I've Been Going to the...MOOOOvies

[2bitnogoodjive]

Glad I finally got around to seeing this after all of these years, it's a very intense and emotionally moving film. Reading up on it, I had no idea just how controversial it was for it's time.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lqakCa-MysE&feature=results_video&playnext=1&list=PL560F14203A0560DA

[Jahfin]

I enjoyed this, much as I have for most every movie I've ever seen from Focus Features but if anyone wants to elaborate on the ending, I'm all ears.

I'm usually not much on the romantic comedies but after reading a favorable review of this from a friend online recently I thought I'd give it a shot.

[Strider]

I enjoyed this, much as I have for most every movie I've ever seen from Focus Features but if anyone wants to elaborate on the ending, I'm all ears.

Hmmmm, I saw this when it came out in the theatres but it's been a few years, so I'll have to refresh my memory before I can comment on the ending. I just remember liking it...always have liked Charlotte Rampling and the girl, Ludivine Sagnier, wow, hubba-hubba!

If you thought "Swimming Pool" was weird, you should check out another of director François Ozon's films, "Water Drops on Burning Rocks".

[Jahfin]

Strange movie full of all kinds of cool cinematography but with no real discernable plot. What little bit of plot there is folds in on itself towards the end and just adds to the confusion.

[redrum]

Watched the original 'King Kong' again and I have to say again how beautiful Fay Wray was in that film and I'm surprised the censors didn't cut the part out where she walked with no bra and her high beams were on.

[Jahfin]

I didn't really know anything about this movie prior to seeing it other than reading some favorable reviews about it from friends online. I'd have to put it up there with my favorites of 2011 right alongside Super 8 and The Tree of Life.

[Jahfin]

[redhairedqueen22]

last time i went to the movies, i went and saw the updated version of footloose, i went with my mom and cousin tiffany. it was her first outing since she had her appendix out a few days before

[TypeO]

I didn't really know anything about this movie prior to seeing it other than reading some favorable reviews about it from friends online. I'd have to put it up there with my favorites of 2011 right alongside Super 8 and The Tree of Life.

Just saw this last night on OnDemand.

I thought it was incredible.

My wife had already seen it numerous times at the theater, so I knew it would be pretty good.

I think it's a real eye-opener.

It really nails a time everyone isn't intimately familiar with, yet not all that long ago, culturally speaking.

[Jahfin]

Just saw this last night on OnDemand.

I thought it was incredible.

My wife had already seen it numerous times at the theater, so I knew it would be pretty good.

I think it's a real eye-opener.

It really nails a time everyone isn't intimately familiar with, yet not all that long ago, culturally speaking.

We had a maid when I was growing up but it was nothing like the situations presented in this movie. She was treated like a member of the family, was included in holiday celebrations, birthdays, etc. and certainly wasn't expected to use outside facilities. I was born in 1962, the year this movie was set in so I could relate to it from that standpoint in a certain sense. It was horrifying to learn of the treatment the maids were treated to in Mississippi (and elsewhere).

[TypeO]

We had a maid when I was growing up but it was nothing like the situations presented in this movie. She was treated like a member of the family, was included in holiday celebrations, birthdays, etc. and certainly wasn't expected to use outside facilities. I was born in 1962, the year this movie was set in so I could relate to it from that standpoint in a certain sense. It was horrifying to learn of the treatment the maids were treated to in Mississippi (and elsewhere).

I think the movie did a decent job of pointing out that many people treated "the help" like - as you said - a member of the family, or, at least, with a degree of dignity (for that time, anyway).

But yes, Mississippi was and still is one of the more severe areas for racism.

As recently as the early 90s, when I was in Jackson, many black women would look away or down if I attempted to make eye contact, which I found very revealing.

And as I prepare for remarks regarding my physical appearance as possible reasons women would look away, let me state that in the early 90s I wasn't totally painful to the eyes, and might well have been considered mildly hawt, thank you! lulz

[Jahfin]

Want quirky? This movie is full of it. Despite the near overload of quirk and neuroses, the underlying message (which is revealed at the end), it succeeds in spite of itself. I could see where someone could find a lot to hate about this movie but I stuck it out until the final scenes and found it to be well worth it.

Everything I've read about this movie was that it's less a sequel than it is a remake of the original. While that's true, it still has some funny scenes. Where it seems to fail most is when it tries to outdo the first one in shock value. Overall, I enjoyed it but it never even came close to topping the first one.

Edited December 11, 2011 by Jahfin

[2bitnogoodjive]

Saw this when it first came out and recently re-watched it. Highly recommended.

[Jahfin]

[redrum]

'The Debt' looks interesting. Gotta check it out.

We just watched 'Hesher' and I only stuck with it to see what would happen to the kid and I was totally shocked to find that Piper Laurie played the Grandmother.

I didn't even recognize her (she was Paul Newman's squeeze in 'The Hustler') and she was a beauty back then. :^)

[Jahfin]

'The Debt' looks interesting. Gotta check it out.

I liked it. There was quite a bit of jumping back and forth between time periods but never to the point of leaving me totally lost.

[Jahfin]

This was widely panned by critics when it came out this past summer but after perusing a handful of favorable reviews of it on Amazon, I decided to give it a go. Turns out the critics weren't entirely off of their mark as I thought there were at least a couple of cringe worthy moments. Otherwise, I found it to be a very enjoyable flick. I'd have to go back and read the reviews to see what the critics found fault with but I can only guess that it was the lack of instant gratification along the love story lines. In that sense, it is a old fashioned love story, an aspect of the film that I found to be very refreshing and a welcome change of pace from most movies these days.

[ebk]

I laughed. I cried. It was wonderful fun!!!

[Jahfin]

Out of all of the movies I saw at the theatre over the summer (Super 8, Rango and Captain America: The First Avenger), Rise of the Planet of the Apes is the only one I've wanted to see again when it came out on DVD. That's nothing against those other movies but it does speak pretty highly of Rise of the Planet of the Apes especially since I wasn't really expecting a whole lot going in and found it to be a very worthy addition (and/or reboot) to the series. I just hope the sequel(s) live up to the precedent set by this one. As for movies I saw that came in 2011, that I didn't see in theatres, my favorite would have to be The Tree of Life.

[Strider]

My latest movie round-up...

Monday night, even though it was raining, I went to see a couple of old 70s films by the German director Wim Wenders("Paris, Texas"; "Wings of Desire"): "The American Friend" starring Dennis Hopper, and "Alice in the Cities".

"The American Friend" is actually based on one of Patricia Highsmith's Ripley books, "Ripley's Game", with Dennis Hopper playing Tom Ripley. Another of her Ripley books, "The Talented Mr. Ripley" has been made into a film at least twice; the first time in 1960 with the title "Purple Noon", with the exquisite Alain Delon as Mr. Ripley, and the later American version, with Matt Damon as Ripley(not as good).

It's quite an interesting take on the Highsmith book, and Bruno Ganz and Dennis Hopper are excellent, as usual. What I really enjoyed was seeing all the shots of Hamburg, and other locations in Germany and Europe that they used. Since the film was shot in 1976, it is closer to the Europe, and in particular Germany, that I remember from being there in the early-80s. Today, post-Berlin Wall, Germany is much more modernized and globalized with all the American crap like McDonalds and Pizza Hut and Starbucks, etc., so I don't get the same sense of the Germany I remember from modern German films that I do with films from the 70s and 80s.

The second film of the night, "Alice in the Cities" (Alice in den Städten) was amazing...truly a delight. Unlike "My American Friend", I had never seen "Alice" before, so didn't know what to expect. All I knew was that it was a road film of sorts, about a man traveling around Germany trying to help a girl(Alice) find her grandmother. The girl who plays Alice is wonderful...Yella Rottländer is her name. It reminded me of Tatum O' Neal's performance in "Paper Moon", in that both play 9-year old girls, both are kind of spunky, but adorable, too. And they don't grate on you or become annoying in the way some child actors do today. Plus, both movies are filmed in black-and-white and are "road movies", with lots of travelling across country...and both came out in the early-70s.

A very charming film.

And, as usual with Wim Wenders, both films feature the wonderful cinemathography of Robby Müller.

Now, onto the more recent films I have seen the past week; films that will be in the discussion about the next Academy Awards.

First up, "The Iron Lady".

I realize I haven't seen everything yet...there are heaps of films to come between now and the end of the year, which is the deadline to qualify for the Oscars. Many films I have yet to see feature actresses who are usually good: Tilda Swinton, Kate Winslet, Jodie Foster, Michelle Williams.

But after seeing Meryl Streep as Margaret Thatcher in "The Iron Lady", I think it's a lock that she will win Best Actress. As usual, she is that good. In fact, she doesn't merely "act"...she performs alchemy.

Right from the opening scene, you are knocked for a loop...DO NOT be late for this movie as you don't want to miss the first scene.

As a bio-pic, "The Iron Lady" is better, in my opinion, than "J. Edgar", which isn't bad but does have some flaws. For one thing, the makeup is better in "The Iron Lady"...less distracting than the aging techniques used in "J. Edgar". I found the cast to be more uniformly excellent, as well. Great British stalwarts like Jim Broadbent, Richard E. Grant, and Anthony Head. I also found the script to be a bit better in "The Iron Lady" than in "J. Edgar".

It does focus more on the woman and less on the politics, which may be why certain liberal critics don't like the film. But it doesn't completely shy away from politics. In this it shares a quality with "J. Edgar", another movie about a polarizing figure of the 20th century...they don't beat you over the head with politics and they don't take sides. They let you decide for yourself.

Of course, having only spent a grand total of 3 months or so in the UK in my lifetime, I am not in a position to judge whether Thatcherism was good in the long run or not...I'll leave that for the Brits to decide.

What truly shocked me about this film was that it came from the director of "Mamma Mia!", one of the schlockiest films ever, and a complete misuse of the talents of Meryl Streep and Colin Firth. If you would have told me Phyllida Lloyd was capable of a film the quality of "The Iron Lady", I would have replied "What are you smoking?"

Remember...don't be late. If your spouse or friend is running slow, put a boot in their arse.

Next up, "The Artist".

This film is garnering plaudits by the boatload. Besides being awarded at Cannes earlier this year, it has in the past week or two been named Best Picture of the year by the New York Film Critics and the Washington, DC critics, among others.

This is a black-and-white silent film about the period when Hollywood switched from silents to talkies...much like the plot of "Singing in the Rain". These are the kinds of movies-about-movies that film geeks(like me) go gaga over. Also, in this day of over-the-top CGI and bombastic sound and special effects, it is refreshing to see a film that has an elegance of craft and doesn't leave you with a headache.

But while I admire the charm and chutzpah of making a movie like this today, is it the Best Picture of the year? I don't think so. Some of the plot elements are cheesy, and whether it was by design or not, the acting comes across as hoaky and uneven. Malcom McDowell and John Goodman are the only recognizable names, but are scarcely used. The two leads are cute, but still, something seemed off to me...the film just didn't click for me. It didn't give me that goosebumps-on-flesh feeling you get when you are watching a truly great film like "Wings of Desire" or "Godfather" or "Casablanca".

And I know the guy who was the gaffer on "The Artist"...he's married to a friend, and his father worked on movies in the silent era, too. If anyone should love this film, it's me...I liked it, but I can't say that I "loved" it. It'll be nominated for Best Picture, for sure. Whether it will win, I think that's a stretch. There will be a sizable segment of the Academy that will embrace this film, but whether the mainstream members of the Academy will be willing to award Best Picture to a silent, B & W movie is another thing altogether.

It's hard enough to get studios to make a B & W movie, let alone a silent one...unless your name is Woody Allen or Marty Scorsese.

By the way, in film lingo a "gaffer" is the head electrician and in charge of lighting the set.

Which reminds me of one pleasure of "The Artist"...seeing all the local Los Angeles locations they used, from Hancock Park to the Orpheum Theatre to the Eagle Rock Power Station.

I still recommend you see "The Artist...preferably with someone who won't mind sitting through a silent movie(there is a film score, including liberal doses of the Scene d'amour music from "Vertigo").

The last new film I saw this past week was British artist and director Steve McQueen's "Shame", which has been given the NC-17 rating (no one under 17 allowed) in the U.S. I don't know what the UK rating is or will be.

I don't know how you feel about McQueen's art installations(I have an artist friend who loathes him), but I think most people's first exposure to McQueen was probably his first feature film, "Hunger", which was about the 1981 Irish hunger strike, and starred Michael Fassbender.

Fassbender is in "Shame", too, and he is quite the Irish hunk, and there is full frontal. In fact, you might subtitle this movie "Fassbender Frees His Willy", which is probably the main reason the film got the dreaded NC-17 rating here. In the US, it's all right to see an actress bare all, or any manner of blood and violence...but show a man's cock and people lose their minds.

That said, and granted the performances of both Fassbender and Carey Mulligan are good, but their characters are such ciphers that it leaves you feeling the film is just an excuse to wallow in nihilism, sex and self-pity. The director and actors have been quoted as saying the film is about addiction not sex per se, but the characters are so poorly written(the script is the weakest part of the film), that you really never care about what's going on.

The sex scenes(and there are many, including solo masturbation and group sex...so be warned, although it's not too explicit) and the rest are lit and shot in such a way that it is a film that looks and sounds good(thanks to a nicely understated score). But at the end, it all just seems so empty...like what was the point?

I really like Fassbender and Mulligan, and wanted to like the movie more than I did.

Who knows...maybe I'm being too harsh...maybe if I see it again, it won't annoy me as much. One thing I did like(other than the score and the cinematography) was the end...the way the last scene was played was very effective.

If you do see it, make sure you see it alone, or at least choose who you see it with very carefully.

Still on my "to-do" list: "A Dangerous Method" about Carl Jung and Freud; "Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy" based on the Le Carré novel; "Young Adult"; "In Darkness"; "Sleeping Beauty"; "The Descendents"; "Carnage", Roman Polanski's film adaptation of the play "God of Carnage"; "My Week with Marilyn" starring Michelle Williams as Marilyn Monroe; and "We Need to Talk About Kevin", with Tilda Swinton as the mother of a son who is involved in a school shooting.

Edited December 15, 2011 by Strider

[Strider]

I'm on the go today so no time for indepth post, but if you're looking for a great, adult movie to see this weekend, you can't go wrong with "Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy"!

I saw "Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy" last night and it is a crackerjack of a film. Don't be put off by those who say it is confusing...only those who have never read an honest book or are half-wits would have trouble following the plot.

Gary Oldman, John Hurt, Colin Firth, Mark Strong, Tom Hardy...anybody that knows their movies should be salivating at the thought of seeing all these actors in the same film.

GO SEE IT! A perfect film to take your honey out to on a Friday or Saturday night. Or if you have family in town for the holidays, take your dad or an uncle who loves spy stories.

For those of a more experimental and freakier nature, I also recommend checking out Pedro Almadovar's latest, "The Skin I Live In", with Antonio Banderas. Not as great as Almadovar's best, but still good and interesting...and just a little creepy and kinky, too. The plot involves a forced sex-change and issues of gender. Not for the squeamish.

I'll be back with more about "Tinker, Tailor...", and some other films another time. I'm seeing "Young Adult" and "Mission Impossible Ghost Protocol" today.

[TypeO]

OK, so I've seen this dozens of times.

Saturday I had a friend over who still hadn't seen it.

So I ordered it up on OnDemand.

Turns out it was the extended version, with additional footage not in the original.

Everyone I've told that immediately said, "Cool!" or "Awesome!"

But you know what?

It wasn't.

Not a SINGLE additional minute helped the movie at all, and most detracted from it.

For me it confirmed that the original edit was the very best.

Some of the very best scenes were left untouched, but others were really ruined.

The toast on the roof - just after Alan cutting his palm for the "blood brothers" - went into an extended quasi-rant from Phil that alluded to coming events (kind of a mild spoiler), something about "no matter what happens tonight.."

It was all so unnecessary.

Very disappointing.

[Jahfin]

^Which is exactly why I tend to watch the version of movies that were originally shown in theatres when given the option to do so on DVDs. Unfortunately, there was no such option when I watched the "Redux" version of Apocalypse Now a few months ago. From what I understand, a lot of folks prefer the original cut.

[Jahfin]

[Strider]

They're coming fast and furious these days...I've seen 10 new films since my last post about "Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy". A quick write-up...and I'll mention "yes" or "no" if I feel the film is worth spending money to see in a theatre.

Earlier tonight I saw David Fincher's American remake of "The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo". While not as bad as other American remakes of foreign films, it's still pretty superfluous. I read the books, then saw the original Swedish film trilogy. Rooney Mara's performance as Lisbeth Salander is the only aspect of the new film that is comparable, maybe even better, to the Swedish original starring Noomi Rapace.

But there's changes to the story that hurt the film, and the movie just won't shut up...Trent Reznor's score never stops and you get sick of all the constant noise after awhile.

Not worth the money you'll spend on tickets to see in a theatre...wait for cable or Netflix if you must. Better yet, see the original.

Oh, the "Immigrant Song" remake is played over the opening credits.

"Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol" Yes. Saw this on the IMAX screen so we could also see the opening prologue to the new "Dark Knight Rises" movie(more about this later). A nice, little popcorn movie with plenty of whiz-bang action and ludicrous stunts...some actually done by Tom Cruise himself. Mindless fun, it probably would've fit in better in the summer, but if you're looking for a movie where you can check your brain at the door and escape the Christmas shopping crowds, MI 4 will fit the bill. Simon Pegg provides comic relief. And the Durbai skyscraper sequence provides the vertigo.

"The Descendents" No. When did Alexander Payne start watching Lifetime movies? Cause that's what this snooze fest feels like...all weepy and earnest and icky nice. Such a disappointment coming from the guy who made "Sideways" and "Election".

"Carnage" No. Adapted from the play God of Carnage, this is nothing more than two couples bickering ala "Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?", another play adapted into a film. The problem is that neither the story or the characters in "Carnage" are as fun or interesting as "...Virginia Woolf?".

Sure, the cast (Jodie Foster & John C. Reilly as couple #1, and Kate Winslet & Christoph Waltz as couple #2) is great, and they do a good job with what little they have to work with. But Jodie Foster is such a caricature of the uptight, politically correct, liberal do-gooder, and Reilly such a milquetoast simp, that you hate them almost from the getgo, especially Jodie Foster, who practically starts at shrieking harpie and moves up in intensity from there. Whether that is the fault of the script or Roman Polanski's direction, I don't know. But it deals a crippling death blow to the film. The other couple aren't much better, but at least they aren't as shrill...Winslet isn't given much to do anyway, other than throw up...which she does with gusto.

Christoph Waltz steals the movie, in my opinion. He is the sole reason to see this film, but even so, just as this movie has echos of other films, so too does Christoph Waltz's constantly on the phone character echo another previous character: Tony Roberts in both the play and film "Play It Again, Sam". And as good as Waltz is, is it worth spending money hiring a sitter, buying tickets, popcorn and parking to see it? No.

"Young Adult" YES! When I first saw the trailer to this months ago, I groaned. It looked too similar to Cameron Diaz in "Bad Teacher", that not even the presence of Patton Oswalt had me enthusiastic about seeing this. But friends who had seen early screenings all raved about it, and it is from the partnership of Jason Reitman and Diablo Cody, so I gave it a shot this past weekend.

Boy, am I glad I did! This is everything "Bad Teacher" was attempting to be, and more...much more. I'm not even going to ruin it by saying anything more...just go and see it and laugh your ass off and be amazed at Charlize Theron's performance. Too bad she already starred in a movie called "Monster", as that would've been a perfect title for this one, too.

I also love how the film adheres to Larry David's famous dictate for "Seinfeld": "No life lessons."

But I'm revealing too much already...just go!!!

That's all for now...I'll deal with the schlock like "New Year's Day" and "War Horse" another time.