25th Hall of Fame

Tools    





Trouble with a capital "T"
Oh, whoops. Didn't notice CR's post. That means Raul has to watch it twice now
You know, it's a movie that's worthy of a second watch...I don't think a single one of us has totally agreed on that movie yet.



You know it's a movie that is worthy of a second watch...I don't think a single one of us has totally agreed on that movie.
Yeah, I wouldn't mind watching it again. I'm surprised the critics on RT gave it really mixed reviews.



Trouble with a capital "T"


Vertigo 1958

I was kinda so-so on this....
It was the messy use of lighting throughout. It was like watching someone who was far more comfortable doing B&W and continued doing things that way instead of adjusting things to accommodate Color.


I'm also inclined with the critics of the time; Jimmy Stewart...While the twenty-odd year difference was a bit off, it is a common enough thing that I skipped past that. It was the severe lack of chemistry when they kissed. It looked like two people being smooshed together who had no wish/desire to be...
I wasn't a big fan of Vertigo on my second watch either. I did feel like the romance was flat and not believable. But...I never noticed the lighting looking amateurish. Can you explain a bit? Which scenes? Were they the studio scenes where Hitch recreates sets and artificially lights them?

* the image you used above IMO has stunning use of light.



Women will be your undoing, Pépé
I wasn't a big fan of Vertigo on my second watch either. I did feel like the romance was flat and not believable. But...I never noticed the lighting looking amateurish. Can you explain a bit? Which scenes? Were they the studio scenes where Hitch recreates sets and artificially lights them?

* the image you used above IMO has stunning use of light.
It did work quite well there and sadly, I couldn't find a good example but kept it as a launching point.

But yeah, now that I think about it, it did happen mostly in the Studio Shoots. Except for scenes with his friend and former love interest (can't remember her name or the actress and too lazy to look it up lol). Those were great. The museum, the Nightclub when he first sees her -- great.

Most of this, for me, would occur around and after the "suicide". Or, rather, get downright blatant to me with the occasional, excessively brief "Wait, what was that? Was that off? Was that a glitch in the copy I'm watching?" before that. Starting with the rooftop chase. There were dark spots that were poorly constructed composition to me and the first hints to what was to come.
In one instance, after the abusive insistence that Judy changes everything to look like Madeline had a lot of that amateur "playing with lights" and was not to Hitchcock's standards for me.
Also, where it would jump from darkened to bright or some variety thereof because of a "reveal". To me, it felt like if someone tripped and pulled a chord out by mistake, or flipped the wrong light switch and then corrected themselves, hoping no one noticed.
__________________
What I actually said to win MovieGal's heart:
- I might not be a real King of Kinkiness, but I make good pancakes
~Mr Minio



Women will be your undoing, Pépé
Sundays and Cybele. So far it's the most topical nom in this HoF.
That played a large part in my choosing it as well.
As stated previously, with 24 min in, I'm very happy to have.



Sundays and Cybele -


I really enjoyed this anti-war and psychological drama. For starters, I appreciate how natural it seems. The acting is uniformly strong, but most importantly, I never thought that "he or she should have been nominated for an Oscar," which I believe is a good thing. I would rather think "this man is so damaged" instead of "he's really good at coming across as damaged," and I don't believe I thought this just because I don't recognize any of the performers. The same goes for the dialogue, which flows like conversations between real people rather than written dialogue. Also, how about those scenes by the lake? I love how serene they are and that they seem to take place in a dream world, whether it’s the pool that Cybele imagines to be a portal to another, better reality - there's a reason it's on the DVD cover - to the horse rider who might as well be a knight in shining armor. This is also a movie that knows how to make important actions count, most of them appropriately involving theft. With each one Pierre does from the dagger to the weathervane, the pang of disappointment for the step backward each one represents and my anxiety regarding their potential consequences are as visceral as it gets.

And now, for the big question: Is it right what Pierre does to Cybele? My two cents is that it's not: Cybele has a fantastical, romantic and altogether unrealistic conception of love that is typical of people her age, and since Pierre exploits this, the relationship is bound to cause long-term psychological damage to her and not just because it ends tragically. It's no boon to Pierre either as its negative effect on his healthier relationships with his friends and Madeleine indicates, which is a goal if not the most important goal of PTSD treatment. The important thing, though, is that the movie asks the big question and that I came up with my answer on my own instead of having it forced upon me. I approve of how the movie does this, particularly in the scene where Bernard's friends give their own takes on the relationship (how interesting is it that Carlos's, the artist, is based on a world that is the way it should be rather than how it actually is). The movie ends up being a beautiful, yet deeply sad tale about life with PTSD, specifically a variety in which the only treatment isn't really a treatment at all. Thankfully, there's an ever-present reminder that if it wasn't for war, none of this would have ever happened.



Whiplash



I watched this with my wife back when it first came out. If someone would have asked me about it the next day I would have said sure it's a good movie. It's not one I would have predicted that I'd remember (I didn't) or one I'd ever want to see again (I didn't). I think I liked it more this time and I'll probably be more likely to remember it if only for the fact that I've now seen it twice.

Unlike a movie like Blackkklansman whose story naturally appeals to me, this one doesn't. It's got to do some work there and it does a good job thanks to getting to business in quick fashion. I enjoy a good portion of the movie mostly from Simmons going off Lee Ermey style. The intended impact of the movie however is not as a comedy, and that's why I probably don't find it as great as others. I just never feel the gravity of it all. It could have something to do with the early slapping and the throwing of whatever that was. I found those things a bit silly. Also, leaving the accident was ridiculous and it was aggravating how this supposedly dedicated little drummer boy could never be on time. The investigation part into the conductor didn't work for me either but the movie recovered nicely for the finale, a finale I enjoyed but wasn't quite sure what to make of. Not sure why the girl was even in the movie. I mean I guess to show how this kid would give up anything, but they never had anything to start with so why bother. Simmons was real good I think, but it was very much a showcase role that was designed to stand out. After all Lee Ermey wasn't much of an actor but I'll never forget him. Miles Teller, blah. He was fine I guess. Overall I very much enjoyed this viewing but it does have me questioning my rating system.




rbrayer's Avatar
Registered User
The Green Years (1963)

Quietly tremendous.

I am sure this is the type of film that rewards multiple viewings. Through most of the film, I felt that it was a bit slow and even somewhat boring. The stunning ending made me re-evaluate the entire experience and the more time I've spent with the film in my unconscious the more I've come to realize that this is a truly great film.

The simple coming-of-age story story (a feature that often results in a standout film in the right directorial hands) involves 19-year old Julio's trip from the country to the big city, Lisbon. Julio's uncle Raul, also the narrator, gives Julio a job as a shoemaker. Julio soon meets the maid Ilda, pretty, modern, and confident, and falls in love. Ilda, like Julio, comes from the country. The couple are blown away by city life, though they handle it differently. Ilda, who works for a rich woman with hundreds of shoes and a classy life, dreams of the same type of life for herself. Julio's working class values conflict with city life and ultimately lead to ruin. The ending is so shocking, I want to steer clear of spoiling it. Suffice it to say it reframes the entire picture.

The film is full of beautiful shots of Lisbon, a city I've never even seen in pictures but would love to visit some day. Despite that, the quality of the copy I watched was not ideal. There apparently is a 4K restoration that I intend to view to get a better idea of Director Paulo Rocha's vision.

I'm sure some will feel, as I did at first, that this is a slow, boring film. The truth is, it explores its themes subtly and through character instead of plot. I am sure I will enjoy it more each time I experience it. Bravo. 10/10.



The Truth (1960) -


I struggled with this one, I must admit. It's definitely well-made and I enjoyed quite a bit about it, but I had some difficulties with getting on board with the story, though I recognize my issue is more of a subjective thing.

Seeing Dominique get pushed around, mistreated, and abused throughout the entire film (with the exception of the first couple acts or so) made for an effective tragedy, I suppose, but it ultimately left me feeling worn down when I finished it. Not a film I'd be eager to revisit. With the exception of Dominique's lawyer seemingly caring for her - though the ending complicates that - it seemed to have bleakness baked into almost every scene (again, save for the opening couple acts). Of course, something like this isn't necessarily a flaw per se. It just made the film hard to watch since I generally don't do well with films where characters are hurt throughout long periods of time. As a comparison, The Whisperers from the 24th HoF was similar in how bleakness filled almost every scene, but its hopeful ending made it an easier film to watch.

Even though this film wasn't for me though, I did enjoy a few things about it. Most notably, how your opinion on Dominique and Gilbert changes throughout the film. Initially, I disliked Dominique since Gilbert and Annie suffered as a result of her free-spirited lifestyle. I also felt sorry for Gilbert since he was often pushed around by Dominique in the first couple acts of the film. I eventually hated Gilbert though once he grew emotionally abusive, while feeling sorry for Dominique since she was treated poorly by him. I found this shift interesting and I think the film found the right balance to make it work. Also, I haven't seen Bardot in many films, but I think she did a great job here. I found the emotions she showed throughout the film, especially in the courtroom scenes, quite convincing. Her final outburst in the courtroom, in particular, was terrific. This is definitely my favorite performance from her.

Overall, while I think this film is well-done, it isn't one I can see myself revisiting. Out of the three films I've seen so far from Clouzot (The Wages of Fear, Les Diaboliques, and this film), this one is my least favorite. Regardless though, I'm still glad I watched it.

Next up: Vertigo
__________________
IMDb
Letterboxd



Trouble with a capital "T"

Chimes at Midnight (Orson Welles 1965)

Orson Welles was a bonafide genius. He often referred to himself as having, "started at the top and worked his way down." At the top, refers to Citizen Kane, and Orson had an unheard of full editorial control over his picture. Studios did not just grant youngsters like 26 year old Orson full control over a major studio film...but then again Orson Welles was no ordinary 26 year old!

Welles had started his career as a stage director doing plays based on Shakespeare but with a modern twist. So it's not surprising Welles chose a work of Shakespeare as the basis for his last feature length, non documentary film.

I hadn't seen Chimes at Midnight before...OMG this was epic! It had a sweeping vastness to the exterior long shots and the interiors made the castle seem vast and cavernous. And the film was drenched in Orson's unique cinema style...Like those low angled shots that made the characters look larger than life itself. I was awed at the scenes with the rows of those long spears. In one magnificent scene the clouds flew by like centuries peeling away layer by layer. How did Orson do that? I don't know, but that's why there's never been another like Orson Welles.





Vertigo



I've seen this a few times now and I'm still not sure how I feel about it. Stewart is good but his character quickly turns me off by falling for the wife (he thinks) of his friend. That normally wouldn't bother me in a movie but it does here. I think instead of a conflicted and complex character, he comes off as inconsistent. The rest of the cast and characters are solid. I very much like the story but am not overly enthused with how it plays out. I largely forget it after every watch so at least it always feels relatively fresh. I like the mystery in trying to see things through his eyes, but I don't feel suspense or surprise. I don't find it overly exciting or entertaining. There are moments that come off as super cheesy but that's probably it's age. It looks and sounds really good. Even though I'm not a huge fan yet, I think it's one of the director's better films.

-



Women will be your undoing, Pépé



Sundays and Cybèle aka Les dimanches de Ville d'Avray (1962)

I think I will keep my remarks regarding the relationship's morality of Cybèle/Francoise (Nicole Courcel) and Pierre (Hardy Krüger) much like Director Serge Bourguignon had intended. And that is, to one's perceptions/beliefs/concerns - much of the arguments for and against already expressed within the film itself.
Is it insidious? Is it innocent? Right/Wrong? Complex or Simplistic? Like so many things, it does not define itself one way or another. It is as it is and, like those who see them in the park and those who know Pierre, it is up to us to decipher and judge/accept, according to how we perceive such a scenario as we experience their relationship and their love for one another.

What I will express and normally do with such a beautifully composed film is. . . well, what I just said. It is VERY beautifully done. The camera work is spot on in each and every scene for me. On pretty much every level when it comes to composition and storytelling. It is and was, engaging and I was very much entranced from the get-go to the end. The bookends of the beginning and end broadcasting tragedy with the body of work telling a beautiful story of two lost/abandoned individuals and the comfort/happiness they found with one another.

I truly loved this, and it is something that would have had a solid chance of slipping into my Countdown List.

And yes, BRAVO



BlacKKKlansman -


This isn't my favorite Spike Lee movie - that honor goes to Do The Right Thing - but it's his most fun movie, slightly edging out Inside Man in that regard. The extraordinary, stranger than fiction story has a lot to do with this. Spike and company took a few liberties with it, but it's still hard to believe that it actually happened. The movie has good comic relief, but with a story like this one, I wouldn't be surprised if it would be labeled as a comedy even if it had none. When I wasn't laughing, I was barely breathing because the suspense is masterful. Again, even though almost everything in the movie is based on a true story, there are many times when I was certain that Stallworth or Zimmerman's covers would be blown and that the entire operation would fail. What makes Spike Lee's movies so compelling to me is that I know I'm going to see an innovation, or at least an attempt at one, and in this movie, it's his treatment of cultural institutions. Some are simple yet still effective like when Zimmerman talks about reevaluating his Jewish or lack thereof upbringing, but then there's the overt ones like the clips from The Birth of a Nation and the slightly more subtle, tongue in cheek ones like the Blaxploitation movie references, all of which amount to a reminder of what's also at stake in the fight against white supremacy. All in all, the movie succeeds for how it proves that fighting against racism regardless of its form is difficult and requires a coordinated effort, but it is not impossible. As for the ending with the footage from the Charlottesville rally, it is difficult to watch and it is hardly subtle, but this is one case where subtlety is not a virtue. If anything, it drills the point home that Stallworth and company may have scored a victory, but it was for a battle and not the war. Oh, and that other ending, i.e. the one that ended Stallworth and David Duke's kindly phone chats? Just thinking about it makes me laugh and pump my fist!