What quirky DVD's have you watched lately?
Posted by: ErikL on 14 February 2004
I recently watched these and both are recommended:
Capturing The Friedmans- A documentary of a middle-class Long Island family, when a son and father were accused of molestation and sodomy. Definitely not a comfy Valentine's Day sort of movie; it's uncomfortable and unsettling but well done as all sides of the events are touched upon.*
Man on the Train (L'Homme du Train)- Two very different guys in an excruciatingly dull town in France, a thief and a teacher, cross paths and form an odd relationship. Definitely a slow builder to the climax where both experience life-altering events, but worth every minute.
(* Don't watch this the same weekend you watch L.I.E.)
Capturing The Friedmans- A documentary of a middle-class Long Island family, when a son and father were accused of molestation and sodomy. Definitely not a comfy Valentine's Day sort of movie; it's uncomfortable and unsettling but well done as all sides of the events are touched upon.*
Man on the Train (L'Homme du Train)- Two very different guys in an excruciatingly dull town in France, a thief and a teacher, cross paths and form an odd relationship. Definitely a slow builder to the climax where both experience life-altering events, but worth every minute.
(* Don't watch this the same weekend you watch L.I.E.)
quote:
Originally posted by Dan M:
_Talk To Her -- which I liked very much_
The thing that bothered me the most about that movie was feeling sympathy for a rapist. I'm still conflicted.
Dan
..and also being asked to feel sympathy for a bloody bullfighter.
I hated it
Stephen
quote:
Originally posted by Dan M:
I saw 'Love Actually' on a recent flight -- Terrible. Really, really bad. Is there something in Hugh Grant's contract that requires a scene where he puts his foot in his mouth around a pretty girl and then in private hits himself in the head?
Dan
If you ignore Grant, LA has a lot going for it. I hear a lot of knee jerk negative reactions to the film. I feel it's up there with the best of british films in the last 20 years. The acting of the rest of the cast, particulary Emma Thompson and Andrew Lincoln was very moving. If this had been a Cohen brothers or PT Anderson people would be fawning over it.
Very good start and end too.
So there!
Regards
Stephen
quote:
Originally posted by Tim Jones:
Stephen -
What rubbish. It's a hypocritical, manipulative and disturbing bit of lottery-funded tat.
Tim
What? My posting?
Stephen
PS
Hypocritical? Please explain?
Manipulative? It's a Movie
Disturbing? Please explain?
Lottery Funded? OK, maybe!
Tim
1. She was flattered by his love. You're falling into the 'If a woman smiles at me/kisses me/looks in my direction, it's a come on' trap. It's always a nice feeling when someone loves you, even when it's complicated. This isn't an unreal situation. Life is hypocritical sometimes - but that doesn't mean the movieis! You can't blame a movie for having hypocrital situations!
2. Good films can be manipulative too. Do you hate all all the films of Spielberg/Lean/Powell/Wenders et al too?
All directors try to manipulate the audience to think/feel like they want them to do.
3. So multi-plot films are lazy? Goodness, you must hate Magnolia and Short Cuts then..
As for 4, I wish that were true....My (small) epic would be on at a multiplex near you today!
Regards
Stephen
1. She was flattered by his love. You're falling into the 'If a woman smiles at me/kisses me/looks in my direction, it's a come on' trap. It's always a nice feeling when someone loves you, even when it's complicated. This isn't an unreal situation. Life is hypocritical sometimes - but that doesn't mean the movieis! You can't blame a movie for having hypocrital situations!
2. Good films can be manipulative too. Do you hate all all the films of Spielberg/Lean/Powell/Wenders et al too?
All directors try to manipulate the audience to think/feel like they want them to do.
3. So multi-plot films are lazy? Goodness, you must hate Magnolia and Short Cuts then..
As for 4, I wish that were true....My (small) epic would be on at a multiplex near you today!
Regards
Stephen
Stephen -
1. "She was flattered by his attention". I think it was a bit more than that. And I'll ask again: how does this square with the Thompson/Rickman plotlet about the effect of adultery?
Of course people who make films can be hypocrites and can be blamed as such - especially if one moral point they attempt to make is promptly contradicted by a different plot for cheap sentimental effect - ie the Lincoln character getting what he wants.
If you wander down that road which begins with the idea that films (or novels, or art) should simply reflect what happens in life, then you're on a slippery slope to asking what the point of doing these things is in the first place. Books are written, films are made, etc, because the people who make them want to make a point, not just reflect reality back to us.
2. Speaking of directors wanting to make a point, of course they try to get an audience to feel the way they want them to feel. But most manage to do it by engaging the audience's intelligence, rather than by dangling little crowd pleasing moments in front of them like so many Christmas ornaments.
Spielberg is a good example. He could not leave the end of A.I alone, so tacked on a ludicrous deus ex machina ending ("Aliens from the future!")to give the audience what it wanted. This has got worse and worse over the past decade and big Steve bears a lot of responsibility for it. I don't remember any of the three directors you mention falling into this trap (especially Powell. How dare you mention his name in the context of an aberration like LA!)
3. I don't hate all multi-plot films. 'Short Cuts' isn't an entirely fair example because Carver's original story was interwoven plot lines. But I do think it's fair to say that a multiple plot is very often a sign of the scriptwriters' inability to sustain our attention.
Let's face it - you're embarrassed because you like a chick-flick. Right, back to the original version of Solaris for me. cough.
Tim
1. "She was flattered by his attention". I think it was a bit more than that. And I'll ask again: how does this square with the Thompson/Rickman plotlet about the effect of adultery?
Of course people who make films can be hypocrites and can be blamed as such - especially if one moral point they attempt to make is promptly contradicted by a different plot for cheap sentimental effect - ie the Lincoln character getting what he wants.
If you wander down that road which begins with the idea that films (or novels, or art) should simply reflect what happens in life, then you're on a slippery slope to asking what the point of doing these things is in the first place. Books are written, films are made, etc, because the people who make them want to make a point, not just reflect reality back to us.
2. Speaking of directors wanting to make a point, of course they try to get an audience to feel the way they want them to feel. But most manage to do it by engaging the audience's intelligence, rather than by dangling little crowd pleasing moments in front of them like so many Christmas ornaments.
Spielberg is a good example. He could not leave the end of A.I alone, so tacked on a ludicrous deus ex machina ending ("Aliens from the future!")to give the audience what it wanted. This has got worse and worse over the past decade and big Steve bears a lot of responsibility for it. I don't remember any of the three directors you mention falling into this trap (especially Powell. How dare you mention his name in the context of an aberration like LA!
)3. I don't hate all multi-plot films. 'Short Cuts' isn't an entirely fair example because Carver's original story was interwoven plot lines. But I do think it's fair to say that a multiple plot is very often a sign of the scriptwriters' inability to sustain our attention.
Let's face it - you're embarrassed because you like a chick-flick. Right, back to the original version of Solaris for me. cough.
Tim
I love Solaris too...but I expect you'll be upset that I like both versions.
PS Lincolns character didn't get what he wanted, but what if he had? You are allowed to have more than one moral angle in a film you know. Why should any director be limited to showing characters following only one viewpoint?
A film doesn't have to be about the director trying to impose his one personal moral view on the audience - it can be about exploring many themes. I never said films should be realistic, by the way - they can be, of course.
Stephen - who unashamedly liked LA a lot - so there!
PPS If you want a film full of moral ambiguity I suggest 'I know where I'm going' - and we know who directed that!
PPPS I can't believe I'm arguing about LA on the net. Without coffee.
Stephen
[This message was edited by Stephen Bennett on Thu 17 June 2004 at 16:37.]
PS Lincolns character didn't get what he wanted, but what if he had? You are allowed to have more than one moral angle in a film you know. Why should any director be limited to showing characters following only one viewpoint?
A film doesn't have to be about the director trying to impose his one personal moral view on the audience - it can be about exploring many themes. I never said films should be realistic, by the way - they can be, of course.
Stephen - who unashamedly liked LA a lot - so there!
PPS If you want a film full of moral ambiguity I suggest 'I know where I'm going' - and we know who directed that!
PPPS I can't believe I'm arguing about LA on the net. Without coffee.
Stephen
[This message was edited by Stephen Bennett on Thu 17 June 2004 at 16:37.]
quote:
I feel it's up there with the best of british films in the last 20 years.
Stephen -
So you think it's crap then? (Sorry, couldn't resist
)My current quirky (well slightly quirky) DVD fave is 'The Parallax View'. If you can get over Beatty's preening it's one of the bst conspiracy movies I've seen...
Tim
quote:
Originally posted by bhazen:
_Alphaville_
The Godard one...ultra-strange _noir_ sci-fi, filmed in b&w in industrial parts of Paris in '65 or so...
I saw this at my local art house a month ago.
I should have guessed that a French dystopian controling computer voice should sound like it had throat cancer, but how come the man/machine interface was a fan heater?
Were they considered so futuristic in the 60s?
Stephen
PS 'The Hole' was very good I thought....