A teacher faces tough challenges with the unruly class he has inherited. A chance to see some familiar faces early in their career like Jameel Farrer aka Jamie Farr of M*A*S*H*. Sidney Poitier is very good. Vic Morrow (threatening Glenn Ford above) is good too, apparently he got the part over Steve McQueen. A risky film at the time, still packs a punch.
ALL THE LEAVES ARE BROWN (ALL THE LEAVES ARE BROWN)
AND THE SKY IS GRAY (AND THE SKY IS GRAY)
I entered the world hearing the song California Dreamin' as it was playing on the radio in the delivery room when I was born; I am obsessed with shawarma and a fantasy of mine is to fall in love with the girl who runs the counter at the shawarma shop; and for some inexplicable reason (but definitely an explainable reason) insane girls are attracted to me. Chungking Express is a film that was made in a laboratory just for me.
I loved this film. It is a great experiment in structure and I loved its use of repetitions and motifs to draw parallels between the two stories - though I probably heard the Mamas and the Papas one too many times at full volume.
This is the film that really got me into Wong. It is his most accessible film, and I absolutely love how free it feels. If people want a fun art film, this is probably my only suggestion.
This is the film that really got me into Wong. It is his most accessible film, and I absolutely love how free it feels. If people want a fun art film, this is probably my only suggestion.
Yep you're right it would be a great introduction to art/international films and into Wong's filmography. I'm also amazed that he made it in only a couple of months considering how long all his other productions took
Yep you're right it would be a great introduction to art/international films and into Wong's filmography. I'm also amazed that he made it in only a couple of months considering how long all his other productions took
At that time, Wong was so burnt out, that he only wanted to film something to get his mind off things, and to rejuvenate his creativity. That was why there was this freedom, because he really did not care at all. Leung only had about 2 weeks of free time in his schedule too, and he was surprised Wong was fine with it.
Also, now that I think about it, Tsai Ming-liang also released his most accessible work, Vive L'Amour, around the same time. If people have time, they should also check it out. Tsai is a lot more difficult to watch, because his films barely have any dialogues or movements, but I find them to be a good companion pieces to Wong, because it is really interesting how both directors can approach similar themes with such polar opposite approach, and yet still make an impact on the audience.
I didn' t know that about Vic Morrow, sad story, reminded me of Jayne Mansfield.
Read about something and went back and checked: sure enough, when the baseball was thrown at the blackboard, it bounced back and hit Glenn Ford in the throat. He was a pro, continued right on with the scene.
I didn' t know that about Vic Morrow, sad story, reminded me of Jayne Mansfield.
Read about something and went back and checked: sure enough, when the baseball was thrown at the blackboard, it bounced back and hit Glenn Ford in the throat. He was a pro, continued right on with the scene.
That video of the incident is still online. It is blurry, but it does not make it any less horrific. That image will haunt you, so I do not recommend anyone to go and find it.
Michael Myers is alive... again... and looking to celebrate with his favorite pastime: killing strangers on Halloween. It picks up later the same night as the 2018 movie and ends with seemingly more to come from that night in next year's conclusion. So, is there a point to this middle act besides stretching things out to a trilogy to make more money? It didn't feel like it to me. There's really no story, much less one that explains anything in the first movie or sets up anything to be resolved in the third. The heroes from the first movie spend most of this one in the hospital, not running from or after Michael. That, more than anything, gave me the sense that the writers were stalling. While they're chilling and delivering exposition in the hospital, the movie introduces new characters just to eventually kill them off. They have no depth and make illogical decisions, like the guy who hurries his girlfriend out of a bar because they just saw on the news that a killer was on the loose, but then goes back inside because he forgot part of his silly Halloween costume, leaving her alone in the parking lot. Then, there are the people knowingly living in Michael's childhood home who suspect that a bloodied intruder is inside and bravely go searching for him. There's also a man who incites town folk to rise up against Michael in what seems to be a commentary on mob justice that might've worked better if it were even possible that we're the monsters, not the undead evil that's killed over 40 people. The movie jumps around between such characters instead of following a few main ones through an actual plot. It's an unstructured mess and one that I didn't even find the least bit tense or scary. There are brutal attacks and kills, but no atmosphere or suspense in between them. The best parts of the movie are, unsurprisingly, the ones that evoke the original, especially the scenes that take place in 1978 and whenever Carpenter's original theme music plays. Those few moments and some nice kills couldn't save the movie from feeling like mostly filler to me, and not well written filler, either. It does feel like a 'Halloween' movie, and that may be enough for a lot of people, but I couldn't get over just how lazy and unnecessary it seemed. In fact, I imagine that you could skip it and not feel like you missed much when next year's conclusion comes out.
This is the film that really got me into Wong. It is his most accessible film, and I absolutely love how free it feels. If people want a fun art film, this is probably my only suggestion.
It was one of my first foreign films as well. Though WKW has made richer, more complex films, this one remains my favorite. Brings me such joy every time I rewatch it.
I didn' t know that about Vic Morrow, sad story, reminded me of Jayne Mansfield.
Read about something and went back and checked: sure enough, when the baseball was thrown at the blackboard, it bounced back and hit Glenn Ford in the throat. He was a pro, continued right on with the scene.
For sure, it`s in the back of my mind when I watch films like Rebel Without a Cause or East of Eden, they are just great films and James Dean is a standout. What might have been. On the other side there was Kirk Douglas who survived a helicopter crash and lived to over 100. Lots of sad stories but some good ones too.
The Nightmare Before Christmas (1993)
3.25 out of 4stars
"Jack Skellington, Halloweentown's beloved pumpkin king, who has become bored with the same annual routine of frightening people in the "real world." When Jack accidentally stumbles on Christmastown, all bright colors and warm spirits, he gets a new lease on life -- and plots to bring Christmas under his control."
Dr Seuss meets ghastly halloween musical in all the right ways. A pretty remarkable accomplishment all around. The stop motion set-pieces creates the most otherworldly imaginative visuals from start to finish. The soundtrack, composed by Elfman whom also does Jack's singing voice, is original, fun, catchy, and perfectly collaborative with the story. The deeper theme of Jack's identity crisis is something very relatable. How many people have a job or do a job that they are good to great, are familially 'born into', or because it pays more money versus one that they truly long to be doing because they are more passionate and personally interested in? Or even on a smaller level, just a change of scenery or experience from the every day repetitiveness. Altogether that rare movie that viewers of all ages should thoroughly enjoy.
Beetlejuice (1988)
3.00 out of 4stars
"The spirits of a deceased couple are harassed by an unbearable family that has moved into their home, and hire a malicious spirit to drive them out."
A pleasantly odd script flipping concept applied with a lot of creativity, zany visual touches, eerie pieces, and a lot of fun darker styled humor. Knowing the film was titled after the character, I can't believe how little screen time Keaton had in the movie (17mins or less than 20% of the entire film). That said, I have a feeling if Keaton expressed himself beyond his already "PG-13"-esque self(not quite sure how this movie received only a PG rating), the movie would have gotten more and more "adult-themed". I honestly signed up for more of Keaton's wackiness than I received, albeit the other parts of the movie were more than satisfying.
The House of Usher (1960)
2.75 out of 4stars
"Roderick Usher is a man who believes his family to be cursed by incurable madness. So sure is he of his family's doom, that when his sister announces her engagement to Philip, Roderick will stop at nothing to prevent their marriage and keep their bloodline from continuing."
A very odd, spooky, and atmospheric horror that hold's the audience's attention throughout, headlined by a great Price performance and excellent behind the camera work. I am still perplexed though on something. There are some unintentionally or intentionally funny things going on throughout this movie, and I honestly could not tell if there was intent or not behind those. Oh well. All of this was brought together by a very well done and exciting, albeit predictable, ending.
Something Wicked This Way Comes (1983)
2.65 out of 4stars
"It is about two 13-year-old best friends, Jim Nightshade and William Halloway, and their nightmarish experience with a traveling carnival that comes to their Midwestern home, Green Town, Illinois, on October 24th. In dealing with the creepy figures of this carnival, the boys learn how to combat fear."
I tried another Disney 'horror' movie that has a children target audience. Disney knows really how to throw in the heavy stuff in these movies. I won't ruin anything, but I'd say there's a handful of visually and/or conceptually disturbing things for younger elementary school aged kids in this. It does blend it's horror concepts very well with it's coming of age story alongside some nice life lessons it proposes.
Dolls (1986)
2.15 out of 4stars
"A dysfunctional family of three stop by a mansion during a storm -- father, stepmother, and child. The child discovers that the elderly owners are magical toy makers and have a haunted collection of dolls."
If you can get past the awful acting and writing, there is a little fun to be had amongst the excellently blended stop animation doll horror action.
The Last Duel (2021)
3.00 out of 4stars
"Jean de Carrouges is a respected knight known for his bravery and skill on the battlefield. Jacques Le Gris is a squire whose intelligence and eloquence makes him one of the most admired nobles in court. When Le Gris viciously assaults Carrouges' wife, she steps forward to accuse her attacker, an act of bravery and defiance that puts her life in jeopardy. The ensuing trial by combat, a grueling duel to the death, places the fate of all three in God's hands."
The same story told from 3 perspectives, "Rashomon style, a plot device that involves various characters providing subjective, alternative and contradictory versions of the same incident in one after another fashion." But they all share the same conclusion delivered at the end of the movie. It never feels boring with this method, albeit deja vu is definitely had in this 14th century "based on true events dramatization". There is a lot going on in this and I'll give you a little background. The brief interviews I've read show this to be Damon's brainchild and a "feminist-esque" period piece that's meant to show the wide class discrepancies and societal views between men and women during that time. On that, I'll say it succeeds moreso in depicting the buffoonery of men than the hardships of women, possibly in part to this movie being only 1/3 from a woman's perspective. The viewer is completely bathed in the world of men during this time. Showcased are the idiocies of viewed honor, viewed power, viewed pride, viewed interpersonal patriotism/brownnosing, machismo, chauvinism, blood related hierarchical positions, government/political corruptiveness, grudges, and household decision making/authority. The woman's side is underexplored, but the viewer does get a clear picture that they are seen as items of property with little to no rights yet are human beings none the less that have the ability to contribute to house and society in meaningful ways. I may be a little generous on the film's evidence on the women's part, but it underwhelmingly tries a bit. The 2 most interesting scenes to me were 1, of Le Gris's recollection of the "rape incident" and 2, Lady Marguerite's reflection of her speaking up and creation of this trial/duel during the time of the court date. Le Gris's scene is the movie's definer, does he truly believe he did nothing wrong, a relatively high ranked ladies' man that is used to some resistance from women he sleeps with (a sad truth of the time). Lady Marguerite's I can't get into detail of, so in spoiler quotes below. Ridley Scott, who turns 84 next month, still has great style and effectiveness behind the camera and another movie coming out next month (House of Gucci). The action scenes don't disappoint either.
Lady Marguerite's reflection of her speaking up and creation of this trial/duel during the time of the court date. Lady Marguerite appearedly got impregnated from or at a similar time of the rape incident. Reflecting back, she said she would have kept her mouth shut if she knew she was going to be pregnant from the incident, directly or indirectly realizing it was Le Gris's child she was bearing. Which leads to a fun ethical question which many activists across movements have faced throughout history. Is the deterioration, ostracizing, and/or possible end of one's life worth being correct, 'speaking the truth/having the truth be known', pushing the rights of your group forward, and having justice be served? (Interesting to put into other instances throughout history also). In this instance for Lady Marguerite, that answer was a resounding no for her. Silence was the path in hindsight she wished she had taken. I wonder how many throughout history in hindsight wish the same.
After seeing audience reviews for Halloween Kills, I may have been a little too high with my rating or overly pleased it appears. Maybe I bought into some things that others didn't. Eh, I admittedly do overrate some movies based on emotional or initial feelings towards them I'd say. I enjoyed it but get why people say some of the things didn't work for them.
After thinking he is betrayed by his lover Madeleine Swann (Léa Seydoux) when Spectre agents ambush him, James Bond (Daniel Craig) becomes a recluse in Jamaica spending his time fishing and seducing the local women. However, when a psychopathic villain (Rami Malek) decides to steal a biological weapon with a plan to murder millions, Bond rejoins MI6 to infiltrate his evil lair. Daniel Craig’s swan song as James Bond and it has everything you come to expect from a Bond film. 007, let’s play the hits. We have exotic locations, cheeky banter, new beautiful bond girls (Ana de Armas is a highlight, Lashana Lynch unfortunately doesn’t have much to work with in the script), Spectre, new and old villains who ham it up, a creepy one-eyed henchman, evil lairs, and a score that has some easter eggs for true Bond-heads. It has everything you want and expect from a Bond film. Also, it is the first Bond film that has some real stakes. The film does start to get weighed down with bloat from the serialization of the Craig bond films towards the end of the film, but it is a great conclusion to the Craig era and a proper send-off to his character. There is a big clean slate for the next instalment and a part of me hopes they reverse back to standalone films and reintroduce a bit more camp to the films in lieu of existential weariness and realism. But not too much camp, I don’t want a return to the Moore years, just more in terms of an acknowledgement that at its core, the premise of Bond films are kind of silly. Is it the best of the Craig films? No, Casino Royale still holds top spot, but as I begin to sour on Skyfall with every subsequent viewing of it, No Time To Die could have a place for 2nd spot. As my first film that I have watched in theatres since February 2020, No Time To Die was well worth the wait and a treat to watch on the big screen.
Thanks so much! I finally got around to testing letterboxd and holy smokes this is what I wanted! I can make my multiple genre lists and can search by any different data like year, actor, etc. Bloody good site! Only thing I dislike is that it's sort of clunky when moving around to movies.
After seeing audience reviews for Halloween Kills, I may have been a little too high with my rating or overly pleased it appears. Maybe I bought into some things that others didn't. Eh, I admittedly do overrate some movies based on emotional or initial feelings towards them I'd say. I enjoyed it but get why people say some of the things didn't work for them.
I'd be a very unhappy cinephile if I cared about audience reviews (just look at my last post in the Halloween thread). Your comment on HK made me want to see it. There's a good chance I'll end up not liking it anyway, but you got me interested, that's more than any consensus opinion could do.
I dunno if I'm allowed to say that a film is both well-directed and longer than it needs to be by 20 minutes at the same time but this is it. Bonus points for creating a horror-like atmosphere throughout a good chunk and a really heightened climax. It's just a bit tough to work around it though for the director when everyone has a rough idea of how it'll end.
I would've loved to see what this film would've looked like in the 90s.
I dunno if I'm allowed to say that a film is both well-directed and longer than it needs to be by 20 minutes at the same time but this is it. Bonus points for creating a horror-like atmosphere throughout a good chunk and a really heightened climax. It's just a bit tough to work around it though for the director when everyone has a rough idea of how it'll end.
I would've loved to see what this film would've looked like in the 90s.
It would've been "Die Hard on a boat," with Tom Hanks grabbing the pirates' AK-47s and making every one of them pay with their lives for picking the wrong boat to hijack. Unfortunately, he made the fateful decision to do the much less exciting Philadelphia that year and the role of a lifetime went to Steven Seagal, instead.
A man who has been sheltered for much of his life is forced out into the world when his benefactor passes away. He doesn't know how to read or write, has never ridden in a car but he does know gardening. A chance accident leads to befriending a wealthy lady and her husband who's health is on the decline. The man's laid back demeanour wins over his new friends and leads to interesting encounters as he charms those he meets.
Peter Sellers is really good. Melvyn Douglas too, he made me think of J. Paul Getty. The gag reel over the end credits is funny. Seems like there are so few good mature comedies, enjoyed this film.
A man who has been sheltered for much of his life is forced out into the world when his benefactor passes away. He doesn't know how to read or write, has never ridden in a car but he does know gardening. A chance accident leads to befriending a wealthy lady and her husband who's health is on the decline. The man's laid back demeanour wins over his new friends and leads to interesting encounters as he charms those he meets.
Peter Sellers is really good. Melvyn Douglas too, he made me think of J. Paul Getty. The gag reel over the end credits is funny. Seems like there are so few good mature comedies, enjoyed this film.
It pleasantly reminded me of Forrest Gump (which came later, of course) in that it's about a simple, uneducated man who is mistaken for being wise and becomes a minor celebrity. I don't remember too many specific scenes except for the one with the "I like to watch" line (which I've used quite a few times in conversation and no one ever gets the reference) and this impressive shot, which has stuck with me:
I'd be a very unhappy cinephile if I cared about audience reviews (just look at my last post in the Halloween thread). Your comment on HK made me want to see it. There's a good chance I'll end up not liking it anyway, but you got me interested, that's more than any consensus opinion could do.
I'm glad to hear I helped peak your interest and I agree. Only when I'm on the fence about movies do other opinions sway me. Otherwise, if I want to see a movie, I'm gonna see the movie. . I see the others viewers notes a bit and understand their feelings. That said, I don't think I'd lower my rating below a 2.50 or a 2.60 out of 4 in retrospect anyway with the movie soaking in my brain. It tries to do a lot, and succeeds on most of it imo. I honestly wonder, if the writing and/or performance of Anthony Michael Hall as Tommy made or broke many a persons' feelings on the movie. I think too many critics or viewers are annoyed at the choice/fact that Jamie Lee and the Strodes are mostly a side story in this movie (were the main characters in the first film) and Michael isn't (purposely or not, who knows) hunting down Jamie Lee specifically/directly in this. That's my best guess, "it's not what they wanted to see". I know a lot of critics, we'll say, "misunderstand the horror genre", and "slasher" as a whole subgenre is generally the most lashed at for it's material and presence, but I honestly don't understand the hate, especially after the love the first on received. I hope you enjoy it.
After thinking he is betrayed by his lover Madeleine Swann (Léa Seydoux) when Spectre agents ambush him, James Bond (Daniel Craig) becomes a recluse in Jamaica spending his time fishing and seducing the local women. However, when a psychopathic villain (Rami Malek) decides to steal a biological weapon with a plan to murder millions, Bond rejoins MI6 to infiltrate his evil lair. Daniel Craig’s swan song as James Bond and it has everything you come to expect from a Bond film. 007, let’s play the hits. We have exotic locations, cheeky banter, new beautiful bond girls (Ana de Armas is a highlight, Lashana Lynch unfortunately doesn’t have much to work with in the script), Spectre, new and old villains who ham it up, a creepy one-eyed henchman, evil lairs, and a score that has some easter eggs for true Bond-heads. It has everything you want and expect from a Bond film. Also, it is the first Bond film that has some real stakes. The film does start to get weighed down with bloat from the serialization of the Craig bond films towards the end of the film, but it is a great conclusion to the Craig era and a proper send-off to his character. There is a big clean slate for the next instalment and a part of me hopes they reverse back to standalone films and reintroduce a bit more camp to the films in lieu of existential weariness and realism. But not too much camp, I don’t want a return to the Moore years, just more in terms of an acknowledgement that at its core, the premise of Bond films are kind of silly. Is it the best of the Craig films? No, Casino Royale still holds top spot, but as I begin to sour on Skyfall with every subsequent viewing of it, No Time To Die could have a place for 2nd spot. As my first film that I have watched in theatres since February 2020, No Time To Die was well worth the wait and a treat to watch on the big screen.
This was also my first return to theaters since Feb. 2020. It was mostly welcome. I put more detailed thoughts in the movie specific thread. I thought it was at its best when it was in the classic globe-hoping Bond adventure lane. I think the commitment to stakes and continuity have been a weight on the Craig movies’ neck. I think it bogged down previous movies and holds this one back too. A lot to like, but this probably settles into middle of the pack for me both for the Craig movies and the series overall.
The Phantom of the Monestary/Convent. (Seen the title both ways). 1930s Mexican horror movie that shows dark stormy nights, haunted spaces and amoral folks in line for potential supernatural comeuppance are a universal language. Dramatic lighting and big line readings. Very cool set. Some nice visuals. An interesting spin from another country on some familiar elements.
Girls Nite Out. Early 80s slasher with a razor clawed college bear mascot hacking up college students. Only on my radar because it was co-written by a notorious lawyer in my town who you otherwise wouldn’t associate with such stuff. It’s about par for genre. Surprisingly solid soundtrack for a low budget slasher though a few of the songs are repeated in a clear move to get the money’s worth.
Hunter’s Blood. Sought this out after reading the famous horror analysis Men, Women and Chainsaws where it features prominently. Don’t make the same mistake as me. A tedious, uninteresting, unentertaining Deliverance rip off. The only positive is Bruce Glover in just a batshit performance (not in a good way).
The Invitation. Friends gather in the California hills for a reunion/dinner party but an ulterior motive may be at play. Had a few folks I respect mention this as an underrated/underseen gem over the years. Glad I finally got to it. I’d agree with that. Slow burn, but keeps you off balance in good, fair ways. What’s real? What isn’t? Good character-grounded horror.
It would actually make a decent double feature about grief with Seance on a Wet Afternoon. More thriller than horror, but two stellar performances at its heart with Kim Stanley as a psychic and Richard Attenborough who kidnap a child. Incredibly tense. It’s British Kitchen sink filtered through a pulp paperback. Sad, desperate people commit a sad, desperate act.
Freaky. Body swap comedy meets slasher. Clever. Humorous. Vince Vaughn seems to be having a grand time.
Evilspeak. Carrie, but a dude a in military school with a computer that can summon up some satanic revenge instead of some standard issue telekinesis. Big, dumb, bloody 80s fun.
This was also my first return to theaters since Feb. 2020. It was mostly welcome. I put more detailed thoughts in the movie specific thread. I thought it was at its best when it was in the classic globe-hoping Bond adventure lane. I think the commitment to stakes and continuity have been a weight on the Craig movies’ neck. I think it bogged down previous movies and holds this one back too. A lot to like, but this probably settles into middle of the pack for me both for the Craig movies and the series overall.
No Time to Die brings closure to Craig's tenure as Bond. I also think it brings closure to a certain kind of Bond movie or maybe more accurately a certain kind of 007 hero. It seems to me the Craig years have been distinguished by two major developments: 1) Craig became the best actor ever to play Bond; and 2) there was a difficult but necessary attempt to transform a macho super-hero from the '60s to a more palatable form that didn't clash so greatly with a 21st century sensibilities. The fact that Craig is the best actor to play Bond comes with some unintended consequences, though. A more complex Bond, a more conflicted Bond has been fun to watch. But the Craig Bond now has deeper relationships with women who in the past were merely conventional Bond girls. This side of Bond's persona requires sequences and scenes to help those relationships develop. And that has meant the pacing of recent Craig films seems off. Every moment devoted to romance is a moment stolen from action and rythmic editing. What was once fast-paced and light has become something of a slog. Far more importantly, No Time to Die is a declaration that the franchise has gone as far as it can go in its attempt to renovate a relic from a distant era. Craig's skill has helped to disguise the fact that this 21st century re-imagining of Bond has rarely been completely successful, and that only in fits and starts. The Craig era is over and with it comes the freedom to start again. The old model needs to be finally discarded. Something more fittingly contemporary needs to rise from the ashes. That will be no easy task; in fact, it may be an impossible task.
Fun Woody Allen film where Diane Keaton is the real star imo, she puts in one of the most fun performances I've seen from a female lead. The film is only 85 minutes long but that feels longer than the gag needs to be. The actual jokes are fairly consistent and I think this is better than anything Mel Brooks did. Unfortunately he can't help himself and soliloquies in the end.
Baby Face (1932) - 7/10
Pre-code films....jesus christ. Barbara Stanwyck has implied sex with everyone, EVERYONE.
A pregnant woman living alone and grieving the loss of her husband fights for her life when a stranger intrudes into her home. This French home invasion horror is like the most frightening part of Rosemary's Baby stretched way out and dialed up to the extreme. It's up there with Martyrs in being brutal, violent and bloody to an almost shocking degree, but isn't as "out there" because it's based on some real-life incidents. We've seen film characters have rough nights before, but this is a real nightmare... especially, I imagine, for expectant women. The film should come with one of those warnings to avoid it if you are or are planning to become pregnant. There isn't much plot to excuse the shock value, but at least it doesn't get too absurd or try to justify itself with pretentious philosophy like Martyrs. It's just a straight and simple slasher, but with a unique twist. It's a bit illogical and unrealistic at times and there's a little CGI that's unnecessary and silly looking, but it's still effectively intense and disturbing. If you have a strong stomach for blood, gore and subtitles, it's on the Criterion Channel (believe it or not) and for rent for a handful bucks on other services, like Amazon.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
