Episode 149:
SPOILERS ALERT!
Not quite ready for our year in review episode so that will come later in the week. Instead, Gamble shows up for a quick catch-up on holiday viewings; including Sherlock Holmes and quite the intense debate over Almodovar’s Broken Embraces. A couple smaller films are discussed as well as revisiting some slightly older titles. DVD picks are scant this week but we managed to scrape together a couple of titles. Enjoy.
And thanks for taking the time to download/stream! And by all means leave your thoughts in the comment section below.
Click the Audio Icon below to listen in:
|
|
|
|
|
http://www.rowthree.com/audio/cinecast_10/episode_149.mp3
TIME LISTINGS:
Intros/Opening: :00
Sherlock Holmes (SPOILERS!): 8:12
House of the Devil (SPOILERS!): 28:19
Broken Embraces: 49:09
A Single Man: 1:14:15
Other recent viewings: 1:13:35
– - the 3D in Avatar (yes, again): 1:26:25
– - Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs: 1:35:34
– - Up in the Air: 1:38:03
– - It’s Complicated: 1:40:59
– - Nine: 1:47:10
DVD picks: 1:49:35
Next week/closing thoughts: 1:55:05
Outro music: 1:56:30 – 2:00:36
MAIN REVIEW:
Sherlock Holmes (R3 review)
OTHER REVIEWS:
House of the Devil (IMDb)
Broken Embraces (Andrew’s review)
A Single Man (R3 review)
DVD PICKS:
Andrew:
– Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs (IMDb)
Kurt:
- Big Love: Season 3 (IMDb)
BLU RAY:
Andrew:
- 10 Things I Hate About You (movie club podcast)
Kurt:
- Dogtown and Z Boys (IMDb)
OTHER TOPICS:
New episode of Spoiler Alert at Wherethelongtailends.com
3D vs 2D (Avatar)
Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs
It’s Complicated
NINE
glad to get Gamble back, but am i gonna have to skip the Avatar discussion? I don’t think I can listen to Kurt talk about it again unless I’m within striking distance
The Avatar thing is really short and only is really about 3D in general. Very very little about the actual movie. In fact he defends it a bit I think.
I would like to reiterate my stance on Almodovar vs Kubrick.
I think I should have said “set design.” I have seen all of Kubrick’s major works several several times. That includes Paths of Glory and Spartacus. Clockwork Orange is in my top 3 films of all time. And yes, the way it’s shot and the framing and slow pans and what not are all reasons why I LOVE Stanley Kubrick’s films. I’ve read lots of pieces on him and watch most of all the extras in the black box set.
I still stand by what I said in the Cinecast. Clockwork Orange and The Shining look awesome. But sorry, the set design is not quite as meticulously and diligently (or at least appears that way) put together as Broken Embraces. It just isn’t. The gang fight scene in Clockwork Orange for instance – or the foyer area of Alex’s apartment. You can’t tell me that Stanley Kubrick walked around and put each empty beer can exactly where it needed to be. He didn’t take each piece of torn paper, fold it and crumple it exactly and that methodically set it just at the right angle. Almodovar not only would have done that, but he would’ve taken the time to paint the piece of paper, tear it just where he wants it so two colors are next to each other and then done that 50 times around the area.
The old man’s (writer guy and wife that gets raped) study might be the closest thing. But even there it isn’t quite so obvious that it was painstakingly put together. Or the old lady with the giant penis statue. The focus of that scene is the statue and there are a couple of interesting paintings on the wall. Look at that room and then look at the way the writer’s study in Broken Embraces is laid out. It’s clearly more attentive in its detail.
I’m NOT saying Almodovar is better or more interesting director than Kubrick – clearly I don’t feel that way – because he’s not. Kubrick obviously beats him on almost every technical and non-technical level. But that’s not the point. I’m just saying that the attention to every conceivable detail (particularly in reference to his color theory) is more worked out in his head.
DVD pick I guess is a spoiler on “Cloudy…”
I dug that too, I may have to order it from the US though because they really fucked that thing up with the French side of the Canadian packaging, in equal size to the logo, and poorly done, it says “Il Pleut des Hamburgers” (It’s raining hamburgers”)
I still have never seen any of his movies and dont know where I’d even start.
The only opinion I have about Pedro is that he looks even more like an old lesbian than Tim Robbins.
All I’ve seen of Almodovar is Todo sobre mi madre, and it was excruciatingly boring and inane in my opinion.
I found nothing in that movie to even make me think of the color scheme of Alexs parents’ house in A Clockwork Orange.
That’s probably my favorite Pedro movie – though it’s been a while (maybe Talk to Her or Volver). Too bad you were bored, the interactions between the women are quite real and tough (and it looks great). I guess it takes someone with more sympathy and compassion of people to really “get it” or understand.
Agreed though. I wouldn’t really compare the two. I would contrast them as examples of completely different styles of film making. It’s just a similar location with similar characters dwelling within the walls.
Kurt, the best seats in the house of an IMAX theater are the last 2 rows of the theater and from that distance you don’t need to be at the center. From there, the angle doesn’t matter so much and you’ll most likely be looking down to see the whole image.
Trust me, the ones you saw going to the back are the smart ones.
Thanks Primal. If I ever brave a 3D Imax movie again, I’ll take that into consideration! I’m looking very much forward to seeing Inception in just straight up 2D Imax however, do the same seating recommendations apply?
Still anticipating rot’s “A Single Man” response to Gamble.
its been too long since we’ve had a good Gamble / rot knife fight.
I haven’t listened to this, but let me guess, A Single Man didn’t conform to some heavenly writ way a film ought to go? I can think of one complaint right out of the gate: the floating naked guy? It indulges too much, scenes go on too long, am I getting warm?
Still anticipating rot’s “A Single Man” response to Gamble.
He’s probably been typing it up for the last hour. If it comes in any less than a 1000 words I’ll be disappointed.
Kurt, the best seats in the house of an IMAX theater are the last 2 rows of the theater and from that distance you don’t need to be at the center.
For the best visuals you always need to be at the center for an IMAX film, and dead center of the screen is optimal. Anywhere else and the image is stretched due to the screen being curved and it can cause issues with watching 3D as well.
For the best sound you would want to be about 2/3rds of the way up, as that is where the sound is mixed from, and that holds true for pretty much any theatre.
Re: Broken Embraces and the auteur of Almadovar; The convoluted story in conjunction with the complex color theory he uses in each of his shots, is what makes the movie intriguing. It is similar to viewing a classic European Modernist painting. The director assumes the viewer is intellectual enough and intrepid enough to make connections themselves. Unlike Avatar, Broken Embraces cares not about whether the viewer cares about the story, only that you are somehow engaged on your own personal level. Art viewers are used to this phenomena, but in film, hand-holding while turning pages of a story is very much the norm. By not doing this, Almadovar did exactly what he set out to do. The discomfort that Kurt seems to feels is thought process.
@Matt, ” and dead center of the screen is optimal. Anywhere else and the image is stretched due to the screen being curved and it can cause issues with watching 3D as well. For the best sound you would want to be about 2/3rds of the way up, as that is where the sound is mixed from, and that holds true for pretty much any theatre.”
This is exactaly where I was sitting. Considering I’ve had 2 solid days of Migraine headaches (not necessarily related to Avatar3D, but maybe), this is my last 3D screening for some time. Ouch.
@Emma, “The discomfort that Kurt seems to feels is thought process.”
Certainly the best line of the week! But if anything Almodovar spends more time hand-holding the audience (he quotes directly a series of DVDs, he specifically indicates so much of the film it is more of a hammer approach than camel hair brush.)
On the whole I quite enjoyed the movie, but I wouldn’t exactly call it the model of subtlety.
“On the whole I quite enjoyed the movie, but I wouldn’t exactly call it the model of subtlety.”
I’m glad you enjoyed it, but I’m positive subtlety was not the intent; nor should it be. I like my films to pop out at me once in a while – if done in the correct way. And Broken Embraces is pretty gorgeous both aesthetically and in terms of it’s nod to classic cinema. I think even the way he nods at his own movies is worn pretty clearly on his sleeve. If he was trying to be clever and hide it, then I would have a problem with it. But it’s completely delightful in its obviousness.
And since when did you require subtlety?
Aesthetically, and dramatically no, subtle Almadovar is not. It is in how he combines the two that is sublime and rareified.
I’ve seen a few films on IMAX in 2-d like American Gangster and Air Force One. I’ve come to the conclusion that films that don’t take advantage of an IMAX screen by not using IMAX cameras or similar is just a waste of your $$$. I do agree with you Matt on where you should be for the best sound. I still don’t get why after a decade they haven’t made a better sound mix for IMAX.
Being at the center is preferred though in any movie going experience, but I still get headaches with films shown in IMAX that aren’t meant to be shown on such a screen. Watching Wanted on IMAX was probably the worst experience and remember being at the center 4th or 5th row from the top.
I haven’t seen too many full-feature 2-d IMAX film except for Speed Racer, but from what I’ve seen from TDK and it’s brief use of IMAX cameras, I know Nolan and whoever his cinematographer is is gonna do a damn good job with Inception.
going to have to revisit this episode now that I have seen The House of the Devil. Awesome movie, way beyond what I expected for the film, incredibly tense.
Welcome to the club on HotD. It’s a rapidly growing one!
I rather watch an XXX video starring Matt Gamble, Woody Allen, Julian Sands, and Lindsay Lohan than to re-watch the House of the Devil. I hated this film…I have not been this mad at a film, since Transformers 2. Yes, the movie is not a total turd: it has a great cinematography and direction. But, besides the the technical aspects of the film, the other aspects of the films are poor at best. One dimensional characters, horrible dialogue, horrible plot, and bad acting. I love slow-burn films, but, in order for a slow-burn film to work, it requires a captivating plot and interesting characters. Sadly, HotD offers minimal effort in these two aspects. On the plus side, if Ty West stays away from writing and focus on directing and editing, he can become a world class filmmaker.
Couldn’t disagree with that more, Antho. The setup and execution of the film is wonderful. The loaded situation is marvelous. Sure the ending of the film (say the last 10 minutes) drops the ball, but it’s the journey, not the destination, my friend.
It was a painful journey. None of the characters were interesting; it did not help that the script had bad dialogue. In comparison, Let the Right One has interesting characters and mesmerizing dialogue. The characters feel like real people. In constrast, HotD’s characters and story feels artifiicial and inhuman. To me it feels like all the characters and story is structure around the pay off; In Let the Right One In–as aswesome as the pool scene is– the film is not structure around the pay of. This time I am going to my homework by watching The Fall and Saragosa before the release of the Movie Club Podcast.
You state that the film follows Hitchcockian troops; but, HotD never fully reaches the pathos of Hitchcock’s films. For instance, unlike HotD, Vertigo goes beyond being a mere thriller. In Vertigo, the audience gets to see the psychological, existential torment experience by the protagonist. IN HotD, the protagonist ends up being a one dimensional character. Kurt, have you seen this film more than once. I bet that if you watch it again, you are going to like it less.
Really. I’d never describe the Hitch for PATHOS. His films are fairly cold.
I’ve seen HOUSE OF THE DEVIL TWICE, and you know what. It was BETTER the second time. No Kidding.