Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 67

Thread: Best Films of 2002

  1. #16
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    24
    I love Almodovar, but this one is hideously misogynistic - and those dances are whack! Everyone was bamboozled on this one.

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Ottawa Canada
    Posts
    5,580
    ooh, I really loved these 5 films.


    Men in Black 2
    Scooby Doo
    Resident Evil
    The Scorpion King
    Crossroads

    Cheeky monkey.
    "Set the controls for the heart of the Sun" - Pink Floyd

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Liverpool, England
    Posts
    6
    Well, I suppose you have to give the public what they want, and if credit is what matters, i'll take credit.

    No seriously, Scooby Doo was great. It really was. Now...... am i still joking? Je suis monsieur mysterie........
    All Freight On The Canals

  4. #19
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Ottawa Canada
    Posts
    5,580
    Those films have an audience, and while they are not my particular taste, I welcome "blockbusters" because they generate lots of dinero. (which allows Harvey Weinstein to bank on projects like Gangs of New York)

    If these "hollywood" movies were flops, THEN there would be a problem. case in point: Emmerich's Godzilla (ID4 gave this guy a false sense of security. ROLAND! There was nothing else to see in the summer of 1996! (not to mention Will Smith was Mr. Popularity)That's my theory, anyway.
    "Set the controls for the heart of the Sun" - Pink Floyd

  5. #20
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Posts
    13,761

    2002--my Best Lists

    I finally closed out my Best Lists last week, even though 2002 contenders are actually still being released locally. Here are my lists (in alphabetical order):


    Ten Best US:

    ADAPTATION
    THE BELIEVER
    CATCH ME IF YOU CAN
    CHICAGO
    THE GOOD GIRL
    IGBY GOES DOWN
    LORD OF THE RINGS II
    ONE HOUR PHOTO
    PERSONAL VELOCITY
    PUNCH DRUNK LOVE

    Ten Best Foreign:

    ALL OR NOTHING
    ATANARJUAT -- THE FAST RUNNER
    EL CRIMEN DEL PADRE AMARO
    THE PIANIST
    LA PIANISTE
    THE SON'S ROOM (LA STANZA DEL FIGLIO)
    READ MY LIPS (SUR MES LEVRES) + TIME OUT
    TALK TO HER
    WHAT TIME IS IT THERE?
    Y TU MAMA TAMBIEN


    I have additional lists of must-sees and wish-I'd-seens that I'll spare you, but I'll give my US Most Overrated List:

    ABOUT SCHMIDT
    FAR FROM HEAVEN
    THE HOURS
    THE ROAD TO PERDITION

    I know there will be strong disagreements on these. Bear in mind that I think they should be seen; I just don't buy the audience ratings or the interpretations being put on these four films. Interest in THE ROAD TO PERDITION may be waning, but the other three are riding high.

    CONFESSIONS OF A DANGEROUS MIND makes me more and more a Charlie Kaufman fan, and it could have been on my 2002 lists, but it didnít open in the Bay Area till yesterday. So goes the distribution system.

  6. #21
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Utah, USA
    Posts
    1,651

    Chris Knipp

    I must say this person knows movie "class" when he experiences it.

  7. #22
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Ottawa Canada
    Posts
    5,580

    NOT a criticism..

    From your lists Chris, I sense you prefer films that have better production value than acting. SO DO I
    "Set the controls for the heart of the Sun" - Pink Floyd

  8. #23
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    446
    Thus far we've had fairly different takes on a few of the goods/bads from this year: igby, punch drunk love, talk to her, about schmidt, far from heaven. BUT, Adaptation is where we come together. Really enjoyed the ideas and the construction.
    Cheers!
    P

  9. #24
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Posts
    13,761
    What about "Confessions of a Dangerous Mind"? It's that one made me realize I really like this Charlie Kaufman guy.

  10. #25
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Utah, USA
    Posts
    1,651

    "Confessions" Way Up There

    I saw "Confessions of a Dangerous Mind" over the weekend as well as "Adaptations" earlier this month and I'm really, really impressed. Both movies are among my favorites during the past year. Both have really unique plots, twists, great characters, substantive and meaningful.

  11. #26
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Posts
    13,761

    Learning to love Charlie is a gradual thing

    I think you really have to know where Charlie Kaufmanís coming from to appreciate his screenplays. When I saw ďBeing John Malkovitch ď I was prejudiced against it due to all the hype about how hip it was but more and more Iím catching on that Charlie is all about a meta-fiction kind of thing Ė something I know about from books. The twists are new and fresh, though, and it's cool that the best people are hot to work with him.

    Only good can come out of this.

  12. #27
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Ottawa Canada
    Posts
    5,580

    Adaptation

    I'm happy that Richard Gere got the golden globe this year. I know Nic Cage is great in Adaptation (I'm seeing it tonight), but I find that his roles have too much "Nicolas" in them.
    Bringing Out The Dead aside (I love that movie), his performances seem too smooth, too easy, and I don't think he has reams of acting talent. I saw the trailer for Captain Corelli's Mandolin and started laughing. This flick just reeks of "trying too hard".
    Cage's films are good at best (Wild at Heart & Raising Arizona were above avg.) and I feel he has a long way to go before he can call himself a "skilled actor". (Oscar be damned)
    "Set the controls for the heart of the Sun" - Pink Floyd

  13. #28

    Actor types

    Cage is one of numerous big name actors who play the same side of themselves in every film, to some degree. Nicholson, Harrison Ford, Nick Nolte... these guys make a living playing themselves. To some extent, I think every actor and actress does that. The truly chameleonlike ones are so "out there," they almost never make it big because they're NOT recognizable.

    I actually thought Cage did a good job playing off his neuroses in "Adaptation." he milks them in every film, but his variance between Donald and Charlie allowed for a wide range of Cage-isms to come out. I don't think he'll get any major awards for it, but he deserves the recognition.

  14. #29
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Utah, USA
    Posts
    1,651

    I Agree

    miseenscene - I agree. Nicholas Cage in playing these two different roles in the same movie, especially in such close proximity and give and take, takes more than basic acting. Such acting does deserve recognition.

  15. #30
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Posts
    13,761

    movie acting and acting

    Yes and he had good material to work with, plus there was a strong contrast between the two twin brothers, and it wasn't so hard for Cage to make the distinction for us, though no doubt about the fact that he makes it well. In "Dead Ringers," the creepy Cronenberg movie about the drug addict gynecologist twins both played by Jeremy Irons, it wasn't so easy to tell them apart, but the effect was still compelling and weird to watch them together. Did you see it?

    I think Cage is quite a good actor, admirable for his willingness to take risks and his dedication and energy, but not supremely gifted as some are, and so sometimes he seems to be working too hard. "Adaptation" made use of that, because the sad sack frustrated brother, Charlie Kaufman, was always working hard and getting nowhere. If you ask me it was the more laid back brother Donald that was more of a stretch for Nick Ė but that was the secondary character.

    A lot of the best movie actors, the matinee idols everybody loves, just played themselves. You have to hold back in movies, not project too much, not be stagey. There's a video of a movie acting class taught by Michael Caine -- a master of the craft -- that explains this very well. Daniel Day-Lewis is a wonderful actor -- he has played so many different roles and done them well -- a real chameleon type -- but by the same token that may not be completely cinematic, and maybe his performance in "Gangs of New York" which everybody is raving about is a bit too actor-y. Working a little hard, but still with a lot of panache. I didn't completely like the character. I thought it was put together piece by piece and you could see the separate parts. You can see that when people comment on the voice and accent, the moustache, the gestures, etc. -- they see the separate parts because it isn't entirely a unified whole. I like Johnny Depp better because he has played a lot of different roles but he's laid back in all of them. Even as Hunter S. Thompson he is pretty laid back, you feel he's just having a good laugh. In "Dead Man" he's very neutral, deadpan, like Buster Keaton, and that is his greatest role. I think Caine would approve of his performance there. But my idea of a great chameleon performance in a movie where the actor disappears into the role is Leo Di Caprio in "What's Eating Gilbert Grape." Scorsese said he didnít know Di Caprio wasnít a retarded boy when he saw the movie. I didnít either.

    I wouldn't say Jack Nicholson always plays himself but that at a certain point he began doing so, when he became a big star, and his personality began to dominate. But not always even now. I don't buy that he disappears into "About Schmidt," but I do think he disappeared into that Sean Penn movie a couple of years ago--"The Pledge", which is a wonderful performance in a fine movie.

    Sure, every actor is "playing himself" -- playing himself as he would be if he were that person in that situation. But nobody is King Lear, so "playing yourself" in King Lear is still a big stretch for anybody. It's a feat of the imagination, even if it comes out of you. Where else is it going to come from?

    Well, then you get into English (technical) vs. American (method) acting. According to English style, it doesnít come out of you, because itís somebody else, so you have to create the character out of technique. But it's an artificial distinction to separate technical from method acting. All the distinctions about acting are artificial. Acting is fundamentally a mystery. It comes down to instinct -- and technique, always both.

    Iím just throwing this out for anyone to comment.

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •