Films you've seen recently and would unreservedly recommend:

[tox]

Probably a bit of both. It's written by Aaron Sorkin (West Wing), who's an aggressively lberal Democrat. I should imagine his postion on Afghanistan is one of pride in undermining the Soviets and shame that they failed to foresee and forestall the Taliban.

Politics aside, was it good?

It certainly entertained and informed me, so on those counts it was good. I find Tom Hanks rather annoying but he was good enough as Charlie Wilson that I was able to put up with him for the duration of the film. On the other hand Philip Seymour Hoffman and Amy Adams were great.

There's a clear pride in the undermining of the Soviets throughout the film, to the extent that a montage plays out showing the number of Russian tanks/aircraft shot down in different time periods. Rather distasteful I thought. In addition to this there are a few dubious stereotypes - one particular scene features a set of Russian pilots discussing sex shortly before getting blown up. This seemed completely needless and out of place. The Afghans featured in the film were not given subtitles, but merely jumped around making happy noises when they shot down a Russian plane. This is a decision I found odd and maybe more betraying of the writer/directors politics than the rest of the content of the movie!

Its given me lots of little things to think about over the last few days though so I would recommend it for a watch.

Walk Hard also kept me amused at the weekend. Its more Hot Shots than Spinal Tap, but not as crass as Scary Movie. A fair few people walked out though!

 

[mistersloane]

Audrey Hepburn, a sorely underrated comic actress (see also Charade), flirting around in a vast wardrobe of Givenchy masterpieces (a new costume for every scene), beautifully misunderstanding everything about sauve, decent Peter O Toole. In April (as it's always April) in Paris.

Watched Charade a while back and can't agree more, shocking in its styling - it's very hard to wear couture - and she's wickedly funny, we were trying to work out which bits were ad-libs to make Cary Grant laugh, there's a couple where he's trying not to lose it which are genius.

 

[stelfox]

I just saw Persepolis, which was truly lovely. Really a beautiful movie. totally satisfying.

isn't this just fantastic. one of the best movies i've seen in years. i really didn't think animation could be that affecting.

 

[wonk_vitesse]

4 months 3 weeks and 2 days

trailer

ive not been as physically nervous in a film before, incredibly tense. best film ive seen in months...

Highly recommended , as Howard Jacobson wrote over the weekend concerning Dostoyevsky if a book is a 'good read' it's probably not worth reading. This is film is not a 'good read' in any sense but it is highly crafted and includes a stunning central performance from Anamaria Marinca.

 

[wonk_vitesse]

4 months 3 weeks and 2 days

oops, dble post

 

[nochexxx]

The Devil and Daniel Johnston http://www.sonyclassics.com/devilanddaniel/

contains an interesting scene where gibby haynes (butthole surfers) is asked if he had spiked daniel with the acid that eventually led to daniels mental demise.


Metallica: Some Kind of Monster
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0387412/

a very funny film about a very funny band, best rockumentary ever!

 

[Dial]

Lust, Caution

Saw Lust, Caution by Ang Lee over the weekend. Too long but I have the urge to go see it again almost immediately. An unusual response for me to a movie. The female lead, so gorgeous and intelligently expressive, just one aspect of its appeal.

 

[Poisonous Dart]

I got one.

The Nines. I saw it and dug it.

One.

 

[IdleRich]

"Saw Lust, Caution by Ang Lee over the weekend. Too long but I have the urge to go see it again almost immediately. An unusual response for me to a movie. The female lead, so gorgeous and intelligently expressive, just one aspect of its appeal."

Yeah, enjoyed that one a lot. Some people have said it was boring but I couldn't see that at all, very tense in lots of bits with a good plot. China and Hong Kong looked absolutely amazing and the love affair was mainly very well done (the reason I say "mainly" was because I'm not sure she would necessarily have come back for more after the first time to be honest).

 

[crackerjack]

I just watched There Will Be Blood about ten minutes ago and I have to say that I found it quite disappointing. I just didn't get why the DDL character hated Eli so much and the collapse of his relationship with his son just seemed to come out of nowhere.

Saw it last night and I was riveted. The hatred for Eli, I thought, came from a general antipathy to religion, a loathing of phoneys and his resentment of anyone trying to get a piece of what he'd sweated blood for. Don't agree that the thing with his son came out of nowhere either - it stemmed from the fire, which was a fairly obvious 'what matters most?' litmus test device.

That said, I think it suffered for its lack of supporting roles (Eli excepted) and the sense that PTA appears to have decided he's going to film a DDL bravura performance and then let everything else slot in around it. For that reason, it's not something I'd be bothered about seeing twice.

 

[IdleRich]

"Saw it last night and I was riveted. The hatred for Eli, I thought, came from a general antipathy to religion, a loathing of phoneys and his resentment of anyone trying to get a piece of what he'd sweated blood for. Don't agree that the thing with his son came out of nowhere either - it stemmed from the fire, which was a fairly obvious 'what matters most?' litmus test device."

Well, I guess it did come from the explosion/fire thing but I didn't really get any sense of the relationship breaking down, it just seemed to happen suddenly in a quite unsatisfactory way. Kind of reminded of the way in Citizen Kane you see how his relationship with his wife deteriorates over time in a few quick scenes - but somehow CK manages to pull it off whereas this one failed.

"That said, I think it suffered for its lack of supporting roles (Eli excepted) and the sense that PTA appears to have decided he's going to film a DDL bravura performance and then let everything else slot in around it. For that reason, it's not something I'd be bothered about seeing twice."

Yes, I'd pretty much agree with that, it was as if PTA had just decided to wind him up and let him go and then see if he could make a film out of the result. That's part of the reason that when it finished I just thought "oh". Also, I personally couldn't understand the character or where he was coming from or even what drove him and it's fairly clear that the film stands or falls with him. I read an absolutely glowing review in the Guardian where he was dismissing those who said DDL was over the top (apparently quite a lot of people), he argued that he had just done (brilliantly) what PTA had told him to and if you dislike the film then blame the director, I think that makes sense. I didn't like the film and I blame the director.
On the other hand, I seem to be in a minority of about one so maybe I should give it another go, everyone except me seems to have seen the film that I was hoping to see.

 

[crackerjack]

Also, I personally couldn't understand the character or where he was coming from or even what drove him and it's fairly clear that the film stands or falls with him.

Yeah, you get these hints at the beginning, like when he falls down the shaft and apparently breaks his leg, but it never tells you whether or not he does. It communicates this sense of absolute determination regardless of personal cost, but doesn't really explain why he's like he is. And when 'Henry' tries to drag it out of him, he pullls the shutters down.

 

[zhao]

also 'Possession' was good

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0082933/

the most intense on-screen performances i have ever seen.

god she is so amazing

 

[mistersloane]

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0082933/

the most intense on-screen performances i have ever seen.


god she is so amazing

That's my favourite film of all time. I used to watch that soooo much. Just amazing.

Just saw 'There Will Be Blood', first hour is breath-taking, really breathtaking. Then it kinda loses it. It could have done with having another 3/4hr to an hours worth more, and I never ever say that about films, they're usually too long.

 

[UFO over easy]

re: there will be blood, saw it this weekend. I liked it but I find it very difficult watching films I can't connect to emotionally. there's nothing to latch on to in any of the characters - I didn't understand any of them. It created a very odd sort of vibe where things just seemed to happen, without meaning much - a completely disconnected series of events.

Highlight was that fantastic scene with his grown up son at the end, when he loses it and demands that he speak.. saying all those dreadful things through the interpreter.

 

[crackerjack]

re: there will be blood, saw it this weekend. I liked it but I find it very difficult watching films I can't connect to emotionally. there's nothing to latch on to in any of the characters - I didn't understand any of them. It created a very odd sort of vibe where things just seemed to happen, without meaning much - a completely disconnected series of events.

Highlight was that fantastic scene with his grown up son at the end, when he loses it and demands that he speak.. saying all those dreadful things through the interpreter.

So was the son definitely adopted? All the reviews say so, but I'd assumed DDL was just making that stuff up to hurt him. Was there something earlier that confirmed he was adopted? Must have had one my little zone-out moments.

 

[UFO over easy]

spoiler alert yougetme



















I think it was just implied - he got really edgy every time someone asked after the boys mother, and maybe goes some way to explaining why he became so incensed when he found out his 'brother' was an imposter. It was only when he found a blood-connection that he was willing to send off his son, and losing that meant enough for him to kill the man once he found out the truth

 

[IdleRich]

"I didn't understand any of them. It created a very odd sort of vibe where things just seemed to happen, without meaning much - a completely disconnected series of events."

Yeah, exactly, some stuff I didn't really care about happened and people got very excited about it and then it finished. That's my summing up.

"So was the son definitely adopted? All the reviews say so, but I'd assumed DDL was just making that stuff up to hurt him."

I guess that's an interesting question (well answered by UFO) but it never occurred to me to ask it - because I just didn't care either way.

 

[mistersloane]

I assumed the son was. What impressed me about the film was the utter Gothicness of it all, which I wasn't expecting, I wasn't expecting such a huge southern Flannery o'Connor gothic epic, and the music is great, for a mainstream film. I'm not sure in Gothic stuff that empathy is the key, it's more like watching the morality unfold. The jumps in it were crap though, which is why I think it coulda done with being longer, it felt like he was trying to wrap things up too fast.

 

[IdleRich]

I was hoping for more gothicness I think. Anyway, just read this on the Guardian website

"I have made the 'mistake' of reading the book, and this picture is nothing like the book. The book is told from the point of view of the child (who IS his real child) and covers the whole history of class struggle in LoS Angeles during this period, Bolshevik revolution and all. The oil man is actually the more liberal of the bunch, not a monster at all. More subtle, because it is more true to life."

I suppose it doesn't necessarily follow that he is his child in the film but may be relevant.