|
Post by codystarbuck on Aug 5, 2024 11:40:37 GMT -5
I'll be away for a couple weeks in the middle of August and unfortunately I'm going to miss some great movies - they're showing 4 Audrey Hepburns (Roman Holiday, Sabrina, Breakfast at Tiffany's, Charade) and 4 Malcolm MacDowells (If ..., O Lucky Man, Caligula, and one other as yet un-named A Clockwork Orange, as one would expect) at the same place they played the Alain Delon and Sam Peckinpah films recently, among others. I'll be able to see one or two of each after I get back later in the month but will miss most of them. They didn't go the whole Mick Travis trilogy and add Britannia Hospital? That's disappointing. Personally, I'd leave out Clockwork and put in Time After Time, so you could see him play a sympathetic character (Mick Travis is a bit of a "tweener, if you ask me). Heck, if you wanted to showcase some lesser known stuff, then Britannia Hospital fits the bill, plus I would throw in Aces High and Royal Flash. The Hepburn films are mostly the same old thing; but, what do you expect, when she wasn't that prolific in her work, for extended periods? For a more varied mix, I might lose Sabrina and Breakfast at Tiffany's and insert Funny Face and How To Steal a Million...and just for fun, The Lavender Hill Mob, just for her cameo.
|
|
|
Post by berkley on Aug 5, 2024 18:07:22 GMT -5
I'll be away for a couple weeks in the middle of August and unfortunately I'm going to miss some great movies - they're showing 4 Audrey Hepburns (Roman Holiday, Sabrina, Breakfast at Tiffany's, Charade) and 4 Malcolm MacDowells (If ..., O Lucky Man, Caligula, and one other as yet un-named A Clockwork Orange, as one would expect) at the same place they played the Alain Delon and Sam Peckinpah films recently, among others. I'll be able to see one or two of each after I get back later in the month but will miss most of them. They didn't go the whole Mick Travis trilogy and add Britannia Hospital? That's disappointing. Personally, I'd leave out Clockwork and put in Time After Time, so you could see him play a sympathetic character (Mick Travis is a bit of a "tweener, if you ask me). Heck, if you wanted to showcase some lesser known stuff, then Britannia Hospital fits the bill, plus I would throw in Aces High and Royal Flash. The Hepburn films are mostly the same old thing; but, what do you expect, when she wasn't that prolific in her work, for extended periods? For a more varied mix, I might lose Sabrina and Breakfast at Tiffany's and insert Funny Face and How To Steal a Million...and just for fun, The Lavender Hill Mob, just for her cameo. Sabrina and Roman Holiday are my two favourites of the Hepburn films and the two I'll have to miss. But I haven't seen Charade or Tiffanys as often - just once each and not too recently in either case - so I'm happy I'll get a chance to catch those again. The MacDowell films, I'm very sorry I won't be able to get to If, which I've seen only once and on VHS cassette, or Caligula, which I've never seen at all. Clockwork Orange I've watched several times over the years and thus may or may not go again, it'll probably be a last-minute decision. O Lucky Man, like If, I've seen only once and on an old-style tv, so I'm happy to get a chance to see that one again and on the big screen this time. Agreed about Time After Time. Haven't seen Aces High or Britannia, will keep an eye out for them.
|
|
|
Post by codystarbuck on Aug 5, 2024 20:46:05 GMT -5
They didn't go the whole Mick Travis trilogy and add Britannia Hospital? That's disappointing. Personally, I'd leave out Clockwork and put in Time After Time, so you could see him play a sympathetic character (Mick Travis is a bit of a "tweener, if you ask me). Heck, if you wanted to showcase some lesser known stuff, then Britannia Hospital fits the bill, plus I would throw in Aces High and Royal Flash. The Hepburn films are mostly the same old thing; but, what do you expect, when she wasn't that prolific in her work, for extended periods? For a more varied mix, I might lose Sabrina and Breakfast at Tiffany's and insert Funny Face and How To Steal a Million...and just for fun, The Lavender Hill Mob, just for her cameo. Sabrina and Roman Holiday are my two favourites of the Hepburn films and the two I'll have to miss. But I haven't seen Charade or Tiffanys as often - just once each and not too recently in either case - so I'm happy I'll get a chance to catch those again. The MacDowell films, I'm very sorry I won't be able to get to If, which I've seen only once and on VHS cassette, or Caligula, which I've never seen at all. Clockwork Orange I've watched several times over the years and thus may or may not go again, it'll probably be a last-minute decision. O Lucky Man, like If, I've seen only once and on an old-style tv, so I'm happy to get a chance to see that one again and on the big screen this time. Agreed about Time After Time. Haven't seen Aces High or Britannia, will keep an eye out for them. If you haven't seen it, Royal Flash is a bit of fun, if a little uneven. It's based on one of George MacDonald Fraser's Flashman novels, where Harry Flashman gets embroiled in Balkan politics, thanks to Lola Montes and Otto Von Bismark, and ends up in a pastiche of the Prisoner of Zenda. Richard Lester directed; but, it's not up to the Musketeer films standard.
|
|
|
Post by EdoBosnar on Aug 6, 2024 2:38:31 GMT -5
Finally got around to watching In Bruges (2008)...
...which I'd been wanting to see for years (and which was mentioned in the 'Favorite Movies of XXXX' thread a few months ago) and which I only realized was offered by the HBO streaming package last night - the problem is that movie titles in the menu are in Croatian, and the title was translated as something like "Criminals on Vacation," which meant nothing to me (it was only when I took note of the fact that it was Colin Farrell's picture in the thumbnail that I realized what it probably was). Anyway, I really liked it. Darkly funny, but with some really moving scenes and excellent performances by Farrell and Brendan Gleeson in particular.
|
|
|
Post by berkley on Aug 6, 2024 3:09:08 GMT -5
Finally got around to watching In Bruges (2008)... ...which I'd been wanting to see for years (and which was mentioned in the 'Favorite Movies of XXXX' thread a few months ago) and which I only realized was offered by the HBO streaming package last night - the problem is that movie titles in the menu are in Croatian, and the title was translated as something like "Criminals on Vacation," which meant nothing to me (it was only when I took note of the fact that it was Colin Farrell's picture in the thumbnail that I realized what it probably was). Anyway, I really liked it. Darkly funny, but with some really moving scenes and excellent performances by Farrell and Brendan Gleeson in particular. Great movie, one of my favourites of the 2000s. I had been very sceptical towards Farrell going into it but his performance in this movie totally changed my mind about him. But it's the movie itself in its entirety that really should be the centre of attention. A fascinating variation or perhaps in some ways satire on the Hollywood gangster film. But that's unfair - I thnk it's much more than just a criticism of other films or of a certain genre of film.
|
|
|
Post by codystarbuck on Aug 6, 2024 11:44:34 GMT -5
Not sure you would classify this as a "classic," given it is only two years old; but, I just watched Good Luck to You, Leo Grande. The film stars Emma Thompson and Daryl McCormack and barely anyone else. It is set in a hotel room, where Thompson's widowed former religious education teacher has booked McCormack, a you sex worker, for a session, hoping to engage in sexual activity for pleasure. She was married for over 30 years to a husband who performed the same missionary sex with her, for the entire time, and he was her only sexual partner. She has never had an orgasm, never explored anything beyond straight intercourse, and has a list of things she wants to do. She is a planner and has trouble relaxing and enjoying things, is self conscious about her age and body, and vacillates between approaching things in a matter of fact way, without preambles or berating herself that "this is wrong" and wanting to back out.
In lesser hands this would be a bad sex comedy or a voyeuristic piece with a noted actress in a nude scene; but, the script by writer/comedian Katy Brand is brilliant and it is a mesmerizing piece of two characters talking, and then engaging in moments of passion. It is a window into "Nancy's" past life, her repression, disappointment and her need to rescue herself from declining. It's also a window into "Leo," an Irishman of color and who he is and why he performs this work and whether he is playing a role or genuinely interested in his clients. Thompson is as great as you would expect, given her resume and lineage; but, McCormack is right there with here, in a sensitive and fun performance, showing that he is more than a "pretty boy." It's sex-positive and body-positive and a wonderful film, as pure drama, with elements of comedy sprinkled in, at just the right moments. Yes, you do, eventually, see Emma Thompson nude...at age 62....but it happens slowly, across time, to the point you share her happiness, when she finally sees the beauty in her body, at any age.
You can tell this was the work of women (writer and director, as well as the lead actor) and it is refreshing to see something that lets a female lead do her thing, in a story that explores the things women are told by male society and their reality, as well as experiencing a reawakening, in the autumn years.
|
|
|
Post by EdoBosnar on Aug 12, 2024 3:48:22 GMT -5
I saw The Thomas Crown Affair (1968) for the first time at a local theatre last week and it was great fun. The story doesn't always make a lot of sense but mostly this is really just a fantastic showpiece for Steve McQueen and Faye Dunaway and their star-power. Dunaway in particular gets to show off to marvellous effect, as she's playing a rather flamboyant character, though she does become a little more subdued later on as her feelings for Crown develop: I think she has a different hairstyle and a different outfit with pretty much every scene change - and many of them are more the kind of thing you'd imagine seeing on the runway than in real life. (...) Just watched this for the first time as well. I'd seen the 1999 remake, but for some reason this one had always slipped past me. Anyway, as you say, it's very much carried by the charisma and good looks of both McQueen and Dunaway, attractive sets and scenery, high fashion, and the very stylish and effective cinematography, all on display in this trailer:
Which is all to the good, as the story is pretty thin gruel. Going into it, I thought much more would be made of the cat-and-mouse game between the two leads, but that aspect was sort of submerged into their romance. I think the remake was actually written better; however, I still prefer this original version.
|
|
|
Post by codystarbuck on Aug 12, 2024 20:42:59 GMT -5
I saw The Thomas Crown Affair (1968) for the first time at a local theatre last week and it was great fun. The story doesn't always make a lot of sense but mostly this is really just a fantastic showpiece for Steve McQueen and Faye Dunaway and their star-power. Dunaway in particular gets to show off to marvellous effect, as she's playing a rather flamboyant character, though she does become a little more subdued later on as her feelings for Crown develop: I think she has a different hairstyle and a different outfit with pretty much every scene change - and many of them are more the kind of thing you'd imagine seeing on the runway than in real life. (...) Just watched this for the first time as well. I'd seen the 1999 remake, but for some reason this one had always slipped past me. Anyway, as you say, it's very much carried by the charisma and good looks of both McQueen and Dunaway, attractive sets and scenery, high fashion, and the very stylish and effective cinematography, all on display in this trailer:
Which is all to the good, as the story is pretty thin gruel. Going into it, I thought much more would be made of the cat-and-mouse game between the two leads, but that aspect was sort of submerged into their romance. I think the remake was actually written better; however, I still prefer this original version.
Yeah, I was gonna say, the remake is a better caper film, but the performances are better here. Can't stand that damn "Windmills of Your Mind" song.
|
|
|
Post by DubipR on Aug 14, 2024 8:08:12 GMT -5
Just watched this for the first time as well. I'd seen the 1999 remake, but for some reason this one had always slipped past me. Anyway, as you say, it's very much carried by the charisma and good looks of both McQueen and Dunaway, attractive sets and scenery, high fashion, and the very stylish and effective cinematography, all on display in this trailer:
Which is all to the good, as the story is pretty thin gruel. Going into it, I thought much more would be made of the cat-and-mouse game between the two leads, but that aspect was sort of submerged into their romance. I think the remake was actually written better; however, I still prefer this original version.
Yeah, I was gonna say, the remake is a better caper film, but the performances are better here. Can't stand that damn "Windmills of Your Mind" song. I love "Windmills of Your Mind" but I hate Noel Harrison's vocals on it. His voice range is effing horrid. It definitely needed a woman's vocals to make it work. I prefer Dusty Springfield's take. Tell me this would've been a better open credit with this version
|
|
|
Post by codystarbuck on Aug 14, 2024 10:29:40 GMT -5
Yeah, I was gonna say, the remake is a better caper film, but the performances are better here. Can't stand that damn "Windmills of Your Mind" song. I love "Windmills of Your Mind" but I hate Noel Harrison's vocals on it. His voice range is effing horrid. It definitely needed a woman's vocals to make it work. I prefer Dusty Springfield's take. Tell me this would've been a better open credit with this version Anything with Dusty Springfield would have been better....but I still hate that song. It's a little too depressing, for my tastes (not as bad as "Send in the Clowns" and "Rainy Days and Mondays Always Get Me Down."). The title sequence of the film, with that endless thing droning on just made me want to cap myself before we got to the first act. There is a version with Sting that I have been tortured with, at work. I tend to prefer more upbeat music, though it depends on context. It definitely would have been better and more cinematic with Dusty. Now, if it was Dusty and the Pet Shop Boys..........
|
|
|
Post by DubipR on Aug 14, 2024 16:46:04 GMT -5
I love "Windmills of Your Mind" but I hate Noel Harrison's vocals on it. His voice range is effing horrid. It definitely needed a woman's vocals to make it work. I prefer Dusty Springfield's take. Tell me this would've been a better open credit with this version Anything with Dusty Springfield would have been better....but I still hate that song. It's a little too depressing, for my tastes (not as bad as "Send in the Clowns" and "Rainy Days and Mondays Always Get Me Down."). The title sequence of the film, with that endless thing droning on just made me want to cap myself before we got to the first act. There is a version with Sting that I have been tortured with, at work. I tend to prefer more upbeat music, though it depends on context. It definitely would have been better and more cinematic with Dusty. Now, if it was Dusty and the Pet Shop Boys.......... The song that gets me is "Raindrops Keep Falling on my Head". The unnecessary song for Butch Cassidy & the Sundance Kid. Okay, I get the bike scene but that song severely dates a period movie piece. Worthless song for that movie.
|
|
|
Post by codystarbuck on Aug 14, 2024 17:30:51 GMT -5
Anything with Dusty Springfield would have been better....but I still hate that song. It's a little too depressing, for my tastes (not as bad as "Send in the Clowns" and "Rainy Days and Mondays Always Get Me Down."). The title sequence of the film, with that endless thing droning on just made me want to cap myself before we got to the first act. There is a version with Sting that I have been tortured with, at work. I tend to prefer more upbeat music, though it depends on context. It definitely would have been better and more cinematic with Dusty. Now, if it was Dusty and the Pet Shop Boys.......... The song that gets me is "Raindrops Keep Falling on my Head". The unnecessary song for Butch Cassidy & the Sundance Kid. Okay, I get the bike scene but that song severely dates a period movie piece. Worthless song for that movie. When I was a kid, every time it rained, the station my parents listened to, on the radio, would always play "Raindrops Keep Falling on My Head" and "Rainy Days and Mondays Always Get Me Down." As if the days wasn't depressing enough without adding mood music to hammer it home. I don't find that as glaring as, say, the synth soundtrack in Ladyhawke, which really just doesn't work with medieval imagery. By contrast, the film Plunkett & McLane had a modern, soundtrack; but, it worked with the theme of a pair of rebels attacking the system.
|
|
|
Post by Batflunkie on Aug 17, 2024 10:50:16 GMT -5
Watched several movies over the past few days, Airheads (1994),Breakfast At Tiffany's (1961), and Rollerball (1975)
Airheads is a film that I've always enjoyed (got if for free I think through a mail-away by sending box tops away). It starts off as a fairly dumb heist movie (a band calling themselves "The Lone Rangers" *Lone Rangers? There's Three Of You, You're Not Exactly Lone* who can't get a record deal goes to a radio station with realistic toy guns and holds them hostage until they can get their song played), but as the film goes on, you see actual character development play out, particularly with Chazz (the main character)
Chris Farley also has a minor role in the film (much like in Coneheads) and absolutely steals every scene he's in. My one gripe, if any, is that they have all these songs in the movie, but fail to credit Regan Youth for the Lone Rangers' song, Degenerated (anybody seen my boy?)
Breakfast At Tiffany's was yet another in my long list of bucket movies. I'd seen some of it briefly on TCM one evening. It's a very nice, relaxing, heart-felt slice of life. I fell in love immediately with Holly, right from the opening scene where's outside Tiffany's with a coffee and doughnut in hand. It's one of those films where it doesn't feel very long because you're so invested in it. (I also loved the fact that Holly's acquaintance with Sally Tomato came back to bite her)
Rollerball is also another bucket list film of mine. The film grabbed me from the offset with Bach's "Toccata In D Minor", which is such an out of left field choice for a science fiction movie, but it fits. In the future, there are no wars, no hunger, no poverty, only Rollerball; this intense gladiatorial blood sport of a game (not too dissimilar from Roller Derby) where the object is not to win, only to survive. Johnathan E (James Cann) is our lead, he's been in the game too long to the point where moves are being made to remove him. What I found interesting about it, is regardless of the "far future" look of early 70's sci-fi, the story feels timeless and I was actually rather surprised that the original short story was written in the 70's and not the 50's or 60's. I miss pulp-era/pre-Star Wars sci-fi so much, so I enjoyed Rollerball immensely
|
|
|
Post by EdoBosnar on Aug 17, 2024 13:14:37 GMT -5
Watched several movies over the past few days, Airheads (1994), Breakfast At Tiffany's (1961), and Rollerball (1975)(...) I very much like all three of those movies. Airheads in particular really surprised me - I rented it on a lark sometime in the late 1990s, thinking it would just be a dumb, forgettable comedy, but I ended up really liking it.
|
|
|
Post by codystarbuck on Aug 17, 2024 17:51:59 GMT -5
Watched several movies over the past few days, Airheads (1994), Breakfast At Tiffany's (1961), and Rollerball (1975)Airheads is a film that I've always enjoyed (got if for free I think through a mail-away by sending box tops away). It starts off as a fairly dumb heist movie (a band calling themselves "The Lone Rangers" *Lone Rangers? There's Three Of You, You're Not Exactly Lone* who can't get a record deal goes to a radio station with realistic toy guns and holds them hostage until they can get their song played), but as the film goes on, you see actual character development play out, particularly with Chazz (the main character) Chris Farley also has a minor role in the film (much like in Coneheads) and absolutely steals every scene he's in. My one gripe, if any, is that they have all these songs in the movie, but fail to credit Regan Youth for the Lone Rangers' song, Degenerated (anybody seen my boy?) Breakfast At Tiffany's was yet another in my long list of bucket movies. I'd seen some of it briefly on TCM one evening. It's a very nice, relaxing, heart-felt slice of life. I fell in love immediately with Holly, right from the opening scene where's outside Tiffany's with a coffee and doughnut in hand. It's one of those films where it doesn't feel very long because you're so invested in it. (I also loved the fact that Holly's acquaintance with Sally Tomato came back to bite her) Rollerball is also another bucket list film of mine. The film grabbed me from the offset with Bach's "Toccata In D Minor", which is such an out of left field choice for a science fiction movie, but it fits. In the future, there are no wars, no hunger, no poverty, only Rollerball; this intense gladiatorial blood sport of a game (not too dissimilar from Roller Derby) where the object is not to win, only to survive. Johnathan E (James Cann) is our lead, he's been in the game too long to the point where moves are being made to remove him. What I found interesting about it, is regardless of the "far future" look of early 70's sci-fi, the story feels timeless and I was actually rather surprised that the original short story was written in the 70's and not the 50's or 60's. I miss pulp-era/pre-Star Wars sci-fi so much, so I enjoyed Rollerball immensely I think I've seen about the first 15 minutes of Airheads and that was it. Breakfast at Tiffany's is wonderfully done, with Blake Edwards at his height and a fine cast, though the Mickey Rooney stuff was always wrong. The film is cleaned and softened up quite a bit from Truman Capote's original. Rollerbal is one of my favorite sci0fi films. In many ways it is very prescient about corporate dominance of people's lives and become global powers, answerable to no one. It also has some exciting stuntwork, filmed in the Olympic arena where basketball was held, at the Munich Olympics. The actors and stunt people would actually play the game, during down time. My only issue with it is how Canadian actor Shane Rimmer pronounces Houston. He does the same thing in You Only Live Twice, pronouncing it "Hooston," instead of "Hugh-ston." One weird quirk is they give James Cann this hat, that is supposed to be the character's trademark, and he only wears it once, very briefly (before tossing it into the crowd) in one scene. The rest of the time, you see him carry it. It looked a bit like a Spanish riding hat; but, for whatever reason Caan didn't seem to want to wear it. Maybe he though he looked goofy. I read the original story, "Rollerball Murder," about 30 years ago. It was pretty good, from what little I recall, but not much like the film. Canadian director Norman Jewison never failed to make a great movie, that I've seen. Back in the 70s, it got this reputation as being a brutally violent film, yet I don't think it was any more violent than a lot of its contemporaries and the violence had a very specific point, in the plot. I think it got a bad rap because of the poster image (by Bob Peak, who heavily influenced Howard Chaykin's painting style), with the exaggerated spikes on the gloves and because of the trailer.....
|
|