Best of the Decade [Archive] - Literature Network Forums

NickAdams

09-22-2009, 05:56 PM

I'm working on my list now and I found it curious that both Eyes Wide Shut and Magnolia were released in 1999. It being curious is nothing more than a particular interest in both of the directors and the casting of Tom Cruise (two great performances) and a heavy use of tracking. Magnolia seems as if it could have been made, or released, in 2001 and Eyes Wide Shut recalls 1996, at least for me. I could see Eyes Wide Shut being in theaters with a film like 12 Monkeys. Just a thought.

Okay, let get some reccomendations and lists going; what do you think are the best five movies of any particular decade?

Here's mine

2000's
1. Werkmeister Harmonies - Bela Tarr
2. City of God - Fernardo Meirelles
3. Chop Shop - Ramin Bahrani
4. Muholland Drive - David Lynch
5. Pan's Labyrinth - Guillermoro del Toro

1990's
1. Pulp Fiction - Quinten Tarantino
2. Satantango - Bela Tarr
3. Fargo - Coen Brothers
4. Goodfellas - Martin Scorsese
5. The Thin Red Line - Terrence Malick

1970's
1. Apocolaypse Now - Francis Ford Coppla
2. The Godfather Part I and II - Francis Ford Coppla
3. Taxi Driver - Martin Scorsese
4. The Mirror - Anrev Tarkovsky
5. Mean Streets - Martin Scorsese

1960's
1. 2001: A Space Odyssey - Stanley Kubrick
2. 8 1/2 - Federico Fellini
3. Bonnie and Clyde - Arthur Penn
4. L'Avventura - Michelangelo Antoini
5. Dr. Strangelove: Or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb - Stanley Kubrick

I'll have to check these out.

2000's (in no particular order):

Adaptation - Directed by Spike Jones Written by Charlie Kaufman
Songs from the Second Floor - Directed by Roy Andersson
Inland Empire - Directed by David Lynch
The Proposition - Directed by John Hillcoat and Written by Nick Cave
Sympathy for Mr. Vengeance - Directed by Park Chan-wook

DanielBenoit

09-22-2009, 06:32 PM

2000's (in no particular order):

Adaptation - Directed by Spike Jones Written by Charlie Kaufman
Songs from the Second Floor - Directed by Roy Andersson
Inland Empire - Directed by David Lynch
The Proposition - Directed by John Hillcoat and Written by Nick Cave
Sympathy for Mr. Vengeance - Directed by Park Chan-wook

I love Charlie Kauffman, and yet I still haven't seen Adaption :eek:

Songs from the Second Floor looks quite interesting.

I was considering adding Inland Empire, but it just didn't have the emotional intensity that Muholland Drive did for me. Still a brilliant movie though.

Here's my 1950's one:

1. La Dolce Vita - Federico Fellini
2. Singing in the Rain - Gene Kelly and Stanley Donen
3. Vertigo - Alfred Hitchcock
4. Through a Glass Darkly - Ingmar Bergman
5. Hiroshima Mon Amour - Alain Resnais

1940's
1. Citizen Kane - Orson Welles
1. The Third Man - Carol Reed
3. The Bicycle Theif - Vittorio De Sica
4. Hamlet - Laurence Oliver
5. Casablanca - Michael Curtiz

1980's

1. Raging Bull - Martin Scorsese
2. My Dinner with Andre - Loius Malle
3. Do the Right Thing - Spike Lee
4. Drugstore Cowboy - Gus van Sant
5. Fitzcarraldo - Werner Herzog

rimbaud

10-23-2009, 11:17 PM

Ok, I'm starting with the 90s since I'm a 90s child
so here goes (but I can't really choose just 5 of them, but I'll try to narrow it down)

Pulp Fiction 1994
Fight Club 1999
Reservoir Dogs 1992
Total Eclipse 1995
Scent of a Woman 1992
Casino 1995
Shakespeare in Love 1998
Desperado 1995
Forrest Gump 1994
The Matrix 1999
The Devil's Advocate 1997
Terminator 2: Judgment Day 1991

I may have missed some

NickAdams

12-03-2009, 10:52 PM

DanielBenoit

12-08-2009, 12:58 PM

The Brown Bunny - Directed by Vincent Gallo

Whenever I think of The Brown Bunny I can't help but think of the war that Ebert and Gallo got into :lol: Still a good film though.

NickAdams

12-08-2009, 01:54 PM

Whenever I think of The Brown Bunny I can't help but think of the war that Ebert and Gallo got into :lol: Still a good film though.

The Brown Bunny is an extraordinary film in that it has two different point of views, one of which can be experienced only once. The first viewing is a first-person (though it seems third-person limited) narrative that, to me, rivals Scorses's Taxi Driver. The scenes seem "indulgent" at times, but the not knowing duplicates the protagonist's denial in the audience. That Brown Bunny can only be viewed once.

The second is a third-person narrative that makes those "indulgent" scenes haunting. Whether it's the race track, highway, or salt plains, those blank moments produce a melancholy.

Ebert said his opinion changed when he saw it a second time, because of the edit, but I wonder if it was because of the emotional context.

I think of the Sixth Sense and other M. Night films and the second viewing is only to confirm that the twist has been hinted at along the way, but Gallo uses context (intentionally or unintentionally) for emotional resonance in a very interesting way.

Goodbye Mr. Vengeance and hello Werckmeister.

2000's:

Werkmeister Harmonies - Directed by Bela Tarr
The Brown Bunny - Directed by Vincent Gallo
Songs from the Second Floor - Directed by Roy Andersson
Inland Empire - Directed by David Lynch
Dogville - Directed by Lars von Trier

1990's:
Three Colours: Blue - Directed by Krzysztof Kieślowski
Eyes Wide Shut - Directed by Stanley Kubrick
Julien Donkey-Boy - Directed by Harmony Korine
Being John Malkovich - Directed by Spike Jonze
Pulp Fiction - Quinten Tarantino

DanielBenoit

12-10-2009, 04:52 PM

Goodbye Mr. Vengeance and hello Werckmeister.

2000's:

Werkmeister Harmonies - Directed by Bela Tarr
The Brown Bunny - Directed by Vincent Gallo
Songs from the Second Floor - Directed by Roy Andersson
Inland Empire - Directed by David Lynch
Dogville - Directed by Lars von Trier

:banana::banana::banana::banana:

Alas, one down six billion to go. Let's hope the rest of the world is keen of ten minute tracking shots :rolleyes:

1990's:
Three Colours: Blue - Directed by Krzysztof Kieślowski

Only Blue?

NickAdams

12-10-2009, 05:20 PM

:banana::banana::banana::banana:

Alas, one down six billion to go. Let's hope the rest of the world is keen of ten minute tracking shots :rolleyes:

This film is not going to win everybody over. I watched it over a three day period. There is a plot, but it's introduced way into the second act, which I don't mind, but it allows one to take breaks. The last hour I watched strait through, it's impossible to look away. It's funny, because if it was made at a major studio the film would have been turned into a thriller.

Only Blue?

I bought the trilogy three years ago and I've only seen Blue.:blush:
If I know a film is going to be emotionally arresting, than I wait for the right mood to watch it.

DanielBenoit

12-10-2009, 05:50 PM

It's funny, because if it was made at a major studio the film would have been turned into a thriller.

Exactly! And yet the approach is the exact opposite. Near the end, I felt more lingering dread than what any thriller could provide me. It truly proves the effect of minimalism.

In my opinion, the 70's was the greatest time for film (for American films that is). There were just too many greats. So I'm slightly revising my list to fifteen of the best.

1970's
1.Apocolaypse Now - Francis Ford Coppola
2. Stroszeck - Werner Herzog
3. Killer of Sheep - Charles Burrnett
4. The Mirror - Andrev Tarkovsky
5. Taxi Driver - Martin Scorsese
6. Barry Lyndon - Stanley Kubrick
7. Aguiree, The Wrath of God - Werner Herzog
8. The Godfather Part I and II - Francis Ford Coppola
9. A Women Under the Influence - John Cassavetes
10. Mean Streets - Martin Scorsese
11. F for Fake - Orson Welles
12. Cries and Whispers - Ingmar Bergman
13. Eraserhead - David Lynch
14. The Conversation - Francis Ford Coppola
15. A Clockwork Orange - Stanley Kubrick

1930's

1. M. - Fritz Lang
2. It Happened One Night - Frank Capra
3. The Grand Illusion - Jean Renoir
4. L'Atlante - Jean Vigo
5. The 39 Steps - Alfred Hitchcock

1920's and 10's
1. City Lights - Charlie Chaplin
2. The General - Buster Keaton
3. Sunrise - F.W. Muranu
4. Broken Blossoms - D.W. Griffith
5. October - Sergi Eisenstein

Dinkleberry2010

12-14-2009, 05:14 PM

1920s and 10s:
1. Birth Of A Nation
2. Intolerance
3. Sunrise
4. City Lights
5. Metropolis

1930s:
1. It Happened One Night
2. Grand Illusion
3. Gone With The Wind
4. The Wizard Of Oz
5. Stagecoach

1940s:
1. Casablanca
2. Citizen Kane
3. How Green Was My Valley
4. The Best Years Of Our Lives
5. The Treasure Of The Sierra Madras

1950s:
1. La Strada
2. Bridge On The River Kwai
3. The African Queen
4. Sunset Boulevard
5. Stalag 17

1960s:
1. Midnight Cowboy
2. 2001: A Space Odyssey
3. Dr. Strangelove
4. In The Heat Of The Night
5. The Graduate

1970s:
1. The Godfather
2. The Godfather II
3. The Deer Hunter
4. Apocalypse Now
5. One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest

1980s:
1. Raging Bull
2. Rain Man
3. The Color Purple
4. A Passage To India
5. Platoon

1990s:
1. Schindler's List
2. Saving Private Ryan
3. Forrest Gump
4. The Crying Game
5. Pulp Fiction

DanielBenoit

12-14-2009, 06:26 PM

Hey, how about best peformances in cinema? This is my thread so I'll cheat and add that too.

Kay, my list is totally biased, but still my honest opinion:

1. Buster Keaton - The General
2. Charlie Chaplin - City Lights
3. Takashi Shimura - Ikiru
4. Orson Welles - Chimes at Midnight
5. Orson Welles - Citizen Kane
6. Emil Jannings - The Last Laugh
7. Marcello Mastroianni - 8 1/2
8. James Stewart - Vertigo
9. Robert DeNero - Raging Bull
10. James Mason - Lolita
11. Gloria Swanson - Sunset Boulevard
12. Robert Mitchum - The Night of the Hunter
13. Humphrey Bogart - Casablanca
14. James Stewart - Harvey
15. Giulietta Masina - Nights of Cabiria
16. Gena Rowlands - A Women Under the Influence
17. Erich von Stroheim - The Grand Illusion
18. Orson Welles - The Third Man
19. Klaus Kinski - Aguirre, The Wrath of God
20. Joseph Cotton - Shadow of a Doubt
21. Ingrid Bergman - Casablanca
22. Dustin Hoffman - Midnight Cowboy
23. Robert DeNero - Taxi Driver
24. Lillian Gish - Broken Blossoms
25. Peter Falk - A Women Under the Influence
26. Gunnar Bjornstrand - Winter Light
27. Kathrine Hepburn - Bringing Up Baby
28. Anthony Perkins - Psycho
29. Cary Grant - North by Northwest
30. Liv Ullman - Persona

Note: Non-professional peformances don't count since they are pretty much a different medium than star acting.

*Classic*Charm*

12-14-2009, 06:41 PM

My film watching is not anywhere close to as extensive as yours, but my list would definitely include

Anne Baxter in All about Eve

besides a number that are on your list

Dinkleberry2010

12-14-2009, 07:47 PM

Best Performances In Cinema:

1. Lillian Gish in Broken Blossoms
2. Orson Welles in Citizen Kane
3. Robert DeNiro in Raging Bull
4. Charlie Chaplin in City Lights
5. Buster Keaton in The General
6. Gary Cooper in Sergeant York
7. Greer Garson in Mrs. Miniver
8. Gloria Swanson in Sunset Boulevard
9. Gregory Peck in To Kill A Mockingbird
10. Peter Sellers in Dr. Strangelove

Mathor

12-14-2009, 10:08 PM

My film watching is not anywhere close to as extensive as yours, but my list would definitely include

Anne Baxter in All about Eve

besides a number that are on your list

Don't forget Bette Davis in All About Eve!

. At least as far as the 50s are concerned, I find All About Eve to be my favorite film of the 50's (so I don't need to make a list), and all the actors in it. Also, this year Quentin Tarantino praised Mankiewicz (director of All About Eve) as the greatest film director of this CENTURY. Haha. Nuff said.

Best of 2000's (this is really hard for me to do so don't judge my decisions TOO harshly)
1. Adaptation
2. The Departed
3. Lost In Translation
3. Wall-E
4. City Of God
5. Children Of Men
6. Pride & Prejudice
7. 4 Months, 3 Weeks, and 2 Days
8. The Class
9. The Life Aquatic
10. Amelie
11. The Hurt Locker
12. Rachel Getting Married

I probably left a lot out, but these are the ones that come to mind.

DanielBenoit

12-16-2009, 02:21 AM

1960's
1. 2001: A Space Odyssey - Stanley Kubrick
2. 8 1/2 - Federico Fellini
3. Bonnie and Clyde - Arthur Penn
4. L'Avventura - Michelangelo Antoini
5. Dr. Strangelove: Or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb - Stanley Kubrick

This needs some major adjusting.

1. 2001: A Space Odyssey - Stanley Kubrick
2. 8 1/2 - Federico Fellini
3. Persona - Ingmar Bergman
4. Bonnie and Clyde - Arthur Penn
5. L'Avventura - Michelangelo Antoini

NickAdams

12-16-2009, 10:29 AM

Christoph Waltz ... there are too many (there can never be too many) strong performances in Inglourious Basterds.

Laura Dern - Inland Empire

Gunnar Björnstrand in everything, but I first took notice of him in The Seventh Seal; I felt he was the only actor in that film that gave a cinematic and not a theatrical performance.

Best of 2000's (this is really hard for me to do so don't judge my decisions TOO harshly)
1. Adaptation
2. The Departed
3. Lost In Translation
3. Wall-E
4. City Of God
5. Children Of Men
6. Pride & Prejudice
7. 4 Months, 3 Weeks, and 2 Days
8. The Class
9. The Life Aquatic
10. Amelie
11. The Hurt Locker
12. Rachel Getting Married

I probably left a lot out, but these are the ones that come to mind.

A lot of good ones on here. Adaptation was my number one for awhile. It's still my favorite Kaufman picture.

This needs some major adjusting.

1. 2001: A Space Odyssey - Stanley Kubrick
2. 8 1/2 - Federico Fellini
3. Persona - Ingmar Bergman
4. Bonnie and Clyde - Arthur Penn
5. L'Avventura - Michelangelo Antoini

I'm surprised you're just now seeing Persona. There are a lot of highlights in that film, but Alma's recounting past exploits are a stand out to me.

DanielBenoit

12-16-2009, 11:53 AM

Gunnar Björnstrand in everything, but I first took notice of him in The Seventh Seal; I felt he was the only actor in that film that gave a cinematic and not a theatrical performance.

True, very true. The theatricality of the whole film put me a bit off at first, but it's far too powerful, beautiful and greatly acted to dislike.

I'm surprised you're just now seeing Persona. There are a lot of highlights in that film, but Alma's recounting past exploits are a stand out to me.

I know :redface: I've seen most of Bergman's other films, and then I realized that I've never seen Persona :eek: I think it's his best :nod:

I have also decided to expand my 60's list which was the best time for movies everywhere.

1. 2001: A Space Odyssey - Stanley Kubrick
2. 8 1/2 - Federico Fellini
3. Persona - Ingmar Bergman
4. Bonnie and Clyde - Arthur Penn
5. Through a Glass Darkly - Ingmar Bergman
6. Chimes at Midnight - Orson Welles
7. L'Avventura - Michelangelo Antoini
8. La Dolce Vita - Federico Fellini
9. Dr. Strangelove: Or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb - Stanley Kubrick
10. The Graduate - Mike Nichols
11. Lolita - Stanley Kubrick
12. Winter Light - Ingmar Bergman
13. Psycho - Alfred Hitchcock
14. To Kill a Mockingbird - Robert Mulligan
15. The Virgin Spring - Ingmar Bergman

and the 50's which was definitley a time of great foriegn classics (despite the fact that my first three choices are overtly Hollywood :lol:)

1. Singing in the Rain - Stanley Donen and Gene Kelly
2. The Night of the Hunter - Charles Laughton
3. Vertigo - Alfred Hitchcock
4. Floating Weeds - Yarujio Ozu
5. Ikiru - Akira Kurosawa
6. Hiroshima, Mon Amour - Alan Resnais
7. Harvey - Henry Koster
8. Touch of Evil - Orson Welles
9. The 400 Blows - Francis Truffant
10. The Seven Samurai - Akira Kurosawa
11. The Seventh Seal - Ingmar Bergman
12. Stalag 17 - Billy Wilder
13. Nights of Cabria - Federico Fellini
14. Strangers on a Train - Alfred Hitchcock
15. Some Like It Hot - Billy Wilder

NickAdams

12-16-2009, 04:01 PM

Once you get into the 80's picking five favorites becomes difficult.

Mathor

12-16-2009, 04:10 PM

Christoph Waltz ... there are too many (there can never be too many) strong performances in Inglourious Basterds.

Indeed. I believe he will earn his first Golden Globe and Oscar for acting in this film. He's so brilliant in that film.

DanielBenoit

12-16-2009, 06:14 PM

Once you get into the 80's picking five favorites becomes difficult.

Eh, the 80's for me wasn't that much of a great time in film. There's probably only thirty or so American mainstream films from that era worth seeing.

Raging Bull is unquestionably the best of the 80's, with Shoah very close behind it. Has anyone seen Shoah? It's a painfully effective ninie hour documentary about the Holocoust, but what's so unique about it is that it doesn't explain through historical documentation like clips from the past, but rather is just a series of interviews with those who were there, including some of those who carried out the killings. It is haunting in that many of the films shots (whilst the interview voice-overs) are of the old ghettos and death camps and the landscape surrounding in the present day. Like ghosts, the past still lingers. The images that the film evokes through words is thoroughly terrifying and graphic, and even more so since virtually nothing is shown onscreen except the haunting landscape and faces of the survivors. It surpasses even Schindler's List in that it deals with the Holocoust as a whole and in a very despairing way, while Speilberg's film depicted one of the extremely few sucsess stories of the Holocost. I've only had the time to watch about half of it, but it is truly great and probably the most important documentary (if not film) ever made.

NickAdams

12-16-2009, 06:49 PM

Eh, the 80's for me wasn't that much of a great time in film. There's probably only thirty or so American mainstream films from that era worth seeing.

That's almost shocking. In the 80's there were multiple films from David Lynch, Ingmar Bergman, Krzysztof Kieślowski, Werner Herzog, Martin Scorsese, Paul Schrader, Jim Jarmusch, Woody Allen, Jean-Luc Godard, Bela Tarr (I haven't seen the four films he directed in the 80's). There was also Full Metal Jacket and Love Streams. I wouldn't say they were all number ones, but there was a lot under the rubble of the 80's.

Raging Bull would be in my top five and so would Love Streams, but it gets tough after that. I wouldn't even attempt to list a top 70's and 60's those decades were magic.

DanielBenoit

12-16-2009, 07:01 PM

That's almost shocking. In the 80's there were multiple films from David Lynch, Ingmar Bergman, Krzysztof Kieślowski, Werner Herzog, Martin Scorsese, Paul Schrader, Jim Jarmusch, Woody Allen, Jean-Luc Godard, Bela Tarr (I haven't seen the four films he directed in the 80's). There was also Full Metal Jacket and Love Streams. I wouldn't say they were all number ones, but there was a lot under the rubble of the 80's.

Raging Bull would be in my top five and so would Love Streams, but it gets tough after that. I wouldn't even attempt to list a top 70's and 60's those decades were magic.

Yeah I know. It just seems that the junk from American mainstream cinema was almost endless.

Btw, when I said that there are only about thirty or so films worth seeing from that time; I meant from mainstream America, and thus pretty much not counting any of those names you mentioned (except Scorsese, Allen and Schrader).

Maybe that was a bit of an overstatement. But it cannot be denied that despite these unbelievably great films like The Decalouge or Raging Bull, a great majority of mainstream American (not foriegn) cinema during that time was trash. Anyone ever heard of Highlander? Leonard Part 6? If you do, I pity you.

NickAdams

12-16-2009, 07:10 PM

Yeah I know. It just seems that the junk from American mainstream cinema was almost endless.

Btw, when I said that there are only about thirty or so films worth seeing from that time; I meant from mainstream America, and thus pretty much not counting any of those names you mentioned (except Scorsese, Allen and Schrader).

Maybe that was a bit of an overstatement. But it cannot be denied that despite these unbelievably great films like The Decalouge or Raging Bull, a great majority of mainstream American (not foriegn) cinema during that time was trash. Anyone ever heard of Highlander? Leonard Part 6? If you do, I pity you.

:lol: Almost endless? It's still going. I wonder if you've seen Quentin Tarantino's film from the 80's "My Best Friend's Birthday"; it's more of a curiosity, like the film Johnny Depp directed "The Brave" (which has Brando).

DanielBenoit

12-16-2009, 07:15 PM

:lol: Almost endless? It's still going. I wonder if you've seen Quentin Tarantino's film from the 80's "My Best Friend's Birthday"; it's more of a curiosity, like the film Johnny Depp directed "The Brave" (which has Brando).

No I haven't. I knew that Tarantino had obviously did some directorial amatuer stuff before Resevoir Dogs, but I had no idea that it was available to view :eek:

Salon.com in there list of best directors of the decade puts Michael Bay at #10. I lost the link so I'll find it later.

NickAdams

12-16-2009, 08:13 PM

You can find it on youtube. Type in My Best Friends Birthday part 1.

Mathor

12-17-2009, 12:01 AM

my only response to all the bashing of the 80's.

BRAZIL came out in 1985 for crying out loud!

And I don't hate Michael Bay as much for his films as what I learned when i heard an interview from Katherine Bigelow. While she was trying to film the Hurt Locker, the army, the navy, the marines, and the guard all refused to help in any way, shape, or form. For an independent film about a freakin war, she was not given any assistance whatsoever from the military. However, the same year, the army was said to have lended around 100 military planes to Transformers 2, and in fact every facet of the military was willing to give as much as possible to the success of the Transformers 2, including even REAL generals and members of the armed forces were IN the movie. WTF?

DanielBenoit

12-17-2009, 01:02 PM

my only response to all the bashing of the 80's.

BRAZIL came out in 1985 for crying out loud!

I'm not bashing those films. They make up about 10% of the total imput of the 80's. Definining the eighties with just a couple films does not turn the era into a reinissance. Every era inevidibly produces masterpieces.

And besides, that comment was reserved for and only for American mainstream films, Brazil is one of those few that was great.

Mathor

12-17-2009, 04:01 PM

I'm not bashing those films. They make up about 10% of the total imput of the 80's. Definining the eighties with just a couple films does not turn the era into a reinissance. Every era inevidibly produces masterpieces.

And besides, that comment was reserved for and only for American mainstream films, Brazil is one of those few that was great.

Every era produces terrible mush, and every era produces masterpieces, the 80's is not worse than any other genre. The 80's was a wonderful decade of cinema. You are not looking in the right places. If you look at hollywood films from any decade you'll find stuff that sucks, and stuff that is amazing.

Do the Right Thing
Tootsie
A Christmas Story
This Is Spinal Tap
Crimes And Misdemeanors
Ran
Sex, Lies, and Videotape
Back To The Future
My Dinner With Andre
The Last Temptation of Christ
Out of Africa
The Terminator
Videodrome
Blue Velvet
Salvador
Raiders of The Lost Ark
The Shining
Amadeus
Platoon
The Elephant Man
Raging Bull
On Golden Pond
Gandhi
Driving Mrs Daisy
Dead Poets Society
Blood Simple

those are all pretty wonderful Hollywood films, but one could do go further into the 80's and find many lesser known treasures that I didn't list.

I would even venture to say that most of the "crappy" teen comedies from the 80's like:

Ferris Buelers Day Off
Say Anything
The Breakfast Club

are also pretty decent, though I can see why they wouldn't be the BEST movies of any period of time. But if you put all of these crappy 80's movies against the thousands of new movies like that that come out in the 90's and the 2000's (American Pie, Saw, etc) you would find that those two decades have a lot more crap like that, and a smaller majority of it has any redeeming quality to it. American mainstream has always sucked.

DanielBenoit

12-17-2009, 04:48 PM

True, it's just that the 80's was the begining of an era which brought genre-formula pictures into the spotlight. Before then, there was neo-classical Hollywood in which films like Bonnie and Clyde and Taxi Driver had the spotlight, and were financed by big studios. And even before then in the 30's, 40's and 50's, Hollywood did produce tons of formula films, but many of them were great (though not all of course). The 30's and 40's made romantic-comedies that would shame even reasonable modern romantic-comedies like Sleepless in Seattle.

Then after Star Wars and Jaws came along (great movies btw) studios saw the money in special effects blockbusters and almost completely dropped the more innovative artistic films of the 60's and 70's. Of course blockbusters have always existed, but for obvious reasons, David Lean is infinitley better than Michael Bay. In the end, it's not the films themselves that created my opinion of the eighties, but rather the outlook of Hollywood and the fact that it was a transitional period into the formula cliched films that we still have today.

Mathor

12-17-2009, 07:34 PM

Taxi Driver wasn't a very high reviewed movie (except by Ebert, he always got it right historically), when it came out. Neither were any of Kubrick's films (Especially not A Clockwork Orange, which was banned from british cinema for about 15 years, and American audiences which outright rejected it) 2001, in the same light, had the most walk-outs of any film in history. They are directors that have aged and found success as people look back on their works. Nowadays I don't think you would find many people who have bad things to say about Stanley Kubrick (at least not heavily respected critics as was the case in the 70's. The 70's had the MOST terrible films of any genre. Hollywood crushed all of the good movies at that period of time. the 70's Hollywood mainstream was made up of spaghetti westerns and Pam Grier Foxy Lady-esque disco films. Only Quentin Tarantino can make these things wonderful, otherwise they are just pure trash.

DanielBenoit

12-17-2009, 07:40 PM

Idk, you're probably right. At least directors during that period were given good financing and had a lot more freedom. Once the 80's came along, that was for the most part dropped for special effects films. Imagine, if made in the 70's, a film like The Hurt Locker would've gotten studio financing and might've been able to get the military technology that Transformers 2 got.

Either way, money isn't everything and despite the fact that studio back-up gave directors like Kubrick all the time they wanted, independent cinema has redefined how films are made.

Mathor

12-17-2009, 07:45 PM

Indeed, which is why I disagree with the other half of critics who believe good cinema ended around 1979, and now we live in some world of filth we are trying to possibly live up to the greatness of these films.

Independent films are much richer (and more genuine) than big studio performances, I think cinema is only getting better.

Captain_Kuchiki

12-24-2009, 06:45 PM

I saw 2001: A Space Odyssey at least twice here, and I agree that's its a goodie. For me...

2000's:

Paranormal Activity
I, Robot
Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines
Star Wars Episode III
Equilibrium
Spider-Man 2
X-Men 3 The Last Stand
Beowulf
Death Note

1990's

Terminator 2
Titanic
The Crow
saving private ryan
The Fifth Element

1980's

Blade Runner
Terminator (again!)
The Thing (personal favorite)
Star Wars Episodes V and VI

1970's

Star Wars Episode IV
THX 1138

I don't watch a whole lot of movies, but there you go! :D

Babbalanja

12-31-2009, 11:29 AM

The Brown Bunny is an extraordinary film in that it has two different point of views, one of which can be experienced only once. The first viewing is a first-person (though it seems third-person limited) narrative that, to me, rivals Scorses's Taxi Driver. The scenes seem "indulgent" at times, but the not knowing duplicates the protagonist's denial in the audience. That Brown Bunny can only be viewed once.

The second is a third-person narrative that makes those "indulgent" scenes haunting. Whether it's the race track, highway, or salt plains, those blank moments produce a melancholy.

Ebert said his opinion changed when he saw it a second time, because of the edit, but I wonder if it was because of the emotional context.

I think of the Sixth Sense and other M. Night films and the second viewing is only to confirm that the twist has been hinted at along the way, but Gallo uses context (intentionally or unintentionally) for emotional resonance in a very interesting way.
I agree that Vincent Gallo made an extraordinary movie with wit and originality. But that movie was Buffalo 66.

Brown Bunny, on the other hand, had none of the charm, humor, or pathos of his first movie. It was an interminable, overindulgent, nonsensical bore from an egomaniac who had run out of ideas. The most poignant moment is when we hear Jackson Frank singing "Milk and Honey." The second most poignant moment is when we hear Ted Curson's "Tears for Dolphy," like we did in Pasolini's Teorema.

Gallo plays the emotionally wounded protagonist Bud with a vacuous stare that seems more comical every time he flashes it. Of course it charms the ladies, all of whom seem to be named after flowers. Flowers, man. Flowers, you get it? Me neither.

You need to see Bud driving his van, driving, and more driving. Then you need to see him get out of his van and open the back. Then you need to see him putting the ramp onto the back of his van and getting into the van. Then you need to see him roll his motorbike out of the van. Then you need to see him getting onto the bike and riding out of sight. Then you need to see him riding back into view after a little while. Oh, and later, you need to see him washing his bike. This is all very very important.

****WARNING!! SPOILERS!!******

Daisy, the love of Bud's life, seems to be missing or something, because he visits her parents who don't seem to remember him. But if he's going to California to see her (and ride his bike, natch), why is he propositioning all these women along the way?

He goes to Daisy's house, but it's obvious she's gone. So he leaves a note for her.

Later she appears to him in a hotel room and smokes crack in the bathroom before giving him head. You need to see all of this in graphic detail. They talk a lot, about stuff.

But after (literally) all is said and done, we realize that Daisy is long dead and Bud saw her body being taken away in an ambulance. But if she's dead, who just came into the hotel room and serviced him? And if he knows she's dead, what's the point of going to her house looking for her and leaving a note?

Oh, I know, I should just go back to watching the Transformer movies and whatever George Clooney is in, right? Not so fast. I'm a huge fan of Bela Tarr and offbeat cinema in general. I love to see movies from directors who know how to use empty narrative space to convey melancholy. And I can tell the difference between their fascinating movies and pretentious, laughable drivel like Brown Bunny.

Regards,

Istvan

JuniperWoolf

12-31-2009, 07:23 PM

Best of the decade, hmm... okay:

1930's:
1. Snow White
2. Wizard of Oz
...and not much else going on in that decade.

1940's:
1. Citizen Kane (duh)
2. Fantasia
3. The Maltese Falcon
4. Bambi (yeah, I like Disney movies)
... that's all I got.

1950's:
1. Rebel Without a Cause
2. Rear Window
3. Paths of Glory
4. A Christmas Carol
5. Cinderella

1960's:
1. Cool Hand Luke
2. Rosemary's Baby
3. Lolita
4. Psycho
5. Spartacus

1970's:
1. Apocalypse Now!
2. Invasion of the Body Snatchers
3. Taxi Driver
4. Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory
5. A Clockwork Orange

1980's:
1. Re-Animator
2. The Breakfast Club
3. Monty Python's The Meaning of Life
4. The Princess Bride
5. Eraserhead

1990's:
1. Pi
2. Dances With Wolves
3. Boogie Nights
4. Fight Club
5. Boyz n' da Hood

2000's:
1. There Will Be Blood
2. Inglorious Bastards
3. Gangs of New York
4. The Fountain
5. American Psycho

Veho

01-01-2010, 09:48 PM

1980s:
When Harry Met Sally.

That's all... Okay, okay, so I'm not some sort of film buff like you all seem to be!

DanielBenoit

01-01-2010, 10:10 PM

I agree that Vincent Gallo made an extraordinary movie with wit and originality. But that movie was Buffalo 66.

Brown Bunny, on the other hand, had none of the charm, humor, or pathos of his first movie. It was an interminable, overindulgent, nonsensical bore from an egomaniac who had run out of ideas. The most poignant moment is when we hear Jackson Frank singing "Milk and Honey." The second most poignant moment is when we hear Ted Curson's "Tears for Dolphy," like we did in Pasolini's Teorema.

Gallo plays the emotionally wounded protagonist Bud with a vacuous stare that seems more comical every time he flashes it. Of course it charms the ladies, all of whom seem to be named after flowers. Flowers, man. Flowers, you get it? Me neither.

You need to see Bud driving his van, driving, and more driving. Then you need to see him get out of his van and open the back. Then you need to see him putting the ramp onto the back of his van and getting into the van. Then you need to see him roll his motorbike out of the van. Then you need to see him getting onto the bike and riding out of sight. Then you need to see him riding back into view after a little while. Oh, and later, you need to see him washing his bike. This is all very very important.

I think you terribly misunderstand the film, for which I can't entirely blame you for virtually 99% of American audiences will misunderstand it. Yes the film is tedious and it does have long dragging parts in which almost nothing seems to happen. But to quote the great Bela Tarr "I despise stories, as they mislead people into believing that something has happened. In fact, nothing really happens as we flee from one condition to another ... All that remains is time. This is probably the only thing that's still genuine -- time itself; the years, days, hours, minutes and seconds." What Gallo has done is something in the tradition of Tarr and Tarkovsky in that they use time, not plot, to lure the audience into an enviroment, not a story, but an enviroment. Through this emotion and ideas come about, not as clearly as linear films would, but certainly more stronger.

In the end extreme long takes are an aquired taste and become more likable the more movies one sees. There is one shot in Bela Tarrs Satantango which lasts for about seven minutes of just the camera slowly zooming in on an owl in the darkness as we hear the echoing voices of people offscreen. Most audiences would have fallen asleep, but I was utterly enthralled the whole five hours of the long movie.

Babbalanja

01-02-2010, 12:04 PM

What Gallo has done is something in the tradition of Tarr and Tarkovsky in that they use time, not plot, to lure the audience into an enviroment, not a story, but an enviroment. Through this emotion and ideas come about, not as clearly as linear films would, but certainly more stronger.And in my opinion, he's just pushing buttons: Death and Loss and Need and Drama. He doesn't actually say anything about these matters, like those better directors do. He's just appropriating a technique of theirs, and using it to completely different ends. Please at least admit that it's possible a director could use the long-take technique and not make a work of genius.

In the end extreme long takes are an aquired taste and become more likable the more movies one sees. There is one shot in Bela Tarrs Satantango which lasts for about seven minutes of just the camera slowly zooming in on an owl in the darkness as we hear the echoing voices of people offscreen. Most audiences would have fallen asleep, but I was utterly enthralled the whole five hours of the long movie.You might recall I said I liked Tarr, so it's not a matter of my unfamiliarity with extremely long takes or slow-paced storytelling. I haven't seen Satantango yet (my wife is Hungarian, even, but she won't watch it), but I loved Werckmeister Harmonies and Damnation. Since you mentioned Tarkovsky, I'll express my admiration for Andrei Rublev and Mirror.

I'm not sure whether Gallo is a fan of these directors or not, but he doesn't have their abilities. It's very telling that his Beckett-like genius showed through in certain brief vignettes in Buffalo 66: the tap-dance in the bowling alley, the argument in the photo-booth, and many other strikingly original touches. He's best in those cinematic miniatures, and is really out of his depth with expansive cinematic composition. Brown Bunny was just narcissism, substituting interminable shots of Bud for really saying anything about the character.

Regards,

Istvan

DanielBenoit

01-03-2010, 05:16 PM

And in my opinion, he's just pushing buttons: Death and Loss and Need and Drama. He doesn't actually say anything about these matters, like those better directors do. He's just appropriating a technique of theirs, and using it to completely different ends. Please at least admit that it's possible a director could use the long-take technique and not make a work of genius.

But maybe he's not trying to say anything about these things, but rather instead trying to create an enviroment for the viewer to experience these things.

Besides, I'm not saying it's a masterpiece. It's a very ambitious piece of work and definitley deserves a reccomendation, but doesn't in my opinion stand to Tarr or Tarkovsky.

So in the end, yes, I do think it is possible for a film with a wealth of long takes can fail to be great or even good. How is admiring some of them somehow announcing that I admire all of them. Believe me, I certainly like the technique and find that it has quite a special effect in films unlike any other. But how do you conclude that I'm saying through merely using it implies that you have just made a great film?

You might recall I said I liked Tarr, so it's not a matter of my unfamiliarity with extremely long takes or slow-paced storytelling. I haven't seen Satantango yet (my wife is Hungarian, even, but she won't watch it), but I loved Werckmeister Harmonies and Damnation. Since you mentioned Tarkovsky, I'll express my admiration for Andrei Rublev and Mirror.

Ahh, then do forgive my assuming. These films are so often neglected by American audiences, that it's become a habit in assuming no one has seen them :redface:

I'm not sure whether Gallo is a fan of these directors or not, but he doesn't have their abilities. It's very telling that his Beckett-like genius showed through in certain brief vignettes in Buffalo 66: the tap-dance in the bowling alley, the argument in the photo-booth, and many other strikingly original touches. He's best in those cinematic miniatures, and is really out of his depth with expansive cinematic composition. Brown Bunny was just narcissism, substituting interminable shots of Bud for really saying anything about the character.

Regards,

Istvan

And there we go, I agree with you that Gallo does not have the ability of Tarr, and Buffalo 66 is a superoir film. But in the end we all have our opinions, and we can agree to disagree :)

NickAdams

01-04-2010, 02:29 AM

I agree that Vincent Gallo made an extraordinary movie with wit and originality. But that movie was Buffalo 66.
:lol:

Brown Bunny, on the other hand, had none of the charm, humor, or pathos of his first movie.

That's because it's the Brown Bunny. Would you criticize Schindler's List for not having the humor and lightheartedness of E.T.?

It was an interminable, overindulgent, nonsensical bore from an egomaniac who had run out of ideas.

When a director cast himself in the lead, he will always be accused of indulgence, but I don't see how you found it nonsensical. I can see how you might have found it boring, but there isn't a dull moment in that film for me.

The most poignant moment is when we hear Jackson Frank singing "Milk and Honey." The second most poignant moment is when we hear Ted Curson's "Tears for Dolphy," like we did in Pasolini's Teorema.

I found far more poignant moments.

Gallo plays the emotionally wounded protagonist Bud with a vacuous stare that seems more comical every time he flashes it.

See, you found humor.

Of course it charms the ladies, all of whom seem to be named after flowers. Flowers, man. Flowers, you get it? Me neither.

Of course the women are charmed: they're not real. The reference to flowers is what attracts him to all of them. I would agree that it is heavy handed and a little to coincidental, but they're not real and he passes two prostitutes before he stops for Rose. Bud goes through the fives stages of death, but not in the standard order:

1. Violet: Bargaining (He begs Violet to go with him)
2. Mrs. Lemon: Denial (They speak of Daisy as if she was still alive. Mrs. Lemon says Daisy had the Brown Bunny for a very long time, but Bud later discovers in a pet shop that they have a short life expectancy *foreshadowing*)
3. Lilly: Depression (Lilly is noticeably upset and Bud asks if she's ok)
4. Rose: Anger (He demands that she leaves his car)
5. Daisy: Acceptance (He remembers what happened)

You need to see Bud driving his van, driving, and more driving. Then you need to see him get out of his van and open the back. Then you need to see him putting the ramp onto the back of his van and getting into the van. Then you need to see him roll his motorbike out of the van. Then you need to see him getting onto the bike and riding out of sight. Then you need to see him riding back into view after a little while. Oh, and later, you need to see him washing his bike. This is all very very important.

The driving is very important. Remember that he ran off when he saw Daisy at the party (she ask him why at the climax and he doesn't know) and he abandons each of the three representatives of Daisy while he drives to California. If you remember, the final scene is Bud driving, after leaving the hotel room, and it the film closes by creating a still frame: he stops running. He has found acceptance.

I can't say that everything is symbolic, but Bud drives the black van that can be seen as a hurst and Daisy the motorcycle. The scene where Bud drives on the salt plains has been considered pointless, but it's significant. Bud pulls the, what seems like a yellow motorcycle, out of the van and pulls up parallel to it. He then looks at the van as if it's a race. He then rides the "yellow" motorcycle into the center of the white salt plans (it's a daisy), but he can't get away until he has closure.

He goes to Daisy's house, but it's obvious she's gone. So he leaves a note for her.

Later she appears to him in a hotel room and smokes crack in the bathroom before giving him head. You need to see all of this in graphic detail. They talk a lot, about stuff.

But after (literally) all is said and done, we realize that Daisy is long dead and Bud saw her body being taken away in an ambulance. But if she's dead, who just came into the hotel room and serviced him? And if he knows she's dead, what's the point of going to her house looking for her and leaving a note?

It's not obvious to him, because he's in denial. He doesn't remember it; call it post-traumatic.

I found their talking to be the best part of the film. The back and forth of the discovery and Bud's childlike whine is pitch perfect.

My only complaint with the film is that the point of view is disturbed when we see Daisy smoke crack in the bathroom.

I'll be the first to admit that I could be making connections that aren't intended, but this is definitely one of my favorites.

Can Gallo's film be accurately judge against Tarr and Tarkovsky?
I don't think so. Gallo pulled more weight than either of those guys for the Brown Bunny. It's the difference between Survivor Man and Man Vs. Wild. If there was ever a film "by" someone it's The Brown Bunny. This is also Gallo's second feature and the the Tarr we are familiar with is much different than the Tarr pre-Damnation.

Janine

01-04-2010, 03:14 AM

Every era produces terrible mush, and every era produces masterpieces, the 80's is not worse than any other genre. The 80's was a wonderful decade of cinema. You are not looking in the right places. If you look at hollywood films from any decade you'll find stuff that sucks, and stuff that is amazing.

Yeah, finally a list that includes ones I liked a emensely, too. "Out of Africa" was one of my alltime favorites; I finally had to buy it..the scenery is spectacular and the music is gorgeous; the acting is superb and the story is based on truth...all elements I truly enjoy in film. I can think of a lot more films to add to this list in the same vane. I will have to make my own list soon; no time left tonight. Seems this thread is already dominated by the guys and guy movies; been that way lately I noticed. Let's get a little balance here with the female element.
I liked and saw all of these you listed, Mathor:

Tootsie
A Christmas Story
Crimes And Misdemeanors
Ran
Back To The Future
My Dinner With Andre
Out of Africa
Blue Velvet
Raiders of The Lost Ark
Amadeus
Platoon
The Elephant Man
On Golden Pond
Gandhi
Driving Mrs Daisy
Dead Poets Society

those are all pretty wonderful Hollywood films, but one could do go further into the 80's and find many lesser known treasures that I didn't list.

Mathor, definitely true - there are a lot more. I just have to put my thinking cap on and come up with my own list. If I go by directors, I am sure I can come up with tons of films I consider classics.

I would even venture to say that most of the "crappy" teen comedies from the 80's like:

Ferris Buelers Day Off
Say Anything
The Breakfast Club

are also pretty decent, though I can see why they wouldn't be the BEST movies of any period of time. But if you put all of these crappy 80's movies against the thousands of new movies like that that come out in the 90's and the 2000's (American Pie, Saw, etc) you would find that those two decades have a lot more crap like that, and a smaller majority of it has any redeeming quality to it. American mainstream has always sucked.

I like those movies a lot, even if they are "crappy" teen movies. Back in my son's adolescent years he and I would watch those film and really laugh...I recall Molly Greenwald was quite good....she was great in "16 Candles" and "Pretty in Pink" and "The Breakfast Club"...they don't make anything like those films anymore. I got a real kick out of them and still do. My son's favorite was "Say Anything" and the dinner scene when Cussack went on about not ever wanting to produce anything, make anything, invent anything, etc. We thought it was a witty film with a lot of heart.

I don't notice many British films on anyone's list. I will have to think of some good films from each decade.

Silence...I didn't kill this thread, did I?....I can hear you serious movie posters cringing at some of the teen movies I listed.

Here are some great films I thought of last night:

Lawrence of Arabia
The Bridge Over the River Kwai
Ryan's Daughter
Passage to India
The Best Years of Our Lives
The Quiet Man

I will think of more later on...have to go out now for the day...

NickAdams

01-04-2010, 03:23 PM

Silence...I didn't kill this thread, did I?....I can hear you serious movie posters cringing at some of the teen movies I listed.

Here are some great films I thought of last night:

Lawrence of Arabia
The Bridge Over the River Kwai
Ryan's Daughter
Passage to India
The Best Years of Our Lives
The Quiet Man

I will think of more later on...have to go out now for the day...

Lol, no cringing from me. A lot of the films that I enjoy can be considered serious, but I enjoy them the same way I enjoyed movies like The Goonies as a child. My favorite movies tend to be the ones that fill me with wonder, so my choices come from personal resonance, rather than technical mastery and that's why I would never list Citizen Kane as a top; I just don't connect with it, so to each their own.

I find it more interesting when people list their favorite of a particular genre, like the Teen-flick; Captain_Kuchiki's list is heavy on Sci-Fi and it makes me want to dust off my THX 1138 dvd and finally watch it.

Concerning British films: I was thinking of replacing Pulp Fiction with Marc Singer's Dark Days for my best of the 90's.

DanielBenoit

01-04-2010, 03:39 PM

My favorite movies tend to be the ones that fill me with wonder, so my choices come from personal resonance, rather than technical mastery and that's why I would never list Citizen Kane as a top; I just don't connect with it, so to each their own.

*cringe* :lol:

I find it more interesting when people list their favorite of a particular genre, like the Teen-flick; Captain_Kuchiki's list is heavy on Sci-Fi and it makes me want to dust off my THX 1138 dvd and finally watch it.

I have a favorite genre, it's called Keaton and Chaplin :lol:

My favorites are:
1. The General
2. City Lights
3. Sherlock Jr.
4. Steamboat Billie Jr.
5. The Kid

I'll be the first to admit that I could be making connections that aren't intended, but this is definitely one of my favorites.

Wow, this post has just convinced me to rewatch this movie after about two years.

NickAdams

01-04-2010, 04:42 PM

*cringe* :lol:

I have a favorite genre, it's called Keaton and Chaplin :lol:

My favorites are:
1. The General
2. City Lights
3. Sherlock Jr.
4. Steamboat Billie Jr.
5. The Kid

:lol:
Personal resonance might not have been the best choice, because my favorites have nothing to do with my life. To me Michael Bay is technical and Tarr is personal, so it's more connotation than what the word denotes. My interest is mostly narrative and the medium of cinema.

I prefer The Playhouse to The General.:D The General is technically superior, but The Playhouse always makes me laugh.

Wow, this post has just convinced me to rewatch this movie after about two years.

Be sure to tell me if I'm making something out of nothing. I think a lot of viewers saw it as realism and I think it was expressionism masquerading as realism.

Babbalanja

01-04-2010, 11:11 PM

I'll be the first to admit that I could be making connections that aren't intended, but this is definitely one of my favorites.They're your hours, amigo, pass 'em as you wish. If such a superficial, exploitative, self-infatuated movie resonated with you, that's not my problem.

Regards,

Istvan

Janine

01-05-2010, 02:13 AM

Lol, no cringing from me. A lot of the films that I enjoy can be considered serious, but I enjoy them the same way I enjoyed movies like The Goonies as a child. My favorite movies tend to be the ones that fill me with wonder, so my choices come from personal resonance, rather than technical mastery and that's why I would never list Citizen Kane as a top; I just don't connect with it, so to each their own.

I find it more interesting when people list their favorite of a particular genre, like the Teen-flick; Captain_Kuchiki's list is heavy on Sci-Fi and it makes me want to dust off my THX 1138 dvd and finally watch it.

Concerning British films: I was thinking of replacing Pulp Fiction with Marc Singer's Dark Days for my best of the 90's.

Thank Nick, the silence was deafening...and Daniel, stop that cringing!

Anyone like films by the Archers - Powell and Pressburger?

I have seen these and hope to see more:

The Red Shoes
Black Narcissus

I just ordered "Life and Death of Colonel Blimp" and I hope to see many more. I think their work is incredibly creative. "The Red Shoe" I have seen many times over and am always fascinated with the characters. It's beautifully choregraphed and filmed, too and the dance sequence is one of the longest in film history.

I also admire the Merchant Ivory Productions of classic adapatations, etc. I think that James Ivory and Ismail Merchant and their fine screenplay writer (her name now escapes me) make a terrific team and they bring many classics to the screen vividly and with much beauty.

Here are some I have enjoyed; I own most of these as well:

The Bostonians
A Room With a View
Howard's End
The Golden Bowl
Heat and Dust
The Remains of the Day
Jefferson in Paris

There I've gotten my English faction into this thread!

DanielBenoit

01-05-2010, 04:20 PM

Anyone like films by the Archers - Powell and Pressburger?

Omg I loove Powell and Pressburger! The Red Shoes is among the most well-choregraphed films ever made!

Okay I'm going to cheat again, but this is my thread so I can do what I want :lol:

Do any of you have a top five or top ten all-time favorites that you feel will never change? Like do you have a top five that you know you will never change? Well I do, I am about certain that these five films will always be my immortal five favorites of all time.

1. 2001: A Space Odyssey
2. 8 1/2
3. The Third Man
4. Citizen Kane
5. Singing in the Rain

Also, what films have you seen that you, in Ebert's words "hated hated hated hated hated"?

As for me:

Transformers 2
The American Pie direct-to-video sequels
North (read Eberts original review!)
Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed

Also, what films have you seen that were so bad that you loved them? I can certainly name two:

The Room: A masterpiece of horridly aweful acting, directing and editing. Unintentionally hilarious from begining to end.

Plan 9 From Outer Space: So jaw-droppingly awful with such low production values, it is something of an accomplishment.

NickAdams

01-05-2010, 04:32 PM

1. Werckmeister Hamornies (I must thank you for introducing me to this amazing film.)
2. Eyes Wide Shut

Those two will always be in my top five.

DanielBenoit

01-05-2010, 04:37 PM

1. Werckmeister Hamornies (I must thank you for introducing me to this amazing film.)
2. Eyes Wide Shut

Those two will always be in my top five.

Oh I'm so proud :D Definitley in my top twenty and will always be.

Also, to add to my list of films I hated, two films which weren't exactly awful, but just really pissed me off was The Rookie and The Blind Side, directed by the same person funny enough.

Janine

01-05-2010, 05:23 PM

Omg I loove Powell and Pressburger! The Red Shoes is among the most well-choregraphed films ever made!

Hurray!... someone finally agrees with me on something. I love that film and have seen it a couple dozen times...a gem of a film in my eyes. Also read the book; I believe it was written after they did the film...strange. I have never seen a bad performance by Anton Wallbrook. I have his version of "Gaslight"...it maybe a bit cruder a version overall than the other well known one but it's still fascinating because he plays the sneaky husband...such a psychological script and role. I just ordered those other two films by the team and one stars Wallbrook again. It's just a pity his emense talent was so shortlived. His loss was great for the film-maker community.

Okay I'm going to cheat again, but this is my thread so I can do what I want :lol:

Do any of you have a top five or top ten all-time favorites that you feel will never change? Like do you have a top five that you know you will never change? Well I do, I am about certain that these five films will always be my immortal five favorites of all time.

1. 2001: A Space Odyssey
2. 8 1/2
3. The Third Man
4. Citizen Kane
5. Singing in the Rain

Throwing us another curve ball, eh...Daniel? Ok, I will have to think about this but pretty sure I know a few already. Let me come back to the question later on with my list. It's a difficult question but I will approach it like this; if all my films could disintegrate which ones could I not live with anymore. If I truly owe up to that, I might have to make a list of at least 10...oh well.

Also, what films have you seen that you, in Ebert's words "hated hated hated hated hated"?

As for me:

Transformers 2
The American Pie direct-to-video sequels
North (read Eberts original review!)
Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed

Also, what films have you seen that were so bad that you loved them? I can certainly name two:

The Room: A masterpiece of horridly aweful acting, directing and editing. Unintentionally hilarious from begining to end.

Plan 9 From Outer Space: So jaw-droppingly awful with such low production values, it is something of an accomplishment.

One I really really hated was:

Dogville...ugh...how I suffered...

I know some people are now groaning...but I really despised that film...so what was with that silly ball and chain bit all about anyway? It's just personal preference, but I really hated it when it came to the ending. I tried to like it and see it as experimental and it captivated me for awhile; but ultimately, I just plain hated it! I *groan* everytime I see it my public library shelf.

DanielBenoit

01-05-2010, 05:45 PM

Hurray!... someone finally agrees with me on something.

Oh yay! I've never disagreed with you until. . . ...

One I really really hated was:

Dogville...ugh...how I suffered...

I know some people are now groaning...but I really despised that film...so what was with that silly ball and chain bit all about anyway? It's just personal preference, but I really hated it when it came to the ending. I tried to like it and see it as experimental and it captivated me for awhile; but ultimately, I just plain hated it! I *groan* everytime I see it my public library shelf.

Uh-oh. I understand your percpective, but yes, I am groaning. Nick won't be happy :lol:

NickAdams

01-05-2010, 06:19 PM

So bad it's good: The Ape directed by James Franco. I don't know why I'm so entertained by this movie. The acting is either bad or over the top (Franco gets a pass for trying to manage both acting and directing on a whim).

The Brave directed by Johnny Depp. This isn't a very good film, but I've seen it a few times. It's like an Ed Wood movie to me; it's so earnest that it's worth watching.

Hate hate hate: I don't remember if I ever hated a movie. There have been a few that I have disliked. When I hate a movie, it's mostly because someone defends it from my criticism:lol:. Crash is an example. There's good acting, good directing (I guess), but the script is horrible. There's no truth to it; I guess this is what I mean by personal resonance. For all the style, there isn't any truth to the movie. I can't believe it passed for gritty realism ... I hate it.:lol:

I might have hated The Blindside and Avatar if I would have seen them.

One I really really hated was:

Dogville...ugh...how I suffered...

I know some people are now groaning...but I really despised that film...so what was with that silly ball and chain bit all about anyway? It's just personal preference, but I really hated it when it came to the ending. I tried to like it and see it as experimental and it captivated me for awhile; but ultimately, I just plain hated it! I *groan* everytime I see it my public library shelf.

Uh-oh. I understand your percpective, but yes, I am groaning. Nick won't be happy :lol:

:lol:
It's funny you say that about the ending. I was ready to throw my DVD player across the room when Grace was defending the town. I don't know what it says about me, but I was more than happy with her decision.

What I find interesting, I don't know if this is true for anybody else, is that by the end I disliked Tom the most. He was the less overtly cruel, but the false hope that he gave her was disgusting. We all do that, when we are "just being nice", but this extreme example shows the harm it can bring. Chuck took advantage of her physically, but Tom took advantage of her kindness and used her as an object for his theory. It makes a great case against seeing humans as numbers. The content was very provocative and held me like no other and the style ... Either Ebert or Roeper said that the style exhausted itself, but each time I though Von Trier couldn't add to the story with the style, he proved me wrong. From the "that we shall not mention" to when she is in the truck. I can't believe Elephant won the award.

DanielBenoit

01-05-2010, 06:38 PM

Hate hate hate: I don't remember if I ever hated a movie. There have been a few that I have disliked. When I hate a movie, it's mostly because someone defends it from my criticism:lol:. Crash is an example. There's good acting, good directing (I guess), but the script is horrible. There's no truth to it; I guess this is what I mean by personal resonance. For all the style, there isn't any truth to the movie. I can't believe it passed for gritty realism ... I hate it.:lol:

And just when I thought people were hating on it because it had beaten Brokeback Mountain at the Oscars. I find your criticism to be geniune. But I mildly disagree. I found it to be a momentually powerful film with greatly profound twists and moments. But it was admittingly too melodramatic and obvious to stand up to the greatest film made about race in America, Do the Right Thing.

I can't believe Elephant won the award.

No, I'm glad Elephant won. Trier already won for Dancer in the Dark, and Elephant for me was even more profound and masterfully well made. My #8 pick for best films of the decade.

Btw, as a note on Trier, I think he may be the most skilled audience puller since Hitchcock, and certainly the most sadistic. As a result some of his films feel condesending towards the audience and sometimes even cruel. But he is still a masterful director, and has got to be one of THE most powerful filmmakers to ever live next to Dreyer and Bergman.

Hey, since it's well past the end of the decade and I've been so busy these past few weeks, I'll just complete decade list of reviews I've been posting on my blog and just reveal the rest here (oooh big deal). I'll include the rest of the reviews soon on my blog.

10. Gosford Park - Robert Altman
9. Elephant - Gus van Sant
8. Man Push Cart - Ramin Bahrani
7. The Curious Case of Benjeman Button - David Fincher
6. The Aviator - Martin Scorsese
5. Where the Wild Things Are - Spike Jonzes
4. Tarnation - Jonathan Cauette / Mulholland Drive - David Lynch
3. Chop Shop - Ramin Bahrani
2. City of God - Fernando Meirelles
1. Werckmeister Harmonies - Bela Tarr

NickAdams

01-05-2010, 07:17 PM

And just when I thought people were hating on it because it had beaten Brokeback Mountain at the Oscars. I find your criticism to be geniune. But I mildly disagree. I found it to be a momentually powerful film with greatly profound twists and moments.

I always cringe when every character in an ensemble piece talks about the theme and even that would be okay, but having them "crash" into each other amounts "when propaganda goes wrong". A greatly executed ensemble piece is Magnolia and the characters this film exist beyond the theme. The have personal lives and needs, but the connect. Crash is just such a contrivance.

But it was admittingly too melodramatic and obvious to stand up to the greatest film made about race in America, Do the Right Thing.

Do the Right Thing is another movie you can add to your list of so bad it's good.:lol: I'm just in a goofy mood today. I'm not a big fan of Do the Right Thing (my money is on Bamboozled), but you're right. My criticism of Crash doesn't hold up when applied to Lee's "joint". It was the early 90's, it was hot (which is really more significant that I would have guessed, but NYC in the summer can get out of hand) and it was concentrated. Do the Right Thing is plausible, but Crash isn't even poetically plausible. I'll give Crash one thing: that whole thing with the invisible cape was great, cheesy or not, it was delivered well.

My #8 pick for best films of the decade.

I know. I'm still waiting on your full review of your top three. Come on Daniel.:D

Btw, as a note on Trier, I think he may be the most skilled audience puller since Hitchcock, and certainly the most sadistic. As a result some of his films feel condesending towards the audience and sometimes even cruel. But he is still a masterful director, and has got to be one of THE most powerful filmmakers to ever live next to Dreyer and Bergman.

I do get the same feeling when watching a Bergman film. Before I discovered Beckett, discovered in the way Columbus did;), Hemingway and Faulkner were my top guys in literature and Kubrick and Bergman in cinema. I got the same out of watching a Kubrick film as I did reading Hemingway (not so much anymore) and Bergman felt the same as Faulkner. But, Dogville and Dancer in the Dark produced the exact sensation in me that Sanctuary and Light in August did when I first read them. Though, Von Trier doesn't resonate the way Bergman does. To think that Bergman's last film came out this past decade and it hasn't received a wink since it was released.

DanielBenoit

01-05-2010, 07:24 PM

Do the Right Thing is another movie you can add to your list of so bad it's good.:lol: I'm just in a goofy mood today. I'm not a big fan of Do the Right Thing (my money is on Bamboozled), but you're right.

:eek:Now that's just blasphomey! You are in a goofy mood today. I just don't understand that. The Room + Do the Right Thing = Contradiction in the purest sense.

NickAdams

01-05-2010, 07:53 PM

:eek:Now that's just blasphomey! You are in a goofy mood today. I just don't understand that. The Room + Do the Right Thing = Contradiction in the purest sense.

:lol:
The problem with Do the Right Thing is that it was given to me as a Christmas gift, that I asked for, and it just wasn't what I expected (years of hype). I was actually impressed by some of the style, particularly Radio Raheem's love/hate speech. What I liked about the film is that it was about racism, yes, but the way the day went it just happened to be what pushed them over the edge; something else could have provoked the climax and that just shows that Spike showed us people leaving and not thematic mouthpieces.

Where did you see The Room?! Was it on Adult Swim or did you catch it in theaters? I haven't seen it, but the clips on youtube are hilarious.

JuniperWoolf

01-05-2010, 07:58 PM

Also, what films have you seen that you, in Ebert's words "hated hated hated hated hated"?

Blindness. Oh god, I hated it. I hated it so much. Even thinking about that *&^% right now fills me with rage. I have an undying hatred of that wretched garbage. I despised it on so many levels. *spit* I WOULD punch the people responsible for that movie right in the face.

DanielBenoit

01-05-2010, 08:07 PM

:lol:
The problem with Do the Right Thing is that it was given to me as a Christmas gift, that I asked for, and it just wasn't what I expected (years of hype). I was actually impressed by some of the style, particularly Radio Raheem's love/hate speech. What I liked about the film is that it was about racism, yes, but the way the day went it just happened to be what pushed them over the edge; something else could have provoked the climax and that just shows that Spike showed us people leaving and not thematic mouthpieces.

Okay, there are some scenes in the film like when Mookie talks to John Tuturro's character about his racial insensitivity, and while I would usually be bothered by moral blabbering, it works in Do the Right Thing because it is a masterful juxtaposition of style throughout the history of cinema. From gritty handheld long shots to sweeping classical Hollywood aerial shots. All of the speeches in the film are important for establishing the dualities of the characters and ironically, the engimaticy of the director.

Btw, Radio's love/hate speech is a direct quotation from The Night of the Hunter, one of the greatest films ever to come out of classical Hollywood.

Where did you see The Room?! Was it on Adult Swim or did you catch it in theaters? I haven't seen it, but the clips on youtube are hilarious.

Saw it on Adult Swim. The funniest non-comedy I've ever seen. It is endlessly quotable, but my typing does not do justice to Wisaeu's magnificently incomprehensible voice.

"I did not hit her, it's not true. It's bull****. I did not hit her. I did naaaaaaat. Oh hi Mark."

"Oh hi Johnnie."

"I have a problem. It's Lisa. She sd that ah hit her."

"Whaaat? Well did you?"

"No man it's not true don't even ask. . . . . . .So what's up with you?"

"Oh I'm just sitting up here thinking."

Blindness. Oh god, I hated it. I hated it so much. Even thinking about that *&^% right now fills me with rage. I have an undying hatred of that wretched garbage. I despised it on so many levels. *spit* I WOULD punch the people responsible for that movie right in the face.

Yeah! What's even worse is that it was directed by Fernando Meirelles, the great man who directed City of God. It was probably the biggest disappointment I've ever had at the movies.

Janine

01-05-2010, 09:01 PM

:lol:
It's funny you say that about the ending. I was ready to throw my DVD player across the room when Grace was defending the town. I don't know what it says about me, but I was more than happy with her decision.

I am not sure what you mean on this. It sounds good, but I am confused. Can you explain this better? I doubt I would ever watch that film again...as I said I groan whenever I see it. I liked it for about the first hour, thinking this is something really different; then I the tide turned for me and I got sick of it. I also wanted to throw my DVD player across the room or better yet hail rotten tomatoes at the screen!...but then I would have to clean it up myself.

What I find interesting, I don't know if this is true for anybody else, is that by the end I disliked Tom the most. He was the less overtly cruel, but the false hope that he gave her was disgusting. We all do that, when we are "just being nice", but this extreme example shows the harm it can bring. Chuck took advantage of her physically, but Tom took advantage of her kindness and used her as an object for his theory. It makes a great case against seeing humans as numbers. The content was very provocative and held me like no other and the style ... Either Ebert or Roeper said that the style exhausted itself, but each time I though Von Trier couldn't add to the story with the style, he proved me wrong. From the "that we shall not mention" to when she is in the truck. I can't believe Elephant won the award.

Was Tom the character played by Paul Betany? I have always liked his acting and so that was my main reason for venturing to see "Dogville" to begin with.

Either Ebert or Roeper said that the style exhausted itself, but each time I though Von Trier couldn't add to the story with the style, he proved me wrong. Exactly how I felt - it just exhausted itself way before the ending. Von Trier - was that her father? I can't recall now and again I say, I won't watch it again. Patricia Clarkson began to wear on my nerves...sometimes she has that effect on me. I liked her better in "Pharaoh's Army"...thought that was an interesting story which caught my interest. I know she's a fine actress, but she tends to exasperate me...I am not sure exactly why...I am sure that's just personal choice...she so often plays such depressing characters.

NickAdams

01-05-2010, 11:40 PM

I di naht like that film. O, hi Daniel.:lol:
I always tell myself that I need to see a film twice before I can give an accurate critique. I've seen Do the Right Thing once. You have convinced me to watch it again. How can I say no to the man that introduced me to Tarr.

I am not sure what you mean on this. It sounds good, but I am confused. Can you explain this better? I doubt I would ever watch that film again...as I said I groan whenever I see it. I liked it for about the first hour, thinking this is something really different; then I the tide turned for me and I got sick of it. I also wanted to throw my DVD player across the room or better yet hail rotten tomatoes at the screen!...but then I would have to clean it up myself.

When you said you really hated it when it came to the ending, I assumed you were referring to the execution of the town.

There is no real justice for what Grace went through, but I would have been devastated if they didn't execute the towns people. Her situation really got under my skin.

Was Tom the character played by Paul Betany? I have always liked his acting and so that was my main reason for venturing to see "Dogville" to begin with.

Yup, that was him. I really responded to his character in the beginning, but my how he revealed himself. I have to give credit to his performence.

Exactly how I felt - it just exhausted itself way before the ending. Von Trier - was that her father? I can't recall now and again I say, I won't watch it again. Patricia Clarkson began to wear on my nerves...sometimes she has that effect on me. I liked her better in "Pharaoh's Army"...thought that was an interesting story which caught my interest. I know she's a fine actress, but she tends to exasperate me...I am not sure exactly why...I am sure that's just personal choice...she so often plays such depressing characters.

Von Trier is the director/writer. I think the style added some much to the tension that was already there. Even though we know that characters see what the chalk lines represent, it always felt like she was being watched, or escape was futile. Like when she was trying to escape and is going behind the house to the truck, we could see how close the towns people were and it felt like she might be caught at any moment. Or when Chuck, the Skarsgard character, was having his way with Grace, we can see the town going about their business and we know there isn't any hope for her and when Tom stops outside of the house and pauses as if he might go in- such tension.

When it came to Patricia Clarkson, I could only think of how attractive she is.:blush:

Babbalanja

01-06-2010, 06:59 AM

Dogville...ugh...how I suffered...
I feel your pain.

I liked Von Trier's creepy 80's movies like Zentropa and Element of the Crime, but he's really lost it. Dogville was one of the worst movies I've ever seen.

The conceit is that it's supposed to resemble a filmed stageplay, but the director isn't true to his vision: if the drama itself had power, it wouldn't need the sappy narration. But the movie seems like you're watching the cast of a soap opera improvising trite dialogue. Nothing real is happening here: what Appalachian town in the Depression didn't have an expensive curio shoppe?

Von Trier insists on having no barriers onstage, so the cast has to knock on doors that aren't there. But at the end, when the gangster appears, an important scene takes place inside his enclosed car. This violates the whole dramatic basis of the movie. And James Caan's wacky-wacky style was great in Honeymoon in Vegas, but is painfully out of place in the doom and gloom of Dogville.

The stagy artifice also has people using invisible rakes, for instance. But you can be sure that when Grace has a leash on, dammit, it's gotta be a real chain. The less said about Kidman's whimpering performance the better.

And what better way to wrap up a gritty experimental drama about America in the 1930's than to play David Bowie's disco hit "Young Americans" as the credits roll? It's just the last bad idea in a movie that was a long, long series of them.

Regards,

istvan

sixsmith

01-06-2010, 08:46 AM

1970s

1. Apocalypse Now
2. Taxi Driver
3. Badlands
4. The Deer Hunter
5. The Godfather

1980s

1. Amadeus
2. Raging Bull
3. Platoon
4. The Natural
5. Blue Velvet

1990s

1. Goodfellas
2. Princess Mononoke
3. Unforgiven
4. Dances with Wolves
5. Crash

2000s

1. Downfall
2. Brokeback Mountain
3. No Country for Old Men
4. Mulholland Drive
5. The Proposition

DanielBenoit

01-06-2010, 12:55 PM

1. Downfall

Very nice choice. I never thought I would ever be able to view that movie again after watching all of the youtube parodies of Hitler reacting to the loss of the war. His performance is by far the greatest portrayal of Hitler in all of cinema. It is a spiteful and unsympathetic portrayal, but still presents him as a human and not some robot. It makes him all the more horrific, the fact that he was in fact able to feel human emotions, and yet could do all of those monstorous things.

I feel your pain.

Oh idk. Von Trier is a director who is strictly not for everyone. He is one of those directors who can be both loved and hated at the same time. He is an aquired taste. The end.

Janine

01-06-2010, 05:49 PM

I feel your pain.

I liked Von Trier's creepy 80's movies like Zentropa and Element of the Crime, but he's really lost it. Dogville was one of the worst movies I've ever seen.

The conceit is that it's supposed to resemble a filmed stageplay, but the director isn't true to his vision: if the drama itself had power, it wouldn't need the sappy narration. But the movie seems like you're watching the cast of a soap opera improvising trite dialogue. Nothing real is happening here: what Appalachian town in the Depression didn't have an expensive curio shoppe?

Von Trier insists on having no barriers onstage, so the cast has to knock on doors that aren't there. But at the end, when the gangster appears, an important scene takes place inside his enclosed car. This violates the whole dramatic basis of the movie. And James Caan's wacky-wacky style was great in Honeymoon in Vegas, but is painfully out of place in the doom and gloom of Dogville.

The stagy artifice also has people using invisible rakes, for instance. But you can be sure that when Grace has a leash on, dammit, it's gotta be a real chain. The less said about Kidman's whimpering performance the better.

And what better way to wrap up a gritty experimental drama about America in the 1930's than to play David Bowie's disco hit "Young Americans" as the credits roll? It's just the last bad idea in a movie that was a long, long series of them.

Regards,

istvan

I am afraid I have to completely agree with this. I thought Kidman whimpering, even whining just too much to take. It was grueling getting through the movie. I never turn one off and abandon a film, without seeing it through to the end. I suffered till the end of this one for certain. I started out liking it and thinking - how incredibly innovative it was...then the longer I had to endure it, the worse I felt. It was so drawn out and when she was given the ball and chain, they then lost me...I was like...no way, this has gone too far. When Cain entered the picture I think began my total hatred of the film. I thought the same thing about the car and invisible boundries...I didn't like his performance at all and I felt like it really plummeted by that point. The ending was totally disturbing and insane....but then again maybe that was the idea of it. I certainly was squirming in my seat by that point....but it may have been from my legs going numb and my back aching...:lol:

Sorry, Daniel, I am definitely on the side of the 'haters' on this one!

DanielBenoit

01-06-2010, 06:22 PM

Another one! What films do you find to be terribly overrated? I know I am bound to cringe because some people are bound to list Citizen Kane or 2001: A Space Odyssey :(

me:
Chicago
Titanic
The Lord of the Rings Trilogy (great movie though)
The Blindside (mainly because this has captured the general public)
Wild Strawberries (believe me I was moved by this film and it is a great film with great peformances, but to call it Bergman's best is overrating it)
High Noon
Million Dollar Baby
Braveheart
Scarface (just didn't work for me, felt like a cheap 80's film untin the final act)
Gladiator (wtf, the most overrated movie of the decade)
Dirty Dancing
Wild at Heart (very good film, but the fact that this one won the Palme d'Or is enough to call it overrated)

How about some underrated?

Werckmeister Harmonies (most neglected great movie of the decade)
Satantango
Shoah (most depressing film ever made)
Synecdoche, New York (why all the hate?)
The Thin Red Line
Gummo
Man Push Cart
Chop Shop
Tarnation
My Man Godfrey
Chimes at Midnight (this low-budget gem directed and starring Orson Welles in an adaptation of Henry IV is a forgotten gem from the 60's, starving for a restoration)
October
F for Fake (most complex and interesting documentary film ever made)
The Brown Bunny
Clockers
Songs from the Second Floor
We, the Living
Even Dwarfs Started Small
Broken Blossoms
Wings of Desire
Inland Empire
The Mission (yes this won the Palme d'Or, was nominated at the Oscars, but that was in 1986, who has ever heard of it today? I mean, it stars Robert DeNero)
The Grey Zone

sixsmith

01-06-2010, 08:22 PM

Very nice choice. I never thought I would ever be able to view that movie again after watching all of the youtube parodies of Hitler reacting to the loss of the war. His performance is by far the greatest portrayal of Hitler in all of cinema. It is a spiteful and unsympathetic portrayal, but still presents him as a human and not some robot. It makes him all the more horrific, the fact that he was in fact able to feel human emotions, and yet could do all of those monstorous things.

A remarkable film and a truly remarkable performance from Ganz.

Janine

01-07-2010, 02:41 AM

Daniel, I love "The Thin Red Line"...saw it in your list. Who's performance of Hitler are you speaking of? Sorry, I seem to have lost track here and also not really listing in decades as you started this thread doing.

Anyway, I just had to throw this out there; I just saw Powell's film: "A Matter of Life and Death" (1946) ...pretty amazing and incredibly creative and ahead of it's time. Interesting how Heaven is perceived in b/w/graytones and life is vibrant color. I loved the film, especially the staircase/escalator scene.

Babbalanja

01-07-2010, 06:43 AM

Just so I don't come off as a hater...

I think Bruce Robinson's early films are underrated. Withnail and I is a cult classic about struggling actors in the 60's, but the surreal comedy deserves to be on the cultural radar. His follow-up How to Get Ahead in Advertising was a bizarre satire that sums up the 80's: greed and madness. Both benefit from maniacal performances by Richard E. Grant.

Hal Hartley also made some significant films in the early part of his career. Movies like The Unbelievable Truth and Trust were droll, wordy comedies that made him seem like a Long Island Beckett. Henry Fool is probably his best film, humane and sardonic at the same time.

Julio Medem is the Hal Hartley of Spain, with his deadpan sense of humor and quirky imagination. He's known on these shores for his surreal, sexy romances Lovers of the Arctic Circle and Sex and Lucia.

I already mentioned that I loved Lars von Trier's out-there films of the 80's, the frightening post-WWII fantasy Zentropa and the thriller Element of the Crime.

I still say Heathers was the best teen comedy ever made. And Clueless was a lot smarter than it let on.

It seems too obvious to list works by Wes Anderson, Jim Jarmusch, and the Coen Brothers, but their work always appeals to me.

And in the so-bad-it's-good category, I have to nominate The Wicker Man. Hypnotically bad. It has everything: atrocious acting, nonsensical plot, strange musical numbers, and a laughable finale. I'd watch it again in a second.

Regards,

Istvan

kilted exile

01-07-2010, 12:09 PM

DanielBenoit

01-07-2010, 12:33 PM

6 pages and still no mention of the greatest film ever made: On the waterfront. Excellence from both Malden & Brando together again with Kazan, whose abilities as a director are seen so clearly in the scene where Brando tells Saint's character how he was responsible for the death of her brother - you dont need to hear the dialogue to understand how tortured both of them are - something scorsese later makes use of in his own way in taxi diver where the camera pans away from de niro's character while he is on the phone - we dont need to see de niro's face it is all in the voice.

You know some people are going to be suprised, me being such a movie buff: I have never seen On the Waterfront. It's one of those films that has been on my "Must See" list for quite a while but I never got around to watching it. That along with Rashomon, Fight Club, A Streetcar Named Desire, Sunrise, etc.

Janine

01-07-2010, 04:09 PM

You know some people are going to be suprised, me being such a movie buff: I have never seen On the Waterfront. It's one of those films that has been on my "Must See" list for quite a while but I never got around to watching it. That along with Rashomon, Fight Club, A Streetcar Named Desire, Sunrise, etc.

I am one who is totally surprised, Daniel. It's such a classic film...one of my alltime favorites! Kilted, everything you said about it is exactly correct. The acting is superb. One can hardly top the film. I am about due to see it again. It only gets better with time.

And Daniel, you have never seen "A Streetcar Named Desire" ? I am again stunned. It's a great film...'method acting', intense and really amazingly engaging...they don't make films like this anymore.

Speaking of 'method acting', I recently saw the James Dean film, "East of Eden"...I totally loved the film. I may rewatch that one tonight. I also loved "Rebel Without a Cause". A shame the gifted Dean died so young and so tragically.

NickAdams

01-07-2010, 06:19 PM

I don't know if it's so bad it's good (I don't know if I consider it bad), but I love The Man Who Knew Too Little with Bill Murray.

Gladiator, lol. If it wasn't for Joaquin Phoenix, I wouldn't have sat through it a second time.

I am afraid I have to completely agree with this. I thought Kidman whimpering, even whining just too much to take. It was grueling getting through the movie. I never turn one off and abandon a film, without seeing it through to the end. I suffered till the end of this one for certain. I started out liking it and thinking - how incredibly innovative it was...then the longer I had to endure it, the worse I felt. It was so drawn out and when she was given the ball and chain, they then lost me...I was like...no way, this has gone too far. When Cain entered the picture I think began my total hatred of the film. I thought the same thing about the car and invisible boundries...I didn't like his performance at all and I felt like it really plummeted by that point. The ending was totally disturbing and insane....but then again maybe that was the idea of it. I certainly was squirming in my seat by that point....but it may have been from my legs going numb and my back aching...:lol:

Sorry, Daniel, I am definitely on the side of the 'haters' on this one!

I'm not a fan of Cain either, but in regards to the car it's established that vehicles (that which is able to leave the town of Dogville) are concrete. It's interesting to note the when Grace attempts to escape from Dogville in the truck we can see through the tarp and we discover that she hasn't left the town, but it doesn't happen to Cain's car and it is in this vehicle that she leaves successfully.

I can understand why someone wouldn't like the film. I wouldn't want to spend time with someone who whimpers in life, but when it comes to cinema it seems as if it's more of a fact than criticism. There are certain behaviors that aren't enjoyed on screen, but I don't think they should be excluded.

I find Brando's early films too odd to totally enjoy. His performances expose the staginess of the actors around him:

a scene from On The Waterfront (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wI2mjRApo-s)

You know some people are going to be suprised, me being such a movie buff: I have never seen On the Waterfront. It's one of those films that has been on my "Must See" list for quite a while but I never got around to watching it. That along with Rashomon, Fight Club, A Streetcar Named Desire, Sunrise, etc.

I'm surprised that you get in as many films as you do.

DanielBenoit

01-07-2010, 07:24 PM

I am one who is totally surprised, Daniel. It's such a classic film...one of my alltime favorites! Kilted, everything you said about it is exactly correct. The acting is superb. One can hardly top the film. I am about due to see it again. It only gets better with time.

I must also be ashamed to admit that I never even knew of Luis Bunuel until a couple of months ago. Though I am suprised I've never seen On the Waterfront. I usually know my classics top from bottom ;)

I'm surprised that you get in as many films as you do.

Lol, so am I.

DanielBenoit

01-13-2010, 09:48 PM

NickAdams

01-14-2010, 10:34 AM

It's official, the general consensious is that Mulholland Drive is the best film of the decade. Yays! It truly is David Lynch's masterpiece and probably, IMHO, the most immersive dream-film since Bunuel's L'Age D'or. Now that may be somewhat of an overstatment, but it certainly is the greatest work of cinematic surrealism since the likes of Fellini and Bunuel.

The one thing that keeps it from being pure surrealism, for me at least, is the last third in which Betty becomes Diane. But, Lynch never confirmed this interpretation and the film may be a little more complex than that. What's interesting though is that if surrealism is the dream of reality then Mulholland Drive is the dream of cinema (surcinemaism?:lol:). I just think it's wonderful (wundervoll!) how Lynch took cinematic cliches/camp and turned it into dream symbolism (intentionally or unintentionally, of course).

DanielBenoit

01-14-2010, 01:01 PM

The one thing that keeps it from being pure surrealism, for me at least, is the last third in which Betty becomes Diane. But, Lynch never confirmed this interpretation and the film may be a little more complex than that. What's interesting though is that if surrealism is the dream of reality then Mulholland Drive is the dream of cinema (surcinemaism?:lol:). I just think it's wonderful (wundervoll!) how Lynch took cinematic cliches/camp and turned it into dream symbolism (intentionally or unintentionally, of course).

Usually Lynch in his past films self-consciously used camp or satirical pastiche, but sometimes to an indulgent extent (Wild at Heart). But Mulholland Drive achieves that tone perfectly and as a result becomes more surreal due to its self-conscious artificiality.

Also the meta-cinematic surrealism of the film (that's the word :lol:) is great because it, as you said, becomes not a dream of reality, but a dream of movies.

I once had a perfect theory about the final third of the film, but I've now forgotten, having not seen it for a bit of a while.

I suppose the aspect I liked most was the love story between Betty and Rita. Lynch treats it with passion and yet with surreal silent emotion.

Such a great film.