Top 10 Movies
Re: Top 10 Movies
RR how can you rewatch requiem for a dream?
Okay... There's all kinds of things wrong with what you just said.
-
MajGenl.Meade
- Posts: 21464
- Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 8:51 am
- Location: Groot Brakrivier
- Contact:
Re: Top 10 Movies
Good points about streaming, Big RR. I wasn't even aware that Frankenstein was a general release - such was the silence about it in Kent OH. But there it is on Netflix - do you think movie houses will become victims of the separation of culture, the isolation of sitting at home vs. going out into the world in the (unacknowledged) company of strangers?
I can't really engage with movies that present too many unpleasant people. So, Blue Velvet (which I did see when it came out, pre-Christianity), Parasite (which I walked out of in the first 10 minutes), and Requiem for a Dream (judging by the reviews) are the kinds of films that make me feel kinda icky. Judging myself, not the movies or others who watch 'em.
It's not that I necessarily stay away from bad language - after all, Fargo is on my list and I consider it an almost perfect film. But I needed Marge, Norm, even the pathetically sad Yanagita and the supporting Brainerd cops and residents of Fargo to provide the necessary balance for the unpleasant pairings - Buscemi/Stormare, Macy/Presnell, Macy/Buscemi, Macy and almost everyone. . .
Maybe I'm naive but I think that a truly great movie is one that a person enjoys re-watching. I too went through film classes - Kane, Potemkin, All the King's Men - and understand why they are so highly regarded. But I don't watch them again, just for fun.
I've seen Krull several times for the sheer pleasure of the creaky plot and spotting "he was in THAT?" actors who went on to greater or other things. It was a flop and a secret pleasure both. Somehow (for me) it gets by without "the story, the performance, the cinematography, the set design, the soundtrack" components of a great movie. Even in the Princess Bride, I still shake my head at the sheer cheap awfulness of the rodents of unusual size in the Fire Swamp. True Krull-standard work that.
I can't really engage with movies that present too many unpleasant people. So, Blue Velvet (which I did see when it came out, pre-Christianity), Parasite (which I walked out of in the first 10 minutes), and Requiem for a Dream (judging by the reviews) are the kinds of films that make me feel kinda icky. Judging myself, not the movies or others who watch 'em.
It's not that I necessarily stay away from bad language - after all, Fargo is on my list and I consider it an almost perfect film. But I needed Marge, Norm, even the pathetically sad Yanagita and the supporting Brainerd cops and residents of Fargo to provide the necessary balance for the unpleasant pairings - Buscemi/Stormare, Macy/Presnell, Macy/Buscemi, Macy and almost everyone. . .
Maybe I'm naive but I think that a truly great movie is one that a person enjoys re-watching. I too went through film classes - Kane, Potemkin, All the King's Men - and understand why they are so highly regarded. But I don't watch them again, just for fun.
I've seen Krull several times for the sheer pleasure of the creaky plot and spotting "he was in THAT?" actors who went on to greater or other things. It was a flop and a secret pleasure both. Somehow (for me) it gets by without "the story, the performance, the cinematography, the set design, the soundtrack" components of a great movie. Even in the Princess Bride, I still shake my head at the sheer cheap awfulness of the rodents of unusual size in the Fire Swamp. True Krull-standard work that.
For Christianity, by identifying truth with faith, must teach-and, properly understood, does teach-that any interference with the truth is immoral. A Christian with faith has nothing to fear from the facts
Re: Top 10 Movies
Meade--do I think theaters will be victims of separation culture? I hope not, but think that's what the Hollywood studios are afraid of (and I think why the big budget special effects films rule right now), Indeed, before cable TV, I think the studios put nudity (often gratuitous nudity) in films to say "you can't see this on television". Of course now that doesn't work, so they put the big budget comic book movies on. FWIW, I do hope people will change and want to go back to the theaters, but I am not so sure.
As for what films you like or not, it is purely persona taste. Like you, I do have some films that are far from great that I can watch over and over; films like The Natural, Meet Me in St Louis, early Woody Allen films (especially Bananas and Take the Money and Run) and many others. I don't include these among my best films for the reasons listed before, but I enjoy them.
CP--it's a tough job, but someone has to do it.
Seriously, it's the kind of film I have to be in the right mood for; I won't say I "enjoy" it, but it moves me. When i worked for DYFS I ran across a number of people pretty much like those characters (the drug addicts specifically) and ti give me a different perspective, which s one thing I like films to do. Many films have pretty despicable characters, but the best films show you something about them in a real and believable way.
As for what films you like or not, it is purely persona taste. Like you, I do have some films that are far from great that I can watch over and over; films like The Natural, Meet Me in St Louis, early Woody Allen films (especially Bananas and Take the Money and Run) and many others. I don't include these among my best films for the reasons listed before, but I enjoy them.
CP--it's a tough job, but someone has to do it.
Seriously, it's the kind of film I have to be in the right mood for; I won't say I "enjoy" it, but it moves me. When i worked for DYFS I ran across a number of people pretty much like those characters (the drug addicts specifically) and ti give me a different perspective, which s one thing I like films to do. Many films have pretty despicable characters, but the best films show you something about them in a real and believable way.