DVDizzy Forum

Last night a saw two classic Disney movies made in the same year together with a friend (for him it was the first time he saw them, for me the umpteenth )

Pinocchio
and
Fantasia

The animation of thse movies is still amazing, considering that both are already 70 years old!

South of the border (2009)

<object width="640" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube-nocookie.com/v/76Ixx ... ram><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube-nocookie.com/v/76Ixx ... 1&hl=nl_NL" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="640" height="385"></embed></object>

This documentary by Oliver Stone could be an eye-opener to many Americans. It tells the story of the historic changes their neighbouring continent, Latin-America, is going through. How, after centuries of colonialism and imperialism, and decades of right-wing dictatorships, leftist leaders are being democratically elected with the help of the poor and indigenous people. And the reforms these leaders bring about that help the poorest and most disadvantaged citizens, for the first time in history.

For a large part, this documentary is also about the manipulation of the mainstream American media when representing this movement. Stone lies bare undeniable instances of distortion and outright lying on the part of the media when they cover presidents like Hugo Chávez, Evo Morales and others. With clear evidence, Stone shows us how different the reality on the ground in Venezuela and Bolivia and all those other countries is, from what is broadcast and written in American media about them --including so-called 'quality media' like The New York Times.

I only wished Stone would have made his film a little longer. At 77 minutes, it's rather short, and therefore there's not much time to really delve into the achievements and accomplishments of these presidents, which are astonishing, in improving the lives of all their citizens, especially the poor. Too many leaders get too little screentime. Only president Chávez and the Kirchners (Argentina) get enough time. Certainly a major player like Lula da Silva (Brazil) deserved more attention. Was 90 minutes really asking too much?

This film gives you the basics, the start of an understanding and appreciation for these leaders and their reforms (if you didn't have knowledge about this before watching). It seems like a good step towards a second film. I urge everybody to watch this film. It's available on YouTube:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=McmCVGWx6JU

^ Hey, Mark! Latin America isn't a continent, but South America is!

I did indeed see Buried last night. It was just alright. Ryan Reynolds did a great job, though. It was well-made, and it was suspenseful, but without much scenery and locations and visible characters, it was just alright.

blackcauldron85 wrote:^ Hey, Mark! Latin America isn't a continent, but South America is!

D'oh!

I'm just glad people actually *read* my rambling posts, as proved by you. Now I would be even more glad if people would also watch the films I recommend.

August Rush-nice movie. it's a surprise it didnt get up there at the Oscars. Basically, a gifted kid who grew up in a New York State facility sets out to find his parents by "following the music". seriously, he hears it everywhere. One of the few films made this decade that define the format as an art form, it stars Freddie Highmore, Kerri Russell, Johnathon Rhys Meyers, Mikelty Williamson, and Robin Williams and is verysweet and definitely is worth a watch.

7/10

I just came back from seeing The Social Network. I wouldn't necessarily recommend it...there are comedies and stuff out right now that surely are better. It was long and wordy. I mean, the acting was good, but it's not really my kind of movie. I feel bad for my friend spending $14 on our tickets...I'd say rent it when it comes out.

Goliath wrote:I'm just glad people actually *read* my rambling posts, as proved by you. Now I would be even more glad if people would also watch the films I recommend.

I read it too! From European media and friends who know a bit about Latin America/Brazil, it's certainly evident that da Silva in particular is doing pretty some needed things at the moment. Again, I don't know too much about Latin American politics (though I did know that the Venuzealan president is often vilified, for some reason I can't quite remember). All the more reason for me to watch the movie, I suppose.

Anyway, the last proper film that I watched was also a documentary, though a very different one at that...

L'Univers de Jacques Demy

A touching and interesting look at the life of French director Jacques Demy, as well as his work (including The Umbrellas of Cherbourg, Lola, Donkeyskin etc). Directed by his own widow, it also features comments from collaborators and acquaintances, including Catherine Deneuve, Jean Marais and Harrison Ford (who was to star in Demy's Hollywood venture Model Shop, but replaced by studio bosses). It appears as a bonus feature on the UK DVD of The Umbrellas of Cherbourg, which is equally recommended.

A couple of days ago, I watched Master of Diguise... Now I need to track down Clean Slate and Opportunity Knocks.

I also watched Jackie Chan's first starring role: The Cub Tiger From Kwang Tung. Most people that have seen it probably saw the version that this was edited into: Master With Cracked Fingers.

well, over the last couple weeks, I watched Wedding Crashers, Forgetting Sarah Marshall, Beauty and the Beast, Iron Man, Iron Man 2, Avatar, ANTZ and, in short, all are recommended.

i got around to watching my Grindhouse Blu-ray last night.

I thought it was a really enjoyable experience, though I found it a bit annoying that they divided the film into two sections (After Planet Terror ended, the clock on the Blu-Ray player reset.). I also liked all the fake trailers (Especially Don't and Thanksgiving). I think I enjoyed Planet Terror a bit more than Death Proof (Which is quite boring until Kurt Russell shows up).

My overall rating: 4/5

Other movies I saw over the week:

It Came From Beneath the Sea: With the exceptance of the Harryhausen effects, this was kind of boring. 3/5

The Curse of Frankenstein: I found this Hammer Horror (making it the first one I've ever actually watched) film to be mildly amusing. I like how the story is told through Dr Frankenstein's own words. 3.5/5

Also, not sure if this counts as a movie or not, but I watched Eddie Murphy: Delirious Wednesday night. It was very raunchy, but very funny at the same time.

Wonderlicious wrote:I read it too!

I always think that people who come here for entertainment, or to catch a break, or to just share harmless opinions, might skip overly lenghty posts about politics, especially in a non-political thread. But now I can say I have 'readers'!

Wonderlicious wrote:From European media and friends who know a bit about Latin America/Brazil, it's certainly evident that da Silva in particular is doing pretty some needed things at the moment.

Yes, the European media is very kind to president Da Silva, whereas it's very hostile toward president Chávez. I think it has a lot to do with style. Media nowadays are more concerned with style over substance. Chávez is really a populist, very loud and outspoken and passionate; whereas Da Silva fits 'our' image of a politician much more: calm, reasonable, looking for compromise rather than conflict. It also doesn't help that Chávez nationalized many Western corporations (mainly in the oil business)...

Maybe if more people saw Chávez the way he was in this interview with Barbara Walters for ABC (the only fair piece about him that I've ever seen in American mainstream media), they would think differently of him.

Wonderlicious wrote:Again, I don't know too much about Latin American politics (though I did know that the Venuzealan president is often vilified, for some reason I can't quite remember). All the more reason for me to watch the movie, I suppose.

Yes, but I was dissatisfied with the depth of Stone's film. Some of the time that could have been devoted to discussing the results of these presidents' policies, instead went to so-called 'funny' parts, like Stone playing soccer with president Morales (Bolivia). Actually, you can see Morales rolls his eyes in disbelief when Stone asks the translators if he could play soccer with the president.

South of the Border is just as much about media manipulation, which is also a main theme in the last film I watched:

Bowling for Columbine (2002)

For the... 4th? 5th? 6th? time? I have forgotten. But it was long ago since I last saw it, and I had forgotten what an important and powerful film it was. You tend to remember only the 'funny' or remarkable parts, like the animated 'History of America'-part, or the tragic 'What a wonderful world'-montage, but only when you watch it again it daunts on you again how strong the narrative is and how everything is interwoven and you appreciate the movie much more. Because it's such an important message that doesn't get heard otherwise --certainly not in the regular media.

I tend to get agitated when people discard this film because of the supposedly left-wing bias of Moore, but where's the sens in that? What's leftist about making a film exploring deadly violence? Is wanting to find out the sources and prevent future incidents from happening 'leftist'? I could see how people would accuse Moore of a liberal bias because he implies that certain political policies lie at the basis of these leathal incidents. But ultimately, he doesn't give a definite answer to the question 'why do Americans shoot each other more than other people do?'. He hints at some very plausible suspects, but ultimately he gives no answer, and that's what most rabid right-wingers don't want to see. Because it's easier to just discard the movie without seeing it.

People who are interested in these themes, also would want to see Videocracy (2009), about the multiple commerical tv stations Italy's prime-minister Berlusconi owns and uses to manipulate the nation's political debate.

Life As We Know It - I kind of actually liked this... Katherine Heigl was not annoying, and Josh Duhamel was good too. Just all around a decent romantic comedy.

Ed Wood - Probably one of Tim Burton's best films. Both Johnny Depp and Martin Landau were both good in their roles.

4/5

The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian (2008)- 9/10
I personally have loved all the Narnia films, and I think that this one really does live up to the original. I love all the new battle sequences, especially the midnight raid. I think this captured the tone of the original very well, while still managing to bring something new to the table. I can't wait for the third one, Disney or not. Who knows? Maybe 20th Century Fox can even make the franchise better.

Fox is only releasing the movie. Walden makes the films on their own.

The Evil Dead (1981) = I really like some of the makeup effects in this film as well as some of the camera work. Though I like the second film a little more, this one is still pretty good.

I just watched the Wonderful World of Disney's remake/sequel of The Love Bug, with Bruce Campbell. I haven't seen it since it aired...

I thought some of the dialogue fell abart at the end, after the race. "Driving an unlicensed devill-car, illegal dumping of said devil-car, you're going to the big house!"

I wish I could find the Absent-Minded Professor remake (and the sequel) with Harry Anderson...

Took a break from horror to (finally) see the Fred Figglehorn movie.





All you have to do to get through this movie is get used to that voice (which is better in the older YouTube videos than it is here). After that, the real problem is that the ideas are too TV (especially the "now Fred is popular, Judy likes him, and everything's happy" end resolution...) and the main concept for the movie is too reminiscent of Pee Wee's Big Adventure. A blast from the 90's: Roddy Bottum from one of my favorite indie bands Imperial Teen (which I listened to incessantly as a teen, definitely one of those "they got me through high school" bands for me) does the music score here. Speaking of the music, at first when you watch the movie it's a bit shocking to see them mixing Fred's YouTube routines with the trendy technical slickness and big hip songs that are trademark of Nickelodeon. But, it's refreshingly not bad at all (though Fred-haters will have it automatically burned at the stake). Several of the jokes work and the supporting cast are pretty good- especially Siobhan Fallon as Fred's mom and Jake Weary as... the strangely not-what-I-expected-at-all Kevin. After the YouTube videos, I really expected Kevin to be a serious bully and I thought Judy would be a lot more like Bertha. But then again... I only watched maybe 6 or 7 of Fred's videos. An easy 82 minutes. Just not nearly as good as it could have been.

Goliath wrote:Bowling for Columbine (2002)

I tend to get agitated when people discard this film because of the supposedly left-wing bias of Moore

Any intelligent right-winger who disapproves of Moore would really get a lot out of his Howard Stern interview. It was so eye-opening, full of personality (he's really easy to like behind the camera), and spoke in a language anyone would understand. After that, it's obvious to me that the hateful opinions are pure ignorance.

I've always said one thing about the guy: he cares. That's not quite as discernible in the case of most other political clowns on TV / in film.

The Simpsons Movie on Blu Ray ( stays so funny everytime even though you know what's gonna happen !!!! )