What Movie Did You Just Watch? - Shh! It's Starting!
- jpanimation
- Anniversary Edition
- Posts: 1841
- Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 12:00 am
I didn't watch it, so I don't know what they showed, but Ingrid Bergman has been in some of my favorites: Casablanca, Gaslight, Spellbound, and Notorious.Escapay wrote:Someone was watching the Ingrid Bergman marathon on TCM last night.
Beauty and the Beast (1946) 6/10 - disappointing. This film has received massive amounts of praise and I'm not entirely sure why. Apparently it's very faithful to the source material but considering how I'm unfamiliar with it, that means nothing to me. So we start out with Belle, who has two sisters and a brother. She's treated as a servant by her sisters, much in the vein of Cinderella. The Gaston role is filled by her brother's friend, who along with her brother, are trouble for the family with their gambling problems. Skip to the point where we meet The Beast (as he calls himself), and it really starts getting goofy. Here, The Beast automatically assumes Belle's dad has daughters and it's The Beast who suggests one of his daughters takes his place. I'll stop talking about the story and start breaking down elements. What I like is the direction, beautiful cinematography with fantastically lit sets, and there is even some slow motion shots put in (something I don't remember seeing in movies from this time). There is lots of over acting but that's forgivable considering. What I really don't like is how one-dimensional some of these characters are. The Beast is melancholy all the way up to the end, with no hint of personality or any other emotion (but Belle falls in love over the course of one or two scenes anyways). I can forgive bad special effects or makeup but The Beast's design is just goofy. His face is OK but they put these big shoulder pads on him that stick out soo much it's laughable. I appreciate they didn't give his furniture and dishes personalities, faces and voices (that would've been PeeWee's Playhouse ridiculous), but they found other ways to be goofy. They have a teleportation glove, a horse that takes you where you want by whispering in it ear, and they end the movie with The Beast (now in human form) flying off with Belle in his arms (I was just waiting for John William's Superman theme to start up). I didn't know he had superpowers. Lets not forget this revelation: The Beast was cursed because his parents didn't believe in magic. Pointless.

- Escapay
- Ultimate Collector's Edition
- Posts: 12562
- Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2004 5:02 pm
- Location: Somewhere in Time and Space
- Contact:
Replace Spellbound with Intermezzo: A Love Story and Autumn Sonata and you've got TCM's marathon.jpanimation wrote:I didn't watch it, so I don't know what they showed, but Ingrid Bergman has been in some of my favorites: Casablanca, Gaslight, Spellbound, and Notorious.Escapay wrote:Someone was watching the Ingrid Bergman marathon on TCM last night.

Here's a copy of the Jeanne-Marie LePrince de Beaumont version:jpanimation wrote:Apparently it's very faithful to the source material but considering how I'm unfamiliar with it, that means nothing to me.
La Belle et la Bête
It's also included (with some minor differences in the translation) in the Criterion DVD, which has two excellent commentaries about the making of the film, and several great video featurettes.
albert
WIST #60:
AwallaceUNC: Would you prefer Substi-Blu-tiary Locomotion?
WIST #61:
TheSequelOfDisney: Damn, did Lin-Manuel Miranda go and murder all your families?
AwallaceUNC: Would you prefer Substi-Blu-tiary Locomotion?

WIST #61:
TheSequelOfDisney: Damn, did Lin-Manuel Miranda go and murder all your families?
- littlefuzzy
- Anniversary Edition
- Posts: 1700
- Joined: Sun Oct 10, 2004 6:36 pm
Ehh, I guess you had to be there (in the 80s). Many a schoolboy drooled over Lisa back in the day...zackisthewalrus wrote:Weird Science - 4/10, A very random, odd 80s film. Wasn't really a fan.
I've just seen the fringes of a fan showing, at a fairly small sci-fi con... It was probably a pale imitation of some of the really big midnight showings, be prepared for weirdness!The Rocky Horror Picture Show - 9/10, I loved it. I had been warned ahead of how out there it was, and I just loved it! My friend and I might go to a midnight show soon...
On a side note, did you know there is "kind of" a sequel to RHPS? It's called Shock Treatment, and it's pretty bizarre in itself. It's kind of set as a TV game show, except the contestants don't know they are on it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shock_Treatment
Now that's what I'm talking about! SequelofDisney- you have to be a little crazy to get into Rocky Horror. Or, be able to recognize the crazy that lives inside all of us. Some of us deny it because we're afraid it'll change us (like Rabbit in Winnie the Pooh and Tigger Too who flips at the suggestion that he bounce... but when he does, he finds it's freed him a little bit). Give the crazy a try.zackisthewalrus wrote:Weird Science - 4/10, A very random, odd 80s film. Wasn't really a fan.
The Rocky Horror Picture Show - 9/10, I loved it. I had been warned ahead of how out there it was, and I just loved it! My friend and I might go to a midnight show soon...
I've never been much on Weird Science either.
I started doing a mammoth response to SoD the other day but quit because it went into outer space, so, here's some of it:
I've only seen the movie 3 times. But every time I have, it was larger than life and deserving of every last bit of praise I've heard was loaded onto it. Think of it as a dark drama. Back when they could actually make dark damn dramas (today's equivalent in most peoples' eyes would probably be something like Repo: The Genetic Opera... God help us). Think: The Other. Think: Theater of Blood. Think: disturbing meets poetic meets cold and calculated meets operatic and theatrical. Then, stir in some rock & roll and sex-fashion kink. Each one spikes the punch. Then add: motorcycles, lazers, a pool, a laboratory, dead bodies, an old elevator (among other things), and a couple of "normal people" from Happy Life commercials or old TV shows to look shocked at the whole thing.
-
- Signature Collection
- Posts: 5263
- Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 3:30 pm
- Location: Ohio, United States of America
I guess I just need to work on my crazy 

The Divulgations of One Desmond Leica: http://desmondleica.wordpress.com/
- blackcauldron85
- Ultimate Collector's Edition
- Posts: 16689
- Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 7:54 am
- Gender: Female
- Contact:
- Margos
- Anniversary Edition
- Posts: 1931
- Joined: Sat Dec 27, 2008 3:12 pm
- Location: A small suburban/rural town in PA
Yes indeed!Escapay wrote:Someone was watching the Ingrid Bergman marathon on TCM last night.
albert

The Seventh Seal - I had already seen this. I really like this movie, it's so dramatic. The image of Death really has become one of those indelible film icons. But some of the scenes are kind of slow-paced, it's not really something you can watch when you're very tired.
http://dragonsbane.webs.com
http://childrenofnight.webs.com
^My websites promoting my two WIP novels! Check them out for exclusive content!
http://childrenofnight.webs.com
^My websites promoting my two WIP novels! Check them out for exclusive content!
-
- Collector's Edition
- Posts: 2039
- Joined: Sun Jun 08, 2008 9:58 am
- Gender: Male
- Location: New Jersey but soon to be Florida!
I could be wrong but I think Netflix has it. Or, they did last I checked about 4 months ago. I started watching one of those but the acting was so bad- I bolted. Can't remember which "Part" it was.carolinakid wrote:Eating Out. I saw it on Logo but I wanna see it unedited. It was hilarious! And Ryan Carnes is freakin' gorgeous!
I watched two *very* different films.
The Magnificent Seven (1960)
I can't believe I hadn't seen this one before! Now, I've finally seen it and already it has become one of my all-time favorites. This is really thanks to all the great acting performances. I did not spot one bad actor in this movie. I think Eli Wallach and Yul Brenner were simply wonderful. (This totally makes up for the mess that was The ten commandments.) Add to that an engaging script, enough character development to not create one single dull moment, and adequate directing as well as memorable music and you've got a winner on all fronts!
Happiness (1998)
Not a movie for everybody. If you're a little like, say, Super Aurora, I think you will enjoy this film. However, if you're more like Disney Duster, you will hate it with passion. Decide to whom you're more akin and you know whether or not you'll enjoy this one. I, for one, loved it.
It's not a happy picture. All characters in the film are failures, to some extent. They're pathetic, ugly, unsympathetic, shallow or just sad. They lead empty, miserable little lifes. Nothing they do has any meaning. It's a movie that records the emptiness of most people's existence, with throwing in a lot of dark humor.
It's also a refreshing film, because it never gives any moral judgement. One of the main characters (and I'm not revealing a major spoiler here), turns out to be a pedophile who fancies little boys. Instead of catering to the expectations of the audience, the film shows him like most of 'these people' arë: not as a monster, but as a father, a husband, a family man. The film certainly shows the consequences of actions for his victims. But it doesn't make the man out to be a monster.
I think this lack of moral judgement is what rubs a lot of people the wrong way about this film. People are used to have some kind of moral judgement in their films. This one doesn't have that. It simply shows people do what they do, and what the consequences are. It's quite refreshing.
The Magnificent Seven (1960)
I can't believe I hadn't seen this one before! Now, I've finally seen it and already it has become one of my all-time favorites. This is really thanks to all the great acting performances. I did not spot one bad actor in this movie. I think Eli Wallach and Yul Brenner were simply wonderful. (This totally makes up for the mess that was The ten commandments.) Add to that an engaging script, enough character development to not create one single dull moment, and adequate directing as well as memorable music and you've got a winner on all fronts!
Happiness (1998)
Not a movie for everybody. If you're a little like, say, Super Aurora, I think you will enjoy this film. However, if you're more like Disney Duster, you will hate it with passion. Decide to whom you're more akin and you know whether or not you'll enjoy this one. I, for one, loved it.
It's not a happy picture. All characters in the film are failures, to some extent. They're pathetic, ugly, unsympathetic, shallow or just sad. They lead empty, miserable little lifes. Nothing they do has any meaning. It's a movie that records the emptiness of most people's existence, with throwing in a lot of dark humor.
It's also a refreshing film, because it never gives any moral judgement. One of the main characters (and I'm not revealing a major spoiler here), turns out to be a pedophile who fancies little boys. Instead of catering to the expectations of the audience, the film shows him like most of 'these people' arë: not as a monster, but as a father, a husband, a family man. The film certainly shows the consequences of actions for his victims. But it doesn't make the man out to be a monster.
I think this lack of moral judgement is what rubs a lot of people the wrong way about this film. People are used to have some kind of moral judgement in their films. This one doesn't have that. It simply shows people do what they do, and what the consequences are. It's quite refreshing.
- Chernabog_Rocks
- Collector's Edition
- Posts: 2213
- Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2006 2:00 am
- Location: New West, BC
Trailer Park of Terror.
God where to start......Well. There's a short little prologue to introduce us to things a bit and just as any pacing builds up it cuts straight to the rest of the film and promptly slows down again. We're introduced to six teens, each who pretty much is one dimensional and represents a cliche (Goth. Drug Addict etc.). Once they get out to the trailer park after crashing their bus we then watch them get offed in a variety of unique (I shall use that term loosely) and brutal ways. Now. I watched the R-Rated version instead of the Unrated (I shudder to think of how gruesome that one was). It's...nowhere near the best ever for horror, but I'm pretty sure I can think of a few that are a lot worse.
God where to start......Well. There's a short little prologue to introduce us to things a bit and just as any pacing builds up it cuts straight to the rest of the film and promptly slows down again. We're introduced to six teens, each who pretty much is one dimensional and represents a cliche (Goth. Drug Addict etc.). Once they get out to the trailer park after crashing their bus we then watch them get offed in a variety of unique (I shall use that term loosely) and brutal ways. Now. I watched the R-Rated version instead of the Unrated (I shudder to think of how gruesome that one was). It's...nowhere near the best ever for horror, but I'm pretty sure I can think of a few that are a lot worse.
-
- Collector's Edition
- Posts: 2039
- Joined: Sun Jun 08, 2008 9:58 am
- Gender: Male
- Location: New Jersey but soon to be Florida!
- ajmrowland
- Signature Collection
- Posts: 8177
- Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 10:19 pm
- Location: Appleton, WI
Kick-Ass-a fresh take on the superhero genre that totally nods at all the comic-book geeks of the world. the idea of a geek becoming a viglante provides nice comedy. the film also takes itself very seriously when it needs to. Hitgirl is the most interesting character to me. I mean, she's 11 and constantly throws herself into harm's way armed with knives, guns, and ends up kicking more ass than Kick-Ass. Nick cage as Big Daddy was actually pretty good. he seems more interested in this film than, say, Sorcerer's Apprentice and it shows. the vilence is noticeably bloodier than other superfilms, but very little is desensitizing. somebody says "fuck" every 2 minutes of course, but that's expected out of a movie called "Kick-Ass". cheap effects and costumes are definitely here, but instead of hindering the experience, they enhance the "average people just decide to become vigilantes" vibe.
a solid 3.5 stars.
a solid 3.5 stars.

- blackcauldron85
- Ultimate Collector's Edition
- Posts: 16689
- Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 7:54 am
- Gender: Female
- Contact:
- my chicken is infected
- Anniversary Edition
- Posts: 1048
- Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 6:55 pm
- Contact:
I'm recording much of TCM's broadcasts today, as the day is devoted to the films of Norma Shearer, a fabulous and underrated film star of yesteryear. Because I'm recording for watching attentively later on, I'm only paying attention here and there, but I caught some of Lady Of The Night. Norma plays two characters, and as optical printers did not yet exist in 1925, the effect of seeing both characters on the screen at the same time was acheived using a body double - in this case, an uncredited future rival and The Women co-star Joan Crawford. 

-
- Collector's Edition
- Posts: 2039
- Joined: Sun Jun 08, 2008 9:58 am
- Gender: Male
- Location: New Jersey but soon to be Florida!
- littlefuzzy
- Anniversary Edition
- Posts: 1700
- Joined: Sun Oct 10, 2004 6:36 pm
I'm sorry. My condolences.littlefuzzy wrote:I've been watching the Police Academy films.
I watched:
Spellbound (1945)
Pfff... I don't get the excitement on UD about this film. I think this is easily the weakest Hitchcock I've ever seen. I was thoroughly disappointed. It lacked excitement, suspense, sympathetic characters and oh, well... a plot that's more engaging than just going from place to place, based on the character's memories or dreams. It got repetitive very quick: repressed memory, clue, going to place A; repressed memory, clue, going to place B etc. Also, Bergman's performance was underwhelming.
Speed (1994)
Sometimes I just like a simple-minded action film, and this is one of the 'better' in that genre. While I enjoyed this seconbd watching, I still have some beefs with it:
- Keanu Reeves can't act his way out of a wet paper bag
- Why do we have an angry, threatening Arab/Persian guy with a gun on the bus? What does he add to the story? Was it to remind the audience that, while this film's terrorist is a white American, they still should be very afraid of Arabs/Persians? It made no sense at all. Hollywood demonizing a people yet again.
- Why does a terrorist who is safe inside of a rmoving subway train go up on the roof to fight with the hero, risking his life?
- I don't expect much character development from an action flick like this, but one thing that bothered me, is that all through the film, different characters keep mentioning that Jack is never using his brains, and this might get him killed someday. So if that's repeated four times, the audience is instructed that Jack will use his brains instead of his guts later on in the film. But he never does! So why this repeated announcement when it doesn't materialize?