list http://www.spout.com/ Recent community activity around L.I.E. on Spout Copyright 2005-9 Spout, LLC Spout RSS http://www.spout.com/images/SpoutLogoRSS.jpg http://www.spout.com/ 136 30 http://www.spout.com/films/L_I_E/184319/default.aspx Title: L.I.E.
Year: 2001
Director: Michael Cuesta
Plot: A teenaged boy in desperate need of a father figure finds one in a place no one should ever have to look in this controversial drama. Howie (Paul Franklin Dano) is a 15-year-old who has been emotionally at sea ever since the death of his mother in an auto accident several years before. Howie's father Marty (Bruce Altman) is also having trouble dealing with the loss, and distracts himself with empty sex while avoiding authorities attempting to prosecute him for using unsafe materials in his building contracting business. Howie falls in with a group of homeless delinquents his own age, becoming especially close to streetwise Gary (Billy Kay). In time, Howie begins to wonder if his feelings for Gary go past ordinary friendship, but the issue of his sexuality is forced into a very different light after Gary persuades Howie to join him in robbing the home of middle-aged former Marine Big John Harrigan (Brian Cox). It doesn't take long for Big John to track down the culprits after Howie and Gary steal several guns from his house, but Howie learns that Big John and Gary have met before -- Gary sometimes works as a male prostitute, and Big John, whose tastes run to boys in their early teens, is a regular customer. When Gary runs away to California, Big John proposes that Howie work off their debt by having sex with him; while Howie is hardly comfortable with this arrangement, he has nowhere else to go after his father ends up in jail, and he finds an unexpected degree of emotional support in his relationship with the curiously compassionate pedophile, who comes to understand just how badly Howie needs help. L.I.E. (the title stands for "Long Island Expressway") premiered at the 2001 Sundance Film Festival. ~ Mark Deming, All Movie Guide
Times Tagged: 4
Number of Lists: 10
Number of blog posts: 2
Number of discussion threads: 3
SpoutRating: 3
]]>Tue, 25 Aug 2009 16:59:23 GMTL.I.E.2001Michael CuestaA teenaged boy in desperate need of a father figure finds one in a place no one should ever have to look in this controversial drama. Howie (<a href="/players/P___347608/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Paul Franklin Dano</a>) is a 15-year-old who has been emotionally at sea ever since the death of his mother in an auto accident several years before. Howie's father Marty (Bruce Altman) is also having trouble dealing with the loss, and distracts himself with empty sex while avoiding authorities attempting to prosecute him for using unsafe materials in his building contracting business. Howie falls in with a group of homeless delinquents his own age, becoming especially close to streetwise Gary (Billy Kay). In time, Howie begins to wonder if his feelings for Gary go past ordinary friendship, but the issue of his sexuality is forced into a very different light after Gary persuades Howie to join him in robbing the home of middle-aged former Marine Big John Harrigan (<a href="/players/P____86106/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Brian Cox</a>). It doesn't take long for Big John to track down the culprits after Howie and Gary steal several guns from his house, but Howie learns that Big John and Gary have met before -- Gary sometimes works as a male prostitute, and Big John, whose tastes run to boys in their early teens, is a regular customer. When Gary runs away to California, Big John proposes that Howie work off their debt by having sex with him; while Howie is hardly comfortable with this arrangement, he has nowhere else to go after his father ends up in jail, and he finds an unexpected degree of emotional support in his relationship with the curiously compassionate pedophile, who comes to understand just how badly Howie needs help. L.I.E. (the title stands for "Long Island Expressway") premiered at the 2001 Sundance Film Festival. ~ Mark Deming, All Movie Guide4Slightly Tagged (1-5)10233http://www.spout.com/ProductImages/t19418n2sl7.jpghttp://www.spout.com/films/L_I_E/184319/default.aspxFilm http://www.spout.com/blogs/thefilmpanelnotetaker/archive/2008/3/18/26341.aspx Post By: thefilmpanelnotetaker
Post To: thefilmpanelnotetaker Blog
Post Date: 3/18/2008 10:00:55 AM
Body: On Saturday, Brooklyn, NY-based filmmaker Leah Meyerhoff will be heading to Beantown to present a retrospective of her short films at the Brattle Theatre during the Boston Underground Film Festival. I had the great pleasure to hang out with Leah recently during the South by Southwest (SXSW) Film Festival in Austin, Texas. I first became familiar with Leah’s work at a screening of short films at the Brooklyn Independent Cinema Series last year where I saw the music video she directed, Team Queen. Soon after, I watched her Student Academy-Award nominated short Twitch, which has played in over 200 film festivals around the world and won numerous awards. Last night, I spoke with Leah about her upcoming trip to Boston and what people can expect there, as well as what’s going on with her feature film in development, Unicorns, and other defining moments in her young career. Leah finds a unicorn in the Enchanted Forest in Austin, Texas, at the Bi The Way World Premiere party during SXSW.TFPN: Can you give a little preview of what you’ll be talking about at the Boston Underground Film Festival? Have you been there before?Leah: This will be my third time there. They showed Twitch and Team Queen there before. It’s a fun festival. They’re calling it a retrospective, which is a little strange because I don’t think I’m old enough for a retrospective. Isn’t that what happens after you’re dead? Anyways, I’ll be screening about a dozen of my short films. A lot of films I made in undergrad at Brown University, some experimental films I made when I was in art school in Chicago, and some of my shorts from grad school NYU. Then I have some commercials and music videos I made outside of school. I’ll be talking about my progression as a filmmaker and how I got from being a teenager going off to college to where I am now about to make my first feature film Unicorns. They’re promoting the Q&A to undergrad and high school students in the area. It’s supposed to be somewhat educational, like an artist lecture, and hopefully will inspire aspiring filmmakers to pursue their own path. Since Twitch was so successful on the festival circuit, I also give lectures at various film schools around the country about how to get into film festivals and what to do once you get in. I enjoy educating people on that process, something I didn’t learn in school and had to figure out for myself.TFPN: What made you decide to become a filmmaker?Leah: I originally thought I wanted to be a marine biologist, something totally not in the arts at all. Then I went school at Brown and started taking film classes. I started with film theory, kind of more on an intellectual basis and then began taking film production classes at RISD which was this art school nearby. I continued to make sculpture, painting, photography and other kinds of visual art for years and went to the School of the Art Institute of Chicago for a year. It was almost a half-creative and half-practical decision to go into filmmaking, a way of doing something that I love while also having an impact on the world. I enjoy the collaborative aspect of filmmaking rather than being in a tiny studio all day painting by yourself. It also has a potential to reach a wide audience and affect social change on a level that other art forms aren’t capable of. The distribution system can be mind-bogglingly complicated, but it’s also great because if you can tap into that, you have the chance to really change the way people think. That is part of the reason why I’m particularly interested in coming of age stories about teenage girls. That was the age range for me when I was figuring out who I was in the world and what it meant to grow up as a female in this society. I didn’t see myself reflected in the media. To me, all the TV shows and films I saw were not my reality. Now that I’m older, this idea of creating characters that young girls can look up to or can identify with is a powerful idea.TFPN: Who are some filmmakers that have inspired you? In general, I’m inspired by artists who show the world how it is, raw, gritty and real. Kimberly Pierce is a great example. I like Lynne Ramsay, Jonathan Caouette, Catherine Breillat, and Gus Van Sant. I like artistically-minded filmmakers who are making stories about real people. And at the same time, having a creative take on it and making the world a more beautiful place.TFPN: What is Unicorns about? Has it been cast yet and when do you go into production?Leah: Unicorns is a coming-of-age film about an awkward teenage girl named Davina who escapes to a fantasy world involving unicorns when her first romantic relationship becomes abusive. The film starts on her sixteenth birthday and follows her relationship with an older, punk rock boyfriend. It starts off being fun and exciting, that kind of butterflies-in-your-stomach feeling, and then progressively becomes more and more emotionally and physically abusive. At the same time, her best friend Cassidy has a crush on her and her father is marrying a woman she despises. It’s kind of like an updated Welcome to the Dollhouse. Or another good reference is The Dangerous Lives of Alter Boys or Heavenly Creatures. It’s a straight-forward narrative drama, but then there are these fantastical animated elements as well. Were hoping to start shooting this summer. Alison Anders, who is executive producing, is a filmmaker I really admire. Her film Gas Food Lodging was instrumental in my teenage years, so I’m excited to have her attached to the project. We’re hoping to start casting next month with Judy Henderson, who also cast L.I.E. and Twelve and Holding and Eyde Belasco, who cast Half Nelson. She also casts the actors for the Sundance Labs, which the Unicorns screenplay was a finalist for, so that’s a great resource as well.TFPN: Do you have anyone in mind who you’d like to cast in the role of Davina?Leah: It’s tough, because I really want the 16-year-old girl to seem like a real 16-year-old girl. There are not a lot of name actors out there who actually look 16. I like Kristen Stewart a lot. I like this girl named Mia Waskilowska who was in a short I saw at Sundance called I Love Sarah Jane. I’m guessing what’s going to happen is the lead girl will be someone we discover who is authentic and real. For the lead boy, it might be more of a name actor, along the lines of Emile Hirsch or Joseph Gordon-Levitt. Really I just want to cast whoever is most right for the part. Whoever feels the most real. I am not interested in making the next Clueless or Mean Girls. It’s more My So Called Life than 90210, you know? There are not a lot of films about teenage girls to begin with. There are a lot of coming-of-age films about boys, but there are not a lot of female stories out there. And of the ones that are, they’re usually so unlike any reality that I experienced. Which is what inspires me to make this film. To dig beneath the glossy surface and scratch at the heart of the matter. The brutal realities of adolescence. This is why I spend so much time on casting. If I can cast someone compelling and authentic, then most of my job as a director is already done.TFPN: What were some of your favorite films you saw and panel discussions you attended at SXSW?Leah: My favorite film was a documentary called Beautiful Losers, which was about street artists like Shepard Fairey and Harmony Korine. It was beautifully shot. I also liked Lynn Shelton’s film My Effortless Brilliance. And it was fun to see Bi the Way in a theater with a lively audience. Honestly, I came away from that festival wishing I had seen more narrative films. At one point, in the middle of a screening, my friend turned to me and said I just really want to see a scripted film. Kimberly Pierce has been giving me advice on my film, so I really wanted to see Stop-Loss but it played the day after I left. I also went to a lot of panels. The writing panel was useful to me, with Amy Dotson and Scott Macaulay. Also the Fact or Fiction one was interesting. I went to part of the one the Four Eyed Monsters kids were on about digital distribution. I’ve spoken on a lot of panels myself so it’s always interesting to be on the other side. In general, festival panels become somewhat redundant, but at SXSW there were so many incredible people smashed together in this small venue that even if you came in part way though you could pick some stuff up and move on to the next. That’s kind of what I did.TFPN: What would you say are some of the best festivals you’ve ever been to with the best panels?Leah: This year, I actually found the panels at Sundance and Slamdance to be really interesting, but SXSW is definitely up there in terms of good panels. They’re well moderated, have interesting guests, and are short and to the point. I tend to judge festivals on more of a filmmaker criterion. I like smaller festivals that take good care of the filmmakers and have really good programming and fun parties. I really like Woodstock, Milan (in Italy), and Avignon (in France). I used to like Brooklyn Underground, which doesn’t exist anymore. I also really like the Sarasota Film Festival as a filmmaker and an audience member. It’s a really well-run festival. And there’s another festival a lot of people haven’t heard of called Cucalorus in North Carolina that I would put on my top 10 list of all time. They make a point to bring all the filmmakers out, no matter where you’re from. You stay with a volunteer and they give you a bicycle to ride around in this tiny little town. The audience is fantastic and the theaters are beautiful and all the films are great. I also like the Newport International Film Festival in Rhode Island. They have parties in mansions with lobsters. It’s fancy but it’s also down to earth at the same time. I was there the year that they were missing the print for the closing night film and a helicopter landed in the middle of town to deliver it, and because of it, they ended up pushing my screening block. To make up for it, they gave us all a free sailboat ride the next day. I don’t like Sundance and Cannes and the larger festivals as much, especially as a short filmmaker because you can get lost in the mix, but Venice is a really great one. Actually I think Venice has the best Q&As I’ve ever seen where it becomes a real community discussion. Plus, it’s in Italy, which is always nice. Originally posted on:The Film Panel Notetaker - Miss a panel discussion? Don't worry! We took notes for you.
]]>Tue, 18 Mar 2008 14:00:55 GMTthefilmpanelnotetakerthefilmpanelnotetaker Blog3/18/2008 10:00:55 AMOn Saturday, Brooklyn, NY-based filmmaker Leah Meyerhoff will be heading to Beantown to present a retrospective of her short films at the Brattle Theatre during the Boston Underground Film Festival. I had the great pleasure to hang out with Leah recently during the South by Southwest (SXSW) Film Festival in Austin, Texas. I first became familiar with Leah’s work at a screening of short films at the Brooklyn Independent Cinema Series last year where I saw the music video she directed, Team Queen. Soon after, I watched her Student Academy-Award nominated short Twitch, which has played in over 200 film festivals around the world and won numerous awards. Last night, I spoke with Leah about her upcoming trip to Boston and what people can expect there, as well as what’s going on with her feature film in development, Unicorns, and other defining moments in her young career. Leah finds a unicorn in the Enchanted Forest in Austin, Texas, at the Bi The Way World Premiere party during SXSW.TFPN: Can you give a little preview of what you’ll be talking about at the Boston Underground Film Festival? Have you been there before?Leah: This will be my third time there. They showed Twitch and Team Queen there before. It’s a fun festival. They’re calling it a retrospective, which is a little strange because I don’t think I’m old enough for a retrospective. Isn’t that what happens after you’re dead? Anyways, I’ll be screening about a dozen of my short films. A lot of films I made in undergrad at Brown University, some experimental films I made when I was in art school in Chicago, and some of my shorts from grad school NYU. Then I have some commercials and music videos I made outside of school. I’ll be talking about my progression as a filmmaker and how I got from being a teenager going off to college to where I am now about to make my first feature film Unicorns. They’re promoting the Q&A to undergrad and high school students in the area. It’s supposed to be somewhat educational, like an artist lecture, and hopefully will inspire aspiring filmmakers to pursue their own path. Since Twitch was so successful on the festival circuit, I also give lectures at various film schools around the country about how to get into film festivals and what to do once you get in. I enjoy educating people on that process, something I didn’t learn in school and had to figure out for myself.TFPN: What made you decide to become a filmmaker?Leah: I originally thought I wanted to be a marine biologist, something totally not in the arts at all. Then I went school at Brown and started taking film classes. I started with film theory, kind of more on an intellectual basis and then began taking film production classes at RISD which was this art school nearby. I continued to make sculpture, painting, photography and other kinds of visual art for years and went to the School of the Art Institute of Chicago for a year. It was almost a half-creative and half-practical decision to go into filmmaking, a way of doing something that I love while also having an impact on the world. I enjoy the collaborative aspect of filmmaking rather than being in a tiny studio all day painting by yourself. It also has a potential to reach a wide audience and affect social change on a level that other art forms aren’t capable of. The distribution system can be mind-bogglingly complicated, but it’s also great because if you can tap into that, you have the chance to really change the way people think. That is part of the reason why I’m particularly interested in coming of age stories about teenage girls. That was the age range for me when I was figuring out who I was in the world and what it meant to grow up as a female in this society. I didn’t see myself reflected in the media. To me, all the TV shows and films I saw were not my reality. Now that I’m older, this idea of creating characters that young girls can look up to or can identify with is a powerful idea.TFPN: Who are some filmmakers that have inspired you? In general, I’m inspired by artists who show the world how it is, raw, gritty and real. Kimberly Pierce is a great example. I like Lynne Ramsay, Jonathan Caouette, Catherine Breillat, and Gus Van Sant. I like artistically-minded filmmakers who are making stories about real people. And at the same time, having a creative take on it and making the world a more beautiful place.TFPN: What is Unicorns about? Has it been cast yet and when do you go into production?Leah: Unicorns is a coming-of-age film about an awkward teenage girl named Davina who escapes to a fantasy world involving unicorns when her first romantic relationship becomes abusive. The film starts on her sixteenth birthday and follows her relationship with an older, punk rock boyfriend. It starts off being fun and exciting, that kind of butterflies-in-your-stomach feeling, and then progressively becomes more and more emotionally and physically abusive. At the same time, her best friend Cassidy has a crush on her and her father is marrying a woman she despises. It’s kind of like an updated Welcome to the Dollhouse. Or another good reference is The Dangerous Lives of Alter Boys or Heavenly Creatures. It’s a straight-forward narrative drama, but then there are these fantastical animated elements as well. Were hoping to start shooting this summer. Alison Anders, who is executive producing, is a filmmaker I really admire. Her film Gas Food Lodging was instrumental in my teenage years, so I’m excited to have her attached to the project. We’re hoping to start casting next month with Judy Henderson, who also cast L.I.E. and Twelve and Holding and Eyde Belasco, who cast Half Nelson. She also casts the actors for the Sundance Labs, which the Unicorns screenplay was a finalist for, so that’s a great resource as well.TFPN: Do you have anyone in mind who you’d like to cast in the role of Davina?Leah: It’s tough, because I really want the 16-year-old girl to seem like a real 16-year-old girl. There are not a lot of name actors out there who actually look 16. I like Kristen Stewart a lot. I like this girl named Mia Waskilowska who was in a short I saw at Sundance called I Love Sarah Jane. I’m guessing what’s going to happen is the lead girl will be someone we discover who is authentic and real. For the lead boy, it might be more of a name actor, along the lines of Emile Hirsch or Joseph Gordon-Levitt. Really I just want to cast whoever is most right for the part. Whoever feels the most real. I am not interested in making the next Clueless or Mean Girls. It’s more My So Called Life than 90210, you know? There are not a lot of films about teenage girls to begin with. There are a lot of coming-of-age films about boys, but there are not a lot of female stories out there. And of the ones that are, they’re usually so unlike any reality that I experienced. Which is what inspires me to make this film. To dig beneath the glossy surface and scratch at the heart of the matter. The brutal realities of adolescence. This is why I spend so much time on casting. If I can cast someone compelling and authentic, then most of my job as a director is already done.TFPN: What were some of your favorite films you saw and panel discussions you attended at SXSW?Leah: My favorite film was a documentary called Beautiful Losers, which was about street artists like Shepard Fairey and Harmony Korine. It was beautifully shot. I also liked Lynn Shelton’s film My Effortless Brilliance. And it was fun to see Bi the Way in a theater with a lively audience. Honestly, I came away from that festival wishing I had seen more narrative films. At one point, in the middle of a screening, my friend turned to me and said I just really want to see a scripted film. Kimberly Pierce has been giving me advice on my film, so I really wanted to see Stop-Loss but it played the day after I left. I also went to a lot of panels. The writing panel was useful to me, with Amy Dotson and Scott Macaulay. Also the Fact or Fiction one was interesting. I went to part of the one the Four Eyed Monsters kids were on about digital distribution. I’ve spoken on a lot of panels myself so it’s always interesting to be on the other side. In general, festival panels become somewhat redundant, but at SXSW there were so many incredible people smashed together in this small venue that even if you came in part way though you could pick some stuff up and move on to the next. That’s kind of what I did.TFPN: What would you say are some of the best festivals you’ve ever been to with the best panels?Leah: This year, I actually found the panels at Sundance and Slamdance to be really interesting, but SXSW is definitely up there in terms of good panels. They’re well moderated, have interesting guests, and are short and to the point. I tend to judge festivals on more of a filmmaker criterion. I like smaller festivals that take good care of the filmmakers and have really good programming and fun parties. I really like Woodstock, Milan (in Italy), and Avignon (in France). I used to like Brooklyn Underground, which doesn’t exist anymore. I also really like the Sarasota Film Festival as a filmmaker and an audience member. It’s a really well-run festival. And there’s another festival a lot of people haven’t heard of called Cucalorus in North Carolina that I would put on my top 10 list of all time. They make a point to bring all the filmmakers out, no matter where you’re from. You stay with a volunteer and they give you a bicycle to ride around in this tiny little town. The audience is fantastic and the theaters are beautiful and all the films are great. I also like the Newport International Film Festival in Rhode Island. They have parties in mansions with lobsters. It’s fancy but it’s also down to earth at the same time. I was there the year that they were missing the print for the closing night film and a helicopter landed in the middle of town to deliver it, and because of it, they ended up pushing my screening block. To make up for it, they gave us all a free sailboat ride the next day. I don’t like Sundance and Cannes and the larger festivals as much, especially as a short filmmaker because you can get lost in the mix, but Venice is a really great one. Actually I think Venice has the best Q&As I’ve ever seen where it becomes a real community discussion. Plus, it’s in Italy, which is always nice. Originally posted on:The Film Panel Notetaker - Miss a panel discussion? Don't worry! We took notes for you. http://www.spout.com/groups/Sound_on_Sight/Re_Re_Episode_15_and_the_rave_over_Blood_Answe/529/23970/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: tadiv
Post To: Sound on Sight
Post Date: 1/16/2008 10:55:14 PM
Body: Ricky -- It's good to read that you don't give out spoilers on the radio show. I find that most of my best film experiences are when I know nothing, or as little as possible, before seeing the film. I'm not sure about your comment "This film is not for everyone. Mostly for ..." - this implies that I must not be a film student or film maker, or, in a broader stroke of the brush, somehow unable to appreciate film as a form of art. I'm not sure I want to make any more comment on that...Regarding your remarks that defend your liking of the film...- Anderson being more mature as a film maker and artist has little to do with the quality of the film - this is not a stab at the quality of the film, I'm just making the logical argument that maturity does not imply a great film will be made. I have not followed Anderson's career, but reviewing his filmography, I have to say that I loved Punch-Drunk Love. I hope that this is not too much of a surprise (I loved Lost in Translation too!). - You mention Dano first, but I think both performances were very strong. I measure a performance on who I observe in the film - is it Paul Dano, or is it Eli Sunday? Dano was better as Eli than he was as Paul Sunday, but I did not really think much about the actor Paul Dano because his performance engaged me with the character. Daniel Plainview was even more engaging as a character. Day-Lewis may well win the Oscar - but if I compare this to the performance given by Forest Whitaker, the Whitaker performance was stronger in my view. I walked out of the Telluride screening of The Last King of Scotland thinking "He has won the Best Actor Oscar." I did not feel that way after Blood.- Reviewing Jack Fisk's filmography reminds me of several interesting film experiences - and one that was not so wonderful - but let's face it, film making is a team effort. My perspective on the photography and set design may be skewed as I was sitting in the front row - I usually try for about the 5th row, but this was a full house and my friend and I arrived while the trailers were running. I do want to see the film again from a not-so-close perspective. My expectations are that I'll get a much better look on the next screening.- I guess I'm not sure what explosion you mean - the initial ignition of the fire or the explosive "blowing out" of that fire... I suppose I liked the ongoing fire better - as the rig crumbled after burning. You're right about people having different tastes - I expected to walk away thinking "Wow, that was fantastic" - sort of like I did in Telluride after The Diving Bell and the Butterfly - but Blood was not so much like that... Your remarks make me think that you think I did not like the film - I did like it - I liked it a lot. There are some great lines of dialog in the film - like the bit about the straw and milkshakes - off the top of my head, I liked the line most when Plainview says to Paul Sunday: "If I travel all the way there and find out that you're a liar, I'll find you and take more than my money back, is that alright with you?"Three and a half stars from Ebert puts the film in contention for his top 10 list - but it has to be one of the best that is so scored. I was interested to read his review after seeing the film - and to review the "At the movies" talk about it. On that show the comment was made that Paul Dano was not up to the challenge of keeping up with Day-Lewis. I think Dano did a fine job. Think of him - and Episode 15 - I recall that there was some wondering about what films he had been in in the past. The film I was really surprised that was not mentioned was L.I.E. That was one of Dano's first films and it was very good.I think that the professional critics, while really liking the film a lot, are not quite ready to jump to the Citizen Kane comparison. I think you are right about future generations - but that general statement is true for art in general. That is, a work of art is often appreciated later rather than sooner... Well, I have to say (or write, as it is) - I have really enjoyed this dialog and hope that our conversation will draw some others to share their opinions here. Looking forward to more episodes of The Naked Lunch Radio Show,Tom
]]>Thu, 17 Jan 2008 03:55:14 GMTtadivSound on Sight1/16/2008 10:55:14 PMRicky -- It&#39;s good to read that you don&#39;t give out spoilers on the radio show. I find that most of my best film experiences are when I know nothing, or as little as possible, before seeing the film. I&#39;m not sure about your comment "This film is not for everyone. Mostly for ..." - this implies that I must not be a film student or film maker, or, in a broader stroke of the brush, somehow unable to appreciate film as a form of art. I&#39;m not sure I want to make any more comment on that...Regarding your remarks that defend your liking of the film...- Anderson being more mature as a film maker and artist has little to do with the quality of the film - this is not a stab at the quality of the film, I&#39;m just making the logical argument that maturity does not imply a great film will be made. I have not followed Anderson&#39;s career, but reviewing his filmography, I have to say that I loved Punch-Drunk Love. I hope that this is not too much of a surprise (I loved Lost in Translation too!). - You mention Dano first, but I think both performances were very strong. I measure a performance on who I observe in the film - is it Paul Dano, or is it Eli Sunday? Dano was better as Eli than he was as Paul Sunday, but I did not really think much about the actor Paul Dano because his performance engaged me with the character. Daniel Plainview was even more engaging as a character. Day-Lewis may well win the Oscar - but if I compare this to the performance given by Forest Whitaker, the Whitaker performance was stronger in my view. I walked out of the Telluride screening of The Last King of Scotland thinking "He has won the Best Actor Oscar." I did not feel that way after Blood.- Reviewing Jack Fisk&#39;s filmography reminds me of several interesting film experiences - and one that was not so wonderful - but let&#39;s face it, film making is a team effort. My perspective on the photography and set design may be skewed as I was sitting in the front row - I usually try for about the 5th row, but this was a full house and my friend and I arrived while the trailers were running. I do want to see the film again from a not-so-close perspective. My expectations are that I&#39;ll get a much better look on the next screening.- I guess I&#39;m not sure what explosion you mean - the initial ignition of the fire or the explosive "blowing out" of that fire... I suppose I liked the ongoing fire better - as the rig crumbled after burning. You&#39;re right about people having different tastes - I expected to walk away thinking "Wow, that was fantastic" - sort of like I did in Telluride after The Diving Bell and the Butterfly - but Blood was not so much like that... Your remarks make me think that you think I did not like the film - I did like it - I liked it a lot. There are some great lines of dialog in the film - like the bit about the straw and milkshakes - off the top of my head, I liked the line most when Plainview says to Paul Sunday: "If I travel all the way there and find out that you&#39;re a liar, I&#39;ll find you and take more than my money back, is that alright with you?"Three and a half stars from Ebert puts the film in contention for his top 10 list - but it has to be one of the best that is so scored. I was interested to read his review after seeing the film - and to review the "At the movies" talk about it. On that show the comment was made that Paul Dano was not up to the challenge of keeping up with Day-Lewis. I think Dano did a fine job. Think of him - and Episode 15 - I recall that there was some wondering about what films he had been in in the past. The film I was really surprised that was not mentioned was L.I.E. That was one of Dano&#39;s first films and it was very good.I think that the professional critics, while really liking the film a lot, are not quite ready to jump to the Citizen Kane comparison. I think you are right about future generations - but that general statement is true for art in general. That is, a work of art is often appreciated later rather than sooner... Well, I have to say (or write, as it is) - I have really enjoyed this dialog and hope that our conversation will draw some others to share their opinions here. Looking forward to more episodes of The Naked Lunch Radio Show,Tom http://www.spout.com/groups/Sound_on_Sight/Re_Episode_15_and_the_rave_over_Blood_Answer/529/23945/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: NakedLunchRadioShow
Post To: Sound on Sight
Post Date: 1/16/2008 2:59:51 AM
Body: Frist I would just like to say that we never give out any spoilers of any movies that are less than a year old. I am glad that you went back and listened to the show again after you saw the film. Now for your answer. As I mentioned in the show. This film is not for everyone. Mostly for film students and film makers. Also I said that it is a film that will only really be appreciated by future generations. Even the early films by Stanley Kubrick were only considered masterpieces a decade later. A few points of why I like the film so much .. - The film marks a major advance for Anderson who reveals increased maturity and artistic assurance with this film. - Dano’s performance is outstanding. His confidence in his character’s truth is breathtaking. -The original music by Jonny Greenwood is fantastic. - There are good performances, and great performances, and then there are performances that so extraordinary that you can’t look away. Like Brando in A Streetcar Named Desire, and Robert DeNiro in Taxi Driver. Day-Lewis gives one as Daniel Plainview. - Anderson delivers an authentic, convincing portrait of this era - Every scene and sequence a fascinating visual perspective -- so that it doesn't look quite like anything we've seen before. (Much of this is due to the great production designer Jack Fisk -- "Mulholland Dr.," "The Thin Red ) - The oil rig explosion is outstanding - The cinematography is eye popping - Of the many Oscar-worthy moments in the film, the best has to be the church scene where Eli forces Daniel to announce himself a sinner. Watch Day-Lewis’ delivery and try to imagine anyone else moving from sarcasm to anger to heartache in the space of those few minutes. I don’t’ know what else to say. You mentioned that you were looking for clues on what you missed. I don’t think you missed anything. People have different tastes. Also I say this time and time again. When you go into a movie with high expectations you are easily disappointed. When you go into a film with no or low expectations, than you have a better chance of enjoying the film if it is half decent. Maybe there was just too much hype. Maybe you like films with more action, films that are a little faster paced and maybe even have a lead female character. I do not know. I try on the show to gear people to the right movies. Movies that are meant for them. Which is why I warned people it was not for everyone and even mentioned that some friends walked out? I just want to close by saying that like it or not, it is a work of art. Maybe it doesn’t entertain every single individual who sees it. However there is not one film that does. In any case we are doing a Paul Thomas Anderson special this Thursday. We will review this film one more time as well as look back at the director’s career. Also Roger Ebert also gave it 3 ½ stars. What I find remarkable is critics who spend so much time tearing apart a great film and focus their review mostly on the negative just to end it by saying something like … “Don’t get me wrong. It’s an amazing movie. Go see it” I actually heard two critics on a pod cast say that after ripping it apart. ????????????????????????????
]]>Wed, 16 Jan 2008 07:59:51 GMTNakedLunchRadioShowSound on Sight1/16/2008 2:59:51 AMFrist I would just like to say that we never give out any spoilers of any movies that are less than a year old. I am glad that you went back and listened to the show again after you saw the film. Now for your answer. As I mentioned in the show. This film is not for everyone. Mostly for film students and film makers. Also I said that it is a film that will only really be appreciated by future generations. Even the early films by Stanley Kubrick were only considered masterpieces a decade later. A few points of why I like the film so much .. - The film marks a major advance for Anderson who reveals increased maturity and artistic assurance with this film. - Dano&rsquo;s performance is outstanding. His confidence in his character&rsquo;s truth is breathtaking. -The original music by Jonny Greenwood is fantastic. - There are good performances, and great performances, and then there are performances that so extraordinary that you can&rsquo;t look away. Like Brando in A Streetcar Named Desire, and Robert DeNiro in Taxi Driver. Day-Lewis gives one as Daniel Plainview. - Anderson delivers an authentic, convincing portrait of this era - Every scene and sequence a fascinating visual perspective -- so that it doesn&#39;t look quite like anything we&#39;ve seen before. (Much of this is due to the great production designer Jack Fisk -- "Mulholland Dr.," "The Thin Red ) - The oil rig explosion is outstanding - The cinematography is eye popping - Of the many Oscar-worthy moments in the film, the best has to be the church scene where Eli forces Daniel to announce himself a sinner. Watch Day-Lewis&rsquo; delivery and try to imagine anyone else moving from sarcasm to anger to heartache in the space of those few minutes. I don&rsquo;t&rsquo; know what else to say. You mentioned that you were looking for clues on what you missed. I don&rsquo;t think you missed anything. People have different tastes. Also I say this time and time again. When you go into a movie with high expectations you are easily disappointed. When you go into a film with no or low expectations, than you have a better chance of enjoying the film if it is half decent. Maybe there was just too much hype. Maybe you like films with more action, films that are a little faster paced and maybe even have a lead female character. I do not know. I try on the show to gear people to the right movies. Movies that are meant for them. Which is why I warned people it was not for everyone and even mentioned that some friends walked out? I just want to close by saying that like it or not, it is a work of art. Maybe it doesn&rsquo;t entertain every single individual who sees it. However there is not one film that does. In any case we are doing a Paul Thomas Anderson special this Thursday. We will review this film one more time as well as look back at the director&rsquo;s career. Also Roger Ebert also gave it 3 &frac12; stars. What I find remarkable is critics who spend so much time tearing apart a great film and focus their review mostly on the negative just to end it by saying something like &hellip; &ldquo;Don&rsquo;t get me wrong. It&rsquo;s an amazing movie. Go see it&rdquo; I actually heard two critics on a pod cast say that after ripping it apart. ???????????????????????????? http://www.spout.com/blogs/jlgdrd/archive/2007/8/13/18016.aspx Post By: jlgdrd
Post To: Wicked Fun
Post Date: 8/13/2007 11:28:00 PM
Body: Jackson (laughing): Tattoos are cool. But it takes a little more than that to turn me on. Derek: Really? “Turn me on?” See I’m talking about love. Jackson: Hey. I’m just a guy. Derek: Hey, I’m just a guy too. They kiss. The above exchange summarizes the key strength of Luster, Everett Lewis’ dry, not altogether unsuccessful comedy on queer attraction. The title is a double-entendre’ for one caught up in the pitch of desire and the gleam of their beloved. It is a wry parable on the dangers of “love at first sight.” All the key characters are love victims, including our hero, Jackson, whose jolts of romantic epiphany are not reciprocated. Not for nothing is the music store milieu (ground zero for Luster) called “No Life.” Practically everyone is tortured by infatuation or poised for their one great, dangerous, ecstatic love to appear on the horizon. Luster doesn’t always work, but the moments when it does are splendid. Like L.I.E. and Spun, Luster adopts the affectless, dispassionate sort of non-acting that tries to compensate for inertia by reaching new depths of authenticity. That kind of vacuum creates tension when the content is truly sinister, but I think the characters in Luster are less nihilistic than simply disappointed. Sometimes the low-key acting has the right feel to it, the tempo seems appropriate. Other times it feels uneven or unbelievable. Maybe it’s easier to play detached than nearly detached. And flawed though it may be, Luster is an impressive film. Jackson, Sam, Alyssa, Jed and Derek are all on the level, what happens to them is moving because we can identify, or at least respect them. The one villain, Sonny Spike, is almost always shot in dark blue silhouette. He concedes he is gay but refuses to come out because it will effect his profits as a musician. Even Billy with his open pleasure in being battered, is achingly ingenuous. He is completely comfortable with who he is, and makes no apologies. This, I think, is what makes Luster a formidable film. A force to be reckoned with. It is enjoyable (though not as funny as I might have hoped) but more than that, it does not make concessions to a heterosexual audience. It doesn’t play to them. It makes no apologies for its’ queer hero, Jackson, or any of its queer characters. Even Sam, who is straight-identified, wants Jackson, and Luster never makes this seem implausible. Maybe because Lewis has written characters whose salient aspect is not their orientation. He doesn’t try to pass them off as straight, they’re not macho jokes and they’re not nelly clowns. More than Will and Grace, more than Queer Eye, Luster says, we’re just guys who like dick. There’s plenty of visual information to reinforce the practice of avid, raucous, same-gender sex. Lewis doesn’t cut away from scrumptious nude men or their genitals because he’s afraid straight men in the audience will be uncomfortable or Luster might get dismissed as porn. The scene I led with could arguably qualify as a great moment in Queer Cinematic History. A couple of guys, a sexy blue-haired punk and a handsome yuppie discuss the nature of attraction. Then they kiss. Just a couple of blokes who want to kiss and do so. No ugly, self-loathing anxiety or homophobic terror. No buried undisclosed sexual tension. Just two guys kissing. And it’s because Luster doesn’t blink, doesn’t smack its’ chops, or try to be diplomatic, because it doesn’t treat this as outre’ that it’s such a revelation. There are numerous moments like this, where sharpness and accuracy in the acting and writing trump content. Where treatment redeems plot. Justin Herwick, who plays Jackson, the protagonist of Luster, is well suited to the role. Jackson falls in love 20 times a day. He’s self-absorbed, alienated, raw, dissolute, and a talented poet. He’s disillusioned with the empty values of the bourgeois and their vapid tastes and finds his only satisfaction in rebellion and passion. Booze, boys and brawling. Filmmakers have been trying to depict the lives of poets with varying degrees of success for awhile now. We hear Jackson composing poetry in his head and though they use Dennis Cooper’s words and are smart enough to make a distinction between lyrics and poetry, it’s a mistake. Jackson is a latter day Rimbaud and Herwick has the vibe down, the comportment and the ‘tude, without the skateboarding segues and an awful scene that comes early on. We understand why Jackson despises the shallow customer and everything he stands for, but the scene feels fabricated and utterly bogus. In addition to Herwick, standout performances in an impressive ensemble include, Shane Powers, B. Wyatt, Sean Thibodeau and Pamela Gidley.
]]>Tue, 14 Aug 2007 03:28:00 GMTjlgdrdWicked Fun8/13/2007 11:28:00 PMJackson (laughing): Tattoos are cool. But it takes a little more than that to turn me on. Derek: Really? &ldquo;Turn me on?&rdquo; See I&rsquo;m talking about love. Jackson: Hey. I&rsquo;m just a guy. Derek: Hey, I&rsquo;m just a guy too. They kiss. The above exchange summarizes the key strength of Luster, Everett Lewis&rsquo; dry, not altogether unsuccessful comedy on queer attraction. The title is a double-entendre&rsquo; for one caught up in the pitch of desire and the gleam of their beloved. It is a wry parable on the dangers of &ldquo;love at first sight.&rdquo; All the key characters are love victims, including our hero, Jackson, whose jolts of romantic epiphany are not reciprocated. Not for nothing is the music store milieu (ground zero for Luster) called &ldquo;No Life.&rdquo; Practically everyone is tortured by infatuation or poised for their one great, dangerous, ecstatic love to appear on the horizon. Luster doesn&rsquo;t always work, but the moments when it does are splendid. Like L.I.E. and Spun, Luster adopts the affectless, dispassionate sort of non-acting that tries to compensate for inertia by reaching new depths of authenticity. That kind of vacuum creates tension when the content is truly sinister, but I think the characters in Luster are less nihilistic than simply disappointed. Sometimes the low-key acting has the right feel to it, the tempo seems appropriate. Other times it feels uneven or unbelievable. Maybe it&rsquo;s easier to play detached than nearly detached. And flawed though it may be, Luster is an impressive film. Jackson, Sam, Alyssa, Jed and Derek are all on the level, what happens to them is moving because we can identify, or at least respect them. The one villain, Sonny Spike, is almost always shot in dark blue silhouette. He concedes he is gay but refuses to come out because it will effect his profits as a musician. Even Billy with his open pleasure in being battered, is achingly ingenuous. He is completely comfortable with who he is, and makes no apologies. This, I think, is what makes Luster a formidable film. A force to be reckoned with. It is enjoyable (though not as funny as I might have hoped) but more than that, it does not make concessions to a heterosexual audience. It doesn&rsquo;t play to them. It makes no apologies for its&rsquo; queer hero, Jackson, or any of its queer characters. Even Sam, who is straight-identified, wants Jackson, and Luster never makes this seem implausible. Maybe because Lewis has written characters whose salient aspect is not their orientation. He doesn&rsquo;t try to pass them off as straight, they&rsquo;re not macho jokes and they&rsquo;re not nelly clowns. More than Will and Grace, more than Queer Eye, Luster says, we&rsquo;re just guys who like dick. There&rsquo;s plenty of visual information to reinforce the practice of avid, raucous, same-gender sex. Lewis doesn&rsquo;t cut away from scrumptious nude men or their genitals because he&rsquo;s afraid straight men in the audience will be uncomfortable or Luster might get dismissed as porn. The scene I led with could arguably qualify as a great moment in Queer Cinematic History. A couple of guys, a sexy blue-haired punk and a handsome yuppie discuss the nature of attraction. Then they kiss. Just a couple of blokes who want to kiss and do so. No ugly, self-loathing anxiety or homophobic terror. No buried undisclosed sexual tension. Just two guys kissing. And it&rsquo;s because Luster doesn&rsquo;t blink, doesn&rsquo;t smack its&rsquo; chops, or try to be diplomatic, because it doesn&rsquo;t treat this as outre&rsquo; that it&rsquo;s such a revelation. There are numerous moments like this, where sharpness and accuracy in the acting and writing trump content. Where treatment redeems plot. Justin Herwick, who plays Jackson, the protagonist of Luster, is well suited to the role. Jackson falls in love 20 times a day. He&rsquo;s self-absorbed, alienated, raw, dissolute, and a talented poet. He&rsquo;s disillusioned with the empty values of the bourgeois and their vapid tastes and finds his only satisfaction in rebellion and passion. Booze, boys and brawling. Filmmakers have been trying to depict the lives of poets with varying degrees of success for awhile now. We hear Jackson composing poetry in his head and though they use Dennis Cooper&rsquo;s words and are smart enough to make a distinction between lyrics and poetry, it&rsquo;s a mistake. Jackson is a latter day Rimbaud and Herwick has the vibe down, the comportment and the &lsquo;tude, without the skateboarding segues and an awful scene that comes early on. We understand why Jackson despises the shallow customer and everything he stands for, but the scene feels fabricated and utterly bogus. In addition to Herwick, standout performances in an impressive ensemble include, Shane Powers, B. Wyatt, Sean Thibodeau and Pamela Gidley. http://www.spout.com/groups/HORROR_MOVIES_101/Re_Hannibal_Lecter_vs_Norman_Bates/222/6978/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: Puhnner
Post To: HORROR MOVIES 101
Post Date: 4/12/2007 3:38:06 PM
Body: Very well put! How about Mr. Cox in L.I.E.; astonishing. He appears as the character he plays, not Cox.
]]>Thu, 12 Apr 2007 19:38:06 GMTPuhnnerHORROR MOVIES 1014/12/2007 3:38:06 PMVery well put! How about Mr. Cox in L.I.E.; astonishing. He appears as the character he plays, not Cox. http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/sex/MemberTagFilms.aspxsex
Number of films tagged: 2414

Number of people who tagged: 126

Number of times used: 548

]]>Fri, 04 Dec 2009 00:50:42 GMT2414126548Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/disturbing/MemberTagFilms.aspxdisturbing
Number of films tagged: 283

Number of people who tagged: 119

Number of times used: 394

]]>Wed, 04 Nov 2009 21:55:54 GMT283119394Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/crime/MemberTagFilms.aspxcrime
Number of films tagged: 401

Number of people who tagged: 70

Number of times used: 303

]]>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 18:51:32 GMT40170303Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/father/MemberTagFilms.aspxfather
Number of films tagged: 3580

Number of people who tagged: 51

Number of times used: 213

]]>Wed, 11 Nov 2009 20:51:56 GMT358051213Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/grief/MemberTagFilms.aspxgrief
Number of films tagged: 539

Number of people who tagged: 20

Number of times used: 32

]]>Wed, 12 Aug 2009 13:02:59 GMT5392032Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/chilling/MemberTagFilms.aspxchilling
Number of films tagged: 10

Number of people who tagged: 11

Number of times used: 12

]]>Thu, 19 Nov 2009 00:30:46 GMT101112Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/pedophilia/MemberTagFilms.aspxpedophilia
Number of films tagged: 36

Number of people who tagged: 8

Number of times used: 11

]]>Wed, 03 Jun 2009 13:03:04 GMT36811Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/authentic/MemberTagFilms.aspxauthentic
Number of films tagged: 4

Number of people who tagged: 4

Number of times used: 4

]]>Wed, 29 Jul 2009 04:04:26 GMT444Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/delinquency/MemberTagFilms.aspxdelinquency
Number of films tagged: 208

Number of people who tagged: 2

Number of times used: 2

]]>Wed, 12 Aug 2009 13:02:59 GMT20822Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/very-dark/MemberTagFilms.aspxvery-dark
Number of films tagged: 1

Number of people who tagged: 1

Number of times used: 1

]]>Sun, 18 Mar 2007 00:53:28 GMT111Tag