the LAST FILM YOU'VE SEEN thread

Quote:

---

Originally posted by wpqx
An even worse film that I just watched was Spooky Bunch.

---

That's why I don't just watch anything. There are too many other films out there that deserve our attention in a short amount of time we do have.

No other filmmaker in Europe has made more features in the last quarter of a century than Ruiz. He isn't always comprehensible but he's never stopped being innovative. Hypothesis is certainly one of his better films. I'd also recommend Genealogies of a Crime, Three Lives and Only One Death, and That Day from the one's I've seen.

A few of those Ruiz films are on my to watch list. Well I just watched Ghost (1990), and I absolutely loved it. I always liked the film as a kid, but somehow watching the film years later, I was amazed at how great I thought it was. I mean I was truly blown away.

Asfalto (2000) DVD

It is the fourth film directed by Spanish filmmaker Daniel Calparsoro and if the promise shown earlier in his career has led to this then here's yet another example of why Spanish cinema - from Spain that is - continues to struggle. Chino and Charly (Gustavo Salmerón & Juan Diego Botto) are small time hoods in Madrid who want to move to Amsterdam after one final drug deal. Chino's girlfriend Lucía (Najwa Nimri) gets involved not only with the deal but also with Charly. Also present are Lucía's mother and Chino's brother who happens to be a cop. The drug deal doesn't go through as expected and it's all onward but downward from there.

It's been a while since I've seen such inept filmmaking. Mr. Calparsoro has no interest at all in dialogue or character development. Any narrative strands are ignored for gratuituous sex-scenes which would've been fine if he didn't exhaust all possibilities early on including a ménage à trois. As for its "crime-thriller" aspect, I've seen that handled better in student films. Asfalto is a disaster and its cast, especially Nimri and Botto, deserve better.

Youth of the Beast (1963), innovative Suzuki. His films are a definite example of style over substance, and this is no different. By the end of the film you could care less who did what, but it's always fun watching it unfold.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by wpqx
Youth of the Beast (1963), innovative Suzuki. His films are a definite example of style over substance, and this is no different. By the end of the film you could care less who did what, but it's always fun watching it unfold.

---

Have you tried the likes of Pistol Opera, Brandid to Kill, and Tokyo Drifter? Suzuki's films are at once both maddening and gratifying.

There are only a handful of Latin American directors that come close to the level of career achievement exhibited by Arturo Ripstein. He has made close to 30 features, and about 15 shorts, most of them documentaries (including one on Bunuel). I've managed to watch 11 of his features. My favorites are El Imperio de la Fortuna (Empire of Fortune), El Castillo de la Pureza (Castle of Purity), La Mujer del Puerto (Woman of the Port) and Profundo Carmesi (Deep Crimson). One cannot discuss his career without mentioning Paz Alicia Garciadiego, who has written every script and has been an active influence on the set of every film Ripstein has directed in the past two decades. Thay are married. Ripstein's films are primarily made for consumption in Spain and France. A Mexican friend told me they are barely distributed in his native Mexico because historically they have never made money there. It has to do with the long takes he favors, the depressing outlook, the anti-religious stance of many of his films, etc. I think he's brilliant, although several of his films (Principio y Fin comes to mind) would benefit from some trimming. The only Latino directors that come close are Argentinians Adolfo Aristarain and Fernando Solanas, Peruvian Francisco Lombardi, and perhaps Chileans Raul Ruiz and documentarian Patricio Guzman.

California Split (1974), another solid, overlooked Altman film from the '70's (ala Thieves Like Us, Three Women, and The Long Goodbye).

Elliot Gould and George Segal play a couple of gambling junkies who meet up after being thrown in together in a poker fight. Segal at least holds down a day job to support his gambling habit, while Gould just drifts along, placing bets on anything and everything, apparently living rent-free with a couple of call girls. He seems to be oblivious to those things that concern most people in their day-to-day lives. But it's a good life - gamble all night, come home, drink a beer, and hit the sack.

They end up going to Reno to get in on a high-stakes poker tournament, and the adrenaline rush of the events is something the two men react differently to. The ending of the film isn't predictable, and it isn't didactic, so I found that refreshing in this film (and once again, an example of the differences between mainstream films of today versus the '70's). Gould is hilarious in his role in this film, and his performance alone is worth checking it out.

I'm always happy when Lope-Nilsson gets mentioned. I didn't because I was only considering active directors. Latin American cinema was ignored by the rest of the world until fairly recently. Spanish Cinema from the Franco era suffered the same fate. Three major figures of Mexican cinema, for instance, are practically unknown to today's cinephiles: directors Emilio Fernandez and Fernando de Fuentes, and cinematographer Gabriel Figueroa (Los Olvidados, The Exterminating Angel, John Huston's Night of the Iguana). I hope to find some of their key works on video someday. I watched a few of Torre-Nilsson's during a visit to Buenos Aires, and the prints were terrible. It's sad. I just read an article about the state of Argentinian cinema that claimed there are more film students than people who want to watch Argentinian films. As you know from previous exchanges, I'm not as enthusiastic about these young directors as you are, but their films are at least worth watching, and a few are worth celebrating (La Cienaga, Lisandro Alonso's Los Muertos and a few others).

Just finished the DVD and it was superior to Hypercube, the sequel to The Cube. This is a "Brazil"-like treat with the horror of the original but with a much more compelling eerie sense of doom and craziness. This more of an independent feature film (DVD) is creative in its dark, odd, forbidden way...with hope and dispair. The element of out of control, unknown permeates this version of the Cube franchise. Like the harsher, graphic version of the television version of The Prisoner, this prequel is surprisingly good.

Les Quatre Cents Coups
Finally saw this...

The Broadway Melody
of 1929 to be exact... This was interesting, but not that great. Although I did like a few of the musical numbers.

And what did you think of Les Quatre-Cents Coups, Kubrick fan?

Nobody Knows (2004), I think there is a thread here, so I'll post any comments there.

I thought that Les Quatre Cents Coups was a very well made film. Truffaut directing was great. I thought the acting was pretty good too. Now that I think about it, it was a great film... I'm not gonna say any more though...

Finding Neverland
I decided to see this so I could say that I had seen all of the Best Picture nominations... I don't know... it was decent...

Agree with you on Finding Neverland. Not a bad film, but there were many many better films that could have taken that nomination. Every year the best picture nominees are filled with two or three (sometimes all five) films that aren't worth the nod. Finding Neverland was not worth this nomination. If it was gonna get anything, perhaps a costume nomination, but none of the acting was spectacular, and the film itself was just decent. Of the films that weren't nominated I think Eternal Sunshine was the best candidate to take it's place, which I believe has now become my official favorite film of 2004.

Originally posted by arsaib4
Baara (1978)
Mr. Souleymane Cissé from Mali has only made a handful of features yet he's still considered one of the very best Africa has ever produced. His 1987 film Yeelen is certainly his most polished and acclaimed work (partly because it is available)

Yeelen is a masterpiece I've seen several times. Where was Baara screened? home video?

1. The Animal Kingdom (1932) - if you've never heard of it, don't worry you didn't miss much.

2. Irma La Duce (1963) - Billy Wilder in his seriously out of touch period.

3. Separate Tables (1958) - melodramtic mush that brought David Niven an Oscar.

1. My Favorite Year (1982) - decent, but nothing worth recommending, aside from a Peter O'Toole fan.

2. Bus Stop (1956) - decent work from Monroe, but in general a rather insignificant movie.

Just finished Pioneers in Ingolstadt (1970) - one of Fassbinder's earlier films. Interesting as usual, with some great camerawork. Focussing primarily on casual sex, and what I believe is the impossibility of it (at least for some people). Worth a look if you like the director, although not a great place to start.

Buffalo Soldiers (2003) - Anti military film falls far short of its predescessors "Catch 22", "Mash", and "Three Kings". Joaquin Phoenix does fine in the lead role as an amoral soldier running a black market operation while stationed in Germany, but overall the film is flat and unconvincing in its viewpoints.

Buffalo Soldiers is not in the same class as those you mentioned, but I don't think its ambition was to be more than a lightweight satire which ended up under a lot of scrutiny due to the times and under the type of atmosphere we're living in (and it certainly seemed more poignant). I think just the fact that it was made and released (no matter how unsoundly) is a cause for celebration itself.

An impressionable, young oscar overrated both M.A.S.H. and Catch 22 back in the day. Still worth-watching though. Buffalo Soldiers is indeed "cause for celebration" but obviously no masterpiece either. Some of the acclaimed films of the early to mid 70s have withstood the passage of time. Check out Nashville, Five Easy Pieces, McCabe and Mrs. Miller, Badlands, The Conversation...

Breathless (1960) Theatrical Screening

Based on a story by his associate François Truffaut, this first feature from JLG is a love story about a crook (Jean-Paul Belmondo) and an American woman(Jean Seberg). Even though Chabrol's Le Beau Serge was made before it, this gets the credit for "starting it all," New Wave that is, but more importantly few films have had as much an influence on cinema today than Breathless. The detached behavioral patterns displayed by his protagonists have also revolutionized the way characters are written. In the film Godard unleashes his directorial style with numerous jump-cuts, tracking shots, fragmented sound-design etc., and along the way he recognizes the authorities before him with various cinematic references. Few films seem as fresh and daringly compelling as this one.

Did you catch Breathless in the theater?

I found that the restored print of Masculin/Feminin is going to make it's way out here next month, not sure if I'll catch it, but I certainly hope it brings about a US dvd release.

I watched 28 Up tonight. It's the fourth film in Michael Apted's Up series, and so far the best. Amazing to see how everyone turned up, and I'll hopefully finish the series up before too long.

Also watched Anne of the Thousand Days. One of several films that brought Richard Burton an Oscar nomination, this one is nothing to get excited about. Burton had done better, particularly in the similarly nominated and Hal Wallis produced Becket (1964). This is the mindless crap that Hollywood systematically churns out every year to win Oscars. A film reeking of prestige and class, and I do mean reeking. No vitality, no life, just playing it safe "mature" period crap.

Honestly the film wasn't that bad, but I'm getting sick of this garbage. This film does absolutely nothing to contribute to the art of cinema. It is worthless in the development of the medium. And any number of much better films should have received the same Oscar consideration in 1969. I mean, how in the year of The Wild Bunch and Once Upon a Time in the West did Butch Cassidey and the Sundance Kid get nominated for best picture? Let's not forget John Wayne winning best actor for True Grit, arguably the worst performance to win an acting Oscar (and I've seen Broderick Crawford in All the King's Men).

Sorry I'm getting into a rant, but I'm just a little pissed at the Academy. I've expanded my usual Alternate Oscars to include alternate best actor, actress, and director awards. I'll post my regular lists soon, and when I get to editing, I'll start some year by year commentary. I have lots of time now, so it'll get done. My commentary is at least in the rough stage up to 2000, so only five more years and I'm all set. It'll wind up a super duper massive thread, that hopefully someone other than me will contribute to.

Yeah, Breathless had a special screening here and it was good to see it again after a while.

Masculine Feminine will play at the Music Box between Apr 15 - 21 so make plans, you won't be disappointed with the new print. Obviously the British have already used it to made their disc, so it's ready if Criterion or whoever wants to release it here.

I recall that you made an oath to watch every Oscar nominated film (and I remember saying that you'll be watching a lot of bad films) so I'm gonna take your word on the films and performances and if they deserved it or not, for now. I'll certainly try to add to it with my take for deserving winners from the last few years. I don't wanna make judgments w/out seeing all the nominees.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by arsaib4
I think just the fact that it was made and released (no matter how unsoundly) is a cause for celebration itself.

---

I agree, I'm glad "Buffalo Soldiers" was at least made and released, and true its intent was probably as a lightweight satire. But, when you take on an institution like the U.S. Military, you better be ready to defend yourself with guns a' blazin'. It had the unfortunate timing of being scheduled for release right after the events of 9/11, which meant it was doomed from the start. Maybe it would have enjoyed more success if released 5-10 years ago.

Another interesting view of the U.S. Military as seen through the eyes of the outside world is in the documentary "Control Room", which came out last year. And they can't accuse that of being fiction...

Yeah I saw the adds for it at the Music Box when I went to see Nobody Knows. I just watched Lola (1961). I think I'm getting to that stage where I'm watching so many movies that none of them are effectively sinking in, or maybe I'm just watching a bunch of mediocre movies. I think I might need to take a break and watch something I KNOW is great, just to see if I'm numb to great cinema.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by wpqx
I think I'm getting to that stage where I'm watching so many movies that none of them are effectively sinking in, or maybe I'm just watching a bunch of mediocre movies. I think I might need to take a break and watch something I KNOW is great, just to see if I'm numb to great cinema.

---

I don't think the two points you made are mutually exclusive. At the rate you watch these films is simply astounding and that might be causing you to see them all as mediocre as most of the films we see out there are just that. Simply put: the good and the great ones are being buried under the rubble.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JustaFied
Another interesting view of the U.S. Military as seen through the eyes of the outside world is in the documentary "Control Room", which came out last year. And they can't accuse that of being fiction...

---

Thanks for mentioning it, I think it's out on video now so I'll check it out.

(1) The most upsetting scene from CONTROL ROOM is near the end ...
-- the reporter at the rooftop scene ...

(2) Another VERY realistic/pragmatic line was delivered from the interviewee who informed frankly that he would leave for FOX if they employ him or a better place in US ...

In sum, can watch, but it is NOT considered the best documentary of 2004, at least NOT the top 5.

It is just a very down to earth documentary that provides a DIFFERENT reporting perspective.
;)

The Life of Emile Zola
This won Best Picture in 1938 I believe... I thought it was a very well made picture. It is very relevant today, at least if you live in America. It is a bit slow at some times, but other than that it was very well done, at least in my opinion...

Well to answer Fan Of Kubrick, Life of Emile Zola won best picture for 1937. Granted the awards ceremony was in 1938, but well you get the point. Honestly I thought the film was rubbish, and none too relevant.

Well I got a double feature of rather short films this evening. The first was John Huston's Red Badge of Courage (1951). Now this film was butchered quite extensively, but I'm not sure if the added footage would help. The film is consice, fast paced, and still compelling. Most remarkable in the film is the photography, which employs many deep space compositions. Huston had been working in deep focus since his first feature, made ten years earlier, and by now seemed to intuitively know how to use it.

Next up was a remarkably different film in almost every aspect, except for the length. I watched Robert Bresson's Trial of Joan of Arc. Seeing how I'll soon be getting another 4 Bresson films, I wanted to get this one out of the way beforehand. The film, although cited as an homage to Dreyer's Passion of Joan of Arc is completely different from that film. Bresson's underdramatic impulses work wonders here. His Joan is not the tortured soul of Falconetti, but a young woman who although defeated, maintains her faith. Bresson's editing rhythm is much slower than Dreyer's, but his takes aren't exactly long. Bresson was a master editor, and this film is well arranged. Rarely have I seen so many eyeline matches in the course of an hour. Seeing how this film was never released in the US, I'd like to recomend it, but I honestly think everyone on earth should watch every single Bresson film. I still have a few to go, but good or bad, they are vital pieces of cinema history. Like Tarkovsky and Kubrick, there aren't too many films to get either, so by all means get what you can. The more Bresson you see, the better he becomes, so if you aren't impressed with your first viewing (which I wasn't), then please don't give up on him. When you understand the man and his style, you will appreciate his work and recognize him as one of cinema's true auteurs. I believe everyone is entitled to one trancendental Bressonian experience. Mine came with Au Hasard Balthazar, a film I saw during it's restoration a year ago. I wasn't overly impressed with that film as I was watching it, but as soon as it ended I found my self speechless and profoundly effected like few films had ever done to me. I left the theater and made the long drive home in a daze unable to even think logically about the film. It is an experience that I think every cinema fan hopes for while watching a film, and hopefully if you venture into the world of Bresson you will have that experience, although it may or may not be with Balthazar, or Joan of Arc.

So to recap, watch this movie if you can.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by wpqx
Bresson was a master editor, and this film is well arranged. Rarely have I seen so many eyeline matches in the course of an hour. Seeing how this film was never released in the US, I'd like to recomend it, but I honestly think everyone on earth should watch every single Bresson film......

---

Well said. Frankly, it shouldn't need to said at this point but one never knows even on this site!

Mouchette was my "transcendental" or metaphysical experience and it has remained that way ever since. Compared to it, everything else almost seems meaningless. Anyway, are you planning to go for the boxset or have you found another way?

Well I found an offbeat (and probably illegal) source. Now I'm all about gettting his films when they become officially available, but Four Nights of a Dreamer has never been released here, and I've been plenty patient. Anyways I should bet back to watching Bambi (which I just bought today).

Well I finished Bambi (1942). Honestly I don't remember ever seeing this film as a child. Personally I don't find it that amazing. Dumbo is still my favorite of the early Disney films (as well as Fantasia, which is a whole different kind of picture). Bambi is just alright, and call it my cold cold hear, but I didn't really feel anything when Bambi's mother got shot. Which is probably more due to the fact that I knew she died. I personally found the imprisoning of Dumbo's mother Jumbo way more heartbreaking.

Tokyo Story (1953)

This my second viewing on the film, and I tried to pay attention to a few things. For one I keep reading through David Bordwell that Ozu doesn't adhere to the 180 rule of shot/reverse shot editing. I tried to follow every single cut in this film and I couldn't spot it. If he does violate continuity editing, he is the most seemless at it.

The film itself is unfortunately one of those movies that is too critically praised to ever be appreciated correctly. I didn't think it was Ozu's best the first time, and I still don't. It did improve slightly, but perhaps I was expecting a much more dramatic second viewing (sort of like my re-watching of Sunrise a few weeks ago).

I honestly feel the film is too long. Granted I don't mind Ozu lingering. Many shots are held for a few extra seconds, and he likes to transition scenes with non-narrative shots of buildings or streets, or empty rooms. What I mean is the story was too long. The ending seemed to be prolonged at the end. This 136 minute film could have been a much more solid 120 minutes without losing any of its emotional power. So I must say this is not a flawless masterpiece. Is it still a great film, of course, and certainly a landmark in Japanese cinema, but in the grand scheme of things I think this film is slightly overrated.

Dogville

http://www.filmwurld.com/forums/show...=9309#post9309

In Good Company (2004) Theatrical Screening

Dennis Quaid is Dan, a 51-year old head of sales at a sports magazine. He learns that he's about to have another child while his older daughter (Scarlett Johansson) is planning to go to NYU. Topher Grace is Carter, a 26-year old hotshot who's wife might be leaving him but he's about to replace Dan because the conglomerate he works for has bought out the sports magazine. Interesting premise, as both are introduced and instead of firing Dan, Carter decides to keep him on in a supporting role since he doesn’t have much experience in that particular field.

Directed by Paul Weitz (About a Boy), the film starts out well and makes some poignant remarks about the prevalent dog eat dog corporate climate. But, eventually as domestic issues and romantic escapades raise their ugly heads it gets sidetracked and then we go through every clichéd situation imaginable; as expected, the veteran ends up having a few tricks up his sleeve and everything slowly but surely fits into what turns out to be a typical middle-brow affair. Dennis Quaid gives a workmanlike performance and it is good to see scarlett Johansson underplaying her role (and her persona), although, the high point in her career might've already come. While watching In Good Company, I kept thinking what Laurent Cantet (Human Resources/Time-Out) would've done using this initial premise with non-actors and quarter-of-a-budget!

I liked this one more than you did, it was just fun to watch and, previously unfamiliar with Topher Grace, I found he had an excellent light touch that carried the movie and gave it lightness and panache. He's excellent as a winner who knows he's a loser and lets us in on it. I didn't find this formulaic despite the conventional blocking out of the corporate conflicts and thought a lot went well in the making of In Good Company, a surprise to me. But I never got around to writing a review of it. I hope you're wrong and Scarlett Johanssen's career hasn't already peaked and am at least glad you think she was underplaying and not just "wasted" in this. Some people like Dennis Quaid in this more than I do; I'd agree he's workmanlike. There are a couple of subtle, sexy moments between Grace and Johannsen some people don't seem to perceive. I disliked Malcolm Macdowell, in one of his worst powerful monster schtick roles, luckily a cameo. True, Laurent Cantet would have taken this in a whole different, interesting direction, but I don't blame it for not being a French movie.

Persona
I'll just say it was brilliant.

Rio Bravo
It was okay... Hawks' directing bothered me a lot though.

I don't know about you, but I loved Rio Bravo, and the more I think about it the better it gets. Maybe I just see its influence more and more. Plus reading into the High Noon comparisons it gets more interesting.

As for me

The Seven Year Itch (1955) - well this is the third time or so I've seen it, and I still say its second rate Billy Wilder.

Be Cool (2005) - I'm ashamed to have spent money on such Hollywood nonsense trash. Please avoid this, it is just as stupid, shallow, and empty as you might imagine.