Osaurus
Footballguy
I’m probably in the minority here, but I think this movie is terrible. The plot is forced and obvious.Last night was Hard Rain. Oh my.
I think tonight it's looking like L.A. Confidential.
I’m probably in the minority here, but I think this movie is terrible. The plot is forced and obvious.Last night was Hard Rain. Oh my.
I think tonight it's looking like L.A. Confidential.
Definitely in the huge minority. Maybe the first person I've ever heard not like the movie tbh. Even my wife and mom who don't usually go for cop/detective/violent movies really liked it.I’m probably in the minority here, but I think this movie is terrible. The plot is forced and obvious.
not terrible, but massively overrated. no art shifts my guts like the heart of noir and it just didnt have it. all the elements, stylishly done. but i couldnt feel the fatal turn of the cylinder.I’m probably in the minority here, but I think this movie is terrible. The plot is forced and obvious.
It felt like they tried to cram a whole bunch of noir elements that were great in their original films into a star-studded movie that was just meh imo.not terrible, but massively overrated. no art shifts my guts like the heart of noir and it just didnt have it. all the elements, stylishly done. but i couldnt feel the fatal turn of the cylinder.
Funny because it’s so wildly trimmed down from the book. The book is quite sprawling compared to the movie.It felt like they tried to cram a whole bunch of noir elements that were great in their original films into a star-studded movie that was just meh imo.
Was it really all that "star-studded"? Looking back, it is now. Russell Crowe and Guy Pearce were not well-known (at least in the US), and this movie helped turn them into stars. It had some other people who were well-known like Kevin Spacey and Kim Basinger (and that guy that was the "that'll do, Pig" guy from Babe), but I'm not sure that rises to star-studded in its time.It felt like they tried to cram a whole bunch of noir elements that were great in their original films into a star-studded movie that was just meh imo.
Yeah, I think in retrospect it seems star-studded, but Crowe had only done Romper Stomper I believe, and Pierce was an unknown. Even Spacey was just ramping up coming off of Glengarry and was Usual Suspects the year before?Was it really all that "star-studded"? Looking back, it is now. Russell Crowe and Guy Pearce were not well-known (at least in the US), and this movie helped turn them into stars. It had some other people who were well-known like Kevin Spacey and Kim Basinger (and that guy that was the "that'll do, Pig" guy from Babe), but I'm not sure that rises to star-studded in its time.
And the film never falters or feels slow despite it's 138 minute run time.Funny because it’s so wildly trimmed down from the book. The book is quite sprawling compared to the movie.
Don’t forget Danny Devito who was on that sitcom that got cancelled twice 15 years earlier.Was it really all that "star-studded"? Looking back, it is now. Russell Crowe and Guy Pearce were not well-known (at least in the US), and this movie helped turn them into stars. It had some other people who were well-known like Kevin Spacey and Kim Basinger (and that guy that was the "that'll do, Pig" guy from Babe), but I'm not sure that rises to star-studded in its time.
LA confidential is amazingDefinitely in the huge minority. Maybe the first person I've ever heard not like the movie tbh. Even my wife and mom who don't usually go for cop/detective/violent movies really liked it.
I understood a wikkid post! Also, while I am not sure I would say that it's massively overrated, after thinking about it for a day, I agree with the bolded. In the end, I wasn't overly invested in the characters and revelations at the end of the movie. Despite the style and performances, it didn't 100% hook me the other night, and really didn't like the ending with Crowe/Pierce/Bassinger. The performances were great though - especially Crowe. Captivating role and he did a fantastic job of switching between mindless tough guy and being vulnerable. Nobody plays that lovable sleazeball like DaVito too.not terrible, but massively overrated. no art shifts my guts like the heart of noir and it just didnt have it. all the elements, stylishly done. but i couldnt feel the fatal turn of the cylinder.
Now for a double feature with Kate Beckinsale's Underworld!Watched Underworld (‘27) by Josef Von Sternberg and it impressed me how much of the gangster genre it set up. A few years before Scarface or Public Enemy, much of the framework was already built. Including the whole “The World is Yours” written in the sky element. Unlike the WB gangster movies though this is a lot more humanist and gets more into the relationships. Pretty good stuff.
I enjoy her as a person but I’m not sure I’ve even a movie she’s in.Now for a double feature with Kate Beckinsale's Underworld!
Her leather outfits would look amazing in 4k.I enjoy her as a person but I’m not sure I’ve even a movie she’s in.
She was good in Snow AngelsI enjoy her as a person but I’m not sure I’ve even a movie she’s in.
i think a lot about Kate Beckinsale's underworld...Now for a double feature with Kate Beckinsale's Underworld!
I like that movie a lot.In the Line of Fire
.
I will throw it out there that it has not held up well. I was laughing a bit more than I think the movie was intended for.I like that movie a lot.
Lilly Raines: [in a conference room] What makes you think he'll call again?
Frank Horrigan: Oh, he'll call again. He's got, uh, "panache."
Lilly Raines: Panache?
Frank Horrigan: Yeah, it means flamboyance.
Lilly Raines: Mm, I know what it means.
Frank Horrigan: Really? I had to look it up.
This is a bold statement. Just curious why you think this.25th Anniversary of Fargo's release date was Monday. Watched it again last night for the umpteenth time. I still noticed new things. Marge Gunderson is one of cinema's all-time best heroes.
He's not wrongThis is a bold statement. Just curious why you think this.
Because the evil she confronts and defeats doesn't change her and she innocently persists on being a force for good.This is a bold statement. Just curious why you think this.
Is there is a film series for the Great Courses?Because the evil she confronts and defeats doesn't change her and she innocently persists on being a force for good.
Case in point 1: She kindly bcorrects Lou when he doesn't get the DLR license plate thing right. But even then she reads in his demeanor that he feels bad about the mistake. So she tries to raise his spirits with the joke about the guy with vanity plated who changed his name.
Case in point 2: After things are wrapped up, even though her worldview was tainted a bit, she's still tender hearted, as evidenced by her support of Norm winning second place in the stamp competition. She proclamation of "we're doin' pretty good Norm". It's also a nice counterpart to Jerry's discontent that started everything - she prevents Norm from taking a step on the path of discontentment that consumed Jerry.
I'd suggest watching on Kanopy the Great Courses video called "Existential Meaning: Fargo". It does a great job deconstructing the plot and characters of the movie.
There's one for Screenwriting 101. Fargo is one topic in the series.Is there is a film series for the Great Courses?
Interesting - thank you. I thought I skimmed through to see if there was one on film or directing, and remember being disappointed in not finding a movie one.There's one for Screenwriting 101. Fargo is one topic in the series.
Well there's other characters that should appeal to you in that regard, I'd think.Great post, @Andy Dufresne. Reading that and piecing together that when we watch movies we seem to be drawn to the different sides of humanity in our favorite movies most of the time. I battle with Fargo a little bit because while I always find her interesting and a damn good officer, I think for my tastes she doesn't change much as a character or go to the dark places that I usually am drawn to.
That film was significant to me because Clint finally got fully away from his superhero roles with it and Unforgiven.KarmaPolice said:In the Line of Fire
.
Good point. Then when he made Gran Torino it was the most believable role for him yet.That film was significant to me because Clint finally got fully away from his superhero roles with it and Unforgiven.
Previously he had made the same cardboard crap like Pale Rider (a lousy remake) and the last Dirty Harry film.
It started a new trend of flawed, more believable characters.
I think a bit of it for me was the relationship with him and Russo.That film was significant to me because Clint finally got fully away from his superhero roles with it and Unforgiven.
Previously he had made the same cardboard crap like Pale Rider (a lousy remake) and the last Dirty Harry film.
It started a new trend of flawed, more believable characters.
only because i know how excited AD gets when i go all frufru on one of his topics, i'll get into this.It is true though that the characters are strictly archetypal. There's not much nuance or change through the story.
Still one I haven't seen, but have it at home now.Miller’s Crossing on the big screen at the local historical film society showing. Byrne is so so good.
Starting to see why we agree on so little.....This is my alltime favorite comedy BECAUSE of the first half hour. Watched it for maybe the 200th (not exaggerating - i briefly taught standup in the 90s and i used Zero's performance as the exemplar for use of comic notes, beats & gestures) time last evening and openly laughed (and i dont do that) 6-7 times.Watched the 1967 Producers last night. The last half hour was hilarious, I was crying during Springtime for Hitler but the rest was a bit boorish. 1960s comedies don’t hit for me for some reason. It’s like comedy was just people being loud and screaming.
Just watched Nomandland tonight. Well made and interesting. I didn’t really love it snd doubt I’ll ever have the urge to watch it again though. Very introspective. Cinematography was incredible though, they must have only filmed for like 15 mins a day given how much magic hour there is in this. It paid off because those scenes were stunning to look at.LINK
Oscar noms came out today. Interesting mix of movies, and the streaming services for sure got a bump from COVID. Going to go through the list and watch as many as I can that are on streaming or for rent. I looks like 6/8 of the best Picture noms are available to watch at home in one way or the other (- 2 NF, 1 Hulu, 1 Prime, 2 for $20 rental). It looks like all of the docs are watchable, and 3/5 of the foreign noms.
I was excited to see Sound of Metal get some love.
Have you seen Minari or any of the documentaries?I’m the anti-KP in that I rarely rewatch a movie, but I watched Nomadland again last night and loved it even more than I had the first time. Caught a few bits I hadn’t noticed the first time, and was struck even more strongly by what a loving and gentle look at life it was.
Really is. Well edited also. Sometimes it lingered a little longer than expected and sometimes it cut away just when the perfect framing had just come into being. Was very interesting. It captured something hard and beautiful in all the faces. I am definitely onboard with Zhao winning editor and director. It’s just not the kind of movie I imagine I’ll want to revisit.I’m the anti-KP in that I rarely rewatch a movie, but I watched Nomadland again last night and loved it even more than I had the first time. Caught a few bits I hadn’t noticed the first time, and was struck even more strongly by what a loving and gentle look at life it was.
I’ve planned to watch Minari a few times and then had intervening events! It’s definitely next on my list. I only rewatched Nomadland because it had come up at social events two days in a row and ex-Mr krista had not seen it (he loved it).Have you seen Minari or any of the documentaries?