Last Movie you Watched?

Fairbairn-Sykes wrote:

HJackson wrote:

I can only hope that THE MAGNIFICENT AMBERSONS gets as good an HD release soon.

Hell, I'd be happy with the SD release at least getting its own INDEPENDANT release rather than having to buy the $80 Ultra Blu-Ray Set of Kane from Amazon or whatever it was.

Universal has always had it in print over here, but it looks like crap (unlike the reasonably crisp-looking Warner). Don't know which situation I'd rather be in, tbh, but it seems like Warner has really turned into a big piece of shit.

Anyway, last night I watched the 1921 version of CAMILLE. Nothing too amazing, but the story is strong enough to make it worth a watch and it's handled inoffensively. I actually think Rudolph Valentino puts in a very solid silent performance, which I wasn't expecting.

Also watched Dassin's RIFIFI. My lord. I agree with the comment that the characters seem a lot more grounded than in Dassin's earlier films, but it still seems to be cut from the same cloth. The heist sequence itself is perfectly handled, and the cutting in that final scene in phenomenal. Not sure if it is my favourite Dassin film (I think it lacks the character of NIGHT AND THE CITY, THIEVES' HIGHWAY, and THE NAKED CITY), but it's another mean piece of filmmaking. The Arrow Academy Blu-ray is stunning too.

To be fair, CITIZEN KANE looks marvelous on Blu-Ray. I did buy the set just to get MAGNIFICENT AMBERSONS (which, truth be told, is one of my least favorite Welles pictures), but KANE would have been worth it on its own.

Can't comprehend the hate for AMBERSONS. Definitely my second favourite Welles, right next to CHIMES AT MIDNIGHT.

I don't hate it--the very worst you could say about it is that it's a decent film--I just don't love it the way that I love almost every other Welles film I've ever seen.

Hmmm.... I don't love THE IMMORTAL STORY, but any means.

Sharky wrote:

Hmmm.... I don't love THE IMMORTAL STORY, but any means.

Ah, I dig THE IMMORTAL STORY. Not that I consider it a masterpiece, mind you.

THE LORD OF THE RINGS: THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING (2001, dir. Peter Jackson)

It's been quite a while since I've seen any of these films, and I've meant to revisit them. On this lazy day, I thought I'd pop FELLOWSHIP in and see what I made of it, now that it's been over a decade since it was released. My reaction was not kind. In the plus column, you have the art direction, Howard Shore's score, Ian McKellen, and Sean Bean. Everything else pretty much misses the mark.

Jackson's direction is at its most compelling when dealing with vast, open spaces, where he can send the camera wheeling over mountains and turrets, or spiraling down into caverns. When he has to stage conversations, or deal with more intimate, tighter locations, he's completely lost.

Is the AMBERSON DVD the chopped-up version of the film? Or does it hold close to Welles's vision?

Mr. Brown wrote:

Is the AMBERSON DVD the chopped-up version of the film? Or does it hold close to Welles's vision?

We only have the chopped-up version of the film. There's no way to restore Welles vision without the missing footage.

God, I hate those revisionist edits, especially that '98 TOUCH OF EVIL one. A disgrace.

I really like the '98 TOUCH OF EVIL. Walter Murch did a fine job with it.

I object to them on principle.

Sharky wrote:

I object to them on principle.

You're free to do so. But when these edits result in a genuinely better film, as it did in the case of the Walter Murch edit of TOUCH OF EVIL, then I'm not going to complain.

Harmsway wrote:

Sharky wrote:

I object to them on principle.

You're free to do so. But when these edits result in a genuinely better film, as it did in the case of the Walter Murch edit of TOUCH OF EVIL, then I'm not going to complain.

I think he ruined it, especially the opening. By dialing out the score he took all of the dynamism out of it, making it dull and flat.

saint mark wrote:

Tubes wrote:

Metropolis

The film that got me into silent films. It helps that the original score is dynamic and powerful. Miles better than the droning house music that backs a lot of bad silent film transfers. Speaking of music:

Was this the old cut or the new longer version?

I haven't seen the new one yet but the old one is one of my favorites (Together with the 2 Nibelungen movies)

That would be the newer, restored version that came out in 2010.

Sharky wrote:

Harmsway wrote:

Sharky wrote:

I object to them on principle.

You're free to do so. But when these edits result in a genuinely better film, as it did in the case of the Walter Murch edit of TOUCH OF EVIL, then I'm not going to complain.

I think he ruined it, especially the opening. By dialing out the score he took all of the dynamism out of it, making it dull and flat.

And the debate rages on: the theatrical opening or the Murch opening? I can understand preferring the theatrical version on this scene, but I personally prefer the Murch version of the opening, with the diegetic music. Murch's version might not quite have the propulsion of the theatrical version, but it's eerier, with a strong sense of decay and dread.

Harmsway wrote:

Sharky wrote:

Harmsway wrote:

Sharky wrote:

I object to them on principle.

You're free to do so. But when these edits result in a genuinely better film, as it did in the case of the Walter Murch edit of TOUCH OF EVIL, then I'm not going to complain.

I think he ruined it, especially the opening. By dialing out the score he took all of the dynamism out of it, making it dull and flat.

And the debate rages on: the theatrical opening or the Murch opening? I can understand preferring the theatrical version on this scene, but I personally prefer the Murch version of the opening, with the diegetic music. Murch's version might not quite have the propulsion of the theatrical version, but it's eerier, with a strong sense of decay and dread.

I know what you mean, but somehow it feels more Kubrick or Zinnemann than Welles. It doesn't gel with the rest of the film either.

Sharky wrote:

I know what you mean, but somehow it feels more Kubrick or Zinnemann than Welles.

Perhaps. But the idea for the diegetic music did belong to Welles. Murch was just following after his instruction on this point.

Sharky wrote:

It doesn't gel with the rest of the film either.

Strongly disagree here, Sharky. I think it fits with the rest of the film far better than the theatrical opener does, and serves as an effective bookend with the film's grimy conclusion.

Harmsway wrote:

Strongly disagree here, Sharky. I think it fits with the rest of the film far better than the theatrical opener does, and serves as an effective bookend with the film's grimy conclusion.

My reasoning comes from the fact the film is full of powerful, modernist sequences that involve Mancini's driving score - like Grandi's sons communicating with the lights and so on. Some films work well as bookends, but TOUCH OF EVIL ain't one of them. It's a very steady progression through the nine circles of hell

TINKER, TAILOR, SOLDIER, SPY (2011, dir. Tomas Alfredson)

Here's hoping we get more Smiley films from these folks, because they knock this one out of the park.

The Spy Who Came in from the Cold (1965)

5/5

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0059749/

yet another Excellent Celluloid adaptation of a John Le Carre novel.

This movie realistically portrays the little known trade of Espionage and its operatives: it's cold, it's not glamorous, it's tedious, it's dangerous!!

It's not splashy and fun and exciting and all glitter and fame and gadgets like it's unrealistically portrayed in the Bond and Bourne films

Richard Burton shines as the alcoholic, aging, disgraced and depressed Spy operative who had enough of the trade but once again, he's pulled back in for one more mission.

The Iron Lady

Was expecting more. I was surprised to see Thomas Newman doing the score. It wasn't bad, but it wasn't anything to write home about. Meryl Streep was phenomenal. Definitely deserves an Oscar, but she carries the film. If it weren't for her, it would be even less of a film. Film was a bit blue as well, much like Inception, which I didn't care for, but the sets were nice and added some colour when the white/yellow lights were on.

6/10.

Sherlock Holmes: A Game Of Shadows.

Another Sherlock-fix and I really did enjoy it. Nicely filmed, Stephen Fry was hilarious, the action scenes were clever. Just good quality film that did its noble duty of entertaining me.

did Noomie get religious?

M I : Ghost Protocol for a second time, with a 'better behaved' audience ... still seemed to be something not quite 'there' about it.