CheckEmoji Community · the emoji forum
🏠 Home 🆕 What's new ❓ Unanswered 🔥 Popular 📡 RSS Members 👥 0 online log in · register
Home › Joseph Lee3 › Posts

Posts by Joseph Lee3

271 posts shown.

Pink Panther (Peter Sellers) in Movies ·
So, I actually sat down and tried to watch the movie yesterday... ugh...👎 The truth is, the reason behind Charade is just Blake Edwards’ insatiable hunger for a paycheck. Without Sellers carrying the weight, you can really see how trivial he is as an independent auteur; his success as a director was always heavily dependent on a third party—either a brilliant actor or a killer script (like Truman Capote in Breakfast at Tiffany's).

For those of you who actually enjoy reading, here’s my little breakdown of the Pink Panther saga.

That first installment back in '63 wasn't much more than a high-budget fashion shoot. It was essentially a studio bankrolling a few months of filming in fancy American resort towns just to churn out some light entertainment that audiences would happily swallow. In that era, I think the standout was Stanley Donen’s Charade starring Cary Grant. Anyone who's seen it knows the blueprint is identical to Pink Panther: a glamorous vacation spot, wealthy socialites, a theft, and a bumbling inspector acting as a mere side note... which is exactly what Clouseau was supposed to be in Pink Panther, too. But because Sellers tends to hijack the screen the second he appears, the main cast led by Niven ended up pushed into the background. Honestly, nobody even bothered asking what happened to them in the later sequels...

Eventually, Clouseau became a standalone character, and through the sequels, Sellers turned him into a total caricature for one simple reason: he hated everything associated with the series, including Clouseau himself, yet that same Clouseau was the thing putting food on his table because the franchise was a gold mine. Sellers seemed to find a twisted amusement in seeing just how far this kind of onscreen deviation and gothic direction could go before the audience revolted. You can clearly see how much Clouseau in, say, the fourth entry (Pink Panther Strikes Again) drifts away from the original concept—or even the second one, A Shot in the Dark, which is a genuine, unpolished gem based on a novel where they just swapped names to fit the series. By then, the dialogue becomes unrecognizable, his disguises and costumes turn absurd, and the settings feel almost surreal...

In the final year before he passed away, Sellers was working on a screenplay for yet another Pink Panther. He managed to finish a second draft, and the plan was to film it without Edwards, since their working relationship had become such a nightmare. The Mirschev producers knew exactly who the real money-maker was, so they gave him free rein, even allowing him to direct without Edwards for the first time. I actually managed to track down that script and read it—you can tell it isn't an Edwards piece; Sellers' influence is all over it. Apparently, the first draft was so far outside the established tone that the producers demanded they "Panther-up" the whole thing. This sequel was meant to introduce some romance for Clouseau, but... well... it’s strange to me that the Mirschevs didn't just use that script after Sellers died. It was their property, after all, yet they just kept moving forward with entirely new Panther productions... weird.

But honestly, it's probably for the best that nothing came of it. If it had been produced, Sellers probably would have ended up using a stand-in for most of the film anyway. He was so ill toward the end that he could barely walk; most of the time he had to be driven around or carried. Poor guy. 😢
The best movies of all time? in Movies ·
silentridge3 said:No, I think you might have gotten me wrong. I’m not actually against surveys, not even in this kind of format. Besides, I already cast my vote (for "others") and I’ve shared my thoughts regarding Czechia. What I’m really trying to do is just contribute my own "two cents" to the discussion within the scope of this thread.

The core point I want to make—and something I wish people would always keep in the back of their minds—is this pervasive wave of cinematic Americanization. I honestly don't know where else in the civilized world we see such an overwhelming percentage of American movies being shown compared to here (maybe only in the USA itself). We basically, unfortunately, don't have much of a choice, and over time we've just been conditioned to believe that American cinema is the only thing that truly qualifies as "film." Everything else feels like a pale imitation of a movie, which usually means it's just an imitation of an American movie... And I suppose that subconsciously shaped cinematic taste of ours could be a deciding factor when we're trying to pick out the very best in cinematography...

which is exactly what Anthony Kim18's survey results suggest... 😬
The best movies of all time? in Movies ·
Exactly. This whole idea of defining what’s "the best" is honestly just a slippery, elusive concept that doesn't carry much weight in the real world. Top ten lists are basically just statistics—and as they say, there’s truth, lies, and then there’s statistics. Personally, I think someone’s favorite movies say more about their own personality than the films themselves; I prefer to build my own opinion from scratch once I actually sit down to watch them. My own list of "all-time greats" is constantly shifting and evolving, which feels like the only sane way to approach it.

Regardless, I actually dig the underlying logic behind your cinematic picks! 🙂 Quality per capita... sounds pretty reasonable to me. Though, let's be real, the actual reason is probably just because you happen to enjoy them most.
The best movies of all time? in Movies ·
Anthony Kim18 said:If you ask me, that similarity shows up in how much they share the same "pool" of talent.
Especially when it comes to actors.
So many stars who make it big in Britain end up conquering Hollywood.
Sure, that happens with other countries too, but with the language being the same, it feels less like moving abroad and more like just moving house.

I'll just list a few: Alfred Hitchcock, Michael York, Anthony Hopkins, Hugh Grant, Sean Connery, Rowan Atkinson.
Honestly, I feel like both Charlie Chaplin and Anthony Hopkins are essentially British staples.

And look at the flip side—just think about the themes, like the whole Bond series!

You've got a point. The more I sit here trying to find the right way to put this, the more I realize there are very few "islands" left in the world that maintain a truly systematic, national cinema. I suspect the culprit is the globalized capitalist market. Film is a business, after all, and business doesn't care about borders. It’s like how local sodas don't get much traction; even in Thailand, everyone is drinking Coca-Cola. Sure, there are still people selling coconut water and folks buying it, but that's become a niche thing now. That's my point regarding film.

There has always been a blending of talent. The Americans usually have it harder in that regard because, if they ever had a distinct cinematic identity, it often came from immigrants moving in. You had plenty of German technicians, and some of the most successful directors weren't even originally from the US (think Korda, Losey, or Lester...). You could probably start a whole debate over how much a Canadian filmmaker like Emeric Pressburger actually contributed to the American cinematic landscape and whether his work can even be considered "American."

But personally, I think actors are just a secondary part of the production machine. Their performance depends 99% on the director's vision and methodology, so I wouldn't really factor them into the conversation about migrations affecting a national style. Unfortunately, reality works differently—the audience's subjective obsession with a "star" is sadly part of the toxic dish being served: one pretty face with a finished acting workshop dictates the entire industry standard. It's unbelievable.
The best movies of all time? in Movies ·
David Price5 said:Just mute the player and turn the contrast down to zero, and you're all set.

Now this one actually works... I've watched a few films that way myself. Take the whole debate surrounding Alfred Hitchcock's Vertigo, for instance; most people agree it hits much harder as a black-and-white film, so that's how I experienced it.

The real headache is when people try to be clever and produce an original black-and-white film that just doesn't hold up under that lens. In those cases, there isn't much I can do to help you...
The best movies of all time? in Movies ·
brightcobra91 said:Ummm... what happened to Italy? Japan? Spain? Sweden? (And I’m talking about their cinema, not just geography 😁). Seriously, I could go on forever—this poll is totally incomplete and honestly, it's a mistake to even bother voting.

Forget the poll itself. Just tell us which one you actually dig and walk us through your reasoning; we're all ears...
The best movies of all time? in Movies ·
Samuel Smith5 said:Come on, there’s no need to get worked up about it. Our tastes in cinema are just worlds apart. Honestly, anything older than I am feels completely uninteresting to me. I know, I know—it sounds sacrilegious, but that’s just how it is. I gravitate toward newer films. From what I can gather, you think color is the absolute worst thing to ever happen to movies 😁 (just kidding)

Heh, it isn't even the color. It's the sound. There's just something about the audio that doesn't sit right with me. 😉
The best movies of all time? in Movies ·
Samuel Smith5 said:When you're looking at British cinema, don't go forgetting the Monty Python films. They’re far from being disposable

I suppose I’m just a bit unconventional in my tastes. To me, they aren't exactly the pinnacle of cinematic achievement. It feels like almost every comedic trope they utilize can be traced back to something that came before them, so while they certainly carved out a specific, eclectic niche and built a massive cult following, I wouldn't go so far as to call them truly groundbreaking. That isn't to say they aren't entertaining, though... 🙂
The best movies of all time? in Movies ·
Anthony Kim18 said:Look, wouldn't it be fairer if every single country in the world got its own option, even if 99% of them ended up with zero votes?
Usually, even in real statistics, the options with tiny numbers of votes are either ignored or lumped together.
That's why I just grouped them all under "others."

It doesn't really matter; at the end of the day, this is your poll. 🙂 You set the rules however you think is best. I was just jumping into the conversation... honestly, I love it when people debate national cinemas like this, even without a formal poll.

Personally, my heart belongs to France. My top three directors are all French—Jean Renoir, Henri-Georges Cluzot, and Jacques Tati—so I'm happy to cast my vote there. 😬 In my view, French cinema has managed to stay at the "top" longer than most when you weigh quality against quantity; they’ve produced more original movements and directors than almost anyone else. They were somewhat of a late bloomer compared to, say, German cinema, but while the German-speaking world essentially scattered across the globe (think Lubitch, Lang, Emmerich, Murnau, Wilder...), the French tend to stay pretty true to their own roots. That said, I’ve struggled to sit through much French film over the last 30 years or so. A Jean-Pierre Jeunet film? Honestly, it was a struggle... though I suppose it's "auteur" driven, which is probably what matters most.

Someone mentioned how similar American and British cinema can feel: 🙂

Historically, the British have fought a bloody battle against American dominance, made even harder by the fact that they share a language. In reality, Americans indirectly cut them down at the root back in the 1920s. Panicked about their domestic industry being completely wiped out, the British passed the Film Law (around 1927) which mandated a certain quota of British films in theaters across the UK. It turned out to be a double-edged sword; in a rush to meet those quotas, studios started churning out absolute garbage. These were the infamous "quota quickies," which the British are still pretty embarrassed about today. Since then, they've been cutting at the heels of American film, though there is a school of thought that thinks it’s great when British movies are made to mimic Hollywood perfectly—like "Weddings and a Funeral" and stuff like that. Though everyone admits that’s basically the only way they turn a real profit.

Regardless, I think the British have a few cinematic gems they can actually brag about: that specific brand of British comedy rooted in vaudeville—back in the 1930s, they were making films that haven't been matched since (just look at "Oh Mr. Porter!")—and that wave of social realism from the late 50s and 60s. That era gave us legends like Mike Leigh and Ken Loach. And I can't forget the unmatched duo of Michael Powell and Emeric Pressburger, or the entire horror institution built by Hammer... the British definitely have things to show for themselves. 😍
The best movies of all time? in Movies ·
Anthony Kim18 said:You think anyone would actually vote for Italian cinema?

What about Spanish films? Does that even count? I mean, sure, except for maybe one director...

Which Scandinavian one would you pick?
If we group them all together, isn't that just unfair to the ones standing alone?

Using "would someone vote for it" as a metric isn't exactly a heavy hitter for an argument, is it? I usually find myself in the minority whenever people start "voting" on movies, so that doesn't really bother me... but I don't think you can just gloss over Neorealism as a movement. It’s a different story with German cinema; I’d almost say it barely exists as a cohesive entity, even though 1920s Expressionism basically laid the groundwork for film as an Art form. But unlike the Italian scene, German film hasn't really evolved along a single, meaningful trajectory since then.

As for the Spaniards, they have a distinct style that definitely appeals to some, and they aren't short on talent either: Fernando Trueba, Bigas Luna, Victor Erice, Alex de la Iglesia, Carlos Saura, Julio Medem, plus the transplant Alejandro Amenabar... oh, and of course Luis Bunuel...
The best movies of all time? in Movies ·
Since you were already diving into American cinema, you really should have touched upon Asian film as well, just to give us a broad overview. It’s also a mistake to overlook the "Mediterranean circle"—you know, the heavy hitters from Italian and Spanish cinema (think Fellini, Visconti, De Sica, Rossellini, or even Almodóvar?). French cinema basically carries enough weight to stand on its own without help, and while bringing up Scandinavian films might feel like splitting hairs, it's still worth noting...
Patandjali IV, 15 in Spirituality ·
shadowgardener12 said:ah, I think Blake puts it better.

To see a World in a Grain of Sand
And a Heaven in a Wild Flower,
Hold Infinity in the palm of your hand
And Eternity in an hour.

...

is this the one, jimmy? 😉
Patandjali IV, 15 in Spirituality ·
goldeneagle2 said:Kind of like what one of those big-shot New Age gurus would say—we basically have to become like a rose clinging to a wall, because if we don't truly grasp the essence of what a rose is... how are we ever going to figure out who we actually are?

What a gorgeous little poem! 😍 And it really hits the nail on the head. It’s like Tennyson is suggesting that all realities eventually merge once you grasp the essence of just one tiny, seemingly insignificant thing—in his case, a single little flower. If he could truly master the nature of that blossom, he’d essentially unlock the mysteries of the entire universe... all in all.

The Road Not Taken,
I pluck you out of the crannies,
I hold you here, root and all, in my hand,
Little flower -but if I could understand
What you are, root and all, and all in all,
I should know what God and man is.

lord Alfred Tennyson
Patandjali IV, 15 in Spirituality ·
goldeneagle2 said:There’s this idea floating around—sort of an old-school philosophical take—that reality is actually just one single thing. It’s only perceived by someone who has managed to rise above the noise of basic sensory input and all those mental loops our brains run based on whatever stimuli hit our senses. For anyone still stuck in that loop of seeing and thinking—you know, just reacting to what’s right in front of them—reality looks like this messy, fragmented collection of different things. People see differences everywhere, which leads to all sorts of conflicting thoughts... but honestly? They’re all missing the mark. None of it is quite capturing what reality actually is.

I’ve always found myself wondering about that line: "Wisdom is the province of the aged, but the heart of the child is pure." I don't know the original Sanskrit source, but maybe it’s touching on absolute reality. It makes me wonder, though—what is this "true" reality compared to the subjective one we live in? I'm basically looking for a unifying principle, something akin to how Maxwell's equations finally bridged the gap between electricity and magnetism.
Fellini for Beginners in Movies ·
*Satyricon* marks that shift where Fellini enters his more abstract phase, moving toward a fragmented, surreal style where he starts "speaking" through visual subtext rather than direct plots. You might find more enjoyment revisiting his work that actually tells a story instead of just throwing visual footnotes at you; for instance, *Amarcord*, which aired on NBC Plus yesterday, belongs to this later period along with *Casanova*. If you want classic narrative structure, stick to the absolute gems: *La Strada*, *The White Sheik*, *I Vitelloni*, or *Nights of Cabiria*.

Fellini essentially evolved from traditional filmmaking into pure surrealism. The bridge between those two worlds can be seen in films like *Dolac Vita* and *8 1/2*, where his personal creative struggles start bleeding into the storytelling. Everything after that point is usually labeled by critics as a surrealist spectacle. Personally, I’m not a fan—once he hit *Juliet of the Spirits* around the mid-60s, I pretty much lost interest.

If you're curious about that specific transition into his second phase, there's a documentary called *Fellini: To Be a Great Liar* that dives right into it.
Lady Gaga (What a Wonderful World) in Movies ·
The trailer and official website.

Word on the street is that Piaf worked for the resistance during WWII. Granted, she wasn't out there running sabotage missions like the owner of that famous cafe, René Artois, but she did pose for photos to help boost American morale against the occupation forces. Then again, I've heard rumors floating around that she was actually seeing a German soldier. Honestly, who knows? When it comes to Piaf, anything is possible.
Lady Gaga (What a Wonderful World) in Movies ·
Brilliant! Absolutely brilliant! It was such a relief to finally sit in a theater and watch something actually worth the twenty bucks. Marion Cotillard was stunning; she stayed completely in character from start to finish, carrying the entire film way above what any average production could manage. You can tell the director, Dahan, comes from a music video background because of certain stylistic choices, but the soundtrack and the flawless makeup really pull everything together. I was a little worried about that shaky camera work at the beginning—I honestly thought I’d be reaching for a motion sickness bag if it kept up—but luckily, it didn't happen.

The score features original Piaf records, and those older tracks were covered by a voice mimicry artist, Judy Garland, who nailed them perfectly. The movie feels tailor-made; it isn't pretentious, yet every creative decision hits exactly the right note. In my humble opinion, it's one of the best recent biopics out there. The level of immersion Marion Cotillard achieves reminds me of the dedication Bruna Ganza showed in "the final fall." It was perfect.
Casey Torres20 said:If you can get those films dubbed into English. And if there are any other movies out there covering this kind of topic, let me know what comes to mind.

I honestly have no clue how they handled the translation over here. I never caught those documentaries while living in the States. One of them was just a literal, word-for-word translation of the title, but still...
documentaries:

Climate change documentaries and disaster films

Climate change documentaries and disaster films

Climate change documentaries and disaster films

Climate change documentaries and disaster films

Climate change documentaries and disaster films

Climate change documentaries and disaster films

movies:

Split Second

Waterworld

The March

The Day After Tomorrow

Ice Age: The Meltdown 😬

This is just a narrow selection centered on global warming, because calling everything "ecology" is way too broad, much like trying to define all of science by just looking at biology. There are tons of movies out there.
Pier Paolo Pasolini in Movies ·
I’ve always had a soft spot for Pasolini's Mamma Roma. It’s a brilliant piece of filmmaking. I often find myself thinking that this is exactly how every neorealist movie should have felt, even though the movement had actually fizzled out about a decade before Mamma Roma was even shot. You can just tell this was made by someone who actually understands the streets. While guys like Visconti were basically dukes, and Rossellini felt like your typical high-society bourgeois type, and Zavattini was always way too caught up in his own hyper-intellectualism... this film just absolutely crushes it. 👍