Baumer's 50 most important films of all time (JFK 3, Earthlings 2.....FREE YOUR MIND! THE MATRIX NUMBER 1)

[baumer]

Just now, Jake Gittes said:

You could make an argument for Streetcar as the best-acted movie ever.

 

 

 

I'm going to see this again.  I haven't seen it in a very long time.  

[CoolioD1]

meh. i feel like at the time people just gave it a pass for dealing with the issues rather than dealing with them well. again, i'm happy it exists cos it probably influenced actual good movies like menace ii society so i wouldn't disagree w/ it's importance.

[baumer]

2 minutes ago, CoolioD1 said:

meh. i feel like at the time people just gave it a pass for dealing with the issues rather than dealing with them well. again, i'm happy it exists cos it probably influenced actual good movies like menace ii society so i wouldn't disagree w/ it's importance.

 

Well, you are also entitled to your opinion.  I hadn't seen anything like it.  Menace II Society was good as well, but nowhere near as good as Boyz.  IMO.

[Dementeleus]

15 minutes ago, Baumer said:

Why it's important to me:  I've always felt that a good amount of acting in films before the 70's is wooden and phoney and has one pitch.  Brando changed that.  This performance really was the catalyst to change performances to become much more of what we know today.  This film, and even I can recognize this, paved the way for that change.  

 

This is a clear signal you're a big fan of the Lee Strasberg/Elia Kazan/Harold Clurman/Cheryl Crawford group -- they founded the Group Theater (and later the Actors Studio) and basically developed the modern technique of Method Acting. In terms of movies, Kazan is the clear leader in pushing this particular movement (and his work with Brando in STREETCAR and WATERFRONT set the tone).

[grey ghost]

23 minutes ago, Baumer said:

 

Well, you are also entitled to your opinion.  I hadn't seen anything like it.  Menace II Society was good as well, but nowhere near as good as Boyz.  IMO.

 

 

I'd say Boyz in the Hood had more mainstream success but Menace 2 Society has more street cred among the young urban audience.

 

Alot of young black guys would quote it endlessly growing up.

[The Stingray]

Menace II Society >>> Boyz n the Hood, and it's not even close, imo.

 

Also, M2S gave us one of the greatest gangsta rap songs of all time.
 

 

[The Stingray]

I second baumer's views on acting back in the days. Back then it was about being a movie star and looking good in front of a camera. Them old guys, Bogart, Kirk Douglas and whatever were unremarkable actors, imo.

 

[Dementeleus]

Just now, The Stingray said:

I second baumer's views on acting back in the days. Back then it was about being a movie star and looking good in front of a camera. Them old guys, Bogart, Kirk Douglas and whatever were unremarkable actors, imo.

 

 

Eh, stars are almost always just stars. It's about the presence they bring to their roles. Bogie is aces in stuff like SIERRA MADRE and AFRICAN QUEEN. I'll put him up against people like Connery and Eastwood any day (no knock against them either, I love those guys).

[The Stingray]

3 minutes ago, Telemachos said:

 

Eh, stars are almost always just stars. It's about the presence they bring to their roles. Bogie is aces in stuff like SIERRA MADRE and AFRICAN QUEEN. I'll put him up against people like Connery and Eastwood any day (no knock against them either, I love those guys).

 

Yeah, compared to those guys they might be okay. Compared to the likes of Pacino and Paul Newman? Not so much.
 

[TalismanRing]

18 minutes ago, The Stingray said:

I second baumer's views on acting back in the days. Back then it was about being a movie star and looking good in front of a camera. Them old guys, Bogart, Kirk Douglas and whatever were unremarkable actors, imo.

 

 

      So so so wrong.  

 

There have always been many different types of actors and stars - there still are.   The 1950s saw a certain movement of acting get all the buzz but even in the 50s there were many actors who weren't Method and there are still many who don't subscribe to it or if they do just use it piecemeal along with several other approaches. 

 

Spencer Tracy was and still is the standard of natural acting on camera.

 

Bogart acts rings around almost any modern star as well as having star power.   He started off his career playing upper crust roles (his own background) on Broadway until his breakout in Petrified Forrest which got him the film role that started him on the path of villains and thugs until he moved into leading man territory with the Maltese Falcon, Casablanca , Treasure Of The Sierra Madre,  Africa Queen, In a Lonely Place, The Caine Mutiny etc.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited June 1, 2016 by TalismanRing

[Dementeleus]

2 minutes ago, TalismanRing said:

Spencer Tracy was and still is the standard of natural acting on camera.

 

Bogart acts wrings around almost any modern star as well as having star power.

 

I don't necessarily disagree, but these two statements are really subjective.

[bartonfink]

14 minutes ago, The Stingray said:

I second baumer's views on acting back in the days. Back then it was about being a movie star and looking good in front of a camera. Them old guys, Bogart, Kirk Douglas and whatever were unremarkable actors, imo.

 

 

Well I think they are certainly more than being just looking good in front of a camera. Humphrey Bogart in The Roaring Twenties, The Big Sleep, In A Lonely Place, The Caine Mutiny etc and Kirk Douglas in Ace In The Hole, Paths Of Glory etc were unforgettably fabulous. 

[RandomCat]

I have seen two of these movies on the list. At least I can say I've heard of them all, and have a desire to see most of them. Some thoughts.

 

Enter the Dragon: Of the films mentioned, one of the films I really want to sit down and watch. It's come and gone from my list as I've gotten into waves of kung fu movies, like my run of Hong Kong Jackie Chan flicks from mid 2000s, to a recent run thanks to randomly watching Donnie Yen's Ip Man.

 

Sixth Sense: I haven't seen this movie in years, since around it's original home video release. I find it weird to call it a Horror film, since I don't recall any horror. I guess I'm weird like that. But it's one of films that I can go back to and think of as well made, with good story telling, and frankly a fantastic twist. It's kind of a shame that Shyamalan has never had this kind of hit since. A lot of wasted potential.

 

Jazz Singer: I don't have much comment on this one. Just kind of one of those that are on a list, that sadly may never be seen.

 

Iron Man: My presence on the CBM threads make this obvious for me. Iron Man is one of the solid Comic Book Movies made, and that is because it manages to hit the right notes. It is pretty impressive that this movie works. It is one of the few Comic book movies I actually go back and rewatch when I'm in the mood.

 

Texas Chainsaw Massacre: I can just say that I never had much a desire to see this movie, or the original. I've never been a huge fan of the Gory slasher films. There are exceptions, of course. I have a fondness for Nightmare on Elmstreet and it's sequels, and Halloween. Friday the 13th has been on my to watch shelf for a while as well.

 

Boyz N the Hood: I am of mixed thoughts on this film. It's a name I've heard but honestly never knew much about. So thank you Baumer, for that. Unfortunately, I'm not sure I'm in the best place in my life to watch a movie like this. Maybe I am. But I find myself drifting towards far lighter fare, trying to get away from stress and all that. That being said, I am interested in watching this movie now.

 

Street Car Named Desire: This film will forever unfortunately suffer the curse of the Simpsons. I'm not sure I could watch this movie now because of them. I don't really agree about the acting though. A movie dear to my heart Arsenic and Old Lace, has a pretty good sequence towards the end of the film, where you can see in Cary Grant a man who is pushed to the bring of insanity, his body language and eyes portray this very well, and when the relief of the climax is over, his body language is visibly different than before.

Edited June 1, 2016 by RandomJC

[Dementeleus]

2 minutes ago, RandomJC said:

Texas Chainsaw Massacre: I can just say that I never had much a desire to see this movie, or the original. I've never been a huge fan of the Gory slasher films. There are exceptions, of course. I have a fondness for Nightmare on Elmstreet and it's sequels, and Halloween. Friday the 13th has been on my to watch shelf for a while as well.

 

I can't speak about the remake, but actually the original TCM has almost no gore. It's a testament to the power of Tobe Hooper's direction that you feel like you've seen something gory and horrific, but it's almost entirely implied.

[TalismanRing]

5 minutes ago, Telemachos said:

 

I don't necessarily disagree, but these two statements are really subjective.

 

Maybe.

[RascarCapat]

10 minutes ago, The Stingray said:

I second baumer's views on acting back in the days. Back then it was about being a movie star and looking good in front of a camera. Them old guys, Bogart, Kirk Douglas and whatever were unremarkable actors, imo.

 

 

Well dude, you've got to take a step back and try to see the picture as a whole.

 

For sure, actors from the 40's seem weird to us now but there are a couple things to take into account :

 

 - Cinema was still a new medium back then and a lot of techniques still came from the theater. Both actors and directors had a vision of how it should be done and even if it may look weird now, back then it was the norm.

 

- Now for sure acting has improved I will not deny that, but if you think modern acting is natural and that people in everyday life act like this, you have a biaised view (like most of us, me included). We think it is natural because we are used to modern acting. In the 40's I'm sure these guys looked natural to the movie goers (ask Tele).

 

- Also you have to take into account the way language (both spoken and body) have evolved. I assure you that my 96 years old French Grandmother has a weird and distinct way of speaking that would sound completely absurd to my children who will never be exposed to a century old french.

 

And also Humphrey Bogart still gets me everytime in the final act of the Maltese Falcon, even though everything I mentionned above makes it harder for his performance to touche me. So yeah, Bogart is remarkable imo.

[Dementeleus]

Just now, RascarCapat said:

In the 40's I'm sure these guys looked natural to the movie goers (ask Tele).

 

[TalismanRing]

6 minutes ago, bartonfink said:

 

Well I think they are certainly more than being just looking good in front of a camera. Humphrey Bogart in The Roaring Twenties, The Big Sleep, In A Lonely Place, The Caine Mutiny etc and Kirk Douglas in Ace In The Hole, Paths Of Glory etc were unforgettably fabulous. 

 

Ace In The Hole is so damn brilliant and may be Kirk's best performance along with  Lonely Are The Brave.

[RandomCat]

2 minutes ago, Telemachos said:

 

I can't speak about the remake, but actually the original TCM has almost no gore. It's a testament to the power of Tobe Hooper's direction that you feel like you've seen something gory and horrific, but it's almost entirely implied.

 

I've heard that, and I'm sure it's a good movie. It's honestly something I've gone back and forth on a lot, but Slasher movies haven't been at a fore front of my viewing experience since my teens, which is when I watched most of them. I think I've only ever saw Halloween outside of that team period. But I guess it's just not a movie for me at this time. Maybe in five years, when I feel like binging through all these late 70s/80s slasher franchises.

[RascarCapat]

4 minutes ago, RascarCapat said:

 

And also Humphrey Bogart still gets me everytime in the final act of the Maltese Falcon, even though everything I mentionned above makes it harder for his performance to touche me. So yeah, Bogart is remarkable imo.

 

Here's the scene I'm talking about :