|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
R.J. Palmer
Inspector
Username: Rjpalmer
Post Number: 430
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, July 17, 2004 - 1:12 pm: | 
|
FAHRENHEIT 9/11. Bad acting by Cheney and Wolfowitz, otherwise an enjoyable film. Nice cameo by John Major as a shady character in support of British oil interests. *** 1/2. |
Jennifer D. Pegg
Chief Inspector
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 545
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, July 18, 2004 - 5:39 am: |
|
Hi RJ,
I too enjoyed that film (Fahrenheit 9/11). I like his books too.
***** (but wonder why the nearest cinema wasn't showing it!)
Jennifer
(Message edited by jdpegg on July 18, 2004)
"Think things, not words." - O.W. Holmes jr
|
Suzi Hanney
Chief Inspector
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 981
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Monday, July 19, 2004 - 3:25 pm: |
|
Hi all
Went to see The Day after tomorrow on Sat!!!! slept through the tedious bits...........god it was long! But LOVED the WET bits!!!!!!! unmissable....if you can cope with that!
xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Suzi
(Cinema Critic of Exchange and Mart!) |
Mark Andrew Pardoe
Inspector
Username: Picapica
Post Number: 250
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, July 19, 2004 - 6:01 pm: |
|
Whatho all,
Just bought the DVD of one of the best British films ever made: A Matter of Life and Death. I would recommend it to anyone.
And writing of classic British films, please boycott the remake of The Lady Killers, can't the modern film makers think of any original plots? My word it was The Italian Job last year, this one this year, what's it to be next? Lawrence of Arabia with old Arnie leading a crack force of American soldiers?
Cheers, bitter Mark (please leave our dreams alone) |
Robert Clack
Inspector
Username: Rclack
Post Number: 276
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 20, 2004 - 7:39 am: |
|
Hi all
Watched "Spider-man 2" yesterday. Very enjoyable, good story, visual effects were very good. Alfred Molino stole the show for me as Dr Octopus. My only complaint was the movie was a bit to long, the ending spent to long setting the scene for another sequel. Still highly recommended.
At the showing I caught the trailer for "Cat Woman". All I can say is Halle Berry, Leathers, Whips. 
Rob |
Jason Scott Mullins
Inspector
Username: Crix0r
Post Number: 289
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 20, 2004 - 9:58 am: |
|
I've yet to have an opportunity to see Spiderman 2 just yet. Unfortunately, real life® has kept me busy over the last few months. Seems like a lot of people like it though. I'm not really into comic books or movies based on comic books.
"At the showing I caught the trailer for "Cat Woman". All I can say is Halle Berry, Leathers, Whips.
Hehhe.. None of those three are really my thang so to speak, but hey.. whatever floats your boat 
In November when "The Return of the King" comes out with it's special edition DVD, I can do a review of all 3 special editions, if anyone wishes.
crix0r
"I was born alone, I shall die alone. Embrace the emptiness, it is your end."
|
Jim DiPalma
Detective Sergeant
Username: Jimd
Post Number: 86
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 20, 2004 - 11:09 am: |
|
Hey Rob,
Did you know Halle Berry's stunt double for many of those scenes involving whips was actually a *man*?? (One of these days, I've got to learn to format links properly):
http://www.ananova.com/news/lp.html?startingAt=21&keywords=Quirkies&menu=
But hey, as Jason sez, whatever floats your boat.
Easy Jim
|
Robert Clack
Inspector
Username: Rclack
Post Number: 277
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 20, 2004 - 4:11 pm: |
|
Hi Jim, Jason
Thanks for destroying all my illusions Jim 
I'll take comfort in the image of Halle in her Cat girl outfit to keep my boat on course.
All the best
Rob |
Peter Sipka
Detective Sergeant
Username: Peter
Post Number: 56
Registered: 1-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, August 05, 2004 - 3:19 am: |
|
The Village (****)
Went to see this Sunday and I saw it again on Tuesday. It's a definite purchase for me. Everything is well done. The acting is great. Bryce Dallas Howard, who plays Ivy, and is the main character and who's first major role is this film, did phenomenal. She’s very convincing playing a blind girl. Also, the setting and atmosphere was great. What's interesting is that I saw an interview with Sigourney Weaver explaining how M. Night Shyamalan wanted no sun in this movie. And if there was sun out, he wouldn't film until it'd go away.
It was a definite quality quality film.
|
Kevin Braun
Detective Sergeant
Username: Kbraun
Post Number: 115
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, August 07, 2004 - 12:14 pm: |
|
Open Water (****1/2)
is the movie to see this summer. Tense, suspenseful, made for under $200,000 and loosely based on a true story….it's downright scary. Do not see this movie alone or bring a child under say thirteen years old. My eleven-year-old son didn't sleep a wink last night. I'm selling my scuba diving gear.
Take care,
Kevin
|
Stephen P. Ryder
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 3137
Registered: 10-1997
| | Posted on Saturday, August 07, 2004 - 12:25 pm: |
|
Definitely agree on the Village... heard nothing but bad reviews for it but went anyway after a friend insisted it was worth it. She was right. Four stars.
Stephen P. Ryder, Exec. Editor
Casebook: Jack the Ripper
|
Kris Law
Inspector
Username: Kris
Post Number: 375
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Monday, August 09, 2004 - 8:57 am: |
|
Eccchhhh . . . I hated the Village . . . boring self important drivel in my opinion.
-K |
Peter Sipka
Detective Sergeant
Username: Peter
Post Number: 57
Registered: 1-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, August 12, 2004 - 2:25 am: |
|
Garden State (*****)
Probably has to be my favorite movie this year. And all time. No one of my favorite movies, ever. Zach Braff-the writer, director, and main character of this movie is great.. And it's his first time doing this! (Major film wise) Natalie Portman also is in this and she probably steals the show with her funny character she plays. And she does it so well. The look of the movie is also great and the direction by Zach Braff is good too. Also, the soundtrack to the movie is very nice. DVD purchase.
Harold And Kumar Go To White Castle (**)
This movie is pretty bad. At first, I thought this movie was going to be terrible. And then, a couple days before I went to see it, I thought it'd be great. It looks like it took two seconds to edit the movie. There are barely any transitions and the cutting from scene to scene seems so sudden and weird. Some funny parts, but nothing compared to American Pie. (What it wants to be)
Collateral (***1/2)
Just saw this tonight. Tom Cruise definitely steals the show by playing a bad guy. His demeanor and everything is so great. The directing and camera shots by Michael Mann are also very nice. And Jamie Foxx is surprisingly good. I now respect him as an actor. The look of the film is fantastic. A bit grainy. Also, the soundtrack is good to this movie. Yeah, definite DVD purchase.
Napoleon Dynamite (***)
A good movie. The look is very nice and the main character, Napoleon, is pretty funny. The only problem I have is that his character gets a bit old and played out. It’s sort of like watching a Beavis and Butthead movie for two hours. The movie is not full with a lot of music compared to other movies. Otherwise, a possible DVD purchase. It costed only $400,000 to produce this movie. And they are near 14 million dollars in profit. And it only played in selected cities, and then select theatres.
(Message edited by Peter on August 12, 2004)
(Message edited by Peter on August 12, 2004) |
Peter Sipka
Detective Sergeant
Username: Peter
Post Number: 58
Registered: 1-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, August 12, 2004 - 2:29 am: |
|
Hey Kris,
Did you not like the ending of The Village? That's what I heard ruined it for most people. How did you like it from the beginning to a bit before the end? I personally liked the ending. And everything between. All the camera shots. |
Ally
Chief Inspector
Username: Ally
Post Number: 714
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, August 12, 2004 - 8:30 am: |
|
I don't think the problem with the Village is with it's ending...the problem is with it's marketing. It's being billed as a scary edge of your seat movie and it's not. The ending is self-evident from like 20 minutes in to it so it is not a shocking surprise at all. It's really more of a love story than it is a fright fest. However, the mood, the shots... all very tasty.
|
Sarah Long
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Sarah
Post Number: 1244
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, August 12, 2004 - 9:16 am: |
|
I really have to watch "The Village" when it comes out over here. One film that was quite jumpy was "Gothika". There was a scene where the whole audience jumped - quite literally in most cases!!
I saw "The Stepford Wives" on Tuesday and I thought that was funny. I haven't seen the original and I hear that one wasn't supposed to be funny. Maybe they changed it to be a comedy because the phrase "a stepford wife" is quite funny now and we joke about it, so it would be hard to make it a serious film, plus they've already done that. I don't see it as a remake, but more of another interpretation.
Sarah
Smile and the world will wonder what you've been up to 
Smile too much and the world will guess 
|
Kris Law
Inspector
Username: Kris
Post Number: 385
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, August 12, 2004 - 9:32 am: |
|
Peter,
I definitely disliked it before the end. And yeah, I suspected one of the surprises just from the trailer, but that wasn't a big deal to me. I just found it slow and plodding . . . the dialogue sounded like the kind of thing a high school play would put on, the kind of lines even Sigourney Weaver can't make sound convincing.
I will admit the cinematography was beautiful and atmospheric, and I was creeped the first time the "Ones" entered the Village, but after that it was all downhill.
I think it exactly what Ally said, the trailer promised one thing, and the film delivered something else. I don't like that. And I also don't like the blatant lie Shyamalan presented in the first two minutes of the film. It makes the second surprise a cheat. If you can fool us, good for you, but don't lie to us.
-K |
Ally
Chief Inspector
Username: Ally
Post Number: 715
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, August 12, 2004 - 9:46 am: |
|
SPOILER ALERT !! DO NOT READ FURTHER IN THIS IF YOU ARE GOING TO SEE THE VILLAGE !!!
.
.
.
I am WARNING YOU
.
.
.
LAST CHANCE
.
Kris,
What lie in the first two minutes? The first two minutes was the funeral scene, where was the lie in that?
|
Kris Law
Inspector
Username: Kris
Post Number: 386
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, August 12, 2004 - 9:55 am: |
|
Ally,
The tombstone read 1800-something to 1800-something else, which is just blatantly wrong. If they are lying to the children of the town it wouldn't really matter what year they used. They could have written 2004 on the tombstone, the kids wouldn't know any different.
So the date shown at the start is to establish it is the time period it appears to be, which turns out to be just a lie.
At least, that's how I see it.
-K
(Message edited by kris on August 12, 2004) |
Stephen P. Ryder
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 3138
Registered: 10-1997
| | Posted on Thursday, August 12, 2004 - 10:05 am: |
|
SPOILERS
Well, isn't the point of the village not just to lie to the children but to provide some comfort-area to the elders (isn't that why they started it in the first place)? It would probably be part of that support to reinforce that fact to themselves as well as everyone else that it was in fact 1895.
As for the stinted dialogue, well there's a reason for that, too... they're making it up from bits and pieces in a textbook.
You may think the whole plot is a bit outlandish - and of course it is - but really I didn't see any plot holes whatsoever. I thought it was very well crafted. I'll admit at first it seems like there are some nonsense moments (sending a blind-girl alone into the woods, the dialogue which at first seemed absolutely silly), but after the final change of perspective, the reasons behind everything become clear.
Really, I know everyone and their mother says they figured the movie out in the first two minutes.... well, I figured out the first surprise pretty quickly, but I had no inkling of the second one, and I enjoyed it immensely. One little scene near the end completely changes your perspective on the film.
Stephen P. Ryder, Exec. Editor
Casebook: Jack the Ripper
|
Kris Law
Inspector
Username: Kris
Post Number: 387
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, August 12, 2004 - 10:10 am: |
|
Stephen,
I think your points are mostly valid (textbook dialogue, and such), and I guess it just comes down to different tastes, but I don't buy the tombstone thing. I think your explanation makes sense, but I don't buy it. If this were Marvel comics you would definitely get a No-Prize, but I really think there's no reason for it. It's just to fool you as I see it.
-K |
Stephen P. Ryder
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 3139
Registered: 10-1997
| | Posted on Thursday, August 12, 2004 - 10:20 am: |
|
Kris -
Yep - not everyone is going to like the movie, that's agreed. Even Ebert and Roeper split straight down the middle - Ebert hated it, Roeper said it was one of the top movies of the year.
In the end I guess it depends on whether you feel cheated by the movie, or whether you enjoy the ride it takes you on.
As for the marketing, I agree that it was presented as something it absolutely wasn't (i.e. a horror/thriler), but really, how else could it have been marketed, without making the surprise ending even more obvious? The brilliant part of it is that the movie was marketed to the public in the exact same way that the actual village and surrounding forest was marketed to its children. The ads used fear and horror to cement our perspective in a particular direction, just as the elders did to their children. Personally I think there's a bit of genius in that.
But yeah, in the end its like arguing religion - either you're into it, or you ain't.
Stephen P. Ryder, Exec. Editor
Casebook: Jack the Ripper
|
Ally
Chief Inspector
Username: Ally
Post Number: 716
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, August 12, 2004 - 11:41 am: |
|
And to add to that...think about textbooks. They have school, we saw it. Now they couldn't print their own textbooks and they would have had to have taught some aspect of history or literature or whatever, we assume, otherwise, why have school? So if they tried to pretend it was 2004 and all their material stops at 1886 wouldn't one of the kids eventually go...hey, where's the books from the last 200 years?
|
Kris Law
Inspector
Username: Kris
Post Number: 390
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, August 12, 2004 - 11:55 am: |
|
Ally,
So they got a complete set of text books dating to the late 1800s (of which I'm sure there are thousands just laying around) and none of the kids ever noticed that the books are a tad, how shall I say? Dusty? Worm riddled? Falling apart?
I guess it's possible, but it's stretching.
I don't think the tombstone is a huge factor, and it certainly wasn't the main reason I didn't care for the movie, but I do think it's intentionally misleading.
-K |
Ally
Chief Inspector
Username: Ally
Post Number: 717
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, August 12, 2004 - 12:36 pm: |
|
No, they didn't need a complete set of textbooks because they didn't have 30 kids in the first grade. They would have needed at most, one or two and even then they could have picked up an anthology of literature, ripped out the 2004 copyright and cover and presented that. The problem is that they couldn't present materials dated from 2004 because they would have referenced things like cars, airplanes, etc. but it is easy to pick up a current printing of an old book and present that.
|
Kris Law
Inspector
Username: Kris
Post Number: 391
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, August 12, 2004 - 12:42 pm: |
|
I suppose.
Well, I guess if you're rich enough that you can convince the government not to allow planes to fly over your national park then you can effectively do anything, so why not?
-K
|
Christopher T George
Chief Inspector
Username: Chrisg
Post Number: 840
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, August 12, 2004 - 1:42 pm: |
|
The Manchurian Candidate (*)
* Spoiler *
.
.
.
.
Not much like the original and more a grade B thriller than its illustrious 1962 forebear directed by the late John Frankenheimer from the Richard Condon novel. Forget the Commies, now it's those infernal corporations with their fingers in the political pie. Apparently those company demons implanted something in Denzel Washington's back when he and his platoon were fighting in 1991 in the first Gulf War -- hmmm, hasn't there been another since?  -- and in Liev Schreiber's head they planted a chip -- that part where they drill into his head to check on the chip, cranium dust pouring out has to be one of the best if unnerving parts of this flick -- so when Liev is nominated for his party's Vice Presidential slot, prodded by his Senator mother Meryl Streep (think Hillary Clinton, nudge nudge), he is all set to run the U.S. of A., presumably, on behalf of the Halliburton-like corporate types. . . are you getting chills yet???, when the Presidential nominee gets assassinated (they hope) on cue. The only thing is, Denzel keeps getting these nasty nightmares and is afraid that Liev is not the hero he is claimed to be and that evil doings went on in the desert, they were all programmed to say he saved the platoon, and in actually the G.I.'s killed some of their own men,... yes even cleancut honorable Denzel was forced to kill!!... and he is going to stop the foul plot. The reasons for that arbitrary killing of a couple of soldiers from the company, or for why the corporation would want to run the nation are unexplained... but we all know why they would want to do the latter, don't we? 
This is all so much hokum and while a certain tension is built up, the movie overall is a severe letdown given its illustrious forebear directed by John Frankenheimer and starring Laurence Harvey and Angela Lansbury in the Liev and Meryl roles, and Frank Sinatra in the Denzel role. See the original and forget the remake. More proof that you should never remake a classic.
De-Lovely (***)
* Spoiler II *
.
.
.
.
Well acted by Kevin Kline as Cole Porter and Ashley Judd as his long-suffering and part-understanding wife (Porter was gay), and of course the songs are de-lovely, if a bit odd to see sung by modern stars such as Alanis
Morissette, Sheryl Crow, Vivian Green, Robbie Williams and Elvis Costello. The premise of the film is wooden, that Porter is taken on a "Christmas Carol"-type journey into his past, seated in a theater watching his own life enacted on the "stage" along with the "director" of the piece, Jonathan Pryce. The movie also goes on too long, and Mrs. Porter after initially vowing herself accepting of Cole's nights out with men comes across as petulant and silly when she later creates scenes about the same situation. These quibbles aside, the film is a visual and aural treat. Recommended. Kline should get an Oscar.
Fahrenheit 9/11 (***)
* Spoiler *
.
.
.
.
Worth seeing but controversial director Michael Moore definitely manipulates the facts to his advantage. What if the Bushes and the Saudis were connected somehow by business dealings? What does that prove? What millionaires with business interests are not tied together in one way or another in this age of mergers and takeovers? It doesn't make Bush responsible for 9/11 as Moore almost seems to imply in noting that Saudis, including relatives of Osama Bin Laden got early flights out of the U.S. after the attacks.
The Bush-Saudi portion of the movie is the most boring part and I dozed during it. The most disturbing parts are the black screen when the airliner crashed into the World Trade Center and the horror scenes in Iraq with bloody children plus American soldiers' blasé attitudes toward the killing of Iraqis. The six minutes after Bush heard about the New York 9/11 attacks when he read My Pet Goat with the class in Florida is eye opening and may be worth the price of admission alone.
Chris George
(Message edited by chrisg on August 12, 2004)
(Message edited by chrisg on August 12, 2004)
Christopher T. George
North American Editor
Ripperologist
http://www.ripperologist.info
|
Kelly Robinson
Detective Sergeant
Username: Kelly
Post Number: 59
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, August 12, 2004 - 4:11 pm: |
|
Chris,
I'm not so sure it's a spoiler that Porter was gay!
Kelly
"The past isn't over. It isn't even past."
William Faulkner
|
Kris Law
Inspector
Username: Kris
Post Number: 392
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, August 12, 2004 - 4:34 pm: |
|
Unless you were his wife.
-K |
Kelly Robinson
Detective Sergeant
Username: Kelly
Post Number: 60
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, August 12, 2004 - 5:49 pm: |
|
No surprise to her either from what I've read {although the movie could suggest otherwise, I dunno}.
Kelly
"The past isn't over. It isn't even past."
William Faulkner
|
Kris Law
Inspector
Username: Kris
Post Number: 394
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Friday, August 13, 2004 - 8:51 am: |
|
But, it might spoil a few things.
-K |
Kelly Robinson
Detective Sergeant
Username: Kelly
Post Number: 61
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Friday, August 13, 2004 - 4:05 pm: |
|
Hee hee. Point taken.
Kelly
"The past isn't over. It isn't even past."
William Faulkner
|
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 1242
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, November 21, 2004 - 4:32 pm: |
|
Thought Fahrenheight 9/11 very powerful and moving,particularly the Mothers story and the reluctance of the Congressmen to discuss sending THEIR sons and daughters to fight in Iraq.Interesting too that many of the youngsters who sign up come from some of the poorer areas of the USA
We got out "Troy" too[on video].Thoroughly enjoyed it actually!
Saw "Finding Neverland".It was OK - though saved by the brilliant Johnny Depp from being a bit tedious at times.
Natalie |
Jeffrey Bloomfied
Inspector
Username: Mayerling
Post Number: 499
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, November 21, 2004 - 7:55 pm: |
|
Small movie review here - I recently watched two of my favorite actors (Sidney Greenstreet and Peter Lorre) in their two best co-starring vehicles: THREE STRANGERS and THE VERDICT (1946). The latter film is based on Israel Zangwell's novella THE BIG BOW MYSTERY (a locked room killing which has some debt to the the 1887 Israel Lipski case). The film developes a new thread, about how ambitious Inspector George Coulouris undermines Chief Inspector Greenstreet by hiding a valuable hunch about the innocence of a suspect so that the suspect is hanged, subsequently found to be innocent, and Greenstreet ruined. When Greenstreet returns to visit the Yard, and has to see Coulouris, the latter has a photo on his wall. The film (set about 1890) has this photograph of Sir Charles Warren in full uniform. Also, a news magazine that is critical of Coulouris and the Yard for failing to catch the murderer of locked-room victim Arthur Kendall (Morton Lowry) has a cartoon drawing reminiscent of the famous one of the "Ripper-like" figure holding the knife and wondering down the streets of the East End. Somebody at Warner Brothers was doing his or her homework.
Now back to FAHRENHEIGHT 9/11, a movie that (whatever it's cudos from critics) obviously did not do very well at the ballot box three weeks back.
Jeff |
Stephen P. Ryder
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 3182
Registered: 10-1997
| | Posted on Sunday, December 05, 2004 - 11:25 pm: |
|
Some rentals of note:
THE TERMINAL: **
Two stars only because Tom Hanks managed to keep this disturbingly awful picture afloat (barely) just on the strength of his own performance. Terribly thought-out and poorly executed in almost every way (camera-work excepted). I'm amazed Spielberg signed his name to it.
PROMISES: ****
Schmaltzy, at times oversimplistic, but nevertheless touching documentary focusing on children on both sides of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. It was shot before the most recent uprising in 2000/2001, but "extra features" in the DVD contain updates shot in 2002 and 2004 which tie things in nicely with current events. Was nominated for an Oscar in 2002, and deservedly-so. Highly recommended.
PANIC: **
Rented this only because I'm a big William H. Macy fan. Another flick in the hit-man-sees-psychiatrist-and-grows-conscience genre. Macy's performance is solid, but overall the movie is dull and predictable. I wouldn't recommend it.
SEABISCUIT: ***
Ok, so I finally saw the movie about the horse with the ridiclous name. It was good. Not great, but thoroughly enjoyable. Got a little sick of the whole "Seabiscuit brought America out of the Great Depression" schtick. Gimme a break. Recommended.
GLENGARRY GLEN ROSS: ****
Brilliant film with an all-star cast. Glad I finally got around to seeing it. Al Pacino and Alec Baldwin at their absolute best.
SAVED!: ***
Decent dramedy which probably could have been great, except that the writers couldn't quite decide if they wanted to be offensive or politically correct, so they started off as one and ended up as the other. Lost its steam as a result. But thumbs up for Mandy Moore - I didn't think she had nearly as much talent as she displays in this film. Who knew?
Coffee and Cigarettes: ***
A series of short-films all revolving around, you guessed it, coffee and cigarettes. Fast forward straight to the one with Steve Coogan and Albert Molina. Its brilliant. Also worth watching is the bit with the Wu Tang Clan and Bill Murray. Skip the rest.
CONTROL ROOM: ****
One of the best documentaries I've seen, ever. Follows reporters/producers from the Al'Jazeera network as they cover the war in Iraq, and gives you an entirely new perspective on the perennial American question - "Why do they hate us?" Your reaction to the film will probably depend a lot on your politics, but if you're one of the few who still have an open mind and like to hear different sides of a story before you make up your own mind, consider this a must-see.
ETERNAL SUNSHINE OF THE SPOTLESS MIND: ****
Best American film of 2004.
SUPER SIZE ME: ***
Disgusting, but it makes its point. Haven't eaten a Big Mac since.
THE KILLING FIELDS: ****
Another "oldie" I finally got around to watching. Brilliant. Haunting. Depressing as all hell to find out that the guy who played the lead Cambodian was murdered in an L.A. parking lot in the 1990s.
THE DREAMERS: ***
Beautiful film that captures Paris in the late 1960s, but sort of gets caught up in its own significance. Definitely worth watching.
PASSION OF THE CHRIST: ***
Gritty, realistic, disgusting. Best film ever made about Christ (except of course Jesus Chris Superstar... "Prove to me that you're no fool, walk across my swimmin' pool...")
Kill Bill, Vol. 2: **
Quentin should've ended it with the first one.
Curb Your Enthusiasm: ****
Most episodes are side-splitting. Only a few have been disappointing. Season 1 and 2 are both strong.
Stephen P. Ryder, Exec. Editor
Casebook: Jack the Ripper
|
David O'Flaherty
Chief Inspector
Username: Oberlin
Post Number: 582
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, December 05, 2004 - 11:55 pm: |
|
Glengarry Glen Ross is terrific, I agree and Mamet at the top of his game. "Will you go to lunch? Will you go to lunch?" Mamet wrote Alec Baldwin's part especially for the film, that scene's not in the play. The Spanish Prisoner is another great Mamet film, as is The Edge (with Anthony Hopkins & Alec Baldwin). I thought State and Main was pretty rough (despite the dream cast). I'm in love with Mamet's wife, Rebecca Pidgeon.
Mamet's celebrated for his realistic dialogue, but I think if someone talked to me like someone from State and Main, I'd punch them
I'm typing on a keyboard.
You're typing?
Yeah, on a keyboard.
A keyboard?
It's a board. With keys.
A board with keys. Oh, a keyboard.
Right, a board with keys. That's why they call it a keyboard.
They make that?
Yeah, they call it a keyboard.
Dave
|
Stephen P. Ryder
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 3183
Registered: 10-1997
| | Posted on Monday, December 06, 2004 - 8:30 am: |
|
I'll have to add some of those to my Netflix queue straight away. Thanks for the recommendations!
Stephen P. Ryder, Exec. Editor
Casebook: Jack the Ripper
|
Kris Law
Inspector
Username: Kris
Post Number: 456
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Monday, December 06, 2004 - 9:52 am: |
|
Concerning Coffee and Cigarettes, I actually enjoyed almost all of them. Jarmusch is always very low-key and in my opinion the only part worth skipping is the one with the two older Italians and the kid who doesn't speak. I also didn't care much for the Wu Tang and Bill Murray one, it was one of the few that screamed 'it's a movie' - My favourites were the Cate Blanchett two-hander, the Coogan and Molina, Jack and Meg White, Buscemi and the sister and brother, and the one toward the end with Taylor Mead. Also, I seem to be the only one who enjoyed the Tom Waits and Iggy Pop one. It amused me.
If you didn't like the rest, Stephen, I wouldn't suggest seeing Strangers In Paradise, Down By Law or Midnight Train.
-K
I'll see you in time . . .
|
Stephen P. Ryder
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 3188
Registered: 10-1997
| | Posted on Thursday, December 09, 2004 - 5:52 pm: |
|
House of Sand and Fog: ****
Ben Kingsley proves himself once again to be one of the finest actors to have worked in the past thirty years. Did he win the Oscar for this performance? I don't know, but he should have. Excellent, excellent film.
Stephen P. Ryder, Exec. Editor
Casebook: Jack the Ripper
|
thomas schachner
Sergeant
Username: Thomas
Post Number: 43
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, December 09, 2004 - 7:33 pm: |
|
hi spry,
nope. he was nominated but didn't win it. the oscar went to sean penn for "mystic river", which was also a great movie!
---------
SEXY BEAST (2001) -- Nominee, Actor in a Supporting Role
BUGSY (1991) -- Nominee, Actor in a Supporting Role
GANDHI (1982) -- Winner, Actor in a Leading Role
---------
greetings from germany
thomas.
|
David O'Flaherty
Chief Inspector
Username: Oberlin
Post Number: 689
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 13, 2005 - 10:37 pm: |
|
I unfortunately won't get to see this, but on Friday BBC 2 is airing The Lost World of Mitchell and Kenyon. It's a three part documentary that's going to show recently discovered archival footage dating back 100 years. The footage is supposed to show everyday life; I think there's some stuff of people on the Mersey, child laborers from Blackburn, Manchester United playing in 1902, and a crime scene recreation.
The film was found in some rusted barrels in someone's basement.
Dave |
John Savage
Inspector
Username: Johnsavage
Post Number: 306
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 14, 2005 - 6:45 am: |
|
Hi David,
Thanks for the reminder, sorry you won't be able to watch, so I will sit back and enjoy it for you.
Regards
John Savage |
John Savage
Inspector
Username: Johnsavage
Post Number: 307
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 14, 2005 - 7:27 pm: |
|
Hi David,
I have just watched The Lost World of Mitchell and Kenyon, and must say I found it fascinating. Most of the footage seems to have been filmed in northern industrial towns circa 1901-2, and shows life in the mills and factories. The Manchester United game is shceduled for next week, so we will have to wait for the result.
What made this all the more interesting for me was that some of the shots were filmed in my home town of Hull, there was a shot of a horse drawn fire engine leaving the fire station in Worship street, which is a couple of hundred yards from the birth place of Donston. This fire station still exists and is clearly much the same today as it was one hundred years ago.
Another piece about a local man Mr. Clive Wilson who returned home a hero from the boer war was also of some interest, as it appears that he was the son of Arthur Wilson of Tranby Croft, famous for the royal baccarat scandal, and I think some of these shots may have been taken outside of Tranby Croft.
I really must recormmend this series, as it brings the period to life so vividly.
Regards
John Savage |
David O'Flaherty
Chief Inspector
Username: Oberlin
Post Number: 690
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 14, 2005 - 7:45 pm: |
|
Thanks for that, John. I also read that descendants of the some if the people in the footage were also interviewed--don't know if that's accurate. Glad to hear that your hometown was featured and it sounds like a great show overall. I believe the crime reconstruction will be featured in the third episode. I'm sure that the show will become available for purchase via the BBC, so I'm sure that I'll eventually see it; I'd especially like to see that fire engine.
Cheers,
Dave |
Phil Hill
Sergeant
Username: Phil
Post Number: 40
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, January 15, 2005 - 3:30 am: |
|
The Lost World of Mitchell and Kenyon was excellent.
What I found was that it brought the world of Whitechapel to life in many little ways. It was only 12 years after the JtR killings so the dress of the working people was probably pretty unchanged. Upper class women may have worn different styles and they didn't wear clogs in the East End, but that apart, the girls with shawls on their heads reminded me of MJK.
Every man wore a hat, as is mentioned in almost every witness description we have of potential JtRs. Yet the range of peaked caps was huge.
We saw cutaway coats, morning coats... and the faces (suffice to say the drawings of men like Joe Barnett, Sadler, kidney etc were there brought to life, moustachioed, gaunt...).
I hope they do a dvd of the series for reference.
I really recommend the series to anyone who can get access.
Phil |
Jeffrey Bloomfied
Chief Inspector
Username: Mayerling
Post Number: 563
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, January 24, 2005 - 10:51 am: |
|
Hi all,
As I was reading about THE LOST WORLD OF MITCHELL AND KENYON, I was thinking of two things.
First an old movie that I enjoyed years ago, which is occasionally shown on cable: THE MAGIC BOX, starring Robert Donat as William Friese-Greene, one of the pioneers of motion pictures in Great Britain (the 1951 film said he was the inventor of the first successful motion picture camera, but that issue is debatable). Donat gave as moving a performance as ever, but the film had most of the leading movie performers of the day in it. For example: When Friese - Greene has successfully gotten a moving picture on a makeshift screen at last, he needs a witness and pulls a Bobby off the street. The Bobby is played by Lawrence Olivier.
The other thing I remembered is a wonderful book I read about seven years ago, THE MISSING REEL by Christopher Rawlence (New York: Atheneum, 1990). It told the story of Augustin Le Prince, another early film pioneer, whose work has a stronger claim to being the first successful motion picture camera (and film) than Friese-Greene or Edison or any of the others. In September 1890 he boarded a train for Paris to present his finished product to the world. But he never arrived...he was never was seen again. The book follows his family's attempts to establish his patents, and how Thomas Edison kept beating them. Oh...while Mr. Rawlence offers no explanation for the disappeance of Le Prince, he does look at several possible solutions. One involves Le Prince being alone in his train car with a silent, sinister man who later is seen having hidden a body in a trunk. And Jack the Ripper is mentioned in passing elsewhere in the book.
Jeff |
|
Use of these
message boards implies agreement and consent to our Terms of Use.
The views expressed here in no way reflect the views of the owners and
operators of Casebook: Jack the Ripper.
Our old message board content (45,000+ messages) is no longer available online, but a complete archive
is available on the Casebook At Home Edition, for 19.99 (US) plus shipping.
The "At Home" Edition works just like the real web site, but with absolutely no advertisements.
You can browse it anywhere - in the car, on the plane, on your front porch - without ever needing to hook up to
an internet connection. Click here to buy the Casebook At Home Edition.
|
|
|
|
