|
Films
May 24, 2008 15:13:09 GMT -5
Post by laurasweetou on May 24, 2008 15:13:09 GMT -5
"Who's life is it anyway"
edited to note; this is a deva flick"
|
|
|
Films
May 24, 2008 20:12:43 GMT -5
Post by Ciao Bella on May 24, 2008 20:12:43 GMT -5
The Notebook and Only You
|
|
|
Films
May 25, 2008 4:54:44 GMT -5
Post by irishclaire on May 25, 2008 4:54:44 GMT -5
Watched The Notebook last night, it's so sad!!
|
|
|
Films
May 25, 2008 11:10:53 GMT -5
Post by irishclaire on May 25, 2008 11:10:53 GMT -5
Ok, I'm gonna make use of this thread! Films mean different things to different people. To some, they're purely for entertainment, a form of excapism. Some use films to learn (for example documentaries). Some use them to form an identity, such as those who see commercial films as being 'the devil' (I know a few films students like this!) However, for me, I think ALL the films I appreciate are special for different reasons. Allow me to explain...
Let's go wayyyyy back, to the Studio Era. During this time we had classics such as Casablanca and Gone With The Wind. Both very beautiful films. They're also revolutionary in terms of style. Gone With The Wind, for example, shows Scarlett O'Hara in a very different light to how other women had been portrayed before. Rhett Butler is still one of THE iconic male figures in film. And at the film lasting over 3hrs, it was certain revolutionary in that it was so damn long! Both Casablanca and Gone With The Wind have given us many iconic phrases which we have adopted into our everyday language: "Frankly my dear, I don't give a damn" and "Of all the gin joints in all the cities she had to walk into mine" being 2 of my personal favourites. Then there was A Streetcar Named Desire...IMO one of Marlon Brando's finest roles. That film saw the birth of arguably THE most influential actors of all times.
In the late 60s, it was all change for Hollywood and the films it produced. The Studio system broke down, leaving Hollywood open to new actors, directors and talent. The time from the late 60s to mid/late 70s was the Hollywood Renaissance, where Hollywood was in a sense re-born. Bonnie and Clyde was the first example of a change in Hollywood. My personal favourite Renaissance films are The Graduate and Taxi Driver. I did an assignment on these 2 films recently for my Uni course and was shamefully geeky about it. Both were revolutionary in terms of film style and thematic content. They also introduced Dustin Hoffman, Robert DeNiro and Scorsese to the game. This period also gave us classics such as The Godfather (another Brando great, obviously).
Now, films tend to be either Blockbuster or 'Indie'. Both have their advantages. Recently, the best film I've seen has been an Irish Indie called 'Once'. For any of you who are even remotely interested in film and music (but not musicals) I couldn't recommend this film any higher. It's all filmed on a hand-held camera and you'd be forgiven for thinking it's a documentary. But it's just a beautiful film. The title song "Falling Slowly" won Best Original Song at the Oscars, which made me very happy!!
In general, I just love films. I appreciate how they're made and the stories behind them. Totally love Steven Spielberg. I respect his work. My biggest argument for Spielberg is how REAL he made those dinosaurs look in Jurassic Park...Given that this film was made in the early 90s, how is it that King Kong in 2006 just managed to look like a giant computer-generated monkey? I'll tell ya why...the director rushed the release to coincide with the summer blockbuster period. This resulted in a shabby, unrealistic final product.
Other favourite directors are Tarantino and Spike Lee. I've been lucky enough to study Spike Lee's work this semester and I love his realist approach to filmmaking. Also cannot rave enough about Pulp Fiction. Once I finally understood how the plot was working (yes, I'm a bit slow) I loved it.
There's not really much point to this response, I just love talking about films with people!!
|
|
|
Films
May 25, 2008 13:01:20 GMT -5
Post by Pony on May 25, 2008 13:01:20 GMT -5
I saw "Who's Life is it Anyway?" recently after i got hurt in a theater with another quad and a nurse from the rehab I was in. Richard Dryfus was GREAT, and it was an emotional movie to me as a young quad that had lost my abilities to play guitar and piano, much like the quad character in the movie that lost his sculpting skills. One scene of that movie had a GIANT impact on me for a long time was when the the female doctor went to kiss Dryfus and he refused her, saying it was further 'torture' of frustration. I told myself 'I would take that kiss!!' I knew from that scene that I didn't want to deny myself of anything pleasurable, or 'normal', that I could get in this new body. For sure I understood Dryfus' frustration, as I hated being anywhere near guitars or pianos for some years after my wreck. It would literally hurt me to be in the same room with them. However, with time I learned to accept it.
Hey Lassi, there was an indie movie, called, "Three Seasons" that I simply adore. It was shot post-Vietnam era in Vietnam...3 stories intertwine in this poverty stricken area, each beautiful, sad and triumphant!!
|
|
|
Films
May 26, 2008 4:53:40 GMT -5
Post by brendanuk on May 26, 2008 4:53:40 GMT -5
Found this on another forum about a new film:
Quid Pro Quo
A bleakly humorous romantic character study, Quid Pro Quo is appealingly offbeat until its narrative takes a wayward detour into pat simplifications.
The story, by first-time helmer Carlos Brooks, tackles subject matter tailor-made for indie eccentricity, as it concerns the weird relationship between wheelchair-bound public radio host Isaac Knot (Nick Stahl) and mysterious Fiona (Vera Farmiga), who introduces Isaac to—and then reveals herself to be a member of—a subculture of people who long to be paralyzed.
Brooks doesn't exploit these "wannabes" for cheap laughs but, instead, depicts their odd condition with bemused fascination, his modest and often tender direction positing the action less as a quirky freak show than as a mystery rooted in unusual anguish. At least during his film's first half, he generates a surprising amount of intrigue simply via the character of Fiona, whom the magnificent Farmiga embodies as an alternately endearing and frightening kook.
With glamorous Old Hollywood blond locks and a high heels-assisted statuesque figure that nicely clash with her paraplegic fantasies, Farmiga is enthralling, her unhinged expressions—and ability to ooze sexuality while revealing intimate, off-the-wall truths about herself—lending the proceedings a beguiling, erotically charged sense of unease.
When Farmiga isn't on screen, however, Quid Pro Quo goes limp, in large part because Isaac is more of a surprise-in-waiting than a real character. This unfortunate fact is obvious from the start, thanks to both Stahl's deliberately opaque performance—which, aside from a few droll remarks about being handicapped, has a frustrating hollowness—and an introductory (and occasionally revisited) flashback that too clearly hints at Fiona's motivations and the truth about the "magic" shoes that, later on, grant Isaac the ability to walk.
Whereas Brooks's protagonists develop the titular tit-for-tat rapport, that dynamic isn't upheld by his film, which reciprocates early interest in Isaac and Fiona's circumstances by wrapping things up with tame neatness.
|
|
|
Films
May 26, 2008 9:24:11 GMT -5
Post by Triassic on May 26, 2008 9:24:11 GMT -5
one thing i've noticed about movies is how much better the acting has gotten over time. it's not something most people would necessarily notice, because solid acting is 'transparent'. you don't notice it-just the character. but back 20, 25 years ago indie or low budget films were loaded with crappy, wooden acting. now it's so rare-even in cheapo movies-that it REALLY stands out immediately. so the bar has been raised...
|
|
|
Films
May 26, 2008 9:36:06 GMT -5
Post by dolly on May 26, 2008 9:36:06 GMT -5
i'm not sure what this thread was intended to be about, but i have to chime in and say that i really hated "the notebook". lol i also couldn't even finish "once" which was a disappointment because i thought i'd like it. "only you" is a quirky pick, isabelle.... lol but i agree it's a great romantic comedy! my choice for goofy romantic comedy would probably be bridget jones diary. and for romantic drama it would be "the lover". irishclaire, have you seen "the lover"? i think you'd like it. it's sexy and intense. as far as devish films go... alas, nothing new has crossed my path since the last time this was discussed.
|
|
|
Films
May 26, 2008 10:56:24 GMT -5
Post by BA on May 26, 2008 10:56:24 GMT -5
I cannot recall a good devish film in a very long time. We did some talking on the board about 'Quid Pro Quo' when it first came out and I thought they handled the fetish culture in a rather unpleasant way. The gal in the film comes off as pretty mentally disturbed from what I could see.
I await to see Sam Reilly in 'Control' - not a dev movie, but I've had it on pre-order forever.
I saw an old indie film 'Henry, Portrait of a Serial Killer' the other night.... deeply disturbing.
|
|
|
Films
May 26, 2008 21:46:27 GMT -5
Post by Ciao Bella on May 26, 2008 21:46:27 GMT -5
LOL Dolly! had not idea what this thread was about either so I just put in the top 2 I could think of. I'm a real sucker for romantic movies, comedy or drama, that's why The Notebook topped my list. Another one (which even I admit is a bit too cheesy) is PS I Love You. A couple of years ago, I started watching foreign films, and much to my pleasant surprise, the French make really good funny romantic comedies. The Valet comes to mind, as well as Apres Vous and my favorite - Amelie (which I think is such a beautiful name) ... might change my alias to Amelie
|
|
|
Films
May 27, 2008 14:22:48 GMT -5
Post by Pony on May 27, 2008 14:22:48 GMT -5
Heyyy, Laura started the thread with "Who's Life is it Anyway?" I responded to it as it was a movie about a quad in early 80s, so I THINK that was it, right Laura???
|
|
|
Films
May 27, 2008 15:56:56 GMT -5
Post by Triassic on May 27, 2008 15:56:56 GMT -5
this is freaky. it purports to show an actual ghost caught onscreen in the movie 'dumb and dumber'. au.youtube.com/watch?v=1ABc7ZBfBPE&feature=relatedif you comment on this, DON'T SAY anything that could prejudice someones viewpoint. let them see it w/an open mind.
|
|
|
Films
May 27, 2008 17:03:49 GMT -5
Post by laurasweetou on May 27, 2008 17:03:49 GMT -5
Pretty cool Tri
|
|
|
Films
May 28, 2008 15:46:11 GMT -5
Post by BA on May 28, 2008 15:46:11 GMT -5
Sorry, but I couldn't see any ghost and I looked really hard.
Edited to say: Wait, I looked again and I DID SEE something!
|
|
|
Films
May 28, 2008 21:56:50 GMT -5
Post by laurasweetou on May 28, 2008 21:56:50 GMT -5
Not to intrupt Tri's wonderful ghost siting ( I LOVE it!) but do you all remember whe Three Men and a Baby came out and there was that big deal about a bouy who offed himself in that apartment and you could see his ghost? I think this belongs in the 80's too, but I won't post it twice.
|
|