who knew point break has such a following
http://news.yahoo.com/appeals-...eator-202805685.html
The Fearless Vampire Killers
I Vitelloni
The latter was rather mainstream for Fellini.
I Vitelloni
The latter was rather mainstream for Fellini.
I know what channel you were watching. I saw FVKs when it first came out in the theater. I think I had seen Two Men and a Wardrobe at that point on public television at that time known as educational TV.quote:Originally posted by steve8:
The Fearless Vampire Killers
I Vitelloni
The latter was rather mainstream for Fellini.
The Garden of the Finzi-Continis
quote:Originally posted by wine+art:
The Garden of the Finzi-Continis
Saw it when it came out and didn't like it. Was I just too young at the time?
quote:Originally posted by The Old Man:quote:Originally posted by wine+art:
The Garden of the Finzi-Continis
Saw it when it came out and didn't like it. Was I just too young at the time?
That surprises me. A well executed film in my opinion.
A Dry White Season
quote:Originally posted by steve8:
A Dry White Season
Lots of talent in that film.
The Longest Day
Spectre
My wife and I really enjoyed it.
Daniel Craig, for me, once again, proves to be the most interesting James Bond.
Christoph Waltz, despite the fact that he delivers another solid performance, has become repetitive in each of his roles. I believe that he needs to depart from the soft-spoken, grinning psychopath that he seems to play in every movie.
Ralph Fiennes, as usual, is excellent, and Ben Whishaw delivers another vulnerable, witty performance as 'Q'.
My wife and I really enjoyed it.
Daniel Craig, for me, once again, proves to be the most interesting James Bond.
Christoph Waltz, despite the fact that he delivers another solid performance, has become repetitive in each of his roles. I believe that he needs to depart from the soft-spoken, grinning psychopath that he seems to play in every movie.
Ralph Fiennes, as usual, is excellent, and Ben Whishaw delivers another vulnerable, witty performance as 'Q'.
spectre- wanted to like it, but felt like that the film was pieced together to get the audience to the next genre
quote:Originally posted by steve8:
The Fearless Vampire Killers
A good campy vampire flick.
I watch the same channel too. More good movies there than with current releases imo.
The Man From U.N.C.L.E. Watched the first hour and gave up on it. Decided to try Mission Impossible: Rogue Nation. Got an hour into that and gave up on it, too. By the next day I couldn't recall which scenes were in which movie. Lots of lame kibitzing and OTT chase scenes, and not much else of consequence.
Strangers On A Train--pts.--sublime. A case study in all that makes Hitchcock, dozens of clever, interesting shots that move his films forward without relying on words. One of my favorite mini-scenes is when the police are coming to Guy's house to let him know about his wife. Bruno is there and on the opposite of a gate. But with the appearance of the police Guy is visually linked to Bruno's crime. Hitchcock has him step around the gate and stand side-by-side with Bruno, ducking from the police. there are many examples of the mind of Hitchcock throughout the film.
Life Happens -- In a word bad. Well at least it had 3 fairly attractive actresses in it.
quote:Originally posted by The Old Man:
Strangers On A Train--pts.--sublime. A case study in all that makes Hitchcock, dozens of clever, interesting shots that move his films forward without relying on words. One of my favorite mini-scenes is when the police are coming to Guy's house to let him know about his wife. Bruno is there and on the opposite of a gate. But with the appearance of the police Guy is visually linked to Bruno's crime. Hitchcock has him step around the gate and stand side-by-side with Bruno, ducking from the police. there are many examples of the mind of Hitchcock throughout the film.
Love it!
the frame
quote:Originally posted by The Old Man:quote:Originally posted by wine+art:quote:Originally posted by The Old Man:
Mr. Holmes--80pts. Bill Condon a middleweight director who gets interesting loglines--the 93 year old Sherlock Holmes attempts to figure out where an old case went wrong--but Condon doesn't have the ability to make a really great film.
I think of an 80 as a good movie.
Yes, though I didn't say it, it's worth a view. But to show what can be done with an interesting revisionist Holmes there's Nicholas Meyer's The Seven-Percent-Solution. I've always thought that another attempt at a Billy Wilder's own attempt The Private Life of Sherlock Holmes was one of his few failures. However it should be noted that like The Magnificent Ambersons it was edited by the studio without Wilder's consent.
Saw this on the weekend. I wasn't impressed by the handling of the flashbacks - it felt disjointed and jarring - but I enjoyed the premise, the characterizations, and especially the performances by Ian McKellan and Milo Parker as Roger.
quote:Originally posted by gigabit:
Spectre
My wife and I really enjoyed it.
Daniel Craig, for me, once again, proves to be the most interesting James Bond.
Christoph Waltz, despite the fact that he delivers another solid performance, has become repetitive in each of his roles. I believe that he needs to depart from the soft-spoken, grinning psychopath that he seems to play in every movie.
Ralph Fiennes, as usual, is excellent, and Ben Whishaw delivers another vulnerable, witty performance as 'Q'.
I also really enjoyed it. Great photography, nice locations, good acting performances. Maybe not quite as good as "Casino Royale", but at least as good as Skyfall, in my opinion.
I loved seeing "M" eating dinner in Rules in Covent Garden. I was there a couple of months ago, on the recommendation of someone from this site, so it was very surprising to recognize the restaurant immediately in the film.
Although certainly not as high brow as most of the movies discussed here, let me just say how much I enjoyed (as did the little ones) the Peanuts Movie. I was so glad to see them keep it true to form and not try to insert a bunch of modern references like Twitter. Had you watched this movie in the 60s it would have made just as much sense as it did this weekend, and it was just as delightful for those of us "kids" who still love Snoopy, Charlie Brown and the gang.
quote:Originally posted by Rothko:quote:Originally posted by gigabit:
Spectre
My wife and I really enjoyed it.
Daniel Craig, for me, once again, proves to be the most interesting James Bond.
Christoph Waltz, despite the fact that he delivers another solid performance, has become repetitive in each of his roles. I believe that he needs to depart from the soft-spoken, grinning psychopath that he seems to play in every movie.
Ralph Fiennes, as usual, is excellent, and Ben Whishaw delivers another vulnerable, witty performance as 'Q'.
I also really enjoyed it. Great photography, nice locations, good acting performances. Maybe not quite as good as "Casino Royale", but at least as good as Skyfall, in my opinion.
I loved seeing "M" eating dinner in Rules in Covent Garden. I was there a couple of months ago, on the recommendation of someone from this site, so it was very surprising to recognize the restaurant immediately in the film.
Well of course, I was always going to see this film, perhaps more than once, but now that you tell me that there is a scene in my favourite restaurant in all of London....
I could go on and on about how cool and wonderful is Rules, for so many reasons (food and service or course, but also history, décor, classic menu) but I'll offer only 3 stories:
-it's where Graham Greene had his birthday suppers, and flew in from Jamaica to eat them, in a private dining room on the second floor
-it's where Prince Whatsisname (George, maybe?) used to meet Lily Langtry for supper before their infamous trysts
-it's where Margaret Thatcher used to take her inner circle (never the "Wets!) for private scheming suppers
And that is just a few of things that went on on the second floor!
One more: it's where I first met for lunch Jan Luthman, The Nicest Man in Britain.
Like I said, I could go on and on and on about Rules!
quote:Originally posted by bman:
Well of course, I was always going to see this film, perhaps more than once,
b, please elaborate.
quote:Originally posted by wine+art:quote:Originally posted by bman:
Well of course, I was always going to see this film, perhaps more than once,
b, please elaborate.
It's Bond. James Bond. No further elaboration required.
quote:Originally posted by bman:
It's Bond. James Bond. No further elaboration required.
No. Only Sean Connery is that.
Trainwreck: not a huge fan of Amy Schumer but this was one funny flick
The Paper: had seen this way back when but re-visited. Great cast and enjoyable movie
The Paper: had seen this way back when but re-visited. Great cast and enjoyable movie
This Is The End
I laughed.
I laughed.
Watched The Dead Zone last, haven't seen it in ages. Good film.
No Way Out
Unbroken
Exodus. Gods and Kings.
quote:Originally posted by WinoCA:
Watched The Dead Zone last, haven't seen it in ages. Good film.
Wow! been a long time since I've thought about that flick. I may need to revisit that because I am completely blanking on what it was all about, but for some reason I have a positive association to the film name
Hotel Transylvania 2 - Even better than the first one.
Au Hasard Balthazar
quote:Originally posted by wine+art:
Au Hasard Balthazar
Happy, happy. I've just never had the guts to watch this.
Spy
Fast Times at Ridgemont High--69pts.
I promised a forum member, after a discussion of this film, that I would re-watch it again. I originally saw it when it first came out on video around 1987. At the time I found it vile and disgusting. The only thing that changed on this time around is at times it was also tedious. I think I did laugh once, of course at the mimeograph paper scene and perhaps once at something else, but I can't recall what.
My premise against this film has remained unchanged for 30 years. Two comedy films about high school life in LA's suburbs came out almost at the same time; this in 1982 and Valley Girl in 1983 (I must confess I didn't see Nicholas Cage hoovering in the background on Fast Times.) Both were directed by first time women directors, Amy Heckerly for Fast Times and Martha Coolidge on Valley Girl. There the similarity ends.
Simply Fast Times has no heart or soul. The characters move around on the screen mostly doing short bits that pass for entertainment in the dozens of teen sex comedies since. And when there is a thread--Jennifer Jason Leigh's story--there's no empathy from the director. When she's used in the dugout the camera, after showing almost no expression on her face, ends with a long shot across the field to totally detach the viewer from her. And when she makes a decision, (that no one I knew wasn't effected in some way), again the director's decision is to make it like she got her nails done. It's a heavy subject but she doesn't want to bring you down so it acts as a cheap device.
In contrast Valley Girl--88pts. is always looking to capture the emotions of the characters. One of my favorite examples of this is when the supporting actress is having sex with her best friend's boyfriend. She portrays not only the thrill of being with this "bitchin' dude", but at the same time you can tell she feels guilt about what she is doing.
Finally Fast Times is loaded with crappy early 80s music, but Valley Girl effectively featured The Plimsouls, A Million Miles Away and Modern English's I Melt With You.
Recently TCM had a month long tribute of women directors in America. It made sense that Coolidge was featured and Heckerling was not.
Sole winner in "Perfect Viewing in Film and TV award 2005, 2006, 2008, 2011 and 2012. Runner up for 2013 and 2014.
I promised a forum member, after a discussion of this film, that I would re-watch it again. I originally saw it when it first came out on video around 1987. At the time I found it vile and disgusting. The only thing that changed on this time around is at times it was also tedious. I think I did laugh once, of course at the mimeograph paper scene and perhaps once at something else, but I can't recall what.
My premise against this film has remained unchanged for 30 years. Two comedy films about high school life in LA's suburbs came out almost at the same time; this in 1982 and Valley Girl in 1983 (I must confess I didn't see Nicholas Cage hoovering in the background on Fast Times.) Both were directed by first time women directors, Amy Heckerly for Fast Times and Martha Coolidge on Valley Girl. There the similarity ends.
Simply Fast Times has no heart or soul. The characters move around on the screen mostly doing short bits that pass for entertainment in the dozens of teen sex comedies since. And when there is a thread--Jennifer Jason Leigh's story--there's no empathy from the director. When she's used in the dugout the camera, after showing almost no expression on her face, ends with a long shot across the field to totally detach the viewer from her. And when she makes a decision, (that no one I knew wasn't effected in some way), again the director's decision is to make it like she got her nails done. It's a heavy subject but she doesn't want to bring you down so it acts as a cheap device.
In contrast Valley Girl--88pts. is always looking to capture the emotions of the characters. One of my favorite examples of this is when the supporting actress is having sex with her best friend's boyfriend. She portrays not only the thrill of being with this "bitchin' dude", but at the same time you can tell she feels guilt about what she is doing.
Finally Fast Times is loaded with crappy early 80s music, but Valley Girl effectively featured The Plimsouls, A Million Miles Away and Modern English's I Melt With You.
Recently TCM had a month long tribute of women directors in America. It made sense that Coolidge was featured and Heckerling was not.
Sole winner in "Perfect Viewing in Film and TV award 2005, 2006, 2008, 2011 and 2012. Runner up for 2013 and 2014.
quote:Originally posted by The Old Man:
Simply Fast Times has no heart or soul.
Maybe, but it does have a topless Phoebe Cates. The defense rests.
Love the new signature line by the way.
quote:Originally posted by The Old Man:
Fast Times at Ridgemont High--69pts.
I promised a forum member, after a discussion of this film, that I would re-watch it again. I originally saw it when it first came out on video around 1987. At the time I found it vile and disgusting. The only thing that changed on this time around is at times it was also tedious. I think I did laugh once, of course at the mimeograph paper scene and perhaps once at something else, but I can't recall what.
My premise against this film has remained unchanged for 30 years. Two comedy films about high school life in LA's suburbs came out almost at the same time; this in 1982 and Valley Girl in 1983 (I must confess I didn't see Nicholas Cage hoovering in the background on Fast Times.) Both were directed by first time women directors, Amy Heckerly for Fast Times and Martha Coolidge on Valley Girl. There the similarity ends.
Simply Fast Times has no heart or soul. The characters move around on the screen mostly doing short bits that pass for entertainment in the dozens of teen sex comedies since. And when there is a thread--Jennifer Jason Leigh's story--there's no empathy from the director. When she's used in the dugout the camera, after showing almost no expression on her face, ends with a long shot across the field to totally detach the viewer from her. And when she makes a decision, (that no one I knew wasn't effected in some way), again the director's decision is to make it like she got her nails done. It's a heavy subject but she doesn't want to bring you down so it acts as a cheap device.
In contrast Valley Girl--88pts. is always looking to capture the emotions of the characters. One of my favorite examples of this is when the supporting actress is having sex with her best friend's boyfriend. She portrays not only the thrill of being with this "bitchin' dude", but at the same time you can tell she feels guilt about what she is doing.
Finally Fast Times is loaded with crappy early 80s music, but Valley Girl effectively featured The Plimsouls, A Million Miles Away and Modern English's I Melt With You.
Recently TCM had a month long tribute of women directors in America. It made sense that Coolidge was featured and Heckerling was not.
Sole winner in "Perfect Viewing in Film and TV award 2005, 2006, 2008, 2011 and 2012. Runner up for 2013 and 2014.
I have to wager you are in the vast minority of movie critics that would say Valley Girl was a better film than Fast Times - as an 80's teenager, Valley Girl was also viewed far more as a T & A movie than Fast Times. I personally always really liked Valley Girl but I throw that out there. That are hard to compare because VG has clear lead Nicholas Cage (then Coppola) and Deborah Foreman and secondary characters while Fast Times does not and is a vignette ensemble movie. I enjoy both although I have not seen Valley Girl in years.
quote:Originally posted by thelostverse:quote:Originally posted by The Old Man:
Simply Fast Times has no heart or soul.
Maybe, but it does have a topless Phoebe Cates. The defense rests.
Where's the bow-down icon when I need it?
quote:Originally posted by Jcocktosten:
I have to wager you are in the vast minority of movie critics that would say Valley Girl was a better film than Fast Times.
Not that I care what critics say, and I'm not a Roger Ebert fanboy, but this says it all:
Fast Times At Ridgemont High
Valley Girl
I've don't think I've read these before. I just looked them up.
FWIW Valley Girl has a 83 to Fast Times' 78 on Rotten Tomatoes. Among "Top Critics" Fast Times gets a 25. Valley Girl has no aggregated by Top Critics rating.
There is no question that among the public Fast Times is more popular.