Directors March Madness Movie Tourney (1 Viewer)

[Brook K]

I'll take your word for it John. I thought the world disintegrating stuff was all CGI but I guess it could have been practical, I don't remember it all that well. I also think I have fused this and Huckabees (a film I disliked even more) in my head. Looking back at my old review I see no mention of new ageiness:

"I thought it was pretentious nonsense, unfunny, not romantic, and poorly structured with way too much running time being given to the annoying supporting cast story. Kirsten Dunst made me want to claw my eyes out anytime she wasn't in her underwear. And Gondrey seemed to be letting the cast do whatever they wanted since Winslet and Carrey didn't even look like they were in the same movie at times."

 

[JohnRice]

OK, Brook, the supporting cast, or just the antics going on in the apartment during the procedure, were weak for me as well. I found Kirsten and Frodo annoying, but Mark Ruffalo managed to pull it off. In my opinion, they were more than made up for with the many things which worked. Plus, I thought the story was kept significanly more in check than other Kaufman screenplays, so it ended up being a bit of a positive, in a way.

Tennenbaums a "Masterpiece"? Hyperbole, anyone?

 

[JohnRice]

Oh yeah, I'm sitting here, chuckling, at the thought of Brook criticizing Eternal Sunshine for being "pretentious". :p)

 

[Jan H]

Because she constantly looks like she just finished sucking a lemon.

And Cold Mountain? Now that lemon sucked.

 

[Marc Fedderman]

Hyperbole, Marc you mean?

Well, I think it's a masterpiece. Surely there are certain films you'd consider great that I'd find less-than-stellar.

 

[Jan H]

Don't mind John, Marc. He has a way of making people flee this board like one would flee a rabid mongrel.

FWIW, I like Royal Tenenbaums, too. So there, John, you big meanie!!

 

[JohnRice]

Ah Jan. Now who's being harsh? :p)

My point is this. Fine, you like Tenenbaums. Jan "likes" Tenenbaums. I think it's an interesting film. In fact, I own it. But, if you refer to a film you "like" as a "Masterpiece", then what do you call Citizen Kane or Lawrence of Arabia? Yes, in reality and with reasonable perspective, I think calling Tenenbaums a "Masterpiece" is hyperbole. If that causes people to flee the board like they would flee from a rabid mongrel, that seems to be more their problem than mine. That's just my $0.02.


Yeah, I can see that in a handful of her roles. Not sure what the deal is there. To see her at her dramatic best (assuming you have any interest in seeing a different side) I suggest White Oleander, which I consider to be her best performance, though it's a small role. One True Thing would be the alternative for a starring role.

 

[Jan H]

Well, to be fair to Marc, he did say 'Wes Anderson's masterpiece,' which is true, IMO. But 'a masterpiece' is a bit much, and I'm a big fan of the film.

As for Zellweger, she never had me at hello. In fact, that film makes me want to say goodbye. I've seen both the films you mentioned and they're decent, but the only thing she's been in that I'd watch again was Nurse Betty. Great performance, brilliant film.

 

[Brook K]

I refer to that Zellweger face as looking like someone just punched her in the stomach. Its present in Jerry McGuire too, Bridget Jones (which I still managed to like), that Doris Day send-up with Ewan McGregor I can't think of the name of....Hardly basing her annoying tendencies just on Cold Mountain and Chicago. Zellweger has several stock "faces" and in many of her movies you can see her mentally deciding which one to put on.

I do agree with you on White Oleander, certainly her finest hour that I've seen. Very good "under the radar" film. I should buy it one of these days.

I rarely, rarely throw around the word pretentious as I think it's one of the most overused words in film criticism and hardly ever really applies. If I use the word I've thought about why I'm using it and mean it.

 

[Adam_S]

Royal Tenenbaums advances 5 - 3 (i'd have picked Amelie, but I've seen RT more, and like both quite a lot, about equally actually)
Mulhullond Dr. advances 3 - 2 (and my pick for second best film of the tourney goes down)



How'd they remove the books from the shelves on a moving camera if it wasn't CG? I know the camera transitions from 'memory' to 'memory' were all in camera because they built connecting sets, but I'm curious how that could be practical.

George, I've no idea if you'll like Eternal Sunshine or not. It has an out of order structuring very similar to Citizen Kane, and the two main characters love each other deeply but still haven't worked out complete trust yet (which sparks off the the memory erasure), so while we get to see the charming and wonderful scenes where they love each other or fall in love, we also get (about equal time for each) the much tougher scenes where one or the other feels betrayed and try very hard to hurt each other and drive each other away. But, the overall meaning of the film is much more intense and hopeful; and deeply, classicly romantic (I'd say, uplifting, exhilerating, and cathartic).

John, spirited away has some of the most gorgeous cinematography ever, animated or no.

ROUND TWO, DAY 3

Finding Nemo
vs
25th Hour



Far From Heaven
vs
Gangs of New York

 

[Jan H]

Eternal Sunshine works more like Memento or Pulp Fiction than Citizen Kane, IMO.

Anyhoo,

Finding Nemo - tough. Very difficult to compare these 2 movies. Both are great.

Gangs of New York

 

[Brook K]

Turnabout is fair play. Here I get to see the 3rd best film in the tournament eliminated by kiddie fluff. I know it looks spectacular but Nemo a great story?

25th Hour

Far From Heaven

 

[JohnRice]

I don't recall any books actually being removed. The spines just went blank and there are many non-computer ways to do that. I always expect people to accuse them on the 4 year old Joel in the kitchen sequence.


Anyway, staggeringly easy set for me.

25th Hour The second best movie of 2002. Second only to...

Far from Heaven, which I think is probably the best film so far this decade. And no, it isn't because of the visuals.



BTW, Adam. Animated movies by definition don't have "cinematography". :p)

 

[Brook K]

John, have you seen All That Heaven Allows & Ali: Fear Eats The Soul? While I found FFH to be very good, and certainly better than Gangs, I don't think it came close to capturing what its predecessors did.

 

[JohnRice]

I have seen All that Heaven Allows and have Ali, but haven't watched it. I think it is a common error to compare movies to predecessors. Each one should be taken as its own entity. It actually took me a couple years to fully appreciate Far from Heaven and it is only more recently I have come to hold it in as high a regard as I do. I tend to think it is not given a fair chance among enthusiasts largely because of the other films it is inspired by. I also think it takes extra effort to completely grasp what is being done since the visuals are so overwhelming. I have thought about it a lot, and I really do think it is the best film of the decade and one of the best ever made.

 

[JohnRice]

Brook, I'll give some speciific examples of why I think Far from Heaven is superior to All that Heaven Allows.
I find Ron Kirby to be rather sanctimonious and self-righteous. The way he treats Cary's "close minded" friends is not much more tolerant than they are toward him. On the other hand, Raymond Deagan not only is much wiser and more tolerant, he also demonstrates how his friends are just as intolerant as Cathy's with the trip to the bar. I also find Cathy to be a significantly more textured character than Cary for more reasons than I can list. The added dimension of Frank's homosexuality and how Cathy is so patient and understanding (as much as she can be) but Frank does not return that same consideration is also a big plus in depth for me. Finally, I find it fascinating that Cathy's friend Eleanor goes right along with everything, until she finds out Cathy has been talking to Raymond, which she can't tolerate. The way so many people perceive such monumental differences between small things is fascinating to me. I see it as very real. In the end, I am stunned by how much is actually going on in FFH and that most of it is done so quietly. Once you dig beyond that stunning surface, it just keeps getting better.

Plus, the acting is stellar.

 

[SteveGon]

Far from Heaven

 

[george kaplan]

Finding Nemo

Well the comparisons for Eternal Sunshine just keep coming. Renee Zellwegger, Citizen Kane, Memento, Pulp Fiction...

Some of that I love, some of that I hate.

I certainly don't mind a director playing with the timeline, etc. (unless he does so in such a way that you can't follow the story - e.g., the mess that Mulholland Dr. becomes unfortunately :frowning: )

 

[Lew Crippen]

Far from Heaven

 

[Lew Crippen]

… add me to the those who love Far From Heaven, All That Heaven Allows and Ali: Fear Eats the Soul?, though I have not ranked then in preference order, nor am I sure which was the best, second best, etc. of their respective decades or years.

I do make comparisons on remakes or adaptations, but I am not really distressed if one is marginally better (or worse) that another. Of course some remakes deserved all the criticism they receive when failing dreadfully.