list http://www.spout.com/ Recent community activity around Me and You and Everyone We Know 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/Me_and_You_and_Everyone_We_Know/250693/default.aspx Title: Me and You and Everyone We Know
Year: 2005
Director: Miranda July
Plot: A handful of disparate characters, both adults and children, find themselves navigating the tricky waters of intimacy in this award-winning independent comedy drama. Richard (John Hawkes) is a recent divorcé who is alternately exhilarated and terrified with his life and the world around him. While he believes great things are in store for him, he's also become so despondent about his wife's departure that he attempts to set his hand on fire. Richard meets Christine (Miranda July) at the shoe store where he works; Christine likes to paint a picture of herself as a stylish and confident video artist, but in truth she supports herself as a driver with a car service for the elderly, and she'd very much like to meet someone special. As Richard and Christine fumble their way into a relationship, Richard's two sons have issues of their own. Seven-year-old Robby (Brandon Ratcliff) has met someone in an Internet chat room who responds to his naïve and scatological perceptions of sex, while 14-year-old Peter (Miles Thompson) finds himself on the receiving end of unusual and unexpected attention from two girls in his class. Me and You and Everyone We Know was the first feature film written and directed by noted performance artist Miranda July; the picture won prizes in 2005 at the Cannes Film Festival and Sundance Film Festival. ~ Mark Deming, All Movie Guide
Times Tagged: 99
Number of Lists: 53
Number of blog posts: 13
Number of discussion threads: 3
SpoutRating: 3
]]>Thu, 09 Jul 2009 11:24:24 GMTMe and You and Everyone We Know2005Miranda JulyA handful of disparate characters, both adults and children, find themselves navigating the tricky waters of intimacy in this award-winning independent comedy drama. Richard (<a href="/players/P____31099/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>John Hawkes</a>) is a recent divorcé who is alternately exhilarated and terrified with his life and the world around him. While he believes great things are in store for him, he's also become so despondent about his wife's departure that he attempts to set his hand on fire. Richard meets Christine (<a href="/players/P___285104/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Miranda July</a>) at the shoe store where he works; Christine likes to paint a picture of herself as a stylish and confident video artist, but in truth she supports herself as a driver with a car service for the elderly, and she'd very much like to meet someone special. As Richard and Christine fumble their way into a relationship, Richard's two sons have issues of their own. Seven-year-old Robby (Brandon Ratcliff) has met someone in an Internet chat room who responds to his naïve and scatological perceptions of sex, while 14-year-old Peter (Miles Thompson) finds himself on the receiving end of unusual and unexpected attention from two girls in his class. Me and You and Everyone We Know was the first feature film written and directed by noted performance artist <a href="/players/P___285104/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Miranda July</a>; the picture won prizes in 2005 at the Cannes Film Festival and Sundance Film Festival. ~ Mark Deming, All Movie Guide99Tag Target (>10)531333http://www.spout.com/ProductImages/t65159mpv1x.jpghttp://www.spout.com/films/Me_and_You_and_Everyone_We_Know/250693/default.aspxFilm http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/12/9/38154.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 12/9/2008 7:02:15 PM
Body: Is romance dead? David Carr seems to think so, at least in American cinema (both Hollywood and “Indiewood,” as he inclusively clarifies). While celebrating the subway station meet-cute from the beginning of Milk, a scene he claims to be of an increasingly rare sort, Carr states that American filmmakers “can do romantic pathology and entropy, but the kind of love for the ages, a big-movie kind of love? Not so much.” If you agree with him, blame the back-to-back Best Picture winners Titanic and Shakespeare in Love for feeding us the kind of romance that’s so cheesy it clogs our arteries and gives us a coronary. Left with a burst heart and a lack of quality Nora Ephron movies, most of us have been cynics when it comes to love stories these past ten years. Yet cynics can still be swept off their feet, and American filmmakers have adequately supplied them with new kinds of love for the ages. Just take a look at these ten films from the past decade. They may be full of cynicism, but they’re also filled with big-movie love, in their own way. If you can’t see the romance, then the problem is with you, not the movies. Love & Basketball (2000) This underrated film has something for everyone: sports for the boys and romance for the girls; and sports for the girls and romance for the boys. See, it’s a love story that avoids clichés and speaks to both sexes equally. And as far as meet-cutes go, it’s hard to top Quincy’s first encounter with Monica: she beats him at basketball, he knocks her to the ground, and they instantly fall in love, at the age of 13. Plenty of recent films have done the whole love-since-childhood thing, including the contrived Love Me if You Dare and this year’s less-sexually-balanced Slumdog Millionaire. But while others treat this kind of story as fairy tale, Love & Basketball is more real, and true love is definitely more romantic than fantastical love. Punch-Drunk Love (2002) Who knew that Adam Sandler, as a modern-day Popeye, could be so romantic? Apparently Paul Thomas Anderson did, and he was able to transform the typical Sandler man-boy persona into an old-fashioned man-as-protector sort of romantic hero. A bit sexist and a little creepy, sure, but Sandler’s Barry Egan manages to fall on the right side of the fine line between stalker and sentimentally drastic admirer (kind of like a male “Amelie”). All the Real Girls (2003) The direction this film may seem too ironic and cynical to be considered truly romantic, but then think of how cynical our favorite romantic classics are. Gone With the Wind and Casablanca? Neither is as positive and hopeful as we pretend Hollywood romance to be. And while those films’ dialogue may be memorable after all these years, none of their lines are as simply and sweetly romantic as the stuff said by Paul (Paul Schneider) and Noel (Zooey Deschanel) to each other when they’re still falling in love. Cold Mountain (2003) Nicole Kidman and Jude Law may be the worst actors to play romantic leads, considering how stiff and plastic they are. But forgetting the performances and concentrating on the epic love story, this relatively modernized take on The Odyssey (set during the Civil War) is as classically romantic as it gets, right down to the tragic denouement. Surprisingly, it was not well received by either critics or audiences. The problem may have been the fault of Kidman and Law, whose characters were hardly believable as in love, although their compatibility is beside the point. The romantic quest made by Inman (Law) to get back to his barely-familiar sweetheart is powered by the concept of love more than the certainty of love. 50 First Dates (2004) Another Adam Sandler movie? That’s right, and this one is even sweeter and more thoughtfully romantic than Punch-Drunk Love. The plot, which is like a reciprocal Groundhog Day, is a tad too gimmicky to grab your heartstrings right away, but the final scene (ironically in the Arctic) could warm the center of even the most pragmatic, unemotional viewer. Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (2004) Two of the best films of 2004 were deconstructions of love. But while Jonathan Glazer’s Birth shattered romance to pieces, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind showed us what it’s made of. The film also somewhat argues that love and romance aren’t necessarily about “happily ever after,” even if the two main characters do seem destined to be together at the end, nor are these concepts limited to good times. The Notebook (2004) It doesn’t get more traditionally romantic than this: forbidden love; correspondence; longing; a World War. But how is this more beloved than either Pearl Harbor or Australia? And why is Nicholas Sparks more respected and read than most romance novelists? Well, if it were that easy to determine, Hollywood wouldn’t keep failing in its attempts to make more films like this. Or, maybe it’s just that The Notebook doesn’t seem to be trying too hard –– it just tells a genuine love story without tugging or overreaching for your presumed romantic buttons. Me and You and Everyone We Know (2005) If Amelie is the most romantic non-American film of the last ten years, and if Punch-Drunk’s Barry Egan is the male Amelie, then Miranda July’s character is simply the American Amelie. She’s a little weird, a little too forthcoming, but she’s so sweet and creative in her pursuits that she’s not just forgivable; she’s completely lovable. Of course, lovable doesn’t exactly equal romantic, but then there are plenty of oddly romantic scenes in the film, too, such as the metaphoric first walk shared by July and John Hawkes’ characters. It’s frank, it’s harsh, but it’s also the best flirtation seen in American cinema in a long time. Brokeback Mountain (2005) It’s upsetting to think of any story involving adultery as being romantic (though Unfaithful almost made this list for other, spoilerific reasons), but the two lovers in Brokeback Mountain are given an exception because of the society they live in. The unapproved affair also makes for one of the most heartbreaking romances ever put on screen. And of all the films selected, this is easily the one that’s liable to make you lose your cynical perspective, at least for a couple of hours. WALL-E (2008) In a way, this animated film is not romantic at all for humans, who are viewed as plump slugs with no real interaction with other people (seriously, a time when we all just use video chat, even when we’re in the vicinity of one another, is not too far off). But for robots, it’s the most romantic thing to come along since the implied relationship between C-3PO and R2-D2. And it’s gender-equal (or, if you believe the characters are gender-neutral, the film is partner-equal) as far as the pursuing, the rescuing and the responsibility go regarding WALL-E and EVE’s relationship. Hopefully, this most recent film on the list will inspire future romantic films to be so progressive and so lacking in cynicism (such optimism: even two humans seem to fall in love at the end). Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Wed, 10 Dec 2008 00:02:15 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com12/9/2008 7:02:15 PMIs romance dead? David Carr seems to think so, at least in American cinema (both Hollywood and “Indiewood,” as he inclusively clarifies). While celebrating the subway station meet-cute from the beginning of Milk, a scene he claims to be of an increasingly rare sort, Carr states that American filmmakers “can do romantic pathology and entropy, but the kind of love for the ages, a big-movie kind of love? Not so much.” If you agree with him, blame the back-to-back Best Picture winners Titanic and Shakespeare in Love for feeding us the kind of romance that’s so cheesy it clogs our arteries and gives us a coronary. Left with a burst heart and a lack of quality Nora Ephron movies, most of us have been cynics when it comes to love stories these past ten years. Yet cynics can still be swept off their feet, and American filmmakers have adequately supplied them with new kinds of love for the ages. Just take a look at these ten films from the past decade. They may be full of cynicism, but they’re also filled with big-movie love, in their own way. If you can’t see the romance, then the problem is with you, not the movies. Love & Basketball (2000) This underrated film has something for everyone: sports for the boys and romance for the girls; and sports for the girls and romance for the boys. See, it’s a love story that avoids clichés and speaks to both sexes equally. And as far as meet-cutes go, it’s hard to top Quincy’s first encounter with Monica: she beats him at basketball, he knocks her to the ground, and they instantly fall in love, at the age of 13. Plenty of recent films have done the whole love-since-childhood thing, including the contrived Love Me if You Dare and this year’s less-sexually-balanced Slumdog Millionaire. But while others treat this kind of story as fairy tale, Love & Basketball is more real, and true love is definitely more romantic than fantastical love. Punch-Drunk Love (2002) Who knew that Adam Sandler, as a modern-day Popeye, could be so romantic? Apparently Paul Thomas Anderson did, and he was able to transform the typical Sandler man-boy persona into an old-fashioned man-as-protector sort of romantic hero. A bit sexist and a little creepy, sure, but Sandler’s Barry Egan manages to fall on the right side of the fine line between stalker and sentimentally drastic admirer (kind of like a male “Amelie”). All the Real Girls (2003) The direction this film may seem too ironic and cynical to be considered truly romantic, but then think of how cynical our favorite romantic classics are. Gone With the Wind and Casablanca? Neither is as positive and hopeful as we pretend Hollywood romance to be. And while those films’ dialogue may be memorable after all these years, none of their lines are as simply and sweetly romantic as the stuff said by Paul (Paul Schneider) and Noel (Zooey Deschanel) to each other when they’re still falling in love. Cold Mountain (2003) Nicole Kidman and Jude Law may be the worst actors to play romantic leads, considering how stiff and plastic they are. But forgetting the performances and concentrating on the epic love story, this relatively modernized take on The Odyssey (set during the Civil War) is as classically romantic as it gets, right down to the tragic denouement. Surprisingly, it was not well received by either critics or audiences. The problem may have been the fault of Kidman and Law, whose characters were hardly believable as in love, although their compatibility is beside the point. The romantic quest made by Inman (Law) to get back to his barely-familiar sweetheart is powered by the concept of love more than the certainty of love. 50 First Dates (2004) Another Adam Sandler movie? That’s right, and this one is even sweeter and more thoughtfully romantic than Punch-Drunk Love. The plot, which is like a reciprocal Groundhog Day, is a tad too gimmicky to grab your heartstrings right away, but the final scene (ironically in the Arctic) could warm the center of even the most pragmatic, unemotional viewer. Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (2004) Two of the best films of 2004 were deconstructions of love. But while Jonathan Glazer’s Birth shattered romance to pieces, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind showed us what it’s made of. The film also somewhat argues that love and romance aren’t necessarily about “happily ever after,” even if the two main characters do seem destined to be together at the end, nor are these concepts limited to good times. The Notebook (2004) It doesn’t get more traditionally romantic than this: forbidden love; correspondence; longing; a World War. But how is this more beloved than either Pearl Harbor or Australia? And why is Nicholas Sparks more respected and read than most romance novelists? Well, if it were that easy to determine, Hollywood wouldn’t keep failing in its attempts to make more films like this. Or, maybe it’s just that The Notebook doesn’t seem to be trying too hard –– it just tells a genuine love story without tugging or overreaching for your presumed romantic buttons. Me and You and Everyone We Know (2005) If Amelie is the most romantic non-American film of the last ten years, and if Punch-Drunk’s Barry Egan is the male Amelie, then Miranda July’s character is simply the American Amelie. She’s a little weird, a little too forthcoming, but she’s so sweet and creative in her pursuits that she’s not just forgivable; she’s completely lovable. Of course, lovable doesn’t exactly equal romantic, but then there are plenty of oddly romantic scenes in the film, too, such as the metaphoric first walk shared by July and John Hawkes’ characters. It’s frank, it’s harsh, but it’s also the best flirtation seen in American cinema in a long time. Brokeback Mountain (2005) It’s upsetting to think of any story involving adultery as being romantic (though Unfaithful almost made this list for other, spoilerific reasons), but the two lovers in Brokeback Mountain are given an exception because of the society they live in. The unapproved affair also makes for one of the most heartbreaking romances ever put on screen. And of all the films selected, this is easily the one that’s liable to make you lose your cynical perspective, at least for a couple of hours. WALL-E (2008) In a way, this animated film is not romantic at all for humans, who are viewed as plump slugs with no real interaction with other people (seriously, a time when we all just use video chat, even when we’re in the vicinity of one another, is not too far off). But for robots, it’s the most romantic thing to come along since the implied relationship between C-3PO and R2-D2. And it’s gender-equal (or, if you believe the characters are gender-neutral, the film is partner-equal) as far as the pursuing, the rescuing and the responsibility go regarding WALL-E and EVE’s relationship. Hopefully, this most recent film on the list will inspire future romantic films to be so progressive and so lacking in cynicism (such optimism: even two humans seem to fall in love at the end). Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/groups/Top_5/Re_Top_5_weirdest_movies/190/37870/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: GradysGhost
Post To: Top 5
Post Date: 12/2/2008 7:10:33 PM
Body: [quote user="seely"] Hm, so many of the ones I would pick have already been picked. Theres a few notables missing, however. One of the all-time weirdest: The Fountain Darren Aronofsky (sp?) at his weirdest. I would try to explain it, but I'm not sure I can anymore. If you're interested, I reviewed it here. Requiem for a Dream Same director as Pi and the Fountain. The really trippy drug induced fantasies and hallucinations, plus the steady downward spiral of all the characters in this film make it a weird one. Fantasia Satan. Mickey Mouse. Pluto. Wizards. Demons. Nuff said. Me and You and Everyone We Know I saw this one twice and still can't really figure out quite what it is about. I've heard a wide range of theories. All I know is there is a 5 year old making out with a 35 year old woman, and he's obsessed with 'pooping back and forth forever'. Is it a metaphor? Is it funny? I don't really know. Stranger than Fiction / The Science of Sleep I don't know why, but I always think of these films together. Anyways, I think they both should be included on any 'weird' list. Both have pretty strange concepts that seem like they wouldn't work/be that interesting, but somehow both of them turned out to be good films--a big compliment to STF considering I don't like Will Ferrel as a rule of thumb. Both will definately mess with your mind a bit. [/quote] It's been ages since I've seen Fantasia, but I will vouch for The Science of Sleep and Me and You and Everyone We Know for being weird. Science of Sleep is such an amazing movie. Another thread around here somewhere spoke of Amelie as being a "gateway drug" to other foreign flicks. My brother has always adamently refused to watch foreign movies on the basis that he doesn't like to "read his movies." But he caught the last half of Science of Sleep and loved it. Something about how they keep switching between three languages for the entire film has this whirlwind effect that just sucks you up and moves you through the narrative, even when it's not so narrativey. Stranger Than Fiction is a pretty good metafiction film, but as far as metafiction is concerned, I have to offer up a couple of Michael Haneke films, Cache and Funny Games. While neither of these movies might be considered "weird," they have a fourth-wall-breaking aspect that your average film doesn't. And that's the understatement of the century. Cache has some disturbing imagery at one point, which seems more gruesome than that of Funny Games, even though Funny Games is far gorier. I think it has something to do with the way Funny Games incorporates its violence, the way that the "bad guys" let you, the audience, know that you know what these games are all about, and you're used to it by now. It's quite convincing, which I guess is the true horror of the film.
]]>Wed, 03 Dec 2008 00:10:33 GMTGradysGhostTop 512/2/2008 7:10:33 PM[quote user="seely"] Hm, so many of the ones I would pick have already been picked. Theres a few notables missing, however. One of the all-time weirdest: The Fountain Darren Aronofsky (sp?) at his weirdest. I would try to explain it, but I'm not sure I can anymore. If you're interested, I reviewed it here. Requiem for a Dream Same director as Pi and the Fountain. The really trippy drug induced fantasies and hallucinations, plus the steady downward spiral of all the characters in this film make it a weird one. Fantasia Satan. Mickey Mouse. Pluto. Wizards. Demons. Nuff said. Me and You and Everyone We Know I saw this one twice and still can't really figure out quite what it is about. I've heard a wide range of theories. All I know is there is a 5 year old making out with a 35 year old woman, and he's obsessed with 'pooping back and forth forever'. Is it a metaphor? Is it funny? I don't really know. Stranger than Fiction / The Science of Sleep I don't know why, but I always think of these films together. Anyways, I think they both should be included on any 'weird' list. Both have pretty strange concepts that seem like they wouldn't work/be that interesting, but somehow both of them turned out to be good films--a big compliment to STF considering I don't like Will Ferrel as a rule of thumb. Both will definately mess with your mind a bit. [/quote] It's been ages since I've seen Fantasia, but I will vouch for The Science of Sleep and Me and You and Everyone We Know for being weird. Science of Sleep is such an amazing movie. Another thread around here somewhere spoke of Amelie as being a "gateway drug" to other foreign flicks. My brother has always adamently refused to watch foreign movies on the basis that he doesn't like to "read his movies." But he caught the last half of Science of Sleep and loved it. Something about how they keep switching between three languages for the entire film has this whirlwind effect that just sucks you up and moves you through the narrative, even when it's not so narrativey. Stranger Than Fiction is a pretty good metafiction film, but as far as metafiction is concerned, I have to offer up a couple of Michael Haneke films, Cache and Funny Games. While neither of these movies might be considered "weird," they have a fourth-wall-breaking aspect that your average film doesn't. And that's the understatement of the century. Cache has some disturbing imagery at one point, which seems more gruesome than that of Funny Games, even though Funny Games is far gorier. I think it has something to do with the way Funny Games incorporates its violence, the way that the "bad guys" let you, the audience, know that you know what these games are all about, and you're used to it by now. It's quite convincing, which I guess is the true horror of the film. http://www.spout.com/groups/Top_5/Re_Top_5_weirdest_movies/190/35446/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: seely
Post To: Top 5
Post Date: 9/23/2008 2:35:16 PM
Body: Hm, so many of the ones I would pick have already been picked. Theres a few notables missing, however. One of the all-time weirdest: The Fountain Darren Aronofsky (sp?) at his weirdest. I would try to explain it, but I'm not sure I can anymore. If you're interested, I reviewed it here. Requiem for a Dream Same director as Pi and the Fountain. The really trippy drug induced fantasies and hallucinations, plus the steady downward spiral of all the characters in this film make it a weird one. Fantasia Satan. Mickey Mouse. Pluto. Wizards. Demons. Nuff said. Me and You and Everyone We Know I saw this one twice and still can't really figure out quite what it is about. I've heard a wide range of theories. All I know is there is a 5 year old making out with a 35 year old woman, and he's obsessed with 'pooping back and forth forever'. Is it a metaphor? Is it funny? I don't really know. Stranger than Fiction / The Science of Sleep I don't know why, but I always think of these films together. Anyways, I think they both should be included on any 'weird' list. Both have pretty strange concepts that seem like they wouldn't work/be that interesting, but somehow both of them turned out to be good films--a big compliment to STF considering I don't like Will Ferrel as a rule of thumb. Both will definately mess with your mind a bit.
]]>Tue, 23 Sep 2008 18:35:16 GMTseelyTop 59/23/2008 2:35:16 PMHm, so many of the ones I would pick have already been picked. Theres a few notables missing, however. One of the all-time weirdest: The Fountain Darren Aronofsky (sp?) at his weirdest. I would try to explain it, but I'm not sure I can anymore. If you're interested, I reviewed it here. Requiem for a Dream Same director as Pi and the Fountain. The really trippy drug induced fantasies and hallucinations, plus the steady downward spiral of all the characters in this film make it a weird one. Fantasia Satan. Mickey Mouse. Pluto. Wizards. Demons. Nuff said. Me and You and Everyone We Know I saw this one twice and still can't really figure out quite what it is about. I've heard a wide range of theories. All I know is there is a 5 year old making out with a 35 year old woman, and he's obsessed with 'pooping back and forth forever'. Is it a metaphor? Is it funny? I don't really know. Stranger than Fiction / The Science of Sleep I don't know why, but I always think of these films together. Anyways, I think they both should be included on any 'weird' list. Both have pretty strange concepts that seem like they wouldn't work/be that interesting, but somehow both of them turned out to be good films--a big compliment to STF considering I don't like Will Ferrel as a rule of thumb. Both will definately mess with your mind a bit. http://www.spout.com/blogs/pippin06/archive/2008/8/28/34490.aspx Post By: pippin06
Post To: Reel Thoughts
Post Date: 8/28/2008 9:32:58 AM
Body: This lengthily titled film represents the last true indie I have for a while on my Netflix queue, which is fine. I like to vary it up, and I've been trying to mix AFI movies with my regular queue, all depending upon where I am in the order of watching them, simply to get a taste of different films. Truthfully, I'd never heard of this film until I started trolling around on Spout. So, here's a plug for the reverent Spout.com: you can really learn about films you might not have otherwise heard about because the user base is so diverse and eclectic in its film-loving tastes. Just troll through the "community buzz" section of the Movies tab and see what people are talking about. My want to see list has grown exponentially thanks to that exercise. I digress. I read the plot summary to this film and some of the reviews and felt I needed to watch it when Netflix recommended it to me, thinking I would like it. Thus, here we are. And I did like it. I didn't love it, but I liked it. It was cute. Miranda July wrote, directed, and starred in the film. She plays Christine, an eccentric artist driven by impulse. She yearns to support herself with her performance art but compromises by running a cab service for the elderly. On one of her day trips with one of her customers, she encounters Richard (John Hawkes), a salesman at a shoe store. He's experiencing a painful divorce that's left him a little lost - mainly because the sinking-in of it caused him to burn his hand. On purpose. I digress. He tries to connect with his two sons Peter and Robby, but their malaise at their parents' situation is coupled with curiosity about sex, which they explore through an internet chat room. Richard also works with his neighbor, who does everything but outright proposition two teenaged girls, just as curious about sex as the boys. And so it goes - every character is connected to another character, but the connection comes through a yearning for that connection. Because all of the characters seem to have a certain loneliness or emptiness to them that motivates their actions, from the sweet to the less-than-innocent, driving them toward a need for intimacy. I liked the originality of this story. It wasn't a traditional romantic comedy, but it toyed with those elements. It wasn't a typical indie drama, per se, but it had all of the ingredients. It was a film that seemed to drive toward something profound - but it didn't quite get there. Or, it did get there, but in an anticlimactic way. This film felt light and frothy when I get the sense that it was trying to be deep. It's this intangible, almost ethereal quality that prevents me from truly loving the picture. On the other hand, I really liked some of the elements. I thought Ms. July's direction was superb, using a variety of camera techniques to connect the viewer, however momentarily, to all of the different players and their particular perspectives. The pacing was also great, even and tight; the film was always engaging. I liked the score, at times, though at other times, its kitsche felt annoying. I also liked the performances. I think the best and most believable performance belonged to John Hawkes as the man-child struggling with his sense of loss while being completely caught off guard by Christine's less-than-subtle though certainly unusual advances. His responses felt real to me. Ms. July also gave a good performance, though, at times, it was uneven, and that's not just because her character is so kooky. I get the sense that her character was semi-autobiographical, and when the character most closely resembled the real woman was when the performance was most convincing. Other times, I just felt like she was staring with big wide doe eyes because she didn't know what else to do. That's not a criticism as much as it is a general impression I got. My biggest problem with this film was with the widespread sexualization of the under-18 crowd. When that kind of stuff gets put into film, I really have to stop and consider the filmmaker's intentions, whether I can grasp the "art" of it or not. I guess I had the hardest time with Robby and his naive explorations in the internet chat room. Naturally, he doesn't get everything because he's so young, and we all have to learn sometime, but I was trying to understand how his need for this connection fit into the whole scheme of things. I think I get it, but it gave me some pause, considering that we also have the curious yet slightly maladjusted teenager girls and Peter, who's really just searching for something real amongst the surreal of his life. All in all, I felt the film was cute, sweet, even a little precious without being over the top. I was entertained; there were just some parts that alienated from the film as much as there were elements that fostered a connection with me. So, I think the film deserves a 7.5, between shaky and very good/minor flaws. It doesn't pass the test, however. I can't see myself watching this more than once or drawing it from my own movie collection, though if it's aired on the indie cable channel, I might stop and watch it for nostalgia's sake. It resonated with me but not in any meaningful way - like it skimmed the surface of a placid lake without sinking in. I appreciate that it's all about everyone (and me and you); I just wish it had reached the finish line with the point it was trying to make.
]]>Thu, 28 Aug 2008 13:32:58 GMTpippin06Reel Thoughts8/28/2008 9:32:58 AMThis lengthily titled film represents the last true indie I have for a while on my Netflix queue, which is fine. I like to vary it up, and I've been trying to mix AFI movies with my regular queue, all depending upon where I am in the order of watching them, simply to get a taste of different films. Truthfully, I'd never heard of this film until I started trolling around on Spout. So, here's a plug for the reverent Spout.com: you can really learn about films you might not have otherwise heard about because the user base is so diverse and eclectic in its film-loving tastes. Just troll through the "community buzz" section of the Movies tab and see what people are talking about. My want to see list has grown exponentially thanks to that exercise. I digress. I read the plot summary to this film and some of the reviews and felt I needed to watch it when Netflix recommended it to me, thinking I would like it. Thus, here we are. And I did like it. I didn't love it, but I liked it. It was cute. Miranda July wrote, directed, and starred in the film. She plays Christine, an eccentric artist driven by impulse. She yearns to support herself with her performance art but compromises by running a cab service for the elderly. On one of her day trips with one of her customers, she encounters Richard (John Hawkes), a salesman at a shoe store. He's experiencing a painful divorce that's left him a little lost - mainly because the sinking-in of it caused him to burn his hand. On purpose. I digress. He tries to connect with his two sons Peter and Robby, but their malaise at their parents' situation is coupled with curiosity about sex, which they explore through an internet chat room. Richard also works with his neighbor, who does everything but outright proposition two teenaged girls, just as curious about sex as the boys. And so it goes - every character is connected to another character, but the connection comes through a yearning for that connection. Because all of the characters seem to have a certain loneliness or emptiness to them that motivates their actions, from the sweet to the less-than-innocent, driving them toward a need for intimacy. I liked the originality of this story. It wasn't a traditional romantic comedy, but it toyed with those elements. It wasn't a typical indie drama, per se, but it had all of the ingredients. It was a film that seemed to drive toward something profound - but it didn't quite get there. Or, it did get there, but in an anticlimactic way. This film felt light and frothy when I get the sense that it was trying to be deep. It's this intangible, almost ethereal quality that prevents me from truly loving the picture. On the other hand, I really liked some of the elements. I thought Ms. July's direction was superb, using a variety of camera techniques to connect the viewer, however momentarily, to all of the different players and their particular perspectives. The pacing was also great, even and tight; the film was always engaging. I liked the score, at times, though at other times, its kitsche felt annoying. I also liked the performances. I think the best and most believable performance belonged to John Hawkes as the man-child struggling with his sense of loss while being completely caught off guard by Christine's less-than-subtle though certainly unusual advances. His responses felt real to me. Ms. July also gave a good performance, though, at times, it was uneven, and that's not just because her character is so kooky. I get the sense that her character was semi-autobiographical, and when the character most closely resembled the real woman was when the performance was most convincing. Other times, I just felt like she was staring with big wide doe eyes because she didn't know what else to do. That's not a criticism as much as it is a general impression I got. My biggest problem with this film was with the widespread sexualization of the under-18 crowd. When that kind of stuff gets put into film, I really have to stop and consider the filmmaker's intentions, whether I can grasp the "art" of it or not. I guess I had the hardest time with Robby and his naive explorations in the internet chat room. Naturally, he doesn't get everything because he's so young, and we all have to learn sometime, but I was trying to understand how his need for this connection fit into the whole scheme of things. I think I get it, but it gave me some pause, considering that we also have the curious yet slightly maladjusted teenager girls and Peter, who's really just searching for something real amongst the surreal of his life. All in all, I felt the film was cute, sweet, even a little precious without being over the top. I was entertained; there were just some parts that alienated from the film as much as there were elements that fostered a connection with me. So, I think the film deserves a 7.5, between shaky and very good/minor flaws. It doesn't pass the test, however. I can't see myself watching this more than once or drawing it from my own movie collection, though if it's aired on the indie cable channel, I might stop and watch it for nostalgia's sake. It resonated with me but not in any meaningful way - like it skimmed the surface of a placid lake without sinking in. I appreciate that it's all about everyone (and me and you); I just wish it had reached the finish line with the point it was trying to make. http://www.spout.com/blogs/captainryannn/archive/2008/8/8/33738.aspx Post By: CaptainRyannn
Post To: CaptainRyannn Blog
Post Date: 8/8/2008 5:01:23 AM
Body: Since January 1st, 2008, I've been keeping track of all the films I've watched. Because I don't feel like taking the time to highlight each movie up until this point, I will start at the previous week, Week 29 and continue from now on. 328. The Dark Knight (2008) -My second time seeing it. Such a great movie. Although not good enough to be considered 'best film of all time'. 329. Teeth (2007) -The storyline attracted me to it. Within the first 20 minutes I wanted it to be done. I hated this thing so much. 330. Heima (2007) -Such a beautiful documentary for such an amazing band; Sigur Ros. Check them out if you haven't yet. 331. La Haine / Hate (1995) -One of the best French films I've seen. If there's one thing I'll remember about this movie years from now, it'll be the ending and how shocked I was after it was all said and done. 332. À ma soeur! / Fat Girl (2001) -There was something sad in the way that the relationship between Anais and her older sister works out. I can't quite place my finger on it. The whole mood of the story is it's strongest part. Even a week after watching it, it still lingers with me. 333. C.R.A.Z.Y. (2005) -I had heard much about this before but now finally got around to watching it. I enjoyed this quite a bit. It deals with real people and real family issues. 334. Me and You and Everyone We Know (2005) - When I first saw this when it came out, I really liked it. After viewing it for a second time, I can't remember why. It's filled with unrealistic dialouge and characters I didn't care about. 335. À bout de souffle / Breathless (1960) -What had been hailed to be the 'crown jewel' of the French New Wave was also the last thing I saw before I feel asleep on Thursday. I think I'm going to have to give this another try. 336. Son of Rambow (2007) -After the rave reviews and catchy trailer, I had been looking forward to this. But after finally viewing it, I was left unfulfilled and wanting something more. 337. Phone Booth (2003) -Are there plot holes? Sure. Is the story likely? Nah. I mainly watched this for mere entertainment and nothing more. 338. Dazed and Confused (1993) -Immediately reminded me of American Graffiti except this took place in the 70's. I always fall for the movies that focus on how familar characters interact with one another. Although American Graffiti played this out much better, I thought this was pretty alright. 339. Batoru rowaiaru / Battle Royale (2001) -Although the dialouge seemed kind of cheesy, I can look past that because this was one hell of a ride. A group of 9th. graders put on an island and ordered to kill each other. Man, if only America had the balls to put something like that out. 340. Dazed and Confused (1993) -Yes, I watched it again. 341. Cool Hand Luke (1960) -My dad told me I would like this film. I did more than like it. Although many of us have never worked on a chain gang, the theme and spirit that this movie has is something that we can all relate to. 342. 21 (2008) -The only reason I watched this is so I could have an opinion about it when I hear kids talking about it in the hallways. I thought it was decent. Although it had many cliches, it was a little better than I expected it to be. 343. Vanishing Point (1971) -One of the first movies from the 70's that I fell in love with. Probably one of the best road chase movies out there, it's easy to tell why Quentin Tarantino decided to use it as his inspiration for Death Proof. 344. Casablanca (1942) -Classic, classic, classic. What else can I say? 345. The Breed (2006) -Such a horrible movie. Don't ever watch it.
]]>Fri, 08 Aug 2008 09:01:23 GMTCaptainRyannnCaptainRyannn Blog8/8/2008 5:01:23 AMSince January 1st, 2008, I've been keeping track of all the films I've watched. Because I don't feel like taking the time to highlight each movie up until this point, I will start at the previous week, Week 29 and continue from now on. 328. The Dark Knight (2008) -My second time seeing it. Such a great movie. Although not good enough to be considered 'best film of all time'. 329. Teeth (2007) -The storyline attracted me to it. Within the first 20 minutes I wanted it to be done. I hated this thing so much. 330. Heima (2007) -Such a beautiful documentary for such an amazing band; Sigur Ros. Check them out if you haven't yet. 331. La Haine / Hate (1995) -One of the best French films I've seen. If there's one thing I'll remember about this movie years from now, it'll be the ending and how shocked I was after it was all said and done. 332. &Agrave; ma soeur! / Fat Girl (2001) -There was something sad in the way that the relationship between Anais and her older sister works out. I can't quite place my finger on it. The whole mood of the story is it's strongest part. Even a week after watching it, it still lingers with me. 333. C.R.A.Z.Y. (2005) -I had heard much about this before but now finally got around to watching it. I enjoyed this quite a bit. It deals with real people and real family issues. 334. Me and You and Everyone We Know (2005) - When I first saw this when it came out, I really liked it. After viewing it for a second time, I can't remember why. It's filled with unrealistic dialouge and characters I didn't care about. 335. &Agrave; bout de souffle / Breathless (1960) -What had been hailed to be the 'crown jewel' of the French New Wave was also the last thing I saw before I feel asleep on Thursday. I think I'm going to have to give this another try. 336. Son of Rambow (2007) -After the rave reviews and catchy trailer, I had been looking forward to this. But after finally viewing it, I was left unfulfilled and wanting something more. 337. Phone Booth (2003) -Are there plot holes? Sure. Is the story likely? Nah. I mainly watched this for mere entertainment and nothing more. 338. Dazed and Confused (1993) -Immediately reminded me of American Graffiti except this took place in the 70's. I always fall for the movies that focus on how familar characters interact with one another. Although American Graffiti played this out much better, I thought this was pretty alright. 339. Batoru rowaiaru / Battle Royale (2001) -Although the dialouge seemed kind of cheesy, I can look past that because this was one hell of a ride. A group of 9th. graders put on an island and ordered to kill each other. Man, if only America had the balls to put something like that out. 340. Dazed and Confused (1993) -Yes, I watched it again. 341. Cool Hand Luke (1960) -My dad told me I would like this film. I did more than like it. Although many of us have never worked on a chain gang, the theme and spirit that this movie has is something that we can all relate to. 342. 21 (2008) -The only reason I watched this is so I could have an opinion about it when I hear kids talking about it in the hallways. I thought it was decent. Although it had many cliches, it was a little better than I expected it to be. 343. Vanishing Point (1971) -One of the first movies from the 70's that I fell in love with. Probably one of the best road chase movies out there, it's easy to tell why Quentin Tarantino decided to use it as his inspiration for Death Proof. 344. Casablanca (1942) -Classic, classic, classic. What else can I say? 345. The Breed (2006) -Such a horrible movie. Don't ever watch it. http://www.spout.com/blogs/ifuhadbeenadog/archive/2008/6/12/31187.aspx Post By: ifuhadbeenadog
Post To: I find myself in villans
Post Date: 6/12/2008 5:30:46 PM
Body: The first time I saw Me and You and Everyone We Know was on DVD a couple of summers ago. I liked the movie and I wanted to find out more about Miranda July. I bought her book No One Belongs Here More Than You. I haven't read it yet. Then I took a class at Columbia College in Chicago where we screened Me and You and Everyone We Know. The second time around, I loved the movie even more. I don't know why. Was it because I watched it with a bunch of other kids and we all responded to the movie in much the same way? I hate 20-something kids, though. They're boring as fuck. So that wasn't it. Maybe it was because it was projected on a big screen...I don't know. But I do know I like it because it strattles between absurdity and absolute honesty and truth. The reality in the movie, at first, seems questionable. But the more you look at it, the more it seems perfectly true. Everything is given out in poetry in the movie. But it doesn't seem too dramatic. It's seems totally natural. I like not being able to tell what's reality. I think that's the kind of place we're at right now.Miranda July managed to make a movie that is exactly the tone and temperature of how I feel during these times. It's the movie I'll talk about when I people ask me what it was like.
]]>Thu, 12 Jun 2008 21:30:46 GMTifuhadbeenadogI find myself in villans6/12/2008 5:30:46 PMThe first time I saw Me and You and Everyone We Know was on DVD a couple of summers ago. I liked the movie and I wanted to find out more about Miranda July. I bought her book No One Belongs Here More Than You. I haven't read it yet. Then I took a class at Columbia College in Chicago where we screened Me and You and Everyone We Know. The second time around, I loved the movie even more. I don't know why. Was it because I watched it with a bunch of other kids and we all responded to the movie in much the same way? I hate 20-something kids, though. They're boring as fuck. So that wasn't it. Maybe it was because it was projected on a big screen...I don't know. But I do know I like it because it strattles between absurdity and absolute honesty and truth. The reality in the movie, at first, seems questionable. But the more you look at it, the more it seems perfectly true. Everything is given out in poetry in the movie. But it doesn't seem too dramatic. It's seems totally natural. I like not being able to tell what's reality. I think that's the kind of place we're at right now.Miranda July managed to make a movie that is exactly the tone and temperature of how I feel during these times. It's the movie I'll talk about when I people ask me what it was like. http://www.spout.com/groups/Butterknife/Re_Episode_5_LAUGH_ATTACK/498/25650/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: mattypro
Post To: Butterknife
Post Date: 2/27/2008 4:13:41 PM
Body: I get it. The formula that is. Stuff happens at work. Stuff happens at home. They relate to and effect one another. The element I have responded to on each episode is the reaction of Ron vs. the reaction of Mary. (As a side note, its weird how they are listed as un-named, and yet they are called by name in the episodes ??) We get to see Ron's day job and then we get to hear about Mary's time at work. This is very familiar to me as when at home I rarely bring up work while my wife seems to speak of nothing else. I wonder if this is just coincidence but it seems likely that Swanberg has hit upon another tidbit of relationship realism that gives this series its charm and "truthiness." I found myself chuckling uncomfortably or grimacing during the first section of each short and then grinning during the home interactions. However, after reading the comments of the other posters from previous episodes, I have begun to wonder if this series is meant for or somehow just more accessible to people in “committed relationships.” I’m not even talking about the artistic parts of this. I mean just basic enjoyment. Going home to a spouse is an experience that not everyone has. Does that give me a leg up on enjoying this set of shorts? Are single people less likely to like it?
]]>Wed, 27 Feb 2008 21:13:41 GMTmattyproButterknife2/27/2008 4:13:41 PMI get it. The formula that is. Stuff happens at work. Stuff happens at home. They relate to and effect one another. The element I have responded to on each episode is the reaction of Ron vs. the reaction of Mary. (As a side note, its weird how they are listed as un-named, and yet they are called by name in the episodes ??) We get to see Ron&#39;s day job and then we get to hear about Mary&#39;s time at work. This is very familiar to me as when at home I rarely bring up work while my wife seems to speak of nothing else. I wonder if this is just coincidence but it seems likely that Swanberg has hit upon another tidbit of relationship realism that gives this series its charm and "truthiness." I found myself chuckling uncomfortably or grimacing during the first section of each short and then grinning during the home interactions. However, after reading the comments of the other posters from previous episodes, I have begun to wonder if this series is meant for or somehow just more accessible to people in &ldquo;committed relationships.&rdquo; I&rsquo;m not even talking about the artistic parts of this. I mean just basic enjoyment. Going home to a spouse is an experience that not everyone has. Does that give me a leg up on enjoying this set of shorts? Are single people less likely to like it? http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/1/21/24152.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 1/21/2008 3:01:15 PM
Body: From what I hear, everyone is talking about Goliath, a film by the Zellner Brothers that premieres at Sundance this evening. But after watching the trailer, I have to wonder what has people so excited. Sure, I think it looks cheap and funny in a Me and You and Everyone We Know sort of way — which isn’t a gripe, as Miranda July’s film was my favorite at the festival back in 2005 — but it also looks like something homemade and bound for YouTube, and I’m not the only person on the internet to say so. Fortunately, the film has support from the right people. On the Goliath Facebook page, SXSW producer Matt Dentler commented that it’s “an awesome, awesome movie. Truly.” But Sundance is very different from Austin, and just because the Zellner Brothers have a loyal following back home doesn’t mean they’ll succeed in Park City. Then again, after excitedly watching Me and You three years ago, I never thought it was going to catch on with other people at Sundance let alone be a huge hit in the real world. Of course, the Zellners have already been to Sundance — every year since 2005, in fact. It could all change this year, though, with their first feature, the simple synopsis of which is as follows: “In the wake of a divorce, a man desperately searches for the one relic of the broken marriage- his pet cat ‘Goliath’, who has gone missing.” So, I can’t wait to hear what festivalgoers think of the film after tonight’s premiere (or even from readers who view the trailer and wish they could be there). For those of you not in Park City, you’ll have to settle for this sorta funny clip. And maybe eventually the film’s website (Goliathismissing.com) won’t be down — damn that Sundance buzz for causing the bandwith to be exceeded — and we can investigate further what is so attractive about this little movie. Is it just the association with filmmaker Andrew Bujalski (Mutual Appreciation), who appears in the film? Is it just the popularity of the Zellner’s three shorts that have shown at Sundance in the past? I guess I could just go and find those films on the interweb and see … Goliath premieres at the Prospector Square Theater tonight at 8:30 PM. It also screens at the Library tomorrow morning and Saturday morning and then in Salt Lake City on Saturday night. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Mon, 21 Jan 2008 20:01:15 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com1/21/2008 3:01:15 PM From what I hear, everyone is talking about Goliath, a film by the Zellner Brothers that premieres at Sundance this evening. But after watching the trailer, I have to wonder what has people so excited. Sure, I think it looks cheap and funny in a Me and You and Everyone We Know sort of way — which isn’t a gripe, as Miranda July’s film was my favorite at the festival back in 2005 — but it also looks like something homemade and bound for YouTube, and I’m not the only person on the internet to say so. Fortunately, the film has support from the right people. On the Goliath Facebook page, SXSW producer Matt Dentler commented that it’s “an awesome, awesome movie. Truly.” But Sundance is very different from Austin, and just because the Zellner Brothers have a loyal following back home doesn’t mean they’ll succeed in Park City. Then again, after excitedly watching Me and You three years ago, I never thought it was going to catch on with other people at Sundance let alone be a huge hit in the real world. Of course, the Zellners have already been to Sundance — every year since 2005, in fact. It could all change this year, though, with their first feature, the simple synopsis of which is as follows: “In the wake of a divorce, a man desperately searches for the one relic of the broken marriage- his pet cat ‘Goliath’, who has gone missing.” So, I can’t wait to hear what festivalgoers think of the film after tonight’s premiere (or even from readers who view the trailer and wish they could be there). For those of you not in Park City, you’ll have to settle for this sorta funny clip. And maybe eventually the film’s website (Goliathismissing.com) won’t be down — damn that Sundance buzz for causing the bandwith to be exceeded — and we can investigate further what is so attractive about this little movie. Is it just the association with filmmaker Andrew Bujalski (Mutual Appreciation), who appears in the film? Is it just the popularity of the Zellner’s three shorts that have shown at Sundance in the past? I guess I could just go and find those films on the interweb and see … Goliath premieres at the Prospector Square Theater tonight at 8:30 PM. It also screens at the Library tomorrow morning and Saturday morning and then in Salt Lake City on Saturday night. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/blogs/go-ape/archive/2007/10/6/20459.aspx Post By: Go-Ape
Post To: Go-Ape Blog
Post Date: 10/6/2007 6:15:29 PM
Body: I really liked this film, but it's another one that I have to be in the right frame of mind to watch. It is a very endearing film with well fleshed out characters who hit all the right nerves and create a real connection with the audience. This is like a more indie Lost In Translation really. It is witty and funny in places but it also deals with some more interesting themes and issues such as the internet culture and chat rooms etc. wherein his very young son makes a date with a woman who is into some rather strange things through something he saw as a joke. I like how the relationships between the characters build throughout thr film, especially the bond between the two kids cause the older brother takes time to help his younger brother and messes around with him - supplying some support that seems missing from his father. All in all, I think it's a good film that's well worth a watch but be aware that it is not an overly cheerful film, but it is interesting and heart-warming.
]]>Sat, 06 Oct 2007 22:15:29 GMTGo-ApeGo-Ape Blog10/6/2007 6:15:29 PMI really liked this film, but it&#39;s another one that I have to be in the right frame of mind to watch. It is a very endearing film with well fleshed out characters who hit all the right nerves and create a real connection with the audience. This is like a more indie Lost In Translation really. It is witty and funny in places but it also deals with some more interesting themes and issues such as the internet culture and chat rooms etc. wherein his very young son makes a date with a woman who is into some rather strange things through something he saw as a joke. I like how the relationships between the characters build throughout thr film, especially the bond between the two kids cause the older brother takes time to help his younger brother and messes around with him - supplying some support that seems missing from his father. All in all, I think it&#39;s a good film that&#39;s well worth a watch but be aware that it is not an overly cheerful film, but it is interesting and heart-warming. http://www.spout.com/blogs/hensdill/archive/2007/9/24/20123.aspx Post By: hensdill
Post To: hensdill Blog
Post Date: 9/24/2007 11:34:49 PM
Body: an amazing feature from Miranda July. full of fantastic dialouge and great ideas. one of the most rewarding independents in a very long time... in our top 50 of all times!!!
]]>Tue, 25 Sep 2007 03:34:49 GMThensdillhensdill Blog9/24/2007 11:34:49 PMan amazing feature from Miranda July. full of fantastic dialouge and great ideas. one of the most rewarding independents in a very long time... in our top 50 of all times!!! http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/funny/MemberTagFilms.aspxfunny
Number of films tagged: 608

Number of people who tagged: 315

Number of times used: 941

]]>Fri, 11 Dec 2009 01:28:29 GMT608315941Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/Great/MemberTagFilms.aspxGreat
Number of films tagged: 231

Number of people who tagged: 202

Number of times used: 371

]]>Fri, 04 Dec 2009 17:11:49 GMT231202371Tag 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/brilliant/MemberTagFilms.aspxbrilliant
Number of films tagged: 179

Number of people who tagged: 137

Number of times used: 285

]]>Tue, 03 Nov 2009 17:28:43 GMT179137285Tag 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/Quirky/MemberTagFilms.aspxQuirky
Number of films tagged: 131

Number of people who tagged: 110

Number of times used: 249

]]>Mon, 30 Nov 2009 19:54:25 GMT131110249Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/cute/MemberTagFilms.aspxcute
Number of films tagged: 210

Number of people who tagged: 98

Number of times used: 314

]]>Tue, 08 Dec 2009 00:46:12 GMT21098314Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/weird/MemberTagFilms.aspxweird
Number of films tagged: 90

Number of people who tagged: 83

Number of times used: 131

]]>Tue, 15 Sep 2009 19:57:36 GMT9083131Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/art/MemberTagFilms.aspxart
Number of films tagged: 674

Number of people who tagged: 66

Number of times used: 116

]]>Mon, 26 Oct 2009 16:09:48 GMT67466116Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/children/MemberTagFilms.aspxchildren
Number of films tagged: 212

Number of people who tagged: 66

Number of times used: 270

]]>Mon, 16 Nov 2009 17:28:15 GMT21266270Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/and/MemberTagFilms.aspxand
Number of films tagged: 59

Number of people who tagged: 53

Number of times used: 64

]]>Wed, 25 Feb 2009 18:54:50 GMT595364Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/life/MemberTagFilms.aspxlife
Number of films tagged: 1082

Number of people who tagged: 52

Number of times used: 224

]]>Wed, 02 Dec 2009 23:13:43 GMT108252224Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/awkward/MemberTagFilms.aspxawkward
Number of films tagged: 49

Number of people who tagged: 47

Number of times used: 72

]]>Wed, 14 Oct 2009 19:09:23 GMT494772Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/divorce/MemberTagFilms.aspxdivorce
Number of films tagged: 1042

Number of people who tagged: 45

Number of times used: 121

]]>Wed, 25 Nov 2009 05:35:44 GMT104245121Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/son/MemberTagFilms.aspxson
Number of films tagged: 2321

Number of people who tagged: 40

Number of times used: 111

]]>Mon, 12 Oct 2009 04:48:06 GMT232140111Tag