Posts by Nathan Baker71

Jose Chase2 said:Good grief. Instead of facing prison for his crimes, he simply makes a few movies and suddenly everyone is ready to forgive him.

Jose Miller17 said:I suspect Polanski’s downfall wasn't actually his filmography, but rather—and I say this with all the artistic grace I possess—his decision to flee the States.
As for Woodie, I suspect his filmmaking—born from the very crimes that landed him behind bars—might only find an audience in France.

I have no interest in playing defense attorney for either of these two lunatics.
Well, this seems like a textbook example of typical female reasoning. Or perhaps you were all present when those men "coerced" minors into such acts? Despite the risk of being labeled a misogynist, I have to ask why you're ignoring the possibility that these "girls" actually seduced—though let's be honest, they assaulted—the Jewish gentlemen in question.

I am well aware that you are all trying to get a rise out of me. By all means, carry on. I suppose I have earned my 400,000,000 blows.

I genuinely enjoyed it. I mean that sincerely; I wouldn't want anyone to mistake my opinion for more of my usual cynicism or provocation.

lepa.pametna@neudata said:We have what we need, and we can make it work...

What's the issue?

Liability is the issue. But we can discuss that, along with plenty of other things, over a drink sometime.😁

slylynx16 said:Lester is easily one of the most powerful cinematic characters I've ever seen.

American Beauty is just more pretentious garbage masquerading as a masterpiece....😁

Karen Diaz32 said:- you must never, under any circumstances, suggest an American film is subpar. If the director of that film was kicked out of the very academy you're trying to join, criticizing the work is essentially spitting in his professors' faces.

- you have to demonstrate a fascination with themes involving marginalized people; it’s a guaranteed hit with the admissions committee. Stories about the working class, the destitute, the drifters—wow, yes, they eat that up! Wealthy characters are persona non grata, unless you’re "exposing" them to show that "even the rich cry." An interest in the sick, the disabled, the eccentric, or any minority group—national, sexual, ethnic—is even more effective. They’ll weep, your camera will capture the misery, and *they* will declare, "There, that's it! That's true cinematic material." How touching.

- you should never admit to having had (if you ever did) experience on a professional or semi-professional set. You are merely raw dough that they need to knead into something useful. You cannot arrive there fully formed, or even partially formed.

- you mustn't possess a firmly defined worldview. They are there to provide one for you.

- you shouldn't let anyone suspect you've read extensively or watched much cinema. Knowledge is a liability; it might inadvertently highlight their own ignorance. Never question authority; college lasts four years, at least.

- you can't show ignorance either—otherwise, what purpose do you serve there? You must strike a precise balance: appear interested, moderately informed, and reasonably intelligent, while implying you will absorb everything else from them. After all, they are the masters and your professors.

Simple enough, isn't it?
And once you're enrolled, unlike other universities where students are just students until they graduate, at USC everyone becomes an actor, a director, or a screenwriter the moment they pass the entrance exam.
Cheers.

I think I'll print this out and frame it. 🙏

Altman?

1. 3 Women
2. Player
3. McCabe & MRS
4. Short Cuts

Taylor Brown61 said:A total disaster of a film. 🙂

Even Streep couldn't have saved that one. 👎

Streep can only make the aesthetic experience worse. I assume you were referring to her acting caliber. Honestly, everyone seems to praise that most overrated actress of all time by default. 🙂Only Pauline Kael had the guts to stand up to it.
Does anyone feel compelled to mention that Lev Schreiber delivered his finest performance in that film?
Is Butterfly Effect actually the superior choice? 😂

True, considering the competition, this works well as a political thriller—especially since the original wasn't exactly a masterpiece...

Anderson really missed the mark this time. Life Aquatic is a pretty weak film—overly stylized, hollow, and frankly, boring. It feels like pure mannerism. I suppose I liked The Royal Tenenbaums because they were inspired by my favorite novel, "Freni i Zui," even if they essentially offered a superficial interpretation of Salinger's Steve.

The Ghost and the Darkness is 👍
It may not be a masterpiece, but it’s genuinely good—right up there with Jaws.
I realize critics, including Ebert, have trashed it, but I stopped caring about their opinions long ago. I find it curious that you place such weight on an Oscar; it hasn't been a relevant award for a long time, if it ever was.

I find it hard to believe that nobody has brought up Roegov's "man Who Fell to Earth." It might not be the greatest sci-fi masterpiece ever made, but it certainly holds its own.

Here is how one film critic justified ranking this movie
among the top ten releases in American theaters last year:

Because it breathes life back into the "body" and offers the world a chance to remember the Virgin Mary; because it asserts that humanity can triumph over inhumanity; and because it explores motherhood through a post-postmodern lens—not as a retreat into patriarchy, but as a transcendence of existing societal structures.
😕

What radical philosophical ideas are you even referring to?
Since when was existentialism considered radical?
Given that you're treating me like a high schooler, I can only assume you've never actually heard of Sartra 🙂

I suppose Roger Ebert is the greatest thinker in your eyes. 😁 It's hard to tell whose film observations are more banal—yours or his.

Honestly, ironcrane7 is getting on my nerves again. Once more, she completely missed the point,
concluding that the film was unintelligent, forced, and entirely lacking in humor. While I agree it feels a bit forced, I find the work quite intelligent and original.
It’s essentially an elitist piece of cinema. Personally, I found it entertaining and refreshing, especially given that optimistic ending. Since ironcrane7 is a well-known critic of philosophy, I wouldn't take her comments too seriously, particularly if you have an appreciation for art. To ironcrane7, I’d suggest sticking to documentaries. 🙂

I recommend this one to all the Charlie Kaufman fans out there.
By the way, I’m not claiming the film is a masterpiece; I admit it's forced and often exhausting, but patient viewers will likely walk away satisfied.

Correction. I made a rather glaring error earlier. 😁 In my view, Natalie Wood's finest work is actually "The Searchers".🙏

It’s a fine film, though perhaps a bit overrated. It reminds me of that line in Dreamers: "Godard said—Nicholas Ray is cinema," and so on.
As for James Dean, I find East of Eden more compelling, while Natalie Wood’s best work is West Side Story. Rebel Without a Cause offers a decent look at the generational divide, but it feels somewhat dated.