"We're putting this movie in the "Vault" so we can rerelease it in 5-15 years and charge $39.95 for it or its equivalent - oh wait in 5-15 years, we won't even sell hard copies anymore. We'll sell you a digital copy of all the HP's for only $475 in 2020"
The main draw for me is that my wife wants it, but it also has some fairly substantial documentaries that aren't readily available in other reasonably priced editions. Plus it's a really nice set and, yeah, GOTTA COLLECT EM ALL.
03/13/15 Wolf Alice - the Rickshaw Stop
04/24/15 Polaris - The Chapel
06/11/15 Neutral Milk Hotel - The Phoenix Theatre
Saw Louie CK at Davies Symphony Hall back in 2010. Thanks for the heads up that he is coming back around!
Criterion's website accidentally charged me shipping even though I spent over $50 and without me even asking they refunded the shipping cost and issued me a $10 gift certificate as an apology. I love this company.
Matt and I are in for Amour this coming Monday at LACMA. Cannot fucking wait.
Looper was pretty good, would recommend to others.
Also, agree with The Master opinions regarding animalistic nature. I think at the beginning of the film PSH's character talks about how men are not animals, and spends the rest of the film trying to control or do away with JP's animalistic nature. And, at the end finally acknowledges and even congratulates JP on not having to serve or feel the need to be controlled by a Master, which some people do, in some form or another. He even rides away from it, with the scene with the motorcycle. JP's manerisms and the way in which he walks are ape-like. At the beginning of the film he pleasures himself, and later in the film PSH does the same, but with the help of his wife. Both men are the same, and have to fulfill their animalistic natures. The beginning and the end reminded me of Stanley Kubrick's 2001. Obviously, there's much more going on, but that's what i enjoy about PTA films and great films in general, that you're thinking about it a week later, like i am now.
Last edited by buddy; 09-28-2012 at 09:36 AM.
How do you want to feel?
What a cynical asshole.
I like O'Hehir, and to a certain extent I agree with some of what he's trying to say here, but he makes some bad arguments.
Sure. That may be true. But he's making an obvious strawman argument here, because we've all had countless conversations over the last few years about several other, better films. I could talk about the double shot of The Tree of Life and Melancholia for as long as anyone would care to. Ditto films like Drive, or The White Ribbon, or Certified Copy.Here are the last four best-picture winners at the Oscars: “The Artist,” “The King’s Speech,” “The Hurt Locker” and “Slumdog Millionaire.” How much time have you spent, cumulatively, talking about those movies with your friends?
I think the better argument to make is that the quality of writing in television shows and about television shows has improved so dramatically since the late '90s that there is a rough intellectual and artistic parity with the cinema that we haven't seen for a very long time.
I love Carnival Of Souls, but i'm also biased since it was shot mostly in my hometown. I wish Criterion would upgrade that one.
Coachellas attended: 2007-present
Saw Detention on netflix. i thought it would just be a cool b-movie teen slasher flick with a pre Hunger Games Josh Hutchinson, but turned out to be way funnier and includes timetravel. Definitely worth a rental.
And I liked it just fine. It was beautifully shot. I'm just not over the moon about it.
I liked this film a great deal, and it continues to grow on me. For the first time, Haneke's coldly controlled mise-en-scene is countered with a sense of sensitivity and even warmth, and the results are extraordinarily moving. It's hard to to know what to say exactly, because this film is exactly what it seems to be on paper (for those who don't know, it's about an elderly couple who must face the indignities of old age and death when the wife suffers a debilitating stroke). What makes it so powerful is the deeply felt performances from Emanuelle Riva and Jean-Louis Trintignant, and Haneke's own refusal to sentimentalize. It's a brutal film, sparing on unsavory detail in its depiction of a slow, agonizing death. But that frankness makes for moments of deep feeling.
Originally Posted by thelastgreatman
1/18 Volcano Choir - The Fonda
1/22 Vampire Weekend - USC
2/14 Spiritualized - Ace Hotel
3/8 Mark Kozelek - First Unitarian Church
3/18 Kraftwerk - Walt Disney Concert Hall
3/19 Kraftwerk - Walt Disney Concert Hall
Going through the Harry Potter series again. I am always surprised that the second one is 3 hours long in the extended cut. I wish David Yates made longer films for the last half of the series so it isn't so off balanced. I tend to think the 2nd is the weakest film in the series but rewatching it last night made me realize that it introduces a good chunk of information that Chris Columbus didn't have time to get into with the first film and isn't in the rest of the films (For example, Prof. Mcgonagall explaining about the 4 founders of Hogwarts). It may be the film in the series that best depicts the day to day life of the students at Hogwarts. Many of the other films just keep that in the background. You can tell that there are tons of scenes and even storylines that would have been cut out of the second film if it were up to Yates and since I enjoy his films more perhaps he is right to condense them. However, at this point I have seen them enough to just want as much of the books to come alive on screen as possible so I don't feel I have to reread them to get everything. I liked the second book more than the film so maybe the length isn't even the problem in the first place.
What do you guys think, should the first few films have been cut down a bit more or should the later ones be longer to include things like Hermione starting S.P.E.W. in the 4th book?
My flatmate made me watch Taken tonight. Can't remember the last film I saw that made me want to punch it in the nuts so hard that wasn't in any way related to Frank Miller. Apologies to anybody who follows me on Twitter, but if it's any consolation I was ranting out loud too.
What a racist, xenophobic, misogynistic piece of shit. A racist, xenophobic, misogynistic piece of shit that made 200 million dollars and a sequel. I don't drink nearly enough.
Also, where the fuck were the other girl's parents and has anybody told them their daughter's dead yet?
I enjoyed Looper somewhat, but it's the kind of movie that is more concerned with being clever than smart, and that has a way of burrowing inside me and pissing me off over time if I keep thinking about the movie in question. It's also not even clever in the right ways; the whole conceit about having one guy at two different stages of life sharing the same space could have been utilized in a variety of interesting ways, but it basically only factors in one major development. This should have driven the entire second half of the film, because the way it actually plays out is dramatically inert - waaay too much fucking around on the farm. The voiceover is also poorly employed; I know Rian Johnson loves his noir tropes, but the logic behind what Joe says, and how it relates to the onscreen events, is thoroughly suspect (if existent in the first place). That said, I like some of Johnson's compositions and set pieces, and I enjoyed JGL and Willis' performances; honestly, I think my favorite moment of the movie is Bruce Willis popping pain pills in the alley, a throwback to the perpetually hungover Last Boy Scout / Die Hard With a Vengeance character that I can't get enough of.
Now that I type it all out, I might have actually hated Looper.
We're here to play some Mississippi Delta Blues. We're in a horrible depression, and I gotta admit - we're starting to like it.
Fact: Everyone who lives in California LOVES Taken