The Watercooler: 11/3/08
By Craig Kennedy - November 3rd, 2008; 12:01 am
Welcome to another Watercooler boys and girls. If you’ve been keeping up with LiC at all the last few days, you already know how I spent my weekend. I’ll have a rundown of AFI Day 3 sometime today.
In the mean time, I need you to fill me in on what’s happening in the rest of the movie world. Did anybody catch Zack and Miri Make a Porno this weekend? How about some of the recent LiC favorites like Synecdoche, New York or Ballast?
Discuss.
Filed under: Watercooler
Related Posts: - Smith Wins ‘Zack and Miri’ Appeal
- ‘Zack & Miri Make a Porno’ Tagged With NC-17 Rating
- The Watercooler: 10/13/08
- Zack and Miri Make a P-O-R-N-O
- ‘Zack and Miri’ Red Band Trailer
*raises hand*
Actually, Mr. Kennedy, I have a question for you.
Did you get the e-mail I sent you? If you did, fine.
If you didn’t, I need to hear from you ASAP at the address that’s part of my post. It’s nothing long. It’s important though.
For the record, I saw RACHEL GETTING MARRIED Thursday night. One of the absolute worst films of the year IMO. Loathed every last minute of it.
Review is up at my site…
What with the Halloween build-up all week and the winding down of the Presidential election (I was stapling Obama signs on telephone polls in Northern New Jersey) I admit that movies placed far down the line in priority. However, as always I applaud Craig for his passionate diligence of yet another 2008 festival, and I will soon read his latest day wrap-up.
I did see some horror-themed DVDs during the week (most picked out by my kids) but from a theatrical standpoint I did get to see three films over the weekend, two of which were quite memorable:
Stranded **** (Sunday evening)
Let The Right One In **** 1/2 (Sat. evening)
Pride and Glory ** (Sunday afternoon)
“Stranded,” which was urged on me by our great friend Nick Plowman at Fataculture last week is a powerful re-enactment and interview documentary about the famed 1972 plane crash that yielded 14 survivors in the Andes. Shocking revelations of cannibalism followed. It’s too long at over two hours, and exhausting with the endless interview clips from the survivors, but’s it’s still riveting and poignant.
“Let The Right One In” is a vampire movie par excellence, with metaphorical imagry, and impressionistic florishes. From Sweden, it’s an arty take on the genre with engaging performances. Like Craig, I enjoyed it immensely and have reviewed it.
“Pride and Glory” is a multiplex time waster, with fair enough performances but cliches otherwise. Two stars is actually a gift.
OBAMA 08!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Let’s see … Friday night I saw Changeling to which I would bestow a solid 4/5. Not Eastwood’s best, but well worth my time and attention. I especially enjoyed the cinematography and John Malkovich.
Big surprise of the weekend was the screener I’ve had sitting around of When Did You Last See Your Father. It’s pretty much a masterpiece and will be available on DVD this Tuesday. I highly recommend it … my review is over at MZ.
Phillip, I can buy what you say about CHANGELING myself. I gave it three-and-a-half of five, and both the cinematography and Malkovich were most accomplished.
And you penned quite a review of WHEN DID YOU LAST SEE YOUR FATHER? which I agree with you lock, stock and barrel on.
A deeply, deeply moving film that deserves serious consideration for any ten-best list.
I saw Brideshead Revisited last Friday, and while I’m not quite as lyrical as Miranda, I did like it a lot, and a lot more than I expected. A review on my blog is forthcoming (and yes, I know I need to update it more. I blame the bf. )
I also saw about half of Alexander on TV yesterday night. Meh.
Saw humorist and all-around great writer David Sedaris Friday night. He was hilarious, one of those rare writers who actually makes his own work more compelling with his readings of it.
Caught Rachel Getting Married this weekend. As I stated over at the RGM review thread, I liked this one but had some reservations about it. A good movie for me, but not great.
Also saw The Pool, which was a very nice movie. I always enjoy a look inside the world of someone whose life is completely different from my own and this film featured an entire cast like that.
Saw Forgetting Sarah Marshall on DVD last night. I was in no mood for this one, but I didn’t think it was a very successful comedy either. I’m somewhat sorry to report that Judd Apatow does NOT, in fact, shat great comedies. This movie was unrelenting in its morbid fascination with breakup pain, but a better cast may have made it work.
Also revisited the 1978 version of Invasion of the Body Snatchers, which is definitely starting to show its age. Not as nimble or engrossing as I remember it, but the second half remains quite disturbing and I still love that ending.
I didn’t want to say anything because A) no one in these parts cares (understandable) and B) I’ve pretty much said as much about it as I could in my review, but I saw High School Musical 3 and was blown away! I loved each and every second of it and cannot wait to see it again sometime, even though I know I wont be able to see it again in theatres unless it sticks around forever, which it may. Yeah, so. I guess I am as far away from a film snob as I could be, and I am glad I am not old enough yet to be offended by cheesy, predictable films aimed at young girls and the like.
I tried to see Stop Loss this weekend but it wasn’t playing anywhere near me, so whatever. I’ll see it some day.
And I will be seeing Let The Right One In tonight, stoked for that.
“Caught Rachel Getting Married this weekend. I liked this one but had some reservations about it. A good movie for me but not great.”
“One of the worst films of the year.”
Vitually every movie yields “reservations.” At the end of the day though, I think RACHEL is one of the best films of 2008. Ah Miranda, compared to what Joel said, your reaction is well……………ah…………..I won’t go there. Still, as I always respect and am enriched by your reactions, i will over at Cinematic Passions to read your take and place appropriate commentary.
Joel, if I can be so presumptuous, I would like to happily say I completely agree with you on THE POOL, another certain Top 10 finisher next month.
Nick, when you visit New York and stay at Spruce Street, you will IMMEDIATELY be embraced by the residents of my abode when they hear what you said about HIGH SCHOOL MUSICAL 3!!!
Regarding Rachel, my reaction is much like Joel’s. I think it would’ve been better had Demme trimmed some of the fat, such as the never-ending toasts during the rehearsal dinner scene. I’m getting the feeling, though, that this film will strike a chord with baby boomer members of AMPAS.
My weekend film activities consisted of a second viewing of I’m Not There, accompanied by an interview/Q&A with music critic Greil Marcus, on whose writings much of the film is based. INT remains one of my favorite films of last year.
I only watched a pair of movies this weekend. I watched Notes on a Scandal off my DVR Friday night, and while I thought the performances were really good, it also felt like it had been handcuffed by a 90 minute runtime. It seemed with a little more exploration, another 15 or 20 minutes, and I would’ve liked it a lot more.
Saturday I ended up going to a major music festival, catching R.E.M., Kaiser Chiefs, Bloc Party and more, so there was no time for film :)
And yesterday I watched Let the Right One In. I liked it, as most people here have, and my thoughts, in more detail, are on the review thread.
I’m considering starting a blog that follows the movies I see and general news sometime this week. I’ve kind of thought about it before, but who knows, maybe I’ll actually do it this time.
Funny you should mention year-end lists, Sam. I spent a good deal of yesterday afternoon culling the LIC Weekend Forecasts for 2008, making a list of all the theatrical releases I’d seen over the year and breaking them out by my general response (those Weekend Forecasts sure come in handy for this). Anyway, I realized that it’s going to be hard to pare down my list to just 10 movies this year, or at least a list of 10 great American movies this year. And it’s going to be awfully hard to not have two lists, one for fiction and one for docs.
But I imagine there’s a good chance The Pool will get into the list. It’s a contender.
My general response: 2008 was a good year for movies, but you had to work harder to see them because most were foreign, indie, or documentaries. Hollywood hasn’t had a great year…so far.
You’re right, KB! Musn’t overdo it. Fortunately, the shoulder is improving, but Watercooler post or two aside, I’m staying calligraphically and typewritingly (my Jesse Jacksonian invented word) mum.
I second what Alexander said. The clocks are sorta fubar here.
Miranda, we’re just not on the same page moviewise lately! Ah well, keeps it interesting, right?
Sam, thanks to Nick and others (and now you) I’m looking forward to Stranded. I’m not even sure if it’s playing in the LA area right now, but I’ll seek it out. I have to say I’m surprised at the great reviews its getting. Like with so many docs, the subject doesn’t move me too much, but sometimes it’s all about the execution. Who’d have thought a movie about a dude walking on a tightrope would be my favorite movie of the year so far?
Thanks for the heads up on Father, Phillip. I’ll have to keep my eye out for that one now….’cause you know, my Netfilx queue just isn’t big enough!
Hedwig, yes I wish you were posting more, but I also think it’s best you have other things going on (you’ll have to tell me what that’s like sometime)…particularly a decent sounding BF who at least appears to humor your passion for old movies.
(continued)
How was that, Pierre? I wanted to go but ended up at the Guthrie instead, where I was blown away by John Carroll Lynch as Eddie Carmone in “A View From the Bridge”. Outstanding production.
Go for it, Michael! Everybody in the world has a blog, so what’s one more? No, seriously, if you’re thinking about doing it you might as well give it a shot. Several LiC’ers have made the jump in the last few months.
Sedaris seems to be on a continual tour, doesn’t he, Joel? I’ve never seen him, but it feels like he’s here every three months or something.
I saw Zack and Miri on Friday afternoon, Halloween. It was scary bad. I left feeling literally angry at Kevin Smith, like the kind of angry I was at Shyamalan for making me sift through his garbage. Banks and Rogen are fine and there a handful of laughs, but the story is just terrible.
I saw Role Models and Ballast last week. The first was surprisingly funny but ultimately stupid, and the second was magnificent. Lance Hammer introduced and discussed afterwards. It was really interesting. I think I was kind of disappointed that the Q & A ended up being much more about the art of the film than the themes of the film. Like all of these people were watching it as a work of art while I was watching it through a cultural lens. Anyway, it’s outstanding from either perspective.
Joel, I completely agree with you on every point. Hollywood has had a poor year, so we’ve had to rely on the docs, indes and foreigns, as is usually the case. It is going to be nearly impossible for me to make that cut-off point f ten as well, but I’m happy that THE POOL is a contender for your list. I would love to see your final list (but I think Craig will run it at LIC) as you are always discerning and not easily fooled.
I agree with Pierre about the rehearsal scene in RACHEL, but the positives in this film really overwhelm the reservations. Two fantastic performances, some penetrating psychological insights and and a superb screenplay overwhelm that rehearsal scene to be honest, a point that our very best professional critics have made in the film’s superlative concensus. And Craig Kennedy came in with 4/5 as well. There’s simply so much greatness in this film, methinks.
Still, Miranda’s review scares me.
Sam, I forgot to mention I’m jazzed you fell for Let the Right One In. I honestly wasn’t sure how you folks would react to that one but I’ve been hearing interesting responses from all over.
Nick, A) that’s awesome HSM3 was everything you wanted it to be and B) especially awesome you can shout it from the rooftops without giving a crap what the cranky people have to say about it. That’s the way loving movies should be. There’s room in a good movie diet for all kinds of stuff.
Joel, I’ll have to head over to RGM, but it sounds like you’re a little cooler on it than I was. This is one of those movies that I kind of fell for, but I’m not expecting (or hoping) everyone else will fall in line. Nevertheless, we agree it was better than Sarah Marshall (which I’d already forgotten).
Pierre, glad to hear INT holds up to repeat viewings. I’ve been itching to catch that one again for a while, but deep down I’m afraid I’ll be disappointed. You give me hope.
Michael. R.E.M. remains one of my favorite bands. Were they terrific? Also happy to see you liked Let the Right One In also. The praise continues to mount…I suppose it’s high time I published my interview with the guy, huh? As for blogging, yes you should give it a go. It’s more fun than I ever dreamed it would be.
Top 10 lists: I’m so not ready for this….
Damnit Daniel, I’ve quietly had high hopes for Zack and Miri, I just haven’t had time to catch it. I still might…you know what I always say about the subjective nature of comedy…
as for Ballast…terrific news! I think it’s finally coming to LA this weekend so I hope people are prepared….
I think it’s great Nick enjoyed HSM3 so much. Honestly, I probably would, too, it I had seen any of the others. I have a musical theater soul at heart (though I can’t sing, dance or act, go figure), and happy, infectious musicals tend to have just that effect on me. That said, I still haven’t had much interest in seeing Mama Mia this year. I wonder what I’ll think when I finally do see it on DVD.
I envy Daniel’s chance to see Ballast at a filmmaker Q&A screening, no less. R.E.M. is also one of my favorites, so I have envy left for Michael, too.
Speaking of great bands, we had weekend guests, so I didn’t see much outside of the (cheesy but not bad for having on during the constant stream of trick-or-treaters) Roger Corman Haunted Palace on TV Friday night and the bio-doc Joe Strummer: The Future is Unwritten yesterday.
I thought the Strummer doc was rather uneven. Great subject material and interesting interviews, but I didn’t like the direction or editing very much, nor the way it was organized. Plus, maybe he wanted to break out of the documentary formula, but if you’re going to have dozens of interviews with his friends and family and colleagues, throw a name and identifying information up on the screen every once and a while. There are several people featured prominently in the doc that neither my husband or I could ever figure out who they were. I’m glad I saw it, but irritated it wasn’t better.
I get to see a whole ot less than most of you guys, but so far, I’m not having any trouble paring down a top 10 list. I may have trouble finding 10 films that deserve to be on one. I imagine that will change eventually as the awards season gets going and a few more trickle down Arkansas-ways.
Okay, so many of you know I’m largely immobile right now, and the only position I feel comfortable in is on my black leather couch watching movies. With that in mind…
Friday afternoon (Halloween afternoon) I watched Jacques Tourneur’s wonderful I Walked With a Zombie (I watched his Cat People the evening before) and the Boris Karloff-starrer The Black Room. After that, I simply watched Turner Classic Movies from 5:00 PM Pacific Standard Time to 2:30 AM. The films playing on that network which I watched were (all based on H.P. Lovecraft tales):The Haunted Palace, a solid Vincent Price-Roger Corman horror picture I had seen once before long ago, Die, Monster, Die!, a decent Karloff-starrer from 1965, The Shuttered Room with Gig Young and Carol Lynley and Oliver Reed, which I didn’t much care for as it was too muddled and the characterizations were poor, save for Lynley’s troubled woman, The Dunwich Horror, which was sadly even more annoying, definitely one of those exploitative horror picutres of the late ’60s/early ’70s (it was 1970) that tried to blend the free-love era ethos with horror (see the same year’s Count Yorga, Vampire for a much better example of this admittedly fascinating effort to construct horror genre beats within the fabric of the counterculture, free-love, etceteras), Blood Feast, which was a rather uneven and uninspired slasher flick and Two Thousand Maniacs!, which was an intriguing cultural excogitation of a Southern town wrecking vengeance for losing the Civil War representing a melange of sociopolitical and horror interests, though the film itself was not especially engrossing or even particularly good or memorable.
Saturday, I watched Spirits of the Dead, a spooky anthology film with three stories based on Edgar Allan Poe poems and short stories. The first story was directed by Roger Vadim, starring Jane Fonda (with a cameo by brother Peter). For some reason, I’ve never been especially aroused by Jane in her films… But, uh, here her dialogue is in French and she’s certainly at the sheer peak of her pulchritude. Ahem. The second was directed by Louis Malle, starring Alain Delon and Brigitte Bardot–excellently directed. The third was directed by Fellini, starring Terrence Stamp, and it was somewhat frustrating because it was so obviously more about Fellini than Poe, but I nevertheless enjoyed it and seeing Fellini attempt to make an auteuristic horror short was quite rewarding, ultimately. After that, it was Twice-Told Tales, which was another good three-part anthology with Vincent Price interpreting Nigel Hawthorne tales. Never had seen it before. I then watched Tales of Terror, the first three-part anthology horror film I ever saw, with Vincent Price, with Edgar Allan Poe tales as the basis–it’s a sentimental favorite of mine, and it actually holds up as rather scary in a way that almost none of these genuinely do. Then another Karloff-starrer, The Ghoul.
Sunday: Strait-Jacket again, with Joan Crawford in William Castle’s axe-murderer picture. The twist is unfortunately extremely obvious, and the film is stuck in neutral for quite a while, but it has some charms. Dead of Night, a terrific 1945 British five-part anthology fright picture was next, and I thoroughly enjoyed this one. The “mirror” and “live dummy” (something The Twilight Zone series would tap as a concept twice) stories were especially well-crafted, and I liked the simple but well-executed idea of basing the tales around the dream of a fellow with his friends (I realize that makes little sense to those who have yet to see the film but I recommend everyone seek it out). After that, it was Kwaidan, a four-part anthology mixing love and romance with the supernatural and macabre, from Japan in 1964. This was rather splendid, too, and I recommend it to all LiCers. After that, I watched Tod Browning’s The Devil Doll–quite offbeat and strange with one of the more bizarre heroes of the horror genre… The ending was gently moving… All and all, a cinematically auspicious weekend of frights for me. Having to stay home on Halloween night, a friend bought some candy for me that day at a bargain rate, I posted my plastic witch on the door and handed out candy to the little trick-or-treaters throughout the evening, looking like a zombie or mummy or hunchback, I suppose, to all of them, with my shoulder condition. This was the first time I stayed home for Halloween since 2003 (I almost always see a film that night) and it was a largely pleasant experience.
Michael W., good luck with your nascent blog, should you start one up… Exactly six months ago I was in your current position, having thought about going ahead with it, doubtful of whether or not I actually wanted to have a blog, fearful that no one would care about it or want to read it… My humble advice is to go ahead with it as I did, as expressing oneself is a most satisfying action unto itself in any event. I am happy I overcame my doubts and procrastination and just jumped into the water, not knowing how to swim, but determined to learn.
Hmm, judging by the length of this post, it would seem the shoulder is well on its way to recovery, though writing this was more arduous than normal.
Oh, and Craig–tell the LiC monkeys to set LiC’s clocks back! :-)
About RGM …. I agree that there are moments that are contrived. But only in retrospect for me …. only in one case did it take me out of the experience. And to me, it was more contrived in a stage-play “unity of time” kind of way — how do you get all this info in in just one weekend. Maybe in real life the dishwasher thing would have waited for the next family gathering. But we’re not going to be there for Christmas.
The rehearsal dinner didn’t bother me in the slightest. I found the speeches atmospheric. If the speeches seem somewhat generic and repetitive, well, I think that’s part of the purpose. Because when you get to Kym, you get a selfish disaster, but an (overly) honest, personal and heartfelt one.
You can have reservations. But this is a film with at least half a dozen great scenes, as many as any film since Jesse James last year. It has at least two, and arguably two more, outstanding performances. I can forgive small issues.
Also, AFI 3 is a bit delayed, for now suffice it to say:
The Class: *** 1/2
Hunger: *** 1/2
A Christmas Tale **** 1/2
I loved how documentary like The Class seemed. It very much had a cinema verite fly-on-the-wall thing going on with amazing performances from the kids. I haven’t read anything about the film yet, but I have to believe some of it was improvised.
Hunger was very good as well, but awfully unpleasant and I haven’t decided to what purpose. I don’t mind going through hell if I come out the other side with something to show for it. I’ll have to mull this one over a bit longer.
A Christmas Tale was delightful. A very heavy subject handled with a lot of wit and humor. Hard to describe. There’s a lot going on with a big ensemble cast. I got a strong vibe of one of Shakespeare’s comedies….the whole anarchy/chaos leading to order/calmness backbone….and since it ended with a quote from Midsummer Night’s Dream, I’m guessing that was by design. Playful is the best word I can think of to describe the movie, with great performances all around. Of course, being in French I could’ve listened to them all day long with no complaints.
Stay tuned (I know I’ve been saying that a lot lately without actually following through) for an LiC interview with the director Arnaud Desplechin which I’ll hopefully be engaging in later this morning.
I thought you were on the injured reserve list, Alex. :)
With a post like that, you’re going to re-aggravate your injury.
Jeez, there’s more….
“I have a musical theater soul at heart (though I can’t sing, dance or act, go figure)” You’re made of good stuff JB. All I’m sayin’.
That’s horrible news about Joe Strummer, but not unexpected. I’ve kind of avoided it for fear of having the same reaction. I love the man and I don’twant to see a disappointing documentary.
Alexander wins the Watercooler prize just for his Halloween viewing alone. Being laid up he’s got an unfair advantage over the rest of us, but I think we can all agree he has fascinating ecclectic taste even when all of his limbs are functioning properly. Nice going Alexander. (and thanks for the clock tip!)
We’ve disagreed on a few things lately KB, but we agree 100% on RGM…even if you’re a teeny bit more enthusiastic than I am.
I’ll be happy to toss my hat into the “RGM is one of the best films of the year” ring. It will almost certainly make my Top 10, but I’ll have to see where it falls on the list.
Over the weekend finally caught The Last House On the Left, one of those classic horror films I’d never seen. What. A. Piece. Of. Crap. The filmmaking incompetence on display is astounding, and if the film has any sociological or cultural value, it’s completely in spite of itself.
Also saw Ils, a perfectly acceptable French horror film that breaks no new ground but is good for scare or two. Although I’m a bit tired of the “complete strangers stalk innocent couple” schtick.
Watched Sukiyaki Western Django and managed to find a soft spot in my heart for it. Completey pretentious filmmaking, but I found plenty enough to enjoy.
And this morning I finally caught Quantum of Solace, and that’s that.
Also….i just changed the LiC clocks so for the next hour, your comments might get buried by comments that were made before. I’ll see if I can fix this easily…
Ok, I put one of the monkeys on the clock problem. It’s fixed for the Watercooler thread, but for the next 30 minutes or so on other threads your comments might not show up in the right order.
So can you give us a hint about QoS, Evan?
I’m not a fan of Last House on the Left either (I assume we’re talking about the original). I know that will get our asses kicked by hard core horror fans, but there it is.
I’m ready to go to bat against Last House On the Left. Horrendous filmmaking. Anyone that wants to bring it, can.
And if I was to say something about something, I’d say that it wasn’t as good as the something that came before it. Plenty of goodies to enjoy, no doubt, but not what I had hoped.
Going back to RGM, I was curled up in the fetal position for almost the entire film. It was utterly painful to watch, but riveting nonetheless. Hathaway has a Best Actress nomination in the bag, and Lumet is guaranteed a nomination for Best Original Screenplay. Whether Demme will get nominated as well is up in the air, and Debra Winger might finagle a Best Supporting nom, but I don’t think it will get the Best Pic nom. Then again, this could be the dark horse, the film that gets nominated for everything and wins nothing (kind of like Michael Clayton last year).
Daniel, I found the Q&A with Greil Marcus to be only mildly interesting. His discussion was not from a cinematic perspective, except that he took a couple of jabs at Haynes’s screenplay. I left early. (And I had to give my tickets away to A View From the Bridge a couple of weeks ago; I heard it was very good.)
With respect to Rachel Getting Married, my discontent with the rehearsal dinner scene is that there were a couple too many toasts; it slowed down the pace. Overall, though, I’m onboard with this film.
K. Bowen, I dare say I am ready to “toast” you on your reactions to RACHEL. Your essay at your site was superlative. I appreciated reading that clarification too Pierre.
Alexander, I expected a marathon, but your report there does boggle the mind. I love the way you started off though for sure….hope you continue your comeback. Feel well.
Why bother with THE LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT Evan? Watch Bergman’s THE VIRGIN SPRING. You’ll essentially get the same story there.
Thanks Craig, I was surprised with my own reaction to the Swedish vamp film. I even liked it a tad better than the Kristen-Scott Thomas French film, which I liked a lot too…….
Sam beat me to it: The Virgin Spring grabs The Last House on the Left by the hair, kicks it in the gut, presses its forehead against a cheese-grater and stomps its neck downward. No contest there.
Thanks for the well wishes, Sam.
Well, I went ahead and got something started, and even did an afternoon viewing so I’d have a review to throw on there. :)
R.E.M. were absolutely mind-blowing. Even in weather far hotter than it should be at this time of year, in an atmosphere that was so cramped I couldn’t even move my arms, it was a blast. Unfortunately, I missed perhaps my favorite song by them, “The Great Beyond”, figuring that Losing My Religion was the closing number, and wanting to beat the crowds to catch a cab back home. :) That being said, even after so many years playing together, they’re a band I’d recommend absolutely anybody to, for a great live show.
My weekend consisted of:
On Friday night, Splinter, the horror movie making a brief pit-stop on its way to DVD. Obviously the work of a first-time director based on way too many scenes shot in close-up, but a decent concept reasonably well-executed.
On Saturday I watched the William Castle movie Homicidal, then spent the rest of the day editing a montage of cars exploding for a birthday party.
And then, Sunday, I goofed off and watched three more old horror movies: I Was a Teenage Frankenstein, The Boogey Man (1980), and Criminally Insane, which were all various shades of mediocre.
On the subject of Last House on the Left, I don’t think that there’s much argument on the subject of its filmmaking qualities - it was, after all, Wes Craven’s first film with no prior experience, and it’s very uneven and sloppy. But I am happy to take on the argument that it’s still a worthy film with definite sociological value (the critic Robin Wood makes the best case for it) and (look out) in some very particular ways it’s a more interesting film than The Virgin Spring (shock!).
But I have a taste for schlock and a strong resistance to received wisdom, so that’s where I’m coming from.
“THE LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT is a more interesting film than Bergman’s THE VIRGIN SPRING.”
Jeff, I really like you buddy, but you have completely lost your mind. I have notified the Los Angeles Police Department, and they have promised to keep close surveillance on your home.
In any case, what is it about what you just reported that gives me the idea that you might favor horror films, just a bit?
LOL!!!!
Sam, please note my conditional ‘in some very particular ways’ remark. It’s a sloppy, uneven movie, but it has its own value.
Also, while there’s a lively discussion about Last House that can be had, I don’t think The Virgin Spring is an untrammeled masterpiece. Even Bergman himself seemed to regard it as one of his more flawed works, later in his career.
Jeff, if nothing else your post wins the award for best non-sequitur sentence of the entire Watercooler:
“On Saturday I watched the William Castle movie Homicidal, then spent the rest of the day editing a montage of cars exploding for a birthday party.”
Sounds like my kind of birthday party!
It almost makes me sound like some kind of weirdo.
THE VIRGIN SPRING was indeed modestly disparaged by Bergman, but the master also took issue with some of his other acknowledged masterworks.
Bergman is my favorite director of all-time, so maybe I get jumpy when I hear stuff like that, but “lesser Bergman” is usually better than the greatest films of others. Still the critical establishment en masse are behind the film and have always been, and it even won a Best Foreign Film Oscar (not that the last accomplishment means much) I watched it last month again and I am amazed how powerful an allegory it still is. Extraordinary.
When LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT opened it received scathing reviews, most of whom dismissed it as nothing more than exploitation. Most have not vacated that position, myself included.
Oh, well if the critical mass are agreed, then clearly the issue is closed permanently. Sorry to have deviated.
Ha! I just bet another LIC regular that you would come up with that as an answer!
LOL!!!!! You didn’t let me down.
Honestly, Sam, I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: using the ‘all critics agree…’ card is not an argument. If anything, it’s a way to stop a discussion before it can start. If you’re interested, I’d be happy to get into the merits of Last House as articulated by the bright and politically engaged film critic Robin Wood (I can only parrot his thoughts, but I think he’s completely on the ball) but if you’re not interested, never mind.
Jeff: Your attempt to “negate” the opinion of film intellectuals, whose opinions are hardly the end all, but most valid in any critical argument, in an effort to steer this discussion as “Jeff vs. Sam” is equally ludicrous.
THE LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT is complete shit. It is an amateurishly-acted, cheaply made film, that is nothing more than a “come-uppance revenge tale.” The script, the photography, editing all poor and little better than a college film class project. It is exploitative, depraved, deliberately vulgar and over-the-top, and if anything a self-parody that actually had me laughing in spots. Yeah, I know, that is deliberate, but it doesn’t save this film from the trash bin. It doesn’t take the “intellectual establishment” to know how terrible this film is, my eight-year old daughter would know this.
Robin Wood stands alone. The same way that you almost villify me for telling you that all the critics hate this film, is precisely why YOU should not be bringing in Wood, who apparently here has had his senior moment.
One of the worst films ever made.
I’ll mark that as a ‘not interested’.
Also, Wood’s writings on this movie were back in 1979, when he was 48, so I don’t think your ageism can be honestly applied there.
(edit)
I haven’t seen LHotL except for some excerpts and so I can’t argue one way or the other, but it’s not atypical for a genre film to get poor, even scathing reviews on its release, only to find a broader audience via cult status over time.
And as for critics revisiting their earlier reviews or changing their minds, this seems to happen far less often than not (by my estimation at least), mainly I think because critics have a vested interest in standing by their opinions and aren’t likely to change them anyway. It’s typically new critics, coming to a film long after its release, who find value in it and trumpet its validity to the broader intellectual establishment. There are countless examples of this.
I know I’ve read some reasoned arguments for Last House, most of them in regards to the resurgence of…how should I say, VISCERAL horror in the last decade. I don’t have time to look for them right now though.
Jeff: You basically told me that YOU were “not interested” when I mentioned the daunting “critical establishment.” I responded in kind.
You want to tell me what Wood said, go right ahead. And I understood Wood was in his 50’s, we can have ’senior moments’ then too! I was being facetious! I am not adverse to listening.
I am a HUGE horror fan by the way. I love the Lewtons, Mario Bava, Argento, the Hammer films, the Amicus films, the Universals, Carnival of Souls, Eyes Without A Face, City of the Dead, Burn Witch Burn, and on and on. And I love some of Craven’s later films. But I can’t see any merit in this film, and don’t at this point believe there was any effort made by Craven other then to make his entrance.
Whew, it’s getting hot in here.
On the one hand, I agree with Sam that the film is “complete shit.” On the other hand, I’d be interested to hear Robin Wood’s thoughts on it’s value (google, here I come) and where you think the value might lie, Jeff.
I’m telling you, these Watercoolers just write themselves. You guys are awesome.
Fair enough Joel. But you just corroborated my argument in essence. “Cult status” does not denote even passable quality. A strong candidate for the worst film of all-time is the Ed Wood film PLAN NINE FROM OUTER SPACE. Very bad films can attract audiences. I don’t say LAST HOUSE doesn’t have some admirers within the cult pantheon, I say it is a terrible bad and poorly made film.
Heh heh, I was just thinking that the above scenario I was describing echoes this fear that Craig and I share. About 10-15 years from now a bunch of European cinematic up-and-comers are going to prove that Michael Bay is an unsung directing genius.
That will be the same month historians announce their view that George W Bush was one of our best Presidents.
Then I’ll wake up in a cold sweat, clutching my beating heart and wheezing a sigh of relief.
LOL Craig!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! this one is a doozer for sure!!!
Wood’s argument is actually pretty complicated and I want to go get lunch, so I’ll keep it brief: in a typical revenge thriller we get a pretty simple set up: somebody gets attacked for cheap thrills, then the victim gets up and strikes back, also for cheap, but emotionally cathartic, thrills.
What Last House does is two things: It makes the degradation of the two girls so utterly realistic and compelling that it can only be viewed as a chronicle of suffering with no sense of enjoyment or pleasure except to the grisliest sadist (which is definitely taken from the Bergman film but updated for early-70s America). And then, when the ‘revenge’ portion happens, it makes that violence so realistic and grisly that true catharsis is rejected. The film’s argument, therefore, is that the bloody revenge that proceeds is a fruitless waste and degrading to all parties involved.
It’s an exploitation movie, but at its heart it’s a morality tale, just like the Bergman film - but I would argue it comes at its morality in a slightly more honest way than The Virgin Spring, and a quote that I found from Bergman expressing his uncertainty over the film speaks to the same issue:
“The idea of making something out of the old folk-song ‘Herr Töre of Venge’s Daughters’ was a sound one. But then the jiggery-pokery began—the spiritual jiggery-pokery. I wanted to make a blackly brutal mediaeval ballad in the simple form of a folk-song. But while talking it all over with the authoress, Ulla Isaksson, I began psychologizing. That was the first mistake, the introduction of a therapeutic idea: that the building of their church would heal these people. Obviously it was therapeutic; but artistically it was utterly uninteresting.”
I know that an artist can’t necessarily be trusted to speak about his or her own work, but when a guy has a point, a guy has a point.
Is it odd, Joel, that I find your Michael Bay fears more terrifying than your George Bush ones?
I’m not a fan of Last House on the Left, but I know it has its admirers and I don’t think Jeff is off base for defending it.
A direct comparison between it and the Bergman film though I think is a little facetious. A flawed Bergman film trumps many other films as Sam says.
As a centrist however, I’m happy coexisting with fans of both films.
I will say about Last House on The Left that his has a sweaty, sleezy, skin crawling effect that most modern horror can only dream of achieving. I mean that as a compliment.
If someone could do a phantom edit of Michael Bay’s movies to take out the stupid plots, bad acting, and (above all) DREADFUL sense of humor, so that they could just be enjoyed as very long formal experiments in color and movement, then he might be redeemable. They used to say Spielberg was the world’s best Second Unit Director, but Bay has him beat by a mile.
Is it because they’re more likely, Evan?
I’m not even particularly a fan of the way Bay blows stuff up, but I know I’m old fashioned in this regard.
I like stepping back from the carnage and being able to appreciate it from a distance. I like a sense of geography in the mayhem.
Having said that, I loved Speed Racer which doesn’t do either. It still owns Michael Bay.
Stop it, Craig! Stop it! SIGN OF THE EVIL ONE!
I can understand what you’re saying, Jeff, and I think I agree about the thinking and motivation behind the film. It’s fairly difficult, however, to separate that from the sub-par filmmaking skills on display. The film is so poorly made that it assaults all common decency - not because of its subject matter (which is horrid, for sure) - but because you’re watching something little better than a joke film made by middle schoolers.
However, I can understand how the way in which Craven portrayed the violence was unique and a “first” for horror films. That said, it’s still sucky filmmaking.
A very astute and well-presented argument by Wood (and by you Jeff, conveying it) but I completely reject Bergman’s self-disqualification there, as he is always second-guessing himself through his career. He made similar disclaimers on “Through A Glass Darkly” and was even at one point unhappy with his masterpiece “Persona.” I find “The Virgin Spring” anything but uninteresting, for so many philosophically inherent and artistic reasons.
I counter pose that the Craven film is a blatent rip-off, not fueled by any kind of originality, updating or not. Some of it’s novelties like the woman biting off the man’s penis near the swimming pool have the deliberate intent to shock, and achieve some kind of vulgar ‘nirvana’ but in essence it’s a cheap trick. I honestly don’t rate this film even ahead of that equally nauseating sadistic excursion into rural environs, MOTHER’S DAY, or even MARK OF THE DEVIL.
I respect Wood, who thinks Mizoguchi’s SANSHO THE BAILIFF is the greatest film ever made (an inspired choice) but on this I dismiss him.
I am going to a worker’s meeting now for Obama so I won’t be back till later to check up on my favorite thread.
Sad to hear of Obama’s grandmother’s death a day before the election.
Evan, I like your way of thinking!!!
Have a good lunch, Jeff.
Back from food.
Evan, I understand what you’re saying, and I agree that major aspects of the filmmaking are amateurish. At the same time, I think that much of that amateurishness is what makes the film as powerful (for some) as it is - so much of the standard film grammar is missing that it’s often less like watching a ‘movie’ and more like watching 16-mm footage of an actual assault, which I mean in the best possible way.
Also, I think that even though many technical aspects are lacking, the movie has moments where other aspects are really, exceptionally strong. The performances of the two girls in the woods and what happens to them in that section, for example, is simple, straight-forward high-quality filmmaking, as far as I’m concerned.
Of course, five minutes later we’re watching Dopey Deputy Dawg try to solve the case to a kazoo solo on the soundtrack, so some of that impact is lost. But I absolutely believe that, on balance, the film has more artistic worth and moral seriousness than a simple-minded shocker like Mother’s Day or Mark of the Devil, which are both clearly simple hackwork, or their modern-day equivalents, the Saw movies.
Also, re: Wood, I don’t agree with him in other areas. He’s famous for being the harshest critic of David Cronenberg’s early films, which rubs me the wrong way (although he does make compelling points re: Rabid and The Brood). But I think the arguments that he makes for Last House and for Sansho the Bailiff are still internally consistent.
“I also saw about half of Alexander on TV yesterday night. Meh.”
@Hedwig, it obviously wasn’t Mr Coleman’s best half.
Sam, cult status doesn’t make a movie bad either. It often means either A) snobbish establishment critics didn’t like it or B) it was ahead of its own time and had to find an audience over time. I’m not going to argue that every “cult classic” is a masterpiece waiting to be discovered, only that the term isn’t some instant sign of shit either.
Evan, I actually agree with you but I find either outcome to be fairly demoralizing.
Jeff, if you were to edit down Michael Bay’s movies to just the pretty bits they’d all be mainstream early 80’s music videos, which is appropriate since that’s really all he’s creating: a product with pretentious artistic effort but little or no substance.
Craig, there’s nothing wrong with liking well-made action movies or pretty action sequences, but I don’t think the latter necessarily equals the former. I’d also be happy to argue that Bay has yet to ever film a pretty action sequence that was worth watching twice.
I suppose I should further point out that some of the directors and films you listed, Sam, amongst your favorites of Horror were cult favorites languishing in obscurity or simply critical disfavor. I love me some Carnival of Souls, but that film didn’t receive the following it deserved until VHS and some thoughtful fans brought it to the attention of the broader public.
“At the same time, I think that much of that amateurishness is what makes the film as powerful (for some) as it is - so much of the standard film grammar is missing that it’s often less like watching a ‘movie’ and more like watching 16-mm footage of an actual assault, which I mean in the best possible way.”
I do agree with this point in particular, Jeff, and it’s one of a million cases of a film’s weaknesses providing a potential strength. The amateurishness you describe arguably endows the picture with a verite stylistic attribute that enhances it to a significant degree.
I concur that the film makes an effort to deprive the audience of the cheap thrills and emotional catharsis usually de rigueur of the overall genre.
I’ve long considered Bergman’s own qualms about The Virgin Spring intriguing–he was notoriously self-critical, and I can see why he believed he stumbled with that film but I do not agree myself.
Regarding Michael Bay: in the past few years it seems like more and more people attempting to make waves (or perhaps they are in earnest) bless Bay with auteurship and marked proficiency. This particular critical “reassessment” terrifies me.
I also agree that Mother’s Day and Mark of the Devil are hackwork below Craven.
On another note, I watched William Castle’s Homicidal recently. Between that, Strait-Jacket and other Castle pictures, it’s safe to say Castle had quite a fixation on Psycho, wouldn’t you say, Jeff?
Edit: Haha, Sartre.
Alexander, I don’t think Castle had a fixation on Hitchcock as much as he had a fixation on money, because of course Psycho was the most successful horror movie ever made up to that point (and until The Exorcist, I think), and Castle was smart enough to try to attach himself to what he must have seen as a new formula for cash. It’s worth noting that Hitchcock himself was inspired to make Psycho when he saw how much money Castle’s earlier (cheap, B&W) movies were making.
I just wanted to follow-up re: Michael Bay that I don’t find his action sequences all that well-made either. They tend to be so self-consciously designed to be his idea of ‘cool’ that all other meaning is squashed out of them. I also think they demonstrate a filmmaker in a constant sense of total panic, that he needs to be constantly pandering to force people to pay attention. He strikes me as a deeply needy, fearful, overcompensating person (which makes him sort of an unintentionally ironic auteur).
Oh, and I want to add that I certainly don’t think The Virgin Spring is a _bad_ movie, but I do think it’s overrated, especially within the Bergman canon, and especially because I don’t like that it has a happy ending.
That is an excellent point about Castle’s fixation being on money, and the almost symbiotic relationship between Hitchcock and Castle in the filmic constitution of Psycho (black & white, low-budget, TV crew), and the financial inspiration the film eventually became for Castle.
Although the introduction appearance by Castle in Homicidal certainly pointed to a desire for him to follow in Hitchcock’s cameo-ing/introducing footsteps.
Joel: Actually I never contended that “cult status” translates to “bad film.” It’s just that “cult status” does not always mean “good film.”
CARNIVAL OF SOULS is admittedly a film that was discovered late and achieved cult status. But it’s a terrifically good film.
Another film that has earned serious cult status is CANNIBAL HOLOCAUST. But this is a poor film by any barometer of measurement. Of course there are cult films that got roundly trashed by the same critical establishment that I brought up to Jeff earlier, yet I liked them. Perfect example would be Zeffielli’s BROTHER SUN SISTER MOON. Other “cult films” were actually very good films for one reason or another, like two early John Waters flicks, FEMALE TROUBLE and DESPERATE LIVING, which are so funny they make me piss my pants.
Jeff, THE VIRGIN SPRING does not really have a happy ending. There could never e such after the brutal murder of the family’s angelic daughter. Thematically yes, but certainly not narratively.
Well I’m dropping the gauntlet on this one Sam, but let me commend you for your volunteer work on the Obama campaign.
I do think it’s funny that my random sarcastic comment regarding my Michael Bay-as-auteur phobia prompted a good ten posts in response including Evan’s hilarious “Stop it, Craig! Stop it! SIGN OF THE EVIL ONE!”
Heh heh, great stuff here.
As far as that “At the same time, I think that much of that amateurishness is what makes the film powerful” shtick, I must say in this instance it was unintentional and the result of a low budget, not any inherent artistic quality or expression. If we are to take major note of this quality as a serious attribute, then we similarly must laud every amateur effort, methinks.
Aye Joel, Aye. Today’s Watercooler is one of the all-time greats for certain. And all it takes is one comment to open the floodgates.
Thanks for the compliment, I’m glad we’re on the same page. But just about all of LIC is.
Not every amateur effort. Just the good ones. Just as there are plenty of well-intentioned, highly crafted films by major filmmakers that are, nonetheless, worthless.
I have to say, Sam, that I also enjoy Cannibal Holocaust, but I don’t think it has much legitimate claim towards artistic or social merit. An example of a cult movie that I personally think is crap would be most Troma movies, or Harmony Korine movies, or most Kevin Smith movies outside of Clerks.
And is not a thematic happy ending still a happy ending?
Oh, and also, I thank you for your Obama campaign work.
“We’ve disagreed on a few things lately KB, but we agree 100% on RGM…even if you’re a teeny bit more enthusiastic than I am.”
We have, Craig, but reading your stuff has usually made me more open to the film we’re discussing.
RIght now, I just want to feel blown away by a film, to give fully to it, and I haven’t seen anything like that lately. I saw a much-hyped film today, for instance, and was completely disappointed.
Why K., what much hyped film would you be talking about? I, sadly, share your disappointment. A couple steps back, methinks, when there was so much promise.
And Joel, glad I could brighten up your day a bit. But please never mention your Michael Bay fears again, ok? I have to sleep, y’know.
And on TLHOTL, I kind of lean towards Sam - whatever brilliant moments the film has are more likely accidental than purposeful. It’s a case of a film being in the right place at the right time, but being defined by that rather than by the skill that was used to make it.
Sure, but ‘accidental’ and ‘purposeful’ aren’t necessary for useful meaning. The movie succeeds because Craven’s intentions are apparent beyond his technical control. Sure, he could have done better, but the movie’s heart is in the right place.
I’ll just go through these one by one.
“…though I’m not as lyrical as Miranda…”
Hedwig, my Dutch princess, you are the BOMB. Despite yourself, I think you really did enjoy BRIDESHEAD REVISITED much more than you thought imaginable.
Perhaps you only need another viewing (or two or three) to fall passionately in love with it?
You’re also quite right about the boyfriend thing. Since I was 16, I’ve found it extraordinarily convenient to blame the men in my life for just about everything.
They’re easy - and they can take the heat…
Nicky, I CARE. Even though I’ll likely NEVER see HSM3 in this (or any other lifetime), I’m ecstatic that you enjoyed it.
Any time the people that I love have a good time doing anything (even when I’m not directly involved - hah hah) I’m deliriously happy.
“Still, Miranda’s review scares me.” Hee hee.
Ah, Mr. Juliano. It IS only a review.
Sam, I do adore you and I swear that I DO NOT mean to offend you with my opinions. But they are mine and I have to give them honestly if I am to have any integrity whatsoever.
I would feel that way regardless. But now that I have my own site my POV is particularly precious to me.
My ex felt exactly the same way about RGM as I did. So did the assistant manager of the theatre where it was showing. Both intelligent, perceptive people. The AM (who I know quite well) also said it was getting a decidedly mixed reaction from audiences there.
I hear from an LA friend that a lot of people in the industry loathe it as much as I do.
Which brings me back to my original point..
Though many people may believe that a particular film is great, there will always be various schools of thought regarding any work of art.
It’s all subjective. There is no right or wrong.
It doesn’t faze me a bit that you and I disagree now and then about film. It doesn’t affect my fondness for you AT ALL.
Hell, I’ve disagreed about artistic merit with guys that I’ve lived with, family and close friends. It matters not.
Intense, profound, meaningful discussion is the cornerstone of any modern, free thinking society.
Personally, I wouldn’t have it any other way.
“Why K., what much hyped film would you be talking about? ”
Well, that’s the million-dollar question, isn’t it, Evan? ;-)
While we’re talking about RGM, what is the deal with its distribution? It’s the slowest platform release I’ve ever seen.
It was released in NY and LA on Oct. 3. The week preceding, Anne Hathaway was on the cover of Entertainment Weekly, and she was on multiple magazine covers. She hosted Saturday Night Live that week, which had one of the highest ratings in years at that point. It had and has a pretty bankable star doing a star turn and getting massive Oscar buzz.
With all the hype going for it, how many screens would you have it on, right now, if you were a Sony Pictures Classics executive? 500? 800? 1,000? 1,200?
It’s on 135 in North America.
For comparison, the little-known Canadian Great War epic Passchendaele (has anyone seen this, btw?) is on187 in North America. Two weeks ago, it was on only a few more screens than Man on Wire and Frozen River.
Insane.
Well, I’ve been working 18 hours a day at this trial that I was contracted to work on (and since I didn’t sleep Saturday night, I got one extra hour to work for DST). I didn’t see any movies, but I had a moment to pop in and say hi, so here I am!
Sam, I’m so glad to hear that you enjoyed Let the Right One In. Although I had qualms with certain things (very small) I still think it’s one of the most well-made vampire films that I’ve ever seen.
Hope everyone is doing well. Happy Election Day. Remember to vote
Democratwell and vote often.Hey Alison, glad to hear you’re surviving but that’s an awful way to utilize daylight’s savings time.
Good luck to all my fellow citizens on this crazy election day. In Oregon, we vote by mail so I was done last week. My heart goes out to the rest of you.
For our non-American readership, I hope we don’t disappoint you this year but hey, you gotta love American democracy.
Right?
Alison, thank you very much for that kind acknowledgement, and your own opinion of the film, which you postred last week also spurred me ont o see it this past weekend. Of course Carig’s review (****) was a major plug plug for this great vampire film. I think you are right there. It is one of the best-made of all vampire films.
Miranda, no hard feelings at all, and the feelings for you are mutual. Apparently RACHEL GETTING MARRIED is a huge hit with the critics more than some of the audience……..at last look at RT, the numbers are through the stratosphere:
99 favorable
17 negative
A superb 7.7 cumulative rating……..and:
The film received glowing reviews from this bunch of diverse critics, all of whom almost never agree with this kind of uniformity:
Stephanie Zachareck (Salon)
A. O. Scott (New York Times)
Roger Ebert (syndicated)
Andrew Sarris (New York Observer)
Chris Orr (The New Republic)
Joshua Rothkopf (Time Out)
Armond White (New York Press)
Rex Reed (New York Observer)
All of these critics are great except for White and Reed, but their convergence with the others speaks volumes.
The numbers at Metacritic are equally superb. Everyone I have spoken to on the film, including colleagues, friends and fellow educators consider this as one of the year’s best films.
As far as ANNE HATHAWAY giving a bad performance, well, the “17″ critics who didn’t like the film still praised Hathaway. What does this mean?
It means this:
Critics Who Thought Hathaway Was Great: 116
Critics Who Thought Hathaway Stunk: 0
She will probably win awards, get a sure Oscar nod, etc, etc, and so she should. She was TREMENDOUS!!!!
Still, as Jeff rightly points out, everyone is entitled to their own views. Miranda has taken the time to write a fine review (as always) and she deserves all the credit for not mincing words. Yes, I have disagreed with her a few times as of late, (I specifically remember BRIDESHEAD and THE DUTCHESS) bit I agreed with her completely on HAPPY-GO-LUCKY and ATONEMENT for starters. I feel bad to disagree with my friends here, and I know Miranda’s own observations are dead-on as well with her companion, with other friends and those in the industry, not to mention audience members. RACHEL is apparently a huge hit with the critics, but less appealing to the general audience. It’s hard to explain why.
I read your review Miranda, and it was so very well-written and reasoned, but I refrained to comment, as I respect you far too much.
Jeff: I understand your position on the Craven film. One day we will resurrect this thread. Glad we’re both on the winning side with Mr. O though, as is Alison and all the rest of the LIC regulars.
God Bless Miranda, Jeff, and all the rest here.
I have absolutely no opinion on RGM because I have yet to see it, even though I am dying to, but I can finally say that I really, really liked Let The Right One In. Hopefully I find time to review it by the end of the week or something.
“For our non-American readership, I hope we don’t disappoint you this year but hey, you gotta love American democracy.”
The second Bush victory was hard for many of us to swallow. But I have complete confidence that this time round the American people will show themselves capable of electing a leader the world can embrace as representing the very best of them.
It pains me to see you work such endless hours Alison. Hope the trial ends soon.
Great conversation people.
KB, as much as I’ve liked many of the movies I’ve seen this year, I’m not sure I’ve had that transcendent film-going experience I crave. There have been some close calls, but nothing yet.
Man on Wire has come closest.
Craig, I did not see a single five-star movie yet this year.
But several four-and-a-half star films:
The Pool
Man on Wire
Edge of Heaven
The Visitor
Let The Right One In
WALL-E
The Last Mistress
Syncoteche, New York
A few others are hovering between 4 and 4 1/2:
Rachel Getting Married
Up The Yangtsze
Happy-Go-Lucky
Alexandre
Boy A
When Was the Last Time You Saw Your Father?
Man on Wire and Rachel are actually two that I felt that way about. Man on WIre, especially. I would say Dark Knight. is the best film of its type that I’ve seen, ie superhero epics. But last year, it was like one a week. Not really, but there a lot of very good films. There wasn’t that dry period. Although Ashes of Time Redux helped some.
The film that I mentioned seeing yesterday was one I really wanted to get behind. It just didn’t happen. I’m thinking about seeing it a second time, just to make sure.
I was trying to be ironic there sartre, but I forgot to use the sarcasm font again.
I like the fact that I get to vote and make an informed decision if I so choose, but I lament the fact that our entire voting system often works no better than most third world countries. For the world’s oldest democracy, we make a poor example of it for everyone else.
I did get and appreciate the irony/sarcasm Joel. And I agree, the entire voting system seems anachronistic. When employed within a California State government department I was struck by many examples of systems and processes that seemed more fitting for the 19th century.
We have fifty state bureaucracies all competing for last place in every category, yet all Americans like to see themselves as winners.
Ironic, no?
Beautifully put.
We’re nearing the century mark on this Watercooler, people. I expect all of you to do your part in putting us over the top here, hopefully with witty, incisive commentary on the state of cinema or politics.
OK, I’ll take non-witty and less than incisive.
Aw, Sam, you’re a sweetheart.
Hey, anyone is free to disagree with me at any time. ESPECIALLY FRIENDS.
I don’t mind if ANYONE that I’m fond of comes over to CP and expresses a viewpoint that is different from my own - as long as they’re polite and generous in their enthusiasms.
Of the critics you mentioned, Sam, I have a HUGE respect for ROGER EBERT and ANDREW SARRIS. STEPHANIE ZACHAREK is also a very fine writer - though she and I are rarely on the same page in terms of opinion.
I certainly don’t begrudge ANYONE enjoying RGM. I wish I had. Hah hah.
But it’s impossible to fall in love with everything. That’s life and we must make adjustments accordingly.
I also appreciate your great kindness, Sam, You praised my review even when we were worlds apart in terms of viewpoint. That was exceptionally decent of you.
I should also take the time to point out that I am on the same page with you regarding THE VISITOR. I saw it twice and gave it four stars.
So it was particularly memorable for me as well.
OK, non-witty. Factual.
Things are looking good for Obama in both Indiana and Virginia in the early going. The big Dem counties haven’t reported in yet.
You love THE VISITOR Miranda????
You are hereby free to hate RACHEL all you want!
You are #1, Numero Uno, Ace-in-the Hole and all that good stuff. Now let’s get Obama elected tonite!!!!
Thanks for the kind words Miranda.
You’re a lovely guy, Sam. Thanks for all of that.
HELL YEAH…
If Obama loses, I think I just might cry…