Sight and Sound (2002) Greatest Films Club - Page 11

ahh that I understand, I occasionally have the same problem. I get TOO into the movie and get very upset when the protagonist is incredibly 'dumb' and doesn't stop making retarded decision on top of decision that just makes things worse and worse.

I've found a way to enjoy these types of movies though (Like Meet the parents, or another genre I have the same trouble with, horror). If I catch myself getting angry with the stupidity of the protagonist, I sit back, tear my mind out of the world of the film as brutally as possible and tell myself repeatedly, "I don't care about any of these people; it's just a movie; it's a freaking comedy; THIS IS FUNNY; I should be enjoying this!; everything will work out fine in the end because its a popular (or screwball) comedy!" I'll repeat this to myself several times. and then go back (now that i've forcibly removed/prevented myself from caring too much about characters that were designed to be more stupid than my seven year old sister and try to enjoy the movie.

This worked wonders for Dead-Alive/Braindead, which made me realize my problem is not so much that I don't like horror, but that I'm too empathic and invest myself TOO much in the characters on the screen. which bites you in the ass when you're supposed to be laughing at the character on the screen instead of sympathizing so much that you're berating him for being a retarded fool.

Damn but I really want to go watch an S&S or thirties movie right now. especially since I've been AWOL from both for a while now. stupid 3000 word research paper...


Adam

OK, here's the list of what I've seen on the S&S list that I'd personally classify as a masterpiece (basically in order of the list, except possibly for Godfather 2 which is on the list 3 times).


Citizen Kane
Vertigo
2001: A Space Odyssey
The Godfather Part II
Singin' in the Rain
The Godfather
Dr. Strangelove
Psycho
Some Like It Hot
City Lights
The Apartment
The Seventh Seal
Casablanca
Chinatown
The Third Man
Metropolis
M
Modern Times
North by Northwest
Blade Runner
The Gold Rush
Rear Window
A Clockwork Orange
GoodFellas
The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance
Double Indemnity
It's a Wonderful Life
My Darling Clementine
Notorious
Duck Soup
Marnie
Rome, Open City
E.T. The Extra-Terrestrial
Jaws
Kind Hearts and Coronets
M. Hulot's Holiday
Meet Me in St. Louis
Out of the Past
Playtime
Spartacus
Star Wars
Sullivan's Travels
The Bridge on the River Kwai
The Great Dictator
The Palm Beach Story
To Have and Have Not
Trouble in Paradise
Unforgiven
The African Queen
Bride of Frankenstein
Bringing Up Baby
The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
The Lady Vanishes
The Maltese Falcon
Odd Man Out
Rosemary's Baby
Schindler's List
Strangers on a Train
To Be or Not to Be
White Heat

that is exactly my problem. but i can only sometimes say to myself "this is only a movie and take it for what it's worth" and actually watch it without critiquing it (to fit my ideals).

.

.

.

Actually I probably agree with you, Arman, a lot more than I do with George when it comes to world cinema.

Just off your last post I'd agree with Yi Yi, Obscure Object, Fanny & Alexander and Shane (though I really should watch Shane again cause it's been 13-15 years since I saw it, while 90% of the S&S films I've seen have been in the last 2). I haven't seen L'Argent. Rio Bravo would be my only disagreement as I'd put it in the B+ - A- range.

Well a lot of the foreign language films I haven't seen (or in lots of cases saw too long ago). The following are ones that I've seen recently enough to have clear enough recollections to form valid opinions, and I'll put them into two categories ("good, but not a masterpiece in my opinion" and "not my cup of tea" )

Good, but not a masterpiece in my opinion:
La Règle du jeu (Rules of the Game)
8 1/2
Seven Samurai
Battleship Potemkin
Bicycle Thieves
La dolce vita
The 400 Blows
La Strada
Nosferatu
Umberto D.
Ashes and Diamonds


Not my cup of tea:
Jules and Jim
Grand Illusion
Cries and Whispers
La Belle et la Bête

Of course there's lot of English language films that fall into one of those two categories for me also.

Well, I have just signed up for the challenge (and to the HTF boards, too) and I decided that I would just start at square one. I have seen about 50 of the films on the list already but I figured, what the heck, I'll start over. So I am officially at one by watching The Hidden Fortress for the first time last night. I'd give it an A, with the only mark going against it for the sometimes big leap in the time frame. But I would say that this being my first Kurosawa, it was a great introduction. Next up: Todo Sobre Mi Madre and Casablanca, one which I have seen and the other not. I'll let you guess which is which.

I just watched Rashomon(A+) last night. I thought it was pretty good up until the final scene. The final scene is just brilliant and made the film absolutely wonderful.

I just watched Rashomon (C) last night. I thought it was ok throughout, but it was nothing special. I do know that there was something special about kurosawa. The last 'witness' scene of the movie i think really was intense and i could sense kurosawa's greatness. Seven Samurai is one of my all-time favorites but some things about akira's films i just don't like, i don't want to get into them because i know i will just hear rants so...
My total is now at 60

Please don't feel like anything I've said should stifle discussion. If it doesn't add anything for me to say, "I disagree, my opinion is xxxx", then I'll just stick to writing about what I've watched.

Truly my only intent is to attempt to clumsily explain why certain movies that have gotten a less enthusiastic reaction from viewers here, deserve their place on the S&S list. I'm just very passionate about a lot of these films and tend to go overboard.

I really don't want to start a controversy or anything but I was wondering if anyone could let me know quite why ET is considered a masterpiece. I can't stand the film so i'm probably hopelessly biased against it but I really don't see much that is simply fantastic in the quality of the film or film making involved.

Anyone care to justify its existence on the list?


I watched 8 1/2 over the weekend and I'm giving it an A-. I really enjoyed the film but I have a sneaking suspicion that it's position so high in the list is a touch coloured by the fact that it is in fact about film itself.

I’ll try—though to be sure this is not a film that I regard highly, as I find that it has too big a dose of sentimentality.

First, it is an universal story (separation from one’s own and being a stranger in a strange land, the triumph of innocence over cynicism, and the simultaneous reuniting and sorrowful parting at the end) told by a master storyteller.

Technically, the film almost never misses a beat and the decision by Spielberg to tell the story through E. T. and Elliot’s eyes is well conceived and brilliantly executed. Because the story is told from the children’s point of view (even though we don’t know if E. T. is a child or not, he has the same child-like qualities possessed by Elliott, which keeps the audience in sympathy with E. T. from the beginning to the end), which keeps children (and many of their parents) hooked right into the story.

From this perspective, this film is very hard to criticize. But for me, Spielberg pushes just a few too many emotional buttons—something I find in a great many of his film. But, just as John Lal does not care for screwball comedies, I don’t particularly care for sentimental films, without enough leavining. I find that Frank Capra usually manages to pull back just in time—but his films are about as close to this kind of thing that I can really enjoy, and even then he sometimes goes over the line (for me).

But this film is so well made and the story is told so well that it is easy for me to see why many critics place it on their ‘best’ list (even though I would not).

Badlands, is a hard film with which to come to grips. Is it a road movie, a lovers on the run (sort of a younger Bonnie and Clyde), a coming of age film or a metaphor for our times set in the 50s? Or all of the above?

No matter, as Malick’s first film can be enjoyed no matter your view. It is hard to believe that he could have such a complete command of the filmmaking craft so early in his career, but given the number of films Malick has chosen to make, it is well that he hit this level so quickly.

Every detail of this film, from the finely etched portraits of the protagonists (we also feel that we know the minor characters and parts of their lives neven to the outstanding cinematography is something to be savored.

Lucky you. I rented the 2 disc criterion from Netflix, well over 3 or 4 months ago. I must muster the courage to go back and finish it, but I suspect this one isn't getting high marks from me.

My netflix membership has been the equivalent to three movies out at a time for like 4 months now because I have been too lazy to go back to this one!

I like metaphors as much as the next guy, but I need some emotional involvement (see Blue, Mulholland Drive), not just pictures...

--
Holadem

I did not mean to shut down any discussion in my post about The Lady Eve. I am really sorry if you read it that way John. Even though I disagreed with your assessment, I meant to do so politely and respectfully.

If it did not seem that way to you, I’ll try to be more careful in the future.

I would certainly be interested in your problems with Kurosawa.

For example, I’ve read George’s dissenting opinions on some Bergman (and other) films, and though I disagree, he has made some very interesting points that I considered carefully.

Lew, i think you did a perfectly fine job with disagreeing to my post, and you have nothing to apologive for.
When i said 'rants' i guess that is kind of an extreme categorization because i have never been offeneded by anything said in this thread.
The reason why i said i didn't want to get into it is because i know that Kurosawa was one of the most celebrated directors in the biz and that there are probably legions ready to defend him.
Knowing of the respect Kurosawa earned himself, and having just as many films on the S&S list as Stanely Kubrick, i would be inclined to expect the same staunch resistance from Kurosawa fans as that which is recieved from Kubrick fans. i have not experienced that yet though because i have never desired that, especially since i have only seen 2 of Kurosawa's films and bits and pieces of his others. I have much experience of Kubrick discussion (if it can be called that sometimes) and i have seen every one of his films (that i know of) so i am not hesitant to get involved. I know what the discussions are like, and that is why i don't really want to start one now, especially since i am not well versed in Kurosawa's work

Oh yeah, HTF sure has had its fair share of Kubrick threads, hasn't it?

RE: E.T.
I disagree with its detractors that it is a manipulative picture, at least in the way I see it. If a film earns its strong emotional response, it's all fair game. Like some other great family films, the film has moments that are almost traumatic. To begin with, the loneliness of Elliot and the absence of his father casts a huge shadow over the entire film. When he finds a friend, no, not friend--soulmate, he sees it lost, dying, captured, and dead. How do children handle all this?

It is only through a series of painful events does the film burst into joy (a bittersweet one, no less) with its last 15 minutes. The biggest moment prior to the finale, the famous ride over the moon, is a moment of sheer joy and beauty, another scene where I cannot detect the Spielberg sentimentality. For me, Spielberg creates more emotion in this film naturally than he has ever done since then.

i am the last person to knock a movie because of it's being sentimental

Written on the Wind, one of Douglas Sirk’s 50s melodramas set in the 50s—all in glorious, over-the-top Technicolor. And all (or nearly all) of Texas and New York clearly on studio sets.

While there is nothing subtle about the style or the story, there is indeed in the substance of the film. Sirk, as usual is highly critical of post-war American families, values and family values. Today some of the symbolism may seem obvious (such as the model oil derrick on the father’s desk), but how well this was understood at the time is not clear. Certainly it was not at all understood by the critics of the day, who were mostly dismissive of this film (and the other Sirk efforts).

Kirk, I agree with your thoughts on E.T., especially after viewing it again recently. In many ways it is more honest that CE3K with some of its character actions (like the scientists running from plane to plane at the beginning of CE3K which is a lot more classic SS showmanship if you will).

I've watched three more movies, bringing my total to 77.

Day of Wrath (1948) - B+
Rashômon (1950) - A-
Raging Bull (1980) - B

NEXT UP: Ikiru, Marnie, Ran

Well Kirk, John and Seth, you have given me something about which to think. And as I’ve not seen E.T. for some time, it may be that I’ll evaluate it differently than when I saw it last.

Another reason for starting this project from scratch (or very close to it).

Well, I changed my mind since my last post. I decided I'd start with some films I have never seen and, when time permits, go back and watch ones I have already. So I stopped and the library and picked up The Bicycle Thief . I've got to say that I was thrilled by this movie. All of the accolades seemed to be true. I have read a few posts about how this movie has seemed to lose some of its "magic" over time, but I don't know.
First of all, the cinematography was beautiful for the age of the picture. (But then again, when you film in Rome...) Each shot of the movie, even on this average restoration, was amazing. I especially love the bridge shot toward the end and the arches in the rain. Stunning!
Next, I have to address the acting. The father, I felt, was a very flimsy character up until the end but his son, Bruno, was outstanding, especially in the church and, once again, during the final scene.
And what an ending! SPOILER: I was waiting and waiting for the Disney-style ending but, alas, it never came. When "Fine" came on the scene, I just about cried.
I think what made the movie for me was that I truly felt horrible about the situation. I cannot pinpoint why this is so, but I was enraged when the "gang" stuck up for the thief and I felt the despair throughout. But where I identified with the film the most was when Antonio had to make his tough decision at the end. I have been so desperate in my life before and when you are trying to decide whether to steal or not, the same things happen that happened in the movie, the anxiety, the pacing back and forth, the darting of the eyes, etc.
So I ranted, sorry! But I felt that this film deserved what meager 2 cents I had to offer. Overall, I'd give it an A, the only detractor being Antonio's somewhat weak beginning.

Next on the pile, Seven Samurai, another Kurosawa I needed to watch. If only I had 3 hours right now...

I agree with George's comments on Trouble In Paradise (way back on page three). The movie is slightly confusing at first, but when the characters become clearer, it really cooks. The confusion is not necessary a weakness; in a way it seems to be asking for our attention, promising great rewards.

As with Shop Around The Corner, Lubitsch just seems to know how to cast a charm upon the audience. There are laugh out loud moments, but through most of the movie I had a smile on my face. He also uses the medium very well, with quick cut montages and elaborate camera moves.

The banter between the characters is flawlessly delivered. The scenes between Gaston and Mariatte are especially priceless. Both are saying lines that are not their intentions, and both know it. It's like a game of hiding true words with little talk, and still wanting the other side to understand the real meaning. Their scenes together are both charming and poignant, a real beauty.

Hell of a thing, killing a man

Well I guess he had it comin’

We all got it comin’, kid


Unforgiven is a Western set at the end of (what we consider) the classic Western era and seems to be Clint Eastwood’s final comment on the genre that brought him to the pubic eye.

There is much to like in this film, especially the performances by Gene Hackman as the mostly corrupt sheriff and Richard Harris (who is the very essence of a degenerating gunfighter from a degenerating country).

You think I’m kicking you? Well I’m just talking to you.

The direction is generally first rate, especially the final gunfight and Eastwood himself is perfect in the role.


Deserve’s got nothin’ to do with it

The Searchers is considered by some to be beautifully shot film that espouses fundamentally racist views and by others to be the ‘greatest Western ever made’ and even ‘the Great American Film’—one that is a metaphor for America and its expanision.

But regardless of how we look at the text of a film made in the 50s (with our politically correct eyes today), it is unarguable by even the most politically correct that technically this is a great film—and one that has been hugely influential on American filmmakers ever since.

I find the racism in John Wayne’s character to not be so off-putting as to pull the movie down—in fact, after the opening, it is so easy to get caught up in the film that it becomes a non-issue (from a watching the film perspective).

And for those for whom this is just too much, sit back and look at Monument Valley. Ford never made it look better.

Well, Lew, I do have to disagree with you about this.

Influential, possibly. Great - not in my opinion. I think the pacing is wrong, and the acting is bad, and I'm frankly surprised I was able to stay awake long enough to be offended by the racist ending. Of course, I realize others will disagree, and I'm not really all that politically correct, but as you can see "unarguably" great, has gotten you an argument. I'd prefer to think of it as "unarguably overrated".