-
Live Streaming... The F/W 2025.26 Fashion Shows
New York Fashion Week F/W 2025.26 Show Schedule
The Film Lovers Thread!
- Thread starter oolie coco
- Start date
Are you a Kubrick fan? This is certainly a movie to divide the audience. If you like his style then you'll probably get sucked into it, otherwise it will leave you cold.
From an English Lit-type perspective it's fantastic because you can really break it down into many layers. There's quite a bit of symbolism going on.
I suppose it helps if you're a Tom Cruise fan as a lot of it rides on his performance.
I quite like the movie once it gets into its stride but it's not my favourite Kubrick.
From an English Lit-type perspective it's fantastic because you can really break it down into many layers. There's quite a bit of symbolism going on.
I suppose it helps if you're a Tom Cruise fan as a lot of it rides on his performance.
I quite like the movie once it gets into its stride but it's not my favourite Kubrick.
IncurableLunatic
Active Member
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2007
- Messages
- 3,082
- Reaction score
- 4
definitely not the best Kubrick film but i believe it's underrated. it takes a lot of attention, patience and less reservations to watch it.
Northern Star
French Chic
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2006
- Messages
- 15,980
- Reaction score
- 206
Certainly not anywhere near Kubrick at his best, but worth a look anyhow.
Nicole Kidman easily the best thing about the film and I found myself longing for her to return when the movie meandered on without her.
Also watch for how many times Cruise's character repeats the last line of the character who spoke before him.
Nicole Kidman easily the best thing about the film and I found myself longing for her to return when the movie meandered on without her.
Also watch for how many times Cruise's character repeats the last line of the character who spoke before him.
IncurableLunatic
Active Member
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2007
- Messages
- 3,082
- Reaction score
- 4
not to mention Sydney Pollack's appearance in the film...too bad Kubrick didn't see the final product. i read he was disappointed with the film before he died
Northern Star
French Chic
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2006
- Messages
- 15,980
- Reaction score
- 206
Taking into account the the lengthy shoot ( I believe Cruise and Kidman lived in the UK for more than a year), and the replacement of Pollack for Harvey Keitel, Jenifer Jason Leigh not being able to return for re-shoots etc.........it is quite disappointing.
From that viewpoint I also wonder why the shoot did take so long
no effects and no huge spectacles, other than an orgy scene, just small intimate set-pieces.........all a bit strange.
From that viewpoint I also wonder why the shoot did take so long
no effects and no huge spectacles, other than an orgy scene, just small intimate set-pieces.........all a bit strange.
IncurableLunatic
Active Member
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2007
- Messages
- 3,082
- Reaction score
- 4
i know. it's one of those "mysteries" surrounding this film if you follow all the theories surrounding this film
I know very little about the film "Eyes Wide Shut." All the hype, controversy, and film in general happened when I was a bit young.
In other news, I finally say "Atonement" after not seeing it all when it was in limited release in theatres. I enjoyed it but some parts left me feeling a bit empty, if that makes any sense. I think it's because the book was written in third person pov, with different perspectives. A lot more is said about the characters and their motivations and feelings in the book. You get inside Cecila's head (a little anyway), Briony's, Robbie's, and even the girls' mother and Paul Marshall. Of course, it's understandable-if something with that many perspectives gets made into a film, a screenwriter and director would have to pick a story and kind of go with it.
So they followed the three parts-the first day, the war, and then Briony's confrontation. So in my head it's kind of like: Briony, Robbie, and then back to Briony again. But at the end of the day, it's Briony's story and the movie goes along with that idea more than the book did. I think if I hadn't read the book and just seen the film, I wouldn't even have noticed. Like I said earlier though, it makes complete sense and I did love the film.
Joe did an amazing job and I think he and the same cinamatographer should do more films together. It had the same roaming, long shots as Pride and Prejudice but they were able to make it a lot darker and fit the context of the film. Certain camerwork was a bit more jerky, indicating a handheld camera probably. The long five minute shot at Dunkirk with not cuts was amazing and I loved watching the special features to see how they did it.
The acting was pretty decent-it's hard for me to say. I think I remember reading they wanted it reflect the actual acting from the time period and I don't know a lot about it. But James was amazing and seeing him break down was fun to watch. Saorise (sp) was wonderful and Keira was pretty good as well-I think Joe really helped her in Pride and Prejudice so I can't really complain about that.
Sorry for the long post. I've been waiting to see the movie for months and I finally got to. That and the fact that I haven't been in this forum for months. It's great to see other peoples' opinions and I've got a whole new batch of movies to see after reading through.
In other news, I finally say "Atonement" after not seeing it all when it was in limited release in theatres. I enjoyed it but some parts left me feeling a bit empty, if that makes any sense. I think it's because the book was written in third person pov, with different perspectives. A lot more is said about the characters and their motivations and feelings in the book. You get inside Cecila's head (a little anyway), Briony's, Robbie's, and even the girls' mother and Paul Marshall. Of course, it's understandable-if something with that many perspectives gets made into a film, a screenwriter and director would have to pick a story and kind of go with it.
So they followed the three parts-the first day, the war, and then Briony's confrontation. So in my head it's kind of like: Briony, Robbie, and then back to Briony again. But at the end of the day, it's Briony's story and the movie goes along with that idea more than the book did. I think if I hadn't read the book and just seen the film, I wouldn't even have noticed. Like I said earlier though, it makes complete sense and I did love the film.
Joe did an amazing job and I think he and the same cinamatographer should do more films together. It had the same roaming, long shots as Pride and Prejudice but they were able to make it a lot darker and fit the context of the film. Certain camerwork was a bit more jerky, indicating a handheld camera probably. The long five minute shot at Dunkirk with not cuts was amazing and I loved watching the special features to see how they did it.
The acting was pretty decent-it's hard for me to say. I think I remember reading they wanted it reflect the actual acting from the time period and I don't know a lot about it. But James was amazing and seeing him break down was fun to watch. Saorise (sp) was wonderful and Keira was pretty good as well-I think Joe really helped her in Pride and Prejudice so I can't really complain about that.
Sorry for the long post. I've been waiting to see the movie for months and I finally got to. That and the fact that I haven't been in this forum for months. It's great to see other peoples' opinions and I've got a whole new batch of movies to see after reading through.
IncurableLunatic
Active Member
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2007
- Messages
- 3,082
- Reaction score
- 4
^we share the same sentiment
i like the fact that Joe Wright works with the same crew (and some actors)
i like the fact that Joe Wright works with the same crew (and some actors)
^we share the same sentiment
i like the fact that Joe Wright works with the same crew (and some actors)
Yea, I freaked when I saw Brenda Bleythen (sp?) in the beginning of Atonement. Like Oh yea!! I like that he works with the same people too, though he would have to be careful. After all, it would get pretty obvious if he used all of the same people, acting wise, in all of his films. But I can't wait to see what he does next.
IncurableLunatic
Active Member
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2007
- Messages
- 3,082
- Reaction score
- 4
^i think it depends on who and what the project is. Spielberg keeps almost the same crew, especially his editor (whose name i can't remember right now...Janus something? ) and of course, the great John Williams!
i have a feeling Joe got this from the late Anthony Minghella who also often works with the same actors and crew (i heard he was close to him and well, the Atonement ending with Vanessa Redgrave
)
i believe he's working in LA with Jamie Foxx right now
) and of course, the great John Williams! i have a feeling Joe got this from the late Anthony Minghella who also often works with the same actors and crew
(i heard he was close to him and well, the Atonement ending with Vanessa Redgrave)i believe he's working in LA with Jamie Foxx right now
Spielberg's regular editor is Michael Kahn. His regular DP is Janusz Kaminski.
It's really not very unusual for a director to want to work with the same key crew if they've got a good thing going. Certainly for a director with a bit of clout he/she can ask for specific crew so they don't get lumbered with someone they don't know/don't like.
Wes Anderson often uses the same bunch of actors in his stuff. And David Lynch too. I think it happens a lot actually.
It's really not very unusual for a director to want to work with the same key crew if they've got a good thing going. Certainly for a director with a bit of clout he/she can ask for specific crew so they don't get lumbered with someone they don't know/don't like.
Wes Anderson often uses the same bunch of actors in his stuff. And David Lynch too. I think it happens a lot actually.
IncurableLunatic
Active Member
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2007
- Messages
- 3,082
- Reaction score
- 4
how could i forget the amazing Mr. Kahn?!
I dunno!
Seriously, I just looked up his filmography. It's really rather amazingly good. He won Oscars for Schindler's List, Saving Private Ryan and the fantabulous Raiders of the Lost Ark (which I watched recently, after not seeing it for years and years - the new Indy flick will have a hard time beating that).
Crying Diamonds
Geometric Discharge
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2008
- Messages
- 7,296
- Reaction score
- 4
My friend and I are completely obsessed with the film Monster with Charlize Theron and Christina Ricci at the moment (for all the wrong reasons admittedly), but it seriously is, an absolutely amazing film.
IncurableLunatic
Active Member
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2007
- Messages
- 3,082
- Reaction score
- 4
I dunno!
Seriously, I just looked up his filmography. It's really rather amazingly good. He won Oscars for Schindler's List, Saving Private Ryan and the fantabulous Raiders of the Lost Ark (which I watched recently, after not seeing it for years and years - the new Indy flick will have a hard time beating that).
i know
i saw it when i was a kid through my uncle (he fed me Spielberg films when i was growing up
) i have high hopes on the new one!
2046 is gorgeously shot but incredibly it's the work of three DPs: Doyle, Kwan Pun-Leung and Lai Yiu-Fai. Can you tell where one stops and the other starts?
I've seen several of the films he's worked on. Definitely incredibly talented but... it's well documented he is rarely without a drink in hand. He sounds a bit nuts to be honest! From what I've read he is also not afraid to speak his mind about the films he's made and the people he's worked with.
I want to say Martin Scorcese (sp?) has been working with the same editor since...forever but I'm not sure if it's him or someone else.
This morning, I was channel surfing and found Cat on Hot Tin on a Roof on Turner Classic Movies! I was so excited and angry at the same time. Of course they would show such a great film when I won't be able to finish it due to school!! That channel tends to show the best stuff at the most odd times. I remember getting up at 2 in the morning and seeing that On the Waterfront was on!!
This morning, I was channel surfing and found Cat on Hot Tin on a Roof on Turner Classic Movies! I was so excited and angry at the same time. Of course they would show such a great film when I won't be able to finish it due to school!! That channel tends to show the best stuff at the most odd times. I remember getting up at 2 in the morning and seeing that On the Waterfront was on!!
