Track the Films You Watch (2006) - Page 5

I'm glad you tried it and enjoyed it. I was attracted to it because of the cast, and thought it was entertaining.

Earth vs the Spider (1958)
Somehow I'd missed seeing this AIP '50s monster flick, so last night I gave the new Lions Gate R1 DVD a spin (the video quality on it is excellent by the way). It's rightly considered a rip of Universal's TARANTULA, but this still turned out to be brisk and enjoyable, and a lot of cheesy fun. When a young girl and her boyfriend search for the girls' missing father, they stumble across a giant spider's cave and, naturally, the monster eventually crawls around town. Better-than-average special effects for this type of cheapie, with some surprisingly vivid shock moments and the required helping of some typical teenage 1950's rock n roll music. Gene Roth is a hoot as the doubting sheriff, and there are some shameless plugs for some of Bert I Gordon's other pictures like THE MAZING COLOSSAL MAN and ATTACK OF THE PUPPET PEOPLE.

The Lions Gate DVDs are sourced from old TV syndication videotape masters, not proper film elements.

So I've read. But while Lion Gates' HOW TO MAKE A MONSTER and BLOOD OF DRACULA definitely left much to be desired in their video quality, the other LG disc I watched last night - EARTH VS THE SPIDER - looked great. If SPIDER is also from those TV video masters, it's one hell of a syndication master, and it could have fooled me.

You would be mistaken here, Michael. Though it may seem to you that you recall some familiar things or parts of things from having seen IMAGINE JOHN LENNON, there is a great deal of new footage in GIMME SOME TRUTH that was new and not in the 1988 documentary. For one thing, GIMME SOME TRUTH is about 60 minutes on its own, and there is not 60 minutes worth of this footage in IMAGINE JOHN LENNON.


By Lennon's words, he was nervous as hell for this show, still not entirely used to playing apart from the other Beatles. He reportedly tossed his cookies before the performance, even. He had been into heroin in the late '60s and wrote a song talking about experiencing withdrawal from it: COLD TURKEY. He wanted it to be on the Beatles' final album, but he wound up putting it out on his own.


Maybe the director should have "directed" her to stay backstage, or not to sing. After all, it was "his" movie.

Relax. Michael, I think you may need to take a Chill Pill.

added to master post:

title: dangerous liasons
rating: b
comments: first viewing. some great dialoge (witty sexual inuendos), nice period piece. not a big malkovich fan, but liked him in this one. got to see uma nekkid ... always a nice thing.

title: the hidden
rating: b
comments: seen this a couple of times. definitely a guilty pleasure. i always watch this and wonder what it would be like to truly "cut loose".

Michael, I'm hoping that someday you may come to realize that you have a tendency to put words into people's mouthes, and to blow things they have said out of proportion, take things out of context, and put your own spin on them. I have said that I am not necessarily a big fan of silent movies and that, as a personal preference, I prefer watching films with sound. I have recently watched Lon Chaney's THE PENALTY (1920) and I liked it and I intend to buy it, to place alongside several other silent films I already own in my personal video collection.

The same twisting of my words has come because you and I had a private conversation recently (as in "offline", and not on this board) about John Lennon's SWEET TORONTO. I said that when an artist is onstage performing a musical concert, and when it is being filmed for posterity, there's not any kind of "acting performance" from the musician (and I think you'd agree), as in Alfred Hitchcock telling Tippi Hedren how to do approach a scene in THE BIRDS, for example.


There is no "story" being told when it comes to a straight performance of a rock concert, captured on film. That's all I'm saying, and I'm sticking to it. Choosing and editing different moments of a performance together, taking different closeups or songs and re-arranging them to make it a better film, that's different. And why you're bringing up GRIZZLY MAN (which I have yet to see, but am very interested in), I don't know. And I never mentioned WOODSTOCK either, so I don't know why you're exaggerating and branching out. It's also YOUR terminology when you write: "these aren't films". I never said this.

GIMME SOME TRUTH, however, is just a little music collection, as far as I'm concerned. Everyone is entitled to 'track their films' as they see fit, but personally I don't list made-for-DVD "Video LP's" as feature films. I also don't count movie shorts, old loony toons cartoons, or DVD "making of" bonus materials in my feature films list. When I think of how much of those I have watched each year but do not list, I would have quite a total at the end of the year, indeed!

First time viewings in Blue

British Agent (1934)
Leslie Howard romances Kay Francis during the Russian revolution.

Jewel Robbery (1932)
Standard 1930’s romantic/comedy as William Powell plays a debonair jewel thief.

The Murderers Are Among Us (1946)
In post-war Germany a young woman freed from a concentration camp shares an apartment with a Nazi Doctor haunted by his past crimes. Liked the odd-angle Third Man cinematography but the story wasn’t as involving as it could have been.

One Wonderful Sunday (1947)
Minor Kurosawa film follows two young people on a day long date as their money dwindles to nothing.

The Harder They Fall (1956)
Bogart’s last film is a good one as he plays a washed up sports writer with a conscious, hired by crooked fight promoter Rod Steiger to be a publicist for a fraud boxer.

Blackbeard The Pirate (1952)
Fairly average adventure yarn bolstered by Robert Newton’s joyfully over the top archetypical pirate portrayal “Arrh shiver me timbers”.

That Touch of Mink (1962)
Badly dated & flaccid sex-farce has businessman Cary Grant romancing 40 year old virgin Doris Day.

The Cardinal (1963)
Would-be epic chronicles one mans rise through the ranks of the Catholic Church.

Dark of the Sun (1968)
Dirty Dozen-like film has mercenaries Rod Taylor & Jim Brown leading a mercy mission in a war torn African nation with the hopes of retrieving 50 million in diamonds. Not a great film but very entertaining & I’d definitely pick it up were it available on DVD.

Hustle (1975)
Flat noir-ish police thriller stars Burt Reynolds investigating the death of a young girl.

Sweet and Lowdown (1999)
Sean Penn stars in this fictional biopic/mocumentary of a 1930’s Jazz guitarist. Sort of a Woody Allen version of This is Spinal Tap minus the laughs. This one probably appeals more to hard-core Woody Allen fans (of which I’m not).

Red Eye (2005)
What starts out as a pretty good thriller aboard an airplane quickly degrades due to idiotic lapses in logic and a overtly predictable finale that’s been done a hundred times over.

New DVD purchases/Revisits (New to DVD/Upgraded DVD)

The Wild Bunch (1969)
(Upgraded to the new 2-discer)
Ride the High Country (1962)
Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid (1973)
Watched the 1988 Turner cut which is the one I’ve seen the most – I’ll watch the new 05 cut sometime down the road.
The Ballad of Cable Hogue (1970)
The Magnificent Seven (1960)
(Upgraded to the new 2-discer)

Michael,

I'd either start with the 88 Turner cut (which I believe got a VHS release) or the new 05 cut (though I haven't seen it) as both versions are on the newly released DVD. I wouldn't recommend starting with the heavily edited (or I consider butchered) original cut. Either way I don't think the VHS you're referring to is OAR.

FYI - I've read that the 05 version is shorter, more tightly paced & edited in some parts compared to the 88 cut.

added:

title: must love dogs
rating: c-
comments: if it wasn't for diane lane, cusack (always a fave of mine), and a few touching/funny moments, i probably would have rated a d. stupid plot, unnecessary characters, and no believability.

You certainly are taking what I said out of context. Because what we were talking about in that BEN-HUR discussion was regarding my opinion of remakes, specifically. I always say I don't think we need more of these 21st century remakes of older films. Then you come in with your usual speech about how "remakes have been here forever, since the silent era of film, and are nothing new " (like I don't already know that). Then I give my opinion that I could understand silent films being re-made in the 30s, 40s, or 50s for benefit of the "sound" era, and when Hollywood still knew how to make them good. When I called the silent BEN-HUR a "warm up," it was a tongue in cheek jab at you during one of our debates, because I love the 1959 sound version very much.

I will say once more that, personally speaking, I prefer sound films to silent. Still, this hasn't kept me from watching, liking, or owning several non-talkies.


I'm sorry it bothers you that I'm only tracking feature films, but it's only my personal choice. There are no rules. I am not tracking short subjects.


You are entitled to believe whatever you choose. I know what I'm interested in and what I care about; you don't. You may have whatever opinion you wish, but it won't change my facts.


I don't know what you're talking about. I certainly "count" silent 'features' as 'feature films'...


I don't know where I ever said you were "nuts" for watching these shorts. There's nothing wrong with having an interest in them and a desire to watch them. But I have toyed with you in some of our more jocular moments about wanting to increase your annual tally of films. I believe you are genuinely interested in films of all eras and genres, but I also believe you enjoy displaying your wide array of "conquests".


To each his own, Mike. Personally, I'll watch silents, talkies, golden age, 40s, 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s, 90,s 00s, black and white, color, 3-D, foreign, etc... but I'm not ashamed to admit that I have certain "preferences". Silent films are not my priority, nor are most musicals or westerns or war films. It doesn't mean I will never watch these types of films; it just means that I have my preferences. Life is way too short. But I thank you for pushing me to see PATHS OF GLORY, because it was a great film I would otherwise have missed.


Learning and knowledge comes with the territory, but I don't specifically watch films to "learn" or become a walking film encyclopedia (though this turns out to become the natural progression when one watches many movies); I watch films to be entertained. To me, it seems you're so busy watching everything and "learning" that you're not relishing the movies themselves.


I could find films you haven't watched, and you could do likewise with me. It doesn't mean anything, and we've covered this ground before. Live and let live, and that's all there is to it, I say. We're just beginning a new year here, tracking our films. It's still early enough to avoid this silly back and forth stuff. Let's not turn this thread into the "Mike and Joe Revue" like last year.

george,

Thanks for the recommendation! This was a wonderful film. I knew that Walk, Don't Run was a remake but just never got around to seeing the original. I was surprised that the Cary Grant remake was such a carbon copy in so many ways. What a great cast. Jean Arthur was terrific.

Thanks again for suggesting I check this film out. This was a Netflix rental but it will be a permanent addition to my library very soon.

Joe

You're welcome.

Not to disrupt the spirited discussion , but I'd like to ask Michael a question.

I noticed in the Kubrick director's thread that you've seen his early short films and I was wondering how you got a hold of them. I've checked Amazon, DDD, and even the IMDB, but none of these sites has any release info. Any help would be appreciated.

Thanks.

Thanks Michael.

I was mostly curious, because although I've known about these films for a while, I was unaware of anyone who'd actually seen them. I do remember hearing something about them, possibly even seeing some clips in the documentary, Stanley Kubrick a Life in Pictures.

Saraband (2003 orig., 2005 US theaterical release) - Ingmar Bergman's latest, and perhaps this time final, film feels both instantly familiar and surprisingly fresh. It is a story of terrifying hatred and possessive love amongst a family fractured by previous wounds. Stellar performances and Bergman's absolute command of film language (even when shooting dig video for the first time instead of film), combine with the acidic script to create a work that shows time and age has dulled none of the fascinating complexity and raw emotional power that comes with the phrase "written and directed by Ingmar Bergman". - A

Tony Takitani (2004) - A quiet, meditative film about a man who, the narrator tells us, doesn't realize how lonely he is. As a child he grew up the neglected son of a touring jazz musician, spending virtually all of his non-school time on his own or in the care of distant relatives. In adulthood he has no friends or relationships outside work. It's only when he falls in love with a client and "the way she inhabits her beautiful clothes" that he realizes how empty his life has been. She makes him happy in ways he has never before experienced. Unfortunately, he cannot fulfill the hole inside this woman that she has filled within him and his carefully self-contained world will begin to unravel.

Using a spare, calm style, director Jun Ichikawa shows us that love can be as disruptive and destructive as it is uplifting and pleasurable. With precise camerawork and a soft piano score, Ichikawa creates a mood of examination and reflection. Yet even in painstaking closeup, the characters remain inscrutable, sometimes frustratingly so. There is an inward collapse that renders them unable to communicate their feelings and fears to one another. This empathic and moving film is almost too brief at only 75 minutes, but it says everything it needs to. - B+

Triple Agent (2004, no US theatrical release) - From French master Eric Rohmer comes this film, set in the pre-war France of 1936-37. A White Russian emigre and his artist wife live in Paris. The husband works for a Russian veterans organization and has access to many political officials and sources of "important" information. The wife is mostly content to remain willfully ignorant and concentrate on her paintings. The speech of every character in the film is dominated by politics and the undercurrent of world events occurring at the time, such as the Spanish Civil War or membership in the Communist Party. With rumors of intrigue, coups, shady financial deals, and war; can the couple remain above events or be swept along by the tide of history?

Like almost every Rohmer film, Triple Agent is dominated by talk. Political discussion, the plight of Russian exiles living abroad, artistic esthetics, male ambition to play a greater role in the "action" are the ways that Rohmer sets the atmosphere through conversation rather than cinematic flourishes. For added period flavor, he cuts in relevant news reel footage from the time. Because this is the language of history rather than love, the film doesn't rise to the heights of many of his previous films, until a key event that is. An event that recasts the film in a different light forcing us to reevaluate what we've already seen. This provides a further layer of emotional complexity to the film calling for an examination of each nuance and creating a film for which re-watching is a requirement. - A-

The Island (2005) - Combining an intriguing sci-fi premise, an excellent cast, and several terrific action sequences (particularly the highway chase with the train wheels rolling off the truck - killer execution), director Michael Bay creates a surprisingly enjoyable film. Unlike Armageddon, The Island is not spastically edited; it takes its time in setting up the story, introducing characters, and appropriately pacing the action with "quiet" moments once the film ramps up. It could have been even better with a more thorough focus and examination of the scientific themes and questions the film generates, and it is unfortunate the creators could not figure out a more suitable climax then an eye-rolling descent into action movie clicheville, but for most of its running time the film delivers more entertainment than I would have thought possible. - B

The rest of this month and into February will see a lower movie-watching output. I'll still be getting Netflix at their now slower rate, and occasionally hitting the theater (tomorrow I hope), but for viewing from my collection I'm concentrating on TV for awhile - we're watching Firefly right now (2 eps so far), and I'm most of the way thru disc 1 of Looney Tunes Gold v3, after that there's S1 of Home Movies and Entourage before I return to movies and the rest of the Warner Noir box 1 (Asphault Jungle, The Set-Up, and rewatch of Out of the Past).

That's how my year has been starting off too, Brook. I've been on a real television kick as of late, and it has taken time away from film viewing!

Yes, and after carefully cutting out almost all non-sports TV watching the last several years so I would have more movie watchin' time, I've found myself watching 4 new shows this season, not to mention the almost unbearable wait for The Sopranos to start again in March.

The Olympics will cut into my time too.

The Dark Corner (1946) 8/10
Slickly constructed noir combines two parallel stories with some clever plotting, as a private eye fighting to overcome his demons gets mixed up with a high-society love triangle that's more than a little familiar, to anyone who's seen Laura. Lucille Ball is a lot of fun as the struggling hero's loyal assistant. Some corny dialogue and a few silly plot devices pop up here and there, but Henry Hathaway's direction hits some great notes as well. I liked this one just as much as Hathaway's much more famous (at least as far as I can tell) Kiss of Death.

Hello, Dolly! (1969) 7/10
Way more flash than substance in this gigantic Broadway musical adaptation, but seeing it in 70mm brings out the best of the breathtaking colors, production design, and locations. Spectacle doesn't get much more spectacular than this, and there's a lot of fun humor from Walter Matthau and Barbra Streisand, but almost none of the other characters are interesting in any way, and the whole thing feels a lot more cartoonish than it should have been. But boy does it look good in 70mm.

Where the Sidewalk Ends (1950) 7/10
Nice lead role for Dana Andrews as a good cop struggling against his violent instincts in another Otto Preminger noir. As Eddie Mueller's DVD commentary points out, Preminger's direction is very solid, but I had trouble buying the story at several points, which could have used some more work. Still pretty entertaining overall, though, especially some of the minor characters.

Sympathy for Mr. Vengeance (2002) 4/10
Chan-wook Park's weird story about the violent adventures of a deaf-mute guy with an ill sister starts off with some entertaining bits, especially with the funny character of the girlfriend. But I found it kind of hard to follow at first, and I thought the second half was a completely incoherent string of unpleasantly brutal and nonsensical scenes. Park's more recent Oldboy got some good reviews, so I might check that one out at some point, but this one didn't work for me at all.

odd I find Sympathy to be the superior work because of its psycho esque reversal and intense psychological impact it held.

Nausicaa of the Valley of the Wind -

My second favorite Miyazaki, right under Spirited Away. This film is complete and utter perfection awe inspiring and jaw dropping. The flying footage was incredible, the voice acting and drawn acting (I saw the subtitled TCM run) were outstanding and I loved the scifi plot/premise. MUCH stronger than Castle in the Sky or Howl's Moving Castle, and a tighter, more focused movie than Kiki's with a less heavy hand than Mononoke. Simply brilliant and I'll be buying the DVD very soon. I'm so THRILLED at TCM's run of these movies.

Excellent, excellent film.

Adam