The Movie Review and Discussion Thread

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by Steve46

Moneyball

[Show spoiler](Biography, Drama, Sport)
Directed by Bennett Miller
Starring Brad Pitt, Jonah Hill and Philip Seymour Hoffman



Sony Pictures | 2011 | 133 min | Rated PG-13 | Released Jan 10, 2012

Video:
Video codec: MPEG-4 AVC
Video resolution: 1080p
Aspect ratio: 1.85:1

Audio:
English: DTS-HD Master Audio 5.1
French: DTS-HD Master Audio 5.1
Spanish: Dolby Digital 5.1

Subtitles:
English, English SDH, French, Spanish

Discs:
50GB Blu-ray Disc
DVD Copy
BD-Live

The Film 4.5/5

Moneyball is a refreshing change from the usual type of sports movie. How many times have you watched the story of an underdog triumphing? How many movies introduce us to a controversial coach who is initially resented because of his methods and then revered by all when he succeeds? This story is certainly a celebration of success, but not in the typical sense.

It’s based on the true story of how General Manager Billy Beane (Pitt) employed a new way of thinking in order to enable the Oakland Athletics to compete with the likes of the New York Yankees. He did this with just one third of the payroll of that available to the Yankees.

Beane’s first move was to hire Peter Brand (Hill) – an economics graduate from Yale. Instead of relying on traditional scouting methods, Brand used statistical analysis to determine the true value of baseball players. Instead of paying huge salaries based on a players’ potential, he sought out value by considering players who were believed to have flaws. These might include injury or advancing age. Beane collaborated with Brand to assemble a team on a low budget. Departing stars were replaced with players who were a good fit for the team.

The reason Moneyball appeals to me so much is that I also rely on my own way of thinking rather than following conventional wisdom. That doesn’t mean I will ignore everything, but I will question the opinions of others and decide whether I agree. It’s something I have done my entire life and one reason I review movies. You might not agree with me, but at least you know that I’m not just repeating the opinions of others.

The dialog is intelligent and full of humor. Some of the scenes, such as Beane pursuing trades with other teams, are quite exciting. Pitt and Hill work well together and are in most of the scenes. One source of conflict is Coach Art Howe (Hoffman). He’s concerned about his own situation and future in the sport, and is reluctant to adopt Beane’s desired strategy.

I enjoyed Moneyball because it was different and the story was told in an appealing way. I won’t ruin the ending for those who don’t remember whether the A’s won the World Series, but I will say that the story doesn’t show a huge amount of baseball action. This is about the people behind the scenes and the way in which they affected the sport.

The 133 minutes race by and that’s always a good sign. I can imagine myself watching this movie several times.

Video Quality 4/5

Sony’s presentation looks great for the most part. There’s plenty of detail and depth. Colors appear accurate and well-defined. The only minor fault is the presence of noise in many of the scenes. It doesn’t ruin the experience, but it’s hard to dismiss it completely. The movie uses a few TV shots and some archive footage, and that’s clearly of lesser quality than the majority of the presentation. That’s purely intentional and no fault in the transfer.

Audio Quality 4/5

This is a story which relies more on dialog than anything else. It rises to the occasion when required, such as during baseball games, but it’s fairly subtle overall.

Special Features 3/5

The extras are in full HD and offer just the right amount of content for those wanting more information:

Blooper: Brad Loses It (3:11) – A scene in which Pitt can’t stop laughing at one of the lines delivered by Hill.

Deleted Scenes (12:05) – Three extended scenes which didn’t make the final cut in their entirety.

Billy Beane: Re-Inventing the Game (16:02) – A discussion about Beane’s impact on the game.

Drafting the Team (20:51) – A feature explaining the reasoning behind some of the casting decisions.

Adapting Moneyball (16:33) – Showing how Michael Lewis’s book was adapted for the big screen.

MLB 12 The Show Preview Trailer (1:21)

Previews

BD-Live

Overall score 4.5/5

Too cold to golf? Thats an old fashioned A+ Steve review.

[Steve46]

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

Too cold to golf? Thats an old fashioned A+ Steve review.

Temperatures are hovering around freezing here today and the courses are closed for the winter.

Yeah, I have been writing a bit more lately. I'm currently working my way through my suggestions of 100 movies to see before you die (blog). I guess I will post them here too

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by Steve46

Temperatures are hovering around freezing here today and the courses are closed for the winter.

Yeah, I have been writing a bit more lately. I'm currently working my way through my suggestions of 100 movies to see before you die (blog). I guess I will post them here too

We are at about 20f, but no snow, which is 100% unheard of this time of year.

[Steve46]

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

We are at about 20f, but no snow, which is 100% unheard of this time of year.

We have had 4 inches, but it's usually 36 inches by now. None on the ground at the moment.

Top 100 coming...

[Steve46]

100 movies you should see before you die

Have you ever read a list like this before?

Doesn't it seem a little arrogant to believe that if you like something it should be seen by everyone?

Think about it logically for a moment. Movies appeal to different people for different reasons. If you detest musicals, do you really want to watch The Sound of Music or The Wizard of Oz? If you don't like violence, will you enjoy Casino or Goodfellas? If you can't bear to watch a subtitled film, will you subject yourself to Das Boot or The Bicycle Thief?

Some people will never watch a black and white film. Others will avoid movies in which an animal dies or gets hurt.

Do you avoid movies with nudity, swearing, or extreme sadness? Can you sit down and watch something that runs for three or four hours, or will you only watch shorter movies?

Do you avoid certain genres or find yourself only watching comedy or action movies?

There is so much to consider when recommending a movie to other people. I regularly try to suggest titles to three or four different groups of friends. I want them to enjoy my selections, but I also want to wow them or broaden their horizons. It's enjoyable seeing friends react when they are watching a movie you have seen several times. Well, it's enjoyable if they end up liking it. It's not much fun knowing that you wasted two hours of someone's life. It doesn't matter how well you think you know a person, one tiny little scene can ruin the movie for them.

With all that in mind, it's clearly impossible to make a sweeping statement such as, "Here are 100 movies you must see before you die." That list differs depending on your audience.

How do you even judge which 100 should be on your list? Should you include movies that introduced ideas or techniques which changed the way movies were made? What about just listing your 100 favorites? Could you even determine your 100 favorites, or would your list have changed by the time you finished compiling it?

What is the purpose of such a list anyway? Are you trying to show people that you have a vast amount of film knowledge? Or are you brave enough to list personal favorites that you know will be ridiculed by some of your audience?

Is the list for you, or is it for your audience?

In my case, I have decided to include 100 movies which are important to me in some way. I admire everything on the list, but the reasons for choosing each title vary. I have also decided not to just list 100 movies I love. I'm a fan of certain directors and actors, but including everything they have produced serves very little purpose.

One of the aims of this exercise is to introduce you to new movies. The best way I can think of to do that is to suggest other titles you may like if you like one of the 100 on my list. So, for each movie, I will include suggestions for similar films.

You have probably noticed that if I do that I'll have considerably more films than 100. Not only that, you'll realize that if you don't like 50 of the films on my list, there's very little point in investigating suggestions related to those particular titles. That's the idea.

I hope that my ramblings so far make some kind of sense and that you see what I am trying for here. I'm not an authority on film like Roger Ebert. He's been around a long time and has been reviewing films for a living for over 40 years.

I'm passionate about film and have been around a while too, but I wasn't always the person I am now. The importance of film is still quite a new realization to me and exploring the medium has only been a big part of my life for the past five years.

If I omit one of your favorites, it may mean that I simply haven't seen it. Or it could mean that it's just not my kind of film. Many on the following list will be loved by some of you and despised by others. There probably aren't two people on earth who would list exactly the same 100 films on a list like this.

Now that you know my reasoning, intent and (lack of) qualifications, I'll start the list. It will be in alphabetical order and I'll add to it when I have the time and inspiration.


1. 12 Angry Men (1957)
Drama, 96 minutes
Directed by Sidney Lumet
Starring Henry Fonda, Lee J. Cobb and Martin Balsam



Sidney Lumet passed away in 2011, but he left us with 72 films, shorts or TV series. This was his first feature for the big screen and it's definitely among his best work.

For me, one of the signs of a good film is to take a subject in which I have no interest and hold my attention for the duration. The story takes place in one room, apart from a couple of minutes at the beginning and end of the film. It succeeds because of the strength of the dialogue and the acting ability of all involved.

After a very compact 96 minutes in which no scene is wasted, the credits roll. I'm left with the feeling that I have just seen something important. The film deals with racism and highlights the good and bad points of the American justice system. Henry Fonda leads a strong cast and every member has a significant role to play.

Lumet used a variety of camera angles to make the viewer feel like a member of the jury and it's easy to be drawn in. This is one of those rare stories where dialogue is actually exciting. It's really something that has the potential to be enjoyed by any audience.

Criterion's recent Blu-ray release offers a wonderful presentation and includes a good supplemental package.

If you like 12 Angry Men:

Consider Dog Day Afternoon for another great Lumet film. Al Pacino stars in the tale of how a bank robbery captured the attention of the media.

If you enjoyed the dialogue in 12 Angry Men, take a look at Glengarry Glen Ross, which is another film that succeeds on the strength of its script. Al Pacino, Jack Lemmon and Ed Harris speak David Mamet's words with utter conviction in a tale involving a group of salesmen.

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by Steve46

If you enjoyed the dialogue in 12 Angry Men, take a look at Glengarry Glen Ross, which is another film that succeeds on the strength of its script. Al Pacino, Jack Lemmon and Ed Harris speak David Mamet's words with utter conviction in a tale involving a group of salesmen.

I though Baldwin was fantastic in that.

Coffee is for closers.

[Steve46]

Originally Posted by SquidPuppet

I though Baldwin was fantastic in that.

Coffee is for closers.

Yep, he was.

Lots of good little roles. Spacey hinting at how good he would become. Arkin, Harris, Lemmon, Pacino all doing great stuff.

[Romulus]

Originally Posted by Steve46

Moneyball

Overall score 4.5/5

Been wanting to check this out for a while, unfortunately didn't get to see it in theaters because I was so busy with school.

Also I'm anxious to read your 100 films list. 12 Angry Men is one of my favorite films of all time. A film for the thinking man in every way.

[Foggy]

Originally Posted by Steve46

100 movies you should see before you die

Have you ever read a list like this before?

[Show spoiler]Doesn't it seem a little arrogant to believe that if you like something it should be seen by everyone?

Think about it logically for a moment. Movies appeal to different people for different reasons. If you detest musicals, do you really want to watch The Sound of Music or The Wizard of Oz? If you don't like violence, will you enjoy Casino or Goodfellas? If you can't bear to watch a subtitled film, will you subject yourself to Das Boot or The Bicycle Thief?

Some people will never watch a black and white film. Others will avoid movies in which an animal dies or gets hurt.

Do you avoid movies with nudity, swearing, or extreme sadness? Can you sit down and watch something that runs for three or four hours, or will you only watch shorter movies?

Do you avoid certain genres or find yourself only watching comedy or action movies?

There is so much to consider when recommending a movie to other people. I regularly try to suggest titles to three or four different groups of friends. I want them to enjoy my selections, but I also want to wow them or broaden their horizons. It's enjoyable seeing friends react when they are watching a movie you have seen several times. Well, it's enjoyable if they end up liking it. It's not much fun knowing that you wasted two hours of someone's life. It doesn't matter how well you think you know a person, one tiny little scene can ruin the movie for them.

With all that in mind, it's clearly impossible to make a sweeping statement such as, "Here are 100 movies you must see before you die." That list differs depending on your audience.

How do you even judge which 100 should be on your list? Should you include movies that introduced ideas or techniques which changed the way movies were made? What about just listing your 100 favorites? Could you even determine your 100 favorites, or would your list have changed by the time you finished compiling it?

What is the purpose of such a list anyway? Are you trying to show people that you have a vast amount of film knowledge? Or are you brave enough to list personal favorites that you know will be ridiculed by some of your audience?

Is the list for you, or is it for your audience?

In my case, I have decided to include 100 movies which are important to me in some way. I admire everything on the list, but the reasons for choosing each title vary. I have also decided not to just list 100 movies I love. I'm a fan of certain directors and actors, but including everything they have produced serves very little purpose.

One of the aims of this exercise is to introduce you to new movies. The best way I can think of to do that is to suggest other titles you may like if you like one of the 100 on my list. So, for each movie, I will include suggestions for similar films.

You have probably noticed that if I do that I'll have considerably more films than 100. Not only that, you'll realize that if you don't like 50 of the films on my list, there's very little point in investigating suggestions related to those particular titles. That's the idea.

I hope that my ramblings so far make some kind of sense and that you see what I am trying for here. I'm not an authority on film like Roger Ebert. He's been around a long time and has been reviewing films for a living for over 40 years.

I'm passionate about film and have been around a while too, but I wasn't always the person I am now. The importance of film is still quite a new realization to me and exploring the medium has only been a big part of my life for the past five years.

If I omit one of your favorites, it may mean that I simply haven't seen it. Or it could mean that it's just not my kind of film. Many on the following list will be loved by some of you and despised by others. There probably aren't two people on earth who would list exactly the same 100 films on a list like this.

Now that you know my reasoning, intent and (lack of) qualifications, I'll start the list. It will be in alphabetical order and I'll add to it when I have the time and inspiration.


1. 12 Angry Men (1957)
Drama, 96 minutes
Directed by Sidney Lumet
Starring Henry Fonda, Lee J. Cobb and Martin Balsam



Sidney Lumet passed away in 2011, but he left us with 72 films, shorts or TV series. This was his first feature for the big screen and it's definitely among his best work.

For me, one of the signs of a good film is to take a subject in which I have no interest and hold my attention for the duration. The story takes place in one room, apart from a couple of minutes at the beginning and end of the film. It succeeds because of the strength of the dialogue and the acting ability of all involved.

After a very compact 96 minutes in which no scene is wasted, the credits roll. I'm left with the feeling that I have just seen something important. The film deals with racism and highlights the good and bad points of the American justice system. Henry Fonda leads a strong cast and every member has a significant role to play.

Lumet used a variety of camera angles to make the viewer feel like a member of the jury and it's easy to be drawn in. This is one of those rare stories where dialogue is actually exciting. It's really something that has the potential to be enjoyed by any audience.

Criterion's recent Blu-ray release offers a wonderful presentation and includes a good supplemental package.

If you like 12 Angry Men:

Consider Dog Day Afternoon for another great Lumet film. Al Pacino stars in the tale of how a bank robbery captured the attention of the media.

If you enjoyed the dialogue in 12 Angry Men, take a look at Glengarry Glen Ross, which is another film that succeeds on the strength of its script. Al Pacino, Jack Lemmon and Ed Harris speak David Mamet's words with utter conviction in a tale involving a group of salesmen

.

Film Four did a list like this when it was first started up, and they showed 50 films over 50 weeks on each Friday, they had films like Apocalypse Now, Scarface and Trainspotting (which they co-produced)

http://www.film4.com/galleries/50-fi...before-you-die

[Steve46]

Originally Posted by Romulus

Been wanting to check this out for a while, unfortunately didn't get to see it in theaters because I was so busy with school.

Also I'm anxious to read your 100 films list. 12 Angry Men is one of my favorite films of all time. A film for the thinking man in every way.

I'm up to No. 15 so far. I'll post the rest soon.

I'm studying for my Canadian citizenship test (Jan 12).

[Steve46]

Originally Posted by Foggy

Film Four did a list like this when it was first started up, and they showed 50 films over 50 weeks on each Friday, they had films like Apocalypse Now, Scarface and Trainspotting (which they co-produced)

http://www.film4.com/galleries/50-fi...before-you-die

I've only seen 33 of those and 10 of them made my list.

[Foggy]

Watching my first film from 2012, Kill List

[Steve46]

I'll post five at a time as I'm up to No. 15 so far:

Originally Posted by Steve46

100 movies you should see before you die

[Show spoiler]

Have you ever read a list like this before?

Doesn't it seem a little arrogant to believe that if you like something it should be seen by everyone?

Think about it logically for a moment. Movies appeal to different people for different reasons. If you detest musicals, do you really want to watch The Sound of Music or The Wizard of Oz? If you don't like violence, will you enjoy Casino or Goodfellas? If you can't bear to watch a subtitled film, will you subject yourself to Das Boot or The Bicycle Thief?

Some people will never watch a black and white film. Others will avoid movies in which an animal dies or gets hurt.

Do you avoid movies with nudity, swearing, or extreme sadness? Can you sit down and watch something that runs for three or four hours, or will you only watch shorter movies?

Do you avoid certain genres or find yourself only watching comedy or action movies?

There is so much to consider when recommending a movie to other people. I regularly try to suggest titles to three or four different groups of friends. I want them to enjoy my selections, but I also want to wow them or broaden their horizons. It's enjoyable seeing friends react when they are watching a movie you have seen several times. Well, it's enjoyable if they end up liking it. It's not much fun knowing that you wasted two hours of someone's life. It doesn't matter how well you think you know a person, one tiny little scene can ruin the movie for them.

With all that in mind, it's clearly impossible to make a sweeping statement such as, "Here are 100 movies you must see before you die." That list differs depending on your audience.

How do you even judge which 100 should be on your list? Should you include movies that introduced ideas or techniques which changed the way movies were made? What about just listing your 100 favorites? Could you even determine your 100 favorites, or would your list have changed by the time you finished compiling it?

What is the purpose of such a list anyway? Are you trying to show people that you have a vast amount of film knowledge? Or are you brave enough to list personal favorites that you know will be ridiculed by some of your audience?

Is the list for you, or is it for your audience?

In my case, I have decided to include 100 movies which are important to me in some way. I admire everything on the list, but the reasons for choosing each title vary. I have also decided not to just list 100 movies I love. I'm a fan of certain directors and actors, but including everything they have produced serves very little purpose.

One of the aims of this exercise is to introduce you to new movies. The best way I can think of to do that is to suggest other titles you may like if you like one of the 100 on my list. So, for each movie, I will include suggestions for similar films.

You have probably noticed that if I do that I'll have considerably more films than 100. Not only that, you'll realize that if you don't like 50 of the films on my list, there's very little point in investigating suggestions related to those particular titles. That's the idea.

I hope that my ramblings so far make some kind of sense and that you see what I am trying for here. I'm not an authority on film like Roger Ebert. He's been around a long time and has been reviewing films for a living for over 40 years.

I'm passionate about film and have been around a while too, but I wasn't always the person I am now. The importance of film is still quite a new realization to me and exploring the medium has only been a big part of my life for the past five years.

If I omit one of your favorites, it may mean that I simply haven't seen it. Or it could mean that it's just not my kind of film. Many on the following list will be loved by some of you and despised by others. There probably aren't two people on earth who would list exactly the same 100 films on a list like this.

Now that you know my reasoning, intent and (lack of) qualifications, I'll start the list. It will be in alphabetical order and I'll add to it when I have the time and inspiration.


1. 12 Angry Men (1957)
Drama, 96 minutes
Directed by Sidney Lumet
Starring Henry Fonda, Lee J. Cobb and Martin Balsam



Sidney Lumet passed away in 2011, but he left us with 72 films, shorts or TV series. This was his first feature for the big screen and it's definitely among his best work.

For me, one of the signs of a good film is to take a subject in which I have no interest and hold my attention for the duration. The story takes place in one room, apart from a couple of minutes at the beginning and end of the film. It succeeds because of the strength of the dialogue and the acting ability of all involved.

After a very compact 96 minutes in which no scene is wasted, the credits roll. I'm left with the feeling that I have just seen something important. The film deals with racism and highlights the good and bad points of the American justice system. Henry Fonda leads a strong cast and every member has a significant role to play.

Lumet used a variety of camera angles to make the viewer feel like a member of the jury and it's easy to be drawn in. This is one of those rare stories where dialogue is actually exciting. It's really something that has the potential to be enjoyed by any audience.

Criterion's recent Blu-ray release offers a wonderful presentation and includes a good supplemental package.

If you like 12 Angry Men:

Consider Dog Day Afternoon for another great Lumet film. Al Pacino stars in the tale of how a bank robbery captured the attention of the media.

If you enjoyed the dialogue in 12 Angry Men, take a look at Glengarry Glen Ross, which is another film that succeeds on the strength of its script. Al Pacino, Jack Lemmon and Ed Harris speak David Mamet's words with utter conviction in a tale involving a group of salesmen.

2. 127 Hours (2010)
Drama, Biography, 94 minutes
Directed by Danny Boyle
Starring James Franco



One of the things I like about 127 Hours is that it transports you to a different place. It's the true story of how Aron Ralston survived after being trapped alone in a canyon.

Danny Boyle uses a variety of techniques and camera trickery to keep the viewer interested, even though the story takes place in a few feet of rock for the majority of the film.

James Franco is very effective in the role and his Oscar nomination was justified. There is one particularly harrowing scene that might not be suitable for some viewers, but it worked for me in the context of the story.

I'm fascinated by how the human mind works and how people deal with adversity and solitude. Ralston's story rings true and gives us a glimpse into how his mind dealt with his ordeal. It's a story that I have watched several times so I can't agree with those who think it has no replay value.

If you like 127 Hours:

Cast Away, featuring Tom Hanks, is another convincing study of a person trapped in isolation. I Am Legend, starring Will Smith, offers a similar perspective. Both films transport the viewer to a different reality and it's easy to become caught up in each story.

Full review in this thread or on my blog.


3. 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968)
Science Fiction, 141 minutes
Directed by Stanley Kubrick
Starring Keir Dullea and Gary Lockwood



Stanley Kubrick certainly didn't restrict himself to one particular genre. In one of his most ambitious films, he took us into space. Up until that point, science fiction was often thought of as amusing and many early movies were laughably bad. Kubrick changed that perception at a stroke with the release of 2001.

The film isn't easy to watch. The opening sequence attempts to show how humans descended from apes and learned how to use tools and weapons. Special effects in 1968 were not advanced and so Kubrick simply dressed actors in ape costumes. This long sequence is told without the use of dialogue and will alienate a lot of viewers.

After one of my favorite cuts in movie history, in which a spinning bone transitions into an orbiting spaceship, we are taken into space. The story involves the discovery of monoliths. The apes find the first one and learn how to use tools. The second is buried on the moon and the third orbits Jupiter. Each monolith marks an advancement in the human race and alerts an alien race to our progress.

Kubrick got a lot of things right, portraying weightlessness and the lack of sound in space. He used classical music throughout the story and saw spaceships docking as a kind of dance. One of his most complex characters was a machine.

This isn't a film I would recommend to everyone. It's suitable for those who like to reflect on what they have just seen. It stands up to repeat viewings and analysis and sparks the imagination, but some viewers will give up very early. The first three minutes appears to be a black screen with background music (it's more than that). The evolution of the apes consists of a lot of shouting and jumping around. It took me several attempts before I fully understood Kubrick's vision and started to make sense of the story. I now regard it as one of the best science fiction movies ever made.

If you like 2001: A Space Odyssey:

Moon, directed by Duncan Jones, resembles 2001 in some ways. The use of models, the pacing, and the presence of an artificial intelligence all remind me of the feel Kubrick's film achieved. If you are a fan of classic science fiction, Jones has made a good film in which Sam Rockwell gives one of his best performances.


4. The 400 Blows (1959)
Drama, 99 minutes, French Language
Directed by Francois Truffaut
Starring Jean-Pierre Leaud, Albert Remy and Claire Maurier



The first time I ever saw Francois Truffaut was in Close Encounters of the Third Kind. I had no idea that he was anything more than a supporting actor at the time. I used to shun subtitled films because it was too much effort to read them, or so I supposed. Then, a few years ago, I decided to borrow a few Criterion films from my local library to see what all the fuss was about. The 400 Blows was the first of those titles.

I learned that the French New Wave wasn't some type of musical genre. I still haven't seen as many Truffaut films as I would like, but this is one I keep returning to. The story concerns the childhood of 12-year-old Antoine Doinel. He lives with his mother and stepfather and they largely ignore him. The film shows what happens at school in a very realistic way. Antoine doesn't like school and often skips classes. We see him wandering around the town, lying and stealing, but he doesn't seem to be a bad kid. His passions include reading Balzac and sneaking off to the cinema.

The 400 Blows is semi-autobiographical and gives the viewer some idea of Truffaut's own childhood. The story is touching and Antoine seems like a good person in a bad situation. This is one of the best films about childhood that I have seen. If you're not put off by subtitles or black and white films, this is definitely a story to check out. Criterion's presentation is fantastic as always.

If you like The 400 Blows:

There are five more Truffaut films about Antoine Doinel, and Jean-Pierre Leaud stars in all of them. They include Antoine and Colette, Love at Twenty, Stolen Kisses, Bed and Board and Love on the Run.

If you enjoy films about childhood, another powerful story is Au Revoir Les Enfants, directed by Louis Malle.


5. Alien (1979)
Science Fiction, Horror, 117 minutes
Directed by Ridley Scott
Starring Sigourney Weaver, Ian Holm and Tom Skerritt



I first saw Alien during its original theatrical run in 1979 and appreciated it even more on the big screen. The first half of the movie is the best part. It's dark and atmospheric and there is an element of mystery. We are introduced to the crew of the mining ship and learn the relationships and personalities involved.

The computer screens on the ship seem dated now, but the overall effect of the movie is just as powerful. The story gathers pace when some of the crew investigate the surface of a moon and find a ship from an unknown species. The way this sequence unfolds is almost worthy of Hitchcock.

The purpose of the mission isn't immediately clear, but I won't reveal the details in case you haven't seen the movie. This is essentially a story of survival. While an actual encounter with an alien race might involve peaceful interaction, Alien never suggests for a moment that peace is possible. The creature is a killer and pursues the crew one at a time. Eventually, the battle focuses on Ripley (Weaver) and the alien. The second half of the movie doesn't quite live up to the promise of the first because most of the mystery is gone, but it's still a gripping story.

Like many movies featuring unknown creatures, we rarely see shots of the whole creature. We are shown glimpses as it evolves and our imagination fills in the gaps. When we are eventually shown the whole thing, it adds to the effect and comes as quite a shock as we realize its strength and resilience.

If you like Alien:

If you are a fan of Alien, there are several movies that might be of interest. The four Alien movies are available on Blu-ray and come with a wealth of special features. The set is region free and the best deals can generally be had by importing from Amazon UK or other UK dealers.

While all four movies in the franchise have something to offer, Alien is the best of the bunch. The first sequel, Aliens, is also an intense ride. It focuses more on the action and assumes that the viewer already knows what to expect from the aliens.

Director Ridley Scott is currently finishing Prometheus. Due to be released in June 2012, the story is apparently set in the Alien universe. It's unclear whether it's a proper prequel, but Scott has stated that the movie explains the origin of the ship discovered in the original movie.

[Romulus]

Warrior (Gavin O'Connor, 2011)

I purposefully avoided seeing this in theaters. To be quite honest, I wasn't even interested in seeing for a couple of reasons. Seeing the trailer reminded me of two other fighting films that have been released in the last few years: The Wrestler (2008) and The Fighter (2010). To me I was pretty sure it was the same genre dealing with the same themes: a protagonist fighter dealing with a dysfunctional family. Warrior isn't exactly a carbon copy of the sentence for one sole reason -- there's two protagonists.

The film follows two brothers Brendan (Joel Edgerton) and Tommy (Tom Hardy) who are estranged from each other and their father Paddy (Nick Nolte). Both falling upon hard times, they decide to each enter the biggest MMA fighting tournament.

Early on in the film it's easy to see where the film is heading, even if you aren't 100 percent certain on the conclusion. For people familiar with the genre and big fans, this is a film worth checking out. The film relies on the trichotomy of the estranged family, and it does succeed in some areas while falling pretty flat in others. I felt the first hour or so of the film really builds the family's back story strongly. Once the tournament begins to unfold some of the subplots built into the story fall apart, rendering them useless to begin with. While the family and three characters are central to the story, only 2 of them have a story worth telling. I found Hardy's and Nolte's characters to be quite fascinating. Edgerton's story I didn't really care for, because his story for me really held no consequence.

Big spoiler paragraph:

[Show spoiler]I know that losing the house was a subplot, but the story of a life threatening injury that happened to Edgerton was poorly done. Edgerton basically says that his injury won't happen again. His trainer and wife are strongly opposed to his idea... for about 30 seconds, then the story continues on. So for me, that little background story didn't mean much for me. Hardy's character and background are far more mysterious and captivating. For me, Hardy was the guy I was rooting for. He was the man who served in the military and fighting for his lost friend. I felt that he had more to prove and accomplish in the grand scheme of things. As a result, I didn't like the ending too much. I understand why the did it that way, but I felt that Tommy winning would have been more satisfactory.

Wish I could write a more non-spoilery review, but I felt like for this movie I couldn't really do that. Overall it's a film that relies on old genre cliche's, strong performances, and offers a good watch. However, there are some issues I have with the story and I felt that it focused on the wrong character.

3.5/5

[Steve46]

Here are numbers 6-10:

6. Amelie (2001)
Comedy, Fantasy, Romance
122 minutes, French Language
Directed by Jean-Pierre Jeunet
Starring Audrey Tautou and Mathieu Kassovitz



Several of my favorite directors produce movies which have a distinct feel, and Jean-Pierre Jeunet is one of them. He can take the darkest topics and infuse them with his own brand of humor. Amelie is not one of his darker films, but it feels like part of his familiar world.

The star of Amelie is Audrey Tautou and she shines in the role. The movie isn't serious at all and is filled with amusing stories and delivered in a whimsical way. We are introduced to the characters by a narrator who tells us their likes and dislikes. I love the use of narration when it's done well.

Amelie is a young woman who accidentally discovers a box of childhood treasures left hidden in her apartment by a previous tenant. She decides to track him down to return it and resolves to do similar good deeds if the outcome is favorable. She's not completely good though. One person in particular annoys her so she decides to play a few pranks to teach him a lesson.

The movie has plenty of mystery and eventually turns into an unconventional romance. The color scheme places an emphasis on red and green and the world seems surreal. The setting is Paris, but this isn't the Paris that I know from my visits.

Audrey Tautou is an incredible actress. She can convey a lot of emotion without saying a word. Her face is one of the most expressive that I have seen. If you have only seen her in The Da Vinci Code, Amelie is a great chance to see her act in her native language.

I know people who would avoid seeing Amelie because it's in French and it's a romance. That would be a mistake. The movie is a pure delight and has a unique style. It won't appeal to everyone, but those who like it will really love it.

If you like Amelie:

If Audrey Tautou is the reason you like the movie, A Very Long Engagement is probably the next one to check out. It's a more serious story, but Tautou is again the leading character and Jeunet's signature humor and style is present throughout. It might even be a better film than Amelie.

If you enjoy the unusual presentation and Jeunet's humor, all of his other films are worth seeing. I would certainly suggest Delicatessen and Micmacs at the very least.


7. American Beauty (1999)
Drama, 122 minutes
Directed by Sam Mendes
Starring Kevin Spacey, Annette Bening and Thora Birch



Although I am not ranking the films on this list, American Beauty is my favorite of those mentioned so far. It's an excellent example of the dysfunctional family. In fact, the Burnhams are more messed up than the Simpsons.

The film wouldn't work without Kevin Spacey. We have come to know him for outspoken characters who are often villains, but it's hard not to root for Lester Burnham. He decides one day that his life is a sham and that he should do something about it. The film is rooted in dark humor and the scene in which he quits his job is a fine example. He's also sick of his wife Carolyn (Bening) and makes his thoughts known at the dinner table. All he really wants to do is work out in an attempt to attract one of his daughter's friends from school.

The Burnhams are not the only dysfunctional family in the neighborhood. Ricky Fitts lives next door and has to deal with a strict father. He likes Jane Burnham (Birch) and finds her a lot more interesting than her more popular friend. He's dealing drugs and is obsessed with photography.

The beauty mentioned in the title has more than one meaning. To Lester Burnham, it's a young girl. To Ricky Fitts, it's Jane's personality and the way a paper bag moves in the wind. Carolyn Burnham values possessions and people's opinion above everything else. Jane's friend measures her success by how popular she is in school and how many people find her attractive.

I like American Beauty for the story, the acting, and the dark humor. It won't appeal to everyone because it could be viewed as a depressing picture of the world and American society in general.

If you like American Beauty:

It's difficult to recommend similar films to American Beauty because there's nothing that quite fits. It really depends on why you liked the film.

If you're a fan of Kevin Spacey, you might enjoy his performances in Se7en or The Usual Suspects. Even his recent role in Horrible Bosses reminds me a little of Lester Burnham.

If the film appeals because of the dark humor, it's worth taking a look at movies such as Fargo, In Bruges, or anything directed by Quentin Tarantino.

If the appeal lies in the portrayal of the dysfunctional family, try Revolutionary Road (also directed by Mendes) or, for something slightly less dark, Little Miss Sunshine.

There's a full review in this thread or on my blog.


8. As Good as It Gets (1997)
Comedy, Drama, Romance, 139 minutes
Directed by James L. Brooks
Starring Jack Nicholson, Helen Hunt and Greg Kinnear



As Good as It Gets blends drama, comedy and romance so well that it's hard to decide which category the movie falls into. Nominated for seven Oscars, Jack Nicholson and Helen Hunt took home the leading actor honors. It was a competitive year with Titanic, L.A. Confidential and Good Will Hunting also in the running.

It's hard to choose Nicholson's top performance with so many candidates choose from, but this has to rank among his best and he thoroughly deserved his third Oscar win. Nicholson plays author Melvin Udall. He lives alone and seems to hate most of the world around him. One of his least favorite people is his homosexual neighbor, Simon (Kinnear). In contrast, one of his favorite people is Carol (Hunt). From Melvin's point of view she's the only competent waitress at his local diner.

As the story unfolds, we learn more about these three people. Melvin has OCD and we see him avoiding cracks in the pavement. He's severely messed up in a number of other ways too. Carol puts on a brave face at work, but she has to deal with her sick son on a daily basis and it's a heavy burden. Simon is an artist and seems to be intimidated by Melvin's attitude toward him.

Nicholson is such a good actor and has incredible range. Think back to One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest for an example of how he can inject comedy into serious drama. I think his ability to make people laugh is often overlooked. As Melvin, he highlights that ability. Melvin isn't a very nice human being, but Nicholson actually makes us root for him. Carol is a positive influence and is the main reason he tries to change. Melvin does care about people, but it's buried beneath the surface.

Nicholson makes us believe that a 60-year-old man with psychological problems is capable of attracting a woman in her early 30s. Kinnear plays Simon just about perfectly and was nominated for the performance. He also shows plenty of comedic ability and times everything well. The interplay between the three characters is fascinating and comes to a head when they take a trip together.

The film contains some of the best dialogue I have heard. Some scenes will bring you close to tears while others will make you laugh. It's a shame that Nicholson and Hunt weren't given more opportunities to make films such as this.

If you like As Good as It Gets:

I mentioned that it's hard to categorize the film and that also makes it difficult to identify similar movies. Perhaps the closest in feel is Pay It Forward, starring Helen Hunt and Kevin Spacey, although it is more inspirational than funny. About Schmidt and The Bucket List are good examples of Nicholson playing cynical characters and making us laugh.


9. Avatar (2009)
Science Fiction, Action, 178 minutes (extended version)
Directed by James Cameron
Starring Sam Worthington, Zoe Saldana and Sigourney Weaver



Here's a title that may leave you questioning my taste. I can see a lot of flaws in the movie, but the overall experience is one that I enjoy. One common objection is that the story steals too much from other movies. While that's true, it doesn't mean that the end result isn't worthy of your time.

James Cameron knows how to make movies with mass appeal. The story is predictable for the most part. A group of humans establish a base on an alien moon and set up a mining operation. The natives are considered primitive and nothing more than a minor inconvenience. In order to blend in better, some of the scientists have created simulated versions of the giant aliens which can be controlled by humans. Jake Sully (Worthington) occupies one such avatar. Sully's direct approach is more successful than that of the trained scientists and he undergoes training by the native population.

Avatar works for me because of the sheer beauty of the world. The training sequences are the most interesting part of the movie and account for the first half of the running time. After that, the story becomes extremely predictable and ends up as a typical Hollywood battle sequence. This would normally bore me, but the first half does a great job of making me care about the characters and I'm actually concerned about the outcome.

For the first time in movie history, I feel like I am visiting another world. It's such a convincing design. Every friend I have shown the movie too has liked it, and some rank it among their all time favorites.

I would strongly recommend the extended version if you are a fan of the movie. It ties up a couple of loose ends, including the fate of an important character. The Blu-ray presentation is arguably the best of any film released on the format.

If you like Avatar:

There are probably hundreds of movies with similarities to Avatar. One that also does a good job of showing us an unfamiliar world is The Abyss. It's another James Cameron movie with a heavy science fiction element and the acting is a lot better than that seen in Avatar. The Matrix is another movie featuring people inhabiting other bodies and it also contains a strong science fiction and action element. For fans of Avatar, two other movies are planned over the next three years.

My full review of Avatar is in this thread or on my blog.


10. Babel (2006)
Drama, 143 minutes
Directed by Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu
Starring Brad Pitt, Cate Blanchett and Rinko Kikuchi



Nominated for seven Oscars and winning for best score, Babel is a sprawling tale of how a gun links four separate groups of people. Pitt and Blanchett are the focus of one of the stories, but the other three are probably more compelling.

The film will take you to Morocco, the US, Mexico and Japan. It deals with themes such as love, loneliness, adolescence, the law, and kindness. It amazes me how people who have almost nothing will still give you something.

The appeal of Babel for me is the way in which Inarritu weaves the complex threads together to create a believable and enthralling story. Many of the actors were unknown to me, but I wasn't disappointed with any of the performances. It's hard to watch this film and not be moved emotionally by at least one of the stories; I was moved by all four.

If you like Babel:

Inarritu likes to take seemingly random story threads and weave them together. Another example is 21 Grams, starring Naomi Watts, Sean Penn and Benicio Del Toro. His films are not easy to watch, but if you are patient and can handle sorrow, the payoff can be rewarding.

Paul Thomas Anderson's Magnolia is another intricate story consisting of many threads and that's also worth your time. Perhaps one of the most obscure using the same technique is Mother and Child. Inarritu was an Executive Producer and I noticed hints of his style throughout the film.

[surfdude12]

Originally Posted by Steve46

100 movies you should see before you die

Have you ever read a list like this before?

yes

Doesn't it seem a little arrogant to believe that if you like something it should be seen by everyone?

that depends on the person reading the Title of the list, not the list itself. i don't think its arrogant.

Think about it logically for a moment. Movies appeal to different people for different reasons. If you detest musicals, do you really want to watch The Sound of Music or The Wizard of Oz? If you don't like violence, will you enjoy Casino or Goodfellas? If you can't bear to watch a subtitled film, will you subject yourself to Das Boot or The Bicycle Thief?

or maybe it'll make the person ask: "why do I detest ___ types of films"?

personally, I don't think films should be categorized. case in point: I hate comedies which show excessive nudity or use crude sex humor and find it disgusting and not funny. I loathe it more than anything. but I then find the nude orgy party in Eyes Wide Shut fascinating. Thus, I clearly don't hate all films with explicit nudity/sex Context is key, and context can make categorization meaningless, since films within the same "category" may have much different context for why they have certain material in the film.

It's not much fun knowing that you wasted two hours of someone's life. It doesn't matter how well you think you know a person, one tiny little scene can ruin the movie for them.

yeah, but that's no more under your control than whether it rains tomorrow. i wouldn't feel bad for one second if someone told me "that movie sucked. i wasted hours watching it."

With all that in mind, it's clearly impossible to make a sweeping statement such as, "Here are 100 movies you must see before you die." That list differs depending on your audience.

thank god! otherwise we'd all be cloned robots!

How do you even judge which 100 should be on your list? Should you include movies that introduced ideas or techniques which changed the way movies were made? What about just listing your 100 favorites? Could you even determine your 100 favorites, or would your list have changed by the time you finished compiling it?

all of the above. and none of the above. and that is the beauty of it.

just go with it. forget what people think.

What is the purpose of such a list anyway? Are you trying to show people that you have a vast amount of film knowledge? Or are you brave enough to list personal favorites that you know will be ridiculed by some of your audience?

Is the list for you, or is it for your audience?

that depends on the lister and the reader of the list.

2 different listers could have 2 different lists: A and B.

2 different readers of lists could have 2 different interpretations of lists: C and D.

Thus, readers C and D could interpret 4 different lists:

-AC: list A as interpreted by C
-BC: list B as interpreted by C
-AD: list A as interpreted by D
-BD: list B as interpreted by D

Thus, 2 lists can quickly become 4 lists, based on the listers AND the interpretations of the readers of the lists! It all gets very subjective very quickly!

suggest other titles you may like if you like one of the 100 on my list. So, for each movie, I will include suggestions for similar films.

good method. I already know I'll check out most of your list, since your favorite film is my #2 favorite film (Mulholland Drive). That's pretty darn close to pay close attention to whatever you recommend.

if you don't like 50 of the films on my list, there's very little point in investigating suggestions related to those particular titles.

or they may start to watch the related titles, love them, and then ask themselves "maybe I need to revisit the 50 I didn't like - maybe I HAVE CHANGED and I will like them now."

I don't believe we rate movies as they are. I believe we rate movies as we are. That is why T2 was my favorite film at age 15, yet is my #80 film now. If I was truly rating THE FILM ITSELF, T2 would have remained my favorite film forever. But it didn't.

[Steve46]

Originally Posted by surfdude12

yes



that depends on the person reading the Title of the list, not the list itself. i don't think its arrogant.



or maybe it'll make the person ask: "why do I detest ___ types of films"?

personally, I don't think films should be categorized. case in point: I hate comedies which show excessive nudity or use crude sex humor and find it disgusting and not funny. I loathe it more than anything. but I then find the nude orgy party in Eyes Wide Shut fascinating. Thus, I clearly don't hate all films with explicit nudity/sex Context is key, and context can make categorization meaningless, since films within the same "category" may have much different context for why they have certain material in the film.



yeah, but that's no more under your control than whether it rains tomorrow. i wouldn't feel bad for one second if someone told me "that movie sucked. i wasted hours watching it."



thank god! otherwise we'd all be cloned robots!



all of the above. and none of the above. and that is the beauty of it.

just go with it. forget what people think.



that depends on the lister and the reader of the list.

2 different listers could have 2 different lists: A and B.

2 different readers of lists could have 2 different interpretations of lists: C and D.

Thus, readers C and D could interpret 4 different lists:

-AC: list A as interpreted by C
-BC: list B as interpreted by C
-AD: list A as interpreted by D
-BD: list B as interpreted by D

Thus, 2 lists can quickly become 4 lists, based on the listers AND the interpretations of the readers of the lists! It all gets very subjective very quickly!



good method. I already know I'll check out most of your list, since your favorite film is my #2 favorite film (Mulholland Drive). That's pretty darn close to pay close attention to whatever you recommend.




or they may start to watch the related titles, love them, and then ask themselves "maybe I need to revisit the 50 I didn't like - maybe I HAVE CHANGED and I will like them now."

I don't believe we rate movies as they are. I believe we rate movies as we are. That is why T2 was my favorite film at age 15, yet is my #80 film now. If I was truly rating THE FILM ITSELF, T2 would have remained my favorite film forever. But it didn't.

Wow, when I wrote that I never expected anyone to answer the questions. I didn't expect many people to even read it

Great points. I like the part about context.

I hate nudity in dumb comedies too, but it works in Mulholland Dr., The Reader, The Double Life of Veronique, Eyes Wide Shut etc.

[Al_The_Strange]

Originally Posted by Steve46

Hayao Miyazaki is 71 today. Let's all watch Totoro or Spirited Away

Sorry Steve, I'm a bit late to the party, and very late in providing reviews.

So, last Friday, I watched "Grave of the Fireflies."

Err...I thought Miyazaki was involved in this film's production, but I'm not seeing his name in the credits. But it is a Studio Ghibili film. So there.

This is one of the few anime films out there that's not based heavily on style, action, or even artwork. It's a bit of a slow-moving war drama. Its focus is not on any kind of fighting, but rather on the suffering of the civilians, and the suffering of the two children whose parents were murdered in the war. As such, it is a grim, dreary, and depressing piece of work. Parts of it even angered me, for I saw Setsuko as being selfish, arrogant, careless, and irresponsible. Of course, one can't hold a grudge against them, because they're just kids and they didn't know any better. But if the damn kid just apologized to his aunt, he could have saved a lot of pain.

As such, the story is pretty strong. It's definitely emotional and invoking. There isn't much conflict or structure to the story, but with its focus on the characters, it manages to keep my interest. The film is probably most notable for showcasing the victims of war. These themes of suffering are underscored even more with some of the cuter scenes where the children try to just be children.

As a film, it gets the job done, but the animation quality is a bit dated and and a bit lacking in details, textures, or movements. But for a film as simplistic as this, the simple style does an adequate job of bringing the story to life. It's just not as visually stunning as most other Studio Ghibili films (much less anime films in general). Voice-acting on the English side is pretty damn cheesy. The production designs look decent. Music is nice.

4/5 (entertainment: 3.5/5, story: 5/5, film: 3.5/5)

Recommendation: Yes, this might even be one of those movies that everybody should experience at least once in a lifetime.

If they Blu-Ray it, I would probably buy it.

If this was a song, it'd be

[Show spoiler]something sad. This song (from some other anime show, albiet one of my favorites) kinda does it for me.

Noir - Secret Game - YouTube

[Steve46]

Originally Posted by Al_The_Strange

Sorry Steve, I'm a bit late to the party, and very late in providing reviews.

So, last Friday, I watched "Grave of the Fireflies."

Err...I thought Miyazaki was involved in this film's production, but I'm not seeing his name in the credits. But it is a Studio Ghibili film. So there.

This is one of the few anime films out there that's not based heavily on style, action, or even artwork. It's a bit of a slow-moving war drama. Its focus is not on any kind of fighting, but rather on the suffering of the civilians, and the suffering of the two children whose parents were murdered in the war. As such, it is a grim, dreary, and depressing piece of work. Parts of it even angered me, for I saw Setsuko as being selfish, arrogant, careless, and irresponsible. Of course, one can't hold a grudge against them, because they're just kids and they didn't know any better. But if the damn kid just apologized to his aunt, he could have saved a lot of pain.

As such, the story is pretty strong. It's definitely emotional and invoking. There isn't much conflict or structure to the story, but with its focus on the characters, it manages to keep my interest. The film is probably most notable for showcasing the victims of war. These themes of suffering are underscored even more with some of the cuter scenes where the children try to just be children.

As a film, it gets the job done, but the animation quality is a bit dated and and a bit lacking in details, textures, or movements. But for a film as simplistic as this, the simple style does an adequate job of bringing the story to life. It's just not as visually stunning as most other Studio Ghibili films (much less anime films in general). Voice-acting on the English side is pretty damn cheesy. The production designs look decent. Music is nice.

4/5 (entertainment: 3.5/5, story: 5/5, film: 3.5/5)

Recommendation: Yes, this might even be one of those movies that everybody should experience at least once in a lifetime.

If they Blu-Ray it, I would probably buy it.

If this was a song, it'd be

[Show spoiler]something sad. This song (from some other anime show, albiet one of my favorites) kinda does it for me.

Noir - Secret Game - YouTube

I love Grave of the Fireflies for some reason. I don't find Setsuko annoying at all. She's pretty happy for a 4-year-old for the most part. I was separated from my sister when she was 3 and we didn't reconnect for about 25 years, so maybe that's part of the reason I find little girls so adorable sometimes.

I'm usually sobbing after three minutes when

[Show spoiler]he dies and his sister's spirit is there to meet him and both are finally happy

.

[Al_The_Strange]

Continued the Ghibli/Miyazaki marathon with:

"Princess Mononoke."

...and yeah, one of the jillions of movies that "Avatar" ripped off...

[Show spoiler]So freaking what?!!

Seriously though, this film could probably be considered the "Ferngully" of the east. It's got a pretty heavy slant toward environmentalism. Thankfully, it's never an in-your-face message, but rather an important dynamic of the story. And even more thankfully, it never impacts the momentum of the film; there is plenty of action to be found in "Mononoke," as people fight a literal war against the forces of nature, and the hero rides in (on a badass elk nonetheless) to save the day! As the body count rises, the movie tends to get quite bloody and violent (although never more than a PG-13 level). Toward the end of the movie, all heck breaks loose in a rather intense climax.

The story is pretty sound, and very much full of adventure and spirit. It bears some semblance to "Nausicaa," but without the intensity or sci-fi elements. "Mononoke" has a likable cast of characters (even the villains are semi-likable...but maybe that's just me ). It's especially gripping (if not a little frustrating) to watch the main hero take so much damage in modesty to preserve peace and balance. And with the strong themes of the environment, the film is pretty satisfying overall.

The movie has decent animation style and quality. Textures and renderings look good, and most movements are decent. Voice-acting is not bad on the English side. Production designs are brilliant. Music is nice.

4/5 (entertainment: 4/5, story: 4/5, film: 4/5)

Recommendation: Sure, why not?

If they Blu-Ray it, I would buy it.

As a song, it'd be

[Show spoiler]something slightly thrilling, but with a certain traditional Asian flair. I'm thinking about this electronica song with lots of Asian drums.

Photek - Ni ten ichi ryu - YouTube