Discussion of movies and ReelThoughts topics

It is currently Sat Dec 20, 2014 9:09 am




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 16791 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 245, 246, 247, 248, 249, 250, 251 ... 840  Next
Last Movie You Watched 
Author Message
Assistant Director
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2009 1:56 pm
Posts: 906
Location: Warner Robins, GA
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
Naqoyqatsi - the last of the Qatsi trilogy, it was a real let down after Koyaanisqatsi and Powaqatsi. I know what the filmmakers were going for, but I don't want to see computer graphics and dollar signs over and over again. It just seemed like they didn't know what to do and put up flashy images to make up for lack of imagination.

Watchmen - just a brilliant film with a very good ending; Jackie Earle Haley was awesome as Rorschach


Thu Aug 19, 2010 1:34 am
Profile
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
City Heat

Clint Eastwood as a prohibition era cop in 1930ies Kansas City teams up with Burt Reynolds as a gumshoe to take on the mob in this painfully unfunny buddy comedy. The only notable thing about this movie is the villains' - even by movie standards - stupefying inability to hit targets with Tommy guns. 3/10

The Fall of the Roman Empire

Anthony Mann's sword and sandal movie is one of the lesser known epics of the 1960ies and not on the level of Ben-Hur or Spartacus. Nevertheless, it delivers when it comes to spectacle and action - there are at least two major battles - one against Germanic barbarians, another one against Persians -, mass scenes including a triumph, a parade, public executions and debates of the senate and The Fall of the Roman Empire also features the second-best chariot race in movie history. The scale of the production with a cast of literally thousands and massive sets is truly impressive and makes for spectacular cinema. Unfortunately, the movie drags at three hours running time, some of the dialogue is ridiculously bad and the acting by the principal actors Stephen Boyd and Sophia Loren is amatuerish.

The story: Roman Emperor Marcus Aurelius (Alec Guiness) is at the northern frontier of the Empire at war with Germanic tribes. His vision for the future is a peaceful coexistence, but he dies before he can make the necessary arrangements and enthrone his trusted general Livius (Stephen Boyd, wooden like an Ikea shelf) as his successor. When his cruel and megalomaniac son Commodus (a gloriously averacting Christopher Plummer) becomes emperor, the empire soon is on the verge of civil war with Livius torn between loyalty to the emperor Commodus and love for Commodus' rebellious sister Lucilla (Sophia Loren). Sounds familiar, doesn't it? Ridley Scott's Gladiator is effectively a remake of this movie (plus some Spartacus thrown in). Overall, The Fall of the Roman Empire is worth watching despite of its numerous faults: 6/10

Crimes and Misdemeanours

On the surface, Woody Allen's 1989 movie is about two parallel stories of adultery: Martin Landau plays a successful eye surgeon whose mistress (Anjelica Huston) threatens to reveal their affair and to contact his wife. So he contemplates having her murdered. Woody Allen plays an unsuccessful director of documentaries who is hired by his successful brother-in-law, Alan Alda as a full-of-himself TV producer, while wooing Alda's characters production assistant (Mia Farrow). It's a typcal movie in Woody Allen's signature style about upper class New Yorkers. But Crimes and Misdemeanors is also a movie about the nature of success, love and happiness, cinema vs. reality and the existence of god and morality. Intelligent, funny, well acted and with great cinematography, this is one of Allen's best movies: 8/10


Thu Aug 19, 2010 5:30 am
Critic
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 9:35 am
Posts: 6483
Location: Easton, MD
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
DylnFan96818 wrote:
Naqoyqatsi - the last of the Qatsi trilogy, it was a real let down after Koyaanisqatsi and Powaqatsi. I know what the filmmakers were going for, but I don't want to see computer graphics and dollar signs over and over again. It just seemed like they didn't know what to do and put up flashy images to make up for lack of imagination.


Does anyone else feel that Dylan just completely made up all those words? :)

_________________
I'm lithe and fierce as a tiger


Thu Aug 19, 2010 11:26 am
Profile
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
Synecdoche, New York

Ummm, yeah, I'm not really sure where to start. Or end. As those who've seen it know, this is one of the most challenging movies you'll ever come across. And one of the most ambititious. Some have called it too ambititious, pretentious, deliberately confusing, and incomprehensible. I don't agree, but I can see people having that reaction. The film is unbelievably dense and difficult. I can't imagine anyone "getting" the whole thing after only one viewing. There's just too much to comprehend.

I was incredibly depressed by the movie, especially by these few lines of dialogue:

[Reveal] Spoiler:
What was once before you - an exciting, mysterious future - is now behind you. Lived; understood; disappointing. You realize you are not special. You have struggled into existence, and are now slipping silently out of it. This is everyone's experience. Every single one. The specifics hardly matter. Everyone's everyone. So you are Adele, Hazel, Claire, Olive. You are Ellen. All her meager sadnesses are yours; all her loneliness; the gray, straw-like hair; her red raw hands. It's yours. It is time for you to understand this.


And really, that's the movie. The literary term synecdoche (a play on the town name Schenactady, New York) is where the part represents the whole. That's how Caden Cotard functions in the film. He's himself, sure, but he's also everyone else. As the movie says, everyone is everyone and the specifics hardly matter. The quandry of existence is universal. Kaufman uses metaphors upon metaphors upon metaphors to explore that concept.

On another level the film is about an artist's struggle to bring truth to his work. It's an impossibility because people see themselves how they see themselves, not how they are. We lie to ourselves daily about all kinds of things. The movie does a great job of this by
[Reveal] Spoiler:
introducing Paul as a real person late in the film. We're led to believe his daughter had been brainwashed into believing he left because he was gay. By introducing Paul as real, we question that. Did Caden leave his family for another man? It would make sense because Adele and Maria end up being a projection of his own guilt in that scenario. They were the ones who broke up the family and ruined the child's life. Who knows if it's true or not, though.


I have no idea if I like the movie or not. No fucking clue. I just know that if affected on a deep, personal level. It's emotional to the point that I'm not sure I can rate it. I also can't really decide if it was well made or not because my initial reaction was purely so emotional. That's a great quality for a movie to have. I probably love the movie, but I need to see it more. It's certainly one of the most ambititious films I've seen, and that's always, always, always a positive.


Thu Aug 19, 2010 11:39 am
Director
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 20, 2010 4:04 pm
Posts: 1798
Location: New Hampshire
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
Last watched: The Bad Sleep Well.

Kurosawa channels Shakespeare and comes up with...an unfortunately mediocre film. The story is simple - a young man worms his way into a corporation to avenge the death of his father. But the story isn't told in a terribly interesting way, and the film is way too long for such a simple story (two and a half hours).

What carries The Bad Sleep Well is Kurosawa's technique. The man was simply a master behind the camera, and this film contains some incredible cinematography and masterful direction. It's a shame it's in the service of a sub-par story. In the hands of a lesser filmmaker, The Bad Sleep Well probably would have been a disaster, but in Kurosawa's hands it's watchable, but not top-shelf Kurosawa. For a great Kurosawa-Shakespeare adaptation, check out Ran.

_________________
Death is pretty final
I'm collecting vinyl
I'm gonna DJ at the end of the world.


Thu Aug 19, 2010 12:45 pm
Profile
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
Sexual Chocolate wrote:
For a great Kurosawa-Shakespeare adaptation, check out Ran.



And Throne of Blood.

And Throne of Blood!

And Throne of Blood!!!!!!!!!


Thu Aug 19, 2010 12:58 pm
Critic
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 9:35 am
Posts: 6483
Location: Easton, MD
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
Sexual Chocolate wrote:
Last watched: The Bad Sleep Well.

Kurosawa channels Shakespeare and comes up with...an unfortunately mediocre film. The story is simple - a young man worms his way into a corporation to avenge the death of his father. But the story isn't told in a terribly interesting way, and the film is way too long for such a simple story (two and a half hours).

What carries The Bad Sleep Well is Kurosawa's technique. The man was simply a master behind the camera, and this film contains some incredible cinematography and masterful direction. It's a shame it's in the service of a sub-par story. In the hands of a lesser filmmaker, The Bad Sleep Well probably would have been a disaster, but in Kurosawa's hands it's watchable, but not top-shelf Kurosawa. For a great Kurosawa-Shakespeare adaptation, check out Ran.


Ran is so overrated. Half-ass King Lear plot grafted onto a Japanese feudal legend. Decent film, but hardly great

_________________
I'm lithe and fierce as a tiger


Thu Aug 19, 2010 3:07 pm
Profile
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
JamesKunz wrote:
Ran is so overrated. Half-ass King Lear plot grafted onto a Japanese feudal legend. Decent film, but hardly great

Burn in hell, heretic. It isn't just great, it's the best Shakespeare adaptation ever. EVER.


Thu Aug 19, 2010 3:10 pm
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
PeachyPete wrote:
Synecdoche, New York

Ummm, yeah, I'm not really sure where to start. Or end. As those who've seen it know, this is one of the most challenging movies you'll ever come across. And one of the most ambititious. Some have called it too ambititious, pretentious, deliberately confusing, and incomprehensible. I don't agree, but I can see people having that reaction. The film is unbelievably dense and difficult. I can't imagine anyone "getting" the whole thing after only one viewing. There's just too much to comprehend.

I was incredibly depressed by the movie, especially by these few lines of dialogue:

[Reveal] Spoiler:
What was once before you - an exciting, mysterious future - is now behind you. Lived; understood; disappointing. You realize you are not special. You have struggled into existence, and are now slipping silently out of it. This is everyone's experience. Every single one. The specifics hardly matter. Everyone's everyone. So you are Adele, Hazel, Claire, Olive. You are Ellen. All her meager sadnesses are yours; all her loneliness; the gray, straw-like hair; her red raw hands. It's yours. It is time for you to understand this.


And really, that's the movie. The literary term synecdoche (a play on the town name Schenactady, New York) is where the part represents the whole. That's how Caden Cotard functions in the film. He's himself, sure, but he's also everyone else. As the movie says, everyone is everyone and the specifics hardly matter. The quandry of existence is universal. Kaufman uses metaphors upon metaphors upon metaphors to explore that concept.

On another level the film is about an artist's struggle to bring truth to his work. It's an impossibility because people see themselves how they see themselves, not how they are. We lie to ourselves daily about all kinds of things. The movie does a great job of this by
[Reveal] Spoiler:
introducing Paul as a real person late in the film. We're led to believe his daughter had been brainwashed into believing he left because he was gay. By introducing Paul as real, we question that. Did Caden leave his family for another man? It would make sense because Adele and Maria end up being a projection of his own guilt in that scenario. They were the ones who broke up the family and ruined the child's life. Who knows if it's true or not, though.


I have no idea if I like the movie or not. No fucking clue. I just know that if affected on a deep, personal level. It's emotional to the point that I'm not sure I can rate it. I also can't really decide if it was well made or not because my initial reaction was purely so emotional. That's a great quality for a movie to have. I probably love the movie, but I need to see it more. It's certainly one of the most ambititious films I've seen, and that's always, always, always a positive.


You know what they say about great minds? Good. Cause I can't recall.

If you're ever on my facebook profile have a look at the quotations sections (you know, that section that you love so dearly) and you'll notice your spoiler quote.

It's a powerful quote from a very powerful film. Ideally, the movie deserves several rewatches, but that first viewing crushed me completely. I was in a weird funk for almost two weeks.

I'd add more, but I don't know what else to say. Your thoughts perfectly sum up the film for me. If anyone is on the fence, see it. It's completely depressing, but it's the kind of depression you need to experience. Something like that at least.

Again: fantastic job Pete. Fuck everybody. Amen.


Thu Aug 19, 2010 4:24 pm
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
PeachyPete wrote:
Synecdoche, New York

Ummm, yeah, I'm not really sure where to start. Or end. As those who've seen it know, this is one of the most challenging movies you'll ever come across. And one of the most ambititious. Some have called it too ambititious, pretentious, deliberately confusing, and incomprehensible. I don't agree, but I can see people having that reaction. The film is unbelievably dense and difficult. I can't imagine anyone "getting" the whole thing after only one viewing. There's just too much to comprehend.

I was incredibly depressed by the movie, especially by these few lines of dialogue:

[Reveal] Spoiler:
What was once before you - an exciting, mysterious future - is now behind you. Lived; understood; disappointing. You realize you are not special. You have struggled into existence, and are now slipping silently out of it. This is everyone's experience. Every single one. The specifics hardly matter. Everyone's everyone. So you are Adele, Hazel, Claire, Olive. You are Ellen. All her meager sadnesses are yours; all her loneliness; the gray, straw-like hair; her red raw hands. It's yours. It is time for you to understand this.


And really, that's the movie. The literary term synecdoche (a play on the town name Schenactady, New York) is where the part represents the whole. That's how Caden Cotard functions in the film. He's himself, sure, but he's also everyone else. As the movie says, everyone is everyone and the specifics hardly matter. The quandry of existence is universal. Kaufman uses metaphors upon metaphors upon metaphors to explore that concept.

On another level the film is about an artist's struggle to bring truth to his work. It's an impossibility because people see themselves how they see themselves, not how they are. We lie to ourselves daily about all kinds of things. The movie does a great job of this by
[Reveal] Spoiler:
introducing Paul as a real person late in the film. We're led to believe his daughter had been brainwashed into believing he left because he was gay. By introducing Paul as real, we question that. Did Caden leave his family for another man? It would make sense because Adele and Maria end up being a projection of his own guilt in that scenario. They were the ones who broke up the family and ruined the child's life. Who knows if it's true or not, though.


I have no idea if I like the movie or not. No fucking clue. I just know that if affected on a deep, personal level. It's emotional to the point that I'm not sure I can rate it. I also can't really decide if it was well made or not because my initial reaction was purely so emotional. That's a great quality for a movie to have. I probably love the movie, but I need to see it more. It's certainly one of the most ambititious films I've seen, and that's always, always, always a positive.


The only time I tried watching this I gave up after an hour. Perhaps I need to go back and try it again. I wasn't connecting with anything Kaufman was trying to say because none of the characters inhabit anything close to the real world. So for now put me in the "horribly pretentious depressing nonsense" camp, but your write-up has provoked me to give it another go.


Thu Aug 19, 2010 4:43 pm
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
You mothers did it again...


Thu Aug 19, 2010 5:40 pm
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
JamesKunz wrote:
Ran is so overrated. Half-ass King Lear plot grafted onto a Japanese feudal legend. Decent film, but hardly great


GASP, somebody agrees with me on Ran. Except you still kinda like it Kunzie but I don't care, I wuv you!


Thu Aug 19, 2010 7:06 pm
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
Been on a binge over the past 3 days

"Umberto D" sits at about 125 on the list of the top 1000. It was made in 1952 by Vittoria De Sica. If you liked his more well known "Bicycle Thief" you're in for another treat here. Umberto is a pensioner who spends his days doing little and has hit on hard times. He is behind on his rent and his landlady is renting out his room to couples for mid afternoon sex. He is on the verge of becoming homeless and can hardly afford to feed his lovely little dog.
The film slowly uncovers the character and the tragedy that is Umberto. As the viewer your emotions are steadily tugged as are steadily pulled upon as you empathize with his plight.
Despite being nearly 60 years old, the film is more relevant today than ever. In our modern world of fast cuts, canned dialogue, here is a wondrous glimpse into the way that films used to be made by directors who had the confidence to move slowly and trust their audience to go with them. 9/10.

"Gertrud" makes me wonder if Carl Theodor Dryer is one of the greatest directors of all. I consider "The Passion of Joan of Arc" (1928) and "Ordet" (1955) to be masterpieces, both scoring perfect 10. Now we have his last film, from 1964.
I'll start with a word of caution. "Gertrud" was clearly a stage play and stylistically it first appears stilted and wooden. The actors seems to be in the same scenes as each other but not relating. It's very strange for the first 20/30 minutes. many will find this film very hard going.
You can read much about the film on IMDB and the external reviews. Basically the film is gertrud's life of love, her men, her relationships and her mistakes. It's set in Swedish high society around the theater and takes place almost exclusively indoors and within 3-4 sets.
So why do I love this film so much?
The acting is a revelation. Dreyer's stationary camera and spartan remove distraction and focus us on the characters. And the actors deliver big time. The central performance of Gertrud is riveting. Anyone who is interested in black and white still photography and cinematography is in for a treat. Note the composition throughout and some of the final scenes will make you draw your breath. Yet they are simple shots of rooms! I'll say no more.
If you have ever loved and lost then this is a film that will strike home to your heart. 9/10 but I'll watch it again as there's room for a ten in here, maybe.

"The Lady Eve" is a Preston Sturges romantic comedy from (1941). It stars Barbara Stanwyck and Henry Fonda. I have watched a series of simply dreadful new release romantic comedies this year. The creative teams behind them should hang their heads in shame and be forced to watch this film and learn. My girlfriend and i are trying to watch a classic romantic movie once a month. It's great fun.
Fonda is the millionaire beer factory heir to be who boards a cruise ship and is ensnared by Stanwyck's con game. She and her dad trap rich people and fleece them. You guessed it, they fall in love. This is not a complex film.
I'm not going to pretend that this is a masterpiece. It's an outstandingly entertaining 90 minutes that is a perfect movie for you and your other half to settle down and enjoy. It's leap years ahead of recent tripe in the local multiplex or Netflix new releases. 7/10.

"Les Olvidados" is from Luis Bunuel in 1950. This is the fourth of fifteen Bunuel movies I'll be watching and I'm getting worried. The good news is that it's the best so far. "L'Age D'Or" and "Viridiana" left me scratching my head. I did not hate them, but they were hardly successes. I saw Belle De Jour" a few years ago and only moderately enjoyed it.
This is the most approachable of the Bunuel films I've seen in that it's a relatively simple story of a bunch of boys in a poor Mexican town, a murder and the consequences.
The film is quite hard going at first, but once the main scene has occurred it clicks into gear and is an interesting look at poverty, childhood and friendship. An enjoyable 6 but dwarfed by Umberto D.

"Chimes at Midnight" is Orson Welles in 1966 continuing his love of Shakespeare. He's got some great support from John Gielgud and Margaret Rutherford. I'm not a Shakespearian expert but Welles seems to capture the feel of the era as well as the majesty of the prose. The battle scene in the middle of the film is simply epic and lighting and shadows throughout are wonderful.
I think you have to be in the mood for these older Shakespearean films. However, Welles clearly has an eye on the funnier side of the bard. His character is often buffoonish and clownish and frequently brought a smile to my face. 7/10.

"Red River" - Howard Hawks, John Wayne, Montgomery Clift and Walter Brennan combine to deliver one of the truly great westerns.

"Leaves of Grass". Tim Blake Nelson directs this interesting indi with Edward Norton 6/10

Rob


Thu Aug 19, 2010 7:42 pm
Director
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 11, 2009 3:31 pm
Posts: 1140
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
PeachyPete wrote:
Synecdoche, New York

Ummm, yeah, I'm not really sure where to start. Or end. As those who've seen it know, this is one of the most challenging movies you'll ever come across. And one of the most ambititious. Some have called it too ambititious, pretentious, deliberately confusing, and incomprehensible. I don't agree, but I can see people having that reaction. The film is unbelievably dense and difficult. I can't imagine anyone "getting" the whole thing after only one viewing. There's just too much to comprehend.

I was incredibly depressed by the movie, especially by these few lines of dialogue:

[Reveal] Spoiler:
What was once before you - an exciting, mysterious future - is now behind you. Lived; understood; disappointing. You realize you are not special. You have struggled into existence, and are now slipping silently out of it. This is everyone's experience. Every single one. The specifics hardly matter. Everyone's everyone. So you are Adele, Hazel, Claire, Olive. You are Ellen. All her meager sadnesses are yours; all her loneliness; the gray, straw-like hair; her red raw hands. It's yours. It is time for you to understand this.


And really, that's the movie. The literary term synecdoche (a play on the town name Schenactady, New York) is where the part represents the whole. That's how Caden Cotard functions in the film. He's himself, sure, but he's also everyone else. As the movie says, everyone is everyone and the specifics hardly matter. The quandry of existence is universal. Kaufman uses metaphors upon metaphors upon metaphors to explore that concept.

On another level the film is about an artist's struggle to bring truth to his work. It's an impossibility because people see themselves how they see themselves, not how they are. We lie to ourselves daily about all kinds of things. The movie does a great job of this by
[Reveal] Spoiler:
introducing Paul as a real person late in the film. We're led to believe his daughter had been brainwashed into believing he left because he was gay. By introducing Paul as real, we question that. Did Caden leave his family for another man? It would make sense because Adele and Maria end up being a projection of his own guilt in that scenario. They were the ones who broke up the family and ruined the child's life. Who knows if it's true or not, though.


I have no idea if I like the movie or not. No fucking clue. I just know that if affected on a deep, personal level. It's emotional to the point that I'm not sure I can rate it. I also can't really decide if it was well made or not because my initial reaction was purely so emotional. That's a great quality for a movie to have. I probably love the movie, but I need to see it more. It's certainly one of the most ambititious films I've seen, and that's always, always, always a positive.


This is eerie, I was already prepared to watch this movie tonight before I even saw this post. Weird.

_________________
My blog: http://dunkindan89.blogspot.com/

UPDATED 8/26 - Top 100 List *Updated*


Thu Aug 19, 2010 8:21 pm
Profile WWW
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
Kick-Ass

Well...I don't think any movie is going be a bigger disappointment this year. I mean I was hyped for this, I rode the wave of anti-Ebert with his review and I saw an awesome clip of the warehouse shoot-out...which was awesome. And after watching it, so what? I didn't really feel anything, I wasn't excited that I watched something and quite frankly, it could have been better.

For example, the story of Kick-Ass himself pretty much ends with him being on the Internet. Now since he's the main character, his story keeps on going and going with WACKY HIJINKS like him pretending to be gay so he could hook up with some really hot chick. And worse, he draws attention away from the other "Supers" in this movie. Imagine if the story was focused on Hit Girl and Big Daddy with Kick-Ass being a peripheral figure? More interesting since this movie got less boring when those two were on screen. And even Red Mist had moments of interest with the combination of Bruce Wayne and some mob guy that ends with a great sequel hook.

I mean there's moments of brilliance, the action's pretty good and it's never horribly boring. But is it too much to ask for a lead character who isn't boring?

6/10


Thu Aug 19, 2010 10:12 pm
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
Patrick wrote:
Kick-Ass

Well...I don't think any movie is going be a bigger disappointment this year. I mean I was hyped for this, I rode the wave of anti-Ebert with his review and I saw an awesome clip of the warehouse shoot-out...which was awesome. And after watching it, so what? I didn't really feel anything, I wasn't excited that I watched something and quite frankly, it could have been better.

For example, the story of Kick-Ass himself pretty much ends with him being on the Internet. Now since he's the main character, his story keeps on going and going with WACKY HIJINKS like him pretending to be gay so he could hook up with some really hot chick. And worse, he draws attention away from the other "Supers" in this movie. Imagine if the story was focused on Hit Girl and Big Daddy with Kick-Ass being a peripheral figure? More interesting since this movie got less boring when those two were on screen. And even Red Mist had moments of interest with the combination of Bruce Wayne and some mob guy that ends with a great sequel hook.

I mean there's moments of brilliance, the action's pretty good and it's never horribly boring. But is it too much to ask for a lead character who isn't boring?

6/10


This is pretty much how I felt about it too. People seem to either love or hate it; I just felt a strong sense of indifference. Scott Pilgrim does the graphic novel adaptation thing a whole lot better.


Thu Aug 19, 2010 10:40 pm
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
Last Year At Marienbad: :? :? :x :x :roll: :roll: :shock: :shock:


Fri Aug 20, 2010 2:29 am
Director
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 20, 2010 4:04 pm
Posts: 1798
Location: New Hampshire
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
PeachyPete wrote:
Sexual Chocolate wrote:
For a great Kurosawa-Shakespeare adaptation, check out Ran.



And Throne of Blood.

And Throne of Blood!

And Throne of Blood!!!!!!!!!


And Throne of Blood.

_________________
Death is pretty final
I'm collecting vinyl
I'm gonna DJ at the end of the world.


Fri Aug 20, 2010 3:09 am
Profile
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
ed_metal_head wrote:
It's a powerful quote from a very powerful film. Ideally, the movie deserves several rewatches, but that first viewing crushed me completely. I was in a weird funk for almost two weeks.

I'd add more, but I don't know what else to say. Your thoughts perfectly sum up the film for me. If anyone is on the fence, see it. It's completely depressing, but it's the kind of depression you need to experience. Something like that at least.

Again: fantastic job Pete. Fuck everybody. Amen.


I know exactly what you mean about it being crushing. It's weird, but it IS the kind of depressing that you need to experience. I'd like to rewatch it at some point to try and figure it out, but it's one of those movies that I'll have to be in the right mood for, I suppose. Agreed that those who are wondering about it should check it out.

Blonde Almond wrote:
The only time I tried watching this I gave up after an hour. Perhaps I need to go back and try it again. I wasn't connecting with anything Kaufman was trying to say because none of the characters inhabit anything close to the real world. So for now put me in the "horribly pretentious depressing nonsense" camp, but your write-up has provoked me to give it another go.


My girlfriend did the same thing. I'll admit I wasn't connecting to the characters either for the most part. Yet, oddly, I was equally confused and compelled while watching. Like I said, I'm not sure that I even like the film, just that I had quite the reaction to it.

DunkinDan89 wrote:
This is eerie, I was already prepared to watch this movie tonight before I even saw this post. Weird.


What'd you think, Dan? I'm curious to hear your thoughts.

Last night I watched Orson Welles' F for Fake. It's an absolutely brilliant deconstruction of art in its various forms. Welles mixes truth with lies and points out the hypocrisy of how we use art to find truth by telling lies. The film is in a sort of documentary format, although film scholars tend to call it a film essay, whatever the hell that means. The very, very loose plot interweaves the "true" stories of art forger Elmyr De Hory, his biographer Clifford Irving, Howard Hughes, Oja Kodar, and Orson Welles himself. The stories Welles tells about each are mostly true, yet the images he shows aren't necessarily accurate. There's a sequence at the end of the film dealing with Picasso that goes beyond brilliant and really captures exactly what Welles is going for. Oh, and the editing is some of the most inventive you'll ever see.

The movie is unlike anything I've ever seen from Welles, and really, it's unlike anything else I've seen. There's no real story, just shreds from the lives of a few men put together in a way to has out a theme. It's a really difficult "story" to tell, but one that somehow works completely.


Fri Aug 20, 2010 9:11 am
Post Re: Last Movie You Watched
PeachyPete wrote:
Last night I watched Orson Welles' F for Fake. It's an absolutely brilliant deconstruction of art in its various forms. Welles mixes truth with lies and points out the hypocrisy of how we use art to find truth by telling lies. The film is in a sort of documentary format, although film scholars tend to call it a film essay, whatever the hell that means. The very, very loose plot interweaves the "true" stories of art forger Elmyr De Hory, his biographer Clifford Irving, Howard Hughes, Oja Kodar, and Orson Welles himself. The stories Welles tells about each are mostly true, yet the images he shows aren't necessarily accurate. There's a sequence at the end of the film dealing with Picasso that goes beyond brilliant and really captures exactly what Welles is going for. Oh, and the editing is some of the most inventive you'll ever see.

The movie is unlike anything I've ever seen from Welles, and really, it's unlike anything else I've seen. There's no real story, just shreds from the lives of a few men put together in a way to has out a theme. It's a really difficult "story" to tell, but one that somehow works completely.


I just watched this a couple of nights ago! Great film, fascinating and witty and strange and completely original.


Fri Aug 20, 2010 1:00 pm
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 16791 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 245, 246, 247, 248, 249, 250, 251 ... 840  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by Vjacheslav Trushkin for Free Forum/DivisionCore.
Translated by Xaphos © 2007, 2008, 2009 phpBB.fr