I didn't know John Cassavetes' son was a director! Or anything in the business. I think I wasn't even aware he had a son, come to think of it.

I like John's 60's work, particularly "The Killers" and "The Dirty Dozen". He was one sexy guy back then.

Yeah, as a tear jerkers'lover (:p), I heard about that movie but still have to watch it (probably because for some mysterious reasons it was not successful here in Italy)....I definitely will watch it sooner or later, especially after your review, SC!

I've not seen The Notebook, but I am delighted to see this thread churning with discussion again. References left, right and centre, critiques, feedback, general chit-chat.

Even Irishman's back reviewing films, which I am very pleased to see.

I've got a general feel for the type of movies you like, Lavinia, (from your posts here) and I think you'll need a box of tissues near you when you watch this one.

Great! I know it may sound slightly sick, but
the more I cry while watching a movie the more I like it! Am I curable?

Probably not.... you're a hopeless romantic.

(Don't change).

Three films today; two shorts, one feature, all for the first time and all on the big screen. The first two explore dreams and the personality filtered through them - one on dream logic, the other dream content. The feature, seen last, was my fifth Fellini film.

Meshes of the Afternoon
Maya Deren / Alexander Hammid 1943 US 1st time; big screen
A woman dreams of being murdered by herself; she wakes up and is killed again.
One of the most genuinely unsettling films ever made, in the feelings its askew cinematography conjures and the lingering tone left by Teiji Ito's score (added 1952). The entire thing is edited and shot so as to constrict the audience in every way possible. It'll probably give you nightmares - its imagery and general style of narrative is echoed by Lynch in Mulholland Dr.

Gently Down the Stream
Su Friedrich 1981 US 1st time; big screen
Fourteen dreams from a filmmaker's personal journal are scratched in text onto film, coinciding with images of a woman swimming.
Disturbing not in content but in the frankness with which its intimacy is achieved, this experimental short looks a lot like the kind of thing Greenaway likes to do - overlaying images and text so as to create a rich visual pattern; less about the logic of dreams and more to do with the actual content, it is daringly personal stuff; and entirely silent, which makes it often uncomfortable to watch.

La strada The Road
Federico Fellini 1954 Italy 1st time; big screen
A simpleton is hired and exploited by a brute as he travels from town to town and circus to circus, and falls for him.
A film all about humanity's need for love and companionship, without really knowing it; it is a decidedly downtrodden affair lifted throughout by Masina's portrayal of the woman taken for granted and led astray by whomever she might meet. It would be an annoying, rather obvious performance if it wasn't so fiercely controlled, and the circus scenes fetch up all kinds of similarities to Chaplin. Speaking of whom, its downfall is probably its undying need to gain its audience's love, flattering them with a sugary ebb and flow of emotions, and it isn't all that great to look at. Still of great interest, however, with lots of ambiguity and interesting scenes and characters - the Fool is one for discussion more than anybody.

Scoop ** 1/2
(First Viewing)

A student journalist, for a college paper, visiting friends in contemporary London happens upon the scoop of a lifetime. Along the investigative trail, she finds magic, murder, mystery - and perhaps love, with a British aristocrat.

This wasn't as good as Allen and Johansson's last effort Match Point (which is my favorite Woody Allen movie). Neither of them shined as much the 2nd time around but it was a good break to see Hugh Jackman in something other than an X-Man film. Not that I have anything against Wolverine but it's just a nice change to see him expand his range as an actor. What I enjoyed most from this film were the scenes on the boat with the Grim Reaper. I haven't really seen too many scenes like that from the afterworld and again it was a nice change for me.

Borat: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan (2006

Man On Fire *** 1/2
(Nth Viewing)

In Mexico City, the former CIA assassin and presently an alcoholic decadent man John Creasy (Denzel Washington) is hired by the industrialist Samuel Ramos (Marc Anthony), with the recommendation of his old friend Rayburn (Christopher Walken), to be the bodyguard of his young daughter Pita (Dakota Fanning) and his wife Lisa (Radha Mitchell). Pita changes the behavior of the cold Creasy, making him live and smile again, and he feels a great affection for her. When the girl is kidnapped Creasy swears to kill each one responsible for the abduction.

Just gearing up for Deja Vu later on this week and thought I'd brush up on my Tony Scott a little. It's well documented here my thoughts and feelings about Tony Scott and this particular movie. My second favorite Tony Scott film behind only True Romance. This was Denzel's best performance since either Training Day or Philadelphia. However, Denzel had some competition for scene stealer and that was in 10-year-old Dakota Fanning who seemed to be well beyond her years in this film. Congrats to the both of them and Mr. Scott who put together a fantastic show.

Sad thing is, I do hear that DEJA VU's surprise ending is like a retarded characture of JACOB'S LADDER. Like I care. I'll get pissed when Tony Scott finally gets around to directing that sure-to-suck THE WARRIORS remake.

Casino Royale ** 1/2
(First Viewing)

Casino Royale introduces James Bond before he holds his license to kill. But Bond is no less dangerous, and with two professional assassinations in quick succession, he is elevated to '00' status. Bond's first 007 mission takes him to Madagascar where he is to spy on a terrorist, Mollaka. Not everything goes to plan and Bond decides to investigate, independently of MI6, in order to track down the rest of the terrorist cell. Following a lead to the Bahamas, he encounters Dimitrios and his girlfriend, Solange. He learns that Dimitrios is involved with Le Chiffre, banker to the world's terrorist organizations. Secret Service intelligence reveals that Le Chiffre is planning to raise money in a high-stakes poker game in Montenegro at Le Casino Royale. MI6 assigns 007 to play against him, knowing that if Le Chiffre loses, it will destroy his organization. 'M' places Bond under the watchful eye of the beguiling Vesper Lynd. At first skeptical of what value Vesper can provide, Bond's interest in her deepens as they brave danger together and even torture at the hands of Le Chiffre. In Montenegro, Bond allies himself with Mathis MI6's local field agent, and Felix Leiter who is representing the interests of the CIA. The marathon game proceeds with dirty tricks and violence, raising the stakes beyond blood money and reaching a terrifying climax.

I can sum up this Bond film in two words: pretty disappointing. I dug Daniel Craig as the cold-hearted pr*ck James Bond and still don't see why so many people were on his a$$ from the start of this project. However, my biggest beef with the movie was it's length. I thought the movie was gonna end about 5 times before it finally did. I liked the note it left on but felt some things should have been cut (it felt like 2 1/2 hours). As for the other characters, Eva Green and Mads Mikkelsen were good but nothing spectacular. Maybe I'll warm up to this with a second viewing but as of now, I kind of have a sour taste in my mouth (mind you, this is only the third James Bond film I've seen in theaters, with the last one being Tomorrow Never Dies). GoldenEye was the first for those wishing to know.

Very interesting critique, there, Irishman. My flatmates saw it last night, and loved it (I had to do an essay), and I must be honest, I'm looking forward to it. Eva Green is absolutely gorgeous, and I've heard it's a lot more gritty, which was my biggest problem with Die Another Day, which I'd rank as one of the worst Bond films.

Yesterday I saw two films on the big screen, one for the second time, which I found rather pointless, another was a masterpiece:

Shrek 2
Andrew Adamson / Kelly Asbury / Conrad Vernon 2004 US 2nd time; big screen
The ogre must race against time in order to retain his new wife, whose parents are plotting against him.
So drenched in references to pop culture, and so reliant on audience awareness of such references, in ten years time this film might have fallen into complete obscurity; different actors play the same minor characters depending on which country it was distributed in, and it is so determined to be hip and of its time that it will soon be outdated. There are a few good visual gags here and there, most of them involving minor characters, but the humour is often forced and simply not funny; it doesn't even look all that astonishing.

Les enfants du paradis Children of Paradise
Marcel Carné 1945 France 1st time; big screen
The Boulevard of Crime, 19th Century Paris: the lives of a stage actor, a mime, a whore, a thief, a nobleman and an actress intertwine, and cross again seven years later.
Spellbinding for those who adore multi-layered scripts and visual frames packed with action and movement; it is entrenched in period detail so as to be seamless, and so riveting in its characters and exploration of acting and the entire notion of acting, that it belies its three-hours running time. Told in two parts; the first an interesting, extended means of expositing its characters, the second, set years later, bringing them back together again for a bitter explosion of love, regret and deep sorrow.

I'll look forward to reading what you had to say about it upon viewing it

Poor Irish and his tush. Tsk Tsk Tsk.

BTW, for such a LOTR fan, I'm surprised you could stand ROTK's 12 endings, but not CASINO ROYALE.

Besides Irish, I wish you would quit your silly artificial expections on films. Its like a round peg into a square hole. Its a disaster waiting to happen. The only expectations I have is that good people associated with a property make something happen worth my time, but thats it. I mean, how fair is it to expect a certain tempo, narrative, or even what one expects in a movie not seen yet?

Thats why when my reviews touch upon "disapointment," its always with the finished product itself. SUPERMAN RETURNS, while I enjoyed it, I felt disapointment in that it opened a can of worms, but not totally open it, but half-ass fashion with a knife, not a can opener.

Its like BATMAN BEGINS. I didn't know what I would get. Maybe a good movie, maybe it would be a bad movie. I mean, Chris Nolan is a great filmmaker but so what? Great filmmakers make bad movies too.

As for CASINO ROYALE, well more complete thoughts later today, but I'll tell you this: My old man saw all of the Bond films in theaters, from DR. NO onto ROYALE yesterday, and he called CASINO ROYALE the best Bond movie ever.

Besides, Daniel Craig is the first Bond in generations that I believed could seriously kick someone's ass in a fight. Not the suspension of belief I (seriously) needed with Moore and Dalton, or half-suspension with Brosnan.

Really, I like this new Bond, and it'll whack the competition over Thanksgiving weekend.

All I've ever heard from people who have seen Casino Royale is how great it is and, as you're father said, could be THE best Bond film ever. How can you not have high expectations with a billing like that? I had absolutely NO interest in seeing Borat but because so many people have said it was so great and hilarious, I'm going to go see it now (with expectations).

Easy Ronnie; it's only natural to have certain expectations of a film. You can't force yourself to love a film, and nor should you. If, for whatever reason, it fails to connect with you on the basic level, then it's not a good film, to whomever is watching.

You were disappointed with A Good Year, for instance.

Not really Capo.

Sure, Ridley Scott is one of my favorite directors.

But fuck, when that project was announced, and I read the plot synopsis...I didn't know what to think. A drama? A romantic drama?

Its like with Scott's AMERICAN GANGSTER, which potentially could be good. Good cast, good material to work with, etc.

A GOOD YEAR on the otherhand, I had nothing.

So how the f*ck can that be expectations?

Oh and Irish, pleeeeeeeeeeeeease. You can't help yourself? You forgot a rule I PMed you to learn months ago:

"The only critic worth a true shit to you that you can totally trust, is you."

I love my Dad, but his taste in movies was like Vietnam: A Mess. Can any of you suckahs say the same about your parents?

However, with people that I know have taste in movies, I take under advisement and at least try to read into what Capo, DV, Mike Sullivan, Hagen, etc., say. Those guys I sometimes totally agree with, and sometimes we're polarized (like me and Capo on SCARFACE, or me and Hagen on ROLLERBALL, for example).

My point being, those guys know their movies, but the only critic that truely knows for sure to digest what they've seen, is YOU.

Poor Irish, he's the guy that'll break under interrogation by me with simply a mighty rope jolt to the balls!

Well I do have to think about the future

Domino ***
(Third Viewing)

Based on the true story of Domino Harvey, daughter of film actor Laurence Harvey. Tired and unsuited to the pretentiousness of her high-society LA life, Domino leaves the glitterarti behind and sets off to become a bounty hunter. She quickly falls under the wing of veteran hunter Ed Mosley and his crew and becomes an unlikely natural in the art of bounty hunting. But things really heat up when a masked gang pilfer the contents of an armored car, and before long the mob, a crazed TV producer, the FBI and a terminally ill child have all got caught up in the crazy situation.

Keira Knightley played a good Domino Harvey and Lucy Liu was enjoyable as well as Taryn Miles. Other than that, no one really stood out to me except for Mo'Nique. This was the first movie or rather part of her's that I saw and liked. A step down from Man On Fire but hopefully a step in the right direction with Deja Vu. And I do agree with some here that after watching this film for the third time, I think Tony got a little crazy with the "MTV style" shooting. I thought it was fine in Man On Fire and sometimes in this film, but at times it did get to be a little much.

Casino Royale **
Hardly any gadgets and the Bond is not shy of violence. International locations, bad villains and a great looking woman... all in all, nice entertainment.

soon to come: review of Fountain

Casino Royale follows the formula of Batman Begins. Im pretty sure ppl who liked BB will also like CR. While both movies portray the beginning of their characters, they actually go as far as making them "mere human" as they can. No aura here folks. You want to see some superheroes or charming agents go look someplace else. Batman Begins will show you a man in a costum of a bat. It's down right to this point that the film bothers to explain how every little gadget actually works. No tricks here, we dont want to see Wayne suddenly wearing a black outfit flying around. No sir, you have to explain how everything works, we dont want no fantasies here. This new Bond can really kick your ass, things are simple- he's so human and such a badass....but is that what Bond supposed to be? ppl got tired of that charming looking fella and they want someone more human to relate to. These movies who deal with beginnings are the excellent way to get the Bond and Batman franchise out of the mud they were in, and thats wonderful, the question is how far its going to work when the movies will get back to the point where their heroes are heroes not for being so "human" but for being that tiresome superhero/ charming agent we've seen before. Or maybe we dont need that anymore. Dont sell us that "aura", its out of fashion.

Both movies were fun to watch. BTW.

Lavinia, you're bound to love me...for I am an animal myself. Quite a wild one at that. 'specially in bed.

But really:

1) I've got 2 dogs.

2) I'm vegetarian.

3) I never EVER pushed an old woman down the stairs.

4) I dont kill ppl on Sundays.


I mean...what more could you ask for?

Careful SC, before you know it she'll be quoting CAPTAIN CORELLI'S MANDOLIN non-stop. Dont say I didnt warn you

But really - that was one of your best posts. 'specially what you said in parenthesis

Lavinia- have u seen the tearjerker "My Life" with Michael Keaton?

Just curious...how many masterpieces have u seen? not an exact number, but is it around 50...100...500 ?

I dont think Ive seen more than 50 masterpieces.

I've seen around three hundred and fifty films that I'd consider absolutely excellent, Fame.

And here's another one:

Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind
Michel Gondry 2004 US 3rd time; DVD
A man decides to get his memory erased of his ex-girlfriend, and, halfway through the procedure, realises he still loves her.
Extraordinarily resonant exploration of memory, love and flawed relationships. Gondry's direction has a loose feel, very casual and very immediate, and Kaufman's script is so tightly concerned with itself, with its own narrative, that the result is a film which evokes an unusual intimacy without really concentrating on its central relationship... at least not in the conventional sense. It seems, for instance, to relish and concentrate more on those moments of embarrassment, those awkward silences which often speak more than conversations, and since it starts at the bitter end and works its way back, the ending, at once tragic and hopeful, couldn't be more explosive. Together, Gondry and Kaufman grasp these memories and wrap them together as a kind of recollection of dreams, and the real revelation of the film, the real winner, is the undying endurance of love itself. Remarkable.

I see. Well, there really are many wonderful films out there, but masterpiece to me is really, REALLY something huge.

Same question for everyone else-

1) how many masterpieces have u seen?

and 2 more questions:

2) which director has the biggest number of films in your masterpieces list?

3) which actor has the biggest number of films in your masterpieces list?

As far as directors, probably Godard or Hitchcock.

I'm not interested in actors.

Thing is, I believe that a movie has to fucking earn itself a 5-star, Masterpiece rating.

Put it another way, I have a close associate who gave 5 star ratings to 2006 movies like CASINO ROYALE, BLACK DAHLIA, and MIAMI VICE.

I quite dig those movies, but 5 star? Hell no.

Hell, I've knocked down many movies that I've reviewed in the past from the 5-star level they had enjoyed. Case in point, ANIMAL HOUSE.

Still, Stanley Kubrick has an insane number of "masterpieces" that I would grade 5 stars. DR. STRANGELOVE, 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY, A CLOCKWORK ORANGE, THE SHINING, and FULL METAL JACKET. So yeah, he's #1 for me.

Oh and Fame, I've heard more than once that CASINO ROYALE as being chided as "BOND BEGINS", which is fitting...still, despite Irishman's wet panties, its the best Bond film in decades.

The Fountain ****
Darren Afronsky is a genius. He made Requiem for a Dream and now he comes up with this stunning masterpiece. The concept, visuals and the excellent sound track by the same composer, Clint Mansel and acting are all excellent. The whole experience was just amazing. Go and watch it immediately.