What general film/series have you just seen.. marks out of 5

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 26 Jan 2009, 15:07

I didnt see Changeling at the cinema (I wanted to) - maybe its on DVD soon.

saltysam · Post by **saltysam** » 26 Jan 2009, 15:58

grim_tales wrote:maybe its on DVD soon.

wow do you really think it'll come to dvd Grim

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 26 Jan 2009, 16:16

You know what I mean, maybe the release isnt far off.

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 26 Jan 2009, 18:53

Maybe you should look

-

http://www.dvdactive.com/news/releases/ ... eling.html

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 26 Jan 2009, 19:38

17 Feb isnt far off but I may wait for the R2

Thanks though.

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 30 Jan 2009, 13:27

Blow-Up (1966): 3/5

I was inspired to watch this partly for the story similarities it shares with Brian De Palma's thriller Blow Out (1981). It's interesting, but I didnt find the photographer the most likeable character or nice person. He almost treats the girls he photographs like cattle, pointing at them and calling them "you", or something like that, and in one scene the act of photographing one model is almost treated like an extension of sex ("Give it to me... give it to me!" etc), and telling a girl to lie down and almost photographing up her skirt.
The cars, fashions and culture etc seem so different from today and were interesting to see. The film focuses on that style quite a bit.
I did wonder why if David Hemmings snaps a murder, why didnt he go to the police? Then I thought that the drama group at the start/end were important as they could have "acted out" the park murder for the man to snap
He seemed self centered and too focused on his job.
I think Blow Out is the better film.

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 30 Jan 2009, 23:27

BLOW OUT is by far the better film.

Only pretentious knobs would disagree.

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 30 Jan 2009, 23:30

FREAKS 1/5

Wow. Most offensive exploitation film ever. Made in 1932 it still has the power to shock today as it parades unfortunate grotesques for your entertainment. A nod is made toward "we are people too" type justification but really this is just as much an exercise in point and stare as the sideshows these "freaks" came from. Such a film could never be made today (and we can be thankful for that).

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 31 Jan 2009, 12:47

Aren't the "normals" who abuse them shown to be freaky too (or at least shown in a bad light?), I thought that was one point of the points of the film. (I havent seen it BTW).
As for BLOW-UP, it was ambiguous at the end, OK he saw the dead body, but did it REALLY happen? BLOW-OUT is superior IMO as its more enjoyable.

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 31 Jan 2009, 14:02

grim_tales wrote:Aren't the "normals" who abuse them shown to be freaky too (or at least shown in a bad light?), I thought that was one point of the points of the film. (I havent seen it BTW).

Yes. They're "freaks" of a different kind. But there's no getting away from the fact that throughout the movie the audience is encouraged to gasp in shock horror at these sideshow performers (and if you haven't seen the film it's worse than you imagine). They aren't just people with disabilities. They're freaks of nature. I've never seen anything like and was disturbed that they were being used as entertainment. See it yourself and you'll know what I mean...

As for BLOW-UP, it was ambiguous at the end, OK he saw the dead body, but did it REALLY happen? BLOW-OUT is superior IMO as its more enjoyable.

Blow Up is more concerned with showing how clever it is than providing an answer to its mystery.

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 31 Jan 2009, 14:43

Yeah, I don't think BLOW-UP has any real answer. Did he really see a murder or didnt he? Did the mime troupe organise it? Why did Vanessa Redgrave want the photos anyway? Why didnt he call the police? We don't know.
Surprised he doesn't just ask her "Why do you want the photos?"
I'll see if I can check out FREAKS.

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 01 Feb 2009, 03:51

Pretentious art filmmakers often think it's beneath them to bother with such trifles as plot and common sense.

HungFist · Post by **HungFist** » 01 Feb 2009, 09:25

It's so irritating when a film doesn't explain everything. It makes my brain hurt.

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 01 Feb 2009, 11:37

Avoid Blow-Up then as I'd hate for your brain to get hurt.

HungFist · Post by **HungFist** » 01 Feb 2009, 11:59

Seen it already. Good film.

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 01 Feb 2009, 12:17

Sometimes I like films that make you think/ask questions etc, but surely Blow Up could have provided answers in addition to its arty meanderings. See, what we "see" in the park or what we see in the photos is actually DIFFERENT from what David Hemmings saw. Why? In some of the photos Hemmings had, we didnt see any of those things.

Killer Meteor · Post by **Killer Meteor** » 01 Feb 2009, 18:14

Markgway wrote:
grim_tales wrote:Aren't the "normals" who abuse them shown to be freaky too (or at least shown in a bad light?), I thought that was one point of the points of the film. (I havent seen it BTW).
Yes. They're "freaks" of a different kind. But there's no getting away from the fact that throughout the movie the audience is encouraged to gasp in shock horror at these sideshow performers (and if you haven't seen the film it's worse than you imagine). They aren't just people with disabilities. They're freaks of nature. I've never seen anything like and was disturbed that they were being used as entertainment. See it yourself and you'll know what I mean...

[.

Its an odd film because Tod Browning was a sideshow performer himself as a boy (he was the Living Corpse buried in a grave for a period of 3 days then "revived") and I expect he bonded with the freaks. The film was intended as the horror to end all horrors and the short story it was based on, "Spurs", has a much less sympathetic portrayal of the freaks; so there seems to be a confusion of intentions. Indeed, after the film, the freaks either remained good friends with Browning (Angelo Rossito, Harry Earles, Johhny Eck) or completely shunned him and the film

gasteropod · Post by **gasteropod** » 05 Feb 2009, 03:35

Live Flesh: 4/5

Another solid film from Almodovar, I saw Volver recently and would rate that the same.

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 05 Feb 2009, 13:39

Live Flesh is excellent. Javier Bardem is as usual brilliant. How many director's have the guts to put one of your main protagonists in a wheelchair.

Volver (USA BD or UK DVD is best) is also excellent, as is Bad Education (R1 is best). I'll be seeing Talk to Her (R1 is best) soon, which I understand is Almodovar's Magnum Opus. I also understand All About My Mother is excellent (R1 or R3 are best).

If I remember correctly the UK DVDs of Live Flesh and All About My Mother are best avoided.

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 06 Feb 2009, 12:42

Peter Pan (1953): 4/5

Good fun, an enjoyable Disney film

It has a timeless story about childhood, heart and some good music. Kathryn Beaumont gives a more assured performance here as Wendy than she did in Alice in Wonderland, maybe as she's older. Sounding rather like the dog Droopy from MGM cartoons, Bill Thompson is good comic relief as Hook's sidekick, Smee

Interestingly the opening theme The Second Star To The Right takes it's melody from a song that was first used for Alice in Wonderland (1951) but was abandoned, called Beyond The Laughing Sky.
I didnt know this at the time either - but the famous (Never Smile) To a Crocodile doesn't actually appear in the movie Peter Pan except as an underscore, marking the croc's appearance. Although versions were recorded by other artists at the time (eg Jerry Lewis), it's one of the most famous songs to ever be cut out of a Disney film.

Shen · Post by **Shen** » 07 Feb 2009, 00:16

Juno 3.5/5
Not a bad movie, not quite what i expected, doesn't glamorize teenage pregnancy to the extent i though it would. Not a bad story line, soundtrack is pretty cool too. Overall not a bad film just a bit patchy and lacking in places.

Trainspotting 4/5
A pretty good film by Danny Boyle, Couldn't understand much of the dialogue at times because of the scottish accents. Gritty and sometimes funny representation of addiction

Wall-e 3/5
Too much hype, found it a bit boring in places. Good animation but just not a great story.

Kung Fu Panda 3/5
Pretty good to relax and watch, it felt a bit rushed, but still a funny movie. Jack Blacks his usual crazy hyperactive self just in panda form.

Strange Days 4/5
Really good film, the plot is intersting with a good, though maybe predictable twist...who know lord voldermort could look like that

Teeth 3/5
Funny and entertaining 'horror' movie, i use the term loosely becuase its not at all scary, but just funny. The plot is pretty loose and the story slow but still pretty enjoyable

Yi-Long · Post by **Yi-Long** » 07 Feb 2009, 01:11

Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind 5/5

Watched this again tonight, as it was on TV. Gawd, how can you not give this movie 5/5!?
And how the hell didnt Jim Carrey get an oscar for this performance? I dont think he even got a nomination, did he!? Kate Winslet was fantastic as well.

Just a classic movie.

Shingster · Post by **Shingster** » 07 Feb 2009, 04:34

Eternal Sunshine was overlooked by the Academy because it was released really early in the Oscar year in America IIRC, not long after the previous year's oscars.

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 07 Feb 2009, 09:55

Yi-Long wrote:Gawd, how can you not give this movie 5/5!?

Easily. Not my cup of tea.

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 07 Feb 2009, 12:24

Shen wrote:Trainspotting 4/5
A pretty good film by Danny Boyle, Couldn't understand much of the dialogue at times because of the scottish accents. Gritty and sometimes funny representation of addiction

Didn't you put the English subs on? The American re-dub is hideous

. As you liked Trainspotting you'll probably like Slumdog.

Shingster wrote:Eternal Sunshine was overlooked by the Academy because it was released really early in the Oscar year in America IIRC, not long after the previous year's oscars.

It's weird how films only released shortly before the Oscars get nominated.