Posts by Larry Martin11

Melissa Gray93 said:Steven Spielberg's Hero from 2002

...man, 😍 Doyle 🤣 is something else, isn't he?

...maybe we’d all actually get along better—and we wouldn't have all these constant American/European misunderstandings 🙂—if everyone just explained their reasoning: like, why is this specific actor actually incredible? What are his best roles? Which director really brings out his best work? Honestly, the whole thread would be way more engaging if there was actual discussion happening instead of just endless list-making 🙂

...good grief, look at this thread 😍

...so, just a quick heads-up so you don't forget 🙂...
...tomorrow, Friday, March 30th, at 10:00 PM, we're watching Hearts of Aga, an indie film by Orson Welles—so, if anyone's actually curious, or just feels like...🙂

...good grief, Kaurismäki 😍 😍 😍

...if every single person from this forum decides to crowd into the movie theater at once, there won't be any seats left 😁 👋

...so, I guess there's nothing happening regarding the presentation of the Danish film school at Sundance this year after all? I know people were talking about it and even making announcements, but now—suddenly—it’s like everyone just stopped mentioning it entirely...😢

ironfalcon9 said:Just some date night ideas for those with partners 🤣

🤣

...so, yeah—this is strictly for the people actually in relationships. For us singles? Nothing for us. 😬

...joking aside, everyone should check out 😍 this page here , or this condensed version here , and stuff 😍
like that.

...it’s complete nonsense, honestly—there isn't a single practical use for it. Just innovation for the sake of innovation, I guess. :triplrolajz:

...that’s just wrong. IMHO 🙂 Good Shepherd is absolutely a movie you should see on the big screen—purely because of how it looks visually 🙂. As for now? I’d say go ahead and watch it, though with a bit of a caveat: it isn’t exactly a masterpiece (and it’s certainly not some life-changing experience), but there are definitely some standout moments 🙂. Is it a "must-see"? Not really...

...but honestly, the hardest part to swallow was realizing that what I used to label as "high art" is actually just... massive superficiality. I don't know—the first time I watched it, I was so caught up in Lars that everything else felt secondary to Letha, aside from the "technical" side of things (you know, how he meets the requirements and clears the hurdles)... but now? Now it's Leth that really sticks in my craw. Watching him work through that third, and especially that fourth film, I couldn't shake the feeling that there isn't any actual artistry hidden behind those obstacles. It just feels like a guy living his comfortable life, if you catch my drift 😁 😳
...and then there's Lars... that transition from "perfection" to just being a "man"—it really gutted me. I think once I finally build up the nerve to rewatch Breaking The Waves, I’m going to try to flip the script or somehow physically shift my perspective, because the truth seems to keep slipping through my fingers... or maybe I should just try taking some antidepressants before the movie starts (just so I'm not promoting any other substances on the forum)? 😵

...you stumble upon all sorts of things when you're cataloging movies—this thread being one of them 😍
...I rushed to watch it immediately, but—well, I'm still stuck on the same issue: I can never quite wrap my head around why The Perfect Human is considered such a cinematic masterpiece 😵. And this Leth guy isn't helping matters at all. If I understood the original correctly, it seems he abandoned the core concept in every single variation except, maybe, the first one. The third installment feels like a total betrayal—it's almost like watching the Coens making a joke out of it, laughing while they meticulously time every single cigarette ash to fall at just the right moment 😁. It’s as if Leth and Lars aren't even speaking the same language—like two completely different wavelengths. The whole situation is honestly ridiculous (he'll probably have to be punished since the "genius" 😍 isn't satisfied 🤣), but as Michelle Gonzalez said ages ago 🙂, the idea of exploring variations on a theme is brilliant. If they had both actually put in a bit more effort, this could have been infinitely better 🙂

...but even as it stands, as a prompt for actual thought and a showcase for Trier's usual madness 😍, it's a pretty interesting piece of work 🙂

...Lawrence Booth2, it's been a minute 🙂 👋
...not to get too off-topic here, but that was a seriously great movie 😍

...hmmm...
...reading through what you guys are posting, I kind of see both sides—I agree with some points and disagree with others 🙂 I watched this movie a while back, and I’ve been trying to wrap my head around why I liked certain parts and why other parts felt totally off... though, honestly, it’s easier to spot the mistakes. They aren't so much script issues (though that happens rarely), but more about directing and acting... From a directing standpoint, Robert De Niro really bit off more than he could chew. Not only did he pick such a massive, sprawling theme, but he made it unnecessarily messy with endless time jumps, repetitions, and an obsession with minute details. He got so lost in the weeds that the film basically falls apart halfway through under the weight of everything he tried to cram in. With that many jumps and tangents, you’d expect a seasoned director to handle it better—so how is it any easier for an actor who’s only dipping his toes into directing? Watching it, I felt like the movie lost its compass at times; it was like he just shoved everything he thought *had* to be seen into the frame, hoping the audience would somehow piece the loose ends together... He could have used "footnotes"—the way Winterbott often does—or just limited the constant jumping back and forth, but he didn't. And he refused to cut things that were just dead weight (like those repetitive dinner scenes year after year just to make a point, or the redundant arguments between the spouses that lacked any real punch and could have been said much more concisely...). It ended up with a structure that feels like it belongs in a prestige TV series rather than a movie, even if it runs three hours... Also, spending so much time on these beautiful, descriptive scenes left him with no room for the actual ending. It leaves you with this rushed, low-intensity impression where things being built up slowly never actually finish. Some characters (especially Baldwin) just hang in mid-air, some plot points are rushed shut (like the bank account subplot), and key moments feel unconvincing—specifically that core dilemma regarding family vs. country. The relationship between Edward and Clover should have been the emotional anchor for that, but since we don't really *see* or feel their connection, it's mostly a failure of the acting...
...The biggest "acting" issue has to be (and she's incredibly talented) A. Jolia. For reasons I can't fathom, she plays this powerful, intense woman who breaks down almost instantly as a cheap femme fatale, which pretty much guts half of the central relationship. I don't get why she was cast, aside from her star power helping pull people into a theater for a movie with a pretty grim subject matter. Matt Damon plays a role very similar to his part in The Departed—essentially playing the same guy with a slight thematic twist—and while he isn't bad, he didn't exactly blow me away either, though he is much more convincing than his co-star. Baldwin is just... Baldwin, as usual. Blanchard is fine as Laura, while Hurt and Hutton are above average. As for De Niro, he feels less like an actor here and more like a presence. The most interesting part—though I wouldn't call it a huge surprise since he's always great—is John Turturro. He was brilliant in his small role as Brocca, Edward's quiet "right hand." Turturro plays him with a sort of dual personality: initially a bit of a troublemaker and provocateur, then shifting into this calm, kindly-looking bureaucrat (which De Niro highlights beautifully with close-ups of his eyes, which actually radiate warmth; for a second, he reminded me of that incredible character in a Scorsese film, with that same subtle, unassuming quality). While it seems vague at first, it all clicks during maybe the best scene in the movie—that transformation from "office guy" to predator in a split second, where every gesture suddenly makes sense. After that, seeing him at the end, polished in a perfect suit, is even harder to process. Turturro makes the transition look so effortless that I actually felt bad the movie premiered right after Oscar season; even if this isn't his absolute peak, in a field of mediocre nominees, it would have been unthinkable not to see him in the running for Best Supporting Actor.🙂...but let's be real—one standout performance and a handful of decent ones aren't enough to save a movie. Even a star-studded cast couldn't quite fix Robert De Niro's issues here...
...still, despite how messy, disjointed, and lacking in intensity it felt, the film managed to hit me in a strange way. I actually liked the story—usually, these plots are either totally boring or get completely watered down by some forced romance, but that didn't happen here. I also appreciated that old-school atmosphere woven through the whole thing (even if every era looked more or less the same). Plus, the choice for the protagonist felt grounded and realistic, and I loved that it didn't try to shove "correct" American values down my throat. It offered a very unidealistic—maybe even non-ideological, if that's not too strong a word—look at what "serving your country" actually means... whatever that entails. At the end of the day, I walked out of the theater feeling satisfied. I even caught myself recommending it to people, which I guess is the ultimate sign that it actually worked for me...🙂

wearygardener13 said:And now another legend sinks into oblivion 😢
first the dabar, now you...
The only one who could pull me out would be Larry Martin11—and even then, only if he admits he can't stand Lars von Trier 😬

...wait, now? After I've finally slogged through the European Trilogy (Epidemic 😍 😍 😍 )? Jeez, you're asking a lot...😬

...and what kind of avatar is that anyway? At this point, I honestly can't tell who's Tinko and who isn't 😵

...has 😉

David Price5 said:Magnolia (1999) — featuring William H. Macy, John C. Reilly, and Philip Seymour Hoffman (though this holy trinity is missing Steve Buscemi)

...anyway, you get that same perfect trio energy in Boogie Nights . 😍

...and while Buscemi is a total genius, he’s part of a different legendary set: Buscemi - Goodman - John Turturro😍

...so I watched it... and honestly, Forest is great, but Jim Jarmusch—unfortunately (since I listen to way too much stuff about him, and I really do respect his specific directorial style)—just doesn't quite click for me as a director 🙂 now, don't get me wrong (unlike the guy above who just rolls his eyes immediately 😉), Whitaker is a solid actor, but I can't help feeling that the movies he works on just don't match his actual caliber...
...but anyway, that's getting pretty off-topic 🙂

...Man, what a total disaster of a movie 😵—I actually stumbled into the theater by mistake, thinking I’d grabbed tickets for Pocahontas 😬—and honestly, it sticks in my mind as one of the absolute worst things I've ever seen... 🙂 Unfortunately, this was the exact film that made me lose all respect for—now an Oscar winner, no less—Forest Whitaker, and nothing has been able to win me back since (mind you, I haven't seen The Last King of Scotland yet)...

...honestly, I was just sitting there yesterday thinking about how long it's been—it really is high time someone put together a proper retrospective on him. That would be pretty incredible 🙂

...it'll probably show up during the American Film Festival—assuming I can stay patient until April 😘