Schoolio's Movie Corner

[schoolofruckus]

heres a trailer for that new FACES OF DEATH movie everyones been going apeshit about...
http://www.d13network.com/videosp/fod2.html
looks like its going straight to video...

metal gear solid movie finally in development
http://www.aintitcool.com/node/31516

I didn't get the "Faces of Death" trailer....is that about the guy who started the "Faces of Death" series? I saw "FoD 2" in high school....it upset the shit out of me. It included a video of a guy being torchered by witches and they cut his cheeks with a pair of garden shears. It was pretty fucking realistic, too. I hated that shit. It was like "Irreversible" without the artistry or the point.

In slightly-less-fucked-up movie news - I finally saw "Blue Velvet" for the first time last night. I thought it was awesome. It was slightly more conventional than the two Lynch films ("Mulholland" and "Inland") that I've seen before it, but I can see what was so audacious about it. It was a great example of how Lynch's masterful visual and audio techniques can work wonders on a relatively-normal plot about a young boy investigating potential foul play in his small town. The acting was terrific as well.

Hopefully I'll make it to "Wild at Heart" tonight. Then I've got a lot more Lynch ahead of me ("Lost Highways", "Elephant Man", "Eraserhead", etc.).

[schoolofruckus]

Ha ha ha ha ha.....any of you who read Ain't It Cool News regularly may be familiar with Neill Cumpston, who writes some of the funniest reviews of action movies and comedies that are humanly possible.

His take on "300". (http://www.aintitcool.com/node/31520)

[chairmenmeow47]

Ha ha ha ha ha.....any of you who read Ain't It Cool News regularly may be familiar with Neill Cumpston, who writes some of the funniest reviews of action movies and comedies that are humanly possible.

His take on "300". (http://www.aintitcool.com/node/31520)

that was fucking hilarious!!!

[lindseyb]

In slightly-less-fucked-up movie news - I finally saw "Blue Velvet" for the first time last night. I thought it was awesome. It was slightly more conventional than the two Lynch films ("Mulholland" and "Inland") that I've seen before it, but I can see what was so audacious about it. It was a great example of how Lynch's masterful visual and audio techniques can work wonders on a relatively-normal plot about a young boy investigating potential foul play in his small town. The acting was terrific as well.

Hopefully I'll make it to "Wild at Heart" tonight. Then I've got a lot more Lynch ahead of me ("Lost Highways", "Elephant Man", "Eraserhead", etc.).

blue velvet is great, isn't it? apparently laura dern and kyle mclachlan dated briefly after they filmed that movie. i saw inland empire last night...it was amazing. i can't wait to buy the dvd and watch it over and over again. did you know twin peaks season 2 is out on dvd in april?

you haven't seen eraserhead, yet? man, you're in for it. i like this the least of his films. not because its any less creative or brilliant, but because the gross-factor made it so hard for me to watch. it literally made me sick to my stomach.

[bmack86]

Eraserhead is an intense viewing experience. Get the Lynch-approved copy of the film if you can; the transfer is pristine and really captures the disgusting glory of the film. As with most of his, it's definitely not conventional. It's also more twisted. I really liked it.

[Mr.Nipples]

yeah i read that review earlier today and it was great. he doesnt disappoint. i honestly dont know what that faces of death film is about, all i know is that it caused hotshit because theyre people actually dying in the film. blue velvet man...what a fucked up film...

jeff: Heineken???
Frank Booth: Heineken!???...FUCK THAT SHIT! PABST BLUE RIBBON!!!

[bmack86]

and, that review of 300 is top notch

[Mr.Nipples]

Eraserhead is an intense viewing experience. Get the Lynch-approved copy of the film if you can; the transfer is pristine and really captures the disgusting glory of the film. As with most of his, it's definitely not conventional. It's also more twisted. I really liked it.

yeah get the lynch signature version...the way it should be viewed. i heard elephant man was coming to criterion, maybe theyll do the same for eraserhead.

[bmack86]

I don't think he'd do a criterion for it, since he's already released a similarily priced definitive edition. The packaging on it is awesome as well; well worth the 30 some odd bucks.
I will buy Elephant Man criterion. I love the Criterion collection; so many awesome movies.

[Mr.Nipples]

i didnt know what the criterion collection was until somebody left Brazil at my house, ever since then you could say ive been addicted. yeah youre right, a release on criterion would be pointless, they really couldnt do any better than the one thats already out.

[schoolofruckus]

So, against all odds, I not only made it to the midnight (well, technically 1 am) screening "Wild at Heart" tonight, but I made it through the whole thing without dozing off. I got a little sleepy towards the middle, but I fought it off with the help of some Red Bulls (and a cappuccino....and a pack of Nitro2Go energy pills) and saw it through to the end.

Holy shit, it was awesome. I had no idea what I was in for. An indescribable and surprisingly sweet cocktail of lovers on the run, Elvis, and "The Wizard of Oz", this film has a diabolically funny surprise at every turn. As a big fan of "Natural Born Killers", this obvious predecessor to that film was a blast.

[mountmccabe]

As a big fan of "Natural Born Killers", this obvious predecessor to that film was a blast.
That was one big reason I figured you'd love this one but I didn't wanna screw up your expectations.

Domino was rented by other people last night and I watched it. It moved enough and had enough going on to be passable but there was nothing special there, nothing new. Better than I expected, I guess.

[schoolofruckus]

I liked "Domino" a lot. I know it was a mess in many ways, but I thought there was some strong satire in there. I took it as a parody of biographical movies that are "based on a true story" as well as "reality" TV shows; that might be reaching somewhat, but I found enough justification that the theory holds. And I've yet to see a movie with Mickey Rourke that isn't at least somewhat fun to watch.

[mountmccabe]

It was def entertaining. As a satire... maybe but it's hard for me to feel that from Tony Scott and, well, I don't know - subjects that are that ridiculous in themselves are difficult to satirize. Ian and BAG were nice touches, though.

In my on-going adventures with Oliver Stone I watched Platoon again. My dad bought it and I had been wanting to re-watch anyway. I liked it a lot more than before (I hated, hated hated it last time) but I still didn't really like it. I have much more respect for it as the things I don't like aren't important things to Stone; he's doing other things, he's not trying to make the kind of movie I want it to be.

(Possible) SPOILERS for PLATOON (1986) follow....




...SPOILERS...

I see Stone's movies as full of sloppy plotting, hamfisted acting and overimportant overemphasized moments that are supposed to be powerful but strike me as ludicrous. Like the slow motion pauses on Barnes and Elias culminating in extreme closeups of the eyes of Barnes and then Elias... I mean, fucking hell. It just boggles my mind why he would want to beat us over the head like that.

Stone to me always fees rushed. I mean, yes, I love the pacing of 2001 but I also love the pacing of Baz Luhrmann's films. Stone is actually after the same sort of expressionism, a mystical, mythical evocation... but Luhrmann's subject matter is lighter so overblown sillyness is a good thing.

There was much that I liked about Platoon. The movie as a whole could be seen as an expressionistic encapsulation of the US's time in Vietnam... maybe. The fresh faces right off the plane walking right into dead bodies being loaded onto another aircraft. The initial feeling of not knowing what the hell was going on was appropriate. You never quite understand why they go one place or another... which is appropriate, I figure. But then again for me I tend to prefer contrast in such situations. There was some real tension in the early battle scenes - where the purpose was accurately expressing the battles compared to later on when the purpose shifted to the Barnes/Elias duality and such which disrupted the pacing thus killing the tension.

The story was stupid and simplistic and, as stated previously way overblown. The acting was uneven. There were so many characters and so little time to do anything with them but they were given moments when they were treated as the most important characters in the movie. Also Corey Glover from Living Colour was in the movie. Matt Dillon's brother was in it and he distracted me by looking familiar without actually being familiar. The voiceover pretty much sucked.

The Barber was good though it was used over and over and over.


OK, I'm not sure I got much across there. I feel as if I understand Stone better and respect him more but I still don't like him. So now it's not that I hate this movie it's just that I wish it was a lot different.

[DeltaSigChi4]

I'm watching Taxi Driver right now.

E

[SojuGorae]

I'm watching Taxi Driver right now.

E

Great fucking movie.

Harvey Keitel just destroys as a pimp.

[DeltaSigChi4]

Word. I think Martin Scorsese tries too hard as the seriously deranged husband taxi passenger.

But it's still one of my personal favourites in the film.

E

[schoolofruckus]

I'm halfway (i.e., still capable of driving, probably not capable of coherent conversation) drunk right now, so please forgive the following review.

Earlier this evening, I watched "Factory Girl", a portrait of one-time Warhol "It Girl" Edie Sedgwick. I thought it was a fantastic movie that slightly suffered from a lackluster ending.

Basically, Edie Sedgwick was a girl from a very rich, prominent American family who, in lieu of capitalizing on her own artistic talents, became the face of Andy Warhol's self-created empire of lost souls. And let me tell you, Sienna Miller - formerly best known as Jude Law's cheated-on ex-girlfriend - plays her swinging for the fences. She gets inside Edie and turns her sadness and emptiness into a Brando-(not to be confused with Brandon :)-esque performance. I'm not going to be able to do this justice right now, but she is flat-out fucking brilliant, taking Edie from her damaged, trust-fund beginnings at the Cambridge School of the Arts to her career pinnacle as the face of "The Factory" - a loft in which Warhol makes ordinary confused people into individual art projects - to a tragic end at the age of 28. Director George Hickenlooper - who made the fantastic Rodney Bingenheimer documentary "The Mayor of the Sunset Strip" - captures the hedonism and emptiness of Warhol World with poignancy and authenticity, and he's aided by a cadre of recognizable, skilled actors playing historical characters of various significance. After Sienna, the film belongs to Guy Pearce (whose Warhol is a model of self-deprecation-gone-wrong) and Hayden Christensen (who does the finest work of his career as a Bob Dylan stand-in who romances Edie until the point he realizes she will never break free of Warhol's grasp). The centerpiece of "Factory Girl" is a Pantheon-level scene in which Dylan is invited to The Factory to stand as the subject of a new Warhol film, and ends up exposing Warhol (to the audience, if nothing else) for the overrated parasite that he is. I'm a fan of Andy Warhol's work, to be sure, but I found this vampire portrayal of him to somehow make complete and perfect sense.

"Factory Girl" is eventually undone by a lazy ending that breaks some of my most hallowed rules for film denouement - namely, don't tell me the ending of a story via subtitles, and don't have interviews about your film's subject as the closing credits roll - but it's not offensive enough to spoil the film's significant accomplishments. It's still one of the best films of (technically) 2006, and one that anyone with a desire to feel the cruelty of fleeting fame should seek out immediately.

[jackstraw94086]

so, jack's post (http://www.coachella.com/forum/showpost.php?p=41964&postcount=77) in the TV thread reminded me...

how come on the 300 trailer the guy says "tonight, we dine in hell!!!" shouldn't it be hades?!?! i see that trailer almost everytime i go to the movies and it makes me wonder.

Remember that old analogy section of the SAT's?

Hell is to English as:
A) Blue is to color.
B) Gluttony is to sin.
C) Hades is to Greek.
D) Bakersfield is to California.
E) Elmo is to Sesame Street

They're not speaking ancient Greek in "300". I know Hades and Hell aren't 100% equivalent concepts, but we all get the idea. Action movies are generally meant to appeal to the lowest common denominator. There are likely far bigger historical innacuracies in that movie than "hell".

EDIT: just saw John's post. What he said.

[smokealotapotamus]

Children of Men was the best movie I'd seen in years. Cant wait for 300 on Imax

[jackstraw94086]

I'm watching Idiocracy tonight. I don't have high hopes but who knows.

This movie was overall horrible, but I did manage a mild chuckle when President Dwayne Elizando Mountain Dew Herbert Camacho addressed the U.S House of Representin' after a WWE-style entrance, then led the parade down Pennsylvania Ave on his massive trike.

I can't believe real money was laid out to produce that movie.

[Tylerdurden31]

Children of Men...good, though I feel like there could've been a little more to it.

[jerpar24]

Anyone Seen Hannabal Rising yet I watched it tonight. I would say its the 2nd best of all the Hannabal movies.

[schoolofruckus]

Yeah, I hated "Idiocracy". It looked more than a little suffocated - as if the studio had pretty much not shown it any support beyond the initial green light - but even what was there was just an awful execution of an idea that could have been great.

Last night, I watched "The Death of Mr. Lazarescu", one of the film elite's favorite films from last year. It's a black comedy (one that makes "Very Bad Things" look like "Dumb & Dumber") from Romania about an alcoholic, retired engineer named Lazarescu, who after a day of vomiting blood and feeling nauseous, finally calls an ambulance. The perimedic can immediately see that there are a list of things wrong with him, and takes him to one hospital after another as each successive doctor chastises him for drinking too much and sends him away.

This film is a stark, almost Dogme-level trip through the cynical side of the Romanian health care system, and it raises a number of pointed questions. Namely - does a man who willfully sabotages himself (as the ulcer-having Lazarescu does in drinking to excess) deserve a doctor's full attention and care? It's a question that hit me pretty hard, as someone with seasonal respiratory problems who was until recently a smoker. I know I've gone to the doctor's office before when I needed an inhaler refill, and once I was hospitalized when I started having a full blown asthma attack; each and every time I had to answer "yes, I'm a smoker" to incredulous nurses and doctors. Having gotten a case of bronchitis every winter since I was 7, I rationalized the smoking as being a contributor to the problem, but not the cause of it, and thus, wasn't something I needed to jetison immediately.

Of course it was stupid, and thank Christ the doctors I dealt with were much more humane than the ones in this movie, because it did a BRILLIANT job of showing the cynicism and the workmanlike detachment of people in the medical profession. I don't know if it's just that way in Romania (the only Romanian person I've known was a former roommate, and she was definitely a fucking bitch and a half), but this film's portrayal of the morale in hospitals is beyond bleak. The specialists in this movie are tired, frustrated, and jaded beyond belief, and they have no time for anything but chastisement for this man who has the nerve to drink himself to death and expect their help - in the wake of a major traffic accident, no less. The nurse feels genuine empathy for him, and tries to reason with the doctors, but she succeeds only in making them feel undermined and insulted.

This film is maybe a little longer than it should have been (I don't think it needed a "Boogie Nights" running time), and it's certainly not any fun whatsoever to watch. But it's an excellent, challenging low-budget piece that any adventurous cineaste who's in the mood for something unique and biting would do well to seek out. Although that may be difficult, as it's not at Blockbuster or even some independent video stores around LA. I pretty much had to buy it before I saw it.

[TomAz]

the only Romanian person I've known was a former roommate, and she was definitely a fucking bitch and a half

My college roommate and one of my best friends did his doctorate on Romanian history. He spent a couple years over there and met a Romanian girl and they got married. Then they moved back to the states. Then she divorced him.

[bmack86]

gabe doesn't care about romanian people

I heard that was a really good movie. I'll have to check it out.

[schoolofruckus]

I think you would really like it, Bryan. I'm sure that a place like Vidiots has it. Maybe Netflix....I cancelled my subscription, so I don't know.

[chairmenmeow47]

one of my co-worker's is romanian. he and his friends got into an altercation with gypsies back in romania, lol. i love when he tells that story!! i got to hear him talk romanian for the first time today too.

and i liked platoon, yeah, it's cheesy, but i tried to keep in mind it was cheesy for the time.

i watched taxi driver for the first time in YEARS yesterday. it's been on my dvr for awhile now. i forgot how good deniro was in that movie, i miss that deniro, what happened to him?!

also watched "a bill of divorcement". it was hepburn's first movie. she was good, but man, she just annoys me for some reason. i liked the movie though, i'd probably see the play if i ever got the chance.

good german tomorrow, WOO-HOO!

[TomAz]

GRAMMAR POLICE GRAMMAR POLICE

PUT YOUR HANDS ABOVE YOUR HEAD AND STEP AWAY FROM THE KEYBOARD

[mob roulette]

"the fabulous baker boys" is on cable right now. i am happy.

[chairmenmeow47]

the good german, tonight!!! finally :)

[downingthief]

"the fabulous baker boys" is on cable right now. i am happy.

I fell in love with Michelle Phieffer in that movie. Simply amazing...

[thinnerair]

Anyone Seen Hannabal Rising yet I watched it tonight. I would say its the 2nd best of all the Hannabal movies.

I caught it this weekend.
It was an interesting flick and I think if it hadn't been a "hannibal" movie, it could have been a really good World War II flick.
It really dragged a bit and tended to get a bit boring after about the halfway point. The cinematography was excellent and the score was great. Gaspard Ulliel as a young Hannibal worked quite well as he did show some of the charm of the older Hannibal Lecther.

Overall, it was a decent movie, and while it was WAY better than Red Dragon, it wasn't as good as Hannibal.

[CiderMouseRules]

Idiocracy was choice. Ya'lls is cray-zee.

[mob roulette]

I fell in love with Michelle Phieffer in that movie. Simply amazing...

agreed. super hot here. also jeff bridges remains criminally underrated in my book as an actor. i mean people show him love and all, but i can't think of too many BAD jeff bridges movies. "starman" i guess would be one.

i'm probably going to get flamed now. imdb start your engines.

[jackstraw94086]

Gabe,
I saw science of sleep last night and I have to say I'm starting to seriously question your tastes. I'm fairly certain at this point that you are a machine. The film was acted well, especially by Bernal. It told a very coherent and compelling story amidst the crazy dream imagery.

Do you simply not like gondry flicks?

[full on idle]

Dave Chappelle>going to the movies.

[Yablonowitz]

What makes you think Jacktimstraw "went" to the movies instead of have the movies come to him?

[thinnerair]

are you saying that its better to be Dave Chappelle than go to the movies?
Or that Dave Chappelle HIMSELF is better than the act of going to the movies?

[full on idle]

I'm saying that going to see Dave Chappelle live at the Punchline is greater than watching a movie.

[jackstraw94086]

I was originally planning to work on music and got engrossed in the movie while cooking and eating dinner...... at the theater.

[thinnerair]

I'm saying that going to see Dave Chappelle live at the Punchline is greater than watching a movie.

thats true. he is one entertaining negro. thats for damn sure.

[KungFuJoe]

Gabe,
I saw science of sleep last night and I have to say I'm starting to seriously question your tastes. I'm fairly certain at this point that you are a machine. The film was acted well, especially by Bernal. It told a very coherent and compelling story amidst the crazy dream imagery.

Do you simply not like gondry flicks?

Wait ... Gabe, you didn't like "The Science of Sleep"?? I must've missed this review. I thought this a wonderfull and very touching film, although it kind of annoyed me at the end.

Bernal was fantastic though. Very funny, imo, and extremely creative. Overall, I prefer "Eternal Sunshine", but this was a sweet film. Perfect for those Valentine's Day suckers out there.

I really love the way Gondry uses his camera. He is easily one of my favorite film makers. This makes me question what your thoughts are on films by Guy Madden and Olivier Assayas? Two of my other favorite film makers working today.

I haven't watched to much recently, but finely got around to peeping "Grizzly Man" last night. I'm glad I waited because I lost any expectations I might've had for the film and was pleasently suprised. I really felt for the man and thought he captured some brilliant footage. Werner Herzog pieced it together beautifully too. I loved it.

Glad to hear you enjoyed "Wild at Heart". I wouldn't have expected anything less.

For those of you in the Valentine's day spirit looking to rent some good films with love stories, I suggest Jean Renoir's classic "Rules of the Game" and Luc Besson's "The Big Blue".

[schoolofruckus]

Jack,

On the contrary, I love Michel Gondry movies. Not just "Eternal Sunshine", but also "Human Nature" (a severely underrated movie). The problem I had with "The Science of Sleep" was that I didn't buy any of the relationships in the movie, especially the love story. I felt like there was absolutely no reason why Charlotte Gainsbourg would have thought Bernal's character was anything but a kroq ken type. I admit that the film gave a good insight into the potential, hidden good nature that can come with an awkward guy who comes off as a deranged stalker; I just didn't see how she would have thought of him otherwise. I also felt like his co-workers were portrayed too over-the-top when they should have been more grounded in reality.

I felt like it was both too similar to Gondry's earlier shit (in the fact that it was about the inner workings of the human brain and the effect on romantic pursuits) and not similar enough (the character work being severely undercooked). I loved the look of the film (a lower-budget, but more inventive dreamscape than Gondry's other films have attempted), and I liked Charlotte's performance individually; but overall, the film's failure (in my mind) to present a strong contrast to his dreamy escapades left me feeling like it was a missed opportunity.

Joe, I've never seen any of Maddin's or Assayas's stuff. Suggestions on where to start?

I was going to watch Cassavetes' first film "Shadows" last night, but I've been so engrossed in "Rebels on the Backlot" that I felt like just reading about movies instead of watching them. I'm going to have a whole lot to write about this book when I finish with it.

[jackstraw94086]

I have some exact opposite opinions on this movie and I think they are based on a very different interpretation of it.
Jack,

On the contrary, I love Michel Gondry movies. Not just "Eternal Sunshine", but also "Human Nature" (a severely underrated movie). The problem I had with "The Science of Sleep" was that I didn't buy any of the relationships in the movie, especially the love story. I felt like there was absolutely no reason why Charlotte Gainsbourg would have thought Bernal's character was anything but a kroq ken type. I admit that the film gave a good insight into the potential, hidden good nature that can come with an awkward guy who comes off as a deranged stalker; I just didn't see how she would have thought of him otherwise. I also felt like his co-workers were portrayed too over-the-top when they should have been more grounded in reality.

I felt like it was both too similar to Gondry's earlier shit (in the fact that it was about the inner workings of the human brain and the effect on romantic pursuits) and not similar enough (the character work being severely undercooked). I loved the look of the film (a lower-budget, but more inventive dreamscape than Gondry's other films have attempted), and I liked Charlotte's performance individually; but overall, the film's failure (in my mind) to present a strong contrast to his dreamy escapades left me feeling like it was a missed opportunity.

should have been more grounded in reality? My dear schoolio, they were intensely grounded in reality and the lack of contrast was intentional. I'll explain later. Gondry initially paints Stephane as his usual painfully shy protagonist, but there is something very different about him. The boy isn't just sensitive, as the movie progresses we come to learn he's truly not well in the head. This is what makes it a different Gondry film. The lack of contrast between dream and reality was the point. His latent schizophrenia becomes more expressed as he falls deeper into unrequited love. This is why the lines between crazy dream shit and reality become blurred as the film progresses. The "reality" scenes start getting stranger and stranger (i.e. him and his coworker tossing the TV into the river) until he can't tell the difference anymore. She suspects he's not quite right in the head and eventually knows it. This creates massive conflict for her. She loves, pities, and fears him (as in her feelings for him) all at once, and he misinterprets it until the end. The part I can't decide is whether he knows it himself in the end. I like that open-endedness aspect. Part of me also thinks that at least sub-consciously knew it from the beginning, which is why he was sabotaging the relationship before it could develop(the note, lying about where he lived, staying at the bar with the random skank while she left, etc.), but he loses control. Eventually he's stuck in a waking dream. His delusions chase him away from her as she waits in the coffee shop. It's just as tragic for her as it is for him.

Calling him crazy isn't a cop out, I don't believe he's completely dysfunctional, and I don't believe all the artistic imagery was all just delusional. The fact that he can't cope with reality is just part of the plot. Gondry's art remains for its own sake, poetry open for interpretation, not just dismissed as halucination. Most of it is separate from his excentricities and eventual craziness.

Eternal Sunshine was far more whimsical, less grounded in reality. The movies were opposite concepts. Carey was a sane character in an insane situation. He was was always completely sane and rational, just sad. He just accepted the craziness of the world around him, believing it to be out of his control. Bernal was the source of the madness and whimsy and projected it on the rest of the world.

[bmack86]

Gabe, you really need to watch Shadows. It's great. Whether or not it's improvised (the essays on it lead me to believe it wasn't truly an act of improvisation) it has a really exploratory and loose feel to it. The acting isn't always superb, but the characters do always feel real and emotionally grounded.

[KungFuJoe]

Joe, I've never seen any of Maddin's or Assayas's stuff. Suggestions on where to start?


I've only seen 3 of Olivier Assayas' films. I highly reccomend "Irma Vep" as this is one of my all time fav's. I really like his style. His films have a very natural / documentary feel. He also usually implents a great soundtrack.

"Clean" is also worth a watch. Though I didn't love it, it's still an interesting pic.

As for Guy Maddin. I still need to catch up on a lot of his work myself. I enoyed "The Saddest Music in the World" and think that'd be a great place to start. "Twighlight of the Ice Nymphs", "Archangel" and "The Heart of the World" are also worth a peep.

[schoolofruckus]

I have some exact opposite opinions on this movie and I think they are based on a very different interpretation of it.


should have been more grounded in reality? My dear schoolio, they were intensely grounded in reality and the lack of contrast was intentional. I'll explain later. Gondry initially paints Stephane as his usual painfully shy protagonist, but there is something very different about him. The boy isn't just sensitive, as the movie progresses we come to learn he's truly not well in the head. This is what makes it a different Gondry film. The lack of contrast between dream and reality was the point. His latent schizophrenia becomes more expressed as he falls deeper into unrequited love. This is why the lines between crazy dream shit and reality become blurred as the film progresses. The "reality" scenes start getting stranger and stranger (i.e. him and his coworker tossing the TV into the river) until he can't tell the difference anymore. She suspects he's not quite right in the head and eventually knows it. This creates massive conflict for her. She loves, pities, and fears him (as in her feelings for him) all at once, and he misinterprets it until the end. The part I can't decide is whether he knows it himself in the end. I like that open-endedness aspect. Part of me also thinks that at least sub-consciously knew it from the beginning, which is why he was sabotaging the relationship before it could develop(the note, lying about where he lived, staying at the bar with the random skank while she left, etc.), but he loses control. Eventually he's stuck in a waking dream. His delusions chase him away from her as she waits in the coffee shop. It's just as tragic for her as it is for him.

Calling him crazy isn't a cop out, I don't believe he's completely dysfunctional, and I don't believe all the artistic imagery was all just delusional. The fact that he can't cope with reality is just part of the plot. Gondry's art remains for its own sake, poetry open for interpretation, not just dismissed as halucination. Most of it is separate from his excentricities and eventual craziness.

Eternal Sunshine was far more whimsical, less grounded in reality. The movies were opposite concepts. Carey was a sane character in an insane situation. He was was always completely sane and rational, just sad. He just accepted the craziness of the world around him, believing it to be out of his control. Bernal was the source of the madness and whimsy and projected it on the rest of the world.

Well, Jack, you clearly got way more out of it than I did. I only saw it a while ago, and I don't remember it as well, but I definitely had no comprehension of how she felt love for him. I thought he was far more deserved to be insulting potential conquests on "Blind Date" than to be receiving infinite chances to win over this girl's heart. You bring up an excellent point in the difference between "Eternal Sunshine" and "Science of Sleep", though.

But really, here were my biggest problems with "The Science of Sleep":

1. There were no White Stripes made out of legos.

2. "Eternal Sunshine" - Kirsten Dunst dancing around in her underwear; "Science of Sleep" - what's with everyone wearing sweaters?

3. A whole movie set in France without a single unprovoked armchair indictment of America is not a whole movie set in France, in my book.

4. Is it really too much to ask for Jim Carrey to talk out of his ass at least once?

Gabe, you really need to watch Shadows. It's great. Whether or not it's improvised (the essays on it lead me to believe it wasn't truly an act of improvisation) it has a really exploratory and loose feel to it. The acting isn't always superb, but the characters do always feel real and emotionally grounded.

Oh, I certainly will. I actually own it as part of that box set that I got for my birthday, so I can watch it whenever I feel like. I'm led to believe that John Cassavetes' films are always more scripted and orchestrated than they seem. "Shadows" apparently started off as an improvisational film, but when the end result didn't work, he went back and wrote it out (possibly with a hired gun screenwriter) and re-shot it. The original version of "Shadows" - which screened for some audience in 1957 - is the subject of a huge showdown between Gena Rowlands (his widow) and Ray Carney (the self-appointed expert on all things Cassavetes). I wish it were available for comparison.

I've only seen 3 of Olivier Assayas' films. I highly reccomend "Irma Vep" as this is one of my all time fav's. I really like his style. His films have a very natural / documentary feel. He also usually implents a great soundtrack.

"Clean" is also worth a watch. Though I didn't love it, it's still an interesting pic.

As for Guy Maddin. I still need to catch up on a lot of his work myself. I enoyed "The Saddest Music in the World" and think that'd be a great place to start. "Twighlight of the Ice Nymphs", "Archangel" and "The Heart of the World" are also worth a peep.

I have been told that "The Saddest Music in the World" is outstanding; I'll have to seek it out pretty soon. I thought "Clean" looked interesting, but I'm a little hesitant to jump into watching anything that has Nick Nolte in it because I can never understand what he's saying. I literally watched all of "Northfork" - which was a really good movie, by the way - with subtitles on because his speech is so garbled.

[mountmccabe]

So Sean and Ivy and I saw The Good German last night. This is one of maybe 2 screens in AZ where it is showing and there wer maybe 12 people there.

I thought it was OK; it never really clicked with me, never got into much of a groove. Tobey MacGwire (sp) played so over the top (even taking into account the fact that he was playing in the movie) that I kinda hated him. Beau Bridges is a terrible actor. George Clooney did fine but he was never fully comfortable... which is odd for his characters. Cate Blanchett was OK, she had the most understated part, I think.

I was questioning the real footage of Germany circa August 1945 under the credits as I expected that that would just point out how fake/new everything else looked but then they ended up doing the whole film looking like that.

The story was very much an homage to Casablanca... at times I tried to figure out how much. I'm not sure but I don't think it goes as far as a full commentary or deconstruction. At times it was overblown and at times it stretched way too far in attempts to be deep and important... but neither of these are inconsistant with what Soderbergh was doing. I just didn't particularly like it.

Soderbergh is an odd one; I think he's really good at what he does. And he doesn't return to the same old tropes and archetypes and obsessions and styles. But I still haven't figured out why he chooses what he does and how i'm gonna react to his movies.

But yeah, it was good to meet Ivy and see Sean again. If shaking hands ina dark club counts as a previous time; after that I wouldn't even've been able to pick you out of a lineup. And, again, sorry I couldn't stick around. Next time, though.


EDIT: At some point I need to go back and see what if any previous comments on this movie there've been. And also learn grammar.

[schoolofruckus]

One thing I really like about Soderbergh is that he tends to approach his career as if he's the most well-paid film school student in the world. He takes on films as projects, trying to take on a new idea with each successive film (well, except for Ocean's 12) so he can add new skills to his repertoire. It makes him wildly uneven, but I enjoy seeing what he does.

"Bubble", his ultra minimalist, low-budget entry from last January (the one that came out on DVD and in theaters on the same day), was terrific. You guys should check it out.

[chairmenmeow47]

it was nice to meet you both! sorry i couldn't stick around either, hopefully my bathroom will be finished in a few days, woo-hoo!

the movie was "eh". i love cate blanchett, she was a great femme fatale. everyone else was "eh". i agree with john that clooney never seemed comfortable. he just doesn't have the bogart charm either. toby maguire was trying way too hard, i agree with that as well.

the casablanca comparisons were weird, but at least it was a little darker. i think this movie could have been much better if there had been stronger actors in the main roles.

very pretty though, i like the way it was filmed and the sets.

[downingthief]

it was nice to meet you both! sorry i couldn't stick around either, hopefully my bathroom will be finished in a few days, woo-hoo!

the movie was "eh". i love cate blanchett, she was a great femme fatale. everyone else was "eh". i agree with john that clooney never seemed comfortable. he just doesn't have the bogart charm either. toby maguire was trying way too hard, i agree with that as well.

the casablanca comparisons were weird, but at least it was a little darker. i think this movie could have been much better if there had been stronger actors in the main roles.

very pretty though, i like the way it was filmed and the sets.


I'll have to echo similar sentiments, although of the three of us, I think I liked it the most. Being the huge Casablanca fan that I am, I didn't mind the similarities much.

Tobey was mis-cast, plain and simple. Not that he's a bad actor, just should not have been in this movie. Clooney's part I imagine was tough to play. A guy that wants to be there, but doesn't want to be there sort of thing. I think he was the right guy to play the part, but there could have been more depth to his character. Plus, I wasn't sold on the chemistry between he and Blanchett.

Blanchett I thought was amazing in it. Too bad the overall movie did not match her performance.

I think the main issue with the movie is that it was trying too hard to be "noir". That led it to have the feel of the old "B" movie noir films at times, the ones that were a bit over the top. What made Casablanca, and others, so good is that it didn't have to try and be anything. Just the way movies were back then.

So, it's worth checking out in the DVD sections, but I would recommend to hold off in the theaters.

[PotVsKtl]

The Departed was really not very good. People calling it Scoresese's best film since Goodfellas are full of shit and should have their criticism license revoked, laminated, and set alight while resting on their supine faces. I just don't care about Matt Damon.

[schoolofruckus]

Why didn't you like it, Pot?

[PotVsKtl]

I didn't dislike it, it was a fine film. A fine film that could have been directed by any number of reasonably talented directors. I'm first in line at the firebomb the Oscars for never recognizing Scorsese tent, but this film doesn't deserve it. Also I do not care about Matt Damon. Quit casting Matt Damon in anything that isn't The Talented Mr. Ripley.

[chairmenmeow47]

I didn't dislike it, it was a fine film. A fine film that could have been directed by any number of reasonably talented directors. I'm first in line at the firebomb the Oscars for never recognizing Scorsese tent, but this film doesn't deserve it. Also I do not care about Matt Damon. Quit casting Matt Damon in anything that isn't The Talented Mr. Ripley.

i agree with this! i mean, it was good, but it was nowhere near the top of my scorcese list. it annoys me that directors like this get passed over for their better work. then comes a year where nothing else is really that much better and all of a sudden everyone thinks the movie is brilliant. i don't get it.

[mob roulette]

I didn't dislike it, it was a fine film. A fine film that could have been directed by any number of reasonably talented directors. I'm first in line at the firebomb the Oscars for never recognizing Scorsese tent, but this film doesn't deserve it. Also I do not care about Matt Damon. Quit casting Matt Damon in anything that isn't The Talented Mr. Ripley.

agreed. eloquently stated.

[Yablonowitz]

lso I do not care about Matt Damon. Quit casting Matt Damon in anything that isn't The Talented Mr. Ripley.

He's good in those Bourne movies.

[downingthief]

He's good in those Bourne movies.

I thought he was good in Syriana, too.

[thinnerair]

...and Oceans 11

[schoolofruckus]

I didn't dislike it, it was a fine film. A fine film that could have been directed by any number of reasonably talented directors. I'm first in line at the firebomb the Oscars for never recognizing Scorsese tent, but this film doesn't deserve it. Also I do not care about Matt Damon. Quit casting Matt Damon in anything that isn't The Talented Mr. Ripley.

Did you like it better than "The Aviator"? I personally have liked most of what Scorsese has done - including "Gangs of New York" and "Bringing Out the Dead", but his Oscar chase reached its apex with "The Aviator", and that was the point where I had to say "ENOUGH!" I don't think "The Departed" is as good as "Taxi Driver" or "GoodFellas" or "Raging Bull" or "Mean Streets" or "Last Temptation of Christ", but I think it's a terrific thriller and it has enough of a character element to make it resonate.

I also think Matt Damon's one of the better A-list actors of that age group. Although I still maintain that a Harvard man shouldn't struggle to hit the toilet bowl.

[PotVsKtl]

I think The Aviator is a fantastic film, one that did in fact deserve an Oscar. At least The Aviator and Gangs of New York had the mark of the director on them. The only time I felt Scorsese in The Departed was when Matt Damon was busting bottles on peoples' heads and adjusting their faces with coatracks, and that was to bemoan the fact that it was such a calculated move - everyone expects the unexpected graphic beatdown.

[chairmenmeow47]

I think The Aviator is a fantastic film, one that did in fact deserve an Oscar. At least The Aviator and Gangs of New York had the mark of the director on them. The only time I felt Scorsese in The Departed was when Matt Damon was busting bottles on peoples' heads and adjusting their faces with coatracks, and that was to bemoan the fact that it was such a calculated move - everyone expects the unexpected graphic beatdown.

agreed! i loved the aviator. the "look" of the movie was MUCH better too. not just because of the style, but the camera work and cuts were better.

in the departed, there's that scene where leo walks into the convenience store and gets his ass beat by two guys. when he walks in, you can tell they try to do the goodfellas long camera shot of the guy at the counter, but it never really worked. there were a few shots like that.

also, can he use some new music?!?

[J~$$$]

I think The Aviator is a fantastic film, one that did in fact deserve an Oscar. At least The Aviator and Gangs of New York had the mark of the director on them. The only time I felt Scorsese in The Departed was when Matt Damon was busting bottles on peoples' heads and adjusting their faces with coatracks, and that was to bemoan the fact that it was such a calculated move - everyone expects the unexpected graphic beatdown.



you may want to watch the movie again.

[mob roulette]

agreed again. the departed is okay, just not a scorsese masterpiece. gangs of new york is a bit of a mess but still way better than the departed just because you can tell someone's actually behind the camera and not just phoning it in. that and daniel day-lewis OWNS.

[Yablonowitz]

Did you like it better than "The Aviator"? I personally have liked most of what Scorsese has done - including "Gangs of New York" and "Bringing Out the Dead"

Bringing Out the Dead was horrible. Just horrible. IMHO.

[PotVsKtl]

you may want to watch the movie again.

To what end?

[schoolofruckus]

"Bringing Out the Dead" was brilliant. Just brilliant. Definitely the most Scorsese-esque Scorsese movie since GoodFellas, and that includes "Casino".

One thing about "The Departed" that I didn't like was the



*********INSIGNIFICANT SPOILER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!*********




rat at the end. I don't understand why that was funny or necessary.

[CiderMouseRules]

1) The Science of Sleep was poorly acted. Being quirky enough to endear the admiration of hipsters is not the same as good acting. This is coming from a Gondry fan.

2) The Departed was expertly directed. I agree with the sentiment that it's Marty's best since Goodfellas.

[schoolofruckus]

Intriguing. Lose the Peyton Manning avatar and we may be onto something.

[mob roulette]

bump.

i could argue scorsese all day. schoolio, how would you rate them from best to worst? the BIG ones anyway. feel free to leave out new york, new york but please do include king of comedy. i want to compare lists. thanks.

[jackstraw94086]

1) The Science of Sleep was poorly acted. Being quirky enough to endear the admiration of hipsters is not the same as good acting. This is coming from a Gondry fan.

2) The Departed was expertly directed. I agree with the sentiment that it's Marty's best since Goodfellas.


The worst hipsters are the ones oblivious to the fact that they are in fact hipsters. They are so deathly afraid of "not getting it" that their minds reject the possibility of alternative interpretations. The presumption that all art can be understood by you and that all else is not art is the truest mark of a hipster. If you're posting here then who's work minding the register at Urban Outfitters?

Anyway, how much taste can a person with a peyton manning avatar really have?

[mob roulette]

somebody please post an oh snap graphic here. please.

[mountmccabe]

One thing I really like about Soderbergh is that he tends to approach his career as if he's the most well-paid film school student in the world. He takes on films as projects, trying to take on a new idea with each successive film (well, except for Ocean's 12) so he can add new skills to his repertoire. It makes him wildly uneven, but I enjoy seeing what he does.

Agreed.


He's good in those Bourne movies.

Bringing Out the Dead was horrible. Just horrible. IMHO.

One for Two, Yabs.

[schoolofruckus]

Here is my list of Scorsese movies - the ones I've seen - in approximate order of preference:

Taxi Driver
GoodFellas
Raging Bull
Mean Streets
The Departed (screw it, I think it actually is better than the ones below)
Bringing Out the Dead
The Last Temptation of Christ
Gangs of New York
Casino
Cape Fear
The Aviator

Obviously, there are a few others like "Alice Doesn't Live Here Anymore" and "Boxcar Bertha" and "After Hours" that I probably should get off my ass and see; forgive me if I don't consider "Kundun" or "The Age of Innocence" to be mandatory even though they are probably also quite good.

What's your list looking like, mob?

[mountmccabe]

My Scorsese list

Raging Bull
Goodfellas
Bringing Out the Dead
Bad (Michael Jackson)
Taxi Driver
The Last Temptation of Christ
Casino
The Aviator
Gangs of New York


And yes, I realize I've got serious gaps. Some non-relative judgements: Raging Bull is stunning. Casino is good. Gangs of New York was awful.

I've seen The Last Waltz but I don't remember it well. Maybe I need to borrow it from my father. It's a good CD.

[PotVsKtl]

Color of Money you motherfuckers. Where is it?

[mob roulette]

Here is my list of Scorsese movies - the ones I've seen - in approximate order of preference:

Taxi Driver
GoodFellas
Raging Bull
Mean Streets
The Departed (screw it, I think it actually is better than the ones below)
Bringing Out the Dead
The Last Temptation of Christ
Gangs of New York
Casino
Cape Fear
The Aviator

Obviously, there are a few others like "Alice Doesn't Live Here Anymore" and "Boxcar Bertha" and "After Hours" that I probably should get off my ass and see; forgive me if I don't consider "Kundun" or "The Age of Innocence" to be mandatory even though they are probably also quite good.

What's your list looking like, mob?

agreed. don't count the lesser known films including innocence and kundun.

goodfellas
taxi driver
raging bull
gangs of new york
casino
mean streets
king of comedy
the departed
bringing out the dead
the last temptation of christ
the aviator
cape fear

we're pretty close at the top but i think goodfellas is his undisputed masterpiece. mean streets is overrated (though it's a lot of people's personal favorite from what i understand) and casino is UNDERrated. neither aviator nor cape fear is all that. my problem with the scorsese hype is that the award is a gimme. it's recognizing him for PAST work and everybody knows it.

also no king of comedy player? that was WAY ahead of its time.

[mountmccabe]

Hey, I feel like doing a Soderbergh list too:


Schizopolis
Traffic
Out of Sight
Sex, Lies and Videotape
The Good German
Erin Brockovich
Ocean's 11
Kafka


The top 4 are all really, really good. Only the last one is bad... and it's one of the worst movies I've ever seen.

[mob roulette]

Color of Money you motherfuckers. Where is it?

i know you're kidding pot. put that up against the hustler and tell me just how good of a sequel it is.

[mob roulette]

Hey, I feel like doing a Soderbergh list too:


Schizopolis
Traffic
Out of Sight
Sex, Lies and Videotape
The Good German
Erin Brockovich
Ocean's 11
Kafka


The top 4 are all really, really good. Only the last one is bad... and it's one of the worst movies I've ever seen.

which one's the jennifer lopez one? that had some pretty good cinematography.

[mountmccabe]

Color of Money you motherfuckers. Where is it?
Blockbuster, I presume. Are you recommending it as something worthwhile? It does have Tom Cruise in it, you know.

[mountmccabe]

which one's the jennifer lopez one? that had some pretty good cinematography.

Out of Sight. It is a light movie but it is stylish and witty and shot well. I really enjoy it.

[mob roulette]

Blockbuster, I presume. Are you recommending it as something worthwhile? It does have Tom Cruise in it, you know.

wow. i bit hard. pot i hate you.

[KungFuJoe]

I never understood why people loved "Traffic" so much. Do I need to rewatch this film? I only saw it once in the theater and was not impressed at all.

[schoolofruckus]

I like "Traffic" a lot, but it's not my favorite Soderbergh.

Out of Sight
The Limey
Traffic
Bubble
Solaris
Sex, Lies, and Videotape
Ocean's Eleven
Ocean's Twelve
The Good German

I enjoyed both "Ocean's" movies in different ways - 11 was a better movie, 12 was a little looser and more fun. The Julia Roberts joke at the end alone was enough to make me gloss over some of the movie's obvious holes.

I've been wanting to see "Schizopolis" for a while.

[KungFuJoe]

I like "Traffic" a lot, but it's not my favorite Soderbergh.

Out of Sight
The Limey
Traffic
Bubble
Solaris
Sex, Lies, and Videotape
Ocean's Eleven
Ocean's Twelve
The Good German

I enjoyed both "Ocean's" movies in different ways - 11 was a better movie, 12 was a little looser and more fun. The Julia Roberts joke at the end alone was enough to make me gloss over some of the movie's obvious holes.

I've been wanting to see "Schizopolis" for a while.


Well, I agree with you on your top two. Out of Sight & The Limey are my favorite Soderbergh films. And I'm not scared to admit that Erin Brokovich is probably number three. I still haven't seen Schizopolis, the Ocean's movies, Bubble or Solaris (or the good german). A friend of mine use to swear by Solaris though.

[schoolofruckus]

I remember liking "Solaris" a lot when I saw it in theaters (like 4 years ago) but I haven't seen it since and I don't remember it that well.

I should probably see "Erin Brockovich" one of these years.

[mountmccabe]

A friend of mine use to swear by Solaris though.

By Soderbergh's Solaris? Really? I haven't seen it, mostly out of love for the Tarkovsky version.

Also, folks thinking about seeing Schizopolis: Do it. Maybe drink a little first. It's not much for a plot or whatnot but it's amazingly wonderful and pretty much responsible for 58% of my love for Soderbergh.

[schoolofruckus]

I was reading about the making of it in "Rebels on the Backlot". Apparently it was made as an attempt to explore the end of his own marriage and to try to see if it could work out. His wife and his daughter in the film are played by his real-life ex-wife and daughter.

[jackstraw94086]

"After Hours"

This may not be counted among his best, but it's a damn good movie for what it is. It reeks of Scorcese's love of NY. Much lighter than his usual stuff. Lot's of fun characters (including cameos by cheech & chong).

It inspired another film called Seach & Destroy, also starring Griffin Dunne (with a cameo by Scorsese), but it somehow wasn't quite as good despite the stellar cast.

[Mr.Nipples]

Uwe boll...

[schoolofruckus]

Yeah, I've always thought that of Scorsese's comic films, that's probably the one that would most likely be the best. I like Griffin Dunne as an actor.

[jackstraw94086]

Yeah, I've always thought that of Scorsese's comic films, that's probably the one that would most likely be the best. I like Griffin Dunne as an actor.

Griffin is excellent in this one. He does befuddlement pretty well (not William H Macy level befuddlement, but up there).

After Hours definitely full of very odd scenarios and behavior.

[amyzzz]

I remember liking "Solaris" a lot when I saw it in theaters (like 4 years ago) but I haven't seen it since and I don't remember it that well.

I should probably see "Erin Brockovich" one of these years.
I liked Solaris a lot in the theatre, and we rented it recently and enjoyed it then too. It has a nice sense of the eternal.

[schoolofruckus]

I heard a lot of comparisons - favorable and not - of "The Fountain" to "Solaris" in the reviews this past fall. That made me want to watch it again as well.

[amyzzz]

I heard a lot of comparisons - favorable and not - of "The Fountain" to "Solaris" in the reviews this past fall. That made me want to watch it again as well.
That's why I wanted to watch Solaris again too. I had a hankering for ANYTHING that felt like The Fountain. I tried watching 2001:A Space Odyssey with my husband, but we couldn't watch all of that. (I've seen it before; he hasn't).

[mountmccabe]

If you didn't do well with 2001 then I guess it would be silly to recommend Solyaris. Oh man how I love those movies.

I've only seen Andrey Rublyov and Solyaris. Can anyone recommend/comment on other Tarkovsky?

[atom heart]

Scorcese did Age of Innocence? I think that's the only movie of his that I've actually seen. I hated it because I hated the book and I have an antipathy towards Daniel Day-Lewis.

[Yablonowitz]

"Bringing Out the Dead" was brilliant. Just brilliant.

I almost swore off Scorsese after watching that. I thought it bordered on exploiting urban cliches and seemed to offer no real flair. His tricks seemed forced like some of Spike Lee's worst excesses.

And while I loved The Departed, it's not even close to Goodfellas to me. But I'm not the best one to comment, I'm not into Scorsese all that much. He lacks subtlety. And his movies are often saturated in testosterone. I'm too much of a girly man to worship that kind of filmmaking. I put Scorsese, Oliver Stone (when he actually tried to do something with his movies), and Spike Lee all in the same general category of filmmakers I like but don't revere like many.

Then again, I love Quentin Tarantino and he really should fit into that category too. I'm a walking contradiction.

Like bullets and love.

[schoolofruckus]

I put Scorsese, Oliver Stone (when he actually tried to do something with his movies), and Spike Lee all in the same general category of filmmakers I like but don't revere like many.

I agree with you almost wholeheartedly, with one caveat - I love them all to death. They're all NYU alumni too, and I believe Scorsese lectured Stone and Lee in some of their classes, so there's definitely a reason for the similarities. Each definitely has his own style, but they're of a silmilar philosophy, I would say.

It's funny, Tarantino worships Scorsese, hates Stone, and is despised by Lee.


atom heart, why do you hate Daniel Day-Lewis, of all actors?

[atom heart]

I think what killed Daniel Day-Lewis for me was the Crucible. That's another bit of literature severely dislike (especially since I've had to read it three times in the past few years), and the movie is possibly more annoying (I've seen the movie twice).

I suppose I don't like him because he's connected with movies I don't like. I've never seen him in any film that I enjoyed.

edit*
Actually, I have seen A Room with a View, but Cecil is an ass. So my entire experience with Day-Lewis has been negative.

[KungFuJoe]

It's funny, Tarantino worships Scorsese,..

Does he really? has he said this?

[mob roulette]

bump

hey ruckus. remember when the board had a best albums of all time survey and everyone voted? you should do that with movies. i'd totally vote. maybe make it only of the last twenty five years or so though. that way it's not too large to manage. whaddya think?

[breakjaw]

bump
it's not too large to manage. whaddya think?
http://imageigloo.com/images/801product_detail_g_said.gif

[amyzzz]

bump

hey ruckus. remember when the board had a best albums of all time survey and everyone voted? you should do that with movies. i'd totally vote. maybe make it only of the last twenty five years or so though. that way it's not too large to manage. whaddya think?

Either you're an alias, you've been lurking for quite a while....

[schoolofruckus]

mob, I've honestly thought of doing this a few times, but just never got my shit together. But with this nudging, I think I just might!

[breakjaw]

But with this nudging, I think I just might!http://imageigloo.com/images/801product_detail_g_said.gif

[schoolofruckus]

I just finished reading "Rebels on the Backlot", and if you don't mind, I'm going to riff on it a little bit. Tessa, you can wait out in the car. I'll be out in a bit.

This book is absolutely a keeper - a compulsively readable look at the process that went into making some of the most important American movies of this generation. Though it does a fine job of evoking the mid-to-late-90's film scene overall, the book largely focuses on the "Class of '99", the directors who made some of the most important films of that year: Paul Thomas Anderson, whose prodigious talent reached new heights with his epic labor of love, "Magnolia". David O. Russell, who brought his dryly humanistic sense of humor to the war genre (and the studio system) to make "Three Kings". Spike Jonze, who found in "Being John Malkovich" the perfect screenplay with which to unharness his restless imagination on the unsuspecting public. David Fincher, an encyclopedia example of subversive cynicism, poured a lifetime of disdain for commercialism into the masterful "Fight Club". The bookends for this story are the birth of the 90's indie boom, with Steven Soderbergh's "sex, lies, and videotape" and Quentin Tarantino's "Pulp Fiction" leading the charge, and Soderbergh's personal career apex in 2000 with "Traffic".

This book is, clearly, right in my wheelhouse for a number of reasons. Namely - I remember what 1999 felt like as a filmgoer. I have studied this era and its films relentlessly, and I'd happily annoint myself an expert on the subject; it's basically like Erik's similar claims about Woodstock '99, only with actual spectator experience. I wasn't living in Los Angeles or working in the film business yet - I was, in fact, a sophomore in high school - but I very clearly remember the buffet of brilliance that was trotted out that year. It began in the spring, with "The Matrix" injecting a welcome dose of ideology and innovation into the action genre. Then it spread to the summer, with "The Blair Witch Project" becoming a one-of-a-kind sensation, outgrossing every handheld-shot independent film in history, while "The Sixth Sense" found a more classical way to reinvent the horror genre. There was also "Go" and "Run Lola Run", two breakneck thrillers that feasted at the table of chronological disarray that Tarantino's breakthrough films had set.

Then came the fall season. Like every other year, this one came packed to the gills with films that promised to redefine American life and sweep through Oscar season with a trail of blown-away audiences in its wake; unlike just about any other autumn in memory, this one delivered on its promise. I remember walking out of one film after another that year wondering what hit me: "American Beauty". "Three Kings". "Fight Club". "Being John Malkovich". "Boys Don't Cry". By the time it started raining frogs at the climax of "Magnolia" in January 2000, I realized that I had just gone through an unparalleled five month span of movies that may never be equaled; a time when the most talented young filmmakers thrived within (and despite) the studio systems and all seemed to hit their stride simultaneously. There was even a terrific article in Entertainment Weekly (I know, I know....shut up) as the renaissance was happening in 1999 about the culture that was being spawned. It hasn't exactly panned out that way; while some of the new breed have worked with prolificity and success (Wes Anderson has kept a pace of making an excellent film every 2-3 years; Steven Soderbergh makes a new movie every couple of weeks, and many of them have been good and/or profitable), there has also been a rash of stunning hiatuses in these great young filmmakers. Aronofsky, who broke out in 1998 - an underrated, outrageously good film year in itself - along with Wes Anderson, famously struggled to finish his latest masterpiece. Paul Thomas Anderson, Russell, Fincher, Tarantino, and Jonze have all also endured stretches of 5 years between their films, and the few films they've made since then have in some cases been met with disappointment from audiences (though I certainly don't share that sentiment for any of the aforementioned) and critics.

As is done often throughout "Rebels on the Backlot", I'm skipping ahead to the end result in the middle of the story. The point is, this book recreates the magic of that era with stunning efficiency, creating a suitably cinematic backdrop for all these young titans while also demystifying them. Each auteur is presented as a character straight off the screen: you have Quentin Tarantino, a stunning example of disorganization (be it in his writing process, his social life, the accounts of his background, or his hygiene) who sees his life in the serial terms of movies to the point that he drops friends as soon as he feels their story has ended. You have Spike Jonze, a mischievous wallflower who, not unlike QT, lets his own portrayal in the media spin wildly out of control; unlike Tarantino, however, he shies away from the limelight at all times. You have David O. Russell, a wildly moody intellectual with a nasty streak a mile wide, the one guy in the book who got bit by the filmmaking bug as a young adult (rather than as a child). You have Paul Thomas Anderson, the young kid lurking in the shadows of film festivals in the early 90's, just waiting to unleash his particular brand of bravado on the movie world. You have David Fincher, a terminally sarcastic man who seemingly derives all of his pleasure in tormenting the people who watch and finance his movies. By contrast, the self-destruction of Steven Soderbergh, a cerebral, emotionally distant, multi-talented artist, seems almost run-of-the-mill.

The portraits of these directors is flat-out fascinating, and author Sharon Waxman makes a terrific decision in examining the emotional and familial complexities of each man. She finds common themes of mommy troubles (Russell, Anderson, Tarantino, and Soderbergh are all severely at odds with their mothers), relentless perfectionism (not one of the bunch is willing to subvert so much as a splinter of his vision), and most of all - as the title states - intransigence. She details the origins of the films that each man made in his young prime; the meetings with studio executives and financers and producers, the kicking around town of all these soon-to-be-treasured scripts, the difficulties on set and in the media.

The most scandalous - and thereby the most intriguing - passage of the book details the making of "Three Kings", which I could, on a given day, claim as my favorite movie of all time (other entries in this book, such as "Boogie Nights" and "Pulp Fiction", have timeshares in that position as well). "Three Kings" was, by all accounts, one of the most hellacious shoots in the history of Hollywood, making the shoot of "Apocalypse Now" look almost like film school by contrast. David O. Russell, in trying to make a $60 million Warner Bros. war movie the same way that he'd made his low budget comedies "Spanking the Monkey" and "Flirting With Disaster", alienated nearly every single person involved with the film with his tireless demands, schedules, improvisations, and tantrums. I had heard in the past about him getting into a fistfight on the set with George Clooney - who Russell felt deep contempt for as an actor prior to filming - but I had no idea that it was this bad. Russell had everyone working 7 days a week, 18 hour days - granted, this is not uncommon for many independent films, but it's anathema for a union crew - in which nobody knew which shot or scene was up next, in the heat of Arizona, while he yelled his directions as if each was a drill seargent's order. Clooney, who was in the twilight of his "ER" career, was shooting three days in Los Angeles and four days in Arizona every week; Spike Jonze, who had a memorable key role as Pvt. Conrad Vig, was flying back and forth on the weekends to finish editing "Malkovich". The executives were harassing him on a daily basis over the budget, the controversy in the script, and his work methods; he responded by withdrawing emotionally, by berating the work of everyone on set, by making crew members cry, and most of all, by needling Clooney about what he deemed "TV actor habits". Things spun wildly, stunningly out of control; I'd love to talk more about it, but I can't do the book justice. This just has to be read.

There are some elements of sloppiness here - minor factual errors (such as claiming "Out of Sight" was released in 1997 when it was clearly '98) and the occasional bout of redundancy, although I think the latter served to make each chapter of the book a self-contained, easy-to-drop-in read in its own right. I can also think of some directors whose stories I think should be included (Wes Anderson and Darren Aronofsky, to name two). But no matter. This book is written in a friendly, breezy fashion that makes it impossible to close, and the level of access granted by all subjects is highly impressive. You could easily knock this out on a plane flight or during a day of jurdy duty. The only side effect is that you're going to be intoxicated on the lore of all these great recent movies, and you're going to want to indulge in them immediately - I've watched "Adaptation", "Three Kings", and "Erin Brockovich" this weekend alone.

I should mention that I really liked "Erin Brockovich" also. It's still utterly embarassing for the Oscars that Julia Roberts won her award for this while Ellen Burstyn's jaw-dropping work in "Requiem for a Dream" went home empty-handed. But throwing that out, it's a terrific Hollywood underdog story that is well-acted, extremely well-written, and wisely grounded in real world grit by the photography of Steven Soderbergh. Looking at my list of Soderbergh movies, I would probably place it just above "The Good German"; If this movie is only his 9th best, you know this dude's got game.

[thinnerair]

i like spike lee.

[jerpar24]

Here is my list of Scorsese movies - the ones I've seen - in approximate order of preference:

Taxi Driver
GoodFellas
Raging Bull
Mean Streets
The Departed (screw it, I think it actually is better than the ones below)
Bringing Out the Dead
The Last Temptation of Christ
Gangs of New York
Casino
Cape Fear
The Aviator





schoolofruckus I like the list but for me I would have The Departed above Mean Streets.

[schoolofruckus]

I might as well. It's a toss-up. They're both awesome.

"A Clockwork Orange" might be my favorite movie ever.

[smellysocks]

A Clockwork Orange is probably one of the best film adaptations from a book. Amazing book...amazing movie

[mob roulette]

*SPOILERS*

hi gabe i'm james. so hey we rented a bunch of movies this weekend, mostly stuff that we had already seen, magnolia (i like yr comments up above), infernal affairs, mulholland drive, bound, etc. but then we rented this old clint eastwood for laughs called the gauntlet (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0076070/) and oh my god. you think you know crazy but you have no idea how crazy this movie is. ever seen it? it's not crazy cause of the story or anything but i have never seen a picture with so many ridiculous premises and lapses in continuity. it's like it was edited by penguins or something. plus the dialogue is horrible. and there all these cool shots of vegas and phoenix in the seventies, but they pretend the symphony hall in downtown phx is police headquarters. and THEN he keeps driving around the same block over and over again, but from diff angles so that if you didn't know the town, you would think he was actually going SOMEWHERE. but then as if to make up for all THAT, they have like these shootouts where they expend hundreds and hundreds of rounds of ammo for no apparent reason. it's AWESOME. they like destroy a HOUSE. and also chase scenes. and also masturbation jokes. and clint taking on a whole army of bikers with just his one gun. and a bus ride. and oh my god the ENDING. seriously i can't even describe it to you really, you just have to see it for yourself. you totally have to. it's a train wreck and it's AWESOME. seriously. seriously. watch it. do it. now.

ok later.

[york707]

spader.

[downingthief]

I just finished reading "Rebels on the Backlot", and if you don't mind, I'm going to riff on it a little bit. Tessa, you can wait out in the car. I'll be out in a bit.

This book is absolutely a keeper - a compulsively readable look at the process that went into making some of the most important American movies of this generation. Though it does a fine job of evoking the mid-to-late-90's film scene overall, the book largely focuses on the "Class of '99", the directors who made some of the most important films of that year: Paul Thomas Anderson, whose prodigious talent reached new heights with his epic labor of love, "Magnolia". David O. Russell, who brought his dryly humanistic sense of humor to the war genre (and the studio system) to make "Three Kings". Spike Jonze, who found in "Being John Malkovich" the perfect screenplay with which to unharness his restless imagination on the unsuspecting public. David Fincher, an encyclopedia example of subversive cynicism, poured a lifetime of disdain for commercialism into the masterful "Fight Club". The bookends for this story are the birth of the 90's indie boom, with Steven Soderbergh's "sex, lies, and videotape" and Quentin Tarantino's "Pulp Fiction" leading the charge, and Soderbergh's personal career apex in 2000 with "Traffic".

This book is, clearly, right in my wheelhouse for a number of reasons. Namely - I remember what 1999 felt like as a filmgoer. I have studied this era and its films relentlessly, and I'd happily annoint myself an expert on the subject; it's basically like Erik's similar claims about Woodstock '99, only with actual spectator experience. I wasn't living in Los Angeles or working in the film business yet - I was, in fact, a sophomore in high school - but I very clearly remember the buffet of brilliance that was trotted out that year. It began in the spring, with "The Matrix" injecting a welcome dose of ideology and innovation into the action genre. Then it spread to the summer, with "The Blair Witch Project" becoming a one-of-a-kind sensation, outgrossing every handheld-shot independent film in history, while "The Sixth Sense" found a more classical way to reinvent the horror genre. There was also "Go" and "Run Lola Run", two breakneck thrillers that feasted at the table of chronological disarray that Tarantino's breakthrough films had set.

Then came the fall season. Like every other year, this one came packed to the gills with films that promised to redefine American life and sweep through Oscar season with a trail of blown-away audiences in its wake; unlike just about any other autumn in memory, this one delivered on its promise. I remember walking out of one film after another that year wondering what hit me: "American Beauty". "Three Kings". "Fight Club". "Being John Malkovich". "Boys Don't Cry". By the time it started raining frogs at the climax of "Magnolia" in January 2000, I realized that I had just gone through an unparalleled five month span of movies that may never be equaled; a time when the most talented young filmmakers thrived within (and despite) the studio systems and all seemed to hit their stride simultaneously. There was even a terrific article in Entertainment Weekly (I know, I know....shut up) as the renaissance was happening in 1999 about the culture that was being spawned. It hasn't exactly panned out that way; while some of the new breed have worked with prolificity and success (Wes Anderson has kept a pace of making an excellent film every 2-3 years; Steven Soderbergh makes a new movie every couple of weeks, and many of them have been good and/or profitable), there has also been a rash of stunning hiatuses in these great young filmmakers. Aronofsky, who broke out in 1998 - an underrated, outrageously good film year in itself - along with Wes Anderson, famously struggled to finish his latest masterpiece. Paul Thomas Anderson, Russell, Fincher, Tarantino, and Jonze have all also endured stretches of 5 years between their films, and the few films they've made since then have in some cases been met with disappointment from audiences (though I certainly don't share that sentiment for any of the aforementioned) and critics.

As is done often throughout "Rebels on the Backlot", I'm skipping ahead to the end result in the middle of the story. The point is, this book recreates the magic of that era with stunning efficiency, creating a suitably cinematic backdrop for all these young titans while also demystifying them. Each auteur is presented as a character straight off the screen: you have Quentin Tarantino, a stunning example of disorganization (be it in his writing process, his social life, the accounts of his background, or his hygiene) who sees his life in the serial terms of movies to the point that he drops friends as soon as he feels their story has ended. You have Spike Jonze, a mischievous wallflower who, not unlike QT, lets his own portrayal in the media spin wildly out of control; unlike Tarantino, however, he shies away from the limelight at all times. You have David O. Russell, a wildly moody intellectual with a nasty streak a mile wide, the one guy in the book who got bit by the filmmaking bug as a young adult (rather than as a child). You have Paul Thomas Anderson, the young kid lurking in the shadows of film festivals in the early 90's, just waiting to unleash his particular brand of bravado on the movie world. You have David Fincher, a terminally sarcastic man who seemingly derives all of his pleasure in tormenting the people who watch and finance his movies. By contrast, the self-destruction of Steven Soderbergh, a cerebral, emotionally distant, multi-talented artist, seems almost run-of-the-mill.

The portraits of these directors is flat-out fascinating, and author Sharon Waxman makes a terrific decision in examining the emotional and familial complexities of each man. She finds common themes of mommy troubles (Russell, Anderson, Tarantino, and Soderbergh are all severely at odds with their mothers), relentless perfectionism (not one of the bunch is willing to subvert so much as a splinter of his vision), and most of all - as the title states - intransigence. She details the origins of the films that each man made in his young prime; the meetings with studio executives and financers and producers, the kicking around town of all these soon-to-be-treasured scripts, the difficulties on set and in the media.

The most scandalous - and thereby the most intriguing - passage of the book details the making of "Three Kings", which I could, on a given day, claim as my favorite movie of all time (other entries in this book, such as "Boogie Nights" and "Pulp Fiction", have timeshares in that position as well). "Three Kings" was, by all accounts, one of the most hellacious shoots in the history of Hollywood, making the shoot of "Apocalypse Now" look almost like film school by contrast. David O. Russell, in trying to make a $60 million Warner Bros. war movie the same way that he'd made his low budget comedies "Spanking the Monkey" and "Flirting With Disaster", alienated nearly every single person involved with the film with his tireless demands, schedules, improvisations, and tantrums. I had heard in the past about him getting into a fistfight on the set with George Clooney - who Russell felt deep contempt for as an actor prior to filming - but I had no idea that it was this bad. Russell had everyone working 7 days a week, 18 hour days - granted, this is not uncommon for many independent films, but it's anathema for a union crew - in which nobody knew which shot or scene was up next, in the heat of Arizona, while he yelled his directions as if each was a drill seargent's order. Clooney, who was in the twilight of his "ER" career, was shooting three days in Los Angeles and four days in Arizona every week; Spike Jonze, who had a memorable key role as Pvt. Conrad Vig, was flying back and forth on the weekends to finish editing "Malkovich". The executives were harassing him on a daily basis over the budget, the controversy in the script, and his work methods; he responded by withdrawing emotionally, by berating the work of everyone on set, by making crew members cry, and most of all, by needling Clooney about what he deemed "TV actor habits". Things spun wildly, stunningly out of control; I'd love to talk more about it, but I can't do the book justice. This just has to be read.

There are some elements of sloppiness here - minor factual errors (such as claiming "Out of Sight" was released in 1997 when it was clearly '98) and the occasional bout of redundancy, although I think the latter served to make each chapter of the book a self-contained, easy-to-drop-in read in its own right. I can also think of some directors whose stories I think should be included (Wes Anderson and Darren Aronofsky, to name two). But no matter. This book is written in a friendly, breezy fashion that makes it impossible to close, and the level of access granted by all subjects is highly impressive. You could easily knock this out on a plane flight or during a day of jurdy duty. The only side effect is that you're going to be intoxicated on the lore of all these great recent movies, and you're going to want to indulge in them immediately - I've watched "Adaptation", "Three Kings", and "Erin Brockovich" this weekend alone.

I should mention that I really liked "Erin Brockovich" also. It's still utterly embarassing for the Oscars that Julia Roberts won her award for this while Ellen Burstyn's jaw-dropping work in "Requiem for a Dream" went home empty-handed. But throwing that out, it's a terrific Hollywood underdog story that is well-acted, extremely well-written, and wisely grounded in real world grit by the photography of Steven Soderbergh. Looking at my list of Soderbergh movies, I would probably place it just above "The Good German"; If this movie is only his 9th best, you know this dude's got game.

Ok, I have to get this book, NOW.
Excellent work, Schoolio!

That time frame was a wonderful time in movie making. The big studios had to really recognize the talent out there, and that the movie going audience actally wanted to see these types of "Indie" movies.

"Three Kings" didn't get enough praise, in my opinion. Excellent movie.

[schoolofruckus]

Ok, I have to get this book, NOW.
Excellent work, Schoolio!

That time frame was a wonderful time in movie making. The big studios had to really recognize the talent out there, and that the movie going audience actally wanted to see these types of "Indie" movies.

"Three Kings" didn't get enough praise, in my opinion. Excellent movie.

You're exactly right, Sean. It's sad in retrospect that, after that huge explosion of talent, a lot of those guys have had difficulty following it up. I'm not sure if they all just went apeshit in 1999 because they knew the millenium was coming and they wanted to get out everything they'd ever wanted to say in one movie, or what the deal was. But hopefully they all can kind of regain footing - after all, we got "The Fountain" last year, and this year we get "Zodiac", "There Will Be Blood", "The Darjeeling Limited", etc.

[downingthief]

You're exactly right, Sean. It's sad in retrospect that, after that huge explosion of talent, a lot of those guys have had difficulty following it up. I'm not sure if they all just went apeshit in 1999 because they knew the millenium was coming and they wanted to get out everything they'd ever wanted to say in one movie, or what the deal was. But hopefully they all can kind of regain footing - after all, we got "The Fountain" last year, and this year we get "Zodiac", "There Will Be Blood", "The Darjeeling Limited", etc.

What did you think of Mendes' follow ups..."Road To Perdition" and "Jarhead"? I only saw "Road", and I did enjoy it, but it seemed disjointed at times.

[schoolofruckus]

"Road to Perdition" is good, but there's not a whole lot to it. It's nowhere near as complex and wonderful as "American Beauty". "Jarhead" is an absolute piece of dogshit. I've said it before, I'll say it a million times - it takes two hours to accomplish what "Three Kings" accomplished in the first three minutes. I keep hearing this theory that it's some kind of misunderstood work of genius, and that's bullshit. It's a well-intentioned movie that fell flat on its face.

[wmgaretjax]

"Road to Perdition" is good, but there's not a whole lot to it. It's nowhere near as complex and wonderful as "American Beauty". "Jarhead" is an absolute piece of dogshit. I've said it before, I'll say it a million times - it takes two hours to accomplish what "Three Kings" accomplished in the first three minutes. I keep hearing this theory that it's some kind of misunderstood work of genius, and that's bullshit. It's a well-intentioned movie that fell flat on its face.

i agree. completely.

[mountmccabe]

A Clockwork Orange is probably one of the best film adaptations from a book. Amazing book...amazing movie
The movie and the book are different stories, though. Kubrick didn't take Burgess' ending so you get a very different take on things.

I agree that both the book and the film are wonderful but they're too at odds for me even consider it for "best film adaptations from a book."


What did you think of Mendes' follow ups..."Road To Perdition" and "Jarhead"? I only saw "Road", and I did enjoy it, but it seemed disjointed at times.

Road to Perdition might be my favorite movie starring Tom Hanks. He doesn't talk for, what, half the movie? I really liked it... I would like to see it again but I'm thinking it'll do better on repeat viewings than American Beauty has.


And, wow, Gabe, that book sounds awesome. And yeah, that was a fantastic year for films.

[wmgaretjax]

I agree about "Clockwork Orange" as an adaptation. I think many of Kubrick's adaptations function in the same way (Strangelove, Shining etc.).

[downingthief]

I agree about "Clockwork Orange" as an adaptation. I think many of Kubrick's adaptations function in the same way (Strangelove, Shining etc.).

Kubrick is my favorite Director overall, followed by Altman (as you all can tell from my Avatar). "Clockwork" was brilliant, but have to side with John with this on the best adaptation idea. Personally, I think "The Shining" was among the worst adaptations. In my opinion, it also was one of Kubrick's weakest films (yes, I know a lot of people disagree with that). For me,
"Strangelove" was his best overall work.

[SojuGorae]

Kubrick is my favorite Director overall, followed by Altman (as you all can tell from my Avatar). "Clockwork" was brilliant, but have to side with John with this on the best adaptation idea. Personally, I think "The Shining" was among the worst adaptations. In my opinion, it also was one of Kubrick's weakest films (yes, I know a lot of people disagree with that). For me,
"Strangelove" was his best overall work.

Have you seen Spartacus and Killer's Kiss? My picks as two of his weakest. At least The Shining was entertaining.

[wmgaretjax]

what the hell, I'll do a "loose" Kubrick ranking:

2001
Strangelove
Eyes Wide Shut
Clockwork Orange
Paths of Glory
Lolita
Full Metal Jacket
Shining
The Killing
Barry Lyndon
Fear and Desire
Killer's Kiss
Spartacus

[downingthief]

Have you seen Spartacus and Killer's Kiss? My picks as two of his weakest. At least The Shining was entertaining.

I don't consider Spartacus weak for a couple of reasons. First, he didn't have the pull that he did in later years with the studios; can't fault him for that. And, Spartacus was the first modern movie "Epic". Every Epic since has measured itself to that film.
Was it perfect? No, and let's face it...Kirk Douglas was the Prince of Over-Actors (Heston is the King, in my opinion).

I do agree on Killer's Kiss...one of the weaker ones.

[downingthief]

what the hell, I'll do a "loose" Kubrick ranking:

2001
Strangelove
Eyes Wide Shut
Clockwork Orange
Paths of Glory
Lolita
Full Metal Jacket
Shining
The Killing
Barry Lyndon
Fear and Desire
Killer's Kiss
Spartacus


Well done. As I said, I would put Shining lower, and raise Spartacus. Glad to see you have Eyes Wide Shut up near the top; very under-rated and misunderstood film!

[TomAz]

Dr Strangelove is in my top 5 list of favorite movies ever by anyone. that movie is about as close to perfect as it gets.

[downingthief]

Dr Strangelove is in my top 5 list of favorite movies ever by anyone. that movie is about as close to perfect as it gets.

So True...never get tired of seeing it.

[mountmccabe]

2001
Paths of Glory
Dr Strangelove
Eyes Wide Shut
Barry Lyndon
A Clockwork Orange
Full Metal Jacket
Spartacus
The Killing
The Shining
Lolita


I really liked Lyndon mainly for the duel. I should probably see Lolita again but I liked the book so much I was kinda letdown by the movie. But none of those are bad. I certainly loves me some Kubrick.

Not seen:

Fear and Desire
Killer's Kiss (or did I? I need to look up what that one was again.)

[schoolofruckus]

Killer's Kiss isn't very good. It's the only Kubrick I can say that about.

My list:

A Clockwork Orange
2001
Dr. Strangelove
Full Metal Jacket
Paths of Glory
The Shining
Eyes Wide Shut
Barry Lyndon
Killer's Kiss

I need to see Lolita, Spartacus, and The Killing, obviously. And Fear and Desire, if I can find it.

[TomAz]

1. Dr Strangelove
2. Full Metal Jacket
3. 2001
4. Barry Lyndon
5. The Shining
6. A Clockwork Orange

I've seen Lolita but I barely remember it. The others I've not seen.

[downingthief]

Ok, safe to say we all enjoy Kubrick's work.

Anyone else enjoy Altman as much as I do?

[TomAz]

Robin Williams as Popeye. blech.

[thinnerair]

more important than your top 5 favorite movies....



THIS IS GONNA BE EPIC!!!

In 1989, Milli Vanilli had it all: A multi-platinum album, legions of seven-year-old fans, rippling pectorals and hair no amount of Soul-Glo could tame. But by 1990, the duo — who brought the world gems like “Girl You Know It’s True” and “Blame It On the Rain” — was outed as frauds when their record skipped during a live MTV performance.
After being dropped from their label, stripped of their Best New Artist Grammy and sued for fraud, Milli Vanilli slipped into obscurity, the stuff of music lore.
But Milli Vanilli’s sordid tale is not forgotten for good: Universal Pictures acquired the rights to a Milli Vanilli biopic and will be bringing it to the big screen as early as next year.
“It’s going to be epic,” says executive producer Kim Marlowe, who cooked up the idea for the as-yet-untitled flick more than a decade ago but never felt comfortable enough to sign off the rights until teaming up with director and writer Jeff Nathanson (Rush Hour 2, Catch Me If You Can). “There’s only room for one major comeback in life and you just can’t leave that to chance.”
Milli Vanilli’s Fabrice Morvan consulted with Nathanson on the film, which is also authorized by the estate of Rob Pilatus (the other half of MV, who died of a drug overdose in 1998). “I’ve always resisted going back to the past because it was painful,” says Morvan. “But it was a healing process for me to relive those moments.”
There’s no word on who’s set to star, but Marlowe knows what she wants: “We need guys that are crazy gorgeous with bodies to die for; one has to have a French accent, the other has to have a German accent.”
The movie — which will trace the warts-and-all moments of Milli Vanilli’s career — has a goal larger than pure entertainment: To break down people’s misconceptions of the group. (What, they didn’t lip sync?) “We’re gonna have you walk in my shoes,” says Morvan. “A lot of people pointed fingers at us but they can’t until they know every aspect of the story.”
So, which hunky dudes would you cast?

[downingthief]

Robin Williams as Popeye. blech.

I try and block that one from my memory. :p

Every Director has a stinker out there.

[schoolofruckus]

I've famously struggled to get into Altman's stuff. I did think "A Prairie Home Companion" was great; I was way underwhelmed by "Short Cuts" and "The Player". I have yet to give "Nashville" or "MASH" or "McCabe & Mrs. Miller" or any of his other stuff a fair shake.

I'm going to be upgrading in the TV department real soon; I'm hoping that a new system will help me at least be able to comprehend the overlapping dialogue, which has just frustrated me on my current little shitty TV.

[PotVsKtl]

Yeah Popeye was atrocious. I just watched The Long Goodbye, Altman's take on a Philip Marlowe gumshoe flick (adapted by Chandler.) Sterling Hayden is a fucking lunatic in his role. I maintain that 1971 - 76 were Altman's best years. Fuck a bunch of Short Cuts. In fact, all work in the '70s is superior to all other work.

[SojuGorae]

Ok, safe to say we all enjoy Kubrick's work.

Anyone else enjoy Altman as much as I do?

Could never get into his movies. I'd always get bored and stop mid-way. The Player was great, though. McCabe & Mrs. Miller was like watching paint dry.

[downingthief]

I've famously struggled to get into Altman's stuff. I did think "A Prairie Home Companion" was great; I was way underwhelmed by "Short Cuts" and "The Player". I have yet to give "Nashville" or "MASH" or "McCabe & Mrs. Miller" or any of his other stuff a fair shake.

I'm going to be upgrading in the TV department real soon; I'm hoping that a new system will help me at least be able to comprehend the overlapping dialogue, which has just frustrated me on my current little shitty TV.

"MASH" is a great film. Worth checking out again.
I personally loved "The Player". That opening shot is just brilliant.

Altman is not for everyone, that is for sure. I refer to him as the "Hemingway" of movie makers; you either love him, or hate him.

[schoolofruckus]

Like I've said before - I feel like if I love Paul Thomas Anderson's shit so religiously (and I do), I should at least be able to get into Altman's stuff somewhat.

[TomAz]

In fact, all work in the '70s is superior to all other work.

http://www.nostalgia.com/large/28899.JPG

[mob roulette]

Like I've said before - I feel like if I love Paul Thomas Anderson's shit so religiously (and I do), I should at least be able to get into Altman's stuff somewhat.

punch drunk love is a fucking masterpiece. just saying.

[KungFuJoe]

2001
Paths of Glory
Dr Strangelove
Eyes Wide Shut
Barry Lyndon
A Clockwork Orange
Full Metal Jacket
Spartacus
The Killing
The Shining
Lolita



Putting "Eyes Wide Shut" above A Clockwork Orange & The Shining is a very bold statement.

[randy ricochet]

1. Flash Gordon
2. Karate Kid
3. BMX Bandits
4. Space Balls
5. Porky's
6. Barbarella
7. Convoy
8. Cannonball Run II
9. Hooper
10. Scarface

[schoolofruckus]

Randy, is that your submission for 10 best movies ever?

[randy ricochet]

Yep

[schoolofruckus]

punch drunk love is a fucking masterpiece. just saying.

It is a fucking masterpiece. I'd say it's the third such film for Anderson, and that's even being strict because "Hard Eight" is fucking great too. The dude's got a golden touch thus far.

[schoolofruckus]

Randy, you should expand your list to 25.

[randy ricochet]

Fair enough......

11. Cannonball Run
12. Confessions of a Window Cleaner
13. Morons From Outer Space
14. Spies Like Us
15. The Firm
16. Digby the Biggest Dog in the World
17. Smokey and the Bandit
18. The Sting
19. Jason and the Argonaughts
20. Smokey and the Bandit II
21. Shaving Ryan's Privates
22. Class
23. Police Academy I
24. Police Academy II
25. Romper Stomper

[mountmccabe]

Putting "Eyes Wide Shut" above A Clockwork O