Change Your Image
Engage_With_Zorp
My list of favorite films is ever-changing and growing. I refuse, however, to go beyond 50 until I have seen more movies. Here they are, then, my top 50 favorite films:
1. Close Encounters of the Third Kind
2. Princess Mononoke
3. Amadeus
4. Citizen Kane
5. Akira
6. Fargo
7. Seven Samurai
8. The Thin Red Line
9. No Country for Old Men
10. Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb
11. Castle in the Sky
12. Ran
13.Lawrence of Arabia
14. The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly
15. The Last Emperor
16. American Beauty
17. The Manchurian Candidate (Original)
18. Magnolia
19. The Empire Strikes Back
20. Blade Runner
21. Late Spring
22. The Pianist
23. The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King
24. The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford
25. Spirited Away
26. One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest
27. Dances With Wolves
28. Babel
29. Sunset Blvd.
30. The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring
31. Monty Python and the Holy Grail
32. Aliens
33. Miller's Crossing
34. Kill Bill, vol. 1
35. A Serious Man
36. Chinatown
37. Jurassic Park
38. Raiders of the Lost Ark
39. The Iron Giant
40. Who Framed Roger Rabbit
41. Tokyo Story
42. The Producers (Original)
43. The Usual Suspects
44. Apocalypse Now
45. All About Eve
46. District 9
47. Se7en
48. Ordinary People
49. Grizzly Man
50. Tora! Tora! Tora!
So, instead of great moments from film, let's change things up and do great moments from TV. Most of these are from recent shows, as most of my favorite shows are recent, but there's a good oldie in there too:
An Acid Bath: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gApZlK9jZzQ
Death of Ceasar: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7FvgP5hO99o
Dan vs the Captain (warning: not for the squeamish): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Blki-DISUis
Firo Owns: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IEg9J78DpT4
The Adama Maneuver: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2HIGlMDanw4&feature=related
Mr. Haney Phone Company: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KsEhXE5IUCQ&feature=related
I thought it would be fun to make some collages, so here they are. First, my favorite films:
[URL]http://i735.photobucket.com/albums/ww352/snakebrain/FavoriteMovies.jpg[/URL]
EDIT: My collages are curently undergoing massive reconstruction. In preparation for OB's top 100 performances, I reevaluated all of my lists, and they changed by quite a lot. Instead, here are my top ten in each category, in list form:
My top ten performances in pictures:
1. http://tinyurl.com/36teurn
2. http://tinyurl.com/3732pee
3. http://tinyurl.com/38zz399
4. http://tinyurl.com/33u6ypw
5. http://tinyurl.com/32uxsqb
6. http://tinyurl.com/nobvse
7. http://tinyurl.com/nobvse
8. http://tinyurl.com/2ubx5f5
9. http://tinyurl.com/lwl8ng
10. http://tinyurl.com/lwl8ng
The following lists are rather old, but I can't really take the time to fix them. I still love all of these performances, though.
Lead Actor:
1.F. Murray Abraham, Amadeus
2.Kevin Spacey, American Beauty
3.Jack Nicholson, Chinatown
4.Timothy Hutton, Ordinary People
5.Marlon Brando, On the Waterfront
6.Jack Nicholson, One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest
7.Adrien Brody, The Pianist
8.Jimmy Stewart, Mr. Smith Goes to Washington
9.Philip Seymour Hoffman, Capote
10.Toshiro Mifune, Seven Samurai
Lead Actress:
1.Elizabeth Taylor, Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?
2.Kathy Bates, Misery
3.Frances McDormand, Fargo
4.Gloria Swanson, Sunset Blvd.
5.Louise Fletcher, One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest
6.Sigourney Weaver, Aliens
7.Vivien Leigh, Gone With the Wind
8.Maggie Smith, The Prime of Miss Jean Brodie
9.Setsuko Hara, Late Spring
10.Anne Bancroft, The Miracle Worker
Supporting Actor:
1.Martin Landau, Ed Wood
2.Rutger Hauer, Blade Runner
3.Darren McGavin, A Christmas Story
4.Claude Rains, Casablanca
5.Kevin Spacey, The Usual Suspects
6.Brad Dourif, One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest
7.Javier Bardem, No Country for Old Men
8.William H. Macy, Fargo
9.George C. Scott, Dr. Strangelove, or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb
10.Gig Young, They Shoot Horses, Don't They?
Supporting Actress:
1.Angela Lansbury, The Manchurian Candidate
2.Mieko Harada, Ran
3.Rinko Kikuchi, Babel
4.Brenda Fricker, My Left Foot
5.Setsuko Hara, Tokyo Story
6.Sandy Dennis, Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?
7.Tilda Swinton, Michael Clayton
8.Saoirse Ronan, Atonement
9.Maggie Smith, California Suite
10.Judith Anderson, Rebecca
My favorite TV Shows:
1. Rome
2. Deadwood
3. Arrested Development
4. Fullmetal Alchemist
5. Breaking Bad
6. Battlestar Galactica
7. Six Feet Under
8. 24
9. Lost
10. Avatar: The Last Airbender
And my favorite TV Shows collage (because I am just THAT bored):
[URL]http://i735.photobucket.com/albums/ww352/snakebrain/FavoriteTVShows-1.jpg[/URL]
Some songs I'm currently obsessing over:
- Sleep
- Freeway, Kurt Vile
- Young Adult Friction, The Pains of Being Pure at Heart
- Hide and Seek, Imogen Heap
- Thick as a Brick - Jethro Tull
And finally, just to make you laugh, poor soul that you are that you hade to wade through this mess of a Biography:
http://deepsm25.files.wordpress.com/2008/10/sense.jpg
http://www.coolfunpics.com/slides/Good_Luck_Road_Sign.jpg
http://members.shaw.ca/adamhighstead/ch851227.jpg
http://img1.tvloop.com/img/showpics/57/33/l358b4bea0000_1_30767.jpg
http://questionabletopic.files.wordpress.com/2008/05/gothopotamus.jpg
And, just to make you think a little bit:
http://www.neophilia.de/onlinehome/calvin/war.gif
Possible signatures list:
I'm going to start compiling some possible signatures here. These are phrases I hear that I like and want to remember for later in case I want to change signature.
-�Ah, Snatch, help! I'm being chased by a mustached super-model! Ah!�
-One minute, you're on the top of the world; the next minute, some secretary is running you over with a lawn mower.
-We need to show them that we believe in our beliefs as much as they believe in their beliefs.
- Sometimes I get the feeling that we're all just a bunch of clowns standing on our tiptoes at the edge of a great abyss. No, I'm just kidding.
-Haiawachakasiwaka! MONSTAH!
-You're thinking about this all wrong! It's not so much what you look like, it's what's inside that he can't stand.
-A bunch of somber, quiet people against a red nuclear sky near a river of blood � wow, that doesn't look threatening at all.
Reviews
Ghost Hound (2007)
Incredible Anime
I want to keep this as brief as possible, because to explain too much of the often complex plot of this wonderful anime would be criminal. Suffice it to say, Ghost Hound features wonderful, complex character, and an intricate plot line that ties together beautifully at the end.
The basic plot involves three teenage boys with traumatic pasts, including our main character, Taro, whose little sister was killed when the two of them were kidnapped in their childhood. They begin "soul traveling" in the "unseen realm," and the story only gets more interesting from there.
True, it is a series that may require more than one viewing, as it incorporates elements from biology, mathematics, physics, and philosophy, but if you're like me, you'll want to start the series over again the instant you finish it.
Finally, a note on the voice acting. The English dub hasn't been released yet, which might make some of you wary of purchasing the set. As someone who almost always watches dubs, I know I was. But Ghost Hound has converted me; the voice acting is top-notch, and I can't imagine ever listening to another dub of this show. Trust me, you'll get used to reading subtitles after an episode or two, and then you'll be as in awe of the voice talent as I was.
I cannot recommend this anime enough. It is thought-provoking and deliberately paced, but also highly engrossing; I devoured the episodes five or six at a time, and was sad when it ended. All in all, there isn't really anything quite like Ghost Hound out there, and if you're in the mood for something different, interesting, intriguing, and thought-provoking, with well-drawn and entertaining characters, then Ghost Hound is your show.
Mononoke-hime (1997)
Greatest Animated Film I've Ever Seen
Miyazaki is a master of animation, on a par with Walt Disney in innovation, and even greater than him, I think, in sheer storytelling ability. You won't find any singing elves in this dark tale, but that's for the best; instead, we get arrows lopping off arms and heads, and a great war between the forest gods and the industrial Irontown.
To reveal any more about the plot would be a crime, but suffice it to say, our main character, Ashitaka, is put under a terrible curse, and must find a way to save himself - and the beautiful forest girl San (the Princess Mononoke of the title) - before it's too late.
That very small summary right there does this complex movie a disservice; the themes here about the coexistence of man and nature are much more nuanced than that, with no clearly defined heroes or villains. Our two extremes are Lady Eboshi and San - but even as despicable as Eboshi's plot might seem, Miyazaki never lets us forget how very human she is, and the good things she is capable of. Between these two lies Ashitaka, who realizes what the audience only begins to understand by the end of the film.
The animation is beautiful, of course, but the absolutely stunning visuals are only a part of what makes this film so beautiful. Everyone should see this movie; it's an experience that's not to be missed.
In closing, if this review seems somewhat scatterbrained, it's because it's difficult to express in words just how magnificent and one-of-a-kind this film is. To call this simply one of the greatest animated movies ever made is a disservice to its genius; it is, without a doubt, one of the greatest films of all time, period. A magnificent achievement all around.
2001: A Space Odyssey (1968)
Visually Stunning, Severely Disappointing Otherwise
Aren't movies amazing? Every movie has a fair share of love and hate directed towards it; no film can be said to be universally lauded or loathed, not even the truly awful ones - someone is bound to enjoy them in some capacity.
There is a reason for this amazing occurrence: no movie is perfect. Not a single one. Not the true "greats" like The Godfather or Citizen Kane, and certainly not From Justin to Kelly. Every movie has its flaws - whether minor flubs or serious dramatic or visual problems. No film is exempt from this rule, and as such, a single film can appeal to a variety of different people for different reasons and in different ways.
As an audience, it is our job to look over the flaws and enjoy the film for what it is: an imperfect, yet still amazing, confluence of ideas and emotions. Obviously, this is not possible for every film, and doubtless after the fact we will find myriad ways in which a film can improve. This is the nature of film-going, and of movie making.
2001: A Space Odyssey is no exception to this rule, despite what its many ardent fans would have you believe. The biggest thing this movie has going for it are its astonishing visuals: they are truly revolutionary, and hole up remarkably well today. They also seem oddly appropriate, as if "updating" them, as George Lucas has done, would somehow detract from the film, rather than add to it.
I won't deny, therefore, that this film is a stunning visual experience, and wildly influential. But that is all that it is.
For all its visual innovation, it is also an incredibly pretentious film. I believe I read one post on these boards that defined pretentious as aspiring to something and not achieving it (the poster then went on to explain that, for this reason, 2001 isn't pretentious; I disagree, but I'll get to that eventually). I would accept that definition, but would add that the journey getting there is just as important.
What 2001 is aspiring to is a story (although I do not believe you could describe it as such) told through the visual, with numerous metaphorical segments alluding to the entire history of mankind and its place in the universe, as well as a dissertation on the evolution of thought and of science.
2001, then, has great aspirations, but I find the film incredibly flawed for its over length and inability to sufficiently approach these ideas. For starters - the scene at the beginning spends fully fifteen minutes on idea that the audience understands after five; the additional minutes add nothing to the meaning or flow of the film, and in fact detract from the overall enjoyment of anyone intelligent enough to understand it.
Kubrick makes the same mistake throughout. Endless scenes of people floating in space emphasize remoteness and the advancement of technology, and of course how far humanity has come - but to what end? No end, apparently. I hate to be condescending, but certainly no one can enjoy the acid trip at the end of the film that lasts for at least five minutes and expresses nothing other than infinity? Did it need to go on so long? No, of course not. I understood what it was trying to say, I accepted the swirling lights as perhaps the best representation of an abstract idea, I appreciated the care and beauty that went into creating it, I took it in for a long stretch of time to fully experience the message ... and then it kept going.
The film is so densely layered with such abstract metaphors as to be rendered meaningless; I have seen some defend the idea that it is not, but truly so many possible explanations can be achieved, almost none of them satisfactory, that it is rendered meaningless. The ending of the film doesn't mean anything precisely because it means everything; there comes a point where restrained is needed, and Kubrick has no concept of this. As a result, the entire film is rendered moot.
All of this combined make for unpleasant business, but could have been redeemed if the characters were at least mildly interesting. You could substitute a cardboard cutout with a smiley face in for any of the actors and would achieve virtually the same film - and with no emotional connection to the characters, or the environment, which is rendered cold and unapproachable by the very exactitude by which it is created, how can you expect the audience to be invested at all in the dramatic conflict of the movie? And surely, for a film about the nature and history of mankind, such relentlessly uninvolving characters is counter to your purpose? Truly, there is very little to admire here other than the arresting visuals.
Or is there? Here we see once again the subjectivity of film. What I regard of flaw, others regard as masterstroke; why is there a disparity? Everyone, I suppose, experiences a film differently.
What I find emotionally uninvolving, cold, and relentlessly pretentious, others find as riveting, meaningful film making. Who is right? Who is wrong? There is of course no answer to that question. As long as a good argument is made, everyone's opinion is equal in the arena of movies. I believe I have presented one such argument here, and have read many, many expressing an opinion opposite to mine that are just as valid.
One thing, I think, is true: this movie is not perfect. There are flaws; its adherents may have to look hard to find them, but however minute, they are there. But then, they are there for every movie. And in the end, because no movie is perfect, we can only understand it as best we can based on how it spoke to us as individuals.
Titanic (1997)
Why is this considered good?
I've never understood why this film garnered such critical and financial success. I've heard it said that it made so much money because teen girls kept going to see it over and over again due to Leo DiCaprio, but I don't think that's the case; I think some people just really liked this film.
Which of course mystifies me. The plot is the stockiest of stock plots; high-society girl falls in love with lower-class, but fun-loving rogue. Cue sappy music. But oh, conflict! She's already engaged to someone else, but he's kind of a jerk and she doesn't really love him (I know, it surprised me, too). At the end, the boat sinks, of course, and Leo DiCaprio dies, apparently having realized that the movie he's in is no good.
Do you see the problem here? Every aspect of this film is utterly predictable, every single character is a character we've seen countless time in other, better films, and yet the stupid thing is almost three-and-a-half hours long. It spends so much time "developing" these characters and situations that we've all seen before, one has to wonder if writer-director Cameron actually thinks he's done anything original here. Indeed, I found myself predicting scenes before they happened, and I was almost always right on the money - with the exception of the fact that the dialogue I had in my head was less cheesy and hackneyed than what was displayed on screen. The only mildly interesting part of the entire affair is the sinking of the ship, and even then I want everyone to hurry up and die so the movie can just END already.
Unfortunately, the actors aren't even at their best here. DiCaprio is downright dreadful, which wouldn't be so unfortunate if he hadn't displayed far greater acting talent than he did here in just about every other movie he's ever been in. Winslet doesn't fare much better, but she does what she can with what's given her. What's worse, great actors and actresses are severely underused, as in the case of Kathy Bates, who is given a criminally small amount of screen time.
In short - uninteresting characters, a predictable plot, cringe-inducing writing, and decent-to-dreadful acting make viewing this film a rather unpleasant business. The ending is good, but that's only by virtue of the phenomenal special effects - and special effects do not a good movie make (see: the Star Wars prequels).
So, with all that in mind, again I ask ... why is this considered good?
The Godfather (1972)
The Best Movie Ever Made? I Think Not.
With a movie as critically acclaimed as The Godfather, you'd think it was the best movie of all time. Sadly, for me, this was not the case. It was a decent movie, of course; but, in the end, it had a few major flaws.
First and foremost is a flaw that many may see as a great asset (thus pointing out the obviously subjective nature of movie watching): its length. Now, I have nothing against long movies, but this one just seemed to drag on and on and on. I've seen many people who made this complaint get called people with low attention spans and low intelligence; this is complete idiocy. The movie had, for all its apparent greatness, many superfluous scenes (the parts of the movie that took place in Sicily seemed particularly long and drawn out). It truly did not know when to end, and thus did not keep my interest.
Another flaw was the the pompousness of the film. It truly seemed to me that every person involved was completely full of themselves and the movie they were making. It just bugged the crud out of me.
Another flaw was the underdevelopment of many of the other crime bosses in the film, all of which are of course killed by Michael's men. I didn't even know any of their names, and this alone should show you how little I could care about them. A great movie makes you care about even the villains, so that their deaths are affecting.
There's more I could say, but I have limited space here, so I'll just sum it up by saying that it was decent, but far from the greatest movie ever made. In fact, it is probably the most highly overrated movie of all time.
The Lost Room (2006)
Fantastically Original Sci-Fi Miniseries
This truly memorable miniseries is far different from the usual Sci-Fi Channel TV movie. Rather than being cheesy and badly overacted, it is intriguing and truly well-acted. The plot is very complex, as many mysteries are introduced and solved throughout the six-hour show, but it all boils down to this: there are objects that were created by some event that caused them to have strange and interesting powers. One of the most powerful of these objects is the Key, which opens any door to a motel room out of time and space where it all started- and it has just fallen into Detective Joe Miller's hands. When his daughter becomes trapped in the room (the room automatically resets if the current occupant doesn't have the key), he goes on a quest to find her, and learns that there are over a hundred of the Objects, and that there are some who would do anything to get their hands on them. And so begins a fantastic series of mystery, intrigue, and murder. As Joe Miller gets deeper and deeper into the mystery of the Objects, he realizes that his life, should he manage to keep it, will never be the same again. The whole story is wonderfully acted, with performances that will blow your mind from almost all of them. And don't forget Elle Fanning, Dakota's little sister, who exudes the same kind of childlike wonder and charm that her sister has perfected to practically an art. The special effects are also very good, especially for a TV series. If I had one complaint, it would be that not every mystery is solved. However, there are theories that this will be the basis for a new ongoing television series by Sci-Fi, or at least another miniseries, and if so, I can hardly wait.
Yours, Mine & Ours (2005)
Not as bad as you may be lead to believe
Despite what you may have heard, this is NOT a bad movie. It did its job- it entertained. It was not meant to be great- no movie in its "slapstick family fun" genre is. Fact is, this was a very decent movie, and certainly not one of the bottom 100 films of all time. I have not read the other user comments, nor do I wish to; fact of the matter is, I really don't care why the majority of people who visit IMDb hated this film. I cannot fathom a 3.1 rating, or that it is 99 on the bottom list. This movie was by no means horrible- the acting was good, the kids were great, and it was overall a very feel good film. Was it the greatest movie ever made? No. Was it one of the 100 worst? Definitely not. The film's main plot is of course what we'd all expect- two parents who are no widowed that meet and fall in love. Unfortunately, they both have an inordinately large amount of kids- one ten, the other eight. They are married without their kid's consent, and the kids decide to take matters into their own hands and break their parents up. This tired plot device is done with obvious familiarity- the filmmakers never strive for brilliance or originality; they are simply trying to make a fun family film ala the Brady Bunch (in fact, the Brady Bunch is even mentioned once). Naturally, the kids change their minds once it's too late, but they manage to save their parents marriage in the end anyhow. Obviously, there is nothing new with this tired contrivance of a plot. In fact, it's the feeling that you get throughout the movie that you've seen it all before that keeps it from achieving the extraordinary; the few things that set it apart, ie Mrs. Mundy and the pig, are used either too sparingly or too much, respectively. In other words, this movie covers no new ground in terms of plot- and thus, never attains any kind of distinction. To conclude, the movie is not bad- far from it, in fact. It is a good, family movie that never tries to be great- only decent. And that, perhaps more than anything else, may be what keeps this movie from being wonderful.