What is the last movie you saw? and rate it.

[_Shannon_]

I'm trying to think what I saw last...I watched the first installment of Cranford this past SUnday on Masterpiece Theater...and then before that I think it was War of the Worlds-the one with Tom Cruise . It was actually really good--it's the first movie that's scared me in a long time!

[Janine]

I gave my rating on this a few days ago. I loved the movie. LOVED IT!!! How it didn't win for cinematography is beyond me!!

Hi Lady Wentworth! haven't seen you for awhile. That is right - you were the one who reviewed it. I skimmed the thread and did see your post, sorry about that.
I don't know how it did not win; it was truly well done. At first when the train is robbed I gasped when I saw the silouette of Sam Sheppard standing on the pilings as the train approaches round the bend and then illuminates the mistly scene - that was just marvelous! I guess there were many good films last year with amazing cinematography. I am sure it was a difficult decision. Was this film even nominated for cinematography, do you know?

Anyway, I have to be a little know-it-all for a second, if that is OK. Is it?

No problem at all. I like hearing more information on things such as historical.

I was down in that area of Missouri just last year (LOVE the Jesse James Farm - one of my absolute favorite places that I have EVER been to!). It is beautiful down in Missouri, but it doesn't look like that. I noticed at the end of the film that it was filmed in Canada (I think it was Alberta). So, honestly, I was a little disappointed that it wasn't actually filmed in that countryside, at least.

That really does sound interesting; especially if you has a fascination before this. I can well understand it. How lucky you were to visit these areas. I did hear it was filmed in Canada, but most are these days - it seems to be less expensive and mimic the areas in the old west or the midwest. I can't see how the poor actors can be subjected to such harsh cold temperatures though. I always watch the extras on the DVD's and in the Making Of you always see the crew in heavy jackets and the poor actors so bare - they must be freezing to death. It may also be they could not get permission to film at the actual farm site because that is an active tourist area - right? It maybe Federally owned, also.

Pointless little thing that I want to say here. I stayed in St. Joseph (the town he last lived in). It is a bustling city. In the film there are just those few homes around and it isn't like that now, of course. But I found that interesting, for some odd reason. I never thought about that before that during his time it wouldn't have been like it is now. I just thought that was an odd little thing that I found interestng.

Never pointless. I find it all interesting. You were so lucky to be able to visit these historic areas.

I said it before and I will say it again. I loved Casey Affleck in here! Fantastic! Nothing else to say about it!

Yes, I agree - he was just great from the first time we encounter him in the film. I don't ever recall seeing him in other films. What has he been in, do you know. I do think he was good and his performance was quite nuanced, never overdone, but subtle.

I think I will have to buy the soundtrack to this film (I already know that I will buy the DVD).

I liked the soundtrack, in conjuction with the film, but to me it got quite redundant. I don't really think I would like it alone. I would have to hear it first on CD. It did support the film well with an edgy mood.

It is funny because as soon as I saw that picture of the horse in the background I remembered it. I actually forgot that I saw it when I was there! But I immediately recognized it. I loved that farm and I would love to go back there again. I didn't get a chance to make it to the home in St. Joseph. That is an excuse to make it back there!

I hope you get a chance to go back and see it someday.

Another comment on the film for me would be this film might not be for everyone. Some may hate it. I don't think any of the characters were that likable; afterall, Jesse James was complex and strange at times, and he could be quite ruthless, as well. He may have been seen as a hero, a kind of modern day Robin Hood, but he did some horrific things. I am glad the film-makers and director did not dwell on bloody scenes. They cut at the right time. I don't know what I ended up thinking of Bob at the end. I felt all the characters might have been delved into a little more. I know - that is hard to explain - but I felt it did cut short of telling us the 'why' of how James became became as he was or got involved as an outlaw. I do feel we saw a lot of confliction in the characters; if anything I saw more of the reasons behind the character of Bob Ford; yet I never truly felt empathy for him entirely, not sure why. I felt the time period was depicted very well and like I said before the structure and the cinamatography of the film, I felt was it's strengths. I liked the idea of the bad guys against the bad guys; but normally I hate ganster/mob films, and basically, this was a mob/gang film to me set in the midwest; however the psycological aspects of it, did pull one in and is does stay on ones mind, after viewing it...it certainly had an impact.

[LadyWentworth]

I don't know how it did not win; it was truly well done. At first when the train is robbed I gasped when I saw the silouette of Sam Sheppard standing on the pilings as the train approaches round the bend and then illuminates the mistly scene - that was just marvelous! I guess there were many good films last year with amazing cinematography. I am sure it was a difficult decision. Was this film even nominated for cinematography, do you know?

Yes, I really liked that scene. I thought that it was brilliant. I loved how they made it look exactly how it would look as if it were a train rolling by in the dead of night. That was, perhaps, my favorite of the film. Yes, it was nominated for an Oscar. "There Will Be Blood" won it instead. TWBB was good, but there is absolutely no comparison between the look of the two films. No comparison. I just don't understand it.

That really does sound interesting; especially if you has a fascination before this. I can well understand it. How lucky you were to visit these areas. I did hear it was filmed in Canada, but most are these days - it seems to be less expensive and mimic the areas in the old west or the midwest. I can't see how the poor actors can be subjected to such harsh cold temperatures though. I always watch the extras on the DVD's and in the Making Of you always see the crew in heavy jackets and the poor actors so bare - they must be freezing to death. It may also be they could not get permission to film at the actual farm site because that is an active tourist area - right? It maybe Federally owned, also.

No, actually, the farm (it is located in Kearney, Missouri) isn't federally owned. Well, it wouldn't have needed to be filmed at the farm at all, anyway. The house, well, it couldn't have been filmed there. Like I said, St. Jospeh is a bustling town. You need the quietness of what we saw on film. But there is a lot of countryside down there that they could've used. Missouri is such a pretty state. Such a shame it wasn't filmed there.

My guess is that MAYBE it was a tax thing. Wisconsin finally lowered the taxes for films to be made here. That is why that new Johnny Depp movie, "Public Enemies", is able to film on location at different places here. So, I figured that is why it wasn't filmed down in Missouri. That is just an assumption, of course.

Yes, I agree - he was just great from the first time we encounter him in the film. I don't ever recall seeing him in other films. What has he been in, do you know. I do think he was good and his performance was quite nuanced, never overdone, but subtle.

Well, I thought he was so strange when he first appeared on screen. I, too, liked his subtle performance (which I tend to like over the really dramatic ones - it seems more realistic to me). I also liked that with the subtly you can see the change in Ford's character. He was nominated for an Oscar for this. I know he was nominated, and won, other awards for this role, too.

He has been in a bunch of things. Most notably, he was in all 3 of the "Ocean's" movies, "To Die For" (the film with Nicole Kidman and Joaquin Pheonix) and he was in "Gone, Baby, Gone" (Ben's film that he directed - I haven't seen it yet).

I have to say, though, that if you ever saw the real Bob Ford, Casey Affleck was a very good choice to play the part!

Another comment on the film for me would be this film might not be for everyone. Some may hate it.

I know people who didn't like it because they had no attention span. That is OK. I personally love long movies. Someone said it was a half an hour too long. I think that is ridiculous. FINALLY we get to actually SEE what happens at the end of a story, or someone's life, rather than have to sit there and just read the words that they put up on the screen. Know what I mean? I liked it a lot more that they actually played it out all the way until the end.

I don't think any of the characters were that likable; afterall, Jesse James was complex and strange at times, and he could be quite ruthless, as well. He may have been seen as a hero, a kind of modern day Robin Hood, but he did some horrific things. I am glad the film-makers and director did not dwell on bloody scenes. They cut at the right time. I don't know what I ended up thinking of Bob at the end. I felt all the characters might have been delved into a little more. I know - that is hard to explain - but I felt it did cut short of telling us the 'why' of how James became became as he was or got involved as an outlaw. I do feel we saw a lot of confliction in the characters; if anything I saw more of the reasons behind the character of Bob Ford; yet I never truly felt empathy for him entirely, not sure why. I felt the time period was depicted very well and like I said before the structure and the cinamatography of the film, I felt was it's strengths. I liked the idea of the bad guys against the bad guys; but normally I hate ganster/mob films, and basically, this was a mob/gang film to me set in the midwest; however the psycological aspects of it, did pull one in and is does stay on ones mind, after viewing it...it certainly had an impact.

Of course, none of the characters are likable. They are all outlaws. None of them are good people. I personally don't understand why people treat Jesse James as a saint. I still find his life interesting, though. He was a ruthless person. I think that is what makes a lot of people conjure this image of this "great" figure. Especially if they combine it with the supposed Robin Hood tales. Of course, all of those stories in dime novels and such didn't help his "legend" any.

I can't say I really feel anything for Bob Ford either. I don't think anyone will really know why he killed him, but I think Ford did it mainly for money and he was a little envious. He was only 20. I don't normally use an age as an excuse for anything, but I think in this case he was young and stupid. But he wasn't a likable person either.

The only person that I ever truly felt bad for was his wife, Zee (who was his cousin, by the way).

As for delving into the characters more, I personally don't think it was necessary. After all, this wasn't about the life of Jesse James. This was about the assassination. I think that to begin to tell the story from where Bob Ford would come in was a good idea. For the people who know the James Brothers (and Ford Brothers, I guess), they don't need to know anymore about them. But for people who are watching this story without that much prior knowledge, I think it was a wise move to keep those people guessing and wondering how these people came to be what they were. I think it helped with the whole psychological effect of the film.

I will say this, though, that if you went to that farm (more so than reading any books, actually), you can see how Jesse's and Frank's lives were. You can understand how they ended up this way. I AM NOT CONDONING. I am saying that you can understand the characters more. He was in the Civil War. After the war, he became what a lot of those men did. He became a train robber, bank robber, murderer and outlaw. There is more to the story, but I won't bore anyone anymore than I already have.

[browneyedbailey]

The "Bee Movie" 4.5/10

[Rakthor]

Iron Man 4.5/5
It was a damn good movie, if I say so myself. It was quite enjoyable, very entertaining, and did what it set out to do. Also, the fact that Jeff Bridges was in it gives it the extra half point. Seeing The Dude (Big Lebowski, anyone?) being evil and bald was really weird and fun. I'm glad that Robert Downey Jr. has stopped abusing those substances. This is his first leading role in quite some time, if I'm not mistaken. Good to see he's back on his feet with a successful new gig. Anyways, the movie itself was one of the better films I've seen this far. One of the highlights of going to see it was actually the credits before the movie. The new Batman trailer and the new Hulk trailer were shown almost back to back. That's pure sex right there. Hopefully the new Hulk film won't be as god-awfully wretched as the one in '03. Well, it has Liv Tyler. That's a redeeming quality by itself. But again, I digress. So, Iron Man. Good film. Would definitely see.
Rakthor Out

[Janine]

Yes, I really liked that scene. I thought that it was brilliant. I loved how they made it look exactly how it would look as if it were a train rolling by in the dead of night. That was, perhaps, my favorite of the film. Yes, it was nominated for an Oscar. "There Will Be Blood" won it instead. TWBB was good, but there is absolutely no comparison between the look of the two films. No comparison. I just don't understand it.

Interesting, Lady Wentworth, I didn't realize it was nominated for the Oscar and lost. Was it nominated for the cinematography only? That was a brilliant scene and suspenseful - that tall figure and image in silouette, stayed with me for some reason, and the way the train rolled around that bend, puffing out white smoke against that blackness of night....amazing.

No, actually, the farm (it is located in Kearney, Missouri) isn't federally owned. Well, it wouldn't have needed to be filmed at the farm at all, anyway. The house, well, it couldn't have been filmed there. Like I said, St. Jospeh is a bustling town. You need the quietness of what we saw on film. But there is a lot of countryside down there that they could've used. Missouri is such a pretty state. Such a shame it wasn't filmed there.

I guess they estimated the cost and something held them back from filming there. I wish the DVD had had some extras on it like "The Making"; that would have revealed why they decided on Canada, instead of Missouri. I was disppointed there were no extras. I thought they would have a bio of Jesse James, or information on Bob Ford. That would have been great. I did go online and found a very good site with photos; I am always curious this way and love doing additional research. More on that below.....

My guess is that MAYBE it was a tax thing. Wisconsin finally lowered the taxes for films to be made here. That is why that new Johnny Depp movie, "Public Enemies", is able to film on location at different places here. So, I figured that is why it wasn't filmed down in Missouri. That is just an assumption, of course.

It could have been a tax thing. I didn't know about that new film. Is it "Public Enemies" or "Public Enemy" because I have heard of the second in a older play and an older film. I want to know more about this now. Hummm...a new role for JD..cool.

Well, I thought he was so strange when he first appeared on screen. I, too, liked his subtle performance (which I tend to like over the really dramatic ones - it seems more realistic to me). I also liked that with the subtly you can see the change in Ford's character. He was nominated for an Oscar for this. I know he was nominated, and won, other awards for this role, too.

I always like the sutle performances better and I love closeup shots of faces. I saw a film recently where the director even zeroed in on parts of the face. I found that to be quite interesting and quite expression - one eye can say so much, it is amazing. I liked that scene in the parlor and the tention at the end, too. Performances were amazing at that point. I don't want to give away anything to those who did not see the film. Glad he was nominated - Casey Afleck did a fine job! So he did win some awards for this performance? He did deserve it.

He has been in a bunch of things. Most notably, he was in all 3 of the "Ocean's" movies, "To Die For" (the film with Nicole Kidman and Joaquin Pheonix) and he was in "Gone, Baby, Gone" (Ben's film that he directed - I haven't seen it yet).

So he is Ben's brother - thought so. I don't really know much about him. I am not sure, if I saw him in anything, before this. Thanks for this information on his filmography. I like the "Ocean's" movies - they are entertaining. I also, love Joaquin Phoenix; try to see as many of his films, as I can.

I have to say, though, that if you ever saw the real Bob Ford, Casey Affleck was a very good choice to play the part!

I know that. When I found that great site it had them side by side - photos. That is interesting. I liked the very young photo of Jesse James I found. Oh my gosh, he looks like a mere baby, a young teen. I felt kind of bad looking at that one.

I know people who didn't like it because they had no attention span. That is OK. I personally love long movies. Someone said it was a half an hour too long. I think that is ridiculous. FINALLY we get to actually SEE what happens at the end of a story, or someone's life, rather than have to sit there and just read the words that they put up on the screen. Know what I mean? I liked it a lot more that they actually played it out all the way until the end.

Well, one always encounters the 'no attention span' viewers. I once lend my friend the excellent A&E miniseries "Shackleton", which I adore; I was horrified to learn she and her son watched it a fast forwarded to the part when they hit the ice in at the South Pole - that is half way through the story! I could not believe it. I always watch these mega long productions and eat up every morsal. I guess I have more patience than some or most maybe. I even watch 4 and 5 hour movies and miniseries in one sitting, with short breaks of course. Yeah really, what would a half hour bother me? Silly...I agree - glad they showed at the end of the story just what happened after. That part was great! Unfortunately, the DVD I was viewing, did some skipping or stopping, throughout the film and towards the end, it kept pausing and would not move on. I hate that and have no idea why it did that. I may have missed something, too. I need to view it again, with a different DVD. The DVD may have been defective. Anyway, the way they presented the end was way better than words on the screen; I agree with you on that fact.

Of course, none of the characters are likable. They are all outlaws. None of them are good people. I personally don't understand why people treat Jesse James as a saint. I still find his life interesting, though. He was a ruthless person. I think that is what makes a lot of people conjure this image of this "great" figure. Especially if they combine it with the supposed Robin Hood tales. Of course, all of those stories in dime novels and such didn't help his "legend" any.

Exactly. I was glad to go look up some more on James and the gangs and see just what was real and what was fiction in this film. I will further explore that site. It is so fascinating. It is strange they aplauded him and made him a 'legend.' Yes, I think the tales and books did that. The public did not know the full reality back then. For one thing communication would be lacking and nowdays it would never happen. He would be called the 'worst of the worst' by TV and media.

I can't say I really feel anything for Bob Ford either. I don't think anyone will really know why he killed him, but I think Ford did it mainly for money and he was a little envious. He was only 20. I don't normally use an age as an excuse for anything, but I think in this case he was young and stupid. But he wasn't a likable person either.

I didn't either; not even when he was whining about being the youngest - so what about that? Yes, his brothers did put him down and tease him but I still could not tap into feeling dreadfully sorry for him. I think he killed him because he felt he would gain fame and be applauded and instead it was the opposite. The ending pretty much stated that fact. He told that woman this in a straightforward way and even that he has been so young when the assasination took place. He wanted to gain the same fame that Jesse James had - that was apparent in the very beginning of the film; when he could not be like James he would be like him in a reverse way.

The only person that I ever truly felt bad for was his wife, Zee (who was his cousin, by the way).

I felt worse for his kids; but yes, I felt badly for her but she knew what she was getting into, didn't she? We didn't see her very fleshed out in the film either so I did not feel much towards her. Did you know JJ's mother was also named Zelda and was called Zee; or that may be his stepmother - not sure now. I read it late last night online.

As for delving into the characters more, I personally don't think it was necessary. After all, this wasn't about the life of Jesse James. This was about the assassination. I think that to begin to tell the story from where Bob Ford would come in was a good idea. For the people who know the James Brothers (and Ford Brothers, I guess), they don't need to know anymore about them. But for people who are watching this story without that much prior knowledge, I think it was a wise move to keep those people guessing and wondering how these people came to be what they were. I think it helped with the whole psychological effect of the film.

Yes, I can see your point here, LW. After I wrote that last night, I did think this and about the title and the point of the story and you are right; it did not center on Jesse James life story. It did start right at the perfect point. You are correct as well, about the film keeping one 'guessing and wondering' -that is so true and did add into the whole psychlogical aspect and effect of the film. I kept me 'guessing and wondering' - that is why I promptly went online to find out more about the story and the characters.

I will say this, though, that if you went to that farm (more so than reading any books, actually), you can see how Jesse's and Frank's lives were. You can understand how they ended up this way. I AM NOT CONDONING. I am saying that you can understand the characters more. He was in the Civil War. After the war, he became what a lot of those men did. He became a train robber, bank robber, murderer and outlaw. There is more to the story, but I won't bore anyone anymore than I already have.

Yes, I did realise that the Civil War had a lot to do with it. I agree with all your wrote, in this paragaph of your post. It was the times and things were much different back then in the South; attitudes were born from those hard times. I also don't condone the gangs actions, but the story was well done in the film and I really did find it interesting in a psychological way, plus I did learn things I had no ideas about prior.

[LadyWentworth]

Interesting, Lady Wentworth, I didn't realize it was nominated for the Oscar and lost. Was it nominated for the cinematography only? That was a brilliant scene and suspenseful - that tall figure and image in silouette, stayed with me for some reason, and the way the train rolled around that bend, puffing out white smoke against that blackness of night....amazing.

It was only nominated for cinematography and supporting actor, which really surprises me now that I have finally seen the movie. That scene was beyond words for me. If nothing else, no other film topped that one scene last year! The look of it was perfect. I haven't felt this strongly about the cinematography for a film since "Glory" (though I thought "Brokeback Mountain" was pretty good). Especially the battle scenes. If it is possible to call a battle scene "beautiful", then that is how I felt about the final battle in "Glory". I guess since I can't find any other words to describe the train scene in this movie, I would almost have to use "beautiful" for that also. Well, at least "Glory" won its well-deserved Oscar for Cinematography!

I guess they estimated the cost and something held them back from filming there. I wish the DVD had had some extras on it like "The Making"; that would have revealed why they decided on Canada, instead of Missouri. I was disppointed there were no extras. I thought they would have a bio of Jesse James, or information on Bob Ford. That would have been great. I did go online and found a very good site with photos; I am always curious this way and love doing additional research. More on that below.....

I was surprised that there wasn't at least a "Making Of" extra. I have no idea what the DVD will have that I will eventually buy. I rented this from Netflix. Maybe there will be a DVD with nothing but extras on that. They do that sometimes.

It could have been a tax thing. I didn't know about that new film. Is it "Public Enemies" or "Public Enemy" because I have heard of the second in a older play and an older film. I want to know more about this now. Hummm...a new role for JD..cool.

"The Public Enemy" is a film with James Cagney. This isn't that. I think there was a Korean movie called "Public Enemy", too. This is called "Public Enemies" (believe me, they talk about it enough here - I know! - very tired of hearing about it, but I have my reasons). It is based on a book. It is about the bank robber John Dillinger. Depp will be playing him (I kind of think it is an odd choice, but oh, well ).

I always like the sutle performances better and I love closeup shots of faces. I saw a film recently where the director even zeroed in on parts of the face. I found that to be quite interesting and quite expression - one eye can say so much, it is amazing. I liked that scene in the parlor and the tention at the end, too. Performances were amazing at that point. I don't want to give away anything to those who did not see the film. Glad he was nominated - Casey Afleck did a fine job! So he did win some awards for this performance? He did deserve it.

He won a bunch of critics awards. You know who else stood out to me in the film? Remember the guy that Jesse visits? He was all alone in that shack. He played the role of Ed Miller. Not a big role, but I liked him when I saw him. I knew this man was no-good, but something about his performance made him somewhat pathetic. I liked him in his truly brief time on screen.

So he is Ben's brother - thought so. I don't really know much about him. I am not sure, if I saw him in anything, before this. Thanks for this information on his filmography. I like the "Ocean's" movies - they are entertaining. I also, love Joaquin Phoenix; try to see as many of his films, as I can.

Yes, he is Ben's brother. They do and don't look alike, I think. I can't say that I would think they were related if I didn't know it, but there were times in that movie where I think he really looked like him. And Joaquin....well....I have my love affair with him.

I know that. When I found that great site it had them side by side - photos. That is interesting. I liked the very young photo of Jesse James I found. Oh my gosh, he looks like a mere baby, a young teen. I felt kind of bad looking at that one.

I think I know the photo that you are talking about of Jesse James. I will be honest and say that I always thought Bob Ford was kind of cute. Yes! I said it! I always thought that it was such a waste of his life that he ended up like that.

I didn't either; not even when he was whining about being the youngest - so what about that? Yes, his brothers did put him down and tease him but I still could not tap into feeling dreadfully sorry for him.

Well, I did feel a little bad in the beginning when they were going through his stuff and teased him. I also understand his frustration when they started up again during that meal that they were having, but that is solely because I know what it is like to be picked on for no reason whatsoever. I always say to just leave everyone alone. Other than that, I didn't care what was happening with him.

I think he killed him because he felt he would gain fame and be applauded and instead it was the opposite. The ending pretty much stated that fact. He told that woman this in a straightforward way and even that he has been so young when the assasination took place. He wanted to gain the same fame that Jesse James had - that was apparent in the very beginning of the film; when he could not be like James he would be like him in a reverse way.

That is pretty much what I meant when I said because he was envious and he wanted the money. Oh, well. Too bad for him that he was so stupid.

I felt worse for his kids; but yes, I felt badly for her but she knew what she was getting into, didn't she? We didn't see her very fleshed out in the film either so I did not feel much towards her. Did you know JJ's mother was also named Zelda and was called Zee; or that may be his stepmother - not sure now. I read it late last night online.

Oh, I was talking about feeling sorry for her in real life. Not the film. Whether or not she knew what she was getting into, that is something I really don't know. I would assume that she did, but I don't know. What I meant was that I always felt bad that it had to happen like that, in that house and with her finding him. I would feel bad for anyone with that situation. I am pretty sure that she was named after his mother. So, that would make her Zerelda, too, then.

Yes, I did realise that the Civil War had a lot to do with it. I agree with all your wrote, in this paragaph of your post. It was the times and things were much different back then in the South; attitudes were born from those hard times. I also don't condone the gangs actions, but the story was well done in the film and I really did find it interesting in a psychological way, plus I did learn things I had no ideas about prior.

I was reading a book about Laura Ingalls Wilder the other day. It was said that her uncle came back from the war "wild". They said that people were generally called "wild" because they would be experiencing something like "post traumatic stress". Then they went on to say that this could be the reason that the west was called the "wild" west. I think that is interesting, considering that so many gunslingers were involved in the war.

Anyway....back to movies.....

Oklahoma
9.95
(I despise Aunt Eller - didn't like her in the stage version either - she ruins any scene that she is in for me - hence, the 9.95 out of 10 - Gordon MacRae on the other hand.... )

[Janine]

....That scene was beyond words for me. .....since "Glory" ....If it is possible to call a battle scene "beautiful", then that is how I felt about the final battle in "Glory"....

Just commenting briefly, don't want to hog this thread going on and on about this film. I wasn't crazy over "Brokeback Mt". so I left that out, but to say the scenery was beautiful, of course. Yes, that train scene sort of creeped up on you and I felt this awe; the lighting was extraordinary. It was just so well done and timed. It was truly beautiful if a train robbery can be called that; I mean of course the art design of that scene. "Glory" was amazing with scenes of splendor even though violent.

Hope they do come out with a "Making Of" extra, but my library edition did not have anything at all.

Thanks for information on "The Public Enemy"; a young Kenneth Branagh also played that on stage but I think when he was still in high school or maybe first year at RADA...I just know he was a hit and caused a lot of talk. Depp does seem a bit odd for the role but let's not prejudge and see what he comes up with this time.

He won a bunch of critics awards. You know who else stood out to me in the film? Remember the guy that Jesse visits? He was all alone in that shack. He played the role of Ed Miller. Not a big role, but I liked him when I saw him. I knew this man was no-good, but something about his performance made him somewhat pathetic. I liked him in his truly brief time on screen.

I agree - that guy was great - who is he anyway? I kept thinking I saw him in something before. That ride they took was really something...kept you on the edge of your seat the way James rode behind him; talk about being paranoid. Would you turn your back to Jessie James? I also liked the touch of having Sam Sheppard in the film. He is always quietly nuanced in his performances. I loved him in "Days of Heaven" and "The Right Stuff". He has long been a favorite of mine. I think his character embodied the sadness of losing the war for the Confederacy, don't you? He captured that pathos so well.

Yes, he is Ben's brother. They do and don't look alike, I think. I can't say that I would think they were related if I didn't know it, but there were times in that movie where I think he really looked like him. And Joaquin....well....I have my love affair with him.

I picked up on that and thought they looked similar now and then in the film. Yes, Joaquin is one of my all-time favorites, too.

I think I know the photo that you are talking about of Jesse James. I will be honest and say that I always thought Bob Ford was kind of cute. Yes! I said it! I always thought that it was such a waste of his life that he ended up like that.

Yes, looks like he could not even grow a beard or peach fuzz if he tried - he looks so young. Yes, I saw Ford and he did look somewhat handsome. It was a waste - sad.

Well, I did feel a little bad in the beginning when they were going through his stuff and teased him. I also understand his frustration when they started up again during that meal that they were having, but that is solely because I know what it is like to be picked on for no reason whatsoever. I always say to just leave everyone alone. Other than that, I didn't care what was happening with him.

I did too, now and then, like when they found his box of keepsakes and tease him unmercifly. I hated the way they treated him then. I guess I felt most sympathetic in that scene. He was a very confused young man. Yes, teasing him at that meal was truly mean, and they all chimed in.

That is pretty much what I meant when I said because he was envious and he wanted the money. Oh, well. Too bad for him that he was so stupid.

I see what you mean now. It was stupid reasoning on his part.

Oh, I was talking about feeling sorry for her in real life. .... bad that it had to happen like that,....... feel bad for anyone with that situation. I am pretty sure that she was named after his mother. So, that would make her Zerelda, too, then.

I understand the names/relationships now. I was trying to figure that out. Yes, I really was shocked it did happen as it did. I guess it had to be so, so he would not suspect. I somehow felt he did suspect though. I think in the film, he has a sort of premonition; what do you think?

I was reading a book about Laura Ingalls Wilder the other day. It was said that her uncle came back from the war "wild". They said that people were generally called "wild" because they would be experiencing something like "post traumatic stress". Then they went on to say that this could be the reason that the west was called the "wild" west. I think that is interesting, considering that so many gunslingers were involved in the war.

Interesting theory; I must look further into that idea. I like it, it could explain a lot of things back then.

Anyway....back to movies.....
Oklahoma
9.95
(I despise Aunt Eller - didn't like her in the stage version either - she ruins any scene that she is in for me - hence, the 9.95 out of 10 - Gordon MacRae on the other hand.... )

Loved it! Those old movies are the best. Love musicals and loved Oklahoma on stage and screen.

[Sir Bartholomew]

Punch Drunk Love 4.0/4.0. Haven't seen There Will Be Blood yet but PDL's the fourth movie I saw from PT Anderson. It's a great departure from Boogie Nights and Magnolia, and most of his mainstay cast are gone. I've never liked Adam Sandler but in here's an exception. As for Emily Watson, an actress I admire, it's fun to see her sane after countless viewings of Breaking the Waves (I've seen Gosford Park though she's only a bit player there).

[Sir Bartholomew]

i heard there was this long sex scene in the Wings of the Dove.

[Janine]

Watched "The Wings of the Dove" based on the Henry James book with my husband today. Loved it, though it is no doubt too slow moving for many people.

I thought the scenery in England and Venice was sumptuous and the performances by Helena Bonham Carter (pre-Tim Burton), Linus Roache, and Alison Elliot were so moving and understand. And Charlotte Rampling's small part was excellent.

I'd definitely watch it again.

5/5

Love that movie, too, Antiquarian; it is one of my favorites. I am glad you finally got to see it. I have not yet read the book, but I ran out to buy it, right after I saw that film. I own the film; saw it at the video rental real cheap, when they sold out the VHS tapes. It is great film; loved the scene at the church with the doves, didn't you? and wasn't there a voice over in the end of that scene or a reading? I just know it was an emotional scene.
The sex scene at the end is in shadows; no big deal anymore, as you said. You do see Helena in all her naked spendor, but is that really anything to gawk at? She is merely 'au naturale'.
I loved the acting and thought everyone was cast perfectly in the film. It is such a beautiful film. Cinematography is wonderful and setting superb and romantic.

I can't write any more. My eye is still hurting me badly and this bright screen is a killer. Just checking in quickly and will resume my listening to "Women in Love" on MP3 - I love it!

[Janine]

Watching tonight:

"No Country for Old Men" - so far I am finding it intriguing. I will let you all know later what I thought of it.

[vheissu]

Notes on a scandal (2006)

Absolutely loved Judi Dench in this one. Cate Blanchett was ok, not her best though.
But the ending....hmm.
8/10

[novelsryou]

I liked "No Country for Old Men" when I first saw it, Janine, but now I'm kind of mad at the Coen brothers for that ending. It was just "too abrupt." It was like we had the chair pulled out from under us.

I haven't seen it yet but what you wrote made me think of Looking for Mr. Goodbar. I found the ending of that movie to be very disturbing.

[Janine]

I liked "No Country for Old Men" when I first saw it, Janine, but now I'm kind of mad at the Coen brothers for that ending. It was just "too abrupt." It was like we had the chair pulled out from under us.

Wow, I know I keep thinking about that ending also, Antiquarian. I felt angry at first, or let down, but then I thought more about it. At first, I thought, 'oh my, that is it?' Now I realise something - it was much more disturbing this way. I felt because of the ending, one could now empathise with the Sheriff and his situation in his life. I especially liked what he told his wife at the end. I thought, before I viewed the film, that the title meant the old men that were murdered; then I realised at the end of the film, that the title took on a whole new significance and because of that ending. I liked the film, but I felt as I have been feeling lately - why must we always be awakened by such violence? We are never awakened as keenly by kindness or goodness, as we are by these intricate characters who exude this unworldly quality we cannot relate to humanly. I felt at times that the main perpetrator acted out like a robot or a ghost, as Jones pointed out, even though I felt Bardem's performance unbelievably fine, and I also felt that Tommy Lee-Jones deserved an Oscar. I thought he was very complex and just great in this film. He is such a pro. Even the Coen Brothers admit the film is a sort of horror film; others on the Extras on the DVD say it has it's own unique genre..who knows? It is funny, looking back now on the film, I feel I saw more humanity in the monster in "Frankenstein"; I actually felt sorry for Frankenstein's creation sometimes, but I could not find this, in the character of Anton in this film. The suspense and cinematography and the acting in the film were all great; it kept one on the edge of your seat, for certain, truly suspenseful...very scary at times. I felt it reminescent also, of moments in "Fargo", which I really loved; especially the tiny bits of 'real' life humor, throughout the film. The casting seemed to me to be excellent. As a well crafted movie, I felt it excelled. It is definitely a finely made thriller.

I just don't think I would go out of my way to view this film a second time; maybe it just was not my type film. I thought it 'wowed' me in many ways, so that last statement of mine is hard to explain. I did think it one of the Coen Brother's finest films; but I am not a huge fan of theirs, personally. I think the content is what I found to be truly disturbing. I think they did make tasteful choices and cuts at the right moments mostly. I think they could have refrained from showing the man bleeding from his neck and the other spurting blood...what else can I say? I preferred the scenes that suggested the violence or one did not see it so blantantly. That is just personal preference, I know.