Recently viewed films

[miss buenos aires]

I know! Mostly everyone has already seen it or hates the way that all movies about unplanned pregnancies gloss over abortion as an option. Then I try to explain to them that "Knocked Up" would have been about 20 minutes long if Katherine Heigl had gone that route (which might have actually been an improvement), but they remain unconvinced. I might see it by myself.

[Richard]

My own efforts with this year’s Academy nominated films are pretty thin.

I personally loved Michael Clayton and would love to see it win. I didn't know what to expect and was totally won over. The story was told in a way that challenged and entertained. I thought the performances were all excellent. The plot unwound in ways that kept me hooked. I can't wait to see it again, even if it just on the small screen.
Blue, what are the 7 or 8 films that you felt it rehashed?

There Will Be Blood was the film I have been anticipating the most of this current crop. What a disappointment. Daniel Day Lewis did all he could to reposition Bill the Butcher as an Oil Man. He mostly succeeded, but was let down by a horrible soundtrack. Screeching pretends classical by a radiohead that telegraphed every piece of drama. The drama itself was overblown and more contrived than I was prepared.
That being said the moments that dealt solely with the development of techniques to get oil out of the ground were fascinating. What an effort and risk they took. For the Day Lewis character it seemed to be all about the challenge and demands of draining the earth of oil. The huge quantities of money were of little interest to him, even as he wheeled and dealed to screw the best arrangement out of those around him.
I will watch it again (this one will suffer even more not being seen in a cinema). I feel I must have missed something or misread the whole deal. I really wanted to love this.
Would love to see some more reactions to this film.

Can't wait to see No Country (& Juno!)

[BlueChair]

Maybe 7 or 8 films is a stretch, but Michael Clayton definitely reminded me of films like The Insider, A Civil Action, and any number of movies based on John Grisham novels. It seemed like it was trying to be a "legal thriller" without being all that thrilling, quite frankly. And I thought it went from too-confusing (i.e. trying to overcomplicate a very simple story) to too-straightforward (predictable) very quickly. But, of course, this is all just my opinion and obviously you aren't the only person to love the film considering it wound up being nominated for Best Picture.

Onto There Will Be Blood, which we saw yesterday. Based on peoples' comments of the movie so far, I expected it to be very polarizing - either I was going to love it or hate it. I didn't really find myself in either camp. I enjoyed the film immensely but walked out feeling like something was missing. Contrary to Richard, I actually thought Jonny Greenwood's score was terrific, and the acting, pace, cinematography, editing, and just about everything else appealed to me. But in the end, I found it to be a bit of a mess... once you finally got invested in some part of the story, after it slowly revealed itself, the film would jump ahead by a few years.

Now that I've seen all five Best Picture nominees, I can say, without any reservation, that No Country For Old Men deserves top prize.

[Richard]

Thanks Blue. I want to see Michael Clayton again to really determine how deluded I was or wasn't.

There were many good things about Blood, thank for highlighting a couple! The final 30 minutes were a real let-down.

[Who Shot Sam?]

Well the Coen Brothers get some long overdue recognition! Nice to see. This used to be a great might for me and the missus - see all of the movies in advance, make our respective educated guesses, get in a few friendly arguments (I thought Shakespeare in Love was shit on a stick, she liked it). Where have those days gone?

[BlueChair]

Hooray for No Country For Old Men! I suspected it would win, but after Atonement took top prize at the Golden Globes and with There Will Be Blood gaining steam I didn't want to get my hopes up. No major surprises in most of the other categories... Diablo Cody, Javier Bardem, Daniel Day-Lewis. I was surprised to see Tilda Swindon beat Cate Blanchett for Best Actress in a Supporting Role, but that was definitely a tough category this year. I thought Jon Stewart did a great job at hosting, but it seemed like another really long Oscars this year. I blame the number of montages. The number of commercial breaks didn't help either.

[mood swung]

The Supporting Actor/Actress speeches were superb. Best part of the show. And was it not annoying as hell listening to all those Enchanted songs?

[RedShoes]

Despite watching the Oscars with a somewhat obnoxious crowd, I really enjoyed the show this year. Jon Stewart was wonderful (Who else could make fun of the yawn-worthy "how we vote for the Oscars" video? How sweet was it that he had Markéta Irglová come back out to give her acceptance speech?), and I generally agreed with all of the big winners. It would've been nice to see Cate Blanchett win something, but I generally think she should win for everything she does, so I'll forgive it.

I was pretty disappointed by the Enchanted performances too. And maybe it's very unhip of me to admit it, but I really liked Enchanted, and was happy to see all of the song nominations. I thought 'That's How You Know' was a fabulous song - a really fun, silly song that poked fun at the typical cheesy Disney song with references to past classics, and it had an overall ridiculous factor by having all of Central Park suddenly break out in song. It managed to make fun of itself while still being a catchy tune. But then the performance of it last night was just... awful. Ah well, I was thrilled to see Glen Hansard and Markéta Irglová win - they were definitely my favourite though I frankly thought they were too "indie" to win.

And I even managed to win my Oscar pool by correctly picking 10 of the 24 to win. Unfortunately it was a very small pool and I tied with 3 other people, so I only won $3.50

[Otis Westinghouse]

Haven't seen the show, but I loved the Enchanted songs from the film. Like you, Red, I thought it was great entertainment. Even my 15 year old 'I'm so cool it hurts' son loved it. Nice to see Tilda Swinton getting an Oscar. You'd never have thought it back in the days when she was Derek Jarman's muse. I knew someone who was at university with her (here in Cambridge, in fact) and although the woman I knew was trying to get into acting, she never had a hope compared to Tilda. Nice one, Daniel DL. Now I just need to get out and see some of these films.

Watched Shadow of a Doubt. 2nd out of 20 in the Westinghouse family's chronological trawl through 20 Hitch box set classics. Weird film! Part ludicrous, part sinister. Joseph Cotton is great.

[mood swung]

I remember several references to Juno being a 'sweet' film during the Oscars broadcast and I was reminded of that word last night watching Stranger Than Fiction. Sweet. A very underrated virtue. And a nice little film.

[Who Shot Sam?]

Wahoo! My wife is back from a business trip on Sunday and has given me carte blanche to do whatever I want that day, so I thought I'd see a couple of the Oscar-winning movies. Looks like No Country for Old Men (early matinee), a brief break for lunch, and then Juno in the afternoon. I think she'd kill me if I saw a Daniel Day-Lewis movie before she had the chance, so There Will Be Blood will have to wait for another day.

[miss buenos aires]

I watched "Raging Bull" last night. Beautifully shot, but not really the most compelling story. I'm definitely willing to hear from its fans, though...

[mood swung]

Lucky you! My husband did the same once for me - I saw Interview With the Vampire. It was kind of a long time ago.

We watched Apocalypto last night. I was prepared to hate it, had a book out to read, but was drawn in in spite of myself. Jaguar Paw looked a little like a young Anthony Kiedis (and I like getting to say 'a YOUNG AK - in fact, I mention this just to say that.) We all figured Seven could have climbed out of the well, but what kind of story would we have then? Why was this R rated anyway? Itchy and Scratchy are more violent. The heads bouncing down the temple steps were kind of cool. And would my heart actually look like that if someone hacked it out of me? They appeared to have too many inlets/outlets compared to the hearts I have imagined and seen in other movies. It was kind of too much at times - Mel G is never gonna win a subtlety award, but interesting to see. I used to look at National Geographic and wonder what the Mayan ruins were like back in their day, so this was my own little archaeological wish fulfilled.

[bambooneedle]

I watched "Raging Bull" last night. Beautifully shot, but not really the most compelling story. I'm definitely willing to hear from its fans, though...

I think it's the sort of film that you get engrossed in the texture of it because a lot of is character study. It's been a while since I saw it last but I vividly remember the way certain scenes were shot, like when that promoter 'hot shot' (who Joe Pesci hits with the car door) is dressed up all smooth in the bar and it goes into slow motion and Scorsese zooms in to his efficient little hand and face gestures because Joe Pesci is observing him and he think he's an asshole.

That sort of detail interests me up to a point but then I didn't think the characters themselves were all that interesting, or depicted as convincingly as they could have.

[bambooneedle]

Watched A Clockwork Orange recently and I thought it might have been really interesting at that moment in time (1971), but that, for whatever ideas it was supposed to inspire (which I later read up on just to check, but no great revelations), it was now surely mostly redundant. Who would find it very shocking nowadays?

I suppose all the disturbing things in it were supposed to add up and have a culmulative shocking effect, but all sorts of disturbing violence and disorder has been seen in so many films by now. And whatever was leftover from that (besides mild interest in just seeing where the story went) was mostly annoying, especially as the characters are sort of these exaggerated sort of surreal caricatures designed to punctuate the ideas and heighten the impact but WERE mostly annoying and so it detracted.

So fuck all the snobs who see a film like A Clockwork Orange 35 years after it was made and mindlessly praise it as though it could still have the same impact and relevance it once may have had just because they think it's supposed to.

[miss buenos aires]

I just have to warn everyone — I watched Death at a Funeral the other night, and it was one of the worst movies I've ever seen. Not offensive, just offensively incompetent. Avoid at all costs!

[miss buenos aires]

Just so I give the great films I've seen recently their due as well:

Persepolis: This was just lovely. I read the first book, and the movie really captures the sense of historical import viewed through the eyes of a child. The animation, though black and white, is terrifically complex and compelling.

Be Kind Rewind: I love Michel Gondry! This made me want to do something creative. People who complain about the lack of realism in it just make me laugh. What were they expecting? Did they not know the premise of the movie or anything about Gondry?

The Lady from Shanghai: This classic is one of the best noir movies I've ever seen. Try it if you liked Elevator to the Gallows (not that they have anything in common besides my love).

[Otis Westinghouse]

So fuck all the snobs who see a film like A Clockwork Orange 35 years after it was made and mindlessly praise it as though it could still have the same impact and relevance it once may have had just because they think it's supposed to.

But who are these snobs? Surely no-one would expect it to have any of the impact now it once had. That impact was blown out of proportion by Kubrick's withdrawal. It's an interesting 1971 film based on an interesting 1962 book. Isn't that enough?

[bambooneedle]

They're just random snobs, I don't know their names. I made them up. But there are film snobs who cling to their sacred cows and who get too dogmatic about what is good no matter what. Like, Dr Strangelove is often touted as one of the funniest films ever and so on. I just resent the idea that something is wrong with me if I don't agree.

[Richard]

Bamboo - I am willing to accept there is something wrong with me rather than you - but surely Dr Strangelove is hilarious?
A Clockwork Orange does appear dated and rather tame compared to current cinema. I agree with Otis that its 'Banned In Britain' tag gave it more notoriety than it deserved.

MissBA - It has been so long since I have seen Raging Bull that I may be off mark - but even in my adolescence when any film with Robert DeNiro was an event, Raging Bull was more fascinating for the physical change DeNiro underwent (6 months of pizza and ice cream to gain all the weight - trained with real boxing trainers who claimed he was ready for a real fight) than the movie itself.
I remember it being beautifully shot, but Jake LaMotta was such a repellant character that it was almost impossible to watch.
His self-destructive spiral was the center piece of the whole movie - the flaccid lame stand-up routine at the end a predictable result of his sad existence.
So I recall the film being admirable in many technical ways, but actually enjoyable in very few, so I have never gone back to watch it again.

[miss buenos aires]

Has anybody seen The Three Burials of Melquiades Estrada? Totally not what I was expecting! Of course, I didn't know anything about it, so I didn't really have any expectations at all...

[sabreman]

The Lady from Shanghai: This classic is one of the best noir movies I've ever seen.

Hall of mirrors!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3_p66HjTweo

Orson Wells!

[pophead2k]

Bring out the tar and feathers! I finally saw No Country for Old Men and was underwhelmed. I'm not even sure why. Visually stunning, nice performances (Tommy Lee Jones, an actor I'm normally not impressed by, was great. Not sure about all the hullabaloo about Josh Brolin though) but it left me pretty empty. Was this a case of too much hype and elevated expectations? Wouldn't rank in my top five fave Coens.

[Otis Westinghouse]

Still kicking myself for not seeing it. Recent comments to me:

50-something man who took teenage son: 'You're witnessing great cinema here, sonny boy.'

20-something man with generally decent taste: 'The best film I've ever seen.'

[johnfoyle]

Just seen Shine A Light , Martin Scorsese's documentary about the Rolling Stones . Filmed in New York City's Beacon Theater in Nov. '06 it is a pretty straight forward depiction of a full on show by Mick 'n co. In a cinema with a very loud PA you really get the feel of being there. By the end the combination of of extreme close ups and carefully selected archive clips of interviews leaves you with a feeling of knowing each member of the group - or , more likely, what they want you to know about them. This is re-enforced by the half hour of clips we were shown ( at a special paid preview - free t-shirt with the 15 euro ticket!) before hand of them arriving at the London premiere this evening . A year and half after the filming and they have exactly the same persona in the short interviews , Keef practically necking with the blond dolly as she babbled her questions etc.

Muddy Waters' Champagne & Reefer' ,featuring Buddy Guy , is the musical highlight.

Elvis 'n Diana were, if I remember correctly, in the audience but don't feature.