The Movie Reel

[tented]

IMO, Almodóvar IS the greatest living director. And I know that Scorcese is not dead. I'd be interested who you or others might nominate.

Hmmm … Scorsese and Coppola are both still alive, and both great directors, although I do think of Coppola as having retired. Alive but (essentially) inactive.

Thinking of all of the great films Almodobar has done, I would also rank him No. 1.

 

[Moxie]

Hmmm … Scorsese and Coppola are both still alive, and both great directors, although I do think of Coppola as having retired. Alive but (essentially) inactive.

Thinking of all of the great films Almodobar has done, I would also rank him No. 1.

I think Scorcese and Coppola are done. I haven't seen "Flower of the Killer Moon," but it's been a long time since I think Marty has made a great film. Francis even longer.

 

[tented]

I think Scorcese and Coppola are done. I haven't seen "Flower of the Killer Moon," but it's been a long time since I think Marty has made a great film. Francis even longer.

Yes, they’re done. IMO, they both could have been killed crossing the street decades ago, and I wouldn’t miss anything.

 

[Moxie]

Yes, they’re done. IMO, they both could have been killed crossing the street decades ago, and I wouldn’t miss anything.

I'm pretty sure that Francis is retired. W/re: to @Federberg's post above, I think "The Godfather" is an absolutely perfect film.

Scorcese's last great film was "Goodfellas," though I did think "Gangs of NY" was extravagantly strange, in a good way. And his only film that ever surprised me, after the first break out ones, was "The Age of Innocence." (Also an excellent film.) I haven't seen the new one, so I'll reserve judgement until I've seen it.

As we were saying with Wes Anderson, I think Scorcese kept himself in a fairly narrow lane, and couldn't get out of it. Which is not to say that Scorcese hasn't created some of the greatest American films. He may have been the greatest, in his prime. Anderson still has to get out of merely "indie-quirky-stylish." Or not...that may be all he's got. Scorcese and Coppola definitely have created more than a few masterpieces.

 

[shawnbm]

Killers of the Flower Moon is way outside Marty's lane, in terms of setting and the dialogue. It is long but spellbinding nonetheless. There is a reason for the hype. Saw it on the big screen.

 

[Vince Evert]

I'm the direct opposite to all of you as i delve more and more into the past cinema's.
I been watching Baby Face, a Pre-code Hollywood era production made in 1933. This starred a very young looking almost-unrecognizable, Barbara Stanwyck who must rate as one of the best ever all-time screen legends! Also in the cast is an equally young looking John Wayne but only for maybe 3 minutes as he was not yet famous (that would come six years later with "Stagecoach"). Barbara plays the part of a sophisticated, schemer, Lily Powers who basically uses and/or sleeps with a numbr of men and breaks their hearts. However this film looks tame than what the storyline depicts, certainly less controversial than it would have been 91 years ago. John plays one of the men who is besotted with Baby Face and desperately asks her for a date.

Anyone here seen Baby Face (1933) ?

 

[Moxie]

I just saw "American Fiction" which is very good, and well-worth a watch. At times gentle-, and at times brutal-farce. I hate to be this person, because I'm trying to save our movie theaters, but you don't have to see it on the big screen. It's story-driven and character-driven. You're fine if you only see it when it streams. But do give it a try!

 

[Kieran]

Okay, I need to break my self imposed exile to vent. I’ll try not to be angry, I’ll inhale after I type every letter. I’ll exhale loudly before I type the next letter. I’ll pause in between each letter for about 8 seconds.

Barbie is expletive deleted. It’s so bad, I ought to be amazed it got past its conceiving thought, and became a script, but this is Hollywood. Bad things get made. The script was so bad, that ought to have killed it. Or melted it, which is more fitting for a Barbie. The script is something an illiterate juvenile might discard. It’s clunky, humourless, brazenly dishonest, idiotic, artless and just plain uninteresting. It’s predictable at every turn. It’s a 90 second SNL sketch dragged out to eternity. And infernity.

But, did I say dishonest? Yep. The American left - which is the only hideous monster that could have conceived this stupid movie - gets everything wrong about race and gender these days because they think it’s still the 1950’s. Yawn slogans about the gee whizz Patriarchy are not a script. Dishonest, because they act as if women are still housewives, as if a giggling dumbass like Kamala Harris can’t rise to becoming the second most powerful person in the world simply because she’s a WPOC. Women are literally being handed the top jobs in places like Harvard, without the talent, qualifications or moral fortitude to do the job - just because they’re women. And making a feck up of the opportunity, too.

Dishonest too because there are great successful kickass woman who are rushing to the top in business and politics through their hard work and talent. These are the examples for young girls, not this feeble dishonest, obnoxious, anaemic movie.

Dishonest because they go into the Mattel boardroom and dishonestly represent its diverse make up. NASDAQ is penalising companies that don’t hit their woefully unfair and dishonest DIE quota, but in Barbieland it’s still 1950 and men rule and ruin everything.

What a horrible, ugly movie. What dire mess on the eyes. What a smug, self-congratulatory piece of pandering Hollywood bullshit. How many times did I curse “fucking Americans” while watching this saccharine bag of steaming poo - because it’s only Americans can make this sentimental nonsense and think it’s relevant?

Why did anyone complain about this film not getting Oscar nominations? For who should there be a nomination? Gosling is good in everything because unlike this film he has a real sense of humour - but an Oscar nomination? Margot Robbie? For what? Being pretty? Greta Gerwig?

She fell off a cliff! She made two great films and thought she should do this brutal vanity project? It was tired after twenty seconds! It’s cheap, sickening and strictly for the gullible.

Bah!

Poor Things is an attempt to make a great and interesting film. I recommend that instead. It treads similar thematic ground to Barbie, but not in the same fucking obvious and obnoxious way. It’s not Yorgos Lanthimos best film, but at least the bastard is trying..

 

[Moxie]

Okay, I need to break my self imposed exile to vent. I’ll try not to be angry, I’ll inhale after I type every letter. I’ll exhale loudly before I type the next letter. I’ll pause in between each letter for about 8 seconds.

Barbie is expletive deleted. It’s so bad, I ought to be amazed it got past its conceiving thought, and became a script, but this is Hollywood. Bad things get made. The script was so bad, that ought to have killed it. Or melted it, which is more fitting for a Barbie. The script is something an illiterate juvenile might discard. It’s clunky, humourless, brazenly dishonest, idiotic, artless and just plain uninteresting. It’s predictable at every turn. It’s a 90 second SNL sketch dragged out to eternity. And infernity.

But, did I say dishonest? Yep. The American left - which is the only hideous monster that could have conceived this stupid movie - gets everything wrong about race and gender these days because they think it’s still the 1950’s. Yawn slogans about the gee whizz Patriarchy are not a script. Dishonest, because they act as if women are still housewives, as if a giggling dumbass like Kamala Harris can’t rise to becoming the second most powerful person in the world simply because she’s a WPOC. Women are literally being handed the top jobs in places like Harvard, without the talent, qualifications or moral fortitude to do the job - just because they’re women. And making a feck up of the opportunity, too.

Dishonest too because there are great successful kickass woman who are rushing to the top in business and politics through their hard work and talent. These are the examples for young girls, not this feeble dishonest, obnoxious, anaemic movie.

Dishonest because they go into the Mattel boardroom and dishonestly represent its diverse make up. NASDAQ is penalising companies that don’t hit their woefully unfair and dishonest DIE quota, but in Barbieland it’s still 1950 and men rule and ruin everything.

What a horrible, ugly movie. What dire mess on the eyes. What a smug, self-congratulatory piece of pandering Hollywood bullshit. How many times did I curse “fucking Americans” while watching this saccharine bag of steaming poo - because it’s only Americans can make this sentimental nonsense and think it’s relevant?

Why did anyone complain about this film not getting Oscar nominations? For who should there be a nomination? Gosling is good in everything because unlike this film he has a real sense of humour - but an Oscar nomination? Margot Robbie? For what? Being pretty? Greta Gerwig?

She fell off a cliff! She made two great films and thought she should do this brutal vanity project? It was tired after twenty seconds! It’s cheap, sickening and strictly for the gullible.

Bah!

Poor Things is an attempt to make a great and interesting film. I recommend that instead. It treads similar thematic ground to Barbie, but not in the same fucking obvious and obnoxious way. It’s not Yorgos Lanthimos best film, but at least the bastard is trying..

I will try to be as judicious as you in considering my response, but I do think you let your politics get in the way of your enjoyment, in this case. You definitely see red when you see diversity and/or feminism, assuming it's the Left taking over, rather than taking it all in as various choices made, and the voice that the filmmaker chose. I'm also surprised you couldn't see humor in it. There was a lot of irony. Maybe some of the jokes too American?

But no matter...different films appeal to different people. Some even inspire anger, as this one seemed to in you. To me, if a work of art causes that much outrage, it's doing something right.

As to the Oscars, it did get nominated for Best Picture. I have no problem that Margo Robbie wasn't nominated for Best Actress, as the field was very crowded with great performances. Less so the Best Actor category, therefore Ryan Gosling slipped in. (Plus, he gave the most rousing performance of a song in living Oscar memory this year! Loved it.) And the old trope of "how can you be nominated for Best Picture, and not Best Director?" doesn't hold up anymore, since they opened Best Picture to 10 films, but the Best Director category only has 10 slots. But I will say this: When a male director makes Hollywood a box-office breaking film, they tend to get nominated. Venal, but true.

I've already stated my thoughts on "Barbie," so I won't reiterate them. But I think Greta Gerwig made a smart, funny film.

I haven't seen "Poor Things" yet, but I am a fan of that director's work. Another one I haven't seen is "Killers of the Flower Moon." I have to say, Scorcese has been boring me for a while, and the length put me off.

Did you like "Oppenheimer" for Best Picture?

 

[Kieran]

I will try to be as judicious as you in considering my response, but I do think you let your politics get in the way of your enjoyment, in this case. You definitely see red when you see diversity and/or feminism, assuming it's the Left taking over, rather than taking it all in as various choices made, and the voice that the filmmaker chose. I'm also surprised you couldn't see humor in it. There was a lot of irony. Maybe some of the jokes too American?

Nope. I’m not letting any of my politics get in the way, but that was the films problem. Lousy, dishonest, low level slogan politics. The jokes were terrible. It was childish. I see they aimed for some style not it was one dimensional, and the script seemed like it was a first draft that nobody seemed intelligent or brave enough to say, “okay let’s tighten this thing up.”

But no matter...different films appeal to different people. Some even inspire anger, as this one seemed to in you. To me, if a work of art causes that much outrage, it's doing something right.

That’s a cliche. If a “work of art” [this is not a work of art] causes outrage, it might simply be wastefully bad, when people were expecting better.

As to the Oscars, it did get nominated for Best Picture. I have no problem that Margo Robbie wasn't nominated for Best Actress, as the field was very crowded with great performances. Less so the Best Actor category, therefore Ryan Gosling slipped in. (Plus, he gave the most rousing performance of a song in living Oscar memory this year! Loved it.) And the old trope of "how can you be nominated for Best Picture, and not Best Director?" doesn't hold up anymore, since they opened Best Picture to 10 films, but the Best Director category only has 10 slots. But I will say this: When a male director makes Hollywood a box-office breaking film, they tend to get nominated. Venal, but true.

It was a huge hubristic mistake by Greta. I was so disappointed at how tin-eared and cliched this film was. It was politics as believed by stupid activists. Really irritating, I’m afraid. It will not age well..

I haven't seen "Poor Things" yet, but I am a fan of that director's work. Another one I haven't seen is "Killers of the Flower Moon." I have to say, Scorcese has been boring me for a while, and the length put me off.

Did you like "Oppenheimer" for Best Picture?

I haven’t seen Oppenheimer yet. I’m a bit off Nolan since trying to scrape some sense out of Tenet, but I’ll get to that. It sounds like it’s less pretentious than his previous effort. Scorsese has built up an impressive body of varied work. He’s constantly intense and pushing himself, which is Dylanesque in his staying true to the muse. But he’s not to everybody’s taste. Poor Things is really interesting. Maybe not as great as it tried to be but maybe it is. I think Emma Stone ought not to have gotten the Oscar. She’s excellent as far as she can be, but it’s not a deep performance. It’s a Hollywoody performance of cute quirky tics and mannerisms. I much preferred Lily Gladstone’s subtle performance in the Scorsese flick. She says so much more with less. I agree with you though that the length of that film is just too much. He could have cut a good 40 minutes from it, but he’s tending towards bloat in his old age..

 

[MargaretMcAleer]

Nope. I’m not letting any of my politics get in the way, but that was the films problem. Lousy, dishonest, low level slogan politics. The jokes were terrible. It was childish. I see they aimed for some style not it was one dimensional, and the script seemed like it was a first draft that nobody seemed intelligent or brave enough to say, “okay let’s tighten this thing up.”

That’s a cliche. If a “work of art” [this is not a work of art] causes outrage, it might simply be wastefully bad, when people were expecting better.

It was a huge hubristic mistake by Greta. I was so disappointed at how tin-eared and cliched this film was. It was politics as believed by stupid activists. Really irritating, I’m afraid. It will not age well..

I haven’t seen Oppenheimer yet. I’m a bit off Nolan since trying to scrape some sense out of Tenet, but I’ll get to that. It sounds like it’s less pretentious than his previous effort. Scorsese has built up an impressive body of varied work. He’s constantly intense and pushing himself, which is Dylanesque in his staying true to the muse. But he’s not to everybody’s taste. Poor Things is really interesting. Maybe not as great as it tried to be but maybe it is. I think Emma Stone ought not to have gotten the Oscar. She’s excellent as far as she can be, but it’s not a deep performance. It’s a Hollywoody performance of cute quirky tics and mannerisms. I much preferred Lily Gladstone’s subtle performance in the Scorsese flick. She says so much more with less. I agree with you though that the length of that film is just too much. He could have cut a good 40 minutes from it, but he’s tending towards bloat in his old age..

Good to see you again I watched the Oscars, this year and go and see Oppenheimer, it has a great cast, I am a big fan of Nolan, though I didnt like Tenet.
I was shocked that Lily Gladstone didnt get best Actress, she was outstanding, her facial features and eyes said it all, even though it was a longer film, I enjoyed it. I am not a fan of Emma Stone, so I wont be rushing to see Poor Things. I must admit Ryan Gosling, singing. Just Ken at the Oscars was the highlight of the Oscar night presentations, he was outstanding.

 

[Moxie]

Nope. I’m not letting any of my politics get in the way, but that was the films problem. Lousy, dishonest, low level slogan politics. The jokes were terrible. It was childish. I see they aimed for some style not it was one dimensional, and the script seemed like it was a first draft that nobody seemed intelligent or brave enough to say, “okay let’s tighten this thing up.”

That’s a cliche. If a “work of art” [this is not a work of art] causes outrage, it might simply be wastefully bad, when people were expecting better.

It was a huge hubristic mistake by Greta. I was so disappointed at how tin-eared and cliched this film was. It was politics as believed by stupid activists. Really irritating, I’m afraid. It will not age well..

I haven’t seen Oppenheimer yet. I’m a bit off Nolan since trying to scrape some sense out of Tenet, but I’ll get to that. It sounds like it’s less pretentious than his previous effort. Scorsese has built up an impressive body of varied work. He’s constantly intense and pushing himself, which is Dylanesque in his staying true to the muse. But he’s not to everybody’s taste. Poor Things is really interesting. Maybe not as great as it tried to be but maybe it is. I think Emma Stone ought not to have gotten the Oscar. She’s excellent as far as she can be, but it’s not a deep performance. It’s a Hollywoody performance of cute quirky tics and mannerisms. I much preferred Lily Gladstone’s subtle performance in the Scorsese flick. She says so much more with less. I agree with you though that the length of that film is just too much. He could have cut a good 40 minutes from it, but he’s tending towards bloat in his old age..

I think you're wrong to say that you're not letting your politics get into it. It's a film, and a comedy, at that. To call it "dishonest" is where I think you show your hand. The filmmaker had a point of view, and a strong one, if you ask me. She took a cultural icon, one that had been languishing, and revived the idea of her, and lampooned her, and also made her heroic. Now, that may not have appealed to you, but what about it is "dishonest?" As to the inclusiveness, you may not be steeped in Barbie culture, but Mattel made actual Barbies in all colors, races, businesses, and aspirational ways for girls. Gerwig didn't invent that. She embraced it, but also satirized it.

As to "childish," well, it's a kids toy. If the humor didn't work for you, that's personal taste.

 

[Moxie]

Good to see you again I watched the Oscars, this year and go and see Oppenheimer, it has a great cast, I am a big fan of Nolan, though I didnt like Tenet.
I was shocked that Lily Gladstone didnt get best Actress, she was outstanding, her facial features and eyes said it all, even though it was a longer film, I enjoyed it. I am not a fan of Emma Stone, so I wont be rushing to see Poor Things. I must admit Ryan Gosling, singing. Just Ken at the Oscars was the highlight of the Oscar night presentations, he was outstanding.

As I've said before, I'm NOT a huge fan of Nolan, but I thought Oppenheimer was excellent. I will also say this about it: a) it should be seen on a big screen, b) it's a film that most people won't see twice, c) it's very "OSCAR WORTHY" in the classic sense: historical, serious, and long, and d) it made a lot of money. That's why it won Best Picture, particularly D. I will say that I'm glad the DP won best Cinematographer, and made a plea for still shooting on actual film. He deserved it.

 

[MargaretMcAleer]

As I've said before, I'm NOT a huge fan of Nolan, but I thought Oppenheimer was excellent. I will also say this about it: a) it should be seen on a big screen, b) it's a film that most people won't see twice, c) it's very "OSCAR WORTHY" in the classic sense: historical, serious, and long, and d) it made a lot of money. That's why it won Best Picture, particularly D. I will say that I'm glad the DP won best Cinematographer, and made a plea for still shooting on actual film. He deserved it.

I think this was one of the best films Nolan has done in sometime, I have seen it twice on the big screen at the movies, exceptional cast, sound effects, music etc great, I enjoyed it, the first and 2nd time around, I also thought Robert Downy Jrn, deserved best supporting actor in the film., apart from the outstanding performance from Cillian Murphy, who won every major award for Best Actor

 

[Kieran]

I think you're wrong to say that you're not letting your politics get into it. It's a film, and a comedy, at that. To call it "dishonest" is where I think you show your hand. The filmmaker had a point of view, and a strong one, if you ask me.

Now, I won’t be hanging around after this so I won’t get contentious. The film is explicitly political, I’ve only pointed out where it’s being dishonest. We don’t live in the 1950’s anymore. According to the film, Mad Men is a documentary showing is what life is like today. This is also why I didn’t like that A Handmaids Tale. I thought it was about women in Saudi Arabia until I was told it wasn’t.

She took a cultural icon, one that had been languishing, and revived the idea of her, and lampooned her, and also made her heroic. Now, that may not have appealed to you, but what about it is "dishonest?" As to the inclusiveness, you may not be steeped in Barbie culture, but Mattel made actual Barbies in all colors, races, businesses, and aspirational ways for girls. Gerwig didn't invent that. She embraced it, but also satirized it.

I know this. Greta made a huge mistake. The story could have been told during an ad break on Nickelodeon.

IMHO.

Good to see you again

Good to see you all, too!

I watched the Oscars, this year and go and see Oppenheimer, it has a great cast, I am a big fan of Nolan, though I didnt like Tenet.
I was shocked that Lily Gladstone didnt get best Actress, she was outstanding, her facial features and eyes said it all, even though it was a longer film, I enjoyed it. I am not a fan of Emma Stone, so I wont be rushing to see Poor Things. I must admit Ryan Gosling, singing. Just Ken at the Oscars was the highlight of the Oscar night presentations, he was outstanding.

I thought Emma Stone did well in the role, but it was a bit like giving Helena Bonham Carter an Oscar for any one of her hammy shows. Emma was better than that though, her attempt at being strange was better, and though I don’t think it was best actress material, I don’t fully begrudge her because the Oscar had often gone to people for strange reasons that don’t seem to be relevant to the craft. She didn’t exactly detract from the film although you never lose the feeling that it’s Emma Stone doing a turn, rather than seeing the Frankensteinish creation she was playing.

I often got that feeling from many actors and actresses, where their acting style is self-conscious and self-aggrandising to the extent that they totally intrude on the story they’re telling. She wasn’t quite that OTT but you get my drift. Lily Gladstone captured so much tragedy and so many qualities of an oppressed woman who had great strength and dignity, and all with a blank face, essentially.

Her relationship with Leo’s character was so well played by both of them, there was huge ambiguity between the lines.

I was delighted for Cillian Murphy, not only because he’s Irish but because he’s always been such a great actor. I haven’t seen Oppenheimer yet, and didn’t see any of the other films, but there was a strong line up there for the Oscar..

 

[Moxie]

Now, I won’t be hanging around after this so I won’t get contentious. The film is explicitly political, I’ve only pointed out where it’s being dishonest. We don’t live in the 1950’s anymore. According to the film, Mad Men is a documentary showing is what life is like today. This is also why I didn’t like that A Handmaids Tale. I thought it was about women in Saudi Arabia until I was told it wasn’t.

I know you're going dark again, so I won't argue with you too much on it, but I don't see how having a POV makes a film dishonest. Now, I recognize that you think women in this country long ceased having issues with equality, but clearly the women don't, so I'm not sure you get to "mansplain" to us that it's all over. But you're sure allowed your "humble" opinion. I do think it's interesting that you didn't just dislike the film...it made you really mad.

As to "The Handmaid's Tale," that's rather a weird comparison...being a dystopian futuristic novel/series. Sure, it had a political undergirding, as did, say, Cormac McCarthy's "The Road," and the film based on it. Very different genre.

I know this. Greta made a huge mistake.

A huge mistake? $1.446 billion dollars worth. Clearly, the film resonated with someone.

Good to see you all, too!

Happy St. Patrick's Day, my friend.

 

[MargaretMcAleer]

I know you're going dark again, so I won't argue with you too much on it, but I don't see how having a POV makes a film dishonest. Now, I recognize that you think women in this country long ceased having issues with equality, but clearly the women don't, so I'm not sure you get to "mansplain" to us that it's all over. But you're sure allowed your "humble" opinion. I do think it's interesting that you didn't just dislike the film...it made you really mad.

A huge mistake? $1.446 billion dollars worth. Clearly, the film resonated with someone.

Happy St. Patrick's Day, my friend.

I second that Happy St Patricks Day, ( btw my favorite Irish actor is Liam Neeson for his overall body of work in his career, though Cillian Murphy is an outstanding actor)

 

[Kieran]

I know you're going dark again, so I won't argue with you too much on it, but I don't see how having a POV makes a film dishonest. Now, I recognize that you think women in this country long ceased having issues with equality, but clearly the women don't, so I'm not sure you get to "mansplain" to us that it's all over. But you're sure allowed your "humble" opinion. I do think it's interesting that you didn't just dislike the film...it made you really mad.

Okay, I’ll answer this, to be fair. But then I’m gone. Having a POV doesn’t exclude the fact that the POV can be dishonest.

That’s just simple. And I’ve explained why it’s dishonest. It’s not that I think there aren’t issues with inequality, it’s that I noticed that no matter how much an effort is made to include and promote minorities and to make up for historic injustice in that regard, the left act as if we’re stuck in the the 1950’s. Especially when it comes to race and gender. There’s barely any acknowledgement that things have massively improved.

If you think they haven’t, go live elsewhere as a racial minority, a woman, a gay person, a trans. Let me know where you end up.

And things are constantly still improving. This film was typical of cheap, dishonest and inaccurate left wing views of gender. And it irritated the hell out of me because Greta made two very good films and I thought she was better than that. That horrible scene at the end with the barmaid from Cheers not only dragged sleepily on and on, it was disgustingly sentimental and vacuous.

As to "The Handmaid's Tale," that's rather a weird comparison...

The comparison being made because I saw pampered princesses state that this was based on life in the west.

A huge mistake? $1.446 billion dollars worth. Clearly, the film resonated with someone.

It did. I’m gonna be polite about this and not mention that there are even worse films that have made even more money. I also acknowledge as I did before (if not here it was elsewhere) that there’s no accounting for taste. Sometimes the worst music/films TV shows appeal to the lowest common denominator.

Happy St. Patrick's Day, my friend.

And a happy Paddy’s day to you too! If the bars are full - make them fuller and hoist a glass!

 

[Front242]

Wtf ?

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt15431910/

 

[Federberg]

Wtf ?

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt15431910/

The fuck??? Is this real?? Never heard of Harvey Rabbit, and not much comes up apart from info from IMDB...