Jake Gittes

But if Hayes Code is so important there remains the question of what to do with 1) pre-1934 films and 2) non-American films, for which the Code wasn't relevant.

Maybe I'm too rationalist or literal-minded or whatever but I don't get the supposed profundity of Rashomon. It's dudes sitting around moping endlessly over the revelation that (shocker!) people are liars (no it's not about "subjective interpretations" or whatever, the stories told are so radically different it's literally impossible for them to be differing biased views of the same agreed-upon core event) before being rescued from their despair by baby ex machina. Also, it rains, so we all know it's serious.

I am going in super rage mode with Pulp coming in this low

Saw Sholay last year. It was... long.

Don't let yourself get attached to any movie you are not willing to walk out on in 30 seconds flat if you see Heat ranking below #1 on the all-time list, BOT.

Why should we give a fuck about what IMDb users think?

RIP. CJohn will see Tenet on the big screen and then immediately kill theaters worldwide. A fitting end

Problem is they can still be seen even by people who aren't looking for them. But point taken. (And, sure, word on the movie's quality before it's opened is more crucial here than with a big franchise tentpole too.)

Feel like any unconventional release strategy would be more productively used by conventional tentpoles, namely franchise movies and remakes that don't rely on any original plotting and wouldn't really be damaged by spoilers.

Norma is an effective movie character but she's pretty one-dimensional. Not really a problem with the movie, which I see not so much as a character study as a deliberately exaggerated perverse cautionary tale. Had it wanted to be more effective as the former, it would've made her a more complex and dynamic human being rather than this outsized grotesque figure whose delusion is the main thing that defines her (and the main thing the movie wants to study. Holden even spends like half his voiceover reviewing it like a critic might.) Her seduction of Joe is the most psychologically interesting part of her character for me because it's pretty much the only one that scans as grounded and recognizable.

I've pretty easily seen 100 movies I find better. Altho I'll concede that SB deserves to make the list more than a lot of the movies that have been revealed as the top 250 so far.

bruh

#ReleaseTheDaltonCut

And Barry Lyndon and Eyes Wide Shut and Paths of Glory.

*Chinatown (1974) - 10/10. No longer means as much to me as it did 5-10 years ago but still pretty immaculate. The perfect poise and elegance is an exactly right counterpoint to the cruelty and ugliness underlying the story, and makes the ending tough to shake even after countless viewings. *Stop Making Sense (1984) - 10/10. Not being hyperbolic when I say I think this is one of the greatest arguments in favor of humanity and what it's capable of doing and being I've ever come across. Totally thrilling and wonderful, perfect marriage of rock music and cinema, top 5 desert island movie. *Ugetsu (1953) - 7/10. Some stirring individual scenes - the fog, the reunion of the wannabe samurai and his wife, most of all the climax of the Lady Wakasa storyline - but it's hard for me to warm emotionally to this sort of supremely sedate, carefully studied sensibility (had the same issue with Ozu out of that era's Japanese filmmakers). Maybe it's not for me, period, or maybe you just need to be older and more understanding of the culture. Still want to see Mizoguchi's other films. The Apu Trilogy (first time) Pather Panchali (1955) - 8/10. Impressively unsentimental, village life as a lot of petty squabbles people can't help but lose themselves to/in, balanced out by just enough joy and warmth to keep it from teetering over into miserablism, until death arrives suddenly and nothing is the same anymore. All feels very true to life, although Satyajit Ray himself was probably right to be critical of the pacing in the first half. Still a lot of great compositions and the climactic rainstorm scene seals the deal emotionally. Aparajito (1956) - 7/10. A major death early on threw me off for a while - here unlike before it just happens without being a dramatic payoff to anything, which is presumably the point but still - and this felt even more episodic than the first film, then again the story's random quality - a life being built on/formed out of spontaneous events and decisions - has its own poignancy. Karuna Banerjee's performance is even more of a standout, one of the best portrayals of tough but loving, resilient motherhood I've seen. Apur Sansar (1959) - 7/10. During the middle stretch this actually felt like it would be my favorite of the trilogy, but sadly a certain plot turn that it ends with really alienated me here, the film throws away its best character for what strikes me as no good reason leading to a final third that's just a lot of moping on the way to the only possible ending that won't make our hero look like an ass. Quick look online suggests other people don't have this issue so maybe I'll come around. Filmmaking-wise it's still mostly excellent. Glad to have caught up with these, and to have been introduced to Ray.

[Also Sprach Zarathustra intensifies]

Damn that was a hell of a drop. Glad we came back to our senses

Kane is great and all but don't be sleeping on the rest of Welles' work. I wish Touch of Evil stood a chance to make it on here, it's such a cracking unhinged thriller (not to mention a prime ACAB movie) and my favorite film he made. The Magnificent Ambersons and Chimes at Midnight are nothing to mess with either.

Glad Ratatouille managed to outrank that other, middle of the road Pixar film

A Cockwank Sausage.

That would be very funny

It's not a narrative at all, but it is insanely enjoyable. There's a shape - it covers one day in the life of a city - but most of all it's just an hour of pure playfulness showcasing what can be done with camera and editing. Maybe the coolest, most modern 90-year-old film you'll ever see.

The first part is fair. If you don't care you don't care. Happens to all of us. But the second part I think short-changes the movie. Yes, it does show you the process of growing up, but 1) it also shows you the process of all the people around him changing as well and 2) it's not just about the process itself but what is revealed through this process: the feeling of time flying by (emphasized by 12 years being packed into under 3 hours), the arbitrariness of connections made and lost, the way your environment shapes you as a person, seemingly insignificant moments become far bigger memories than usual coming-of-age touchstones and some events mean much more (or less) to you than they do to other people and you don't even realize it. The goal of the movie isn't to thrill you with "plot" or unexpected character development, but to observe human lives being lived and get you to reflect on all the above-mentioned things by relating them to your own experience of growing up and passage of time.

The Pirates sequels were messy as shit back then and I refuse to believe they still aren't now. I know we all have PTSD from the conveyor-belt TV-in-public blockbusters and want some of that weirdness and grandiosity back but please.

Boyhood, being an experiment created piece-by-piece rather than a fully pre-conceived scripted work, is probably not the best entry point for Linklater. I recommend giving his earlier movies like the Before trilogy and Dazed & Confused a shot, they express what he's all about in a much more dynamic way and may give you a better understanding of why he's so well-liked. School of Rock, too, his very good Hollywood comedy.