Movies Serious Movie Discussion

[Deleted member 110072]

Is there going to be a student rebellion on the 2nd unit?

Speaking of architects and going from a recommendation I seem to remember being made here I picked up Peter Greenaway's The Belly of an Architect to branch out from my avi and The Draftsman's Contract as all I'd seen previously of him. I admit part of that has always been the feeling the rest of his work bar Cook, Thief, etc would be more heartless(for all the punishment that film delt out it did obviously have characters to care about) and whilst this was somewhat true it wasn't to nearly the degree I feared and overall I enjoyed it a great deal.

Blasic plot if anyone doesn't want to read wiki, American architect played by Brian Dennehy comes to Rome to direct an exhibition based on his hero Boullée, a 17th century French pioneer of neoclassical only to have his life/health fall apart.

Dennehy on the face of it seems like a bit of strange choice being mostly a more straight forward(if very good) character actor but he does fit the role well and does carry off the more Greenaway level dramatic turmoil well and stands up to Lambert Wilson who is obviously very at home in this kind of film.

Visually its certainly up to his other work although feels like almost a halfway point between Cook, Thief, etc's style as a stage play and a more conventional film with location work. Seeing Greenaway use classical roman architecture rather than the baroque certainly made for rather a different experience and the merger between that and modernism didn't feel forced. Using Wim Mertens for the soundtrack rather than the typical Nyman does I spose fit into that as well as he goes even further down the route of classical shifted into impersonal machine like angst modernism.

Plot wise actually a bit less straight forward than I expected, not just the lead characters desent into megalomania that his hero's architecture seems to suggest. Even as someone with only a laymans interest in the subject the style in question obviously now call to mind authoritarianism/facism but it ends up as something rather more personal maybe hinting at the frailty behind looking to leave such monuments.

 

[Rimbaud82]

Bait (2019)

Outsanding!! What a brilliant, unique film. Definitely one of the best this year and a modern British masterpiece. Plot wise it tackles (see what I did there) tensions between local residents and hordes of tourists in a Cornish fishing village. Obviously this is within the context of the decline of traditional fishing industries and the gentrification and 'Air BnB-ification' of Cornwall.

Instead of the proud fishing culture that existed in the past, the main character Martin is forced to scrape by selling a few fish at a time in an attempt to save up and buy his own boat, while his own brother makes money taking drunken stag dos on boozy trips round the coast. We quickly learn that pride and tradition is something crucial in this film, pitted against the harsh realities of modern Cornwall and the erosion of that culture. At one point a rich Londoner tells Martin he didn't have to sell them the house (his families fishing cottage, now done up as an Air BnB complete with fishing nets, cabin holes and other fishing paraphernalia), to which Martin tellingly responds "Didnt we?".

These tensions create the drama of the film. There is a tone of indignation at these wealthy tourists, and a sense of loss for the decline of the traditional industries, but it avoids sentimentality or caricature.Its all interesting from a thematic standpoint, but without going into too much specifics some of the storylines in the village play out more like a soap opera.

However, if the plot is at times suggestive of melodrama the style is anything but. This is where the real brilliance and originality of the film lies. Its very experimental. Shot in black and white with a vintage Bolex camera on 16mm it has a very vintage look to it, complete with crackles and imperfections on the film itself. Until the modern cars come in to focus we could intially be watching the start of some pre-war BBC documentary on the Cornish fishing industry. This struck me as a perfect stylistic contrast between the past and present.

As well as this the techniques the film are, as I said very experimental and add a lot to the strangeness of the film. Originally it was shot silently with voice over and sound added later. Visually it does seem like an old silent film at points, something like F.W. Murnau. This gives the film a strange, surreal quality. Other elements seem to be lifted from film history, from Murnau-esque Expressionism as I said, through Soviet Montage theory (with some excellent jump cuts and juxtapositions) and with other scenes almost reminiscent of Italian neo-realism (particularly something like Visconti's La Terra Trema).

All in all a brilliant, hypnotically strange and fascinating film.

 

[HenryFlower]

@HenryFlower @europe1 @Tycho Brah @Rimbaud82 @chickenluver @moreorless87

So Henry reminded me in the SMC that I never got around to posting my syllabi for the two film classes that I'm teaching this term. In case you guys are interested, here's what I'm doing.

First, I'm teaching a class at Columbia College Chicago (where I did my undergrad - it's a great film school and it's where I've always wanted to at least start teaching if not where I end up teaching permanently, though that'd be a sweet gig). It's one of the core film studies classes called Cinema Analysis and Criticism. It's a writing and research intensive class that film students take after they've already taken a couple of film classes. The structure of the course is as follows: There are three units over the course of the 15-week term. Unit 1 is aesthetic analysis, Unit 2 is ideological analysis, and Unit 3 is historical research. The structure remains the same, but each professor gets to pick which movies to screen and have the students write essays about each unit. For my choices, I'm having them watch and do an aesthetic analysis of Taxi Driver in Unit 1, watch and do an ideological analysis of The Fountainhead for Unit 2, and watch and write a research paper on The Dark Knight Rises for Unit 3. I fucking love the students in the class and the idea/structure of the class is awesome. If I could just teach four or five units of this exact class each term, I'd be a happy professor.

Second, I'm teaching a class at DePaul University. Technically, I'm at another campus, but it's a DePaul class and it's part of their History of Cinema core. The way DePaul does it, there are three History of Cinema classes: The first is 1895-1945, the second is 1945-1975, and the third is 1975-today. I'm teaching 1945-1975. This isn't a film school class, so the students are mostly advertising/marketing students with a few general "media studies" undergrads thrown in and one kid who wants to be a filmmaker. I'm going to be honest, I'm not all that excited about this class, mainly because teaching film students is so much more fun and rewarding than random kids who don't really know or care that much about movies just looking to take a gen ed class, but still, I get to talk about movies, so I'm not complaining. For this class, I'm going to have the students write a midterm paper and a final paper and then have them keep film journals for each weekly screening. As for the screenings, this is how I've broken the 10-week quarter down week-by-week:

Unit 1: American Cinema in the 1940s - The Best Years of Our Lives (I wanted for sure to have them watch a movie that dealt with WWII, but I also want to emphasize the "classical Hollywood" style, and it's hard to find a better showcase than a William Wyler movie)

Unit 2: Italian Neorealism - I Vitelloni (Neorealism was a must, but while I do like many of the obvious exemplars like Open City and Bicycle Thieves, I figured I could talk about those while having them watch I Vitelloni, which, though a late example, is IMO the best Neorealist film and massively influential despite being pretty damn underrated)

Unit 3: American Cinema in the 1950s - On the Waterfront (I wanted to emphasize the Method Acting boom with Brando, Clift, and Dean, plus On the Waterfront will allow me to talk about the blacklist and what was going on in and around Hollywood at the time)

Unit 4: Postwar Japanese Cinema - The Burmese Harp (Similar to the Neorealism week, while I could've gone the obvious route and had them watch a Kurosawa or Ozu movie, I figured I could talk about them while having them watch the supremely underrated Kon Ichikawa's supremely underrated antiwar film The Burmese Harp, plus it's an opportunity to compare-and-contrast how different national cinemas dealt with the same event, viz. WWII, from different perspectives)

Unit 5: Ingmar Bergman: Authorship and the Arthouse - Through a Glass Darkly (Honestly, this week is here to justify my purchase of the Ingmar Bergman's Cinema collection from Criterion and to give me an excuse to spend a week talking about Bergman movies)

Unit 6: French New Wave - Last Year at Marienbad (Shout-out to Henry, I'm once again eschewing the obvious in Truffaut and Godard and will focus instead on Monsieur Left Bank, Alain Resnais, and maybe use the day as a fun day right after they turn in their midterm papers to put the students into teams to debate what's happening in various scenes )

Unit 7: American Cinema in the 1960s - Midnight Cowboy (The Graduate is too obvious and I hate Bonnie and Clyde, so the best candidate to talk about American cinema in the '60s was obviously Midnight Cowboy. Plus, it'll allow me to tie together the rise of the arthouse and cinematic modernism and show its influence on post-classical Hollywood)

Unit 8: Britain on the Brink - Get Carter (Your eyes do not deceive you, europe: I'm going to do a week on British cinema and I'm going to focus on the '60s/'70s leading them up to the non-Stallone original )

Unit 9: Hong Kong Martial Arts Cinema - Fist of Fury (No one is surprised that I shoved in a Bruce Lee week, right?)

Unit 10: American Cinema in the 1970s - The Getaway (I wanted to end with an introduction to the burgeoning American action film, and since I'm past 1968 and thus can't use Bullitt, I'm using the next best thing and still managing to end with a Lee/McQueen one-two punch )

Finally, speaking of the American action film, I already know that in January I'm going to be teaching an additional two classes at DePaul. One is a very general "Media and Cultural Studies" class (doing it for the money, though it'll still be fun, as I'll be able to talk about movies, TV, and stand-up, all of which I love) and the other is a class that I was allowed to design myself. It's a film elective under the "Topics in Film Genre" umbrella, and it's going to be called "The Hollywood Action Film." Here's how that one's going to go down:

Unit 1: Chase Films, Swashbucklers, and Slapstick - Instead of a single film screening, on this intro week I'm just going to show them a lot of clips of early chase films, some Douglas Fairbanks stuff, and then the Clown Trio of Chaplin, Keaton, and Lloyd.

Unit 2: Fighting Crime - G-Men (It is my position that the first "official" Hollywood action film was G-Men and the first "official" Hollywood action and martial arts star was James Cagney, so how better to officially kick off the class?).

Unit 3: Superwesterns - Shane (Rejoice once again, europe: I think that old school gangster movies and Westerns are prerequisites to contemporary action movies, so we've got to cover those bases early).

Unit 4: A New Era - Bullitt (Dirty Harry gets all the attention, but the new school action movie begins with Bullitt, and my students are going to learn that).

Unit 5: Martial Arts Spectacular - Enter the Dragon (Um...duh).

Unit 6: Righting Wrongs - Rambo: First Blood Part II (I wanted to do a right-wing action and left-wing action double-header, and the obvious right-wing pick was the movie that set '80s US politics on fire).

Unit 7: Liberal Action - On Deadly Ground (The obvious left-wing pick, meanwhile, is, of course, the Sensei's passion project).

Unit 8: Gender in Action - Kill Bill (I had to show the ladies some love, and if I'm going to talk about gender, why not give The Bride the floor? I was originally thinking about using Haywire, but I think that there's more to talk about with Kill Bill, especially with how Tarantino connects The Bride to the Come Drink with Me/Lady Snowblood lineage of action heroines).

Unit 9: Race in Action - Black Panther (Can't leave the race card in the deck after pulling the gender card. While I was originally thinking of doing the race unit on Action Jackson, once again, I think that Black Panther would provide more to talk about, especially inasmuch as it opens the door to superhero movies in general, about which I'll have very little to say in the course on the whole).

Unit 10: Pasts and Futures - Rambo: Last Blood (This is kind of contingent on Stallone not stinking up the joint with this one, but I'd really love to be able to take the class from the birth of cinema to a movie that may well still be in theaters during the class. Plus, the ability to connect back to the previous week with Rambo II would be very cool).

So, in short:

not only do i empty my entire bank account of respekt on your name for going Left Bank over Cahiers, but choosing Last Year as your screening just melts my goddarn heart.

 

[ufcfan4]

@Bullitt68 congrats on the professor position, man. Really awesome and very much deserved. Hope you share some experiences/insights from the course here. Every time I see Serious Movie Discussion resurface since the unsticky, it's always awesome.

Any of you guys see Touch of Evil? I'm trying to watch more film noir and I checked this one out today. Awesome film, in my opinion. There were some great aesthetic decisions by Welles and co. that really complemented the story well. Also thought that all the actors did a solid job. Welles is the standout with his character really commanding the screen whenever he is on, but I've always enjoyed the work of Heston and Leigh, too and this was no exception. Welles was virtually unrecognizable here, and it was intriguing hearing his distinctive voice garbled with the accent he utilized.

Really enjoyed how the plot balanced and integrated the two main threads- the investigation into the murder of Lineker and his lover, and the chess match between Heston and Welles as one tries to expose the other as corrupt while the other attempts to discredit his opponent.

I also enjoyed how Heston portrayed a dignified, intelligent dude but then they had the one scene that utilized his physicality when he was desperately looking for his wife and chases down Grandi's underlings. Dude basically grabs one of them by the collar, lifts him off the floor and carries him across the room with one arm. Thought I was about to see this

Thought it maybe lost a bit of momentum toward the end with the confrontation between Welles' corrupt cop and his partner, but, the final moments- the exchange between the DA and Marlene Dietrich, were great and basically epitomized that film noir mentality. Overall, really dug the atmosphere, the narrative, and the performances.

 

[Deleted member 110072]

Got around to watching Claire Denis's High Life, Pattinson and Binoche as death row convicts on a one way space mission to a black hole. Most of the comparisons I'd seen were of Tarkovsky's Solaris and I can see where they come from in terms of a mysterious story set on a "lived in" space station although I'd say the story and tone also bring to mind 2OO1 and a much more obtuse/arty version of Danny Boyle's Sunshine and a bit of Alien.

Moreso than any of those films though I'd say its a mood piece without as clear a message to it, there is obviously drama but I'd say mostly towards building the strange and menacing atmosphere their destination brings to mind(death, rebirth etc). It seems to have been the final redemption of Pattinsons career post Twilight and he's certainly good in the role although acting wise I think Binoche clearly dominates the film as the ships doctor obsessed with creating a child. Certainly a shift from her normal roles as a mix of desperation and deeply menacing, her riding the ships mechanical "sex box" dildo like some animalist pagan priestess isn't a sight soon forgotten.

Maybe not as expansive as the Tarkovsky and Kurbtrick filsm visually but it does certainly have a very effective atmosphere to it with the warped/sleazy jazz fitting things nicely although I could almost imagine....

 

[chickenluver]

Certainly a shift from her normal roles as a mix of desperation and deeply menacing, her riding the ships mechanical "sex box" dildo like some animalist pagan priestess isn't a sight soon forgotten.

 

[chickenluver]

new Haxon criterion release just in time for Halloween

Spoiler

Also the showa era Godzilla collection is happening. I haven't seen all of the films of that era, and some I did see probably aren't worth watching more than once, but there are some real classics among them. Some of the cover art is spectacular, especially this Kong one. Larger images are in spoiler tags.

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler

I just realized that the harder to find ones will now be readily available in great quality. I probably won't buy the entire set, but will at least pick up Mothra vs Godzilla and a few others.

 

[Yotsuya]

B&W Godzillas looked gorgeous already on DVD and deserve a Criterion mastering. Really good excuse to rewatch Godzilla vs. King Kong too.

Btw, The X from Outer Space on Eclipse’s Shockiku box is awesome!

 

[Yotsuya]

The Blue Dahlia was really nice. It starts very suave and aloof but Alan Ladd and Veronica Lake keep it afloat to get it’s kind of brutal momentum going. Not blingy film noir by any means, but recommemded for fans of gritty crime movies.

 

[Rimbaud82]

Shadow Dancer (2012)

A political thriller/drama set towards the end of The Troubles. It's from the perspective of Colette McVeigh, a female IRA volunteer who gets arrested after a botched bombing attempt in London. What is crucial to the plot is that she is also single mother, and the threat of losing her child while she serves a lengthy prison sentence in England is what enables the British security forces to "turn" her. In return for staying out of jail and seeing her young son she agrees to become an double-agent/informant.

The film uses this starting point to explore this critical period of the Troubles as the slow slide towards peace continues in spite of more militant factions within the IRA. It is a somber look at life as a IRA member and the background and motivations of those - including Colette - who would choose such a life. It looks at the tensions between the idealism of republicanism and actual day to day family life. It's not supportive of violent republicanism, but the prologue set earlier in her life acts as a way of at least understanding how some chose that path. Of course, equally central to this story is the role of British intelligence and their working of agents within the IRA. Colette's handler (played by Clive Owen) is a seemingly honest man who promises Colette that he will protect her whilst working as an informant; this reaches crisis point as the personal relationship between the two is eventually undermined by shadowy factions and classified decisions from higher-up the intelligence network, seemingly looking to protect an even more valuable informant within the IRA...with tragic consequences. Of course all these shady dealings, double-agents, double-crossings and lack of any coherent strategy between different agencies/factions very much echoes real life British security policy and as such the critical tone of the film is extremely apt on this point.

All in all, it was decent. It was rather understated on the whole, bit of a slow-burn, with a lack of emotional intensity at times for me considering the subject but all in all a reasonably effective look at the intelligence war. Will say that while some performances were good, there were a few dodgy accents as always...just give the roles to NI actors for fuck sake.

 

[Rimbaud82]

Operación Ogro (1979)

Really good film, and an extremely interesting one. It recounts the assassination of General Franco's successor in fascist Spain, Luis Carrero Blanco. This is a film told from the perspective of ETA which is interesting from the start. The so-called terrorists are the good guys, at least to begin with. It recounts the plan - code named Operation Ogre - initially to kidnap Blanco in exchange for political prisoners and then later to assassinate him once he has been elected Prime Minster. So the film is from the perspective of ETA volunteers and explores various topics surrounding that. For instance the tensions between politics and personal relationships (the main character Txabi's relationship with his gf is strained as a result of the conflict). It is from an ETA perspective and their volunteers are shown as admirable and resourceful. The plot involved digging a tunnel under the road in order to plant the bomb and we see them carrying out this extremely difficult and dangerous work with grim determination. When the attempt is completed the mood of the film is triumphant, like "fuck yes we got him". From what I've read this was the most important and sympathetic attack ETA ever carried out.

it is clearly extremely sympathetic with the cause of Basque Nationalism (me too), there is an early scene showing Basque school-children - later to be ETA members - getting viciously beaten with a ruler for speaking Basque and refusing to accept that they are Spanish rather than Basque. However it isn't an entirely pro-ETA film, the director has said the film was made with a guilty conscience due to left-wing terrorist actitives taking place in Italy at the time it was being made. Other scenes question the relationship between ETA and left-wing politics, as well as the legitimacy of ETAs armed struggle in the new context of democratic politics...it seems to ultimately try and suggest that the shift democracy is the right thing (represented by Izarra the former leader of the unit, played by Gian Maria Volonté) but despite Txabi's hardened views in a few flash-forward scenes, the film doesn't outright denounce him (I wouldn't wanna go into spoiler territory). But there are internal contradictions in the film which are never fully resolved. The director had originally intended it to be a straightforward depiction of the assassination, but the influence of the "Moro Affair" at that time had led him to question the "perplexities" (as he said) of armed struggle in the different contexts provided by dictatorship vs democracy. Obviously this explains some of the different scenes and editing choices. I suppose coming from a northern Irish point of view (and as someone who has grown up in peace-time) I couldn't help but looking at those themes from that perspective and comparing to some degree. But I wouldn't say it's a criticism of the film that these tensions are not resolved because ultimately I am not sure they can be. Certainly I know a lot less about about the Basque Conflict and ETA than I do about our own countries and although of course ETAs actions within the context of a Francoist dictatorship are naturally much more praiseworthy than those in the decades following it's a very messy thing, where to draw the line where armed struggled/terrorism is no longer needed/acceptable once it has been implicitly or explicitly accepted.

 

[Rimbaud82]

@BeardotheWeirdo If I remember right it was you who alerted me to Ogro years ago, had been looking a copy ever since. I think it was you who also chose The Moro Affair for the movie club. Any other good "terrorist/freedom fighter films" along the same lines as Ogro you would recommend?

 

[Rimbaud82]

Watched two films today.

Hidden Agenda (1990)

A solid political thriller from Ken Loach about British state terrorism during The Troubles...the story itself is fictional, but heavily inspired by real events, or real policies/activities would be a better way to put it. It is the story of an American human rights lawyer investigating allegations of prisoner mistreatment/torture in NI who is killed by undercover security agents (along with an IRA sympathiser he was meeting) when he stumbles upon top-secret information which implicates leading members of the security forces in a plot to bring down the Labour government and arrange Thatcher's/the Conservatives rise to power. The film itself is then the story of the inquest into these murders by an English detective and the girlfriend of the lawyer that was killed. Naturally they uncover some alarming facts about the British State's actions at this time (and previously) and are met with significant resistance at the higher levels of British government....

Decent political thriller all around, which rightly exposes British actions during The Troubles. While watching I was thinking that it seemed to do a pretty good job of capturing what a "dirty war" it was - the murkiness of different intelligent agencies and the illegal activities frequently carried out by them. As you would expect from Loach it carries a strong politically indignant tone. However, I was thinking that while it was decent, the stuff about Thatcher seemed to be too far-fetched despite the fact that the British security forces were up to all kinds of shady activities. However, as I only found out after looking into it now....this is actually based on the real testimony of Colin Wallace (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colin_Wallace). Extremely alarming....but not surprising. The lawyers at the beginning frequently mention and make comparisons to their previous work in Chile, and the film makes the case that the actions of the British state in NI are not as far removed as those of somewhere like Chile as the average population would believe.

Brian Cox is excellent as the lead detective, while Frances McDormand is less convincing as the human rights lawyer/ex-GF. But all in all a quality political thriller. I did like especially how it used a lot of Irish actors, and was clearly filmed here too.

The Devils (1971)

Finally got round to this infamous classic by Ken Russell. Partly based on a book by Aldous Huxley, along with a play from 1960 adapted from the same source, it recounts the historical incident of the "Loudun possessions" in which the local priest Urbain Grandier (played impressively by Oliver Reed) , who had some rather unorthodox views on clerical celibacy, is convicted of having used witchcraft to seduce the local convent of Ursuline nuns (Sister Jeanne of the Angels, played by Vanessa Redgrave as a sexually repressed Mother Superior). Grandier is tortured and then burned at the stake. The film is mostly known now for the controversy surrounding it. I did manage to find an Uncut version with some additional footage included. There is indeed a lot of blasphemy in the film, including a serious amount of nudity and lewd acts committed with religious iconography

However, unlike shite films like Visions of Ecstasy (1989) I did not feel that the film was "shocking" solely to be controversial. There are perhaps some elements of that, it is obviously deliberately transgressive, but those scenes form a part of a larger film. And overall I found the film to be an extremely interesting look at sexual repression and most especially the political context of the Loudun Witch trials, which are placed within the wider social and political situation of the time. It looks at the misuse of Church authority, as well as the paranoia provided by the Huguenot persecutions and the increasing centralisation of the French state compared with the autonomy previously enjoyed by city states like Loudun. All in all a really interesting film, with an incredible performance from Reed.

 

[Deleted member 110072]

These days you don't need Mi5 doing that kind of thing, it seems to have become a pretty open culture across the entire UK media.

I do generally like Loach's focus less on exact details(which personally I preffer to read about rather than have fictionalised) and more on the lives of people at the sharp end. Along those lines I always felt the best film on the troubles was Cal, pointing the finger at everyone whilst focusing on people just watching normal lives.

 

[Rimbaud82]

Like many folks I have recently watched

The Irishman (2019)

I have to say, it was mostly excellent. Obviously some there will inevitably be comparisons to the likes of Goodfellas etc. and this film is which is just a step below that, but considering it's a late period piece for all concerned it comes remarkably close to that standard. It is a sprawling, epic film. What does separate it from earlier films like Goodfellas the way the story is told. On one level the basic plot is the rise of Frank Sheeran through the Mafia, the kind of story we have seen many times in films, and then his involvement with Jimmy Hoffa...but the way the story moves fluidly through time and different periods of his life was an interesting approach.

Of course, the elephant in the room...what enabled this was the much-advertised de-aging processed. Have to say I thought the results were mixed. It was a positive in a sense in that allowed Scorsese to actually fulfill his vision and have the film flit through time as it does. At certain points it did look spectacular, particular still shots. However, other points it just looked really strange. There was an "uncanny" effect where you just know it doesn't look like a real human, the noses looked weird, little facial movements just seemed off. It was close to what those actors looked like, but not quite... for me there it added a slight "gimmicky" element to what is a real masterpiece in terms of the story itself. It looks a bit fake and I worry it will age the film in years to come. There is also the fact that you can de-age De Niro's face, but ultimately it's still a 76 year old man acting. Certain scenes just look ridiculous watching him shuffle about trying to act a young man, when everything about his body, his gait and everything tells you he is pensioner. The scene where he beats up the fella in the shop nearly had me laughing out loud.

However, despite some slight misgivings about the de-aging thing it was still a brilliant film. The final 30 minutes or so were extremely powerful, having moved at a pretty fast pace swapping between different decades the sudden shift to the last years of Sheeran's life was particularly impactful.

The religious aspect is much more pronounced than in any of Scorsese's other mob films. Of course, this has always been a feature, for instance the tension between Catholic guilt and his mob characters is clearly evident even as early as Mean Streets. However the final act of The Irishman is focused with mortality and the big questions of religion in a much more explicit way than before (of course it also comes after his last film, Silence which was also a religious film. I found that it was this element which really pushed the film beyond something like second-rate Goodfellas. All in all, well worth a watch. Especially considering it's on Netflix.

 

[Deleted member 110072]

On a technical level I felt the main problem with the de aging was some of the physical scenes that De Niro still obviously looked like an old man moving, they should probably have used a body double there or at least more cuts.

The big problem with it for me is that I never really connected with De Niro's character. With Henry Hill for example I think you get a much better feel for what he wants out of life and a lot of what we see in the early stages of the film relates to that. The first hour here just seems to rumble along to me, not unpleasant but also not of much consequence IMHO compared to Goodfellas were the detail of the setting and the soundtrack tells you a lot about the lead character.

When Hoffa enters the story it is a definite improvement, I mean we don't get masses of detail on the character but I think Pacino's performance is more energizing and gives the film a sense of direction. The idea of his doomed obsession with power and Frank's closeness to him does make that part of the film really come alive for me and scenes like the award presentation and the assassination itself are definitely up with Goodfellas.

The last hour didn't really hit me as much I have to say, again I spose because I never really bought into Frank's character in terms his relation to his family. Pesci on the other hand I'd agree was effective, he maybe didn't have masses to work with for much of the film but there was a lot of dignity there which definitely make his final scenes in prison effective.

Talking about Goodfellas as well I watched the other main thing I signed up(well took a free month of) Netflix for in Marriage Story with a very Tom Berginer looking Ray Liotta in it, not seen any Noah Baumbach since Margot at the Wedding and I admit theres a limit to how much of this kind of self obsessed bohemian New Yorker stuff I can watch even if I really enjoy some of it(Annie Hall, Hannah and Her Sisters, Metropolitan, etc). Considering this is getting Oscar buzz for the leads I thought that was a good time to alter that.

Generally I would say a positive view and I can definitely see why the buzz is there, I'd probably make Johansson favourite for best actress and Driver seems like the main challenge to Phoenix taking best actor. It does feel a bit like the film is pulling in two rather different directions, half of it is more comedic send ups of divorce/custody battles with Liotta and Laura Dern(who I'd guess had desided to soak up the Last Jedi hate and play someone truly unpleasant) sparing quite effectivenly although probably not something I'd guess the average non Baumbach fan who hasn't gone though similar expereinces will go out of there way to see. The other half being more a drama about a failing relationship akin to say Blue Valentine which is probably what a wider audience would be more interested in?

Again I do think both the leads are very indeed good here, Johansson playing a teary empathy magnet well isn't that surprising I spose as she's always been effective there but she does also show some bitchiness which isn't as common, actually starting to remind me of mid 90's Juliette Binoche a lot in looks and style. Driver giving probably the best of the kind of put upon hound dog performance he's so good at that I do think it makes the characters arty preciousness easier to look past and indeed it is actually referenced somewhat. Very good chemistry together as well which does cover the jumping around in plot quite effectively and doesn't make the escalating arguments feel forced(although maybe some of the dialog is deliberately). When it comes down to it though you could I spose say theres a bit of a lack of substance here? films like Blue Valentine/Waremst Colour the breakdowns did seem to have some fundamental issues that ran though them, here it seems like those are touched on a bit but not played up as well which combined with the film being rather spilt in character for me would mean it doesn't reach that level.

 

[Tycho- Taylor's Version]

Jojo Rabbit was a 10/10 for me. That film took some huge risks and walked the tightrope to perfection, I can't wait to watch it again.

Should be able to catch Marriage Story and Knives Out in the coming weeks.

 

[Deleted member 110072]

Just got back from watching Knives Out and yeah its a fun little who done it, maybe somewhat over dependant on explanation at the end but then again I spose not too different from the Agatha Christine stuff its following.

Jojo Rabbit seems to have a later release here in the UK.

 

[Rimbaud82]

A few days ago I went to see

The Nightingale (2019)

The latest film from Jennifer Kent, the director of the Babadook (which I have not seen yet). It's a period revenge drama set in Van Diemen's Land, later to be named Tasmania, in 1825.

The plot concerns a young Irishwoman called Clare, now living in penal servitude. In addition to the regular duties/hard labour imposed by her criminal sentence, Clare also works as a servant for the local British officer Lt. Hawkins and sings as a form of entertainment for the soldiers. She is subject to both the hardship of penal labour, and the indignity of being leered at and harassed by the British soldiers. However, despite the tough existence Clare at least has some solace in her husband Aidan and baby daughter. However, things very quickly become even more bleak. Clare is raped by Hawkins and then, in a separate incident gang-raped by his men. Her husband, who tried to pick a fight with Hawkins is shot dead and their infant child is brutally killed. After her story is met with disbelief by the local authorities, Clare ventures into the wilderness, along with an Aboriginal guide called Billy, in order to seek her revenge against Hawkins who is travelling to Hobart to seek a promotion....

The first thing is that this film is up there with Come and See (1985) as one of the most brutal and relentlessly violent films I have ever seen. In the opening 30 minutes or so there are three extremely graphic rape scenes, a murder and a brutal infanticide. It is extremely tough to watch, and there were some seriously horrified people in the audience. However, this obviously serves to set the tone for the rest of the film and it is extremely effective. I won't go into spoiler territory but as the story continues there are also graphic scenes of horrific violence against the Aboriginals (including a further rape scene). There is a rhythm to the horror and it does not let up.

However, the violence is not gratuitous despite awful it is. As a historian by training I was curious about this, so I did some brief reading into the subject. As it happens, Van Diemen's Land was "a particularly terrifying colonial outpost" in which "a culture of terror shaped early colonists' lives, pysches and behaviour". Punishment against convicts was harsh and desensitized the local white populace to violence, whilst there were horrific acts of brutality committed upon the native population (Benjamin Madley, 'From Terror to Genocide: Britain's Tasmanian Penal Colony and Australia's History Wars', Journal of British Studies, Vol. 47, No. 1 (Jan., 2008), pp 77-106).

It is not a simplistic film though. While Clare is clearly the wronged protagonist, she also displays several negative characteristics. Although she is Irish, she is just as racist towards Billy (her aboriginal guide) as the British imperialist. She initially treats him as a lesser sub-human and repeatedly calls him "boy" while she barks commands at him. In a sense, although she is a convict from another colonised people and thus marginalised within the Imperial state she is also, in a sense, complicit in that imperialism. Although, the film doesn't delve too deeply into that implication it was still intersting. Over the course of the film, Clare does change her attitude towards Billy (whose real name is Mangana) as the two bond over their traumatic experiences and memories, as well as their commonalities as two colonised peoples and shared hatred of the British. Billy/Mangana speaks in Palawa kani at several points throughout the film, which is a reconstructed Aboriginal Tasmanian language, while Clare speaks in Irish. There is a particular god scene with Billy sings a native song, and Clare responds by singing an Irish one in order to illustrate that she is not British.

I will say that towards the final third of the film it perhaps suffered from some pacing issues...but on the whole it was an excellent revenge thriller set within the context of 19th century British Imperialism.

 

[Oogie Sharp]

B&W Godzillas looked gorgeous already on DVD and deserve a Criterion mastering. Really good excuse to rewatch Godzilla vs. King Kong too.

Btw, The X from Outer Space on Eclipse’s Shockiku box is awesome!

All those old Godzilla movies are classic.