Schoolio's Movie Corner

[schoolofruckus]

it was a little heavy handed to use a catalyst like that to show us that he was scared... we already should've been able to figure that out from his performance.

Perhaps, but that's how it happened. He wrote the song "She's Lost Control" based on that girl.

[mountmccabe]

Spoilerific discussion of Control:




It still came off clumsy. It still felt like forced movieland lynchpin nonsense. That scene, where his boss comes in and says you have to choose between your jobs and then he calls on the woman still was overdone. They could've given it more space, played it lighter.

But, really, mine is a small complaint. I don't want to focus my discussion on this one bit. I really, really liked the movie. It was very emotionally affecting for me; I normally am not one to yell at the screen, to treat on-screen characters as real people. Maybe it was all the awesome music in the beginning and how much of a thrill it was to hear those early songs... but it sucked me in. And then I kept on being hurt for Ian and wanting him to say something, to somebody. And I wanted the few people he did talk to a bit, that wanted to help him, to be able to actually help him.

Also the guy what played Bernard Sumner was awesome. Also the fact that those are all live performances by those actors is also awesome.






And we're done.

[schoolofruckus]

More Spoilerific discussion of Control:

Perhaps.

I also don't remember the Killers song at the end. At the very end? Or in the latter half of the film?

The sequence of the last day of his life fucking took the movie to a higher level for me. It was just little touches - showing him raging at night and kind of tearing his life apart, and then the next morning where he wakes up in an uncomfortable position, and everything is still in the same place it had been when he passed out. I mean, obviously, and it's a fairly simple idea to convey, but it did a lot as far as representing the hopelessness he felt towards his situation.

[keriann]

Also the fact that those are all live performances by those actors is also awesome.

I heartily agree with this.

[mountmccabe]

The Killers do a cover of "Shadowplay." It is the second and final song to run during the credits.

[Down Rodeo]

I saw Sweeney Todd last night. Overall, it was a good movie, visually stunning, but it just didn't engage me that much. Maybe it's because I'm not familiar with the musical, but I was just never really impressed by the movie. It's as bloody as a Tarantino film, though, and has a dark, morbid plot. But it was a little disturbing hearing everyone in the theater clapping and cheering every time Todd slit someone's throat. All in good fun, I guess.

[amyzzz]

I didn't stay for the credits. Clearly, you should have left too. This movie made me feel kind of like I felt when I saw Sylvia (about Sylvia Plath)--why couldn't anyone help him out? I didn't know those were live performances by the actors. I kinda hoped it was the band. Oh well. I like the Bernard Sumner actor as well.

edit: I've heard that Killers cover on the radio and it makes me want to kill someone with my vomit,

[mountmccabe]

Also I looked up Sam Riley on IMDb and just got the "it could be worse, you could be in the Fall" joke from Control: He played Mark E Smith in 24 Hour Party People.

[keriann]

That was clever.

[amyzzz]

Also I looked up Sam Riley on IMDb and just got the "it could be worse, you could be in the Fall" joke from Control: He played Mark E Smith in 24 Hour Party People.
That's funny. I remember that line, and I was wondering what that was all about.

[full on idle]

I just got the best gift in the mail of A Streetcar Named Desire TWO DISC SPECIAL EDITION and I'm so excited that I'm dancing a little jig. I don't know which to watch first, the movie or the special features!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

[Neutral Milk Hotel]

omg

[full on idle]

Shut up and go back to discussing mid-90s albums that have been discussed into the ground like you discovered them. kthx.

[Neutral Milk Hotel]

I wasn't trying to be a dick, I love the movie too, I'm sorry if it came off as assholish. I was just making a slight dig at your excitement, but lord knows I Have geeked out even more over awesome DVDs, so it was meant to be a harmless little whatever. I'm sorry if it offended you.

But don't hate on Aeroplane, I'm not trying to act like I discovered it at all (what would be the point? it's the fucking Coachella forum after all), I just love it beyond all reason.

[full on idle]

Ok. Disregard my dickholeness. They got me feeling like Mask up in here. I would never say a bad word about that album.

[thelastgreatman]

Foi, for Christmas I've gotten you a bowl of kisses with whipped backrubs on top. Happy now?

[Jerm05]

just got back from watching Control..I wasn't really looking forward to watching it because i thought it would be a pretty depressing rest of the night, but i'm glad i did. Great film.

[Deviate_420]

What are your peoples opinion on Syrianna?

[schoolofruckus]

Valarie, your enthusiasm is contagious. I simply must see Streetcar very soon.

Deviate, I have only seen Syriana once, but I distinctly remember thinking it was top-notch.

I myself just watched There Will Be Blood for a second time. Its greatness is confirmed - particularly the final scene, which I feel will soon go down as one of the most legendary (and most polarizing) in all of cinema.

And I'll leave it at that. But come next Wednesday when the film opens, you all better make haste.

[microlovebeat]

i thought control was excellent.




oh and if you guys are talking about a streetcar named desire.......then your ass best be renting it soon, son.


it would be the equivelent to marlon brando putting down the box of oreos and slowly regaining his piece of mind, had he done that before he died; in other words, a nearly impossible work of art.

[Neutral Milk Hotel]

And I'll leave it at that. But come next Wednesday when the film opens, you all better make haste.

But I'm in Bakersfield. :( I am so pissed, there was this free screening in Los Angeles w/Anderson and Day Lewis, but I didn't find out until it had already happened. Now I might not even get to see it in theaters.

[Neutral Milk Hotel]

Ebert really loved Juno (http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071220/COMMENTARY/176124809)

Gaaaah. I liked the movie, but come on. It's like he was tuned out for all of the other inspired comedies of the past decade. And it seems like every year my favorite film of the year is his 2nd or 3rd. In this case, No Country.

[ruetheday]

I'm watching Adventures in Babysitting

[Neutral Milk Hotel]

Good movie, that. I may watch The Station Agent later tonight, never seen it.

[breakjaw]

Sam Riley was incredible in Control.I've watched it twice now,and it's such a good performance.It makes me mad that the woman who played his wife was billed first.She's good too,but he is brilliant in it.Still not sure if I ever want to see it again,kinda like Schindler's List.

[thelastgreatman]

I grew to kinda like Ebert's picks in the last 13 years or so. Schindler's List was perfectly rewatchable except for all the sentimental crap--that scene where the gun jams on Fiennes is hilarious.

[thelastgreatman]

Also, Streetcar? C'mon.

[KungFuJoe]

Ebert really loved Juno (http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071220/COMMENTARY/176124809)

Gaaaah. I liked the movie, but come on. It's like he was tuned out for all of the other inspired comedies of the past decade. And it seems like every year my favorite film of the year is his 2nd or 3rd. In this case, No Country.

No mention of Assassination of Jesse James? Not even in the tied for 11th place section? Shame on Ebert. Kudos for including Across The Universe though. haha. I realize i'm probably the only person on this board that actually liked the film.

[schoolofruckus]

Ebert really loved Juno (http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071220/COMMENTARY/176124809)

Gaaaah. I liked the movie, but come on. It's like he was tuned out for all of the other inspired comedies of the past decade. And it seems like every year my favorite film of the year is his 2nd or 3rd. In this case, No Country.

Fuck Ebert.

I kind of love the guy - think he comes from the right place in the way he approaches films - but any list of best films of 2007 where Juno places first is an abomination. Twenty years down the road, will anyone who has not seen Juno even be compelled to seek it out unless they read about it in the obituary page after Diablo Cody dies in a freak gasoline fight accident? Of course not.

And Joe's right - If you're going to essentially have 25 nominations for best picture and The Assassination of Jesse James is nowhere to be found, your list isn't complete.

[schoolofruckus]

And yet - Ebert is still capable of expressing his thoughts on some of the best films in ways that I could only dream of.

The Diving Bell and the Butterfly (http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071220/REVIEWS/712200301), for example.

[Down Rodeo]

Syriana is amazing.
Streetcar Named Desire is amazing.

I can't wait to see There Will Be Blood - you keep making me more anxious, Gabe. My friend sent me a link to the entire script. I'm still debating whether or not I should read it before I see the movie. Any suggestions?

[schoolofruckus]

Definitely don't.

I got it early too, and still haven't read it. I need to do that now that I've seen it - perhaps on the plane on Sunday.

[microlovebeat]

yeah jesse james was spectacular in my book, albeit a little too long. actually way too long.

[thelastgreatman]

What are your peoples opinion on Syrianna?

Primarily, we're of the opinion that it's misspelled.

[schoolofruckus]

True dat.

Jesse James wasn't too long. What would you have cut? No movie that rich and fulfilling can be "too long".

[microlovebeat]

for jesse james i'd cut half of the scenes focused in on one of the various characthers' mugs.




are those shots really crucial to the overall movie??? come on......

[Neutral Milk Hotel]

They totally are, hip hop suprefan.

I haven't seen the movie.

[schoolofruckus]

for jesse james i'd cut half of the scenes focused in on one of the various characthers' mugs.




are those shots really crucial to the overall movie??? come on......

So any scene with a close-up of a character's face gets cut? Am I understanding that correctly?

[Yablonowitz]

So any scene with a close-up of a character's face gets cut? Am I understanding that correctly?

Nope. Half of the close-up scenes, he said. Just half of them.

[thelastgreatman]

His avatar is a close up, can we cut him?

Also, Yabs, I think you should start a thread about statistical analysis of board names and avatars. It would seem that if you use an Adult Swim character as an avatar, you're both mentally and socially retarded--proof via Supre, Kingsblend, and this jizzbucket.

[wmgaretjax]

i think the portion with the old man love triangle love/fuck tryst could have been condensed, but that's about it.

I saw Eastern Promises and loved it, happy to see Cronenberg getting back to "queer" film.

Going to see "Diving Bell and the Butterfly" tonight. I'm pissed, just found out "There Will be Blood" doesn't come out here until Jan 4th...

[Somewhat Damaged]

I'm Not There finally opened today and I hurried over to the first showing after work. For all the talk of Cate Blanchett's greatness, I thought Christian Bale's performance was the best. There were parts that were spectacular, like near the end with Heath Ledger's relationship with Charlotte Gainsbourg drawing to a close, but there were other parts that felt too experimental for the sake of being too experimental. I think I'll probably appreciate it more if I see it again, but considering I was expecting this to vie for my favorite film of the year, I'm a little let down. Still a very good film, just not up to my expectations.

[wmgaretjax]

The Diving Bell and the Butterfly was fantastic. A gorgeous film.

My only complaint was the manner in which they eased the viewer into his communication in the beginning. By supplying that internal communication (that was such a shift from the monologue that was so beautifully done in the rest of the film) it pulled away from how easy it was to relate to his isolation. I didn't need him responding to his surroundings constantly, I was having the same responses myself because of the fantastic editing and cinematography.

Fantastic film. I hope Kazinski stops working with Speilberg.

[rage patton]

So, who saw Walk Hard? Brilliant. Fucking brilliant. The casting was perfect, the jokes were well timed, the cameos were hilarious, the story was great and was that John C. Reiley singing? If so, I am impressed.
If anyone is debating going to see this movie, I seriously suggest going to see it. Especialy if you are a fan of music in general. Which, considering the board, Im guessing everyone here is.

[schoolofruckus]

Jared - Be not angry.

eQR9LOBPL-Y

[Deviate_420]

So, who saw Walk Hard? Brilliant. Fucking brilliant. The casting was perfect, the jokes were well timed, the cameos were hilarious, the story was great and was that John C. Reiley singing? If so, I am impressed.
If anyone is debating going to see this movie, I seriously suggest going to see it. Especialy if you are a fan of music in general. Which, considering the board, Im guessing everyone here is.

Whats this "music" you speak of.....

[wmgaretjax]

thanks Gabe! yay.

[Neutral Milk Hotel]

So, who saw Walk Hard? Brilliant. Fucking brilliant. The casting was perfect, the jokes were well timed, the cameos were hilarious, the story was great and was that John C. Reiley singing? If so, I am impressed.
If anyone is debating going to see this movie, I seriously suggest going to see it. Especialy if you are a fan of music in general. Which, considering the board, Im guessing everyone here is.

Seeing tonight.

[schoolofruckus]

Seeing in half an hour with Tessa.

[mountmccabe]

Rented and watched The Simpson's Movie tonight. It was rather funny. It was just a long episode, though. On the other hand they've done so many things on the show that I can't even imagine how you'd transcend it.

I now count that I've seen 16 movies from 2007. I may be forgetting some from the first half of the year.

[full on idle]

So, who saw Walk Hard? Brilliant. Fucking brilliant. The casting was perfect, the jokes were well timed, the cameos were hilarious, the story was great and was that John C. Reiley singing? If so, I am impressed.
If anyone is debating going to see this movie, I seriously suggest going to see it. Especialy if you are a fan of music in general. Which, considering the board, Im guessing everyone here is.

This movie was the funniest movie I've seen all year. I was CRYING. I was literally slapping my knee. Absolutely brilliant. I want the soundtrack. My sister and I were singing "Did you hear the news? all night last night. I actually might go see it again and I never go see movies twice. IT'S THAT GOOD, BOARD!!!

I also watched the Simpsons movie on DVD and it was okay, but I kept losing interest. I might try to watch it again if I get bored.

[Neutral Milk Hotel]

Walk Hard was pretty good, but not a favorite or anything. The problem for me with these movies is that there isn't any kind of continuity or arc or anything. I understand that that's not what you look for in a movie like this, but I still really prefer stuff like that, although I do love Monty Python. The strongest part of the movie was easily the 1960s stuff (The Beatles scene is the funniest thing I've seen all year). It was a lot more entertaining than the biopic stuff because making fun of music biopics is like shooting fish in a barrel--what is there to do really other than recreate all of the cliches with a wink? On the other hand, when you have targets as broad as The Beach Boys, Dylan, and The Beatles there's a little more you can do.

PS: Is it just me or was Walk Hard actually a pretty decent song?

[Courtney]

I too saw Walk Hard last night, with apparently half of the board. It was quite funny at parts but other times it just felt like it was trying too hard. I thought the Beatles scene and the marijuana bathroom scene were both especially funny.

Also Jenna Fischer is really hot.

[Neutral Milk Hotel]

Yeah and it looks like we were the only ones who actually saw it.

Also Jenna Fischer is really hot.

Hell yes she is.

[rage patton]

This movie was the funniest movie I've seen all year. I was CRYING. I was literally slapping my knee. Absolutely brilliant. I want the soundtrack. My sister and I were singing "Did you hear the news? all night last night. I actually might go see it again and I never go see movies twice. IT'S THAT GOOD, BOARD!!!

I agree with pretty much everything you said. I went to find the soundtrack today and I couldn't find it. "I want you to blow me... some kisses." Oh god... I am considering seeing it again as well.

(The Beatles scene is the funniest thing I've seen all year).

PS: Is it just me or was Walk Hard actually a pretty decent song?

The Beatles scene was quite possibly one of the funniest part of the movie. I couldn't stop laughing. Jack Black and Paul Rudd were funny as Paul McCartney and John Lennon. But Justin Long and Paul Schwartzman as George Harrison and Ringo Star were fucking hilarious.

I actually thought not only was Walk Hard a pretty decent song, but all of them were quality songs. Thats why I really want the soundtrack.

[Neutral Milk Hotel]

Yeah, Schwartzman's facial expressions alone made it one of the funniest things ever.

[Yablonowitz]

My mom really liked Eastern Promises. She's 67. Is that right?

[roberto73]

My mom really liked Eastern Promises. She's 67. Is that right?

Even sexagenarians can't say no to Viggo Mortensen's dong.

[bmack86]

Movies I've watched thus far over break, with letter grade, because I can't write a ton about all of them.

Simpsons movie:B-
Superbad (Twice):A-
Futurama movie:A
Christmas in July:B
The Lady Eve:A
Planet Terror:B
The 39 Steps:A
Insomnia (Skolbaerg version):A+
Andrei Rublev:A+
Nanook of the North:A
Breathless:A+

Erik Skolbaerg's Insomnia is awesome. Whereas the Pacino version was a fairly straightforward crime drama with an interesting twist, this movie, through the strengths of the performances and the amazing scenery/cinematography, becomes a much more nuanced pschological portrait. I absolutely loved it.

I will say that, at first, Andrei Rublev seemed a bit slow to me. However, as I let it set in a bit, I began to really appreciate the camera pans, the subtle character development and the really nuanced religious over and undertones. The movie is epic in its scope, incorporating 30 years in one mans life, but it's very intimate in the portrayals of the characters, and, rather than forcing a large ideological point down your throat, it allows you to take your own interpretation of events. It's an amazing piece of art, and I'd wholeheartedly recommend it.

Breathless is the opposite of Rublev in many ways. It's full of quick camera cuts and hip, jazzy characters and music. Many scenes move quickly and without a great deal of motivation. Instead, like an early Godard film would, it dances around ideological views and cool imagery to ultimately build something more. The main character could be deplorable, or he could be sad, or cool, depending on how you want to look at it. Even more than Rublev, Breathless is open to interpretation, but it's much more jumpy, tense and explosive. In a sense, it's a perfect expression of teenage life, full of questions and bristling with nervous energy and rebellion. I like Band of Outsiders and Masculin/Feminin better, but it's a great film nonetheless.

Nanook is cool. Sure, most of the shots are staged, but they had to be. The camera was too heavy and immobile to catch many of the shots otherwise. Also, it was made before documentaries became a style, so the director didn't have to feel tied to truthful storytelling. It's damn entertaining, and fast paced for a silent film set in a bleak, unchanging landscape.

[bmack86]

And, queued up for the next few days

Solaris (Tarkovsky version)
Killing of a Chinese Bookie
Ace in the Hole
The Blow-Up
Rear Window
Notorious

And many others. I hope to get in Sullivan's Travels, Palm Beach Story, Hail the Conquering Hero, I Vitelloni, Down By Law and some of the ones I got for christmas, but there's never enough time.

[mountmccabe]

I will say that, at first, Andrei Rublev seemed a bit slow to me. However, as I let it set in a bit, I began to really appreciate the camera pans, the subtle character development and the really nuanced religious over and undertones. The movie is epic in its scope, incorporating 30 years in one mans life, but it's very intimate in the portrayals of the characters, and, rather than forcing a large ideological point down your throat, it allows you to take your own interpretation of events. It's an amazing piece of art, and I'd wholeheartedly recommend it.

Well said. It's really breathtaking in both scope and execution. And visually... oh man, what a gorgeous film. And I've never thought of the word "dumbbell" (referring to an idiot) in the same way since.

Also, I thought this one moved at a quicker pace than Solyaris. Just as a warning.

[Neutral Milk Hotel]

Breathless is the opposite of Rublev in many ways. It's full of quick camera cuts and hip, jazzy characters and music. Many scenes move quickly and without a great deal of motivation. Instead, like an early Godard film would, it dances around ideological views and cool imagery to ultimately build something more. The main character could be deplorable, or he could be sad, or cool, depending on how you want to look at it. Even more than Rublev, Breathless is open to interpretation, but it's much more jumpy, tense and explosive. In a sense, it's a perfect expression of teenage life, full of questions and bristling with nervous energy and rebellion. I like Band of Outsiders and Masculin/Feminin better, but it's a great film nonetheless.

I've had this DVD for almost a month and plan to get to it this week. Masculin Feminin is a favorite of mine.

[wmgaretjax]

Solaris (Tarkovsky version)
Killing of a Chinese Bookie
Ace in the Hole
The Blow-Up
Rear Window
Notorious

And many others. I hope to get in Sullivan's Travels, Palm Beach Story, Hail the Conquering Hero, I Vitelloni, Down By Law and some of the ones I got for christmas, but there's never enough time.

You are watching some great fucking movies man, enjoy. A nice diverse set too, I might add.

[breakjaw]

I'm personally most jealous of the fact that you'll be watching Sullivan's Travels the first time.Enjoy,it's one of my favorite movies of that era.

[bmack86]

Watched two movies tonight.

Rear Window A+. It doesn't matter that I knew the story beforehand, this one is still full of Hitchcock's trademark suspense, and I think he pulls it off better here than in many of his other films. I like how claustrophobic he makes the set. By keeping us inside Jimmy Stewart's apartment for the whole movie, you get a feel for the stir crazy madness that his character must be feeling. There's a reason this one has been imitated so many times. Absolutely fantastic.

I also watched Sullivan's Travels. A+ I've been watching Sturges films recently, in chronological order, and this one is by my favorite. It's much more developed than the prior films, the characters are interesting and I liked the fact that it was far from a conventional comedy, as well as the fact that it was a subtle, but pointed, indictment of Hollywood and the "Message" movies that are sometimes substituted for actual entertainment. If you haven't seen either of these, then get off the internet and watch both. Fantastic films.

Tomorrow will most likely be Solaris, Killing of a Chinese Bookie and Palm Beach Story.

[KungFuJoe]

ok. I apologize for being the youtube bandit on obscure asian cinema a lot of the time, but I feel like there are enough "Beat" Takeshi fans out there that would be interested in this. I haven't been up on the news lately for Takeshi Kitano's new film, but just opened an email that advertised the release of his new pic on dvd entitled Kantoku Banzai (aka: Glory to the Filmmaker!) Needless to say, I'll be putting in my order for this one shortly.

l3-b8y-2gqA

[schoolofruckus]

I've been rewatching a lot of stuff lately, including "I'm Not There", "Days of Heaven" (both of which because I wanted my brother to see them) and "My Own Private Idaho" (the DVD I got from my parents for Christmas - ha ha!).

Joe - That's cool news. I loved "Hana-Bi" when I saw it many years ago; I'd like to get into some more of Beat's stuff.

Bryan - You're doing an exemplary job of keeping the movie corner humming while everyone's fucking off on vacation (including me), and from the roster of films you're choosing from, it sounds like the pleasure is all yours.

[full on idle]

Everyone else, you're doing a good job too.

[idrive1life]

I'm personally most jealous of the fact that you'll be watching Sullivan's Travels the first time.Enjoy,it's one of my favorite movies of that era.

I'm so jealous too. Wish I've never seen them yet OR that I have the time to revisit/rewatch ( 'em even in DVDs i.e, all those that received As and A+s from Bryan).

So many great movies, so little time ...

I think it was in 2003 when I've seen them all. *Well, 2003 was really a spectacular year for me since it's the year I've seen pretty much most films in my 300 greatest films list*

I'll probably just re-watch them once they get re-shown in the big screen. *sigh, when?* One of my greatest movie watching moments I will never forget
...
seeing Lawrence of Arabia for the first time in the big screen at Fox Theater in Atlanta - June 08, 2003.

[Stefinitely Maybe]

Went to see I Am Legend tonight, thought it was entertaining but not great, and the monster CGI was kinda lame.

The Cloverfield trailer (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IvNkGm8mxiM) looks amazing though.

[iv3rdawG]

Just got back from There Will Be Blood... wow. Truly a masterpiece.

[Mr.Nipples]

Eugene Levy delivers another inspired performance in American Pie:Beta House...

[KungFuJoe]

Joe - That's cool news. I loved "Hana-Bi" when I saw it many years ago; I'd like to get into some more of Beat's stuff.




If that's the only film you've seen by Takeshi then you must check out all his others. I recommend going in chronological order. If not, definately make it a point to see Sonatine, Kikujiro, Brother and, of course, Zatoichi. I'd say Hana-Bi is my favorite by him, but Zatoichi comes real close. Once you catch up on some of his work then seek out Takeshis', his self reflective dreamlike parody. It's a puzzle of a film. Magnificent in many ways, but you must be familiar with his work in order to understand where he's coming from with it. It's as if he purged himself of a million ideas he had and is now moving on to a new style of filmmaking. Certainly, one that looks more entertaining. the man's a genius.

[thelastgreatman]

The Cloverfield trailer (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IvNkGm8mxiM) looks amazing though.

Are people still impressed by crap blowing up?

[breakjaw]

RE:Old movies that are not necessarily classics,but real enjoyable:
My Man Godfrey
Surrender (w/ a great performance by Sinatra as a would-be assassin)
A Guy Named Joe (Spencer Tracy at his best.This was remade by Spielberg as Always.The old one is much better,because of Tracy)
Here Comes Mr. Jordan (another one that was remade,into Heaven Can Wait which was better,but this one is still good because of Claude Rains)
And speaking of Claude Rains,I saw you had Notorious on your list Bryan,and that is one of the most romantic and suspenseful Hitchcock movies,that you don't ever hear about.

[tessalasset]

I'm probably gonna see Walk Hard tomorrow (sorry Gabe, you lose). I just saw Atonement tonight. While it didn't blow me away nearly as much as I hoped it would, I absolutely loved that long scene Ebert mentioned with the troops on the beach. About halfway through that scene I realized they hadn't switched to another camera yet, and then I was completely captivated with the way the view switched from character to character all with the same camera shot. Totally made the movie for me and reminded me of the car chase in Children of Men. Atonement ended too abruptly for me though. I didn't know the book ended like that and I really wish it hadn't. I had a couple tears, but nothing like Gabe had. Hahaha.

[breakjaw]

That is a staggering scene.It is too bad that in the context of the film you are not entirely sure of what is going on at that point.Still,though,that sets the standard for the long tracking shot.Easily an 8 million dollar shot.

[Stefinitely Maybe]

Are people still impressed by crap blowing up?

Yep.

[thelastgreatman]

Lord help us.

[J~$$$]

I saw I am Legend last night. I want my money back. What a piece of shit.

[downingthief]

Gabe, you will be happy to know that I got one of the Kubrick collections for Christmas from the Mrs. Includes 2001, A Clockwork Orange, Full Metal Jacket, The Shining, Eyes Wide Shut, and the Kubrick Documentary. Tons of extras with each flick. Can't wait to dive into it.

[ivankay]

Just got back from There Will Be Blood... wow. Truly a masterpiece.

That movie was ridiculously great! i went to an 11:45PM screening at the Arclight and was blown away the whole time. No question it is Paul Thomas Anderson's best film. i still need to see Sweeney Todd, but Daniel Day-Lewis had one of the best roles and acting performances in the history of film....period, and should get every best acting award there is for 2007. Paul Dano (Eli Sunday) was too good as well. This movie ruled on so many levels.

POTENTIAL SPOILERS



POTENTIAL SPOILERS





POTENTIAL SPOILERS













POTENTIAL SPOILERS













POTENTIAL SPOILERS (seriously don't read until you see the movie)










The gusher scene with one of the most awesome tracking shots ever blew my mind.

Johnny Greenwood! (how is that a spoiler? i try to know next to nothing when i see a movie and when his name came up for the brilliant score, i just got soooo happy...Oscar time for Johnny)




















Spoiler done.





THERE WILL BE BLOOD!

[iv3rdawG]

i still need to see Sweeney Todd, but Daniel Day-Lewis had one of the best roles and acting performances in the history of film....period, and should get every best acting award there is for 2007.

Yes you are so right. Depp's performance is great but his role as Sweeney Todd doesn't come close to Daniel Day Lewis' performance. He was amazing. The way he talked, his mannerisms, all brilliant.

[ivankay]

i so wanted them to start the movie over when it was done. When i saw how long it was before seeing it, i was concerned. When it comes to Boogie Nights and Magnolia, i'm in the club of "too much dude...scale it back". Punch Drunk Love was short and tight. There will be Blood is juicy perfection. Paul Thomas Anderson has just entered the realm of Greatness in my book.

[iv3rdawG]

i so wanted them to start the movie over when it was done. When i saw how long it was before seeing it, i was concerned. When it comes to Boogie Nights and Magnolia, i'm in the club of "too much dude...scale it back". Punch Drunk Love was short and tight. There will be Blood is juicy perfection. Paul Thomas Anderson has just entered the realm of Greatness in my book.

Yeah. Not one time did I look at my watch to see what time it was. I was completely entranced by the film. I need to go and see it again soon.

[schoolofruckus]

Shit yeah, guys. I'm glad that LA/NY at least get to see it. The rest of the country (major markets at least) have a lot to look forward to on January 4th (or Saturday night at midnight in some cities).

Funny you should mention the Kubrick set, Sean (and yes, your wife gets an A+ for Christmas this year) - I just finished watching The Killing. I would have to say it was probably his earliest great film, though definitely not as good as the film that proceeds it (Paths of Glory). It's a great noir film, full of strong performances, rich characters, and exquisite, hard-bitten dialogue. Some of the music is poorly utilized, and there's a little bit of shakiness in some of the "action" scenes (though the climactic Mexican stand-off is awesome) and supporting roles, but most of the film is terrific.

[schoolofruckus]

Everyone else, you're doing a good job too.

NO! Only bmack.

[downingthief]

Shit yeah, guys. I'm glad that LA/NY at least get to see it. The rest of the country (major markets at least) have a lot to look forward to on January 4th (or Saturday night at midnight in some cities).

Funny you should mention the Kubrick set, Sean (and yes, your wife gets an A+ for Christmas this year) - I just finished watching The Killing. I would have to say it was probably his earliest great film, though definitely not as good as the film that proceeds it (Paths of Glory). It's a great noir film, full of strong performances, rich characters, and exquisite, hard-bitten dialogue. Some of the music is poorly utilized, and there's a little bit of shakiness in some of the "action" scenes (though the climactic Mexican stand-off is awesome) and supporting roles, but most of the film is terrific.

I need to get re-aquainted with some of this earlier works. Haven't seen Paths in I don't know how many years. Is there a collection out of his pre-Spartucus films? Not aware of one.
My wife enjoys some of Kubrick's films, Eyes Wide Shut being probably her favorite. I imagine that will be the one we start with.

[amyzzz]

Someone explain Inland Empire to me? I've watched 2 hours of it, and I'm wondering if I should keep going and watch the third hour. At least explain the bunny head people and the group of whores? Please?

I also watched The Lives of Others which was OK but nowhere near as good as I was expecting. The best thing I can say about it is it reminded me a lot of the book 1984 which really creeped me out. Both movies are awfully long, and maybe I just can't focus on them with my children running in the room every 15 minutes.

[iv3rdawG]

Just got back from 4 Luni, 3 Saptamani Si 2 Zile (4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days). Wonderful film but wow, it's a downer.

[bmack86]

I'm gonna maybe go see Walk Hard tonight. Also, I found Eastern Promises, Ivan's Childhood and Help! at Borders, where they're having a 3 for 2 dvd sale. Hop on over, it's not a bad deal.

[schoolofruckus]

I need to get re-aquainted with some of this earlier works. Haven't seen Paths in I don't know how many years. Is there a collection out of his pre-Spartucus films? Not aware of one.
My wife enjoys some of Kubrick's films, Eyes Wide Shut being probably her favorite. I imagine that will be the one we start with.

I'm not aware of any such collection. MGM released Killer's Kiss, The Killing, and Paths of Glory, so you would think they would have a set. But then again, Killer's Kiss is nothing special - the only unremarkable Kubrick film ever, although believe it or not I still have yet to see Spartacus - so really, you should just watch Paths of Glory again. I also haven't seen it in forever - probably 7 years - but it's stuck with me deeply.

Someone explain Inland Empire to me? I've watched 2 hours of it, and I'm wondering if I should keep going and watch the third hour. At least explain the bunny head people and the group of whores? Please?


Good luck on finding a taker for this. I just saw it once, and that's definitely not enough to be able to help. And finishing it will, believe it or not, just make the film make even less sense. But if you're not actually taking enjoyment in the weirdness (and I thought you were a big Lynch fan?), then I don't see what reason you would have to keep on.

Just got back from 4 Luni, 3 Saptamani Si 2 Zile (4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days). Wonderful film but wow, it's a downer.

Really? I thought it wasn't opening until January 25th.



Now for another review from me.


I just finished watching Reign Over Me, a sometimes-brilliant character study of a 9/11 widower (in a STUNNING performance by Adam Sandler) who, through re-connecting with his college roommate (an expected but never under-appreciated turn from Don Cheadle), eventually begins to cope with the tragedy that claimed the lives of his wife and daughters. This is a pretty frustrating film. There are some scenes here that are written and performed with sharp, precise insight - including the big scene for Sandler which, I shit you not, brought me to tears - and a refreshingly subtle, un-sensationalist look at the greater subject at the core of the film, that at the 3/4 mark I was wondering if it may make it onto my best of the year list. Then things start to get a little overcooked, but not fatally. I was rolling with an over-the-top scene in which Sandler really starts to melt down, mostly on the goodwill that the bulk of the film had built up. Then there's another scene in a Chinese restaurant where things are looking up again (for the movie, not the character).

Regular readers will recall the discussion a few pages back in this thread of the ending to No Country For Old Men - which had many viewers marveling at the film's instinct to end at precisely the moment that it should. Had Reign Over Me ended in the Chinese restaurant, it would have been excellent; perhaps a little sloppy, not perfect, but certainly a satisfying cocktail of equal parts realism and emotional substance. I'm even willing to bet that writer/director Mike Binder delivered the film having ended there, but the studio opted to bring in Steven Spielberg to shoot it in the foot....I mean, re-work the last act. Because after this scene, things go to fucking SHIT. A courtroom scene of clumsy, disjointed, embarassing execution follows, and then after that nearly everything else either does further damage or registers irrelevant. A potentially great film becomes an overlong, noticeably imperfect film (as opposed to the kind that works well enough for the flaws to be absolved). But nevertheless, it's still worth your time, for the material that works and especially for an Adam Sandler performance that is truly impressive.

[iv3rdawG]

Really? I thought it wasn't opening until January 25th.

It is but it ran for a week at the Laemmle on Sunset. I posted that a couple weeks ago in this thread.

[full on idle]

I just finished watching Reign Over Me, a sometimes-brilliant character study of a 9/11 widower (in a STUNNING performance by Adam Sandler) who, through re-connecting with his college roommate (an expected but never under-appreciated turn from Don Cheadle), eventually begins to cope with the tragedy that claimed the lives of his wife and daughters. This is a pretty frustrating film. There are some scenes here that are written and performed with sharp, precise insight - including the big scene for Sandler which, I shit you not, brought me to tears - and a refreshingly subtle, un-sensationalist look at the greater subject at the core of the film, that at the 3/4 mark I was wondering if it may make it onto my best of the year list. Then things start to get a little overcooked, but not fatally. I was rolling with an over-the-top scene in which Sandler really starts to melt down, mostly on the goodwill that the bulk of the film had built up. Then there's another scene in a Chinese restaurant where things are looking up again (for the movie, not the character).

Regular readers will recall the discussion a few pages back in this thread of the ending to No Country For Old Men - which had many viewers marveling at the film's instinct to end at precisely the moment that it should. Had Reign Over Me ended in the Chinese restaurant, it would have been excellent; perhaps a little sloppy, not perfect, but certainly a satisfying cocktail of equal parts realism and emotional substance. I'm even willing to bet that writer/director Mike Binder delivered the film having ended there, but the studio opted to bring in Steven Spielberg to shoot it in the foot....I mean, re-work the last act. Because after this scene, things go to fucking SHIT. A courtroom scene of clumsy, disjointed, embarassing execution follows, and then after that nearly everything else either does further damage or registers irrelevant. A potentially great film becomes an overlong, noticeably imperfect film (as opposed to the kind that works well enough for the flaws to be absolved). But nevertheless, it's still worth your time, for the material that works and especially for an Adam Sandler performance that is truly impressive.

The preview for that movie made me cry. I forgot about it. I'll have to rent it if it's out. That and Balls of Fury. I'm gonna rent Balls of Fury.

[thelastgreatman]

I'll check out There Will Be Blood I guess. My roommate saw four movies on Christmas so he should be able to tell me whether Walk Hard, Sweeney Todd, and two other ones sucked or not.

Going back to the Batman Begins argument a few pages back though, you'll all be glad to know my cocksucker of a brother has somehow fallen so far from the graceful state of perfect taste he once had--and taught me--so fucking far that he called Batman Begins a "flawless" movie. Said he'd been watching The Dark Knight trailer non-stop.

Gentlemen, if spending Christmas in my brother's apartment in San Francisco with my poor lonely mother who can't go more than 20 minutes without making reference to how both her parents and her husband died on her within two weeks of Christmas on back-to-back years wasn't enough to drive the unpleasant reality that I'll never have a Christmas with my family, nor any true sense of a family ever again... well I say to you that my older brother trying to tell me Rah's Al Ghoul was a great villain because the character was motivated by an intellectual ideology instead of anything remotely personal... those words sealed the fucking deal. The Mills family is kaput. I want the rest of these bastards to hurry up and die now so I can move on with my second life unfettered.

[anti-square]

TMI?

[idrive1life]

Saw SiCKO on Saturday night. Wow. I know I gotta take what's fed to me with a grain of salt, but if all that's true, what the fuck. I was very tempted to move to a different country at one point in the movie. So many people in the theater were crying. A pregnant woman down the row was completely bawling. Once again, Michael Moore accomplishes his mission.

Side note: I believe Matthew Modine was sitting a few rows in front of me at the theater.

Wow, what a day! *I was so ready to hate Juno but what a pleasant surprise ... oh well, maybe not ...*

Though I pretty much know how pathetic the health care system we have here (as compared to the health care systems in other countries where some of my close international or foreign friends live), I was blown away watching Sicko that I found myself crying near the end of the film.

If I have to include Once in my 2007 list, I will definitely rank it higher than No Country for Old Men. But for many personal (etc.) reasons, I would have to put Once and Sicko as my #1 films of 2007.

[amyzzz]

Gabe, I think I like the movie (Inland Empire) so far, but I'm having trouble making sense of it. I guess I should just forget about making sense of it, and just enjoy the ride. I really like the white trash Laura Dern (with the bruise on her lip). I can't wait to hear what she says next. I do really like Lynch--I just have to remember that I need to wait and think about it before I make a judgment.

[idrive1life]

And oh, up next, I'm about to see Away From Her and Zui hao de shi guang (aka Three Times). I was planning to see Sweeney Todd after Juno today but I decided to watch 3 movies in DVD tonight. I'll watch ST with some friends tomorrow then hopefully, finally watch Friday night & Saturday morning all the DVDs I borrowed from our local library.

[Neutral Milk Hotel]

Three Times is a masterpiece, you won't be disappointed. I should rewatch that sometime, maybe over this break.

[idrive1life]

Gabe, I think I like the movie (Inland Empire) so far, but I'm having trouble making sense of it. I guess I should just forget about making sense of it, and just enjoy the ride. I really like the white trash Laura Dern (with the bruise on her lip). I can't wait to hear what she says next. I do really like Lynch--I just have to remember that I need to wait and think about it before I make a judgment.

Yeah, it's a very challenging film (*more difficult than his masterpieces, Mulholland Dr. and Blue Velvet*). I need to see it again (good thing our library has a copy of it) in the future when I'm not tired (mentally & physically because of me trying to watch at least 3 films every night).

[idrive1life]

Three Times is a masterpiece, you won't be disappointed. I should rewatch that sometime, maybe over this break.

Thanks. Jared recommended it to me. I hope that I still have the energy and that my mind will be up for it.

[Mr.Nipples]

Filmmaking siblings Joel and Ethan Coen are set to make their goriest film ever - a Spaghetti Western featuring scenes of primitive torture methods. The brothers, whose notoriously gory new film No Country for Old Men has been tipped for Oscar glory, are desperate to make a film about the days of cowboys and Indians battling it out in the Wild West of America. But - as Joel warns - it won't be one for the faint-hearted. He says, "We've written a western with a lot of violence in it. There's scalping and hanging ... it's good. Indians torturing people with ants, cutting their eyelids off." Ethan adds, "It's a proper western, a real western, set in the 1870s. It's got a scene that no one will ever forget because of one particular chicken."

good god...

[wmgaretjax]

I loved both Paths of Glory and The Killing, not sure which I prefer, but I remember both being great films.

I'm seeing There Will Be Blood at one of the Saturday midnight showings. Very excited.

I hated Reign Over Me. Adam Sandler was kind of ridiculous, although there were some pretty solid moments. The sloppiness that Gabe described ruined the movie for me, I was never able to get past it. It had potential.

As far as Inland Empire goes, I wouldn't try and make sense of it in a first viewing. Just let it wash over you and sit in the back of your head for a few days, then watch it again. At that point I'll be willing to have a discussion about it... Mainly because I should probably watch it again... The second time I watched it was dubbed in Italian and I was having a tough time following it.

[thelastgreatman]

TMI?

I don't believe in acronyms, that one especially.

[thelastgreatman]

I'm glad somebody's brought up Sicko again, haven't thought about that flick in months. Can't believe some of you hadn't seen it until now. Now let me pose this question to the board:


Can you think of any movie released this year that produced a more intense emotional connection to what was happening on the screen than Sicko? Can you think of any that came close?

[Neutral Milk Hotel]

The Simpsons Movie, duh.

[thelastgreatman]

Actually, you might be right about that. I stayed angry about The Simpsons Movie for days, but was able to put Sicko in the back of my mind by the next morning.

[Bud Luster]

Havent seen Sicko. I got Micheal Moor'd out w/ F-911. Liked it. Liked Bowling For Columbine better. Maybe it's time to step back into the arena.

Also, The Killing is much more enjoyable movie than Paths of Glory. Paths has too much of that Kubrickian detailed rituals and methods. Anyone that gets a chance should read Thomas Nelson's: Kubrick Inside a Filmakers Maze. I took his Kubrik class at San Diego State, so you know it's the cream of the intellectual crop on the subject.

[wmgaretjax]

I really didn't care for Sicko. Talk about pandering to the lowest common denominator... The whole Cuba segment was ridiculous; sensationalism at it's worst.

I also hated The Simpsons Movie. It was like a mediocre episode that went on far too long.

I saw Hedwig and the Angry Inch last night. A really fun, sweet film. I'm not a fan of musicals, but I really loved the way in which the songs and animated segments were woven into the film. Not as good as Shortbus, but damn entertaining.

[TomAz]

you Serious Film People are gonna bang me over the head for this..

over xmas the family and I were watching Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix.. pure escapist fun, not much art to it at all.. but it really struck me that there's a lot of damned good acting going on. not the kids so much but the adults. I can't name any of the actors (and am too lazy to wikipedia it right now) but whoever's playing Delores Umbridge, Sirius Black, Professor Macgonagal, and Professor Lupin, are doing really good work. among others. Snape too.

[jonnypark]

I've been watching the old James Bond movies as they've been on tv most nights this week. Just thought you all should know.

[iv3rdawG]

over xmas the family and I were watching Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix.. pure escapist fun, not much art to it at all.. but it really struck me that there's a lot of damned good acting going on. not the kids so much but the adults. I can't name any of the actors (and am too lazy to wikipedia it right now) but whoever's playing Delores Umbridge, Sirius Black, Professor Macgonagal, and Professor Lupin, are doing really good work. among others. Snape too.

I really enjoy all the Harry Potter films. And yeah all the actors listed above are great. If you like Alan Rickman (Snape) check out Sweeney Todd for a good, recent performance.

[bmack86]

Or the first Die Hard for another classic performance.

[thelastgreatman]

I really didn't care for Sicko. Talk about pandering to the lowest common denominator... The whole Cuba segment was ridiculous; sensationalism at it's worst.

What the fuck do you mean "pandering to the lowest common denominator?" Which lowest common denominator is that, exactly? The one that thinks that health insurance providers SHOULDN'T try to fuck people out of their lives? You accuse him of sensationalism? Exactly what vulgar tastes is he appealing to with a call to health care reform? That wasn't fucking tabloid reporting, goddammit. WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?

[tessalasset]

Walk Hard was great. I laughed a lot. My favorite was every time he pulled a sink out of the wall.

[Courtney]

The Harry Potter movies are great. Although I'm too busy/lazy/uninterested to read through the books, so that may be a reason why my opinion might differ from that of the more literary Harry Potter fans.

I watched The Apartment again, with my grandmother, a few days ago. It's cute and parts of the cinematography are really spectacular although it seems uneven. It truly sets the precedent for modern romantic comedies in that none of the characters are terribly well developed, although charming. It struck me more this time that the Jack Lemmon's character revelation about his dark past was quite incongruous with the rest of the film. But I still did enjoy the film overall, and think it was a good choice for a cross-generational holiday pick.

[tessalasset]

Courtney, take it from Jennie - once you pick up that first Harry Potter book, you will not stop until you have read all 7. I'm pretty sure Jennie read all of them in a week. They're ridiculously good.

[Courtney]

Yeah that scares me slightly. Especially because the busy excuse was a complete lie.

[Courtney]

Or in other words, DON'T TRY TO INDUCT ME INTO YOUR CULT TESSALASSET. I SEE WHAT YOU ARE DOING HERE.

[tessalasset]

I promise. It's the best time of year to do it, too. Just tuck out of sight for a week and get it done with already.

[Courtney]

Just tuck out of sight for a week and get it done with already.

That's what she said?

[schoolofruckus]

I never saw Sicko. So every film this year produced a more intense emotional reaction. I know that I've hated few films as violently as I hated Fahrenheit 9/11, one of the most undisciplined botches in the history of cinema - I even sold my DVD of Bowling for Columbine, which I had previously liked - and it's an uphill battle for me to ever sit in a room in which a Michael Moore "film" is playing. I'm getting there, though...Sicko would seem like it would have to be fairly straightforward, but well....as they say: Fool me once, shame on me. Fool me twice.....won't get fooled again!

Tom, I dug the latest Potter movie immensely. I'd only previously seen the one before, and I thought it sucked. But the new one was an excellent fantasy film.

Also, The Killing is much more enjoyable movie than Paths of Glory. Paths has too much of that Kubrickian detailed rituals and methods. Anyone that gets a chance should read Thomas Nelson's: Kubrick Inside a Filmakers Maze. I took his Kubrik class at San Diego State, so you know it's the cream of the intellectual crop on the subject.

See, the detailed Kubrickian rituals are like a form of occular drugs to me. Part of the kick of his films is in watching his form serve so many different genres and storylines perfectly each time out. And other films that have a kind of spiritual and aesthetic kinship to Kubrick's work - films that he didn't make, I mean - usually tend to have added appeal to me. There Will Be Blood, in particular, is a perfect evocation of many of Kubrick's hallmarks. To a lesser extent, Last Days was as well (and I realize in saying this that I just probably pushed Randy away from seeing Blood yet again).

Filmmaking siblings Joel and Ethan Coen are set to make their goriest film ever - a Spaghetti Western featuring scenes of primitive torture methods. The brothers, whose notoriously gory new film No Country for Old Men has been tipped for Oscar glory, are desperate to make a film about the days of cowboys and Indians battling it out in the Wild West of America. But - as Joel warns - it won't be one for the faint-hearted. He says, "We've written a western with a lot of violence in it. There's scalping and hanging ... it's good. Indians torturing people with ants, cutting their eyelids off." Ethan adds, "It's a proper western, a real western, set in the 1870s. It's got a scene that no one will ever forget because of one particular chicken."

Is that Burn After Reading?

I've been watching the old James Bond movies as they've been on tv most nights this week. Just thought you all should know.

I'm sorry. My thoughts and condolences go out to you.


As for Inland Empire...I have a feeling that that's the Lynch we're going to see primarily from here on out. He seemed liberated by the switch to video (fiends for coherence will argue that his emancipation was their incarceration), and with his self-distribution plan seeming to have worked just fine, what reason would he ever have to burden himself in the future making expensive, studio-controlled films?

[tessalasset]

I'd only previously seen the one before, and I thought it sucked. Remember when I made you come see it with me at 9 am? I remember.

[schoolofruckus]

Oh I remember. I also remember blowing out a tire that day on the drive home from that movie.

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/121/296211344_aed54848f2.jpg

[downingthief]

Now for another review from me.


I just finished watching Reign Over Me, a sometimes-brilliant character study of a 9/11 widower (in a STUNNING performance by Adam Sandler) who, through re-connecting with his college roommate (an expected but never under-appreciated turn from Don Cheadle), eventually begins to cope with the tragedy that claimed the lives of his wife and daughters. This is a pretty frustrating film. There are some scenes here that are written and performed with sharp, precise insight - including the big scene for Sandler which, I shit you not, brought me to tears - and a refreshingly subtle, un-sensationalist look at the greater subject at the core of the film, that at the 3/4 mark I was wondering if it may make it onto my best of the year list. Then things start to get a little overcooked, but not fatally. I was rolling with an over-the-top scene in which Sandler really starts to melt down, mostly on the goodwill that the bulk of the film had built up. Then there's another scene in a Chinese restaurant where things are looking up again (for the movie, not the character).

Regular readers will recall the discussion a few pages back in this thread of the ending to No Country For Old Men - which had many viewers marveling at the film's instinct to end at precisely the moment that it should. Had Reign Over Me ended in the Chinese restaurant, it would have been excellent; perhaps a little sloppy, not perfect, but certainly a satisfying cocktail of equal parts realism and emotional substance. I'm even willing to bet that writer/director Mike Binder delivered the film having ended there, but the studio opted to bring in Steven Spielberg to shoot it in the foot....I mean, re-work the last act. Because after this scene, things go to fucking SHIT. A courtroom scene of clumsy, disjointed, embarassing execution follows, and then after that nearly everything else either does further damage or registers irrelevant. A potentially great film becomes an overlong, noticeably imperfect film (as opposed to the kind that works well enough for the flaws to be absolved). But nevertheless, it's still worth your time, for the material that works and especially for an Adam Sandler performance that is truly impressive.

Gabe, could not agree more on Reign. It was one of those "Could've" movies for me...as in, Could've been so much better. That court scene, and the after scenes just didn't seem to fit. I remember watching it shaking my head and wondering why in the Hell they added that sequence. Those scenes definitely should have been left out.

[downingthief]

I never saw Sicko. So every film this year produced a more intense emotional reaction. I know that I've hated few films as violently as I hated Fahrenheit 9/11, one of the most undisciplined botches in the history of cinema - I even sold my DVD of Bowling for Columbine, which I had previously liked - and it's an uphill battle for me to ever sit in a room in which a Michael Moore "film" is playing. I'm getting there, though...Sicko would seem like it would have to be fairly straightforward, but well....as they say: Fool me once, shame on me. Fool me twice.....won't get fooled again!







Gabe, see Sicko. Seriously...much better film than 9/11.

[KungFuJoe]

THERE WILL BE BLOOD

My best friend & I caught it last night in Lincoln Square. I was pleasantly suprised to find out that it was in a theater with a balcony. Also, the screen is HUGE and the sound was pristine. We set up shop with our snacks in the front row of the balcony. I couldn't think of a better theater in which to watch this sprawling masterpiece! I encourage anyone living in the NY area to get up off your asses and head down nice an early to this theater to see what is surely the best film of the year!

In a year filled with such great films as No Country For Old Men, Diving Bell and The Butterfly, Atonement, Assassination of Jesse James & I'm Not There, it is amazing to me that this film can rise so far ahead of the pack. It certainly confirms that PT Anderson is one of the worlds greatest directors. The fact that he was snubbed from the globes is a crime to the highest degree. And yes. Daniel Day Lewis is every bit amazing as you all say. The true suprise for me though was the intense performance by Paul Dano. He held his own very well against Lewis and even outshined him at parts. If he doesn't get a supporting nod for his efforts, then there truly is no justice in the Academy awards system. The score was brilliant as well. what more can i say? See this film a.s.a.p!

I also caught, Sweeney Todd this week. My lil cousin wanted to see it, so we went.... meh. It was good, but it didn't blow me away. Some of the singing was way too shrill. It's about what you'd expect, maybe less after hearing all these glowing reviews, but not a terrible movie by any means.

I definately plan on changing it up and going to see Walk Hard next. I'm ready for a good laugh. Although, i must say, my friend and I suprisingly found a lot of humor in There Will Be Blood.

[schoolofruckus]

There Will Be Blood was truly hilarious at times. It's a morbid kind of humor that makes you want to take a shower after laughing, but laugh you shall do. I'm glad that you found it to be as good as advertised.

I will end up seeing Sicko sometime in the next month, I bet.

[schoolofruckus]

Also, I watched Cool Hand Luke last night. It was really good, as I'm sure most people already know. Paul Newman was terrific, the supporting actors (obviously George Kennedy in particular) were all good. It was a much richer, more fulfilling tale of a man's inherent desire to avoid conformity than Rebel Without a Cause.

[iv3rdawG]

4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days is still stuck in my head. I can't wait to see it again when it's actually released. Definitely in my top 10 this year.

[schoolofruckus]

Word to that.

And I do remember (now, at least) you mentioning in the past that it would be playing for a week at the Sunset 5. Must be to drum up additional Oscar support.

[wmgaretjax]

You accuse him of sensationalism?

Yes. Moore makes a lot of common sense, surface level observations about health care... good for him. He throws it into a punch with a bunch of silly, sensationalized sob stories that take the same exploit-9/11 routes that Giulliani and his peers have indulged in. A two page summary of the state of American health care in contrast to European health care could have taught you more than this film did. It was silly.

I love "Cool Hand Luke." My favorite Newman performance.

I saw "Fur" last night. It was really disappointing. It started off with promise, but once Downey and Kidman's relationship matured it just got downright lame. How can you take someone as amazing as Kidman and as interesting as Arbus and come out with a boring movie?

[iv3rdawG]

Word to that.

And I do remember (now, at least) you mentioning in the past that it would be playing for a week at the Sunset 5. Must be to drum up additional Oscar support.

Yeah. In other news, seeing The Orphanage later today.

[TomAz]

I want to see There Will Be Blood and No Country for Old Men but instead I think I'm being "forced" to see Charlie Wilson's War this afternoon. which is supposed to be pretty funny. we'll see.

[iv3rdawG]

Well although I liked Blood and Country better, Charlie Wilson's War is still really enjoyable. Some really great performances by Amy Adams and Tom Hanks. Even one by Philip Seymour Hoffman that I think could challenge Javier Bardem's in No Country for an Oscar.

[wmgaretjax]

Yeah. In other news, seeing The Orphanage later today.

That one looks fun.

[amyzzz]

you Serious Film People are gonna bang me over the head for this..

over xmas the family and I were watching Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix.. pure escapist fun, not much art to it at all.. but it really struck me that there's a lot of damned good acting going on. not the kids so much but the adults. I can't name any of the actors (and am too lazy to wikipedia it right now) but whoever's playing Delores Umbridge, Sirius Black, Professor Macgonagal, and Professor Lupin, are doing really good work. among others. Snape too.
I agree that the adult actors in the Harry Potter movies are quite good, and they seem even better when compared with the horrible kid actors. I really hate the Harry Potter kid. He's cute, but my God, he can't act.

[iv3rdawG]

That one looks fun.

It was. It had the same feel Pan's Labyrinth did, and no wonder since Guillermo had what seems like a major part in the making of the film. I loved that though because Pan's was my favorite film from last year. Kudos to Belén Rueda. She did a wonderful job. Before I went and saw it I heard that it wasn't as scary as people thought it would be but there are definitely some scenes that got me. The whole part with the medium and the ending were great. It's a very solid supernatural/mystery/thriller/horror film.

[rage patton]

Went to see I Am Legend tonight, thought it was entertaining but not great, and the monster CGI was kinda lame.

The Cloverfield trailer (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IvNkGm8mxiM) looks amazing though.

Agreed on the monster CGI.

Double agreed on Cloverfield.

Walk Hard was great. I laughed a lot. My favorite was every time he pulled a sink out of the wall.

Agreed to the nth degree on this. When he pulled the 5 out in a row I was actually crying.

[Neutral Milk Hotel]

Might be seeing There Will Be Blood a week from now, if I go up to LA to visit my friend Sky. Tonight I'll try to get to Breathless and Time.

[Benis23]

Just got through a month of renting movies on-line. Here are some ratings for what I've seen so far:

The Ice Storm: A-. I really liked this movie. Katie Holmes' acting was so bad that she stuck out like a sore thumb, but she wasn't on-screen for very long.

Paris Je t'aime: B-. Decent, but nothing spectacular. The shorts by Gus Van Sant and the Coen brothers were my favorites.

Oldboy: A. This is a phenomenal movie. A story of revenge that easily surpasses Kill Bill imo.

Once: C+. I don't get what's so great about this movie. The novelty of watching a romance where the two main characters make music together wore off for me after the first 15 minutes or so.

Dirty Pretty Things: A. I had no idea this movie was going to be so good. This is the best written movie I've seen in a long time, and I thought the acting was very strong, too - especially Chiwetel Ojiofor.

Year of the Dog: C+. Usually I don't mind a depressing movie, but I couldn't take this one.

The Lookout: B+. This wasn't one of the best movies that I saw, but definitely worthwhile.

Being There: A. Maybe my favorite of all the movies that I saw. I couldn't bring myself to watch TV for a week after watching this.

Sicko: A-
Spider-man 3: C
That Obscure Object of Desire: B

[algunz]

I saw Juno yesterday. I enjoyed it, although at times the witty dialogue seemed contrived. I know that she was supposed to be this unique, clever, intelligent 16 year old, but sometimes I felt hyper aware that her words were written by a "grownup."

It was a movie full of great characters.

[bmack86]

I watched Walk Hard last night. B-
It was fun, and I liked all the musical references, but it wasn't something I would rave over or buy for future viewings. John Reilly was good, and I love Upright Citizens, so Matt Besser made me happy, but overall, it wasn't fantastic.

I watched Ivan's Childhood tonight. A+++
This movie was amazing. Absolutely amazing. I've studied Russian history at some length, and this period in particular, and I felt that this movie perfectly encapsulated the Russians during World War 2. The Lieutenant who Ivan interacts with is young (probably too young) and is a representative of the youth of the whole army. The soldiers express the doubts and leadership of the russian army as a whole, and the story is both interesting and completely heartbreaking. It doesn't have Tarkovsky's signature long takes and very developed characters, but it nonetheless thrives as a spectacular and singular success in the world of film. Easily in the top 10 films I've seen this year, and quite probably one of the best movies I've ever watched. I can't wait to see more Tarkovsky films.

[wmgaretjax]

I can't wait to see more Tarkovsky films.

Hell yes. The Mirror, Stalker and Solaris are incredible.

Seeing There Will be Blood tomorrow. Yay!

I saw "The Savages" tonight. Still processing it. I enjoyed it a lot. Great caustic humor, but the movie felt incredibly human. I didn't love any of the characters, but they felt incredibly real. I could relate to both on them on multiple levels. The narrative is simple, but the interactions are complex and compelling. Still trying to figure out whether I thought it all amounted to anything important, it felt incredibly optimistic, which was nice given the bitterness. I need to see it again once I've stepped back from it.

[TomAz]

Charlie Wilson's War: a typical Hollywood "based on a true story" plot where you can tell it's not an actual true story because the pieces fit too neatly together. Entertaining though. Does make me interested to know the real story.

Tom Hanks is not believable as Charlie Wilson -- the role should have gone to someone who is more of a rascal than Saint Tom. Even when he's drinking bourbon in a hot tub full of naked strippers in Vegas, he has that goody two shoes aura about him. Plus his Texas accent is abysmal.

Julia Roberts is better as Joanne Herring and Amy Adams is good as well. But the show is really belongs to Philip Seymour Hoffman. part of it probaby is because he's the only character in the film the audience can relate to -- the streetwise, common sense, smartass who is the only one who actually knows what he is doing. but Hoffman plays it perfectly.

overall the movie is good enough though would have been a lot better with somebody other than Hanks in the lead. (and I am not a Hanks hater).

[thelastgreatman]

Jared, you need to refresh your understanding of what "sensationalism" is. Sensationalism is making a crisis out of nothing, what you're talking about is Moore's overuse of tugging on the ol' heart strings, and I agree with you that he languishes on those segments too long. That was my one real beef with Farenheit--the twenty minutes about the one woman's dead soldier son made me almost glad the fucker died. But hating on Sicko even though it makes excellent points about something that gets NO press coverage whatsoever just because Moore is a bit hamhanded with the sorrow is silly, and not sensationalist at all.

Gabe, what the hell is your big beef with Farenheit? Aside from that section with the mother it was solid.

[TomAz]

But hating on Sicko even though it makes excellent points about something that gets NO press coverage whatsoever

right. there are never any newspaper articles about the uninsured and health care reform is not a major issue in the presidential campaign.

[wmgaretjax]

Sensationalism is making a crisis out of nothing

No it's not:

Sensationalism is subject matter, language, or style producing or designed to produce startling or thrilling impressions or to excite and please vulgar taste.

Either way, Moore's film just adds mostly noise to the argument. Sicko would have made a great quick and dirty 30 minute long informational documentary, instead Moore decided to dwell on bullshit like he usually does. Because it gets a rise out of people...

[iv3rdawG]

Finally picked up Heima today. Don't know why I waited so long to get it. It's still just as great as when I first saw it.

[ivankay]

No it's not:

Sensationalism is subject matter, language, or style producing or designed to produce startling or thrilling impressions or to excite and please vulgar taste.

Either way, Moore's film just adds mostly noise to the argument. Sicko would have made a great quick and dirty 30 minute long informational documentary, instead Moore decided to dwell on bullshit like he usually does. Because it gets a rise out of people...

And if you didn't get a rise out of your audience, how would you have a chance to affect any change you were hoping for? All film makers (All) tell stories to present a certain points of view to affect an audience and leave some influence in some way or another. Moore knows the audience he is speaking to and it is primarily those who are middle to lower class who usually don't have or take them time to explore issues that deeply impact their lives. If he gets a little humorous or emotional in his presentaion, so what? It's a way story tellers connect with the viewers. Is he presenting a bold face lie as the truth? If he is, then his trust as a story teller goes in the toilet. What are the intentional lies (intentional, because people do make mistakes) in his films? Believe it or not (and like it or not), he is one of the most trusted film makers making documentaries today. He has elevated interests in the genre that has made it possible for many other voices to get heard on stories that would have serious trouble seeing the light of a theater or TV because they do not serve the purpose of the Money. Man deserves a little more respect.

[TomAz]

he's a propagandist.

[wmgaretjax]

And if you didn't get a rise out of your audience, how would you have a chance to affect any change you were hoping for? All film makers (All) tell stories to present a certain points of view to affect an audience and leave some influence in some way or another. Moore knows the audience he is speaking to and it is primarily those who are middle to lower class who usually don't have or take them time to explore issues that deeply impact their lives. If he gets a little humorous or emotional in his presentaion, so what? It's a way story tellers connect with the viewers. Is he presenting a bold face lie as the truth? If he is, then his trust as a story teller goes in the toilet. What are the intentional lies (intentional, because people do make mistakes) in his films? Believe it or not (and like it or not), he is one of the most trusted film makers making documentaries today. He has elevated interests in the genre that has made it possible for many other voices to get heard on stories that would have serious trouble seeing the light of a theater or TV because they do not serve the purpose of the Money. Man deserves a little more respect.

Did I accuse him of lying? Did I even say he was untrustworthy? It has nothing to do with him being "humorous" or "emotional." You can be humorous and emotional without being manipulative or saccharine. That's the problem with what Moore does for me personally is this: I'm already feeling what Moore wants me to feel when he presents the simple information in a well-constructed manner, but then he drags me along by a chain and shoves it down my throat the whole time. It's not a positive or particularly insightful experience for me, I'd rather get the same information from another source less concerned about twisting me into feeling a way I already do. I'm not judging more on the quality of his information, rather the manner in which he presents it.

There are great examples of films or documentaries that are successful because they make the viewer fell uncomfortable or manipulated. I don't think Moore's films are examples of this, inevitably they leave me wishing that I disagreed with him.

[ivankay]

Who isn't?

That was in response to the propangandist . He's spreading the ideas of movements towards change in certain areas. ARen't most people doing that when they exchange ideas about the things that piss them off? If you are saying he is a propagandist who bases his tales on rumors that aren't backed up by anything, please present.

In response to wmgaretjax, you are well informed and don't need to hear it. You have fallen out of the intended audience. i understand what it's like to sit in front of someone trying to tell you something you already know...it can get a tad dull. All film and discussion is manipulation by the way. The saccharine part might have a lot to do with you not "Needing to hear it". If someone is involed in the story and they are geniunely affected by the story of say a woman who no longer has her son because of bullshit policy, then it might not come off a saccharine to them.

[wmgaretjax]

In response to wmgaretjax, you are well informed and don't need to hear it. You have fallen out of the intended audience. i understand what it's like to sit in front of someone trying to tell you something you already know...it can get a tad dull. All film and discussion is manipulation by the way. The saccharine part might have a lot to do with you not "Needing to hear it". If someone is involed in the story and they are geniunely affected by the story of say a woman who no longer has her son because of bullshit policy, then it might not come off a saccharine to them.

It has little to do with already knowing what Michael Moore is saying, because there are lots of specifics that I don't know. I'm not going to split hairs by trying to define how Michael Moore's work is more manipulative than others, it's semantics and I figure you already know what I'm getting at.

It has everything to do with Moore demanding a certain perspective and emotive response, that's what makes it saccharine. It's one thing to say, here is some information, here are evidences of it, here are some questions that imply a solution and blame... It's another to add a step in there that indicates what my exact emotional response should be. Take that step out of Moore's films and I'd probably sing his anthem too, but that's a pretty critical misstep in my book. It's no better, like I said earlier, than Giulliani's use of 9/11... the only difference is I happen to agree with Moore more often than not.

[ivankay]

It has everything to do with Moore demanding a certain perspective and emotive response, that's what makes it saccharine. It's one thing to say, here is some information, here are evidences of it, here are some questions that imply a solution and blame... It's another to add a step in there that indicates what my exact emotional response should be. Take that step out of Moore's films and I'd probably sing his anthem too, but that's a pretty critical misstep in my book. It's no better, like I said earlier, than Giulliani's use of 9/11... the only difference is I happen to agree with Moore more often than not.

Almost anyone who is good at making a film or telling a story in anyway is doing that. There are variations in style (which would be the saccharine i suppose), but to say the act of demanding a certain perspective and emotive response is to put all film makers (that can get an emotive respone...plenty try, few succeed) under the "saccharine" label. Say i'm making a scary movie and i want the audience to freak out (the emotive response) and do it by choosing not to reveal my monster until a certain amount of tension has been laid out (the certain perspective), does that make it saccarine? Moore is one of those jovial, self depreciating story tellers who will definitely go as far as he can to milk the emotions of his viewer. More power to him. Whenever i talk to people about the hardest thing to do when you make a movie, the number one thing is to affect emotions. He's pretty good at that. Sometimes he does it with a spoonful (alright, maybe a cup) of sugar, but you know what that helps out with.

[wmgaretjax]

shades of grey... exactness is the issue, the specificity of my response is what moore's work demands. good film injects ambiguity into the anticipated responses. of course film uses perspective and expected emotional response. the exactness is what I'm taking issue with.

yes, he goes as far as he can to milk the emotions of his viewers. the problem is that he people lose faith in his honesty by the time they come out the other side. not honesty in the facts, but honesty in the response his has forced us into. there is no breathing or thinking room in any of it. it's about as mindless in it's expectations of the viewer as the worst kind of propaganda.

[ivankay]

shades of grey... exactness is the issue, the specificity of my response is what moore's work demands. good film injects ambiguity into the anticipated responses. of course film uses perspective and expected emotional response. the exactness is what I'm taking issue with.

yes, he goes as far as he can to milk the emotions of his viewers. the problem is that he people lose faith in his honesty by the time they come out the other side. not honesty in the facts, but honesty in the response his has forced us into. there is no breathing or thinking room in any of it. it's about as mindless in it's expectations of the viewer as the worst kind of propaganda.

Some good films inject ambiguity. Some good films are striving for a specific emotional response. When you go for the specific, you are asking a lot out of your craft and hopefully you can live up to it. But then again, we all know "good" is subjective. i think if he wanted to make me angry or sad with a particular scene and it worked, bravo. If he fails, bummer for his art (if it fails on everyone that is).

Moore is making films for people from Flint. The people he knew and lived with. He wants them to be affected by his work and hopefully get them riled up to the point where they get off their ass and do something to change the things that are negatively influencing the quality of their lives. i don't believe a good number of his audience loses faith in his honesty when he takes them on an emotional journey to hammer a point home. If anything viewers will more than likely trust a source additionaly if the source has tapped into what some philosphies argue is the only true thing about a human (the emotions). i still don't see where he's not relying on the honesty in his facts as far as his film making goes. He presents some facts, sometimes adds a joke or human story to go with them, interjects his feeling on the matter (it is a Michael Moore film after all)...i don't recall him outright making something up to manipulate his viewers. And there's plenty of time to breathe and reflect. The people who don't think about information presented to them and suck it up as the gospel will have that problem with everything in their lives. To slam the artisit because of the passionate devotion of some members of her or his audience is unfair criticism of the work.


The worst kind of propaganda is to take fabrications and prop them up as popular truth in order to get your counrty to go along with the killing of a few million here or there. "Sicko" is not even remotely close to that.

[wmgaretjax]

To slam the artisit because of the passionate devotion of some members of her is his audience is unfair criticism of the work.


This is probably where we disagree the most. It's definitely the source of a lot of my problems with Moore. I do think it is "fair" to criticize an artist for having tunnel vision in regards to their audience. It's important (although there are exceptions to this being critical historically) to have an understanding of your audience, but the best and most effective art transcends it's audience. So to pander to an audience by emulating mediocre, sensationalist journalism would be an example of this completely failing to do this. This may seem ridiculous, and I am certainly being idealistic but... I would consider recent documentaries like "The Corporation," "Iraq in Fragments," "Control Room," "Manufacturing Consent" etc etc as examples of highly politicized documentaries that even my conservative, fundamentalist Christian father could enjoy and be challenged by. Whereas my Dad understands what Michael Moore is doing, but detests the guy because he finds it all pretty juvenile (for the record, several of the above documentaries are much more "controversial" in the content that they ask the audience to digest than "Sicko" or "Bowling for Columbine"). I don't even find Moore's work to be effective, much less important "art."

edit: and I withdraw my statement about "the worst kind of propaganda." it was a poor exaggeration.

[full on idle]

go ivankay!

[full on idle]

no offense, wmgaretx.

[wmgaretjax]

no offense, wmgaretx.

http://www.mindhacks.org/wp-content/uploads/2007/02/WindowsLiveWriter/MindOverBodyHealing_EC56/illness%5B6%5D.jpg

[ivankay]

Nothing wrong with being juvenille. It can be a lot of fun sometimes even when discussing serious subject matter. It may have some people not listen to you becuase you have not fit into their "standards", but why should he compromise his style just to try and get 100% of the audience.

And i was not saying you could not criticize an artist on their motivation and or techniques to create a response in their audience. i was saying you could not fairly critique the work based on the response of the audience other than your own. For example a band makes songs and does shows that generate fans who are freakishly religious about them. Them fans can be quite annoying and influence how i feel about the songs and artisits. Is that fair? i don't think so because i am not focusing on the work but the afterbirth (is the baby a dick because of the gushing and praise her or his family puts out for it?) If you are negatively criticising him for his motivation to elicit a response, then you are going to have to slam a lot of filmmakers (including the ones you mentioned). If the critique is based on the guy who wants to kill Bush because he saw Ferenheit 9/11 and got all pissed off, not fair. Helter Skelter sucks becase Manson loved it.

And the work may not be effective on you or a lot of people, but it has had more influence than all the documentaries (as great as they are) you mentioned combined. You do not have to be personally affected to acknowledge Moore's films' influence. His films are his art. Importance once again is subjective (and arrogant...when it comes down to it, nothing the human race does is of importance...time will continue to unravel wheter we're here or not) If there are artists out there who think their work is "important", suck on a humility pill for a while.

[wmgaretjax]

Moore certainly finds his work "important."

What kind of influence have Moore's documentaries had? They generate press. People argue all day about them. Did "Fahrenheit 9/11" have any kind of profound effect on anyone that mattered? Did it have a profound enough effect on the middle-american population as a whole, enough to change the way the ball was rolling? Fuck no. Not in the slightest. So in reality, Moore's "influence" has been to initiate a swell of similar documentaries to the same effect.

I've never met anyone that claimed that Moore had any kind of impact on the way they thought about things. I did however watch two people close to me completely change their perspective on American-Iraqi foreign policy after seeing "Iraq in Fragments." If you ask me, that's what Moore could do if he changed some of his tactics (the talent and the insight is there). He has the fucking audience already, it's too bad he's too busy preaching to the choir or pandering to controversy. More than anything I get really frustrated watching his films, because I see the power they could have if he stepped back a little.

[iv3rdawG]

http://img178.imageshack.us/img178/3711/explodingheadzf1.gif

[ivankay]

There is a large audience out there who are not as educated and informed as people on this board (and i suspect in your social circles). They tend to be classified as "working class" and that is the genesis of Moore's film making with "Roger and Me". Not all of those people are necessarily the "choir". They vote for candidates (if they vote at all) who pander to interests that do not benefit them financially or socially. Why do they do that? They have bought into the message from the "conservative" pulpits that tell them unions are bad for you, socialism is evil in all it's forms, and y'all can be rich as you wanna be and some day can enjoy the awesome tax breaks. To say he has not had an influence on the way a lot of middle to low income people think and act is ingnoring the films parts in certain chains of events. Take his most influencial work in Ferenheit, did it get more people to think about the Iraq war and it's necessity? The election may not have dumped Bush out, but there was more discussion and participation in an election than i recall in my lifetime (i'll be 40 next month); and Ferenheit sure created a lot of heat. i talk to more people that got pissed off after seeing that (not all college educated) than have heard of, let alone seen (as a bummer as it is), Control Room, The Corporation, No End in Sight, Iraq in Fragments, ect.. You say his work did not affect anyone who "mattered". i am curious who matters?

Moore is probably the only "Pop" documentary film maker out there. He serves his roll well. If he altered his approach to echo or mimick the "serious", journalistic films, you can bet he would have as many viewers as they have. That's not to say he's selling out for a big audience. He's a guy who fell into unusal circumstances and is riding his particular wave. The jouralistic doc makers benefit from a Moore breaking out and tapping into the popular consiousness that will hopefully lead others to their work.

And if Moore is finding his stuff or himself important, then he's risking losing a lot. Guys like him can not afford to not be humble.

[ivankay]

Oh yeah, on a side note:

Saw Sweeney Todd and Juno.

my reaction to Todd when the credits started to roll was "pretty cool." Getting into Sondheim music is a little difficult, but maybe that will change with a second viewing. Mr. Depp is fantastic, but my condolences on not getting an Oscar because of Daniel Day-Lewis falling into the roll of a lifetime in "There Will Be Blood". The look is brilliant and this is my favorite Burton film since Ed Wood (which i am hearing and reading more than a few times)

i loved Juno. Cute and funny. Characters are memorable and the cast is excellent.

[wmgaretjax]

Moore is probably the only "Pop" documentary film maker out there.

That's ludicrous. "The Corporation" is "pop," so was "Supersize Me," and you could even jump back in time to Welles' "F is for Fake."

Now that I think about it, that Welles film has a lot in common with Moore. His own personal, cariacatured persona is embedded in the film. It's not as directly political, but it takes many of the vignetted and narrated approaches. Hell, Welles even goes as far to assert what he thinks about what he is reporting on in real-time throughout the course of the film. The difference? Most of what I've touched on already.

I actually loved "Roger and Me" when I saw it. I'd be curious to watch it again after becoming frustrated with his get-up.

In all honesty, I tend to enjoy simpler documentaries. Things like Iraq in Fragments really appeal to me in that respect. Or Fog of War. Moore's latest stuff just feels to bloated and unfocused to me. That coupled with what I've mentioned has really turned me off to it. Has anyone seen his TV series? Is it worth checking out?

EDIT: Oh, and I'm not really interested in the political influence that Farenheit exerted. You talk about it's role in chains of events, but like you said, nothing really chained. You can claim it was "heated" all you want, but the time before with Gore seemed to be more inflamed to me. Either way, for me his "inlfuence" is beside the point. A lot of worthless things are done and said by people with loud/heard voices.

[ivankay]

That's ludicrous. "The Corporation" is "pop," so was "Supersize Me," and you could even jump back in time to Welles' "F is for Fake."

i was totally thinking of that after i wrote it, but let it go because Spurlock is still in his infant stage as far as being a popular film maker goes (looks like he's definitely on the way though) and "The Corporation" never broke out beyond art houses (although stylistically, i will agree). Now that i think about it, Moore has a HUGE impact on the way documentaries are made now a days. Documentaries seemed afraid to be entertaining before "Roger and Me" came along.

The TV series was funny. Basically doing the ballsy confrontation thing with people who don't want their laundry out there for everyone to see.

And in response to your edit, i think there was change in the way a lot of people thought and felt. The affect is still going on in politics and the approval ratings of the people who run government. If there was no Ferenheit, would it be exactly the same as it is today? Maybe Bush would have a little more support. Maybe the republicans would have held the House and Senate and we wouldn't have discussions and investigations on and into the things that are creeping about right now. Change happens every nano second and his work has helped push some ripples.

[wmgaretjax]

Now that i think about it, Moore has a HUGE impact on the way documentaries are made now a days.

I won't deny this. Especially when you think about documentaries that are made with the intent to try and have it break out to a larger audience. For better and worse I guess.... It's all a little too ADD/MTV for me. I liked in The Corporation, but that was more because a simple, incredibly interesting claim was laid down early on, and the spastic anecdotes were always brought back to that point (rendering them non-spastic as best as possible I guess).

[ivankay]

Thanks for the discussion. i must get in that thing known as a shower.

[wmgaretjax]

Thanks for the discussion. i must get in that thing known as a shower.

http://www.inventiveparent.com/in%20use%20shower.gif

[thelastgreatman]

right. there are never any newspaper articles about the uninsured and health care reform is not a major issue in the presidential campaign.

Sicko is not about the uninsured whatsoever.

[ivankay]

http://www.inventiveparent.com/in%20use%20shower.gif

How ever did you g