Another Xixax Film Festival?

[Kal]

Well... I speak for most of the people in here who have seen almost every film you can think of... thats the majority... and unless you live in another planet you can get almost any DVD in any city... or with NetFlix they have also whatever you want... shit even Blockbuster has a lot of old movies from that time... at least the ones we could use that are well known...

Hm. Another planet. Let's see. Well in case you haven't noticed at all from visiting Xixax every day, I live in Ontario, Canada. Not in Toronto. A small town over an hour away. You think they have a place where I can rent a good foreign film that would be shown for an Xixax movie night? And I said I live in Canada, so in case you forgot, that would cancel out NetFlix. Blockbuster has fuck all here.

You know sometimes I really hate when people pry like this. Like when they don't just give up and trust me when I think I know my own hometown.

Dude I guess your problem with me is more important than wherever you live... you'll always have something to say... I think I will just ignore you from now on because its obvious that my intention to be friendly with you was useless...

Anyway... back to the point... it would be neat to pick old movies that the majority has access to and watch them... I think many of the movies that we would come up with are available anywhere... but maybe I'm wrong... if then... fuck it... lets do it with current movies... or find some kind of originality in the whole thing so we dont end up talking only about PTA again

[SHAFTR]

Kill Bill Vol 1 is a good pick just because a lot of us would have it.

I was thinking about summer movies: along with George Washington: Jaws, Speed & Do the Right Thing.

[modage]

george washington.  that's like the perfect xixax movie that no one can hate.

i hate to disagree but...

i think for summer movies shaftrs jaws and do the right thing are good.
i like the idea of doing a certain movement as well.
i also like the idea of doing the top 5.

[ono]

I wouldn't have Kill Bill.  And I think it's the same case with a lot of people as they're probably waiting for the full set.  The best bet, really, is Lebowski.  It's only $10, give or take, and it's probably one of the most universally-admired movies here.

[modage]

I wouldn't have Kill Bill.  And I think it's the same case with a lot of people as they're probably waiting for the full set.  The best bet, really, is Lebowski.  It's only $10, give or take, and it's probably one of the most universally-admired movies here.

you would think so, and yet it didnt make the TOP 15!!!  lord only knows how many times everyone here is quoting my life to live in their sigs and avatars.  WAY more than lebowski.  maybe we should watch that.

[ono]

Eh, it'll make it next time around.  I'm convinced there were just a few too many people on a pretentious, boring foreign film kick.  Decembers will do that to people.  Fact is, I try so hard to get in to the "great films of the 60s," that time give or take, but films that actually succeed in engaging from that era are so few and far between.  I could say a lot about Persona because it really is perfect (and even The Seventh Seal, but that was '57), but both of them suffered from bad VHS copies I saw them on.  Bergman is the real "Berg."  And those are DVDs I would probably pay money for ... if I had it ... Criterion prices suck.  But just say no to Godard and Fellini.

[Gold Trumpet]

I heard all the ideas and still am going for the Summer Film Festival. Top 5 of the XIXAX Dekapenticon would be just repeating the results of our last big thing and thats not as much as fun. With each new festival or event, its interesting to see what new films are chosen. The specific film movement, like someone else said, would bomb because people just don't have the dvds and may not know well enough about the movement to really specialize in making a great list from it. I'm no specialist in italian neo realism or any other movement and this board is a general film board. Choosing summer films seems best placed for this board.

[cine]

... The Royal Tenenbaums?

[ono]

... The Royal Tenenbaums?

Seconded.  All in favor?

[godardian]

But just say no to Godard and Fellini.

*gasp!* Vulgarian!!

Seriously... "boring" and "pretentious" are not words I would associate with either of these two filmmakers. It's just a matter of perception and frame of reference, really.

I wouldn't argue too hard if you were to call Stan Brakhage boring or pretentious, for example. I wouldn't agree, but I'd understand. But it's my opinion that if you find the bracing, provocative, and sensuous Godard or Fellini "boring" or "pretentious," you haven't seen very many truly boring or pretentious movies.

Those terms are so subjective, anyway. Does "boring" mean "slow" to you? Something that you personally aren't interested in? Does "pretentious" mean raising the bar too high (is there any such thing?), failing to hit the bar raised, or "showing off"? I find that people say "boring" when something is supposedly "too slow," and "pretentious" when they don't understand something. But because of their overuse and misuse, those terms don't really carry a lot of meaning, which is why I generally avoid using them (along with "weird," "mainstream," "alternative" and the like). They're  so compromised by now that they fail to articulate what you really mean, what you really want to say when you're criticizing something.

I personally find Saving Private Ryan more boring (unimaginative, predictable, literally uninteresting, extremely bland) and pretentious (self-impressed and grandiose to a laughable and wholly undeserved extreme) than any of the intellectually playful, engaging, interesting work of Godard or the earthily playful, engaging, interesting work of Fellini.

I would endorse a Royal Tenenbaums fest, although I'm not sure I could participate with my frantic schedule...

We should consider doing a DVD festival and do the extras on a DVD that has a lot of great extras.

[Gold Trumpet]

Tough...but I'd say no cigar. I think that film is about other things I think we should vote on Tennebaums though by holding the summer film festival!

[ono]

Seriously... "boring" and "pretentious" are not words I would associate with either of these two filmmakers. It's just a matter of perception and frame of reference, really.

I probably just need to see more of their films to appreciate them.  Of Godard, Breathless and My Life to Live.  Of Fellini, 8 1/2 and La Dolce Vita.  I've already posted my reasonings on why I wasn't too fond of these films, but I do look forward to seeing more from these filmmakers, and I'll leave it at that.

I wouldn't argue too hard if you were to call Stan Brakhage boring or pretentious, for example. I wouldn't agree, but I'd understand. But it's my opinion that if you find the bracing, provocative, and sensuous Godard or Fellini "boring" or "pretentious," you haven't seen very many truly boring or pretentious movies.

The thing about Brakhage is, I've had his short collection on my list of things to get for the longest time.  I guess my definition of pretentious and boring is different than other people's, because I'm wholly interested in what I've read he's trying to do, even though it may fail and bore me.  Kind of like from reading about Soderbergh's Schizopolis, it seems like it'd be right up my alley while everyone else seemed to hate it.

Those terms are so subjective, anyway. Does "boring" mean "slow" to you? Something that you personally aren't interested in?

To me, "boring" simply means exhibiting a lack of ability to engage or provide the viewer with some sort of entrance point.  This, to me, is why 8 1/2 was a failure, because all throughout we are on the outside, wanting to be let in, yet the film is coated with an impenetrable veneer.  My Life to Live really warmed up in a few scenes that cause me to admire it, but simply not to the extent that others here do.  It had a lot of interesting ideas, and I do admire idea movies, but it's all about the execution.  It had that in structure, but some of the shots the seemed to be done for the sake of doing.  La Dolce Vita, a little better than 8 1/2, and I feel I'd like it better if I viewed it again.  Part of my dislike is probably because of the distraction brought on by the pan-and-scan of the good ol' VHS version I watched.  Breathless didn't leave me breathless, we'll just leave it at that.

Does "pretentious" mean raising the bar too high (is there any such thing?), failing to hit the bar raised, or "showing off"? I find that people say "boring" when something is supposedly "too slow," and "pretentious" when they don't understand something. But because of their overuse and misuse, those terms don't really carry a lot of meaning, which is why I generally avoid using them (along with "weird," "mainstream," "alternative" and the like). They're  so compromised by now that they fail to articulate what you really mean, what you really want to say when you're criticizing something.

I am a fan of pretentious works when made pretentious for the right reason.  I am also fascinated by the word because of people's knee-jerk reactions in using it.  See also: the thread on the definition of that word.  "What makes pretention," I think it is.  Schizopolis SOUNDS like some of the most pretentious tripe you could imagine, and as a student film or festival entry, it would be laughed or booed out.  And it was poorly received at Cannes, apparently.  Soderbergh said it went from "personal" to "private," but still, in the right hands, I find this type of effort fascinating, because it REALLY says something about the filmmaker as artist/auteur, something I strongly believe in, but only when the filmmaker has something to say, and can mask it in such a way that he isn't preaching to us, which is one of the death knells of a "personal/private" film.

Pretention is usually marked by showing off, but "showing off" is sometimes necessary.  It's also aspiring to speak on something one doesn't know enough about, also marked by displays of ignorance.  This, too, can be necessary for growth, though, which is why I don't frown on pretention.  It's all a matter of presentation, really.  HOW it's done.  And the problems with those films, especially in 8 1/2 and Breathless, is the HOW.  La Dolce Vita and My Life to Live are a little less bad in this sense, IMO of course, which makes them admirable failures if anything, and films that probably would improve with a second viewing.  But any film that you caution yourself not to watch when tired probably isn't that great a film in the first place.

I personally find Saving Private Ryan more boring (unimaginative, predictable, literally uninteresting, extremely bland) and pretentious (self-impressed and grandiose to an laughable and wholly undeserved extreme) than any of the intellectually playful, engaging, interesting work of Godard or the earthily playful, engaging, interesting work of Fellini.

I agree with you wholeheartedly.  Saving Private Ryan is one of the worst "films" I've ever seen, and it's good to know people who see it for what it is.

I think I spoke too harshly in saying "Just say no to Godard and Fellini."  But in the context of a Xixax film festival, it fits, given the nature of the events.  We need films we can talk about, chat up, and laugh at.  Not "look at the way she longingly puffs on that cigarette" or "isn't it so great how she wistfully sighed?  I mean, OMG, if she does it again, I'm gonna cream my pants.  It's just so transcendental."  :-P

[mogwai]

Saving Private Ryan is one of the worst "films" I've ever seen, and it's good to know people who see it for what it is.

could you please simplify that statement so that i who suffer from gumpness can comprehend?

[molly]

.........Finding Nemo?
i agree with Tenenbaums

[ono]

Saving Private Ryan is one of the worst "films" I've ever seen, and it's good to know people who see it for what it is.

could you please simplify that statement so that i who suffer from gumpness can comprehend?

Saving Private Ryan is one of the worst "films" I've ever seen.  It is nice to know people who see it for what it is.  (Read: boring, pretentious, overly-patriotic dreck.)

Seriously, there's nothing wrong with that sentence.  That was a first.  Can't really make it any clearer than that.