| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| randall |
Posted - 12/31/2008 : 14:36:04
I've just become aware of your Xmas '08 film-watching thru my assiduous pursuit of accolades. AMADEUS and FARGO both disappointed? Fascinating. Why? |
| 15 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Sean |
Posted - 01/12/2009 : 03:17:18
quote:
Originally posted by Randall
quote:
Originally posted by Se�n
quote:
Originally posted by bife
I found Fargo humdrum, didn't care for the story or the people, and it seemed to force form over substance. I tired quickly of the pseudo-dialogue (don't know if it was supposed to be 'realistic', i just found it annoying).
Not caring for the characters isn't a problem for me. E.g., Pulp Fiction,
Meant to note this way upthread, but don't you actually come to oddly "like" the two hitmen because of their recognizably banal conversations before they retrieve the briefcase and in the diner scene toward the end? I did. Whether or not he intended it this way, I took that to be the moral [or at least human] anchor Tarantino is throwing us before he stretches everything else beyond recognition. I desperately wanted there to be no gunplay in the diner -- mainly because I didn't want Sam Jackson hurt!
I know what you mean. I suppose that's the difference between 'liking' a character and 'caring about' a character. I found most characters in Pulp Fiction very interesting (in their own way), but I could not have cared less who got themselves killed on the way. Sure there was some kind of justice in that Sam Jackson got away at the end after giving up his hitman life (and that Travolta didn't), but it would have been equally fair if he'd walked out of the diner and was accidentally crushed by a falling grand piano, he still deserved whatever was coming to him. So I liked them but didn't care what happened to them, and I thought the same about Lock, Stock.... BTW, I also 'liked' Hopkins' Lecter but wouldn't have minded him getting what he deserved.... after having Dr Chilton for lunch of course. 
I suppose bife may be saying that he didn't like any of the characters in Amadeus or care what happened to them either. It would be hard to like a movie under those circumstances. |
| randall |
Posted - 01/12/2009 : 02:12:47
quote:
Originally posted by Se�n
quote:
Originally posted by bife
I found Fargo humdrum, didn't care for the story or the people, and it seemed to force form over substance. I tired quickly of the pseudo-dialogue (don't know if it was supposed to be 'realistic', i just found it annoying).
Not caring for the characters isn't a problem for me. E.g., Pulp Fiction,
Meant to note this way upthread, but don't you actually come to oddly "like" the two hitmen because of their recognizably banal conversations before they retrieve the briefcase and in the diner scene toward the end? I did. Whether or not he intended it this way, I took that to be the moral [or at least human] anchor Tarantino is throwing us before he stretches everything else beyond recognition. I desperately wanted there to be no gunplay in the diner -- mainly because I didn't want Sam Jackson hurt!quote:
If you don't love Mozart's music then I can see it being very difficult to like Amadeus.
Absolutely right, and I overlooked this factor: if Mozart's music is adding to your boredom, bife, then AMADEUS won't stand a chance with you. To each his own and all, but the power of this piece absolutely depends upon your finding the music gorgeous. |
| randall |
Posted - 01/11/2009 : 19:38:37
The good news: I played Thomas More in college.
The bad news: instead of A MAN FOR ALL SEASONS, it was in ANNE OF THE THOUSAND DAYS. [It's only a cameo in that one.] |
| demonic |
Posted - 01/06/2009 : 16:22:12
"A Lion in Winter" is a significant gap in my viewing, but I'd highly recommend "A Man for All Seasons" too. A brilliant play given a first rate cast on film; Scofield, McKern, Davenport, Robert Shaw and John Hurt are all awesome. I talked to John Hurt about it when I met him a few years ago having recently played the same part on stage and he had some interesting things to say about the parallels between the trecherous grasping Richard Rich and Tony Blair. |
| MisterBadIdea |
Posted - 01/06/2009 : 15:31:20
Funny -- it's one of my least favorite movies.
Oooh, look at this guy being contrary over here. |
| Whippersnapper. |
Posted - 01/06/2009 : 15:07:26
You got it in one! |
| ChocolateLady |
Posted - 01/06/2009 : 14:03:36
quote:
Originally posted by Whippersnapper
I just KNEW you were going to say A LION IN WINTER.
And how did I know that? 
Um... maybe because it is one of my all-time favourite films starring my all-time favourite actress?
|
| Whippersnapper. |
Posted - 01/06/2009 : 12:45:28
I just KNEW you were going to say A LION IN WINTER.
And how did I know that?
|
| ChocolateLady |
Posted - 01/06/2009 : 12:40:23
quote:
Originally posted by Whippersnapper
quote:
Originally posted by bife
I've long had an interest in 16th century english history but i can't think of a Tudor-period film that i have any regard for.
A MAN FOR ALL SEASONS isn't bad. 
Actually, A Man for All Seasons is EXCELLENT.
And while it isn't perfect, Anne of a Thousand Days does a very good job with investigating that primary Boleyn girl.
But if you're willing to go back several centuries before this period and still stick with English history, don't miss the original version (not the Hallmark remake) of A Lion in Winter and Becket - that famous duo of films where O'Toole plays Henry II in both of them, and got Oscar nominations for both performances.
|
| bife |
Posted - 01/06/2009 : 12:22:48
quote:
Originally posted by Whippersnapper
A MAN FOR ALL SEASONS isn't bad.
It's gone straight onto my 'movies to rent' list 
Sean - what kind of a disagreement discussion is this? "Fair enough"? Pah! I smite your "fair enough" with my Bill & Ted box set ... |
| Whippersnapper. |
Posted - 01/06/2009 : 12:01:29
quote:
Originally posted by bife
I've long had an interest in 16th century english history but i can't think of a Tudor-period film that i have any regard for.
A MAN FOR ALL SEASONS isn't bad.
|
| Sean |
Posted - 01/06/2009 : 06:20:49
Fair enough. Then I'll remain confused about why you didn't like those movies. |
| bife |
Posted - 01/06/2009 : 02:45:16
I understand and agree with what you are saying about characters sean, but i think we are at cross-purposes. I have liked many films where I didn't 'like' any of the characters (both of the films you mention included), but then the characters usually have to at least engage me. The problem with Fargo wasn't that i didn't 'like' the characters, it was that I had no emotional or intellectual response of any sort to them.
It does help to like the subject matter of a film, but i don't think it's critical. I've long had an interest in 16th century english history but i can't think of a Tudor-period film that i have any regard for. And I've an extensive interest in 1970's Cambodian history but The Killing Fields, whilst shocking in its time and important in bringing events in cambodia to a wider public, is still a weak film. As a biography I'll admit to no interest in JM Barrie or Peter Pan, but I loved Finding Neverland. I also like the Johnny Cash biography, but have no interest in his music. And I just can't believe that in the late 20th century all the praise heaped on amadeus came from die-hard Mozart fans!
Amadeus did overplay the subject-matter for a non-Mozart fan, and that decidedly reduced my interest, but i think my disappointment stemmed from more than that. |
| Sean |
Posted - 01/06/2009 : 01:51:51
quote:
Originally posted by bife
I found Fargo humdrum, didn't care for the story or the people, and it seemed to force form over substance. I tired quickly of the pseudo-dialogue (don't know if it was supposed to be 'realistic', i just found it annoying).
Not caring for the characters isn't a problem for me. E.g., Pulp Fiction, Lock Stock and Two Smoking Barrels have no 'likeable' characters but they're excellent movies.
The 'pseudo-dialogue' is a part of the Coen style. They exaggerate character traits so the characters are a little OTT but not excessively so. I love this movie.quote:
My main gripe with Amadeus was boredom.
.
.
Long, long stretches of classical music to show Salieri's mediocrity vs Mozart's brilliance, problem is I'm a bit of a pleb and i couldn't tell the difference between the two...
...on a subject matter i don't really 'get' but would happily have 'accepted' without the long 'proofs'.
This all adds up to "you don't like the subject matter". I can't imagine someone loving this movie if they didn't inherently love the subject matter - the music. Likewise, someone could make the best-ever biographical drama about a musician, but if the subject in question was a hip-hop artist then I'd kill anyone who tried to drag me to the cinema to see it. 
If you don't love Mozart's music then I can see it being very difficult to like Amadeus. |
| bife |
Posted - 01/05/2009 : 06:11:26
I'm sure time has something to do with it, many films I watched 15/20 years ago, which I considered classics, don't do the same for me now.
Fargo may be one of those films that brought new things to cinema, but watching it now for the first time there wasn't anything original there. Maybe I'm just 15 years too late.
I'm upgrading my opinion on Amadeus to 'good', because it really has stayed with me and I've found myself going over it again in my mind. You are right that the scene I enjoyed so much IS the film, but I still find it a shame that it took so long to get there, it COULD have been a classic for me too but falls short because it's just too damn boring.
I watched Casablanca for the first time on Sunday night. Black and white, no special effects, 'dated' acting and script - but not a shred of doubt that this IS a classic film, can't believe I went 39 years without seeing it.
Also saw Seven Pounds, at the cinema saturday night - what a waste of an intriguing concept. I wont give away the plot (although to call it a spoiler is really to insult your intelligence), but why take such an original idea and turn it into a second rate love story? Seems to be a Will Smith thing right now if this and I am Legend are representative of what he wants to do - great ideas badly executed.
Actually, was a busy christmas and new year, caught up on a lot of films i'd wanted to see for a long time; City of God (very good), Persopolis (good), Life is Beautiful (good but flawed), Baran (good, if you can look past what I assume is dubious acting even in Farsi) and Nine Queens (decent), as well as casablanca, amadeus and fargo and a pile of less remarkable (and mostly children's) titles. |
|
|
