|
|
Post by samplestiltskin on Oct 7, 2008 15:30:09 GMT -5
Saw two movies in a row recently that made me weep for joy. Marcel Carne's Les enfants du paradis and Roman Polanski's The Tenant. I could watch that former a hundred times in a row. Possibly the most beautiful movie I've ever seen.
|
|
|
|
Post by Thorngrub on Oct 8, 2008 9:58:30 GMT -5
The most beautiful movie I've ever seen was this hot little number called "Detroit Honey Dews".
|
|
JACkory
Struggling Artist
Posts: 167
|
Post by JACkory on Oct 10, 2008 10:59:03 GMT -5
 Decent. Not Pacino's best...not his worst. Story never quite took off. Too many loose ends. Really, the only thing that made it worth watching was Pacino. |
|
|
|
Post by Thorngrub on Oct 16, 2008 11:57:55 GMT -5
I wish not to see it.
|
|
|
|
Post by samplestiltskin on Oct 16, 2008 12:08:28 GMT -5
lol thorn. nice new moniker.
|
|
|
|
Post by Thorngrub on Oct 16, 2008 12:23:27 GMT -5
blue flowers.
|
|
|
|
Post by samplestiltskin on Oct 16, 2008 12:35:00 GMT -5
and ants. look around as they dance in blue flowers.
|
|
|
|
Post by Thorngrub on Oct 16, 2008 15:50:52 GMT -5
I'm not just a doctor, I am a man.
I have desires. I have needs.
Supersonic bionic robot voodoo power.
|
|
|
|
Post by rocknroller on Oct 16, 2008 21:40:38 GMT -5
Aww..he was such a sweet little boy...   |
|
|
|
Post by Thorngrub on Oct 17, 2008 10:01:25 GMT -5
If you don't eat your meat you can't have your pudding!
|
|
|
|
Post by upinkzeppelin2 on Oct 17, 2008 10:34:15 GMT -5
How can you have any meat if you don't eat your pudding?!!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by Thorngrub on Oct 17, 2008 11:05:01 GMT -5
;D
|
|
|
|
Post by rocknroller on Oct 17, 2008 21:26:59 GMT -5
The real thing thats sick to me is that 20 years ago I would have gone home with him...he was a handsome man in my opinion   |
|
|
|
Post by Thorngrub on Oct 20, 2008 11:55:40 GMT -5
Well, W. was flat -out amazing. Wow.
Look, this movie is a tour-de-force. It is incredibly nuanced (thanks to the outstanding performances by nearly everyone onboard: in particular Jeffrey Wright as Colin Powell's voice of reason, Thandie Newton nailing a caricature of Condi Rice that really has to be seen to be believed, Scott Glen captures Rummy's posed presence perfectly, Richard Dreyfuss wields his seniority and acting experience to full effect as Cheney [imo deserving an Oscar nomination for Best Supporting Actor], and Josh Brolin puts in such a well-textured Bush humanising rather than demonising our president, you can bet he will be nominated for the golden statuette as well), but all this nuance is not limited just to these actor's fine performances, equal measures of credit must be given to the writer and director, whose choices in what to leave out of the story are just as important as what they put in, and this is where I found the movie to achieve a near perfect balance in depicting just who this most "fortunate son" is, where he came from, and how he came to make a play for a presidency which arguably out-did his father's legacy while at the same time screwing it up even worse. It really is a remarkable piece of filmmaking which, I think, succeeds at a level I would have ordinarily thought impossible: it functions in a way which should polarise both Bush-haters and -supporters, because it refuses to pander to the biases of either camp. This, in my opinion, is the measure of a true and balanced work of cinematic art. I think Oliver Stone has come a long way towards a fair & balanced middle view with this film, showing his maturity as a human being and also his insight behind the real people that have really been running this country for the past eight years. It is not merely brave filmmaking, it is canny, smart, and crafty and dares to squeegee the mindset of the vastly divided American public for a clear view at "what really happened" during these dizzying, confusing times since 911. Go see W. not because you like Oliver stone and certainly do not make the mistake of avoiding W. because its directed by him, but rather, go see W. because it is easily one of the most self-assured depictions of an American presidency ever committed to film.
I am going to step up to the plate here and state that W. is a great film. It's great not because of any misconstrued boldness in its execution or subtext, but rather, its a great film despite the lack of such judgmentalism (which I find bold in itself). I.e, it is a subtle film that poses nothing new to the American public in its details; yet what it does provide is in the laying -out of key events in the Bush presidency so that we are provided with an unprecedented opportunity to get a glimpse of the whole picture, and it does so with as much restraint towards personal bias as is humanly possible, I think. Here is a depiction of a living president still in office which dares to pay respect to the esteem that is traditionally owed to the presidency while at the same time revealing the all-too-human errors comitted during its increasingly disastrous term. I think that for this reason among others, W. will not only win its share of Oscars, but will also serve to give Oliver Stone back some of the respect he used to enjoy in the 90s. Only now he is older, wiser, and not anywhere as far out on the fringe left as he used to appear to be. Movie audiences the world over can only benefit from his having matured in this fashion, just as they can only benefit from taking a chance on seeing this excellent expose of a film. W. is entertaining, funny, insightful, charming, and disarming. It cuts through all the bullshit and gets to the heart of the story. I find that utterly remarkable. Some have criticized it for being "too close" to the source material, that it somehow lacks clarity of hindsight, etc. Although this may be true in some respects, I found that the movie's principal concerns are well within the writers sights. In fact, I'd argue the exact opposite from those critics by countering that, actually, the movie's entire point is rewarded by the freshness of its creator's perspectives. There is no better time than NOW for a moviemaker with the life experience of Oliver Stone to focus on this presidency - while its still fresh on our minds -- in order to expose the all-too human foibles clustered at its heart. This is a movie I am eager to see again, to marvel over Richard Dreyfuss's Dick Cheney, for the scenes of Bush's cabinet discussing matters in the War Room, for the sheer audacity of this veteran troupe of actors seizing their opportunities to really capture something real here. To coin the most obvious phrase that comes to mind, Oliver Stone knocked this one right out of the park.
|
|
|
|
Post by strat-0 on Oct 20, 2008 20:24:50 GMT -5
My sister said it was pretty good too. I'd like to see it. I'm always a bit leary of Stone in these kinds of things, though. It's always like 'the world according to Stone' and he plays a little fast with the facts. Also seems a little like shooting fish in a barrel with W, but I guess he has it coming.
I'm always way late with movies these days, but I do wish I had back the two hours I spent watching No Country for Old Men. Very disapointing. However, Before the Devil Knows you're Dead really delivered - gripping and well fleshed-out. Old Albert Finney is still always such a fine actor. And Marisa Tomei is still such a hottie.
|
|
