Richard Hernandez13 said:We’re talking about contemporary directors who already possess their own signature styles and are still alive and kicking—which is why, for instance, you won't find Wim Wenders on the list, because the man has already delivered his absolute best.
Well, at least he’s got more life in him than Terrence Malick, doesn't he?😁
lonescout2 said:I mean, those Coen brothers have put together one pretty decent movie...
Wrong, they've made two great ones—their first film, "Bound," is an absolute noir masterpiece. 😁
The list itself is perfectly fine, though it feels a bit too focused on English-speaking cinema, but I can live with that. There are a few (positive) surprises in there: Ang Lee, Aleksandr Sokurov, Walter Salles... but I honestly cannot wrap my head around why people like Alexander Payne (Election, About Schmidt... nothing out of the ordinary) Michael Winterbottom, or Wes Anderson are even on here!? And there isn't a single trace of Jim Jarmusch... pfff. They could have easily squeezed in: Atom Egoyan, Shohei Imamura, Mike Leigh, Wim Wenders, or John Sayles... ...but I suppose that’s just how it always goes whenever anyone tries to compile these "best of" lists, isn't it?
casualotter21 said:1. If you walked into this theater expecting some profound answer to those deep-seated needs we all have—you know, that desperate urge to define our own existence because we're stuck in the soul-crushing void of the daily grind and searching for meaning—then honestly, the only thing you’re going to take away from this movie are the exact same conclusions I’ve seen most people draw in this thread: religious nonsense, mindless copying of other people's "reviews," and just spitting on whatever it is you don't understand. ...
6. Since we are all subjective beings, we all have the right to our own perception, to like or dislike what's served up to us, and to analyze it however we want; frankly, trying to debate it doesn't make much sense if you actually stop to think about it, because then we drift into the realm of philosophy, which the Hollywood machine is likely incapable of sustaining...
So, by your logic, there's no point in discussing movies at all—or "art," if we're being fancy—because you can always hide behind the argument of subjectivity, right? But let's be real: there are certain elements that can be observed objectively, specifically regarding how this entire story is paced and told. And that is where the true disappointment lies. If the same creative minds worked on all three installments, why on earth is there such a massive shift in approach? Why would explaining "revolutionary" ideas in The Matrix Reloaded and The Matrix Revolutions require two-thirds of Reloaded and four-fifths of The Matrix Revolutions to be nothing but ultra-mega-zen-cool action sequences... interrupted by these brief, pseudo-philosophical dialogues? In the whole first movie, we had a narrative that actually functioned on the level of the real world versus the virtual world; the symbolism was multi-layered, and the analogies to our "modern" society were glaringly obvious... it left it up to the viewer to "piece together" the story based on their own sensibilities, which provides plenty of room for that subjective difference you're talking about. But then, in parts 2 and 3, we're suddenly bombarded with lasers, commanders, and explosions... we're watching some Defense Council and a battle between completely polarized Good Guys and Bad Guys (honestly, all that was missing was Jar Jar Binks 😁). Morpheus goes from being one of the central pillars of the story to being completely sidelined, and characters introduced in The Matrix Reloaded—like The Merovingian, Persephone, the Keymaker, and The Twins—get almost zero breathing room in The Matrix Revolutions. And what was the point of that forced romance between Morpheus and Niobe anyway!? Some of these scenes are just straight-up pathetic: Neo, blinded, with Trinity dying in his arms (a blatant rip-off of the ending of John Woo's masterpiece, The Killer), the Machines addressing Neo through that creepy "projection" with that terrifyingly deep voice... and finally, that sunny landscape featuring a small Indian woman, a Japanese man, and an African-American woman... all they needed was to belt out "Give Peace a Chance" while they sat there. 🙄
Honestly, if the Wachowskis had just focused on their own business instead of all this nonsense, maybe we wouldn't be here. Absolute disasters. I swear, they let the money go straight to their heads. 😠 They could have simply left us with the first—and frankly, the only—Matrix movie and then moved on to making something actually entertaining, like "Neo's Revenge," "The Return of Baby-battery," or even "Trinity's Wildest Dreams." Ugh, would it have killed them to hire someone like Roger Corman to produce their next project? Instead, we get these absolute megalomaniacs. Two Oscar nominations? Yeah, right. My foot.
P.S. I should probably wait at least 24 hours after watching a movie before trying to be rational about it. 😁 😁
What an incredible show! It’s almost a shame they had the "misfortune" of playing the exact same venue just a few days after that phenomenal set by Steve Wynn & Miracle 3... Honestly, the absolute highlight for me was how "Satisfied Mind" just hit differently, and then, during the second encore, getting that unexpected acoustic "Americana" rendition of "There Is a Light That Never Goes Out" from Chris and Carla? Just perfection. 🙏 🙏
Finally caught up and watched it yesterday... after a bit of a "delay," if you can call it that. My takeaway? It’s such a shame because the subject matter is actually fascinating, but the execution feels incredibly clunky and heavy-handed. From the very opening credits, Parker makes his stance crystal clear and refuses to budge an inch throughout the entire runtime: capital punishment is an obsolete relic, and the USA absolutely needs to move past it. Throughout the film, they drop these very blunt data points—like how most mass murderers apparently vote Republican, or how the practice doesn't even exist in places like France or Germany. Even the protest scenes feel like caricatures; you have this group of religious fanatics and rednecks cheering for the death penalty, while the opposition is just a collection of liberals, volunteers, and underfunded NGOs. It all feels so overly simplified, almost too black-and-white. Where are the actual moral complexities? Where are the deep ethical dilemmas or the messy internal conflicts? You won't find them here.
Fair warning! If you haven't seen the movie yet but want to, please skip the rest of this post! Of course, as if making a point wasn't enough, Parker decides to really hammer home his agenda by giving Constance (Laura Linney) a terminal illness—leukemia—and painting David Gale (Kevin Spacey) as this broken alcoholic, divorced guy who's lost access to his kid right before everything goes down. It completely shifts the weight of their shared act, doesn't it? If Parker had actually had the balls to portray them as two perfectly "normal" people making a conscious, deliberate choice to do what they did... man, wouldn't that have been gripping? In that scenario, their behavior might have actually aligned with what the American psychologist Lawrence Kohlberg describes in his theory of moral development as the highest sixth level of moral consciousness: acting beyond individualistic principles to uphold universal norms (sort of like Kurtz in Apocalypse Now). Instead, we just get yet another retread of the same old story about a lone individual fighting against "the system," an unjust modern society, and sensationalist media... blah, blah, blah... 🙄
Since it’s clearly more entertaining for some of you to dissect the order in which these threads were opened rather than actually discussing the film itself, allow me to provide a brief history: the very first topic was kicked off by Mark Nelson17, and then a little while later, Jessica Nguyen85 started one as well, though she titled it after Kill Bill Vol. 1... eventually, they were merged into a single thread under her title because, well, that became the official name of the movie in the meantime. Later on, someone else tried to start the exact same topic... but honestly, we can probably let them off the hook since that was only their second post ever made. 🙄
It hasn't really been its own dedicated thread before... though I swear I see it popping up every now and then whenever people are tossing out movie recommendations. Truly an incredible film.
By the way, I’m actually dying to know—has anyone here sat down and watched "21 Grams"? You know, that American film by Alejandro Gonzalez featuring Sean Penn, Benicio Del Toro, and Naomi Watts... has anyone actually seen it?
Good news, we have confirmed another run of dates and the band will play in Canada, Mexico, America and Poland for the first time as well as going back to Austria, Switzerland and the Czech Republic. There are also details of all the new merch we have prepared for the tours and news on supports for some of the shows.
11/25/03 Lincoln Center, Belgrade 11/26/03 The Fillmore, Chicago 11/27/03 Skarpa, Prague 11/28/03 Warsaw
Betty Wright64 said:...and for all those people out there who think British women aren't attractive, I have just two words for you—Keira Knightley. 👍
Wait, isn't she that blonde girl from "Bend It Like Beckham"? I mean, sure, she’s not bad looking... but honestly, my mind keeps wandering back to that famous quote from that director in Hong Kong, Ringo Lama, when he was asked about working with Jean-Claude Van Damme; he basically said, "She looks great... but she acts like absolute garbage." 😁 😁 😁
What a fantastic movie! And honestly, the fact that Philip Zimbardo—the guy who actually ran the original psychological study—was practically blocked from getting it distributed in the States because he was being absolutely buried under a mountain of protest letters and angry emails... well, it just goes to show how much people were "hooked." People were furious about the inhuman treatment of the participants and why he didn't step in sooner. Now, if we're being completely honest, no one actually died during the study, and he did eventually shut the whole thing down, but the filmmakers conveniently left out that little "detail" to keep the drama high. If anyone is actually interested in looking into the experiment itself, here is the link
Disney Inc. stands as one of those massive "big six" media conglomerates—you know the type, like Time Warner, News Corp, Vivendi, Viacom, Sony, or even Disney + Bertelsmann acting as an international powerhouse—that basically hold the entire media landscape of the USA and the rest of the world in their hands. Can you even wrap your head around that level of control? I mean, look at what Disney actually owns:
Walt Disney Company Book Publishing Hyperion Miramax Magazine Subsidiary Groups
ABC Publishing Group Disney Publishing, Inc. Diversified Publications Group Financial Services and Medical Group Miller Publishing Magazine titles include:
Automotive Industries Biography (alongside GE and Hearst) Discover Disney Adventures Disney Magazine ECN News ESPN Magazine (distributed by Hearst) Family Fun Institutional Investor Jane JCK Kentucky Prairie Farmer Kodin Top Famille US Weekly (50%) Video Business Quality
Disney - Broadcasting (this includes the Capital City/ABC subsidiary) Television
ABC Television Network Owned and Operated Television Stations
WLS - Chicago WJRT - Flint KFSN - Fresno KTRK - Houston KABC - Los Angeles WABC - New York City WPVI - Philadelphia WTVD - Raleigh - Durham KGO - San Francisco WTVG - Toledo Radio Stations
WKHX – Atlanta Radio Disney ESPN Radio (syndicated programming) Cable Television
ABC Family Disney Channel Disney Channel SoapNet ESPN Inc. (80% - Hearst Corporation holds the other 20%) which covers ESPN, ESPN2, ESPN News, ESPN Now, and ESPN Extreme Classic Sports Network A&E Television (37.5%, shared with Hearst and GE) History Channel (with Hearst and GE) Lifetime Lifetime Movie Network (50% with Hearst) E! Entertainment (shared with Comcast) International Broadcast
Disney Channel UK Disney Channel Taiwan Disney Channel Australia Disney Channel Malaysia Disney Channel France Disney Channel Middle East Disney Channel Italy Disney Channel Spain ESPN INC. International Ventures Sportsvision of Australia (25%) ESPN Brazil (50%) ESPN STAR (50%) - providing sports coverage all over Asia Asia Net (33%) owners of The Sports Network Other International Ventures (all involving minority ownership)
Tele-Munchen - German television production and distribution RTL-2 - German television production and distribution Hamster Productions - French television production TV Sport of France Tesauro of Spain Scandinavian Broadcasting System Japan Sports Channel Television Production and Distribution
Buena Vista Television Touchstone Television Disney Television Disney Television Animation (which maintains three full production facilities outside the US - specifically in Japan, Australia, and Canada) Disney - Movie Production and Distribution
Disney Pictures Touchstone Pictures Hollywood Pictures Caravan Pictures Miramax Buena Vista Home Video Buena Vista Home Entertainment Buena Vista International Disney - Financial and Retail
Financial
Sid R. Bass (partial interest - involved in crude petroleum and natural gas production) Retail
The Disney Store Disney - Multimedia
Walt Disney Internet Group
ABC Internet Group ABC.com ABCNEWS.com Oscar.com Mr. Showbiz Disney Online (various websites and content) Disney's Daily Blast Disney.Com Family.Com ESPN Internet Group ESPN.sportzone.com Soccernet.com (60%) NFL.com NBA.com NASCAR.com Skillgames Wall of Sound Go Network Toysmart.com (majority stake - educational toys)
Disney Interactive (develops/markets computer software, video games, CD-ROMs)
Disney - Music
Buena Vista Music Group Hollywood Records ( popular music and soundtracks for motion pictures) Lyric Street Records (Nashville based country music label) Mammoth Records (popular and alternative music labels) Walt Disney Records Disney - Theater and Sports
Theatrical Productions
Walt Disney Theatrical Productions (productions include stage version of The Lion King, Beauty and the Beast, King David) Professional Sports Franchises
Anaheim Sports, Inc. Mighty Ducks of Anaheim (National Hockey League) Theme Parks & Resorts
Disneyland - Anaheim, CA Disney -MGM Studios Disneyland Paris Disney Regional Entertainment (entertainment and theme dining in metro areas) Disneyland Resort Disney Vacation Club Epcot Magic Kingdom Tokyo Disneyland (partial ownership) Walt Disney World - Orlando, FL Disney's Animal Kingdom Disney - MGM Studios Walt Disney World Sports Complex (golf course, auto racing track and baseball complex) Disney Cruise Line The Disney Institute
------------------------------------------------------------------------ The Disney animated films we see here—wrapped up in all this imagery of innocence and pure-heartedness—actually serve to mask a massive, sprawling multinational corporation, and frankly, the message being beamed into children's heads through these movies is often deeply problematic! Have you noticed how female characters are frequently reduced to mere caricatures, overly sexualized, or, more predictably, constantly waiting to be rescued by some male lead? And don't even get me started on the representation of African Americans and Asian Americans, who are almost always pigeonholed into a handful of tired racial stereotypes... The whole animation production is essentially just one giant engine designed to peddle toys, video games, and kids' clothing featuring these very same characters. It’s all part of the machine, much like what Michael Eisner, the Disney CEO, once admitted: "To make money is our only objective."
And yet, people just sit there and think the movies are charming. 🙄 😁
restlessviper20 said:What do you guys think of Lambchop and Sparklehorse?
We absolutely adore them. 😁 PS. I happened to catch some pretty scandalous whispers about potential negotiations for Tindersticks to play in Belgrade this October... let's just hope we get a happy ending similar to what happened with SY. 😁 😁 😁
I mean, if you’re already hanging around New York City, why not just pick up a copy of Sight & Sound, or maybe grab some American versions like Film Comment or Film Maker?
A few years back, there was this fantastic American magazine called Neon—it had such engaging perspectives, those wonderfully eccentric deep dives into "cult" classics, and gorgeous vintage posters... but unfortunately, it didn't stay around for very long. 😁 😁
PS. And look, regarding the subject at hand, I did actually flip through both of those magazines I mentioned... and I wasn't exactly blown away (to put it mildly 😁). Total film and the original edition feel way too "straightforward," nothing more than glorified propaganda pieces without any real backbone or opinion, and frankly, I can barely even remember what Hollywood used to be like. 😁 🙄
James Williams3 said:Death to Smoochie—man, it took me forever to finally get my hands on this one; I feel like I’ve been watching it from a distance for ages, just keeping it on the back burner. But let me tell you, folks, this movie is an absolute masterpiece of dark comedy, driven by a stellar cast. And at the helm? The otherworldly Eduard Noriega, who honestly seems capable of playing absolutely anything. I mean, ANYTHING. I have to admit, the guy is climbing my list of favorite actors at lightning speed. Even Robin Williams is nothing short of phenomenal here. It is a must-watch. (Directed by Danny DeVito, who also delivers a fantastic performance in the film itself.)
You have Robin Williams playing this twisted version of a cinematic Krusty the Clown—this children's show entertainer who drinks, has certain... colorful inclinations, and basically puts kids in the front row for whatever happens next just for the paycheck. 😁 😁 😁 It is such a subversive piece of filmmaking... it depicts the entire television industry in the most gut-wrenching, cynical way possible, all while being wrapped up in this "comedy" package. Truly one of the best mainstream American films to come out in the last couple of years.