Last Movie You Watched

[Linus]

Black sunday is one of his most famous movies but one of those I liked the less. Anyway "tremendous lack of talent" is something so wrong that I don't even know where to start. It's true that a lot of his movies are not that great, dull plots and stupid dialogues, but visually a lot of his movies (especially if one likes the kind of fantasies of directors like Melies, Michael Powell or Fellini) are some of the best ever seen on screen, especially when he moved from the first black and white movies to the color.
There's a reason if Fellini, Dario Argento or Lynch were influenced by him and he was admired by other big names like Scorsese or John Landis.

Bava was the cinematographer as well? I'll retract my "tremendous lack of talent" statement.

Because the still images of that film are quite a sight to behold. They (and the trailer) were what made me want to watch the film in the first place. (In a way, even in the cinematography department I find a fault though: almost every scene has the same high-contrast, deep-shadow quality about it, making it difficult to highlight a single moment in the film overall.)

I can imagine many directors were inspired.

[Drasko]

One of the best films I've seen in the past few years.

Most of the people I know loved it as well. Unfortunately I had few issues with the film, some stylistic choices struck me more as a gimmick than having a purpose, and there is one aspect of the story itself I couldn't understand, finding it baffling.

[escher]

Bava was the cinematographer as well? I'll retract my "tremendous lack of talent" statement.

Because the still images of that film are quite a sight to behold. They (and the trailer) were what made me want to watch the film in the first place. (In a way, even in the cinematography department I find a fault though: almost every scene has the same high-contrast, deep-shadow quality about it, making it difficult to highlight a single moment in the film overall.)

It must be said that he always worked with incredibly low budgets but then, it's not one of my favorite works of him even for that aspect. I confess: it was the first movie of him I watched and I was really disappointed.
If you want to have a good idea of his visual talent Blood and black lace in my opinion is a good starting point. The plot is mediocre, but visually is truly a joy for the eyes.






And also

- Kill baby kill
- Five dolls for an august moon
- Bay of blood
- Lisa and the devil
- Diabolik
- Black sabbath
- La ragazza che sapeva troppo

as a whole many of those above aren't great movies at all with the partial exception of Kill baby kill (if you know twin peaks you will have a surprise) and the third and last episode of Black sabbath. I haven't listed Rabid dogs, one of his very best works because it's very different from the stylized fantasies of the titles above.

[Bogey]

Saw Kill Bill 1 and 2.

Typical Tarentino. I think he can't help himself in making bloody scenes as graphic as possible (coming up with new ways of spraying blood). What really irritated me is that the main character is supposed to be a professional killer, yet her tactics were those of a three year old! Made no sense to me. I think Uma THurman did a decent job, but the only characters I enjoyed were the brother and one-eyed Darryl Hannah in the second part. The best fight and funniest moments are with the Vivica Fox (spelling?). I don't know why he has her fight 100 people at the end of #1, which was just boring to watch.

Tarentino lost me after Pulp Fiction.  That was twenty years ago.  I thought Django could of recaptured some of the Pulp Fiction glory, but then he let off the reins and what has become typical Tarentino nonsense took center stage.

[Ken B]

Tarentino lost me after Pulp Fiction.  That was twenty years ago.  I thought Django could of recaptured some of the Pulp Fiction glory, but then he let off the reins and what has become typical Tarentino nonsense took center stage.

More or less my reaction, but there have been a couple good films, especially Jackie Brown.

Tarantino has a reputation as thinking director, but I have my doubts. I saw an interview where he claimed that the real test of a director is how he handles action movies, and especially action scenes. Choreography, cutting, adrenalin. Action scenes can be important to a movie but I think great scenes are almost always about reaction: how characters react, and how the director shows us that. I am going to list a few such scenes, and I will use just a few words to identify it. My point is, these scenes are so memorable that is all it will take
•   Chaplin boiling a shoe
•   Keaton not moving when the wall falls
•   Colbert and Gable hitch-hiking
•   Chaplin playing with an inflated globe
•   Play it Sam.
•   Sometimes a lost cause is the only kind worth fighting for.
•   Straight down the line.
•   I'm still big, it's the pictures that got small.
More than enough to make the point I think.

[Karl Henning]

Tarentino lost me after Pulp Fiction.

I realize it may just be one of my eccentricities (like, enjoying the Mennin Eighth    but I like Kill Bill a good deal better than Pulp Fiction.

[Linus]

It must be said that he always worked with incredibly low budgets but then, it's not one of my favorite works of him even for that aspect. I confess: it was the first movie of him I watched and I was really disappointed.
If you want to have a good idea of his visual talent Blood and black lace in my opinion is a good starting point. The plot is mediocre, but visually is truly a joy for the eyes.

And also

- Kill baby kill
- Five dolls for an august moon
- Bay of blood
- Lisa and the devil
- Diabolik
- Black sabbath
- La ragazza che sapeva troppo

as a whole many of those above aren't great movies at all with the partial exception of Kill baby kill (if you know twin peaks you will have a surprise) and the third and last episode of Black sabbath. I haven't listed Rabid dogs, one of his very best works because it's very different from the stylized fantasies of the titles above.

I highly appreciate the recommendations (and the screenshots!), I think I will give 'em a go sooner or later.

[Linus]

Action scenes can be important to a movie but I think great scenes are almost always about reaction: how characters react, and how the director shows us that.

Interesting idea.

What about e.g. Kurosawa's battle scenes though? Those can be seen as reactions in characters (e.g. the [e]motions of the main character), but probably not in the same way as you have described. If Kurosawa's battle scenes are an ideal for action scenes, it would seem to me that action scenes can be quite expressive and important after all.

But perhaps those are the exceptions that prove the rule.

[Brian]

he claimed that the real test of a director is how he handles action movies, and especially action scenes.

I disagree with him too. But for me the test is how directors shoot the everyday, mundane stuff between set pieces. Like the POV shots filmed from inside Breaking Bad's refrigerators, test tubes, and stovetops. Or the magnificent final scene of Big Night, when they cook omelets. A great example is in this awesome video, where Tony Zhou breaks down comedy direction that works vs. comedy direction that doesn't. I'm thinking of the sequence starting at 1:10, where he illustrates the difference between a director who treats commonplaces like commonplaces, and one who does not.

http://www.youtube.com/v/3FOzD4Sfgag

[North Star]

where he illustrates the difference between a director who treats commonplaces like commonplaces, and one who does not.

Sounds rather similar to what Tarantino said.

[TheGSMoeller]

Interstellar: This was quite a ride. Huge in its scope, both visually and in storytelling. Solid acting (especially Bill Irwin as the voice of the robot, TARS) and beautiful outer space imagery. Emotionally it's very deep, a few moments between Matthew McConaughey and his children that are difficult to watch. And there are many scenes filled with an intensity that I haven't seen on screen in a while. All of this aided by Hanz Zimmer's minimalistic score which provides huge walls of sound to complement the large vastness of space. Large, and at times very loud chords that consisted primarily of an organ, that sounded as if the pipes were the size of skyscrapers, and various percussions, but Zimmer really provided a true score for this film that works on many levels.
Of course there a few flaws, falling mainly in some of the plot points, mostly towards the end. But Nolan has made a quality film with very little fat from the dialogue or story structure. I also admire Nolan for still giving a purist feel to Interstellar by shooting it on film and also not in 3D. It's a huge premise so it does cover a lot of ground, and you will have to suspend disbelief, but isn't that what going to the movies is about? I really don't care how accurate this film is regarding space travel or exploration, because I care too much about the characters and the mission, which are all well defined. I'm very eager to experience this film again, and highly recommend it be seen in a large theater with good sound. Big thumbs up from me.

[Brian]

Sounds rather similar to what Tarantino said.

Tarantino was talking about fight scenes and action sequences, though.

[North Star]

Tarantino was talking about fight scenes and action sequences, though.

Those are rather commonplace in cinema these days, as unfortunate as it is.

[Cato]

Interstellar: This was quite a ride...
Of course there a few flaws, I'm very eager to experience this film again, and highly recommend it be seen in a large theater with good sound. Big thumbs up from me.

Many thanks for your review: your comments on Hans Zimmer's score are also appreciated!

The reviewer for the Wall Street Journal apparently saw a defective print, complaining about the quality of the images and about the special effects being less than state-of-the-art.

But he also complained about the script being boring, with too much discussion of quantum physics and astrophysics.

e.g.

...Eager for grandeur, I went in hoping for the very best from a filmmaker with his own vision of the theatrical medium's potential. The last thing I expected was a space adventure burdened by turgid discussions of abstruse physics, a wavering tone, visual effects of variable quality and a time-traveling structure that turns on bloodless abstractions....hints of wrongness soon set in. The early frenzy of a cornfield chase, which evokes the crop-duster sequence in "North By Northwest," proves disproportionate to the payoff. The overall pace is laggardly. Mr. McConaughey's purring speech patterns grow mannered and repetitive...one of the production's unintentional mysteries is its unexceptionalism in the visual realm. At one point the orchestral churnings of Hans Zimmer's score suggest something epic under way, but it's only a conventional docking maneuver, conventionally shot. At other points the space ship looks like nothing more or less than a nicely detailed model...

See:

http://online.wsj.com/articles/interstellar-review-too-many-faults-in-its-stars-1415303687

Quite happy to read a positive review: not much of interest out there for my wife and me right now, but this was one of the few which held promise!

[George]

Saw this because the first scene came so highly recommended and found myself held tight till the end. Brad Pitt was so good in this. Every word he said had me laughing my ass off.

[Todd]

I also admire Nolan for still giving a purist feel to Interstellar by shooting it on film and also not in 3D...and highly recommend it be seen in a large theater with good sound. Big thumbs up from me.

Love the fact that it's 2D.  I'm heading to the biggest screen (80') in the area tomorrow to see it.  I expect visual awesomeness.

[SonicMan46]

Last few days, some recent Blu-Ray acquisitions, only the Eastwood film a DVD replacement (Wake... a burned DVD):

A New Leaf (1971) w/ Walter Matthau & Elaine May - a wacky comedy co-written & directed by May - I've not seen this film since release and enjoyed just as much - she was such a comedic genius; after the film, I googled Elaine Mays & Mike Nichols and watched a half dozen of their skits - give it a try!  Ratings 4.6/5* on Amazon & 100%, Rottentomatoes.

In the Line of Fire (1993) w/ Clint Eastwood, John Malkovitch, & Renee Russo - just love Malkovitch in his role - ratings 4.6/5* on Amazon & 95% on Rotten Tomatoes - I'd be doing 4* for both of these films on Amazon - recommended.

Wake of the Red Witch (1948) w/ John Wayne & Gail Russell - the ratings are somewhat less on this film but I enjoyed seeing these actors together (just two films, I believe - the other 'Angel & the Badman' made the year before; image below from that film showing Russell's beautiful doe-like eyes) - this has the undersea octopus fight which is quite lame for special effects but standard at that time.  Russell had a tragic life which deteriorated into alcoholism - she died at the age of 36 y/o - Dave

   

 

[SonicMan46]

Love the fact that it's 2D.  I'm heading to the biggest screen (80') in the area tomorrow to see it.  I expect visual awesomeness.

Same here on Sunday - Interstellar on the big screen and then early dinner @ our favorite Japanese restaurant near home - Dave

[Bogey]

Caught this on the Criterion thread.

Anatomy of a Gag:

http://www.criterion.com/current/posts/3351-playtime-anatomy-of-a-gag

Extremely clever.

[SonicMan46]

Last night, two new BD acquisitions, neither in my commercial DVD collection:

The Women (1939) w/ Norma Shearer, Joan Crawford, Rosalind Russell, and many other ladies; George Cukor, director - delightful movie w/ well developed female characters each w/ her own sweat (Shearer) or nasty (Crawford) personalities - 91% on Rottentomatoes - and in the Videohound & Leonard Maltin books, both 3+*/4* - recommended to those who like these 'smart' comedy dramas from that time period.

Elmer Gantry (1960) w/ Burt Lancaster, Jean Simmons, Shirley Jones, & Arthur Kennedy; Richard Brooks, director; multiple Oscar nominations and wins, including Lancaster & Jones; 96% on Rottentomatoes; and also 3+*/4* each in the two video review books already mentioned - based on the Sinclair Lewis novel - I would say this film in a MUST see, if not a purchase just to watch Burt in his prime!  Dave