|
|
 |
|
01-03-2006, 03:45 PM
|
#61 of 2071 
|
|
Member
Join Date: Nov 2003
Local Time: 12:50 PM
Local Date: 11-18-2008
Posts: 4,608
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
|
01-03-2006, 05:00 PM
|
#62 of 2071
|
|
Member
Join Date: Mar 2001
Local Time: 11:50 AM
Local Date: 11-18-2008
Posts: 14,313
|
Frank & Ollie
A good example of how my rating system is often misunderstood.  This is a great documentary, but like almost all documentaries, once you've seen it, it holds little rewatchability (at least for me). There's no narrative story, it's informative. It's like a well-written textbook compared to a well-written novel. One you learn from, but don't re-read for fun. The other you can read and enjoy many times over. That doesn't make the textbook bad, it's just not something you re-read.
If there were a sideways thumb smiley, I'd use that.
"Movies should be like amusement parks. People should go to them to have fun." - Billy Wilder
"Subtitles good. Hollywood bad." - Tarzan, Sight & Sound 2012 voter.
"My films are not slices of life, they are pieces of cake." - Alfred Hitchcock
"My great humility is just one of the many reasons that I am vastly superior to everyone else." - Ramrod Clerk
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
01-03-2006, 05:49 PM
|
#63 of 2071
|
|
Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Local Time: 01:50 PM
Local Date: 11-18-2008
Posts: 4,206
|
Quote:
|
We're just going to have to agree to disagree, cause I can't for the life of me figure out how you can watch some great film for the first time such as Gunga Din, Bambi, The Seventh Seal, Laura and Rashomon and look forward to not having to rewatch those again, so you can better spend that time seeing other films you've never seen before like White Chicks 2, Smallpox Returns, Frankenstein's Great Aunt Tillie Comes Back, Manos the Feet of Fortune, and Queen of Kong Island.
|
Now now George, don't knock FRANKENSTEIN'S GREAT AUNT TILLIE until you've seen it.  I'm not sure if you knew this when making fun of the title but there is a QUEEN KONG that was released during the 70s.
You mentioned a few titles but I did watch a lot of "BOMB" rated films last year and I'm sure I'll see plenty more this year. The horror genre is an exception for me because I've seen the majority of the "A", "B" and "C" titles so now I'm searching for those "X", "Y" and "Z" titles, which will lead to a lot of BOMB ratings. Am I wasting my time watching them? Probably but the "reward" of finding some entertaining trash like BILLY THE KID VS DRACULA is worth it.
What I did last year was cut out a lot of the "watch once a year" titles like ON THE WATERFRONT, COOL HAND LUKE, HUD, ANNIE HALL, MANHATTAN and various others. This let me try the new stuff, which I will continue to do this year. I'll rewatch some of these great films but I've seen them enough times where there's no suspense or shock in the story so I might as well find a new film to give me that.
Like you, I'm going to guess I've seen 10,000 films, which leaves us with around 110,000 films we've never seen. We'll never get all of those watched but you've gotta think there are many more hidden gems to be discovered. Many hidden gems that are now forgotten but thanks to TCM we can find them. That's probably why I record 10-15 movies from TCM each week.
I seriously doubt someone's going to come and take my collection away but if they did I'm sure I could find just as many films in those 110,000 that would keep me busy the rest of my life.
Haggai, so far I've got discs sitting here from Lions Gates, EC Entertainment (overseas company) and Rhino. A couple other studios will donate some titles as the year goes by. I'm just going to let the studio pick the "winner" each month and I'll go from there. I'm not going to get involved on who wins so no one can send me the death threats. :b
I'll announce the first month's titles at the end of the week because I'm expecting another package by the weekend. All the titles will be brand new, never viewed but I'm going to guess some screeners will be out of the wrap just like they're sent to reviewers. EC Entertainment has never put wraps on their discs but I assure everyone they will be new discs. Rhino is mixed with how they send but most of the Lions Gate titles are sealed from the studio. I've got four titles here and will announce them as soon as I see what else is delivered this month.
|
|
|
|
|
|
01-03-2006, 07:07 PM
|
#64 of 2071
|
|
Member
Join Date: Nov 2003
Local Time: 12:50 PM
Local Date: 11-18-2008
Posts: 4,608
|
Quote:
|
The fact that I had to watch tons of crap to get to such great films, stuff like L'Age D'Or, Fashions of 1934, The Sea of Grass, The Snake Pit, The River, The Pride & the Passion, L'Avventura, Shock Corridor, The Masque of Red Death, Au Hasard Balthazar, Arabella, Kill!, The Night Porter, Dawn of the Dead,
|
George, George, George -- when will you ever learn to stop watching non-mainstream "B" horror films? You just cannot appreciate them! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
01-03-2006, 10:11 PM
|
#66 of 2071
|
|
Member
Join Date: Mar 2001
Local Time: 11:50 AM
Local Date: 11-18-2008
Posts: 14,313
|
| George, George, George -- when will you ever learn to stop watching non-mainstream "B" horror films? You just cannot appreciate them! |
As soon as they stop getting recommended by various lists of great films that I use to help me try to decide which of the 110,000 films I haven't seen to watch next.
| I seriously doubt someone's going to come and take my collection away but if they did I'm sure I could find just as many films in those 110,000 that would keep me busy the rest of my life. |
I could certainly stay busy the rest of my life watching as many of those 110,000 films as possible, but I suspect I could watch for 50 years and only find 1 or 2 that are as good as my current top 100. 10,000 out of 120,000 may only be 8% of all films, but it wasn't a random selection, and if God provided me with a rank-ordered list of all 120,000 according to how I'd like them, I suspect that the vast majority of the top films are in the 10,000 I've already seen. That won't stop me from seeing as many of those unseen 110,000 as possible, but no way would I trade that for the ones I own.
"Movies should be like amusement parks. People should go to them to have fun." - Billy Wilder
"Subtitles good. Hollywood bad." - Tarzan, Sight & Sound 2012 voter.
"My films are not slices of life, they are pieces of cake." - Alfred Hitchcock
"My great humility is just one of the many reasons that I am vastly superior to everyone else." - Ramrod Clerk
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
01-03-2006, 10:38 PM
|
#67 of 2071
|
|
Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Local Time: 01:50 PM
Local Date: 11-18-2008
Posts: 4,206
|
Quote:
|
I could certainly stay busy the rest of my life watching as many of those 110,000 films as possible, but I suspect I could watch for 50 years and only find 1 or 2 that are as good as my current top 100.
|
This is an interesting point because you've been watching movies a bit longer than I have. I'm not sure what your age is but I'm 25 so "new" films are always taking me by shock and making my Top 100. Perhaps after ten more years a viewings I'll find less and less to make my list but within the past few years several films have jumped into my tops including last year's viewing of INTOLERANCE, which might very well end up as my #1 film. Others like SUNRISE, HE WHO GETS SLAPPED, WILD STRAWBERRIES and various others come to mind.
The one viewings I'm deadly lacking in is the foreign genre, which I plan to change this year. As I said in the other thread I watched seven Bergman films this year and gave six of them four stars. This is just one foreign director I've discovered so there's a lot more out there for me to see and a lot of chances that one will end up in my Top 100.
Now, to carry over the CGI stuff from the 2005 thread:
Quote:
|
Have you seen King Kong Michael?
|
Yes, all three versions plus countless rips. For my money the 1933 version still has the best effects. The most up to date effects? No but in terms of quailty I'd rank the 1933 tops. In terms of difficulty I'd also put the 1933 version at tops. The guys of today and work on a computer and make effects. It wasn't that easy in the older days when everything had to be built by hand.
I mentioned Jack Pierce in the other thread as well. There have been many recent FRANKENSTEIN films that used CGI for the monster but again, not one of them comes close to the look of Karloff in FRANKENSTEIN and its sequel THE BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN.
Quote:
|
Oh get over it already and join the 21st century.
|
I was on a date the other night bitching because this girl wanted to listen to Master P and I was trying to introduce her to Dylan, Lennon and a Johnny Cash CD I had just picked up. She said the exact same thing!!!
Quote:
|
Watch any Pixar doc to see some of the mind boggling things they've done to simulate certain specific effects.
|
Pixar is a different matter just as Disney's animation of the 40's would be different and not right to compare to a live film. Pixar does incredible work but using these same effects for something like KING KONG just doesn't work because it's so obviously fake. It's so obviously fake that it takes me right out of the story and I have a rather hard time building up any suspense. Someone mentioned the dino chase in KK and this is the perfect example for me.
Buster Keaton, Harold Lloyd and Charles Chaplin risked their lives to bring certain stunts to the screen. These things are done in real time and are 100% real. Keaton broke his back during SHERLOCK JR. and nearly killed himself twice during THE GENERAL. These stunts work a lot better than the CGI stunts of today because one is real while the other is just so obviously fake.
They might make a "big, beautiful NYC" on a computer but I can see the real thing in the 1933 version. A computer might build some epic battle but we can see a real epic battle with real people and real sets in films like INTOLERANCE, THE BIRTH OF A NATION, BEN HUR and countless other films.
Quote:
|
Now that I agree with. Here's where Pixar excels. Can't comment on King Kong.
|
Which is why I'd only let Spielberg use CGI. A lot of it was used in MINORITY REPORT and WAR OF THE WORLDS but in both films it looked real because Spielberg uses it as part of the story. It's not just there to look pretty and Spielberg never lets it take over the center story of what's going on. For my money these are the two best examples of great CGI with WAR OF THE WORLDS being 100% better than KK because it looks real. The CGI isn't used in an over the top fashion that makes it seem fake.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
01-03-2006, 10:47 PM
|
#68 of 2071
|
|
Brandon Harbeke
Member
Location: Arizona
Join Date: Apr 2004
Local Time: 10:50 AM
Local Date: 11-18-2008
Posts: 522
|
| |
