lew crippen / george kaplan mini-challenge (1 Viewer)

[Rob Lutter]

The real trick with anime is learning some basic phrases of the language. I didn't ever, say, pick up a textbook and start reading about basic Japanese... after you watch this stuff for a couple of months, it's fairly easy to take in the visuals and words that you don't know.

The subtitles REALLY shouldn't be the end-all-be-all of watching foreign movies. I just thinj of them as a guide... sort of like lines on the road under understanding (wow... deep). The real way to watch is to learn to watch like the Japanese watch (by listening)

 

[Brook K]

Good point Rob, and it gets into the use of "pillow words" or even "pillow images" as Ozu would use to separate scenes with seemingly innocuous and irrelevant shots.

I'm definitely not a hardcore anime fan and while I do plan to explore more down the road, I haven't watched much beyond Studio Ghibli. Just the usual suspects: Akira, Fist of the North Star, the other famous one with the cyborg chick, and a couple of others. I've never tried one of the series'.

I watch as many or more subtitled films than I do in English so I barely even notice subs anymore unless they are particularly hard to read like when its a high contrast B&W picture with white subtitles.

 

[Lew Crippen]

You’re fucked!


Is a car rental agent’s reply to an angry and profane tirade by Steve Martin, who is at the end of his rope in Planes, Trains & Automobiles, John Hughes take on The Odd Couple. Steve Martin and John Candy are paired as the opposites forced together by circumstances, who are trying to get home for Thanksgiving. The flight from New York to Chicago is the nightmare of every business traveler. Probably other than driving down the wrong side of an Interstate most of the misadventures have happened to us all one way or another

Candy and Martin pull off their characters perfectly. The direction is sure handed and there are laughs aplenty. Martin is not afraid to be seen as to mean, Candy as too pathetic and Hughes saves the unbelievable incidents until after a degree of credibility has been established.

While I enjoyed the movie and will likely watch it again, I am puzzled as to why many see this as a ‘must-see’ film. For me, it does not go past being a well done comedy. Pretty good and pretty forgettable.

 

[george kaplan]

Well Lew, let me just suggest that you might want to read http://www.suntimes.com/ebert/greatm...nestrains.html. It's unlikely to change your mind, but might give you some insight into why some critics elevate this above other comedies.

My own experience with this film is probably somewhat akin to Ebert's. I saw it in the theater when it came out, and enjoyed it, but didn't really think much of it. But over the years I kept coming back to it, and now I watch it with my wife every year on, or just before, Thanksgiving. I laugh more at this movie than almost any other, but deep down, something about the emotions of the character rings true, and my own Thanksgivings are always a bit better for having seen it.

 

[Brook K]

While it is very funny, there's a lot of comedies you can say that about. I think it is the poignant final scenes, where Martin realizes how important it is to take the time to care and offer kindness to someone less fortunate than himself that helps Planes, Trains,... rise above the pack. A small thing perhaps, but I'm always touched when I happen across it on TV and I would rather watch the final 15m than any of the popular comedic set pieces it offers.

 

[Lew Crippen]

Thanks for the link George, it made for interesting reading. I can understand why Ebert feels the way he does (any be extension, yourself). I guess it will be interesting to see how I fell about Planes, Trains & Automobiles in another few years. For now, I’m on the ‘a lot of fun, but nothing special’ side.

A few random comments on Spirited Away, as I’ve sat on the sidelines while all of the anime experts discuss.

I watched this again this weekend and I am convinced that there is really no out-of-character issues with which to deal. For me, they do exactly as they should within the world presented and its rules and context. Some of the rules seem a bit arbitrary from time-to-time, but everyone is consistent within them. For example we don’t know why Yubaba agreed to give a job to anyone who asked (nor to what higher power she is answerable), but she did.

We don’t know why No Face only acts badly inside the bath house, but Chihiro knows (and we can guess as to the reasons for his actions). Interestingly she is able to recognize a kindred soul—someone who is alone and has no family or friends, other than the ones that can be purchased.

The story is not complex nor are the underlying moral messages: that power and greed corrupt and the innocence, friendship and love will prevail. All told in a very small, confined setting with allusions to a greater world—if this were a Western story, it would be a proper fairy tale.

I agree with comments as to the crudeness of the animation, compared to that of Disney. But what works for me is the charm of the drawings. Some of the background comes very close to the Japanese woodblock masters. In particular the town (and the town at night) and the bath house exterior. I can just see these as classic woodblocks—the balance, detail and the lines, and especially the color choices. Very reminiscent of Japan of another day.

 

[Angelo.M]

There's something about John Candy's performance in PT&A that really makes the film memorable for me. Just the right mix of zaniness and pathos make his character, and the film, something subtly more than a 'road movie.'

We try to watch this at least once per year, and recently saw it again. The only thing about it that hasn't aged well is the cover of "Everytime You Go Away" during the last sequence. The original was bad enough.

 

[Lew Crippen]

I will say about Planes, Trains & Automobiles that I have experienced most of their frustration in some of my travels—and I do not pretend that this is unique—or even uncommon.

·I’ve run after cabs unsuccessfully
·I’ve had cabs stolen out from under my nose
·I’ve been in meetings with clients who ignored my opening statement as to time and as a consequence put me under time pressure to meet my travel seclude.
·I’ve missed flights.
·I’ve missed trains
·I’ve had more transportation delays for longer than you can imagine, including a 70 hour delay on the island of Guam
·I’ve had many, many flights cancelled.
·I’ve been rerouted, including winding up in La Paz when I thought I was on a simple, routine flight from Caracas to Buenos Aries.
·I’ve set next to endless talkers (much worse than John Candy, as they normally down scotch at an alarming rate).
·I’ve met many, many agents who were as helpful as the car rental agent in this film.
·I’ve been promised a hotel due to a cancelled flight (Washington) and been sent to a Baltimore hotel, arriving after the restaurants were closed, room service was finished and nothing within walking distance. Here’s to the drinks and chips in the mini-bar.
·I’ve slept in airports many times (to be sure, I prefer this to sharing a room with a strange male).
·I’ve been days late arriving home, including spending New Year’s Eve in Venezuela, my wife’s birthday in Adelaide and our anniversary in Singapore.
·I’ve rented cars that were not there (but I’ve never set one on fire).
·I’ve switched from one mode of transportation to another and back and forth in an effort to beat the system.
·And these guys never even had much of a hassle with their luggage—or was that considered just too easy.
·And they also never got into the joys of international travel and not being fluent in the local language nor knowing the local customs.

I don’t know what this means, but perhaps it does go to the commonality of the problems of business travel. I pretty much think that this was someone’s real experience.

 

[Rob Tomlin]

While I enjoyed the movie and will likely watch it again, I am puzzled as to why many see this as a ‘must-see’ film. For me, it does not go past being a well done comedy. Pretty good and pretty forgettable.

Personally I think good, quality comedies are few and far between. Planes is definitely an exception. While I might not elevate it quite to the level that George or Ebert do, it is definitely a top quality comedy that definitely has the repeatability factor going for it. Like George, I try to watch this one on Thanksgiving day or the prior evening.

I think much the films success is based on people being able to relate to what the characters are going through, just like you mention in your post Lew.

4/5 Stars

 

[MartinTeller]

A friend and I once counted every bad thing that happens to Steve Martin in PT&A. IIRC, the final tally was 99.

It's a very very good comedy with very few flaws (I personally don't like the "those aren't pillows" scene, but I know it's a fan favorite). I don't know if I would call it a "must see" movie but it's really just as good as any comedy that's considered a "classic".

 

[Dome Vongvises]

I think what seperates Planes, Trains, and Automobiles from other comedies is the great, comedic interplay between John Candy and Steve Martin, and the honesty of its humanity. I still think it's one of the most moving scenes when

Steve Martin's character comes back to the train station to find John Candy's character is still there.


It makes you appreciate the holidays even more.

 

[Rob Tomlin]

I don't know if I would call it a "must see" movie but it's really just as good as any comedy that's considered a "classic".

Well, if it's "really just as good as any comedy that's considered a classic", wouldn't that be considered a "must see"!?

 

[MartinTeller]

No.

 

[Rob Tomlin]

No.

Well, once again your analysis impresses beyond belief!

:rolleyes

 

[MartinTeller]

In some cases, it's not worth the effort. I don't want to get bogged down in some lame argument.

 

[Lew Crippen]

Another comment on I’m All Right Jack

Now, again, this is broad exaggerated humor, and no doubt many union members were racist at this time, but I just cringed when this came up.

I just watched this again George and I’d forgotten all of the delightful tidbits of the BBC interview show.

If you recall, Sellers’ character gets into the racist statements when he becomes nervous and stumbles over every word he is saying. Pretty clear the slant this film was taking on working class racism.

If you are not aware, Malcolm Muggeridge, the host of the TV show was a real person, who was a writer, journalist and iconoclast of some note (among other things is creditied with bringing Mother Teresa to the attention of the public back in the early 70s.

He was noted for his style, wit and satirical view on almost everything and so he was the perfect choice for this interview.

 

[george kaplan]

Lew,

I shall watch that scene carefully when I next watch this movie.

All That Heaven Allows

Well Lew, if we agreed about everything there wouldn’t be much point to this challenge now, would there?

I guess in some sense, intellectually, I get it, but I so don’t agree with it, that I guess I don’t get it. I’ve been struggling with Sirk ever since I saw Written on the Wind (I’ve also seen Magnificent Obsession). I’ve read the critical analyses, and like I said, I get it, but I don’t.

First of all, let me start by saying that melodramatic soap operas are my least favorite type of movie (or tv show). Of all the films I most dislike, they fall into this category. On the surface, All That Heaven Allows, is just another one of these sappy soap operas. Yet it’s critically acclaimed (Sight & Sound, Criterion, and Lew). Why? Well, I can’t speak for Lew, but it seems that when these films came out, the critics dismissed them as trashy soap operas, but after critical reevaluation found more there, hidden under the surface.

Now, I won’t deny that there may be something of artistic value if you dig deep enough in this movie. But, for me, that’s inconsequential. If a movie is enjoyable on the surface, with no deeper meaning or symbolism or cinematic virtues, then that’s a film I can enjoy. If it’s enjoyable on the surface, plus it has those other things, then that’s a truly great movie. But if the surface isn’t enjoyable, then no amount of deeper layers is going to overcome that for me. And on the surface, this is just a trashy 50’s soap opera.

Now, there’s lots of things I don’t like about soap operas, but the primary one is the writing. The one ‘soap opera’ I did like was Knot’s Landing, because it had much better, much more realistic writing (as well as truly top notch acting, and a direction style that had nothing to do with soap operas – very little of the lingering close-up of a frozen face as you fade to commercial). But most soap operas just have really cheesy dialogue. And this film is no exception. Sure, there’s the occasionally well written monologue, but it’s surrounded by soap opera dialogue of the corniest sort. The direction in this film is sometimes very good, but more often wasn’t. Some of the cinematography was excellent (I particularly liked her face reflected in the television set), but often it was just ‘soap operaish’. And the acting was almost always irritating to me – the son and daughter were particularly atrocious.

Is there something deeper here than just a soap opera? Sure, but at its heart it’s just a soap opera. I believe Sirk himself said there was a fine line between trash and art, and unfortunately there’s too much trash that has to be dug through to reach the art. For me, it just doesn’t work.

However, I’ve really enjoyed this challenge Lew. Two films I love and am adding to my collection, two that I respect that I’m very glad to have seen and were in no way unpleasant to watch, and one that I have to admit was very painful to sit through. I look forward to your thoughts about it though.

 

[Brook K]

I'll let Lew go on this one, I have to get to bed before 3am as I've been staying up way to late all week and its affected my movie watching the past few nights. And I could write about All That Heaven Allows for an hour or more. Suffice to say that you don't have to "look deeper" for the commentary. It's all right there on the surface. But I have to stop myself. Paragraphs are forming in my head and I have to get to bed.

 

[Lew Crippen]

I'll let Lew go on this one, I have to get to bed before 3am as I've been staying up way to late all week and its affected my movie watching the past few nights.

And I was going to let this one go, waiting for your comments. I’ll make a few, but I also just re-watched Ordet and I’ll probably make a few comments on that film as well.

 

[Dome Vongvises]

Ooh, what's the matter? Can't keep up with the youngin's at three in the morning?

:p)