Pherdy
Ghost writer
Posts: 596
|
2007
Mar 6, 2008 23:02:54 GMT
Post by Pherdy on Mar 6, 2008 23:02:54 GMT
I can't really think of bad things about Michael Clayton - strong acting, good script, brilliant mise-en-scène - but at the same time, I found it hard to perceive it as really superb or magnificent or great. and to be fair, I have seen 3:10 to Yuma more recently.
perhaps if I saw all those 'equally good' movies again in a short period, the order would change. but I'm pretty sure about the first four. just my taste I guess...
except for There Will Be Blood, no movie came close to being exceptionally outstanding, in my opinion.
|
|
Omar
Global Moderator
Professione: reporter
Posts: 2,770
|
2007
Mar 7, 2008 2:05:49 GMT
Post by Omar on Mar 7, 2008 2:05:49 GMT
except for There Will Be Blood, no movie came close to being exceptionally outstanding, in my opinion. Welcome back, by the way!
|
|
|
2007
Mar 7, 2008 3:10:24 GMT
Post by Mike Sullivan on Mar 7, 2008 3:10:24 GMT
There Will Be Blood, Michael Clayton and No Country along with The Bourne Ultimatum and Sweeney Todd are my favorite films from 2007.
All intelligent films. Greengrass creates an equally wonderful film that can stand next to "Supremacy". Greengrass' hand held camera and quick editing may annoy some. But it makes it a visceral experience. It lends to a documentary like immediacy. Those who say that it doesn't allow audiences to become oriented with the environment, I mist say that I never once felt that way. Damon gives a subdued but nuanced role that has come to define the post-Cold War spy genre.
Michael Clayton reminds me of a noir film. A good man in a dirty field, life in danger. Except the thugs have law degrees and don't walk through the alleys but the skyscrapers of NYC. Intelligent, well-paced and directed with panache by Tony Gilroy and a marvelous performance by the whole cast. This is a great piece. Nothing terribly new, ultimately. But entertainment at its finest.
Sweeney Todd is the finest musical since My Fair Lady. Depp and Carter's performances, the marvelous score by Stephen Sondheim, the production design, the direction by Tim Burton is all mesmerizing and disturbing and strangely beautiful.
I've posted my thoughts on No Country and There Will Be Blood. Cool to see you back here, Pherd.
|
|
Capo
Administrator
Posts: 7,847
|
2007
Mar 7, 2008 23:04:59 GMT
Post by Capo on Mar 7, 2008 23:04:59 GMT
I'll be voting Sweeney Todd and Rambo as the worst of 2007.
|
|
Capo
Administrator
Posts: 7,847
|
2007
Mar 10, 2008 16:58:05 GMT
Post by Capo on Mar 10, 2008 16:58:05 GMT
Michael Clayton is brilliant! I loved it. The sort of "thriller" I like.
|
|
Pherdy
Ghost writer
Posts: 596
|
2007
Mar 15, 2008 14:30:32 GMT
Post by Pherdy on Mar 15, 2008 14:30:32 GMT
how many "2007" movies have you all seen?
I've just finished Breach, which is the 72nd I've seen from 2007 (admitted, including Away from her, 300 and Once, which do not count for the yearly lists). And I've yet to see some big ones, like I'm not There or Lust, Caution, or all the documentaries Kino Ozu's mentioned.
my "2006" count stands at 91 so far.
|
|
Pherdy
Ghost writer
Posts: 596
|
2007
Mar 15, 2008 14:57:11 GMT
Post by Pherdy on Mar 15, 2008 14:57:11 GMT
As the Imdb-years are the only logical criterion we can use for the top tens, I'm afraid Bella and Lake of Fire are ineligible.
|
|
|
2007
Apr 10, 2008 6:05:36 GMT
Post by seyfried on Apr 10, 2008 6:05:36 GMT
1. Southland Tales 2. No Country for Old Men 3. Sunshine 4. En la Ciudad de Sylvia 5. Juno 6. Control 7. There Will be Blood 8. Redacted 9. Eastern Promises 10. Lars and the Real Girl
(haven't seen a bunch, however)
|
|
RNL
Global Moderator
Posts: 6,624
|
2007
Apr 10, 2008 13:55:16 GMT
Post by RNL on Apr 10, 2008 13:55:16 GMT
Wow. I don't think we can be friends.
|
|
|
2007
Apr 10, 2008 18:35:19 GMT
Post by seyfried on Apr 10, 2008 18:35:19 GMT
But...we...err...love...Videdrome... ;D In all fairness... I don't like it for those: www.uk.imdb.com/title/tt0405336/board/nest/94220203 reasons. And as is a rare case it's one of those films that I think is ostensibly atrocious approached from almost every angle...except one. Well, two or three, counting the Kelly fanboy takes, but come on, we're both cynical of those, I can see.
|
|
RNL
Global Moderator
Posts: 6,624
|
2007
Apr 10, 2008 18:58:22 GMT
Post by RNL on Apr 10, 2008 18:58:22 GMT
I'd be interested to hear your take on it then. Post it here if you like. I'll admit it could be analysed quite interestingly as a cultural artefact, but so could Date Movie. You could write a fascinating critical paper on films like these, but they're still shit, unless we remove the significance of authorial intent altogether from the critical process, which I have no interest in doing except as an isolated intellectual exercise. I'll never approach art in that way as a matter of course. ( Southland should be in the 2006 thread, by the way.)
|
|
|
2007
Apr 10, 2008 19:11:37 GMT
Post by seyfried on Apr 10, 2008 19:11:37 GMT
(I'll be giving it a rewatch soon, so I'll certainly write a review at some point in the future)
You could write a fascinating critical paper on films like these, but they're still shit, unless we remove the significance of authorial intent altogether from the critical process, which I have no interest in doing except as an isolated intellectual exercise. I'll never approach art in that way as a matter of course.
Of course, that would be proclaiming some sort of omniscient knowledge of the actual intent of a film like this. Perhaps clarify this "approach" a bit for me in relation to Southland Tales. I'm very curious.
|
|
|
2007
Apr 10, 2008 19:33:58 GMT
Post by svsg on Apr 10, 2008 19:33:58 GMT
Firstly I haven't watched southland tales, so my comments aren't specific to that. But in general you can over analyze and come up with stuff that weren't intended by the author. How does one know the intent? I agree with you that it is not possible to find out, except by the means of our own experience. It is difficult to be accurate, but unless we want to do it as an academic excercise, we can make an intelligent guess. One can possibly find some deep symbolism or a new insight into the working of human mind with "snakes on a plane", but in all possibility, the movie was just that - snakes on a plane. Maybe an opportunity for Samuel Jackson to say "motherfucking snakes" . Or was it an expression of existential angst by a man trapped in a technological age, haha
|
|
RNL
Global Moderator
Posts: 6,624
|
2007
Apr 11, 2008 0:27:08 GMT
Post by RNL on Apr 11, 2008 0:27:08 GMT
(I'll be giving it a rewatch soon, so I'll certainly write a review at some point in the future) You could write a fascinating critical paper on films like these, but they're still shit, unless we remove the significance of authorial intent altogether from the critical process, which I have no interest in doing except as an isolated intellectual exercise. I'll never approach art in that way as a matter of course.Of course, that would be proclaiming some sort of omniscient knowledge of the actual intent of a film like this. Perhaps clarify this "approach" a bit for me in relation to Southland Tales. I'm very curious. One of THE questions in critical theory, isn't it. For one thing, most obviously, in the case of Southland Tales, Kelly has talked extensively about his intentions; why he made the film and what the film is 'saying'. As I mentioned, name-dropping Dick and Warhol, and explicitly calling it a satire. He's had to apologise for it over and over again for two years, trying to undo the damage done by the Cannes press, so the film's raison d'être has been laid out for all to see. This topic really deserves a thread of its own, though.
|
|
|
2007
Apr 11, 2008 3:53:57 GMT
Post by seyfried on Apr 11, 2008 3:53:57 GMT
I've always been a bit skeptical about director's explicating their intentions...as if viewers are destined to be confined within such limitations. I'm not saying he's wrong, and, furthermore, the film isn't "satirical", but I've always taken the Cannes receptions with grain of salt. The apology should have been more apologia; however, I think the added clarity was perhaps for more superficial (commercial) reasons than anything. It's certainly a media experience, and part of the inherent appeal of Southland Tales is the transparency of its cultural actors, I suppose. But, nevertheless, I'll get around to it (when it comes up in my queue) and try to make some more sense of what makes it so damn near interesting.
(If anything, the film feels more vectorial than anything with its thematics, kind of like an ethnographical film or a cinematic essay a la F is for Fake or Sans Soleil. IMHO, of course.)
|
|
|
2007
Dec 2, 2008 8:21:02 GMT
Post by Anasazie on Dec 2, 2008 8:21:02 GMT
1. Don't Touch the Axe - Jacques Rivette 2. State Legislature - Frederick Wiseman 3. You, the Living - Roy Andersson 4. Wolfsbergen - Nanouk Leopold 5. Aleksandra - Aleksandr Sokurov 6. Zodiac - David Fincher 7. I'm Not There - Todd Haynes 8. Flight of the Red Balloon - Hou Hsiao-Hsien 9. Desert Dream - Lu Zhang 10. Import/Export - Ulrich Seidl
Lots of honorables also to:
Alone in Four Walls - Alexandra Westmeier Her Name is Sabine – Sandrine Bonnaire The Romance of Astrea and Celadon - Eric Rohmer Respite - Harun Farocki Boarding Gate - Olivier Assayas Go Go Tales - Abel Ferrara Secret Sunshine - Lee Chang-Dong Joy Division - Grant Gee My Winnipeg - Guy Maddin The Silence Before Bach - Pere Bortella Yella - Christian Petzold Yo - Rafa Cortes
Especially the last two.
|
|
Pherdy
Ghost writer
Posts: 596
|
2007
Feb 9, 2009 19:09:29 GMT
Post by Pherdy on Feb 9, 2009 19:09:29 GMT
Zodiac replaced There Will Be Blood as #1 of 2007. Mind you, There Will Be Blood tops four lists, Zodiac 'only' three. There Will Be Blood has a higher average as well (8 pts, the same as You, The Living)
|
|
Capo
Administrator
Posts: 7,847
|
2007
Feb 9, 2009 21:09:27 GMT
Post by Capo on Feb 9, 2009 21:09:27 GMT
There Will Be Blood may no longer be in my Top Ten, were I to redo my list.
|
|
jrod
Ghost writer
Posts: 970
|
2007
Feb 9, 2009 23:24:30 GMT
Post by jrod on Feb 9, 2009 23:24:30 GMT
bastard! just kidding...kind of I need to go through and update all these fuckers someday, but in the time that would take I could watch 3 or 4 movies. Decisions, decisions.
|
|
jrod
Ghost writer
Posts: 970
|
2007
Feb 10, 2009 4:31:28 GMT
Post by jrod on Feb 10, 2009 4:31:28 GMT
update time:
1-There Will Be Blood 2-The Band's Visit 3-No Country for Old Men 4-The Visitor 5-Chop Shop 6-Paranoid Park 7-4 Months, 3 Weeks, 2 Days 8-The King of Kong 9-Juno 10-Eastern Promises
some others...
Meet Bill Atonement Bourne Ultimatium Zodiac Shotgun Stories
|
|