Row Three Narcissism: Movies We Watched
With Kurt off soaking up all that TIFF has to offer, I’ll be filling in with Row Three’s bi-weekly posting of Movies we Watched, those films that caught the fancy (or turned the stomachs) of the Row Three Contributors. As mentioned in the past, the following are films that didn’t receive a full write-up on Row Three, but were instead presented as mini-reviews in the Movies We Watched area (which you can access at any time by clicking the icon on the side bar).
We’ve got quite a selection for you this time around, so let’s get right to them
Jindabyne (2007) 3.5/5
Rip about a quarter or the pages out of Robert Altman’s “Short Cuts” and turn it into a much more serious 2 hour drama and you have Jindabyne. Four men embark on a fishing weekend and discover a dead body. Instead of doing anything abut it, they continue to fish for two days before letting anyone know. Understandably, folks at home are more than upset about this. “Jindabyne” takes it’s time with setting and making sure we see into character’s feelings. A little bit too much time. It’s Australian setting is pretty and we have some nice performances, but the setup to the inevitable lingers a little too much. - ANDREW
Once (2006) 5/5
Independent filmmaking at its finest. A beautiful story of a musician and his budding relationship with a young Czech woman. Great story, awesome music, a whole lot of heart. -JONATHAN
Slap Shot (1977) 4/5
I can only imagine what people thought of the first time this saw this with the mindset of going to see a Paul Newman film. Very unconventional Newman material, I still say it is one of best sports flicks ever made, large in part due to snagging someone of Newman’s caliber for the starring role. -JONATHAN
Frenzy (1972) 4.5/5
Frenzy is proof positive that Hitchcock remained the master of suspense late into his career. The story of a serial rapist/murderer who strangles his victims with neckties, Frenzy is an exceptional suspense piece, not to mention an excellently directed film. His first movie made entirely in London since the 1930’s, Hitch’s return home must have been an inspiration, and as a result his creativity was firing on all cylinders. A terrific movie. -DAVE
Fly Me to the Moon (2008) 2.5/5
I can understand the technical marvel behind this film (the first animated film to be rendered specifically for 3D) but 3D is not my thing which immediately lowered my experience a little but beyond that, the story itself, though interesting enough, is really only enough for 30 minutes of film - not 90. Not quite as bad as “Space Chimps” but still unimpressive. - MARINA
Sukiyaki Western Django (2007) 3.5/5
Japanese actors speaking English, epic tale of the good guy coming to save the day, a woman as the best gunslinger around - it’s the western on it’s head. Miike’s film is a hodgepodge of ideas but the marriage between them and the story he is telling is joyous to watch. From the odd opening sequence to the final moments of true drama, this is what genre bending should be. Every. Single. Time. - MARINA
Man on Wire (2008) 4.5/5
It’s been a while since I held onto a theater seat for dear life but that’s exactly how I felt seeing photos of Philippe Petit perched between the WT towers. One of the most entertaining films I’ve seen all year. - MARINA
North by Northwest (1959) 3.5/5
Considered by most a classic, I had a good time seeing Hitchcock’s film but I was not particularly taken with the story. I love the characters and the interaction between Grant and Eva Marie Saint but it’s not one of my favourites. – MARINA
Live Free or Die Hard (2007) 0.5/5
An absolute abomination. –JONATHAN
Babylon A.D. (2008) 2/5
There is actually a good movie in here, unfortunately it is ruined by a terrible abrupt ending and the fact the the movie has been gutted by the studio. I’m not sure if the longer version would have actually worked but it had to be better than what we were given. - JOHN
Professione: reporter (1975) 3.5/5
A movie that I should have really enjoyed that fell somewhat flat with me as it was the second darker movie I watched in a row. The movie if beautifully shot and has a strong performance from Jack Nicholson as a man who decides to steal the identity of a dead man so that he can escape his unhappy existence. I’m sure this is one move for which my appreciation will only grow up subsequent viewings. – JOHN
Boy A (2007) 4.5/5
A truthful story about an ex-convict who has been released from prison after serving fourteen years for a crime which he committed during his childhood. Andrew Garfield is quite powerful in his role as Jack. Boy A doesn’t rely on any gimmicks it is just the sad true to life story of a man who can not escape his past. This is currently one of my favourite movies of 2008. – JOHN
Contact (1997) 5/5
Both smart and accessible, Robert Zemekis’ film about the discovery of an alien intelligence resonates from the ground as it asks a lot of the big questions of philosophy, religion and science. At the far reaches of space and the great unknown, it shows that all three of these disciplines meet in the same spot. One of the best American films of 1997. –KURT
The Rock 3.5/5
As action movies go, or more appropriately as Michael Bay films go, this one is more than tolerable. It’s a bit heavy on the bullshit, John Woo-ness factor - not to mention predictable as hell, but the performances are fun; particularly from Nicolas Cage. This film is also very fun to watch because I believe it to be the most character-actor rich film of all time. Prepare: John Spencer, David Morse, Phillip Baker Hall, William Forsythe, Michael Biehn, Todd Louiso, John McGinley, Tony Todd, Claire Forlani; plus about a million other people of whom you’ll say, “oh, it’s that guy!” - ANDREW
Comment by Jonathan B. — September 7, 2008
Comment by Goon — September 7, 2008
Comment by Rusty James — September 7, 2008
Comment by Andrew James — September 8, 2008
for a recent example of an actor making a mediocre movie better, see Iron Man. mediocre movie, perfect casting.
Comment by murph — September 8, 2008
Comment by murph — September 8, 2008
Comment by Rusty James — September 8, 2008
Comment by murph — September 9, 2008
I thought I would be less critical the second time around but I still hated it. Almost every single scene bugs me, mostly because of Tom Hanks. I’m not saying it’s a terrible performance but I hate the character. The phony balony product of a screen writing focus group who I never bought for a second.
You know what else I never bought, the feeling of isolation. Zememkis makes a dreadful miscalculation by breaking up the island stuff. Also he doesn’t pull the camera back enough. There’s no sense of him being at the mercy of nature.
This isn’t necessarily a criticism but film is very old fashioned in some ways. Particularly look at the scene between Hanks and Hunt (who was washed even when she was popular) before Hanks takes off on his ill fated journey. That scene is way too telegraphed for my taste. Its the type of thing that may be okay if you’ve never seen a movie before.
There’s another scene between the two of them later in the film. They’re reunion as it were. This scene is obviously the lynchpin of the movie, I’m sure Zemekis considers it the heart of the film. It’s pure hokum. You know what should happen in that scene? Hanks should try to get her to leave her husband and she should refuse. That’s what an actual person would do. But this character doesn’t have that in him. He’s selfless where a human being would be selfish.
A lot of people probably wouldn’t like my ending. The actual ending reassures us about human nature. People love to be reassured, they don’t like the truth so much.
Comment by Rusty James — September 9, 2008
Comment by Rusty James — September 9, 2008
i can’t say i agree with that and it has little to do with selfish and selflessness. it is the ultimate irony that she is all that kept him alive and he came back to find her married with a child. do you think he was selfless or perhaps in his mind was he thinking, “my god, i cannot believe she betrayed me and married so soon.” would he want her after she had been “tainted,” if you will. i find that perhaps more selfish.
i always felt HAD he asked her, she would have agreed. but he did not. and really, it was not an act of being selfish or selfless even.
i don’t know. you could look at that scene from quite a few ways and my argument here is scattered all over the place
Comment by murph — September 9, 2008
Comment by Rusty James — September 9, 2008
I have only seen the film once though, years ago, and thought it was a fucking bore.
Comment by Henrik — September 10, 2008
Comment by Rusty James — September 10, 2008
I love how Mr. Hitchcock sets up his shots, you can see the storyboard in action.
Comment by dougnagy — September 10, 2008
Nice to see you lurking around Doug!
Comment by Marina Antunes — September 10, 2008
Comment by Rusty James — September 10, 2008
I’ve seen about half of them. None of them are really my favorites.
I like Vertigo, Shadow of a Doubt, The Trouble With Harry, 39 Steps, Rope, Psycho, and Frenzy (I think it’s his last film). I’m probably forgetting a few others. I’ve never seen The Birds.
There’s a bunch of his classics that I’m not as big a fan of as everyone else including Rear Window and NXNW.
Comment by Rusty James — September 10, 2008
I’ve never seen the pack you linked to but I’ve got this one (or one from this same company) http://www.amazon.com/Alfred-Hitchcock-Studies-Peter-Lorre/dp/B001989ZEY/ref=tag_stp_st_edpp_url
Comment by Marina Antunes — September 10, 2008
I really like the buddy team-up and pleasant athmosphere of Rear Window, and the ending with the flash is suspenseful. I very much enjoyed it. North by Northwest is saved by the set pieces, it’s a pretty boring story which makes no sense.
Comment by Henrik — September 10, 2008
Comment by Marina Antunes — September 10, 2008
Comment by Primal — September 10, 2008
Comment by Henrik — September 10, 2008
Comment by Rusty James — September 10, 2008
Comment by Henrik — September 10, 2008