Last Movie You Watched

[DavidRoss]

Last weekend (wifey suffering a cold, we stayed in and watched DVDs):

Marley & Me:  Better than I thought it would be.  Not the stupid comedy about an unruly dog ala Beethoven that the trailers and Owen Wilson's presence suggest, but a warm and gentle memoir about family.  6 out of 10

Bolt:  Exactly as expected, at least if you've seen any of the recent Dreamworks or Pixar animated features.  6 out of 10

W:  Unwatchably bad.  Imagine Michael Moore and Saturday Night Live teaming up to do a hit job on Bill Clinton in which every scene portrays him as a coarse pathological liar and sexual predator trolling for blow jobs.  No rating--turned it off after about 20 minutes.

Slumdog Millionaire:  Not a disappointment, and not the Bollywood-meets-Trainspotting I expected (I seldom read reviews of movies I already intend to see).  Instead, it was more like a Trainspotting-meets-Pichote fairy tale, told with sufficient depth to hold up in subsequent viewings over the next few years.  8 out of 10

Bottle Shock:  A pleasant surprise.  With Alan Rickman as a wine snob, I expected more comedy--a satire, perhaps, about the wine industry in Napa.  Instead, it was a mildly comic but largely factual retelling of the events that brought the world's attention to the quality of Napa Valley wines.  I liked it--not least for the nostalgia provoked over how much we (the world, yes, but Northern Californians especially) have lost in the past 30+ years of "progress."  7 out of 10.

[Bu]

Good to see you back.....hope all is well.

Why, thank you, Bogey!   Have been working way too much, and haven't had much time to post here. Hopefully you've been blessed since we last chatted.   0:)

*ahem*

Thanks to a blowout clearance sale at Borders was able to buy this dirt cheap:



After a second viewing still am not quite sure if its a  0:)  or a 

[George]

After a second viewing still am not quite sure if its a  0:)  or a 

Tell me about it. That's my response to most of his films. I guess that's why I buy them and keep coming back for more.

[Kullervo]

Watch Sawdust and Tinsel.

Just finished:

[Sergeant Rock]

Bottle Shock:  A pleasant surprise.  With Alan Rickman as a wine snob, I expected more comedy--a satire, perhaps, about the wine industry in Napa.  Instead, it was a mildly comic but largely factual retelling of the events that brought the world's attention to the quality of Napa Valley wines.  I liked it--not least for the nostalgia provoked over how much we (the world, yes, but Northern Californians especially) have lost in the past 30+ years of "progress."  7 out of 10.

I saw Bottle Shock a few days ago too



I did enjoy it overall (every scene with Alan Rickman is classic) but I was bothered by the extreme Hollywoodization of the event it was based on: the 1976 Paris wine tasting. The director and writers somehow managed to include sex, violence, racism, the noble minority character, wet t-shirts and police cars in a tale about wine Apparently they had an American Film Cliché Checklist on hand which they ticked off as they made the movie. Only in Hollywood 

Two major historical distortions bothered me too: the man who actually made the prize-winning Chardonnay, the legendary Mike Grgich, is not even mentioned. He was Chateau Montelena's winemaker. (The man Bill Pullman's character was based on was a lawyer who owned the property; he didn't make the wine.) Gustavo wasn't employed by the winery until after Steven Spurrier had returned to France. (The film shows him being fired! not hired!) Gustavo had nothing to do with the wine that won. He didn't begin producing his own wines until years later. And it's doubtful he was part of a romantic triangle with the owner's son and a blonde intern

Another movie based on the Paris Tasting is due out in 2010: The Judgment of Paris. It promises to stick closer to the historical facts. Whether that will produce a more entertaining movie though...well, we'll see.

Sarge

[SonicMan46]

I saw Bottle Shock a few days ago too

 

I did enjoy it overall (every scene with Alan Rickman is classic) but I was bothered by the extreme Hollywoodization of the event it was based on: the 1976 Paris wine tasting................

David & Sarge - thanks for the comments on this film - I own the book Judgment of Paris: California vs. France and the Historic 1976 Paris Tasting That Revolutionized Wine (inserted above) by George Taber that was released on the 30th anniversary of this tasting, and found it a good read of the event & consequences.  However, not sure that I really want to see the film after Sarge's thoughts, although I do love Rickman!  May be that we need a 'Michael Moore' to do some pseudo-doc about this tasting!     Dave

[DavidRoss]

I did enjoy it overall (every scene with Alan Rickman is classic) but I was bothered by the extreme Hollywoodization of the event it was based on: the 1976 Paris wine tasting. The director and writers somehow managed to include sex, violence, racism, the noble minority character, wet t-shirts and police cars in a tale about wine Apparently they had an American Film Cliché Checklist on hand which they ticked off as they made the movie. Only in Hollywood 

Only in Hollywood?  Do you mean that German, Scottish, Indian, French, Australian, Swedish, or Italian movies are all cliché-free?  As for the charge of "extreme Hollywoodization":

The one brief sex scene was suggested, not shown or designed to stimulate prurient interest.  Violence?  The sole event--the stand off with the trucker--is presented almost comically and turns Hollywood convention on its head.  Racism?  I must have missed that, unless you're referring to the class difference shown between estate owners and the mostly hispanic farm workers, which is accurate but incidental to the plot.  Wet t-shirts?  I missed that too--guess I'd better watch the film again!  And police cars?  Again, the role of the sheriff's deputy hardly fits Hollywood conventions and the incident provides a mildly amusing twist on the homage to It Happened One Night.

Granted, Randy Miller and his co-writers had to sell the story as commercially viable to get financing, but it's still an indie film and not a Hollywood studio movie.  And yes, it's not completely factual, but it's not meant as a documentary but rather a feel-good fable based on factual events--and that's part of its charm, like The World's Fastest Indian or Swimming Upstream, to name two similar recent films that I found equally enjoyable.  (Gee, Sarge--I had no idea I liked it enough to defend it against the charge of Hollywood slickness!   )

[Sergeant Rock]

As for the charge of "extreme Hollywoodization":

Racism: the scene with the trucker

The Noble Minority Character: Gustavo

Violence: the owner and his son continually beating the crap out of each other in the boxing ring

Sex: the intern who had absolutely nothing to do with the plot or the making of the wine; she only had one function: to provide tension and conflict between two main characters...and to look good with a hose 

Wet T-shirt: the scene where the intern hoses down the machinery while the men oogle (not really wearing a t-shirt, it's true, but that was the effect intended)

Granted, Randy Miller and his co-writers had to sell the story as commercially viable to get financing, but it's still an indie film and not a Hollywood studio movie

Which is why it mildly disappointed me. As an indie film I expected more from them.

And yes, it's not completely factual, but it's not meant as a documentary but rather a feel-good fable based on factual events--and that's part of its charm, like The World's Fastest Indian or Swimming Upstream, to name two similar recent films that I found equally enjoyable.  (Gee, Sarge--I had no idea I liked it enough to defend it against the charge of Hollywood slickness!   )

The slickness comes from scenes that aren't realistic; that are clichéd bits of forced drama--events invented by the writers. Examples: the scene with the trucker. Why is that in the film? What does that have to do with wine? Only purpose I can see is to show that Gustavo (who in reality wasn't even employed by the winery then) wouldn't put up with even mild forms of racism. And why need that be shown at all? Because the film makers are following the checklist; they have to trot out the "American workers are racists" card. Gustavo's speech after he's fired is another example. Why is he fired at all? So that he can give his speech about the noble native being the superior winemaker. Nothing about it is grounded in reality or even logic. (The real Gustavo never said anything like that nor does he believe only those native to the land know how to produce great wine. Mike Grgrich, the guy who actually made that Chardonnay, was from Croatia.) But American films almost invariably show minority characters in this exaggerated positive way. It's become cliché.

Or the scene in the bank where Bill Pullman's character goes seemingly mad, breaking open the bottle with a sword! Pure Hollywood, Dave   Another: the silly business of the wine being thrown out and the race to save it from being dumped, ending with a police car and a minor character unbelievably saving the day: ridiculous "melodrama." Another: the scene at the airport where a crisis invented by the film's writers is resolved in a most unrealistic but gung ho American way   (The wine would not be jostled any more in the plane's hold than in some passenger's carry on luggage.)

As I said, I found the film entertaining but I think its great beginning and middle were sabotaged in the last third by the invented conflicts between characters and the invention of brown wine. A film that started smart, intriguing and different degenerated into clichés of conflict that were then too easily resolved. It almost followed the RomCom formula of conflict resolution. 

But hey, I liked the film, David. I'd recommend it. And I agree: some of the clichés I mention were presented as comedy, which was refreshing.

Sarge

[DavidRoss]

Ain't it grand that we can swap divergent views without attacking one another's capacity or character?  I just love exchanges among the adults (not necessarily age-dependent) on this forum.  I learn so much from them and enjoy expanding my appreciation of things thanks to your input.  It's what keeps me coming back to GMG, despite the occasional thorn among the roses. 

[karlhenning]

Ain't it grand that we can swap divergent views without attacking one another's capacity or character?

(* sips hot tea *)

[Haffner]

Ain't it grand that we can swap divergent views without attacking one another's capacity or character?  I just love exchanges among the adults (not necessarily age-dependent) on this forum.  I learn so much from them and enjoy expanding my appreciation of things thanks to your input.  It's what keeps me coming back to GMG, despite the occasional thorn among the roses. 

The fact that you commented on this today helps mark the great improvement this forum has made, interaction-wise. I've noticed alot more adult (and thus interesting) approaches to dissent. It's as though this forum has reached maturity, in more ways than one.

[DavidRoss]

* puts the kettle on to make hot tea to sip while otherwise giving my full attention to op. 132 * 

[George]

The fact that you commented on this today helps mark the great improvement this forum has made, interaction-wise. I've noticed alot more adult (and thus interesting) approaches to dissent. It's as though this forum has reached maturity, in more ways than one.

Why today? (just curious)

[Haffner]

Why today? (just curious)

I felt it was time to mark the progression as of today, to give us more an idea of how things used to be (before today).
I'm not sure how often the subject of this forum's progression into maturity comes up.

Or maybe I'm a presumptuous, pompous ahss.

[George]

I felt it was time to mark the progression as of today, to give us more an idea of how things used to be (before today).
I'm not sure how often the subject of this forum's progression into maturity comes up.

Or maybe I'm a presumptuous, pompous ahss.

Oh, I just thought that you meant that today, meaning Ash Wednesday or something else significant about the date independent of the forum.

FWIW, everyday is a good day for me to grow up a little more. 

[Kullervo]

I felt it was time to mark the progression as of today, to give us more an idea of how things used to be (before today).
I'm not sure how often the subject of this forum's progression into maturity comes up.

Or maybe I'm a presumptuous, pompous ahss.

To further digress, it could have something to do with:
A) We haven't had many new members in the past few months...
B) The youngest of the posters here are growing up or have just stopped posting...
C) The regulars are so used to each others' quirks that more things are just brushed off...
D) We haven't had an Elgar thread in some time.

[Haffner]

To further digress, it could have something to do with:
A) We haven't had many new members in the past few months...
B) The youngest of the posters here are growing up or have just stopped posting...
C) The regulars are so used to each others' quirks that more things are just brushed off...
D) We haven't had an Elgar thread in some time.

This is both true and insanely funny. Post of the day.

[karlhenning]

Artfully done, Corey!

[rockerreds]

The Class

[Haffner]

A Simple Plan

My fiancee and mine watched this for a second time, it had been a long time since the first. It was even more effecting, thought provoking. The word "existentialism" keeps ringing in my mind. The abyss...