Jump to content

LateReg

Free Account+
  • Content Count

    101
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

111 Likes

About LateReg

  • Rank
    Cult Classic

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    USA

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Agreed. The scene seems like both a daydream and a memory at the same time. Even so, it's not how Tarantino sees Lee, but how Cliff Booth sees him. Huge difference there.
  2. I didn't get to revisit as many of these as I'd have liked to, but something like this. (According to first festival/theatrical screenings, not US release dates) 1. Beau Travail 2. Eyes Wide Shut 3. Being John Malkovich 4. The Wind Will Carry Us 5. The Straight Story 6. Time Regained 7. Magnolia 8. Topsy Turvy 9. The Matrix 10. Rosetta 11. Fight Club 12. Three Kings 13. L'humanite 14. All About My Mother 15. Audition 16. Election 17. Toy Story 2 18. Ratcatcher 19. The Blair Witch Project 20. The Insider 21. Taboo 22. eXistenZ 23. The Limey 24. The Virgin Suicides 25. Bringing Out the Dead Runners Up: Outer Space, The Iron Giant, Run Lola Run, American Movie, Ghost Dog, American Beauty, South Park: Bigger Longer & Uncut, The Mission, Boys Don't Cry, Go, Pola X, The Talented Mr. Ripley, The Sixth Sense, Dead or Alive Further Personal Favorite: The Ninth Gate I think the American Beauty debate is interesting. It hasn't held up as well as most other films because it seemed so fully formed in its time, especially when I was a freshman in college. I'm not gonna lie - I still think it's very good despite it not being a cool thing to like. But it doesn't hold a candle to the somewhat similar Magnolia, or precursors like Blue Velvet, and I think that's part of why the thrill of its newness faded fast. It's put together well and impresses on first viewing but it's not very deep or original in the final analysis.
  3. Following is his first film. Insomnia is also R. He started his career as a very adult director who made lean movies on a small budget, which is why some clamor for him to make a return to that territory.
  4. I think both parts of the story in this basically plotless movie are wonderfully intertwined on an atmospheric level, which is where this movie lives and breathes. The Mansons were incorporated from the second scene in the film, and frequently revisited throughout, which helps. But this movie is about the times, and the changing of times, and the confusion of the times, and perhaps a loss of innocence, and all of that is tied together. To me, saying that the Mansons don't belong in the movie is like saying that they don't belong in real life. They don't, and yet there they are, influenced by and influencing the times. It all feels right to me, and there's a lot to read into, and I'm happy he left it loose and the meaning of it all understated. As far as Bruce Lee, I simply don't see the things described here as a bad thing. I don't think in these terms, but even if it is a white male fantasy, that's that character's white male fantasy. The film doesn't need to pass judgment on that character for fantasizing (if it's a daydream, as it felt to me, or a hazy memory, as it also felt) or for actually fighting Lee in that fashion (if it is a flashback). Maybe it's just something that happened. Maybe the Pitt character is simply a macho man who felt underappreciated who wanted to take down somebody who everybody admired in order to prove himself. Or, maybe the character actually is racist in some way. Maybe that is the point, and we see it through his eyes, and it just is what it is.
  5. Why was it cringy? I genuinely don't understand that criticism, which was tossed around by some as early as its premiere.
  6. This, 100%. It's shaping the industry, reverberating effects of how and what movies are being made, etc. That's the practical reason to be against certain films without simply being able to ignore them.
  7. I think "indifference" is more like it. But... Calculating backlash or even indifference is an odd thing to do, because of course you can't prove there's any when a zillion fans have flocked to Aladdin and loved it. Of course that doesn't seem like backlash at all. But I still think a tiny bit of backlash and a boatload of indifference is there when it comes to critics and film lovers who are growing tired of Disney's current methods of moviemaking. It's just that those people - people who would rather see The Farewell this weekend than The Lion King - are and will remain in the minority for the foreseeable future in a blockbuster-heavy studio system.
  8. Redlettermedia makes a difference because 1999 is the year of Phantom Menace. His elaborate and jokey reviews are famous for pointing out every single possible flaw and goof in, mainly, the Star Wars prequels. Many people I know credit him as being a key contributor to the prevalent opinion that the prequels are not in any way good. I think that's why it has been suggested that Redlettermedia may matter to the placement of films from 1999.
  9. Scar Jo is right, and doesn't sound entitled to me at all. Acting is playing someone you're not. Thats the fun, thats the challenge. The notion you have to turn something down because you aren't, say, gay or straight and the character is, is artistic restriction and is awful. That said, all should have equal opportunity based on talent and that obviously isn't the case.
  10. The difference between The Lion King and Psycho shot for shot remakes are that one is a sincere attempt at remaking a movie with new technology, and the other is actually an ironic commentary on reproduction in the mechanical age. As such, Van Sant's Psycho - which is a perfectly fine and fascinating if also obviously unnecessary movie - COULD be said to become more valuable with age since it knowingly predicted the current predicament studios find themselves in. Both types of remakes have merit, but both come from entirely different philosophical places, and I think it's important to note that Psycho "succeeds" because, with a sly wink, it set out to demonstrate the process of filmmaking and the impossibility to recapture the magic of a classic whereas The Lion King literally tried to recapture the magic of the original in a sincere way and thinks that that is enough, when usually it isn't.
  11. If you're talking about Kyle Smith, he's the opposite of edgy. He's an extremely conservative critic with, in my opinion, very safe, middle of the road taste.
  12. Same here. Bao is the best in some time and I'm surprised that folks here didn't like it given its reception. It's quite unique, beautiful and deep.
  13. Divisive not only because of the political division, but because the movie, if it is anything like The Big Short, will be wild, fractured, chaotic editing, etc. Not for everyone in that regard.
  14. Same actress from Wonderstruck. Half of which took place in the era of silent cinema and was shot as though it was made then. She's a great little actress.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Guidelines. Feel free to read our Privacy Policy as well.