Movie Tab II [Archive] - Page 85

Iroquois

08-08-14, 04:54 AM

Captain Phillips (Paul Greengrass, 2013) - 2.5

Based-on-a-true-story film starring Tom Hanks as the titular freighter captain as his ship is overtaken by a crew of Somali pirates that's decent enough for the most part but it runs out of steam a bit about halfway through.

Escape Plan (Mikael Håfström, 2013) - 2.5

Campy enough high-concept thriller starring Sylvester Stallone as a professional security consultant who breaks out of prisons for a living being unwillingly imprisoned in an extremely high-security facility and teaming up with an old con (Arnold Schwarzenegger) in order to break out. Constant barrages of prison-break clichés muddy a film that really makes you wish it had been made 20 years earlier, but it still has its moments.

Rocky II (Sylvester Stallone, 1979) - 2.5

On the Easter weekend I decided to marathon all six Rocky movies because I'd gotten a box set as a Christmas present and I figured I'd do them all at once. I guess I had some reservations about this particular entry because the whole plot of Rocky II - the closeness of the match from the original prompts enough controversy for Rocky and Apollo to have a highly publicised and much more conclusive rematch - seemed to kind of contradict the whole point of the original film. Still, it was still pretty decent but I'd probably rank it in the bottom half of the series.

The Passion of the Christ (Mel Gibson, 2004) - 2

So this was on TV on the Easter weekend and I figured, "Well, I haven't seen it before so I might as well watch it". I'm pretty sure it doesn't need a plot summary, but as for the film - well, it was technically well-made and some of the music was good but the writing and acting was extremely lacklustre and it's definitely not worth watching again.

Rocky III (Sylvester Stallone, 1982) - 2.5

I think I prefer this slightly to Rocky II because the addition of Mr. T as Rocky's vicious new rival made for some interesting viewing (also the scene with Hulk Hogan was a highlight, even if it did anticipate the franchise's decline into silliness). I'm not sure you can really marathon Rocky movies as numbers two through four kind of blur together a bit (but IV is a great piece of camp, though).

Rocky V (John G. Avildsen, 1990) - 1

I tried giving this one a chance. I did. The fact that this one tried to break from the formula by having Rocky give up fighting and go from riches to rags at the very start of the movie was an admirable choice in a franchise that had descended rather quickly into self-parody, but the execution...not so much. Still, I don't hate it, at least not to the point where I'd rank it lower than one out of five.

Rocky Balboa (Sylvester Stallone, 2006) - 2.5

At least this was a bit of an improvement on its predecessor, if not by that much. Takes the good parts from Rocky V and makes them work a bit better. Seems like a decent way to encapsulate on the best elements of the series and it has good call-backs, a decent enough antagonist and a very fitting ending.

The Lego Movie (Christopher Miller and Phil Lord, 2014) - 4

Much like Wreck-It Ralph, this was another great example of clever, well-made fun-for-all-ages animation that just so happens to be riddled with excessive levels of product placement. Not sure if I'll watch it a second time or anything, though.

Pitch Perfect (Jason Moore, 2012) - 2

Extremely average underdog movie about a cappella groups having competitions involving a bunch of wacky characters and one straight character (Anna Kendrick's wannabe DJ) to experience the craziness first-hand and eventually save the day. You know, the usual.

The Postman Always Rings Twice (Tay Garnett, 1946) - 3

Pretty solid noir classic about a drifter who conspires with a married woman to pull off the ol' "murder a relative and claim the life insurance" gambit on her husband. Well-made and all, but I have nothing strong to say about it.

From Here to Eternity (Fred Zinnemann, 1953) - 4

My enjoyment of the film was hampered a bit by knowing a little of the censorship-heavy backstory, but as it stands a very good film about the various dramas surrounding a Hawaiian military base in the days leading up to the Pearl Harbour attacks. Strong performances and striking photography boost a story that might have used some trimming here and there but otherwise pretty good.

Swordfish (Dominic Sena, 2001) - 1.5

Extremely trashy early-2000s action-thriller where Hugh Jackman plays a brilliant computer hacker who's coerced into helping high-tech crooks John Travolta and Halle Berry steal millions of dollars or some damn thing. Not the worst movie ever, but it barely has any redeeming qualities and a very weak ending.

Frozen (Jennifer Lee and Chris Buck, 2013) - 2.5

Eh, it's alright, I guess.

V For Vendetta (James McTeigue, 2005) - 2

I avoided this for the longest time because of various negative preconceptions and while I didn't totally hate it, it still doesn't do anything for me. The art direction is pretty good, even if the decision to make it into more of a regular action-packed superhero kind of movie ruins the film a bit.

The Grand Budapest Hotel (Wes Anderson, 2014) - 4

Solid effort from Wes Anderson. Maybe gets its pacing a bit wrong at times, but otherwise a well-rounded film with great technical aspects and good performances.

Clue (Jonathon Lynn, 1985) - 4

So this is how you adapt a boardgame into a movie? Excellent. Manages to weave an excellent and surprisingly plausible plot around the game's outlandish setting and rules, sold by some great performances (especially Tim Curry as the butler). Granted, I didn't find it laugh-out-loud funny for the most part, but I was still extremely amused by the cleverness of it all and that was satisfying enough.

Where the Buffalo Roam (Art Linson, 1980) - 2

The first film based off Hunter S. Thompson's writings, but it's more of a mish-mash of loosely-connected vignettes featuring Thompson (Bill Murray doing a serviceable impression) and his lawyer (Peter Boyle, again serviceable). Ultimately, they're kind of wasted (as in used poorly) in a very haphazard depiction of Thompson's various journalistic shenanigans.

X-Men: First Class (Matthew Vaughn, 2011) - 3

Until I watched this, I hadn't bothered with an X-Men film since X2 and in the months after watching this I still haven't bothered with any others. As for this, I'm writing this off as a technically decent but significantly flawed origin story/prequel type of superhero movie.

Anaconda (Luis Llosa, 1997) - 2.5 (Camp rating: 4)

I can see now why the AV Club named this as part of their "New Cult Canon" feature. A National Geographic documentary crew sailing down the Amazon getting caught up in a crazed game hunter's search for a giant anaconda makes for a film that's most definitely so-bad-it's-good. Cheesy effects work, Jon Voight coming across as a mix of Tony Montana and Quint from Jaws being a bizarre career highlight and some surprisingly decent cinematography all make for a surprisingly fun experience.

Anaconda 3: The Offspring (Don E. FauntLeRoy) - 1 (Camp rating: 2)

For some reason, this aired directly after the first film did and it's pretty obviously a straight-to-video mockbuster playing fast and loose with the whole "giant snake" thing. Two giant genetically-engineered super-snakes break out of a top-secret laboratory and it's up to a team of mercenaries led by David Hasselhoff to try to contain the situation. Hasselhoff hams it up in the Voight role and there's plenty of obviously horrible mockbuster effects in action, plus a glorified cameo by John Rhys-Davies of all people. Not the worst movie ever, but definitely not worth it.

Only Lovers Left Alive (Jim Jarmusch, 2013) - 4

Jim Jarmusch's take on the vampire genre is naturally a slow-burning character study tempered by minimal but dramatic moments of action. Tom Hiddleston and Tilda Swinton are great as a pair of centuries-old vampires and the film is sufficiently fascinating as they hang around Detroit musing about the modern world and their past exploits. It gets so comfortable that by the time a major plot complication surfaces (namely, the arrival of Mia Wasikowska's extremely bloodthirsty and bratty vampire) it feels extremely contrived and knocks the wind out of the film a bit. Still, for the most part it's a technically well-done film with some great music and good performances from all involved.

Life of Pi (Ang Lee, 2012) - 3

Looks great, too bad the story's a little thin (but that's to be expected, I guess).

Men in Black II (Barry Sonnenfeld, 2002) - 2

This was on TV back-to-back with the original (which I reckon gets a solid 3), which really made the flaws in this one stand out. Recycling ideas and grafting on an extremely ancillary romantic subplot are among the worst of this film's flaws, but I don't hate it.

Men in Black III (Barry Sonnenfeld, 2012) - 2.5

A slight improvement on its predecessor, but of course the inclusion of time travel opens up a whole new can of plot holes. Otherwise, this is a tolerable little popcorn movie.

The Aviator (Martin Scorsese, 2004) - 3

For the most part, I don't much care for Leonardo diCaprio's collaborations with Scorsese (I haven't watched Gangs of New York in about a decade and haven't seen Shutter Island, but still...) This is the good kind of middle-of-the-road, using some stylish visuals in depicting the highs and lows of famed entrepreneur Howard Hughes. Some good performances, but diCaprio doesn't really impress me here.

Rope (Alfred Hitchcock, 1948) - 4

Good stuff, though even at about 75 minutes in length it drags ever so slightly. Still, the whole "as close to a single take as possible" experiment yielded some interesting visuals plus the writing and performances are naturally top-notch.

Melancholia (Lars von Trier, 2011) - 2.5

Well, at least it looks kind of pretty, but otherwise it's a long and dreary film and if it's supposed to do that in order to make you feel as miserable as Kirsten Dunst's character, then it works.

The Artist (Michel Hazanavicius, 2011) - 3.5

Great tribute to silent film.

Strangers on a Train (Alfred Hitchcock, 1951) - 4

Another solid Hitchcock film with the plot of two guys semi-intentionally cooking up a scheme to remove obstructive persons from each other's lives but of course it quickly goes pear-shaped.

Calvary (John Michael McDonagh, 2014) - 3.5

Extremely black comedy set in a small Irish town where the local Catholic priest (Brendan Gleeson) takes confession one Sunday and learns that one of his parishioners plans to murder him in seven days. The comedy tends to come from Gleeson interacting with the various colourful and not particularly sympathetic characters that inhabit the village but it's not exactly laugh-a-minute (maybe not even laugh-an-hour), especially when the mood frequently whiplashes into more dramatic moments.

Man Bites Dog (Benoît Poelvoorde, André Bonzel and Rémy Belvaux, 1992) - 3.5

Another darkly comic film, this time a monochromatic Belgian mockumentary about a low-life serial killer and petty thug who is followed around by a camera crew during his day-to-day exploits. Solid enough low-budget filmmaking that's not exactly laugh-out-loud funny and actually gets fairly grim at times, but not a bad watch.

The Human Centipede (First Sequence) (Tom Six, 2010) - 0.5 (Camp rating: 2)

Watched this at a friend's request. The first third or so plays out like the most clichéd horror movie possible (car breaks down, creepy house in the middle of the woods, extremely foolish choices by the "good" characters lead to them getting captured repeatedly, etc.) and then once the "centipede" is put together, it's just...what's the point anymore? It occasionally has a passable moment of tension, but it really is just a terrible movie in just about every regard.

Black Moon Rising (Harley Cokeliss, 1986) - 2

I had hopes that this would be a good little bit of Eighties trash (the fact that it's based on an early John Carpenter screenplay also gave me a little hope), but really it could have been a good candidate for an episode of Mystery Science Theater 3000. The plot - Tommy Lee Jones' professional thief ends up in the middle of a plot involving a villainous corporation, rival thieves and an experimental rocket car - is a bit flimsy, as are most of the action sequences and non-action sequences.

Bullitt (Peter Yates, 1968) - 3

I remember trying to watch this back when I was about 11 or 12 and giving up within the first fifteen minutes. Even now, it's a little hard to stick out at times. Obviously the car chase is great but otherwise it's a fairly standard cowboy cop movie (although that's probably because it's set the standard in the first place).

The Wizard of Oz (Victor Fleming, 1939) - 3

I don't think I've ever managed to see this all the way through (or if I did I was too young to remember) so I decided to watch it while it was on TV (a lot of the films in this tab post were on TV, now that I think about it). I guess I liked it, but the odds of me watching it again are minimal.

The Descendants (Alexander Payne, 2011) - 3

Alexander Payne does his Alexander Payne thing in yet another down-to-earth semi-serious drama about people coping with stuff. Not bad by any means, but it's fairly middle-of-the-road compared to some of Payne's other works.

Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome (George Miller, 1985) - 2

You'd think I'd like Mad Max a lot more than I do, but I don't, and so I'm a little unforgiving of this watered-down threequel that plays up the scale of the action and for a while it's sort of alright but then the tribe of kids enter the film and from there...ehhhhh. Also love how much it recycles from the last film.

A Most Wanted Man (Anton Corbijn, 2014) - 3.5

Nice and moody slow-burning thriller featuring Phillip Seymour Hoffman as a disgraced German intelligence agent trying to investigate an illegal immigrant who may or may not be involved with terrorists. Good performances (definitely a worthy last ever role for Hoffman, anyway) and a lean plotline that takes some concentration but works well for the most part. Hell of an ending, too.

Guardians of the Galaxy (James Gunn, 2014) - 4

I feel as though I may be overrating this a bit at the moment, but screw it, this was fun. Good little bit of space opera with some literally colourful characters, some decent enough flashy action sequences, good song picks and whatnot. Shame they had another boring British-sounding guy as the main villain, though.

Megamind (Tom McGrath, 2010) - 3

After all the relatively straightforward superhero movies I've mentioned in this post, it was interesting to see a family-friendly subversive take on the genre. Doesn't do anything amazingly original, but it's a fun little film about the titular supervillain finally managing to defeat his heroic arch-nemesis and eventually struggling with life after victory. Definitely doesn't suck.

mark f

08-08-14, 07:47 AM

Mesmerized aka Shocked aka My Letter to George (Michael Laughlin, 1986) 2
The Playgirls and the Vampire (Piero Regnoli, 1960) 2
Man Push Cart (Ramin Bahrani, 2005) 2
I Am a Fugitive from a Chain Gang (Mervyn LeRoy, 1932) 3.5
http://www.soundonsight.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/iamafugit.png
Homeless WWI veteran Paul Muni is forced at gunpoint to participate in a robbery in a southern state, and he’s sentenced to 10 years of hard labor on a chain gang.
Black Fury (Michael Curtiz, 1935) 2.5
The Colony (Jeff Renfroe, 2013) 2
The Undefeated (Andrew V. McLaglen, 1969) 2.5
Happy, Texas (Mark Illsley, 1999) 3-
http://blog.bestsundancefilms.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Happy-Texas_l.jpg
Convicts Steve Zahn and Jeremy Northam escape from a chain gang and arrive in Happy, Texas, where they are mistaken for the two gay men who were supposed to stage a little girls’ beauty pageant. They go with the flow which causes lots of sexual mischief.
Vivacious Lady (George Stevens, 1938) 2.5
Lonesome Jim (Steve Buscemi, 2005) 2
Rebecca of Sunnybrook Farm (Allan Dwan, 1938) 2.5
The Last Angry Man (Daniel Mann, 1959) 3
http://s3.amazonaws.com/auteurs_production/images/film/the-last-angry-man/w448/the-last-angry-man.jpg?1317141953
Poor but sincere doctor Paul Muni arm wrestles troubled youth Billy Dee Williams whom he tries to gain treatment for a brain tumor.
P.U.N.K.S. (Sean McNamara, 1999) 2
Music Made Simple (Roy Rowland, 1938) 2.5+
Friends & Lovers (George Haas, 1999) 2
Quartet (Dustin Hoffman, 2012) 3-
http://mylusciouslife.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Quartet-2012-starring-maggie-smith-billy-connolly-tom-courtenay-pauline-collins.jpg
At a retirement home for old musicians, the arrival of ex-diva Maggie Smith sends her shattered ex-husband Tom Courtenay into a frenzy, but eventually they, and fellow singers Billy Connolly [far left] and Pauline Collins [far right] agree to reunite to sing Verdi’s “Rigoletto”.
The Hidden Master (Sammy Lee, 1940) 2.5
Homer and Eddie (Andrei Konchalovsky, 1989) 2
Of Human Hearts (Clarence Brown, 1938) 2.5+
The Patsy (Jerry Lewis, 1964) 2
http://www.cinefamily.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/patsy_website.jpg
Episodic, occasionally cringe-inducing slapstick satire of TV/show business has Jerry Lewis as a bellboy-turned-“comedian” who also plays all three of his back-up singers in one bit.

Skepsis93

08-08-14, 09:08 AM

*Rewatch

Barry Lyndon (Stanley Kubrick, 1975) 4.5
The Ascent (Larisa Shepitko, 1977) 3.5
Boyhood (Richard Linklater, 2014) 4
Magnolia* (Paul Thomas Anderson, 1999) 5
The Last Days of Disco (Whit Stillman, 1998) 3.5+
Tokyo Story (Yasujiro Ozu, 1953) 3.5+
F for Fake (Orson Welles, 1973) 4+
Me and Orson Welles (Richard Linklater, 2008) 4-
Con Air* (Simon West, 1997) 4
Charade (Stanley Donen, 1963) 4+
Life Itself (Steve James, 2014) 4
The Invisible Man (James Whale, 1933) 2+
The Great Gatsby (Baz Luhrmann, 2013) 2.5
How to Train Your Dragon 2 (Dean DeBlois, 2014) 4

http://whatculture.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/charade3.jpg

http://www.journeybyframe.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Barry-Lyndon.jpg
Barry Lyndon - Much is written about the stunning candlelit interior scenes, but the exteriors are at least as beautiful.

Brother Blue

08-08-14, 09:16 AM

Hard to be a God (German, 2013) 4.5
The Butcher (Chabrol, 1970) 4
Columbiana (Megaton, 2011) 1
Guardians of the Galaxy (Gunn, 2014) 4
Don't Look Now (Roeg, 1973) 4.5
Turns out I hadn't seen this film as I assumed I had. I'd just seen the ending out of context.
The Outlaw Josey Wales (Eastwood, 1976) 3.5
The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford (Dominik, 2007) 4*
Hercules (Ratner, 2014) 1
Transcendence (Pfister, 2014) 0
Dire! One to avoid at all costs.
The Saragossa Manuscript (Has, 1965) 5
It's not often these days that a film will leave me staring off into space in absolute awe of what I've just seen upon its completion. This film did, an amazing piece of work.
M*A*S*H (Altman, 1970) 5*
Panic in the Streets (Kazan, 1950) 3
The Misfits (Huston, 1961) 4
La Harve (Kurismaki, 2011) 3
Point Blank (Boorman, 1967) 4
Out of the Past (Tourneur, 1947) 4.5
The Breach (Chabrol, 1970) 4
Pickup on South Street (Fuller, 1953) 4
Noah (Aronofsky, 2014) 2.5

*=rw

Daniel M

08-08-14, 09:20 AM

Con Air* (Simon West, 1997) 4

Love you.

Also was Tokyo Story your first Ozu, I watched it the other week too as my first, I thought it was great and the more I have thought about it sense, the better I think it is as a film. With quite a bit of discussion about him recently, and of course as a person looking to expand my film knowledge, I look forward to watching and learning more about him and his films :)

BlueLion

08-08-14, 09:56 AM

http://i.imgur.com/e8BnWRX.png

Through a Glass Darkly (1961) - 4

Werckmeister Harmonies (2000) - 4

Bronson (2009) - 4

Come and See (1985) - 3.5

The Treasure of the Sierra Madre (1948) - 3.5

Picnic at Hanging Rock (1975) - 3

A Taste of Cherry (1997) - 3

Hot Fuzz (2007) - 3

Alien³ (1992) - 2.5

Swan

08-08-14, 09:57 AM

Hard to be a God (German, 2013) rating_4_5

I want to see this movie, I downloaded it a while ago but there were no subtitles. Glad to hear you like it.

bluedeed

08-08-14, 10:18 AM

Werckmeister Harmonies (2000) - 4

Minio will be moderately pleased! And tell you to watch Satantango next (which you should).

A Taste of Cherry (1997) - 3

Kiarostami's worst of the decade. Still a very strong film, but the ending significantly weakened the film's effect for me, which is very opposite of how Kiarostami's endings normally affect me.

BlueLion

08-08-14, 10:30 AM

Minio will be moderately pleased! And tell you to watch Satantango next (which you should).

I'll definitely be watching, like Minio himself would say, MOAR Tarr. I think I'll check out Damnation first.

Kiarostami's worst of the decade. Still a very strong film, but the ending significantly weakened the film's effect for me, which is very opposite of how Kiarostami's endings normally affect me.

I agree 100% on the ending. At first, it didn't even make sense to me. Was he trying to say, "Look, this is only a film"? I think the themes of the film are controversial in his country (to say the least), so with that ending he wanted to show his people that it's only a film, after all. That he actually didn't just take a camera and film a non-actor trying to commit suicide for real.

Swan

08-08-14, 10:31 AM

I recommend The Turn Horse, I've only seen that and Werckmeister, but it's my favorite of the two and one of my favorite movies.

Skepsis93

08-08-14, 10:33 AM

Also was Tokyo Story your first Ozu, I watched it the other week too as my first, I thought it was great and the more I have thought about it sense, the better I think it is as a film. With quite a bit of discussion about him recently, and of course as a person looking to expand my film knowledge, I look forward to watching and learning more about him and his films :)

Yeah. I felt a little disconnected from it, which is typical for me on a first viewing of something like this. I tend to let myself get wrapped up in the importance and reputation of it all and my expectations skyrocket to levels nothing can meet. Usually it's on a rewatch that I can let them work their magic, so I'll be giving Tokyo Story another go quite soon, I think. It might well be that I just don't like it that much, but I have to give it another chance.

bluedeed

08-08-14, 10:46 AM

I'll definitely be watching, like Minio himself would say, MOAR Tarr. I think I'll check out Damnation first.

I agree 100% on the ending. At first, it didn't even make sense to me. Was he trying to say, "Look, this is only a film"? I think the themes of the film are controversial in his country (to say the least), so with that ending he wanted to show his people that it's only a film, after all. That he actually didn't just take a camera and film a non-actor trying to commit suicide for real.

Damnation is great, was on my 80s list, though there wasn't enough support :(.

I've always felt that the ending of Taste of Cherry was made out of fear rather than artistic intent, but Kiarostami has been able to subtly subvert the strictness of Iranian regulations in his film before with much greater ease and power before, where it seems both artistic and politically necessary (the last shot of Through the Olive Trees for instance). Kiarostami said himself that he wanted to put something more light hearted at the end to compensate for the grimness of the movie, but it doesn't really work that well. Jonathan Rosenbaum said that the ending served to express an impossibility of the film. It shows that even making a film about profound loneliness is a collective activity that can exhume happiness, a kind of paradox about cinema. While I think what Rosenbaum said is somewhat valid, I tend to stick with my personal reaction to it, a far less creative and complex way of exposing the fiction in the film than something like Close-Up.

bluedeed

08-08-14, 10:52 AM

Yeah. I felt a little disconnected from it, which is typical for me on a first viewing of something like this. I tend to let myself get wrapped up in the importance and reputation of it all and my expectations skyrocket to levels nothing can meet. Usually it's on a rewatch that I can let them work their magic, so I'll be giving Tokyo Story another go quite soon, I think. It might well be that I just don't like it that much, but I have to give it another chance.

Yeah, this is why I don't typically recommend that people start with Tokyo Story. Though Guaporense says that Tokyo Story gives him "greatest movie ever vibes" I couldn't feel more different about it. Ozu never wanted to make the best movie ever made, he just wanted to make better tofu. A lot of people go into Tokyo Story looking for Citizen Kane or Vertigo or The Godfather, and what they end up with instead is some tofu.

Brother Blue

08-08-14, 11:43 AM

I want to see this movie, I downloaded it a while ago but there were no subtitles. Glad to hear you like it.

They're available now, at least in the version I have. Check it out.

Mr Minio

08-08-14, 01:02 PM

Through a Glass Darkly (1961) - rating_4
Werckmeister Harmonies (2000) - rating_4
Come and See (1985) - rating_3_5

http://gifsec.com/wp-content/uploads/GIF/2014/03/Thumbs-up-gif.gif

I'll definitely be watching, like Minio himself would say, MOAR Tarr. I think I'll check out Damnation first.

http://i2.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/169/432/nic_cage_moar.gif

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/3/32/Spiritofthebeehiveposter.jpg/220px-Spiritofthebeehiveposter.jpg

rating_3

http://img4.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20131018195503/disneycreate/images/5/53/Not_bad.jpeg

Sane

08-08-14, 06:28 PM

Two Cars, One Night (2003) - Taika Waititi
12 minute short from the director of Eagle vs Shark. I usually struggle a bit with shorts because they don't run long enough to develop the characters so I am often left feeling a bit flat. Waititi, however, is a bit of a genius when it comes to character development and it really showed in this. Nicely shot too. rating_3_5

REW-FFWD (1994) - Denis Villeneuve
I think this may have been Villeneuve's first short. It's kind of a Marker style documentary - almost a Jamaican Travelogue with a fictional story running over the top. It's interesting but flawed. rating_3

Canticle of All Creatures (2006) - Miguel Gomes
Short from the acclaimed Portuguese director about ... not really sure ... animals I think ;) Looks nice though. rating_3-

Fantastic Planet (1973) - Rene Laloux
Really liked the animation and the concept but I perhaps felt that it's point was a bit obvious. Enjoyed it. rating_4-

The Green Mile (1999) - Frank Darabont
Considering how popular The Shawshank Redemption is I find it strange that this has kind of been forgotten. It's mostly very good although it's way too long and the last half hour is pretty crappy. rating_4-

Braveheart (1995) - Mel Gibson
Pure ego project from someone who is, unfortunately, not a good enough actor to carry a three hour film on his own - and he is on his own because he doesn't allow any other characters to develop. Liked it when I watched it years ago but now not so much. rating_2_5-

Frankenstein (1994) - Kenneth Branagh
Speaking of ego ... Kenneth Branagh mostly films Kenneth Branagh running around with his shirt off and with his locks flowing ... This movie is a huge wasted opportunity. rating_2_5

Sherlock Jr. (1924) - Buster Keaton
Funny scene after funny scene. I hardly ever say this about a movie - in fact I don't think I ever have - but I wish it was longer. rating_4+

All That Jazz (1979) - Bob Fosse
I'm generally not a fan of musicals for one reason - all of the filler songs. Most musicals have a few good songs and then the rest become tedious IMO. That was the situation here - I liked the story, script and acting but all the mediocre songs stopped me loving it. rating_3_5+

More to come ...

Sane

08-08-14, 07:17 PM

Kurt & Courtney (1998) - Nick Broomfield
Not a particularly good documentary because it was very biased but it was still interesting in ways that perhaps Broomfield didn't intend - mainly the desire for fame. Not just from Love but from any number of people who want to get their 15 minutes by talking about someone with actual talent. BTW, really weird that the guy who said he was offered money by Love to kill Cobain was hit by a train two days after the interview ... rating_3-

Aileen: Life & Death of a Serial Killer (2003) - Nick Broomfield/Joan Churchill
This was a good documentary - because Broomfield brought his usual lack of balance but was forced to constantly have his own beliefs challenged. Also, this is much scarier than any horror movie I've ever seen. rating_4

Logan's Run (1976) - Michael Anderson
Movie about a future where Michael York and Jenny Agutter are forced to have the same hairstyle. Very dated and cheesy but, as always, Agutter makes it worth watching. rating_3

The 40 Year Old Virgin (2005) - Judd Apatow
This is mostly decent but it's score gets bumped up by a whole popcorn box thanks to it's ridiculously funny ending. rating_4

Knocked Up (2007) - Judd Apatow
Apatow appears to only be able to make one type of film at the moment - but that's OK because he is quite good at it and his films seem to have a somewhat good heart which I like. rating_3_5

Saturday Night Fever (1977) - John Badham
The dancing and music are good and the story is good but together they don't work overly well. I don't mind it but it could/should have been much better. rating_3-

L'Avventura (1960) - Michelangelo Antonioni
Loved the first hour but it lost me a bit after that. rating_3_5

Battle for Haditha (2007) - Nick Broomfield
Really interesting look at both sides of a massacre in Iraq. Flawed in many ways but I found it very engaging. rating_4

Boy (2010) - Taika Waititi
I loved this. Extremely funny for me because I have some understanding of the culture (Maori's in NZ) but others should be able to enjoy it as an amusing "coming of age story" with some great acting by all of the kids involved. rating_4_5

Rabbit-Proof Fence (2002) - Phillip Noyce
Noyce managed to do what no other director has managed - get a good, restrained performance out of Branagh :) Really touching story of girls taken from their mother (part of Australia's "stolen generation") trying to find their way home. Final couple of minutes showing the real people that the movie is based on is hugely emotional. rating_4_5-

The Fly II (1989) - Chris Walas
Sequel starring Eric Stoltz and Daphne Zuniga ... what could go wrong, right? rating_1_5

Rocco and His Brothers (1960) - Luchino Viconti
Beautifully shot but too long and whilst the first two hours are great, the last hour is so melodramatic. rating_3_5-

Purple Noon (1960) - Rene Clement
French version of The Talented Mr Ripley. Loved the ending - which is different to the book apparently. Also I have to say, without a hint of gayness, that Alain Delon was one super good looking dude ;) rating_4+

Brief Encounter (1945) - David Lean
One of those movies that grabbed my attention in the opening seconds and held it. Great movie. rating_4_5

Monkeypunch

08-08-14, 11:16 PM

Guardians of the Galaxy - This is my favorite movie this year. I don't see anything topping it. Chris Pratt will be a major star after this, and even non-actor Dave Bautista works perfectly here. Lots of laughs and escapist fun with a brilliant use of 1970's pop hits, and some hilarious cameos. 5

The Legend of Bagger Vance - Soul searching golf movie directed by Robert Redford. Well made, fun to watch, serious but not depressing story of a golf pro (Matt Damon) who returns from WWI with serious PTSD and how he regains his life with the help of his philosophically inclined caddy (Will Smith). 4.5

Dawn of the Planet of the Apes - a smart anti-war movie masquerading as a summer actioner. Caesar, the super smart chimp from Rise of the Planet of the Apes, is now the leader of an entire ape civilization built after a disease wipes out most of humanity. When the surviving humans encroach on his home, is there a chance the two species can coexist, or will the world be plunged into war? Check the title. It's not "Planet of the Apes and Humans." :D 4.5

Oldboy - Soulless American remake. Wow, did the makers of this not get why the original was so good? Josh Brolin plays the film's anti hero with a fixed scowl on his face, and none of the dark humor of the original. Spike Lee can't be totally blamed, the original was so strange that there was no way that an American version would ever work. .5

Sympathy for Mr. Vengeance - ugly but artsy revenge film about a green-haired deaf mute who kidnaps a young child in an attempt to raise money for his sister's kidney transplant. Everything goes horribly wrong, and the resultant bloodbath is painful and ultimately futile. I liked how this was done, the film is quick and brutal, not ever glamorizing it's violence, and with strange little humorous bits to offset the grim narrative. 4

Lucas

08-09-14, 07:05 PM

http://26.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_li3iikXtqm1qb8bifo1_500.gif

Jules and Jim 4
Elegant,beautiful and very cool as well. Jules and Jim is about two best friends, and their relationship with the women they are both in love with. Truffaut's direction is beautiful, yet he is also able to capture a firm grasp and understanding of his characters alongside his remarkable filmmaking.

The film however does have some issues though. I think its a bit too long and towards the end it begins to get rather repetitive. Nonetheless, this is a much watch French-New Wave film. I do however prefer The 400 Blows though.

The Life Aquatic 3-
I decided to up my rating for the film a little bit from my intial 2.5. This is my 5th Wes Anderson film, and I just don't think his style is for me. I tried very hard to get into The Life Aquatic, but I just couldn't. The art-style,visuals and stop motion effects are pretty impressive. But other than that, there's not much for me to cling to. I found it poorly paced,the shifts in tone jarring and the movie is just too damn long! Oh well, can't love them all....

Stripes 3+
I've been watching alot of Bill Murray films this week XD. This is a pretty solid comedy, nothing great or anything. But its very watchable.

Bela Tarr:I used to be a filmmaker 3.5+
Interesting documentary about the creation of the legend's final film.

Quick Change 3.5+
Yet another Bill Murray film. Honestly, this was really excellent movie as far as comedies go. Likeable characters,solid script,good jokes,etc.

mark f

08-09-14, 10:58 PM

Monsters University (Dan Scanlon, 2013) 3-
Elysium (Neill Blomkamp, 2013) 2.5+
Wrong Side of Town (David DeFalco, 2010) 1.5
The Past (Asghar Farhadi, 2013) 3
http://s.admin.clip.vn/uploads/14/03/533287b31ea0578942.jpg
The slightest word or action in the past has huge repercussions for Frenchwoman Bérénice Bejo, her separated Iranian husband Ali Mossafa and her current Arab boyfriend Tahar Rahim.
The Twilight Saga: New Moon (Chris Weitz, 2009) 2
The Overcoat (Alberto Lattuada, 1952) 2.5
RV (Barry Sonnenfeld, 2006) 2+
They Died With Their Boots On (Raoul Walsh, 1941) 3.5
http://img198.imageshack.us/img198/683/pdvd000641.jpg
General George Armstrong Custer (Errol Flynn) meets his fate at the Battle of Little Big Horn.
Battle of the Year (Benson Lee, 2013) 2
Undisputed (Walter Hill, 2002) 2.5+
Kermit's Swamp Years (David Gumpel, 2002) 2
No (Pablo Larraín, 2012) 3-
http://images.entertainment.ie/images_content/rectangle/620x372/no.jpg
Ad executive Gael García Bernal is in charge of the campaign to have Chile’s “democratic dictator” Augusto Pinochet defeated in the 1988 referendum, but he’s worried about the safety of his family.
Double Harness (John Cromwell, 1933) 2
The Invisible Woman (Ralph Fiennes, 2013) 2.5
My Soul to Take (Wes Craven, 2010) 2
Diary of a Chambermaid (Luis Buñuel, 1964) 3.5-
http://livedoor.blogimg.jp/pupu55560/imgs/b/f/bff87402.jpg
New chambermaid Jeanne Moreau is admired by the father (Jean Ozenne) of her employer who “like[s] to pull the strings”.
Phantom Punch (Robert Townsend, 2008) 2+
The Wicked (Peter Winther, 2013) 1.5
Summer ‘04 (Stefan Krohmer, 2006) 2.5
The Lone Ranger (Gore Verbinski, 2013) 3- (middle 30 min should be cut)
http://a.dilcdn.com/bl/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2013/04/OMD_TLR_GIFs5.gif
http://cdn3.dolimg.com/en-US/blogs/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/OMD_TLR_GIFs3.gif
Tonto (Johnny Depp) and the Lone Ranger (Armie Hammer) do some Rube Goldberg-type stunts set to the “William Tell Overture” in the film’s highlight.

Derek Vinyard

08-09-14, 11:04 PM

My Soul to Take (Wes Craven, 2010) 2

I'm certainly in the minority but I appreciate this flick I find it pretty entertaining ...

mark f

08-09-14, 11:17 PM

The main problem I have with it is that it seems like a third-or-fourth-generation A Nightmare on Elm Street. I think Craven needs to make fresher material.

Camo

08-09-14, 11:19 PM

Out of interest what are the other four Wes Anderson films that you've seen Lucas? Imo The Life Aquatic is his weakest, then again i've still not seen Moonrise Kingdom or The Grand Budapest Hotel.

Camo

08-09-14, 11:21 PM

Mark how would you rate Monsters Inc? Just wondering because it's my second or third favourite animated film, and i'm a bit paronoid over the mixed responses to Monsters University.

rauldc14

08-09-14, 11:23 PM

Lazy Ratings are just how I roll these days. I'll explain if needed

Mean Streets 4+
Guardians of the Galaxy 3.5
Manhunter 4
Yojimbo 3
Foreign Correspondent 4
Ed Wood 4.5

mark f

08-09-14, 11:40 PM

Mark how would you rate Monsters Inc? Just wondering because it's my second or third favourite animated film, and i'm a bit paronoid over the mixed responses to Monsters University.
I have to rewatch Monsters, Inc. to know if I give it a 3.5 or a 4. University isn't nearly as tender, funny or original. I'm sure I'd give it a 2.5 for content, but it was just a lot of fun watching the bright colors and interesting creatures. Yeah, I guess that makes me a closet Teletubbies fan! (:nope:)

Lucas

08-10-14, 11:29 AM

Out of interest what are the other four Wes Anderson films that you've seen Lucas? Imo The Life Aquatic is his weakest, then again i've still not seen Moonrise Kingdom or The Grand Budapest Hotel.

I've also seen

Rushmore 2.5

The Royal Tenenbaums 3.5-

The Grand Budapest Hotel 3

Moonrise Kingdom 3.5

Like I certainly don't hate his films, but I haven't seen one yet thats really struck me as "Great". They're well-made and watchable, but something is keeping me back from enjoying them as much as other people.

Pussy Galore

08-10-14, 11:19 PM

Who's Afraid of Virginia Wolf was very interesting, but I think I missed something. First who's Virginia Woolf and what did she had to do with the movie other than that catchphrase that they sing? And the thing with the baby did they invent the baby? Then what is it with richard Burton killing it?

But I'd be willing to rewatch it, it was a pleasant watch and a great script.

The Gunslinger45

08-10-14, 11:25 PM

Pussy Galore

08-10-14, 11:37 PM

Yep that's what I thought, but how can Richard Burton kill it then?

The Gunslinger45

08-11-14, 12:12 AM

Yep that's what I thought, but how can Richard Burton kill it then?

More reveal to the world the kid never was, hence killing the illusion.

mark f

08-11-14, 01:07 AM

Virginia Woolf was a famous writer who committed suicide due to mental illness and depression. George and Martha were battling their own mental illness and depression by inventing an imaginary child they could watch grow up and love, but only when they were alone. George decided to exorcise their delusions/demons by killing off the child when Martha told Honey about "him". Have you heard the children's song "Who's Afraid of the Big Bad Wolf?" It was in a Disney short called The Three Little Pigs. The song sung in WAoVW? was a play on the lyrics of that song, and originally Martha thought it was hilarious while George thought it was only amusing. George was perhaps readier to try to start their life together over, so he performs the "exorcism" so they'll have to live together by themselves from now on. Martha says she's afraid of that - she's afraid of Virginia Woolf - because she doesn't want what happened to VW to happen to her. Hopefully really together now, after all the drinking and the exorcism of their demons, they can get ahold of themselves with some treatment for their problems. Anyhow, that's my explanation of your questions. Pussy. :)

Pussy Galore

08-11-14, 01:18 AM

Very good answer thank you, when I'll rewatch it I'll keep that in mind.

mark f

08-11-14, 06:11 AM

Rise: Blood Hunter (Sebastian Gutierrez, 2007) 2
Home Early (Roy Rowland, 1939) 2.5
High Pressure (Mervyn LeRoy, 1932) 2
CBGB (Randall Miller, 2013) 2.5
http://www.licknyc.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/something-to-look-forward-to-cbgb-480x270.jpg
Hilly Kristal (Alan Rickman), owner of NYC’s CBGB (country/bluegrass/blues) nightclub, opened his doors to literally thousands of punk bands, including Talking Heads, Ramones, Iggy Pop, Blondie and Television
In Name Only (John Cromwell, 1939) 2
Cimarron (Anthony Mann, 1960) 2.5
All Is Bright (Phil Morrison, 2013) 2 (ending is best part)
Noah (Darren Aranovsky, 2014) 3
http://img0.joyreactor.com/pics/post/gif-war-time-1237432.gif
Noah relates a reason to his family why the Creator must bring a great flood to destroy Mankind – his constant love of war.
The Gay Bride (Jack Conway, 1934) 2
Kill Your Darlings (John Krokidas, 2013) 2.5
Virtue (Edward Buzzell, 1932) 2
The Bible: In the Beginning... (John Huston, 1966) 3-
http://blogimg.goo.ne.jp/user_image/19/45/f9289e8cd7ae9cfcb4b8e09916fbb8a9.png
Dueling Noah/Ark movies, although Huston (who plays Noah) takes on a much larger part of the book, including the Garden of Eden, Cain/Abel, The Tower of Babel, Sodom/Gomorrah and Abraham/Isaac.
At Middleton (Adam Rodgers, 2013) 2.5
Parkland (Peter Landesman, 2013) 2.5
Inspector Bellamy (Claude Chabrol, 2009) 2.5
Wadjda (Haifaa Al Mansour, 2012) 2.5+ (last 20 minutes the best)
http://kazenosenlitu.cocolog-nifty.com/photos/uncategorized/2013/12/10/wadjda_5.jpg
In the first film directed by a female in Saudi Arabia, Wadjda (Waad Mohammed) and her mother (Reem Abdullah) are constantly arguing over the former’s inappropriate behavior for a girl, but they really are each other’s best friends.
Underworld: Evolution (Len Wiseman, 2006) 2.5
Fools for Scandal (Mervyn LeRoy & Bobby Connolly, 1938) 2.5-
The Scout (Michael Ritchie, 1994) 2.5-
Kill List (Ben Wheatley, 2011) 2.5+
http://www.top10hq.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Jay-and-Gal-The-Kill-List.png
Hitmen Neil Maskell and Michael Smiley take an assignment that turns out completely unexpected.

cricket

08-11-14, 10:29 AM

Mark, I'm happy with your rating on Kill List. I didn't think you'd especially like it and I thought you may possibly dislike it. Would you mind expanding a little?

mark f

08-11-14, 01:11 PM

I've seen two of Ben Wheatley's films so far, and all I can say is that he's a madman. A Field in England was a magic-mushroom-suffused B&W 17th century freakout with only a semblance of plot or meaning but it was mesmerizing. Kill List starts out as a boring, but-strangely-edited kitchen-sink drama before it turns into something so violent that it makes Tarantino and Refn look like pre-schoolers. Then it gets really weird. It also creates a lot of suspense along with all the WTF moments in the final section, but it ends with the ultimate WTF? After the fact, there were earlier hints as to what actually happened, but I can't for the life of me understand why and what it all means, and if I did, I probably would think less of both movies. Right now I'm happy to just go for the ride, which is certainly muddled but also original and thrilling. I have to show both films to my brother because I'm sure he'd like them even more. :cool:

cricket

08-11-14, 01:15 PM

That's cool Mark, thanks for that. Sightseers is another good movie from him, and I'll be watching Down Terrace soon.

honeykid

08-11-14, 04:22 PM

Sightseers is OK. Far more 'normal' than either A Field In England or The Kill List. It does have 3 or 4 genuinely lol moments, though. Far more than I get from most comedies.

Sedai

08-12-14, 12:26 PM

King Kong (Guillerman, 1976) 3

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-UQwgh_WL_TI/UBbenYi3IYI/AAAAAAAAPWU/M9zLXEKX-pg/s1600/kong6.jpg

This was better than I expected it to be... For 1976, the ape was brought to life and infused with emotion fairly well. I know everyone raves about Jackson's 2005 remake, but that flick has pacing issues, and a bunch of tacked on material (the bug ditch etc.) that tend to take away from the main thrust of the story for me. That said, this film also has issues, but mostly due to the period of time it was made in. While the creature effects work for the most part, there are a couple of segments where it all comes apart due to poor effects. Still, those are few and far between, so this worked for me overall. I have always been a Jeff Bridges fan, and I am pretty much over the moon for 1976 Jessica Lange.

After watching both the original 1933 film and this remake, it seems like Peter Jackson was aiming to remake this film in 2005 more than the classic original, although Jackson did set his remake in the 30s, as he was more able to recreate the period with advanced CGI. Watts is perhaps a better actress than Lange, but Lange is perfect for the role, without any of the post-modern characterization that was injected into the 2005 version my Watts. King Kong works better without post-modern concepts, IMO. The 1976 makes no claims at being the definitive version of Kong, which is of course reserved for the 1933 classic, but it's not as bad as its reputation would lead you to believe. I think it is just as entertaining as the 2005 remake, anyway. Also - the finale features the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center, now also a relic of the past.

Mr Minio

08-12-14, 05:35 PM

http://31.media.tumblr.com/586c800ea88298aee81d86a155ed4dbc/tumblr_mla0t7ztUo1qf1aoao4_r1_500.gif
That moment almost broke the fourth wall for me.

铁西区 [Tie Xi Qu: West of Tracks] (2003) - rating_4 (557 min of Chinese workers, how they live and go by in direct cinema style. The first hour was extremely powerful. Almost like a descent to hell. It was about smelter workers and all them drab ashy locations were extremely hypnotic. Then, the other three hours of this part were just as great, only the initial 'descent' feel vanished. Then, the second 3-hour part was the worst. It was a three star one. The last only two hour long part was almost as good as the first, but slightly worse. I give it four stars as well. It was more focused on particular family than the whole society, so it helped to make an emotional impact. An impressive documentary.)
Matka Królów [Mother of the Kings] (1982) - rating_3_5 (A Polish movie that shows a mother in Poland from 1930s to 1950s. The ending felt like somebody slapped me with a pancake. But damn, it was a heavy pancake.)
Die Büchse der Pandora [Pandora's Box] (1929) - rating_4 (Louise Brooks is a cute femme fatale sort of character, who brings every man to ruin. Her amazing charm would tame any beast. But beasts are wayward. I found the cinematography very alluring and Brooks engaging. Or maybe it's the other way around.)

http://38.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_ltc7arXtLk1qdx4k4o1_500.gif
Badass!

The Searchers (1956) - rating_2_5 (I don't remember much and I've seen it the 4th. The cinematography was good and I liked the scene, in which cowboys are flanked by Indians, but that's about it. The white actor playing Indian chief was hilarious. Blue-eyed Indian FTW! But seriously, it's such a classic and it's mediocre. :( )
Faces (1968) - rating_4 (Oh my! <creepy Asian guy smile> It's completely nuts in the beginning. People behave strangely like they are high or children, but I didn't find it annoying and were just observing them. Then, the movie gets more and more serious with a totally groundbreaking finale. It's not the plot that's most important, though. It's cinematography and particulary the zooms on faces. Many faces. Many emotions. Gotta watch more Cassavates.)
The Invisible Man (1933) - rating_3_5 (How did they do it back then?! Don't tell me how, I read about it, so I know, but still.. how!? An amazingly executed movie that probably couldn't have been made better technically. And Gloria Stuart is a total babe.)

http://media.giphy.com/media/10lmTotGJxeYcE/giphy.gif
You said kinky?

怪談昇り竜 [Blind Woman's Curse] (1970) - rating_4 (Meiko Kaji in Ninkyo Eiga flick! You don't know what does it mean? No worries, I didn't before I'd seen the movie neither. :) It's amazing, tho, the movie. It's exploitation with chambara themes and it's based on Japanese legend as well.)
The Vampire Lovers (1970) - rating_4 (How come I rated it four stars?! Oh, must've been them b00bies, but seriously it's quite appealing with nice ladies, cool vampire themes and vivid colours.)
三匹の侍 [Three Outlaw Samurai] (1964) - rating_4 (It's cliche to say, but it's like Kurosawa movie not directed by Kurosawa. There's a dose of humanism and also some samurai fights. Nothing to hate.)

http://meikokaji.net/images/film/blind-womans-curse/misc/curse-gif2.gif
Clothes always are an unnecessary ballast in a fight. ALWAYS!

Village of the Damned (1960) - rating_3_5 (These kids. There's something wrong with them. These eyes. Crappy & kitschy as hell, but it does work!)
やさぐれ姐御伝　総括リンチ [Female Yakuza Tale: Inquisition and Torture] (1973) - rating_4 (For Reiko Ike it wasn't enough to kick ass topless in Sex and Fury, now in this film there's a whole gang of such ladies at the end! And everybody's naked. Haha. And there's a gangsta smug with bare butt and hookers smuggling coke in their private parts. The humour in this is the lowest you can imagine, but still it's such a guilty pleasure gem you can't ignore if you're into them exploitation flicks.)
Singin' in the Rain (1952) - rating_3_5 (At first I didn't like the idea of them singing without any reason. Like they just have a casual conversation and out of nothing they decide to sing, but later I stopped payin attention to this detail. Also, the final scenes when that screeching lady was p0wn3d were amazing. And I'm sure she was an inspiration for Lynch to make that dumb policewoman secretary in Twin Peaks.)

https://eu.rymimg.com/lk/o/u/deab2fa4162e101fab302c9fffff9e83/5360840.jpg
Wow!

Vtáèkovia, siroty a blázni [Birds, Orphans and Fools] (1969) - rating_4_5 (I watch movies to have moments like these. Madness. Madness is the movie. And mad are the characters. And everything is so beautiful visually. But then you realise that madness is the only way to keep your sanity and liberty. No matter what you do, though, you're going down anyways.)
The Hound of the Baskervilles (1959) - rating_3 (Weakest Hammer so far. It's cool to have both Cushing and Lee in one flic, but I prefered the Soviet take on this story in that amazing Sherlock Holmes series I've been watching some time ago.)
Final Cut: Hölgyeim és uraim [Final Cut: Ladies and Gentlemen] (2012) - rating_3 (The idea is impressive and it took a lot of time, making it, for sure, but all in all, the final output is just your usual romance flick, isn't it?)

https://eu.rymimg.com/lk/o/u/64f4f1c557290c82a7438081c644ca17/5365680.jpg
It's not easy to be crazy.

Berg-Ejvind och hans hustru [The Outlaw and His Wife] (1918) - rating_3_5 (Sjöström on his way to masterpieces. The ending is very powerful.)
The Other Side of the Underneath (1972) - rating_4 (Asylum. Everyone's mad and has some visions & speaks with therapist and then has a good time with some Scotch hippies!)
Аэлита [Aelita: Queen of Mars] (1924) - rating_3_5 (freakin' amazing for what it is. And it's a sci-fi flick with a lot of underlying themes. Too bad the Earth scenes outnumber the Mars scenes by so much. The costumes and scenography are impressive. The idea of Red Revolution on Mars made my laugh, though. Red revolution on red planet. Kinda fits. :) )

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-9UZrVAj-fSo/U5Nh3f0d4NI/AAAAAAAA1wk/l0EZrpyNDnI/s1600/Aelita++++fastor.gif
That's how the Queen of Mars looks like. In case you're wondering.

Regi Andrej Tarkovskij [Directed by Andrei Tarkovsky] (1988) - rating_4_5 (Tarkovsky works on his last movie and we observe him. How much control he has over everything. He doesn't compromise, neither. You have to shoot the scene once again, because you f*cked up? Let's do it! You have to rebuild the freakin' villa? Then do it! So many great quotes from the master director as well. So wise. Now I love him even more.)
L'étrange couleur des larmes de ton corps [The Strange Color of Your Body's Tears] (2013) - rating_4_5 (And I thought Amer was awesome... Total audiovisual orgy with a nice mystery YOU have to solve. A lot of leads to be found in VISUAL side of this pic.)
Zabiæ bobra [To Kill a Beaver] (2012) - rating_3 (Probably the worst Kolski movie. It wasn't as bad as people made it to be, though. LOL @ comments of sex scenes and how the parents of the girl would be ashamed. She's 24 but plays 16 and has a nice body. The movie was underwhelming and nothing new.)

https://eu.rymimg.com/lk/o/u/05dc13923baa7d006014ce7021b09475/5365689.jpg
Them Belgians are modern giallo masters!

Angst [Fear] (1983) - rating_4 (More disturbing than all Saw movies together. This stuff f*cks with your brain, man. When I was watching it I started to think what I would do if I was a killer. How would I do in the victims. God, it made me realise I'm a psychopath. OK, I'm kidding, but it still gets under your skin. Amazing movie. Colder than polar bear's butthole.)
乾いた花 [Pale Flower] (1964) - rating_3 (Underwhelming Japanese New Wave flick. I didn't even feel like one. It's about gambling and I didn't find it particulary great. The cinematography is good. :) )
Thriller - en grym film [They Call Her One Eye] (1974) - rating_3_5 (I really wanted to rate it higher, but I can't. LOL @ porno scenes that are too short to do anything and too long to not notice them. I'm indifferent to them, though, so I'm not like decreasing my rating because of 'em. The movie just didn't feel like a great one, though, but it actually had a lot of potential seen in the first scene, the last one with the horse and the one with two policemen getting their ass kicked in slowmo. Hell, there's even some kind of perversed beauty to it.)

http://i500.listal.com/image/810218/500full.jpg
Lookin' for ya to kick your ass!

Letter From an Unknown Woman (1948) - rating_3_5 (Such an insipid rom flick, but Ophüls really squeezes off everything he can out of it and actually makes it a beautifully shot and EMOTIONALLY ENGAGING story.)
Tempo di viaggio [Voyage in Time] (1983) - rating_3 (Another Tarkovsky doc, directed by him and one of the best screenwriters in history. Sadly, it's much shorter than the other one. It's less interesting and powerful too, but it was nice to hear who are Tarkovsky's favourite filmmakers.)
The Man Who Knew Too Much (1956) - rating_4 (I can't believe how much I actually liked that one. It's in my Hitchcock Top 5 outrunning films like Rear Window and Dial M for Murder. The Albert Hall scene is one of the best things Hitch has ever directed and I liked all these pastel colours and sense of humour as well.)

http://31.media.tumblr.com/0d8f168ba75d29629793095959b97df4/tumblr_n2jgtf1n1V1qdau9mo1_500.gif
Love that moment!

Obsession (1976) - rating_3_5 (Another good De Palma flick. It heavily borrows from Hitchcock, namely Vertigo, but also somehow doesn't feel like a rip-off. The cinematography and music are top notch and the usual De Palma over-the-top love moments are amazing. The solution is obvious and the weakest part of the movie.)
Хрусталёв, машину! [Khrustalyov, My Car!] (1998) - rating_2_5 (Wow! What a disappointment. The movie is a very chaotic and annoying mish-mash of everything you can possibly think of. There's some film noir atmosphere and outstanding cinematography (that's a good thing) and a lot of annoying characters and unfunny scenes, anal rape being one of them.)
Casualties of War (1989) - rating_2_5 (The worst De Palma. His style doesn't fit war flicks at all. His over-the-top kitschy soppy moments really fit them crime/romance flicks and make them guilty pleasures/feel goods, but in a war movie it just turns out to be PATHOS. And pathos in a war movie is bad.)

http://www.jonathanrosenbaum.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/obsession3.png

honeykid

08-12-14, 05:41 PM

Been years since I saw either, but I remember Casualties Of War being so much better than Obsession, which is a total snorefest. Nice to see you are watching some decent stuff, though. When i say that, I'm guessing I don't mean the ones others will think are decent. :D

Sedai

08-12-14, 05:50 PM

@ Minio - Everyone needs a little madness in their cinema...

mark f

08-12-14, 06:07 PM

Pathos in a war movie is good. Bathos in any movie is bad. :)

jiraffejustin

08-12-14, 06:09 PM

I'm happy I have somebody to share Belgian, neo-giallo love with.

Mr Minio

08-12-14, 07:26 PM

Do you mean any other films besides Amer and this one?

jiraffejustin

08-12-14, 07:29 PM

The couple that did those two movies have also made five shorts, but I haven't watched any of them. I don't know of any others.

BlueLion

08-12-14, 08:17 PM

http://38.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m701jhXXD71qav6t5o1_500.gif

The Holy Mountain (1973) - 4.5 So brilliant. El Topo I didn't like, but this one I could watch over and over again, and I'm sure I would never get tired of it. I want more of this kind of cinema. Minio, suggestions please.

McCabe & Mrs. Miller (1971) - 3.5 Great scenery, I liked Beatty's character, and just very enjoyable overall. I take back what I said regarding Altman. He really takes his time here, and in the end it pays off.

The Insider (1999) - 3.5 It never gets slow and there isn't a dull moment despite its runtime, and the leads bring their A-game. Pretty good thriller from Mann. "Wipe that smirk off your face!"

Synecdoche, New York (2008) - 3.5 Some very good acting from Hoffman. I've never really been a fan of Kaufman and his quirk, but this is by far his best work. Pretty much a film that every human can relate to, in one way or another.

Repulsion (1965) - 2.5 Deneuve loosens her screws completely.

Autumn Sonata (1978) - 2.5 And for the first time, Bergman disappoints. The acting is solid, but I look for so much more in a film. And call me a heartless bastard but I couldn't care less for the characters. Honestly.

Lilya 4-Ever (2002) - 2.5 Eh.

jiraffejustin

08-12-14, 08:36 PM

Autumn Sonata (1978) - 2.5 And for the first time, Bergman disappoints. The acting is solid, but I look for so much more in a film. And call me a heartless bastard but I couldn't care less for the characters. Honestly.

Heartless bastard!

Swan

08-12-14, 08:39 PM

http://38.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m701jhXXD71qav6t5o1_500.gif

The Holy Mountain (1973) - rating_4_5 So brilliant. El Topo I didn't like, but this one I could watch over and over again, and I'm sure I would never get tired of it. I want more of this kind of cinema. Minio, suggestions please.

There isn't much like The Holy Mountain, maybe Minio knows some I don't, but I do recommend checking out Jodorowsky's debut, Fando y Lis, and another film he did called Santa Sangre.

Mr Minio

08-12-14, 08:53 PM

Repulsion (1965) - rating_2_5 Deneuve loosens her screws completely.

Autumn Sonata (1978) - rating_2_5 And for the first time, Bergman disappoints. The acting is solid, but I look for so much more in a film. And call me a heartless bastard but I couldn't care less for the characters. Honestly.

Lilya 4-Ever (2002) - rating_2_5 Eh.

http://www.joncampbellacting.co.uk/photos/Ingrid%20Bergman%20in%20Autumn%20Sonata.png

mark f

08-13-14, 01:30 AM

Roustabout (John Rich, 1964) 2
Seance: The Summoning (Alex Wright, 2011) 1.5
The Formula (John G. Avildsen, 1980) 2+
The Teahouse of the August Moon (Daniel Mann, 1956) 3.5
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/--E8QdkajDXQ/UQ1411dChLI/AAAAAAAAEX8/dC2gU4nNbi0/s1600/teahouse+of+the+august+moon.jpg
In post-WWII Okinawa, con man/interpreter Marlon Brando helps American captain Glenn Ford indoctrinate the citizens in democracy, but it actually turns out it’s the Americans who are being indoctrinated.
Sayonara (Joshua Logan, 1957) 3+
The Greatest Movie Ever Sold (Morgan Spurlock, 2011) 2.5
Punk Vacation (Stanley Lewis, 1990) 1+ (The Wild One done by a kindergarten class while generic rock music plays for 90 minutes. No, it's not as fun as it sounds.)
Space Cowboys (Clint Eastwood, 2000) 3-
http://mlm-s2-p.mlstatic.com/dvd-jinetes-del-espacio-space-cowboys-clint-eastwood-7218-MLM5181518365_102013-O.jpg
Because of movie conventions, four old-time pilots (Tommy Lee Jones, Donald Sutherland, James Garner & Clint Eastwood) must travel into space to try to repair a failing satellite.
Split Second (Dick Powell, 1953) 2
The Punisher (Jonathan Hensleigh, 2004) 2.5
Silvia Prieto (Martin Rejtman, 1999) 2+
Mister Roberts (John Ford & Mervyn LeRoy, 1955) 3+
http://api.ning.com/files/G2EJhF1dJ8NhnDS6Faek8HD-Hwh-rt8lRWIkwNTI7YltoRsjeWdgc-r2iyi0ZJzLz4A4XgGL2StHfZfuKthHzNQToXBXXERd/a2withpulverinrack.jpg
Mr. Roberts (Henry Fonda) challenges Ensign Pulver (Jack Lemmon) to stand up to Captain James Cagney and his draconian authority.
Stormhouse (Dan Turner, 2011) 1+
Toujours moins aka Less and Less (Luc Moullet, 2010) 2
Night and Day (Michael Curtiz, 1946) 3- (Total hogwash – divine music)
Rhapsody in Blue (Irving Rapper, 1945) 3 (Slightly-better hogwash – even more divine music)
http://filmp.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/3271630257_c10677659a.jpg
George Gershwin (Robert Alda) performs the title tune during the "An Experiment in Modern Music" concert at Aeolian Hall in Manhattan.
Last Night (Don McKellar, 1998) 2.5+
Beauty Shop (Bille Woodruff, 2005) 2+
Sightseers (Ben Wheatley, 2012) 2.5
The Last of the Mohicans (Michael Mann, 1992) 3.5-
http://weaponsman.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/lastofthemohicans-running.jpg
During the French and Indian War, adopted Mohican Hawkeye (Daniel Day-Lewis) reluctantly fights with the British against Huron attack.

Mr Minio

08-13-14, 06:35 AM

So high for The Last of the Mohicans! The best thing about it is music.

Lucas

08-13-14, 11:21 AM

http://magnoliaforever.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/the-prefab-people.jpg

The Prefab People 4-
Marriage is hell. This film presents a dying,decaying marriage between a man and his stay at home wife. At a point in the film you realize its not even being told in chronological order, and the harsh reality kicks in. Its told in a very minimalist, almost Cassavetes-style realism mode and its a very "rough" looking film. It actually adds to the film and gives it an even greater kick of realism. Dark,bleak,hopeless.

The Wild One 2.5
Brando is good, but the rest of the film is sorta....forgettable. Oh and its a bit too melodramatic for my tastes. Meh

Autumn Sonata 4+
I saw this one a bit of a while back but I never wrote my thoughts on it. I disagree with your score BlueLion and I'll try to emphasize why. This movie is unbelievably well acted and for the first time we see both the Bergman's together in one film(ingmar and Ingrid obviously). The first half of the film shows tension,turmoil bubbling...simmering below the surface until it all comes out into the open during the second half. You see a mother and daughter go at it,laying it all on the line. Its emotionally draining,powerful, and very believable. Bergman was a master of discomfort, of bringing out the worst aspects of humanity and presenting it through the Cinema.Cinema can be both spectacle and a vehicle of entertainment yes. But it is also a form of catharsis, or a form of reflecting on our own lives through art. Autumn Sonata is one of his rawest,most honest films in my opinion.

Taken 3.5-
Liam Neeson kicking as* and taking names. Honestly, this was a bit of a surprise for me. Its a very watchable and entertaining action flick and it moves at such a rapid pace that you never become bored.Yeah its stupid,cliche blah blah. But honestly it did what it need to do:Entertain me. So its a success in my book.

Wall Street 3.5
Gordon Gecko is one slimy son of gun ain't he?

The Natural 3+
Robert Redford is such a great actor and he does a heck of a fine job in the role. The movie is very watchable and quite good, although Its a bit too "by the books". It doesn't leave it's comfort zone in hopes of being something really good.

The Rainmaker 3.5-
Pretty good. Pretty good.

Mr Minio

08-13-14, 03:07 PM

And I always thought that The Prefab People is just a movie about buying a washing machine...

Kaplan

08-13-14, 08:16 PM

Some more 70s films from the countdown:

Le Cercle Rouge B+
Animal House B
The Conformist A-

Of the films I've watched for the first time because of the countdown, The Conformist is my favorite by far, visually outstanding and very haunting.

Also saw The Big Lebowski last week in the theatre, first time on the big screen but at least the twelfth time overall. It was one of the funnest movie-going experiences ever.

Daniel M

08-13-14, 08:21 PM

Le Cercle Rouge and The Conformist were both top five films on my seventies list, so I'm glad you enjoyed them both :)

mark f

08-14-14, 02:58 PM

Any Number Can Play (Mervyn LeRoy, 1949) 2+
Hot Saturday (William Seiter, 1932) 2.5-
Mulberry St (Jim Mickle, 2006) 2
The Young Philadelphians (Vincent Sherman, 1959) 3
http://38.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mb0zlv29FK1qkg5u5o1_500.gif
With the hopes of becoming a lawyer, poor college student Paul Newman works in construction to help pay his tuition, but his prospects improve when he meets socialite Barbara Rush.
Exorcist II: The Heretic (John Boorman, 1977) 2+ (Visually-striking but ludicrous)
Post Grad (Vicky Jenson, 2009) 2+
Henry Busse and His Orchestra (Jean Negulesco, 1940) 2
Bringing Up Baby (Howard Hawks, 1938) 3.5+
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-agaAmVMg-CA/UnuM80nMB_I/AAAAAAAAYQU/fhb9EyWa-cs/s320/baby+gay.gifhttp://31.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lkj6jcYCjJ1qzjidwo1_500.gif
Paleontologist Cary Grant has to explain to ditzy Katharine Hepburn’s aunt May Robson why he’s in a woman’s nightgown. Later Hepburn destroys his life’s work.
Tomorrow You're Gone (David Jacobson, 2012) 2
Every Girl Should Be Married (Don Hartman, 1948) 2.5
Stranger in the House (Rodney Gibbons, 1997) 2
The Man in the Moon (Robert Mulligan, 1991) 3-
http://31.media.tumblr.com/2efbb23ce5b4b111d964133ff43f725c/tumblr_mlah83y4k31rmf03co1_500.jpg
1957. In rural Louisiana, 14-year-old Reese Witherspoon finds first love with older neighbor boy Jason London, but he thinks they're just friends because she’s just a kid.
The Yacht Party (Roy Mack, 1932) 2.5
The Quiller Memorandum (Michael Anderson, 1966) 2
Double Take (Johan Grimonprez, 2009) 2.5
My Favorite Wife (Garson Kanin, 1940) 3
http://38.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m3l18sdMJv1qbsbnoo1_500.gif
Irene Dunne was assumed lost at sea, but she was really shipwrecked on a desert island with Randolph Scott for seven years. When she suddenly returns, she finds that she’s legally dead and husband Cary Grant has just remarried.
The Good Mother (Leonard Nimoy, 1988) 2.5
Together aka Juntos (Nicolás Pereda, 2009) 1
Room for One More (Norman Taurog, 1952) 2
Barcelona (Whit Stillman, 1994) 2.5+
https://i.ytimg.com/vi/hnytcMClO38/hqdefault.jpg
Uptight salesman Taylor Nichols thinks he loves blonde Tushka Bergen, but his selfish cousin Chris Eigeman complicates matters while sexy Mira Sorvino looks on.

Swan

08-15-14, 01:40 AM

The Devils (Ken Russell, 1971) – rating_3_5
Waking Life* (Richard Linklater, 2001) – rating_4+
Boyhood* (Richard Linklater, 2014) – rating_5
In Cold Blood (Richard Brooks, 1967) – rating_3_5
Vertigo* (Alfred Hitchcock, 1958) – rating_4_5
The Birds* (Alfred Hitchcock, 1963) – rating_3_5
Gosford Park (Robert Altman, 2001) – rating_4_5
Sweet Smell of Success (Alexander Mackendrick, 1957) – rating_3_5+
Boyhood* (Richard Linklater, 2014) – rating_5
Nashville (Robert Altman, 1975) – rating_4_5

*Rewatch

Derek Vinyard

08-15-14, 02:56 AM

Frozen(2010) 4
Inside (2007) 3.5+
Session 9 (2001) 3
The Changeling (1980) 3.5+
Identity (2003) 4.5
Shame (2011) 4
Once Upon A Time In America (1984) 4.5-

the samoan lawyer

08-15-14, 05:29 AM

Camo

08-15-14, 06:14 AM

Glad you liked Shame,Once Upon a Time in America and The Changeling Derek :).

Swan

08-15-14, 08:27 AM

How many times have you seen Boyhood?
Pretty low score for In Cold Blood, its a fantastic film.

Seen Boyhood three times.

In Cold Blood wasn't a very good movie watching experience for me. The movie itself is very good, but I was having some problems with my meds and I was really antsy and tired and feeling really weird. I could barely focus. That's why my rating is so low. I need to see it again.

Daniel M

08-15-14, 08:39 AM

Vertigo* (Alfred Hitchcock, 1958) – rating_4_5
The Birds* (Alfred Hitchcock, 1963) – rating_3_5
Gosford Park (Robert Altman, 2001) – rating_4_5
Sweet Smell of Success (Alexander Mackendrick, 1957) – rating_3_5+
Nashville (Robert Altman, 1975) – rating_4_5

Some great films here, I actually re watched The Birds the other day too and would probably give it 3.5-

Monkeypunch

08-15-14, 06:23 PM

The Invention of Lying - Ricky Gervais stars in this, a (mostly) great satire about a world where everyone tells the absolute truth at all times and lying isn't even a thing, until a down on his luck screenwriter invents it to get out of debt. The film starts off brilliantly, but devolves into a tepid romantic comedy in the last third, which is a bit of a let down. But I still recommend it for the funny performances of Gervais, Louis C.K., Jennifer Garner, and Rob Lowe, and for it's unapologetic satire on religion. 3.5

rauldc14

08-15-14, 07:30 PM

The Birds 3.5 REWATCH
Robots 2.5
Revolutionary Girl: Utena 0.5
Mad Max 2.5
Popeye 1.5
Once Upon a Time in the West 4.5

Mr Minio

08-15-14, 08:01 PM

Once Upon a Time in the West rating_4_5

http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mdvgjxX4R11rfcdu4o3_500.gif

Miss Vicky

08-15-14, 08:12 PM

(Re)watched while I was away for my brother's wedding:

Mary and Max. (Adam Elliot, 2009) 5

Charlotte's Web (Charles Nichols and Iwao Takamoto, 1973) 4

Bridesmaids (Paul Feig, 2011) 3.5+

Gladiator (Ridley Scott, 2000) 5

Surf's Up (Ash Brannon and Chris Buck, 2007) 4.5+

http://www.angelfire.com/music6/walteregan/MoFoPics/maryandmax/maryreading.gif

http://www.angelfire.com/music6/walteregan/MoFoMovieGifs/joaqtongue.gif

donniedarko

08-16-14, 08:00 PM

donniedarko

08-16-14, 08:05 PM

http://prettycleverfilms.com/files/2014/03/Enemy.jpg
Enemy

Recent Watches:
Breaking Away (Yates, 1979)- 3
Enemy (Villeneuve, 2013)- 3++
Monty Python and The Holy Grail (Gilliam & T. Jones, 1975)- 3
Victim (Dearden, 1961)- 1.5
Badlands (Malick, 1973)- 3
Under the Skin (Glazer, 2013)- 1.5+

Short films:
Buy Buy Baby (Marrywether, 2012)- 2.5-
Western Spaghetti (Pes, 2008)- 3
Boats (Dec, 2013)- 3

mark f

08-16-14, 08:28 PM

Kidco (Ronald F. Maxwell, 1984) 2
The Shunning (Michael Landon Jr, 2011) 2.5
Possums (J. Max Burnett, 1997) 2+
The Champ (Franco Zeffirelli, 1979) 3
http://guycodeblog.mtv.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/the-champ_l.jpg
Ricky Schroeder dearly loves his father Jon Voight, “The Champ”, despite all his screw-ups.
The Night of the Living Dead (Tom Savini, 1990) 2.5
The Children of the Living Dead (Tor Ramsey, 2001) 1.5+
Miss March (Zach Cregger & Trevor Moore, 2009) 2
The Blue Max (John Guillermin, 1966) 3.5
http://www.cageyfilms.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/blue_max_16.jpg
While ruffling lots of feathers along the way, arrogant George Peppard becomes the newest German flying ace during WWI.
Phoenix (Danny Cannon, 1998) 2+
The Three Musketeers (Richard Lester, 1973) 4
Needle (John V. Soto, 2010) 2-
Dead Poets Society (Peter Weir, 1989) 3.5
https://38.media.tumblr.com/d228b7642efa69c7fc9a4d99e9e42061/tumblr_n5m2xcaHY31rx3q30o1_500.gif
Oh Captain, My Captain! Carpe diem.
Reborn (Craig McMahon, 2009) 1
Little Big Man (Arthur Penn, 1970) 5
Days of Darkness (Jake Kennedy, 2007) 1.5+
Three Days of the Condor (Sydney Pollack, 1975) 3.5
http://strategieevolutive.files.wordpress.com/2014/07/condor21.jpg?w=820&h=337
CIA reader/analyst Robert Redford battles the “Mailman” who’s come to Faye Dunaway’s apartment to assassinate him.
Bloodwork (Eric Wostenberg, 2012) 2
Cold Sassy Tree (Joan Tewkesbury, 1989) 2.5
Good Morning, Miss Dove (Henry Koster, 1955) 2+
Damn Yankees! (George Abbott & Stanley Donen, 1958) 3.5
http://ktismatics.files.wordpress.com/2010/08/damn-mambo.png?w=701&h=436
The Devil’s henchwoman Gwen Verdon dances and sings “Who’s Got the Pain?” with Bob Fosse (her future husband).

honeykid

08-16-14, 09:19 PM

Victim (Dearden, 1961)- 1.5
Wow., That's a really low rating for a rather decent film. What didn't you like?

Sane

08-16-14, 09:38 PM

Trouble in Paradise (1932) - Ernst Lubitsch
My first Lubitsch movie and I'll definitely be watching more. rating_4

French Connection II (1975) - John Frankenheimer
Really just a showcase for Hackman's acting - which is fine with someone as talented as him. Slightly better than the first IMO. rating_4-

King King (2005) - Peter Jackson
This would have been great if it was about an hour and a half shorter. As it was I enjoyed it well enough. rating_3+

The Graduate (1967) - Mike Nichols
Remember when Hollywood did more than remakes and super hero movies? Those were the days ... rating_5

Primal Fear (1996) - Gregory Hoblit
Watched for HoF. Mostly OK but gets bad at the end. rating_2+

Paper Moon (1973) - Peter Bogdanovich
Remember when Hollywood did more than remakes ... ;) Tatum O'Neal was great, Ryan O'Neal was, well, Ryan O'Neal. rating_4_5-

Apocalypto (2006) - Mel Gibson
First half was excellent - second half turned into a standard action movie with all the clichéd story devices. Decent overall but I was pretty disappointed by the end. rating_3

Spring, Summer, Fall, Winter ... and Spring (2003) - Kim Ki Duk
One of my favourite movies. rating_5

What's Up, Doc (1972) - Peter Bogdanovich
Streisand was great and it had some funny parts but overall it was only decent. rating_3

The Man Without a Face (1993) - Mel Gibson
OK, I'm calling it, Gibson is an average actor and a bad director. rating_1_5-

Dead Calm (1989) - Phillip Noyce
Pretty effective thriller. The ending gets criticised but I thought it was OK. rating_3_5

Catch a Fire (2006) - Phillip Noyce
True story about the making of a terrorist in South Africa. I liked it. rating_3_5+

The Travelling Players (1975) - Theodoros Angelopoulos
Angelopoulos doesn't exactly make "easy" to watch films but with patience they often end up great. This is a four hour historical drama that becomes really worth watching if you get through the first hour and a half. rating_4

Halloween Resurrection (2002) - Rick Rosenthal
When a movie starts and you see that the top billed actor is Busta Rhymes you kind of know you aren't about to see a masterpiece. Still, this wasn't as bad as I thought it might be. rating_2_5

In the Heat of the Night (1967) - Norman Jewison
I love Poitier and Steiger and they are at their best here. rating_4_5+

The Adventure of Sherlock Holmes' Smarter Brother (1975) - Gene Wilder
When I saw Willy Wonka in the 70s countdown I got hit with some nostalgia so I searched for Gene Wilder films. Upon seeing he directed a few I thought I'd watch some - I think that may have been be a bad decision. rating_2

donniedarko

08-16-14, 10:27 PM

Wow., That's a really low rating for a rather decent film. What didn't you like?

Growing up very recently, Victim just seems really timid for its subject matter, many state (including Roger Ebert) that it's daring for its time, but for mine it quite bland. I also felt that the film tried to hard to be dramatic, and I was never really touched. I can't say it's an awful film, just extremely ineffective. That being said I plan on watching more films from Basil Dearden. Any recs?

honeykid

08-16-14, 10:36 PM

As you know, I don't really care about directors too much, however, looking at his other work, I'd recommend The League Of Gentleman, The Mind Benders and Dead Of Night.

mark f

08-16-14, 10:57 PM

There's really a lot going on in Victim. Just because the subject matter isn't so edgy now doesn't mean it wasn't a big deal, and I think it stands up today as solid entertainment and social comment. Besides the fact that Dirk Bogarde plays a lawyer in the closet, there's the fact that at the time Bogarde was also in the closet. I guess there was more to it than coincidence when he was pitched in the '50s as England's Rock Hudson. Another Dearden film from that era is Sapphire, a murder mystery dealing with a "victim" who passed for white. It's similar in treatment and quality (I'd say good) to the film you gave a crap rating. :)

Daniel M

08-17-14, 08:19 AM

I have Victim recorded to and I'm going to watch it for the 60s list :D

Mingusings

08-17-14, 10:16 PM

Palo Alto (2014): 2_5
Ivan's Childhood (1962): 3_5
Solaris (1972): 2_5
Fantastic Planet (1973): 2_5
Heathers (1988): 2_5
A Woman Under the Influence (1974): 3_5
Christiane F. (1981): 3
Aladdin (1992): 4

Derek Vinyard

08-17-14, 11:26 PM

* = Rewatch
High Tension (Haute Tension) (2003) 3.5+
Sauna (2008) 4
Lawless (2012) 4+
*Jaws 2 (1978) 2.5-
*Good Will Hunting (1997) 4+
*American Beauty (1999) 5
Signs (2002) 3+
The Fourth Kind (2009) 3.5+

Miss Vicky

08-17-14, 11:28 PM

Heathers (1988): 2_5

:(

Lucas

08-18-14, 04:09 PM

http://robotmafia.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/the_cranes_are_flying3.gif

The Cranes are Flying 4.5
Oh great Kalazatov why are thou films so beautiful?

Tatiana Samoilova <3

Apocalypto 4
Honestly, as far as big epic blockbusters go this film is top of the line. Thoroughly engrossing,exciting,intense and its remarkable how well-crafted it is. Mel Gibson might be a slimey scumbag of a human-being, but as a director he's damn good.

My Girl Friday 3-
Alright film but the characters are just outright irritating. They never shut up!

The Circus 3-
Meh

The Great Dictator 4-
One of the better Chaplin films I've seen and it showed that the transition to sound works really well. It could use some trimming in terms of length, but its a really enjoyable film and I'm glad I viewed it.

mark f

08-18-14, 05:15 PM

Kidnapped (Miguel Angel Vivas, 2010) 2.5-
Terror from Beneath the Sea (Maury Dexter 1963) 1+
The Letter (Jean de Limur, 1929) 2.5
Mrs. Doubtfire (Chris Columbus, 1993) 3.5
http://cdn29.elitedaily.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/tumblr_lk2nmxaN0Q1qi3n3go1_5001.gif
Divorced dad Robin Williams poses as Mrs. Doubtfire to get a job as nanny for his kids but also displays his cooking and fire safety skills.
Make Way for a Lady (David Butler, 1936) 2
High Wall (Curtis Bernhardt, 1947) 3-
Wagons East (Peter Markle, 1994) 2
The Cottage (Paul Andrew Williams, 2008) 2.5+
http://www.mansplat.com/cottage_4.jpg
A serial-killer farmer has someone else’s kidnap victim (Jennifer Ellison) right where he wants her.
Battle Zone (Lesley Selander, 1952) 2
Across the Wide Missouri (William A. Wellman, 1951) 2.5
Marriage is a Private Affair (Robert Z. Leonard, 1944) 2
One Hour Photo (Mark Romanek, 2002) 2.5
http://cdn.novafm.com.au/sites/default/files/one-hour-photo-gif.gif
Lonely photo developer Robin Williams has been taking an unhealthy interest in some of his customers, and after he’s fired, he has a nightmare.
The Birds and the Beasts Were There (Andre De La Varre, 1944) 2+
Lifeboat (Alfred Hitchcock, 1944) 3.5-
Two Smart People (Jules Dassin, 1946) 2
A Bell for Adano (Henry King, 1945) 3
http://s3.amazonaws.com/auteurs_production/images/film/a-bell-for-adano/w448/a-bell-for-adano.jpg?1305483505
During WWII, Italian Gene Tierney has an innocent romance with married American major John Hodiak who tries to get her hometown a new bell to replace the historical one the fascists took.
Planes (Klay Hall, 2013) 2.5
The Last Posse (Alfred L. Werker, 1953) 2
New World Disorder (Richard Spence, 1999) 2
The Producers (Susan Stroman, 2005) 3
http://i.perezhilton.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/matthew-broderick-nathan-lane-the-producers-broadway-return.gif
Nazi playwright Will Farrell gets Broadway producer Nathan Lane and accountant Matthew Broderick to show approval (with the Fuhrer-approved forefinger) for his Springtime for Hitler which they want to stage to make a ton of money when it flops, but they keep switching fingers to show their true feelings.

Daniel M

08-19-14, 07:23 AM

Nice to see such a high rating for Lifeboat as I have it recorded as I aim to watch more Hitchcock.

Mr Minio

08-19-14, 11:01 AM

The Cranes are Flying rating_4_5
Oh great Kalazatov why are thou films so beautiful? Tatiana Samoilova <3

http://31.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m5znwv9wbj1r9mu8so6_250.gif

TRV N KVLT!

Have you seen I Am Cuba and Letter Never Sent? I love the first one. The latter is decent, but the cinematography is still outstanding.

Watch MOAR beautiful Soviet films! Like Ballad of a Soldier or Destiny of a Man.

Lucas

08-19-14, 11:03 AM

Have you seen I Am Cuba and Letter Never Sent? I love the first one. The latter is decent, but the cinematography is still outstanding.

I've seen Letter Never Sent, tis' a magnificent film. Some of the most gorgeous cinematography I've ever seen. Haven't seen Soy Cuba though,but its on my watchlist.

Sedai

08-19-14, 05:05 PM

Primal Fear (Hoblit, 1996) 3

http://newslang89.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/primalfear4.jpg

When this first hit, I recall people being sort of over-the-moon about Norton's performance as Aaron. His performance is definitely good, and I don't recall seeing much of Norton before this flick, but its not to tour-de-force it was made out to be. Something about the production approach seemed sort of bland to me, as well. It's pretty workmanlike and lacks any signature style; sort of a Film Making 101 type approach that didn't age very well. I dunno, it fell pretty flat for me this time around, especially the final act.

The Last Boy Scout (T Scott, 1991) 2_5

http://cdn-static.denofgeek.com/sites/denofgeek/files/styles/insert_main_wide_image/public/picture-7.jpg?itok=yMbqvrEN

Apparently I am still quoting this film all these years later, and I wasn't even aware of it. That's too bad, because it's not a very good movie. I am sure it appealed to my 19-year old self when it first came out, but Bruce Willis turns in a fairly one-dimensional, cliched performance as a tough-guy private investigator. Damon Wayans is terrible as the ex-quarterback with a chip on his shoulder turned sidekick. One scene in particular has Wayans shedding a tear, and the way Tony Scott set it up, shot and edited it made it seem like it belonged on the gag reel. I was reminded of another Wayans performance in I'm Gonna Get You Sucka, in which a gag with a Rambo type character getting a tiny cut on his finger goes over the top with melodrama, and the character drops to his knees screaming, all over a tiny cut. Too bad a similar scene is supposed to be serious in The Last Boy Scout; I was supposed to feel bad for the character, but I was in ****ing stitches laughing.

Tony Scott has done a couple of decent flicks, but the guy can sure dial up a garbage scene from time to time. The Last Boy Scout is full of them. It's not all bad, as the opening scene is very memorable, and there is some decent comedy from Willis, who seemed stuck mid-transition between Moonlighting and Die Hard. The guy is entertaining enough to keep the film moving, but the screenplay hamstrings the proceedings far too often for my taste, like Bruce Willis and a badly planned escape involving a sock puppet, or a final joke centered around a bomb going off in a residential neighborhood in Los Angeles, clearly contrived and written long before either 9/11 or the Oklahoma City bombings. Regardless, the whole thing is just in sort of poor taste.

Derek Vinyard

08-19-14, 05:28 PM

The Cottage (Paul Andrew Williams, 2008) 2.5+]

I listen to it tonight ! you're attracted my attention

mark f

08-19-14, 05:30 PM

Make sure you stick with it because the second half is better than the first. :)

mark f

08-20-14, 01:16 AM

Zion: Canyon of Colour (James A FitzPatrick, 1934) 2.5
Dark Feed (Rasmussen Bros., 2013) 1.5
The Smiling Lieutenant (Ernst Lubitsch, 1931) 2.5
It Happened One Night (Frank Capra, 1934) 3.5+
http://37.media.tumblr.com/8f945df7c187d0c7cd031ffeb0cd17aa/tumblr_n2eg523nBX1sr1ki0o1_500.gif
Newspaper journalist Clark Gable carries runaway heiress Claudette Colbert through a stream to demonstrate his masculine superiority and she allows him to fool himself.
Hasty Marriage (Gilbert Pratt, 1931) 2.5+
Skylark (Mark Sandrich, 1941) 2.5+
Coyote Ugly (David McNally, 2000) 2
Three Came Home (Jean Negulesco, 1950) 3
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Af4v7jOoIEQ/UVoj2U9adqI/AAAAAAAARQs/YtoQXw8_PPE/s1600/three-came-home.jpg
After years of separation from her husband in a Japanese concentration camp, Agnes Newton Keith (Claudette Colbert) keeps an eye out for Allied aircraft.
A Duke for a Day (James Parrott, 1934) 2.5
The Secret Heart (Robert Z. Leonard, 1946) 2
Without Reservations (Mervyn LeRoy, 1946) 2.5
The Outrage (Martin Ritt, 1964) 2.5+
http://basementrejects.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/outrage-rape-paul-newman-laurence-harvey-claire-bloom.jpg
In this western variation on Rashômon, Claire Bloom plays the “violated” wife, Paul Newman is the animalistic bandit and Laurence Harvey is the Southern aristocrat husband.
Dirty Laundry (Maurice Jamal, 2006) 2.5
Resident Evil (Paul W.S. Anderson, 2002) 2.5
The Mighty Quinn (Carl Schenkel, 1989) 2.5
Diary of a Hitman (Roy London, 1992) 2.5+
http://s3.amazonaws.com/auteurs_production/images/film/diary-of-a-hitman/w448/diary-of-a-hitman.jpg
Professional hitman Forest Whitaker wants to get out of the business, but things get complicated with his last job involving his client's wife Sherilyn Fenn and her infant.
Rachel, Rachel (Paul Newman, 1968) 2.5
Minotaur (Jonathan English, 2006) 1.5
A Field in England (Ben Wheatley, 2013) 2.5
The Left Handed Gun (Arthur Hiller, 1958) 2.5+
http://thehollywoodprojects.files.wordpress.com/2011/06/billy.png?w=620
Billy the Kid (Paul Newman) is quick on the draw and true blue to his friends, but he has a serious addiction to death.

honeykid

08-20-14, 01:18 AM

Was that viewing of A Field In England with your brother?

mark f

08-20-14, 01:24 AM

Yep. I got him that, Sightseers and Kill List (watching that now) for his birthday, and he came over to watch them. He loves them. :cool:

honeykid

08-20-14, 01:30 AM

Excellent. I did wonder, seeing as you saw it so recently, but were talking about showing them to him as you thought he'd really like them. :up:

meatwadsprite

08-20-14, 02:21 AM

Get on Up

http://www.technologytell.com/entertainment/files/2014/07/get-on-up-brown-and-co.jpg

Takes non-linear story telling to all new heights. The scenes are just scattered around for no reason. Not to suggest that if it was edited correctly it would actually be a good movie. Pulseless.

rating_2

Chef

http://images.smh.com.au/2014/05/07/5407049/kq_Chef_videothumb-620x349.jpg

This movie takes place in some upbeat dreamworld, where Scarlett Johansson and some spanish supermodel want Jon Favreau, and then he gets a food truck and becomes a millionare. But for some unexplainable reason it's actually an enjoyable flick.

rating_3

Life Itself

http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/artsdesk/files/2014/05/LifeItselfMM-544x320.jpeg

This movie should be called Death Itself, because it's mostly about Roger succumbing to severe cancer. I think a lot of us here have a lot in common with this guy, who wasted most of his life watching movies and writing what he thought about them. I was expecting something brilliant, a documentary that validated all of this time I've spent watching movies. Instead we get this. Not terrible, but it's subject deserves much better.

rating_3

Jodorowsky's Dune

http://collider.com/wp-content/uploads/jodorowskys-dune-poster-slice.jpg

An outrageous story about a ridiculous filmmaker filled with enormous passion for movie making. Just seeing glimpses of Jodorowsky's films made me break down in a laughing fit. His version of Dune belongs next to the two movies below, which were also unrealistically ambitious.

rating_3_5

Boyhood

http://davethenovelist.files.wordpress.com/2014/07/boyhood.jpg

Somehow it never draws attention to it's spectacular gimmick, but what makes Boyhood worthwhile is some of Linklater's best writing. Although I did enjoy the first half where he's a little kid much more than the rest of it. I felt as the boy got older, I related to him less and less.

rating_3_5

Apocalypse Now

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-C_YUIU9R68g/TYbud1UtnXI/AAAAAAAAAHA/E6HyxPmIDok/s1600/apocalypse-now-movie-still-5.jpg

Wasn't really planning on watching the whole thing, but 20 minutes in I was completely sucked back in. Although I've always admired Apocalypse Now, I never understood how evil Martin Sheen's character was until this viewing. I also didn't remember the bizarre synthesizer score, which lends a giant hand in shaping the nightmarish landscape the journey inhibits.There are a lot of things I didn't understand about this movie 2 or 3 years back and some things I still don't.

rating_4_5

Cobpyth

08-20-14, 02:23 AM

Apocalypse Now

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-C_YUIU9R68g/TYbud1UtnXI/AAAAAAAAAHA/E6HyxPmIDok/s1600/apocalypse-now-movie-still-5.jpg

Wasn't really planning on watching the whole thing, but 20 minutes in I was completely sucked back in. Although I've always admired Apocalypse Now, I never understood how evil Charlie Sheen's character was until this viewing. I also didn't remember the bizarre synthesizer score, which lends a giant hand in shaping the nightmarish landscape the journey inhibits.There are a lot of things I didn't understand about this movie 2 or 3 years back and some things I still don't.

4.5

I believe it's Martin Sheen. ;)

the samoan lawyer

08-20-14, 05:33 AM

Yep. I got him that, Sightseers and Kill List (watching that now) for his birthday, and he came over to watch them. He loves them. :cool:

In what order would you rank Wheatley's films Mark?

Sedai

08-20-14, 11:32 AM

Divergent (Burger, 2014) 2_5

http://a57.foxnews.com/global.fncstatic.com/static/managed/img/Entertainment/876/493/zoe%20kravitz%20divergent%20ap.jpg?ve=1&tl=1

"Why is everything grey?"
"It matches our hearts."
"Wut?"
"I dunno, I am just reading my lines."

Grey, lifeless Hunger Games clone with an actress not anywhere near as talented as Jennifer Lawrence. Also - it's 2.5 hours long without having even a piece of a reason to be. Say, I gave it 2.5 stars...coincidence?

meatwadsprite

08-20-14, 01:08 PM

I believe it's Martin Sheen. ;)

Ok that makes more sense. I was wondering why they would cast Charlie Sheen as Willard and Vin Diesel as Colonel Kurtz.

Sedai

08-20-14, 05:17 PM

*Waves at Meaty*

mark f

08-20-14, 06:48 PM

In what order would you rank Wheatley's films Mark?
The three of Wheatley's films that I've seen are all so weird and unique that it's kinda difficult to quantify them, especially against themselves. I've only seen Sightseers once, so it's at a disadvantage, also perhaps for being the most-straightforward of them. My rewatches makes me feel sure that Kill List is the best, Sightseers is the funniest and A Field in England is the kind of wacko Lynch/Jodorowsky atmospheric nonsense I would normally not go for but there's just something about it that's appealing (if that's the right word). I've changed Kill List to 3 and the other two are 2.5. My brother thinks they're about a whole rating higher. I'm interested to see what Wheatley does with the first two hours of "Dr. Who" :)

Swan

08-20-14, 06:52 PM

A Field in England is Jodorowsky-esque? I must check this out.

cricket

08-20-14, 08:08 PM

I've changed Kill List to 3

I'm disturbingly happy about this

Camo

08-20-14, 08:13 PM

I'm disturbingly happy about this

Sweet Sixteen got a two and a half from him and i was chuffed :D

Miss Vicky

08-20-14, 09:00 PM

Tropic Thunder (Ben Stiller, 2008) (Rewatch) 4+

The Immigrant (James Gray, 2013) (Rewatch) 3.5+

Midnight Cowboy (John Schlesinger, 1969) 3.5+

Persona (Ingmar Bergman, 1966) 4

The Green Mile (Frank Darabont, 1999) (Rewatch) 4

http://www.angelfire.com/music6/walteregan/MoFoMovieGifs/midnightcowboy.gif

http://www.angelfire.com/music6/walteregan/MoFoMovieGifs/persona.gif

Swan

08-20-14, 09:01 PM

Persona (Ingmar Bergman, 1966) rating_4

My heart... it's so full right now!

meatwadsprite

08-20-14, 09:02 PM

*Waves at Meaty*

Now it's a party.

Camo

08-20-14, 09:14 PM

I'm not a fan of The Green Mile personally. Good to see how much you liked both Midnight Cowboy and Persona which i finally watched in full a few days ago.

Miss Vicky

08-20-14, 09:18 PM

I'm not a fan of The Green Mile personally. Good to see how much you liked both Midnight Cowboy and Persona which i finally watched in full a few days ago.

It's not a favorite - the supernatural elements in it lose something for me - but it's got some really good performances and some touching moments. Plus Mr. Jingles is adorable.

Camo

08-20-14, 09:32 PM

It's not a favorite - the supernatural elements in it lose something for me - but it's got some really good performances and some touching moments. Plus Mr. Jingles is adorable.

Agreed on Mr.Jingles, i'm not really fond of any rats,mouses,rodents in general; sorry i know they are your faourite types of pet. Mr.Jingles relationship with the Death Row inmate was actually one of the things i really liked about the film though.

mark f

08-22-14, 12:37 AM

The Helen Morgan Story (Michael Curtiz, 1957) 2.5
The Spellbinder (Jack Hively, 1939) 2+
Jason and the Argonauts (Nick Willing, 2000) 2.5-
Daddy Long Legs (Jean Negulesco, 1955) 3
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-fBnW_n8sNzU/U3jpRzwcrzI/AAAAAAAABbw/SlB4f4X2c5g/s1600/daddylonglegs.png
Orphaned French girl Leslie Caron is sent to college by benefactor Fred Astaire who decides to take a closer look at her.
For Love or Money (Michael Gordon, 1963) 2.5
The Second Time Around (Vincent Sherman, 1961) 2
With a Song in My Heart (Walter Lang, 1952) 2.5+
The Simple Life of Noah Dearborn (Gregg Champion, 1999) 2.5+
http://static.cinemagia.ro/img/resize/db/movie/00/82/65/the-simple-life-of-noah-dearborn-375507l-imagine.jpg
Simple, hard-working Sidney Poitier owns a piece of land attractive to oil speculators, and his refusal to sell gets him into trouble, which psychologist Mary-Louise Parker tries to help him get out of.
The Mating Season (Mitchell Leisen, 1951) 2.5
Wanted: Jane Turner (Edward Killy, 1936) 2
The Model and the Marriage Broker (George Cukor, 1951) 2.5
Birdman of Alcatraz (John Frankenheimer, 1962) 3.5
http://skymovies.sky.com/image/unscaled/2012/02/16/SVOD-L-birdman-of-alcatraz.jpg
Robert Stroud (Burt Lancaster) spends most of his life in prison in solitary confinement, yet somehow becomes the world’s foremost authority on bird anatomy and pathology.
Millionaires in Prison (Ray McCarey, 1940) 2
Child’s Play (Tom Holland, 1988) 2.5
Behind the Headlines (Richard Rosson, 1937) 2
Kill List (Ben Wheatley, 2011) 3
http://31.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lwtwf50HFO1qazkdco1_500.gif
You’re on your own.
The Strange Love of Molly Louvain (Michael Curtiz, 1932) 2
Blessed Event (Roy Del Ruth, 1932) 2.5
The Visitors (Jack Ersgard, 1988) 2+
The Half Naked Truth (Gregory La Cava, 1932) 2.5
http://www.avcesar.com/source/software/dvd/1997/image_tech_A_1159140816.jpg
Carnival huckster Lee Tracy (right) argues with his star singer/dancer Lupe Velez while his partner Eugene Pallette nips from the jug.

Swan

08-22-14, 12:38 AM

Didn't know there was a Jason and the Argonauts remake.

mark f

08-22-14, 01:06 AM

A two-part TV movie.

Monkeypunch

08-22-14, 01:44 AM

Spider-Man 2 - "I know you think we can't be together, but can't you respect me enough to let me make my own decision? I know there'll be risks but I want to face them with you. It's wrong that we should be only half alive... half of ourselves. I love you. So here I am - standing in your doorway. I have always been standing in your doorway." this quote sort of fits my life right now.

Sane

08-22-14, 07:22 PM

Mansfield Park (1999) - Patricia Rozema
Like all the other Jane Austen movies, this is a perfectly decent way to waste a couple of hours. rating_3

X2: X-Men United (2003) - Bryan Singer
I remember absolutely nothing about this but I gave it a rating_3 so I guess I quite liked it?

Walkabout (1971) - Nicolas Roeg
Took me a while to get past the family living in Sydney seemingly being able to drive into the desert, with no roads near by, in their VW one afternoon. I guess that's what happens when people in other countries make movies about Australia ;) Beyond that it was good. rating_3_5+

The Philadelphia Story (1940) - George Cukor
Nice movie, silly ending. rating_3_5+

The Time Machine (1960) - George Pal
A childhood favourite. Horribly acted by most of the cast but such an enjoyable story. rating_3

Hard Eight (1996) - Paul Thomas Anderson
Obviously Anderson has done better but it's a pretty good debut. rating_3

Belle (2014) - Amma Asante
A flawed movie that slips into clichés too often but the story of a girl with an English father and African mother raised in a rich family in 18th century Britain is a fascinating and emotional one. rating_3_5+

La Dolce Vita (1960) - Federico Fellini
I'd never watched a Fellini movie. Always wanted to but every time I think about it I feel like they will be hard work - but surprisingly for a three hour movie this was remarkably easy to watch thanks largely to Mastroianni. rating_4_5-

Mammoth (2009) - Lukas Moodysson
I love the way Moodysson builds flawed characters that I care about. His ability to do this means that even though his movies are far from perfect they are always highly enjoyable. This Babel-esque movie starring Michelle Williams is not his best work but I liked it a lot. rating_4

Games of Love & Chance (2003) - Abdel Kechiche
IMO Moodysson and Kechiche are two of the best modern directors when it comes to character driven movies and for that reason they have become two of my favourites. This is a remarkably well acted movie about Muslim teenagers in Paris dealing with growing up and love - most of the cast being amateurs. rating_4_5-

mark f

08-24-14, 03:34 AM

Mission: Killfast (Ted V. Mikels, 1991) 1+
A House in the Hills (Ken Wiederhorn, 1996) 2.5
April Fool’s Day (Butcher Bros., 2008) 2-
Roman Holiday (William Wyler, 1953) 3.5
http://25.media.tumblr.com/7b2a9b0b082138d79e7549517ccb3184/tumblr_mijlnrDW7s1qkg5u5o1_500.gif
While trying to get a scoop, American newspaperman Gregory Peck shows princess Audrey Hepburn the most carefree, fun and romantic day of her life.
Beautiful Bavaria (James A. FitzPatrick, 1953) 2.5-
The Fan (Edward Bianchi, 1981) 2
Hold Your Breath (Jared Cohn, 2012) 1.5
Blind Husbands (Erich von Stroheim, 1919) 2.5-
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-lfbLmhonq-s/TuFaemOetnI/AAAAAAAABmM/7I4sx73YZJo/s1600/blind-husbands1.jpg
Womanizing Austrian lieutenant Erich von Stroheim sets his sights on the wife, Francelia Billington, of American doctor Sam De Grasse, who forsakes her while obsessing over his mountain-climbing.
Green Mansions (Mel Ferrer, 1959) 2+
Over the Counter (Jack Cummings, 1932) 2.5
The Gospel (Rob Hardy, 2005) 2
Tony Manero (Pablo Larraín, 2008) 2.5
http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Film/Pix/pictures/2009/4/3/1238758764619/Scene-from-Tony-Manero-20-001.jpg
In Pinochet’s Chile, a man (Alfredo Castro) obsessed with the John Travolta character in Saturday Night Fever also has obsessions with violent killings.
The Jane Austen Book Club (Robin Swicord, 2007) 2.5
The Bounty Hunter (Andre De Toth, 1954) 2
Eraser (Chuck Russell, 1996) 2.5+
Persepolis (Vincent Paronnaud & Marjane Satrapi, 2007) 3.5
http://37.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mcfd5c4hJl1qa4yc3o2_500.gif
Marjit is confronted by the fashion police in post-Shah Iran, but they let her go when she feigns abuse at home.
Creep (Christopher Smith, 2004) 2+
Secret People (Thorold Dickinson, 1952) 2
Seance (Mark L. Smith, 2006) 2
Doctor Who: Deep Breath (Ben Wheatley, 2014) 3
https://fbexternal-a.akamaihd.net/safe_image.php?d=AQDy8eFZ0GJ-WR_q&w=484&h=253&url=http%3A%2F%2Fimage-cdn.zap2it.com%2Fimages%2Fdoctor-who-season-8-peter-capaldi-jenna-coleman-bbc.jpg&cfs=1&sx=0&sy=10&sw=750&sh=392
The good doctor, Peter Capaldi, and his companion, Jenna Coleman, realize that everyone else at their restaurant is an enemy.

Cobpyth

08-24-14, 02:38 PM

Jason and the Argonauts (Nick Willing, 2000) 2.5-

I saw that film many times when I was young! Back then, I thought it was absolutely EPIC (I was a 10 year old boy or something, so all that stuff looked awesome to me). I'm not too sure what I'd think of it now, though. :p

Roman Holiday (William Wyler, 1953) 3.5
http://25.media.tumblr.com/7b2a9b0b082138d79e7549517ccb3184/tumblr_mijlnrDW7s1qkg5u5o1_500.gif
While trying to get a scoop, American newspaperman Gregory Peck shows princess Audrey Hepburn the most carefree, fun and romantic day of her life.

Audrey looks wonderful there! :love:
This film nearly made my top 101. I LOVE it!

Swan

08-24-14, 02:39 PM

Roman Holiday was immediately thrown into my top ten when I first saw it. Audrey Hepburn was my favorite actress back then. :cool:

Cobpyth

08-24-14, 02:50 PM

Roman Holiday was immediately thrown into my top ten when I first saw it. Audrey Hepburn was my favorite actress back then. :cool:

She's a dream, isn't she? :blush:

Swan

08-24-14, 02:50 PM

:yup:

Swan

08-25-14, 12:04 AM

Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid* (George Roy Hill, 1969) – rating_4
Sansho the Bailiff (Kenji Mizoguchi, 1954) – rating_4+
Aguirre, the Wrath of God* (Werner Herzog, 1972) – rating_5
Maniac* (William Lustig, 1980) – rating_3
Signs of Life (Werner Herzog, 1968) – rating_3_5
Boyhood* (Richard Linklater, 2014) – rating_5
Stroszek (Werner Herzog, 1977) – rating_4_5
Mrs. Doubtfire* (Chris Columbus, 1993) – rating_2_5+
The Thin Red Line* (Terrence Malick, 1998) – rating_4
Heart of Glass (Werner Herzog, 1976) – rating_3_5+

*Rewatch

Mr Minio

08-25-14, 06:36 AM

Sansho the Bailiff (Kenji Mizoguchi, 1954) – rating_4+
Aguirre, the Wrath of God* (Werner Herzog, 1972) – rating_5
Stroszek (Werner Herzog, 1977) – rating_4_5
The Thin Red Line* (Terrence Malick, 1998) – rating_4

http://img849.imageshack.us/img849/4083/imw.gif

Daniel M

08-25-14, 11:34 AM

L'Avventura (Michelangelo Antonioni, 1960) 4

Fantastic exercise in atmosphere that uses great imagery to capture the mood of the characters after a woman goes missing on an island. Great chemistry between the two main characters, and fantastic use of camerawork to make us feel like someone is watching them.

All About Eve (Joseph L. Mankiewicz, 1950) 3.5+

A great acerbic script, and some fantastic performances, I can see why so many people love this. I didn't find it as powerful or emotionally involving as some other films that I truly love though.

Under The Skin (Jonathan Glazer, 2013) 4+

Great film that shares a lot in terms of story with another favourite of mine, The Man Who Fell to Earth. Interesting critique of human beings and lifestyle, relationships and such. Wonderfully shot as it mixes hidden camera and surreal scenes. Loved the strange 'fixer' type of character, a simple but effective tale as the hunter becomes hunted.

Blow (Ted Demme, 2001) 2.5-

As cricket said in another thread, with Scorsese at the helm this could have been a hell of a film. The content is interesting enough to make it enjoyable for some, but I just found it very dull with very few memorable moments, no where near as fun as it should have been.

The Philadelphia Story (George Cukor, 1940) 3.5+

Great classic old film that could become a favourite. I absolutely love Cary Grant and james Stewart who gives a superb performance as a character who I absolutely loved, the story was a bit silly at times but I knew what to expect and it left a smile on my face

Sexy Beast (Jonathan Glazer, 2000) 4.5-

Great British crime film with fantastic performances by the now typecast Ray Winstone and Ben Kingsley. Wonderfully odd script that was right up my street. Instead of being a buddy heist film that I half expected, it focuses more before the crime and the relationship between Winstone and Kingsley who provides many unforgettable scenes. Great soundtrack and great to see Ian McShane in a small role too.

Goldfinger (Guy Hamilton, 1964) 4

Arguably the greatest Bond film. A rewatch of a favourite, it has everything that makes me love the series. Sean Connery gives probably his best performance, and opposite him Gert Fröbe is great as Goldfinger. The supporting characters are some of the most memorable of the series with Pussy Galore and Oddjob. Many great and memorable scenes, the laser, the gold course, and the fort knox ending.

James Bond: Do you expect me to talk?
Auric Goldfinger: No, Mr. Bond, I expect you to die!

Jackass Presents: Bad Grandpa (Jeff Tremaine, 2013) 2.5

Interesting concept and it does have some great moments, but overall I thought there were too many dull moments, like it was mixed in what it wanted to be, a serious movie or just full of laugh out loud comedy.

Miss Vicky

08-26-14, 04:21 AM

The Good, the Bad and the Ugly (Sergio Leone, 1966) 1.5-

Mrs. Doubtfire (Chris Columbus, 1993) (Rewatch) 3.5

Unhung Hero (Brian Spitz, 2013) 2.5+

The Virgin Spring (Ingmar Bergman, 1960) 3.5-

The Children's Hour (William Wyler, 1961) 4+

http://www.angelfire.com/music6/walteregan/MoFoMovieGifs/mrsdoubtfire.gif

http://www.angelfire.com/music6/walteregan/MoFoMovieGifs/childrenshour.gif

Mr Minio

08-26-14, 05:56 AM

The Good, the Bad and the Ugly (Sergio Leone, 1966) rating_1_5-

http://media.giphy.com/media/Tur97wZTm2O2c/giphy.gif

mark f

08-26-14, 05:31 PM

The Night of the Following Day (Hubert Cornfield, 1968) 1.5
They Gave Him a Gun (W.S. Van Dyke, 1937) 2
The Little Ranger (Gordon Douglas, 1938) 2.5
The Family Way (Boulting Bros., 1966) 3+
http://img.rp.vhd.me/4504236_l3.jpg
Young newlyweds Hayley Mills and Hywel Bennett cannot consummate their marriage due to the fact that their planned honeymoon fell through and they live at his parents' house.
Mystery Team (Dan Eckman, 2009) 2
The Avenging Angel (Craig R. Baxley, 1995) 2.5
Hard to Get (Ray Enright, 1938) 2+
Trilogy: The Weeping Meadow (Theodoros Angelopoulos, 2004) 2.5+
http://bianet.org/system/uploads/1/articles/spot_image/000/151/830/original/teo-501.jpg
A lyrical funeral on a river in 1936 Greece is one of many long shots in the epic film.
New Jerusalem (Rick Alverson, 2011) 1.5
My Cousin Vinny (Jonathan Lynn, 1992) 3
Going Places (Ray Enright, 1938) 2+
Wolf Creek (Greg Mclean, 2005) 2.5
http://37.media.tumblr.com/2a29c0d262d8a2ddf97aa817fccda7c7/tumblr_n1sj10nYOP1rjmhkwo2_500.gif
Crazed Australian bushman John Jarratt terrorizes stranded backpacker Cassandra Magrath.
The Pride and the Passion (Stanley Kramer, 1957) 2.5
Lady L (Peter Ustinov, 1965) 2
Van Gogh: Darkness Into Light (Fritz Goodwin, 1956) 2.5
The Life and Death of 9413, a Hollywood Extra (Robert Florey & Slavko Vorkapich, 1928) 3-
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-gocmtvF66ec/UZ6gXLEi5YI/AAAAAAAAEBs/aqlyN1Zoavg/s1600/tumblr_lcx0gbGX0v1qaphz7o1_500.gif
Dreaming of making it big in Hollywood, Jules Raucourt starts as a film extra, but work is difficult to find in this classic experimental film.
Dawn at Socorro (George Sherman, 1954) 2
100 Years at the Movies (Chuck Workman, 1994) 4
Brass Target (John Hough, 1978) 2.5
Operation Crossbow (Michael Anderson, 1965) 3
http://www.simonprior.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/operationcrossbow1.jpg
During WWII, Allied agent George Peppard is sent behind enemy lines to try to foil the Nazis' V-2 rocket program.

Derek Vinyard

08-26-14, 05:33 PM

Wolf Creek (Greg Mclean, 2005) 2.5
http://37.media.tumblr.com/2a29c0d262d8a2ddf97aa817fccda7c7/tumblr_n1sj10nYOP1rjmhkwo2_500.gif
Crazed Australian bushman John Jarratt terrorizes stranded backpacker Cassandra Magrath.

This movie is awesome ! :)

Kaplan

08-26-14, 05:43 PM

From the 70s Countdown:

Nashville B
Mad Max C
Picnic at Hanging Rock B+
American Graffiti B+
Fantastic Planet B-
The Texas Chain Saw Massacre B
The Long Goodbye B+
Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory B

Plus these:

The Fisher King B+
The Survivors C
How to Marry a Millionaire B+
Rounders B

Going to watch All That Jazz now.

Mr Minio

08-26-14, 05:45 PM

Trilogy: The Weeping Meadow (Theodoros Angelopoulos, 2004) rating_3_5+ Looks better to me this way.

rauldc14

08-26-14, 05:48 PM

I couldn't imagine watching twenty straight movies and thinking none of them are higher than 3+ (except that small doc.)

BlueLion

08-26-14, 07:08 PM

http://38.media.tumblr.com/799e0aab67eb909c5f8885dd409d69d8/tumblr_n6453kD9y51tcxm2ro1_500.jpg

Body Double (1984) 4.5
Faptastic.

Samsara (2011) 3.5
Stunning visuals. All these wonderful places in the world, and I'm sitting here and... never mind.

To Catch a Thief (1955) 3.5
Not top tier Hitchcock and it lacks focus at times, but it's great to look at, with Cary Grant bringing his A-game.

Winter Light (1962) 2.5
Watching a Bergman film is definitely never time wasted. Wasn't that impressed by this one, but there are things in it that I admire. And I'll always admire Bergman as a director, but in some of his films, such as this one, he fails to truly hit me, or affect me in a way that a great director should. This could have been one hell of a film, but I feel that he barely scratched the surface.

The Virgin Spring (1960) 2.5
Pretty much the same way I feel about Winter Light. Like that film, it has great photography, but ultimately unconvincing in its execution. Max von Sydow is terrific here though, like in nearly everything I've seen with him. I don't care much for actors but I'm really starting to like this dude.

The Deer Hunter (1978) 2
Three hours long, and not one single scene/line in this film stood out. Even the one good scene in the film (Russian roulette) gets tiresome because of how repetitive it becomes. Such a good cast, material and setting, all wasted. Shame, really.

Harold and Maude (1971) 0.5
Didn't even like the premise of this to begin with, and I gave it a try only because it made the 70s list. I don't like being so harsh against particular films, but when you feel as though you've literally wasted nearly two hours that could have been spent on a truly great film, you just cannot help but let it all out. This is easily the worst film I've seen all year. I would rather drown in a pit of boiling hot oil than watch this again.

Mr Minio

08-26-14, 07:12 PM

Rating mediocre Hitchcock film higher than Bergman masterpieces? You can't join my imaginary LEGIT movie watchers club.

rauldc14

08-26-14, 07:13 PM

The Virgin Spring (1960) 2.5
Pretty much the same way I feel about Winter Light. Like that film, it has great photography, but ultimately unconvincing in its execution. Max von Sydow is terrific here though, like in nearly everything I've seen with him. I don't care much for actors but I'm really starting to like this dude.
:(

Harold and Maude (1971) 0.5
Didn't even like the premise of this to begin with, and I gave it a try only because it made the 70s list. I don't like being so harsh against particular films, but when you feel as though you've literally wasted nearly two hours that could have been spent on a truly great film, you just cannot help but let it all out. This is easily the worst film I've seen all year. I would rather drown in a pit of boiling hot oil than watch this again.
:highfive:

BlueLion

08-26-14, 07:15 PM

Rating mediocre Hitchcock film higher than Bergman masterpieces? You can't join my imaginary LEGIT movie watchers club.

If those are Bergman masterpieces, then what does that make Cries and Whispers, Persona, or Through a Glass Darkly? :)

Mr Minio

08-26-14, 07:19 PM

All of them are masterpieces even though some of them I rated four stars instead of four and a half, but does it really matter? Bergman is one of the greatest directors ever living. Of course, I was joking, but every time I watch one of his films I have a feeling of watching a masterpiece. That's why it's weird for me when somebody else doesn't feel it, but figures not everybody has such vibes from his films.

Cobpyth

08-26-14, 07:36 PM

Harold and Maude (1971) 0.5
Didn't even like the premise of this to begin with, and I gave it a try only because it made the 70s list. I don't like being so harsh against particular films, but when you feel as though you've literally wasted nearly two hours that could have been spent on a truly great film, you just cannot help but let it all out. This is easily the worst film I've seen all year. I would rather drown in a pit of boiling hot oil than watch this again.

It would be more interesting (for me at least) if you actually told us what's so bad about the film, instead of just saying you've wasted 2 hours of your life. You're saying that this is the worst film you've watched all year and yet you don't give a single reason to back up that outrageous statement...

Why is this film a waste of time? What makes it a 0.5 film for you?

BlueLion

08-26-14, 07:51 PM

It would be more interesting (for me at least) if you actually told us what's so bad about the film, instead of just saying you've wasted 2 hours of your life. You're saying that this is the worst film you've watched all year and yet you don't give a single reason to back up that outrageous statement...

Why is this film a waste of time? What makes it a 0.5 film for you?

That's because these aren't reviews, they're merely comments. If I explained in that post what I found so terrible about it, in addition to what I already said, it would be one hell of a long comment and I feel that this film simply doesn't deserve it.

But since you asked, I just think it's really silly. From the premise, to the script and dialogue, to the execution, everything. Every line of dialogue has to sound smart and/or darkly humorous, but none of them are. It masquerades as a profound film about life and death, about relationships and social alienation, but it's about none of these things. It's about nothing, nothing whatsoever. It thinks it has quirk and charm, but in reality it's just really weird and with no substance. And it's a chore to sit through. And Harold has such a punchable face.

God would smite me if I rated it any higher than 0.5

Cobpyth

08-26-14, 08:39 PM

That's because these aren't reviews, they're merely comments. If I explained in that post what I found so terrible about it, in addition to what I already said, it would be one hell of a long comment and I feel that this film simply doesn't deserve it.

Well, if you're going to say something instead of just giving your rating, at least say something that's useful. ;)

But since you asked, I just think it's really silly. From the premise, to the script and dialogue, to the execution, everything. Every line of dialogue has to sound smart and/or darkly humorous, but none of them are. It masquerades as a profound film about life and death, about relationships and social alienation, but it's about none of these things. It's about nothing, nothing whatsoever. It thinks it has quirk and charm, but in reality it's just really weird and with no substance. And it's a chore to sit through. And Harold has such a punchable face.

You're still doing the same thing as before. You're simply saying nothing in this film works and everything is bad about it. That's pretty hollow and doesn't make for a very valuable piece of film criticism.

Why is it really silly? Why is it not smart and darkly humorous? Why is it about nothing, instead of the themes it 'claims' to be about? Why is it just really weird and with no substance? Why is it a chore to sit through?
Those things are not evident for everyone who has seen the film. You're not properly analyzing the film. You're basically just saying that nothing in it worked (for you), without being able to say why.

Most people just seem to rate films from a random gut feeling they get while watching, without ever questioning themselves as a viewer. There's no problem with that, because it's natural. However, when you're actually deciding to state your opinion about a certain film in the open, especially if it's an extremely different opinion than the "standard" seems to be, I think a person shoud explain that point of view in a deeper and more substantive manner.

I don't have any problems with people saying a movie simply "didn't work for them" in a humble manner, but when they are describing a film as "the worst film they've seen all year" and are pretty much making the film appear to be a complete piece of crap in the absolute sense, I think that person should be able to argumentate that statement in a way that at least makes people understand their position.

When a person berates a movie publicly, like it's some kind of dogmatic truth, but then doesn't seem to be able to back up their opinion in a proper way, it's not the film that looks bad, but (to me at least) it's the person that makes a fool of himself.

Now, I don't think you're a fool AT ALL, but sometimes you do act like one (like most people do sometimes, including me). This is one of those moments. :p

rauldc14

08-26-14, 08:42 PM

Why do you feel the need for people to say why they don't like the film in such detail? He gave plenty a decent response. He's not going to write a 3 page paper on why it was a bad film to him :p

Cobpyth

08-26-14, 08:51 PM

Why do you feel the need for people to say why they don't like the film in such detail?

People can dislike a film as much as they want without explaining it, but when they actually seem to believe it's a genuinely bad film, not to mention "the worst film they've seen all year", and they're expressing it in a very extreme way, I think that asks for a proper explanation. ;)

He gave plenty a decent response. He's not going to write a 3 page paper on why it was a bad film to him :p

"Hollow" is not the same as "decent". Noone can deduce from his writings why he thinks it's the worst film he's seen all year. He basically said that he hates Harold's face and that he thinks everything is bad about it. That sums up to a total of zero valuable arguments that back up his statement. That's not decent.

Also, a proper explanation only takes 10 lines if you actually get to the point and clearly adress the issues you have with a certain film.

mark f

08-26-14, 09:05 PM

rauldc14

08-26-14, 09:08 PM

I want you to think of one of your least favorite films Cob and write up why you don't like it.

My least favorite film of all time is Meet the Spartans. I don't need to explain why :p

Camo

08-26-14, 09:11 PM

Mines is Kazaam i don't have to explain why :p!!

Shaquille O'Neal

rauldc14

08-26-14, 09:11 PM

Cobpyth

08-26-14, 09:17 PM

You should give him some slack though for your shared love of Body Double and cool being aggressive for the time being. And I've loved Harold and Maude for 40 years. I just write off some opinions as anomalies in everyone's case, We're each allowed a few. :)

Yeah, on forums I tend to come across a bit more agressive sometimes than I actually want to. I think I made a valid point, though.

It's indeed awesome that he likes Body Double as much as I do, but I already complimented him on that in another thread, I think. BlueLion and I actually have quite a few favorites in common. ;)

Now, Harold and Maude is not particularly one of my absolute favorite movies, but the extreme way in which he denounced the film attracted my attention and I simply didn't want to let him get away with that. :p

Cobpyth

08-26-14, 09:21 PM

This is what I got out of BlueLion not liking it.

1. The script itself was hollow. It tried to be something that it wasn't.
2. The film itself has no substance. It's not quirky and not as cool as it thinks it is.
3. The characters are annoying and add little to the film itself.

Three reasonable reasons not to like the film.

1. You can say that about every film. That doesn't mean anything. Give an example. Adress the issues you have with the script.

2. You can say that about every film. Elaborate a little on it, so people can understand why you have that opinion.

3. Saying one of the characters has a "punchable" face is not a valid criticism. Elaborate.

Look:

Casablanca's script just didn't work. It was hollow and it tried to be something that it wasn't. The film also has no substance at all and it's also not funny or cool (which it thinks it is). Rick Blaine also should get punched in the face and the other characters didn't add to the story.

You see? Every moron can write stuff like that about every film. They're completely missing the point of what criticism is all about. You have to explain the accusations you're making.

mark f

08-26-14, 09:38 PM

That sounds like Minio's review. Maybe he'd add MOAR punching! :)

rauldc14

08-26-14, 09:43 PM

1. You can say that about every film. That doesn't mean anything. Give an example. Adress the issues you have with the script.

2. You can say that about every film. Elaborate a little on it, so people can understand why you have that opinion.

3. Saying one of the characters has a "punchable" face is not a valid criticism. Elaborate.

Look:

Casablanca's script just didn't work. It was hollow and it tried to be something that it wasn't. The film also has no substance at all and it's also not funny or cool (which it thinks it is). Rick Blaine also should get punched in the face and the other characters didn't add to the story.

You see? Every moron can write stuff like that about every film. They're completely missing the point of what criticism is all about. You have to explain the accusations you're making.

If that's how someone feels about the film, it's still an argument as to why they didn't like it. Not detailed by any means, but it's still a reason. Just because you can use the same reasons for any film doesn't mean that broad criticism is invalid:cool:

I feel as if you have to get too in depth as to why you don't like a film (especially if you aren't liking it) is to say that you are giving up on the film and looking at it from a negative view rather than a neutral one, IF you are seeing it for the first time.

honeykid

08-26-14, 09:47 PM

3. Saying one of the characters has a "punchable" face is not a valid criticism.
I, respectfully, disagree. :D

Cobpyth

08-26-14, 09:57 PM

If that's how someone feels about the film, it's still an argument as to why they didn't like it. Not detailed by any means, but it's still a reason. Just because you can use the same reasons for any film doesn't mean that broad criticism is invalid:cool:

Since when have wild accusations suddenly become valid arguments?

I feel as if you have to get too in depth as to why you don't like a film (especially if you aren't liking it) is to say that you are giving up on the film and looking at it from a negative view rather than a neutral one, IF you are seeing it for the first time.

I couldn't disagree more. Writing in depth about a film makes you actually think about it. After reflecting a little more about a film, you may for instance discover that it actually isn't that bad from a neutral point of view.
Someone who tries to properly explain why he feels a certain way about a film will be much more neutral than someone who simply says it's crap without ever properly saying or even understanding why.

Searching for the fundamental reasons of certain issues you have with a film will ALWAYS make your opinions richer, more objective and therefore more valid and interesting to read.

BlueLion

08-27-14, 07:57 AM

Ouch, did I just hit a nerve...

Well, if you're going to say something instead of just giving your rating, at least say something that's useful. ;)

I can say whatever I like. Like I said, I'm not writing reviews here because I'm not a reviewer. On another film, the last time I posted here, I simply said "Meh". Is that useful? I don't think so. Do I care? No, I don't. Does it make my feelings toward the film clear, and does it say whether I liked the film or not? Yes, it does! And that's all I care about. I'm assuming that's what people care about too when they read my comment next to my rating. They'll be interested in seeing whether I liked that film or I didn't. Whether I thought it was any good or worth seeing. I'm no Ebert. Or Rosenbaum. Or Pauline Kael. Hold your horses dude.

You're still doing the same thing as before. You're simply saying nothing in this film works and everything is bad about it. That's pretty hollow and doesn't make for a very valuable piece of film criticism.

Again, I am not a film critic. I could write a long review on the film if I really wanted to, and maybe then I could have attempted to properly analyze the film, but I feel as though you're totally missing the point of this thread and how people use it.

Why is it really silly? Why is it not smart and darkly humorous? Why is it about nothing, instead of the themes it 'claims' to be about? Why is it just really weird and with no substance? Why is it a chore to sit through?

Because it's poop.

Most people just seem to rate films from a random gut feeling they get while watching, without ever questioning themselves as a viewer. There's no problem with that, because it's natural. However, when you're actually deciding to state your opinion about a certain film in the open, especially if it's an extremely different opinion than the "standard" seems to be, I think a person shoud explain that point of view in a deeper and more substantive manner.

My reaction to this film wasn't from a random gut feeling. There are so many things and details that I take into consideration when I rate films, and it was the same with this film. I already explained what I didn't like and I don't want to sound repetitive by listing once again all the things I disliked. Here, and in pretty much every other thread in this forum, I try to be as brief as possible, especially when I'm commenting on my ratings. You're confusing comments with reviews. A review would allow me to write an entire paragraph on Harold's character alone for instance. In a review, I would explain why I hated his character, why the film's execution bothered me, and why the whole thing didn't work for me in general.

I don't have any problems with people saying a movie simply "didn't work for them" in a humble manner, but when they are describing a film as "the worst film they've seen all year" and are pretty much making the film appear to be a complete piece of crap in the absolute sense, I think that person should be able to argumentate that statement in a way that at least makes people understand their position.

When a person berates a movie publicly, like it's some kind of dogmatic truth, but then doesn't seem to be able to back up their opinion in a proper way, it's not the film that looks bad, but (to me at least) it's the person that makes a fool of himself.

Now, I don't think you're a fool AT ALL, but sometimes you do act like one (like most people do sometimes, including me). This is one of those moments. :p

Look, to me Harold and Maude is an absolute embarrassment. It's not just the worst film I've seen all year, it's one of the worst films I've ever seen period. I'm making the film appear to be a complete piece of crap because that's what it was to me, and my explanation to my rating, followed by my additional comment afterwards, should surely be enough for people to understand my position.

You're seriously overreacting. How am I acting like a fool if I simply didn't like a film, and then explained why I didn't like it? It's normal for another person to absolutely loathe a film you love. You have to move on.

Daniel M

08-27-14, 08:53 AM

The problem lies in that you say you're not a film critic and can't explain why is a movie good, basically that your ratings are pure subjectivity and objectivity, yet you act and speak as if these are objective facts and are quick to aggressively shoot down a movie you dislike that others don't. Surely if you're rating subjectively on enjoyment and not having any objectivity (otherwise Harold and Maude wouldn't be 0.5) then you can understand when someone rates them higher than you...

BlueLion

08-27-14, 09:54 AM

The problem lies in that you say you're not a film critic and can't explain why is a movie good

Where and when did I say this?

basically that your ratings are pure subjectivity and objectivity, yet you act and speak as if these are objective facts

You have come to this conclusion how?

Surely if you're rating subjectively on enjoyment and not having any objectivity (otherwise Harold and Maude wouldn't be 0.5) then you can understand when someone rates them higher than you...

So it HAS to be one or the other? It's not possible to rate them both subjectively and objectively at the same time?

Look, the worst thing when it comes to movies is if you lie to yourself, and pretend to like something that in reality you don't. This isn't the case with me. Never has been, and never will be. If I love a film I'll make my thoughts clear and I won't be ashamed to admit I love that film even if the majority thinks it's trash.

And it will be the same for those that I hated. For me, each film starts at 0, or at 0/100. Once the film is over I will assign my score. I don't care what the standard is or how well received that film is. If you look at films differently because they're classics, or they've received great reviews, or because they're in the Sight and Sound polls, then I feel sorry for you. That's when the thoughts and opinions of others take over, and you no longer view films with the state of mind that you should.

bluedeed

08-27-14, 10:11 AM

Would you rather be Pauline Kael or Susan Sontag, Bluelion?

Skepsis93

08-27-14, 11:40 AM

Obviously Kael, what a badass

Cobpyth

08-27-14, 03:36 PM

I can say whatever I like. Like I said, I'm not writing reviews here because I'm not a reviewer. On another film, the last time I posted here, I simply said "Meh". Is that useful? I don't think so. Do I care? No, I don't. Does it make my feelings toward the film clear, and does it say whether I liked the film or not? Yes, it does! And that's all I care about. I'm assuming that's what people care about too when they read my comment next to my rating. They'll be interested in seeing whether I liked that film or I didn't. Whether I thought it was any good or worth seeing. I'm no Ebert. Or Rosenbaum. Or Pauline Kael. Hold your horses dude.

A comment that says "it's the worst film I've seen all year" is not something people care about. People do care about the reasons behind your "hate" for a certain film. People don't care about hollow opinions. People care about arguments. Not just me, but every thinking human being does!

Again, I am not a film critic. I could write a long review on the film if I really wanted to, and maybe then I could have attempted to properly analyze the film, but I feel as though you're totally missing the point of this thread and how people use it.

I'm not totally missing the point of this thread. You are. It's kind of laughable that you actually dare accusing me of that.
The point of this thread is to post your "ratings" of movies, but if you're not willing to talk about your opinion, why would you even want to share it in the first place (especially in such a forceful way as you did)? Forums are meant to generate interesting discussions about certain topics.
So, if you're deciding to share your opinion and then suddenly start acting surprised when someone asks to substantiate that opinion a little bit (especially when it's presented in a dogmatic manner), THAT seems to be missing the point. ;)

If you actually look at the origins of this particular thread, by the way, it's just people saying which movies they've seen lately (without rating them or anything like that). It has evolved into something much more interesting over time. People are posting their ratings and sometimes they're asked for an explanation.
This thread has a rich history of interesting discussions about certain movies. If you think that's missing the point of this thread, well, then you couldn't be more wrong, in my opinion.

Because it's poop.

That's just sad. If you're completely unwilling or incapable to talk on a reasonable level about this, just say so.

My reaction to this film wasn't from a random gut feeling. There are so many things and details that I take into consideration when I rate films, and it was the same with this film. I already explained what I didn't like and I don't want to sound repetitive by listing once again all the things I disliked. Here, and in pretty much every other thread in this forum, I try to be as brief as possible, especially when I'm commenting on my ratings. You're confusing comments with reviews. A review would allow me to write an entire paragraph on Harold's character alone for instance. In a review, I would explain why I hated his character, why the film's execution bothered me, and why the whole thing didn't work for me in general.

You haven't explained anything about your feelings towards this film. The only thing we can deduce from your posts is that you somehow hate the film on every level. Do you really believe that's a proper explanation? You're shouting accusations, but you haven't explained one single bit of your hate.

Look, to me Harold and Maude is an absolute embarrassment. It's not just the worst film I've seen all year, it's one of the worst films I've ever seen period. I'm making the film appear to be a complete piece of crap because that's what it was to me, and my explanation to my rating, followed by my additional comment afterwards, should surely be enough for people to understand my position.

You seem to be confusing "understanding" with "knowing". We know your position, but noone can possibly understand it because you haven't explained it.

For all I know, you just watched the cover of the film and gave it a bad rating, because you don't like Harold's face. That's how thin your effort to explain your position is.

You're seriously overreacting. How am I acting like a fool if I simply didn't like a film, and then explained why I didn't like it? It's normal for another person to absolutely loathe a film you love. You have to move on.

You're acting like a fool, because you seem convinced that you actually explained why you didn't like this film.
It's totally normal for someone to hate a film I like, but if that person is completely unwilling or unable to explain the reasons behind their hate, the value of their opinion automatically equals zero. I simply don't understand why anyone would ever want to share an opinion that they don't even want to explain (or can explain).

Look, the worst thing when it comes to movies is if you lie to yourself, and pretend to like something that in reality you don't. This isn't the case with me. Never has been, and never will be. If I love a film I'll make my thoughts clear and I won't be ashamed to admit I love that film even if the majority thinks it's trash.

Not at all. The worst thing you can do when it comes to movies or life in general, is taking your own gut feeling as the only general truth and never bothering to explain or understand the reasons behind your opinion properly.

Instead of just defending your right to make shallow comments, you could've actually just defended and substantiated your opinion about Harold and Maude properly (which was actually the purpose of my earlier posts) and I would've been completely satisfied.

Somehow you don't seem to be willing to do that, which seems rather odd to me...

rauldc14

08-27-14, 03:58 PM

Anyways back to film ratings :)

La Dolce Vita 4
Flubber 2
Spring, Summer, Fall, Winter...and Spring 2
The Virgin Spring 4.5
Ponyo- 3
Man on Fire 5+ REWATCH

honeykid

08-27-14, 04:11 PM

Fantastic Mr. Fox 1.5 - I can't remember who it was (I think it was either Cob or Swan) said they'd be interested to hear what I thought of this. Well, a couple of weeks ago I saw it was on, so I decided to watch it. Sadly it was everything I feared it would be and a little bit worse. As I've said from the moment I saw the trailer, I hate the look of the models. Ugly looking things that make me feel scratchy, I hated looking at them. I repeatedly thought about turning it off, but stuck with it because I'd decided to try it. So, I hate the look of it, which is what I expected. What I didn't expect was to not like the sound of it, either. There were a couple of pieces in the score which I really didn't like at all, but none of it appealed to me. Also, the choice of voices were terrible and that did surprise me. Maybe it was because they were American, but it didn't work for me at all. In fact, the only good thing about this was that it made me want to really read the book again. God, I loved that book as a kid. When the film sticks to the book, it's OK, but everything else really didn't work for me at all.

Who Framed Roger Rabbit? 1 - So, as you might be able to tell, I'm watching some films that I normally wouldn't. I saw this when it came out and I thought it was rubbish. I saw it was on TV the other day, so I decided to give it a go. It's actually worse than I remember it. Firstly, I really hate Roger Rabbit. What an annoying character. There were times where I had to do something else as it was the only way I was going to keep going with it. Get rid of the rabbit, the cameo toons, the weasels, Judge Doom, the slapstick and Bob Hoskins accent and, maybe, there'd be something there I'd like to watch. Maybe. I honestly think I'd rather watch A Clockwork Orange than that.

Ghost Shark 3.5 - Thank you for films like this. This is a ridiculous film which tackles the age old problem of shark movies. Get out of the sea and you're fine. How go you get around this? Kill the shark, have some mumbo jumbo mean that the shark now exists in spirit only, then have it turn up in any water, anywhere in the town. Genius. Toilets, buckets, sprinkler systems. My favourite kill is a man who drinks the shark when it ghosts into a water cooler. It's superb stuff. The only real problem is that it doesn't really all make sense, even in the world of the film which is, naturally, a problem. But I'd happily watch this five times back to back than suffer either of the other two again.

mark f

08-27-14, 04:40 PM

On second thought, people should not share their reasons for liking or hating a movie - they're poop! :)

honeykid

08-27-14, 05:10 PM

See, you should be careful what you wish for. :p

Mr Minio

08-27-14, 05:27 PM

Spring, Summer, Fall, Winter...and Spring rating_2 Elaborate.

Miss Vicky

08-27-14, 05:29 PM

I can understand your feelings for Fantastic Mr. Fox, I've never even read the book and I agree with pretty much everything you've said. But your hatred for Who Framed Roger Rabbit? Really? Really?! I just don't get it. But then you're the same guy who doesn't like Indiana Jones and loves Charlie's Angels so I have to consider the source.

Nostromo87

08-27-14, 05:58 PM

if i may be so bold as to interject my personal opinion on the BlueLion vs Cobpyth prize fight! :p

Thinking it's as simple as this. folks who like a particular movie enjoy reading thoughtful reviews on it, even if they're thoughtful negative reviews

yet, it's often not the first instinct to be particularly thoughtful about a movie one has just suffered through

basically, i can see where both are coming from. Cobpyth wishes to see a thoughtful review, BlueLion simply didn't respect the movie enough to give it more of his time than he already had

gotten to the point where i don't like internet arguments that seem to be going nowhere. i've been a part of them on other forums and sometimes hoped a voice of reason would chime in, that never came. not sure if this will be that, but i tried :)

Cobpyth

08-27-14, 08:15 PM

basically, i can see where both are coming from. Cobpyth wishes to see a thoughtful review, BlueLion simply didn't respect the movie enough to give it more of his time than he already had

That's not completely what it is. My main complaint is that you shouldn't shout things like "worst film ever made" or "it's an embarrassment" if you're not even remotely willing or capable to back it up. It's useless.

Also, he has probably spent much more time to defend his right to not explain his opinion, than the few minutes a normal person would need to give some valid arguments to substantiate his/her opinion.

I'm sorry. I think I'm being pretty reasonable here.

That's all. :)

BlueLion

08-28-14, 12:24 AM

This is seriously getting ridiculous now.

Cobpyth

08-28-14, 12:55 PM

Person A: "This film is the worst film I've seen all year. I would rather drown in a pit of boiling hot oil than watch this again."

Person B: "Euhm, it would be a little more interesting if you would actually explain why you hate the film so much."

Person A: "These are just comments! I'm not a reviewer. Since you asked: I think every aspect of it sucks. It thinks it's about something, but it's about NOTHING and the main character should be punched in the face."

Person B: "Euhm, you still didn't actually explain why you hated the film. You just pretty much said everything is bad about it. Could you be more specific? I think people who state strong opinions like you just did should at least be able to explain that opinion properly, otherwise they seem quite foolish."

Person A: "I can say whatever I like. I'm not Roger Ebert. I only care about saying whether I liked a film or not and I assume that's also the only thing other people care about. I think everyone understands my position. This is a comment, not a review. I already said I didn't like it. That's what this thread is for. You seem to be missing the point. The film is an absolute embarrasment! You're overreacting.
The worst thing someone can do, is to lie to themselves."

Person B: "I think people actually care more about the reasons behind your hate for the film. Everyone knows your position, but noone can possibly understand it, deduced from what you've just written about it. The purpose of this thread and of forums in general is to generate discussions, so you shouldn't be surprised when someone asks to explain your opinion a little more thoughtfully.
The worst thing someone can do is take their own gut feeling for granted and not even attempting to think a little deeper about their own opinion. Instead of just defending your right to not explain your opinion about this film, you should just explain it."

Person A: "This is seriously getting ridiculous."

:skeptical:

mark f

08-28-14, 01:13 PM

Persons A & B need to have a drink together and bury the hatchet (preferably not in each other).

BlueLion

08-28-14, 01:15 PM

Person A thinks Person B is becoming laughing stock thanks to his theatrics.

http://i.minus.com/ixbw5UOj74pZa.gif

Cobpyth

08-28-14, 01:17 PM

There is no hatchet. I just wanted him to explain his opinion.

BlueLion

08-28-14, 01:20 PM

Which I did. And then you resorted to personal attacks.

Cobpyth

08-28-14, 01:30 PM

Which I did. And then you resorted to personal attacks.

You still believe you've actually explained your opinion?

:facepalm:

Show me one personal attack, by the way. I only stated you were acting like a fool, which is about your actions (acting/action, you get it?) and is definitely not a personal attack in any way (I actually explicitly stated that I don't think you are a fool).

This whole discussion and especially your responses only prove that you're unable or unwilling to defend your own opinions, even though you're expressing them in a very extreme and dogmatic way, and that you're somehow taking this very personally, which is totally unnecessary.

Skepsis93

08-28-14, 01:35 PM

This needs its own thread. Cobpyth vs. BlueLion

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ioE_O7Lm0I4

jiraffejustin

08-28-14, 01:37 PM

After reading this, if anybody ever asks me to explain something, I'm just going to say no. :D

Yoda

08-28-14, 01:38 PM

If one person wants an explanation and the other person believes they've already explained themselves, that's pretty much an impasse, yeah?

Skepsis93

08-28-14, 01:39 PM

Casablanca is balls and I refuse to explain why.

Swan

08-28-14, 01:39 PM

Casablanca is balls and I refuse to explain why.

Dammit you stole my idea.

Skepsis93

08-28-14, 01:41 PM

"Balls" is negative, "the balls" is positive. Balls in general... can be good or bad.

EDIT: Yoda deleted his post and now I look like a crazy person.

Cobpyth

08-28-14, 01:48 PM

Anyone who actually believes that his hate for the film has been properly explained, please enlighten me.

I'm not even saying he HAS to explain his opinion. I just said it would be more interesting, but then he started giving the impression that my response was totally uncalled for ("I'm not a critic!") and that he already did explain his opinion properly, while he clearly didn't (in my opinion).

That's why I kept responding. I hope people don't think I am the one who's being unreasonable here.

jiraffejustin

08-28-14, 01:51 PM

I don't think you are being unreasonable. Maybe a little overly aggressive, but not unreasonable.

Mr Minio

08-28-14, 02:06 PM

"Balls" is negative, "the balls" is positive. Balls in general... can be good or bad. So when a creepy guy sneaks in a dressing room of female basketball team he should say: "Now we will be playin' with the balls" or rather: "Now we will be playin' with balls"?

Cobpyth

08-28-14, 02:09 PM

I don't think you are being unreasonable. Maybe a little overly aggressive, but not unreasonable.

I was hoping this post had taken care of that and would lighten the mood a little bit after Mark already pointed it out:

Yeah, on forums I tend to come across a bit more agressive sometimes than I actually want to. I think I made a valid point, though.

It's indeed awesome that he likes Body Double as much as I do, but I already complimented him on that in another thread, I think. BlueLion and I actually have quite a few favorites in common. ;)

Now, Harold and Maude is not particularly one of my absolute favorite movies, but the extreme way in which he denounced the film attracted my attention and I simply didn't want to let him get away with that. :p

I guess that was a little naive of me. :p

But anyway, if the other person involved does not want to go on with this little discussion or talk about the movie that it's actually supposed to be about, I'll gladly withdraw myself. I just wanted to address a certain issue that bothers me sometimes when people are trashing a film. It was not my intention to start some kind of argument on a more personal level, even if it might have seemed that way to some people. :)

Daniel M

08-28-14, 02:25 PM

Where and when did I say this? [that you can't explain why a movie is good]

I was talking in the objective, descriptive sense, not about enjoyment, and you said:
" Whether I thought it was any good or worth seeing. I'm no Ebert. Or Rosenbaum. Or Pauline Kael. Hold your horses dude."
" I am not a film critic"

You are simply stated your personal enjoyment, and I have no problems with that, or your ratings, people use ratings differently, some use pure enjoyment, some attempt to apply some objectivity to them.

You have come to this conclusion how?

About how you state your opinions as objective facts? Well, it's my opinion too, not a fact, but I think a lot of people would back me up here, it's your vocabulary. You say thing's like "it's a bad movie" 'it's overrated" "it's an embarassment" and when films like The Untouchables, Casablanca, Chinatown, Under The Skin, and others come up you immediately state your 'opinion' as if we haven't heard you already and that you are informing them the correct opinion, as if you're right and everyone's wrong.

So it HAS to be one or the other? It's not possible to rate them both subjectively and objectively at the same time?

No it doesn't. I use a mixture of both, but sometimes it doesn't seem that you do. Like your Last Year at Marienbad comments where bluedeed made appropriate remarks about what type of movie and about 'engaging the audience', you seem to take a lot of what you see in a film at surface level and if you don't get it, you seem unforgiving and unwilling to comprehend why anyone else would.

And if you're using both then I highly doubt Harold and Maude would be a 0.5 film. That's bottom of the barrel stuff that I would only give to ametuer films. It's made professional, shot well and even though it doesn't work for you, it's clear what it's going for and what it's market it. I didn't particularly love the film, but I found it interesting and appealing and want to watch it again. I give it 3

Look, the worst thing when it comes to movies is if you lie to yourself, and pretend to like something that in reality you don't.

True, no ones arguing about that, I 100% have no problems with you completely not enjoying Harold and Maude, but don't understand how you absolutely think that some o these films are terrible.

And it will be the same for those that I hated. For me, each film starts at 0, or at 0/100. Once the film is over I will assign my score. I don't care what the standard is or how well received that film is.

Fair enough, but I am going to paraphrase something Mark always says, but you're not really rating films on a level playing field. What he seems to do is start at 2.5 for the average, and then move up and down depending on how successful he found it. 0.5 is for embarrassments and are rarely used for mainstream films, and in the same way 5 is rarely used but for absolute favourites he considers masterpieces. 1.5 to 4 are the ratings he mainly uses.

If you look at films differently because they're classics, or they've received great reviews, or because they're in the Sight and Sound polls, then I feel sorry for you.

Cool, but again no one is doing this. Similarly if you think it's cool to go against the opoosite and feel the need to constantly state your minority opinion to be controversial, then I feel sorry for you.

BlueLion

08-28-14, 02:31 PM

You still believe you've actually explained your opinion?

Excuse me? Then what do you call this?
But since you asked, I just think it's really silly. From the premise, to the script and dialogue, to the execution, everything. Every line of dialogue has to sound smart and/or darkly humorous, but none of them are. It masquerades as a profound film about life and death, about relationships and social alienation, but it's about none of these things. It's about nothing, nothing whatsoever. It thinks it has quirk and charm, but in reality it's just really weird and with no substance. And it's a chore to sit through. And Harold has such a punchable face.

I explained the many aspects of the film which I strongly disliked, yet you still complain. You're obviously bitter because you love the film and you deemed my comment aggressive (maybe I shouldn't have expressed my dislike for the film in the way that I did to start with, but I couldn't help it, sorry).

All this is fine though, you can disagree with my comment all day long, but these personal attacks and your constant bickering is just making you look really immature. To make things even worse, you have made yourself (and me, which is something that I loathe) the center of attention because of your theatrics. This thread should be used for movie talk only, and even arguing about films is acceptable (I hope), but now you've completely went off topic because you're focusing on a forum member (me) rather than the discussion.

Show me one personal attack, by the way. I only stated you were acting like a fool, which is about your actions (acting/action, you get it?) and is definitely not a personal attack in any way (I actually explicitly stated that I don't think you are a fool).

These weren't direct personal attacks, like for example, "you're a complete moron". But you're constantly implying that I'm incapable of forming an opinion and unable to explain things, which a "normal" person would be able to.

Yeah, you'll probably respond now by saying I am completely overreacting, but if there's anyone who's overreacting here, it's you.

This whole discussion and especially your responses only prove that you're unable or unwilling to defend your own opinions, even though you're expressing them in a very extreme and dogmatic way, and that you're somehow taking this very personally, which is totally unnecessary.

No, what this whole discussion has proved so far, is, like I said, that you can be very immature and overemotional at times, especially for films that you love. And as soon as you read a negative response on those films, you feel the need to act aggressively by disparaging the member who commented on the film rather than trying to discuss about the film.

I'm not even saying he HAS to explain his opinion. I just said it would be more interesting, but then he started giving the impression that my response was totally uncalled for ("I'm not a critic!") and that he already did explain his opinion properly, while he clearly didn't (in my opinion).

I did explain, briefly, because like I said, sometimes I just can't be bothered to write a long review, and this film certainly doesn't deserve it. Furthermore, I'm not even a good reviewer (hence "I'm not a critic!"). I could try and write a review if I wanted to, but this isn't the place to do that, and this is something which seems you're not capable of understanding, no matter how hard I try. Reviewing a film is one thing. Commenting on a film, and explaining why you liked or didn't like it, is another. The latter I'm very capable of doing, as is every avid film watcher I believe.

Anyway, this has been a really pointless conversation so far and I honestly regret wasting my time and energy on it. I bet it has been extremely irritating for the readers and for that I'd like to apologize. Please return to discussing about what we all love.

Derek Vinyard

08-28-14, 02:41 PM

http://m.memegen.com/hd07x3.jpg

Yoda

08-28-14, 02:43 PM

I explained the many aspects of the film which I strongly disliked, yet you still complain.
Maybe this is the problem: he's not asking you which aspects you dislike, he's asking you why you disliked what you did. So merely enumerating them ("premise, to the script and dialogue, to the execution, everything") wouldn't really serve as an explanation.

I did explain, briefly, because like I said, sometimes I just can't be bothered to write a long review, and this film certainly doesn't deserve it.
This is a perfectly fair response! :) You don't like the movie and don't care about it enough to delve into why. Totally fine, and I doubt anyone would have a problem with it. But it should be noted that this reason is different than saying an explanation has already been given.

BlueLion

08-28-14, 02:55 PM

You are simply stated your personal enjoyment, and I have no problems with that, or your ratings, people use ratings differently, some use pure enjoyment, some attempt to apply some objectivity to them.

This doesn't even make sense. How do you know this, are you inside my brain? I never enjoyed A Clockwork Orange, but I think it's great nonetheless (hey, explain why it's great!)

when films like The Untouchables, Casablanca, Chinatown, Under The Skin, and others come up you immediately state your 'opinion' as if we haven't heard you already

lulz I haven't even seen The Untouchables. You sir have a great memory.

Under The Skin for me was a massive disappointment, and I found the film shallow and unaffecting, with nothing unique to offer.

As for Casablanca and Chinatown, this is where my objectivity comes into play, which you claim is nonexistent when it comes to my movie watching. I wouldn't say I liked those movies (I would lie to myself if I said I did), but I never denied the fact that those films are good filmmaking. I think that's the biggest compliment you can give to a film you're not too fond of. I appreciate and respect those films. I'll never respect anything like Harold and Maude, however.

and that you are informing them the correct opinion, as if you're right and everyone's wrong.

I never tried to do that. There's no such thing as right or wrong.

Like your Last Year at Marienbad comments where bluedeed made appropriate remarks about what type of movie and about 'engaging the audience', you seem to take a lot of what you see in a film at surface level and if you don't get it, you seem unforgiving and unwilling to comprehend why anyone else would.

Um, what? I never got Persona, but I think it's a work of art anyway. That argument is invalid.

Cool, but again no one is doing this. Similarly if you think it's cool to go against the opoosite and feel the need to constantly state your minority opinion to be controversial, then I feel sorry for you.

How am I controversial? Most of the films I love are extremely mainstream! I honestly don't see where you're coming from.

BlueLion

08-28-14, 03:05 PM

This is a perfectly fair response! :) You don't like the movie and don't care about it enough to delve into why. Totally fine, and I doubt anyone would have a problem with it. But it should be noted that this reason is different than saying an explanation has already been given.

What I meant was that an explanation had been given as far as my initial comment is concerned. Basically I tried to sum up what I didn't like about the film. Cobpyth then asked me to explain everything in detail (which pretty much constitutes a review), and I gave him three reasons why I wouldn't do it.

1) The film doesn't deserve it.
2) I'm not a professional reviewer, meaning, even if I do attempt to review it, in all likelihood he will not be satisfied because of for example my vocabulary, the way I analyze the film, and so on. You can go and take a look at Ebert's website for example, and see how even professional critics are treated by the readers. I feel as though one can never be satisfied with a review if they disagree with the rating assigned to it. It's that simple.

and 3) This isn't the place to do it. This is Movie Tab where you rate films. It isn't a thread for reviews.

I hope I've made myself clear.

honeykid

08-28-14, 03:09 PM

I was going to tab a movie, but I appear to've stumbled into the wrong thread.

Daniel M

08-28-14, 03:10 PM

Okay, instead of going back and forth arguing I'll explain my main problem in one simple statement.

The biggest issue I have, and I hope I am not the only one. Is the way that you write/speak, it seems very matter of fact, I'm right you're wrong, and deliberately controversial and provocative, as if you want to upset people you like a film you don't.

You've just provided me with another example of this:

I tried to sum up what I didn't like about the film ...and I gave him three reasons why I wouldn't do it.

1) The film doesn't deserve it.

--------

and 3) This isn't the place to do it. This is Movie Tab where you rate films. It isn't a thread for reviews.

Not really, there's no rules or regulations, people can use it as they please, if you wantto use it for just ratings, fair enough :)

Mr Minio

08-28-14, 03:35 PM

BlueLion got into discussion about a movie he hated and wasted a lot of time on wanton quarrels. He lost. :P

Cobpyth

08-28-14, 03:42 PM

Excuse me? Then what do you call this?

I call that an enumeration of aspects you call "bad". Explaining means that you actually say why they are bad.

"An explanation is a set of statements constructed to describe a set of facts/opinions which clarifies the causes, context, and consequences of those facts/opinions."

I explained the many aspects of the film which I strongly disliked, yet you still complain. You're obviously bitter because you love the film and you deemed my comment aggressive (maybe I shouldn't have expressed my dislike for the film in the way that I did to start with, but I couldn't help it, sorry).

Again, you haven't explained anything. That's something you should be realizing by now.

I don't love Harold and Maude. It's not a favorite of mine and I'm certainly not bitter because you seem to hate it.

All this is fine though, you can disagree with my comment all day long, but these personal attacks and your constant bickering is just making you look really immature. To make things even worse, you have made yourself (and me, which is something that I loathe) the center of attention because of your theatrics. This thread should be used for movie talk only, and even arguing about films is acceptable (I hope), but now you've completely went off topic because you're focusing on a forum member (me) rather than the discussion.

Again, I haven't made any personal attacks. You're the one who's calling me immature now, even though you used the word "poop" as an argument and you tried to ridicule all my former statements with an image. Ironic.

I was never focusing on you as a person. I was focusing on the way you were commenting on a certain film.

You seem to think this thread should be used for movie talk only and I agree, but then I think it's rather odd that you've been specifically defending your right to not talk about a certain film this whole time. :p

These weren't direct personal attacks, like for example, "you're a complete moron". But you're constantly implying that I'm incapable of forming an opinion and unable to explain things, which a "normal" person would be able to.

Yeah, you'll probably respond now by saying I am completely overreacting, but if there's anyone who's overreacting here, it's you.

Please, give me one example where I am overreacting. I think I've been reasonable the whole time, so you won't find any. ;)

Again, I've stated multiple times that my intention was not to make any personal attacks (and I never said anything that could officially be categorized under that term either). I was always focusing on the issue.

No, what this whole discussion has proved so far, is, like I said, that you can be very immature and overemotional at times, especially for films that you love. And as soon as you read a negative response on those films, you feel the need to act aggressively by disparaging the member who commented on the film rather than trying to discuss about the film.

Give me one example of me being immature and overemotional in this whole discussion. :)

You're the guy who started taking things personally, who used the word "poop" and who called me laughable, while adding a Jim Carrey image to your post as a reinforcement...

I did explain, briefly, because like I said, sometimes I just can't be bothered to write a long review, and this film certainly doesn't deserve it. Furthermore, I'm not even a good reviewer (hence "I'm not a critic!"). I could try and write a review if I wanted to, but this isn't the place to do that, and this is something which seems you're not capable of understanding, no matter how hard I try. Reviewing a film is one thing. Commenting on a film, and explaining why you liked or didn't like it, is another. The latter I'm very capable of doing, as is every avid film watcher I believe.

I didn't ask for a review. I asked for a proper explanation, which shouldn't take more than 10 lines of text. If you had simply refused, that would've been the end. You started implying that my remark was uncalled for though and you actually started believing that you explained something, while you didn't. That's why I kept responding.

Please return to discussing about what we all love.

That was exactly what I was trying to do in the first place. :)

Skepsis93

08-28-14, 03:45 PM

http://www.reactiongifs.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/mad.gif

Nostromo87

08-28-14, 04:43 PM

http://oi59.tinypic.com/15f27ix.jpg

Cobpyth

08-28-14, 04:44 PM

:laugh:

mark f

08-28-14, 08:43 PM

Two Women (Vittorio De Sica, 1960) 3
Cow Country (Lesley Selander, 1953) 2
Day Watch (Timur Bekmambetov, 2006) 2.5
White Heat (Raoul Walsh, 1949) 3
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-GyJX9a7bLZU/Tofb8sCX2sI/AAAAAAAAAuA/GSQI6-igF48/s1600/White-Heat-21.gif
James Cagney's Cody Jarrett - "Made it Ma! Top of the World!"
D.O.A. (Rudolph Mate, 1950) 3
The Key (Carol Reed, 1958) 2.5
The Last Voyage (Andrew L. Stone, 1960) 3
2001 Maniacs (Tim Sullivan, 2005) 2+
http://38.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_ly3isrdGkI1qco9duo1_500.gif
In this remake of Herschell Gordon Lewis' cult gorefest Two Thousand Maniacs!, Robert England oversees the Northerners' deaths in Dixie. In this case, the victim is crushed by a bell.
Obliging Young Lady (Richard Wallace, 1941) 2
An Act of Murder (Michael Gordon, 1948) 2.5+
No Questions Asked (Harold F. Kress, 1951) 2+
The Black Book aka Reign of Terror (Anthony Mann, 1949) 2.5+
http://i.ytimg.com/vi/GbT0lOcyRj8/hqdefault.jpg
During the French Revolution, patriot Robert Cummings poses as a public prosecutor, but policeman Jess Barker and chief of secret police Arnold Moss are suspicious of his intentions.
Backfire (Vincent Sherman, 1950) 2
Ghosts, Italian Style (Renato Castellani, 1967) 2-
Up Periscope (Gordon Douglas, 1959) 2
Pinocchio (Ben Sharpsteen & Hamilton Luske, 1940) 4
https://s1.yimg.com/cd/resizer/original/TaJ6N4sXCKwP-44ZvY-WSuqZYcE.gif
On his way to school, Pinnochio does a variation on The Exorcist's head-spinning in honeykid's favorite animated film. :)
She Played with Fire aka Fortune Is a Woman (Sidney Gilliat, 1957) 2+
Souvenirs of Death (Edward Cahn, 1948) 2+
Dracula’s Guest (Michael Feifer, 2008) 1
A Southern Yankee (Edward Sedgwick, 1948) 3-
http://www.idoodit.com/1948SOYANK.JPG
During the Civil War, George Coulouris (left) is a captured Rebel spy, and bumbling bellboy Red Skelton (right) agrees to go behind enemy lines and pose as him in this updating of numerous Buster Keaton gags.

Swan

08-28-14, 08:58 PM

Two Women (Vittorio De Sica, 1960) rating_3

So in your opinion, 2 is greater than 3? :p

jiraffejustin

08-28-14, 11:21 PM

Did he give 3 to 2 and 2 to 3?

mark f

08-28-14, 11:25 PM

Go ahead. Act like I'm not here.

jiraffejustin

08-28-14, 11:31 PM

Swan, what rating did mark give 3 Women?

mark f

08-28-14, 11:33 PM

Too high whatever it was.

Harry Lime

08-28-14, 11:45 PM

What movie were BlueLion and Cobpyth fighting about anyway? I gave up after a few pages.

Miss Vicky

08-28-14, 11:46 PM

Harold and Maude.

Harry Lime

08-28-14, 11:47 PM

Oh. That movie sucks.

jiraffejustin

08-28-14, 11:49 PM

Oh. That movie sucks.

But WHY does is it suck?

Miss Vicky

08-28-14, 11:49 PM

Oh. That movie sucks.

But WHY?! Explain yourself!

Harry Lime

08-28-14, 11:50 PM

Because I said so.

jiraffejustin

08-28-14, 11:51 PM

Because I said so.

Yeah, but WHY do you say so?

Swan

08-29-14, 12:05 AM

Swan, what rating did mark give 3 Women?

He liked Two Women better than 3 Women, because I know he doesn't like 3 Women at all. But I don't know his exact rating for 3 Women. :p

Mr Minio

08-29-14, 06:25 AM

mark is a classy gent. 2 is enough for him.

Cobpyth

08-30-14, 12:24 PM

What movie were BlueLion and Cobpyth fighting about anyway? I gave up after a few pages.

We weren't actually fighting about a movie. We were having a discussion about whether he had explained his opinion properly or not and then it kind of escalated.

Jiraffe and Miss Vicky got it, even though they were merely parodying me. :p

----------------------------

Pinocchio (Ben Sharpsteen & Hamilton Luske, 1940) 4
https://s1.yimg.com/cd/resizer/original/TaJ6N4sXCKwP-44ZvY-WSuqZYcE.gif
On his way to school, Pinnochio does a variation on The Exorcist's head-spinning in honeykid's favorite animated film. :)

Is Pinocchio actually Honeykid's favorite animated film or was that a joke?
I can't remember Honeykid ever saying something positive about an animated film, besides Monsters Inc., which was on his top 100 if I remember correctly.

Honeykid, tell us your favorite animated films!

mark f

08-30-14, 01:03 PM

honeykid thinks Pinocchio is evil since it scared the crap out of him, just like evil Whoopi Goldberg.:whoopi:

Cobpyth

08-30-14, 01:08 PM

honeykid thinks Pinocchio is evil since it scared the crap out of him, just like evil Whoopi Goldberg.:whoopi:

What's so scary about Pinocchio?

.
.
.
.
.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pnamFerzNvw

Oh...

honeykid

08-30-14, 02:21 PM

honeykid thinks Pinocchio is evil since it scared the crap out of him, just like evil Whoopi Goldberg.:whoopi:
No, she's Satan, Pinocchio is evil. :D
What's so scary about Pinocchio?
It's that bloody fox. :eek:

http://kenraggio.com/Pinocchio-Fox.jpg

Derek Vinyard

08-30-14, 02:25 PM

The Lion King is the greatest animated movie of all-time hands down! On the emotional plan, Lion King is a crying fest each times I see it I cry ... so good

mark f

08-30-14, 03:10 PM

What's so scary about Pinocchio?
Besides the Pleasure Island part where the boys literally make asses of themselves, Stromboli is very scary, locking him up in a cage as he cries and screams for his father and then threatening to make firewood out of him. Of course, Monstro is pretty frightening too. I love Pinocchio for being so dark while being one of the most-perfect spiritual films at the same time. I always cry at the beginning ("When You Wish Upon a Star") and uncontrollably at the end, maybe as much as I do at the last part of Dumbo. :cool:

Voigan

08-30-14, 03:18 PM

The Lion King is the greatest animated movie of all-time hands down! On the emotional plan, Lion King is a crying fest each times I see it I cry ... so good

If it's anything like the show then the second Puella Magi movie easily tops The Lion King in the tearjerker department. :yup:

Miss Vicky

08-30-14, 03:25 PM

The Lion King never made me shed a tear. It did make me roll my eyes a few times though. I'm pretty sure I could watch PMM without crying, unless they were tears of boredom.

Cobpyth

08-30-14, 03:44 PM

Besides the Pleasure Island part where the boys literally make asses of themselves, Stromboli is very scary, locking him up in a cage as he cries and screams for his father and then threatening to make firewood out of him. Of course, Monstro is pretty frightening too. I love Pinocchio for being so dark while being one of the most-perfect spiritual films at the same time. I always cry at the beginning ("When You Wish Upon a Star") and uncontrollably at the end, maybe as much as I do at the last part of Dumbo. :cool:

Yeah, I love that darker side too.

I think it's the best Disney classic ever made, even though I also have a very special connection with Sleeping Beauty, because it was my favorite film when I was a little kid. Pinocchio is a really powerful film on all levels. It will probably be in my top 5 favorite animated films when I'll put together my top 25 list.

They don't make many movies anymore that are as smart, morally guiding and straightforwardly intense as Pinocchio, especially for children (although Pixar had a great run in the 2000s).

It has all the aspects of a meaningful and daring classic movie that I love so much.

Voigan

08-30-14, 03:44 PM

The Lion King never made me shed a tear. It did make me roll my eyes a few times though. I'm pretty sure I could watch PMM without crying, unless they were tears of boredom.
I'm not a huge Lion King fan either. It's not an unwatchable mess like Pocahontas but it's one easily one of Disney's weaker movies IMO. PMMM is amazing though. I don't know what kind of TV shows you like but it's well worth checking out if you have time. The show is 12 episodes long at 25 minutes each so it's not like it'll take weeks to finish or anything.

BlueLion

08-30-14, 03:50 PM

rauldc14

08-30-14, 03:50 PM

PMMM is one of the worst "movies" I've ever seen. Makes me laugh that anyone can consider that superior to Lion King.

rauldc14

08-30-14, 03:51 PM

I used to love Pinocchio, when I was about 11. Probably it will make my list, but I'm not sure. I really ought to see more Disney classics, so far I've seen more from Ghibli and Pixar than I've seen from Disney. Recommendations, anyone?

Alice in Wonderland, Aladdin, and Lion King. Sword in the Stone, Great Mouse Detective, The Rescuers.

Cobpyth

08-30-14, 03:54 PM

I'm not a huge Lion King fan either. It's not an unwatchable mess like Pocahontas but it's one easily one of Disney's weaker movies IMO.

I think The Lion King is actually the best thing the Disney Renaissance of the '90s produced when it comes to 2D animated films.

It has an epic feeling to it (the music score, the story about a royal betrayal), the plot is really intense and adresses interesting themes like responsability, dealing with the past, finding yourself and especially the reason why an empty life that only focuses on having fun and being lazy is ultimately unsatisfying (even if it seems like it is for a while).

I always thought it was one of the strongest Disney films as a kid and I still stand by that opinion. I think it's no coincidence that it's one of the most beloved films of all time. It's simply a really good film!

Miss Vicky

08-30-14, 03:58 PM

Recommendations, anyone?

Of the classics I recommend Bambi, Fantasia, and Lady and the Tramp. Robin Hood, Dumbo, Aladdin, Oliver and Company and The Fox and the Hound are also good.

Of their more recent material, I recommend Lilo and Stitch, Bolt, Meet the Robinsons, Wreck it Ralph, and Brother Bear.

Voigan

08-30-14, 04:04 PM

I think The Lion King is actually the best thing the Disney Renaissance of the '90s produced when it comes to 2D animated films.

It has an epic feeling to it (the music score, the story about a royal betrayal), the plot is really intense and adresses interesting themes like responsability, dealing with the past, finding yourself and especially the reason why an empty life that only focuses on having fun and being lazy is ultimately unsatisfying (even if it seems like it is for a while).

I always thought it was one of the strongest Disney films as a kid and I still stand by that opinion. I think it's no coincidence that it's one of the most beloved films of all time. It's simply a really good film!
I probably need to rewatch it but this review (http://decentfilms.com/reviews/lionking) pretty much nails every problem I have with TLK.

mark f

08-30-14, 04:04 PM

All the early ones - Snow White, Fantasia, Pinnochio, Dumbo, Bambi, Alice in Wonderland is my favorite surrealistic movie. Lady and the Tramp is great, and Sleeping Beauty uses real medieval-style artwork and has a thrillingly-awesome climax. I really like The Little Mermaid, Beauty and the Beast, Aladdin, The Lion King, The Hunchback of Notre Dame (talk about dark!) That's a start. :)

BlueLion

08-30-14, 04:24 PM

Lion King
Bolt, Wreck it Ralph
Snow White, Pinnochio

Seen these. Are all of the others absolutely must-see? I'll check some of those out, but the anime stuff that I've yet to watch sounds a lot more intriguing to me.

The worst thing when it comes to particular films is not to have the patience that is needed for them, and when it comes to that, I'm not that sure on some of these Disney classics. And I don't think that's something that I could say about any other film, or genre in general. I have patience for just about anything.

rauldc14

08-30-14, 04:25 PM

They are all pretty short and worth a one time watch at least.

the samoan lawyer

08-30-14, 04:55 PM

I used to love Pinocchio, when I was about 11. Probably it will make my list, but I'm not sure. I really ought to see more Disney classics, so far I've seen more from Ghibli and Pixar than I've seen from Disney. Recommendations, anyone?

Besides the obvious choices, check out The Emperors New Grove. Pretty underrated.

Also, Finding Nemo doesn't get much love here but I think it's great, Bruce is worth a watch alone.

Cobpyth

08-30-14, 05:02 PM

I probably need to rewatch it but this review (http://decentfilms.com/reviews/lionking) pretty much nails every problem I have with TLK.

Allow me to respond to certain issues the review adresses then.

MY BIG DEFENSE OF THE LION KING

First remark the review makes:

I’m tempted to dub The Lion King “Hamlet without Hamlet.” It’s got the big themes, the conflicts, the beats — but they all revolve around a boring, passive protagonist with none of the complexity or inner tensions of, say, Belle or Aladdin. (Or Kuzko or Lilo, for that matter.)

I don't agree with this at all. I think Simba is actually one of the better protaginists Disney has ever had. He has an uncertainty and fear hanging around him all the time, because of the guilt that was imprented in his mind in his past. He has lost the concept of identity. He has the feeling that he will fail in this world, because something bigger has prevented him from making it.

The sequence in which he's walking on his own, meets Rafiki and starts accepting that he has to fight for what he has a right to, is one of the best sequences in ANY Disney film! He's not boring or passive, he's extremely interesting to follow!

How the hell this reviewer actually believes there are no complexity or inner tensions to Simba's character is completely beyond me.

He sums up a couple of issues he has with the character, but then always seems to somehow authoritatively refuse every situation in the film that actually counters the issues he has. Here's an example:

Then he meets Timon and Pumbaa, and accepts their “Hakuna Matata” philosophy. Any second thoughts, any regrets? Any sign of trauma over the tragedy that changed his life forever? Other than an awkward stargazing exchange, not really.

"Yeah, he doesn't show any regrets or he doesn't seem to have any complexities... Oh, OK there's that one moment in the film, but that's awkward, so it doesn't count."

Not particularly great criticism if you ask me. I think that's actually a great moment, for instance, and I know many people agree with me. He has no ground to stand on, so he just completely dismisses a very important scene in the movie.

After he's done with criticizing Simba's character in all kind of ways (which is about three quarters of the whole review) that can easily be countered by someone who actually interprets the film and the motivations of Simba's character as they are supposed to be interpreted (and not in a deliberately antagonistic way that often completely misses the point of certain moments in the film), he inevitably starts complaining about the musical numbers...

Like everyone, he likes The Circle of Life, but then he starts hating on Can't Wait to be King and Hakuna Matata, because they are so stylistically different from the former..
Alright, I personally think they're fun songs, but they're obviously made for the children and I can see why some adults are bothered by that.
Both songs do have meaning to them, though. Can't Wait to be King shows the early confidence Simba has as a kid and it beautifully contrasts with his later uncertainty that's caused by the "trauma" and Hakuna Matata captures the careless state of mind Simba lets himself be consumed by to forget his troubles during a couple of years. The tone of those songs is probably something that takes certain people out of the film, but I think they have a significance to them that perfectly works in the context of the film's story..

He then says Be Prepared is OK, but that it pales in comparison to other villain songs (Gaston's Song and Poor Unfortunate Souls), which is AGAIN a totally subjective and weak argument that doesn't prove anything. I happen to think it's actually better than the two villain songs he calls superior (although I do like both of the songs he mentions). The sequence features striking imagery that reminds me (and many other viewers) of the German fascism from the 1930s and 1940s and it's simply a great song.

“Can You Feel The Love Tonight?” isn’t bad, although it follows awfully closely on the heels of Nala’s arrival. Not much chance for building romantic tension like The Lion King’s predecessors.

Here he is again dismissing a large part of the film. In the first act there's a whole build up between Simba and Nala as kids. Yes, the romance does happen quite fast after they meet eachother as adults, but I think the first act works perfectly as an introduction to their later romance.

The "predecessors" he's talking about are by the way ALL films that are completely built around one romance (The Little Mermaid, Aladdin, Beauty and the Beast). In The Lion King the romance is simply a much smaller aspect of the film. It doesn't need as much scenes to confirm the romantic tension as those other films, because it simply isn't that important in this film's context.

After that he does say a few positive things. He compliments the characters of Mufasa and Scar and states the voices were perfectly cast for both parts. I totally agree with that.

On the other hand, the females — Nala and Simba’s mother Sarabi — are given little to do. Nala’s liberated but not empowered; she pins Simba no fewer than three times (and when she winds up on her back during “Can You Feel the Love?” it’s willingly), but her biggest contribution to the plot is to unsettle Simba and soften him up for Rafiki. As for Sarabi, her big scene consists in her head high under Scar’s dystopian regime. Not the sort of tale I want my daughters to grow up with.

I think Nala's character was just fine. Besides, I don't think every movie needs good female or male characters. Are Lawrence of Arabia and 12 Angry Men bad films because there aren't any female characters in it? It's a criticism that doesn't really make any sense to me, to be totally honest.

Then he simply states that he doesn't "feel the love" and that's the end of his review.

My Personal Conclusion: This review doesn't revoke any of the positive feelings I have for this movie. To the contrary, I even feel more confident about my feelings! [The Lion King[/i] is simply a very good film and everyone who's trying to claim something otherwise, either has personal, subjective issues with it (which is totally fine), have found other meaningful substantive issues that I haven't noticed yet or they simply feel like they have to hate it, because it's so damn popular. :p

honeykid

08-30-14, 05:52 PM

I'm pretty sure I could watch PMM without crying, unless they were tears of boredom.
Of course you could. I'd only give an each way bet that mark would.

The show is 12 episodes long at 25 minutes each so it's not like it'll take weeks to finish or anything.
It'll feel like it, though.

Guaporense

08-30-14, 06:47 PM

If it's anything like the show then the second Puella Magi movie easily tops The Lion King in the tearjerker department. :yup:

For me The Lion King was my favorite movie when I was 6 but I re-watched it when I was 24 and I disliked the Lion King so I did not have any emotional connection with it. It felt forced and simplistic and I hated the songs. But as I said I dislike Disney's style in general and I dislike it since I was about 9.

I'm not a huge Lion King fan either. It's not an unwatchable mess like Pocahontas but it's one easily one of Disney's weaker movies IMO.

Well, it's certainly weaker than Dumbo, Pinocchio, Bambi, Fantasia and Alice in the Wonderland. It's better than Brother Bear and other movies in the bottom of the barrel of the studio. I might re-watch the films considered among their best such as Beauty and the Beast.

PMMM is amazing though. I don't know what kind of TV shows you like but it's well worth checking out if you have time. The show is 12 episodes long at 25 minutes each so it's not like it'll take weeks to finish or anything.

I don't think she will like it though. It's something made for experienced anime fans. Anime good for westerners without experience is Satoshi Kon and Miyazaki. Anyway, this is not a good place to talk about anime, I recommend you join an anime forum to talk about the field, people here do not understand it.

Pussy Galore

08-30-14, 08:15 PM

Pretty much all the movies I've seen since late july. I don't like to rate movies, I think they are more than a quantifiable entity, but for that much film it would be to long to write a review for each movie so I tried to rate them according to my enjoyment and not to the quality of the film

9/10
Spring, Summer, Fall, Winter... and Spring (2003) 54
Inherit the Wind (1960) 54

8,5/10
Red Beard (1965) 53.5
The Red Shoes (1948) 53.5
Lucy (2014) 53.5
The Twilight Samurai (2002) 53.5
Encounters at the End of the World (2008) 53.5
The Secret World of Arrietty (2010) 53.5

8/10
Trouble in Paradise (1932) 53
Moonrise Kingdom (2012) 53
A Man Escaped (1956) 53
The Big Blue (1988) 53
Hud (1963) 53
L'emmerdeur (A Pain in the A...) (1973) 53
The Man From Nowhere (2010) 53
Dallas Buyers Club (2013) 53
The Big Heat (1953) 53
Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? (1966) 53
Home (2009) 53
Earthlings (2003) 53
The World's End (2013) 53
The Killing Fields (1984) 53
Underground (1995) 53
61* (2001) 53

7,5/10
Play Time (1967) 52.5
Guardians of the Galaxy (2014) 52.5
Rounders (1998) 52.5
Secretary (2002) 52.5
Baraka (1992) 52.5
Delicatessen (1991) 52.5
Finding Nemo (2003) 52.5
Shane (1953) 52.5
Hot Fuzz (2007) 52.5
Ghost Dog: The Way of the Samurai (1999) 52.5

7/10
Il Postino (1994) 52
Bigger Than Life (1956) 52
8½ (1963) 52

6.5/10
Casino (1995) 51.5
Fallen Angels (1995) 51.5
Synecdoche, New York (2008) 51.5

6/10
Mr. Hulot's Holiday (1953) 51

5/10
The Expendables 3 (2014) 50
One Hour Photo (2002) 50

Voigan

08-30-14, 09:21 PM

I don't agree with this at all. I think Simba is actually one of the better protaginists Disney has ever had. He has an uncertainty and fear hanging around him all the time, because of the guilt that was imprented in his mind in his past. He has lost the concept of identity. He has the feeling that he will fail in this world, because something bigger has prevented him from making it.

The sequence in which he's walking on his own, meets Rafiki and starts accepting that he has to fight for what he has a right to, is one of the best sequences in ANY Disney film! He's not boring or passive, he's extremely interesting to follow!

I think while Greydanus might have been a little too harsh here and there he hits the main problem of Simba's lack of decisiveness perfectly. I don't mind a character needing help and/or advice from others but by the end of the film he or she needs decide what is that they want and why, instead of blindly going along with what everyone else expects of them. Is there ever a moment where Simba says "I'm going to do this because I think it's right, not because everyone else wants me to"? As I recall, the rest of the cast keep forcing their opinions on Simba and in each case he goes along with them.

Scar says "Mufasa's death is your fault" and Simba accepts it*, Timon and Pumbaa tell Simba to forget all responsibility and he does, then Rafiki, Nala, and Mufasa's ghost tell him to to back and kick Scar's arse and he does so without question. Simba never asks himself "Do I really want to be king? Do I want that much responsibly? Can I do a good job since I've spent most of my life playing around with a meerkat and a warthog or will I let everyone down? Should my mother or Nala lead the pride instead of me? Can I really bring myself to overthrow someone I've always trusted and looked up to?" For what's supposed to be a coming of age movie there's not nearly enough growth or introspection from the leading character.

*I'm actually OK with this part give how young and upset Simba was at the time.

He then says Be Prepared is OK, but that it pales in comparison to other villain songs (Gaston's Song and Poor Unfortunate Souls), which is AGAIN a totally subjective and weak argument that doesn't prove anything. Well, all reviews are subjective. The songs are a mixed bag for me. The Circle of Life is great, Be Prepared hasn't got anything on Frollo's Hellfire https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U3NoDEu7kpg but it works well enough, and I can sit through Love Tonight if I have to. I loathe Hakuna Matta though and Can't Wait to Be King is extremely annoying.

In the first act there's a whole build up between Simba and Nala as kids. Yes, the romance does happen quite fast after they meet each other as adults, but I think the first act works perfectly as an introduction to their later romance.I haven't seen the movie in about five years but IIRC Nala and Simba are totally against the idea of romance but Zazu insists that they'll fall for each other eventually (again, someone running Simba's life for him.)

The "predecessors" he's talking about are by the way ALL films that are completely built around one romance (The Little Mermaid, Aladdin, Beauty and the Beast). In The Lion King the romance is simply a much smaller aspect of the film. It doesn't need as much scenes to confirm the romantic tension as those other films, because it simply isn't that important in this film's context.I agree with this part. TLK isn't a straight romance movie so I don't think Nala's and Simba's relationship taking a backseat is a much of a problem. Although, give how little screentime the romance between the two gets and how little impact it has on the rest of the story it might have been better if the love story had been cut out entirely. Either way, it's not a huge issue.

I think Nala's character was just fine. Besides, I don't think every movie needs good female or male characters. Are Lawrence of Arabia and 12 Angry Men bad films because there aren't any female characters in it? It's a criticism that doesn't really make any sense to me, to be totally honest.For me, the problem with Nala and Simba's mother is how pointless they are. Sarabi does next to nothing throughout and Nala is just there to serve as a token love interest. Cut both characters out or reduce them to background characters with no dialogue and the movie is pretty much the same.

My Personal Conclusion: This review doesn't revoke any of the positive feelings I have for this movie. To the contrary, I even feel more confident about my feelings! [The Lion King[/i] is simply a very good film and everyone who's trying to claim something otherwise, either has personal, subjective issues with it (which is totally fine), have found other meaningful substantive issues that I haven't noticed yet or they simply feel like they have to hate it, because it's so damn popular.While certainly don't think it's a good movie I can see why so many people like it and I'm totally fine with that. I'm not out to try and ruin The Lion King for you or anyone else; I just wanted to point out what I consider flaws with the movie.

mark f

08-30-14, 09:26 PM

Brown Sugar (Rick Famuyiwa, 2002) 2.5
Laid to Rest (Robert Hall, 2009) 2+
Heart to Heart (Gunther V. Fritsch, 1949) 2.5
The Sailor Who Fell from Grace with the Sea (Lewis John Carlino, 1976) 3.5
http://cdn.highdefdigest.com/uploads/2012/08/09/sailor-who-fell-from-grace-1.png
Adolescent Jonathan Kahn's preoccupation with his mother Sarah Miles' sexuality is one of his more-innocent pastimes.
The Steel Trap (Andrew L. Stone, 1952) 2.5
Hush (Mark Tonderai, 2008) 2.5-
Glimpses of Ontario (James A. FitzPatrick, 1942) 2.5
Eastern Promises (David Cronenberg, 2007) 2.5
https://31.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m4wtd5cav71qzi80do1_r3_500.gif
His intentions are unclear, but Russian mobster Viggo Mortensen seems protective of midwife Naomi Watts.
Journey Into Fear (Norman Foster, 1943) 2.5-
Area 407 (Dale Fabrigar & Everette Wallin, 2012) 2
On the Shores of Nova Scotia (James A. FitzPatrick, 1947) 2.5
Duel in the Sun (King Vidor, 1946) 3+
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-0xuSF07xcVo/T7aeM4qbK0I/AAAAAAAAbtU/q3eDTZFzBQM/s640/DuelintheSun.jpg
Land baron Lionel Barrymore wheelchairs himself outside when strange colors envelop his place after his wife dies.
Old Man Rhythm (Edward Ludwig, 1935) 2+
The Deep End (Scott McGehee & David Siegel, 2001) 2.5
Give Me a Sailor (Elliott Nugent, 1938) 2+
Portrait of Jennie (William Dieterle, 1948) 3
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-6XMZ9UkfWCY/UWHHApCLcOI/AAAAAAAARd4/u-5lkUC364s/s1600/portrait_of_jennie1.jpg
Eerie, timeless romance/ghost story/noir with a haunting musical score has painter Joseph Cotten in love with ethereal Jennifer Jones who is apparently dead..
The Reeds (Nick Cohen, 2010) 2
Cyrus - Mind of a Serial Killer (Mark Vardik, 2010) 1.5+
Meet Me After the Show (Richard Sale, 1951) 2.5
Waltz with Bashir (Ari Folman, 2008) 3.5
https://secure.static.tumblr.com/4b7375c12150a3e2029b811bae789bc5/xflzila/ok7n7j8tl/tumblr_static_6su9goba1ew48cwoc0k0ocg4_1280_v2.gif
A veteran of the 1982 Israeli invasion of Lebanon has blocked out some of his memories and interviews others to try to remember.

Swan

08-30-14, 09:30 PM

Waltz with Bashir (Ari Folman, 2008) rating_3_5

:highfive:

honeykid

08-30-14, 09:32 PM

Cyrus - Mind of a Serial Killer was on over here tonight. Only just finished, actually. I thought about watching it, but I was recording something else.

Voigan

08-30-14, 09:35 PM

For me The Lion King was my favorite movie when I was 6 but I re-watched it when I was 24 and I disliked the Lion King so I did not have any emotional connection with it. It felt forced and simplistic and I hated the songs. But as I said I dislike Disney's style in general and I dislike it since I was about 9.
I don't mind simple movies as long as I enjoy the story and care about the characters. Heck, I have two Disney movies in my top ten and Beauty and the Beast is my all time favorite.

I might re-watch the films considered among their best such as Beauty and the Beast.I doubt you'd like it. It's by far Disney's best movie in my opinion, but since you don't care for Disney's style BATB isn't likely to change your mind.

I don't think she will like it though. It's something made for experienced anime fans. Anime good for westerners without experience is Satoshi Kon and Miyazaki. Anyway, this is not a good place to talk about anime, I recommend you join an anime forum to talk about the field, people here do not understand it.I might do that. I haven't seen nearly as much anime as you and a forum that focuses exclusively on that might help broaden my horizons a bit. :D

seanc

08-30-14, 09:51 PM

I recommend you join an anime forum to talk about the field, people here do not understand it.

LIKE it as much as you, there is a distinction here that for some reason you fail to recognize. Forget that, you don't make the distinction because, God forbid, that might mean your not the smartest guy in the room. On top of that I do think there are people who love anime for the same reasons you do, they just don"t treat it like a damn religion. You frustrate me so much Guap, why can you not talk about movies without being so flippin condescending.

Cobpyth

08-30-14, 09:52 PM

I'll just quote the part about Simba's character, because you pretty much agree with me on all the other parts or you have some subjective issues with them that can't really be discussed.

I think the romance aspect works fine and shouldn't be cut or expanded on and the chemistry they have as kids is a good enough build up. Of course they don't want to be in love as children and they think it's disgusting, but that's the typical childish way to actually admit to eachother that they're very much in love. When they're mature, they consume the tension that was already there back in their youth.

The argument about the female characters is simply nonsensical in my opinion. Again, they're there, they have some small purpose. The mother is pretty much a background character, but she has some importance because she's the main character's mother and Nala is the love interest and is mainly important because she makes Simba realize that there's more back home to fight for in the second act. No need to cut them or expand on them. They're there, they're needed for the plot (Nala) and for some extra gravitas (The mother) and just because they're female, doesn't mean that they should get more or less screen time.

I think while Greydanus might have been a little too harsh here and there he hits the main problem of Simba's lack of decisiveness perfectly. I don't mind a character needing help and/or advice from others but by the end of the film he or she needs decide what is that they want and why, instead of blindly going along with what everyone else expects of them. Is there ever a moment where Simba says "I'm going to do this because I think it's right, not because everyone else wants me to"? As I recall, the rest of the cast keep forcing their opinions on Simba and in each case he goes along with them.

Is that why he goes to the elephant graveyard? Is that why he runs away from Nala when she asks him to come back with her at first? He doesn't follow every single advice that's given to him. He's actually very stubborn at times. But OK, let's see which specific situations you really have issues with:

Scar says "Mufasa's death is your fault" and Simba accepts it*

Like you already said yourself. He's just a kid. It's an accusation he can't rationalize at that time of his life and it becomes a burden when he grows older, which makes him more interesting.

Timon and Pumbaa tell Simba to forget all responsibility and he does

Well, I don't see why you can't use the same argument here? He's a kid. He's in grief. He's all alone in the middle of a dry savannah and he has just lost everything. Suddenly there are two energetic outcasts that just think life should be lived without worries and should just be about being lazy and having fun.

Of course he's going to follow that philosophy! At the time, it seems the perfect remedy for his irreparable feelings of guilt and inner sorrow. It makes perfect sense.

then Rafiki, Nala, and Mufasa's ghost tell him to to back and kick Scar's arse and he does so without question. Simba never asks himself "Do I really want to be king? Do I want that much responsibly? Can I do a good job since I've spent most of my life playing around with a meerkat and a warthog or will I let everyone down? Should my mother or Nala lead the pride instead of me? Can I really bring myself to overthrow someone I've always trusted and looked up to?" For what's supposed to be a coming of age movie there's not nearly enough growth or introspection from the leading character.

You should really rewatch the film, because pretty much all he does is question himself and the choices he made and has to make! One of Simba's main characteristics is that he's constantly unsure about what to do or what he has done.

He doesn't really do anything without question. When Nala tells him to go back he runs away to think things over. When Rafiki attracts his attention he's very sceptic at first, but ultimately follows him into the woods because Rafiki seems to have known his father and when he looks at his own reflection, he sees his father in some sort of vision (which I interpret more as something that's going on inside Simba's own soul) and the first thing he does is question everything that his father's ghost (or his inner conscience that was mainly guided by his father in his youth) tells him. He seems even mad that he has to face everything alone. He wants help, but it becomes more and more clear that he'll have to choose his own path, no matter what people want him to do. In the end it seems of course that he does follow most of the advice that's been given to him, but what's so bad about that? Is it a sin to follow advice? Following an advice is also a decision you have to make yourself. I don't see why it should necessarily be a negative thing.

I don't really know what they should've done to show more growth or introspection. The whole third quarter of the movie is about his development and it's very well done, in my opinion. I don't think there are many more Disney films that actually show a greater intrinsic struggle of a character. Simba is brilliantly developed.