|
Rorschach posted:Is the cut of Robocop on the Steelbook edition the same as on the Criterion DVD? It's got both the theatrical cut and the cut from the Criterion DVD on it.
|
#
¿
Jun 21, 2008 03:25
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 6, 2024 22:36 |
|
|
ClydeUmney posted:I really, really like The Treatment, with Elvis Mitchell. Mitchell is one of the best interviewers around, and he has a habit of either really creating deep conversations about the film or exposing the director as an idiot who doesn't know what they're talking about. Either way, I really like it. More info here: http://www.kcrw.com/etc/programs/tt I've always been a fan of Elvis Mitchell's reviews. Had no idea he did these podcasts. Which episodes are the best?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2010 02:06
|
|
|
Penpal posted:Empire Theatres, the biggest (and really only) theatre chain in the eastern provinces of Canada. They're all across the country, but mostly situated right here. I am just really pissed off. It was incredibly incredibly distracting. But characters were constantly half in the frame and poo poo like that, it was just annoying as gently caress. I don't have the e-mail of the President, and I don't think I want to e-mail the dude with my little problem. I think that might be too much. But I paid like 13 bucks to see a movie in a chain theatre that didn't have their poo poo together, which sucked. I've had this problem with a few theaters in NYC. Never had a single theater actually fix the problem, which makes me wonder if it even can be fixed while the projector is still running. I know nothing about projectors though. When I've asked for a refund I've gotten one. I usually just describe it as the picture being cropped and they know what I mean. Barely anyone complains about this though, I've only seen a few other people besides myself mention anything or ask for a refund, and this was for movies where names in the opening credits were cut in half. Similarly, I've been to a lot of movies where the focus was off. I've found that to be way more common than cropping. Vincent Gallo, after being pissed off at the focus being off in theaters showing Buffalo '66, made his Gray Daisy production company logo a focus chart, so that when the focus was off on The Brown Bunny at a theater, he would know instantly and could point it out directly to the staff, without seeming like he's just nitpicking and crazy.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2010 03:40
|
|
|
The Cameo posted:I have no idea what the gently caress "cropped" is supposed to mean. Is there some sort of visual aid someone can give me to understand this, because I bet if I saw it, I could figure out what the gently caress they're doing wrong in like ten seconds. 
codyclarke fucked around with this message at 07:56 on Apr 2, 2010 |
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2010 07:53
|
|
|
The Cameo posted:Clever way of showing that. Haha, thanks! I'm pretty sure if I said anything about an 'aperture plate' or 'scope' to the employees at some of the theaters I've had this problem at, they'd have no idea what I was talking about. Are there even actual projectionists working in theaters anymore? Usually the guy going up to the booth to 'check it out' is the guy that was sweeping up popcorn five minutes earlier. We're living in a sad age for movie theaters. Prices get higher every year and quality control is non-existent.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2010 00:33
|
|
|
FishBulb posted:I don't really know if it proves what you are implying it proves, its entirely possible that its just a chance encounter. Absolutely. I thought it was entirely deliberate that at the end of the movie we don't know who did it, and the reason for such is so we can feel Georges' unending frustration. With this movie, Haneke isn't crafting a subtle mystery for us to analyze stills from and obsess over. Instead he wants us to ponder on 'mystery' itself, and guilt, and grief.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2010 01:14
|
|
|
ServoMST3K posted:What are some movies that really give a nice sense of weight and urgency to the use of firearms? A good number of films that involve hails of bullets don't tend to capture my attention. Also, I'd prefer less recommendations for war films, since I have a bunch of those on my list I need to watch anyway. Two that come to mind are Reservoir Dogs and Road to Perdition.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2010 21:35
|
|
|
boeman posted:In Caché, what is the point of the scene where Georges and Anne are throwing a dinner party, and one of their guests tells a joke about an old woman telling him that he looks like her old dog? Every scene in the movie is very meticulously placed and framed by Haneke...this is the only one I don't see fitting in, so I must be missing something. Pretty sure it's just to be an unexpected scare. You're lured into this story and then he loudly starts barking outta nowhere. When I saw it in the theater I remember that part being pretty loud.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2010 07:16
|
|
|
The DVD of Steven Seagal's Marked For Death is non-anamorphic, making it annoyingly tiny when viewed on a 16:9 TV. A blu-ray is coming out of it on Tuesday, and apparently it's still going to be tiny like that. Then doing research I learned there's no such thing an 'anamorphic' for blu-ray. So are all 2.35:1 movies tiny on blu-ray, or am I misunderstanding things? I don't have a blu-ray player so my knowledge of it is pretty bare.
|
|
#
¿
May 11, 2010 04:29
|
|
|
Fayez Butts posted:Huh? Blu Ray supports all aspect ratios and there are probably some older movies or television shows that come in 4:3 though I don't know any off the top of my head. That said, yeah, there will be black bars if the aspect ratio isn't 16:9 like your television. I know there will be black bars, since obviously the film isn't 16:9, it's 2.35:1. However there's a difference between 2.35:1 being displayed in a 16:9 area and a 4:3 area. Apparently, the new Seagal DVD is 2.35:1 in a 4:3 area, thus making it tiny on a 16:9 screen if viewed in its proper dimensions. My question is whether this is the case for a lot of 2.35:1 movies that are blu-ray, or if this is just some weird, lazy isolated incident with this one particular title.
|
|
#
¿
May 11, 2010 05:23
|
|
|
The Cameo posted:There is no 2.35 movie on Blu that will be squeezed into a 4:3 area. Alright maybe I received really bum information from these strangers complaining on Amazon. This is good news.
|
|
#
¿
May 11, 2010 05:35
|
|
|
Green Crayons posted:I've already seen the Kurosawa recommendations (loved 'em), and I've seen Kobayashi's Harakiri and loved it even more than the Kurosawa movies... so, I've Netflixed everything I could find from the three directors you recommended. Do yourself a favor and check out Inagaki's Samurai Trilogy as well. It's a really engrossing saga chronicling the duels of Miyamoto Musashi, a famous Japanese swordsman who wrote The Book of Five Rings. I have no idea how historically accurate the movie is, but Mifune is brilliant and the first film in the series is one of my favorite films.
|
|
#
¿
May 25, 2010 06:10
|
|
|
kapalama posted:BTW is the Brown Bunny worth seeing? I love The Brown Bunny to death, but it's not for everyone. It's an very powerful and haunting portrait of one man's loneliness and grief. Give it a shot if you're down for that sort of a film journey. Also, Roger Ebert, who harshly criticized the unfinished Cannes cut, ended up giving the final cut three stars. His review is worth checking out: http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20040903/REVIEWS/409020301/1023
|
|
#
¿
May 27, 2010 04:20
|
|
|
the Bunt posted:My problem is that most of the time, I can't for the life of me distinguish many of the actors from one another. For instance, I recently watched Wong Kar-wai's 2046 and until halfway through I didn't realize that the protagonist was having flings with several different women. This really confused me. Most of the time, I have to look at an actor's hair style or other defining features because their faces look so similar. I know I'm a filthy gaijin but I was wondering if it ever gets easier the more films I watch. Might be more due to constantly glancing at the subtitles than their asian-ness. You could try watching movies dubbed (if you can stand it, some dubs are just atrocious) and see if that clears it up.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2010 08:11
|
|
|
the Bunt posted:Could be a subtitle issue, I suppose. I really dislike dubs for the most part, but if anyone knows of some serviceable ones that'd be great. Also, try watching some films with not much dialogue (if it is the subtitles) or a very limited cast of characters. Kim Ki-Duk films tend to fit both those criteria.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2010 09:35
|
|
|
Does anyone know of recent films (2000-2010) that, for a stylistic reason, were shot in 4:3 or 1.37:1, other than Elephant and Fish Tank?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2010 10:09
|
|
|
VorpalBunny posted:To be fair, Affleck co-wrote GONE BABY GONE and his upcoming film THE TOWN, and Damon co-wrote GERRY, so they're not completely done with writing. To be fair, I coulda written Gerry in the time it took me to write this post. I mean that with all due respect to Matt, though. I think he's a competent writer and a great actor. Most likely I think they both just have a lot of interests other than writing, and would rather be doing them. Maybe Matt just plain enjoys acting better.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 22, 2010 05:11
|
|
|
Schweinhund posted:Are there any movies (or any medium I guess) where they try to have something look like it was filmed a long time ago and it really looks like it? It seems like whenever they try to make something look like it was filmed like it was in the 30's or 40', or even the 60's or 70's or whenever, it always looks too crisp or just off in some way. Can't they just use an old movie camera and do it like that or is it something with modern film stock that makes everything look modern? You'd probably love both Forgotten Silver and Zelig.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 23, 2010 05:21
|
|
|
I just noticed that John McTiernan came out with Predator, Die Hard, and The Hunt for Red October in the span of roughly 3 years. Each one of those films are arguably the greatest films of their sub-genres. That's extremely impressive. Can anyone think of other directors that came out with 3 very important and iconic films in roughly 3 years? I'm trying to think of some and I'm blanking.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 11, 2010 04:19
|
|
|
I don't know why I never realized these were made so close to each other. The fact that North by Northwest and Vertigo are technicolor and Psycho is black and white throws me off I guess.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 11, 2010 04:34
|
|
|
Yall hatin'. I just wanted to open a discourse on directors that nailed the 3-in-a-row wam bam pow. A fun thing devolved into a pissing contest. Forget I even brought it up.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 11, 2010 08:01
|
|
|
On Fawlty Towers and some other british shows of that era, stuff shot indoors always looked okay, but stuff shot outdoors always looked to be pretty low quality. Was this due to low light, a different camera, or what? It has a very distinct look. I'm curious as to what camera they used for each.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2010 07:52
|
|
|
Just watched Breathless and I really dug it. I'd like to check out some more Godard, but christ the man has made a lot of films, and seeing them listed on wiki under various eras and whatnot is pretty daunting. Any recommendations on where I should go after this one? Should I just continue chronologically, or try a few from each era, or what?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2010 04:42
|
|
|
Trying to think of some great movie performances by actors that weren't regarded as particularly good actors, or serious actors, prior to the role. Some that come to mind from recent history: - Marlon Wayans in Requiem for a Dream - Steve Zahn in Rescue Dawn - Adam Sandler in Punch Drunk Love - Katie Holmes in Pieces of April - Anne Hathaway in Rachel Getting Married - Amy Adams in Junebug
|
|
#
¿
Aug 12, 2010 08:21
|
|
|
regulargonzalez posted:Tom Hanks was known for lightweight comedies before Philadelphia. Which of his previous movies made you think "drat, that there is one fine actor?" -- The Burbs, Turner and Hooch, or Joe vs the Volcano? I'd say Groundhog Day was really Bill Murray's breakthrough in that regard. if not that, then certainly Rushmore. And for Tom Hanks, Big really showcased his acting chops. The scene where he's alone in the cheap hotel room crying in particular.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2010 05:12
|
|
|
ClydeUmney posted:Keanu Reeves, who is usually considered a terrible actor, is absolutely fantastic in The Gift. It's a surprisingly great job from him. Yeah, this is a great pick. Don't know what the hell Sam Raimi did to get that performance out of him, but I'd love to see them work together again. Katie Holmes ain't half bad in that movie either.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 14, 2010 03:31
|
|
|
I remember when The General's Daughter came out there was a trailer for it where John Travolta's character asks "What's worse than rape?!" The line popped into my head today outta nowhere, after not thinking about the movie since it came out. I'm now overcome with the desire to know what's worse than rape. I looked up the response to the answer online, and here's what it said: "When you find that out you'll have all the answers." Can someone who has seen this movie let me know whether he was just being cheeky with that response, or what? Is the question ever answered? What the hell is going on? Someone spoil me on this movie. I don't wanna have to sit through it, I hear it's a piece of poo poo.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 26, 2010 07:13
|
|
|
SubG posted:`I have no regrets about Runaway (1984), but when I think of Chopping Mall (1986), I fear I might have wasted my precious time on this earth.' I watch Chopping Mall drat near every year around Halloween 
|
|
#
¿
Sep 2, 2010 18:26
|
|
|
2xSlick posted:Can anyone think of some really good post 1980's action movies where the hero doesn't completely walk all over the bad guys and actually has to struggle to win? With the whole Schwarzenegger/Stallone films running rampant, the only two action stars I can think of that fit are Harrison Ford and Jackie Chan. Both of them can sell a punch and usually don't gain the upper hand until they pull out their ace in the hole (the flying tackle or jumping off a building, respectfully). Arnold had to fight pretty hard in Predator, especially the 3rd act.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 6, 2010 17:38
|
|
|
2xSlick posted:But he trades his assault rifle for mud and a rock. And survives a nuclear explosion by jumping. I think he was just screwing around with the Predator. Only other one I can think of then is Pedicab Driver. Sammo Hung is still really strong in it, but he gets really big bruises and black eyes and poo poo along the way, and isn't too confident for most of the film.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 6, 2010 17:49
|
|
|
Henron posted:So can someone tell me the significance of the character Buck in Boogie Nights? He really seemed like the only one who had any sort of dream or ambition in life but the path he took to achieve it was pretty unorthodox. He also seems like the most innocent and well-meaning character. I think the donut scene serves as a metaphor for his relationship to the industry.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 24, 2010 21:50
|
|
|
Power of Pecota posted:In The Box, in the very last scene when the camera zooms in on the window, you see someone approach Walter and stand next to him. Who was that? I thought it was just one of the suits working for the same aliens Steward was, but I have no idea whether that's right or not. Just a suit.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 17, 2010 09:11
|
|
|
the Bunt posted:I don't think Lynch has this intent at all. To me, his work is like an aural stream-of-consciousness novel. He believes that everything comes from one unified place, even if to many people it appears like he's just pulling the rug from under everyone for the sake of loving with them. While that aspect might be intended as well, I just can't see his work as "trolling". I feel like David Lynch makes 'dreams about movies' rather than 'movies'. If you've ever had a dream about a movie you've seen that's kind of what I mean. And trying to remember exactly what happened in a David Lynch movie is like trying to remember what happened in a weird dream you had. I don't think his films are always entertaining, but that's the vibe I get from his stuff.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 27, 2011 23:24
|
|
|
What are some first films by well-known filmmakers that are admittedly bad or even disowned? For instance Tarantino's My Best Friend's Birthday, James Cameron's Piranha II, and Woody Allen's What's Up Tiger Lily?.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 2, 2011 22:19
|
|
|
FitFortDanga posted:I love What's Up Tiger Lily. The Lovin' Spoonful bits are stupid, but everything else is terrific. I like it too. Wikipedia says the Spoonful stuff was put in my by the studio against Woody's wishes. I've read two books of interviews with Woody Allen, and Tiger Lily is never discussed at all. Dude won't talk about it, and doesn't even refer to it as his first movie. As far as he's concerned his first movie is Take the Money and Run.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 2, 2011 22:57
|
|
|
Twin Cinema posted:In Last Tango in Paris, what was Jeanne's rationale for staying in the "relationship" with Paul? I figured that it was due to some unresolved daddy issues, and that being a 20-year old girl, she doesn't fully realize the consequences of her actions. IMDB posted:According to Maria Schneider, the famous "butter scene" was never in the script and improvised at the last minute by Marlon Brando and Bernardo Bertolucci without consulting her. Though the sodomy act was faked, her real tears in the film clearly testify her state of shock.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 13, 2011 03:37
|
|
|
IMDB posted:The title for the film came to Quentin Tarantino via a patron at the now-famous Video Archives. While working there, Tarantino would often recommend little-known titles to customers, and when he suggested Au Revoir Les Enfants (1987), the patron mockingly replied, "I don't want to see no reservoir dogs!"
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2011 23:43
|
|
|
kapalama posted:Was Al Pacino ever a good actor, was he always an "Acting- Brilliant" actor? My favorite performance of his was Ricky Roma in Glengarry Glen Ross. Definitely check that one out.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2011 19:14
|
|
|
Pedro De Heredia posted:Are there examples of movies made by reasonable talent that were so bad that even the makers didn't really want to release them? Manhattan. Woody Allen disliked his work in this film so much he offered to direct another film for United Artists for free if they kept "Manhattan" on the shelf for good. Also, Woody allen reshot September with different actors because he didn't like the first version.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 10, 2011 03:27
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 6, 2024 22:36 |
|
|
On the subject of directors working on films uncredited, Paul Thomas Anderson helped Judd Apatow edit Funny People.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 10, 2011 09:48
|
|