Lastly, I've seen 2 powerful, smartly disturbing movies (by the interesting questions they raise) and artistically Well done:

- Dogville
- Elephant (based on the dramatic Columbine High school massacre)

Has anyone seen one these ?

Haven't seen or heard of either of them, but speaking of the Columbine topic, have you seen Bowling for Columbine? Great movie/documentary. Very insightful, I thought.

Yes Indeed, But in "Bowling for columbine" M. Moore made an effective demonstration to present his point, his explanation of this tragic event.

The process of dealing with the topic is completely different.

In "Elephant" (dir: Gus van Sant, he also made "Will Hunting"), this movie is not a documentary, it doesn't give you any explanation. It's just giving you a series of various elements, from the beginning till the end when the shooting start. So it lets you make your own judgment.
The pace of the movie, the music, the way this movie is filmed and sequenced give you a sense of the menace floating.
very original artistically.

"Dogville" is from the director Lars Von Trier with Nicole Kidman playing very well in it.

Well, aren't I just living in a cultural sewer because the last films I saw were Alien (Director's Cut), Kill Bill and Matrix Revolutions, and I slept through part of Cidade de Deus! Have I no shame?

Anyone seen 'Hero' or 'De Zaak Alzheimer'? I'm thinking of taking my nonagenarian gran-in-law to the cinema this weekendand these two are on the possibles list.

Yo Dumblond, is it worth going to see the last Tarantino "Kill Bill" ?
Some told me "2 thumbs down" for this movie.

<img src="../images/emoticons/bbutbut.gif">

Didgy, I thought Kill Bill was entertaining enough, but not great, definitely not on the level of Reservoir Dogs or Pulp Fiction. But if you're a fan of Japanese samourai films, then you'll love it.

Yep, I've seent it. not too bad, good action movie.

What about Messrs Neo, Morpheus et al - what's the verdict on Revolutions??

I feel embarrassed admitting this, but I have not seen any of the Matrix movies!

I am hanging out for Lord of the Rings: Return of the King, though! Only a couple more weeks to go!!

I've seen the 3 Matrix Movies...The best one, for me, remains the 1st.

The Matrix Reloaded was perhaps the most pointless piece of nonsense I've seen in the last five years, much as I thought the first film had its merits in terms of dorky cod-philosophy and high-camp stylism.

Is Matrix Revolutions less of a video game and more of a film? Does Hugo Weaving get a few more dastardly lines like in the first film? Does the camera stay put just for a few seconds, or is it still spinning and tilting like a pollen grain in a physics class?

I'm wondering whether Revolutions is worth a sleepy interruption to the commute.

"Revolutions" is slightly better than "Reloaded", but definitely still falls in the category of pointless piece of nonsense. My advice: don't bother.

... think I'll give Revolutions a miss then.

Saw 'Dogville' last night - I agree didgy, an excellent film for those who enjoy highbrow cinema (this and probably Lilja4Ever being my favourites of this year). From all I'd read I'd imagined it would be more experimental: it was all pretty straightforward, well-acted storytelling. I look forward to the 'S' and 'A' parts of the trilogy.

I just watched "Ken Park", but I can't for the life of me figure out why on earth this film was made. For shock value only?

I agree. Ken Park was basically an exercise in bored voyeurism - that asphyxiation masturbation scene being just the start of its faults. Don't say i didn't warn you about its overall crapness!

You did, Belgophile, and I should have listened to you!

The Movie “21 Grams” by the Mexican director Alejandro González Iñárritu

One of the best movie I’ve seen in months.

I was surprised that none of the actors playing in this movie didn’t get any rewards, at the British Academy Film Awards, for their outstanding performance.
Ok “Lost in Translation” wasn’t bad at all, but frankly I wouldn’t put it at the same degree of performance.

Thx for the rec - didgy (I'd asked about the film on the 'let's play a game' thread but got a pun worse than 'That Lovin' Spoonful' as a reply). Will see it this weekend.

Have you seen Amores Perros?

Why, is he in it as wwell?

Haven’t seen “Amores perros” yet …”Amours Chiennes” in French…., will try to rent the DVD if I can find it ! Heard excellent critics on this one too, with same kinds of Movie Construction, non linear fashion in chronology, flash showing different characters in different states of mind or situation, etc…similar to some Tarentino’s movies, reminds me also “Memento”, have you seen this one ?

"Amores Perros" is a raw, fascinating and intensely personal film, nothing to compare with the overrated, more commercial "Memento".

DB-
I rather found “Memento” very innovative, original & experimental in the way & method of proceeding.
I was referring to the type of movie construction sketchy, fragmented, bits of sequences out of chronology order. The analogy stop there !

PS: Au fait, Tu parles français couramment je crois ?

Effectivement, je suis française (en partie), mais comme l'habitude de la maison est de communiquer en anglais, je ne ferai pas d'exception pour toi ;-)

FYI, I agree that Memento's backwards-constructed storyline was original, but the acting was terrible and the story ridiculously unbelieveable.

Backwards constructed storyline original? Ok, haven't seen this film, but it's not the first film to start with the ending - Irreversible is a fairly recent example.

"Mulholland Drive" is also not in chronological order... but I didn't figure that out until halfway through the film (duh!). I'm not a big David Lynch fan, anyway (with the exception of "Blue Velvet").

Rewind narrative is common and perennially trendy (especially in novels). But it's usually confusing like in 'Finnegan's Wake' or just gimmicky like in Wayne's World or the recent Dylan Thomas documentary 'From Grave to Cradle'. I loved Memento because it was a decent thriller that was (relatively) easy to follow - I thought the acting was passable (Guy Pearce began with the handicap of a role in 'Neighbours', remember).

Martin Amis did backwards storytelling extremely well in 'Time's Arrow'.

BTW, reviewing this thread, I asked about 'Hero' before. I saw this last week and highly recommend it (provided you see it on the big screen). It's a tear-jerking martial arts epic reminiscent of Crouching Dragon Hidden Tiger, only with decent performances and LOTR-style digitised effects in the battlescenes. It's also built around flashbacks and multipe narratives.

DB, it's funny you mention Blue Velvet after I mentioned Irreversible, cause they were they only two films that I ever saw which made me feel physically sick afterwards. Belgo - Wayne's World, party on, excellent! It's true that in novels, this reverse chronology is not new. Ie - Milan Kundera. I have an essay of his right in front of me (The Art of the Novel) which I haven't read for years but I seem to remember that he tried to explain that his technique of telling the ending at the beginning added weight to whole story. (Classic example - Unbearable Lightness of Being). Sorry Belgo, a Beavis and Butthead explantion, but the best I can manage at the moment.

Anyone catch the Dunkirk series last week on the Beeb? Thank goodness I missed that in real!

mrs belgo often feels ill at the films
- the blue velvet ear, ken park's kournikova scene, the rules of attraction suicide, the amputation in requiem for a dream, the sedan-trunk stabbing in goodfellas... no way am I going to take her to see Irreversible!

The only film that made me feel sick was a cinema vérité fly-on-the-wall pic called 'Henry, portrait of a serial killer'. Perhaps the most scary film I've seen -- half the audience walked out.

I notice that many of my female friends and relatives can't stomach violent films at all, to the point of having to cover their eyes or leave the theatre. I don't have a problem with it, as long as it's necessary to the plot and/or artistic (Natural Born Killers, C'st Arrivé Près de Chez Vous, Reservoir Dogs...).

I’ve just seen “Pollock” this WE.
Ed Harris is terrific in this role, as the director too. He completely embodied (psychologically, emotionnaly, artistically,..) this “revolutionary” ? and contronversial American artist.
Apparently, he started to immerse himself and work this character years in advance.
His performance, probably his best one, confirms it.

Quote:

I notice that many of my female friends and relatives can't stomach violent films at all, to the point of having to cover their eyes or leave the theatre. I don't have a problem with it, as long as it's necessary to the plot and/or artistic (Natural Born Killers, C'st Arrivé Près de Chez Vous, Reservoir Dogs...).

************************************

How about Irreversible DB?

I definitely had a problem with it - watched it on DVD and had to fast forward the 2 bad bits as I physically couldn't/didn't want to watch.

Pulp Fiction is the best example I can think of rewind narrative -

Haven’t seen the ultra-violent « Irreversible » movie, …there’s Albert Dupontel in it I think.
Dumblond , half-compatriot !
;-)
have you seen he delirious & corrosive « Bernie » also with (and from) Albert Dupontel ? (French production)

Belgo, did you really mean the Blue Velvet ear scene, or the Reservois Dog's one? Cause the first didn't bother me at all but the second I really still cant watch- and believe me, I'm no wimp (Still haven't seen Henry etc). Having said that, Brewer, I also watched Irreverisible on DVD, and I had to pause the film to take a coffee and recomposed myself after the first 15 minutes (not even the worst part). Still not sure if I think It was a great work of art or simply shocking for the sake of it. I guess it's a modern day equivalent of Straw Dogs, which I also still haven't seen.

Nope, haven't seen Irreversible. Should I?

Quote:

I notice that many of my female friends and relatives can't stomach violent films at all, to the point of having to cover their eyes or leave the theatre. I don't have a problem with it, as long as it's necessary to the plot and/or artistic (Natural Born Killers, C'st Arrivé Près de Chez Vous, Reservoir Dogs...).

************************************

I walked out halfway through Reservoir Dogs (I'm sure you can guess which scene <img src="../images/emoticons/ytongue.gif"> ). I have very little stomach for graphic violence, and I'm not too keen on being scared half to death either. I'm such a wimp...

I have a difficult time equating graphic, stomach-turning violence with art. Once that image is in my brain, it's hard to get rid of it. No, thanks. It's bad enough to listen to the news sometimes.

I'm no fan of slasherfilm violence unless its directed against zombies, aliens and orcs -- the brooding, suggested menace of state-sponsored violence is what gets me scared (in 'Garage Olimpo' or... a scary 70s Spanish short film... 'La Cabina').

oblo - mrs. belgo hated the rotting ear in the field in Blue Velvet and of course that Reservoir Dogs ear scene too, ditto that photo with the mouse with a human ear and the severed ears with the knife from Bosch's sidepanel 'Hell'. What did ears do to deserve such abuse?

Dunno Belgo, but out of boredom I was looking through a book of quotations on the subject of ears, and there's an awful lot of entries. Beats me. Not a part of my body that I give much attention to.

Quote:

I have a difficult time equating graphic, stomach-turning violence with art. Once that image is in my brain, it's hard to get rid of it. No, thanks. It's bad enough to listen to the news sometimes.

************************************

I agree Raquel. Sweet, feel-good Bolly movies suit me best !! But I have decided I will watch 'The Passion of Christ' in spite of all the violence.

And I've decided I won't watch it. I've OD'd on all the press it's gotten--way overdone.

I've basically ignored the press hype about it, but heaps of people are talking about it. I'm not sure why exactly - is it because of just the media thing, or is it one of those films that really shakes things up? I am interested in the subject matter but haven't decided whether or not to see it yet.

I saw "21 Grams" this weekend. The acting was great, particularly Naomi Watts, but I really didn't enjoy the film due to the subject matter. I question the entertainment value of being made to contemplate death, dying and the futility/worthlessness of my life. It's just plan depressing. Similarly, after I saw "The Hours", I felt like putting rocks in my dress pockets and drowning myself in a lake, too!

I missed 21 Grams and went to 'Cold Mountain' by accident -- they'd published the wrong times in the newspaper. Far from what I was expecting it to be (that is, Hollywood pants - a slushy tearjerker for Jude Law-fantasising spinsters) it was an engaging film with strong scenes.

I finally saw 21 Grams last night - a strong film, but it doesn't really compare to the burst of energy that was 'Amores Perros'. I didn't find the subject matter too morbid, but the pacing was slow: a plod through wasted lives, regret, revenge, mortality. The filmschool editing - all those flashbacks, shouldercam shots and the visual stitching (character drinks glass, another character picks up glass) - also got on my nerves.

Still, definitely worth seeing.

Just seen "Flatliners" (from Joel Shumacher) on cable yesterday nite. movie on near death experiences... released in 1990, quite well constructed, good pace, plot & suspens.