The Criterion Collection

[ShellOilJunior]

Originally Posted by octagon

I really, really didn't like it and to be honest, can't remember much about it beyond 'is that the one with Aaron Eckhart or the one with the guy from The Piano'.

That said, of course you should watch it. I hated it and I'm going to give it another look at some point. I mean, I'm not in any rush and I'm not going to go out of my way but if I can give The Godfather Part III, the first two Star Wars prequels and The Ninth Gate multiple chances I can certainly give DePalma a little slack too

The Godfather III is a good film. The problem it's not in the same league as I and II. FFC waited to long to make it as well.

[bwdowiak]

Originally Posted by hoytereden

Sometimes, I find I concentrate too hard trying to make sense of or understand a puzzling film. So, I try the other extreme and just "stop thinking."

that is excellent advice. when I was making my way through some of the Godard stuff, I'd watch a scene and then rewatch it right away if I didn't understand something or if I felt I wanted a better understanding.

after I watched Weekend and took that whole approach to an extreme, I vowed to just let some stuff sink in even if it seems over my head.

I figure that subsequent viewings (of any film) will shed more light on certain aspects that initially come across as vague.

[Polaroid]

I always over think when viewing films, but id rather watch a film multiple times to understand or get it, than try in one sitting, hell I've seen some film 100+ times I get that obsessed or passionate about it.

[Scottie]

Originally Posted by EricJ

Try "Nine" first. Imitations usually help explain the original.

(See, he's, like, imagining things...)

I know what the film is about lol. I just have a problem conceptualizing it. Furthermore, the narrative has always tied me up.

Originally Posted by ShellOilJunior

I just finished James Ellroy's The Black Dahlia and enjoyed it. Is DePalma's film worth a viewing? I've heard very bad things about it...

It's a very forgettable film, in my opinion.

I saw it when it first hit DVD and I cannot remember a thing about it except it containing a very ambiguous ending that left me agitated.

[jayembee]

Originally Posted by bwdowiak

yeah, I see what you mean. I haven't seen The Big Sleep yet, but from what I understand, it is very difficult to follow the plot.

It's not at all difficult to follow the plot of The Big Sleep if you pay attention while you're watching it. There are only two real "problems" with the movie:

(1) Some actions and motivations seem a bit vague because the Production Code did not allow Hawks to be explicit about certain characters.

(2) There's a death that seems significant to the plot, but it's never revealed who killed that person and why. There's even a famous anecdote that screenwriters William Faulkner and Leigh Brackett, in adapting the novel, realized they couldn't figure out who killed this particular character, and called Raymond Chandler. Chandler realized that he didn't know, either. There's a speculation about that death that seems reasonable, so it's not really that big a deal.

[Feiereisel]

Originally Posted by ShellOilJunior

I just finished James Ellroy's The Black Dahlia and enjoyed it. Is DePalma's film worth a viewing? I've heard very bad things about it...

It's flat-out garbage.

Honestly, just keep reading Ellroy if you're looking for similar kicks.

[SammyJankis]

Originally Posted by ShellOilJunior

I just finished James Ellroy's The Black Dahlia and enjoyed it. Is DePalma's film worth a viewing? I've heard very bad things about it...

It's appallingly bad. Given the subject matter, I expected something worthwhile, but it's basically De Palma going out of control with his style.

[Rich Pure Doom]

Originally Posted by octagon

I really, really didn't like it and to be honest, can't remember much about it beyond 'is that the one with Aaron Eckhart or the one with the guy from The Piano'.

That said, of course you should watch it. I hated it and I'm going to give it another look at some point. I mean, I'm not in any rush and I'm not going to go out of my way but if I can give The Godfather Part III, the first two Star Wars prequels and The Ninth Gate multiple chances I can certainly give DePalma a little slack too

The first 2/3 of The Ninth Gate are pretty great. It's the end that really hurts that film.

[The Great Owl]

Originally Posted by jayembee

It's not at all difficult to follow the plot of The Big Sleep if you pay attention while you're watching it. There are only two real "problems" with the movie:

(1) Some actions and motivations seem a bit vague because the Production Code didn't not allow Hawks to be explicit about certain characters.

(2) There's a death that seems significant to the plot, but it's never revealed who killed that person and why. There's even a famous anecdote that screenwriters William Faulkner and Leigh Brackett, in adapting the novel, realized they couldn't figure out who killed this particular character, and called Raymond Chandler. Chandler realized that he didn't know, either. There's a speculation about that death that seems reasonable, so it's not really that big a deal.

I agree with the above. I had no trouble following The Big Sleep during my first viewing, but I also accepted the notion that "peripheral" plot details are vague. This is why I compared this film to Melville's Le Samouraï and Le Cercle Rouge. The storylines can be followed, and the ideas that the filmmakers are trying to convey are easy to grasp, but viewers who are inclined to go checking every component to see how things snap together may have some difficulty.

[ShellOilJunior]

All this talk of The Big Sleep...

Chandler's Marlowe novels are a slice of heaven.

The Big Sleep (1939)
Farewell, My Lovely (1940)
The High Window (1942)
The Lady in the Lake (1943)
The Little Sister (1949)
The Long Goodbye (1953)
Playback (1958)
Poodle Springs (Started by Chandler, finished by Robert Parker).

Several years ago I read them one after another - I just couldn't put them down.

[Ray Jackson]

Originally Posted by ShellOilJunior

The Godfather III is a good film. The problem it's not in the same league as I and II. FFC waited to long to make it as well.

I just have to respectfully disagree with this statement.

GF III is not a good film in any sense.

Bad acting, bad dialogue and too many pretentious scenes that play out like poorly-written caricatures of the first two films.

And then there's Sophia Coppola.

...the horror.

...the horror.

[hoytereden]

Originally Posted by ShellOilJunior

I just finished James Ellroy's The Black Dahlia and enjoyed it. Is DePalma's film worth a viewing? I've heard very bad things about it...

I saw it but frankly it didn't leave much of an impression. I enjoyed Hollywoodland much more which, I believe, came out about the same time. Two films about unresolved crimes although officially the George Reeves case is classified as a suicide.

[spargs]

Originally Posted by ShellOilJunior

I just finished James Ellroy's The Black Dahlia and enjoyed it. Is DePalma's film worth a viewing? I've heard very bad things about it...

I found it to be a major disappointment. And I'm as big a De Palma fan as you'll find.

[The Great Owl]

It looks as though I'm going to be enjoying a double feature of The Blob next month. I've pre-ordered the 1988 remake (which is one of the better horror remakes out there), and I'm looking forward to setting an evening aside to watch the Criterion Blu-ray of the 1958 original first, followed by the remake.

I was planning to revisit the Criterion Blu-ray anyway next month, but this seals the deal.

[jhiggy23]

Originally Posted by ShellOilJunior

I just finished James Ellroy's The Black Dahlia and enjoyed it. Is DePalma's film worth a viewing? I've heard very bad things about it...

I thought it was beyond awful.

[jayembee]

Originally Posted by jhiggy23

I thought it was beyond awful.

I've never seen it, as I'm not really a DePalma fan. It's one I've been tempted to watch anyway, simply because I like Ellroy, but the more negative comments I see about it, the less I'm tempted.

[monorail91]

Originally Posted by iScottie

I know what the film is about lol. I just have a problem conceptualizing it. Furthermore, the narrative has always tied me up.



It's a very forgettable film, in my opinion.

I saw it when it first hit DVD and I cannot remember a thing about it except it containing a very ambiguous ending that left me agitated.

The audio commentary on the Blu-ray is excellent, provides a ton of insight that was new to me (a hardcore Fellini and 8 1/2 fan). A lot of the surreal imagery is explained very clearly.

[jw007]

Originally Posted by Ray Jackson

I just have to respectfully disagree with this statement.

GF III is not a good film in any sense.

Bad acting, bad dialogue and too many pretentious scenes that play out like poorly-written caricatures of the first two films.

And then there's Sophia Coppola.

...the horror.

...the horror.

You know, nepotism in cinema is nothing new. I recently re-watched The Postman and I could only shudder every time Kevin Costner's daughter, Annie, came onscreen and did her bits. It was godawful acting. I'd say it was even worse than Francis Ford's daughter Sofia in The Godfather: Part III.

[jw007]

I finally did it.

I watched Stagecoach last night finally for the first time.

Westerns aren't usually my cup of tea, but this is such a pivotal, influential film that I couldn't hold off any longer.

I've been in a "Western" kind of phase lately and I plan to follow this up with Red River.

I watched O Brother, Where Art Thou? a few nights ago and that was a bit of a western road film on Homer's Odyssey.

I don't own too many Westerns in my film collection but I do have a few others I plan to watch after Red River next. That will be the classic Dances With Wolves of course (which I've already seen 4 times), and then My Darling Clementine (which I have to wait until it is released in October of course).

[AaronJ]

Originally Posted by Ray Jackson

I just have to respectfully disagree with this statement.

GF III is not a good film in any sense.

Bad acting, bad dialogue and too many pretentious scenes that play out like poorly-written caricatures of the first two films.

And then there's Sophia Coppola.

...the horror.

...the horror.

First, GF3 is a pretty decent film on its own. It's not bad.

And yes, Sofia was terrible. But she isn't an actress, and should never have been put into that situation. A director, however? She's one of the best alive.

She just got stuck into a situation where she never should have been. Imagine something like LeBron James given a bat to hit in the 9th inning of the World Series. Yeah, he's unbelievably talented. No, he's not a baseball player. He's gonna look foolish, just like, sad to say, Sofia did.

But Sofia behind the camera (or LeBron on the basketball court) and everything is right with the world.