Schoolio's Movie Corner

[schoolofruckus]

Not untrue, but I didn't mind it. The meat of it was so damn good that it earned the right to flirt with sentimentality.

[wmgaretjax]

Not untrue, but I didn't mind it. The meat of it was so damn good that it earned the right to flirt with sentimentality.

i had the same response. hated the end at first, but ended justifying it as I stepped away. I need to watch it again.

[schoolofruckus]

I'm watching Tarantino's "Death Proof" right now. I'm about halfway through and I'm bored to tears, but I'm trying like hell to last until the supposedly-awesome finale. Holy shit I'm glad I didn't pony up to watch the full double bill of "Grindhouse" in theaters.

UPDATE: Yeah I finished it....wow. What a colossal waste of time and talent for all involved. I mean, Zoe Bell was pretty kick-ass, but the car chase wasn't anywhere near as good as I'd heard. And it was certainly unworthy of carrying what can graciously be described as an extremely flimsy narrative consisting mostly of fourth-string Tarantino banter that goes nowhere and says nothing. In spite of all the stylistic showmanship and borrowed conventions, the key to Tarantino's work has always, always, always been his strong characters - people whose humanity would shine through ever so slightly, and just enough to care about whatever insane shit they were going through. In every other movie, he's kept it interesting by finding a soul within the genre idiosyncrasies. With this film, he has completely wanked off from even attempting that, preferring to have every female in the movie channel Samuel L. Jackson and thinking it would somehow fit the bill.

I know this is a "grindhouse" movie, and it's supposed to be low-rent and cornball and purposefully ignorant to the way the real world works. That's what angers me the most. Why anyone as gifted as Tarantino would waste his time with something that shamelessly tries to be garbage is anyone's guess. I'm sure it's a blast for him to go back to the movies he enjoyed so much as a kid. But it's a damn shame, and he - more than any other filmmaker - is in dire need of a quiet walk in the park, or a jail sentence, or any other method of solitude where he can think long and hard about what his next move should be.

[HowToDisappear]

Huh.

We saw Death Proof a couple of weeks ago. LOVED IT.

But then, we're old enough to remember Vanishing Point and White Line Fever with fondness --- Vanishing Point especially (I loved that movie...is it available for rent somewhere?).

It definitely was a little talky and slow in places - come on already let's get on with the car chases!!! - but when it got there - damn. I thought the crashes and chases were good, shlocky, shocky fun, just like they're supposed to be. We laughed our asses off.

And I love Kurt Russell. And Rosario Dawson.

[wmgaretjax]

I really enjoyed Death Proof.

Saw "Before the Devil Knows You Are Dead." Great acting. Heavy-handed direction. Boring story.

Not much more I can say. There were a few great scenes, but I checked my watch maybe 4 or 5 times. It was really boring, and I think it was because it was just completely unbelievable and overly dramatic. Avoid it. Check it out on video if you really like the cast (who are impressive as can be expected).

[Mr.Nipples]

ALU7xlaTfyc&rel=1

[tessalasset]

Into the Wild was so good.

[tessalasset]

Oh Gabe I forgot you wanted to see that. Sorry. I'll go see it again with you if you want.

[bballarl]

Ohhhhhhhh dissssssssssssssssss.

[Stefinitely Maybe]

I saw Grindhouse and loved it. It worked well as a double-feature, with the edited versions of the films, and the commercials in the middle, and the whole idea of the project. I have since seen Planet Terror and Death Proof, and hated them both.

[SojuGorae]

Loved Death Proof and Planet Terror. Moreso, Death Proof because it just felt authentic(whatever the fuck that means). I didn't grow up during the 70s, but for some reason Death Proof really seemed like a movie that was dug out from an abandoned film archive warehouse.

I really liked the small touches throughout the movie like how it built up layers of mystery and suspense in introducing Stuntman Mike and then to completely fuck it all up by revealing him as some harmless douchebag near the end was fitting as a movie trying to be as bad as those exploitation flicks it was aspiring to emulate.

Same with the first batch of girls. The movie took its sweet ass time establishing a level of comfort and familiarity of the characters to the viewers and then abruptly fucked it all up with that random car crash.

Meticulous set-up and then fucking it up seemed like the concept Tarantino was aiming for. I'm assuming that's how exploitation flicks back in the day were.

But I can understand why so many people were pissed off at the movie. Most of my friends who hated the movie understood what Tarantino was attempting to do but they all said the same thing in different ways like, "but why? what's the fucking point?"

[schoolofruckus]

That's pretty much it. I mean, I get the style references, I get the nostalgic value of something that Tarantino spent his adolescence wallowing in, and I get the whole New Wave, film-about-filmmaking thing in making the second half of the movie about a group of real stuntwomen. What I don't get is - why waste your time making ridiculous, schlocky movies that don't give even a faint shit about their characters when you're the best in the business at making ridiciulous, schlocky movies with great characters?

I'm not asking Tarantino to start making profound personal statements or existential meditations (though I'd be interested to see what that would produce). I just want him to not get lazy with the most key component of his work.

Into the Wild was so good.

Oh Gabe I forgot you wanted to see that. Sorry. I'll go see it again with you if you want.

Bitch I'm'a kill you.

[schoolofruckus]

Also, I was glad the first group of girls got killed. If the whole movie had been about the second group, it would have been significantly better.

[schoolofruckus]

Saw "Before the Devil Knows You Are Dead." Great acting. Heavy-handed direction. Boring story.

Not much more I can say. There were a few great scenes, but I checked my watch maybe 4 or 5 times. It was really boring, and I think it was because it was just completely unbelievable and overly dramatic. Avoid it. Check it out on video if you really like the cast (who are impressive as can be expected).

That's extremely disappointing to hear. I have heard nothing but busted nuts over this one since it started screening. Do you think everyone's just commending it because they want to give props to an 83 year old director?

I love Lumet's "12 Angry Men" and "Network" and I'm working my way to some of his other classics from the 70's.

[roberto73]

As much as I love Lumet's early work, hearing that his latest isn't very good doesn't surprise me. You have to go back to 1990's Q&A to find his last good movie, and 1982's The Verdict to find his last great one. I mean, look at his recent output:

Find Me Guilty (2006)
Gloria (1999)
Critical Care (1997)
Night Falls on Manhattan (1997)
Guilty as Sin (1993)
A Stranger Among Us (1992)

That's a pretty impressive losing streak. The praise Lumet gets reminds me of the way critics greet Woody Allen's new movies: the criticism is cushioned by the goodwill they feel about his superior early work. It can't be easy to tee off on the guy who gave us 12 Angry Men, The Pawnbroker, Fail-Safe, Serpico, Murder on the Orient Express, Dog Day Afternoon, Network, and The Verdict. That said, I plan on seeing his new one and keeping my fingers crossed that it'll be better than I think it will.

[wmgaretjax]

for the record, I love Lumet's early work.

I think it's a typical sensationalist Hollywood film. That mixed with his age and prestige pretty much explains why it's gotten good press.

[dorkfish]

i'm seeing There Will Be Blood tonight.

oh hi movie corner.

[Yablonowitz]

for the record, I love Lumet's early work.

I think it's a typical sensationalist Hollywood film. That mixed with his age and prestige pretty much explains why it's gotten good press.

Lumet's work is actually kind of sloppy. He very rarely gets his paperwork in on time and it's not very readable. He also surfs on the web a lot. I don't think he will reach much further than low middle-management at best.

[schoolofruckus]

i'm seeing There Will Be Blood tonight.

oh hi movie corner.

There will be - nay; there is - extreme fucking jealousy.

[wmgaretjax]

i'm seeing There Will Be Blood tonight.

oh hi movie corner.

damn. lucky. please do tell what you think...

[mountmccabe]

I am seeing No Country for Old Men on Thursday night.

[Down Rodeo]

i'm seeing There Will Be Blood tonight.

oh hi movie corner.

I just heard about this screening tonight. I hate you. Please tell me it's awesome, though.

[ThomThom]

I took schoolofruckus' advice and saw "The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford". One of the better films of the year. Great cast, particularly Affleck (who I USED to despise). The best part of this film for me was Deakins cinematography, I just wish I would have seen the film in a better setting like Arclight or something, unfortunately the Beverly Center Mann 5 was the only theater left playing it in all of LA.

Lucky bastards in SF and Austin already got small screenings of "There Will Be Blood", I am just hoping LACMA does a private screening with a Paul Thomas Anderson Q&A within the next few weeks.

[SojuGorae]

That's pretty much it. I mean, I get the style references, I get the nostalgic value of something that Tarantino spent his adolescence wallowing in, and I get the whole New Wave, film-about-filmmaking thing in making the second half of the movie about a group of real stuntwomen. What I don't get is - why waste your time making ridiculous, schlocky movies that don't give even a faint shit about their characters when you're the best in the business at making ridiciulous, schlocky movies with great characters?

I'm not asking Tarantino to start making profound personal statements or existential meditations (though I'd be interested to see what that would produce). I just want him to not get lazy with the most key component of his work.





Bitch I'm'a kill you.

Interesting point with the whole lazy theory. Come to think of it, it does sort of make sense. Maybe making movies under the Grindhouse banner is him being lazy and saying "fuck it" half-way through hashing out a decent script. Maybe Death Proof was suppose to be like a Kill Bill but once he hit a road block he just gave up on it.

Who knows, he might even have a whole stash of incomplete scripts he gave up on that he's wishing to make under the Grindhouse banner.

[dorkfish]

They made it sound like LA isn't getting a screening until the limited release in December.

You shouldn't read my review. It'll ruin the movie for you. Don't read any reviews. Especially not mine. Seriously, below, I'm probably going to describe the plot, motifs, meanings, endings, best parts, etc. Don't read this. Just go see the movie and enjoy it.

For your convenience, I'm writing my review in a hard to read font. Highlight it if you want to destroy something for yourself that badly. I generally suck at praising things I like. Just scroll down below the picture of Winnie the Pooh that signals the end of the spoilers.



I'm tired, so I'll keep this short. Daniel Day Lewis gets the Best Actor Oscar. I can not really fathom anyone coming up with a performance that could catch up to this man's shadow. Hands down, if he was going up against any other performance of the last 20 years, he'd win. And surprisingly, that kid from Little Miss Sunshine, Paul Dano comes up with an amazing performance himself. Not sure that he'll win a Supporting Actor Oscar, but he'll get a nod.

The movie was stunningly shot. They hired LucasArts to help with the various oil derrick (sp?) fiascos.

Greenwood's dissident score is repeated throughout the movie. I was a bit let down that a lot of the "new" music was just from Popcorn Superhet Receiver, but if you haven't heard that endlessly already, you're in for a treat. He didn't do the entire movie's score, but rather just two of the main pieces. I suspect he'll get some good credit for the new piece "Smear."

As a movie, it was very...human, I guess. The crowd laughed uncomfortably. There were many forms of violence. There was blood. The last line was executed perfectly. There are many villains in the movie.

Towards the end, DD-Lewis was starting to give off a Howard Hughes vibe.

The whole film is about greed as an infinite evil that corrupts everyone when the world is limitless.




http://img208.imageshack.us/img208/7048/winnithepoohdf059905c2coe8.jpg

[KungFuJoe]

It may be that i'm just extremely jaded Gabe, but I thought 4 Months, 3 Weeks & 2 Days was weak. I agree with you about the performances and the way the movie was handled in general, but serious intestinal fortitude? Really? Did I see the same film or did the matinee get the PG cut?

[schoolofruckus]

It may be that i'm just extremely jaded Gabe, but I thought 4 Months, 3 Weeks & 2 Days was weak. I agree with you about the performances and the way the movie was handled in general, but serious intestinal fortitude? Really? Did I see the same film or did the matinee get the PG cut?

It was one particular shot that I was referring to (and I know you know which one). I mean, there are emotionally wrenching aspects to the movie, but it's that one moment (which is an instant addition to the pantheon of unsettling imagery, as far as I'm concerned) that will really make it difficult for some people to watch.

I think I see where you're going with this - the movie wasn't nearly as much of a back-alley odyssey as I've heard it described. I noticed that as well once it was over, and I would say that probably goes a long ways towards making you feel that it wasn't all that extreme. But the emotional violence in this film was, to me, some of the most harrowing that I've ever seen. The scene at the dinner table (I'm trying like hell to tread lightly on spoilerz, I promise) was the defining moment for Otilia's character and for the film's concept overall.

[schoolofruckus]

They made it sound like LA isn't getting a screening until the limited release in December.

You shouldn't read my review. It'll ruin the movie for you. Don't read any reviews. Especially not mine. Seriously, below, I'm probably going to describe the plot, motifs, meanings, endings, best parts, etc. Don't read this. Just go see the movie and enjoy it.

For your convenience, I'm writing my review in a hard to read font. Highlight it if you want to destroy something for yourself that badly. I generally suck at praising things I like. Just scroll down below the picture of Winnie the Pooh that signals the end of the spoilers.

http://img208.imageshack.us/img208/7048/winnithepoohdf059905c2coe8.jpg

You're the luckiest guy on the lower east side.

[Courtney]

But has he got wheels and do you want to go for a ride?

[schoolofruckus]

Fo sho.

[KungFuJoe]

I understand why you would not want to send out any spoilers on the film Gabe. It certainly is a film I might have enjoyed more if I did not hear a single thing about it and didn't suffer from the high expections one would have for a Palme d'Or winner. For anyone that would like to see this film, do not read below.






That image you are referring to didn't do much for me in the way of being unsettling. Perhaps because I knew it was coming, waiting through the build up to it made it less effective. That sort of image was much more unsettling in Fruit Chan's "Dumplings", which, imo, was a much more harrowing & interesting spin on this subject matter. Granted this film was more realistic than that one and I really enjoyed the dogme esque approach to it. I also agree wih you on the dinner table scene. However, this is not a film that really grabbed me emotionally. think I went in expecting too much in the way of a tragic heavy drama and it came up a bit light. Not a bad film, but I doubt I'll ever care to sit through it again.

[DeltaSigChi4]

The Libertine [Laurence Dunmore] is a MASTERPIECE.

E

[ThomThom]

The film was good but Depp as Rochester was great.

[wmgaretjax]

last night while building pre-amp circuits I watched the following films:

Todd Solondz' "Storytelling:" Too convoluted, and not bitter enough to pull off how contrived the film felt. Worth checking out if you like his other stuff, but anywhere near the caliber of his other films (for the record, "Palindromes" is my favorite with "Happiness" at a close second).

Danny Boyle's "The Beach:" I like Boyle, but I turned this movie off half way through. Stupid. Stupid. And some of the worst acting I've ever seen (even from Swinton).

Oliver Stone's "Any Given Sunday:" I don't like him. But this movie made me laugh. What a silly, silly film.

Well, my roommate gets an F- for a lot of the movies he has. He has good taste, but he sure owns some shitty ones.

[Courtney]

It starts rolling out this Friday in Los Angeles and maybe some other cities. It'll be in most major cities by the end of the month.

And for those who may be growing tired of Wes-world - in spite of respect for his previous films as well as his overall skill set - The Darjeeling Limited should be right in your wheelhouse. Don't get me wrong, the film still has its fair share of slow motion dollies and 60's pop songs and immaculately-composed static shots that are production-designed within an inch of life. But Wes has also shed some of his more superfluous idiosyncrasies this time out, and the result is maybe his strongest visual narrative, as well as his most earnestly emotional film since Rushmore. Now, I grant that maybe some people don't go to Wes Anderson films for emotional substance, particularly when it stands in for distant, dryly-rendered comedy, but I've always felt that there was far more heart and humanity to his films than he gets credit for - which is part of what I love about them. And this one is more than worthy of that canon.

After the sweeping ensembles of The Royal Tennenbaums and The Life Aquatic, Darjeeling is a welcome return to the more intimate style of storytelling that Wes used earlier in his career - the scope is small, the running time is quick (a brief-but-not-criminally-so 91 minutes), the funny bits are more knowingly amusing than laugh-out-loud raucous. The film focuses exclusively on the three brothers - Francis (Owen Wilson), Peter (Adrian Brody), and Jack (Jason Schwartzman) - who are brought together somewhat against their wills to take the purposeful journey across India on the film's titular locomotive. They've drifted apart over the course of the previous year due to family tragedy and the circumstances of their own lives, the causes of which are sometimes explored, sometimes left mysterious, and - in Jack's case, with the "Hotel Chevalier" short - sometimes dramatized elsewhere. Francis, being the older brother and ringleader, has pre-organized the trip to an almost suffocating degree, and it's clear right away that it's being performed by the other two brothers out of a sense of obligation rather than any real desire to be there. The way the film establishes the characters and their dynamics is a model of efficiency, and each actor brings a distinct voice and a diversity of personality to his character; love them or hate them, you can't always say that about all of Wes Anderson's films.

Anyway - I'm going to cut the plot synopsis off before it gets going. The point is - this may be familiar Wes territory as far as subject and many of the usual style elements, but it's also a strong new direction for him in other ways. I mentioned earlier the production design, always the #1 harbinger of Wes' authorship in his films. It's still as heavily orchestrated as ever here, but for the first time since Bottle Rocket, it doesn't feel the slightest bit like a movie set. I've never been to India, couldn't tell you shit about it, but as presented here - it feels authentic. I also loved the multitude of passages with no dialogue. Again, I feel like this film terrifically does away with expository dialogue in as many situations as possible, preferring instead to let the exotic surroundings and the actions of the characters peel away the emotional layers.

I've compared the film to every one of Wes' other films in the course of this review, but the truth is, I don't know where it stands in relation to his erstwhile output. It could be, by default, my least favorite of his five films due to my love for the other four; it could be as high as #2 (I can't imagine he'll ever top Rushmore). Only years of further viewings - the benefit of which all his other stuff has - will tell. But I do know that this is both a satisfyingly recognizable member of his familial filmography, and a unique child in its own right.

One last thing - make sure you do see Hotel Chevalier in conjunction with this movie, preferably right before heading out to the theater. You could get Darjeeling without it, absolutely....but when you see it, and the way it enhances the film, you'll know you would have been missing something to do so. If any of you haven't seen it, go on the iTunes store and search for it. It's free and it should be easy to find.

I finally got around to seeing The Darjeeling Limited last weekend. I agree with Gabe that it's much in the same vein as the rest of Wes Anderson's oeuvre complete with lots of static, immaculately designed sets and another excellent soundtrack. It doesn't have the dollhouse preciousness of The Life Aquatic or the The Royal Tenenbaums, but maybe this is a good thing. And much of the Anderson family of actors is back again -- Owen Wilson, Jason Schwartzman, Anjelica Huston, Kumar Pallana, and even a small role for Bill Murray. There are also some good additions including the formidably melancholic Adrien Brody and a seducingly icy Natalie Portman.

Most of Anderson's characters seem to have some sort of iciness -- whether it comes from the internalization of their problems or merely their emotional detachment from their companions. Is suits his style well to de-emphasize the gooey side of human emotion in favor of a sort of clever, deadpan savoir faire. While Anderson does sometimes seem to attempt an exploration of the real underlying emotional motivation for the narrative, in the case of Francis' facial wounds, their mother's absence from their father's funeral, and especially in the case of the drowned boy, these explorations all seem to come up short. The drowned boy is vehicle for some sort of spiritual tourism wherein enlightenment comes in the form of billowing white symmetry with a retro-nostalgic soundtrack. The mother character disappears before any sort of real resolution is reached. And Francis' face is re-wrapped, favoring the aesthetic order over open wounds.

As with some of his earlier films, Anderson here has a PC problem. It's not surprising that quite a few critics panned the film. This isn't the first time his films have been criticized for being too rich, too male, too white. With The Darjeeling Limited, this disparity becomes glaringly apparent. While I don't think that sort of filmic tourism is necessarily a bad thing, and Anderson does make use of the Indian location for some gloriously colorful and foreign visuals, his signature flatness is sure to offend viewers looking to his films for any deeper sense of understanding The Other to which his leading characters turn for a foil. This problem is neatly summarized through the train stewardess Rita, whose class, ethnicity and gender all so starkly contrast that of the brothers. Like many of Anderson's secondary characters, Rita's character remains fairly undeveloped and serves more as eye candy and plot vector for Jack than as a unique entity.

But really, anyone who is going to a Wes Anderson movie in search of deep emotional understanding of women or otherwise is just silly. Anderson succeeds here at what he does best -- creating a stylized, easy-to-swallow gem of a film for the bourgeois bohemian consumer. I'd say this ranks above Life Aquatic for me, although below Rushmore, Bottle Rocket, or The Royal Tenenbaums. Which isn't to say I didn't enjoy it. I'm an unabashed Anderson fan. And frankly I don't care about all of the above criticism, I still loved the film.

[schoolofruckus]

Jared - "Palindromes" is your favorite? I find that interesting. "Happiness" is the only Solondz film I've ever really felt worked. "Welcome to the Dollhouse" was too cruel, "Storytelling" was too self-conscious, and "Palindromes" was too erratic.

I haven't seen "The Beach", but I would like to for the sake of thoroughness. I also like Oliver Stone a lot (although with each person I talk to whose taste I admire, I seem to meet a new Oliver Stone hater, which makes me wonder), and "Any Given Sunday" isn't one of his best, but I still enjoy it.

Courtney - That was a very thoughtful review, thank you. I had never put much consideration into the politically-incorrect aspect of Wes Anderson's work - though I've heard the charge lobbed before - but thinking about it now, I would almost have to feel the contrast between the exotic Indian setting and the archetypical Wes protagonists was a self-conscious examination of that syndrome. I don't know. I'll have to watch it again when the Criterion DVD comes out and think it over some more.

Chris and I watched No Country For Old Men tonight. What the fuck do you expect me to say? It's absolutely brilliant, and one of the top Coen brothers films I've ever seen (which is all of them except Miller's Crossing and the last half of Raising Arizona). It's a riveting, tightly coiled trampoline spring of a chase film for about the first 75%, and then it takes a rocky detour into a brutally fatalistic worldview that is more fulfilling than any conventional ending could have been. Seriously - the bleak assessment of humanity here rivals the nightmarish existentialism of Sympathy For Mr. Vengeance, and while it leaves an anxious pit in your stomach as it unfolds, it also threatens to leave many an audience member walking out ripping up their ticket stubs in unsatisfied disgust. Which is bad news for anyone who likes to see the bad guys brought to justice, and a great thing for anyone who prefer that the chilly truth of real life be acknowledged.

The acting in the film is pitch perfect - Tommy Lee Jones wages an unforgettable struggle against hopelessness; Javier Bardem is both "the ultimate bad-ass" and a haunting personification of the animal recklessness the film is so afraid of; and Josh Brolin hits the ground running as a simple man who gets involved in things that are far beyond his reach. The cinematography by Roger Deakins is mesmerizing - not as showy as his for-the-ages work in "Jesse James", but a perfect display of range in its stark evocation of the fugitive life. And obviously, the maestros behind the film are in indisputable peak form. Hanging their warm, Great North classic Fargo upside down and whipping it into a nihilistic Southern meditation on the same themes of crime and a world gone wrong, they've created a darkly funny masterpiece that will redefine their career.

In other words, the competition against "Jesse James" for best movie of 2007 just got interesting.

[AEversW]

I watched this film called After Life today. Apparently it's what the Radiohead song Videotape is based on kinda...overall it was very good and Erika Oda is very very beautiful.

[schoolofruckus]

Interesting.

Is it new? I assume it's not American.

[AEversW]

It's Japanese, it was made in 1998. It's directed by Hirokazu Koreeda and it won a few awards at various film festivals. I lucked out and found it at Barnes and Noble. You can order it online but you can also download it for a small 5 dollar fee.

http://www.jaman.com/a/video/0f4xELBfN2bU/

[Courtney]

I haven't seen "The Beach", but I would like to for the sake of thoroughness.

Oh god I saw The Beach a while ago. I may have even gone to the trouble to put it on my Netflix queue. I think my reasoning was something along the lines of, "Hey, I like budget travel. I like Thailand. I like meeting other young foreigners when I'm doing budget travel in places like Thailand. I think the film is about something like that. Maybe I'll like the film." These are not good reasons to see a movie.

Courtney - That was a very thoughtful review, thank you. I had never put much consideration into the politically-incorrect aspect of Wes Anderson's work - though I've heard the charge lobbed before - but thinking about it now, I would almost have to feel the contrast between the exotic Indian setting and the archetypical Wes protagonists was a self-conscious examination of that syndrome. I don't know. I'll have to watch it again when the Criterion DVD comes out and think it over some more.

Thanks for reading my post. You're right that the choice of Indian location does put these issues into a certain sort of spotlight, and it's interesting to think that maybe this is intentional. I mean, I feel like maybe the answer to this a bit is the Mr. Tenenbaum / Pagoda relationship in The Royal Tenenbaums. There the film starts out with a more prototypical, distant master-servant relationship and then through the course of the plot we see the characters becoming increasingly close (Pagoda faking Royal's illness, passing information, etc) until finally Royal reaches the point where he is kicked out and becomes Pagoda's coworker after Pagoda helps him to get a job. It seems like with their relationship, Anderson is able to explore the race/class divide a bit. Although maybe that's a cop-out in the sense that it's all abbreviated and stylized and generally more emblematic than exploratory. I don't know.

[Courtney]

Chris and I watched No Country For Old Men tonight. What the fuck do you expect me to say? It's absolutely brilliant, and one of the top Coen brothers films I've ever seen (which is all of them except Miller's Crossing and the last half of Raising Arizona). It's a riveting, tightly coiled trampoline spring of a chase film for about the first 75%, and then it takes a rocky detour into a brutally fatalistic worldview that is more fulfilling than any conventional ending could have been. Seriously - the bleak assessment of humanity here rivals the nightmarish existentialism of Sympathy For Mr. Vengeance, and while it leaves an anxious pit in your stomach as it unfolds, it also threatens to leave many an audience member walking out ripping up their ticket stubs in unsatisfied disgust. Which is bad news for anyone who likes to see the bad guys brought to justice, and a great thing for anyone who prefer that the chilly truth of real life be acknowledged.

The acting in the film is pitch perfect - Tommy Lee Jones wages an unforgettable struggle against hopelessness; Javier Bardem is both "the ultimate bad-ass" and a haunting personification of the animal recklessness the film is so afraid of; and Josh Brolin hits the ground running as a simple man who gets involved in things that are far beyond his reach. The cinematography by Roger Deakins is mesmerizing - not as showy as his for-the-ages work in "Jesse James", but a perfect display of range in its stark evocation of the fugitive life. And obviously, the maestros behind the film are in indisputable peak form. Hanging their warm, Great North classic Fargo upside down and whipping it into a nihilistic Southern meditation on the same themes of crime and a world gone wrong, they've created a darkly funny masterpiece that will redefine their career.

In other words, the competition against "Jesse James" for best movie of 2007 just got interesting.

This sounds amazing. The problem with reading this thread is I'm quickly amassing a laundry list of films I would like to see.

[mountmccabe]

I haven't seen "The Beach", but I would like to for the sake of thoroughness. I also like Oliver Stone a lot (although with each person I talk to whose taste I admire, I seem to meet a new Oliver Stone hater, which makes me wonder), and "Any Given Sunday" isn't one of his best, but I still enjoy it.

The Beach was Danny Boyle, not Stone. I saw it because I liked the novel (by Alex Garland, who wrote 28 Days Later and Sunshine for/with Boyle.) This is also not a good reason to see a movie.

The novel definitely had it's flaws but it expresses a lot of good ideas, this was a pre-9/11, pre-Iraq war novel and was of a generation that grew up on Vietnam and WWII stories and had nothing of that horror in their lives; it was about a decadent search for "authentic" experience. It was about the tendency to romanticize war, it was about escape.

The movie is kind of rough, though. I am not sure I would go as far as "stupid", Jared, but I was very disappointed.

But yeah, the acting is awful. It has been a long recovery for my estimation of what DiCaprio can do.

[schoolofruckus]

I know "The Beach" was Boyle. I was responding to two of Jared's pans in one paragraph.

[mountmccabe]

I noticed the "also," that's one of my favorite words of ever. What I mean is I know you know that; I was mostly just taking a swing at you for posting stuff on No Country for Old Men that I can't read until tonight.

[mountmccabe]

Preemptive strike: I am not actually saying that I am upset at you for writing about that particular film.

[Yablonowitz]

Gabe - you haven't seen Miller's Crossing?

You shouldn't have been allowed into the theater last night.

God, you're fucking stupid.

[full on idle]

I love, so much, the days when Yabs wakes up on the aggro side of the bed.

[schoolofruckus]

I watched "Fred Claus" tonight. Why? I don't know. Morbid curiosity plus time to kill make Schoolio something something.

I basically slept through Act II - which in this case, unlike 95% of the times when I fall asleep in movies, was largely intentional. The screenplay was awful, a pretty good cast was largely wasted, and the effects sequences - of Santa's sleigh soaring through the night as well as the parts where they put the faces of standard-size actors onto the bodies of midgets - are dreadfully off-putting (or off-puttingly dreadful). But I'd be lying if I didn't admit that there are a few smirk-worthy moments of Vince Vaughn motor-mouthing, and the young actor who plays a latch-key orphan that is friends with Fred Claus is amusing as well (poorly written though the part may be). Which means that this movie is approximately 5,000 times better than I was expecting; worse family fare mine eyes have seen. However, since this comes out the same day (this Friday) as "No Country For Old Men", and will probably make a shit-fist of money while "No Country" draws only the members of the Finer Things Club, I'm going to declare it the worst movie of the year anyway.

[Down Rodeo]

I watched Fellini's 8 1/2 recently, and I'm still not sure how I feel about it. I know a lot of directors consistently name this as one of the best movies ever made, but I obviously can't relate to it like they can. I did really enjoy some of the scenes in the movie, and I think the overall theme of being caught in an enterprise you've lost motivation for can be applied to other aspects of life besides filmmaking. Other opinions would be very useful.

And Gabe, thanks for the good review of No Country for Old Men. I seriously can't wait to see this.

[RotationSlimWang]

The Beach is an interestingly disastrous movie. Not even necessarily because the script (from what I glean of what was put on screen) or the execution was all that horrible. But because The Beach is responsible for driving a wedge between Ewan McGregor and Danny Boyle. The role was supposed to go to Ewan, and Danny bitched out and put Leo in there I believe to satisfy the studio. So in one manner of looking at it, The Beach is at fault for a film adaptation of Porno still being delayed. But more to the point Danny Boyle is at fault for ever siding against the actor who helped make his fucking career.

As flawed of a picture as it is, I kinda really enjoy watching it because I've always been extremely entranced by daydreams of living out my days on an untouched island with white sand and clear water. It's just a very, very pleasant fantasy of mine. Seems like the kind of place I could possibly exist peacefully without drugs or anything really. For that reason, I enjoy watching it. The video game sequence is fucking godawful though--Boyle should have his ass kicked for that.

And Gabe, you absolutely do have to see all of Raising Arizona and to a slightly lesser extent Miller's Crossing. These things are mandatory.

[Yablonowitz]

Chris and I watched No Country For Old Men tonight. What the fuck do you expect me to say? It's absolutely brilliant, and one of the top Coen brothers films I've ever seen (which is all of them except Miller's Crossing and the last half of Raising Arizona). It's a riveting, tightly coiled trampoline spring of a chase film for about the first 75%, and then it takes a rocky detour into a brutally fatalistic worldview that is more fulfilling than any conventional ending could have been. Seriously - the bleak assessment of humanity here rivals the nightmarish existentialism of Sympathy For Mr. Vengeance, and while it leaves an anxious pit in your stomach as it unfolds, it also threatens to leave many an audience member walking out ripping up their ticket stubs in unsatisfied disgust. Which is bad news for anyone who likes to see the bad guys brought to justice, and a great thing for anyone who prefer that the chilly truth of real life be acknowledged.

The acting in the film is pitch perfect - Tommy Lee Jones wages an unforgettable struggle against hopelessness; Javier Bardem is both "the ultimate bad-ass" and a haunting personification of the animal recklessness the film is so afraid of; and Josh Brolin hits the ground running as a simple man who gets involved in things that are far beyond his reach. The cinematography by Roger Deakins is mesmerizing - not as showy as his for-the-ages work in "Jesse James", but a perfect display of range in its stark evocation of the fugitive life. And obviously, the maestros behind the film are in indisputable peak form. Hanging their warm, Great North classic Fargo upside down and whipping it into a nihilistic Southern meditation on the same themes of crime and a world gone wrong, they've created a darkly funny masterpiece that will redefine their career.

In other words, the competition against "Jesse James" for best movie of 2007 just got interesting.


Plus, have you checked this shit out? (http://www.metacritic.com/film/titles/nocountryforoldmen) Fucking crazy.

[RotationSlimWang]

Also, can we all just agree (and I'm basing this solely on the trailer) that no one in the world does the "Baddest Motherfucker In All The Land" character half as good as the Coens have done repeatedly?

[Courtney]

Plus, have you checked this shit out? (http://www.metacritic.com/film/titles/nocountryforoldmen) Fucking crazy.

Wow, those are some good reviews.

[Courtney]

And ohhh fail. Limited release does not include Hawaii.

[schoolofruckus]

Also, can we all just agree (and I'm basing this solely on the trailer) that no one in the world does the "Baddest Motherfucker In All The Land" character half as good as the Coens have done repeatedly?

They're definitely the best. And this film's convention-shattering ending makes this their piece de resistance in that sweepstakes.

[schoolofruckus]

How do the release patterns in Hawai'i work? Do they get only a small fraction of films released there?

Apparently No Country is in the top 10 all time for Metacritic ratings.

[Courtney]

Yes, Hawaii only gets a fraction of what major US markets get. It's somewhat compensated by the unusually good selection of first-run Asian films.

[Courtney]

And now I'm curious what the other nine are for Metacritic.

[HowToDisappear]

And ohhh fail. Limited release does not include Hawaii.

Nor San Diego, apparently. My husband and I were really excited and were so looking forward to seeing it this weekend. Now we'll have to wait 'til the 21st with the rest of the plebians.

[schoolofruckus]

Movie Year Score

1. Godfather, The 1972 100
2. Superman II 1981 99
3. Army of Shadows 2006 99
4. Pan's Labyrinth 2006 98
5. Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb 1964 96
6. Ratatouille 2007 96
7. Manchurian Candidate, The 1962 94
8. Pulp Fiction 1994 94
9. Killer of Sheep 1977 94
10. No Country for Old Men 2007 94

Keep in mind, this only includes films that were released or re-released theatrically since Metacritic's inception in 1999.

[mountmccabe]

Chris and I watched No Country For Old Men tonight. What the fuck do you expect me to say? It's absolutely brilliant, and one of the top Coen brothers films I've ever seen (which is all of them except Miller's Crossing and the last half of Raising Arizona). It's a riveting, tightly coiled trampoline spring of a chase film for about the first 75%, and then it takes a rocky detour into a brutally fatalistic worldview that is more fulfilling than any conventional ending could have been. Seriously - the bleak assessment of humanity here rivals the nightmarish existentialism of Sympathy For Mr. Vengeance, and while it leaves an anxious pit in your stomach as it unfolds, it also threatens to leave many an audience member walking out ripping up their ticket stubs in unsatisfied disgust. Which is bad news for anyone who likes to see the bad guys brought to justice, and a great thing for anyone who prefer that the chilly truth of real life be acknowledged.

The acting in the film is pitch perfect - Tommy Lee Jones wages an unforgettable struggle against hopelessness; Javier Bardem is both "the ultimate bad-ass" and a haunting personification of the animal recklessness the film is so afraid of; and Josh Brolin hits the ground running as a simple man who gets involved in things that are far beyond his reach. The cinematography by Roger Deakins is mesmerizing - not as showy as his for-the-ages work in "Jesse James", but a perfect display of range in its stark evocation of the fugitive life. And obviously, the maestros behind the film are in indisputable peak form. Hanging their warm, Great North classic Fargo upside down and whipping it into a nihilistic Southern meditation on the same themes of crime and a world gone wrong, they've created a darkly funny masterpiece that will redefine their career.

In other words, the competition against "Jesse James" for best movie of 2007 just got interesting.

This movie is tense, a little slow and dark. And magnificent.

Standard blockbuster cliches are absent, or, at most, they're teased and subverted. There were a couple times when I thought we had found our big twist or Deus Ex Machina that would send everything along to the Hollywood climaxes we expect but none of that ever happened. It just moved on to ends which were ineluctable according to its own logic. And what's more, there was no post-modern winking; this is a serious, no nonsense movie.

This is not to say it doesn't have a sense of humor. This is a very humorous film, but it's not a funny one. It is not a hilarious movie. Raising Arizona, for example, had a good deal of farce and fairy tale to it; No Country for Old Men does not.

At one point Anton Chigurh shoots at a bird on the side of the road as he drives by; this brought to mind the ridiculous Leonard Smalls (from Raising Arizona) doing the same thing while riding his motorcycle, with his bushy beard and leather jacket. Chigurh isn't a big joke, though. He isn't a caricature of toughness, he simply is tough. And relentless. And a little goofy-looking which adds to the effect.

I have to agree that the acting was top notch; and, oddly for a Coen brothers film, it wasn't overly affected.

This is certainly one of the best films I've seen this year and it ranks up there with the Coens' best work.

[Courtney]

Movie Year Score

1. Godfather, The 1972 100
2. Superman II 1981 99
3. Army of Shadows 2006 99
4. Pan's Labyrinth 2006 98
5. Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb 1964 96
6. Ratatouille 2007 96
7. Manchurian Candidate, The 1962 94
8. Pulp Fiction 1994 94
9. Killer of Sheep 1977 94
10. No Country for Old Men 2007 94

Keep in mind, this only includes films that were released or re-released theatrically since Metacritic's inception in 1999.

Haha Ratatouille. I guess I should see that.

[PotVsKtl]

Metacritic scores for movies released prior to widespread interfuck journalism are nothing but reflections in the rosey lensed Ray-bans of times gone by.

I watched about 5 minutes of The 400 Blows the other day then realized I was high and played Saint's Row instead. Cinema is so boring.

[menikmati]

I'm gonna watch Ratatouille tonight. I just watched Cars the other night (bought both together)...it was good. I love Pixar. I also have the Batman anthology to watch (haven't seen any of those four in years). Batman Forever was my favorite growing up.

[wmgaretjax]

Metacritic scores for movies released prior to widespread interfuck journalism are nothing but reflections in the rosey lensed Ray-bans of times gone by.

I watched about 5 minutes of The 400 Blows the other day then realized I was high and played Saint's Row instead. Cinema is so boring.

i laughed. i have so much trouble picking movies out when i'm high.

[schoolofruckus]

Saw "Before the Devil Knows You Are Dead." Great acting. Heavy-handed direction. Boring story.

Not much more I can say. There were a few great scenes, but I checked my watch maybe 4 or 5 times. It was really boring, and I think it was because it was just completely unbelievable and overly dramatic. Avoid it. Check it out on video if you really like the cast (who are impressive as can be expected).

Jared, you were dead on with this review - "Before the Devil Knows You're Dead" was a stiff, incoherent wipe-out. Philip Seymour Hoffman gives an outstanding performance (even by his own standards) and there's a generous amount of Marisa Tomei nudity, but it's not enough to save this movie. The direction was extremely clunky, with many scenes being very poorly executed on a visual level and an editing theme that was off-puttingly amateurish. The storytelling was borderline inept, with the forced chronology shifts, lazy subtitles, and then as you said, the film just goes off the rails with believability-murdering plot twists. Some of the dialogue was sharp to be sure, but whoever this Kelly Masterson (the screenwriter) is, she needs to wait until after she finishes more than just one semester of film school to write her next script. A big disappointment across the board given what I had heard about it before.

[roberto73]

I just watched Talk to Me, the film about Washington D.C. disc jockey Petey Greene. Don Cheadle is definitively the coolest man alive. That said, this movie starts strong, but descends into the typical biopic tropes that we all could put on a checklist. Does he overcome a checkered past? Yup (he's an ex-con). Does he descend into substance abuse? You betcha (in this case, alcoholism). Does he treat his woman poorly? And how. Does he sabotage himself at the height of his popularity? Unequivocally. Does he achieve personal redemption at the end of the film? Of course.

It's not a bad film. The actors (especially Cheadle, as Greene, and Chiwetel Ejiofor, as Dewey Hughes, his manager and confidante) do their damnedest to steer the ship, and there are a couple scenes in the first hour (one set in a poolhall, where Ejiofor's character proves his street cred) that are especially exciting, but once Greene manages to snag his DJ position, the film goes into a slump it only periodically rouses itself from.

Is it worth seeing? Yes, for the acting. Cheadle and Ejiofor are fantastic, and manage to compensate for the staleness of the material. It's unfortunate that a film about one of the most radical and groundbreaking voices in radio should be so conventional.

[schoolofruckus]

Good to know, Roberto. That one looked like it could be good (Cheadle gives any film a fighting chance), but ultimately it just wasn't something I was probably going to catch. Hearing that it has all the trappings of "Ray", "Walk the Line", and the like makes that a certainty.

[Courtney]

Rob, thanks for the write-up. I was considering seeing Talk To Me. Well, I'm still considering. But it helped to hear your thoughts.

Erik, how was Ratatouille?

[wmgaretjax]

Good to know, Roberto. That one looked like it could be good (Cheadle gives any film a fighting chance), but ultimately it just wasn't something I was probably going to catch. Hearing that it has all the trappings of "Ray", "Walk the Line", and the like makes that a certainty.

I saw this at SIFF's "Secret Festival" in April and hated it. I can't stand bio-pics and this has all the failings that generally come with the genre. "Stale" is an incredibly appropriate way to describe it. Cheadle's good, but I couldn't care less about anything else in the film.

I watched "The Human Stain" last night. An awful movie with a stellar cast, however the acting choices make little sense.

I'm going to see either Gone Baby Gone or Michael Clayton tonight. Haven't decided yet.

[Courtney]

I saw American Gangster yesterday. It was good enough, if strove a little too hard to be a sort of black Godfather.

The movie was morally ambiguous. I guess that's the point. Drug lord Frank Lucas (Denzel Washington) throws free turkeys out from the back of a truck to the poor at Thanksgiving; "good" cop Richie Roberts (Russell Crowe) sleeps around shamelessly and provides a generally unsavory environment for his young son.

The film itself is bloated at two and a half hours. Much of the time is spent cataloging Frank Lucas' entrepreneurial climb to success. So much so that the film itself becomes largely sympathetic to Lucas and his struggle for success in the face of adversity. It's the American dream! Ridley Scott does his best to counter this prevailing sympathy through slicing up the film. Every turkey-throwing scene is permeated with quick cuts to scenes of anonymous arms shooting up and anonymous bloody mothers ODed on their bed while their baby cries. What does this accomplish? Sure at surface it provides a sort of foil to the moral heroism of Lucas by reminding the audience of the underbelly of his success, but moreover it provides a sort of visual titillation. In a movie like American Gangster, heart-warming family dinner scenes don't make box office numbers; naked female corpses and blood do.

The film is also permeated with cuts to black and white TV footage of the blood and gore at the heart of the Vietnam War. Moreso than just to merely remind the viewer of Frank's dependence on his Vietnamese connection to supply his product, it also seems a bit of a heavy-handed reminder than not only are the lead characters morally ambiguous, but so is the world in which they live.

Despite the film's length, parts of the plot still feel undeveloped. Exactly what happened to Frank's mama's dresser when Frank was five? Why did Frank as a boy have to watch his brother (or was it cousin?) be shot in the head?

Russell Crowe gets typecast as the slightly out of control, rough-around-the-edges good guy, and Denzel Washington does an excellent job portraying a charming but also ruthless gangster. This film is not The Godfather, but it is a decent way to spend a Saturday afternoon. If not for its own moral ambiguity through the gratuitous use of anonymous violence, I would give it more credit for its deft exploration of Frank's and Richie's own characters and flaws. But as is, it remains an interesting if not quite fully hashed out epic of a film.

[Courtney]

I watched "The Human Stain" last night. An awful movie with a stellar cast, however the acting choices make little sense.

I'm going to see either Gone Baby Gone or Michael Clayton tonight. Haven't decided yet.

Have you read The Human Stain, and if so how did it compare? It was a good book, but in my opinion quite flawed itself. Roth is an uneven writer.

Michael Clayton is good. I have not seen Gone Baby Gone.

[wmgaretjax]

Have you read The Human Stain, and if so how did it compare? It was a good book, but in my opinion quite flawed itself. Roth is an uneven writer.


I have not, and honestly, after the movie I'm not particularly interested. Can you imagine Anthony Hopkins as the main character? hahahaha. I don't want to spoil the movie, even with how bad it is. But it is completely unbelievable.

[schoolofruckus]

Lots of people here like Michael Clayton a lot. It doesn't seem that many have seen Gone Baby Gone, but I can report that it's fucking great and has none of the things that made Mystic River age so poorly.

[menikmati]

Erik, how was Ratatouille?

It was good, as I expected something coming from Pixar to be. I mean obviously the animation was top notch, and the amount of detail put into shots and sequences is really amazing actually, and it has a nice uplifting story/theme. I just woke up so I'm too lazy to write up some huge review...but seeing this (and Cars the day before) reminds me why Pixar is like a million miles ahead of every other computer animation studio from the likes of Fox (Ice Age) and Dreamworks (Shrek - in fact Shrek is some of the most pathetic work I've seen). I wouldn't call it Pixar's best work, but its good. If I had to rank the Pixar films, I would probably do it something like:

1. Toy Story
2. Finding Nemo
3. Monsters Inc.
4. Cars
5. Toy Story 2
6. Ratatouille
7. The Incredibles
8. A Bug's Life

Of course that isn't to say that Pixar movies don't have flaws. The only perfect one I can think of is the original Toy Story. I do enjoy Finding Nemo, though I do find that Dory character to be annoying at times. But I liked the fact that they went with Thomas Newman for the score, and made the film kinda sad (which is always a plus). And I absolutely can't stand the Jesse character in Toy Story 2 - thought it was way over the top and very annoying, which is why that film gets ranked so low (though its still good). With more viewings, I'm sure Ratatouille will move up the list.

[Stefinitely Maybe]

there's a generous amount of Marisa Tomei nudity

Must see.

[mountmccabe]

I saw The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford this evening based on nothing but word of mouth from this board. I can't even say I had read the many fine reports posted here from wanting to avoid spoiling anything so it was just the secondhand stuff that hooked me.

We went to the UA Sonoran Village 8 after a few pints at 4 Peaks Brewing Company (mmm, Pumpkin Porter) and my friends and I were the only three in the theater. Ahh, that's a nice feeling.

It did feel ponderously slow but I have no idea what I could've cut; I loved the rich background provided.

I was excited to see Nick Cave up there.

I can confirm that the cinematography was strong and that the narration was odd and unwelcome.

I was slightly uncomfortable whenever Casey Affleck was on screen, his slightly disturbed portrayal of a young man trying to fit in with his idols was that strong.

Brad Pitt's Jesse James was more actorly and I'm not sure it fit so well; much of the side happenings were hinted at and suggested whereas when Jesse was on screen he was carefully studied.

These are relatively minor quibbles, though, this was a very strong movie.

[roberto73]

I'm seeing No Country for Old Men at the Arclight tomorrow. I currently feel like an 8-year-old on Christmas Eve.

[wmgaretjax]

I saw "Gone Baby Gone" tonight because of Gabe's recommendation. I almost went and saw "Wristcutters" afterwords, but opted to call it an early night.

Ben Affleck should keep directing. I don't see how this point could be argued. His film is an incredible first effort. It is flawed... very flawed, but deserves every bit of the acclaim it has been receiving.

Start with the bad points. Affleck falls victim to so many of the issues directors have with their early films. Main points being the music and the "peripheral" actors. The music in the film is awful. I can't stress this point more. Affleck does not have enough confidence in his ability to communicate the impressions of the film, and so offers the responsibility up to hamhanded music. What occurs is a frustrating experience of being told the same thing twice (once beautiful and quietly, second loud and obnoxiously). He also has some trouble directing the less fleshed out characters. A prime example is the girlfriend. While we don't need to know exactly what makes her tick, Affleck seems to have directed her with some inconsistency. She feels as if she has been loosely drawn and is simply pulled around like a ragdoll according to the events in the film. Because of this, uncharacteristic and unnatural dialogue pops out, even when she seems to make sense within the internal logic of the film.

These serious faults aside, the film is fucking phenomenal.

I have a lot of trouble coming up with similar films that articulate moral ambiguity in such a powerful and controlled manner. It is impossible as a viewer to make judgements of these characters without becoming entwined with the complexity of their situations. I wanted to hate this film the whole way through because I don't like crime dramas and the issues I raised above, but Affleck had me pinned. This film is not clean; not in clarity, not in understanding, and not in convention. It is dirty as fuck and is impossible to break yourself away from.

The plot feels contrived at moments, but always makes up for it in the extraordinary relationships the characters have to their own interests, conceptions of morality, and impressions of the few moments in time we experience. There is some heavy handed editing, but it's forgiven quickly by the following sequence.

The acting is excellent from Casey Affleck (who is quickly becoming one of my favorite actors) and Ed Harris, with the remainder of the cast being competent. I called the ending about half way through the film (and you could call it a "twist" I guess), but it certainly didn't detract from the experience (and to me, that's a sign that a film has the potential to be great).

All in all, I highly recommend this film. It handles many of it's themes more deftly than past films have even come close to. It is incredibly flawed, but also extraordinarily rewarding. I fucking hate crime dramas, but this film had me engaged all the way through.

[rage patton]

1. Toy Story
2. Finding Nemo
3. Monsters Inc.
4. Cars
5. Toy Story 2
6. Ratatouille
7. The Incredibles
8. A Bug's Life


My Pixar movie ratings.

1. Toy Story
2. Monsters Inc.
3. Finding Nemo
4. Toy Story 2
5. The Incredibles
6. A Bugs Life
7. Cars

Ratatouille?

I havent rated Ratatouille yet, because I havent seen it. I expect it to be just above/below The Incredibles. Personaly, the only Pixar movie that has disapointed me was Cars. I was very, very let down. It took me a while to figure it out. But not long ago, I think I finaly found out the reason. Larry The Cable Guy. I really fuckin hate that guy. Not only that though, I found myself kind of bored and uninterested in the charcters/story line. Something that hasnt been the case in any of the other Pixar movies. So with that being said, there is a big gap between A Bugs Life and Cars. Because I did enjoy A Bugs Life quite a bit. I would give Cars a 6/10, while I would give a Bugs Life 7.5
Toy Story will never been taken out of the number one spot. Not only is it my favorite Pixar movie, but it is my favorite Disne movie. Well, a dead tie with The Lion King. You are right though Menik, Jesse was a pretty annoying charcter in Toy Story 2. But I just love the characters in that movie so much, I couldnt help but love the movie. I have high hopes for Toy Story 3.

[Yablonowitz]

Are you guys ranking Toy Story so high because it was their first one? Because that's the only reason I can think of. yeesh.




1. Finding Nemo
2. The Incredibles
3. Ratatouille
4. Monsters Inc
5. Toy Story 2
6. A Bug's Life
7. Cars
8. Toy Story

[luckyface]

I will get in on this...

1. Monsters Inc.
2. The Incredibles
3. Ratatouille
4. Toy Story 2
5. Toy Story
6. A Bug's Life
7. Finding Nemo
8. Cars

I think I really missed the boat on Finding Nemo. Had it not been for the disaster that was Cars, it would easily be the bottom choice for me.

[C DUB YA]

Are you guys ranking Toy Story so high because it was their first one? Because that's the only reason I can think of. yeesh.




1. Finding Nemo
2. The Incredibles
3. Ratatouille
4. Monsters Inc
5. Toy Story 2
6. A Bug's Life
7. Cars
8. Toy Story

We park our cars in similar garages on this.

1. Finding Nemo
2. The Incredibles
3. Monsters Inc
4. Toy Story 2
5. Ratatouille
6. Toy Story
7. A Bug's Life
8. Cars

Oh and someone mentioned Shrek being bad, it's not just bad - it's horrid. Shrek 3 might be some of the most lackluster writing ever done.

[ThomThom]

I saw The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford this evening based on nothing but word of mouth from this board. I can't even say I had read the many fine reports posted here from wanting to avoid spoiling anything so it was just the secondhand stuff that hooked me.

We went to the UA Sonoran Village 8 after a few pints at 4 Peaks Brewing Company (mmm, Pumpkin Porter) and my friends and I were the only three in the theater. Ahh, that's a nice feeling.

It did feel ponderously slow but I have no idea what I could've cut; I loved the rich background provided.

I was excited to see Nick Cave up there.

I can confirm that the cinematography was strong and that the narration was odd and unwelcome.

I was slightly uncomfortable whenever Casey Affleck was on screen, his slightly disturbed portrayal of a young man trying to fit in with his idols was that strong.

Brad Pitt's Jesse James was more actorly and I'm not sure it fit so well; much of the side happenings were hinted at and suggested whereas when Jesse was on screen he was carefully studied.

These are relatively minor quibbles, though, this was a very strong movie.


What is weird about Affleck's performance in this film is that it is almost unwatchable but in a good way. I felt embarrassed for him in virtually every scene. I thought it was fucking fantastic. One of the better performances of the year. Not many young actors could have developed that character as well as he did.

[Courtney]

It was good, as I expected something coming from Pixar to be. I mean obviously the animation was top notch, and the amount of detail put into shots and sequences is really amazing actually, and it has a nice uplifting story/theme. I just woke up so I'm too lazy to write up some huge review...but seeing this (and Cars the day before) reminds me why Pixar is like a million miles ahead of every other computer animation studio from the likes of Fox (Ice Age) and Dreamworks (Shrek - in fact Shrek is some of the most pathetic work I've seen). I wouldn't call it Pixar's best work, but its good. If I had to rank the Pixar films, I would probably do it something like:

1. Toy Story
2. Finding Nemo
3. Monsters Inc.
4. Cars
5. Toy Story 2
6. Ratatouille
7. The Incredibles
8. A Bug's Life

Of course that isn't to say that Pixar movies don't have flaws. The only perfect one I can think of is the original Toy Story. I do enjoy Finding Nemo, though I do find that Dory character to be annoying at times. But I liked the fact that they went with Thomas Newman for the score, and made the film kinda sad (which is always a plus). And I absolutely can't stand the Jesse character in Toy Story 2 - thought it was way over the top and very annoying, which is why that film gets ranked so low (though its still good). With more viewings, I'm sure Ratatouille will move up the list.

Thanks. I have not seen any of these! Actually, that's not true. I think I saw Toy Story on a flight once and slept through half of it. But that hardly counts.

[wmgaretjax]

pixar movies... I have not seen Ratatouille.

1. Incredibles
2. Toy Story 2
3. Toy Story
4. Monster's Inc
5. Finding Nemo
6. Cars
7. A Bug's Life

[RotationSlimWang]

Way to go, Jared. I was terribly confused that anyone thought The Incredibles wasn't Pixar's best work to date, myself also not having seen Rattattat or whatever.

[Mr.Nipples]

the one with the lamp...

[RotationSlimWang]

The Brave Little Toaster beats anything Pixar's ever done.

[PotVsKtl]

4. Cars
5. Toy Story 2


Something is tragically wrong with you.

[wmgaretjax]

The Brave Little Toaster beats anything Pixar's ever done.

holy shit yes. actually no.

i did mushrooms last year and was rumaging through my old stuff from childhood. I found a VHS and popped it in. it was so terrible. it made me sad that something I thought was so great when I was a kid could be so awful. seriously. think about it... a kid's shit goes on an epic journey to find him.

[RotationSlimWang]

Dude, I don't know what the fuck you're talking about. That movie rules, I watched it like two years ago. It's a first-class kids movie.

[wmgaretjax]

Way to go, Jared. I was terribly confused that anyone thought The Incredibles wasn't Pixar's best work to date, myself also not having seen Rattattat or whatever.

i shit my pants during incredibles... i laughed harder than I have ever laughed in my entire life.

[chrislasf]

The Incredibles is Pixar's best. Anyone who argues is mistaken. And Iron Giant is even better than the Incredibles.

[schoolofruckus]

I saw "Gone Baby Gone" tonight because of Gabe's recommendation. I almost went and saw "Wristcutters" afterwords, but opted to call it an early night.

Ben Affleck should keep directing. I don't see how this point could be argued. His film is an incredible first effort. It is flawed... very flawed, but deserves every bit of the acclaim it has been receiving.

Start with the bad points. Affleck falls victim to so many of the issues directors have with their early films. Main points being the music and the "peripheral" actors. The music in the film is awful. I can't stress this point more. Affleck does not have enough confidence in his ability to communicate the impressions of the film, and so offers the responsibility up to hamhanded music. What occurs is a frustrating experience of being told the same thing twice (once beautiful and quietly, second loud and obnoxiously). He also has some trouble directing the less fleshed out characters. A prime example is the girlfriend. While we don't need to know exactly what makes her tick, Affleck seems to have directed her with some inconsistency. She feels as if she has been loosely drawn and is simply pulled around like a ragdoll according to the events in the film. Because of this, uncharacteristic and unnatural dialogue pops out, even when she seems to make sense within the internal logic of the film.

These serious faults aside, the film is fucking phenomenal.

I have a lot of trouble coming up with similar films that articulate moral ambiguity in such a powerful and controlled manner. It is impossible as a viewer to make judgements of these characters without becoming entwined with the complexity of their situations. I wanted to hate this film the whole way through because I don't like crime dramas and the issues I raised above, but Affleck had me pinned. This film is not clean; not in clarity, not in understanding, and not in convention. It is dirty as fuck and is impossible to break yourself away from.

The plot feels contrived at moments, but always makes up for it in the extraordinary relationships the characters have to their own interests, conceptions of morality, and impressions of the few moments in time we experience. There is some heavy handed editing, but it's forgiven quickly by the following sequence.

The acting is excellent from Casey Affleck (who is quickly becoming one of my favorite actors) and Ed Harris, with the remainder of the cast being competent. I called the ending about half way through the film (and you could call it a "twist" I guess), but it certainly didn't detract from the experience (and to me, that's a sign that a film has the potential to be great).

All in all, I highly recommend this film. It handles many of it's themes more deftly than past films have even come close to. It is incredibly flawed, but also extraordinarily rewarding. I fucking hate crime dramas, but this film had me engaged all the way through.

I do agree that not nearly enough was done with Michelle Monaghan's character. I let that skate because I find her so likable that it didn't feel as egregious. But she should definitely have been more of a factor.

(everyone's Pixar rankings)

I haven't seen Cars or Ratatouille, although the latter is definitely on my list.


Toy Story 2
Toy Story
Finding Nemo
The Incredibles
Monsters Inc.
A Bug's Life


John, I'm glad you liked Assassination of Jesse James, but it doesn't exactly sound like it made you come. I'm sorry - it was probably just drunk and tired that night and didn't really put all its effort into satisfying your needs.

I myself just watched Andrei Rublev. Pretty stunning film.....visually outstanding (although my TV didn't exactly handle the old-school Criterion transfer all that well, so I watched the film in about 3:1 aspect ratio). The story was pretty great too; I often found individual scenes wowing me, but the through-line of the film didn't really add up until I weighed it over during the color montage at the end. Still have no fucking clue what the first scene had to do with anything, although it was cool in its own way.

[rage patton]

Are you guys ranking Toy Story so high because it was their first one? Because that's the only reason I can think of. yeesh.

Toy Story is ranked as number one, because it is easily the best. I have such a fond place in my heart for that movie.

Had it not been for the disaster that was Cars...

Calling Cars a disaster is generous.

the one with the lamp...

I was actually looking through my VHS collection for that movie the other day. I didn't find it.
But you know what I did find? Petes Dragon! That was also one of my favorites as a kid. That movie is still great! I just realized Mickey Rooney is in it! And he is drunk pretty much the whole movie... I wonder if I "got it" as a kid...

And looking back at my Pixar list... I might switch The Incredibles and Toy Story 2 around. It depends on what kind of mood I am in. I highly doubt my top 3, Toy Story, Monsters Inc., and Finding Nemo respectively, will ever change though.

[roberto73]

No Country for Old Men today. What a film. I know the book, have read it more than once, and this movie still hit me on a completely visceral level. There was a coiled spring in my gut from the get-go, and it didn't unwind itself until the credits rolled. I don't have much to add to what has already been said except to chine in that this is undoubtedly one of the best pictures of the year. Yes, people were griping about the ending, but fuck 'em. Anything less would have been a cheat.

One thing I guess I will say is that I'm now an unrepentant Josh Brolin fan. I remember laughing my head off at his character during Flirting With Disaster, but then he got shuffled off into the cinematic purgatory of crap like Hollow Man and The Mod Squad. 2007 – between No Country and Planet Terror – has been a great year for him. I'd love to see him get an Oscar nod. And my infatuation with Kelly MacDonald – born with Trainspotting over a decade ago – continues unabated here.

[menikmati]

damn...why such hate for Cars? Maybe I'm the only one here, but when I was little...my sister and I would get our big box of cars (hotwheels, matchbox etc...) and create our own little car village with families, groups, cliques, good guys, bad guys etc...and we would play for hours...that movie hit home for me I guess.

And yablo, I like Toy Story for many reasons (nothing to do with it being the first Pixar film)....I just love the story (because again, my sister and I had this big box of odd toys - and we called it that too 'odd toys' - and we would play with them for hours on end on a weekend - just like what you see in the movie)...plus I think the clash between Woody and Buzz is classic. Good stuff.

[SojuGorae]

Saw American Gangster last night.

I liked it, but I was expecting more. All throughout I kind of wished certain elements of the story were fictionalized for dramatic effect. Everything seemed too low-key. It seemed as though the filmmakers told the story of Lucas maybe too accurately. It had the same effect as Blow. The main character's life didn't seem too exciting for a drug-running gangster.

Or maybe I've been weened on too much Scarface, The Godfather, and countless other gangster pictures from the past with jacked up testosterone levels.

If Frank Lucas had an out-of-control lifestyle and disposition as Henry Hill from Goodfellas, I think the picture would have been a blast.

[miscorrections]

One thing I guess I will say is that I'm now an unrepentant Josh Brolin fan.

I saw this on Sunday and I was completely blown away, but I thought Josh Brolin kind of paled in comparison to Javier Bardem. I read the book so long ago that I didn't remember anything, but I think I'd like to read it again because the movie was so excellent.

I found it interesting that Brolin has the same mustache in both American Gangster and No Country For Old Men. And I mean nearly identical.

[Jerm05]

Saw American Gangster last night.

I liked it, but I was expecting more. All throughout I kind of wished certain elements of the story were fictionalized for dramatic effect. Everything seemed too low-key. It seemed as though the filmmakers told the story of Lucas maybe too accurately. It had the same effect as Blow. The main character's life didn't seem too exciting for a drug-running gangster.

Or maybe I've been weened on too much Scarface, The Godfather, and countless other gangster pictures from the past with jacked up testosterone levels.

If Frank Lucas had an out-of-control lifestyle and disposition as Henry Hill from Goodfellas, I think the picture would have been a blast.

I agree with you totally, especially about the Blow comparison. That movie did not live up to its title, but it was still good.

[miscorrections]

Seriously? I thought the subtlety of his personality made for great tension. Anything over-the-top would have been unremarkable.

And for the record, I dislike both Denzel Washington and Russell Crowe but somehow they both managed to not irritate me.

[roberto73]

I saw this on Sunday and I was completely blown away, but I thought Josh Brolin kind of paled in comparison to Javier Bardem. I read the book so long ago that I didn't remember anything, but I think I'd like to read it again because the movie was so excellent.

I found it interesting that Brolin has the same mustache in both American Gangster and No Country For Old Men. And I mean nearly identical.

No disagreement with you on Javier Bardem. I focused on Brolin just because he's flown under the radar for so long and been in so many lousy movies that it's good to see him in high-profile films like this and American Gangster. See Flirting With Disaster if you haven't. It's David O. Russell's second film, and I think it's one of the best comedies of the 90's.

[wmgaretjax]

http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,20158721_1,00.html

jonny on scoring "There Will Be Blood."

fuck I am so excited for this film.

[Courtney]

Saw American Gangster last night. [...] The main character's life didn't seem too exciting for a drug-running gangster. [...] If Frank Lucas had an out-of-control lifestyle and disposition as Henry Hill from Goodfellas, I think the picture would have been a blast.

But in my opinion, that was the whole point! I wrote a bit about this a couple days ago (http://coachella.com/forum/showpost.php?p=338717&postcount=3333). The film addressed issues of moral relativism by contrasting Frank Lucas' character with Richie Roberts. One has a very exciting (and "immoral") personal life but spent his days as a cop; the other had a traditional family and "boring" personal life but spent his days as a drug lord. By serving as a foil for each other, the characters worked in tandem to question ideas of absolute good and bad.

[SojuGorae]

But in my opinion, that was the whole point! I wrote a bit about this a couple days ago (http://coachella.com/forum/showpost.php?p=338717&postcount=3333). The film addressed issues of moral relativism by contrasting Frank Lucas' character with Richie Roberts. One has a very exciting (and "immoral") personal life but spent his days as a cop; the other had a traditional family and "boring" personal life but spent his days as a drug lord. By serving as a foil for each other, the characters worked in tandem to question ideas of absolute good and bad.

That was indeed interesting. Especially during the custody hearing when Richie's wife tells him that whole schpiel about how he carries a holier-than-thou mentality at work even though his personal life is as morally corrupt as the cops taking kick-backs.

[algunz]

I saw Into the Wild and absolutely hated every second of it.

The cinematography was horrible. Considering the terrain they had to work with they managed to make much of America look like the 395.

The voiceover from his sister's perspective was boring and forced, even Eddie's soundtrack seemed flat.

And I hated how they glorified this kid's self-righteous stupidity, at least in the book Krakauer recognizes his misguided motivations.

Thank god I was comfortably stoned, otherwise it was a total waste of time.

[bmack86]

What's wrong with 395? you tell me that!

[thefunkylama]

Tchk. Clearly everything.

[Cpt. Funkaho]

And I hated how they glorified this kid's self-righteous stupidity, at least in the book Krakauer recognizes his misguided motivations.


You have just identified the reason that 90% of Alaskans detest the Chris McCandless story. Half of the people who come here are looking to get away from people the way he was... they just aren't stupid enough to go out and die doing it.

The other half of the people here, generally, are on the run from the law. This is as far out on the frontier as they can get with limited means.

[algunz]

What's wrong with 395? you tell me that!

Nothing really, B. It's the road to Mammoth, so that's A-OK with me, but making every stop along McCandless' cross country route look like the film crew just drove an hour out of LA was frustrating. America is full of beautiful views and Penn seemed to capture none of it. So much potential for a really lyrically visual film and it was just plain flat. He even managed to make an Alaskan stream look dirty, now how the fuck is that possible?

[C DUB YA]

I am most excited about THERE WILL BE BLOOD. There is a bit of curiosity about BEOWULF though, esp. since all the rave reviews are pouring in now.

[schoolofruckus]

I just got back from Todd Haynes' brilliantly inventive Bob Dylan biopic I'm Not There. I toyed with the idea of sitting on this one for a little while and trying to figure it out further, but with my limited familiarity with Dylan's life and work, further insight is probably not forthcoming. Besides, I want to talk about this one while it's still fresh, and before it gets overwhelmed by the film I'm seeing tomorrow night.

Once again, I'm a Dylan neophyte, so I'm looking at this solely as a self-contained film. It'll take multiple viewings and a great deal of reading up on the subject before I understand the reasons and symbolism behind most of this film's unique tapestry. But I was absolutely slave to every aspect of this story, from the performances to the presentation....I'm sorry, did I just say story? No, no, I really didn't mean that. The film absolutely presents a man's life and times, but to bill this as a sequence of interconnected events is just plain fallacy. Rather, this is a series of diverse vignettes with a complete, unquestionably unified embodiment of common spirit. It's surprisingly cohesive for how out-there and experimental the approach is, but this film's through-line runs no nearer to the surface than its soul.

I'm doing a great job of pissing on sunshine thus far, so now would be a good time to mention that this film is fucking fun. It's an outright kick watching different actors present their take on the evasive genius who seemed to enjoy subverting expectations above any other pleasure his life had to offer. Those looking for easy Dylan touchstones need to stick to the documentaries, as all the actors here are playing various characters borne out of Dylan's mythology; in fact, none of them even bear his real name. Cate Blanchett's performance has received most of the upfront buzz for some superficial reasons, but the truth is that she gets most of the juiciest material (the thinly veiled Newport Folk Festival, for starters), and it really is a wonder to watch her inhabit this character in all his unsettled rebellion. The young Marcus Carl Franklin does a magnificent job portraying the earliest-featured incarnation of Dylan, nailing his early, wide-eyed confidence with warmth. Christian Bale gets probably the least amount of time in character, but his performance and press conference footage is handled expertly. Ben Whishaw is featured mostly as a young Dylan being interviewed by the authorities, and his "testimony" serves as more of a bridge/narration between different sequences than it does its own strand, but it does so in a way that feels wholly organic. Richard Gere's section as the Billy the Kid has been maligned as "the one that doesn't fit"; while I don't feel like he makes as strong of an impression compared to the other five, his plot is definitely of a piece with the rest of the film, and he does fine with what he's given. Heath Ledger plays an incarnation of Dylan that, frankly, I have no idea about the history of; he ends up getting what little conventional biopic material there is here, but apart from that (which is so minimal as to be noticed but forgiven), he does a nice job and is given some strong scenes.

Bottom line - this is one of the year's boldest, most uncompromising films, and a perfect companion to the relentless intransigence that is perhaps the most consistent piece of Bob Dylan's life. If you profess or aspire to any love of either Dylan, or movies in general, you absolutely must see it. It's one of the finest music films ever made, and definitely among this year's best.

[full on idle]

Gabe, I barely ever read your reviews before I see the movie but you just got me so freaking amped with that one.

[schoolofruckus]

I'm glad to hear that. This film is so oddball that it may put people off in advance, but I need to stress - shit is a BLAST. Not in the "it's a venerable work of aht!" sense, but in the "holy shit, this is blowing my mind" sense.

[full on idle]

do you know when it opens here?

[schoolofruckus]

It's going out on Wednesday 11/21. From what I gather, it's not a wide release, but it seems to be major markets (more than just LA/NY). I bet it hits the Bay on that day.

[bballarl]

I wonder if it will play at a Mann theater so I can use the coupon for a free movie that we got last year when me/you/Chris saw "The Prestige" and couldn't hear shit.

[Steez]

ive seen a lot of movies in like the past three weeks

Michael Clayton, ill give that an 9/10
Saw 4 that gets a 5/10
American Gangster 8/10, liked it the first time, saw it again and thought less of it
Bee movie 6/10
and i know there is one i keep forgetting

[mountmccabe]

Southland Tales opens in Phoenix tomorrow. Half a dozen or so screens.

[wmgaretjax]

good to hear about the Haynes film Gabe, I'm a big fan of his. Comes out next week here.

I should be seeing Southland Tales and Old Country this weekend. If I'm lucky I'll slip in Wristcutters as well.

[schoolofruckus]

I'm seeing There Will Be Blood in 5 hours. And Paul Thomas Anderson and Daniel Day-Lewis will be in the house for a question and answer session. There, I said it.

I will probably try to catch some movies this weekend, but they can go fuck right now for all I care.

[wmgaretjax]

I'm seeing There Will Be Blood in 5 hours. And Paul Thomas Anderson and Daniel Day-Lewis will be in the house for a question and answer session. There, I said it.

I will probably try to catch some movies this weekend, but they can go fuck right now for all I care.

fuck you gabe.

fuck you.

seriously?

fuck you.

[RotationSlimWang]

I'm not paying to see There Will Be Blood. In fact, I'm not watching it unless I can steal it or it's on HBO.

[schoolofruckus]

Neither am I. At least not this time.

Also, I have to give ThomThom mad props for hooking me up with the info on this screening. He gets the Movie Corner Reader of the Week award.

[schoolofruckus]

I saw it. It fucked my skull. In an amazing way. That's all you get for now.

No, seriously, Brad had it right - the less you know, the better. It's not like spoilers would kill the movie (by the way - he's dead the entire time and doesn't know it yet), but it's just such a mesmerizing and awe-striking slow burn that knowing what's on the horizon would rob it of an ever so slight fraction of it's formidable power. And since I don't probably need to sell anyone on seeing it (because anyone - and I mean ANYONE - who is even a casual fan of cinema will be there, no questions asked), what's to gain in writing about it now? I'll get into it around New Year's after you guys have gotten your own crack at it. After all, it just ruined my holiday film diet - I'm sure a couple films on my to-see list just hit the deck because I'll be rewatching this one probably at least twice.

[comiddle]

At the video store the other day I inadvertently picked up a night of Aussie/Kiwi flicks:

Black Sheep (Kiwi) 7/10
He Died With a Falafel in His Hand (Aussie) 10/10
Ten Canoes (Aussie) 7/10

And then I dusted off my copy of Chopper (Aussie) just for kicks (Cheers, big ears!) 7/10

[schoolofruckus]

I'd like to see Chopper. Wasn't it done by the guy that did Assassination of Jesse James...?

[Yablonowitz]

Daniel Day Lewis did not kill you?

[wmgaretjax]

I saw it. It fucked my skull. In an amazing way. That's all you get for now.

No, seriously, Brad had it right - the less you know, the better. It's not like spoilers would kill the movie (by the way - he's dead the entire time and doesn't know it yet), but it's just such a mesmerizing and awe-striking slow burn that knowing what's on the horizon would rob it of an ever so slight fraction of it's formidable power. And since I don't probably need to sell anyone on seeing it (because anyone - and I mean ANYONE - who is even a casual fan of cinema will be there, no questions asked), what's to gain in writing about it now? I'll get into it around New Year's after you guys have gotten your own crack at it. After all, it just ruined my holiday film diet - I'm sure a couple films on my to-see list just hit the deck because I'll be rewatching this one probably at least twice.

ah shit. thanks for having the consideration not to spoil it. I'm avoiding reviews of this one, and i'm glad you didn't feel the need to go through all the details. now I just have to wait...

[schoolofruckus]

Something this bold and of the highest possible caliber a movie can be at needs to just be experienced. There are several current filmmakers who are as good as Paul Thomas Anderson, but he may very well be my personal favorite.

And no, Yablo, I did not get killed by Daniel Day-Lewis. He was actually a big teddy bear. I punched him in the face to see if he'd respond, and he turned the other cheek.

[TomAz]

how was Greenwood's score?

[schoolofruckus]

Insane. And I don't mean that as in "insanely good" - I mean it's literally insane. Although it definitely is beneficial to the film.

[wmgaretjax]

Insane. And I don't mean that as in "insanely good" - I mean it's literally insane. Although it definitely is beneficial to the film.

a good chunk of it is available. Popcorn Superhet Receiver 2 is absolutely awesome. his score for Bodysong was also really good.

[PotVsKtl]

I'd like to see Chopper.

I'd recommend you do that. It's basically a biopic about a myth and Bana's only great role.

[roberto73]

I'd like to see Chopper. Wasn't it done by the guy that did Assassination of Jesse James...?

Yes, it was. And to echo Pot, Eric Bana is great in it. Which means his performance in Chopper is a fluke, or he's a great actor who's been slumming it for the last seven years. I can't really tell.

[schoolofruckus]

It wasn't what I would call a great role, but I liked him in Black Hawk Down. However, that hallucinatory fuck scene in Munich is one of the most embarassing sequences in movie history, so he gets jail time for taking part.

[luckyface]

However, that hallucinatory fuck scene in Munich is one of the most embarassing sequences in movie history, so he gets jail time for taking part.

Hahaha. That seriously is the worst scene I have ever witnessed in a movie. Has anyone figured out what the hell that was supposed to mean?

[schoolofruckus]

It meant "I'm Steven Spielberg, I have no idea how to portray scenes of intimate human interaction, but I'm making a movie about important historical events so god DAMMIT you will kowtow! Whateva! I do what I want!"

[ThomThom]

The entire time I was watching that I was imagining his wife doing her nails, smoking a cigarette, or texting on a cell phone

[schoolofruckus]

What did you think of last night's experience?

[wmgaretjax]

i thought the meaning was pretty clear. the manner in which desensitization creeps into the home. granted I thought it was heavy handed as fuck.

i'll take a moment to say that my favorite sex scene in a movie is History of Violence (both as a pair).

i saw No Country for Old Men. No one should miss that movie.

[ThomThom]

What did you think of last night's experience?


I left work later than expected, by the time I got there around 7:15 they were already packing up outside the venue and told me and my guests that it was at capacity. The Paramount rep there told me that they were looking into another special screening/Q&A soon with no other information, I will do some snooping around and let you know about that screening if and when I get details. I am seeing No Country for Old Men tonight at the new Arclight in Sherman Oaks which has me somewhat excited but I am still pretty bummed about missing There Will Be Blood on Thursday. How was the Q&A?

[schoolofruckus]

Oh man! That is fucking brutal. Here's hoping they do play it again with additional Q&A.

That night's Q&A was probably the best I've ever witnessed. I love PTA's commentary on "Boogie Nights" to death, and he's always a pretty great interview from everything I've seen, in spite of being a little on the evasive side. And Daniel Day-Lewis is the absolute opposite of the larger-than-life villains he's been playing lately - polite, soft-spoken, and extremely thoughtful. His performance in "Blood" speaks for itself, as far as being one of the finest I've ever seen, but seeing the contrast of just how fucking far the real Day-Lewis is from his Daniel Plainview really put the scope of his achievement into context. If the character weren't so vile, I would take my savings account to Vegas on him winning the Oscar this year, but we all know how seldom the Academy tends to get these things right. Anyway, my favorite observation of this panel was when Anderson said that pretty much the only thing he and Day-Lewis discussed in terms of the character was the idea that a man who spends his days mining or drilling for oil is essentially alone all the time, with nothing but the sound of his tools and occasionally his own voice. But when such men are required to have to go out and sell their quarry, they have to interact with other people, and they wanted to capture the feeling that a guy like Plainview got when he was interrupted while speaking. I thought that was a fantastic fucking detail to use as the jump-off point.

But what really took the session to a higher level was the moderator. I noticed when entering the theater that Judd Apatow was attending as well, and when I got inside he was sitting in a row with Seth Rogen, Jonah Hill, and a couple other guys from their cadre. It turned out that Apatow wasn't only there to view the film, but to actually be the one interviewing the filmmakers! I'm guessing they got him because of his improv background, because he said he hadn't seen the movie prior to that night. Anyway, he was pretty damn funny and definitely engaging as a moderator. He wasn't shy about making jokes in reference to his own work, but he asked great questions, and actually the audience did as well. Usually when the questions get turned over to the audience members, I get up to leave because fanboys can be mercilessly stupid in front of their idols, but everyone at this show seemed to have decent things to ask.


In other news, I'm watching "Titanic" on TNT-HD right now. I don't care what anybody says - it may be heavily flawed, but it's a goddamn astounding film. If Cameron had just taken a story credit and let a more skilled screenwriter handle the dialogue duties, this movie would have been unstoppable.

[menikmati]

I like Titanic. High five.

[menikmati]

oh and A Walk to Remember is on after Titanic. I like that movie too. Shoot me.

[algunz]

My husband and I are going to see a movie on Friday. We don't have many opportunities to get to the theater these days and last time we went we saw Into the Wild and it was HORRIBLE. I don't want to waste another movie venture. What current films would you kids recommend? No Country for Old Men is top on my list right now, but are there any other movies that I should consider?

[Mr.Nipples]

are there any other movies that I should consider?
DEe5dVsdAMM&rel=1

[schoolofruckus]

My husband and I are going to see a movie on Friday. We don't have many opportunities to get to the theater these days and last time we went we saw Into the Wild and it was HORRIBLE. I don't want to waste another movie venture. What current films would you kids recommend? No Country for Old Men is top on my list right now, but are there any other movies that I should consider?

You should stay home and rent Orange County.

[schoolofruckus]

Last night I watched Day Night Day Night, an abstract, guerilla-style film about a young girl spending two days preparing for a suicide bombing mission in Times Square. If I say anything further about it, it'll ruin what there is to enjoy about it. It's not as absorbing as, say, "Elephant" - a far more composed, but narratively similar film - but it's an intriguing concept made all the more fascinating by its minimalism. It starts out a bit underwhelming, but definitely gets stronger as it progresses. And it's impressive in the fact that I can't imagine it cost more than $1,000 to make.

[suprefan]

So who saw Beowulf? There is a trailer for ''Cloverfield'' on it aka 1-18-08 the new J.J. Abrams film. The trailer looks crazy.

[Hannahrain]

I'd forgotten how good Blue Velvet was until last night. Kyle McLachlan looks like he should be on a toothpaste box.

Somehow (it was completely unplanned), we all ended up wearing ridiculous hats and switching them every time someone in the movie said "mother" or "mom" or any derivative thereof. But there was no pattern to it, you just sort of threw your hat to someone else and hoped someone threw one to you. Somehow I ended up wearing most of the hats, stacked on top of one another. The topmost one was a blue velvet top hat, which was purely accidental.

[full on idle]

Beowulf in IMAX 3-D was awesome. Beowulf was such a stud. Also, demons and a dragon.

[wmgaretjax]

why the fuck does anyone give a shit about jj abrams? he has yet to make or write or produce a decent film.

[miscorrections]

Negative Nancy alert.

[schoolofruckus]

why the fuck does anyone give a shit about jj abrams? he has yet to make or write or produce a decent film.

I thought his "Mission: Impossible" was decent. I'm not a fan of the series, but I liked his the best.

[menikmati]

Hey gabe, what are your favorite Leo DiCaprio movies?

[schoolofruckus]

I liked him in "Titanic" (did what he could with dialogue that was largely sub-par), "Catch Me If You Can" (the movie vaguely sucks, but he was good in the role), and "Basketball Diaries" (solid all around). I like "Gangs of New York" a lot, but his performance wasn't very good in it. I loved "The Departed" and thought that was his best work. It's been too long since I saw "Romeo + Juliet" to comment on it. I did not like "The Aviator" and his being miscast was a huge part of that.

[Mr.Nipples]

I liked him in "Titanic" (did what he could with dialogue that was largely sub-par), "Catch Me If You Can" (the movie vaguely sucks, but he was good in the role), and "Basketball Diaries" (solid all around). I like "Gangs of New York" a lot, but his performance wasn't very good in it. I loved "The Departed" and thought that was his best work. It's been too long since I saw "Romeo + Juliet" to comment on it. I did not like "The Aviator" and his being miscast was a huge part of that.

what about whats eating gilbert grape?

[wmgaretjax]

i watched gangs of new york last night. that's a good leo movie. The only other one I've seen that I liked a lot was The Departed. I didn't care for Catch Me if You Can, Blood Diamond, Titanic, Beach, Romeo and Juliet, or What's Eating Gilbert Grape.

[menikmati]

I love Gangs of New York.

[RotationSlimWang]

Off to see No Country. Will be back with the definitive word on it shortly.

[Courtney]

I'd forgotten how good Blue Velvet was until last night. Kyle McLachlan looks like he should be on a toothpaste box.

Yes yes yes.

[Courtney]

I watched Paris, je t'aime the other day. It was mostly good, although I do think that something could have been gained by a greater cohesion of the various segments. Considering the all-star cast of directors and actors involved, I guess I was expecting more.

[Mr.Nipples]

going to see no country for old men in about an hour...

[KungFuJoe]

BEOWULF in Imax 3D was awesome. Not sure it's a film I'd enjoy so much in any other format, but it was awesome none the less. Sure the animation is fairly stiff and distracting at times, but the 3D & action scenes make up for it enough. Also, Crispin Glover!! If your going to see it though make sure it's in
3D. It doesn't have to be in IMAX, but it should be in 3D. Otherwise you may find yourself bored at times. On a side note, what's with the nude male fight scenes this year??

Also saw Southland Tales this week. That movie is ridiculous and I mean that mostly in a very good way. Not all of it works and it's a bit too long, but it certainly is a interesting and entertaining piece of work. Not sure it would make my top ten at the end of the year though.

I'll probably see No Country For Old Men again next weekend. It's as great as you all say, though I'm not entirely sold if it beats out Assassination of Jesse James. Both great films! Funny how they share the same cinematographor. I see an Academy Award in Roger Deakons future.

I'm jealous of all ya'all that have seen There Will Be Blood.

[Mr.Nipples]

I'm not one to get deep into giving critiques on films and such...No Country For Old Men is the film of the year, dont sit on this and wait for it to come out on DVD, go see it now.

[RotationSlimWang]

Chris and I watched No Country For Old Men tonight. What the fuck do you expect me to say? It's absolutely brilliant, and one of the top Coen brothers films I've ever seen (which is all of them except Miller's Crossing and the last half of Raising Arizona). It's a riveting, tightly coiled trampoline spring of a chase film for about the first 75%, and then it takes a rocky detour into a brutally fatalistic worldview that is more fulfilling than any conventional ending could have been. Seriously - the bleak assessment of humanity here rivals the nightmarish existentialism of Sympathy For Mr. Vengeance, and while it leaves an anxious pit in your stomach as it unfolds, it also threatens to leave many an audience member walking out ripping up their ticket stubs in unsatisfied disgust. Which is bad news for anyone who likes to see the bad guys brought to justice, and a great thing for anyone who prefer that the chilly truth of real life be acknowledged.

The acting in the film is pitch perfect - Tommy Lee Jones wages an unforgettable struggle against hopelessness; Javier Bardem is both "the ultimate bad-ass" and a haunting personification of the animal recklessness the film is so afraid of; and Josh Brolin hits the ground running as a simple man who gets involved in things that are far beyond his reach. The cinematography by Roger Deakins is mesmerizing - not as showy as his for-the-ages work in "Jesse James", but a perfect display of range in its stark evocation of the fugitive life. And obviously, the maestros behind the film are in indisputable peak form. Hanging their warm, Great North classic Fargo upside down and whipping it into a nihilistic Southern meditation on the same themes of crime and a world gone wrong, they've created a darkly funny masterpiece that will redefine their career.

In other words, the competition against "Jesse James" for best movie of 2007 just got interesting.

I agree with Gabe's review pretty much, he does a good job of summing it up. I personally also found it really, really funny, but I also laugh at lots of weird things in movies and violence in particular.

I also think Javier Bardem had better get a supporting nod and perhaps Tommy Lee as well. Even Josh Brolin was really really fucking good.

The end made me so unbelievably happy.

[wmgaretjax]

The end made me so unbelievably happy.

yes. there are times when I'm at a movie I am enjoying, and towards the conclusion I scream in my head "end it there! end it there!" Unfortunately, it rarely does end there. "No Country for Old Men" actually ended perfectly.

[schoolofruckus]

I agree with Gabe's review pretty much, he does a good job of summing it up. I personally also found it really, really funny, but I also laugh at lots of weird things in movies and violence in particular.

I also think Javier Bardem had better get a supporting nod and perhaps Tommy Lee as well. Even Josh Brolin was really really fucking good.

The end made me so unbelievably happy.

I was afraid you wouldn't like it. I'm really, really, really glad I was wrong on that one.

You're right, it was pretty goddamn hilarious at certain times.

[Steez]

and this isnt an ad or anything, but if you wanna watch some old tv stuff that isnt on anymore or just current ones, or movies and stuff go to movieforumz.com, the only thing that sucks is registering is disabled for some reason so you can request anything

[schoolofruckus]

Even if J.J. Abrams' erstwhile output does nothing for you, does this not look fucking sick?

Full "Cloverfield" trailers in HD. (http://www.apple.com/trailers/paramount/11808/)

I know I've got the homer thing against me, but I'm so excited to check this out. Looks like it could be one of the best films of its type.

[roberto73]

I agree with Gabe's review pretty much, he does a good job of summing it up. I personally also found it really, really funny, but I also laugh at lots of weird things in movies and violence in particular.

I also think Javier Bardem had better get a supporting nod and perhaps Tommy Lee as well. Even Josh Brolin was really really fucking good.

The end made me so unbelievably happy.

yes. there are times when I'm at a movie I am enjoying, and towards the conclusion I scream in my head "end it there! end it there!" Unfortunately, it rarely does end there. "No Country for Old Men" actually ended perfectly.

I saw it a week ago and on the way out of the theater people were grumbling about the ending. It apparently should've ended at the hotel because, y'know, the rest of the film didn't have anything to do with anything.

It didn't surprise me to hear the complaints, but it always irritates me. The same thing happened at the end of A History of Violence, which I think is one of the most pitch-perfect endings I've ever seen. Why the preoccupation with having everything wrapped up so neatly?

[wmgaretjax]

Even if J.J. Abrams' erstwhile output does nothing for you, does this not look fucking sick?

Full "Cloverfield" trailers in HD. (http://www.apple.com/trailers/paramount/11808/)

I know I've got the homer thing against me, but I'm so excited to check this out. Looks like it could be one of the best films of its type.

the acting and story look stupid. it has potential though, the glitch, handheld style is wicked. I hop all the video glitch isn't just a trailer gimmick, I hope it retains that stylistic element.

[KungFuJoe]

the acting and story look stupid. it has potential though, the glitch, handheld style is wicked. I hop all the video glitch isn't just a trailer gimmick, I hope it retains that stylistic element.


I agree with all of this. I doubt it will be as good of a monster flick as "The Host", though it may be a bit scarier. It does have pontential, but the fact that it opens in January is also bad sign. I'm interested, but not terribly excited yet.

[tessalasset]

Ok I just watched Before Sunrise on netflix and I actually really really liked it a lot. I can't wait to see Before Sunset now.

[schoolofruckus]

Sunset > Sunrise, in my opinion.

[roberto73]

Sunset, yes. Another movie with a perfect ending.

[TomAz]

so I went and saw I'm Not There last night.

all in all very engaging, cate blanchett was really good, richard gere less so, IMO.

but I would think it would be very confusing if you weren't already a dylan fan and somewhat knowledgable about his history.

[Stefinitely Maybe]

I just clicked this thread and for some reason it took me to Page 3, but I didn't realise, so I was reading all the posts and getting really confused, and wondering why people were talking about old movies getting nominated for the Oscars...

Anyway. Tessa, I just watched 2 Days In Paris a few days ago and you should watch that too. It has a similar feel to Before Sunrise and Before Sunset, and some really funny maxims about the differences between Europeans and Americans.

[Stefinitely Maybe]

Also, Gabe, have you ever seen this movie (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0312549/)?

I sat down to watch it a couple of nights ago because it was on TV and I was bored and curious to know what it would be like. All I knew was that it's a Jerry Bruckheimer release, directed by Joel Schumacher, starring Cate Blanchett, featuring a cameo by Colin Farrell, and was nominated for several awards on its release. So I was expecting a taut, fast-paced, big-budget thriller. Turns out I couldn't have been more wrong. What it actually is, is a simple but nicely-performed character piece by Blanchett, focusing on the true story of a female journalist who got involved in the drugs scene in Ireland in the 90s. But, honestly, it felt like I was watching an independent film. The setting and the story and the production values all seemed to be so... basic. I couldn't believe Bruckheimer and Schumacher were behind it. It's just totally incongruous with the rest of their catalogues. Seriously, it's a weird but harmless film, worth checking out as a curio, if you ever get the chance to see it.

[roberto73]

Paris Je T'aime was on the menu after dinner last night. I thought most of the short films were, at the very least, interesting, and a few of them were truly outstanding. I especially liked The Coen Brothers' take on the dangers of making eye contact on the Metro (with Steve Buscemi); Gerard Depardieu's account of a disintegrating marriage (played by Gena Rowlands and Ben Gazzara); and Sylvian Chomet's love story about mimes. The two show-stoppers, though, were Tom Tykwer's "Faubourg Saint-Denis" and Alexander Payne's "14th Arrondisement." Tykwer's is a neat little switcheroo about an actress (Natalie Portman) and her blind boyfriend; Payne, on the other hand, captures middle-aged loneliness with note-perfect precision. No more than ten minutes combined, yet I'd rank each as among the best work in each director's canon. Taken as a whole, Paris Je T'aime succeeds more often than it fails, which, considering the structural and narrative demands of the project, is admirable.

I also saw Beowulf in IMAX 3D. If you're going to see it, see it this way. Even while I admired the technology, it felt longer than The Godfather trilogy. I imagine that watching it without the razzle-dazzle of 3D will further reveal it for what it is: a really well-animated, but incredible poorly-acted yawner.

[Stefinitely Maybe]

Oh, also I watched Black Snake Moan last week, and all I could think about through the entire movie was "Damn, they should have named this Skanks On A Chain".

[wmgaretjax]

so I went and saw I'm Not There last night.

all in all very engaging, cate blanchett was really good, richard gere less so, IMO.

but I would think it would be very confusing if you weren't already a dylan fan and somewhat knowledgable about his history.

I know very little about bob dylan, but like a good chunk of his music.

I loved the film. Todd Haynes is one of my favorite directors (Safe pops in and out of my favorite film of all time) and this film easily competes for the best of the year. There were points were it felt like it was about to unravel and stop working, but somehow, and I would need to see it again to pinpoint why, it manages to stay together. The acting was great I thought, and the pacing absolutely phenomenal. I loved it.

[Courtney]

Anyway. Tessa, I just watched 2 Days In Paris a few days ago and you should watch that too. It has a similar feel to Before Sunrise and Before Sunset, and some really funny maxims about the differences between Europeans and Americans.

I agree. 2 Days In Paris is totally cute, and has a a similar feel to Before Sunrise/Sunset. The humor is a little darker, so it has a bit more of a bite, but that's a good thing imo.

[Courtney]

Paris Je T'aime was on the menu after dinner last night. I thought most of the short films were, at the very least, interesting, and a few of them were truly outstanding. I especially liked The Coen Brothers' take on the dangers of making eye contact on the Metro (with Steve Buscemi); Gerard Depardieu's account of a disintegrating marriage (played by Gena Rowlands and Ben Gazzara); and Sylvian Chomet's love story about mimes. The two show-stoppers, though, were Tom Tykwer's "Faubourg Saint-Denis" and Alexander Payne's "14th Arrondisement." Tykwer's is a neat little switcheroo about an actress (Natalie Portman) and her blind boyfriend; Payne, on the other hand, captures middle-aged loneliness with note-perfect precision. No more than ten minutes combined, yet I'd rank each as among the best work in each director's canon. Taken as a whole, Paris Je T'aime succeeds more often than it fails, which, considering the structural and narrative demands of the project, is admirable.

I admit that before seeing all these, I got a little confused between the dueling 2 Days In Paris, Dans Paris and Paris je t'aime. Seriously, that's too many Paris films for one year.

But yeah, I also saw Paris je t'aime recently. I found the gimmick of unifying disparate stories through the theme of Parisian neighborhoods not entirely successful, but I agree that some of the individual segments were gems. Payne's stood out to me too as excellent. I have no idea what the hell was going on with Wes Craven's vampire thing being thrown in there like that. I wasn't entirely a fan of Sylvian Chomet's mimes, but I did adore the Coen Brothers' metro short. I guess overall I didn't really enjoy the film as much as you did, but I did think there were some excellent parts. Maybe that format just isn't for me.

[roberto73]

I admit that before seeing all these, I got a little confused between the dueling 2 Days In Paris, Dans Paris and Paris je t'aime. Seriously, that's too many Paris films for one year.

But yeah, I also saw Paris je t'aime recently. I found the gimmick of unifying disparate stories through the theme of Parisian neighborhoods not entirely successful, but I agree that some of the individual segments were gems. Payne's stood out to me too as excellent. I have no idea what the hell was going on with Wes Craven's vampire thing being thrown in there like that. I wasn't entirely a fan of Sylvian Chomet's mimes, but I did adore the Coen Brothers' metro short. I guess overall I didn't really enjoy the film as much as you did, but I did think there were some excellent parts. Maybe that format just isn't for me.

Wes Craven's was actually the Oscar Wilde short, set in Pere Lachaise. The vampire episode was directed by Vincenzo Natali. Did you ever see Cube? That's his big claim to fame. Anyway, I made the same mistake. It wasn't until the Pere Lechaise scene came on that I realized someone else had turned Frodo into Dracula.

[Courtney]

Wes Craven's was actually the Oscar Wilde short, set in Pere Lachaise. The vampire episode was directed by Vincenzo Natali. Did you ever see Cube? That's his big claim to fame. Anyway, I made the same mistake. It wasn't until the Pere Lechaise scene came on that I realized someone else had turned Frodo into Dracula.

Oh haha oops. That's right. I do remember the Pere Lachaise one as being the Wes Craven segment. Although I didn't think that was very strong either. I guess it was just... forgettable.

And no, I haven't seen Cube.

[TomAz]

I know very little about bob dylan, but like a good chunk of his music.

I loved the film. Todd Haynes is one of my favorite directors (Safe pops in and out of my favorite film of all time) and this film easily competes for the best of the year. There were points were it felt like it was about to unravel and stop working, but somehow, and I would need to see it again to pinpoint why, it manages to stay together. The acting was great I thought, and the pacing absolutely phenomenal. I loved it.

yeah it felt to me like it's one of those movies you have to see more than once to 'get' all of it. like the whole 6 lane freeway thing and Jim James singing "Goin to Acapulco" at a wake.

[schoolofruckus]

so I went and saw I'm Not There last night.

all in all very engaging, cate blanchett was really good, richard gere less so, IMO.

but I would think it would be very confusing if you weren't already a dylan fan and somewhat knowledgable about his history.

I knew very little about Dylan's life before seeing it. Seriously - I'm talking a quick Wikipedia scroll and that's about it. Maybe that should be a prerequisite, but I definitely think this is a film that non-Dylanologists can get into if they're in the mood for something fiercely unique.

Also, Gabe, have you ever seen this movie?

No. I kind of wanted to when it came out, but ultimately, Joel Schumacher's name drove me off of it.

(All the stuff about Paris je'Taime)

I want to see that too. I didn't feel like paying to see an anthology film in the theater, but I want to catch it on DVD.

Oh, also I watched Black Snake Moan last week, and all I could think about through the entire movie was "Damn, they should have named this Skanks On A Chain".

Ha ha. I had never heard that one before. But I liked that movie regardless (though not as much as Hustle and Flow).

[idrive1life]

Sunset, yes. Another movie with a perfect ending.

Agreed.

Below is a Spoiler (Don't click if you have'nt seen the movie yet):

I <3 NS

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CGKIIiDEB8o

[schoolofruckus]

Hmmm......do I want to see this or don't I? Does THIS NEWS (http://www.aintitcool.com/node/34867) plus my love for the story/atmosphere/benchmark-annihilating action of the first two outweigh my ambivalence over the third one and the pounding-head-on-desk choice of director for part four? Probably, but it's not going to be an easy call.

[suprefan]

I read this yesterday and was just like '' Batman vs Cyborgs!!!''

[idrive1life]

... vs. American Psycho

Hmmm......do I want to see this or don't I? Does THIS NEWS (http://www.aintitcool.com/node/34867) plus my love for the story/atmosphere/benchmark-annihilating action of the first two outweigh my ambivalence over the third one and the pounding-head-on-desk choice of director for part four? Probably, but it's not going to be an easy call.

Holy cow!

[KungFuJoe]

Christian Bale as John Connor. Hell yeah. I'm in.

on another note, this is the film I'm most excited about after There Will Be Blood, even though I've heard some not so good things about it.

9C514-tpNG8

[RotationSlimWang]

If they seriously let Mc-fucking-G anywhere near that franchise I will McMurder.


Also, Joe, that trailer looks good and all... but if that's one of your most anticipated movies... well...


you've raped a girl here and there, haven't you? It's okay, you can come clean, most of us have, it's no big whoop.

[smokealotapotamus]

Went and saw Hitman the other day. fun flick, plus it has DVNO by justice in it.

[KungFuJoe]

If they seriously let Mc-fucking-G anywhere near that franchise I will McMurder.


Also, Joe, that trailer looks good and all... but if that's one of your most anticipated movies... well...


you've raped a girl here and there, haven't you? It's okay, you can come clean, most of us have, it's no big whoop.


ummm. no. Olivier Assayas happens to be one of my favorite directors and Asia Argento one of my favorite actresses. His body of work has been hit and miss, but I love his style. Irma Vep is easily one of my favorite films of all time. This may not be the best film of the year, or even close, but the combination of the talents involved has me very anxious to see the result.

I agree about McG though. T4 could be ruined with him at the helm with or without Bale.

[schoolofruckus]

I just watched Days of Heaven. For the first time.

Fuck yeah.

[Courtney]

I watched The Queen for the first time the other night. It wasn't as unpleasant as I was expecting it to be.

[C DUB YA]

I saw BEOWULF last night and I honestly don't know how I feel about it.

Maybe time to watch Microcosmos DVD to re-charge my brain.

[idrive1life]

Before The Devil Knows You're Dead and No Country For Old Men are finally both showing in our local theaters so we'll try to see both of them later today.

[C DUB YA]

No Country is great.

By the way, idrive - I wouldn't put MBV on the "out" list

[idrive1life]

I just watched Days of Heaven. For the first time.

Fuck yeah.

It's in my one of (oh well, I don't how many) greatest American films I 've seen list. Yup, fucking amazing film.

I :pulse Terrence Malick!

[denies the day]

Pretty excited about the new Todd Haynes, especially with all the buzz about it. Will try to catch it tonight. Wasn't entirely thrilled about Before The Devil Knows or Darjeeling Limited as they both left a little to be desired. They also finally opened No Country in a theater within bike-riding distance so I won't hafta sit in a packed house in the one theater in town that had been showing it exclusively. Very amped about that one.

C-Dub, I almost copped that same dunny last week.

[schoolofruckus]

Indeed. I've loved Malick's films (all three of them) for a while now, but for some reason had never gotten around to seeing his masterpiece. I'd like to think some otherworldly forces were merely prolonging the viewing until the towering achievement that is the new Criterion transfer was out. I know it's been long-renowned as one of the most visually arresting pieces in all of cinema, but I'm curious to know if it looked this good on previous DVD's or prints. I mean, every shot in this film is a fucking museum-worthy portrait. Even with all that I've heard about the photography in advance, it still managed to impress.

[idrive1life]

I love all FOUR of them ;) with The Thin Red Line (<- still love it though) as my least favorite and I consider the other 3 as **** masterpieces. They are all gorgeously photographed.

The New World (2005) - one of my very best of '05
The Thin Red Line (1998)
Days of Heaven (1978)
Badlands (1973)

[schoolofruckus]

I knew there was four, I just meant the three I'd seen until today. And actually, I think The Thin Red Line is neck and neck with Days of Heaven for being my favorite. I rewatched it a couple years ago and felt like it had gotten much better over time (which is saying something, because I loved it when it came out). I really liked Badlands in high school, but it's been forever since I've seen it. The New World was definitely awesome, and I loved the direction it went in the last hour, but I can't help but wonder what was in the original cut (which I missed during its one-week run in LA).

[roberto73]

I knew there was four, I just meant the three I'd seen until today. And actually, I think The Thin Red Line is neck and neck with Days of Heaven for being my favorite. I rewatched it a couple years ago and felt like it had gotten much better over time (which is saying something, because I loved it when it came out). I really liked Badlands in high school, but it's been forever since I've seen it. The New World was definitely awesome, and I loved the direction it went in the last hour, but I can't help but wonder what was in the original cut (which I missed during its one-week run in LA).

I'm right with you on Thin Red Line, Gabe. It's the closest thing I've ever seen to a poem onscreen. The fact that it's a three-hour meditation on death and how man has fucked up the balance with nature (in the guise of a WWII action flick) is even more impressive. It easily makes my all-time Top Ten.

[KungFuJoe]

The Thin Red Line is great. A New World was ok, but got significantly better when Christian Bale graced the screen. Seriously, Colin Farrel nearly ruined that film for me. It's beautiful, but not one I'd be likely to sit through again.

I'm a loser and still need to see Days of Heaven & Badlands.

[wmgaretjax]

Assays' stuff is always worth turning out for. The only film of his I would really recommend is Irma Vep, everything else I've been lukewarm on. This looks like he's treading a lot of the same water as Demonlover.

Mallick is great. He straddles the line between eye candy and visual poetry sometimes, but Thin Red Line will probably be looked at as his masterpiece. I have not seen New World yet, but I just threw it on my Netflix list.

[schoolofruckus]

I'm right with you on Thin Red Line, Gabe. It's the closest thing I've ever seen to a poem onscreen. The fact that it's a three-hour meditation on death and how man has fucked up the balance with nature (in the guise of a WWII action flick) is even more impressive. It easily makes my all-time Top Ten.

I remember when it came out that there was some perceived competition between it and Saving Private Ryan since they were both WWII films by legendary (for different reasons) directors that were commanding Oscar attention. A silly idea when you consider that each film had the polar opposite on its mind from what the other was up to. But I remember reading differing reviews in which the critic attacked one film in order to defend the other, and thinking for the first time (I was 15) what a crock of shit film criticism could be sometimes. At the time I liked both films evenly for different reasons; of course, Ryan, for all its undeniable visceral achievement, diminishes more and more each time I consider it, and as I said, Thin Red Line continues to resonate. So the "contest" is ridiculous in both its inappropriateness and its one-sidedness.

[C DUB YA]

I didn't like Thin Red line. Ryan is a better film.

[menikmati]

I saw Zodiac last night (in full screen mode though, I hate that)...pretty good. But I wanna see the director's cut.

[mountmccabe]

The Thin Red Line has some awkwardness that knocks it down just a touch, for me. Just a touch, though, it is still mind-bogglingly good.

I remember reading reviews that just completely misunderstood everything about the film. This quote from Ebert's review (http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/19990108/REVIEWS/901080302/1023) still sticks out in my mind "The Japanese throughout are totally depersonalized (in one crucial scene, their language is not even translated with subtitles)"... I mean, wow. He talks of how much he loved Malick's earlier films but doesn't seem to even try to accept this one for what it is, accept that Malick knows what the hell he's doing with, say, having a huge cast of characters flit in and out. He brings up Ryan in his review too; he recognizes The Thin Red Line "is not a movie of conventional war cliches" like Spielberg's movie is and he seems to think that that's a bad thing.


Days of Heaven is my favorite Malick, though.

[bmack86]

I bought Days of Heaven last night because it was on sale at Best Buy. I'll be watching it soon.

[wmgaretjax]

I didn't like Thin Red line. Ryan is a better film.

Saving Private Ryan is sentimental tripe.

[schoolofruckus]

Saving Private Ryan is a series of good battle scenes bookended and interspersed with some of the most patronizing, aggravating, and flat-out fucking worst story work I've seen in any film ever. It's got a ridiculously stupid reversal of perspective - revealing at the end that the story is being recollected by Private Ryan, who apparently made up 80% of what happens in the film because he wasn't around for most of it - just so they could do the dramatic Spielberg character intro with Tom Hanks on the boat. How that shit flies with anyone makes absolutely no sense to me. Again, on a purely kinetic level, a lot of Ryan works really well, but it's undone by a collective narrative effort to send veterans out of the theater with all hankies spent.

[RotationSlimWang]

The best part about Ryan was getting incredibly dirty looks from everyone in the theatre when I could not stop laughing from the guy trying to put his severed arm back on his body.

[wmgaretjax]

Saving Private Ryan is a series of good battle scenes bookended and interspersed with some of the most patronizing, aggravating, and flat-out fucking worst story work I've seen in any film ever. It's got a ridiculously stupid reversal of perspective - revealing at the end that the story is being recollected by Private Ryan, who apparently made up 80% of what happens in the film because he wasn't around for most of it - just so they could do the dramatic Spielberg character intro with Tom Hanks on the boat. How that shit flies with anyone makes absolutely no sense to me. Again, on a purely kinetic level, a lot of Ryan works really well, but it's undone by a collective narrative effort to send veterans out of the theater with all hankies spent.

perfectly stated. some great scenes in an awesomely shot, but stupid fucking movie.

[schoolofruckus]

The best part about Ryan was getting incredibly dirty looks from everyone in the theatre when I could not stop laughing from the guy trying to put his severed arm back on his body.

Ha ha ha ha

[Jerm05]

I just watched Days of Heaven. For the first time.

Fuck yeah.

Just watched Days of Thunder for the first time. eh..

[C DUB YA]

Sorry I like Speilberg...

I really dislike Thin Red Line and I fancy myself quite the film buff. I don't know why it never clicked, it just never did. I think I liked Ryan from a technique standpoint.

[garrett222]

Anyone seen "no country for old men"? Please explain the endng to me please.

[wmgaretjax]

Sorry I like Speilberg...

I fancy myself quite the film buff.

fancy away...

as far as the ending to "No Country for Old Men" goes, isn't the title of the film enough to pull it all together for you?

[tessalasset]

LOVED Before Sunset. Yeah, more than Sunrise. So fucking passionate. I put both of those on my Christmas list.

[schoolofruckus]

He he he.....Tessa thinks she's getting Christmas presents this year....

[tessalasset]

I put poison in Izzy's food. It takes five days for it to take effect.

[roberto73]

Saw Lars and the Real Girl today. I had serious reservations going in, afraid that it was going to be a big quirky quirkfest. I mean, it's a movie about a guy who falls in love with a sex doll, and the family who convinces an entire town to go along with his delusion. To my surprise, it does a terrific job of balancing really awkward, uncomfortable humor with some uncommonly perceptive views on family, mental illness, and loneliness. Ryan Gosling is, naturally, a force to be reckoned with. The actor I enjoyed almost as much, though, is Paul Schneider, whom I've been a fan of ever since I saw him in David Gordon Green's All the Real Girls. He's fantastic, too, and so is Emily Mortimer, as his wife. This isn't a year-end Top Ten kind of movie, but it's a nice way to spend a couple hours.

[gmoneyak]

Anyone seen "no country for old men"? Please explain the endng to me please.


It was loyal to the book (which I haven't read), but I liked it.. I also found it quite amusing how 1/2 of the audience I was with became disgusted during the credits.

I thoroughly enjoyed myself with this movie. I really liked how each scene took it's time to slowly develop, it became pretty engrossing towards the end..

[gmoneyak]

on another note, this is the film I'm most excited about after There Will Be Blood, even though I've heard some not so good things about it.

9C514-tpNG8

Any movies that have Asia Argento naked in it are watchable to me..

[Stefinitely Maybe]

This sounds pretty awesome. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walk_Hard) Jack White as Elvis! Ha.

[Hannahrain]

Jack White as Elvis Presley
Paul Rudd as John Lennon
Jack Black as Paul McCartney
Jason Schwartzman as Ringo Starr
Justin Long as George Harrison
Adam Herschman as Jerry Garcia
Frankie Muniz as Buddy Holly

Huh.

[C DUB YA]

they are referring to Walk Hard

[Hannahrain]

NO WAY.

[TomAz]

Will Farrell as Roger Waters ?!?

[wmgaretjax]

I watched The Thin Red Line and Badlands last night in honor of all the Mallick discussion. Badlands is a good film, but it hasn't held up to well for me.

I also watched The Dreamers, and while the film is incredibly flawed, I love it. Bertolucci has made some awful films (Little Buddha, Stealing Beauty) and some brilliant films (La Commere Secca, Il Conformista, 1900, Last Tango in Paris), but this is simply my favorite film that is self conscious of it's history and origins. sexy too...

[schoolofruckus]

I fucking love The Dreamers. Not perfect - I'm not sure the ending works, although I really liked it - but like you said, for a film that's so self-consciously film geeky, it's handled pretty assuredly. And some of the best sex scenes in film history.

I saw last night that Walk Hard is R-rated. You can now count me in. God bless Judd Apatow.

[amyzzz]

I saw Southland Tales last weekend. It was awful. Somehow everything was slightly off with it: the comic timing, the editing, the narration, etc. And it was way too long. I tried to give it a chance--I chuckled at some of the jokes, but I was the only one (out of maybe 8 people) in the audience chuckling. I should've seen The Mist instead.

[schoolofruckus]

Finally our first non-Schoolio Southland Tales review! And it's....pretty much everything I would have expected. Love or hate - there are literally no other sides for the coin to fall on with this one.

That said, I bet The Mist is far, far worse, even allowing for people to dislike Southland.

Does anyone else out there even give a fuck about seeing Southland Tales? Is it a bigger deal to me than it is to most people?

[RotationSlimWang]

Oh shit, Southland is out, isn't it? Goddamn, I can't wait til I get paid.

[bballarl]

When does Walk Hard come out?

[schoolofruckus]

December 14th. Or maybe 21st. I don't remember and I don't care enough to look it up right now.

[rage patton]

Walk Hard looks awesome.

I knew about Jack White as Elvis... but I didn't know about the rest of these.

Paul Rudd as John Lennon
Jack Black as Paul McCartney
Jason Schwartzman as Ringo Starr
Justin Long as George Harrison
Adam Herschman as Jerry Garcia
Frankie Muniz as Buddy Holly

Jack Black as Paul McCartney cracks me up. And its rated R? Awesome. That is a definate must see.
I love the tagline too. "Life made him tough. Love made him strong. Music made him hard."

[luckyface]

I think it comes out the 21st. We got handed a free pass to see it the other night at the Arclite, but I totally forgot about it and missed out.

[roberto73]

Southland Tales played Santa Barbara for exactly one week, when I was in New York and then preoccupied with holiday crapola. I am not happy to have missed it.

[kitt kat]

FUCK WALK HARD

IF JUDD APATOW MAKES ANOTHER MOVIE
I'M GONNA SHANK A BITCH

[RotationSlimWang]

FUCK WALK HARD

IF JUDD APATOW MAKES ANOTHER MOVIE
I'M GONNA SHANK A BITCH

You know... I like Judd Apatow... but I gotta say, the girl makes a convincing argument.

[kitt kat]

hah.

No seriously. How many films has the man put out this year? Like seriously.

And, take it from my perspective, as a female filmmaker. Judd Apatow is a sexist, misogynistic fucktard who has openly stated that he sees no reason to write a film with a strong female character because (and I quote) "chicks have too many movies already."

His humor is idiotic and unoriginal; figuring out 15 different ways to make a joke about having a hard-on in an inappropriate public place is hardly genius or novel. His movies are trite, poorly written/constructed, and go on too long. Since when were comedies 2.5 hours?? Please.

Man needs to stop being such a woman-hater and try and make something with some comedic value.

[RotationSlimWang]

Well then, speaking as a male filmmaker to your female filmmaker...


You know there are no good female filmmakers, right? =)