list http://www.spout.com/ Recent community activity around The New World 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/The_New_World/242947/default.aspx Title: The New World
Year: 2006
Director: Terrence Malick
Plot: Terrence Malick, the universally acclaimed American filmmaker responsible for the key 1970s features Badlands and Days of Heaven, returns for a rare directorial outing with the sweeping period piece The New World -- an epic dramatization of Pocahontas' relationships with John Smith and John Rolfe. Malick's story opens at the dawn of the 17th century, just prior to the colonization of the United States -- when the North American population consisted of an interconnected series of native tribes. In April 1607, three maritime vessels approach the unfamiliar continent, with 103 sailors on board. As members of the Virginia Company, these adventurers carry a royal charter to mount a society on the edge of the new continent. John Smith (Colin Farrell) sits chained below one of the decks. He is a 27-year-old loose cannon, who, for his persistently rebellious acts, has been sentenced to death by hanging as soon as the ships dock. Nevertheless, Captain Christopher Newport (Christopher Plummer) acknowledges Smith's ability to aid with exploration and consents to pardon him as a result. Upon landing, Smith seeks assistance from local Native American tribes with colonization, but runs into the unexpected -- he falls desperately in love with Pocahontas, or "Playful One" (Q'orianka Kilcher), the daughter of the omnipotent Chief Powhatan (August Schellenberg). Needless to say, this does not sit well with Powhatan or the rest of the tribe. Moreover, the oft-bellicose Smith enters a head-to-head conflict with his fellow Britons when he finds his tempestuousness calmed by the tranquility of the new landscape, as the anger and violence of his shipmates concurrently build in the face of the Native Americans. Later, Smith temporarily returns to England; believing that Smith is dead, Pocahontas accepts the hand of plantation owner John Rolfe in marriage (with her father's blessing) and follows Rolfe back to the old country. When Smith returns to America, his intended is nowhere to be seen, and the entire community teeters on the brink of a British-Indian war. Malick shot the production on location in Virginia; it co-stars Jonathan Pryce, John Savage, and David Thewlis. ~ Nathan Southern, All Movie Guide
Times Tagged: 48
Number of Lists: 34
Number of blog posts: 14
Number of discussion threads: 16
SpoutRating: 3
]]>Tue, 12 May 2009 02:41:39 GMTThe New World2006Terrence Malick<a href="/players/P___100893/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Terrence Malick</a>, the universally acclaimed American filmmaker responsible for the key 1970s features <a href=/films/2207/default.aspx style='text-decoration:underline'>Badlands</a> and <a href=/films/8252/default.aspx style='text-decoration:underline'>Days of Heaven</a>, returns for a rare directorial outing with the sweeping period piece The New World -- an epic dramatization of Pocahontas' relationships with John Smith and John Rolfe. Malick's story opens at the dawn of the 17th century, just prior to the colonization of the United States -- when the North American population consisted of an interconnected series of native tribes. In April 1607, three maritime vessels approach the unfamiliar continent, with 103 sailors on board. As members of the Virginia Company, these adventurers carry a royal charter to mount a society on the edge of the new continent. John Smith (<a href="/players/P____22766/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Colin Farrell</a>) sits chained below one of the decks. He is a 27-year-old loose cannon, who, for his persistently rebellious acts, has been sentenced to death by hanging as soon as the ships dock. Nevertheless, Captain Christopher Newport (<a href="/players/P____57110/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Christopher Plummer</a>) acknowledges Smith's ability to aid with exploration and consents to pardon him as a result. Upon landing, Smith seeks assistance from local Native American tribes with colonization, but runs into the unexpected -- he falls desperately in love with Pocahontas, or "Playful One" (Q'orianka Kilcher), the daughter of the omnipotent Chief Powhatan (<a href="/players/P____63598/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>August Schellenberg</a>). Needless to say, this does not sit well with Powhatan or the rest of the tribe. Moreover, the oft-bellicose Smith enters a head-to-head conflict with his fellow Britons when he finds his tempestuousness calmed by the tranquility of the new landscape, as the anger and violence of his shipmates concurrently build in the face of the Native Americans. Later, Smith temporarily returns to England; believing that Smith is dead, Pocahontas accepts the hand of plantation owner John Rolfe in marriage (with her father's blessing) and follows Rolfe back to the old country. When Smith returns to America, his intended is nowhere to be seen, and the entire community teeters on the brink of a British-Indian war. Malick shot the production on location in Virginia; it co-stars <a href="/players/P____57980/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Jonathan Pryce</a>, <a href="/players/P____63326/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>John Savage</a>, and <a href="/players/P____70493/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>David Thewlis</a>. ~ Nathan Southern, All Movie Guide48Tag Target (>10)3414163http://www.spout.com/ProductImages/t77806rjbmv.jpghttp://www.spout.com/films/The_New_World/242947/default.aspxFilm http://www.spout.com/groups/Movie_Polls/Re_What_is_your_favorite_movie_directed_by_Terrenc/657/40801/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: QFLW
Post To: Movie Polls
Post Date: 3/3/2009 5:16:13 PM
Body: [quote user="Risselada"] Please reference this thread for the rules of this group. Is anyone looking forward to Terrence Malick's The Tree of Life which should be coming out some time in 2009? I believe shooting has wrapped and they are into post production. It will be interesting to see what Malick does with Brad Pitt and Sean Penn. And interesting to see both of them starring in a movie together. Although I will admit that I enjoy each subsequent Malick movie less than the previous one. Is anyone else looking forward to this film? Do you feel like Malick's best days are behind him or is he still gearing up for his best? Please vote only once in each poll. Movies referenced in this poll:BadlandsDays of HeavenThe New WorldThe Thin Red Line [/quote] The one I haven't seen is Thin Red Line; I just never got around to it. Got bored with The New World & didn't finish watching. Days of Heaven was just depressing, as much for the relentless, unending expanse of wheat as for the downer of a story and blandness of characters. My vote went to Badlands; it really is my favorite of the lot. Certainly more exciting than the others. Although each of Malick's films have been a disappointment to some degree, I'm curious to see Tree of Life. The premises, trailers and cast always look so interesting, so I keep being drawn in by new hope.
]]>Tue, 03 Mar 2009 22:16:13 GMTQFLWMovie Polls3/3/2009 5:16:13 PM[quote user="Risselada"] Please reference this thread for the rules of this group. Is anyone looking forward to Terrence Malick's The Tree of Life which should be coming out some time in 2009? I believe shooting has wrapped and they are into post production. It will be interesting to see what Malick does with Brad Pitt and Sean Penn. And interesting to see both of them starring in a movie together. Although I will admit that I enjoy each subsequent Malick movie less than the previous one. Is anyone else looking forward to this film? Do you feel like Malick's best days are behind him or is he still gearing up for his best? Please vote only once in each poll. Movies referenced in this poll:BadlandsDays of HeavenThe New WorldThe Thin Red Line [/quote] The one I haven't seen is Thin Red Line; I just never got around to it. Got bored with The New World &amp; didn't finish watching. Days of Heaven was just depressing, as much for the relentless, unending expanse of wheat as for the downer of a story and blandness of characters. My vote went to Badlands; it really is my favorite of the lot. Certainly more exciting than the others. Although each of Malick's films have been a disappointment to some degree, I'm curious to see Tree of Life. The premises, trailers and cast always look so interesting, so I keep being drawn in by new hope. http://www.spout.com/groups/Movie_Polls/What_is_your_favorite_movie_directed_by_Terrence_M/657/40792/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: Risselada
Post To: Movie Polls
Post Date: 3/3/2009 1:33:40 PM
Body: Please reference this thread for the rules of this group. Is anyone looking forward to Terrence Malick's The Tree of Life which should be coming out some time in 2009? I believe shooting has wrapped and they are into post production. It will be interesting to see what Malick does with Brad Pitt and Sean Penn. And interesting to see both of them starring in a movie together. Although I will admit that I enjoy each subsequent Malick movie less than the previous one. Is anyone else looking forward to this film? Do you feel like Malick's best days are behind him or is he still gearing up for his best? Please vote only once in each poll. Movies referenced in this poll:BadlandsDays of HeavenThe New WorldThe Thin Red Line
]]>Tue, 03 Mar 2009 18:33:40 GMTRisseladaMovie Polls3/3/2009 1:33:40 PMPlease reference this thread for the rules of this group. Is anyone looking forward to Terrence Malick's The Tree of Life which should be coming out some time in 2009? I believe shooting has wrapped and they are into post production. It will be interesting to see what Malick does with Brad Pitt and Sean Penn. And interesting to see both of them starring in a movie together. Although I will admit that I enjoy each subsequent Malick movie less than the previous one. Is anyone else looking forward to this film? Do you feel like Malick's best days are behind him or is he still gearing up for his best? Please vote only once in each poll. Movies referenced in this poll:BadlandsDays of HeavenThe New WorldThe Thin Red Line http://www.spout.com/blogs/jimbell/archive/2008/9/30/35733.aspx Post By: JimBell
Post To: JimBell Blog
Post Date: 9/30/2008 7:00:47 PM
Body: You know about a bad hair day; well, this was a bad movie night—three promising rentals, three disappointments. Although the period detail is excellent in The Man Who Wasn’t There (2001), the main character, played by Billy Bob Thornton, is too unrealistic in contrast to the other characters, who may be a bit off kilter but seem plausible. For example, early on, the protagonist and his wife entertain her boss and his wife for a painful dinner, the social interaction saying all that needs to be said. In contrast to this fine presentation of self in everyday life, our protagonist is so clinically depressed that the interaction involving him seems fakey because ordinarily people would not put up with his taciturn rudeness. Although I liked this film when I saw it several years ago, I’m no longer enamoured with it simply because it is film noirish. Flight of the Red Balloon (2007) begins with a worrisome scene: A boy is talking up into the air to a balloon which we cannot see, asking it to come home with him. This does not bode well for an interesting movie. Unfortunately, the cinematography makes things worse. As with the opening shot, the camera often focuses on only half the action. For example, if the young boy is playing the piano, the camera focuses on the new babysitter watching him. But the shot does not show enough facial expression to tell us anything. So we’re left staring at an impassive profile while the sound track plays piano scales badly. Maybe I should have watched Terrence Malick’s The New World (2005) all the way through, but during the first part I felt so preached at that I thought it would only get worse. The natives are fakey—fakey choreographed movements, fakey face paint, fakey handling of a prisoner, and on and on—totally unconvincing. The main white man, Captain John Smith is dull and, apparently, stupid. What’s he doing leaving his men and wandering off through the swamps in a suit of armour? It is symbolic, of course, and just more preaching.
]]>Tue, 30 Sep 2008 23:00:47 GMTJimBellJimBell Blog9/30/2008 7:00:47 PMYou know about a bad hair day; well, this was a bad movie night&mdash;three promising rentals, three disappointments. Although the period detail is excellent in The Man Who Wasn&rsquo;t There (2001), the main character, played by Billy Bob Thornton, is too unrealistic in contrast to the other characters, who may be a bit off kilter but seem plausible. For example, early on, the protagonist and his wife entertain her boss and his wife for a painful dinner, the social interaction saying all that needs to be said. In contrast to this fine presentation of self in everyday life, our protagonist is so clinically depressed that the interaction involving him seems fakey because ordinarily people would not put up with his taciturn rudeness. Although I liked this film when I saw it several years ago, I&rsquo;m no longer enamoured with it simply because it is film noirish. Flight of the Red Balloon (2007) begins with a worrisome scene: A boy is talking up into the air to a balloon which we cannot see, asking it to come home with him. This does not bode well for an interesting movie. Unfortunately, the cinematography makes things worse. As with the opening shot, the camera often focuses on only half the action. For example, if the young boy is playing the piano, the camera focuses on the new babysitter watching him. But the shot does not show enough facial expression to tell us anything. So we&rsquo;re left staring at an impassive profile while the sound track plays piano scales badly. Maybe I should have watched Terrence Malick&rsquo;s The New World (2005) all the way through, but during the first part I felt so preached at that I thought it would only get worse. The natives are fakey&mdash;fakey choreographed movements, fakey face paint, fakey handling of a prisoner, and on and on&mdash;totally unconvincing. The main white man, Captain John Smith is dull and, apparently, stupid. What&rsquo;s he doing leaving his men and wandering off through the swamps in a suit of armour? It is symbolic, of course, and just more preaching. http://www.spout.com/blogs/captainryannn/archive/2008/8/11/33880.aspx Post By: CaptainRyannn
Post To: CaptainRyannn Blog
Post Date: 8/11/2008 9:08:45 PM
Body: Titles in bold represent a first time viewing. 346. Magnolia (Anderson, 1999)----------I thought that this was a pretty great collage-type film with the likeness of a more familiar title, Crash. Aside from Julianne Moore's performance, one of the few things I didn't like was the fact that the characters didn't connect with each other other than the bizarre finale at the end of the film. (7.5 / 10) 347. Stuck (Gordon, 2007)----------Based on a true story, stuck follows a wannabe-ghetto woman (Mena Suvari) after she hits a homeless man and drives him into her garage. The acting was terrible, the premise was good though. Towards the end, it began to pick up in terms of entertainment. (6 / 10) 348. Equilibrium (Wimmer, 2002)----------Christian Bale? Sweet. Reviews relating it to The Matrix? Awesome. This is why I initially checked out Equilibrium. The action was pretty sweet but every few minutes, I couldn't help but see a blatant plot-hole. Also, can someone answer me why do the people have dust fly out of them when they get shot? (7 / 10) 349. The New World (Malick, 2005)----------It seems that whenever Malick puts out a new movie, I become less and less interested. To me, Badlands was his best and his vast collection of movies since then have just seemed to have gone downhill. I appreciated the beautiful cinematography and music along with the great acting. But the pacing was just a little too slow for me. (7 / 10) 350. The Terminator (Cameron, 1984)----------It's funny to think that The Terminator, one of the most masculine movies of all time, came from the same guy who made Titanic, one of the most popular love stories of all time. I basically watched this for mere entertainment and it satisfied that. (7 / 10) 351. Terminator 2: Judgment Day (Cameron, 1991)----------Again, I just watched this purely for entertainment. I think it did a better job at doing that than the first one. The best thing about watching these movies is just pausing it at certain testosterone-filled moments and thinking, This is the governor of California. (7.5 / 10) 352. Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines (Mostow, 2003)----------This got quite a bit of negative reviews. I wouldn't say that it was especially bad, but rather on par with the first one. The best part was how they ended it. It got me excited for Terminator Salvation. (7 / 10) 353. A Home at the End of the World (Mayer, 2004)----------Although the subject matter may not be something many of us can relate to, the themes definitely are. The overall mood and and portrayals of friendship and love make this worth watching alone. (7 / 10) 354. Undertow (Green, 2004)----------When I first watched this, it was decent. Once I delved into some reviews and analysis' I watched it again and fell in love with it. The story follows two brothers who live with their dad out in the southern forests. Their mysterious uncle comes around and suddenly a game of cat-and-mouse begins. The tone of the film stays consistent and I think that that is it's strongest point along with great performances by Jamie Bell and Josh Lucas. (8 / 10) 355. Antikörper / Antibodies (Alvart, 2005)----------Antibodies is a film that follows closely in the footsteps of The Silence of the Lambs. Our protagonist is a village cop and the antagonist is a serial killer whose finally been caught. The cinematography was good and the acting was average. The basic story-line is something that's been done plenty of times before but the sheer intensity that this takes it to puts Antibodies a little bit above the rest. (7.5 / 10) 356. Cidade de Deus / City of God (Meirelles, 2002)----------I've seen City of God countless times as it is my favorite film along with Once Upon a Time in America. It takes us through two decades in the lives of a handful of children / teenagers in the slums of Rio de Janerio. Most grow up to be hoods and murder and robbery isn't something uncommon in their lives. Our protagonist, Rocket, is an aspiring photographer and just so happens to be there as all of the violence breaks out. If you're okay with subtitles, be sure to check this one out. (10 / 10) 357. Harold & Kumar Escape from Guantanamo Bay (Hurwitz, 2008)----------The whole 'Escape' part only really lasts about five minutes. The rest of the film is basically slapstick comedy executed in an non-comedic way. (5 / 10) 358. Shotgun Stories (Nichols, 2007)----------I have been looking forward to seeing this one for quite some time. After falling in love with the trailer, I had to see it. There are two sets of step-brothers. Their father just died. One set knew him as a loving man and the other knew him as a violent, neglecting one. A feud erupts between them and their egos don't allow themselves to stop until irreversible damage has been caused. This movie had some of the most real characters I've ever seen portrayed and it was as if I were watching this unfold in real life. (8.5 / 10) 359. My Bodyguard (Bill, 1980)-----------I rented this based off of Roger Ebert's shining review but found it to be just average in comparison to other tough-time-in-high-school films. The main kid is a rich boy who starts going to a public school. The bullys don't like this and pick on him. After getting pushed around he gets the tough-guy bodyguard and they become friends, but not after finding out a few secrets about each other. (6 / 10) 360. Kicking and Screaming (Baumbach, 1995)----------Unlike the 2005 comedy, this one is actually good. But it's not about a children's soccer team, but rather a group of friend who have just graduated from college and don't know what to do next. This has some of the most subtly humorous dialogue I've ever experienced and I couldn't help but laugh virtually the entire way through. The plot really isn't there, there's no character development or twists. This movie basically stands up on the dialogue and it's characters. The friendship that exists reminds me slightly of that of the American Pie trilogy. Great movie. Worthy of its Criterion stamp. (8 / 10) 361. Schizopolis (Soderbergh, 1996)----------What did I just watch? (?? / 10) 362. Children of Men (Cuarón, 2006)----------Featuring probably some of the best camera work and choreography in film in recent years, Children of Men was superb. To be able to shoot such busy scenes all in one shot takes a certain amount of skill. Watching the special features and commentary definitely gave me an idea of how much work went into this. Children of Men takes place about twenty years in the future where women are infertile and no one knows why. Immigrants are killed and the world is in chaos. An immigrant is found bearing a child and Theo (Clive Own) is in charge of getting her to safety. (8 / 10) 363. The Chumscrubber (Posin, 2005)----------Set in a 'Desperate Housewives' kind of neighborhood, shy-boy Dean, through a series of events, is in charge of getting drugs for the popular kids. With an all-star cast, The Chumscrubber is entertaining, dark, and comedic all at the same time. (7.5 / 10)
]]>Tue, 12 Aug 2008 01:08:45 GMTCaptainRyannnCaptainRyannn Blog8/11/2008 9:08:45 PMTitles in bold represent a first time viewing. 346. Magnolia (Anderson, 1999)----------I thought that this was a pretty great collage-type film with the likeness of a more familiar title, Crash. Aside from Julianne Moore's performance, one of the few things I didn't like was the fact that the characters didn't connect with each other other than the bizarre finale at the end of the film. (7.5 / 10) 347. Stuck (Gordon, 2007)----------Based on a true story, stuck follows a wannabe-ghetto woman (Mena Suvari) after she hits a homeless man and drives him into her garage. The acting was terrible, the premise was good though. Towards the end, it began to pick up in terms of entertainment. (6 / 10) 348. Equilibrium (Wimmer, 2002)----------Christian Bale? Sweet. Reviews relating it to The Matrix? Awesome. This is why I initially checked out Equilibrium. The action was pretty sweet but every few minutes, I couldn't help but see a blatant plot-hole. Also, can someone answer me why do the people have dust fly out of them when they get shot? (7 / 10) 349. The New World (Malick, 2005)----------It seems that whenever Malick puts out a new movie, I become less and less interested. To me, Badlands was his best and his vast collection of movies since then have just seemed to have gone downhill. I appreciated the beautiful cinematography and music along with the great acting. But the pacing was just a little too slow for me. (7 / 10) 350. The Terminator (Cameron, 1984)----------It's funny to think that The Terminator, one of the most masculine movies of all time, came from the same guy who made Titanic, one of the most popular love stories of all time. I basically watched this for mere entertainment and it satisfied that. (7 / 10) 351. Terminator 2: Judgment Day (Cameron, 1991)----------Again, I just watched this purely for entertainment. I think it did a better job at doing that than the first one. The best thing about watching these movies is just pausing it at certain testosterone-filled moments and thinking, This is the governor of California. (7.5 / 10) 352. Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines (Mostow, 2003)----------This got quite a bit of negative reviews. I wouldn't say that it was especially bad, but rather on par with the first one. The best part was how they ended it. It got me excited for Terminator Salvation. (7 / 10) 353. A Home at the End of the World (Mayer, 2004)----------Although the subject matter may not be something many of us can relate to, the themes definitely are. The overall mood and and portrayals of friendship and love make this worth watching alone. (7 / 10) 354. Undertow (Green, 2004)----------When I first watched this, it was decent. Once I delved into some reviews and analysis' I watched it again and fell in love with it. The story follows two brothers who live with their dad out in the southern forests. Their mysterious uncle comes around and suddenly a game of cat-and-mouse begins. The tone of the film stays consistent and I think that that is it's strongest point along with great performances by Jamie Bell and Josh Lucas. (8 / 10) 355. Antik&ouml;rper / Antibodies (Alvart, 2005)----------Antibodies is a film that follows closely in the footsteps of The Silence of the Lambs. Our protagonist is a village cop and the antagonist is a serial killer whose finally been caught. The cinematography was good and the acting was average. The basic story-line is something that's been done plenty of times before but the sheer intensity that this takes it to puts Antibodies a little bit above the rest. (7.5 / 10) 356. Cidade de Deus / City of God (Meirelles, 2002)----------I've seen City of God countless times as it is my favorite film along with Once Upon a Time in America. It takes us through two decades in the lives of a handful of children / teenagers in the slums of Rio de Janerio. Most grow up to be hoods and murder and robbery isn't something uncommon in their lives. Our protagonist, Rocket, is an aspiring photographer and just so happens to be there as all of the violence breaks out. If you're okay with subtitles, be sure to check this one out. (10 / 10) 357. Harold &amp; Kumar Escape from Guantanamo Bay (Hurwitz, 2008)----------The whole 'Escape' part only really lasts about five minutes. The rest of the film is basically slapstick comedy executed in an non-comedic way. (5 / 10) 358. Shotgun Stories (Nichols, 2007)----------I have been looking forward to seeing this one for quite some time. After falling in love with the trailer, I had to see it. There are two sets of step-brothers. Their father just died. One set knew him as a loving man and the other knew him as a violent, neglecting one. A feud erupts between them and their egos don't allow themselves to stop until irreversible damage has been caused. This movie had some of the most real characters I've ever seen portrayed and it was as if I were watching this unfold in real life. (8.5 / 10) 359. My Bodyguard (Bill, 1980)-----------I rented this based off of Roger Ebert's shining review but found it to be just average in comparison to other tough-time-in-high-school films. The main kid is a rich boy who starts going to a public school. The bullys don't like this and pick on him. After getting pushed around he gets the tough-guy bodyguard and they become friends, but not after finding out a few secrets about each other. (6 / 10) 360. Kicking and Screaming (Baumbach, 1995)----------Unlike the 2005 comedy, this one is actually good. But it's not about a children's soccer team, but rather a group of friend who have just graduated from college and don't know what to do next. This has some of the most subtly humorous dialogue I've ever experienced and I couldn't help but laugh virtually the entire way through. The plot really isn't there, there's no character development or twists. This movie basically stands up on the dialogue and it's characters. The friendship that exists reminds me slightly of that of the American Pie trilogy. Great movie. Worthy of its Criterion stamp. (8 / 10) 361. Schizopolis (Soderbergh, 1996)----------What did I just watch? (?? / 10) 362. Children of Men (Cuar&oacute;n, 2006)----------Featuring probably some of the best camera work and choreography in film in recent years, Children of Men was superb. To be able to shoot such busy scenes all in one shot takes a certain amount of skill. Watching the special features and commentary definitely gave me an idea of how much work went into this. Children of Men takes place about twenty years in the future where women are infertile and no one knows why. Immigrants are killed and the world is in chaos. An immigrant is found bearing a child and Theo (Clive Own) is in charge of getting her to safety. (8 / 10) 363. The Chumscrubber (Posin, 2005)----------Set in a 'Desperate Housewives' kind of neighborhood, shy-boy Dean, through a series of events, is in charge of getting drugs for the popular kids. With an all-star cast, The Chumscrubber is entertaining, dark, and comedic all at the same time. (7.5 / 10) http://www.spout.com/blogs/kristen/archive/2008/5/16/29357.aspx Post By: kristen
Post To: kristen Blog
Post Date: 5/16/2008 9:08:17 PM
Body: How do you get over your first love? Maybe you will always love him, but that is all right because it is possible to love the man of your past and live in the present. Terrence Malicks fourth film The New World (2005) is an epic love story that misses the mark. Pocahontas, Q'orianka Kilcher, exuberates life. She experiences the joys of first love with Colin Farrell. They share pleasures in a fantasy world, which Farrell says is a dreamlike world, but he later acknowledges that this world was the most real thing he has known. The dream world shatters with the outside world, which demands Farrells attention. Farrell feels the call of reality and leaves his love, and instructs the she be informed that he is dead in an attempt to make her forget him. His departure almost breaks her. Another man, Christian Bale, relates to her sufferings and eventually grows to love her. They marry, but she has not forgotten her first love. Voiceovers tell the emotions. These voiceovers have a beauty and quality of their own, for they are the only insight into the characters love. Some may say that they detract from the love; however, they are the only way that the depths of the love are made known. The acting is minimalist and one could not understand the love on its own. The movie has a generic look comparable to the recent epics like Ridley Scotts Kingdom of Heaven (2005) or Oliver Stones Alexander (2004). There are a few beautiful shots of nature, but this is not uncommon. Nick Cassavetes The Notebook (2004) also features dazzling shots of the sunset and rain. A subplot to the love story is the clash of cultures. The British civilize Kilcher while she carries on her romances. These details play a minor role in contrast to the love story. Some of the metaphors in the film are poorly written. At one point Kilcher says something to the effect of your words pour through me like a river. There is also a running symbolism with trees. After Farrell leave Kilcher, she is encouraged to be like a tree, one that grows and always reaches for the light. The last shot is the tree metaphor cashed out in poor taste. The film is too big for a simple love story. The audience senses a detachment from the characters, possibly because of the voiceovers. The movie has some insight on how first love stays with a person, but the problem is that the relationship with the second lover is hardly established. The love seems forced. The movie is a disappointment for Malick fans. Ryan just informed me that Malick, in between making films, is a philosophy professor and is into Kierkegaard: a good choice with Kierkegaard if you want your life to be changed in a necessary but depressing way. There is some hope to his despair. ~Kristen Gorlitz
]]>Sat, 17 May 2008 01:08:17 GMTkristenkristen Blog5/16/2008 9:08:17 PM How do you get over your first love? Maybe you will always love him, but that is all right because it is possible to love the man of your past and live in the present. Terrence Malicks fourth film The New World (2005) is an epic love story that misses the mark. Pocahontas, Q'orianka Kilcher, exuberates life. She experiences the joys of first love with Colin Farrell. They share pleasures in a fantasy world, which Farrell says is a dreamlike world, but he later acknowledges that this world was the most real thing he has known. The dream world shatters with the outside world, which demands Farrells attention. Farrell feels the call of reality and leaves his love, and instructs the she be informed that he is dead in an attempt to make her forget him. His departure almost breaks her. Another man, Christian Bale, relates to her sufferings and eventually grows to love her. They marry, but she has not forgotten her first love. Voiceovers tell the emotions. These voiceovers have a beauty and quality of their own, for they are the only insight into the characters love. Some may say that they detract from the love; however, they are the only way that the depths of the love are made known. The acting is minimalist and one could not understand the love on its own. The movie has a generic look comparable to the recent epics like Ridley Scotts Kingdom of Heaven (2005) or Oliver Stones Alexander (2004). There are a few beautiful shots of nature, but this is not uncommon. Nick Cassavetes The Notebook (2004) also features dazzling shots of the sunset and rain. A subplot to the love story is the clash of cultures. The British civilize Kilcher while she carries on her romances. These details play a minor role in contrast to the love story. Some of the metaphors in the film are poorly written. At one point Kilcher says something to the effect of your words pour through me like a river. There is also a running symbolism with trees. After Farrell leave Kilcher, she is encouraged to be like a tree, one that grows and always reaches for the light. The last shot is the tree metaphor cashed out in poor taste. The film is too big for a simple love story. The audience senses a detachment from the characters, possibly because of the voiceovers. The movie has some insight on how first love stays with a person, but the problem is that the relationship with the second lover is hardly established. The love seems forced. The movie is a disappointment for Malick fans. Ryan just informed me that Malick, in between making films, is a philosophy professor and is into Kierkegaard: a good choice with Kierkegaard if you want your life to be changed in a necessary but depressing way. There is some hope to his despair. ~Kristen Gorlitz http://www.spout.com/blogs/karina/archive/2008/4/16/27376.aspx Post By: Karina
Post To: Karina on SpoutBlog
Post Date: 4/16/2008 7:00:57 PM
Body: Over our five days at the Institute, we kept returning to serious of binary oppositions: print versus online; doing it for the passion versus doing it for the pay; criticism as consumer reporting versus advocacy for artists. With such circular questions, it’s hard to get anywhere, making it easy to lapse into what filmmaker Kelly Reichardt jokingly referred to at one point as “glass half full of shit” thinking. But out of the morass of questions and unresolvable clashes came an emphasis on compromise and balance: nearly every guest speaker made some mention of making trade offs, of covering for noble failures with less-noble successes. This seemed most prevalent on Saturday, with Reichardt and Tom Kalin’s independent filmmaker panel; Ryan Werner of IFC and Don Krim from KINO representing indie distribution; and, particularly, the online film criticism panel, featuring Eugene Hernandez (indieWIRE), Michael Koresky (Reverse Shot), Matt Zoller Seitz (The House Next Door and The New York Times) and Stu Van Airsdale (The Reeler and Defamer). The issue of blogs as an alternative/corrective to the mainstream media came up early in the day, with Seitz’s explanation for how The House Next Door got started. “I was really irritated by the negative reviews of Terrence Malick’s The New World,” he said, “And I just wanted to write about how great it was like every day.” Though Matt experimented with Google and Amazon’s ad programs, both “were just a pain in the ass to maintain,” and The House Next Door evolved into a not-for-profit clearinghouse for mostly-serious material that an interested community of professional and amateur writers wouldn’t be able to publish elsewhere. It’s an employed film critic’s outlet for non-commercial writing, but it’s also an effort to create a greater balance in the types of voices that get to weigh in on film culture. But to established print critics who whisper to him in confidence that they’d love to have an outlet to write the kind of stuff that appears daily, for no compensation, on The House Next Door, Seitz has no sympathy. “Where do you get off with your sense of superiority, Print, if you constrain your writers in a way that [blogs] don’t?” Seitz says what’s happening online is not in opposition to journalism––it’s returning journalism to what it should be. “Blogs have returned human communication to its natural state,” he said. “Journalism has been a white collar profession for about 20 years now, and it didn’t used to be…a lot of the defense that critics feel has to do with impoliteness.” Of course, in a session just the day before, the lead critic of the New York Times had all but loosened his tie in discomfort at the very mention of the blogosphere, with the stated problem being comment section vitriol. Seitz referred to this factor as “Assholism,” in regards to which he shrugged, “There are certain people who only exist to show up on websites in order to tell you what an idiot you are.” He compared the blog space to high school debate: even though arguments get vicious, “there are rules, and you don’t take it personally.” Newly-minted Defamer Stu VanAirsdale, who usually keeps at least part of a foot in the mainstream print world, concurred. “Blogs are famously kind of a caustic environment. I’m honest, maybe to a fault, but if something’s bullshit, I’m going to say it’s bullshit. That doesn’t mean I’m right, it just means I have an opinion. The print loyalty is absolutely afraid of that dialogue, and they can’t conceive of a world where they’d have to defend themselves.” Stu noted that he had been hired to inject a sense of film culture into Defamer, a site maybe best known for posting images of Tom Cruise jumping on Oprah’s couch, captured by former editor Mark Lisanti with cellphone cam pointed at his TV. Such successes for the site have apparently been few and far between of late, and with Defamer traffic down over the past twelve months, Stu noted that his talents were seen as desirable because they could potentially attract a new audience. One of my fellow Institute fellows, New York Magazine blogger Dan Kois, expressed surprise that famously lowest common denominator-mad Defamer publisher Nick Denton would consider deeper content as a viable traffic raising solution. But as Stu pointed out, the site already has the celeb sex tape beat covered by other writers. With that steady stream of traffic taken care of, Defamer can afford to take a risk on someone like Stu, presumably in the hopes of attracting a wider audience. Over and over again, these discussions came back to compromise. Tom Kalin needed to cast an actress of Julianne Moore’s caliber in order to get funding for his incest-infused true crime movie Savage Grace; Julianne Moore can only make Savage Grace because she pays both her own mortgage and rent on her stardom/bankability by making movies like Next. Filmmakers care primarily about their movies seeing theatrical release, but as Ryan Werner pointed out, VOD is a new revenue stream that can not only support the cost of a theatrical release, but it supports long-term word of mouth for all ancillaries. Seitz even talked about bargaining with an editor at the Newark Star-Ledger: he’d get to do an interview he really wanted to do, if he interviewed Jerry Springer as well. In my first post about attending the Institute, I mentioned something about how I was heading to Queens to confront an existential void. I can’t say that the future looks appreciably less murky just yet, although maybe it will when it dust settles a bit. At least I know I have one thing to look forward to: a never-ending series of deals with devils. Maybe it’s not “you scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours”; maybe it’s more like “if you let me scratch your eyes out, I’ll make it worth your while.” Does it matter, as long as the rent gets paid? Originally posted on:SpoutBlog » Karina Longworth
]]>Wed, 16 Apr 2008 23:00:57 GMTKarinaKarina on SpoutBlog4/16/2008 7:00:57 PMOver our five days at the Institute, we kept returning to serious of binary oppositions: print versus online; doing it for the passion versus doing it for the pay; criticism as consumer reporting versus advocacy for artists. With such circular questions, it’s hard to get anywhere, making it easy to lapse into what filmmaker Kelly Reichardt jokingly referred to at one point as “glass half full of shit” thinking. But out of the morass of questions and unresolvable clashes came an emphasis on compromise and balance: nearly every guest speaker made some mention of making trade offs, of covering for noble failures with less-noble successes. This seemed most prevalent on Saturday, with Reichardt and Tom Kalin’s independent filmmaker panel; Ryan Werner of IFC and Don Krim from KINO representing indie distribution; and, particularly, the online film criticism panel, featuring Eugene Hernandez (indieWIRE), Michael Koresky (Reverse Shot), Matt Zoller Seitz (The House Next Door and The New York Times) and Stu Van Airsdale (The Reeler and Defamer). The issue of blogs as an alternative/corrective to the mainstream media came up early in the day, with Seitz’s explanation for how The House Next Door got started. “I was really irritated by the negative reviews of Terrence Malick’s The New World,” he said, “And I just wanted to write about how great it was like every day.” Though Matt experimented with Google and Amazon’s ad programs, both “were just a pain in the ass to maintain,” and The House Next Door evolved into a not-for-profit clearinghouse for mostly-serious material that an interested community of professional and amateur writers wouldn’t be able to publish elsewhere. It’s an employed film critic’s outlet for non-commercial writing, but it’s also an effort to create a greater balance in the types of voices that get to weigh in on film culture. But to established print critics who whisper to him in confidence that they’d love to have an outlet to write the kind of stuff that appears daily, for no compensation, on The House Next Door, Seitz has no sympathy. “Where do you get off with your sense of superiority, Print, if you constrain your writers in a way that [blogs] don’t?” Seitz says what’s happening online is not in opposition to journalism––it’s returning journalism to what it should be. “Blogs have returned human communication to its natural state,” he said. “Journalism has been a white collar profession for about 20 years now, and it didn’t used to be…a lot of the defense that critics feel has to do with impoliteness.” Of course, in a session just the day before, the lead critic of the New York Times had all but loosened his tie in discomfort at the very mention of the blogosphere, with the stated problem being comment section vitriol. Seitz referred to this factor as “Assholism,” in regards to which he shrugged, “There are certain people who only exist to show up on websites in order to tell you what an idiot you are.” He compared the blog space to high school debate: even though arguments get vicious, “there are rules, and you don’t take it personally.” Newly-minted Defamer Stu VanAirsdale, who usually keeps at least part of a foot in the mainstream print world, concurred. “Blogs are famously kind of a caustic environment. I’m honest, maybe to a fault, but if something’s bullshit, I’m going to say it’s bullshit. That doesn’t mean I’m right, it just means I have an opinion. The print loyalty is absolutely afraid of that dialogue, and they can’t conceive of a world where they’d have to defend themselves.” Stu noted that he had been hired to inject a sense of film culture into Defamer, a site maybe best known for posting images of Tom Cruise jumping on Oprah’s couch, captured by former editor Mark Lisanti with cellphone cam pointed at his TV. Such successes for the site have apparently been few and far between of late, and with Defamer traffic down over the past twelve months, Stu noted that his talents were seen as desirable because they could potentially attract a new audience. One of my fellow Institute fellows, New York Magazine blogger Dan Kois, expressed surprise that famously lowest common denominator-mad Defamer publisher Nick Denton would consider deeper content as a viable traffic raising solution. But as Stu pointed out, the site already has the celeb sex tape beat covered by other writers. With that steady stream of traffic taken care of, Defamer can afford to take a risk on someone like Stu, presumably in the hopes of attracting a wider audience. Over and over again, these discussions came back to compromise. Tom Kalin needed to cast an actress of Julianne Moore’s caliber in order to get funding for his incest-infused true crime movie Savage Grace; Julianne Moore can only make Savage Grace because she pays both her own mortgage and rent on her stardom/bankability by making movies like Next. Filmmakers care primarily about their movies seeing theatrical release, but as Ryan Werner pointed out, VOD is a new revenue stream that can not only support the cost of a theatrical release, but it supports long-term word of mouth for all ancillaries. Seitz even talked about bargaining with an editor at the Newark Star-Ledger: he’d get to do an interview he really wanted to do, if he interviewed Jerry Springer as well. In my first post about attending the Institute, I mentioned something about how I was heading to Queens to confront an existential void. I can’t say that the future looks appreciably less murky just yet, although maybe it will when it dust settles a bit. At least I know I have one thing to look forward to: a never-ending series of deals with devils. Maybe it’s not “you scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours”; maybe it’s more like “if you let me scratch your eyes out, I’ll make it worth your while.” Does it matter, as long as the rent gets paid? Originally posted on:SpoutBlog » Karina Longworth http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/4/16/27375.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 4/16/2008 7:00:50 PM
Body: Over our five days at the Institute, we kept returning to serious of binary oppositions: print versus online; doing it for the passion versus doing it for the pay; criticism as consumer reporting versus advocacy for artists. With such circular questions, it’s hard to get anywhere, making it easy to lapse into what filmmaker Kelly Reichardt jokingly referred to at one point as “glass half full of shit” thinking. But out of the morass of questions and unresolvable clashes came an emphasis on compromise and balance: nearly every guest speaker made some mention of making trade offs, of covering for noble failures with less-noble successes. This seemed most prevalent on Saturday, with Reichardt and Tom Kalin’s independent filmmaker panel; Ryan Werner of IFC and Don Krim from KINO representing indie distribution; and, particularly, the online film criticism panel, featuring Eugene Hernandez (indieWIRE), Michael Koresky (Reverse Shot), Matt Zoller Seitz (The House Next Door and The New York Times) and Stu Van Airsdale (The Reeler and Defamer). The issue of blogs as an alternative/corrective to the mainstream media came up early in the day, with Seitz’s explanation for how The House Next Door got started. “I was really irritated by the negative reviews of Terrence Malick’s The New World,” he said, “And I just wanted to write about how great it was like every day.” Though Matt experimented with Google and Amazon’s ad programs, both “were just a pain in the ass to maintain,” and The House Next Door evolved into a not-for-profit clearinghouse for mostly-serious material that an interested community of professional and amateur writers wouldn’t be able to publish elsewhere. It’s an employed film critic’s outlet for non-commercial writing, but it’s also an effort to create a greater balance in the types of voices that get to weigh in on film culture. But to established print critics who whisper to him in confidence that they’d love to have an outlet to write the kind of stuff that appears daily, for no compensation, on The House Next Door, Seitz has no sympathy. “Where do you get off with your sense of superiority, Print, if you constrain your writers in a way that [blogs] don’t?” Seitz says what’s happening online is not in opposition to journalism––it’s returning journalism to what it should be. “Blogs have returned human communication to its natural state,” he said. “Journalism has been a white collar profession for about 20 years now, and it didn’t used to be…a lot of the defense that critics feel has to do with impoliteness.” Of course, in a session just the day before, the lead critic of the New York Times had all but loosened his tie in discomfort at the very mention of the blogosphere, with the stated problem being comment section vitriol. Seitz referred to this factor as “Assholism,” in regards to which he shrugged, “There are certain people who only exist to show up on websites in order to tell you what an idiot you are.” He compared the blog space to high school debate: even though arguments get vicious, “there are rules, and you don’t take it personally.” Newly-minted Defamer Stu VanAirsdale, who usually keeps at least part of a foot in the mainstream print world, concurred. “Blogs are famously kind of a caustic environment. I’m honest, maybe to a fault, but if something’s bullshit, I’m going to say it’s bullshit. That doesn’t mean I’m right, it just means I have an opinion. The print loyalty is absolutely afraid of that dialogue, and they can’t conceive of a world where they’d have to defend themselves.” Stu noted that he had been hired to inject a sense of film culture into Defamer, a site maybe best known for posting images of Tom Cruise jumping on Oprah’s couch, captured by former editor Mark Lisanti with cellphone cam pointed at his TV. Such successes for the site have apparently been few and far between of late, and with Defamer traffic down over the past twelve months, Stu noted that his talents were seen as desirable because they could potentially attract a new audience. One of my fellow Institute fellows, New York Magazine blogger Dan Kois, expressed surprise that famously lowest common denominator-mad Defamer publisher Nick Denton would consider deeper content as a viable traffic raising solution. But as Stu pointed out, the site already has the celeb sex tape beat covered by other writers. With that steady stream of traffic taken care of, Defamer can afford to take a risk on someone like Stu, presumably in the hopes of attracting a wider audience. Over and over again, these discussions came back to compromise. Tom Kalin needed to cast an actress of Julianne Moore’s caliber in order to get funding for his incest-infused true crime movie Savage Grace; Julianne Moore can only make Savage Grace because she pays both her own mortgage and rent on her stardom/bankability by making movies like Next. Filmmakers care primarily about their movies seeing theatrical release, but as Ryan Werner pointed out, VOD is a new revenue stream that can not only support the cost of a theatrical release, but it supports long-term word of mouth for all ancillaries. Seitz even talked about bargaining with an editor at the Newark Star-Ledger: he’d get to do an interview he really wanted to do, if he interviewed Jerry Springer as well. In my first post about attending the Institute, I mentioned something about how I was heading to Queens to confront an existential void. I can’t say that the future looks appreciably less murky just yet, although maybe it will when it dust settles a bit. At least I know I have one thing to look forward to: a never-ending series of deals with devils. Maybe it’s not “you scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours”; maybe it’s more like “if you let me scratch your eyes out, I’ll make it worth your while.” Does it matter, as long as the rent gets paid? Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Wed, 16 Apr 2008 23:00:50 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com4/16/2008 7:00:50 PMOver our five days at the Institute, we kept returning to serious of binary oppositions: print versus online; doing it for the passion versus doing it for the pay; criticism as consumer reporting versus advocacy for artists. With such circular questions, it’s hard to get anywhere, making it easy to lapse into what filmmaker Kelly Reichardt jokingly referred to at one point as “glass half full of shit” thinking. But out of the morass of questions and unresolvable clashes came an emphasis on compromise and balance: nearly every guest speaker made some mention of making trade offs, of covering for noble failures with less-noble successes. This seemed most prevalent on Saturday, with Reichardt and Tom Kalin’s independent filmmaker panel; Ryan Werner of IFC and Don Krim from KINO representing indie distribution; and, particularly, the online film criticism panel, featuring Eugene Hernandez (indieWIRE), Michael Koresky (Reverse Shot), Matt Zoller Seitz (The House Next Door and The New York Times) and Stu Van Airsdale (The Reeler and Defamer). The issue of blogs as an alternative/corrective to the mainstream media came up early in the day, with Seitz’s explanation for how The House Next Door got started. “I was really irritated by the negative reviews of Terrence Malick’s The New World,” he said, “And I just wanted to write about how great it was like every day.” Though Matt experimented with Google and Amazon’s ad programs, both “were just a pain in the ass to maintain,” and The House Next Door evolved into a not-for-profit clearinghouse for mostly-serious material that an interested community of professional and amateur writers wouldn’t be able to publish elsewhere. It’s an employed film critic’s outlet for non-commercial writing, but it’s also an effort to create a greater balance in the types of voices that get to weigh in on film culture. But to established print critics who whisper to him in confidence that they’d love to have an outlet to write the kind of stuff that appears daily, for no compensation, on The House Next Door, Seitz has no sympathy. “Where do you get off with your sense of superiority, Print, if you constrain your writers in a way that [blogs] don’t?” Seitz says what’s happening online is not in opposition to journalism––it’s returning journalism to what it should be. “Blogs have returned human communication to its natural state,” he said. “Journalism has been a white collar profession for about 20 years now, and it didn’t used to be…a lot of the defense that critics feel has to do with impoliteness.” Of course, in a session just the day before, the lead critic of the New York Times had all but loosened his tie in discomfort at the very mention of the blogosphere, with the stated problem being comment section vitriol. Seitz referred to this factor as “Assholism,” in regards to which he shrugged, “There are certain people who only exist to show up on websites in order to tell you what an idiot you are.” He compared the blog space to high school debate: even though arguments get vicious, “there are rules, and you don’t take it personally.” Newly-minted Defamer Stu VanAirsdale, who usually keeps at least part of a foot in the mainstream print world, concurred. “Blogs are famously kind of a caustic environment. I’m honest, maybe to a fault, but if something’s bullshit, I’m going to say it’s bullshit. That doesn’t mean I’m right, it just means I have an opinion. The print loyalty is absolutely afraid of that dialogue, and they can’t conceive of a world where they’d have to defend themselves.” Stu noted that he had been hired to inject a sense of film culture into Defamer, a site maybe best known for posting images of Tom Cruise jumping on Oprah’s couch, captured by former editor Mark Lisanti with cellphone cam pointed at his TV. Such successes for the site have apparently been few and far between of late, and with Defamer traffic down over the past twelve months, Stu noted that his talents were seen as desirable because they could potentially attract a new audience. One of my fellow Institute fellows, New York Magazine blogger Dan Kois, expressed surprise that famously lowest common denominator-mad Defamer publisher Nick Denton would consider deeper content as a viable traffic raising solution. But as Stu pointed out, the site already has the celeb sex tape beat covered by other writers. With that steady stream of traffic taken care of, Defamer can afford to take a risk on someone like Stu, presumably in the hopes of attracting a wider audience. Over and over again, these discussions came back to compromise. Tom Kalin needed to cast an actress of Julianne Moore’s caliber in order to get funding for his incest-infused true crime movie Savage Grace; Julianne Moore can only make Savage Grace because she pays both her own mortgage and rent on her stardom/bankability by making movies like Next. Filmmakers care primarily about their movies seeing theatrical release, but as Ryan Werner pointed out, VOD is a new revenue stream that can not only support the cost of a theatrical release, but it supports long-term word of mouth for all ancillaries. Seitz even talked about bargaining with an editor at the Newark Star-Ledger: he’d get to do an interview he really wanted to do, if he interviewed Jerry Springer as well. In my first post about attending the Institute, I mentioned something about how I was heading to Queens to confront an existential void. I can’t say that the future looks appreciably less murky just yet, although maybe it will when it dust settles a bit. At least I know I have one thing to look forward to: a never-ending series of deals with devils. Maybe it’s not “you scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours”; maybe it’s more like “if you let me scratch your eyes out, I’ll make it worth your while.” Does it matter, as long as the rent gets paid? Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/groups/Top_5/Re_Top_Five_deceptively_intriguing_trailers/190/25591/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: STEPHENtheDIRECTOR
Post To: Top 5
Post Date: 2/25/2008 9:40:57 PM
Body: Awesome TopicThe New World - Just as T-Money said, this movie seemed advertised as a war movie, instead of the contemplative piece it was.Shaun of the Dead - I thought this movie looked so incredibly stupid from the trailer. So much so I never wanted to see it, until finally I was forced to, and thought it was the best comedy I had seen in a long time.Hot Fuzz - This time i didn't let the trailer discourage me, but still...people can't seem to give these films the advertisement they deserve.Night Watch - After seeing the trailer, I was so excited to see this film. I had to...every moment without it was painful. And then I watched it, and was disappointed. The movie isn't necessarily bad, but it's not nearly as good as the trailer makes it out to be. Although, I might just be partial to the M83 song they played over it (which never actually makes it into the film).Domino - Okay so the movie was exactly like the trailer. Just extended. When I first saw the trailer, I thought it was just a fun interesting way of introducing the film. Little did I know, they pretty much just took the first five minutes out of the hyper-edited pretentious poo of a movie. So I guess this trailer didn't lie about the movie you were going to see, just I didn't expect it to suck as much as it did.
]]>Tue, 26 Feb 2008 02:40:57 GMTSTEPHENtheDIRECTORTop 52/25/2008 9:40:57 PMAwesome TopicThe New World - Just as T-Money said, this movie seemed advertised as a war movie, instead of the contemplative piece it was.Shaun of the Dead - I thought this movie looked so incredibly stupid from the trailer. So much so I never wanted to see it, until finally I was forced to, and thought it was the best comedy I had seen in a long time.Hot Fuzz - This time i didn&#39;t let the trailer discourage me, but still...people can&#39;t seem to give these films the advertisement they deserve.Night Watch - After seeing the trailer, I was so excited to see this film. I had to...every moment without it was painful. And then I watched it, and was disappointed. The movie isn&#39;t necessarily bad, but it&#39;s not nearly as good as the trailer makes it out to be. Although, I might just be partial to the M83 song they played over it (which never actually makes it into the film).Domino - Okay so the movie was exactly like the trailer. Just extended. When I first saw the trailer, I thought it was just a fun interesting way of introducing the film. Little did I know, they pretty much just took the first five minutes out of the hyper-edited pretentious poo of a movie. So I guess this trailer didn&#39;t lie about the movie you were going to see, just I didn&#39;t expect it to suck as much as it did. http://www.spout.com/blogs/risselada/archive/2008/1/17/23990.aspx Post By: Risselada
Post To: Risselada Blog
Post Date: 1/17/2008 12:41:18 PM
Body: Making 'The New World' There's no Spout link for this movie. It's a documentary that is included on the DVD for The New World. It's a reminder of the incredible amount of work that is put into some movies that you can hardly even imagine, especially when you have a director and team who are really dedicated to such a huge and somewhat unusual project.While you do learn many interesting things about the film and some things of historical interest, there's nothing that really makes this making-of documentary stand out. Actually I was hoping (although I had no reason to) that I would finally get to see or hear a bit of Malick talking or at least more than a glimpse of him in action. No such luck. The guy is obviously still as shy and reclusive from appearing personally to the public.Something else kind of strange, this was directed by Austin Jack Lynch, the son of David Lynch.Rating: 7/10
]]>Thu, 17 Jan 2008 17:41:18 GMTRisseladaRisselada Blog1/17/2008 12:41:18 PMMaking &#39;The New World&#39; There&#39;s no Spout link for this movie. It&#39;s a documentary that is included on the DVD for The New World. It&#39;s a reminder of the incredible amount of work that is put into some movies that you can hardly even imagine, especially when you have a director and team who are really dedicated to such a huge and somewhat unusual project.While you do learn many interesting things about the film and some things of historical interest, there&#39;s nothing that really makes this making-of documentary stand out. Actually I was hoping (although I had no reason to) that I would finally get to see or hear a bit of Malick talking or at least more than a glimpse of him in action. No such luck. The guy is obviously still as shy and reclusive from appearing personally to the public.Something else kind of strange, this was directed by Austin Jack Lynch, the son of David Lynch.Rating: 7/10 http://www.spout.com/blogs/risselada/archive/2008/1/17/23986.aspx Post By: Risselada
Post To: Risselada Blog
Post Date: 1/17/2008 12:12:19 PM
Body: This blog entry is part of my “movie year countdown round #2”. Read more about that here.The New WorldWell it's strange but I seem to like each of Malick's subsequent movies less and less. Badlands is one of my absolute favoirtes of all time. In the cold, decisive world of movie ratings I gave it at 10. Days of Heaven I gave a 9, The Thin Red Line an 8, and The New World a 7.I feel like the movies are losing the inherent ironic humor of his characters and narration for something that's trying to be more poetic and profound in it's sincerity. It's not connecting with me as much.I don't think I ever really connect with Malick's characters. I guess at first I didn't think we were supposed to. But now he uses the same distancing techniques on conjunction with techniques that seem to be striving for the opposite. I won't deny the cinematography is gorgeous. The worlds and history come alive to an extent that is rare on screen. But the message seems trite. Which is fine in irony, but doesn't work as much in sincerity.Rating: 7/10
]]>Thu, 17 Jan 2008 17:12:19 GMTRisseladaRisselada Blog1/17/2008 12:12:19 PMThis blog entry is part of my &ldquo;movie year countdown round #2&rdquo;. Read more about that here.The New WorldWell it&#39;s strange but I seem to like each of Malick&#39;s subsequent movies less and less. Badlands is one of my absolute favoirtes of all time. In the cold, decisive world of movie ratings I gave it at 10. Days of Heaven I gave a 9, The Thin Red Line an 8, and The New World a 7.I feel like the movies are losing the inherent ironic humor of his characters and narration for something that&#39;s trying to be more poetic and profound in it&#39;s sincerity. It&#39;s not connecting with me as much.I don&#39;t think I ever really connect with Malick&#39;s characters. I guess at first I didn&#39;t think we were supposed to. But now he uses the same distancing techniques on conjunction with techniques that seem to be striving for the opposite. I won&#39;t deny the cinematography is gorgeous. The worlds and history come alive to an extent that is rare on screen. But the message seems trite. Which is fine in irony, but doesn&#39;t work as much in sincerity.Rating: 7/10 http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/love/MemberTagFilms.aspxlove
Number of films tagged: 12478

Number of people who tagged: 336

Number of times used: 1477

]]>Wed, 09 Dec 2009 05:08:37 GMT124783361477Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/Loved-It/MemberTagFilms.aspxLoved-It
Number of films tagged: 509

Number of people who tagged: 179

Number of times used: 921

]]>Tue, 03 Nov 2009 17:56:35 GMT509179921Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/beautiful/MemberTagFilms.aspxbeautiful
Number of films tagged: 259

Number of people who tagged: 149

Number of times used: 416

]]>Wed, 09 Dec 2009 05:08:38 GMT259149416Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/masterpiece/MemberTagFilms.aspxmasterpiece
Number of films tagged: 226

Number of people who tagged: 101

Number of times used: 214

]]>Tue, 22 Sep 2009 08:30:57 GMT226101214Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/moving/MemberTagFilms.aspxmoving
Number of films tagged: 286

Number of people who tagged: 68

Number of times used: 160

]]>Tue, 24 Nov 2009 05:15:30 GMT28668160Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/romantic/MemberTagFilms.aspxromantic
Number of films tagged: 84

Number of people who tagged: 66

Number of times used: 113

]]>Sat, 20 Jun 2009 16:24:01 GMT8466113Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/haunting/MemberTagFilms.aspxhaunting
Number of films tagged: 79

Number of people who tagged: 46

Number of times used: 103

]]>Thu, 19 Nov 2009 00:30:05 GMT7946103Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/slow/MemberTagFilms.aspxslow
Number of films tagged: 91

Number of people who tagged: 46

Number of times used: 105

]]>Mon, 02 Nov 2009 03:56:36 GMT9146105Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/stunning/MemberTagFilms.aspxstunning
Number of films tagged: 30

Number of people who tagged: 32

Number of times used: 44

]]>Fri, 10 Jul 2009 14:18:04 GMT303244Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/visual/MemberTagFilms.aspxvisual
Number of films tagged: 140

Number of people who tagged: 28

Number of times used: 161

]]>Mon, 30 Nov 2009 19:54:25 GMT14028161Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/Changed-My-Life/MemberTagFilms.aspxChanged-My-Life
Number of films tagged: 46

Number of people who tagged: 27

Number of times used: 60

]]>Tue, 12 Jun 2007 03:22:35 GMT462760Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/Poetic/MemberTagFilms.aspxPoetic
Number of films tagged: 27

Number of people who tagged: 25

Number of times used: 35

]]>Sat, 26 Jul 2008 14:34:55 GMT272535Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/WTF/MemberTagFilms.aspxWTF
Number of films tagged: 24

Number of people who tagged: 15

Number of times used: 25

]]>Fri, 10 Jul 2009 03:50:48 GMT241525Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/racist/MemberTagFilms.aspxracist
Number of films tagged: 19

Number of people who tagged: 13

Number of times used: 22

]]>Sun, 12 Jul 2009 01:01:24 GMT191322Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/eye-candy/MemberTagFilms.aspxeye-candy
Number of films tagged: 42

Number of people who tagged: 11

Number of times used: 53

]]>Sun, 03 Aug 2008 00:06:44 GMT421153Tag