Resurrecting the Movies thread...

[serious crayons]

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.

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! 

With Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes as the religious cult next door neighbors!

And Sarah Jessica Parker is their family therapist!

[BelAir]

Even after what that homewrecking slut did to our "Friend" Jennifer Anniston?!!    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!

[BelAir]

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?

[BelAir]

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.

[MaineWriter]

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

[oilgun]

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.

[MaineWriter]

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

[MaineWriter]

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

[oilgun]

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!

[MaineWriter]

"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