Y'all know the drill.

List it up.
Talk about it.

Go.

It's a new month and i promise i will be nice and sweet. I won't be giving out any big red F's.

Bliss

having only seen the trailer, a long time ago, I had somehow avoided any spoilers of the actual plot. a pleasant surprise. I'm not a big fan of Woody, but I like Owen Wilson and this was mostly charming.

Margin Call
http://board.okayplayer.com/okp.php?az=show_topic&forum=6&topic_id=585535&mesg_id=585535&listing_type=search#593980
^ summed up my feelings. Irons killed it. the last half hour of Spacey reconciling with his inevitable decision wasn't really engaging to me. I enjoyed it though, especially the first hour.

Moneyball
I'm impressed this even became a movie, given the source material was a burden to adapt. that said, the end result was overly long and sterile. Pitt's emotionless family storyline was part of that, and I found his acting to be a compilation of go-to mannerisms, drawing from the "cool guy" persona that birthed Tyler Durden, Joe Black and Rusty (albeit toned down). I really like Pitt, Aaron Sorkin, PSH and baseball -- but this movie was *way* less than the sum of those parts.

Made it all the way through the second and third seasons of Parks and Rec (skipped the first because I heard it was ass-awful) and I fucking loved it. I feel like a fool for not having Ron Swanson in my life before this. I'll try my best to catch up with Season 4 on Hulu.

Just started the first season of Community. About five episodes in. It's funny, but I'm preferring Parks and Rec so far. From what I understand, it becomes less about sexual tension between the two leads and more about Troy and Abed, which I'm certainly all for.

Also, saw the Descendants. Really enjoyed it.

Didn't really care for this. It's far less absurd than the show-- they replace the true surreal nature of the show with a traditional movie narrative and grossout gags that simply aren't funny. The funniest part is the opening credits, which spoof the opening credits of films. (I like the TV show btw... it's hit-and-miss, but the funny stuff is very funny.)

The Mechanic (the Statham version): last 20 minutes were pretty fun, but everything before that was more or less stagnant. A lesser Statham flick.

Meteor Man: I liked this. It's sloppy, as Townsend is clearly trying to make this film everything to everyone, but the earnestness is charming and a few of the gags are legitimately funny. I wish someone could find a way to make this idea (earnest urban black superhero) work completely... but Meteor Man is enjoyable. It made me sad that Townsend doesn't really make films anymore.

At least in my view.

That guy wanted to make movies, and dammit he did.

You can't make "Hollywood Shuffle" without throwing a few errant darts at the board.

that make the weaker parts still worth it. The score is great too.

Who would be the ultimate black actor to have a Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon style game with? John Witherspoon? James Earl Jones?

Especially considering it's his "follow-up" to Meteor Man.

Statham would have to be a Jumper or Nightcrawler to cover the territory he does in it.

Lot of spare time this month. I went whole hog on the movies, people.

Two things of note before I begin -
This month saw me reaching 489 on the TSPDT list, making my goal of 500 a virtual reality.
Beginning now I'm adding on the only two recommendations I really need to give, the STAMP OF APPROVAL and the SEAL OF APPROVAL. The seal, requiring wax AND a stamp, is naturally the stronger of the two. It's the difference between "see this movie" and "SEE THIS MOVIE."

In alphabetical order for my amusement:

Apocalypto - I was constantly surprised. I was surprised by how involved I was in the story, especially the first half. I wasn't surprised by how gory the film was, but I was surprised by how explicit it wasn't and by how cartoonish some of the action was. I honestly thought I would see knives get plunged into bodies instead of the cutaways I received. Not that it wasn't violent enough for me, I definitely got a fix, it's just that I expected it to be more brutal. Which brings me back to the cartoonish aspect - early on a man is yanked through his wall with such distance and force the invisible wires that did the trick bled into my mind. The same goes for the computerized bees, snake, and animal-trap spikes. The backdrop and violence were shown with so much realism that the diversions were painful. Despite these qualms I must admit I was gripped throughout and would gladly watch this again. Hell, I even listened to the commentary. STAMP OF APPROVAL.

Brick - I'll give it to Rian, the dialogue did its job; I instantly knew this was film noir. I guess. Sure, the dialogue was snappy, but outside of two exceptions ("You put Brad Bramish in the game!") it felt like a teen writing the way he assumes adults talk. Luckily the plot was strong enough to keep me interested because I don't know if I could have dealt with all that too-cool-for-school dialogue.

Crank 2: High Voltage - Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha. Yep, I'm in the cult now. I can't get this movie out of head. Must... see it.... again. SEAL OF APPROVAL

Dead Ringers - I am investigating Cronenberg slowly, but once every three months or so has worked fantastically. If I wait long enough I start to get a Cronenberg craving and he has yet to disappoint. I was nervous early on with this one because I found the lead actress wooden and unappealing. Once it switched to completely about the brothers it took off. STAMP OF APPROVAL

Death at a Funeral (the original) - The first movie I watched this month, it stayed middle of the pack for the duration. When, later in the month, another British comedy came up for viewing my girlfriend declined with the reasoning "British comedy isn't very funny." This got a few solid laughs, but I can't say it comes to my mind very often. The biggest positive of this movie came in my realization that my respect for farce does not match my enjoyment. A well done farce seems like the greatest of scripts, but the necessary foreshadowing and payoff work against my desire to be surprised by film. The acting was great yet I can't say I'm wholly for the notion that this version MUST be better than the remake. Don't know if/when I will see the Chris Rock version, but I'm not averse to it.

Floating Weeds - I never thought this would happen: an Ozu film was my favorite of the month. I had seen "Tokyo Story" and was not impressed. The story and style were underwhelming, I cared about no one and nothing. Why then did I watch "Floating Weeds?" Well, it was on. Duh. It's been a few weeks now and it still hasn't left me. I could go on for days with superlatives to describe this movie, but my joy is so great none of them will do it justice. That said, I'm still nervous about the rest of his catalog because this was barely over "too quiet" and it was his version of melodrama. This troubles me. SEAL OF APPROVAL

The Haunting - A very pleasant surprise. Because I don't believe in ghosts, I'm rarely scared by ghost movies. This movie effectively convinced me that the haunting was all inside our lead's head. As a result, I stayed engaged. Yes, there were times that were a bit talky, but I genuinely felt like I got closer to the characters during this time. I then was able to have my own reading of what was happening in each ghostly encounter, which it turns out I appreciate. STAMP OF APPROVAL

Hausu - I went into this movie wondering why the title sounded familiar. As soon as I realized the soundtrack wasn't going to relent to the dialogue I started laughing and it never let up. What a wild ride. If you watch it, watch with friends. There will be no end to the discussion. Thank you, TCM Late Night. SEAL OF APPROVAL

The Insider - Hated "Public Enemies," loved "Heat." This movie sits immediately between the two. Some good, some boring, some great, some bland.

Lone Wolf and Cub: Sword of Vengeance - I've never really liked martial arts movies, but seeing so much Kurosawa got me thinking I might be into samurai movies. This was the first of the two I watched this month. I think I will see more this series but not at any incredible rate. Has anybody seen this series? I know there is a stretch of 5 or so in a row, but I need to know if this handful has an overarching storyline. If so I'll be more anxious to check out the others. The shot of Lone Wolf and Cub walking between walls of fire and water was perfect.

The Lady Killers - Better than the Coens version but not as enjoyable as "Kind Hearts and Coronets" or "The Lavender Hill Mob." Alec Guiness grows larger in my heart with each new performance.

Murder! - Hitchcock count climbs to 42 and that was all this movie was good for. Not as bad as "Topaz" or "Number Seventeen," this was too dull to reach any significant height on my list.

Murder on a Sunday Morning - Sigh, Duval. Fun fact: 8 years to the day after the verdict, the two lead defense attorneys in this movie were fired from the public defenders office for "budget cuts." Ahem. SEAL OF APPROVAL

Nausicaa of the Valley of the Wind - I found this to be very similar to "Castle in the Sky" but better. I appreciated the relationship of the children in "Castle in the Sky," but I thought it was a bit too long. The solo lead in this was more well rounded than that co-leads in "Castle" and the story was told at just the right pace for me. There was a great mixture of the magical and the grotesque in this movie, one of my favorite things about Ghibli. STAMP OF APPROVAL

Nosferatu: Phantom der Nacht - This is the German version of the Herzog/Kinski collaboration and the opposite of Van Sant's "Psycho." There was only one completely unique sequence, Lucy's wanderings through the devastated village, and I loved it. The rest I enjoyed because and in spite of the original. I'd watch another "Nosferatu."

The Palm Beach Story - I had seen the first scene of this movie a year or two prior and knew within that scene my mood couldn't handle it at the time. This month the proper mood finally came to me and I checked it out. Having bought into the quick pace this go-round, I strapped in and let myself go. The ending was bizarre, which I didn't mind, and abrupt, which I did. I could have watched this movie with twice as many scenes before I got my fill. STAMP OF APPROVAL cause I can't rank it with "Sullivan's Travels" SEAL.

Punisher: War Zone - I took the "How Did This Get Made Challenge" with this one and made it a drinking game with a few buddies. We chose 5 things to drink on, including "Every time there is a head wound" because we assumed this wouldn't happen very often. Wrong. Comically absurd and I loved it. Then I watched "Crank 2" and I now only like "War Zone."

Sleuth - Ugh. This was painful to get through. I thought the acting was great but even when things were twisting and turning I couldn't get into it. Too old school for me this month.

Stranger Than Paradise - My first Jarmusch. I can see the appeal in the minimalist style which I never though I would. That said, this particular story wasn't to my taste even if it was cool to see Vito. I like to imagine that he came back from this movie to work at Sal's. Anyways, unless recommended otherwise, I am putting "Dead Man" and "Ghost Dog" on my to watch list. I'll leave Jarmusch's other films out of my mind until I decide whether or not I'm committed.

The Tenant - I liked this more after the fact than I did during the watching, and it was my own fault. I, for some unknown reason, went into this thinking it would be more surreal. When the movie finished I could see the journey in my rear view and appreciated it more. "Nosferatu" and this I was introduced to Isabelle Adjani. More, please.

Thieves' Highway - If it wasn't for Jules Dassin's involvement I prolly never would have seen this movie. Nothing terrible, nothing special.

Vicky Cristina Barcelona - Vicky got a raw deal. She was by far the character I was most interested in; she got as much if not more screen time than Scarlett, let alone Penelope; her story drove the movie as much as Scarlett's did; yet she is nowhere to be seen on the cover because she isn't as famous as her co-stars. Bummer. In other news, Javier Bardem is one sexy man.

Z - I actually had to start this film from the beginning after SPOILERUNLESSYOUREADTHEBOX the assassination ENDSPOILERONTHECOVEROFTHEDVD because I thought the aforementioned DVD case had deliberately mislead me during the first 15-20 minutes. "Political campaign procedural? I didn't sign up for this!" WRONG. Everything after was a roller coaster for one reason only: as a viewing I inherently knew this was an assassination attempt and not a mundane accident. Had the director allowed from the beginning the idea that this could have been accidental it would have lost all of the dramatic intensity in the following cover up and investigation. I loved not being able to see the cover up. I grew increasingly frustrated along with our hero, who doesn't even show up until 30 minutes into the picture. I enjoyed being taken on the ride and felt satisfied with the end. Adding on to all of this was the films style: quick cuts, often to visualizations of the thoughts of different characters, made the pace of the film feel surprisingly modern even while the thickness of the subject threatened to slow things down. STAMP OF APPROVAL. (End note: The only reason this movie does not receive the SEAL is because the combination of subtitles and subject matter may turn some of our more conservative friends off)

Zatoichi: The Tale of Zatoichi - Because there are only two Yojimbo movies I will watch more Zatoichi. Even if it is a step below, it seems like a reliable series to get a samurai fix.

Alright, that's it for me.

That's all.

It still did numbers if I remember right, but it should have been a game changer if it didn't come off the first salvo in Mel Gibson's career suicide.

I mean, while even in 2012 we complain about how white washed movies can be, particularly the action genre...that was as ethnic as it gets, lol. And it still hit on all the beats we are used to in our action flicks.

No message

yes, im mexican

full of historical inaccuracies, racial stereotypes, and a silly plot. if people want to take the it's just an action / chase movie, that's fine. I don't. Mel being an idiot or asshole has nothing to do with it either. it's just a bad movie

I don't want to speak for you, so I can't say to what degree I agree or disagree.

Here's my little train of thought the racial politics of this thing:

I don't think the setting and peoples represented inherently made me like or dislike the movie any more than a different setting.

It was nice to see a world not represented very often, but I cannot comment on the factual basis for sets, costumes, or actions.

I did think a wide range of characters were shown, so while I do believe it is possible it presented broad stereotypes I thought a good job was done of individualizing everyone.

If this movie was set in Middle Ages Europe I still think I would like it.

At the same time, Gibson has sort of already made that movie. He clearly likes historical pieces, and he's now been to Middle Ages Scotland, turn of the millennium Middle East, and 16th/17th century South America. (I know it was shot in Mexico, but I thought it was set in the continental south.)

Now, whether or not it is factually correct is something I will gladly learn more about, but I will reserve a moral judgment on it till later. I am a-okay with movies changing facts to serve the film, but if things were done out of laziness I can see it from your side.

without wiki or imdb name three characters or two of the tribes that were depicted? you can't because they were basically nameless and grouped together like that wasn't a major factor. Any other film, and this small (but big detail) is immediately a strike for lack of focus or central storyline. Add that on top of all the famished looking, fucked teeth smiling, overly violent powers that be, and their is a lot of e-racing and stereotyping going on. If Mel had made a movie about the Aztecs, the brutal inter-tribe waring would've made much more sense, being that they tended to fight more than other indigenous civilizations, but Mel made a movie about the Maya.

As scholars like Acuna and Murguia have pointed out (about history and Apocolypto) the very idea of human sacrifice is so misrepresented and over-blown that it denies the fact that the Maya's historical record was looted, destroyed and misinterpreted by the very colonizers who try to frame the Maya (and other indigenous groups) as savages. So for Mel to base a whole movie on the supposed violence for sport / human sacrifice bullshit is to continue that very problematic narrative.

Than their is Mel's "commentary" on the film were he says he left the real "gnarly stuff" out. LOL, what a fucn clown. If he knew shit about anything he'd know that one of the main reasons Europeans were able to colonize the Maya civilization is because, they were in a state of stasis. Their leaders had grown lazy and un-alert of possible foreign invaders. their last real war was with Vikings nearly 400 years prior. Maya had an abundance of food, land and what the European thought of as material wealth. Their was no famine, drought and in-fighting, that came after the white-man polluted the civilization with his flu, guns, ideas on ownership and Christianity.

it's the same shit that makes me roll my eyes when a shitty movie about the slave trade, reconstruction, or jim crow America is made (ehhem... The Help). Did Apocalypto look good yes, was some of the violence intense/enjoyable yes, could i sit through it a 3rd time, fuck no. I find the movie, in particular it's story, ridiculous

You totally have the right to be offended. I obviously can't tell a person what is or isn't offensive.

But I think getting offended at the depiction of Mayans in Apocalypto is like being offended at the depiction of Asians in Crank 2. The filmmakers are trying to be so over-the-top and grotesque and insane that, for me, it goes past offensive and becomes like a big awesome violent cartoon.

Like, the PC part of me doesn't have flags shoot up when I'm busy thinking, "OH SHIT THAT DUDE'S HEAD IS STRAIGHT UP GETTING GNAWED ON BY A PANTHER." Know what I mean?

So it's not that it's not offensive or that it's historically accurate (my brother is a dead languages major and was laughing at some of the translations). It's just insane.

But I can't argue against dude if he finds the depiction inaccurate (which they certainly are) or offensive (subjective).

These super-extreme, awesomely violent movies full of shock and kinetic energy tend to not send up my red flags because they're about the visceral experience more than the accuracy.

One could argue Gibson IS going for more accuracy by using the ancient language though. One could also argue, like you did, that the characters are developed in a sympathetic manner (Jaguar Paw certainly is... but the rest you might have to be a bit of an apologist for).

I just know I wanna watch it again. Over and over. Because it's so fucking awesome.

did you just really compare Apocalypto racism to Crank 2 racism? Crank exist in the contemporary world were sex, race, to some extent class, and violence are put on visual roids to further suspend our belief (in the movie's world) and enjoy the action on a pure visceral level. it becomes comedic on a ironic and satirical level in Crank

Saying Apocalypto exist in that same filmed universe is disingenuous. It's a fucn period piece about Mayan's completely relying on under-informed misrepresentations of the indigenous to tell a tale of one man surviving against all odds; which if we really wanted to go deep into it, is another example of our white bigoted friend Mel using HIS Privileged world view to tell the story of people of color.

But if you want to keep telling yourself that one of the few major "mainstream" films populated by a non-white/non-black world is really about gore and violence, do you.

His shtick, with both The Passion and Apocalypto, is to make you *feel* the violence, to *feel* the action. He's far more interested in revealing imagery than developing the characters. Now, you can argue with both that because these films are set in period and the attempt is made to make the language accurate that he still should adhere to historical accuracy, which I can understand the argument for. But if Gibson's main objective is historical accuracy, that's not represented on the screen. In my opinion, not unlike the Neveldine/Taylor films (going back to my comparison), he is going for very over-the-top visceral violence and action over elements like dialogue, storyline, and "message" (the message IS the violence in The Passion, so that's kind of an exception).

Obviously because Crank is in contemporary LA, fleeting images provide satirical content. One could argue Gibson does the same thing with insensitivity. Again, I understand, and I can't tell anyone it is or isn't offensive... it just didn't bother me because its primary objective didn't seem to me to be to present a period piece.

>without wiki or imdb name three characters or two of the
>tribes that were depicted?
Jaguar Paw
Cocoa Tree (Leaf? Bean? Dammit!)
Snake Tail

I think those guesses are correct, so I can see your point here. I wonder how much that has to do with the names being different than what I'm used to and my constant case of CRS. I definitely don't remember the names of the tribes, but I also didn't remember exactly where it was set. This prolly helps your stance because I prolly should have come away with a clearer idea of how these people were.
That said, I still think there are lots of characters I remember.
I remember the humor of Jaguar Paw's father,
I remember the loud mouth and eventual despair of the mother-in-law,
I remember the impotent man's resilience,
I remember the tumultuous father-son relationship of the rival tribe's two main hunters,
and I remember the different architecture and designs of each tribe separately.

Cultural whitewashing is evident, but I think it's unfair to say everyone is nameless when there are still discernible personalities on both sides.

Add that on top of all the famished looking, fucked
>teeth smiling, overly violent powers that be, and their is a
>lot of e-racing and stereotyping going on.

I can see this, but I wonder what his options for the physicality of the people is. Now, if the Aztecs were much more warlike than the Maya, this seems to be a definite problem. I don't know what would be lost placing this with the Aztec instead. Lazy. I don't like it.


>As scholars like Acuna and Murguia have pointed out (about
>history and Apocolypto) the very idea of human sacrifice is so
>misrepresented and over-blown that it denies the fact that the
>Maya's historical record was looted, destroyed and
>misinterpreted by the very colonizers who try to frame the
>Maya (and other indigenous groups) as savages. So for Mel to
>base a whole movie on the supposed violence for sport / human
>sacrifice bullshit is to continue that very problematic
>narrative.

I agree that everything was overblown, but I also want to take the movie as more of an allegory than true representation. Mel couldn't have known I would interpret it that way, and neither of us can say for certain how factual or allegorical he wanted it to be. I do know that I was not upset about the representation as one of the tribes as warlike because I did take it as an allegory, so I wasn't seeing only these people being represented. The first tribe was peaceful but overtaken by a stronger, vicious force from the outside. I accepted the tribes as extremes because it helped the dramatic tension - I always believed the characters I liked were in very real danger and it made me root for them.
As to the reinforcing of savage stereotypes - you are correct. I have no answers for this problem in past, present, or future examples. In some cases it really bothers me (The Searchers) in others I can get past it. It's a problem I don't like to think about very often because I still enjoy a good amount of John Ford movies, "Andrei Rublev," and this film. We need more education and more integration.


>
>Than their is Mel's "commentary" on the film were he says he
>left the real "gnarly stuff" out. LOL, what a fucn clown. If
>he knew shit about anything he'd know that one of the main
>reasons Europeans were able to colonize the Maya civilization
>is because, they were in a state of stasis. Their leaders had
>grown lazy and un-alert of possible foreign invaders. their
>last real war was with Vikings nearly 400 years prior. Maya
>had an abundance of food, land and what the European thought
>of as material wealth. Their was no famine, drought and
>in-fighting, that came after the white-man polluted the
>civilization with his flu, guns, ideas on ownership and
>Christianity.

All of this I was aware of but I honestly didn't think about it while watching. Let's not forget though that Mel also gave it a bit of a religious angle - the more forceful tribe ignored prophecy. I think it can be said that the stasis of which you speak was represented by the decadence of their violence. I felt famine and drought then were used to justify this stasis and desperate violence, so it was a whole chain of things really. Every time someone stepped up to be sacrificed there were shots of a fat kid (presumably in power or child of someone in power) giggling and clapping. It reminded me of that kid who was way too old to be sucking tit in "Game of Thrones."

>
>it's the same shit that makes me roll my eyes when a shitty
>movie about the slave trade, reconstruction, or jim crow
>America is made (ehhem... The Help).
Didn't see it.

> I find the movie, in
>particular it's story, ridiculous
I know I'm being an apologist for most of this stuff, but it's because I did enjoy this movie and the discussion is great too.

you're being an apologist. That's the tricky thing about creating period pieces: we want things to be "authentic", while still being entertained. Yes, liberties should be taken, but at what cost?

For me as a person of color, with half of my ancestors being descendents of Maya/Azteca people, seeing us up on the big screen greedy, corrupted by power and destroying/killing each other is highly problematic; especially when in that moment it wasn't the case. It's the same argument Blacks have been making about representation in film for near a century. I think because Apocalypto exist outside of the American racial schism of Black/White, people (in particular whites) are quicker to dismiss to historical and racial inaccuracies to enjoy the film on a film for film's sake basis

either way, after this conversation, i think imma Netflix it this weekend and see if I still feel the same about it as i did the year it dropped

It is true that there is an overly violent tribe, but they are balanced out by a peaceful tribe.
I think specifically of the scene early on when Jaguar Paw's tribe is met by another tribe. Frightened, and a bit creepy in their own right, this third tribe is allowed free passage by Jaguar Paw's tribe.
The main dramatic thrust of the piece comes from the difference in ideology of the two main tribes, which is also born out in the characterization and set design each group is given.

I agree wholeheartedly on this standing outside America's usual racial conversation - had this been set in Africa during the same time period I can imagine tons of uproar. Hell, I don't even know if a film version of "Things Fall Apart" could be made because of the many cultural elements Achibe gave to the story that would be shouted down on a public release. (Why are they all dancing around a fire? Why are these people wearing masks, the villagers have to know they aren't gods!)

I watched "Braveheart" tonight and couldn't help bring myself back to this conversation. When it was over my lady and I went online and found a slew on factual inaccuracies, and the homo- and Anglophobic elements were in full force.
I think at the end of the day we can make a few assessments on Mel Gibson the film maker:
He makes entertaining, engaging films from a fresh perspective.
He likes violence. A lot.
He has lots of inner demons that work themselves into his films.
He thinks about religion with a deep zealotry that he then gives to all of his characters. This does not mean it always manifests in the characters as religious devotion, but the majority of his characters are driven by an unwavering belief in something.
To paraphrase one of my favorite teachers, he cares more about "Truth" than he does about "truth," and it is this desire to get to the heart of a story that gets him into hot water.


EDIT: And since I forgot to mention it above... if as you say there was little to no conflict amongst the Maya at the time this movie takes place that is a pretty big leap and does reinforce a myth which screams laziness. If you want it in that time and place, why not move it north a bit and put it with the Aztec? And they shot in Mexico? Cmon, Mel.

of how this schism/dynamic could/would play out. I wonder if it would fall into the Ali movie bait of a "Black director must to do it in order for it to be "authentic"". I mean it's one of the reason i just wrote fuck this movie to begin, because these conversations cane derail very quickly into the "ohh you're just ignorant" or "take your racial agenda to activist" shit. Back in the day i use to be mad a people who liked movies like this, now i just understand different films work for different people and that's how it should be, but debating the merits/value of a film is also, well valuable.

Even with that I agree on your points about Mel, I love Braveheart too, well i haven't seen it in a long time, but i did. He's a strange man who does violence very well and religiosity bleeds into his films. some times they work, some times they don't.

One of my favorite films ever. Such a unique visual experience.

The floating heads,
the sparkling eyes,
the drawings on the screen,
there was always something new on the screen.
I could not get enough.

I've watched all six (LOVED all six!) but the main arc as you move forward is that the camp factor ramps up. essentially Ogami Itto, the action star, gets increasingly bad ass. so yeah, personally I loved it, but I was appreciating the camp a lot as it went on.

I've read the whole manga, too. if you dig the themes / content of the early movies, you might dig most of the stuff in the 1st 10 books or so. like the movies, the books increasingly start pushing towards an ultimate resolution and get increasingly filler-ish the closer he gets to Edo. and for the last books in the 20s? siiiiigh, I have NEVER seen so much filler in a story. it's kinda amazing just in that respect, but yeah, if you're not looking to find the amazing ways someone can pump filler to extend a story to sell more units, don't ever read past book 15 or so.

I think the Academy loves Hugo & The Artist so much because they're movies about movies. Specifically old school movies. Neither lived up to expectations.

I think I'm in love with Shailene Woodley but not the rest of The Descendants.

Coriolanus was OK. Nothing amazing but I didn't know the play so I was interested.

Morning Glory and True Grit are new on Netflix so they became the movie I put on as I go to bed. Morning Glory is a charming yet poorly made as I remembered.

Started watching The Take, the British show with Tom Hardy, but wasn't feeling it. It was OK, just seemed like a standard gangster getting out of prison story.

I watched the first ep of Shadow Game, Chiwetel Ejiofor's BBC show, and it was OK.

Kill List is terrible. The stuff with the hit men is OK but I have no idea how it's getting such great reviews. It's not even like Drive where I could see how people might have connected with the character and liked the movie; this is one where I don't know what the hell the people are lauding because most of what they're saying is great, I found laughable.

Three episodes into BSG; really good so far.

Chronicle was solid but standard. I was surprised to find out that it was so short, felt longer. Still, not a bad way to spend an hour or so.

...Game of Thrones.

Five hours later, I was debating if I really needed to sleep before work or whether I should just finish the last half of the season.

weekday night, I figured I'd put on the first episode before I fell asleep. big mistake!

I didn't look too much into it before so was surprised it used the origianl language but that's fine. I enjoyed it though i was gettng antsy near the end.

After Hours - This movie is pretty slept-on - Griffin Dunne is fantastic and it has BOTH the MOM AND THE DAD from Home Alone. Pretty dark. It's usually pretentious to mention Kafka - but there are clear influences here.

Cross of Iron - Pecinpah FTW. A classic. Intense. Must-see.

Affliction - It takes place in NH. Also - Nolte and Coburn are great. And PREZBO!!!

Mean Streets - I had not seen this yet and I was not disappointed. DeNiro.

Horrible Bosses - I expected MUCH more with this cast. Some funny moments but pretty dull overall.

>After Hours - This movie is pretty slept-on - Griffin Dunne
>is fantastic and it has BOTH the MOM AND THE DAD from Home
>Alone. Pretty dark. It's usually pretentious to mention Kafka
>- but there are clear influences here.

Yeah, this was pretty damn good. And kind of unexpected from Scorcese. I dug it.

>Affliction - It takes place in NH. Also - Nolte and Coburn are
>great. And PREZBO!!!

Loved this movie. Nolte and Coburn did their damn thing, and the latter definitely deserved his Oscar. I had zero idea PRez was in it. Wow.

I've basically kept to the "gangsters and murder" side of Scorsese. My only real venture outside of this was "Alice Doesn't Live Here Anymore." I thought it proved Scorsese wasn't able to handle a film outside his comfort zone, but I liked it nonetheless. Here's my question: Does it feel like a whole movie or an exercise? If it's the latter I'll respectfully hold it off for another day.

outside of the moving camera shots you wouldn't know it was scorcese - rent it!!

>I've basically kept to the "gangsters and murder" side of
>Scorsese. My only real venture outside of this was "Alice
>Doesn't Live Here Anymore." I thought it proved Scorsese
>wasn't able to handle a film outside his comfort zone, but I
>liked it nonetheless. Here's my question: Does it feel like a
>whole movie or an exercise? If it's the latter I'll
>respectfully hold it off for another day.

He didn't really have a comfort zone yet though, he had only just made Mean Streets the year before and Boxcar Birtha the year before that. I think Scorsese has had a lot of relatively successful excursions outside of his comfort zone (...but then again, I love Scorsese.) Nonetheless, you should really check out The King of Comedy and After Hours. A lot of people swear by Bringing Out the Dead, but I haven't seen that in 13 years and I was only 14, so I can't really say if it's worth it. I've not seen The Age of Innocence, Kundun, or Last Temptation of Christ, so I can't really speak on those, but they certainly have their ardent supporters. After Hours, if I remember it correctly, is pretty much a just a (masterful) exercise in style within the framework of a quirky, 80s (very) dark comedy. Check it out some day.

Pina was awesome...a documentary/tribute to Pina Bausch but in 3d. What made it good was that in the current fad of 3D it's really not necessary to enjoy the movie, but with this doc it's integral...the pieces they chose and the editing really compliments the technology well.

Shame...technically great but soulless. Carey Mulligan is having a good run as a reincarnated Michelle Williams tho.

Carnage. It was good, but like many theater to film translations is a much better play then movie.

Also finally caught Capt. America. I can see how people hate on the film since it's totally not a superhero blockbuster movie...it's very pulpy and I thought THAT made it a better film.

Besides that I finished the Increasingly Poor Decisions of Todd Margret Season 1...great but it felt more like a long form film then a serialized show.

had no idea it was in 3D

SO FUCKING PISSED.

The Examined Life (doc) @@@
The Perfect Host @@@ 1/2
I Will Follow @@@ 1/2
Don't Be Afraid of the Dark @@
Cowboys & Aliens @@
The Debt @@@, maybe @@@ 1/2
Ides of March @@@ 1/2, maybe @@@@
Laugh at My Pain @@ 1/2
Shame @@@@, maybe @@@@ 1/2
50/50 @@@

I can't even lie, i did. what was strange i in a way found it "admirable" that they would have actors of that age engage in such a scene, a nice break from the norm, but it was also just comedy. I left the Debt wanting more. Ithink the writers punked out of some better plots for the sake of trying to be original

The Help @@@ 1/2; can't even front i enjoyed this shit a lot. yes i got criticisms of it, but it made me hate white people, which means it wasn't sugar coating race-relations

The Artist @@@ 1/2; maybe just a @@@
I'm lock-step with everything Longo has been saying about this film for the past couple of weeks

just watched the 6th ep so I'm officially halfway. kudos to whoever made the post encouraging people to watch it! pretty damn good.

tinker tailor soldier spy - i wanted to like it. im going to blame the slow pacing and the fact that i'd just gotten out of the hospital/was hopped up on meds for the fact that i fell asleep about 45min into it. i'll give it another shot sometime probably.

i have "drive" and "the fades" on deck (along w random stuff that's been lingering for years). might watch drive tonight if i don't feel like watching AHS after top chef and modern family.

i swear i feel like i watch too much tv even tho i know people that watch so much more than i do :o/

>just watched the 6th ep so I'm officially halfway. kudos to
>whoever made the post encouraging people to watch it! pretty
>damn good.
>
>tinker tailor soldier spy - i wanted to like it. im going to
>blame the slow pacing and the fact that i'd just gotten out of
>the hospital/was hopped up on meds for the fact that i fell
>asleep about 45min into it. i'll give it another shot sometime
>probably.
>
>i have "drive" and "the fades" on deck (along w random stuff
>that's been lingering for years). might watch drive tonight if
>i don't feel like watching AHS after top chef and modern
>family.
>
>i swear i feel like i watch too much tv even tho i know people
>that watch so much more than i do :o/

I'd watched the first ep a while back (free on itunes) and it didn't really do anything for me. Decided to give it a go again when I saw it on Netflix instant and I was hooked. The sketch format actually works very well because no character overstays their welcome. You probably have to be a hipster yourself (or at least devote part of your time to the almighty tumblrz) to enjoy the show, since most of the jokes are inside ones, but I thought it was well-written and acted. Definitely not groundbreaking by any means, especially not at a time when comedy is killing it on TV, but how can I hate on a show that uses Washed Out for its intro.
Also a big fan of the British-style 6-episode format. I believe one of the reason most network shows have been bad at generating online buzz is that 24 episodes is just too damn much for people to watch unless they're really motivated. 6 or 13 episodes is the way to go, especially when you're catching up on a show a few seasons in.

This would've been a lot better with anyone else besides McG directing

for a second there I thought you were talking about the French flick (France's entry for the best foreign movie Oscar) and was wondering what McG had to do with it

not too sure how I feel about it yet.

no matter how many dusty Hawaiian shirts, tacky haircuts or glasses you put on George Clooney, he's still George Clooney. and that's where this movie falters. he's simply not a believable actor for his character's problems. not for little stuff, like awkwardly running to his friends' house or snooping around the beach. not for bigger moments, like the hospital visits or a trustee meeting speech where his own persona overwhelms the character.

Clooney tried, he really did, but he never reached *that place* -- not like Giamatti, Nicholson and Broderick did in Payne's previous movies. Shailene Woodley and the kids were awesome though.

It was smart for Payne not to go with Clooney over Payne in Sideways and I think Payne's lovable loser vibe would have been a better fit in this movie as well. Not that Clooney was bad but I agree he never really fit and I really don't get all of the Best Actor love.

If I'm interpreting that ending correctly, when Gyllenhaal breaks off and creates that new/alternate reality, does he basically just steal that other dude's whole existence. AND his girl?

Kind of a dick move no?

One of the many problems with the ending.

I kinda got the vibe that it was an ending they thought would be cool without worrying about how much sense it actually made.

Of course, the whole movie, as enjoyable as it is, hangs together by a tenuous thread. My vote is that the narrator is not reliable.

They should have gone with him just dying. It actually would have been happier than the ending they had.

And he's trapped in a world where he'll never look like Jake Gyllenhaal again

It's been awhile so my mind is fuzzy,
why exactly does his world start to crumble?
Self-awareness? Fatigue?
I want to say it was the former because it adds credence to my thought that the final section is in his mind. Maybe he dies, maybe he is allowed to create his own reality. He can have the girl (though we all know the finer of the two wasn't in the field) and he can be the hero he desperately wants to be.
Part of me wants to scrap all this and call the movie bullshit on principle, but Monaghan aside I enjoyed most of this thing. I want it be better than it prolly is.

I didn't mean to dismiss the whole thing just because of that ending. There were even aspects of the ending I liked, but the romance aspect doesn't hold up to scrutiny. The science doesn't either but that's not as problematic for me. My main problem with the "science" is how much the guy who "invented" source code didn't understand it. That's not a bad twist in and of itself, but again: If he had been paying as much attention as I was, he would have realized his concept of it was bullshit to begin with. It actually feels forced that he's only considering this incredibly narrow application of the technology and not asking questions that this semi-brain dead dude figures out in a matter of minutes.

I like that you're considering the whole "unreliable narrator" angle. I don't think that's the case here, but stories like this are fun because they're open to multiple interpretations.

Why exactly wasn't he running things? Why not just have Vera be the inventor as well as communicator? Either way, it seemed like nobody really understood how it worked and neither did the director. The movie seemed to set up a "he has to die" rule with the first few trips. He dies at the EXACT SAME TIME for various reasons, but then that isn't important for the rest of the picture? I choose to believe in the unreliable narrator because this thing is sloppy without it.

Weird balance between the funny & serious scenes but the Blunt & Kristen Scott Thomas make it work for the most part.

Regardless of whether it is good or not, I don't see how that movie connects with audiences here. CBS Films has a horrific track record and already got rid of their first lead exec. I don't think this one is going to put them in the black (although it has to be better than their previous attempts.)

this weekend

_________________________________________________________________________
Baby, I'm your carpenter, please let me lay your tile

And Gambit could be good so maybe they're turning things around over there.

... using his fishing rod like Indian Jones' whip. If that's true, I mean, how bad could the rest of it really be?

>... using his fishing rod like Indian Jones' whip. If that's
>true, I mean, how bad could the rest of it really be?

was actually pretty good. and funny 2/3rds of the way.
the last third got to be a little much.
lotta of awkward laughing in the theater.
everyone was pretty funny, ewan with aspergers was funny.
cant see it being too popular here in the US. especially with that title.
i havent seen one ad for this thing yet either.

Television:
BBC America's The Fades (i'm catching up on BBC America On Demand) LOVE IT! :)
BLUEBLOODS
REVENGE
SOUTHLAND
THE GOOD WIFE
LOST GIRL (i like this show!)
BEING HUMAN
WHITE COLLAR

Movies/DVD:
THE GREY
CHRONICLE (planning to see both this weekend)
THE TAKE (BBC miniseries Tom Hardy co-wrote that came on back in 2009, I think. I am going to watch it straight through since I missed this when it actually premiered and I hear it's good)
PHASE 7 (spanish apocalytic (sp?) thriller)
THE ASSASSINATION OF JESSE JAMES BY THE COWARD ROBERT FORD (i missed this when it came out in 2007 and I hear Brad Pitt *SHOULD* have been nominated for this but wasn't. This is the movie that Casey Affleck got an oscar nomination for)
adding more horror to my netflix queue since i'm on Dae021's horror movie podcast and I want to make sure I can chime in when i'm officially on (mid February, here I come!!!!)

and i'm sure i'll catch whatever indie and other movies coming out this month that I haven't checked for yet.

Saw the first two episodes, and now I'm hooked.

"Contagion" starring Laurence Fishburne, Kate Winslet, and a lot more
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1598778/

"The Experiment" staring Forest Whitaker and Adrien Brody
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0997152/
-Remake of the German film that I hope to see soon.

"Closer" starring Natalie Portman, Jude Law, Clive Davis and Julia Roberts
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0376541/
-Liked it better than I expected to.

but with march madness creeping up, I'm going to break down soon, also seems like live sports links are drying up with the quickness.

TV
*Enterprise* yeah, I am clearly hitting bottom and will do anything to satisfy my space opera fix. I saw a few episodes of this when it was on and never really formed a strong opinion. Just knew compared to TNG it felt too light-hearted and watered down, not as smart. But it is on Amazon Prime, so I've started going through season 1. Not too bad, not great, but good enough to keep going sporadically. I actually like Bacula as captain, and the vulcan is hot, but the writing is lacking.

*Shark Tank* I streamed season 1. Really like this show, love the concept and really connects with my own interest. The musical score is so corny and over the top, and they add drama for no reason at times, but its really good considering the premise they are taking on. Oleary is really over doing it with the fake persona. Show is always 50% better when Cuban is on.

*Happy Endings* Stumbled on to it a few weeks back and fully caught up, my new "community" not saying they are similar, but its my in my 1-2 network sitcoms I actually track.


MOVIES

I've probably watched more movies since getting rid of cable than I have in a long time:

*50/50* Maybe I'm getting soft, but this movie hit me in the heart a bit. Only "-" was Seth Rogan, I just hate that guy

*Moneyball* Similar to Will's comment, but in the end I enjoyed it, wasn't impressed but a fun 90 min. Maybe its because I'm not a baseball fan, and this is the only Michael Lewis book I haven't read.


*Drive* Ehh, visually compelling, but felt no emotional connection. There was so many pointless decisions/actions taken that made no sense but to make a cool visual (like him putting on the mask to eventually merc perlman, the blood-stained jacket, etc). Cinematographic porn, but I did got a woody off some of the scenes.

*Apollo 18* Worst movie I've ever seen, maybe. Scratch that, not sure I can say "seen" since I stopped it after 50 minutes and couldn't finish (see above my scifi withdrawal that forces me to try shit like this)

*Beginners* Liked. But I've always been a big McGreggor fan.

A handful of others I'm probably forgetting right now

The details of the animation are nothing short of amazing, some shots of the garden were just beautiful. This isn't an adventure epic but it doesn't try or need to be. Definitely worth watching if you're an anime fan.

Grave:

One of the saddest movies I've seen. They pulled no punches with this one. Some nice moments, but overall it was pretty rough. 4/5

Hanna:

Didn't like this one. Most of the characters here were real goofy, which might have been intentional, but shit bothered me. I don't know if over-directed is the right term, but there were a couple of scenes where I was thinking to myself "errr...why is this happening?" Some of the sets/locations were great, but the story was kinda boring. 2.5/5

Bombay Beach - Another indie that straddles the line between documentary and feature (see: Putty Hill), this one had a very dream-like quality to it that I really enjoyed. Great cinematography that managed to show some beauty amidst the desolation of the Salton Sea (7.5/10)

Chronicle - Good fun, went a little darker than I was expecting, which was good. Did not feel that involved in the characters, but enough to pay attention till the end. Impressively realistic-looking, as these things go (7/10)

Design For Living - Jules and Jim by Lubitsch. This wasn's as fun as I had hoped, but it was still enjoyable and breezy. Pretty amazing this film is from the 30s though, what with the girl getting with 2 guys (I think this is one of the first Hollywood films where they explicitly refer to having sex, though I might be wrong) (8/10)

Rear Window - I tend to consider the latest Hitchcock that I've watched to be the GOAT, but in this case it really might be true. But since Vertigo is on Netflix Instant right now, this opinion might change in the next week (9/10)

Detour - Kind of a by-the-numbers noir. The main actor was good but the femme fatale was really shrill and annoying (6/10)

I suppose the connection here depends on how steeped you are in Judaism or Christianity, because the opening passage from Job summarized the movie plainly: reconciliation with God.

mainly, Jack's. it's about him being aware of God, connecting with God, feeling rebuked by God, accepting God -- a journey from birth to his current age. how his parents formed his perspective ("always you wrestle inside me"), as they dealt with life in disparate ways. father as nature, mother as grace.

I was wary of this, having not enjoyed The Thin Red Line, but nearly everything here worked (especially the voiceovers). even the last 20 minutes made sense. an ambitious, spectacular movie that I was sure I'd hate but ended up really loving.

yeah, about the wealthiest 1%

made by a privileged kid who's fam is in that category. it's decent... def worth checking out, but it would've been better if he didn't try so hard to imitate michael moore, even down to his speaking tone when he was narrating

some great moments though, like the Kinko's founder's awkward ineraction with a homless guy, and what an old dickwad every conservative's hero Milton Friedman is.

It's also a trip that Warren Buffett's granddaughter got disowened for being involved, given his current public views on wealth inequality, but this was made 5 years ago

"Over the top" doesn't really begin to describe "RoboGeisha." Suffice to say, it's big, dumb, poorly dubbed fun...although you're probably just as well off watching the trailer (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0HdeX4mO1Kg) than sitting through all 1 hour and 40 minutes of it. It's available on Netflix, though.

Also, I've been covering the Portland International Film Festival for a local publication, so in the last week I've seen seven
foreign films of varying quality. Here's a quick'n'dirty recap of what I've seen so far:

1) "Bullhead," A. Set in the Flemish "hormone mafia underground," it's a knotty crime drama with a unique setting and an even more unique performance from Matthias Schoenearts (I'm probably butchering that name). It's a better character study than crime movie, but definitely worth checking out (it's nominated for an Oscar, too).

2) "The Forgiveness of Blood," A. Joshua Marston's follow-up to "Maria Full of Grace," about a blood feud in an Albanian village and its effect on a family. Quietly compelling, and really tense even in scenes where nothing much is happening.

3) "Monsieur Lazhar," B. From Canada, it has a really startling opening image: A boy peaking into his classroom and finding his teacher's lifeless body hanging from the ceiling. It gets more conventional from there (it's your typical, "new teacher comes, has a rough early go with the kids, ends up forging a bond with them, but has a secret that threatens to separate them" flick), but has a really great natural performance from Mohamed Fellag and the two main kids. It's simple and unassuming enough that that's all it needs to succeed.

4) "Cirkus Columbia," C-. About a guy returning to Bosnia after 20 years in exile and extracting revenge on his ex-wife, who refused to follow him. Couldn't get into it.

5) "Declaration of War," C. A whimsical French movie framed around a child battling brain cancer. It's not quite as terrible as that sounds, but it's not all that good, either.

6) "Where Do We Go Now?," D. Really shallow, tone-deaf Lebanese movie that resembles one of those English community comedies (i.e. "Full Monty" or "Calendar Girls") then swings to melodrama, then back again. Considering the subject matter -- religious strife in a remote village -- it's handled really indelicately. But director-star Nadine Labaki isn't bad to look at for two hours.

7) "Cafe de Flore," F. Eye-rollingly pretentious, annoyingly edited, uses Down syndrome kids as symbolism, has a lot of underwater dream sequences shot in a pool, etc. Terrible.

Lastly, I saw Ti West's latest, "The Innkeepers." If you saw "House of the Devil," you know West is great at making traditional, effective horror throwbacks. This one is a haunted house movie set in the '90s. It's another slow burn, but a pretty ho-hum payoff. Still pretty good.

>7) "Cafe de Flore," F. ... uses Down syndrome kids as symbolism, has a lot of
>underwater dream sequences shot in a pool, etc.

go on...

... The movie features two concurrent storylines. One involving a 40-ish club DJ who's recently left the woman he was married to for 20 years to shack up with a hot blonde. He's apparently conflicted about this. His ex-wife is not over the breakup. She sleepwalks, and keeps having dreams about car accidents and children with Down's syndrome. Also, the DJ is a recovering addict who sees the royal guard from the Beefeater Gin bottles everywhere. (In one scene, early on, he sees him in the crowd at a rave he's DJing. Seriously.)

The other story involves a single mother in late '60s France raising a boy with Down's syndrome. At some point, the boy, who's like 6 or 7, falls in love with a little girl in his class who also has Downs. They become inseparable, literally -- they hug each other and won't let go until they're pulled apart. This starts to anger the mother, who tells her son he can't see the girl again.

The film intercuts between the two stories with fidgety, showy editing, while also throwing in stuff like quick flashes of the Beefeater guy in the background or the DJ and his girlfriend swimming naked in a pool or the ex-wife looking at her former husband and seeing him as he looked as a teenager -- that kind of shit.

Eventually, we learn how these two stories are related: The ex-wife goes to a psychic to interpret her dreams, and is told that, in another life, she was the mother of the kid with Downs. The kid with Downs represents the DJ, and the little girl with Downs represents the DJ's new girlfriend, and basically the lesson is she has to learn to let him go...or something. I'm not sure if the reincarnation thing is supposed to be taken literally or symbolically, but this is all treated as a very poignant message about love and happiness and music.

Really, though, I knew this piece of shit was gonna be horrible during the opening credits, when the DJ fades into the background of an airport terminal as a slow-motion parade of people with Downs march into the foreground. The only good thing about is the woman who plays the DJ's new girlfriend looks good naked, and she's naked in, like, every other scene.

And it's still the best television show ever.

The details and dialogue alone are astounding.

And yeah, the ending was brilliant (cue the haters: life goes on).

>And yeah, the ending was brilliant (cue the haters: life goes
>on).

but Tony died.

...there was no definitive answer, IMO.

Its a shame when the only thing I could positively say about the film is how gorgeous it was shot, and Judi Dench.

They made such a big deal about this film.

Going to watch "Submarine" next.

yeah, it was pointless. there have been much better versions.

if you're a fan of the story, you may enjoy the Ruth Wilson/Toby Stephens one.

Its beyond me how in the pits of hell did I miss this film all these years *SMH* come to think of it, maybe because its due to my indifference to fantasy films.

Everything about this film took me by surprise, and I couldn't hold the tears @ the end of the film.

Really good doc screened here last night in Seattle with the widow & daughter (co-producer) in attendance for a Q&A afterwards. According to IMDB this was televised in 2011 but it's getting another showing next week here (& other cities as well I believe) on the big screen again. Highly recommended to any fans of the man/mma/inspirational stories/etc...etc...

A packed house
(99% black and mostly lesbian couples)

I noticed some people would lol
Every time Kim Wayne's was on screen
Even if she didn't say anything
I heard similar things went down in precious
W Monique


Really irritating
Cause I thought Kim did an excellent job

netflix instant.

This is one of those cases where your childhood memories stand up. Quality show.

Unlike He-Man (also on instant). There are like 10 people in Eternia - 3 know he is He-Man but the rest can't figure it out? ALL HE DOES IS TAKE HIS SHIRT OFF!

I loved watching this show when it was on.

Remember SPARTACUS (the one where Spartacus was a blue eyed black man from some subterranean world of sorts)? That was the shit, too!

I might have to get those cartoons on netflix!

But TMCOG is a gem.

a pleasant and unmemorable movie. the good part is that it's never bad and sidesteps some clichés; the bad part is there's not much risk or substance. Will Ferrell is strong here, given what he has to work with, as are Rebecca Hall and Chris Wallace. but there's a monotony to the story that is never broken. it should have tried to be funnier, or sadder, or more dramatic...something.

I agree that at times it definitely verges on uncinematic (the most "cinematic" moment-- the Pena revelation at the end-- was maybe my least favorite part of the movie), but I couldn't help but see in it one of my best friends, who went through a very similar, monotonous, undramatic alcoholism that ended up taking him to a really scary place. The scene with Howerton in the bar... I sat and wondered if I'd ever offered my friend a drink in such a flip manner before.

It's really hard to toe that line between realism and flatness. I probably enjoyed it more solely from watching a friend go through it mere months earlier... not sure how it'd play on repeat. I do remember thinking it was the first time I'd seen Ferrell in a serious role in which he seemed effortless-- Stranger Than Fiction seemed at times to me to be Ferrell trying desperately to not be funny. This movie let him be funny at times, which made it all the sadder in others.

that final revelation was an unnecessary shit kick. like I said, I enjoyed the performances, but movie felt as if it wanted to say something...it just never did. low stakes are fine, there just wasn't enough draw or intrigue to pull me in closer. reminded me of Win Win in that respect.

Shit, man, it's never too late to catch up on classics. There's really nothing I can say about this noir masterpiece that hasn't already been said, so I'll leave it at that. I will say, though, that Orson Welles fucking awesome in his limited screen time. I loved the tilted angles and the shots of silhouettes running into bright lights at the end of tunnels. Great, great movie.

I get that it's supposed to reflect the local Bohemian/gypsy aesthetic but it really grates on me. Last time I watched it the music actually took me out of a couple of scenes

Safe House - another pleasant surprise in a year that's been very consistent for new releases so far (Haywire, The Grey, Chronicle and now this). Denzel was his usual badass self, and Ryan Reynolds actually impressed me by really playing his part to a T. The Tony Scott-ish grainy cinematography and shaky cam was pretty bad though

Vertigo - saw that this was up on Netflix Instant for a short while so treated myself to a projector session of this gem. It's not my favorite Hitchcock, but I like it more each time I see it

Bullhead - Belgium's entry for the 2012 Oscars, a reasonably coherent tale involving bit-gangsters dabling in illegal animal steroid trading. The main actor was spot on, and the plot felt very organic (if a bit dull at times). Bonus points for the cinematography that manages to create nice visuals out of the Western Belgium location.

finished up Portlandia s1 and Breaking Bad s4 (man that finish...). Now I need to finally get started on Boardwalk Empire s2

>Vertigo - saw that this was up on Netflix Instant for a short
>while so treated myself to a projector session of this gem.
>It's not my favorite Hitchcock, but I like it more each time I
>see it

Now after about ten to fifteen viewings, it's my favorite Hitchcock by a reasonable distance. And Hitchcock is one of my favorites ever.

Not as fun as NxNW... but so brilliant.

somehow I've seen this entire franchise, for reasons best omitted. the first 45 minutes were really wooden, but it settles into a B-list Ocean's 11 groove after that. Vin is Vin; Paul Walker is so bad it's entertaining. Don Omar and Tego Calderon do the sidekick thing that Ludacris and Tyrese attempt to. The Rock brought the one-liner cheddar.

I was disappointed with the female objectification. Jordana Brewster's thin lips and thick eyebrows never did it for me. Gal Gadot has a great face but that swimsuit reveal was saddening. more gratuitous T&A next time. regardless, the action was mostly fun and I liked the repeated sweeping location shots, so...yeah, it was worth it.

when is Soderbergh going to make interesting movies again? he doesn't even need to use new talent now, just have his Oscar-winning friends take on any nondescript, brief role he has to fill. Jude, go fuck up your teeth, that'll be such an authentic touch.

it's like going to a four-star restaurant and getting a grilled cheese sandwich. yeah, it's good, and made with an expert touch, but who the hell is going to be amazed by a grilled cheese sandwich?

I thought it was well-made and I liked the performances, especially Damon. I mean, it didn't crack my top 25 from last year, but I still gave it a "B"...certainly more than just a grilled cheese sandwich.

Better and a lot funnier than I remembered. And my memory was relatively fond of it to begin with. The humor and the visuals (goddamn Anderson went ham with this one, didn't he?) make up for any other problems the movie has. For me at least.

Perfect Sense - semi-interesting apocalyptic love story between Ewan McGregor and Eva Green. The idea is that people start slowly losing their senses, and to be fair that aspect was treated pretty well. But I never felt involved by the characters' lives, and the voice-overs, though pretty, made things a bit too didactical. Maybe it would have been better if one of them were unaffected by the world-wide "virus"

The Trouble With Harry - meh, this has some Hitchcock's usual flair and was well-constructed, but felt too whimsical at times. Some of the innuendo was pretty blatant though, that was kinda funny ("it's been a while since someone crossed her threshold" BOOM)

Ivan The Terrible - watched part 1 last night, and now I can't wait to finish up. This was my first Eisenstein, and now I get why he gets so many props from cinephiles. Tremendous visuals and possibly the best use of lighting and shadows I've ever seen. The acting was a little tough to get into, but I thought it was epic on purpose (for all I know the tsar really did act and talk like that). The propaganda was extra-strong but having seen a few Russian flicks from the 50s I knew what to expect here.

started re-watching Mad Men s3, to get ready for the s5 premiere next month. Finally!

God damn. Lives up to the hype. The acting might have been the best acting I saw all year, up and down the whole list. Every character is played pretty much flawlessly IMO. That movie is seared into my brain.

I also watched:

Notorious. The Hitchcock movie, not the Biggie Smalls movie. I thought it took a little while to get going, but once it did, I fucking loved it. Great movie all around.

Spellbound. The plot was distractingly implausible, but Bergman sold it well enough for me to suspend my disbelief. A handful of awesome shots, such as the camera lingering on the straight razor in Peck's hand every time the camera panned in that direction. The Salvador Dali dream sequence was cool as well.

rum diaries- ehhhhhhh. and i love hst
the artist- lovedddddd it, captivating
a dangerous method- soooo good, edge of my seat the whole time.
taebdm- fantastic, but im a total stan for these two
take me home tonight- good for what it was
in the middle of take shelter, which i love so far
kept up with all the regular tv shows

My first time seeing it. I'm sure it's been discussed here before, but I don't think I've even taken part. Obviously a strong contender for the single biggest "What If" in film history. Personally, I still think it's got enough strong material that it retains its overall excellence - it's just too bad that it's clearly not the masterpiece that it most likely was before 50 minutes were chopped off and a new ending was shot and tacked on without Welles' involvement or approval...

...and that's coming from an unabashed Welles devotee.

The great parts are great and it still works as a piece, but it's ultimately only decent. The book is very good but it too is not an earth-shattering masterpiece. I would rather watch "Touch of Evil," "The Stranger," "The Trial," or "F for Fake" again before seeing "Ambersons" a third time, so what unseen greatness can be hiding in 50 minutes of trimmed fat? Maybe calling it "fat" is harsh; I am sure that most of what got cut is still worth seeing, but it would also make "Ambersons" his longest movie ever. I believe that if Welles had been able to recut the recut he would have only been able to add about half that 50 minutes anyways. I would definitely watch a full version of, I just don't think it would drastically reshape my view of the film.
I do love that once again Orson slyly gives himself the best part instead of the biggest.

Even in it's present form I thought it was better than "decent". Going into to it I questioned if it would live up its lofty reputation, and my expectations were sort of dominating my mind for the first 20 minutes or so. I think it's a great credit to the movie that I basically started to forget all about those expectations and get absorbed in the story. Certain parts had me positively riveted - the dinner table outburst of George telling Eugene how he felt about him (and automobiles) was exceptional. (Joe Cotton killed.)

There are a few things I really can't get over. Firstly, how incredibly confident Welles seemed as both a storyteller and a film maker on only his first and second features. To me, there is an undeniable assuredness there that most filmmakers never achieve. Secondly, the fact that he was only in his mid-twenties!! That shit is mind blowing. At that age, to have a technical mastery that impressive (as well as an incredible level of insight into the human psyche - and the knowledge of how to convey it through film) is mind blowing to me.

I'm checking out the other titles you mentioned soon, as well as The Lady from Shanghai.

>Even in it's present form I thought it was better than
>"decent". Going into to it I questioned if it would live up
>its lofty reputation, and my expectations were sort of
>dominating my mind for the first 20 minutes or so.

My favorite part is those first 20 minutes. Talk about confidence and assuredness, he goes through about 25 years of history in 10 minutes or so. Welles can direct.

Certain parts had me positively riveted - the dinner
>table outburst of George telling Eugene how he felt about him
>(and automobiles) was exceptional. (Joe Cotton killed.)

Any and everything about automobiles is great, and it was the element which I thought worked best in the book as well. Joe Cotton did kill it, but everybody kills it in Welles movies.

At that age, to
>have a technical mastery that impressive (as well as an
>incredible level of insight into the human psyche - and the
>knowledge of how to convey it through film) is mind blowing to
>me.

I think his insight for "Ambersons" is mostly from the book. However, I do agree that his knowledge of how to convey that through film is phenomenal. How was this guy so fucking good?

>
>I'm checking out the other titles you mentioned soon, as well
>as The Lady from Shanghai.

The Lady from Shanghai is good and has one absolutely breathtaking sequence, but it suffers in my mind for the same reason MacBeth does: Welles should not do accents.

I do hope you enjoy your time with him though, even when he is imperfect (and trust me, his later work is chopped and refiltered plenty) he still presents a lot of stuff that has stuck with me for years. Few people have understood the purpose AND artistry of film at the same time so strongly as Welles.

Yet another Hitchcock movie that I initially thought was taking a while to get going, but once it did, I was completely all in. I admit that at first I was rolling my eyes, saying to my girlfriend, "don't tell me this is really going to be just her bumping her head and imagining Mrs. Froy the whole time," but nope, I was way off. Very cleverly plotted overall, with a lot of masterful direction that really maximized the suspense.

I admit I was slightly at odds with the shootout scene at the end, but, whatever. I'm just not 100% percent sure why they needed to go that route - that scene was the least plausible part of the film and I'm not entirely sure what it added. Maybe Hitchcock wanted a way to be able to kill the annoying/cowardly guy who was on the train with his sidepiece. (Btw, I eventually found the two British dudes watching the whole thing go down to be hilarious.) Overall, great movie. (And the Criterion blu-ray looked pretty damn good for a 75 year old movie...)

So Leo balled out as usual, and it felt like the "epic" I w expecting, but... If I had to pick 1 word to describe my feeling watching it- bored. It felt more documentary than historical epic drama. Why not dive not their relationship more, don't know, I also think te way the story was designed, jumping around across different times in his history added a disjointed-ness tar made it difficult to connect to the film.

This was the fick I was looking most forward to, just off the trailer, ads. Havnt read any reviews, outside of the new Yorker one a few months back which was + but Los wishing for more. Not sure if I'm. Alone here or not.

So Leo balled out as usual, and it felt like the "epic" I w expecting, but... If I had to pick 1 word to describe my feeling watching it- bored. It felt more documentary than historical epic drama. Why not dive not their relationship more, don't know, I also think te way the story was designed, jumping around across different times in his history added a disjointed-ness tar made it difficult to connect to the film.

This was the fick I was looking most forward to, just off the trailer, ads. Havnt read any reviews, outside of the new Yorker one a few months back which was + but also wishing for more. Not sure if I'm. Alone here or not.

Edit: ok, looked up on rt, panned, good.

Gosford Park (2001)
I wanted too like this film but it was kinda, meh. Did anyone else find the lighting bad?
Grade C+

The Constant Gardner (2005)
this was an extremely disapponting and depressing film. Had i known what the subject matter ws about i would have skipped this one. The love story was totally unbelievable.
Grade F

Panic In Needle Park (1971)
I can't say much about this other than it was like watching Requiem for a Dream all over again. It is not terrible but i was not moved in any way by it.

Grade C

Haven't seen the third.

Recently watched Macross (again), and decided to watch the feature length adaptation, which for some reason I had never seen before. The art and animation is fantastic (almost 30 years old), and there were some good action sequences early in the film. Unfortunately, I thought it got really boring about half way through. C

Client 9: The Rise and Fall of Eliot Spitzer

If you're really interested in deeper look into Spitzer and scandal, I would of course recommend reading Peter Elkind's Rough Justice, but for those who are perhaps more interested in the scandal, its colorful characters, and conspiracy theories, this doc will entertain. Only probably I really had was its use of an actress at one point. Felt a little awkward. B

Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1978)

This movie reminded me of a bad dream. Lots of running, near captures, and a feeling of hopelessness. The ending was funny as hell. C

Spacey is a freaking MONSTER in this. But the cast otherwise is a bit uneven- the main issue is that Richmond, who is supposed to be the savior of the realm from Richard, just came off flat, and honestly, kinda douchey.

Mendes went a bit overboard with the interstitial title cards to break the action of the play up, but the minimalist score of heavy percussion and keyboard flourishes was really effective.

Those concerns aside, I really enjoyed the show, and since Spacey's on stage for the vast majority of it, and he just KILLS it, it's a hell of a ride.