The Film Lovers Thread!

[ChrissyM]

I actually didn't like 2046 too much (but I did love "In The Mood For Love"), but I know many people who do. I have to say, though, in the technical aspects, it is masterful. The film LOOKS beautiful. Acting was wonderful, too (I Tony Leung; he's a terrific actor).

Story is kind of flimsy, imo, and too pretentious. But it's obvious that WKW is in love with images more so than the story, because there are lots of lingering (and kind of useless, imo) shots on the women in this film...who are all beautiful. Especially Gong Li and Zhang Ziyi. But ultimately, I thought it was a pretty disappointing movie, especially in comparison to his earlier works.

I'd love to hear what you thought of the movie after you watch it.

After watching the film I have to say that I think you are right on with your criticisms. Like you said, the film was visually beautiful and the shots were framed in the sort of signature wkw style, but the story really couldn't compare to his previous work.

I found the plot/story to be disjointed and difficult to follow at times. The film didn't pull me in emotionally--I didn't feel invested in the outcome or in the fates of the characters.

 

[visconti]

I'm with the three of you on 2046. I only saw it once (on an early HK DVD), but as you mentioned, it has the elements that worked so perfectly in ITMFL, but there's something lacking. I think the earlier movie worked so well because it stays focused on Leung/Cheung and takes full advantage of the typical WKW/Doyle mood. He's at his best when he has similarly magnetic characters. I consider Chungking Express, and, to a lesser degree, Happy Together to be favorites for similar reasons. In 2046 he maintains the pieces simply don't add up to the same cohesive whole. I'm interested in giving it a second run, but I expect it'll be the same result. Nice visuals and a good score, but no emotional engagement.

Fuuma- Thanks for sharing your thoughts on the new Kitano. I've seen about half of what he's directed, so I'll probably give it a rent one day, but it's good to approach it with reduced expectations.

 

[ChrissyM]

I'm with the three of you on 2046. I only saw it once (on an early HK DVD), but as you mentioned, it has the elements that worked so perfectly in ITMFL, but there's something lacking. I think the earlier movie worked so well because it stays focused on Leung/Cheung and takes full advantage of the typical WKW/Doyle mood. He's at his best when he has similarly magnetic characters. I consider Chungking Express, and, to a lesser degree, Happy Together to be favorites for similar reasons. In 2046 he maintains the pieces simply don't add up to the same cohesive whole. I'm interested in giving it a second run, but I expect it'll be the same result. Nice visuals and a good score, but no emotional engagement.

Fuuma- Thanks for sharing your thoughts on the new Kitano. I've seen about half of what he's directed, so I'll probably give it a rent one day, but it's good to approach it with reduced expectations.

i totally agree about the characters...
the focus on leung and cheung worked so well in ITMFL and Chungking Express is great as well (I think I might actually need to see it again because though I liked it I didn't give it a fair go the first time around--it was the first WKW film I saw)
in 2046 I just kept feeling that the film was dragging, and thinking "who the hell am I supposed to be rooting for?"
I gather that gong li was supposed to be his true love but there seemed to be so much unnecessary plot in the middle that the significance of leung's relationship with her was lost--I think it deserved much more focus than it was given if she was really his true love.
I thought that Faye Wong's character's romance with her Japanese boyfriend was a better aspect of the film, but even that was marred by the implication that leung's character had feelings for her and the jarring interspersals of the futuristic 2046 story--which i often found to be confusing/disjointed

 

[xtine888]

i totally agree about the characters...
the focus on leung and cheung worked so well in ITMFL and Chungking Express is great as well (I think I might actually need to see it again because though I liked it I didn't give it a fair go the first time around--it was the first WKW film I saw)
in 2046 I just kept feeling that the film was dragging, and thinking "who the hell am I supposed to be rooting for?"
I gather that gong li was supposed to be his true love but there seemed to be so much unnecessary plot in the middle that the significance of leung's relationship with her was lost--I think it deserved much more focus than it was given if she was really his true love.

Thank you Chrissy and visconti for your reviews
I totally agree with your assessment of the characters. I was also disappointed that Maggie had such a small part in 2046. Her and Tony are movie gold; they complement each other perfectly onscreen. I hope they do more movies together.


Anyway, I wanted to recommend "A Chinese Ghost Story" starring Joey Wong and the late Leslie Cheung. Watched this many years ago, but recently rewatched it and remembered how much I loved it. Wonderful and enchanting movie. "A Chinese Ghost Story Part II" is not as good, but still hugely enjoyable and hilarious.

 

[fashionicon]

I watched Dear Frankie and A Clockwork Orange , both for the first time this past weekend.
Dear Frankie I loved, very sweet and some funny moments with a deeper message.
Clockwork orange was definitely interesting and because of all the 'hype' im glad i saw it, but man it was straaaange! I liked watching the character development of Alex but most of those hooligan scenes i could seriously do without

I feel kind of a little bit silly posting my thoughts because they're pretty simple. I dont like to speak about movies in the way others do in here, you guys are all so fimmakerish! I guess im intimidated

I ed Dear Frankie.

It was sweet without being sentimental.

 

[adorefaith]

I'll be watching Tony Takitani soon, anybody seen it?

yes....interesting film....
i didnt fall in love with it though..
what did you think of it?...

 

[Fuuma]

yes....interesting film....
i didnt fall in love with it though..
what did you think of it?...

I liked the short story, literary feel and the wardrobe of the main protagonists. The constant camera panning was somewhat contrived and didn’t add that much to the story in most scenes it was used, although it sometimes made for creative transitions (slowly moving from the left to right side of the room cut then back again to the same room and same camera movement but the story had jumped ahead a few years). I understand the film is an adaptation of a short story by an existentialist author (Murakami) and not a 19th century romantic novel, nevertheless the distant treatment really reinforced the fact that here I was, an observer watching a situation unfold on a TV screen, everything was foreordained and I could do nothing to change it or really interact with what was going on. The best movies tend to make me forget I’m a viewer and feel like I’m standing just beside the characters and involved in everything that is happening, effectively blurring the subject/object line. Now that being said I make it sound worse than it really is, Tony Takitani isn’t perfect but definitely makes for an interesting watch.

 

[adorefaith]

interesting review...
i do agree about the sense of distance..
though i think that added to the sense of loss, in some way.... the whole film had a very distant, cold, detached feel.... and the moments of intimacy and warmth really stood out, as a result.... i wasnt ever completely 'connected' though, as you say... something i think we expect from cinema... so it put me in an interesting place..... i felt like something was missing... maybe i was waiting to grow attached....

interesting....not rave-worthy though...

 

[adorefaith]

saw 3 very interesting films this past week...

hable con ella (talk to her)
sous le sable (under the sand)
lucia y el sexo (sex & lucia)


lucia y el sexo was prob my fave of the 3

 

[xtine888]

I watched two Johnny To movies this past week (FINALLY can start watching movies again now that finals are over!!), Running Out of Time and Election. He has a deliberate directorial style....very stylistic, clean lines, quick, smart. Although he didn't direct "Infernal Affairs," that movie is right up his alley. Both movies are in Cantonese, English subtitled.

Running Out Of Time was terrific and my favorite of the two (although both were excellent). Plot: a thief with advanced cancer (72 hours to live) plays a cat-and-mouse game with a police negotiator. Basically, they try to outsmart each other throughout the movie. Quite similar to many HK movies, but very well-acted and well-written. Lots of war-of-words moments. Andy Lau was ace. Lots of nice touches, too, including two scene on a minibus where the thief attempt to elude police attention by pretending to be the bf of a random female passenger. Extremely entertaining throughout and well-paced. Even kind of hilarious at times; the two male leads jive well.

Election came out last year and did pretty well on the HK and Taiwan (Golden Horse) award circuit. It was also in contention for the Golden Palm at the Cannes Film Festival. It's about a democratic election in an organized crime society, with two guys jousting for the top spot. Also done in the same, clean, unpretentious, cool style of Johnny To. It stands out from other HK triad movies because, like "Running Out of Time", the emphasis is on a battle of wits and words, not extreme gang battles and such. It's a rich portrayal of blood ties, allegiances, bribes, etc within an organized crime society. Terrifically entertaining.
(A LOT more violent and disturbing than "Running Out of Time" (which wasn't violent at all), just a warning.)

Both movies have sequels. I haven't seen either, but I am told that "Election 2" is superior to the original.

 

[Kawari]

Well after moving, with two months of no Internet access, it feels good to be back to my fave thread...
Since the new year is around the corner there's going to be a big push for movies with the Academy Awards. Who do you think are serious contenders? Who do you want to win and why?
Are the Academy Awards even credible anymore, or are they just a popularity contest with Hollywood?
Just a thread bump....

 

[visconti]

I don't think they're very relevant anymore (if they ever really were). I used to get excited about the ceremony, but last year I figured it was a better use of my time to watch another movie and just check the results and red carpet shots online.

The selections are usually so predictable and middle of the road that I can't imagine anyone being truly satisfied with the ceremony. Fans of light "entertainment" will find the selections too stuffy/serious, but people who really follow the festivals and take film seriously will almost never see their favorites nominated. Other than times when hugely commercial projects like LOTR or Titanic win big, I doubt that many people are really pulling for their favorites or even what they consider the best of the year.

The foreign film category is especially disappointing in this regard. Unless it's changed, they only permit one film per country and that often ends up eliminating interesting work in favor of pop favorites or whatever the exotic locale of the season happens to be (No Man's Land, Osama, Tsoti to name some recent ones). These movies are rarely terrible, but never close to showcasing the best of world cinema.

I haven't thought through the serious contenders this season, but I guess they'd be stuff like Mirren in "The Queen" and Whitaker in that Idi Amin movie. There don't seem to be any towering favorites for best film. I guess they'll go with Scorsese, the new Eastwood work, Babel (although I've seen a few people calling it an "international Crash" not realizing that Innaritu has been re-using that format for years) and maybe The Queen for best picture. I think that overlap with the golden globe noms too. It'd be nice if they looked at Volver, but who really knows?



On another topic, if you haven't been following DVD news, those of us in North America are fortunate because Criterion recently annouced the start of their oft rumored secondary line. Each month will see the release of a boxed set of 3-5 films from a director or on a certain theme. They'll be lesser known works that will serve to either supplement their catalog of masters (Ozu, Mizoguchi, Bergman) or relatively unknown directors who they'd like to introduce. The price point will be low because these mini-retrospectives will be featureless and possibly not up to the standard CC restorations. They've hinted at releases from Naruse and Imamura as well. March will see the release of 5 early Bergman films (well, 4 he directed and one of his scripts). Some are out in the UK now, but not for a good price.

 

[visconti]

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xx07s_kennethangertrailer

Here's a link to the trailer for Fantoma's soon-to-be-released Films of Kenneth Anger: Vol 1 DVD. It's the first time his work has been this widely available and it looks like the extremely lengthy delay will be worth it. It should be out on the 27th of this month. This should appeal to fans of Jodorowky, Lynch, Bunuel and other similarly minded directors.

It contains the following short films:
Fireworks (1947)
Puce Moment (1949)
Rabbit's Moon (1950, the rarely seen original 16 minute version)
Eaux d'Artifice (1953)
Inauguration of the Pleasure Dome (1954)

 

[Kawari]

I know what you mean about the Academy Awards. I always wonder how many amazing movies get looked over in general, due to a variety of reasons such as lack of "star" power, not a huge advertising push. This past year, I haven't felt really interested in anything.

 

[ChrissyM]

i saw a couple movies recently that i feel the need to rant/discuss a little bit...

first, house of flying daggers - i love love love zhang yimou's first martial arts film, hero heart so i was hoping that this would be at least equally good.
visually the film was stunning, and had the typical sort of zhang yimou touches (vivid colors, symmetrical framing etc) but for me the story just wasn't there. Hero tells such a rich story and then in house of flying daggers it just felt like i was unaware of the plot and didn't know whose side i was supposed to be on.. even at the end the whole thing felt somewhat unresolved for me and i felt that i didn't know what there was to resolve because there was no real plot for me...
the fight scenes are beautiful to watch so it wasn't a waste of time..

the other film that's actually been really frustrating me is, oddly enough, harry potter and the goblet of fire
i know, i know, i shouldn't complain but i do enjoy the whole harry potter business... i obviously prefer the books but i appreciated the first three films as well
this fourth film just didn't seem true to the book or the characters for me, and i found that to be so frustrating.
understandably many things had to be cut out--i would almost prefer a 4-hour long movie because i love the intricacies of the story--but this is not my main complaint
mad-eye moody was not at all how i would have envisioned him, and i found that on the whole many of the characters were far more abrasive than rowling portrayed them in the novels... which brings me to my biggest disappointment--Dumbledore.
Obviously the actor who first portrayed him can't be brought back from the dead, but I find this new guy's portrayal to just be so totally wrong! He makes Dumbledore a forceful, bellowing man, instead of a wise, soft-spoken, quietly powerful and strong presence.
I'm just hoping that the next film goes in a better direction than this one because i was very disappointed by the direction that the characters are going in...

Sorry to subject you all to my rant but I watched the movie a few days ago (I had also watched the other films recently) and the differences really got me thinking about all this...
Just wondered if anyone else felt the same way about all of it...
Maybe I should find the Harry Potter thread and ask in there

 

[bleuFunk]

^ I actually liked Goblet of Fire better than Prisoner of Azkaban, but that might be partially because i liked that book better. Though i thought Prisoner of Azkaban was sort of all-over-the-place. I watched it with someone who hadn't read any of the books and he couldn't follow what was going on and i couldn't blame him. I don't get why they keep switching directors! They should be going for a consistent look/feel.

I agree with you on Dumbledore though. They'd be better off CGI-ing the original actor! He doesn't have the right feel at all.


I recently finally saw Little Miss Sunshine, which i thought was adorable. It was sweet, funny, warm, endearing, touching but not even a little sappy - which i think is hard to do.

I also saw an older film, which i highly recommend. It's called Pretty Poison and stars a Anthony Perkins and Tuesday Weld. It's a really engaging, unexpected story well told and well played. Spot-on all-round.

 

[visconti]

I'm with you on House of Flying Daggers. I saw it whenever the first wave of supposedly legit Hong Kong dvds came out and unlike Hero, haven't been inclined to go back to it. Everything is there in terms of presentation, but as you said, there's no plot to keep it from being a series of fairly impressive showpiece scenes. He has a new one (but not his absolute newest) coming out on DVD in the US in a month. I haven't read anything about it, but plan to see it ASAP.

Have you seen his pre-martial arts movies? They're really worthwhile. Beautiful and much quieter than Hero and HoFD. Most of the good ones star Gong Li. Ju Dou, Raise the Red Lantern and To Live can be recommended without reservation except for the fact that the first two have mediocre DVDs that don't present the vivid reds and other colors as nicely as the should. The Road Home introduced Zhang Ziyi and is also excellent. The only one that was less than satisfactory was Happy Times, the one he did right before Hero. It's comedy and I just didn't find it very amusing.

As far as Harry Potter goes, I've never read the books, but have followed the movies. The third is actually my favorite because it was the first time I actually cared about the characters. The Columbus movies felt like cliff notes versions of the book. It was like he just went through and made a check list of every plot point and squeezed them all in without worrying about giving the characters any emotions beyond the generic happy/scared sorts of things that the plot points demanded. Since I don't know about all of the sideplots in the novels, I didn't feel like I was missing much when things were streamlined in the newer ones. I also liked that the third finally had a unique visual style and some nice editing. Columbus bores me to tears because he never does anything surprising. There's a lot of Cuaron's trademark greens and use of other colors. One of my friends who loves the books, but has absolutely no sense of what I like in movies hated it though. I can't remember the reasons aside from it not being plot point 1, 2,3,4 etc.

I didn't like the fourth one as much because I felt like it lost some of the subtleties and subtexts that Cuaron employed, but it didn't revert back to the dull Columbus presentations. I didn't like the new Dumbledore as much either, but without having invested the time in the books, it didn't bother me as much as I'm sure it would if I had a really firm idea of how he should be. The fourth one has a lot of dark visuals doesn't it? I remember being sort of annoyed that it looked all shadowy, but it was all surface. I bet some of the side plots and things that were cut out would have gone deeper.

Is anyone familiar with the TV work that this new director has done? There's not much to go on in the teaser, but it looks like he may be going for a less polished more "realistic" look. If so, it'll either work really well or be terribly dull and TV show looking. I guess we'll have to wait for a full trailer to know more.

 

[ChrissyM]

As far as Zhang Yimou's films, pre-martial arts I've seen Raise the Red Lantern and I really enjoyed it--I saw it before any of the martial arts stuff
Raise the Red Lantern is probably a film that I'll revisit at some point... though I think I may have already watched it twice there's so much there in terms of the political messages.. I believe it (and several other of his films) were banned right?

I think when it comes to the Harry Potter films it's sometimes difficult for me to separate myself from the way I "see" the books and just watch them as films...
I wish the films were more streamlined and wouldn't jump around so much in terms of directors etc, but I can't say I'm sorry that someone new will be taking on--or already has i should say--the next film.. though it seems that there will be someone new after that as well..
I don't know a whole lot about the new directors but I'm curious to see the trailers..

 

[susie_bubble]

Just wanted to come into the thread and review Perfume: The Story of a Murderer, directed by Tom Tykwer (probs most famous for Run Lola Run). If you have read the Patrick Suskind novel on which this is based, then I think fans of the book will not be disappointed. I actually think it may help people to grasp the movie better if they have read the book because by the very nature of the subject matter, it is incredibly difficult to convey SCENT on screen.

Tykwer has really done the best he can by using a sweeping audio, a voiceover (something I'm not usually a fan of but is pretty much essential here as it guides the audience through the scents and because the lead character Grenouille is by and large mute) and absolutely stunning cinematography.

Just to summarise, it's set in 18th century Paris and the lead character Jean Baptiste Grenouille (played by Ben Whishaw) was born with an incredible sense of smell, being able to identy and pick out almost all scents in the world whilst having no scent of his own. He grows up to be a Perfumer's apprentice but wishes to capture the scent of human beings, after losing the scent of a girl he accidentally murdered in his youth. So in his quest, he becomes a serial killer of young beautiful girls and combines their scent to make one truly spectacular perfume.

After watching it, I could only say that the film was lip smackingly sumptuous. It's a visual treat in the richest form because of the sweeping closeups, the details. It's not that everything on the film is beautiful. The opening scene is particular gory what with Grenouille being born under a fish stand in a street market. It's that the director has really focused on everything and made good use of the camera techniques so that it zooms in on things in a way that is spellbinding. Sure we can't smell the leaves that Grenouille is able to pick out 100 metres away but we have a vague idea and really, it pushed my imagination as to what Grenouille might be smelling.

It did help a lot that I had read the book because the language of it did the same thing as what the motion film did: spur my imagination - try to smell what Grenouille was smelling. This is why I think people who haven't read the book may find the film a little absurd and melodramatic - there are some unintentionally funny moments where you can't quite believe in the power of scent. But I did during the movie and when I was reading the book so hand in hand, the movie really worked for me.

In terms of performance, I think Ben Whishaw did a fine job considering the task. I had thought he might be too good looking to play what is essentially a hideous character but they never made him all that attractive in the film and I felt the things you're supposed to feel for the character which is a combination of sympathy and disgust.
Dustin Hoffman was midly amusing as the aging perfumer Baldini and the female victims were also quite alluring too.

I'd like to get the opinion of a person who hasn't read the book though.

 

[susie_bubble]

Forgot to add - the score to the film is sublime and largely creates the right ambiance for us to 'smell/feel' what Grenouille was smelling - preview it here http://www.perfumemovie.com/