Posts by ironcrane7

If he keeps playing the same old character in comedies, I honestly don't mind one bit.

It wasn't exactly foolish of me to hold out hope, but that opera aria scene? Absolutely brilliant.

Larry Martin11 said:👍
...Man, I wish I’d phrased it that way 😍 but hey, you have my vote!

...And if I can jump in, I’ll add just one thing: at the very least, a movie should offer some level of hedonistic pleasure—meaning the person watching it actually enjoys themselves. That alone would be something. Even if a film were stripped down to nothing more than pure entertainment, it would at least be fun. However, this whole approach of hoarding totally negates even that, in my opinion. It's no longer about enjoying what you see; it’s just about watching so you can list it later—or, even worse, buying it just so you can own it and add it to a collection. Sadly, there's no escaping this mindset entirely (I mean, if I watch two movies today from two different eras, with two different styles, directors, and sensibilities, how much attention can I really give to either?), but it's a shame we're amplifying that exact behavior

Information terror—that is simply the era we live in.
I used to consider hedonism to be that constant stream of audio-visual stimulation we are subjected to, where film is just one more way we keep ourselves hovering at this hyper-stimulated level. Because personally, I am a hedonist; I crave catharsis, that specific feeling where a movie keeps spinning in your head for weeks after the credits roll.

Larry Martin11 said:...this thread is basically the perfect case study for how much the values and life dynamics of Americans have shifted. It used to be that we’d discuss The Conversation based on whether it was—well, good or not—focusing on the twists, those unexpected endings, or even the "process" itself. We talked about what else could still catch us off guard in a movie. But now? Now we just list things endlessly. We exhaust ourselves trying to rank one thing over another—because apparently, in every single category, something must come out on top, which implies everything can just be filed away into neat little boxes. And as if that wasn't enough, we all just take it for granted that our categorizations are somehow (!) distinct from one another, even though none of us can actually explain why. We don't have the time to talk about it; we just need to keep listing. We'll obsess over cinematography, direction, the script, or the acting—those "standalone" elements that are easy to compare—but the actual quality of a film's unpredictability, its sense of wonder, requires me to completely redefine my entire way of watching movies. Honestly, that's too much work for three lifetimes...

...I honestly think this is the most depressing thread ever started on this forum. 😢 🙂

I’d argue that this "checkbox" approach to cinema is symptomatic of the death of true film culture. Everything has been reduced to a consumerist, pluralistic dimension where people no longer say, "I watched that movie," but rather, "I own that in my collection." Not that I’m trying to vent my frustrations here, but this total free-for-all—this complete lack of criteria—strips away all context. It turns film from a medium for communicating ideas into nothing more than pure, hedonistic gratification. And honestly, none of it is helped by this recent American obsession with narrative gimmicks, which seems to be where all our modern experimental ambition has gone to die.
The Conversation, much like the pakulin trilogija (which likely served as an inspiration just as much as Blow Up did), functions primarily as a chronicle of the Watergate era paranoia that gripped America. While the screenplay feels somewhat predictable and flat, the film is absolutely revolutionary in its sound design. And, of course, it remains one of those tragic, rare instances where we get to see John Cazale’s brilliance captured on celluloid.

Mandy Barry Manilow. 😍

So, I actually found myself watching a behind-the-scenes feature on The White Stripes just the other day while I was busy grinding through some mindless tasks.

quietdriver3 said:Do yourself a favor and grab some skins of the '93 Bottom Live from a torrent. Seriously. You won't regret it; seeing them in a continuous flow without being butchered by TV censorship makes it a totally different beast.

Or just download Young Ones. It’s not exactly "laugh-out-loud" hilarious, but man, what an absolute viewing experience.

Personally, I find Young Ones absolutely hysterical. Alexei Sayle is basically every manic Eastern European archetype rolled into one. 😍 The best episode features Good Life (since we're already discussing terrible British sitcoms).

I ended up watching about half the film in its entirety, even if it was just on a small screen—including that pregnant socialite who mysteriously vanishes later on.
It’s actually quite good. I was worried it would turn into one of those "issue movies" filled with endless, repetitive questions, but Mike Leigh handled it beautifully, bringing such genuine empathy and warmth to the characters.

Soft Machine - Moon in June

wearygardener13 said:But I’d also have to bring up Grega Kinnear; in my eyes, he’s easily the most underrated actor working today. He completely steals every scene he's in, yet somehow, he can't seem to string together even two or three great performances in a row.

I find myself agreeing with this sentiment. Grega 😍

northernangler17 said:Technically, it's a 2005 film—it hit theaters in the States around November of '05 and had already snagged its first Golden Lion at the Venice Film Festival by September—but since it didn't premiere here until February 2006, I guess we could call it a 2006 release.😍 😍 😍

By that logic, I might just nominate Kiss Kiss Bang Bang instead; I think that was actually making the rounds here this year.
Babel doesn't even arrive in the USA until January, though I doubt I'll bother watching it.

Larry Martin11 said:...may I ask why? 🙂 Personally, I actually enjoyed it—it’s quite witty, and I love that "movie about a movie" approach...🙂 It felt logical for a smart filmmaker like Winterbottom to shoot something like this, and I thought he did a pretty solid job. 🙂

Because I am honestly sick to death of the all-star comedy casts that rotate incessantly on American television, especially Steve Coogan. It's a scene that constantly celebrates itself, even when attempting satire. A total vanity project, if you catch my drift. 😉 😬
I know you're a fan of Winterbottom. I thought his take on historical themes in 24 Hour Party People was brilliant, especially how he used that dual-layered narration with constant footnotes and an unreliable narrator. But this? This just grated on my nerves. In a moment of pure, classic irritability, I walked out of the theater. I won't elaborate further, other than to say they probably shouldn't be hiring Coogan for film projects anymore.

Was *Brokeback Mountain* released back in 2006?

I haven't been particularly active in the theater this year, but even within such a comparative vacuum, *Brick* and *The Three Burials of Melquiades* deserve a nomination. And *Children of Men*, of course. Oh, and *Cache*, naturally.

When it comes to animation, I’ve unfortunately had to suffer through a lot of garbage, but two stand out as truly exceptional: Cars and Flushed Away. I'll admit I might be biased toward the latter because of that British voice cast, but it’s also one of those rare gems—much like Cars—that doesn't rely on cheap, tired parental jokes just to appeal to adults. Honestly, Cars probably only ranks this high here because the competition is so pathetic.
Oh, naturally—even *Wallace and Gromit: The Curse of the Were-Rabbit* is on the list. By all means, let’s just go ahead and buy everything British.

As for my biggest disappointment of the year? Definitely Cock and Bull Story.

The middle section was solid, but that first half-hour was such a slog I had to rewind three times just to catch up. If they’d actually paced the intro better and spent more time on the unraveling and the actual procedures (including how they get out of the woods), the final twist might have actually landed. Plus, the whole "noir" label would feel a lot less forced.
As it stands, the whole vibe feels like a total Fincher wannabe, and honestly, it gives off some serious Nolan debut energy—except, you know, executed with zero competence.
Regarding the cinematography—I'm assuming this is digital? I wasn't a fan; it felt amateurish and flat. It probably would've worked much better with some gritty, dirty tones, something like Beyoncé.
But hey, word is there’s a Hollywood remake in the works.

Jun Tabor. Especially when she’s performing alongside Maddy Prior. They even have songs about impotence.

I haven't seen the original version, which—if you believe the internet—was allegedly quite racist. It’s fascinating that Freddie Washington turned down offers to hide her heritage and race; in fact, she was a fierce political activist and served as the president of the Black (eek) SAG-AFTRA.
In Sirk's version, that role is played by a white actress. However, Sirk masterfully repackages everything into this manipulative blend of pathos and irony, resulting in a truly provocative film.

By contrast, Quote: Far from Heaven is just an unnecessary, campy mess and a mere technical exercise—a plain, issue-based drama stripped of both context and soul.

Richard Jenkins and Robert Duvall

Marguerite Duras

I remember his films being on TV back in the eighties—maybe they were part of some special series on Georgian cinema, I can't quite recall. He was ethnically Armenian, though he did most of his work in Georgia. I’ve seen plenty of his stuff, but Sayat-Nova (The Color of Pomegranates) remains the most captivating experience for me; it’s this mesmerizing sequence of images and symbols, almost static at times, yet absolutely saturated with folk motifs... truly stunning. Honestly, the only film that even remotely reminds me of Parajanov is Pasolini's Medea.

Dreamcatcher 😁