Last movie you watched

[zxc]

I saw Polanski's Chinatown recently. It has a really high reputation as one of the best screenplays, best film scores, won all the awards in its time, etc. I thought it was good but with that reputation I was a little disappointed, especially as I'm a fan of his early cinema.

It's a film noir that plays on a lot of the film noir expectations. We're essentially following a private detective who is investigating into a case of adultery then murder, but is consistently duped by each of his informants so that nothing's ever what it seems. I won't give away the twists.

I found the plot a bit too dense, which made it overly confusing. I don't mind density of information, I love thinking over background details, motifs and things, but when it's density in terms of the actual plot it becomes hard to follow. We kept pausing every 25 minutes to recap what had happened; I have a low attention span admittedly, but my friend is normally quite observant so I found it odd.

There's some good cinematography and foreshadowing and some of the shots produce their own mysteries. I felt by the end though that it was largely a plot film, with not as much thematic depth as I'd hoped. If you like the genre (or Jack Nicholson) I'd definitely recommend it though.

You make the film sound very appealing actually.

That's a Film Noir trope as well though. Think of The Big Sleep. The plot was so thick in it that at one point the director and the screen writer had to wire the author of the book it was based on to confirm if a character had killed himself or simply been killed. The author couldn't remember. (That's good ol' drunk Raymond Chandler for you.)

However, having said that I have not seen Chinatown yet.

The Big Sleep is fabulous in this way! I've seen it I think three times now, and I still don't quite know what is going on, but I don't mind because I get to watch Bogey puzzle it out before me.

Just watched the last twenty minutes of Primer, after having stopped in the middle about six weeks ago. That was a mistake, boy does my head hurt. Primer is the kind of movie that is hard enough to follow when you watch it in one sitting. Coming into it after having forgotten details from the first 50 minutes just ended up frying my brain.

But it isn't just me: I Googled it after, found a great detailed synopsis, and it's pretty mind-blowing to try to keep everything in order. (xkcd made a joke timeline for the characters in the movie by just drawing a huge squiggle ball with the ends of the lines just sticking out of it at random points).

If you don't know much about it, it's a time-travel movie made on a budget of $7000, which is absolutely crazy, but the director (who also performed about six other duties, including starring in it) ended up making a film that won the Grand Jury prize at Sundance in 2004. I guess one of the reviewer quotes is, "If you understand Primer on your first view, you're either a savant or a liar." The film is specifically written to NOT dumb things down or overexplain, and the quick back and forth hushed dialogue leaves you almost feeling as if you are eavesdropping on the main characters... which was exactly how you're supposed to feel. At the same time, I agree with the reviewer that says it's one of the better time-travel movies out there because of its realism -- not the devices themselves, but the people who invested time travel. Not only did they discover it as a side-effect of somethign else they were trying to create, but they approach it exactly you would expect the kind of people who might actually create time travel to approach it. And they're heavy-tech-inclined, without much ethical wisdom.

I recommend it if you like movies with twists that mess with your head (it's kind of the NT version of Mulholland Drive, IMO). And if you give up watching it a few times to "get it," you can Google the movie to find a few good sites that can explain (more or less) what actually happens.

I found Primer fascinating and engaging. I looked up the xkcd comic you referred to and found it highly amusing (spoilers: Lord of the Rings, Star Wars, Jurassic Park, 12 Angry Men, Primer(!)). Mulholland Dr. I saw a long while back now, and really liked the atmosphere it had going on.

Lawrence of Arabia


Great visuals and film score, I'm sure it would have been tons better at a theater. The motorcycle accident in the beginning wasn't very believable, but I suppose it does effectively contrast with how he unbelievably lived through the desert campaign. I also noticed how everyone he personally helps ends up dying: his escort, the two servants, and the man he went back for. Favorite characters were Auda ibu Tayi, and Prince Feisal to a lesser extent.

I completely agree about the visuals and score, fantastic film. It prompted me to read a lot more about Lawrence.

Strangely, my kids have had this film in their DVD collection for quite awhile, but I never bothered to give it a look. It was just a fluke that I saw it today. I took two of my ESL students, both 9 year old boys, to the mercado to pick out a film to watch in English, and this is what they chose. They certainly enjoyed it, even though they probably understood less than 20% of the dialog. I wonder if I'd have enjoyed it half as much if I'd watched it alone.

It is certainly interesting how our experiences with film vary when shared with others. I have enjoyed watching parts of foreign language films without subtitles on more than one occasion. I personally prefer to watch the first Pirates of the Caribbean film again whenever I get the pirate itch, rather than its sequels which I didn't enjoy quite as much.

 

[Jennywocky]

Just got back from "Man of Steel."

I actually really enjoyed it -- I think it's a better movie than the sum of its flawed parts (which you'll understand if you see it, I wish the pieces had been done better, but they still worked). If you hate slugfests, though, YMMV -- there's a few pretty crazy "trash half the town" fights that make the Neo/Smith fight look like pattycake. I wish all the secondary characters had been a bit more nuanced and explored.

The big thing is that Clark is trying to figure out who he is and what his values are, being torn between his feeling like an alien among his adopted family (earth) and surrounded by asshats from his home planet (krypton). Either choice has its drawbacks.

 

[Chad]

Just got back from "Man of Steel."

I actually really enjoyed it -- I think it's a better movie than the sum of its flawed parts (which you'll understand if you see it, I wish the pieces had been done better, but they still worked). If you hate slugfests, though, YMMV -- there's a few pretty crazy "trash half the town" fights that make the Neo/Smith fight look like pattycake. I wish all the secondary characters had been a bit more nuanced and explored.

The big thing is that Clark is trying to figure out who he is and what his values are, being torn between his feeling like an alien among his adopted family (earth) and surrounded by asshats from his home planet (krypton). Either choice has its drawbacks.

I just seen it as well tonight.

I think it was a very interesting origin story. The made it there own and it stayed true enough to the original.

I thought it was also very interesting how they dropped in all these characters in the back ground
-Lana Lang
-Pete Rose
-Whitney Fordmen
-Dr. Hamilton
and -Parry White

They were name dropping like crazy however they really didn't develop any of the characters well besides Clark, Lois Lane, Jar-El, Martha and Johnathan Kent to some degree.

The only other characters inportant to the story was Lara- EL and Zod. Both of which where kind of underdeveloped.

Over all I have to agree I enjoyed the movie but if they don't take the time to develop the back ground charters more in the next movies its going to get old quick.

 

[Jennywocky]

I just seen it as well tonight.

I think it was a very interesting origin story. The made it there own and it stayed true enough to the original.

I thought it was also very interesting how they dropped in all these characters in the back ground
-Lana Lang
-Pete Rose
-Whitney Fordmen
-Dr. Hamilton
and -Parry White

They were name dropping like crazy however they really didn't develop any of the characters well besides Clark, Lois Lane, Jar-El, Martha and Johnathan Kent to some degree.

The only other characters inportant to the story was Lara- EL and Zod. Both of which where kind of underdeveloped.

Over all I have to agree I enjoyed the movie but if they don't take the time to develop the back ground charters more in the next movies its going to get old quick.

Well, they'll have more time. Origin stories get kinda packed. Ma Kent actually got a lot of screen time, but wasn't never as developed as Pa Kent, who got less screen time.

One reviewer noted that women were downplayed in this version, from the traditional story (which has a few strong female leads), and I'd agree -- the women didn't really contribute much that was essential, aside from Zod's right-hand leader, and it wasn't really a dramatic role, it was very action oriented.

 

[Cavallier]

World War Z

It was a fair to middlin zombie flick. I enjoyed Brad Pitt's performance as I usually do. Somehow the man went from paper thin pretty boy persona to someone with acting chops. The story went as you might expect. It was not a bad way to waste a few hours in an air-conditioned theater.

 

[Nezaros]

Weekend at Bernie's. Idiotic in that charming way that movies can occasionally be.

 

[SpiralHacker]

The Company You Keep. Great film.

 

[ShameFace]

rewatched American splendor. Pretty good little film. I relate to Harvey Pickard

 

[Jennywocky]

Just got back from Despicable Me 2.

If you think the minions are hilarious, then you'll love this movie -- it's pretty much theirs. (I think they're hilarious, so I was laughing so hard I was crying in spots... but I know not everyone has the same sense of humor.)

If you aren't amused by them, well, I didn't find the plot particularly interesting (kind of a vague hodgepodge of other movies in the genre); Kristen Wiig doesn't really garner many laughs despite trying, and Gru gets about your average amount of them as he did in the first movie.

it was better than many of the crap trailers, though, running before the movie. Smurfs 2? Free Bird? Planes? About the only trailer of interest that didn't leave me feeling sick afterwards was Turbo, and that could go either way. The Smurfs 2 trailer was so bad I was actually laughing because of how TERRIBLE it was -- I mean, you actually have to TRY to make a movie that god-awful.

 

[zxc]

The past two weeks I've been busy watching quite a few films:

Ivy (1947)
Suspicion (1941)
No Country for Old Men (2007)
Touch of Evil (1958)
Vampyr (1932)
Twelve Monkeys (1995)
LA Confidential (1997)
Dial M for Murder (1954)
The Exterminating Angel (1962)
The Shop Around the Corner (1940)

I must say I enjoyed all of them immensely, but then, I am careful with my selection of films so I generally expect to have a good time. However, a couple stood out still:

No Country for Old Men had about the most tension I've experienced in a film since Das Boot (1981), as well as the scariest character I remember ever seeing.

The Shop Around the Corner was a wonderfully subtle and understated film. The characters were so charming and beautiful. I found myself wanting to rewatch it immediately upon its ending.

 

[Jennywocky]

Watched the weirdest double header on Weds -- Evil Dead (2013) and Jack the Giant Slayer

I can't say either one was good.

The problem with Evil Dead was that it was more realistically gorier and had better production quality than the original, but wasn't quite as fun and needed to lighten up a bit (or get deeper). It kind of stuck in the middle and was unsatisfying in lots of ways, although it was the kind of violence that kind of makes you laugh when you see it coming because it's so over the top.

Jack the Giant Slayer was just kind of there. Stanley Tucci and Ewan McGregor were kind of amusing, but Ian McShane was wasted and it was kind of a "plod through the numbers movie" where ultimately not much even happened.

 

[Wolf18]

I just watched Regarding Henry (Harrison Ford, 1991). My mother, who loves awful movies, convinced me to watch it with her, but I could not make it through. It was horrible and pointless, although it was good for a few laughs.

SW

 

[BigApplePi]

"Requiem for a Dream." Aptly named. I almost made this a separate thread but didn't because I couldn't focus on any one thing.

Thoughts:

1. Film about flaws in having false dreams and how they will inevitably lead to downfall. So if you happen to have any flaws, see this film to see what can happen.

2. If you've never been in love and wonder what's it's like at its best, see the boy-girl relationship at the beginning. (Never mind what happens later.) Photo of Jennifer Connelly:
http://www.listal.com/viewimage/1090962h

3. There is a thread elsewhere about Fi (if you claim you don't have it) and another about music and the emotion it evokes. I am not alone in liking the match of the music and the movie's theme:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fStQd9yFbvY

4. If you've seen this film, feel free to comment. Most reviews are about drug addiction, but the above caught my attention.

 

[Solitaire U.]

The Hangover Part 2

Hmmm, I think this movie just topped "A Fish Called Wanda" as the funniest film I've ever seen. Outstanding.

 

[galaticgoose]

Donnie Darko. Major love for this film. (and Jake Gyllenhaal's face)

 

[Slacker_Assassin]

Secretary.

 

[TimeAsylums]

Kung Fu Hustle

Again and again and again

 

[Puffy]

Martyrs (2008) - My impression was torture porn trying to be art-house, but only getting it on a surface level. Though it took some "risks" (apparently) with the structure I didn't think it particularly meaningful (though maybe I'm just being lazy.) I thought the "surprise" ending was particularly lame.

It was difficult to feel anything for the characters as there only characterisation was that they're victims (though maybe that was the point). It seemed unnecessarily misogynistic in that sense, and the justification in the plot for it was weak.

The shotgun scene was pretty awesome though. I'm up for any film that mows down children for the lols.

 

[Puffy]

A Serbian Film (2008) - (yeah, alongside Martyrs and a few other things I've been in a horror mood recently. Might watch Necromantik later...)

I've held back on this one for a while, as from its reputation it sounded like it was just going to be a senseless torture porn. Hostel, Human Centipede, etc - they're bad examples of the genre in my estimation of it (unless you're in it for the lols). But I noticed this one coming up in a lot of lists, so I caved in to curiosity. (My friend's housemates telling me the film made them cry uncontrollably had nothing to do with it obviously. )

The exploitation elements are obviously there, and I don't think the acting or writing in a lot of places is very good, but I was surprised how narrative driven it was. There are two (maybe three) highly disturbing sequences spread out over two hours; they're not drawn out, and though there is explicitness a lot of the horror is delivered through suggestion.

I'm actually tempted to think the film might have a degree of integrity, and a semblance of meaning. I don't really recommend it though, it's not a great film - more for niche horror audiences - was just surprised. It's supposed to be an allegory of power relations particular to Serbian history apparently; could be true, but I felt that something like Pasolini's Salo had handled a similar idea better overall.

 

[some.body]

A Serbian Film (2008) - (yeah, alongside Martyrs and a few other things I've been in a horror mood recently. Might watch Necromantik later...)

I've held back on this one for a while, as from its reputation it sounded like it was just going to be a senseless torture porn. Hostel, Human Centipede, etc - they're bad examples of the genre in my estimation of it (unless you're in it for the lols). But I noticed this one coming up in a lot of lists, so I caved in to curiosity. (My friend's housemates telling me the film made them cry uncontrollably had nothing to do with it obviously. )

The exploitation elements are obviously there, and I don't think the acting or writing in a lot of places is very good, but I was surprised how narrative driven it was. There are two (maybe three) highly disturbing sequences spread out over two hours; they're not drawn out, and though there is explicitness a lot of the horror is delivered through suggestion.

I'm actually tempted to think the film might have a degree of integrity, and a semblance of meaning. I don't really recommend it though, it's not a great film - more for niche horror audiences - was just surprised. It's supposed to be an allegory of power relations particular to Serbian history apparently; could be true, but I felt that something like Pasolini's Salo had handled a similar idea better overall.

Which cut of A Serbian Film did you see? There are quite a few, one of them being very very different with iirc about 30mins tagged onto it.

What did ya think of Martyrs? in retrospect I think that I enjoyed it for what it is. I felt the ending was pretty weak, kinda a big deus ex machina, BUT imho much better than a lot of other new-wave french horror cinema.

Oh, and thanks for reminding me about Necromantik, haven't seen either 1 or 2 for a while. Awesome sound track though eh?

 

[Puffy]

Which cut of A Serbian Film did you see? There are quite a few, one of them being very very different with iirc about 30mins tagged onto it.

What did ya think of Martyrs? in retrospect I think that I enjoyed it for what it is. I felt the ending was pretty weak, kinda a big deus ex machina, BUT imho much better than a lot of other new-wave french horror cinema.

Oh, and thanks for reminding me about Necromantik, haven't seen either 1 or 2 for a while. Awesome sound track though eh?

The uncut version on Youtube is 104 mins? I'm pretty sure it wasn't cut; the scenes I'd heard about from friends were there.

See post above Serbian Film one for Martyrs. I enjoyed the first half but wasn't that impressed with the second. Gaspar Noe is still my French new-wave fave.

I haven't watched Necromantik yet, but will do....

 

[some.body]

Martyrs (2008) - My impression was torture porn trying to be art-house, but only getting it on a surface level. Though it took some "risks" (apparently) with the structure I didn't think it particularly meaningful (though maybe I'm just being lazy.) I thought the "surprise" ending was particularly lame.

It was difficult to feel anything for the characters as there only characterisation was that they're victims (though maybe that was the point). It seemed unnecessarily misogynistic in that sense, and the justification in the plot for it was weak.

The shotgun scene was pretty awesome though. I'm up for any film that mows down children for the lols.

Yeah, totally agree about the ending, that's what I ment by it being a pretty big deus ex machina; it really felt like the writers just said "fuck it, we'll leave it ambiguous because after all the torture scenes we're out of ideas."

 

[some.body]

The uncut version on Youtube is 104 mins? I'm pretty sure it wasn't cut; the scenes I'd heard about from friends were there.

See post above Serbian Film one for Martyrs. I enjoyed the first half but wasn't that impressed with the second. Gaspar Noe is still my French new-wave fave.

I haven't watched Necromantik yet, but will do....

Hmmm. Okay then it's *probably* the same one i'm thinking of, but I did manage to get my hands on a screener copy and seem to remember there being more plot development but unfortunately that's lost on my old laptop.

Since you're into the whole exploitation/whatever kinda thing you'll probably "enjoy" Necromantik. It's a pretty arty film for that style with quite a few gross scenes thrown in. I'd love to say more but don't wanna ruin it for ya.

While I was looking around IMDB I came across this film called The Bunny Games.
It's another exploitation film that I think I'm gunna pass on. Allegedly the "actresses" we're subject to real branding and other horrible shit, willing of course but still, my eyes have seen enough REAL things like that and don't need to see anymore. BUT I mention it in case you or someone else has seen it and would like to comment on it.

I brought this movie up earlier in this thread and its easily the most grotesque film I've ever seen, in fact its a trilogy, the Vomit Gore trilogy. All the actors/actresses in these movies were/are in hardcore porn vids. Despite the disturbing scenes there IS a plot, albeit a very abstract one.

IMDB link to the second installment Regoregitated Sacrifice

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1979309/

 

[Puffy]

Hmmm. Okay then it's *probably* the same one i'm thinking of, but I did manage to get my hands on a screener copy and seem to remember there being more plot development but unfortunately that's lost on my old laptop.

Since you're into the whole exploitation/whatever kinda thing you'll probably "enjoy" Necromantik. It's a pretty arty film for that style with quite a few gross scenes thrown in. I'd love to say more but don't wanna ruin it for ya.

While I was looking around IMDB I came across this film called The Bunny Games.
It's another exploitation film that I think I'm gunna pass on. Allegedly the "actresses" we're subject to real branding and other horrible shit, willing of course but still, my eyes have seen enough REAL things like that and don't need to see anymore. BUT I mention it in case you or someone else has seen it and would like to comment on it.

I brought this movie up earlier in this thread and its easily the most grotesque film I've ever seen, in fact its a trilogy, the Vomit Gore trilogy. All the actors/actresses in these movies were/are in hardcore porn vids. Despite the disturbing scenes there IS a plot, albeit a very abstract one.

IMDB link to the second installment Regoregitated Sacrifice

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1979309/

It's more that I happen to like things with a horror aesthetic. Probably largely nostalgic as I used to read a lot of horror when I was a kid. I still like there to be some kind of artistic integrity behind the creation, the more ambitious the better. Repulsion, The Shining, I Stand Alone, Shivers, Evil Dead, Battle Royale, bla bla bla.

There are some truly excellent "exploitation films" I've seen. There are also mountains of shit (among other things.) I'm happy to try things out at least once though and haven't heard of those, so may as well try at some point.

The only film that has actually thoroughly disturbed me in the last whatever years is Cannibal Holocaust. And that's because of the animal killings - I really didn't like that and it spoiled (to me) what is otherwise a surprisingly intelligent creation. It kind of worked too - it disturbed me because it made me question the aesthetic pleasure I was taking out of the images (and consequently out of horror as a genre). It works in terms of the themes of the film, it's just nihilistic as it is the thing it's critiquing. You're shit for watching it, it's shit for existing, nobody comes out of it clean, etc. Which I guess is kind of interesting for an exploitation film.

So I haven't actively gone out to watch films where people are being injured, unsure if it would hold what interests me about horror.

 

[Cavallier]

Chasing Ice

It was beautiful. The images were arresting. I know those are cliched things to say but this movie really was beautiful and arresting.

 

[Palaver]

The last film I watched was "More than Honey".

It was very beautiful, very sad and informative.

 

[some.body]

It's more that I happen to like things with a horror aesthetic. Probably largely nostalgic as I used to read a lot of horror when I was a kid. I still like there to be some kind of artistic integrity behind the creation, the more ambitious the better. Repulsion, The Shining, I Stand Alone, Shivers, Evil Dead, Battle Royale, bla bla bla.

There are some truly excellent "exploitation films" I've seen. There are also mountains of shit (among other things.) I'm happy to try things out at least once though and haven't heard of those, so may as well try at some point.

The only film that has actually thoroughly disturbed me in the last whatever years is Cannibal Holocaust. And that's because of the animal killings - I really didn't like that and it spoiled (to me) what is otherwise a surprisingly intelligent creation. It kind of worked too - it disturbed me because it made me question the aesthetic pleasure I was taking out of the images (and consequently out of horror as a genre). It works in terms of the themes of the film, it's just nihilistic as it is the thing it's critiquing. You're shit for watching it, it's shit for existing, nobody comes out of it clean, etc. Which I guess is kind of interesting for an exploitation film.

So I haven't actively gone out to watch films where people are being injured, unsure if it would hold what interests me about horror.

Totally. For every "good" exploitation movie I've seen there are probably 5-6 bad/terrible ones (acting, dialog, ect).

Cannibal Holocaust is really something. The whole story of what happened after the release of the film in Italy is pretty interesting. That movie really stirred the shit up.

I've read that the whole reason why they included the animal killings in the movie was to, hopefully, blur the lines between reality/fiction i.e. "well their *really* killing those animals! how do I know with absolute certainty that the actors are still alive??"

Now, that may seem far fetched that anyone could think that actors were really being slaughtered on camera. BUT it's worth mentioning that the director made all the actors sign or have some clause in their contract where after filming was done they had to leave the country for a year and could not give interviews, contact media so on and so forth (how/if this would be possible to actually pull off I really am not sure. Perhaps Andy Kaufman could have done it? )
for the exact reason that Ruggero Deodato wanted to make people think that there were real human killings happening in Cannibal Holocaust.

Shortly after the release Deodato was jailed on suspicion of murder (something along those lines) and was therefore pretty much forced to get in touch with the actors and film crew to prove they were still alive.

In regards to the animal killings; yeah, that stuff really REALLY puts me off. I forget who, but one of the actors in CH was interviewed a few years ago before the re-release of CH and pretty much broke down on camera, crying and almost begging the company doing the re-release to cut those scenes out.

That stuff (animal abuse) puts me off so much that I think I've really missed out on some good documentaries. I heard great things about one called "Earthlings" ::: I got 5 mins in and turned it off.

 

[nancykap1986]

Gravity..

 

[HsinHsin]

Serial Mom.
I did not really like it but it has a point.

 

[BigApplePi]

Mad Dog and Glory. Funny cop/mob film with Robert DeNiro, Bill Murray, and Uma Thurman.

Here is a song from it. It improves as you get half way thru.
http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q...&mid=CC4E7341673C3FC2B1CFCC4E7341673C3FC2B1CF

 

[Rook]

Cabin in the woods. Classic horror format, with a few noteworthy twists. I'm sure the stoner is an intp. Quite an eccentric and intelligent character.

 

[HsinHsin]

Just watched Kick-Ass (2010).

It kicked ass I admit

Your comment made me laugh. Thanks!!

 

[Cherry Cola]

Spring Breakers 10/10

I expected a good deal of fun, what I got was sublime beauty and a good deal of fun; great photography, unforgettable characters; a lingering sense of belonging.

 

[HsinHsin]

Has anyone seen Dogville (2003)?

 

[Jennywocky]

Has anyone seen Dogville (2003)?

Not recently, but I plan a rewatch. it deserves that much.

 

[HsinHsin]

Yes yes yes.

 

[HsinHsin]

Diana.
Didn't like it.

 

[NoID10ts]

I watched the remake of Maniac. I always knew Frodo was a little creep. It was okay, but nothing can compare to the shotgun to the head scene of the original.

I also finally got around to Valhalla Rising. That was a trip. I've decided I really like Mads Mikkelsen after watching his turn as Hannibal Lecter in the new Hannibal series.

 

[Cavallier]

Not recently, but I plan a rewatch. it deserves that much.

I'm going to watch it for the first time soon. I'm excited!!!

 

[Jennywocky]

I watched the remake of Maniac. I always knew Frodo was a little creep. It was okay, but nothing can compare to the shotgun to the head scene of the original.

I first figured out Frodo was a creep when watching him sniff around Clementine's panties (mostly figuratively) in "Endless Sunshine of the Spotless Mind." What a jerk.

I also finally got around to Valhalla Rising. That was a trip. I've decided I really like Mads Mikkelsen after watching his turn as Hannibal Lecter in the new Hannibal series.

I first saw him in Casino Royale.

I think he's done an excellent job with the series portrayal of Hannibal, and didn't fall into the trap of trying to compete with Hopkins' interpretation. (Typewise, it's interesting to see see Hopkins' version seem more INTJ, while Mikkelsen's comes off as more INFJ.)

 

[wonkavision]

Has anyone seen Dogville (2003)?

Yes. I loved it.

But everyone else hates it. (I mean, everyone I know who has seen it.)


I love every film of Von Trier's that I've seen.

 

[Jennywocky]

I love every film of Von Trier's that I've seen.

I wonder what the inside of that guy's head is like.

But yeah, he's a damn good filmmaker, that's for sure. Still trying to parse Antichrist, yeeesh. I feel lots of things watching that, some of them almost contradictory. I don't even know what to say about Melancholia; kind of speechless, words are too little.

 

[wonkavision]

I wonder what the inside of that guy's head is like.

But yeah, he's a damn good filmmaker, that's for sure. Still trying to parse Antichrist, yeeesh. I feel lots of things watching that, some of them almost contradictory. I don't even know what to say about Melancholia; kind of speechless, words are too little.

"Antichrist" is absolutely brilliant.

It was largely improvised, and was a kind of self-therapy for Von Trier.

And I think it shows, in a really good way.

I wish more films were created this way, through INTUITIVE EXPLORATION and not ALWAYS so much structure and polish.

 

[wonkavision]

The last really good movie I saw was "Pandaemonium."

It's about the rocky relationship between English poets Samuel Taylor Coleridge ("Rime of the Ancient Mariner") and William and Dorothy Wordsworth.

Lots of philosophizing, some hallucinogenic drug-taking, some writing, some romance, and some silghtly cheesy but still cool fantasy/dream sequences.

Might not be as apealling to an INTP as an INFJ, but I suspect some INTPs might appreciate it, especially ones with a literary bent.

 

[HsinHsin]

I wonder what the inside of that guy's head is like.

But yeah, he's a damn good filmmaker, that's for sure. Still trying to parse Antichrist, yeeesh. I feel lots of things watching that, some of them almost contradictory. I don't even know what to say about Melancholia...

I think he tries to show the beauty in human vulnerability because there is a greater force (fate?) in Dogville and Melancholia that bring human beings to our/their? destruction.
There is ugliness, but also beauty in human existence.
The person who is conscious of death suffers the most, yet in the end she is dignified, almost god-like. "To live with dignity is to be conscious of death" might be the message I got from the two films.
I haven't seen Antichrist yet..

 

[Jennywocky]

I haven't seen Antichrist yet..

Some people accuse him of misogyny, especially for Breaking the Waves and for Antichrist. Let us know what you think of it, when you see it.

Antichrist is visually one of the most beautiful pictures I've seen and also one of the most disturbing. It's interesting how he also uses slow-mo in this film, to create tension and uneasiness. i found the forest scenes where he used slow-mo to be extremely creepy and am not even sure why, it just disturbed me.

 

[Cherry Cola]

you should watch triers show about a haunted mental hospital, featuring Ernst Hugå Järegård of all people

should be a subbed version somewhere

and yeah trier da man

 

[redbaron]

Rush. Was quite impressed. Enjoyed it a lot actually.

The World's End - not sure if it's the worst movie or the best movie I've ever seen.

 

[Jennywocky]

Ender's Game. Never read the book. The last 15 min took the wind out of my sails and I'm speechless. While perhaps it's not as nuanced as the book (which I will read at some point), not sure why all the RT hate exists (61%? You mean 39% reviews gave it a "negative" score?) I mean, it's not in the top ten movies ever made, but it's probably in the top third or higher of movies I've seen this year in the theater and more solid than Hunger Games.

 

[BigApplePi]

Last movie watched was "State and Main." My wife refuses to watch films because she is very selective. So I gave her a list of ~30 recordings and recommended State and Main. My 2nd viewing. She bit ... and loved it asking me for other films of David Mamet. A brilliant movie where every line of dialog counts. If you've seen it, is it an ESFJ film or an INTP film? I'm no good at evaluating.

Actually I'm 3/4 way through, "Any Given Sunday", a football film, but that doesn't count cuz I'm not finished.