Last Movie You Watched? 7.0

Control wrote:

Herrmann's music was too good for that film, to be honest.

It's sort of like when a YouTube filmmaker inserts John Williams music into their mediocre drama. The music ends up being better than the entire scene, and the footage doesn't match the quality of the music.

I once saw a John Williams soundtrack set to a porno. Talk about dissonance

VERTIGO (1958, dir. Alfred Hitchcock)

In 35mm.

• It was lovely to see VERTIGO projected, though I thought the project could have used a brighter bulb. The darker moments of the film seemed a bit too dark, and the bright daylight scenes never seemed quite bright enough.
• The strongest criticism one can make of VERTIGO is that it does not reflect the neat, tidy craftsmanship that Hitchcock is known for. It has dazzling moments and switches, but there are also signs of clunkiness here, with two very significant exposition dumps.
• I'm a formalist at heart, with a bias toward stylistic expressionism. It's no wonder I love this film.
• VERTIGO has only become more relevant. Many have talked about how Scotty starts as a moviewatcher and moves into the role of director. Scotty-as-director, though, carries the air of the obsessive fanboy, making his own sort of real-world fan-film.
• Interesting to note that MARNIE was on quite a few of the Sight&Sound ballots, too, though clearly not enough to make it onto the list. It's easy to see how critics see in MARNIE a lot of what they see in VERTIGO, though MARNIE has never quite worked for me. I don't understand the characters. I fully understand the peculiar obsessions driving the story in VERTIGO, though.
• The audience I was with seemed slightly puzzled by the film; there were a lot of film students, and they didn't seem to like it. There were gray-haired women who came just to see a Hitchcock film, and they burst into applause as soon as the film concluded.
• My runner-up favorite Hitchcock film to VERTIGO is STRANGERS ON A TRAIN. I don't know if there are any obvious commonalities between VERTIGO and STRANGERS, though they both share a somewhat odd structure.
• As much as I haven't really loved OBSESSION, I now wish I could see a film print of it.

Harmsway wrote:

VERTIGO (1958, dir. Alfred Hitchcock)

In 35mm.

[list][*]VERTIGO has only become more relevant. Many have talked about how Scotty starts as a moviewatcher and moves into the role of director. Scotty-as-director, though, carries the air of the obsessive fanboy, making his own sort of real-world fan-film.

Interesting point.

How'd the audience react to particular scenes through out the film, such as when Scottie was obsessively transforming Judy into Madeline towards the end? When I saw the film in the theater last Fall, a lot of people in the audience laughed at those scenes. I'm not sure if they found them to be "cheesy", if they found the obsession to be so ridiculous that it was humorous, or if the scenes simply made them uncomfortable, and their only option was to laugh.

Harmsway wrote:

• As much as I haven't really loved OBSESSION, I now wish I could see a film print of it.

I enjoyed the film before seeing it on the big screen (twice), but I really hope you get a chance to see it in the near future. The finale is absolutely stunning in a theater.

Largo's Shark wrote:

Quote :

I think Sharky and I are the only two here that liked WAR HORSE.

I don't think anyone else here has seen WAR WHORES.

I have. I enjoyed it a lot ... Spielberg's still 'got it' :) .

The White Tuxedo wrote:

Interesting, THE MAN FROM LARAMIE might be my least favorite. Spawned an amusing song, though.

Gonna see the "Ranown cycle" soon, too. I've seen two of them, I think.

It seems you admire the Mann films from their straight ahead roughness, so a distaste for LARAMIE is understandable. It really straddles the harshness of his westerns and the grandness of his later epics, and that's why I loved it so much. One I hope to revisit soon - not going to bother waiting for a blu (which would be amazing) since Sony/Columbia don't seem to have much of an interest in releasing pre-60s stuff.

May have to join you on the Boetticher viewing. I've only seen SEVEN MEN FROM NOW, which was certainly a respectable lean western. Which films make up the cycle?

Harmsway wrote:

• It was lovely to see VERTIGO projected, though I thought the project could have used a brighter bulb. The darker moments of the film seemed a bit too dark, and the bright daylight scenes never seemed quite bright enough.

Going back to my complaint about the DVD from a few pages ago, my problem with the DVD is that it seems too bright and pale, so this screening seems to present the film in a way that would certainly be more pleasing to my eyes. If the lightness of the film (as seen on the DVD) is intentioned, I don't really know how I feel about its visual composition.

Last night I saw the new restoration of THE LIFE AND DEATH OF COLONEL BLIMP on the big screen. Powell & Pressburger films work so well in a cinema. It wasn't surprising that I loved THE RED SHOES when I got a chance to see that a few years back, but I was a little lukewarm on this one before last night. It blew me away. Visually I don't think it holds up to the stuff they did with Cardiff (I haven't sampled the later Challis stuff yet - will watch GONE TO EARTH soon), but it is still spectacularly staged (I love the business when the British embassy is informed of the duel, and they shuffle about that corridor for about a minute). The story is so rich, and so well supplied with fine performances (Walbrook in particular). One of those three hour films that doesn't drag for a moment.

I'm being spoiled for screenings the next few weeks. Seeing THE APARTMENT tonight. Then I have some Hitchcocks coming up and Welles' F FOR FAKE.

Control wrote:

Interesting point.

I think so.

I was also viewing the film in light of this article by Richard Brody , which highlights how Hitch's Catholic guilt complex plays out in the film. I don't agree with everything Brody has to say there, but it's undoubtedly significant that Scotty/Judy's relationship is ended by a scary nun.

Control wrote:

How'd the audience react to particular scenes through out the film, such as when Scottie was obsessively transforming Judy into Madeline towards the end?

With horrified gasps. I was surprised that there were no guffaws throughout the screening. Even the dream sequence played out without so much as a sneer from the audience.

HJackson wrote:

Going back to my complaint about the DVD from a few pages ago, my problem with the DVD is that it seems too bright and pale, so this screening seems to present the film in a way that would certainly be more pleasing to my eyes. If the lightness of the film (as seen on the DVD) is intentioned, I don't really know how I feel about its visual composition.

Well, I don't know what you're seeing versus what I'm seeing (there can be worlds of difference between two different television sets). With my Blu-Ray/DVD player and TV color settings, my VERTIGO DVD appears to be startlingly vivid, with rich, saturated colors and deep, dark blacks.

This print--whether an issue with the print itself or the projection--didn't have particularly strong contrast between light and dark.

Control wrote:

I'm currently watching GILDA.

Hayworth was unbelievable. What a woman.

Oddly I thought the movie worked best in it's first 15 or 20 minutes, or however long it was before Rita showed up. But Rita is #1 for me in terms of Golden Age leading ladies. She was dynamite.

HJackson wrote:

The White Tuxedo wrote:

Interesting, THE MAN FROM LARAMIE might be my least favorite. Spawned an amusing song, though.

Gonna see the "Ranown cycle" soon, too. I've seen two of them, I think.

It seems you admire the Mann films from their straight ahead roughness, so a distaste for LARAMIE is understandable. It really straddles the harshness of his westerns and the grandness of his later epics, and that's why I loved it so much.

Yeah, with LARAMIE it was almost like the worst of both worlds. It was reaching for epicness, without actually getting it's hands on it. I like the leaness and meaness of his earlier films. I've seen some of EL CID, and I want to see it all.

The White Tuxedo wrote:

Control wrote:

I'm currently watching GILDA.

Hayworth was unbelievable. What a woman.

Oddly I thought the movie worked best in it's first 15 or 20 minutes, or however long it was before Rita showed up. But Rita is #1 for me in terms of Golden Age leading ladies. She was dynamite.

The movie's alright. It's fun picking up on the innuendos and it's always a pleasure to watch Rita Hayworth in nice gowns and dresses for 2 hours.

Adaptation

Somewhat innovative in its structure, this film works very well and is quite funny. It is far superior to the SPOTLESS trash, which seems to confirm my hypothesis that the director of said film sucked. ADAPTATION is more accessible and more interesting and funnier than MALKOVICH, which I enjoyed for some time, but lost interest in completely somewhere down the line (I may give it another chance).
ADAPTATION links the eponymous screenwriting process to Darwin's theory about the biological mechanism of the same name, draws interesting philosophical cogitations from it, among them anthropological ones, is based on a script written by an author who writes about himself and his process of struggling with said script... and it's even more complicated and richer than that.
Brian Cox is in it, too; he plays Robert McKee, another real person who has made it into this movie. I could write much more about it, but I'll just say it's clever and quite funny. It also features some impressive shots of nature. Cage is good, as is Cooper. The film has some shortcomings, too, but they are minor. Certainly a film for multiple viewings. It may become even more interesting.

Harmsway wrote:

VERTIGO (1958, dir. Alfred Hitchcock)

In 35mm.

[list][*]It was lovely to see VERTIGO projected, though I thought the project could have used a brighter bulb. The darker moments of the film seemed a bit too dark, and the bright daylight scenes never seemed quite bright enough.[*]The strongest criticism one can make of VERTIGO is that it does not reflect the neat, tidy craftsmanship that Hitchcock is known for. It has dazzling moments and switches, but there are also signs of clunkiness here, with two very significant exposition dumps.[*]I'm a formalist at heart, with a bias toward stylistic expressionism. It's no wonder I love this film.[*]VERTIGO has only become more relevant. Many have talked about how Scotty starts as a moviewatcher and moves into the role of director. Scotty-as-director, though, carries the air of the obsessive fanboy, making his own sort of real-world fan-film.

RE: Exposition dumps. That scene with Midge at the beginning I'll guess is one you're meaning. Something about that scene always... I dunno. Not quite bothered me, but it never excited me.

I love when Scottie starts moulding Judy. Something strikes me as off in VERTIGO and I'm still in the camp that wants to really love it, but can't quite seem to. I do plan to see it again soon, back-to-back with OBSESSION. As for OBSESSION, as big a fan as I've become of De Palma it leaves me quite cold. CARRIE has the opposite effect.

-----

Hugo (2011)

This one I will have to see again. The first 90 minutes did very little for me, but from the scene where they watch A TRIP TO THE MOON on, I either loved or really liked what I saw. Though I'll admit, the actual Melies footage is what excited me the most.

Kingsley is the one that really interested me, not the boy. I'd have prefered a movie about Kingsley.

Since I ranked them above, why not continue the trend?

1. THE DESCENDANTS
2. THE ARTIST
3. HUGO
4. THE HELP
5. MIDNIGHT IN PARIS
6. EXTREMELY LOUD AND INCREDIBLY CLOSE

The White Tuxedo wrote:

RE: Exposition dumps. That scene with Midge at the beginning I'll guess is one you're meaning. Something about that scene always... I dunno. Not quite bothered me, but it never excited me.

I was thinking more of the inital chat with Elster, and then Judy's letter-writing scene later in the film. I quite like the scene with Midge. There is some great character work there.

Harmsway wrote:

The White Tuxedo wrote:

RE: Exposition dumps. That scene with Midge at the beginning I'll guess is one you're meaning. Something about that scene always... I dunno. Not quite bothered me, but it never excited me.

I was thinking more of the inital chat with Elster, and then Judy's letter-writing scene later in the film. I quite like the scene with Midge. There is some great character work there.

Ah. I see. It's just the one that instantly popped into my mind.

I will say that Scottie's investigation never really intrigued me to heavily. I'm trying to ditch logic when looking at the film, though.

the last cinematic outing was one that would've had Orson Welles shrieking from the grave. The imposition that was Hot Tub Time Machine or Have Script but no Talent or Where's the Shatner When You Need Him or Hot Tits No Machine or...

Diora Baird perked things up a bit but it was a fairly forgettable experience. The film not Diora...or maybe it was, who knows. The lights were off.

The Change-Up (2011)

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1488555/

The movie is funny in some parts, crude in others and just downright juvenile in most of it.

3/5

But Olivia Wilde is White Hot!

http://www.imagebam.com/gallery/6x9a9mckuosm8k3kttn5b243bnojvft1/

Leviathan (1989)

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0097737/

This came out a few months before James Cameron's The Abyss was released.

I guess it wanted to capitalize on the Deep Underwater In the Ocean genre.

Recognize the item in this screenshot from the movie?



Some of the special effects in this film was one of that company's earliest project!

The Man from Laramie (1955)

Remains my least favorite of the Mann/Stewart westerns, but it's still a totally solid film in the genre. Yeah, it's antipating the more epic Mann films down the line, but it doesn't quite reach far enough. At least that's what I see. I like the lean and mean films he did before this one.

These films generally even out for me. I'd probably say that WINCHESTER '73 and THE NAKED SPUR are the best, while BEND OF THE RIVER and THE FAR COUNTRY are the most enjoyable. THE FAR COUNTRY was the real standout for me on this, my third go of these movies. A really fine collection they make, and it's a shame Mann got fired from NIGHT PASSAGE or whatever happened. I'm gonna see that one soon. It's a pity Stewart didn't do MAN OF THE WEST as well. Cooper seemed out of place to me in that one.

The Thing (2012)

More of a remake than a prequel (aside from the last 2 minutes). I didn't hate it, is perhaps the best praise I can offer. More than anything else I think the film stands as the perfect example of why CGI is no replacement for physical effects, the creature stuff here lacks the impact and credibility of Bottin's work for the 1982 film, moreover there's far too much of it, far too clearly captured. The bits that echoed the original while not as good are still enjoyable, I am a fan of the base under siege by monster scenario, but pretty much nothing new was brought to the table and there was too little tension or mystery. Critically the addition of being able to spot the creature by it's inability to replicate inorganic elements really undermines the film...suddenly there is an easy visual clue anyone can check at any time - farcical. Best part was any scene with Kristofer Hivju who'se permanently surprised expression was hilarious....why wasn't this guy Volstagg.

5/10

The Untouchables

I was surprised to find that most of it was straight in tone, opposed to what I thought I remembered of it from my first viewing. The only noticeable exception being the "attack with Mounties" sequence, and De Niro's heavy hamming with his reaction to the swapping of the juries, which itself is a pretty simple solution to the Capone problem, yet not completely unprepared or ridiculously unbelievable. The film relies too heavily on action/suspense set-pieces, rendering it a bit shallow. But most of the time the direction makes it still enjoyable. But I am pretty sure it loses of that enjoyability with every viewing; the rooftop chase was a bit disappointing compared with my first viewing. Production design, cinematography, music (with exceptions), and direction (with exceptions) are really good. Given the material, Connery's acting is okay. It's certainly not his greatest achievement (- but what has he achieved actingwise anyway?). Apart from the writing lacking some depth, it's all right.


I think intuitively, I've ranked it correctly from the beginning (below FEMME FATALE!):

CARRIE
BLOW OUT
OBSESSION
CARLITO'S WAY
MISSION TO MARS
PHANTOM OF THE PARADISE
THE BLACK DAHLIA
RAISING CAIN
SISTERS
FEMME FATALE
THE UNTOUCHABLES
SCARFACE
MISSION IMPOSSIBLE
CASUALTIES OF WAR

My favorite thing in THE UNTOUCHABLES is Seannery's innovative use of a corpse.

The 39 Steps (1935)

Aside from just being a terrific movie, it's got a real iconic magic to it. I've not seen a giant amount of 30's films, but this might be my favorite of those I've seen. I'd like to see the stage production. Wish I could have seen the one with Catherine McCormack.

Well, the elderly couple in the apartment across the way found out we hadn't seen AVATAR (well, the first 3 minutes on HBO was all I managed) and since it was the only DVD they owned, they decided we HAD to see it.

About the best I can say is that I got all the way through it with only three breaks for bathroom and eating (though I dozed off twice in the first hour.)

Still have no clue at all what the excitement was about, but if I want to see a movie this long, it needs to deliver in compelling and/or innovative fashion. JFK, RAGTIME, those movies never FELT long to me.

This ... this was like the time when we were visiting at the home of an associate from my wife's old job, and I wound up in a roomful of strangers watching NASCAR.

trevanian wrote:

This ... this was like the time when we were visiting at the home of an associate from my wife's old job, and I wound up in a roomful of strangers watching NASCAR.

Yeah, AVATAR was a huge bore for me. Some nice design work, I guess nice specticle and everything if you see it on a big screen in 3D. But worth committing suicide over? Only to escape the sheer boredom of watching it.

Great points made about DISTRICT 9, and it actually looks more impressive, while AVATAR looks cartoony.

I wanted to watch another movie tonight but now I'm too tired. I hate when that happens.

MYSTERIES OF LISBON (2011, dir. Raul Ruiz)

The casual virtuosity on display here would make Welles burn with envy if he were still around to see it.


STRANGERS ON A TRAIN (1951, dir. Alfred Hitchcock)

I love this film for its villain. What a tremendously creepy baddie. The good guys are mostly bland--Farley Granger is nobody's idea of a great leading man--but every time Robert Walker is on screen, the movie crackles. And it has some of my favorite Hitchcock set-pieces.

The Letter

My second Wyler, I believe, and my first Davis. A really good film (though there was one line of dialogue that didn't make sense to me). I'm curious about seeing more Wyler, hopefully I can get hold of other films of his.

PS: Reading some reviews and comments about THE UNTOUCHABLES, I suddenly remembered more scenes and bits that weren't completely straight, but I do not find them obtrusive in their style. I get the impression that De Palma deliberately makes the viewer sense the slightly camp style, but if it's only a joke on his behalf I don't know. What may have been his intentions? It's certainly not a film that seriously tries to present believable events and character studies, it's just a simplistic (regarding content) and stylish cops-vs.-mob flick, or perhaps a camp version of it. Not sure what really to think of it. I wonder if it's allowed to enjoy most parts of it. :scratch:

Harmsway wrote:

MYSTERIES OF LISBON (2011, dir. Raul Ruiz)

The casual virtuosity on display here would make Welles burn with envy if he were still around to see it.


STRANGERS ON A TRAIN (1951, dir. Alfred Hitchcock)

I love this film for its villain. What a tremendously creepy baddie. The good guys are mostly bland--Farley Granger is nobody's idea of a great leading man--but every time Robert Walker is on screen, the movie crackles. And it has some of my favorite Hitchcock set-pieces.

I still mean to see LISBON.

As for STRANGERS, Walker is tremendous and it's a shame he died so young. Granger strikes me as a John Gavin/Rod Taylor type. I've always taken it that Hitch would intentionally cast bland leading men in the "hero" role to subvert the whole thing and make the audience identify with the villain. In STRANGERS, Granger is a bit too bland for me. Even more so Ruth Roman, and I don't think Hitch cared for her either. STRANGERS doesn't work for me as well in parts, notably the tennis match. But the amusement park sequence is one of my favorites from any Hitchcock film. Hell, it's one of my favorite ten-or-so minute stretches from all of cinema.

Johnny Guitar (1954)

What a pleasure to finally see this. A powerhouse western. I'm thinking I kinda wish it had been in widescreen, maybe 1.66 or 1.85, but nothing wider than that. Still looks good in the old Academy ratio, but something about it's colors just seems to fit a wider image to me.

I like that it's between two women, and McCambridge is a great baddie. I liked the sense of villainy in this film.

I was also watching bits of PHANTOM OF THE PARADISE. Must see it again soon. Just about my favorite "new movie" I've seen this year, as in a movie I'd not seen before.