Support NeoGAF

[~Kinggi~]

Funny, i saw a Serious Man last night and was in complete amazement this is critically hailed as one of the best of 2009. I actually found this just as disappointing as Burn After Reading.

I refuse to have to watch a movie twice to "understand" it, so i rely on a very concentrated first viewing. I have no distractions and wont watch a movie if i do.

So anyway, barring the fact i dont have a clue about Jewish culture, or about religious subtexts and all that crap, i think the movie really aggravated when after i finished the film with the typical "What the fuck did i just watch?' mentality, i started watching the special features on the DVD to gain insight. I then didn't feel so bad as the Coen Brothers began to explain how the movie doesnt have much of a plot, and essentially came down to stating life is like the movie, full of surprises and nobody has any idea what's going on.

Spoiler

master of the obvious.gif

I think i was more amazed just how pretentious the Coen Brothers have become. They seem to just "wing it" and do what they want and don't care if anyone "gets" it. I respect their artistic freedom but I am one of the majority that the film alienates with its completely specific approach. I love many of their films and think they are great, but i didnt like this much.

On the positive side of things, the lead actor was great. The cast was suitably annoying Jewish typecasts.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

I finished The Passion of Joan of Arc a few hours ago, and it was pretty good although I couldn't really get into it; the lack of audio was sort of a distraction.

 

[Wanace]

The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly: 5/5 - Watched the extended American version and all three hours felt like they belonged. What a great film, the way it all came together at the end and Clint Eastwood's cool as shit delivery and acting were amazing. I normally avoid westerns but I'm glad I finally watched this. Going to watch Once Upon a Time in the West next.

Y Tu Mama Tambien: 4.5/5 - Great movie, had me laughing and then feeling sad at the end. I really enjoyed the narration and the music, the whole film was just really great. If I were to go gay for anyone it'd be Julio. What a handsome fellow.

Up in the Air: 4/5 - George Clooney was great, Jason Bateman was good and it was nice to see Danny McBride in a not-so-funny role. The actress who played Natalie dragged the film down a bit for me, I didn't enjoy her characterizations much. The whole bomba dropped on Clooney's character towards the end made me feel awful for him. Also the whole scene where he

Spoiler

reaches 10 million miles

on the plane felt like it should've been a dream sequence. I thought it was at first until the next scene when he's looking at his card in the office. Overall I liked this movie a lot.

 

[AlternativeUlster]

Funny, i saw a Serious Man last night and was in complete amazement this is critically hailed as one of the best of 2009. I actually found this just as disappointing as Burn After Reading.

I refuse to have to watch a movie twice to "understand" it, so i rely on a very concentrated first viewing. I have no distractions and wont watch a movie if i do.

So anyway, barring the fact i dont have a clue about Jewish culture, or about religious subtexts and all that crap, i think the movie really aggravated when after i finished the film with the typical "What the fuck did i just watch?' mentality, i started watching the special features on the DVD to gain insight. I then didn't feel so bad as the Coen Brothers began to explain how the movie doesnt have much of a plot, and essentially came down to stating life is like the movie, full of surprises and nobody has any idea what's going on.

Spoiler

master of the obvious.gif

I think i was more amazed just how pretentious the Coen Brothers have become. They seem to just "wing it" and do what they want and don't care if anyone "gets" it. I respect their artistic freedom but I am one of the majority that the film alienates with its completely specific approach. I love many of their films and think they are great, but i didnt like this much.

On the positive side of things, the lead actor was great. The cast was suitably annoying Jewish typecasts.

I don't think it was pretentious though for I don't think the film flew over my head but I just didn't care. I thought that A Serious Man had some nice touches in it but many times it felt like the Coen Brothers were throwing food against a wall and seeing what stuck and overall, had nothing to really draw me in with humor sparse and the scene with the kid on pot being pretty grating to me. Great ending though which makes the film feel more important than it is. I only gave a Serious Man two stars and won't probably go out of my way to rewatch it. I was never much of a fan of the Coen Brothers anyways though. I can say I really only loved Fargo and Barton Fink (and I haven't seen Barton Fink since I owned it on VHS when I was like 13). I liked No Country but I don't think it even made my top 10 for that year.

 

[goldenticket]

one thing that i would like to suggest if you have a strong interest in the movie but haven't seen it yet: watch it twice. after the first time, if you feel confused or ambivalent about it, read up on it.

See if i have to watch a film then read up on it and then watch it again to like it i feel the film wasnt made well enough. Like the saying goes if you have to explain the joke it wasnt funny. I have the opposite feelings on a serious man the idea of watching it again is like torture to me at this point.

 

[Salazar]

Y Tu Mama Tambien: 4.5/5 - Great movie, had me laughing and then feeling sad at the end. I really enjoyed the narration and the music, the whole film was just really great. If I were to go gay for anyone it'd be Julio. What a handsome fellow.

Indeed. Great film. I liked the contemplative, quiet camera sweeps as much as the comedy. Diego Luna deserves fine roles almost as much as Bernal.

 

[Speevy]

The Coens really don't need to prove their style of directing and writing to anyone. The Oscars and acclaim speaks for itself.

 

[creativity]

I refuse to have to watch a movie twice to "understand" it ...

That's your privilege. However, the less you understand a film, the less you are qualified to discuss its merits. Otherwise, a film is only as good as its audience is attentive. And that's nonsense. The ideas in this film aren't too difficult to unpack. If you'd bothered to think or read about it just a little bit more, I think you'd find that if the filmmakers had presented these ideas any more prominently, it would have seriously compromised any artfulness or subtlety in the film. Many times my opinion of a book or film has shifted upon discovering new things about it. If you put in a little more effort, you might come to respect, even like, this film. You never know.

See if i have to watch a film then read up on it and then watch it again to like it i feel the film wasnt made well enough.

I am reminded of one time, in an English class, the professor presented a version of some Shakespearean sonnets "translated" to make their meaning as literal and direct as possible. Much to the horror of the rest of us, half the class expressed a genuine preference for, e.g., "I think you are hot, babe" to "Shall I compare thee to a summer's day?" To them, the latter was just inscrutable and excessive. Is it Shakespeare's shortcoming he couldn't make himself immediately understood to these lazy philistines, his fault that they'd have to reread it, expand their vocabularies and perceptions until it became clearer? You don't really feel that way, do you?

 

[Snowman Prophet of Doom]

I feel like A Serious Man is a very penetrable movie.

Anyway...

The Trial (Orson Welles, 1962)

9/10

I kind of have no idea what happened in the movie, but I feel like that was part of the point; the idea of becoming embroiled in a legal entanglement with no idea how you got there or any hope of getting out of it is absolutely terrifying. Welles says in the film that there is a nightmarish tone to it, and I definitely agree; it is disjointed in the best way possible. The cinematography was really interesting, as was the artistic design; Anthony Perkins was also pretty damn good.

 

[goldenticket]

I am reminded of one time, in an English class, the professor presented a version of some Shakespearean sonnets "translated" to make their meaning as literal and direct as possible.

i didnt say i needed it translated i said i didnt like it. if you have to watch a film then read about it and then watch it a second time to like it to me thats a failure. i didnt like the film you liked the film thats totally fine but im not going to get into some internet pissing contest over it

 

[Snowman Prophet of Doom]

i didnt say i needed it translated i said i didnt like it. if you have to watch a film then read about it and then watch it a second time to like it to me thats a failure. i didnt like the film you liked the film thats totally fine but im not going to get into some internet pissing contest over it

I used to agree with this train of thought, but the second time I watched 2001 I went from apathetic to in love; it is now in my top ten of all time.

I think that one's enjoyment or non-enjoyment of a film can often come down to the way you were feeling and thinking when you watched the film; giving oneself some time and coming back to a film you were lukewarm on the first time can sometimes be a very rich experience.

 

[Dr. Strangelove]

A Serious Man isn't a dumb film by any means, but at no point did I ever find myself confused or lost. It isn't a terribly complex film or hard to decipher in any way.

For the record, I thought it was great.

 

[Snowman Prophet of Doom]

A Serious Man isn't a dumb film by any means, but at no point did I ever find myself confused or lost. It isn't a terribly complex film or hard to decipher in any way.

For the record, I thought it was great.

I feel pretty much the same way. I didn't get the opening section until I got back and read up on it a little bit (and even then, it is sort of cryptic), but most of the other stuff was pretty straightforward. I mean, I figured some stuff out later, but that's the mark of a great film, in my opinion: your mind keeps coming back to it and finding new things.

 

[beelzebozo]

i think it's a very layered movie capable of satisfying many different kinds of viewer, similarly to NCFOM. the ending may not give everyone but they want, but that's the coens for you. the answers to your questions are there if you are willing to think and look deep enough, but it can also be enjoyed as just a piece of entertainment. the best films, i think, exist in that special place.

and to goldenticket, i would suggest there's something valuable about having to think about a film, in having to struggle to come to grips with what it means or how it makes you feel. not every piece of cinema should be easy.

 

[Eric WK]

A Serious Man isn't a dumb film by any means, but at no point did I ever find myself confused or lost. It isn't a terribly complex film or hard to decipher in any way.

For the record, I thought it was great.

Yeah, I have absolutely no idea what these guys are talking about. It's a relatively straightforward film.

 

[creativity]

i didnt say i needed it translated i said i didnt like it. if you have to watch a film then read about it and then watch it a second time to like it to me thats a failure. i didnt like the film you liked the film thats totally fine but im not going to get into some internet pissing contest over it

I thought it was a fair comparison because in both cases, the issue was with a work not being completely understood and rejected for demanding additional effort. Like those students, you would prefer the Coens didn't bury the film's literal message under so much "obscurity," so you wouldn't have to rewatch it and read about it to get the point. Right?

But you also misunderstood me. I think it's perfectly legitimate to dislike the movie. And I wasn't trying to persuade you to like it! Instead, I'm trying to persuade you that it's wrong to reject something you don't understand. Why would I bother with this? To get in an "internet pissing contest?" No. Because so many times I've run into works of art I didn't understand, and by putting in the necessary effort to understand them, I learned different ways of seeing, different ways of thinking. I think this is ultimately a valuable thing to do. I wasn't arguing for the film's sake, I was arguing for yours.

 

[AlternativeUlster]

See if i have to watch a film then read up on it and then watch it again to like it i feel the film wasnt made well enough. Like the saying goes if you have to explain the joke it wasnt funny. I have the opposite feelings on a serious man the idea of watching it again is like torture to me at this point.

Ideally, I like it when I watch something that completely goes over my head and talks above my understanding. I try to figure out what's actually being said through facial expressions and tones. For example, a lot of Tetro is in Spanish (I would say about 20 to 30 percent) and when I watched it, there was no subtitles with it. I didn't know if it was an artistic choice or not but I loved being lost during these scenes, trying as best as I can to understand what was going on.

Like I have said before, I don't think a Serious Man is one of those movies that talk above people but do feel feel that it really doesn't have much to say at all. There isn't anything wrong though with a film that says nothing at all though. I mostly hate films that try to sell you a message but fail to do so.

Do you watch much surrealist or avant-garde cinema?

 

[nilbog21]

Yeah, I have absolutely no idea what these guys are talking about. It's a relatively straightforward film.

how is A Serious Man a relatively straightforward film?

 

[jarosh]

No Country will almost certainly be known as the Coen movie of the decade (deservedly so, I think), but A Serious Man is only a hair below it for me.

The Coens are the current masters, in my opinion. I love so many of their movies it's ridiculous.

agreed with pretty much everything. i don't think a serious man is quite up there with ncfom. that's definitely their movie of the decade, their masterpiece. they have made some stinkers but the great ones come as close to cinematic perfection as anyone will ever get. my favorites are: barton fink, the man who wasn't there, fargo, no country for old men, a serious man. these are all pretty much perfect movies if you ask me. i'm not too fond of ladykillers, hudsucker proxy or burn after reading. and i'm kind of indifferent about big lebowski - which i maintain is minor coen.

I refuse to have to watch a movie twice to "understand" it, so i rely on a very concentrated first viewing. I have no distractions and wont watch a movie if i do.

See if i have to watch a film then read up on it and then watch it again to like it i feel the film wasnt made well enough. Like the saying goes if you have to explain the joke it wasnt funny. I have the opposite feelings on a serious man the idea of watching it again is like torture to me at this point.

that's ok. i don't hold that against anyone. it's a perfectly reasonable point of view. personally, after my first viewing, i immediately felt like i had seen something that i was truly curious about, something that i thoroughly enjoyed - but i wasn't ready to call it a masterpiece yet and i knew there was more to it, i just felt that the movie was NOT as straightforward as some people were making it out to be. so i decided to look into it.

in the past i have often found my appreciation and understanding of a movie to increase after a second or third viewing. i'm familiar with that process and i can usually tell if i need to see a movie again. i don't think there's anything that speaks against having to watch a movie or read a book several times to fully appreciate it. now, you could make a case against having to research the subject matter to fully appreciate the contents. but, staying in the literary world, there are countless important, highly influential, essential books that depend on the reader's prior knowledge of highly complex or obscure themes.

clearly there is a cut-off and that's a personal thing - how much do you expect your audience to know about a story from the hebrew bible? is it sensible to expect them to at least be somewhat familiar with it? or maybe you craft a movie where not every obscure reference NEEDS to be understood - a movie that can be enjoyed without knowing too much about its background but that can be appreciated even more if you do. i think a serious man is a movie like that. of course if you go in once, disliking the movie strongly, i see no reason for anyone to dig deeper or give it a second chance.

what i'm trying to get at is: if you liked the movie, but feel you could have liked it more or that there was some intangible quality to it that you couldn't quite grasp, then give it a second chance and if you feel the movie deserves the additional effort then go out and read up on its themes. you'll be rewarded. that's all i'm saying. if you feel the movie warrants the effort, you will be rewarded for putting in the time and energy to look beyond the surface.

A Serious Man isn't a dumb film by any means, but at no point did I ever find myself confused or lost. It isn't a terribly complex film or hard to decipher in any way.

For the record, I thought it was great.

i have a hard time believing this. while the film does work on a very surfacy and straightforward level, there are a lot of complexities underneath and many references, allegories, metaphors that are not immediately recognizable as such.

i think it's a very layered movie capable of satisfying many different kinds of viewer, similarly to NCFOM. the ending may not give everyone but they want, but that's the coens for you. the answers to your questions are there if you are willing to think and look deep enough, but it can also be enjoyed as just a piece of entertainment. the best films, i think, exist in that special place.

and to goldenticket, i would suggest there's something valuable about having to think about a film, in having to struggle to come to grips with what it means or how it makes you feel. not every piece of cinema should be easy.

great post. and layered is a good way of describing "a serious man". i think it's not quite as universal in its appeal or as accessible as ncfom but it shares the layered structure and many of the same sensibilities.

 

[beelzebozo]

Yeah, I have absolutely no idea what these guys are talking about. It's a relatively straightforward film.

now you're too far in the other direction. a relatively straight-forward film is something like BILLY MADISON that you watch, finish, and say, yep, that requires no more of my thought. A SERIOUS MAN has many many elements that require a lot of dissection and thought to fully come to grips with.

 

[Madrin]

Avatar - 5/10. The plot has been rehashed a million times and the movie doesn't even do the courtesy of putting any new twists on the formula. The visuals were the only saving grace.

Juno - 5/10. High school girl gets pregnant and

Spoiler

decides to give the baby up for adoption.

Nothing about the plot screamed originality to me. Ironically, the Juno character was the most annoying part of the movie. Her personality was exaggeratedly saucy, her dialogue was too fake-edgy, and the actress's delivery didn't do much to humanize the lines. Every time she was on screen I felt like I was watching a character instead of a real person.

Fantastic Mr. Fox - 4/10. The directorial style was really odd. I couldn't get past the creepy animation, awkward editing, and choppy dialogue. The voice acting was good at times but for the most part the flow of the film had an unusual rhythm to it that I found distracting. There were some funny moments, but then there were moments when I wasn't sure whether or not I was supposed to be laughing. It's like being around an eccentric guy who you can't tell if he's trying to be funny. Also Mr. Fox's son has a really creepy voice. Just a strange film.

500 Days of Summer - 8/10. Finally a movie I actually enjoyed. The story wasn't astoundingly original, but I did like how it ended

Spoiler

with Tom coming to the realization that he is in control of his own fate and nothing is "meant to be."

I had a smile on my face for entire scenes at a time. I'm sure the film resonates even more with guys who have been in the same type of relationship as Tom, which thankfully I have not.

 

[afternoon delight]

The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly: 5/5 - Watched the extended American version and all three hours felt like they belonged. What a great film, the way it all came together at the end and Clint Eastwood's cool as shit delivery and acting were amazing. I normally avoid westerns but I'm glad I finally watched this. Going to watch Once Upon a Time in the West next.

I love the American Cut, probably because Leone is one of the few that deserve any screen time they use. The man knew the meaning of "epic" - Peckinpah reminds me of him with "The Wild Bunch" Director's Cut.

 

[beelzebozo]

Avatar - 5/10. The plot has been rehashed a million times and the movie doesn't even do the courtesy of putting any new twists on the formula. The visuals were the only saving grace.

i know i'm not insane for disliking this movie so much, but reading posts like this that i agree with helps alleviate my worries that i just missed something. in fact, i'd drop your score several points, if i were trying to assign a numerical value to the movie; i generally just like to say, "it was very, very bad."

 

[Blader]

Just watched this for the first time. Possibly the best noir film I've ever seen.

Well...it was better than Fear and Desire. The Killing is next up on my Kubrick catch-up list.

 

[AcciDante]

I watched The Host off netflix instant streaming, and really enjoyed it. Anything else like that that I should watch?

 

[Lumpy Onion]

The Box- 2009 1 Star

What a boring and confusing sack of shit that movie was. And I usually enjoy sci-fi movies like this. I swear that 3/4 way through I started to dose off a few times. And I ended up just fastforwarding the last 15 mins or so. The movie probably would have been alright had they just stuck with the original box idea and not turned it into this really complicated sci-fi plot.

 

[Snowman Prophet of Doom]

Alphaville (Jean-Luc Godard, 1965)

8.5/10

This movie is very, very interesting. I think that it's a bit of a mess in terms of trying to follow what is happening (though that might be a translation issue), but it is really pretty looking and has enough of a hard sci-fi edge to make me enjoy the hell out of it.

La Dolce Vita (Federico Fellini, 1960)

9.5/10

I had a weird experience with this movie; I spent two hours wondering where it was going, but the last hour or so made the whole thing click. I have never come around on a movie so strongly as I did with this film. This was my first Fellini movie, but I will certainly give his other works a shot.

Aguirre: The Wrath of God

9.5/10

I was going to give this film a 9 last night, but I can't get it out of my head. Klaus Kinski is a god of physical acting, and this film has probably the most beautiful and haunting opening/closing shot juxtaposition that I have ever seen.

Some Like it Hot

9/10

Great screwball movie. I actually thought it was a noir movie, for some reason (and the first few minutes made me think it was going to be one), so the screwball nature of it came as a nice surprise. Marilyn Monroe was really sexy, by the way.

 

[Dice]

Saw The Hurt Locker. It was... weird. And why was it called that?

 

[Timbuktu]

Saw The Hurt Locker. It was... weird. And why was it called that?

nickname for the suit?

 

[Snowman Prophet of Doom]

Does anybody feel like At the Movies is missing that certain 'spark' that made it a special show? I love Scott and Phillips and think that they are absolutely the best choices to head up a modern version of that show, but something feels a little 'off' to me, though it is still good. Siskel and Ebert had a very good rapport that allowed them to absolutely get down and dirty with each other, whereas Scott and Phillips tend to swipe at each other in rather limp ways. In addition, I think that Scott and Phillips are less skilled at being concise; every time they review a movie, I get the sense that they are being pressed for time (which is why their web features are quite nice, actually; they focus in on a movie or actor and have a little more breathing room).

I have enjoyed their work thus far, but I feel like they haven't quite made that leap into magic territory just yet.

 

[Mifune]

Aguirre: The Wrath of God

9.5/10

I was going to give this film a 9 last night, but I can't get it out of my head. Klaus Kinski is a god of physical acting, and this film has probably the most beautiful and haunting opening/closing shot juxtaposition that I have ever seen.

This movie. I watched it streaming on my girlfriend's laptop one afternoon (about the worst way you could experience a film like this) and there are images and moments and bits of motion (I'm thinking of the way that final raft scene is shot) that haunt me and will probably be with me forever. It's a fucking amazing movie.

 

[Snowman Prophet of Doom]

This movie. I watched it streaming on my girlfriend's laptop one afternoon (about the worst way you could experience a film like this) and there are images and moments and bits of motion (I'm thinking of the way that final raft scene is shot) that haunt me and will probably be with me forever. It's a fucking amazing movie.

I only thought to check it out because it's in Ebert's top 10, and I was really impressed by it. It being my first 'pure' Herzog (I've seen Rescue Dawn and Grizzly Man, both of which somewhat lack his philosophical bleakness), I didn't really get its implications immediately upon watching it, but reading about it a little bit, I came to realize just how awesome it had been.

Klaus FUCKING Kinski, baby.

 

[micster]

Saw Joint Security Area [2000] on Saturday. Seriously amazing film, regret having it on my shelf for so long without watching it

 

[Mifune]

I only thought to check it out because it's in Ebert's top 10, and I was really impressed by it. It being my first 'pure' Herzog (I've seen Rescue Dawn and Grizzly Man, both of which somewhat lack his philosophical bleakness), I didn't really get its implications immediately upon watching it, but reading about it a little bit, I came to realize just how awesome it had been.

Klaus FUCKING Kinski, baby.

That first shot of the line of soldiers moving down the mountain. Something about the jerkiness and lo-fi quality sucked me into that world like nothing else. It struck me that somehow some way somebody had snuck a camera into 16th Century South America and this movie was the result. Is Herzog a time traveler? Maybe.

I haven't felt that way watching a movie since I was a kid when everything I watched transported me.

 

[Snowman Prophet of Doom]

I had this weird moment during Aguirre where I realized how indoctrinated into Hollywood's stylistic conventions I am; I was really bugged at the fact that these Spanish soldiers were speaking German, but at some point, I had to point out to myself that Hollywood's bread-and-butter is having people in period pieces speaking English.

 

[Wanace]

Chinatown - 5/5 - I didn't know anything about this movie, but came out floored. Jack Nicholson's performance was top notch.

Once Upon a Time in the West - 5/5 - The whole revelation at the end with Frank and Harmonica was brilliantly played.

 

[creativity]

I used to listen to the Popol Vuh soundtrack on repeat in college while working all night. I think that's my favorite thing about Aguirre, actually. It really sets the mood of the film beautifully.

 

[AlternativeUlster]

I used to listen to the Popol Vuh soundtrack on repeat in college while working all night. I think that's my favorite thing about Aguirre, actually. It really sets the mood of the film beautifully.

I would too. Heart of Glass soundtrack is my favorite and I never have even seen the movie. After all this talk about Aguirre, I think I am finally going to put in my copy of Fitzcarraldo tomorrow.

 

[Snowman Prophet of Doom]

One thing that sucked for me: I had the revelation at the end of Once Upon a Time in the West spoiled for me; they actually had the stupidity to put it on the back of the fucking DVD case!

 

[Mifune]

I would too. Heart of Glass soundtrack is my favorite and I never have even seen the movie. After all this talk about Aguirre, I think I am finally going to put in my copy of Fitzcarraldo tomorrow.

Damn, I haven't seen Fitzcarraldo either. I think I'm waiting until I've exhausted my other Herzog options, since it's supposed to be his magnum opus.

 

[Wanace]

One thing that sucked for me: I had the revelation at the end of Once Upon a Time in the West spoiled for me; they actually had the stupidity to put it on the back of the fucking DVD case!

That sucks! I'm definitely glad I didn't have this movie spoiled for me.

 

[Blader]

Fan-fucking-tastic. I think this might be Spielberg's best.

 

[Wanace]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/08/Munich_1_Poster.jpg

Fan-fucking-tastic. I think this might be Spielberg's best.

Yeah I loved this movie too, but I'm going to have to give Spielberg's best to Schindler's List.

 

[Blader]

Yeah I loved this movie too, but I'm going to have to give Spielberg's best to Schindler's List.

Yeah, Schindler's List is one of the few remaining Spielberg films I still have to see (the others being Close Encounters and Empire of the Sun).

 

[sneakypete]

Just watched The Goods: Live Hard, Sell Hard last night. Fkn hilarious if you're in the mood for a Ferrell + McKay movie. Craig Robinson steals the movie as DJ Request, and Ferrell makes an amazing appearance.

"Look, I may be old fashioned, but when a man tells me to wear my boner pants I wear my boner pants."


On another note, I've been watching some old Eastwood westerns. Check out The Outlaw Josey Wales and Two Mules for Sister Sara. Both are supreme.

 

[Expendable.]

watched A Perfect Getaway, can't believe how much I enjoyed it (minus the flashbacks)

 

[~Kinggi~]

Second time I've seen this movie; first viewing was with the director's cut, this time it was the final cut, and I didn't see any real difference between the two. Anyway, I liked the movie a bit more than last time, but I'm still of the opinion that it's very overrated. At least from a narrative point of view. From a more aesthetic, technical perspective, it's absolutely brilliant.

Which leads me to the next film I've been watching:

I've always been fascinated with the creative process behind films and tv shows, and I've always loved watching documentaries about films. This is no exception. Just watching the unbelievably meticulous attention to detail that went into creating Blade Runner is making me more appreciative of the film. Damn good stuff and, for me, a blast to watch.

Holy shit. I have the 5 disc blu ray set but didnt realize there was a 3 1/2 hour documentary on it that was brand new!! Good lord. Im watching it now but wondering if i should put it off since i dont want to be up too late......but Ridley Scott is so sexy i dont know

 

[Snowman Prophet of Doom]

Jules and Jim (Francois Truffaut, 1952)

9/10

The fastest 106 minutes of my life; the editing in this movie is pretty much perfect. My favorite thing about the French New Wave is that it was willing to examine characters who live their lives in ways that defy conventional morality; I think Breathless and The 400 Blows are better than this, but this was neat as hell. I especially liked that it was somewhat relatable; I know that I have sometimes felt that my friends' girlfriends are not right for them or been very attracted to them.

Le Samourai (Jean-Pierre Melville, 1967)

10/10

Now THIS is a movie. It is perfect pretty much from start to finish; the tension is wonderful.

 

[Dr. Strangelove]

Didn't get to watch many films this weekend, Valentine's Day fucking and drunkenness and such. What I did watch:

Umberto D - Potentially better than Bicycle Thieves. I will say that I enjoyed the ending of this film far more. Yes, it's heavy and sad as Italian neorealist films tend to be, but it also has a good deal of charm and it can be pretty humorous. - 9.5/10

Shoot the Piano Player - I absolutely loved this film. A nice jaunt through film noir tropes as filtered through the mind of a French new wave auteur. My favorite Truffaut to date. - 9.5/10

Pillow Talk - This was the "Valentine's Day movie." Light-hearted romantic comedy with Doris Day and Rock Hudson. Cute and pretty funny in spots. - 6/10

 

[jarosh]

ballast

you probably haven't seen ballast. and chances are you haven't heard of it either. it is virtually unknown. it was at sundance in 2008 where it won 2 awards. it eventually played at several other festivals, though it never made it to theaters.

i'd been hoping it would somehow find a distributor, get to europe and make its way to the local arthouses. but that never happened. however, to my surprise it was recently released on dvd and on bluray. i picked up the bluray.

ballast is a somber, slow, quiet, understated, yet intense movie. the performances are pitch-perfect, the cinematography is gorgeous. it tells a simple, rather bleak story with some shimmers of hope about a tragic death and its afermath and the people affected by it. i'm not gonna tell you much more about the plot. if you're interested at all, avoid spoilers or any kind of plot synopsis at all costs. but i urge you to watch the trailer here: http://www.apple.com/trailers/independent/ballast/. it captures the mood of the film perfectly, but gives away very little of the plot. if you think the film might appeal to you based on the trailer, it probably will.

both manohla dargis and ebert have written great, insightful reviews. together with the trailer those are what really got me curious and interested in the movie in the first place. i think it's worth your attention. give it a shot if you feel like it sounds like your type of movie.