Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1
This Year In Film / Re: Sorry To Bother You
« Last post by Tictacbk on Today at 02:55:50 AM »
Ah, XixaX. The only place that gets me. I felt exactly the same way about this movie (should we be worried about that?). It was sufficiently weird and has a great cast, but in the end it just wasn't compelling. The third act draaaags and doesn't land anywhere. I almost turned my phone on to check the time. And yet when Boots Riley makes another movie, I'll be there.
2
Stanley Kubrick / Stanley Kubrick - First and Last Scenes
« Last post by artemind on Yesterday at 05:17:37 PM »
Hi. My name is Ulvi. I am from Azerbaijan and I am big fan of Stanley Kubrick and his filmography.
This video collection includes all Stanley Kubricks film's first and last scenes and I enjoy to watch it again and again.
This is video:
3
Paul Thomas Anderson / Re: Influences on each film
« Last post by wilder on July 21, 2018, 02:06:24 AM »
Question mark. But whoa.


aka Paris Thrills (1945)

Philippe Clarence, a famous Parisian dressmaker, seduces his friend’s fiancee. But, for the 1st time in his life, this is for real. The film is also a sharp picture of the fashion world.

Quote from: CriterionForum user sensebove
July 20, 2018

Just saw Jacques Becker's absolutely wonderful Falbalas—did Anderson actually acknowledge it as an influence anywhere?

Because I find it hard to believe he didn't see it... There are too many things that seem to be lifted: a fussy, capricious, and wantonly cruel couturier whose House is managed by his only living relative, a matronly older sister; a breakfast scene where the obsequious former lover who has fallen out of favor storms off when he rejects her overt attempts to cater to him; and some banter between the designer and a model which starts with his seemingly derisive comment on her breast size and ends with him telling her its none of her business (implying what PT makes explicit: it's his to make her have some if he wants her to). I may have gone into it looking for them—but put together they all seem a bit much to be coincidental.

Quote from: Letterboxd user rischka
May 30, 2016

an early becker effort set in the world of haute couture. raymond rouleau stars as a womanizing diva designer who employs an army of seamstresses to produce his creations, each season inspired by a new muse. his latest discovery is betrothed to a dear friend, a girl who's too naive to see his seductions shouldn't be taken seriously. that is, until she's no longer available to him, when he suddenly decides to chuck everything and run away with her, not caring who may be hurt in the process. while i don't totally buy the ending, raymond rouleau is terrific here, becker has a deft hand with the witty dialogues and frantic pace and a great eye for interesting character traits. he still hasn't let me down. plus the wonderful paris 40s fashions esp amazing hats!!

Quote from: Letterboxd user Connor Denney
July 16, 2017

Flippant playboyism descends into the psychosexual when that required component of physical relationships, the self-gratification awarded by absolute power over romantic partners, is not awarded. We see the effects that objectification of women can have when the "objects" begin to turn on their "master," and the response feels as truthful as it does striking and surprising.


4
News and Theory / Re: Theatrical Release Calendar and Projects In Development
« Last post by wilder on July 20, 2018, 07:04:30 PM »
updated
5
Quentin Tarantino / Re: Once Upon A Time In Hollywood
« Last post by wilberfan on July 20, 2018, 06:38:24 PM »
Made a visit to the Hollywood Blvd set today (because, how many chances to do that will I get?).  They were shooting interiors inside Musso Franks all day, but I'm fascinated by film sets--and curious to the point of annoyance--so I had no trouble entertaining myself talking to crew, security, etc.  Spotted Kurt and Brad when the company broke for lunch.  Knew I had to stay cool, photo-wise around them, but took some shots of the work being done to get ready for the exterior shooting next week.


[edit] A much better set of photos (via Brian Donnelly).
6
News and Theory / Re: Specifically: Asia
« Last post by jenkins on July 20, 2018, 02:53:56 AM »
China’s Most Expensive Movie is an Epic Flop

The fantasy movie, which supposedly led a trilogy, spent 750 million yuan ($112 million) in its production that lasted for six years.

Unfortunately, it only earned 49.05 million yuan ($7.3 million) on its opening weekend.

As a result, producers Alibaba Pictures, Zhenjian Film Studio and Ningxia Film Group decided to pull the movie from cinemas on Sunday and offered their “deepest apologies to viewers who did not get a chance to watch the film,” the South China Morning Post noted.

“This decision was made not only because of the bad box office. We plan to make some changes to the film and release it again,” a Zhenjian Film representative told Sina News.

7
News and Theory / Re: Who's Next To Croak?
« Last post by Lottery on July 20, 2018, 12:27:06 AM »
Shinobu Hashimoto

Screenwriter that worked on masterpieces such as Harakiri, The Seven Samurai, Rashomon and Ikiru.
8
News and Theory / Re: Film Restoration and Preservation
« Last post by eward on July 19, 2018, 08:17:25 PM »
Commence joyful tearing out of hair!

I've long had a very poor DVD copy of it, but fortunately I got to see a 35 print at Anthology some time ago, and it's just one of the all-time great American films. Rips me apart.
9
News and Theory / Re: Film Restoration and Preservation
« Last post by wilder on July 19, 2018, 07:39:23 PM »
Speaking of...

Out of the Blue is getting a 4K restoration from Discovery Productions

Quote
Discovery Productions, Inc. (John Alan Simon and Elizabeth Karr) plans now to undertake a 4K digital restoration of this landmark film. - so that we can make it available to a whole new generation of cinema audiences.    Because Out Of The Blue exists only as a 35mm print, its audience has been limited to those who are fortunate enough to see it in a theatre like BFI, Cinemateque, Anthology Film Archives, The Roxie, Metrograph and other art house / indie cinemas.

As on the previous successful 35mm restoration, Robert Harris has been kind enough to offer his advice and expertise to us in this process - Robert is currently working with the Cinematheque on the much more difficult digital restoration of Abel Gance's Napoleon - and we are already benefiting from this learning curve.  Other of his restorations include Lawrence of Arabia and Rear Window.
10
The Small Screen / Re: Who Is America?
« Last post by Jeremy Blackman on July 19, 2018, 06:48:14 PM »
Watched Episode 1. It is exactly in line with previous Sacha Baron Cohen shows and films. The final segment (posted above) is an absolute masterpiece.

In the lead-up, I heard a lot of hand-wringing about SBC's methodology. These criticisms are nothing new, but they started to gain a new resonance with me. In a time when our grip on the truth is so tenuous, do we really need Sacha Baron Cohen weaponizing out-of-context moments and distorting reality even further? Maybe his type of art is now too destructive. Maybe it's not worth it anymore.

Then I watched the episode, and I had a new reaction: Actually this is great and I love it. And it's fine.

There's a lot of prime satire here. Does SBC reveal what's in these people's hearts? In some cases, yes. In other cases, no—he just reveals that they're willing to say anything when they believe some Israeli organization is honoring them. In the actual episode, the production team's deceptive tactics are not some closely-held secret. They are in full view. In the gun segment, SBC is perhaps more transparently deceptive than ever before. At one point, the show even basically deconstructs its own methodology (at 8 min in the clip above).

In the final stretch of the gun segment, it is made 100% clear to viewers that the participants are reading a script to the camera. That's the whole point of that part—that they're willing to pimp themselves and say literally anything for the sake of Israel and/or gun advocacy. The deception there is mostly done for the purposes of comedy and humiliation.

The other segments are essentially at the expense of SBC's character. The Bernie interview is actually kind of great for that reason. The dinner segment is basically prank comedy.

I wasn't entirely comfortable with the art segment until I read this.
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
DMCA & Copyright | Terms & Conditions | Privacy Policy