|
Someone should do Kazuo Hara. He's an amazing documentarian.
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2014 11:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 3, 2024 11:15 |
|
|
Current Director: Akira Kurosawa Progress: 26/30 [ Just watched: First thing's first - Dreams is gorgeous, and tt is actually a series of short films that are loosely connected by a theme of man's relationship with nature rather than a single, continuous movie. It is a drat shame Kurosawa didn't get to do all his films in color. The segment with Van Gogh has an incredible transition that features a life-size reproduction of "The Langlois Bridge at Arles with Women Washing". It took me totally by surprise and is a seriously cool shot. However, the cinematography is incredible throughout the film. The opening two segments feature traditional kabuki costumes and mesmerizing dance. "The Blizzard" segment is haunting, portraying the terror of being caught in a snowstorm and the struggle to fight off hypothermia and death. The shot with the snow demon flying away in the wind is incredible. "The Tunnel" is a bleak look at the psychological damage of war that features some great sound design - the echoing of footsteps in a dark tunnel are used to great effect. Throughout the film, smoke and fog are used to invoke things that are dark or supernatural, whereas flowers and flower petals are used to symbolize what is good and wholesome, creating a strong visual language that ties the seemingly disjointed segments of the film together. The final scene features a number of waterwheels, showing man and nature living side by side in harmony - the central message of the film. The first half of the film is more subtle than the second, and the final four segments are connected by the notion that war is bad and, in particular, the development of nuclear technology will eventually lead the Earth to ruin. While I agree with the idea that nuclear bombs are bad, Kurosawa takes it a little to far for my taste - nuclear power plants eventually turn the entire world into a wasteland where humans have all mutated into demons (yes, seriously). I still love the way he films the ruined landscape, and his use of fog and smoke effects are awesome, but man is it heavy-handed and preachy. And then the final segment is basically just an old guy talking about how science is evil and only serves to destroy nature and kill people. I get that it's a dream, and based on his earlier work I'm sure Kurosawa wasn't a total Luddite, but it's too long-winded and extreme. It hearkens back to some his earlier work, and not in a good way. It's especially unnecessary when a line from one of the earlier segments perfectly encapsulates the "living in harmony with nature" theme of the film ina a much more poetic way: "Peaches can be bought, but where can you buy a full orchard in bloom?" That being said, I still really enjoyed the film. As I said at the beginning - it is beautiful. I would watch most of Dreams with no dialog and just the background music and still love it. I also appreciated the symmetry of the film opening with a wedding procession and closing with a funeral. There's really no plot, which makes the visuals that much more important, and prevents the preachiness near the end from destroying the movie as a whole. Overall rating: A- Next up: Rhapsody in August
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2014 00:06
|
|
|
 Director: John Huston Progress: 23/37 Just watched: Freud (a.k.a. Freud: The Secret Passion) and Beat The Devil Next up: The MacKintosh Man I have been gone from the forums for a bit and I have seen two Huston's recently. Freud This is a really conflicting movie. On one hand you have a really interesting character piece of Freud discovering his theories and actually hating himself for what he discovers. No matter your beliefs in psychology, Montgomery Clift (who only a year earlier was amazing in Huston's The Misfits) gives a subtle yet stellar performance as Freud. The photography is concise and well planned and there are some really well executed surreal dram sequences obviously inspired by Fellini and Bergman. On the other hand, the movie is about 30 minutes too long and some scenes read like a Psychology 101 textbook. While the means to the end is interesting, the actual statement of the thesis is unnecessary and dry. (6.5/10) Beat The Devil Considered, in some circles, to an awful script by Truman Capote and awful Direction by John Huston and awful acting from Bogart... Beat the Devil isn't as bad as people say, but it isn't a cinematic masterpiece by any means. The main trouble with this film is the plot holes and half motives. Bogart does phone it in a bit but Jennifer Jones actually steals this movie. Both married couples seem to swap partners and no one seems to care all that much all under the umbrella of African Uranium. Peter Lorre gives, for me, his best performance aside from M. This whole story suffers under the weight of not knowing if it is a romantic comedy or thrilling heist. If you are a Bogart or Loree fan, I would tell you to see it, otherwise you can skip it. It seems like, from reading trivia about the film, everyone had their eyes on other projects and just were not all that into it. (5.5/10) Must See: The Dead, Prizzi's Honor, Wise Blood, The Man Who Would Be King, Fat City, Moulin Rouge, The Treasure of Sierra Madre, The Maltese Falcon, Let There Be Light, Reflections in a Golden Eye See: The Life & Times of Judge Roy Bean, The Misfits, The African Queen, The Asphalt Jungle, Key Largo, The Red Badge of Courage, Night of the Iguana, Freud Don't Have To See: Annie, Victory, Heaven Knows, Mr. Allison, Moby Dick, Beat the Devil Seen: [/quote]
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2014 20:06
|
|
|
Current Director: Akira Kurosawa Progress: 26/30 [ Just watched: Rhapsody in August is a beautiful, intimate film about the importance of family, and the nature of familial love, while also portraying an anti-war message that specifically focuses on the atomic bombs dropped on Japan during WWII. I read some criticism of this film after watching it that talks about how the film fails to be fair toward America, and that Kurosawa glosses over the Japanese atrocities committed during the war, but this criticism feels misguided and is also false. Kane, the elderly woman at the center of the film, lost her husband to the bombing of Nagasaki, but she specifically mentions that even though the Americans killed many Japanese, the Japanese also killed many people. Not to mention, the Japanese atrocities aren't necessarily relevant to the people at the center of this film - Kane and her family. People who focus on the war-related pieces of the film fail to see that they are ultimately used to show how foolish it is to let misgivings about the past drive a family apart. The bomb, and Kane's feelings towards America, keep her from visiting Hawaii to see her brother, a decision which she ultimately sees as a mistake. Her brother has an American wife, and because of the awkwardness of talking about the death of Kane's husband, this drives a wedge of silence and awkwardness between the Japanese and American halves of the family. In the end, however, the two sides of the family reconcile and come to love and respect one another because the power of family is greater than the power of war. That, to me, was the central message of this film, and I think it was done very intelligently by Kurosawa. The motif of breaking down barriers between family members is reflected in the cinematography. At the beginning of the film, all of the grandchildren's beds are divided by sliding doors, but by the end of the film we see a shot of all the doors open and all of them sleeping in what is now essentially the same room. Kane's brother owns a pineapple farm in Hawaii, and as the film progresses more and more pineapples, pineapple t-shirts, boxes with pineapples, etc. show up in Kane's house, as the two sides of the family come close together. The electric organ - broken at the beginning of the film - is finally fixed by one of the grandchildren only AFTER their American cousin comes to visit them in Japan. Then they sing a song about a rose - and we are ultimately shown a shot of a rose as the Japanese side of the family and their American cousin attend a memorial service for the victims of the Nagasaki bombing. This shot of the rose, with a line of ants marching toward it, also foreshadows and mirrors the final shot of the film (which I won't spoil). Also, I loved the way the plot meanders along during the beginning of the film and lets the audience get to know Kane, her grandchildren, and the family's history in a personal, meaningful way. By the film's climax, I knew and liked this family very much and wanted the best for them. The stories Kane tells are perfect Grandmother stories - weird, funny, sometimes scary, sometimes sad. We get some gorgeous shots of the Japanese countryside to accompany these tales, as the children often go out and look for the places their grandmother talks about in her stories. Overall, I loved this film and think it's one of my favorite Kurosawa films, period. I can see why people would get distracted by the atomic bomb stuff, but I also think those people are missing the point. As I said at the beginning - this is a film about family, not a film about war, and it has a lot of substance and subtlety, in my opinion. I'm still rolling it around in my head and am finding new things to appreciate and talk about. Overall rating: A+ Next up: Madadayo
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2014 05:32
|
|
|
Current Director: Andrei Tarkovsky Progress: 7/7 [ Just watched: Nostalghia. I'm not sure if I should talk about the plot at all, not that there is a plot worth talking about. Tarkosvky said it in an interview before the film's showing at Cannes: "the plot isn't important to me, the film is made of a different kind of matter". The overarching theme, though, is the modern man's spiritual impotence and failure to find love in himself and others. As for the other things that make a film, it is all pretty, contemplative and slow. Unfortunately, it does not quite live up to what it wants to be. The potential for honesty is watered down by Tarkovsky's ego, ambition and unwillingness to compromise for ours - the viewer's - sake. As a result, Nostalghia is at its best when the characters stop trying to make sense. I wished it had more of the mad Italian's poetry and and less of the man/woman duo hopelessly lost in dilemmas and fears, unable to show honesty, compassion or resolve. To sum up: a decent follow-up once you've already seen Tarkovsky's better movies. It feels more like a series of still-life paintings than an actual piece of film, lacking the sense of humanity and detail that made Andrei Rublev, Solaris or Stalker resound so deeply on more than just an aesthetic note. Overall rating: C+ It was my last film by a director that I have loved and admired since I was 16. I didn't enjoy it as much as I wanted to but eh, it still feels good to think I have finally come to see the man's work as a whole. Kubla Khan fucked around with this message at 13:56 on Nov 9, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2014 13:53
|
|
|
Kubla Khan, you should hunt down Steamroller and the Violin if you haven't seen it. It's amazing to see because it's like you can see his whole career in motifs all collected in about 30 minutes.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2014 02:25
|
|
|
York_M_Chan posted:
Please add The Battle of San Pietro to your list. It's another of Huston's war documentaries and fantastic.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2014 05:57
|
|
|
I've only got 20 Hitchcock films left and I am dragging my feet so much with this. I planned to save Marnie and Lifeboat for towards the end so I still have some certified great ones to look forward to but I'm not sure if I should just watch em now in order to get back into the game.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2014 07:09
|
|
|
TrixRabbi posted:I've only got 20 Hitchcock films left and I am dragging my feet so much with this. Hate to do this to you, but neither of those are certified great ones.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2014 07:12
|
|
|
penismightier posted:Hate to do this to you, but neither of those are certified great ones. poo poo. Looks like I gotta watch Juno and the Paycock for nothing.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2014 07:21
|
|
|
Kull the Conqueror posted:Kubla Khan, you should hunt down Steamroller and the Violin if you haven't seen it. Thanks for bringing it up. What a sweet and uplifting piece, such a shame I didn't see it until now. I do wish he kept on making movies about people other than himself. quote:you can see his whole career in motifs all collected in about 30 minutes I wish it were so.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2014 09:14
|
|
|
I started following this thread last year after it was featured in a "best of current threads" article on the front page. I talked about it with my GF, and it even contributed to her joining the forums as Hypatias Homegirl. This is a really cool idea, and I'm glad to be finally contributing. Last year we watched all of Ridley Scott's movies, starting with Prometheus (  ) and ending with Alien. I had intended to participate in this thread last year, but watching Prometheus first left me with nothing coherent to say in the review. By the time we got to movies I thought I could talk about semi-intelligently, I'd racked up a backlog and, yeah,  Now we're watching two directors: Pedro Almodovar and Deepa Mehta. Current Director: Pedro Almodovar Progress: 1/32 [ I'm So Excited! | The Skin I Live In | Broken Embraces | The Cannibalistic Councillor (short) | Volver | Bad Education | Talk to Her | All About My Mother | Live Flesh | The Flower of My Secret | Kika | High Heels | Just watched: Átame (Tie Me Up! Tie Me Down!)  This movie makes no goddam sense. The plot synopsis from IMDB doesn't do the crazy here justice. Antonio Banderas is Ricky, who is let out of a mental institution (with curiously unlocked doors) at the beginning of the film, but not before he gets one more chance to roger the Director of the institute. He has a pile of cash and he's on his way, a free man. Very quickly he makes his way to the dressing room on the set of a randy old director's final movie. The old man's motorized wheelchair is worth a few laughs, his blatant sexual harassment of every woman on or near the set starts out creepy and weird, and just goes downhill from there. Ricky ransacks the dressing room, stealing the ex-porn star, ex-drug addict leading lady's (played by Victoria Abril and none of her clothes in more than one scene) housekeys among other loot. He follows her home, and proceeds to kidnap her in her own apartment. Various unbelievable adventures follow, and his cunning plan to make her fall in love with him actually works, somehow. Heroin and other drugs are involved, which I guess is supposed to explain her behaviour? Somehow? Stockholm syndrome is a thing, but this movie takes it to Overall Rating: 3/10 I might modify that after I've had a chance to think about it for a day or two. It's just too hosed up for a solid score.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2015 05:30
|
|
|
Director currently working on: Pedro Almodovar Progress: 1/32 [ I'm So Excited! | The Skin I Live In | Broken Embraces | The Cannibalistic Councillor (short) | Volver | Bad Education | Talk to Her | All About My Mother | Live Flesh | The Flower of My Secret | Kika | High Heels | Just watched: Atame (Tie me up, tie me down). What.The.poo poo. I'm reluctant to review this movie immediately after having just seen it, cause honestly I think I'm still in shock, but given that Execudork and I watched the entire repertoire of Ridley Scott for this thread and then NEVER POSTED A SINGLE REVIEW, I figure I should just get on with it and then retire to the corner to cry myself to sleep. This movie, Atame, is a bit of a cluster gently caress. According to IMDB, the synopsis is, "An unbalanced but alluring former mental patient takes a porn star prisoner in the hopes of convincing her to marry him." Violent psychotic Ricky (Antonio Banderas) is in no way alluring, but I suppose this synopsis gets it in a nutshell. The characters in this movie seem to be caricatures of themselves, which in of itself is interesting, but I'm struggling to understand the overall vision for this flick. The lead female character was indeed a former junkie porn star who has gotten clean and is trying to make it as an actress for an obsessive director who relaxes at home to her old porn vids. The movie-within-a-movie in which the ex-porn star, Marina, is starring, is a horror movie-cum-love story that *kind of* mirrors the mixture of love/horror in her personal life when Ricky attacks her and confines her to her apartment. Buuuuuut, in the movie-within-a-movie, the female lead dramatically strangles the crazed ex-lover while in Marina's reality Ricky holds her captive and claims that he'll make her love him, AND HE DOES. I would have preferred if Marina swung down from a balcony by a cord that wrapped around Ricky's alluring neck. I know myself enough to know that I am very turned off by the overly Stockholmy aspects of this movie, but even if I try to see through the uncomfortable violence into a movie trying to tell me a compelling story about the apathetic exploitation of women, I feel like I'm trying to see a movie that just isn't there. Maybe I'm missing something. Overall rating: 5/10 I've watched a couple of Almodovar's movies (Volver and Talk to Her) and I've had "All About My Mother" and "Woman on the Verge of a Nervous Breakdown" on my list of movies to see for a long time. I intend to re-watch the two movies I've seen as part of this project. Looking forward to more of the frenetic Almodovar style that I love. Execudork and I are tackling two directors at once, Pedro Almodovar and Deepa Mehta. Next up: Mehta's Midnight's Children Hypatias Homegirl fucked around with this message at 21:13 on Feb 8, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2015 05:49
|
|
|
I should get back in this thread, but I'd try to roll with the punches for Tie Me Up! Tie Me Down! It's good but not great Almodovar, but it's absurd and very much a comedy. And I think that's the key to the film, is that it's screwy and funny. In fact, there's times where he seems to be making something not unlike Hitchcock - exploring themes of gender, seduction, violence, crime - but also with a sly politically incorrect sense of humor. And then there's the Hermann-esque score and roof top chase (am I remembering that correctly? It's been a few years since I watched it). I don't know how familiar you are with Almodovar, but expect him to push sexual limits in a similar vein throughout the rest of his filmography. It's uncomfortable and challenging, but that's where the allure lies.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2015 06:17
|
|
|
Director currently working on: Deepa Mehta Progress: 1/14 At 99: A Portrait of Louise Tandy Murch | K.Y.T.E.S: How We Dream Ourselves | Martha, Ruth & Edie | Sam & Me | Camilla | Fire | Earth | Bollywood/Hollywood | The Republic of Love | Water | Let's Talk About It | Heaven on Earth | Just watched: Midnight's Children Based on the book by Salman Rushdie, Midnight's Children tells the story of a developing India through the lives of the mystical children who were born in the first hour of its nationhood. The cinematography is compelling and natural; as the story moves throughout the former British India Empire, the scenes and set composition convey the emotional landscape of the main characters and show the diversity of landscapes of the Indian continent. Mehta's movies make me long to visit the India of her movies; she makes mundane gestures and customs beautiful in their own right. I haven't read the book so I wasn't expecting the magical elements, but I loved that they were part of this historical story. I thought the Midnight's Children conferences were neatly and simply edited and I appreciated the way the powers were depicted; that they were shown as being truly magical AND possibly only a projection of the conjurer. Parvarti's magic in particular made me feel like she could either be making people disappear, or that through willful ignorance, her subjects were invisible to the searcher. The violence of the initial partitioning is left out of the story, on purpose, and this omission is addressed by the narrator, who says that it is another story that will not be told here. Mehta's Earth, by contrast, expressly addresses the violence of the partition, including the train massacres, and remains focused on the partition time itself. The pair of movies would be interesting to watch in succession, I think we'll watch Earth next for Mehta. I really enjoyed this movie. I'm biased by the fact that I'm drawn to movies about India's history, but even so, I thought this was a great movie and I'm looking forward to more from Mehta. Overall rating: 8/10 Next up: Almodovar's Bad Education Hypatias Homegirl fucked around with this message at 23:52 on Feb 8, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 22:27
|
|
|
Current Director: Deepa Mehta Progress: 1/14 [ Beeba Boys |  Just Watched (2 days ago): Midnight's Children I really enjoyed this movie. It's based on the book of the same name by Salman Rushdie, and he is the voice of the narrator throughout the film. It's the third quarter of the 20th century from the point of view of a man (Saleem Sinai, played as an adult by Satya Bhabha) born at the stroke of midnight on August 14, 1947, at exactly the same time India gained its independence. The next 30 years make up the story. It's a kind of grand tour of the sub-continent - not just India, but also Pakistan and Bangladesh - from the point of view of a person caught up by accident in great historical forces. He experiences major historical events the way most people probably do, without much in the way of control or comprehension and merely reacting to these events as they apply to him as an individual. As a result of being born at the same time as India, he has a magical power that manifests when he's 10 years old. He can summon visions of the voices in his head and talk to them. These people are the other children born within moments of midnight, Indian Independence Day, and are the Midnight's Children of the title. A bit of exposition by one of the other Midnight's Children explains to both the main character and to the audience that each of these 1001 children has a different power, and the strength of that power (though the film never tries to rank these powers) relates to how close to exactly midnight that person was born. There's a mini-tour of India in that scene, when young Saleem points at different spectral visions and says where they're from and what they can do - "You're from Goa and you can fly!" and so forth. The other key member of the MC is Shiva. Shiva was born at the same instant as Saleem, but a revolutionary nurse at the hospital switched them in their cribs at the hospital. As a result, Saleem grows up in a wealthy family, the son of a successful businessman, while Shiva is condemmed to a life of extreme poverty as the son of a widower street performer. There are a bunch of other details about these two boys and their provenances that relate to India's history in the 20th century; I suspect if I watched this movie a second time I'd pick out a few more. I found it a bit surprising that religion was relatively downplayed in this movie. Saleem's family is Muslim, but you almost never see anyone praying and there's only one scene involving a mosque - a long shot when Saleem first arrives in Delhi showing people leaving a large mosque that I gather is a significant architectural and cultural feature of the city; I never saw Saleem inside that mosque, or any other religious building. I say surprising because the major historical events of the movie were all heavily influenced by religion in reality, such as the partitioning of Pakistan and India, and the Emergency that sweeps up all of the MC. The cinematography is excellent throughout, with a range of different shot angles and setups that contribute to the feel of different scenes. Long shots with the foreground out of focus and a character silhoutted in a doorway, for example, happen a few times in the movie and seem to relate to the impending doom of that character. A visual metaphor for leaving this life, perhaps. Characters are generally well-developed, and we can see the motivations of most of the important people. It's fine storytelling, in other words. Overall, I rate it 8/10. Next up: Bad Education (Almodovar) TrixRabbi posted:I don't know how familiar you are with Almodovar, but expect him to push sexual limits in a similar vein throughout the rest of his filmography. It's uncomfortable and challenging, but that's where the allure lies. EDIT: Screwed up character names. ExecuDork fucked around with this message at 23:32 on Feb 8, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2015 22:54
|
|
|
Yeah...It's been a while Director Currently Working on: Emir Kusturica  Progress: 3/8 (I'm not doing his documentaries, TV movies or shorts) Do you Remember Dolly Bell (1981), Just Watched: When Father was Away on Business (1985) I normally link to the trailer but couldn't find one so take this intro scene instead https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4r-0KgfSDXk Malik is a young boy growing up under Titos Yugoslavan government in the early 50's. He is obsessed with football, sleepwalks and is just a little dim witted. His father is a businessman and womaniser. One of his many affairs involves the girlfriend of his secret police brother in law. When the brother in law finds out he arrests the father under the guise he didn't laugh at a political cartoon. As if a cartoon could ever cause so much trouble. Before he is sent away to a prison camp the dad lies to Malik and tells him instead that he is going away on business. Did that all sound confusing? It isn't when you watch the film I just suck at synopsis. It is essentially a slice of life film from the perspective of Malik and the movie is quite content to just float along and let the characters do their thing. In comparing this to Kusturica's other films I have seen so far you may notice several stylistic differences. If this is because as an early film of his he hadn't quite developed his unique look or whether it is a deliberate choice based on the repressive world the characters inhabit I'm a little unsure of. The use of music and its place in the daily lives of of the characters doesn't really come into play here. There are people who play music like Maliks older brother but its certainly not front and centre like in Black Cat. I suspect this is deliberate as in the opening scene the drunk only sings in Spanish as music and national/ethnic identity in this new world are so volatile it might get you killed. The other big difference is chaos. This film is considerably more subdued than his other two films seen so far. Having said all that there are a number of similarities. The actors for starters. Kusturica has a trusted group of actors he just has to use for all his films and is a delight to see them pop up. The film is wonderfully shot and you can tell he loves the characters even when they are despicable bastards at times. Its also bloody long for what it is and you could accuse it of being melodrama but I've come to expect that from this director and I don't really care. This film can be bleak at times, especially the last half hour or so. For some this could really annoy. There are some characters who we want to succeed or change but don't. Some even get worse. The last scene tries to leave on a high, somewhat whimsical note but its difficult to forget what we have just seen. I'm also a little unsure of who the target audience for this film is, or at least the target age. At times it seems for a younger audience but then...well I wont spoil. Do I recommend this film? Its not the best slice of life film I've ever seen and its not the best film from this director but it is watchable and the boy who plays Malik does a great job and is adorable. So yes, if you don't mind bleak slice of life films with a dash of humour then check this film out. Next Up: Underground Wrageowrapper fucked around with this message at 13:52 on Feb 21, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 13:49
|
|
|
Current Director: Pedro Almodovar Progress: 2/32 [ I'm So Excited! | The Skin I Live In | Broken Embraces | The Cannibalistic Councillor (short) | Volver | Just watched: Bad Education OK, not "Just watched", rather "Watched a couple of weeks ago but had life stuff get in the way of writing a review"  This is a very, very good movie. The cinematography was really excellent, with the use of light, colour, and camera angles integrated into the story. But what sets this movie apart is the storytelling. The story, a convoluted tale about a pair of men who were each other's first love in school (at around the age of 12), is told via a movie-within-the-movie, flashbacks, and well-constructed dialogue. The identities and personalities of major characters are hidden, with false leads presented to the audience and a series of gradual reveals throughout the entire story. It's masterfully done, I was completely engrosed in the story from the first scene. Absurd sexuality, which I'm thinking is a trademark of Almodovar, is a part of this movie but it's a very different kind of weirdness than Átame; deceit in the bedroom is again an important part, but it's not the sexy-Stockholm-syndrome of Átame, and instead is tied directly to the hidden and false identities of key characters. The story is very complex, and while most major themes and character identities are revealed by the final scene, at the very end there's is a series of text blocks that describe the fates of characters after the end of the film. This is a cliche, but Almodovar does it so well that it does not come across as at all trite or unnecessary. Overall Rating: 8/10 Next Up: Earth (Mehta)
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2015 01:34
|
|
|
It would be really awkward if you two broke up halfway through this
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 08:26
|
|
|
Current Director: Akira Kurosawa Progress: 30/30 [ Just watched: I finally got around to watching Madadayo, and I honestly don't know how to feel about it. It's well shot and has some funny moments, but it's also a really painful film and it's obvious Kurosawa was reflecting on his own mortality when he was making it. It wasn't a bad film, but it was far from his best - it definitely drags in parts and the segment about the lost cat has an incredibly rushed and unsatisfying conclusion. I found the final scene to be really heart-breaking, though, and you can tell Kurosawa was still pouring everything he had into his movies even as his body failed him. He actually wrote two more original screenplays after this film came out, but he died before they could be filmed. While this film feels like an underwhelming conclusion to such an amazing body of work, his skills as a cinematographer still shine through. The ending scene and credits might actually be the best part of this film - dream-like and beautiful, but also haunting and sad. I will also say that I loved how the main character talks about how others may think he's overly sentimental, but he doesn't care what they think - which is pretty much Kurosawa directly calling out the people who criticize his films for being too sentimental. Despite his best efforts and some gorgeous camera work and set design, it still fell a bit flat for me - mostly due to the pacing issues throughout (the first party scene just drags on forever). Not terrible, but certainly not peak Kurosawa. Overall rating: B Next up: I guess I have to pick a new director - probably someone with fewer than 30 films to their name this time. I'm currently leaning toward either Guillermo del Toro or John Milius.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2015 02:44
|
|
|
Wow I did another of these in less than a month! Director Currently Working on: Emir Kusturica Progress: 4/8 (I'm not doing his documentaries, TV movies or shorts) Do you Remember Dolly Bell (1981), Just Watched:Underground (1995) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iKdl5r7_ZPc Just watch that trailer and tell me you aren't even just a little bit interested in it. Essentially the movie is about Blacky, who has just joined the communist party in the early 1940s, and the people that make up Blackys life such as his aloof friend Marko and the zoo keeper Ivan, his wife and his mistress. Before long the city of Belgrade is bombed by the Nazis and Blacky comes up with the idea of sending his family and friends into an underground shelter. There society continues on in miniature. The film opens in 1941 in Yugoslavia and we meet up with the characters several times before the films ending in 1992. People live, people die, there is much craziness and fun music, the end. Much like most of Kusturica's movies this a slightly surreal slice of life film. It is also his most chaotic. Blacky in particular is quite manic and great fun to behold even if the guy is kind of a dick to everyone in his life. As I have said before this director just has a knack for capturing chaotic scenes so well. The film is very well shot and of course the music helps with this immensely. And speaking of the music it is, as always, fantastic. I just love how in his movies the music isn't always simply a soundtrack but an actual band instead. It just reinforces how important music is to his subjects lives. Nerd alert: if you have ever played Ravin' Rabbids Go Home you will recognise alot of the tracks. I normally complain about the length of this guys movies but its not a huge problem here. The theatrical release of this film runs for a comfortable 2 1/2 hours. Kusturica wanted the film to run for over 5 hours. This is why the world needs producers. What I will complain about however, or rather warn others, is the depiction of animal cruelty. The bombing raid at the beginning of the film is mostly from the perspective of the zoo keeper while he is at work and its quite distressing. The first time I tried to watch this film I had to turn it off. Now I have researched this particular scene a little bit and I couldn't get any straight answers over whether or not some animals were actually killed for this scene but some of it does look real and the same director has sacrificed animals for his movies before (see the next review for more) so I don't know. Viewer discretion I suppose. But if you can move passed that like I eventually did you will find a thoroughly enjoyable film. Should you watch this film? Yes, watch this film. Even if you have to stop the movie after the bombing raid just go take a walk for a while then come back to it. It is worth it. Next Up: Life is a Miracle Wrageowrapper fucked around with this message at 05:32 on Mar 17, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2015 04:39
|
|
|
FLEXBONER posted:Current Director: Akira Kurosawa So now that you've finished his catalog, how do you feel about him as a filmmaker? What are his highs and lows (haha)? Any underappreciated gems that stick out to you? And what do you think you gleaned from watching all of these? I love Kurosawa, but I have not come close to completion yet.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2015 05:07
|
|
|
Ratedargh posted:So now that you've finished his catalog, how do you feel about him as a filmmaker? What are his highs and lows (haha)? Any underappreciated gems that stick out to you? And what do you think you gleaned from watching all of these? I love Kurosawa, but I have not come close to completion yet. I think my favorite films of his that I'd never heard of before were: - Sanjurō, the sequel to Yojimbo. Everyone knows the latter, but I never even knew there WAS a sequel. It has a lighter tone and is kind of an action-comedy, but it also treats the subject of a lone swordsman whose seen a lot of senseless violence with appropriate seriousness. - Stray Dog. Decent crime drama with a lot of great motion shots and scene transitions. It was fun to see Kurosawa go all out with different types of shots to show movement, the passage of time, etc. - Dersu Uzala. I liked how nuanced and subtle the messages of this film were. Kurosawa can get a little heavy-handed and sentimental somtimes, but this is a film that presents a lot of ideas without ever feeling like they're being shoved down your throat. - Ikiru. apparently a lot of other people have heard of this film, but I hadn't when I started this project. The sound design - the cadence of dialog, music, and silences - is pure perfection, and it is one of the most beautifully bittersweet films I've ever seen. - The Hidden Fortress. Not unknown, but pretty underrated I think. Every director of the past 50 years who's made an action/adventure film has probably cribbed something from this film. I think it's pretty well known that Star Wars draws on this film VERY heavily. As a director, I think Kurosawa's biggest strengths were sound design and cinematography. His best shots are often pauses in the action, or transition scenes, but he also knew how to shoot action scenes and dialog. He uses camera angles and framing to create emotions without the need for any extra exposition. However, sometimes, I think he got in his own way and added MORE dialog or explanation than was needed for a given scene. And, occasionally, his films get a little too melodramatic and sappy for my taste. This is not to take anything away from the man - almost all of his films are far above-average in terms of execution and entertainment value, but occasionally these flaws make some of his movies merely good or decent when they could've been GREAT. I think the most fun thing about this project was, going in (almost) chronological order, you could see him trying out different techniques in each film, then slowly incorporating the ones he liked into his general style and carefully improving them. Even his worst films (except The Most Beautiful, which you should avoid like the plague) there are a few scenes that will capture your attention and leave you appreciating his skill as a director.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 02:40
|
|
|
 Current Director: Alfred Hitchcock Films Completed: 37/56 Just Watched: Champagne Goddammit I will finish what I started! Unfortunately I'm returning to the thread with a dud. Champagne is another early British feature that feels like a paycheck job. It's a romantic comedy about a young heiress who, after crash landing her father's personal plane in the middle of the ocean in an attempt to board a cruise ship, is told that the family is flat broke. This is all a ruse by her father of course - a lie meant to punish her for taking their wealth for granted. Along the way, the heiress goes through a relationship struggle with her boyfriend, whom the father accuses of being a gold digger. There's some inspired shots here. There's an opening montage of champagne bottles, topped off by a view from inside a glass that looks rather snazzy. The cruise ship sequences feature some lavish sets and a shaky, rocking boat that makes some character close-ups feel like an early attempt at that famous shot of Cary Grant in Notorious (you know the one). Quick moments of great editing, like a flash of white dissolving to a moving train. Dizzy dream sequences. But unfortunately these moments are few and far between. After the great opening with the plane landing in the ocean, it's a bland, cliched comedy of manners with lame jokes. While I wouldn't recommend to film to anyone, other than those fellow Hitchcock completists who are obligated to finish it, I would still give it another shot if I got to see it in a theater. I watched on Youtube, with poor picture quality. There was no soundtrack so for half the film I watched it completely silent, until it became too much and I put on a Bonobo album just to add some atmosphere (this of course skewed my perception of the latter half as a bit trippier than it would be with a classical score). I imagine this could be more fun with a crisp image, live pianist, and an audience to share the experience with. But on my own streaming at low-end 480p, it's a struggle to get through.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 02:21
|
|
|
Nah, a soundtrack wouldn't save Champagne from being fairly boring overall. I finished off Hitchcock's filmography last Summer, and truthfully quite a few of the films you have left are very similar in how good they are(n't). You still have some gems left to watch though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 03:21
|
|
|
Raxivace posted:Nah, a soundtrack wouldn't save Champagne from being fairly boring overall. Yeah, I want to power through the rest of that early batch if I can and save the best for later. If I watch Foreign Correspondent, Marnie, Lifeboat, etc. now then I'll be completely uninterested in finishing. In general I regret choosing Hitchcock because he's really not someone you need to see everything by. The bulk of his films are phenomenal, but the bad nulls you.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 03:31
|
|
|
Personally I feel that while Family Plot is not a masterpiece or anything like that, it is a fun enough note to end Hitch's filmography on. Someone once described it the being the final pencil sketch of a master painter. Plus, Bruce Dern is one of the leads in it. I know what you mean though. The last film I watched was Jamaica Inn which is not only a disappointing end to the British period (Ignoring Frenzy years later), but also somehow a fairly dull film despite starring Maureen O'Hara and Charles Laughton. Some of the less popular films are still worth watching though. Foreign Correspondent is just as good as any of the other "man on the run films" (I think I might even prefer it to North by Northwest, but not The 39 Steps), and Young & Innocent has a really cool tracking shot in it that totally makes the movie worth watching (Though there is a...questionable component to it, as you'll see). It's really only the silent period minus The Lodger that I find mostly pretty bad, and about half of the 30's output. From the 40's on there's a much higher quality to crap ration.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 03:46
|
|
|
Raxivace posted:
Regarding the pre- and post-1940 divide, I think the weak post-1940 stuff is preferable to the weak pre- movies. I'd rate "Paradine Case" and "Mr. and Mrs. Smith" as "meh." But "Number 17" is nothing but a godawful mess. Even so, "The 39 Steps" is magnificent, as is "The Lady Vanishes."
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 04:05
|
|
|
I don't know, I liked the haunted house vibe Number 17 had going. I think that's a movie though that would be appreciated slightly more if any prints of it were actually audible. Still, I agree that the 40's clunkers are a little better than the 30's ones at least. The Paradine Case has a proto-Vertigo thing going for example that's kind of neat.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 04:46
|
|
|
As far as his weaker 40s films go (of which there aren't many), even stuff like Aventure malgache has shots like this:
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 05:11
|
|
|
Raxivace posted:I don't know, I liked the haunted house vibe Number 17 had going. I think that's a movie though that would be appreciated slightly more if any prints of it were actually audible. I think it's possible to find something to like in all of Hitchcock's movies, and with that point of view, the haunted house vibe is probably the way to approach "Number 17." My "godawful mess" opinion is based mainly on the story, such as it is—I'm willing to forgive a lot of technical flaws and shortcomings. Better audio would definitely make this one a lot easier to watch, but I'm not sure that it would be of any help in appreciating the story. I have a DVD, which I watched once, years ago, and I haven't felt motivated to go back to it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 14:15
|
|
|
Current Director: Alfred Hitchcock Films Completed: 38/56 Just Watched: Rich and Strange Apparently Rich and Strange has it's fans (They Shoot Pictures, Don't They lists it as Recommended. Although they also list The Trouble With Harry as Approach with Caution). But despite a strong, King Vidor-lite opening through the sad life of an everyman, the story quickly unravels into a mess. It remains mostly uninteresting until the third act when it turns out the princess was a fraud who took Fred for their money. I liked the scene where Fred freaks out in the hotel room. It added some much needed life to the movie. The ship sinking sequence towards the end also started out strong. It was done effectively, and the abandoned ship scene had a nice eerie vibe to it. The scene where they let the dangling man drown was fascinating, and a harsh turn for what was a fairly goofy movie before. In general I like the look of the movie, but there's no feel. It's slow and plodding but the characters feel dead and uninteresting half the time. I don't even know what was up with that girl with the glasses.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 15:36
|
|
|
Director Currently Working on: Emir Kusturica Progress: 5/8 (I'm not doing his documentaries, TV movies or shorts) Do you Remember Dolly Bell (1981), Just Watched: Life is a Miracle (2004) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=03-0QG4_pAU It's 1992 and civil war is just around the corner in Yugoslavia. Luka is Serbian but lives in a remote part of Bosnia. He is trying to rebuild the train line between the two troubled regions. His wife is a little insane and hates Luka for moving away from the city where she worked as an opera singer. They stick with the troubled relationship until the day their son Milos is conscripted into the Serbian army. Then the war begins, the wife runs away and Milos is taken prisoner. Some hope arrives for Luka in the form of Sabaha, a Bosnian nurse recently taken prisoner by the Serbs who plan to use her to get Milos back in a prisoner exchange. In true Kusurica plotting this major point doesn't happen until about half way through the movie. This film has a very Wes Anderson vibe to it. In many ways Kusturica is the Serbian Wes Anderson, or maybe Wes Anderson is the American Kusturica. Either way this a charming film with a few distressing elements thrown in. Lukas almost schitzophrenic relationship with the women in his life could easily distance people from this film. As I alluded to in Underground there is some animal cruelty in this film so be warned. It certainly caused some controversy when it was released and unlike in Underground it isn't that it just looks real it is. When a swan gets eaten by a hawk its real, when another bird gets grabbed by a cat its real as well. Small little parts of the film but they are there. But looking past that there are some beautiful nuggets. I wont spoil what the postman finds at the station masters house the beginning of the film but it really set the tone for the kind of humour to expect for the rest of it. And even with the language divide and the subject matter it is a very funny film. Kusturica has been criticised in the past for taking a more pro Serbian view on the various conflicts of the region and though I'm not sure if those claims are justified or not you can see this film as a sort of sorry note. Its not dumped on heavy and I didn't find it overly melodramatic either. Do I even need to mention the music at this point. Of course its good. So should you watch Life is a Miracle? Yes you should. Next Up: Do You Remember Dolly Bell
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 03:15
|
|
|
I've been doing this for John Waters and it's been an awesome experience. For his early movies like Pink Flamingos and Desperate Living, I enjoyed the commentary more than the movies themselves. Which isn't to say that I didn't enjoy the movies, I just found the commentary to be extremely engaging because I could listen to John Waters talk about anything. I really enjoyed his early movies but not necessarily on a humor level. I'm not really sure how to describe how I felt about them. My favorite of his earlier films was Female Trouble. Pink Flamingos has its moments and Desperate living does too, but I enjoyed Female Trouble much more because it's less screamy and hateful and more obviously humorous. I really like his later work. Cecil B. Demented and Pecker are two movies I watched repeatedly because they're wonderful. Pecker is both heartwarming and slightly obscene. Cecil B. Demented is a great commentary on both Hollywood and anti-Hollywood art, with a really awesome performance by Melanie Griffith. I don't care what anyone says about her performance, it was perfect. His mid movies like Hairspray, Polyester are also wonderful. Hairspray is kind of a classic in my eyes. It's about a really important time in our culture but that's the backbone of the story, not the only reason to watch it. I adore the costumes, the sets, the music. Just about everything. On the other hand, I absolutely hated A Dirty Shame. Every artist has a dud now and then and A Dirty Shame was a big dud. It looked ugly, the suspension of disbelief it required was too much because the movie itself wasn't enjoyable and the plot just didn't do anything. I seriously hate that movie. It's a real shame that such a turd is the last movie he's made so far because he's not getting any younger. Someone needs to give him a few million dollars! juniperjones fucked around with this message at 19:48 on Jul 2, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2015 19:46
|
|
|
Director currently working on: Neil Breen Progress: 2/3 Next up: Fateful Findings I finally get to watch Fateful Findings tomorrow. Something tells me it can't be as horribly boring as Double Down, or as incompetently insane as I Am Here....Now, but then again, this is Neil Breen we are talking about. I hope I come out of this alive...
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2015 12:36
|
|
|
juniperjones posted:I've been doing this for John Waters and it's been an awesome experience. For his early movies like Pink Flamingos and Desperate Living, I enjoyed the commentary more than the movies themselves. Which isn't to say that I didn't enjoy the movies, I just found the commentary to be extremely engaging because I could listen to John Waters talk about anything. I really enjoyed his early movies but not necessarily on a humor level. I'm not really sure how to describe how I felt about them. My favorite of his earlier films was Female Trouble. Pink Flamingos has its moments and Desperate living does too, but I enjoyed Female Trouble much more because it's less screamy and hateful and more obviously humorous. He's been trying to get funding for a family Christmas movie called "Fruitcake" for years. He had it locked down and then the recession hit in 2008 and it all fell through. Now no one will give him enough to make what he wants to make. He says he only needs $5 million, but these days no one wants to fund more than $2 million. Polyester is way underrated and people don't talk about it enough. It's where Divine really got to stretch his legs as an actor and I really enjoy the absurdity of it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2015 14:03
|
|
|
2DCAT posted:Director currently working on: Neil Breen What even is this... what wonderful world of non-ironic bad cinema have you opened up here?
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2015 23:02
|
|
|
SaviourX posted:What even is this... what wonderful world of non-ironic bad cinema have you opened up here? It is so epically amazing. As someone experienced in film, it is so awesome to watch someone sit there and film three movies and do almost everything completely the wrong way. I'd love to do a write-up/review of these movies of his, but it's impossible. One must physically experience Neil Breen to understand his amazingness: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MBJp4PzypNk
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 00:06
|
|
|
Egbert Souse posted:Please add The Battle of San Pietro to your list. It's another of Huston's war documentaries and fantastic. Yeah, it's a hard one to find but I added it to the list. Thanks. Director: John Huston Progress: 24/38 Just watched: The MacKintosh Man Next up: The Bible The MacKintosh Man This is a atypical espionage movie that John Huston apologizes for in his biography. Paul Newman is a British, I think, spy. There are two really things I did really like about this film - the first is the set-up - keeping you in the dark for the first act. Once you figure out what is going on, however, the whole film is really predictable. The other is the female roles in the film. Maybe I read too much into it, but it seemed like a comment on the awful misogyny of James Bond films. They set all the female up to be objects only to have them be the most violent characters in the film. Everyone stated that Huston wasn't really "into" this film - showed up late and didn't really seem excited by the whole process. You can feel that throughout the film, which is a shame because it could have been a really neat twist on spy films. EDIT: I was able to find The Battle of San Pietro and, at the same time, read about the making of the film in John Huston's Autobiography. (Which I highly recommend, if even just for the section about his fist fight with Errol Flynn). The film is really intense. They shot a documentary about The Battle of San Pietro at San Pietro just after the battle happened. The footage of the battle is reenacted but the dead bodies and bombings are real. Obviously the War Department banned the film, stating that it was anti-war. Huston replied, "If I ever made a picture that was pro-war, I hoped someone would take me out and shoot me." Huston wanted to have a cut of the film where the interviews with the soldiers talking about what they were going to do after the war played over images of their dead bodies. The actual film about the strategy for the battle kinda sounds like someone reciting moves in Chess with a map and pointer reciting the activity - like a power-point presentation. That isn't all that good but the realism of the war footage is like something I have never seen. You can feel the cameraman's fear in the piece; at times literally dropping the camera. So for a documentation of the horrors of war, this is a great piece, but as a narrative short film it struggles. Must See: The Dead, Prizzi's Honor, Wise Blood, The Man Who Would Be King, Fat City, Moulin Rouge, The Treasure of Sierra Madre, The Maltese Falcon, Let There Be Light, Reflections in a Golden Eye See: The Life & Times of Judge Roy Bean, The Misfits, The African Queen, The Asphalt Jungle, Key Largo, The Red Badge of Courage, Night of the Iguana, Freud, The Battle of San Pietro Don't Have To See: Annie, Victory, Heaven Knows, Mr. Allison, Moby Dick, Beat the Devil, The MacKintosh Man Seen: York_M_Chan fucked around with this message at 15:55 on Aug 13, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2015 15:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 3, 2024 11:15 |
|
|
Current Director: Alfred Hitchcock Films Completed: 41/56 Just Watched: To Catch a Thief, Lifeboat, Foreign Correspondent Hey, y'all remember this thread? Four years after starting this and I'm not giving up (even if I suck at dedicating myself to finishing a list of movies). I knocked off three of the bigger Hitchcocks I hadn't seen over the past week and they range from middling to excellent. First up was To Catch a Thief, which is easily the weakest film from Hitch's otherwise impeccable 50's (Man Who Knew too Much is the only other weak link that decade, everything else ranges from great to masterpiece). This actually marks the first complete decade of his career I've finished as well! But unfortunately it's a slow one with low stakes and a bit of a drowsiness to it. Cary Grant as a Frenchman is lame and laughable even by old Hollywood standards and no one really seems to be on their A-Game. The one real boon though is the color, it's a very vibrant looking movie, especially with the masquerade ball at the end. Of course, it doesn't even hold up to the foliage of The Trouble With Harry that came out the next year. The one real standout scene is the romantic fireworks in the middle of the movie. The editing there is top notch and ranks with some of Hitchcock's finest sequences. Shame it's in the middle of an otherwise forgettable flick. Next up I watched a much more memorable film, and one of his most fascinating imo, Lifeboat. A tight survival story set entirely on a single lifeboat that becomes as desperate as the war itself. A group of allies find themselves shipwrecked after a German U-Boat open fires, and the last man on the boat is none other than a member of the U-Boat. Calls for mercy and humility are turned on their head as the crew decides against throwing him overboard, a decision that will let the man get the better of them and reign over them like a jovial, yet deceptively vicious avatar of Hitler. Benevolent only because he knows he has them under his thumb. The moral is you can't trust a German, one of several Hitchcock propaganda pieces during World War II. But even with the political overtones, the story is still one of suspense and human resilience. The cast becomes more haggard and delirious as they starve and dehydrate. A gangrenous leg serves as one of Hitchcock's more visceral plot points (even when you never see it) and we get a wonderful and diverse bunch of characters, all of whom are acted marvelously. Finally, I watched another World War II propaganda piece, Foreign Correspondent. Made four years before Lifeboat, it plays much more like Saboteur. Globetrotting spy adventures full of plot twists, big set pieces and your classic suspense tropes. As a journalist, watching movies like this one is akin to Nick Frost in Hot Fuzz watching Bad Boys II and Point Break. It's absurd, over-the-top, but a fun fantasy. The plane crash at the end is phenomenal and an amazing display of 40's special effects. I prefer the European paranoia of Fritz Lang's World War II movies, like Ministry of Fear, but this is fun a uniquely Hitchcock adventure style. TrixRabbi fucked around with this message at 19:30 on Jul 1, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 19:20
|
|