BetterMost, Wyoming & Brokeback Mountain Forum

The World Beyond BetterMost => The Culture Tent => Topic started by: ednbarby on October 21, 2006, 10:27:34 am

Title: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on October 21, 2006, 10:27:34 am
My dear JennyC mentioned in chat last night that we should really resurrect the movies thread we had going a while back.  Being too lazy to actually find that thread, I'll just start another one if you all don't mind.

I've been a theater-going fool lately, ever since I discovered the highly secure children's playroom my local Muvico theater provides and found that Will *loves* it and in fact prefers going there over seeing a movie (must be his father's son on that one).  They have all kinds of computers and computer games for little kids, they show a Disney movie on a big-screen TV continuously (oh, well - gotta take the good with the bad), they have a chest full of costumes for them to play dress-up, which Will has decided he really likes doing - I've found him running around in fireman garb when I've gone to pick him up more times than I can count...  It's all good.

ANYway, here is the litany of movies I've seen since making this discovery:

The Illusionist - liked it a lot

The Black Dahlia - didn't like it at all

The Departed - liked it a lot

The Devil Wears Prada - liked it

Little Miss Sunshine - liked it a lot

Today, for lack of anything better playing at this theater, I'm going to see "Flicka," mostly because I'm one of those weirdos who always loves the following movie genres, no matter how bad the resulting movies may be:

Movies about horses

Movies about baseball (even though I couldn't actually care less about baseball)

Movies about serial killers (don't ask me why on that one)

So what movies have you all seen lately in the theaters or on DVD that you've liked/hated/would recommend?

I'd recommend all of the above except for The Black Dahlia, but none of them knocked my socks off.  I keep waiting for that to happen since Brokeback, and it ain't yet.  But I'm hopeful.

Movies I'm looking forward to seeing:

Sherrybaby

Infamous (hopefully this week on that one)

Running With Scissors (opens next Friday here)

You?
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: SFEnnisSF on October 21, 2006, 10:39:20 am
I think I'm gonna go see Flicka too.  Mmmmm, Tim McGraw....  :P :D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: RouxB on October 21, 2006, 12:53:16 pm
Prior to BbM, Flicka would have never entered my consiousness to see. Now, I'm counting the days for it.

Good idea Barb to resurrect the movie thread. I would love to see the level of analysis (if not the love) we bestowed on BbM directed towards some other flicks.

Someone pick one...or two.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: jura86 on October 21, 2006, 03:58:40 pm
I've been a cinema junkie recently too. I saw The Departed and thought it was brilliant! Perhaps not a classic like "Goodfellas" but still had me interested and entertained throughout. Went to see World Trade Center the other day, which I thought was awful, not at all moving, the story was very strangely told, I just couldn't connect with any of the characters. Also saw Children of Men a few weeks ago - I know that its not coming out in the US for a while - but when it does, I urge you all to see it. Wasn't perfect, but thought-provoking - the idea of a world without children is very creepy indeed... Also saw The Queen which I really enjoyed, very amusing!

As for upcoming films I'm really looking forward to seeing Bobby - what an amazing cast! Wanna see The Good Shepherd, The Prestige and Babel too.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: belbbmfan on October 21, 2006, 04:45:07 pm
Also saw Children of Men a few weeks ago - I know that its not coming out in the US for a while - but when it does, I urge you all to see it. Wasn't perfect, but thought-provoking - the idea of a world without children is very creepy indeed...

I just got back from the cinema where we saw this movie. Depressing and creepy indeed, but with a glimmer of hope at the end. I thought it was very well made and a good performance by Clive Owen.

I saw Thank You For Smoking last week. Very good, sarcastic, funny and thought provoking too.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on October 21, 2006, 09:56:52 pm
You know, I actually saw The Departed twice (my husband hadn't seen it with me the first time).  And on my second viewing, I did appreciate Leonard DiCaprio's work much more.  And Matt Damon's much less.  The latter was really just playing Bad Will Hunting.  The character was very charming, but then so was Will Hunting.  Meanwhile, I didn't see any of Howard Hughes in Leo's Billy Costigan.  At least he's capable of stretching.

I thoroughly enjoyed Flicka today.  A bit predictable at times, but excellent performances throughout, and fairly true to the short story except it was a girl not a boy who tried to tame him.  And all the horses were *gorgeous* - especially Flicka.  He put Black Beauty to shame.

Tim McGraw was especially good.  I'll tell you what - these country singers (for the most part) have got it going on.  Dwight Yoakum blew me away in "Sling Blade," and McGraw was equally intimidating here, but in a much less violent way.  It's funny - just looking at a still shot of McGraw doesn't do much for me, but he's so magnetic in these roles that you can't help but go... "Ooh."

I agree with you, Jura, about World Trade Center.  I was pretty underwhelmed by it.  The women were good, but there was way too little of them to allow you to really connect with them.  And I think Oliver Stone (of all people) was trying too hard to be tasteful, and in so doing sacrificed an already compelling story.  United 93 is the movie you want to see if you want to really get in touch with the magnitude of the loss we experienced that day.  I still shudder thinking about a couple aspects of it.

I'm looking forward to The Good German (as opposed to The Good Shepherd - sorry - on Matt Damon overload lately - I might have to pass on that one).  That's the one where Tobey Maguire actually plays a (mostly) bad guy.  I know he's been on a couple of your most hated actors lists, but dammit, I think the boy can act.  I love him in the Spider-Man movies - I love how really subtle he is, especially when he's first realizing the extent of his new-found powers in the first one.  And I loved him in Pleasantville and The Ice Storm, too.

Speaking of horse movies again, I think Sea Biscuit was my favorite one of all time, mostly because it captured the extraordinary personality of that horse.  And the race sequences were truly thrilling.  That real-like jockey - what is his name? - stole the show.  Talk about magnetic.  I'm not usually one for really short men, but WOW.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: SFEnnisSF on October 22, 2006, 01:24:38 am
Dwight Yoakam is THE MAN.  Not only is he one of my favorite CW singers, he's a great actor too.  Check him out in THE THREE BURIALS OF MELQUIADES ESTRADA, where Tommy Lee Jones gives an excellent performance as well. 

Back in March, several Century Theatres locations paired BBM with THREE BURIALS as a double feature!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: silkncense on October 22, 2006, 11:17:09 am
Quote
saw The Departed twice (my husband hadn't seen it with me the first time).  And on my second viewing, I did appreciate Leonard DiCaprio's work much more.  And Matt Damon's much less.  The latter was really just playing Bad Will Hunting.

Barb - I'm glad to read this.  I was going to take issue w/ your first assessment but got sidetracked somewhere along the way & never did.  I loved DiCaprio in The Dparted - actual made me know how he was feeling - w/ Damon - what the hell was he feeling??  I loved this film - not in the realm of Brokeback, but then I truly believe nothing else ever will.

Eric  - Having said that, The Three Burials is the only other movie I even went to while Brokeback was in theaters (saw it once - Brokeback 17 times) and I loved it as well.  Own it also.  The scene with the Blind Rancher - very thought provoking.

Also thouroughly enjoyed Little Miss Sunshine - my sons wanted me to go to that with them (Hmmmmmmm).  Actually laughed out loud.

Planning on seeing The Prestige at some point...

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: jura86 on October 22, 2006, 06:57:33 pm
Also thouroughly enjoyed Little Miss Sunshine - my sons wanted me to go to that with them (Hmmmmmmm).  Actually laughed out loud.


Little Miss Sunshine was brilliant! Will defnitely add that one to my dvd collection when it comes out...

I was surprised too ednbarby by what Oliver Stone did with WTC - I have only just recently watched JFK for the first time, and really enjoyed it - of course it is completey historically inaccurate, but was entertaining nevertheless, and full of great performances, which just made WTC all the more disappointing by comparison. I guess it must be a reactionary thing, Stone was convinced that Alexander was a flop because America is homophobic, which probably isn't true, it just flopped because it was a poor film. I guess he was aiming this one directly at the audiences he supposedly lost last time round.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: littleguitar on October 23, 2006, 12:10:48 am
Saw The Prestige today... it was good, not great, but I enjoyed it. It was smarter than the Illusionist and the ending wasn't quite as predictable, but even given that I still enjoyed The Illusionist more.

Christian Bale gives a good performance, though I wouldn't say it's his best. Hugh Jackman was very good. Scarlett Johansen once again convinced me that she is plastic and she gets steadily worse with every movie since the Island. I think it's worth seeing, but don't expect it to blow you away. And I think the beginning is messy. I'm not sure if that makes sense, maybe it will when you see it...
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on October 23, 2006, 12:16:37 am
I'm dying to go see 'The Prestige', and 'Marie Antoinette' and 'The Queen' (the one with Helen Mirren).

2007 is shaping up to be a great movie year for me.

Jake has a new movie cominig out and Ewan McGregor is going to star with Hugh Jackman in one movie, Colin Farrell in another.

Life is sweet.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on October 23, 2006, 09:08:59 am
I'd like to see The Prestige mostly because I like Christopher Nolan films.  They're always so atmospheric - they really put you in that place with the characters.  I love that.  I'd also like to see Marie Antoinette mostly, again, because I like Sofia Coppola.  I really loved Lost in Translation (and yes, Mandy, kind of in spite of Scarlett Johannson - she doesn't do a thing for me, either).

LJ, I totally agree with you about Leo in The Departed.  Not sure where my head was at on that first viewing.  I do still believe that Mark Wahlberg stole it, and I still can't believe I'm saying that.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: chefjudy on October 23, 2006, 09:19:34 am
 :) I saw "The Prestige" last night and really liked it.  If you are thinking of going, watch it with an open mind and pay attention to everything, characters, spoken lines and sets, etc. and even if you figure some of it out, you will want to see it again just to see how it was done, so to speak :D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: silkncense on October 23, 2006, 01:06:39 pm
Quote
Scarlett Johansen once again convinced me that she is plastic and she gets steadily worse with every movie since the Island

Littleguitar - Sooo true.  I totally do not understand any of the hype.  She is a worthless addition to every movie she's in.

Barb - Mark Wahlberg was indeed a great surprise.  Glad you went back & saw how good DiCaprio really was - I've been holding out hope for him every since I saw Gilbert Grape.
 
When things in the theaters got so boring earlier, I went to Hollywood Video & they'd have (haven't seen it lately) 5 DVD's for $20.00.  Bought all kinds of movies I'd never have seen otherwise, some very good, some - worth the money & a few that I couldn't make it through.  It's was a great experiment in movie viewing.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on October 23, 2006, 07:48:14 pm
OK, I don't like Leonardo DiCaprio, but his accent in 'Blood Diamond' has me intrigued.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: jura86 on October 23, 2006, 08:27:33 pm
OK, I don't like Leonardo DiCaprio, but his accent in 'Blood Diamond' has me intrigued.

I laughed out loud when that trailer came on before Departed - his accent was atrocious!

Just remembered I saw Death of a President the other day - have to say I was disappointed with it, I was under the impression that the film would look at what would happen to the world, what the consequences would be, if Bush was assassinated. Instead, it just focused on who committed the assassination, so played a bit like an episode of CSI, different people investigating the shooting.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on October 23, 2006, 10:12:38 pm
I laughed out loud when that trailer came on before Departed - his accent was atrocious!

Is he supposed to be South African or Scandinavian?  I can't tell.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: littleguitar on October 24, 2006, 12:22:07 am
I thought South African... and maybe it was just me but I thought it was fairly good. I spent some time with a few south african men about a year ago... about 12 days on a bus... and it sounded right to me, but that could just be time messing with my mind as 12 days isn't long in the grand scheme of things.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on October 24, 2006, 01:00:43 am
I thought South African... and maybe it was just me but I thought it was fairly good. I spent some time with a few south african men about a year ago... about 12 days on a bus... and it sounded right to me, but that could just be time messing with my mind as 12 days isn't long in the grand scheme of things.

Accents are funny things.  People hear them differently.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: RouxB on October 24, 2006, 10:34:13 pm
I'll play it for a South African tomorrow and see what he says...

 O0
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on October 25, 2006, 09:33:33 am
What do you guys think of Tim Robbins' attempt at it in "Catch a Fire" - have you seen the trailer for that one yet?  From what I can tell, I think he does it better - more (or some) subtle.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on October 29, 2006, 10:41:40 pm
Bumped for her pleasure...  ;)

So here's my new tally:  This week, I have seen Infamous, The Prestige, and today - Running With Scissors.  I'd give them three stars, two and a half stars, and three stars respectively.  That said, I thoroughly enjoyed the first and the last.  The Prestige I did not care for much - I saw the "twist" from a mile away and it irritated me.  Way too obvious.  And I saw what several of you mean about Scarlett Johannson.  I didn't think she was terrible, but compared with the actors who played the young magicians' wives, she sucked royally.  Both of them were so subtle.  I don't know what it is, but I've just never fully believed Scarlett in a role.  Not ever.  She even irritated me in The Horse Whisperer.  I kept thinking "Too bad somebody else isn't playing that girl."  I hadn't even read the book - I just didn't believe her.  Hell, I wanted to see the horse's acting more.  He conveyed way more humanity.

Infamous is one of those movies that's deeply flawed - the tone and pacing are uneven to the point of being unnerving - but that contains one or two movie "moments" that burn into your memory cells.  The first for me was the very first scene, with Gwyneth Paltrow singing a Peggy Lee type song and Capote's and his companion's reaction to it.  Beautiful, beautiful acting by Paltrow, Toby Jones and Sigourney Weaver.  Just - Wow.  The other one is the scene with that rancher I mentioned in another post talking to Capote and Harper Lee about what makes a good person go bad.  Sandra Bullock was excellent, by the way.  And I'm not one of those who particularly likes her, especially ever since that certain movie she so gleefully touted last year got a certain award it didn't come close to deserving.  But I digress.  I liked that this one gave the Harper Lee character much more air time and depth than did "Capote."  I liked how Catherine Keener played her in the latter - I just wanted to know more about her.  This one did that.  In spades.  And since Sandra Bullock sufficiently uglified herself, she's a shoo-in for an Oscar.   ::)

The thing about Running With Scissors that makes it most worth seeing is the acting.  Just fearless, vulnerable, wide-freaking-open-and-out-there stuff.  I've never seen so many people cry so often and found myself so entertained by it before.  Joseph Cross was amazing.  I will now say what I said out loud about The Gyllenhaal after seeing "October Sky" - if that boy plays his cards right, he's got a bright future ahead of him.  And Joseph Fiennes was just - Holy Shit Wow.  And I'm not just saying that because I lusted for him mightily after seeing Shakespeare in Love.  Eleven times.  After that, I kept watching his movies with high hopes that I'd see that same spark and intensity as before and was disappointed every time.  Not this time.  Again, totally fearless portrayal.  Just the psychotic episodes alone would be daunting to a lesser actor.  And of course Annette Bening was, as they say, riveting.  You know what it is?  She has those bright eyes, like Judi Dench - you just cannot take your eyes off of them.

OK, enough pontificating for now.  But God, I love this time of year where movies are concerned.  And it's only getting better from this point on.  Have I seen a Romeo/Brokeback Mountain?  I have not.  But I have high hopes.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: dot-matrix on November 05, 2006, 08:29:47 pm
Been working lots of hours so haven't been to the cinema in a while now but I did see a film last night I'd like to suggest to anyone renting or netflixing films.

Bee Season(2005)
directed byScott McGehee & David Siegel 

Richard Gere, Juliette Binoche, Flora Cross and Max Minghella

My initial attraction to this film was because the screen play was written by Jake’s Mom, Naomi Foner Gyllenhaal based on a novel by Myla Goldberg.  First let me say, I love indie films, there are some real jewels to found outside studio films. They are often quiet, deep, introspective films like Brokeback Mountain.  That’s what I found here, a quiet profound little jewel.

In many ways, the family at the center of this story is not that different from the family in the middle of the divorce drama THE SQUID AND THE WHALE. They enjoy the benefits of belonging to an upper-middle class society and their household is one full of books and musical instruments and a sense of harmony.

Or is it? Are they the perfect family? Meet the Naumanns: Father (Richard Gere) is an avid scholar who teaches the Kabbalah. Mother (Juliette Binoche) is an introvert who passes the time going into other people's properties and collecting items (some which she even gives her daughter Eliza) and has of late taken to a habit of coming home late to dinner. Oldest son Aaron (Anthony Minghella) has a quiet intensity and devotion to his family, particularly his sister, whom he clearly loves. And Eliza (Flora Cross) is one of those quiet individuals who have an ancient wisdom that makes her come across closer to an old soul. It is Eliza who senses all that is wrong with her family, as it appears they are falling apart in front of her, and as a little girl, she simply can't do anything at all to bring everyone together. As a way to escape the unhappy home, Eliza immerses herself in the spelling bee contests in which she excels. Not until then, does she get the attention of her father, who supports her newly found talent.

The advent of the spelling bee victories signals the downward spiral that eventually tears at the foundation and reveals the ugliness beneath. For people who are in love with words, and for Saul Naumann, who teaches the vibration of words and their connection to a greater reality, the reality of being One with the Verb, he is the one most at fault. He's the perfect student who knows what he's reading, but doesn't necessarily practice what he preaches. This spelling bee is a ways for him to bask in Eliza's prowess.

Aaron progressively becomes aware of this lie within his home and is the first to openly rebel. It's a predictable move because it's happened to the best of us. Since Dad practices the Jewish faith, why not choose a belief that challenges it? Enter Challi (Evan Rachel Wood), the girl whom Aaron finds attractive, like a siren calling out to him. Sure, their meeting feels cliché, but I've seen the same types of encounters happening with people of other sects. Her pat screen time serves to instill action in Aaron and create a deeper need to attack Dad's quiet, arrogant pomposity.

Even so, it's not a sincere move.  Against this back drop the mother, Miriam is a woman who is deeply disturbed by what happened in her own life with the tragedy of her parents death. Saul and Miriam's marriage is over, but they don't do anything to correct the situation. Miriam's problems come to a head when she is taken away and makes Saul confront the many issues that he probably never dealt with before.  And with Miriam 's progressive descent into her own world of trinkets and stolen gifts, the only one who seems capable of any real sense of spirituality is young Eliza who lives deep inside her own unformed, unnamed faith. It's of such a magnitude that she at one key moment, invoking the voice of God before her climactic contest, suffers a seizure immediately following an intense rapture.

BEE SEASON is a movie that looks hokey from different perspectives but spoke to me with its message of what true mysticism means
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Ellemeno on November 06, 2006, 01:49:56 am
I really was glad to read the book Bee Season.  I look forward to the movie.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on November 13, 2006, 11:48:13 am
I really was glad to read the book Bee Season.  I look forward to the movie.

I'll have to check that out, too.  It gets really good reviews, and I always enjoy Angela Bassett.

Speaking of six degrees of Jake movies, I checked out Stranger Than Fiction yesterday (Maggie's in it) and LOVED it.  Maybe it helps that I went into it with somewhat lowered expectations - for Will Ferrell, primarily.  And I was very pleasantly surprised.  This just in:  It turns out he can act.  And he and Maggie had a very nice and believable chemistry together.  She's so adorable, really.  And the character she plays is basically me, except I don't have tattoos and I didn't drop out of Harvard Law.  But I can bake (quite well, thankyouverymuch - my bourbon pecan pie is to die for), and I *am* somewhat of an anarchist.  And I'm definitely opinionated.  I especuially loved her character Ana's rationale for not paying 22% of her federal income tax.

And I so enjoyed listening to Emma Thompson's beautiful voice and witty narration of Harold Crick's life.

It was all good, even the ending - which normally wouldn't be my cup of tea - because it was ironic.  And that's all I'll say on that matter.

Don't miss it!  :)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on November 13, 2006, 08:31:07 pm
Saw Marie Antoinette.

I liked Sofia Coppola's 'Lost in Translation', but though Marie is lushly filmed and the costumes are gorgeous, the settings magnificent (you can't go wrong with Versailles), you can see she was going for something similar with Marie, but didn't pull it off.

The period was too fraught with history, politics and change, the court at Versailles rife with intrique and cabals...and all of that is ignored.

The few modern soundtrack pieces did nothing for the story which was extremely spare in dialogue.  It was meant to be a character study, I think, but it failed.  You get next to nothing on her character, no history, no politics, it's not a dialogue/plot driven movie.  The whole movie was like gorgeous postcard shots of Marie's life.

I think Coppola meant to point out how isolating and boredom-inducing being a dauphine was, but Coppola touched so little on Marie's character that you didn't much care that she was bored.  She seemed to fill her time amply enough without any deep thoughts about it being any other way.

Several people walked out before the end.

I didn't pay full price and I'm glad I didn't.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on November 14, 2006, 02:08:33 pm
You know, I debated about seeing this one.  Then I saw it go to just night-time screenings after being open for only a few weeks, and I knew that was the kiss of death.  I like Kirsten and Sofia, but I've never been too wild about purposely (or otherwise) anachronistic things.  Titanic, anyone?   :P

Thanks for the review, Del.  I'll gladly pass.

Again, I really must urge everyone to go see Stranger Than Fiction.  Especially given we're such a literate crowd.  Here's a link to a review that aptly describes exactly why it's so appealing to literature buffs like us:

http://www.pajiba.com/stranger-than-fiction.htm (http://www.pajiba.com/stranger-than-fiction.htm)

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on November 16, 2006, 11:57:01 pm
OK, just got home from a free screening of The Fountain with Hugh Jackman.

Pluses - beautiful cinematography, imaginative camera angles, intriguingly crafted tale, the camera loves the two acting leads (Hugh Jackman has his contractual obligatory shirtless scene which is always a plus), deeply emotional story

Minuses - deeply emotional story.  It's heartwrenchingly depressing.  I'm sure there is supposed to be a positive note to the movie somewhere, but the anguish of the characters completely buries it.  You will spend much of the movie in tears.

Hint - the advertising for the movie is misleading.  It's not what you think.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on November 17, 2006, 12:27:40 am
I'd like to see Hugh in The Boy from Oz or Oklahoma, but I guess I never will.

Has anybody seen Casino Royale yet? I'd like to know what Brokies think of this newest Bond film.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: dot-matrix on November 17, 2006, 03:24:11 am
I'd like to see Hugh in The Boy from Oz or Oklahoma, but I guess I never will.

Has anybody seen Casino Royale yet? I'd like to know what Brokies think of this newest Bond film.

His London stage production of Oklahoma for Trevor Nunn is on DVD Front Ranger and it is magnificient!  Unfortunately Boy from Oz is noton DVD, I keep watching for it though with my fingers crossed  :D So far no luck.  Since it was such a limited run and only he played it you'd thing by now they would have a DVD out.  Hmmmmm unless of course Hugh plans to reprise the role in a revival of Boy from Oz...
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on November 25, 2006, 02:43:33 pm
Saw A Good Year yesterday.

Lovely, picturesque move.  It's a movie about love.  Love between an uncle and his nephew, between a man and his career, a man and a country, a man and his memories, a man and his lifestyle and finally, less importantly, love between a man and a woman.

Ridley Scott keeps the tempo of the movie moving quickly considering the subject matter.  Beautifully filmed, Russell Crowe at his most charming.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on November 27, 2006, 06:27:13 pm
Thanks for the review, I went to A Good Year yesterday. Russell Crowe was so charming that his early attempts at being an ass I couldn't believe in the film.

Also, della, could you give me more info on The Fountain? Is it really an adaptation of the novel The Time Traveler's Wife?
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on December 03, 2006, 01:43:09 pm
Thanks for the review, I went to A Good Year yesterday. Russell Crowe was so charming that his early attempts at being an ass I couldn't believe in the film.

Also, della, could you give me more info on The Fountain? Is it really an adaptation of the novel The Time Traveler's Wife?

Sorry being so late in response.  I'm on vacation now and last week was a bear tying up loose ends.

No, The Fountain is defintely NOT an adaption of The Time Traveler's Wife.  It is an original work.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on December 16, 2006, 11:41:16 pm
Went and saw The Holiday.  Good romantic comedy fluff.

Practically got a headache from all the blinding whitened teeth showing during the scenes between Jude Law and Cameron Diaz when the Beautiful People are smiling at each other and flirting.

The Kate Winslet/Jack Black storyline is more believable, as much as can be expected in such a comedy about fabulously wealthy people who have love troubles in a world where everyone dresses in high end designer wear and lives in huge fabulous houses

Hollywood sure does like to make movies about itself though.  :P
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on December 26, 2006, 11:09:17 pm
Went and saw Apocalypto.

Amazingly it was a just a good action adventure.  That simple. 

You can indentify with the characters - on both sides - and really feel for them.  There are plot holes but not anymore than any other movie.  HIstorically there were problems, but you're pretty much following the story which could have been set in any ancient culture.

The violence is not as gory as I thought it would be.  No different than some Conan the Barbarian type movie - much much less gory than a Quentin Tarantino movie.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: silkncense on December 27, 2006, 02:59:17 pm
As an aside:


Premiere's Top 20 Most Overrated Films of All Time

American Beauty
Chicago
Clerks.
Fantasia
Field of Dreams
Chariots of Fire
Good Will Hunting
Forrest Gump
Jules and Jim
A Beautiful Mind
Monster's Ball
Moonstruck
Mystic River
Nashville
The Wizard of Oz
An American in Paris
Easy Rider
The Red Shoes
2001: A Space Odyssey
Gone with the Wind
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on December 27, 2006, 03:30:02 pm
Okay, I can agree with all those except Nashville. That Robert Altman film was groundbreaking conceptually, entertaining, and thought-provoking on several levels. Plus, it had amazing performances by Lily Tomlin and others.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on January 02, 2007, 08:54:11 pm
Went and saw The Children of Men with Clive Owen.

Clive is looking fine and was worth the price of admission alone.

The movie was OK.  Not great.  Watching the movie's version of the 3rd worldization of the West was disturbing.  But what got to me the most was the movie's attitude.


I don't believe the below contains any spoilers because it was pretty much evident from the previews.



I'm not sure if it's because I'm not a big fan of children, but the attitude of the main character and movie in general I found unusual.  Clive's character was described as being depressed and the society in general has an atmosphere of hopelessness because the human race is going to go extinct because of the infertility of the women (the movie states outright it's the women and not the men).

I guess I don't understand this attitude being so prevalent.  Would it be, do you think?

Is it a parent thing?  I understand that some people feel bereft for a myriad of reasons if they wanted to have children and can't.  But that doesn't bother the rest of us who never wanted children.

Or is it a humanocentric thing?  That nothing matters except humans and if we are going to go extinct then that's a reason to want to commit suicide or tear society apart?

What's wrong with enjoying what's left of one's life?   
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: cmr107 on January 02, 2007, 10:13:07 pm
I don't usually like to make recommendations, but I highly recommend The Pursuit of Happyness (sic) with Will Smith. He had a wonderful performance. They say this is the performance of his career, and I agree. His son (his real son played his son in the movie) is adorable and gave a really great performance too. I hardly ever cry at movies, but I got teary twice.

I also saw Dreamgirls. For those of you who don't know, it's a movie version of a Broadway musical. I never saw the stage version, but a friend of mine who knows pretty much everything there is to know about musicals said it did a great job of staying true to the original. Great cast, with terrific performances by all. Jennifer Hudson has an AMAZING voice, and Keith Robinson has probably the most gorgeous smile I've ever seen. If you like musicals, you won't be disappointed.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: j.U.d.E. on January 03, 2007, 05:47:27 am
As far as I can see, noone has mentioned "Little Miss Sunshine". Saw it yesterday and it is a truly wonderful film! All the cast is exceptional and there's lots of poetry!

j. U. d. E.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: belbbmfan on January 03, 2007, 08:01:54 am
As far as I can see, noone has mentioned "Little Miss Sunshine". Saw it yesterday and it is a truly wonderful film! All the cast is exceptional and there's lots of poetry!

j. U. d. E.


Yes! i saw it too last week and loved it. It was funny and very moving. Great film.

hey Jude! Good to see you again! Happy New Year!  :)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on January 03, 2007, 08:14:48 am
I also saw it recently, but I guess I missed the poetry?? Can you refresh my memory??

Maybe join us for the full moon chat later on and discuss it??

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 03, 2007, 08:19:39 am
I saw Little Miss Sunshine a week or two ago on DVD and enjoyed it.

As for the overrated movies list, I would take The Red Shoes off. I have always loved that movie and the dancing is spectacular.

Some of the others...Wizard of Oz, Gone with the Wind...seem overexposed to us now, but we have to remember the time and context in which they were made.

I definitely agree on American Beauty and Monster's Ball, though.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on January 03, 2007, 10:06:32 am
I didn't think Moonstruck was all that overrated.  Not a *great* movie, but then it wasn't touted to be.

TOTALLY agree on A Beautiful Mind.  That was SO not even a good movie.  What a bunch of crap.  And of course it won the Oscar.   ::)

I really enjoyed Little Miss Sunshine.  At the time I saw it in the middle of last year, I thought it was overrated.  But now I look back on the year and realize it was one of the best five or so movies I saw in the theater.

Was it a crap movie year, or is it just me?

Of all the movies I saw, these are the ones I liked the best, in order, with my Barb-O-Meter rating following:

The Departed - 8 1/2
The Queen - 8
Little Miss Sunshine - 8
Casino Royale - 8
The Illusionist - 7 1/2
The Fountain - 7

Crap.  I can't think of any other good ones.  I haven't seen The Pursuit of Happyness, Dreamgirls, or Babel yet, though.  And I'm hoping Notes on a Scandal will be good.  I'm sure Judi Dench's performance alone will be worth the price of admission.  That opens here this weekend.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 03, 2007, 10:15:50 am
I posted on another thread that I thought it was a lousy year for movies, so you are not alone, Barb.

I saw the first three on your list and would agree with your ratings, although I think The Departed is a consolation prize for Scorcese. I liked GoodFellas better and thought it was a better movie.

Other things I saw this year: Prairie Home Companion (yawn); The Devil Wears Prada (good for a few laughs but I felt like Anne Hathaway was reprising her role from The Princess Diaries); Candy (Heath is great, the movie is depressing). I liked The Prestige ALOT. I'd give it an 8.5. I am surprised more people aren't talking about it.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on January 03, 2007, 11:46:47 am
I liked The Prestige, but Christian Bale leaves me cold as an actor.  He's another one like Mark Wahlberg that has little to no light in his eyes.  I feel like he's always behind a curtain, you know?  The only thing I've ever liked Wahlberg in was The Departed, and he wasn't only good, he stole the damned thing.  It's like someone turned on the light inside of him.  Scorsese, maybe?  I don't know, but he was brilliant.  Couldn't stand him in Invincible - I spent the entire movie imagining how much better it would be with someone - ANYONE - else playing Vince Papale.  When they showed the real Vince at the end, he blew Wahlberg off the screen.

But I digress.  The Prestige was very good, but again, I'd have liked it better with someone with a tad more (or some) charisma playing Bale's part.  Sorry, Christian fans.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 03, 2007, 11:55:16 am
Ha ha, I guess I was too busy be mesmerized by Hugh in The Prestige to pay too much attention to Christian. I am not all that familiar with him, anyway (but isn't he going to be Batman to Heath's Joker?)

As for Mark Wahlberg, I agree...I have never cared for him, since Boogie Nights (another overrated movie, IMO). But he absolutely stole the show in The Departed. I didn't realize who the actor was until the credits rolled and my jaw dropped open.

Leslie
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on January 03, 2007, 03:03:02 pm
Yep, Christian Bale was Batman in "Batman Begins" and will be again opposite Heath.  Didn't much like the former in that one, either.  I think what bugs me about him is that he played Laurie in "Little Women" and didn't live up to the decades-long vision I'd had (and carried close in my heart) of that character.  He looked the part, but again there was no light in his eyes.  And don't even get me started about Winona Ryder playing Jo.   ::)
Title: Re: Best Movie of 2006?
Post by: ednbarby on January 05, 2007, 11:22:34 am
I have *got* to see United 93.  Just put it on the top of my Netflix queue.  Dammit.

Of all the ones I've seen, I liked The Departed the most, but I haven't seen the above, Little Children, or Letters From Iwo Jima yet.  I think those are gonna be great.
Title: Re: Best Movie of 2006?
Post by: Lynne on January 05, 2007, 11:29:15 am
I have *got* to see United 93.  Just put it on the top of my Netflix queue.  Dammit.

Of all the ones I've seen, I liked The Departed the most, but I haven't seen the above, Little Children, or Letters From Iwo Jima yet.  I think those are gonna be great.

I've missed The Departed in the theatre and I really wanted to see it, thanks in large part to the good things you had to say about it, Barb.  See Babel if you get a chance - it's highly decent and nice to watch/hear Rodrigo and Prieto together.
Title: Re: Best Movie of 2006?
Post by: Scott6373 on January 05, 2007, 11:40:58 am
"United 93" was brilliant.  "The Departed" was also quite good, but just because if the star-studded cast dosen't mean it is the best.  "Cars", was awfully good as well.
Title: Re: Best Movie of 2006?
Post by: ednbarby on January 05, 2007, 03:21:28 pm
I agree about The Departed, Scott.  Actually, if anything, the weak links in it were Jack Nicholson and Martin Sheen.  I believed Jack well enough, but I thought a couple of the scenes were overindulging him.  Martin Sheen I barely believed at all.  I kept seeing President Whats-It from The West Wing.  But I thought it was overall a well-structured movie and compelling story, well-done for the most part.

I'm looking (strangely) forward to seeing United 93, now.  I see it's at the top of most critics' Top Ten lists.  I just put it at numero uno on my Netflix queue.  My bonehead husband got to the queue first and put (gag) Hostel there, so that's what we're getting tonight.  I have news for him:  He'll be watching that one alone.  He may tell me the same about United 93.  I hope not, though, because in that case he'll be missing probably a great movie.
Title: Re: Best Movie of 2006?
Post by: Kd5000 on January 05, 2007, 03:55:59 pm
I think I will remember this cinematic year for the number of disappointments. I was looking fwd to RUNNING WITH SCISSORS.  It wasn't up to par.  THE FOUNTAIN directed by the guy who did REQUIEM FOR THE DREAM had beautiful imagery, good score, but very, very confusing narrative. THE BLACK DHALIA was no L.A. CONFIDENTIAL. 

THE QUEEN was the movie I most enjoyed watching this year. Saw it at a film fest. Got a standing ovation.   

I didn't see THE DEPARTED. For some reason, couldn't get motivated to go see it.   I rather Scorsese when he does movies like THE AGE OF INNOCENCE or THE AVIATOR as oppose to gangster films.  I might be seeing CHILDREN OF MEN (a dystopic future sci-fi film) this weekend.

Abstaining from THE OSCARS won't be hard for me this year as I think it was a rather mediocre year in cinema.

Good look with watching UNITED 93.  The local critic picked that as his favorite movie.  I just don't think I'm ready for it.
Title: Re: Best Movie of 2006?
Post by: Scott6373 on January 05, 2007, 03:58:44 pm
"United 93" wasn't that tough to watch.  It was so well done.  Everyone should see it.  "World Trade Center" was garbage in comaprison.  I liked "The Queen", and Helen deserves some award (besides there were no other noteworthy female performances this year).
Title: Re: Best Movie of 2006?
Post by: MaineWriter on January 05, 2007, 04:06:43 pm
Remember when rt was here and telling us all (begging us, actually) to go see United 93? He said it was that good? Obviously, he was right since it is landing on lots of top ten lists.

I have said it before and I'll said it again, The Departed was good, but GoodFellas was better. And Barb and I have already agreed that Mark Wahlberg stole the show.

All of the Oscar watch predictions have Helen Mirren lock, stock, and barrel for Best Actress. Meryl Streep may get nominated for The Devil Wears Prada.  Who else? Nothing comes quickly to mind. Maybe the woman from Little Miss Sunshine (blanking right now...Toni Collette?).

A movie I enjoyed that is not getting much press is The Prestige.

Leslie
Title: Re: Best Movie of 2006?
Post by: ednbarby on January 05, 2007, 06:04:07 pm
I sure do remember rt talking about United 93, Leslie.  He'd laugh if he could see us talking about it now, like, "Hel-LO!  I told you guys about this six months ago!"  (But in a good-natured way, of course.)

I'm sure it's WAY better than World Trade Center.  I thought that one sucked out loud (except for Maggie's, as always, riveting part in it).  Sorry, but it was a total bust other than that.  I swear Oliver Stone has been invaded by the Bush Administration Soul Snatchers.  Did he just get way too rich and now he's a Republican?  I don't get it.  Way dumbed down for the masses, if you ask me.

I really liked The Queen, too.  Actually, there's starting to be a lot of talk about Judi Dench in Notes on a Scandal and Kate Winslet in Little Children, both of which I hope to see this weekend.  They're about my favorite actors, so it's all good.  I guess I'd have to go see who else was nominated for Golden Globes.  I think Toni Collette might have been.  And maybe Meryl Streep.

Yeah, it was a pretty random fiesta as far as movies went this year (so far).  Like I say, I still have high hopes for Letters From Iwo Jima - it'll be something to see that story told from the Japanese point of view (and not have them - or us - portrayed as monsters, but just people involved in a very unfortunate situation).
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on January 07, 2007, 02:57:56 pm
Did anyone see "The Good Shepherd"?  I saw it last night and thought it was respectable.  It follows the career of a bigwig in the CIA (Matt Damon) from when he was a child to the time following the Bay of Pigs invasion in the 60's.  There are tons of flashbacks, which after a while made me pretty confused, but the performances are good.  Don't expect lots of action, though.  It's mostly a character study of a very private, conflicted man.  Robert DeNiro directed it and played a small part, and I totally missed noticing Keir Dullea in a small role as the Senator who is Angelina Jolie's character's father.

It really is anybody's guess what movies will emerge as Oscar nominees.  The NY Times critics published their choices today, and only one movie was chosen by all three: "Letters from Iwo Jima."  Two chose "Pan's Labyrinth."  The rest were all different.  Not one of them chose "The Departed" or "United 93."  Out of all the acting categories, all three agreed only one person: Helen Mirren for "The Queen."
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on January 07, 2007, 05:28:37 pm
I saw The Good Shepherd.  And at the risk of sounding just like one of those idiots on the IMDb board with their usual list of complaints about BBM, I thought it was way too long and overall pretty forgettable.  Two weeks later, I can't remember a single one of the character's names except Clover/Margaret (Angelina Jolie).  That tells you something (in my case, anyway).  And what was Robert DeNiro's purpose to be in it, other than to indulge himself?  His character was completely disposable.  Another thing that bugged me was that Matt Damon's character didn't age, like, a minute in 22 years.  I mean, it's like no attempt was even made.

Maybe I just had too high expectations for it, but it really let me down.

I saw Dreamgirls yesterday.  It had a couple of thrilling moments - mostly when Jennifer Hudson sang - but otherwise was just eh.  Jamie Foxx basically phoned it in.  He was by far the most blah I've ever seen him.  Eddie Murphy was tremendous, though.  It was worth the price of admission for him and Hudson alone.  I'd give it a 6 1/2 on the Barb-O-Meter was just being way too uneven and for the couple of unintentionally funny moments where the songs were so cheesy it was almost painful to watch/listen to them.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Lynne on January 07, 2007, 11:08:14 pm
I haven't seen a lot of new movies this year.  Seeing BBM 21 times and a bunch of the older recommended films has taken a lot of time.  I really want to see The Departed.

But to rank what I managed to see besides BBM that was released - here's the order - and I have a tie for #1.

1) Babel
1) Bobby
2) A Scanner Darkly
3) The Good Shepherd
4) The Lake House
5) Clerks II
7) The Holiday
8) The Devil Wears Prada
9) Casino Royale
10) Something New

I think that's it...and if it makes me fluffly, I don't care...I've been loving Keanu since Point Break and I don't see that changing!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on January 08, 2007, 09:52:47 am
I like Keanu.  He was Africa hot in "Speed."  Liked him in My Own Private Idaho a lot.

I have a story about him (do I ever not have a story?).  Absolutely true.  About seven years ago, I worked with this guy who had studied filmmaking at the University of Miami, of all places, and whose wife Barbara had studied at the all-powerful USC.  In so doing, she had worked with a few big name actors and still kept in touch with a few of them.  Around the time Keanu was playing in his band (Dogstar, wasn't it?), the phone rings one day, my co-worker answers and someone says, "Yeah, can I speak to Barbara, please?"  He says, "She's not in right now, can I take a message?"  He goes, "Yeah.  Just tell her Keanu called."  We laughed about that, like, imagine if he said, "Keanu who?"  Turns out he was calling her to invite her to see Dogstar play at a local club (in Miami) that night.  Both of them ended up going, naturally, and they were out until 4 a.m.  He said he was "a really cool guy - just acted like a regular guy you've grown up with, or something."
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on January 08, 2007, 11:39:06 am
I saw Children of Men yesterday and didn't love it. It wasn't boring, and its vision of a near-future dystopia was dazzling and scary. But overall I thought the story was bleak and kind of pointless. (Re the question Dell posed: I do have children, so that might color my view, but I really do understand why some people don't have and don't want children. However, I think the prospect of all of humanity being wiped out within a few decades would be depressing, regardless of one's parent or nonparent status. Besides, I'm not sure whether the movie was suggesting that the world was falling apart BECAUSE children weren't being born, or the other way around.)

But overall, I saw a lot of pretty good movies over the past year. (That is, once I could venture out to the theaters and enjoy any movie at all, aside from ... you know.) In no particular order, I liked:

Little Miss Sunshine -- just saw that again a week ago, and it's still wonderful
The Queen -- both lead performances were excellent
The Departed -- yes, Mark Wahlberg was great (actually I always like him, for some reason, even though he's bland and affectless) but personally I think Leo stole the show
Blood Diamond -- again, Leo was excellent, and believe me, I am NOT a huge Leo fan normally
Hollywoodland  -- critics just did not get this movie; it was a lovely study on success and failure
The Illusionist -- I usually like Edward Norton, too, again inexplicably because he, too, is bland and affectless
The Prestige -- not only do I l ike Christian, but * donning hardhat * I like him even better than Hugh!
The Devil Wears Prada -- light and cute

I still haven't seen United 93 or Babel or Casino Royale or The Good Shepherd, The Lake House, The Pursuit of Happyness, Dreamgirls, A Good Year, and probably a bunch of others.

Back to the overrated movies: my picks for most overrated from that list are Forrest Gump and Chicago.

Whew! OK, now I think I've caught up.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on January 08, 2007, 12:11:19 pm
I would definitely pick Forrest Gump from that list, too.  And (donning my hardhat) I would add Titanic.

I really loved Chicago - own it, in fact - so I'm going to plead the Fifth on that one.

I've avoided seeing Children of Men because it seems just too bleak to me, too.  But I hear it's a good "action" movie and that Clive Owen is "the perfect action hero."

I still want to see Little Children and Notes on a Scandal next, because they contain, together, my three favorite actors right now (Judi Dench, Kate Winslet, and Cate Blanchett, in order (not respectively ;)).  I might take Friday afternoon off to see Little Children, because it's only playing at a theater that doesn't have a day care center for Will-O.  I'd also like to see Volver, but I'll have to try to fit that in sometime maybe next week.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on January 08, 2007, 12:14:10 pm
Oh, and Katherine, I thought Ben Affleck was *wonderful* in Hollywoodland.  It's a shame he hasn't gotten more notice for it - it was really such a subtle, nuanced performance.  That last scene shooting the home movie - Oh.My.God.  Amazing, beautiful stuff.  And like you with Leo, I *am not* a Ben Affleck fan.  But I do think he tends to be more underrated than not.  For instance, I thought his comic, self-satirizing turn in Shakespeare in Love was brilliant.  Maybe that's where he just excels - at making fun of himself.  He was also quite good in Bounce, which I hear was another self-deprecating one in the alcoholic-in-rehab sense.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Lynne on January 08, 2007, 04:06:05 pm
I like Keanu.  He was Africa hot in "Speed."  Liked him in My Own Private Idaho a lot.

I have a story about him (do I ever not have a story?).  Absolutely true.  About seven years ago, I worked with this guy who had studied filmmaking at the University of Miami, of all places, and whose wife Barbara had studied at the all-powerful USC.  In so doing, she had worked with a few big name actors and still kept in touch with a few of them.  Around the time Keanu was playing in his band (Dogstar, wasn't it?), the phone rings one day, my co-worker answers and someone says, "Yeah, can I speak to Barbara, please?"  He says, "She's not in right now, can I take a message?"  He goes, "Yeah.  Just tell her Keanu called."  We laughed about that, like, imagine if he said, "Keanu who?"  Turns out he was calling her to invite her to see Dogstar play at a local club (in Miami) that night.  Both of them ended up going, naturally, and they were out until 4 a.m.  He said he was "a really cool guy - just acted like a regular guy you've grown up with, or something."

Thanks for the terrific story, Barb!  Ah...one day maybe I'll get to brush close with Keanu's greatness!   While having coffee after Gustavo with the NYC crowd, someone (John Gallagher maybe?) was trying to think of 'that actor who was born in Beirut'...I immediately came up with 'Keanu Reeves' and I think everybody else looked at me like I had two heads ;), but that's who he was thinking of.  I mean just because I know all of Jacob Benjamin Gyllenhaal's pertinent data doesn't mean I don't have room for additional trivia!

Oh, and Katherine, I thought Ben Affleck was *wonderful* in Hollywoodland.  It's a shame he hasn't gotten more notice for it - it was really such a subtle, nuanced performance.  That last scene shooting the home movie - Oh.My.God.  Amazing, beautiful stuff.  And like you with Leo, I *am not* a Ben Affleck fan.  But I do think he tends to be more underrated than not.  For instance, I thought his comic, self-satirizing turn in Shakespeare in Love was brilliant.  Maybe that's where he just excels - at making fun of himself.  He was also quite good in Bounce, which I hear was another self-deprecating one in the alcoholic-in-rehab sense.

I need to see Hollywood - I also like Ben Affleck.  He was very good, I thought, in Bounce, and I also loved him in Chasing Amy.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on January 08, 2007, 05:25:15 pm
So true about Ben Affleck, Barb and Lynne! I think JLo and a few bad role choices were his downfall. I liked him in a few things (Shakespeare, Good Will Hunting), then became soooo not interested in him for a while. But Hollywoodland changed my whole view of Ben -- he was fantastic: poignant, likeable, subtle, tragic.

And thanks for the nice words about Keanu! I probably would not fight to the death to defend his acting, but he's cute and appealing and not nearly as bad as people make fun of him for being.

I wish I could see Little Children, but it hasn't shown anywhere near here at this point. And another one I'd love to see but will probably have to wait for the DVD: Half Nelson.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on January 08, 2007, 05:33:42 pm
I saw Half Nelson.  It was very good.  Very... raw.  As good as Ryan Gosling was, the performance somehow didn't stay with me.  I probably need to don my hard hat again, but I think it's being a tad overrated.

One nice thing about living in Boca Raton - we do get many arthouse films here that a lot of similar-size markets don't because there are so many transplanted New Yorkers here.  We never did get Sherrybaby or Sweet Land, unfortunately, but we have gotten several others that didn't make it to other places.
Title: Re: Best Movie of 2006?
Post by: Kelda on January 12, 2007, 04:58:06 am
I think I will remember this cinematic year for the number of disappointments. I was looking fwd to RUNNING WITH SCISSORS.  It wasn't up to par. 

Really?  - I was really looking forward to seeing this (not in UK cinemas yet) as I really enjoyed the book.

From the 'best Movie of 2006' thread in 'Movie resources' ...

quote author=JakeTwist link=topic=7088.msg135563#msg135563 date=1167626628]
http://www.sundaylife.co.uk/features/article2115036.ece (http://www.sundaylife.co.uk/features/article2115036.ece)

The Belfast Telegraph

Damon's top 5 movies

[Published: Sunday 31, December 2006 - 15:27]

By Damon Smith


1. BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN (released January 6)

The most controversial film of the year, Ang Lee's heartbreaking love story, based on a 30-page novella by Annie Proulx, wears its heart on its sleeve to chart the tempestuous 20-year love story of ranch hands Jack Twist (Jake Gyllenhaal) and Ennis Del Mar (Heath Ledger), who cross paths one summer in ultra-macho 1960s Wyoming.

This is a heartrending portrait of an enduring yet impossible love, distinguished by gorgeous cinematography, haunting orchestral score and an elegant screenplay.

Gyllenhaal's energetic turn as talkative dreamer Jack contrasts with Ledger's riveting portrayal of an introverted soul, simmering with self-loathing.

Michelle Williams and Anne Hathaway are stunning as the wives who end up casualties of Jack and Ennis's war with their true desires. As Jack puts it: "That ol' Brokeback got us good."


2. UNITED 93 (released June 2)

On September 11, 2001, the world as we knew it was changed forever. The events in New York City that fateful autumn still resonate today and are a stark reminder of mankind's terrifying capability for destruction.

Paul Greengrass' harrowing recreation of events on United Airlines Flight 93, the fourth hijacked plane, unfolds in real time, beginning with scenes of the hijackers in their hotel rooms, preparing for their mission.

Greengrass shoots events in the claustrophobic cabin and on the ground on handheld cameras, with a cast of largely unknown actors playing the passengers.

Key military and civilian personnel, including Ben Sliney (the man in charge of the FAA's command centre), play themselves, adding to the unsettling air of realism.

Even though we know, with sickening certainty, how the film will end, we pray for a different resolution.


3. THE DEATH OF MR LAZARESCU (released July 14)

Cristi Puiu's jet black comedy, charting one man's haphazard journey through the Romanian health system, is by turns hilarious and emotionally heartbreaking, shot with an unflinching eye for detail.
.
/snip/
.
.
.

4. LITTLE MISS SUNSHINE (released September 8 )

Husband and wife team Jonathan Dayton and Valerie Faris gearshift seamlessly from directing music videos to the vast canvas of big screen with their glorious celebration of 21st century family life in all of its perplexing, dysfunctional glory.
.
/snip/
.
.
.

5. RED ROAD (released October 27)

British writer-director Andrea Arnold, who collected the 2005 Oscar for best live action short, graduates effortlessly to feature film with this voyeuristic thriller that crawls under your skin and lingers in the memory long after the end credits roll.

CCTV operator Jackie (Kate Dickie) is one of the team of people charged with scouring the city, spotting trouble before it happens. While focusing one of the cameras on the Red Road estate, Jackie is shocked to see Clyde (Tony Curran), the man she thought was still in prison for killing her husband and child.
.
/snip/
.
.
.

http://www.sundaylife.co.uk/features/article2115036.ece
© Belfast Telegraph


[/quote]

Red Road is a notorious estate in Glasgow (gang fights are common - and its really just a very depressing council estate) - I haven't seen it but I have been told it gived a pretty accurate portrayal of life there. And has got a lot of directing and acting awards... If you want an idea of REAL scottidh accents - and not those of Mel Gibson in Braveheart - see this!!!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on January 15, 2007, 12:01:15 pm
OK, so I finally saw United 93 on Friday night.  Wow.  WOW.

I would urge everyone to see it mainly because it's so well-done.  It's difficult to watch, though - not for the reason you might think - not because it's tear-jerking and/or manipulates you into caring so deeply for the characters that you're haunted afterwards.  But because it's so fast-paced that it agitates you.  It agitates you to know what ultimately happened to those poor people and to wish you could tell them through the TV set what's going on and to take the plane over sooner so they can save themselves.

My husband was actually quite upset afterwards, and I, for once, had to calm him down.  It wasn't because he's an airline pilot and it freaked him out to think he could be on the receiving end of such a thing.  But because he truly believed that had he or someone like him (who is an airline pilot who happens to have a purple belt in karate and who used to carry a hunting knife under one of his socks back when they could still do that) been on that flight, he could have saved them all.  And he was upset that they didn't do what they did sooner.  I told him you have to remember that they had no idea that the hi-jacking was any different from the kind they'd known of in the past, where they take you somewhere and make demands of the government but eventually let you go.  It was only when they started talking to people on the ground about it that they learned the truth, and by then, it was too late.  But the fact that they did as much as they did and didn't just sit there like lemmings waiting to die, I think, is extraordinary.

The movie was fantastic.  It is *not* a Hollywood movie.  That's what I love about it.  There is no back-story on any of the people on the plane.  You can't even figure out who Todd Beamer is until he finally says his infamous line "Let's roll."  And it's not said in a big Hollywood, "Die Hard," Ahnuld kind of a way.  It's said in the way a real guy under those conditions would say it at that moment.  If you blink, you might miss it.  I only recognized two of the actors - the only way it could have been better, I think, as if I didn't recognize any of them.  Because other than them, you feel as if you're watching a film someone on that plane and in those air-traffic control towers and at that military base took that somehow survived it all.  It feels real.  You are there.  I can't say enough about how impressive it is that Peter Greengrass made the suspense build like he did even though you know the outcome.  Or maybe it's because you know.  It made my stomach spin.

But I talked about it with my husband for about a half hour afterwards and then went to bed and had no trouble sleeping, and didn't find myself crying in the shower afterwards.  Why?  I don't think I'm heartless.  But I think this was, thankfully, an extraordinary situation that people got caught up in that brought the best out of most of them and the worst out of some of them.  We can only relate to it in our imaginations.  Most of us have not been held at gun- or knife- or bomb-point.

It's a reverent tribute to all of those people without being manipulative like World Trade Center, I think, was.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Scott6373 on January 15, 2007, 12:07:35 pm
Wasn't it something?  I need to watch it again soon.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on January 15, 2007, 12:34:06 pm
Sure enough, Scott.

Here's a link to a site that plays several critics' sound bites about it.  Gotta say I agree with all of them - especially "intestinally powerful."  I have never had my stomach so churned up by any movie in my life.  I could feel the tension in every single person on that screen, even the terrorists (which was in itself unsettling).  I also strongly agree with the critic who said, "both unbearable and unmissable."

http://www.united93movie.com/ (http://www.united93movie.com/)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: silkncense on January 21, 2007, 12:48:43 pm
I wasn't looking forward to United 93 but now I will definitely get it - Thanks for that.

Yesterday I saw Notes on a Scandal.  I very much like the actresses & was looking forward to it.  And, the acting was very good - but the film just left me cold.  The actions of the characters didn't seem to fit exactly.  Anyone else see it? 
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on January 21, 2007, 06:50:48 pm
I saw it yesterday, too.  I thought it was quite good, actually.  I know what you mean about its leaving you cold - I kind of feel that way, as well.  But not because I think the characters' actions didn't fit - I thought they did so well that their actions were totally believable.  The only problem I found with it was that Bill Nighy's character didn't have enough reason to have so much disdain for Barbara at the time he lashed out at her when they were on their way to the play.  Later he did, sure, but at that point, I thought his words were overly harsh.

I saw The Last King of Scotland today.  I had been basing my opinion on Forest Whitaker's performance being legendary on seeing the trailer alone.  I learned today that I was right.  That was the kind of performance that actually enriches your life just to see it, which is especially admirable considering he played a.) a real historical figure and b.) a monster.  I thought James McAvoy was really quite good, too.  Too bad he had to be the counterpart to that role - no matter who you were or how well you did, Whitaker *owned* every scene.  Hell, even the ones he wasn't in.

It was a much better-done movie than I expected, too.  I kind of expected a tour-de-force performance in an otherwise mediocre movie.  Instead I got a tour-de-force performance in a great movie.  What a fantastic character study about how power can so easily corrupt, and not just Amin, but the fictional doctor who started out being so believably (but not cloyingly so) idealistic.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 21, 2007, 06:59:40 pm
I saw Dreamgirls yesterday. As many have said, Jennifer Hudson, in her first big role, was excellent. I also thought Eddie Murphy was very good. Beyonce Knowles did a good job and Jamie Foxx must have been good because I just hated his character...by the end of the movie, it was "hiss, boo!" every time he showed up on the screen.

The movie did seem long, though, and as my mother said, by the end I was tired of the "shouting songs."

While Jennifer Hudson was very good, I don't think she'll win Best Supporting Actress...it's her first time out of the gate and I just don't think the Academy is that generous.

Thoughts from others who have seen Dreamgirls?

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on January 21, 2007, 07:06:08 pm
It was a much better-done movie than I expected, too.  I kind of expected a tour-de-force performance in an otherwise mediocre movie.  Instead I got a tour-de-force performance in a great movie.  What a fantastic character study about how power can so easily corrupt, and not just Amin, but the fictional doctor who started out being so believably (but not cloyingly so) idealistic.

That's a great endorsement, Barb.  I think I'll have to add that one to the (very) long list of films I want to see.

I saw "Pan's Labyrinth" a few days ago, a story that takes place during the Spanish Civil War.  What an interesting combination of the real and unreal!  But is the unreal any less real than what we think is the real world?  The imagery is beautiful, and the little girl who plays the lead is excellent.  It makes you think about all the layers of history, in fact the layers of reality itself, that lie just under the surface of where we live our day to day lives.  It's also about being tested and about both winning and losing what is most dear to you.  I definitely recommend it.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on January 21, 2007, 07:12:50 pm
I very nearly saw that one instead today, but I opted for The Last King of Scotland because Pan's Labyrinth just started for the first time on Friday, whereas the former is just a revival of sorts so I was afraid it'd be gone, soon.  Although, judging from the packed theater today and the applause at the end, maybe I was wrong about that one.

I'm still wanting to see Volver, but it's only playing at a theater I really don't like, so chances are I'll have to wait for the DVD.  Same goes for Little Children, unfortunately.

I hope to see Babel this Thursday.

Kind of annoying that they can't spread these good movies out over the year a little more (or some).  Stupid "awards season."  Man, I wish all that would just go away.  I mean, hand out awards if you want - we do at my company and in my business, too.  But the televising of it all (and the marketing and the hype) needs to stop.

And that's my truly revolutionary comment for the day.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on January 21, 2007, 07:14:25 pm
Oh, and Leslie, I have no comment to add to your Dreamgirls review except that I agree with every word.  Well, no - I thought Jamie Foxx was a little blah - but otherwise I agree with every word.

:)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 21, 2007, 08:08:34 pm
Barb, I think you and I should go to the movies together...one of these days, right?

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Ellemeno on January 21, 2007, 09:20:40 pm
Late to the party - and just popping in to say I think An American in Paris should come off the over-rated list.  George Gershwin and Gene Kelly - who could ask for anything more?

My sister's boyfriend's brother was on United Flight 93.  I'm not ready to see it.  Though I go through dark phases of scouring the internet about it every six months or so.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on January 22, 2007, 12:00:21 am
My sister's boyfriend's brother was on United Flight 93.  I'm not ready to see it.  Though I go through dark phases of scouring the internet about it every six months or so.

I can understand that.  I think it's one of those things that when you're ready for it, you'll know.  You go through hell watching it, even if you don't have such a personal connection.  But you come out clean on the other side.

Getting back to The Last King of Scotland (obsessive much?) - this thought just occurred to me: the relationship between Idi Amin and Nicolas Garrigan is not unlike that between, ironically, Forest Whitaker's and Stephen Rea's in The Crying Game.  But the roles are reversed this time.  Amin is now the captor instead of the captive.  Everything else is the same: the two of them are utterly infatuated with each other.  And it's easy to understand why.  They are both completely beguiling.  The homoeroticism in this movie is now staying with me, and I suspect will for a long while.  To a straight woman, there is nothing more electrifying - and heartbreaking - than the affection between two (apparently, anyway) straight men - especially when you care deeply about one (or both) of them.

My husband has a couple of such close friendships with men.  And I envy his partners deeply.  Because I know I can't give him what they do.  We've been living together for 19 years.  And we still get along exceedingly well on a platonic level.  And yet he'll get on the phone with one of these two or three and laugh like I haven't heard him laugh since the early days.  For hours.  Similarly, I know that when I get on the phone with one of my two or three closest women friends, I can talk and laugh like that for hours.  And he gets equally as jealous - to the point that he'll usually find some reason to interrupt me, even.  I just don't do it as often as he, so he forgets.

The electricity between these two characters is palpable.  They just understand each other.  Instantly.  Even though one comes from a very privileged background and one comes from a very disadvantaged one.  They both speak the same language of Lack of Father Love.  I guess it's so intoxicating when it's between two men because they don't let us in on that shit very often in real life.  With us women, it's just modus operandi.  What I love about this movie is that it doesn't force the Father/Son Conflict down our throats - just as Brokeback doesn't - it just lets it unwind slowly like a coiled spring, just as it would between people who understand each other instantly in the real world.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on January 24, 2007, 12:34:34 am
Went and saw Miss Potter with Ewan McGregor and Renee Z.  This movie can be described as achingly sweet and sincere and just nice nice nice.  Think 'Neverland-lite'.  Gonna buy this one when it comes out.   ;D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Lynne on January 26, 2007, 03:18:54 am
...I've been loving Keanu since Point Break and I don't see that changing!

My second fave guy is getting seriously dissed!  There's a dinner theatre production of Point Break where ...

What is unique about the stage take is that the role of Utah (played by Reeves in the film) is played by an audience member (selected at random each night) who is thrust upon the stage (guided by a PA - who also serves as stunt double) and given his/her lines on cue-cards. "Keanu Reeves roles demand a special kind of acting," explains director Hook, on the show's conceit. "Essentially, in every scene, you have to look like you've just been dropped into a room and you have no idea what's going on."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/playbill/20070125/en_playbill/105174

Oy!  Hopefully, his sense of humor is intact!
 8)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: silkncense on January 26, 2007, 10:26:08 pm
Lynne -

Do you recall a Keanu film w/ Peter Falk where Keanu's character falls in love w/ an older woman - I think played by Barbara Hershey?  I'm trying to recall the name - I swear I owned it a some point on VHS but have no idea whatever became of it. 
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Lynne on January 26, 2007, 10:32:48 pm
Lynne -

Do you recall a Keanu film w/ Peter Falk where Keanu's character falls in love w/ an older woman - I think played by Barbara Hershey?  I'm trying to recall the name - I swear I owned it a some point on VHS but have no idea whatever became of it. 

Sure thing, silkie!

That's Tune in Tommorrow!

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0100822/
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: silkncense on January 27, 2007, 12:11:15 pm
Ah yes -

Thanks much.  I remember at the time I thought it was cute.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Scott6373 on January 27, 2007, 12:15:27 pm
I saw Dreamgirls yesterday. As many have said, Jennifer Hudson, in her first big role, was excellent. I also thought Eddie Murphy was very good. Beyonce Knowles did a good job and Jamie Foxx must have been good because I just hated his character...by the end of the movie, it was "hiss, boo!" every time he showed up on the screen.

The movie did seem long, though, and as my mother said, by the end I was tired of the "shouting songs."

While Jennifer Hudson was very good, I don't think she'll win Best Supporting Actress...it's her first time out of the gate and I just don't think the Academy is that generous.

Thoughts from others who have seen Dreamgirls?

L

Having seen the original on B-Way, the movie was well made.  All the actors did a fine job with both singing and acting, however, it was basically a musical rip-off of the original artists.  It's a tough genre of music not to plagiarize, but they needed to do more than throw a few measures of music at some new performer in order to make it fresh and original.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on January 27, 2007, 12:54:16 pm
That was a very poignant post, Barb. I think it's possible to have that kind of relationship with someone, not necessarily of the same gender, but certainly not with one's spouse.

I saw the trailer for Miss Potter and I don't think I'll be seeing it, because I can't stand to look at Renee Zellweger's face!! The review in The New Yorker was not all that good either.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on January 27, 2007, 01:55:03 pm
I can't stand Renee Zellweger's face, either!  She always looks like she just swallowed a bug.  I don't know who it was who put it in her head that that smarmy, pursed-lip grin of hers is the least bit attractive.  But they were wrong.

Yes, Leslie, I think you, Lee and I should go to the movies together.  We seem to have the same taste.  Too bad we're scattered all over the country - practically in a diametrically opposite triangle, in fact.

I'm going to go see Pan's Labyrinth today at 2:20.  Can't wait!!!  Wish you all could join me.  :)



Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on January 27, 2007, 02:32:24 pm
My daughter's words to me before I saw Pan's Labyrinth were "it's a little violent." Well, no sh**!!! Just so you'll be prepared!

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: mvansand76 on January 27, 2007, 03:26:23 pm
I am not sure if I should post this here, but has anybody seen Little Children?
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on January 27, 2007, 04:16:17 pm
Count me in as a member of the "not able to stand Renee Zellweger's face" club!

Anthony Lane's review of "Miss Potter" in the New Yorker is hilarious. He talks about how Ewan McGregor's character "is required to utter the line, 'We shall give them a bunny book to conjure with."  :P  Then he writes, "Only one man on earth can speak those words with a straight face, and that is Hugh Hefner."  :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

I was considering taking my kids to "Pan's Labyrinth," but because it is R I looked it up on one of those parent/movie websites (my kids can see some R movies, no problem -- "28 Days Later," "V for Vendetta," "Little Miss Sunshine," "The Royal Tennenbaums," "Collateral" -- but not others). Anyway, the site had a list describing every single act of violence in the movie, and it sounded so sickening that by the end I didn't even want to see it.

Other than that, did you like it, Lee? ("Other than that, how did you like the play, Mrs. Lincoln?"  :laugh:)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on January 27, 2007, 04:57:18 pm
Actually, sorry to say, I didn't. I really wanted to like it and wanted the director to be a new Bunuel. But the whole thing was so murky and dark I couldn't really see the details. My favorite character was a mandrake root.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on January 27, 2007, 05:31:18 pm
Count me in as a member of the "not able to stand Renee Zellweger's face" club!

She scrunches her face unbearably in this movie.  I'm not sure why.  Perhaps the real Miss Potter did the same and they hired Renee because she's already so good at it?  ;)

Quote
Anthony Lane's review of "Miss Potter" in the New Yorker is hilarious. He talks about how Ewan McGregor's character "is required to utter the line, 'We shall give them a bunny book to conjure with."  :P  Then he writes, "Only one man on earth can speak those words with a straight face, and that is Hugh Hefner."  :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

 :D :D  He does say the line, and it's supposed to be funny for both the audience and the characters because in the plotline, Miss Potter has gone to some publishers to get her book published and they accept it, but then send their youngest brother (Ewan's character) to arrange the details.  They're essentially fobbing off the 'bunny book' job as they derisively described it to get rid of their youngest brother who is trying to do something with his life.  Ewan's character is quoting his brothers.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on January 27, 2007, 07:15:07 pm
I actually quite liked Pan's Labyrinth.  My theater's print was not murky and dark at all.  Yes, of course it was violent, but mercifully most of the violent acts were implied and not shown (or at least not fully).

I thought it was a beautiful parable, actually, of the importance of questioning authority at times when authority is clearly, terribly wrong.

I'm very glad I went to see it today.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on January 28, 2007, 03:46:03 pm
I am not sure if I should post this here, but has anybody seen Little Children?
I saw it yesterday and loved it!  I had to really suspend disbelief when it came to seeing Kate Winslet as plain though, lol! An excellent film with a constant underlying feeling of dread throughout.

Another favourite which I've mentioned in the Oscar Prediction thread, is Perfume: The Story of a Murderer.  It was badly marketed and is very underrated, I can't wait for the DVD.  Ben Whishaw was a revelation.

Pan's Labyrinth was a bit disappointing.  I realize that it's billed as fairy tale for adults but I still found the "bad guys" too easy to hate.  I too found the print way too dark.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: mvansand76 on January 28, 2007, 03:54:52 pm
I saw it yesterday and loved it!  I had to really suspend disbelief when it came to seeing Kate Winslet as plain though, lol! An excellent film with a constant underlying feeling of dread throughout.

Another favourite which I've mentioned in the Oscar Prediction thread, is Perfume: The Story of a Murderer.  It was badly marketed and is very underrated, I can't wait for the DVD.  Ben Whishaw was a revelation.

Pan's Labyrinth was a bit disappointing.  I realize that it's billed as fairy tale for adults but I still found the "bad guys" too easy to hate.  I too found the print way too dark.

Thank you Oilgun, I am gonna watch it on Tuesday!  :)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on January 28, 2007, 05:57:10 pm
I wanted to see Little Children today, myself.  But, alas, it has left all my local theaters.  I ended up seeing Venus and loving that instead.  What a gem!  And again, not just because of the lead actor's (Peter O'Toole's) performance - the movie as a whole was lovely.

Yes, the bad guys were awfully easy to hate in Pan's Labyrinth, but they were fascists, after all.

I still thought it was beautiful.  Sorry about the dark prints you guys have experienced.  I'm usually very sensitive to that, so I'm certain the one I saw did not have that problem.  I remember seeing a very dark print of BBM in one of my theater viewings, and it was very disappointing indeed not to be able to see very much at all - even/especially facial expressions - during TS1.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on January 28, 2007, 06:50:53 pm
I actually quite liked Pan's Labyrinth.  My theater's print was not murky and dark at all.  Yes, of course it was violent, but mercifully most of the violent acts were implied and not shown (or at least not fully).

I thought it was a beautiful parable, actually, of the importance of questioning authority at times when authority is clearly, terribly wrong.

I'm very glad I went to see it today.


Just came from seeing he movie.  My theater version was dark and murky too.  It was easy to hate the bad guys, but it made you wonder when the Captain drew the straight edge across his mirror image.

I thought it was very well done.

I guess it had a happy ending.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on January 28, 2007, 07:48:19 pm
Re dark prince prints: I have read articles, I think by Roger Ebert, saying that in order to save money some movie theaters use dimmer projection lighting than the films are designed to require. So that could be the problem, rather than the prints.

I haven't noticed that problem before, but thanks to BBM I do now know that theaters' sound quality differs considerably. The first two times I saw it, I had trouble making out much of the dialogue. The third time I saw it in a different theater, and suddenly everything was clear as a bell. Then back to the original theater, and it was murky again.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on January 28, 2007, 10:09:24 pm
That makes perfect sense, Katherine.  I would hope Muvico can afford to use the proper lighting systems - they charge more than any other theater in the area.  But I had the same experience with the sound of BBM.  My first two viewings were in that theater.  The picture quality was tremendous, but the sound was not quite clear.  Then I saw it in a theater where the picture was darker, but the sound was perfect.  I think the best showing overall was the Castro Theater showing in San Francisco.  Both the picture and the sound were the clearest I'd ever seen and heard.

Yes, I thought the captain drawing the knife across his own mirror image and deliberately fixing the watch his father had wanted him to keep broken to remind him of the time of his death showed self-loathing probably due to father-son conflict.  So he wasn't quite as cut and dried as he seemed.  I also thought that the showing of his stitching up his own face showed what a hard-ass, tough son of a bitch he was.  I saw him actually as fairly complex.  But the best acting I thought was done by the woman who played Mercedes.  I honestly didn't know whether she was a "good guy" or "bad guy" until about a third of the way through.  I credit the writing and acting for that.

I just thought it was a beautiful film about the power of the imagination to help us through hard times and about how obeying just for obeying's sake is dangerous and wrong.  I imagine if the film had appeared dark and murky the whole time, I would literally not have seen all I did see in it.  But as it was, I thought it was magical.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on January 29, 2007, 11:56:56 pm

Yes, the bad guys were awfully easy to hate in Pan's Labyrinth, but they were fascists, after all.


Lol! Good point but I'm sure fascists aren't evil all the time, wouldn't that be too tiring?  The guy didn't even like his wife, he was really the evil king figure. 

I realise that the shaving & mirror scene and the watch thing were there to add some complexity to the character but for some reason, it wasn't enough for me, I just wanted him dead, no questions asked.  I was hoping that some of his underlings might have second thoughts about following some of the orders. [mild spoiler ahead] Actually, now that I think of it, there were some protests in the farmer and son bottle-in-the face-scene.

Anyway, don't get me wrong, I thought it was a wonderful film overall.  I'm just not a big fan of the fantasy genre, I guess. (although I loved Naked Lunch if that can considered fantasy)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on January 30, 2007, 12:17:48 am
I get you, oilgun.  Yes, he was overall pretty black and white, I agree.

I, too, am not a fan of the fantasy genre.  For example, I couldn't care less about The Lord of the Rings or Harry Potter movies.  I saw the first installment of both and didn't feel the need to continue.

I dunno...  Something about this movie just grabbed me.  Maybe because I can relate to using one's imagination to get through terrible times.  But I can also understand why it's not universally appealing.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 30, 2007, 07:45:26 am

I, too, am not a fan of the fantasy genre.  For example, I couldn't care less about The Lord of the Rings or Harry Potter movies.  I saw the first installment of both and didn't feel the need to continue.


Another similarity in our movie taste, Barb. I have tried to watch LOTR a bunch of times and get totally bored in the first 15 minutes. I have sat through more of the Harry Potter movies, only because I love the books so much, but this is another example of a situation where the book is way better than the movie.

I also don't like comic book movies, at all, which is why I am not looking forward to Heath as Joker in the Batman movie. Speaking of that, I just read yesterday that Katie Holmes Cruise will not be reprising her role in that.

Leslie
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on January 30, 2007, 10:11:37 am
Totally agree with you on all of that.  I like the Spider-Man movies, but they're about the only comic book movies I can stand.  And they're pushing the envelope on that one.  The LOTR lose me after about 15 minutes, too, as do the Harry Potters.  I've only seen the first of both of those series, and the first 15 minutes of the second in both!

I was hesitant to see Pan's Labyrinth knowing that the director has done a couple of comic book movies, one of which I saw and *hated* (and won't mention here lest I totally dissuade you from seeing it).  But it just drew me in.  Very subtlely at first.  Like my first Brokeback viewing, I'm kind of at a loss for words to describe it except to say, again, that I thought it was magical.  And it has stayed with me since Saturday when I saw it.  I keep seeing certain scenes in my head.  A couple of the underworld creatures are scary as hell, but they're beautiful allegories for the very essence of the natural world (Pan, the faun) and of all unseen, dormant evil (the pale, sleeping monster).  Oops - guess I'm not at a loss for words after all.  But that would be one of the Seven Signs of the Apocalypse, wouldn't it?


 
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on January 30, 2007, 10:21:28 am
I saw "Pan's Labyrinth" last night on a number of friends' recommendations. 

While I appreciated the history/fantasy/allegory, I found the violence appalling.  To me, it was gratuitous and unnecessary to the story; the brutality could easily have been suggested more subtly.  It spoiled the film for me.

I'm all for dark fairy tales.  This one was nauseating.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 30, 2007, 10:31:37 am
Really, Paul...thanks for this.

Tony wants to take Hannah to see Pan L. I have no interest and have been of two minds about Hannah seeing it...I will share your comment with him. He may do some re-thinking.

Leslie
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on January 30, 2007, 10:38:37 am
Late to the party - and just popping in to say I think An American in Paris should come off the over-rated list.  George Gershwin and Gene Kelly - who could ask for anything more?

My sister's boyfriend's brother was on United Flight 93.  I'm not ready to see it.  Though I go through dark phases of scouring the internet about it every six months or so.


I agree with you about An American in Paris! Did you know that Leslie Caron will be in an upcoming episode of Law & Order?
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on January 30, 2007, 11:27:18 am
While I appreciated the history/fantasy/allegory, I found the violence appalling.  To me, it was gratuitous and unnecessary to the story; the brutality could easily have been suggested more subtly.  It spoiled the film for me.

That's too bad. It sounds like a movie that, if not for the violence, I'd like to take my kids to see (I don't know if any of us could handle it -- me included!). And it seems as if they're cutting their own nose off to spite their face (so to speak  ;D). You'd think the audience for über-violent movies and the audience for fantasy movies don't have a huge overlap. Reduce the violence, and I bet a lot more people would go.

I hear "Smoking Aces" is really violent, and of course my sons want to see that, and they can't. But in that case, it makes more sense; from what I've read, it's the kind of movie that would attract an audience that would tolerate -- if not prefer -- lots of violence.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on January 30, 2007, 11:33:44 am
Really, Paul...thanks for this.

Tony wants to take Hannah to see Pan L. I have no interest and have been of two minds about Hannah seeing it...I will share your comment with him. He may do some re-thinking.

Leslie

How old is Hannah?  I don't think I'd take a kid much younger than 15 or 16, myself.  It's pretty intense.

It's interesting that I didn't find the violence nauseating.  Usually gratuitous violence really turns me off and spoils a film for me, too.  Not sure why I was in a frame of mind to accept it this time.  For what it's worth, Saturday was the 15-year anniversary of my mother's death.  I wanted to see something that took me completely outside of myself.  This did the trick for me.  But I agree - it's not for everyone.  And impressionable young people (and impressionable old people, too) should steer clear.

That said, I haven't had any nightmares about it, whereas I had nightmares for 2-3 weeks following seeing "The Passion of the Christ" and "Saving Private Ryan."  The 2-3 extremely violent scenes were fairly fleeting and you could see them coming and know to look away ahead of time.  Which I did.  BTW, "Kill Bill, Vol. 1" has the dubious distinction of being the only movie I've ever walked out of the theater in the middle of.  (I at least did it discretely so as not to spoil it for the folks who were actually enjoying it.)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Scott6373 on January 30, 2007, 11:34:56 am
I saw "Pan's Labyrinth" last night on a number of friends' recommendations. 

While I appreciated the history/fantasy/allegory, I found the violence appalling.  To me, it was gratuitous and unnecessary to the story; the brutality could easily have been suggested more subtly.  It spoiled the film for me.

I'm all for dark fairy tales.  This one was nauseating.

You're not the first person to say that to me.  It's not my kind of film to begin with, but I probably will be avoiding this one.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on January 30, 2007, 11:40:52 am
That said, I haven't had any nightmares about it, whereas I had nightmares for 2-3 weeks following seeing "The Passion of the Christ" and "Saving Private Ryan."  The 2-3 extremely violent scenes were fairly fleeting and you could see them coming and know to look away ahead of time.  Which I did.  BTW, "Kill Bill, Vol. 1" has the dubious distinction of being the only movie I've ever walked out of the theater in the middle of.  (I at least did it discretely so as not to spoil it for the folks who were actually enjoying it.)

That's the only reason I never saw "Saving Private Ryan," and one of the reasons I never saw "The Passion of the Christ." "Kill Bill" I never saw because it looked like it would be violent and gimmicky and pretentious. (I could be wrong about that, I guess.)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Scott6373 on January 30, 2007, 11:49:57 am
That's the only reason I never saw "Saving Private Ryan," and one of the reasons I never saw "The Passion of the Christ." "Kill Bill" I never saw because it looked like it would be violent and gimmicky and pretentious. (I could be wrong about that, I guess.)

No you're not wrong.  I did not see KB as I dislike Tarrentino, but I did see the other two.  SPR was tedious...I had a hard time staying interested.  I've had many discussions about TPOTC and, even now, I hold to my assertion, that if you remove the violence, it's "B" retelling of the same old biblical story. 
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on January 30, 2007, 12:00:34 pm
Totally agree with you about TPOTC, Scott.  And SPR, come to think of it.  After you're barraged by the first 20 minutes (and do we *really* have to see the guys' heads and legs get blown to bits?), it's tedious at best.  And the ending was cringe-worthy, IMO.  But then, Spielberg's endings always are.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 30, 2007, 12:55:49 pm
How old is Hannah?  I don't think I'd take a kid much younger than 15 or 16, myself.  It's pretty intense.


She's 15. And she has dark thoughts, so this concerns me a bit. But she wants to see this movie and Tony said he did too, and that they'd go together, so maybe the water is under the bridge on this one.

Leslie
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 30, 2007, 12:56:22 pm
That's the only reason I never saw "Saving Private Ryan," and one of the reasons I never saw "The Passion of the Christ." "Kill Bill" I never saw because it looked like it would be violent and gimmicky and pretentious. (I could be wrong about that, I guess.)

What she said.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on January 30, 2007, 01:36:32 pm
Well, it does give a little bit of a history lesson, too, about the Fascists winning the Spanish Civil War.  And as fantastical as it is, its message is not at all a dark one.  It's actually a very liberal message - about taking a stand when the people/society around you are doing something terribly wrong, even if taking that stand puts you at risk.  It is also kind of Christian allegory in the sense that when you do the right thing, you are rewarded with everlasting life.  Normally, that would annoy me a bit, but the way it was presented here is actually rather comforting.  It's presented in the sense that you shouldn't do what you think your God/your church is telling you to do if you know it isn't right - that sometimes going against all that is preached is really the way to salvation.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on January 30, 2007, 05:12:08 pm
I agree with all you've said about "Pan's Labyrinth," Barb.  I almost didn't go, knowing about the violence, but nowadays if we avoid films with violence in them, we won't see much.  And when all is said and done, I didn't think it was really gratuitous.  Its very senselessness and severity was indicative of how far the commander had gone in losing his humanity.  It's the first film I've seen since BBM that I felt was rich enough in ideas and execution to warrant the kind of analysis we've given our beloved movie here.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on January 30, 2007, 05:46:44 pm
It's the first film I've seen since BBM that I felt was rich enough in ideas and execution to warrant the kind of analysis we've given our beloved movie here.

Couldn't agree more.  I'm even toying with posting on its very own IMDb board about it, since I can't get it outta my head.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on January 31, 2007, 10:32:07 am
OK, so I went to see Letters From Iwo Jima last night.  And I have to say...  Pfffffffffft.  Not good.  Not good at all.  In fact, I'd daresay it's one of Eastwood's weakest films.  Which isn't saying a lot, since I'm one of the few people on the planet who isn't bowled over by his directing prowess.  Of all his movies, I thought Unforgiven was the best.  By far.  I honestly don't think he's ever come close to that again.  A big part of the problem - perhaps the major part - is his collaborater - Paul Haggis.  I can poop better dialog than that man can write.  Here are just a few examples of what he had Japanese Imperial Army soldiers saying, in Japanese (I think it's almost more painful to read the triteness than to just hear it):

"Everything comes in threes."

"Every man for himself!"

"Do the right thing.  Because it is the right thing."

Um...  Hello?  First of all, the first two expressions are purely Western/American.  Second of all, I don't even want to talk about how gut-wrenchingly bad that third line is.  Not to mention that he actually made it the theme of his movie, so it got repeated once or twice.

The good things about the movie (that Haggis the Hack had nothing to do with) are that the violence was more implied than shown - I always deeply appreciate that - and that it's always an enjoyable experience to watch Ken Watanabe, even when he's saying trite crap in Japanese.  The other good thing about it that I have to concede he had something to do with was that at least an attempt was made to tell this story from the Japanese point of view and in a way that didn't paint them all as mindless, soulless robots.  The attempt missed the mark in that even though they were speaking Japanese, it was still a very American story.  But at least the attempt was made.

If this thing wins the BP award (and the fact that it was even nominated, and for screenplay besides, makes me wanna yak)...  Well, it'll just be case in point for why the Academy has become utterly irrelevent and couldn't recognize real art if it tripped over it.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 31, 2007, 10:58:20 am
OK, so I went to see Letters From Iwo Jima last night.  And I have to say...  Pfffffffffft.  Not good.  Not good at all.  In fact, I'd daresay it's one of Eastwood's weakest films.  Which isn't saying a lot, since I'm one of the few people on the planet who isn't bowled over by his directing prowess.  Of all his movies, I thought Unforgiven was the best.  By far.  I honestly don't think he's ever come close to that again. 

Amen to that, sweetheart. Don't even get me STARTED on Million Dollar Baby!
Quote
If this thing wins the BP award (and the fact that it was even nominated, and for screenplay besides, makes me wanna yak)...  Well, it'll just be case in point for why the Academy has become utterly irrelevent and couldn't recognize real art if it tripped over it.

And it may still win. Even though I predicted "Little Miss Sunshine" yesterday, part of my mind still believes that the cadre of old white men who vote will get some twisted notion in their heads of patriotism, WWII, the greatest generation and all the rest and decide this movie is deserving of the honor of best picture...to remind of us all of when America Was Great.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on January 31, 2007, 11:04:22 am
A big part of the problem - perhaps the major part - is his collaborater - Paul Haggis.

Whoa, Barb! I'm surprised you even consented to see it!  :o
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on January 31, 2007, 11:22:52 am
So am I.  Note to self:  Never again.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: SFEnnisSF on January 31, 2007, 11:49:26 am
I saw THE GOOD GERMAN last night.  http://thegoodgerman.warnerbros.com/

Cate Blanchett was HOT HOT HOT!  :D

The movie was not.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on January 31, 2007, 01:27:39 pm
I saw THE GOOD GERMAN last night.  http://thegoodgerman.warnerbros.com/

Cate Blanchett was HOT HOT HOT!  :D

Is there any movie out right now that Cate Blanchett is not in? I'm trying to decide whether to go this weekend to see "Babel" (with Cate Blanchett) or "Notes on a Scandal" (with Cate Blanchett).
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Lynne on January 31, 2007, 01:32:47 pm
Is there any movie out right now that Cate Blanchett is not in? I'm trying to decide whether to go this weekend to see "Babel" (with Cate Blanchett) or "Notes on a Scandal" (with Cate Blanchett).

I vote Babel, but that's my inner Gustavo fan speaking!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on January 31, 2007, 01:34:17 pm
I may try to squeeze in both. And because I live in Chicago and the Super Bowl is Sunday -- I might have the whole theater to myself!  :D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: nakymaton on January 31, 2007, 01:35:13 pm
A big part of the problem - perhaps the major part - is his collaborater - Paul Haggis.  I can poop better dialog than that man can write.

This is why I won't go see "Letters from Iwo Jima." Heck, I wouldn't have seen Crash even before the BBM snub at the Oscars, simply because I was so annoyed with the writing in Million Dollar Baby.

If this is what counts as good writing in movies these days, well, that's depressing.  ::) (I'm trying to think of what screenwriters other than Larry McMurtry and Diana Ossana have impressed me lately, now. Did Emma Thompson write or co-write the script for "Stranger than Fiction"? That was pretty clever. I didn't see "For Your Consideration," but that comedy troupe is usually pretty clever. But that's comedy; I don't know about drama. I guess bad writing can kill comedy as well -- see Saturday Night Live -- but bad writing in drama is like fingernails on a chalkboard to me.)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Lynne on January 31, 2007, 01:44:33 pm
::) (I'm trying to think of what screenwriters other than Larry McMurtry and Diana Ossana have impressed me lately, now. Did Emma Thompson write or co-write the script for "Stranger than Fiction"?

Emma's biggest screenwriting successes are Pride & Prejudice and Sense and Sensibility - I thought both were fabulous.

From IMDb:

Nanny McPhee (2005) (screenplay)
Pride & Prejudice (2005) (additional dialogue) (uncredited)
... aka Orgueil et préjugés (France)
Wit (2001) (TV) (teleplay)
Sense and Sensibility (1995) (screenplay)
"Thompson" (1988) TV Series (writer)
Emma Thompson: Up for Grabs (1985) (TV)
An Evening for Nicaragua (1983) (TV)
"Alfresco" (1983) TV Series (additional material)
Cambridge Footlights Revue (1982) (TV)

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000668/
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on January 31, 2007, 02:46:19 pm
Aw, Nanny McPhee is really a sweet movie.  I just saw it on cable.  It goes a little awry at the end (snow at the summer wedding?), but it's nicely done.  Emma Thompson is the greatest.  :)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on February 02, 2007, 03:39:30 pm
I watched a lovely indy last night - "Sweet Land."  It was a screener for members of Film Independent only (la-tee-da, I know), so it's not available yet for DVD rental.  But it will be soon.  I highly recommend it.  It's about a Norwegian immigrant farmer in Minnesota in the 1920s who has his marriage arranged with a young woman who turns out to be German.  Apparently at that time there was a lot of anti-German/anti-Socialist sentiment, so when the townspeople find out she's German, they essentially turn their backs on both of them and no one will marry them.  She refuses to leave and he's too busy struggling with bringing in his corn crop alone and with no machinery to be too concerned.  So she sleeps in the bedroom and he sleeps in the barn.  She can't speak English and his is only broken, so they can barely communicate, at least with words.  And they fall in love.  And it's magical, because you fall in love with each of them yourself as the layers of their characters are revealed.  They are strong, brave, compassionate people with hearts and wills as big as the all outdoors and you can't help but love both of them.  And watching their furtive glances at each other and how they come to bond before they even touch each other's hands is sublime.  Reminds me of something...  I can't quite put a finger on it, but some other movie where love seemed to be being invented on the screen before our very eyes...  It'll come to me...

On tap for this weekend:  "Children of Men."  I wasn't originally planning to see this one because I don't much like Julianne Moore, but I keep seeing too many good reviews and hearing too many people here and elsewhere say they felt like they were part of the action and it was thrilling, etc., to miss it.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on February 02, 2007, 07:17:03 pm
I finally got to see "Volver" the other day.  I didn't want to miss an Almodovar movie that had gotten such good reviews, and I wanted to see Penelope Cruz in a role that really used her talents.  I enjoyed it, though I wasn't wowed by it. 

It's rather overplotted, with a fair number of twists and turns and convenient coincidences that require some suspension of belief.  Family secrets, ghosts and mistaken identity all figure in the story.  In the hands of, say, Mel Brooks, it would make a good slapstick comedy.  Almodovar makes it more like a Spanish Woody Allen film--you laugh more because of the characters than the situations.  Penelope Cruz does have some nice scenes, but   I don't think it's a role that would usually be singled out for an Oscar nomination.  I think voters were rewarding her for stepping out of the girlfriend roles in big Hollywood movies and doing something more artsy.  She looks great, but a little too great--what regular Spanish housewife who cleans office buildings for a living looks like she's had her hair and makeup done by a professional every day?

In the end I didn't think it was satisfying because it stayed too much in the middle of comedy and tragedy, not taking either far enough.  The other actors are fine, and it's very enjoyable.  Just think of it as a nice, light meal rather than dinner.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on February 02, 2007, 09:40:54 pm
I agree with all you've said about "Pan's Labyrinth," Barb.  I almost didn't go, knowing about the violence, but nowadays if we avoid films with violence in them, we won't see much.  And when all is said and done, I didn't think it was really gratuitous.  It's very senselessness and severity was indicative of how far the commander had gone in losing his humanity.  It's the first film I've seen since BBM that I felt was rich enough in ideas and execution to warrant the kind of analysis we've given our beloved movie here.

Quote
Well, it does give a little bit of a history lesson, too, about the Fascists winning the Spanish Civil War.  And as fantastical as it is, its message is not at all a dark one.  It's actually a very liberal message - about taking a stand when the people/society around you are doing something terribly wrong, even if taking that stand puts you at risk.  It is also kind of Christian allegory in the sense that when you do the right thing, you are rewarded with everlasting life.  Normally, that would annoy me a bit, but the way it was presented here is actually rather comforting.  It's presented in the sense that you shouldn't do what you think your God/your church is telling you to do if you know it isn't right - that sometimes going against all that is preached is really the way to salvation.

Well said Meryl and Barb.  I didn't think the violence was gratuitous, it was war, the real violence  - torture scenes - were done - thankfully - offscreen.  I agree the stepfather's character was a complex man.  Cruel and callous but still his character was more than just an ogre.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on February 03, 2007, 01:56:34 pm
I finally got to see "Volver" the other day.  I didn't want to miss an Almodovar movie that had gotten such good reviews, and I wanted to see Penelope Cruz in a role that really used her talents.  I enjoyed it, though I wasn't wowed by it. 


I agree Meryl, I wasn't wowed by Volver either.  It didn't have the emotional impact of All About My Mother, which I think is Almodovar's masterpiece.  I'm pretty excited  because I just bought the Viva Pedro boxed set which has eight of his films, including Law of Desire, Matador, Women on the Verge, Live Flesh, The Flower of My Secret, All About My Mother, Talk To Her & Bad Education.

Has anyone seen Soderbergh's Bubble?  It's one of his low budget Digital Video projects and it was released in theatres, PPV and DVD all at the same time.  It's the story of two friends in a midwestern working class town who work in a doll factory and how the dynamics of their relationship is affected when a new employee arrives on the scene.  A murder complicates things further.  The actors are all non-professional but are surprisingly effective.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on February 03, 2007, 10:01:00 pm
I haven't seen Bubble yet, but I'd like to.

I saw Children of Men today.  It was very good - I'd give it a solid three stars.  But as you've said about Volver, as much as this one tried, it somehow lacked that emotional punch I was hoping for.  I do quite like Clive Owen, though.  There is something so multi-layered even about his physical appearance.  How he looks so craggly and lined and hard (albeit handsome) in the face, but how when he smiles, it's a little boy's bashful smile with perfect white teeth.  Amazing.  Changes his whole face so much that it's almost like it's someone else's for a time.  I really enjoyed Michael Caine, which I don't always do, too.  When he doesn't take himself too seriously, he's still quite a gifted comic actor.

Meanwhile, I can't stop thinking about two scenes in Sweet Land when it's subtlely but profoundly shown how the protagonists are falling in love with each other.  One is when their eyes meet - I won't say when or why because it's so beautiful I don't want to spoil the impact for someone later - and hold on each other's for several seconds.  The other is when one takes the other's hand for the first time.  The filmmakers leave a lot to the imagination, not unlike certain other filmmakers I could mention, so I find myself finishing a couple of the scenes in my mind, if'n ya know what I mean.  Good, GOOD stuff.  Can't recommend it enough.  (But God knows I'll try.)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: SFEnnisSF on February 03, 2007, 10:26:37 pm
Anybody here a David Lynch fan?  :D

I'm excited about INLAND EMPIRE opening here next Friday.  It is opening at the two theatres BBM premiered at, The Embarcadero and the California in Berkeley.  The Landmark Theatres website says this about the Cal:
Giveaways before all evening shows all weekend!
Plus: Prizes for anyone who brings a log
or comes in a Lynch-inspired costume!


Too bad I'll be headin' to Santa Barbara this weekend, otherwise I'd come as Frank Booth, gas mask and all.  LOL.  :D  And after reading the fan fiction Green Eyes, I'll all ready for another David Lynch adventure...

The Cal was so great for BBM on opening night.  The ran an old trailer for Urban Cowboy!  :D


(http://www.inlandempirecinema.com/)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on February 03, 2007, 10:32:54 pm
I'd come as Laura Palmer, draped in a plastic body bag with grey face paint and lipstick.  Probably not the most original idea out there, though, I reckon.

You know what I think my favorite movie of his is?  The Straight Story.  Man, that was lovely.  I also thoroughly enjoyed Blue Velvet back in the day.  You too, I take it.




Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: SFEnnisSF on February 03, 2007, 11:03:43 pm
I'd come as Laura Palmer, draped in a plastic body bag with grey face paint and lipstick.  Probably not the most original idea out there, though, I reckon.

You know what I think my favorite movie of his is?  The Straight Story.  Man, that was lovely.  I also thoroughly enjoyed Blue Velvet back in the day.  You too, I take it.

Barb!  Fly out here and I'll cancel my Santa Barbara trip!  Let's do it!  :D

Blue Velvet is of course a classic, but I think my favorite is Lost Highway.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on February 03, 2007, 11:22:09 pm
Oh, how I wish I could!  At my company, until you're on five years, you accrue vacation days.  So far, I've spent all the ones I've accrued for this year on Will's sick days or to go see schools for him.

I liked Lost Highway, too.  It's been a long time since I've seen it - I'm thinkin' I should check it out again.  :)

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Lynne on February 03, 2007, 11:27:28 pm
The Cal was so great for BBM on opening night.  The ran an old trailer for Urban Cowboy!  :D

 :D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: SFEnnisSF on February 03, 2007, 11:41:36 pm
:D

And when Nurse Betty opened, all the staff was in nurse costumes with broken arm casts on and such.  LOL.

When Donnie Darko Directors Cut opened, Frank The Bunny greeted everyone in the audience.

So you know Inland Empire is gonna be 'off the hook'.

 :D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: SFEnnisSF on February 03, 2007, 11:43:25 pm
I liked Lost Highway, too.  It's been a long time since I've seen it - I'm thinkin' I should check it out again.  :)

"Her name is Renee, if she tells you her name is Alice, she's lying."  ;)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: opinionista on February 04, 2007, 01:55:00 pm
Sorry to change the topic here. But considering Penelope Cruz has been nominated for an Oscar, has any of you (other than Kirk) seen Volver? I'd like to know your opinions about it. I thought it was an amazing piece of cinematography but I think you need to understand a bit about Spain's culture in order to fully comprehend the characters, their ways of thinking and behavior, and in some ways the plot itself. I'm not sure if people who reviewed the movie were aware of it. Almodovar does an amazing portrayal of the female culture in Spain, especially women from La Mancha (as in Don Quixote), where he is from. I was totally taken by surprise, considering that he is a man.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on February 04, 2007, 03:30:22 pm
Sorry to change the topic here. But considering Penelope Cruz has been nominated for an Oscar, has any of you (other than Kirk) seen Volver? I'd like to know your opinions about it. I thought it was an amazing piece of cinematography but I think you need to understand a bit about Spain's culture in order to fully comprehend the characters, their ways of thinking and behavior, and in some ways the plot itself. I'm not sure if people who reviewed the movie were aware of it. Almodovar does an amazing portrayal of the female culture in Spain, especially women from La Mancha (as in Don Quixote), where he is from. I was totally taken by surprise, considering that he is a man.

Natali, check out page 9 of this thread.  I gave my impressions of Volver, and oilgun also made some remarks about it.  :)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: saucycobblers on February 08, 2007, 02:13:16 pm
Just had to stop by and recommend 'The Last King of Scotland' starring Forest Whitaker as Idi Amin. I saw it at the weekend. Absolutely EXCELLENT. I had knots in my stomach by the time the credits rolled, which I always take as a good sign  :D

So pleased he's been nominated for an Oscar, as I've loved him since seeing him in the excellent Jim Jarmusch film 'Ghost Dog' and think he's criminally underrated. Go Forest!!  :D

(http://images.killermovies.com/l/thelastkingofscotland/gallery/poster.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on February 08, 2007, 02:55:29 pm
Yes, wasn't it (and he) WONDERFUL???  Now you can see why this one is on my Top Five list for the year.  I find it better as a movie than all five Oscar nominees, and I find Whitaker's performance better than just about any I have ever seen on film.  For once, a juggernaut who *totally* deserves all the praise and awards he's getting and then some.

I add my enthusiastic recommendation that everyone see this one if you can, too, and SOON.  Then, for those who still care about the Oscars, when he inevitably wins, you'll be nothing but glad.


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: saucycobblers on February 08, 2007, 03:08:16 pm
And WHEN he wins I'll be a-cheerin' very loudly and hoping we'll be seeing more of him on our screens as a result!

Have you seen 'Ghost Dog' Barb? If you haven't then you should check it out. A completely different kind of performance from our man Forest, but equally as powerful. Man oh man, he's a huge talent. Even in the smallest of film or TV roles you can't take your eyes off him.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on February 08, 2007, 04:36:21 pm
No, I haven't seen Ghost Dog yet, but you're the second person in as many days to tell me I should.  :)

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on February 08, 2007, 10:06:09 pm
Barb, I saw "Venus" last weekend because you were so enthusiastic about it, and I loved it.  Peter O'Toole is just wonderful, as are all the actors.  It's both sad and funny, and I thought the direction by Roger Michell was very good, too--witty and illuminating.  I looked him up on IMDb and saw that he directed "Notting Hill" and "Changing Lanes" as well as a couple of films with Daniel Craig.

I'm so glad that Peter O'Toole found this great vehicle to remind us how good he IS, not just WAS.  It was a treat, too, to see Vanessa Redgrave in it, always so radiant no matter how frumpy and old they try to make her.  :)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: jpwagoneer1964 on February 08, 2007, 11:03:33 pm
I Like 'Venus' as well. I got to see it Jan 28 at my bud's, Chris Atkins.

Saw 'In Search of Happiness' last Sat with one of my oldest bud's (we have known eachother since we were ten). Very good Movie.

Mark
Title: I watched Making Love again on HBO tonight
Post by: Bucky on February 09, 2007, 08:06:36 am
I don't think I truly appreciated just what a complex, sad and moving movie Making Love was until I saw it again tonight.  For its time it was truly a pioneer movie.  The movie was made in 1981 and at that time many gay guys were afraid of long term relationships and were content with "one night stands."  This movie also was made prior to the outbreak of AIDS and many gay men did engage in alot of sex without true love.  Bard who was Harry Hamilin's character was like that.

 Michael Ontkean's character Zach in my opinion was the saddest character in the movie because he had homosexual desires most of his life but repressed them and married Kate Jackson's character(Claire).  They had a life together which had everything but sexual passion.  Zach loved Claire but mostly as a friend who had a lot in common with him but she wanted more out of him than he could give her.  He became attracted to Bard when Bard was a patient of his and spent an evening with Bard.  Bard knew who he was and he knew that he did not want a long term relationship with a man but that was exactly what Zach was looking for at the time.  Bard pushed Zach away and finally Zach told Claire that he was gay.  She didn't accept it very well at least not at first so they seperated and Zach went to New York. 

In the end Claire finally married another man and had a child that she always hoped that she and Zach would have.  Zach found a man in New York while he worked at the Sloan-Kettering Medical Center.  They met again when Zack went back to California to attend a funeral of a mutual friend.  The whole thing was sad.  It was a sad experience for Zach, Claire and Bard.  I can relate to the struggles of Zach trying to come to terms with who he was and his confusion about his sexual identity at first.  Claire was sad because she would always love Zach and Bard had to question his "one night stand" love style and his encounter with Zach made him think that perhaps a long term relationship might be better for him. 
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: saucycobblers on February 09, 2007, 08:52:13 am
I was wondering whether or not to bother with 'In Search of Happiness'. I definitely will if you recommend it Mark!  :D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on February 09, 2007, 08:55:46 am
I rented Maurice and was wondering if it is a good film to see with a friend or by myself. Your recommendations?
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: saucycobblers on February 09, 2007, 08:57:33 am
I rented Maurice and was wondering if it is a good film to see with a friend or by myself. Your recommendations?

It's a bit like BBM, in that if you're gonna watch it with someone it has to be someone like-minded 'cos it's very emotional in places  :'(
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on February 09, 2007, 11:33:33 am
Barb, I saw "Venus" last weekend because you were so enthusiastic about it, and I loved it.  Peter O'Toole is just wonderful, as are all the actors.  It's both sad and funny, and I thought the direction by Roger Michell was very good, too--witty and illuminating.  I looked him up on IMDb and saw that he directed "Notting Hill" and "Changing Lanes" as well as a couple of films with Daniel Craig.

I'm so glad that Peter O'Toole found this great vehicle to remind us how good he IS, not just WAS.  It was a treat, too, to see Vanessa Redgrave in it, always so radiant no matter how frumpy and old they try to make her.  :)

Glad you loved it, Meryl.  It's a shame that this movie isn't getting more (or much) attention.  It really is a gem, as they say.  And another one that I find better than all five Oscar nominees.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on February 09, 2007, 11:39:06 am
I was wondering whether or not to bother with 'In Search of Happiness'. I definitely will if you recommend it Mark!  :D

You're talking about the movie with Will Smith? (Not to nitpick, but that's "pursuit.") Anyway, yes, I was wondering whether or not to bother, too, but I found it very enjoyable. Mainly because of Will Smith. He's just the world's most likeable person. Could he ever play a bad guy, do you think?

Robin Williams successfully made the transition from good guy to bad guy, but then he was already getting pretty annoying as a good guy. Tom Hanks has kind of edged a bit toward badness, but has never quite made it all the way there.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on February 09, 2007, 11:51:13 am
It's a bit like BBM, in that if you're gonna watch it with someone it has to be someone like-minded 'cos it's very emotional in places  :'(

Thank you for that recommendation!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: opinionista on February 10, 2007, 09:46:17 pm
Has anybody here seen Bobby? Emilio Esteve's latest flick. I saw it tonight and totally hated it. It was two hours of complete boredom, which was too bad given the topic of the movie. I thought it was too propagandist.  IMO the movie would've been a lot better if it took place after the murder of Bobby Kennedy, instead of before. 
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on February 11, 2007, 10:20:17 am
I haven't seen it mostly because it got thumbs-down reviews like yours.  I noticed it only lasted in our biggest megaplex for three weeks.  It started out in the "Premiere" section, which is a balcony-only section with assigned seating that you pay extra for.  Only the most-promising/biggest money-making movies are shown up there because you have to pay double for a ticket.  It lasted a week up there, got bumped down to the minors for two more, then was gone.  That tells me something.  On the other hand, The Departed started out up there in November and is *still* showing up there, and at the full gamut of possible movie times.  Brokeback started up there in late December last year and lasted up there until the end of April.  A theater manager told me that so far, that's the longest any movie's run up there.  The Departed may give it a run for its money, especially if it wins Best Picture, but that's OK with me because I found it thoroughly entertaining and very well-done.

On a side note (ha ha), Crash didn't play up there at all until *after* it got nominated for Best Picture.  Then, it lasted two weeks up there and only another three downstairs.

But who's counting?

 ;D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on February 11, 2007, 10:23:50 am
OT but I saw the Vagina Monologues last nite with LauraGigs, it was great!! I laughed a lot. Don't know why, but it seemed very appropriate for Valentines.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on February 11, 2007, 11:55:30 am
I didn't see "Bobby" for all the reasons Barb and Natali mentioned -- and also because I thought even the trailer was boring!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: opinionista on February 11, 2007, 07:50:58 pm
I went to see Little Children tonight and I totally recommend it. It is a haunting and thought provoking film. Well acted, well written, and well done. Kate Winslet was superb and so was Jackie Earle Haley (he's nominated for best supporting actor). He managed to make me hate his character and feel very sorry for him at the same time. Noah Emmerich's performance was also impressive and IMO he deserved a nomination too for his role. It's a must see. Go see it if you haven't.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: opinionista on February 11, 2007, 08:28:29 pm
It's rather overplotted, with a fair number of twists and turns and convenient coincidences that require some suspension of belief.  Family secrets, ghosts and mistaken identity all figure in the story.  In the hands of, say, Mel Brooks, it would make a good slapstick comedy.  Almodovar makes it more like a Spanish Woody Allen film--you laugh more because of the characters than the situations. 

I did like Volver, and very much. But I think this movie was not really suitable for the international public. IMO, it is too deep rooted in the culture of Spain, especially of La Mancha. It's really about the women, and the strange, but strong-tied relationship they develop, mostly to protect each other. They can fight and grow apart, but in the end they go back to each other. They also have a different understanding of death. I went to see it with two friends whose parents are from small towns of La Mancha. They live in Madrid, but they still have strong ties with their respectives towns, and visit them often. They thought the movie's portrayal of La Mancha women is very accurate. Of course, their lives are different to Raimunda's, but in general, they felt very represented in the movie.

Penelope Curz's Raimunda is based on Almodovar's own aunt, who was also a Raimunda. Part of the plot is based on real-life events.

This is the type of movie you can't see from an American point of view, IMO that is.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on February 12, 2007, 12:05:40 am
I did like Volver, and very much. But I think this movie was not really suitable for the international public. IMO, it is too deep rooted in the culture of Spain, especially of La Mancha. It's really about the women, and the strange, but strong-tied relationship they develop, mostly to protect each other. They can fight and grow apart, but in the end they go back to each other. They also have a different understanding of death. I went to see it with two friends whose parents are from small towns of La Mancha. They live in Madrid, but they still have strong ties with their respectives towns, and visit them often. They thought the movie's portrayal of La Mancha women is very accurate. Of course, their lives are different to Raimunda's, but in general, they felt very represented in the movie.

Penelope Curz's Raimunda is based on Almodovar's own aunt, who was also a Raimunda. Part of the plot is based on real-life events.

This is the type of movie you can't see from an American point of view, IMO that is.

I guess that's so that an American wouldn't get as much out of it, but I didn't really have a problem believing the relationships or the supernatural part.  It was just that some of the plot twists seemed pretty contrived.  I can't go into much detail without spoiling it for others, but I hope you know what I mean.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: saucycobblers on February 12, 2007, 09:28:21 am
WOOHOO!!! Forest Whitaker won the Best Actor BAFTA!! Go Forest!!

The BAFTAs sure have great taste - remember thay gave the statue to Jakey last year?

 ;D :D ;D :D ;D :D ;D :D ;D :D ;D :D ;D :D ;D :D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on February 12, 2007, 12:03:11 pm
Yes, they have great taste.  Except for not giving one to Heath and Michelle, that is.  But I'll give them snaps for at least getting it right where Jake and the movie, screenplay, and director were concerned.

I was glad to see Forest win.  As I've said before, he's one juggernaut who deserves everything he gets and then some.  I've just about never seen a performance like his - legendary.  The only film performances I can compare it to are Judi Dench in "Mrs. Brown," Ralph Fiennes in "Schindler's List," and Heath Ledger in "Brokeback Mountain."

And unlike Phillip Seymour Hoffman, I feel like Forest is just gettin' started.

(Sorry, btw - but I appear to be about the only person on the planet who thinks Marlon Brando, James Dean, and Sean Penn are vastly over-rated, so I didn't include their penultimate performances in that list.)

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: opinionista on February 17, 2007, 12:24:17 pm
I guess that's so that an American wouldn't get as much out of it, but I didn't really have a problem believing the relationships or the supernatural part.  It was just that some of the plot twists seemed pretty contrived.  I can't go into much detail without spoiling it for others, but I hope you know what I mean.

I thought the plot twist were plot devices. I didn't see them as an important part of the movie. I think it was more about the relationship. That's why it is called Volver. It means coming back.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on February 17, 2007, 12:48:31 pm
I thought the plot twist were plot devices. I didn't see them as an important part of the movie. I think it was more about the relationship. That's why it is called Volver. It means coming back.

Yes, they were devices.  But once you accept them as such, they work well to help the story achieve that "coming back" theme. "Volver" applies in many ways to the story and characters, don't you think?
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on February 17, 2007, 11:18:17 pm
I just got done watching "sherrybaby."  Wow.  What a great character study.  And Maggie is so wonderful.

I've known two heroin addicts in my time.  Both ended up meeting early ends.  I totally believed her struggle to stay clean.  That anyone can come back from that particular addiction and lead any semblance of a normal life is extraordinary, and yet she makes you believe it's possible.  Junkies are a breed apart from your run-of-the mill addicts, and I've known and know all kinds.

The movie is difficult to watch, as they say, at times because Sherry is so self-destructive.  You know she's better than what she cracks herself up to be, so it's that much more painful to see her fail, and fail so spectacularly.  What is the line in the song...   Every junkie's like a setting sun.

It's ultimately a very interesting story about family relationships, too.  The good, the bad, and the ugly.  And it's one that stays with you.  I find myself still rooting for her (and worrying for her) from the point at which the story left off on as if she is a real person.  Kinda like some other fictional (?) character I could name.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on March 06, 2007, 09:28:02 pm
I saw "Amazing Grace" this weekend and really enjoyed it.  I mainly went for the period flavor and the plethora of terrific English actors I saw in the previews.  It's the story of William Wilberforce's battle to make the slave trade illegal in Britain in the early 1800's.  I am a big fan of the Patrick O'Brian novels set in the same period, the ones that "Master and Commander" is based on, so I wanted to drink in that atmosphere.

The settings and costumes are first rate, from lovely English estates to the dirty, congested docks in London to the halls of Parliament.  Ioan Gruffudd was very good as Wilberforce, and it was especially nice to see Albert Finney and Michael Gambon in lesser roles.  The camera loved every wrinkle in their glorious old faces.  Rufus Sewell and Ciaran Hinds also had good parts.

Although they tried hard to approach each scene interestingly, the screenwriters focussed unrelentingly on Wilberforce's mission, so the film was centered on politics and religion.  Still, there are lots of human touches, and the ending is quite emotional, if a little corny.  I recommend it, and probably you should see it soon, since it won't be around too long.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: saucycobblers on March 07, 2007, 08:29:38 am
'amazing Grace' is next on my must-see list, so thanks for the info Meryl!

I saw 'Notes on a Scandal' a couple of days ago and highly recommend it. Judi Dench is fantastic - a very, very complex performance and most deserving of the Oscar nom. And anyone who's ever taught kids for a living will be chuckling and nodding in agreement at the first 10-15 minutes! :)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on March 07, 2007, 11:03:20 am
I saw "Amazing Grace" this weekend and really enjoyed it.

Good to know, Meryl! I was going to probably skip it, but with your endorsement I will try to get to it.

I saw Breach this weekend. It was quite good. I always love Chris Cooper (especially in Adaptation!). Ryan Phillipe was pretty good, too, though having just seen Half Nelson a couple of days earlier, I couldn't help wishing that if they were going to cast a Ryan they'd have picked Ryan Gosling instead.

Half Nelson was great -- right up until the time I fell asleep (I started the DVD way too late). But Ryan Gosling was fantastic and so was Shareeka Epps. I also finally saw Proof, which I'm sure most of you have already seen. I liked it pretty well. I was a little uncertain about Gwyneth in the lead role -- I'd seen it on stage with the wonderful Mary Louise Parker, and couldn't imagine anyone else in the part -- but I thought she was fine. And Jake, it goes without saying, was excellent.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on March 12, 2007, 01:02:20 am
I got to see the German film "The Lives of Others" last weekend.  What a good movie!  I can see why Anke and Chrissi have been rooting for it to win awards, and it did win the Oscar for Best Foreign Film over "Pan's Labyrinth," surprisingly.  It's quite a different film from PL, although both deal with political oppression.

The main character works for the government in East Germany before the fall of the Berlin Wall.  He's assigned the job of spying on a playwright and his actress girlfriend, looking for evidence of subversive ties with the West.  As he comes to sympathize with his subjects, he finds himself looking for ways to protect them and plays a dangerous double game.  It's very well written and acted, and it makes you ever so happy to live in a country that has freedom of speech!  The ending is perfect.  It won't play in many theaters here, but when it comes out on DVD, it's definitely worth renting.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on March 12, 2007, 01:06:26 pm
Meryl, I watched "The Lives of Others" this past weekend, myself.  EXCELLENT.  I agree with all you've said.  The acting across the board was extraordinary.  What a wonderful film.  And the last line, as they say, is like a shot to the heart.

Now that I've seen it, I guess I can live with it winning those awards over "Pan's Labyrinth."  It is truly a A+ movie.  One of the few perfect ones I've seen in recent times.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: opinionista on March 12, 2007, 07:29:11 pm
WOOHOO!!! Forest Whitaker won the Best Actor BAFTA!! Go Forest!!

The BAFTAs sure have great taste - remember thay gave the statue to Jakey last year?

 ;D :D ;D :D ;D :D ;D :D ;D :D ;D :D ;D :D ;D :D

I finally saw The Last King of Scotland and I have to say, Forest Whitaker's performance is beyond outstanding. I was so impressed. Too bad they gave too much movie time to the scot guy. He didn't do it that good.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: saucycobblers on March 12, 2007, 07:38:02 pm
I finally saw The Last King of Scotland and I have to say, Forest Whitaker's performance is beyond outstanding. I was so impressed. Too bad they gave too much movie time to the scot guy. He didn't do it that good.

I felt the same - I think he overdid the cocky new boy act a little. It didn't need to be that strong (or irritating) in the beginning to show his journey over the course of the film.

I hope the Oscar means we'll see more of Forest on our screens from now on  :D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on March 12, 2007, 07:49:55 pm
I actually quite liked James McAvoy in that role.  But then again, I'm an American, and we don't get to hear nearly enough of that particular accent, IMO.  Or at least I don't.

:)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on March 12, 2007, 08:31:40 pm
I'm dying to see 'Amazing Grace' simply because of my man Ioan Gruffud.  :-* :-*

The cast looks outstanding and I love the era.  Haven't made it yet, though.

Did go see 'Bridge to Terebithia' which is based apparently on a famous children's book, which I didn't know.  My friend who is a teacher and up on those kind of things took me, and it was very well done.  The children were excellent actors and very convincing, the adults played with dignity and not mocked and it was truly emotional. 

The previews are somewhat misleading.  What they show is mostly just to sell the story to the kids and get them in the theaters.  It's the least of the story.  Thumbs up! 
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: opinionista on March 24, 2007, 04:14:14 pm
Meryl, I watched "The Lives of Others" this past weekend, myself.  EXCELLENT.  I agree with all you've said.  The acting across the board was extraordinary.  What a wonderful film.  And the last line, as they say, is like a shot to the heart.

Now that I've seen it, I guess I can live with it winning those awards over "Pan's Labyrinth."  It is truly a A+ movie.  One of the few perfect ones I've seen in recent times.


I finally went to see it and I have to say it is one of the most touching movies i have ever seen. That oscar was well deserved.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on March 25, 2007, 09:08:08 pm
The Shooter   5/10

The plot was conventional and formulaic, but points for the sidekick being ethnic, the woman actually able to use a gun and of course, points for Marky Mark's obligatory shirtless scenes, worth the price of admission alone.

Amazingly, the plot is politically balanced, showing neither support nor contempt for our current administration.

But all you pacificists and our lovely European fans, be warned it is a strictly gun culture American shoot 'em up.  In one scene, we learn that the valued memento mori of one character is a rifle left to them by a dead loved one.  :P
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: mvansand76 on April 28, 2007, 01:12:10 pm
I get you, oilgun.  Yes, he was overall pretty black and white, I agree.

I, too, am not a fan of the fantasy genre.  For example, I couldn't care less about The Lord of the Rings or Harry Potter movies.  I saw the first installment of both and didn't feel the need to continue.

I dunno...  Something about this movie just grabbed me.  Maybe because I can relate to using one's imagination to get through terrible times.  But I can also understand why it's not universally appealing.


Hey!
I just saw Pan's Labyrinth and I was so amazed. It's such a disturbing movie. I don't know why the movie grabbed me like it did, but by the end I was crying more than I have ever cried over BBM. The violence was definitely too much and I had to close my eyes several times (The Oh-no-they-are-not-gonna-show-that-are-they-oh-shit-yes-they-are moments). It was refreshing to see this movie also because of the actors, they were incredible, the little girl and Mercedes were so good. Spain does have some amazing talents! Anyway, I am still trying to figure out why it grabbed me like it did....
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on April 28, 2007, 08:13:54 pm
I'm glad you got to see it, Snavel.  It's something I urge everyone here to see - it and "The Lives of Others" were by far the most moving films I've seen in the last year.  Like it did you, "Pan's Labyrinth" really got a hold of me.  It haunted me for a long time afterwards.  I had a vivid imagination as a child, too, and actually wrote a fairy tale once about a girl who sees the reflection of the sky in big puddle and gets mezmerized by it, bends down to see it more closely, and gets pulled into another world on the other side of it.  But never in my wildest imaginings did I conjure up anything like Pan or the pale monster (yikes) or the giant toad.  It was all beyond magical.  Put all the LOTR and Harry Potter crap to shame, if'n you ask me.  (OK, so I've only seen the first LOTR and Harry Potter movies and was underwhelmed by both of them...)

I saw a good one today - "Hot Fuzz" - made by the guys who made "Shaun of the Dead."  Wonderful satire.  Some very gross violence in that one, too, but it somehow wasn't as disturbing as Pan's because it was so surreal, ironically enough.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on April 28, 2007, 10:00:04 pm
Hey!
I just saw Pan's Labyrinth and I was so amazed. It's such a disturbing movie. I don't know why the movie grabbed me like it did, but by the end I was crying more than I have ever cried over BBM. The violence was definitely too much and I had to close my eyes several times (The Oh-no-they-are-not-gonna-show-that-are-they-oh-shit-yes-they-are moments). It was refreshing to see this movie also because of the actors, they were incredible, the little girl and Mercedes were so good. Spain does have some amazing talents! Anyway, I am still trying to figure out why it grabbed me like it did....

Yes, I really like Pan's Labyrinth as well.  I was enthralled by the world the girl made for herself.  At the end, my friend was asking, "Well did she make it up or not?"

That's the best part.  You don't know.  :)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: mvansand76 on April 29, 2007, 05:40:05 am
Yes, I really like Pan's Labyrinth as well.  I was enthralled by the world the girl made for herself.  At the end, my friend was asking, "Well did she make it up or not?"

That's the best part.  You don't know.  :)

Yeah I was discussing that with my boyfriend last night and we think it was all in her head, because her body really was still there, the grown-ups didn't see anything magical (he took her brother away from her, but didn't see the Faun). But then that little root she put in the milk under her mother's bed did have that effect on her mother.. it's all very intriguing and it leaves a lot to be discussed, just like BBM, that's probably why I thought it was such an interesting film, for the first time since BBM I saw a movie that I was still thinking about hours later, and now even days later...

I'm glad you got to see it, Snavel.  It's something I urge everyone here to see - it and "The Lives of Others" were by far the most moving films I've seen in the last year.  Like it did you, "Pan's Labyrinth" really got a hold of me.  It haunted me for a long time afterwards.  I had a vivid imagination as a child, too, and actually wrote a fairy tale once about a girl who sees the reflection of the sky in big puddle and gets mezmerized by it, bends down to see it more closely, and gets pulled into another world on the other side of it.  But never in my wildest imaginings did I conjure up anything like Pan or the pale monster (yikes) or the giant toad.  It was all beyond magical.  Put all the LOTR and Harry Potter crap to shame, if'n you ask me.  (OK, so I've only seen the first LOTR and Harry Potter movies and was underwhelmed by both of them...)

I saw a good one today - "Hot Fuzz" - made by the guys who made "Shaun of the Dead."  Wonderful satire.  Some very gross violence in that one, too, but it somehow wasn't as disturbing as Pan's because it was so surreal, ironically enough.


Oh I would love to see Hot Fuzz, I looooved Shaun of the Dead, it was hilarious! It's me, Mel, by the way (Snuitje). LOL! Das Leben der Anderen I need to see too.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on April 29, 2007, 10:02:25 am
Oh, hi, Mel.   ;D

You'll love "Hot Fuzz."  I looooved "Shaun of the Dead," too, and this one is very much in keeping with that same broad but sly wit.  I laughed myself silly at several things in it.  Funny thing - this youngish guy two seats over from me and I kept laughing at exactly the same stuff and in exactly the same way - we'd chuckle at some stuff, kind of snort at others, and laugh out loud at others.  It was almost a little awkward until finally I quietly said to him "Hey.  Are we related?"  He and his friends laughed at that and the awkwardness dissipated.  We still kept laughing at the same stuff in the same way.

It was a fun crowd at this movie.  In the Land of Seniors, I was for once one of the oldest people in the theater instead of one of the youngest.  That was definitely refreshing.  I did enjoy how the one group of senior men who came together sitting in the row in front of me and one seat over laughed enthusiastically at several parts.  So my sense of humor will still be very much intact at their age.  Good to know.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: opinionista on May 02, 2007, 05:14:35 am
Yeah I was discussing that with my boyfriend last night and we think it was all in her head, because her body really was still there, the grown-ups didn't see anything magical (he took her brother away from her, but didn't see the Faun). But then that little root she put in the milk under her mother's bed did have that effect on her mother.. it's all very intriguing and it leaves a lot to be discussed, just like BBM, that's probably why I thought it was such an interesting film, for the first time since BBM I saw a movie that I was still thinking about hours later, and now even days later...

I still think it was all part of the girl's imagination. Even the mandragora, the root she puts underneath her mother's bed. I don't know why she gets better but it could've been the medicines the doctor had been giving her, though the doctor doesn't understand her sudden improvement. I think the girl, with her fantasy, is trying to cope to the reality of death. Not killiing herself but that dying is possible. She said the the princess's father is waiting for the return of her soul. We all think children don't think of death, but I think they do if they are within an environment where dying violently seems to be norm.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: mvansand76 on May 02, 2007, 07:57:44 am
Oh, hi, Mel.   ;D

You'll love "Hot Fuzz."  I looooved "Shaun of the Dead," too, and this one is very much in keeping with that same broad but sly wit.  I laughed myself silly at several things in it.  Funny thing - this youngish guy two seats over from me and I kept laughing at exactly the same stuff and in exactly the same way - we'd chuckle at some stuff, kind of snort at others, and laugh out loud at others.  It was almost a little awkward until finally I quietly said to him "Hey.  Are we related?"  He and his friends laughed at that and the awkwardness dissipated.  We still kept laughing at the same stuff in the same way.

It was a fun crowd at this movie.  In the Land of Seniors, I was for once one of the oldest people in the theater instead of one of the youngest.  That was definitely refreshing.  I did enjoy how the one group of senior men who came together sitting in the row in front of me and one seat over laughed enthusiastically at several parts.  So my sense of humor will still be very much intact at their age.  Good to know.


I can't help but think I would be laughing at the same things as you did! I love the type of humour in Shaun of the Dead. I love the part in the beginning where he keeps passing by zombies and he doesn't realise it. Or the record throwing in the garden. LOL!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on May 02, 2007, 07:50:23 pm
Reading about the humour in Shawn of the Dead reminds me of another more recent "horror" film that had me on the floor laughing:  Slither with Nathan Fillion.  It has some rather disturbing scenes so it's not for the squeamish but man is it ever funny in parts.  I was pleasantly surprised.

Has anyone seen Dito Montiel's A Guide to Recognizing Your Saints.  At first I was really hating it because it felt like watching a bunch of people in an acting class and we all know how awful that can be, lol!  There is a lot of Acting with a capital A  in this but once I got used to it I really enjoyed it.  The revelation for me was Channing Tatum, the guy CAN act althopugh he doesn't need to as this pic of him (not from the movie) will attest: 

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ChanningTatum-1.jpg)

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: loneleeb3 on May 08, 2007, 07:02:31 pm
Channing Tatum[/i], the guy CAN act althopugh he doesn't need to as this pic of him (not from the movie) will attest: 

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ChanningTatum-1.jpg)
DANG!
Who cares if he can act!!!!
Title: Pirates of the Caribbean III
Post by: delalluvia on May 28, 2007, 01:13:39 am
Just came from watching "Pirates of the Caribbean III:  At World's End."

Entertaining but overly long, they made the same mistake as the producers did on The Mummy II - had too many characters, introduced more and spent too little time on the important ones - they didn't have to show what happened to everyone, ya know? - worried more about amping up the special effects than the characters' stories.  One plotline was very interesting, but took a bizarre and unnecessary turn, another storyline we waited for for 3 years took a tragic turn that was tossed off way too casually for what actually happened.

I give it a 6/10
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on May 28, 2007, 08:38:03 am
Sounds an awful lot like Spider-Man 3, Del.  Thanks for the intel - I do believe I'll pass.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on May 29, 2007, 05:47:26 pm
Sounds an awful lot like Spider-Man 3, Del.  Thanks for the intel - I do believe I'll pass.

I have to go, if for no other reason than to see Keith Richards!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on May 29, 2007, 09:30:01 pm
I'd love to see that bit, too, Kat - and Geoffrey Rush is always a joy.  But...I...just...can't.

I'm going through another "I refuse to sit through mediocre movies" stage, and I haven't even seen Brokeback lately!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on May 30, 2007, 08:07:32 pm
Not to say Pirates III completely sucked.   I enjoyed it, it was just disappointing.  I completed the trilogy and will probably have to buy the DVD just to complete my set.

Jack is still Jack which is always a plus and I did enjoy the quadruple double-crosses they had going at one point.  By the time Keith Richards showed up, I had completely forgotten he was going to be in it.  He looked perfect, played his part perfectly, the director made him comfortable and did not ask too much of him.  Heh.  They probably didn't bother with any makeup for him.

If you do go, it's very long, so don't drink too much before hand and stay for the end of the credits.  Unbeknownst to me, all 3 movies have a final scene at the end of the credits and I missed this one as well.  I'll have to check my DVDs for the others.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on May 31, 2007, 10:56:42 pm
Keith Richards, in my book, can pretty much do no wrong (he and I even share initials!). Sounds like his role is too short.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on June 01, 2007, 07:36:25 pm
Yesterday I watched Terry Gilliam's Tideland and I'd like to nominate it as one of the most underrated films ever.  The bad press and my disappointment with The Brothers Grimm   prevented me from seeing it at the theatre and now I really regret it. It might well be my favourite Gilliam film ever, I loved it!

Some people have compared it to Pan's Labyrinth because both involve a little girl escaping into a world of fantasy but I think it is superior.   I became emotionally invested in Tideland very early in the film but for some reason with PL, it was the opposite, I lost the connection early on.

I'd love to hear what others thought of it.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on June 01, 2007, 08:01:18 pm
Wow - I'll have to check that one out, oilgun.  I *love* "Brazil" - and if you say it's superior even to "Pan's Labyrinth," I'll have to see it.

Thanks for the recommendation.  :)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on June 02, 2007, 12:37:56 pm
Yesterday I watched Terry Gilliam's Tideland and I'd like to nominate it as one of the most underrated films ever.  The bad press and my disappointment with The Brothers Grimm   prevented me from seeing it at the theatre and now I really regret it. It might well be my favourite Gilliam film ever, I loved it!

Some people have compared it to Pan's Labyrinth because both involve a little girl escaping into a world of fantasy but I think it is superior.   I became emotionally invested in Tideland very early in the film but for some reason with PL, it was the opposite, I lost the connection early on.

I'd love to hear what others thought of it.
I need to see this, especially since I watched "Lost in La Mancha" last nite about how Don Quixote didn't get made by Gilliam, so I need to see a movie of his that did get made!!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on June 02, 2007, 12:46:20 pm
Anybody seen Waitress? I'm thinking of going this weekend. It's either that or Pirates, and I have a feeling I'll have a much longer opportunity to see the latter.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on June 02, 2007, 03:14:51 pm
I've seen Waitress and LOVED it.  Best time I've had at the movie theater in...  I don't know how long.  It's beautifully-written - the dialogue is so natural and perfect.  Adrienne Shelly totally got how people really talk.  It's such a crying shame that we won't get to see any more films from her.  She was a wonderful director and a very good actor, too.  But Keri Russell is the star here, and she is absolutely adorable in every way.  What a talent.

DON'T miss this one.  I do believe I'd rather see it again, to be honest, than see Pirates for the first time.  It was just so much fun on so many levels.  Even the tough stuff (like watching Jenna struggle through an emotionally abusive marriage) was interesting to watch because Shelly never goes over the top with her dialogue, situations, or actors.

DON'T miss it.  Did I say that already?  ;)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: mvansand76 on June 02, 2007, 04:30:51 pm
Has anybody seen Black Snake Moan? It's getting mixed reviews here, so I am not sure if we should go and see it.... :-\

And... I am gonna see Zodiac on the 12th of June! Believe it or not, but it only just came out 2 days ago.... no Jake at the premiere here in Amsterdam though, I wonder why? I wonder why actors hardly ever come to premieres in Holland. Amsterdam is a pretty cool city, right?  :-\

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: opinionista on June 02, 2007, 07:10:51 pm
Zodiac opened in Madrid a few weeks ago but i haven't had the chance to see it yet. I also thought Jake was going to be here to promote it but he was in Cannes, instead. He came when Jarhead opened, along with Peter Sarsgaard, but as far as I am concerned hasn't been back since. Kirsten Dunst, however, came to Spidey's opening.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: opinionista on June 03, 2007, 07:04:39 pm
I just saw Zodiac. When Jake delivers his first line I immediately thought of Jack Twist. That lasted about one second.

Well, the movie is good and interesting but not thought provoking. Jake is good in it but i was more impressed with Mark Ruffalo and Robert Downey Jr. I thought Downey Jr. was superb in his role.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on June 03, 2007, 07:29:48 pm
I've seen Waitress and LOVED it.  Best time I've had at the movie theater in...  I don't know how long.  It's beautifully-written - the dialogue is so natural and perfect.  Adrienne Shelly totally got how people really talk.  It's such a crying shame that we won't get to see any more films from her.  She was a wonderful director and a very good actor, too.  But Keri Russell is the star here, and she is absolutely adorable in every way.  What a talent.

... Even the tough stuff (like watching Jenna struggle through an emotionally abusive marriage) was interesting to watch because Shelly never goes over the top with her dialogue, situations, or actors.

You are so right, Barb! I saw it this afternoon and loved it, too. Cute, touching, restrained, ambiguous, sad. Keri Russell was good, and so were the other waitresses, including Adrienne Shelly  :'(. Lots of nice little details, like the way the writing on Andy Griffith's card looked shaky (thought he was excellent too, BTW). And the way the marriage was portrayed -- terrible, yes, but without descending into the melodramatic horrors that a lesser writer might be tempted to show. The guy who played the loathesome husband was good, too.

And I loved hearing the dialogue with its nonagreeing pronouns and verbs ("you was ..." "we was ..." etc.) -- reminded me of you-know-who!

Funny; the reviews I read were sort of mixed. I'm going to rottentomatoes to see if women reviewers liked it better. It's a bit of a chick flick, but in the good sense of the term.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on June 03, 2007, 08:58:14 pm
Yeah - I don't get that it gets any mixed reviews at all.  I thought it was damn near perfect.

Meanwhile, against my better judgment, I saw "Knocked Up" today, which the nimrod MALE reviewer in our local paper gave FOUR FUCKING STARS.  (That's out of four.)

I walked out of it thinking, "Yeah, that was certainly a solid 2 1/2 stars, bordering on 3, but FOUR FUCKING STARS?"

Men writing for men (and really young and/or immature ones at that).  Gag.

I think I'll go watch "Waitress" again and be cleansed.

 :P
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: memento on June 04, 2007, 08:26:39 pm
I loved how Waitress  used pies as a metaphor for Jenna's life - I Hate My Husband pie, I Don't Want Earl's Baby pie, Baby Screaming Its Head Off in the Middle of the Night and Ruining My Life pie. I really enjoyed its quirkiness and its message, which was in Andy Griffith's words: "Start fresh. It’s never too late."
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on June 04, 2007, 09:15:14 pm
I loved how Waitress  used pies as a metaphor for Jenna's life - I Hate My Husband pie, I Don't Want Earl's Baby pie, Baby Screaming Its Head Off in the Middle of the Night and Ruining My Life pie. I really enjoyed its quirkiness and its message, which was in Andy Griffith's words: "Start fresh. It’s never too late."

Excellently put.  I couldn't agree more.  :)

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on June 15, 2007, 09:04:49 pm
Has anybody seen Black Snake Moan? It's getting mixed reviews here, so I am not sure if we should go and see it.... :-\ 

My best friend is a feminist and she loved it considering its strange premise.

Quote
I wonder why? I wonder why actors hardly ever come to premieres in Holland. Amsterdam is a pretty cool city, right?  :-\

Dunno, too small an audience I suppose.  Doing promotion junkets is tiring for the actors, so they just hit the bigger markets.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on July 10, 2007, 04:26:37 pm
I got to see a preview of "Hairspray" last night and had the best time!  I haven't seen the stage show, so I was not familiar with the music, which is a spot on recreation of those 1960's tunes popular when I was in junior high and high school.  The adorable cast simply kept singing and dancing practically nonstop, and although the plot deals with serious stuff like racism and stereotypes, it was handled so adroitly and with such a light touch that it didn't get bogged down like it might have.

The girl they found to play Tracey, Nikki Blonsky, is just right--irrepressibly good-natured, full of life and of course plump, and she sings and dances beautifully.  As her parents, John Travolta and Christopher Walken are an utter hoot.  Michelle Pfeiffer does a great job as the villainous ex-beauty queen, and the small roles are perfect cameos: Jerry Stiller as the cheesy owner of a shop for big girls, Queen Latifah as a soulful record shop owner, and Allison Janney as an evangelical terror of a mom.  John Waters and Ricki Lake, the writer and star of the original movie, made quick (and appropriate) appearances, too.

It was so energizing, what with one catchy number after another, that I went in feeling tired and sleepy and came out wanting to dance down the street!  Go see it when you need a pick-me-up.  ;D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...Factory Girl
Post by: oilgun on July 30, 2007, 12:28:52 pm
I just bought the uncut version of  Factory Girl, and really enjoyed it.  I didn't see the theatrical version so I can't compare the two but I thought this one was quite good. 

Sienna Miller, who really didn't impress me in Casanova, was a revelation as poor little rich girl Edie Sedgwick but I absolutely LOVED Guy Pearce as a child-like petulant Warhol.  He completely disappears in the role and is a joy to watch.  His performance rivals that of PSH's as Capote, it's that good.  A lot of people didn't like Hayden Christiansen as "the folk singer" but I thought it was uncanny how much he looked and sounded like Dylan.

Anyway, I pronounce it an underrated gem, lol!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...Factory Girl
Post by: delalluvia on July 30, 2007, 09:14:47 pm
I just bought the uncut version of  Factory Girl, and really enjoyed it.  I didn't see the theatrical version so I can't compare the two but I thought this one was quite good. 

Sienna Miller, who really didn't impress me in Casanova, was a revelation as poor little rich girl Edie Sedgwick but I absolutely LOVED Guy Pearce as a child-like petulant Warhol.  He completely disappears in the role and is a joy to watch.  His performance rivals that of PSH's as Capote, it's that good.  A lot of people didn't like Hayden Christiansen as "the folk singer" but I thought it was uncanny how much he looked and sounded like Dylan.

Anyway, I pronounce it an underrated gem, lol!

I want to see both "Factory Girl" and "Casanova" as I seemed to have missed both in the theaters.  Guy Pearce disappears so much in the character that I didn't recognize him.  At first, I thought Warhol was being placed by James Marsden!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: shortfiction on July 31, 2007, 01:14:23 am
I'm off to Blockbuster tomorrow to see what I can find, but mostly I watch Netflix movies.  I'm going through the Black Adder series and I also bought all four seasons of A Bit of Fry and Laurie, as I am a fan of eccentric, absurdist, wacky British humor.   
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on July 31, 2007, 07:19:13 pm
I *love* Black Adder.  "Now's about the time the conversation turns to picking weevils out of biscuits and drinking urine."

:)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: shortfiction on July 31, 2007, 07:26:24 pm
Oh man...I just finished watching Perfume and it is very disturbing and grotesque.   Beautifully shot, though, and the 18th century French set design is very authentic looking.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on July 31, 2007, 08:56:34 pm
I just got finished watching Transformers.  And I must say, it is very disturbing and grotesque, too.  (But what did I expect from Michael Bay, anyway?)

I feel I must cleanse my movie soul with something - worth watching.  Something that redeems my faith in the movie-making gods.

Fargo, it is.  :)

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: opinionista on August 01, 2007, 07:36:48 am
Oh man...I just finished watching Perfume and it is very disturbing and grotesque.   Beautifully shot, though, and the 18th century French set design is very authentic looking.


You should read the novel. It is much, much better. The way the odors are described is amazing. You'll think you are acutally smelling them. Author is Patrick Süskind.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: shortfiction on August 01, 2007, 01:47:36 pm
You should read the novel. It is much, much better. The way the odors are described is amazing. You'll think you are acutally smelling them. Author is Patrick Süskind.

Wow.  That sounds like powerful writing.  I'll go see if I can find it.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: JCinNYC2006 on August 01, 2007, 03:52:04 pm
I agree with everyone who loved Waitress, it was one of the best surprises of the year so far.  I never watched Felicity but I thought Keri Russell was totally engaging in this film.  Plus the assortment of kooky characters (hmmm, reminds me of a certain trip I just took  ;) ) and especially Andy Griffith was hilarious and very touching.

Another unexpected gem was La Vie en Rose, about French icon Edith Piaf.  While I'm the first to admit I'm over actors playing real people and doing great imitations (PHS, feh!) I was blown away by Marion Cotillard.  She plays Piaf from late teenage years to early 40s, and she's a freaking dynamo.  The direction of the movie is interesting in how it travels back and forth in time.  I like that style but I found myself confused as to who certain characters were.  It was very interesting to see more of what Piaf's life was like and how she came to be such a legend, not having known much about her before the film.  It's a challenging movie but rewarding in the end.

Juan
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Casey Cornelius on August 02, 2007, 11:48:46 pm
The latest film which has provided me multiple joyful viewings is The History Boys.  Wonderful script by Alan Bennett from his incredibly witty Tony and Olivier award winning play, directed by Nicholas Hytner [Madness of King George (also from an Alan Bennet play), The Crucible. The Object of My Affection - but, more than a film director he is one of Britain's greatest theater and opera directors]
-- with an unbelievable cohesive ensemble cast of eight wonderful young British actors, Richard Griffiths [who was in the recent controversial London production of Equus with that Harry Potter actor dropping his kit - come to think of it Richard Griffiths was also in a Harry Potter film !] and the subtley stunning Frances de la Tour.  Makes me upset that I did not make more of an effort to see the original National Theatre production in London or the tour to New York last year.
If you watch the film and enjoy it, make an effort to get a hold of the original play-script [not just the film script]
and read the rest of the play, as about 3/4 of an hour of material had to be excised in the film adaption.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: SFEnnisSF on August 03, 2007, 02:21:48 am
I saw Sunshine tonight.  Awesome film.  I loved it.  

...And Chris Evans is a hottie!   :P   :D

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0448134/

http://www.foxsearchlight.com/sunshine/
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on August 03, 2007, 10:04:35 am

...And Chris Evans is a hottie!   :P   :D



Then you'd like him in Cellular.  It's actually an fun little thriller and he was just adorable in it!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: shortfiction on August 03, 2007, 05:25:06 pm
Valley of the Dolls---is there a more camptastic movie than this one?   
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on August 04, 2007, 02:29:35 pm
Sunshine sounds/reads pretty spooky.  Something I'd like to see.

Anyone seen Goya's Ghost?  The cast and direction is stellar (well maybe except for Randy Quaid).  8)

A biographical tale told through the eyes of celebrated Spanish painter Francisco Goya, whose paintings are best known for their brutality and the colorful depictions of life during the Spanish Inquisition. The drama unfolds as Brother Lorenzo, an enigmatic member of the powerful Spanish clergy, becomes infatuated with Goya⿿s beautiful teenage muse, Ines.

Cast and Credits
Starring:    Javier Bardem, Natalie Portman, Stellan Skarsgard, Randy Quaid, Jose Luis Gomez
Directed by:    Milos Forman


Or, since I'm on a French kick for my Paris trip La Vie en Rose?

From the slums of Paris to the limelight of New York, Edith Piaf's life was a battle to sing and survive, live and love. Raised in poverty, Edith's magical voice and her passionate romances and friendships with the greatest names of the period - Yves Montand, Jean Cocteau, Charles Aznavour, Marlene Dietrich, Marcel Cerdan and others - made her a star all around the world. But in her audacious attempt to tame her tragic destiny, the Little Sparrow - her nickname - flew so high she could not fail to burn her wings.

Both look amazing.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on August 04, 2007, 05:39:33 pm
I loved how Waitress  used pies as a metaphor for Jenna's life - I Hate My Husband pie, I Don't Want Earl's Baby pie, Baby Screaming Its Head Off in the Middle of the Night and Ruining My Life pie. I really enjoyed its quirkiness and its message, which was in Andy Griffith's words: "Start fresh. It’s never too late."

I haven't seen Waitress but my mother and sister have. There is a potato masher that makes an appearance during the credits and one or two other times in the movie. It is called "My Mother's Potato Masher" and is really made by my mother. You can read about it here:

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=980DEED91F39F932A15752C1A962948260

Unfortunately, you can't order the potato masher from Mom anymore (address that is in the article) as she sold the business a few years ago. I searched for a place to order it online but didn't find anything. I am not sure of the current status of the business.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on August 11, 2007, 05:30:40 pm
Just came from seeing the The Bourne Ultimatum.

For what it is, an action-packed thriller?  Excellent.  Very good.  I recommend it if you've been following the series.

Pacing and action is breathtaking and I appreciate how the fighting is not really focused on as it was the two previous movies, story is excellent, even though they have the inevitable plot holes.  Nice sense of symmetry to the movie with its choices of echoing images and dialogue and dovetailing one movie from the last.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on August 11, 2007, 07:35:27 pm
Then you'd like him in Cellular.  It's actually an fun little thriller and he was just adorable in it!

I love Cellular. I've seen it three times, which prior to BBM was as often as I ever saw a movie. I like it better than Speed, which it sort of resembles. I like Speed, too, but Cellular is wittier. And Chris Evans is great!

Just after I saw it the first time, in the theater, a friend called me and said she was urging everyone she knew to go out and see What the (bleep) do we know? I told her I was urging everyone to see Cellular ( :laugh: -- it wasn't exactly parallel; she had gone all spiritual about WTBDWK). I did go see WTBDWK finally, and discovered that my recommendation was much, much better.

I saw Bourne on opening night with my 11-year-old son. Very enjoyable! My son hadn't seen the first two, but he loved this one anyway. Now we are trying to rent the first two, but of course it's impossible to find them in the video stores.

Oh, and Barb, I kind of liked Transformers. Or at least I didn't hate it. But then, I'm a sucker for anything with Shia LaBoeuf.


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on August 12, 2007, 12:02:19 am
I really liked the first two Bourne movies, so I'm looking forward to seeing the new one.  8)

Just got back from seeing the French film Moliere, which was very enjoyable.  My friend compared it to Shakespeare in Love, which I can agree with.  It also reminded me a bit of Tom Jones, one of my favorite movies.  It's a serio/comic imagining of what might have happened to Moliere to inspire him to write his comedies, particularly Tartuffe.  The original music is quite nice, and the sets and costumes are beautiful.  If you saw Paris, je t'aime, the actor who plays Moliere, Romain Duris, was the student who had an affair with his friend's wife in Barcelona.
Title: Re: Best Movie of 2006?
Post by: Front-Ranger on August 13, 2007, 12:42:23 am
THE FOUNTAIN directed by the guy who did REQUIEM FOR THE DREAM had beautiful imagery, good score, but very, very confusing narrative.

The Fountain is now out on DVD. I watched it tonite and enjoyed it very much. It reminded me a little of the movie What Dreams May Come with Robin Williams. I don't pretend to understand it, but I'm glad there is a movie tackling the subjects of death, creation in destruction, and everlasting life. Some of the images were stunningly beautiful, and Hugh Jackman and Rachel Weitz are a delight for the eyes.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on August 14, 2007, 09:37:56 am
I loved The Fountain!  I thought Hugh Jackman was amazing in it.

I watched two excellent films on the weekend. My apologies if they have already been discussed here:

1- Infamous - The other movie about Capote writing In Cold BloodCapote was very stylish and compelling but I found PSH's performance rather distracting.  In this version however, I could focus more on the story.  Toby Jones, who actually resembles Capote physically,  is pitch-perfect.  Daniel Craig, who plays killer Perry Smith,  is in his best rough trade mode since Love is the Devil.  It seems that the relationship between the two is explored a bit more deeply.  It's unfortunate that it was released after PSH's vanity project because it's a very enjoyable film that deserves more attention.

2-  Fur: An Imaginary Portrait of Diane Arbus - I've always been a big fan of Diane Arbus' photographs so I was excited about this film, even though it is a fictional exploration.  It's a very strange and audacious film that is part Alice in Wonderland, part Beauty & the Beast, complete with surreal touches.  Nicole Kidman and Robert Downy Jr. are excellent as the leads.  I absolutely loved it! I think Diane would be pleased. 


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: JCinNYC2006 on August 14, 2007, 03:06:15 pm
The music in The Fountain is fantastic, a very good score if you're into movie music.  The narrative is non-sequential so a little harder to follow, but I'm used to films like that.  La Vie en Rose used a similar style, and again, Marian Cotillard is phenomenal as Edith Piaf.

I also agree that Infamous was a more satisfying film in that it varied more from scene to scene.  And the relationship b/w Capote and Perry Smith is definitely more intense.  I'm about ready to cancel my Netflix account because I am so far behind in new movies that I've rented that I want to see.....

Juan
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kelda on August 20, 2007, 08:08:19 am
I actually quite liked James McAvoy in that role.  But then again, I'm an American, and we don't get to hear nearly enough of that particular accent, IMO.  Or at least I don't.

:)

Okay so I finally saw last king of scotland last night. and did a little search on here to see if anyone had talked about it.

Loved the film, even if grusome, and thought Jaames McAvoy was great in it too! I wonder if Ewan McGregor was just too expensive for this project so they chose James instead? He is a Scot, so perhaps its not surprising he had the typical scots reactions down to a tee. I wonder who wrote the screenplay as they had the Scots/English bias just right. The way he immediately corrects Abi when he says hes British, the football loving guy, the way he slags of the english civil servant, little things like that.

Favouite line is probably..

Girl on Bus: Do you have monkeys in Scotland?
Nicholas Garrigan: No, but if we did we'd probably deep fry them!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: opinionista on September 03, 2007, 08:18:29 am
La Vie en Rose used a similar style, and again, Marian Cotillard is phenomenal as Edith Piaf.


Like I said in my blog I totally recommend La Vie en Rose. What a wonderful movie. I agree with Juan, Marion Cotillard does an outstanding job playing Edith. I posted a video of the real Edith singing La Vie en Rose in my blog as a tribute. She was gifted with a beautiful voice.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: shortfiction on September 06, 2007, 08:50:19 pm
The Missouri Breaks is by far the most unconventional, unpredictable "Western" I have ever seen.  Just watched it today, via Netflix delivery.    And hey, it's got Nicholson and Brando and Harry Dean Stanton!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on September 06, 2007, 09:09:40 pm
Anybody have a report on 3:30 to Yuma? It's on at my local theater this weekend, and I've seen a couple of decent reviews. Shoot 'Em Up is there, too, but I haven't seen a thing about that -- except an interview with Clive Owen on TV yesterday. It's not my usual type of movie, I don't think, but you never know. So if anybody has recommendations on either of these, yay or nay, I'm all ears.


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on September 06, 2007, 10:57:43 pm
I saw a good review of 3:10 to Yuma on CBS Sunday Morning.  I'm looking forward to it, especially because I like Russell Crowe.  Looks like a good old-fashioned Western with some very good performances.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on September 07, 2007, 01:57:54 pm
I'm gonna see that one tomorrow.  Russell Crowe is one of those guys I like as an actor, but not so much as a person.  That's OK - I'm never gonna meet him, most likely, let alone marry him.  ;)

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on September 07, 2007, 02:10:24 pm
I'm gonna see that one tomorrow.  Russell Crowe is one of those guys I like as an actor, but not so much as a person.  That's OK - I'm never gonna meet him, most likely, let alone marry him.  ;)

Me too. It takes a lot for me to dislike a talented actor onscreen, regardless of his offscreen persona. For example, I like Tom Cruise onscreen -- and he's not even all that talented!  :laugh: I like John Travolta, too.

Exceptions include Mel Gibson -- I'll never feel the same way about him again. Tony Curtis, Ernest Borgnine and that guy from Grey's Anatomy are also off my list (not that they were really on it in the first place). I have a hard time watching Michael Richards on Seinfeld now. And Sarah Jessica Parker is on thin ice, though I've always found her kind of annoying anyway.

I just read on another thread about Jerry Lewis using the F-word (not the four-letter one) in the Telethon, so my opinion of him has dropped, but it couldn't get much lower in the first place.



Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: shortfiction on September 07, 2007, 04:59:27 pm
Crowe is a tremendously gifted actor.  He becomes the character he plays and inhabits that person.


I would like to see the original 1957 version of 3:10 to Yuma as well as the new one.   
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on September 08, 2007, 09:01:27 pm
OK, I saw 3:10 to Yuma this afternoon and loved it.

It's about these two handsome men in the West -- one outgoing and confident, one troubled and taciturn -- who get thrown together by circumstances and, as they spend time together, grow to form an unexpected bond ...

Guess it's obvious why I liked it, hunh?  :laugh:

Actually, to like it you'd probably have to be at least open-minded toward Westerns, and you certainly have to not mind a lot of shooting and killing (non-gory, though), but if you pass those tests I bet you'd really enjoy it. It's what a Western should be, IMO, character study combined with morality play against a colorful backdrop.

Russell Crowe and Christian Bale are both really good. Really good.

I didn't take my sons with me, because of its R rating, but I wound up wishing I had, because they would have liked it and it contained nothing they haven't seen before. The rating is almost perplexing -- it must have been right on the line for PG-13. There's very little swearing. No real sex or nudity. Nothing vulgar or icky. Lots and lots of deaths, it's true. But probably not more than you'd see in, say, a special two-hour episode of 24.



Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Shasta542 on September 08, 2007, 10:39:16 pm
Oh--I'm so glad to hear that it's good from a real person, ineedcrayons! I've read good reviews. This is the one Eric and the hot Alabama cowboy are seeing tonite--sounds like they'll like it!!  
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on September 08, 2007, 11:35:04 pm
OK, I saw 3:10 to Yuma this afternoon and loved it.

It's about these two handsome men in the West -- one outgoing and confident, one troubled and taciturn -- who get thrown together by circumstances and, as they spend time together, grow to form an unexpected bond ...

Guess it's obvious why I liked it, hunh?  :laugh:

 Lots and lots of deaths, it's true. But probably not more than you'd see in, say, a special two-hour episode of 24.

 :laugh:  :laugh:  :laugh:

That's great news, Katherine!  I can't wait to plop down with some popcorn and enjoy it!  8)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on September 11, 2007, 08:59:55 pm
I loved it, too, Katherine.

It's a testament to the performances these two turned in that I went into it not at all into any of their previous stuff (I have always thought they are both grossly over-rated) and came out of it a fan.

They played the relationship beautifully.  And Crowe was tremendous.  He never once raised his voice, even when he was killing someone.  His character reminded me a lot of Dexter on the show (that I also love) of the same name - in fact, I have to wonder if the creator of "Dexter" fashioned him directly after Ben Wade.  The similarities in their childhood stories and the morality at their core are astonishing.

But as thrilling as it was to watch both of them (and it really was - so much so that I think I'll watch both of them again this weekend), the one who stole the thing was Ben Foster as Charlie Prince.  I read one review that nailed it:  "Prince's loyalty to his boss goes beyond propriety, sexuality, and sanity.  The kid (meaning Foster) is mesmerizing."

I tell ya, for my money, there was more exquisite homoerotic tension in this movie than in "Jarhead" ten times over.  Between Charlie Prince's passionate, unblinking devotion to Ben Wade and the way Wade damn near seduced Dan Evans just by talking to him, I was in heaven.

This same reviewer, by the way, said that the actors in this one were "an improvement" over the original ones, and that's saying a lot when Ben Wade was originally played by Glenn Ford.

Some reviewers didn't like the bit of a twist (so to speak) in the ending.  I loved it.  I thought it made perfect sense.  But then, I love "Dexter" (and for those uninitiated, Dexter is a serial killer who only kills people that are even nastier than he is - people who kill for fun, and he believes he is cursed, just like the "Hand of God" gun :).)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on September 11, 2007, 09:32:29 pm
The Missouri Breaks is by far the most unconventional, unpredictable "Western" I have ever seen.  Just watched it today, via Netflix delivery.    And hey, it's got Nicholson and Brando and Harry Dean Stanton!


Little Big Man, also from the same director, is in the same vein.

Sounds like 3:10 to Yuma is a must-see!!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on September 12, 2007, 01:47:28 am
But as thrilling as it was to watch both of them (and it really was - so much so that I think I'll watch both of them again this weekend)

I'm thinking of seeing it again, too. I wished I had taken my sons. It's rated R, so I thought I'd better vet it first, but it's probably the most PG-13ish R I've ever seen. True, there's a high body count and a little swearing, but neither seemed quite enough to warrant that rating.

I told my husband, who I later learned had also wanted to see it, that he should take the boys. But maybe I'll go, too!

Quote
Some reviewers didn't like the bit of a twist (so to speak) in the ending.  I loved it.  I thought it made perfect sense.

Me too. The ending couldn't have been more fitting. I saw a reviewer on Rotten Tomatoes criticize it, I figured he must have just been looking for something to complain about.

Sounds like 3:10 to Yuma is a must-see!!

You bet! I don't want to oversell it to the point that people come out disappointed, but FRiend, I'm pretty sure you'd like it.



Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kd5000 on September 12, 2007, 11:33:08 am
3:10 to Yuma. Should I stay away from this film.? I'm not that thin skin, but I thought society was evolving beyond this. Stereotypical gay acting villians are popping up everywhere in Hollywood film.   Interesting quote in the review by the director of  the 300 as well.   

After all, as Zack Snyder, director of 300, said about his movie's version of the villainous god-king Xerxes, “'What's more scary to a 20-year-old boy than a giant god-king who wants to have his way with you?''


I'm just posting an excerpt as the review as it had quite a few spoilers.  For the full review, see http://www.afterelton.com/movies/2007/9/310toyuma

========================================================================================
The new film 3:10 to Yuma delivers yet another coded gay villain to add to the already crowded pantheon. A remake of the 1957 film starring Glenn Ford, Russell Crowe plays the role of outlaw Ben Wade. Christian Bale co-stars as Dan Evans, the down on his luck Civil War veteran desperate enough to try to bring Wade to justice despite the near certainty he’ll die trying. And Ben Foster stars as Charlie Prince, Wade’s villainous henchman and second in command who oozes gay subtext.

To be perfectly clear, Foster’s part is actually rather small, so don’t expect GLAAD to issue a press release taking director James Mangold to task for denigrating the gay community. That being said, there is also no mistaking that Foster’s character is indeed coded as gay and is done so to make him even more unsettling to filmgoers since being a murderous sociopath apparently isn't bad enough.

When we first see Charlie Prince, he is astride his horse, one hand draped delicately over the other with the limpest wrist this side of the Mississippi river. He is by far the nattiest dresser in the entire cast, and if that isn’t mascara he’s wearing when we first meet him then I’m Buffalo Bill.

Foster’s casting tells us a great deal about what Mangold intended for the character. He is a slight man, probably best known as Angel in X-Men: The Last Stand and as Russell, Claire’s sexually ambiguous boyfriend in Six Feet Under. Macho isn’t a word likely to often be used in describing Foster.



Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on September 12, 2007, 12:30:43 pm
First, I want to say: Anyone wanting to see this film without pretty big spoilers should skip the second page of this review. The first page seems OK.

The essay is interesting. As a straight person, I'm no doubt more oblivious, but to be perfectly honest it didn't cross my mind that the character seemed gay -- except for the fact that his devotion to Russell Crowe's character is so intense. That I did wonder about a bit. But I didn't catch any of the supposedly stereotypical gay acting or any of the other subtle signals the writer mentions.

And maybe I'm out of it, but I don't necessarily think of a sterotypical gay character as an outlaw who goes around brutally killing people. And even if this character IS supposed to be gay, I'd be tempted to argue that the vast majority of outlaws and brutal killers in movies are straight, so if we occasionally see a gay brutal killer, isn't that just sort of giving equal time in a way that could be seen as normalizing gayness?

The essay makes some interesting points, but it also seems a bit hypersensitive. But again, maybe that's just me. Barb and anyone else who's seen it, what do you think?




Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on September 12, 2007, 02:34:39 pm
I didn't find the character stereotypically gay at all.  I agree that the reviewer is being hypersensitive.  I do think there is some serious homoerotic tension between Wade and Prince, but I liken it to the homoerotic tension I feel, in a way, between Jack and Sawyer on "Lost."  They're both indeed straight, but the intensity of their emotion toward each other (in their case, it's an intense hatred rather than devotion) is super-charged and makes someone like me REALLY want to see them make out.

I think the homoeroticism in 3:10 was intentional, but I didn't think Mangold/Foster were making the Prince character seem stereotypically gay.  Like Katherine, maybe I'm out of it, but I didn't see anything the least little bit limp-wristed about him.  In fact, he kind of scared the crap outta me, and no overtly gay character has ever done that before.  I do think his sexuality is meant to be ambiguous, though.  And I think the sense I got watching him and Wade interact that Wade knows this and plays on it in his own favor (i.e., plays Prince a little to get that dogged devotion out of him) was intended.

I also think this is a love story.  An unconventional one, and one about platonic, filial love and not sexual love.  I think Wade and Evans come to love one another - they come to respect the decency and morality they each find in the other and come to realize they're really very much alike, and that if one event in either's lives had gone the other way, they would be exactly like the other.  It's really lovely to watch their respect and ultimately love for each other grow over the course of the film.  Without giving too much away, I think Ben does what he does in the end more out of love for Dan than because it is his nature (but both are true).
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on September 12, 2007, 02:57:24 pm
Well put, Barb!

I noticed no limp-wristedness whatsoever. There is, however, something extreme and fanatical about Prince's devotion to Wade. It did cross my mind that Prince could be in love with Wade.

But, to take an analogy from an entirely different genre, it's also a little like the over-the-top devotion the character Dwight has for his boss, Michael, on The Office. Dwight is not gay (although at times Michael seems uncomfortable with those undertones). Though it's also a little like the devotion Smithers, who apparently IS gay, has for Mr. Burns on The Simpsons.

But so what if Prince IS supposed to be gay, and that he loves Wade in a romantic way? Would that, in and of itself, be so wrong for the movie to depict?

I think Wade and Evans come to love one another - they come to respect the decency and morality they each find in the other and come to realize they're really very much alike, and that if one event in either's lives had gone the other way, they would be exactly like the other.  It's really lovely to watch their respect and ultimately love for each other grow over the course of the film.  Without giving too much away, I think Ben does what he does in the end more out of love for Dan than because it is his nature (but both are true).

Interesting take, Barb. I don't know that I would have thought to describe their feelings for each other as "love," exactly, though certainly there's deep respect. And they come to see what they have in common. I think one of the most important moments in the film is in the hotel, when Dan's son says Wade won't (whisper whisper) because deep down he's really (whisper whisper), and then Wade responds by saying (whisper whisper) -- but actually (whisper whisper). Don't you?

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on September 13, 2007, 12:48:15 pm
Yes, I do.  :)

And I do think it's love - platonic love.  I have a couple of long-time female friends - one of them is my sister-in-law - with whom I can talk on the phone for hours (they both live far away).  And whenever we do that, which is only a few times a year, and get to the end of the conversation, one of us always says "I love you," and the other one says, "I love you, too."  And we mean it.  Maybe men look at it differently, but to me, deep, abiding mutual respect and understanding is love.  It's not the only kind of love there is, but it is love.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on September 13, 2007, 01:21:55 pm
Maybe men look at it differently, but to me, deep, abiding mutual respect and understanding is love.  It's not the only kind of love there is, but it is love.

Sure! I'm not saying men (and women) can't love each other platonically. And I agree that mutual respect and understanding are among the prerequisites, which Wade and Evans certainly share.

The only reason I would hesitate to call it "love" between them is that they've only known each other a couple of days. When I think of love, especially the platonic kind as opposed to the romantic kind, I think of emotions that need a bit longer to develop.

To me, they've barely gotten past the point where they're supposed to be mortal enemies (especially in the case of Evans, who is more resistant to Wade's appeal than Wade is to his). By then, maybe seeds have been planted of something I might imagine conceivably developing into love, under the right circumstances (which these aren't).

So I might say they reach something like ... an unexpected closeness. You see that particularly in the scenes where Evans tells Wade about his war experience and his reason for staying on his farm. And certainly in Wade's behavior. But I, personally, think of the feelings as stopping short of out-and-out love.

But that's just me!  :)  :-*

It's a really interesting movie, you all! And BTW, there are a couple of discussions of the homophobia issue on imdb's 3:10 to Yuma message board. I only glanced at a few of the posts, but it looks like most people don't think it's homophobic (either because they don't see Foster as gay, or they don't see a gay Foster as offensive). Not that imdb posters are necessarily the most sensitive analysts.  ::)






Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on September 13, 2007, 06:23:30 pm
I saw 3:10 to Yuma today and thought it was terrific.  I felt like I was watching an old-fashioned Western, like the ones with Jimmy Stewart or Henry Fonda.  Very good performances, and worth a second look to pick up on the subtleties of character.  The gay thing?  Would not have picked up on it at all without having read some of the comments here.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on September 14, 2007, 12:31:09 pm
I concur on all counts, Meryl.  Well-said (and so much more briefly and succinctly than I ever could)!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on September 14, 2007, 03:06:30 pm
I concur on all counts, Meryl.  Well-said (and so much more briefly and succinctly than I ever could)!

Yeah, but I like your lack of brevity!  ;D

I just remembered that in the first scene someone tells Ben Foster's character that he's known in some circles as Charlie Princess instead of Charlie Prince.  That's really the only overt tip-off that I could see to why he's so "devoted" to Ben Wade.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on September 14, 2007, 07:44:26 pm

Speaking of homo-erotic sub-text and gay villains, I just got back from seeing Cronenberg's Eastern Promises.  I really enjoyed it,  Viggo's performance is excellent and it was great seeing him in a movie with Vincent Cassel who's another favourite of mine.    Early on in the film it becomes very evident that Vincent's character is in love with Viggo's and at times their relationship is oddly touching.  Despite all the psychotic goings on, lol! 

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on September 15, 2007, 07:09:28 pm
I just saw 3:10 to Yuma and then read the afterelton commentary. Frankly, I think the guy is grasping at straws to say this had a homophobic subtext. It is sort of like he had a certain idea and was going to make the movie fit that context, no matter what.

The movie was a little more shoot-'em-up than I expected but I found it absorbing. It will go on my "glad I saw it, once is enough" list. Sort of like The Departed and Munich.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on September 17, 2007, 10:13:29 pm
Good to know, oilgun!

I saw another wonderful one yesterday:  "Across the Universe."  A must-see for Beatles and/or Julie Taymor fans.  (She's the one who did tremendous things with color and Salma Hayek in "Frida" and who made the very interesting "Titus" with Anthony Hopkins.)

It maybe helped that I went into this with low-ish expectations.  Some of the critics have been very harsh, calling it things like "a spectacular failure."  I didn't see it that way at all.  In fact, I found the plot remarkably absorbing.

It's basically a musical made up entirely of Beatles songs, and set during the time that each of the songs it uses came to be.  One review I read said that the Vietnam War was to this movie what AIDS was to "Rent."  I didn't much care for "Rent."  Never saw the stage version, but I thought the movie largely sucked.  So this was way better, IMO.

Here's the most pleasant surprise of all, in a movie, to me, full of surprises:  Evan Rachel Wood can sing.  Like an angel.  I cried three times during this movie, and two of those were when she was singing, just at the beauty of her voice and the underlying emotion.  This is the first movie since "Brokeback" after which a complete stranger singled me out to talk about it.  It was a woman about my age waiting for her husband/partner to come out of the rest room.  She goes "Great film, huh?"  I said "Wasn't that wonderful?"  She goes, "Oh, yes.  And what a tremendous amount of talent, there."

The harmonies were GORGEOUS.

It didn't hurt that Jim Sturgess, who plays Jude (the Paul counterpart) is a dead ringer for my first longtime boyfriend and probably the love of my life.  And man, what a sweet, but powerful, voice.  Joe Anderson, who plays Maxwell (Max), the John prototype, had the perfect voice for his songs, too, and was adorable in every other way.

Hell, I want to see it again just to catch some of the Beatles in-jokes I missed.  And to figure out some more of the cameos.  One of Jakey's faves does a neat rendition of "I Am the Walrus."  ;)

One part got a little too Sgt. Pepper-ish for my taste, as much as I like the actor who did the bit (not gonna tell ya who he is - you'll all figure it out).  But once that passed, I was right back in it.  Lovely.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on September 18, 2007, 10:11:40 am
Wow, there are several must-see movies this fall!!

Regarding 3:10 to Yuma, my husband, who's seen it and I haven't, says that the 3:10 refers to a verse in the Bible. Did any of you others pick up on that? The Bible verse, John 3:10, refers to the concept of original sin.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on September 18, 2007, 10:32:08 am
Regarding 3:10 to Yuma, my husband, who's seen it and I haven't, says that the 3:10 refers to a verse in the Bible. Did any of you others pick up on that? The Bible verse, John 3:10, refers to the concept of original sin.

Interesting idea. No, I didn't pick up on it. Here's the verse:

Quote
In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother.

There is a Bible in the movie that becomes significant. Maybe there are other Biblical allusions ...? Biblical and religious allusions aren't really my forte.

C'mon, the rest of you! Go see it and add your views!

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on September 18, 2007, 10:51:38 am
I think there must be a connection, given that Ben Wade is a bit of a Biblical scholar and regular quotes Bible verses in the movie.  VERY interesting.  Thanks for that one, Lee.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on September 18, 2007, 10:56:05 am
Oh, and at one point Ben Wade (Russell Crowe's bad-guy character) says he read the Bible in three days while waiting for his mother, who had abandoned him.

I found this a little implausible. About the three days, I mean.



Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on September 18, 2007, 11:09:28 am
He draws the picture of Dan Evans on the front page of the Bible, and Dan's son Will sees it (near the end).

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on September 18, 2007, 12:11:58 pm
He draws the picture of Dan Evans on the front page of the Bible, and Dan's son Will sees it (near the end).

Right. That's what I meant when I referred above to a Bible that becomes significant. I didn't get more specific because I'm sort of hypersensitive about discussing things that happen near the end.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on September 18, 2007, 03:49:32 pm
Right. That's what I meant when I referred above to a Bible that becomes significant. I didn't get more specific because I'm sort of hypersensitive about discussing things that happen near the end.


Ooops, oh well...

I guess I was sort of assuming that people on this thread had seen the movie. My bad!

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on September 18, 2007, 04:17:42 pm
I don't think you've given too much away, there, Leslie.  And I think you're right on about that scene and the Biblical reference.  Nice job!  :)

Now, everyone knows Bruce Willis is really dead the whole time, right?  ;)

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on September 18, 2007, 04:22:18 pm
I haven't seen it yet, so I appreciate y'all being obtuse! Tho I'm not too good at putting two and two together anyway!!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on September 18, 2007, 04:47:54 pm
Now, everyone knows Bruce Willis is really dead the whole time, right?  ;)

I actually figured that out long before seeing the movie, just by everyone talking about a big surprise, and seeing the trailer with the kid going, "I see dead people." Oh well, I enjoyed it anyway.

Leslie, that's OK. I'm probably just extra-sensitive in this case because I went into this one with an unusual degree of ignorance about what was going to happen (usually I've read so many reviews I already know the entire plot), so I wasn't sure who was going to live or die or what. But on this thread we've discussed the plot in general terms anyway.

Just don't anybody mention what happens at the very very end!  >:(  ;)



Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on September 18, 2007, 09:24:49 pm
I actually figured that out long before seeing the movie, just by everyone talking about a big surprise, and seeing the trailer with the kid going, "I see dead people." Oh well, I enjoyed it anyway.


Maybe we should start a thread of "movies that were given away by the trailer and/or reviews." High on my list would be Million Dollar Baby and The Crying Game.

Quote

Leslie, that's OK. I'm probably just extra-sensitive in this case because I went into this one with an unusual degree of ignorance about what was going to happen (usually I've read so many reviews I already know the entire plot), so I wasn't sure who was going to live or die or what. But on this thread we've discussed the plot in general terms anyway.

Just don't anybody mention what happens at the very very end!  >:(  ;)


Actually, I had read quite a reviews about this and they were, all in all, very unspoilerish. I knew it was 2 guys going to get the prison train but beyond that, reviewers managed to keep their lips zipped.

The only movie I can think of that I went to see without reading a single review and knowing nothing about was Titanic. Well, okay, I knew the boat was going to sink but that's about it! We saw it on opening night because we had a suddenly "free" night when both children were invited to play dates or parties (they were 9 and 6 at the time). A night by ourselves to go to the movies? Wow! I was blown away by Titanic and I still think it's great, even though it seems to have become the movie that "everybody loves to hate." Oh well, I am a sucker for romance and I still enjoy it. (And I am of the mind there are a few Titanic references in BBM that are intentional.)

The other one I saw "cold" was Fatal Attraction. Yikes!

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on September 18, 2007, 09:30:31 pm
I am of the mind there are a few Titanic references in BBM that are intentional
L
Oh, that's interesting! What are they??
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on September 18, 2007, 09:36:25 pm
Oh, that's interesting! What are they??


The graphic designers had admitted that the "iconic" poster of image of Jack and Ennis was meant to evoke an image of Titanic. If I can find an image of the two posters comparing them side by side I'll post them (I am too tired right now to go hunting on the Internet).

Old Rose whiskey is another.

If I think of more, I'll post them.  Others?

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on September 19, 2007, 12:59:21 am
Others?

Well, one person in both is named Jack!  :laugh:

Just kidding. I don't think Annie Proulx got her inspiration from Titanic.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on September 19, 2007, 07:20:23 am
Well, one person in both is named Jack!  :laugh:

Just kidding. I don't think Annie Proulx got her inspiration from Titanic.


No. I never said Annie Proulx. This is a totally a movie depiction. I think there are things in the movie that are subconscious aids to evoke reminders of another romantic movie. As I said, the graphic designers have said their poster picture was deliberate in their reference to Titanic.

Because Titanic has become "the movie everyone loves to hate" and BBM is the movie that "everyone loves to love" they vehemently disagree with me on this point. That's fine, but I think the references are there.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on September 19, 2007, 10:11:09 am
No. I never said Annie Proulx. This is a totally a movie depiction.

Oh, I know, Leslie. I was just being silly. It was the only other similarity I could think of offhand, but of course the name "Jack" predated the movie.

I think the two are often compared because Titanic is a traditional love story -- and famous and recent, so most people are familiar with the details. So it's often useful as a comparative example: "In Titanic blah blah blah, whereas in Brokeback blah blah blah." Like, in Titanic the love scenes aren't very sexy, whereas in Brokeback they are. Or whatever.

So as a result, it might seem as if people "hate" Titanic. I don't; I think it's entertaining if not great.


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on September 19, 2007, 10:57:59 am

So as a result, it might seem as if people "hate" Titanic. I don't; I think it's entertaining if not great.


Personally, I think it's great.

People seem to forget that Titanic was number one at the box office for how many months? Six? And it won a slew of Oscars. Now I hear people saying, "Oh, Titanic...it should never have won best picture! It is such a soap opera...the dialog is trite, the characters two-dimensional, Kate Winslet was fat..." blah, blah, blah. That's their opinion...I still love it.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on September 19, 2007, 02:58:47 pm
Personally, I think it's great.

People seem to forget that Titanic was number one at the box office for how many months? Six? And it won a slew of Oscars. Now I hear people saying, "Oh, Titanic...it should never have won best picture! It is such a soap opera...the dialog is trite, the characters two-dimensional, Kate Winslet was fat..." blah, blah, blah. That's their opinion...I still love it.

You have every right to!  :) Leonardo DiCaprio is one of my favorite actors, generally. And anyone who calls Kate Winslet fat deserves ... well, I can't think of a bad enough punishment but it would probably involve brown rice and low-fat tofu.

Personally, I was very sorry that the fabulous LA Confidential didn't win that year. But Titanic was entertaining, moving and had amazing special effects. In any case, to each her own!  :D

Also, I bet the people who dis Titanic and the people who kept it No. 1 at the box office aren't necessarily the same people. Lots of moviegoers probably still do love Titanic, even if most of them aren't Brokies. Though somewhere along the way I recall seeing posts by this very intelligent, insightful woman who loved Brokeback and was writing a college thesis on the psychological-something-or-other in Titanic! So it's not that the two can't ever go hand in hand.




Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on September 19, 2007, 03:10:24 pm
Actually, I never meant to imply that the Titanic-bashers were BBM-lovers. I was speaking more in general...for a long time, everyone loved Titanic and then, it came out on DVD. And when they watched it on DVD (probably endlessly), people could suddenly see the mistakes in the sets, and when they listened carefully to the dialog, they said it all sounded so trite, and they never realized just how cardboardy all the characters were, etc. etc.

It was sort of like, "Oh, Titanic...that's so 90s."

And it just irritated me because the movie hadn't changed. It was more like it became fashionable to bash Titanic.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on September 19, 2007, 03:38:18 pm
Actually, I never meant to imply that the Titanic-bashers were BBM-lovers. I was speaking more in general...for a long time, everyone loved Titanic and then, it came out on DVD. And when they watched it on DVD (probably endlessly), people could suddenly see the mistakes in the sets, and when they listened carefully to the dialog, they said it all sounded so trite, and they never realized just how cardboardy all the characters were, etc. etc.

It was sort of like, "Oh, Titanic...that's so 90s."

And it just irritated me because the movie hadn't changed. It was more like it became fashionable to bash Titanic.

L

You're right that following it's huge success Titanic became the movie 'everyone' loved to hate.  Lately though, I've noticed that several movie/dvd sites are calling it under-rated so the backlash seems to be abating, lol!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on September 19, 2007, 04:13:38 pm
Actually, I never meant to imply that the Titanic-bashers were BBM-lovers. I was speaking more in general...It was more like it became fashionable to bash Titanic.

Oh, OK. I haven't talked or read anything about Titanic one way or the other in years -- except on Brokie boards -- I guess I'm just out of the loop.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on September 21, 2007, 01:15:50 pm
This is for Barb...Barb, your favorite director (NOT!) has a new movie out. Read this review and weep...tears of joy, maybe. LOL. From www.pajiba.com. For anyone who is interested, you might want to dance over there and read the comments. They are funny.



Oh, Haggis. Why Do You Torture Me So?

In the Valley of Elah / Dustin Rowles

Before I begin, let me set the record straight on my feelings toward Crash and Paul Haggis, the director of In the Valley of Elah, who has been a regular whipping boy on this site for the last couple of years. See, there were two Crashs: There was the moderately popular Crash — a ponderous, kind of dumb film, slightly offensive in its simplification of race relations in America, but as a piece of throwaway entertainment, certainly not the worst movie in the world, just another film like Breach or 16 Blocks that no one remembers a year after it leaves the theaters. And then there was Crash, the Oscar Winner for Best Picture — a schlocky, cretinous ham-fisted pseudo-profound film that violently curbed its message into a viewer’s jawbone like he’d hit on Tony Soprano’s daughter.

It’s easy to dismiss a director who attains modest box-office success and the right to make another, hopefully better, film. However, when that subpar effort is not only lumped into the same category as four infinitely superior movies, but is then declared the best, you begin to see why we’ve developed an unhealthy sense of hatred toward the man. On the spectrum of achievements and just desserts, Haggis lands so far off the charts that not even Phil Keoghan would await his return. It’s tantamount to Jimmy Kimmell — a reasonably affable, somewhat offensive talk-show host with the IQ of a dirty jockstrap — not only being nominated for a late-night talk show Emmy, but beating out the likes of Conan O’Brien (Capote), Stephen Colbert (Good Night, and Good Luck, David Letterman (Munich), and Jon Stewart (Brokeback Mountain). It’s untenable, and for those in the business of judging the qualitative merits of film, seeing a criminally undeserving Haggis win an Oscar for Crash rightly inspired some borderline homicidal resentment in many of us. (That said, there was only one The Last Kiss, and it was incorrigibly unwatchable.)

In the Valley of Elah is a similarly ponderous, slow-moving Haggisian effort that may even be modestly better than Crash. In fact, I even reluctantly admire the courage it must have taken for Haggis to direct this film. To be sure, there’s nothing new about the themes of Elah — the dehumanizing effects of combat, the way killing can rob you of your soul, and the difficulties of transitioning from solider to civilian life — but as far as I know, Haggis is the first non-documentarian to transpose them into the context of the current war, and he was even brave enough (or stupid enough) to do it while the war was ongoing. Indeed, depending on just how literally you interpret “inspired by true events” — whether the soldiers depicted were based on actual people or meant to be stand-ins for a larger segment of the military population — you might even find Elah mildly uncomfortable to watch, in the way that learning truths you don’t want to learn can be uncomfortable. Others may simply find the movie aggressively unpatriotic in the way it questions the Iraq war effort and characterizes soldiers after they come home, though I came away with the impression — given the toll that battle takes on the human condition — that it was questioning the value of any war, though perhaps especially one fought to “bring democracy to a shithole.”

I just find it a shame that, given the intended complexities of Elah, Haggis was given the right to adapt the story for the screen and direct it. Because, in more capable hands (I understand that Fred Savage is directing films these days), In the Valley of the Elah might have deserved the accolades and award nominations it will inevitably receive. It is, at times, a powerful film; unfortunately, much of the power comes by way of cheap manipulation and overwrought, in-your-face symbolism. A man with any sense of nuance whatsoever might have been able to create, with Mark Boal’s source material (a piece originally published in Playboy), the definitive movie of this war. As it stands, Haggis has created another more-or-less forgettable film that the Academy is likely to fall all over itself praising.

But, there is nothing forgettable about Tommy Lee Jones’ performance in Elah — it may be the best I’ve seen since Ryan Gosling in Half Nelson or Heath Ledger in Brokeback, a simmering, mournful performance that clings to you like melancholy cologne long after you leave the theater. Jones has always been reliably capable of playing his typical Jonesian cowboy: Full of piss and vinegar, a cocksure shitkicker with or without a gun. But as Hank Deerfield, he turns that bluster and bravado inwards — that same arrogant machismo is an agonizing weakness. He recognizes it as such when he realizes that it’s more or less responsible for the death of his two sons: The first 10 years before in a military helicopter accident, and the second (the subject of this movie) a peach-fuzzed kid (Jonathan Tucker) sent off to fight in Iraq, only to turn up missing, then dead, a week after returning to his base in New Mexico.

Deerfield, a former military policeman, travels from his home in Tennessee to New Mexico overnight (not before pulling over to instruct an El Salvadorian on flag-flying etiquette) to investigate his son’s disappearance. When his son’s body is found burned and in pieces, Elah quickly becomes an old-fashioned genre film — a police procedural, only the lead crime scene investigator, detective, and pathologist is a grieving father. Deerfield pieces together clues from the crime scene, from questioning witnesses, and from videos from Iraq that he discovers on his son’s phone. As one might expect, his son’s time in Iraq plays into his homicide.

He’s aided in this effort by Det. Emily Sanders (Charlize Theron). Theron does an admirable job with what she has to work with, but her character’s involvement in the story is a clear and extraneous nod to conventions of the genre, and her plotline, unfortunately, is where Haggis dumps all his ham-handedness. She’s there so that Haggis can introduce the jurisdictional pissing match between the cops and the military, who seem to be hiding something; so that he can follow the tale of the rookie lady cop who slept her way to a promotion to its logical conclusion; and so he can shoehorn a single-mom who has a kid that likes bedtime stories all into one character (and the title, which comes from a bedtime story Deerfield tells Sanders’ son about David and Goliath, has absolutely nothing to do with anything else in the film, there being no legitimately metaphorical Davids or Goliaths anywhere in the narrative). Additionally, the plot strand involving the dog-abusing husband is particularly preposterous, completely unnecessary, and distracts from the overall message in Elah — but it does allow Haggis to develop a scene so heavy-handed that you can hear knuckles burst from violently dragging on the ground.

But, while In the Valley of Elah begins as a movie about a father investigating his son’s death, it evolves slowly (but not quietly, thanks to Haggis) into a movie about the broader implications of war, ultimately hitting where it hurts the most: The disillusionment of families who have lost sons and daughters in the conflict, seemingly stripping from them the one notion they could cling to — that their loved ones fought and died for a worthy cause. And it could’ve been a great film, if only Haggis had not learned lessons in subtlety from colicky newborns. As it is, however, Elah is a mediocre movie with a strong message and perhaps the best performance by a lead actor you will see all year. And that alone, actually, is reason enough to see it.

Dustin Rowles is the publisher of Pajiba. He lives with his wife and son in Ithaca, New York.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on September 21, 2007, 02:59:16 pm
Here's another similar review from the Globe & Mail:

Quote
Okay, we see the Davids. But where's Goliath?

RICK GROEN

From Friday's Globe and Mail

September 21, 2007 at 12:14 AM EDT

In the Valley of Elah

Directed and written by Paul Haggis

Starring Tommy Lee Jones and Charlize Theron

Classification: 14A

Rating: ** ½ [out of 4]

Buoyed by the boast that it's “inspired by actual events,” In the Valley of Elah dearly wants to be the Iraq war's counterpart to Coming Home, documenting the tragic domestic legacy of a misguided foreign conflict. Wants to be, but isn't. In his first solo outing since the Oscar-winning Crash, writer-director Paul Haggis falls into a familiar trap, where his lofty social theme fights its own battle against the forces of artifice and contrivance. Once again, there are victories en route – at least one gripping scene and a quietly evocative performance from Tommy Lee Jones – but the broader mission is never accomplished. Blame defeat on a script that charts a steady course along schematic channels – it's way too post-traumatic predictable.

Part of the trouble is that a complex issue is packaged in the marketable form of a whodunit. The iconically named Hank Deerfield (Jones) is a father, a proud American, a Vietnam vet and, on a late November day in 2004, the recipient of the sad news that his soldier son met a violent death, not on the grim streets of Baghdad where he recently served but on his home army base where he just landed. Pausing just long enough to introduce the first half of the clumsy flag symbolism that frames the movie, Haggis takes his protagonist to the scene of the murder, where Hank is made to encounter a further metaphorically charged moment – the authorities of military and civilian justice have reached a Guantanamo-like impasse, the former covering up and the latter absenting themselves.

Luckily, Emily, the local cop (Charlize Theron in another de-glamorized outing), soon offers to assist, even while contending with her chauvinist colleagues (one of several quickly inserted, and often abandoned, subplots). What's more, she's a single mom with a little boy who should never, never have to fight in such an untenable war. Yep, the pat in the picture is starting to emerge.

Proving to be a crack investigator all by his lonesome, Hank appropriates his son's cellphone, which contains grainy video images of a truth that many don't want to face – that once-decent American men, placed in a bewildering urban battlefield, are killing innocent Iraqi civilians. Of course, you know where this is heading: These same men have come home in a state of psychotic rage and confusion. They're loose cannons abandoned even by the military that primed them.

The soldiers, then, are painted as domestic victims of the very carnage they unleashed upon their foreign victims. This could be a sound psychological interpretation but, within the context of the film, it creates problems. Not wanting to erode our sympathy for the troops, Haggis refuses to dramatize the stateside murder (it occurs off-screen) and confines the brutality in Iraq to that grainy cellphone imagery – he literally blurs the atrocities and, in that sense, behaves much like the mass media he's implicitly criticizing.

Also, with no guilty party here, the whodunit stalls, and the additional symbolism embedded in the title – Elah is the valley where David had his Biblical set-to with Goliath – gets twisted and blunted. If the soldiers are manipulated Davids, then who is Goliath? The obvious answer is the war machine and its architects, but surely the warriors are a part of that machine. To exculpate them completely may be politically correct, yet it's dramatically muddled and morally dubious, at least from the perspective of the other victims, those unnamed and countless thousands of Iraqis lying dead in their own soil.

No doubt, Haggis's rationale is that the perspective is deliberately narrowed here, that the tale is designed to unfold exclusively from Hank's all-American point of view. To his credit, he's cast wisely. Jones's near-silent gravitas helps to anchor a film inclined to float away on its liberal sentiment, and his portrayal of Hank's conversion, from committed patriot to perplexed mourner, has real poignancy. So does a sequence that sees the father and the mother (a touching cameo by Susan Sarandon) obliged to stand behind a sheet of plate glass to view their son's guarded remains – it's a potent tableau of grief suffered from an enforced distance.

But these genuine moments are the exception. Too often, artifice rules; too often, the script drops dialogue like the clunker delivered to Hank by a psychically wounded trooper: “We shouldn't send heroes to places like Iraq.” However laudable the intention of that line – and Haggis is nothing if not sincere – its effect is to summon the cynic in me, who promptly calls up a different line, from Elvis Costello, that has more post-9/11 resonance than anything in this well-meaning movie: “They're making heroes out of fall guys/They say it's good for business.”

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on September 21, 2007, 03:16:41 pm
Another scathing review can be found here:

http://www.slantmagazine.com/film/film_review.asp?ID=3106

from the concluding paragraph:

...The mind boggles trying to rationalize how this scenario could ever transpire outside a privileged screenwriter's computer screen (or one of Fred Armisen's "I'm just keeeeeeding" SNL sketches), but this wouldn't be the first time Haggis has crapped on common sense (and decency) in the name of cheap bathos. Still, nothing—not even multiple viewings of Crash—can prepare one for the ludicrous bookend this racist sequence receives. It's so predictable you'd think Haggis would have avoided visualizing it—but there it is, stinking up the screen and further confirming Haggis's warped sense of reality.
 
Yowza!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on September 21, 2007, 03:52:23 pm
I'm sorry I'll be having to miss Jones' performance.  As a salve, I'll just re-watch "The Three Burials of Melquiades Estrada."  Jones directed that one himself, and did a fine job of it.

Thanks for that, Leslie.

(Did you know that whenever I see a preview to this movie in the theaters, which has been several times now, I say out loud, "Screw you, Haggis"?  Once, someone even laughed like they shared in my disgruntlement.)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on September 21, 2007, 04:00:00 pm
Another scathing review can be found here:

http://www.slantmagazine.com/film/film_review.asp?ID=3106

Ooh -- that one gives Elah one star -- same rating the site gave Good Luck Chuck! Ouch!!  :-X

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on September 21, 2007, 04:07:11 pm
I am making my prediction here and now...Sept 21, 2007. In The Valley of Elah will be nominated for Best Picture for the Academy Awards.

And people will howl.

It won't win though.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on September 21, 2007, 04:13:44 pm
It won't win though.

Maybe Lust, Caution will win in a vain attempt to right an old wrong.  :-\

All the reviews I've seen for Elah have been mixed, at best. But then, the same was true of Crash.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on September 21, 2007, 04:18:48 pm
Maybe Lust, Caution will win in a vain attempt to right an old wrong.  :-\


Lust, Caution will be nominated for best foreign film, and will win. (Boy, I am full of predictions today, aren't I?)

Quote

All the reviews I've seen for Elah have been mixed, at best. But then, the same was true of Crash.


Exactly. Crash was something like 72% at rottentomatoes. Right now Elah is 64%.

Since I am in the mood for predictions today (who knows what has gotten into me!) I predict that 3:10 to Yuma will be nominated for Best Picture, and win. I'm Not There will also be nominated--won't win--but Todd Haynes will for Best Director.

Since all the reviews are raving about Tommy Lee Jones, I bet he will get a best actor nom. Maybe even win, since the movie itself will be shut out. Russell Crowe will be nominated for 3:10 to Yuma. Maybe Christian Bale, too, which is why neither of them will win (since they are in the same movie).

Cate Blanchett will be nominated for best actress for I'm Not There. Maybe she'll win.

Is it going too far out on a limb to predict Ben Foster getting  best supporting actor nom for 3:10 to Yuma?

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kd5000 on September 21, 2007, 04:32:34 pm
Cate Blanchett is reprising a role she performed earlier.  She should have won for Elizabeth.  I wonder if this time, they might get it right and she will have another Oscar.   She's a good actress. The trailer looks very very impressive.  Oh, I wonder if Elizabeth the Golden Age will strike a chord with the Hillary Clinton backers.  Hillary is our Elizabeth.  ;)

Ang Lee won't win best director, but BP, let's hope so. 
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on September 21, 2007, 04:59:25 pm
Leslie, I think your predictions sound very possible!

I was going to say they could nominate Christian Bale for BA and Russell Crowe for BSA, but then where would they put poor Ben Foster? Though he might be hurt by what I consider to be a faux-homophobia (homofauxbia!  :laugh:) backlash.

I think 3:10 to Yuma certainly deserves to win BP, and Crowe and Bale both deserve BA nominations. But there are so many good-sounding movies coming out in the next few months -- I can't remember what any of them are at the moment, but I know I've heard of some -- that I think I'll wait to put any money on it.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on September 21, 2007, 06:30:28 pm
Russell Crowe will be nominated for 3:10 to Yuma. Maybe Christian Bale, too, which is why neither of them will win (since they are in the same movie).

Is it going too far out on a limb to predict Ben Foster getting  best supporting actor nom for 3:10 to Yuma?

L

Wow, you really liked 3:10 to Yuma didn't you,lol!  Actors from the same movie are never nominated for the same award because of vote splitting so you have to pick either Russell or Christian for BP ;)  I haven't seen the movie but I'm planning to go this weekend.

I think Viggo will get a nomination for BP for Eastern Promises

Perhaps Ryan Gosling for Lars and the Real Girl - I just have a gut feeling about this one.

And definitely Tommy Lee Jones for  In the Valley of Elah.  He'll probably win too.






Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on September 21, 2007, 08:03:58 pm
I think Viggo will get a nomination for BP for Eastern Promises

Perhaps Ryan Gosling for Lars and the Real Girl - I just have a gut feeling about this one.

And definitely Tommy Lee Jones for  In the Valley of Elah.  He'll probably win too.

These predictions sound right, too, oilgun! I haven't seen Lars, but I loved Ryan Gosling so much in Half Nelson that I wouldn't be surprised if he deserves a BP nomination for something else. And I haven't seen Eastern either, but from everything I've read it sounds like Viggo was great.

Quote
Wow, you really liked 3:10 to Yuma didn't you,lol!  Actors from the same movie are never nominated for the same award because of vote splitting so you have to pick either Russell or Christian for BP ;)  I haven't seen the movie but I'm planning to go this weekend.

Let us know what you think!

I guess if I were forced to pick, I'd go with Christian for BA. They were both great, so it would be tough. But I think Christian may have had the more complex role; his character grows in ways that are a little less expected than what happens with Russell's character. But again, they'd both fully deserve the nomination.

So we've already got five good choices, and there's three more months left of the year! But that's so often the case with BAs, an embarrassment of riches.

Whereas for Best Actress, it's the opposite. It always seem like they're kind of casting about for nominees -- which actress found new angles on the adoring wife role? Which played the most convincing hooker?

Needless to say, the problem is not a dearth of good actresses.




Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on September 21, 2007, 08:48:04 pm
There has never been a dual-nominee from the same movie? Ie, best actor with 2 actors from the same film. I thought there were a few of those...guess I need to do some research.

Meanwhile...I didn't think 3:10 to Yuma was great, I thought it was good, but it is the kind of good that might win an Academy Award (when better films don't).

For the best actor thing: maybe Christian Bale for BA for Yuma, and Russell Crowe for American Gangster (not yet released). Could happen!

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on September 22, 2007, 12:09:39 am
There has never been a dual-nominee from the same movie? Ie, best actor with 2 actors from the same film. I thought there were a few of those...guess I need to do some research.

There probably has been, but the studios have learned not to do that because the actors wind up canceling each other out. That is, say that among the X number of people who loved Yuma, half vote for Bale and half vote for Crowe. Meanwhile, 100 percent of the people who loved Eastern Promises vote for Viggo. So the other two lose.

For example, that's probably why, with Brokeback, Jake was nominated for BSA and Heath for BA.



Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on September 22, 2007, 07:25:05 am

For example, that's probably why, with Brokeback, Jake was nominated for BSA and Heath for BA.


That may be true, but in my mind, Jake was very definitely a supporting actor in BBM. In Yuma, I don't think either Crowe or Bale was in a supporting role.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on September 23, 2007, 02:57:09 pm
Ooh.  Speaking of rottentomatoes.com, I just checked Eastern Promises' rating.  It's got an 89 after 122 reviews.  That's the highest I've seen in a long time.  (Brokeback ended up with an 86, but that was after 222 reviews.)

And I'm going to see it at 4:30 today.  Woo-eeeeeee!  Yeah!

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on September 23, 2007, 04:59:01 pm

Can't wait to hear what you think, Barb!  :D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on September 23, 2007, 11:16:45 pm
I thought it was excellent.  Viggo Mortensen is really something else.  Just as he did in "A History of Violence," he makes you believe at once that his character is at heart a good man, and at heart a monster.  There aren't too many other actors out there who can pull that off.  I think Jake is one of them.  But then, I'm a tad biased.

It slays me how undereducated so many filmgoers still are.  I mean, here I am, in Boca Raton, FL, sometimes referred to as Manhattan South, and where we get the most sophisticated, sometimes cutting-edge, films going.  And here's this David Cronenberg film.  And people - otherwise seemingly mature, sophisticated people, walk out of it going, "But it was so VIOLENT."  Hel-LO!  Never heard of David Cronenberg, I take it?  Never seen or heard of "Naked Lunch," "Dead Ringers," or "A History of Violence" (not to mention my personal favorite, "Spider")?

I can understand the beauty of knowing zero about a movie before going to see it, and this one got a four-star rating in my local paper.  So I can see someone going, "Hey it got four stars, and it's got that Viggo something-or-other guy in it.  Let's go."  But COME ON.

The only more stupid response I heard coming out of a movie in recent times was after "The Brave One," when one woman said to another, "Well, what did you think?" and her companion replied, "I dunno.  I guess I was just expecting a FASTER movie."  It was all Ed and I could do to keep from laughing out loud.  Once we were out of her earshot, Ed goes, "What?  The killings didn't start soon enough for ya?" and "Not nearly enough explosions?"

Gawd.

Anyway, excellent, haunting performances.  Really something special.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on September 23, 2007, 11:26:09 pm
Here's a bit from the Boston Globe's Ty Burr about Mortensen's performance:

"Mortensen plays this role as if he had different blood chemistry than the rest of us. Nikolai remains eerily still until he's moved to act; then he glides forth with reptilian grace. Yet something still glows at the bottom of those half-lidded eyes - enough to suggest the cobra has a soul."

I bet he lost some sleep coming up with that one.  ;)

I agree, though.


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Mikaela on September 29, 2007, 06:18:28 pm
I saw "Eastern Promises" in NYC with Meryl last week, and posted the following in my LJ. Meryl suggested I post it here too - and well, here I am and here it is.  :) Don't think there are very specific spoilers in this, but hints at what's going on, yes - surely.

(I should perhaps also mention first that I am and remain a serious Lord of the Rings fan and I'm also very impressed with "History of Violence". Viggo was the big draw for me in wanting to see EP.)

 

I hate movie violence, but in Eastern Promises the sinister tension level always let you knew what was coming so it was possible to avert your gaze if you needed to. And while the physical violence *was* extremely graphic, it wasn't gratuitous, drawn-out, lingering, sadistic nor motivated by the pleasure of describing the giving of pain and suffering for its own sake. Any such instances *would* have made it a no-no for me. The violence also was very contained. That is, the graphically violent scenes were actually few and far between.  (I had my hands firmly over my eyes each time.  ::)  ) That is, except for the already justly-famous nude bathhouse fight. One review I just read on Rottentomatos described how the lady next to the reviewer kept alternating between covering her eyes and looking up despite herself to check out Viggo's "kibbles and bits". I suppose that pretty much describe my viewing of it too.  ::) He's a courageous guy, doing that scene - because he has to know it'll be screencapped to exhaustion by every fanperson in sight. And the number of those *must* now be increasing.

Apart from that, it was an incredibly *acted* scene. You believed every second of it - so intense, real, life-or-death desperate - not seeming choreographed at all. Viggo did an incredible acting job all throughout this film - like a cobra, so poised and still most times. Oozing danger and self-assurance and self-confidence but with a completely controlled and contained body language, and then suddenly exploding into impressive movement and deliberate action. And those tattoos he was covered in! I've always seen the tattoos that people like David Beckham and Angelina Jolie and Heath Ledger cover themselves with as so much unpleasant visual noise, but on Viggo it actually looked great and adding to the personality. (Helps to know he washed it all off at the end, though.)

And the film keeps me thinking about it. All the actors were *very* good. (Though I'll be interested in reading opinions on Naomi Watt's spoken english.) The film's colour language was fitting and very noticable -  dark and murky, bleak, approximating black-and-white film language, almost... but with splashes of intensely bright colour (many times red, though not always blood) ever so often.

The story was gripping, very tense, a believable and frightening world of unscrupulous mafia - grabbing hold and keeping me on the edge all the while. Its focus on the dreadful plight of poor Eastern girls who get lured west and end up in a miserable hopeless life of forced prostitution was told with a lot of compassion and a hint of sentimentality too. The more films that show this for what it is, - inhuman cruel slavery - the better it is.

And it seems being "queer" is no more an option in today's "macho" Russian mafia than in 1963 Wyoming, and that the denial takes just the same toll on a person's psyche..... Not that the character in question managed to elicit much sympathy from me in any case. Nevertheless  - a multilayered portrayal, all the more interesting.

There was a twist at the end I totally didn't see coming, in addition to several twists that I did see might be coming. Some elements of the story's plot I found completely unrealistic (relating to the mother and the newborn child and what happened to them) - but only in hindsight, and even those events I keep thinking about, whether there might not be a reasonable explanation for them after all, just that the film didn't use up precious time spelling those explanations out.

The short of this? I think I'm turning into a serious Viggo fangirl. And "Eastern Promises" despite its violence level was fascinating, interesting, haunting and very, very good. I'll watch it again soon as it premieres in my neck of the woods.  :)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on September 29, 2007, 06:49:42 pm
Thanks for posting that, Mika!  You bring up lots of things, like the use of the color red, that remind me of our discussions of BBM.  I want to see EP again, too, but I think I'll wait a few weeks to let it sink in first.  8)

Tomorrow, I'm seeing Lust Caution with Lynne, John Gallagher and maybe Jenny and Juan.  Will let you know what we thought!  8)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Mikaela on September 29, 2007, 07:03:56 pm
Oh, yes please!   :) :)


*small gripe warning*

Just checked the premiere dates for upcoming movies here and to my chagrin discovered the following:

Rendition - February 1
Lust, Caution - February 29
I'm not there - end of February, exact date undecided


Hello, this is totally unacceptable! I think I need to move to NYC on permanent basis!

*grump*
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on September 29, 2007, 10:20:33 pm
Meryl, you lucky, LUCKY girl.  On several levels.  Please let us know how my dear John is doing.  I think about him so often and miss his presence here terribly.  Can't wait to read your thoughts on the movie as well.  It doesn't start here until next week...

And Mikaela, my heart goes out to you.  It's been difficult enough to wait for these movies this long, let alone another few to several months.  Reminds me of how the premiere of the second season of "Dexter" got postponed from last June to - TOMORROW NIGHT.  Woo-hoo!  (Sorry.)  And how it'll be April before I get to see new episodes of "Lost."  I used to be such a TV whore.  But these two shows (and a couple others before them, like "Six Feet Under") have ruined it for me.  They're just too damned good, and nothing else compares.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on September 30, 2007, 12:29:14 am
Oh yes indeed, I know I am lucky!  It rocks to see Eastern Promises with Mikaela, then in less than a week be able to see Ang Lee's new movie with a clutch of Brokies, then the very next weekend get to see Annie Proulx at a book signing!  Living in NYC is the greatest.  8)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on September 30, 2007, 11:36:43 pm
Well, we saw Lust, Caution tonight, and it was really good.  John Gallagher, Jenny newyearsday, Juan (JCinNYC2006) and Lynne were there.  If it hadn't been for Lynne, I would have forgotten to even go!  But she was in Connecticut at a wedding this weekend and made the effort to get down here to see the movie.  What a Brokie!  ;D

The movie is beautiful to look at, thanks to Rodrigo Prieto, and has an authentic period feel, like the better Merchant-Ivory productions.  It takes place in Hong Kong and Shanghai during World War II, when the Japanese occupied parts of China.  A group of idealistic young students decide to serve the cause of patriotism by targeting an infamous Japanese collaborator for assassination.  Throughout the film they become more hardened and sophisticated by the experience and have some harrowing ordeals.  One young girl becomes the mistress of the villainous collaborator, and it is the story of what she goes through emotionally that is the core of the film.

We noticed several things that made us think of Brokeback, particularly a couple of shots of the full moon, Ang Lee's attention to colors (the heroine wore mostly shades of blue) and an elegiac last shot that made us think of the last shot in Brokeback.  As reviewers mentioned, the sex scenes were indeed explicit and powerful.  Those were brave actors!   :P

I do want to see this film again because it's very layered and rich, as you might expect from Ang.  But I agree with Jenny, who commented "I'm certainly not going to see this one 13 times!" as we left the theater.  ;D

We had a fun dinner at a Chinese place (of course!) afterwards and got caught up on each others' doings.  Then Lynne and I said goodbye to Juan, Jenny and John and picked up her rental car at the parking garage nearby.  She's probably arriving at her digs in Hartford about now.  Thanks for a great time, Lynne!  :-*
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on September 30, 2007, 11:51:07 pm
Great report, Meryl! Thank you for being our front line!! I'm so glad you went with Lynne, Jenny, John, and Juan!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Mikaela on October 01, 2007, 12:02:24 pm
Thanks so much for posting the review, Meryl.

Did you lot truly feel for the heroine and her (I assume) plight as the plot progressed?

Do you think this one was Oscar-material in line with Ang Lee's previous win in Venize? 
(Heh - that would be in the foreign language film category if so,  - which means those voting would actually have to watch the film! That could make all the difference....)  ::) >:(
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on October 01, 2007, 01:20:17 pm
Did you lot truly feel for the heroine and her (I assume) plight as the plot progressed?

Do you think this one was Oscar-material in line with Ang Lee's previous win in Venize? 
(Heh - that would be in the foreign language film category if so,  - which means those voting would actually have to watch the film! That could make all the difference....)  ::) >:(

I pretty much kept the review sketchy so as to not spoil it for others, but I did feel for the heroine.  She was so young and determined to be worthy of her friends (especially the man she was in love with) and her country.  She shut out her own needs and really focussed on her task.  Inevitably, she was unable to really keep her own feelings at bay and had a desperate struggle.  Tang Wei did a great job with the role, never overplaying it, as did Tony Leung.  Ang was the perfect director to catch the subtleties of their thoughts.

I can totally see why it won the Golden Lion.  It's beautifully crafted and acted.  I think it's definitely Oscar-worthy, and probably fortunate that it will be nominated in the foreign-language category.  The puritanical nature of film audiences here would make it unlikely the Academy would have the nerve to put it up for Best Picture with those explicit sex scenes.  ::)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on October 01, 2007, 01:35:07 pm
Well, I was going to say something about Midnight Cowboy winning BP, but from what you're saying, it sounds like LC was more explicit. And I bet audiences here are more puritanical now than they were in 1969, anyway.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ifyoucantfixit on October 01, 2007, 02:32:37 pm

          I saw the previews of that at the theatre yesterday.  We went and saw Eastern Promises.
Wow that was a powerful film.  Very violent but it had a kind of 40s feel to it.  I thought it was rather stylized in relation to the blood and gore.  The blood seemed to be particularly placed to make it contrast with the darkness of the rest of the movie.  Rather like the movie.  Sin City. Viggo Mortenson and Naomi Watts were great, as was the guy that played his friend, I dont know his name.  He was wonderful.  The rest of the cast were stellar as well...If you cant take blood, this is not for you..If you can watch it or turn your head and still see the movie..Its worth the look.  When the movie is over.  I defy you not to say wow!!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Mikaela on October 01, 2007, 02:47:33 pm
Thank you for responding, Meryl. Sounds good.  :)

I pretty much kept the review sketchy so as to not spoil it for others....
I figured as much, but perhaps we could/should allow ourselves some slightly spoilerish reviews here and mark them clearly as such?

I know, I know, I'm probably thinking of my own good here :blush: as I won't get to see the film till another half year has passed. And I don't mind some spoilers if they help illuminate the points made in the review and opinion stated about the film, - that goes for this film or others.    :)

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Lynne on October 02, 2007, 10:17:33 am
Well, we saw Lust, Caution tonight, and it was really good.  John Gallagher, Jenny newyearsday, Juan (JCinNYC2006) and Lynne were there.  If it hadn't been for Lynne, I would have forgotten to even go!  But she was in Connecticut at a wedding this weekend and made the effort to get down here to see the movie.  What a Brokie!  ;D

The movie is beautiful to look at, thanks to Rodrigo Prieto, and has an authentic period feel, like the better Merchant-Ivory productions.  It takes place in Hong Kong and Shanghai during World War II, when the Japanese occupied parts of China.  A group of idealistic young students decide to serve the cause of patriotism by targeting an infamous Japanese collaborator for assassination.  Throughout the film they become more hardened and sophisticated by the experience and have some harrowing ordeals.  One young girl becomes the mistress of the villainous collaborator, and it is the story of what she goes through emotionally that is the core of the film.

We noticed several things that made us think of Brokeback, particularly a couple of shots of the full moon, Ang Lee's attention to colors (the heroine wore mostly shades of blue) and an elegiac last shot that made us think of the last shot in Brokeback.  As reviewers mentioned, the sex scenes were indeed explicit and powerful.  Those were brave actors!   :P

I do want to see this film again because it's very layered and rich, as you might expect from Ang.  But I agree with Jenny, who commented "I'm certainly not going to see this one 13 times!" as we left the theater.  ;D

We had a fun dinner at a Chinese place (of course!) afterwards and got caught up on each others' doings.  Then Lynne and I said goodbye to Juan, Jenny and John and picked up her rental car at the parking garage nearby.  She's probably arriving at her digs in Hartford about now.  Thanks for a great time, Lynne!  :-*

Thanks for a great review, Meryl!  I posted stuff over in the 'Lust, Caution' thread in The Culture Tent, including some pics!

http://bettermost.net/forum/index.php/topic,1955.msg260666.html#msg260666

I'd love to have a deeper discussion about this one after more people have had a chance to see it.  Like Jenny, I doubt I'll need to join another support group (a la Bettermost  8)) over this one, but it was completely worthy, IMO.  Like you say, very brave actors and what we're coming to think of as trademark Ang Lee and Rodrigo Prieto!

Hugs,
Lynne
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on October 03, 2007, 12:02:48 pm
In case folks haven't figured it out yet, I am a fan of Pajiba (www.pajiba.com). Now they have an article, "Eight Films That Shouldn't Have Won Best Picture." I won't post the whole article here, you can read it at

http://www.pajiba.com/eight-films-that-shouldnt-have-won-best-picture.htm

but I will post the entry for 2005. By and large I agree with the conclusions although as folks on this thread know, I am a fan of Titanic. Even so, it makes for could reading. Enjoy!



2005
Crash beats Brokeback Mountain, Capote, Munich, and Good Night, and Good Luck
Scratch that; this is the year I stopped trusting the Academy. This is the year I realized that they will still continue to award quality work in filmmaking, but only serendipitously, out of sheer happy coincidence. Ang Lee’s Brokeback Mountain was a tender, doomed love story, and became a cultural event larger than the film itself. Bennett Miller’s Capote was a stunning feature debut that revolved around Philip Seymour Hoffman’s amazing lead performance, which won the Best Actor award. Steven Spielberg’s Munich was the director’s most politically charged film in years, and showed he was still at the top of his class of film-school revolutionaries. George Clooney’s Good Night, and Good Luck was an equally thought-provoking film, one where Clooney took a back seat to the story at hand and David Strathairn’s gripping turn as Edward R. Murrow. All of these films are good films, smart, strong, well-made films that deserve to be praised. But Paul Haggis’ Crash is just the kind of pseudo-intellectual dreck that finds itself atop the awards heap when all is said and done. It attacks the issue of modern-day racism with all the sophistication of a college freshman, never stopping to wonder if people fight each other because they’re lonely, or frustrated, or just plain assholes. If someone cuts you off in traffic, and you get upset, maybe it’s not because the driver’s a different race; maybe you just don’t like being cut off on the highway, you know? Haggis’ film soars past the usual level of manipulation filmmakers employ when telling a story and becomes something cheap, and unclever, and almost offensive in the haphazard way it pretends to talk about real issues. It’s not merely that Haggis made a clunky film about race; it’s that, in the midst of a turbulent war and with the memory of Sept. 11 still lingering over a generation, he abused the power he has a filmmaker to create something complex and tough and challenging and good and instead funneled into something tawdry and exaggerated and stereotypical and embarrassing. Movies can show us who we are, and what we want to be, and how far we sometimes have to go make up the difference, and Crash is the antithesis of all of that. Of the other four films nominated this particular year — and they’re all masterful films — perhaps Munich comes closest to dealing with the terrors we visit on each other and the price we pay for what we think is justice. But Spielberg’s film is a tough one, unwilling to compromise in its search for answers to the big questions, and that ultimately disqualified it from winning. Crash is slick, dumb, and full of answers, but no one seemed to care that they were the wrong ones.


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on October 03, 2007, 11:35:50 pm
          I saw the previews of that at the theatre yesterday.  We went and saw Eastern Promises.
Wow that was a powerful film.  Very violent but it had a kind of 40s feel to it.  I thought it was rather stylized in relation to the blood and gore.  The blood seemed to be particularly placed to make it contrast with the darkness of the rest of the movie.  Rather like the movie.  Sin City. Viggo Mortenson and Naomi Watts were great, as was the guy that played his friend, I dont know his name.  He was wonderful.  The rest of the cast were stellar as well...If you cant take blood, this is not for you..If you can watch it or turn your head and still see the movie..Its worth the look.  When the movie is over.  I defy you not to say wow!!

Vincent Cassel (as Kirill).  And I didn't even have to look that up on imdb.com because he impressed me so much.  And because I have a freakish sponge memory for names and faces.

And that was very well-said, especially "If you can watch it or turn your head and still see the movie, it's worth the look."  I turned my head but still saw the movie.  And it was magnificent.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on October 19, 2007, 12:38:51 am

Saw Elizabeth, the Golden Age.

2.5 out of 5

Cast was flawless in their acting, but the story let them down.  Amazing that it could considering what events of Elizabeth's reign they chose to portray.

They had such opportunities for greatness in the movie - a cast completely capable of handling it - but everything was half-assed.

It's like they didn't have the budget they did for the first Elizabeth.  The sets, costumes, extras and CGI were much simpler, reused over and over again and ineffective/badly used.

The historical liberties I can understand, but it was just disjointed and heavy-handed in some parts. 

Had a chance to go see a sneak peek at Rendition for my birthday Tuesday, but got violently sick and was unable to go.  I hope to catch it when it opens.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on October 19, 2007, 12:58:38 am
Happy birthday, Del! Good to see you back. How was Paris?
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on October 19, 2007, 01:01:43 am
Happy birthday, Del! Good to see you back. How was Paris?

Thanks!  Paris was nice.  I'll be updating my 'American Girl in Paris' thread shortly.  Stay tuned.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on October 19, 2007, 12:04:34 pm
I just received my copy of Gus Van Sant's first film, Mala Noche, which Criterion recently released on DVD for the first time.  I'm pretty excited and hope to watch it on the weekend.  It's supposed to be pretty good, has anyone here seen it?

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0089537/ (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0089537/)


(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/Mala_Noche.jpg)


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on October 20, 2007, 03:37:48 am
Anyone seen "Michael Clayton"? I've heard generally good things about it, but nothing very specific. It's on at my local cinema this weekend.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on October 20, 2007, 01:25:05 pm
Anyone seen "Michael Clayton"? I've heard generally good things about it, but nothing very specific. It's on at my local cinema this weekend.



I've not seen it, but 3 friends of mine have, and none were impressed by it.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: moremojo on October 24, 2007, 10:04:10 am
Los Angeles-based film critic David Ehrenstein, who loathes Brokeback Mountain, has nothing but the highest praise for the new film I'm Not There, which features Heath Ledger as Bob Dylan:

http://movies.groups.yahoo.com/group/a_film_by/message/46589 (http://movies.groups.yahoo.com/group/a_film_by/message/46589)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on October 24, 2007, 04:51:51 pm
Anyone seen "Michael Clayton"? I've heard generally good things about it, but nothing very specific. It's on at my local cinema this weekend.

I saw it a couple weeks ago and really liked it, myself.  And I am not a George Clooney fan.  So, for what it's worth...

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: shortfiction on October 28, 2007, 04:14:33 pm
I just saw Into the Wild and found it quite well done, with great performances from Emile Hirsch, Hal Holbrook, and Catherine Keener in particular.   Sean Penn did a great job of directing.   You might have read the book of the same name by Jon Krakauer. 
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Lynne on October 28, 2007, 04:28:43 pm
I saw it a couple weeks ago and really liked it, myself.  And I am not a George Clooney fan.  So, for what it's worth...

I liked Michael Clayton too.  I give it 3.5/5 stars.  I've seen quite a few movies the past couple of weeks.  I had high expectations for We Own the Night - but 3/5 I guess - it was good, but when you've seen Joaquin Phoenix and Mark Wahlberg at their best (say Walk the Line, The Departed), it seemed like they were phoning it in.

The best by far I thought was Gone Baby Gone, directed by Ben Affleck and starring Casey Affleck, Michelle Monaghan, Ed Harris, and Morgan Freeman.  It's based on a novel by Dennis Lehane (Mystic River) and set in Boston.  I loved the book, so I went into it with a great deal of trepidation.  The adaptation was extremely well-done and Casey becomes Patrick Kenzie.  The rough character of the Dorchester neighborhood was completely convincing for me.  5/5 for me.

30 Days of Night 2/5 - could have been good (Josh Hartnett was) but the villains were one-dimensional and not very scary.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on October 28, 2007, 04:40:24 pm
I'm going to a movie in about an hour: either Michael Clayton or Dan in Real Life. Those are the two best choices at my local theater. I'm leaning toward the latter, simply because it seems light and I could really use some lightness right now.

This is similar to a dilemma I had about a year and a half ago: Brokeback Mountain or Munich or The New World? I chose BBM almost by chance. The rest is history.

Whatever I pick, I'll report back here afterward. That is, unless I have become an obsessive devotee of the Michael Clayton or Dan in Real Life message boards  ;D (highly doubtful)!

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Lynne on October 28, 2007, 04:45:03 pm
Whatever I pick, I'll report back here afterward. That is, unless I have become an obsessive devotee of the Michael Clayton or Dan in Real Life message boards  ;D (highly doubtful)!

 :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
Have fun!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on October 29, 2007, 01:00:48 am
I wound up going to Dan in Real Life, and I can report that it was cute, light, mildly funny, gently touching. It's what The Family Stone would have been if TFS hadn't sucked (the two have almost identical plots, only from different characters' POV).

Steve Carrel isn't my idea of a romantic lead, but he's very likable and, as called for in this role, very much a regular-guy type. And he has interesting ways of reading lines, some unexpected rhythms in his speech. The only problem is that from time to time I get a disconcerting flash of Michael Scott. Which I suppose is just an indication of how good he is in that role.

Juliet Binoche, for some reason, got on my nerves. Maybe because she was playing The Most Perfect Woman of All Time. Couldn't Dan have fallen for someone who was just pretty cool, instead of unbelievably amazingly fantastic? Dane Cook was actually fairly appealing.

OK, that's the latest from the critic's corner.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on October 29, 2007, 07:03:29 am
I hated The Family Stone. Did Dan in Real Life have the "horrible nasty mother who was dying from cancer and everyone thought she was wonderful character" (ie, Diane Keaton in TFS)? I hope not. How about the obligatory perfect gay couple with their adopted child?

What an awful movie that was. Ugh. It gives me creeps just thinking about it. And I wasted money to see this in a theater! Ack!

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on October 29, 2007, 09:59:54 am
I hated The Family Stone. Did Dan in Real Life have the "horrible nasty mother who was dying from cancer and everyone thought she was wonderful character" (ie, Diane Keaton in TFS)? I hope not. How about the obligatory perfect gay couple with their adopted child?

Yes, TFS was really, really awful. I wouldn't feel so bad about having wasted money on it -- God knows I've wasted money on other bad movies -- but I dragged my SONS to it with me. They wouldn't even have liked Dan in Real Life, let alone TFS. Poor kids. We had just moved -- no wonder they hate it here! Plus, I wasted money on three tickets, and it wasn't even a matinee!

Whenever I think of how much I hated TFS, I remember the very worst scene in that terrible movie, the one where Sarah Jessica Parker asks Diane Keaton, "Don't you wish your son had been normal?" No high-powered Manhattan career gal, as she was supposed to be, would say something that stupid. Even if she thought it, she wouldn't say it, especially right in front of the son.

Anyway, no. DiRL didn't have an obnoxious, horrible, much-beloved, tragically dying Diane Keaton. Just a sweetly authoritative Diane Wiest. No gay couple at all, I'm afraid. And instead of screechy irritating SJP, there's beatific saintly Juliet Binoche. And instead of Dermot Mulroney there's Dane Cook who -- in this particular role, anyway -- is an improvement.

But if you imagine TFS told through the eyes of Luke Wilson, only instead of a stoned slacker he's a regular guy with three daughters, that's DiRL. Both feature a big, close-knit, rollicking, matriarch-headed, upper-middle-class family that plays games together and gets into each other's business. Both feature a new girlfriend brought to the party by one son who winds up with another. And so on.




Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on October 29, 2007, 10:11:43 am
I remember some critic--maybe Roger Ebert--said TFS is going to become "the next Christmas tradition, like 'A Wonderful Life'." Yeah, in which dysfunctional universe?

Speaking of the Wilson brothers, my husband and daughter saw "The Darjeeling Limited" yesterday (I had a prior commitment). They both gave it two thumbs up and my husband said, unlike other Wes Anderson movies, this one actually had an ending.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on October 29, 2007, 10:47:34 am
I remember some critic--maybe Roger Ebert--said TFS is going to become "the next Christmas tradition, like 'A Wonderful Life'." Yeah, in which dysfunctional universe?

Ooohh, I just remembered another thing I hated about that one scene in TFS. It was worse than what SJP said. Diane Keaton said she was always glad her son was gay because, something like, "then he'd always live with me."

How f'ed up is that? Especially because the son was IN a relationship (and didn't live with her, I don't think?).

And Diane Keaton was supposed to be the GOOD character.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on October 29, 2007, 11:26:07 am

And Diane Keaton was supposed to be the GOOD character.


Diane Keaton was a first class bitch. While I could understand the premise of the daughter not liking her brother's fiancee, to turn mom totally against her (the fiancee) before mom ever laid eyes on her...and they call this a wonderful mother? Ugh. She makes my stomach turn.

Supposedly Diane Keaton played another bitch mom in a movie that came out recently...can't remember the name but she spends the whole movie trying to fix up her younger daughter or something. I don't get it, Diane...what's up? Just because you are playing "older" women in movies now, you have to be a bitch?

Come to think of it, she wasn't all that pleasant a character in "Something's Gotta Give," either. Dumping the good looking doctor in the middle of dinner in Paris. But she got stuck with Jack Nicholson, a former philanderer, who I have NEVER found attractive. Never, ever, ever!

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: moremojo on October 29, 2007, 11:53:21 am
Keaton may be taking the only roles that are being offered to her. It's well-known that an American movie actress's options become much more limited as she grows into middle age and beyond, and Keaton may simply be falling into this pattern.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on October 29, 2007, 11:57:44 am
Keaton may be taking the only roles that are being offered to her. It's well-known that an American movie actress's options become much more limited as she grows into middle age and beyond, and Keaton may simply be falling into this pattern.

Yes, this is true. And maybe being a bitch appeals to her, who knows?
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: notBastet on October 30, 2007, 02:24:26 pm
I saw The Aviator last night.  It was totally not what I was expecting, but I still thought it was pretty good.  One thing I didn't like was Kate Beckinsale (sp?) in her role as Ava Gardner.  I haven't yet been on wikipedia to try to verify how accurate the movie was.  One pseudo complaint about the movie I read was that it didn't necessarily give you an ending...  That was okay with me.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on October 30, 2007, 04:18:04 pm
Yes, this is true. And maybe being a bitch appeals to her, who knows?

Maybe, but she could play the bitch in a GOOD movie.  I think she should explore roles in smaller independent films.  I mean it's not like she needs the the big paychecks anymore.  I'm at the point where I feel some of these "older" stars should just retire rather than coast through tired roles in mediocre movies. 

For example, when's the last time Nicholson, Deniro and Pacino have done something they can be proud of?  Are they that greedy that they'll do anything to keep working?  Maybe they just feel that they've paid their dues and now they can just do crap and watch the money roll in?
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on October 30, 2007, 04:32:17 pm
Very good points, oilgun. We are in the 1977 round in the movie game and have posted "Annie Hall" and "Looking for Mr. Goodbar." Remember Diane Keaton in those?

Jack Nicholson in The Departed (2006) was good. I didn't see DeNiro in The Good Shepherd so I can't comment on that, but Meet The Fockers? Please.


L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: notBastet on October 30, 2007, 04:38:29 pm
Maybe, but she could play the bitch in a GOOD movie.  I think she should explore roles in smaller independent films.  I mean it's not like she needs the the big paychecks anymore.  I'm at the point where I feel some of these "older" stars should just retire rather than coast through tired roles in mediocre movies. 

For example, when's the last time Nicholson, Deniro and Pacino have done something they can be proud of?  Are they that greedy that they'll do anything to keep working?  Maybe they just feel that they've paid their dues and now they can just do crap and watch the money roll in?

what did you think of The Departed?

(whoops - I see Leslie beat me to the question!)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on October 30, 2007, 04:41:35 pm
Very good points, oilgun. We are in the 1977 round in the movie game and have posted "Annie Hall" and "Looking for Mr. Goodbar." Remember Diane Keaton in those?

Jack Nicholson in The Departed (2006) was good. I didn't see DeNiro in The Good Shepherd so I can't comment on that, but Meet The Fockers? Please.


L

To be honest, I didn't think much of Nicholson in The Departed, lol!  I think I saw The Good Shepherd, that's the one with Matt Damon right? For some reason I don't even remember DeNiro being in it, lol!  Must be the early onset thing, plus I really didn't like that film.  Anyway Meryl Streep & Sigourney Weaver still manage to find interesting roles.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on October 30, 2007, 04:50:05 pm
what did you think of The Departed?

(whoops - I see Leslie beat me to the question!)


I really enjoyed the film but although I wasn't impressed with Nicholson's performance at least it's in a good film so I'll give him that one, lol!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on October 30, 2007, 05:14:05 pm
I really enjoyed the film but although I wasn't impressed with Nicholson's performance at least it's in a good film so I'll give him that one, lol!

I agree. Nicholson's performance was no more than third best in that film, after Leonard DiCaprio and Matt Damon, and some might argue he was also below Alec Baldwin and Mark Wahlberg and Vera Farmiga and maybe even Martin Sheen. He was a caricature of himself.

"About Schmidt" was pretty good, though.

I think good roles are few and far between for older men and even fewer and far betweener for older women. What good roles there are all seem to go to Streep and Weaver.

The new trend, I guess, is for older actresses to take roles as gritty, interesting characters in TV dramas. Glen Close and  Holly Hunter and Kyra Sedgewick (and is there another one?) have all done this. I haven't seen any of those programs, but I've heard the characters are more interesting than most movie characters.


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on October 30, 2007, 09:44:01 pm
I hated The Family Stone. Did Dan in Real Life have the "horrible nasty mother who was dying from cancer and everyone thought she was wonderful character" (ie, Diane Keaton in TFS)? I hope not. How about the obligatory perfect gay couple with their adopted child?

What an awful movie that was. Ugh. It gives me creeps just thinking about it. And I wasted money to see this in a theater! Ack!

L


DITTO!!!!!!!!!!! 
I despised this movie for all the reasons you guys say and for more - fucked up mother, the 'won't leave me' attitude was extremely creepy, and a cast of characters with fucked up ethical values - a sister who has no compunctions whatsoever about seducing her sister's fiance.  Which would be bad enough if it weren't for the fact that the fiance is a loser, about as trustworthy as low-life crack addict and faithful as a bull in rut, apt to stray the moment a new blonde walks into view, the fiancee is one of those women who plays drunk when upset so she can fall into bed with the nearest man who listens to her whiny bitching and excuse herself with "But I was drunk!"

Gods this movie was so bad.  The only reason I had to sit through it to the end was because a friend had treated me.

GRRRRRRRRRRRRR
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on October 30, 2007, 09:58:03 pm
Mark Wahlberg was the best thing in The Departed, IMO. And he did get nominated for an Academy Award.

Changing the subject completely, over on the movie game we just played "Days of Heaven" which reminded me of this fabulous movie. I saw it in the theater....oh my god....30 years ago! Yikes! But it has just been re-released on DVD, all remastered and beautiful.

Any other Days of Heaven fans around here?

L

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on October 30, 2007, 11:09:24 pm
Changing the subject completely, over on the movie game we just played "Days of Heaven" which reminded me of this fabulous movie. I saw it in the theater....oh my god....30 years ago! Yikes! But it has just been re-released on DVD, all remastered and beautiful.

Any other Days of Heaven fans around here?

Me! I saw it twice, so long ago it was still in theaters (though the second time was a college-town revival, I think). The second time I knew it was going to be such a beautiful visual experience that I brought in a sprig of lilac with me so it would be beautiful smell-wise, too.

(OT, isn't there a better word than "smell-wise"? What's the smell equivalent of aural, visual, tactile?)

Back for just a moment to The Departed, personally I loved Leo. And Matt was pretty good, too. But Mark Wahlberg ... well, I used to like him and I thought he was good in it, but I've never felt quite the same about him since reading his homophobic comments in an interview a few months ago.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on October 30, 2007, 11:09:59 pm
Mark Wahlberg was the best thing in The Departed, IMO. And he did get nominated for an Academy Award.

Changing the subject completely, over on the movie game we just played "Days of Heaven" which reminded me of this fabulous movie. I saw it in the theater....oh my god....30 years ago! Yikes! But it has just been re-released on DVD, all remastered and beautiful.

Any other Days of Heaven fans around here?

L


As you know from HHH,  I just bought the DVD today!  I saw it i guess thirty years ago and never since so I'm looking forward to getting re-aquainted with it.  I love the cover of the DVD, is Criterion the only company that actually hires a graphic designer for their dvd covers?  Everyone else seems to slap on Big Floating Heads on the cover. I guess they are appealing to the lowest common denominator (*Cough* Walmart *cough*)

Ugly DVD covers are a pet peeve of mine.  I'll actually NOT buy some DVDs if I find the cover too repulsive.  For example, I loved Little Children but I can't bring myself to buy the dvd with that god-awful cover, especially since the movie poster was so great.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: notBastet on October 31, 2007, 12:19:40 am
Me! I saw it twice, so long ago it was still in theaters (though the second time was a college-town revival, I think). The second time I knew it was going to be such a beautiful visual experience that I brought in a sprig of lilac with me so it would be beautiful smell-wise, too.

(OT, isn't there a better word than "smell-wise"? What's the smell equivalent of aural, visual, tactile?)

Back for just a moment to The Departed, personally I loved Leo. And Matt was pretty good, too. But Mark Wahlberg ... well, I used to like him and I thought he was good in it, but I've never felt quite the same about him since reading his homophobic comments in an interview a few months ago.



I loved Leo, too...  Sigh.  I was dumbfounded by the ending (I tend just go along for the ride with movies, rather than try to guess what is going to happen.)

Is the word you want scent?  Yeah, there's probably something better than scent - my guess is leslie or Louise will know.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on October 31, 2007, 07:48:10 am

(OT, isn't there a better word than "smell-wise"? What's the smell equivalent of aural, visual, tactile?)


olfactory
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on October 31, 2007, 07:55:37 am

Back for just a moment to The Departed, personally I loved Leo. And Matt was pretty good, too. But Mark Wahlberg ... well, I used to like him and I thought he was good in it, but I've never felt quite the same about him since reading his homophobic comments in an interview a few months ago.



I never paid much attention to Mark Wahlberg after seeing him in Boogie Nights, a movie I did not care for. I guess that's one of the reasons I was so surprised by his performance in The Departed.

Apparently, he has replaced Ryan Gosling in "The Lovely Bones." Ryan got the ax the day before filming began. Depending on which gossip mag you want to believe, he left because of "creative differences" or because director Peter Jackson wasn't happy with his 20 lb weight gain.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on October 31, 2007, 09:45:49 am
Neither "scent" nor "olfactory" can be substituted for "smell-wise" in the sentence, "I brought in a sprig of lilac with me so it would be beautiful smell-wise, too" and make scents sense. Olifactorily would work, though a bit awkward-wise. I guess it doesn't slide off the tongue quite the way "visually" or "aurally" do.

Too bad for The Lovely Bones. Ryan Gosling has become one of my favorite actors on the basis of two movies: Half Nelson, during which I fell asleep but up until then was blown away by his performance, and Fracture, in which I liked him better than Anthony Hopkins.

I read the book The Lovely Bones years ago, and my reaction was, ehhh ...






Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kd5000 on October 31, 2007, 09:49:01 am
I saw ELIZABETH THE GOLDEN AGE this past Sunday.  There was much to recommend about the film, if you know something about history.  The costumes and sets were quite good as was Blanchett's performance.  However, the dialog wasn't well written and they tried to cover every historical story going on at the time in a matter of minutes.  A bit of dehumanization of Phillip II, the king of Spain.  He was shown as very dark skinned and oily, bad hair (very unattractive) and walked with a bad limp. In real life, he was tal and fair skin, blond hair and quite tall.  He did walk with a limp on account of gout.  

There are too many serious R rated films out right now.  I did see RENDITION which I liked. Much has been made about Clooney not being much of  a draw as Michael Clayton isn't doing well.  I believe it was on SLATE.com that posted an essay that the era when a major movie star  (it's not just Clooney, but Brad Pitt's film isn't doing well) could pull in a crowd was now over.  
I think that's been the case for awhile.  :o
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on October 31, 2007, 10:56:56 am
Neither "scent" nor "olfactory" can be substituted for "smell-wise" in the sentence, "I brought in a sprig of lilac with me so it would be beautiful smell-wise, too" and make scents sense. Olifactorily would work, though a bit awkward-wise. I guess it doesn't slide off the tongue quite the way "visually" or "aurally" do.

Too bad for The Lovely Bones. Ryan Gosling has become one of my favorite actors on the basis of two movies: Half Nelson, during which I fell asleep but up until then was blown away by his performance, and Fracture, in which I liked him better than Anthony Hopkins.

I read the book The Lovely Bones years ago, and my reaction was, ehhh ...


I haven't paid too much attention to Ryan, myself. However, Lars and The Real Girl is getting interesting reviews and might be worth seeing.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on October 31, 2007, 10:58:56 am

There are too many serious R rated films out right now.  I did see RENDITION which I liked. Much has been made about Clooney not being much of  a draw as Michael Clayton isn't doing well.  I believe it was on SLATE.com that posted an essay that the era when a major movie star  (it's not just Clooney, but Brad Pitt's film isn't doing well) could pull in a crowd was now over. 
I think that's been the case for awhile.  :o

I think it was the same article on Slate that said people ask for serious, adult movies but then they don't go to them. Are they being marketed incorrectly or is it a myth that people want serious adult movies?

And frankly, the whole "fabulous George Clooney" thing is lost on me. He'd never be a reason for me to see a movie.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: notBastet on October 31, 2007, 11:05:11 am
Neither "scent" nor "olfactory" can be substituted for "smell-wise" in the sentence, "I brought in a sprig of lilac with me so it would be beautiful smell-wise, too" and make scents sense. Olifactorily would work, though a bit awkward-wise. I guess it doesn't slide off the tongue quite the way "visually" or "aurally" do.

Too bad for The Lovely Bones. Ryan Gosling has become one of my favorite actors on the basis of two movies: Half Nelson, during which I fell asleep but up until then was blown away by his performance, and Fracture, in which I liked him better than Anthony Hopkins.

I read the book The Lovely Bones years ago, and my reaction was, ehhh ...



How about: I brought in a sprig of lilac with me so there would a beautiful aroma...?



Spoiler (sort of)...



I read the Lovely Bones awhile back, as well.  I only remember a little.  I can't exactly guess what part Ryan Gosling or his replacement would be playing....  the bad guy?
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: notBastet on October 31, 2007, 11:07:45 am
I loved Ryan Gosling in The Notebook.


I had thought about seeing the 2nd Elizabeth movie last week, but decided against it because Clive Owen does not always strike me the right way... (in fact, he may never have done so).  I opted for Into the Wild instead.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on October 31, 2007, 12:30:07 pm
I think it was the same article on Slate that said people ask for serious, adult movies but then they don't go to them. Are they being marketed incorrectly or is it a myth that people want serious adult movies?

I read that, too. I think the answer is that this particular movie is being marketed incorrectly. I almost went to it on Sunday, though even then I really didn't know what it's about.

Serious adult movies, IMO, are still in too short supply. I think the problem financially is that serious adults rarely see a movie more than once or twice (BBM aside  ;D), whereas kids are more likely to see movies several times.

I read the Lovely Bones awhile back, as well.  I only remember a little.  I can't exactly guess what part Ryan Gosling or his replacement would be playing....  the bad guy?

Oh yeah, the bad guy. I was wondering about that, too, and for some reason I'd forgotten all about the bad guy. I think Ryan Gosling, talented though he is, seems too sympathetic an actor to play a guy that evil. Even Mark Wahlberg might not be abhorrent enough. I was thinking the cop.


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on October 31, 2007, 12:38:07 pm
I read that, too. I think the answer is that this particular movie is being marketed incorrectly. I almost went to it on Sunday, though even then I really didn't know what it's about.
I don't know what it's about, either. My children (ages 19 and 16) saw it and couldn't tell me what it was about! LOL

Quote
Serious adult movies, IMO, are still in too short supply. I think the problem financially is that serious adults rarely see a movie more than once or twice (BBM aside  ;D), whereas kids are more likely to see movies several times.

True. But we do rush out and buy the DVDs!

Quote
Oh yeah, the bad guy. I was wondering about that, too, and for some reason I'd forgotten all about the bad guy. I think Ryan Gosling, talented though he is, seems too sympathetic an actor to play a guy that evil. Even Mark Wahlberg might not be abhorrent enough. I was thinking the cop.

I haven't read the book but apparently he plays "the father" of (I think) the girl who is murdered. There was some thought that Ryan Gosling wouldn't look old enough to play the father which is why he gained weight and grew a beard but Peter Jackson didn't like the beard and weight. Probably Wahlberg is more age appropriate, in general.

L


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: notBastet on October 31, 2007, 12:45:05 pm
I haven't read the book but apparently he plays "the father" of (I think) the girl who is murdered. There was some thought that Ryan Gosling wouldn't look old enough to play the father which is why he gained weight and grew a beard but Peter Jackson didn't like the beard and weight. Probably Wahlberg is more age appropriate, in general.

Hmmnnn.  I don't really remember the role of a cop, but I think I can (sort of) remember a role for the father.  But I do think you're right about Wahlberg being more age appropriate... on the other hand - sometimes make up can do a lot for age-appropriateness (thinking of older Jack/Ennis Jake/Heath), but I guess for an entire movie of this genre you'd rather not have to make someone look older...

(maybe I'll like the movie since I don't seem to remember much about the book!  I went to see The English Patient right after I finished reading the novel, as in same day.  Was completely unimpressed with the movie at that juncture... though I did eventually come to appreciate the movie on its own accord.)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on October 31, 2007, 01:44:48 pm
I haven't read the book but apparently he plays "the father" of (I think) the girl who is murdered. There was some thought that Ryan Gosling wouldn't look old enough to play the father which is why he gained weight and grew a beard but Peter Jackson didn't like the beard and weight. Probably Wahlberg is more age appropriate, in general.

Ryan Gosling, according to imdb, is 27, so it is a stretch to see him as father of a 15-year-old. It makes more sense to cast someone closer in age.

Then again, Heath Ledger at 24 convincingly played the father of a 19-year-old, even without the beard and weight!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on October 31, 2007, 01:56:20 pm

Then again, Heath Ledger at 24 convincingly played the father of a 19-year-old, even without the beard and weight!

Yes. Another one that comes to mind is Anne Bancroft in "The Graduate." She and Dustin Hoffman were less than 6 years apart in age but look how much older her character was supposed to be, compared to Benjamin Braddock.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on October 31, 2007, 02:33:50 pm
Right! It probably didn't hurt that Dustin Hoffman was 30. At 36, Ann Bancroft's age was probably closer to her character's than his was (Benjamin Braddock would be about 22, right? And Mrs. Robinson, mother of a girl still in college, who told Ben she "had" to get married, could plausibly have been under 40).

BTW, in fact-checking this on imdb, I noticed that Dustin Hoffman appeared on an episode of "The Match Game" in 1968!!



Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on October 31, 2007, 07:24:49 pm
I think the problem financially is that serious adults rarely see a movie more than once or twice (BBM aside  ;D), whereas kids are more likely to see movies several times.

 ??? ??? ???

So if I like a movie so much I'll take every friend I have to go see it, I"m not a serious adult?

Last, I saw, I have a full time job that I treat as important, I still vote, pay my taxes and involve myself in enviro-socio-political issues but I'm not a serious adult because I like to watch a movie more than twice?
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on October 31, 2007, 07:56:55 pm
??? ??? ???

So if I like a movie so much I'll take every friend I have to go see it, I"m not a serious adult?

Last, I saw, I have a full time job that I treat as important, I still vote, pay my taxes and involve myself in enviro-socio-political issues but I'm not a serious adult because I like to watch a movie more than twice?

I hope you're teasing, Del. Obviously I didn't mean that no serious adult on the face of the earth ever sees a movie more than twice. I meant in general, compared to kids.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on October 31, 2007, 08:36:16 pm
I hope you're teasing, Del. Obviously I didn't mean that no serious adult on the face of the earth ever sees a movie more than twice. I meant in general, compared to kids.



Heh, I know lots of serious adults who see movies more than once.  They're usually fans of a series - Harry Potter any one? - so I think in genera' is not so much a true statement any more.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on October 31, 2007, 10:24:46 pm
Heh, I know lots of serious adults who see movies more than once.  They're usually fans of a series - Harry Potter any one? - so I think in genera' is not so much a true statement any more.

I don't know any adults who see movies more than once or, rarely, twice. My kids, now older, limit most viewings to three or four times, but used to watch the same movies 15 times. But obviously both your and my experiences are anecdotal, and I don't have any hard data readily available, nor am I willing to scour the web for statistics. So I'll admit my earlier statement was my impression based on observation and things I've read in the past, not on recent extensive research.

And to clarify my earlier statement, the phrase "serious adults" in the sentence "... serious adults rarely see movies more than once or twice ..." stemmed from the fact that we were talking about "serious adult movies" (movies like Michael Clayton, apparently, as opposed to Harry Potter). It wasn't a judgment of gravitas, not did it imply anything about the employment history, political involvement, etc., of specific moviegoers.




Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on November 01, 2007, 12:58:02 am
I don't know any adults who see movies more than once or, rarely, twice. My kids, now older, limit most viewings to three or four times, but used to watch the same movies 15 times. But obviously both your and my experiences are anecdotal, and I don't have any hard data readily available, nor am I willing to scour the web for statistics. So I'll admit my earlier statement was my impression based on observation and things I've read in the past, not on recent extensive research.

Is multiple viewings something that would normally come up in a conversation?  It's not something people normally talk about at work or at most places people gather.  But it's a lot more common than one would think.  Take a poll on this board.  How many have seen BBM more than once?  How many told their friends/family each and every time they went to go see it?  I'm willing to bet - not many.  That's likely one reason why we're here.  We've found someone else with whom we can talk about this movie and our fandom worship of it without fear of being thought of as wierd.

So I'm quite sure that happens with other movies as well.

After all, people buy DVDs in droves.  Why do they if they're not going to watch them again?

Why do people buy CDs or books?  Why listen to a CD or read a book more than once? 

Ask someone if they've seen a certain Xmas movie more than once.  You'll find people who've watched the same Xmas movies every single year since they were kids.

[shrug]

Quote
And to clarify my earlier statement, the phrase "serious adults" in the sentence "... serious adults rarely see movies more than once or twice ..." stemmed from the fact that we were talking about "serious adult movies" (movies like Michael Clayton, apparently, as opposed to Harry Potter). It wasn't a judgment of gravitas, not did it imply anything about the employment history, political involvement, etc., of specific moviegoers.

I was thinking perhaps you might have meant "Adults rarely see serious movies more than once."

But I don't know what you meant, I can only read what you put down. 

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: SFEnnisSF on November 01, 2007, 01:13:38 am
I saw RESERVATION ROAD (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0831884/) tonight.  Mmmmmm, Joaquin Phoenix sportin' a beard.  :P

Ohhh, seeing that FOCUS FEATURES logo before a movie always does somethin' to me...

So, this movie opened on one screen in San Francisco two Friday's ago.  Last Friday it was completely removed from that theatre, and it opened at a theatre in the East Bay, a theatre in San Jose, and the theatre in Mountain View, where I saw the movie tonight.  None of these theatres are playing the movie past Thursday night.  (Meaning it played at all these theatres for only one week.)

The movie itself seems to play like a made for TV movie, but it was REALLY good.  Either that or I'm still swoonin on Joaquin and his beard.  Mark Ruffalo ain't to bad to look at either, especially in some shirtless shots, but still Joaquin wins the eye candy.  Jennifer Conley is good at being sad and depressed as she always is.  The story and suspense builds up to a final confrontation at the end that was inaudiable.  Some really bad directing or sound mixing.  Probably coulda done the shots again.  However the acting in the confrontation scene was incredible.  Just couldn't understand or hear what they said.

Now, this movie carried an R rating.  There was NOTHING in the movie IMO to make it carry the R rating.  Maybe a few cuss words.  Ok, losing your child is some tough subject matter.  Yes, it has adult themes.  There was no nudity or grotesque violence or mangled kid shots or anything.  However, I just watched the RED BAND TRAILER  for BEOWULF (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2s5O-c4U0k) and somehow this has gotten an official PG-13 rating?  WHAT THE FUCK?  It just doesn't compute!  What, are they adding violence and gore and Angelina Jolie naked to the trailer only?  Just really pisses me off!  Did they cut out a few things to get a PG-13 rating?  You know, fuck that.  Just release the damn thing as an R and stop being pussies.  Even as a PG-13, this is way more violent and upsetting as RESERVATION ROAD could have ever been.  Why was RESERVATION ROAD rated R?  

Over on the Beowulf boards on IMDB there's posts saying Robert Zemeckis can take his PG-13 rating and shove it.  LOL  :laugh:  Lotsa folks no longer interested in seeing the move no more.  Time for the film industry to stop being politically correct pussies and just release the damn movies as their intended.  Oooooh, this whole subject makes my blood boil.  Ok, /rant.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: SFEnnisSF on November 01, 2007, 01:48:19 am
Next movie I want to see is No Country for Old Men (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0477348/).

See the trailer here on You-Tube :


[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YBqmKSAHc6w[/youtube]

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on November 01, 2007, 08:54:31 am
Is multiple viewings something that would normally come up in a conversation?  It's not something people normally talk about at work or at most places people gather.  But it's a lot more common than one would think.  Take a poll on this board.  How many have seen BBM more than once?  How many told their friends/family each and every time they went to go see it?  I'm willing to bet - not many.  That's likely one reason why we're here.  We've found someone else with whom we can talk about this movie and our fandom worship of it without fear of being thought of as wierd.

So I'm quite sure that happens with other movies as well.

After all, people buy DVDs in droves.  Why do they if they're not going to watch them again?

Why do people buy CDs or books?  Why listen to a CD or read a book more than once? 

Again, Delalluvia, what I said about kids watching movies multiple times more often than adults do (and I explicitly excluded BBM for obvious reasons) was not meant as an insult. It's simply my impression, based on what people have told me about their own viewing habits -- and yes, the subject does occasionally come up in conversation -- and things I've read, which cite it as one reason why cartoon-based, special-effects-laden blockbusters tend to make more money than critically acclaimed, character-driven Oscar contenders (another being that action flicks fare better overseas because language is not as crucial to their appeal).

You disagree. But tracking down real statistics or a Variety story about this is more trouble than I care to take. So unless someone has some figures handy, we'll just have to leave it at that. To drag this debate out based on our personal impressions does not seem worth it.

Quote
I was thinking perhaps you might have meant "Adults rarely see serious movies more than once."

But I don't know what you meant, I can only read what you put down. 

I was playing around with words. We were talking about "serious adult movies." Reusing the same words, I said something like "Serious adults rarely see movies more than once or twice ... blah blah blah."

I didn't mean anything particular by it, and I'm very sorry if it came off as an insult of you and your viewing habits, or those of people you know.




Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on November 03, 2007, 06:55:06 pm
I saw Lars and the Real Girl today and I absolutely LOVED it!  I wasn't prepared for how heart-breaking it turned out to be though, it's not exactly the light comedy that its marketing leads us to believe.  Gosling's character's anxiety and loneliness is palpable and I was brought to tears (literally) in many scenes.  One of the most moving and ultimately life-affirming film I've seen in a long while! 
Run, don't walk, to see it!

Move over Heath, Ryan's in town, lol!  Just kidding, I have room for both of them.  ;-)

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/lars2.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on November 03, 2007, 08:02:30 pm
I just got back from Michael Clayton, and I liked it a lot. I can see why they're having trouble marketing it. It's one of those movies that unfolds gradually, so everything's a little fuzzy at first but becomes clearer and clearer as the movie progresses. So if an ad came right out and said what the movie's about, it might conceivably spoil some of the suspense.

The closest I can come to describing it is it's like Erin Brokovich, but with George Clooney playing the Julia Roberts role (sans cleavage). It's not as cute and sprightly and upbeat as EB, it's grimmer. But the gist of the plot is vaguely similar.

Oilgun, glad to hear you enjoyed Lars. The one review I read made me feel kind of iffy about it. But with your endorsement I'll be sure to see it as soon as it reaches my local theater. As I've probably mentioned numerous times on this thread already, I love Ryan Gosling.


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on November 04, 2007, 06:45:34 pm

Oilgun, glad to hear you enjoyed Lars. The one review I read made me feel kind of iffy about it. But with your endorsement I'll be sure to see it as soon as it reaches my local theater. As I've probably mentioned numerous times on this thread already, I love Ryan Gosling.


Ineedcrayons:  Apparently, Richard Roeper didn't like Lars so that says it all as far as I'm concerned, LOL!  Definitely see it!

I just got back from seeing Gone, Baby, Gone and it was a real shock to the system after just seeing Lars yesterday.  Come to think of it, it was like the antithesis of Lars.
(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/GBG.jpg)

I even loath the title.  It was probably the most unpleasant movie-going experiences I've had since, I don't know, Ted Bundy?  I actually felt like taking a shower afterwards.  I only went to see it because I quite like Casey Affleck and boy, do I regret it.  It seemed that every character was scuzzier than the next (In Boston, the greeting of choice seems to be "f*ck you, mudderf*ckin' c*cks*cka".  And that's just the kids!) and as for the story, it was disjointed, predictable and worst of all, about a third of the way through I started feeling really manipulated and once that happens they've lost me as a viewer. 

I'd love to hear other opinions.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on November 04, 2007, 06:54:43 pm
Well, you won't hear my opinion of Gone, Baby, Gone because your comments above are enough to convince me that there's no way I would see it!  :-X

I decided some time ago that my mental instability is such that I can't see movies that are depressing and bleak, no matter how well made they are. A sad movie is OK, obviously, since I loved BBM. But depressing, no way. BTW, I made this resolution after seeing Affliction, a good movie starring an actor I like, Nick Nolte, but one that ended on a very grim note. No more, I told myself afterward.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on November 04, 2007, 08:01:04 pm
Well, you won't hear my opinion of Gone, Baby, Gone because your comments above are enough to convince me that there's no way I would see it!  :-X

I decided some time ago that my mental instability is such that I can't see movies that are depressing and bleak, no matter how well made they are. A sad movie is OK, obviously, since I loved BBM. But depressing, no way. BTW, I made this resolution after seeing Affliction, a good movie starring an actor I like, Nick Nolte, but one that ended on a very grim note. No more, I told myself afterward.



Then you should definitely stay away. Calling Gone, Baby, Gone bleak would actually be an understatement, it makes Mystic River, a movie it's been compared to because of themes and location, feel positively Capra-esque, LOL!  Oh and I take back that comment about Ted Bundy.  At least that movie doesn't pretend to be anything other than what it is, a gore-filled B horror fest.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kd5000 on November 05, 2007, 12:12:39 pm
I saw INTO THE WILD last night. The breathtaking scenery reminded me of Brokeback Mountain.  The film is based on the nonfiction bestseller of a young man who gave away his life savings to embrace nature. He also left his family behind without a note or explanation. As far as they were concerned, he had just vanished.

He journeys all over America, (staying away from cities) and the film is a recollection of his adventures and some of the ppl he met along the way.  He ended up in Alaska, living in a bus, wanting to live in the wild.  Well you can't get a place with more wilderness then Alaska.  It had been his lifelong ambition, the great trek to Alaska

The film was quite well acted, directed by Sean Penn.  I'm not going to spoil the ending, though everyone I know seems to know how it turns out.  He kept a journal referencing Tolstoy and Thoreau.  He had many interesting philosophical insights.

I'm surprised the film has not been released in more theaters (only 600) as it should be a box office hit. The book and his story are quite well know.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on November 05, 2007, 12:22:28 pm
Ineedcrayons:  Apparently, Richard Roeper didn't like Lars so that says it all as far as I'm concerned, LOL!  Definitely see it!

I just got back from seeing Gone, Baby, Gone and it was a real shock to the system after just seeing Lars yesterday.  Come to think of it, it was like the antithesis of Lars.

I even loath the title.  It was probably the most unpleasant movie-going experiences I've had since, I don't know, Ted Bundy?  I actually felt like taking a shower afterwards.  I only went to see it because I quite like Casey Affleck and boy, do I regret it.  It seemed that every character was scuzzier than the next (In Boston, the greeting of choice seems to be "f*ck you, mudderf*ckin' c*cks*cka".  And that's just the kids!) and as for the story, it was disjointed, predictable and worst of all, about a third of the way through I started feeling really manipulated and once that happens they've lost me as a viewer. 

I'd love to hear other opinions.



Your reaction is interesting because it is at 92% on rottentomatoes and it appears that most of the critics are raving about it.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on November 05, 2007, 12:41:38 pm
Your reaction is interesting because it is at 92% on rottentomatoes and it appears that most of the critics are raving about it.

One explanation might be that critics rarely seem to see bleakness as a fault. Sometimes I think they even see it as a virtue. Most of the bleak movies that led me to swear off bleak movies were critically acclaimed -- and rightly so, because bleakness aside they were very well-made movies (other examples that come to mind include Platoon, Blue Velvet and the bleakest movie I've seen, Leaving Las Vegas.).

I can think of others that critics liked but that I avoided because I could tell just by the reviews they'd be too bleak for me (The Cook, the Thief, his Wife and her Lover, any movie directed by Todd Solondz ...).

(Oh, reading back just now I see that oilgun also called the movie other things you'd think critics would object to, such as disjointed, predictable and manipulative. Well, maybe it was so nice and bleak that the critics were willing to overlook these problems)


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: notBastet on November 05, 2007, 01:24:14 pm
I saw INTO THE WILD last night. The breathtaking scenery reminded me of Brokeback Mountain.  The film is based on the nonfiction bestseller of a young man who gave away his life savings to embrace nature. He also left his family behind without a note or explanation. As far as they were concerned, he had just vanished.

He journeys all over America, (staying away from cities) and the film is a recollection of his adventures and some of the ppl he met along the way.  He ended up in Alaska, living in a bus, wanting to live in the wild.  Well you can't get a place with more wilderness then Alaska.  It had been his lifelong ambition, the great trek to Alaska

The film was quite well acted, directed by Sean Penn.  I'm not going to spoil the ending, though everyone I know seems to know how it turns out.  He kept a journal referencing Tolstoy and Thoreau.  He had many interesting philosophical insights.

I'm surprised the film has not been released in more theaters (only 600) as it should be a box office hit. The book and his story are quite well know.

I saw this a week or two ago.  I was pretty impressed.  It was a good experience for me.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on November 05, 2007, 06:34:00 pm
Your reaction is interesting because it is at 92% on rottentomatoes and it appears that most of the critics are raving about it.

L

Wow, 92%!?  I think it's the first time that my opinion of a film differs so drastically from the majority of critics!  I really don't know what to say, except that I guess I just couldn't buy into the story.  It's hard to say more without revealing important plot points.  I did enjoy the story's setup and the acting was fine but then something happened, and I can't really pin-point exactly what it was, but I started losing my suspension of disbelief, and when one of the characters stormed into the bar with a Popeye mask, that really sealed the deal for me.

Oh well, you win some and you lose some.  I'm over it now, I had the day off so I went to see Ang's Lust, Caution and REALLY enjoyed it!  Although I do feel a bit cheated.  Why couldn't the sex have been as graphic in BbM? LOL!

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/LustCaution.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on November 05, 2007, 07:40:26 pm
There's a piece on Slate about Gone, Baby, Gone that's semi-critical. Here's an excerpt:

Quote
Ben Affleck's Boston
His portrait of the city is far from perfect—but at least it's not wicked bad.
By Patrick Radden Keefe

... Affleck's movie feels more grounded in the specific geography of Boston than any other major Hollywood production ever has. And more populated by real Bostonians. But in striving to capture Boston in all its sordid glory, Affleck overapplies the grit. The problem struck me in an early scene in which the camera lingers on a gaggle of daytime boozers, and I swear, more than one of them has a cleft lip. In an effort to cast aside the Hollywood airbrush, Affleck has zoomed in on the freakish underbelly of Boston and somewhat overstated the case. The result is not so much what Mean Streets did for New York as what Deliverance did for Appalachia.

"I wanted something raw and authentic and even a little scuffed up," Affleck told the New York Times recently. For much of the movie, half of Dorchester seems to be standing around outside their creaky wooden houses, just killing time. But as the camera pushes in on dozens of extras—sickly skinny women and gin-blossomed men with complexions like blood sausage—"scuffed up" begins to feel positively generous. At a certain point, the parade of uglies marches past verisimilitude and into freak-show territory. This isn't actually what the people of Dorchester look like. Yes, you can walk into a Dorchester bar and find a healthy crowd at 11 a.m. on a weekday. But give the barflies cleft lips, and you're overdoing it a bit. It's Dorchester by way of Diane Arbus. (continues ...)



Here's the whole piece:

http://www.slate.com/id/2176404/ (http://www.slate.com/id/2176404/)

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Lynne on November 06, 2007, 01:52:22 am
Oilgun - will you elaborate a bit on in what ways you felt manipulated by Gone, Baby, Gone?  It's interesting to me how people's opinions differ.  I liked GBG alot, but I was watching it from a couple of specific points-of-view.  I was particularly interested in how well the adaptation of Dennis Lehane's novel was done, the Boston characterization, Casey's performance, and Ben's direction.  I read the novel years ago, and it kept me guessing until the very end.  So knowing where the movie was going, assuming the original plot survives (and it does), I wasn't in a place to feel manipulated.

I'm not so sure I agree with the reviewer about Dorchester being portrayed as overly gritty.  Some of Dorchester is being revitalized and it's not as bad as it used to be, so I think this is probably a good representation of 1990's Dorcester.  However, I didn't notice let alone count cleft lips, so I may need a repeat viewing.  ;)  I do know that they really toned down the violent tendencies of Patrick Kenzie's friend, Bubba, compared to his character in the novel.

Crayons - glad you enjoyed Michael Clayton.  :)

I think American Gangster is next on my list...
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: notBastet on November 06, 2007, 04:09:43 pm
I watched the Pursuit of Happyness this afternoon.  I thought Will Smith's portrayal was fine... but there were aspects of the movie (what I considered to be basic premise type issues...) that I didn't like at all...

spoilers:




I guess maybe I am too much of a "what if" person...  It all worked out for him... but what if it hadn't, then it really wasn't such a bright idea to take an unpaid internship while you had a child to feed.  And great that the guy gave him his $5 back... but is that a good message - work your ass off, do what the man wants, and if you're lucky the man will give you a job and your $5 back?  don't know.  but I was suprised to see all the good reviews.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on November 06, 2007, 05:55:31 pm
I guess maybe I am too much of a "what if" person...  It all worked out for him... but what if it hadn't, then it really wasn't such a bright idea to take an unpaid internship while you had a child to feed.  And great that the guy gave him his $5 back... but is that a good message - work your ass off, do what the man wants, and if you're lucky the man will give you a job and your $5 back?  don't know.  but I was suprised to see all the good reviews.

I see what you're saying. And probably in many or most cases it would not have ended "happyly." But the guy Will Smith plays is a real-life person. So I suppose you could say that filmmakers, looking back with 20/20 hindsight, wouldn't have wanted to make a movie about someone who tried that and failed and wound up permanently homeless. But it does make sense to make a movie about a millionaire who once was homeless and took a big risk and succeeded.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on November 06, 2007, 09:08:02 pm
Oilgun - will you elaborate a bit on in what ways you felt manipulated by Gone, Baby, Gone?  It's interesting to me how people's opinions differ.  I liked GBG alot, but I was watching it from a couple of specific points-of-view.  I was particularly interested in how well the adaptation of Dennis Lehane's novel was done, the Boston characterization, Casey's performance, and Ben's direction.  I read the novel years ago, and it kept me guessing until the very end.  So knowing where the movie was going, assuming the original plot survives (and it does), I wasn't in a place to feel manipulated.

I'm not so sure I agree with the reviewer about Dorchester being portrayed as overly gritty.  Some of Dorchester is being revitalized and it's not as bad as it used to be, so I think this is probably a good representation of 1990's Dorcester.  However, I didn't notice let alone count cleft lips, so I may need a repeat viewing.  ;)  I do know that they really toned down the violent tendencies of Patrick Kenzie's friend, Bubba, compared to his character in the novel.


Thanks for asking, Lynn.  First offl, I have to explain that I saw the film cold, as they say.  I'm not familiar with the novel, I just found out that Lehane also wrote Mystic River.  I hadn't read any reviews but knew that it had been very well received by critics.   I went to see it mainly for Casey Affleck, I've had a bit of thing for him ever since seeing him in Gerry.  (Yeah, I loved that film, go figure, lol!)

Like I said previously I started off quite enjoying it.  The "colourful" characters were a hoot and some of the dialogue was laugh-out-loud funny. But  the all-pervasive "scuzzyness" became too much, it never let up!  The characters started to feel cartoonish rather than human.  The result was that I didn't care what happened to any of the characters, so anything I had invested into the story went out the window.  It felt like I was being manipulated into hating these one dimensional characters and I found that a bit insulting (OK, I get it Ben, these people are lowlifes! Sheesh!)

I did like Bubba though, he was pretty cool.  Probably the only one who tried to help.  Him and that guy at Murphy's Law who told Patrick about Helene & Skinny Ray. Oh, I did feel bad for Cheese, the poor guy really got screwed, lol!

Maybe I was just pissed off because the movie ruined my Lars high. ;)

Edit:  I just remembered I had a similar, albeat much less intense, reaction to the movie Pan's Labyrinth.   In that film, I didn't like how the fascist step-father was so completely evil.  If he had had a dog I'm sure he would have kicked it.  I understand that it was supposed to be a fairy tale and he was the evil step-father and all that, but the fact that he was so easily despised somehow made me lose interest in the story.   It severed my emotional connection.  I was still able to enjoy the film thematically and especially visually but I didn't buy the dvd... :-\
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on November 06, 2007, 09:48:39 pm
Oilgun, you saw Gerry?? You're one of only two people in the world I know who has seen it! I thought it was both one of the most boring and one of the most interesting movies I've ever seen.

For those who haven't seen it, Gerry is directed by Gus Van Sant, stars Casey Affleck and Matt Damon, and is about two guys who get lost in the desert. They always call each other Gerry. They also use "gerry" as a verb, meaning "screw up." The whole movie is about watching them wander around trying to find their way out of the desert, as they get weaker and weaker. There are numerous long long stretches, like 10 minutes or more, where the camera just follows them as they walk silently side by side. It's sort of an endurance test for the audience, as well. Compared to Gerry, BBM is positively chatty -- and what dialogue there is is almost all mundane small talk like you might hear between two guys who've been friends for a long time -- they talk about a video game, a Jeopardy episode, etc.

So this friend insisted that I see it. I had to call several video stores to track it down. Finally I watched it, and at the end I was like, huh? What was the big deal about this arty but incredibly boring movie?

Then my friend told me something he'd figured out about it. And that changed my whole attitude toward the movie. Suddenly it became really very interesting.

Shall I say what he told me? It's not really a spoiler, but it's something not everyone would figure out (I sure didn't).

(BTW, the friend who told me this was Clancy/TFMC/ruthlesslyunsentimental -- those who know him know he's good at analyzing movies.)

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on November 06, 2007, 09:57:13 pm
Oilgun, you saw Gerry?? You're one of only two people in the world I know who has seen it! I thought it was both one of the most boring and one of the most interesting movies I've ever seen.

For those who haven't seen it, Gerry is directed by Gus Van Sant, stars Casey Affleck and Matt Damon, and is about two guys who get lost in the desert. They always call each other Gerry. They also use "gerry" as a verb, meaning "screw up." The whole movie is about watching them wander around trying to find their way out of the desert, as they get weaker and weaker. There are numerous long long stretches, like 10 minutes or more, where the camera just follows them as they walk silently side by side. It's sort of an endurance test for the audience, as well. Compared to Gerry, BBM is positively chatty -- and what dialogue there is is almost all mundane small talk like you might hear between two guys who've been friends for a long time -- they talk about a video game, a Jeopardy episode, etc.

So this friend insisted that I see it. I had to call several video stores to track it down. Finally I watched it, and at the end I was like, huh? What was the big deal about this arty but incredibly boring movie?

Then my friend told me something he'd figured out about it. And that changed my whole attitude toward the movie. Suddenly it became really very interesting.

Shall I say what he told me? It's not really a spoiler, but it's something not everyone would figure out (I sure didn't).

(BTW, the friend who told me this was Clancy/TFMC/ruthlesslyunsentimental -- those who know him know he's good at analyzing movies.)



Well, you can't just tease us like that!  Tell us!!   
I actually saw Gerry at the theatre, t played here for about a week, and it was absolutely mesmerizing on the big screen.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on November 06, 2007, 11:11:07 pm
OK. Keep in mind that this is just Clancy's theory -- I couldn't find any review or interview or any other source to verify it -- but it's pretty brilliant and does make perfect sense once you think about it.




**SPOILER ALERT**









Matt Damon and Casey Affleck are the same person. That's why they're both named Gerry. That's why they talk about Jeopardy and video games in such shorthand -- their conversations are really Gerry's thoughts. When they use "gerry" as a verb, it's Gerry's self-reproach when he screws up.

Their trip into the desert is a journey into manhood. You know how Matt is the stronger and tougher one, and Casey is weaker and more passive and prone to tears? When Gerry leaves as one person, he has become a man. You know how he gets picked up by a father and son and the last (long boring 10-minute  ::)) scene is of the three driving away in silence? Well, the boy represents Gerry as a kid, the father is the future Gerry. And Gerry, in between them in age, has passed that maturation milestone.

So what d'ya think?

UPDATE with a later thought: Plus, it's interesting that when the end of the desert sojourn comes, the car is suddenly right there!








Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on November 07, 2007, 11:43:54 am
Well ...? Am I making sense? Does that theory sound plausible?

I thought so, but of course not everyone has to agree!  :)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: notBastet on November 07, 2007, 12:18:39 pm
it sounds quite plausible to me from your description!  I haven't seen the movie though...
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on November 07, 2007, 12:34:21 pm
Well maybe now you'll want to see it. I know, I know, my talk of long boring dialogueless sequences probably doesn't make you want to move it to the top of your Netflix list. But it really is an interesting movie once you think of it that way, so that interpretation isn't necessarily a spoiler -- could be an enhancer!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: notBastet on November 07, 2007, 12:44:00 pm
Well maybe now you'll want to see it. I know, I know, my talk of long boring dialogueless sequences probably doesn't make you want to move it to the top of your Netflix list. But it really is an interesting movie once you think of it that way, so that interpretation isn't necessarily a spoiler -- could be an enhancer!


yes you are right... when I was first reading about it I was like "Hmnn... a Matt Damon movie I've never heard of..."

your friend's suggestion definitely makes it sound interesting... I will keep it in mind for when I am in the mood for "long dialogueless sequences"

 ;)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on November 07, 2007, 03:05:39 pm
I was like "Hmnn... a Matt Damon movie I've never heard of..."

You know, before this movie I was never a huge Matt Damon fan. I mean, I liked him all right, but ... and then somehow this movie, boring or not, made me appreciate him more. Now I'd be likely to see anything he's in (except maybe The Good Shepherd, which I fell asleep trying to watch).


 
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on November 07, 2007, 09:05:34 pm
You know, before this movie I was never a huge Matt Damon fan. I mean, I liked him all right, but ... and then somehow this movie, boring or not, made me appreciate him more. Now I'd be likely to see anything he's in (except maybe The Good Shepherd, which I fell asleep trying to watch).


 

LOL!  I fell asleep as well!  That wasn't his best role.  I became more of a fan of his after seeing The Talented Mr. Ripley.

Anyway, back to Gerry and Clancy's analysis!  I read something similar somewhere and I think it makes a lot of sense, although that film can be interpreted in so many ways.  I do like the idea of the internal struggle though.  Gus van Sant dedicated the film to Ken Kesey, the author of One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest and apparently a lot of what happens in that book was inspired by acid trips.  That kinda supports the theory I think.



Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: BelAir on November 10, 2007, 10:49:41 pm
The Wizard of Oz is on TBS tonight.

Does anyone know how the movie came to be a "holiday movie" - associated with its original release date, maybe?

Thanks.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Ellemeno on November 11, 2007, 07:43:01 am
Wow, I had no idea that this has been such an active thread.  I just spent three hundred hours (give or take) catching up on it.  I'll try to remember to keep up with it from now on.

Michael Clayton - I thought Tom Wilkinson and Tilda Swinton were each terrrific in their roles.  The Tilda Swinton role was especially interesting - she plays this awful, high-powered, tough, articulate legal counsel for the bad guy corporation, but we (the audience) are treated to her stumbling rehearsal of her phrasing while she gets dressed in the morning, her shaky lack of confidence in the office bathroom stall, it's cool.

Dan in Real Life - It's amazing how plain old likeable Steve Carell is in it, considering his likeability on "The Office" has more to do with pity at his patheticness.  He looks completely different, rather than stocky and stiff, he looks lithe and loose.  Very interesting.  I've decided he is quite a good actor.  Poor Dianne Wiest, it's fucked that she isn't carrying major movies as the star.  But no, she's a middle-aged woman...

You all ought to come by and play the ABCs at the Movies game with Leslie and oilgun and me (and others).  We're going through the years, backwards.  We started at 2007, and are now doing the movies of 1959.  The last 3 movies posted were, North by Northwest for N, Operation Petticoat for O, and Porgy and Bess for P.  Anyone want to post a good Q movie from 1959...?  We use IMDb as our source and arbiter.  The people on this thread would love it!  http://bettermost.net/forum/index.php/topic,13749.new.html#new



Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on November 11, 2007, 10:43:39 am
The Wizard of Oz is on TBS tonight.

Does anyone know how the movie came to be a "holiday movie" - associated with its original release date, maybe?

Thanks.

It was released in August, 1939, so that didn't have anything to do with it!

Back in the dark ages (ie, my youth) they showed movies once a year on TV as a "special event" and we'd all gear up for that viewing. I remember that for years, The Wizard of Oz was shown in February, to coincide with the Washington Birthday holiday. Easter always had a Biblical epic, like King of Kings and Christmas...well there has always been a ton of Christmas programming. So maybe it came from that BelAir. Who knows?

BTW, welcome to Bettermost.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on November 11, 2007, 01:34:21 pm
Back in the dark ages (ie, my youth) they showed movies once a year on TV as a "special event" and we'd all gear up for that viewing. I remember that for years, The Wizard of Oz was shown in February, to coincide with the Washington Birthday holiday. Easter always had a Biblical epic, like King of Kings and Christmas...well there has always been a ton of Christmas programming.

LOL. I get how The Ten Commandments=Easter, and It's a Wonderful Life=Christmas. But how does The Wizard of Oz=Washington's birthday?? Are they equating Washington with Oz?

Anyway, I remember those "special event" days, too. I used to look forward to TWoO for weeks. And my mom always made tomato soup and grilled-cheese sandwiches for dinner! Our own little secular family ritual.

we (the audience) are treated to her stumbling rehearsal of her phrasing while she gets dressed in the morning, her shaky lack of confidence in the office bathroom stall, it's cool.

Yeah, that was a cool scene! I hadn't seen one like that before. And it helps explain her actions later.

Quote
Dan in Real Life - It's amazing how plain old likeable Steve Carell is in it, considering his likeability on "The Office" has more to do with pity at his patheticness.  He looks completely different, rather than stocky and stiff, he looks lithe and loose.  Very interesting.  I've decided he is quite a good actor. 

I agree.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on November 11, 2007, 07:57:04 pm
Well, I just got back from seeing what is possibly the best film of the year:  Into the Wild
It's amazingly good and should garner several nominations and wins.   I predict:  A best director award for Sean Penn, Best actor for Emile Hirsh and best supporting actor for Hal Holbrook.
(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/intothewild.jpg)

EDIT:  I just checked Rotten tomatoes and it rates a relatively paltry 79% Fresh while Affleck's GBG get's 91% Fresh (both Cream of the Crop) so don't quote me on the above, LOL!  Anyway, what do I know, I base my ratings on how much I've enjoyed them.  And for me ItW was a 10/10  (Gone Baby Gone 6/10)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on November 11, 2007, 08:10:22 pm
I'll put that on my list too, then.

Oilgun, this is slightly OT but, even though I'm a huge Ryan Gosling fan, I still really miss your old avatar!  :-\ 
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on November 11, 2007, 10:09:34 pm
I'll put that on my list too, then.

Oilgun, this is slightly OT but, even though I'm a huge Ryan Gosling fan, I still really miss your old avatar!  :-\ 

I changed it back for you!  To be honest I missed it too, it's such a great pic of Heath and it makes me smile.  Sadly,  Lars was probably more fitting  :-\
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on November 12, 2007, 12:51:27 am
I changed it back for you!  To be honest I missed it too, it's such a great pic of Heath and it makes me smile.  Sadly,  Lars was probably more fitting  :-\

Thank you, oilgun! Seriously, you have the most cheerful avatar in all of Brokiedom. Who could look at it and not smile?

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on November 17, 2007, 06:52:30 pm
Man, I've been making some really good choices lately! 

Just saw the Romanian film 4 Month, 3 Weeks & 2 Days and I have to agree with the Cannes  jury who awarded it the Palme D'or.  Wow!  It's the type of realist drama that I absolutely love. If you like the work of the Dardennes brothers than this powerful and emotionally complex film is a must. Oustanding! 10/10

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/4m3w2d-2.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on November 18, 2007, 05:35:20 pm
Well, another good one! Control, the Ian Curtis bio-pic.  Curtis was the lead singer of Joy Division, one of my favourite bands.  He suffered from epilepsy and depression and committed suicide at the age of 23.  The film is in gorgeous black & white with great performances by Sam Riley (as Ian) & Samantha Morton as his wife, whose book the movie is based on.  Might make a good double-bill with Brothers of the Head.

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/control_big.jpg)
(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/control-banner.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: BelAir on November 18, 2007, 05:37:59 pm
oilgun, I hope you will keep your fave film list going (or at least post it somewhere else) - so I can refer to it when trying to decide which movie to go see!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ifyoucantfixit on November 18, 2007, 05:54:46 pm
LOL. I get how The Ten Commandments=Easter, and It's a Wonderful Life=Christmas. But how does The Wizard of Oz=Washington's birthday?? Are they equating Washington with Oz?

Anyway, I remember those "special event" days, too. I used to look forward to TWoO for weeks. And my mom always made tomato soup and grilled-cheese sandwiches for dinner! Our own little secular family ritual.

Yeah, that was a cool scene! I hadn't seen one like that before. And it helps explain her actions later.

I agree.
                 DONT LOOK TOO CLOSLY AT THE MAN BEHIND THE CURTAIN?

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on November 18, 2007, 06:06:54 pm
oilgun, I hope you will keep your fave film list going (or at least post it somewhere else) - so I can refer to it when trying to decide which movie to go see!

Thanks, I'm honored!  I do update it as I go along and it will probably stay there up until the Oscar nominations are announced.  Do note that I'm not a critic by any means, I rate them according to my enjoyment.  ;)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on November 23, 2007, 08:41:55 pm
I saw Lars and the Real Girl today and I absolutely LOVED it!  I wasn't prepared for how heart-breaking it turned out to be though, it's not exactly the light comedy that its marketing leads us to believe.  Gosling's character's anxiety and loneliness is palpable and I was brought to tears (literally) in many scenes.  One of the most moving and ultimately life-affirming film I've seen in a long while! 
Run, don't walk, to see it!

Move over Heath, Ryan's in town, lol!  Just kidding, I have room for both of them.  ;-)

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/lars2.jpg)

My daughter and I went to see this today and I have very mixed feelings. On an acting level, I could see what a superb job Ryan Gosling and everyone else (esp. Patricia Clarkson) did. On the other hand, I struggled with the total implausibility of much of it...from the fact of Lars' mother dying in childbirth to no one seeking any sort of help for him to him falling in love with a sex toy and the entire town becoming a bunch of enablers....in one way, this story would have worked better in the 30s but then, in the 30s, they didn't have the Internet and anatomically correct sex toys...

I have very mixed feelings about this movie. I am glad I saw it but I don't want to see it again.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on November 23, 2007, 09:33:35 pm
My daughter and I went to see this today and I have very mixed feelings. On an acting level, I could see what a superb job Ryan Gosling and everyone else (esp. Patricia Clarkson) did. On the other hand, I struggled with the total implausibility of much of it...from the fact of Lars' mother dying in childbirth to no one seeking any sort of help for him to him falling in love with a sex toy and the entire town becoming a bunch of enablers....in one way, this story would have worked better in the 30s but then, in the 30s, they didn't have the Internet and anatomically correct sex toys...

I have very mixed feelings about this movie. I am glad I saw it but I don't want to see it again.

L

Aww?  I'm so disappointed you didn't like it and I feel somewhat responsible because I built it up so much!  I didn't have a problem at all suspending my disbelief.  (Obviously, since I gave it a nine, LOL!)  The movie just swept me off my feet like very few movies have.  Oh well, you probably loved Gone Baby Gone  ;)

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on November 23, 2007, 11:01:20 pm
I feel so far behind all you guys, but it's nice to see my little ol' thread thriving.  :)

Michael Clayton - loved it, especially Tilda Swinton and Tom Wilkinson.  And George Clooney's nearly last line was invigorating - as Hollywoodish as it was, it made me feel good all over.

Before the Devil Knows You're Dead - I'm still rather pissed off at just how often poor Marisa Tomei had to walk around with her perky boobies on display - it did nothing to further the story and was almost laughable after a while.  That said, Ethan Hawke was amazing.  Phillip Seymour Hoffman didn't do much for me.  But his upcoming role with Laura Linney in the one about placing their father into a nursing home looks promising - I much prefer him when he plays those schlubby characters than when he plays someone strait-laced and professional.

No Country for Old Men - I wish I could say I loved it.  I certainly liked it, and was very happy to see a lot of loose ends left completely to the viewers' imagination.  I'm sure it won't fare well in Peoria for that reason, though.  My problem with it wasn't that it didn't tie everything up into nice, neat little packages, but that it lacked a soul.  I think Tommy Lee Jones was supposed to be that, and he was good - I guess I'd have just liked to have seen him have a bit more to work with.  His last scene was wonderful, though.

Dan in Real Life - I didn't like most of Juliette Binoche's dialogue.  But I liked Steve Carell's.  Since I gotta figure the same person/people wrote both, I can only guess that her acting was lacking, somehow.  Dane Cook pretty much sucks, too - I found the actor who played the other brother to be much more convincing.  And I agree with you, Katherine - it turns out Steve Carell really is quite a good actor.  I discovered that in Little Miss Sunshine, really - this just sealed the deal.

Don't know why I'm not interested in seeing American Gangster - I always enjoy Denzel Washington.  I think I'm just tired of gangster flicks.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on November 24, 2007, 01:31:45 am
Hi Barb, it's great to see you back!  8)

I haven't seen much this fall other than Eastern Promises and Lust, Cauton, both of which I loved, but I went to see Elizabeth: The Golden Age last week because I didn't want to miss it on the big screen.  I knew it would be worth it just for the costumes, and I was not disappointed.

Really, it was worth the price of popcorn just to sit there and take in the utter gorgeousness of Cate Blanchett's endless parade of gowns, wigs and jewelry and the impressive settings:  castles, churches, moors, ocean vistas, all dressed and lit to perfection, fabrics draped everywhere, props that looked straight out of a museum, and eye candy for days.  It's operatic in its scope (and unfortunately in its credibility) and who cares if the history is accurate?  See Cate standing on a cliff, cape flowing out behind her while she watches the Armada burn, the sun setting over the stormy Channel; see Clive Owen clench his manly jaw and jump off a flaming ship; or see Cate reining in a prancing, pure white stallion, her red hair streaming over her shoulders, silver armor gleaming, as she delivers her address to the troops at Tilbury; or watch her, in high dudgeon, cuss the hell out of her lady-in-waiting for marrying manly Clive in secret.  That's entertainment, folks!  I heartily recommend it.  8)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on November 24, 2007, 09:34:38 am
Aww?  I'm so disappointed you didn't like it and I feel somewhat responsible because I built it up so much!  I didn't have a problem at all suspending my disbelief.  (Obviously, since I gave it a nine, LOL!)  The movie just swept me off my feet like very few movies have.  Oh well, you probably loved Gone Baby Gone  ;)


I am not even going to see Gone Baby Gone! It doesn't sound like my kind of movie, at all!

As for Lars, I wanted to be swept off my feet...I really did. And if I focused just on the acting, I could, because the acting was that good, from everyone involved. But something about the story...reality just kept nibbling at the edge of my mind and I couldn't push it away.

I also thought it was incredibly sad which probably wasn't helped by my post-Thanksgiving low mood.

Oh well. I am glad I saw it. And I watched "The Commitments" last night to try and cheer myself up and it mostly worked.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on November 26, 2007, 01:56:57 am
I posted an interesting article in the Movie Resources forum about William Pohlad, one of the producers of Brokeback.  Y'all might want to check it out: http://bettermost.net/forum/index.php/topic,15173.msg292656/topicseen.html#msg292656
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on November 27, 2007, 10:03:14 am
How did I miss this? I just read that "The Namesake," by Mira Nair, is coming out on DVD today (Nov 27). I loved "Monsoon Wedding," and read countless movie reviews and articles, but I totally missed hearing anything about this movie. I gather it was shown at the Toronto Film Festival in 2006 and also London. Was it ever in movie theaters? Did any of my fellow movie-lovers here at Bettermost see it?

Looks like a DVD rental is in store for me, but man, I would have loved to see this on the big screen! Any reviews from anyone....comments are appreciated.

Leslie
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on November 27, 2007, 10:43:22 am
How did I miss this? I just read that "The Namesake," by Mira Nair, is coming out on DVD today (Nov 27). I loved "Monsoon Wedding," and read countless movie reviews and articles, but I totally missed hearing anything about this movie. I gather it was shown at the Toronto Film Festival in 2006 and also London. Was it ever in movie theaters? Did any of my fellow movie-lovers here at Bettermost see it?

Looks like a DVD rental is in store for me, but man, I would have loved to see this on the big screen! Any reviews from anyone....comments are appreciated.

Leslie
It played in theatres here in Toronto but I skipped it for some reason, probably because of mediocre local reviews.  However, Rotten Tomatoes gives it an 86%  fresh rating.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on November 27, 2007, 10:49:58 am
It played in theatres here in Toronto but I skipped it for some reason, probably because of mediocre local reviews.  However, Rotten Tomatoes gives it an 86%  fresh rating.

Yes, and people are raving about it on IMDb, too! I am surprised that this one totally slipped by me...I try to keep abreast of this stuff.

I guess I'll just have to blame it on being in the throes of Brokeback Fever at the time. LOL!

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on November 27, 2007, 11:53:24 am
I saw "The Namesake" when it came out here.  It was wonderful.

The one I'm looking forward to seeing this weekend is "The Savages" (or is it just "Savages?") with Laura Linney and Phillip Seymour Hoffman.  The subject matter looks like it'll hit especially close to home for me, having just come through the shitstorm that was my father-in-law living with us for two months while he recovered from a broken hip.  Let me put it this way:  If I ever see him or hear his voice again, it'll be too soon.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on December 02, 2007, 12:10:49 am
I just saw a sweet little Canadian gay film called Breakfast With Scot about a gay couple who suddenly find themselves taking care of an 11 year boy who happens to be gayer than gay.  We're talking feather boas and show tunes gay.  It has a TV movie feel to it but it's so endearing that you can't help but love it.

It caused a bit of controversy because one of the "parents" played by Tom Cavanagh (of the TV show Ed) plays a sports caster who used to play for the Maple Leafs and the NHL gave the filmmakers full support so they were able to use the team's logos etc.  Of course that upset the usual (Christian) idiots, mostly American btw.

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/breakfast.jpg)

For the trailer: http://www.caprifilms.com/breakfastwithscot/index.html (http://www.caprifilms.com/breakfastwithscot/index.html)

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0910847/ (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0910847/)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: BelAir on December 02, 2007, 12:19:08 am
tom cavanagh is a cutey patootie.  I liked him in Ed.  He was also in some horror movie recently that I didn't think I would be able to stomach watching... and I certainly haven't tried to do so.  I will add Breakfast with Scot to my list though!
 ;)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on December 02, 2007, 09:05:06 am
I think I saw a preview for that movie, oilgun, and it looked like a fun one. I'll watch out for it.

I guess I am missing the connection about why people would be upset that the NHL cooperated? The NHL isn't supposed to be supportive of movies with a gay theme or something? Huh?

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on December 02, 2007, 09:25:42 am
The NHL isn't supposed to be supportive of movies with a gay theme or something? Huh?

L
That's exactly it, they accuse the NHL of promoting homosexuality:

Christian Activists Campaign Against Yet-Unfinished Movie
12 February 2007 (StudioBriefing)
The upcoming indie movie Breakfast With Scot, which tells the story of two gay men -- one of whom is a member of the Toronto Maple Leafs hockey team -- who are raising an eccentric 11-year-old boy, is already arousing controversy even before its release, the Los Angeles Times reported Sunday. Bernadette Mansur, the NHL's senior vice president for communications, indicated that the protests are being spearheaded by Christian activist James Hartline, who claims to be a former homosexual. Although he has not seen the movie, he has called it "degrading" and accused the NHL of "promoting homosexualization of small children" and "becoming a willing partner with the fringe elements of the radicalized homosexual agenda and their ultimate goal of worldwide sexual anarchy." In Canada itself, Brian Rushfeldt of Canada Family Action Coalition charged that the Maple Leafs are "underwriting homosexuality. ... I don't think it does much for the image of the NHL amongst families who may want their children involved in hockey." Mansur insisted, however, that the NHL "didn't intend to make a statement one way or another about homosexuals" and that the film merely tells "a story of a contemporary American family that exists today."

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0910847/news (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0910847/news)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on December 02, 2007, 09:34:20 am
Oh, for Pete's sake. All the more reason for me to seek out this movie!

I am assuming in the last line it is is typo and should be NHL, not NFL.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on December 02, 2007, 09:49:02 am
Oh, for Pete's sake. All the more reason for me to seek out this movie!

I am assuming in the last line it is is typo and should be NHL, not NFL.



I corrected it.  Strangely enough I made the same typo when I wrote my original post, but then, I was always a bit like Scot myself NHL, NFL , it's all the same to me :laugh:
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on December 02, 2007, 07:26:18 pm
I corrected it.  Strangely enough I made the same typo when I wrote my original post, but then, I was always a bit like Scot myself NHL, NFL , it's all the same to me :laugh:

Yes, but you are a Canadian, no? Ordinarily I would agree with you, but as a Canadian, you are required to have hockey on the brain, at least during the winter months!!

So, where's the movie about the gay hockey players??
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on December 02, 2007, 08:09:16 pm
Yes, but you are a Canadian, no? Ordinarily I would agree with you, but as a Canadian, you are required to have hockey on the brain, at least during the winter months!!

So, where's the movie about the gay hockey players??


The movie with the gay hockey player is Breakfast with Scot mentioned above.
I know that not knowing or caring about ice hockey makes me a bad Canadian  :(  I can't help it.  It was probably a rebellion thing, often kids reject tghe things that are so important to their parents.  My father loved both Hockey and CFL football.  To this day the sound of a game on TV, of either sport,  brings back feelings of inadequacy and of being my father's big disappointment.  Eww!

Anyway, maybe if the uniform was a bit more revealing and hockey players had been more like Jiri of the Leafs (shown with impressive tongue, below, partying with a friend), I would have had more of an interest in the game:
(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/jiritlusty.jpg)

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kd5000 on December 03, 2007, 02:41:24 pm
The film I had been looking forward to the most this holiday season is THERE WILL BE BLOOD.    It's loosely based on Upton Sinclair's book titled OIL.  I saw the trailer for the first time Saturday and it looked very intense.  Daniel Day Lewis performance from what I've read, may just overwhelm the movie.  He plays a ruthless oil tycoon. Some are comparing it with CITIZEN KANE. 

I really like Daniel Day Lewis.  The director is Paul Anderson who did MAGNOLIA and BOOGIE NIGHTS.  I think he's quite talented.  I do hope the film lives up to expectations. So many disappointments last holiday season.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on December 03, 2007, 04:03:46 pm
The film I had been looking forward to the most this holiday season is THERE WILL BE BLOOD.    It's loosely based on Upton Sinclair's book titled OIL.  I saw the trailer for the first time Saturday and it looked very intense.  Daniel Day Lewis performance from what I've read, may just overwhelm the movie.  He plays a ruthless oil tycoon. Some are comparing it with CITIZEN KANE. 

I really like Daniel Day Lewis.  The director is Paul Anderson who did MAGNOLIA and BOOGIE NIGHTS.  I think he's quite talented.  I do hope the film lives up to expectations. So many disappointments last holiday season.


That looks so amazing!  Just from the trailer I'm tempted to put my money on DDL for winning Best Actor!
(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/therewillbebloodteaserposter.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on December 04, 2007, 09:17:52 pm
Please don't hate me, but I'm not the biggest DDL fan in the world.  The only thing he's ever done in which I couldn't see him acting was "In the Name of the Father."  I'll admit I've never seen "My Left Foot."  However, he looked *very* impressive in this trailer.

I'd love to see that Tom Cavanaugh movie.  I *loved* him in "Ed."  He did a guest stint on "Scrubs" recently, though, in which he looked worse for the wear.  I fear he's got some serious addiction problems.  Too bad, but I honestly don't know how as many of these folks avoid it as they do, sadly.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on December 04, 2007, 09:51:51 pm
Please don't hate me, but I'm not the biggest DDL fan in the world.  The only thing he's ever done in which I couldn't see him acting was "In the Name of the Father."  I'll admit I've never seen "My Left Foot."  However, he looked *very* impressive in this trailer.


DDL has had a special place in my heart ever since My Beautiful Laundrette . His kiss with his male co-star is still one of the best in the history of cinema!  ;D

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/My_Beautiful_Laundrette-4.jpg)(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/My_Beautiful_Laundrette-3.jpg)(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/My_Beautiful_Laundrette-2.jpg)(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/My_Beautiful_Laundrette-1.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on December 04, 2007, 11:55:26 pm
DDL has always left me a little cold, too. But I loved him in Gangs of New York.


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on December 05, 2007, 12:01:49 am
What about his turn as Hawkeye in The Last of the Mohicans? I had a very stressful day today and at one point I imagined him intoning "Stay alive, no matter what occurs!"

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on December 05, 2007, 12:24:39 am
What about his turn as Hawkeye in The Last of the Mohicans? I had a very stressful day today and at one point I imagined him intoning "Stay alive, no matter what occurs!"

Oh yeah, that was his hunkiest role!  Loved it.  :P

I also loved him in A Room with a View as the prissy, self-adoring Cecil.  He was a hoot!  :laugh:
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on December 05, 2007, 12:36:34 am
Oh yeah, that was his hunkiest role!  Loved it.  :P


abs-solutely!! And in Room With A View, he was just so precious, holding his shoes!!

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kd5000 on December 05, 2007, 01:07:36 pm
After doing LAST OF THE MOHICANS (1992),  he played NEWLAND ARCHER in THE AGE OF INNOCENCE (1993).  Talk about a role switch.  I thought he and Michelle Pfeiffer were great in that film. Come to find out, he almost turned the role down as he thought it was too "English." This was reported recently and it caused a fire-storm on the other side of the Atlantic.   

From viewing the trailer THERE WILL BE BLOOD, I wouldn't have recognized Mr. Lewis if I didn't know that was him.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on December 05, 2007, 01:55:45 pm
Ahh, DDL in My Beautiful Laundrette .  Dreamy...

***

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/breakfast.jpg)

Is it me, or do these pancakes have a, um, funny shape?
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on December 05, 2007, 02:45:12 pm
Ahh, DDL in My Beautiful Laundrette .  Dreamy...

***

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/breakfast.jpg)

Is it me, or do these pancakes have a, um, funny shape?

It's not you  :D  It's one of the visual jokes in the film, Scot made the pancakes and they're supposed to be in the shape of the letter "T" for the single "T" in Scot, but of course they look like something else.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on December 05, 2007, 06:05:49 pm
As the awards season gets underway, the first news....



"No Country" wins first film award of Oscar season
Wed Dec 5, 2007 4:18 PM EST

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Grim crime thriller "No Country for Old Men," from brothers Joel and Ethan Coen, was named best film of 2007 by the National Board of Review of Motion Pictures on Wednesday in the first major award of the Oscar season.

George Clooney won the best actor award for "Michael Clayton" and Julie Christie won the best actress award for "Away From Her."

Tim Burton took the best director award for "Sweeney Todd," featuring his wife Helena Bonham Carter and "Pirates of the Caribbean" star Johnny Depp.

Amy Ryan won the best supporting actress award for Ben Affleck's "Gone Baby Gone," which secured the best directorial debut award for Affleck. His brother Casey Affleck won the best supporting actor award for "The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford."

Julian Schnabel's "The Diving Bell and the Butterfly" won the best foreign film award. "Body of War" won best documentary and "Ratatouille" was named best animated feature.

Emile Hirsch won an award for breakthrough performance by an actor for Sean Penn's "Into the Wild," and Ellen Page took the breakthrough performance by an actress award for "Juno."

"Juno" and "Lars and the Real Girl" tied for best original screenplay, and "No Country for Old Men" won awards for best adapted screenplay and best ensemble cast.

The board also presented a career achievement award to Michael Douglas, an Oscar winner for best actor for "Wall Street" in 1988. He and Saul Zaentz shared a best picture Oscar for producing "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest" in 1976.

The awards can be an indicator of what to expect for the Academy Awards, the top honors of the film business, which will be presented in February.

(Reporting by Robert MacMillan, editing by Arthur Spiegelman and Eric Walsh)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on December 05, 2007, 06:11:18 pm
From Awards Daily (www.awardsdaily.com) the prize winners with all the nominees



No Country for Old Men Wins NBR!
By Sasha Stone
NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN NAMED 2007 BEST FILM OF THE YEAR BY THE  NATIONAL BOARD OF REVIEW
***
George Clooney and Julie Christie Named Best Actor and Best Actress
 
Michael Douglas is honored with the Career Achievement Award
 
THE GREAT DEBATERS and PERSEPOLIS win the
The BVLGARI Award for NBR Freedom of Expression
 
***
 
New York, NY – December 5th, 2007 – The National Board of Review of Motion Pictures named NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN the 2007 Best Film of the Year.  Directed by Joel Coen and Ethan Coen, released by Miramax and Paramount Vantage on November 21st, the film is based on Cormac McCarthy’s novel. It simultaneously strips down the American crime drama and broadens its concerns to encompass themes as ancient as the Bible, and as bloodily contemporary as this morning’s headlines.
 
For Best Actor and Actress of 2007, the NBR honors two artists whose performances were truly outstanding. The 2007 Best Actor, GEORGE CLOONEY, was selected for his performance in the title role of Michael Clayton.  For the 2007 Best Actress honor, the NBR has selected JULIE CHRISTIE for her performance in Away From Her.
 
Below is a full list of the awards given by the National Board of Review:
 
Best Film: NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN
Best Director: TIM BURTON, Sweeney Todd
Best Actor: GEORGE CLOONEY, Michael Clayton
Best Actress: JULIE CHRISTIE, Away From Her
Best Supporting Actor: CASEY AFFLECK, The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford
Best Supporting Actress: AMY RYAN, Gone Baby Gone
Best Foreign Film: THE DIVING BELL AND THE BUTTERFLY
Best Documentary: BODY OF WAR
Best Animated Feature: RATATOUILLE
Best Ensemble Cast: NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN
Breakthrough Performance by an Actor: EMILE HIRSCH, Into The Wild
Breakthrough Performance by an Actress: ELLEN PAGE, Juno
Best Directorial Debut: BEN AFFLECK, Gone Baby Gone
Best Original Screenplay (tie):
DIABLO CODY, Juno and NANCY OLIVER, Lars and the Real Girl
Best Adapted Screenplay: JOEL COEN and ETHAN COEN, No Country For Old Men
 
Top Ten Films:
(In alphabetical order)
THE ASSASSINATION OF JESSE JAMES BY THE COWARD ROBERT FORD
ATONEMENT
THE BOURNE ULTIMATUM
THE BUCKET LIST
INTO THE WILD
JUNO
THE KITE RUNNER
LARS AND THE REAL GIRL
MICHAEL CLAYTON
SWEENEY TODD
 
Top Five Foreign Films:
(In alphabetical order)
4 MONTHS, 3 WEEKS, 2 DAYS
THE BAND’S VISIT
THE COUNTERFEITERS
LA VIE EN ROSE
LUST, CAUTION
 
 
Top Five Documentary Films
(In alphabetical order)
DARFUR NOW
IN THE SHADOW OF THE MOON
NANKING
TAXI TO THE DARKSIDE
TOOTS
 
Top Independent Films
(In alphabetical order)
AWAY FROM HER
GREAT WORLD OF SOUND
HONEYDRIPPER
IN THE VALLEY OF ELAH
A MIGHT HEART
THE NAMESAKE
ONCE
THE SAVAGES
STARTING OUT IN THE EVENING
WAITRESS
 
Career Achievement – MICHAEL DOUGLAS
William K. Everson Film History Award – ROBERT OSBORNE
Career Achievement in Cinematography – ROGER DEAKINS
The BVLGARI Award for NBR Freedom of Expression – THE GREAT DEBATERS and PERSEPOLIS
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: SFEnnisSF on December 06, 2007, 01:50:23 pm
If NCFOM wins for Best Picture at the Oscars this year, it just further shows what a joke and a charade they are.  Need I remind you that Miramax, the company behind Crash, is responsible for NCFOM!  You bet they're gonna play dirty again.  And what did the BP win for Crash do for it?  Abolutely nothing!  :laugh: 


On a lighter note, I saw BLADE RUNNER: THE FINAL CUT last Friday night at the Spectacular GRAND LAKE THEATRE (http://www.rrfilms.com/) here in Oakland, CA.  The theatre has almost ~600 seats and was near SOLD OUT!  :o  I had never seen BLADE RUNNER before and it was pretty good.  The crowd ate it up.  With the sell out conditions for it at all theatres playing it here in the Bay Area (I checked), it seems to me there's $$ to be made in touching up these older (but not too old) classics and re-releasing them on the big screen. 

Here are some pictures of the inside of the auditorium of the GRAND LAKE THEATRE:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/12494104@N00/424193874/
and
http://www.renaissancerialto.com/images/grandmain.jpg

Yes, they do play the Wurlitzer Organ before the movie.  This theatre is also famous for the ANTI-BUSH political messages on the marquee  :D, as seen here (Barb you'll love this!):

http://www.flickr.com/photos/jaseo/403101378/

And another photo at night:
http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=1914388037&size=l


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on December 06, 2007, 02:38:19 pm
Those are great pictures, Eric, thanks!  I'd love to see that new cut of Blade Runner.  I really loved that film when I saw it years ago.  8)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on December 08, 2007, 11:25:39 pm
I miss River Pheonix!  I finally watched The Thing Called Love and he is so adorable in it.  It's not a bad little film.  Dermott Mulroney is at his sexiest and Sandra Bullock is a delight as Linda Lou Linden.  Not crazy about Samantha Mathis though.

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/thing_called_love.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kd5000 on December 09, 2007, 12:18:48 am
I'm surprised THE DIVING BELL AND THE BUTTERFLY didn't make it as one of the five best foreign films. I saw it at a film fest in October at a friend's insistence.  I quite enjoyed it, never had heard of the book before or the guy's story. Really amazing.  The movie is getting alot of publicity now as it's in general release.  I'm glad Johnny Depp wasn't cast in the lead role as initially reported.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on December 09, 2007, 12:21:09 am
I heard of the guy's story when it became a book. What an amazing accomplishment! Not just to do a book at all, but to do a really good one. It didn't seem filmable, but I'm looking forward to seeing it if it comes my way.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on December 09, 2007, 04:13:24 pm
Well, just getting back from Atonement.  I haven't read the book but I quite enjoyed the film.  Talk about your tragic love story!  I always said that children should never be believed  ;)  It's a beautiful film but I wasn't completely sucked into the story. I mean I wasn't moved to tears or anything like that.  James McAvoy and Keira Knightley are wonderful in it but I actually have to think about whether it will displace I'm Not There or Fracture from my top ten.

EDIT:  After sleeping on it, I've decided that Atonement won't make my top 10 list.  Although I loved everything about the first half, IMO the story faultered too badly in the second.  I also felt that the final revelation was anti-climactic and a bit of a relief and I don't think that was the intent.

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/Atonement.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on December 09, 2007, 05:42:35 pm
I'm surprised THE DIVING BELL AND THE BUTTERFLY didn't make it as one of the five best foreign films. I saw it at a film fest in October at a friend's insistence.  I quite enjoyed it, never had heard of the book before or the guy's story. Really amazing.  The movie is getting alot of publicity now as it's in general release.  I'm glad Johnny Depp wasn't cast in the lead role as initially reported.

Yes, I read about it in last week's Wall Street Journal and the story and movie both sound amazing. Not sure I want to see it though.

"Grace is Gone" with John Cusack got a fabulous review at Pajiba. I think John Cusack is terrific, anyway, and they say he is great in this. It is only open in New York and Los Angeles at the moment. And it sounds like you should go to the theater prepared with a big box of tissues.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on December 09, 2007, 08:21:59 pm
Just came from seeing "The Golden Compass" aka anti-Narnia.

Very good all the way around.  It's a fantasy movie, so I don't worry about the lapses of commonsensicalness.

Tells an interesting story and one worth telling.  Alas, not enough Daniel Craig.

Recommend.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on December 09, 2007, 09:57:45 pm
AND, Del, ... Since Christian groups are saying Christians should boycott it, I AM SO SEEING IT.  Gleefully.  (I would have anyway for Daniel Craig and the talking polar bear, but this clinches it.)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: BelAir on December 09, 2007, 11:10:13 pm
I saw I'm Not There this evening.

Overall, I thought it was a very interesting film.  I expected it to play out as "chapters" with each of the different actors having the central role in each subsequent chapter.  But it wasn't like that at all really, they were all mixed in together.  I guess I spent the first half of the moving just trying to figure things out, but by the second half I could buy that I was watching different aspects of one man's life.  I could even empathize a little.  I wasn't quite prepared for the length of the movie (about 2 1/2 hours).  I was most mesmerized by Charlotte Gainsbourg's (spelling?) performance.  I also found the scenes with Ben Whishaw quite compelling.  I thought Cate Blanchett was quite good (especially her last scene with Bruce Greenwood), but some of her scenes were quite jarring in terms of the loudness of the music, and I also didn't care for the movie video-esque nature of some of her scenes.  It was nice to see Heath smiling in Robbie's early scenes, but by the end I was very sad for Robbie... 

It was definitely worth the six bucks I paid.  In fact I would have paid six bucks just to sit in the theater and listen to the musical tracks, I think.  (So, if you don't like Bob Dylan's music, I doubt you'll like the movie, lol...) 
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on December 09, 2007, 11:36:38 pm
I saw I'm Not There this evening.

Overall, I thought it was a very interesting film.  I expected it to play out as "chapters" with each of the different actors having the central role in each subsequent chapter.  But it wasn't like that at all really, they were all mixed in together.  I guess I spent the first half of the moving just trying to figure things out, but by the second half I could buy that I was watching different aspects of one man's life.  I could even empathize a little.  I wasn't quite prepared for the length of the movie (about 2 1/2 hours).  I was most mesmerized by Charlotte Gainsbourg's (spelling?) performance.  I also found the scenes with Ben Whishaw quite compelling.  I thought Cate Blanchett was quite good (especially her last scene with Bruce Greenwood), but some of her scenes were quite jarring in terms of the loudness of the music, and I also didn't care for the movie video-esque nature of some of her scenes.  It was nice to see Heath smiling in Robbie's early scenes, but by the end I was very sad for Robbie... 

It was definitely worth the six bucks I paid.  In fact I would have paid six bucks just to sit in the theater and listen to the musical tracks, I think.  (So, if you don't like Bob Dylan's music, I doubt you'll like the movie, lol...) 

Six bucks!! That only gets me half a seat where I live and I'm talking at a matinee!   :laugh:

I loved Charlotte Gainsbourg.  I fell in love with her in The Science of Sleep and she's fast becoming my favourite actor.  I thought she was great with Heath, they had wonderful chemistry.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: BelAir on December 10, 2007, 12:08:12 am
Oilgun -

I guess if I lived where you live, I'd only get to see half as many movies per year!  I can still remember when matinees were 3 bucks!

Oh - I forgot to mention that I saw a preview for No Country for Old Men.  Yikes, does not look appealing to me at all!  I MIGHT rent it on DVD to see Tommy Lee Jones.... unless someone round here convinces me otherwise.... it looked like too violent of a movie for me...
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on December 10, 2007, 12:38:41 am
Belair:  Best you avoid No Country for Old Men because it IS quite violent.

I just watched a great documentary called Helvetica. It was a blind buy for me but I figured it was a safe bet since I've been a committed modernist since the seventies and I love the typeface.   It's chock full of interviews with famous graphic designers, some who love Helvetica and some who hate it.  One jokingly blames the Iraq war on the typeface, another equates it with a disease or fast food.  Others see it as THE perfect typeface that cannot be improved on.  I recommend it to anyone who has an interest in design.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0847817/ (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0847817/)

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/helvetica-1.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on December 10, 2007, 01:01:01 am
AND, Del, ... Since Christian groups are saying Christians should boycott it, I AM SO SEEING IT.  Gleefully.  (I would have anyway for Daniel Craig and the talking polar bear, but this clinches it.)

 :laugh: :laugh:

Yep, anytime the Church says don't see/read/hear something, it's almost always worth seeing/reading/hearing.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on December 10, 2007, 01:18:28 am
I just watched a great documentary called Helvetica. It was a blind buy for me but I figured it was a safe bet since I've been a committed modernist since the seventies and I love the typeface.   It's chock full of interviews with famous graphic designers, some who love Helvetica and some who hate it.

Oilgun, once again your movie recommendations have proved very useful. I've read about this film and thought it sounded interesting, but I don't know that I would have gone so far as to rent it. I will now!  :)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on December 10, 2007, 09:35:17 am
Some more awards news, this time from Los Angeles:

Paul Thomas Anderson's "There Will Be Blood," an epic tale of the oil business in early 20th-century California, won four awards from the Los Angeles Film Critics Association in their year-end voting Sunday including best picture, director and actor honors.

Anderson was selected as best director while Daniel-Day Lewis' performance as a rapacious oil man in "There Will Be Blood" won as best actor. The group also gave its production design honor to "Blood's" Jack Fisk, whose early California design won over Dante Ferretti's re-creation of late 19th century London for "Sweeney Todd."

The other multiple-award winner was Christian Mungiu's Romanian film "4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days" -- the Palme d'or winner at Cannes this year -- which won both best foreign language film honors and best supporting actor in Vlad Ivanov, who played the abortionist in the film.

The film that finished runner-up in the best picture and director categories was Julian Schnabel's French-language "The Diving Bell and the Butterfly."

Best actress went to French actress Marion Cotillard, who delivered a knock-out performance as Edith Piaf in the biopic "La Vie en Rose." Runner-up was Anamaria Marinca, who played a young woman helping a friend get an abortion in "4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days."

The runner-up to Lewis as best actor was Frank Langella, who played an aging novelist in "Starting out in the Evening."

Tamara Jenkins won the best screenplay citation for "The Savages," her comic drama about two quarreling siblings trying to settle their mentally failing father, beating out "There Will Be Blood," Anderson's adaptation of Upton Sinclair's novel.

The best supporting actress nod went to Amy Ryan, recognized for her work in two films, "Gone Baby Gone" and "Before the Devil Knows You're Dead." She won over Cate Blanchett, who played Bob Dylan in "I'm Not There."

Hal Holbrook, who played a retired army officer in "Into the Wild," finished second to "4 Month's" Ivanov.

The New Generation Award, which usually goes to a cinema newcomer, went to Sarah Polley, a long time Canadian actress but first time director with "Away From Her."

In animation, Brad Bird's "Ratatouille," made at Pixar, tied "Persepolis," made in France and directed by Marjane Satrapi (which Vincent Paronnaud co-directed).

In the documentary category, the critics honored Charles Ferguson's Iraqi doc, "No End in Sight." Michael Moore's indictment of health care in the U.S., "Sicko," came in second.

For cinematography, the group voted for Janusz Kaminski's work in "The Diving Bell and the Butterfly." Robert Elswit's cinematography on "There Will Be Blood" was runner-up.

For best musical score, the critics selected the score -- mostly songs written by Glen Hansard and Markita Irglova -- for the Irish musical "Once." Jonny Greenwood's score for "There Will Be Blood" was runner-up.

The Douglas E. Edwards Independent/Experimental Award went to Portuguese filmmaker Pedro Costa for his film "Colossal Youth," which played at the Redcat in Los Angeles.

The group bestowed its newly created Film Legacy Award to Milestone Films, for its efforts to release such vintage films as "Killer of Sheep" and "I am Cuba," and Outfest Legacy Project, for its restoration efforts on many gay and lesbian films.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/film/news/e3i58cca3606862e973c28dbcc6e4b543af
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Lumière on December 10, 2007, 03:53:11 pm

I too saw The Golden Compass this past weekend.
Lovely fantasy movie, loved it, recommend it.
I will definitely check out the sequels whenever they come out.



Last night, I watched Mulholland Drive for the first time.  I had a headache by the end of the movie but must say that David Lynch's warped mind is genius.  Naomi Watts gave a phenomenal performance in it, IMO.   I have to watch it again to get a clearer understanding of Lynch's tangled web of clues and dream world vs. reality.  Great, even though, disturbing film.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on December 11, 2007, 09:35:48 am
From Time Magazine:

Monday, Dec. 10, 2007
Do Film Critics Know Anything?
By Richard Corliss

I sprinted down the corridors of TIME this afternoon, eager to spread the news of the New York Film Critics Circle voting for the year's best films. The winner, in the film, director, screenplay and supporting actor categories? The Coen brothers' No Country for Old Men, which three different people told me they'd been meaning to see. The runner-up, with wins for best actor and cinematographer? There Will Be Blood, an audience-punishing epic that doesn't open for another two weeks. Best actress? Julie Christie, in Away from her, which earned less than $5 million in its North American release.

I didn't even tell them that the very popular, and very good, Pixar cartoon Ratatouille lost out to a French movie about the troubles in Iran. (Though Persepolis, take my word for it, is funny.) By the time I'd got back to my office I had realized that we critics may give these awards to the winners, but we give them for ourselves. In fact, we're essentially passing notes to one another, admiring our connoisseurship at the risk of ignoring the vast audience that sees movies and the smaller one that reads us.

In the past five days, five groups — the National Board of Review, the Boston Society of Film Critics, the Los Angeles Film Critics Association, the Washington. D.C. Film Critics Association and my crowd, the New Yorkers — have convened to choose the most notable movies and moviemakers. No Country was named best picture in four of the groups, There Will Be Blood in L.A. George Clooney won two best actors awards, playing a lawyer at crisis point Michael Clayton, Daniel Day-Lewis a pair for his oil mogul in There Will Be Blood and, in Boston, Frank Langella the prize for playing an aged novelist in Starting Out in the Evening. Three groups selected Julie Christie as best actress — she's an Alzheimer's patient in the Canadian film Away From Her — and two liked Marion Cotillard as Edith Piaf in La vie en rose.

You will be forgiven if, like my friends at Time, you are scratching your head and feigning interest, hoping I'll get quickly to the sexy stuff, like best non-fiction feature (the Iraq docs No End in Sight and Body of War and Michael Moore's Sicko) and distinguished achievement in production design (Jack Fisk, There Will Be Blood, L.A.) . Gee, you're wondering, did The Diving Bell and the Butterfly, the French story of a man totally immobilized by a stroke, beat out the German spy drama The Lives of Others? (Three out of five critics groups say yes.) If you're getting restless, movie lovers, too bad. You'll be hearing the same obscure names at the Golden Globes and on Oscar night.

In animation, Ratatouille won the award outright in Washington and from the National Board of Review. Boston gave the Pixar film a screenplay award, which rarely goes to a cartoon. But in L.A. it shared the L.A. prize with Persepolis, the biographic cartoon from the Iranian exile Marjane Satrapi. And the New York critics rebuffed Ratatouille — and The Simpsons Movie and Bee Movie and Beowulfand other ani-movies people have actually seen — with a first-ballot vote for Persepolis. An art-house film beat out movies that have already grossed nearly $1.5 billion dollars (or about 47 euros) worldwide.

That's the deal with critics' awards. They give prizes to whom they damn well please. No problem with that; it's their gig, and obviously they should pick their favorites. (The choices are fine with me: No Country, Persepolis and No End in sight are all on my 10 best.) But these laurels factor into publicity campaigns for the Oscars and Golden Globes; often they are the campaigns. It's the way we critics contribute to the art-industrial complex. Our prizes certainly help determine which films get nominated, setting in motion the next round of ballyhoo before the final prizes are handed out. So almost all the nominees will be from worthy obscurities that can't draw much of an audience in the theater or, when the awards shows are aired, on TV.

You might think the highest-rated Oscar telecasts are in years when there's a close contest in the major categories, as with Crash and Brokeback Mountain two years ago. Nuh-uh. It's the runaway years, when billion-dollar blockbusters like Titanic and The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King get what are essentially People's Choice awards, and its makers wear a path in the rug from their seats to the stage. Moviegoers who are TV viewers don't want horse races; they want coronations — validations that somebody in Hollywood is ready to honor the movies they love.

That won't happen this year. If the Oscars follow the critics' prizes, there won't be a hit film among them — not even the hits that reviewers loved. Disney's megahit comedy Enchanted has the highest rating on Rotten Tomatoes, the critics' polling site, but I barely heard the film mentioned at the New York voting today. Dozens of scribes raved about the smash comedies Knocked Up and Superbad, but neither film has won a critics' prize. The comedy they love now is Juno, which came out last week.

Actually, it's hard to tell which if any of the critical faves will be popular, because most of the big winners (Diving Bell, No Country, Persepolis, Starting Out in the Evening, Sweeney Todd, There Will Be Blood) are November or December releases. Half of them haven't hit the commercial theaters yet. Maybe the critical establishment has A.D.D.

But the Golden Globes and the Oscars, if they follow the critics' lead, will have V.D.D. — viewer deficit disorder. Large numbers of people won't watch shows paying tribute to movies they haven't seen. In the old Golden Age days, most contenders for the top Oscars were popular movies that had a little art. Now they're art films that have a little, very little, popularity. The serious movies Hollywood gives awards to in January and February are precisely the kind it avoids making for most of the year. The Oscars are largely an affirmative action program, where the industry scratches its niche. The show is a conscience soother, but not a crowd pleaser.

And it all starts here, with critics fighting over which hardly seen movie they want to call the best of the year.

Find this article at:
http://www.time.com/time/arts/article/0,8599,1693300,00.html
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on December 11, 2007, 10:24:55 am

 Gee, you're wondering, did The Diving Bell and the Butterfly, the French story of a man totally immobilized by a stroke, beat out the German spy drama The Lives of Others? (Three out of five critics groups say yes.)


That's strange, The Lives of Others is from last year, isn't it?
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on December 11, 2007, 11:08:26 am
That's strange, The Lives of Others is from last year, isn't it?

According to IMDb, it is a 2006 film, yes. Maybe it has to do with when it went into limited release in the US (2007)? I really don't know, I am just speculating.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on December 11, 2007, 11:45:00 am
According to IMDb, it is a 2006 film, yes. Maybe it has to do with when it went into limited release in the US (2007)? I really don't know, I am just speculating.

L

I know it was in the running for the foreign language film Oscar and it may even have won.

EDIT:  Yep, it did win:  http://www.oscar.com/oscarnight/winners/?pn=detail&nominee=TheLivesOfOthersForeignLanguageNominee (http://www.oscar.com/oscarnight/winners/?pn=detail&nominee=TheLivesOfOthersForeignLanguageNominee)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on December 11, 2007, 10:08:49 pm
I just finished watching The Bourne Ultimatum.  I stupidly missed it at the cinema.  All I can say is Wow! 
I wish Jason Bourne was my boyfriend! :-* 

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/bourne-ultimatum-big2.jpg)




Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on December 12, 2007, 01:13:38 am
I just finished watching The Bourne Ultimatum.  I stupidly missed it at the cinema.  All I can say is Wow! 
I wish Jason Bourne was my boyfriend! :-*

I know what you mean, oilgun.  I think all three of those Bourne movies are great entertainment, and Matt Damon does a spot-on job as a no-nonsense, dangerous agent.  8)

I saw "Starting Out in the Evening" this afternoon and thought it was quite good.  It's a quiet movie, but the characters draw you in.  You watch them go through some life-changing stuff, but it all happens without big blow-ups or contrived plot devices.  Frank Langella is terrific as an aging author who's lost his writing chops.  Lauren Ambrose is a grad student who idolizes him and has a dream of bringing his works back into popularity.  Lili Taylor is his daughter, who is going through her own midlife crisis.  It was absorbing to watch them coming to terms with some hard truths about themselves, and coming out on the other side the better for it.  I liked also that it was filmed in New York, which made it feel very familiar and real.  I recommend it.

I also saw "The Golden Compass" last week and enjoyed it.  The best thing about it is the stunning art direction.  Everything looks beautiful, and they did a marvelous job creating the daemons and the polar bears.  Humans in this universe wear part of their spirit on the outside, in the form of an animal who is actually a part of them.  While they're children, the animal can morph into various forms, but when they reach puberty, the daemon "settles" into one particular animal.  The story, based on the first book of a trilogy by Philip Pullman, is rather complex, so I'm interested in knowing if those who haven't read the books will be able to follow what's going on.  I thought the performances were good, but the director was so busy getting the characters to explain the plot that there was little chance to become emotionally involved with them.  The exception to this was the polar bear Iorek, voiced by Ian McKellen.

I hope it picks up at the box office, because I'd like to see them make at least one sequel to finish the story.  However, the other two books are much darker, and IMO potentially confusing and alienating to an audience.  I mean, they actually end up making war on Heaven (Pullman models much of it on "Paradise Lost").  It's much less approachable than "Lord of the Rings," and Chris Weitz, if he directs the sequel(s), needs to make us care about the characters much more than he has in this first movie.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on December 12, 2007, 02:25:04 am
While I'm still in my Bourne-again mode, I think it's time for a gay action hero!  The closest we have is Private Eye Donald Strachey, played by Chad Allen, in the movies Third Man Out, Shock to the System and the upcoming Icy Blues.  Chad does a great job but the series is more like a gay version of the Nick & Nora Charles films. 

I want an edgy action hero!  I even know who to cast:  Robert Gant!

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/RobertGant.jpg)
"Who, me?"  Yes, Robert, you would be perfect!

And what a coincidence, here he is with Chad Allen:
(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ChadAllenRobertGant.jpg)

Doesn't Chad look like Quentin Tarantino's cuter little brother  :laugh:
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on December 12, 2007, 02:48:38 pm
I just finished watching The Bourne Ultimatum.  I stupidly missed it at the cinema.  All I can say is Wow! 
I wish Jason Bourne was my boyfriend! :-*

I know! I've always liked Matt Damon but never considered him anywhere near the Sexiest Man Alive. But now that I know he can jump from building to building like that ... !  :-*

Also oilgun, you're right, there SHOULD be a gay action hero. Now that we have gay cowboys, that seems like the natural next step!




Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on December 13, 2007, 12:21:10 am
I just watched Luchino Visconti's Ossessione(1943), which is the first adaptation of the novel The Postman Always Rings Twice. It was excellent and just dripped with sensuality! Lead actor Massimo Girotti, as Gino the handsome stranger, has unbelievable charisma.  Visconti teases us at the beginning by not showing us Gino's face, not until Giovanna (Clara Calamai), the cafe owner's sexually charged wife, sets eyes on him. The look they share is simply incendiary and we, like her, become instantly obsessed! Yikes, it's getting hot in here, I have to go take a cold shower now!

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/Ossessione.jpg) (http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ossessione-3.jpg)
(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ossessione-gino.jpg)

From: http://cinemahighandlow.blogspot.com/2007/07/ossessione-1943.html
"Ossessione", Luchino Visconti's first film is the also the first filmed adaptation of James M. Cain's potboiler "The Postman Always Rings Twice". It is slightly different than the 1946 John Garfield/Lana Turner version or the 1981 Bob Rafaelson/Nicholson/Lange version, but the basic plot stays the same, except moved to Italy. To me it's amazing that this film survives, since it came out during strict Fascistic rule and also Cain's novel was still under copyright at the time, so it was never shown in this country until the 1960's.
[...]
Unlike the 1946 version, this version deals much more freely with sex, between the strapping leading man and his adulterous paramour. Since this was made in 1943 during the height of the war, this sexuality was contained in mainly glances, body language, and very candid sensuality.


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: BelAir on December 13, 2007, 12:30:22 am
I just finished watching The Bourne Ultimatum.  I stupidly missed it at the cinema.  All I can say is Wow! 
I wish Jason Bourne was my boyfriend! :-* 

http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/bourne-ultimatum-big2.jpg



hah hah - me too!  once, I think I watched the first Bourne movie for three days in a row straight!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on December 15, 2007, 09:54:25 am
Interesting article I came across....



Globes put Focus on "Atonement" producer
Fri Dec 14, 2007 8:28am EST

By Gregg Goldstein and Steven Zeitchik

NEW YORK (Hollywood Reporter) - Two years after "Brokeback Mountain" powered Focus Features to the top of the heap for the Golden Globe nominees, the specialty studio is back in familiar territory.

Focus and Paramount Vantage scored 11 nominations each Thursday. But Focus also could boast the dominant film, "Atonement," with its seven nominations. In addition, it fielded "Eastern Promises" (three) and "Lust, Caution" (one). And that's not counting Focus' stake in Paramount Vantage's "Into the Wild," for which the company is handling non-English international rights.

But then, who's counting?

"I'm back from Taipei and I'm on such a high," said Focus Features CEO James Schamus, who co-wrote and executive produced Ang Lee's "Lust," which just won seven Golden Horse awards in the director's homeland.

Focus came out of the awards gate slowly this year, gaining little traction with such hopefuls as "Evening," "Reservation Road" and "Talk to Me." But a careful rollout strategy for "Atonement" and a late surge for the dark-horse thriller "Eastern Promises" as well as "Lust" have put it in a pole position. "Today is a massive sweep," Schamus said.

The nominations also restore the company to its awards luster of two years ago, when it scored 12 Golden Globe nominations, including seven for "Brokeback Mountain" and two for "Pride & Prejudice," from "Atonement" director Joe Wright.

"It's a mistake to believe any one company can produce an awards-worthy lineup," Schamus said. "It's the company you keep -- great directors and great producers."

But the company also knows that a long race lies ahead of the January 13 Globes and the February 24 Oscars: Two years ago "Brokeback" was an early favorite for the best picture Oscar -- it won best drama at the Globes -- but it lost the big one to "Crash" at the Oscars.

"Atonement," which opened in limited release December 7, is now positioned to ride a Globes rush at the box office. "Lust," possibly hampered by its NC-17 rating, has grossed just $4.3 million domestically to date, but Schamus noted the rating won't pose any problem for its January DVD release. And "Promises" producer Paul Webster said that despite that film's $17 million gross since it bowed November 4, the recognition will give the film "a new lease on life."

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on December 19, 2007, 11:55:32 pm
I just watched Superbad and thought it was absolutely hilarious!  Actually it was a bootleg and it konked out on me 3/4 of the way through!  I liked it enough to buy  myselfa copy tomorrow!  Is Fogell the new Stifler?

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/Superbad.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kd5000 on December 21, 2007, 09:30:02 pm
I just came back from seeing CHARLEY WILSON'S WAR. Very timely.  And of the course, the msg about being careful with what you sow.  Evidently, since it was covert war, (America's involvement with getting the USSR out of Afghanistan), many Afghans were unaware of what efforts the USA made. Countries seem to do a poor job of planning for victory. It's all about defeating the enemy and then everything is forgotten. 

Towards the film's end, when Charley wants to introduce bills to help rebuild Afghan schools, he's met with rebuffs as "there's Eastern Europe to worry about." OF course, the rest is history. 

A well acted film at the least.  The film does sag a few times.   
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on December 22, 2007, 12:35:48 pm
I just came back from seeing CHARLEY WILSON'S WAR. Very timely.  And of the course, the msg about being careful with what you sow.  Evidently, since it was covert war, (America's involvement with getting the USSR out of Afghanistan), many Afghans were unaware of what efforts the USA made. Countries seem to do a poor job of planning for victory. It's all about defeating the enemy and then everything is forgotten. 

Towards the film's end, when Charley wants to introduce bills to help rebuild Afghan schools, he's met with rebuffs as "there's Eastern Europe to worry about." OF course, the rest is history. 

A well acted film at the least.  The film does sag a few times.

My friend and I were anxious to see it, until, again, we saw the slant of the film toward the left.  I know Hollywood politics traditionally slant left a great deal and most of the time I have no problem with it since I do as well, but we wondered why can't they just tell the story the way it actually was and let the viewer make up their minds?  Otherwise, all these anti-war morality tales do not reach the people they need to.

All my right-wing friends have already turned up their noses at these movies.  They like to crow about how every single one of these left-wing war movies have failed at the box office.

I haven't seen the movie, but based on kd's review, it's another headshaker.  Yes, you reap what you sow, but if that's so, why isn't the USSR then or Russia now getting the 'great Satan' shit the US is?  THEY invaded after all, not us.  Also we did have eastern Europe to worry about at the time - or thought we did -  and if we were in Afghanistan covertly, we couldn't exactly start openly funding the infrastructure there, now could we?  Sometimes a war is about fighting a common enemy, not helping friends and what becomes of that - well, hindsight is 20/20. 
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kd5000 on December 22, 2007, 01:56:19 pm
Actually a conservative poster had this to say about CHARLEY WILSON's WAR at IMDB.com.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hollywood Finally Sticking it To Mushy-headed Liberals

Charlie Wilson was an aimless and directionless Congressman into little more than hookers and blow until he was spurred to action by a God-fearing, conservative Texan.

In uncompromising terms, the film lays out the moral failure and weak-willed incompetence of the Carter Administration in recognizing the real threat that the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan posed. Here was a Carter Administration that armed Afghan resistence with pop guns.

The film makes a very good point. Once a liberal Congress lined up behind Ronald Reagan, they brought an end to a global ideology that threatened world security.

I thought it was particularly bold in the way that it endorsed the idea that covert action in such instances is very effective. The way it exposes how the Democrats in Congress weren't even willing to fund $1 million in building Afghan schools was a courageous tactic for this film to take, especially given Jack Murtha's role as chairman of that committee.

Given that Murtha has been one of the more vocal critics of the current war, I could see how easy it would be to gloss over that fact, but it made no mistake of excusing teh short-sidedness of Murtha's failings as chairman.

I know that a lot of conservatives are going to have a knee-jerk reaction to this movie and call it un-American. A lot of liberals are going to line up to look at this as a bold attack on republicans.

But, in the end, it shows that Rudy Giuliani has been fighting corruption and criminal wrong-doing since the 1970s. It shows that Carter was a weak leader and that inteh 1980s, we brought the Soviets to their knees. It shows that great things happen when Congress lines up behind these principles and has a strong Republican leader in the White House to back the expenditures and effort, we get great things.

God Bless Tom Hanks. God Bless Julia Roberts.God Bless Charlie Walker. God Bless Ronald Reagan. And God Bless a Hollywood film with the courage to show what can happen when men like Jimmy Carter are sent to the ash heap of history.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0472062/board/flat/92830154
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on December 22, 2007, 02:02:28 pm
*sigh*

Well, let's just say politics is in the mind of the beholder.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on December 22, 2007, 02:29:20 pm

[...]
All my right-wing friends have already turned up their noses at these movies. 
[...]


My god!  How many have you got?!  I only have ONE and we always end up at each others throat!  :laugh:
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on December 22, 2007, 03:12:44 pm
My god!  How many have you got?!  I only have ONE and we always end up at each others throat!  :laugh:

Several.  They are also either Born Again Christians or give lip-service to Christianity (e.g. they are homophobic, pro-life, pro-church and state, yet they are also fully behind the military, the death sentence, cutting social programs and have no problem sleeping around and judging others).  Yes, we tear each other to shreds over politics and religion, but somehow, we still manage to stay friends.  I've known them for years.  I abhor their politics and religious beliefs and I'm sure they do mine, but they will also give you the shirt off their backs and offer to bring chicken soup to you if you're sick.  They e-mail me right-wing political/religious things and I'm right back at them with counter stories and e-mails.

They sadden me.  :(  They're intelligent, college educated men, yet cannot or will not make logical connections or educate themselves if the conclusions they will reach are beyond their comfort levels.  I gave my favorite Carl Sagan book to one during a long operative convalescent period.  He was honest enough to admit it was interesting and well written but he just stopped reading because he grew 'uncomfortable' with Sagan's atheistic leanings.

He didn't even want to read what the man had to say.  What does that say about this man's ability to look at or listen to others' opinions objectively on any subject before making a decision?   :(
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on December 22, 2007, 03:24:45 pm
You and della are luck oilgun. I happen to actually be married to one.  :'( He won't go to a concert, movie, or play or read a book or watch a TV show that was created by a non-Republican. An...that's how come me end up here!!


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Shasta542 on December 22, 2007, 03:32:52 pm
You and della are luck oilgun. I happen to actually be married to one.  :'( He won't go to a concert, movie, or play or read a book or watch a TV show that was created by a non-Republican. An...that's how come me end up here!!


 :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on December 22, 2007, 03:33:55 pm
You and della are luck oilgun. I happen to actually be married to one.  :'( He won't go to a concert, movie, or play or read a book or watch a TV show that was created by a non-Republican. An...that's how come me end up here!!

Now that's true love!!  ;D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kd5000 on December 22, 2007, 05:10:45 pm
I have a few conservative friends.  We tend to NOT talk much about politics.  In other words, I'm not friendly with them because of their politics.  Front-Ranger, how??? Well I do know a married couple and they do an awful amount of quarreling over politics.  I guess they like to argue.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on December 22, 2007, 07:18:50 pm
I just watched "The Fountain" on DVD and enjoyed it very much. Of course, lots of close-ups of Hugh Jackman probably helped! Even so, I enjoyed the story. The music was great, too. Anyone else here see this?

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on December 22, 2007, 07:21:50 pm
I just watched "The Fountain" on DVD and enjoyed it very much. Of course, lots of close-ups of Hugh Jackman probably helped! Even so, I enjoyed the story. The music was great, too. Anyone else here see this?

L

Yes.  Saw it when it first came out.  It was marketed badly, it was not at all what we were expecting.  We went without the required box of tissue and suffered for it.  Very good, very sad.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on December 22, 2007, 07:25:54 pm
Yes.  Saw it when it first came out.  It was marketed badly, it was not at all what we were expecting.  We went without the required box of tissue and suffered for it.  Very good, very sad.

Interesting...I am usually a waterworks and cry at anything, but I didn't cry at this. Maybe if I had seen it on the big screen, I would have reacted differently. But I found the whole thing sort of hopeful, as if Tommy and Izzi (or Tomas and Isabel) were going to be together, forever, as she predicted/promised.

Leslie
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on December 22, 2007, 07:30:22 pm
Interesting...I am usually a waterworks and cry at anything, but I didn't cry at this. Maybe if I had seen it on the big screen, I would have reacted differently. But I found the whole thing sort of hopeful, as if Tommy and Izzi (or Tomas and Isabel) were going to be together, forever, as she predicted/promised.

Leslie



SPOILERS!!!!!!!!!!!!  SPOILERS!!!!!!!!!!!!    SPOILERS!!!!!!!!!!!!














I didn't take it at all like that.  I took it all as allegorical.  It was all in Tommy's head.  None of the future/historical stuff was real.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on December 22, 2007, 07:47:07 pm
I just watched "The Fountain" on DVD and enjoyed it very much. Of course, lots of close-ups of Hugh Jackman probably helped! Even so, I enjoyed the story. The music was great, too. Anyone else here see this?

L

I LOVED the Fountain!  Hugh was amazing in it, I was really impressed with his performance.  I can't believe he's the same guy who plays Wolverine, talk about range!  I think he's very underrated.  

I was disappointed with the DVD's lack of a director commentary but have since found out that Aronofski recorded one and it's available for downloading on his website if you're interested.  It's in a Torrent format file, whatever that is,  so I haven't figured out how to play it yet. I have to download some sort of software I think, I'm not very tech-savvy unfortunately  :'(
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on December 22, 2007, 07:52:57 pm

I didn't take it at all like that.  I took it all as allegorical.  It was all in Tommy's head.  None of the future/historical stuff was real.


The historical stuff was her book. The future stuff was how he finished the book, at her request. But in a spiritual sense, it represented lives past, present, and future. They were going to be together, as she predicted.

That's how I see it, at least, just a few hours after watching it. I need more time to think about it.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Shasta542 on December 22, 2007, 07:56:02 pm
Have any of ya'll seen "A River Runs Through It"? I bought it at the $5.00 bin and I'm thinking about watching it tonight. Will I have to think a lot? I don't want to.  :P
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on December 22, 2007, 07:56:48 pm
I LOVED the Fountain!  Hugh was amazing in it, I was really impressed with his performance.  I can't believe he's the same guy who plays Wolverine, talk about range!  I think he's very underrated. 

I was disappointed with the DVD's lack of a director commentary but have since found out that Aronofski recorded one and it's available for downloading on his website if you're interested.  It's in a Torrent format file, whatever that is,  so I haven't figured out how to play it yet. I have to download some sort of software I think, I'm not very tech-savvy unfortunately  :'(

Ah, thanks for this tidbit, oilgun. I'll see if I can find it.

And I knew we had similar taste in movies, despite the Lars and The Real Girl slip up...LOL. But I might just have seen that on a bad day. (Leslie thinks). No...I don't think my opinion will change, no matter what day I see it. Oh well...

I think Hugh is terrific but then...look at my avatar. LOL. I am very worried about Australia, though. Nicole Kidman has been a flop in her last six movies. I am hoping she doesn't drag this down because it is my kind of movie...big sweeping epic. I love those. Hopefully Baz Luhrmann has been able to tease a decent performance out of her this time around.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: louisev on December 22, 2007, 08:01:07 pm
I watched 'The Fountain' too in 'simulcast' with Leslie!

as a sort of a Christmas treat!

I love love LOVED HUGH.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on December 22, 2007, 08:06:31 pm
Have any of ya'll seen "A River Runs Through It"? I bought it at the $5.00 bin and I'm thinking about watching it tonight. Will I have to think a lot? I don't want to.  :P

Um, the only thing I recall thinking about when I saw that movie was how young and hot Brad Pitt was...this was in his early days, circa Thelma and Louise.

There was some other story going on, something about fly fishing as I recall...LOL

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on December 22, 2007, 08:08:36 pm
Ah, thanks for this tidbit, oilgun. I'll see if I can find it.

And I knew we had similar taste in movies, despite the Lars and The Real Girl slip up...LOL. But I might just have seen that on a bad day. (Leslie thinks). No...I don't think my opinion will change, no matter what day I see it. Oh well...

I think Hugh is terrific but then...look at my avatar. LOL. I am very worried about Australia, though. Nicole Kidman has been a flop in her last six movies. I am hoping she doesn't drag this down because it is my kind of movie...big sweeping epic. I love those. Hopefully Baz Luhrmann has been able to tease a decent performance out of her this time around.

L

Re your Avatar.  You wouldn't believe how long it took me to figure out it was Hugh Jackman!  For the longest time I just assumed it was Jake G.!  I don't remember ever seeing Hugh with hair like that, he's gorgeous!

I haven't heard anything about Australia.  As for Nicole, I liked her a lot in Fur: An Imaginary Portrait of Diane Arbus.  Of course few people saw it unfortunately.  What happened to Margot at the Wedding?  That looked pretty good but I haven't read any reviews or anything.  ???
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Shasta542 on December 22, 2007, 08:09:35 pm
Um, the only thing I recall thinking about when I saw that movie was how young and hot Brad Pitt was...this was in his early days, circa Thelma and Louise.

There was some other story going on, something about fly fishing as I recall...LOL

L

:laugh:  :laugh: OK -- thanks! So-watching will definitely be worth seeing a young hot Brad Pitt, huh!?

OT -- some of my friends had a Staffordshire terrier (some people call them pit bulls -- this one was friendly, tho.) and his name was Brad Pit.  :)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on December 22, 2007, 08:25:58 pm
Ah, thanks for this tidbit, oilgun. I'll see if I can find it.


Here's the link:

http://www.darrenaronofsky.com/fountain_com.html (http://www.darrenaronofsky.com/fountain_com.html)

Let me know if you figure out how to play it!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on December 22, 2007, 08:54:50 pm
A little commercial break for oilgun, then we'll get back to our regularly scheduled discussion....

(http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h243/lnicoll/hugh_jackman1.jpg)

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on December 22, 2007, 09:01:45 pm
Re your Avatar.  You wouldn't believe how long it took me to figure out it was Hugh Jackman!  For the longest time I just assumed it was Jake G.!  I don't remember ever seeing Hugh with hair like that, he's gorgeous!

Yes, he is, isn't he? Please see the commercial break...
Quote
I haven't heard anything about Australia.  As for Nicole, I liked her a lot in Fur: An Imaginary Portrait of Diane Arbus.  Of course few people saw it unfortunately. 

I didn't see it but I did read a few reviews. When I said 6 recent flops, I wasn't counting "Fur" on that list, since no one had seen it. My list: The Golden Compass, Margot at the Wedding, The Invasion, Bewitched, The Interpreter, Birth, and The Stepford Wives.

Oh wait...that's seven....well, a few people liked The Interpreter.

Quote
What happened to Margot at the Wedding?  That looked pretty good but I haven't read any reviews or anything.  ???

Reviews are mixed. Some folks say "more dysfunctional family." Others say, "Good portrayal of more dysfunctional family." However, it sounds like Nicole comes off as a bitch on wheels and doesn't do much to illuminate the role beyond that....I am only speaking from reviews, I haven't seen the movie.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on December 22, 2007, 09:03:24 pm
:laugh:  :laugh: OK -- thanks! So-watching will definitely be worth seeing a young hot Brad Pitt, huh!?

OT -- some of my friends had a Staffordshire terrier (some people call them pit bulls -- this one was friendly, tho.) and his name was Brad Pit.  :)


Yeah, watch it and give us a review tomorrow...

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on December 22, 2007, 09:04:09 pm
Bringing over a comment from the movie game, has anyone seen "Gods and Monsters"? Comments...?

Leslie
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on December 22, 2007, 09:06:59 pm
I watched 'The Fountain' too in 'simulcast' with Leslie!

as a sort of a Christmas treat!

I love love LOVED HUGH.

The "simulcast" thing was fun. We both rented the DVD and started watching at the same time. Because we both liked the movie, we didn't talk much (on chat). It might be fun to pick and old, campy movie with a group of people and all watch together, and chat, sort of like Mystery Science Theater 3000 (MST3K). Anyone?

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on December 22, 2007, 09:30:21 pm
A little commercial break for oilgun, then we'll get back to our regularly scheduled discussion....

(http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h243/lnicoll/hugh_jackman1.jpg)



Now, I have to go and pleasure myself!  ;D 

Heath, I'm kidding!  Don't worry, I'm still your bitch!
(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/Heathsquint.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on December 22, 2007, 10:15:45 pm
Bringing over a comment from the movie game, has anyone seen "Gods and Monsters"? Comments...?

Leslie


Yes.  Very good.  Excellent acting from a great cast.  Very haunting.  I bought the book it was based on as well.  Sticks with you a long time.  And Brendan Fraser was fresh from his "George of the Jungle" and his body was still showing the results of his serious workout regime. Rowr!!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kd5000 on December 23, 2007, 12:32:43 am
Yes, I saw THE FOUNTAIN when it was first released. I found the narrative somewhat hard to follow.  Couldn't figure out if he found the elixir of life after Izzy had died and lived to the 25th century to be finally reunited with her in that nebula.  Silly me, I thought I was going to see a story whereby a conquistador drinks from the Fountain of Youth and lives for a thousand years.  Not that easy.  Well scored and visually interesting....
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Shasta542 on December 23, 2007, 12:53:27 am
OK. Checking back. I just finished watching "A River Runs Through It" -- (1992). I thought it was great. The cinematography was beautiful -- 1920's Montana was the setting; I guess that's where it was filmed. Wherever it was, was gorgeous. Along with a young Brad Pitt who was fantastic as the happy-go-lucky, rebellious, alcoholic, fly-fishing expert, younger brother. He was so sweet, tho troubled.

OMG -- he was cute as everything!!


(http://i183.photobucket.com/albums/x221/Shasta542/SSSC16.jpg)

The theme, I think, was basically about "you can't help someone who doesn't want to be helped, no matter how hard you try" and something the father says near the end....."you can love someone completely without understanding them completely".

I'd recommend it. And...I know it's bad to smoke, but there is one scene where the two brothers share a cigarette by the side of the river that is sooooo SEXY.

Oh yeah, Robert Redford's narration was wonderful too.
 ::)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on December 23, 2007, 09:37:23 am
I am seriously thinking I need to sign up for Netflix again. I have so many older movies I want to see these days, Netflix might be the way to go. Thanks for reminding me about "River," Shasta. That was one of those movies I saw years ago, enjoyed, and I have sort of forgotten about. It might be fun to see it again.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on December 23, 2007, 03:25:12 pm
Regarding "Charlie Wilson's War," I'm sure everyone will see just what they want to see.  And in my case that means not seeing Reagan as some sort of hero and Carter as some sort of incompetent.  ::)  It does sound like a good movie, though.  Maybe I can go with my conservative brother when I'm in Indiana over the holiday and we can have a knock-down drag-out afterwards.  ;D

I saw "Gods and Monsters" and thought it was terrific.  I'm glad to know something more about Whale and his work, and I always enjoy watching Ian McKellen's take on a character.  It was clever and telling how the screenplay drew parallels between Brendan Fraser's character and Frankenstein's monster.

John Gallagher, Jenny newyearsday and I went to see "I'm Not There" yesterday and had three differing reactions.  She loved it, John hated it and I (in addition to having to fight to stay awake) had mixed feelings about it.  It depends on what you bring to it, maybe.  I can see how it could be taken as ingenious and creative, but it can also seem pretentious and forced.  I mostly enjoyed the parts with Cate Blanchett and Christian Bale because they were most like the Dylan we are familiar with, and you could anchor yourself on that.  The other characters seemed only vaguely relevant to the whole operation.  Heath was good, but he played an actor who was known for his portrayal of a Dylan-like character; although his wife  (Charlotte Gainsbourg) resembled one of Dylan's early girlfriends, I didn't see how his personal life was all that relevant to Dylan.   The movie seemed really long because I never knew where the director was going to end it, so every time he finished one scene and started another, I was like "oh well, here we go again."  I wouldn't not recommend it, but just don't expect a clear story line!  The best thing?  The soundtrack, and a shot at the very end of the real Dylan playing the harmonica.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Shasta542 on December 23, 2007, 05:04:46 pm
Quote
She loved it, John hated it and I (in addition to having to fight to stay awake) had mixed feelings about it.  It depends on what you bring to it, maybe.


Ever since I've started reading about it, I thought it sounded boring. I think just the idea of several characters playing Dylan was off-putting. That's bad -- I need to see it before I judge it, but I probably won't until it hits CD status. This isn't exactly a glowing review that would cause me to change my mind about it. What did John hate about it?  
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on December 23, 2007, 05:15:01 pm
OK. Checking back. I just finished watching "A River Runs Through It" -- (1992). I thought it was great.

Thanks for the reminder, Shasta! I saw this when it came out and loved it. I'd forgot that I'd been thinking of renting it for my kids.

Regarding "Charlie Wilson's War," I'm sure everyone will see just what they want to see.  And in my case that means not seeing Reagan as some sort of hero and Carter as some sort of incompetent.  ::)  It does sound like a good movie, though.  Maybe I can go with my conservative brother when I'm in Indiana over the holiday and we can have a knock-down drag-out afterwards.  ;D

I think this must be true. The script was written by Aaron Sorkin, writer of "The West Wing," which reminded us on a weekly basis, often through well-reasoned argument, how honorable and honest and intelligent and noble and full of integrity liberals are. (I loved it!) But that Afghanastan thing really was/is a complicated situation. Maybe not everything falls easily into liberal vs. conservative terms.

My sons and I saw National Treasure II yesterday. Ehh ... I'd say it was a pretty good movie to take an 11- and 13-year-old to -- they both liked it -- but I did not like it was well as the first one. It was just a bit too ... facile, I guess.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on December 23, 2007, 09:07:54 pm
What did John hate about it?  

He just felt the whole thing was pretentious, fake posturing on the part of the director and screenwriters.  Nothing about it convinced him that it was exploring Dylan with insight and freshness.  :(

The script was written by Aaron Sorkin, writer of "The West Wing," which reminded us on a weekly basis, often through well-reasoned argument, how honorable and honest and intelligent and noble and full of integrity liberals are.

How refreshing to hear this description of liberals.  It makes me realize how little they stand up for themselves.  Why???  :(
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on December 24, 2007, 12:11:28 am

How refreshing to hear this description of liberals.  It makes me realize how little they stand up for themselves.  Why???[/size]

My theory is because we can't depend on our fellow liberals to support us.  After all, liberals are not known for being dogmatic, so we don't have a 'party line' that we all adhere to.  We expect our fellow liberals to have their own minds and own opinions and they may not necessarily mesh with our own.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on December 24, 2007, 12:13:07 am
Just come from seeing P.S. I love you.

It was sweet, extremely sad, felt very very long, full of fantasy poor New Yorkers and OMG full of gorgeous men.

P.S. Hilary Swank needs to eat a burger.  Many of them.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Shasta542 on December 24, 2007, 12:26:19 am
Just come from seeing P.S. I love you.

It was sweet, extremely sad, felt very very long, full of fantasy poor New Yorkers and OMG full of gorgeous men.

P.S. Hilary Swank needs to eat a burger.  Many of them.



I've had it for Jeffrey Dean Morgan since his time on "Gray's Anatomy". I think he's such a handsome hott HUNK!!! I'm dying to see this movie. I'm meeting my best friend and her daughter halfway next Friday, and I'm going to try to talk them into this one! I'll say dellaluvia recommended it!!!  :P  ;D


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on December 24, 2007, 02:14:10 am

I've had it for Jeffrey Dean Morgan since his time on "Gray's Anatomy". I think he's such a handsome hott HUNK!!! I'm dying to see this movie. I'm meeting my best friend and her daughter halfway next Friday, and I'm going to try to talk them into this one! I'll say dellaluvia recommended it!!!  :P  ;D




Heh, don't forget your box of tissues.  I snuffled throughout the movie and came out looking like a white rat with reddened eyes, nose and a pounding sinus headache.

Enjoy, the men were still a pleasure to watch.

EDITED TO ADD:  Sorry, but as I'm dressing for work, I remembered that one of the songs played during this movie contained a gay slur, so be warned.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on December 24, 2007, 09:41:26 am
My daughter and I went and saw National Treasure II yesterday and Katherine, I'd agree with you. It was fun but the first one was better. I have to say, Justin Bartha (the Riley Poole character) is as cute as a button and I could watch him for days! Since he had lots of screen time, he made the whole thing enjoyable. I did agree with one reviewer who said the long drawn out climax looked like an ad for a new attraction at Disney World. The Goofy cartoon at the beginning was fun, too.

In the evening, we did a "simulcast" with Louise of The Namesake, directed by Mira Nair. My husband really liked it. I thought it was good, but I liked Monsoon Wedding better. I'll wait for Louise to weigh in with her review.

This afternoon, we are going to "simulcast" Gods and Monsters....if anyone wants to join us. (I need to run off to the video store this morning to pick it up.)

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on December 24, 2007, 06:00:10 pm
How refreshing to hear this description of liberals.  It makes me realize how little they stand up for themselves.  Why???  :(

I think part of being a liberal, almost by definition, is being open to new ideas, which can translate into being open-minded about other people's ideas, which can translate into not standing up for one's own ideas.

Of course, there are lots of exceptions to this. I know (plenty of) liberals who are close-minded about certain things.

I have to say, Justin Bartha (the Riley Poole character) is as cute as a button and I could watch him for days! Since he had lots of screen time, he made the whole thing enjoyable.

I liked him, too, and one thing I found slightly annoying was I thought they did the "Riley is the loser who gets the short end of every stick" schtick.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Lynne on December 24, 2007, 06:15:41 pm
Two words:  Avoid Hitman

I was under the mistaken impression that it was developed based on a Lawrence Block novel, which is fabulous, but no...
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on December 24, 2007, 09:28:02 pm
Hilary Swank needs to eat a burger.  Many of them.

I think I've been eating all of hers.   :-\

I saw "Juno" on Saturday and "Sweeney Todd" on Sunday.  Thought both were good, but not great.

Is it just me, or are the critics more out of whack than ever in the last year or so?  My opinions used to jibe pretty closely with most of theirs - especially the most pretentious ones from the biggest N.Y. and L.A. papers.  But lately most of them are raving about movies like this, I go to see them, and go, "Hunh?"

"Juno" had some lovely moments.  Ellen Page was terrific, but who really stood out to me was Michael Cera as Paulie Bleeker.  He had some non-verbal reactions that were so deliciously subtle - if I squinted hard for a moment, I could have been looking at an extremely young Spencer Tracy.  But some of the dialog was really contrived.  All very witty, but it kept not ringing true to me as stuff these characters would actually say.  God, I hate it when that happens.

And "Sweeney Todd" - well, Johnny Depp was wonderful, though - gasp - a tad over the top towards the end.  But for my money, he's quite a decent little singer.  And Alan Rickman was great as always - he's another one who's so subtle - is there any English actor who isn't?  But there were certain directorial choices (and I love Tim Burton) that left me cold - not exhilarated like I remember being when I first saw it at 20-something many, MANY moons ago.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: louisev on December 24, 2007, 09:38:52 pm
I liked 'The Namesake' more than 'Monsoon Wedding' , probably because I thought that the father character was very well drawn and understandable.   However, I do agree with the reviewer about the 'whirlwind speed' of the sweeping plot, and it was never more noticeable than when when the Gangullis settle in New York and one minute Ashima is crying and saying she wants to go home to India and the next minute she has two kids.  That part went WAY too fast for me!  But there were some fabulous little amusing lines in it, like when Gogol decides that he wants to keep his first name at school instead of of changing to his 'good name' and his father says 'There is nothing we can do in a country where the president is named Jimmy.'

The plot went too fast but mainly because I wanted to get to know them all better, but I agree also with one of the dissenting reviewers who said the insights into the son's romantic life would be better left out, and seem oddly out of place.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on December 25, 2007, 12:40:34 am
I think I've been eating all of hers.   :-\

I saw "Juno" on Saturday and "Sweeney Todd" on Sunday.  Thought both were good, but not great.

Is it just me, or are the critics more out of whack than ever in the last year or so?  My opinions used to jibe pretty closely with most of theirs - especially the most pretentious ones from the biggest N.Y. and L.A. papers.  But lately most of them are raving about movies like this, I go to see them, and go, "Hunh?"

"Juno" had some lovely moments.  Ellen Page was terrific, but who really stood out to me was Michael Cera as Paulie Bleeker.  He had some non-verbal reactions that were so deliciously subtle - if I squinted hard for a moment, I could have been looking at an extremely young Spencer Tracy.  But some of the dialog was really contrived.  All very witty, but it kept not ringing true to me as stuff these characters would actually say.  God, I hate it when that happens.

And "Sweeney Todd" - well, Johnny Depp was wonderful, though - gasp - a tad over the top towards the end.  But for my money, he's quite a decent little singer.  And Alan Rickman was great as always - he's another one who's so subtle - is there any English actor who isn't?  But there were certain directorial choices (and I love Tim Burton) that left me cold - not exhilarated like I remember being when I first saw it at 20-something many, MANY moons ago.



I'm with ya, Barb.  Contrived dialogue, plotline, plot devices and movies are becoming more and more obvious to me.  That's why I seldom tolerate sitcoms or TV dramas any more.  The characters do and say things that no real person would - but you realize they do this so the plot can move forward.

I'm not surprised Johnny Depp has a singing voice, he actually came to L.A. to be in a rock band as I recall.  So he had to feel he had some kind of talent in that direction.  I"m always in awe of most A list Brit actors.  Most of them attend the Academy or whatever they call their Drama school there, and it's pretty prestigious and only the really good ones make it through, so most of the time, they're very impressive talents.

 
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on December 26, 2007, 10:44:31 am
Louise and I had our simulcast film festival this weekend and saw The Fountain, The Namesake, Gods and Monsters, and Ed Wood. I liked them all but Gods and Monsters was definitely my favorite. There's a special "Making Of.." feature on the DVD that I would recommend, too.

Sir Ian McKellan was definitely robbed of his Oscar for best actor. So what else is new with the Academy? An openly gay man playing an openly gay movie director? Of course he'd never win, even though he deserved it.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kd5000 on December 29, 2007, 12:06:54 am
Slightly off topic, but I've seen two lists today, one on CNN.com and one on MSN.com which ranked ZODIAC as one of the ten best movies of 2007.  MSN.com ranked it #2 after NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN.  It was released so early in the year, it will probably be forgotten by Award season.  Do wish ZODIAC had done better at the box office.

http://movies.msn.com/movies/2007review/top10movies?photoidx=10
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: BelAir on December 29, 2007, 11:08:26 am
I just watched "The Fountain" on DVD and enjoyed it very much. Of course, lots of close-ups of Hugh Jackman probably helped! Even so, I enjoyed the story. The music was great, too. Anyone else here see this?

L

I saw it Les.  I thought it was fascinating...
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: BelAir on December 29, 2007, 11:11:24 am
Bringing over a comment from the movie game, has anyone seen "Gods and Monsters"? Comments...?

Leslie

a while back.  I would like to see it again.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: BelAir on December 29, 2007, 11:20:24 am
I finally saw Zodiac yesterday.  I thought it was a pretty good film.  I haven't seen enough of this year's movies to have a 10 best list, so can't really comment about whether it's one of the "best" films of 2007. I thought Jake did a good job in his role, and I also really enjoyed Mark Ruffalo's performance.

 :)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on December 29, 2007, 11:33:55 am
For this weekend's simulcast movie fest, Louise and I have Transamerica and Big Fish. If anyone wants to join us, we'll be watching one today and the other tomorrow. We usually watch the movie in the afternoon, around 2 pm EST.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on December 29, 2007, 11:48:43 am
Got dragged to go see "Sweeney Todd".

It was good.  Solid piece of work, but it's not something I would have ever gone to see by myself.

Only reason I went is because a friend is a Johnny Depp fanatic and even she wasn't sure after it was over if she liked it or not.  The cast was solid, singing good - one singer was so irritating though, you finally understood what dogs must feel when they hear a dog whistle - very funny parts, lots and lots of gore.  My friend thought it campy in some parts, but I reminded her this was a movie about a singing serial killer, so camp was to be expected.  ;D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread... (SPOILERS)
Post by: Shasta542 on December 29, 2007, 03:31:43 pm
Heh, don't forget your box of tissues.  I snuffled throughout the movie and came out looking like a white rat with reddened eyes, nose and a pounding sinus headache.

Enjoy, the men were still a pleasure to watch.

EDITED TO ADD:  Sorry, but as I'm dressing for work, I remembered that one of the songs played during this movie contained a gay slur, so be warned.

SPOILERS FOR "P.S. I LOVE YOU" SKIP IF YOU DON'T WANT TO KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT IT.  





We loved it, Delalluvia!! Later, as we talked about it, one of my friends said she did not think she'd like it at first because of the way the funeral was held. I told her that was a traditional Irish wake and that's the way they would do it. She'd never been exposed to that type of rite. Anyway -- all three of us enjoyed it immensely. We mixed laughter and tears throughout the whole thing. H.C. Jr. was great in his part -- they have pills for being rude. hahaha And I just sat and lusted after Jeffrey Dean Morgan -- OMG. He is so MMMMMM!!!!!! The only thing --I thought it was odd how Gerry was out in the national park and she was out in the national park (1st meeting) and they were all alone. I would have been terrified if a man showed up like that out of nowhere.  :o  lol.  Course -- it helped that he was yummy looking. Thanks for the review, Del. It was all that and more! (I missed the song you are talking about I guess) (2 bathroom visits and 1 choking episode)  :P  I want to see it again anyway.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Luvlylittlewing on December 29, 2007, 03:43:15 pm
Got dragged to go see "Sweeney Todd".

It was good.  Solid piece of work, but it's not something I would have ever gone to see by myself.

Only reason I went is because a friend is a Johnny Depp fanatic and even she wasn't sure after it was over if she liked it or not.  The cast was solid, singing good - one singer was so irritating though, you finally understood what dogs must feel when they hear a dog whistle - very funny parts, lots and lots of gore.  My friend thought it campy in some parts, but I reminded her this was a movie about a singing serial killer, so camp was to be expected.  ;D

I saw sweeney Todd with my daughter last week.  I'm not sure how I feel about it!  I mean, I love the look of the film, and was surprised that Johnny Depp and Helena Bonham(sp?) Carter can actually carry a tune.  But I was turned off by all of the gore.  I realize the movie is about a serial killer, but, the entire thing seemed rather pointless to me.  My daughter was disappointed, no end.  In fact, she was sullen once the film ended.  I suppose she thought the movie would have more depth, or something.  But given the subject matter, I don't know what she expected!

Some of my favorite movies:


Ed Wood
Lord of the Rings Trilogy
Sunset Blvd.
Whatever Happened to Baby Jane
House on Haunted Hill (what can I say?)  :laugh:
Laura
Psycho

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on December 29, 2007, 04:04:28 pm
I saw Walk Hard on Christmas Day. It's very silly, a bit over-the-top in parts, kind of cheesy for my taste -- but often absolutely hilarious. John C. Riley is great, and almost everybody else in it some famous comedy character actor from SNL, 30 Rock, The Office, Judd Apatow (who co-wrote) movies, etc. Who would cast Jack Black as Paul McCartney and Paul Rudd as John Lennon? But they're great.

I probably shouldn't have taken my 11- and 13-year-old sons to it, though. Luckily, they sat separately from my husband and me, so we could loudly complain in shocked tones about what kind of parents would take children to a movie like that.

I saw Sweeney Todd last night. Yuck. I love Johnny Depp, and Helena Bonham-Carter was very cute, and Alan Rickman was as usual a brilliant villain. My 16-year-old niece loved it -- she was seeing it for at least the second time and owns the soundtrack. But I agreed totally with my 11-year-old son's review: "It's boring, it's bleak and Johnny Depp does all the killings the same way." Oh, and it's gross.

Set design was fantastic, though. Tim Burton is a genius at that. And only a slight exaggeration of what I imagine  19th-century London probably was like. If only they hadn't done so much singing and killing, the movie would have been good. Unfortunately, that was 90 percent of it.










Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on December 29, 2007, 06:22:07 pm
If only they hadn't done so much singing and killing, the movie would have been good.

Best review-in-a-nutshell ever.  :laugh:  :laugh:  :laugh:
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on December 29, 2007, 07:34:42 pm
This afternoon I watched "Transamerica" and I would highly recommend it. I can see why Felicity Huffman was nominated for an Oscar, she was great. At first I thought the ending was a little weak, but thinking about it, perhaps it was supposed to show what real life is...things just go on, without alot of fireworks or drama. Life is.

This came out in 2005, the same year as BBM. Thinking about the two of them together (and the Academy Award nominations, and how the Academy voted) is interesting.

If someone is looking for a good movie to add to their Netflix queue, or pick up at Blockbuster, I would suggest this.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kd5000 on December 29, 2007, 07:50:07 pm
I saw THE GOLDEN COMPASS today and wasn't really into it.  Of course, the guy with the picket sign outside the theater (with some Catholic group) was what enticed me.  If someone says don't go to see this film, I go.   Of course, it would have been annoying if ppl had disrupted the film shouting out off handed comments.  I heard much of this occurred for Fahrenheit 9/11 in the suburbs around America.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on December 29, 2007, 07:52:50 pm
I saw THE GOLDEN COMPASS today and wasn't really into it.  Of course, the guy with the picket sign outside the theater (with some Catholic group) was what enticed me.  If someone says don't go to see this film, I go.   Of course, it would have been annoying if ppl had disrupted the film shouting out off handed comments.  I heard much of this occurred for Fahrenheit 9/11 in the suburbs around America.

My husband and daughter saw it, and liked it. I wasn't interested. It has landed on a few "worst movies of 2007" lists. It seems to definitely be a movie that people react to differently.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Luvlylittlewing on December 30, 2007, 09:41:34 pm
I saw Walk Hard on Christmas Day. It's very silly, a bit over-the-top in parts, kind of cheesy for my taste -- but often absolutely hilarious. John C. Riley is great, and almost everybody else in it some famous comedy character actor from SNL, 30 Rock, The Office, Judd Apatow (who co-wrote) movies, etc. Who would cast Jack Black as Paul McCartney and Paul Rudd as John Lennon? But they're great.

I probably shouldn't have taken my 11- and 13-year-old sons to it, though. Luckily, they sat separately from my husband and me, so we could loudly complain in shocked tones about what kind of parents would take children to a movie like that.

I saw Sweeney Todd last night. Yuck. I love Johnny Depp, and Helena Bonham-Carter was very cute, and Alan Rickman was as usual a brilliant villain. My 16-year-old niece loved it -- she was seeing it for at least the second time and owns the soundtrack. But I agreed totally with my 11-year-old son's review: "It's boring, it's bleak and Johnny Depp does all the killings the same way." Oh, and it's gross.

Set design was fantastic, though. Tim Burton is a genius at that. And only a slight exaggeration of what I imagine  19th-century London probably was like. If only they hadn't done so much singing and killing, the movie would have been good. Unfortunately, that was 90 percent of it.












I did love the overall "feel" of Sweeney Todd, but the killing was just ridiculous.   I like the look of the movie.  It seems impossible to hide Johnny Depp's beauty.  My daughter thinks Sweeney Todd would have been better if we were shown some of what his life was like in prison.  It would have made more sense if we saw what actually turned him into a throat slashing monster.

I was all ready to see Walk Hard this morning.  I was turning the car into the theatre parking lot when my daughter asked to have breakfast instead.  We'll probably see it next week.  The first show of the day in Emeryville is only $6.00.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: BelAir on December 31, 2007, 05:14:13 pm
I saw Last King of Scotland yesterday.  Anyone want to comment on that?

I haven't really formed an opinion yet.

(Leslie - I'm glad you liked Transamerica.  I thought it was very good, and I think you're right about the ending...)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Shasta542 on December 31, 2007, 05:36:02 pm
I saw Last King of Scotland yesterday.  Anyone want to comment on that?

I haven't really formed an opinion yet.

(Leslie - I'm glad you liked Transamerica.  I thought it was very good, and I think you're right about the ending...)

Hello BelAir.

I watched it not long ago. It was intense and brutal. I know it was based on fact, but it was fictionalized inasmuch as the Jame McAvoy character was not a real person -- was he? I had to turn my head several times. It shows how the masses don't have all the info they probably need to have!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on December 31, 2007, 05:40:58 pm
I saw Last King of Scotland yesterday.  Anyone want to comment on that?

I haven't really formed an opinion yet.

(Leslie - I'm glad you liked Transamerica.  I thought it was very good, and I think you're right about the ending...)

I watched it on DVD a few months ago. It's obvious why Forest Whitaker won the Oscar. I also thought James McAvoy was excellent although a few critics dissed his performance.

It is one of those "glad I saw it but once is enough" movies for me. I see it is on HBO now. I probably will pass on a repeat viewing!

And Shasta, I believe you're right, that Garrigan was a fictional character.

L

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: BelAir on December 31, 2007, 08:17:30 pm
I watched it on DVD a few months ago. It's obvious why Forest Whitaker won the Oscar. I also thought James McAvoy was excellent although a few critics dissed his performance.

It is one of those "glad I saw it but once is enough" movies for me. I see it is on HBO now. I probably will pass on a repeat viewing!

And Shasta, I believe you're right, that Garrigan was a fictional character.

L



you guys are right.  Gerrigan was a fictional character (I watched the special features on the DVD).  However, one of Amin's wives did die following an attempted abortion; she was found dismembered; she had an affair with the health minister (according to wikipedia).   Amin did have British doctors. 

At first, I was someone put off by the incorporation of a fictional character into a true story.  In the special features, McAvoy describes his character as sort of a mirror to British/white society... (I'm paraphrasing somewhat poorly).  So if I think of McAvoy and his experiences as a sort of amalgamation of "white" experience with "dark Africa" I am less annoyed.  I did like how they presented a personalized story of what in actuality was widespread terror and brutality, and that we were able to see the 'good' and 'bad' Amin through McAvoy's eyes. 
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on December 31, 2007, 08:50:01 pm
you guys are right.  Gerrigan was a fictional character (I watched the special features on the DVD).  However, one of Amin's wives did die following an attempted abortion; she was found dismembered; she had an affair with the health minister (according to wikipedia).   Amin did have British doctors. 

At first, I was someone put off by the incorporation of a fictional character into a true story.  In the special features, McAvoy describes his character as sort of a mirror to British/white society... (I'm paraphrasing somewhat poorly).  So if I think of McAvoy and his experiences as a sort of amalgamation of "white" experience with "dark Africa" I am less annoyed.  I did like how they presented a personalized story of what in actuality was widespread terror and brutality, and that we were able to see the 'good' and 'bad' Amin through McAvoy's eyes. 

Thanks for this, Bel. Interesting information. I am not sure I watched the special features so I didn't have this information.

Louise and I are planning another simulcast tomorrow. This time we'll be watching "Finding Neverland" for anyone who wants to join us.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Lumière on December 31, 2007, 09:06:57 pm
I saw Last King of Scotland yesterday.  Anyone want to comment on that?

I recently got the DVD, haven't watched it yet.  Will remedy that soon.
Did you watch Hotel Rwanda ?  (that's another one I want to check out)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on December 31, 2007, 09:37:57 pm
I recently got the DVD, haven't watched it yet.  Will remedy that soon.
Did you watch Hotel Rwanda ?  (that's another one I want to check out)

That is one of those movies I meant to see in the theater, didn't, and haven't seen on DVD yet. Thanks for the reminder.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: BelAir on December 31, 2007, 10:34:09 pm
Thanks for this, Bel. Interesting information. I am not sure I watched the special features so I didn't have this information.

Louise and I are planning another simulcast tomorrow. This time we'll be watching "Finding Neverland" for anyone who wants to join us.

L

I liked that one!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: BelAir on December 31, 2007, 10:35:39 pm
I recently got the DVD, haven't watched it yet.  Will remedy that soon.
Did you watch Hotel Rwanda ?  (that's another one I want to check out)

Hotel Rwanda is on my Netflix list but I haven't seen it yet.  Let us know what you think of Last King.  I did not know anything about Idi Amin before watching the movie.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Lumière on January 01, 2008, 12:00:30 am
Hotel Rwanda is on my Netflix list but I haven't seen it yet.  Let us know what you think of Last King.  ...

Will do.

I saw Robots tonight....loved it!
If you haven't seen it yet, check it out when you feel like taking a light, entertaining break from more 'serious' movies.. :)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 01, 2008, 09:51:08 am
I watched "For Your Consideration" last night, the latest effort from Christopher Guest & Co. (Waiting for Guffman, Best in Show, A Mighty Wind). I loved his other movies. I didn't see this one in the theater because it had very mediocre reviews but I thought on TV it might be worth a few chuckles. Wrong. It was very disappointing in every way.

Oh well, at least I didn't waste money in the theater or on a DVD!

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on January 01, 2008, 03:07:23 pm
Hotel Rwanda is excellent. Very moving, very informative, very shocking and sad and scary. It really gets you thinking about why the U.S. does or doesn't get involved in conflicts in other countries and whether or not they should. There's one scene I'll never forget -- an American TV journalist gets some footage of the carnage in the streets, and the Rwandans hiding out in the hotel are all excited about how, once the world sees what's going on, they'll be saved! And Joaquin Phoenix breaks the news that, no, they'll look up, go, "it's that terrible," and go back to their dinners. Which of course is exactly what happened.

Don Cheadle is magnificent, and all the main actors are good. Despite its subject matter the film isn't particularly graphically violent. Just last night I saw a trailer for another movie about Rwanda, but the stars were all white people. The movie looked good, but in general I hate that practice; it suggests audiences can't connect to movies in which the movies are about black people or Asians unless they have a white star. So I loved that Hotel Rwanda didn't resort to that.




Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Shasta542 on January 02, 2008, 09:03:13 am
Article

2008 movie preview: The 10 most anticipated movies of the new year and more:

http://movies.msn.com/movies/hitlist/12-28-07?GT1=7701& (http://movies.msn.com/movies/hitlist/12-28-07?GT1=7701&)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kd5000 on January 02, 2008, 09:17:35 am
Doesn't look that terribly exciting Shasta.  The Mysterious Case of Benjamin Buttons sounds the most original.  I thought it was going to be more a scifi drama, but Forest Gump was mentioned in the same sentence. 

I watched MAYERLING yesterday, historic epic made in 1968.  I was thinking, wow, historic epics aren't really made anymore and that's too bad. It must cost alot of money to make and I guess the studios wonder if the adults are going to turn out to see it.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 02, 2008, 09:29:21 am
Article

2008 movie preview: The 10 most anticipated movies of the new year and more:

http://movies.msn.com/movies/hitlist/12-28-07?GT1=7701& (http://movies.msn.com/movies/hitlist/12-28-07?GT1=7701&)

This little tidbit will make Barb groan:

"Bond 22" (Nov. 7)
Currently untitled, director Marc Forster ("The Kite Runner," "Monster's Ball") teams up with screenwriter Paul Haggis ("Crash") and the latest 007, Daniel Craig, for an original story that picks up immediately after the events of "Casino Royale."


It was interesting that there was no mention of "Australia," the massive epic from Baz Luhrman, starring Hugh Jackman and Nicole Kidman. They just wrapped up shooting a few weeks ago--nine months in all. Filming started back in April. They are behind schedule and the release date has been pushed back, but they are still planning on 2008.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kd5000 on January 02, 2008, 09:55:31 am
Actually this morning's LA TIMES is already saying award season this year is a bust and gives a list of films for 2008 as Oscar bait.

 :)

"But with awards season pundits are already declaring the 2007awards race a wash (blame those Iraq war films, a lack of big popular hits like "Titanic" and the ongoing writers strike) and it's not a moment too soon to consider next year's hopefuls.

Lots of Oscar favorites are poised to make their return in 2008. From Clint Eastwood, Sam Mendes and Ed Zwick to actors Russell Crowe, Leonardo DiCaprio, Brad Pitt and actresses Meryl Streep, Cate Blanchett, Keira Knightley and Kate Winslet. Here is The Envelope's look ahead at Oscar bait in 2008."

Revolutionary Road
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
The Changeling
Here's the full article. There is a slide show of movies to look forward to in 2008

http://theenvelope.latimes.com/awards/oscars/env-prestige08-phoga01jan01,0,6454981.photogallery
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 02, 2008, 12:22:32 pm
My treat over the past two long weekends has been to watch lots of movies, some of them simulcast with Louise, and some on my own. With that in mind, here is my ranking of what I saw:

1. Gods and Monsters (definitely the best of all)
2. Transamerica
3. The Fountain
4. Big Fish
5. Finding Neverland (I liked this alot more than Louise did)
6. Ed Wood
7. The Namesake
8. National Treasure: Book of Secrets (saw in the theater)
9. For Your Consideration
10. The Notorious Bettie Page (this was a big disappointment--it was actually dull!)

Next up...for our next simulcast, we are hoping to watch The Wages of Fear (1953). In the theater, I'll be seeing Atonement, with my daughter. It opens here in Maine on Friday.

I also want to watch Cruising one of these days. I bought the DVD a few months ago and haven't had a chance to see it yet.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 02, 2008, 01:00:40 pm
From today's New York Times:

January 2, 2008

A Film Year Full of Escapism, Flat in Attendance


By BROOKS BARNES

LOS ANGELES — Despite a modest increase in 2007 box office receipts, moviedom is trudging into January with a droop in its shoulders.

Ticket sales at North American movie theaters totaled $9.7 billion, a 4 percent increase over the previous year, according to Media by Numbers, a box office tracking company. But attendance was flat, after a narrow increase in 2006 and three previous years of sharp declines. Movie fans bought about 1.42 billion tickets last year, according to Media by Numbers. The high watermark of the last 10 years came in 2002, when moviegoers bought about 1.61 billion tickets.

The results last year were largely driven by expensive sequels like “Spider-Man 3” (the top-grossing film) and “Shrek the Third” (the runner-up), although a handful of expert marketing campaigns turned some oddball entries like “Alvin and the Chipmunks” into bona fide hits. One surefire franchise was born to Paramount and DreamWorks in “Transformers” (which placed third).

Nine of the Top 10 grossing films were science fiction, fantasy or animation. The sole exception (unless you count the mock-historical “300”) was Universal’s action thriller “The Bourne Ultimatum,” which placed sixth with $227 million in domestic ticket sales.

As the movie industry turns its attention to 2008, the dark “No Country for Old Men” is showing box office legs, and one film in particular is already shaping up as a home run. Early results for “Juno,” about a quirky teenager who becomes pregnant, have outpaced those for the indie hits “Little Miss Sunshine” and “Brokeback Mountain.”

“The critical acclaim and award recognition have magnified the movie,” said Peter Rice, the president of Fox Searchlight, which is distributing “Juno.”

But box office results are always a game of glass half-full and glass half-empty, and the half-empties this time seem more prominent.

DVD sales continue to slump both domestically and abroad. The private money that has washed over Hollywood in recent years is starting to slow, investment bankers say, as more hedge funds go home with little to show. And movie executives are worried about the impending collision between striking screenwriters and the important awards shows.

The strike, now in its ninth week with no new talks scheduled, is starting to weigh more heavily on the movie business over all. Until now, the damage has been mostly confined to television, which operates with a shorter production pipeline. But as the strike drags on, movie executives — and their corporate bosses — are starting to worry about having enough time to put together their mega-movie slates for summer 2009.

At the box office the happy surprises of 2007 were almost all confined to escapist offerings like “The Game Plan,” a Walt Disney release about an N.F.L. quarterback and his young daughter, or sophomoric comedies like “Superbad,” a Sony release from the producer Judd Apatow.

But studios have instead churned out gloomy message movies, and more are on the way, noted Paul Dergarabedian, the president of Media by Numbers.

“There were some great films, but the appetite wasn’t there,” he said. Movies rooted in the Iraq war or terrorism — “In the Valley of Elah,” “Rendition,” “Redacted” — particularly struggled. A glut of serious-minded awards hopefuls canceled one another out. Signs of trouble lurked even during the blockbuster-packed summer, in which ticket sales surpassed the $4 billion mark for the first time. Sequels, with the notable exception of “Bourne,” the third in a series, were generally not well reviewed and sold fewer tickets than their second or first installments.

“Shrek the Third,” “Spider-Man 3” and “Pirates of the Caribbean: At World’s End” all marked low points for these franchises at the domestic box office when ticket sales are adjusted for inflation, according to Box Office Mojo, another tracking service.

(The studios note that more than half of the ticket sales for each of those titles came from overseas. While there are no reliable independent data for overseas ticket sales, entertainment trade publications estimate that foreign receipts for the six biggest studios increased 9 percent in 2007 over a year earlier, to $9.4 billion.)

Stars did not seem to interest moviegoers, with marquee names playing to empty seats. Angelina Jolie flopped with “A Mighty Heart,” about the murder of the Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl, and Nicole Kidman’s career grew chillier with the North American collapse of “The Golden Compass.” Among the men, Tom Cruise struggled to avoid blame for a dead-on-arrival “Lions for Lambs,” and Brad Pitt drew shrugs for “The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford.”

One big exception: Will Smith cemented his status as a top box office draw — and perhaps the biggest star in the business today — with robust results for “I am Legend,” a Warner Brothers release about a man wandering a post-apocalyptic Manhattan. The picture has sold $195 million in tickets since its Dec. 14 opening, with another $61.3 million coming from overseas, according to Box Office Mojo.

(Denzel Washington also gets credit for helping to turn Universal’s “American Gangster” into a $184 million hit, although he appears to be having a harder time with the just-opened “Great Debaters.”)

Of course results vary by studio, and some are entering 2008 on a high note. Walt Disney, for instance, has played the game better than most.

“Ratatouille” overcame early skepticism about its rat-in-the-kitchen subject to become both a global blockbuster and a critical darling. “Enchanted,” about an animated princess who comes to life, continues to chug away in theaters, and “National Treasure: Book of Secrets” is a slam dunk. That action film, starring Nicolas Cage, sold $124 million in tickets domestically in its first 10 days of release, according to Box Office Mojo.

Mark Zoradi, president of the Walt Disney Motion Pictures Group, cited a recent decision to focus more intently on the company’s brand as a catalyst for its performance. “The Disney name continues to be enormously successful with audiences,” he said.

Twentieth Century Fox appears to be able to sell just about anything. That studio has set the standard for effective Internet marketing by coming up with ways for fans to personalize messages. “The Simpsons Movie,” with its $526 million in total ticket sales around the world, benefited from Simpsonize Me, a Web promotion (simpsonizeme.com) that allowed visitors to animate pictures of themselves. Fox used a similar promotion to fuel “Alvin and the Chipmunks.”


http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/02/movies/02year.html
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on January 02, 2008, 03:09:33 pm
This little tidbit will make Barb groan:

"Bond 22" (Nov. 7)
Currently untitled, director Marc Forster ("The Kite Runner," "Monster's Ball") teams up with screenwriter Paul Haggis ("Crash") and the latest 007, Daniel Craig, for an original story that picks up immediately after the events of "Casino Royale."


Make that a double-groan, I also heard that the Olsen twins were being considered to play villains (!) I hope that's not true!

There are concerns about Marc Forster directing because he's never done an action film.  Anyway, with Haggis on top of all that, it doesn't look good, lol!  I think I'll sell my Bond22 shares on Hollywood Stock Market, lol!

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on January 03, 2008, 02:29:59 am
After the aforementioned Sweeney Todd, I saw No Country for Old Men. It was admirably arty, kept my interest, the acting was all good by all involved (Tommy Lee Jones! Javier Bardem!, Josh Brolin! Woody Harrelson! the actress who played the guy's wife!) but ultimately it left me a little cold. Cohen Bros. movies tend to do that with me. Still, worth seeing. Suspenseful, and not as graphically violent as I'd feared.

We also rented several movies, as follows:

Zodiac. Liked it OK, was left a bit unsatisfied (unavoidably) by the ending -- maybe because I knew the mystery was going to remain unsolved and felt guilty because the people in my group kept saying, "I bet it's him!" about one character or another, as if the movie were a whodunit, and I knew they'd wind up disappointed when there was no resolution. Jake was good, but (sorry for the sacrilege, Jake fans) Mark Ruffalo and Robert Downey Jr. were a bit more charismatic -- partly due to their having more dynamic parts than Jake's (plus, I love both of those actors). Anthony Edwards was fun, too!

The Kingdom. I liked this a lot, maybe because I went in with low expectations. It got mediocre reviews. I'll have to go to rottentomatoes to figure out why -- if I recall correctly, it might have to do with its political messages. Anyway, if you're as ignorant about Middle Eastern politics as I am, it was fascinating (though possibly misinformative). Jamie Foxx and Chris Cooper were good as always, Jennifer Garner was OK, and a surprisingly cast Jason Bateman had the most terrifying scene in the movie.

Premonition. Don't bother. But you already knew that. This was my 16-year-old niece's choice. I like Sandra Bullock, and she made it watchable. Plus my attention was sustained by that NipTuck guy's eyebrows -- what's up with those things?

TV Set. I thought this was going to be really funny, but there were only a few laugh-out-loud lines. It's more wry, subtle, somewhat Hollywood-insiderish humor. But nevertheless fascinating and informative -- a behind-the-scenes look at the making of a TV show. It explains a lot about what's on TV. In fact, it leaves you wondering how anything really good (The Office, etc.) winds up on TV at all. And speaking of Batemen, there was Justine, first time I'd seen her since Family Ties! She was fine, and it was nice to see a person you remember as young, looking older, but good.


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 04, 2008, 10:03:26 am
Pajiba has posted their top 12 list for the year and "Waitress" is their no. 1 choice. I gave that DVD to my mother for Christmas so I'll be seeing it soon. One movie on the list, which I have never heard of, but it sounds interesting, is "Starter for 10." Has anyone here seen it? It's been out on DVD since the summer.

Just curious.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on January 04, 2008, 01:02:43 pm
Owen Gleiberman of Entertainment Weekly put out his favorite movies of the year, and "Zodiac" was number 10.  Number one was "I'm Not There."  In between were some surprising picks like "Grindhouse" and "Superbad".

http://www.ny1.com/ny1/content/index.jsp?stid=13&aid=77134
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 04, 2008, 01:06:13 pm
"I'm Not There" is finally playing here in Maine, so we're off to see it tomorrow at 2 pm.

"Atonement" opens here today, too, so I may go see that on Sunday.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Lumière on January 04, 2008, 01:21:59 pm
Anyone into period/corset movies as much as I am?  :)

I recently watched the 1995 BBC adaptation of Edith Wharton's book The Buccaneers.
The story revolves around the lives of four young women, American aristocrats who travel to England in a quest of love and adventure.
It has about 5 episodes, 302 minutes in total and I absolutely loved it...the costumes, the scenery, the performances.


Another period movie I have watched a few times over the past weeks is Fingersmith (BBC adaptation of Sarah Waters' novel)...quite a Victorian thriller and a beautiful love story between two women who are brought together in a twisted plot of betrayal.
After recently reading the novel, I can't seen to stop myself from popping in the DVD every so often.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: BelAir on January 04, 2008, 01:41:07 pm
L - I'm glad you finally get to see I'm Not There.  I am not sure what you will think of it. 

(I haven't read any reviews of Atonement yet.)

I saw Waitress over the holiday and did not particularly care for it.  There were some humerous moments, but all in all, I did not find Keri Russell particularly believable.  Oh, I did love Andy Griffith though!  I was shocked and surprised to read that the director and co-star was killed last November (06).

M - I will add those to my netflix!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: BelAir on January 04, 2008, 01:42:42 pm
also on Owen's list was "before the devil knows you're dead", anyone seen that?
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: belbbmfan on January 04, 2008, 02:02:25 pm
Anyone into period/corset movies as much as I am?  :)

I recently watched the 1995 BBC adaptation of Edith Wharton's book The Buccaneers.
The story revolves around the lives of four young women, American aristocrats who travel to England in a quest of love and adventure.
It has about 5 episodes, 302 minutes in total and I absolutely loved it...the costumes, the scenery, the performances.


Another period movie I have watched a few times over the past weeks is Fingersmith (BBC adaptation of Sarah Waters' novel)...quite a Victorian thriller and a beautiful love story between two women who are brought together in a twisted plot of betrayal.
After recently reading the novel, I can't seen to stop myself from popping in the DVD every so often.

*raises hand*

I'll watch a good 'corset movie' any day. I haven't seen any of the ones you mentioned Milli, although I have heard of the Buccaneers. The BBC has just started showing Sense and Sensibility, a tv adaptation by Andrew Davies. It was announced as 'from the man who brought you Mr. Darcy in a wet shirt'! LOL

It was very good. The next episode is scheduled for next Sunday. Yummy!!

The other day, Pride and Prejudice, the movie was on tv. I started watching it but I didn't like it. This Mr. Darcy was bland and I wasn't much impressed with Kiera Knightly's performance either.

And in spite of the poor reviews, I think I'll go and see Becoming Jane too.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on January 04, 2008, 03:45:00 pm
Pajiba has posted their top 12 list for the year and "Waitress" is their no. 1 choice. I gave that DVD to my mother for Christmas so I'll be seeing it soon. One movie on the list, which I have never heard of, but it sounds interesting, is "Starter for 10." Has anyone here seen it? It's been out on DVD since the summer.

Just curious.

L

I saw Starter for 10!  It's with the man of the hour James McAvoy.  One of those charming and funny British comedies, this one set in the 80s.  It's good but I wouldn't include it in my top ten by any means.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 04, 2008, 03:58:15 pm
I saw Starter for 10!  It's with the man of the hour James McAvoy.  One of those charming and funny British comedies, this one set in the 80s.  It's good but I wouldn't include it in my top ten by any means.

Ah, great, thanks! They had it at the local video store so I rented it for viewing sometime this weekend. I'll report back!

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on January 04, 2008, 04:27:31 pm
Two recent views:

The Diving Bell and the Butterfly (Le scaphandre et le papillon) is spectacular and moving.  Don't be put off by the premise of the guy with a stroke.  This ain't no disease-of-the-week flick.  Max von Sydow in a small role broke my heart.

Juno.  On my way into the above film, I ran into a friend who was coming to see Juno for the second time in two days.  Why?  Because he was laughing so hard the first time, he missed half the dialogue.  Again, don't be turned off by the teenage-pregnancy theme, this ain't no after-school special!  A super performance by Ellen Page, a snappy soundtrack, zippy dialogue, and somehow manages to give every character a way out of a stereotype.  After I saw it, I ordered a hamburger phone on ebay.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Lumière on January 05, 2008, 02:44:20 am
*raises hand*

I'll watch a good 'corset movie' any day. I haven't seen any of the ones you mentioned Milli, although I have heard of the Buccaneers. The BBC has just started showing Sense and Sensibility, a tv adaptation by Andrew Davies. It was announced as 'from the man who brought you Mr. Darcy in a wet shirt'! LOL

It was very good. The next episode is scheduled for next Sunday. Yummy!!

The other day, Pride and Prejudice, the movie was on tv. I started watching it but I didn't like it. This Mr. Darcy was bland and I wasn't much impressed with Kiera Knightly's performance either.

And in spite of the poor reviews, I think I'll go and see Becoming Jane too.


Hey Fabienne,

You may also be interested in checking out the latest BBC adaptations of these period movies ..

- Wives & Daughters
- North & South
- Our Mutual Friend
- Tipping the Velvet
- Bleak House


More later.. ;)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: BelAir on January 05, 2008, 07:29:55 pm
I thought this was interesting

Sean Penn to lead Cannes Festival Jury

http://movies.msn.com/movies/article.aspx?news=290835&GT1=7701

sad to see the note about his marriage ending, though
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 05, 2008, 07:38:20 pm
Thanks for that info, Bel!

Today I watched "Once" in a simulcast with Louise. I have a feeling I liked it more than she did! I thought it was a very sweet film about two people who meet and connect, for a week, through their music. Lots of very nice scenes of Dublin. I enjoyed the music. A bittersweet--but real to life--ending. Not a Hollywood ending, which was nice for a change. I would definitely recommend that folks add it to their Netflix queue, or pick it up at Blockbuster, which is where I got it.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on January 05, 2008, 09:31:28 pm
I finally saw The Savages with PH Hoffman and Laura Linney and what a wonderful film.  It more than lived up to my expectations! It has a wonderful script, excellent acting and best of all, most of it is set in Buffalo, lol!  (I like Buffalo!) 

Plot Summary: An irreverent, hilarious and heartbreaking story revolving around a modern American family, "The Savages" portrays an all-too-common dilemma: after drifting apart emotionally and geographically over the years, two siblings Wendy (Laura Linney) and Jon (Philip Seymour Hoffman) must band together to care for an elderly parent (Philip Bosco).


I may have to make room for it on my top ten list!  This has been a good year for movies because I keep wanting to expand my list, ten isn't enough!

Anyway, I highly recommend it!

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/the-savages.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on January 06, 2008, 03:02:24 am
It is wonderful to have this resource whenever I'm in the mood to see a movie!! Thank you and keep the reviews coming!!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 06, 2008, 09:52:48 am
The whole family watched "Starter for 10" last night on DVD. It was, as oilgun said, a quirky British movie that was funny. James McAvoy was cute. I would recommend it although I wouldn't put it on my top ten list. Maybe top 25!

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 06, 2008, 06:49:36 pm
Today I went with my two children to see "I'm Not There." I enjoyed it although I felt it started to drag for the last third. I didn't entirely get the Richard Gere part (I guess I'll have to think about it). I thought Heath was great. The scene early on, when he was in the coffee shop with "Claire" -- he looked and sounded so much like Ennis -- that might have been my favorite moment of all.

The background music was great (naturally!).

Since people know my pet peeve about smoking--once again a movie where EVERYONE smoked like chimneys. Does (or did) Dylan really smoke 80 cigarettes a day (4 packs)?? Yikes. So maybe his representation was accurate. But did everyone have to smoke so much? Sigh....

I am glad I saw this on the big screen. I have a feeling watching this on DVD, my attention would wander or I would fall asleep. In the theater, I am forced to stay alert.

L

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on January 06, 2008, 07:06:29 pm
Today I went with my two children to see "I'm Not There." I enjoyed it although I felt it started to drag for the last third. I didn't entirely get the Richard Gere part (I guess I'll have to think about it). I thought Heath was great. The scene early on, when he was in the coffee shop with "Claire" -- he looked and sounded so much like Ennis -- that might have been my favorite moment of all.

The background music was great (naturally!).

Since people know my pet peeve about smoking--once again a movie where EVERYONE smoked like chimneys. Does (or did) Dylan really smoke 80 cigarettes a day (4 packs)?? Yikes. So maybe his representation was accurate. But did everyone have to smoke so much? Sigh....

I am glad I saw this on the big screen. I have a feeling watching this on DVD, my attention would wander or I would fall asleep. In the theater, I am forced to stay alert.

L



I remember something about that, lol!  I've softened my position on that subject ever since I found out that there was no smoking in Zodiac, most of which was set in the smokin' 70s and I hadn't even noticed.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 06, 2008, 07:10:27 pm
I remember something about that, lol!  I've softened my position on that subject ever since I found out that there was no smoking in Zodiac, most of which was set in the smokin' 70s and I hadn't even noticed.

There was also NO SMOKING in Lars and the Real Girl, and the only scene with any drinking was at the party.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on January 06, 2008, 07:14:25 pm
There was also NO SMOKING in Lars and the Real Girl, and the only scene with any drinking was at the party.

L

Then how come you didn't like it more then you did?!  ;D

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: BelAir on January 06, 2008, 07:26:42 pm
random interlude (feel free to continue the smoking debate) -

I saw Nat'l Treasure 2 in the theater today (entertaining) and I saw a scary movie poster and in my head went "ew - that looks too scary to see in the theater" - then I realized it was The Dark Knight (which of course I will go see in the theater)!  Have you guys seen it??? It's mostly white with a red smile and "Why so serious?" in red with (i think) the joker outlined in the background...  I really can't believe I was frightened from a gazillion feet away...
 >:(
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 06, 2008, 07:27:54 pm
Then how come you didn't like it more then you did?!  ;D



You know, I saw it the day after Thanksgiving and I was feeling really down that day. More than I realized at the time. And all those dreary scenes of the midwest in winter, knowing Winter was coming to Maine (we'd already had a storm at that point, I think)...it probably just didn't hit me in the right frame of mind. Maybe it was my mistake to see it that day, who knows?

But I did notice the absence of smoking!

And oilgun, you are online on a Sunday evening. Does that mean your home computer is fixed?

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 06, 2008, 07:33:44 pm
I saw "I'm Not There" at The Movies on Exchange Street which is this little, tiny, funky, indie theater in the Old Port of Portland, ME.

I haven't been to the Movies in ages. Random thoughts: I am glad the place had heat! The seats were really uncomfortable and close together. I felt like I was on an airplane. And I have a whole new respect for the sound systems in the multiplexes, as well as the digital movies.

Movies that are coming to The Movies include "The Diving Bell and The Butterfly," and "Persepolis." So I might be in those uncomfortable seats again in the next few weeks. LOL

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on January 06, 2008, 08:15:38 pm

And oilgun, you are online on a Sunday evening. Does that mean your home computer is fixed?

L

My computer is toast, the last message it gave me was to backup all my files (couldn't) and to replace my hard drive (!) because a failure was imminent.  (That'll teach me for visiting those naughty sites, lol!)  Anyway, I hooked up my old, and much slower, CPU until I buy a new one, I was having e-withdrawals!

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on January 06, 2008, 08:29:07 pm
I remember something about that, lol!  I've softened my position on that subject ever since I found out that there was no smoking in Zodiac, most of which was set in the smokin' 70s and I hadn't even noticed.

You're right! And I didn't notice that, either.

I saw Juno today. I was afraid it had been so overhyped that I'd be disappointed, but I wasn't. The dialogue was extremely clever, and the lead actress, Ellen Page, was amazing. She really became Juno, and it couldn't have been easy to pull off that all that witty dialogue coming from a 16-year-old girl. She almost started to get on my nerves, she was so constantly witty and smart and cool, but only the way a girl like that in real life would probably get on your nerves now and then. Actually, she was a very nice girl.

The other actors were good, too. It was very much the classic, "I laughed, I cried" kind of movie. I highly recommend it.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: belbbmfan on January 07, 2008, 02:58:22 am

I haven't been to the Movies in ages. Random thoughts: I am glad the place had heat! The seats were really uncomfortable and close together. I felt like I was on an airplane. And I have a whole new respect for the sound systems in the multiplexes, as well as the digital movies.

L

I have two cinemas to choose from. One is a big commercial cinema called Kinepolis, part of a large chain of cinemas, where you'll find all the blockbusters, the other one is smaller, older. And even though the sound system isn't as good, i prefer the latter. In the Kinepolis it seems the people go there to eat (smelly nachos or crisps, yuck!) or chat while a movie is playing in the background. The audience just doesn't seem to be very interested in what's on the screen.
Another thing (okay, and then I'll shut up! LOL) is that the schedule changes very fast. Take Gone, Baby Gone. It had great reviews, I really wanted to see it. It came out in Kinepolis and after one week, it was no longer scheduled at 8 pm. And 10.30 pm is late to go see a movie.

Atonement will be released here next Wednesday, again in Kinepolis. I'll have to call my babysitter soon!

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 07, 2008, 10:19:37 am
After seeing "I'm Not There" my daughter was curious about Richard Gere. So last night, we re-watched "Days of Heaven." I realized, as I watched it, that I really, really love this movie. It may rival Brokeback as my number 1 favorite movie of all time (don't shoot me, folks!). Seriously, if the Internet had existed when this came out (1978) and I could have conversed with other "Days of Heaven" fans...who knows what my life would have been like? LOL

As I watched it, I realized that it is not entirely dissimilar from BBM. Yes, the stories are completely different but major themes: what we do--or don't do--for love; the pain, and cost, of keeping a secret--are present in both movies.

Like BBM, this was filmed in Alberta, but in the plains, not the mountains. But it still has stunning scenery and the cinematography is magnificent.

It was released as a Criterion Collection DVD a few months ago, so it is available on Netflix and video stores that carry Criterion movies. I definitely recommend this as a "must see"! I'd love to chat about this movie with anyone here who does watch it/has seen it.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: belbbmfan on January 07, 2008, 10:33:55 am
Wow, Leslie, that's some recommendation.

I'll admit I haven't seen this movie. But I will!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on January 07, 2008, 11:05:13 am
I haven't seen Days of Heaven since the '70s, but I saw it a couple of times then and loved it. What a beautiful movie. From time to time I've thought of watching it again. When I do, Leslie, I'll let you know!

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on January 07, 2008, 01:00:34 pm
After seeing "I'm Not There" my daughter was curious about Richard Gere. So last night, we re-watched "Days of Heaven." I realized, as I watched it, that I really, really love this movie. It may rival Brokeback as my number 1 favorite movie of all time (don't shoot me, folks!). Seriously, if the Internet had existed when this came out (1978) and I could have conversed with other "Days of Heaven" fans...who knows what my life would have been like? LOL

As I watched it, I realized that it is not entirely dissimilar from BBM. Yes, the stories are completely different but major themes: what we do--or don't do--for love; the pain, and cost, of keeping a secret--are present in both movies.

Like BBM, this was filmed in Alberta, but in the plains, not the mountains. But it still has stunning scenery and the cinematography is magnificent.

It was released as a Criterion Collection DVD a few months ago, so it is available on Netflix and video stores that carry Criterion movies. I definitely recommend this as a "must see"! I'd love to chat about this movie with anyone here who does watch it/has seen it.

L

I bought The Criterion DVD when it came out and have yet to watch it.  In fact, I don't think I've ever actually seen Days of Heaven.  After reading your post I'll have to put it on top of the pile!

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on January 07, 2008, 01:07:37 pm
Yes, let's watch it! Days of Heaven was one of my favorites too! Was that Karen Allen who played the female lead? I was hot for her rather than Gere, believe it or not!! As I recall, Gere played a somewhat James Dean type of character.

I have been rewatching old movie favourites lately. I loved the director's cut of The Last of the Mohicans. Good set-up also to see D Day-Lewis in There Will be Blood. Last night I saw Robert Altman's Three Women. Powerful acting from Janice Rule, Sissy Spacek, and Shelley Duvall. Does it seem to you like movies used to be much more complex than they are now that 90% of movies are produced to satisfy the teenage hetero male, LOL??

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 07, 2008, 01:16:14 pm
Yes, let's watch it! Days of Heaven was one of my favorites too! Was that Karen Allen who played the female lead? I was hot for her rather than Gere, believe it or not!! As I recall, Gere played a somewhat James Dean type of character.


No, not Karen Allen...it was Brooke Adams. As for Gere as a Dean-type character...well, we could discuss that. I am not sure that is how I would characterize him.

The imagery of the wheat field with the house in the distance was inspired by Wyeth's painting, "Christina's World." The actual style of the house itself was inspired by the house in "Giant," which did star James Dean. The "Christina's World" house is here in Maine. You can visit it in the summer, when it is open for tours.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on January 07, 2008, 01:17:44 pm
Yes, let's watch it! Days of Heaven was one of my favorites too! Was that Karen Allen who played the female lead? I was hot for her rather than Gere, believe it or not!! As I recall, Gere played a somewhat James Dean type of character.

I have been rewatching old movie favourites lately. I loved the director's cut of The Last of the Mohicans. Good set-up also to see D Day-Lewis in There Will be Blood. Last night I saw Robert Altman's Three Women. Powerful acting from Janice Rule, Sissy Spacek, and Shelley Duvall. Does it seem to you like movies used to be much more complex than they are now that 90% of movies are produced to satisfy the teenage hetero male, LOL??



I'm in!  And OMG! I love Three Women!  Shelley Duvall is wonderful in that!   "She and I are best friends!" "It's for the kitchen!"
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on January 07, 2008, 01:45:13 pm
Yes, let's watch it! Days of Heaven was one of my favorites too! Was that Karen Allen who played the female lead? I was hot for her rather than Gere, believe it or not!!

I came as close as a straight woman can to being hot for Brooke Adams in that movie, myself. She was beautiful. But then, so was Richard Gere! And Sam Shepherd was attractive, too. Whatever happened to whoever played the younger sister?

Quote
Does it seem to you like movies used to be much more complex than they are now that 90% of movies are produced to satisfy the teenage hetero male, LOL??

Absolutely. Film writers have often written about the '70s being the Golden Age of movies, with the success of "Star Wars" being the turning point. Once studios found how much money they could make with special-effects-laden, cartoonish action pictures, that was that.

I've read that it's not only teenage hetero males that today's big blockbuster movies are designed to appeal to, but also to global audiences. A non-English-speaker can gather the meaning of car chases and building explosions much more easily than talky character dramas.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on January 07, 2008, 06:02:57 pm
I came as close as a straight woman can to being hot for Brooke Adams in that movie, myself. She was beautiful. But then, so was Richard Gere! And Sam Shepherd was attractive, too. Whatever happened to whoever played the younger sister?
Sam Shepard was extremely sexy (He still is really), I had such a thing for him!

Quote
I've read that it's not only teenage hetero males that today's big blockbuster movies are designed to appeal to, but also to global audiences. A non-English-speaker can gather the meaning of car chases and building explosions much more easily than talky character dramas.

Good point, I hadn't thought of that.  Makes a lot of sense.

I just got back from There Will be Blood and all I have to say is: Oh My God!  It's a strange film, very over the top, especially the ending.  I loved the dramatic soundtrack which makes itself quite evident, like a lead character.  Daniel Day Lewis' theatrics at the end brought to mind Al Pacino in Scarface, Orson Wells in Citizen Kane & James Dean in Giant.  And it takes place in a bowling alley(!)  Anyway, I really enjoyed it!  It's not perfect, I thought Paul Dano was miscast, I didn't find him very convincing as the preacher.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 07, 2008, 06:11:51 pm
Sam Shepherd was extremely sexy (He still is really), I had such a thing for him!


Oh, join the club! LOL
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on January 07, 2008, 06:23:55 pm
I'm in!  And OMG! I love Three Women!  Shelley Duvall is wonderful in that!   "She and I are best friends!" "It's for the kitchen!"

Where is the back of the line for people who want to marry oilgun and spend the rest of their days happily watching movie after movie!!

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on January 07, 2008, 06:26:14 pm
Where is the back of the line for people who want to marry oilgun and spend the rest of their days happily watching movie after movie!!



Behind me, missy!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on January 07, 2008, 06:33:29 pm
Behind me, missy!

LOL!  The line to marry me is definitely only VIRTUAL, sadly.  ;)

Here are some pics of Sam for Leslie (especially the last one, lol!)  Very Viggo isn't he?

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/Back-Bog-Beast-Bait.jpg)
(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/SamShepard.jpg)(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/shepard.gif)
(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/sam50x.jpg)

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on January 07, 2008, 06:53:26 pm
Behind me, missy!

With the newfangled flat paneled screens, three is definitely not a crowd these days!! Anyone for polygamy?

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on January 07, 2008, 06:55:02 pm
So has anyone seen Don't Come Knocking? Sam was his usual fascinating self, but wasn't it a shocker seeing Jessica Lange??

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 07, 2008, 07:19:15 pm
So has anyone seen Don't Come Knocking? Sam was his usual fascinating self, but wasn't it a shocker seeing Jessica Lange??



I haven't seen it and in fact, haven't heard of it. What's the shocker?

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 07, 2008, 07:19:57 pm
LOL!  The line to marry me is definitely only VIRTUAL, sadly.  ;)

Here are some pics of Sam for Leslie (especially the last one, lol!)  Very Viggo isn't he?



Hahahaha, yes....

But the one right above and to the right, that's my favorite!

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on January 07, 2008, 09:09:36 pm
So has anyone seen Don't Come Knocking? Sam was his usual fascinating self, but wasn't it a shocker seeing Jessica Lange??



I've loved Jessica Lange ever since Frances.

Hey, haven't those two been shacking up together for like 25 years?
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on January 07, 2008, 10:46:49 pm
I've loved Jessica Lange ever since Frances.

Hey, haven't those two been shacking up together for like 25 years?

Yes, I think that was the reason she was in the film. It was a rather obscure film by Werner Herzog about a washed-up Hollywood cowboy who returns to the scene of a film he did in Montana and...well, I don't want to spoil it.

My goodness, Jessica has aged a lot.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on January 07, 2008, 10:51:07 pm
Recently I read she'd had plastic surgery, though she'd vowed for years she wasn't going to. But in Broken Flowers -- that was the name of it, right? That movie where Bill Murray goes back to visit three old girlfriends? -- she looked strangely different. Several critics commented on it, too.

Twenty-plus years ago I worked with a woman who knew Jessica Lange's aunt (Jessica Lange grew up near the area I was working at the time). She said Jessica's aunt looked exactly like Jessica, except that the aunt was really, really aged and wrinkled.

Course, Sam Shepherd looks pretty aged these days, too, but on men nobody seems to mind as much.




Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on January 08, 2008, 01:41:58 pm
I have to admit that I fell asleep during Don't Come Knocking...

So, upon everyone's recommendation, I watched Days of Heaven last night.  While it is certainly beautifully filmed and scored, it won't be rivaling BBM for me.  The story was interesting, almost telegraphic, or staccato, but I didn't respond to it emotionally. 

Reminded me of Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid in some ways:  the idyllic scenes with the characters having fun, the triangle, and of course the man-hunt. 

(http://www.brightlightsfilm.com/53/53_images/53visionsday2.jpg)

(http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film/DVDReviews9/days-of-heaven/days-of-heavenPDVD_00801.jpg)

(http://www.sensesofcinema.com/images/days.jpg)

Here are some interesting trivia from IMDb:

1)  Shot almost entirely at "magic hour," the hours between day and night early in the morning and late in the evening. Terrence Malick wanted to have a white sky and no sight of the sun.

2)  Cinematographer Néstor Almendros was going blind during production. Before each shot, he would have his assistant take a picture with a Polaroid camera and then would view under a high-powered magnify glass.

3)  John Travolta, Al Pacino and Dustin Hoffman turned down the role of Bill.

4)  The shot of locusts ascending to the sky was shot in reverse with the helicopter crew throwing peanut shells down, and actors walking backwards.

5)  The film's title is a reference to Deuteronomy 11:21 - "That your days may be multiplied, and the days of your children, in which the LORD swore to your fathers to give them as the days of heaven upon the earth."
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 08, 2008, 01:58:56 pm
I have to admit that I fell asleep during Don't Come Knocking...

So, upon everyone's recommendation, I watched Days of Heaven last night.  While it is certainly beautifully filmed and scored, it won't be rivaling BBM for me.  The story was interesting, almost telegraphic, or staccato, but I didn't respond to it emotionally. 

Reminded me of Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid in some ways:  the idyllic scenes with the characters having fun, the triangle, and of course the man-hunt. 


That's interesting since Butch Cassidy is also one of my favorite movies. But I am not seeing the connection the same way as you! LOL

Someone commented on IMDb about the cinematographer going blind. This commenter worked with him on another (later) movie. Apparently Amendros had coke-bottle glasses during the filming of Days of Heaven but on this later movie, no glasses at all. The commenter didn't know if he had surgery or something, but whatever, his sight was restored.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on January 08, 2008, 02:51:55 pm
That's interesting since Butch Cassidy is also one of my favorite movies. But I am not seeing the connection the same way as you! LOL

I do, however see quite a connection between Butch Cassidy and BBM!

Quote
Someone commented on IMDb about the cinematographer going blind. This commenter worked with him on another (later) movie. Apparently Amendros had coke-bottle glasses during the filming of Days of Heaven but on this later movie, no glasses at all. The commenter didn't know if he had surgery or something, but whatever, his sight was restored.

That's good news, because when I read the previous post I was sad. Though Nestor Almendros is dead now, he's the first cinematographer whose name I actually knew. Mainly because of Day of Heaven. But he also worked on the beautiful (though otherwise stupid) Blue Lagoon, as well as Places in the Heart (the farm flick with Sally Field) and Sophie's Choice.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on January 08, 2008, 11:27:05 pm
Lust, Caution will be nominated for best foreign film, and will win. (Boy, I am full of predictions today, aren't I?)

Exactly. Crash was something like 72% at rottentomatoes. Right now Elah is 64%.

Since I am in the mood for predictions today (who knows what has gotten into me!) I predict that 3:10 to Yuma will be nominated for Best Picture, and win. I'm Not There will also be nominated--won't win--but Todd Haynes will for Best Director.

Since all the reviews are raving about Tommy Lee Jones, I bet he will get a best actor nom. Maybe even win, since the movie itself will be shut out. Russell Crowe will be nominated for 3:10 to Yuma. Maybe Christian Bale, too, which is why neither of them will win (since they are in the same movie).

Cate Blanchett will be nominated for best actress for I'm Not There. Maybe she'll win.

Is it going too far out on a limb to predict Ben Foster getting  best supporting actor nom for 3:10 to Yuma?

L

Well, Leslie, now I understand your enthusiasm for 3:10 to Yuma!  I just finished watching it man, what a solid film!  I was actually in tears at the end, for some bizarre reason I don't wish to explore right now, lol!  It really affected me.  This is what movies are all about.  A movie like this makes me forget the crap I've had to sit through. I loved all the performances, Russell Crowe and Christian Bale sure are damn fine actors. And I'll never look at Ben Foster the same way again.

A couple of little things bothered me.  I thought Mrs Evans seemed a tad too contemporary-beautiful.  I also thought that for poor ranchers the Evanses were burning an awful lot of oil lamps, even in rooms not being used.  But this is just nitpicking. 

What a satisfying experience, I loved it!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on January 08, 2008, 11:41:50 pm
Satisfying is a good way to put it. 3:10 is like an old-fashioned good movie. Not arty or envelope-pushing -- just entertaining, suspenseful, emotional, well-acted.


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on January 09, 2008, 01:25:45 am
I remember something about that, lol!  I've softened my position on that subject ever since I found out that there was no smoking in Zodiac, most of which was set in the smokin' 70s and I hadn't even noticed.

Well, I've was misinformed.  I'm watching Zodiac, I got the director's cut today,  and there have been several instances of smoking already.  Robert Downy Jr's character smokes.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on January 09, 2008, 01:29:57 am
Well, Leslie, now I understand your enthusiasm for 3:10 to Yuma!  I just finished watching it man, what a solid film!  I was actually in tears at the end, for some bizarre reason I don't wish to explore right now, lol!  It really affected me.  This is what movies are all about.  A movie like this makes me forget the crap I've had to sit through. I loved all the performances, Russell Crowe and Christian Bale sure are damn fine actors. And I'll never look at Ben Foster the same way again.

A couple of little things bothered me.  I thought Mrs Evans seemed a tad too contemporary-beautiful.  I also thought that for poor ranchers the Evanses were burning an awful lot of oil lamps, even in rooms not being used.  But this is just nitpicking. 

What a satisfying experience, I loved it!

I'm glad you got to see this movie, oilgun, and that you've added it to your top ten.  I've been hoping to see it in some critics' top ten lists, but so far only Alison Bailes of Reel Talk has done so.  But she put it as number 1 on her list of favorites.  8)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Lumière on January 09, 2008, 03:57:46 am

I've been meaning to watch 3:10 to Yuma...Now it's on DVD, I'm gonna rent it one of these nights.


Tonight, I watched Boys Don't Cry (I've seen it before).
It's an excellent, tragic film.. it always leaves me feeling drained and depressed.  I could not get all the way to the end this time.   :-\ 
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 09, 2008, 08:58:32 am

So, upon everyone's recommendation, I watched Days of Heaven last night.  While it is certainly beautifully filmed and scored, it won't be rivaling BBM for me.  The story was interesting, almost telegraphic, or staccato, but I didn't respond to it emotionally. 


I spent some time thinking about this comment yesterday, trying to sort out what it is, exactly, about Days of Heaven that hits me so hard.

I think that my original viewing experience was somewhat "Brokebackian" and that has always stayed with me. We lived in Chicago at that time, and I saw Days of Heaven in the theater. Like BBM, I think Days of Heaven is best on the big screen. This theater had a wonderful sound system and Days of Heaven has a terrific score, plus I have always been a huge Leo Kottke fan. So that also enhanced my original viewing experience.

I remember when the movie ended, I just sat there in my seat, sort of stunned. I went back and saw it again, a few days later and had the same reaction. To be honest, if the theater hadn't been right downtown, with the hassle of Chicago parking, I might have seen it more than twice!

I had sort of forgotten about this movie, but when I saw an announcement for the Criterion DVD, all the memories came flooding back. And watching it on DVD, I had the same visceral reaction I had 29 years ago. Interesting how a movie can evoke such strong emotional memories.

Like I said in my other post, if the Internet had been around in those days and I could have chatted with other "Heavenites" who knows what my life would have been like. As it was, I had my own memories, thought about the movie, then filed it away.

When I think about movies that are on my "favorites" list, a large part of it is the memory of the emotional reaction I had the first time I saw it--which puts Brokeback Mountain up there, Days of Heaven, Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, and yes, even Titanic. Poor Titanic, the movie that everybody loves to hate now, but I still love it, because I remember how I felt the first time I saw it.

Leslie

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 09, 2008, 09:02:14 am
Well, Leslie, now I understand your enthusiasm for 3:10 to Yuma!  I just finished watching it man, what a solid film!  I was actually in tears at the end, for some bizarre reason I don't wish to explore right now, lol!  It really affected me.  This is what movies are all about.  A movie like this makes me forget the crap I've had to sit through. I loved all the performances, Russell Crowe and Christian Bale sure are damn fine actors. And I'll never look at Ben Foster the same way again.


Having seen Christian Bale just the other day in I'm Not There, I am becoming more and more impressed with his talent. I also thought he was excellent in The Prestige.

And you're right...Ben Foster, wasn't he great? Wow.

I may need to rent this and watch it again. I am so glad I saw it in the theater, though!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 09, 2008, 09:03:42 am

Tonight, I watched Boys Don't Cry (I've seen it before).
It's an excellent, tragic film.. it always leaves me feeling drained and depressed.  I could not get all the way to the end this time.   :-\ 


I've never seen that, and it has been on my "must watch"  list for years. I suggested it to Louise for a simulcast and she said no, she couldn't watch it again. Once was enough for her.

One of these days...

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 09, 2008, 09:11:15 am
I'm glad you got to see this movie, oilgun, and that you've added it to your top ten.  I've been hoping to see it in some critics' top ten lists, but so far only Alison Bailes of Reel Talk has done so.  But she put it as number 1 on her list of favorites.  8)

I was disappointed in this too, Meryl. Maybe it suffered the curse of coming out too early in the year.

Looking at my predictions, obviously I called quite a few wrong. Lust, Caution won't be nominated because of some technical glitch that it wasn't Taiwanese enough. I don't think 3:10 to Yuma will be nominated, either.

I still think Todd Haynes might get nominated for best director, but I don't think he'll win. Likewise, I still think Tommy Lee Jones will get a best actor nom for that Elah thing he was in.

And I still wonder...Ben Foster for best supporting actor? Hmmm....

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on January 09, 2008, 09:31:37 am
Leslie, can you say more about what "stunned" you with Days of Heaven?  I'd really like to know. 

Since I saw it, I've read a bunch of reviews that, besides mentioning the great cinematography and music, didn't really tell me what they connected with.  The narrator?  The struggle of poverty? 

Maybe I need to see it again. 

3:10 to Yuma is now out on DVD, so I'll probably see that soon.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on January 09, 2008, 09:35:45 am
Having seen Christian Bale just the other day in I'm Not There, I am becoming more and more impressed with his talent. I also thought he was excellent in The Prestige.

I thought he was great in The Prestige, too. Especially when you get to the end and think back, and realize that ... well, I'll say no more. But those who've seen it know what I mean.

Christian Bale also very good in Rescue Dawn. I rented that over Thanksgiving. It's kind of a grueling film, which I'd known going in, though somehow I found it a bit disappointing. But Christian Bale is good in it.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: BelAir on January 09, 2008, 09:55:39 am
I've been meaning to watch 3:10 to Yuma...Now it's on DVD, I'm gonna rent it one of these nights.


Tonight, I watched Boys Don't Cry (I've seen it before).
It's an excellent, tragic film.. it always leaves me feeling drained and depressed.  I could not get all the way to the end this time.   :-\ 


aw, M....
 :(
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: BelAir on January 09, 2008, 10:04:14 am
sort of along the lines of remembering how movies make you feel...

two of my favorite movies from when i was young are Superman and Star Wars.  I loved them then, and I love them now.  But I wonder if I had never seen them before, how I would feel about them now...

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on January 09, 2008, 10:51:17 am
two of my favorite movies from when i was young are Superman and Star Wars.  I loved them then, and I love them now.  But I wonder if I had never seen them before, how I would feel about them now...

I know. I've had the experience of going back and watching a movie I'd loved years ago, and being disappointed -- not only because I've changed, but because movies themselves have changed. For example, I rented Raiders of the Lost Ark to watch with my kids. If there's ever a movie that struck me, at the time, as being vibrant and dynamic and action-packed and exciting, that was it! But when my boys and I watched it, a few years ago, it was ... slow. I couldn't believe it! They were bored. In the years since then, action movies have just sped up so much that the difference was really noticeable.

But we've watched some movies together that depended less on action, such as Big and Back to the Future, and they've held up pretty well.

My brother and I and our kids rented Marathon Man over Christmas. I remember really liking that and have been wanting to see it for years. But it's really hard to find in video stores. Finally, we found it! But then we ran out of time and I didn't get a chance to see it. My brother watched it after we left and said it was still good.





Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 09, 2008, 12:28:27 pm
Leslie, can you say more about what "stunned" you with Days of Heaven?  I'd really like to know. 

Since I saw it, I've read a bunch of reviews that, besides mentioning the great cinematography and music, didn't really tell me what they connected with.  The narrator?  The struggle of poverty? 


I think it was the totality of the experience. The images that totally filled the screen, the music, the evocation of the time...I felt like I was there. I could have been one of the people riding on top of the train, or working in the wheat field, that's how much I felt like I was in the movie.

I also, at that time, had never seen a movie like that before. I was 23 and although I liked movies and had seen plenty, I had pretty much been watching mainstream movies at the mall theater. I hadn't yet discovered indie movies at the local art theater. Days of Heaven was a totally different experience for me and gave me an idea of what a movie could "do" to you.

The last piece that was special to me was the narration. I really liked Linda Manz' voice in this, and what she said. Again, I am not sure I had ever seen a movie before that used that technique and I thought it worked perfectly in this film. I read that Malick edited her narration from 60 hours of her speaking! But then again, it took him two years to edit the movie.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 09, 2008, 12:30:59 pm
I know. I've had the experience of going back and watching a movie I'd loved years ago, and being disappointed -- not only because I've changed, but because movies themselves have changed. For example, I rented Raiders of the Lost Ark to watch with my kids. If there's ever a movie that struck me, at the time, as being vibrant and dynamic and action-packed and exciting, that was it! But when my boys and I watched it, a few years ago, it was ... slow. I couldn't believe it! They were bored. In the years since then, action movies have just sped up so much that the difference was really noticeable.


I remember the first time I saw The Pink Panther after a many year hiatus, I thought it seemed very slow. But then, I let myself relax and got into the pacing and I enjoyed it just like I did in the old days.

I really can see what the zoom-zoom-zoom pace of life has done to my attention span!

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on January 09, 2008, 01:40:25 pm
I thought he was great in The Prestige, too. Especially when you get to the end and think back, and realize that ... well, I'll say no more. But those who've seen it know what I mean.

Christian Bale also very good in Rescue Dawn. I rented that over Thanksgiving. It's kind of a grueling film, which I'd known going in, though somehow I found it a bit disappointing. But Christian Bale is good in it.

I read that Bale got put thru the wringer by Werner Herzog when this film was shooting in ...Thailand, was it? Between that and 3:10 to Yuma, he had quite a bang-up year!! Wonder if he'll be nominated for an Oscar. Wonder if there'll be an Oscar night this year?
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on January 09, 2008, 01:44:32 pm
Wonder if there'll be an Oscar night this year?

I sure hope the strike will have been settled by then. I don't know how much longer I can stand watching Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert wing it without writers.



Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kd5000 on January 09, 2008, 02:13:39 pm
I feel sorry for the GOLDEN GLOBES having to resort to a one hour telecast as it stands now. The Oscars, I think they might postphone it.   If the Academy is  looking for a blockbuster to bring up the ratings at this year's Oscar, all I can say is good luck because nothing is doing it for them. 

I saw BROTHERS (the Danish version which is titled Brødre) yesterday.  I enjoyed it, but it's another heavy film.   Jakey G, Tobey Maguire and Natalie Portman are starring in the remake.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Lynne on January 10, 2008, 03:49:59 pm
Mark (jpwagoneer) and I saw ATONEMENT yesterday afternoon and I absolutely loved it...not to be missed, IMO.

Lynne
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 11, 2008, 10:03:48 am
Has anyone here seen "Breakfast on Pluto"? Opinions?
Title: Sundance Film Festival begins January 17th
Post by: MaineWriter on January 12, 2008, 10:18:11 am
From the Wall Street Journal:



Play It Again, Sundance

Families in crisis, high school and rock 'n' roll. At this year's installment of the Utah-based film festival, the themes may sound familiar, but the crowds should be larger than ever and the bidding for movies is expected to hit new heights.

By LAUREN A.E. SCHUKER
January 12, 2008; Page W1

At Sundance, "Once" isn't enough. Many of the movies at this year's Sundance Film Festival echo the themes of past festival hits, such as the family drama-comedy "Little Miss Sunshine" and the rock musical "Once."

Familiar subjects like family dysfunction, high-school melodrama and classic rock are dominating the festival, which opens Thursday. The lineup reflects the increasingly blurred line between the studio and independent film worlds, as indie filmmakers repeat tested formulas to appeal to the mass audiences that studios covet. As the writers' strike drags on and studios search for fresh material, bidding wars for Sundance movies are expected to break records.

While music-inspired films can sometimes spell box-office trouble, Sundance 2008 includes a number of music-focused flicks. Showing in the festival's high-profile closing slot is "CSNY Déjà Vu," which looks back critically at the 1960s by focusing on the Crosby, Stills, Nash and Young "Freedom of Speech Tour" of 2006. "U2 3D" presents the Irish rock band's 2005-2006 global "Vertigo" tour in 3D. And "Patti Smith: Dream of Life" is a documentary about the acclaimed punk poet.

From the same producers who made "Little Miss Sunshine" comes a film with a similar title about difficult familial relationships: "Sunshine Cleaning" tells the story of two troubled sisters who enter the biohazard waste removal business. Other films about distressed families include the drama "Sleepwalking," which traces what happens to a 12-year-old girl when her mother (Charlize Theron) takes off and her uncle (Nick Stahl) raises her on his own, and the comedic "Smart People," with Sarah Jessica Parker and "Juno" star Ellen Page.

Geoffrey Gilmore, director of the Sundance festival, says that inevitably some films will repeat themes. "The industry is exhausted," he says. But he adds that there are "a million fresh takes on an issue."

He says that many of the films focus on quirky, dysfunctional families not because they are trying to copy the recipe behind "Little Miss Sunshine" but because it's easiest to address the world's troubles "by not directly engaging in issues, and instead telling a personal, family story."

Additional highlights this year include Robert De Niro as a frenzied film producer in Barry Levinson's comedy "What Just Happened?," Mos Def in director Michel Gondry's "Be Kind Rewind" and Morgan Spurlock's documentary "Where in the World Is Osama Bin Laden?" Irish playwright Martin McDonagh's "In Bruges," starring Colin Farrell, opens the festival.

More than 50,000 people are expected to attend Sundance this year, up from 36,000 four years ago. Routinely, cellphones at Sundance stop working because so many people crowd Main Street during opening weekend. Studio executives say that when closing multimillion-dollar deals to purchase film rights, they have to drive six miles down the highway to the interstate to regain service.

Harvey Weinstein, the studio head and producer behind major indie and mainstream hits like "Pulp Fiction" and "The English Patient," says that buying a film at Sundance is "an endurance test. You see the film at 8, start bidding at 10 and finish at 6 a.m. There is another tone at the other festivals -- at Cannes, you see the film, but then there are other things to do before buying, there's a fabulous party to go to and you're in a tuxedo rather than a ski jacket."

Nearly half of the 64 films in competition at Sundance this year were made by first-time directors. Nevertheless, some say that the festival has changed in the past couple of years.

"It used to be a launching festival," says Tom Bernard, co-president of Sony Pictures Classics -- meaning that Sundance is now a better place to buy a film than to generate publicity for a movie that's already been purchased. "It's changed dramatically -- now it's all about the middlemen, about the deal that closes at 4 a.m. while other buyers are banging down the door and sitting out in the cold."

This year, only slightly more than a dozen of the films at Sundance boast distributors before the festival begins -- in part because sales agents are holding out for on-site bidding wars.

Sundance's Mr. Gilmore says that last year the films that sold at the festival itself went for more money than ever before: about $45 million in total, he estimates.

Studio executives worry that this year some prices will get pushed up into the range of $12 million to $15 million per film owing to increased demand for material, persistence of the writers' strike, and prospective director and actor strikes.

Buyers say they are looking carefully at three star-packed films aimed at young audiences: "Hamlet 2" (with Elisabeth Shue), about a high-school drama course that puts on a musical sequel to Shakespeare's play; "The Wackness" (with Mary-Kate Olsen), about a high-school kid growing up in New York who pays his therapist with marijuana; and "Assassination of a High School President" (with Mischa Barton), about a newspaper nerd and popular girl at a Catholic high school who investigate stolen SAT exams.

A number of documentaries are commanding buyers' attention, including "American Teen" (about high-school seniors in the Midwest) and newcomer Chris Waitt's "A Complete History of My Sexual Failures," which chronicles its director's love life through doctors, ex-girlfriends and his mother.

Mr. Spurlock, who scored a Sundance hit with "Super Size Me" in 2004, returns with "Where in the World Is Osama Bin Laden?," which features the filmmaker's whimsical journey through the Middle East to track down the al Qaeda head.

There are a record seven films from the Middle East, but many of them focus on the fringes of society there rather than the war in Iraq. "Slingshot Hip Hop" examines the rap scene in Palestine, where the music is charged with lyrics about poverty and politics. "Be Like Others" chronicles the lives of Iranian transsexuals and the rise of gender-reassignment surgery in the country. And "Strangers," an Israeli film, follows the love story between an Israeli man and Palestinian woman who meet during the World Cup finals in Germany.

Sundance began in 1978 as the Utah/US Film Festival; Robert Redford took it over in 1985 to showcase American independent film; it was renamed the Sundance Film Festival in 1991. Many of today's most famous filmmakers got their big break at Sundance, including Kevin Smith, Quentin Tarantino and Jim Jarmusch. The event has also launched such films as "sex, lies, and videotape," "Clerks" and "The Blair Witch Project."

Social activities pack the Sundance calendar, including concerts and presentations featuring some of the singers from this year's films (Patti Smith and U2's Bono are expected) and late-night parties beginning at 3 a.m. and ending only after the first screenings start around 8 a.m.

Not everyone enjoys the hoopla. Errol Morris, the Academy Award-winning documentary filmmaker, likens Sundance to "spending a week in a meat locker. ... I'd rather be eviscerated by the Iroquois than go," he says. Mr. Morris's film "A Brief History of Time" won the Grand Jury Prize at Sundance in 1992. "Sundance has been very kind to me," he says, "but I have logged my time."

Write to Lauren A.E. Schuker at [email protected]

     URL for this article:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120008195567084409.html
Title: Sundance Film Festival begins January 17th
Post by: MaineWriter on January 12, 2008, 10:23:16 am
"In Bruges" opens the film festival. I was actually 'in Bruges' with Fabienne last March and saw some of extras of the movie 'in Bruges'! I am looking forward to the reviews. Here's a synopsis:

Martin McDonagh, an award-winning playwright and Academy Award winner for his short Six Shooter, makes his feature debut with a work that is deliriously funny, pointed, and perverse, yet sad, thoughtful, and infused with a moral vision that resonantly reflects today's surreal world. The film takes place in a storybook setting, the preserved medieval Flemish town of Bruges, where two hit men, Ray (Colin Farrell) and Ken (Brendan Gleeson), have been ordered to cool their heels among holiday tourists after a botched execution. Though he feels out of place amid the Gothic architecture, canals, and cobbled streets, Ken is drawn to the serenity of the place as he tries to soothe Ray's haunted psyche. As they wait for their boss Harry's (Ralph Fiennes's) call, they are caught up in a series of weird encounters with locals, tourists, a dwarf American filmmaker, and Dutch prostitutes, and a romantic liaison that is not what it seems. When the call finally comes, it prompts a life-and-death struggle that is violent, darkly comic, and surprisingly touching.

The Irish are without peer in making us laugh about ourselves, life, and especially things that aren’t supposed to be funny. The profane brilliance of McDonagh’s writing is all that and more. Galvanized by perceptive performances and framed by a unique beauty, this is filmmaking at its most exhilarating.

Director(s): Martin McDonagh

Screenwriter(s): Martin McDonagh

Executive Producers: Jeff Abberley, Julia Blackman, Tessa Ross
Producers: Graham Broadbent, Peter Czerin
Cinematographer: Eigil Bryld
Editor: Jon Gregory

(http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h243/lnicoll/Maine/08F0071.jpg)
Title: Sundance Film Festival begins January 17th
Post by: MaineWriter on January 12, 2008, 10:24:54 am
Here's the website for the festival:

http://www.sundance.org/festival/
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: BelAir on January 12, 2008, 11:18:23 am
I watched Queen Margot last night... 1994 French film based on the novel by A. Dumas.  Being rather ignorant about French history at the time, I didn't exactly know what I was in for - it was more shocking and violent than I was expecting, but still good.  (Parts of it are fictitious, so that helped me sleep a little easier, lol...)

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on January 13, 2008, 01:11:35 am
I saw Charlie Wilson's War this afternoon and liked it much more than I had expected. I forgot, until the credits rolled, that it was written by Aaron Sorkin, which explains the snappy dialogue and colorful, likable characters. It reinvigorated my faltering faith in Tom Hanks, who is excellent. And it reinforced my consistent faith in Philip Seymour Hoffman, who is excellent also.

It's moving but also unexpectedly subtle. I think I recall a discussion about it a few pages back where we noted that people see this movie different ways depending on their politics. Well, I would say that it is mostly a feel-good movie about fighting Communists, so conservatives can enjoy that. But it has a decidedly ironic, foreshadowing tone at the end that unmistakably points to the future blowback.

"We'll see ..." as PSH's character says.



Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: belbbmfan on January 13, 2008, 02:12:44 pm
"In Bruges" opens the film festival. I was actually 'in Bruges' with Fabienne last March and saw some of extras of the movie 'in Bruges'! I am looking forward to the reviews. Here's a synopsis:



Thanks for that Leslie. I'm wondering whether the scene we saw will be included in the movie.

Imdb isn't saying much about this film. I don't even know whether it will be released in Belgium. I sure hope so.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 13, 2008, 02:58:03 pm
Thanks for that Leslie. I'm wondering whether the scene we saw will be included in the movie.

Imdb isn't saying much about this film. I don't even know whether it will be released in Belgium. I sure hope so.



I would think, just for national pride, it would be released. People will want to see the scenery, if nothing else!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on January 13, 2008, 05:46:09 pm
Mark (jpwagoneer) and I saw ATONEMENT yesterday afternoon and I absolutely loved it...not to be missed, IMO.

Lynne
Sounds like a great film and great company!!

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on January 13, 2008, 10:33:33 pm
Today i saw The Diving Bell and the Butterfly and it truly is a wonderfully moving, funny and uplifting film.  It surpassed my expectations.

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/diving-bell-2.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kd5000 on January 13, 2008, 11:28:43 pm
I saw THE ORPHANAGE today.  Overall, the film had the feel of a 1960's ghost story. I'm thinking on the lines of THE HAUNTED as well as THE OTHERS.  While a decent film THE ORPHANAGE wasn't as good as the two I mentioned above.  There were a few rather large plot holes which took away from the film. 

There has been some controversy about the film being in Spanish and not being advertised that way.  The couple sitting behind me moaned and said "we have to read subtitles?"   It's sad ppl can be so lazy. 
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on January 13, 2008, 11:34:33 pm
There has been some controversy about the film being in Spanish and not being advertised that way.  The couple sitting behind me moaned and said "we have to read subtitles?"   It's sad ppl can be so lazy. 

I really don't understand people who see a film without knowing anything about it.  I guess those are the people that most DVD covers are designed for, lol!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Lumière on January 13, 2008, 11:46:09 pm
Today, I watched The Children's Hour (1961) starring Audrey Hepburn, Shirley MacLaine, James Garner.

Martha (Shirley MacLaine's character) and Karen (Audrey's character) are headmistresses of a girls' school.   When they punish a notorious bratty child for bad behavior, she tells her grandmother (who wastes no time in spreading the word) that the two women are lovers.  Of course, all the parents are disgusted and proceed to pull their children out of the school.

Like was the case with the few gay-themed movies in those days, Shirley MacLaine's character was made to portray the fact that she was actually in love with her friend and fellow teacher in a manner that showed her disgust and shame.  When she confesses her love to Karen, she repeatedly says how ashamed and dirty she feels by the whole thing. Even though Martha's love was not reciprocated in the same way, Karen offered that they go away together, somewhere where they weren't known for the "unnatural" sexual activities they'd been accused of engaging in.  I think that could've been a nice ending but no, Martha's fate was sealed by the end of the movie (let's just say they didn't ride off in the sunset together).

I am glad we've made some progress since then.  :)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kd5000 on January 13, 2008, 11:58:18 pm
Lucise, I just want to say I love your Audrey Hepburn signature.  Audrey was just so nice and charming, made some wonderful movies, incredibly photogenic and a humanitarian.   It's no wonder her passing made for a rare editorial in The New York Times. So much more then a movie star.

I always loved her in Breakfast at Tiffany's and Roman Holiday.   

I heard Audrey approached THE CHILDREN'S HOUR with hesitation.  This was considered very very edgy material when it came out in the early 1960's.  The play I believe dates back to the 1930's.  I guess the theater crowds are more sophisticated about things like that.   The playwright Hellman brought up the issue of lesbianism because she said at the time, it was the most scandalous thing you could be accused of...
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Lumière on January 14, 2008, 12:14:25 am
Hey KD, cheers.  :)


Here is a piece from the documentary: The Celluloid Closet, referencing The Children's hour:


[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=429gotnYSt0[/youtube]
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 14, 2008, 11:20:52 am
I saw THE ORPHANAGE today.  Overall, the film had the feel of a 1960's ghost story. I'm thinking on the lines of THE HAUNTED as well as THE OTHERS.  While a decent film THE ORPHANAGE wasn't as good as the two I mentioned above.  There were a few rather large plot holes which took away from the film. 

There has been some controversy about the film being in Spanish and not being advertised that way.  The couple sitting behind me moaned and said "we have to read subtitles?"   It's sad ppl can be so lazy. 

My daughter went and saw it on Saturday with a friend. She said it was very scary. Funny, she never even mentioned the subtitles, so obviously, they didn't bother her!

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: BelAir on January 14, 2008, 08:34:41 pm
My daughter went and saw it on Saturday with a friend. She said it was very scary. Funny, she never even mentioned the subtitles, so obviously, they didn't bother her!

L

oh, I finally realized what movie you were talking about...

The advertisements I saw linked it with "Pan's Labyrinth"...  so if a movie goer saw Pan's, then they should have been prepared (for the subtitles).  But maybe lots of people are seeing The Orphanage that didn't see Pan's...

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Lumière on January 15, 2008, 02:06:00 am
I finally got to see a movie I've wanted to see in quite a while.
It is an Indian movie called Sancharram (aka The Journey), written and directed by Ligy J. Pullappally.
Like Deepa Mehta's "Fire", The Journey mainly addresses the subject of lesbianism in Indian society.


(http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i285/Lucise/Misc/ba0ea482.jpg)

 
At its centre are two young women who have been best mates since they were children.  As they grow older, their relationship transitions from friendship to love (with great performances by the two leads).  The complications surrounding their blossoming relationship go from bad to worse when they are found out and a marriage is hastily arranged. 

I enjoyed the movie more than I thought I would in fact.  It felt like watching a long and rather sensual poem ... loved the cinematography :)


Excerpt from an interview with the screenwriter/director [on her motivation for making the movie]:

Ligy J. Pullappally: On January 25, 2000, I received an email about a young woman at a university in the South Indian state of Kerala. She and her girlfriend had fled the school, presumably under the threat of expulsion as a result of the rumors of their love affair with each other. The women were recovered and sent back to their respective families. The next day, one of the young woman's body was found floating in the reservoir of a dam. It was a tragic loss of young life and potential, a suicide. It was, I would learn, an all too familiar circumstance in the South Indian state of Kerala.

I wanted to do something to draw attention to the alarmingly frequent incidents of gay suicide - to try to stem that tide; I knew that isolation was a factor in these incidents, so I considered creating a positive media representation of young gay people.

[courtesy of -  http://www.desiclub.com/bollywood/bollywood_features/bolly_article.cfm?id=253]



Worth checking out.  :)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on January 16, 2008, 05:38:03 pm
The AMPAS shortlist for the Foreign Language Film Award shockingly excludes 4 Months, 3 Weeks & 2 Days and Persepolis

http://www.variety.com/blog/890000489/post/1600020160.html (http://www.variety.com/blog/890000489/post/1600020160.html)

I've heard of one and seen none of the following shortlisted films:

Austria, "The Counterfeiters," Stefan Ruzowitzky, director
Brazil, "The Year My Parents Went on Vacation," Cao Hamburger, director
Canada, "Days of Darkness," Denys Arcand, director
Israel, "Beaufort," Joseph Cedar, director
Italy, "The Unknown," Giuseppe Tornatore, director
Kazakhstan, "Mongol," Sergei Bodrov, director
Poland, "Katyn," Andrzej Wajda, director
Russia, "12," Nikita Mikhalkov, director
Serbia, "The Trap," Srdan Golubovic, director


Jeffrey Wells of Hollywood Elsewhere is also pissed off:

One of the biggest outrages in the history of the Academy's foreign film committee -- a scandal fed by deficient taste and myopic, mule-like obstinacy -- has just happened with the release of the nine-film short list that doesn't include Cristian Mungiu's widely hailed 4 Months, 3 Weeks & 2 Days. The people who pushed for this decision need to be identified and, with all charity and compassion, expelled from this group for life. What will it take? Torches and pitchforks at the corner of Wilshire and La Peer at 8 pm this evening?

More at: http://hollywood-elsewhere.com/archives/2008/01/4_months_doesnt.php (http://hollywood-elsewhere.com/archives/2008/01/4_months_doesnt.php)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 16, 2008, 05:50:53 pm
What about "The Diving Bell and the Butterfly"? Or do you think that will get nominated in the best picture category?

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on January 16, 2008, 06:06:13 pm
What about "The Diving Bell and the Butterfly"? Or do you think that will get nominated in the best picture category?

L
Actually, France submitted Persepolis so Diving Bell wasn't in the running for this award:  http://www.thefilmexperience.net/Awards/2007/foreignfton.html (http://www.thefilmexperience.net/Awards/2007/foreignfton.html)

 It might get a best picture nom, certainly a best director and adaptation.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: belbbmfan on January 17, 2008, 05:21:24 pm
The AMPAS shortlist for the Foreign Language Film Award shockingly excludes 4 Months, 3 Weeks & 2 Days and Persepolis



The Lives Of Others (das Leben der Anderen) from Germany wasn't included either. It is one of the best movies I've seen last year.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on January 17, 2008, 05:41:24 pm
The Lives Of Others (das Leben der Anderen) from Germany wasn't included either. It is one of the best movies I've seen last year.

The Lives of Others was in the running last year and won. The film came out in 2006 in the U.S.  I was really surprised to see it listed for the 2007 BAFTAs.
Title: Criterion releases 2-Disc Edition of THE ICE STORM!
Post by: oilgun on January 17, 2008, 05:56:48 pm
Here's some exciting news on the DVD front.  Criterion is releasing a 2 disc edition of Ang Lee's The Ice Storm. It includes a commentary with Ang and James Schamus

This is giving me hope that we may eventually get a decent edition of Brokeback Mountain! Hope it doesn't take ten years like it did for The Ice Storm though:

http://www.criterion.com/asp/release.asp?id=426 (http://www.criterion.com/asp/release.asp?id=426)

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/IceStorm.jpg)

(Now there's a nicely designed DVD cover! Criterion must be the only one to hire professional Graphic Designers.... "Whaaa...no floating heads?!"  :laugh:)

Compare that with the cover of the Fox edition (I'll be happy to be rid of this monstrosity!):
(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/IceStorm--2.jpg)



Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kd5000 on January 17, 2008, 06:30:17 pm
Yep, Lee and Schamus should have tackled BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN after they did the commentary for THE ICE STORM. It's been ten years since they did THE ICE STORM. Don't you forget things in a ten year time period?   I've never heard Lee give commentary on DVD before.  I wonder if he will talk in generalities or specifics about the film. 
Title: Re: Criterion releases 2-Disc Edition of THE ICE STORM!
Post by: BelAir on January 17, 2008, 07:59:16 pm
Here's some exciting news on the DVD front.  Criterion is releasing a 2 disc edition of Ang Lee's The Ice Storm. It includes a commentary with Ang and James Schamus




be sure you report back after you watch the commentary...

 ::)
Title: Re: Criterion releases 2-Disc Edition of THE ICE STORM!
Post by: oilgun on January 17, 2008, 08:11:19 pm
be sure you report back after you watch the commentary...

 ::)

Oh, I will!  I forgot to mention that the DVD's release date is March 18th.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Artiste on January 17, 2008, 10:30:37 pm
So you want an BM II movie??

Anyone?

Hugs!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 18, 2008, 09:50:41 am
In Bruges opened the Sundance Flim Festival last night. Here's an early review from Filmthreat.com

IN BRUGES
   
by Jeremy Mathews

(2008-01-19)

2007, Rated R, 107 minutes

In the opening voice-over of "In Bruges," Colin Farrell immediately puts the audience at ease. His character, Ray, admits that he didn't even know where Bruges was until his boss told him to lay low there. Then, he punctuates the commentary with some helpful information: "It's in Belgium."

Writer/director Martin McDonagh has crafted his entire film with the same spirit as the introduction. The content may initially seem daunting, but the film presents it in an accessible, entertaining manner that dares you not to enjoy yourself. This is a film about people who have done bad things and deal with real psychological issues, but they're also people who ramble, bicker and talk—and do so in the way peculiar to British criminals in movies.

Ray and his mentor Ken, played by the great Brendan Gleeson, flee from London to the medieval town after Ray's debut job as a hitman ended in failure. The two were instructed to go sight-seeing, but Ray spends most of his time whining about the town, indulging his neuroses and pissing all over Ken's attempts to take in the culture. His mood changes a bit, however, when he meets a cute local (Clémence Poésy) who works on the set of a pretentious Dutch film whose case includes a drug-loving dwarf (Jordan Prentice).

The dynamic between Gleeson and Farrell grows more and more fascinating as we learn more about what the characters have been through. As they exchange stylish dialogue, they reveal more about whether or not they indulge one another and why.

In a film full of great performances, Ralph Feinnes steals the show as Harry, the boss. Initially heard only over the telephone, Feinnes takes on an accent and a philosophy far from that of his typical role. He makes Harry presumptive and indignant, approachable and intimidating, a bundle of rage in a reasonable demeanor. It would be hard to find a better harbinger of doom.

During its conclusion, the film oscillates between big ideas and big set pieces. It's only here that McDonagh falters a bit in his balancing act, using what could have been a considerable emotional payoff as a launch pad for a rather elaborate (but quite well done) chase scene. Even when the film goes off the rails, however, it's still a fun ride.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: belbbmfan on January 18, 2008, 10:22:07 am
Leslie, have you seen the trailer?

http://imdb.com/title/tt0780536/trailers-me60268068 (http://imdb.com/title/tt0780536/trailers-me60268068)

I think it has some great dialogue!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 18, 2008, 10:50:55 am
Thanks for that, Fabienne, I hadn't seen it.

The reviewers are all praising the "snappy dialog" which had the audience laughing out loud. While some reviews praised the movie (like the one I posted) a few complained that this was one of those movies that started out funny, felt like a comedy, and then took an abrupt turn. I have a feeling I know what that turn is, given the occupations of the leads.

Either way, I'll seek it out because I want to see the scenery!

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: belbbmfan on January 18, 2008, 12:02:03 pm
And what was in my mailbox today? The dvd of Days Of Heaven!

I ordered it just because of your recommendation Leslie. Maybe we'll watch it tonight.  :)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on January 18, 2008, 12:05:28 pm
Is anyone planning to see JJ Abrams' Cloverfield this weekend?  The reviews are pretty good and I love the trailer.

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/cloverfield.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 18, 2008, 12:14:47 pm
Maybe I'll go with my son. I still want to see Atonement, though...

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 18, 2008, 12:15:10 pm
And what was in my mailbox today? The dvd of Days Of Heaven!

I ordered it just because of your recommendation Leslie. Maybe we'll watch it tonight.  :)

Oh, I can't wait for your review!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: belbbmfan on January 18, 2008, 12:53:38 pm
Maybe I'll go with my son. I still want to see Atonement, though...

L

I know what you mean. We were going to see it last night, but my husband had a hard day at work and he wanted to watch something that would give him a laugh, so we decided on Charlie Wilson's War. And we laughed! I really enjoyed the biting satire. Tom Hanks was really good as the Congress man knocking back one whiskey after another. Julia Roberts had interesting wigs. LOL But Philip Seymour Hoffman really stole the show, his performance was hilarious.

We'll watch Atonement next week. And I still haven't seen Gone, Baby Gone or Rendition or Before The Devil Knows You're Dead. *sigh* Never enough time.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on January 18, 2008, 08:16:26 pm
I went to see "Atonement" today and really enjoyed it.  I'd been led to believe from the trailer that it was a big epic film, but it wasn't, really.  There was a big scene showing the gathering of troops for the Battle of Dunkirk (really well done), but basically, it was an intimate story of two lovers whose lives were tragically impacted by a third person.  The music, by Dario Marianelli, was beautifully evocative and made the bittersweet story all the more moving.  The director used the camera in a way that I can only describe as lyrical.  Overall, the impression I got was that of having read a long, evocative, sadly beautiful poem.  Highly recommended.  8)

There was a preview for "In Bruges," and it looks very appealing.  If for no other reason than to see that gorgeous town (I've spent many imaginary hours there by working on the opera "Die Tote Stadt"), I have to see it. Clemence Poesy, who played Fleur in the most recent Harry Potter movie, is also in it. :D

Another preview was for "Miss Pettigrew Lives for a Day," starring Frances McDormand and Amy Adams.  It looks really cute.  Frances McDormand is a not too successful London nanny who finally gets a job with Amy Adams' character, an American actress.  Ciaran Hinds, one of my favorites, is also in it, as is Shirley Henderson, who plays "Moaning Myrtle" in the Harry Potter movies.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kd5000 on January 19, 2008, 01:26:34 pm
The film critic at Time Magazine had a recent article that Hollywood needs to make more "Out of Africa's" in order to get ppl to watch the Oscars and to get adults to the cinema.  He said ppl don't watch the Oscars as a contest to see who will win best picture, but rather as a coronation (Titanic).   However, I thought well doesn't the movie poster from OUT OF AFRICA have a comparable look with a certain image from BBM??   ;D


http://www.movieposter.com/posters/archive/main/27/A70-13827 

I'm having a problem copying the image, so I just posted the link.  As Meryl pointed out in a msg to me, "It's is a nice image, and very evocative of the shot in BBM."

I know Ennis and Jack weren't' having a picnic "the morning after," but it's still familiar enough.  Who needs OUT  OF AFRICA when you the scenery and passion of BBM.

http://popbytes.com/img/brokeback-dec9.jpg
















Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on January 19, 2008, 01:55:20 pm
Karl, here's the picture you mentioned, in case others are having trouble opening it:

(http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h269/merylmarie/out_of_africa.jpg)

And the BBM shot to go with it:

(http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h269/merylmarie/BBMLinesVisualized/BrokieBrunch/Brokeback/PosterBBM.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on January 19, 2008, 03:31:18 pm
This would be a good companion piece to our analysis of the more familiar BBM poster and its resemblance to the Titanic poster.

The thing that most strikes me in contrasting these is that Meryl Streep and Robert Redford are turned toward the camera and facing each other, while Jack and Ennis are turned away from both us and each other. That faintly suggests something secretive or illicit about their relationship. Of course, knowing that this is the "I ain't queer" scene probably reinforces that inference, for me.

Plus, while Meryl and Bob are touching or almost touching, Jack and Ennis are not, leaving the nature of their relationship vague.

It's interesting to imagine a poster with Jack and Ennis posed like the "Out of Africa" stars.


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: BelAir on January 19, 2008, 04:34:16 pm
i agree to all of the above...

i was also thinking that Meryl and Robert (can't remember their character's names) looked enclosed by their scenery (i.e. the mountains 'wrapping' around them) whereas as Jack and Ennis looked removed from the view in front of them...

e.g. 'where do we belong in this world?' for Jack and Ennis and 'we are happy in this world' for Meryl and Robert.  Obviously the fact that we see the backs of one couple and the front of the other has something to do with it as well.

Quote
It's interesting to imagine a poster with Jack and Ennis posed like the "Out of Africa" stars.

this makes me think of scene around the fire, that I think is actually just Jake and Heath, not Jack and Ennis...  I'll see if I can find it.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: BelAir on January 19, 2008, 04:49:53 pm
(http://i234.photobucket.com/albums/ee304/BelAirChoice/bbm3.jpg)

(http://i234.photobucket.com/albums/ee304/BelAirChoice/bbmpair.jpg)

well, those were the two images I was thinking of... but because they are close-ups and in the trees, they aren't really all that similar to the OoA poster.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on January 19, 2008, 04:58:45 pm
Sorry to break in here with a totally different topic but I just saw Juno and thought it was great!  After all the hype it actually exceeded my expectations.  It's a really sweet and intelligent film with excellent performances and a wonderful soundtrack. (I'm listening to it as I write this, lol!)

Sonic Youth's version of the Carpenters' Superstar (4:05)

[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e0--RCqzJkA[/youtube]
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: BelAir on January 19, 2008, 05:00:58 pm
I am glad to hear it lived up to all the hype!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 19, 2008, 05:40:07 pm
Hannah and I went to see Atonement. I thinks she is still upstairs sobbing...poor thing.

It was good and I enjoyed it. The scenery, the costumes, the evocation of an earlier time...all great. I kept saying to myself, "there is something about this movie..." and I couldn't quite put my finger on it. Then, I was reading comments at The New York Times and commenter #63 hit the nail on the head. I said, "Ah ha!" Not to give too much away (for those who haven't seen it) but the exact same conceit was used in "Adaptation," another movie I liked the first time around and grew to love on subsequent viewings. I suspect the same thing will happen with "Atonement." Interesting.

I saw very different previews than Meryl, though! "The Eye" (blech, skip), "Charlie Bartlett" (looks funny), and "10,000 BC" which looks really really dreadful. When I saw it was the same director as "Independence Day" and "The Day After Tomorrow" I knew that meant STAY AWAY. I will.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on January 19, 2008, 07:19:29 pm
Sorry to break in here with a totally different topic but I just saw Juno and thought it was great!  After all the hype it actually exceeded my expectations.  It's a really sweet and intelligent film with excellent performances and a wonderful soundtrack. (I'm listening to it as I write this, lol!)

I'm glad you also enjoyed Juno.  The soundtrack is full of wonderfully quirky, sweet songs. 
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on January 20, 2008, 07:22:31 pm
I saw Before the Devil Knows You're Dead today and quite enjoyed it.  Let's just say that it isn't exactly a feel-good film,  :o! although there are some touches of dark humour.  Phillip Seymour Hoffman is great as usual and so is Ethan Hawke and I liked how the film was structured, jumping back and forth in the timeline, it worked quite well.
The French poster below is somewhat misleading, btw.

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/Before_devil_knows_youre_dead_2007.jpg)
(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/before_the_devil.jpg)
"Aww man, there's a fly in my beer!  It's just not a good day!"
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: BelAir on January 20, 2008, 10:08:02 pm
I saw Before the Devil Knows You're Dead today and quite enjoyed it.  Let's just say that it isn't exactly a feel-good film,  :o! although there are some touches of dark humour.  Phillip Seymour Hoffman is great as usual and so is Ethan Hawke and I liked how the film was structured, jumping back and forth in the timeline, it worked quite well.
The French poster below is somewhat misleading, btw.

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/Before_devil_knows_youre_dead_2007.jpg)
(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/before_the_devil.jpg)

from that profile view in the poster, EH reminds me of Benicio del Toro (sp?)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 21, 2008, 10:19:41 am
I am not  quite sure what I think about this...



January 21, 2008

Oliver Stone to Make "Fair" Movie About George W. Bush


By REUTERS

Filed at 9:00 a.m. ET

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Director Oliver Stone, who has made movies about Presidents John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon, is developing a project about the current occupant of the White House, but promises it will not be a hatchet job, Daily Variety reported on Sunday.

Stone is in talks with Josh Brolin, who is starring in "No Country For Old Men," to play the title role in "Bush," the trade paper said.

He is shopping the script to financiers and hopes to start production by April, with a release date in time for the election in November, or the inauguration of Bush's successor in January.

Stone told Daily Variety that he planned to make "a fair, true portrait" of Bush, focusing on such areas as his relationship with his father, President George H.W. Bush, his wild youth, and his conversion to Christianity.

"It will contain surprises for Bush supporters and his detractors," said Stone.

He said Brolin was better looking than Bush, "but has the same drive and charisma that Americans identify with Bush, who has some of that old-time movie-star swagger."

A White House spokesman could not immediately be reached for comment. Bush has acknowledged that he was a heavy drinker in his younger days, but has long been sober.

Stone, who has had his battles with drink and drugs, earned three Oscar nominations for his 1991 conspiracy film "JFK." In 1996, he also received a script nomination for "Nixon," which starred Anthony Hopkins. He won best directing Oscars for the Vietnam sagas "Platoon" and "Born on the Fourth of July."

Other historical figures reinterpreted by Stone include dead rock star Jim Morrison in "The Doors," and Alexander the Great in "Alexander."

In 2002, he shot a flattering documentary about Cuban leader Fidel Castro for HBO, but the pay-cable network told him to balance it with more footage about political prisoners on the communist island.

Stone's efforts last year to film a documentary about another Bush nemesis, Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, also hit turbulence. His request for access was denied with an official reportedly dismissing the filmmaker as "part of the Great Satan."

(Reporting by Dean Goodman, editing by Philip Barbara)

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: BelAir on January 21, 2008, 10:59:06 am
I am one of those people who doesn't like 'historical' movies to be released in such closeness (at least temporally) to real events...

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on January 21, 2008, 11:04:06 am
I am not  quite sure what I think about this...



January 21, 2008

Oliver Stone to Make "Fair" Movie About George W. Bush


By REUTERS

Filed at 9:00 a.m. ET

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Director Oliver Stone, who has made movies about Presidents John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon, is developing a project about the current occupant of the White House, but promises it will not be a hatchet job, Daily Variety reported on Sunday.

Stone is in talks with Josh Brolin, who is starring in "No Country For Old Men," to play the title role in "Bush," the trade paper said.

He is shopping the script to financiers and hopes to start production by April, with a release date in time for the election in November, or the inauguration of Bush's successor in January.

Stone told Daily Variety that he planned to make "a fair, true portrait" of Bush, focusing on such areas as his relationship with his father, President George H.W. Bush, his wild youth, and his conversion to Christianity.

"It will contain surprises for Bush supporters and his detractors," said Stone.

He said Brolin was better looking than Bush, "but has the same drive and charisma that Americans identify with Bush, who has some of that old-time movie-star swagger."

A White House spokesman could not immediately be reached for comment. Bush has acknowledged that he was a heavy drinker in his younger days, but has long been sober.

Stone, who has had his battles with drink and drugs, earned three Oscar nominations for his 1991 conspiracy film "JFK." In 1996, he also received a script nomination for "Nixon," which starred Anthony Hopkins. He won best directing Oscars for the Vietnam sagas "Platoon" and "Born on the Fourth of July."

Other historical figures reinterpreted by Stone include dead rock star Jim Morrison in "The Doors," and Alexander the Great in "Alexander."

In 2002, he shot a flattering documentary about Cuban leader Fidel Castro for HBO, but the pay-cable network told him to balance it with more footage about political prisoners on the communist island.

Stone's efforts last year to film a documentary about another Bush nemesis, Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, also hit turbulence. His request for access was denied with an official reportedly dismissing the filmmaker as "part of the Great Satan."

(Reporting by Dean Goodman, editing by Philip Barbara)



He won't have to do a hatchet job, just depicting reality will be bad enough,  :laugh:

This reminds me, a friend at work who recently went to Vegas was unable to use her left-over American cash to pay for her lunch at the food court, nobody wanted to accept it (i'm in Canada).  She said people used to kill for American money so she's convinced the end of the world is near  ???
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 21, 2008, 11:04:25 am
I am one of those people who doesn't like 'historical' movies to be released in such closeness (at least temporally) to real events...



Very good point. I agree and feel the same way.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 21, 2008, 11:05:28 am
He won't have to do a hatchet job, just depicting reality will be bad enough,  :laugh:

This reminds me, a friend at work who recently went to Vegas was unable to use her left-over American cash to pay for her lunch at the food court, nobody wanted to accept it (i'm in Canada).  She said people used to kill for American money so she's convinced the end of the world is near  ???

End of the world, huh? I guess I should just start going to the movies more often, then!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on January 21, 2008, 11:06:53 am
End of the world, huh? I guess I should just start going to the movies more often, then!
Let's go ee Cloverfield!  :laugh:

According to the Mayan calendar we've got until 2012!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 21, 2008, 12:12:50 pm
Here are some movies NOT to see...



"I Know Who Killed Me" kills critics at Razzies


Mon Jan 21, 2008 6:32am EST

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Two New York firemen posing as a gay couple, psychically linked identical twins and a mild-mannered man dominated by his latex-wearing obese wife are all contenders this year for the worst screen couples in Hollywood.

Among the nominations announced on Monday for the 28th annual Golden Raspberry awards, which celebrate the worst in filmmaking, are Adam Sandler, Lindsay Lohan and Eddie Murphy for their respective work in "I Now Pronounce You Chuck & Larry," "I Know Who Killed Me" and "Norbit."

It's a double-whammy for Lohan and Murphy, who play multiple roles in their cinematic fiascoes and were nominated opposite themselves in the worst screen couple category.

"I Know Who Killed Me," a teen thriller in which Lohan plays psychically connected twins, "is a Lindsay Lohan 'vehicle' that proved as dangerous for its star as any car she ever ran off the road," said John Wilson, who heads the group that spoofs the Oscars by celebrating the year's worst films.

"Norbit" garnered Murphy five nods for what Wilson described as a "latex-laden, nearly laugh-free 'comedy.'"

In that film, Murphy plays Norbit, as well as his adopted Asian father and hugely obese girlfriend.

Rounding out the list is "I Now Pronounce You Chuck & Larry," in which Sandler and co-star Kevin James claim to be domestic partners in order to receive medical benefits, a comedy Wilson describes as a "gag-inducing 'gay romp.'"

"I Know Who Killed Me" received a total of nine nominations by the Razzies -- worst screen couple, picture, horror movie, screenplay, director, remake/rip-off, supporting actress and two nods for actress -- trailed by "Norbit" and "I Now Pronounce You Chuck & Larry," which both received eight.

The worst film category also includes "Bratz," based on the popular toy dolls -- the four lead actresses were all named in the worst actress category in a "four-for-one deal" -- and "Daddy Day Camp," starring Oscar winner Cuba Gooding Jr.

The worst actor category also includes Nicolas Cage for his turns in "Ghost Rider," "National Treasure: Book of Secrets" and "Next" and Jim Carrey for "The Number 23."

Others nominated for worst actresses include Diane Keaton in "Because I Said So," Jessica Alba in "Awake," "Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer" and "Good Luck, Chuck."
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kd5000 on January 21, 2008, 12:37:57 pm
Let's go ee Cloverfield!  :laugh:

According to the Mayan calendar we've got until 2012!

I saw CLOVERFIELD over the weekend. Let's just say I'm glad it was a short film, I believe it was less then an 1:30 minutes.   I'm not a film snob, so I don't mind seeing films like this. Plus I had a busy weekend, so I couldn't squeeze in the time to see longer fare such as THERE WILL BE BLOOD.

CLOVERFIELD was an overblown chase film except they are being chased by a monster.  Like Spielberg's WAR OF THE WORLDS, the characters aren't given much information; where does the monster come from,  what is it,  etc etc.  The movie is shot via camcorder and some ppl might not like that as the picture doesn't stay steady for long. In that regards, it reminded me of the much lower budgeted BLAIR WITCH PROJECT.  Also, 95% of the film takes place at nighttime so we really don't get a "Godzilla" image of the monster.   It's hard to describe what it looks like.   

This is the second "disaster" movie I've recently seen that takes place in Manhattan.  I AM LEGEND was the other one. You'd think they'd be tired of seeing their city destroyed by plague or by monster.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on January 21, 2008, 12:52:43 pm
This is the second "disaster" movie I've recently seen that takes place in Manhattan.  I AM LEGEND was the other one. You'd think they'd be tired of seeing their city destroyed by plague or by monster.

I saw a column on this very subject in The Guardian. It points out the movie's echoes of 9/11 and suggests that Americans are trying to process that event through movies.

Here's the link and an excerpt.

http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/film/2008/01/cinematic_take_on_911.html (http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/film/2008/01/cinematic_take_on_911.html)

Quote
Over a century of cinema , America has contemplated and iterated its origins in the movies, mostly through westerns. It's still doing so. Paul Thomas Anderson's superb There Will Be Blood is less a character-study than a thesis on the two opposing forces - entrepreneurial capitalism and evangelical Christianity - that have shaped the Midwest. But America also has its destruction myth, inevitably set in New York, whose reduction to rubble both confirms that city's pre-eminence and signals that the stakes are high. The spectacle of NY landmarks (the Brooklyn Bridge, the Flatiron Building) being totalled is as much a recurring obsession for American filmmakers as among the higher echelons of al-Qaida. I can't recall another culture - even the Sumerians, no strangers to fatalism - which has rehearsed its own extinction with such apparent relish.

... In the end much of the film's power resides not in its special effects but in the plausibility of its set-up: a surprise party in a downtown apartment is suddenly interrupted by an explosion outside. And just like that everything changes forever. It demonstrates one of the chief lessons of 9/11: vast, largely unguessed-at forces can abruptly irrupt into everyday life, shattering bourgeois self-absorption and upending supposed certainties. It's a chastening lesson, one that America is still learning how to tell.

BTW, I found that piece by reading a review of Cloverfield on Slate, which also addresses this topic:

Quote
I'm more interested in how Cloverfield plays on 9/11 anxieties—not in the way one "plays out" issues in therapy, but in the way one plays a video game. 2008 has already seen a notable uptick in America's historical eagerness to eradicate New York in our imagination. Besides Cloverfield and I Am Legend, there's the upcoming History Channel special Life After People, whose ubiquitous poster shows a crumbling Brooklyn Bridge overgrown with vines. As this fine piece in the Guardian points out, Americans seem almost soothed by replaying the fantasy of our flagship city in ruins. What's that about?

In a quote from the press notes, Abrams says, "We live in a time of great fear. Having a movie that is about something as outlandish as a massive creature attacking your city allows people to process and experience that fear in a way that is incredibly entertaining and incredibly safe." Cloverfield's entertainment value remains to be determined over its opening weekend. For viewers in the same demographic as Rob and his buddies, I suspect it will be a big hit. But maybe its re-imagining of 9/11 as the ultimate buzzkill is a little too safe. The movie may be the first to repackage the events of Sept. 11 as pure entertainment. It's certainly the first to use those events as part of a viral marketing hook, in a spooky untitled trailer that premiered before last summer's Transformers. Whoa, that would be intense, if lower Manhattan was suddenly destroyed by some terrible, faceless agent of evil. Oh, wait.


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on January 21, 2008, 02:05:53 pm
It's interesting that you bring that topic up, Karl and Leslie.  I was just ruminating this morning on my underlying anxiety about being unexpectedly thrown out onto the street here in NYC. 

I often wonder what I would do if we had to evacuate suddenly.  I never forgot the images of those poor Bosnians, especially old people and children, who were made to trek miles and miles over the harsh countryside as part of Milosovic's ethnic cleansing policy.   It's not that far-fetched, unfortunately, given the scenario of a possible "dirty bomb" attack here that could spread radiation over many miles.  In fact, ever since 9/11, I have had a purse-size bag sitting in my closet with extra money, a transistor radio, energy bars, water and other portable necessities, ready to pick up and take with me.  Sounds paranoid, I know, but I'm not alone by a longshot.

Although a monster attack or a quick climatic disaster is really unlikely, I do think it's only a matter of time before New York and other coastal cities will have to be abandoned in the face of the rising sea levels brought on by global warming.  I'm just glad I can enjoy living here now.  It's a great city, full of beautiful and exciting things, a wonderful example of how millions of people can coexist together in relative harmony.  The disaster scenarios just make me appreciate it all the more on a daily basis.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on January 21, 2008, 02:39:36 pm
I am not  quite sure what I think about this...



January 21, 2008

Oliver Stone to Make "Fair" Movie About George W. Bush


By REUTERS

Filed at 9:00 a.m. ET

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Director Oliver Stone, who has made movies about Presidents John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon, is developing a project about the current occupant of the White House, but promises it will not be a hatchet job, Daily Variety reported on Sunday.

Stone is in talks with Josh Brolin, who is starring in "No Country For Old Men," to play the title role in "Bush," the trade paper said.

He is shopping the script to financiers and hopes to start production by April, with a release date in time for the election in November, or the inauguration of Bush's successor in January.

Stone told Daily Variety that he planned to make "a fair, true portrait" of Bush, focusing on such areas as his relationship with his father, President George H.W. Bush, his wild youth, and his conversion to Christianity.

"It will contain surprises for Bush supporters and his detractors," said Stone.

He said Brolin was better looking than Bush, "but has the same drive and charisma that Americans identify with Bush, who has some of that old-time movie-star swagger."

A White House spokesman could not immediately be reached for comment. Bush has acknowledged that he was a heavy drinker in his younger days, but has long been sober.

Stone, who has had his battles with drink and drugs, earned three Oscar nominations for his 1991 conspiracy film "JFK." In 1996, he also received a script nomination for "Nixon," which starred Anthony Hopkins. He won best directing Oscars for the Vietnam sagas "Platoon" and "Born on the Fourth of July."

Other historical figures reinterpreted by Stone include dead rock star Jim Morrison in "The Doors," and Alexander the Great in "Alexander."

In 2002, he shot a flattering documentary about Cuban leader Fidel Castro for HBO, but the pay-cable network told him to balance it with more footage about political prisoners on the communist island.

Stone's efforts last year to film a documentary about another Bush nemesis, Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, also hit turbulence. His request for access was denied with an official reportedly dismissing the filmmaker as "part of the Great Satan."

Has anyone else ever had the thought that Heath Ledger would make a convincing George W. Bush?  The voice might be a challenge, since Bush is a tenor and Heath a bass, but there are a number of moments in BBM where he reminds me of him, a few of which are below:

(http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h269/merylmarie/BBMLinesVisualized/BrokieBrunch/Brokeback/EnnisReunionSmile.jpg)

(http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h269/merylmarie/BBMLinesVisualized/BrokieBrunch/Brokeback/afterthedivorce.jpg)

(http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h269/merylmarie/BBMLinesVisualized/BrokieBrunch/Brokeback/itsnormalandall.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 21, 2008, 02:51:22 pm
Although I can see the resemblance that you are referring to, Meryl, especially in the nose, the thought of Heath playing Mr. Bush just makes me throw up a little in my mouth! LOL

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on January 21, 2008, 03:03:20 pm
Although I can see the resemblance that you are referring to, Meryl, especially in the nose, the thought of Heath playing Mr. Bush just makes me throw up a little in my mouth! LOL

L

I know, Leslie!  I didn't say I liked the resemblance, just that it's there.  ;)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: loneleeb3 on January 21, 2008, 03:10:33 pm


(http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h269/merylmarie/BBMLinesVisualized/BrokieBrunch/Brokeback/EnnisReunionSmile.jpg)

(http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h269/merylmarie/BBMLinesVisualized/BrokieBrunch/Brokeback/afterthedivorce.jpg)

(http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h269/merylmarie/BBMLinesVisualized/BrokieBrunch/Brokeback/itsnormalandall.jpg)
No, he will always be my Ennis! I don't care what Movie he is in or how old he gets. In my mind he will forever be Ennis Del Mar.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Lumière on January 21, 2008, 03:29:24 pm

One of the movies I watched recently is called The Gymnast. (directed by Ned Farr)
http://www.thegymnastfilm.com/thegymnast_flash.html


It is lovely little film with breathtaking aerialist performances by the two leads.  Simply wow.
That, and it's a love story.  I really enjoyed it.  :)


(http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i285/Lucise/Misc/9c103de9.jpg)


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on January 21, 2008, 04:19:28 pm
Well, I had to do it!  Just got back from seeing Cloverfield! (I'm not a film snob either, lol!)  It really does play on post 9/11 anxieties, several early scenes of clouds of dust and debris billowing through the streets of lower Manhattan looked eerily familiar.  All in all, it was a pretty effective film, I was pretty much on the edge of my seat throughout.  The camcorder effect, which often didn't show us what was happening, or only partly, worked well at increasing the confusion and fear. There was just enough character development to make us care about happens to them.  The creature was a bit of a disappointment, I think it would have been more effective if we never actually got a good look at it.  Anyway, it was fun!

The trailers shown:  A teaser trailer of Star Trek showing the enterprise under construction.  -Hellboy II, looks pretty bad.  -21 with Kevin Spacey about that ring of card-counting math wiz MIT students in Vegas.  Wasn't there a TV show about that?  There must have been others but I can't remember them.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kd5000 on January 21, 2008, 04:48:31 pm
Well Oilgun, do you realize how many Trekkies are going to pay just to see that 3 second image of the new Star Trek, coming Christmas 2008.  I've actually seen the image posted on some mainstream film blogs and that's all it was, an image of the Enterprise under construction.  William Shatner is still whining about not being cast... Probably wanted a pretty penny.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on January 21, 2008, 04:55:48 pm
[...] William Shatner is still whining about not being cast... Probably wanted a pretty penny.

How come actors never retire, that's what I want to know. :laugh:
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on January 21, 2008, 04:56:52 pm
Has anyone else ever had the thought that Heath Ledger would make a convincing George W. Bush?

If that thought has ever passed through my mind for even a split second I immediately got rid of the thought, destroyed the brain cells it touched and forgot I ever had it.

 :P :P :P

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: loneleeb3 on January 21, 2008, 05:46:36 pm
I just watched a great movie today. It's "A Love Song For Bobby Long".
It's got Scarlett Johanson and John Travolta! Oh, what a beautiful story.
It was agreat cast and acted very well!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: BelAir on January 21, 2008, 06:34:45 pm
It's interesting that you bring that topic up, Karl and Leslie.  I was just ruminating this morning on my underlying anxiety about being unexpectedly thrown out onto the street here in NYC. 

I often wonder what I would do if we had to evacuate suddenly.  I never forgot the images of those poor Bosnians, especially old people and children, who were made to trek miles and miles over the harsh countryside as part of Milosovic's ethnic cleansing policy.   It's not that far-fetched, unfortunately, given the scenario of a possible "dirty bomb" attack here that could spread radiation over many miles.  In fact, ever since 9/11, I have had a purse-size bag sitting in my closet with extra money, a transistor radio, energy bars, water and other portable necessities, ready to pick up and take with me.  Sounds paranoid, I know, but I'm not alone by a longshot.

Although a monster attack or a quick climatic disaster is really unlikely, I do think it's only a matter of time before New York and other coastal cities will have to be abandoned in the face of the rising sea levels brought on by global warming.  I'm just glad I can enjoy living here now.  It's a great city, full of beautiful and exciting things, a wonderful example of how millions of people can coexist together in relative harmony.  The disaster scenarios just make me appreciate it all the more on a daily basis.


I know people (okay, actually only one person, and it's NOT me) that won't consider living near any big cities due to possible bomb attacks... 

Anyhow... having the little bag packed - actually sounds like a good idea, no matter where you live...

and your last point up there is a really good one.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: BelAir on January 21, 2008, 06:38:12 pm
Well, I had to do it!  Just got back from seeing Cloverfield! (I'm not a film snob either, lol!)  It really does play on post 9/11 anxieties, several early scenes of clouds of dust and debris billowing through the streets of lower Manhattan looked eerily familiar.  All in all, it was a pretty effective film, I was pretty much on the edge of my seat throughout.  The camcorder effect, which often didn't show us what was happening, or only partly, worked well at increasing the confusion and fear. There was just enough character development to make us care about happens to them.  The creature was a bit of a disappointment, I think it would have been more effective if we never actually got a good look at it.  Anyway, it was fun!

The trailers shown:  A teaser trailer of Star Trek showing the enterprise under construction.  -Hellboy II, looks pretty bad.  -21 with Kevin Spacey about that ring of card-counting math wiz MIT students in Vegas.  Wasn't there a TV show about that?  There must have been others but I can't remember them.

that always seems to happen, doesn't it?  (I remember being enjoying the ride of Jeepers Creepers until we actually saw the creature...)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 22, 2008, 09:50:17 am
I am home this morning making a casserole so I decided to flip on the announcement of the Academy Award nominees. Of my predictions from months ago, I was mostly wrong, but I did nail one: Tommy Lee Jones for Best Actor in "In the Valley of Elah." Yeah!

Hal Holbrook snuck in for Best Supporting Actor for "Into the Wild." I think he stole Ben Foster's nomination for "3:10 to Yuma." Oh well.

Cate Blanchett had a double nomination! Best Supporting Actress for "I'm Not There" and Best Actress for the Queen Elizabeth movie (I don't remember the name).

Best Picture nominees:

Atonement
Juno
There Will Be Blood
No Country for Old Men
Michael Clayton (I think). I didn't write anything down (I'm making a casserole, remember!).

I'll post a press release with all the nominees as soon as I find one online.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 22, 2008, 10:13:25 am
The casserole is made so without further ado:

List of 80th Annual Oscar Nominees

By The Associated Press – 14 minutes ago

Complete list of 80th annual Academy Award nominations announced Tuesday:

1. Best Picture: "Atonement," "Juno," "Michael Clayton," "No Country for Old Men," "There Will Be Blood."

2. Actor: George Clooney, "Michael Clayton"; Daniel Day-Lewis, "There Will Be Blood"; Johnny Depp, "Sweeney Todd the Demon Barber of Fleet Street"; Tommy Lee Jones, "In the Valley of Elah"; Viggo Mortensen, "Eastern Promises."

3. Actress: Cate Blanchett, "Elizabeth: The Golden Age"; Julie Christie, "Away From Her"; Marion Cotillard, "La Vie en Rose"; Laura Linney, "The Savages"; Ellen Page, "Juno."

4. Supporting Actor: Casey Affleck, "The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford"; Javier Bardem, "No Country for Old Men"; Hal Holbrook, "Into the Wild"; Philip Seymour Hoffman, "Charlie Wilson's War"; Tom Wilkinson, "Michael Clayton."

5. Supporting Actress: Cate Blanchett, "I'm Not There"; Ruby Dee, "American Gangster"; Saoirse Ronan, "Atonement"; Amy Ryan, "Gone Baby Gone"; Tilda Swinton, "Michael Clayton."

6. Director: Julian Schnabel, "The Diving Bell and the Butterfly"; Jason Reitman, "Juno"; Tony Gilroy, "Michael Clayton"; Joel Coen and Ethan Coen, "No Country for Old Men"; Paul Thomas Anderson, "There Will Be Blood."

7. Foreign Film: "Beaufort," Israel; "The Counterfeiters," Austria; "Katyn," Poland; "Mongol," Kazakhstan; "12," Russia.

8. Adapted Screenplay: Christopher Hampton, "Atonement"; Sarah Polley, "Away from Her"; Ronald Harwood, "The Diving Bell and the Butterfly"; Joel Coen & Ethan Coen, "No Country for Old Men"; Paul Thomas Anderson, "There Will Be Blood."

9. Original Screenplay: Diablo Cody, "Juno"; Nancy Oliver, "Lars and the Real Girl"; Tony Gilroy, "Michael Clayton"; Brad Bird, Jan Pinkava and Jim Capobianco, "Ratatouille"; Tamara Jenkins, "The Savages."

10. Animated Feature Film: "Persepolis"; "Ratatouille"; "Surf's Up."

11. Art Direction: "American Gangster," "Atonement," "The Golden Compass," "Sweeney Todd the Demon Barber of Fleet Street," "There Will Be Blood."

12. Cinematography: "The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford," "Atonement," "The Diving Bell and the Butterfly," "No Country for Old Men," "There Will Be Blood."

13. Sound Mixing: "The Bourne Ultimatum," "No Country for Old Men," "Ratatouille," "3:10 to Yuma," "Transformers."

14. Sound Editing: "The Bourne Ultimatum," "No Country for Old Men," "Ratatouille," "There Will Be Blood," "Transformers."

15. Original Score: "Atonement," Dario Marianelli; "The Kite Runner," Alberto Iglesias; "Michael Clayton," James Newton Howard; "Ratatouille," Michael Giacchino; "3:10 to Yuma," Marco Beltrami.

16. Original Song: "Falling Slowly" from "Once," Glen Hansard and Marketa Irglova; "Happy Working Song" from "Enchanted," Alan Menken and Stephen Schwartz; "Raise It Up" from "August Rush," Nominees to be determined; "So Close" from "Enchanted," Alan Menken and Stephen Schwartz; "That's How You Know" from "Enchanted," Alan Menken and Stephen Schwartz.

17. Costume: "Across the Universe," "Atonement," "Elizabeth: The Golden Age," "La Vie en Rose," "Sweeney Todd the Demon Barber of Fleet Street."

18. Documentary Feature: "No End in Sight," "Operation Homecoming: Writing the Wartime Experience," "Sicko," "Taxi to the Dark Side," "War/Dance."

19. Documentary (short subject): "Freeheld," "La Corona (The Crown)," "Salim Baba," "Sari's Mother."

20. Film Editing: "The Bourne Ultimatum," "The Diving Bell and the Butterfly," "Into the Wild," "No Country for Old Men," "There Will Be Blood."

21. Makeup: "La Vie en Rose," "Norbit," "Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End."

22. Animated Short Film: "I Met the Walrus," "Madame Tutli-Putli," "Meme Les Pigeons Vont au Paradis (Even Pigeons Go to Heaven)," "My Love (Moya Lyubov)," "Peter & the Wolf."

23. Live Action Short Film: "At Night," "Il Supplente (The Substitute)," "Le Mozart des Pickpockets (The Mozart of Pickpockets)," "Tanghi Argentini," "The Tonto Woman."

24. Visual Effects: "The Golden Compass," "Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End," "Transformers."

___

Academy Award winners previously announced this year:

HONORARY AWARD (Oscar statuette): Robert Boyle
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on January 22, 2008, 10:42:10 am
The casserole is made so without further ado:

List of 80th Annual Oscar Nominees

By The Associated Press – 14 minutes ago

Complete list of 80th annual Academy Award nominations announced Tuesday:

1. Best Picture: "Atonement," "Juno," "Michael Clayton," "No Country for Old Men," "There Will Be Blood."

2. Actor: George Clooney, "Michael Clayton"; Daniel Day-Lewis, "There Will Be Blood"; Johnny Depp, "Sweeney Todd the Demon Barber of Fleet Street"; Tommy Lee Jones, "In the Valley of Elah"; Viggo Mortensen, "Eastern Promises."

3. Actress: Cate Blanchett, "Elizabeth: The Golden Age"; Julie Christie, "Away From Her"; Marion Cotillard, "La Vie en Rose"; Laura Linney, "The Savages"; Ellen Page, "Juno."

4. Supporting Actor: Casey Affleck, "The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford"; Javier Bardem, "No Country for Old Men"; Hal Holbrook, "Into the Wild"; Philip Seymour Hoffman, "Charlie Wilson's War"; Tom Wilkinson, "Michael Clayton."

5. Supporting Actress: Cate Blanchett, "I'm Not There"; Ruby Dee, "American Gangster"; Saoirse Ronan, "Atonement"; Amy Ryan, "Gone Baby Gone"; Tilda Swinton, "Michael Clayton."

6. Director: Julian Schnabel, "The Diving Bell and the Butterfly"; Jason Reitman, "Juno"; Tony Gilroy, "Michael Clayton"; Joel Coen and Ethan Coen, "No Country for Old Men"; Paul Thomas Anderson, "There Will Be Blood."

7. Foreign Film: "Beaufort," Israel; "The Counterfeiters," Austria; "Katyn," Poland; "Mongol," Kazakhstan; "12," Russia.

8. Adapted Screenplay: Christopher Hampton, "Atonement"; Sarah Polley, "Away from Her"; Ronald Harwood, "The Diving Bell and the Butterfly"; Joel Coen & Ethan Coen, "No Country for Old Men"; Paul Thomas Anderson, "There Will Be Blood."

9. Original Screenplay: Diablo Cody, "Juno"; Nancy Oliver, "Lars and the Real Girl"; Tony Gilroy, "Michael Clayton"; Brad Bird, Jan Pinkava and Jim Capobianco, "Ratatouille"; Tamara Jenkins, "The Savages."

10. Animated Feature Film: "Persepolis"; "Ratatouille"; "Surf's Up."

11. Art Direction: "American Gangster," "Atonement," "The Golden Compass," "Sweeney Todd the Demon Barber of Fleet Street," "There Will Be Blood."

12. Cinematography: "The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford," "Atonement," "The Diving Bell and the Butterfly," "No Country for Old Men," "There Will Be Blood."

13. Sound Mixing: "The Bourne Ultimatum," "No Country for Old Men," "Ratatouille," "3:10 to Yuma," "Transformers."

14. Sound Editing: "The Bourne Ultimatum," "No Country for Old Men," "Ratatouille," "There Will Be Blood," "Transformers."

15. Original Score: "Atonement," Dario Marianelli; "The Kite Runner," Alberto Iglesias; "Michael Clayton," James Newton Howard; "Ratatouille," Michael Giacchino; "3:10 to Yuma," Marco Beltrami.

16. Original Song: "Falling Slowly" from "Once," Glen Hansard and Marketa Irglova; "Happy Working Song" from "Enchanted," Alan Menken and Stephen Schwartz; "Raise It Up" from "August Rush," Nominees to be determined; "So Close" from "Enchanted," Alan Menken and Stephen Schwartz; "That's How You Know" from "Enchanted," Alan Menken and Stephen Schwartz.

17. Costume: "Across the Universe," "Atonement," "Elizabeth: The Golden Age," "La Vie en Rose," "Sweeney Todd the Demon Barber of Fleet Street."

18. Documentary Feature: "No End in Sight," "Operation Homecoming: Writing the Wartime Experience," "Sicko," "Taxi to the Dark Side," "War/Dance."

19. Documentary (short subject): "Freeheld," "La Corona (The Crown)," "Salim Baba," "Sari's Mother."

20. Film Editing: "The Bourne Ultimatum," "The Diving Bell and the Butterfly," "Into the Wild," "No Country for Old Men," "There Will Be Blood."

21. Makeup: "La Vie en Rose," "Norbit," "Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End."

22. Animated Short Film: "I Met the Walrus," "Madame Tutli-Putli," "Meme Les Pigeons Vont au Paradis (Even Pigeons Go to Heaven)," "My Love (Moya Lyubov)," "Peter & the Wolf."

23. Live Action Short Film: "At Night," "Il Supplente (The Substitute)," "Le Mozart des Pickpockets (The Mozart of Pickpockets)," "Tanghi Argentini," "The Tonto Woman."

24. Visual Effects: "The Golden Compass," "Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End," "Transformers."

___

Academy Award winners previously announced this year:

HONORARY AWARD (Oscar statuette): Robert Boyle


Oooh, I hope Norbit wins for Makeup!  :laugh:

Other than that, not too many surprises really...
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 22, 2008, 10:52:29 am
Oooh, I hope Norbit wins for Makeup!  :laugh:

Other than that, not too many surprises really...

Norbit gets nominated for Makeup. It also got nominated for a gang of Razzies. Is that a first? Razzie noms and Academy Award in the same year?

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on January 22, 2008, 10:58:43 am
Norbit gets nominated for Makeup. It also got nominated for a gang of Razzies. Is that a first? Razzie noms and Academy Award in the same year?

L

Somehow, I doubt that it's a first, but I can't remember any examples off-hand.

Hopefully Michael Clayton will be re-released, it's the only one I haven't seen.  I just noticed that American Gangster was shut-out, haven't seen that one either.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 22, 2008, 11:12:06 am
Somehow, I doubt that it's a first, but I can't remember any examples off-hand.

Hopefully Michael Clayton will be re-released, it's the only one I haven't seen.  I just noticed that American Gangster was shut-out, haven't seen that one either.

Michael Clayton is being re-released, I think in the next week or two.

My son saw it and wasn't terribly impressed. I'll be interested in what you think of it. Frankly, the whole George Clooney mystique is lost on me, which is why I wasn't terribly interested in seeing the movie.

So far, of the best picture noms, I have seen one: Atonement. I do want to see Juno, which is still playing, and maybe There Will Be Blood. I'm not too interested in the other two.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on January 22, 2008, 11:52:10 am
I liked Michael Clayton a lot. It was very well written and directed: both as a suspenseful thriller as well as an effective, subtle character drama. And it's well acted, not only by George Clooney but also by Tom Wilkinson and Tilda Swinton. I'm not as huge a fan of Clooney-as-matinee-idol as some people but I think he can be a very good actor.

I don't think it will win the Best Picture, one because it's just not a BP type of movie and two because it's so far overshadowed by Juno and There Will Be Blood (which seem like the front-runners to me). Nor do I think Clooney will win BA or Swinton BSA (my predictions: Daniel Day-Lewis and Cate Blanchett). But they were both good.

UPDATE: Oops! I belatedly realized that Tom Wilkinson had been nominated for BSA, too. Again, I don't think he'll get it (Phillip Seymour Hoffman is my prediction), but he was very good.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: belbbmfan on January 22, 2008, 12:12:21 pm
I liked Michael Clayton a lot. It was very well written and directed: both as a suspenseful thriller as well as an effective, subtle character drama. And it's well acted, not only by George Clooney but also by Tom Wilkinson and Tilda Swinton. I'm not as huge a fan of Clooney-as-matinee-idol as some people but I think he can be a very good actor.

I don't think it will win the Best Picture, one because it's just not a BP type of movie and two because it's so far overshadowed by Juno and There Will Be Blood (which seem like the front-runners to me). Nor do I think Clooney will win BA or Swinton BSA (my predictions: Daniel Day-Lewis and Cate Blanchett). But they were both good.


I agree! I really liked Michael Clayton. And George Clooney was very good. No pretty face mr. charming, but a man caught up in an empty world and trying to find his way out. I also liked him in Syriana.

Go see it Leslie, you won't be disappointed.


And I have a question. We're going to see Atonement tonight. And I was reading Robert Egbert's review. It started with 'Atonement" begins on joyous gossamer wings, and descends into an abyss of tragedy and loss.'

What does 'gossamer' mean? I couldn't find an adequate description in my dictionary. Fluffy? Featherlike? hmmm

I've never heard it before.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on January 22, 2008, 12:20:36 pm
What a lovely word, gossamer! To me, it is like a fabric, like chiffon, that is so feather-light and translucent that it may well be imaginary.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 22, 2008, 12:22:24 pm
I agree! I really liked Michael Clayton. And George Clooney was very good. No pretty face mr. charming, but a man caught up in an empty world and trying to find his way out. I also liked him in Syriana.

Go see it Leslie, you won't be disappointed.


And I have a question. We're going to see Atonement tonight. And I was reading Robert Egbert's review. It started with 'Atonement" begins on joyous gossamer wings, and descends into an abyss of tragedy and loss.'

What does 'gossamer' mean? I couldn't find an adequate description in my dictionary. Fluffy? Featherlike? hmmm

I've never heard it before.

Probably the best description would be "soft, sheer and gauzy." If you think of wings that fairies might have (in a children's story, for example) -- that sort of gauzy, see through look with sparkles -- that describes gossamer to me.

I can't wait to hear what you think of Atonement. It has been in my mind pretty much constantly since I saw it on Saturday. There is a spoiler thread on this board (don't look at it now!) that you might want to chime in on after you have seen it.

I don't think I read Roger's review. A.O. Scott in the New York Times totally missed the boat on this movie, though, if you want my opinion.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Lumière on January 22, 2008, 01:09:14 pm

Atonement is also on my next-to-see list.   :)



Back in the world of period movies, last night I watched the last of two episodes of Rebecca, the 1997 BBC adaptation of Daphne du Maurier's book.  I have not seen the Alfred Hitchcock 1940 production of the same film, but this 'newer' version was enjoyable to watch, particularly the last episode.  I loved Diana Rigg in her role as Mrs Danvers, the domineering (& somewhat insane) housekeeper..


(http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i285/Lucise/Misc/6cce82c1.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kd5000 on January 22, 2008, 01:10:59 pm
They say no picture has won the Academy Award for best picture without being nominated for Film Editing.  The last one that did was ORDINARY PEOPLE.  BBM was not nominated in this category. 

Here's the list for this year.
Film Editing

"The Bourne Ultimatum"
"The Diving Bell and the Butterfly"
"Into the Wild"
"No Country for Old Men"
"There Will Be Blood"


I think those two are frontrunners right now. However, given how studios use "Crash tactics," who knows?
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 22, 2008, 01:29:30 pm
Atonement is also on my next-to-see list.   :)

Excellent! Report back....

Quote

Back in the world of period movies, last night I watched the last of two episodes of Rebecca, the 1997 BBC adaptation of Daphne du Maurier's book.  I have not seen the Alfred Hitchcock 1940 production of the same film, but this 'newer' version was enjoyable to watch, particularly the last episode.  I loved Diana Rigg in her role as Mrs Danvers, the domineering (& somewhat insane) housekeeper..


You need to see the 1940 version, it's fabulous. Put it on your netflix queue!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 22, 2008, 01:30:51 pm
They say no picture has won the Academy Award for best picture without being nominated for Film Editing.  The last one that did was ORDINARY PEOPLE.  BBM was not nominated in this category. 

Here's the list for this year.
Film Editing

"The Bourne Ultimatum"
"The Diving Bell and the Butterfly"
"Into the Wild"
"No Country for Old Men"
"There Will Be Blood"


I think those two are frontrunners right now. However, given how studios use "Crash tactics," who knows?

That's interesting and I would have put those two down as the frontrunners. Probably the winner will be the one with the bigger marketing campaign. Was either one distributed by Lionsgate (wasn't that the distributor for Crash?).

Edited to add: Yes, my memory is still intact. Lionsgate was one of the Crash distributors.

NCFOM and TWBB were both distributed by Miramax so it will be interesting to see how that shakes out.

Atonement was distributed by Focus Features--shades of BBM!



L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: belbbmfan on January 22, 2008, 01:41:10 pm

Probably the best description would be "soft, sheer and gauzy." If you think of wings that fairies might have (in a children's story, for example) -- that sort of gauzy, see through look with sparkles -- that describes gossamer to me.

I can't wait to hear what you think of Atonement. It has been in my mind pretty much constantly since I saw it on Saturday. There is a spoiler thread on this board (don't look at it now!) that you might want to chime in on after you have seen it.

I don't think I read Roger's review. A.O. Scott in the New York Times totally missed the boat on this movie, though, if you want my opinion.

L

Thanks for that Leslie!


And a Belgian entry has been nominated in the category Best Short Film, Live Action. It's Tango Argentini.

I'll be honest, I haven't heard much of this. These short films are only shown at special film festivals, not in the regular cinemas. I found this on IMDB. 'An office clerk with a hankering to tango enlists the support of a workplace colleague as he prepares for a date. It's Christmas time and the concept of giving assumes fairy tale proportions in this beguiling modern story.'

It sounds interesting. I'd like to see it.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on January 22, 2008, 01:50:39 pm
Go, Juno!  I just saw it again yesterday, and loved it just as much.  The theatre was packed!  I was able to pay attention to the little details, and the nuances of the performances this time. 
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Lumière on January 22, 2008, 02:03:51 pm
Excellent! Report back....

You need to see the 1940 version, it's fabulous. Put it on your netflix queue!

I don't think we've got NetFlix up here but I'll definitely check it out.  :)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on January 22, 2008, 02:05:14 pm
To me, the consensus narrative on NCFOM and TWBB goes like this: NCFOM was good, but TWBB is kind of like it and better. So TWBB wins out between those two (I've only seen the first, but if I were an Academy member, I wouldn't vote for it -- though artistically accomplished, it kind of left me cold).

Juno is completely different, so can compete without comparison. This could capture the prize if the Academy is in a "Little Miss Sunshine" mood.

It would be quirky-and-feel-good vs. epic masterpiece.


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on January 22, 2008, 03:21:21 pm
I don't think we've got NetFlix up here but I'll definitely check it out.  :)

No Netflix up here but we do have Zip.ca which is great. (Except that it put my local Specialty DVD rental place, The Revue, out of business)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kd5000 on January 24, 2008, 12:33:08 pm
Shaky movie (the camera) is making ppl sick according to CNN.com.  CLOVERFIELD is causing ppl to leave the theater with motion sickness.  I heard ppl utter such comments when they left the theater.  They hated the wobbling camera affect.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/HEALTH/01/24/movie.sickness/index.html?iref=mpstoryview

I had the same feeling when I watched the Woody Allen film HUSBANDS AND WIVES.  I think there was some symbolism that their relationship were "rocky" and hence the camera was all over the place. Couldn't wait for the film to be over with.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on January 24, 2008, 05:00:30 pm
Shaky movie (the camera) is making ppl sick according to CNN.com.  CLOVERFIELD is causing ppl to leave the theater with motion sickness.  I heard ppl utter such comments when they left the theater.  They hated the wobbling camera affect.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/HEALTH/01/24/movie.sickness/index.html?iref=mpstoryview

I had the same feeling when I watched the Woody Allen film HUSBANDS AND WIVES.  I think there was some symbolism that their relationship were "rocky" and hence the camera was all over the place. Couldn't wait for the film to be over with.

The shaky camera, and it really is shaky, didn't bother me at all, so I guess I'm not susceptible to vertigo.  My sister, however, is the opposite, she has to sit in the very last (top) row of the theatre for ANY movie, otherwise she starts feeling sick. Meanwhile, I like to sit way in the front so that the screen takes over my whole field of vision, we're not exactly the best movie partners...
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 24, 2008, 05:08:29 pm
The only movie that ever made me sick was Koyaanisqatsi, which came out in 1982. I think it was the combination of the way it was filmed and the music. I have never had motion sickness before in my life, but I was sick at the end of this!

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kd5000 on January 25, 2008, 05:57:53 pm
I got halfway thru a Heath Ledger film last night called "A Knight's Tale."  Has anybody ever seen this film. I usually love these medieval stories, but I don't know what sort of audience this film was was shooting for.  They had contemporary rock music from QUEEN I believe during the jousting segments.   I preferred the use of Wagner's scores in EXCALIBUR (1981). Now that was rousing...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pylGJO6I30M&feature=related   Wait till it gets to thirty seconds. That's when it gets kickin...


Of course, I did enjoy seeing Heath in "A Knight's Tale."  He's good at everything I've seen him in. He had the "gift."  I'll have to finish watching the movie. 
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 25, 2008, 06:07:30 pm
Actually, I saw "A Knight's Tale" in the theater and enjoyed it very much. The modern music was the whole spin of that movie--that, and the fact that Shannon Sossamyn's costumes were a blend of old fashioned and modern. We own the DVD.

But I know there are plenty of folks who hate the movie, precisely because of the music.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: BelAir on January 25, 2008, 09:12:35 pm
Actually, I saw "A Knight's Tale" in the theater and enjoyed it very much. The modern music was the whole spin of that movie--that, and the fact that Shannon Sossamyn's costumes were a blend of old fashioned and modern. We own the DVD.

But I know there are plenty of folks who hate the movie, precisely because of the music.

L

I have the movie on right now, and am quite enjoying it.  Wasn't Heath a little shocked at the movie's final presentation/promotion?

Still there are some wonderful, wonderful moments in the film...

I think Heath has a particularly angelic appearance as well.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on January 25, 2008, 11:41:53 pm
I watched Sarah Polley's Away From Her.  It's her first feature as a director and it's like she's been doing it for years.  It's a surprisingly mature film,  beautiful and quietly heart wrenching.  Although it's mainly known as the Julie Christie movie outside this country, it's veteran Canadian actor Gordon Pinsent who has the more difficult role as the husband losing his beloved to Alzheimer's.  A wonderful performance.

I also watched Claire Denis' Beau Travail.  I love this movie more each time I see it.  The final scene with Galoup dancing (to This is the Rythm of the Night) is so strangely cathartic and joyful, it gives me shivers.

And of course, it's on Youtube (!):

[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8e5g_wXJf1I[/youtube]
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kd5000 on January 26, 2008, 12:39:07 pm
Getting back to EXCALIBUR, I see the director, John Boorman's latest project is Memoirs of Hadrian scheduled for release in 2009.  The Roman emperor Hadrian had a  male lover who drowned and it drove him into a terrible stage of grief.

From wikipedia.org

"Hadrian was especially famous for his romance with a Greek youth, Antinous. While touring Egypt, Antinous mysteriously drowned in the Nile in 130. Deeply saddened, Hadrian founded the Egyptian city of Antinopolis. Hadrian drew the whole Empire into his mourning, making Antinous the last new god of antiquity."

Somebody on the msg board posted that Zac Efron should play Antinous. Yeah, that's gonnna happen. High School Musical star plays male lover to a Roman emperor.   ;)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on January 26, 2008, 12:50:04 pm
Getting back to EXCALIBUR, I see the director, John Boorman's latest project is Memoirs of Hadrian scheduled for release in 2009.  The Roman emperor Hadrian had a  male lover who drowned and it drove him into a terrible stage of grief.

From wikipedia.org

"Hadrian was especially famous for his romance with a Greek youth, Antinous. While touring Egypt, Antinous mysteriously drowned in the Nile in 130. Deeply saddened, Hadrian founded the Egyptian city of Antinopolis. Hadrian drew the whole Empire into his mourning, making Antinous the last new god of antiquity."

Somebody on the msg board posted that Zac Efron should play Antinous. Yeah, that's gonnna happen. High School Musical star plays male lover to a Roman emperor.   ;)


Memoirs of Hadrian!: The Movie Musical!   ;D  Hadrian could be played by Nathan Lane... :-X
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on January 26, 2008, 05:22:21 pm
Apparently, Johnny Depp along with two other major actors will be 'replacing' Heath in The Imaginarium of Dr. Parnassus.  The idea is to change the actor once he goes through the magic mirror so they'll be able to keep many of the already filmed scenes with Heath.

I think that's good news if it's true.   My source is not exactly official, it's a poster on IMDb who knows a Vancouver costume designer, Jane Still, who is friends with Monique Prud'homme, the film's costume designer...  It certainly sounds plausible though, considering how fantastical the film sounds and all the love and respect that both Heath and Gilliam have from other actors.

It would be nice to have another Heath moment to look forward to.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Shakesthecoffecan on January 26, 2008, 05:26:06 pm
So last night I saw a really good film on Logo, from 2004, called Outing Riley.

I would recomend it.

[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hTZwGePZRe8[/youtube]
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 26, 2008, 05:45:14 pm
Apparently, Johnny Depp along with two other major actors will be 'replacing' Heath in The Imaginarium of Dr. Parnassus.  The idea is to change the actor once he goes through the magic mirror so they'll be able to keep many of the already filmed scenes with Heath.

I think that's good news if it's true.   My source is not exactly official, it's a poster on IMDb who knows a Vancouver costume designer, Jane Still, who is friends with Monique Prud'homme, the film's costume designer...  It certainly sounds plausible though, considering how fantastical the film sounds and all the love and respect that both Heath and Gilliam have from other actors.

It would be nice to have another Heath moment to look forward to.

The news reports on this seem to be going back and forth on this. The Australian press says Johnny Depp is in and the movie is going ahead, while UK sources say it is stopped, no mention of Depp.

I actually think it would be terrific if Johnny could do it. I heard the same explanation about the mirror, oilgun, so I think it could be feasible. They finished all the on location and outdoor scenes in London. They were scheduled to go to Vancouver to work on a sound stage, do "blue screen" filming, and special effects. Two months of filming were left in the schedule.

I agree, it would be nice to have another Heath moment to  look forward to and not have his last movie be as the Joker.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on January 26, 2008, 05:54:25 pm
I agree, it would be nice to have another Heath moment to  look forward to and not have his last movie be as the Joker.

I was just thinking that. Having his last movie be as the Joker will definitely be a mixed blessing at best. Nice to see Heath one more time and to hear yet another outpouring of what I'm sure will be respect and admiration. But sad, especially given all we've heard about how playing the Joker stressed him out so much it might have contributed to his need for sleeping pills.

 :'(

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on January 26, 2008, 11:15:52 pm
It would be nice to have another Heath moment to look forward to.

Amen, brother.  8)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: BelAir on January 26, 2008, 11:59:25 pm
I agree...

 :)

It would be nice for the film to be completed...  if it's not, there certainly will be all sorts of hoopla about getting a hold of the filmed scenes, etc. 

I read one report, and only one report, that said Heath had an argument with some folks related to the film... anyone else see that substantiated anywhere?  (Sorry if I should move the question to a different thread.)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: belbbmfan on January 27, 2008, 08:29:50 am
I was just thinking that. Having his last movie be as the Joker will definitely be a mixed blessing at best. Nice to see Heath one more time and to hear yet another outpouring of what I'm sure will be respect and admiration. But sad, especially given all we've heard about how playing the Joker stressed him out so much it might have contributed to his need for sleeping pills.

 :'(



My thoughts too. I never planned to go see this movie (it's really not my type of thing), but now, i definitely don't want to.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 27, 2008, 10:00:04 am
I agree...

 :)

It would be nice for the film to be completed...  if it's not, there certainly will be all sorts of hoopla about getting a hold of the filmed scenes, etc. 

I read one report, and only one report, that said Heath had an argument with some folks related to the film... anyone else see that substantiated anywhere?  (Sorry if I should move the question to a different thread.)


I posted that article. I haven't seen anything else that has mentioned the argument. Supposedly he was upset because he didn't like the way a scene turned out and they wouldn't let him re-do it.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kd5000 on January 27, 2008, 01:32:43 pm
The mirror thing is already getting mixed up with THE DARK KNIGHT.  I butted into a conversation last night when I heard others saying that Heath was going to go thru the mirror and Johnny Depp would come out as the joker.  I told them that the film had already wrapped, so I don't understand why they'd need to replace him.   OILGUN's post about The Imaginarium of Dr. Parnassus sounds like he got the right story.   

Doesn't the JOKER die and is usually resurrected for latter films. I presume Heath's joker might meet a similar fate.  Hate to see that as Heath's last moment in film.   

Last night, the director of CANDY was talking about how Heath submerged into him into the world of a junkie. More speculation about "not being able to let go of that character."  They said that about River Phoenix and MY OWN PRIVATE IDAHO.  I think this is all very premature as there is no evidence of Heath doing narcotics. But the media loves to speculate and of course assuming the worse does sell.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: opinionista on January 27, 2008, 05:43:01 pm
I'm not sure if this has already been discussed. I went to see Love in Time of Cholera and I was so disappointed. I think Javier Bardem is superb as Florentino Ariza but the movie in general lacks of the passion Gabriel García Márquez put in the novel. It seems like the director and the screenwriter are not familiar with the Caribbean culture and understanding of life and love. I didn't see the point in having an hispanic cast if the movie is in English. Some of the actors don't speak it well. Also John Leguizamo is a complete miscast.

If you don't know what this story is about I strongly recommend reading the novel and not spending your money on this movie. Really.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kelda on January 27, 2008, 05:45:06 pm
The news reports on this seem to be going back and forth on this. The Australian press says Johnny Depp is in and the movie is going ahead, while UK sources say it is stopped, no mention of Depp.

I actually think it would be terrific if Johnny could do it. I heard the same explanation about the mirror, oilgun, so I think it could be feasible. They finished all the on location and outdoor scenes in London. They were scheduled to go to Vancouver to work on a sound stage, do "blue screen" filming, and special effects. Two months of filming were left in the schedule.

I agree, it would be nice to have another Heath moment to  look forward to and not have his last movie be as the Joker.

L

The UK tabloid press (specifically the sun) as the forst place I saw it mentioned about Johnny Depp, but nothing anywhere else in the UK since, who knows...
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: BelAir on January 27, 2008, 05:57:42 pm
I'm not sure if this has already been discussed. I went to see Love in Time of Cholera and I was so disappointed. I think Javier Bardem is superb as Florentino Ariza but the movie in general lacks of the passion Gabriel García Márquez put in the novel. It seems like the director and the screenwriter are not familiar with the Caribbean culture and understanding of life and love. I didn't see the point in having an hispanic cast if the movie is in English. Some of the actors don't speak it well. Also John Leguizamo is a complete miscast.

If you don't know what this story is about I strongly recommend reading the novel and not spending your money on this movie. Really.

oh, I'll be sure to avoid it (the movie) then...  (but I'll keep the novel on my list)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on January 27, 2008, 11:09:15 pm
I finally watched the Irish film Once.  I now understand why it rates 97% Fresh on RottenTomatoes, it's absolutely wonderful!  Brilliant really.

Here's the RT Synopsis:
The Irish romance ONCE may be a musical, but it is miles away from the traditional Hollywood idea of people bursting into song. Glen Hansard (frontman for indie rock band The Frames) plays the guy, a street musician who is playing for change when he meets the girl (Marketa Irglova), an immigrant from the Czech Republic. The pair immediately bond over their shared love of music (he is a guitarist, and she plays the piano), and the film chronicles their tentative relationship. Both are weighed down by plenty of baggage: his songs are fueled by a painful breakup, and she is a young mother who left her husband behind in her native country. Like the independent favorite BEFORE SUNRISE, ONCE is a simple, sweet drama that doesn’t rely on an elaborate plot. With its use of digital video and handheld cameras, ONCE matches its spare visual style to its intimate mood. Each moment feels stolen from real life, and the story is at once familiar and fresh. Driven more by music than by dialogue, ONCE features a stirring soundtrack of heartfelt indie rock sung by Hansard and Irglova. Before his foray into film, director John Carney (ON THE EDGE) played bass in The Frames, and his passion for music is clear in this modern musical that hits every note perfectly.

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/Once-01.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: BelAir on January 28, 2008, 01:15:57 am
Oilgun,

Fantastic new signature!

It is now on my to-do list to see every single one of Daniel Day Lewis' films... and to not ever think another less than good thought about him ever again.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Lumière on January 28, 2008, 10:33:06 pm
Oilgun,

Fantastic new signature!

It is now on my to-do list to see every single one of Daniel Day Lewis' films... and to not ever think another less than good thought about him ever again.

B,

Definitely check out "My Beautiful Laundrette".  Great film.  :)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on January 28, 2008, 11:53:19 pm
Oilgun,

Fantastic new signature!

It is now on my to-do list to see every single one of Daniel Day Lewis' films... and to not ever think another less than good thought about him ever again.

Thanks!

Here are some clips of DDL in My Beautiful Laundrette (8:01min.):

[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LKup9VLuM5U[/youtube]
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 29, 2008, 09:33:42 am
I finally watched the Irish film Once.  I now understand why it rates 97% Fresh on RottenTomatoes, it's absolutely wonderful!  Brilliant really.


I watched it a few weeks ago and I loved it too. That may be a good one to watch again and try to cheer myself up. I loved the music.

One of the songs was nominated for an Academy award. I so, so, so hope it wins!

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on January 29, 2008, 09:43:37 am
I watched it a few weeks ago and I loved it too. That may be a good one to watch again and try to cheer myself up. I loved the music.

One of the songs was nominated for an Academy award. I so, so, so hope it wins!

L

The film really was a good tonic.  As for its nominated song, Falling Slowly, I hope it wins too but of course they'll probably give it to Happy Working Song from Enchanted  ::)  :laugh:
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 29, 2008, 10:58:48 am
The film really was a good tonic.  As for its nominated song, Falling Slowly, I hope it wins too but of course they'll probably give it to Happy Working Song from Enchanted  ::)  :laugh:

Three of the five songs are from Enchanted. Maybe they'll cancel themselves out.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 29, 2008, 11:04:42 am
For fun, you can go to www.pressherald.com and vote for the top categories of the Oscar awards. I think it would be fun if they started getting votes from all over the world!

The link for the survey is right on the first page. Let me know if you entered!

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on January 29, 2008, 12:24:27 pm
For fun, you can go to www.pressherald.com and vote for the top categories of the Oscar awards. I think it would be fun if they started getting votes from all over the word!

The link for the survey is right on the first page. Let me know if you entered!

L

Done!  I won't win though, I'm always wrong at those things.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on January 29, 2008, 10:39:14 pm
I took the survey, too.  If I win, you've got the movie tickets, Leslie.  ;D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 29, 2008, 10:58:15 pm
I took the survey, too.  If I win, you've got the movie tickets, Leslie.  ;D

Ah, thank you Meryl. Maybe we can plan a weekend? I'll show you Portland, buy you a lobster...

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on January 29, 2008, 11:43:02 pm
Ah, thank you Meryl. Maybe we can plan a weekend? I'll show you Portland, buy you a lobster...

L

The lobster sealed the deal.... ;D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on January 30, 2008, 12:49:33 am
Hey, Leslie, I took the survey also. 

If I win, we're going together, and we'll have a pamplemousse. :)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 30, 2008, 09:29:45 am
Hey, Leslie, I took the survey also. 

If I win, we're going together, and we'll have a pamplemousse. :)

Ah, excellent!

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: BelAir on February 03, 2008, 11:02:48 am
So, yesterday, I watched my first full length movie since Heath died.

I had been nervous for whatever reason, but everything went fine.  I watched Annapolis - a random movie I've had stored on my DVR for a while.  I thought it was a fine, easy, movie.  Not as horrible as all the reviews said...  I liked that no one died, that the liar got in trouble, that there wasn't any sex...

I also saw a little bit of "Where the Heart is," a movie I've always liked.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kelda on February 03, 2008, 12:50:49 pm
I don't pop in here often but had to say that I saw Juno yesterday and really really enjoyed it. I though the characters were quirly and witty and the storyline was great...

wow! Dream big!

I also like the Superbad guy - me thinks him and Ellen are the up and coming hot actors over the next few years.

(and on a side note - I really love the name Juno!)

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on February 03, 2008, 01:56:34 pm
I saw "There Will Be Blood" yesterday, and I won't say that my recent gratitude to Daniel Day-Lewis didn't play a part in the choice of what to go see.  ;)

I thought it was a very strong film, an unblinking look at oil speculators during the beginnings of that business: gritty, unsentimental and fascinating.  Unlike many films today that try to capture a period, this one did succeed in making me feel I was in the early 1900's.  Daniel Day-Lewis gave his usual superb performance--there wasn't a nano-second when you felt he wasn't totally in character as this driven, misanthropic businessman whose heart's love was given out only with great reluctance to the boy he adopted and the man who claimed to be his half brother.  His hatred for the young preacher who tries to get the best of him is made monumentally clear in the masterful final scene.  Wow, what a catharsis.  :P

I think something light like "Juno" is definitely next up on my list.  ;D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on February 03, 2008, 05:20:44 pm
I saw "There Will Be Blood" yesterday, and I won't say that my recent gratitude to Daniel Day-Lewis didn't play a part in the choice of what to go see.  ;)

I thought it was a very strong film, an unblinking look at oil speculators during the beginnings of that business: gritty, unsentimental and fascinating.  Unlike many films today that try to capture a period, this one did succeed in making me feel I was in the early 1900's.  Daniel Day-Lewis gave his usual superb performance--there wasn't a nano-second when you felt he wasn't totally in character as this driven, misanthropic businessman whose heart's love was given out only with great reluctance to the boy he adopted and the man who claimed to be his half brother.  His hatred for the young preacher who tries to get the best of him is made monumentally clear in the masterful final scene.  Wow, what a catharsis.  :P

I think something light like "Juno" is definitely next up on my list.  ;D

You took the words right out of my mouth, Meryl, and said it more eloquently than I could.

I just saw "There Will Be Blood" this afternoon. My reaction walking out of the theater was, "I need to think about this movie." And I do.

I certainly think Daniel Day-Lewis should get the Oscar for his performance.

The only other nominated film I have seen (so far) is "Atonement." I liked "Atonement" better, but I think this might be a better movie (if that makes sense).

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on February 03, 2008, 08:26:59 pm
The only other nominated film I have seen (so far) is "Atonement." I liked "Atonement" better, but I think this might be a better movie (if that makes sense).

Yes, it makes perfect sense. I didn't feel the same way about Atonement, but I know what you mean in principle. Some movies are more enjoyable even if they aren't as "good." For example, I liked Michael Clayton better than No Country for Old Men. But NCFOM is probably better in terms of art.

TWBB is the only nominated film I haven't seen. I was going to see it last night, then I was going to see it today ... now it looks like it will be next weekend.





Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on February 03, 2008, 08:36:38 pm
Yes, it makes perfect sense. I didn't feel the same way about Atonement, but I know what you mean in principle. Some movies are more enjoyable even if they aren't as "good." For example, I liked Michael Clayton better than No Country for Old Men. But NCFOM is probably better in terms of art.

TWBB is the only nominated film I haven't seen. I was going to see it last night, then I was going to see it today ... now it looks like it will be next weekend.


I hope you see it and report back. It is definitely a movie that has me thinking and I would like to know what others are thinking...

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kd5000 on February 03, 2008, 10:02:15 pm
I saw TWBB yesterday and it left me cold.  Maybe I'm due to see a film where a person is acting in a noble manner.  So many films I've seen of late don't exactly paint an optimistic portrait of  human nature or the future of the human race. 

Don't get me wrong, I liked TWBB very much, but I was expecting DDLewis to start off by being somewhat of a visionary who is eventually torn apart by his lust for oil and wealth. I guess that sounds too Hollywood and that's been done before.  I can't think of much to say about this film without the revelation of potential spoilers.  I probably need to see it again to get some questions answered. 

Interesting article in THE ECONOMIST on why Americans despise the oil industry as illustrated by the likes of TWBB. Oh, those evil oilmen.  >:(

http://www.economist.com/world/na/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10533992

 
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: BelAir on February 04, 2008, 12:16:39 am
I am curious whether there is any violence to speak of, or 'there will be blood' only metaphorical?

I watched Hedwig and the Angry Inch this afternoon and love, love, loved it!  Who knew I had such an inner East Berlin-punk rockin-transgendered soul?  One of my favorite [heart-breaking] lines - "It's what I have to work with..."
Too bad the movie has to go back tomorrow, or I'd have the soundtrack on autoplay for days...

On another topic, have y'all seen previews for Wall E?  (There was one during the super bowl tonight, and also, I think one at Nat'l Treasure 2.)  I think it looks real cute.

 :)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on February 04, 2008, 02:11:37 am
Wal-E does look cute. I saw a commercial, too.

I rewatched Blood Diamond and 3:10 to Yuma (second time for both) this weekend with my sons. They liked both, though preferred the latter. I'm still bummed that 3:10 didn't get nominated for anything. I think Christian Bale and Russell Crowe were very viable as best actor/best-supporting actor.

And while I wouldn't nominate Leonardo DiCaprio on the basis of Blood Diamond, I thought he was very good in it.


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: opinionista on February 04, 2008, 06:06:39 am
And while I wouldn't nominate Leonardo DiCaprio on the basis of Blood Diamond, I thought he was very good in it.

I also thought his performance was good but not enough for a best actor nomination. I think he was nominated because he spoke English with an African accent during the entire movie.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on February 04, 2008, 07:41:14 am
I am curious whether there is any violence to speak of, or 'there will be blood' only metaphorical?

There is some violence but it is not wall-to-wall blood like you see in "Munich" or "The Departed." I don't like really violent movies and this one didn't bother me.

Quote
On another topic, have y'all seen previews for Wall E?  (There was one during the super bowl tonight, and also, I think one at Nat'l Treasure 2.)  I think it looks real cute.

 :)

Yes, I have seen the previews for that. It does look cute.

Previews at the movies yesterday: The Duchess, with Keira Knightley; Young at Heart (a documentary about old folks who sing rock and rolls songs, it looks like fun) and Defiance, with Daniel Craig and Liev Schrieber.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on February 04, 2008, 07:42:34 am
Wal-E does look cute. I saw a commercial, too.

I rewatched Blood Diamond and 3:10 to Yuma (second time for both) this weekend with my sons. They liked both, though preferred the latter. I'm still bummed that 3:10 didn't get nominated for anything. I think Christian Bale and Russell Crowe were very viable as best actor/best-supporting actor.


I still think Ben Foster should have gotten Best Supporting Actor. It was a good movie and I am disappointed that it didn't get nominated for anything.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: opinionista on February 04, 2008, 08:12:44 am
I know this has been discussed already but us in Europe get to see movies later  >:(

Anyway, I went to see Juno and I totally loved it!!!! I'm not sure if it'll actually win anything but I am glad it is among the best picture nom movies. I thought it was very well done and well acted. I think this year No Country for Old Men will take all awards. Can't wait to see it. It opens this weekend.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on February 04, 2008, 09:36:07 am
I know this has been discussed already but us in Europe get to see movies later  >:(

Anyway, I went to see Juno and I totally loved it!!!! I'm not sure if it'll actually win anything but I am glad it is among the best picture nom movies. I thought it was very well done and well acted. I think this year No Country for Old Men will take all awards. Can't wait to see it. It opens this weekend.

I still haven't gotten to Juno but it is on my list.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on February 04, 2008, 11:24:47 am
I still think Ben Foster should have gotten Best Supporting Actor. It was a good movie and I am disappointed that it didn't get nominated for anything.

Me too. I think it's victim of that Oscar amnesia, where if a movie is released too early it gets overshadowed by the big holiday films. That's the only explanation that makes sense to me, because it is one of my two or three favorite movies from last year.

I'm not sure if it'll actually win anything but I am glad it is among the best picture nom movies. I thought it was very well done and well acted. I think this year No Country for Old Men will take all awards. Can't wait to see it. It opens this weekend.

I actually think the competition will be between Juno and There Will Be Blood. I think people who might be inclined to vote for NCFOM will vote for TWBB instead, because they're very vaguely similar, and while I haven't seen Blood I'm judging by reviews that it's more acclaimed. Juno is something completely different, and will compete on its own terms. So it comes down to whether the voters will be in more of a Little Miss Sunshine mood, in which case Juno will win, or a Departed mood, in which case Blood will win.

When it gets closer to the ceremony, we'll have to place our bets!  :)

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on February 04, 2008, 11:45:48 am
Me too. I think it's victim of that Oscar amnesia, where if a movie is released too early it gets overshadowed by the big holiday films. That's the only explanation that makes sense to me, because it is one of my two or three favorite movies from last year.
Oscar Amnesia and lack of Studio support.  Remember that Crash came out very early in the year, everyone had forgotten it (probably a day after seeing it, lol!) but the Studio really pushed it come Oscar time (and every liberal homophobe jumped on it.)   I'm sure 3:10 would have gotten more noms if it had been promoted more.

Quote
I actually think the competition will be between Juno and There Will Be Blood. I think people who might be inclined to vote for NCFOM will vote for TWBB instead, because they're very vaguely similar, and while I haven't seen Blood I'm judging by reviews that it's more acclaimed. Juno is something completely different, and will compete on its own terms. So it comes down to whether the voters will be in more of a Little Miss Sunshine mood, in which case Juno will win, or a Departed mood, in which case Blood will win.

When it gets closer to the ceremony, we'll have to place our bets!  :)

I really hope JUNO doesn't win, it will give the right-to-lifers too much amunition.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on February 04, 2008, 11:49:58 am
Don't count out "No Country."  Half of Hollywood will be wanting to kiss up to the Coens, and that won't hurt when it comes time to vote.  ;)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Lumière on February 06, 2008, 12:57:53 am

Recently watched Boys On the Side (1995)..


(http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i285/Lucise/Misc/da3dd8ee.jpg)


Great casting and chemistry between the three ladies.  Loved it, as well as the movie soundtrack - Indigo Girls, Bonnie Raitt, Melissa Etheridge, Sarah Mclachlan....
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on February 06, 2008, 07:51:12 am
I wasn't sure where to post this, but this thread seemed to make sense to me. From the New York Times:

February 6, 2008

Vanity Fair Cancels Its Oscars Party


By RICHARD PÉREZ-PEÑA

Imagine a wedding reception without food, music or Champagne, and you get an inkling of how a lot of Hollywood would view the Oscars without the Vanity Fair party. But Hollywood will no longer have to imagine it — the party is off.

In sympathy with striking writers, Vanity Fair on Tuesday canceled its annual multimillion-dollar must-attend party. There are other parties, but this is the one Oscar-related trapping that has come to rival the main event for a cast of above-the-title stars, assorted billionaires and several hundred of their closest friends.

The editor of Vanity Fair, Graydon Carter, said on Tuesday that canceling was the right thing to do, whether or not there was a breakthrough in talks between the Writers Guild of America and production companies before the Oscar ceremony on Feb. 24.

“A magazine like Vanity Fair is a group of writers and artists, and we are in solidarity with the writers and artists out there,” Mr. Carter said. “Whether the strike is over or not, there are a lot of bruised feelings. I don’t think it’s appropriate for a big magazine from the East to come in and pretend nothing happened.”

He added, “There will be something sort of liberating about ordering Chinese food and watching the Oscars in bed.”

The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences has pledged that the Oscars will go on, and it has asked the writers not to picket given recent progress in contract talks.

But the guild insists that it will picket, and many stars are expected to skip the event rather than cross a picket line.

Vanity Fair’s invitation-only party — it would have been the 15th — was to begin with dinner for 170 people during the ceremony at Craft restaurant in Century City, Mr. Carter said, and continue into the early morning with 650 to 700 people.

Someone cruising through last year’s party could have seen Oprah Winfrey chatting with John Travolta, Ellen DeGeneres with Sacha Baron Cohen, or Martin Scorsese with John Singleton.

For the stars, arrival at the party offers the second red carpet walk of the day, complete with cameras. Many women change gowns between the Oscars and the party.

“The Vanity Fair party is the crown jewel,” said Leslee Dart, the publicist, who has several clients up for awards. “It’s the party everybody wants to go to. At 1 and 2 in the morning, it’s still going on strong. I started getting calls a month ago from people saying, ‘Can you help me get into the Vanity Fair Party?’ ”

At the annual lunch for nominees in Beverly Hills on Monday, Sidney Ganis, the academy’s president, urged the group — including the actors George Clooney, Viggo Mortensen and Laura Linney — to show up and claim their awards. He joked that official certificates of nomination would carry the legend “Must be present to win.”

Even if the sides continue to move toward a settlement of the three-month-old strike, it appeared unlikely that the walkout would end before the middle of next week. That leaves academy officials planning for alternatives — one with a full complement of nominees, one without.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/06/business/media/06vanity.html?_r=1&ref=media&oref=slogin
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on February 06, 2008, 12:17:45 pm
I wasn't sure where to post this, but this thread seemed to make sense to me. From the New York Times:

February 6, 2008

Vanity Fair Cancels Its Oscars Party


By RICHARD PÉREZ-PEÑA

Imagine a wedding reception without food, music or Champagne, and you get an inkling of how a lot of Hollywood would view the Oscars without the Vanity Fair party. But Hollywood will no longer have to imagine it — the party is off.

In sympathy with striking writers, Vanity Fair on Tuesday canceled its annual multimillion-dollar must-attend party. There are other parties, but this is the one Oscar-related trapping that has come to rival the main event for a cast of above-the-title stars, assorted billionaires and several hundred of their closest friends.

The editor of Vanity Fair, Graydon Carter, said on Tuesday that canceling was the right thing to do, whether or not there was a breakthrough in talks between the Writers Guild of America and production companies before the Oscar ceremony on Feb. 24.

“A magazine like Vanity Fair is a group of writers and artists, and we are in solidarity with the writers and artists out there,” Mr. Carter said. “Whether the strike is over or not, there are a lot of bruised feelings. I don’t think it’s appropriate for a big magazine from the East to come in and pretend nothing happened.”

He added, “There will be something sort of liberating about ordering Chinese food and watching the Oscars in bed.”

The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences has pledged that the Oscars will go on, and it has asked the writers not to picket given recent progress in contract talks.

But the guild insists that it will picket, and many stars are expected to skip the event rather than cross a picket line.

Vanity Fair’s invitation-only party — it would have been the 15th — was to begin with dinner for 170 people during the ceremony at Craft restaurant in Century City, Mr. Carter said, and continue into the early morning with 650 to 700 people.

Someone cruising through last year’s party could have seen Oprah Winfrey chatting with John Travolta, Ellen DeGeneres with Sacha Baron Cohen, or Martin Scorsese with John Singleton.

For the stars, arrival at the party offers the second red carpet walk of the day, complete with cameras. Many women change gowns between the Oscars and the party.

“The Vanity Fair party is the crown jewel,” said Leslee Dart, the publicist, who has several clients up for awards. “It’s the party everybody wants to go to. At 1 and 2 in the morning, it’s still going on strong. I started getting calls a month ago from people saying, ‘Can you help me get into the Vanity Fair Party?’ ”

At the annual lunch for nominees in Beverly Hills on Monday, Sidney Ganis, the academy’s president, urged the group — including the actors George Clooney, Viggo Mortensen and Laura Linney — to show up and claim their awards. He joked that official certificates of nomination would carry the legend “Must be present to win.”

Even if the sides continue to move toward a settlement of the three-month-old strike, it appeared unlikely that the walkout would end before the middle of next week. That leaves academy officials planning for alternatives — one with a full complement of nominees, one without.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/06/business/media/06vanity.html?_r=1&ref=media&oref=slogin


Damn!  I bought a new outfit and everything!!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Lumière on February 06, 2008, 05:14:30 pm

Recently watched Last of the Blonde Bombshells (2000) starring Dame Dench(bought the movie 'cause of her).
I thought it was good but Judy made it even more worth it.


(http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i285/Lucise/Misc/292abf1d.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on February 07, 2008, 09:45:51 am
I watched Latter Days yesterday. It one way, it has every cliche and stereotype in the book. In another way, it's a very good movie. I'd recommend it.

The two leads have a very hot sex scene with lots of long legs and chiseled abs. Definitely worth seeing! LOL. My favorite line (right after the sex scene):

Chris: "I thought you'd be more...y'know, reticent."

Aaron: "Well, I'm already going to Hell for kissing you, so I may as well take the scenic route."

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Lumière on February 07, 2008, 01:05:13 pm
After meaning to watch it for a long time, I finally got the movie Aimee & Jaguar(1999) and watched it last night.


(http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i285/Lucise/Misc/b3ba90da.jpg)


I'll have to re-watch it again real soon because there were places where the subtitles disappeared so fast I think I missed some words, lol.


Aimée & Jaguar is a 1999 German war and drama film set during World War II. It was written and directed by Max Färberböck, based upon Erica Fischer's book, chronicling the actual lives of Lilly Wust and Felice Schragenheim during that time period. [Wikipedia]



Berlin 1943/44 ("The Battle of Berlin"). Felice, an intelligent and courageous Jewish woman who lives under a false name, belongs to an underground organization. Lilly, a devoted mother of four, though an occasional unfaithful wife, is desperate for love. An unusual and passionate love between them blossoms despite the danger of persecution and nightly bombing raids. The Gestapo is on Felice's trail. Her friends flee, she decides to sit out the war with Lilly. One hot day in August 1944, the Gestapo is waiting in Lilly's flat...[Imdb Summary]



Highly recommended!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Lynne on February 07, 2008, 01:22:52 pm
I watched Latter Days yesterday. It one way, it has every cliche and stereotype in the book. In another way, it's a very good movie. I'd recommend it.

The two leads have a very hot sex scene with lots of long legs and chiseled abs. Definitely worth seeing! LOL. My favorite line (right after the sex scene):

Chris: "I thought you'd be more...y'know, reticent."

Aaron: "Well, I'm already going to Hell for kissing you, so I may as well take the scenic route."

L

You're right, Leslie - LATTER DAYS does have every cliche and stereotype in the book - I think it's intentional - that and the low production value somehow are part of its charm for me.  I guess I like it so well because I can feel the emotional connection between Aaron and Christian and Christian's pain.  The scene when Christian visits Sister Davis hits my heart hard.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on February 08, 2008, 12:16:21 am
An interesting article on the most anticipated book to film adaptations.

http://themovie-fanatic.com/tmf_top_50/books_to_films_hitlist/books_to_movies_part1/ (http://themovie-fanatic.com/tmf_top_50/books_to_films_hitlist/books_to_movies_part1/)

Excerpt:
I love reading books! Some may say it's a dying media- with the internet and all- but the pleasure you get from reading is hard to experience in other, perhaps more modern form. Doubling the pleasure is when a favorite book is adapted on the big screen!

While some of the most engrossing films are based on original scripts, there are some equally awesome movies which are based on adaptations of some of today's best-selling novels and non-fiction books. In this feature, we listed 50 of the most anticipated book to movie adaptations for 2008 and beyond.

The list is quite diverse- thrillers and horror, coming-of-age, fantasy and adventure, classics, romantic novels, crime and drama. Some of them are currently 'works in progress' and soon to be released, while some are still at the stage of being optioned by various extremely excited filmmakers and producers.


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kd5000 on February 08, 2008, 05:52:30 pm
Anybody heard about the new gay surfer movie. And unlike other surfer movies, i.e. SURF CITY, this one looks like it has a plot.  Oh, they look rather conflicted in the trailer.  Is it really the most anticipated gay themed movie of the year?  Opening in March of 2008.


Best. Gay. Week. Ever. (February 8, 2008)
by Michael Jensen, Editor
February 8, 2008
Several weeks ago, I wrote about Shelter, the upcoming movie from here! about two surfing buddies who fall in love. To say the reaction to those clips was strong would be an understatement. That makes me all the more pleased to announce that we have the world premiere of the brand-new trailer for the highly-anticipated gay surfing drama.

The link for the video and the rest of the story is
http://www.afterelton.com/bgwe/2-8-08

The link for the film is
http://www.heretv.com/sheltermovie/

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on February 08, 2008, 05:58:48 pm
Anybody heard about the new gay surfer movie. And unlike other surfer movies, i.e. SURF CITY, this one looks like it has a plot.  Oh, they look rather conflicted in the trailer.  Is it really the most anticipated gay themed movie of the year?  Opening in March of 2008.


Best. Gay. Week. Ever. (February 8, 2008)
by Michael Jensen, Editor
February 8, 2008
Several weeks ago, I wrote about Shelter, the upcoming movie from here! about two surfing buddies who fall in love. To say the reaction to those clips was strong would be an understatement. That makes me all the more pleased to announce that we have the world premiere of the brand-new trailer for the highly-anticipated gay surfing drama.

The link for the video and the rest of the story is
http://www.afterelton.com/bgwe/2-8-08

The link for the film is
http://www.heretv.com/sheltermovie/



I've never heard of Shelter before, but after watching the trailer, I can't wait to see it!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kelda on February 08, 2008, 09:18:16 pm
I know this has been discussed already but us in Europe get to see movies later  >:(

Anyway, I went to see Juno and I totally loved it!!!! I'm not sure if it'll actually win anything but I am glad it is among the best picture nom movies. I thought it was very well done and well acted. I think this year No Country for Old Men will take all awards. Can't wait to see it. It opens this weekend.

Heh, yes Nat - i was the same although I had a dvd screener  ::) but i totally loved it too!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on February 08, 2008, 10:06:42 pm
While I'm still in my Bourne-again mode, I think it's time for a gay action hero!  The closest we have is Private Eye Donald Strachey, played by Chad Allen, in the movies Third Man Out, Shock to the System and the upcoming Icy Blues.  Chad does a great job but the series is more like a gay version of the Nick & Nora Charles films. 

I want an edgy action hero!  I even know who to cast:  Robert Gant!

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/RobertGant.jpg)
"Who, me?"  Yes, Robert, you would be perfect!


I seem to have a lot of influence in Hollywood, look what I just found:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1043839/ (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1043839/)

Kiss Me Deadly
Ex-spy Jacob Keane (Robert Gant) is drawn back into the shadowy world of international espionage when his former partner Marta reappears after 17 years, her memory erased, on the run from a pair of deadly, psychopathic assassins.


The bad news is that Shannen Doherty co-stars,  ;)!

But they more than make up for that by featuring the Australian out actor & ex-rugby player Ian Roberts:

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/IanRoberts01.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Shasta542 on February 08, 2008, 11:56:00 pm
Look what's on the worst Oscar picks:

http://movies.msn.com/movies/oscars2008/photos/worstoscars?gt1=7701 (http://movies.msn.com/movies/oscars2008/photos/worstoscars?gt1=7701)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on February 09, 2008, 01:31:17 am
Look what's on the worst Oscar picks:

http://movies.msn.com/movies/oscars2008/photos/worstoscars?gt1=7701 (http://movies.msn.com/movies/oscars2008/photos/worstoscars?gt1=7701)

3. "Crash," Best Picture, 2006
Another raging example of Hollywood's intense desire to reward itself for "saying something." Only this time, they forgot to notice that the winning picture actually said nothing about race and class in America that you couldn't learn from reading a bumper sticker or wearing a ribbon on the lapel of your tux. Yes, Virginia, mean people do suck, and there is a vast inequity between white people and black people in not just America but the world. It's worth remembering, but is it worth dramatizing? Worth letting good actors sink their whiter-than-white teeth into roles that never rise above archetypes? Worth converting into a script that makes every situation an Important Moment? Worth watching? Worth nominating? Worth a Best Picture Oscar? Just for caring? I vote no. (Lionsgate Films)

Love it, love it, love it.  ;D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on February 09, 2008, 01:10:05 pm
Love it, love it, love it.  ;D

Wow, that is brilliant writing.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on February 10, 2008, 12:01:01 pm
I saw There Will Be Blood last night. Like Leslie, I have to think about it some more. I came out of it and told my husband, "I don't think I get it." It seemed like it marshalled a lot of powerful elements -- powerful acting, impressive sets and costumes, an epic plot -- to say ... well, what exactly?

I'm still not sure. Although as we talked about it over dinner, it started to feel a bit more cohesive.

And today I'm still thinking about it. It's like it works on an almost unconscious level.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Shasta542 on February 10, 2008, 12:05:58 pm
If you're like me, you might have to watch it again to take it all in!  :P  ;)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on February 10, 2008, 12:22:02 pm
I saw There Will Be Blood last night. Like Leslie, I have to think about it some more. I came out of it and told my husband, "I don't think I get it." It seemed like it deployed a lot of powerful elements -- powerful acting, impressive sets and costumes, an epic plot -- to say ... well, what exactly?

I'm still not sure. Although as we talked about it over dinner, it started to feel a bit more cohesive.

And today I'm still thinking about it. It's like it works on an almost unconscious level.



Am I the only one who laughed at the "bowling with God" scene?
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Artiste on February 10, 2008, 07:03:49 pm
The other day, The Four Feathers was playing on TV with Heath Ledger!!

That was a surprise, since I did not know but when I found out late, I only say the last half!!

Brilliant Heath was in that movie!!

Does anyone know more about that movie?

Hugs!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: BelAir on February 10, 2008, 09:37:25 pm
we discussed it a little bit a while back on the Heath Heath Heath thread.

did you want to talk about anything in particular Artiste?
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Artiste on February 10, 2008, 10:08:22 pm
The Four Feathers!!

What did Heath say about his role there?

Why did HE CHOOSE that movie?

It is about muslims... taking over, in some ways!! ??

Hugs!!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on February 11, 2008, 08:16:35 am
Am I the only one who laughed at the "bowling with God" scene?

I didn't laugh, but there was some laughter in the theater.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on February 11, 2008, 08:19:58 am
The Four Feathers!!

What did Heath say about his role there?

Why did HE CHOOSE that movie?

It is about muslims... taking over, in some ways!! ??

Hugs!!


You can find out more here, Artiste:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Four_Feathers_(2002_film)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on February 13, 2008, 12:36:11 am
I found an interesting site where you can actually watch full length B movies for free.  You don't even need to register, jut click PLAY and watch.  There are some interesting titles: Carnival of Lost Souls, Metropolis, A Boy and His Dog, The Brother From Another Planet (!) and the early Peter jackson film Bad Taste.

www.bmovies.com (http://www.bmovies.com)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on February 13, 2008, 09:31:57 am
It's a sad day in Boston.  My local independent video store is closing for good.  They were champions of things other than the latest blockbuster:  foreign films, gay films, documentaries, "camp and cult".  I much preferred patronizing them rather than some chain store (although, they're all gone too). 

On the good side, they are selling everything!  All DVDs for $8. 

Needless to say, my library has grown considerably in the last twenty-four hours.  I was able to round out my Heath collection with Brothers Grimm and The Order; also Jake with Moonlight Mile, October Sky and The Good Girl, even City Slickers!

A few other gems included Days of Heaven (thanks, Leslie) and All the Pretty Horses.

Hello, Netflix...
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on February 13, 2008, 11:00:42 am
It's a sad day in Boston.  My local independent video store is closing for good.  They were champions of things other than the latest blockbuster:  foreign films, gay films, documentaries, "camp and cult".  I much preferred patronizing them rather than some chain store (although, they're all gone too). 

On the good side, they are selling everything!  All DVDs for $8. 

Needless to say, my library has grown considerably in the last twenty-four hours.  I was able to round out my Heath collection with Brothers Grimm and The Order; also Jake with Moonlight Mile, October Sky and The Good Girl, even City Slickers!

A few other gems included Days of Heaven (thanks, Leslie) and All the Pretty Horses.

Hello, Netflix...

The same thing just happened to me just recently.  My local specialty video store closed for good and had all its DVDs on sale.  They specialized in foreign films, documentaries and experimental.  Zip.ca (like Netflix) put them out of business.  I spent a bundle there on French and LGBT titles and even found some out-of-print and Criterion titles and all in pristine condition. 
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kd5000 on February 13, 2008, 12:22:09 pm
Dreadful how ppl are having to resort to Netflix or Blockbuster.  I know Blockbuster does tailor their stores to their area's demographics.  Suburban blockbusters usually have limited fgn film selection and one gay film jumbled in with "Drama."    I was at a Blockbuster's store in the gay area of Houston,TX  (Montrose) and the gay section was titled "Community Interest."   

Rents are so high in some cities that independent video stores and used bookstores are the first to go. Can't pay the deep pocket rents that Pottery Barn can.  And we do need more "Pottery Barns."  ;)

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on February 17, 2008, 11:25:55 am
One of the gems I found at my  soon-to-be-closing video store is "An Early Frost"; I didn't even know it had been released on DVD.

I watched it last night:  I think I hadn't seen it since it came out in 1985.  Wow, so powerful, even 20+ years later.  A young Aidan Quinn, in one of his earliest performances, portrays the main character with dignity and intelligence.  Gena Rowlands was brilliant as the mother, and Ben Gazzara, although prone to overdoing it, develops the most.  I loved Sylvia Sydney as the grandmother:  "Come and kiss your grandmother; it's a disease, not a disgrace."  John Glover (today known as Lionel Luther on "Smallville") practically stole the show, befriending Aidan Quinn's character with warmth and humor. 

This film (the first to deal with AIDS) managed to educate the public and show a very affecting story at the same time.  Neither maudlin nor hopeless.  Thank God things have changed.

(http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp/en/thumb/9/91/180px-Earlyfrost.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on February 17, 2008, 11:42:26 am
I remember that movie. I had such a crush on Aidan Quinn (after seeing him in Reckless the year before) I was busy watching anything he was in. It was good...I'd like to see it again.

Let's add it to the list, Paul!

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Artiste on February 17, 2008, 12:05:11 pm
Did anyone talk about these two movies:

My Sister Eileen 1955;

Sweet Charity 1969;

which I saw both last night, with joy!!

These two movies sure say a lot!! You think so too??

Hugs!!
Have a Beautiful Happy Sunday!! Bon Dimanche!! (Good Sunday!!)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: BelAir on February 17, 2008, 12:33:09 pm
One of the gems I found at my  soon-to-be-closing video store is "An Early Frost"; I didn't even know it had been released on DVD.

I watched it last night:  I think I hadn't seen it since it came out in 1985.  Wow, so powerful, even 20+ years later.  A young Aidan Quinn, in one of his earliest performances, portrays the main character with dignity and intelligence.  Gena Rowlands was brilliant as the mother, and Ben Gazzara, although prone to overdoing it, develops the most.  I loved Sylvia Sydney as the grandmother:  "Come and kiss your grandmother; it's a disease, not a disgrace."  John Glover (today known as Lionel Luther on "Smallville") practically stole the show, befriending Aidan Quinn's character with warmth and humor. 

This film (the first to deal with AIDS) managed to educate the public and show a very affecting story at the same time.  Neither maudlin nor hopeless.  Thank God things have changed.

(http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp/en/thumb/9/91/180px-Earlyfrost.jpg)

Thanks for that review...  I will add it to my netflix... no independent video stores round these parts...
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on February 17, 2008, 09:16:25 pm
Since I'm in training these days, I've been spending more time in a hot tub with my friends, and it's reminding me of that old movie Altered States with William Hurt. Anybody remember it?
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on February 17, 2008, 09:19:14 pm
I just got back from Definitely, Maybe. It was very light but cute. I'd seen the trailers and thought it looked stupid, but A.O. Scott gave it a good review in the NYT, which persuaded me to give it a shot. And sure enough, it was worth seeing.

But Leslie, watch out -- there's a scene in which some pretty intense flirting is centered on ... smoking. There were a lot of logos in this movie, so I'm guessing they pocketed some tobacco industry money, too.


Since I'm in training these days, I've been spending more time in a hot tub with my friends, and it's reminding me of that old movie Altered States with William Hurt. Anybody remember it?

F-R, your post came in while I was writing. I loved Altered States! I was in journalism school at the time and it inspired me to spend time in an isolation tank and then write about it.







Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: belbbmfan on February 18, 2008, 03:50:50 am
I remember that movie. I had such a crush on Aidan Quinn (after seeing him in Reckless the year before) I was busy watching anything he was in. It was good...I'd like to see it again.

Let's add it to the list, Paul!

L

I can't remember how long it has been since I've seen that movie, but i really liked it. I thought Aidan Quinn's performance was very sensitive. I liked him.

Wasn't he in Desperately Seeking Susan? hmmm, need to check on IMDB
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on February 18, 2008, 09:46:18 am
I can't remember how long it has been since I've seen that movie, but i really liked it. I thought Aidan Quinn's performance was very sensitive. I liked him.

Wasn't he in Desperately Seeking Susan? hmmm, need to check on IMDB

Yes, he was, and he was so hot in that....

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on February 18, 2008, 09:51:35 am

But Leslie, watch out -- there's a scene in which some pretty intense flirting is centered on ... smoking. There were a lot of logos in this movie, so I'm guessing they pocketed some tobacco industry money, too.


Hahahaha, I have such a reputation! LOL

Yesterday I watched my netflix DVD, "Imagine Me and You." I think I saw previews for this back in Brokeback Days. Or maybe with "Thank You for Smoking"...which I did go and see by the way. Do you realize in that movie you never see one character smoke? Lots of talk about cigarettes, of course, but no actual smoking. But I digress...

"Imagine Me and You" was...eh. Just so-so. Certainly an easy diversion for a Sunday afternoon, but nothing that I want to rewatch.

I don't think there was any smoking, though!

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on February 18, 2008, 10:31:18 am

F-R, your post came in while I was writing. I loved Altered States! I was in journalism school at the time and it inspired me to spend time in an isolation tank and then write about it.
Cool...did you get in touch with your primal self and/or turn into a monkey??








Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on February 18, 2008, 11:42:22 am
Cool...did you get in touch with your primal self and/or turn into a monkey??

Unfortunately no, so the piece I wrote was somewhat anticlimactic. I didn't even have LSD-like hallucinations. I just got really, really bored.

Or maybe with "Thank You for Smoking"...which I did go and see by the way. Do you realize in that movie you never see one character smoke? Lots of talk about cigarettes, of course, but no actual smoking. But I digress...

Thank You for Smoking was the first movie I saw after Brokeback that I was able to enjoy without constantly thinking about how it wasn't Brokeback. BTW, for those who don't already know, the director of TYFS, Jason Reitman, also directed Juno.


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on February 18, 2008, 12:33:19 pm
I'm off work today because Ontario has a new Holiday called Family Day (Is it just me or does that name sound offensive to others as well, thanks to the Christian right?) and I'm getting ready to go see a movie, I'm considering:

MICHAEL CLAYTON
UP THE YANGTZE
DIARY OF THE DEAD
PERSEPOLIS

What do you think?

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on February 18, 2008, 12:40:07 pm
I'm off work today because Ontario has a new Holiday called Family Day (Is it just me or does that name sound offensive to others as well, thanks to the Christian right?) and I'm getting ready to go see a movie, I'm considering:

MICHAEL CLAYTON
UP THE YANGTZE
DIARY OF THE DEAD
PERSEPOLIS

What do you think?



If I had that list, I'd choose Persepolis.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on February 18, 2008, 12:43:15 pm
If I had that list, I'd choose Persepolis.

L

Me too!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on February 18, 2008, 12:59:29 pm
The only one on the list I've seen is Michael Clayton. I liked it a lot.

I've read Persepolis, though, and thought it was good. But you wouldn't catch me going to Diary of the Dead if I were being chased into the theater by zombies.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on February 18, 2008, 05:08:39 pm
If I had that list, I'd choose Persepolis.

L

Well, I was on my way to see PERSEPOLIS but stupidly got the start times confused and got there 10 minutes late.  With all the ads and trailers the movie probably hadn't started but I didn't take the chance.  So I headed to another theatre just in time for HANNAH MONTANA!

Just kidding, I saw MICHAEL CLAYTON and really enjoyed it.  The opening scene just hooks you and reels you in, I was on the edge of seat throughout.  I wonder what the people at Monsanto think of it  >:(   Damn that George Clooney!  As soon as I'm finally able to hate him, something like this happens!

Speaking of trailers,I did get a bit of jolt, one of them was for THE DARK KNIGHT and I was NOT expecting it.  I'm just glad I was sitting down (in the dark) because my heart just broke into a million pieces. Again!  :'(
There was also a more extended trailer for 10,000 BC and I have to admit that I'm quite intrigued.  Those woolly mammoths look mighty fine.  I'm a sucker for prehistoric movies, I loved QUEST FOR FIRE and 1,000,000 YEARS BC.
Anyway, I thought they were unusual choices to show before a movie like MC.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on February 18, 2008, 05:31:27 pm
Just kidding, I saw MICHAEL CLAYTON and really enjoyed it.  The opening scene just hooks you and reels you in, I was on the edge of seat throughout.  I wonder what the people at Monsanto think of it  >:(   Damn that George Clooney!  As soon as I'm finally able to hate him, something like this happens!

Glad you enjoyed it, oilgun! You know, I don't think the movie really deserves a BP Oscar, but I'm glad it was nominated, if only to get more attention for that much-overlooked movie.

Quote
There was also a more extended trailer for 10,000 BC and I have to admit that I'm quite intrigued.

I thought that looked interesting, too.

Quote
I did get a bit of jolt, one of them was for THE DARK KNIGHT and I was NOT expecting it.

Same thing happened to me when I saw There Will Be Blood. It's a very strange feeling.


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on February 18, 2008, 05:33:04 pm

Speaking of trailers,I did get a bit of jolt, one of them was for THE DARK KNIGHT and I was NOT expecting it.  I'm just glad I was sitting down (in the dark) because my heart just broke into a million pieces. Again!  :'(


Oh my. To see that without being prepared would be quite a jolt.

Quote
There was also a more extended trailer for 10,000 BC and I have to admit that I'm quite intrigued.  Those woolly mammoths look mighty fine.  I'm a sucker for prehistoric movies, I loved QUEST FOR FIRE and 1,000,000 YEARS BC.
Anyway, I thought they were unusual choices to show before a movie like MC.

You're intrigued...when I saw it (before Atonement, of all things!) I said to my daughter, "Yuck..not for me!" That feeling was reinforced when I saw it was from the director of Independence Day and The Day After Tomorrow (is that the right name? The one with Jake when NY turns into an ice tundra?)

The woolly mammoths did look fine, but the people weren't too appealing. LOL

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: BelAir on February 18, 2008, 11:16:00 pm
Oh my. To see that without being prepared would be quite a jolt.

You're intrigued...when I saw it (before Atonement, of all things!) I said to my daughter, "Yuck..not for me!" That feeling was reinforced when I saw it was from the director of Independence Day and The Day After Tomorrow (is that the right name? The one with Jake when NY turns into an ice tundra?)

The woolly mammoths did look fine, but the people weren't too appealing. LOL

L

Yes, indeed.  I don't honestly anticipate going to the theater for a movie anytime soon...   But, if I do, I'll just plan/expect to see it, so I'm not jolted...
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on February 19, 2008, 12:07:21 am
Glad you enjoyed it, oilgun! You know, I don't think the movie really deserves a BP Oscar, but I'm glad it was nominated, if only to get more attention for that much-overlooked movie.


I wonder about the BP nom as well.  Maybe the story is a bit too John Grisham-esque?  Not that there's anything wrong with that, lol!  I think maybe George's famous charm ::) gave it a nudge.

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/MichaelClayton01b.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on February 19, 2008, 12:29:17 am
You're intrigued...when I saw it (before Atonement, of all things!) I said to my daughter, "Yuck..not for me!" That feeling was reinforced when I saw it was from the director of Independence Day and The Day After Tomorrow (is that the right name? The one with Jake when NY turns into an ice tundra?)

The woolly mammoths did look fine, but the people weren't too appealing. LOL

L

I should have specified Guilty Pleasure,  :D  The fact that it was by the same director as THE DAY AFTER TOMORROW (contender for worse movie title ever?) was actually a plus for me, because I figure he had the budget to pull it off and I know what to expect. 

I actually enjoyed TDaT - and Jake has nothing to do with it, I'm not a Gyllenhallic (sp?) by any means.  I actually think he should be embarrassed about being in it..  I also hated the CGI wolves -  I just love movies where cities are either deserted or destroyed.  I didn't see I AM LEGEND at the theatre because of my ongoing grudge against Will Smith, but I know I'll love seeing a deserted and crumbling New York City.  These movies speak to the kid in me.  Same thing with movies about prehistory, it's like seeing all these museum displays and artists' renderings from science books come to life, it's just so..COOL!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: yb on February 19, 2008, 01:10:24 am
I didn't see I AM LEGEND at the theatre because of my ongoing grudge against Will Smith, but I know I'll love seeing a deserted and crumbling New York City.  These movies speak to the kid in me.  Same thing with movies about prehistory, it's like seeing all these museum displays and artists' renderings from science books come to life, it's just so..COOL!

Oh!  You should have gone to see I AM LEGEND just to see the trailer of The Dark Knight!  LOL.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on February 19, 2008, 09:49:56 am


"No Country" adds honors in pre-Oscar awards blitz

Tue Feb 19, 2008 2:11am EST

LOS ANGELES (Hollywood Reporter) - Oscar front-runner "No Country For Old Men" picked up two awards during the weekend as the countdown to the Academy Awards entered its final week.

The film won the top prize in sound mixing at the 44th annual Cinema Audio Society awards on Saturday.

The award was accepting by production mixer Peter Kurland and re-recording mixers Skip Lievsay, Craig Berkey and Gregg Orloff, who will compete at the Oscars on Sunday against the teams from "The Bourne Ultimatum," "Ratatouille," "3:10 to Yuma" and "Transformers."

The grim Western picked up eight Oscar nominations, tying with "There Will Be Blood" as the leading contender.

Also Saturday, "No Country for Old Men" was named best contemporary film at the 12th annual Art Directors Guild awards. The prize was accepted by Jess Gonchor, who did not receive an Oscar nomination.

Instead, two other Art Directors Guild winners "There Will Be Blood" (period film) and "The Golden Compass" (fantasy film) will compete for the Oscar against "American Gangster," "Atonement" and "Sweeney Todd."

But "No Country" was not able to secure a clean sweep during the weekend awards blitz. A day later, "The Bourne Ultimatum" and "Sweeney Todd" won the top prizes at the 58th annual American Cinema Editors Eddie Awards, for drama and musical/comedy, respectively.

"The Bourne Ultimatum" will compete for the Oscar against "No Country," "The Diving Bell and the Butterfly," "Into the Wild" and "There Will Be Blood."

Reuters/Hollywood Reporter

http://www.reuters.com/article/filmNews/idUSN1821326220080219
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on February 19, 2008, 10:33:33 am
I have been invited to two previews, Honeydripper and Penelope. I'm hoping to see both of them and will post reviews. Wow, this is my first chance to see a movie that isn't at least two years old in a long time!

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on February 19, 2008, 11:18:18 am
I have been invited to two previews, Honeydripper and Penelope. I'm hoping to see both of them and will post reviews. Wow, this is my first chance to see a movie that isn't at least two years old in a long time!

Both excellent choices, F-R! Honeydripper should be good because how can a John Sayles movie not be. And Penelope I hadn't heard of, so I was curious enough to go to the website just now, and it looks really charming.

A couple of days ago I went to see U2 3D at my local IMAX theater.  Never mind that I am crazy for U2, this film was phenomenal.  The technology was unmatched.  I have been to several live U2 concerts over the years, and this movie was BETTER.

That sounds good, too, susiebk. I think it's coming to my local theater and, though I like U2, I hadn't planned to see it. But now I will try to take it in.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kd5000 on February 19, 2008, 01:48:07 pm
I recently rented AWAY FROM HER and found it a very moving film.  The acting was excellent and the main female character,  Julie Christie , portraying the character Fiona says "I think I may be beginning to disappear."  Like I said it's a good human interest story.


Oh, it's a Canadian film and there only one jab at the United States!  :D   Julie Christie's character is asked by her doctor what movies she has seen recently" Oh, we never go to the movies, it's just the multiplex full of American Hollywood garbage."  Well something to that effect. 
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on February 28, 2008, 08:29:11 am
Yesterday I watched 30 DAYS OF NIGHT.  It's a VERY effective horror featuring a couple of great performances by Ben Foster and Danny Huston as the lead vampire and an appropriately brooding Josh Hartnett.  It's quite gory although it's not all about the gore, it's scared the crap out of me!

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/thirty_days_of_night_ver6.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on February 28, 2008, 06:20:35 pm
Ooh, I love vampire stories.  I just added it to my Netflix queue.


You won't regret it, but be warned, these are not your standard Anne Rice-ish sexy & romantic Vampires.  I can't wait to get home and watch it again along with the Director/Josh Hartnett commentary.

Strangely, the movie rates only 50% on Rotten Tomatoes.  There are plot holes of course but the constant tension made them fairly easy to ignore.  I don't know what these critics were expecting from a movie based on a graphic novel.  It's way better than most films in the horror and the based-on-graphic-novel genres.

Here's a review that I agree with by James Berardinelli:

http://www.reelviews.net/movies/t/30_days.html (http://www.reelviews.net/movies/t/30_days.html)

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/30days-2.jpg)(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/30days-1.jpg)

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/30days-3.jpg)
Aaah, look at that face!  Here's Josh looking tense, no, concerned.  Scared?  Sad?  Determined?  Who cares, he looks gorgeous! :-*
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on February 28, 2008, 07:19:41 pm
Thanks for the warning, but I don't mind a little blood and gore.  I recently viewed and enjoyed 28 Days Later (zombies as opposed to vampires), and also Underworld with Kate Beckinsale.  Have you seen either film?

The review sounded interesting - thanks for the link.



Yes, I've seen both and really enjoyed 28 Days Later.  I liked Underworld but mostly for Scott Speedman, lol! (Yes I was a Felicity fan, lol!)  Anyway if you like those two than you'll have a blast with this one.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on February 28, 2008, 08:40:52 pm
Thanks for the warning, but I don't mind a little blood and gore.  I recently viewed and enjoyed 28 Days Later (zombies as opposed to vampires), and also Underworld with Kate Beckinsale.  Have you seen either film?

The review sounded interesting - thanks for the link.



I liked Underworld - mostly because of the twist of the story and because of all the shenanigans that were going on behind the camera.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on February 29, 2008, 07:57:09 am
Has anyone seen Margo At The Wedding?  I watched it yesterday, and I really liked it a lot.   :D

Really? I saw it in the video store and thought about renting it, but it got such lousy reviews. I think it played in the movie theater for 20 minutes or so.
What did you like about it?

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on February 29, 2008, 07:58:03 am
My daughter and I are going to see In Bruges this afternoon. That's the plan of the moment, at least.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: belbbmfan on February 29, 2008, 08:24:04 am
My daughter and I are going to see In Bruges this afternoon. That's the plan of the moment, at least.

L

Ah, great plan. Let us know what you think! Too bad we didn't run into Ralph Fiennes last year..

(http://i107.photobucket.com/albums/m312/Belbbmfan/HPIM1103.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on March 01, 2008, 12:12:30 am

Just came from seeing The Other Boleyn Girl.

Critics gave it a C- and tore it up, but me and my friend thought it was quite good and not as soap-opera-y as the critics made out.

I do recommend it, and of course, it's based on a historical fiction book so liberty has been taken with historical events.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on March 01, 2008, 09:45:37 am
I saw In Bruges late yesterday afternoon.

I mostly wanted to see it because I was "in Bruges" last year at this time, when they were filming the movie. In that way, I wasn't disappointed. Lovely scenes of the city and it brought back good memories.

Storywise, it was good, but not great. It starts off in a light vein and then takes a dark turn with a fairly violent, bloody ending. I was prepared for that from having read the reviews. I am glad I saw it but it is a "once is enough" movie for me.

Lots of jokes that pick on Belgium, though.  >:(

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Artiste on March 01, 2008, 07:06:13 pm
Did anyone see Red River 1948?

I just started a thread on that film.

Be happy to get your views on it...

hugs!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on March 03, 2008, 02:41:55 pm
Has anyone seen In the Valley of Elah?

I watched it yesterday and I thought it was very good.  It was about a man, played by Tommy Lee Jones, who sets out to investigate the disappearance of his son.  The son is a soldier and he goes missing soon after returning from Iraq.

The film examines how patriotism can sometimes lead us to make bad decisions, and it looks at the effects war has on the young people who are forced to fight.  And it also explores the love parents have for their children and what a shock it can be for them when they learn their kid might have serious flaws.

Ultimately, I think In the Valley of Elah is about confronting the truth.

In the Valley of Elah got okay reviews when it came out but lots of praise for Tommy Lee Jones, who was nominated for an Oscar for his performance. I didn't see it because it was directed by that Haggis guy, who directed Crash, and I don't like his movies.

Glad to hear you enjoyed it, Gary.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on March 03, 2008, 02:43:25 pm
Here's a few more films that I've seen recently on DVD that I would recommend:

Michael Clayton

Great World of Sound

Gone Baby, Gone

Eastern Promises

Two Days In Paris

The Namesake

Rocket Science

December Boys

3:10 to Yuma

Once



Of the movies on that list, I really enjoyed Once and 3:10 to Yuma. I really wanted to like The Namesake, because Monsoon Wedding (same director, Mira Nair) is one of my all time favorites. I thought The Namesake was good, but not great and that was a disappointment.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on March 04, 2008, 08:38:58 pm
Leslie, why do I get the feeling that I'm a the glass is half full type of person, and you're a the glass is half empty kind of person?   :laugh:



In general, I think I am a glass half full person, but when it comes to movies and books, that's the wrong yardstick to use.

Books: if a book doesn't pull me in quickly, I very rarely plow through it. People who say to me, "Oh keep going, it will catch you by page 160..." sorry that doesn't work for me. I need to be caught by page 10. This is probably part of the reason I never took a literature course in college. I knew there would a problem with must read/can't plow through.

If I like a book, I am likely to read and re-read it over and over. My "pendulum" swings all the way the other way.

Movies (in the theater): I think long and hard about going to see a movie in a theater. I read reviews and want to make sure it is a movie I want to see. If, in that case, I don't care for it, I am sorely disappointed. Probably my best/worst example of this is "The Family Stone." That movie got good reviews (from some reviewers) and I loathed it. In fact, it is one of my all time WORST movies. Even so, in the movie theater, I very rarely walk out. I stick it out til the end....painful. LOL

Most of the time, though, I do a good job about picking movies to see in the theater, probably because of my advance research.

Movies...on DVD/HBO/TV: I can be a little more reckless here. I'll watch something I heard about but that didn't meet my "gold standard" for the theater. In this case, it is more like a book: if it doesn't catch me quick, I turn it off. On the other hand, there are many movies I enjoy and watch all the way through. If I really really like something, I'll watch it endlessly, just like I'll read a book repeatedly.

This all applies to fairly new movies. Historical films or films that are new to me, I am willing to give a try, and am often wildly surprised. That is how I discovered "Wages of Fear" (1953) a few months ago.

This is probably way too much information and way too analytical for you, isn't it? Oh well, it gives you an idea of how my mind works and why it is hard to reduce me to a half full/empty glass. LOL

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on March 04, 2008, 09:40:39 pm
Leslie, why do I get the feeling that I'm a the glass is half full type of person, and you're a the glass is half empty kind of person?   :laugh:

Either of those is fine. It's the people who see the glass as empty who annoy me.

When it comes to movies, I'm a glass-is-just-about-full person. I'll see almost anything. And what I won't see in theaters, I'll definitely see on DVD. With the exception of violence-for-the-sake-of-violence movies, like Saw, or anything where it's all about the car chases and explosions and gun battles (though I'll even make an exception here if they're fairly well done, like that most recent Die Hard).

Which brings me to the movie I saw on Sunday: Vantage Point. I haven't posted anything because I'm not sure I have anything worth saying about it. It was an interesting concept, it held my interest, there were suspenseful moments ... but, ehh. In the end, kind of a car-chase-explosion-gun-battle kind of movie.

I've decided that Dennis Quaid, like Kevin Costner and Nicholas Cage, is an actor I like in light, fairly cheerful movies and don't really like in more serious dramas or action roles. What are some other examples of this? And who is the opposite? I'm tempted to say Russell Crowe -- I don't think I'd like him in anything too light.

Probably my best/worst example of this is "The Family Stone." That movie got good reviews (from some reviewers) and I loathed it.

I had the same experience. I believe we've both ranted about the terribleness of TFS before.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: belbbmfan on March 05, 2008, 03:01:02 am
In general, I think I am a glass half full person, but when it comes to movies and books, that's the wrong yardstick to use.

Books: if a book doesn't pull me in quickly, I very rarely plow through it. People who say to me, "Oh keep going, it will catch you by page 160..." sorry that doesn't work for me. I need to be caught by page 10. This is probably part of the reason I never took a literature course in college. I knew there would a problem with must read/can't plow through.

If I like a book, I am likely to read and re-read it over and over. My "pendulum" swings all the way the other way.

Movies (in the theater): I think long and hard about going to see a movie in a theater. I read reviews and want to make sure it is a movie I want to see. If, in that case, I don't care for it, I am sorely disappointed. Probably my best/worst example of this is "The Family Stone." That movie got good reviews (from some reviewers) and I loathed it. In fact, it is one of my all time WORST movies. Even so, in the movie theater, I very rarely walk out. I stick it out til the end....painful. LOL

Most of the time, though, I do a good job about picking movies to see in the theater, probably because of my advance research.

Movies...on DVD/HBO/TV: I can be a little more reckless here. I'll watch something I heard about but that didn't meet my "gold standard" for the theater. In this case, it is more like a book: if it doesn't catch me quick, I turn it off. On the other hand, there are many movies I enjoy and watch all the way through. If I really really like something, I'll watch it endlessly, just like I'll read a book repeatedly.

This all applies to fairly new movies. Historical films or films that are new to me, I am willing to give a try, and am often wildly surprised. That is how I discovered "Wages of Fear" (1953) a few months ago.

This is probably way too much information and way too analytical for you, isn't it? Oh well, it gives you an idea of how my mind works and why it is hard to reduce me to a half full/empty glass. LOL

L

hehehehe

I agree about the books. I have a number of books that I have started and never finished. I used to feel guilty about that, like I hadn't tried hard enough. But now, I feel, if I don't care about the characters from early on in the story, I'm not going to keep on reading.

Same with movies, I read a lot of reviews so I pretty much know what to expect before I go see a movie. Of course, that's no guarentee. I saw Juno on sunday. It was ok, but I couldn't see what all the fuss was about. It had a few funny moments, but the foul language got old after about 15 minutes.


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on March 05, 2008, 07:29:07 am

I really liked Dennis Quaid in Far From Heaven.  That was a pretty serious role.  Did you see him in that?


Yes, I did, and I thought he was great.

I liked Dennis Quaid from the very first time I saw him, in Breaking Away. Have you seen that, Gary? There's a good daydream movie! I also liked him in The Long Riders, The Right Stuff, The Big Easy (oh yes, for that one! "Watch out for the  gator, baby!"), Everybody's All American, Great Balls of Fire, Undercover Blues, The Parent Trap, The Rookie....do you get the feeling I am a Dennis Quaid fan? Lately, though, it seems like he is picking stupid roles just to make a buck: The Day  After Tomorrow, Yours, Mine, and Ours and now, Vantage Point. Sigh....
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on March 05, 2008, 07:34:19 am
I didn't like The Family Stone either.  I thought the way the mother treated her son's girlfriend was both mean-spirited and weird.  But the story never confronted that.  It was as if we were to think her attitude was sympathetic, and it wasn't.  It was nasty.

And then the way they sprang that bit about the mother dying there at the end seemed really strange.  That came out of left field.

I love Diane Keaton, but I sure didn't like her character in this film.  I kept wanting Sarah Jessica Parker's character to give her a good smack.   :P  So what if she's this man's mother, and she's dying?  She doesn't get to decide who he's going to marry. 


I wanted to wring Diane Keaton's neck. What a witch of a mother...grrrr....I hear that Diane hasn't been a very nice character in her other recent movies (Because I Said So and Mad Money). They say that women of a "certain age" have a hard time finding decent roles but look at Helen Mirren. She's the same age as Diane and doesn't seem to have accepted the fact that she has to be a bitch on screen to keep working. Jane Fonda is another one who seems to be falling into the same trap.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on March 05, 2008, 09:44:13 am
I really liked Dennis Quaid in Far From Heaven.  That was a pretty serious role.  Did you see him in that?

Did you see Nicholas Cage in Leaving Las Vegas?

Oh, there you go, finding exceptions to what I thought was a perfect rule of thumb.  ::)   ;) You're right, I loved Dennis Quaid in FFH, too. And I thought Nicholas Cage was good in LLV (though I wasn't exactly happy I'd seen the movie). So maybe I should amend that to say, I like them in light comedies or in character dramas, but not in action films.

I defy you to find an exception in Kevin Costner's case, though. A week or so ago, I watched the first 10 minutes of Mr. Brooks and knew I wouldn't be able to stand it. I switched it off. Too horrible. I watched The Heartbreak Kid instead, which I thought was going to be stupid but turned out to be kind of (emphasis on the kind of) funny and cute.


I wanted to wring Diane Keaton's neck. What a witch of a mother...grrrr....I hear that Diane hasn't been a very nice character in her other recent movies (Because I Said So and Mad Money). They say that women of a "certain age" have a hard time finding decent roles but look at Helen Mirren. She's the same age as Diane and doesn't seem to have accepted the fact that she has to be a bitch on screen to keep working. Jane Fonda is another one who seems to be falling into the same trap.

TFS was one of those watershed roles that changed my whole view of Diane Keaton. She'd better do a nice sympathetic or at least funny role, fast.

Jane Fonda has fallen into the same trap, but I think that's because she felt it was a hurdle to get back into movies at all.



L
[/quote]
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on March 05, 2008, 09:53:32 am

TFS was one of those watershed roles that changed my whole view of Diane Keaton. She'd better do a nice sympathetic or at least funny role, fast.

True. On her biography on IMDb, it doesn't even list anything as being in production. Maybe she is taking a break to reassess the disaster her career has become at the moment.

Quote

Jane Fonda has fallen into the same trap, but I think that's because she felt it was a hurdle to get back into movies at all.


Yes, this is true. And why did she have to get back into the movies, anyway? Georgia Rule and Monster-in-Law certainly aren't shining stars in the cinematic firmament. LOL

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on March 05, 2008, 11:00:19 am
I don't mind Diane Keaton and Jane Fonda (etc.)  playing unsympathetic characters, I just wish they did it in movies worth seeing, lol!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on March 05, 2008, 11:16:16 am
I defy you to find an exception in Kevin Costner's case, though. A week or so ago, I watched the first 10 minutes of Mr. Brooks and knew I wouldn't be able to stand it. I switched it off. Too horrible. I watched The Heartbreak Kid instead, which I thought was going to be stupid but turned out to be kind of (emphasis on the kind of) funny and cute.

I agree KC has done a lot of junk.  But he was irresistible in No Way Out in 1987, and, I'm still a sucker for Field of Dreams  (just try  watching that with your father...)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on March 05, 2008, 11:20:21 am
I agree KC has done a lot of junk.  But he was irresistible in No Way Out in 1987, and, I'm still a sucker for Field of Dreams  (just try  watching that with your father...)

Oh, No Way Out. I forgot that one. I loved that movie! And to be honest, I liked Dances With Wolves the first time I saw it, but now it seems sort of trite.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on March 05, 2008, 11:33:33 am
I am a long-time Costner fan.  I love him in Dances with Wolves and No Way Out, and even (I admit it) Waterworld and Robin Hood, Prince of Thieves.

My favourite KC films are Dances With Wolves and Tin Cup.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on March 05, 2008, 11:59:13 am
Oh, Susie - here we have our first lovers' spat:  I cannot stand Kevin Costner.  I remember thinking he was good at the time in No Way Out and Bull Durham, but on watching them years later on TV, I could see him acting the whole time.  I'm a sucker for Field of Dreams, though, but I don't think he does any acting in that - he's just being Kevin Costner, albeit a considerably less boring version.

The only movie I think he was ever good in and still do is American Flyers.  I thought he stole every scene he was in in that one, when it was really the other guy's (I can't even think of the actor's name - that's how much he stole it) show.

I've been referring to KC for many years now as "The most boring man in America."  If you've ever seen him interviewed, you'll see why.  He's not quiet and introverted and mysterious like Robert DeNiro - he's BORING.


*backs slowly out of room*
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on March 05, 2008, 02:03:48 pm
Wow, so much to respond to!

Re Jane Fonda:

Yes, this is true. And why did she have to get back into the movies, anyway? Georgia Rule and Monster-in-Law certainly aren't shining stars in the cinematic firmament. LOL

I know! They're tarnishing her reputation more, in my view, than her visit to Hanoi!  ;D  She was once a really good actress. So why bother to come back at all, just to be in crap? So much better to go the Julie Christie route, and come back only for a really good role. It's not like she needs the money, is it?

I don't mind Diane Keaton and Jane Fonda (etc.)  playing unsympathetic characters, I just wish they did it in movies worth seeing, lol!

Exactly! The problem with Diane in TFS was that she wasn't supposed to be unsympathetic, she was supposed to be a wise, beloved matriarch. That movie was soooo deeply flawed. For me, it was also the last straw for Sarah Jessica Parker, who gets on my nerves anyway. And let's throw in Dermot Mulrooney, whom I sometimes like but don't feel very attached to. Even Claire Danes didn't come off looking great. Rachel McAdams and Luke Wilson are the only ones I don't like less after that film, and only because I've seen them in enough other things where I do like them.

Re Kevin Costner:

He's always totally delightful in romantic comedies: Bull Durham, Tin Cup, The Upside of Anger. He's also good in dramas with a mostly lighter tone: Field of Dreams, Silverado, the way-underrated A Perfect World. I'd put Dances With Wolves in that category, too, though I'm afraid that like Leslie I might find it trite at this point.

I don't like him in movies where he has to frown the whole time. I thought he was out and out bad in JFK. I don't recall him adding much to The Untouchables. No Way Out I don't remember very well, but from what I do recall I kind of suspect I'd like it better for the screenplay than for Kevin.

As for what he's like in real life ... I can't say I've ever read or seen an interview with him. If so, it must have been boring, because I don't remember it!  :laugh: But with a few exceptions (are you listening, Mel Gibson?) I don't care what people are like in real life as long as they entertain me onscreen. Though they do get extra credit for being appealing in real life.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on March 06, 2008, 10:18:21 pm
I just watched Day Zero.  It takes place in the near future, and the draft has just been reinstated.  Three young men have just gotten a notice in the mail telling them to report to duty within 30 days.  The film explores their reactions to this news. 

I think the film could have been better if the writer had worked on the characters a bit more and hadn't relied on cliches so much.  But I did like the film.  However, I'll admit this might have something to do with the fact that it stared Elijah Wood.  He played one of the characters that was unexpectedly drafted.  I could watch Elijah do almost anything for a hour and a half -- scrape gum off the bottom of his shoe, pick his nose -- and I'd be a happy camper.  He's sooo cute.   ;D

I'm a big fan of Elijah Wood, too, Gary.  His radiant, exquisitely beautiful Frodo in LOTR sent me running to the message boards for those movies.  I saw Day Zero purely because of him, and I thought it was okay but wished it were a better vehicle for him.  He's had a string of small movies since LOTR, the best of which I think is Everything Is Illuminated.  That's a movie more people should have seen; Liev Schreiber directed it beautifully.  I have hopes that Elijah's upcoming The Oxford Murders will be more successful, particularly since it co-stars John Hurt, one of my favorites.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on March 06, 2008, 11:04:25 pm
Last night I discovered yet another young movie hunk, the ridiculously handsome Andreas Wilson from Sweden.  He plays the lead in the film EVIL(Ondskan) which is based on a popular autobiographical coming of age novel set in an elite boarding school in fifties Sweden.  It's a wonderful and qute disturbing film looking at how violence breeds violence.  It brought to mind REBEL WITHOUT A CAUSE.

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/EVIL-01.jpg)(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/andreas_wilson_02b.jpg)

I just ordered another movie of his called ANIMAL by Roselyne Bosch.  In that, he plays a "brilliant young geneticist" who does DNA altering experiments on a sadistic killer in an attempt to increase his empathy and make him less violent.  Of course things go awry...I can't wait!

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/Animal01.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on March 08, 2008, 12:52:55 am
I just watched a terrific movie, and then searched for a mention of it on BetterMost. But, how is it possible that there is no mention of this movie anywhere on BetterMost?? Can you guess? It is B...
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on March 08, 2008, 01:03:55 am
Here's a hint. A scene I snapped when I visited Times Square for the very first time last October!

(http://www.divshare.com/img/3975350-f41.JPG)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on March 08, 2008, 01:06:00 am
Here's a hint. A scene I snapped when I visited Times Square for the very first time last October!

(http://www.divshare.com/img/3975350-f41.JPG)

Well, that's a pretty obious hint, lol!  BEOWULF? 
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on March 08, 2008, 01:24:18 am
Yes, oilgun, you are rite!! And I agree, that hint was as big as the breasts on Angelina Jolie's enhanced body!! I have a crying need to talk about this awesome overreaching film! Have you seen it? Are you game??
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on March 08, 2008, 01:35:02 am
Of course, the movie was a big overarching epic (Oh where oh where are you when we need you moremojo???????)

But the main point for me was the collision between the pagan religion and the Christian era. In the end, Beowulf vanqusihed the dragon but SHE lived on....
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on March 08, 2008, 01:46:47 am
Yes, gary and meryl, I liked Everything is Illuminated too. But I kinda wanted to talk about Beowulf tonite. Oh, Well...
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on March 08, 2008, 01:53:23 am
Yes, oilgun, you are rite!! And I agree, that hint was as big as the breasts on Angelina Jolie's enhanced body!! I have a crying need to talk about this awesome overreaching film! Have you seen it? Are you game??


I'm afraid I haven't seen it.  I'm not a big fan of performance capture animation although I hear that it's quite good in this one.   I did see the low budget Beowulf and Grendel with Gerry Butler and quite liked that  ;D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on March 08, 2008, 01:57:26 am
I, too, liked Everything Is Illuminated, Meryl.  But I hadn't heard anything about The Oxford Murders.  I'll be on the look out for it.  Interesting title.  Is it a murder mystery?  I love a good murder mystery.  Thanks for telling us about it.

Don't hate me, but I really didn't like Elijah Wood's performance in Everything is Illuminated.  Although his portrayal of the character was more sympathetic than the arrogant one in the book.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on March 08, 2008, 10:14:23 am
Me sowwy.   :(  I've not seen Beowulf, so I don't have much to say about it. 

It's okay, gary. So, go to your Blockbuster and get it, will ya? After being in New York for the big splashy premiere of Beowulf, I returned to my humble hometown of Denver all jazzed to see the movie. I was so thrilled that somebody had actually made a movie of this epic tale from the medieval Northern Isles that is the underpinning of so much of our literature and culture. Actually, a dirty little secret here. I have never actually read the book. But now that I have seen the movie, I want to read the book right away. I enlisted my son to go with me to the movie because he had just studied the book in school. But, a complication arose. He did not want to see the movie. Apparently, my husband had read a review about how bad it was, and also it is unrated but there was some adult content. So my son refused to go with me and since it takes an Act of God for me to actually see a movie other than BBM in a movie theater, I didn't go either. So, when the movie came out on DVD this past week, I was full of pent-up anticipation to see it!! Okay, who else has seen it???
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on March 08, 2008, 11:07:30 am
Great, susie! Okay, I will try not to spill any spoilers for a while. But, be forewarned, this movie has lots of violence (however, it's cgi comic book type violence, zap, pow that kind of thing). And it is somewhat raunchy, especially at the beginning. Oh, and you have to look at Angelina Jolie wearing high heels and nothing else. But other than that, it's a lot of fun and the story and characters are amazing. Added to that, the camera work, sets, and action are literally out of this world!!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on March 08, 2008, 12:34:24 pm
I didn't see Beowulf either, but a friend of mine - the teacher - read the story - and she was disgusted at the preview of the movie because it had nothing in it that was from the story.

Most of the reviews I read also said the only things taken from the story were the three main character, the hero, Grendel and his mother and the fact that there is a battle and that's pretty much it.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on March 08, 2008, 12:40:36 pm
there was some adult content. So my son refused to go with me

Does your son refuse to see movies with adult content?? Or does he refuse to see movies with adult content ... with you?

If it's the latter, my sons are exactly the same way. If it's the former, my sons are exactly the opposite (they refuse to see movies that don't have at least some violence -- or, as they like to call it, "action").



Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on March 08, 2008, 09:55:00 pm
I, too, liked Everything Is Illuminated, Meryl.  But I hadn't heard anything about The Oxford Murders.  I'll be on the look out for it.  Interesting title.  Is it a murder mystery?  I love a good murder mystery.  Thanks for telling us about it.

Yes, it's a murder mystery set at Oxford. The serial murderer leaves clues that have meaning to mathematics experts.  John Hurt is a professor of mathematics and Elijah plays a gifted student.  I read the book and thought it was diverting, but not great.  But the setting is beautiful, and of course, so is Elijah.  8)

Don't hate me, but I really didn't like Elijah Wood's performance in Everything is Illuminated.  Although his portrayal of the character was more sympathetic than the arrogant one in the book.

Arrogant?  I don't remember that character striking me that way.  I loved how funny the book was, as well as moving.  I don't hate you, oilgun, but as an Elijah groupie, I must respectfully disagree.  ;D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on March 09, 2008, 07:40:34 pm
I saw In Bruges late yesterday afternoon.

I mostly wanted to see it because I was "in Bruges" last year at this time, when they were filming the movie. In that way, I wasn't disappointed. Lovely scenes of the city and it brought back good memories.

Storywise, it was good, but not great. It starts off in a light vein and then takes a dark turn with a fairly violent, bloody ending. I was prepared for that from having read the reviews. I am glad I saw it but it is a "once is enough" movie for me.

Lots of jokes that pick on Belgium, though.  >:(

L

Just came from seeing In Bruges.  I thought it was very good.

IMO, I don't believe it ever started on a lighter vein.  I thought that it would too - that's what all the previews I watched seemed to indicate - but it never did.  The mood of the movie is somber from start to finish with some blackly funny moments thrown in.  It's not for everyone - lady beside me in the theater was upset - but my friend and I and others in the theater enjoyed it a great deal.

Beautifully shot scenery of Bruges.  Made me want to go visit.  ;D

I do recommend this movie but be warned, it may not be to everyone's taste.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on March 09, 2008, 08:32:16 pm
Does your son refuse to see movies with adult content?? Or does he refuse to see movies with adult content ... with you?

If it's the latter, my sons are exactly the same way. If it's the former, my sons are exactly the opposite (they refuse to see movies that don't have at least some violence -- or, as they like to call it, "action").

LOL, the latter, ineed. By adult content, I mean sex and nudity. Violence seems to be omnipresent, even in Bugs Bunny cartoons. (The wily coyote/roadrunner ones are vicious!) In Beowulf, the violence is scattered thruout, but there are also some raunchy scenes and we get to see a full FRontal Angelina Jolie wearing just some spatterings of mud and high heels!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kd5000 on March 09, 2008, 09:35:42 pm
Delalluvia , that's the impression I got from the trailer of IN BRUGE.  My friend said, "This is suppose to be a comedy?"  The preview did not give me that impression.

I saw the THE OTHER BOYLEYN GIRL on Saturday.  The reviews had been lousy, so I wasn't expecting much.  Of course, I knew how it was going to end.  :(  Anne was less of a shrew in this film then what I've read about her. Favorite Anne Boyleyn movie remains ANNE OF A THOUSAND DAYS. Her sister, Mary, wasn't even in that film.  I heard THE OTHE BOYLEYN GIRL doesn't follow the book that closely. Natalie Portman does look good in that green dress.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on March 09, 2008, 10:21:27 pm

I do recommend this movie but be warned, it may not be to everyone's taste.

I concur.

And Bruges is a wonderful place to visit.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on March 09, 2008, 10:23:22 pm
LOL, the latter, ineed. By adult content, I mean sex and nudity. Violence seems to be omnipresent, even in Bugs Bunny cartoons. (The wily coyote/roadrunner ones are vicious!) In Beowulf, the violence is scattered thruout, but there are also some raunchy scenes and we get to see a full FRontal Angelina Jolie wearing just some spatterings of mud and high heels!


I have no interest in watching Angelina Jolie ever, in a movie, no matter what she is wearing (or not!)...

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on March 09, 2008, 11:52:33 pm
I have no interest in watching Angelina Jolie ever, in a movie, no matter what she is wearing (or not!)...

L

hehe, this movie is certainly not for everybody. Most people I've talked to about it either don't like the cgi effects, or the violence, or AJ. I realized that the main reason I was so enthralled was because of the story. So, I rummaged around in the local library my daughter's room and found the book, and now I am happily reading it!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on March 09, 2008, 11:59:13 pm
LOL, the latter, ineed. By adult content, I mean sex and nudity.

Yes, that's what I mean, too, when I talk about movies my sons won't watch with me present. I used to usher them out of the room during the "inappropriate" scenes -- now they want to usher ME out of the room!  :laugh: And if there's any explicit sex or nudity, they won't watch it with me, period!

Quote
Violence seems to be omnipresent, even in Bugs Bunny cartoons.

So true. I've tried to keep a lid on it with my kids, but it's a losing battle. Especially when it comes to video games.  :-\

I have no interest in watching Angelina Jolie ever, in a movie, no matter what she is wearing (or not!)...

How come, Leslie? I have only seen her in one or two things, but I thought she was a pretty good actress. I'm not crazy about her real-life escapades, but I blame those more on the tabloid coverage than on her own behavior. I'm curious about your opposition to her.


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on March 10, 2008, 08:04:22 am
How come, Leslie? I have only seen her in one or two things, but I thought she was a pretty good actress. I'm not crazy about her real-life escapades, but I blame those more on the tabloid coverage than on her own behavior. I'm curious about your opposition to her.

It's not her acting Leslie has against her.

I, on the other hand, am a huge fan - though I don't see everything she does - and am eagerly awaiting Angelina's latest movie Wanted which also stars the hunk from Atonement James McAvoy.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on March 10, 2008, 09:28:26 am
I like her too, in many ways.  She is gorgeous, not concerned with what people think, and a decent actress.  I have been a fan since seeing her years ago in Girl Interrupted with Winona Ryder.



Even after what that homewrecking slut did to our "Friend" Jennifer Anniston?!!  :laugh:  Just kidding! 

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on March 10, 2008, 09:56:23 am
It's not her acting Leslie has against her.


Yes, Del and I had a long heated debate about AJ back in the day, and in the end, we agreed to disagree about this person.


Quote
How come, Leslie? I have only seen her in one or two things, but I thought she was a pretty good actress. I'm not crazy about her real-life escapades, but I blame those more on the tabloid coverage than on her own behavior. I'm curious about your opposition to her.

In most cases, I can easily separate a person's personal life from who they are up on the screen (or stage). But in AJ's case, I have such fundamental disagreements with so many of the things she has said and done, I have lost my "separate-ability." So, for myself, I decided it's just better to stay away. I don't read about her (gossip or serious interviews or anything else) and I won't watch her in movies.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on March 10, 2008, 12:38:16 pm
In most cases, I can easily separate a person's personal life from who they are up on the screen (or stage). But in AJ's case, I have such fundamental disagreements with so many of the things she has said and done, I have lost my "separate-ability." So, for myself, I decided it's just better to stay away. I don't read about her (gossip or serious interviews or anything else) and I won't watch her in movies.

That's interesting! I have a pretty good separatability, too. I can watch Tom Cruise, for example, with no problem. The only actor I can think of who I might draw the line with is Mel Gibson. Though if Mel were in a really good movie (which he hasn't been, IMO, in quite a while), it's possible I might go see him. My moral standards in this area are pretty lax  :laugh:  -- either that, or where movies is concerned, I got no resistance.

Now, my husband has a long list of actors he refuses to see in a movie -- many of them seemingly innocent people. Cher, Julia Roberts, Bruce Willis ... if anyone has ever annoyed him on a talk show or something, that's it for that person. Though I probably could talk him into seeing something if it was really really good.

How about the rest of you? What actor(s)/ess(es) do you refuse to go see?

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on March 10, 2008, 02:46:44 pm
I can only think of one actor that I avoid like the plague:  Steven Seagal. That's because of his lack of acting talent and his sleazy personal life.

I'm getting pretty sick of Will Ferrel, lol!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on March 10, 2008, 02:55:48 pm
I can only think of one actor that I avoid like the plague:  Steven Seagal. That's because of his lack of acting talent and his sleazy personal life.

Tell you what, I don't know anything about his personal life and I don't think I've ever seen him act, but I have no problem avoiding his movies!  ;D

Quote
I'm getting pretty sick of Will Ferrel, lol!

Me too!



Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: belbbmfan on March 10, 2008, 04:00:33 pm
I can only think of one actor that I avoid like the plague:  Steven Seagal. That's because of his lack of acting talent and his sleazy personal life.

I'm getting pretty sick of Will Ferrel, lol!

Steven Seagal! Yuk!

There was a Steven Seagal movie on almost every day during the summer (summer is a very slow tv season over here). I actually didn't know he'd made that many. Or maybe they were reruns, no one would probably notice anyway. I can watch him act  ::) for 5 minutes maximum. Awful movies, really awful.

Tell you what, I don't know anything about his personal life and I don't think I've ever seen him act, but I have no problem avoiding his movies!  ;D


You can say that again!  :laugh:
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on March 10, 2008, 07:25:21 pm
Dakota Fanning.  She's evil.
Speaking of Evil:  The Olson twins!  Ewww!  Man, they give me the creeps!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on March 15, 2008, 11:20:50 pm
Today I saw Haneke's FUNNY GAMES.  It really is a shot for shot remake of his 1997 German film, it was almost like watching the same film.  All the performances are excellent,  Michael Pitt was perfectly cast as the more talkative of the two psychos, I was really impressed.  I found the psychological violence just as disturbing, so much so that I actually felt sick to my stomach after it ended.  I must be a sucker for punishment, lol!   The film is definitely not for everyone.

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/FunnyGames02.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: elomelo on March 16, 2008, 12:07:45 am
Dakota Fanning.  She's evil.

And here I thought I was alone on that opinion.  :D

Jennifer Lopez. I dunno why but just seeing her in movies just unnerves me.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kd5000 on March 16, 2008, 12:11:24 am
Your probably right Oilgun. The trailer for FUNNY GAMES was painful to watch in more ways then one. It seemed so long for one thing.  I might go see IN BRUGES tomorrow.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on March 16, 2008, 12:53:43 am
I can hardly stand to read the REVIEWS for Funny Games. Seriously, the only way you'd get me to see it is wearing a strait-jacket, with my eyelids close-pinned open.

I'd sooner see a heartwarming family drama with Mel Gibson as the antisemitic dad, Diane Keaton as the obnoxious matriarch, and the Olsen twins as the strung-out daughters.

 :laugh:



Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on March 16, 2008, 01:34:31 am
I can hardly stand to read the REVIEWS for Funny Games. Seriously, the only way you'd get me to see it is wearing a strait-jacket, with my eyelids close-pinned open.

I'd sooner see a heartwarming family drama with Mel Gibson as the antisemitic dad, Diane Keaton as the obnoxious matriarch, and the Olsen twins as the strung-out daughters.

 :laugh:


 :laugh: :laugh:  Don't give them any ideas!  Hmmm, Cate Blanchett could play the twins... :-X
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on March 16, 2008, 09:07:58 am
I'd sooner see a heartwarming family drama with Mel Gibson as the antisemitic dad, Diane Keaton as the obnoxious matriarch, and the Olsen twins as the strung-out daughters.

 :laugh:


With Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes as the religious cult next door neighbors!

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on March 16, 2008, 09:08:26 am
Your probably right Oilgun. The trailer for FUNNY GAMES was painful to watch in more ways then one. It seemed so long for one thing.  I might go see IN BRUGES tomorrow.

If you do, report back and let me know what you think if it.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on March 16, 2008, 09:20:05 am
Today I saw Haneke's FUNNY GAMES.  It really is a shot for shot remake of his 1997 German film, it was almost like watching the same film.  All the performances are excellent,  Michael Pitt was perfectly cast as the more talkative of the two psychos, I was really impressed.  I found the psychological violence just as disturbing, so much so that I actually felt sick to my stomach after it ended.  I must be a sucker for punishment, lol!   The film is definitely not for everyone.


I haven't even heard of Funny Games!  I guess I need to go read some reviews!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on March 16, 2008, 10:55:50 am
I haven't even heard of Funny Games!  I guess I need to go read some reviews!

The film, right now, gets a 46% Rotten rating on RT.  But here are a couple of positive reviews that I agree with:

http://www.salon.com/ent/movies/btm/feature/2008/01/24/games/
excerpt:
The real "funny games" in "Funny Games" are not between the family and their white-gloved tormentors, but between audience and director. Throughout the film, Haneke keeps submerging us in the wrenching drama of his story and then pulling us back out again, as if asking: "Do you really want to watch this?" Roth, Watts and young Devon Gearhart, who plays their son, are portraying naturalistic movie characters, and the things that happen to them don't bear thinking about. Any viewer with an ounce of humanity will shut down emotionally during the infamous extended shot (it must last five minutes or longer) that follows the first act of violence.

http://www.thestar.com/entertainment/Movies/article/345885
excerpt:
Funny Games can't be viewed as simple entertainment. It's not a date movie or a fun night out; it's an assault on the senses. Having seen the original doesn't prepare you for it. You may still feel inclined to walk out on this film.
Indeed, the movie seems all the more intense in the post-9/11 era, where random violence is now much more common than it was in 1997.
Critics have long assailed Haneke for having no point to his horrific visions of modern life.
In films like Caché, The Piano Teacher and Year of the Wolf, he depicts a bleak human condition where desires are unhealthy, actions are furtive and motives are suspect. But does a mirror need to have a point?
Funny Games is one of Haneke's finest movies, both the original and this remake. The performances are outstanding across the board. The direction and writing are masterful
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on March 16, 2008, 11:18:27 am
Quote
n films like Caché, The Piano Teacher and Year of the Wolf, he depicts a bleak human condition where desires are unhealthy, actions are furtive and motives are suspect.

It's just been announced that Haneke has been engaged to direct Mozart's Cosi fan tutte at New York City Opera in 2012.  I wonder what he'll do to those poor, sweet, silly boys and girls?  :P
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on March 16, 2008, 02:50:18 pm
Roth, Watts and young Devon Gearhart, who plays their son, are portraying naturalistic movie characters, and the things that happen to them don't bear thinking about. Any viewer with an ounce of humanity will shut down emotionally during the infamous extended shot (it must last five minutes or longer) that follows the first act of violence.

Quote
Funny Games can't be viewed as simple entertainment. It's not a date movie or a fun night out; it's an assault on the senses. Having seen the original doesn't prepare you for it. You may still feel inclined to walk out on this film.
Indeed, the movie seems all the more intense in the post-9/11 era, where random violence is now much more common than it was in 1997.

And these are the POSITIVE reviews!  :laugh:



With Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes as the religious cult next door neighbors!

And Sarah Jessica Parker is their family therapist!



Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: BelAir on March 16, 2008, 08:09:24 pm
Even after what that homewrecking slut did to our "Friend" Jennifer Anniston?!!  :laugh:  Just kidding! 



yeah, that's what made me anti-AJ for awhile, I am less vigilant in my anti-ness now...  though I do sometimes question their decisions as a couple/family... anyhoo - I didn't watch Mr. and Mrs. Smith for the longest time because I was "mad" at the two of them.  I did finally catch it one day - and well, I enjoyed it!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: BelAir on March 16, 2008, 08:16:39 pm
I saw Cache, but daggone if I can remember what it was about...

Oh wait, it's coming back to me...

The Algerian boy that the husband disliked as a child...

Anyone else see this?
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: BelAir on March 22, 2008, 02:39:42 pm
I watched My Beautiful Laundrette this afternoon, and thought it was really really good.  I appreciated very much that even though it was full of strife and sadness, there was [at least to me] a glimmer of hope at the end.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on March 22, 2008, 03:00:10 pm
Hannah and I went and saw "The Diving Bell and the Butterfly" yesterday. Oh my goodness, what a movie. It was excellent, incredibly well done. Very moving performances, very beautifully told. This is a definite 5 star movie!

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on March 22, 2008, 04:09:48 pm
Oilgun, I just wanted to tell you that I watched Evil the other night, and I was very impressed by it.  It was disturbing, as you say, but I'm so glad I watched.  The story examines something I've been concerned with ever since I was in school myself, and that's hazing, which in southern West Virginia back in the 70's and 80's had a pronounced homophobic air.

The film showed how authority figures are often aware of hazing, but they turn a blind eye to it, foolishly thinking that it's just a part of growing up, and that it might even serve some benefit by toughening up weaker boys.  But this story goes a long way in countering that argument.  Hazing and bullying are not only evil, allowing it to happen is stupid, and that's because the boys who are brutalized do not go on to become highly successful men, but in many instances, emotional cripples.

Hazing is really about bigger, and in many instances older boys taking advantage of smaller boys.  And the system of hazing creates an atomsphere of strict conformity.  The hazing I experienced and saw back when I was growing up was meant to weed out any traits that were deemed feminine, including homosexual desire.  Bullying, which is ignored by adults by and large, is meant to keep boys in a box.  When hazing goes unchecked originality, and, heaven forbit, femininity, and most especially homosexuality, and general lack of obedience to established norms are used as pretexts for abuse, both verbal and physical, and in some cases sexual.

The fact that we do not take bullying and hazing more seriously says something about the brutish quality of our society.

Thanks again for telling us about the film Evil.     



I'm glad you enjoyed EVIL Gary!  I'm always nervous when people see movies that I recommend.   
I went through a bit of hazing in highschool but it was extremely mild in comparison to what happens in this film and it was only for a day.  In fact, until I watched the special features, I thought that the incidents portrayed were all exaggerated for dramatic purposes and I still have trouble believing that teachers would turn a blind eye to such violence, even back in the fifties.

Today I saw Gus van Sant's PARANOID PARK and quite enjoyed it.  It's similar in style to his "death trilogy" of GERRY/ELEPHANT/LAST DAYS, so if you like those then I highly recommend seeing this one.   It's a simple but quietly disturbing story.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on March 24, 2008, 07:00:50 am
Yesterday I watched, "For the Bible Tells Me So," which I know folks on this thread have recommended before. It was very good and I am glad I watched it. Unfortunately, I feel like the people who really need to watch this movie aren't seeing it.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on March 28, 2008, 07:13:14 am
This afternoon--assuming that the snow that is falling doesn't slow us down--my children and I are going to see 21. I just read the book which was really good. I heard the movie isn't quite as good. We'll see. I'll report back!

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on March 28, 2008, 09:36:11 am
This afternoon--assuming that the snow that is falling doesn't slow us down--my children and I are going to see 21. I just read the book which was really good. I heard the movie isn't quite as good. We'll see. I'll report back!

L

Yeah, the reviews are pretty bad for 21. "Deals a lot of cards, but doesn't make a winning bet" is how The Globe & Mail puts it. 

It's really not a good weekend for new movies.  STOP-LOSS, one I was been looking forward to because of the cast (of cuties), fares no better with "...the first really bad Iraq war movie." .  RUN, FATBOY, RUN with Simon Pegg is described as a "Marathon of mediocrity"
All three films get 2 stars.(out of 4)

Even the Brazilian oscar nominee, THE YEAR MY PARENTS WENT ON VACATION, gets a so-so 2.5 stars, and only because it's "saved in the second half."

I suppose that's good news for the French Film Festival that is starting here today, although none of their titles has caught my attention.  They are not even screening the eagerly anticipated modern day musical LOVE SONGS by Christophe Honoré and starring Louis Garrel(!)  I want to see that so bad I can taste it!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on March 28, 2008, 07:13:17 pm
"21" was pretty disappointing. I would put it in the category of "forgettable entertainment" which means that it is entertaining while you watch it and instantly start forgetting it as you walk out of the theater. Actually, that might be generous. It was completely predictable, the characters were not believable (I am sorry, the Kate Bosworth character did not look like a college student, much less an MIT undergrad!) and there were some serious ethical issues that were just glossed over. That said, I knew from the first 5 minutes that the movie was going to preach the mantra, "Crime doesn't pay." And it does, even though the characters weren't doing anything illegal! (Card counting is not illegal but casinos don't want card counters in their midst--which is understandable. While this point is made clearly in the book, it is totally ignored/glossed over in the movie.) They also, in this "crime doesn't pay" mindset, made the whole money thing completely ridiculous. In real life, Jeff Ma (who actually has a cameo in the movie--watch for him as "Dealer Jeff") made close to $6 million. In the movie, Ben makes (and loses) $315,000. The Kevin Spacey character (Rosa) goes bullshit over Ben losing $200,000. Oh please...come on...

The ending is telegraphed in the first five minutes. Totally. I don't think I am giving anything away by saying that, you just need to think for 4 seconds and you'll figure it out. Also, sorry, the Dean of Harvard Medical School (or whoever that guy was supposed to be) is not a doofus-idiot.

I did enjoy the scenes of Boston and it was fun seeing Las Vegas, too, since I have been there, now, and can recognize some of the buildings (not casinos). But overall, storywise, the book was much, much better.

I did learn a new expression from my daughter, though. The two young men in front of us had an empty seat between them, which is supposedly known as a "gay seat"---just so no one thinks they're gay! LOL...thanks for that one, Hannah. And yesterday from Dan Savage I learned "pee shy." What a week it has been!

L

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kd5000 on March 30, 2008, 06:36:33 pm
Okay I heard from a fellow BROKIE who just bought The Ice Storm - Criterion Collection .  He said the audio commentary featuring Ang Lee and producer-screenwriter James Schamus was excellent and he thoroughly enjoyed listening to what they had to say.  Well at least we know Lee is a talker. I didn't know if he did audio commentary.  Has anyone else see the Criterion version?  It was released on 3/18 so maybe not too many have seen it yet. 

Maybe I should have started a separate thread. I could order it from Amazon.com as I don't think WALMART  :D carries Criterion stuff.

Maybe there is hope that one day BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN will gets the same high quality treatment that THE ICE STORM received courtesy of Criterion. I'm quite a fan of THE ICE STORM and saw it twice at the theaters.  Probably Criterion released it on account of it's 10th anniversary. Hope we don't have to wait so long. That would mean 2015. :-\
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on March 30, 2008, 06:55:56 pm
You can also order it direct from Criterion:

http://www.criterion.com/asp/new_releases.asp

It is actually $3 less than the price at amazon.com right now.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on April 01, 2008, 04:05:18 pm
You can also order it direct from Criterion:

http://www.criterion.com/asp/new_releases.asp

It is actually $3 less than the price at amazon.com right now.

L

I'm anxiously waiting for my copy from Amazon, another item in my order has delayed the delivery.  Ang Lee also did a commentary for HULK but I haven't listened to it.

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/IceStorm.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on April 01, 2008, 04:19:14 pm
Oh wow, I have been waiting for this...the Criterion Edition of "The Landlord" starring Will Ferrell.

http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/3db471fcea
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on April 02, 2008, 09:45:39 am
Over the weekend, I re-watched two movies I had liked the first time around.

Juno was still good; I developed even greater appreciation for the secondary performances. Ellen Page is amazing, of course. But Allison Janney, R.K. Simmons and Michael Cera are all great, too. And you know whose performance I found the most touching? Jennifer Garner's! Who knew??

Michael Clayton was even better the second time -- I picked up on a couple of details I'd missed the first time. One thing I really like about that movie is that it's just the right amount of complexity. That is, it's tough enough to keep up with that it exercises your brain (well, mine anyway) but it's never so complex that you can't actually get it. It's one of those movies that unfolds gradually and makes more sense as it goes along, so seeing it a second time, knowing what's to come, was helpful. And there's a key scene involving horses that seemed like kind of a poetic throwaway the first time I saw it. Now I realized that it's actually quite a nice metaphor for the turning point in Michael Clayton's understanding of the situation.

Then we rented August Rush. My 16-year-old niece had wanted to see it, and she seemed to like it pretty well, so it wasn't a total waste of time and money. We were roaming around the video store trying to decide what to get when a lady who worked there just spontaneously burst out with a recommendation of August Rush, saying it's one of her favorite movies of all time. Put it this way: I wouldn't be taking any more recommendations from her. In fact, I'd probably try to find out her least favorite movies of all time, and then rent those.


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on April 02, 2008, 10:05:48 am
Last night I watched ENCHANTED, and actually enjoyed it!
==Spoilers==
I thought James Marsden, as The Prince, stole the show, he was hilarious.  I fast forwarded through a couple of the songs even though they didn't sound as awful as they did at the oscars.  Patrick Dempsey was rather...bland, especially compared to everyone else, and the character of little girl was not well written, she didn't seem to know what to do half the time.   I also thought the ending with the Evil Stepmother turning into a CGI dragon was pretty lame and superfluous. 
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kd5000 on April 02, 2008, 01:55:12 pm
I like James Marsden and look forward to seeing him work with Jake G in NAILED.   

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1137470/

Last night, (I got it from the library) I watched  THE LAST MAN ON EARTH.   They finally have it on a nice DVD which came out in 2007. No doubt to coincide with the release of I AM LEGEND.    I think  THE OMEGA MAN as the best of the three interpretations of Richard Matheson's 1954 novel I AM LEGEND.   

This version is suppose to be set in Los Angeles, but it was filmed in Rome. I recognized a few of the landmarks as NOT being Southern California so I guess production costs were cheaper in Italy back in 1965.  Many of the actors and actresses were Italian.  Vincent Price is the only star I recognized.  I thought it was a bit silly when he's burying his dog with a stake thru it. He doesn't want his dog to turn into a vampire! Also, some of the voices seem to have been dubbed. Apparently, the actors and actresses spoke English with an Italian accent.  The dubbing isn't terribly apprent, but still noticeable. Other then that, it's a good free rental.

By the way, I really like the DVD cover for THE ICE STORM. So abstract.  I'd like to get another movie poster and don't know if this would go with BBM poster in my room.   I like the movie poster for THE FOUNTAIN as well, but don't know if it would be too out there after awhile.

http://justevolvin.files.wordpress.com/2007/07/the_fountain-poster.jpg
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on April 05, 2008, 08:44:14 am
Man, I've been making some really good choices lately! 

Just saw the Romanian film 4 Month, 3 Weeks & 2 Days and I have to agree with the Cannes  jury who awarded it the Palme D'or.  Wow!  It's the type of realist drama that I absolutely love. If you like the work of the Dardennes brothers than this powerful and emotionally complex film is a must. Oustanding! 10/10

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/4m3w2d-2.jpg)

I went and saw this yesterday, solely on your recommendation, Gil! I agree with your assessment: "powerful and emotionally complex." It was excellent.

I remember reading your comment and not knowing anything about the movie. Obviously it played in Canada months before it came to the US (Roger Ebert wrote his review on February 7, 2008). I hadn't really thought about it  but in yesterday's paper I saw it was playing at the Nickelodeon. My daughter and I like to go to movies on Friday afternoon, so we chose this.

I went in with very little knowledge of the movie other than it was Romanian and won the Palme d'Or. This is unusual for me as I usually read reviews obsessively beforehand. Not knowing what to expect, I was rather blown away. So much so that I have been actually posting on IMDb this morning! LOL.

I did find myself racking my brain, trying to remember the details of the Cecescau regime (the movie takes place in 1987). The dark, dirty, and grimy feel to everything certainly reinforces the mental image that I have always had about the old Soviet bloc countries. According to some of the Romanians who are posting on IMDb, things have not really changed, despite the fact that the Communists are gone.

I definitely suggest folks seek this out. It is worth seeing and you need to see it in a theater (imo). Many scenes are very dark and on a TV screen they would just look black.

If anyone does want to read I review, I would suggest Ebert's. He wrote the review I would have written, if I was a critic.

http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080207/REVIEWS/802070302/1023

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on April 05, 2008, 09:21:35 am
I'm so glad you enjoyed the film, Leslie!  (Hope that makes up for Lars! ;)) And thanks for the Ebert link, I hadn't read his review.  It's true what he says about Anamarinca's performance being masterful, she really was amazing!  One of the best performances I've seen in quite some time.

It's another weak new movie weekend.  The only opening film that has received good reviews here is the Australian comedy Kenny, a mockumentary about a porta-potty maintenance guy.  It looks like great fun.  I assume it's opening in the US as well. 
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on April 05, 2008, 09:55:53 am
I'm so glad you enjoyed the film, Leslie!  (Hope that makes up for Lars! ;)) And thanks for the Ebert link, I hadn't read his review.  It's true what he says about Anamarinca's performance being masterful, she really was amazing!  One of the best performances I've seen in quite some time.

It's another weak new movie weekend.  The only opening film that has received good reviews here is the Australian comedy Kenny, a mockumentary about a porta-potty maintenance guy.  It looks like great fun.  I assume it's opening in the US as well. 

Yes, Lars is definitely made up for! LOL.

No mention of Kenny anywhere that I can find...

One of the previews yesterday was for Snow Angels. Do you know anything about that one? It is getting moderately good reviews on rottentomatoes (67% right now). In the preview, there was a familiar face but I couldn't quite place him. Turns out it is Michael Angarano, who played Sid in Lords of Dogtown, which I just watched last Saturday for the Heath Ledger film festival. Duh!

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on April 06, 2008, 08:30:58 am
Finally watched Sweeney Todd and quite enjoyed it.   It was great hearing Johnny Depp sing, what a good voice, is there anything he can't do?  I also liked how they pared down the story and made it more intimate and internal and less of a standard musical with singing crowds & choruses etc.  The special features included in the 2 disc edition look pretty good too.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on April 06, 2008, 10:36:31 am
I saw Shine a Light yesterday.  Pure.Unadulterated.Joy.  And I'm not even a Stones fan, per ce.  Or at least, I wasn't until yesterday.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on April 06, 2008, 10:41:10 am
Turns out it is Michael Angarano, who played Sid in Lords of Dogtown, which I just watched last Saturday for the Heath Ledger film festival. Duh!

What? You have not seen LOD prior to this?? Thud!!

Barb, I will have to put that movie on my list!! I heard that Mick Jagger was on the cover of the AARP Magazine recently!  :P

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on April 06, 2008, 02:16:06 pm
What? You have not seen LOD prior to this?? Thud!!

I like Michael Angarano. I also like Emile Hirsch, who played Jay in LOD as well as the guy in Into the Wild, another good film (have we talked about this one? I saw it a few weeks ago and enjoyed it a lot). LOD really has a potential-star-studded cast. The actor who plays Tony Alva is good, too.

Quote
Barb, I will have to put that movie on my list!!

It's on my list now, too! I'm a longtime Stones fan, and I loved Martin Scorcese's other two rock movies (The Last Waltz and the Dylan one, both wonderful). Still, I might have skipped this without Barb's endorsement.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on April 06, 2008, 02:21:59 pm
What? You have not seen LOD prior to this?? Thud!!



No, I have seen it before. In fact, we own the DVD. I was just saying, the actor in the preview was at the edge of my mind and I couldn't place him, and then when I looked Snow Angels up on IMDb, I realized I had just seen him when I re-watched LOD for the Heath DVD festival.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on April 06, 2008, 02:32:59 pm

It's on my list now, too! I'm a longtime Stones fan, and I loved Martin Scorcese's other two rock movies (The Last Waltz and the Dylan one, both wonderful). Still, I might have skipped this without Barb's endorsement.



The other rock movie (recent) that I am wondering about, and no one talks about, is the Tom Petty documentary directed by Peter Bogdonavich. That was supposed to premiere at a film festival in NYC last fall and since then...not a word. Anyone know anything? I am a Tom Petty fan, I will admit...

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kd5000 on April 07, 2008, 04:08:12 pm
I can be a lazy dvd watcher so I'm glad the lady at BLOCKBUSTER VIDEO STORE (yes, I go there from time to time)  talked me into watching THE KITE RUNNER.  I'm not one to read the subtitles on a TV screen and some of the stuff wasn't even translated.  I still got the important stuff, I think.  I don't know if it's already been discussed on this thread, but I strongly recommend it.   I had to check IMDB.com as it looked like it was filmed in Afghanistan and I know they wouldn't have let this be filmed there.  It was actually filmed in the westermost part of China. 

I guess I should check out the book it's based on as I've seen around quite a bit. 
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: BelAir on April 08, 2008, 06:40:53 pm
haha, I went to Blockbuster the other day too...  spur of the moment wanted to watch Out of Africa again.

 ::)

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on April 15, 2008, 11:34:09 pm
I'm anxiously waiting for my copy from Amazon, another item in my order has delayed the delivery.  Ang Lee also did a commentary for HULK but I haven't listened to it.

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/IceStorm.jpg)

I finally got my copy and I watched the special features.  And they are special, definitely worth more than one viewing.

The interview with the very articulate,Rick Moodie is very interesting.  He talks about how he felt when the story he slaved over for so long suddenly became Ang Lee's The Ice Storm.  How the characters he knew intimately became refracted versions of what he wrote, at once the same yet different.

Weathering The Storm features exclusive recent interviews with the main actors: Sigourney Weaver, Joan Allen, Kevin Kline, Christina Ricci, Tobey McGuire and Elijah Wood.  They are all candid and revealing with their reminiscences. While watching them it dawned on me that if Brokeback Mountain ever gets the Criterion treatment, Heath would not be included in the series of interviews and I just emotionally deflated...

Other documentaries include "visual essays" featuring the cinematographer, production designer and costume designer.  I learned:- that most of the ice in the film was actually biodegradable hair gel!  Yep, it was all dippety-doo!  -The costumes, which were all original designs, kick-started a worldwide seventies inspired fashion trend.  - Why they picked the houses that they did for each family, the cold glass house for the Carvers, the warmer fifties modern house for the Hoods and the grand colonial house for the key party scene.  Really interesting stuff.

I still haven't listened to the Ang Lee commentary, I'm saving that for later.

All in all, highly recommended.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: BelAir on April 15, 2008, 11:38:08 pm
Thanks for that review oilgun.  I was out to dinner with some friends tonight, one of whom said the most recent movie he had seen was Lars and the Real Girl (sp?) and that he loved it - of course, I immediately thought of you and MaineWriter!!!

Didn't have a chance to figure out exactly why he thought it was such a good movie, however.

 ::)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on April 16, 2008, 08:43:43 am
Apparently it is now out on DVD so here is your chance to watch it and tell us what you think.

I am interested in Smart People. It is at 50% on rottentomatoes and the reviewers who like it are reviewers I like: A.O. Scott from the New York Times, the guy from the Wall Street Journal, etc. Hannah and I might go see it for our Friday afternoon movie.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on April 16, 2008, 10:46:01 am
I am interested in Smart People. It is at 50% on rottentomatoes and the reviewers who like it are reviewers I like: A.O. Scott from the New York Times, the guy from the Wall Street Journal, etc. Hannah and I might go see it for our Friday afternoon movie.

Dana Stevens of Slate, another critic I like, also wrote a decent review of Smart People.

http://www.slate.com/id/2188756/ (http://www.slate.com/id/2188756/)

And here's a review by Chris Hewitt of the St. Paul Pioneer Press, another reviewer I like (who isn't normally on rt).

http://www.twincities.com/movies/ci_8876267?nclick_check=1 (http://www.twincities.com/movies/ci_8876267?nclick_check=1)

Hewitt pretty closely describes my reactions to the film when he says, "I liked "Smart People" for a while, then I didn't like it, then I kinda hated it, then I liked it again. It's a semi-infuriating movie, and yet, I think I'd recommend it." Or, "It's an occasionally amusing film, and Quaid's worth the price of admission, but I left "Smart People" with this thought: It feels like a movie that would like to tell five stories but has room enough for only one."

I didn't absolutely love it and probably wouldn't see it again, yet I was glad I saw it. I'll be eager to hear what you think, Leslie.

Oh, and look out for Christine Lahti, an accomplished actress who weirdly plays, as Hewitt says, basically an extra.

The other movie I saw last weekend that I also didn't absolutely love but found enjoyable was Leatherheads. It has gotten very mediocre reviews, and though I can see what they're getting at, I think they're being too harsh. I thought it was fun, and my son liked it a lot.

What's really weird is that I enjoyed two movies in a row featuring actresses I normally can't stand: Renee Zellwegger and Sarah Jessica Parker!





Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kd5000 on April 18, 2008, 08:05:36 pm
Has anyone seen GOYA'S GHOST. I rented it yesterday. Well I have been renting alot of movies as there is not much playing at the theater.  I don't understand why the critics were so hard on this film. It's directed by the same guy who did AMADEUS and produced THE ENGLISH PATIENT (didn't like that film thought). 

It's not a biopic film about Goya but what he sees going on around him.  The Spanish Inquisition lauches a new wave of hysteria followed by the arrival  Napoleon who gets rid of the Inquisition but starts his own reign of terror.   I thought it was a well done film.  It's one of the better historic dramas I've seen in some time.  My only gripe might be the lenght.  Javier Bardem and Stellan Skarsgård give excellent performances.  I thought Randy Quaid was an odd choice to be the King of Spain.  It's certainly a better film then the last two historic dramas I've seen, THE OTHER BOLEYN GIRL and ELIZABETH: THE GOLDEN AGE.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on April 20, 2008, 12:03:32 pm
Went and saw Leatherheads.

I give it a 6.5 out of 10

Some scenes went on a little too long and overall the movie was a little too slow, the pacing off, and the Roaring 20's not quite recreated, someone needs to feed Renee Z. and give her a movie where she doesn't have to grin until her face looks like a squashed lemon.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on April 23, 2008, 12:28:19 pm
I think this has come up on this thread before, but last night I watched Dogtown and Z-Boys which was the documentary that inspired The Lords of Dogtown. I enjoyed it very much. It was fun to see the real people and real footage of skateboarding and surfing and so on. They explained alot of things which made LOD make more sense to me. I'd recommend both.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on April 23, 2008, 01:53:28 pm
I think this has come up on this thread before, but last night I watched Dogtown and Z-Boys which was the documentary that inspired The Lords of Dogtown. I enjoyed it very much. It was fun to see the real people and real footage of skateboarding and surfing and so on. They explained alot of things which made LOD make more sense to me. I'd recommend both.

Not to sound like a broken record, because I've said this before, but Dogtown and Z-Boys is one of two movies I own! (Guess what the other is?  ::)) But Dogtown came first, because my son gave it to me for Mother's Day a couple of years ago.  :)

And of course I love LOD. Which I've also said many times. So I'll shut up now.  ;D


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on April 23, 2008, 01:59:56 pm
I saw Smart People yesterday, and like you, Katherine, I didn't absolutely love it, but I enjoyed it.  The performances were all good, and I like that kind of cynical, ironic family humor.  I didn't even mind Sarah Jessica Parker, maybe because she wasn't playing a narcissistic bimbo.  I did wonder why both she and Dennis Quaid's character kept picking up their relationship time and again.  Neither was exactly captivating.  Thomas Hayden Church was the best, I think; you just have to look at him, and you're grinning.  He's got a great comic gift.  Setting the story in Pittsburgh was a good idea, too, since that area has a combination of highly educated people and lots of depressed, poor people, both of which come into play in the movie.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on April 23, 2008, 02:20:02 pm
Not to sound like a broken record, because I've said this before, but Dogtown and Z-Boys is one of two movies I own! (Guess what the other is?  ::)) But Dogtown came first, because my son gave it to me for Mother's Day a couple of years ago.  :)

And of course I love LOD. Which I've also said many times. So I'll shut up now.  ;D



Hahahaha, you don't need to shut up!!

You own two movies? Cripe, I own five copies of BBM alone...the bootleg version, the widescreen version, the fullscreen version, the deluxe version, and the other one that someone gave me (not sure which version that is).

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on April 23, 2008, 02:21:49 pm
I saw Smart People yesterday, and like you, Katherine, I didn't absolutely love it, but I enjoyed it.  The performances were all good, and I like that kind of cynical, ironic family humor.  I didn't even mind Sarah Jessica Parker, maybe because she wasn't playing a narcissistic bimbo.  I did wonder why both she and Dennis Quaid's character kept picking up their relationship time and again.  Neither was exactly captivating.  Thomas Hayden Church was the best, I think; you just have to look at him, and you're grinning.  He's got a great comic gift.  Setting the story in Pittsburgh was a good idea, too, since that area has a combination of highly educated people and lots of depressed, poor people, both of which come into play in the movie.

Hm, sounds like the kind of movie that I would enjoy, too. I haven't gotten to see it yet and I probably won't this weekend, since I need to go see Deception really fast since I think it is going to get lousy reviews and close in a matter of days. But I want to see Hugh Jackman, Ewan McGregor and Michelle Williams. That trio alone is enough to get me to plunk down $8, even on a lousy movie!

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on April 24, 2008, 12:29:33 am
You own two movies? Cripe, I own five copies of BBM alone...the bootleg version, the widescreen version, the fullscreen version, the deluxe version, and the other one that someone gave me (not sure which version that is).

What's even more shocking is that I didn't own ANY versions of BBM until last October, when someone (a Brokie, of course!  :)) gave it to me for my birthday.


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on April 26, 2008, 06:20:35 pm
So I went and saw Deception. My review? I am not quite sure why the reviewers are being so savage.

It wasn't great but I have sat through movies that are much, much worse. Yes, it had corny dialog, and yes, I could figure things out pretty easily, but it was still entertaining for 108 minutes. The actors are certainly enjoyable to look at, the camera angles interesting, the music appropriate. It could have been much worse. And there was one big surprise I was totally unprepared for so I guess I didn't figure out every single plot twist.

Ewan McGregor did have one strange accent, I have to say. When he hit a US accent, he sounded like he was from Brooklyn (born and bred) but the rest of the time, he was mixing up three accents in one sentence. Weird. It seemed to get better as the movie went on, but maybe he wasn't talking so much, just frowning at the computer screen.

The pot smoking scene (near the beginning) was ridiculous. They share one joint for 35 minutes and inside of that 35 minutes they both (Hugh and Ewan) end up sitting cross-legged on the big, fancy conference room table, Ewan babbling on and on about the "perfect symmetry of numbers" or something equally inane. I thought, stoned out of their minds on one joint in 30 minutes? What is this, Reefer Madness or something?

While there is more sex with Ewan, we do have one shirtless scene with Hugh. I could have used more. I didn't like Hugh at the beginning, but I liked him better as the movie went on--and he was the bad guy! I guess he got more convincing as the bad guy. In fact, everyone got better as the movie went on. It was almost like they were acting at the beginning, then finally got comfortable in their roles. Unfortunately, it seems for alot of reviewers, they lost interest by that part, but I kept watching.

Oh, BTW, Charlotte Rampling as the semi-nude cougar was great.





Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: belbbmfan on April 27, 2008, 10:48:07 am
Thanks for that review Leslie. After reading all the very negative other reviews I was thinking this movie wasn't worth much. But I think I'll go see it anyway. Besides, there really isn't much interesting programmed in our local cinema at the moment. Summer has come early this year...

'Deception' will be released here next week.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: BelAir on April 27, 2008, 10:58:37 am
Yes, thanks for the review Leslie.  I will keep Deception on my mental list of one to watch.

Anyone heard anything about Speed Racer???  It comes out here in a few weeks and I like Emile Hirsch a lot but am not sure what sort of expectations to have for the film.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on April 28, 2008, 05:52:13 pm
I rented Enchanted the other night. I don't know that it would be everybody's cup of tea, but I liked it a lot. It's so light it makes Little Miss Sunshine look like something by Ingmar Bergman. But it's light in a cute way!  :D



Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on April 28, 2008, 07:03:08 pm
I rented Enchanted the other night. I don't know that it would be everybody's cup of tea, but I liked it a lot. It's so light it makes Little Miss Sunshine look like something by Ingmar Bergman. But it's light in a cute way!  :D



Enchanted was great fun up until the silly(!) ending.  I mentioned earlier that James Marsden stole the movie as Prince Charming: "This little black box seems to control the magic mirror!".

I watched Bonnie & Clyde and was actually disappointed,  I didn't think it aged very well.  Maybe it was my mood, but it really felt like an OLD movie, which I suppose it is.  The acting seemed mannered and melodramatic and the direction lacked subtlety, everything seemed so obvious.  I remember loving that movie years ago and being so disturbed by the violent ending, lol!

Finally saw Breach with Chris Cooper and Ryan Phillippe.  I enjoyed it up until the melodramatic ending where Chris Cooper's  make-up made him look like an extra from Dawn of The Dead. A decent film.

And Takashi Miike's Visitor Q -  :o :o Holy lactating incestuous necrophiliac, Batman!  :o
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on April 29, 2008, 12:35:51 am
And Takashi Miike's Visitor Q -  :o :o Holy lactating incestuous necrophiliac, Batman!  :o

Oy, I don't think I want to know any more about that one.... :P  ;D

I went to see Enchanted with my sister-in-law, who has played ingenue characters in community theater all her life and didn't want to miss it.  I had a great time!  All the New York locations were familiar, which was fun, but to me the most hilarious part was when she was cleaning the apartment with the help of flies, pigeons and rats, singing cheerily ala Cinderella.   :laugh:   I thought the ending was a letdown, too, but for the most part it was a very clever take on the whole Disney thing.  :)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on April 30, 2008, 03:23:52 pm
Oy, I don't think I want to know any more about that one.... :P  ;D

[...]
And I didn't even mention the woman (the one lactating) who gets beaten on a daily basis by her substance-sniffing(?) teenage son and how she turns tricks to support her heroin addiction while her husband visits their prostitute daughter.  The theme of the film is the importance of family I think.  ;D 

-------------------------

I recently ordered a DVD copy of LOVE IS THE DEVIL: A Study for a Portrait of Francis Bacon,  I hadn't watched it since in came out back in '98 so I was eager to see if the movie was as good as I remembered or if my memory was distorted by the Daniel Craig full-frontal bathtub scene. (naked-hunk-tinted glasses?)  Well,  I'm happy to report that I enjoyed it even more this time around, the movie and the FF.

One thing I had forgotten (or didn't even know) is that Tilda Swinton is also in it as one of Bacon's drunken friends.  She's completely unrecognizable and wonderfully OTT.  I saw her name in the closing credits and that's how I found out she was in it.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on May 01, 2008, 07:12:43 pm
The Toronto InsideOut film Festival opens in a couple of weeks and it looks like it will be a good year.  I'd love to here what people think of some of the movies, what are the must-sees and the stinkers.  I already have tickets for Shelter and Love Songs  :-* but any input would be greatly appreciated:

http://www.insideout.on.ca/18Annual/schedule.cfm (http://www.insideout.on.ca/18Annual/schedule.cfm)

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/weretheworldmine.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on May 04, 2008, 04:30:34 pm
I finally watched La Vie en Rose and if Marion Cotillard's twitchy OTT performance is what AMPAS is into, then I'm officially relieved that Heath did NOT win for BbM!  I thought she was just terrible and shame on the director for not reigning her in. She wasn't just chewing the scenery, she was swallowing it whole. She played Piaf's alcoholism like it was Parkinson's and made her to be such an unlikeable person it was a mystery that she had any friends at all. 

By the end of the film when she's (yet again) deliriously screaming her dead lover's name, I was thinking, "The guy's dead, just get over it!  Now it's your turn, die already!"  Sorry, it was all too much swelling melodrama for me.  Which is funny because the day before I watched an equally melodramatic & mainstream film, Jacquou le Croquant, and really enjoyed it.  I think the difference is that I cared about the characters in Jacquou, but in this one, Piaf is portrayed as such a repulsive drunk that it was impossible for me to empathise.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on May 04, 2008, 05:59:04 pm
I went and saw Made of Honor with my daughter last evening. We were having a girl's night out and it was her choice, so...

Completely predictable. It is one of those movies you start forgetting the minute you walk out of the theater. I thought Patrick Dempsey was too old for the part (he is supposed to be 32 and he looks very much his full 42 years). And, if you think about the movie for 3 minutes, you start to realize all these implausibilities.

Oh well, at least I enjoyed the evening with Hannah!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on May 05, 2008, 09:47:02 am
I went and saw Made of Honor with my daughter last evening.

I saw two movies in one afternoon yesterday! First Baby Mama. I laughed out loud a few times, but it wasn't great. Tina Fey and Amy Poehler were good, but they needed better material. Still, I felt I had to support it because I'd just read a NYT piece about how movies starring women are almost nonexistent these days.  >:(

Then I had extra time, so I went to see Made of Honor. I agree with Leslie's assessment. It was a decent but unexceptional addition to this inescapably fluffy genre.


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on May 05, 2008, 10:13:30 am
I saw two movies in one afternoon yesterday! First Baby Mama. I laughed out loud a few times, but it wasn't great. Tina Fey and Amy Poehler were good, but they needed better material. Still, I felt I had to support it because I'd just read a NYT piece about how movies starring women are almost nonexistent these days.  >:(

Well, you should try Miss Pettigrew lives for a Day. Fluffy, but well-acted wartime London comedy with one of my favorite actresses Frances McDormand! She makes the transition from a North Dakota to a British accent with flying colours! Lots of pretty boys featured too!


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on May 05, 2008, 04:27:03 pm
Well, you should try Miss Pettigrew lives for a Day. Fluffy, but well-acted wartime London comedy with one of my favorite actresses Frances McDormand! She makes the transition from a North Dakota to a British accent with flying colours! Lots of pretty boys featured too!

I do want to see that, because it also stars another actress I like, Amy Adams. Who, I notice (having just looked up her imdb bio to double check that she was in Pettigrew), is from Colorado, and got her first big career boost at a dinner theater in Minnesota that I used to work at! So we both have something in common with her.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on May 05, 2008, 04:40:44 pm
Amy Adams is great! I didn't know she was from Colorado! She plays the fluffhead starlett without getting cloying and has a great sense of timing.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on May 05, 2008, 05:01:38 pm
Amy Adams is great! I didn't know she was from Colorado! She plays the fluffhead starlett without getting cloying and has a great sense of timing.

She does. I loved her in Enchanted. And now I want to rent Junebug, for which she won (? or just was nominated?) an Oscar for best supporting.

I'm in the middle of Charlie Wilson's War -- watching it for the second time, this time with my son. Amy Adams plays Charlie Wilson's (Tom Hanks) secretary. A small role, but she's even good in that.

CWW, is as good the second time as it was the first. A highly underrated film. It has even held the attention of my son -- not easy for a movie about a congressman and U.S. foreign policy. "Snappy dialogue," he said, so I told him that it was written by Aaron Sorkin. No wonder!



Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on May 05, 2008, 05:27:46 pm
She does. I loved her in Enchanted. And now I want to rent Junebug, for which she won (? or just was nominated?) an Oscar for best supporting.

I'm in the middle of Charlie Wilson's War -- watching it for the second time, this time with my son. Amy Adams plays Charlie Wilson's (Tom Hanks) secretary. A small role, but she's even good in that.

CWW, is as good the second time as it was the first. A highly underrated film. It has even held the attention of my son -- not easy for a movie about a congressman and U.S. foreign policy. "Snappy dialogue," he said, so I told him that it was written by Aaron Sorkin. No wonder!

Charlie Wilson's War had the worst marketing campaign in recent history.  The movie's poster was so horrible, the message it conveyed was basically:  STAY AWAY! THIS MOVIE SUCKS THE BIG ONE!   In fact, it received several Worst Movie Poster of the Year citations.  You'd think the studio would have learned something from the humiliation and hired a professional designer to come up with a decent DVD cover, but no.

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/charlie_wilsons_war.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Mikaela on May 05, 2008, 06:45:19 pm
I finally watched La Vie en Rose and if Marion Cotillard's twitchy OTT performance is what AMPAS is into, then I'm officially relieved that Heath did NOT win for BbM!  I thought she was just terrible and shame on the director for not reigning her in. She wasn't just chewing the scenery, she was swallowing it whole. She played Piaf's alcoholism like it was Parkinson's and made her to be such an unlikeable person it was a mystery that she had any friends at all. 

By the end of the film when she's (yet again) deliriously screaming her dead lover's name, I was thinking, "The guy's dead, just get over it!  Now it's your turn, die already!"  Sorry, it was all too much swelling melodrama for me.  Which is funny because the day before I watched an equally melodramatic & mainstream film, Jacquou le Croquant, and really enjoyed it.  I think the difference is that I cared about the characters in Jacquou, but in this one, Piaf is portrayed as such a repulsive drunk that it was impossible for me to empathise.


I just feel like popping in here to voice an opposing opinion, if I may - in case anyone's pondering whether or not to see the film. I really enjoyed La Vie en Rose, and admired Marion Cotillard's performance, which to me seemed Oscar-worthy enough (then again, I haven't got any respect for the Oscars since 2006). I thought the film was a wonderful and touching portrayal of true artistry conquering in the face of hopeless beginnings, severe health problems, substance abuse and any number of mishaps and personal difficulties. When Je ne Regrette Rien rolled around it was so poignant, I wanted to stand and cheer!

There were problems with the film though, it was by no means perfect. The disjointed narrative (jumping back and forth in time) made Piaf's story difficult to follow for someone who wasn't overly familiar with her story. And the choice of scenes and incidents by which she was portrayed seemed focused a bit too much on the melodrama in her life (which apparently were the major parts, but still....) I didn't at all understand the director's choice to hide till the very end the fact that Piaf had a little daughter who died in infancy, as this must surely have informed her life and her many troubles in dealing with life, - troubles that the film otherwise took care to portray.

But all in all, a good film. I saw it with my mother who also enjoyed it very much, though had about the same objections as me.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on May 05, 2008, 07:29:13 pm
My reaction to it was pretty much the same as yours, Mikaela. I found it absorbing, and thought Marion Cotillard's performance was excellent. I thought the ending dragged on waaaayyyyy too long, but I thought my reaction might have been influenced by the fact that I was on an overseas flight, it was 2 a.m., and I knew I should have been asleep long before but wanted to see it through.  ::)



Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on May 11, 2008, 01:31:21 pm
Last night I watched THE NINES starring Ryan Reynolds, Melissa McCarthy and Hope Davis, who are all excellent.  All three play three different characters in the movie's three segments.  The film inexplicably didn't make much of an impact when it was released,  but iit is sure to become a cult favourite.  It's a treat to watch and I highly recommend it!\

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/Nines-1.jpg)

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on May 12, 2008, 01:12:20 pm
Anyone else seen Iron Man yet?

Will anyone still love me if I admit I've not only seen it, I've seen it twice?  ::)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on May 12, 2008, 01:41:07 pm
Anyone else seen Iron Man yet?

Will anyone still love me if I admit I've not only seen it, I've seen it twice?  ::)

I still love you, Barb! I saw it yesterday. I thought the plot was preposterous but Robert Downey Jr. was just fabulous. He really makes the movie (the other actors were fine, too).

So if my sons watch it again, I'll probably watch it twice, myself. And I'm looking forward to the sequel!

(Will YOU still love ME if I confess that Robert Downey Jr.'s was my favorite performance in Zodiac  :-X ? Or are them fightin words?)

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on May 12, 2008, 01:43:08 pm
(Will YOU still love ME if I confess that Robert Downey Jr.'s was my favorite performance in Zodiac  :-X ? Or are them fightin words?)

Now more than ever.   :-*

<--- Adores Robert Downey Jr. (and loved him in Zodiac)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on May 12, 2008, 02:20:03 pm
I haven't seen Iron Man but I agree, RD jr. was the best performance in Zodiac.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: SFEnnisSF on May 13, 2008, 01:55:06 am
I would like to see "Before The Rains".  I think this looks good.  Yet another tale of forbidden love...

Opens this week (here in the Bay Area anyways...)

Trailer


[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q37yxRpKzx0[/youtube]
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Lynne on May 13, 2008, 06:00:28 pm
I also *love* Robert Downey, Jr.  He was very good in A SCANNER DARKLY also... 8)

Now that I've glommed seven seasons of BUFFY, five of ANGEL, SERENITY, FIREFLY, BONES... ::)  ::), I am getting back to watching movies!

Here are the movies I've seen this week and briefly my opinion...

STREET KINGS - This was a very predictable action movie with cookie cutter police procedural characters...I was hoping it would be more like LA CONFIDENTIAL, but it just didn't hold up.

NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN - I was disappointed in this for some reason but I want to read the book now.  I liked how some of the violence occurring off-screen made it seem even more chilling to me.  The ending, however, seemed in a sense to be contrived.

CHARLIE WILSON'S WAR - I absolutely loved it...watched it twice even...Aaron Sorkin is a terrific screenwriter.

LIONS FOR LAMBS - I really liked it and I'm still thinking about it today.  It was profoundly disturbing to me to watch the CNN-like news ticker scroll past.  Meryl Streep's character had me believing in her to that point.

SWEENY TODD - Another absolute love.  Johnny Depp and  Helena Bonham Carter are super fabulous.  I kept putting this off because I wasn't 'in the mood for a musical'!  My bad, because it was such a twisted story and was very intriguing to watch this horror musical unfold.  I was so captivated I watched all the DVD extras too!  Tim Burton is a genius.

Lynne
 8)

In the queue for later this week:  RENDITION!

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on May 13, 2008, 06:20:11 pm
So, did everyone get their DVD copy of I'M NOT THERE ?  It was released today and I was thrilled to see that it's a 2-disc edition, thank you Weinstein bros! :
 
Disc 1:
-Feature Commentary with Todd Haynes
EDIT- Note: Probably the most intelligent & insightful commentary I've ever had the pleasure of listening to.  A couple of heartbreaking Heath moments, at one point TH mentions that it's the first time he's seeing the film since Heath's death and that it's almost too much to handle.
-On-screen song lyrics
EDIT- Note: Option to have the lyrics appear on the screen while watching the film.
-Song Selection
-Introduction to the film
EDIT- Note: The intro is just a series of pages of on-screen text explaining the concept of the film along with short descriptions of each Dylan incarnation.

Disc 2:
-Deleted Scenes
-Alternate/extended Scenes
-Outtakes
-Auditions
-A conversation with TH
-Making the Soundtrack
-The red carpet premiere
-Trailer Gallery
-Still Galleries
-A "Dylanography"
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on May 18, 2008, 08:29:29 am
Just saw the madcap Spanish comedy CHUECATOWN (aka: BOYSTOWN) and thought it was great fun!  A psychotic Real Estate agent is killing off little old ladies in the gay village so he can renovate their apartments and sell them to young gay couples.  A sort of neighbourhood gay-ification plan.  It stars Carlos Fuentes, that cutie from Km.0, who has since packed on the pounds and turned into a cuddly bear.

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/chuecatown.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on May 18, 2008, 09:10:15 pm
Prince Caspian:  the Chronicles of Narnia.

8.5 out of 10

Very enjoyable.  I think a great many liberties were taken with the story, but it's one of those book-was-good-movie- was-different-but-just-as-good things.  Christian folk are not likely to be as thrilled over this episode as the last.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on May 18, 2008, 09:22:19 pm
Thanks for all the great info about movies on this thread! If I ever get a chance to watch a movie again, I'll be sure to check your recommendations ahead of time!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: BelAir on May 20, 2008, 09:56:48 am
I saw Iron Man this weekend....

Ummm, if it had been say Ben Affleck in the role of Iron Man, I wouldn't have watched, and probably not enjoyed.

Anyhoow - RDJ was great fun, and I also enjoyed seeing Gwenyth Paltrow and Jeff Bridges (and even J. Favreau in his little cameo role)....  While I realize Iron Man had to have something to fight and spur his transformation, I could have done without the 'war against terror' plot.

I got my I'm Not There DVDs yesterday!  (Not sure when I'll watch, but glad to have them, regardless.)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: BelAir on May 20, 2008, 09:59:36 am
oh - regarding the latest Narnia movie - I didn't really enjoy the first one, so am not planning to see the second one until dvd.  If anyone similarly did not like the first, but really enjoys the second, please say so!

 ;)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on May 25, 2008, 10:13:51 pm
I just spent the second half of Lars and the Real Girl weeping.  I knew what it was about going in.  But then again, I really didn't.  Kinda like "the gay cowboy movie," I knew it only as "the one with the guy who buys a blow-up doll and believes she's his girlfriend."  Of course when the why of it hits you, it hits you like a ton of bricks.  I have to admit I haven't been all that impressed with Ryan Gosling up until now.  And I've seen pretty much everything he's done (except for The Notebook) mostly because he chooses interesting, challenging projects.  He was... I can't even come up with an appropriate word.  Except maybe perfect.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on May 27, 2008, 09:44:13 am
I have to admit I haven't been all that impressed with Ryan Gosling up until now.  And I've seen pretty much everything he's done (except for The Notebook) mostly because he chooses interesting, challenging projects.

Wow, and I really like Ryan Gosling, so I would probably love it. Thanks for the review, Barb! I'll put it on my mental rental list.



Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on May 30, 2008, 09:35:38 am
Not much love from Toronto critics for SEX AND THE CITY!

Here's a review from one of my fave critics:


In this case, ladies, bigger is far from better
Walking on high heels, our culture hits a new low
RICK GROEN

From Friday's Globe and Mail

May 29, 2008 at 11:54 PM EDT

Sex and the City
Directed and written by Michael Patrick King
Starring Sarah Jessica Parker, Kim Cattrall, Cynthia Nixon and Kristin Davis
Classification: 18A
Rating: 0

I liked the TV series, honest. Admittedly, any really enlightened appreciation was limited by my lowly status as a man, and not even a gay man at that. But, for a fellow who wouldn't know a Jimmy Blahnik from a Manolo Choo, I got intrigued by the sociology of the show and especially by the glue linking the sex to the city – the internal bonding among the four famously single women and the collective bonding among the New Yorkers themselves. Both groups wore their urban sophistication too proudly on their sleeves and, as a result, both seemed touchingly provincial (cosmopolitan, in their lexicon, is just a drink). Better still, I learned a lot from the celebrated dialogue, not least that girl talk could be every bit as crude, boorish and, yes, chauvinistic as any of the macho dreck I'd grown up listening to, and cringing at, in the guys' locker room.

For sure, I liked the TV series, along with the fact that success turned the show into its own label, a designer brand unto itself, which may explain why, after the last episode aired four years ago, the series felt instantly dated, so yesterday's Valentino. But that dated quality doesn't begin to explain why I hate, loathe and despise – sorry to mince my words – the movie based on the TV show. Or perhaps that reaction (okay, overreaction) is intriguing too. After all, bad summer films, full of furious hype and signifying nothing, are hardly exceptional these days, nor is the sound they typically make: the dull scrape of a culture hitting rock bottom. Yet this one seems uniquely bad; this one is a threshold-breaker with a different sound, the crack of rock-bottom giving way to a whole deeper layer of magma.

Why? Well, the attendant hype has been ordinary enough, with the script and its narrative possibilities – Will someone die? Will someone else marry? – treated as the usual state secret. Spoiler alert, the secret is out: There is no script, at least nothing recognizable as such to any sentient being with a room-temperature IQ. Instead, writer-director Michael Patrick King takes the designer brand that is the TV series, which he helped create, and simply mounts it on the screen, just sticks it up there along with the other brand names, the ones attached to dresses and shoes and handbags. That means the iconic foursome with their adjectival personalities – bouncy Carrie (Sarah Jessica Parker), horny Samantha (Kim Cattrall), judicious Miranda (Cynthia Nixon), preppy Charlotte (Kristin Davis) – don't perform so much as parade, fixed in their roles as semi-animated clothes hangers on a cinematic runway.

Sometimes, the runway is literal – like when Carrie, on the brink of her nuptials with Mr. Big, models designer wedding gowns while breathlessly providing her own voice-over exclamations: “Lagerfeld!”, “de la Renta!”, “Balenciaga!”, “Vivienne Westwood!” (her ultimate choice and the clear winner in the picture's product-placement sweeps). Even more impressive than the haute-couture list is the freedom it provides King – this time, no need for clever or catty wit when the dialogue's sole purpose is to wed label to label, Carrie to Vivienne.

To be sure, the impending nuptials hint at the presence of something akin to a plot, which lazily diverges to include all the girls in something akin to subplots. Oh, the suspense will have you on the edge of your Eames chair: Carrie bouncily wonders whether Big will let her down again; Samantha hornily contemplates whether one hunky stud is ever enough; Miranda judiciously ponders whether to forgive her errant hubby; Charlotte preppily worries whether too much happiness is a terrible burden (now, there's a hot-button issue plaguing the planet).

Occasionally, girls being girls, the four set aside their worldly concerns to provide us with fun and laughter. They're off for a Mexican getaway, where Charlotte, after drinking too deeply of the local agua, cacks her panties. The gals guffaw. Then there's the hilarious sight of Miranda overflowing the southernmost region of her bathing suit, having apparently neglected her waxing duties. More guffaws. The yuks never end.

Nor does the movie, at well over 21/4 hours and counting. Rather, like a bloated sitcom suffering from a wicked case of insomnia, it meanders through an entire year's worth of calendar events – Halloween, Christmas, New Year's, Valentine's Day. Inflated too are the sitcom mannerisms of the starring cast. On the small screen, their exaggerated tics are tolerable as standard TV hyperbole; on the large, however, that damn mugging looks like all-out slaughter. Alas, in the less-is-more department, King's only directorial concession is to ask each woman in turn to shed her designer duds and pose for soft-porn close-ups: Parker in her skivvies, Davis under the shower, Nixon in bed enjoying hot make-up sex; and (the money shot) Cattrall lying on her back naked save for a discreet covering of sushi. Yes, sushi – it's the sexually emancipated babe as a human bento box, or if you prefer, a black widow spider roll.

The male characters, straight and gay, are essentially just window-dressing here, and since that decorative job has historically been women's work in the movies, I suppose the picture can at least claim the distinction of transferring the inequity across gender lines – hoping, perhaps, that two wrongs add up to Mr. Right. On the distaff side, Jennifer Hudson, playing Carrie's newly hired assistant, earns honorary membership in the girls' club and, as she opens a Christmas present, the chance to squeal in gratitude: “Wow, my very own Louis Vuitton.”

Wow, our very own Sex and the City. The TV series, at its best, was a witty little accessory, a clutch purse containing pearls of dubious wisdom, definitely worth fighting over and arguing about. But this exercise in recycled fashion is a whole other vat of Vuitton. This is a pricey handbag of a movie, uncontaminated by anything so crass as substance, filled only with the perfumed air of a culture at rest – concept blissfully free of content.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on May 30, 2008, 12:12:54 pm
That catty reviewer says he's not gay? :-X
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on May 30, 2008, 01:30:27 pm
My fave critics have said pretty much the same thing about SITC.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on May 30, 2008, 07:32:19 pm
I bought a DVD called Cinema 16- European Shorts and realy enjoyed it.  It includes Martin (In Bruges) McDonagh's   Oscar winner SIX SHOOTER and that film alone is worth the price of the DVD.

"London-Irish playwright Martin McDonagh made his first foray into film with Six Shooter, a 27-minute comedy that's blacker than a pint of Guinness and no less intoxicating. Set predominantly on a train, the short stars Brendan Gleeson as a bereaved man who encounters a passenger like no other (Ruaidhri Conroy) after boarding the train home from the hospital where his wife has just died."

Rúaidhrí (Pronounced Rory, I think) Conroy is just amazing in it!   That's the actor who was unable to attend the Oscars because he was refused entry to the US for overstaying a visa (by two days) years ago.  He was apparently held for 22 hours for questioning.  Anyway, he's definitely one to watch:

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/CONROY_Ruaidhri.jpg)
(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/CONROY_Ruaidhri-Banner.jpg)

Here's a clip from the film:
[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a8-t-Ynl1ic&feature=related[/youtube]
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on May 30, 2008, 08:50:18 pm
My fave critics have said pretty much the same thing about SITC.



I was never a fan of the show except for the fashion hints, but a friend of mine is a big fan and she's seeing the movie tonight.  Guess I'll wait for her verdict.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on May 30, 2008, 11:13:00 pm
I've seen a total of maybe 30 minutes of the show, cumulatively. I don't have HBO, and haven't seen it in its many other platforms. It never seemed compelling enough to rent or even watch on cable.

But most of the critics say that the movie doesn't live up to the show, and I kind of get what they mean.


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: injest on May 31, 2008, 08:02:46 am
I bought a DVD called Cinema 16- European Shorts and realy enjoyed it.  It includes Martin (In Bruges) McDonagh's   Oscar winner SIX SHOOTER and that film alone is worth the price of the DVD.

"London-Irish playwright Martin McDonagh made his first foray into film with Six Shooter, a 27-minute comedy that's blacker than a pint of Guinness and no less intoxicating. Set predominantly on a train, the short stars Brendan Gleeson as a bereaved man who encounters a passenger like no other (Ruaidhri Conroy) after boarding the train home from the hospital where his wife has just died."

Rúaidhrí (Pronounced Rory, I think) Conroy is just amazing in it!   That's the actor who was unable to attend the Oscars because he was refused entry to the US for overstaying a visa (by two days) years ago.  He was apparently held for 22 hours for questioning.  Anyway, he's definitely one to watch:

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/CONROY_Ruaidhri.jpg)
(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/CONROY_Ruaidhri-Banner.jpg)

Here's a clip from the film:
[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a8-t-Ynl1ic&feature=related[/youtube]


 :o :o

that is a COMEDY?? spooky!!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on May 31, 2008, 02:46:43 pm
Regarding "Sex in the City," two of the women on The View (Sherry and Elizabeth) saw a preview and were gushing like crazy over it.  I also saw a positive review on CBS Sunday Morning.  It seems to be one of those things you love or hate.  I think I'd be in the latter category, having watched only two episodes.  They struck me as crass and unfunny and hardly a compliment to women liviing in NYC.  It seemed like just another show encouraging women to equate self-esteem with clothes, jobs, boyfriends and hipness, and the writing and acting did not make up for it.  ::)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on May 31, 2008, 03:14:25 pm
I'm with you, Meryl.  I saw exactly one episode, in middle-of-nowhere Montana with friends who had a big satellite dish!  The whole show was about the women complaining of the taste of their bfs', um, body fluids.  That was enough for me.   :P
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on May 31, 2008, 04:12:11 pm
 
It seemed like just another show encouraging women to equate self-esteem with clothes, jobs, boyfriends and hipness, and the writing and acting did not make up for it.  ::)

That's exactly what I expected to feel about it. Don't get me wrong, not that I don't consider clothes, jobs, boyfriends and hipness important ;D  but I don't like to think they're ALL that matters.

Besides, I never spend more than $100 on shoes, hardly ever wear heels higher than an inch or two tall, and have a hard time identifying with those who spend $500 to teeter 4 inches above the sidewalk.

I'd watch a shoe show where the women are all obsessed with Clarks and Merrells rather than Manolo Blahnik and Jimmy Choo.  :laugh:



Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Lynne on May 31, 2008, 04:24:54 pm
I like Naturalizers and Timberlands, myself.  :)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on May 31, 2008, 05:34:24 pm
I like Naturalizers and Timberlands, myself.  :)

I'd drink a Cosmopolitan shot of Old Rose to that!  :D


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kd5000 on June 02, 2008, 09:25:57 pm
I am disappointed to report that they have started filming a sequel to Donnie Darko.  D.D. is one of my favorite movies and I can't believe they are doing this.  Filming started 5/18.  Only the actress that played Donnie's little sister will be in the film. No one else connected with Donnie Darko is involved with the film.   It sounds rather similar to the first film in many aspects.

The synopsis here might give away to many SPOILERS for some.

S. Darko takes place in the summer of 1995, seven years after the original film. It follows Donnie Darko's younger sister, Samantha (Daveigh Chase), who, in the wake of his death, has found herself at age 17 with a broken family, mired in feelings of insignificance. She and her best friend Corey (Evigan) set off on a road trip to Hollywood in a bid to 'make it big', but their journey is cut short when their car breaks down unexpectedly, leaving them stranded in a small desert town. When a meteorite happens to crash-land nearby, Samantha is plagued by bizarre visions telling of the universe's end and it appears that their breakdown was part of some grander plan. She must face her own demons and, in doing so, save the world and herself [Source Wikipedia]

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1231277/synopsis
Here's a brief synopsis.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on June 02, 2008, 09:47:16 pm
Oh, Karl, how sad.  Should have left "bizarre" enough alone.

I, too, love Donnie Darko.  In fact, there was a stage play version of it here in Cambridge, MA last fall.  It was brilliant.  I went with a few friends on Halloween.  Chris Cooper was in the audience (he lives near here).  There's one degree of separation from Jake (Jarhead).
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Aloysius J. Gleek on June 03, 2008, 04:25:25 pm
I saw this amazing, amazing film last night (at Film Forum, West Houston near 6th Avenue in New York)

THE EDGE OF HEAVEN
A FILM BY FATIH AKIN

"Auf der anderen Seite" ("On the other side" or "On the other hand") (2007)

Cannes 2007: Won Best Screenplay by Fatih Akin
 
http://www.filmforum.org/ (http://www.filmforum.org/)
Trailer:
http://www.filmforum.org/films/edgetrailer.html (http://www.filmforum.org/films/edgetrailer.html)
IMDb:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0880502/ (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0880502/)


(http://www.filmforum.org/films/edge/edgepostermed.jpg)


(http://www.filmforum.org/films/edge/edge1.jpg)
(http://www.filmforum.org/films/edge/edge2.jpg)
(http://www.filmforum.org/films/edge/edge.gif)
(http://www.filmforum.org/films/edge/edgelola.gif)
(http://www.filmforum.org/films/edge/edge3.jpg)
(http://www.filmforum.org/films/edge/edge4.jpg)


"RIVETING!" – David Ansen, Newsweek

"The latest from HEAD-ON'S Fatih Akin is another cross-cultural stunner. This detour into Altmanesque territory suggests a dramatic leap forward, and the performance by Fassbinder muse Hanna Schygulla is, in a word, heavenly." – David Fear, Time Out NY

LIKE FATIH AKIN'S PREVIOUS FEATURE, THE SMASHINGLY SUCCESSFUL HEAD-ON, THE EDGE OF HEAVEN spans the uneasy relationship between two cultures, Germany and Turkey. German born and educated, of Turkish descent, the filmmaker fashions a complex story with six protagonists whose lives become inextricably linked. Ayten, a Kurdish activist wanted by the German authorities, is harbored by Lotte, a German student whose political naivete is offset by her sexual agenda. Fassbinder muse Hanna Schygulla plays Lotte's suspicious mother with understated hauteur. It's a riveting story of intergenerational conflict between grown children and their parents, the clash of values between East and West and the edgy relationship between conventional and gay sexuality. Akin throws into the mix his special knowledge of how Europe's borders are disappearing, bringing people together in random, dangerous, exciting and sometimes fatal ways.

GERMANY/TURKEY • 2007 • 122 MINUTES • IN GERMAN, TURKISH & ENGLISH WITH ENGLISH SUBTITLES •

LA 5/30
Chicago 6/13
Washington, D.C. 6/20
Boston 6/27
SF 7/11
San Diego 7/18
Philadelphia 8/1
Minneapolis 8/8
Seattle 8/15
Atlanta 9/5
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: belbbmfan on June 04, 2008, 01:38:10 am
'Brothers' is on tv tonight. The original Danish version. I'm curious about this film, I've wanted to see it ever since I heard about the American remake.

from imdb:

Michael has everything under control: a successful military career, a beautiful wife and two daughters. His younger brother Jannik is a drifter, living on the edge of the law. When Michael is sent to Afghanistan on a UN mission the balance between the two brothers changes forever. Michael is missing in action - presumed dead - and Sarah is comforted by Jannik, who against all odds shows himself capable of taking responsibility for both himself and the family. It soon becomes clear that their feelings have developed beyond mutual sympathy. When Michael comes home, traumatized by being held prisoner in the mountains of Afghanistan, nothing is the same...
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on June 04, 2008, 10:06:19 pm
Someone I know saw the Sex & the City yesterday and really enjoyed it.  Still, I find I can't relate a whole lot to the lives and issues of those women, even though I did watch the show on occasion when it was on the air.  Y'all have me laughing about the shoes.  My days of spiked heels are largely over, although there are a few of them in the back of the closet.  I try to blend style and comfort, regardless of brand.



Hey, I love love love spike heels.  The idea behind $500 high end high heels is that they're designed better than the $40 pumps you buy at your local mall.  The heel portion inside the shoe is designed like a bucket seat, so all your weight - instead of sliding down the front of your shoe and pinching your toes and instep - rocks back and rests on the heel portion of your foot, more in line with the long bones of the leg and therefore the hip and spine.  That's why movie stars do say the 'shoes are comfortable' and they can wear those shoes longer than we mortal women.

Or that's what I've read anyway.  Unless I win the lotto, I'm never going to know.  8)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on June 04, 2008, 10:12:01 pm
I am disappointed to report that they have started filming a sequel to Donnie Darko.  D.D. is one of my favorite movies and I can't believe they are doing this.  Filming started 5/18.  Only the actress that played Donnie's little sister will be in the film. No one else connected with Donnie Darko is involved with the film.   It sounds rather similar to the first film in many aspects.

The synopsis here might give away to many SPOILERS for some.

S. Darko takes place in the summer of 1995, seven years after the original film. It follows Donnie Darko's younger sister, Samantha (Daveigh Chase), who, in the wake of his death, has found herself at age 17 with a broken family, mired in feelings of insignificance. She and her best friend Corey (Evigan) set off on a road trip to Hollywood in a bid to 'make it big', but their journey is cut short when their car breaks down unexpectedly, leaving them stranded in a small desert town. When a meteorite happens to crash-land nearby, Samantha is plagued by bizarre visions telling of the universe's end and it appears that their breakdown was part of some grander plan. She must face her own demons and, in doing so, save the world and herself [Source Wikipedia]

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1231277/synopsis
Here's a brief synopsis.

This is a trend in movie-making that I despise.  Hollywood making movies about themselves.  Young teenager has trouble at home?  Of course she wants to run away to Hollywood and become a movie star.   ::)  What?  No kid - especially from an extremely intelligent politicized family - Donnie's grades were off the chart and his sister got into Harvard - ever wants to work hard and put themselves through school?  I know Donnie's little sister was in that dance contest, but was Sparkle Motion really a good showcase of 'talent' that an agent would take seriously or that her parents would have encouraged as a career?  Maybe for the Gong Show...
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on June 05, 2008, 08:51:58 am
I think that on 9/11, women wearing spike heels had to whip them off and run barefoot no matter how much the shoes cost. I wish we'd get past finding high heels attractive. Chinese women with bound feet, which breaks the feet and folds them in half, with the toes scrunched under the heels, thought that looked pretty, too (there are still some old women around with feet like this).

But I digress. I saw Lars and the Real Girl yesterday. I liked it -- I like anything starring Ryan Gosling. ALL of the actors were good, including Lars' girlfriend. ;D And it was cute and interesting. But I didn't absolutely love it. I guess the premise stretched my credulity just a bit too far.


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kelda on June 05, 2008, 01:25:50 pm
Regarding "Sex in the City," two of the women on The View (Sherry and Elizabeth) saw a preview and were gushing like crazy over it.  I also saw a positive review on CBS Sunday Morning.  It seems to be one of those things you love or hate.  I think I'd be in the latter category, having watched only two episodes.  They struck me as crass and unfunny and hardly a compliment to women liviing in NYC.  It seemed like just another show encouraging women to equate self-esteem with clothes, jobs, boyfriends and hipness, and the writing and acting did not make up for it.  ::)

Well I love SATC - its brainless TV - with some laugh out load moments and is nothing like my life - and the movie well i loved it - it was an enjoyable 2 hours and yes was basically 5 episodes of SATC but they're aint anything wrong with that - me and my three mates made a day of it and enjoyed a few cockatils and dinner before the film and a few more drinks after it. I gret (cried) about 5 times throughout it!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on June 05, 2008, 10:06:59 pm
I think that on 9/11, women wearing spike heels had to whip them off and run barefoot no matter how much the shoes cost.

Or how comfortable they are.  You can't run in high heels.  But on the other hand, you can't run in sandals either.

Quote
I wish we'd get past finding high heels attractive. Chinese women with bound feet, which breaks the feet and folds them in half, with the toes scrunched under the heels, thought that looked pretty, too (there are still some old women around with feet like this).

They didn't think it was pretty, they thought it was necessary because high ranking Chinese men thought it was sexy.  People do some drastic things to get ahead in life.  Unfortunately it's usually women who end up having to "adjust" their bodies.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on June 06, 2008, 01:24:12 am
They didn't think it was pretty, they thought it was necessary because high ranking Chinese men thought it was sexy.  People do some drastic things to get ahead in life.  Unfortunately it's usually women who end up having to "adjust" their bodies.

I agree that the women were victims of having to "adjust" their bodies. However, I think Chinese women whose feet were bound DID consider it attractive. Here's an NPR story about it:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=8966942 (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=8966942)

Excerpt:


Quote
As Wang surveys her tiny shoes, cocking her head from side to side, it's clear she's proud of her little feet.

"There's not a single other woman in Liuyicun who could fit their feet into my shoes," she says. "When my generation dies, people won't be able to see bound feet, even if they want to."

African women who favor female circumcision think that women's genitals are ugly without it. Western women who wear high heels or shave their legs think that's what's necessary to be attractive.

Of course, among the three, the Western choices are the least invasive. Yay! You can take your shoes off any time, and switch to whatever footwear you want. You can let your leg hair grow in, if you choose.

But I was thinking earlier tonight: It's funny that what's considered attractive for women often has so much to do with keeping women from being strong and/or functional. Bound feet or high heels keep them from running. Expensive dresses in luxury fabrics keeps them from rugged activities. Long painted nails keeps them from using their fingers. Makeup, etc., inhibits their time to do other things.

Quote
Or how comfortable they are.  You can't run in high heels.  But on the other hand, you can't run in sandals either.

Most sandals, no. And you notice that only women wear sandals to work. Men's work shoes aren't ideal for running.  But I bet there weren't many men who felt the need to take their shoes off on 9/11.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: BelAir on June 06, 2008, 02:02:16 am
Show was entertaining, but not anxious to see the film.




late to the party I know, but that's how I feel about it.  Fine to watch little hour long vignettes, but no way for a 2 hour movie-type story line.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: BelAir on June 06, 2008, 02:09:55 am
Oh, Karl, how sad.  Should have left "bizarre" enough alone.

I, too, love Donnie Darko.  In fact, there was a stage play version of it here in Cambridge, MA last fall.  It was brilliant.  I went with a few friends on Halloween.  Chris Cooper was in the audience (he lives near here).  There's one degree of separation from Jake (Jarhead).

Chris Cooper was in Jarhead?  Wasn't he also Jake's dad in October Sky?  Who played Donnie's dad?
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Ellemeno on June 06, 2008, 03:04:47 am
I was looking forward to seeing Sex and the City, because I had a nostalgic spot for it - when my daughter was a newborn, several people asked if we had named her after one of the characters in the show.  We hadn't, but it got me curious, so I rented Year One, Disc One from Netflix, and for the next several weeks, alone with my baby, sleep deprived walking and rocking in the middle of the night, with spit up on my shoulder, I watched all six seasons, vicariously tripping around Manhattan with my imaginary friends.  So they got me through a rough spot, and I was grateful.

But the other night, I felt lonely after seeing Sex and the City with three other women.  Lonely, because they only gushed about how wonderful it was, and none of them seemed to want to hear my tentative attempts at discussing the emptiness of Handbags and Huge Walk-in Closets as Gods.

And I'll tell you another part that stretched suspension of disbelief to the breaking point.  When Anthony sees Stanford at a big event and grabs him, says "Thank God you're here," and plants a big kiss on his lips.  In the series, Anthony loathed Stanford, so what happened?

Yes, the movie was fun and cute, and even touching and somewhat redemptive, but holy mother.


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on June 06, 2008, 09:08:26 am
Chris Cooper was in Jarhead?  Wasn't he also Jake's dad in October Sky?  Who played Donnie's dad?

Hi BelAir,

Chris Cooper played Lt. Colonel Kazinski in Jarhead.  A small part, but he says something ridiculous like "I felt it move" after the marines cheer.

Yes, he played John Hickam in October Sky. 

For more BBM connections, he was Colonel Harry Burwell in The Patriot, and was July Johnson in Lonesome Dove! 

Donnie Darko's dad was played by Holmes Osborne.

Thank you, IMDb!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Aloysius J. Gleek on June 06, 2008, 09:32:29 am
LOVE Chris Cooper--

--and he played the ultimate Chris Cooper rôle as 'Conklin' in The Bourne Identity (uncredited in The Bourne Supremacy, and continued to echo malignly in The Bourne Ultimatum).

ibid., op. cit. IMDb!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on June 06, 2008, 03:11:01 pm
I really like Chris Cooper too.  I find something about him captivating.  Guess that's why he's a successful actor, LOL.  Others must feel the same way!

Count me in! I especially loved him in Adaptation, though that wasn't at all like his typical roles.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on June 06, 2008, 07:55:49 pm
Chris Cooper is the man!

I also loved him in "Lone Star" which is a very good little movie.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on June 06, 2008, 08:15:44 pm
I agree that the women were victims of having to "adjust" their bodies. However, I think Chinese women whose feet were bound DID consider it attractive. Here's an NPR story about it:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=8966942 (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=8966942)

Well, it does help one psychologically to come to love one's deformity.  Helps people move on with their lives with a better attitude.  Since footbinding is done ideally when a girl is young, she would be just another child who had no choice and through constant indoctrination from her female relatives and men, came to like and find attractive what she had.

Quote
African women who favor female circumcision think that women's genitals are ugly without it.

Some do, I'm sure. Or else they're speaking the party (men's) line.  Most of the literature I read on the subject is that older women's attitude is if they "had to suffer, then so does the younger generation".  It had nothing to do with sexual aesthetics.

A fellow but older student I had in my speech class at college said he lived in Indonesia for awhile after getting out of the Navy.  The men there found it strange that he wanted and enjoyed talking with their wives.  They got to talking about marriage and relations between spouses and the men quite confidently assured him that their wives "found their [sexual] pleasure in pleasing them".  When the student turned to the wives and asked if this was true, the wives all looked at each other then quickly nodded, "Oh yes, we get our pleasure from pleasing our husbands."

 ::)  Women speaking the "party" line.

Quote
Western women who wear high heels or shave their legs think that's what's necessary to be attractive.

Depends.  Why are women wearing high heels?  I personally think my feet are unattractive and are more so in flat shoes.  High heels makes them look much more pleasing to the eye, more streamlined.  And I know a bunch of ethnic women who don't bother shaving, so it's not as cut and dried in the West as we might think.

Quote
But I was thinking earlier tonight: It's funny that what's considered attractive for women often has so much to do with keeping women from being strong and/or functional. Bound feet or high heels keep them from running. Expensive dresses in luxury fabrics keeps them from rugged activities. Long painted nails keeps them from using their fingers. Makeup, etc., inhibits their time to do other things.

You could look at it that way.  They are also things that makes women different from men.  What men - straight men anyway - tend to find attractive in women is that we're different from them.  So the more we are different, the more attractive they find it.  Since men tend to spend a lifetime in unconscious competition with other men, they tend not to like competition from a possible sexual partner - it's threatening - so if a woman can look more helpless and more vulnerable and not so threatening, then they like that too.

Quote
Most sandals, no.

I can't run in any.

Quote
And you notice that only women wear sandals to work.


Only in this country.  I see quite a few African and Indian men wearing sandals everywhere.

Quote
Men's work shoes aren't ideal for running.  But I bet there weren't many men who felt the need to take their shoes off on 9/11.

I bet there were a few who wanted to.  Leather-soled shoes are extremely slippery.  I remember reading about one Port Authority officer on 9/11 who was walking through the underground before the collapse of the Towers, bemoaning the fact that he was ruining his patent leather shoes in the water from all the sprinklers.

Then of course a second later, he comes to and realizes, I'm going to die in these shoes.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Ellemeno on June 07, 2008, 08:44:42 am
Chris Cooper is the man!

I also loved him in "Lone Star" which is a very good little movie.


This is the one I was going to mention.  Lone Star is my other very favorite movie in the whole world.  If you haven't seen it, watch it ten or fifteen times and see if you might agree.  :)


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Lynne on June 07, 2008, 03:10:22 pm
Hey buds!  I just posted my overdue report on C Jay Cox's film KISS THE BRIDE in my blog.  The trailer is there a few posts back.

http://bettermost.net/forum/index.php/topic,102.msg376895.html#msg376895

 :D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on June 07, 2008, 03:58:00 pm
  Most of the literature I read on the subject is that older women's attitude is if they "had to suffer, then so does the younger generation".  It had nothing to do with sexual aesthetics.

Here's an excerpt from the activist Ayaan Hirsi Ali's book, Infidel, which gives some idea about attitudes in Somalia, among girls and boys, about genital mutilation

Quote
But the kids at madrassah (Islamic religious school) were tough. They fought. One girl, who was about eight years old, they called kintirleey, "she with the clitoris".

I had no idea what a clitoris was, but the kids didn't even want to be seen with this girl. They spat on her and pinched her; they rubbed sand in her eyes, and once they caught her and tried to bury her in the sand behind the school.

The madrassah teacher didn't help. Once in a while he called her dammin, dunce, and kintirleey, too. My teenage cousin Sanyar used to pick me up after madrassah. One day she arrived just as a girl hit me in the face. Sanyar took me home and told the story. "Ayaan didn't even defend herself," she said in horror. "Coward!" my family jeered.

The next day Sanyar waited for me outside the madrassah with another teenager, the older sister of the girl who had hit me the day before. They caught hold of the two of us and tugged us over to an open space, then ordered us to fight. "Scratch her eyes out. Bite her," Sanyar hissed at me. "Come on, coward, think of your honour."

The other girl got the same encouragement. We flew at each other, fists tight, hitting, wrestling, pulling each other's hair, biting. "Ayaan, never cry!" Sanyar called out. The other children cheered us on. When they let us stop, our dresses were torn and my lip was bleeding, but Sanyar was delighted. "I don't want you to ever let another child hit you or make you cry," she said. "Fight. If you don't fight for your honour, you're a slave."

Then, as we walked away, the other girl shouted after me, "Kintirleey!" Sanyar winced. I looked at her, horror dawning on me. I was like that other girl? I, too, had that filthy thing, a kintir? In Somalia, like many countries across Africa and the Middle East, little girls are made "pure" by having their genitals cut out. There is no other way to describe this procedure, which typically occurs around the age of five.


In the rest of this excerpt, she goes on to describe her experience of having it done to her, at age 5. Beware -- it's not fun reading.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,21160254-28737,00.html (http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,21160254-28737,00.html)

Her parents are opposed to the procedure, but when they're away, the grandmother has it done to Ayaan and her siblings. The grandma's attitude suggests that she's not doing it because she had to suffer, therefore so do her grandchildren. She's doing it because she really does see it as aesthetically preferable, in fact "pure." To me, it seems logical that most women who grow up in that culture absorb the culture's notions of aesthetics -- even if they are its victims.


Sorry to go so OT!


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kelda on June 08, 2008, 08:21:03 am

And I'll tell you another part that stretched suspension of disbelief to the breaking point.  When Anthony sees Stanford at a big event and grabs him, says "Thank God you're here," and plants a big kiss on his lips.  In the series, Anthony loathed Stanford, so what happened?


Well I wouldn't say Anthony LOATHED Stanford but they were very different.... but you did see them get friendlier over the seasons.... but I guess lots of things happen in 4 years - it was quite fun to see them planting a biog smacker on each other on new year event! (But I wanted to know what happened to Stanford's ballet dancer!)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on June 20, 2008, 03:55:09 pm
I saw a very interesting Russian film last nite titled Mongol, about the early life of Genghis Khan. The acting was very good but what really made the movie were the beautiful scenes of the steppes and the amazing battle scenes. The culminating battle scene really brought home why Genghis Khan was such an extraordinary leader. I have never seen blood and dirt represented so beautifully. Of course, the real stars of the movie were the horses!
Go see it if it shows near you!

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Ellemeno on June 21, 2008, 03:27:16 am
Well I wouldn't say Anthony LOATHED Stanford but they were very different.... but you did see them get friendlier over the seasons.... but I guess lots of things happen in 4 years - it was quite fun to see them planting a biog smacker on each other on new year event! (But I wanted to know what happened to Stanford's ballet dancer!)

Remember the episode where the women set them up to sit next to each other at some event, and when Anthony arrived and took a look at Stanford, he turned and left?  When asked about it, he said some pretty scathing things.




Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: BelAir on July 06, 2008, 06:30:08 pm
I saw Hancock with family over the weekend.  I thought it was pretty good as far as [recent randomish] superhero movies go... quite humorous, plot not too annoying...  There was no RDJ but Jason Bateman was sweet, and I preferred it to Iron Man actually.

(http://i234.photobucket.com/albums/ee304/BelAirChoice/movies/002432490686.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on July 06, 2008, 07:11:46 pm
I have an Amazon Kindle and I love my Kindle and I am reading more than I have in months. I also have a New York Tiimes subscription on my Kindle so this morning, I was busy reading the Sunday Book Review and came across this (see below). Because I can buy books at a touch of a button, I did and now I am halfway through it. The book is great and the descriptions of movies (and little trivia tidbits) are even better. Highly recommended! Even if you don't own a Kindle and have to acquire this book the old fashioned way, I'd still suggest seeking it out.

THE FILM CLUB

By David Gilmour.

225 pp. Twelve. $21.99.


July 6, 2008

Home Screening

By DOUGLAS McGRATH


Since I became a father, I have read stories about parents and their children with a humiliating lack of emotional armor. Right after our son was born, someone gave me a copy of Scott Berg’s biography of Charles Lindbergh. I thought it was wonderful until the Lindbergh’s baby was kidnapped, and then my stomach knotted up so badly I had to put the book away. Instead I read Knut Hamsun’s “Hunger,” a story of a homeless writer almost starving to death, and it was like a light comedy by comparison.

David Gilmour is a father as well as a novelist and former film critic. He has written a memoir, “The Film Club,” about his decision to allow his 15-year-old son, Jesse, to drop out of school on the condition that he watch three movies a week of Gilmour’s choosing. Because it smacked of a plot gimmick from one of the movies Gilmour used to review, I feared the book would be similarly cute and tidy. But it’s a heartfelt portrait of how hard it is to grow up, how hard it is to watch someone grow up and how in the midst of a family’s confusion and ire, there is sometimes nothing so welcome as a movie.

Given that Gilmour was a film critic, a lot of the book is about the films he and Jesse watch. Their discussions give you a quick and appealing sense of the kind of people they are. You can wonder at the Gilmours’ acuity or insanity, depending on how close they are to your own opinions. I do not share Gilmour’s view that Gene Kelly has a “malignant phoniness” in “Singin’ in the Rain,” nor his view that “The Exorcist” is the scariest movie ever made — if you’re interested in malignant phoniness, I’d look no farther than “The Exorcist.” I am certainly not “bewildered” as Gilmour is by the praise for John Ford’s beautiful and haunting film “The Searchers” — John Wayne’s unnervingly dark performance alone makes it essential viewing. On the other hand, I agree with him about Clint Eastwood and “Psycho” and “Rosemary’s Baby” and “The 400 Blows.” And he made me curious to see some films I didn’t know.

But the book is not a catalog of film recommendations. Gilmour uses the movies and, more important, the time he and Jesse spent together watching them, as an opening to explore and maybe understand who each of them is. The book chronicles Jesse’s troubles — mostly with girls, but also with drinking and drugs. And it does not spare Gilmour: he is out of work when the story starts, at an age when finding something new is both difficult and embarrassing. But he is modest about his own problems and doesn’t ask for pity. Like any good parent, he focuses on his son and he makes us care very much about what happens to him.

Like the two men at its center, the book itself stumbles every so often. Early on, I wanted to know more about Gilmour’s decision to let his son quit school in exchange for watching three films a week. That doesn’t seem like much of a standard for a boy as quick and smart as Jesse; I wondered why he set the bar so low. I also wanted to know more about why he felt that watching movies was a worthy equivalent to a more formal education. Or even an informal one. Gilmour is a novelist, yet he never made reading a part of the deal; I wondered why. I’m not trying to set up a home-schooling system for the Gilmours. I just would have liked to hear his case for why he felt movies were a better way to reach his son than museums or books or Outward Bound.

This is a minor sin of omission; there was for me a more bothersome sin of commission. Gilmour has a fondness for simile that sometimes exceeds his gift for it. There were phrases that many times took me out of the story, making me think about things that temporarily severed my connection to the material. For instance, Gilmour writes: “How little I can give him, I thought — just these little apple slices of reassurance, like feeding a rare animal at the zoo.” (Is an apple really an image of reassurance? Hasn’t he ever read Genesis? Is feeding rare animals at the zoo a way to comfort them or just a way to feed them?) Later he writes: “The trees, budding at their very tips like fingernails, appeared to be extending their branches toward the sun.” (Do the tips of budding trees really look like fingernails? I know he was distracted with his son, but maybe Gilmour needs a manicure.) Or: “For the moment we were on the porch, his spirits temporarily lifted from their coffin, to which they would return, like ghosts at sunset.” (I’m not that up on the afterworld, but do ghosts go back to their graves at sunset? Don’t they get up at sunset and sleep during the day? Or are those vampires?)

These are not the things I wanted to be thinking about as I read “The Film Club,” not only because they distracted me from a story I was interested in, but because Gilmour is as capable of the deft phrase as the daft. I loved his reference to someone’s boyfriend as “a damp-handed nightmare.” Or this quick and vivid description: “I went out that night, got ecstatically, knee-walking drunk.” The movie “Bullitt,” he says, “has the authority of stainless steel” — a perfect image for that tough and shiny film. Best of all was this sentence that captured the reality-altering magic that movies cast: “I remember emerging from the Nortown theater that summer afternoon and thinking that there was something wrong with the sunlight.”

My regard for Gilmour’s best writing, my sympathy for his struggles and my engagement in his story make my complaints seem small. If his style sometimes irked me, he has my admiration as a father for making his son, not himself, the very winning hero of this story. Not only did I find Jesse smart and funny, but more than once I was moved to tears by his battle to find his place. At the end of the book, Gilmour, helpless with love for his son, watches him onstage performing, and recalls a line from “True Romance,” a movie they’d both loved: “You’re so cool, you’re so cool, you’re so cool!”

Not only as a reader but as a father, too, I know how he feels.

Douglas McGrath is a writer and director. Among his films are “Emma,” “Nicholas Nickleby” and “Infamous.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/06/books/review/McGrath2-t.html?_r=1&oref=slogin&ref=books&pagewanted=print
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Ellemeno on July 09, 2008, 04:10:33 am
I thought you was talking about the Pink Floyd David Gilmour for a while.  I like how the writer juxtaposed 'deft' and 'daft.'   I never thought of that before.

I also liked Hancock, more than I thought I would. 
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Lynne on July 09, 2008, 07:04:39 pm
I saw Hancock with family over the weekend.  I thought it was pretty good as far as [recent randomish] superhero movies go... quite humorous, plot not too annoying...  There was no RDJ but Jason Bateman was sweet, and I preferred it to Iron Man actually.

Thanks for the report about Hancock, Bel Air.  I am trying to decide what to see tonight and ran across this at IMDb:

Hancock Makers Accused Of Homophobia

9 July 2008 12:13 PM, PDT | From wenn.com | See recent WENN news

Will Smith's new movie Hancock has been accused of homophobia by gay rights campaigners.

Bosses at The Gay + Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) allege a scene in the superhero movie takes a "cheap, unfunny shot at gay people".

The offending scene involves Smith's washed up crime fighter dismissing other superhero images, saying, "Homo. Homo in red. Norwegian Homo."

GLAAD chiefs claim "the slur sends a message that it's okay to discriminate against gay people".

Representatives for Columbia Pictures, the studio behind the movie, have refused to comment.


 ??? ??? ??? Thoughts?
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: BelAir on July 10, 2008, 02:02:58 pm
Thanks for the report about Hancock, Bel Air.  I am trying to decide what to see tonight and ran across this at IMDb:

Hancock Makers Accused Of Homophobia

9 July 2008 12:13 PM, PDT | From wenn.com | See recent WENN news

Will Smith's new movie Hancock has been accused of homophobia by gay rights campaigners.

Bosses at The Gay + Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) allege a scene in the superhero movie takes a "cheap, unfunny shot at gay people".

The offending scene involves Smith's washed up crime fighter dismissing other superhero images, saying, "Homo. Homo in red. Norwegian Homo."

GLAAD chiefs claim "the slur sends a message that it's okay to discriminate against gay people".

Representatives for Columbia Pictures, the studio behind the movie, have refused to comment.


 ??? ??? ??? Thoughts?

Hmnnn, Lynne... 

I'm not exactly sure what to say.  They do have a point...  Do you want me to describe the scene in more detail?  He does end up wearing a superhero suit... so I guess I forgot about what he had said when he was initially looking at 'suit suggestions'...    If I sort of analyze what you quoted in more detail, I personally didn't interpret it as 'homophobia' - just stupidity, I guess.

What do you think?
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Lynne on July 10, 2008, 02:54:20 pm
Hmnnn, Lynne... 

I'm not exactly sure what to say.  They do have a point...  Do you want me to describe the scene in more detail?  He does end up wearing a superhero suit... so I guess I forgot about what he had said when he was initially looking at 'suit suggestions'...    If I sort of analyze what you quoted in more detail, I personally didn't interpret it as 'homophobia' - just stupidity, I guess.

What do you think?

Mostly, I just wondered if you noticed it.   :)

I'll probably see Hancock this weekend.  There's a definite lack of things I want to see right now!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: BelAir on July 10, 2008, 03:14:21 pm
Mostly, I just wondered if you noticed it.   :)

I'll probably see Hancock this weekend.  There's a definite lack of things I want to see right now!

ah, okay.  what I thought was "uh, stupid joke..."  but also, Hancock is sort of a stupid, ignorant guy at that point in the movie...

(and for anyone who cares, i do not think stupid and ignorant are redundant, they mean two different things to me...  ::))

Well, if you see it, you will of course have to let us know what you think.

I agree in terms of "lack of things to see"...  I went cause my fam wanted to go - they chose that or Wall E... I went with Hancock.  not one I would have picked to spend money on by myself at the theater.  I forget Leslie's exact terminology, but something along the lines of "fine way to pass a few hours" but then you forget it entirely.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Lynne on July 10, 2008, 03:19:31 pm
Truman/shakestheground had very good things to say about Wall E!  That might be another option!  :)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: BelAir on July 13, 2008, 06:03:52 pm
Truman/shakestheground had very good things to say about Wall E!  That might be another option!  :)

Oh yes!!!  I saw that just today and it was great.  In fact, I have a new little love....

(http://i234.photobucket.com/albums/ee304/BelAirChoice/movies/wall-e.jpg)

So if you have to choose b/t Wall-E and Hancock - I say Wall-E!  Unless of course you are having a Will Smith craving or want to see what the hype is all about, or are anti-Pixar and anti-robots...

 8)

(I actually went to see Wall-E not wanting to like it; I initially had thought it was robots only, and was annoyed when I saw the plump humans on the adverts...  however, I was hooked and immediately over not liking it when Wall-E and EVE took their first flight!)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on July 15, 2008, 09:53:17 am
1) Re Hancock's homophobia -- I haven't seen it, but isn't Hancock supposed to be an obnoxious loser? Seems like in that context, a slur does not carry the same meaning as it would if uttered by a respectable character. I did see about ten minutes of the movie, in which Hancock threatened an old lady that he would "break off [his] foot in [her] ass" or something like that. I didn't take that as sexist or ageist -- just jerkist.

2) Re "The Film Club" -- it sounds very good. Thanks for posting this, Leslie.

3) Re "Wall-E" -- I hate to be the nay-sayer, but I didn't love it as much as I thought I would. I'd read a four-star review that called it the best movie of the summer. But I came close to falling asleep at one point, which I've only done two or three times in my life at a movie.

4) Re Kindle -- Leslie, I've been interested in the Kindle, but I'm concerned about one aspect of it. If you lose or wreck it, does that mean you lose all of the books you purchased on it? I'd be afraid to have hundreds of dollars worth of books at stake in that one little package. Or are your purchases kept on record, so you can just buy new hardware and re-download your same texts?


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: BelAir on July 15, 2008, 03:04:24 pm
I read an interesting neflix WallE review today.

A man had gone to see the film with his children; he liked it quite a bit.  He worried it may have been 'not light hearted enough' for his kids, but he reported the children liked it quite a bit too.  He said his wife found all the flying/fight scenes towards the end too boring, his male-friend fell asleep, and the wife of his male friend felt it was too dark.

 ::)

ps - nice to see you again crayons!

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on July 15, 2008, 03:26:01 pm

4) Re Kindle -- Leslie, I've been interested in the Kindle, but I'm concerned about one aspect of it. If you lose or wreck it, does that mean you lose all of the books you purchased on it? I'd be afraid to have hundreds of dollars worth of books at stake in that one little package. Or are your purchases kept on record, so you can just buy new hardware and re-download your same texts?


Hey Katherine, good to see you!

If you buy books at amazon.com, they are stored in "Your Media Library" at amazon. So they are always available to you there for download. Say you finish a book and you delete it from your Kindle, then decide later you want to read it again, you can download it again.

If you buy books from different sites (fictionwise, mobipocket), many of those sites also store your purchased books, so you can download them again should the need arise.

Free book sites--well, they're free, so just go and get them for free again!

You can also transfer books from your Kindle to your PC via the USB cable. You can't read them on your PC but you can back them up so you have them available locally in case something happens to your Kindle.

I started a thread called the E-Book files over in the Creative Writer's Corner. If you want to ask me a million questions about the Kindle--which I am happy to answer--maybe we should take this discussion over there and keep this thread focused on movies.

Leslie

PS. The Film Club is very good. Katherine, as a mom with teenage boys, I think you might find it very interesting. I know as a mother of teens, it speaks to me. L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: tamarack on July 16, 2008, 09:07:00 pm
I just got home from my son's house where we watched a movie called The Prestige. I apologize if it has been mentioned here before. Has anybody else seen it? It's from 2006, I believe. I can safely say that this is maybe the best movie I've seen since Brokeback, at least in terms of having to do some thinking about what I just saw, even after discussing it for 15 minutes or so with my son, who has seen it 4 or 5 times. I'm going to have to watch it some more in order to catch everything.

It's a movie about rival magicians and the name comes from the three stages of a magic trick. First, there is the setup, or the "pledge," where the magician shows the audience something that appears ordinary but is probably not, making use of misdirection. Next is the performance, or the "turn," where the magician makes the ordinary act extraordinary. Lastly, there is the "prestige," where the effect of the illusion is produced.

There are trailers online that you can watch to see if you are interested. I knew after about 5 seconds that this would be a good movie, but I had no idea it would be so involved and hold so many secrets.

This movie reminds me of Memento in many ways. For those of you who haven't seen Memento, the movie starts at the end and proceeds toward the beginning in sections, and you discover the story along the way. Even after you've seen it once there are still many reasons to watch it again with your new-found knowledge. I feel the same way about The Prestige.

BTW, there is a good explanation of it on Wikipedia, but don't read it until you see the movie. Use it to answer the questions that you have after you watch it for the first or second time. 

Oh yeah...Hugh Jackman is in it.   :)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on July 16, 2008, 10:35:02 pm
Tamarack,

I loved The Prestige. I loved everything about it, even though it took a few watchings to get it all.

It is particularly fitting that you saw it this week with the Batman movie on our heels...also featuring Christian Bale.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: tamarack on July 17, 2008, 07:06:43 am
Hi, Leslie! Yes, this is an amazing movie. I'm glad to hear you liked it, too; I wondered if I was overreacting!

And Christian Bale, of course!  I've got Batman Begins from Netflix which I intended to watch again before TDK; I guess I'd better get going on that, eh?
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: BelAir on July 17, 2008, 09:54:19 am
I watched a HORRIBLE movie last night, called Hostage with Bruce Willis.  Really, the part of the movie regarding the kidnapped children I could have tolerated (despite the loop holes) but there was this second coexistent 'crazy murderous teenager' plot that was just absolutely horrendous (and horrific)... 

Horrible horrible horrible.

That said, it was so compelling I couldn't turn off the TV.  I was like "I should not be watching this.  I cannot believe I am sitting here watching this horrible horrible stuff... but there I sat..."

 :-\

No one should watch this movie ever.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on July 18, 2008, 08:12:19 pm
ps - nice to see you again crayons!

Thanks, BelAir! And I agree with you about Hancock. I saw it yesterday and liked it a lot. I've always liked Will Smith (how could you not?), but I thought this was his best work yet. He was excellent. And I liked Jason Bateman, too.

The plot has some hokiness to it -- I won't go into details but those who've seen it probably know what I mean -- but much of it is really lovely. I love that they explore new and interesting aspects of the super hero cliches.

Hey Katherine, good to see you!

Thanks, Leslie! And thanks for the info about Kindle. I think I would really be interested in getting one of those, now that I know you don't risk losing all your purchases. I'll check out your other thread.

Quote
PS. The Film Club is very good. Katherine, as a mom with teenage boys, I think you might find it very interesting. I know as a mother of teens, it speaks to me. L

I stood there in the bookstore today glancing longingly through it. If it had been in paperback -- or if I'd had a Kindle! -- I would have bought it. Come to think of it, there was another hardcover book I would have bought if I'd had a Kindle (called The Unthinkable, it's about how people respond psychologically during emergencies and disasters -- looked really interesting, from what I saw).

I just got home from my son's house where we watched a movie called The Prestige. I apologize if it has been mentioned here before. Has anybody else seen it? It's from 2006, I believe. I can safely say that this is maybe the best movie I've seen since Brokeback,

I loved The Prestige! It's definitely one of the best movies I've seen since Brokeback (another is 3:10 to Yuma, another Christian Bale film).


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on July 19, 2008, 10:28:26 pm
I loved 3:10 To Yuma.  It was highly underrated then, and still is.  A shame.  It was the first movie in which Christian Bale ever did anything that truly moved me.  He's one of those actors like Mark Wahlberg in whose eyes it must be hard to catch the light because they don't reflect much.  Someone managed to do this in 3:10.  Or maybe he just came to life for the first time.

I think he's perfect to play Batman, who always vied neck-and-neck with my other favorite superhero, Spider-Man.  Batman is the personification of the duality of man.  He is Joe Friday by day, Ozzie Osbourne by night.  I always loved that about him - that he couldn't quite figure out what he was.  Loved that about Spider-Man, too.  In both cases, greatness was thrust upon them, in a way.  They are the reluctant Messiahs.  All the other actors playing Batman never made sense to me (yes, there *is* sense to be had in comic books and superhero worship).  Michael Keaton came close, but he couldn't dial down that electric spark in his eyes while playing Bruce Wayne.  The rest were just laughable.  As were all the villains.  But I digress, and segue into another thread...

I liked The Prestige, but I enjoyed The Illusionist more.  And I don't even like Edward Norton all that much.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Ellemeno on July 19, 2008, 11:05:46 pm
The Prestige AND Memento were directed by Christopher Nolan, who directed The Dark Knight.


About the "homo" remarks in Hitchcock.  I'm not sure I'll do a good job verbalizing why I thought it was actually quite funny when he said them, but I'll try, which feels risky, because if I don't do a good job, I risk alienating beloved men here.

Okay, so, in the beginning, Hitchcock is basically a scruffy, dirty, drunk or hungover mess.  His appearance and behavior are rude and crude.  The Jason Bateman character takes it on himself to spiff up Hitchcock's public image, sort of Professor Higgins/Eliza Doolittle style.  He teaches him how to say "Thank you" and "please," that sort of thing.

And he designs a superhero costume, to go with the "remodelling" he's doing on Hitchcock.  As he shows him the first design, a spiffy, sharp outfit, crappy, crusty old Hitchcock says "Homo."  Which as seriouscrayons and BelAir point out, shows his own limitations and prejudices, and definitely has a startle effect.  And then as he is shown variations on costumes, he comes up with variations on his continuing view of them. 

But I think why I actually liked these comments of his is because superheros, like cowboys, were so very recently thought to be ever so hetero.  And the worldview is opening up.  Superheros, like cowboys, just might be gay.

Sumpn like that.  Hope it comes across how I mean it.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: tamarack on July 20, 2008, 07:54:48 am
I liked The Prestige, but I enjoyed The Illusionist more.  And I don't even like Edward Norton all that much.

This is the third time that The Illusionist has come up when I've talked with someone about The Prestige. I'll definitely add that to my Netflix queue. 3:10 to Yuma is already on there but I'll have to find it and move it closer to the top. I seem to be on a roll here, with Christian Bale.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on July 20, 2008, 08:40:20 am
Tam, I think the comparison of the two movies is inevitable because they came out almost at the same time.  You know how almost every year, a particular genre gets done a few times over in rapid succession?  Like Deep Impact and Armageddon.  (I liked the first one more, and by the way, why are Presidents always either black or women in the movies - is it because that's the only way we'll ever see that in this country?)  Or like Mission to Mars and The Red Planet.  That sort of thing.

The Prestige really is an excellent movie.  For some reason, The Illusionist just moved me more - I guess because it's about an immortal love.  Go figure.

I came across an extremely well-written review by Wade Major about The Dark Knight that talks about Jung and the Duality of Man, and about how Nolan explored that in The Prestige and TDK.  Check it out:

http://boxoffice.com/reviews/2008/07/the-dark-knight.php (http://boxoffice.com/reviews/2008/07/the-dark-knight.php)

In 1939, the same year that Hitler’s invasion of Poland officially launched World War II, Bob Kane created Batman. It was also the year that famed psychiatrist Sigmund Freud died, facilitating the ascendance of his onetime friend, Carl Jung, along with Jung’s more mystical and uncertain understanding of man as a creature beset by an internal tug-of-war. While there’s no clear evidence that Kane was influenced by Jung in creating his famously Jungian hero, it seems less than coincidental that Kane would choose that particular moment in time—when the global line between good and evil was drawn more starkly than at any other time in history—to deliver not only the world’s first conflicted superhero, but a villain in the Joker driven not so much by greed or perverted morals as by an almost righteous amorality. It was a tandem which—in contrast to those of other comics heroes of the day like Superman and Captain America—suggested something that the World War II generation would probably have rejected had they fully understood it; that every human being has the capacity to be a Batman or a Joker, that morals can be fragile and frequently conditional, if not contradictory, that choices are based as much on expediency and whim as conscience, and that good and evil—for better or worse—need each other.

Subsequent generations have come to not only acknowledge Batman’s bewitching psychological undercurrent, but even embrace it, reaffirming Kane’s creation as the most compelling and complex comics character in history, and quite likely the most fiercely debated. That media depictions of Batman—the camp ’60s television series and the kinetically executed, thematically bankrupt Tim Burton and Joel Schumacher films of the late ’80s and ’90s—have shied from fully engaging such vagaries speaks to how intimidating it can be to grasp such a character in the flesh.

Pretentious though it may seem, such preamble is necessary to fully convey the magnitude of what director Christopher Nolan—arguably the most Jungian of filmmakers—has brought to Kane’s 69-year-old creation. Practically without exception, Nolan’s pre-Batman films—Following, Memento, the remake of the Swedish Insomnia—as well as his interlude effort, The Prestige, all suggest a fascination, even an obsession with Jungian dualism, the nature of good and evil and the limits of human morality. If those concerns appeared to receive their most refined examination in Batman Begins, The Dark Knight voices them with a bone-chilling primal scream.

In this gripping continuation of the story—which should all but erase any lingering memory of the Burton/Schumacher films—Nolan methodically lays the groundwork for what is clearly meant to be a grand, ongoing, epic saga. While Wayne Manor undergoes reconstruction (along with, one presumes, the eventual Batcave), Bruce Wayne (Christian Bale) struggles to reconcile the seeming irreconcilable—so long as he carries out his moral obligation to extrajudicial vigilante justice in a crime-besotted, seemingly ungovernable Gotham City, he and his childhood sweetheart, the love of his life, public prosecutor Rachel Dawes (a wonderful Maggie Gyllenhaal, mercifully replacing Katie Holmes), cannot be together. Adding to the irony of a hero who yearns for his own obsolescence is the thorny matter of Wayne’s one great hope for a Batman-less Gotham, a tough new crusading D.A. named Harvey Dent (Aaron Eckhart). who also happens to be Rachel’s boss and primary rival for Wayne’s affections. It’s a love triangle that would seem to have a great deal riding on its outcome—for Wayne, Dawes and Dent as well as the entire city of Gotham. Unfortunately, it’s an outcome that will be determined by a wild card—the wild card, as it were: the Joker.

Introduced by the simple but unmistakable emblem of a playing card at the close of Batman Begins, the Joker’s role in the film has been unduly magnified in recent weeks by the untimely death of Heath Ledger, whose characterization is already being touted for posthumous Oscar consideration. Had Ledger lived, however, it’s unlikely the reaction would have been any less enthusiastic. In a brave return to the Joker’s origins, Ledger’s incarnation is a brilliant, terrifying and unpredictable psychopath—the furthest possible cry from the charming chicanery of Cesar Romero and Jack Nicholson—for whom murder is but a casual hobby and mayhem a religious obligation. Oscar has typically loved villains of this sort—Anthony Hopkins’ Hannibal Lecter in 1991 and Javier Bardem’s Anton Chigurh in 2007 being the most notable—and it’s entirely possible that Ledger will also be so bestowed. But Ledger’s Joker is, in many ways, an even more troubling figure, for he sees the creation of mayhem as purposeful, and his role in the world as catalytic, a life’s work for a prophet of doom who, from beneath his own gruesome makeup and mysterious scars, means to strip society of its illusion of benevolence and prove just how base and loathsome a creature humankind really is.

As the Joker, with the reluctant cooperation of organized crime, proceeds to make quick work of the progress laid by Wayne/Batman and Dent via a series of brilliantly orchestrated crimes, Gotham is plunged back into uncertainty and fear. But as Alfred (Michael Caine) prophetically observes early on, the Joker is quite likely not a criminal fixated on material gain. Says the wizened butler to the young Wayne, “Some men just want to watch the world burn.”

If Wayne and the Joker represent the most emblematic outward manifestation of a classic Jungian struggle—the archetypal extrovert literally willing to stop at nothing to remove the introvert’s mask—it’s Eckhart’s virtuoso and equally Oscar-worthy portrayal of Dent that hammers home the tragic culmination of that struggle. Fans of the comics—and even the previous series of films—will recognize Dent (Billy Dee Williams in the 1989 Batman and Tommy Lee Jones in 1995’s Batman Forever) as an essential component in Gotham’s murky moral landscape. His eventual transformation into the villain Two-Face is one of the great tragedies in comics history, a transformation that figures just as tragically in The Dark Knight in that it brings into devastating focus a thicket of heady issues with which comics—much less comics-based movies—rarely concern themselves. Each man, in his own way—Wayne, Joker and Dent—represents a different philosophical facet to the impenetrable diamond that is human nature, each a seeming pillar of conviction potentially crippled by hairline cracks of indecision and simple human weakness. That those around them—Alfred, Rachel, the future Police Commissioner Gordon (Gary Oldman) and Wayne’s stalwart aide-de-camp Lucius Fox (Morgan Freeman)—are both less pessimistic in their view of human nature and less effective in putting their idealism into practice is, perhaps, the most crucial dilemma of the film, and one which it intentionally never resolves, instead dropping it squarely into the lap of the audience.

None of this is to suggest that intellectual engagement as such is anything new for the movies, though it has certainly become increasingly infrequent in studio films. The great film noirs of Kane’s own era—particularly those from Warner Bros.—often wrestled with similar issues, which Kane himself acknowledged as at least a partial inspiration for certain aspects (and characters) of the Gotham world. What is surprising in this instance is that it comes from a notoriously risk-averse studio, which has in recent years gone to great lengths to become the kind of company its founders absolutely loathed. This certainly says more about Nolan and producer Charles Roven than any prospective change in Warners philosophy, though even as a momentary blip on the radar, it’s a welcome one.

Marred only by a handful of distracting cameos (Anthony Michael Hall, Tiny Lister and U.S. Sen. Patrick Leahy) and a peculiar and unnecessary technological contrivance best characterized as “phonar,” The Dark Knight is an impressively dense and exceptionally well-written film (by Nolan and his brother, Jonathan, with co-story credit to Nolan’s Batman Begins collaborator David S. Goyer) as well as a technically dazzling one, with at least two key sequences and a variety of aerial shots captured in IMAX (though only audiences seeing the film in IMAX theaters will get the benefit of the impact). Nolan’s much-publicized aversion to CGI pays off once again in a number of gritty, hard-hitting set pieces that further reinforce the film’s real-world relevance. Far from offering traditional summer escapism, Nolan has instead delivered the kind of picture that would normally make studio executives cringe—a brainy, action-packed morality play meant to throttle the audience, body and mind, for a solid 152 minutes and haunt them for days and weeks later.

Coming weeks will provide intriguing insight into the film’s visceral and intellectual reach, as a wide range of reactions draws an even wider range of analogies and extra-cultural connections. In hindsight, one wonders whether Stanley Kubrick and novelist Gustav Hasford, whose novel The Short-Timers provided the foundation for Kubrick’s Full Metal Jacket, meant to consciously connect Matthew Modine’s Private Joker with his villainous namesake when he explains his reasoning for wearing both a peace symbol and the slogan “Born To Kill” on his helmet: “The Duality of man—the Jungian thing.”

Such considerations, of course, are largely beside the point for average filmgoers simply seeking a momentary afternoon thrill—few will likely make any connections of the sort, or even want to. At least not consciously, which may well be the most Jungian touch of all.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: BelAir on July 25, 2008, 11:21:51 am
http://movies.yahoo.com/photos/collections/gallery/906/#photo10

Top 10 Historically Inaccurate Movies

oops!  I better stop taking history lessons from the movies....  Interesting to me how many Mel Gibson films are on the list...
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on July 30, 2008, 07:00:38 pm
About the "homo" remarks in Hitchcock.  I'm not sure I'll do a good job verbalizing why I thought it was actually quite funny when he said them, but I'll try, which feels risky, because if I don't do a good job, I risk alienating beloved men here.

Okay, so, in the beginning, Hitchcock is basically a scruffy, dirty, drunk or hungover mess. 

Whoa! I read this and thought, Hunh?? There's a movie in which Alfred Hitchcock is a scruffy, dirty, drunk and hungover mess, as well as a homophobe??!

Then I figured out whom you meant. And yeah, that's how I saw it, too.


Tam, I think the comparison of the two movies is inevitable because they came out almost at the same time. 

And they are both set in Europe around the turn of the last century. And both have two-word titles involving "the" followed by a noun. I saw and liked both of them, and sometimes get momentarily confused myself.


Last week, really wanting to see TDK but already having committed myself to seeing it with my husband over the weekend (which we did), I went to Mama Mia. It was light and fluffy to the point of ridiculousness, even stupidity.

But a week later, I'm still humming the songs.


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on August 01, 2008, 10:10:15 pm
Like you, Katherine, a week later I am still humming the Mamma Mia! songs. That was a great bit of summer entertainment...silly, harmless, laugh outloud funny, with good looking 3/4s naked men leaping out of the ocean at strategic moments. What more could you want from a flick?

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on August 01, 2008, 10:43:11 pm
I saw "Journey to the Center of the Earth" today in 3D.  Talk about harmless fun--if I had kids I'd take them to it in a minute.  Not too long, lots of fun tricks with the 3D and lots of scary critters.  Brendan Fraser is the perfect actor for it--cute, hot, and doesn't take himself seriously at all.  They made going to the center of the earth and back seem like a vacation--only one that happened to be like an amusement park ride gone amok.  ;D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Aloysius J. Gleek on August 03, 2008, 01:15:20 pm
I saw a wonderful, funny and poignant black-and-white indie movie last night, a "disastrous, Misanthrope-seeks-Misanthrope-first-date-via-Craigslist-on-New-Year's-Eve-in-L.A. movie" (you know the kind, right??)--

In Search of a Midnight Kiss (2007)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0989000/

The writer-director and the two stars were there for a Q&A afterwards--these are terrifically talented kids, all originally from Texas, living in L.A.--the movie was filmed in something like eight days, but it has a polish and a knowingness and texture; it is a light, profound, silly and sophomoric, subtle and ageless movie that is lightyears above--far above--the usual drek--

Anyway--

Here's the trailer--it's cute, but doesn't even begin to give you the real idea (how could it?)--one of the lines is "I look like a rodeo clown," which is not at all Brokeback, but it's silly and fun--


In Search of a Midnight Kiss - Trailer (2:23)
[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q7a-XW6zQF4&feature=related[/youtube]


--and go here: http://www.ifcfilms.com/ (http://www.ifcfilms.com/)


(http://ia.media-imdb.com/images/M/MV5BOTg0MzU1MjgzNV5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTcwNjg0ODU2MQ@@._V1._SX480_SY360_.jpg)

(http://ia.media-imdb.com/images/M/MV5BMjEyNjgxMTgzNl5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTcwODQ1Mzc3MQ@@._V1._SX600_SY338_.jpg)

(http://ia.media-imdb.com/images/M/MV5BMTI3ODgxNTE4NV5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTcwOTQ1Mzc3MQ@@._V1._SX500_SY281_.jpg)

(http://ia.media-imdb.com/images/M/MV5BMjA1MDMzMzYyNF5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTcwMTU1Mzc3MQ@@._V1._SX500_SY281_.jpg)

(http://ia.media-imdb.com/images/M/MV5BMTc1OTE0MTg4N15BMl5BanBnXkFtZTcwMDU1Mzc3MQ@@._V1._SX483_SY281_.jpg)

(http://ia.media-imdb.com/images/M/MV5BMTA4NDM5MDgxODFeQTJeQWpwZ15BbWU3MDM1NTM3NzE@._V1._SX500_SY276_.jpg)

It may never come to your theater, but it might--and if not, try and give it a go on Netflix--

 :)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: BelAir on August 03, 2008, 11:18:38 pm
John...

Will you translate your siggie?

I haven't noticed it before.

If forced to guess, I would say, "Do you know that I love you?"
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Aloysius J. Gleek on August 03, 2008, 11:59:36 pm
John...

Will you translate your siggie?

I haven't noticed it before.

If forced to guess, I would say, "Do you know that I love you?"

Thanks! I changed my 'siggie' in February or March after seeing 'Les chansons d'amour' (Love Songs) by Christophe Honoré; roughly, one character is letting another (clueless) character know, in no uncertain terms:

"Tu doives entendre je t'aime."

"You must hear 'I love you,'" or, rather,  "You need to hear 'I love you!!'" (Exclamation Point!)

Unfortunately, Jack didn't say it (early enough) to Ennis, I guess--
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on August 07, 2008, 01:08:54 pm
I have just learned about this movie: Chris & Don, A Love Story. It's a documentary about Christopher Isherwood and Don Bachardy. Here's the trailer. Anyone here seen this? It's getting very positive comments on IMDb. Unfortunately, I don't think it will be playing in Maine anytime soon!

[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KNQMFAG33hY[/youtube]
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on August 07, 2008, 01:53:54 pm
I saw Chris & Don at the Ptown film festival, Leslie.  I'd have to say it was the best film that I saw that week.

Fascinating bio of an unlikely couple, told through interviews, old film, Isherwood's diary (read by Michael York), and an inventive use of animation.  Watching Don Bachardy "grow up" from very impressionable young man to a mature artist was compelling. 

There's always the DVD, Leslie.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on August 07, 2008, 02:37:17 pm
Thanks for that info, Paul. It sounds like the sort of movie that's right up my alley--I love documentaries. And yes, DVD, although I like movies in the theater, better! I pay more attention and don't get distracted...

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Aloysius J. Gleek on August 07, 2008, 02:56:54 pm
Chris & Don: a love story

New York Starts June 13
Huntington Starts June 13
Fort Lauderdale Starts June 27

Los Angeles July 4-July 11
Berkeley July 18-July 25
San Francisco July 18-July 25

Boston July 18-July 24
Philadelphia July 23-August 1
Chicago Starts July 25
Minneapolis July 25-August 1

San Diego July 25-August 1
Washington, DC July 25-July 31

Atlanta August 1-August 7
Kansas City Starts August 1
Seattle August 1-August 7
St. Louis August 1-August 8

Columbus, OH September 18

(http://www.zeitgeistfilms.com/films/chrisanddon/photos/chrisanddon.photo01_sm.jpg)
Don Bachardy and Christopher Isherwood in the early ’50s.


(http://www.zeitgeistfilms.com/films/chrisanddon/photos/chrisanddon.photo02_sm.jpg)
Don Bachardy and Christopher Isherwood sitting in front of a portrait of themselves painted by David Hockney (late ’70s).

(http://www.zeitgeistfilms.com/films/chrisanddon/photos/chrisanddon.photo06_sm.jpg)

(http://www.zeitgeistfilms.com/films/chrisanddon/photos/chrisanddon.photo05_sm.jpg)

(http://www.zeitgeistfilms.com/films/chrisanddon/photos/chrisanddon.photo07_sm.jpg)

For large format images of the thumbnails above, go to:

http://www.zeitgeistfilms.com/film.php?directoryname=chrisanddon&mode=downloads (http://www.zeitgeistfilms.com/film.php?directoryname=chrisanddon&mode=downloads)


(http://www.zeitgeistfilms.com/films/chrisanddon/poster_large.jpg)

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: SFEnnisSF on August 13, 2008, 12:45:17 am
Kate Mara on a train...

"Transsiberian" opens this weekend...



[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_5MUTPx_SIY[/youtube]

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on August 13, 2008, 01:21:48 am
Kate Mara on a train...

"Transsiberian" opens this weekend...



[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_5MUTPx_SIY[/youtube]


Ehh, just looks like a normal ride on Amtrak.  ;D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Flashframe777 on August 13, 2008, 02:45:29 am
"MILK" - I'm really keen on seeing that hot "mustached-Flagg Brothers' Shirt wearing, Blue Jean cutoff shorts sporting, prosthetic penis swinging" James Franco/Sean Penn nude poolside kiss. 

Can they legally use those promotional movie T-shirts that say "Got Milk?"
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: SFEnnisSF on August 15, 2008, 01:26:08 am

Ehh, just looks like a normal ride on Amtrak.  ;D



Yep, pretty much!  :laugh:
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: SFEnnisSF on August 15, 2008, 01:29:12 am
I saw SWING VOTE tonight with Kevin Costner. 

I loved it! :D     But aparently I'm the only one who did, according to the manager of the theatre.  BTW patron count watching Swing Vote tonight including me:  3   :o    No wonder the theatre is no longer showing it as of tomorrow...  'Least BBM lasted longer than 2 weeks..  :D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on August 16, 2008, 05:40:16 pm
I finally saw In Bruges, and loved it. My son saw it a couple of weeks ago and wanted me to see it with him. Good acting, nice cinematography, absorbing story. Why is it that so many European movies have real plots, while so many American films are just concepts or situations?

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: shortfiction on August 16, 2008, 09:34:31 pm
Anybody up for the newest Coen Brothers film, Burn After Reading?  It comes out on Sep. 12 and looks to be a dark comedy featuring a CIA agent and some gym employees.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on August 16, 2008, 11:06:34 pm
Oilgun, glad to hear you enjoyed Lars. The one review I read made me feel kind of iffy about it. But with your endorsement I'll be sure to see it as soon as it reaches my local theater. As I've probably mentioned numerous times on this thread already, I love Ryan Gosling.

Finally, I saw this film as a double bill with Mannequin, starring Andrew McCarthy and Kim Cattrall. I enjoyed both films, but especially Lars. One line that struck me very much was the doctor's as she pretended to examine Lars' "girlfriend" (but really him) "Sometimes I get so lonely I forget what day of the week it is, or how to spell my name."
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: SFEnnisSF on August 17, 2008, 12:05:51 pm
I  loved Lars & The Real Girl.  I cried near the end...
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kd5000 on August 17, 2008, 12:49:27 pm
Anybody up for the newest Coen Brothers film, Burn After Reading?  It comes out on Sep. 12 and looks to be a dark comedy featuring a CIA agent and some gym employees.


Well it sure looks interesting.  It looks like Brad Pitt has hair highlights and Frances McDormand is a blond.  The trailer, which I saw yesterday, really doesn't give you any idea of what the movie is about.  I like the trailer for Bottle Shock, "the story of the early days of California wine making featuring the now infamous, blind Paris wine tasting of 1976..."

Yesterday, I saw the new Woody Allen movie called Vicky Cristina Barcelona.   Penelope Cruz was quite good, but the movie itself wasn't up to par, though it might make you want to take a vacation in Spain.   :D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on August 20, 2008, 12:10:42 am
though it might make you want to take a vacation in Spain.   :D

That in itself might be enough reason to see a movie!  ;D

I saw Pineapple Express and Tropic Thunder with my sons (12 and 13). They loved both, but I wasn't as impressed. Both had mildly funny or interesting moments, but devolved into stupid violence and were ultimately, to me, disappointments. Still, in the first, I liked James Franco. Very fun and likable -- a whole new kind of character. In the second, I liked Robert Downey Jr. and especially -- get this! -- Tom Cruise!! As a matter of fact, one could argue that Tom Cruise was the best thing in that movie. Not something I'd ever expect to hear me say, except possibly regarding Magnolia, which I haven't seen.





Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: horo04 on August 20, 2008, 12:23:01 am
Finally, I saw this film as a double bill with Mannequin, starring Andrew McCarthy and Kim Cattrall. I enjoyed both films, but especially Lars. One line that struck me very much was the doctor's as she pretended to examine Lars' "girlfriend" (but really him) "Sometimes I get so lonely I forget what day of the week it is, or how to spell my name."


You saw Mannequin? YARGHH!.....worst movie ever...I still have nightmares of Switcher and mannequins riding on motorbikes! :P
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: SFEnnisSF on August 26, 2008, 11:41:20 pm
I saw Frozen River tonight.  It was excellent!

http://www.sonyclassics.com/frozenriver/


I love the music in the trailer and in the movie:

Trailer:



[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7MnmB79yt0[/youtube]




Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on August 28, 2008, 04:06:53 pm
Most of the movies I've watched lately have been older and rather mediocre so I haven't bothered to post about them here.   One exception, however, is the 1976 French film THE BEST WAY TO WALK (La meilleure façon de marcher), the first film from director Claude Miller.  I don't remember ever hearing about it before but since I'm a fan of Patrick Dewaere I rented it.   What a wonderful surprise!

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC Movies/BestWayToWalk.jpg)

Summary:
In the summer of 1960, Marc and Philippe work as supervisors in a French summer camp for young boys.  Their different methods of treating their young charges reflect their different personalities.  Marc, an extrovert bully, leads his boys as if they were rookie soldiers, subjecting them to a gruelling schedule of sport and drill exercises.  Philippe, by contrast, is a quieter, kinder man, who is more concerned with developing his boys’ artistic talents.  The two men co-exist comfortably side-by-side until one day Marc sees Philippe dressed up as a woman in his room.  From that day, Marc is determined to make Philippe’s life a misery.  He humiliates Philippe in front of his fellow supervisors and then his girlfriend, Chantal.  Finally, Philippe can take no more.  His self-esteem in tatters, he is driven to take a drastic revenge against his tormenter…

Review Excerpt: The two characters in the film, Marc and Philippe, represent two diametrically opposed facets of masculinity – Marc the virile, physical lout, Philippe the well-mannered, studious type.  The two kinds of male personas still exist, and have probably always existed, each fatally drawn towards the other in a kind of love/hate symbiosis, from which each derives some sort of perverse self-justification.  The conflict between them, so masterfully captured in this film,  is perhaps as ancient and as unforgiving as that which exists between men and women.


Synopsis and review both from: http://filmsdefrance.com/FDF_La_Meilleure_facon_de_marcher_rev.html (http://filmsdefrance.com/FDF_La_Meilleure_facon_de_marcher_rev.html)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on September 04, 2008, 11:02:06 pm
Well, the reviews for the Cohen Bros' BURN AFTER READING have not been very good here in Toronto. - It's playing at the TIFF.  It's too bad I was looking forward to seeing Brad Pitt play a doophus, he really shines in comedies.  Remember how hilarious he was when he guested on FRIENDS?
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on September 04, 2008, 11:24:21 pm
Yesterday, I saw the new Woody Allen movie called Vicky Cristina Barcelona.   Penelope Cruz was quite good, but the movie itself wasn't up to par, though it might make you want to take a vacation in Spain.   :D

Agreed, Karl.  I enjoyed the movie but could have done without the intrusive voice-over narration.  The only reason I could come up with for it was that maybe Woody wanted it to come across as some sort of "chick lit" book that they market to young women.  The actors were appealing, even Scarlett Johansson, whom I usually find annoying.  There were some signature Woody Allen bits that made me miss some of his earlier films.  And yes, Barcelona looks terrific.  Afterwards, all I wanted to do was go out and get some wine and listen to Spanish guitar music in a secluded little cafe.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on September 04, 2008, 11:38:45 pm
Well, the reviews for the Cohen Bros' BURN AFTER READING have not been very good here in Toronto. - It's playing at the TIFF.  It's too bad I was looking forward to seeing Brad Pitt play a doophus, he really shines in comedies.  Remember how hilarious he was when he guested on FRIENDS?

I'll have to say, the trailers did not look promising. It looked like one of those Cohen Bros. movies where everyone shamelessly mugs -- especially George Clooney. Maybe I'm finding that George, and for that matter Joel and Ethan, are at their best with solemn dramas. Kind of the opposite of Kevin Costner.



Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on September 05, 2008, 07:24:29 am
The trailer for MILK which will be out in November. From Focus Features with Sean Penn, Emile Hirsch and Josh Brolin.
[youtube=425,350]
[/youtube]
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on September 05, 2008, 08:49:06 am
Thanks for the Milk trailer, Leslie.  I worry about the Dan White portrayal, even from the brief trailer; he looks too calculating.  Most of the actual footage of him I've seen makes him look rather stupid and pathetic. (I'm thinking The Times of Harvey Milk.)

A pleasant diversion from the Repugnican Convention last night:  I flipped the channel and found Blade Runner.  I probably hadn't seen it in more than 25 years, yet I used to listen to the soundtrack a lot in the 80s. 

I think it certainly has held up (outside of the blatant Atari ads).  It reminded me of BBM in that it leaves things ambiguous and you have to think!  Rutger Hauer's "tears in the rain" speech is fantastic!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on September 05, 2008, 09:23:08 am
Thanks for the Milk trailer, Leslie.  I worry about the Dan White portrayal, even from the brief trailer; he looks too calculating.  Most of the actual footage of him I've seen makes him look rather stupid and pathetic. (I'm thinking The Times of Harvey Milk.)

A pleasant diversion from the Repugnican Convention last night:  I flipped the channel and found Blade Runner.  I probably hadn't seen it in more than 25 years, yet I used to listen to the soundtrack a lot in the 80s. 

I think it certainly has held up (outside of the blatant Atari ads).  It reminded me of BBM in that it leaves things ambiguous and you have to think!  Rutger Hauer's "tears in the rain" speech is fantastic!

Repugnican?  Did you make that up?  I love it!

Thanks for the MILK trailer Leslie!  It's looking good, I'm really getting excited about the movie.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on September 05, 2008, 12:15:50 pm
Repugnican?  Did you make that up?  I love it!


I thought I did, but it's in the urban dictionary. 8)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on September 05, 2008, 04:47:12 pm
Here are the best reviewed films (4/4 stars) screening at TIFF (as per THE GLOBE & MAIL):


The Good, the Bad, the Weird
Kim Jee-Woon (South Korea)
With one of the most exciting and possibly longest horse-chase gun battles committed to celluloid, this Korean spaghetti western is both an exotic treat and an old-fashioned rollicking action pic. After meeting on a train in the Manchurian desert in the 1930s, the destinies of a gifted bounty hunter, a sadistic gang leader and an eccentric train robber become intertwined with that of a valuable map. The biggest budget Korean flick to date, this film is visually rich and fully loaded with wildly inventive comedy and action sequences. The director has fun with conventions, yet the movie feels fresher than Hollywood's most recent batch of westerns. J.P.


Rachel Getting Married
Jonathan Demme (U.S.)
Many films have used the ritual of a wedding to peer into the dysfunctions of a troubled family, but none better than this. In its raw honesty and emotional grit, Demme's work here is unsurpassed. Borrowing a little from Robert Altman, and a little more from the Dogme directors, Demme brings a probing camera to the gathering of a Connecticut clan, digging beneath the surface of the rehearsal party chatter — the gaiety real and forced, the speeches graceful and cringe-making — to examine some very large themes at a very intimate level, themes like sin and atonement and the blood that sometimes runs thinner than water. As the sister who gets checked out of rehab long enough to attend the wedding, Anne Hathaway delivers a nuanced and revelatory performance (expect Oscar to call). But so does Rosemarie DeWitt in the title role. The love/hate tension between them, filtered through the crowd around them, is almost voyeuristic in its intensity. Normally reserved for action flicks, that edge-of-your-seat cliché has a new home here — the rawness will have you leaning into the screen, often uncomfortable but always entranced. R.G.

Hunger
Steve McQueen (U.K.)
The debut film from Turner Prize-winning artist Steve McQueen is a harrowing experience and a rule-breaking tour de force. Hunger focuses on the 1981 death of Irish hunger striker Bobby Sands over the course of 66 days in the Maze prison. Without endorsing Sands's and his fellow IRA soldiers' tactics, the film places his death in the context of religious martyrdom and portrays the choice of extreme physical degradation — naked and starving in excrement-covered cells — as a form of sacrifice echoing Christ's death. That's not the same as saying McQueen endorses their actions. At the film's centre comes an extraordinary, single-take, 20-minute conversation between Sands (Michael Fassbender) and a sympathetic priest (Liam Cunningham) who tries to convince him this is an ego-driven suicide mission by a man who is no longer in his right mind. For those who are expecting Ken Loach-style propaganda, that's not McQueen's aim. This is a portrait of a hideous human drama, with distinct resonances of the martyrdom and torture in the post-9/11 world. The prison guards here are also victims in a literal sense: They were killed by IRA assassins at the same rate as the prisoners starved to death. L.L.

JCVD  [Woohoo! - oilgun]
Mabrouk El Mechri (France/Belgium/Luxembourg)
Loaded with hilarious in-jokes and packing an unexpected emotional wallop, this smart postmodern hostage pic stars martial-arts action thesp Jean-Claude Van Damme as a washed-up version of himself. In this brave career jolt, Van Damme transforms his leaden acting into Buster Keaton deadpan, pitch-perfect for the string of humiliations — a custody battle, losing a role to Steven Seagal, an unco-operative ATM — that lead his character to a botched Brussels post-office heist. Cops, fans and his parents gather, believing he's gone postal. But can this celebrity become a real-life hero? Shot in dreamy sepia hues, with a fab cast and intellectual and visual zip, JCVD opens the Midnight Madness program in style. J.P.

RR
James Benning (USA)
Barring a change of mind or circumstance, RR will be the last of James Benning's films shot on 16 mm, and it ends with a locomotive, pointedly stopped in front of a wind farm outside Palm Springs, Calif. It's the last in a line of 43 trains shot across the U.S., each one a witness to America's overconsumption. Those familiar with Benning's recent landscape films will be comforted by the fixed camera and the film's continental scope, but in RR the signified (the train) takes over from the signifier (the camera), each shot lasting as long as it takes for a train to traverse the frame; this is both an aesthetic and a political choice. Each shot comes as a surprise, and every one is mesmerizing (yet unspectacular), yet RR acquires a cumulative power over its running time, as the simplicity of the structure gives way to infinite experiences. A masterpiece of structural filmmaking. M. Peranson


For the films rated 3.5 stars and less: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080902.wtiff_minireviews/BNStory/tiff2008/home/?pageRequested=2 (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080902.wtiff_minireviews/BNStory/tiff2008/home/?pageRequested=2)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on September 05, 2008, 05:05:53 pm
Here is another TIFF movie review that should be of special interest to Bettermostians.  Toronto NOW magazine gives it an  impressive 5/5 stars:


Wendy And Lucy
Director(s): Kelly Reichardt
Country: USA
Starring: Michelle Williams, Walter Dalton
Program: CWC
Rating: NNNNN
Review by NW



Wendy (Williams) is driving through Oregon on her way to Alaska with a few possessions, a limited supply of money and her enthusiastic dog, Lucy. Car trouble and an empty bag of dog food trigger a cascade of unpleasant events that send the increasingly desperate woman racing around a small town, bleeding cash and seeing her options dwindle before her eyes.

I freely admit that this movie pushed just about every button I have. I spent most of its 80-minute running time grinding my teeth with mounting tension and silently begging the story not to end up where I feared it would. (It doesn't, though the ending Reichardt comes up with is just as devastating.)

My own issues aside, Williams holds the screen with a riveting, utterly sympathetic performance. Wendy And Lucy works powerfully as both a wrenching character study and a mournful commentary on the economic desperation of small-town Americans.


For more:  http://www.nowtoronto.com/guides/tiff/2008/ (http://www.nowtoronto.com/guides/tiff/2008/)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on September 05, 2008, 06:23:34 pm
Well, the reviews for the Cohen Bros' BURN AFTER READING have not been very good here in Toronto. - It's playing at the TIFF.  It's too bad I was looking forward to seeing Brad Pitt play a doophus, he really shines in comedies.  Remember how hilarious he was when he guested on FRIENDS?

A friend saw it yesterday - he had a free pass.  He said it was funny, enjoyable, Pitt was great, but it was weird like all Cohen movies.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on September 07, 2008, 07:47:35 pm
I saw "Bottleshock" last night and, while I like Alan Rickman, it was kind of an ordeal to sit through. There were way too many closeups of sweaty faces and tangled hair, too much bad French being spoken, and so much wine swilling that my stomach began to feel queasy. Or maybe it was all those handheld camera shots. Also, there was a young surfer-boy actor named Chris Pine who looked like a cross between Heath and Brad, but with nothing of their acting talent or intellectual abilities. I vote to return this bottle for recycling!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on September 07, 2008, 09:17:32 pm
 :D  And here is Chris Pine:

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/Bottleshock-1.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on September 07, 2008, 10:04:56 pm
Thanks friend! He does deserve watching to see if he matures at all... I also saw the trailer for Australia. That looks promising with Aussies Hugh Jackman and what's her name...after I wrote Hugh Jackman, my mind just went blank! Whats'a matter with my head!!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on September 07, 2008, 10:17:53 pm
I saw "Bottleshock" last night and, while I like Alan Rickman, it was kind of an ordeal to sit through. There were way too many closeups of sweaty faces and tangled hair, too much bad French being spoken, and so much wine swilling that my stomach began to feel queasy. Or maybe it was all those handheld camera shots. Also, there was a young surfer-boy actor named Chris Pine who looked like a cross between Heath and Brad, but with nothing of their acting talent or intellectual abilities. I vote to return this bottle for recycling!

I'm sorry to hear it's not up to par, Lee.  I love Alan Rickman and may see it just for him, though.  :)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: JCinNYC2006 on September 08, 2008, 12:40:40 pm
Thanks for the Milk trailer, Leslie.  I worry about the Dan White portrayal, even from the brief trailer; he looks too calculating.  Most of the actual footage of him I've seen makes him look rather stupid and pathetic. (I'm thinking The Times of Harvey Milk.)

A pleasant diversion from the Repugnican Convention last night:  I flipped the channel and found Blade Runner.  I probably hadn't seen it in more than 25 years, yet I used to listen to the soundtrack a lot in the 80s. 

I think it certainly has held up (outside of the blatant Atari ads).  It reminded me of BBM in that it leaves things ambiguous and you have to think!  Rutger Hauer's "tears in the rain" speech is fantastic!
Hey Paul!  Hey everyone else!  I can't see the Milk trailer from work but I'll check it out at home, I'm looking forward to it.  Van Sant runs hot and cold with me but I'm dying to see Milk's story on film.  And Repugnican?  Too funny!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on September 08, 2008, 12:47:15 pm
Hey, Juan!

Speaking of Gus Van Sant, I just rewatched Good Will Hunting for the first time since it was in the theaters. It held up really well. My 12-year-old son liked it, too, which is amazing considering nobody gets killed during the entire movie! Ben Affleck and Matt Damon really wrote an amazing script. Matt Damon has become one of my favorite actors, and I think Ben Affleck is highly underrated (anybody else see Hollywoodland?)

Speaking of Matt Damon, I watched Saving Private Ryan for the first time last night. It was good and all, I guess, but ... well, as a general rule I'm the opposite of my son. The more people get killed, the less I like it (with plenty of violent exceptions, such as 3:10 to Yuma and The Departed). This one had too high a killing:character development ratio for me.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on September 08, 2008, 12:53:46 pm
Hey Paul!  Hey everyone else!  I can't see the Milk trailer from work but I'll check it out at home, I'm looking forward to it.  Van Sant runs hot and cold with me but I'm dying to see Milk's story on film.  And Repugnican?  Too funny!

Hey Juan!  Miss you around these parts.

I guess we can be glad that Van Sant didn't do BBM after all. 
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on September 09, 2008, 12:09:37 am
How could I forget to mention it earlier? I saw Man on Wire yesterday, about the guy who in the 1970s walked, ran, and lay down on a tightrope strung between the tops of the World Trade Center towers. The film combines an amazing amount of photos and films shot at the time, recent interviews with the participants, all still engaging and articulate, and a little bit of not-too-cheesy recreation. It got a little long in parts -- all the details about the preparation -- but was suspenseful overall. The guy is an interesting character. And when he goes out on the wire ... even now, my pulse races a bit just thinking about it!




Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on September 09, 2008, 11:14:57 am
Last night I watched Greg Araki's SMILEY FACE starring Anna Faris. Of course, since the movie was never released in theatres, I wasn't expecting much, which probably explains why I thought it was pretty hilarious. 

It's not completely successful but it's way better than many Hollywood comedies that do get theatrical runs.  Think DUDE, WHERE'S MY CAR?, but with a female pothead instead of two guys.  It's not a very glamourous role for Anna who spends the whole movie - and she's in every scene - completely stoned out of her mind.  We're talking slack-jawed-and-falling-down stoned, not just a good buzz.  It's actually a bit too much after a while, I found myself yelling at her to close her mouth!  Also, at times she seemed to be channeling Britney Spears, the resemblance was uncanny and a bit disturbing.

The script is clever, the supporting cast is quite good and the soundtrack is a hip mixture of Styx, REO Speedwagon, Mojave 3 and the Chemical Bros.  If you like stoner comedies, or like to partake yourself, then I think you might enjoy it.  In fact, it's probably a good idea to have a bong at hand while watching it.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on September 09, 2008, 11:29:41 am
You are so right, oilgun! She would be perfect for Britney when they do the biopic. It could be Anna's breakthrough role, like Jennifer Lopez's in Selena or Marion Cotillard as Edith Piaf or Barbara Streisand as Fanny Brice. And you know Britney's life story is probably just about as compelling as those other singers'.



Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kd5000 on September 09, 2008, 11:31:50 am
Has anyone heard anything good about Jake and Tobey's new movie "BROTHERS."  I've seen random posting from ppl who attended advanced screenings. They've said it wasn't very good, not as good as the original. I had high hopes for this film, even hoping Jake would make it to Award season this year.  Anne Hathaway is getting good reviews at the Toronto film festival for her new movie.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Shakesthecoffecan on September 09, 2008, 03:43:27 pm
I saw this movie last night that was from a few years ago, Birth, staring Nicole Kidman as a woman remarrying when a young boy appears claiming to be her deceased husband. Never heard of it when it came out, but it was quite the psychological thriller:

[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8gHj75ntqHU[/youtube]

This was my favorite part:

[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m8lrDiZQJQg&feature=related[/youtube]
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on September 09, 2008, 03:53:20 pm
You are so right, oilgun! She would be perfect for Britney when they do the biopic. It could be Anna's breakthrough role, like Jennifer Lopez's in Selena or Marion Cotillard as Edith Piaf or Barbara Streisand as Fanny Brice. And you know Britney's life story is probably just about as compelling as those other singers'.


Separated at birth?  ;D

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/britney-spears.jpg)
(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/Anna-Faris-Smiley-Face.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on September 09, 2008, 05:35:48 pm
I saw this movie last night that was from a few years ago, Birth, staring Nicole Kidman as a woman remarrying when a young boy appears claiming to be her deceased husband. Never heard of it when it came out, but it was quite the psychological thriller:

This was my favorite part:

[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m8lrDiZQJQg&feature=related[/youtube]

That is a really interesting sequence, though I kept waiting for something to happen!   Anyway, considering it was the opening bars of one of the operas in Wagner's Ring Cycle, it strained credulity that they would have been permitted to enter the theater after the music had started.  Wagner fans are notoriously fierce when it comes to being distracted from their opera!  ;D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on September 09, 2008, 10:12:39 pm
That is a really interesting sequence, though I kept waiting for something to happen!   

Wow, I thought something really did happen:  I realized again how good an actress Nicole Kidman can be.  I couldn't take my eyes off her.  And I don't even know what's going on with her in this film.  Apart from her portrayal of an ice cube in Moulin Rouge, she can have incredible depth.  The Hours will always be my favorite. 

I'll see anything with Lauren Bacall LOL.  I'll have to look for Birth.  Thank you, Truman. 
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Shakesthecoffecan on September 09, 2008, 10:19:25 pm
  I'll have to look for Birth.  Thank you, Truman. 

Awe Shucks! Your Welcome.  ;D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on September 09, 2008, 10:36:44 pm
Awe Shucks! Your Welcome.  ;D

Me too! And Nicole Kidman was the name I was trying to think of down there when I got lost in Hugh Jackman land. She and he will be starring in Australia coming out late this fall. Looks like another Titanic.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on September 09, 2008, 10:45:29 pm
Me too! And Nicole Kidman was the name I was trying to think of down there when I got lost in Hugh Jackman land. She and he will be starring in Australia coming out late this fall. Looks like another Titanic.  

Ooh, that's not necessarily a good thing. LOL

**runs from Titanic fans**
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on September 09, 2008, 11:58:54 pm
Just so it's not another "Crash"!  :laugh: :laugh:

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kd5000 on September 10, 2008, 11:05:19 am
I wasn't too impressed with "BIRTH." A pretty big disappointment. Now a good reincarnation movie (it was a trendy topic in the 1970's) was "THE REINCARNATION OF PETER PROUD." Probably looks dated now, but it used to come on tv quite frequently in the 1970's.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on September 10, 2008, 11:14:56 am
Me too! And Nicole Kidman was the name I was trying to think of down there when I got lost in Hugh Jackman land. She and he will be starring in Australia coming out late this fall. Looks like another Titanic.


Don't be so quick to judge. It is getting alot of positive publicity. And remember, Titanic still leads the Dark Knight in total $$, and TDK probably won't catch up the way things are going. Even though lots of people sneer at Titanic it was a huge hit, and lots of people love it, including me.

(http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h243/lnicoll/Maine/Aussie-2.jpg)

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on September 10, 2008, 11:28:02 am

Don't be so quick to judge. It is getting alot of positive publicity. And remember, Titanic still leads the Dark Knight in total $$, and TDK probably won't catch up the way things are going. Even though lots of people sneer at Titanic it was a huge hit, and lots of people love it, including me.

(http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h243/lnicoll/Maine/Aussie-2.jpg)

I'm just eager to learn more about Australia. Especially now that I have Brokie friends there.  :D

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kd5000 on September 10, 2008, 11:31:36 am
Is it going to be like THE THORNBIRDS?  It was one of most watched tv miniseries of all times. Maybe the movie industry is hoping to tap into that sentiment.  Of course, you can't mention THE THORNBIRDS to some ppl without the phrase "He's gay!" being stated afterwards.  Did Richard Chamberlain's coming out destroy the fantasy for some.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on September 10, 2008, 11:35:02 am
Is it going to be like THE THORNBIRDS?  It was one of most watched tv miniseries of all times. Maybe the movie industry is hoping to tap into that sentiment.  Of course, you can't mention THE THORNBIRDS to some ppl without the phrase "He's gay!" being stated afterwards.  Did Richard Chamberlain's coming out destroy the fantasy for some.


I have heard it described as an epic set against the background of war, akin to Gone With the Wind (different country and different war, though).
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on September 10, 2008, 11:40:32 am
Of course, you can't mention THE THORNBIRDS to some ppl without the phrase "He's gay!" being stated afterwards.  Did Richard Chamberlain's coming out destroy the fantasy for some.

I hope not, because it's exactly that thinking that keeps gay actors who might want roles in straight romances from being able to come out.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on September 11, 2008, 06:58:18 am
I hope not, because it's exactly that thinking that keeps gay actors who might want roles in straight romances from being able to come out.



Chamberlain came out at seventy or something, no one cares who an actor sleeps with at that age, lol!

I watched JUMPER last night and was pleasantly surprised,  I had heard mostly negative things.  Hayden Christensen is his usual arrogant and ridiculously handsome self and I always love Jamie Bell.  I hope the planned sequals get made.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on September 11, 2008, 09:03:31 am
Chamberlain came out at seventy or something, no one cares who an actor sleeps with at that age, lol!

But I think a lot of people thought he might be gay long before he officially came out.

It's sad, because I've heard that, too -- someone says they find a movie romantic, and someone else snaps back that the actor in it is gay in real life, as if that canceled everything out and the first person should rethink her original opinion of the movie. News flash: The actor was playing a role! Even if he were straight, he'd likely be unavailable to you in real life for all kinds of reasons -- he lives in Los Angeles, he dates supermodels, he's a total stranger. So what's the difference if he's gay?





Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on September 14, 2008, 06:45:06 pm
I find movies about gays more romantic than the typical hetero romance. It seems like the more unusual and unlikely the relationship is, the better the story and romance are to me. When two gay men hook up in a movie, I am not only glad for them, but I also relate to one or both characters strongly, even though I am not male. I also prefer intercultural, intergenerational and interracial romances. Am I weird or what?  ::)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on September 14, 2008, 06:58:10 pm
I also prefer intercultural, intergenerational and interracial romances. Am I weird or what?  ::)

No weirder than Heath. I gather from his interviews that he took the role of Ennis for similar reasons.


Not to change the subject, but I saw Burn Before Reading yesterday and found it fairly tedious.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kd5000 on September 14, 2008, 07:32:37 pm
I just saw BURN AFTER READING and I thought it wasn't one of the COEN BROTHER's best movies.

I did like Brad Pitt's character quite a bit.  It's one of his better performances of late. There are some jarring twists and turns in the film but in the end, I really didn't care so much for the other main characters.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on September 14, 2008, 10:34:50 pm
 :laugh: :laugh:

When I wrote the last post, i couldn't remember if it was "Burn AFTER Reading" or "Burn BEFORE Reading." I took a wild guess at the latter, googled it, came up with a bunch of hits, and without looking too closely figured that was it and proceded accordingly.

Later, my son overheard me on the phone calling it "Burn Before Reading" and corrected me.

I thought actually that would be a more clever name, though.  ;D





Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on September 14, 2008, 10:52:49 pm
:laugh: :laugh:

When I wrote the last post, i couldn't remember if it was "Burn AFTER Reading" or "Burn BEFORE Reading." I took a wild guess at the latter, googled it, came up with a bunch of hits, and without looking too closely figured that was it and proceded accordingly.

Later, my son overheard me on the phone calling it "Burn Before Reading" and corrected me.

I thought actually that would be a more clever name, though.  ;D



A writer titled his review of the film: "Burn Before Watching"  :laugh:
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on September 15, 2008, 01:42:16 am
A writer titled his review of the film: "Burn Before Watching"  :laugh:

Good plan!  :laugh:

I only hope the next Cohen Bros.' movie is better. They're reportedly making a film based on their childhood, in a Minneapolis suburb right next to the one I grew up in. It could be a heartwarming return to the golden days of my youth, or ... uh-oh ....  :o ;)



Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kd5000 on September 16, 2008, 11:16:46 am
Minneapolis suburb. Sounds very wholesome.  ;) Must be a great setting for the "banality of evil."  ;D   What a great contrast.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on September 16, 2008, 11:24:16 am
Minneapolis suburb. Sounds very wholesome.  ;) Must be a great setting for the "banality of evil."  ;D   What a great contrast.

Yup, the Minneapolis suburbs are teeming with hidden evil. I can vouch for that!  :laugh:


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on September 16, 2008, 12:03:13 pm
Yup, the Minneapolis suburbs are teeming with hidden evil. I can vouch for that!  :laugh:




I heard that Minneapolis is a very fit city with nice paths for running around three small lakes?
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on September 16, 2008, 03:35:47 pm
Yes. I live near one of them. Takes about an hour from my door, around the lake and back. It is connected by bike and walking paths to another one, which is connected to another one. The bike and walking paths also extend farther, follow a creek to a waterfall, and take in a couple more lakes. The creek is a couple of block from my house.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on September 16, 2008, 04:42:17 pm
Yes. I live near one of them. Takes about an hour from my door, around the lake and back. It is connected by bike and walking paths to another one, which is connected to another one. The bike and walking paths also extend farther, follow a creek to a waterfall, and take in a couple more lakes. The creek is a couple of block from my house.



NICE!  It reminds me of Ottawa, where I grew up.  It's located at the confluence of 2 rivers and a canal and all three have well maintained bike paths along both sides that can all be accessed from the downtown core.  Plus just across the bridge in Hull/Gatineau, there is a provincial park accessible from their downtown with a beautiful path makes its way through the forest.  I've actually seen deer while riding this path!  It's amazing and just minutes by bike from the Ottawa centre.  That's the one thing I miss from that city, all the easily accessible green space.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on September 16, 2008, 04:49:56 pm
NICE!  It reminds me of Ottawa, where I grew up.  It's located at the confluence of 2 rivers and a canal and all three have well maintained bike paths along both sides that can all be accessed from the downtown core.  Plus just across the bridge in Hull/Gatineau, there is a provincial park accessible from their downtown with a beautiful path makes its way through the forest.  I've actually seen deer while riding this path!  It's amazing and just minutes by bike from the Ottawa centre.  That's the one thing I miss from that city, all the easily accessible green space.

That sounds lovely. I saw a deer here in the city once, galloping down the sidewalk of a major thoroughfare, a few blocks from the creek. People out raking their lawns stopped to stare in wonder. When she got to the creek, she plunged down into the brush and disappeared. I don't know how she got so off track in the first place, but she got back safely.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on September 19, 2008, 12:19:38 pm
Art lovers, have you seen Simon Schama's POWER OF ART from the BBC.  Excellent show.   Each episode covers one artist. I just watched the first two which look at Caravaggio and Bernini respectively and it reminded me of how exciting these guys' lives were, full of political intrigue, intense rivalries, sex & violence.    Which brings me to why I'm posting in this thread.

Why aren't there any movies about them?  I know, and loved, Derek Jarman's CARAVAGGIO, but I'm talking about more mainstream fare, there is great material to be mined from these great artists' lives. 

Then I started thinking about casting, who would play bad-boy & murderer, Caravaggio?  And what about the arrogant & nasty Bernini who tried to kill his own brother and had his lover/model's face slashed when he found out they were having an affair?

For inspiration, this is what they looked like:

Caravaggio
(http://img65.imageshack.us/img65/9066/caravaggio01sx3.jpg)(http://img65.imageshack.us/img65/969/caravaggio02vj8.jpg)

Bernini
(http://img65.imageshack.us/img65/1725/bernini02yn5.jpg)(http://img65.imageshack.us/img65/8125/bernini01yl3.jpg)

I immediately thought of Benicio Del Toro for Caravaggio but I'm stumped when it comes to Bernini.  Any thoughts?

(http://img84.imageshack.us/img84/5871/beniciodeltoro01ih1.jpg)

EDIT:   I just thought of a good Bernini:  Joseph Fiennes!
(http://img231.imageshack.us/img231/3366/josephfiennes01ot1.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on September 20, 2008, 12:45:05 pm
I immediately thought of Benicio Del Toro for Caravaggio but I'm stumped when it comes to Bernini.  Any thoughts?

EDIT:   I just thought of a good Bernini:  Joseph Fiennes!
(http://img231.imageshack.us/img231/3366/josephfiennes01ot1.jpg)

Or what about his brother, Ralph??

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on September 20, 2008, 01:37:49 pm
Or what about his brother, Ralph??



Thanks for the response Front-Ranger (I guess few people share my love of fantasy casting, lol!).  Ralph would be great too, I actually like him better as an actor, but I thought that the younger Joseph might be a better choice to portray Bernini at different periods of his life. 

I just discovered that Joseph has been cast to play Vivaldi in one of apparently two upcoming biopics.  Not that it really matters, but there isn't much of resemblance:

(http://img113.imageshack.us/img113/824/vivaldihh2.jpg)
By oilgun (http://profile.imageshack.us/user/oilgun) at 2008-09-20
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on September 23, 2008, 03:54:03 pm
(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/Shadows_in_Paradise01.jpg)

Any Aki Kaurismäki fans out there?  The Criterion Collection  just released his "Proletariat Trilogy" which includes:  SHADOWS IN PARADISE (1986),  ARIEL (1988) and THE MATCH FACTORY GIRL (1990), all good films.  I just love his deadpan humour. 

- "You want I should break your face?"
- "No."
- "Okay."


http://www.criterion.com/asp/boxed_set.asp?id=2001200 (http://www.criterion.com/asp/boxed_set.asp?id=2001200)

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on September 26, 2008, 11:59:49 pm
Art lovers, have you seen Simon Schama's POWER OF ART from the BBC.  Excellent show.   Each episode covers one artist. I just watched the first two which look at Caravaggio and Bernini respectively and it reminded me of how exciting these guys' lives were, full of political intrigue, intense rivalries, sex & violence.    Which brings me to why I'm posting in this thread.

Why aren't there any movies about them?  I know, and loved, Derek Jarman's CARAVAGGIO, but I'm talking about more mainstream fare, there is great material to be mined from these great artists' lives. 

Then I started thinking about casting, who would play bad-boy & murderer, Caravaggio?  And what about the arrogant & nasty Bernini who tried to kill his own brother and had his lover/model's face slashed when he found out they were having an affair?

For inspiration, this is what they looked like:

Caravaggio
(http://img65.imageshack.us/img65/9066/caravaggio01sx3.jpg)(http://img65.imageshack.us/img65/969/caravaggio02vj8.jpg)

Bernini
(http://img65.imageshack.us/img65/1725/bernini02yn5.jpg)(http://img65.imageshack.us/img65/8125/bernini01yl3.jpg)

I immediately thought of Benicio Del Toro for Caravaggio but I'm stumped when it comes to Bernini.  Any thoughts?

(http://img84.imageshack.us/img84/5871/beniciodeltoro01ih1.jpg)

EDIT:   I just thought of a good Bernini:  Joseph Fiennes!
(http://img231.imageshack.us/img231/3366/josephfiennes01ot1.jpg)

Good choices, Gil!  8)

How about Colin Ferrell or Robert Downey, Jr. for Caravaggio?

(http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h269/merylmarie/ColinFerrell.jpg)(http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h269/merylmarie/RobertDowneyJr.jpg)

And Daniel Day Lewis for Bernini?

(http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h269/merylmarie/DDLewis.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on September 27, 2008, 02:48:30 am
Oooh, I'm no Bernini expert by any means, but from what little I know DDL would be great in the role.  :D

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on September 27, 2008, 06:35:49 pm
Good choices, Gil!  8)

How about Colin Ferrell or Robert Downey, Jr. for Caravaggio?

(http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h269/merylmarie/ColinFerrell.jpg)(http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h269/merylmarie/RobertDowneyJr.jpg)

And Daniel Day Lewis for Bernini?

(http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h269/merylmarie/DDLewis.jpg)


Thanks!  I like your choices as well.  Especially Colin Farrell.  In fact,  Benicio's out, I'm giving the part to Colin!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on October 06, 2008, 09:26:20 pm
I inexplicably forgot to report that I saw Appaloosa last week at a sneak preview. It's a western starring Ed Harris, Viggo Mortenson and Renee Zellwegger.

I'd give it about three out of four stars. It's beautifully filmed, the acting is fantastic (Renee Zellwegger, as usual, was good enough to almost make me forget how much she annoys me), the characters are interesting, the setting seemed authentic. The plot holds some unexpected twists and turns. I renewed and even increased my appreciation of both Viggo and Ed.

However, it was a little slow in parts. The movie conjures a palpable tension that it never, IMO, quite delivers on.

In short, it's no 3:10 to Yuma. But overall I'd recommend it anyway.

Oh! I think I also forget to mention having seen Lakeview Terrace. It was a big ehhhh, for me. Good acting and pretty suspenseful in parts, but to what end?? It was one of those where after it's over, you want to ask, tell me again why I sat through that?








Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on October 06, 2008, 09:34:55 pm
Thanks for the response Front-Ranger (I guess few people share my love of fantasy casting, lol!).  Ralph would be great too, I actually like him better as an actor, but I thought that the younger Joseph might be a better choice to portray Bernini at different periods of his life. 

I just discovered that Joseph has been cast to play Vivaldi in one of apparently two upcoming biopics.  Not that it really matters, but there isn't much of resemblance:

(http://img113.imageshack.us/img113/824/vivaldihh2.jpg)
By oilgun (http://profile.imageshack.us/user/oilgun) at 2008-09-20

I think Art Garfunkel should play Vivaldi!!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on October 09, 2008, 01:09:19 pm
Thanks friend! He does deserve watching to see if he matures at all... I also saw the trailer for Australia. That looks promising with Aussies Hugh Jackman and what's her name...after I wrote Hugh Jackman, my mind just went blank! Whats'a matter with my head!!

I forgot to point out that Chris Pine will be the youing Captain Kirk in the upcoming Star Trek movie.

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/ChrisPine_Kirk.jpg)

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on October 09, 2008, 03:39:24 pm
Yes, I could see him in that role, provided he gets a haircut!! Thanks for the heads-up friend!

I hope he does better than Kirstie Alley as a Vulcan!!

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on October 09, 2008, 04:06:07 pm
Yes, I could see him in that role, provided he gets a haircut!! Thanks for the heads-up friend!

I hope he does better than Kirstie Alley as a Vulcan!!



Of course, playing Kirk shouldn't require much acting ability considering who originally portrayed the character, lol!

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/Shatner-Kirk.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on October 09, 2008, 05:34:17 pm
Of course, playing Kirk shouldn't require much acting ability considering who originally portrayed the character, lol!

No, but William Shatner's "acting" was part of Kirk's charm:

"WE THE PEOPLE ... these words . . . were not written only for the Yangs ... but for the Kohms as well. They must ... apply to ... everyone ... or they mean nothing."

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on October 17, 2008, 03:33:06 pm
My apologies if this one has already been brought up recently, but I just watched We Are Marshall for the first time (I say that because there probably will be others) last night.  Thoroughly enjoyed it.  I found it to be about the most inspiring football movie I've ever seen - even moreso than Invinceable or Rudy - and one of the most inspiring sports movies I've ever seen.  Matthew Fox really is a wonderful, wonderful actor, and as much as Matthew McConaughey annoys me outside of acting, he's always big fun to watch onscreen, too.  Both are capable of such subtlety in both their line readings and their non-verbal acting.  And you can almost never go wrong with David Straithairn.  It was also nice to see our dear Kate Mara in a relatively new movie, though I thought she was a bit underused in this one.  The only distracting thing about it was that Ian McShane couldn't quite pull off an authentic West Virginia accent - I kept hearing Irish, is it, in there.

I especially liked that the movie wasn't about the importance of winning, just as that first team after the plane crash wasn't - it was about the importance of moving on with life after enduring a devastating loss.  What made me cry at the end was how one character in particular really wasn't able to.  And it made me want to learn more about the real coaches and players who kept that program alive.
 
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on October 17, 2008, 03:42:50 pm
Thanks for the review, Barb. I'm puttin it in my queue!

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on October 18, 2008, 06:12:24 pm
Speaking of sports movies, my son and I saw The Express this afternoon, the story of Ernie Davis, star running back for the Syracuse Orangemen who died of leukemia at the age of 23. He was the first African American to win the Heisman trophy. Dennis Quaid plays the coach and does a fine job. Dennis always does a fine job in sports movies! It was good--not great--but definitely watchable. Good Saturday afternoon entertainment.

I am debating about whether or not to see W. If anyone wants to weigh in with an opinion, I'm listening.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Ellemeno on October 20, 2008, 01:01:23 am
I just saw Read After Burning, or whatever it was (I know what it was), last night, and left the theater feeling yucky.  I enjoyed the first half or so, kind of, but... welll can't think how ot express without giving anything away.  I will say I liked the second tier of character actors, David Rasche, J.K. Simmons especially.  George Clooney looked oddly gaunt.  I love Frances McDormand but...  Anyway, I realized I didn't really like any of the characters.  Heck of a cast, though, Brownie.  John Malkovich too.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Ellemeno on October 20, 2008, 01:02:05 am
I want to see "Salute" after reading Kelda's thread about it.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on October 20, 2008, 10:37:06 am
I had that problem with it, too, Elle - I didn't like any of the main characters.  Not even a little bit (although John Malcovich was a riot in his role).  I found myself liking J.K. Simmons' character the most, even though he was the quintessential out-of-touch-with-reality, self-serving head Intelligence guy.

I was deeply disappointed in Frances McDormand, actually.  The first time I've ever been.  Which just added to it.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Lumière on October 21, 2008, 07:13:16 pm

Movies on my next-to-watch list:

- The Lover (1992)
- The Red Violin (1999)
- Iron Jawed Angels (2004)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on October 23, 2008, 01:44:38 pm
Next in my Blockbuster Online queue are Quiz Show and The Great Debaters. The latter I passed up numerous times in hotel pay-per-views, because it looked like just another one of those sincere "Economically or Educationally Underprivileged Students Who Triumph at Some Big Challenge" movies, of which I feel I've seen enough of to last a lifetime (I skipped the one with Hilary Swank, too). But I've had a number of people tell me it's really good, so I'll give it a shot.

Quiz Show is another in my long line of seeing movies I loved in the past, preferably with one or both of my sons, to see if I still love them, and see how the boys react. L.A. Confidential and Good will Hunting held up, and how! The Player, sadly, did not -- I fell asleep. I think it was edgy and new for its time, but it's kind of era-specific, and some of those devices have been reused since and are more familiar. And Tommy, which I'd liked when I saw it in high school (this we just happened to see on TV recently) was appalling garbage.

Another movie I'd love to resee is Shampoo, though not with my sons. But that might be too era-specific, too.

What other movies do you all want to see that you last saw in the theater years ago? And if you have seen some, did they hold up, or not?

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on October 23, 2008, 02:02:39 pm
Just saw Rachel Getting Married with Sandy/memento. 

Wow!  Very powerful performances from screen sisters Anne Hathaway and Rosemary DeWitt as Rachel.  The jerky camera makes you feel like a guest at the wedding weekend. 

A surprise was Debra Winger:  so recognizable, yet I felt she had aged 20 years overnight, since I hadn't seen her in anything.  Still has that catch in her voice.  Does wonderful things with a small role. 

Bill Irwin was delightful as the father of the bride; Anna Deveare Smith was completely wasted, however.

A criticism:  too much music; I found it distracting.

Overall:  highly recommended.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on October 23, 2008, 07:28:19 pm
Overall:  highly recommended.

Thanks, Paul! I'll pencil it in for this weekend.

I've seen Debra Winger here and there over the years, so that won't be a shock. But her presence in the movie is the clincher for me. I've always liked her and was sorry she dropped out there for a while.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on October 23, 2008, 10:01:56 pm
Thanks, Paul! I'll pencil it in for this weekend.

I've seen Debra Winger here and there over the years, so that won't be a shock. But her presence in the movie is the clincher for me. I've always liked her and was sorry she dropped out there for a while.



Be sure to tell use what you think, Katherine.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on October 25, 2008, 02:45:09 pm
I just saw Burn After Reading ...last night, and left the theater feeling yucky.  I enjoyed the first half or so, kind of, but... welll can't think how ot express without giving anything away.  I will say I liked the second tier of character actors, David Rasche, J.K. Simmons especially.  George Clooney looked oddly gaunt.  I love Frances McDormand but...  Anyway, I realized I didn't really like any of the characters.  Heck of a cast, though, Brownie.  John Malkovich too.

Just goes to show you - humor is such a personal thing.  A friend and I went to see this and were laughing throughout most of it.  We thought it really enjoyable.  We didn't have to like the characters.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on October 25, 2008, 02:47:31 pm
Anyone seen Religulous yet?

I'm dying to see it, but haven't had the opportunity.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Lynne on October 26, 2008, 01:02:35 am
I saw Body of Lies tonight.  It was much as expected - lots of graphic violence, fast-paced, action-packed.

Leonardo DiCaprio did a fabulous job, IMO - he seems to have a real knack for accents.  (I'm thinking of both Blood Diamond and The Departed.)  Obviously, I don't speak Arabic, but he convinced me that he did.  Golshifteh Farahani in her role as his love interest, Aisha, was subtle and believable.  I'd like to see more of her.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on November 05, 2008, 02:52:21 pm
Body of Lies sounds interesting...I'm looking forward to Australia opening this month (thanks, Leslie, for reminding us). We've been needing this ever since The Thorn Birds!!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on November 05, 2008, 04:30:51 pm

Is there no one from the UK here who might have seen QUANTUM OF SOLACE
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on November 11, 2008, 04:26:01 pm
When my local indy video store closed early this year, I snatched up all the Jack and Heath and Ang movies I could find (for about $5 each!).

I finally got around to seeing Moonlight Mile with Jake, Dustin Hoffman and Susan Sarandon.  Also an early Ellen Pompeo, and a sublime Holly Hunter in a small role.

What a pleasant surprise!  Jake getting away from the awkward, adolescent phase of Donnie Darko and The Good Girl.  A relatively quiet performance, he managed to hold his own opposite Dustin and Susan, and had good chemistry with the pre-Grey's Anatomy Ellen. 

Jake has a wonderful courtroom scene.

Special interest for me:  I thought I recognized some of the film sites.  Sure enough, the credits listed Marblehead and Gloucester, Mass., among others.  As chance would have it, I visited Marblehead the very next day, and managed to pick out a couple of the actual sites.  Cool!

(http://www.dga.org/news/v27_3/images/features_sept02/silberling_opener-ani.gif)

Jake and Dustin with the director Brad Silberling in Crocker Park, Marblehead, MA
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on November 11, 2008, 05:49:02 pm

Special interest for me:  I thought I recognized some of the film sites.  Sure enough, the credits listed Marblehead and Gloucester, Mass., among others.  As chance would have it, I visited Marblehead the very next day, and managed to pick out a couple of the actual sites.  Cool!

What is this about Gloucester? Did you see the Man at the Wheel???

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on November 11, 2008, 06:06:42 pm
As chance would have it, I visited Marblehead the very next day, and managed to pick out a couple of the actual sites.  Cool!

Finding Moonlight!

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Lynne on November 11, 2008, 07:35:32 pm
Neat, Paul!  I haven't seen Moonlight Mile in a long time.  Needs another viewing.   :-*
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on November 11, 2008, 07:48:09 pm
THE BOYS IN THE BAND was just released on DVD and I couldn't resist getting a copy, if only for the great one-liners .

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/Boys_In_the_Band-01.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on November 11, 2008, 08:44:42 pm
THE BOYS IN THE BAND was just released on DVD and I couldn't resist getting a copy, if only for the great one-liners .

"Give me librium or give me meth."
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on November 11, 2008, 08:46:45 pm
What is this about Gloucester? Did you see the Man at the Wheel???

I know! We were just there!

Finding Moonlight!

Good one, Katherine!

Neat, Paul!  I haven't seen Moonlight Mile in a long time.  Needs another viewing.   :-*

Indeed, great to see Jake's talent progressing.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on November 14, 2008, 07:00:39 pm
Damme Good!

Just getting back from seeing Jean-Claude Van Damme's much anticipated film, JCVD.  The critics were right, it's a very good film,  I laughed, I cried (well, my eyes teared up a bit), I loved it!  Another title for my top ten of the year.  Granted, it's been a weak year so far and the good film season is just starting, it will be interesting to see if it stays on the list.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on November 14, 2008, 08:31:39 pm
Hey Gil, does he play himself in this?  (I admit, it took me a minute to notice the title = his name, duh.)

Is this a documentary or a parody?
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on November 15, 2008, 11:55:50 am
Hey Gil, does he play himself in this?  (I admit, it took me a minute to notice the title = his name, duh.)

Is this a documentary or a parody?

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/jcvd01.jpg)
"JCVD" is not an action movie but a shrewd satire about stardom and the cult of celebrity. It tells the story of an action star who is still famous, and yet something of a has-been. A man who still has fans, but who has serious career problems. A man who is recognized everywhere, but as much for his failures as his successes. A man who could probably spend the rest of his life making good money in pictures, but in low-budget, demeaning productions that are beneath him.

In other words, it's about Jean-Claude Van Damme, who is played by none other than Jean-Claude Van Damme, who does so with great self-effacement and a battle-scarred humility. Van Damme brings to the film a weary sense of humor and an emotional facility that we haven't seen from him before. Alert the media: Van Damme is an actor. Not just a muscleman, not just a martial artist, but someone with access to a rich internal life that's manifest on his once smooth and now rugged 47-year-old face. Seriously, if "JCVD" doesn't signal some kind of turnabout in Van Damme's career, there is no justice."


The above is an excerpt from Mick Lasalle's review:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/11/13/DD88143A0I.DTL (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/11/13/DD88143A0I.DTL)

Offical Site:
http://www.jcvd-lefilm.com/journal/?cat=3&lang_pref=en (http://www.jcvd-lefilm.com/journal/?cat=3&lang_pref=en)

Trailer:
[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4z_6UfkQ-c0&NR=1[/youtube]



Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on November 15, 2008, 12:44:45 pm
Oilgun, that looks really good!

I'll have to admit, when I read your first post, I was confused. What? A movie starring Jean-Claude Van Damme? Have oilgun's reliably high standards suddenly plummeted?

But after reading the review and watching the trailer, I get it. In fact, it's like I'm one of the characters in the movie. It is on my list of must-sees.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on November 15, 2008, 01:21:22 pm
It's on my list too! Thank you so much, oilgun, for your outstanding movie recommendations. We should git you out a those oilfields and into the movie theater on a regular basis, on a professional basis! (Who knows, you probably run the Toronto Film Festival and your oilgun tag is a cover LOL!)

Finally, it's the Denver Intl. Film Festival, and my list of films to see includes Laurel Canyon, Wendy and Lucy, The Eternal City, The Hustler, and, on closing night, Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kit and Wild Combination: a Portrait of Arthur Russell. I wish I were seeing more international films, so I'll try to add to this list as/if I get more time!

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on November 15, 2008, 02:09:02 pm
(Who knows, you probably run the Toronto Film Festival and your oilgun tag is a cover LOL!)

If not, he should.

Quote
Finally, it's the Denver Intl. Film Festival, and my list of films to see includes Laurel Canyon, Wendy and Lucy, The Eternal City, The Hustler, and, on closing night, Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kit and Wild Combination: a Portrait of Arthur Russell. I wish I were seeing more international films, so I'll try to add to this list as/if I get more time!

The Laurel Canyon with Frances McDormand and Christian Bale? I saw that in the theater and liked it. It's what a friend of mine and I call SBL -- smart but light.



Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on November 15, 2008, 02:58:04 pm
Oilgun, that looks really good!

I'll have to admit, when I read your first post, I was confused. What? A movie starring Jean-Claude Van Damme? Have oilgun's reliably high standards suddenly plummeted?

But after reading the review and watching the trailer, I get it. In fact, it's like I'm one of the characters in the movie. It is on my list of must-sees.



That's funny, thank you SC!   I never thought I would ever rush to a Van Damme movie on opening day!  Mind you, I do like some of his action movies but only as guilty pleasures.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on November 15, 2008, 04:06:57 pm
The Laurel Canyon with Frances McDormand and Christian Bale? I saw that in the theater and liked it. It's what a friend of mine and I call SBL -- smart but light.


Yes, that's the one. McDormand is one a my favorite actors and I missed it during its commercial run.

Wendy and Lucy stars our Michelle Williams.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on November 15, 2008, 06:34:02 pm
It's on my list too! Thank you so much, oilgun, for your outstanding movie recommendations. We should git you out a those oilfields and into the movie theater on a regular basis, on a professional basis! (Who knows, you probably run the Toronto Film Festival and your oilgun tag is a cover LOL!)

Finally, it's the Denver Intl. Film Festival, and my list of films to see includes Laurel Canyon, Wendy and Lucy, The Eternal City, The Hustler, and, on closing night, Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kit and Wild Combination: a Portrait of Arthur Russell. I wish I were seeing more international films, so I'll try to add to this list as/if I get more time!



Are you calling me a Roughneck?!  I like it!  I'm afraid I'm not a TIFF programmer (I wish!), but I'll come clean, I'm actually Jean-Claude Van Damme!   ;D
Thanks for the kind words FR, and have fun at the film fest!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on November 16, 2008, 01:27:52 am
Are you calling me a Roughneck?!  I like it! 


Oh well, in that case, I'll call you a Roustabout and a Scalawag!! I had a wonderful time at the fest, enjoyed so much meeting Wally Pfister, and I'll write it all down as soon as I come down off my cloud!!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on November 16, 2008, 02:04:28 am
I enjoyed Laurel Canyon. Yes, it was "light but good" as you mentioned, friend Katherine. I actually thought the best performances were turned in by the supporting actors. I was a little disappointed in Fran McDormand's performance (I thought she overacted...if I were in her situation, I would not have had any angst...I would have been going "I am the luckiest damn woman in the whole wide world!!") and it was not a stretch for Christian Bale either. . . but the most exciting part was meeting the cinematographer, Wally Pfister (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0002892/). His cinematography credits include Memento, Insomnia, The Prestige, and...The Dark Knight!! He talked for about 40 mins and I could have listened to a couple of hours more. . . but there was another film scheduled, so we had to vacate the theater.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on November 16, 2008, 02:25:07 am
I was entranced to see Natasha McElhone  (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001523/) in Laurel Canyon! I haven't seen her since Solaris...what a beauty and natural talent!!

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on November 17, 2008, 01:34:11 am
Here is fine Frances!!

(http://www.divshare.com/img/207320-78c.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on November 17, 2008, 01:35:16 am
And in closeup!!

(http://www.divshare.com/img/207322-30e.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on November 17, 2008, 01:43:29 am
Here is fine Frances!!

(http://www.divshare.com/img/207320-78c.jpg)

Yes, she looked very cool in that movie.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on November 17, 2008, 03:02:45 pm
Alas, I did not get to see Wendy and Lucy yet because the show was sold out.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on November 18, 2008, 05:46:42 pm
Body of Lies sounds interesting...I'm looking forward to Australia opening this month (thanks, Leslie, for reminding us). We've been needing this ever since The Thorn Birds!!


Should we have a new topic about the much anticipated movie Australia which is opening soon?
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: SFEnnisSF on November 19, 2008, 01:05:20 pm
Should we have a new topic about the much anticipated movie Australia which is opening soon?


I just saw the new trailer on Youtube and it looks great.  I will definitely be going to see this.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on November 19, 2008, 01:28:06 pm
Should we have a new topic about the much anticipated movie Australia which is opening soon?


Lee,

Leslie has posted several articles, reviews, and pictures over on the HughHughHugh thread in Anything Goes:

http://bettermost.net/forum/index.php/topic,5079.420.html (http://bettermost.net/forum/index.php/topic,5079.420.html)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on November 22, 2008, 09:26:35 pm
Just saw Quantum of Solace.

I thought it was very very good.  Craig is amazing and it is humorous in some places without being camp.  Always enjoy the banter with his CIA friend.  Didn't buy his last fight scene though, but hey, nothing's perfect.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on November 22, 2008, 10:03:54 pm
The Midnight Meat Train (2008)

A very stylish slasher with a cool twist at the end (If you haven't read the Clive Barker short story it's based on) The cinematography is gorgeous and the screenplay is fairly tight.

The blood and guts quotient is quite high - at least I thought so but then I'm not a connoisseur of the genre - but the stylish camera work and some of the F/X are a bit cartoon-ish (at one point a victim's eyeballs go flying out from the impact of a hammer blow to the back of the head) so it helps keep the gruesome action at a safe distance from the viewer and man is it ever gruesome!

Vinnie Jones makes an effective villain and it's always nice to see Brooke Shields. Highly recommended and it would make a great double bill with THE END OF THE LINE, another subway horror, as the appetizer.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on November 25, 2008, 12:56:29 am
I was invited to a screening of "Milk" tonight, which stars Sean Penn as the gay activist Harvey Milk, directed by Gus Van Sant.  I do think it's a must-see for Brokies, if only because it features the Castro Theater!  ;)

**SPOILERS BELOW**

I thought it was very well done, with a few reservations.  Gus Van Sant did a great job of mixing together live action with clips of actual events of the 70's.  You get a real feel for the time and place.  The characters are well drawn and believable, with the possible exception of Dan White (Josh Brolin), who I think needed to be better developed in order for us to fully absorb the events at the end of the film. 

Sean Penn's performance is excellent, as you might expect.  He portrays Harvey Milk as an outgoing, friendly, feeling man who is inspired at age 40 to give up his closeted life and live openly in San Francisco with his lover, played by James Franco.  They move from New York in 1970 to the largely gay Castro district in San Francisco.  The camera shop that they open soon becomes a neighborhood gathering place, and Harvey decides to run for office to make a difference in how gays are perceived and treated by the local police and city government.  He's a natural leader, passionate about his cause, and unapologetic about his homosexuality.  He does battle not only with bigots but with closeted homosexuals in positions of power who don't want him to make too many waves.  It's moving to see his ups and downs, both in love and politics, and his eventual triumph in getting elected to the Board of Supervisors of SF in 1977.  Sean Penn plays him with absolute conviction and naturalness, and his body language is terrific.

Some of my favorite scenes involved Harvey standing up to a State Senator who was pushing the passage of Proposition 6, which would have given the state the right to fire not only gay teachers but teachers who expressed support for them.  There were numerous clips of Anita Bryant preaching her awful, self-righteous sermons about how evil homosexuals were (I had forgotten how truly smug and loathesome she was).  When, against all hope, Harvey saw the proposal defeated, it was a joy to see him rewarded for all his hard work.  This is the real strength of the film, I think.  It really connects the viewer to the feelings and hopes of the men and women who so needed to be told that their lives counted for something and that they had a right to be who they were.

If I have a criticism of the movie, it would be that I wish it were more edgy.  The music had a Hallmark-y quality to it, kind of like it was asking you to get all teary-eyed, and it didn't jive with the grittiness of the story.  Also, though Harvey's affability and passion were clear, his darker side wasn't explored much.  The buildup to his death at the hands of his disturbed former colleague lacked the right tension, and the climax suffered accordingly.  The ending was moving, but it had an overly sentimental feel to it.  It was here that I most missed Ang Lee's spareness and silence, so devastating in BBM.

Watching this, it was impossible not to think of the current situation in California with Proposition 8.  If this film had been released a few months earlier, it might have made a difference in the outcome of the vote.  Harvey Milk would have reached out from the grave to once again remind his fellow citizens that everyone, EVERYONE, deserves to have their rights, to have HOPE (a word he adopted long before the Obama campaign came along and made it their own).
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Lynne on November 25, 2008, 01:07:00 am
Meryl,

Thank you so much for the analysis of Milk and bringing your unique Brokie analysis to the table.  I have only seen the documentary, but I am really looking forward to this film also.

Teri Gross interviewed James Franco today on Fresh Air, but I tuned in a bit late...seemed to me they talked about everything except Milk, like boxing lessons in preparation for Annapolis  ::) disappointing.

And yes, I think I understand your point about the timing vis a vis Proposition 8.   :-\

Lynne
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Ellemeno on November 25, 2008, 01:40:39 am
I'm behind the times again.  I forget this thread is here. 

K, I'm sad we differ on The Player, but in all fairness to it, if you fell asleep during it, maybe you were super-tired, and refreshed and lively you might have enjoyed it more.  It's one of my favorite movies.  I am curious, which movies do you think did it better?

Meryl, thanks for your thoughts on Milk, I'm very excited to see it.  That was such a confusing time.

Paul, thanks for yours on Rachel Gets Married.  I might have said this already in this thread, but I have very high regard for both Bill Irwin and Anna Deveare Smith, so am excited about that.


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: retropian on November 25, 2008, 02:55:26 am
I was invited to a screening of "Milk" tonight, which stars Sean Penn as the gay activist Harvey Milk, directed by Gus Van Sant.  I do think it's a must-see for Brokies, if only because it features the Castro Theater!  ;)

**SPOILERS BELOW**

I thought it was very well done, with a few reservations.  Gus Van Sant did a great job of mixing together live action with clips of actual events of the 70's.  You get a real feel for the time and place.  The characters are well drawn and believable, with the possible exception of Dan White (Josh Brolin), who I think needed to be better developed in order for us to fully absorb the events at the end of the film. 

Sean Penn's performance is excellent, as you might expect.  He portrays Harvey Milk as an outgoing, friendly, feeling man who is inspired at age 40 to give up his closeted life and live openly in San Francisco with his lover, played by James Franco.  They move from New York in 1970 to the largely gay Castro district in San Francisco.  The camera shop that they open soon becomes a neighborhood gathering place, and Harvey decides to run for office to make a difference in how gays are perceived and treated by the local police and city government.  He's a natural leader, passionate about his cause, and unapologetic about his homosexuality.  He does battle not only with bigots but with closeted homosexuals in positions of power who don't want him to make too many waves.  It's moving to see his ups and downs, both in love and politics, and his eventual triumph in getting elected to the Board of Supervisors of SF in 1977.  Sean Penn plays him with absolute conviction and naturalness, and his body language is terrific.

Some of my favorite scenes involved Harvey standing up to a State Senator who was pushing the passage of Proposition 6, which would have given the state the right to fire not only gay teachers but teachers who expressed support for them.  There were numerous clips of Anita Bryant preaching her awful, self-righteous sermons about how evil homosexuals were (I had forgotten how truly smug and loathesome she was).  When, against all hope, Harvey saw the proposal defeated, it was a joy to see him rewarded for all his hard work.  This is the real strength of the film, I think.  It really connects the viewer to the feelings and hopes of the men and women who so needed to be told that their lives counted for something and that they had a right to be who they were.

If I have a criticism of the movie, it would be that I wished it were more edgy.  The music had a kind of Hallmark-y quality to it, kind of like it was asking you to get all teary-eyed, and it didn't jive with the grittiness of the story.  Also, though Harvey's affability and passion were clear, his darker side wasn't explored much.  The buiidup to his death at the hands of his disturbed former colleague lacked the right tension, and the climax suffered accordingly.  The ending was moving, but it had an overly sentimental feeling to it.  It was here that I most missed Ang Lee's spareness and silence, so devastating in BBM.

Watching this, it was impossible not to think of the current situation in California with Proposition 8.  If this film had been released a few months earlier, it might have made a difference in the outcome of the vote.  Harvey Milk would have reached out from the grave to once again remind his fellow citizens that everyone, EVERYONE, deserves to have their rights, to have HOPE (a word he adopted long before the Obama campaign came along and made it their own).

Thanks for your review. I haven't seen it yet, but plan on doing so this week for sure. Harvey Milk is a Hero.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on November 25, 2008, 08:14:06 am
[...]
If I have a criticism of the movie, it would be that I wished it were more edgy.  The music had a kind of Hallmark-y quality to it, kind of like it was asking you to get all teary-eyed, and it didn't jive with the grittiness of the story.  Also, though Harvey's affability and passion were clear, his darker side wasn't explored much.  The buiidup to his death at the hands of his disturbed former colleague lacked the right tension, and the climax suffered accordingly.  The ending was moving, but it had an overly sentimental feeling to it.  It was here that I most missed Ang Lee's spareness and silence, so devastating in BBM.
[...]

Thanks Meryl for the great write-up!  I read somewhere else that MILK is Gus' most mainstream work since FINDING FORRESTER which is my least favourite of his films.  That worries me because I've really enjoyed his last few movies which are anything but mainstream.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on November 25, 2008, 08:30:40 am
Last night I watched THE STRANGERS with Liv Tyler and Can-cutie Scott Speedman looking strangely like John Kennedy Jr. at times.  Despite the story having a few holes it does a good job of slowly generating tension.  It's a rather grim story and although there is a torture scene it isn't extended or gratuitous.  I was on the edge of my seat pretty much the whole time.  The leads are excellent in what is essentially a two-hander.

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/The_Strangers.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on November 25, 2008, 11:05:15 am
Elle, The Player is one of my favorite movies, too.   :-*

I'm psyched to see Milk.

I saw Role Models this past weekend, for lack of anything more interesting to me playing.  It was entertaining, mostly because Paul Rudd is so fun to watch, but probably a better candidate for DVD rental than anything else.  I was a little perturbed by the vast array of homosexual jokes.  They were at least relatively subtle, but it was disconcerting that there were so many references to anal sex that weren't at all positive.  Did Judd Apatow write this, or what?
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on November 25, 2008, 12:52:11 pm
Elle and Barb, I've always counted The Player among my favorite movies, too, so I was surprised and disappointed by my reaction. Has either of you seen it lately, and if so did you like it as much as ever?

Maybe it's just me. I wrote the last post as I was preparing to watch Quiz Show, and as it happened I fell asleep during that, too! Maybe I just need to start the movies earlier in the evening.

Meryl, excellent review of Milk. I am looking forward to seeing it, and to being reminded that things used to be more draconian even than they are now.




Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on November 25, 2008, 04:08:18 pm
Oh, no!  I LOVE Quiz Show, too.

I do think that's one you need to watch when you're very much awake and alert.  The dialogue is so literate and layered, you'll easily miss a lot if you're the least bit sleepy.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: SFEnnisSF on November 25, 2008, 11:57:51 pm
Meryl, thanks for the review of Milk.  And yes, it's even premiering tonight at the Castro Theatre.  Focus Features got smart after the botched Brokeback Mountain release in SF that they went with the large grand Castro theatre for Milk.  They limited themselves so much with the small theatre they opened Brokeback Mountain in.  If only we could turn back time and have Brokeback Mountain premier at the Castro, as it should have.

I feel lots of us are going to try to compare Milk to BBM, and want that same gritty powerful edgy-ness that BBM had.  But, Milk is not going to have that, so it's important to know going in so we know what to expect now and not let ourselves be disappointed.


Barb, I also saw Role Models, only because I'm in love with both of them and was hoping for a secret love scene to break out between them!   :D  To be honest, I laughed at all the gay jokes.  They were subtle and meant to be that way. (Double entendre style).  That's what made them funny.  While the majority of straight folks still have such issues with gay "stuff", that's what makes it funny.  And, hopefully, the more and more they hear stuff like this, then the more and more the taboo will finally wear off where it just wont be such a dang issue anymore.

The "let's gently touch our sword tips in a circle" line had me crackin' up so much I almost fell out of my seat!  :laugh:
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on November 26, 2008, 07:55:22 pm
Barb, I also saw Role Models, only because I'm in love with both of them and was hoping for a secret love scene to break out between them!   :D  To be honest, I laughed at all the gay jokes.  They were subtle and meant to be that way. (Double entendre style).  That's what made them funny.  While the majority of straight folks still have such issues with gay "stuff", that's what makes it funny.  And, hopefully, the more and more they hear stuff like this, then the more and more the taboo will finally wear off where it just wont be such a dang issue anymore.

The "let's gently touch our sword tips in a circle" line had me crackin' up so much I almost fell out of my seat!  :laugh:

You're right, Eric - most of it was really quite funny, like that one.  I certainly didn't feel the same kind of anti-gay vibe I've felt watching other "comedy" movies (especially Adam Sandler's and some of Will Ferrell's) - it did seem to be being done in a warm-hearted way.

I've been in love with Paul Rudd since "Clueless," and I must say Seann William Scott is quite the cutie, also.  I definitely wouldn't mind being the meat in that man sandwich.

My favorite line in the whole movie was

*Spoiler Alert (kinda)*
















"I'd be psyched if he was my kid."

Just the way he said it, and how it came at the end of that powerful speech about why they were such shitty parents made me gasp out loud.

The rant about the poison he was selling to the school kids in the assembly was pretty great, too.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on November 26, 2008, 09:18:25 pm
The rant about the poison he was selling to the school kids in the assembly was pretty great, too.

I liked,

"What'd you have for dinner?"
"Was it cocaine?"


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kd5000 on November 26, 2008, 10:02:00 pm
I have mixed feeling seeing MILK. I'm sure it's a great film, but again, the gay guy gets killed. I know it's a biopic so you can't change the ending. Of course, I did see a film on Kennedy in which it closes with him boarding the plane to Dallas.  Nothing else needed to be said. 

Even I LOVE YOU PHILLIP MORRIS won't have a happy ending. I'm not giving anyting away, though. It's based on a true story and the facts are out there.

I wonder how well MILK will do at the B.O. 

I'm looking forward to seeing DOUBT.  No doubt if that and MILK are nominated, it's going to be a controversial Award season. 
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Lynne on November 28, 2008, 08:54:33 pm
I saw two movies yesterday - Quantum of Solace and Twilight.

I should have stayed home and watched Supernatural videos.

Quantum was OK, I guess.  Daniel Craig is eye candy, and it was fun to look for Randall in David Harbour's character; he was weasel-ly.  And I like Giancarlo Giavanni.  Shame, that.

Twilight, however, was near unwatchable.  I don't see how I managed to sit there to the end.  I figured it would be teenage romance and I'm thinking - fun!  Boy, was I wrong.  The diaglog was painful, excruciating...both in content and delivery.

Every...single.....word.......had.........to............be............dragged............out.............of...........them
................with.......................sufficient............................................................angst.......................
befitting.........................................the...........................................................tragedy
.............................................................of............................................................................their
...............................................................love......................................................................

They both need killing.  (And that's hyperbole for anyone thinking I'm not being sensitive enough!)  8)

On the positive side, there was a Coming Soon poster for Milk!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on November 28, 2008, 08:57:59 pm
I saw two movies yesterday - Quantum of Solace and Twilight.

I should have stayed home and watched Supernatural videos.

Quantum was OK, I guess.  Daniel Craig is eye candy, and it was fun to look for Randall in David Harbour's character; he was weasel-ly.  And I like Giancarlo Giavanni.  Shame, that.

Twilight, however, was near unwatchable.  I don't see how I managed to sit there to the end.  I figured it would be teenage romance and I'm thinking - fun!  Boy, was I wrong.  The diaglog was painful, excruciating...both in content and delivery.

Every...single.....word.......had.........to............be............dragged............out.............of...........them
................with.......................sufficient............................................................angst.......................
befitting.........................................the...........................................................tragedy
.............................................................of............................................................................their
...............................................................love......................................................................

They both need killing.  (And that's hyperbole for anyone thinking I'm not being sensitive enough!)  8)

On the positive side, there was a Coming Soon poster for Milk!

 :laugh:

I felt similarly about TWILIGHT the book, unreadable!  (And no sex!  ;))

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Lynne on November 28, 2008, 09:08:08 pm
:laugh:

I felt similarly about TWILIGHT the book, unreadable!  (And no sex!  ;))



 :laugh: :laugh:

Thank the goddess.  If those two had had sex, I would have had to leave the theatre!

I think 10 Things is the perfect teen movie.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on November 30, 2008, 03:33:37 am
I do think that's one you need to watch when you're very much awake and alert.  The dialogue is so literate and layered, you'll easily miss a lot if you're the least bit sleepy.

You are so right, Barb! Thank you.

I still had Quiz Show from my Blockbuster online account, so I watched it again tonight, including of course the part I'd slept through before. And I'm SO glad I did! Some observations:

1) My memory was that it was about an interesting episode in 1950s television history. Watching it tonight, I realized it's much more about class and ethnicity in the 1950s. I love movies that explore '50s class and ethnicity, because the dynamics are partly forgotten now. For example, one of my favorite scenes:

HERB STEMPLE (John Turturro) to government investigator DICK GOODWIN (Rob Morrow): Here, have some rugula, it's a Jewish delicacy, you don't know what you're missing.

GOODWIN: I'm very familiar with rugula, thanks.

(STEMPLE and his wife exchange glances.)

STEMPLE: How'd a guy like you get into Harvard?

2) I want to include this movie on one of my many hypothetical writing projects, about class in movies.

3) Rob Morrow! I would have gone to the grave not remembering Rob Morrow as being good in anything since Northern Exposure. But he was fantastic in QS. (Makes me want to rewatch a season or two of NE. Why isn't that show on 24 hours a day, like That '70s Show?) I wonder why he's not doing much now.

5) And of course Ralph Fiennes was really good, too. I kept thinking of the first time I saw him, in Schindler's List, and marveling at his versatility.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on November 30, 2008, 02:08:02 pm
3) Rob Morrow! I would have gone to the grave not remembering Rob Morrow as being good in anything since Northern Exposure. But he was fantastic in QS. (Makes me want to rewatch a season or two of NE. Why isn't that show on 24 hours a day, like That '70s Show?) I wonder why he's not doing much now.

When I was in Alaska last month, I was constantly reminded of "Northern Exposure" and wondered the same thing.  Where are the reruns?  There were a lot of them a few years ago.  Time for a revival of that great series.   Good writing and great, quirky characters, many of whom I swear I saw in the flesh in Alaska.  :)

Rob Morrow, aside from doing a few movies, has been in a TV series for the last few years, "NUMB3RS," on Friday nights.  It's a decent crime drama about an FBI agent who solves crimes with the help of his brother, who is a math genius.  I didn't stick with it, but it's been on for three years, so it has a following.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on November 30, 2008, 02:35:41 pm
Rob Morrow, aside from doing a few movies, has been in a TV series for the last few years, "NUMB3RS," on Friday nights.  It's a decent crime drama about an FBI agent who solves crimes with the help of his brother, who is a math genius.  I didn't stick with it, but it's been on for three years, so it has a following.

Oh, that's good. He had a very small role in as a doctor The Bucket List -- it could have been played by anyone, actually -- so I assumed he was washed up. Glad to hear he's not.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on November 30, 2008, 03:59:01 pm
I remember seeing a short interview with Rob Morrow over something he was either directing or co-starring in - I forget what, but it wasn't Quiz Show - and they asked him about Northern Exposure and asked about his relationship with Janine Turner.  Rumor had it she had become angry with him when he abandoned the show for the movie career that didn't exactly pan out.  The interviewer didn't mention any of that, but asked him about his relationship with her and Morrow was very gracious, saying how caring she was in particular and even at the last turned to the camera and said, "I miss you.  Call me."

I loved Northern Exposure.  I even have pictures of "Cicely, Alaska".  A friend of my sister traveled to the northwestern town where it was filmed and took pictures of the street, the cafe and Dr. Fleischman's office front.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on November 30, 2008, 04:28:36 pm
Thanks for that anecdote, Del. I'm glad to hear it, because somewhere along the way I read that Rob Morrow was kind of a jerk, and that idea stuck with me, perhaps even as an explanation of why his career went downhill. I can't remember the source, and it might not have been particularly reliable. Damn entertainment press! Thankfully, now I have a better impression of Rob Morrow as an actor and a human being.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Monika on November 30, 2008, 06:37:52 pm
:laugh:

I felt similarly about TWILIGHT the book, unreadable!  (And no sex!  ;))


No?  damn, that´s the only reason I started reading the second book. Hoping.... ;D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on November 30, 2008, 07:45:31 pm
:laugh: :laugh:

Thank the goddess.  If those two had had sex, I would have had to leave the theatre!

I think 10 Things is the perfect teen movie.

10 Things is a great teen film, I love Ms. Perky! ("Now scoot!")

Today I saw an absolutely wonderful French film:  Un conte de Noël (A Christmas Tale)
Man, I love French films!  It was such a relief to watch a 'Xmas movie' that's completely devoid of sentimentality!
It has a wonderfully intelligent and almost poetic screenplay.  The big name cast is fabulous:  Catherine Deneuve, Melvil Poupaud, Mathieu Almaric (he's been busy lately!), Emmanuelle Devos & Chiara Mastroianni.

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/conte-de-noel03.jpg)

Here are a couple of comments from some IMDb happy campers that share my feelings about this brilliant film:

From Michael Fargo -SF: It just doesn't get much better than this for fans of movie-making…or fans of music, art, literature, philosophy…even algebra? Arnaud Desplechin uses Robert Altman's impressionistic approach to film-making taking multiple characters, plots lines then adding Altman's playfulness with cinematic technique to dazzle the viewer with a rich mix of ideas and allusions. Watching, you just don't want it to end.

The actors here—as in Altman—take center stage. Catherine Deneuve is the reluctant matriarch of some pretty messed-up siblings. We aren't ever clued in on the exact details of the rifts and jealousies. We just recognize them from our own family experiences. During an introduction to the cast of characters at the beginning of the film, the death of a young infant early in the family's history suggests that interpersonal problems will result, but it can't be the sole reason for the pathologies represented. As in life, it's never a simple thing to find the "reason" for conflict, unhappiness or even joy. We simply have to accept it and make the best of the situations before us. And this film is a wonderful demonstration of making the best of a real mess.

There's not a weak link in the cast. And as the bizarre begin to assemble for a very strange Christmas homecoming the delight we feel for being onlookers instead of participants is palpable in the audience.

I should warn that this is not a film in the tradition of Home Alone or A Christmas Story. You may wait a long time for the Baby Jesus to arrive here (as the children on the screen do). It's more a film about family life and the peculiar kind of fulfillment we get from the strife that results. As with the "ghost wolf" in this family's basement, we're haunted by the familiar and the strange: it's both fearful and thrilling to see. And that's a very admirable accomplishment for Arnaud Desplechin.


(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/conte-de-noel02.jpg)

From: emeiserloh from United States - Another brilliant French film.  This one, however, is not for everyone. Most people will probably not only have trouble with its length, but its style, as well.  Both as wild as it is imaginative, this film is like a post-modern jazz score, mixing elements from a variety of cinematic styles that are jarring (at times), but always interesting to behold. And as long as the film is, it always keeps moving and changing before our very eyes. What makes its odd stylistic combinations work is the compelling depths of its explorations into family and the bonds the unite, or divide us. Like and The Royal Tennenbaums, with a nouvelle vague twist, the film is not only full of odd combinations of image and music, but seems to jump from one film to another from scene to scene, as if each character or emotional quality (from light comedy to serious drama) were each receiving its own rendering. At times, the characters turn and speak directly to the camera. The filmmaker also intercedes by providing chapter headings and keyhole views, but, somehow, what could have become a cacophony of chaos, turns into a wonderment of cinema that any real cinephile will be amazed to behold and want to experience again....

Easily 4 stars, maybe even 4-1/2 out of 5!

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/conte-de-noel01.jpg)


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Aloysius J. Gleek on December 01, 2008, 12:24:53 am

Today I saw an absolutely wonderful French film:  Un conte de Noël (A Christmas Tale)
Man, I love French films!  It was such a relief to watch a 'Xmas movie' that's completely devoid of sentimentality!
It has a wonderfully intelligent and almost poetic screenplay.  The big name cast is fabulous:  Catherine Deneuve, Melvil Poupaud, Mathieu Almaric (he's been busy lately!), Emmanuelle Devos & Chiara Mastroianni.

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/conte-de-noel03.jpg)


(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/conte-de-noel02.jpg)

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/conte-de-noel01.jpg)



Oilgun: I loved it, too. Gorgeous. (And not a bad weekend, no? A Christmas Tale, Milk, and Slumdog Millionaire. Not shabby at all!)

Deneuve is--Deneuve. Brilliant. Daughter Chiara Mastroianni is getting better and better (and more and more beautiful) by the minute. Mathieu Almaric is wonderful, fantastic, even when in nonsense like La question humaine (2007).

And, oh yes--Melvil Poupaud.
(http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0WTbx.5XzNJCWwAdnWjzbkF/SIG=1287n8dfi/EXP=1228190009/**http%3A//www.france-jp.net/02info/03video/image/35.jpg)
WOOF!

I love French movies, too--even all those French Christmas movies that can be so silly (Except for La Bûche (1999), which was silly, but good).

Thanks for posting!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on December 01, 2008, 12:04:42 pm

Oilgun: I loved it, too. Gorgeous. (And not a bad weekend, no? A Christmas Tale, Milk, and Slumdog Millionaire. Not shabby at all!)

Deneuve is--Deneuve. Brilliant. Daughter Chiara Mastroianni is getting better and better (and more and more beautiful) by the minute. Mathieu Almaric is wonderful, fantastic, even when in nonsense like La question humaine (2007).

And, oh yes--Melvil Poupaud.
(http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0WTbx.5XzNJCWwAdnWjzbkF/SIG=1287n8dfi/EXP=1228190009/**http%3A//www.france-jp.net/02info/03video/image/35.jpg)
WOOF!

I love French movies, too--even all those French Christmas movies that can be so silly (Except for La Bûche (1999), which was silly, but good).

Thanks for posting!

Then you must have seen LE TEMPS QUI RESTE (2005 ) (Time to Leave).  That's when I first noticed the gorgeous M. Poupaud.  It's an excellent Ozon film that also stars Valeria Bruni Tedeschi (the good Bruni  ;) ).  http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film/DVDReviews24/time_to_leave.htm (http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film/DVDReviews24/time_to_leave.htm)

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/Temps_qui_reste-01.jpg)

Unlike you guys, I only had a two day weekend so I decided to hold off on  SLUMDOG MILLIONNAIRE, prefering to add my bum to the opening weekend tally of MILK and A CHRISTMAS TALE.  I'll catch it this weekend along with RACHEL GETTING MARRIED.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on December 01, 2008, 12:47:32 pm
I saw the trailer of Un conte de Noël and thought it looked good. Kind of like The Royal Tennenbaums, though maybe less self-consciously cutely quirky (the one flaw in TRT, which I otherwise love). I'm looking forward to it.

And as I thought of that, I realized I had seen the trailer when I saw Rachel Getting Married, which I forgot to report on here! I liked it. I thought Anne Hathaway was simply amazing, and of course everyone else in the cast was good, too. (I think Elle mentioned Anna Deveare Smith, whose part was too small -- I like her, too, and wish she'd get bigger roles.) It was an interesting glimpse into the dynamics of a complicated, confused, dysfunctional yet loving (and incredibly hip!) family.

My one quibble was that there were a few parts I thought were, well, boring. There are some Jonathan Demme-esque stretches of music and dancing that seemed way too long to me. Others might find them entertaining, though.


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on December 01, 2008, 01:05:52 pm
I am looking forward to Milk but it is only on 36 screens at present and none of them are in Maine. A few more weeks til the wide release.

My holiday movie viewing was to go to the opening day of Australia, which I enjoyed very much. My non-spoiler review is on the Hugh, Hugh, Hugh thread along with pictures and lots of other info.

At Australia, they showed the trailer for Valkyrie which looks absolutely dreadful, and The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, which looks good. I was curious about the latter so I downloaded the short story (by F. Scott Fitzgerald) and read it on my Kindle. If anyone else is interested, you can find it (for free) at www.feedbooks.com. You don't have to have a Kindle, either.


L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Ellemeno on December 01, 2008, 01:12:38 pm
I love Northern Exposure too.  And I also have made the pilgrimage to Roslyn, Washington, where it was filmed.

Last night, I saw Rachel Getting Married.  Anne Hathaway WAS good, and her character Kym was so amazingly self-absorbed.  One moment of example.  They are all in the kitchen, and wedding food is all around.  A very large rectangular pan of some food is sitting on the counter.  Kym picks up a fork, and digs directly into the center of the pan to take a couple of bites.  :laugh:  I mean who would do that?

One of my favorite characters in that movie was the house.  It was perfect.  And the guy who played the best man was very enjoyable, Mather Zickel.  I looked him up on IMDb, and in his forum they are arguing over whether he looks like George Clooney or not.  So, as John said recently, WOOF!  Anna Deveare Smith and Debra Winger were at their most beautiful too.  Bill Irwin looked like his skin and hair needed some major moisturizing.  It was almost distasteful to look at him at times.  Wonderful actor, but why didn't they spruce him up a bit?

For those who saw the movie, a question.  Not much of a spoiler, but stop reading this post now if you already thought I gave too much away with the middle-of-the-pan anecdote:




























I thought the undiscussed multi-ethnicity of the movie was wonderful.  But did they ever explain why the wedding party was wearing saris and other Indian garb, and why the wedding cake was an enormous Indian elephant?  Did anybody else laugh at this incongruousness?


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on December 01, 2008, 02:05:55 pm
Debra Winger

How could I forget to mention Debra Winger?! She was my main reason for wanting to see the movie. And she was great, though not onscreen nearly enough.

Quote
I thought the undiscussed multi-ethnicity of the movie was wonderful.


Me too. In this family, it seemed almost expected that you marry outside your race.

Quote
But did they ever explain why the wedding party was wearing saris and other Indian garb, and why the wedding cake was an enormous Indian elephant?  Did anybody else laugh at this incongruousness?

I figured that was just Rachel's chosen decor theme, though it didn't really say why. A lot of questions were left unanswered, which was fine with me.

Oh, and Mather Zickel reminded me really strongly of someone, though I don't think it was George Clooney. Antonio Banderas? No, not quite. Hmm ... I'll get back to you.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on December 08, 2008, 04:32:11 pm
I just ran into Tom Cruise!  He didn't look nuts or anything, in fact, he seemed rather friendly and acommodating. 
I work in the CBC building so he must be here for a taping to promote VALKYRIE.  I was heading off for a coffee when I saw a small cluster of people in the lobby and it turned out to be Tom signing autographs.   I wish my mobile had a camera, he was like three feet away. He seems less paranoid about security than Mark Walberg was when he visited.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on December 08, 2008, 05:05:19 pm
That's exciting, Gil!  Is he really short? 

I'd probably want to trip him. :-X
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kd5000 on December 08, 2008, 05:22:05 pm
Why so much hostility towards TOM?  I know he hates psychology? It's wrong!   >:(

He probably thought this film was his chance to win an Oscar, playing someone who tried to kill Hitler and then paid the consequences.  The early "leaks" I've read about the film haven't been so kind.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on December 08, 2008, 05:45:46 pm
If I saw Tom Cruise, that would really give a lift to my day!

I thought he was good in The Outsiders, Risky Business, and Jerry Maguire.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on December 08, 2008, 06:42:31 pm
I feel fairly positive toward Tom Cruise, too. His RL craziness doesn't really seem to harm anyone, except Brooke Shields, and he sent her a nice baby gift to make up for it.

Now if you'd seen Mel Gibson ...  >:(


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on December 08, 2008, 07:41:18 pm
That's exciting, Gil!  Is he really short? 

I'd probably want to trip him. :-X

You probably wouldn't want to trip him, to be honest,  he has a very disarming smile.  He is shorter than me and I'm 5'10", so he must be about 5'-8", nothing drastic.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on December 08, 2008, 07:49:19 pm
I really was kidding.

I like some of his work, sure enough. 

(It's just the shrink in me who would fantasize about tripping him.)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on December 08, 2008, 07:58:00 pm
I feel fairly positive toward Tom Cruise, too. His RL craziness doesn't really seem to harm anyone, except Brooke Shields, and he sent her a nice baby gift to make up for it.

Now if you'd seen Mel Gibson ...  >:(
I have a Mel Gibson story:

Back in the late 80's, early 90's I used to go to this really cool after-hours booze-can.  It was in a funky penthouse loft in a back alley and to get in you'd have to buzz and someone would drop the door key from a window 5 floors up.  We called it the Baroque Booze Can because the 'host' would wear a powdered wig and there was often live classical music.  It was all very gay.  Anyway, I heard from a reliable source that one night, Mel Gibson showed up with a male friend, got piss drunk and at one point, went to the washroom and teasingly waved his dick around for everyone else to see.  I wish I had been there that night.  :laugh:
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: HerrKaiser on December 08, 2008, 08:46:35 pm
I'm glad the director did not attempt to have Tom Cruise fake his way through a German accent in Valkyrie.

He makes a very good physical impression that looks very much like Count Klaus von Stauffenberg.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on December 10, 2008, 02:47:34 pm
I saw a preview for Valkyrie and it looks dreadful.

Sorry, I am not paying $8 to see Tom Cruise live out his gay uniform fetish fantasy up on there on the big screen. LOL.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on December 10, 2008, 03:12:45 pm
I saw a preview for Valkyrie and it looks dreadful.

Sorry, I am not paying $8 to see Tom Cruise live out his gay uniform fetish fantasy up on there on the big screen. LOL.

L

Aargh!  $8.00?  I just paid $12.50 for a movie here in NYC.  Sometimes it doesn't work to your advantage to be in a big city.  >:(
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on December 10, 2008, 03:21:21 pm
Aargh!  $8.00?  I just paid $12.50 for a movie here in NYC.  Sometimes it doesn't work to your advantage to be in a big city.  >:(

But you got to see Milk before me...

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: HerrKaiser on December 10, 2008, 07:33:44 pm


Sorry, I am not paying $8 to see Tom Cruise live out his gay uniform fetish fantasy up on there on the big screen. LOL.

L

what on  earth does that mean?  ???
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Artiste on December 10, 2008, 09:39:53 pm
         Tom Cruise live out his gay uniform              ... wow !

Do tell...

au revoir,
hugs!  I just saw cruise this morning on TV talking about it and answering OTHER questions which were posed not being about that movie; he mentioned that he wears not boxers but briefs... and he laughed of course ! Is he, Tom Cruise, turning gay ? - dare anyone ask jokingly ?
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Artiste on December 10, 2008, 09:43:53 pm
 Is he doing a homosexual charactor ?
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on December 10, 2008, 11:48:07 pm
Is he, Tom Cruise, turning gay ?

I thought he always was...it seems clear.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on December 11, 2008, 01:44:25 am
I thought he always was...it seems clear.

Yeah, I've long assumed so.


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Ellemeno on December 12, 2008, 06:13:43 am
Tom Cruise in the closet


[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S5By3xNlMPs[/youtube]
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Ellemeno on December 12, 2008, 06:14:29 am
Anyone seen Synecdoche, NY?  I saw it today and want to talk about it.  Michelle Williams is in it.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: HerrKaiser on December 12, 2008, 07:43:22 am

I thought he always was...it seems clear.


Yeah, I've long assumed so.



For a group of people here who are so intolerant of assumptions and opinions not based on proven, documented evidence, it seems funny to make such charges.  ;D  For decades, gays and gay groupies have fantasized that Cruise would be gay, but that is all it is...wishful thinking.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on December 12, 2008, 10:44:30 am
For a group of people here who are so intolerant of assumptions and opinions not based on proven, documented evidence, it seems funny to make such charges.  ;D  For decades, gays and gay groupies have fantasized that Cruise would be gay, but that is all it is...wishful thinking.

Well, they aren't exactly "charges." They're not public accusations, just our private assumptions based on things we've heard and/or observed -- including his own odd public behavior at times, such as his Oprah appearance. And they're not negative assumptions, as the word "charges" implies, except in the sense that it would be sad if he had to go through life not feeling free to be himself. I think most of us on a Brokeback Mountain website can relate to the pathos in that.

Being neither a gay man nor in any way likely to have romantic interaction with Tom Cruise, it's pretty immaterial to me one way or the other.

I think many of us probably have various opinions -- well founded or not -- about what this or that celebrity might be like in private life. That's just part of being famous. Many obviously believe it's a fair exchange for the millions of dollars and other perks they receive. And if 10 percent of the population (or whatever) is gay, but nowhere near 10 percent of movie stars acknowledge being gay, then it stands to reason that there are some movie stars who are gay but not tellin.


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on December 12, 2008, 01:42:15 pm
what on  earth does that mean?  ???

It means I am not going to see Valkyrie.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on December 14, 2008, 05:03:34 pm
Milk has opened here in an exclusive engagement at the Nickelodeon Theater (which also had an exclusive engagement with BBM three years ago). I am hoping to go see it on Wednesday afternoon.

Just back from seeing Australia for a second time and I liked it even more. I could focus on the characters and dialog and picked up things I missed the first time. I definitely recommend it as a big, sweeping epic movie. If you are at all interested, see it in the theater. It will lose alot of its impact on a TV screen.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on December 14, 2008, 09:41:04 pm
Just back from seeing Australia for a second time and I liked it even more. I could focus on the characters and dialog and picked up things I missed the first time. I definitely recommend it as a big, sweeping epic movie. If you are at all interested, see it in the theater. It will lose alot of its impact on a TV screen.

Oh, all right!  >:( ;) :-*

I was going to skip Australia in favor of all the other movies I feel the need to see: Milk, Slumdog Millionaire, JCVD (thanks, oilgun!  :D), that French Christmas one with Catherine Deneuve, and maybe another one or two I can't think of right now.

But I have heard such great word-of-mouth about Australia that I'm afraid after all I'm going to have to throw it on the barbie (sorry, Aussiebrokies!  ;D).


UPDATE: Wendy and Lucy is one of the other ones. And maybe that Brad Pitt one.



Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: belbbmfan on December 15, 2008, 02:38:40 am
Australia opens here on Wednesday. We'll be there. I'm really looking forward to this movie. I'm ready for a big sweeping romance.  :)


My husband and my kids watched Madagascar 2 yesterday. They said it was fantastic. Very well made and very funny.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kd5000 on December 15, 2008, 11:57:27 am
I saw THE DAY THE EARTH STOOD STILL yesterday.  It's about what you expect nowadays of remakes.  Better special effects, characters and plot not as developed.  I'd give it a C.    The American Film Institute released the year's 10 best movies.  The only ones I've seen so far were Wall-E and The Dark Knight.  The other ones have not been released in my area.

LOS ANGELES — The Batman epic "The Dark Knight," the political biopic "Milk" and the gritty drama "The Wrestler" were among critical favorites that landed on the American Film Institute's list of the year's 10 best movies.

Also on AFI's list, released Sunday, were the animated "Wall-E," Clint Eastwood's "Gran Torino," the superhero blockbuster "Iron Man," the indie dramas "Frozen River" and "Wendy and Lucy," the adapted play "Frost/Nixon," and the Brad Pitt epic "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button."

Unlike other film honors, the institute does not rank films or pick one as the year's best. The filmmakers behind the top 10 choices will be honored at a luncheon Jan. 9.

Many of the films on the list picked up Golden Globe nominations last week and are expected to compete for Academy Awards. Oscar nominations are to be announced Jan. 22.

Among Globe best-drama nominees were "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button," David Fincher's drama about a man who ages backward, starring Pitt and Cate Blanchett; and Ron Howard's "Frost/Nixon," based on the Peter Morgan play about the famous TV interview of Richard Nixon by David Frost, starring Frank Langella and Michael Sheen.

The AFI also released a top 10 list of TV shows for 2008, featuring "Breaking Bad," "In Treatment," "John Adams," "Life," "Lost," "Mad Men," "The Office," "Recount," "The Shield" and "The Wire."

The top 10 lists were chosen by two 13-member panels, one each for movies and television. Members included writer Mark Harris, filmmaker Robert Towne, and critics Leonard Maltin, Elvis Mitchell and Richard Schickel.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/12/15/afis-top-10-films-of-2008_n_150997.html
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: HerrKaiser on December 15, 2008, 11:44:39 pm
Well, they aren't exactly "charges." They're not public accusations, just our private assumptions based on things we've heard and/or observed -- including his own odd public behavior at times, such as his Oprah appearance. And they're not negative assumptions, as the word "charges" implies, except in the sense that it would be sad if he had to go through life not feeling free to be himself. I think most of us on a Brokeback Mountain website can relate to the pathos in that.



 ;D ;D ;D  The way the thread was referring to him was accusatory! "gay uniform fetish..."? The verbiage sounded like "charges" to me.

And, for a group who is ever so critical of anyone having "private assumptions based on things we've heard and/or observed" without factual documentation is more than a bit disengenuous, n'est pas?  ;)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Ellemeno on December 16, 2008, 05:58:43 am
No takers for Synecdoche, hunh?  Roger Ebert loved it.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on December 16, 2008, 11:21:48 am
No takers for Synecdoche, hunh?  Roger Ebert loved it.

I don't think it's even playing around here. I am off to see Milk tomorrow, however.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on December 16, 2008, 11:56:21 am
No takers for Synecdoche, hunh?  Roger Ebert loved it.


Because the reviews that I read were not very good, I've decided to wait for the DVD.  I'll check out what Ebert has to say, though, it might change my mind.

I thought I was mispronouncing the title, yes it's a new word for me, but I just checked and it turns out that I'm using the British pronunciation:  Sin-eck-dock.  The American is: sin-eck-dock-ee.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on December 16, 2008, 12:03:31 pm

Because the reviews that I read were not very good, I've decided to wait for the DVD.  I'll check out what Ebert has to say, though, it might change my mind.

I thought I was mispronouncing the title, yes it's a new word for me, but I just checked and it turns out that I'm using the British pronunciation:  Sin-eck-dock.  The American is: sin-eck-dock-ee.

I've used the word before, but always pronounced it SIN-eck-dosh! [insert blushing smiley icon]



Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on December 16, 2008, 06:50:46 pm
I thought I was mispronouncing the title, yes it's a new word for me, but I just checked and it turns out that I'm using the British pronunciation:  Sin-eck-dock.  The American is: sin-eck-dock-ee.

I read somewhere that the director meant it as a kind of play on the name of Schenectady, New York.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Aloysius J. Gleek on December 16, 2008, 11:26:08 pm
Funny, or not funny, depending--

Two weeks ago, at a whim, I walked into Synecdoche  (the Landmark Sunshine on Houston in Manhattan) about 5 minutes after the movie had started--

As to not why, I won't go into a not nice explanation, but--

Within THREE MINUTES I was OUT of the theater and, as soon as I could, into a taxi.

This may be crackers, but--I think I may never be able to see a movie with (a certain person) again--

Fine by me--
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Aloysius J. Gleek on December 16, 2008, 11:52:37 pm

Sorry, Utter Bosh OT, but--

http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-syn1.htm (http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-syn1.htm)

[Q] “Can you tell me whether the words synecdoche and metonymy mean the same thing?”

[A] Both are figures of speech used in rhetoric. They’re not the same thing, though metonymy is often interpreted so widely that synecdoche can be regarded as a special case of it.

Let’s take synecdoche first (which is pronounced as /sɪˈnɛkdəkɪ/, by the way). You use this when you speak of a part of something but mean the whole thing. When Patrick O’Brian has Captain Jack Aubrey tell his first lieutenant to “let the hands go to dinner” he’s employing synecdoche, because he’s using a part (the hand) for the whole man. You can also reverse the whole and the part, so using a word for something when you only mean part of it. This often comes up in sport: a commentator might say that “The West Indies has lost to England” when he means that the West Indian team has lost to the English one. America is often used as synecdoche in this second sense, as the word refers to the whole continent but is frequently applied to a part of it, the USA.

Metonymy is similar, but uses something more generally or loosely associated with a concept to stand in for it. When Americans speak of the Oval Office, for example, they are really referring to the activity within it, the position or function of the President. It’s a linked term, and so a metonym. British writers refer similarly to the Crown, when they’re really discussing the powers, authority and responsibilities of the monarchy, which is symbolised by the crown. The difference between synecdoche and metonymy is that in metonymy the word you employ is linked to the concept you are really talking about, but isn’t actually a part of it. Another example is the turf for horse racing. But the distinction isn’t always obvious and often can’t be rigorously applied, and many people use metonymy to mean both.

In his story Here Lies Miss GrobyJames Thurber wrote about his English teacher’s attempts to explain metonymy by talking about “the container for the thing contained”. This sounds like synecdoche rather than metonymy, but Miss Groby’s examples show she really meant metonymy. For example, when Shakespeare had Antony say in Julius Caesar: “Friends, Romans, Countrymen, lend me your ears” he was speaking figuratively of the thing the ears contained — that is, their function, their ability to listen, not some literal component. Thurber recalled that he lay awake that night trying to find an example of the reverse idea and came up with an image of an angry wife about to bash hubby over the head with a bottle of Grade A, saying “Get away from me or I’ll hit you with the milk”. That’s metonymy all right, but you can argue it’s also synecdoche, because milk is an essential component part of a bottle of milk, not just something associated with it.

Sorry!

As you were!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Aloysius J. Gleek on December 17, 2008, 12:11:05 am

I thought I was mispronouncing the title, yes it's a new word for me, but I just checked and it turns out that I'm using the British pronunciation:  Sin-eck-dock.  The American is: sin-eck-dock-ee.

Ok, now I'm really crackers, but, re different pronunciations, for example,

the girl's given name,

IRENE,

is mostly pronounced

in America as aye-REEN,
in parts of the UK as aye-REEN-ee (three syllables),
and parts of the UK as AYE-reen,
and in France as EE-ren.

Sorry again! Just ignore! G'bye!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on December 17, 2008, 12:15:39 am
Sorry!

As you were!

As I was?? NO WAY!!
 ;D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Aloysius J. Gleek on December 17, 2008, 12:19:57 am

As I was?? NO WAY!!
 ;D

Mad, I tell you, mad.

Soree!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on December 17, 2008, 12:28:24 am
I swore off going to movies with a certain friend earlier this year. It was the movie Shelter. I got to the theater early, bought the tickets, and then had to call and tell him I was ready for him to arrive. After giving very specific directions, I went outside and stood at the entrance to the parking lot, waving him in and pointing to a vacant spot. He ran into the theater because it was snowing lightly and he didn't want to get snow on his cowboy hat. We went into the theater and watched several good shorts, one with Judy Shepard, and then the movie. Afterwards, my friend split immediately. I am the kind of person who likes to savor a movie, go out for dinner or coffee afterwards and talk about it. But after this disastrous incident, we did see a movie a few months later and enjoyed it very much together. So, I say never say never.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Lynne on December 25, 2008, 09:21:37 pm
I swore off going to movies with a certain friend earlier this year. It was the movie Shelter. I got to the theater early, bought the tickets, and then had to call and tell him I was ready for him to arrive. After giving very specific directions, I went outside and stood at the entrance to the parking lot, waving him in and pointing to a vacant spot. He ran into the theater because it was snowing lightly and he didn't want to get snow on his cowboy hat. We went into the theater and watched several good shorts, one with Judy Shepard, and then the movie. Afterwards, my friend split immediately. I am the kind of person who likes to savor a movie, go out for dinner or coffee afterwards and talk about it. But after this disastrous incident, we did see a movie a few months later and enjoyed it very much together. So, I say never say never.

That's too bad, Lee.  The right company can certainly make a big difference, especially when seeing a movie in the theatre, when you don't have pause and rewind options.  Can you imagine seeing BBM with someone who won't wait until the last credit has rolled?!?!  No way!

I watched Leaving Metropolis on Netflix a few evenings ago and did a search here to see if anyone had mentioned it.  The only comment I found was by oilgun over in the ABCs at the Movies thread:

Quote
As for LEAVING METROPOLIS, the play was much better!  Although Vince Corazza is an absolute doll!...

I didn't realize there was a play.  I thought the movie was good enough, but I didn't love it.  I guess I'm too much of a romantic to be satisfied by an average movie if I don't get my happily-ever-after.  Truly great films, like Brokeback Mountain and Casablanca of course, get much more latitude.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on December 26, 2008, 11:15:36 pm
Hi there, cinemaphiles.  I just saw The Curious Case of Benjamin Button tonight.  **Not too spoilerish***

All I can say is WOW!  I haven't read any reviews, just the bare outline of the story.  It's an epic that holds your attention through the whole 2 3/4 hours--no mean feat.  I was on the verge of tears practically throughout the entire film.  Spanning eight decades, with not a cliche in sight.  Effective use of spare music, unintrusive voice-overs, interesting lighting add to the delight.  Not to mention special effects that are used for human purposes, not just to blow up stuff.  Hurray!

Brad Pitt is phenomenal.  You can't take your eyes off him.  I don't think I've ever appreciated him as an actor before this.  He makes great use of his eyes and his voice, in this case a quiet, slow, gentle New Orleans lilt.  He is gradually transformed from a little old man, eventually to Brad Pitt, to Brad Pitt of twenty years ago!

I always expect great things from Cate Blanchett and she doesn't disappoint.  From waif to Martha Graham-esque and beyond, she is a wonder. 

I didn't really have much of a sense of David Fincher, except for Zodiac, which I didn't much like.  I see he has directed TV commercials, and music videos (Madonna) primarily, along with Fight Club and Se7en, neither of which had I seen. 

Based on short story by F. Scott Fitzgerald, the film was apparently heavily adapted by Eric Roth.  Perhaps Brokeback Mountain started a trend of adapting good short stories into films. 

I expect this film will haunt me for some time. 

To celebrate, my film partner and I went to dinner at the venerable Boston establishment, Locke Ober, for dinner (lobster bisque and crispy sweetbreads, yum) and a Sazerac, featured in the film.

*****

Sazerac, considered the first truly American cocktail, pre-Civil War, born in New Orleans:

coat an old fashioned glass with Pernod and discard
muddle sugar cube and bitters, add ice and bourbon (or whiskey, or rye)
strain into Pernod-coated glass
garnish with lemon peel

Aromatic and gorgeous!

Cheers to Benjamin Button!



Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Ellemeno on December 26, 2008, 11:34:58 pm
Wow, now I want to see Benjamin Button, Paul.

And I have always loved that meaning of the word "muddle."  I'll have a Sazerac too, when I see it.  :)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on December 27, 2008, 02:19:14 am
I drank a few Sazeracs back in my New Orleans days and can add my endorsement.

Paul, thanks so much for the TCCoBB review. I was extremely on-the-fence about it; I'd heard things both ways, and with a running time of 2:55 wanted to be more sure before I committed. Your recommendation has me jumping off the fence and all but striding immediately off to the multiplex.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Ellemeno on December 27, 2008, 04:56:36 am
I drank a few Sazeracs back in my New Orleans days and can add my endorsement.

Paul, thanks so much for the TCCoBB review. I was extremely on-the-fence about it; I'd heard things both ways, and with a running time of 2:55 wanted to be more sure before I committed. Your recommendation has me jumping off the fence and all but striding immediately off to the multiplex.




I wish we could go see it together, K.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on December 27, 2008, 05:29:18 am
Thanks for your movie review, Paul and for the drink reviews, everyone! Tonight I saw "Were the World Mine" with friend Offline Chuck on the recommendation of Truman and Paul . It was outstanding and fun! Especially since I have a long relationship with the play A Midsummer Nights Dream by William Shakespeare. I first saw it at the Denver Botanical Gardens on a midsummer's night with my husband and daughter, who was 2 years old at the time. I thought I would regret taking her to it because she was so young, but she was mesmerized and paid attention for the entire performance. Fast forward to 2005 when my daughter was chosen to play Puck in the high school performance of this play. So, as you can imagine, I was interested in seeing this musical about a young man's adventure when he was chosen to play the part of Puck and figured out how to create the mystical flower that sprays a love potion, bewitching half of his small town into becoming gay! As I was going out of the theater, I saw somebody I knew...a friend of my daughter's who had played the role of Demitrias in the play to her Puck. He was her first crush in high school but when he came out, they decided to be good friends. His name...Will!!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on December 27, 2008, 05:46:04 pm
Hi there, cinemaphiles.  I just saw The Curious Case of Benjamin Button tonight.  **Not too spoilerish***

All I can say is WOW!  I haven't read any reviews, just the bare outline of the story.  It's an epic that holds your attention through the whole 2 3/4 hours--no mean feat.  I was on the verge of tears practically throughout the entire film.  Spanning eight decades, with not a cliche in sight.  Effective use of spare music, unintrusive voice-overs, interesting lighting add to the delight.  Not to mention special effects that are used for human purposes, not just to blow up stuff.  Hurray!

Brad Pitt is phenomenal.  You can't take your eyes off him.  I don't think I've ever appreciated him as an actor before this.  He makes great use of his eyes and his voice, in this case a quiet, slow, gentle New Orleans lilt.  He is gradually transformed from a little old man, eventually to Brad Pitt, to Brad Pitt of twenty years ago!

I always expect great things from Cate Blanchett and she doesn't disappoint.  From waif to Martha Graham-esque and beyond, she is a wonder.

A friend of mine went to see this over Xmas.  She did her graduate work in English Lit and loves F. Scott Fitzgerald.  She was anxious to see "Benjamin Button" too.

She thought it a big snooze-fest.

She doesn't know why the movie is getting all the buzz it is.  The acting, she said, was perfectly competent.  No more, no less.  Nothing really to write home about.  The movie was way too long at nearly 3 hours and as it was not an action movie where the action can keep one riveted, the movie she said was too slow and the story not sufficiently engrossing nor the dialogue interesting enough to keep one's attention. 

She gave it 2.5 out of 5 stars and definitely not award worthy.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on December 27, 2008, 05:49:55 pm
Having now read the Fitzgerald story, I could see how and English lit grad would not like it.  It's heavily adapted.  The original story seems satirical in nature, and the film is more fable-like.

I'm not surprised there are vastly different opinions of the film.  I recall many people finding BBM to be a snooze-fest too.

To each and every, their own!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on December 27, 2008, 06:08:33 pm
I just got home from seeing Slumdog Millionaire. Oh my. I went in knowing absolutely nothing about it. I hadn't read a single review which is unusual for me. It was good seeing it "cold" like that.

It's very very good. In fact, it's probably more than good, once I've had a chance to let it sink in a little bit.

There was a line (unusual) and everyone was seeing either Milk, Benjamin Button, or Slumdog. No one wanted to see Valkyrie. Poor Tom Cruise, I think his day has passed.

Paul...interesting review of Benjamin Button. I read the short story a few weeks ago (free on my Kindle!). It sounds like the only thing in common with the story is the title! They've changed the location (from Baltimore to New Orleans), the time frame (the movie goes up to 2005 according to the New York Times review), the War (in the story it was the Spanish American War and a little bit of WWI), and just about everything else it seems. If I see it, I'll forget about the short story.

Similarly, Lance and I just read Farewell to the Master, the 1940 short story that was the basis for The Day the Earth Stood Still (both of them). The 1950 movie had very little to do with the story and Lance tells me the 2008 version has even less. BTW, he didn't think much of the film and said Keanu Reeves had his bored/board expression in place all the way through.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on December 27, 2008, 06:26:45 pm
Having now read the Fitzgerald story, I could see how and English lit grad would not like it.  It's heavily adapted.  The original story seems satirical in nature, and the film is more fable-like.

I'm not surprised there are vastly different opinions of the film.  I recall many people finding BBM to be a snooze-fest too.

To each and every, their own!

and

Quote
Paul...interesting review of Benjamin Button. I read the short story a few weeks ago (free on my Kindle!). It sounds like the only thing in common with the story is the title! They've changed the location (from Baltimore to New Orleans), the time frame (the movie goes up to 2005 according to the New York Times review), the War (in the story it was the Spanish American War and a little bit of WWI), and just about everything else it seems. If I see it, I'll forget about the short story.

Exactly what I had read prior to my friend seeing the movie. It's like Hollywood can't come up with its own concepts anymore, but takes them from existing stories, but then homogenizes them into crowd-pleasing box office palatables - which, of course, destroys what the author really intended to say with his story.

However, having said that, if put in the hands of a talented enough Hollywood story-teller, the story can take on a different life of its own.

I watched the DVD extras on the movie "The Golden Compass" and saw what the book's famous award-winning author thought of his story going Hollywood (the director was quite public in how he adapted the story).  Pullman was really strict on the difference between a movie and his story.  He replied, "They didn't change my story at all.  It's still in my book, right there on the shelf."
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on December 27, 2008, 06:54:48 pm
Wow, now I want to see Benjamin Button, Paul.

And I have always loved that meaning of the word "muddle."  I'll have a Sazerac too, when I see it.  :)

Reminds me of that scene in A Room With A View where that great actor who played the father said, "It seems to me like you're all in a muddle!!"

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on December 27, 2008, 09:04:35 pm
..it's probably more than good,

Well, Leslie, I think that's a rave!  I hope to see Slumdog Millionnaire soon !
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Aloysius J. Gleek on December 28, 2008, 03:32:13 am

Hi there, cinemaphiles.  I just saw The Curious Case of Benjamin Button tonight.  **Not too spoilerish***

All I can say is WOW!  I haven't read any reviews, just the bare outline of the story.  It's an epic that holds your attention through the whole 2 3/4 hours--no mean feat.  I was on the verge of tears practically throughout the entire film.  Spanning eight decades, with not a cliche in sight.  Effective use of spare music, unintrusive voice-overs, interesting lighting add to the delight.  Not to mention special effects that are used for human purposes, not just to blow up stuff.  Hurray!

Brad Pitt is phenomenal.  You can't take your eyes off him.  I don't think I've ever appreciated him as an actor before this.  He makes great use of his eyes and his voice, in this case a quiet, slow, gentle New Orleans lilt.  He is gradually transformed from a little old man, eventually to Brad Pitt, to Brad Pitt of twenty years ago!

I always expect great things from Cate Blanchett and she doesn't disappoint.  From waif to Martha Graham-esque and beyond, she is a wonder. 

I didn't really have much of a sense of David Fincher, except for Zodiac, which I didn't much like.  I see he has directed TV commercials, and music videos (Madonna) primarily, along with Fight Club and Se7en, neither of which had I seen. 

Based on short story by F. Scott Fitzgerald, the film was apparently heavily adapted by Eric Roth.  Perhaps Brokeback Mountain started a trend of adapting good short stories into films. 

I expect this film will haunt me for some time. 

To celebrate, my film partner and I went to dinner at the venerable Boston establishment, Locke Ober, for dinner (lobster bisque and crispy sweetbreads, yum) and a Sazerac, featured in the film.

*****

Sazerac, considered the first truly American cocktail, pre-Civil War, born in New Orleans:

coat an old fashioned glass with Pernod and discard
muddle sugar cube and bitters, add ice and bourbon (or whiskey, or rye)
strain into Pernod-coated glass
garnish with lemon peel

Aromatic and gorgeous!

Cheers to Benjamin Button!


Paul--I saw it today (Saturday), at the Ziegfeld. Wow indeed.

My film partner is a New York-based New Orleanian (named Charbonnet--how New Orleanian can you get??) whose mother lived in a (real) house just across from the (fictional) nursing home. (And Mr. Button, Sr.'s beautiful house on Esplanade was just up the block from a real house belonging to a friend of mine.)

I mention this to only say in passing that Mr. Charbonnet said that Brad Pitt's New Orleanian accent was perfect. Not 'good,' not 'very good,' but perfect.

And Mr. Pitt's perfect accent is mentioned in passing simply because we were in awe of his acting talent. Flawless is the word on that score.

I would not say the film itself is flawless. There were points at which I could cavil,  and there were omissions. But I thought the movie was brilliant. What a love letter to the City of New Orleans itself. And the mood, the pacing--amazingly beautiful. Have you ever seen a movie with this length--and you had wished it had been a half-hour, even an hour longer??

I thought Cate Blanchett was fine. Surprisingly, I thought Tilda Swinton even better. I have always thought her very good, but 'cold'--but in the Russian hotel episode, Ms. Swinton was warm, touching, vulnerable.

Anyway. Yes, I will be seeing Benjamin Button again.

Beautiful film. Beautiful man. (I mean it--what a beautiful man. )

Go. Now.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on December 28, 2008, 03:56:14 am
My film partner is a New York-based New Orleanian (named Charbonnet--how New Orleanian can you get??) whose mother lived in a (real) house just across from the (fictional) nursing home. (And Mr. Button, Sr.'s beautiful house on Esplanade was just up the block from a real house belonging to a friend of mine.)

Well, that does it. I didn't realize how New Orleanian it was. I will see it for sure.

In fact, if not for about five wrong turns on a too-tight schedule and very icy roads and two only semi-committed kids and a new remote-control helicopter that hadn't yet been tried out and a couple of Netflix at home, I would have seen it tonight.

It was not to be. But I'll see it soon.

Quote
I mention this to only say in passing that Mr. Charbonnet said that Brad Pitt's New Orleanian accent was perfect. Not 'good,' not 'very good,' but perfect.

And Mr. Pitt's perfect accent is mentioned in passing, simply because we were in awe of his acting talent. Flawless is the word on that score.

Good. I have seen way too many terrible New Orleans accents. For example, Kevin Costner in JFK (shudder).


Actually, what we wound up watching at home was not the Netflix movies but the on-demand Fred Claus. I can't recommend it to anyone but a sappily sentimental Vince Vaughn fan with very low standards ... but apparently around Christmastime that's me, so I enjoyed it.



Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Aloysius J. Gleek on December 28, 2008, 04:40:28 am


Well, that does it. I didn't realize how New Orleanian it was. I will see it for sure.


Katherine, I must say--it is not only a fictional New Orleans, it is a fantasy. A fable. The train station and the clock at the beginning of the film , for example, is a fantasy. And, as I said, there are cavils. (And kids?--oh, dear. I don't think so. They'll rebel--or go to sleep.) But overall--gorgeous.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on December 28, 2008, 01:12:52 pm
I would not say the film itself is flawless. There were points at which I could cavil,  and there were omissions. But I thought the movie was brilliant. What a love letter to the City of New Orleans itself. And the mood, the pacing--amazingly beautiful. Have you ever seen a movie with this length--and you had wished it had been a half-hour, even an hour longer??

That sounds right up my alley.  Long movies with great art direction are like reading a good novel; you can get immersed in another world. "Barry Lyndon" is one of my favorites for that, also "The Last Emperor," "Doctor Zhivago," "Lawrence of Arabia," even "Dances with Wolves" and the "Lord of the Rings" movies.  Thanks for the reviews, John and Paul.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on December 28, 2008, 01:49:38 pm
So glad you liked it, John.  I loved Brad's voice; good to hear that it's authentic as well.  (That subtle "oy" for "er" was not overdone.)

I agree with you about Tilda Swinton--she reveals the warmth in British "cold". 

As for longish films I wish were longer, I can think of one 2 1/4 hour film.... ::)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Ellemeno on December 28, 2008, 02:47:01 pm
I love this thread and I love all of you.  From 'cavil' to 'remote-controlled helicopter' to, as I said, 'muddled,' I'm as happy as a clam reading all a youse.

Tilda Swinton was superb in Michael Clayton, where she played a bitch-cold corporate lawyer defending the environmental evil doers, but who secretly falls apart in bathroom stalls.  Incredible.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on December 28, 2008, 03:39:24 pm
Tilda Swinton was superb in Michael Clayton, where she played a bitch-cold corporate lawyer defending the environmental evil doers, but who secretly falls apart in bathroom stalls.  Incredible.

I loved Michael Clayton so much that every time I see the title in the video store or on "on demand" or sumpn', I wish I could see it again for the first time.

It's not one of those movies I could watch 22 times (there's only one of those one of thoses), but I really enjoyed it twice.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Aloysius J. Gleek on December 28, 2008, 04:45:10 pm

Sad....

http://www.nydailynews.com/money/2008/12/26/2008-12-26_forrest_gump_eric_roth_screenwriter_sues.html (http://www.nydailynews.com/money/2008/12/26/2008-12-26_forrest_gump_eric_roth_screenwriter_sues.html)

'Forrest Gump' (and 'Benjamin Button') screenwriter, Eric Roth,
sues over Madoff losses


(http://assets.nydailynews.com/img/2008/12/27/amd_eric-roth.jpg)

BY SOO YOUN and OWEN MORITZ  
DAILY NEWS WRITERS

Saturday, December 27th 2008, 1:21 AM

The writer of a string of Hollywood hits - including "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button" - sued his investment manager Friday for losing a bundle in Bernie Madoff's Ponzi scheme.


Screenwriter Eric Roth claims his "trusted investment manager," Stanley Chais, "simply handed off" his money to Madoff while collecting "enormous fees."

When he learned of his "heavy" losses last week: Roth exclaimed: "I'm the biggest sucker who ever walked the face of the Earth. The tragedy is the people who lost their life savings and their dreams."

Madoff is accused of running a $50 billion Ponzi scheme on charities, Yeshivas and high-rollers around the world, including New York Mets owner Fred Wilpon.

In papers filed in Los Angeles, Roth - also authored the screen versions of "Forrest Gump"  and "The Horse Whisperer"  - claims he suffered "massive losses" at the hands of Chais.

Roth, listing himself as the trustee for Vanessa Productions Ltd. profit-sharing plan, charged Chais "funneled to Madoff the billions of dollars in investment capital that he needed to perpetuate his confessed Ponzi scheme."

Roth charges Chais ignored "red flags" from other investors and hedge fund managers, investment advisers and banks that had refused to invest with Madoff's firm, BMIS.

After a long slump, Roth just hit it big again as writer of "Benjamin Button,"  in which the lead character ages backward - from old age to youth.

He was nominated this week for a Golden Globe.

Chais failed to conduct "reasonable due diligence" of Madoff's investment practices and the failure to diversify investments constituted "gross negligence and an egregious breach of fiduciary duties," the suit says.

Roth is seeking unspecified compensatory and punitive damages.

[email protected] (http://[email protected])
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on December 28, 2008, 04:53:17 pm
Hannah and I went and saw Benjamin Button and thought it was great. Happy, sad, an emotional roller-coaster. Good thing we had lots of napkins from the popcorn. Hannah got a little restless at the Russian interlude (Tilda Swinton part) but I think that was a little subtle for a 17 year old. She loved the rest of it though. I loved all of it.

I swear, at the latter part, they photoshopped the Thelma and Louise Brad Pitt into the movie. I haven't seen him looking that good or buff for years! LOL.

It is something to see two great movies in one weekend. I expect Slumdog Millionaire and Benjamin Button will both get best picture noms for the Oscars. Right now I am thinking I'd add Milk to the list, too. Sean Penn and Brad Pitt will also get Best Actor noms. And I think Cate Blanchett for best actress in this.

BUT HERE IS MY BIG QUIBBLE....

Did anyone else notice this? Daisy as a child had blue eyes (and Benjamin talked about them) and Daisy as an adult did, but the pre-teen/tween Daisy had brown eyes! Come on, people, we had the same damn problem in BBM! Don't they think people notice eye color (especially when characters talk about them!). Can't they use contacts or something?

Jeesh.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on December 28, 2008, 05:12:43 pm
Roger Ebert didn't like Benjamin Button and gave it only 2 1/2 stars. I found this final paragraph of his review interesting:

According to the oddsmakers at MovieCityNews, "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button" is third among the top five favorites for best picture. It may very well win. It expends Oscar-worthy talents on an off-putting gimmick. I can't imagine many people wanting to see the movie twice. There was another film this year that isn't in the "top five," or listed among the front-runners at all, and it's a profound consideration of the process of living and aging. That's Charlie Kaufman's "Synecdoche, New York." It will be viewed and valued decades from now. You mark my words.

(bolding mine).

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Ellemeno on December 28, 2008, 07:11:53 pm

There was another film this year that isn't in the "top five," or listed among the front-runners at all, and it's a profound consideration of the process of living and aging. That's Charlie Kaufman's "Synecdoche, New York." It will be viewed and valued decades from now. You mark my words.

(bolding mine).

L


Yes, I read Ebert's blog about Synecdoche, and then many pages of comments and his replies to the comments.  He fawned over it like it was his Citizen Kane.


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Aloysius J. Gleek on December 28, 2008, 07:16:25 pm

Yes, I read Ebert's blog about Synecdoche, and then many pages of comments and his replies to the comments.  He fawned over it like it was his Citizen Kane.


 ::)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Aloysius J. Gleek on December 28, 2008, 07:23:18 pm

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/28/opinion/28sun3.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/28/opinion/28sun3.html)

(http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/misc/nytlogo153x23.gif)
Editorial Notebook
Klaatu Had Better Rent the Video

By BRENT STAPLES
Published: December 27, 2008


The remake of “The Day the Earth Stood Still”  is a sentimentalized take on the 1951 classic. The new version has its uses, so see it. Then rent the original and watch it late at night — the way bleary-eyed adolescents did when it could be seen only on grainy broadcasts in the wee hours of the morning.

I compared the two earlier this month, watching the vintage version for the first time in at least 25 years. I was reminded of how deeply it had insinuated itself into the DNA of popular culture. I also thought of Norma Desmond, the fallen movie idol in “Sunset Boulevard,”  who said of her spent career: “I am big. It’s the pictures that got small.”

Digital effects have revolutionized the monster, science-fiction and superhero genres, making the films larger than ever visually. But the same effects have whittled away at the acting space, making the movies smaller in the dramatic sense.

The minimalist — and altogether cool — effects in the 1951 film leave lots of room for the performers. Michael Rennie is aces as Klaatu, the brainy, handsome and thoroughly polite alien who threatens to eliminate every creature on the planet — kittens, puppies and cute little babies included — if earthlings become a danger to the galaxy.

Watching the movie as a middle-aged man, I saw what I lacked eyes to see as a 12-year-old. There is no shred of sentimentality in Rennie’s performance. He is a congenial exterminating angel, dropping round for tea to tell of horrors to come.

Rennie’s Klaatu is God-fearing, emotionally sophisticated, superior to but indistinguishable from the earthlings among whom he walks. That’s an open-minded characterization at the start of a decade dominated by red-baiting and fear of outlanders in general.

Keanu Reeves’s Klaatu is numbingly monotonic. He is emotionally underdeveloped, and suffers from a robotic flatness of affect. Instead, the scriptwriters gave him powers that are predictably demonstrated through pricey special effects that do not sustain dramatic momentum. With all this digital sleight of hand, the performers are reduced to the equivalent of bystanders at a fireworks show.

By making the new Klaatu emotionally naïve, the writers make him subject to earthling tears and cuddly puppy influences that would have cut no mustard with the Klaatu of old. This emotional vulnerability allows for a great deal of unjustified optimism about the human race’s ability to change its destructive behavior.

It is nearly impossible to recast a movie that is so deeply embedded in pop cultural understanding. The virtue of the new Klaatu is that he points us back to the original.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Ellemeno on December 28, 2008, 08:05:58 pm
With all this digital sleight of hand, the performers are reduced to the equivalent of bystanders at a fireworks show.


Well, some people know how to make the most of being bystanders at a fireworks show.

(http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h257/Ellemeno_2006/BM_0671.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on December 28, 2008, 08:38:36 pm
'Michael Rennie is aces as Klaatu, the brainy, handsome and thoroughly polite alien who threatens to eliminate every creature on the planet — kittens, puppies and cute little babies included — if earthlings become a danger to the galaxy.

Watching the movie as a middle-aged man, I saw what I lacked eyes to see as a 12-year-old. There is no shred of sentimentality in Rennie’s performance. He is a congenial exterminating angel, dropping round for tea to tell of horrors to come..."


Very god-like.  He's the dispassionate outsider, knowing in his vast experience that sometimes you reap, but sometimes you have to cull.

Hmmm, wonder why the 50's showed a more adult attitude than our current version.

 
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on December 28, 2008, 09:41:19 pm
Hmmm, wonder why the 50's showed a more adult attitude than our current version.

My opinion? Because in many ways -- setting aside racism, sexism, homophobia, gray-flannel-suitism -- the '50s was a more adult era.

These days, we worship the young, whether children or young adults. Older people strive to appear more youthful, in appearance, behavior and cultural tastes. 21-year-olds are huge stars, full of wisdom and insight; 40-year-olds are washed up geezers, hopelessly clueless. The movies reflect these attitudes.



Well, some people know how to make the most of being bystanders at a fireworks show.

(http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h257/Ellemeno_2006/BM_0671.jpg)


What a great screencap! Practically frameable.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on December 28, 2008, 10:31:17 pm
So, I have been thinking about it and I think I can come up with my top five movies of the year. My purely subjective list, based only movies I have seen in the theater. I realize my list is minuscule compared to Oilgun but hey, it's my list:

1. Slumdog Millionaire
2. Milk
3. Australia
4. The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
5. The Dark Knight

Some notes: I realize the Australia pick is controversial. But I actually saw that twice in the theater (yes, I liked it that much) and I am not sure I'll go see BB again. So Australia nudged it out.

I saw a number of 2007 movies in 2008 which I really liked, including:


The Diving Bell and the Butterfly
4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days
I'm Not There
In Bruges

All of them were excellent but I am uncomfortable adding them to my top five list. My 2007 but seen in 2008 list is presented in the order that I would rank them.

Other movies that I saw in the theater but didn't make the cut are: Deception, 21, Made of Honor, Mamma Mia!, and The Express.

Are others willing to share?

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on December 28, 2008, 10:42:18 pm
Leslie, of your 2008 list I've seen only Nos. 1 and 5, but I enjoyed both of those. As for 2007, I saw only In Bruges, but I loved that and, like Michael Clayton, wish I could watch it for the first time again. Four Months is in my Blockbuster queue, and I'm looking forward to it.

Let me go think if I saw anything else I'd put in my own top 5 or 10 list.

I will probably see all or most of the others on your list. I'm also looking forward to JCVD (thanks, oilgun!), The Wrestler, A Christmas Tale ... what else?

Slightly OT: Don't you sometimes wish you could search one particular person's posts in a single thread? In this case, I'd like to search my own posts, to jog my memory about what else I saw this year.




Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on December 28, 2008, 10:55:24 pm
I will probably see all or most of the others on your list. I'm also looking forward to JCVD (thanks, oilgun!), The Wrestler, A Christmas Tale ... what else?

Oh! Doubt, Valkyre, and I've decided that if pressed I'll even see Marley and Me.







[/quote]
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on December 28, 2008, 11:05:44 pm
Leslie, of your 2008 list I've seen only Nos. 1 and 5, but I enjoyed both of those. As for 2007, I saw only In Bruges, but I loved that and, like Michael Clayton, wish I could watch it for the first time again. Four Months is in my Blockbuster queue, and I'm looking forward to it.

Let me go think if I saw anything else I'd put in my own top 5 or 10 list.

I will probably see all or most of the others on your list. I'm also looking forward to JCVD (thanks, oilgun!), The Wrestler, A Christmas Tale ... what else?

Slightly OT: Don't you sometimes wish you could search one particular person's posts in a single thread? In this case, I'd like to search my own posts, to jog my memory about what else I saw this year.

I was just thinking that   :laugh:  as I was searching for my movie list that Leslie referred to. Couldn't find it... :(


Over xmas i watched, for the first time, KUNG FU PANDA which I found to be just ok, and LIVE FREE OR DIE HARD which was ridiculously OTT but fun as all hell.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on December 28, 2008, 11:23:01 pm
I suppose my list might change if I see Frost/Nixon but I have very ambivalent feelings about that movie. Sort of like Good Night and Good Luck. I watched it, I could see why people liked it but it was low on my list.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: SFEnnisSF on December 28, 2008, 11:54:32 pm
I'm about 3 years late to the party, but I finally rented Monster's Ball.  It was nice to see "Ennis" again  :)  ;D , and hearing him speak different dialogue than what I'm used to and already know by heart.

Also watched The Shipping News.  Noticed Annie Proulx's gritty storytelling there.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on December 29, 2008, 12:14:33 am
I suppose my list might change if I see Frost/Nixon but I have very ambivalent feelings about that movie. Sort of like Good Night and Good Luck. I watched it, I could see why people liked it but it was low on my list.

That's right! I forgot about F/N.

As for GNaGL, I just watched it for the second time the other night. I can see why you'd be ambivalent. I liked the look of it, the acting, the seemingly pitch-perfect recreation of the tone of the era, the constant flow of cigarette smoke (oh, I guess you wouldn't agree with me on that one, L!), the kind of "adult" mood to it.

You know what I said to Del a few posts back about the '50s being a more adult era? This movie captures that, I think. The characters all seem like grownups. Even Robert Downey Jr., who doesn't always come off that way in other roles (though I like him either way).

That said, the plot just didn't have enough oomph for me. At the end, it kind of fizzles and feels anti-climactic.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on December 29, 2008, 01:02:32 am

Slightly OT: Don't you sometimes wish you could search one particular person's posts in a single thread? In this case, I'd like to search my own posts, to jog my memory about what else I saw this year.



Why don't you just enter 'serious crayons' in the search box? Try it!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on December 29, 2008, 01:09:05 am
Why don't you just enter 'serious crayons' in the search box? Try it!

Interesting! Well, it's true that all the posts that came up were from this thread. But there were two problems.

One is, they were not posts by "serious crayons," they were posts that mentioned or quoted "serious crayons." For the quotes, of course, I could click on them to find some of my own original posts. But then the other problem: they only went back to November.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Ellemeno on December 29, 2008, 03:27:34 am
If you click on this link, it will take you to the 100 most popular titles for 2008 by total votes, over at IMDb, if like me, you need memory-joggers.  I'm going to look for my top and bottom movies for 2008.

http://us.imdb.com/List?year=2008&&votersort=on&&votes=500&&nav=/Sections/Years/2008/include-totalvotes&&heading=7;Most%20popular%20titles;2008%20by%20total%20votes
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Ellemeno on December 29, 2008, 05:16:52 am
Well this was a fun project.  I looked through several lists of what were called 2008 movies (though I notice that IMDb, which I consider the arbiter, didn't always agree, and called some of them 2007, but if they were on a 2008 list, and I felt like including them, here they are).


My Top Movies of 2008:
Walk Hard  (Great and respectful parody of Ray, Walk the Line, The Doors, and others.  I really enjoy John C. Reilly.)
Synecdoche, New York  (Oh man, someone see it!)
Rachel Getting Married  (Our Ann, and my Bill Irwin and Anna Deveare Smith AND it's set in a wonderful Connecticut house)
You Don't Mess with the Zohan  (I have a weakness for the more mature Adam Sandler, alright?)
Miss Pettigrew Lives for a Day  (Frances McDormand steps in lucky shit.)

Movies I enjoyed, but wouldn't call top:
Get Smart  (I also have a fondness for Steve Carell, and in fact had an erotic dream about him recently.)
Baby Mama  (Especially liked Amy Poehler.  Tina Fey's character was a little too annoying.)
Hancock  (I also have a fondness for Jason Bateman.  Hey, you're learning all kinds of personal things about me.)

Bottom:
The Dark Knight  (Don't hate me.  I never would have seen it if it weren't for you know.)
Burn After Reading  (Liked the first four fifths quite a lot, but was so annoyed by the last fifth, that it puts it on this list.)
Sex and the City  (All the predictable fatuous vapidity of the TV show, with none of the wit or insightful social commentary or true pathos.  And I saw every episode of all six seasons, so I feel confident of what I'm saying.  Why did they think we'd care more about the size and contents of Carrie's closet than about how their actual lives were going?  And the big joke of the movie was Samantha actually has diarrhea on a fabulous tropical vacation, while we and the other three "girls" watch.  Um, hunh?)
Vantage Point  (Great premise, could have used better writers to actually tighten up the weak plot points.)
Horton Hears a Who!  (Insulted homeschoolers, of which I am one.  I have to admit I fell asleep during it, so did miss a good bit.)


Ones I still want to see, roughly in order of desire:
Frost/Nixon  (I admire Ron Howard.)
Milk  (Because it's Harvey Milk, and Sean Penn playing him with love.)
The Women  (I LOVED the Clare Booth Luce original.  And it has Carrie Fisher and Cloris Leachman, two of the smartest.)
Wendy and Lucy  (You know why.  Plus it's in my beautiful southern neighbor, Oregon.)
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button  (Sounds intriguing, and I want to hear Brad Pitt's accent.)
CSNY  (I have Crosby, Stills, Nash and Young in my cells.)
Trumbo  (About Dalton Trumbo, blacklisted writer of "Johnny Got His Gun," and other powerful stories.)
Chicago 10  (Should make this a double feature with CSNY.)
Pineapple Express  (Judd Apatow and Seth Rogen.)
Zack and Miri Make a Porno  (What can I say?)
Step Brothers  (More what can I say?)
Battle in Seattle  (The revolution will be movie-ized.)
The Business of Being Born  (Because I'm a proponent of respectful birth.)
The Secret Life of Bees  (I think I read the book and liked it.)
Then She Found Me  (Did read the book and liked it a lot.  Also Helen Hunt's directing debut.)
Humboldt County  (For someone who hasn't smoked marijuana since 1987, I sure enjoy it in movies sometimes.)
Tropic Thunder  (I dunno.)
In Bruges  (I hear it's good.)
Where the Wild Things Are  (Michelle Williams and Maurice Sendak.  Though can it compare to the Carole King version?)
Be Kind Rewind  (Okay, I like Jack Black too.  Now you know how unbelievably low brow I am.)






Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on December 29, 2008, 08:47:20 am
Here's the Golden Globe nominees for 2008:

The Curious Case Of Benjamin Button
- saw, liked, should be on the list.

Frost/Nixon - like I said, I'm ambivalent. Ron Howard is the director. I guess that's why it is on the list.

The Reader - doesn't open til 2009 so it won't be on my 2008 list. Looks good from the preview.

Revolutionary Road - also doesn't open until 2009 so it won't be on my 2008 list. Another one I have mixed feelings about. Early reviews say it is incredibly depressing.

Slumdog Millionaire - saw, liked, should be on the list.

Personally, I think I would substitute Milk for Frost/Nixon, if only because they are recreations of actual events, so it is sort of an eye-for-an-eye swap.

I saw the preview for The Wrestler and I can see why everyone is raving about Mickey Rourke's performance, just from 2 minutes of film.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on December 29, 2008, 10:11:36 am
So interesting to read people's lists.  I don't think I saw enough films to merit a list.

I did see Doubt yesterday (mostly because the times for Slumdog Millionnaire were inconvenient).

Doubt has some wonderful performances, and much nostalgia for one who went to Catholic school, but it didn't work for me as a film.  I could see how it would be effective on the stage, however.  I liked the individual performances, but I thought the film lacked a necessary tension.  My theory is that the playwright, John Patrick Shanley, who wrote the screenplay and directed, was too close to the material.  I wonder how it would have been with a different director, or writer. 

Meryl Streep is still The Goddess!  She does wonders with limited material, suggesting a very complicated character that I wanted to know more about. 

Viola Adams was very effective in a small but important role.  I had a hard time separating Amy Adams from her "Enchanted" character, sorry.

***mini spoiler***









Philip Seymour Hoffman has a tougher part to portray--the ambiguity of the situation.  The audience relies on his performance to make up their minds.
Reportedly, Shanley secretly tells the actors playing Father Flynn whether he thinks the character is guilty or not, but no one else knows.  (IMDb)

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on December 29, 2008, 10:14:33 am
BTW, I saw the trailer for Revolutionary Road and it looks just awful to me.  But then again, I am not a Leo fan, and I'm one of those few people who hated Titanic , thus not interested in a rematch of him and Kate.

I did recognize David Harbour (our Randall); however, not enough for me to want to see this. 
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on December 29, 2008, 11:33:30 am
This is kind of scary. I went through the whole IMDb list and only saw a few movies I completely liked: In Bruge, Slumdog Millionaire, Dark Knight. Was it an off year or did I just not get out enough?

Here are some movies I can say I pretty unequivocally liked, though not loved:

Quantum of Solace
Forgetting Sarah Marshall
Get Smart
Definitely, Maybe
Baby Mama
Leatherheads
Smart People


Here are some movies with some good qualities, but too flawed or unexceptional to make my "liked" list:

Iron Man -- Robert Downey Jr. is great, but too implausible
Hancock -- loved Will Smith and the basic concept, but hated it once his connection with Charlize Theron was revealed
Vantage Point -- what Clarissa said
Bank Job, The -- it it's the one I kind of half remember, it was standard medium-entertaining thriller
Mamma Mia! -- while watching I kept thinking how stupid it was, but then found myself humming the songs for days after
Role Models -- a bit too juvenile, but funny and cute in parts
Tropic Thunder -- funny at times, but too violent
Fool's Gold -- complete fluff, but Matthew McConaughey and Kate Hudson both look great



And here are the ones I found disappointing:

Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull -- Zzzzzzzzz ....
WALL·E -- this did not grab me the way it apparently did everyone else
Burn After Reading -- don't get me started
Pineapple Express -- like Tropic Thunder, it starts out funny but gets way too violent





 
 
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on December 29, 2008, 01:28:19 pm
BTW, I saw the trailer for Revolutionary Road and it looks just awful to me.  But then again, I am not a Leo fan, and I'm one of those few people who hated Titanic , thus not interested in a rematch of him and Kate.

I did recognize David Harbour (our Randall); however, not enough for me to want to see this. 

A co-worker was just blown away by REVOLUTIONARY ROAD, he thought it was excellent.  But then again, the guy rated BENJAMIN BUTTON a 5 out of 10 and said that FORREST GUMP is a great movie.  ;)

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on December 29, 2008, 02:30:52 pm
I saw Frost/Nixon last week and thought it was excellent, a class act from Ron Howard and the two lead actors.  I saw the same actors on Broadway in the play, and it was nice to see them close up because they have incredibly expressive eyes.

I think Ron Howard managed to achieve a mounting tension and a credible climactic moment, which couldn't have been easy in a story that was basically about a few TV interviews.  Both Frank Langella and Michael Sheen each deserve to be nominationed for an Oscar, but probably only Langella will get one.  The art direction was great---lots of 70's clothes and hairstyles that hit the mark, and I think they filmed the San Clemente scenes on the actual location.  The showing I went to was packed, and there was hardly a peep out of the audience, some of whom applauded at the end.  Highly recommended.

As far as I can tell, I didn't see more than 5 or so 2008 movies in the theater all year:  Frost/Nixon, Quantum of Solace, TDK, Milk, and Vicki Cristina Barcelona.  Earlier in the year I saw Enchanted and There Will Be Blood.  IMO both Frost/Nixon and Milk should be in the top 5 movies of the year.

Hopefully I'll get to see Benjamin Button, Slumdog and Doubt soon.  Gotta get up off my pockets.  :)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on December 29, 2008, 03:13:31 pm
Earlier in the year I saw Enchanted and There Will Be Blood. 

Now, there are two movies I really liked. In fact, I might say I enjoyed Enchanted as much as anything I saw this year (I didn't count it in my list because I think it's from a previous year). It maybe wasn't the best -- There Will Be Blood is undoubtedly higher-caliber art -- but I enjoyed it a lot. That scene where she's dancing and singing through Central Park and it turns into a giant production number? I watched that over and over.

I must secretly be an 11-year-old girl.  ::)



Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on December 29, 2008, 04:17:37 pm
Now, there are two movies I really liked. In fact, I might say I enjoyed Enchanted as much as anything I saw this year (I didn't count it in my list because I think it's from a previous year). It maybe wasn't the best -- There Will Be Blood is undoubtedly higher-caliber art -- but I enjoyed it a lot. That scene where she's dancing and singing through Central Park and it turns into a giant production number? I watched that over and over.

I must secretly be an 11-year-old girl.  ::)

I had a really good time at Enchanted, too, Katherine.  There were tons of clever jokes, mostly visual, that New Yorkers would get a big kick out of.  The ending got a bit overmuch for me, but overall I thought it was great.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on December 29, 2008, 09:40:56 pm
My opinion? Because in many ways -- setting aside racism, sexism, homophobia, gray-flannel-suitism -- the '50s was a more adult era.

These days, we worship the young, whether children or young adults. Older people strive to appear more youthful, in appearance, behavior and cultural tastes. 21-year-olds are huge stars, full of wisdom and insight; 40-year-olds are washed up geezers, hopelessly clueless. The movies reflect these attitudes.

Well said.  I'll go along with this, seeing as Miley Cyrus has been signed up to write her 'autobiography' and her latest CD has songs about the pain of love and loss.

This was right before her 16th birthday.   ::)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on December 29, 2008, 10:02:01 pm
I would not say the film itself is flawless. There were points at which I could cavil,  and there were omissions. But I thought the movie was brilliant. What a love letter to the City of New Orleans itself. And the mood, the pacing--amazingly beautiful. Have you ever seen a movie with this length--and you had wished it had been a half-hour, even an hour longer??


I followed your edict to "Go. Now." And I enjoyed it immensely! I'm wondering (no spoilers here I hope) whether one of your cavils was the practice of using the diary to move the story forward. Every time the screen switched to Julia Ormond, I was tempted to step out of the theater for a minute or two! I also loved Tilda Swinton!! How dare they call her "plain"!!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Aloysius J. Gleek on December 30, 2008, 01:23:49 am

I'm wondering (no spoilers here I hope) whether one of your cavils was the practice of using the diary to move the story forward. Every time the screen switched to Julia Ormond, I was tempted to step out of the theater for a minute or two!



Exactly. The "framing" seemed necessary, yet--not. Might not have been J. Ormond's fault--maybe the editing or the writing. Also--we know what was really going on in the hospitals in New Orleans during Katrina--yet in this film, it seemed like a heavy rain storm. Major cavil! But I love this film.


I also loved Tilda Swinton!! How dare they call her "plain"!!



Tilda Swinton is not plain--she is a Space Alien! (But a gorgeous Space Alien...)

Just joking. She is plain gorgeous. The Russian episode is one of my favorite parts.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Ellemeno on December 30, 2008, 02:19:52 am
I love this thread.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Aloysius J. Gleek on December 30, 2008, 10:24:21 am


Look what one of my New Orleanian friends sent me--Benjamin Button's nursing home--the real one--is for sale. Nice house!
 
(The fourth photo shows the back stair, where the wizened infant Benjamin was found, and where the beautiful Benjamin meets Daisy after she returns from Paris.)

http://www.noro.com/dorian_bennett_property_detail.cfm?Property_ID=631 (http://www.noro.com/dorian_bennett_property_detail.cfm?Property_ID=631) 

Property Type: Residential
Listing Address: 2707 Coliseum St.
New Orleans LA 70130
Listed by: Dorian M. Bennett http://www.noro.com/dorian_bennett_real_estate_agents.cfm?Searched=1&Agent_ID=7 (http://www.noro.com/dorian_bennett_real_estate_agents.cfm?Searched=1&Agent_ID=7)

7,800 Sq. Ft Garden District Mansion!
$2,850,000

Approx. 7,851 Square Feet * 6 Bedrooms * 6 Bathrooms * Parking * Central Air & Heat * Huge Lot * Library * Music Room * Reception Hall
 
7,800 sq. ft. Garden District mansion w/incredible Victorian details. Music room, library, reception hall, 6 bedrooms & much more


(http://www.noro.com/prop_imgs/631.1.JPG)


(http://www.noro.com/prop_imgs/631.2.JPG)


(http://www.noro.com/slide_imgs/631.34.jpg)


(http://www.noro.com/slide_imgs/631.31.jpg)


(http://www.noro.com/slide_imgs/631.3.jpg)


(http://www.noro.com/slide_imgs/631.12.jpg)


(http://www.noro.com/slide_imgs/631.5.jpg)


(http://www.noro.com/slide_imgs/631.4.jpg)


(http://www.noro.com/slide_imgs/631.11.jpg)


(http://www.noro.com/slide_imgs/631.7.jpg)


(http://www.noro.com/slide_imgs/631.6.jpg)


(http://www.noro.com/slide_imgs/631.8.jpg)


(http://www.noro.com/slide_imgs/631.9.jpg)


(http://www.noro.com/slide_imgs/631.21.jpg)


(http://www.noro.com/slide_imgs/631.25.jpg)


(http://www.noro.com/slide_imgs/631.27.jpg)


(http://www.noro.com/slide_imgs/631.33.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on December 30, 2008, 10:35:27 am
Has anyone seen "Marley & Me" yet?  I'm thinking about seeing it on Saturday.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on December 30, 2008, 12:01:19 pm


Exactly. The "framing" seemed necessary, yet--not. Might not have been J. Ormond's fault--maybe the editing or the writing. Also--we know what was really going on in the hospitals in New Orleans during Katrina--yet in this film, it seemed like a heavy rain storm. Major cavil! But I love this film.

We learned through Brokeback Mountain that it is not necessary to reference contemporary events in order to give the flavor of the times. Thus, the Katrina mentioned seemed superfluous. In fact, anything other than Benjamin Button's beautiful face seemed superfluous sometimes to me...except for Tilda Swinson, that is!! Actually, I liked all the actors, Cate, Jared Harris as Captain Mike, etc.


Just joking. She is plain gorgeous. The Russian episode is one of my favorite parts.

Ever since I saw Tilda in Orlando, I've been a big fan. I try to watch Orlando every New Year's!!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on December 30, 2008, 12:07:05 pm
Those photos make me homesick for N.O. Thanks for posting them, John.

$2.8 million really doesn't seem like a lot for that house. Real estate prices must be pretty low there.


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on December 30, 2008, 12:16:16 pm
[...]
Ever since I saw Tilda in Orlando, I've been a big fan. I try to watch Orlando every New Year's!!

I loved ORLANDO and that's when I became a fan of hers as well.  I knew her from the films of Derek Jarman before that, but ORLANDO sealed the deal.  Did you see her in LOVE IS THE DEVIL?  She is unrecognizable as Muriel Belcher, one of Francis Bacon's drinkling buddies.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on December 30, 2008, 02:42:44 pm
Yeah we saw it.  Go rested, and if you are prone to tears over pet stories, bring a hanky.  Pretty good movie.

Ever since a fairly recent hormonal shift, I'm pretty much prone to tears 24/7.  So I will have some travel Kleenex in my purse.

I'm actually looking forward to Marley making my two new doggies look exceptionally good in comparison!  And to the fact that John Grogan lived in Boca Raton and West Palm Beach when he wrote for the Sun-Sentinel and had Marley, and I understand the movie was filmed mostly in Miami but has a couple of local shots mixed in.  I also understand it takes a couple of pretty good shots at "Boca Bitches" which I look forward to giggling at.  I've not read the book, but I did very much enjoy Grogan's columns about fatherhood and dog ownership in my early years down here.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: HerrKaiser on December 30, 2008, 05:37:02 pm

No one wanted to see Valkyrie. Poor Tom Cruise, I think his day has passed.


While the film opened with mixed reviews, it came in a surprising 4th place for Christmas weekend box office sales...a very good showing. And Tom Cruise, imo, remains huge box office and has much more left in his stellar career.

I thought Valkyrie was quite good. It was well paced, extremely intense and nerve-racking; in spite of my having read two bios on von Stauffenberg and knew the story quite well, the director had me on edge the full 2 hours.

Casting was overall superb. Cruise looked strikingly similar to von Stauffenberg, and his performance was a B+, imo; he came across very well. His stiffness was completely in character with von Stauffenberg.

Unlike most 'historical' films, it did not suffer the typical Hollywoodization by signifcantly altering historical fact, which was a pleasure. There was some obvious scripting that had to have been infused by the writers' imaginations, but overall, the history was solid.

The two areas that could have been better were the portrayal of Hitler as a munchin like creature, silent and brooding, slow and seemingly 'not all there'. This was inaccurate; while it did not majorly distract from the core film, it would have been better, imo, to portray Hitler as the strong and powerful and intense persona he was, and his being assassinated would have seemed all the more intriguing.

The other part that was under represented was the executions at the end. Hitler and his gang brutally murdered the conspirators and the killings were bloody, torturous and horrendous scenes of mayhem which did not get shown.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on December 31, 2008, 02:05:46 am
I was reminded tonight of another movie I really enjoyed in 2008, though I think it was released in 2007: Charlie Wilson's War. I've seen it twice and would love to see it again sometime. I'm baffled that it didn't win any big awards.


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on December 31, 2008, 02:14:03 am
I loved ORLANDO and that's when I became a fan of hers as well.  I knew her from the films of Derek Jarman before that, but ORLANDO sealed the deal.  Did you see her in LOVE IS THE DEVIL?  She is unrecognizable as Muriel Belcher, one of Francis Bacon's drinkling buddies.

Friend, you never cease to amaze me! No, I haven't seen Love is the Devil, but it has zoomed to the top of my must-see list!! Did you think Lord Orlando was credible as a man? I still think you must be some bigwig in the Toronto Film Festival!!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on December 31, 2008, 01:03:41 pm
Friend, you never cease to amaze me! No, I haven't seen Love is the Devil, but it has zoomed to the top of my must-see list!! Did you think Lord Orlando was credible as a man? I still think you must be some bigwig in the Toronto Film Festival!!


 :laugh:  No, I'm afraid not a bigwig in anything, lol!   In fact my attendance at the TIFF has been reduced to seeing just one or two films.  I used to buy the pass and sit through 3 or 4 films a day for 10 days but it became to much after a while.

Anyway, another reason to watch LOVE ISTHE DEVIL:  Study for a Portrait of Francis Bacon is Daniel Craig's famous (& lingering) full frontal in the bathtub scene.  He plays George Dyer, Bacon's rough-trade lover.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on December 31, 2008, 02:33:03 pm
Anyway, another reason to watch LOVE ISTHE DEVIL:  Study for a Portrait of Francis Bacon is Daniel Craig's famous (& lingering) full frontal in the bathtub scene.  He plays George Dyer, Bacon's rough-trade lover.

To quote Terri Garr: "Woooff!!" I don't think I've seen a full frontal (in the movies  8)) since Richard Gere in Breathless! Of course, there was Mark Wahlberg in Boogie Nights, but that was just too freaky to enjoy! 

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on December 31, 2008, 02:45:42 pm
To quote Terri Garr: "Woooff!!" I don't think I've seen a full frontal (in the movies  8)) since Richard Gere in Breathless! Of course, there was Mark Wahlberg in Boogie Nights, but that was just too freaky to enjoy! 



Very, very, very briefly: Dennis Quaid in The Big Easy. "Watch out for the gator, baby!"
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on December 31, 2008, 03:19:27 pm
Ooh!  You all just reminded me (strangely enough) that I ought to watch "Holiday" tonight.  I can play a drinking game with myself of taking a swig every time Katharine Hepburn's alcoholic brother speaks.  It'll be fun!

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Aloysius J. Gleek on December 31, 2008, 07:11:59 pm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triptych,_May-June_1973 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triptych,_May-June_1973)

Triptych, May–June 1973
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/ab/Triptych_May-June%2C_1973.jpg)

Triptych, May–June 1973 is a triptych completed in 1973 by the Irish-born artist Francis Bacon (1909–1992). The oil-on-canvas work was painted in memory of Bacon's lover George Dyer, who committed suicide on the eve of the artist's retrospective at Paris's Grand Palais in October 1971. The triptych is a portrait of the moments before Dyer's death.[1] Bacon was preoccupied by Dyer's suicide in his last twenty years,[2] during which time he painted a number of similarly themed works. He admitted to friends that he never fully recovered from the event, and described painting the triptych as an exorcism of his feelings of loss and guilt.[3]

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/48/Study_for_the_Head_of_George_Dyer.jpg)(http://www.zonezero.com/editorial/enero07/images/02.jpg)(http://gala.univ-perp.fr/~dgirard/Exposes/francisbacon/francisbacon04.jpg)


Biographical context

Francis Bacon's relationships prior to Dyer had all been with older men who were as tumultuous in temperament as the artist himself, but each had been the dominating presence. Peter Lacy, his first lover, would often tear up the young artist's paintings, beat him up in drunken rages, and leave him on the street half-conscious.[7] Bacon met George Dyer in 1964 when, he claimed, he caught the young man breaking into his home.[8] Dyer was then about thirty years old and had grown up in the East End of London in a family steeped in crime. He had spent his life drifting between theft, juvenile detention center, and jail. Typical of Bacon's taste in men; Dyer was not an intellectual, but fit and masculine.

Bacon was attracted to Dyer's vulnerability and trusting nature. Dyer was impressed by Bacon's self-confidence and his artistic success, and Bacon acted as a protector and father figure to the insecure younger man.[9] Dyer was, like Bacon, a borderline alcoholic and similarly took obsessive care with his appearance. Pale-faced and a chain-smoker, Dyer typically confronted his daily hangovers by drinking again. His docile and inwardly tortured personality belied a compact and athletic build; the art critic Michael Peppiatt described him as having the air of a man who could "land a decisive punch". Their behaviours eventually overwhelmed their affair, and by 1970, Bacon was merely providing Dyer with enough money to stay more or less permanently drunk.[9]

(....)

In October 1971, Dyer accompanied Bacon to Paris for the opening of the artist's retrospective at the Grand Palais. The show was the high point of Bacon's career to date, and he was now being described as Britain's "greatest living painter". Dyer was now a desperate man, and although he was "allowed" to attend, he was well aware that he was "slipping", in every sense, out of the picture. To draw Bacon's attention he earlier planted cannabis in Bacon's flat, then phoned the police,[14] and he had attempted suicide on a number of occasions.[15] On the eve of the Paris exhibition, Bacon and Dyer shared a hotel room, and Bacon spent the next day surrounded by people eager to meet him. In mid-evening he was informed that Dyer had taken an overdose of barbiturates and was dead. Though devastated, Bacon continued with the retrospective and displayed powers of self-control "to which few of us could aspire", according to Russell.[2] Bacon was deeply affected by the loss of Dyer, and he had recently lost four other friends and his nanny. From this point on, death haunted his life and work.[16] Though he gave a stoic appearance at the time, he was inwardly broken. He did not express his feelings to critics, but later admitted to friends that "daemons, disaster and loss" now stalked him as if his own version of the Eumenides.[17] Bacon spent the remainder of his stay in Paris attending to promotional activities and funeral arrangements. He returned to London later that week to comfort Dyer's family. The funeral proved to be an emotional affair for all, and many of Dyer's friends, including hardened East-End criminals, broke down in tears. As the coffin was lowered into the grave one attendant screamed "you bloody fool!". Although Bacon remained stoic throughout, in the following months Dyer preoccupied his imagination as never before. To confront his loss, he painted a number of tributes on small canvasses and his three "Black Triptych" masterpieces.[18]

(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51VK8YX4G9L._SS500_.jpg)
(http://www.filmdope.com/Gallery/ActorsJ/8597-24079.gif)(http://www.filmdope.com/Gallery/ActorsC/23388-24079.gif)
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v492/coconutsodas/Hotness/007/DC3.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on December 31, 2008, 07:22:57 pm
That is very powerful and sobering, friend. The panel on the left reminds me of Ennis in the alley.

The message loud and clear to me is that we must pay attention to and help our friends when they are emotionally dying or sooner or later they will be physically dead.

 :'(

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on December 31, 2008, 07:47:56 pm
While the film opened with mixed reviews, it came in a surprising 4th place for Christmas weekend box office sales...a very good showing. And Tom Cruise, imo, remains huge box office and has much more left in his stellar career.

I thought Valkyrie was quite good. It was well paced, extremely intense and nerve-racking; in spite of my having read two bios on von Stauffenberg and knew the story quite well, the director had me on edge the full 2 hours.

Casting was overall superb. Cruise looked strikingly similar to von Stauffenberg, and his performance was a B+, imo; he came across very well. His stiffness was completely in character with von Stauffenberg.

Unlike most 'historical' films, it did not suffer the typical Hollywoodization by signifcantly altering historical fact, which was a pleasure. There was some obvious scripting that had to have been infused by the writers' imaginations, but overall, the history was solid.

The two areas that could have been better were the portrayal of Hitler as a munchin like creature, silent and brooding, slow and seemingly 'not all there'. This was inaccurate; while it did not majorly distract from the core film, it would have been better, imo, to portray Hitler as the strong and powerful and intense persona he was, and his being assassinated would have seemed all the more intriguing.

The other part that was under represented was the executions at the end. Hitler and his gang brutally murdered the conspirators and the killings were bloody, torturous and horrendous scenes of mayhem which did not get shown.

I'm going to go see it this weekend and am very much looking forward to it!!  I'm glad to read that they didn't Hollywoodize it too much.  Frankly, reality was better than any fiction that could be made up.  I'll wait to see for myself of course, but by July of 1944, Hitler was already deep into his addictions and I think Parkinson's was already taking hold, so he probably wasn't the imposing charismatic fanatic that we see in all the Nazi speech newsreels.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on January 01, 2009, 02:23:54 am
Anyway, another reason to watch LOVE ISTHE DEVIL:  Study for a Portrait of Francis Bacon is Daniel Craig's famous (& lingering) full frontal in the bathtub scene.  He plays George Dyer, Bacon's rough-trade lover.

Hmm, you just got my attention, oilgun!  ;D

BTW, this fellow is, as far as I know, alive and well.  He's a wonderful tenor whom I've directed several times---a great guy, sexy and talented.  His name is George Dyer, but that's where the connection ends.  ;)

(http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h269/merylmarie/georgedyer.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Aloysius J. Gleek on January 01, 2009, 02:41:20 am

Hmm, you just got my attention, oilgun!  ;D

BTW, this fellow is, as far as I know, alive and well.  He's a wonderful tenor whom I've directed several times---a great guy, sexy and talented.  His name is George Dyer, but that's where the connection ends.  ;)

(http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h269/merylmarie/georgedyer.jpg)

Oops! Thanks, Meryl. I have taken the tenor away!  :-X
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on January 01, 2009, 03:31:28 am
Don't take the tenor away!! I'm enjoying him!!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on January 01, 2009, 04:03:03 am
Don't take the tenor away!! I'm enjoying him!!

ENCORE!

(http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h269/merylmarie/GeorgeDyer2.jpg)

(http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h269/merylmarie/GerogeDyer3.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on January 01, 2009, 01:43:11 pm
For New Year's Eve, my friend and I could not decide where to go - she's undergoing hypnosis to quit smoking and right now she's at the phase where the scent of cigarette smoke makes her nauseous, so we were limited as to where we could go indoors.  There was the outdoor festival, but to attend such things requires the planning skills of Patton, the patience of a mother of 4 and the stamina of a skier in the lift line on a holiday - being willing to stand for 4-5 hours in 30 degree weather.

So we passed, ended up in jammies, with sparkling cider, on my couch and rented

The Duchess with Kiera Knightly - yes, Georgina Spencer's character, marriage and activities have a great many similarities with the late much lamented Princess of Wales, but unfortunately the wherewithal to press her case is not one of them.  Even looking at it from the POV of someone in 18th century, Georgina had other options she could have exercised in response to treatment by her husband, but the movie was just a lovely visual feast of her caving in and caving in, over and over and over again.  Until the point was driven home into the brain with a hammer and 10 inch nail that yes it sucks to be a woman.   Gag.  No redeeming qualities whatsoever.  No wonder this sank at the box office so quickly.

Deception with Hugh Jackman, Ewan McGregor and Michelle Williams - this was quite enjoyable.  I don't know why it didn't last at the box office.  It was a mild but still engaging tale of suspense and Jackman's character is delicious.  The final ending is a bit of a why didn't you do X, but eh, nothing's perfect.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on January 01, 2009, 02:08:48 pm
I ended up seeing "Gran Torino", Clint Eastwood's latest, last night because my friend didn't think she could handle the harshness in "Slumdog Millionaire."  I think it would have been worth dealing with that and hiding our eyes rather than seeing this turkey, though.

I expected a better film, frankly, given Clint Eastwood's track record, but I guess everybody's entitled to stumble once in awhile.  I found the story consistently contrived and the acting stiff and amateurish.  Clint Eastwood was good in his snarly "Dirty Harry" kind of way, but was pretty one-note.  It looked at times like a film school project or an after-school special to me.  The ending managed to jerk a few tears from me, but overall I can't recommend it.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Aloysius J. Gleek on January 01, 2009, 03:18:44 pm

I ended up seeing "Gran Torino", Clint Eastwood's latest, last night because my friend didn't think she could handle the harshness in "Slumdog Millionaire."  I think it would have been worth dealing with that and hiding our eyes rather than seeing this turkey, though.

"--harshness--"

Huh?? (Can your friend pick'em, or what??)

Seriously, Slumdog is going to be a GOOD FEELINGS classic. Forever. Maybe even at Christmas, even though it's in Mumbai, with Muslim and Hindu characters, but just because the film was first released in the US at Christmas.

I'm a wuss, and there is one minute when I closed my eyes (the way I would have nearly fifty years ago watching the original 101 Dalmatians, a film that actually resembles in more ways than one); ok, two minutes, three, tops. Otherwise, it makes you feel ten feet tall, ready to run all the way home, shadowboxing, and saying 'Yessss!'

That's something you have to see before the semi-bleak holiday season is over--because it make you feel good!

(Rant over! Sorry!)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on January 01, 2009, 03:24:36 pm
THE DARK KNIGHT:  My first hi-def Blu-ray experience.  Interestingly, I enjoyed the film more than when I saw it on imax,  (I think I'm too old for the imax experience :laugh:)  I could actually follow the story this time.

EUROPA:  Thank you Criterion for finally making this von Trier film available in North America.  I hadn't seen since it was released 17 years ago (!).  Although I still enjoyed it immensely, I was surprised by the atrocious acting of some of the secondary actors.  The print is gorgeous, as one would expect from a Criterion release.  Still need to watch the extras.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on January 01, 2009, 03:34:28 pm
"--harshness--"

Huh?? (Can your friend pick'em, or what??)

Seriously, Slumdog is going to be a GOOD FEELINGS classic. Forever. Maybe even at Christmas, even though it's in Mumbai, with Muslim and Hindu characters, but just because the film was first released in the US at Christmas.

I'm a wuss, and there is one minute when I closed my eyes (the way I would have nearly fifty years ago watching the original 101 Dalmatians, a film that actually resembles in more ways than one); ok, two minutes, three, tops. Otherwise, it makes you feel ten feet tall, ready to run all the way home, shadowboxing, and saying 'Yessss!'

That's something you have to see before the semi-bleak holiday season is over--because it make you feel good!

(Rant over! Sorry!)

 :D  No kidding!  Picking the "urban-get-off-my-lawn-vigilante-film" over this year's "feel-good crowd-pleaser" was definitely a misguided move.  I wasn't as charmed by Slumdog as most but it did make me feel good.  Its harshness is more Dickens than Lehane.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Aloysius J. Gleek on January 01, 2009, 06:53:05 pm

:D  No kidding!  Picking the "urban-get-off-my-lawn-vigilante-film" over this year's "feel-good crowd-pleaser" was definitely a misguided move.  I wasn't as charmed by Slumdog as most but it did make me feel good.  Its harshness is more Dickens than Lehane.

Oh my gosh, that's it! It's Dickens! And the kids--nearly all of them great natural actors--are plucky.

This movie makes me feel brave--is that a brilliantly clever fiction, or what?  :laugh:

Also, just for the aesthetic reasons alone--as nutty as it might seem, the cheerful color and the light makes it look Christmas-y to me. I'd love to hang this shiny bauble on the biggest Christmas tree.

Run, run, run before Twefth Night is over, and the dark descends again until Spring--seriously!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: BelAir on January 01, 2009, 11:45:27 pm
I don't think I saw enough 2008 movies to have a list.  Ones I can remember seeing: I'm Not There, Hancock, The Dark Knight, Quantum of Solace, Seven Pounds (anyone else see this?), Iron Man, Wall-E....  I pick I'm Not There, TDK, Seven Pounds, and Wall-E as most interesting...  (in reality, TDK wasn't that interesting, but The Joker was...  fwiw, I did find Seven Pounds and Will Smith quite compelling)

PS - Elle - erotic dream about Steve Carell, sounds very very interesting...?!?
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on January 01, 2009, 11:52:27 pm
Oh my gosh, that's it! It's Dickens! And the kids--nearly all of them great natural actors--are plucky.

This movie makes me feel brave--is that a brilliantly clever fiction, or what?  :laugh:

Also, just for the aesthetic reasons alone--as nutty as it might seem, the cheerful color and the light makes it look Christmas-y to me. I'd love to hang this shiny bauble on the biggest Christmas tree.

Run, run, run before Twefth Night is over, and the dark descends again until Spring--seriously!

I just love you to bits, Jmmgallagher!  :)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on January 02, 2009, 12:04:48 am
I just love you to bits, Jmmgallagher!  :)


Get in line friend! We've been loving him to bits since March 30, 2006! And there ain't no reins on this one!!

http://bettermost.net/forum/index.php/topic,230.msg1316.html#msg1316 (http://bettermost.net/forum/index.php/topic,230.msg1316.html#msg1316)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Aloysius J. Gleek on January 02, 2009, 12:49:13 am

(Blush!)

Lee is so kind. She is FRiends with wildcats, wild horses and Buddha!

As for--

I just love you to bits, Jmmgallagher!  :)

--the word is n-u-t-s, not b-i-t-s. But, gosh, thank you!

(More on Slumdog as Christmas--remember how Diana Vreeland said that "--(the color) pink is the navy blue of India;" well, now I think it's the fir cones-and-eggnog of India.

Or something.

(N-u-t-s. I told you.)

xxx
John

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on January 02, 2009, 01:21:43 am
To quote Terri Garr: "Woooff!!" I don't think I've seen a full frontal (in the movies  8)) since Richard Gere in Breathless!

Maybe you should rent Walk Hard: The Dewey Cox Story with its long, lingering close-up of full-frontal male nudity. That'll tide you over for a while. But be forewarned, it's not exactly Richard-Gere-in-Breathless material -- to say the least!  :laugh:


"--harshness--"

Huh?? (Can your friend pick'em, or what??)

Seriously, Slumdog is going to be a GOOD FEELINGS classic. Forever. Maybe even at Christmas, even though it's in Mumbai, with Muslim and Hindu characters, but just because the film was first released in the US at Christmas.

I'm a wuss, and there is one minute when I closed my eyes (the way I would have nearly fifty years ago watching the original 101 Dalmatians, a film that actually resembles in more ways than one); ok, two minutes, three, tops. Otherwise, it makes you feel ten feet tall, ready to run all the way home, shadowboxing, and saying 'Yessss!'

For me, there were about half a dozen moments of harshness (though I think I know the one you mean), and a few of disgustingness. But without those, it would be almost too syrupy! Frankly, it needs those bits of harshness to ground it.

The harshness isn't graphic, and although some of those harsh moments are bleak if you think of the real life implications, the overall effect of the movie is, as you say, the opposite of depressing.


Not like the year when my mom and brother were planning to rent Leaving Las Vegas on Christmas Eve. I had to step in and forbid it! They would have ruined Christmas. LLV left me depressed for days.


Disappointing about Gran Torino, though. That was one of many I was looking forward to.


In other news, I finally saw The Notebook last night. Fluffy but very romantic -- it appealed to my inner 16-year-old girl. Ryan Gosling was great as always, even in something sappy, and lookin good. He should never have gotten that nose job.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 02, 2009, 09:44:57 am
Meryl, go see Slumdog. What oilgun, John and Katherine said, I second, and third. You definitely need to see it.

There's a new chick flick coming out with Dustin Hoffman and... somebody? They say Dustin is as cute as he was in The Graduate. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem to have opened yet so I can't put that on the agenda for today. Darn!

My other choices: Doubt - not interested; Marley & Me - I don't do dog movies; Valkyrie - I've expressed my opinion on this one (!); Seven Pounds - I don't really know anything about this one, but Will Smith usually leaves me flat.

Maybe I'll go see Milk again. I am in the mood for a movie.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Aloysius J. Gleek on January 02, 2009, 12:03:00 pm

There's a new chick flick coming out with Dustin Hoffman and... somebody? They say Dustin is as cute as he was in The Graduate. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem to have opened yet so I can't put that on the agenda for today. Darn!

 ;D

*Dustin Hoffman and... somebody?                     (2:29)
[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kUTyyhDJQX0[/youtube]


*Possible spoiler: This is a legitimate trailer, but trailers can sometimes be a little--didactic. Fair warning before you click and watch--this 2:29 trailer has a beginning, a middle and an ending--everything but the full credits crawl as you look for your left mitten under the seat!

(Non-spoiler: turn down the sound, no plot points are revealed and London looks great! After a walk along the revitalized South Bank and across the Hungerford Bridge, Dustin and Emma sit in the central courtyard of Somerset House (at 2:15)--that's where a few Brokies saw an outdoor screening of Brokeback Mountain this Summer! Very nice!)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on January 02, 2009, 01:23:28 pm
Yes, Last Chance Harvey, with Emma Thompson. Cute Dustin? Oh I suppose in a kind of a lost puppy type of way. If you like the idea of Dustin in a grey crewcut. If you're looking for cute Dustin, I suggest Little Big Man, especially the sight of a naked Dustin going around the teepee from Indian maiden to Indian maiden! Now, that's cute! Also cute is the gay Indian couple...excuse me, the same-sex Native American partners. Or whatever. Anyway, it's something worth renting and better than Dances With Wolves IMHO.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 02, 2009, 01:38:16 pm
Yes, Last Chance Harvey, with Emma Thompson. Cute Dustin? Oh I suppose in a kind of a lost puppy type of way. If you like the idea of Dustin in a grey crewcut. If you're looking for cute Dustin, I suggest Little Big Man, especially the sight of a naked Dustin going around the teepee from Indian maiden to Indian maiden! Now, that's cute! Also cute is the gay Indian couple...excuse me, the same-sex Native American partners. Or whatever. Anyway, it's something worth renting and better than Dances With Wolves IMHO.

Oh, I saw Little Big Man back in the day...in the theater. Might be worth a re-watch, though. I'll definitely be seeing Last Chance Harvey, when it opens.

Meanwhile, here's a little New Year's Treat for all of you. Fantastic animation! I am going to post it on the book thread, too.

http://vimeo.com/2295261?pg=embed&sec=2295261
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on January 02, 2009, 01:45:09 pm
Meanwhile, here's a little New Year's Treat for all of you. Fantastic animation! I am going to post it on the book thread, too.

http://vimeo.com/2295261?pg=embed&sec=2295261

Very clever and pretty, Leslie, thanks.  I hope that town has a good Fire Department.  ;D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on January 02, 2009, 05:28:32 pm
I just got back from seeing THE WRESTLER and I really, really enjoyed it.  It's an excellent film and I think Mickey Rourke will be the one to beat at the oscars. 

Some trivia: 
Apparently, Rourke and Bruce Springsteen, who sings the song that plays over the closing credits, worked pro-bono on the project.
Originally, sad sack Nicholas Cage was set to play the lead. (but I guess he wanted to get payed  :laugh:  ;) )

! ! ! ! ! !

My Top Ten Favourite Films of the Year, so far, in alphabetical order, and of course, subject to change:

The Band's Visit
Chansons d'amour (Love Songs)
Cloverfield
Un conte de Noël (A Christmas Tale)
The Edge of Heaven
Funny Games
JCVD
Milk
Paranoid Park
The Wrestler


Honorable mentions:  The Dark Knight, In Bruges, Slumdog Millionnaire

My Bottom: Wanted

I still have to see:

Curious Case of Benjamin Button - Maybe it was all the Forrest Gump references from people who saw the film that make this one feel like homework.
Doubt
Frost/Nixon
Happy-go-Lucky
Wall-E
Waltz with Bashir
Wendy & Lucy



Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on January 02, 2009, 07:19:17 pm
Hi oilgun! Can you tell me what you liked about The Band's Visit? Another friend of mine said she liked it, too, but I can't remember why. I rented it and fell asleep about 20 minutes into it and was not exactly chomping at the bit to go back to it. But I trust your endorsements! JCVD is on my must-see list entirely because of you.



Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on January 02, 2009, 08:16:06 pm
Hi oilgun! Can you tell me what you liked about The Band's Visit? Another friend of mine said she liked it, too, but I can't remember why. I rented it and fell asleep about 20 minutes into it and was not exactly chomping at the bit to go back to it. But I trust your endorsements! JCVD is on my must-see list entirely because of you.



The Band's Visit.  I really liked how the director managed to pull off a delicate balance of sweetness & melancholy without getting sentimental.   Plus, it 's just gorgeous to look at with some amazingly well composed shots.

Here's a quote that perfectly expresses why I liked the film: "The Band's Visit has many graces you might not expect to find in a film from a first-time director: A meticulous sense of timing, a gift for small-scale naturalism, a dry sense of humor, a warm sense of humanity. "  (from James Rocchi's review at http://www.cinematical.com/2007/09/07/tiff-review-the-bands-visit/ (http://www.cinematical.com/2007/09/07/tiff-review-the-bands-visit/))
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: pnwDUDE on January 05, 2009, 12:14:06 am
Don't know if this movie has been discussed. Steve and I got it on Netflix. Worth the rent. It is outstanding:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1212408/

Brad
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Ellemeno on January 05, 2009, 04:20:45 am
Surfwise
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Aloysius J. Gleek on January 05, 2009, 10:05:59 am



Surfwise - Trailer #1                                                     (2:40)
[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rLrx_QSd44E[/youtube]


Surfwise - Trailer #2                                                     (2:52)
[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KN7s36Ht22o[/youtube]
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Aloysius J. Gleek on January 05, 2009, 10:12:30 am



Dog Tags Trailer                                                              (1:22)
[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HcI6Gb2I9P4[/youtube]
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on January 05, 2009, 11:15:14 am
WE OWN THE NIGHT - Joaquin Phoenix, Mark Walberg, Robert Duvall, Eva Mendez
Dreadful film. Obvious & predictable storyline with some embarrassingly bad dialogue.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: BelAir on January 05, 2009, 09:08:40 pm
WE OWN THE NIGHT - Joaquin Phoenix, Mark Walberg, Robert Duvall, Eva Mendez
Dreadful film. Obvious & predictable storyline with some embarrassingly bad dialogue.

oh, I just saved this on to my DVR to watch....

is it at least pleasant to look at any of the aforementioned actors?

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on January 06, 2009, 12:15:58 am
I just got back from seeing THE WRESTLER and I really, really enjoyed it.  It's an excellent film and I think Mickey Rourke will be the one to beat at the oscars. 

Some trivia: 
Apparently, Rourke and Bruce Springsteen, who sings the song that plays over the closing credits, worked pro-bono on the project.
Originally, sad sack Nicholas Cage was set to play the lead. (but I guess he wanted to get payed  :laugh:  ;) )

I'm excited about seeing this tomorrow nite!! So glad it's not Nicholas Cage...if it were, I'd pass!!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on January 06, 2009, 10:12:07 am
I like Nicolas Cage OK, but to me Mickey Rourke's kind of disturbing visage and backstory enhance the power of the movie (judging from the trailer).

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on January 06, 2009, 12:53:42 pm
oh, I just saved this on to my DVR to watch....

is it at least pleasant to look at any of the aforementioned actors?



I was kind of harsh wasn't I.  The movie starts off pretty good. a kind of cross between Eastern Promises and The Departed.  Joaquin is pretty good in it and he has a couple of steamy scenes with Eva, who is gorgeous.  For me the story fell apart at around the mid-point, something happened that completely took me out of the movie and I didn't manage to get back in, but I can't blame the actors, they did their best.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on January 06, 2009, 12:56:34 pm
I'm excited about seeing this tomorrow nite!! So glad it's not Nicholas Cage...if it were, I'd pass!!


You and me both, lol!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on January 10, 2009, 04:23:42 pm
Finally saw the movie Valkyrie, for those of you who can stomach Tom Cruise, it was a very good movie and I do recommend it.  The Brits tone down their accents, so next to no actor has a 'German' accent.  The acting is flawless, the story tight and pacing swift - this isn't a 3 hour historical epic - and the director did such a good job of telling the story that even I was convinced at one point that they actually had a chance.  But we all know how it ends and you're left wondering what might have been.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on January 10, 2009, 09:44:22 pm
Finally saw the movie Valkyrie, for those of you who can stomach Tom Cruise, it was a very good movie and I do recommend it.  The Brits tone down their accents, so next to no actor has a 'German' accent.  The acting is flawless, the story tight and pacing swift - this isn't a 3 hour historical epic - and the director did such a good job of telling the story that even I was convinced at one point that they actually had a chance.  But we all know how it ends and you're left wondering what might have been.

I just got back from Valkyrie myself. I wasn't quite as enthusiastic as you, Del, but I liked it well enough. It seemed slow for a while, and then the end was pretty bleak. (Spoiler alert -- they did not succeed in killing Hitler.) But it was very suspenseful in parts.

I myself have no trouble stomaching Tom Cruise, except in real life. And there were some other interesting actors in it, too. I always enjoy Tom Wilkinson. And nice to see Kenneth Branagh again! What's he been doing in recent years, anyway?



Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on January 10, 2009, 10:15:55 pm
I just got back from Valkyrie myself. I wasn't quite as enthusiastic as you, Del, but I liked it well enough. It seemed slow for a while, and then the end was pretty bleak. (Spoiler alert -- they did not succeed in killing Hitler.) But it was very suspenseful in parts.

I myself have no trouble stomaching Tom Cruise, except in real life. And there were some other interesting actors in it, too. I always enjoy Tom Wilkinson. And nice to see Kenneth Branagh again! What's he been doing in recent years, anyway?

Adored the casting.  Almost every main character was someone you knew or had seen somewhere else.  The acting was just superb.  VERY nice to see Branagh again, though I hope he only gained weight for the movie.  The general in North Africa that Von Stauffenberg is talking to right before they're strafed is also very familiar, though I can't place him.  The German Army officer who was the hunk in the swimming pool, who keeps complaining about all the drills was actually a German actor - the gorgeous ship captain from the movie King Kong.  I saw him then and thought 'Wow! why don't we see more of this guy?' - actor Thomas Kretschmann.  And interestingly, an act I thought dramatic license in the movie turned out to be real:


SPOILER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! SPOILER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!













At the last when VonStauffenberg is about to be shot and his loyal lieutenant breaks free to stand in front of him to take the bullets?

True event.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Werner_von_Haeften
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on January 11, 2009, 11:37:16 am
Almost every main character was someone you knew or had seen somewhere else. 

I kept wondering who the actor was who played Olbricht. Bill Nighy. I didn't recognize him, because in the role I mainly associate him with, he had huge tentacles growing from his face, one of the Pirates of the Caribbean movies.

Quote
VERY nice to Branagh again, though I hope he only gained weight for the movie. 

He's 48, though he could pass for mid-50s. Looks slightly on the hefty side in his most recent photos on imdb. Maybe he's been busy on stage in recent years?

Quote
The German Army officer who was the hunk in the swimming pool, who keeps complaining about all the drills was actually a German actor - the gorgeous ship captain from the movie King Kong.  I saw him then and thought 'Wow! why don't we see more of this guy?' - actor Thomas Kretschmann.

I know! I thought the same. He reminds me of a younger Liam Neeson.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: BelAir on January 11, 2009, 02:18:28 pm
I had my whole day planned in order to see Milk yesterday afternoon.  Unfortunately, when I arrived at the theater, there was no longer an afternoon showing.  (I had checked the schedule Friday night, but not Saturday morning.)  So, I spent my whole afternoon shopping, for better or worse. 

 ::)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on January 11, 2009, 02:23:31 pm
I had my whole day planned in order to see Milk yesterday afternoon.  Unfortunately, when I arrived at the theater, there was no longer an afternoon showing.  (I had checked the schedule Friday night, but not Saturday morning.)  So, I spent my whole afternoon shopping, for better or worse. 

 ::)

My plan had been to see Frost/Nixon. Blame my 14-year-old companion. But it worked out for the best, because I probably wouldn't have seen Valkyrie otherwise. And I still had time to buy a new pair of silver gym shoes!

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on January 11, 2009, 02:34:51 pm
I kept wondering who the actor was who played Olbricht. Bill Nighy. I didn't recognize him, because in the role I mainly associate him with, he had huge tentacles growing from his face, one of the Pirates of the Caribbean movies.

Bill Nighy has been in everything.  He sticks out in my mind most prominently from his roles in Love Actually and Underworld.

Quote
He's 48, though he could pass for mid-50s. Looks slightly on the hefty side in his most recent photos on imdb. Maybe he's been busy on stage in recent years?

I suppose, since his last few movies bombed.

Quote
The German Army officer who was the hunk in the swimming pool, who keeps complaining about all the drills was actually a German actor - the gorgeous ship captain from the movie King Kong.  I saw him then and thought 'Wow! why don't we see more of this guy?' - actor Thomas Kretschmann.

I know! I thought the same. He reminds me of a younger Liam Neeson.

OMG Thomas K. is such a manly man.

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v728/Jovieve/kongcrop3-1.jpg)

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v728/Jovieve/Margot5-1.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kelda on January 11, 2009, 07:07:58 pm
"--harshness--"

Huh?? (Can your friend pick'em, or what??)

Seriously, Slumdog is going to be a GOOD FEELINGS classic. Forever. Maybe even at Christmas, even though it's in Mumbai, with Muslim and Hindu characters, but just because the film was first released in the US at Christmas.

I'm a wuss, and there is one minute when I closed my eyes (the way I would have nearly fifty years ago watching the original 101 Dalmatians, a film that actually resembles in more ways than one); ok, two minutes, three, tops. Otherwise, it makes you feel ten feet tall, ready to run all the way home, shadowboxing, and saying 'Yessss!'

That's something you have to see before the semi-bleak holiday season is over--because it make you feel good!

(Rant over! Sorry!)

Slumdog just came out here on Friday. So I decided to see it. I really liked it. I'm not sure I'd call it feel good cos as folk have said its quite harsh at times, but the littlest Jamal was just adorable.

I laughed so hard at the toilet/helicopter scene!

Dev Patel who played adult Jamal was very good - I wasn't sure what he'd be like as hes only been in one cult teenage programme over here called Skins" - it was basically a drugged and drink fuelled, very British version of "The OC" I guess! And he defintely wasn't stand out in that although he had some great funny scenes, hes obviously got a natural falre for the comedy.

Was nice to see some of the scams before I got to India too!

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on January 11, 2009, 07:21:48 pm
On a whim, I went to see The Reader today.  So glad I did.

I have great respect for Stephen Daldry and David Hare, who directed and wrote, respectively, The Hours

I went into the film without knowing much at all, and was pleasantly surprised. 

Not a huge Kate Winslet fan, but she's terrific in a very difficult role.  Ralph Fiennes is fine in a smaller role.  However, David Kross is incredible.  He looks so much like Charlie Hunnam.  He's actually German.  What a performance.  Lena Olin in a dual role is brilliant.  Bruno Ganz (the angel from Wings of Desire shows up).

I found it very moving and very rewarding. 

(http://cache.daylife.com/imageserve/0gGX2Ij7s5ekQ/610x.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on January 11, 2009, 09:04:39 pm
Hey, Kate W. just won a Golden Globe for The Reader!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 11, 2009, 09:06:08 pm
Hey, Kate W. just won a Golden Globe for The Reader!

I was just going to post this! You beat me!

And what on earth has Jennifer Lopez ever done to be characterized as an actress??? LOL

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 11, 2009, 09:06:46 pm
Yikes! What happened to Sting's hair? I thought he was a blonde??!!>?
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on January 11, 2009, 09:16:19 pm
I was just going to post this! You beat me!

And what on earth has Jennifer Lopez ever done to be characterized as an actress??? LOL

L

Cheers, Leslie!

Jennifer Lopez was almost an actress in Maid in Manhattan:  with Ralph Fiennes of The Reader, no less!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: BelAir on January 11, 2009, 10:17:12 pm
I was just going to post this! You beat me!

And what on earth has Jennifer Lopez ever done to be characterized as an actress??? LOL

L

come on Leslie - Serena, Gigli???

 ::)

i guess The Reader is going on my 'to see' list.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on January 11, 2009, 10:21:08 pm
Gigli? Oh, no.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 11, 2009, 10:28:56 pm
Like I said, what has Jennifer Lopez ever done to be called an actress?

Meanwhile, Jake sort of stumbled through some Benjamin Button announcement.

Heath won the best supporting actor award and Chris Nolan accepted it. Sigh....

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Aloysius J. Gleek on January 12, 2009, 01:36:43 am


Slumdog just came out here on Friday. So I decided to see it. I really liked it. I'm not sure I'd call it feel good cos as folk have said its quite harsh at times, but the littlest Jamal was just adorable.


Yes, adorable! Actually, I thought all  the kids were great, and I have a feeling that the Indian CO-director, Loveleen Tandan (love that name!) had quite a lot to do with it. But I love Danny Boyle too!

(http://cache.gettyimages.com/xc/83641014.jpg?v=1&c=ViewImages&k=2&d=17A4AD9FDB9CF193003A50471BAAE0D58F3AAAA97A236C7A5A5397277B4DC33E)
Freida Pinto as Latika, Loveleen Tandan the co-director,
and Dev Patel as Jamal Malik



http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/12/movies/awardsseason/12globe.html?hp (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/12/movies/awardsseason/12globe.html?hp)
Hollywood Finds Its Party Mood
for the Golden Globes

(http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2009/01/12/arts/12globe.6006.jpg)
Danny Boyle, third from right, won the award for best director for "Slumdog Millionaire,"
which also won best drama.




http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/01/11/golden-globes-winslet-and_n_156994.html (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/01/11/golden-globes-winslet-and_n_156994.html)
'SLUMDOG' SWEEPS
(http://images.huffingtonpost.com/gen/57684/thumbs/r-SLUMDOG-huge.jpg)

Good job!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on January 12, 2009, 03:33:09 am
I finally saw Milk. Wow. I don't know where to start, except to say I sure was glad I had an old wadded-up Kleenex in my coat pocket, since I started using it with the opening images. Sean Penn will definitely be a Best Actor nominee, perhaps the winner. He was fantastic. And everyone else was good, too.



Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on January 12, 2009, 12:48:32 pm
And what on earth has Jennifer Lopez ever done to be characterized as an actress??? LOL

Well, it was hardly Shakespeare, but I did like her performance in "Out of Sight" with George Clooney years ago.  I always thought they should make a sequel to that.  They had good chemistry.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on January 12, 2009, 01:00:41 pm
Well, it was hardly Shakespeare, but I did like her performance in "Out of Sight" with George Clooney years ago.  I always thought they should make a sequel to that.  They had good chemistry.

You have a better memory than I do, Meryl! LOL.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: BelAir on January 12, 2009, 10:35:52 pm
Gigli? Oh, no.

 ;D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on January 14, 2009, 02:17:52 am
I saw "Revolutionary Road" tonight and thought it was very, very good.  Sam Mendes has a way with suburban angst.  Kate Winslet and Leo DiCaprio were great, and even though the story dealt with problems many couples face and many movies have addressed, I never lost interest.  The inner lives of the characters were so intense, I was never quite sure what they'd do.

David Harbour (BBM's Randall) had a supporting role as a neighbor.  This resulted in a scene that was pure Brokeback.  Any Brokie who sees the movie will instantly recognize it.  ;D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kelda on January 14, 2009, 05:05:40 pm
I saw "Revolutionary Road" tonight and thought it was very, very good.  Sam Mendes has a way with suburban angst.  Kate Winslet and Leo DiCaprio were great, and even though the story dealt with problems many couples face and many movies have addressed, I never lost interest.  The inner lives of the characters were so intense, I was never quite sure what they'd do.

David Harbour (BBM's Randall) had a supporting role as a neighbor.  This resulted in a scene that was pure Brokeback.  Any Brokie who sees the movie will instantly recognize it.  ;D

ooooh!!!!!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on January 18, 2009, 11:42:00 am
I saw Gran Torino last night and liked it a lot. Great characterization, good acting by Clint and others. My sons liked it, too.



Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: belbbmfan on January 18, 2009, 03:08:18 pm
I saw "Revolutionary Road" tonight and thought it was very, very good.  Sam Mendes has a way with suburban angst.  Kate Winslet and Leo DiCaprio were great, and even though the story dealt with problems many couples face and many movies have addressed, I never lost interest.  The inner lives of the characters were so intense, I was never quite sure what they'd do.

David Harbour (BBM's Randall) had a supporting role as a neighbor.  This resulted in a scene that was pure Brokeback.  Any Brokie who sees the movie will instantly recognize it.  ;D

Wow! I'm curious.

The movie is released here next wednesday.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on January 23, 2009, 12:28:12 pm
I just watched The Greenstreet Hooligans (aka Hooligans, 2005) and although not a great film, I thought it was pretty darn good & I don't think many people have seen it.  I didn't even know it existed until a few months ago.   It stars Elijah Wood, who isn't one of my favourite actors, I found him insufferable in LotR, and Charlie Hunnam, who I do like a lot, but man, he sure isn't the Twink from QaF-UK, that's for sure.  There is a brief scene of him shirtless that sent my jaw dropping to the floor with a large thud.  Let's just say that he's in amazing shape, god-like, really.  Anyway, wrapped around this tasty scene is a fascinating story about the football hooligan sub-culture.  Highly recommended but, as to be expected, it is quite violent.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on January 23, 2009, 02:02:17 pm
(http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u20/rjimages/charlie01.jpg)
(http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f108/calicasullivan/CharlieHunnam01.jpg)

Cheers, Gil.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on January 23, 2009, 04:46:08 pm
(http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u20/rjimages/charlie01.jpg)
(http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f108/calicasullivan/CharlieHunnam01.jpg)

Cheers, Gil.

Thanks Paul! Those are great shots of him but they don't compare to that scene.

Which reminds me, did you ever watch THE TATTOOIST with Mr. Behr?   Blockbuster's had a previously viewed DVD of it on sale for under $10 and I stupidly didn't buy it.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on January 23, 2009, 08:43:51 pm
Thanks Paul! Those are great shots of him but they don't compare to that scene.

Which reminds me, did you ever watch THE TATTOOIST with Mr. Behr?   Blockbuster's had a previously viewed DVD of it on sale for under $10 and I stupidly didn't buy it.

Unfortunately, I'm way behind on my young hunk film viewing.  Tattoist is on my list, to which I'll add Hooligans.  Thanks.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on January 24, 2009, 02:05:50 am
(http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u20/rjimages/charlie01.jpg)
(http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f108/calicasullivan/CharlieHunnam01.jpg)

Cheers, Gil.
Well, if that's not god-like, then I just don't know what is. I'd be happy to move that figure into the Acropolis!!

I'm totally elated tonight after seeing Slumdog Millionaire!! Some of the images are bursting in my brain, filling me with a primitive urge to paw the white out of the moon!!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on January 24, 2009, 12:30:51 pm
Of course, the scene is on Youtube, I should have thought of that before:

[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TdiJKm9FwNs[/youtube]

I said it was brief, lol!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on January 26, 2009, 03:25:07 pm
I saw THE CLASS (Entre les murs) yesterday and really, REALLY enjoyed it.  It's up for Best Foreign language film and I wouldn't be surprised if it wins because it's a quietly brilliant piece of work.  Definitely a must see for teachers and anyone interested in education.  It's engaging, riveting, exasperating and thought provoking.  It also deservedly won the grand prize at Cannes

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/ENTRE_les_murs.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on January 31, 2009, 08:41:56 am
Last night I watched a pretty decent Spanish horror movie called [REC].  Apparently, QUARANTINE  is close to being a shot-for-shot remake of it. 

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/rec.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on February 01, 2009, 12:14:16 pm
I finally got around to seeing Frost/Nixon and Pan's Labyrinth yesterday. Both were excellent. In different ways, of course.

F/N did such a great job of humanizing Nixon without making him any less evil. As Neil Young sang, "Even Richard Nixon has got soul." (George W. Bush I'm not so sure about.) Michael Sheen and Frank Langella were both really good. I kept trying to remember what the real Frost and Nixon were like. Now I'd be interested in renting the original interviews.






Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on February 01, 2009, 12:51:27 pm
I agree about "Frost/Nixon", Katherine.  They all did a great job making those interviews into an interesting, even suspenseful, movie.  8)

Last night I saw "The Wrestler" with Mickey Rourke.  I enjoyed it and thought it was a very well-done character study of this aging guy who was no longer able to make a living at wrestling and really had no game plan for the future.  Mickey Rourke was terrific, and fearless about showing the wear and tear on his beat-up, over-drugged, battle-scarred body, as well as very sensitive to the inner workings of the man.  There's not much story here except to watch him slowly drowning and reaching out for whatever human contact he can manage along the way.  The look of the film is really great; the locations, the people around him, all make you feel you've lived in that seamy world for a short time.  Just be prepared for some harrowing stuff in the wrestling ring--I didn't know the crowds demanded such brutality from their heroes.  Afterwards I felt like going home and swallowing a handful of ibuprofen!  :P
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Aloysius J. Gleek on February 01, 2009, 03:22:35 pm

I'm totally elated tonight after seeing Slumdog Millionaire!! Some of the images are bursting in my brain, filling me with a primitive urge to paw the white out of the moon!!


Told you! Yes!

 ;D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Aloysius J. Gleek on February 01, 2009, 03:27:45 pm

Last night I saw "The Wrestler" with Mickey Rourke.

You DID?? Meryl, you never told me you know Mr. Rourke! Did you have dinner afterwards? Tell us more!  ::)

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: belbbmfan on February 01, 2009, 03:52:59 pm
 ;D  :laugh:
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on February 01, 2009, 04:04:53 pm
You DID?? Meryl, you never told me you know Mr. Rourke! Did you have dinner afterwards? Tell us more!  ::)

 :laugh:  :laugh:  :laugh:

Actually, I did have dinner afterward.  My friends and I tried out that Italian seafood restaurant we spotted on Eighth Avenue on our "Thais" excursion: Mare.  It's a cozy neighborhood place with a bar just inside, a neat vintage coke machine, painted paneling and nautical wall hangings.  The food was good, and it was fairly reasonable.  I had a good-sized plate of shrimp scampi for under $20.  Very nice!  8)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Aloysius J. Gleek on February 01, 2009, 04:12:52 pm

:laugh:  :laugh:  :laugh:

Actually, I did have dinner afterward.  My friends and I tried out that Italian seafood restaurant we spotted on Eighth Avenue on our "Thais" excursion: Mare.  It's a cozy neighborhood place with a bar just inside, a neat vintage coke machine, painted paneling and nautical wall hangings.  The food was good, and it was fairly reasonable.  I had a good-sized plate of shrimp scampi for under $20.  Very nice!  8)



Lovely! Since that wonderful 8th Avenue excursion I really want to go back and try all those cozy dives! -- BUT--it was COLD  :o  in New York late last night, wasn't it??--Around 1:00 AM the iPhone told me it was 26 F, and it felt like 06 F--brrr! And today, it's Spring. Go figure!



I saw THE CLASS (Entre les murs) yesterday and really, REALLY enjoyed it.  It's up for Best Foreign language film and I wouldn't be surprised if it wins because it's a quietly brilliant piece of work.  Definitely a must see for teachers and anyone interested in education.  It's engaging, riveting, exasperating and thought provoking.  It also deservedly won the grand prize at Cannes

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/ENTRE_les_murs.jpg)



I saw THE CLASS last night at the Angelika, the 10:10pm screening--I was waiting for it to open for quite some time, and in the end I really liked it--I told a friend that it was a contemporary, French semi faux docu-version of To Sir With Love (1967) and Up the Down Staircase (also 1967)


(http://bp2.blogger.com/_RWBpca--4PY/RslZMvFhJ1I/AAAAAAAAADA/PfERQhzXYnk/s400/up_the_down_staircase.jpg)(http://imagecache2.allposters.com/images/pic/MG/144151~To-Sir-with-Love-Posters.jpg)



So, I liked the film and I really liked François Bégaudeau, the actor playing the teacher, M. Marin; he is a real teacher, and he wrote the original book and the adapted screenplay. If this gets Best Foreign Language Film Oscar, I guess we'll see him on stage, for sure.



(http://facssf.files.wordpress.com/2008/09/entre-les-murs2.jpg)



(I will say, though, that I could not follow the French--especially the students' very 'street' French--at all. I was completely dependent upon the subtitles. I wonder if anyone who saw it with English subtitles and knows French might comment--I'd appreciate it!)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on February 01, 2009, 09:47:29 pm

--it was COLD  :o  in New York late last night, wasn't it??--Around 1:00 AM the iPhone told me it was 26 F, and it felt like 06 F--brrr!

Oh, dear, I have a friend in New York this weekend...well he's used to the cold.
 :-\
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Aloysius J. Gleek on February 01, 2009, 10:13:22 pm


Oh, dear, I have a friend in New York this weekend...well he's used to the cold.
 :-\



Don't worry, Lee. Today, it was 51 F !!! (And gorgeous!  )

Tomorrow? Who knows. Anybody's guess!

I'm sure your FRiend will be fine. LAYERS  are the thing!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on February 02, 2009, 12:24:41 pm
[...]

(I will say, though, that I could not follow the French--especially the students' very 'street' French--at all. I was completely dependent upon the subtitles. I wonder if anyone who saw it with English subtitles and knows French might comment--I'd appreciate it!)

I had some difficuylty understanding some of the students because of their strong accents.  Also, some of the slang expressions were unfamiliar to this French-Canadian  so at times I too had to rely on the subtitles.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on February 06, 2009, 05:33:35 pm
SILK (2007) - Dir: François Girard (THE RED VIOLIN) with: Michael Pitt, Keira Knightley.  The reviews were not kind but there was enough here to keep me interested.  Well, most of the time.  I think Michael Pitt is an interesting actor, I've followed his work since his turn as the lovesick Henry in Dawson's Creek but I think he is horribly miscast here. 

I just checked the NYT review and Stephen Holden agrees: "The film’s problems begin with Mr. Pitt. As he mumbles Hervé’s story, sometimes inaudibly, his character sounds either supremely detached or heavily medicated. With his swollen, chiseled lips and empty blue eyes that sometimes tear up, Mr. Pitt is a reasonably photogenic specimen. But this actor, whose typical screen character is a broken, androgynous man-child, is disastrously miscast."

Pitt is not the only reason that the film fails, the director bears much of the blame with choppy editing and the pace is very, very slow and not in a good way, although there is some good cinematography along the way.

If nothing else, the film made me want to read Alessandro Baricco's novel on which it is based.
2/5

MAN ON WIRE - Wow!  Fantastic documentary about Phillippe Petit's guerilla high-wire act on top of the WTC in 1974.  I was amazed at how much it affected the people who helped him prepare.  Even today, some tear up while recounting this daring event.  A strangely afffecting film, fascinating, suspensful,  passionate &  melancholic. 4.5/5

This weekend I'm planning on seeing WENDY & LUCY which finally opened here to rave reviews (4/4 stars -Globe & Mail)
 
 
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on February 06, 2009, 06:02:39 pm
I saw The Wrestler yesterday. It was quite good, and Mickey Rourke was really fantastic. If I were in the Academy, at this point I think he'd get my vote over Sean Penn or Frank Langella, though they were both very very good, too.

(As for other nominees, I didn't see Richard Jenkins in The Visitor, and Brad Pitt, though visually breathtaking, was not in the same league acting-wise IMO.)

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on February 06, 2009, 06:15:23 pm
MAN ON WIRE - Wow!  Fantastic documentary about Phillippe Petit's guerilla high-wire act on top of the WTC in 1974.  I was amazed at how much it affected the people who helped him prepare.  Even today, some tear up while recounting this daring event.  A strangely afffecting film, fascinating, suspensful,  passionate &  melancholic. 4.5/5

This weekend I'm planning on seeing WENDY & LUCY which finally opened here to rave reviews (4/4 stars -Globe & Mail)
 
 
An interesting juxtaposition of movies, friend! It will be interesting because Wendy in her own way, is just as daring as Phillippe Petit!

I saw Wendy & Lucy last weekend and I will see Man on Wire this weekend for the second time! I hear it's up for an Oscar for Best Documentary!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on February 07, 2009, 07:25:52 pm
I saw "Revolutionary Road" tonight and thought it was very, very good.  Sam Mendes has a way with suburban angst.  Kate Winslet and Leo DiCaprio were great, and even though the story dealt with problems many couples face and many movies have addressed, I never lost interest.  The inner lives of the characters were so intense, I was never quite sure what they'd do.

David Harbour (BBM's Randall) had a supporting role as a neighbor.  This resulted in a scene that was pure Brokeback.  Any Brokie who sees the movie will instantly recognize it.  ;D
I wonder if you liked the score to RR. It was done by Thomas Newman, a favorite composer of mine recently, and I'm thinking about getting the CD.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on February 07, 2009, 09:30:17 pm
Saw Coraline today, with my 13-year-old son. We both liked it. It was visually spectacular, and a pretty good story, too!

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on February 07, 2009, 10:34:38 pm
I wonder if you liked the score to RR. It was done by Thomas Newman, a favorite composer of mine recently, and I'm thinking about getting the CD.

I'm sorry to say I'm having trouble recalling the music now.  But I know I didn't not like it.

Here's a link to the msn Oscar site.  Lots of interesting features, like "Worst Best Picture Oscar" ever ("Crash" gets Dishonorable Mention, but "Dances with Wolves" edges it out) and montages of the big nominees:  http://movies.msn.com/oscars/.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ednbarby on February 09, 2009, 12:43:03 pm
I saw The Wrestler yesterday. It was quite good, and Mickey Rourke was really fantastic. If I were in the Academy, at this point I think he'd get my vote over Sean Penn or Frank Langella, though they were both very very good, too.

(As for other nominees, I didn't see Richard Jenkins in The Visitor, and Brad Pitt, though visually breathtaking, was not in the same league acting-wise IMO.)

I agree, largely, on all counts.  I only disagree on Sean Penn.  I could see him acting in "Milk," and it irritated me.

I love Richard Jenkins and am sorry I missed him in "The Visitor."  I'm sure he was tremendous.

But for my money, Mickey Rourke deserves it, for what it's worth, hands down.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on February 09, 2009, 05:14:35 pm
MY WINNIPEG - A "docu-fantasy" by Guy Maddin.   I enjoyed it much more than his previous THE SADDEST MUSIC IN THE WORLD.  Anne Savage, who has since died I think, plays his mother. She's famous for her unforgetable role in the Noir cult classic DETOUR. MY WINNIPEG is a bizarre, humourous and touching tribute to his hometown.
Watch the trailer!:

[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aY9BtROpNQ4[/youtube]
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kd5000 on February 10, 2009, 11:36:02 am

I love Richard Jenkins and am sorry I missed him in "The Visitor."  I'm sure he was tremendous.


I rented THE VISITOR at Blockbuster several weeks back, before the Academy Award nominations were announced. The movie was mentioned on NPR in their listing of small movies from 2008 that were worth a looksee. And yes, Jenkins was very good in that role.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on February 10, 2009, 02:41:21 pm
David Denby had a good description of Brad Pitt's performance in this week's New Yorker:

"Pitt's modesty when he comes into his own handsome flesh is becoming, yet his eyes are unforgivably blank. Where is Benjamin's exhilaration at shedding his infirmities?"

Exactly.


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on February 10, 2009, 02:56:09 pm
MY WINNIPEG - A "docu-fantasy" by Guy Maddin.   I enjoyed it much more than his previous THE SADDEST MUSIC IN THE WORLD.  Anne Savage, who has since died I think, plays his mother. She's famous for her unforgetable role in the Noir cult classic DETOUR. MY WINNIPEG is a bizarre, humourous and touching tribute to his hometown.
Watch the trailer!:

[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aY9BtROpNQ4[/youtube]

What a hoot! How entertaining! A putdown/tribute to all small towns everywhere, no matter what size!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kd5000 on February 10, 2009, 03:54:58 pm
David Denby had a good description of Brad Pitt's performance in this week's New Yorker:

"Pitt's modesty when he comes into his own handsome flesh is becoming, yet his eyes are unforgivably blank. Where is Benjamin's exhilaration at shedding his infirmities?"

Exactly.

I wonder what point in the movie the critic is talking about?  The movie did bring home the point that as we aquire wisdom, our body begins to let us down. In TCCBB, he gets to experience wisdom from having lived a full life yet having the body of a 26 year old man.  I really wonder what that would be like?   
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on February 10, 2009, 04:01:30 pm
THE CURIOUS CASE OF BENJAMIN BUTTON - Well, let me put it this way, now I know what "Oscar boring" means. I didn't really hate it, but there is absolutely no way I could watch that again.  At one point the young looking Brad reminded me of a CG "actor" from FINAL FANTASY, that was kinda cool actually.  I thought the music was maudlin, intrusive and relentless.   It was strangely un-affecting film for such a melodramatic story, with its abandoned babies, mowed-down ballerinas, drunken sailors & womanizing pygmies.
Sorry, Fincher fans, but it won't even make my top-ten.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on February 10, 2009, 04:26:09 pm
I wonder what point in the movie the critic is talking about?  The movie did bring home the point that as we aquire wisdom, our body begins to let us down. In TCCBB, he gets to experience wisdom from having lived a full life yet having the body of a 26 year old man.  I really wonder what that would be like?   

I think it would be a lot of people's idea of Heaven -- wisdom, beauty, peak health, the best of all possible worlds. But Benjamin goes through that phase in his usual stolid, pleasant, responsible, unexcited way. That's my interpretation of what Denby means.

THE CURIOUS CASE OF BENJAMIN BUTTON - Well, let me put it this way, now I know what "Oscar boring" means. I didn't really hate it, but there is absolutely no way I could watch that again.  At one point the young looking Brad reminded me of a CG "actor" from FINAL FANTASY, that was kinda cool actually.  I thought the music was maudlin, intrusive and relentless.   It was strangely un-affecting film for such a melodramatic story, with its abandoned babies, mowed-down ballerinas, drunken sailors & womanizing pygmies.
Sorry, Fincher fans, but it won't even make my top-ten.

I thought the makeup in that dance-school scene, where Benjamin was maybe 18 or so (physically), was a bit startling. Completely convincing, on the one hand, though his eyes looked slightly alien, like they were pasted on.

I suspect the earlier film footage when he was in India or wherever, physically about 22, was of the actual Brad Pitt, traveling in his younger years. What a cutie!

Re your comment about the film being unaffecting, despite the melodrama, here's another good line of Denby's:

"He eventually leaves the home, enters a stunningly gentle world, and has assorted and generally meaningless adventures."

Just like Forrest Gump!



Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on February 10, 2009, 11:36:20 pm
How apt that you're discussing Benjamin Button, because I just saw it this afternoon.  8)

I can see how the "boring" description could be applied to it, but I did enjoy it very much.  I like movies that tell a story gradually, taking time to savor their characters and settings, and that aren't afraid to dwell on moments that other movies would rush through.  I guess that's the reason "Barry Lyndon" is one of my favorite films.

I've been wondering why Benjamin's character was so unremarkable in itself, and the reason I came up with is that he's there to allow the people who choose to care about him to be their best selves.  He listens to, empathizes with and loves them unconditionally, making no demands, just accepting what is offered.  He seems to be storing up everything about them.  Why does he go from old to young?  It's an interesting idea to explore, I guess.  It's his own particular pain--never to fit in, always to be going in the opposite direction to the ones he loves.  It gives him a certain clarity but keeps him apart.  Far from worshiping youth, he fears its helplessness as others fear the infirmities of old age.

I thought Brad Pitt was lovely in the role.  Yes, his eyes could be more alive, but I thought the same thing about Christian Bale in "The Dark Knight."  The compensation is physical beauty and an aura of sweetness that fit the character well.  To a large extent, it may have been simply a choice; anyone who's seen him in "Twelve Monkeys" knows his eyes can take on a mad, penetrating look.  I often think of Brad Pitt as a younger Robert Redford; he's another one more known for his looks than his emotive ability.  Cate Blanchett is one of my favorite actors, and she was terrific as usual.  But she wasn't given any real scenery-chewing opportunities either, which makes me think the director made a choice to keep histrionics out of the film.

I failed to catch the original reference to the humming bird, so every time one showed up I was clueless as to its meaning.  Can anybody enlighten me?
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on February 11, 2009, 12:01:50 am
I often think of Brad Pitt as a younger Robert Redford;

Me too. The resemblance is startling. I think Robert Redford was thinking the same when he directed A River Runs Through It.

Quote
I failed to catch the original reference to the humming bird, so every time one showed up I was clueless as to its meaning.  Can anybody enlighten me?

No, I didn't get that, either. My son suggested they should have used it more. That might have seemed heavy-handed, but as it was it was just kind of mystifying.



Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kd5000 on February 11, 2009, 12:10:53 pm
I finally got around to seeing MILK yesterday evening.  To tell you the truth, the movie didn't grab me. I felt like it should have been made twenty years earlier.  Maybe I'm expecting every movie with "gay themes" to hit me like BBM and that's not going to happen.   :-\   

I still have not seen THE READER, SLUMDOG, or THE WRESTLER.  SLUMDOG comes out in mid-March on DVD so maybe I will just wait.  It will probably win best picture. PPl want a "happy movie" (I gather that it is not serious social commentary) for BP given the dreary historic times the world finds itself in.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on February 11, 2009, 12:12:07 pm
How apt that you're discussing Benjamin Button, because I just saw it this afternoon.  8)

I can see how the "boring" description could be applied to it, but I did enjoy it very much.  I like movies that tell a story gradually, taking time to savor their characters and settings, and that aren't afraid to dwell on moments that other movies would rush through.  I guess that's the reason "Barry Lyndon" is one of my favorite films.

I've been wondering why Benjamin's character was so unremarkable in itself, and the reason I came up with is that he's there to allow the people who choose to care about him to be their best selves.  He listens to, empathizes with and loves them unconditionally, making no demands, just accepting what is offered.  He seems to be storing up everything about them.  Why does he go from old to young?  It's an interesting idea to explore, I guess.  It's his own particular pain--never to fit in, always to be going in the opposite direction to the ones he loves.  It gives him a certain clarity but keeps him apart.  Far from worshiping youth, he fears its helplessness as others fear the infirmities of old age.

I thought Brad Pitt was lovely in the role.  Yes, his eyes could be more alive, but I thought the same thing about Christian Bale in "The Dark Knight."  The compensation is physical beauty and an aura of sweetness that fit the character well.  To a large extent, it may have been simply a choice; anyone who's seen him in "Twelve Monkeys" knows his eyes can take on a mad, penetrating look.  I often think of Brad Pitt as a younger Robert Redford; he's another one more known for his looks than his emotive ability.  Cate Blanchett is one of my favorite actors, and she was terrific as usual.  But she wasn't given any real scenery-chewing opportunities either, which makes me think the director made a choice to keep histrionics out of the film.

I failed to catch the original reference to the humming bird, so every time one showed up I was clueless as to its meaning.  Can anybody enlighten me?

RE: Significance of the Hummingbirds.  A quick google search provided the following opinions:

"According to Wikipedia, "the hummingbird is known as a messenger and stopper of time due to its speed... The hummingbird is also able to fly backwards, teaching us that we can look back on our past."

In the movie, the hummingbird appears during times that a hummingbird should not survive - out at sea and during a winter storm. Perhaps the hummingbird represents that these characters can learn from their trying experiences but move forward with energy like a hummingbird. Perhaps the hummingbird represents the need for these characters to also act as messengers and share their stories with others."
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20081226204943AA5FvdJ (http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20081226204943AA5FvdJ)

-------------------------------

"[...] an amusingly recurring gag involving lightning strikes, and an egregiously symbolic hummingbird, Benjamin Button unavoidably invites comparisons to Gump." - http://www.slantmagazine.com/film/film_review.asp?ID=4036 (http://www.slantmagazine.com/film/film_review.asp?ID=4036)  (I had to look up egregiously, lol!)

--------------------------

"As Captain Mike dies after a heroic attack on a German U-boat, Benjamin tells him, "There's a nice spot in heaven waiting for you." Benjamin spies a hummingbird flying upward, perhaps a symbol of Mike's spirit. A hummingbird appears again when Benjamin grows too young to live any longer." - http://www.pluggedinonline.com/movies/movies/a0004413.cfm (http://www.pluggedinonline.com/movies/movies/a0004413.cfm) - I can't believe I'm quoting a i]Focus on Family[/i] site!  Ewww!

--------------------------
 
"Cloying symbol of, well, something:

"Forrest Gump:" A feather that appears in key moments of the film, cascading downward lightly, spritely, representing the uplifting vicissitudes of survival and existence.

"Benjamin Button:" A hummingbird that appears in key moments of the film, madly flapping its wings, representing the uplifting vicissitudes of survival and existence."
- http://www.insidesocal.com/tv/2008/12/benjamin-button-a-gump-by-any.html  (http://www.insidesocal.com/tv/2008/12/benjamin-button-a-gump-by-any.html)


Hope this helps
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on February 11, 2009, 12:23:36 pm
Thanks, Gil.  The messenger and flying backwards characteristics really resonate with the movie's themes, I think.  Maybe the hummingbird was never mentioned in the script by any character, but just appeared.  I wonder, was it in the original short story?
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kd5000 on February 13, 2009, 12:10:33 pm
Another list showing Brokeback Mountain as being a great Valentine's Day movie to watch. Most of the lists I've seen BBM appearing on say "You don't have to be gay to..." well something to that effect. I guess more ppl might watch BBM if it keep appearing on so many lists. 

Check this one out. Some of the other movies mentioned are among my favorites; Annie Hall, Eternal Sunshine and Roman Holiday.

11. Brokeback Mountain (2005)
For all the talk about Brokeback Mountain as a groundbreaking film about gay lovers, what really makes the story work is its depiction of love as a kind of lucky escape: how fortunate Heath Ledger and Jake Gyllenhaal are to find each other in the middle of nowhere, and how eagerly they look forward to the few times a year they get to reunite. Gay or not, anyone who’s ever been in a long-distance relationship can identify with the feeling that the time spent with a beloved partner is portioned off from everyday life—so sacred and rare that it’s almost unreal.

"Romance minus the schmaltz: 29 falling-in-love movies we actually believe in"
http://www.avclub.com/articles/romance-minus-the-schmaltz-29-fallinginlove-movies,23565/
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on February 14, 2009, 09:44:05 am
Thanks, Gil.  The messenger and flying backwards characteristics really resonate with the movie's themes, I think.  Maybe the hummingbird was never mentioned in the script by any character, but just appeared.  I wonder, was it in the original short story?

No. I just read the short story a few weeks ago. It is not much of a stretch to say that the only thing the short story and the movie have in common is the title and the notion of someone aging backwards. Everything else is different.

The short story is free at feedbooks.com. You can probably download it and read it on your computer. I read it on my Kindle.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on February 14, 2009, 10:22:03 am

I thought the makeup in that dance-school scene, where Benjamin was maybe 18 or so (physically), was a bit startling. Completely convincing, on the one hand, though his eyes looked slightly alien, like they were pasted on.


Wasn't that an outtake from Thelma and Louise?? ;)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on February 14, 2009, 10:33:29 am
I still have not seen THE READER, SLUMDOG, or THE WRESTLER.  SLUMDOG comes out in mid-March on DVD so maybe I will just wait.  It will probably win best picture. PPl want a "happy movie" (I gather that it is not serious social commentary) for BP given the dreary historic times the world finds itself in.

A movie can be serious social commentary AND have funny/happy moments too. Where is it decreed that a movie about real life has to have a sad ending? (Maybe Sartre declared that?) I'm thinking about Arthur Penn's Little Big Man and the British film O Lucky Man. SM is in that genre.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on February 14, 2009, 11:09:31 am
No. I just read the short story a few weeks ago. It is not much of a stretch to say that the only thing the short story and the movie have in common is the title and the notion of someone aging backwards. Everything else is different.

The short story is free at feedbooks.com. You can probably download it and read it on your computer. I read it on my Kindle.

I read it online. Or I should say, skimmed it. Your description is right on, Leslie, not a stretch at all.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: MaineWriter on February 14, 2009, 07:53:57 pm
Wasn't that an outtake from Thelma and Louise?? ;)

It sure looked like it. Or they photoshopped the T&L Brad Pitt into the scene.

L
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on February 18, 2009, 11:04:58 pm
On a whim, I saw Coraline on Monday.  Well, actually not a whim, but rather I had heard the filmmaker on NPR and was inspired to go.

I don't think it has been advertised very well, but the show was sold out! 

Honestly, it must have been my first 3-D film ever.  Go for the animation alone.  It's that very labor-intensive stop-animation stuff, so imaginative.  The story, well, it's less Alice in Wonderland, and more cliché-evil-engulfing-mother-be-careful-what-you-wish-for. 
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on February 19, 2009, 12:21:47 am
It's that very labor-intensive stop-animation stuff, so imaginative. 

So do they actually shoot one frame, stop, move the character's hand a quarter millimeter, shoot another frame, stop, move a foot and an eyebrow a quarter millimeter, etc.?

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on February 19, 2009, 08:32:12 am
So do they actually shoot one frame, stop, move the character's hand a quarter millimeter, shoot another frame, stop, move a foot and an eyebrow a quarter millimeter, etc.?



You bet!

Same in Nightmare Before Christmas and the Wallace and Gromit films.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: BelAir on February 21, 2009, 01:16:35 am
in case anyone didn't know...  'he's just not that into you' - sh*t movie.

 >:(
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on February 21, 2009, 08:50:37 pm
THE READER - I loved it!  A movie you can really sink your teeth into.  I was in tears for half of it thanks to the wonderful performances by everyone involved. 
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: BelAir on February 22, 2009, 11:16:43 pm
THE READER - I loved it!  A movie you can really sink your teeth into.  I was in tears for half of it thanks to the wonderful performances by everyone involved. 

I wasn't sure whether to put it on my 'sooner' or 'later' list.  The clips they have showed on the Oscars look really good.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Aloysius J. Gleek on February 23, 2009, 12:40:37 am

I'll just put it here, on the 'Movies' thread:

(http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2009/02/23/movies/23oscar.xlarge2.jpg)


(He would give a slow, wry, ironic clap for winning an Oscar, don't you think?

But for me--no. Congrats, Heath. Sincerely so.)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Lynne on February 23, 2009, 12:43:17 am

I'll just put it here, on the 'Movies; thread:

(http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2009/02/23/movies/23oscar.xlarge2.jpg)


(He would give a slow, wry, ironic clap for winning an Oscar, don't you think?

But for me--congrats, Heath. Sincerely so.)


Word, John...  That's a phenomenal image.  I'm happy for him and his family.  And don't misunderstand me - I thought his performance amazing.  Though I firmly believe that artists will *always* remember Heath as Ennis Del Mar instead of The Joker.

RIP Friend Heath.  You are done for now.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: BelAir on February 23, 2009, 01:00:30 am
I'll just put it here, on the 'Movies' thread:

(http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2009/02/23/movies/23oscar.xlarge2.jpg)


(He would give a slow, wry, ironic clap for winning an Oscar, don't you think?

But for me--no. Congrats, Heath. Sincerely so.)


Agreed.

 :)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Aloysius J. Gleek on February 23, 2009, 01:20:26 am

Agreed.

 :)

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/23/movies/awardsseason/23oscar.html?hp (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/23/movies/awardsseason/23oscar.html?hp)

"I have to say this is ever so humbling, just being amongst such wonderful people in such a wonderful industry," said his father, Kim Ledger, who accepted the award on behalf of the actor’s three-year-old daughter, Matilda. "We’d like to thank the Academy for recognizing our son’s amazing work, Warner Bros., and Christopher Nolan in particular for allowing Heath the creative license to develop and explore this crazy Joker character."


 ;D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Ellemeno on February 23, 2009, 02:06:00 am
I'm just catching up on about 6 pages of this thread.  I want to see The Class.  I keep forgetting to.  And for those interested in Robert Redford cum Brad Pitt, I really enjoyed Spy Game a lot, which stars the two of them.



I just got back from Valkyrie myself. I wasn't quite as enthusiastic as you, Del, but I liked it well enough. It seemed slow for a while, and then the end was pretty bleak. (Spoiler alert -- they did not succeed in killing Hitler.) But it was very suspenseful in parts.

I myself have no trouble stomaching Tom Cruise, except in real life. And there were some other interesting actors in it, too. I always enjoy Tom Wilkinson. And nice to see Kenneth Branagh again! What's he been doing in recent years, anyway?






You, my friend, are hilarious.  :)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on February 23, 2009, 02:18:08 am
For me, the iconic scene was when Two-Face woke up to the Joker in a nurse's uniform and he said, "Hiiiii....." and then after he departed, fiddling with the detonator, he pushed the button and exited the scene with a flip of his nurse's uniform!! I won't forget that!!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Aloysius J. Gleek on February 23, 2009, 03:18:10 am

For me, the iconic scene was when Two-Face woke up to the Joker in a nurse's uniform and he said, "Hiiiii....." and then after he departed, fiddling with the detonator, he pushed the button and exited the scene with a flip of his nurse's uniform!! I won't forget that!!


Quite a joker, that Joker....
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Aloysius J. Gleek on February 23, 2009, 03:21:43 am

I want to see The Class.  I keep forgetting to. 

It's quite good. Also: Waltz with Bashir.  Very, very good, actually. Next, I want to see Gamorra.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Aloysius J. Gleek on February 23, 2009, 03:25:19 am

http://www.nytimes.com/slideshow/2009/02/23/movies/awardsseason/0223-WINNERS_3.html (http://www.nytimes.com/slideshow/2009/02/23/movies/awardsseason/0223-WINNERS_3.html)



(http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/images/photo/2009/02/23/0223-WINNERS/27058029.JPG)

Heath Ledger was posthumously awarded the best supporting actor Oscar for his role in "The Dark Knight." 
Mr. Ledger's family -- Kim Ledger, left, Kate Ledger and Sally Bell -- accepted the award on his behalf.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on February 25, 2009, 03:23:49 pm
I recommend Man on Wire, winner of the best documentary Oscar. I think it's out on DVD now. You may have seen the subject of the film, Philip Petit, bound on stage during the thank-yous, and exit, making a gold coin disappear.

http://www.documentary.org/content/walking-air-man-wire-presents-petits-terrific-tale (http://www.documentary.org/content/walking-air-man-wire-presents-petits-terrific-tale)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on February 25, 2009, 03:27:50 pm
I recommend Man on Wire, winner of the best documentary Oscar. I think it's out on DVD now. You may have seen the subject of the film, Philip Petit, bound on stage during the thank-yous, and exit, making a gold coin disappear.

http://www.documentary.org/content/walking-air-man-wire-presents-petits-terrific-tale (http://www.documentary.org/content/walking-air-man-wire-presents-petits-terrific-tale)

Yes, it is out on DVD.  As a Brokie bonus, it includes The Man Who Walked Betwen the Towers  narrated by our own Jake. 
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on February 25, 2009, 03:32:19 pm
Yes, it is out on DVD.  As a Brokie bonus, it includes The Man Who Walked Betwen the Towers  narrated by our own Jake. 

No kidding! That is super-dooper!! (Segue to yet another movie/play we both like!!)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on February 25, 2009, 03:35:26 pm
No kidding! That is super-dooper!! (Segue to yet another movie/play we both like!!)

I'd put on the Ritz for you any day, Friend. 
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: HerrKaiser on February 25, 2009, 03:52:23 pm

THE READER - I loved it!  A movie you can really sink your teeth into.  I was in tears for half of it thanks to the wonderful performances by everyone involved. 
I wasn't sure whether to put it on my 'sooner' or 'later' list.  The clips they have showed on the Oscars look really good.


So many have given the Reader very high marks, but I had mixed emotions. Too many times when suspensions of disbelief were required for a top-level film. Also, it totally (like Milk) avoided the big elephant in the room--child sexual abuse by an adult.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on February 25, 2009, 04:08:29 pm

So many have given the Reader very high marks, but I had mixed emotions. Too many times when suspensions of disbelief were required for a top-level film. Also, it totally (like Milk) avoided the big elephant in the room--child sexual abuse by an adult.

Wait -- when did that happen in Milk?

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on February 25, 2009, 05:16:30 pm

So many have given the Reader very high marks, but I had mixed emotions. Too many times when suspensions of disbelief were required for a top-level film. Also, it totally (like Milk) avoided the big elephant in the room--child sexual abuse by an adult.

I was wondering when that would come up.  "Not only was she a Nazi but she was also a sexual predator who preyed on poor innocent CHILDREN!!"  ::)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: HerrKaiser on February 25, 2009, 07:54:13 pm
right. And no mention of that 'minor point' during the film's quite positive reviews by most critics and audiences.

Nor was the obvious craving for teen boys by Milk ever noted as an issue for the film (or his real life predator activities).

Had either film used a teen girl as the object of such abuse, a totally different dialog would have emerged months ago.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Ellemeno on February 25, 2009, 08:22:16 pm
Now I don't feel the same hilarity I did about posting this, but I will anyway.


[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VH2nQHPs4aA[/youtube]


Quick - which one of these actors acted with Heath?
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on February 25, 2009, 08:23:47 pm
Peter Boyle.  Monster's Ball.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Ellemeno on February 25, 2009, 08:27:29 pm
Peter Boyle.  Monster's Ball.

You ARE in a hurry.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on February 25, 2009, 08:28:21 pm
You ARE in a hurry.

You said "Quick"!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Ellemeno on February 25, 2009, 08:29:14 pm
You said "Quick"!


I know.  I was quoting this movie I saw once thirty-something times.


Paul is our winner!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on February 25, 2009, 09:06:46 pm

Paul is our winner!

Yee-haw!! Paul, as a prize, would you take a T-shirt, size small, that says "Woof"??
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on February 25, 2009, 09:22:15 pm
Yee-haw!! Paul, as a prize, would you take a T-shirt, size small, that says "Woof"??

Aw, that's so thoughtful.  But, I haven't been a small since, well, never.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on March 06, 2009, 03:23:02 pm
Well this was a fun project.  I looked through several lists of what were called 2008 movies (though I notice that IMDb, which I consider the arbiter, didn't always agree, and called some of them 2007, but if they were on a 2008 list, and I felt like including them, here they are).


My Top Movies of 2008:
Walk Hard  (Great and respectful parody of Ray, Walk the Line, The Doors, and others.  I really enjoy John C. Reilly.)
Synecdoche, New York  (Oh man, someone see it!)


This will be out on Blu-Ray March 10!!

http://www.sonyclassics.com/synecdocheny/ (http://www.sonyclassics.com/synecdocheny/)

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on March 06, 2009, 05:25:17 pm
Thank heavens for DVVDs, Blu-Ray and otherwise. I just looked at the list of upcoming movies and it looks like a long spring for me... beginning with X-Men (yawn), yet another Star Trek, Angels and Demons (it won't be what it could have been, I fear), Terminator (pleaz!) and Up (looks like the best, but it won't be here till nearly June!).
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on March 06, 2009, 08:53:44 pm
Well, for what it's worth, the upcoming STAR TREK won't have William Shatner in it!  That's a good thing.

At least three good movies are opening this weekend in my city:
 
1- NIGHTWATCHING - A new Peter Greenaway film  featuring Rembrandt and the story behind his famous painting. 

2- WATCHMEN -  I want to read the graphic novel first so I'll probably wait a couple of weeks.  The novel is by he same guy who did V FOR VENDETTA which I really enjoyed, but the film's director is the guy who did 300 which I hated.

3- PONTYPOOL - This is probably only opening in Canada but it's getting good reviews.  Canadian actor Stephen McHattie plays a radio shock jock in a small town where a strange infection, spread by the English language, is turning the inhabitants into killer zombies.  From director Buce MacDonald.

Next week:

GOMORRAH - The mafia film from Italy that has been generating a lot of buzz. 
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on March 06, 2009, 10:42:31 pm
Well, for what it's worth, the upcoming STAR TREK won't have William Shatner in it!  That's a good thing.

At least three good movies are opening this weekend in my city:
 
1- NIGHTWATCHING - A new Peter Greenaway film  featuring Rembrandt and the story behind his famous painting.

Greenaway?  Whatever else it will be, the movie will be beautiful to watch. 

Quote
2- THE WATCHMEN -  I want to read the graphic novel first so I'll probably wait a couple of weeks.  The novel is by he same guy who did V FOR VENDETTA which I really enjoyed, but the film's director is the guy who did 300 which I hated.

I'm not a graphics novel fan, so these sort of movies are wasted on me. I wasn't impressed with V for Vendetta, and the only saving grace for 300 was the cast of hunky men in next to nothing - and sometimes nothing - and the beautiful graphics.

The Ghost by Roman Polanski is currently filming, but for me, Roman is hit or miss.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on March 07, 2009, 01:14:02 pm
I'm planning on going to two movies today! A Farewell to Arms and Monty Python and the Holy Grail.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on March 07, 2009, 05:33:17 pm
Aw, that's so thoughtful.  But, I haven't been a small since, well, never.

Well, how about a keyring that plays the sound of terrified horses neighing??
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on March 07, 2009, 05:52:34 pm
Well, how about a keyring that plays the sound of terrified horses neighing??

Frau Blucher!  Perfect!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Lynne on March 09, 2009, 12:19:47 am


Dog Tags Trailer                                                              (1:22)
[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HcI6Gb2I9P4[/youtube]

Hey there, John!  I rented this at Blockbuster tonight and am looking forward to watching it.

It was kinda funny, because as I was checking out, the clerk asked me if I realized it was a 'gay' film.  I perked up..'Sure!'  Then I went on to tell him that I'm one of Brokeback Mountain's greatest fans, and we chatted about other recent GLBT film releases.  I don't know how I missed this one, but I'll report back.  The clerk hadn't yet seen Prayers for Bobby but heard that Sigourney Weaver had an amazing performance.

Pretty cool, all in all.

P.S.  I was also happy to see it alphabetized in the New Releases section, instead of on some obscure shelf somewhere else... :)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kd5000 on March 09, 2009, 12:21:05 pm
That's weird (though not suprising) that an employee of Blockbuster would say that.   :o What section of the section of the store is the film located? Is it in the action section?   I never been to a BLOCKBUSTER that said G/L interest though I've been to one's that say "Community Interest."   

I checked out LARS AND THE REAL GIRL and the clerk at Blockbuster said something about he doesn't rent movies about blowup dolls.   I thought I was going to be watching a FARGO type film and it was nothing of the sort. I still enjoyed it.  ;)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Lynne on March 09, 2009, 12:44:18 pm
That's weird (though not suprising) that an employee of Blockbuster would say that.   :o What section of the section of the store is the film located? Is it in the action section?   I never been to a BLOCKBUSTER that said G/L interest though I've been to one's that say "Community Interest."   

I checked out LARS AND THE REAL GIRL and the clerk at Blockbuster said something about he doesn't rent movies about blowup dolls.   I thought I was going to be watching a FARGO type film and it was nothing of the sort. I still enjoyed it.  ;)

Hey there, Karl!  Dog Tags was on the New Releases wall alphabetized with the other New Releases.  I expect it will go to Drama eventually; it was not really an action movie, more of a growing, coming-of-age type film.  I watched it last night and it was OK...not great, but better than many I've seen.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on March 09, 2009, 06:13:29 pm
PONTYPOOL - (2008) Dir: Bruce MacDonald
IMdb Synopsis: The flick is set in a radio station in Pontypool where one day the morning team starts taking reports of extreme, bloody incidents of violence occurring in town. As the story unfolds, the radio staff soon realizes the violence that is ripping society apart is due to a virus being spread through the English language. That in turn poses a problem for a yappy radio jock [Stephen McHattie, the bad guy who gets hit with the coffee pot in A HISTORY OF VIOLENCE)] and his staff holed up in the broadcast booth housed in the basement of the town's abandoned church as a slaughter rages beyond its walls.
3.5/5
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Ellemeno on March 10, 2009, 12:24:29 am
Frau Blucher!  Perfect!


[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e5IWHt4OoNk[/youtube]
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on March 10, 2009, 08:39:17 am
Thanks for the three seconds of hilarity! :-*
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on March 11, 2009, 02:39:47 pm

I just received my Amazon DVD order, which includes CANNIBAL by German filmmaker Marian Dora.  It's a dramatisation of that horrific gay cannibal case from a few years ago.  Has anyone seen the film?  Will I regret buying the dvd?  ???

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/cannibal.jpg)

From IMDb:  Sparse, economical, and surprisingly affective, this film wisely eschews exploitation to instead attempt an oddly serious and almost artistic analysis of the famous Meiwes case. Almost in 3 clinical acts (the hunt, the seduction, and the consumption), the film minimalistically explores the theme of sex as predation, consummation as consumption. It also superimposes Meiwes' favorite Grimm tale of Hansel and Gretel onto it as a frame, creating an odd fairy-tale for adults.

It is not an entertaining or pleasant film--but it works very ingeniously. With little to no dialog, the film creates a sense of unease and distaste in the audience through the simple use of frank male nudity, homoeroticism (which for some will seem more disturbing than the violence), and ritualistic slaughter and cannibalism implied cheaply and brilliantly with what appears to be almost no real special effects. Much of what we see is most likely the carcass of a pig, and yet we will feel like we are seeing much more.

The film also creates a sense of an actual relationship between the two men--not that they loved each other, but that they understood each other and each other's desires. The way they interact seems genuine and a part of the paradox of this case.

Shot using the simplest and cheapest of home equipment and with only 2 real actors, the film is also a testament to how successfully done an independent film can be. So little was needed to create this, and it all comes together very well.

Unlike American films like "Hard Candy", which try to moralize its themes to death, this film is far superior in its provocation. I'm not sure who else the audience for this film is, but for those to whom it works--it works almost perfectly.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Ellemeno on March 12, 2009, 03:18:29 am
I just watched The Celluloid Closet on Netflix Watch Instantly.  I may well be the last person here to have seen it, I know I've seen it mentioned a number of times on BetterMost.  It was pretty wonderful.  Narration written by Armistead Maupin and spoken by Lily Tomlin

I think it came out about 1995, and Tony Curtis is interviewed in it, talking about his roles in Some Like It Hot and Spartacus.  I was surprised to see that he didn't really exhibit homophobia in his remarks, though I would say he sounded kinda ignernt.  Didn't he say something homophobic about BBM being nominated for Academy Awards?  That didn't come across in The Celluloid Closet.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on March 12, 2009, 10:50:47 am
I just watched The Celluloid Closet on Netflix Watch Instantly.  I may well be the last person here to have seen it, I know I've seen it mentioned a number of times on BetterMost.  It was pretty wonderful.  Narration written by Armistead Maupin and spoken by Lily Tomlin

I think it came out about 1995, and Tony Curtis is interviewed in it, talking about his roles in Some Like It Hot and Spartacus.  I was surprised to see that he didn't really exhibit homophobia in his remarks, though I would say he sounded kinda ignernt.  Didn't he say something homophobic about BBM being nominated for Academy Awards?  That didn't come across in The Celluloid Closet.



He defended himself, however unconvincingly, in his recent auto-bio by saying his words were taken out of context and that all he meant was that the subject of BbM was no big deal and that he's had many wonderful friendships with gay people over the years. 
I met him once, back in the mid nineties, when he was in Toronto for an Opening of a show of his horrible paintings and he sounded ignorant then.

UPDATE on the movie CANNIBAL:  Oh.  My.  God.   I was expecting a kind of exploitation film with artistic pretensions, but man, I bit off way more than I could chew.  (Pun intended, of course)  I actually felt physically ill afterwards.  The violence is so graphic and realistic (and relentlessly gory) that at times it felt like I was watching a snuff film.  I'm still numb.  Not recommended!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on March 12, 2009, 11:05:25 am
UPDATE on the movie CANNIBAL:  Oh.  My.  God.   I was expecting a kind of exploitation film with artistic pretensions, but man, I bit off way more than I could chew.  (Pun intended, of course)  I actually felt physically ill afterwards.  The violence is so graphic and realistic (and relentlessly gory) that at times it felt like I was watching a snuff film.  I'm still numb.  Not recommended!

 :laugh:

When I read your previous post with the description of the film and your question of whether you'd regret buying the DVD, I was tempted to respond, YESSSSS!!!!! But I held back, knowing that your tastes are bolder and stomach stronger than mine (recalling that you liked Funny Games, for example).

Whereas I can't handle even mainstream splatter flicks. Hell, I can barely handle the commercials I've been seeing for Last House on the Left. So I'm not the best judge.



Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Ellemeno on March 12, 2009, 05:08:18 pm
He defended himself, however unconvincingly, in his recent auto-bio by saying his words were taken out of context and that all he meant was that the subject of BbM was no big deal and that he's had many wonderful friendships with gay people over the years. 
I met him once, back in the mid nineties, when he was in Toronto for an Opening of a show of his horrible paintings and he sounded ignorant then.



Thanks Gil.  That's interesting that he cares enough to want to defend himself against being seen as homophobic.  Jamie Lee Curtis seems like a great person, I'm going to give her father the benefit of the doubt.

:)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on March 13, 2009, 10:39:55 am
:laugh:

When I read your previous post with the description of the film and your question of whether you'd regret buying the DVD, I was tempted to respond, YESSSSS!!!!! But I held back, knowing that your tastes are bolder and stomach stronger than mine (recalling that you liked Funny Games, for example).

Whereas I can't handle even mainstream splatter flicks. Hell, I can barely handle the commercials I've been seeing for Last House on the Left. So I'm not the best judge.





Speaking of Trailers.  You should see the ones included on the DVD!  Titles like FRANKENHOOKER, BONE SICKNESS; VISIONS OF SUFFERING; NAILS, a bizarre Russian underground  existentialist splatter film, and  CITY OF ROTT, a gory animated film.  Basically a blood-smeared window into a cinematic world that I knew existed but had never explored.  Until now, anyway.  To paraphrase Jay Baruchel in KNOCKED UP after he looked into the delivery room during the birth: "I SHOULDN'T HAVE GONE THERE!"

It's funny that you should mention LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT.   The original was the only other movie to make me physically ill.  And that was back in the early seventies!  The remake is supposed to be quite nasty and pointless, one reviewer gave it 1 star.

Tonight, I think I'll watch HAPPY-GO-LUCKY, lol!  (After DOLLHOUSE, natch!)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on March 13, 2009, 10:59:40 am
Tonight, I think I'll watch HAPPY-GO-LUCKY, lol!  (After DOLLHOUSE, natch!)

I'll be interested in hearing your take on Happy-Go-Lucky. It's in my queue, and I'm looking forward to seeing it.

When you mentioned Dollhouse, at first I was thinking of the movie Welcome to the Dollhouse. That's a movie I've never seen. I'm kind of afraid to, given my low threshold for post-cinema depression.

I've never seen Dollhouse, either, for that matter. I've heard interesting things about it, though.



Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on March 14, 2009, 02:10:27 am
Finally saw Milk.  Strange movie.  A little uneven, heavily unbalanced in its treatment of characters and it meandered into small subplots that didn't impact or enhance the plotline at all.  White was a cipher.  He was in the movie so little, his backstory so vague that when the time comes for him to snap, you have no idea what his motivation is or why he's so upset in the first place.  I'm not sure if they played it this way because in reality no one did know why he went postal.  I expected a better soundtrack to help set the time and place and a lot more sex.  This was the 70's, before AIDS came in and destroyed a way of life, sex was everywhere.  The movie was kinda gimmicky with some of the cinematography, but for the most part it was extremely well done.  Sean Penn was inspired casting, his Oscar well deserved.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: BelAir on March 14, 2009, 10:16:53 am
I saw Slumdog finally.  I thought it was quite good, but not in the class of Brokeback...  And I'm not certain where I would rank it in the 'best movies of all time' list...

I have to admit I'm a little surprised it won the Oscar - not because it wasn't good enough, just because it doesn't seem like typical Oscar fare.  That said, I haven't seen any of the other best pic nominees.

One thing that I find especially amazing about Slumdog, despite all the awful things that happen, I never really felt "down" - only worried and hopeful for Jamal and Latika.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kd5000 on March 14, 2009, 12:44:32 pm
I saw Slumdog finally.  I thought it was quite good, but not in the class of Brokeback...  And I'm not certain where I would rank it in the 'best movies of all time' list...


I have to agree with you on that matter. I've seen all pictures this year that were critically acclaimed and I wasn't big on SLUMGDOG MILLIONAIRE.  Not since CRASH have I seen a movie as weak to have won best picture. I liked NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN and the THE DEPARTED, but SLUMDOG didn't grab me.   

I saw THE READER last weekend and it was better then I thought it would be.  So much moral ambiguity in THE READER.  What is evil?  What's it like to live in a post genocide society? Whose to blame and how much responsibility do ordinary ppl who just looked share?  How does a society come to term with it's recent atrocious past?
It touches on these issues and many many more...
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on March 16, 2009, 04:29:02 pm
Which reminds me, did you ever watch THE TATTOOIST with Mr. Behr?   Blockbuster's had a previously viewed DVD of it on sale for under $10 and I stupidly didn't buy it.

Hey Gil, I finally saw The Tattoist.  (Netflix streaming video--pretty good.)  I'd see Jason Behr in just about anything.  The story was interesting, and not as violent as I'd thought it might be, a little light overall.  Jason was very cute, but unfortunately just as wooden as he was in Roswell.

(http://bp2.blogger.com/_9EG7LXCqPiY/SHBrWHx8OtI/AAAAAAAAFw4/gc5Wjh-WoFk/s400/Jason+Behr.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on March 16, 2009, 05:53:10 pm
Hey Gil, I finally saw The Tattoist.  (Netflix streaming video--pretty good.)  I'd see Jason Behr in just about anything.  The story was interesting, and not as violent as I'd thought it might be, a little light overall.  Jason was very cute, but unfortunately just as wooden as he was in Roswell.

(http://bp2.blogger.com/_9EG7LXCqPiY/SHBrWHx8OtI/AAAAAAAAFw4/gc5Wjh-WoFk/s400/Jason+Behr.jpg)

Yes, well, Jason Behr never did seem to have much range I'm afraid.  He did some "emoting" in RITES OF PASSAGE.  (Well, he tried! ;)) Too bad the homoeroticism was so ... restrained, it could have been so hot if he had made-out with James Remar!

PS:  I was always in the Fehr camp, myself... ;)
(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/fehr2.jpg)
(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/fehr1.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on March 16, 2009, 10:59:27 pm
Yes, well, Jason Behr never did seem to have much range I'm afraid.  He did some "emoting" in RITES OF PASSAGE.  (Well, he tried! ;)) Too bad the homoeroticism was so ... restrained, it could have been so hot if he had made-out with James Remar!

PS:  I was always in the Fehr camp, myself... ;)

Hmm, Brendan never did much for me. 

Trivia: Jason Behr has one degree of separation from BBM.  How? 

Also, shameless name-dropping:  I met James Remar in 1989 when he was filming Tales from the Darkside:  The Movie.  He's from Boston and he knows his psych meds!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on March 17, 2009, 12:06:37 pm
Hmm, Brendan never did much for me. 

Trivia: Jason Behr has one degree of separation from BBM.  How? 

Also, shameless name-dropping:  I met James Remar in 1989 when he was filming Tales from the Darkside:  The Movie.  He's from Boston and he knows his psych meds!
Not counting the DAWSON'S CREEK/Michelle Williams connection, I assume?  Or THE SHIPPING NEWS/ANNIE PROULX connection?
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on March 17, 2009, 02:25:02 pm
Not counting the DAWSON'S CREEK/Michelle Williams connection, I assume?  Or THE SHIPPING NEWS/ANNIE PROULX connection?

Yeah, I was thinking about The Shipping News--he played "Dennis Buggit".  Gotta love Annie's weird names. 
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on March 17, 2009, 02:30:12 pm
Yeah, I was thinking about The Shipping News--he played "Dennis Buggit".  Gotta love Annie's weird names. 

Cool, I didn't even look it up!  :D

On the weekend I saw:

GOMORRAH - (2008) Matteo Garrone 4/5
-Excellent film! A violent & unsentimental look at the Neopolitan mob. It feels like a documentary and certainly doesn't glorify the lifestyle. A must see.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on March 21, 2009, 10:02:54 pm
Duplicity

8 out of 10

Plus 1 point for outstanding chemistry between the two leads.  They're very natural together.

The valuable product they're plotting to steal adds a hint of ludicrousness to the whole atmosphere of super-secret, high tech, underhanded, cut-throat corporate espionage world they're working in.

Clive is gorgeous and does a mean Southern accent and I take a point off the movie for not giving him a shirtless scene every 15 minutes.   :-*

Another point off  - can't Julia Roberts look glam for once?  She's still doing this organic frumpy thing - and it's not flattering at all.

The flashbacks were a bit difficult to keep up with.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on March 22, 2009, 06:13:10 pm
WATCHMEN - I was apprehensive about seeing this one because I hated 300, the director's previous film, but I really enjoyed it.   I would recommend reading the graphic novel first,though.  Some details have been changed but they actually improve on the story.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on April 13, 2009, 01:35:17 pm
I highly recommend Frozen River, the little independent film about an unusual friendship between two women in financial crisis on the US/Canadian border. 

Great performances by Melissa Leo (the longshot for the Best Actress Oscar this year) and Misty Upham.  First-time filmmaker Courtney Hunt both wrote and directed. 
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on April 13, 2009, 02:52:52 pm
Thanks for the reminder, Paul.  :)

I forgot to mention I saw "Sunshine Cleaning" with Amy Adams and Emily Blunt, which I also recommend.  It's being advertised as a yuk-yuk comedy, but it's more than that.   It's been compared to "Little Miss Sunshine," which gives you a better idea, mainly in that there's humor, but it comes out of underlying family problems.  Both Amy Adams and Emily Blunt turn in great performances, and smaller roles by Alan Arkin, Steve Zahn, Clifton Collins, Jr. (the killer in "Capote") and Mary Lynn Rajskub (Chloe on "24") make it even better.  The director, Christine Jeffs, hasn't done a lot, but she did a great job, I think.  It's shot in Albuquerque and follows two down and out sisters who start a crime scene cleanup business.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Ellemeno on April 14, 2009, 03:21:30 am
Meryl, you make me want to see Sunshine Cleaning.  Good cast.

delalluvia, please to forgive, I came on this thread to say what a piece of barely mitigated crap Duplicity was, with annoying plot holes (plotholes being particularly irksome in thriller/caper/how'd they do it movies).  I will agree that Julia Roberts didn't look good, but I like what I imagine you mean by the "organic" look, and am often not as keen on glamorous.  To me it looked she had more weird plastic surgery and then bad make up.  Clive Owen, I concur, is pretty dang yummy, and so interesting to look at.  And he did do a good job on the accent, though it didn't sound like any Tennessee accent I'm familiar with.  He could do a whole movie with that accent and carry it off, I think. 

The dialogue was incredibly lame-o.  I didn't feel chemistry between them other than I kept getting the sense they were signalling, "I can't believe I'm delivering this horseshit."  "I know, we've sold out, but remember, it's worth it."  "I guess.  Where do you want to go for lunch today?"

I did like Kathleen Chalfant

I went to the IMDb forum for it, and read some pretty entertaining plot hole explosions.


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on April 14, 2009, 09:21:37 am
I saw I Love You, Man last week and I loved it, man. Well, liked it anyway. It's not high art, but it's cute and funny. Paul Rudd and Jason Segal were both good.

I liked how it subtly, tacitly, subverted some gay stereotypes. Paul Rudd's character, a straight guy, gets along well only with women. He comes home and makes a big tray of root beer floats for his fiancée and her friends -- complete with chocolate straws -- but he's awkward around guys. His brother, Andy Samberg, is gay, but he is closer to their traditional dad and gets along much better with guys in general, including straight men.

Unfortunately the women characters, as usual in this kind of movie, were fairly dull. Even those who were potentially funny didn't get much to do. Maybe someday they'll start making comedies in which women get to say funny things, too.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Ellemeno on April 14, 2009, 11:41:17 am
K, I'm really glad you told us about I Love You, Man.  I had made a judgment, based on the title, and who the two main actors are, that  the phrase "I love you, man," was a line from the movie, where stoners rasp that out semi-facetiously with a big bong hit escaping their lungs.  Not that there might be anything wrong with that, but I wasn't hurrying to find out more.  I assumed, and you know what assuming can get a person.

Now I look forward seeing it. 
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on April 14, 2009, 12:40:43 pm
K, I'm really glad you told us about I Love You, Man.  I had made a judgment, based on the title, and who the two main actors are, that  the phrase "I love you, man," was a line from the movie, where stoners rasp that out semi-facetiously with a big bong hit escaping their lungs.  Not that there might be anything wrong with that, but I wasn't hurrying to find out more.  I assumed, and you know what assuming can get a person.

Now I look forward seeing it. 

Well, the camera lens does fall upon a bong at one point, but it doesn't get used. And I should mention that a smattering of the jokes do not meet my standards for tastefulness. But overall, I found it likable. I hope you do, too!



Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Ellemeno on April 15, 2009, 03:59:23 am
Well, the camera lens does fall upon a bong at one point, but it doesn't get used. And I should mention that a smattering of the jokes do not meet my standards for tastefulness. But overall, I found it likable. I hope you do, too!



A smatterin' a smut.


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Ellemeno on April 25, 2009, 11:53:33 pm
I had a satisfying experience last night.  I and four other women have recently started a once a month movie and pizza night.  Last night was our second time together, and I was theone who brought the movie.  We watched one of my very favorites - Lone Star by John Sayles.  I have tried to turn many people onto it, but you know, you can't make people watch a movie.  But you can if it's your turn to choose the film for pizza and movie night!  I'm happy to tell you that without exception the other four loved it.  What a great movie.  Best dialogue and plot ever. 

Lone Star (1996)
http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0116905/


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on April 26, 2009, 10:51:34 am
What a great movie.  Best dialogue and plot ever. 

Lone Star (1996)


I've seen this and remember liking it, but not much else. Maybe I'll put it in my queue. I love John Sayles. One of the few people who has managed to juggle a movie career and writing. Him and Nora Ephron and ...?

Meanwhile, I saw State of Play yesterday and liked it a lot. It's just a well done traditional thriller in the mode, as some critics have said, of the old 1970s thrillers. I always like Russell Crowe, as well as cast-against-type Jason Bateman and Jeff Daniels.

It's set against a backdrop of the collapse of the newspaper industry, and every time that was mentioned I teared up.


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Ellemeno on April 26, 2009, 12:45:21 pm
I've seen this and remember liking it, but not much else. Maybe I'll put it in my queue. I love John Sayles. One of the few people who has managed to juggle a movie career and writing. Him and Nora Ephron and ...?

Meanwhile, I saw State of Play yesterday and liked it a lot. It's just a well done traditional thriller in the mode, as some critics have said, of the old 1970s thrillers. I always like Russell Crowe, as well as cast-against-type Jason Bateman and Jeff Daniels.

It's set against a backdrop of the collapse of the newspaper industry, and every time that was mentioned I teared up.






I'm curious which type Jason Bateman is cast against in this movie.  The hapless straight man of Arrested Development?  The manipulative schemer of The Ex
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Ellemeno on April 26, 2009, 12:49:40 pm
Hey, I  just went and looked at the IMDb page for State of Play.  David Harbour is in it.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on April 26, 2009, 12:54:30 pm


I'm curious which type Jason Bateman is cast against in this movie.  The hapless straight man of Arrested Development?  The manipulative schemer of The Ex

The personable marketing professional of Hancock. This time he's an unpersonable marketing professional.



Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on April 26, 2009, 01:40:13 pm
I had a satisfying experience last night.  I and four other women have recently started a once a month movie and pizza night.  Last night was our second time together, and I was theone who brought the movie.  We watched one of my very favorites - Lone Star by John Sayles.  I have tried to turn many people onto it, but you know, you can't make people watch a movie.  But you can if it's your turn to choose the film for pizza and movie night!  I'm happy to tell you that without exception the other four loved it.  What a great movie.  Best dialogue and plot ever. 

Lone Star (1996)
http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0116905/

I rented this a few years back.  Very good.  Very understated story, but interesting.  Wonderful acting all the way around.  And I was amused as a Texan that the town was sooooooooo small that they had to send to a larger town - San Marcos - for help.  I've lived in San Marcos.  It isn't much of a town either.   :laugh:
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Ellemeno on April 26, 2009, 01:57:01 pm
The personable marketing professional of Hancock. This time he's an unpersonable marketing professional.






Ah.  Thanks for the clarification.  :)  You did make the movie sound good.  Now the two top movies on my wish list are I Love You, Man and State of Play, both 'cause a you.


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on April 26, 2009, 10:06:30 pm
Well, today a friend asked me to see 17 Again with her and her 8-year-old son, and I am SO glad I went.

Now I am not only feeling cheerful and upbeat, I also am drawing "Mrs. Serious Crayons Efron" on all of my notebooks, with a big heart dotting the "i."

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Ellemeno on April 30, 2009, 03:02:47 am
I saw State of Play tonight.  I mostly thought it was very good.  Russell Crowe and Jason Bateman were very good.  Helen Mirren could have been better, if they hadn't made her character such a One Note Johnny.  Jeff Daniels looked like Tom Brokaw.  Robin Wright Penn is aging gorgeously.  The last few minutes were a disappointment.  I was watching for a while when I suddenly realized that the person on the screen I'd been watching was David Harbour.  He doesn't seem to make much of an impression on me.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on May 04, 2009, 07:43:32 am
X-Men Wolverine

7 out of 10

Very entertaining movie, not at least for all the Hugh Jackman contractually obligatory shirtless scenes (and almost naked scenes!).  ;D   Lot of story told in less than 2 hours.

Points take off for normal comic-book movie plot holes, cliches and unexplained talents of mutants (like how almost everyone can jump around like frogs - except when it's part of the script that they can't).

Otherwise, recommended!!

P.S.  Stick around for credits and end of credits for extra scenes.  They're showing alternate ones in different theaters.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on May 16, 2009, 03:07:27 pm
Angels and Demons

7 out of 10

Very good.  Not excellent, but overall, a well done movie.  Enough suspense to keep everyone in the sold-out show dead silent and unmoving - no one left for the bathroom or popcorn - and a friend of mine who had already read the book and knew what was going to happen, biting her nails and riveted the entire 2.5 hours of the movie.  The production quality was amazing, you couldn't tell you weren't actually in the Vatican.  It stuck fairly close to the book - some of the bad parts of the book were thankfully left out.  (see below for some of them)

Acting was well done by professional international cast, some of the actors however, didn't have much to work with, their parts however pivotal, were smaller than expected.  The weakest character was the woman.  Not that she wasn't convincing, but that there wasn't much to her.  The whole movie/book could have been done without her.  This is Landon's chase.



SPOILER!!!  SPOILER!!!  SPOILER!!













In the book, the characters were driven by fanaticism of all kinds.  In the movie, this fanaticism was toned down, one character was money-driven, another driven by political power, religion seemingly a lesser concern for them when in the book, it was the main impetus for their actions.

The movie does not delve into motivations as deeply as it should have.  The book's characters were driven by deep feelings which made you empathize with them, both the good and bad characters, but the movie made their motivations more 'secular' you could say and less emotional which I feel is a great loss.  Another character does not have the public death that was so important to the whole point of the book.

They did leave out some lame parts of the book - the whole woman-running-around-the-Vatican-in-tight-t-shirt-and- bicycle-shorts thing, the soap-opera-y immaculate conception thing (though they could have done more with the father/son thing than they did), the helicopter fall and the romance.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on May 31, 2009, 11:53:23 am
I saw "Up" last nite with the Denver Brokies...a very fine time! I recommend it!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on June 16, 2009, 07:43:58 pm
So Just How Gay is James Franco's Student Film?
Written by S.T. VanAirsdale | 15 Jun 2009, 12:00 PM

James Franco has been dabbling in directing for a while now at New York University’s film school, where he has acknowledged the influence of poetry on his early short work. Not just any poetry, though — we’re talking about Anthony Hecht’s blisteringly homoerotic piece The Feast of Stephen, Franco’s adaptation of which screened here at CineVegas. And when it comes to nailing the tone, vitality and flopping penises of his source material, the fledgling filmmaker is unquestionably in a league of his own. Let’s break down the festival’s gayest film (with spoilers!) after the jump.

Also paying homage to the trailblazing work of Kenneth Anger, the silent, black-and-white Stephen opens with its meek, bespectacled title character (Remy Germinario, in his screen debut) watching a pick-up basketball game in New York City. But the only score Stephen is keeping is the number of shirtless hunks dribbling, sweating and writhing on the court. One mop-topped stud in particular has all the moves, nudging Stephen’s daydream into the more erotic realm of naked boys playing hoops — in slow-motion, natch, and suddenly transported to a wooded glen where society’s referees won’t blow a whistle on their hard fouls.

That sylvan utopia quickly turns into a leafy city park, where the boys haul Stephen off for a prolonged beating. This doesn’t quite reflect the eloquence of Hecht’s “kilowatts of noon” or the “bully’s thin superiority”; Franco opts instead for the more squirming, sustained brutality of fists, elbows, knees and blood. But one sporting fantasia calls for another, apparently, and by now Stephen daydreams of himself as the object of the naked boys’ violent game. Franco pulls this together stylishly if graphically, with chests, thighs and asses pressed tight in various permutations, infusing the violence with the poem’s more visceral sense of ecstasy.

No single punch or kick or bout of dry-humping, however, wields quite the diminishing power of feces smeared on one’s face, which Stephen endures in Franco’s grand finale. But really, endurance has less to do with his ordeal than does experience. The “feast” of the title is Stephen’s big gay rite of passage, however demeaning and/or gang-rapey it might be; the literally shit-eating grin he shares with the audience at the end suggests that even the most horrendous intimacy is better than none at all.

As student films go, it’s a tight, competent, attractive exercise. As James Franco projects go, it cements the young hyphenate’s place in the canon of the gayest stories ever told. Howl won’t stand a chance.

from: http://www.movieline.com/2009/06/so-just-how-gay-is-james-francos-student-film.php (http://www.movieline.com/2009/06/so-just-how-gay-is-james-francos-student-film.php)

I'm really starting to like James Franco, a lot!
Title: The 50 Greatest Trailers of All Time
Post by: oilgun on July 16, 2009, 08:11:02 pm
The 50 Greatest Trailers of All Time

They should be called leaders.

We know them as trailers, but they don't trail anything; they play before the movie, not after it. The name dates to their earliest incarnation, when they actually did follow the feature. The documentary "Coming Attractions" dates the very first trailer to a 1912 Edison serial entitled "What Happened to Mary?" After each installment, a black card with white text would appear to inform audiences "The next incident in the series of 'What Happened to Mary' will be shown a week from now." Not exactly "In a world..." but it did the trick back in 1912.

What happened to Mary wasn't nearly as important as what happened to trailers, which have grown into one of the most popular forms of advertising in the world. Some think they spoil the movies -- Gene Siskel famously hated them so much he wouldn't enter a theater while they were playing -- but for the rest of us, they're a treasured part of the moviegoing ritual, a delicious cinematic appetizer to prepare us for the main course.
[...]

Continues, and you can watch all 50 trailers: http://www.ifc.com/news/2009/06/50-greatest-trailers.php (http://www.ifc.com/news/2009/06/50-greatest-trailers.php)
Title: Re: The 50 Greatest Trailers of All Time
Post by: delalluvia on July 16, 2009, 08:33:31 pm
The 50 Greatest Trailers of All Time

They should be called leaders.

We know them as trailers, but they don't trail anything; they play before the movie, not after it. The name dates to their earliest incarnation, when they actually did follow the feature. The documentary "Coming Attractions" dates the very first trailer to a 1912 Edison serial entitled "What Happened to Mary?" After each installment, a black card with white text would appear to inform audiences "The next incident in the series of 'What Happened to Mary' will be shown a week from now." Not exactly "In a world..." but it did the trick back in 1912.

What happened to Mary wasn't nearly as important as what happened to trailers, which have grown into one of the most popular forms of advertising in the world. Some think they spoil the movies -- Gene Siskel famously hated them so much he wouldn't enter a theater while they were playing -- but for the rest of us, they're a treasured part of the moviegoing ritual, a delicious cinematic appetizer to prepare us for the main course.
[...]

Continues, and you can watch all 50 trailers: http://www.ifc.com/news/2009/06/50-greatest-trailers.php (http://www.ifc.com/news/2009/06/50-greatest-trailers.php)

Soooooooooo disagree with so many of their choices.  Heck, my favorite trailers weren't even on the list!
Title: Shock to the System
Post by: oilgun on July 21, 2009, 01:30:56 pm
Trailer:
[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4n7zGVwi4AA[/youtube]

The Second Installment in the Donald Strachey Mystery Series: Even Better than the First!

Richard Stevenson's gay mystery novels based on his creation of Donald Strachey, Private Investigator have found the perfect crew to transform these very interesting and entertaining stories to film. SHOCK TO THE SYSTEM is the second in the series and as adapted for the screen by Ron McGee, directed with panache by Ron Oliver, and starring the very fine actor Chad Allen as the sleuth with couth and style and charisma the results are a polished little gem of a film. But aside from the fact that the film is so well put together, it presents gay people in roles that are so far away from the usual stereotypical types that their sexual proclivity is in many ways simply incidental: you have to look long and hard to find a solid healthy gay relationship as well portrayed as that between Strachey and his life partner Tim (the very fine Sebastian Spence).

The story this time around involves Strachey's being asked to help one Paul Hale (Jared Keeso), the supposed poster boy for the Phoenix Foundation, a 'turn gay people straight' institute run by Dr. Trevor Cornell (Michael Woods) and his wife Lynn (Anne Marie Loder). Paul is soon found dead and the implications are suicide. But Strachey suspects foul play (we later discover Hale was his first love in the Army!) and aided by Hale's mother Phyllis (Morgan Fairchild looking terrific and acting well) who encouraged her son's joining the Phoenix Foundation, he begins his own style of investigation.

Strachey wisely 'becomes a patient' with Dr. Cornell and in group therapy makes discoveries and friends with those who eventually help to solve the case: a strong group of actors including Rikki Gagne, Stephen Huszar, Ryan Kennedy, Jeffrey Bowyer-Chapman, Shawn Roberts, Dany Papineau, and Gerry Morton. The clues are laid out, the deaths follow and the truths finally surface. And all the while Strachey is supported by Tim, by a very fine comic actor Nelson Wong as his 'office manager', and by his 'boss' Detective Bailey (Daryl Shuttleworth).

The dialogue is crisp, relevant, intense when it needs to be and funny when it relaxes, the cinematography takes a beautiful bow to the old Hollywood film noir techniques, and the cast is excellent, filled with not only a lot of eye candy but also with some very well realized characterizations. In the end the film belongs to the very hunky and versatile Chad Allen, only making wait for the next installment in this very successful series! Highly recommended for all audiences.

From gradyharp from United States at IMDB: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0780606/usercomments

That movie was on TV recently and i caught the second half.  I love the series, they are above average TV movies and rather earnest in tone but I find them wonderfully entertaining guilty pleasures, reminiscent of QaF.
The gay "Nick & Nora"  had their own 'Shasta'  in the previous film, Third Man Out, which I thought was a nice touch but for some reason the little terrier was absent in this one.

Anyway, what really brings me here is the speech by the Doctor at the 'ex-gay Phoenix foundation.    The anti-gay sentiments expressed match almost verbatim what I've been hearing from the androphiles on this site.    And I'm not saying this to start an argument or to shit on the andros, it was just so uncanny that I had to bring it up.  I'll check Youtube to see if that scene is available.  If you have the chance to see it, please let me know what you think.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on July 21, 2009, 04:01:33 pm
After seeing this post, I had to look up Chad Allen's bio. What an interesting actor. Apparently he played Matthew Cooper on Dr. Quinn Medicine Woman which I watched regularly. But I don't remember him. Here's a quote from Chad:

"[Until Brokeback Mountain (2005)] there was a huge fear or belief that you couldn't tell a story with a gay hero and have it make money. A well-made movie with a good story trumps everything. It's not just a victory for gay rights; it's a victory for humanity."
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on July 21, 2009, 04:25:41 pm
After seeing this post, I had to look up Chad Allen's bio. What an interesting actor. Apparently he played Matthew Cooper on Dr. Quinn Medicine Woman which I watched regularly. But I don't remember him. Here's a quote from Chad:

"[Until Brokeback Mountain (2005)] there was a huge fear or belief that you couldn't tell a story with a gay hero and have it make money. A well-made movie with a good story trumps everything. It's not just a victory for gay rights; it's a victory for humanity."

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/DrQuinn-01.jpg)

I never watched that show so I'm not sure when I became aware of him.  He's one of the few 'christians' that I respect in show business .
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on August 09, 2009, 05:16:44 pm
It's on my list too! Thank you so much, oilgun, for your outstanding movie recommendations. We should git you out a those oilfields and into the movie theater on a regular basis, on a professional basis! (Who knows, you probably run the Toronto Film Festival and your oilgun tag is a cover LOL!)

Finally, it's the Denver Intl. Film Festival, and my list of films to see includes Laurel Canyon, Wendy and Lucy, The Eternal City, The Hustler, and, on closing night, Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kit and Wild Combination: a Portrait of Arthur Russell. I wish I were seeing more international films, so I'll try to add to this list as/if I get more time!

Ten months later, I finally get to see Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid! It was playing at the Central City, Colorado, Opera House (a historic venue dating from the Colorado Gold Rush) so EDelMar and I tooled up there to see it in wide screen. Sundance was definitely a man in the mold of Ennis, while Paul Newman as Butch was a Jackian character. Sundance even told Butch more than once: "You keep thinking, that's what you do best."

An inadvertently funny passage came late in the movie when Etta, Sundance's girlfriend as played by Katherine Ross, kept saying, "There are other ways to go straight" and the camera zoomed in on Butch and Sundance looking at each other intently. I could just imagine them telepathing to each other, "Why would we want to do that?!???
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Monika on August 09, 2009, 05:46:13 pm
(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/DrQuinn-01.jpg)

I never watched that show so I'm not sure when I became aware of him.  He's one of the few 'christians' that I respect in show business .


Oh, I remember Matthew. I was an avid Dr Quinn viewer back in the days. I haven´t seen him in anything since, though.
I´ll try to check out the new movie
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: BelAir on September 26, 2009, 09:46:13 am
What happened to this thread???  I want to go to the theater and need advice on what to see...

(maybe there's just nothing good to see...?)

anyhoo, i'm considering Adam, 9, District 9, and 500 Days of Summer...
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on September 26, 2009, 12:16:11 pm
What happened to this thread???  I want to go to the theater and need advice on what to see...

(maybe there's just nothing good to see...?)

anyhoo, i'm considering Adam, 9, District 9, and 500 Days of Summer...

I have only seen the last two. District  9 is one of my favorite movies of the past six months or so. Very original and compelling. 500 Days ... was just OK. I do like both Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Zooey Deschanel but, IMO, they aren't quite as cute as the movie thinks they are.

Extract was kind of cute and charming, I thought.

I really want to see The Informant!

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: BelAir on September 26, 2009, 06:49:40 pm
I have only seen the last two. District  9 is one of my favorite movies of the past six months or so. Very original and compelling. 500 Days ... was just OK. I do like both Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Zooey Deschanel but, IMO, they aren't quite as cute as the movie thinks they are.

Extract was kind of cute and charming, I thought.

I really want to see The Informant!



I opted for Adam.  Rotten Tomatoes made me think District 9 was too bloody for me to see on the big screen.  Adam was also showing at the local independent theater, whereas all the others were at the mall mogul.

I thought it was pretty good.  Rushed at the end a bit.  Was crazy to hear Rose Byrne without the Australian accent...
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on October 02, 2009, 11:18:30 pm
Ye gods.

Just came back from seeing District 9

Have no idea why the critics think this movie is any good.  I'd give it a 4.5 out of 10 and that's for the acting and what it tried to do..

It's a movie that

A) was a favor done by Peter Jackson for a friend

or

B) a movie that got visited half-way through by the studio heads who saw what had been done and said CHANGE IT!

Fairly good, but heavy-handed, beat-you-over-the-head political allegory for the first hour that devolved into a buddy-GI Joe versus Cobra summer fanboy movie for the last hour with gore and cool weapons and even a pro-life Matrix like scene AND a racist scene to boot.

Gag.  Do NOT recommend this.  My friend and I decided on this movie, knowing nothing other than the A rating given it by critics.  We wanted to avoid grossness and gore so we didn't go see Inglorious Basterds.

We were literally nauseous and almost walked out.  :P  Don't waste your time or money.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on October 02, 2009, 11:48:05 pm
District 9 was one of my favorite movies of the summer! Highly original, fascinating, realistic (within its parameters), well-acted, scary, kind of poignant.

Inglorious Basterds ... interesting in parts, disgusting and stupid in others. Christoph Walz is fantastic as the evil Nazi guy. The British film critic character (who was that?) was good, too. Everyone else ... ehh.

So I guess you just never know!  :laugh:


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on October 03, 2009, 12:00:31 am
District 9 was one of my favorite movies of the summer! Highly original, fascinating, realistic (within its parameters), well-acted, scary, kind of poignant

So I guess you just never know!  :laugh:

Really?  We didn't think it original at all


SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS













Star Trek has done 'aliens as allegorical ghetto-ized people' in many of their episodes.  There was even a movie and TV series based on a similar theme (James Caan was in the movie, I don't remember the name).  The GI Joe versus Cobra knockoff of Aliens with the powersuit at the end was ridiculously fanboyish.  The PC-correct it's OK to boo hiss pro-apartheid white people so it was set in South Africa, was a move so heavy handed it was laughable, along with the bad conscienceless mercs - Blackwater anyone? - the pro-life Matrix-like scene with the lead pulling the plug on babies and the horrible racist scenes - aren't all Nigerians thugs and whores and witchdoctors who voodoo and eat their victims?  Gag.

Then of course the lack of continuity scenes - he grew a full-fledged alien hand in 30 minutes but the rest of him takes more than three days?  He says they're trapped and it's a dead end, but actually no, if you follow Christopher there's an exit just there.  Since when does fuel change someone genetically?  How did he come up with pocket money to buy food much less weapons?  The questions that don't get asked are legion.  Why was one alien and his son smarter than all the other aliens?  Why did they come?  Were they running?  Did they get lost?  Why didn't they ask for help to leave?  Why aren't scientists and the military tearing apart the ship to see how it works?  None of these questions are asked or answered.  He says he'll be back in 3 years?  Just the perfect amount of time to make a movie sequel.  What was his son and he going to eat for those years?  They were starving when they arrived.  It was just terrible.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on October 09, 2009, 08:20:22 pm

So, what should I go and watch tomorrow?  ZOMBIELAND or CAPITALISM: A LOVE STORY.  It's a tough one.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on October 09, 2009, 08:24:35 pm
So, what should I go and watch tomorrow?  ZOMBIELAND or CAPITALISM: A LOVE STORY.  It's a tough one.

I haven't yet seen either, but I say, go for Michael Moore!  He's more voracious than any zombie.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on October 18, 2009, 11:30:51 pm

Where the Wild Things Are

6/10

Great acting, production values, but plot lacks a point.  Movie is 1.5 hours long but feels like a solid 2 hours.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on November 27, 2009, 03:16:30 am

Men who stare at goats

6.5 out of 10

Silly and enjoyable (I certainly didn't mind staring at my man Ewan McGregor for two hours  ;D ) some minor political points made, but the story just meandered and didn't know quite what it wanted to be - a political allegory told through the character study of one man, a black comedy on the absurdities governments go through in wartime, a tale of the dichotomy between Dark and Light forces and how they reflect on the individual and on the whole, etc., etc.,

The movie didn't ever come to a climax because it didn't know what it was trying to say.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on November 27, 2009, 11:57:34 am
I'm glad you resurrected "Resurrecting the Movies thread," Del, because I've seen a bunch of movies on DVD lately and have been meaning to post here about them.

Taking of Pelham 123 -- Pretty typical thriller, mildly entertaining but nothing to write home about. It made me want to see the one from the '70s, which is supposed to be more interesting.

Adventureland -- I really liked this. I had heard it wasn't a typical teen comedy, and it wasn't -- it's much more intelligent and subtle.

The Lookout -- Excellent! A bit like Memento, one of my favorite movies ever, in that it helps you understand how brain damage would make one vulnerable to being messed with by others. Beautifully filmed, and not nearly as bleak as I'd feared it would be. In fact, there's one really funny line. JGL's performance is very good.

The Proposal -- Typical rom-com, but cute and actually funny at times. I used to be pretty meh about Ryan Reynolds, but I liked him in this (and in Adventureland, above). And I always like Sandra Bullock, even though her movies are almost always bad.

Out of Sight -- Just saw it last night and liked it a lot. George Clooney is charming as always, and Jennifer Lopez makes you wish she'd have stayed like this instead of turning into JLo. Good chemistry between them. Somehow I didn't realize until the end that Steven Soderbergh had directed, which makes sense.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on November 27, 2009, 12:16:01 pm
The PC-correct it's OK to boo hiss pro-apartheid white people so it was set in South Africa, was a move so heavy handed it was laughable,

I think the main reason it was set in South Africa is that the director is South African.



Where the Wild Things Are

6/10

Great acting, production values, but plot lacks a point.  Movie is 1.5 hours long but feels like a solid 2 hours.

I can't say the plot is gripping, but it does have a point. The wild things -- their personalities and the relationships between them and with the kid -- represent the emotions the kid is struggling with as he grows up. Same as in the book, only the movie takes the concept much further. I went with a friend who really wanted to see it and I didn't expect to like it. The friend wasn't all that impressed, and I wound up finding it interesting.


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Ellemeno on November 27, 2009, 12:38:27 pm

I'm glad you resurrected "Resurrecting the Movies thread," Del, because I've seen a bunch of movies on DVD lately and have been meaning to post here about them.


I was just thinking this thread is pretty well-titled.




Taking of Pelham 123 -- Pretty typical thriller, mildly entertaining but nothing to write home about. It made me want to see the one from the '70s, which is supposed to be more interesting.


I saw it as a New York City subway-riding kid when it came out, and it was terrifying to me.  Robert Shaw is always so sinister - in that, and Jaws, and The Sting.




The Lookout -- Excellent! A bit like Memento, one of my favorite movies ever, in that it helps you understand how brain damage would make one vulnerable to being messed with by others. Beautifully filmed, and not nearly as bleak as I'd feared it would be. In fact, there's one really funny line. JGL's performance is very good.


I had never seen or heard of Isla Fisher before seeing The Lookout, but ever since, I dislike her and her characters with an unreasonable ferocity, for duping and endangering the sweet and lovely JGL character in The Lookout.  It's hard to picture my hard feelings toward her changing.  Of all the reasons people have of being turned off by Sasha Baron Cohen, my reason is because he's married to Isla Fisher.  It's even made me like the likable Amy Adams less, since they remind me of each other.  I was watching an old The Office a couple of days ago, and Amy Adams had a short stint on it, and I noticed I feel completely different toward that episode now.  Maybe also because I now know that Pam and Jim get married, so Amy Adams feels more like an interloper than a plot-delayer now. 

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on November 27, 2009, 12:55:25 pm
I think the main reason it was set in South Africa is that the director is South African.

I thought the director was from New Zealand?

I can't say the plot is gripping, but it does have a point. The wild things -- their personalities and the relationships between them and with the kid -- represent the emotions the kid is struggling with as he grows up.

OK, I understand this, but this is a big, Yeah, So?  Anyone above the age of the character knows this.  We didn't need a movie to tell us this.  So what an audience might have expected to see was how the kid handled these emotions, calmed and controlled them and gained some sense of himself in the doing of it - IOW a coming of age story.  So what did the kid do with these emotions?  As far as I can tell from the movie, he did nothing.  Just experienced them, the monsters had no resolution and then he went home where there was no resolution there either.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on November 27, 2009, 01:23:24 pm
I had never seen or heard of Isla Fisher before seeing The Lookout, but ever since, I dislike her and her characters with an unreasonable ferocity, for duping and endangering the sweet and lovely JGL character in The Lookout.  It's hard to picture my hard feelings toward her changing.  Of all the reasons people have of being turned off by Sasha Baron Cohen, my reason is because he's married to Isla Fisher.  It's even made me like the likable Amy Adams less, since they remind me of each other.  I was watching an old The Office a couple of days ago, and Amy Adams had a short stint on it, and I noticed I feel completely different toward that episode now.  Maybe also because I now know that Pam and Jim get married, so Amy Adams feels more like an interloper than a plot-delayer now.

Wow, that's some serious Isla Fisher dislike -- that it even spreads to innocent bystanders whose only crime is physical resemblance!  :laugh:

The first thing I ever saw her in was The Wedding Crashers, but she didn't make a huge impression on me then. The next thing was Definitely Maybe, in which I liked her a lot. And then there was Confessions of a Shopaholic, which was not a good movie but she was OK in it. So my feelings toward her were vaguely positive before she duped and endangered JGL.

I'm the other way around with SBC and IF -- I hold him against her, rather than her against him. She reminds me of Amy Adams, too. They seem like sisters, the way that JGL and Heath seem like brothers. If anything, I probably like IF more because of her resemblance to AA, whom I found so enchanting in Enchanted.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Ellemeno on November 27, 2009, 01:26:41 pm

I agree that she and Amy Adams remind me of each other. They seem like sisters, the way that JGL and Heath seem like brothers.




There's a movie that will never happen.  :-\
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on November 27, 2009, 01:34:39 pm
I thought the director was from New Zealand?

Nope. Neill Blomkamp: born 17 September 1979, Johannesburg, South Africa.

Quote
OK, I understand this, but this is a big, Yeah, So?  Anyone above the age of the character knows this.  We didn't need a movie to tell us this.  So what an audience might have expected to see was how the kid handled these emotions, calmed and controlled them and gained some sense of himself in the doing of it - IOW a coming of age story.  So what did the kid do with these emotions?  As far as I can tell from the movie, he did nothing.  Just experienced them, the monsters had no resolution and then he went home where there was no resolution there either.

What the kid did with the emotions was to gain a new perspective on them, by seeing them in the form of the wild things rather than roiling around unnamed in his own mind. He didn't control them in the sense of vanquishing them, but in the sense of seeing that they're an inevitable part of life -- disturbing and not always controllable, but survivable. And there was resolution at home, which resembled the way things like that are resolved in real life: imperfectly. People get mad at each other, they say regrettable things, but in the end they still love each other, which  they eventually recognize is more important than passing flares of anger.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on November 27, 2009, 01:44:36 pm
]
What the kid did with the emotions was to gain a new perspective on them, by seeing them in the form of the wild things rather than roiling around unnamed in his own mind.

How did he get a new perspective on them?  I didn't see this at all.  He reacts to the situations with the monsters no differently than how he did at home, except with the monsters he actually has power, whereas at home, his childish ideas are ignored.

Quote
He didn't control them in the sense of vanquishing them, but in the sense of seeing that they're an inevitable part of life -- disturbing and not always controllable, but survivable.

Was there ever a question in his mind that they weren't?  Has he never gotten mad before?  Seems to me that a kid as mischevious as Max, who wears a Wolf costume, who is obviously attention-seeking, has many many times experienced wild emotions and they're already a part of him.

Quote
And there was resolution at home, which resembled the way things like that are resolved in real life: imperfectly. People get mad at each other, they say regrettable things, but in the end they still love each other, which  they eventually recognize is more important than passing flares of anger.

Again, I never saw this as sometihing he didn't already know.  Max is a child, but not an infant.  He goes to school, he has a sibling, he already knows people can fight and fall out and it not be a permanent situation.   
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on November 27, 2009, 01:54:40 pm
So my feelings toward her were vaguely positive before she duped and endangered JGL.


Who is JGL??
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on November 27, 2009, 01:56:56 pm
How did he get a new perspective on them?  I didn't see this at all.  He reacts to the situations with the monsters no differently than how he did at home, except with the monsters he actually has power, whereas at home, his childish ideas are ignored.

But he gets outside of those emotions -- for example, when consoling the goatlike one who complains of always being ignored, or when seeing that the main one has destroyed his toothpick landscape the way that Max had destroyed the popsicle-stick heart he made for his sister -- rather than being controlled by them.

Quote
Was there ever a question in his mind that they weren't?  Has he never gotten mad before?  Seems to me that a kid as mischevious as Max, who wears a Wolf costume, who is obviously attention-seeking, has many many times experienced wild emotions and they're already a part of him.

Again, I never saw this as sometihing he didn't already know.  Max is a child, but not an infant.  He goes to school, he has a sibling, he already knows people can fight and fall out and it not be a permanent situation.    

I don't know. I said I thought the movie was interesting, not a masterpiece, so I'm really not up for defending it endlessly. But I don't think the movie was intended to depict some singularly life-changing experience, as if Max never had any inkling about any of this stuff until that one fateful night. No, I think it was simply showing, in metaphorical terms, the way that kids gradually learn to handle emotions as they grow up. Small children (younger than Max) really don't know how to handle their emotions, and as they mature they get better at it, but even adults do it imperfectly.

One flaw I saw in the movie is that the actor who played Max seemed a little too old for the part. The plot about dealing with emotions might make more sense with a younger child, and in fact the kid in the book appears younger. But he was a good actor, and I'm sure it would be hard to get a 5-year-old to carry a movie.

Here's an excerpt from a NYT piece that describes it fairly well:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/08/movies/08scot.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/08/movies/08scot.html)

Quote
Mr. Jonze’s film, extrapolated from a few hundred words and a dozen or so illustrations by Maurice Sendak — not uncontroversial in their own right, by the way — is dense with difficult emotions. The hero, Max, is often angry and lonely, frustrated when his sister neglects him and jealous when his divorced mother spends time with her boyfriend. The depiction of Max’s home life and his impulsive, aggressive behavior seem almost designed to provoke disapproval from some concerned, hypercritical party or another, even if those opening scenes of domestic chaos also elicit a flicker of pained recognition.

But like Dorothy before him, who found in Oz some of the same characters she’d left back in Kansas, Max escapes to an enchanted world that looks a lot like home. The furry, talking creatures who give the movie its name are strikingly grouchy, quarrelsome and passive-aggressive. They whine, they pout, they manipulate, they break things and hurt one another for no good reason. One of them makes a big deal about her cool new friends, who turn out to be a pair of terrified owls. Others use self-deprecation as a way to feel special, or deploy aggression to mask insecurity.

They act, in short, just like people and turn to Max, a human child in a wolf suit who proclaims himself a king, to deliver them from their humanity. The love between ruler and subjects is mutual, but so is the disillusionment that rounds off Max’s sojourn on the island and sends him back across the sea to his mother. No place is free of conflict and bad feeling, and no person has the power to make problems disappear. Where there is happiness — friendship, adventure, affection, security — there is also, inevitably, disappointment. That’s life.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on November 27, 2009, 01:57:48 pm
Who is JGL??

Joseph Gordon-Levitt.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on November 27, 2009, 02:36:59 pm
No, I think it was simply showing, in metaphorical terms, the way that kids gradually learn to handle emotions as they grow up. Small children (younger than Max) really don't know how to handle their emotions, and as they mature they get better at it, but even adults do it imperfectly.

One flaw I saw in the movie is that the actor who played Max seemed a little too old for the part. The plot about dealing with emotions might make more sense with a younger child, and in fact the kid in the book appears younger. But he was a good actor, and I'm sure it would be hard to get a 5-year-old to carry a movie.

Here's an excerpt from a NYT piece that describes it fairly well:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/08/movies/08scot.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/08/movies/08scot.html)

Well, the issue I had with the movie is that I didn't see Max learning anything really.  I expected the homecoming to SHOW what he might have learned, but the ending showed nothing.  He didn't improve the monster's lives, he just left when things went south for him.

As for the link you posted, I completely disagree with analogy to Wizard of Oz.  Dorothy had regrets about her home life and how she left.  Max had none.  Basically had Dorothy been like Max, she would have left the wicked witch alive and in power, never gave a heart, brain or courage to anyone, proclaimed herself superior to everyone there and then when things turned on her, went back home without showing any sign she wouldn't run away again if she had the chance.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Ellemeno on November 27, 2009, 02:58:07 pm
Joseph Gordon-Levitt.




Funny how he got an acronym right away, when we first started talking about him.  Faster than any actual BBM actor or character.  Doesn't it also seem like he got unoffical BBM-related status a long time ago too?
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on November 27, 2009, 03:05:34 pm
As for the link you posted, I completely disagree with analogy to Wizard of Oz.  Dorothy had regrets about her home life and how she left.  Max had none.  Basically had Dorothy been like Max, she would have left the wicked witch alive and in power, never gave a heart, brain or courage to anyone, proclaimed herself superior to everyone there and then when things turned on her, went back home without showing any sign she wouldn't run away again if she had the chance.

In that case, WTWTA is more realistic than TWOZ. In real life, most of us don't get a chance to kill a wicked witch and see to it that all of our friends' wishes are fulfilled and return home to live happily ever after. Not to take anything from TWOZ, but it's a classic hero story with the traditional cut-and-dried conflict/action/climax/conclusion structure. WTWTA takes a more complex approach. In the end, the movie says, you never completely vanquish the "monsters" and, yes, you probably will eventually feel like running away again. Life means finding a way to deal with those realities, however imperfectly.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on November 27, 2009, 03:08:34 pm

Funny how he got an acronym right away, when we first started talking about him.  Faster than any actual BBM actor or character.  Doesn't it also seem like he got unoffical BBM-related status a long time ago too?

Yes!! Good point. That could almost make a whole thread: Things that don't have anything directly to do with BBM yet have unofficial BBM-related status.

Here's another one: "Wish you were here." (How many non-Brokies would understand the connection between BBM and, of all things, a Pink Floyd song?)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on November 27, 2009, 04:46:51 pm
In that case, WTWTA is more realistic than TWOZ. In real life, most of us don't get a chance to kill a wicked witch and see to it that all of our friends' wishes are fulfilled and return home to live happily ever after. Not to take anything from TWOZ, but it's a classic hero story with the traditional cut-and-dried conflict/action/climax/conclusion structure. WTWTA takes a more complex approach. In the end, the movie says, you never completely vanquish the "monsters" and, yes, you probably will eventually feel like running away again. Life means finding a way to deal with those realities, however imperfectly.

Except that Max doesn't learn to deal with those realities.  We don't see it.

What the movie is then - I'm partially agreeing with you - is a realistic - comparatively speaking - view of a kid acting out his problems at home but showing no growth, no learning, no moral to his story, just reality - that he has feelings and they happen and they're everywhere.

*Yawn*  No wonder I was bored and it was only a 1.5 hour movie.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on November 27, 2009, 04:53:58 pm
Except that Max doesn't learn to deal with those realities.  We don't see it.

What the movie is then - I'm partially agreeing with you - is a realistic - comparatively speaking - view of a kid acting out his problems at home but showing no growth, no learning, no moral to his story, just reality - that he has feelings and they happen and they're everywhere.

*Yawn*  No wonder I was bored and it was only a 1.5 hour movie.

Well, like I said, it's not the classic hero adventure with the traditional obvious plot. However, I do think there is growth, learning and a moral. They're just subtle.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on November 27, 2009, 05:06:51 pm
Well, like I said, it's not the classic hero adventure with the traditional obvious plot. However, I do think there is growth, learning and a moral. They're just subtle.

So subtle that me, my teacher friend and other friends and relatives - ranging in ages from 19 to 46 -who saw the movie missed them as well.  We all had the same complaint about the movie.  :laugh:
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: BelAir on November 27, 2009, 11:01:03 pm
I saw A Serious Man tonight and thought it was great!

A little bit dark and terribly funny...
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on November 29, 2009, 04:18:26 pm
Just got back from seeing Hillcoat's The Road and loved it!  It's pretty bleak, of course, but I didn't find it particularly depressing.  More like horrifying and I did tear up quite a bit, so make sure you have tissues, lol!  Viggo gives an excellent performance and I hope it gets him a nomination at least.   Highly recommended.

I should add that I haven't read the book,  I understand that those who have, enjoy the film less.

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/road01.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Sammi on December 01, 2009, 06:55:45 pm
OK I am not sure if this is the right thread to posts this... but anyway...

I don't really watch movies very often, I have not been to a movie in a theater in about 4 years and I rarely watch them on cable.  However it seems like aorund this time of year the cable stations do play lots of good movies, and lately I have seen several movies that are not new, but new to me (BBM being one of them). 

For example I just watched Little Miss Sunshine, and The Lake House with Keanu Reeves and Sandra Bullock.  I liked both movies.  Has anyone ever seen Lake House?  I did enjoy this movie even though I could never really wrap my head around the time warm thing.  ***SPOILERS*** At the end of the movie the two main characters are united and they can finally embrace and they give this totally lackluster kiss, I was like "huh?" about it.  I guess after watching that reunion scene kiss in BBM I expect more from on-screen kisses!  SB and KR seemed like they has zero passion and chemistry, and they have been in movies together before!  Weird ending.   

Little Miss Sunshine was just funny, I liked it.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Sophia on December 01, 2009, 07:09:09 pm
OK I am not sure if this is the right thread to posts this... but anyway...

I don't really watch movies very often, I have not been to a movie in a theater in about 4 years and I rarely watch them on cable.  However it seems like aorund this time of year the cable stations do play lots of good movies, and lately I have seen several movies that are not new, but new to me (BBM being one of them). 

For example I just watched Little Miss Sunshine, and The Lake House with Keanu Reeves and Sandra Bullock.  I liked both movies.  Has anyone ever seen Lake House?  I did enjoy this movie even though I could never really wrap my head around the time warm thing.  ***SPOILERS*** At the end of the movie the two main characters are united and they can finally embrace and they give this totally lackluster kiss, I was like "huh?" about it.  I guess after watching that reunion scene kiss in BBM I expect more from on-screen kisses!  SB and KR seemed like they has zero passion and chemistry, and they have been in movies together before!  Weird ending.   

Little Miss Sunshine was just funny, I liked it.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Sophia on December 01, 2009, 07:18:46 pm
OK I am not sure if this is the right thread to posts this... but anyway...

I don't really watch movies very often, I have not been to a movie in a theater in about 4 years and I rarely watch them on cable.  However it seems like aorund this time of year the cable stations do play lots of good movies, and lately I have seen several movies that are not new, but new to me (BBM being one of them). 

For example I just watched Little Miss Sunshine, and The Lake House with Keanu Reeves and Sandra Bullock.  I liked both movies.  Has anyone ever seen Lake House?  I did enjoy this movie even though I could never really wrap my head around the time warm thing.  ***SPOILERS*** At the end of the movie the two main characters are united and they can finally embrace and they give this totally lackluster kiss, I was like "huh?" about it.  I guess after watching that reunion scene kiss in BBM I expect more from on-screen kisses!  SB and KR seemed like they has zero passion and chemistry, and they have been in movies together before!  Weird ending.   

Little Miss Sunshine was just funny, I liked it.

sounds like you had a great time. Which character did you prefare in lake house? keanu or Sandra. I haven't seen any chose movies but next time i am in a mood for a movie I definitely will look out for them.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Sammi on December 01, 2009, 07:50:14 pm
Which character did you prefare in lake house? keanu or Sandra.

Hmm not sure.  I like both actors but I felt like this movie does not showcase either one very well.  For the characters. I like the Keanu/Alex charcter better, only because we learn more about him, his character is more deeply revealed.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Sophia on December 01, 2009, 08:04:33 pm
lake house is it a love story or comedy ? haven´t seen so many love stories or comedy with keanu reevs. When I think of Keanu I think of action.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on December 01, 2009, 08:19:11 pm
lake house is it a love story or comedy ? haven´t seen so many love stories or comedy with keanu reevs. When I think of Keanu I think of action.

Keanu has been in a few comedies (he first became famous in Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure), and a few love stories (A Walk in the Clouds, Feeling Minnesota). So he gets points for trying different things, anyway.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Sammi on December 01, 2009, 08:21:08 pm
Lake House - It's a love story - there is no action in it whatsoever.  It is not up there with the great love story movies by any means - it was a little flat.  And it has this weird time warp element that is hard to get into.  I liked the movie becuase I really like both actors, but if you are a Sandra Bullock fan I think Hope Floats was better.

I was also thinking about the movie Steel Magnolias, I have seen it a million times, but it was on recently too.  This is a sad and tragic movie but I was thinking about how even though it is very sad when Shelby dies, the movie ends on a hopeful note with the little boy and the theme is "life goes on", you know?   But in BBM the ending is so sad and tragic and there are no signs of hope.  Very haunting indeed.

I can't help but to start comparing every movie to BBM now.  It's part of my obsession.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on December 01, 2009, 08:24:11 pm
I found that for a while after seeing BBM I was better off with movies that weren't anything like BBM. The first movie I liked after seeing BBM was Thank You for Smoking.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Sammi on December 01, 2009, 08:30:15 pm
Things like kissing scenes being flat or lackluster, I wonder if that has to do with the director too.  Like seeing a lame kissing scene, I wonder "why didn't they reshoot that until they got it right?"  Maybe poor direction.  Hard to say.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Sophia on December 01, 2009, 08:34:21 pm
Lake House - It's a love story - there is no action in it whatsoever.  It is not up there with the great love story movies by any means - it was a little flat.  And it has this weird time warp element that is hard to get into.  I liked the movie becuase I really like both actors, but if you are a Sandra Bullock fan I think Hope Floats was better.

I was also thinking about the movie Steel Magnolias, I have seen it a million times, but it was on recently too.  This is a sad and tragic movie but I was thinking about how even though it is very sad when Shelby dies, the movie ends on a hopeful note with the little boy and the theme is "life goes on", you know?   But in BBM the ending is so sad and tragic and there are no signs of hope.  Very haunting indeed.

I can't help but to start comparing every movie to BBM now.  It's part of my obsession.

its totally understandable, and I am sure we all have been there or still are there. The ending is really emotionally, I cry every time I see it. the ending is something we have discussed here at bettermost many times. for some its no sign of hope, for others the shirt is some satisfaction and realisation of there love.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Sammi on December 01, 2009, 08:42:00 pm
The ending is one of the saddest things I've even seen. This middle aged man all alone, alone out on this dirt road somewhere in his trailer with only the shirts.  When I watch it I can hear Jack's words ringing "We coulda had a good life together, but you didn't want it".  Ugh - so gut wrenching. 
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on December 01, 2009, 08:51:17 pm
Hi, Sammi, and welcome. 

In terms of hope, I think Ang tried to add a hint of hope to the film that may be lacking in the story.

Ennis's coming around to decide to attend Jr.'s weddding, complete with a Cassie white wine toast, is a hopeful sign.  Plus, he finally says the word "love", when asking about Kurt, all the while looking out the window of his little trailer, and, presumably, thinking about Jack. 
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Sophia on December 01, 2009, 09:00:24 pm
The ending is one of the saddest things I've even seen. This middle aged man all alone, alone out on this dirt road somewhere in his trailer with only the shirts.  When I watch it I can hear Jack's words ringing "We coulda had a good life together, but you didn't want it".  Ugh - so gut wrenching. 

but we shouldn´t forget the life Ennis had as a child, from what we know it doesn't sounds so good. So maybe living in a trailer ain't so bad for him. For me he is a simple man, don't need so many things in his life. And a trailer is just ok.

But the sorrow after Jack, I guess most be dreadful. But still life continues and the love they had is something Ennis will carry with him for eternity.

and that love I guess is something he never really experienced with anyone else, not even as a child.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Sammi on December 08, 2009, 11:08:50 am
Over the weekend I watched Sense and Sensibility, an Ang movie, and October Sky starring Jakey.  I enjoyed them both.  SAS was "OK", it is a good story, but I was not blown away by it and I did not think it was very exceptionaly done.  I loved Emma Thomson in it though, she is great. I wish we saw more of her.  October Sky was great - Jake was still a teen when he did this movie and he was already such a good actor. 
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Ellemeno on December 12, 2009, 10:20:37 pm
Over the weekend I watched Sense and Sensibility, an Ang movie, and October Sky starring Jakey.  I enjoyed them both.  SAS was "OK", it is a good story, but I was not blown away by it and I did not think it was very exceptionaly done.  I loved Emma Thomson in it though, she is great. I wish we saw more of her. 


And Emma Thompson wrote the screenplay.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on December 13, 2009, 08:48:12 pm
Saw the movie Brothers

Give it 6.5 out of 10

Great acting all around.

But the story wasn't as tight as it might have been.  The story is truly about brothers. the focus is on neither of them, but on both, so you have two storylines, but Jake's story was a bit more nebulous since his story combined with Natalie's and Tobey's story was more linear and focused on him, but when they all combine, there is no real resolution to any of their stories, which of course makes it more realistic, but makes you feel it's a little lacking movie-wise.  It should have been longer so some scenes might have fully developed more rather than ending abruptly or the characters saying something out of the blue.

SPOILER   SPOILER   SPOILER  SPOILER  SPOILER














But I did wonder why Tobey's character was listed as KIA instead of MIA.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on December 19, 2009, 12:09:13 am
Maybe this belongs in the "Things Faintly Brokish" thread. I heard today about a movie called "Did you hear about the Morgans". Apparently a couple is relocated under the Witness Protection Program from Manhattan to a small town in Wyoming called Ray. Dig this: the names of the couple are Meryl and Paul!!  ;D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Ellemeno on December 19, 2009, 12:23:15 am
Maybe this belongs in the "Things Faintly Brokish" thread. I heard today about a movie called "Did you hear about the Morgans". Apparently a couple is relocated under the Witness Protection Program from Manhattan to a small town in Wyoming called Ray. Dig this: the names of the couple are Meryl and Paul!!  ;D


One of my happiest Brokie memories is sitting in the backseat in Alberta, while Meryl and Paul in the front kept me joyfully entertained. 
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on December 19, 2009, 12:59:36 am
Maybe this belongs in the "Things Faintly Brokish" thread. I heard today about a movie called "Did you hear about the Morgans". Apparently a couple is relocated under the Witness Protection Program from Manhattan to a small town in Wyoming called Ray. Dig this: the names of the couple are Meryl and Paul!!  ;D

Sounds like some filmmakers have been spending time Chez Tremblay!

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on December 19, 2009, 08:42:00 am
Maybe this belongs in the "Things Faintly Brokish" thread. I heard today about a movie called "Did you hear about the Morgans". Apparently a couple is relocated under the Witness Protection Program from Manhattan to a small town in Wyoming called Ray. Dig this: the names of the couple are Meryl and Paul!!  ;D


My ears perked up when i found out they went to Wyoming but unfortunately the film is supposed to be a one-star dud of a film.  One of those if-you-saw-the-trailer-skip-the-film things. 
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on December 19, 2009, 11:11:54 am
I still don't think I can resist peeking at Hugh in a cowboy hat!!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on December 19, 2009, 11:38:37 am
Maybe this belongs in the "Things Faintly Brokish" thread. I heard today about a movie called "Did you hear about the Morgans". Apparently a couple is relocated under the Witness Protection Program from Manhattan to a small town in Wyoming called Ray. Dig this: the names of the couple are Meryl and Paul!!  ;D

 :laugh:  :laugh:  :laugh:

That's about the closest I'll ever come to being compared to Sarah Jessica Parker.  ;D

Now if our Paul ever wants to share a house with me in Wyoming, you bet I'll go for it.  8)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on December 19, 2009, 11:48:14 am
:laugh:  :laugh:  :laugh:

That's about the closest I'll ever come to being compared to Sarah Jessica Parker.  ;D

Now if our Paul ever wants to share a house with me in Wyoming, you bet I'll go for it.  8)

Ditto re me and Hugh Grant! 

As long as we don't have to witness a murder, I'm all for it, Meryl!

(BTW, poor Wyoming--looks like it was filmed in New Mexico.)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on December 19, 2009, 11:58:13 am
As long as we don't have to witness a murder, I'm all for it, Meryl!

OK, I'll keep my eyes peeled for a nice chalet in the Tetons.  ;)

I saw two screenings this week:  "Nine" and "It's Complicated."  Both were very good, but I won't review them now since they haven't opened yet.  It's so nice to finally have some good movies to see over the holidays.  8)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on December 19, 2009, 12:15:55 pm

My ears perked up when i found out they went to Wyoming but unfortunately the film is supposed to be a one-star dud of a film.  One of those if-you-saw-the-trailer-skip-the-film things. 

Judging from this review by a Salon writer, I'll take the REAL Paul and Meryl any day.

"Did You Hear About the Morgans" stinking?
This Hugh Grant-Sarah Jessica Parker debacle is so unfunny it's offensive
By Mary Elizabeth Williams


The most entertaining moment of "Did You Hear About the Morgans?" came halfway through the press screening, during yet another scene of middle-aged bickering. Hugh Grant, one-half of a recently separated New York power couple, sputters an excuse for his infidelity to his estranged wife. "I'm not perfect," he says. "I'm human. I made a mistake." At which point the woman next to me cracked, "That's what Tiger said!"

Unfortunately, not everyone will be so fortunate in their random seat mates. So in case you're still on the fence about this shambling wreck of a romantic comedy (which is neither romantic nor comic), let me help by saying that you have already seen this movie. You may have seen it on the Hallmark channel, or Lifetime, or an old episode of "Who's the Boss?" Although, to be fair, "Who's the Boss?" had better writing.

(continues ... http://www.salon.com/entertainment/movies/did_you_hear_about_the_morgans/index.html?story=/ent/movies/review/2009/12/17/did_you_hear_about_the_morgans_sucking (http://www.salon.com/entertainment/movies/did_you_hear_about_the_morgans/index.html?story=/ent/movies/review/2009/12/17/did_you_hear_about_the_morgans_sucking))

BTW, it's funny that the URL says "sucking" but the headline says "stinking." Maybe they feared the former could open up the possibility of misunderstandings or double entendres?



Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on December 19, 2009, 12:33:07 pm
Update to above: Now that I've read the rest of that (scathing!) review, there do seem to be a few suspiciously Brokieish aspects to Did You Hear About the Morgans?:

Let's see if you too can be a Hollywood writer. What will happen when this duo -- one who's infertile and one who's unfaithful -- are thrown together again one starry night? Should there be a scene in which someone runs away from a bear? Attempts to chop wood? Dances in a cowboy hat? Will those fussy Gothamites bitch about how it's too "quiet" to sleep and the air is "too clean"? Will a vegetarian be served a plate of sausages? When someone mentions that it's a good thing the Morgans will be in town for the rodeo, will there be a scene involving an assassin, a bull and clowns? Congratulations, here's $50 million. Go fuck something up.

Can a movie that's just opened and reportedly terrible achieve Brokieish status?


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on December 19, 2009, 06:06:35 pm
RUN, do not walk, to see AVATAR!

I don't say that very often, but I was completely enthralled by this spectacle of a movie.  I gasped, I laughed and I even shed a tear or two.  Of course, this being Cameron, the script is a bit weak  but I didn't even care. 

Yes, Blue is the new Sexy (and the new Green)

(I can't even imagine conservatives hating it, but they probably will.   ;))

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/avatar01.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on December 19, 2009, 06:21:53 pm
New York Times film critic Manohla Dargis was interviewed on Jezebel a couple of days ago. It's a good interview overall, but here's an excerpt of particular interest to Brokies:

Let's acknowledge that the Oscars are bullshit and we hate them. But they are important commercially... I've learned to never underestimate the academy's bad taste. Crash as best picture? What the fuck.

http://jezebel.com/5426065/fuck-them-times-critic-on-hollywood-women--why-romantic-comedies-suck (http://jezebel.com/5426065/fuck-them-times-critic-on-hollywood-women--why-romantic-comedies-suck)

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Berit on December 19, 2009, 07:55:51 pm
We, the husband, the son and your's truly, saw it this evening and it is GOOD! Go and see it folks. We didn't see it in 3D since I only can see with one eye.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on December 19, 2009, 09:07:05 pm
We, the husband, the son and your's truly, saw it this evening and it is GOOD! Go and see it folks. We didn't see it in 3D since I only can see with one eye.

I'm so glad you liked it, Berit!

I was just telling my friend - I called everyone, lol! - that the film would be just as good without the 3D effect because it's not done in a gimmicky manner, it just is.  I'm sure the film would still be visually stunning in 2D.

One thing that bothered me though was Sam Worthington's voice when he was Nav'i-Jake.  It kept reminding me of Mel Gibson!  Ewww!  :laugh:
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on January 01, 2010, 07:36:00 pm
I just saw AN EDUCATION and quite enjoyed it , it has a very intelligent script and it's chock-full of wonderful performances, the young lead is a revelation.  Oh and I didn't realize that Rosamund Pike was in it and I love her!  Not sure why they cast Peter Sarsgaard but he seemed fine in the role, I can't really judge how good his accent is, though.  I kept thinking Dominic Cooper should have had the role.



Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on January 01, 2010, 09:29:52 pm
I just saw AN EDUCATION and quite enjoyed it , it has a very intelligent script and it's chock-full of wonderful performances, the young lead is a revelation.  Oh and I didn't realize that Rosamund Pike was in it and I love her!  Not sure why they cast Peter Sarsgaard but he seemed fine in the role, I can't really judge how good his accent is, though.  I kept thinking Dominic Cooper should have had the role.

I'd forgotten about this one. Thanks to your review, it's on my list.

Might have to wait for the January doldrums and/or DVD, though. I still have to catch Avatar and Up in the Air!

I saw It's Complicated a few nights ago and unexpectedly liked it. I feared there'd be too much older-woman-wish-fulfillment content, which sometimes gets so outlandish that it has started really getting on my nerves. While was "aspirational," it seemed reasonably natural in the context of the plot.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Ellemeno on January 01, 2010, 09:38:45 pm
I saw Up in the Air yesterday, and am glad I did, although - ugh - Vera Farmiga's haircut and make up were very irritating.   

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on January 01, 2010, 09:43:36 pm
I saw Up in the Air yesterday, and am glad I did, although - ugh - Vera Farmiga's haircut and make up were very irritating.   



I haven't seen Up in the Air, but I recently wracked my brain, because the name Vera Farmiga sounded so familiar. Then I realized that she played Caitlin opposite Heath in the series "Roar".

(http://epguides.com/Roar/cast.jpg)
Vera Farmiga, at Heath's left
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Ellemeno on January 01, 2010, 09:53:02 pm
I haven't seen Up in the Air, but I recently wracked my brain, because the name Vera Farmiga sounded so familiar. Then I realized that she played Caitlin opposite Heath in the series "Roar".

(http://epguides.com/Roar/cast.jpg)
Vera Farmiga, at Heath's left


Yes, it's part of why I wanted to see it.  I really enjoyed her in Roar.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on January 02, 2010, 10:58:39 am

Yes, it's part of why I wanted to see it.  I really enjoyed her in Roar.

That's funny, I didn't even recognize her.  Maybe it's because I thought she was pretty weak in ROAR (Plus she was a damn Xian, lol!) but I did like her in UP IN THE AIR.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on January 02, 2010, 02:26:35 pm
Vera Farmiga's haircut and make up were very irritating. 

How so?

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on January 02, 2010, 11:48:11 pm
Red-hot American actor: Jeremy Renner
(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/People/JeremyRenner.jpg)

Red-hot French actor, Jérémie Renier
(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/People/jeremierenier1.jpg)
Coincidence?  ;)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on January 03, 2010, 08:07:35 pm
Just watched (500) DAYS OF SUMMER and really enjoyed it!  Joseph Gordon-Levitt is wonderful in it.  I also loved that it feels like an old-fashioned rom-com but isn't and it features parts of L.A. that are seldom seen in movies. Here's one of my favourite scenes:

[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2seAJsrtIbQ[/youtube]
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on January 03, 2010, 08:29:20 pm
I'm glad you liked 500 Days, Gil.  JGL is very talented in this quirky film.  (Gotta love the bluebird.)

BTW, JGL, who was "Elder Ryder" in Latter Days, had apparently read for the part of Aaron, but the filmmakers thought he had too much of an edge to convincingly play a Mormon!

I keep hoping he'll play in the Heath Ledger Story.  Someone please write a script, quick!!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on January 04, 2010, 04:09:43 pm
I'm glad you liked 500 Days, Gil.  JGL is very talented in this quirky film.  (Gotta love the bluebird.)

BTW, JGL, who was "Elder Ryder" in Latter Days, had apparently read for the part of Aaron, but the filmmakers thought he had too much of an edge to convincingly play a Mormon!

I keep hoping he'll play in the Heath Ledger Story.  Someone please write a script, quick!!

But his character was still a Mormon  ???  Anyway, that edge is why we love him so much anyway, isn't it.
While listening to 500 days commentary he mentions that he had starred with Zoey Deschanel once before in the movie Manic.  I had forgotten that she was in that.  He said that he had a few Manic-flashbacks in the big fight scene.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on January 04, 2010, 04:14:15 pm
But his character was still a Mormon  ???  Anyway, that edge is why we love him so much anyway, isn't it.

OOps, well, Aaron was the "sweet" Mormon, and Ryder was the "edgy" Mormon. LOL
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kerry on January 06, 2010, 12:59:06 am
Saw Sherlock Holmes  yesterday.

Absolutely fabulous!   :D

Don't miss it.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Aloysius J. Gleek on January 10, 2010, 05:26:04 pm


RUN, do not walk, to see AVATAR!

I don't say that very often, but I was completely enthralled by this spectacle of a movie.  I gasped, I laughed and I even shed a tear or two.  Of course, this being Cameron, the script is a bit weak  but I didn't even care. 

Yes, Blue is the new Sexy (and the new Green)

(I can't even imagine conservatives hating it, but they probably will.   ;) )
(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/avatar01.jpg)


Yup.

The New York Times's (senior) conservative columnist is harrumphing rather than hating because, officially, the NYT is never  supposed to hate, only harrumph. But as much as I love Avatar (I've now seen it twice), David Brooks clearly does not--

Figures.


http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/08/opinion/08brooks.html?adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1263157307-8K12D5NE7ilul9beX+wl8w (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/08/opinion/08brooks.html?adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1263157307-8K12D5NE7ilul9beX+wl8w)


(http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/misc/nytlogo152x23.gif)

Op-Ed Columnist
The Messiah Complex


By DAVID BROOKS
Published: January 7, 2010


Readers intending to watch the movie “Avatar” should know that major events in the plot are revealed.

Every age produces its own sort of fables, and our age seems to have produced The White Messiah fable.

This is the oft-repeated story about a manly young adventurer who goes into the wilderness in search of thrills and profit. But, once there, he meets the native people and finds that they are noble and spiritual and pure. And so he emerges as their Messiah, leading them on a righteous crusade against his own rotten civilization.

Avid moviegoers will remember “A Man Called Horse,” which began to establish the pattern, and “At Play in the Fields of the Lord.” More people will have seen “Dances With Wolves” or “The Last Samurai.”

Kids have been given their own pure versions of the fable, like “Pocahontas” and “FernGully.”

It’s a pretty serviceable formula. Once a director selects the White Messiah fable, he or she doesn’t have to waste time explaining the plot because everybody knows roughly what’s going to happen.

The formula also gives movies a little socially conscious allure. Audiences like it because it is so environmentally sensitive. Academy Award voters like it because it is so multiculturally aware. Critics like it because the formula inevitably involves the loincloth-clad good guys sticking it to the military-industrial complex.

Yet of all the directors who have used versions of the White Messiah formula over the years, no one has done so with as much exuberance as James Cameron in “Avatar.”

“Avatar” is a racial fantasy par excellence. The hero is a white former Marine who is adrift in his civilization. He ends up working with a giant corporation and flies through space to help plunder the environment of a pristine planet and displace its peace-loving natives.

The peace-loving natives — compiled from a mélange of Native American, African, Vietnamese, Iraqi and other cultural fragments — are like the peace-loving natives you’ve seen in a hundred other movies. They’re tall, muscular and admirably slender. They walk around nearly naked. They are phenomenal athletes and pretty good singers and dancers.

The white guy notices that the peace-loving natives are much cooler than the greedy corporate tools and the bloodthirsty U.S. military types he came over with. He goes to live with the natives, and, in short order, he’s the most awesome member of their tribe. He has sex with their hottest babe. He learns to jump through the jungle and ride horses. It turns out that he’s even got more guts and athletic prowess than they do. He flies the big red bird that no one in generations has been able to master.

Along the way, he has his consciousness raised. The peace-loving natives are at one with nature, and even have a fiber-optic cable sticking out of their bodies that they can plug into horses and trees, which is like Horse Whispering without the wireless technology. Because they are not corrupted by things like literacy, cellphones and blockbuster movies, they have deep and tranquil souls.

The natives help the white guy discover that he, too, has a deep and tranquil soul.

The natives have hot bodies and perfect ecological sensibilities, but they are natural creatures, not history-making ones. When the military-industrial complex comes in to strip mine their homes, they need a White Messiah to lead and inspire the defense.

Our hero leaps in, with the help of a pack of dinosaurs summoned by Mother Earth. As he and his fellow freedom fighters kill wave after wave of Marines or former Marines or whatever they are, he achieves the ultimate prize: He is accepted by the natives and can spend the rest of his life in their excellent culture.

Cameron’s handling of the White Messiah fable is not the reason “Avatar” is such a huge global hit. As John Podhoretz wrote in The Weekly Standard,  “Cameron has simply used these familiar bromides as shorthand to give his special-effects spectacular some resonance.” The plotline gives global audiences a chance to see American troops get killed. It offers useful hooks on which McDonald’s and other corporations can hang their tie-in campaigns.

Still, would it be totally annoying to point out that the whole White Messiah fable, especially as Cameron applies it, is kind of offensive?

It rests on the stereotype that white people are rationalist and technocratic while colonial victims are spiritual and athletic. It rests on the assumption that nonwhites need the White Messiah to lead their crusades. It rests on the assumption that illiteracy is the path to grace. It also creates a sort of two-edged cultural imperialism. Natives can either have their history shaped by cruel imperialists or benevolent ones, but either way, they are going to be supporting actors in our journey to self-admiration.

It’s just escapism, obviously, but benevolent romanticism can be just as condescending as the malevolent kind — even when you surround it with pop-up ferns and floating mountains.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Sophia on January 10, 2010, 07:05:59 pm
thanks john for the report, you really have inspire me to watch it now.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on January 10, 2010, 07:13:09 pm
...
Yes, Blue is the new Sexy (and the new Green)


(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/avatar01.jpg)
Just reading in my Celtic history about the early Celts who painted themselves blue with woad (whatever that is), bleached their hair with lime and went naked and dreadlocked into battle, scaring the Romans into retreat!!

Haven't seen Avatar yet but want to so much. Can't get ennione to go with me, so I'll go by myself.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on January 10, 2010, 07:55:28 pm
This is not at all in the same league, but I saw DAYBREAKERS today!  The Vampire movie with Ethan Hawke, Willem Dafoe & Sam Neal:

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/daybreakers02.jpg)
A shot of captured humans having their blood harvested like we do to dairy cows.

The film was pretty much what I expected:  a decent and innovative addition to the Vampire canon.  It's not a great movie by any means but I thought it was good fun.  There were a few niggling details (and plot holes) that bothered me but nothing too serious. The main one being that the vampires have no mirror reflections which is a ridiculous vampire trait that most contemporary writers discard so why they use it here is beyond me.  Especially since it has no bearing on the plot whatsoever.  At least sunlight does harm them, unlike the fangless faux-vamps of the Twilight saga.  It's very gory with exploding heads and blood and guts flying all over the place but it's all very cartoonish.  Recommended to Vampire addicts only.  7/10
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Aloysius J. Gleek on January 10, 2010, 10:29:46 pm


RUN, do not walk, to see AVATAR!
I don't say that very often, but I was completely enthralled by this spectacle of a movie.  I gasped, I laughed and I even shed a tear or two.  Of course, this being Cameron, the script is a bit weak  but I didn't even care.  
Yes, Blue is the new Sexy (and the new Green)


Just reading in my Celtic history about the early Celts who painted themselves blue with woad (whatever that is), bleached their hair with lime and went naked and dreadlocked into battle, scaring the Romans into retreat!!
Haven't seen Avatar yet but want to so much. Can't get ennione to go with me, so I'll go by myself.

thanks john for the report, you really have inspire me to watch it now.



I'll just add to Gil's very succinct and dead-on review: if you can, go and see the IMAX 3-D version. It's unbelievable! Brilliant!

I wear glasses because one of my eyes (the left) is much, much weaker than the other, and somewhat astigmatic as well.
B.A. (Before Avatar ) I had never before been to a 3-D movie, half thinking that the necessary visual stereo effect would not work for me.

Happily, I was wrong. I wore the supplied (free) goggles:

the slightly more expensive-looking pair in the first smaller theater, and then this slightly cheaper affair at the largest IMAX screen in Manhattan--
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_-NbL8W9Jnco/Sl62rxsDT9I/AAAAAAAAE8I/vviVD5N1Ie4/s400/CIMG7320.jpg)(http://www.vividideas.net/pb/pb_balt14.jpg)


Either pair of goggles, comfortably worn in addition to  my own prescription pair of glasses, had the same result: resplendent, eye-popping beauty.

If anybody was hesitant, well--in re both Avatar  and movies in general--I think it is a new (3-D) world! Give it a whirl!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on January 11, 2010, 12:06:50 am
I saw Avatar today with some friends in a fancy theater that had food and cocktails and huge comfy seats and tables. It was great, but next time I'm going to forgo the frills and sit closer to the screen.

Anyway, I liked it a lot! I do understand why conservatives wouldn't like it. In fact, I would think that for some conservatives it would pose a minor moral dilemma: they couldn't help but appreciate the coolness of the film, but there are so many anti-conservative messages in the plot (it's anti-military, anti-corporate, pro-environment) that it might leave them feeling conflicted.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Aloysius J. Gleek on January 11, 2010, 12:40:43 am


I do understand why conservatives wouldn't like it. In fact, I would think that for some conservatives it would pose a minor moral dilemma: they couldn't help but appreciate the coolness of the film, but there are so many anti-conservative messages in the plot (it's anti-military, anti-corporate, pro-environment) that it might leave them feeling conflicted.

Maybe not so a minor  moral dilemma, Katherine; all during my first screening, I was wondering what the American born-again christians would be thinking....
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Aloysius J. Gleek on January 11, 2010, 01:08:00 am


But of course. How could I have missed it? The New York Times's junior  conservative columnist had  to comment,
his Harvard robes worn lightly, working hard:

"As usual, Alexis de Tocqueville saw it coming" and "As the Polish philosopher Leszek Kolakowski noted"-- ::)

And like Mr. Brooks, Baby Ross Douthat has had to take issue with the "enviably slender" Na’Vi.
(Feeling a little bit pudgy there after the holidays, Ross, old boy?)




http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/21/opinion/21douthat1.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/21/opinion/21douthat1.html)

(http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/misc/nytlogo152x23.gif)
Op-Ed Columnist
Heaven and Nature

(http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2009/04/23/opinion/douthat-profile.jpg)

By ROSS DOUTHAT
Published: December 20, 2009


It’s fitting that James Cameron’s “Avatar” arrived in theaters at Christmastime. Like the holiday season itself, the science fiction epic is a crass embodiment of capitalistic excess wrapped around a deeply felt religious message. It’s at once the blockbuster to end all blockbusters, and the Gospel According to James.

But not the Christian Gospel. Instead, “Avatar” is Cameron’s long apologia for pantheism — a faith that equates God with Nature, and calls humanity into religious communion with the natural world.

In Cameron’s sci-fi universe, this communion is embodied by the blue-skinned, enviably slender Na’Vi, an alien race whose idyllic existence on the planet Pandora is threatened by rapacious human invaders. The Na’Vi are saved by the movie’s hero, a turncoat Marine, but they’re also saved by their faith in Eywa, the “All Mother,” described variously as a network of energy and the sum total of every living thing.

If this narrative arc sounds familiar, that’s because pantheism has been Hollywood’s religion of choice for a generation now. It’s the truth that Kevin Costner discovered when he went dancing with wolves. It’s the metaphysic woven through Disney cartoons like “The Lion King” and “Pocahontas.” And it’s the dogma of George Lucas’s Jedi, whose mystical Force “surrounds us, penetrates us, and binds the galaxy together.”

Hollywood keeps returning to these themes because millions of Americans respond favorably to them. From Deepak Chopra to Eckhart Tolle, the “religion and inspiration” section in your local bookstore is crowded with titles pushing a pantheistic message. A recent Pew Forum report on how Americans mix and match theology found that many self-professed Christians hold beliefs about the “spiritual energy” of trees and mountains that would fit right in among the indigo-tinted Na’Vi.

As usual, Alexis de Tocqueville saw it coming. The American belief in the essential unity of all mankind, Tocqueville wrote in the 1830s, leads us to collapse distinctions at every level of creation. “Not content with the discovery that there is nothing in the world but a creation and a Creator,” he suggested, democratic man “seeks to expand and simplify his conception by including God and the universe in one great whole.”

Today there are other forces that expand pantheism’s American appeal. We pine for what we’ve left behind, and divinizing the natural world is an obvious way to express unease about our hyper-technological society. The threat of global warming, meanwhile, has lent the cult of Nature qualities that every successful religion needs — a crusading spirit, a rigorous set of ‘thou shalt nots,” and a piping-hot apocalypse.

At the same time, pantheism opens a path to numinous experience for people uncomfortable with the literal-mindedness of the monotheistic religions — with their miracle-working deities and holy books, their virgin births and resurrected bodies. As the Polish philosopher Leszek Kolakowski noted, attributing divinity to the natural world helps “bring God closer to human experience,” while “depriving him of recognizable personal traits.” For anyone who pines for transcendence but recoils at the idea of a demanding Almighty who interferes in human affairs, this is an ideal combination.

Indeed, it represents a form of religion that even atheists can support. Richard Dawkins has called pantheism “a sexed-up atheism.” (He means that as a compliment.) Sam Harris concluded his polemic “The End of Faith” by rhapsodizing about the mystical experiences available from immersion in “the roiling mystery of the world.” Citing Albert Einstein’s expression of religious awe at the “beauty and sublimity” of the universe, Dawkins allows, “In this sense I too am religious.”

The question is whether Nature actually deserves a religious response. Traditional theism has to wrestle with the problem of evil: if God is good, why does he allow suffering and death? But Nature is suffering and death. Its harmonies require violence. Its “circle of life” is really a cycle of mortality. And the human societies that hew closest to the natural order aren’t the shining Edens of James Cameron’s fond imaginings. They’re places where existence tends to be nasty, brutish and short.

Religion exists, in part, precisely because humans aren’t at home amid these cruel rhythms. We stand half inside the natural world and half outside it. We’re beasts with self-consciousness, predators with ethics, mortal creatures who yearn for immortality.

This is an agonized position, and if there’s no escape upward — or no God to take on flesh and come among us, as the Christmas story has it — a deeply tragic one.

Pantheism offers a different sort of solution: a downward exit, an abandonment of our tragic self-consciousness, a re-merger with the natural world our ancestors half-escaped millennia ago.

But except as dust and ashes, Nature cannot take us back.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Aloysius J. Gleek on January 11, 2010, 01:56:06 am


The best of several good responses--


http://community.nytimes.com/comments/www.nytimes.com/2009/12/21/opinion/21douthat1.html (http://community.nytimes.com/comments/www.nytimes.com/2009/12/21/opinion/21douthat1.html)
Readers' Comments
Heaven and Nature

By ROSS DOUTHAT
The film “Avatar” is the director’s long apologia for pantheism, Hollywood’s religion of choice for a generation now.

Comment 27.
This is not pantheism, but a blend of animatism and animism.
The rest of you can look it all up in the dictionary.
Trust me, I do this for a living.
 

Will Spires
Santa Rosa, CA
December 21st, 2009
9:53 am
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on January 11, 2010, 04:03:01 pm
http://community.nytimes.com/comments/www.nytimes.com/2009/12/21/opinion/21douthat1.html (http://community.nytimes.com/comments/www.nytimes.com/2009/12/21/opinion/21douthat1.html)
Readers' Comments
Heaven and Nature

By ROSS DOUTHAT
The film “Avatar” is the director’s long apologia for pantheism, Hollywood’s religion of choice for a generation now.

Comment 27.
This is not pantheism, but a blend of animatism and animism.
The rest of you can look it all up in the dictionary.
Trust me, I do this for a living.
 

Will Spires
Santa Rosa, CA
December 21st, 2009
9:53 am


You chose the most authoritative response, but it was too short. Another interesting response was:

Quote
Clemsy Greenfield, NY
December 21st, 2009
1:41 pm
The question isn't if nature "deserves a religious response." The question is how could we have ever thought otherwise.

I haven't seen the movie yet, but several of the responses strike me as biased or ill-informed. However, I doubt that pantheism is the best name for what's illustrated in the movie. I'll have to get back to you on that.

I wonder if Cameron might have taken some inspiration from Druidism, which I'm studying now!!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on January 11, 2010, 04:26:02 pm
Just reading in my Celtic history about the early Celts who painted themselves blue with woad (whatever that is), bleached their hair with lime and went naked and dreadlocked into battle, scaring the Romans into retreat!!

Haven't seen Avatar yet but want to so much. Can't get ennione to go with me, so I'll go by myself.

Woad is the name for both a type of herb and the blue dye made from its leaves.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on January 11, 2010, 08:12:23 pm
Oh, okay! Maybe it grows on the wind-tossed heaths of the Highlands!

Oh, I automatically capitalized the word Heath.  :-\
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Aloysius J. Gleek on January 11, 2010, 08:34:28 pm


Yes, Blue is the new Sexy (and the new Green)

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/avatar01.jpg)

I wonder if Cameron might have taken some inspiration from Druidism, which I'm studying now!!

Woad  is the name for both a type of herb and the blue dye made from its leaves.

Well, if it walks like a duck--!  :D

Who knew??!!
http://www.woad.org.uk (http://www.woad.org.uk)/
(http://www.woad.org.uk/assets/images/autogen/All_About_Woad_Nbanner.gif)

(http://www.woad.org.uk/assets/images/autogen/a_1a-woadspool.jpg)
Learn more about the Woad plant (http://www.woad.org.uk/html/biology.html) (Isatis tinctoria ), a famous source of natural indigo dye
and how it has been used for several thousand years (see woad history (http://www.woad.org.uk/html/woad_history.html)) in Europe
and the Middle East. Woad dye extraction (http://www.woad.org.uk/html/extraction.html) produces natural indigo dye from the dark
blue-green, spinach-like woad leaves (http://www.woad.org.uk/html/biology.html). Buy woad pigment here (http://www.woad.org.uk/html/dye_and_seed.html).

Woad Facts (http://www.woad.org.uk/html/woad_facts.html)
Woad Images (http://www.woad.org.uk/html/woad_images.html)
Woad Resources (http://www.woad.org.uk/html/woad_resources.html)

(http://www.iwatchstuff.com/2009/08/04/avatar-poster-neytiri.jpg)



Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kerry on January 12, 2010, 12:46:28 am
I've just returned from seeing Avatar  in 3-D and was absolutely blown away. It is an amazing movie and I will be returning to see it again. I sat near the front and allowed myself to become totally enveloped within the experience. I was thrilled to see fellow-Aussie, Sam Worthington, as Jake Sully:

(http://i119.photobucket.com/albums/o126/kez4oz/Album%201/sam_worthington.jpg)
Sam Worthington
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kerry on January 12, 2010, 12:51:32 am
I've just returned from seeing Avatar  in 3-D and was absolutely blown away. It is an amazing movie and I will be returning to see it again. I sat near the front and allowed myself to become totally enveloped within the experience. I was thrilled to see fellow-Aussie, Sam Worthington, as Jake Sully:

(http://i119.photobucket.com/albums/o126/kez4oz/Album%201/sam_worthington.jpg)
Sam Worthington

Rats! Just checked Wikipedia and found Sam was actually born in England. He came to Australia with his family when he was a child and must be an Australian citizen now, because Wiki refers to him as an "Australian actor." The family settled in Perth, Western Australia. Same place Heath grew up. Small world.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sam_Worthington
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Ellemeno on January 12, 2010, 06:38:54 am
Well, if it walks like a duck--!  :D

Who knew??!!
http://www.woad.org.uk (http://www.woad.org.uk)/


Me!  I love woad.  Very cool stuff.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on January 12, 2010, 09:21:29 am
I've just returned from seeing Avatar  in 3-D and was absolutely blown away. It is an amazing movie and I will be returning to see it again. I sat near the front and allowed myself to become totally enveloped within the experience. I was thrilled to see fellow-Aussie, Sam Worthington, as Jake Sully:

I'd never heard of him before, but I liked him -- both in the regular form and the blue one.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Aloysius J. Gleek on January 12, 2010, 10:08:47 am

I'd never heard of him before, but I liked him -- both in the regular form and the blue one.



I liked Sam Worthington--the only thing or person I liked in the disaster that was Terminator Salvation --feh! What an ignominious end to a glorious original film, series, concept.




Anyway--Whups! Navisex! Fanfic on the starboard bow, captain!


http://gawker.com/5445676/the-avatar-navi-sex-scene-revealed (http://gawker.com/5445676/the-avatar-navi-sex-scene-revealed)
(http://supermoose37.files.wordpress.com/2008/12/gawker_logo.jpg)

The Avatar Na'vi Sex Scene Revealed
(http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/7/2010/01/500x_avatarsexscene-thumb-585xauto-9082.jpg)

Our friends at Movieline noticed that the sex scene between Jake and Neytiri that was axed
from the movie is in the script Fox posted online. The Na'vi don't have sex like humans—they
have "the ultimate intimacy." No, these giant blue creatures don't need genitals (so then why
the loincloths?) because they have their pony tail-like "queues" to mesh together. Riding your
woman is just like riding a banshee, except the wind isn't in your face. Check out the dirtiest
bits from page 90 of the script below. It's almost enough to...uh, make your hair stand on end.

(http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/7/2010/01/500x_navisex.jpg)

Send an email to Brian Moylan, the author of this post, at [email protected] (http://[email protected]).


Also:

http://www.pandorapedia.com/doku.php (http://www.pandorapedia.com/doku.php)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on January 12, 2010, 11:40:31 am
I'd never heard of him before.

Me, neither, until I saw a newspaper article back in the fall, when they were really starting to hype the movie. Cute and manly. ...  ;D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Lumière on January 12, 2010, 02:04:48 pm
Saw Sherlock Holmes  yesterday.

Absolutely fabulous!   :D

Don't miss it.


Yes to all this.  :)  I enjoyed it a great deal.
RDJ's Sherlock Holmes was basically as badass as I've always wanted Holmes to be.  And JL was the most refreshing, fun Watson I've seen yet.
And the chemistry between them - worked.  In short, the casting was great.
Recommended!

Next up for me - Avatar!  I can't wait actually.
I have avoided all spoilers pretty well so far.  Except this morning I was reading the Metro paper and there was an article in there about a group of people saying that Avatar is racist.  I didn't get into it because I want no spoilers.  But... racist against who? the blue people?  
 Anyway, don't answer that. lol.  Can't wait to see it this weekend!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on January 12, 2010, 04:55:36 pm
Yes to all this.  :)  I enjoyed it a great deal.
RDJ's Sherlock Holmes was basically as badass as I've always wanted Holmes to be.  And JL was the most refreshing, fun Watson I've seen yet.
And the chemistry between them - worked.  In short, the casting was great.
Recommended!

Ditto to all of this!  :D

Quote
Next up for me - Avatar!  I can't wait actually.

Milli, you will love it. The visual effects are amazing, and based on what I have seen of your own art, I would think very much your taste.

Quote
I have avoided all spoilers pretty well so far.  Except this morning I was reading the Metro paper and there was an article in there about a group of people saying that Avatar is racist.  I didn't get into it because I want no spoilers.  But... racist against who? the blue people?  
 Anyway, don't answer that. lol.  Can't wait to see it this weekend!

I'm familiar with this accusation. It has to do with the way the plot is structured. I'll say no more, unless you want me to. To me, the accusation has a grain of truth but it's a larger problem in Hollywood, not just with this film, and it's not a big enough problem to reduce my enjoyment of the film.



Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kerry on January 13, 2010, 09:35:59 am
I'd never heard of him before, but I liked him -- both in the regular form and the blue one.

I too had never heard of Sam. These quotes from his Wiki bio are interesting:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sam_Worthington

"He was 19 and working as a bricklayer when he auditioned for the National Institute of Dramatic Art in Sydney (NIDA) and was accepted, with scholarship."

and

"When he was around 30 years old, he sold most of his possessions and ended up with around $2,000 to his name. He then purchased a car with the money and lived in it for a period of time. He analogously equated his actions to hitting Control-Alt-Delete on a computer. He subsequently got a place to live following his successful audition and signing to the Avatar film project."

I'm looking forward to seeing Sam in his next big starring role as Perseus in "Clash of the Titans."

(http://i119.photobucket.com/albums/o126/kez4oz/Album%201/titans.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on January 13, 2010, 10:47:09 am
I too had never heard of Sam. These quotes from his Wiki bio are interesting:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sam_Worthington

"He was 19 and working as a bricklayer when he auditioned for the National Institute of Dramatic Art in Sydney (NIDA) and was accepted, with scholarship."

and

"When he was around 30 years old, he sold most of his possessions and ended up with around $2,000 to his name. He then purchased a car with the money and lived in it for a period of time. He analogously equated his actions to hitting Control-Alt-Delete on a computer. He subsequently got a place to live following his successful audition and signing to the Avatar film project."

I'm looking forward to seeing Sam in his next big starring role as Perseus in "Clash of the Titans."

(http://i119.photobucket.com/albums/o126/kez4oz/Album%201/titans.jpg)

In the meantime you should rent the Aussie film Somersault, that's when I discovered this hottie.  It also stars Abbey Cornish who was the reason for my renting it.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0381429/ (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0381429/)

And speaking of Australians, the other night I caught the TV show The Flight of the Conchords and it was the episode when Jemaine accidently sleeps with an Australian woman.  he wakes up and the first thing he sees is a poster for Men at Work, the blanket he's under has an Australian flag design, he tries to sneak out and next to the door there's a poster of kangaroos.  It's hilarious!  Of course his friends shun him because they can't accept the mixed race relationship.  "Think of the children you'll have,destined to go from city to city, looking for the perfect wave." 
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kerry on January 13, 2010, 10:53:47 am
In the meantime you should rent the Aussie film Somersault, that's when I discovered this hottie.  It also stars Abbey Cornish who was the reason for my renting it.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0381429/ (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0381429/)

And speaking of Australians, the other night I caught the TV show The Flight of the Conchords and it was the episode when Jemaine accidently sleeps with an Australian woman.  he wakes up and the first thing he sees is a poster for Men at Work, the blanket he's under has an Australian flag design, he tries to sneak out and next to the door there's a poster of kangaroos.  It's hilarious!  Of course his friends shun him because they can't accept the mixed race relationship.  "Think of the children you'll have,destined to go from city to city, looking for the perfect wave." 


 :laugh:

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Aloysius J. Gleek on January 13, 2010, 11:00:19 am


http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/13/movies/13avatar.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/13/movies/13avatar.html)

(http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/misc/nytlogo152x23.gif)
For All Its Success, Will ‘Avatar’
Change the Industry?

(http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2010/01/13/arts/13avatar_CA0span/articleLarge.jpg)
From left, Jamie Bell, Andy Serkis, Peter Jackson and Steven Spielberg at work on Mr. Spielberg's
“Adventures of Tintin: The Secret of the Unicorn,” which is due out in 2011.

By MICHAEL CIEPLY
Published: January 12, 2010

LOS ANGELES
— Just five months after Warner Brothers released its talking-picture sensation “The Jazz Singer” in October 1927, the studio was back in theaters with another talkie, the crime drama “Tenderloin.”

In today’s Hollywood, things take a little longer.

Even as James Cameron’s science-fiction epic “Avatar” continues to dazzle the audience with its visual wizardry, filmmakers and studios are struggling to figure out when, if ever, viewers can expect an equally striking on-screen experience. With its combination of immersive 3-D images and a sophisticated performance-capture technology, the movie has, as of Sunday, taken in $1.3 billion in worldwide ticket sales, much of it from 3-D screens.

Asked last week if any similarly ambitious film were in the works, Alec Shapiro, senior vice-president for sales and marketing of Sony Corporation’s content creation group, whose digital cameras were used on “Avatar,” was stumped. “Not to my knowledge,” he said. “I can’t, offhand, see another half-billion-dollar production.”

Mr. Cameron and his producing partner, Jon Landau, have talked of possible sequels to “Avatar.” But 20th Century Fox, which distributed the movie and helped underwrite production and marketing costs of about $460 million, has yet to announce plans for any successor to a film that was at least 15 years in the making.

In a research report published by Barclays Capital on Wednesday, Anthony J. DiClemente and George L. Hawkey called “Avatar” an “outlier”: a unique event that leaves the business environment around it largely intact.

“While ‘Avatar’ is likely a watershed for digital and 3-D technology,” they wrote, “it does not tell us that the underlying economics of the film business have changed.”

Mr. DiClemente and Mr. Hawkey predicted that “Avatar” would be a moneymaker, though they do not expect imitators anytime soon. In a detailed financial model of the film, they estimated that Fox and its partners would see slightly more than $1 billion in pretax profit from their investment in “Avatar.”

As for cinematic technology, the achievement of “Avatar” was not so much a single leap — like the one from silent film to sound — as an integration of complex filmmaking systems that allowed Mr. Cameron to combine live actors and computer animation in a relatively seamless, and believable, blend of fantasy and the real world. Critics and audiences noted a qualitative difference between what they saw on the screen in “Avatar” and what they saw in other recent films that used 3-D or motion-capture technology.

At its core was a 3-D “virtual” camera, developed by Mr. Cameron in partnership with the effects expert Vince Pace. The camera and its rigging systems allow a director to view actors within a computer-generated virtual environment, even as they are working on a “performance-capture” set that may have little apparent relationship to what appears on the screen.

Among the next films to use the same system will be “Tron: Legacy,” a cyberspace adventure due from the director Joseph Kosinski and Walt Disney this December. Another is “The Adventures of Tintin: Secret of the Unicorn,” directed by Steven Spielberg and set for release by Paramount Pictures and Sony Pictures in late 2011.

But it is not clear, for instance, that Mr. Spielberg’s use of the technology — and reliance on Weta Digital, the company made famous by Peter Jackson and that produced the effects for “Avatar” — will strike viewers in the same way as Mr. Cameron’s fantasy moon and blue aliens.

“We can’t talk about what it’s going to look like, because that process goes on for another two years, practically,” said Marvin Levy, Mr. Spielberg’s longtime spokesman.

(“A Christmas Carol” from the filmmaker Robert Zemeckis used motion capture and 3-D technology, but looked wholly different from “Avatar” and took in just $137 million in domestic theaters after Walt Disney released it in early November.)

So far, Guillermo del Toro, who is expected to direct the first of a two-part fantasy series based on “The Hobbit” for release in 2012, has stuck with a plan to film that movie with more conventional, 2-D techniques, even though Mr. Jackson — a powerful force behind both “Avatar” and “Tintin” — is among his producers.

Executives of Warner’s New Line Cinema unit, one of the studios behind the project, have in the past said that they believed that 2-D would be well suited to the sense of intimacy they anticipated from “The Hobbit” and its fantasy universe — and nothing about “Avatar” appears to have changed that plan.

Still, some filmmakers were sufficiently inspired, or jolted, by “Avatar” to shift gears. Shortly after seeing “Avatar” last month, for instance, Bryan Singer, who in the past directed summer blockbusters like “X-Men” and “Superman Returns,” asked New Line to consider using 3-D in filming his planned fantasy “Jack the Giant Killer.” The debate continues, according to people who have been briefed on the matter and spoke on condition of anonymity because of studio policy.

Katie Martin Kelley, a spokeswoman for Paramount, said that studio had made no decision about whether its planned “Transformers” and “Star Trek” sequels would make the leap to 3-D, possibly giving the audience another sampling of the kind of immersive world devised by Mr. Cameron.

Michael Bay, whose third “Transformers” film is set for release in July of next year, declined to be interviewed about his plans.

J. J. Abrams, who is developing another “Star Trek” film to be shot in the next couple of years, also declined to be interviewed about his plans for that franchise. But Paramount executives have already begun debating whether to shoot the next film in 3-D, even if that increases the cost and production difficulty, according to one person who was briefed on the talks but spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to comment.

Asked whether he would consider making a movie on the scale of “Avatar,” Brad Grey, the chairman of Paramount, said in an interview in early December, “With a lot of sleepless nights, I guess I would.”

But the “Transformers” and “Star Trek” sequels are at least a year and a half away. And a new “Spider-Man” episode is not due until 2012, now that Sony Pictures has canceled a planned fourth installment from the director Sam Raimi and the star Tobey Maguire, choosing instead to focus on a reinvention of the series, with a new director and cast.

That leaves a long stretch during which moviegoers, tantalized by “Avatar,” will be watching fantasy films like “Iron Man 2” from Marvel Entertainment and Paramount or “Jonah Hex” from Warner and Legendary Pictures, neither of which is as technologically ambitious as Mr. Cameron’s recent film.

Speaking by telephone last week, Mr. Landau said the “Avatar” innovations were perfectly suited to prospective projects like “Battle Angel,” a film that is based on a Japanese comic and that has been in development for Mr. Cameron to direct at Fox.

While he and Mr. Cameron have not settled on their next project, Mr. Landau said he believed a new, “Avatar”-like film could now be made in no more than the two years or so it takes to produce many effects-driven films, and for no more expense.

Asked how quickly the next such movie might arrive, Mr. Landau said, “I hope sooner, rather than later, and not just from us.”



Published: January 10, 2010
Timeline: 3-D Cinema
Ten milestones in 3-D film over the years.

From 1830 -  To 2004

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2010/01/10/movies/20100110-3dmovies-timeline.html (http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2010/01/10/movies/20100110-3dmovies-timeline.html)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on January 13, 2010, 11:54:07 pm
Well, I succumbed and saw Avatar tonight.  As one of the few people who greatly disliked Titanic, I had low expectations.  I wasn't disappointed.

Of course, the visuals are stunning.  But in the service of this story?  Oy.

It really is Lion King meets Pocahontas meets Dances with Wolves meets Iron Man (!), et cetera ad infinitum.

I've decided the Na'vi have exactly Barbie's body proportions.  Too bad they cut the sex scene, it was perfectly set up.

I swear I heard Sam W. utter some Aussie vowels from time to time.  And Giovanni Ribisi really can overact!

It's not often that I agree with David Brooks.  :-\

Bonus:  the theatre had an enormous headshot of Jake as Prince of Persia with the word "Courage".
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on January 14, 2010, 12:33:31 am

I've decided the Na'vi have exactly Barbie's body proportions.  Too bad they cut the sex scene, it was perfectly set up.


No, not exactly...they have wider nose bridges!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on January 14, 2010, 12:35:26 am
I saw a couple of really good 3-D movies last year. One was called Earth and the other one was called Up. Too bad they seem to have gotten lost in the shuffle.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kerry on January 14, 2010, 12:50:38 am
I saw a couple of really good 3-D movies last year. One was called Earth and the other one was called Up. Too bad they seem to have gotten lost in the shuffle.

I loved Up  and posted lots of pics from the movie over at Kerry's Komedy Klub in Anything Goes a couple of months ago. I wasn't sure where to post them at the time, so decided to post them at the Komedy Klub because they're cartoons. Most of the pics I posted feature Dug, the talking dog. I absolutely fell in love with Dug!  :D

 
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on January 14, 2010, 12:50:51 am
I saw a couple of really good 3-D movies last year. One was called Earth and the other one was called Up. Too bad they seem to have gotten lost in the shuffle.

I don't think Up has. I bet it will be nominated for an animation Oscar, and possibly win. I've never heard of Earth, though.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kerry on January 14, 2010, 01:00:02 am
Well, I succumbed and saw Avatar tonight.  As one of the few people who greatly disliked Titanic, I had low expectations.  I wasn't disappointed.

Of course, the visuals are stunning.  But in the service of this story?  Oy.

It really is Lion King meets Pocahontas meets Dances with Wolves meets Iron Man (!), et cetera ad infinitum.

I've decided the Na'vi have exactly Barbie's body proportions.  Too bad they cut the sex scene, it was perfectly set up.

I swear I heard Sam W. utter some Aussie vowels from time to time.  And Giovanni Ribisi really can overact!

It's not often that I agree with David Brooks.  :-\

Bonus:  the theatre had an enormous headshot of Jake as Prince of Persia with the word "Courage".

I too could hear Sam's Australian accent throughout the movie, Paul. I didn't mind, though. I was cool with it. Anything Sam does is fine with me!  Sigh!  :P   ;)   :D

(http://i119.photobucket.com/albums/o126/kez4oz/Album%201/SamWorthington.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Aloysius J. Gleek on January 15, 2010, 12:39:14 pm


http://nymag.com/daily/entertainment/2010/01/avatar_killed_spiderman_4_sam.html (http://nymag.com/daily/entertainment/2010/01/avatar_killed_spiderman_4_sam.html)

1/15/10 at 11:15 AM

Vulture Exclusive:
What Really Killed Spider-Man 4?
Avatar!

(http://images.nymag.com/images/2/daily/2010/01/20100115_spideyvavatar_560x375.jpg)
Photo-illustration: Jed Egan; Photos: 20th Century Fox (Avatar), Columbia Pictures (Spider-Man), iStockphoto.


The Green Goblin couldn't kill Spider-Man. Nor could the Sandman, Dr. Octopus, or even that anticlimactic black goo from Spider-Man 3. So how was Tobey Maguire's webslinger finally squashed? Oddly enough, insiders say it was Avatar.

Director Sam Raimi isn't commenting on exactly why he pulled out of Spider-Man 4;  Columbia execs are mum, too. But production insiders tell Vulture that after seeing James Cameron's fully immersive film, Raimi wanted all sorts of envelope-pushing CGI (though not 3-D, which the studio was considering). Such effects would take more money and, just as crucially, more time. But the studio, whose corporate parent Sony must answer to Wall Street, had set a strict May 6, 2011 release date, and missing that date would mean depriving Sony of a billion dollars in revenue. “Every movie is a power struggle,” explains one producer on the Sony lot familiar with the fracas. “But the tipping point was that Sam wanted to do certain things that would push the envelope in terms of [special effects] ‘toys’ and other visual stimulation, and Sony didn’t feel that was essential to the franchise.”

The studio is obviously upset about losing such a huge tent pole, and yet script issues with Raimi had them nervous about the project anyway. After three different writers, the Spider-Man 4  script was still a schizophrenic mess, and according to a knowledgeable production insider, the Spider-Man story line championed by Raimi “threatened to torpedo the whole franchise.”

Condensed, it went something like this: Peter Parker gets over MJ, finds a new girl, falls in love. But: Peter also discovers her father is actually the Vulture, a naughty green guy with wings to be played by John Malkovich. Peter is torn between the love of his new lady and taking down the Vulture. Being a Spandex tight-ass, he decides to take down the Vulture, and kills him. This patricide goes down poorly with Peter’s new fiancée, and she rejects him. Despondent, Peter decides to abandon his superpowers, and Movie No. 4 ends with Peter Parker throwing away his Spider-Man mask, and audiences wondering if they are watching Superman II.

Sony’s execs didn’t much care for this dour story line, and its consumer-products division especially detested the villain who, let’s face it, is pushing 60. (But hey, John Malkovich, from one Vulture to another, we think you look great! Really!) Columbia’s toy partner, Hasbro, also worried that suggesting its main character was packing it in might hurt future toy sales. And these days, toys are a key revenue stream, and demand far more forethought than that given to the scripts of $200 million movies. "This is piecemeal, old-school Hollywood mentality," says Jeff Gomez, President and CEO of Starlight Runner Entertainment, which advises studios on how to define their franchises' universes and mythologies for maximum toysploitation. (Past clients: Pirates of the Carribean, Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen, and — wait for it — Avatar !) "Spider-Man belongs to a millennial generation that demands continuity, and that requires long-term and careful design. None of that has existed for Spider-Man since the second movie."

Columbia was about to bring in — yet again — screenwriter Alvin Sargent (who wrote 2 and 3 and is also the husband of former Spider-Man producer Laura Ziskin) to fix things, but by that time it was too late: Raimi had become convinced that even if the script were perfect, he still couldn't hit Sony’s immovable date, and he was out.

Now the studio is scrambling to find something to play in the summer of next year, but it also may be relieved to be rid of such a creatively muddled financial burden. Director Raimi and star Tobey Maguire were being paid a fifth of the film’s gross, and neither seemed to have a clue as to what story, exactly, they were telling.

The planned reboot with younger talent will be far, far cheaper. You can almost imagine Columbia chairman Amy Pascal screaming at her pool of assistants: “Somebody get me that kid from Twilight  on the phone!"

“Which one?”

“Any of ‘em!”
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on January 15, 2010, 12:55:35 pm
Well, I succumbed and saw Avatar tonight.  As one of the few people who greatly disliked Titanic, I had low expectations.  I wasn't disappointed.

You have at least some company, Paul. I was so put off by all the hype and mania over Titanic that to this day I dislike it without ever even having seen it.

Of course, I also have a visceral dislike of Leonardo diCaprio, so. ...
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Aloysius J. Gleek on January 15, 2010, 01:37:31 pm


Yes, Blue is the new Sexy (and the new Green)

(I can't even imagine conservatives hating it, but they probably will.   ;))



Update: They do.


http://www.slate.com/id/2241542/ (http://www.slate.com/id/2241542/)

James Cameron Hates America
The conservative attack on Avatar.
By Tom Shone

Posted Thursday, Jan. 14, 2010, at 1:46 PM ET

(http://img.slate.com/media/1/123125/123050/2240796/2240833/100114_CB_avatarTN.jpg)
Zoe Saldana as Neytiri in Avatar


James Cameron's Avatar  has been greeted on the right with the kind of immediate snarling antagonism reserved for Oliver Stone pics. In an article titled "Cameron's 'Avatar' Is a Big, Dull, America-Hating, PC Revenge Fantasy," Big Hollywood's John Nolte called it "Deathwish 5 for leftists." No less an authority than MovieGuide, "the family guide to Christian movie reviews," awarded the movie "four Marxes and an Obama" for its "abhorrent New Age, pagan, anti-capitalist worldview that promotes Goddess worship and the destruction of the human race"—an unfortunate formulation that also happens to clip most of my favorite Disney movies. Drudge has been providing a daily drip-feed of joy-killing stories: "Vatican says no masterpiece," "Audiences experience Avatar  blues; depression and suicidal thoughts. ..." In the words of one right-wing blogger: "This is cinema for the Hate America crowd."

Once you've gotten over your shock at seeing James Cameron pilloried as a typical Hollywood liberal—dude wrote Rambo  for heaven's sake!—the first response to this is: What took them so long? Ever since George Lucas revealed that the real model for his evil empire in the Star Wars  movies was not Britain but America, it has been common practice for the makers of summer blockbusters to encode cryptic commentary of American foreign policy into their car chases and fireballs. Last year, The Dark Knight  descended into a probing disquisition on the efficacy of torture. This summer, the makers of Star Trek  conducted an equally spirited back-and-forth on the merits of diplomacy versus the phasers when dealing with obstreperous Romulans.

None of those movies made a billion dollars in 21 days, however. Not only is this criticism of Avatar  the first time the right has dipped its toe into the phosphorescent waters of allegorical science fiction, but it's also the first time it has mobilized a hate-a-thon against a movie that stands to become the most profitable of all time. Normally when right-wingers come gunning for a movie, it's meek, well-intentioned granola like Lions for Lambs, Rendition, or Good Night, and Good Luck—movies that can only perform a single one-armed push-up before collapsing facedown into the mud. When Michael Medved published his snit-fit broadside against Hollywood liberals, Hollywood Versus America, in 1993, he reserved the full force of his fury for such muscular Trotskyist tracts as Martin Scorsese's The Last Temptation of Christ, Total Recall,  and The Prince of Tides,  thus proving that when it comes to threatening the very fabric of democracy, the only thing that rivals heretical sex and bone-cracking violence is a picture about therapy with Barbra Streisand. Or maybe I am misinterpreting Medved's thesis. Maybe it was just: Barbra Streisand!

A blockbuster like Terminator 2: Judgment Day,  on the other hand, Medved wisely body-swerved, since it would have scrambled his narrative: Liberal elites have forgotten how to make good old-fashioned movies for real America. Cameron's Avatar  therefore puts the right in a bind. Having for years cited the failure of movies like In the Valley of Elah  and Lions for Lambs  as proof that Hollywood is too liberal-elitist to connect with the real America, they're now turning on a movie that has done just that. Writing in the London Daily Telegraph,  Nile Gardner professed himself astonished by "the roars of approval which greeted the on-screen killing of US military personnel." They "were a shock to the system, especially at a time when the United States is engaged in a major war in Afghanistan. ..." He concludes that Avatar  is "one of the most left-wing films in the history of modern American cinema, and perhaps the most commercially successful political movie of our time."

The last time I looked, American cinema-goers were not well-disposed to reward pictures offering them a sprightly mixture of ecological censure and high treason. And, indeed, those killed Marines are no such thing, but members of a Blackwater-style mercenary operation. Audiences are not stupid. Neither is Cameron. Yes, he included a bunch of tone-deaf references to the Iraq war in his movie—"shock and awe," "fighting terror with terror," and so on, every one of which succeeds magnificently in yanking you out of the immersive spectacle as surely as a kick to the shins. But any desire to push the Avatar-is-liberal-propaganda argument further must be met by a principled push-back against the incursion of so grindingly and narrowly ideological a focus into so mercurial and prismatic a medium as motion pictures. In other words: It's about a bunch of blue people.

Seriously. I haven't seen this kind of wild mangling of pop culture since the heyday of cultural studies, when you couldn't cross a campus without accidentally wandering into seminars attended by four people titled "Totally Recalling Arnold: Sex and Violence in the New Bad Future." But then James Cameron was always going to be a tough nut to crack. His politics are an intriguing salad: dove-ish bromides strapped into the titanium exoskeleton of a hawk. Or as Colonel Quaritch says in Avatar,  "A Marine inside a Na'vi body. That's a potent mix." It is, especially for a medium as fluid as cinema, which quickly bores of people in perfect agreement with themselves. Remember that Cameron was born in Canada in 1954, which means that he spent his formative teenage years—the years he was getting into guns and trucks and girls—watching the giant that lived next door receive the beating of its life in Vietnam. It left him with an almost forensic fascination for "how the mighty fall," his enduring theme as a filmmaker, from The Terminator  through to Titanic.

Think of the Marines in Aliens,  whooping it up in the drop ship as they load their gun clips, only to find that their superior firepower is useless on LV426 for fear of triggering the plant's nuclear core. Their armor hissing with alien acid, they cannot ditch it fast enough. The film is a study in military hubris. Cameron may have beefed about what happened to his Rambo  script—"The action was mine, the politics Stallone's," he would later complain—but he needn't have worried: He'd already shot his Vietnam picture. Or think of the enemy he devised in Terminator 2: Judgment Day.  Almost any other director would have come up with a Terminator that was bigger than Arnold—heftier, more hi-tech—but Cameron tacked the other way, devising a slim, sinuous shape-shifter, a Porsche to Arnie's Panzer tank. What makes T2  such eerie viewing now is seeing how accurately it foreshadows the very real threat America would face on 9/11, a cellular, hydra-headed demon who absorbs every punch, its molecules scattering before regrouping again, deploying the sheer might of its attackers against them.

Cameron has an uncanny feel for asymmetrical fights: It's what gives his films such a vicelike grip on the national unconscious and makes him a useful filmmaker to have around right now. If I were on the right, I'd be celebrating the director for his keen-eyed, conservative critique of Wilsonian foreign adventurism. Yes, it's regrettable that the pivot point of the final battle hinges on the incursion of a deity, no less, but I also learned some interesting stuff about how to subdue any huge flame-colored dragons I see flying around the skies: You attack from above, where he least expects it. "Tarouk is the biggest, baddest boy in the sky," Jake Sully informs us. "He never gets attacked." With yet another airplane bomber in American custody, it would seem we cannot get enough of that lesson.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on January 15, 2010, 01:49:01 pm
You have at least some company, Paul. I was so put off by all the hype and mania over Titanic that to this day I dislike it without ever even having seen it.

Of course, I also have a visceral dislike of Leonardo diCaprio, so. ...

I'd love to see Titanic in 3D IMAX!

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Lumière on January 15, 2010, 02:12:45 pm
You have at least some company, Paul.
I was so put off by all the hype and mania over Titanic that to this day I dislike it without ever even having seen it.

I know one or two people who felt this way about BBM when it came out.  And yeah, I still can't get them to watch the movie.


I'd love to see Titanic in 3D IMAX!


Ditto.  I'm gonna go see Avatar in  IMAX 3D tomorrow! :)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on January 15, 2010, 02:29:16 pm
I know one or two people who felt this way about BBM when it came out.  And yeah, I still can't get them to watch the movie.

Of course, if Leonardo DiCaprio had been in Brokeback Mountain, I probably wouldn't have seen it, either!  :laugh:
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on January 15, 2010, 10:42:15 pm
Of course, if Leonardo DiCaprio had been in Brokeback Mountain, I probably wouldn't have seen it, either!  :laugh:

I usually like Leo diC, but I go up and down. He was sooo amazing in What's Eating Gilberg Grape, the first thing I ever saw him in, that I became fascinated. Then, after Titanic, I got kind of sick of him. And he was not that great in Gangs of New York -- way upstaged by Daniel Day Lewis, but then who wouldn't be? -- and only just OK in Catch Me if you Can and The Aviator. But Leo was back to his old good form in Blood Diamond and The Departed, so I liked him again. In The Departed, especially -- I found him more riveting than Jack Nicholson or even Matt Damon. But then came Revolutionary Road -- meh; it's Mad Men without the wit.

I once told a friend all this, prefacing with, "I go up and down on Leonardo DiCaprio." She goes, "Yeah, you wish."  :laugh:

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on January 16, 2010, 12:08:48 am
I usually like Leo diC, but I go up and down. He was sooo amazing in What's Eating Gilberg Grape, the first thing I ever saw him in, that I became fascinated. Then, after Titanic, I got kind of sick of him. And he was not that great in Gangs of New York -- way upstaged by Daniel Day Lewis, but then who wouldn't be? -- and only just OK in Catch Me if you Can and The Aviator. But Leo was back to his old good form in Blood Diamond and The Departed, so I liked him again. In The Departed, especially -- I found him more riveting than Jack Nicholson or even Matt Damon. But then came Revolutionary Road -- meh; it's Mad Men without the wit.

I once told a friend all this, prefacing with, "I go up and down on Leonardo DiCaprio." She goes, "Yeah, you wish."  :laugh:

Tell you what, I thought Blood Diamond looked like it might be an interesting movie, despite the fact that it had LdiC in it.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kerry on January 16, 2010, 12:21:13 am
Of course, if Leonardo DiCaprio had been in Brokeback Mountain, I probably wouldn't have seen it, either!  :laugh:

If LDCaprio had been cast as either Jack or Ennis in BBM, I would have definitely never seen it and would not be here right now, writing this post. I have never been a fan of LDC. Have only seen Titanic once and that was on television, years after it was first released. And I only coped with it on that occasion by making a deliberately conscious effort to ignore LDC whenever he was on screen, which was difficult, seeing as he is in practically every single frame.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on January 16, 2010, 11:00:33 am
Tell you what, I thought Blood Diamond looked like it might be an interesting movie, despite the fact that it had LdiC in it.

It is! I'd recommend renting it.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kerry on January 17, 2010, 01:42:02 am
I went to see Avatar in 3-D again yesterday - my second time this week. I took a friend along with me and we sat down the front, near the screen. My friend loved it and I was just as blown away as before. I'm already making plans for a third viewing, maybe IMAX next time; though, I can't imagine IMAX being all that much better than conventional 3-D as viewed from row A. The screen is HUGE from there. My two previous viewings were at the Hoyts Multiplex in the Broadway Shopping Centre, not far from where I live, and where I first saw Brokeback Mountain, back in Jan 2006. I sat in the front row on both occasions for Avatar, but it's not exactly a "row" as such. Rather, there are three pairs of high-back armchairs, where you can put your head back and stretch your legs. I sat in the middle pair both times. Perfect for Avatar.

(http://i119.photobucket.com/albums/o126/kez4oz/Album%201/avatar7.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Aloysius J. Gleek on January 17, 2010, 03:17:42 pm


Avatar is now in the Mother Tree of the Zeitgeist--even political/satirical cartoonists have caught the meme. Eywa be praised!



http://www.salon.com/ent/comics/tom_the_dancing_bug/2010/01/13/tom_the_dancing_bug

Wednesday, Jan 13, 2010 20:14 EST
From the West Wing to Wall Street
The transformation of Timothy Geithner

By Ruben Bolling


(http://www.salon.com/ent/comics/tom_the_dancing_bug/2010/01/13/tom_the_dancing_bug/story.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Aloysius J. Gleek on January 17, 2010, 04:02:58 pm


and here--


(http://c0389161.cdn.cloudfiles.rackspacecloud.com/dyn/str_comic/78.logo.large.gif)
(http://c0389161.cdn.cloudfiles.rackspacecloud.com/dyn/str_strip/307901.full.gif)

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Sophia on January 17, 2010, 04:25:26 pm

and here--


(http://c0389161.cdn.cloudfiles.rackspacecloud.com/dyn/str_comic/78.logo.large.gif)
(http://c0389161.cdn.cloudfiles.rackspacecloud.com/dyn/str_strip/307901.full.gif)



 :laugh: :laugh: now i know what i want for birthday present.   ;D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kerry on January 17, 2010, 09:39:40 pm

Avatar is now in the Mother Tree of the Zeitgeist--even political/satirical cartoonists have caught the meme. Eywa be praised!


Was looking online for yet more info on Avatar today when I saw this. Also came across a Facebook group called (something like) "I Want to be a Member of the Na'vi People and live on Pandora." I was tempted to join!!!  :o  Brokeback Mountain was the last time I felt so excited about a movie! Can't wait to see Avatar again!  :D

(http://i119.photobucket.com/albums/o126/kez4oz/Album%201/un-obtainium.gif)

(http://i119.photobucket.com/albums/o126/kez4oz/Album%201/unobtainium-avatar.jpg)

(http://i119.photobucket.com/albums/o126/kez4oz/Album%201/avatar6.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on January 17, 2010, 10:49:08 pm
The plot to Avatar was spoiled for me and despite knowing that if I see it, I will love it, it seems sadly formulaic.

As was Blood Diamond.  What you think happens, happens.   :P  DiCaprio...he's a perfectly adequate actor, but he's fallen into that pool of movie stars where you see the actor and not his character.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Lumière on January 18, 2010, 04:48:16 pm
Kerry - I share your enthusiasm about Avatar.   :D

We were planning to go watch it on IMAX 3D this past Saturday.  I was definitely excited.  Got to the theater only to find out that ALL the Imax Avatar shows were sold out for the entire weekend.  There were 2 other screens showing the movie in 3D at the same cinema.   One of them was completely sold out for that night as well.  Anyway, long story short - we ended up getting the last 2 tickets for the 8.45 show.


In any case, it was an awesome way to spend 162 minutes.  3D is a wonderful thing.
And I already know I'm gonna go see the movie again.  Soon.  8)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kerry on January 18, 2010, 06:53:52 pm
Kerry - I share your enthusiasm about Avatar.   :D

We were planning to go watch it on IMAX 3D this past Saturday.  I was definitely excited.  Got to the theater only to find out that ALL the Imax Avatar shows were sold out for the entire weekend.  There were 2 other screens showing the movie in 3D at the same cinema.   One of them was completely sold out for that night as well.  Anyway, long story short - we ended up getting the last 2 tickets for the 8.45 show.


In any case, it was an awesome way to spend 162 minutes.  3D is a wonderful thing.
And I already know I'm gonna go see the movie again.  Soon.  8)

I had the same experience with IMAX here in Sydney. For my second viewing, last Saturday, we thought we might take in the IMAX version. Alas, after checking online, I found that every session was booked out for a WEEK in advance! And I didn't fancy, even then, sitting in a packed theatre, shoulder to shoulder, in a seat that's not my first choice. So we went to the 3-D morning session at the local multiplex again, where I could get exactly the seat I prefer - front stage centre! I was so hoping you would enjoy it, Milli. I had a feeling you would, because the artwork is absolutely spectacular! As is the music, acting and . . . and . . . well, and absolutely everything about it! And now it has a Golden Globe for Best Picture! Yee-Haw! I too will be seeing it again. (Please note, Kerry did not mention Sam Worthington once this time - Oops!)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Aloysius J. Gleek on January 18, 2010, 07:03:49 pm

 :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

(Please note, Kerry did not mention Sam Worthington once this time - Oops!)

(http://stargazertvfs.files.wordpress.com/2009/05/sam_worthington_web.jpg)(http://stargazertvfs.files.wordpress.com/2009/05/sam_worthington_web.jpg)(http://stargazertvfs.files.wordpress.com/2009/05/sam_worthington_web.jpg)(http://stargazertvfs.files.wordpress.com/2009/05/sam_worthington_web.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Aloysius J. Gleek on January 20, 2010, 02:05:31 am

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/19/science/19essay.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/19/science/19essay.html)

Essay
Luminous 3-D Jungle Is a Biologist’s Dream
   
(http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2010/01/19/science/19essay-span/articleLarge.jpg)
Seeing is believing: The deerlike yerik, with six legs and blue skin, is among the creatures that populate
Pandora in the science-fiction epic “Avatar.”

(http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2010/01/19/science/19essay-1/popup.jpg)
ALIEN Even the sky and the moss hanging from trees seem alive in a scene from "Avatar," directed by James Cameron.


By CAROL KAESUK YOON
Published: January 18, 2010


When watching a Hollywood movie that has robed itself in the themes and paraphernalia of science, a scientist expects to feel anything from annoyance to infuriation at facts misconstrued or processes misrepresented. What a scientist does not expect is to enter into a state of ecstatic wonderment, to have the urge to leap up and shout: “Yes! That’s exactly what it’s like!”

So it is time for all the biologists who have not yet done so to shut their laptops and run from their laboratories directly to the movie theaters, put on 3-D glasses and watch the film “Avatar.” In fact, anyone who loves a biologist or may want to be one, or better yet, anyone who hates a biologist — and certainly everyone who has ever sneered at a tree-hugger — should do the same. Because the director James Cameron’s otherworldly tale of romance and battle, aliens and armadas, has somehow managed to do what no other film has done. It has recreated what is the heart of biology: the naked, heart-stopping wonder of really seeing the living world.

The real beauty of it, though, is that you do not have to be a scientist to enjoy the experience. “Avatar” is well within reach of becoming the highest-grossing film of all time. And while the movie’s dazzling animation and use of 3-D has received so much attention, it cannot be anything but the intense wonder so powerfully elicited, rather than merely the technical wizardry itself, that has people lining up to see it.

There have, of course, been many films that have depicted the excitement of scientists during discovery (think of Laura Dern in “Jurassic Park,” gleefully sticking her hand into a pile of dinosaur dung), and, from “Lord of the Rings” to “Star Trek,” there has been no shortage of on-screen fantastical floras and faunas.

But rather than having us giggling at a tribble or worrying over the safety of the children when a T. rex attacks, Mr. Cameron somehow has the audience seeing organisms in the tropical-forest-gone-mad of the planet Pandora just the way a biologist sees them. With each glance, we are reminded of organisms we already know, while marveling over the new and trying quickly to put this novelty into some kind of sensible place in the mind. It is a mental tickle, and wonderful confusion sparks the thought, “Oh, that looks like a horse, but wait, it has six legs and it’s blue, and whoa, that looks like a jellyfish but it’s floating in the air and glowing.”

The clues that we are “not in Kansas anymore,” as we are told early on, can be seen in every aspect of the life of Pandora. If there is one color that is most decidedly not a classic Earth tone, one that is least associated with living things, it might just be neon blue. And so many things on Pandora, like the Pterodactyl-like ikran and the deerlike yerik, are a staring, screaming blue. Another thing we do not expect from most living things is light. Yet on Pandora, life glows everywhere in the night, including the long, pulsating white Spanish-moss-like strands elegantly dangling off tree branches and the brightly glowing green and purple ferns.

And touching closest to home, Mr. Cameron has put a version of ourselves on Pandora, the Na’vi people, with whom he uses every trick. For they are blue, they have bioluminescing spots on their faces and they display the other of Pandora organisms’ stunning quirks: they are huge, at 10 feet tall.

To so strongly experience these kinds of wonderfully shocking similarities and dissimilarities among living things is the kind of experience that has largely been the prerogative of biologists — especially those known as taxonomists, who spend their days ordering and naming the living things on Earth. But now, thanks to Mr. Cameron, the entire world is not only experiencing this but also reveling in it.

What is sort of funny for me is that I spent much of the last six years working on a book about exactly this, about how inside of all humans there is a deep desire and ability to really see life, to see order among living things, and about the joy that comes with it. So at the end of “Naming Nature” (W. W. Norton, 2009), I make a plea to readers to go out into the world and see the life and find the order in the living world around them. I may have to amend the paperback to suggest, or you may want to begin by, heading into a darkened room to see “Avatar” and have your mind blown.

Please excuse me if I seem a bit breathless, but the experience I had when I first saw the film (in 2-D, no less) shocked me. I felt as if someone had filmed my favorite dreams from those best nights of sleep where I wander and play through a landscape of familiar yet strange creatures, taking a swim and noticing dinosaurs paddling by, going out for a walk and spying several entirely new species of penguins, going sledding with giant tortoises. Less than the details of the movie, it was, I realized, the same feeling of elation, of wonder at life.

Perhaps that kind of potent joy is now the only way to fire up a vision of order in life. Many biologists of my generation (I will be 47 this month) were inspired to careers in science by the now quaint Time-Life series of illustrated books on animals or by the television program “Wild Kingdom,” rugged on-screen stuff for its time (“Now my assistant Jim will attempt to sedate the cheetah”). But maybe that isn’t enough anymore.

Maybe it takes a dreamlike ecstasy to break through to a world so jaded, to reach people who have seen David Attenborough here, there and everywhere, who have clicked — bored — past the Animal Planet channel hundreds of times without ever really seeing the animals. Maybe it takes a lizard that can glow like fire and hover like a helicopter and a staring troop of iridescent blue lemurs to wake us up. Maybe “Avatar” is what we need to bring our inner taxonomist back to life, to get us to really see.

And waking up and seeing is what “Avatar” is about, as its characters tell us repeatedly, as when the marine hero, Jake Sully, played by Sam Worthington, struggles to make sense of his love interest’s passion for life on Pandora.

“Try to see the forest through her eyes,” urges Dr. Grace Augustine, played by Sigourney Weaver, head of the Avatar project.

And here we have yet another reason for scientists to love this movie. Who has not tired of seeing scientists portrayed as either grant-greedy maniacs or naïve dangers to humanity, shouting “I’m sure the creatures are friendly!” just before being devoured? In films, scientists are often assumed to be inhuman to some degree, and if they become more human as a film proceeds, it is by becoming less of a scientist.

Instead, in “Avatar,” Dr. Augustine begins as usual, abrasive and obsessed with her own project. But the audience begins to like her more and more, not because she becomes less involved with the life on Pandora, but because we become more involved with it.

“Get it?” she asks, after explaining the beauty and importance of the life on Pandora to her corporate nemesis. And though he does not, by that point, we do.

And — spoiler alert! — that is why when she, dying, arrives at the most sacred and most biologically important site on Pandora, it is with a sympathy and respect that we laugh when her first thought is that she really needs to take some samples. There is no line between her wonder, her love of the living world and her science. We get it.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on January 20, 2010, 02:42:11 am

(http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2010/01/19/science/19essay-1/popup.jpg)
ALIEN Even the sky and the moss hanging from trees seem alive in a scene from "Avatar,"

 What a scientist does not expect is to enter into a state of ecstatic wonderment, to have the urge to leap up and shout: “Yes! That’s exactly what it’s like!”
...
Another thing we do not expect from most living things is light. Yet on Pandora, life glows everywhere in the night, including the long, pulsating white Spanish-moss-like strands elegantly dangling off tree branches and the brightly glowing green and purple ferns.
I just came from seeing this film, and one of the things that impressed me the strongest was when Jake's Avatar wakes up in the night on Pandora, and sees everything glowing with a lunar luminescence. It was eerily similar to my solo hike at night in the Maroon Bells Wilderness, when the crystals of snow were tilted by the wind, and reflected the starlight, so I felt like I was walking in a galaxy with stars above me, below me, and all around me. It was enchanting!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on January 20, 2010, 02:11:34 pm
(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/avatar01.jpg)

Don't you just love the way their ears twitch and add to their expressiveness??!!

I know where Cameron got those wide nose bridges...my cat!!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on January 20, 2010, 03:22:36 pm
The word avatar has had many meanings over the years. One that I read about captured my fancy back in the early 1990s. There was an article in a scientific journal about the development of these things called search bots (the predecessor to search engines). These bots, called avatars, would be sent out onto the Internet to search for data to fit your specifications. If you ignore the data they brought back, they would die. If you selected the data, they would live and procreate, and their children would search for similar data.

Then, there are the Hindu gods and goddesses, who walk the earth in many different incarnations, or avatars.

Of course, there are our own avatars on BetterMost and the Web. They are much more than just our screen names, or should be anyway.

The avatars in the movie were hybrid human/Na'vi beings, but whether they were driven by the human mind or by their own minds is a matter of confusion.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Aloysius J. Gleek on January 20, 2010, 03:28:18 pm

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/20/movies/20avatar.html?hpw (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/20/movies/20avatar.html?hpw)

(http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/misc/nytlogo152x23.gif)
You Saw What in ‘Avatar’? Pass Those Glasses!
(http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2010/01/20/arts/20avatar_CA0_span/articleLarge.jpg)
Chinese moviegoers donned 3-D glasses to watch “Avatar” in Hefei, in Anhui Province.


By DAVE ITZKOFF
Published: January 20, 2010

 
If you thought that “Avatar” was just a high-tech movie about a big-hearted tough guy saving the beguiling natives of a distant moon, you might want to check the prescription on your 3-D glasses.

Since its release in December, James Cameron’s science-fiction epic has broken box office records and grabbed two Golden Globe awards for best director and best dramatic motion picture. But it has also found itself under fire from a growing list of interest groups, schools of thought and entire nations that have protested its message (as they see it), its morals (as they interpret them) and its philosophy (assuming it has one).

Over the last month, it has been criticized by social and political conservatives who bristle at its depictions of religion and the use of military force; feminists who feel that the male avatar bodies are stronger and more muscular than their female counterparts; antismoking advocates who object to a character who lights up cigarettes; not to mention fans of Soviet-era Russian science fiction; the Chinese; and the Vatican. This week the authorities in China announced that the 2-D version of the film would be pulled from most theaters there to make way for a biography of Confucius.

(http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2010/01/20/movies/20avatar2/popup.jpg)
Advertisements for "Avatar" and a state-backed biography of Confucius in Beijing.


That so many groups have projected their issues onto “Avatar” suggests that it has burrowed into the cultural consciousness in a way that even its immodest director could not have anticipated. Its detractors agree that it is more than a humans-in-space odyssey — even if they do not agree on why that is so.

“Some of the ways people are reading it are significant of Cameron’s intent, and some are just by-products of what people are thinking about,” said Rebecca Keegan, the author of “The Futurist: The Life and Films of James Cameron.” “It’s really become this Rorschach test for your personal interests and anxieties.”

The “Avatar” camp isn’t endorsing any particular interpretation, but is happy to let others read the ink blots. “Movies that work are movies that have themes that are bigger than their genre,” Jon Landau, a producer of the film, said in a telephone interview. “The theme is what you leave with and you leave the plot at the theater.”

Mr. Cameron might have opened the door to multiple readings with his declaration that “Avatar” was an environmental parable. In a news conference in London in December, he said he saw the movie “as a broader metaphor, not so intensely politicized as some would make it, but rather that’s how we treat the natural world as well.”

In a column for the Christian entertainment Web site movieguide.org (http://movieguide.org), David Outten wrote that “Avatar” maligned capitalism, promoted animism over monotheism and overdramatized the possibility of environmental catastrophe on earth. At another site that offers a conservative critique of the entertainment industry, bighollywood.breitbart.com (http://bighollywood.breitbart.com), John Nolte wrote that the film was “a thinly disguised, heavy-handed and simplistic sci-fi fantasy/allegory critical of America from our founding straight through to the Iraq War.”

Not surprisingly, the religious overtones of “Avatar” were of interest in Vatican City, where the film was reviewed by Gaetano Vallini, a cultural critic for L’Osservatore Romano,  the daily newspaper of the Holy See.

In his review, Mr. Vallini wrote that for all of the “stupefying, enchanting technology” in the film, it “gets bogged down by a spiritualism linked to the worship of nature.”

In a telephone interview, Mr. Vallini said his widely reported review might have been overemphasized because of the publication it appeared in. His assignment to write about “Avatar” was not an attempt to advance a particular agenda, he said, but rather “a compulsory choice” given the anticipation surrounding the film.

Ultimately, Mr. Vallini said, “the movie doesn’t provoke many emotions,” and its observations about militarism, imperialism and the environment “are just sketched out as themes.”

“It is Cameron’s narrative choice,” he continued, “as he is aware of the fact that the visual aspect widely compensates for this lack.”

Other viewers say that issues of imperialism are central to the film. In a post on the science-fiction Web site io9.com (http://io9.com), Annalee Newitz, the site’s editor in chief, wrote that “Avatar” depicted “the essence of the white guilt fantasy, laid bare,” a dimension she said it shared with movies from “The Last Samurai” to “District 9.” (Critics have also said that “Avatar” copied story elements from the movies “Dances With Wolves,” “Pocahontas” and “Ferngully: The Last Rainforest”; the Poul Anderson novella “Call Me Joe”; and the “Noon Universe” book series by the Russian authors Arkady and Boris Strugatsky.)

In movies like “Avatar,” Ms. Newitz wrote, “humans are the cause of alien oppression and distress,” until a white man “switches sides at the last minute, assimilating into the alien culture and becoming its savior.”

Ms. Newitz said in an interview that since publishing that post, she had heard from readers around the world who disagreed with her interpretation, which she appreciated. “Just the idea of whiteness is a local phenomenon,” she said. “It’s certainly not in parts of the world where white people are not dominant.”

In China, for example, the film’s imperialist themes have upset audiences who believe that the plight of the aliens, the Na’vi, who are forced from their home by human industrialists, is a parable for Chinese people whose dwellings have been forcibly razed by local governments to make way for new construction. As one pseudonymous commenter quoted on Chinasmack.com (http://Chinasmack.com) wrote: “China’s demolition crews must go sue Old Cameron, sue him for piracy/copyright infringement.”

There is, at least, consensus among “Avatar” critics that good science fiction operates on an allegorical level. In novels like “Dune,” films like “Star Wars” or television series like the recent “Battlestar Galactica,” Ms. Newitz said the fantastical elements of these works offer a place of “narrative safety” to contemplate real-life issues like environmental decay, totalitarianism and torture.

“There’s something very satisfying about being able to think through those issues without feeling you’re actually taking a political position,” she said. “Because you’re not – you’re just talking about stories.”

Over the breadth of Mr. Cameron’s career, he has been attracted to outsize themes. Ms. Keegan said that it was possible to read “The Terminator,” his breakthrough 1984 movie, as an anti-technology polemic, an anti-war film or a modern gloss on the birth of Jesus.

“Or,” she said, “ you could just watch it as a movie where Arnold Schwarzenegger stomps around like a robot.”

Paradoxically, the pileup of arguments surrounding “Avatar” might have made a sympathetic figure out of the outspoken Mr. Cameron, who now finds himself in the underdog position of having to account for every possible message in his ostensible popcorn film.

“Often to his detriment, he says exactly what he thinks,” Ms. Keegan said. “All of that makes him seem outside the Hollywood bubble, even though on paper he couldn’t be more of an insider.”

Ms. Newitz, however, was not sympathetic to Mr. Cameron, who wanted to make a singularly ambitious film, and may have gotten his wish. “It’s like, do you feel bad for Obama?” she said. “He’s the president — he kind of asked for it.”

Gaia Pianigiani contributed reporting from Rome.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on January 21, 2010, 12:47:13 am
There was so much I didn't understand about the movie AVATAR. For one thing, why was there no backstory about the dead twin brother? How did he die and why did Jake feel compelled to step into his place? Why was he in the scientific group instead of the security group?
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on January 21, 2010, 09:22:52 am
There was so much I didn't understand about the movie AVATAR. For one thing, why was there no backstory about the dead twin brother? How did he die and why did Jake feel compelled to step into his place? Why was he in the scientific group instead of the security group?

I don't know how he died, but the reason Jake felt compelled to step into his place, in the scientific group, was that as a twin he shared the same genes, and apparently for the avatar to work it had to be a genetic match to its originally intended person.

How convenient. Maybe everyone selected for the mission was a twin, just in case!

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Ellemeno on January 21, 2010, 01:30:43 pm
I don't know how he died, but the reason Jake felt compelled to step into his place, in the scientific group, was that as a twin he shared the same genes, and apparently for the avatar to work it had to be a genetic match to its originally intended person.

How convenient. Maybe everyone selected for the mission was a twin, just in case!




Does anybody else think it would be good for the Avatar posts to be split out into their own thread that can be continued?
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on January 21, 2010, 09:02:05 pm

Does anybody else think it would be good for the Avatar posts to be split out into their own thread that can be continued?

Sure why not. I hope you will participate, Elle!!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kerry on January 22, 2010, 02:04:47 am

Does anybody else think it would be good for the Avatar posts to be split out into their own thread that can be continued?

Sounds good.  :)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kerry on January 22, 2010, 02:24:44 am
There was so much I didn't understand about the movie AVATAR. For one thing, why was there no backstory about the dead twin brother? How did he die and why did Jake feel compelled to step into his place? Why was he in the scientific group instead of the security group?

I may be wrong, but I think something was said about Jake's twin brother being murdered.

. . . . and what Katherine said about the genetic match. There was also mention made of the much greater salary Jake would get as an avatar, as opposed to his usual marine grunt's modest salary. That may have been an incentive. And from the way he looked affectionately at his brother's coffin as it was incinerated, and the defensive way he snapped, "He's dead!" at Dr Augustine, I would say the twins were probably close and, therefore, maybe Jake agreed to take his brother's place out of loyalty and love.

And of course he would be able to walk again as an avatar. He couldn't afford the operation on his Marine's salary on Earth.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kelda on January 24, 2010, 08:45:44 am
I finally saw avatar yesterday and thought it was abou 40 mins too long....
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Aloysius J. Gleek on January 27, 2010, 01:01:49 am


Uhm--what????

SW as--who??

And: "--the guy who appeared as Jake Sully in his non-blue, human form during all of Avatar's boring parts--"

Excuse me?
I resemble that remark!



http://nymag.com/daily/entertainment/2010/01/jake_sully_to_play_dracula.html (http://nymag.com/daily/entertainment/2010/01/jake_sully_to_play_dracula.html)

Jake Sully
to Play Dracula

By: Lane Brown
1/26/10 at 6:30 PM


(http://images.nymag.com/images/2/daily/2009/12/20091211_worthington_250x375.jpg)

Here's how Hollywood thinks money gets made: Sam Worthington — the guy who appeared as Jake Sully in his non-blue, human form during all of Avatar's boring parts — will play a vampire (one who does not fight with a werewolf over Kristen Stewart) in Alex Proyas's Dracula Year Zero.  Also, the treatment sounds slightly Batman Begins -ish; according to The Hollywood Reporter (http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/news/e3i888f5f58648771057d8b5f62b88ba95c), the script "explores the origin of Dracula, weaving vampire mythology with the true history of Prince Vlad the Impaler. It seeks to depict Dracula as a flawed hero in a tragic love story set in a dark age of magic and war." Unless it's a war over unobtanium and the magic involves sticking ponytails into flying dragons, we're skeptical about this one.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Lumière on January 27, 2010, 08:04:49 pm
Excuse me?
I resemble that remark!

 ???  ;)


I finally saw avatar yesterday and thought it was abou 40 mins too long....

I hope you didn't walk out before it was over, Kelda!



Next up on my to-watch list is Nine (followed by another Avatar viewing, this time at the Imax).



Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kelda on January 28, 2010, 05:13:05 am

I hope you didn't walk out before it was over, Kelda!


No, I didn't but nope.. just too long IMO!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Lumière on January 28, 2010, 12:56:43 pm
No, I didn't but nope.. just too long IMO!

Ok ok.   :)

--

Another film I watched recently - Summer Storm (German movie: Sommersturm, 2004).
It was bittersweet.  Quite well done and definitely worth a look.


http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0420206/

(http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i285/Lucise/Misc/sommersturm_titel.jpg)




Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: belbbmfan on January 28, 2010, 03:19:26 pm
We saw 'Up In The Air' last night. I thought it was good but nothing that exceptional. George Clooney was fun to watch. He was the perfect actor to play Ryan Bingham.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on February 02, 2010, 03:59:03 pm
The Weary Kind, the Oscar-nominated song from CRAZY HEART:

[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K7Jf2mcSplw[/youtube]


Not too many surprises, as usual.  Were there ten nominated films last year, or is this a new thing?
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on February 02, 2010, 04:08:34 pm
Another nominated song:

“Loin de Paname” from “Paris 36” Music by Reinhardt Wagner Lyric by Frank Thomas.

[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cpun4L5E2O0[/youtube]

You can almost smell the moldy baguette, lol!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on February 04, 2010, 09:35:29 am
Oh my god -- look what I just noticed!

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1193138/ (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1193138/)

Up in the Air (2009/I)
Cast
George Clooney   ... Ryan Bingham

http://content.foxsearchlight.com/inside/node/4196 (http://content.foxsearchlight.com/inside/node/4196)

"The Weary Kind" (the theme From CRAZY HEART) was written by Ryan Bingham and T Bone Burnett, performed by Ryan Bingham and will be on the soundtrack from New West Records.


Am I the first person in the world to notice this?



Update: No, apparently I'm the second person in the world. There's a mention of it in a blog called Showbiz411, but that's the only other reference I could find.

http://showbiz411.blogs.thr.com/2010/01/24/george-clooney-is-the-weary-kind/ (http://showbiz411.blogs.thr.com/2010/01/24/george-clooney-is-the-weary-kind/)

Quote
Just realized this: the musician who co-wrote “The Weary Kind” from “Crazy Heart”–which has won the Critics Choice and Golden Globe for Best Song–is named Ryan Bingham.

It’s a little confusing because George Clooney’s character’s name from “Up in the Air” is…Ryan Bingham.  That must be an Oscar first, as Clooney’s main rival for Best Actor is Jeff Bridges, who sings the song in “Crazy Heart.”



Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on February 04, 2010, 09:49:32 am
I saw Crazy Heart last weekend, BTW, and aside from one minor plot point that I HATED, I liked it. Jeff Bridges was amazing, and definitely should win the BA Oscar.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Ellemeno on February 04, 2010, 12:33:40 pm
Oh my god -- look what I just noticed!

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1193138/ (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1193138/)

Up in the Air (2009/I)
Cast
George Clooney   ... Ryan Bingham

http://content.foxsearchlight.com/inside/node/4196 (http://content.foxsearchlight.com/inside/node/4196)

"The Weary Kind" (the theme From CRAZY HEART) was written by Ryan Bingham and T Bone Burnett, performed by Ryan Bingham and will be on the soundtrack from New West Records.


Am I the first person in the world to notice this?



Update: No, apparently I'm the second person in the world. There's a mention of it in a blog called Showbiz411, but that's the only other reference I could find.

http://showbiz411.blogs.thr.com/2010/01/24/george-clooney-is-the-weary-kind/ (http://showbiz411.blogs.thr.com/2010/01/24/george-clooney-is-the-weary-kind/)





I'm copying my reply from somewhere else:  "Oh! I saw it, but didn't understand it. Somebody posted a YouTube of the song, and I watched it for a few seconds, trying to figure out how they melded George Clooney into the video. When I saw no George Clooney, I aborted the mission, not understanding the fact that you posted - that they have the same name."
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on February 04, 2010, 12:41:23 pm
I'm copying my reply from somewhere else:  "Oh! I saw it, but didn't understand it. Somebody posted a YouTube of the song, and I watched it for a few seconds, trying to figure out how they melded George Clooney into the video. When I saw no George Clooney, I aborted the mission, not understanding the fact that you posted - that they have the same name."

Déjà vu!  :laugh:

Also, when I saw your reply somewhere else, and you mentioned that someone had posted it, I knew that you knew that I knew that you knew that ...


It's a good song, BTW.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on February 05, 2010, 01:02:22 am
Saw the Imaginarium of Dr. Parnassus.

8/10

My review is over in the Imaginarium thread.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on February 05, 2010, 01:13:04 am
I saw Crazy Heart last weekend, BTW, and aside from one minor plot point that I HATED

OK, nobody asked, so I'll just tell you. Early in the movie, Jeff Bridge's character is established as a loser -- a raging alcoholic, playing in bowling alleys and two-bit clubs, having sex with women over 40 or even (shudder) his own age.

Bridges' character, Bad Blake, is 60-ish, washed up and puking into garbage cans -- but still has that certain something that causes a 32-year-old woman (Maggie Gyllenhaal) to pretty much immediately fall in love with him. And, to its credit, I would say the movie makes that prospect semi-credible. But it also implies that women of Bad Blake's own age, or even much younger -- women who by all appearances are nice and well-groomed and aren't late-stage alcoholics -- are not only inadequate to be Bad Blake's redemption-supplying girlfriends, but are by their very presence proof of how much his life has slid downhill.

In an early couple of scenes, he winds up in a one-night stand with a woman in the audience played by actress Beth Grant, who is about a month and a half older than Jeff Bridges:


(http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j266/thisiskaty/BethGrant.jpg)

Then he meets Maggie Gyllenhaal, who thankfully is 28 years younger and therefore suggests the possibility of redemption. First, though, he has to rebuff an overly strong come-on from this woman, played by Debrianna Mansini (whose age is not listed on IMDb). Having met Maggie, Bad Blake obviously would not be interested in anyone this ridiculously old:


(http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j266/thisiskaty/debrianna.jpg)




Other than that, the movie was good. Really. But that was a pretty big problem.



Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on February 05, 2010, 11:23:47 am
OK, nobody asked, so I guess I've got to tell you. Early in the movie, Jeff Bridge's character is established as a loser -- a raging alcoholic, playing in bowling alleys and two-bit clubs, having sex with women over 40 or even (shudder) his own age.

Bridges' character, Bad Blake, is 60-ish, washed up and puking into garbage cans -- but still has that certain something that causes a 32-year-old woman (Maggie Gyllenhaal) to pretty much immediately fall in love with him. And, to its credit, I would say the movie makes that prospect semi-credible. But it also turns around and implies that women of Bad Blake's own age, or even much younger, women who by all appearances are nice and well-groomed and aren't late-stage alcoholics, that these women are not only not adequate to be Bad Blake's redemption-supplying girlfriends, but are by their very presence proof of how much the protagonist's life has slid downhill.

In an early couple of scenes, he winds up in a one-night stand with a woman in the audience played by actress Beth Grant, who is about a month and a half older than Jeff Bridges:


(http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j266/thisiskaty/BethGrant.jpg)

Then he meets Maggie Gyllenhaal, who thankfully is 28 years younger and suggests the possibility of redemption. First, though, he has to rebuff an overly strong come-on from this woman, played by Debrianna Mansini (whose age is not listed on IMDb). By now, Bad Blake has already met Maggie and would therefore would obviously not be interested in anyone this ridiculously old:


(http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j266/thisiskaty/debrianna.jpg)




Other than that, the movie was good. Really. But that was a pretty bit problem.





Thanks for telling us SC.  I didn't ask because I assumed it was a spoiler.  I would have the same problem with this plot point.  You'd think that as a society, an aging one, we would have moved passed these negative depictions of middle-aged women.  I guess watching these films it becomes clear that narcissistic old white guys rule in Hollywood.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on February 05, 2010, 12:55:01 pm
Thanks for telling us SC.  I didn't ask because I assumed it was a spoiler.  I would have the same problem with this plot point.  You'd think that as a society, an aging one, we would have moved passed these negative depictions of middle-aged women.  I guess watching these films it becomes clear that narcissistic old white guys rule in Hollywood.

Glad you agree, oilgun! So did the people with whom I saw the movie, which was nice to hear. As a woman whose age is probably somewhere between those two actresses', this seriously hindered my enjoyment of what was otherwise a good film. Neither of their characters is established as being particularly unappealing aside from their age. I don't think Beth Grant's character even has any lines, but the movie shows Bad Blake sneaking out while she's still asleep, less to portray him (as I interpreted it) as a one-night-standing weasel than to indicate his shame at how far he has to stoop for sex. Debrianna Mansini's character does have some lines, and she is depicted as a groupie who comes on too strong. But Maggie Gyllenhaal is basically a groupie, too, just operating under the guise of a sort of semi-journalist.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Ellemeno on February 06, 2010, 06:50:22 am
Beth Grant played Dwight's occasional carnal partner on The Office.  She's funny.

K, do his friends actually call him, "Bad?"  Does the name come across as dumb in the movie as it does to me?
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on February 06, 2010, 12:11:03 pm
Beth Grant played Dwight's occasional carnal partner on The Office.  She's funny.

She appeared on My Name is Earl  as the mother of a friend of Earl's with whom Earl, for reasons I can't remember, was forced to have an affair. Again, the joke was that it was horrifying for Earl to have to sleep with such an old woman, and he kept trying everything he could to get out of it. At least in that case, though, she actually was older than Earl (Jason Lee will be 40 this year; Beth Grant 61), and she was the mom of his friend (Giovanni Ribisi).

I liked MNiE, but I hated that particular episode.

Who knew that out of all of these men, the one with the most acceptable attitude would be ... Dwight? But then, the very fact that Dwight finds her attractive is a backhanded compliment -- yet another slam at poor Beth Grant.


Quote
K, do his friends actually call him, "Bad?"  Does the name come across as dumb in the movie as it does to me?

Yes, and sort of, but you get used to it. It's an issue in the movie -- someone asks his real name, and he won't give it, but then at the end of the movie he does.

Not like it's some big spoiler, but I won't tell you what his real name is. However, I will tell you that it was the name of my great uncle, and also a name that my then-husband and I actually bandied about as a possible name for one of our sons. When we mentioned to some relatives -- people related to my great uncle -- that we were thinking of naming him (X), they all in unison said, "DON'T NAME HIM (X)."

Also, a former neighbor had a bull dog named (X).


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Ellemeno on February 07, 2010, 04:56:44 am


Not like it's some big spoiler, but I won't tell you what his real name is. However, I will tell you that it was the name of my great uncle, and also a name that my then-husband and I actually bandied about as a possible name for one of our sons. When we mentioned to some relatives -- people related to my great uncle -- that we were thinking of naming him (X), they all in unison said, "DON'T NAME HIM (X)."

Also, a former neighbor had a bull dog named (X).





Hm, of everything I've heard about this movie so far, this (the name of your great uncle and almost name of your baby) most makes me want to see it.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on February 07, 2010, 11:26:33 am
Hm, of everything I've heard about this movie so far, this (the name of your great uncle and almost name of your baby) most makes me want to see it.

 :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on February 10, 2010, 07:20:44 pm
I slogged through The Last Station today. Despite brilliant acting by Helen Mirrin, I didn't feel sympatico to her throughout the movie. Terrific chemistry between her and Christopher Plummer, who played her husband Leo Tolstoy. Even a great scene of them in bed. But, honestly, who wants to see two old people in bed??

James McAvoy's acting was just as good as Mirren's, I thought. He played a young secretary to Tolstoy who is sympathetic to the Countess (Mirren) and becomes her confidante. Another great actor was Paul Giamatti as Tolstoy's friend Cherkov. After the first few minutes I didn't even see him as the sideways guy!

So if great acting's your thing, you might like The Last Station. Me being a writer, the plot's the thing for me, and this one was pretty thin.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on February 11, 2010, 11:17:49 am
Oh, and one other thing about The Last Station. It was plagued with those extreme closeups that are so popular now. Sometimes you wonder how the actors can do their jobs with a camera lens right in their faces! Plus, jittery hand-held camera work. The combination made me a little seasick. A Single Man had extreme closeups too, but they didn't bother me because the camera was blissfully still.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on February 13, 2010, 07:49:54 pm

I saw It's Complicated a few nights ago and unexpectedly liked it. I feared there'd be too much older-woman-wish-fulfillment content, which sometimes gets so outlandish that it has started really getting on my nerves. While was "aspirational," it seemed reasonably natural in the context of the plot.

I just saw It's Complicated with my Mom. After a bit of a slow start, it was rolling-on-the-floor hilarious in spots! I especially loved Jim Shakowski as Meryl Streep's daughter's fiance. I never thought a movie about fifty-somethings could be so hip and funny!! Since one of my nicknames is Mrs. Robinson, I was happy to see The Graduate make a cameo appearance.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on February 13, 2010, 11:19:35 pm
I especially loved Jim Shakowski as Meryl Streep's daughter's fiance.

I think that would be John Krasinski, FRiend Lee--the guy from The Office?
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on February 14, 2010, 12:29:01 am
I never thought a movie about fifty-somethings could be so hip and funny!!

Because I know plenty of hip and funny fifty-somethings, present company included, my reaction is just the opposite -- why are there so few movies about them?

Or rather, in particular [once again donning Humorless Strident Middle-Aged Feminist hat] so few movies about hip and funny fifty-something women. You do occasionally see hip and funny men, of fifty and beyond, in movies.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Lynne on February 19, 2010, 06:40:44 pm
We saw Avatar over the weekend and although R liked it (I think he's a special-effects guy  ;) but he'll have to address that), I was not really impressed.

I appreciate, of course, the parallels of one society enslaving another, robbing them of their natural resources, from the beginning of time to our current relations with fundamentalist Muslims in the Middle East.  And there are plenty of other moral lessons to be learned if you pay attention.

But

I felt like the point was beaten home like the dead horse - much more so than the Crash lessons on racism, and it's not like Crash was very subtle.

I did appreciate what little creativity went into creating the oppressed (blue) society and even more the concept of one species being able to merge with another and thereby understand who they are...that might engender future science fiction goodness.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on February 19, 2010, 06:45:22 pm
We saw Avatar over the weekend and although R liked it (I think he's a special-effects guy  ;) but he'll have to address that), I was not really impressed.

I appreciate, of course, the parallels of one society enslaving another, robbing them of their natural resources, from the beginning of time to our current relations with fundamentalist Muslims in the Middle East.  And there are plenty of other moral lessons to be learned if you pay attention.

But

I felt like the point was beaten home like the dead horse - much more so than the Crash lessons on racism, and it's not like Crash was very subtle.

I did appreciate what little creativity went into creating the oppressed (blue) society and even more the concept of one species being able to merge with another and thereby understand who they are...that might engender future science fiction goodness.

Yikes! 

I guess I'm an Avatard, lol!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on February 19, 2010, 06:50:58 pm
Ha! I must be an Avatard too! Lynne has a point that you don't go to Avatar for its subtle and original script!! It's more like a comics/graphic novel storyline.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Lynne on February 19, 2010, 06:52:00 pm
I'm sorry, Friends...I was bored despite the cool special effects.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on February 19, 2010, 09:10:56 pm
Here's an interesting short article from the current issue of The New Yorker about the top two nominated films and the new AMPAS voting process for Best Film:

And the Oscar Goes To
by Hendrik Hertzberg February 15, 2010

[...]

Everyone seems to agree that the director, James Cameron, and his legions of artists and technicians have created a thrillingly immersive, lovingly detailed, surprisingly believable alternative world. There’s been less unanimity about the movie’s “message.” Liberals are unhappy with the white-guy-rescues-the-natives aspect of the story, though this aspect surely has less to do with racism per se than with Cameron’s reliance on old-movie plot devices. Conservatives complain that the picture’s vision of the future (the action takes place in the year 2154) is overly hospitable to century-and-a-half-old lefty talking points.

[...]

This year, the Best Picture list was expanded, partly to make sure that at least a couple of blockbusters would be on it. (The biggest grosser of 2008, “The Dark Knight,” was one of the better Batman adventures, but it didn’t make the cut.) To forestall a victory for some cinematic George Wallace or Ross Perot, the Academy switched to a different system. Members—there are around fifty-eight hundred of them—are being asked to rank their choices from one to ten. In the unlikely event that a picture gets an outright majority of first-choice votes, the counting’s over. If not, the last-place finisher is dropped and its voters’ second choices are distributed among the movies still in the running. If there’s still no majority, the second-to-last-place finisher gets eliminated, and its voters’ second (or third) choices are counted. And so on, until one of the nominees goes over fifty per cent.

[...]

Read more: http://www.newyorker.com/talk/comment/2010/02/15/100215taco_talk_hertzberg#ixzz0g2AucTpN

[Interesting, the link was added automatically]
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Lynne on February 19, 2010, 09:16:16 pm
Now see, I didn't get that at all. The natives axed themselves with help from a man who was bi-species in some sense. Definitely not a white guy, IMO.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on February 19, 2010, 10:13:16 pm
Now see, I didn't get that at all. The natives axed themselves with help from a man who was bi-species in some sense. Definitely not a white guy, IMO.

I think of him as a white guy in blueface.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: SFEnnisSF on February 19, 2010, 11:18:43 pm

I have still not seen Avatard/Avatanic, and I probably never will...  :laugh:
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on February 19, 2010, 11:40:26 pm
I have still not seen Avatard/Avatanic, and I probably never will...  :laugh:

I don't have any plans to see Dances with Navi either. ...  8)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on February 19, 2010, 11:59:46 pm
I don't have any plans to see Dances with Navi either. ...  8)

Why? It's a great 3D experience.  Oh and it's Nav'i with an apostrophe,  ;)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Lynne on February 20, 2010, 12:03:44 am
but crayons, he was merged genetically with one of the blue faced warriors, given his memories and thoughts. How can you say he was solely white?
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on February 20, 2010, 01:03:26 am
but crayons, he was merged genetically with one of the blue faced warriors, given his memories and thoughts. How can you say he was solely white?

Well, partly I was just making a joke. But since you ask, from the way I perceived the film he was a white man's mind in a Nava'i's (sp?) body. That is, yes, they were genetically merged, but the blue genes were all physical and athletic, while the white genes were all cognitive and emotional. Which in itself you might look askance at, if you were sensitive about portrayal of race on film (the white part is the "brains," while the colored part would make a really good basketball player?).

In other words, I do think there is some validity to the criticism of the movie as Hollywood's typical "white man as savior of people of color" theme that we've seen in so many, many movies. At the same time, I can't get too up in arms about it -- for the reasons you mentioned as well as the fact that a) the Nava'i are fictional, b) he actually was, physically, blue and c) the film was so obviously well meaning (simplistic, yes, as you said, but certainly well-intentioned) politically.

On the other hand, almost all of those "white guy as savior" movies are well-meaning. The idea, as I understand it, is that the filmmakes feel that it will be easier to sell the audience on progressive ideas about race if they're presented by a protagonist they can relate to -- i.e., a white one. "Dances with Wolves," "Beyond Rangoon," "Mississippi Burning," "Blood Diamond," "Secret Life of Bees" -- those are a few examples I can think of off the top of my head.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Lumière on February 23, 2010, 04:54:11 am
I guess I'm an Avatard, lol!

I have seen the movie twice and both times, I was engrossed in the imagery of Pandora and the Na'vi.
I loved the concept of 'queues' and bonding with other living beings on the planet.
On my first viewing, I might've guessed what 50% of the story would be but that didn't bother me because I was more interested in the way the story was being told and not if I'd heard it before.
Conclusion:  I am an Avatard as well.  8)


In other words, I do think there is some validity to the criticism of the movie as Hollywood's typical "white man as savior of people of color" theme that we've seen in so many, many movies.


I see the movie as less about race politics and more about a search/definition of one's identity.  
I think I have an entire essay on this topic but it's late and I am not sure y'all care that much about it. lol

Re: The "white man saves natives"?  Oversimplification.  The Blue Girl, Neytiri, is at the center of the story as far as I'm concerned ..(she only saves the "White/Blue" boy's life at least 7 times)..
Then again, I have a thing for badass warrior women characters...  :)


Why? It's a great 3D experience.

I am taking one of my friends to our final viewing this weekend at the IMAX.  Yes!  Should be a blast.  :)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Aloysius J. Gleek on February 23, 2010, 07:55:24 am


Moi, je suis un avatard aussi!  :D
(http://cache.gawkerassets.com/assets/images/2010/01/custom_1262858650190_avatard.jpg)         (http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_L_GZprrwLvU/S0Dh5DgLU1I/AAAAAAAABoI/pAeM0Je1PEE/s640/stone_avatard.jpg)

(http://pix.motivatedphotos.com/2010/1/3/633981428940417160-avatard.jpg)

Uhm--well, not so much as that...
                                                 (http://loyalkng.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/james-cameron-avatar-avatard-titanic-air-bender-last.jpg)  ::)




 ;D

http://gawker.com/5442399/avatards-are-the-new-twihards-how-to-tell-if-you-or-a-loved-one-is-at-risk (http://gawker.com/5442399/avatards-are-the-new-twihards-how-to-tell-if-you-or-a-loved-one-is-at-risk)

and

http://www.examiner.com/x-15166-Dallas-Comedy-Examiner~y2010m1d8-Avatar-fans-being-ruthlessly-mocked-online-are-they-the-next-Twihards (http://www.examiner.com/x-15166-Dallas-Comedy-Examiner~y2010m1d8-Avatar-fans-being-ruthlessly-mocked-online-are-they-the-next-Twihards)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Aloysius J. Gleek on February 23, 2010, 11:26:20 am


Of course, the ORIGINAL avatar was blue:
(http://hinduismonline.files.wordpress.com/2009/06/maha-vishnu2.jpg)




But my favorite was:
(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_zujuN6nwbHA/SaL4ZvRClXI/AAAAAAAAAAo/2RcAf6zEWwU/s400/jambi.jpg)
Ma semblable, ma soeur!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on February 23, 2010, 12:12:30 pm

But my favorite was:
(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_zujuN6nwbHA/SaL4ZvRClXI/AAAAAAAAAAo/2RcAf6zEWwU/s400/jambi.jpg)
Ma semblable, ma soeur!

And he's coming back, did you here?  And also the original Miss Yvonne!  Oh Peewee, we missed you!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on February 23, 2010, 01:19:28 pm
John and Gil, you are a Rhapsody in Blue!!  ;D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on February 23, 2010, 10:39:12 pm
I saw "Avatar" in 3-D while I was on the road and really enjoyed it.  Despite a plot drawn from just about every sci-fi, action, western and fantasy film you've ever seen, I was drawn in emotionally, felt real suspense, and was of course amazed at the beauty and creativity of Pandora and its creatures.  Tomorrow I'm going to see it in IMAX 3-D to complete the experience.  8)

Today I saw a screening of "Shutter Island."  I was reluctant to go to what I've seen advertised as a spooky kind of thriller, but since Scorsese directed it, I went along.  Despite the creepy location, a hospital for the criminally insane, and a fair amount of gore and corpses, I found it more of a cerebral exercise than a thrill ride.  There were lots of good actors, including Leo DiCaprio, Michelle Williams, Ben Kingsley and Max Von Sydow, but in the end I think it's more for fans of mystery novels and Hitchcock movies than anyone.  There were lots of plot holes, and the film has the too-perfect look that can make period movies seem fake.  I'd give it a seven out of ten.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Lumière on February 24, 2010, 04:47:15 pm
... Tomorrow I'm going to see it in IMAX 3-D to complete the experience.  8)

Hey Meryl,
You'll love it.   8)

ETA:

You mentioned being amazed by the beauty of Pandora ...
If you wish to embrace your inner nerd lol, check out this Avatar Wiki site (http://james-camerons-avatar.wikia.com/wiki/Pandora) that includes details about the planet as well as the flora and fauna.
I found it quite interesting to read.


Quote
Today I saw a screening of "Shutter Island."  I was reluctant to go to what I've seen advertised as a spooky kind of thriller, but since Scorsese directed it, I went along.  Despite the creepy location, a hospital for the criminally insane, and a fair amount of gore and corpses, I found it more of a cerebral exercise than a thrill ride.  There were lots of good actors, including Leo DiCaprio, Michelle Williams, Ben Kingsley and Max Von Sydow, but in the end I think it's more for fans of mystery novels and Hitchcock movies than anyone....

I've been thinking about checking out Shutter Island as well.  I love period movies and I'm a huge fan of mystery novels/films so I figured I'd like it.  Thing is - it looked really creepy and slightly nightmare-inducing.  I can't handle scary movies because images tend to stay in my mind and haunt me for days, lol.  So I'll have to see if I can go watch this one.

Another period piece I will most likely go see - Wolfman .
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on February 25, 2010, 12:29:14 am
Hey Meryl,
You'll love it.   8)

ETA:

You mentioned being amazed by the beauty of Pandora ...
If you wish to embrace your inner nerd lol, check out this Avatar Wiki site (http://james-camerons-avatar.wikia.com/wiki/Pandora) that includes details about the planet as well as the flora and fauna.
I found it quite interesting to read.

I did love the IMAX version, Milli!  Especially the aerial sequences.  Wow!  :P  And thanks for the link.  8)

Quote
I've been thinking about checking out Shutter Island as well.  I love period movies and I'm a huge fan of mystery novels/films so I figured I'd like it.  Thing is - it looked really creepy and slightly nightmare-inducing.  I can't handle scary movies because images tend to stay in my mind and haunt me for days, lol.  So I'll have to see if I can go watch this one.

I worried about being haunted by it, too, but somehow I haven't been.  The imagery was harrowing, but somehow I didn't feel engaged emotionally FWIW.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on February 28, 2010, 02:36:52 am
Saw Shutter Island tonight. A bit too long, but reasonably engaging. Leonardo Di Caprio was pretty good, and as always I liked Mark Ruffalo.

But you know, Leo could do better. Only one of Leo's best films was directed by Martin Scorcese (The Departed). Several others (The Aviator, Gangs of New York) were only so-so. I'm not sure they're as great for each other as they both seem to think. It would be interesting to see Leo in a movie by someone more kind of out there: Wes Anderson, Spike Jonze, Stephen Soderbergh ...

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on March 13, 2010, 10:16:18 pm
A Thing of Beauty is a Joy Forever

(http://cinematicpassions.files.wordpress.com/2009/05/45694714_brightstar1_466x300.jpg)

I think Lee recently mentioned Bright Star, the Jane Campion film about Keats.  

Ben Whishaw (who starred with Heath in I'm Not There) redeems himself from his awful turn as Sebastian in Brideshead Revisited to star as John Keats in this small, lovely film.  

Abbie Cornish (in Candy with Heath) costars as Fanny Brawne, and completely disappears into the role.

It's a slow, sincere period piece.  Keats cannot marry his beloved because of his station in life.  They are victims of the early 19th century.

Makes one want to read (or re-read) Endymion, Ode on a Grecian Urn, La Belle Dame Sans Merci and the titular Bright Star.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on March 13, 2010, 10:49:53 pm
Well paul, I loved him as Sebastian! >:(
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on March 14, 2010, 12:31:11 am
Well paul, I loved him as Sebastian! >:(

I know, Gil, and we will always disagree on that one. 

Have you seen Bright Star?  And, what do you think? 

Also, I recently saw Paris, je t'aime (and the companion New York, I Love You).  My head is still spinning, but couldn't help but notice your Gaspard Ulliel.  And so much Natalie Portman.  In both.  I love the 5-minute genre!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Marina on March 14, 2010, 03:02:29 pm
I happpened to see Shutter Island over the weekend too - I loved it, very atmospheric and hauntingly beautiful.   Everyone is great in it, but I thought Ben Kingsley and Michelle were wonderful.   One of the best soundtracks I have ever heard as well.

I have to admit, I am an Avatar fan too.   I thought Neytiri was a very strong character.  Dances with Wolves is just about my favorite movie of all time, which Avatar does remind me of, and the concept of an outsider rejecting everything they had been taught and adopting their cultures is the highest of compliments IMO.   Our Native American cultures in the Americas are some of the most beautiful in all the world, deserving of the highest respect.   Brokeback is right up there with my favorite films of all time.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on March 14, 2010, 04:51:12 pm
I have to admit, I am an Avatar fan too.   ...  Brokeback is right up there with my favorite films of all time.

Brokeback, Avatar, or both??
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Marina on March 14, 2010, 06:47:03 pm
Hi FrontRanger,

Sorry, Brokeback is right up there with my favorite movies of all time, I meant to say.   I loved Avatar, but time will tell if it gets on my favorites of all time list.  :)

Happy Vernal Equinox to you as well, btw.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on March 14, 2010, 07:44:00 pm
Thanks for clarifying, Marina!! Happy VE Day, when it arrives next weekend!!

Say, did you know there is a character named Marina in one of my all-time favourite films? It is a little known film called Local Hero, and Marina is a Scottish marine biologist with a very mysterious air about her...
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on March 14, 2010, 07:46:43 pm
A Thing of Beauty is a Joy Forever

(http://cinematicpassions.files.wordpress.com/2009/05/45694714_brightstar1_466x300.jpg)

I think Lee recently mentioned Bright Star, the Jane Campion film about Keats.  

Ben Whishaw (who starred with Heath in I'm Not There) redeems himself from his awful turn as Sebastian in Brideshead Revisited to star as John Keats in this small, lovely film.  

Abbie Cornish (in Candy with Heath) costars as Fanny Brawne, and completely disappears into the role.

It's a slow, sincere period piece.  Keats cannot marry his beloved because of his station in life.  They are victims of the early 19th century.

Makes one want to read (or re-read) Endymion, Ode on a Grecian Urn, La Belle Dame Sans Merci and the titular Bright Star.

Thanks for reminding me of this lovely film, friend!! Two things I really liked about this film were the poetry (of course) and the way that Fanny's sister (sometimes) and brother (always) were charged with going behind her wherever Fanny went to protect her propriety!!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Marina on March 14, 2010, 08:08:36 pm
Quote
Say, did you know there is a character named Marina in one of my all-time favourite films? It is a little known film called Local Hero, and Marina is a Scottish marine biologist with a very mysterious air about her...

Ohmygosh, no I didn't realize that!   Although the name of the film does sound vaguely familiar - who knows?   It could be stored in some dusty corner of my brain.   I sometimes write stuff and don't realize things like that until after I've written it!  :)   It's also my aunt's middle name and I have always loved it.

I did see Bright Star too - a beautiful film.   Jane Campion's The Piano is one of my all-time faves.  :)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Sason on March 15, 2010, 03:15:59 pm
Thanks for clarifying, Marina!! Happy VE Day, when it arrives next weekend!!

Say, did you know there is a character named Marina in one of my all-time favourite films? It is a little known film called Local Hero, and Marina is a Scottish marine biologist with a very mysterious air about her...

I loved Local Hero !!!

A wonderful film, and with some great humour too!

I saw it two, or maybe even three times, which is a lot in my cinematic history.  ;D

Must be at least 25 years ago.....
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Sophia on March 15, 2010, 06:34:13 pm
I would love to see Bright star. I was a huge fan of Piano, so I don´t think it can't be bad. Even if this is a total different story I just love the way Jane Champion works with the surroundings to tell the story. Something I assume she also has succeed very well with Bright star!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Marina on March 15, 2010, 08:57:57 pm
She does - Bright Star, at least to me, is a much different story than the Piano.    It's more of a story of unfulfilled love, love as a romantic ideal.   I don't want to spoil it for you, but there's a symbol throughout that meant to me something brief and ephemeral.

The Piano was so different - earthy, passionate and one of the most erotic films I have ever seen - the soundtrack was breathtaking too.   As well as themes of womanhood, from a time where women were treated like chattel and didn't have a "voice", there was a theme to me of the clash of the wild and natural vs. the civilized and subdued of the environment as well as humankind, which is a theme I love to explore as well.   I was really affected by it; it's one of my favorite films ever.  I love Harvey Keitel's Maori tattoos.  :)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on March 19, 2010, 10:51:18 am
I think Gerard Butler should consider getting another agent.  :o
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on March 19, 2010, 10:55:21 am
I think Gerard Butler should consider getting another agent.  :o

I have one of his movies, called PS I Love You. He gets killed off in the very beginning! And now this Bounty Hunter thing. I've seen the trailer so often, I feel like I've seen the movie. So, yes, I agree with you. But he has gotten a lot of airtime for someone so ordinary.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on March 20, 2010, 12:43:04 am
I have one of his movies, called PS I Love You. He gets killed off in the very beginning! And now this Bounty Hunter thing. I've seen the trailer so often, I feel like I've seen the movie. So, yes, I agree with you. But he has gotten a lot of airtime for someone so ordinary.

His choices have been abysmal lately.  He was great in DEAR FRANKIE, the film that made him famous, and I remember him from HARRISON'S FLOWERS.  I  liked him in BEOWULF AND GRENDEL which although not a great film, at least it was an interesting role.  I can forgive him 300 and I haven't seen ROCK AND ROLLA but it seems all he's doing is disposable crap.  Oh well, I suppose his bank account is his first priority.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on March 20, 2010, 12:53:48 am
I know, Gil, and we will always disagree on that one. 

Have you seen Bright Star?  And, what do you think? 

Also, I recently saw Paris, je t'aime (and the companion New York, I Love You).  My head is still spinning, but couldn't help but notice your Gaspard Ulliel.  And so much Natalie Portman.  In both.  I love the 5-minute genre!

I just started watching BRIGHT STAR and so far so good, I'm quite enjoying it.  I think Ben is absolutely delightful as Keats.  But then, I would love him in anything, I think.  he has a quality, maybe a vulnerability, that I just love, I've been smitten ever since seeing him in PERFUME.  I also love ABBIE CORNISH, I think she's a wonderful actor.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Marina on March 20, 2010, 11:52:37 am
Quote
I think Ben is absolutely delightful as Keats.  But then, I would love him in anything, I think.

He is beautiful in this - this was the first film I had seen him in.  Abby is wonderful too.   Jane Campion's films are like works of art.  I didn't want to say too much about Bright Star in case people haven't seen it yet, but I loved it as well.   The Piano is still my favorite Jane Campion film tho.  :)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on March 20, 2010, 07:41:34 pm
He is beautiful in this - this was the first film I had seen him in.  Abby is wonderful too.   Jane Campion's films are like works of art.  I didn't want to say too much about Bright Star in case people haven't seen it yet, but I loved it as well.   The Piano is still my favorite Jane Campion film tho.  :)

I just finished watching the rest of the film and all I can say is it seems I've spent half of today in tears!  What a heartbreaking story.  Of course, i knew it wouldn't end well but the film was so well done I was practically sobbing!  And yes, Ben is beautiful in this and Rob Schneider was also really good!   BRIGHT STAR is only my second Sally Potter film, the first being THE PIANO which I loved. I'm ashamed to say I never did see SWEETIE or AN ANGEL MY TABLE.  She's such a brilliant romantic! 

I had started the day by going to see REMEMBER ME, the new Rob Pattinson film which turned out to be quite a little tearjerker as well.  The film is not in the same league of course, but still well worth watching.  I was pleasantly surprised to see Lena Olin as Pattinson's mother.  I always like her and she does wonders with a rather small role. I know the ending has caused some controversy but it sure had me reaching for the Kleenex.

No wonder I'm depressed, sheesh!  :'( :'(
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Fran on March 21, 2010, 06:10:17 pm
I had started the day by going to see REMEMBER ME, the new Rob Pattinson film which turned out to be quite a little tearjerker as well.  The film is not in the same league of course, but still well worth watching.  I was pleasantly surprised to see Lena Olin as Pattinson's mother.  I always like her and she does wonders with a rather small role. I know the ending has caused some controversy but it sure had me reaching for the Kleenex.

No wonder I'm depressed, sheesh!  :'( :'(

I saw REMEMBER ME last week with my younger daughter.  She made me promise not to read anything about it at IMDb before seeing it (which I typically do), so I really didn't know what I was in for.  I thought the movie was well done and perfectly cast.  (Robert Pattinson is VERY easy on the eyes.)  Afterwards, I was more stunned than depressed -- no Kleenex needed here, and I cry quite easily.  To me, it's the kind of movie that makes you think about how one thing (the actions of those mean girls at school, for example) can lead to another and result in a person ending up in the wrong place at the wrong time through no fault of their own, just by a twist of fate.  I'm kind of surprised by the lousy reviews.  In any event, I'm planning on seeing it again.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on March 21, 2010, 07:50:46 pm
Thanks for the recommendation, friend. I will give this a look whenever I have a craving for Robert Pattinson with no fangs. But my favourite RP movie so far is Little Ashes, where he plays Salvador Dali.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on March 22, 2010, 08:45:55 am
I've seen the trailer so often, I feel like I've seen the movie.

Seems to me this happens an awful lot these days. Between endless TV commercials for a film and appearances by the stars/director/whoever on TV chat shows to promote the film, it's the rare movie indeed--like, of course, Brokeback Mountain--that I really feel I need to see in order to know about it.  :-\
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on March 23, 2010, 09:36:11 am
Ain't that the truth! The amazing thing is that I don't watch these talk shows or commercials, but I still see the trailers ad nauseum!! I did gorge myself on movies just before the Oscars, but never enuff, never enuff...but way too much of trailers. I think the funnest time I had watching trailers was just before AVATAR when I saw the trailers for all the 3D movies that are coming up. How to Train Your Dragon looks like fun. I wish Beowulf had been in 3D!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on March 25, 2010, 03:32:24 pm
Caution: The following post is about Local Hero...yes, again!!

Two other things that are similar between LH and BBM: there is a crying baby, and a tattooed woman!! The baby is a humorous character, as most of the characters are. (Only Burt Lancaster and Jenny Seagrove play straight parts, as Felix Happer and Marina.) The new guy, Mac, approaches a group of working men and notices a baby in a stroller, crying. He says, "Whose baby?" and there is an uncomfortable silence. We never find out. The tattooed woman is, I think, played by Caroline Guthrie. She's always chasing after Oldsen, Mac's sidekick.

The baby in BBM is, of course, Ennis' daughter Jenny, who he tries to comfort while creating a fit of jealousy in elder daughter Alma Jr. The tattooed woman appears dancing next to Ennis and Cassie at the Wolf Ears bar.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on March 26, 2010, 12:39:07 am
But wait! I'm not done yet with Local Hero!!

One of the most prominent set pieces of both LH and BBM is...the telephone booth!! In LH, it's the bright red booth of Britain...supposedly placed right on the beach. But, in reality, the bright red booth was a prop made of papier mache. The REAL telephone booth is more subdued, and is placed outside the inn in the little town which serves as the surrogate of Furness. It is called Pennan, and is on the northeastern coast, not far from Aberdeen.

Yes, it's a  town of lobstering altho, true to the movie, the locals canna afford to actually eat the lobster. They ship it off to Spain and thereabouts.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on April 02, 2010, 11:35:37 pm
I'm glad I saw Chloe, it was very interesting. Somewhat formulaic during the first halfhour or so, took too long to set the plot points. But once it got going, it was quite good! I loved Amanda Seyfried in the title role. At one point (where the movie "kicked in") she looked like an insect...maybe a preying mantis!! Her oversized eyes and mouth really worked for her in developing the character. But of course, the movie belonged to Julianne Moore. I identified so much with her midlife woman character that when I went into the restroom after the movie, I couldn't stand to look at myself in the mirror. I thought, "If a gorgeous woman like JM feels self conscious about growing older, then I can't even be a person!" but when I finally got up the courage to look, I found I was not unbearable, after all! Liam Neeson was also very good as JM's husband. I was shocked to learn that he lost his wife during the filming of this movie.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Penthesilea on April 11, 2010, 12:33:18 pm
Ain't that the truth! The amazing thing is that I don't watch these talk shows or commercials, but I still see the trailers ad nauseum!! I did gorge myself on movies just before the Oscars, but never enuff, never enuff...but way too much of trailers. I think the funnest time I had watching trailers was just before AVATAR when I saw the trailers for all the 3D movies that are coming up. How to Train Your Dragon looks like fun. I wish Beowulf had been in 3D!



I'm just back from seeing How to Train Your Dragon in 3D. It's a helluva lot of fun! Go see it! Amazing 3D effects and a fun movie. What more can you want?
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on April 13, 2010, 08:56:26 am
Has anyone seen The Assassination of Jesse James (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/) by the Coward Robert Ford, which is playing on AMC this week? It's an interesting drama. There's a scene where Casey Affleck completely upstages Brad Pitt and Brad looks at him like "Well, I'll be a ...."
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Marina on April 13, 2010, 01:54:08 pm
No!  I'll definitely have to look for that.   That was one I really wanted to see at the theater, but for some reason never got to it.   From the previews, it looked beautifully filmed.   Thanks for the info!  :)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on April 13, 2010, 04:30:33 pm
Has anyone seen The Assassination of Jesse James (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/) by the Coward Robert Ford, which is playing on AMC this week? It's an interesting drama. There's a scene where Casey Affleck completely upstages Brad Pitt and Brad looks at him like "Well, I'll be a ...."

Upstaging Brad Pitt, now there's an accomplishment.  ;)

I can't wait to see Casey in the controversial THE KILLER INSIDE ME.  Perfect casting!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on April 13, 2010, 11:20:54 pm
The scene reminds me of the Dozy Embrace, although there's a table between Robert Ford and Jesse James. Casey has such a look of total acceptance and love, which turns to bitter disillusionment and regret, so like Jack's look.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on April 14, 2010, 03:10:38 pm
The scene reminds me of the Dozy Embrace, although there's a table between Robert Ford and Jesse James. Casey has such a look of total acceptance and love, which turns to bitter disillusionment and regret, so like Jack's look.

I'l have to rewatch the film because I don't recall that scene.  I saw it when it first came out so it's been a while.  I remember really enjoying it though.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on May 19, 2010, 10:06:11 pm
Saw the movie Robin Hood opening weekend.  Russell Crowe taking his shirt off is worth the price of admission and the hour wait.   ;D  Super cast, great production values, wonderful 'twist' to the story, but otherwise silly, with dumb parts, and it sets itself up for sequel I'm not sure we'll see.

IMDb reports Russell Crow is the same age Sean Connery was when he played Robin in the 'autumn' version of Robin and Marian.  Neither Crowe nor Blanchette are spring chickens and their characters admit as much, but they show no signs of acting like geriatric cases.

Give it 6.99 out of 10
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on May 20, 2010, 10:57:10 am
Saw the movie Robin Hood opening weekend.  Russell Crowe taking his shirt off is worth the price of admission and the hour wait.   ;D  Super cast, great production values, wonderful 'twist' to the story, but otherwise silly, with dumb parts, and it sets itself up for sequel I'm not sure we'll see.

IMDb reports Russell Crow is the same age Sean Connery was when he played Robin in the 'autumn' version of Robin and Marian.  Neither Crowe nor Blanchette are spring chickens and their characters admit as much, but they show no signs of acting like geriatric cases.

Give it 6.99 out of 10

I'm glad you liked it more than not, del.  I'm planning to see this one, purely for Russell and Cate.  Sounds like a good popcorn flick.  8)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on May 20, 2010, 01:31:34 pm
Saw the movie Robin Hood opening weekend.  Russell Crowe taking his shirt off is worth the price of admission and the hour wait.   ;D  Super cast, great production values, wonderful 'twist' to the story, but otherwise silly, with dumb parts, and it sets itself up for sequel I'm not sure we'll see.

IMDb reports Russell Crow is the same age Sean Connery was when he played Robin in the 'autumn' version of Robin and Marian.  Neither Crowe nor Blanchette are spring chickens and their characters admit as much, but they show no signs of acting like geriatric cases.

Give it 6.99 out of 10

I'm glad you liked it more than not, del.  I'm planning to see this one, purely for Russell and Cate.  Sounds like a good popcorn flick.  8)

Yes, it does, and I plan to see it, too. I am looking forward to seeing those high production values convincingly recreate Europe from a millennium ago.

And I love Russell Crowe as an actor. I did read one review that wished the role had been given to someone with more sprezzatura -- the reviewer suggested Robert Downey Jr., Johnny Depp or Brad Pitt. I can see what she means about the first two (I'm not sure I'd find Brad Pitt convincing), but I'll wait and see.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Marina on May 20, 2010, 01:40:31 pm
Hi All,

I saw Robin Hood over the weekend too - I thought it was very well done!  Looking forward to more.

I have Jesse James yet too watch too.

M

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Ellemeno on May 21, 2010, 12:20:37 am

And I love Russell Crowe as an actor. I did read one review that wished the role had been given to someone with more sprezzatura -- the reviewer suggested Robert Downey Jr., Johnny Depp or Brad Pitt. I can see what she means about the first two (I'm not sure I'd find Brad Pitt convincing), but I'll wait and see.



You mean like the sprezzatura you exhibited in the way you dropped the word into your post?

I had to look it up, it's new to me.

:)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Ellemeno on May 21, 2010, 12:43:34 am

You mean like the sprezzatura you exhibited in the way you dropped the word into your post?

I had to look it up, it's new to me.

:)


Serendipity!  I learned the word just in time.   http://bettermost.net/forum/index.php/topic,462.msg572850.html#msg572850
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on May 26, 2010, 10:37:54 am
You mean like the sprezzatura you exhibited in the way you dropped the word into your post?

Wish I could take credit, but initially it was the movie critic who dropped it into her review.

Serendipity!  I learned the word just in time.   http://bettermost.net/forum/index.php/topic,462.msg572850.html#msg572850

Looks like you're exhibiting some sprezzatura yourself!

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on May 26, 2010, 10:50:12 am
Saw "Robin Hood" yesterday and loved it.

Not that we'll ever know, but it sure does have a ring (whiff?) of authenticity about it. Another one of those movies that is so realistic, you can practically smell it!

Gladiator in Lincoln Green!

Wonderful escapist fantasy. 

9/10   :D

I saw it on Sunday and liked it. My biggest gripe is that I often had a hard time understanding what was going on. So many bad guys in the movie -- pretty much everybody in the film is a bad guy except for Robin, Marion, the dad and the Merry Men. Oh, and William Hurt. The bad guys include: the new king, the old king, the French king, the traitorous scheming Mark Strong, the Sheriff of Nottingham, even for a while the feral forest children. They were all against Robin (except the forest kids), but often they were against each other, too. I found it hard to keep straight which bad guy was in league with or plotting against which other bad guy.

I still wish somebody would do a really realistic movie about the Middle Ages. I think this movie made some headway, but it was still somewhat glamorized. I think life in that period really was nasty, brutish and short, but movies tend to make it look pretty much like our life except with old-fashioned clothes. For one thing, in real life back then there'd be far fewer teeth.

I did really like the relationship between Robin and Marion, though. And Marion is a good, strong character. I can see why they picked Russell Crowe rather than someone with more sprezzatura -- they're going for a more noble, wise, mature Robin than, say, Robert Downey Jr. or Johnny Depp would have created. Next to them, Cate Blanchett's Marion might have looked too stern and stodgy; instead, she was a good match for Robin.

 
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on May 26, 2010, 11:17:37 am
I saw "Robin Hood" the other day and agree with Kerry and Katherine - great entertainment, and very nice depiction of the Middle Ages, though somewhat cleaned up.  ;D

It was reminiscent of two of my favorite films:  "Gladiator" and "LOTR: Return of the King."  The opening was just like "Gladiator" what with the armies of the king on campaign in a foreign land, and the successor to the doomed Richard was just as self-centered and sneering as Joaquin Phoenix's nasty little Commodus.  The manor in Nottingham reminded me of Maximus's home that he so longed to return to, and its pillaging did the same.  The end was pure LOTR, though, with the giant horse emblem on the hillside, the Rohirrim Brits mustering and riding to battle with the orcs French, Cate's Eowyn Maid Marian tagging along in battle garb, right down to the hobbits feral boys on ponies.  Loved the unsubtle Hollywood one-liners and dispatching of the bald bad guy, too.  Oh, and the gratuitous chest-baring scene?  Icing on the cake.  ;D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on May 26, 2010, 12:41:04 pm
It was reminiscent of two of my favorite films:  "Gladiator" and "LOTR: Return of the King."  

It reminded me of my favorite LOTR, "The Two Towers," particularly the battle scenes. I loved that movie expressly because it felt like a pretty accurate depiction of what warfare in the Middle Ages would have been like, sans Hobbit feet and Elvin ears.

My very favorite moment in the entire 11-hour LOTR trilogy is when Orlando Bloom rides a shield or something down a huge castle staircase like a kid on a skateboard. If only Orlando had exhibited that kind of sprezzatura in any of his other roles!

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on May 26, 2010, 01:27:03 pm
I saw "Robin Hood" the other day and agree with Kerry and Katherine - great entertainment, and very nice depiction of the Middle Ages, though somewhat cleaned up.  ;D

It was reminiscent of two of my favorite films:  "Gladiator" and "LOTR: Return of the King."  The opening was just like "Gladiator" what with the armies of the king on campaign in a foreign land.

I forget who it was did the review in The New Yorker, but he suggested Ridley Scott filmed both openings at the same time and held one back.  ;D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ifyoucantfixit on May 27, 2010, 12:15:08 am
    I liked Robin Hood a lot, but them doing the pc thing with Marion, was off the charts
hard to believe.  The women in that time were not warriors, or sword players or even
spear throwers.  It just reminds me of the modern day womens movements complaints
about the womens roles needing more chutspah. 
    I think Russell Crowe is one of the best actors of our time.  He did himself proud in
this bad boy romp.  I can say he is not one of my favorite people personally, but I don't
have to be his friend, just an admirer.  He is magnificent on screen.  The film was great
with authenticity of time and place, that I haven't seen equaled since Heath's Knights Tale.
They obviously went to great effort to make the movie not all cgi.  I thought there was
little sex appeal between Blanchett and Crowe.  They were ok, but not much chemistry.  I thought she was very believable and authentic until she tried to be a warrior.   That just seemed
cartoonish.  JMO.  All in all I enjoyed it. 
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on May 27, 2010, 12:25:54 pm
Salon reviews SATC2:

http://www.salon.com/entertainment/tv/sex_and_the_city/index.html?story=/ent/movies/andrew_ohehir/2010/05/26/satc2 (http://www.salon.com/entertainment/tv/sex_and_the_city/index.html?story=/ent/movies/andrew_ohehir/2010/05/26/satc2)

Sample representative sentences: "It would have been more merciful for writer-director Michael Patrick King to have rented Carrie, Samantha, Charlotte and Miranda out to the "Saw" franchise, or to Rob Zombie, so we could watch them get shot in the head or skinned alive by Arkansas rednecks. Instead of that, we get something that's truly sadistic: the SATC girls as haggard specters, haunted by their freewheeling '90s past and stupefied by the demands of work, marriage and/or motherhood."

So do you like it or don't you, critic? Don't be shy, just come right out and say!  :laugh:

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on May 27, 2010, 12:56:05 pm
I didn't think after these reviews that another sequel was possible, but that "Saw" franchise idea has legs.  ;D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on May 28, 2010, 07:03:42 pm
SPOILERS


I saw "Robin Hood" the other day and agree with Kerry and Katherine - great entertainment, and very nice depiction of the Middle Ages, though somewhat cleaned up.  ;D

It was reminiscent of two of my favorite films:  "Gladiator" and "LOTR: Return of the King."  The opening was just like "Gladiator" what with the armies of the king on campaign in a foreign land, and the successor to the doomed Richard was just as self-centered and sneering as Joaquin Phoenix's nasty little Commodus.  The manor in Nottingham reminded me of Maximus's home that he so longed to return to, and its pillaging did the same.  The end was pure LOTR, though, with the giant horse emblem on the hillside, the Rohirrim Brits mustering and riding to battle with the orcs French, Cate's Eowyn Maid Marian tagging along in battle garb, right down to the hobbits feral boys on ponies.  Loved the unsubtle Hollywood one-liners and dispatching of the bald bad guy, too.  Oh, and the gratuitous chest-baring scene?  Icing on the cake.  ;D
 


    I liked Robin Hood a lot, but them doing the pc thing with Marion, was off the charts
hard to believe.  The women in that time were not warriors, or sword players or even
spear throwers.
[ It just reminds me of the modern day womens movements complaints
about the womens roles needing more chutspah. 
    I think Russell Crowe is one of the best actors of our time.  He did himself proud in
this bad boy romp.  I can say he is not one of my favorite people personally, but I don't
have to be his friend, just an admirer.  He is magnificent on screen.  The film was great
with authenticity of time and place, that I haven't seen equaled since Heath's Knights Tale.
They obviously went to great effort to make the movie not all cgi.  I thought there was
little sex appeal between Blanchett and Crowe.  They were ok, but not much chemistry.  I thought she was very believable and authentic until she tried to be a warrior.   That just seemed
cartoonish.  JMO.  All in all I enjoyed it. 

My biggest dislikes.  Maid - er Lady - Marian and the Lost Boys.  The Lost Boys were in two scenes and mentioned once before the Big Battle.  No relationship, no explanation, no important scene of Lady Marian using example, courage and rhetoric to bring together a band of punks.  Yet there she is at the end, leading the boys.  :P

I can buy her knowing how to wield a bow, but a sword?  Skinny Cate?  You needed muscles like Russell Crowe's to fight with a sword.  That was completely ludicrous as was the taking time out for romance in the middle of a battle.  That was a big  ::)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on May 28, 2010, 11:46:20 pm
Though she emerged some two hundred years after Maid Marion's time, there was another larger-than-life Maid whose exploits may have inspired the makers of the movie, "Robin Hood." She was the Maid of Orleans, Saint Joan of Arc.

(http://img62.imageshack.us/img62/7779/joanofarc4.gif) (http://img62.imageshack.us/i/joanofarc4.gif/)
Saint Joan of Arc

Child soldiers were sent into battle in the time of Robin Hood. As I watched the forest children fighting on the beach in the movie, I was reminded of the Children's Crusade of 1212.

(http://img189.imageshack.us/img189/4436/childrenscrusade1212.jpg) (http://img189.imageshack.us/i/childrenscrusade1212.jpg/)
The Children's Crusade, 1212


Yes, but Joan of Arc never fought.  What she is famous for, is not a sword, but her banner.  She carried a banner into battle and sometimes for show, a small ax or a sword, but she never used them.  As she said at her trial, she never killed anyone.

The Children's Crusade wasn't about swords or fighting - it was a religious pilgrimage where children decided to go the Holy Land to free it from the heathens by the purity of their faith and innocence, not by fighting.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on June 07, 2010, 11:31:28 am
The Children's Crusade wasn't about swords or fighting - it was a religious pilgrimage where children decided to go the Holy Land to free it from the heathens by the purity of their faith and innocence, not by fighting.

And they never got anywhere near the Holy Land.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on June 07, 2010, 11:38:27 am
So last night I finally got to see another of those "cultural icon" films that I'd never seen: Disney's Old Yeller. Turner Classics showed it, introduced by John Lithgow (!).

Spoiler Alert (Is that really necessary here?):

This is a movie so much talked about that it held no surprises for me. I already knew how it was going to end; I'd just never seen the film. But I have to think, had I first seen it as a small child who didn't know what to expect, it would have scared the beejeezus out of me when Tommy Kirk opened the door of the corn crib and found that the dog had gone "feral," as John Lithgow put it, from "hydrophoby."
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Kerry on June 07, 2010, 11:17:08 pm
And they never got anywhere near the Holy Land.

That's true. Alas, many of the children were sold into slavery en route.   :'(
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on June 09, 2010, 01:37:07 pm
So last night I finally got to see another of those "cultural icon" films that I'd never seen: Disney's Old Yeller. Turner Classics showed it, introduced by John Lithgow (!).

Spoiler Alert (Is that really necessary here?):

This is a movie so much talked about that it held no surprises for me. I already knew how it was going to end; I'd just never seen the film. But I have to think, had I first seen it as a small child who didn't know what to expect, it would have scared the beejeezus out of me when Tommy Kirk opened the door of the corn crib and found that the dog had gone "feral," as John Lithgow put it, from "hydrophoby."

Well, here's something I didn't know. Tommy Kirk is "family."

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0456565/bio (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0456565/bio)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on August 18, 2010, 10:24:23 pm
On a whim, I saw "Eat Pray Love" tonight.  I've not read the book, but thought the cast looked interesting:  Julia Roberts, Billy Crudup, James Franco, Richard Jenkins, Javier Bardem. 

My review is short:  eat pray love......snooze.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Penthesilea on August 19, 2010, 01:17:12 am
My review is short:  eat pray love......snooze.


You don't say much, but you get your point across ;D.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Ellemeno on August 19, 2010, 03:05:43 am

You don't say much, but you get your point across ;D.


:laugh: 

Ah, that's what I needed.  :)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on August 19, 2010, 03:00:34 pm
Here's another review:  sweat cry whine.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on August 19, 2010, 03:06:49 pm
Here's another review:  sweat cry whine.

Did you see The Daily Show last night?  Great segment on EPL by Lewis Black:

http://www.thedailyshow.com/

Click on Lewis Black's picture.  ;D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on August 19, 2010, 07:25:52 pm
Did you see The Daily Show last night?  Great segment on EPL by Lewis Black:

http://www.thedailyshow.com/

Click on Lewis Black's picture.  ;D

Thanks, Meryl.

Here's another review:  caché couché cliché.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on August 22, 2010, 10:12:06 am
I think I'm going to love the 'new' Francis Ford Coppolla!   I haven't seen his first film, YOUTH WITHOUT YOUTH but I just watched TETRO and really enjoyed it.

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/tetro.jpg)

"Awkward, but full of life. Awkward, but impassioned - like something written by a young person. Let's look at "Tetro" as the new Coppola's second film and greet this as the first major work of a promising young filmmaker." - Mick Lasalle

Full Review: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2009/06/19/MVKE188CF8.DTL#ixzz0xLLM9Nl3 (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2009/06/19/MVKE188CF8.DTL#ixzz0xLLM9Nl3)

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/tetro01.jpg)
New discovery Alden Ehrenreich is a young actor to watch.



Maybe it's time for Martin Scorsese to "reboot his creativity" as well.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on August 22, 2010, 07:21:36 pm
Just got back from watching "Inception" in IMAX.  Yoiks.  Brilliant movie, but I was confused most of the time and kept wishing it would be over already.  The tension got to be a bit much.  Seems like a heckuva lot of trouble to go to to save your corporation, but I guess it had to hinge on something.  :P  I liked the cast and thought it was funny that they kept playing "No, je ne regrette rien" to wake themselves up, what with Edith Piaf (Marion Cotillard) playing the wife.  ;D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on September 04, 2010, 06:07:30 pm
Took my mother to see E P L. It was watchable, though it seemed kind of long even when broken up into the three segments. Don't go on an empty stomach! You'll get really hungry watching people eat. Julia Roberts had left behind many of her irritating mannerisms, even the horse laugh. I enjoyed the Brokeism when the Brazilian love interest explained why he called a telephone caller "darling": it was his son. He explained that he called all his children and pets darling and, yes, in time, he came to call Roberts (Liz) darling too!!

There was better food photography, scenes of people gushing over food, and shots of Italian men in I am Love. Plus Tilda Swinton too, an actor who makes Julia Roberts seem like a talk show host.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on September 10, 2010, 04:19:34 pm
Another thing that was a thrill when I watched Eat Pray Love was hearing two (2!) Neil Young songs!! One was Heart of Gold. I don't recall which of the hundreds of worthy Young songs was the other. They didn't seem dated at all.

My family went to see the new Robert Duvall vehicle Get Low Tuesday night. It also featured Sissy Spacek and a new young actor who played Bobby, a funeral home worker. The funeral home owner was Bill Murray, who was excellent, but more subdued than usual. I kept getting the name of the movie wrong, calling it Down Low, much to the amusement of my spouse.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on September 10, 2010, 04:27:36 pm
Another thing that was a thrill when I watched Eat Pray Love was hearing two (2!) Neil Young songs!! One was Heart of Gold. I don't recall which of the hundreds of worthy Young songs was the other. They didn't seem dated at all.

The other song was "Harvest Moon." I watched about half an hour of EPL when my son and I went to the theater together, saw different movies, and mine got out earlier.

I agree that Neil Young's music has remained remarkably undated. And of all the '60s rock musicians who are still working, Neil is the one who seems to have remained most relevant and with-it over the years.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on September 23, 2010, 10:35:44 pm
I saw Cairo Time tonight. A very appealing movie and Patricia Clarkson was wonderful in it. I haven't seen her often before but I loved her in Pieces of April a couple of years ago as a woman recovering from cancer. In this movie, the theme is much like I Am Love except in Egypt rather than Italy. Clarkson plays a woman who travels to Cairo to have a vacation with her husband, who works there. But when she arrives, her husband is away on business in Gaza, and sends a friend to host her until he can get back. Clarkson is entranced by the culture and timeless aura of Cairo and its people. I highly recommend it!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on September 30, 2010, 09:06:52 pm
(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/revanche_02.jpg)

I'm finally watching this amazing Austrian film that I've read so much about.  It rates a well deserved 96% at Rotten Tomatoes.  Why it didn't win the Oscar for best foreign film is beyond me. One of the best films I've seen in quite a while, a must see!
 

from Roger Ebert's review:
How often, after seeing a thriller, do you continue to think about the lives of its characters? If you open up most of them, it’s like looking inside a wristwatch. Opening this one is like heart surgery.

http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090805/REVIEWS/908069995
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on October 05, 2010, 04:07:02 pm
The other song was "Harvest Moon." I watched about half an hour of EPL when my son and I went to the theater together, saw different movies, and mine got out earlier.

I agree that Neil Young's music has remained remarkably undated. And of all the '60s rock musicians who are still working, Neil is the one who seems to have remained most relevant and with-it over the years.

Harvest Moon was covered by a chanteuse and Garrison Keillor on A Prairie Home Companion this past weekend. I liked it even better than when Neil sang it!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on October 07, 2010, 05:28:35 am
(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/TheTrotsky01.jpg)

A privileged Montreal teen believes he’s the reincarnation of Russian revolutionary Leon Trotsky and acts accordingly in high-concept teen comedy The Trotsky, from Canadian writer-director Jacob Tierney (Twist).

Sharing his radical hero’s birth name, Leon Bronstein (Jay Baruchel) keeps a bright red checklist in his bedroom that outlines his destiny. It includes ‘get exiled (twice), marry an older woman (preferably named Alexandra) and get assassinated (hopefully somewhere warm).’

After Leon organizes a hunger strike at his father’s garment factory, his capitalist père (Saul Rubinek) cuts off funds for private school. Enrolling at a public high school for his senior year, Leon brings new meaning to the words ‘student union’ – and conceives a social-justice theme for the school prom.

While fighting fascism as embodied by detention-dispensing Mrs. Davis (Domini Blythe) and dictatorial principal Berkhoff (Colm Feore), Leon must also battle student apathy among his peers, who’ve never heard of collective action. As his antics get him in trouble with the law, he meets retired activist turned disillusioned McGill professor Frank (Michael Murphy) and his gorgeous former student – named Alexandra, natch (Emily Hampshire) – who is the requisite nine years older than Leon.


A funny and very sweet film.  Jay Baruchel is hilarious and charming.  I laughed out loud several times. He has a recurring dream in which he's the baby in the famous baby-carriage-rolling-down-the-steps scene from Battleship Potemkin, lol!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on November 03, 2010, 07:27:28 pm
I discovered a real gem from Argentina:

(http://img530.imageshack.us/img530/7060/planbposter01.jpg)

Bruno is dumped by his girlfriend; behind a calm, indifferent expression, his mind plans a cold, sweet vengeance. She, a modern girl, keeps on seeing him once in a while, but has another boyfriend, Pablo. Bruno becomes Pablo's friend, with the idea of eroding the couple, maybe introducing him to another woman. But, along the way, the possibility of a plan B arises, a more effective one, which will put his own sexuality into question.

A sweet romantic art film that made my heart melt. I was completely seduced by the two leads' wonderfully naturalistic performances and on-screen chemistry. A deliberately paced and understated gem.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on November 03, 2010, 09:35:55 pm
Yes, I saw the preview of this, it looks wonderful!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Sophia on November 20, 2010, 05:14:25 pm
One of my new favorite movies.

The Kids Are Allright. With Annette Bening and Julianne Moore as couples who decide to get kids throw insemination.


                             (http://cdn.buzznet.com/media-cdn/jj1/headlines/2010/04/the-kids-are-all-right-trailer.jpg)


                            (http://images.hitfix.com/photos/556282/MarkRuffaloJulianneMoore_article_story_main.jpg)


what a great acting I love Annette and Julianne in this movie. And Mark Rufalo is such a hottie,  :P
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on November 20, 2010, 06:19:02 pm
^^^I just watched it last night and really enjoyed it as well. ^^^

Today I finally saw INCEPTION, what a thrill ride that was!  I was on the edge of seat during the whole thing.  Loved it!  I was surprised to see Lucas Haas and in such a small role and, of course, Tom Hardy made my heart flutter, lol!  That guy has charisma to spare.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Sophia on November 20, 2010, 07:40:03 pm
^^^I just watched it last night and really enjoyed it as well. ^^^

Today I finally saw INCEPTION, what a thrill ride that was!  I was on the edge of seat during the whole thing.  Loved it!  I was surprised to see Lucas Haas and in such a small role and, of course, Tom Hardy made my heart flutter, lol!  That guy has charisma to spare.

 :laugh: :laugh:

I remember two, siting in the cinema and literally jumping up and down, mean while I was biting my nails.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on November 29, 2010, 01:37:11 pm
Over the weekend I finally watched Enchanted, on broadcast TV.

I thought it was, well, enchanting. I liked the way the Disney people were able to, well, send up Disney films. But also, I'm in love with Amy Adams; I think she's a wonderful actress.  :D Just too bad we didn't see more of Susan Sarandon.  :-\

James Marsden didn't look too bad in those tights and riding boots, either. ...  8)

And I loved the uncredited--at least I think it was uncredited--voiceover by Julie Andrews as the reader of the story.  :)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on November 29, 2010, 01:45:35 pm
Over the weekend I finally watched Enchanted, on broadcast TV.

I thought it was, well, enchanting. I liked the way the Disney people were able to, well, send up Disney films. But also, I'm in love with Amy Adams; I think she's a wonderful actress.  :D Just too bad we didn't see more of Susan Sarandon.  :-\

I LOVED Enchanted. My favorite scene is where she sings "How Do You Know?" in the park. I've watched it over and over!

Quote
James Marsden didn't look too bad in those tights and riding boots, either. ...  8)

For a long time, I thought Jameses Marsden and Franco were the same person -- that is, there was this one actor named "James,' and he was in Enchanted, Milk, etc.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on November 29, 2010, 02:28:57 pm
I LOVED Enchanted. My favorite scene is where she sings "How Do You Know?" in the park. I've watched it over and over!

That scene is a hoot! I love how it turns into this huge production number, and Patrick Dempsey seems to be the only one who doesn't know the song.  ;D

And I loved the pigeons and the rats and the cockroaches helping to tidy up Patrick Dempsey's apartment,  ;D

Quote
For a long time, I thought Jameses Marsden and Franco were the same person -- that is, there was this one actor named "James,' and he was in Enchanted, Milk, etc.

Yeah, I tended to confuse them, too.

I've secretly been wanting to see Enchanted for a long time, and I'm really glad I finally had the chance to see it.  :D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on November 29, 2010, 05:16:23 pm
And I loved the pigeons and the rats and the cockroaches helping to tidy up Patrick Dempsey's apartment,  ;D

The best part of the movie!  New Yorkers got a huge kick out of this.  ;D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on November 29, 2010, 05:19:06 pm
The best part of the movie!  New Yorkers got a huge kick out of this.  ;D

I'll bet they did!  :laugh:

I thought it was a hysterical reference/homage to the "tidying up the nursery" sequence in Mary Poppins.  ;D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on November 29, 2010, 06:06:09 pm
I thought it was a hysterical reference/homage to the "tidying up the nursery" sequence in Mary Poppins.  ;D

It made me think of the sewing scene in "Cinderella".  ;D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on November 29, 2010, 07:45:37 pm
It made me think of the sewing scene in "Cinderella".  ;D

It was probably supposed to evoke that, too.  :)

All in all, I think it's a very clever movie.  :)

And did I mention that James Marsden doesn't look too bad in those tights and riding boots, either?  8)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on November 29, 2010, 07:54:15 pm
(http://cdn.buzznet.com/media-cdn/jj1/headlines/2006/04/enchanted-movie-james-marsden.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on November 29, 2010, 08:14:45 pm
I thought it was a hysterical reference/homage to the "tidying up the nursery" sequence in Mary Poppins.  ;D

It made me think of the sewing scene in "Cinderella".  ;D

That's funny! It made me think of a scene in Snow White where she gets help with the housework from woodland creatures.  ;D


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on November 29, 2010, 10:30:09 pm
That's funny! It made me think of a scene in Snow White where she gets help with the housework from woodland creatures.  ;D

That's probably the direct reference, especially when you consider that Susan Sarandon looks like the evil queen in Snow White, then later she looks like the witch in Snow White, and Giselle falls asleep when she eats a poisoned apple, like in Snow White.

I'm just more familiar with Mary Poppins.  8)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on November 29, 2010, 10:31:53 pm
(http://cdn.buzznet.com/media-cdn/jj1/headlines/2006/04/enchanted-movie-james-marsden.jpg)

As they used to say, "Hubba-hubba."  ;D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on November 29, 2010, 11:45:10 pm
That's funny! It made me think of a scene in Snow White where she gets help with the housework from woodland creatures.  ;D

Oh yeah, that too!  ;D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on December 04, 2010, 06:45:42 pm
INCENDIES is Canada's submission for the Foreign Language Film Oscar and I'll be surprised if it doesn't make the short list.  It's an astonishing film that packs an emotional wallop.  In fact, it's my favourite film of the year, so far.  If you guys have a chance to see it, don't miss it.  Like I love saying: run, don't walk, to see this, you won't regret it.   :D

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/incendies.jpg)

To encounter a film of heart-wrenching tragedy, mythic proportions and sweeping visual majesty is rare, but such are the riches of Denis Villeneuve’s Incendies. After last year’s multiple Genie Award-winning Polytechnique, Villeneuve continues his acute examination of women in devastating situations facing complex and harrowing circumstances.

At the reading of their mother Nawal’s will, twin siblings Simon (Maxim Gaudette) and Jeanne (Mélissa Désormeaux-Poulin) learn for the first time that they have a brother, and that their father, whom they thought was dead, is in fact alive. Among their mother’s various unsettling requests is her final wish that the twins find both brother and father and deliver to them certain sealed letters. Nawal (Lubna Azabal) was a mystery to her children and their relationship is a difficult one. Simon is angry and resistant, but Jeanne feels compelled to respect her mother’s requests.

As a young woman, Nawal fell pregnant out of wedlock in her Middle-Eastern homeland. After narrowly escaping an honour killing, she was forced to give up her baby boy, vowing one day to find him. Shifting back and forth in time, Incendies follows two parallel journeys, expertly interwoven: the twins’ journey to find their brother and father in their mother’s homeland, and Nawal’s journey to find her son. Both journeys shine a disturbing light on Nawal’s past and culminate in a shocking final revelation.

Villeneuve masterfully adapts the acclaimed play by Wajdi Mouawad, while André Turpin’s arresting cinematography captures the arid landscape of the Middle-East, seamlessly shifting between shadowy corners and stark, bright daylight. Azabal is riveting as Nawal, while Désormeaux-Poulin and Gaudette deliver equally strong performances as the twins. Moving, visceral and epic, Incendies shows Villeneuve reaching ever greater heights as he probes characters that must face obstacles with extraordinary resilience and love. –TIFF

http://mubi.com/films/33111 (http://mubi.com/films/33111)

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on December 05, 2010, 01:00:13 pm
I just found out that the National Board of Review included INCENDIES in their Top Five Foreign Films 2010 along with I AM LOVE, LIFE ABOVE ALL, SOUL KITCHEN & WHITE MATERIAL

http://www.nbrmp.org/awards/ (http://www.nbrmp.org/awards/)

INCENDIES trailer:
[youtube=425,350]
[/youtube]
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on December 08, 2010, 05:36:25 pm
James Franco, James Franco, James Franco

[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-J2UZZ45BqU[/youtube]
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on December 08, 2010, 08:52:27 pm
Reminds me of that sculpture I saw in The New Yorker of the guy making love with himself...about nine times, LOL!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on December 12, 2010, 08:16:41 pm
^^I like when, after the first kiss, he seems to ask "You want more?", lol!"^^^


(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/black_swan-01.jpg)

OMG!  What a wonderfully insane movie this is!  Imagine THE RED SHOES via Polanski's REPULSION and Cronenberg's THE FLY, then add a dash of SHOWGIRLS and you have the best Holiday movie of 2010.  Some people complain that the film is too over-the-top but I think it works beautifully.  I mean, I was humming Tchaikovsky for the rest of the day, lol!  Easily makes my top ten list.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on December 13, 2010, 02:29:08 pm
^^I like when, after the first kiss, he seems to ask "You want more?", lol!"^^^


(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/black_swan-01.jpg)

OMG!  What a wonderfully insane movie this is!  Imagine THE RED SHOES via Polanski's REPULSION and Cronenberg's THE FLY, then add a dash of SHOWGIRLS and you have the best Holiday movie of 2010.  Some people complain that the film is too over-the-top but I think it works beautifully.  I mean, I was humming Tchaikovsky for the rest of the day, lol!  Easily makes my top ten list.

Friday night somebody asked me if I was going to see it. I said I didn't know if I needed to see Natalie Portman simulate masturbation and Lesbian sex with Mila Kunis.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on December 13, 2010, 03:23:14 pm
Friday night somebody asked me if I was going to see it. I said I didn't know if I needed to see Natalie Portman simulate masturbation and Lesbian sex with Mila Kunis.

Oh, man, are you kidding me?  >:(

[grumps]  I was pretty excited to go see this, but now I'm wondering if my seeing it will go against my belief that such scenes - especially between lovely young women - is just titillation put in movies by male producer/director/writers.

Now I have heard that Natalie Portman considers herself bisexual, but I don't know if that's true or not.  If true, then I can justify seeing it.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on December 13, 2010, 03:30:12 pm
Oh, man, are you kidding me?   >:(

I read that in the review that was in Friday's Philadelphia Inquirer.

Quote
[grumps]  I was pretty excited to go see this, but now I'm wondering if my seeing it will go against my belief that such scenes - especially between lovely young women - is just titillation put in movies by male producer/director/writers.

Now I have heard that Natalie Portman considers herself bisexual, but I don't know if that's true or not.  If true, then I can justify seeing it.

I'm not sure I follow the logic here, but if it works for you, that's what matters.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on December 13, 2010, 07:20:14 pm
I read that in the review that was in Friday's Philadelphia Inquirer.



It must have been a negative review.  It's usually the critics who didn't like the film that focus on  those scenes.

Anyway, you guys are funny, letting a little lesbian content prevent you from seeing a film, lol!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on December 13, 2010, 07:59:09 pm
I'm not sure I follow the logic here, but if it works for you, that's what matters.

Well, my thinking is is because if she were a bisexual, I doubt she would have done the scene had she considered it exploitive.  Natalie Portman does not HAVE to work for anyone.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on December 13, 2010, 10:19:48 pm
I read that in the review that was in Friday's Philadelphia Inquirer.

I'm not sure I follow the logic here, but if it works for you, that's what matters.

I see I told a lie. I double checked, and that review wasn't in the Inquirer. I know I read it somewhere. It must have been in the Metro.

But it was an unfavorable review. I remember the writer thinks the movie is rather "over the top."
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on December 21, 2010, 10:09:32 am
Friday night somebody asked me if I was going to see it. I said I didn't know if I needed to see Natalie Portman simulate masturbation and Lesbian sex with Mila Kunis.

Of course, now I see in this morning's Philadelphia edition of the Metro that Natalie Portman also gets to have fake sex with Sergio Torrado, one of the principal dancers from the Pennsylvania Ballet. Seeing that just might be worth the price of admission. ...  8)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on December 29, 2010, 07:35:32 pm
Watched the movie, Creation about Charles Darwin, starring real life married couple Paul Bettany and Jennifer Connelly.

6/10

While I appreciate that the producers tried a different tack with Darwin, trying to humanize him and making him 'user friendly' for the masses by focusing on his personal life (the movie was based on the book Annie's Box), it didn't really make the impact it should have because you don't really get into the public reaction to his writings, so it's all on a personal and local level and thus rather soap-opera/movie-of-the-week-ish. I found myself wanting more on the conflict in his writings and publishing as I believe that would have been even more dramatic and worthy of the movie. There were lines that were really intriguing that SHOULD have been explored in the movie,

"I see you've received Wallace's letter? Forget it. He has 20 pages, you have a book."

"Your enemies - and you have them - are ready to burn you at the stake if they knew what you were about to publish."

"But you need to publish. We can win this in our lifetime. We must win."

but weren't and it's a shame. The makers of the movie had the production values and talented actors to make a powerful movie, but they underutilized them and wimped out, IMO. A shameful waste of talent.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on December 29, 2010, 08:11:52 pm
Oh, too bad. I still want to see it, for the wardrobes, as well as to look at Jennifer Connelly. She has the most amazing eyes! I wonder if they fell in love on the set of A Brilliant Mind.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on December 29, 2010, 11:37:21 pm
Oh, too bad. I still want to see it, for the wardrobes, as well as to look at Jennifer Connelly. She has the most amazing eyes! I wonder if they fell in love on the set of A Brilliant Mind.

I think they did.  They started dating shortly thereafter I think.

Well, anyway, it was good enough for a rental.  Those 3 most intriguing lines are said by Benedict.  :)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on December 30, 2010, 01:56:19 am
Those 3 most intriguing lines are said by Benedict.  :)

I can totally hear him saying them!!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on December 30, 2010, 03:32:19 pm
I can totally hear him saying them!!


 ;D

Oh, and yes Jennifer Connelly is very striking. Great eyes.  Terribly thin though.  Her arms - which is pretty much all you can see in Victorian period dress - are painfully thin, almost emaciated.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on January 01, 2011, 07:31:09 pm
Rented the movie Amazing Grace which is the story of William Wilberforce a 18th-19th century English abolitionist who was instrumental on abolishing the slave trade in the British Empire.

7/10

Excellent production values, super period piece.  A veritable Who's Who of modern British actors cast with their superb acting.  

Unfortunately, the writing isn't as great as I would like.  The film is choppy, the timeline confusing, the story jumps from the past to the current time of the story - back and forth - and sometimes you can only tell by the color of the actors' hair.  Strange little things are emphasized and it's less visceral than what you think it'd be.

Don't know about you, but the movie Amistad is the only movie that literally made me leave the theater I was so disturbed by what I saw.  

I was prepared for Amazing Grace to be similar but it isn't like that.  It's basically a hero's tale, so it stays pretty much in the quite lovely English garden backyards of the abolitionists.  And while I believe it is a good thing to bring the heroic actions of someone like Wilberforce to the attention of the modern world, I also like how it shows how the high-minded, principled and good moral character hero could not have succeeded in his task without the help of his less high-minded, not as principled and more flexible in moral character friends in places both high and low.  It keeps lofty religious sentiment out of it.  
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on January 02, 2011, 03:07:14 am
Rented the movie Amazing Grace which is the story of William Wilberforce a 18th-19th century English abolitionist who was instrumental on abolishing the slave trade in the British Empire.

I saw AG in the theater when it came out. As best I can remember, your review is pretty much the way I saw it, too.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on January 03, 2011, 01:20:47 am
The Chronicles of Narnia:  Voyage of the Dawn Treader.

6.5/10

Very much a good children's story.  All about growing up, accepting oneself and assuming responsibility.  Seamless special effects, the 3-D didn't really add to or detract from the story.  Solid acting.  The mouse is much less annoying this time around.  Very slow paced though.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on January 18, 2011, 01:17:19 am
(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/black_swan-01.jpg)

OMG!  What a wonderfully insane movie this is!  Imagine THE RED SHOES via Polanski's REPULSION and Cronenberg's THE FLY, then add a dash of SHOWGIRLS and you have the best Holiday movie of 2010.  Some people complain that the film is too over-the-top but I think it works beautifully.  I mean, I was humming Tchaikovsky for the rest of the day, lol!  Easily makes my top ten list.

Great description, Gil!  I saw this today and loved its craziness.  It's an instant camp classic.  To top it off, I was delighted to see a cameo by my alter ego John Epperson (Lypsinka) as the rehearsal pianist (a job he held for years at ABT).  The climax is great, with the Tchaikovsky music blaring and her crazy mom (Barbara Hershey in Joan Crawford mode) in the audience. 

An added fun thing:  the exterior shots of the theater are the Koch Theater at Lincoln Center, where I work.  I saw the film right across the street at the Lincoln Plaza Cinema.  I'll never look at the fountain in the same way again.  ;D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on January 31, 2011, 08:48:47 pm
Great description, Gil! I saw this today and loved its craziness.  It's an instant camp classic.  To top it off, I was delighted to see a cameo by my alter ego John Epperson (Lypsinka) as the rehearsal pianist (a job he held for years at ABT).  The climax is great, with the Tchaikovsky music blaring and her crazy mom (Barbara Hershey in Joan Crawford mode) in the audience.  

An added fun thing:  the exterior shots of the theater are the Koch Theater at Lincoln Center, where I work.  I saw the film right across the street at the Lincoln Plaza Cinema.  I'll never look at the fountain in the same way again.  ;D

Thanks!  That's the movie I'll be rooting for come Oscar time.  I know it won't win, the prize will go to the sentimental favourite of course, but at least it made the shortlist. A lot of people dislike it.

_______________________________________________
In other movie news:



For those who have seen the film, this is a really interesting analysis of non-verbal behaviour in THE SOCIAL NETWORK.
I wish David Bordwell had done something similar for BbM.


THE SOCIAL NETWORK: Faces behind facebook

http://www.davidbordwell.net/blog/?p=12186

Excerpt:
Watching eyes is tremendously important in our social lives. We need to monitor other people’s glances to see if they are looking at us. We need to track what else they might be looking at. We need to watch for signals sent by the eyes, particularly attitudes toward the situation we’re in. For example, we seldom look directly into each others’ eyes, as characters in movies do constantly; in real life, “mutual gaze” is intermittent and brief. But if two people stare intently at each other, we’re likely to assume keen attraction or rising aggression.

In an essay from Poetics of Cinema available on this site, I talk about mutual gaze in cinema and how it can be exploited for dramatic purposes. The same essay takes up the issue of blinking; we blink frequently, but film characters seldom do, and the actors usually make the blinks emotionally expressive (of fear, uncertainty, weakness, etc.).

The problem is that eyes, by themselves, tell us very little about what the person behind them is thinking or feeling. We can show this with a little experiment.

Do the eyes have it?
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on February 01, 2011, 11:41:10 pm
Thanks!  That's the movie I'll be rooting for come Oscar time.  I know it won't win, the prize will go to the sentimental favourite of course, but at least it made the shortlist. A lot of people dislike it.

Yes, it has engendered a lot of different reactions all right.

Quote
In other movie news:
For those who have seen the film, this is a really interesting analysis of non-verbal behaviour in THE SOCIAL NETWORK.
I wish David Bordwell had done something similar for BbM.

I certainly agree that the eyes say everything in BBM.  My favorite example of this is the scene by the brook where Ennis asks Jack whether he ever wonders if people on the street suspect him.  His eyes show fear, calculation, curiosity, a wish to seem nonchalant--all in a matter of a few lines.  Brilliant.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on February 02, 2011, 09:17:37 am
I certainly agree that the eyes say everything in BBM.  My favorite example of this is the scene by the brook where Ennis asks Jack whether he ever wonders if people on the street suspect him.  His eyes show fear, calculation, curiosity, a wish to seem nonchalant--all in a matter of a few lines.  Brilliant.

Good one, Meryl!

Or, a bit less subtly, the eyes in the Jimbo the Clown scene.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on February 06, 2011, 03:35:28 pm
(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/black_swan_02.jpg)

Apparently, no commentary track is planned for the DVD of BLACK SWAN which is unfortunate.  The following video interview is the next best thing though. It's very informative on the technical aspects of the film but also goes into the creative procesws.  Well worth the listen.

DP/30: Black Swan’s Darren Aronofsky, cinematographer Matthew Libatique, and editor Andrew Weisblum

55:59 min.
http://moviecitynews.com/2011/02/dp30-black-swans-director-darren-aronofsky-cinematographer-matthew-libatique-and-editor-andrew-weisblum/
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Monika on February 06, 2011, 04:00:02 pm
I watched the movie Salmonberries this weekend. It was released in 1991 and stars k.d. lang. It deals with a romantic relationship between two women in Alaska.
By no means is this a "perfect" movie but I found its flaws rather endearing than anything else. This movie has a genuine feel to it and I had no idea of how it would end, which is really refreashing, and I found k.d. lang fascinating.
And the soundtruck is beautiful.


[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dhr5i7IYyWc[/youtube]
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Sason on February 08, 2011, 03:50:16 pm
^^^^^^^^^

Preparing yourself for the summer, are you?   :)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Lynne on February 09, 2011, 08:32:16 pm
I just watched the shortish (~1 hour) documentary Small Town Gay Bar, via Netflix streaming, which takes a look at a few proprietors and their clientele of gay bars in northern MS.  It's been in the queue forever.  It sure is easy to forget - living in the city - how oppressive life and culture is in those parts.

The common thread through all the stories was the need to have somewhere they could be themselves and feel a sense of kinship and community.  A very familiar theme to most of us, I think.

A few of them came and went at the whim of local politicians and law enforcement, and at least one came back again.  It's pretty scary how arbitrary the harassment seemed to be.  And I guess like most things, there's a life cycle, and places became rougher and scarier and maybe they needed to close and be re-invented.

This is the first time I've listened to Fred Phelps for any amount of time.  I guess the waste of celluloid was necessary to properly frame the extreme element of local attitudes.  Interestingly he talks about going to seminary with Billy Graham (at Bob Jones U) and how he had written to Graham to tell him he was going to picket Graham's funeral.  I swear.  And I wonder if he did, but I don't care enough to look it up.  He's such a caricature of a human being, and I mean that purely in the one-dimensional sense.  

I like that Kevin Smith of Chasing Amy, among other things, produced/invested - I've always liked his work.  Here's an interview about how Kevin got involved with his friend Malcolm Ingram - who conceived and directed.

[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-7bqJIHrQ28[/youtube]

I gave it five stars.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on February 22, 2011, 06:56:44 pm
A very funny interview with Tom Hardy  :-* on the UK Alan Carr Show . He talks about possible Inception sequels and of course Batman.

[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9gLIy_8R8PQ[/youtube]
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on March 02, 2011, 08:33:19 pm
This is really good!

[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=djRAiiFlCy8[/youtube]

Archie is torn between Betty and Veronica, Jughead downs burgers, Moose plays football. These storylines are familiar to generations of fans who grew up on Archie comics, but a trailer parody produced by a Vancouver company that has gone viral suggests darker issues lurking down the hallways of Riverdale High. Drug use, abortion, suicide and maybe murder figure in the Riverdale trailer, which had more than 185,000 views by late Wednesday – less than a week after it went online.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on March 02, 2011, 10:26:13 pm
This is really good!

Archie is torn between Betty and Veronica, Jughead downs burgers, Moose plays football. These storylines are familiar to generations of fans who grew up on Archie comics, but a trailer parody produced by a Vancouver company that has gone viral suggests darker issues lurking down the hallways of Riverdale High. Drug use, abortion, suicide and maybe murder figure in the Riverdale trailer, which had more than 185,000 views by late Wednesday – less than a week after it went online.


*sigh*

Does everything have to be a public service announcement or 'relevant' to the current social situation?  Why can't something just be what it originally was?   What happened to escapism?  Jeez, if I wanted to know about kids and drug use, abortion, suicides and maybe murder, etc., etc, all I have to do is read the headlines.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on March 02, 2011, 11:07:39 pm
Geez, I just thought it was funny.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on March 25, 2011, 11:08:11 am
Anybody planning to see Jane Eyre this weekend? How about Mildred Pierce on HBO?
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on March 25, 2011, 12:30:40 pm
Anybody planning to see Jane Eyre this weekend? How about Mildred Pierce on HBO?

A local critic, who likes Jane Eyre, says this:

Quote
A seven-word review: Very good performances. Much too much weather.


 ;D

She also says it's the 27th screen adaptation of the story, provided you don't count I Walked with a Zombie. I guess if you do count IWWAZ, then it's the 28th.  ;D

Dame Judi Dench plays the housekeeper!  :D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Sophia on April 30, 2011, 12:59:12 pm
Normally I never watch french movies. I think they are bit dull. But this comedy is just hilarious and funny straight threw, and I am rolling on the floor in laughter all the time. If you loved the dance parts, in Dirty Dancing, and the love, in Love and other drugs, I think you will love this.

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heartbreaker_(2010_film)

(http://www.jadid4you.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/heartbreaker2010.jpeg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on April 30, 2011, 05:00:40 pm
Normally I never watch french movies. I think they are bit dull. But this comedy is just hilarious and funny straight threw, and I am rolling on the floor in laughter all the time. If you loved the dance parts, in Dirty Dancing, and the love, in Love and other drugs, I think you will love this.

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heartbreaker_(2010_film)

(http://www.jadid4you.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/heartbreaker2010.jpeg)

I really enjoyed that film as well.  I'm a big fan of Romain Duris

Speaking of French films, I just got back from seeing The Princess of Montpensier starring another favourite of mine, Gaspard Ulliel.

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/Princesse_de_montpensier-01.jpg)

It's a wonderful costume drama set in 16th century France during the wars between the Catholics and Huguenots.  The period detail and costumes feel amazingly authentic but the film feels fresh and original.  the cinematography is gorgeous and lush and the acting is excellent, especially Gregoire Leprince-Ringuet as the tortured Prince de Montpensier.  Mélanie Thierry is beautiful and somewhat icy as his wife, whom every man falls in love with.  This is not just a love triangle, more like a love pentagon!  A sweeping drama, complete with swash-buckling and court intrigue, with an intelligent script.  Highly recommended.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Sophia on April 30, 2011, 05:50:21 pm
I really enjoyed that film as well.  I'm a big fan of Romain Duris

Speaking of French films, I just got back from seeing The Princess of Montpensier starring another favourite of mine, Gaspard Ulliel.

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/Princesse_de_montpensier-01.jpg)

It's a wonderful costume drama set in 16th century France during the wars between the Catholics and Huguenots.  The period detail and costumes feel amazingly authentic but the film feels fresh and original.  the cinematography is gorgeous and lush and the acting is excellent, especially Gregoire Leprince-Ringuet as the tortured Prince de Montpensier.  Mélanie Thierry is beautiful and somewhat icy as his wife, whom every man falls in love with.  This is not just a love triangle, more like a love pentagon!  A sweeping drama, complete with swash-buckling and court intrigue, with an intelligent script.  Highly recommended.

thank you for sharing... I will try to find it on the internet. Its sounds really good, I love costume drama.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on April 30, 2011, 05:54:43 pm
The trailer:

[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2D5JTxLf_K4[/youtube]
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on May 22, 2011, 02:21:08 pm
The Tree of Life wins the Golden Palm

The Jury of the 64th Cannes Film Festival, presided over by Robert De Niro, and further comprised of Martina Gusman, Nansun Shi, Uma Thurman, Linn Ullmann, Olivier Assayas, Jude Law, Mahamat Saleh Haroun and Johnnie To, has awarded the Palme d'Or to Terrence Malick's The Tree of Life.

The Grand Prix has been split this year, going to both Nuri Bilge Ceylan's Once Upon a Time in Anatolia and Jean-Pierre and Luc Dardenne's The Kid with a Bike.

Nicolas Winding Refn wins Best Director for Drive.

Joseph Cedar's won the Best Screenplay award for Footnote.

Best Actor goes to Jean Dujardin for his performance in Michel Hazanavicius's The Artist.

Kirsten Dunst's won Best Actress for her performance in Lars von Trier's Melancholia. She thanked the Festival for allowing the film to carry on competing even though its director has been declared "persona non grata."

The Jury Prize goes to Maïwenn's Poliss. Accepting the award, the young director was clearly overwhelmed. As she struggled to speak, some may have worried that she might not survive the experience.

Pablo Giorgelli wins the Camera d'Or, presented to the director of a first feature, for Las acacias.

Maryna Vroda takes the Short Film Palme d'Or for Cross-Country.

http://mubi.com/notebook/posts/3353
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on May 31, 2011, 07:31:32 pm
Apparently...

In the last year of his life, German auteur Rainer Werner Fassbinder cataloged, in the form of top 10 lists, his favorite things, from his favorite operas to his favorite soccer players.

Here are his 10 favorite films:

1. THE DAMNED, Luchino Visconti

2. THE NAKED AND THE DEAD, Raoul Walsh

3. LOLA MONTÈS, Max Ophuls

4. FLAMINGO ROAD, Michael Curtiz

5. SALO, OR THE 120 DAYS OF SODOM, Pier Paolo Pasolini

6. GENTLEMEN PREFER BLONDES, Howard Hawks

7. AGENT X27, Josef von Sternberg

8. THE NIGHT OF THE HUNTER, Charles Laughton

9. JOHNNY GUITAR, Nicholas Ray

10. RED ELDERBERRY, Vassily Shukchin

http://www.facebook.com/notes/the-criterion-collection/rw-fassbinders-10-best-films/10150195772668562


What would your list look like?


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on May 31, 2011, 11:18:02 pm
I wouldn't be able to even come close to his level of taste, although I do love the Italian greats, and would include Visconti's The Leopard and Pasolini's Teorama (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0063678/), in addition to one or two by Antonioni and Bertolucci.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on May 31, 2011, 11:31:41 pm
I saw Crazy Heart last weekend, BTW, and aside from one minor plot point that I HATED, I liked it. Jeff Bridges was amazing, and definitely should win the BA Oscar.

I finally got around to seeing this. Jeff was good, but if I am not mistaken was playing the same damn part that he played in The Big Lebowski, was he not? Oh, yes, he sang a few songs, pretty well too. In fact, I think the big star of this movie was the soundtrack!! Many of the songs were written by T-Bone Burnett.

Why was Colin Farrell not credited in the movie? I thought his role as Tommy Sweet was one of his best. I wasn't really impressed with Maggie Gyllenhaal's portrayal as the love interest, Jean.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on June 01, 2011, 01:11:36 am
What would your list look like?

I rustled up an old thread where I posted my list:

http://bettermost.net/forum/index.php/topic,840.msg14421.html#msg14421

Brokeback Mountain
The Fellowship of the Ring
Tom Jones
Close Encounters of the Third Kind
To Kill a Mockingbird
Barry Lyndon
Sense and Sensibility
A Hard Day's Night
Midnight Cowboy
Master and Commander

The last two are exchangeable, perhaps for Gone with the Wind and something with Fred & Ginger, like Top Hat, then there's Woody Allen's Manhattan and Woman of the Year with Tracy and Hepburn and Enchanted April and...
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on June 01, 2011, 08:31:29 am
I finally got around to seeing this. Jeff was good, but if I am not mistaken was playing the same damn part that he played in The Big Lebowski, was he not?

Well, there are some similarities, but I see a lot of differences, too. The Dude is pretty happy-go-lucky and content with his life. And he drinks a lot, but he's not really a drunk. Bad Blake is a more somber and complex role, I think.

Quote
Oh, yes, he sang a few songs, pretty well too. In fact, I think the big star of this movie was the soundtrack!! Many of the songs were written by T-Bone Burnett.

I really liked the music, too. Especially this one

[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LwwkqABItLA[/youtube]

Quote
Why was Colin Farrell not credited in the movie? I thought his role as Tommy Sweet was one of his best.

Seriously? His name didn't appear in the credits? That's strange. It's right at the top on IMDb. I thought he was good, too. Not exactly who you'd expect Central Casting to send for the part of a country singer!

Quote
I wasn't really impressed with Maggie Gyllenhaal's portrayal as the love interest, Jean.

I thought she did the best she could. But i didn't like her character much. In fact her whole relationship with Bad Blake -- the way he had to be redeemed by the love of a good (30 years younger) woman -- was the movie's big flaw. Come to think of it, that movie sucked.  :laugh:



Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on June 01, 2011, 12:09:53 pm
No, I didn't see Ferrell's name appear in the credits. Sometimes that happens due to contractual problems.

The problem I had with Maggie's performance was mostly because she brought such a small bag of tools to the role...facial expressions, body language, etc. But I agree with you that she probably did the best she could with a role that was incidental to the main event, i.e. Jeff. Reviewers also think Robert Duvall's role was a waste but I thought he did well.

That Jeff Bridges...he must have the best agent on earth to get these roles!

One thing that really irritated me was the reverse angles, showing Jeff's back of head when he was having a conversation with someone. It showed an obviously fake head of blond hair on some stand-in. Those shots stood out like a sore thumb. Really made me appreciate Ang Lee more.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on June 01, 2011, 03:03:04 pm
I really liked the music, too. Especially this one

[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LwwkqABItLA[/youtube]


What a tragic song! I've never heard of Ryan Bingham, but he is one talented musician! His voice has that tragic ring to it. Thanks!!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on June 04, 2011, 03:10:11 pm
I'm just especially open to any movie in which the main character(s): 1) are over 40 2) didn't originate in a comic book or video game and 3) don't kill anybody.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on June 10, 2011, 11:45:43 pm
I saw "The Tree of Life" tonight, and I'm not really sure what I think about it. 

For its first week, it showed exclusively at an art house theatre, but was shown at the multiplexes starting tonight.  Sparsely attended, several people walked out early on. 

It is certainly visually stunning, yet perplexing.  Light on dialogue and even lighter on plot, I suppose it's very personal to filmmaker Terrence Malick, in that it seems to be his own brand of spirituality.   Some of the images will stay with me.  Especially one sequence showing a huge flock of birds from a great distance as they swoop and swerve, almost as a single unit following some mathematical formula.  (I once witnessed this exact same phenomenon on a much smaller scale, in a tidal pool of tiny minnows, and was completely mesmerized by it.)

I thought Brad Pitt was very good (he produced the film as well), and had a hard time imagining Heath in the role.  In fact, I thought Heath might have been better in Sean Penn's role.  Lots of wordless closeups. 

Creation and loss and grace.  I'm still not sure what it's all about, but I'm glad I saw it.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on June 11, 2011, 12:20:23 am
Interesting...reviewers seem to think of it as a poetry movie. I vaguely remember Badlands and Days of Heaven...they launched careers and were mezmerizing and memorable. Not so much The New World (for me). I will see it when I'm in a certain mood. Thanks, friend.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on June 11, 2011, 12:42:35 am
I thought Brad Pitt was very good (he produced the film as well), and had a hard time imagining Heath in the role.  In fact, I thought Heath might have been better in Sean Penn's role.

Wait, what? Was Heath originally cast in the role, or do you just routinely pause to consider how Heath would have done in roles in various movies?

Your reaction comes very close to my pre-viewing opinion of the movie. From the trailer and reviews, I'm not especially excited about it, but intrigued enough to see it anyway.

I loved Days of Heaven. I remember going to see it for maybe the second time and bringing a sprig of lilac into the theater so I could breathe the beautiful fragrance while watching the beautiful onscreen images.

I never saw The New World, though. I remember deciding one night in January 2006 to go to the movies and choosing between TNW and a couple of others. One of the other movies happened to be showing at a time that better fit my schedule, so I saw that one instead. And then for the next 8 or 10 times I went to the theater, I saw that same one.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Penthesilea on June 11, 2011, 04:47:31 am
Wait, what? Was Heath originally cast in the role,


Yes, he was.


Quote
or do you just routinely pause to consider how Heath would have done in roles in various movies?


 :laugh: I'll leave that for Paul to answer.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on June 11, 2011, 08:31:50 am
Quote
Wait, what? Was Heath originally cast in the role, or do you just routinely pause to consider how Heath would have done in roles in various movies?

In his own words:

[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p8Lhv7VdnpA[/youtube]
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on June 11, 2011, 11:36:26 am
In his own words:

Oh, OK, thanks.

Kind of a portentous interview.

On the brighter side, when I first started watching it, I thought, Wow, he's sitting amazingly still.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on June 11, 2011, 12:08:14 pm
Getting back to Tree of Life, here's what LA Times columnist Meghan Daum posted on Twitter:

Tree of Life: a movie or a screensaver? #treeoflife #isowantedtoloveit


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Mandy21 on June 15, 2011, 11:24:59 pm
Watched "Burlesque" tonight.  Thought it was a relatively pointless movie, but oh-my-God, Cher's and Christina's voices were perfection.  I've decided there's no way I'll ever be a lesbian because I fast-forwarded through all the semi-naked-girl scenes:)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on June 15, 2011, 11:55:03 pm
Greetings from the 13th annual Provincetown International Film Festival!

A Maxfield-Parrish-blue dusk sky and a buttery full moon reflected in the bay provided the backdrop for the opening night selection:  "The Perfect Family" with Kathleen Turner.  The Ptown glitterati, such as they are, showed up for the sold-out screening, including John Waters, who hugged Miss Turner right in front of me. 

Miss Turner plays Eileen Cleary, who is up for the "Catholic Woman of the Year" award, yet her lesbian daughter (Emily Deschanel) is pregnant, and her son (Jason Ritter) is leaving his wife for the town manicurist, and the bishop wants to have a home visit!  Let's just say her faith is challenged, and along the way, she receives counseling from the liberal-minded Father Joe, played by Scott Michael Campbell--better known around these parts as Monroe!  Seems there's always a Brokie connection. 

Miss Turner was very gracious in the Q&A, volunteering that she should get credit for not being vain, as her character had a bad Lady Di wig and less-than-glamorous clothes. 

Best line:  "I don't have to think--I'm Catholic!"


(http://mycdn.theexcitantgroup.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/perfectfamily-poster1.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on June 16, 2011, 12:41:23 am
Thanks for the evocative review, Paul.  So cool that you got to see John Waters hug Kathleen Turner!  Oh to be in P-town.... 8)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on June 16, 2011, 09:22:56 am
(http://mycdn.theexcitantgroup.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/perfectfamily-poster1.jpg)

Richard Chamberlain is the bishop?
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on June 16, 2011, 09:37:45 am
Richard Chamberlain is the bishop?

No, he's the parish priest, and was exceedingly dull in the role.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on June 16, 2011, 11:27:04 am
Oh dang. No Thorn Birds redo then.

Say I heard a review that, surprisingly, Midnight in Paris is supposed to be good? Anyone seen it?
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on June 16, 2011, 12:15:34 pm
Oh dang. No Thorn Birds redo then.

Say I heard a review that, surprisingly, Midnight in Paris is supposed to be good? Anyone seen it?

Yes, and I was happy to find it was in the vein of the old Woody Allen movies, doing for Paris what he did so beautifully for Manhattan, making it look like the most desirable city in the world.  He also makes fun of intellectuals while adoring them, the way only he can do.  Owen Wilson does well in the lead, recalling Woody's earlier incarnations while still keeping his own charm.  Not earthshaking, but a nice night out.  8)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on June 16, 2011, 02:07:58 pm
Thanks, Meryl! Sounds like it's time to start watching Woody Allen movies again!!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on June 16, 2011, 07:14:54 pm
A very emotional day here at the Ptown film festival.  I have often found that the documentaries are the ones that stay with me.

First this morning, I saw an extraordinary film that will certainly stay with me.  "Buck" is a film about a different kind of cowboy:  a "tortured soul", who went from child trick-rope star with a sadistic father, to an unassuming sage who runs clinics to help people with horse problems, or as he says, helping horses with people problems.  He understands what it is to be a horse, and gently but firmly shares that in his clinics.  He criss-crosses the country, from Limerick, Maine to Thermopolis, Wyoming.  Redford hired him as a consultant for "The Horse Whisperer".  

(Brokie aside:  his mother worked in Ennis, Montana.)

[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IShjmWYuHZ0[/youtube]

www.buckthefilm.com

Here's the calendar of cities where it can be seen:  http://www.buckthefilm.com/playdates.htm
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on June 16, 2011, 07:26:36 pm
After drying my tears from "Buck", I headed to another venue to see "We Were Here", another documentary, about AIDS in San Francisco.  I know that Bay City John has promoted this film and it was different from other such films, much more personal.  Non-stop tears this time.

[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oCxqJgpejbs[/youtube]

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on June 16, 2011, 07:29:22 pm
Boy did I need a change after those two.  The third film of the day was "Weekend", a British film billed as "Brokeback Mountain" meets "Before Sunrise".  

It was neither.  

Now I need a break.  
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on June 16, 2011, 08:38:53 pm
Paul!!  :'( :-* :P
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on June 16, 2011, 11:47:09 pm
Say I heard a review that, surprisingly, Midnight in Paris is supposed to be good? Anyone seen it?

Saw it last night. I was fascinated for a while. I like Owen Wilson, and thought he did a great job of mastering a combination Owen Wilson-Woody Allen persona. In the tradition of non-Woody-Allen Woody Allen heroes, he assumed that classic Woody Allenesque halting, stammering delivery, which I love, while also seeming entirely himself. I also liked the tense, unpleasant, not overwritten dynamic between him and Rachel McAdams.

But ultimately I started to drift off. That could have partly been me, because I went following an evening that involved both work and strong beer (writing about a beer event). But I also think that the sequences in the past, while an interesting concept on the surface, eventually lost excitement. With the possible exception of Kathy Bates' Gertrude Stein, the historical figures were kind of wooden and two-dimensional and stereotypical.

And why force Michael Sheen to speak in an American accent? For one thing, his American accent is not that great. He's a wonderful actor, but accent-wise he's no Hugh Laurie or Christian Bale. And for another, I thought his character would work just as well, if not better, as a Brit.

I thought it approximately as compelling as the last one, which is to say so-so.


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on June 17, 2011, 08:27:20 pm
Paul!!  :'( :-* :P

Greetings again from Provincetown and the film festival.

Well, today's fare was a bit lighter than yesterday's emotional tour. 

First up, was a French animated feature "A Cat in Paris"  aka "Une vie de chat" en francais.  Standing in line next to Kathleen Turner, who was eating an ice cream cone and doing her best Tallulah Bankhead voice, I looked forward to something whimsical.  And whimsical it was.  Apparently all hand-drawn cels, the film was a charming story of a cat, Dino, who is a faithful pet by day, and an accomplice to a cat-burglar by night.  It's also about Dino's girl, who lost her father, and her policewoman mother.  Exciting climax at Notre Dame de Paris.  Very popular with the audience!

Here's a trailer in French, although the version we saw was dubbed by British actors.

[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H7e07c52VWg[/youtube]
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on June 17, 2011, 09:03:11 pm
The next film I was really looking forward to.  It was "Higher Ground", Vera Farmiga's directorial début, also starring her.  An honest depiction of a woman who chooses faith, almost literally by accident, and then continues to have doubts, Ms. Farmiga brilliantly portrays her character's ambivalence.  

Spanning a few decades, the film shows her as a child and adolescent before Vera herself appears.  I was blown away by how much the adolescent Corinne resembled Vera, only to later discover that it was in fact Vera's younger sister in the role (younger by 21 years).  Also in the wonderful ensemble cast were two BIG Broadway actors:  Donna Murphy and Norbert Leo Butz.  However, Dagmara Dominczyk, as the best friend, stole the show.

Vera was present for a Q&A, and was a bit, um, rambling, but charming nonetheless.  She noted that she was 4-5 months pregnant as she shot this film.  

I couldn't find a proper trailer, but here's this:

[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YULG0QcP4qA&feature=related[/youtube]

Her Brokie connection:  she has acted with BOTH Heath and Jake:  with Heath in the Aussie TV series "Roar" (1997) and this year with Jake in "Source Code".  

(http://www.cbsnews.com/i/tim//2010/02/17/530390.jpg)

(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-WjB3M9QXVng/TYlTue7DjgI/AAAAAAAA98Q/2Q_2badVGCM/s1600/MV5BMTMyMTY2MDc2N15BMl5BanBnXkFtZTcwNTE4OTQ2NA%2540%2540._V1._PT-90._SX640_SY425_.jpg)

(http://media17.onsugar.com/files/2011/03/10/0/192/1922398/e13228f72f545c95_Screen_shot_2011-03-13_at_12.38.49_PM/i/Pictures-Jake-Gyllenhaal-Vera-Farmiga-SXSW-Premiere-Source-Code.png)
Jake and Vera with Michelle Monaghan at South by Southwest.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Mandy21 on June 17, 2011, 09:13:49 pm
Paul, I swear, you are a neverending bounty of trivial knowledge of all topics.  What would we ever do without you?
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on June 17, 2011, 09:38:21 pm
Vera has it all...looking forward to seeing this! 
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on June 18, 2011, 12:48:57 am
 I was blown away by how much the adolescent Corinne resembled Vera,

I was wishing you had posted a picture, but I saw her in the video and see what you mean! Though does the sister have brown eyes? Vera's are so strikingly light blue.

Quote
Her Brokie connection:  she has acted with BOTH Heath and Jake:  with Heath in the Aussie TV series "Roar" (1997) and this year with Jake in "Source Code".  

I love Vera Farmiga. I guess I've always thought of her as Brokieish, even though the first movie I ever saw her in, The Departed, has arguably no first-degree Brokie connections. Maybe when I like people I tend to just want to bring them under the Brokie umbrella.


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Penthesilea on June 18, 2011, 03:47:24 am
I love Vera Farmiga. I guess I've always thought of her as Brokieish, even though the first movie I ever saw her in, The Departed, has arguably no first-degree Brokie connections. Maybe when I like people I tend to just want to bring them under the Brokie umbrella.


Yes, probably. At least that's clearly the case with me. I don't know Vera Farmiga, even though I might have encountered her name over on HHH. I saw Source Code last night, and reading Paul's post about her Brokie connection made me grin from ear to ear.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on June 18, 2011, 09:35:05 am
I was wishing you had posted a picture, but I saw her in the video and see what you mean! Though does the sister have brown eyes? Vera's are so strikingly light blue.

Good pick up, K, on the eyes, I mean.  I found a photo of them.  The sister's name is Taissa (ta-EE-sa):

(http://www.dlcache.indiatimes.com/imageserve/0bzL5AC7tr8Mr/350x.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on June 18, 2011, 09:46:23 am
Paul, I swear, you are a neverending bounty of trivial knowledge of all topics.  What would we ever do without you?

 :-*
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on July 17, 2011, 12:02:19 am
Just came from seeing Midnight in Paris. It was fun in a wistful sort of way. Since Owen Wilson is a blonde, I thought how much better Heath would have been in the role. Heath and Woody Allen...that would have been quite a combination. The parts with the '20s celebrities were enticing and quite a tease. I wish those characters had been developed more. Luis Bunuel as a dunce, getting his inspiration from surfer dude Owen? It was great to see Carla Bruni in a role as a working woman in Paris...she was great!!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on July 17, 2011, 10:02:09 am
I wish those characters had been developed more.

I thought so, too.

But I really liked Owen Wilson. Well, I always like him. He seems surfer-dudish, but he's really smart. He co-wrote The Royal Tenenbaums, one of my favorite movies, and once wrote an eloquent and funny letter to the New Yorker  taking down movie critic David Denby, who had said some out-of-line things (he's right -- I'd read Denby's review, and it was harsh) about Ben Stiller:

http://gawker.com/032504/gossip/owen-wilson/owen-wilson-comes-to-buddy-ben-stillers-defense (http://gawker.com/032504/gossip/owen-wilson/owen-wilson-comes-to-buddy-ben-stillers-defense)

Quote

I read David Denby's piece on Ben Stiller with great interest (The Current Cinema, January 24th & 31st). Not because it was good or fair toward my friend but exactly because it wasn't. I've acted in two hundred and thirty-seven buddy movies and, with that experience, I've developed an almost preternatural feel for the beats that any good buddy movie must have. And maybe the most crucial audience-rewarding beat is where one buddy comes to the aid of the other guy to help defeat a villain. Or bully. Or jerk. Someone the audience can really root against. And in Denby I realized excitedly that I had hit the trifecta. How could an audience not be dying for a real "Billy Jack" moment of reckoning for Denby after he dismisses or diminishes or just plain insults practically everything Stiller had ever worked on? And not letting it rest there, in true bully fashion Denby moves on to take some shots at the way Ben looks and even his Jewishness, describing him as the "latest, and crudest, version of the urban Jewish male on the make." The audience is practically howling for blood! I really wish I could deliver for them—but that's Jackie Chan's role.

Owen Wilson
Dallas, Texas


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on July 17, 2011, 10:38:48 pm
Tonight, at the Montreal Fantasia film fest, I saw

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/a_lonely_place_to_die_02.jpg)

A lonely Place to Die -  A white-knuckle tense mountain climbing thriller from Scotland.  I was on the edge of my seat from start to finsih.  I highly recommend it.  Melissa George leads the excellent cast which includes Ed (Eragon) Speleers:

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/People/Ed_Speleers_01.jpg)

Review:
http://twitchfilm.com/reviews/2011/07/fantasia-2011-a-lonely-place-to-die-review.php

Then I saw Another Earth which was a completely different experience. A low budget, intimate, philosophical, melancholic & gripping sci-fi drama.  Well worth seeing!  The performances by the two leads, it's basically a two-hander, are excellent.  An intelligent and quietly affecting film.  It's being released on Aug 5th

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/another-earth-01.jpg)
Review:
http://twitchfilm.com/reviews/2011/07/fantasia-2011-another-earth-review.php
Trailer:
[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N8hEwMMDtFY[/youtube]
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on July 17, 2011, 11:54:28 pm
I just saw a preview of "Another Earth" tonight, Gil.  Love the effect of seeing the earth and moon in the daytime sky.  8)

I saw "The Tree of Life" tonight and have to agree with Paul's assessment: exquisitely beautiful images and tons of great music paired with a kind of stream-of-consciousness, inscrutable look at a young family in Texas.  I was very moved at the end and love the feeling Malick creates of how we are both part of and overwhelmingly dwarfed by the Creation.  That said, however, it was a bit like watching grass grow.

I saw "The Tree of Life" tonight, and I'm not really sure what I think about it. 

For its first week, it showed exclusively at an art house theatre, but was shown at the multiplexes starting tonight.  Sparsely attended, several people walked out early on. 

It is certainly visually stunning, yet perplexing.  Light on dialogue and even lighter on plot, I suppose it's very personal to filmmaker Terrence Malick, in that it seems to be his own brand of spirituality.   Some of the images will stay with me.  Especially one sequence showing a huge flock of birds from a great distance as they swoop and swerve, almost as a single unit following some mathematical formula.  (I once witnessed this exact same phenomenon on a much smaller scale, in a tidal pool of tiny minnows, and was completely mesmerized by it.)

I thought Brad Pitt was very good (he produced the film as well), and had a hard time imagining Heath in the role.  In fact, I thought Heath might have been better in Sean Penn's role.  Lots of wordless closeups. 

Creation and loss and grace.  I'm still not sure what it's all about, but I'm glad I saw it.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on July 23, 2011, 10:29:49 pm
This will probably surprise a lot of people--it sort of surprises even me--but I actually went to a movie this evening. I went with a friend to see Captain America. I think I saw lots of echoes of early Star Wars and Raiders of the Lost Ark in it, but I liked it. It's my kind of movie.

I probably wouldn't have bothered without Chris Evans, so cute and buff, in the title role, but I'm glad I saw it.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on July 24, 2011, 01:00:44 pm
This will probably surprise a lot of people--it sort of surprises even me--but I actually went to a movie this evening. I went with a friend to see Captain America. I think I saw lots of echoes of early Star Wars and Raiders of the Lost Ark in it, but I liked it. It's my kind of movie.

I probably wouldn't have bothered without Chris Evans, so cute and buff, in the title role, but I'm glad I saw it.

I hear CA is one of the better super hero movies to come along for awhile.  Might duck in to see it if the heat keeps up.  :P
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on July 24, 2011, 01:23:33 pm
I hear CA is one of the better super hero movies to come along for awhile.  Might duck in to see it if the heat keeps up.  :P

I think Chris Evans is well cast. I don't know the Captain America comic book franchise, but in this movie, anyway, the character is supposed to be both the stereotypical 98-pound-weakling (although a 98-pound-weakling who never backs down or gives up) and something of an average Joe. Chris Evans is cute, but I think he has a boy-next-door quality to his cuteness that makes him right for this role. If I were a beer drinker, I could see myself comfortably having a beer with Chris Evans.

Incidentally, I noticed someone in a supporting role as one of CA's "team" who looked familiar, but I couldn't quite place him. I watched the credits at the end, then double-checked at IMDb. Turned out the familiar face was Neal McDonough; I didn't quite recognize him because in CA he's got side whiskers and a big mustache.  ;D

And of course there's good ol' reliable Tommy Lee Jones as a gruff army officer.  ;D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on July 26, 2011, 10:44:56 am
OK, I confess, I don't care how cheesey the concept sounds, I wanna see Cowboys and Aliens.  ;D

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0409847/ (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0409847/)

Actually, I guess I wanna see it because it does sound cheesey.  :laugh:

With Harrison Ford, Daniel Craig, and Olivia Wilde (House), it can't be entirely unredeemably awful.

Can it?  ;D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on July 26, 2011, 11:13:39 am
I want to see Cowboys and Aliens, too.  It sounds like a hoot, and with Daniel Craig to boot!  8)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on July 26, 2011, 11:34:25 am
OK, I confess, I don't care how cheesey the concept sounds, I wanna see Cowboys and Aliens.  ;D

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0409847/ (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0409847/)

Actually, I guess I wanna see it because it does sound cheesey.  :laugh:

With Harrison Ford, Daniel Craig, and Olivia Wilde (House), it can't be entirely unredeemably awful.

Can it?  ;D

With movies like that, I pay attention to the reviews. If critics slam it, I'll probably skip it. But if it gets half-decent reviews, I'll go, too.


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on July 26, 2011, 11:42:12 am
With movies like that, I pay attention to the reviews. If critics slam it, I'll probably skip it. But if it gets half-decent reviews, I'll go, too.

In my case, I have to admit that with a title like Cowboys and Aliens, the more critics slam it, the more likely I am to think, "That's probably my kind of picture."  :laugh:
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on August 01, 2011, 03:22:18 pm
I'm thinking about seeing Cowboys and Aliens after work one day this week. That reminds me of the experience of seeing Captain America. As I sat in the theater before the movie began, I was reminded how much the world has changed: I was sitting in a movie theater watching commercials for TV shows!  :o
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on August 01, 2011, 06:48:52 pm
A coworker saw Cowboys and Aliens and said it was really fun and good.  Harrison Ford and Daniel Craig had chemistry.  Worth seeing she said.

'Course, she also liked The Green Lantern.

I plan on seeing Cowboys and Aliens and Captain America this week.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on August 03, 2011, 12:24:20 am
I think I'll skip Cowboys & Aliens, a reviewer I trust hated it.  I will see Rise of the Planet of the Apes though.

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/People/Dominic-Cooper-THE-DEVILS-DOUBLE.jpg)

A couple of nights ago I saw The Devil's Double with Dominic Cooper in a double role. He plays Uday Hussein, Saddam's psychotic (& bisexual) son and also his double. A very enjoyable thriller, with some scenes of extreme violence - I jumped and went Ewww! a couple of times -  but also some dark humour that prevents the film from being a downer.  Lee Tamahori is the director.  The film loses some steam in the last act but it's well worth seeing.

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/the-devils-double-01.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on August 03, 2011, 10:59:47 am
I saw the trailer for Devil's Double too. Intriguing concept! Looked like it would be very engrossing, over the top in some places, but aren't all movies these days?

The main attraction last night was a restored print of The Man Who Fell to Earth, a mid-'70s film by Nicholas Roeg starring David Bowie in his first film role. He was so perfect you might think the role was written for him, but no! It was conceived as a vehicle for Peter O'Toole. Bowie was much more relaxed and natural in the role than O'Toole would have been.

Over the top it was not and that made the climactic scenes even more powerful. It was interesting to see how many technological innovations the main character started, in his quest to raise funds to return to his home planet, that have really come to pass. Self developing cameras, disposable recyclable cameras, speakerphones, unleaded gas, remote controls, etc. I expected him to produce contact lenses that would correct Buck Henry's terrible eyesight, but he never did. I wonder why that wasn't part of the story.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Mandy21 on August 03, 2011, 04:24:50 pm
I hope Amanda checks out your review, Lee, since she seems to be one of the world's biggest fans of all things Bowie:)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on August 03, 2011, 10:21:09 pm
I'm thinking about seeing Cowboys and Aliens after work one day this week.

Well, I really broke out of my routine today. Cowboys and Aliens was playing at a theater four blocks from the office, and there was a show at 5:00, so I went there directly from work. I really liked it. Hey, what's not to like about cowboys, outlaws, and Apaches mixing it up with aliens?  ;D

Harrison Ford can still pull it off, and Daniel Craig--what a hunk, and what incredible blue eyes! And then there's the beautiful Olivia Wilde, from TV's House.

Strangely enough, in the "Movie Openings" column in the August 1 New Yorker, the movie is characterized as a "comedy." This movie is by no means a comedy. It's very violent, and the violence is not played for laughs. Sympathetic characters get killed. But it's still a great movie for the adolescent boy in me who likes to see stuff blown up.  ;D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on August 03, 2011, 10:22:57 pm
I think I'll skip Cowboys & Aliens, a reviewer I trust hated it.

Probably wasn't his kind of picture. What did he expect from a movie inspired by a video game?
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on August 04, 2011, 01:18:24 pm
Oh, yeah. There was one thing that kind of puzzled me when I saw Cowboys and Aliens yesterday.  The previews included The Conspirator as a coming attraction. That's the movie, with Robin Wright, about Mary Surrat, hanged as a participant in John Wilkes Booth's plot to assassinate Lincoln. But that movie came out in the spring.  ???  Maybe it's being rereleased to generate support for Oscar nominations?  ???
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on August 05, 2011, 06:54:01 pm
Well, I didn't go see Cowboys and Aliens last week, but I am going tonight.  My sister is pretty enthused.  She has some crazy theory about all the ghost towns in the Southwest Americas.  Some that literally were abandoned overnight.  She wonders, "How do we know the people actually left?  They didn't track people back then.  Maybe some WERE kidnapped by aliens!"  8)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on August 06, 2011, 12:23:11 am
Cowboys and Aliens gets two thumbs up from me!!!

Simple enough cowboy morality tale, robbers with hearts of gold, bad guys finding redemption, relationships acknowledged, not too deep a plot, good acting all around - except of course, Olivia Wilde who's barely believable and spends a lot of time looking like a Gio Aqua commercial - good special effects and beautiful scenery.

Great summer popcorn movie.

And Daniel Craig is a god with those cornflower blue eyes and a body you could bounce a quarter off of, and he takes his shirt off no less than 3 times.  :-* :-* :-* :-*

Worth the price of admission alone.  Go see it.  ;D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on August 06, 2011, 12:29:59 pm
And Daniel Craig is a god with those cornflower blue eyes and a body you could bounce a quarter off of, and he takes his shirt off no less than 3 times.  :-* :-* :-* :-*

Worth the price of admission alone.  Go see it.  ;D

Say no more.  I'm there!  8)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on August 09, 2011, 11:59:33 pm
I saw Crazy Stupid Love this weekend. Thought it was kind of crazy in parts, kind of stupid in parts, and I didn't love it.

But I liked it. Thought it was worth seeing. I laughed a number of times, and liked some of the characters. Speaking of quarters, Ryan Gosling appears quite bounceable. If I were so inclined, I would probably think the same about Emma Stone. And who can speak ill of Steve Carrell and Julianne Moore?

Did I tell you all that I saw Friends With Benefits a couple of weeks ago? Same thing there, mixed feelings. The downside: There was actually too much sex for me! I'm not a prude (I don't think), but it just felt like TMI about somebody else's sex life. But the script was smart and funny, both JT and Mila Kunis were charming and attractive, the supporting actors -- particularly Woody Harrelson, Patricia Clarkson and Richard Jenkins -- all wonderful, the views of NYC attractive, the fashions worth noting. What more do you need from a light summer rom-com?

Though if any of you see this, please share with me what you thought of Woody Harrelson's character. Woody played him well, but as written he was a bit over the top -- a gay guy who was constantly referencing his own gayness. Too much, do you think?


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on August 10, 2011, 02:21:13 pm
And who can speak ill of Steve Carrell and Julianne Moore?

I like Julianne Moore, though I heard she phoned in her performance. But I'm always happy to speak ill of Steve Carrell. The man drives me around the bend.  ;D

Quote
Woody Harrelson's character -- a gay guy who was constantly referencing his own gayness. Too much, do you think?

Well, there are people out there like that. They make being gay their profession.  ::)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on August 10, 2011, 08:08:28 pm
Lots of movies to see...I hear One Day, starring our Anne, will open on the 19th. Then, there's Dream House with Daniel Craig and Rachel Weitz. I didn't know those two were married in real life. The trailer can be seen here (http://www.flixster.com/movie/dream-house-2011-videos/Dream+House-11150875).

I'm upset about yet another Sherlock Holmes Robert Downey Jr. vehicle. I'll have to pass if it portrays Holmes as a bully and a fighter, like the first one. Jude Law makes a rather nice Watson, though.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on August 10, 2011, 11:16:11 pm
Quote
Daniel Craig and Rachel Weitz. I didn't know those two were married in real life.

 :o Me neither!

Quote
I'm upset about yet another Sherlock Holmes Robert Downey Jr. vehicle. I'll have to pass if it portrays Holmes as a bully and a fighter, like the first one. Jude Law makes a rather nice Watson, though.

I'll see just about anything with RDJ in it. Though I hated that one where he's a journalist and Jamie Foxx is a mentally ill violinist.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on August 11, 2011, 08:58:49 am
I'll see just about anything with RDJ in it.

I really ought to see Iron Man. I'm sure I'd find it fun.

Quote
Though I hated that one where he's a journalist and Jamie Foxx is a mentally ill violinist.

The guy who wrote the book that was based on used to write for the Philadelphia Inquirer. I always enjoyed his newspaper columns.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on August 11, 2011, 09:01:57 am
Did I tell you all that I saw Friends With Benefits a couple of weeks ago? Same thing there, mixed feelings. The downside: There was actually too much sex for me! I'm not a prude (I don't think), but it just felt like TMI about somebody else's sex life. But the script was smart and funny, both JT and Mila Kunis were charming and attractive.

Yeah, I'd rather be having sex with JT than spend a whole movie watching him do it with someone else.  ;D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on August 11, 2011, 11:14:06 am
The problem with the Friends With Benefits proposition (and I assume this was a big theme of the movie) is that it gets to be all about the benefits and little about the friendship.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on August 11, 2011, 11:50:50 am
The problem with the Friends With Benefits proposition (and I assume this was a big theme of the movie) is that it gets to be all about the benefits and little about the friendship.

AKA: Fcuk-buddy.  Nothing wrong with that, i sure wish i had a couple, lol!  ;)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on August 13, 2011, 03:16:21 am
The problem with the Friends With Benefits proposition (and I assume this was a big theme of the movie) is that it gets to be all about the benefits and little about the friendship.

In real life, perhaps. But since it's Hollywood, then you know going into it that at some point the benefits won't be enough and they'll become More than Friends.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on August 13, 2011, 05:30:21 pm
AKA: Fuck buddy.

I don't think that term is generally used when the parties involved are male and female, is it?  ???
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on August 14, 2011, 02:16:31 am
I don't think that term is generally used when the parties involved are male and female, is it?  ???

Yes.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on August 15, 2011, 09:06:14 am
Yes.

"Yes," what? "Yes," it is used for male-female couples (eeewww), or "yes" it isn't used for male-female couples?  ???
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on August 15, 2011, 09:29:05 am
Some interesting things seen over the weekend, thanks to Turner Classics.

Saturday night I was home from the anniversary party I went to in time to see most of the classic The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance. Released in 1962 but still a B&W film, and what a cast! John Wayne, Jimmy Stewart, Vera Miles, Lee Marvin, Woody Strode, Andy Devine, Lee Van Cleef, Strother Martin, John Carradine, Jeanette Nolan--consumate professionals all!

Sunday, it turned out, that TCM was celebrating the career of Ralph Bellamy. I didn't know that when I tuned in just to see what was "on," and found myself early on in The Wolf Man, with Lon Chaney, Jr. This was not the first time I'd seen it (Ralph Bellamy had a supporting role, which is why it "qualified"), but even when I did see it the first time, I didn't find it the least bit scary. I found it more of a tragic story than a scary one. I wonder how people felt about it when it was released?

Funny thing about the movie: It's set in Wales, yet the only principal player with anything even approaching a British accent is Claude Rains--good old reliable Claude Rains.  :D

Anyway, I needed to double check someone I thought I recognized in the cast (it was Patrick Knowles--I was correct), so while the movie was still running I looked it up at IMDb, and was interested to read that most of what we now "know" as the "folklore" of werewolves--the full moon, the silver bullet, etc.--was, in fact, just made up by the screenwriter for this movie!  :o

Anyway, next up was one of the funniest movies of all time, His Girl Friday, with Cary Grant and Rosalind Russell, again with Bellamy in a supporting role. I forget now what came next, but it both annoyed and surprised me that since they were "celebrating" the career of Ralph Bellamy, they were running Sunrise at Campobello, an acclaimed film with Bellamy in the leading role of FDR, opposite Greer Garson as Eleanor, late at night, instead of in prime time--too late for me to stay up and watch it when I had to be up for work the next morning. I've never seen Sunrise at Campobello, and I'd like to see it some day.

A note on His Girl Friday: Sure is a movie of its time. There is one scene where one of the reporters phones in a story where he describes the subject as "a colored woman," and reports that she gave birth to a "pickaninny."  :o  >:(
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on August 15, 2011, 12:02:28 pm
I'm so glad there's a station that still specializes in vintage movies.  I ended up catching the last half of "It Happened One Night" on TCM this weekend, and it was a refreshing change from today's more cynical, hip couples "meeting cute."

Last night I watched "Blade Runner," a favorite from 1982, on the Sci-Fi channel.  Even with commercial interruptions, it was great to catch up with this movie, so stylish and moody, with great performances from Rutger Hauer as the doomed android Roy, and Harrison Ford as the weather-beaten cop who has to hunt him down.  It holds up very well against the movies of today with all their sophisticated special effects and has a genuine emotional punch to boot.  The Vangelis score is a plus, too.  8)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on August 15, 2011, 12:12:38 pm
Blade Runner was one of the influences on Duncan Jones when he was creating the 2009 movie Moon, so I'd love to see it. Will have to check out that Sci-Fi channel! The movie was supposedly one of the first to show ordinary people in space instead of superheroes/astronauts.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on August 15, 2011, 12:20:51 pm
I'm so glad there's a station that still specializes in vintage movies.  I ended up catching the last half of "It Happened One Night" on TCM this weekend, and it was a refreshing change from today's more cynical, hip couples "meeting cute."

I'm just glad I still get TCM as part of the "basic" service that comes with my condo fee. Where my dad lives, TCM is included in one of the tiers where you have to pay extra for it.  :(  >:(

I didn't notice It Happened One Night, but I think they were "celebrating" Claudette Colbert Friday night. I saw Midnight, with Claudette, Don Ameche, John Barrymore, Mary Astor, and--believe it or not, as an actor--Hedda Hopper!  :o Ben Mankeweicz said the movie was hell on the director. By that point Claudette could get in her contracts that she could only be photographed from her left side--and Barrymore was by then a hopeless drunk.  :(

Doncha just love the "autogyro" in IHON?  ;D

Quote
Last night I watched "Blade Runner," a favorite from 1982, on the Sci-Fi channel.  Even with commercial interruptions, it was great to catch up with this movie, so stylish and moody, with great performances from Rutger Hauer as the doomed android Roy, and Harrison Ford as the weather-beaten cop who has to hunt him down.  It holds up very well against the movies of today with all their sophisticated special effects and has a genuine emotional punch to boot.  The Vangelis score is a plus, too.  8)

I remember Blade Runner as being very ... damp.  ;D  And--I think--a female android who acted like a Coppelia who had way too much caffeine.  8)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on August 15, 2011, 12:33:01 pm
"Yes," what? "Yes," it is used for male-female couples (eeewww), or "yes" it isn't used for male-female couples?  ???

Yes, it is so used.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on August 15, 2011, 01:08:16 pm
Yes, it is so used.

Thanks.

Eeewww.  :P

Any guy who would refer to a woman as his "fuck buddy" is no gentleman.  >:(

I didn't even know the term was used by anyone other than gay men.  :-\
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on August 15, 2011, 03:57:56 pm
I didn't notice It Happened One Night, but I think they were "celebrating" Claudette Colbert Friday night. I saw Midnight, with Claudette, Don Ameche, John Barrymore, Mary Astor, and--believe it or not, as an actor--Hedda Hopper!  :o Ben Mankeweicz said the movie was hell on the director. By that point Claudette could get in her contracts that she could only be photographed from her left side--and Barrymore was by then a hopeless drunk.  :(

Doncha just love the "autogyro" in IHON?  ;D

I remember Blade Runner as being very ... damp.  ;D  And--I think--a female android who acted like a Coppelia who had way too much caffeine.  8)

Oh yeah, I didn't mention I watched Midnight, too.  Kind of a crazy, overbaked plot, but I thought the writing was actually quite funny.  I don't remember which character Hedda Hopper played, though.

Yes, Blade Runner has lots of rain!  I guess that's part of how they envisioned the future of climate change in 1982.  People smoke like chimneys in it, though.  They didn't foresee all the anti-smoking laws.  ;D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on August 15, 2011, 04:15:45 pm
Oh yeah, I didn't mention I watched Midnight, too.  Kind of a crazy, overbaked plot, but I thought the writing was actually quite funny.  I don't remember which character Hedda Hopper played, though.

Hedda Hopper was the hostess at that musical soiree that Claudette Colbert sneaked into using her pawn ticket.  ;D  Then she showed up at the hat shop, and at the weekend house party that Mary Astor and John Barrymore gave. I had to look up the movie at IMDb to make sure it was her.

Quote
Yes, Blade Runner has lots of rain!  I guess that's part of how they envisioned the future of climate change in 1982.  People smoke like chimneys in it, though.  They didn't foresee all the anti-smoking laws.  ;D

 :laugh:
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on August 18, 2011, 11:56:24 am
Yay! One Day opens tomorrow! I hope Anne has a more agreeable character to play in this movie... If not, I'm going to have to start wondering if there's a Brokeback curse   ???
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on August 18, 2011, 12:32:25 pm
Yay! One Day opens tomorrow! I hope Anne has a more agreeable character to play in this movie... If not, I'm going to have to start wondering if there's a Brokeback curse   ???

Jim Sturgess is cute. ...
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on August 18, 2011, 05:12:34 pm
I didn't know where to put this but since it involves Gerard Depardieu peeing on a plane...

Have a giggle with Anderson Cooper (aka that nice Vanderbilt boy)

[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5XcYNOoth-0[/youtube]
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on August 19, 2011, 12:52:19 am
I didn't know where to put this but since it involves Gerard Depardieu peeing on a plane...

Have a giggle with Anderson Cooper (aka that nice Vanderbilt boy)

I saw this posted on Facebook or somewhere else today. I feel sorry for Anderson. You can see him thinking, OMG, this is going to be on YouTube. And the joke isn't even at all funny!  ::)

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on August 19, 2011, 08:46:51 am
This morning I read a review of the new Conan movie that said the best thing about it is Jason Momoa's buttocks.

(OK, the terms the reviewer actually used were rock-hard buns and rear end. Must be pretty impressive since he mentioned it/them twice.)

Colin Farrell might be a really nasty vampire in the retread of Fright Night, but he can still bite me. ...
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on August 19, 2011, 11:09:14 am
This morning I read a review of the new Conan movie that said the best thing about it is Jason Momoa's buttocks.

(OK, the terms the reviewer actually used were rock-hard buns and rear end. Must be pretty impressive since he mentioned it/them twice.)

The Conan trailer doesn't bode well for the level of high class entertainment one might hope for, but I have seen the buns in question in HBO's Game of Thrones and can understand the critic's respect for them.  The guy is massively hot.  ;D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on August 19, 2011, 11:21:44 am
The Conan trailer doesn't bode well for the level of high class entertainment one might hope for, but I have seen the buns in question in HBO's Game of Thrones and can understand the critic's respect for them.  The guy is massively hot.  ;D

 ;D  You want "massively hot"? Remember Marc Singer in The Beastmaster? That was really him, too--no (or very little) CGI back then. I forget what triggered a memory yesterday, but I looked him up at IMDb. Ah, my youth. ...  :laugh:
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on August 19, 2011, 11:40:53 am
Yay! One Day opens tomorrow! I hope Anne has a more agreeable character to play in this movie... If not, I'm going to have to start wondering if there's a Brokeback curse   ???

Oh, no. As I feared, the reviews for One Day are not good. I'm thinking of passing on it...there are too many other movies I'd like to see. Plus, I still remember the Alan Alda/Ellen Burstyn version, Same Time Next Year,  (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0078199/)and I don't know if this one could walk 20 years in its shoes.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on August 19, 2011, 03:02:44 pm
The Conan trailer doesn't bode well for the level of high class entertainment one might hope for, but I have seen the buns in question in HBO's Game of Thrones and can understand the critic's respect for them.  The guy is massively hot.  ;D

From the NYT:

http://6thfloor.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/08/18/five-ku-short-poems-on-the-conan-the-barbarian-remake/?ref=magazine (http://6thfloor.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/08/18/five-ku-short-poems-on-the-conan-the-barbarian-remake/?ref=magazine)


Five-Ku: Short Poems on the “Conan the Barbarian” Remake

By ADAM STERNBERGH[/b]

Jason Momoa,
Stepping into Arnold’s shoes
Or, rather, loin cloth.

Barbarian: Once
Icon, now not even world’s
Most famous Conan.

Expect broadswords, mead,
And digressions on Sartre.
Kidding. No Sartre.

In credits, seven
Women’s roles listed, simply,
As “Topless Wenches.”

But if “Conan” scores?
Call the Rock: time to fast-track
“Kull the Conqueror.”



Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on August 19, 2011, 03:03:24 pm
Oh, no. As I feared, the reviews for One Day are not good. I'm thinking of passing on it...there are too many other movies I'd like to see. Plus, I still remember the Alan Alda/Ellen Burstyn version, Same Time Next Year,  (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0078199/)and I don't know if this one could walk 20 years in its shoes.

I thought the trailer made it look profoundly uninteresting.


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on August 19, 2011, 03:09:04 pm
I thought the trailer made it look profoundly uninteresting.

Seems its chief attraction is the attractiveness of its stars.

Sorta like Jason Momoa's buns.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on August 19, 2011, 06:17:49 pm
Seems its chief attraction is the attractiveness of its stars.

Sorta like Jason Momoa's buns.

Is that a problem? [goes to buy popcorn so I can sit and watch beautiful people emote and show their buns]
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on August 19, 2011, 06:55:10 pm
Is that a problem? [goes to buy popcorn so I can sit and watch beautiful people emote and show their buns]

Not for me!  ;D

(Especially about the buns. ...)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on August 26, 2011, 10:15:58 am
Last night, once again courtesy of TCM, I got to see a film I'd been wanting to see for years: Il Gattopardo (The Leopard), with Burt Lancaster and the unbelievably handsome Alain Delon.

Years ago I read about this movie, or, rather, about the author of the book on which it is based, in--where else?--The New Yorker.  The New Yorker article compared The Leopard to an Italian Gone With the Wind, and I think the comparison is apt, as long as you don't push it too much.

The story takes place in and about 1860, as Italy is at last being unified under the House of Savoy, the ruling dynasty of the Kingdom of Sardinia, centered in the north of Italy with its capital at Turin. Lancaster plays Fabrizio, prince of Salina, a Sicilian aristocrat, and Delon is his nephew, Tancredi. So the movie takes place at roughly the same time as GWTW, and the central character is a man trying to make his way through rapidly changing times, as the world he knew is being replaced by a new order--much as Scarlett O'Hara does the best she can to make her way as the world she grew up in comes to an end and is replaced with a new and unfamiliar world.

The movie is in Italian--logically enough--with subtitles, but I found the subtitles difficult to read at times because they were in white and often projected over the fabulous colors of the film. Lancaster was dubbed into Italian--clearly, it wasn't his voice--so it was kind of odd to read subtitles for the dialogue of an English-speaking actor who was dubbed into Italian.

The early part of the movie was a little confusing because I'm not that conversant with Italian history. I knew about the Risorgimento in a general sort of way, and that the Red Shirts, followers of the Italian nationalist Giuseppe Garibaldi, fought to unify the country. Early in the movie, Tancredi goes off to join the Red Shirts; there is a battle sequence, and Tancredi is wounded, but not badly. What I wasn't clear about at all was who the Red Shirts were fighting in Sicily and southern Italy.

Fortunately I still had an old World History text in my library, so after the movie was over I reviewed the section on Italian unification. Turns out that at the time of unification, Sicily and southern Italy constituted the Kingdom of Naples, also known as the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies (though I don't know why), which was ruled by a branch of the old Bourbon family. So presumably the Red Shirts were fighting to overthrow the Bourbon dynasty in southern Italy in order to unite the region with Sardinia. So that cleared up for me who the Red Shirts were fighting.

I liked the movie very much, despite its being in Italian--with the subtitles it was sort of like watching a silent movie with a lot of noise in the background instead of music. At the end the movie has an extended and very gorgeous sequence set at a ball. The cinematography is beautiful--not just at the ball but throught the whole movie.  :D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on August 26, 2011, 12:31:20 pm
Great to hear you enjoyed The Leopard, Jeff. We have quite a few fans of that film here, including oilgun and pipedream. I discussed it back in 2006 starting here (http://bettermost.net/forum/index.php/topic,710.msg99851.html#msg99851). I actually obtained the remastered DVD at the library.

Since you like Burt Lancaster, you should try viewing one of his last films. That's right, you guessed it....Local Hero!!  ::)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on August 26, 2011, 03:44:47 pm
Since you like Burt Lancaster, you should try viewing one of his last films. That's right, you guessed it....Local Hero!!  ::)

Well, I didn't really want to see the movie for Burt Lancaster. I was intrigued by what I had read of the plot and the historical setting. I didn't really care who was in it--and I probably would have gotten more out of it if it had been dubbed in English for American audiences.

Of course, even with the subtitles, there was one line that I find quite memorable. The prince's private chaplain chides him for patronizing a prostitute--or maybe the woman was a regular mistress; I wasn't clear on that point. In response the prince complains of the lack of passion in his marriage and of the extreme piety of his wife, who blesses herself before every sexual act and exclaims "Gesumaria!" when it's all over. Says the prince, "I have seven children with her and I've never seen her navel!"

 :laugh:
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on September 14, 2011, 11:04:36 am
Just came from seeing Midnight in Paris. It was fun in a wistful sort of way. Since Owen Wilson is a blonde, I thought how much better Heath would have been in the role. Heath and Woody Allen...that would have been quite a combination. The parts with the '20s celebrities were enticing and quite a tease. I wish those characters had been developed more. Luis Bunuel as a dunce, getting his inspiration from surfer dude Owen? It was great to see Carla Bruni in a role as a working woman in Paris...she was great!!

Here's a good "cheat sheet" to MIP: check it out and then see the movie again!!

http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2011/06/hemingway-said-what-a-cultural-cheat-sheet-for-midnight-in-paris/240198/#slide1 (http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2011/06/hemingway-said-what-a-cultural-cheat-sheet-for-midnight-in-paris/240198/#slide1)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on October 02, 2011, 06:46:17 pm
I just learned that a new Monty Python movie will be out next year! Apparently, it is based on the memoirs of the one Pythoner who died, Graham Chapman. The Liar's Autobiography has all the surviving members involved except for Eric Idle. Something to look forward to!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Sason on October 03, 2011, 12:08:48 pm
I just learned that a new Monty Python movie will be out next year! Apparently, it is based on the memoirs of the one Pythoner who died, Graham Chapman. The Liar's Autobiography has all the surviving members involved except for Eric Idle. Something to look forward to!

Great news!

Something to look forward to indeed!

Thanks for sharing, Lee.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on October 25, 2011, 11:53:42 am
One of my favorite stories of all time is getting the big screen treatment! It's about time...I'm purring over this preview!!

[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=55gmAtakjJ4&feature=related[/youtube]

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: brianr on October 27, 2011, 11:23:15 pm
I saw 'Midnight in Paris' 3 weeks ago with our movie group and loved it. But then I am in love with Paris. I warned the others I might walk straight out and head for the Travel Agent. Lucky it was Sunday  ;D  I recognised many locations from my fairly regular visits there. I also love 20's music and so am thinking of buying the DVD. The story was silly but that did not worry me.
The reason I came to this thread was that I have just returned from seeing 'One Day'.  I had to fill in time while my car was serviced. I had seen the trailer (at MIP) and thought it was mildly interesting  and there was not much available on a weekday morning. In fact I was the only person in the theatre. Just as well. I do not think I have cried so much since BM.
I had never heard of Jim Sturgess but he is cute. his smile made me melt. I had trouble understanding Anne Hathaway at times. Perhaps she was trying to sound English. I do not read here as we usually get movies in NZ months after you do.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Penthesilea on October 28, 2011, 02:16:18 am
The reason I came to this thread was that I have just returned from seeing 'One Day'.  I had to fill in time while my car was serviced. I had seen the trailer (at MIP) and thought it was mildly interesting  and there was not much available on a weekday morning. In fact I was the only person in the theatre. Just as well. I do not think I have cried so much since BM.
I had never heard of Jim Sturgess but he is cute. his smile made me melt. I had trouble understanding Anne Hathaway at times. Perhaps she was trying to sound English. I do not read here as we usually get movies in NZ months after you do.


I've just started reading the book. 8)
I didn't even know there was a movie to it. The book apparently was a hit last summer in GB, when I spent my holidays there, so I bought it.
I'm not far in, and from the beginning, I can't stand the character of Dexter, which makes it hard to get into the story. I hope he gets more simpatico with time.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on October 31, 2011, 06:46:25 pm
One of my favorite stories of all time is getting the big screen treatment! It's about time...I'm purring over this preview!!

[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=55gmAtakjJ4&feature=related[/youtube]

Appurrently, this is not a telling of the original story but is instead a mashup of several Mother Goose tales including Jack in the Beanstalk, Humpty Dumpty, etc. But I shall still see it. I love the story, though, which begins:

"A miller who had three sons was growing old and ill, sad and forgetful.... His two older sons ... forced him to write a will. The oldest was left the mill, the second, a donkey that took flour to market, but to Robin, the youngest, a shy bullied boy, was left only Puss, whose wretched job was to keep rats from the stored grain."
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on January 23, 2012, 11:06:52 am
I saw two rather interesting old relic horror movies on Turner Classics last night. The first was Murders in the Rue Morgue, with Bela Lugosi, and the second was The Black Cat, with Lugosi and Boris Karloff.

They both seem so dated. ...

What interested me most about Murders in the Rue Morgue was thinking I recognized one of the other actors, though he was a very young man at the time. I was correct: It was Leon Ames, best known to me as Judy Garland's father in Meet Me in St. Louis. He was billed here under his birth name, Leon Waycoff. What interested me most about The Black Cat was noticing that at the time, Boris Karloff was billed only as "Karloff." Apparently at that time he was so well known that he could go by one name. Like Madonna. ... Or Cher. ...  ;D

The Black Cat was set in contemporary times and had really cool Art Deco sets.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on January 29, 2012, 09:55:37 pm
I saw "The Iron Lady" today and can highly recommend it.

Forget about the stupid trailer--I hate how they edit those things.  It's a much more intimate portrait, not your typical biopic.  The filmmakers use some very interesting techniques to portray the lady, rather than simply rely on the usual chronological stuff. 

Meryl Streep continues to prove that she can do anything. 
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: brianr on January 30, 2012, 01:54:10 pm
It is worth seeing because of Meryl Streep. Other than her fine performance I found the movie rather disappointing.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on February 27, 2012, 01:38:20 am
Hurrah for Meryl winning her third Oscar!  Now I have to get out there and see "The Iron Lady."  8)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on February 27, 2012, 01:52:05 am
Hurrah for Meryl winning her third Oscar!  Now I have to get out there and see "The Iron Lady."  8)

I wouldn't rush if I were you, she's the only good thing in it.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on March 11, 2012, 03:27:02 pm
Oooh, I can't wait for this one!

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/mariachi-gringo-01.jpg)

Tom Gustafson's musical drama beat out the favorites in a surprising awards ceremony outcome at the annual film festival.

GUADALAJARA, Mexico -- Tom Gustafson's musical drama Mariachi Gringo pulled off a big upset on Saturday at the Guadalajara Film Festival, winning best Mexican picture here in the nation's mariachi capital.
Many festival goers saw Rodrigo Pla's La Demora (The Delay) and Gabriel Marino's feature debut Un Mundo Secreto (A Secret World), both of which participated at the recent Berlin Film Festival, as favorites going in to Saturday's awards ceremony.
But Mariachi Gringo, the sophomore film of New York-based director Gustafson (Were the World Mine), won not only best Mexican feature but also best actress for Martha Higareda. The story revolves around a gringo who moves to Guadalajara to learn how to play mariachi music. The film has no sales agent nor distribution deals in place.
[...]

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/mariachi-gringo-guadalajara-film-festival-winners-298298

[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FjXdxj4_b3I[/youtube]
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on March 11, 2012, 11:03:33 pm
Thanks, Gil.  I'm a big Were the World Mine fan--saw it at the Provincetown film festival in 2008, and Gustafson was there to introduce it. 

So, I just watched the clip, and said to myself, That's Jimmy Olsen from Smallville.  Wrong.  That's his twin!  Shawn Ashmore is in Mariachi Gringo and his twin Aaron Ashmore was Jimmy Olsen.  Freaky!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on March 21, 2012, 10:52:03 pm
Thanks, Gil.  I'm a big Were the World Mine fan--saw it at the Provincetown film festival in 2008, and Gustafson was there to introduce it. 

So, I just watched the clip, and said to myself, That's Jimmy Olsen from Smallville.  Wrong.  That's his twin!  Shawn Ashmore is in Mariachi Gringo and his twin Aaron Ashmore was Jimmy Olsen.  Freaky!

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/People/ashmore2.jpg)

I always confuse those two cuties.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ifyoucantfixit on March 28, 2012, 05:47:12 pm
   This is the first time I have heard about that movie.  I am very intrigued.  It sounds good.

   That is a funny line, about the children and the navel.  I think I will try and rent that.


  Thanks for the tip Jeff.  Oh by the way, is it as long as GWTW?  That movie takes some time commitment. 
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on March 28, 2012, 06:56:02 pm
  Thanks for the tip Jeff.  Oh by the way, is it as long as GWTW?  That movie takes some time commitment. 

Heavens, it's been so long since I posted on this thread I had to go back to see if I could figure out which movie. Il Gattopardo? It's been a while now since I saw it, but I think I remember that it was a full-evening movie.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on April 24, 2012, 08:13:01 pm
I've always been a secret fan of Jean-Claude Van Damme but I never knew he had a son who is also an actor.  And he's absolutely adorable!  Meet Kristopher van Varenberg:

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/People/Kristopher_Van_Varenberg-03.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on April 24, 2012, 09:22:31 pm
(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/Cabin_In_The_Woods-02.jpg)

Last weekend I saw THE CABIN THE WOODS and really enjoyed it!  Divulging anything would be cruel so all i can say is there is a scene with a shirtless (pre-Thor) Chris Hemsworth (natch).
I was a bit worried because the film was shelved for a couple years.  Well, it's a wonderfully entertaining film, kind of like SCREAM, but even better.  It scores a healthy 91% at Rotten Tomatoes.  It's pretty damn violent and very bloody and gory but it's clever, scary and funny. Loved it!

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Mandy21 on April 24, 2012, 10:08:19 pm
I've always been a secret fan of Jean-Claude Van Damme but I never knew he had a son who is also an actor. 

Have you seen his autobiographical DVD, which is called JCVD?  I borrowed it from library, but you might find it on Netflix or the like.  It was surprisingly good and insightful.  He is quite a man, not just some dumb pile of muscles.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on April 24, 2012, 10:35:09 pm
Have you seen his autobiographical DVD, which is called JCVD?  I borrowed it from library, but you might find it on Netflix or the like.  It was surprisingly good and insightful.  He is quite a man, not just some dumb pile of muscles.

Not that there's anything wrong with that.  ;)  ;D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on April 24, 2012, 10:48:33 pm
Have you seen his autobiographical DVD, which is called JCVD?  I borrowed it from library, but you might find it on Netflix or the like.  It was surprisingly good and insightful.  He is quite a man, not just some dumb pile of muscles.

Are you kidding?  I saw JCVD on the big screen, I was first in line.  I don't think it was that autobiographical though, lol!  He did prove that he could really act and we all expected a big comeback but nothing really followed it for some reason.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Aloysius J. Gleek on April 25, 2012, 03:21:50 am



(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/People/ashmore2.jpg)
I always confuse those two cuties.



They are just as confused!
(http://scifimafia.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/fringe-shawn-ashmore-aaron-ashmore-WIDE.jpg)
(http://www.andpop.com/images/mmvas2006/aaron_ashmore_and_brother_shawn_ashmore.jpg)




And Just Because.
(http://www.youngmalecelebs.net/galleries/sashmore/Ashmore063.jpg)


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on April 27, 2012, 11:40:12 pm
I am so looking forward to PROMETHEUS  and Logan Marshall-Green is definitely a major incentive:

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/People/Logan-Marshall-Green-025-2.jpg)

He's like Tom Hardy's more troubled brother.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Andrew on April 28, 2012, 01:03:49 am
I just came away from a really wonderful quiet drama, In the Family.  It was showing for (Shame!) two days only here at an MIT film festival, tomorrow is the last night scheduled in the Boston area for the foreseeable future.  Fortunately it looks as if it is about to have at least a short run in several cities starting this weekend or next week.  And I really hope the Kendall Square or at least the gay film festival pick it up.  It was at MIT in part because the the director/lead is an alumnus.

http://inthefamilythemovie.com/ (http://inthefamilythemovie.com/)

This is a film for the people who did not think Brokeback Mountain was too long, slow and uneventful.  The actual duration was two and three quarters hours and yet it  brought me to its pace such that my reaction was shock that it was finishing.  Although the ending was completely satisfying.

Patrick Wang was really outstanding in the lead role and Sebastian Brodziak as his and his partner's son was also terrific.  I want to find out whether Wang says anywhere that he appreciates Ang Lee.

http://movies.nytimes.com/2011/11/04/movies/in-the-family-from-patrick-wang-review.html (http://movies.nytimes.com/2011/11/04/movies/in-the-family-from-patrick-wang-review.html)

"REMARKABLY FRESH. TOPICAL AND TIMELESS." - THE NEW YORK TIMES

"POWERFUL. A REMARKABLE DEBUT." - VARIETY

"ASTOUNDING. A MUST SEE!" -FILMMAKER MAGAZINE



Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on April 28, 2012, 12:56:58 pm
I saw Hunger Games before I left for Italy.

I liked the premise (Sorta tone-downed Battle Royale) and the books were extremely popular.  I haven't read them yet. 

I give it 7 out of 10 in that the premise is good, acting pretty solid by supporting cast, though the main characters aren't given much acting to do as reacting.

I enjoyed it and it was disturbing.  I am told the books are even more disturbing.

Sequels are set to start filming this summer.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on June 02, 2012, 01:06:47 am
MIB3

I give a 6/10

Light, fun, fluffy, cotton candy movie.  Easily digested and forgotten about.  Josh Brolin owns his "young Tommy Lee" role.  You forget it's not Tommy Lee after a while.

The Avengers
I give 8/10
Excellent comic book movie.  Each character is given a turn at showcasing their talents and who they are as a person.  Captain America is my childhood favorite and he's especially poignant in this.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on June 08, 2012, 08:33:27 pm
Salmon Fishing in Yemen
Ewan McGregor and Emily Blunt
7.5 out of 10 for sheer sweetness
Nothing unexpected happens, it is exactly what you think it is, predictable but very charming.

On a Chris Evans kick, I rented:

Sunshine
9 out of 10
This is a very haunting movie.  Tension filled, poignant and tragic.  Danny Boyle is the director.  Excellent, recommend viewing.

Push
6.5 out of 10
I love the Hong Kong location of this movie, the fact that the main character actually does speak some Cantonese in the movie and many of the supporting characters are international.  I also love the premise.  The world it exists in is very interesting and I also very much like how




SPOILER FOLLOWS








the main character doesn't suddenly realize his potential and becomes a superhero and saves the day.  He remains very human, very vulnerable, with a few breakthroughs from time to time, but triumphs by thinking his way through their predicament.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on June 08, 2012, 08:48:09 pm
MIB3

I give a 6/10

Light, fun, fluffy, cotton candy movie.  Easily digested and forgotten about.  Josh Brolin owns his "young Tommy Lee" role.  You forget it's not Tommy Lee after a while.

The Avengers
I give 8/10
Excellent comic book movie.  Each character is given a turn at showcasing their talents and who they are as a person.  Captain America is my childhood favorite and he's especially poignant in this.

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/thor-01-1.jpg)

My childhood favourite was THOR and he was pretty good in the film.  He had good lines and was the butt of some good jokes.  I loved it when he tried to defend Loki saying "After all he IS my brother" and someone said "He killed 90 people in half an hour!", "He was adopted."  :D

I would go to PROMETHEUS and COSMOPOLIS this weekend but Euro cup 2012 just started!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on June 09, 2012, 01:22:23 am
(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/thor-01-1.jpg)

My childhood favourite was THOR and he was pretty good in the film.  He had good lines and was the butt of some good jokes.  I loved it when he tried to defend Loki saying "After all he IS my brother" and someone said "He killed 90 people in half an hour!", "He was adopted."  :D

 :laugh: :laugh:

That was the funniest line in the movie IMO.  He seems to cut Loki loose pretty fast in that exchange, but the entire movie is him trying to reach his [adopted] brother.  He wants to save him, even from himself.  It's very sweet.

Yeah, the Cap, he's my favorite.  I'm not sure but I'm think it was the shield I thought was so neat as a kid and I still think is pretty cool.

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v728/Jovieve/CaptainAmerica4.jpg)

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v728/Jovieve/captain-america-shield-throw.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: brianr on June 09, 2012, 01:31:53 am
My movie group went to see Salmon Fishing in the Yemen and I was a bit hesitant after seeing a promo on TV  but then I thoroughly enjoyed it. I gave it 8. Then I went by myself to see The Five year Engagement because I like Emily Blunt and could not wait for it to finish. I gave it 5.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on June 29, 2012, 04:14:44 pm
Katie Holmes has decided not to renew her 5 year contract with Tom Cruise...

http://www.tmz.com/2012/06/29/tom-cruise-katie-holmes-divorce/
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on June 30, 2012, 12:06:46 pm
Kathie Holmes has decided not to renew her 5 year contract with Tom Cruise...

http://www.tmz.com/2012/06/29/tom-cruise-katie-holmes-divorce/

I've come to see this situation, and to some extent Tom Cruise's life as a whole, as kind of sad. If a world-famous billionaire can be considered sad.

But let's assume he's gay. Despite all of his advantages and power, he is as trapped, in a way, as Ennis: partly by his own internal reservations about what the people on the pavement will think, partly by what the people on the pavement (waiting in line at the box office) may actually think.


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on June 30, 2012, 01:07:03 pm
I've come to see this situation, and to some extent Tom Cruise's life as a whole, as kind of sad. If a world-famous billionaire can be considered sad.

But let's assume he's gay. Despite all of his advantages and power, he is as trapped, in a way, as Ennis: partly by his own internal reservations about what the people on the pavement will think, partly by what the people on the pavement (waiting in line at the box office) may actually think.

The guy has made his fortune already though.  So unless he's really insecure and gets his props from what other people think - which is tragic in itself - he has other things that keep him in denial.

I'd say Scientology.

I think they have a 'gay is a choice' attitude, don't they?

I didn't know there were rumors about John Travolta either and now guys are starting to come out of the woodwork with accusations against him.  He's also a Scientologist.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on June 30, 2012, 01:16:30 pm
He has other things that keep him in denial.

I'd say Scientology.

I think they have a 'gay is a choice' attitude, don't they?

I was going to ask that question, too. Sticks in my mind for some reason that Scientology is anti-gay.

Quote
I didn't know there were rumors about John Travolta either and now guys are starting to come out of the woodwork with accusations against him.  He's also a Scientologist.

I can't recall knowing about rumore about Travolta, either, but if the accusations are true, it's interesting to consider the Scientology connection.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on June 30, 2012, 03:33:55 pm
I was going to ask that question, too. Sticks in my mind for some reason that Scientology is anti-gay.

I can't recall knowing about rumore about Travolta, either, but if the accusations are true, it's interesting to consider the Scientology connection.

I've heard the rumors about both for years, and always thought it an odd coincidence that they're also the two most famous faces of Scientology, and both (potentially) closeted.

I'm not sure what Scientology's stand is on sexual orientation, but you can certainly think of other reasons why Cruise and Travolta would not want to come out. Either, of course, has all the money he'll ever need (and I don't recall seeing Travolta in anything for a while, so maybe he's decided the same), but Cruise is obviously still very interested in maintaining and building his career. And his particular star image is one that still, unfortunately, risks being damaged if he comes out. Thanks to all the other stars who've come out already, I think we're in transition on this, but we're not quite there yet for a star of Cruise's type.



Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on June 30, 2012, 05:00:41 pm
I saw John Travolta in a recent movie called "From PAris with Love" with Jon Rhys-Meyers. It was a shoot-em-up about terrorists in Paris, and it was surprisingly good!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Mandy21 on June 30, 2012, 05:34:15 pm
I saw John Travolta in a recent movie called "From PAris with Love" with Jon Rhys-Meyers. It was a shoot-em-up about terrorists in Paris, and it was surprisingly good!

I LOVED Travolta in that movie, Lee.  I've seen it six times so far.  Funny thing is, I went to see it at the theater because I'm a Rhys-Meyers' fan; yet, he was almost invisible compared to Travolta's badassed badass role.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on July 01, 2012, 02:14:00 am
And I just saw Travolta in the trailer for Oliver Stone's new movie "Savages" so the guy is still working...
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ifyoucantfixit on July 01, 2012, 07:32:22 pm


So far, it looks like his Vinnie Barbarino charisma is still holding on.  I wonder if this is swept under the rug, he will keep on doing the same
thing he has always done, and using his sweet, hail fellow well met attitude to get around all his until now hidden faults. 
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: ifyoucantfixit on July 01, 2012, 07:35:58 pm
Katie Holmes has decided not to renew her 5 year contract with Tom Cruise...

http://www.tmz.com/2012/06/29/tom-cruise-katie-holmes-divorce/


                             WELL SAID... love it..


Another great quote I found yesterday may be more of an insider for Glamberts.  But I thought it was hilarious....
      One of Adams fans said, during the concert.  "Hope the adrenaline doesn't get to him so much this time,  til he trips, does the
ninja roll, pops up, and kisses Brian."
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on August 21, 2012, 10:34:07 pm
(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/Metamorphosis-01.jpg)

This looks interesting.  A film adaptation of Franz Kafka's Metamorphosis.

[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pEC1JwigcsQ[/youtube]

http://www.metamorphosisthemovie.com/
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on August 21, 2012, 10:56:33 pm
This looks interesting.  A film adaptation of Franz Kafka's Metamorphosis.

[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pEC1JwigcsQ[/youtube]

http://www.metamorphosisthemovie.com/

Heh, I'd scream, too!  ;D

Love this cartoon:

(http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h269/merylmarie/Catchall/Kafkatwitter.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on August 22, 2012, 12:17:34 am
Love the cartoon  :laugh: ^^

I've been going through the program of Montreal's Festival des film du monde, here's a another interesting find, The Parade, a gay-themed film from wait for it, Serbia(!).  It was apparently a surprise hit there:

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/Parada-01.jpg)

Here's a scathing review by Jay Weissberg:

"Billed as the first pan-Yugoslav feature (minus Bosnia) since the country's break-up, "The Parade" sees itself as a genial satire, but Srdjan Dragojevic's tired and tiresome caricatures are just embarrassing. Using formulaic traits -- effeminate gay men, over-macho nationalists -- to convince auds to confront their homophobia might work for anyone still thinking Paul Lynde is fresh, but viewers who've watched gay-themed pics mature since the 1970s will cringe at this naively well-meaning but hopelessly dated farce. Local admissions have been strong, but more discriminating offshore queer showcases should avoid.
Dragojevic has made winning broad comedies before, but "Parade" recycles every cartoonish stereotype without finding anything real underneath. Bridal designer Mirko (Goran Jevtic) and his gay-rights colleagues in Belgrade are terrorized by gay-bashing thugs and abandoned by the cops. Partner Radmilo (Milosh Samolov), a vet, convinces Serb nationalist Lemon (Nikola Kojo) to offer protection in exchange for a tasteless wedding bash with gf Pearl (Hristina Popovic). Lemon calls in favors from former enemies in other ex-Yugoslav countries and confronts his own prejudices. If the pic helps combat Yugo homophobia then it's worthwhile, but this is one comedy best left at home.

http://www.variety.com/review/VE1117947094/

Mark Adams of Screen Daily is more forgiving:

"A rude and raunchy challenge to Balkan homophobia, The Parade (Parada) may be the most un-PC of films around, but it smartly celebrates those very un-PC qualities as it turns transgression into comedy, detailing the very real battlefield between machismo and gay pride.Written and directed by Srđjan Dragojevic, The Parade has proved to be a surprise success in the Balkans, and Serbia in particular where it has achieved more than 500,000 admissions. And this in a country where 5,000 police had to guard the 1,000 people who made up the 2010 Pride march. The film may intrigue buyers aware of its comedy success, though whether gay and lesbian festivals will embrace it remains to be seen.

It is broad comedy fare that revels in its stereotyping and takes no prisoners with its deliberately scattershot approach. Srđjan Dragojevic directs with a good deal of intelligence, and is very much aware that his unsubtle characters offer an entertaining look at the culture clash between brutal Balkan machismo and a gay community that suffers violent attacks with little support or assistance from the authorities.

The film sets out its position right from the start. It opens with a glossary of slang terms – ‘Shiptar’ (derogatory term for Kosovar Albanians), ‘Chetnik’ (for Serbs), ‘Ustasha’ (for Croats) and ‘Balija’ (for Bosnians) – that the various factions in the Yugoslavian war used about each other…but ends pointing out that the term ‘Peder’ is the one that unites the factions when they refer to homosexuals.

The two worlds come together when Lemon (Kojo), an ex-criminal and war veteran has to rush his pet pit-bull terrier to the vet after it is the victim of a drive-by shooting. The dog is saved by vet Mirko (Jetvic), who is appalled by Lemon’s bombastic behavior. Mirko is the partner of Radmillo (Samolov), who runs an agency that organises weddings and has been approached by Lemon’s fiancée Pearl (Popović) to organise her wedding to Lemon.

Gay activist Radmillo, who is planning Belgrade’s Pride march, balks about the thought of organising the event but eventually agrees…on the condition that Lemon, who runs a judo gym and security company, agrees to provide security for the march. Lemon reluctantly agrees, but when his staff all refuse to protect the march he is forced recruit his old enemies from his war-time days, and heads off with Mirko (in his bright pink mini) in accompaniment.

They manage to sign up Croat Niko (Navojec); Bosnian Muslim Halil (Aćimovic) and Kosovo Albanian Azem (Mihailovski) and they return to Belgrade to face their greatest challenge…protecting the march for marauding homophobic skinheads.

The characters are all broadly drawn, though the wonderfully stoney faced Nikola Kojo is the rock that holds the film together, with Hristina Popović also amusing as the determined Pearl…her finest moment comes when she slips on a flack-jacket to help Lemon and his men fight off the skinheads – but only if it will take an hour as she has parked her car at a meter."

http://www.screendaily.com/reviews/the-latest/the-parade/5037646.article


Director's Statement

"In the late 1970s, a small park just below Hotel Moskva in downtown Belgrade was the gathering place for some twenty of us, punk rock fans. The same park was the gathering place for homosexuals, too. Not far from us, these neatly dressed family men with impeccable socialistic biographies were looking for partners. Besides sharing the same location, we had just one more thing in common - both groups were repeated bashing targets for healthy looking, and "healthy" thinking young men. They couldn't stand the sight of us, with our safety pins, dyed hair and ragged clothes, as well as the other group, but only because of their different sexual orientation.

Over the following decades, Belgrade has seen much "weirder" looks than our silly clothing style that was just a mere revolt against the Socialist life. No-one gets bashed anymore because of the clothes they wear or the music that they listen to. But even today, in Serbia 2011, these "healthy" looking young men beat up men and women of a different sexual orientation not only in parks but also on the streets of Belgrade.

After the fall of the Milošević's regime, we thought that sexual minorities would finally gain their rights and dignity. In 2001, there was even an attempt to organize the first Pride Parade in the history of Serbia. The attempt ended in bloodshed - some thirty gay activists were brutally beaten up by football hooligans and neo-Nazis while the police just stood by doing nothing to stop this massacre. Images of this savage beating circled the globe and shattered the hope for young Serbian democracy, and the European Union revoked €50 million of financial help for Serbia. A decade later, nothing has improved in this regard.

On the contrary – with a "little help" from Orthodox church, a wide specter of quasi-democrat politicians in power and mass desperation and frustration induced by wild and brutal social-economic transition from the socialist-communist self-management model to capitalist free market economy, things have never been worse on the human rights front – especially LGBT rights. For me, three-year process to finish this film was much more than regular film making. Faced with threats from nationalist and neo-nazi organizations, shooting almost secretly, with constant lack of money, I have always had in mind that making Parada is my citizen's duty.

Now, when the film is done, I believe even more that Serbia badly needs this story in 2011, just as I believed, more than a decade ago, that my country needed a film that would speak about the war and guilt in a different voice from the official line. The result was Pretty Village, Pretty Flame and two years later The Wounds, with a movie theater audience of more than 1.5 million people overall. These two films were the first to spark the debate about the war and the responsibility for violent conflicts in ex-Yugoslavia.

I strongly believe that Parada will have a similar effect on the Serbian nation. They will scream, they will shout but – they’re going to watch it. And when they watch it – maybe they will think and reconsider their prejudices and stereotypes toward those whose only guilt is that they're different. I was shooting the ending of Parada during last year's pride in Belgrade, the first "successful" Pride in Serbia's history. The only success was that participants stayed alive. Six and a half thousand policemen were protecting less than thousand gay activists & friends against seven thousand hooligans and neo-nazis. The result of the pride was 300 wounded policeman and hooligans and demolition of Belgrade's downtown. I strongly believe that `The Parade` will help so we can enjoy happy and joyfull Pride in Belgrade in following years. Sometimes, Art can work in that way..."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Parade_(film)

The trailer.  unfortunately it's not sub-titled:

[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g3qv-OkIo6s[/youtube]

Eye candy alert.  Serbian singer and heartthrob Relja Popovic aka Drema plays the main character's homophobic skinhead son:

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/People/relja-popovic-02.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on August 22, 2012, 01:01:45 am
I didn't know Eytan Fox made a sequel to Yossi & Jagger!

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/yossi-01.jpg)

The ridiculously handsome Oz zehavi plays Yossi's new love interest ten years after Jagger's death.  I hope this film doesn't end up being a tear jerker.

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/People/oz-rehavi-02.jpg)

[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LUOBN_uahrI[/youtube]
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on October 03, 2012, 11:55:14 pm
Maggie Gyllenhaal, how could you?!!

School Reform's Propaganda Flick

The guys behind "Won't Back Down" stand to profit from education privatization. No wonder the movie hates on teachers unions
BY ALEXANDER ZAITCHIK

The first thing to know about Friday’s opening of the school-choice drama “Won’t Back Down” is that the film’s production company specializes in children’s fantasy fare such as the “Tooth Fairy” and “Chronicles of Narnia” series. The second thing is that this company, Walden Media, is linked at the highest levels to the real-world adult alliance of corporate and far-right ideological interest groups that constitutes the so-called education reform movement, more accurately described as the education privatization movement. The third thing, and the one most likely to be passed over in the debate surrounding “Won’t Back Down” (reviewed here, and not kindly, by Salon’s own Andrew O’Hehir), is that Walden Media is itself an educational content company with a commercial interest in expanding private-sector access to American K-12 education, or what Rupert Murdoch, Walden’s distribution partner on “Won’t Back Down,” lip-lickingly calls “a $50 billion sector in the U.S. alone that is waiting desperately to be transformed.”

http://www.salon.com/2012/09/27/the_corporate_education_agenda_behind_wont_back_down/

Lee Camp's take:

[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8TqnchgOucE[/youtube]
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on October 05, 2012, 09:46:19 am
Maggie Gyllenhaal, how could you?!!

I've wondered the same thing.


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on October 05, 2012, 10:47:03 am
I've wondered the same thing.

She's got two kids. Maybe she needs the money.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on October 05, 2012, 04:26:14 pm
She's got two kids. Maybe she needs the money.

Depends on your definition of "needs." She and her husband make in the millions when they work. She comes from an affluent family.

I have two kids, no husband and work part time at a newspaper. Would I do anything that would increase my income, regardless of how morally questionable? No.

I guess we all have our price, but I'd be surprised if she were financially desperate. I tend to suspect she just didn't think the politics through, or care about them as much as we would have thought.


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on October 05, 2012, 09:49:37 pm
Depends on your definition of "needs." She and her husband make in the millions when they work. She comes from an affluent family.

I have two kids, no husband and work part time at a newspaper. Would I do anything that would increase my income, regardless of how morally questionable? No.

I guess we all have our price, but I'd be surprised if she were financially desperate. I tend to suspect she just didn't think the politics through, or care about them as much as we would have thought.

Well, "when they work" is the key phrase there, I think.

Maybe she just thought it was a good part.

Accusing her of immorality for taking a role in this movie seems a bit harsh, don't you think?
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on October 05, 2012, 11:21:47 pm
Well, "when they work" is the key phrase there, I think.

Maybe she just thought it was a good part.

Accusing her of immorality for taking a role in this movie seems a bit harsh, don't you think?

It is harsh but she should choose her roles more carefully. Especially, considering that she is unionized herself.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on October 09, 2012, 10:32:10 am
Well, "when they work" is the key phrase there, I think.

Sure. And they both seem to work frequently enough that their millions should tide them over from one project to the next without their having to desperately take any old crap role, or morally questionable role, just to get by.

Quote
Maybe she just thought it was a good part.

Well, I assume she did. I'm not saying she took it because she secretly subscribes to the movie's right-wing agenda.

The character is described as (and can be seen in trailers as) a feisty, working-class single mother, which seems right up her alley. Maybe she didn't look much past that.

Quote
Accusing her of immorality for taking a role in this movie seems a bit harsh, don't you think?

I haven't seen the movie, only criticisms by those who have, so I can only go by those. But no, I don't think it's harsh to expect people to consider the moral and social consequences of their career decisions, especially if they have the luxury of choice.

Even Maggie herself seems to agree:

http://observer.com/2012/09/films-stars-dont-back-down-from-films-politics/ (http://observer.com/2012/09/films-stars-dont-back-down-from-films-politics/)

Quote
The film’s stars, wearing grave political faces in addition to red carpet gowns, were ardent about education reform but wary of appearing anti-union. Ms. Gyllenhaal said that she came from “the most progressive left. I wouldn’t be allowed to go home for Thanksgiving if I made an anti-union movie.”


So see? I'm not even as harsh as the Gyllenhaals -- I'd still serve her Thanksgiving dinner!  :)  But as I passed the mashed potatoes, I'd ask her what the hell she was thinking when she took that role.

Here are excerpts from a review on Salon (by a writer who, BTW, homeschools):

http://www.salon.com/2012/09/26/wont_back_down_why_do_teachers_unions_hate_america/ (http://www.salon.com/2012/09/26/wont_back_down_why_do_teachers_unions_hate_america/)

Quote
Wednesday, Sep 26, 2012 06:45 AM CDT
“Won’t Back Down”: Why do teachers’ unions hate America?
"Won't Back Down" is an offensive, lame, union-bashing drama, which somehow stars Viola Davis and Maggie Gyllenhaal
By Andrew O'Hehir


So teachers’ unions don’t care about kids. Oh, and luck is a foxy lady. This is what I took away from the inept and bizarre “Won’t Back Down,” a set of right-wing anti-union talking points disguised (with very limited success) as a mainstream motion-picture-type product. Someone needs to launch an investigation into what combination of crimes, dares, alcoholic binges and lapses in judgment got Viola Davis and Maggie Gyllenhaal into this movie. Neither of them seems likely to sympathize with its thinly veiled labor-bashing agenda and, way more to the point, I thought they had better taste. Maybe it was that actor-y thing where they saw potential in their characters – a feisty, working-class single mom for Gyllenhaal, a sober middle-class schoolteacher for Davis – liked the idea of working together and didn’t think too much about the big picture.

Perhaps that was a mistake, because the big picture is that the movie is unbelievable crap ...


... As presented in this script (written by Barnz and Brin Hill), the Pittsburgh teachers’ union has no goal beyond protecting the status quo at all costs, and no interest whatever – no altruistic interest, no self-interest and no public-relations interest — in improving the quality of public education. Most people still understand, I believe, that teachers work extremely hard for little pay and low social status in a thankless, no-win situation. But this is one of those areas where conservatives have been extremely successful in dividing the working class, which is precisely the agenda in “Won’t Back Down.” Breeding hostility to unions in themselves, and occasionally insinuating that unionized teachers are a protected caste of incompetents who get three damn months off every single year, has been an effective tactic in what we might call postmodern Republican populism, especially in recent battles over public employee contracts in Wisconsin and elsewhere. It works something like this: 1) Turn the resentment and frustration of people like Jamie – people with crappy service-sector jobs and few benefits, whose kids are stuck in failing schools – against the declining group of public employees who still have a decent deal. 2) Strip away job security and collective bargaining; hand out beer and ukuleles instead. 3) La la la la, tax cuts, tax cuts, I can’t hear you!



 
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on October 09, 2012, 11:04:18 am
Actually, when it comes to teachers' unions, I'm inclined to agree with the Right on the problem. I just disagree with the Right on the solution. But this isn't the place to discuss that.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on October 09, 2012, 09:18:31 pm
Actually, when it comes to teachers' unions, I'm inclined to agree with the Right on the problem. I just disagree with the Right on the solution. But this isn't the place to discuss that.

I'm more or less with you there. Unions can sometimes benefit bad teachers at the expense of good ones. But the fact is, there are plenty of talented and dedicated teachers, and unlike some people like to portray it, it's not a cushy job. From what I've read and seen in the trailer -- and again, I have to caution that I haven't seen the movie -- the movie portrays teachers unfairly.

Plus, I'm sorry, but I was turned off by Maggie's over-the-top "I'll lift a car for my kid" spunkiness. Watching it, I felt like Lou Grant ("Kid, you've got spunk. I hate spunk!").

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on October 09, 2012, 09:26:16 pm
There are plenty of talented and dedicated teachers, and unlike some people like to portray it, it's not a cushy job.

Agreed, hunnerd percent.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on October 30, 2012, 01:11:02 am
(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/Pickpocket-MartinLasalle-01.jpg)

I caught the last 30 minutes of Robert Bresson's PICKPOCKET (1959) and that's all I needed to rate the film a 10!  I'm ashamed to say I have never this or any other of his films.  The bright side is that I a lot amazing viewing ahead.  (It helped that I fell in love with the lead "model" (Bresson's word) Martin Lasalle.  There is a pickpocketing scene near the end that is positively erotic.  The pickpocket's hand slowly moves up the jacket lapel of a mark standing behind him, just barely touching it, making its way to the inside pocket, had me breathing heavy.  I couldn't believe it. Wow!

James Kendrick's review:
In a 1960 interview on the French television program Cinépanorama, writer/director Robert Bresson openly stated, “I’d rather people feel a film before understanding it.” This is a crucial sentiment and one that should be kept in mind when approaching Bresson’s work, which is often discussed in haughty academic terms as “austere,” “difficult,” and “minimalist.”
Yet, the fact that Bresson’s films tend to be intimate character studies of isolated human beings struggling with the world around them suggests that he is aiming primarily at the viewer’s emotions. He wants you to feel what it is like to be a young priest struggling in a rigid, isolated community in his first masterpiece Diary of a Country Priest (1954), and in Pickpocket, which many argue as the pinnacle of his art, he wants you to experience the life of a lonely thief whose self-imposed isolation and criminality are one in the same.

Pickpocket is certainly one of Bresson’s most readily accessible films, at least at the narrative level, because it takes the basic plot structure of a crime thriller and intertwines it with a redemptive love story. Martin La Salle plays Michel, a young Parisian who has turned to thievery as a means of survival. At first operating completely on his own, he later teams up with two other professional thieves, working complex sleight-of-hand jobs in which they nimbly pilfer wallets, cash, watches, and the contents of purses all over the city.

It is a profitable life of crime, and one that brings a kind of sly pleasure to Michel; it’s not for nothing that the scenes of thievery have been described by critics in sexual terms, with the final lifting of the wallet standing in as a kind of orgasm. Yet, it is ultimately an empty life, one that pays, but doesn’t fulfill. Michel’s real redemption lies with Jeanne (Marika Green), a young woman who lives next door to Michel’s dying mother. The love-as-redemption trope is certainly an old and arguably overused one, but Bresson breathes new life into it by setting it in a bleak, existential realm that turns love into the only true salvation. Bresson heightens the film’s prison ending into a moment of genuine transcendence; Michel’s body may be imprisoned, but his spirit is finally let free.

Pickpocket is arguably the film in which Bresson perfected his singular style, which at the time was so unusual that he felt the need to put a disclaimer at the beginning the film explaining it. Bresson eschewed traditional acting and referred to his actors as “models.” He did not want them to emote or express anything directly, but instead just go through the physical motions, thus becoming blank slates onto which the audience could project their own meanings. It is an amazingly effective approach that works only because it’s not as extreme as it sounds; even though the actors are certainly passive, they never come across as wooden or false. Perhaps this is just because the film invites so much projection from the viewer, but it may also be because the very nature of the material infuses itself into the actors’ words and actions, giving them a sense of life despite the lack of conventional “acting.”

Bresson also eschewed psychological explanations. Although there is an explanatory voice-over narration, we never know much about Michel’s past or why he turned to pickpocketing or even why he does certain things in the film itself. Like the flat acting style, Bresson wants us to fill in the gaps, to create our own meaning. In a way, this makes Pickpocket a highly personal film, not just for Bresson, but for each individual who sees it. Bresson’s style is certainly challenging and perhaps not even for all tastes, but for those who are willing to give themselves to it, it can be an immensely rewarding experience, as close to transcendental as the cinema could be.

http://www.qnetwork.com/index.php?page=review&id=1572
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on October 31, 2012, 01:02:38 pm
Wow, those eyes!  Those lips!  Those nose! Thanks, Gil, for the recommendation.

Meanwhile, tonight, for Halloween, it's time for Donnie Darko and The Rocky Horror Picture Show!

(http://www.deviantart.com/download/28351892/Donnie_Darko_Wallpaper_by_Zenovia.jpg)

(http://www.beachtheatre.com/images/Rocky%20Horror%20Picture%20Show.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Penthesilea on October 31, 2012, 01:09:43 pm
Meanwhile, tonight, for Halloween, it's time for Donnie Darko and The Rocky Horror Picture Show!


Good choices!
Chez nous, it'll be MIB III. Aliens are halloween-ish, no?
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on October 31, 2012, 11:21:41 pm
My Halloween viewing:

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/Burnt-Offerings-Chauffeur-01.jpg)

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/Sutherland_scream_Invasion_Of_The_Body_Snatchers-01.jpg)

And the end of:
(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/the-shining-shelly-duvall-01.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on October 31, 2012, 11:56:49 pm
Here's an 12 minute clip of PICKPOCKET. Just because:

[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wd77TaeSjSU[/youtube]
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on November 03, 2012, 11:40:02 am
Remember the old discussion that the BBM poster was modeled after that of Titanic?  The similarity is even clearer when the BBM image is reversed!

(http://i.chzbgr.com/completestore/2009/6/7/128888615263111742.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on November 03, 2012, 12:02:31 pm
Remember the old discussion that the BBM poster was modeled after that of Titanic?  The similarity is even clearer when the BBM image is reversed!

(http://i.chzbgr.com/completestore/2009/6/7/128888615263111742.jpg)

True! The mountain in the background even parallels the prow in the foreground.

The differences are clearer here, too -- Jack's reserved distance vs. other Jack's actual snuggling; Ennis' downcast gaze vs. Rose's quiet but more confident expression.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Sason on November 03, 2012, 12:53:50 pm
Remember the old discussion that the BBM poster was modeled after that of Titanic?  The similarity is even clearer when the BBM image is reversed!

(http://i.chzbgr.com/completestore/2009/6/7/128888615263111742.jpg)

Sure is!

That's very interesting!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on November 03, 2012, 10:58:35 pm

Oh, good GOD, I just returned from "Diana Vreeland: The Eye Has to Travel." You simply MUST see it! You'll be mad about it! MAAAAAAADDDD about it!!!


(https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTaaP70ecNjLyIf92J4O5YfYb4WefkTwuAXqpA1GO8gEeiJQT4D8w)




Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Penthesilea on November 04, 2012, 06:37:04 am
Oh, good GOD, I just returned from "Diana Vreeland: The Eye Has to Travel." You simply MUST see it! You'll be mad about it! MAAAAAAADDDD about it!!!


Such emotional outbreak from you? Made me check it out on the spot. :laugh:
Normally not a movie that would peak my interest, but now I'm intrigued. If it played here, that is. From what I've found, which is absolutely nothing, zero, zilch, this movie will not be shown here at all. It simply doesn't exist in my part of the world. Maybe one day on DVD or youtube.....
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on November 04, 2012, 11:47:26 am
Such emotional outbreak from you? Made me check it out on the spot. :laugh:

 :laugh:

I'll have to confess -- I was joking. Sorry, that was an UScentric joke that even a lot of Americans wouldn't get. Anyway, that's how Diana Vreeland talked. All the time. About everything.

Quote
Normally not a movie that would peak my interest, but now I'm intrigued. If it played here, that is. From what I've found, which is absolutely nothing, zero, zilch, this movie will not be shown here at all. It simply doesn't exist in my part of the world. Maybe one day on DVD or youtube.....

However, I did like it a lot. It's possible it would appeal most to someone who grew up reading Vogue, or at least being conscious of that particular culture. As a kid who pored over fashion magazines at 12 and 13, I remember a lot of those photos, and the models and photographers and actors and so on, and the mood of the times.

That said, even if you'd never heard of her, you'd probably find it interesting as a character study. She really was a larger-than-life figure, with a vastly open mind and upbeat outlook and original vision and amazing ability to not give a damn what anybody else thinks.



Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Penthesilea on November 04, 2012, 04:45:23 pm
:laugh:

I'll have to confess -- I was joking. Sorry, that was an UScentric joke that even a lot of Americans wouldn't get. Anyway, that's how Diana Vreeland talked. All the time. About everything.


 :laugh:
I totally didn't get it. But that's alright, I can laugh about myself. :laugh:
I did wonder though, it was so unlike you. But of course, that explains it. :)

And I like your new avatar!



Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on November 04, 2012, 05:06:33 pm
And I like your new avatar!

Thanks! It's amazing what comes up when you google "serious crayons."

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on November 04, 2012, 05:10:34 pm
I like your new avatar!

Me, too. I have to confess that I found that face a little creepy.  :-\
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on November 04, 2012, 08:10:50 pm
Me, too. I have to confess that I found that face a little creepy.  :-\

I don't know if you could tell, but that face was made of crayons. Not drawn with crayons, but sculpted from full physical crayons in various shades. There's a lot of that genre on the "serious crayons" google images page.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on November 04, 2012, 08:42:03 pm
I don't know if you could tell, but that face was made of crayons. Not drawn with crayons, but sculpted from full physical crayons in various shades. There's a lot of that genre on the "serious crayons" google images page.

Sure enough! I remember you mentioning somewhere that the face was sculpted with crayons, but it still made me think of a scull, er sumpin'. Like I said, creepy. ...  :-\
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on November 09, 2012, 08:16:54 pm
(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/nicholas-hoult-warm-bodies-02.jpg)

How gorgeous is Nicholas Hoult, even as a zombie. I love that boy!

[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07s-cNFffDM[/youtube]
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on November 13, 2012, 12:07:57 am
(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/Pick_Pocket-03.jpg)

Today, I received my copy of the Criterion Pickpocket DVD that I ordered about a week ago from amazon.  I had watched the whole film on youtube but the commentary and supplements included on the dvd were a joy to watch.  I still can't believe that I had never seen a Robert Bresson film.  He is considered the father of the French New Wave to Jean Cocteau's mother of the French New Wave.  I have seen a couple of Cocteau's films, La belle et la bête and Orphée on TV when I was too young to really appreciate them but old enough to realize that what I was watching was something special, but for some reason I never came upon a Bresson film.  Anyway, all that to say that Pickpocket is now on my top ten all-time favourite films. The fact that the film is so damn homoerotic is definitely a factor, lol!


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on November 13, 2012, 12:43:35 am
Formidable!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: brianr on November 13, 2012, 03:39:08 am

 He is considered the father of the French New Wave to Jean Cocteau's mother of the French New Wave.  
?????Jean Cocteau was male
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on November 13, 2012, 03:56:37 am
?????Jean Cocteau was male
Yes, but oh so gay, lol!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on November 13, 2012, 09:36:46 am
But what about Francois Truffault, Jean Renoir and Jean-Luc Godard?
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on November 13, 2012, 11:17:28 pm
But what about Francois Truffault, Jean Renoir and Jean-Luc Godard?

The last Godard film I saw was  Film Socialisme, and man, was it ever tough going!  I'm afraid I just couldn't get into it.  I suppose I should give it another chance but just the thought makes me anxious, lol!

[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FN27Hhfkf6k[/youtube]
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on January 01, 2013, 03:05:29 pm
(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/Warm-Bodies-02_zps43a33e69.jpg)

The first 4 minutes of Warm Bodies, the zombie love story starring Nicholas (A Single Man) Hoult!

[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?annotation_id=annotation_891246&feature=iv&src_vid=rARN6agiW7o&v=4GKzwcCbLCI[/youtube]
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on January 04, 2013, 02:19:52 am
Tonight a local TV station was showing Luchino Visconti's Rocco and His Brothers (1960) starring a bevy of sexy actors, including Alain Delon, in his prime,  and Renato Salvatori. The film is an operatic and homoerotic melodrama and I highly recommend it!

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/Alain-Delon-Rocco-02_zps15b1ca29.png)

Homoeroticism is blessedly rampant throughout Rocco. Someone once said that Visconti "cast with his dick," though unfortunately there's no footage of this process taking place. Still, the parade of gorgeous male flesh, the lingering close-ups on these men who are still somehow boys, supports the idea, giving the film a sensuality that sets it apart from other films of the period, Italian or not. When Simone, who has the unmistakable whiff of rough trade, takes a shower after a boxing match, it's a toss-up who's doing the heaviest cruise on his hunky form: the camera, as directed by Visconti; or the blatantly queer impresario who's "taken an interest" in Simone and his ample "natural gifts." The relationship of Rocco and Simone also plumbs the depths of homoerotic attachment, and Rocco's anguish at Simone's increasingly disastrous life — at one point he's a virtual rent boy — is one of the most moving elements in the film.
http://brightlightsfilm.com/39/rocco.php
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on January 04, 2013, 04:12:11 pm
I'll look for it. I love Visconti. They said something similar about Pier Paolo Pasolini, one of my other Italian favorites!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on January 04, 2013, 11:24:25 pm
I'll look for it. I love Visconti. They said something similar about Pier Paolo Pasolini, one of my other Italian favorites!
You won't regret it, it's a masterpiece. I think Visconti, being more conflicted, was a bit more subtle than Pasolini as far homoeroticism is concerned. Sometimes, I find subtlety to be so much more enticing.  For example I found Rene Clement's Purple Noon (Plein Soleil,also from 1960) the more erotic adaptation of The Talented Mr. Ripley compared to the one with Matt Damon.  But then, it stars Alain Delon as Ripley so I'm biased. ;)

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/Alain-Delon-Plein-Soleil_02_zps4737e909.jpg)

http://generalthinker.blogspot.ca/2010/08/plein-soleil-rene-clement-1960.html
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on January 06, 2013, 10:08:54 pm
I saw this again a couple of days ago. Loved especially Kathy Bates delivering the line (as Gertrude Stein)

Gertrude Stein: The artist's job is not to succumb to despair but to find an antidote for the emptiness of existence.

I saw 'Midnight in Paris' 3 weeks ago with our movie group and loved it. But then I am in love with Paris. I warned the others I might walk straight out and head for the Travel Agent. Lucky it was Sunday  ;D  I recognised many locations from my fairly regular visits there. I also love 20's music and so am thinking of buying the DVD. The story was silly but that did not worry me.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on January 07, 2013, 08:45:57 pm
The Impossible 8/10

Very disturbing if you have kids.

I liked how the director did not go for sensationalizing the event.  You didn't get a build up to the tsunami, no 'forboding', you don't have an outside eye of the event as that is not what the story's focus is about.  It's about this family's experience.  You experience the tsunami as they did.

So the movie tsunami hits out of the blue as it no doubt did to the real victims.  The movie didn't linger on the deaths of thousands or have lurid scenes of those caught in the path of the wave.  It stayed focused on the family.  There is no 'moral' to the story, the ending is not "Hollywood-ized", you feel very much for the family, you empathize a lot.  But though your heart strings are tugged, it's not because the movie is manipulative.  Your heart strings are tugged because you're human.  Of course you would feel for the people in this situation.  You end up feeling a tiny fraction of the stunned shock the victims spent most of the movie in more than anything else.   It was a lot more realistic than I expected.

Naomi Watts is amazing as is the actor who played her elder son.  Ewan McGregor does what he does best, anchors the movie with his always sincere and believable performance.



Beginners  6/10

While the movie is good, it's a bit too vague and unrealistic for me.  The main character Oliver, played by Ewan McGregor spends a lot of the movie sad and not really knowing how to cope, though it appears he had sufficient love and interaction with - his mother at least - parents.  You wonder where other family members are to support him.  His friends try, but his father's friends, of which there appear to be many, are nowhere in sight.

I give kudos for the director actually showing he has a job, but it disappoints in that he doesn't actually seem productive there and this is shown, so I spent the movie wondering when his bosses were going to lay him off.  

His love interest, while I found her character very engaging and interesting, was disappointing in that she remained mysterious, with no real reason why Oliver finds her attractive, there is no clear explanation of why her character is the way she is and her choice of profession was very "Hollywood".  I was like, really? ::)

And both, of course, live in large, retro homes in LA and one has a decent sized apartment in NY even though both have professions that do not indicate they get paid much more than a barista at Starbucks.

However, on the upside, the acting was well done.  You can see why Christopher Plummer won an Oscar.  His acting is effortless.  His coming out story is, surprisingly, not the focus of the movie.  Neither is how his son deals with it and the ramifications of it.  What the focus of the movie is how Oliver deals with grief.  While that is good in one way, his father's coming out and being gay isn't the OMG!! event, it's also kind of strange in that it's like window dressing on a movie about grief and loss.

I guess that's a good thing and a sign of progress.  Being gay is no longer a big deal.

Watch it if you have nothing else going on because Ewan is at his most beautiful in this and The Impossible.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on February 24, 2013, 11:55:47 am
I'm not into zombies, but I found "Warm Bodies" to be terrific!  When the human girl, Julie, tries to ask our zombie hero, known as "R", what his name was (because apparently zombies don't remember much, including their names)--"Is it Robert? Richard? Ricardo?", I wanted to scream a name at the screen!

Note to Gil/oilgun:  I finally got "Rocco and his Brothers" from Netflix.  You didn't mention it's three hours long!!!.  I'll carve out some time however...
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on February 24, 2013, 12:37:46 pm
Glad you enjoyed WARM BODIES, I thought it was a real charmer.  Good luck with Rocco, you'l be fine, it's well done melodrama with eye-candy.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on April 03, 2013, 08:29:14 pm
for fans of Spartacus: Blood & Sand, there is a documentary in the making about his fight against the cancer that so quickly took his life:  Be Here Now: the andy whitfield story

[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wE_Y5brW-ZE[/youtube]


www.beherenowfilm.com

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/426354716/be-here-now-the-andy-whitfield-story
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on May 05, 2013, 10:20:05 pm
I saw Mud last night and liked it a lot. Matthew McConaughey, like Heath though at an older age, has undergone a similarly dramatic mid-career redefinition from lightweight pretty boy to amazing actor.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on May 06, 2013, 11:52:38 am
I've heard good things about Mud. I saw Trance instead and, although it was uneven and no Slumdog Millionaire, I enjoyed it.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: CellarDweller on May 06, 2013, 09:14:14 pm
I've also heard good thing about Mud, and similar comments about Matthew McConaughey, and how he's grown as an actor.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Mandy21 on May 07, 2013, 08:15:16 am
Can't wait to see Mud, but it's only playing at one theater down in the big city so far, hasn't spread out here to us country folks yet.  I get a-skeered when I have to cross the big river, so I'm waiting impatiently.  Iron Man 3 tonight with an out-of-state buddy celebrating his 65th birthday, and he chose to do it with me.  :D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Sason on May 07, 2013, 04:03:05 pm
Here's a little gem. Fritz posted it on FB, I'm just stealing it.

It's a HILARIOUS parody on Ingmar Bergman. Even if you haven't seen his movies, you'll still enjoy it.
It's all in mock Swedish (barely disguised English), with subtitles. From 1968.

Enjoy!   :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:



[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8X2QmLWWxq4[/youtube]


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: fritzkep on May 07, 2013, 04:38:22 pm
It really is great! Thanks for posting it here, Vårensdotter!

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Sason on May 07, 2013, 04:47:54 pm
It is indeed!

You're welcome, Körkompis! It deserves a big audience!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on May 07, 2013, 05:42:47 pm
I love the mock Swedish!  (Somehow, it sounds familiar.)

Water = H2Oska LOL
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Penthesilea on May 08, 2013, 01:05:48 am
Perhopska. LOL :laugh:

Men scheene mädele. ;D
Loved the faux Swedish with quite some German thrown in it. Or maybe that was only because some German and Swedish words are almost the same.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: CellarDweller on May 08, 2013, 02:38:11 pm
I love the mock Swedish! 


Bork Bork Bork!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Sason on May 08, 2013, 04:59:32 pm
I love the mock Swedish!  (Somehow, it sounds familiar.)

Water = H2Oska LOL

The reason it sounds familiar to you is that it's the same sing-song intonation as your dear old friend, The Swedish Chef, uses!  :laugh: :laugh:
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Sason on May 08, 2013, 05:00:20 pm

Bork Bork Bork!

Exactly!  ;D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Sason on May 08, 2013, 05:04:13 pm
Perhopska. LOL :laugh:

Men scheene mädele. ;D
Loved the faux Swedish with quite some German thrown in it. Or maybe that was only because some German and Swedish words are almost the same.

I hear quite a lot of German, some Yiddish, some (probably mock) Russian, and I believe some French and Dutch too!

What I don't hear at all, is Swedish!   :laugh: :laugh:

And Sigfrid is a male name.

The folk tune at the end is genuine, though.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on May 09, 2013, 08:07:38 pm
Speaking of Swedish, I finally watched The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo.  The American version.

It was really entertaining.  It held my interest.  The relationships were done well.  The acting was awesome.

I enjoyed it more than the book.  The sexual violence Lisbeth experiences was not as sickening as everyone told me it would be.  Guess I've read and seen too much porn.  :-\
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: CellarDweller on May 14, 2013, 07:33:46 am
I enjoyed it more than the book.  The sexual violence Lisbeth experiences was not as sickening as everyone told me it would be.  Guess I've read and seen too much porn.  :-\

I had heard it was a violent movie, perhaps with everyone discussing the voilence, it made it into something it wasn't.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on May 14, 2013, 11:05:20 am
I had heard it was a violent movie, perhaps with everyone discussing the voilence, it made it into something it wasn't.

I took my teenage sons to see it on Christmas afternoon (our annual tradition is to go see a movie). We had planned to see Sherlock Holmes, but I got the times wrong and we wound up instead at TGWTDT, which one of my sons preferred to see anyway. Around the point of the second rape, my other son turned to me and said "Nice Christmas movie, Mom."  I apologized. It's not a nice Christmas movie. It is, however, a pretty good movie, and while I had steeled myself for the violence, it's actually not as bad as what I had feared.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: CellarDweller on May 15, 2013, 08:03:29 am
Around the point of the second rape, my other son turned to me and said "Nice Christmas movie, Mom." 


 :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on May 27, 2013, 12:36:17 pm
This looks like a movie that might interest us!
Blue is the Warmest Color (http://www.imdb.com/news/ni54480982/?ref_=hm_nw_tp_t1)

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on May 27, 2013, 07:29:14 pm
This looks like a movie that might interest us!
Blue is the Warmest Color (http://www.imdb.com/news/ni54480982/?ref_=hm_nw_tp_t1)



It's supposed to be wonderful and a rare non-controversial winner at Cannes winnning the top prize and the the Fipresci international critics prize.
Too bad Americans won't see the original version in theatres.  ;)  From IMDb:

At its premiere at the Cannes Film Festival, the audience was reportedly 'shocked beyond belief' by the graphic sex scenes that take place throughout the course of the movie. Many members of the audience remarked in reviews that the film would 'send shockwaves across the world', and would definitely need to be edited in many countries to attain a certificate.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on May 27, 2013, 08:05:14 pm
(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/l-inconnu-du-lac-01_zps23815433.jpg)


Another Cannes film we might be interested in is Stranger by the Lake.  It won the Queer Palm and its director won the Un Certain Regard direction award.

Review:
http://www.ioncinema.com/reviews/stranger-by-the-lake-review

The two leads:
(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/ABC%20Movies/L-inconnu-du-lac-03_zps087339c8.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on May 28, 2013, 08:18:22 am
It's supposed to be wonderful and a rare non-controversial winner at Cannes winnning the top prize and the the Fipresci international critics prize.
Too bad Americans won't see the original version in theatres.  ;)  From IMDb:

At its premiere at the Cannes Film Festival, the audience was reportedly 'shocked beyond belief' by the graphic sex scenes that take place throughout the course of the movie. Many members of the audience remarked in reviews that the film would 'send shockwaves across the world', and would definitely need to be edited in many countries to attain a certificate.

Americans are such prudes!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on May 28, 2013, 08:51:14 am
It's supposed to be wonderful and a rare non-controversial winner at Cannes winnning the top prize and the the Fipresci international critics prize.
Too bad Americans won't see the original version in theatres.  ;)  From IMDb:

At its premiere at the Cannes Film Festival, the audience was reportedly 'shocked beyond belief' by the graphic sex scenes that take place throughout the course of the movie. Many members of the audience remarked in reviews that the film would 'send shockwaves across the world', and would definitely need to be edited in many countries to attain a certificate.

Americans are such prudes!

I'm not sure how, or whether, the film will be edited for Americans. But on a global spectrum of national prudishness, Americans are hardly at the far end. Let's keep in mind that there are countries where women can't show their ankles in public. The quote about needing to be edited in many countries may not even have referred to the United States.

Steven Spielberg seemingly expects it will play here as is, just not everywhere.

"I'm not sure it will be allowed to play in every state," Steven Spielberg told journalists Sunday. Spielberg, in his capacity as Cannes jury president, had presented the award, heaping praise on the film and its director, calling it a "great love story."

Sorry, Wyoming.

http://www.latimes.com/features/books/jacketcopy/la-et-jc-graphic-novel-blue-angel-adapted-cannes-warmest-color-20130527,0,154496.story (http://www.latimes.com/features/books/jacketcopy/la-et-jc-graphic-novel-blue-angel-adapted-cannes-warmest-color-20130527,0,154496.story)


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on May 28, 2013, 09:31:37 pm
I'm not sure how, or whether, the film will be edited for Americans. But on a global spectrum of national prudishness, Americans are hardly at the far end. Let's keep in mind that there are countries where women can't show their ankles in public. The quote about needing to be edited in many countries may not even have referred to the United States.

Steven Spielberg seemingly expects it will play here as is, just not everywhere.

"I'm not sure it will be allowed to play in every state," Steven Spielberg told journalists Sunday. Spielberg, in his capacity as Cannes jury president, had presented the award, heaping praise on the film and its director, calling it a "great love story."

Sorry, Wyoming.

http://www.latimes.com/features/books/jacketcopy/la-et-jc-graphic-novel-blue-angel-adapted-cannes-warmest-color-20130527,0,154496.story (http://www.latimes.com/features/books/jacketcopy/la-et-jc-graphic-novel-blue-angel-adapted-cannes-warmest-color-20130527,0,154496.story)




Lets not compare the USA with Iran or Saudi Arabia.  Practically all movies that are rated Restricted in the states are rated 13+ in Canada (well Quebec really) so I can just imagine what kind of rating Blue will get in the the US.  Unless there's no swearing, of course, lol!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on May 28, 2013, 10:51:52 pm
Lets not compare the USA with Iran or Saudi Arabia.  Practically all movies that are rated Restricted in the states are rated 13+ in Canada (well Quebec really) so I can just imagine what kind of rating Blue will get in the the US.  Unless there's no swearing, of course, lol!

OK, so 13- through 17-year-old Americans can't see some movies in theaters unless accompanied by parents, that Quebecois of those ages can go see without bringing their parents along. That rule, BTW, has never kept my teenage sons from finding their way into movies on their own that would be way too much for me (mostly because of violence). But sure, it does exist.

That's pretty different, though, from your "Too bad Americans won't see the original version in theatres."

I agree that the ratings system here is fucked up in some ways. It is stricter about sex than violence, it is homophobic, and it is ridiculous about swearing. And I guess you could argue that a 13-year-old should be able to watch graphic scenes of adults having sex, although I can't say I'm convinced that their lives are all that ruined if they have to wait a few years or have their parents join them or wait until it comes out on DVD. This from a mom, by the way, whose kids have been seeing R-rated movies since they were about 10. (They grew out of kiddie movies early.)

There are, of course, two ratings categories that kids under 18 aren't allowed to see in theaters at all: NC-17 and X. According to the official  movie-ratings site, somewhere between zero and three movies a year get rated NC-17. X appears not to get used at all anymore.

I suppose it's possible that the movie-ratings board could slap an NC-17 on it and the U.S. distributor would be caught between having to cut it and wanting to avoid a box-office-damaging NC-17.

But we don't know that yet. The "too bad Americans won't see it" crack seemed out of line. That's why I brought up the specter of countries that actually DO ban movies.


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: milomorris on May 29, 2013, 10:22:57 pm
Too bad Americans won't see the original version in theatres.  ;)

Yeah...y'all get a movie. We've got drones.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on May 30, 2013, 12:05:31 am
Yeah...y'all get a movie. We've got drones.

I'll take a good lesbian coming of age film over your terrorist-producing drones anyday.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on May 30, 2013, 08:30:40 am
Please, can we keep this discussion on topic? Thank you.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: milomorris on May 30, 2013, 10:59:12 am
Please, can we keep this discussion on topic? Thank you.

America and its "prudishness" was not the topic of this thread. So I find it curious that you would want to to redirect the conversation since you were the one who commented on American prudes.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: milomorris on May 30, 2013, 11:00:36 am
I'll take a good lesbian coming of age film over your terrorist-producing drones anyday.

That's your choice. Films don't leave terrorists laying dead in the streets. Drones do. That's my choice.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on May 30, 2013, 04:25:38 pm
America and its "prudishness" was not the topic of this thread. So I find it curious that you would want to to redirect the conversation since you were the one who commented on American prudes.

The prudishness of the American movie rating system is germane to a movies thread, I believe, while the military and political systems are not.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: milomorris on May 30, 2013, 10:09:38 pm
The prudishness of the American movie rating system is germane to a movies thread, I believe, while the military and political systems are not.

Wrong. Your subjective displeasure with Americans has nothing at all to do with the content of the film itself. Therefore, your vitriol is superfluous.

Moreover, your assumptions about Americans are nothing short of stereotyping. You have no clue how Americans will receive the film being discussed, yet you are more than willing to jump to a negative conclusion. But you're not alone. Gil is right there with you.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on May 30, 2013, 11:01:58 pm
You are missing the point. My comment was acceptable and in line with the subject of the thread but yours wasn't it.  Drones have little to do with film.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: milomorris on May 30, 2013, 11:08:36 pm
You are missing the point. My comment was acceptable and in line with the subject of the thread but yours wasn't it.  Drones have little to do with film.

No, you're missing your point. Your comment was yet another expression of your disdain for Americans. Drones have to plenty to do with people who don't like America.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: milomorris on May 30, 2013, 11:54:14 pm
Julie Maroh, 'Blue Is The Warmest Color' Author, Slams Film's Lesbian Sex Scenes As 'Ridiculous'


"...this is all that it brings to my mind: a brutal and surgical display, exuberant and cold, of so-called lesbian sex, which turned into porn..."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/29/julie-maroh-blue-warmest-color-slammed_n_3348678.html

And we're supposed to "accept" this shit? Um...no.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on May 31, 2013, 08:44:41 am
A response to how the American ratings board and/or audiences may or may not receive a film is perfectly on topic for a film thread. So is one's subjective opinion regarding that anticipated response.

Drones are definitely off topic, though a quick one-off crack for the sake of imagined humor (and/or exhibition of hawkish patriotism) is acceptable here and there.

It's when the conversation devolves into, "Well so what, our drones can kill your lesbian films!" "Can not!" "Can so!" etc. that the topic derails.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Monika on May 31, 2013, 08:56:12 am
No, you're missing your point. Your comment was yet another expression of your disdain for Americans. Drones have to plenty to do with people who don't like America.

There is no law about having to love the US.


I love being unpatriotic myself
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on May 31, 2013, 09:51:31 am
And we're supposed to "accept" this shit? Um...no.

Where to start with this?

Um ... no, you-plural, whoever it is you're referring to (which, let's hope, given previous comments on this thread, is not "Americans" as a group) you need not "accept" anything. It's a free country.

For those who are considering whether to "accept" it, the opinion of the author of the book on which the film is based is fairly irrelevant. There's a history, going back to D.W. Griffith probably, of writers disapproving of the films made from their books. Sometimes critics and audiences agree, sometimes not. The fact is, a book and a film are two different pieces of art, which should be judged independently of each other. The writer's opinion obviously merits more publicity than that of any random filmgoer, but doesn't necessarily carry more weight.

Example: If Annie Proulx had disliked the sex scenes in Brokeback Mountain -- and it's not inconceivable that she would have, because some are fairly different from what she wrote -- I wouldn't love the movie any less. (To bring the parallel even closer, I have seen gay men on this site say they found Tent Scene 2 unrealistic, and straight women who react to it sort of the way Maroh complains straight men react to the sex scenes in Blue. If Proulx were a gay man who complained about the staging, does that automatically mean "we" shouldn't "accept" the film?)

Regarding the artistic merit of a film I haven't seen, if I am weighing two opinions and one is from an author I've never heard of and the other is from Steven Spielberg, I'll go with Spielberg in a second. I don't like all of his films, but I love some of them. He is a master of the craft.

Throw in the rest of the jury and the audience at Cannes, composed of film-industry professionals and sophisticated film enthusiasts, the majority of whom reportedly liked the film, and you've at least convinced me to view the author's reaction with skepticism.

Still, does the author make a good point when she complains that the sexual orientation of the viewers determined their reactions to the sex scenes, and that those reactions were not what the filmmakers intended? Possibly.

On the other hand, while much has been made about the film's long and graphic sex scenes, I can't imagine they're the entire basis for its receiving a Palme d'Or. If so, expect to see some easy Palmes d'Ors scored in coming years. Filming a graphic sex scene isn't nearly as difficult as making a great film.

Nor does Maroh say anywhere in that HuffPo article that she disliked film as a whole. She just talks about disliking the staging of the sex scenes. She may regard the rest of the film, for all we know, as a masterpiece.

None of this -- whether the sex scenes achieve their storytelling goal or are just prurient and/or ridiculous, whether the author likes the film or not -- has anything to do with whether "we" should "accept" the film, if by "accept" you mean, going back to the previous discussion, screen it in theaters here without edits.

I can't help wondering why you, Milo, are so reflexively attacking the film. If it's because Gil praised it and then used it as the basis for an anti-American remark, then the quality of the film itself in this discussion seems a McGuffin.


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: milomorris on May 31, 2013, 02:44:54 pm
I can't help wondering why you, Milo, are so reflexively attacking the film. If it's because Gil praised it and then used it as the basis for an anti-American remark, then the quality of the film itself in this discussion seems a McGuffin.

Then let me put your "wonder" to rest.

The quality of the film is not a point of my discussion. The content is. The author of the opus on which the film is based has evaluated the sex scenes as pornographic. Gil, FrontRanger, and Lord knows who else have assumed that Americans will treat the film "unfavorably" before any action has even been taken by the MPAA. That is plain old prejudice on their part.

Honestly, I really don't care about the film one way or another. What I care about is the fact that people here at Bettermost seem to think its OK to be bigoted against Americans.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: milomorris on May 31, 2013, 02:46:57 pm
I love being unpatriotic myself

Parading your character flaws out in public as if they were beneficial is dishonorable.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Monika on May 31, 2013, 02:50:20 pm
Parading your character flaws out in public as if they were beneficial is dishonorable.

I don´t think it is a character flaw - I think it´s extremely healthy.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: milomorris on May 31, 2013, 03:44:15 pm
I don´t think it is a character flaw - I think it´s extremely healthy.

We clearly have different opinions.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Monika on May 31, 2013, 04:02:28 pm
We clearly have different opinions.
yup
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Monika on May 31, 2013, 04:06:17 pm
In order to get back on topic - has anyone yet seen "Behind the calebra"?

I´m waiting for it to premiere over here so that I can go and see it.
I´ve been reading up lately on Liberace - he was mostly known in the US and not so much in Europe. I know of him mainly from references made about him in American movies  :)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on May 31, 2013, 04:10:11 pm
In order to get back on topic - has anyone yet seen "Behind the candelabra"?

I´m waiting for it to premiere over here so that I can go and see it.
I´ve been reading up lately on Liberace - he was mostly known in the US and not so much in Europe. I know of him mainly from references made about him in American movies  :)


I was really looking forward to seeing this; however it was an HBO movie and I don't get that channel.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Monika on May 31, 2013, 04:20:43 pm
I was really looking forward to seeing this; however it was an HBO movie and I don't get that channel.
Will it only be shown on TV in the US?
Here it premieres on the big screen June 7.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on May 31, 2013, 04:35:54 pm
Is it the MPAA ratings system that has diluted American movie content? This link (http://www.businessinsider.com/the-6-biggest-nc-17-and-r-rated-controversies-in-film-history-2012-3?op=1) discusses some (mostly recent) movie ratings controversies. Among the mis-rated were The King's Speech, Once, and Blue Valentine (with Michele Williams who received an Oscar nomination for her role) while dreck such as Scary Movie, Orgazmo and Hostel Part 2 got lenient treatment while showing body parts and torture.

I find it interesting that the MPAA instituted this "self-regulation" in late 1968 after the success of films like Blow-up, Michael Antonioni's masterpiece of dystopia. Blow-up was the first adult movie I ever saw (I was not yet 18) and had a tremendous influence on me, one of the reasons why I decided to study film. Early X-rated films included Stanley Kubrick's Clockwork Orange and John Schlesinger's Midnight Cowboy. All were made by Europeans.

Roger Ebert protested the emphasis of the MPAA on censoring sex while allowing hard core violence to get a pass. Is this why we're in the pickle we're in now? What does it mean that a whole generation, or two, of American moviegoers has gorged on violence while being turned away from movies like Blue Valentine, which showed a husband and wife having sex?

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: milomorris on May 31, 2013, 06:01:29 pm
Roger Ebert protested the emphasis of the MPAA on censoring sex while allowing hard core violence to get a pass. Is this why we're in the pickle we're in now? What does it mean that a whole generation, or two, of American moviegoers has gorged on violence while being turned away from movies like Blue Valentine, which showed a husband and wife having sex?

Huh?? We're in a "pickle"???

Violence and sex have very different cultural positions in society. While sex is not even a consideration for most children until puberty, violence can very easily be present in a child's life at an early age. Therefore, violence is an element that can be exposed to, and discussed with children much sooner than sex.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on May 31, 2013, 06:41:47 pm
Then let me put your "wonder" to rest.

The quality of the film is not a point of my discussion. The content is. The author of the opus on which the film is based has evaluated the sex scenes as pornographic. Gil, FrontRanger, and Lord knows who else have assumed that Americans will treat the film "unfavorably" before any action has even been taken by the MPAA. That is plain old prejudice on their part.

Honestly, I really don't care about the film one way or another. What I care about is the fact that people here at Bettermost seem to think its OK to be bigoted against Americans.

Oh, OK. When you said "we're supposed to accept this shit" I thought by this shit you meant the film. Maybe you were talking about Americans getting shit from critics like Gil and Lee.

Franky, I get slightly irked at knee-jerk criticisms of Americans, too. We may be more "prudish" in some ways than people in some countries, and we're obviously far LESS "prudish" than people in others. A reasonable analysis suggests that we're somewhere in the middle of the human range of prudishness. If the best that Gil can offer as proof of our prudishness compared to Canadians is that 13-through-16-year-old kids in Quebec can see movies without their parents that American kids can't, it seems a pretty weak distinction, and one I'm more or less willing to live with, especially since there are so many ways around it if you're really determined to have your 13-year-old see an R-rated movie without you (I speak from experience).

Frankly, I can think of far worse examples of American prudishness, but very few would be on-topic on this thread. (The only one I can think of that is -- and this was a particularly outrageous situation -- was that teenage bullying movie that got slapped with an R rating because it contained too many "fucks," thereby restricting its accessibility among the very audience it should have targeted.)

On the other hand, taking a little criticism is part of the price of being the world's most powerful country, of having our culture and movies so dominate the global market. It's kind of like prejudice against white people or straight people or men. It's not that it doesn't happen, nor that it doesn't sting or isn't morally objectionable, but it's not exactly comparable to prejudice against people who are in the non-power group.

And Americans are certainly not above crticism on any number of counts.

So my reaction to cultural criticism of the U.S., even when it comes from non-Americans, generally ranges from an annoyed shrug to vehement agreement.


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on May 31, 2013, 06:56:43 pm
Is it the MPAA ratings system that has diluted American movie content? This link (http://www.businessinsider.com/the-6-biggest-nc-17-and-r-rated-controversies-in-film-history-2012-3?op=1) discusses some (mostly recent) movie ratings controversies. Among the mis-rated were The King's Speech, Once, and Blue Valentine (with Michele Williams who received an Oscar nomination for her role) while dreck such as Scary Movie, Orgazmo and Hostel Part 2 got lenient treatment while showing body parts and torture.

I find it interesting that the MPAA instituted this "self-regulation" in late 1968 after the success of films like Blow-up, Michael Antonioni's masterpiece of dystopia. Blow-up was the first adult movie I ever saw (I was not yet 18) and had a tremendous influence on me, one of the reasons why I decided to study film. Early X-rated films included Stanley Kubrick's Clockwork Orange and John Schlesinger's Midnight Cowboy. All were made by Europeans.

Roger Ebert protested the emphasis of the MPAA on censoring sex while allowing hard core violence to get a pass. Is this why we're in the pickle we're in now? What does it mean that a whole generation, or two, of American moviegoers has gorged on violence while being turned away from movies like Blue Valentine, which showed a husband and wife having sex?

Huh?? We're in a "pickle"???

Violence and sex have very different cultural positions in society. While sex is not even a consideration for most children until puberty, violence can very easily be present in a child's life at an early age. Therefore, violence is an element that can be exposed to, and discussed with children much sooner than sex.

Your assumption about the appropriate ages to address the subject of violence and sex is highly debatable. But even if your argument is granted, there's violence and then there's violence. A parent may well choose to discuss violence with, say, a 12-year-old, and might want to talk about, say, avoiding violent situations or using self defense or war or capital punishment or whatever.

But a discussion of violence and its consequences does not require having children watch as a maniac rips out someone's spinal cord or forces someone to saw off his own foot.

Though for the record, my kids would never in a million years pick "Blue Valentine" over, say, "Saw XXXVII." Is that because their preferences have been shaped by our culture? Or are many teenage boys just hardwired to be less interested in the subtle disintegration of a marriage than they are in gruesome violence? It's unknowable, I guess, but my money's on the latter.

As for sex, even if you don't think it's necessary to touch on the subject before puberty (which would be extraordinarily late for kids in this culture, since they certainly see references to sex all over the place, and most likely even depictions of it going on, from the time they're old enough to turn on the TV), then we're back to Gil's idea that we shouldn't prevent post-pubescent 13-through-16-year-olds from freely accessing it.




Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on May 31, 2013, 07:42:17 pm
Then let me put your "wonder" to rest.

The quality of the film is not a point of my discussion. The content is. The author of the opus on which the film is based has evaluated the sex scenes as pornographic. Gil, FrontRanger, and Lord knows who else have assumed that Americans will treat the film "unfavorably" before any action has even been taken by the MPAA. That is plain old prejudice on their part.

Honestly, I really don't care about the film one way or another. What I care about is the fact that people here at Bettermost seem to think its OK to be bigoted against Americans.

Oh, good grief! Please don't play the victim.  America, and yes I resent the fact that you have appropriated the word America, deserves all the criticisms it's gets being the world's leading terrorist state.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on May 31, 2013, 10:05:43 pm
America, and yes I resent the fact that you have appropriated the word America, deserves all the criticisms it's gets being the world's leading terrorist state.

 :laugh:  :laugh:  :laugh:

A statement like that is so ridiculously over the top that the only appropriate response to it is laughter.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on June 01, 2013, 12:27:26 am
Oh, good grief! Please don't play the victim.  America, and yes I resent the fact that you have appropriated the word America, deserves all the criticisms it's gets being the world's leading terrorist state.

You know, I even think that the last part of that sentence is arguably true. According to the website iraqbodycount.org, which to me seems pretty credible, Iraqi civilian deaths since the early 2000s exceed 100,000. They peaked in the Bush years of '06-'07 -- but the site says 34 were killed on Thursday, 873 in May. It's hard to imagine how the U.S. would be reacting if some other country had killed 100,000 of its civilians.

But that doesn't mean "America ... deserves all the criticisms it gets." "America" or anything else only deserves the criticisms that accurately apply. Otherwise those criticisms just wind up sounding stupid, and diminishing the credibility of whoever makes them.

I actually try to avoid calling it America, especially when talking to Canadians, because I know you guys get huffy about that, understandably. But "the United States" is such a relatively colorless and bureaucratic-sounding name that I wish we could just call it the lovely "America," and the other countries could call themselves Canada and Mexico and Uruguay and Brazil and so on. Let's just change the names of the continents themselves.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: milomorris on June 01, 2013, 08:43:09 am
Franky, I get slightly irked at knee-jerk criticisms of Americans, too. We may be more "prudish" in some ways than people in some countries, and we're obviously far LESS "prudish" than people in others.

I guess I get more irked than you do. But you seem to understand my position.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: milomorris on June 01, 2013, 09:01:36 am
Your assumption about the appropriate ages to address the subject of violence and sex is highly debatable. But even if your argument is granted, there's violence and then there's violence. A parent may well choose to discuss violence with, say, a 12-year-old, and might want to talk about, say, avoiding violent situations or using self defense or war or capital punishment or whatever.

But a discussion of violence and its consequences does not require having children watch as a maniac rips out someone's spinal cord or forces someone to saw off his own foot.

I agree. The violence depicted in movies is often at a level that very few humans will ever experience in their lifetimes. Movie makers even go so far as to create forms of violence that are absolutely impossible (vampires, warewolves, and supervillains for example).

But what I was getting at with my comparison of sexual content with violent content is that pre-pubescent children are far more likely to experience actual violence in some form or another than they are to experience actual sex. I was hearing "Don't hit your brother" many years before I heard "Wear a rubber." I also witnessed my first shooting the summer before I turned 6. It was police-related. And I didn't have my first sexual encounter until many years later.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: milomorris on June 01, 2013, 09:05:08 am
Oh, good grief! Please don't play the victim.  America, and yes I resent the fact that you have appropriated the word America, deserves all the criticisms it's gets being the world's leading terrorist state.

I'm going to start a new thread so you can explain why it is you think the U.S.A. is a "terrorist state." 
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on June 01, 2013, 11:48:56 am
Thank you.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on June 01, 2013, 03:22:19 pm
In order to get back on topic - has anyone yet seen "Behind the calebra"?

I´m waiting for it to premiere over here so that I can go and see it.
I´ve been reading up lately on Liberace - he was mostly known in the US and not so much in Europe. I know of him mainly from references made about him in American movies  :)


Yes.  I read a review in Entertainment magazine which said it was very well done.  I recommended it to a gay co-worker - a man - who has HBO and he watched it and came back raving about it.  It was apparently very well done, the acting was superb and the story did not go over the top into camp.  He highly recommended it.

I don't have HBO, so I'm going to have to wait to see it.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on June 01, 2013, 03:25:39 pm
Saw Star Trek into Darkness.

MUCH better than the first Star Trek movie reboot.

They actually deal with sticky ethical and moral issues like the old Star Trek did.

Cumberbatch is amazing as usual, and his character is very interesting.

Uhura and Spock's relationship is sometimes played for laughs, but on the other hand it adds to the vibe that this is Star Trek 90210 as almost all the characters over the age of 35 are not present.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on June 01, 2013, 03:59:22 pm
No, you're missing your point. Your comment was yet another expression of your disdain for Americans. Drones have to plenty to do with people who don't like America.

Correction, my comment was an expression of disdain for the MPAA.  BTW, the drones create way more 'terrorists' then it assassinates.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on June 01, 2013, 04:17:35 pm
Then let me put your "wonder" to rest.

The quality of the film is not a point of my discussion. The content is. The author of the opus on which the film is based has evaluated the sex scenes as pornographic. Gil, FrontRanger, and Lord knows who else have assumed that Americans will treat the film "unfavorably" before any action has even been taken by the MPAA. That is plain old prejudice on their part.

Honestly, I really don't care about the film one way or another. What I care about is the fact that people here at Bettermost seem to think its OK to be bigoted against Americans.

Yeah and some others are bigoted against gay men, especially the effeminate ones, and that is also tolerated so get over it.

Besides, this conversation is not about Americans, it's about the MPAA and how out of touch they are.  They also treat foreign and independent films (ie: the competition) more harshly so that's another black mark for Blue.  They also treat homosexual sex more harshly so I doubt an uncut version will reach the screens in the US. 

Oh, and my comment was not plain old prejudice on my part.  It's an educated assumption based on the MPAA's track record of laughable rating decisions.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on June 01, 2013, 04:18:33 pm
I'm going to start a new thread so you can explain why it is you think the U.S.A. is a "terrorist state." 

Let me know where it is.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: milomorris on June 01, 2013, 04:19:19 pm
Correction, my comment was an expression of disdain for the MPAA.  BTW, the drones create way more 'terrorists' then it assassinates.

You didn't cite the MPAA specifically. You cited Americans as a whole.

As for drones, please see the Terrorist thread.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: milomorris on June 01, 2013, 04:21:05 pm
Let me know where it is.

Here: http://bettermost.net/forum/index.php/topic,50526.msg646781.html#msg646781
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on June 01, 2013, 04:37:13 pm
You know, I even think that the last part of that sentence is arguably true. According to the website iraqbodycount.org, which to me seems pretty credible, Iraqi civilian deaths since the early 2000s exceed 100,000. They peaked in the Bush years of '06-'07 -- but the site says 34 were killed on Thursday, 873 in May. It's hard to imagine how the U.S. would be reacting if some other country had killed 100,000 of its civilians.

But that doesn't mean "America ... deserves all the criticisms it gets." "America" or anything else only deserves the criticisms that accurately apply. Otherwise those criticisms just wind up sounding stupid, and diminishing the credibility of whoever makes them.

I actually try to avoid calling it America, especially when talking to Canadians, because I know you guys get huffy about that, understandably. But "the United States" is such a relatively colorless and bureaucratic-sounding name that I wish we could just call it the lovely "America," and the other countries could call themselves Canada and Mexico and Uruguay and Brazil and so on. Let's just change the names of the continents themselves.



The first time I became aware of this America thing, I was quite young, I was looking up Canada in a French dictionary and the first thing it said was "an american state".  I was like 'Whaa?' until I realised that they were referencing the continent.  That's how linked the word America is with the USA.  (Poor Mexico which was until recently, the United States of Mexico, many people don't even consider it to be part of North America.)  Plus I wish there was another way of calling the citizens of the US, Americans, like the Spanish estadounidense and the French états-uniens(iennes). Somehow United-statesman and United-stateswoman, just don't sound right, lol!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on June 01, 2013, 04:41:36 pm
You didn't cite the MPAA specifically. You cited Americans as a whole.

As for drones, please see the Terrorist thread.

No, I said too bad Americans won't see the uncut version.  And who's fault would that be?  The MPAA of course.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on June 02, 2013, 12:45:31 am
In order to get back on topic - has anyone yet seen "Behind the calebra"?

I'm waiting for it to premiere over here so that I can go and see it.
I've been reading up lately on Liberace - he was mostly known in the US and not so much in Europe. I know of him mainly from references made about him in American movies  :)

I watched it the other night and thought it was well done.  It's mainly about Matt Damon's character and his relationship with Liberace, how he evolves from a relative innocent to a bitter, jaded ex-lover.  Both he and Michael Douglas give very good performances, and I expect to see them nominated for Emmys.  When I was a kid, Liberace was on TV a lot, smiling ingratiatingly, wearing fantastic outfits, doing comic bits and of course playing the piano impressively.  He was so over the top you had to love him.  I didn't even know what gay was in those days, and neither, apparently, did his legions of female fans.

Liberace's mother is played by Debbie Reynolds, who is almost unrecognizable.  In fact, I didn't remember until I saw the credits that she was in the cast.  Dan Ackroyd and Paul Reiser have small roles.  The sets are great, and having recently seen a youtube of Liberace's home, I'd say they made it look much better than the real thing.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on June 02, 2013, 02:11:24 am
For those who didn't see Good Night and Good Luck, there's a funny segment involving a network news interview with Liberace. The interviewer asks, "When are you going to settle down and get married, Lee?" I can't remember how Liberace (known as Lee) respond, but it's played for ironic humor.



Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on June 23, 2013, 01:18:52 pm
Saw Man of Steel last night. Lots of fun for us little boys who like movies where lots of stuff gets destroyed  ;D  with no thought for the people who might be getting destroyed along with it.  :-\

In addition, in the new get-up to match the new take on the story, Henry Cavill might just be the sexiest Superman ever. Christopher Reeve will always be the standard for what I might call the "classic Superman," but for the new take, Henry Cavill. ... O.M.G.  :o Thud!

Plus, I adore Amy Adams. Absolutely adore her!  :D

The thought came to me this morning, Next time they feel a need for a new James Bond, they should give that role to Henry Cavill, too.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Brown Eyes on August 04, 2013, 01:52:54 am
Has anyone here seen the new Lone Ranger movie with Johnny Depp in it?  I haven't seen it, but I'm very curious about it.  I know that he was very inspired by Keith Richards for his role in Pirates... and I'm interested in his make-up for Lone Ranger and the idea of inspiration from music.  

His make-up is so reminiscent of Marilyn Manson make-up... I'm super curious about whether that was deliberate (and the war paint metaphor is very appropriate for Manson).  As with Richards, there's some personal connection and history with Manson for Depp.   Has there been any discussion of that anywhere?

I'm tempted to see the movie - just because is looks amusing.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on August 04, 2013, 09:17:00 am
Try out Jeff's "Everything Lone Ranger" thread in his blog.  :)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on August 04, 2013, 01:09:14 pm
His make-up is so reminiscent of Marilyn Manson make-up... I'm super curious about whether that was deliberate (and the war paint metaphor is very appropriate for Manson).  As with Richards, there's some personal connection and history with Manson for Depp.   Has there been any discussion of that anywhere?

I'm tempted to see the movie - just because is looks amusing.

I found the movie amusing, but then it has lots of trains in it, so maybe it's best not to take my word for it.

I hope this link works....

http://colorlines.com/archives/2012/05/johnny_depps_make-up_for_new_tonto_movie_is_awful.html (http://colorlines.com/archives/2012/05/johnny_depps_make-up_for_new_tonto_movie_is_awful.html)

I heard or read somewhere that the inspiration for Johnny Depp's makeup was a painting of an actual Crow Indian. I found the above, which, when I looked at it, showed the painting next to a photo of Depp. Since his Tonto is supposed to be a Comanche, I have no idea why they would base his makeup on a member of the Crow Nation. I guess that's Hollywood for you.  ???
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on August 04, 2013, 04:10:00 pm
(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/Ben-Whishaw-01_zpsbd8e193f.jpg)

British actor Ben Whishaw (right, Skyfall, Brideshead Revisited, Cloud Atlas) has confirmed he's gay via a statement from a publicist about his marriage to his partner, Australian composer Mark Bradshaw, which took place nearly a year ago. Up till now it was thought Whishaw was gay but never confirmed because of the actor's hesitancy to discuss it.

Read more: http://www.towleroad.com/#ixzz2b25lNOt8

One of my favourite actors!  Now I love him even more!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Brown Eyes on August 05, 2013, 10:04:33 pm
I found the movie amusing, but then it has lots of trains in it, so maybe it's best not to take my word for it.

I hope this link works....

http://colorlines.com/archives/2012/05/johnny_depps_make-up_for_new_tonto_movie_is_awful.html (http://colorlines.com/archives/2012/05/johnny_depps_make-up_for_new_tonto_movie_is_awful.html)

I heard or read somewhere that the inspiration for Johnny Depp's makeup was a painting of an actual Crow Indian. I found the above, which, when I looked at it, showed the painting next to a photo of Depp. Since his Tonto is supposed to be a Comanche, I have no idea why they would base his makeup on a member of the Crow Nation. I guess that's Hollywood for you.  ???

That's awesome about the Crow make-up.  But you're right that if the tribe was supposed to be different, that's a big problem.  Native American issues have become especially interesting to me after reading the entire Lonesome Dove series.  Amazing and fascinating.

My curiosity about his make-up had to do with that, but also my crossover obsession with Marilyn Manson.  Knowing that Depp modeled his pirate behavior on Keith Richards (and Depp is old friends with Richards's son, and now Richards himself) I was really wondering about the possible Manson inspriation.  He's also somewhat friendly with Manson.  To a Manson fan the make-up immediately is evocative. (famously, Manson has a goofy crush on Depp... he's mostly heterosexual, but he's talked very openly about his crush on Depp... for what it's worth).

An early example of some of his more elaborate face makeup:
(http://i352.photobucket.com/albums/r347/atz75/MM/marilyn-manson-love-his-makeup--large-msg-118469658383_zps7def4c09.jpg) (http://s352.photobucket.com/user/atz75/media/MM/marilyn-manson-love-his-makeup--large-msg-118469658383_zps7def4c09.jpg.html)

(concert photos from 2000 / 2001)
(http://i352.photobucket.com/albums/r347/atz75/MM/2282136_zpsf8d8657f.jpg) (http://s352.photobucket.com/user/atz75/media/MM/2282136_zpsf8d8657f.jpg.html)
(http://i352.photobucket.com/albums/r347/atz75/MM/Mm_hw_2_zps2177a01a.jpg) (http://s352.photobucket.com/user/atz75/media/MM/Mm_hw_2_zps2177a01a.jpg.html) (http://i352.photobucket.com/albums/r347/atz75/MM/images2_zps99db8b9a.jpg) (http://s352.photobucket.com/user/atz75/media/MM/images2_zps99db8b9a.jpg.html)(http://i352.photobucket.com/albums/r347/atz75/MM/VTS_01_101-18-58_zpscad5ab68.jpg) (http://s352.photobucket.com/user/atz75/media/MM/VTS_01_101-18-58_zpscad5ab68.jpg.html)


Depp performing with MM in 2012 :D (I can't get the youtube embed to work, so I'll just post the links)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HhN-_VkdSpc (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HhN-_VkdSpc)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ObiNpAk1p-8 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ObiNpAk1p-8)

Johnny Depp, Marilyn Manson Perform 'Sweet Dreams' & 'Beautiful People'
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/12/johnny-depp-marilyn-manson-perform-video_n_1421354.html (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/12/johnny-depp-marilyn-manson-perform-video_n_1421354.html)

(http://i352.photobucket.com/albums/r347/atz75/MM/johnny-depp-marilyn-manson_zps654ba638.jpg) (http://s352.photobucket.com/user/atz75/media/MM/johnny-depp-marilyn-manson_zps654ba638.jpg.html)(http://i352.photobucket.com/albums/r347/atz75/MM/images9_zps582d1904.jpg) (http://s352.photobucket.com/user/atz75/media/MM/images9_zps582d1904.jpg.html)(http://i352.photobucket.com/albums/r347/atz75/MM/images6_zpsd5e47abe.jpg) (http://s352.photobucket.com/user/atz75/media/MM/images6_zpsd5e47abe.jpg.html)(http://i352.photobucket.com/albums/r347/atz75/MM/Johnny-Depp-Marilyn-Manson-To-Release-Youre-So-Vain-_zpsfd23e876.jpg) (http://s352.photobucket.com/user/atz75/media/MM/Johnny-Depp-Marilyn-Manson-To-Release-Youre-So-Vain-_zpsfd23e876.jpg.html)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on August 06, 2013, 09:13:56 am
Of course, I can never think about Marilyn Manson without thinking about the ... murse ... that Henry brought with him on Roundup back in '08--and the famous exploding container of glitter.  :)

Good memories of good times with nice people. ...  :)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Brown Eyes on August 06, 2013, 03:33:32 pm
It's one of the funny quirks of the Brokie community... I know who Henry is and I remember lots of people talking about meeting him on trips (etc.), but we've never met and I don't think I've ever even communicated with him online anywhere. 

LOL, I feel like I really need to meet Henry. It sounds like we might have a bit in common.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: CellarDweller on August 10, 2013, 09:50:20 pm
Of course, I can never think about Marilyn Manson without thinking about the ... murse ... that Henry brought with him on Roundup back in '08--and the famous exploding container of glitter.  :)

Good memories of good times with nice people. ...  :)

Yup!  The explosion all over our bathroom!  LOL
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Brown Eyes on August 10, 2013, 10:31:04 pm
OMG, now I need to know... what happened with the glitter... Need the full story! :D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: CellarDweller on August 10, 2013, 10:58:22 pm
 :laugh:

Henry and I were rooming together, I got there first, and was hanging out with the Brokies when Henry showed up. 

I helped him with his bags, and he went into the bathroom with his toiletries, and one of the containers with his glitter exploded, we had glitter everywhere.  :laugh:  We assumed that it was due to the air pressure change on the plane.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Brown Eyes on August 10, 2013, 11:29:52 pm
It was just loose powder glitter?  Probably the cap was just off... Unless it was a gel, then yeah, it could have exploded due to pressure changes.

Haha!!! I love how we've turned this thread into a discussion about glitter! :D


Anyway... more on the Depp/ Manson make-up thing.  This is being discussed kind of a lot in the Manson fandom lately so it's on my mind.

(http://i352.photobucket.com/albums/r347/atz75/MM/556747_500612083359588_1901016840_n_zps9ee1d2b9.jpg) (http://s352.photobucket.com/user/atz75/media/MM/556747_500612083359588_1901016840_n_zps9ee1d2b9.jpg.html)

I really never knew how much they are friends until I started looking into ths. I also never realized that Depp could play guitar (certianly not to the level where he could participate in playing at a MM show - based on youtubes he did a serviceable job, though Twiggy and Fred were there to pick up the slack).  I find it interesting how much Depp often seems to model his characters on rock stars (or at least to some extent).

(http://i352.photobucket.com/albums/r347/atz75/MM/JohnnyDeppMarilynManson2012RevolverGoldenDYf8YtBv282l_zps5473e646.jpg) (http://s352.photobucket.com/user/atz75/media/MM/JohnnyDeppMarilynManson2012RevolverGoldenDYf8YtBv282l_zps5473e646.jpg.html)



Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on August 12, 2013, 09:45:22 am
 I find it interesting how much Depp often seems to model his characters on rock stars (or at least to some extent).


I think he's kind of a rock-star wannabe.

I read a magazine piece a year or so ago in which he interviewed Patti Smith. I've never been much of a Patti Smith fan (I know, sacrilege  ::)), and overall I found the piece annoying and pretentious. I've always felt that way about Smith, and the article made me feel that way about Depp as well

But I am, of course, a huge Keith Richards' fan. Whatever his faults, Keith has never struck me as at all pretentious (one of my least favorite faults). So that relationship redeems Depp for me, even if it does seem to be a sort of shorthand way to acquire cool-by-association.

A few years back, when Depp was up against Sean Penn for an Oscar (I think), I read a magazine article arguing that Depp was actually the better actor of the two because he had taken a lightweight commercial character like Capt. Jack Sparrow and made it into something complex and interesting yet still comic and light, whereas Penn always had to go the standard actorly route of being all intense and serious and tortured and whatnot. At the time, I was thoroughly convinced. I thought the writer had an excellent point.

In the years since then, though, Depp has continued taking lightweight commercial jokey roles. I don't see him ever even attempting any of the deeper, more serious roles that are Penn's territory (and of course, many other actors'). So now my view has shifted again.

There you go -- more than you wanted to hear about my opinions re Johnny Depp!  :laugh:



Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: CellarDweller on August 15, 2013, 10:50:54 am
I watched two DVDs yesterday.

Stonewall Uprising - a documentary about the Stonewall riots in '69.  The title comes from one of the interviewees description that it wasn't a riot to him, but an uprising, a group of people rising up to fight for their rights.   Very well made documentary that starts with the history of the gay scene in NYC pre-Stonewall, vintage scenes from anti-gay propaganda films, interviews with people from that time frame, and who were at the Stonewall the night it happened.   Interviewees included Mayor Koch (who admits to police entrapment of gay people) and one of the police who raided the bar that night.


Small Town Gay Bar - another documentary, this film follows twoo gay bars in the rural south, and their clientele.  The film also puts a spotlight on the murder of Scotty Joe Weaver.  The film depicts the Rumors and a change in ownership, Crossroads Estates and its destruction.   STGB also includes interviews with Tim Wildman from the AFA (American Family Association) and Fred Phellps from Westboro Baptist Church.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on August 23, 2013, 08:01:42 pm
I think he's kind of a rock-star wannabe.

I read a magazine piece a year or so ago in which he interviewed Patti Smith. I've never been much of a Patti Smith fan (I know, sacrilege  ::)), and overall I found the piece annoying and pretentious. I've always felt that way about Smith, and the article made me feel that way about Depp as well

But I am, of course, a huge Keith Richards' fan. Whatever his faults, Keith has never struck me as at all pretentious (one of my least favorite faults). So that relationship redeems Depp for me, even if it does seem to be a sort of shorthand way to acquire cool-by-association.

A few years back, when Depp was up against Sean Penn for an Oscar (I think), I read a magazine article arguing that Depp was actually the better actor of the two because he had taken a lightweight commercial character like Capt. Jack Sparrow and made it into something complex and interesting yet still comic and light, whereas Penn always had to go the standard actorly route of being all intense and serious and tortured and whatnot. At the time, I was thoroughly convinced. I thought the writer had an excellent point.

In the years since then, though, Depp has continued taking lightweight commercial jokey roles. I don't see him ever even attempting any of the deeper, more serious roles that are Penn's territory (and of course, many other actors'). So now my view has shifted again.

There you go -- more than you wanted to hear about my opinions re Johnny Depp!  :laugh:

When Johnny came to California, it was to be a musician, not an actor.  Remember, he owned the Viper Club and used to played there fairly often.[/size]
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on August 24, 2013, 10:44:05 am
When Johnny came to California, it was to be a musician, not an actor.  Remember, he owned the Viper Club and used to played there fairly often.

Good thing he kept his day job.


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on August 25, 2013, 11:01:39 am
I'm with you on happy endings, x-man. I often see movies as a form of escape. With rare exceptions (BBM obviously being one), I don't want to finish the movie feeling worse than I did when I started.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: x-man on August 25, 2013, 04:13:15 pm
Excuse me, everyone.  On my posting above I was confusing Undertow with Bent.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on August 25, 2013, 05:33:15 pm

[...]

Next time I want to tell you about Strapped (TLA Releasing 2010), perhaps the best gay film I have seen.

 

Interesting.  I didn't care for Strapped.  I'm not sure why but it just didn't move me and the characters didn't seem believable to me.

As for happy endings, they are often overrated, some of the best films I've seen, gay or otherwise, have tragic and depressing endings.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on August 25, 2013, 06:50:49 pm
I distinguish between movies that are "sad" and movies that are "depressing." The former includes BBM, for example, and I'm often fine with them.

The latter includes Leaving Las Vegas, Platoon, both Elephant Man and Blue Velvet, that one with Sean Penn and Michael J. Fox in Vietnam, the one where Nick Nolte lives in a small town, and Requiem for a Dream. All of the latter (arguable exception: Platoon) are well-crafted, well-acted movies. But I was sorry for having seen all of them. Now, if I suspect a movie is going to be depressing, even if it gets glowing reviews, I avoid it. If I think it will contain a scene set to Barber's "Adagio for Strings," I avoid it. Direction by David Lynch, needless to say, is a red flag.

I'd rather see a light comedy any day, even if it gets worse reviews.

Maybe my own emotional stability is too fragile to mess with.  :-\



Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: brianr on August 26, 2013, 01:27:16 am
I guess a lot of the movies I see are sad as I often have to sit through the credits with tears trickling down my face trying to compose myself. Brokeback was over the top. The first time I had tears streaming down my face for about half an hour in the nearby food court, very embarrassing for a (then) 61 year old male. ;D
I rarely discuss movies here as we get them so much later than the US. However I rate movies on IMDB and my list shows I gave 10 to BBM naturally and

A Very Long Engagement
Les Miserables
The King's Speech
Young Victoria
and 9 to
My Afternoons with Marguerite
Mao's Last Dancer
Patrik Age 1.5 (a swedish gay movie)
Ladies in Lavender (surprised I did not give it 10 as I have seen it twice and would do so again)
The Last station
December Boys
I've loved you so long (nearly equalled BBM in the tears it produced)
The Help
Milk
Chocolat
Doubt

So you an see I like sad movies :)

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on October 11, 2013, 10:24:31 am
I saw Hunger Games before I left for Italy.

I liked the premise (Sorta tone-downed Battle Royale) and the books were extremely popular.  I haven't read them yet. 

I give it 7 out of 10 in that the premise is good, acting pretty solid by supporting cast, though the main characters aren't given much acting to do as reacting.

I enjoyed it and it was disturbing.  I am told the books are even more disturbing.

Sequels are set to start filming this summer.
I watched this last night and found it engrossing. Although it seemed like each step in the action was drawn out a little too long. I'm very impressed with Jennifer Lawrence. I hear Josh Harkness, the costar, bought Heath Ledger's "treehouse."
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on October 11, 2013, 12:58:38 pm
On my recent ramble I finally  ::) got to see Latter Days.

Kind of interesting to see Joseph Gordon-Levit (I didn't know he was in it) before he started to become such a Big Deal, and also Rob McElhenny, before he "made it" with It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia (I didn't know he was in it, either).

BTW, it is not always sunny in Philadelphia. ...  ;D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on October 12, 2013, 02:19:56 pm
For previous discussions

I will watch a movie that is sad if I find something in it to identify with or find the topic engrossing.  Otherwise, it's difficult to sit through.  Those that Crayons mentioned along with

Amistad - I had to leave the theater to stop from throwing up.  But I did go back in and finish watching it.
Gallipoli - you need a strong drink after this movie
Romeo and Juliet/Hamlet/other tragedies in literature - you know it's going to end badly
Black Hawk Down - sense of futility
Agora - sense of frustration and fear
Schindlers List and Valkyrie - enough said
BBM of course


I really want to go see 12 years a slave when it opens, but I'm afraid it will be this decade's Amistad for me.

I watched this last night and found it engrossing. Although it seemed like each step in the action was drawn out a little too long. I'm very impressed with Jennifer Lawrence. I hear Josh Harkness, the costar, bought Heath Ledger's "treehouse."

Josh Hutcherson is the co-star, did you mean him?

I am looking forward to the newest one Catching Fire in November, but I know a movie is disturbing to me when I get that sick feeling in my stomach.  I got that - and still get it - when I see The Hunger Games and when I think about the next installment, I get that same sense of "I want to see this...but I don't want to see this..."
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on October 12, 2013, 03:18:51 pm
Excuse me if I've reviewed this before, I can't remember if I did or not

2011's The Thing 6.99/10 - when people heard that there was going to be a 'remake' of John Carpenter's 1982 movie The Thing, the fans were up in arms.  JC's movie is now considered a classic, nearly a perfect movie of its genre.  

But the producers pulled a fast one.  It's not a remake.

If you know the 1982 story, you know that the movie starts off with a helicopter chasing a dog into the US Antarctic science base.  The helicopter pilot and his passenger are armed and acting irrationally.  One of the Americans remembers the helicopter having the word "Norge" on the side of it and they realize the helicopter is from the Norwegian science base some miles away.  They investigate the base and the story takes off from there.

2011's The Thing is the story of what happened at that Norwegian base.  It is not as scary as the first movie - I guess because the surprise factor is gone for those who know the 1982 movie.  In a great treat, the actors are mostly all Norwegian.  The producers got the OK to cast the creme de la creme of Norwegian film stars and got them.

There are some liberties taken with some things.  But for the most part, the extras on the movie talk about how they had to do a lot of 'reverse engineering' using the 1982 movie to show how things ended up as they did and they nail it.

Hint:  Stick around for the first part of the credits.

And I've been on a Benedict Cumberbatch kick recently so I've watched the following.  I've also recently bought a DVD/blu ray player that plays region 2 movies so be aware two of these are not available in the US:

Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy 8.5/10 - I missed this in theaters when it first came out and finally rented it.  Well worth it.  I ended up buying the movie.  I do like spy movies (they don't all have to be Bond or Bourne) and it got such excellent reviews and I like almost everyone in it.  So I picked a cold, rainy night so I could concentrate on the plot because I heard it was tricky.  But it turned out to be a fairly straightforward tale, the acting by EVERYone is FAR beyond reproach and it was a lot more emotional than it looks from the trailers.  The sexuality of some of the characters, like the morals, is surprisingly fluid in this movie.  But John le Carre gave that his blessing as he says that was quite common.

Third Star 7/10 - movie of a man with terminal cancer taking a trip with his close friends to his favorite wilderness beach in Wales.  I like it because you rarely get to see a movie about friendships between (straight) men that gets so intimate.  They rip each other to shreds emotionally in this movie, are rude, crude and cruel with one another, but also treat one another with great tenderness and love.

Stuart: A life backwards  Based on a true story of an author (Benedict's character) who decides to write a biography of a homeless man (Tom Hardy's character) and the odd friendship they develop.  I need to watch this again before I give it a rating because it wasn't what I was expecting.

First off - culture shock - what is 'homeless' in the UK is apparently not the same as someone considered homeless in the US.  Stuart is considered 'homeless' but he actually does live in government housing and owns a car.  In the US, when you're homeless you are truly homeless, you are living under bridges or in dumpsters or in a box in a back alley somewhere and have nothing.

Secondly, Stuart the character is really bad off - he's ill, a heroin addict and an alcoholic, so he mumbles.  And it is very very difficult to understand what he is saying, so I was stuck concentrating on understanding his words instead of focusing on what he was actually saying and what it meant, so I played catch up the entire movie, lagging behind in meaning and being divorced from the emotions of the story because I wasn't getting most of Stuart's dialogue.

Tom Hardy is spectacular in this role.  I think he either won a BAFTA or was nominated for one and deservedly so, but my goodness, the man can't put two words together in person.

The DVD has extras and interviews with each of the cast and in his interview, Hardy rambles on and on, unable to find the words for what he wants to say.  But he does obviously admire Cumberbatch as a person and an actor, he smiles when he says the man's name and is quite prophetic when he says he knows when someone is an Olympic level actor and Benedict is that.

Hardy apparently really took Benedict to heart.  They worked together again in Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy and on the red carpet at that premiere, Hardy gave Cumberbatch a very intimate hug that apparently got awkwardly long:

  (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v728/Jovieve/Hug_zps61ba33e2.jpg) (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/Jovieve/media/Hug_zps61ba33e2.jpg.html)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on October 12, 2013, 04:03:27 pm

  (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v728/Jovieve/Hug_zps61ba33e2.jpg) (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/Jovieve/media/Hug_zps61ba33e2.jpg.html)

Heavens to Betsy!!  :P
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on October 12, 2013, 06:03:19 pm
I really want to go see 12 years a slave when it opens, but I'm afraid it will be this decade's Amistad for me.

Same here. I don't think I can miss it, but I will approach it with deep dread.

I held out against Fruitvale Station, though I heard it's good.





Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on October 12, 2013, 09:12:46 pm
Same here. I don't think I can miss it, but I will approach it with deep dread.

I held out against Fruitvale Station, though I heard it's good.

I heard Fruitvale Station is tremendous, but it's going to be a rental for me as the tension will probably make me sick.  :-\
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on October 13, 2013, 01:58:53 pm
Like I posted earlier, I watched Stuart: a life backwards and the two actors Benedict Cumberbatch and Tom Hardy did a great job together.  Guess it's a sign of a good acting that the actors can go from playing everyday folks to mythical villains  ;D

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v728/Jovieve/yha3r46100_zps98623afb.jpg) (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/Jovieve/media/yha3r46100_zps98623afb.jpg.html)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on October 14, 2013, 10:27:31 am
So I heard and read that Charlie Hunnam has dropped out of playing Christian Gray (as in "Fifty Shades of"). I also hear that some book fans want Matt Bomer to play the role. Since, if I understand correctly, the book is basically soft-core hetero porn, seems to me it would be really something to have an openly gay actor play the male lead.

Or maybe the fans who want him for the role live in caves and don't know he's gay?  ???
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on October 14, 2013, 07:26:59 pm
So I heard and read that Charlie Hunnam has dropped out of playing Christian Gray (as in "Fifty Shades of"). I also hear that some book fans want Matt Bomer to play the role. Since, if I understand correctly, the book is basically soft-core hetero porn, seems to me it would be really something to have an openly gay actor play the male lead.

Or maybe the fans who want him for the role live in caves and don't know he's gay?  ???

I heard either dropped out or fired.  Not sure.  The story is trash, so I imagine only up and coming actors will want the role for the - ahem - exposure it will get them.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on October 15, 2013, 10:59:15 pm
So I heard and read that Charlie Hunnam has dropped out of playing Christian Gray (as in "Fifty Shades of"). I also hear that some book fans want Matt Bomer to play the role. Since, if I understand correctly, the book is basically soft-core hetero porn, seems to me it would be really something to have an openly gay actor play the male lead.

I agree! That would open some new doors. That alone -- and I really do mean that alone -- would make me root for the movie. Not see it, probably, but root for it.

Quote
Or maybe the fans who want him for the role live in caves and don't know he's gay?  ???

Possibly, though hard to believe in this day and age that anyone interested enough in popular culture to care about a fairly obscure actor being cast in a movie that hasn't even started production yet would not know something like that.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on October 15, 2013, 11:11:46 pm
(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/People/Jamie-Dornan-01_zps7dc5f9bc.jpg)
I'm kind of glad that Charlie Hunnam backed out/got fired despite the fact that his involvement had me interested in the project. Apparently Alexander Skaarsgard (Yum) and Jamie Dornan (double yum!)  are the frontrunners to replace him.

http://www.theguardian.com/film/2013/oct/15/fifty-shades-of-grey-movie-crisis-new-lead-actor
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on October 16, 2013, 11:43:35 am
(Re: Matt Bomer possibly playing Christian Gray)

Possibly, though hard to believe in this day and age that anyone interested enough in popular culture to care about a fairly obscure actor being cast in a movie that hasn't even started production yet would not know something like that.

Yes, it does seem difficult to believe, but I suppose fans of that TV show he's in--which I've never watched--wherein, I gather, he plays a flaming hetero  ;) might conceivably not know. He played a flaming hetero stripper in Magic Mike.

I wonder how "obscure" he is? Granted, he's not Brad Pitt or Matt Damon, but I really don't know.  ???
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on October 16, 2013, 11:54:48 pm
Matt Bomer would be a terrible choice.  He's handsome and all, but he's not very charismatic and lacks that dangerous bad-boy appeal that I feel the role requires.  Remember Mickey Rourke in 9 1/2 Weeks?  Now that was good casting.  IMO Matt was the weakest character in Magic Mike despite Alex Pettyfer's stunned deer in the headlights performance.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Penthesilea on October 17, 2013, 07:22:04 am
Possibly, though hard to believe in this day and age that anyone interested enough in popular culture to care about a fairly obscure actor being cast in a movie that hasn't even started production yet would not know something like that.


(Re: Matt Bomer possibly playing Christian Gray)

Yes, it does seem difficult to believe, but I suppose fans of that TV show he's in--which I've never watched--wherein, I gather, he plays a flaming hetero  ;) might conceivably not know. He played a flaming hetero stripper in Magic Mike.

I wonder how "obscure" he is? Granted, he's not Brad Pitt or Matt Damon, but I really don't know.  ???


The only thing I've ever seen him in is the TV show Jeff mentioned (White Collar, which I like btw).
And if it weren't for BetterMost, I wouldn't know he's gay.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on October 17, 2013, 09:30:39 am
And if it weren't for BetterMost, I wouldn't know he's gay.

If it weren't for BetterMost, I'd never have heard of him, period. I've never heard of the TV show and didn't know he was on one until Jeff said so, and I barely noticed him in Magic Mike. In fact, I doubt I could pick him out of a lineup of handsome young stars now.

That said, I'm not closely following the casting of FSoG (and by the way, I'm amused that you guys are!).

But it's true, sometimes people are less aware of pop-culture things than you'd think. For example, a few years back I mentioned at a gathering of my ex-husband's family the rumors that Tom Cruise is gay. Every person there (average middle-class suburbanites, reasonably well-informed about current events and the like) was astonished. Not one person had ever heard such a thing.

In any case, I salute Matt Bomer. That a young, handsome, potential romantic lead actor is out is fantastic. Tom Cruise and John Travolta (or someone like Tom Cruise and John Travolta, if in fact they're straight) must look at his example and sigh wistfully. Even Keanu Reeves, whom I've kind of gathered over the years might be gay (but might not be; feel free to correct me if you know otherwise), while not making such a big show of being not-gay as to marry actresses, undoubtedly felt he couldn't do it.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on October 17, 2013, 09:37:28 am
In any case, I salute Matt Bomer. That a young, handsome, potential romantic lead actor is out is fantastic. Tom Cruise and John Travolta (or someone like Tom Cruise and John Travolta, if in fact they're straight) must look at his example and sigh wistfully. Even Keanu Reeves, whom I've kind of gathered over the years might be gay (but might not be; feel free to correct me if you know otherwise), while not making such a big show of being not-gay as to marry actresses, undoubtedly felt he couldn't do it.

Actually, if you think to Google Matt Bomer--which only occurred to me now--it's pretty clear. Heck, he's got three kids with his partner!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matt_Bomer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matt_Bomer)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on October 25, 2013, 09:23:42 pm
Quote
Stuart: A life backwards Based on a true story of an author (Benedict's character) who decides to write a biography of a homeless man (Tom Hardy's character) and the odd friendship they develop.  I need to watch this again before I give it a rating because it wasn't what I was expecting.

First off - culture shock - what is 'homeless' in the UK is apparently not the same as someone considered homeless in the US.  Stuart is considered 'homeless' but he actually does live in government housing and owns a car.  In the US, when you're homeless you are truly homeless, you are living under bridges or in dumpsters or in a box in a back alley somewhere and have nothing.

Secondly, Stuart the character is really bad off - he's ill, a heroin addict and an alcoholic, so he mumbles.  And it is very very difficult to understand what he is saying, so I was stuck concentrating on understanding his words instead of focusing on what he was actually saying and what it meant, so I played catch up the entire movie, lagging behind in meaning and being divorced from the emotions of the story because I wasn't getting most of Stuart's dialogue.

Tom Hardy is spectacular in this role.  I think he either won a BAFTA or was nominated for one and deservedly so, but my goodness, the man can't put two words together in person.

OK, I'm sorry to say I had to watch this about 4 times with Stuart's dialogue getting more and more understandable with each viewing.  Yes, the more I understand what he's saying, the more emotionally tied I get to the movie and it's really become very poignant and I find myself in the unusual circumstance of having seen a movie like 3 times, but suddenly bursting out laughing at something Stuart said that I didn't understand the first 3 times.

I give it a 7.4/10.

Lighting on the movie is horrible though.  Whoever they had doing the lighting thought that full on klieg lighting in every closeup was the correct technique and I'm not fond of the soundtrack.  It sounds really cheesy.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on October 30, 2013, 10:02:54 am
Actually, if you think to Google Matt Bomer--which only occurred to me now--it's pretty clear. Heck, he's got three kids with his partner!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matt_Bomer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matt_Bomer)

Here's a sample of what out celebrities encounter:

When basketball player Jason Collins became the first openly gay man in American professional team sports earlier this year, he quickly found himself the target of death threats. When Frank Ocean spoke frankly of his love affair with another man, the New York Times noted he soon became “the target of dozens of death threats and antigay comments on Twitter, mostly from men.” When musician Chely Wright came out, she says her record sales “went directly in half” and that “My life has been threatened. I get nasty letters every day, ‘I’m through with you Chely Wright, you’re going to hell.’” And when actress Rayven Simone came out this summer,  a bunch of her former Disney-era fans promptly declared their childhoods had been “ruined.”

http://www.salon.com/2013/10/29/sean_hayes_doesnt_owe_us_an_apology_for_not_coming_out/ (http://www.salon.com/2013/10/29/sean_hayes_doesnt_owe_us_an_apology_for_not_coming_out/)


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on October 30, 2013, 10:11:28 am
That said, I'm not closely following the casting of FSoG (and by the way, I'm amused that you guys are!).

It's kind of difficult to avoid it when they make a fuss over it on the morning chat shows--unless, of course, you avoid the morning chat shows.  ;D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on October 30, 2013, 01:22:19 pm
It's kind of difficult to avoid it when they make a fuss over it on the morning chat shows--unless, of course, you avoid the morning chat shows.  ;D

Oh. Well, I do (avoid them). I used to watch them daily while working out, but pretty much fell out of the habit around the time Katie Couric left the Today Show. Unfortunately, much the same happened with my morning workouts. ;D

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on October 30, 2013, 01:29:12 pm
Oh. Well, I do (avoid them).

I'm not so sure I wouldn't be better off if I avoided them, too, but Today is more or less the only way I keep up on what's going on in the popular culture. And some hard news, too.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: delalluvia on November 05, 2013, 02:02:46 pm
Still feverishly in the midst of my Benedict Cumberbatch kick.  ;D

I'm not sure this qualifies as a movie, so mods, feel free to move it:

Parade's End 8.5/10

Wow, this is a mini-series, came out on HBO.  Benedict Cumberbatch was nominated for an Emmy for his role as leading man Christopher Tietjens.  I'm glad Michael Douglas won, but OMG, was Benedict robbed.

He was - as usual - brilliant in this role.  It's a 5 part series and if you love him, or the British Edwardian era or Downtown Abbey, you will very much enjoy this.

I started off thinking I'd watch one episode a night but instead watched all 5 hours in a row and found myself unable to sleep at 3 am on weeknight.  :P

Parade's End is based on a tetralogy by Ford Madox Ford. It is set mainly in England and on the Western Front in World War I.  It has been hailed it as "possibly the greatest 20th-century novel in English".

It is a character study on the life of Christopher Tietjens, a genius government statistician from a wealthy landowning family. His wife Sylvia is an upper class beauty who seems intent on ruining him but at the same time, admires him above all other men and tries to win his love.  Tietjens may or may not be the father of his wife's child. Meanwhile, after deciding with typical 'famous last words' to remain faithful to his not quite loveless marriage as per the standards of the gentleman's and social and cultural code he embodies ("the parade" of the title), he meets Valentine Wannop, a high-spirited pacifist and suffragette.  Despite their instant attraction, Tietjens keeps to his code and does not pursue her despite what vicious gossip starts. The series follows Tietjens as WWI approaches and then his progress in the army in France and Belgium, as well as Sylvia and Valentine in their separate paths over the course of the war.  It includes direct references to the changing social and gender roles and women's rights.

Benedict's portrayal of a man caught between eras, lashed by convention and its breakdown, attacked from all sides, becoming "a man with no friends whatsoever" and in constant emotional pain will make you believe you can fall in love with a fictional character.  :-*  :-*  :-*

His wife is actually much more sympathetic here than the novels, apparently, which is good as it adds to the depth of her character and the emotional turmoil of Christopher.  IOW, she's not what you expect.

As one reviewer said,

"It makes Downtown Abbey look like Teletubbies".  ;D

Must see.

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v728/Jovieve/dde279f8-5256-4b5c-8ca3-8a5dac982356_zpsef29300e.jpg) (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/Jovieve/media/dde279f8-5256-4b5c-8ca3-8a5dac982356_zpsef29300e.jpg.html)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on November 06, 2013, 12:19:26 am
Look who's on the cover of Vogue Homme this month, Alain Delon's youngest son, Alain Fabien:

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/People/alain-fabien-delon-03_zps1c45183c.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on December 01, 2013, 11:52:18 am
R.I.P. Paul Walker

Irony of ironies, he died in a fiery car crash.

(http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w197/oilgun/People/paul-walker-01_zps5a6c1740.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on December 29, 2013, 04:11:31 pm
Meryl, I watched Enchanted April last night. It only took me 2 1/2 years from the time you first recommended it to me!

It was great, especially the Italian countryside. I loved Joan Plowright, but Miranda Richardson disappointed me when she paired up with someone other than Lady Carolina! Those two were obviously meant for each other. I also thought the reaction of the women when their men showed up was not very credible.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Meryl on December 29, 2013, 09:33:47 pm
Meryl, I watched Enchanted April last night. It only took me 2 1/2 years from the time you first recommended it to me!

It was great, especially the Italian countryside. I loved Joan Plowright, but Miranda Richardson disappointed me when she paired up with someone other than Lady Carolina! Those two were obviously meant for each other. I also thought the reaction of the women when their men showed up was not very credible.

I'm so glad you saw and enjoyed, Lee!  :D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: brianr on July 30, 2014, 08:52:27 pm
The New Zealand international Film festival begins here tonight. The only gay referenced movie I can see is "Love is Strange' set in New York. It is on next Monday night and Tuesday midday (when I will be walking). Has anyone seen it?  Actors are John Lithgow and Alfred Molina, director Ira Sachs.

Tomorrow I plan to see "the Great Museum" set in the Kunsthistoriches Museum in Vienna. I am planning a week in Vienna next May.
On Saturday I have chosen "Still Life" set in London by Italian director Pasolini.
I sometimes make great plans for film festivals but do not always complete the effort of getting there.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on July 30, 2014, 09:04:00 pm
Hi Brian.  Yes, I saw "Love is Strange" this past June.  It was one of the highlights of the Provincetown Film Festival; the audience loved.  I could definitely recommend it.  Strong performances from Lithgow and Molina.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: CellarDweller on July 31, 2014, 04:49:25 pm
So, did anyone see Sharknado 2?   :laugh:
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on July 31, 2014, 06:43:18 pm
So, did anyone see Sharknado 2?   :laugh:

It was TV last night but on a channel I'm not subscribed to. I did see the trailer for the first one and that was enough, lol!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on October 06, 2014, 10:59:16 pm
I caved to all the hype and went to see "Gone Girl." Frankly, I was disappointed. David Fincher is a good director, but I find his movies full of obscurity and confusion. Also, since I don't really like Ben Affleck, I had to steel myself before watching him again (I found Argo awful). But it wasn't enough, because Affleck is in every single scene, and the camera gets up close and personal with him. I found myself scrunching back in my seat to try to put a little more air space between me and him.

There were a lot of good things about the movie. I especially liked the performance of Carrie Coon as Affleck's twin sister. Tyler Perry as his attorney was good too, as well as the detective played by Kim Dickens. And Neil Patrick Harris was very convincing.

Appreciate your thoughts on the movie.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: CellarDweller on October 07, 2014, 05:46:23 pm
Also, since I don't really like Ben Affleck, I had to steel myself before watching him again (I found Argo awful). But it wasn't enough, because Affleck is in every single scene, and the camera gets up close and personal with him. I found myself scrunching back in my seat to try to put a little more air space between me and him.

I haven't heard any reviews on his performance, do the critics like him in this?
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on October 08, 2014, 08:18:36 pm
I haven't heard any reviews on his performance, do the critics like him in this?

I think he's gotten reasonably good reviews.

I saw it and thought it was OK. I would have liked it a lot more if I hadn't read the book. But both the movie and book derive a lot of their interest from plot twists, and both handle them well enough, but since they're the exact same plot twists I wasn't at all surprised and the movie some of its appeal for me. I think the same would happen if you did it the other way around.

I have nothing against Ben Affleck and liked "Argo." Lee, I hope you didn't look too closely at that shower scene -- you would see ... well, let's say more of Ben Affleck than has been in featured in previous movies.


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on October 08, 2014, 10:30:39 pm
I have nothing against Ben Affleck and liked "Argo." Lee, I hope you didn't look too closely at that shower scene -- you would see ... well, let's say more of Ben Affleck than has been in featured in previous movies.

Sounds like a good argument in favor of seeing the movie, if you ask me.  ;D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on October 09, 2014, 11:21:42 pm
Tonight I watched Jack the Giant Slayer and I enjoyed it much more than Gone Girl. Nick Hoult was excellent as Jack.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on October 10, 2014, 10:18:35 am
That's one of the reasons I don't like BA, actually. For instance, in Argo, there was a scene where he had just put on a shirt and he was buttoning it up. He was standing in front of a mirror so as to maximize the view of his luxuriantly hairy chest (oddly, his chest in GG had only a bit of hair). It was a totally superfluous shot. And now we have the famous shower scene. Well, I prefer the shower scene in Breathless where Richard Gere gave us not only a full frontal but a full rear view too. Not to mention that the organ in question was in deep shadow and could have been mistaken for the shower door handle. And, to top it off, gorgeous Rosamund Pike was right there  under the shower, her ripe curves set off by a coating of ... well, I don't want to go into too much detail here!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on October 11, 2014, 09:43:51 pm
Lat night, I watched again An Education. I was charmed to notice Rosamund Pike in a supporting role. I hadn't noticed her before, I was so entranced with the lead actor, Carey Mulligan.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on December 16, 2014, 08:17:14 pm
I love good movie criticism. It is usually well written. And of movie review writing, the negative ones are often the best! Check this out:
http://www.avclub.com/article/20-worst-films-2014-212689 (http://www.avclub.com/article/20-worst-films-2014-212689)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: CellarDweller on December 16, 2014, 08:43:17 pm
Has anyone seen Nightcrawler?  It's been getting a ton of great reviews.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on December 16, 2014, 10:20:08 pm
Has anyone seen Nightcrawler?  It's been getting a ton of great reviews.

I've seen it and enjoyed it a lot! It's not a movie for people who like their Jake in cute mode. He is not cute in this. He's very convincingly creepy. And as I said somewhere else on this site, there are some plot features that I didn't buy. But it's entertaining, original, well-acted, etc.

For the record, I saw it a week after Birdman and liked it a lot better. So if you're ever deciding between the two, Nightcrawler would be my recommendation.


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: CellarDweller on December 17, 2014, 06:13:36 pm
I've been hearing "creepy" a lot regarding Jake's performance.  Hey, it got him a Golden Globe nomination.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: CellarDweller on January 21, 2015, 10:43:14 pm
I am looking forward to the newest one Catching Fire in November, but I know a movie is disturbing to me when I get that sick feeling in my stomach.  I got that - and still get it - when I see The Hunger Games and when I think about the next installment, I get that same sense of "I want to see this...but I don't want to see this..."


Hunger Games star Jennifer Lawrence is hitting the pop charts now. 

In Mockingjay she sings a song that inspires the rebels, called "The Hanging Tree".

The song was released as a single, even though Lawrence was not thrilled with it, and it's managed to get to #14 on the Billboard Hot 100.

Here is the version most radio stations are playing, with a 'pop remix' to it.



[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YNrBBfqWpzE[/youtube]
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on February 04, 2015, 12:43:41 am
(http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h249/giluno01/LIFE-01_zpshcs4sw7q.jpg)

Berlin film festival 2015: 17 key films to look out for – in pictures
 
The Berlin film festival opens for business on Thursday with a sparkling line-up, including new films from
Terrence Malick and Werner Herzog, Ian McKellen as Sherlock Holmes, and some obscure, little-known film
about a student journalist who interviews a rich businessman
 
 
-Dane DeHaan plays James Dean and Robert Pattinson photographer Dennis Stock in the
Anton Corbijn-directed Life, an account of the pair’s friendship
 
-Terrence Malick’s latest, Knight of Cups, a study of LA disillusion and decadence with
Christian Bale and Natalie Portman.
 
-Breathe Umphefumlo, from U-Carmen eKhayelitsha director Mark Dornford-May, a reworking
of Puccini’s opera La Bohème relocated to a South African township
 
-Ian McKellen plays Sherlock as a bee-keeping retiree in his 90s looking back over his career in
Mr Holmes. Bill ‘God and Monsters’ Condon directs.
 
-Wim Wenders hooks up with the ubiquitous James Franco for the German director’s
first fiction feature since 2008’s Palermo Shooting. Every Thing Will Be Fine is a study of
a man (Franco) who knocks down a child in his car
 
-Kenneth Branagh’s live-action Cinderella – starring Lily James as Cinders and
Cate Blanchett as the Wicked Stepmother – gets its worldwide release in March, but is
showing out of competition here
 
-German director Oliver Hirschbiegel bounces back from the Diana disaster with Elser (AKA 13 Minutes),
an account of Georg Elser, who tried to kill Hitler in 1939
 
-The latest from Iranian director Jafar Panahi, who has managed to complete three features
despite being banned from film-making by Iran’s authorities. Taxi has Panahi himself driving
a cab around Tehran, talking to the people he picks up
 
-The big hope of China’s commercial domestic film industry, Gone with the Bullets is the sequel
to action comedy smash Let the Bullets Fly, directed by and starring Jiang Wen as gangster in the 1920s
 
-Maverick British director Peter Greenaway examines Soviet master film-maker Sergei Eistenstein’s
abortive trip to Mexico in the 1930s in Eisenstein in Guanajuato
 
-Having made his name with the low-budget Weekend, British director Andrew Haigh scales up
with 45 Years, a study of a long-married couple with explosive secrets. Tom Courtenay and
Charlotte Rampling star
 
-Helen Mirren and Ryan Reynolds star in Woman in Gold, a based-on-truth study
of a Holocaust survivor and her lawyer who are fighting to reclaim a Klimt painting after it was stolen
by the Nazis. Simon Curtis directs
 
-Veteran German auteur Margarethe von Trotta returns with The Misplaced World,
a fable of a man obsessed with a woman who bears a striking resemblance to his dead wife
 
-A quick European jaunt for Sebastian Silva’s Nasty Baby, fresh from its Sundance premiere.
Kristen Wiig is a surrogate mother for a gay couple, played by Tunde Adebimpe and Silva
 
-Léa Seydoux stars in a faithful adaptation of Octave Mirbeau’s turn of the century novel
Diary of a Chambermaid, previously reworked by Buñuel and Renoir among others.
Benoît Jacquot takes the reins this time
 
-The hugely anticipated adaptation of EL James S&M novel Fifty Shades of Grey gets its
world premiere in Berlin – sensibly, though, it is being screened out of competition
 
-Werner Herzog has rounded up a strong cast – James Franco, Nicole Kidman,
Robert Pattinson, Damian Lewis – for Queen of the Desert, a biopic of traveller/diplomat
Gertrude Bell, who was instrumental in the creation of Iraq in the 1920s


http://www.theguardian.com/film/gallery/2015/feb/03/berlin-film-festival-2015-15-key-films-to-look-out-for-in-pictures
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on February 04, 2015, 09:39:41 am
Quote
-Kenneth Branagh’s live-action Cinderella – starring Lily James as Cinders and Cate Blanchett as the Wicked Stepmother – gets its worldwide release in March, but is showing out of competition here

Well, I guess we now know who's going to take Meryl Streep's place when Meryl graduates to Shirley Maclaine roles.

These films all sound good except one. Fifty Shades of Grey seems really out of place on this list.


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on February 04, 2015, 09:40:57 am
Thanks, Gil.  Looks like another good film year coming up.

BTW, I saw U-Carmen eKhayelitsha on a plane; it featured the fiercest Carmen I've ever seen!

And, Queen of the Desert is a fascinating biography, and should make a good film.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: CellarDweller on February 04, 2015, 09:42:00 am
These films all sound good except one. Fifty Shades of Grey seems really out of place on this list.

I can't believe they made a movie out of that god-awful  book.  LOL
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on February 04, 2015, 09:43:08 am
I can't believe they made a movie out of that god-awful  book.  LOL

Oh, I can believe they made a movie out of a god-awful book that sells eight gazillion copies.


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on February 04, 2015, 10:23:21 am
Oh, I can believe they made a movie out of a god-awful book that sells eight gazillion copies.

You bet! It's gonna make a shit-load of money.

I wish I owned a piece of it!  :laugh:

Or, at least, somebody expects it's gonna make a shit-load of money.  ;D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on February 04, 2015, 07:17:07 pm
-Ian McKellen plays Sherlock as a bee-keeping retiree in his 90s looking back over his career in
Mr Holmes. Bill ‘God and Monsters’ Condon directs.
 
-Having made his name with the low-budget Weekend, British director Andrew Haigh scales up
with 45 Years, a study of a long-married couple with explosive secrets. Tom Courtenay and
Charlotte Rampling star
 
-Helen Mirren and Ryan Reynolds star in Woman in Gold, a based-on-truth study
of a Holocaust survivor and her lawyer who are fighting to reclaim a Klimt painting after it was stolen
by the Nazis. Simon Curtis directs
 
-Werner Herzog has rounded up a strong cast – James Franco, Nicole Kidman,
Robert Pattinson, Damian Lewis – for Queen of the Desert, a biopic of traveller/diplomat
Gertrude Bell, who was instrumental in the creation of Iraq in the 1920s[/i]

These are the ones I'm really looking forward to. In addition, a new version of Frankenstein and a Johnny Depp film called Mortdecai.

"...and some obscure, little-known film
about a student journalist who interviews a rich businessman"
haha, they're referring to 50 Shades of here. I recall that taking on this film changed the whole structure of Focus Features and didn't James Schamus suddenly exit right in the middle of it? Plus, doing 50SOG meant that FF couldn't take on the indie films it was previously noted for. It was a sad business and I definitely plan to boycott 50SOG because of it!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on February 05, 2015, 02:19:18 am
I love good movie criticism. It is usually well written. And of movie review writing, the negative ones are often the best! Check this out:
http://www.avclub.com/article/20-worst-films-2014-212689 (http://www.avclub.com/article/20-worst-films-2014-212689)

I’ve seen many of the titles on several other “Worst Film” lists. Especially Atlas Shrugged III, Saving Christmas & Left Behind. I dodged 20 bullets because I haven’t seen any of the films listed. But then, I’m very selective when picking a film to watch so I rarely see bad films.
 
It’s sad to see so many big names among these turkeys. What happened to Atom Egoyan? He hasn’t made a good film since 1999’s Felicia’s Journey. And Razzie winner Nicolas Cage’s films have been hit & miss - mostly miss – since Wild at Heart way back in 1990. I guess he says yes to everything he’s offered.  Same with Robert DeNiro, he’s been mostly slumming since 1997.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on February 05, 2015, 02:33:14 am
Thanks, Gil.  Looks like another good film year coming up.

BTW, I saw U-Carmen eKhayelitsha on a plane; it featured the fiercest Carmen I've ever seen!

And, Queen of the Desert is a fascinating biography, and should make a good film.

You’re very welcome.
 
RE: Life: I have a copy of Stark's book so I'm a bit worried about the casting of Dane Dehaan as James Dean. I don't mind that he doesn't look like him, it's just that he looks like a teenager – a kind of Gilbert Grape Dicaprio - while Dean looked older for his age. We'll see. I never did see James Franco's James Dean but I suspect he was pretty good in the role.

(http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h249/giluno01/Pattinson-Dehaan-Dean-01_zpspk6le22m.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on February 05, 2015, 03:07:23 am
I can't believe they made a movie out of that god-awful  book.  LOL

(http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h249/giluno01/jamie-dornan-02_zpsg9cirbhg.jpg)

But it stars the adorable Jamie Dornan who is so good as the serial killer in The Fall.

You have to watch him on the Graham Norton Show as he explains how he learned how to walk, it's hilarious:

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: CellarDweller on February 05, 2015, 09:39:35 am
Oh, I can believe they made a movie out of a god-awful book that sells eight gazillion copies.

You bet! It's gonna make a shit-load of money.

I wish I owned a piece of it!  :laugh:

Or, at least, somebody expects it's gonna make a shit-load of money.  ;D


I won't lie, I wish I had a piece of it too.  LOL   I was just thinking there are so many better books out there that could be made into movies.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: CellarDweller on February 05, 2015, 09:40:26 am

(http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h249/giluno01/jamie-dornan-02_zpsg9cirbhg.jpg)

But it stars the adorable Jamie Dornan who is so good as the serial killer in The Fall.

You have to watch him on the Graham Norton Show as he explains how he learned how to walk, it's hilarious:


I'll check out the video at home tonight.   And yes, he is adorable. 
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on February 05, 2015, 10:09:23 am
RE: Life: I have a copy of Stark's book so I'm a bit worried about the casting of Dane Dehaan as James Dean. I don't mind that he doesn't look like him, it's just that he looks like a teenager – a kind of Gilbert Grape Dicaprio - while Dean looked older for his age. We'll see. I never did see James Franco's James Dean but I suspect he was pretty good in the role.

(http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h249/giluno01/Pattinson-Dehaan-Dean-01_zpspk6le22m.jpg)

Sure enough, when I glanced at your post before reading the text I thought for a sec those were pictures of stars when they were younger and the middle one was LD. Then I noticed Pattinson and Dean and saw that they weren't younger. Both of them, in those three pictures, look about 10 years older than the middle guy.




Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on February 05, 2015, 01:00:01 pm
I'm not sure a person's age should matter in the movie business. It's acting, after all. And in this age of makeup and special effects, it should matter even less. I'm remembering that Anne Bancroft did a good job as Dustin Hoffman's mother even though she was only six years older than him in The Graduate. And I could cite many other examples, including our own Heath Ledger, who convincingly aged 20 years in Brokeback Mountain.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on February 06, 2015, 04:41:10 am
I haven't seen Dehaan in anything but with that baby face he better be a great actor if he wants to emulate James Dean.

(http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h249/giluno01/James-Dean-01_zpstofyrarg.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on February 06, 2015, 08:47:32 am
(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2011/10/25/article-2053466-0E88864800000578-849_634x733.jpg)
James Franco (didn't see it)

(http://lh4.ggpht.com/_78wgd5ujqrc/THx4skA16nI/AAAAAAAAitU/eUdfeg_5qYQ/s800/JamesPrestonasJamesDean.jpg)
James Preston (saw it and wished I hadn't)

(http://www.urban.ro/data/Image/image/first-look-at-dane-dehaan-as-james-dean-in-life1.jpg)
Dane Deehan (who knows?)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on February 07, 2015, 01:28:36 pm
I'm not sure a person's age should matter in the movie business. It's acting, after all. And in this age of makeup and special effects, it should matter even less. I'm remembering that Anne Bancroft did a good job as Dustin Hoffman's mother even though she was only six years older than him in The Graduate. And I could cite many other examples, including our own Heath Ledger, who convincingly aged 20 years in Brokeback Mountain.

His lover, but of his mother's generation. Anyway, yes, that worked, partly because her bone structure makes her look oldish and because she actually was practically playing her age -- the mother of an 18-year-old could pretty easily be 36 or just a year or two above. But he ... well, at 30 he was very convincing as a recent college graduate.

Another example: Sally Field played Tom Hanks' mother and is only 10 years older.



Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on February 07, 2015, 01:49:32 pm
His lover, but of his mother's generation.

Thank you. If she had played his mother, that would have made for an awfully kinky movie!  :laugh:
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Monika on February 07, 2015, 04:19:00 pm
Has anyone seen Jupiter Ascending? The trailer looks good but ithas gotten really bad reviews over here.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on February 07, 2015, 05:15:57 pm
Has anyone seen Jupiter Ascending? The trailer looks good but ithas gotten really bad reviews over here.

The local reviewer gave it zero out of four stars.


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...MAGIC MIKE 2
Post by: serious crayons on February 08, 2015, 03:33:45 pm
SC,  I hope you will do the BetterMost review of Magic Mike 2.  I stumbled on MM1 quite innocently.  I thought, "OK, 2 hours of eye-candy-- I can handle that."  Then they started talking, and I realized I couldn't stand 2 hours of it.  Then I saw Matt Bomer, looking disoriented and wondering "What in hell am I doing here?"  Good question Matt.  Go back to White  Collar and your hunky FBI boyfriend and the kinky slave anklet he makes  you wear.  You don't belong in this movie!  I can't believe a bunch of men, even straight men, would behave like that.  Does Magic Mike 2 promise even more of this bizarre behaviour?  Or was MM1 all just a gigantic send-up that I stupidly missed?

I don't really understand this objection. Of course men behave like that. Never heard of the Chippendales? I think I read somewhere that the movie was based on a magazine article about such a place.

I'm not a big male-stripper enthusiast, but I thought the movie was pretty good. As for MM2, I'll wait and see what the reviews say.


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on February 08, 2015, 03:35:29 pm
Still another question, x: why would you be so surprised that men would do that? Surely you're aware that women do it all the time, even if you've never been to a strip club yourself they are a familiar setting in movies. Why is it so hard to believe men would do the same thing as a way to earn money?


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...MAGIC MIKE 2
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on February 08, 2015, 03:51:57 pm
I don't really understand this objection. Of course men behave like that. Never heard of the Chippendales? I think I read somewhere that the movie was based on a magazine article about such a place.

And on star Channing Tatum's experiences before he hit it big in Hollywood.

Quote
I'm not a big male-stripper enthusiast, but I thought the movie was pretty good. As for MM2, I'll wait and see what the reviews say.

I'll see it if it plays some place I can get to conveniently.

Still another question, x: why would you be so surprised that men would do that? Surely you're aware that women do it all the time, even if you've never been to a strip club yourself they are a familiar setting in movies. Why is it so hard to believe men would do the same thing as a way to earn money?

I regularly see newspaper ads for male "reviews" aimed at women audiences.

And, of course, male strip shows used to be common in that mecca of gay travel, Provincetown, Mass. I saw one there back in the Eighties. The guys weren't nearly as good as the guys in Magic Mike.

I still remember getting a good laugh at the quick shot of big bruiser Joe Manganiello seated at a sewing machine sewing on a thong.  ;D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on February 08, 2015, 04:30:50 pm
It was also one of the movies that contributed to the McConaughssance -- Matthew McConaughey's comeback -- a phenomenon that I've found entertaining and inspiring.



Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on February 08, 2015, 05:40:52 pm
It was also one of the movies that contributed to the McConaughssance -- Matthew McConaughey's comeback -- a phenomenon that I've found entertaining and inspiring.

I thought he was very good in that role. He scared me.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on February 08, 2015, 06:05:15 pm
Montreal has not one, not two, but four male strip clubs. Oh and another one for women only.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on February 08, 2015, 06:10:50 pm
I thought he was very good in that role. He scared me.

Yes! He walked a perfect line between benevolent and scary, simultaneously playing his classic typecast role and subtly caricaturing it. He was like emcee in Cabaret with better abs.

MM is kind of goofy in real-life interviews and awards speeches, but every one of his post McConaughssance roles has been spellbinding.




Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...MAGIC MIKE 2
Post by: southendmd on February 08, 2015, 08:01:54 pm
And, of course, male strip shows used to be common in that mecca of gay travel, Provincetown, Mass. I saw one there back in the Eighties. The guys weren't nearly as good as the guys in Magic Mike.

Sorry, a little OT, but...

I've never even heard of male strip shows in Ptown. Certainly not in the last 20 years.  Now, we have "Well Strung", a clothed chamber group.

(https://fbcdn-sphotos-b-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xap1/t31.0-8/c0.53.851.315/p851x315/1048207_632642273450397_1443094635_o.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...MAGIC MIKE 2
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on February 08, 2015, 09:23:21 pm
I've never even heard of male strip shows in Ptown.
 Certainly not in the last 20 years.

It was the Eighties, and you didn't miss much.

Quote
Now, we have "Well Strung", a clothed chamber group.


(https://fbcdn-sphotos-b-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xap1/t31.0-8/c0.53.851.315/p851x315/1048207_632642273450397_1443094635_o.jpg)


Clothed, yes, but somebody clearly thinks it's good for business to show off his shoulders and biceps.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Aloysius J. Gleek on February 09, 2015, 03:04:23 am
Has anyone seen Jupiter Ascending? The trailer looks good but it has gotten really bad reviews over here.

I quite liked it--I had a silly grin on my face all the way through. It was fun! I really cannot understand all the hate--especially the hate sent at Mila Kunis. I liked her AND Jupiter Ascending. I also especially liked Magic Mike--I mean Channing Tatum--as 'Caine'.

Jupiter (Mila Kunis) says, yearningly, "But I like dogs!" in re Channing/Caine, who is a genetic 'splice' wolf/human, and I laughed out loud. Caine the wolfman once had bird wings that had been amputated as punishment, so, as is usual with the Wachowski siblings, things are complicated, an over-the-top mish-mash.

I see many influences: Cordwainer Smith's Norstrilia and his bombastic future history ('The Instrumentality of Mankind') with the Underpeople (animals-slash-humans treated as property) that spanned several interlocking stories, novellas and novels; Robert Heinlein's Glory Road, with a soldier of fortune who helps a beautiful young girl (who turns out to be far, far older, and the Empress of the Twenty Universes besides); H. Rider Haggard's She (or more likely the 1965 film starring Ursula Andress and John Richardson)--there are even elements of Terry Gilliam's Brazil.

Oh well--at least it isn't boring!   ;)  ::)  :laugh:

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on February 09, 2015, 10:37:09 am
I quite liked it--I had a silly grin on my face all the way through. It was fun!

I haven't seen it, but it certainly looked like fun in the TV commercials for it.

And it's got Sean Bean and Magic Mike Channing Tatum.  8)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Aloysius J. Gleek on February 09, 2015, 03:12:14 pm
I haven't seen it, but it certainly looked like fun in the TV commercials for it.

And it's got Sean Bean and Magic Mike Channing Tatum.  8)


(http://i.ytimg.com/vi/oONtvNAve-A/hqdefault.jpg)
Oops! Wrong costume!

That's better! ("But I love dogs--I've always loved dogs!!") WOOF!  ;D ;D
(http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/198z54at6jaqnjpg/ku-xlarge.jpg)


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on February 09, 2015, 04:04:26 pm
That's better! ("But I love dogs--I've always loved dogs!!") WOOF!  ;D ;D
(http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/198z54at6jaqnjpg/ku-xlarge.jpg)

But can he interbreed with humans?  8)

With those ears he could probably play an elf, too.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Aloysius J. Gleek on February 09, 2015, 06:45:06 pm
But can he interbreed with humans?  8)


Well, he could do his darndest!  :D


With those ears he could probably play an elf, too.

Quarter Wolf, quarter Vulcan, quarter Keebler Elf.  ;D

(http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/198z54at6jaqnjpg/ku-xlarge.jpg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on February 09, 2015, 07:28:21 pm

Well, he could do his darndest!  :D


Quarter Wolf, quarter Vulcan, quarter Keebler Elf.  ;D

(http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/198z54at6jaqnjpg/ku-xlarge.jpg)


I was thinking more LOTR, but can you see him baking cookies in a hollow tree?  ;D
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: oilgun on February 11, 2015, 12:07:04 pm
Very Disappointing, no penis shots.

Fifty Shades of Grey review: making a bad fist of it
1 / 5 stars
Sam Taylor-Johnson’s adaptation of the EL James erotica goes big on the red tape and very, very small on our hero’s legendary member, with results so awful they’re more Victoria Wood than Victoria’s Secrets

http://www.theguardian.com/film/2015/feb/11/fifty-shades-of-grey-review
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on February 11, 2021, 05:16:44 pm
Since you like Burt Lancaster, you should try viewing one of his last films. That's right, you guessed it....Local Hero!!  ::)

I just watched an almost two hour interview with Peter Riegert, star of Local Hero, about the amazing 1980s Scottish comedy that is just about my second facorite movie of all time. It's worth a listen if you liked the movie.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=vPx2frHQ8kw&feature=youtu.be&fbclid=IwAR0Nc0cO0cAwgNmoymdXR7haut-H93GYy-tJ0Z0mDVcin5tQE2HRTOKVUcY (https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=vPx2frHQ8kw&feature=youtu.be&fbclid=IwAR0Nc0cO0cAwgNmoymdXR7haut-H93GYy-tJ0Z0mDVcin5tQE2HRTOKVUcY)
Interesting that Peter's girlfriend back in the early 1980s was Bette Midler!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Sason on February 11, 2021, 05:19:11 pm
I saw Local Hero a couple of times back when it came out, and loved it!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on February 12, 2021, 02:13:44 pm
So wonderful to hear of our shared good taste in movies, both comedy and drama!

Another Brokie who likes Local Hero is Jenny (newyearsday).

A book, The Making of Local Hero, was mentioned in the talk, so I looked it up on Amazon and a used copy (https://www.amazon.com/Local-hero-making-Allan-Hunter/dp/0904919676/ref=sr_1_7?dchild=1&keywords=local+hero&qid=1613153321&s=books&sr=1-7) is $199.00   :o
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Sason on February 12, 2021, 04:23:54 pm
So wonderful to hear of our shared good taste in movies, both comedy and drama!

It is, isn't it!  ;) ;D


Quote
A book, The Making of Local Hero, was mentioned in the talk, so I looked it up on Amazon and a used copy (https://www.amazon.com/Local-hero-making-Allan-Hunter/dp/0904919676/ref=sr_1_7?dchild=1&keywords=local+hero&qid=1613153321&s=books&sr=1-7) is $199.00   :o

 :o :o :o
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on February 12, 2021, 09:10:56 pm
Enjoyed another Local Hero documentary tonight:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JEm6AsTY0WI (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JEm6AsTY0WI)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Sason on February 12, 2021, 09:24:11 pm
Thanks for the link.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on February 12, 2021, 10:52:59 pm
I just tonight had an idea of trying to watch old episodes of The Highlander, if that counts for researching my Scottish heritage. My then-husband and I used to watch the show every Friday night at about midnight. Just tonight the show came up in another conversation and I had the idea of trying to watch an episode or two.

It will be a tough assignment, of course. Imagine the burden of having to sit through all these visuals on my way to ferreting out genealogical data. Yeah yeah yeah, so you're shirtless and look like you're been to the gym, let's get back to your thoughts about Inverness!

Unfortunately, it appears that actor Adrian Paul is not Scottish, he's English. But The Highlander is, so that counts, right?



(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/bf/16/09/bf16095d773b699c2373b6aca2574408.jpg)









Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on February 13, 2021, 08:32:03 pm
Enjoy your "research"! Watching Outlander was one way I got hooked on genealogy; maybe it will work for you!

I've been reading about how the name Read is a variant of Red, describing the hair color of your ancestors, maybe!
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on February 14, 2021, 11:13:48 am
Enjoy your "research"! Watching Outlander was one way I got hooked on genealogy; maybe it will work for you!

I've been reading about how the name Read is a variant of Red, describing the hair color of your ancestors, maybe!

And the genes live on in my hair, my brother's hair and my son's hair!

However, I always thought my name was Read because I am a writer. Or is it the other way around? Maybe my ancestors were writers and I inherited those genes. That at least does apply to my immediate ancestors -- my grandfather was a newspaper editor and both my folks was in advertising writing.




Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on February 21, 2021, 09:47:31 pm
Guess what? I saw a movie today...in a movie theater! "Blithe Spirit" starring Dan Stevens and Judy Densch. From a play by Noel Coward. My companion had seen the original version starring Rex Harrison and said it was nothing like what we saw today. Still, it was fun and felt daring to go to a movie theater. It's been nearly a year! We wore our face masks the whole time.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on February 21, 2021, 10:51:07 pm
Guess what? I saw a movie today...in a movie theater! "Blithe Spirit" starring Dan Stevens and Judy Densch. From a play by Noel Coward. My companion had seen the original version starring Rex Harrison and said it was nothing like what we saw today. Still, it was fun and felt daring to go to a movie theater. It's been nearly a year! We wore our face masks the whole time.

I didn't know they remade that. Is it recent? Did Dame Judy play Madame Arcati?
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on February 21, 2021, 10:57:53 pm
I just tonight had an idea of trying to watch old episodes of The Highlander, if that counts for researching my Scottish heritage. My then-husband and I used to watch the show every Friday night at about midnight. Just tonight the show came up in another conversation and I had the idea of trying to watch an episode or two.

It will be a tough assignment, of course. Imagine the burden of having to sit through all these visuals on my way to ferreting out genealogical data. Yeah yeah yeah, so you're shirtless and look like you're been to the gym, let's get back to your thoughts about Inverness!

Unfortunately, it appears that actor Adrian Paul is not Scottish, he's English. But The Highlander is, so that counts, right?



(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/bf/16/09/bf16095d773b699c2373b6aca2574408.jpg)

So, who's it gonna be, Adrian Paul or Same Heughan (sp?)? Pick one.  :laugh:
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: brianr on February 22, 2021, 12:24:09 am
I didn't know they remade that. Is it recent? Did Dame Judy play Madame Arcati?
Yes. It was a 2020 production. I saw it on December30. I considered it amusing but not wonderful. I did go to the Library to see if I could read the play but it was borrowed. Perhaps I can try again this week. Besides Dame Judy I wanted to see Dan Carter as I had a crush on him in Downton Abbey and was annoyed when they killed him off (he wanted to leave the series). I did not have the same reaction to him this time.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on February 22, 2021, 10:48:17 am
So, who's it gonna be, Adrian Paul or Same Heughan (sp?)? Pick one.  :laugh:

The former.

Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on February 22, 2021, 07:50:52 pm
Yes. It was a 2020 production. I saw it on December30. I considered it amusing but not wonderful. I did go to the Library to see if I could read the play but it was borrowed. Perhaps I can try again this week. Besides Dame Judy I wanted to see Dan Carter as I had a crush on him in Downton Abbey and was annoyed when they killed him off (he wanted to leave the series). I did not have the same reaction to him this time.

My friend said that Stevens overacted. He certainly did give the impression that writer's block was driving him crazy. The person who played Elvira also overacted. But Densch was excellent as usual.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on February 22, 2021, 09:11:12 pm
So, who's it gonna be, Adrian Paul or Same Heughan (sp?)? Pick one.  :laugh:

The former.

So of course the latter is all yours.


Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Front-Ranger on February 23, 2021, 12:27:13 pm
But Jeff said that Sam is not to his liking. I'm a little surprised. Wouldn't Sam be a reenactor's dream?
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on February 23, 2021, 12:59:22 pm
But Jeff said that Sam is not to his liking. I'm a little surprised. Wouldn't Sam be a reenactor's dream?

Then again, who needs costumes?

(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/33/f3/25/33f3259eec135d6627a70829213c2751.gif)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on February 23, 2021, 01:24:09 pm
So, who's it gonna be, Adrian Paul or Same Heughan (sp?)? Pick one.  :laugh:

So of course the latter is all yours.

But Jeff said that Sam is not to his liking. I'm a little surprised. Wouldn't Sam be a reenactor's dream?

He might be a reenactor's dream for 18th-century reenactors, but the Middle Ages or Renaissance maybe not so much--not dressed that way, anyway.

I was just interested in what you and FRiend Lee had to say.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Sason on February 23, 2021, 02:02:48 pm
But Jeff said that Sam is not to his liking. I'm a little surprised. Wouldn't Sam be a reenactor's dream?


Jamie!!!!!!!

There's a new season of Outlander on Netflix here now.

I think I'll try and wait till the weekend, so I can binge watch it  ;D


Jamie reminds me quite a bit of Heath.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on February 23, 2021, 03:13:32 pm
(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/a6/75/fc/a675fce2d31681fa8fd893300e5f1d6a.gif)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Sason on February 23, 2021, 03:23:18 pm
yup
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on February 23, 2021, 04:22:44 pm
I was just interested in what you and FRiend Lee had to say.

I mean, if Sam were to ask me out to dinner, I'd go.

But I've detected over the years that you and I have somewhat different tastes. As is to be expected, I guess. Brokies don't even agree on Jake vs. Heath!

When I see Paul's profile photo, I tend to just think of it as a picture of Paul himself. I'm not sure I'd do that with a Heath photo.



Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on February 23, 2021, 07:11:32 pm
I mean, if Sam were to ask me out to dinner, I'd go.

Oh, I wouldn't kick him out of bed. In that "smoldering" photo, he looks a bit smug to me.

Quote
When I see Paul's profile photo, I tend to just think of it as a picture of Paul himself. I'm not sure I'd do that with a Heath photo.

Our Paul?  ???
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on February 23, 2021, 07:54:21 pm
Hunh?  That's Jake, not me. 

I once met a fellow Brokie, who, upon seeing me, was clearly VERY disappointed.   This person must have thought it was I in the photo.   How embarrassing. 
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on February 23, 2021, 09:33:18 pm
Our Paul?  ???

Hunh?  That's Jake, not me.

I don't mean I literally think that's a picture of you. For one thing, I've met you in person. And while of course you and Jake are both ruggedly handsome I know you aren't doppelgangers.

I've actually thought that even about women Brokies who use a Jake portrait as their profile pic. It's like it's their words, but coming from Jake's face.

With that in mind, I may adopt this one:


(http://i0.wp.com/moviebabble.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Wicked-Witch-of-the-West.jpg?fit=1200%2C630&ssl=1)



Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: southendmd on February 24, 2021, 08:44:11 am
(https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/378800000662096929/7184beadbef1b576c447084142435bd6_400x400.jpeg)
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: Jeff Wrangler on February 24, 2021, 10:20:08 am
Hunh?  That's Jake, not me. 

That I know. I didn't know which Paul she was talking about, you or Adrian Paul.
Title: Re: Resurrecting the Movies thread...
Post by: serious crayons on February 24, 2021, 10:25:44 am
That I know. I didn't know which Paul she was talking about, you or Adrian Paul.

Ohhh. I didn't make the connection.