list http://www.spout.com/ Recent community activity around Inland Empire 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/Inland_Empire/262767/default.aspx Title: Inland Empire
Year: 2006
Director: David Lynch
Plot: Cinema of the surreal icon David Lynch follows up the success of his critically acclaimed 2001 feature Mulholland Drive with this dark mystery, shot on a handheld Sony PD150 digital video recorder. It is the tale of an actress whose personality becomes increasingly fragmented as she delves ever deeper into her work for a high-profile filmmaker. Kingsley (Jeremy Irons) is a director looking to adapt for the screen a Polish gypsy folktale that was previously stalled when the two leads were viciously murdered. Having offered the female lead to devoted actress Nikki (Laura Dern), Kingsley warns her male co-star, Devon (Justin Theroux), to maintain his professional distance, as Nikki's husband (Peter J. Lucas) is known to be notoriously possessive. As the passionate co-stars quickly cross the line and become lovers, Nikki's slowly slipping sense of reality causes her to eventually become lost in her character while the mysterious story of a Polish couple and a trio of giant stage-bound rabbits (voices of Naomi Watts, Scott Coffey, and Laura Harring) lounge around on the sofa and tend to their domestic duties. Shot over the course of two and a half years and without a formalized script, Lynch's hallucinogenic look at a doomed film project features all of the abstract imagery and strange symbolism that have long made the director a favorite of film fans who embrace his disorienting approach to unconventional storytelling. ~ Jason Buchanan, All Movie Guide
Times Tagged: 22
Number of Lists: 23
Number of blog posts: 14
Number of discussion threads: 8
SpoutRating: 3
]]>Tue, 21 Jul 2009 20:56:03 GMTInland Empire2006David LynchCinema of the surreal icon <a href="/players/P___100454/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>David Lynch</a> follows up the success of his critically acclaimed 2001 feature Mulholland Drive with this dark mystery, shot on a handheld Sony PD150 digital video recorder. It is the tale of an actress whose personality becomes increasingly fragmented as she delves ever deeper into her work for a high-profile filmmaker. Kingsley (<a href="/players/P____34545/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Jeremy Irons</a>) is a director looking to adapt for the screen a Polish gypsy folktale that was previously stalled when the two leads were viciously murdered. Having offered the female lead to devoted actress Nikki (<a href="/players/P____18704/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Laura Dern</a>), Kingsley warns her male co-star, Devon (<a href="/players/P___200875/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Justin Theroux</a>), to maintain his professional distance, as Nikki's husband (Peter J. Lucas) is known to be notoriously possessive. As the passionate co-stars quickly cross the line and become lovers, Nikki's slowly slipping sense of reality causes her to eventually become lost in her character while the mysterious story of a Polish couple and a trio of giant stage-bound rabbits (voices of <a href="/players/P____75056/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Naomi Watts</a>, <a href="/players/P____13920/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Scott Coffey</a>, and Laura Harring) lounge around on the sofa and tend to their domestic duties. Shot over the course of two and a half years and without a formalized script, Lynch's hallucinogenic look at a doomed film project features all of the abstract imagery and strange symbolism that have long made the director a favorite of film fans who embrace his disorienting approach to unconventional storytelling. ~ Jason Buchanan, All Movie Guide22Tag Target (>10)231483http://www.spout.com/ProductImages/s262767.jpghttp://www.spout.com/films/Inland_Empire/262767/default.aspxFilm http://www.spout.com/groups/Weekly_Theme/Re_Weekly_Theme_for_July_20_Television/625/43216/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: mercurial
Post To: Weekly Theme
Post Date: 7/21/2009 4:56:03 PM
Body: A great movie that doesn't get a lot of attention in Series 7: The Contenders. It came out during the height of reality shows like Survivor and was about a faux new television show in which seven unsuspecting people are picked by a lottery and only the last one standing gets their freedom. At the time, it seemed like an Americanized version of Battle Royale, but Series 7 focused more on the television aspect and just how ridiculous it was becoming. I know it's mushy and preachy, but I still love Pleasantville. Watching modern day kids trying to survive in a black white Leave It To Beaver like town; and it was when Reese Witherspoon was still in her slutty bad ass girl Freeway stage which is always hilarious to watch. Bolt fits the theme. A dog raised believing it is a super enhanced cyber puppy on a television show gets lost and must learn to live in the real world was decent enough. Hairspray was about a bunch of kids vying for a coveted spot on a local tv dance show. Halloween III: Season of the Witch revolved around kids putting on cursed masks and watching a television commercial that would kill them. Fun times. Galaxy Quest was about a group of washed up Strek Trek like actors that find themselves transported to a real intergalactic war and must try and imitate their faux television personas to survive. I'll have to watch it a dozen more times, but I'm fairly kinda sorta maybe almost certain that Inland Empire had something to do with television. Natural Born Killers was more or less an indictment of the horrors of television on our society. I didn't really care for The Nines because I thought it was a little too too; it was trying to convey something about losing ourselves in the false reality of television. Or maybe not, I don't know. Bamboozled is one of my favorite Spike Lee movies about a television executive that tries to get fired by programming a horrifically racist minstrel show but is shocked to learn that it becomes a sensational hit. Soapdish was a stupid fun look at all the ridiculous bitching and backstabbing that goes on behind the scenes of a daytime soap opera series. Edtv came out right after The Truman Show and was pretty much trying to say the same thing. The Cable Guy. Doesn't get the credit it deserves and is probably one of Jim Carrey's best performances. American Dreamz was just __________. I don't watch American Idol so maybe I wasn't cool enough to enjoy it. Stay Tuned was one of those movies from my childhood where most of the comedy went straight over my head. Something about a family getting sucked into a sadistic television and must survive all the twisted versions of popular shows at the time. Need to watch it again.
]]>Tue, 21 Jul 2009 20:56:03 GMTmercurialWeekly Theme7/21/2009 4:56:03 PMA great movie that doesn't get a lot of attention in Series 7: The Contenders. It came out during the height of reality shows like Survivor and was about a faux new television show in which seven unsuspecting people are picked by a lottery and only the last one standing gets their freedom. At the time, it seemed like an Americanized version of Battle Royale, but Series 7 focused more on the television aspect and just how ridiculous it was becoming. I know it's mushy and preachy, but I still love Pleasantville. Watching modern day kids trying to survive in a black white Leave It To Beaver like town; and it was when Reese Witherspoon was still in her slutty bad ass girl Freeway stage which is always hilarious to watch. Bolt fits the theme. A dog raised believing it is a super enhanced cyber puppy on a television show gets lost and must learn to live in the real world was decent enough. Hairspray was about a bunch of kids vying for a coveted spot on a local tv dance show. Halloween III: Season of the Witch revolved around kids putting on cursed masks and watching a television commercial that would kill them. Fun times. Galaxy Quest was about a group of washed up Strek Trek like actors that find themselves transported to a real intergalactic war and must try and imitate their faux television personas to survive. I'll have to watch it a dozen more times, but I'm fairly kinda sorta maybe almost certain that Inland Empire had something to do with television. Natural Born Killers was more or less an indictment of the horrors of television on our society. I didn't really care for The Nines because I thought it was a little too too; it was trying to convey something about losing ourselves in the false reality of television. Or maybe not, I don't know. Bamboozled is one of my favorite Spike Lee movies about a television executive that tries to get fired by programming a horrifically racist minstrel show but is shocked to learn that it becomes a sensational hit. Soapdish was a stupid fun look at all the ridiculous bitching and backstabbing that goes on behind the scenes of a daytime soap opera series. Edtv came out right after The Truman Show and was pretty much trying to say the same thing. The Cable Guy. Doesn't get the credit it deserves and is probably one of Jim Carrey's best performances. American Dreamz was just __________. I don't watch American Idol so maybe I wasn't cool enough to enjoy it. Stay Tuned was one of those movies from my childhood where most of the comedy went straight over my head. Something about a family getting sucked into a sadistic television and must survive all the twisted versions of popular shows at the time. Need to watch it again. http://www.spout.com/blogs/chrismorrell/archive/2008/7/31/33316.aspx Post By: chrismorrell
Post To: chrismorrell Blog
Post Date: 7/31/2008 6:42:30 AM
Body: Further into the labyrinth we go with David..if the twists of "Mulholland Drive" lost you,(did you see what i did ?) then i dont expect you will get here... It's over-long and sprawling on first viewing ,but the apparently barren sections are punctuated by such genuinely shocking imagery,that you will go back for more,but with a deal of trepidation.. A crazily quick run through from me..The fracturing of the "narrative" begins almost straight away..the first section echoes "Mulholland Drive"and then "Lost Highway" ,as reality and artifice is undermined and characters appear to transform..a thread that is introduced in the first few scenes dominates the middle section..the final section brings the climaxes of shocks and mind games, further twisting into the labyrinth..the end-title sequence with all Lynch's assembled "lovelies" ,like waking from a nightmare,provides a welcome sigh of relief.
]]>Thu, 31 Jul 2008 10:42:30 GMTchrismorrellchrismorrell Blog7/31/2008 6:42:30 AMFurther into the labyrinth we go with David..if the twists of "Mulholland Drive" lost you,(did you see what i did ?) then i dont expect you will get here... It's over-long and sprawling on first viewing ,but the apparently barren sections are punctuated by such genuinely shocking imagery,that you will go back for more,but with a deal of trepidation.. A crazily quick run through from me..The fracturing of the "narrative" begins almost straight away..the first section echoes "Mulholland Drive"and then "Lost Highway" ,as reality and artifice is undermined and characters appear to transform..a thread that is introduced in the first few scenes dominates the middle section..the final section brings the climaxes of shocks and mind games, further twisting into the labyrinth..the end-title sequence with all Lynch's assembled "lovelies" ,like waking from a nightmare,provides a welcome sigh of relief. http://www.spout.com/blogs/smooth_j/archive/2008/7/28/33178.aspx Post By: Smooth_J
Post To: Smooth_J Blog
Post Date: 7/28/2008 2:21:02 PM
Body: The idea for this analysis came to mind when I recently saw Bergman's The Seventh Seal. While I was not quite as blown away by the film as most accolades of the film would suggest, I still found it to be an excellent movie, and could see very clearly the influence it has had on so many films that have come after it. The one scene that I especially noticed a direct legacy in later films was a short, almost gimmicky little snippet during the medieval religious cult scene in the town--where the drums are beating loudly, people are screaming in agony as whips crack, and monks and other repenters are carrying enormous crosses on their backs. There is a short string of profile shots: Antonius, Jons, and "The Girl" (the only specific name I could find for her anywhere on the internet). The cuts between the faces are done with the beats of the drums; they are perfectly centered, with mist or smoke rising in the backgrounds, adding to each image's raw, black-and-white imagery; and each face perfectly describes what each character is feeling in the specific scene. Antonius stares onward at the happenings, in the middle of an intense existential dilemma, scrutinizing the scene and attempting to sort out what it all could mean. Jons observes with amused (yet somewhat disturbed) contempt for not only the people of the scene, but for all of humanity. And The Girl stares ahead in fear, the only one of them who truly realizes the oncoming apocalypse at such an early stage. At first glance, it seems like an empty trick thrown in for effect by Bergman. But such use of tone and the profile shot have been used countless times, seemingly originated by Bergman and his equals at this time of cinematic experimentation. For example, this technique of switching profiles to the beat of something is used pretty much verbatum in the film I'm Not There, where Todd Haynes switches between all the faces of Bob Dylan to the sound of gunshots--all in misty black-and-white photography. What makes a profile shot so effective is that (sorry for this cliche...) every face tells a story, and it only takes a skilled actor, a good director, and a camera with the right film to turn it into a work of art. But I mean, portraits and sculpture dating back to prehistoric times make use of the nuances of the human face, from Egyptian sculptures of pharaohs, the stone heads of Easter Island, and technically even Native American tikis. Different societies and different mediums of art have used the face for various forms of expression, and it is probably one of the most common depictions in art. Look at the Mona Lisa--it's one of the most famous works of art ever created, and it is a painting of a woman's face. It's the mystery behind her expressions, her features, her true identity that makes the work so timeless and so debatable. However, there's something about seeing the human face framed in a camera--especially on a black-and-white one--that is so beautiful and so perfect. In my mind, who cares about Joe Wright's five minute tracking shot. Hundreds of extras, thousands of dollars, all to capture a vast expanse of imagery without any empathy involved. For a well-done profile shot, all one needs an actor, a director, and a camera--nothing else. I'm not necessarily saying that a tracking shot would not be a work of art, since it is one in itself, but I feel as though such broadness cannot capture the undeniable intimacy of human emotion that is shown on any person's face. Even one's eyes, shifting crazily during a "trip" through time and space (2001: A Space Odyssey) have the ability to captivate a viewer, and give them a glimpse into a character's psyche. Last night, while running through this topic in my head, I came up with several movies and genres that utilize the human profile extensively. The first that came to mind was the film-noir genre, with its fims' personal, close feel. Who can forget the faces of the tortured heroes of these films, driving around puffing on their ever-present cigarettes? While my knowledge of this genre is pretty limited, I know enough to recognize the faces of the classic noir heroes. Neo-noir and crime films have taken up these techniques, especially films like Pulp Fiction (and other Tarantino) and Chinatown (which is pretty much classic noir). Another film that really sticks out in my mind is The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly, with its infamous final shoot-out of only profile shots and guns. Leone had a gift for the small touches of the human face, as he also demonstrates his penchant for this in Once Upon a Time in the West. He perfectly illustrates the dirtiness and inherent wickedness in a lot of his characters through perfectly staged shots of their sweaty, grizzled faces. Kubrick was an auteur in many ways, and one that I have especially noticed is his perfect use of a framed, still camera shot. One of my favorites occurs in Dr. Strangelove, with the shot of General Jack Ripper during one of his monologues, where the camera is beneath his face and it basically looking right up his nose at a crooked angle. Just the staging of this shot gives the viewer a perfect sense of how unhinged the man really is. It's hilarity through just good direction. Now, I hate to stray off of my established topic, but I feel as though I can't discuss the profile shot without talking about its cinematic opposite, the subjective shot. While not nearly as popular, in the right hands, it can be nearly as effective as the human profile. David Lynch has pretty much mastered this craft, and he uses it flawlessly to create almost unbearable terror in Inland Empire. One of the most terrifying experiences I've every had while watching a movie happened when I watched Mulholland Dr. for the first time, when the man in the restaraunt is walking to face the monster in the alley--Lynch uses the man's point of view to emphasize the horror being faced. I pretty much shit my pants. Did that aspect of the film really serve much of a purpose? No, not really. But it has an undeniable finesse and effectiveness that makes it essential to the overall tone of the movie. Another film that uses the subjective point of view to enhance horror is one that I watched recently, Dreyer's Vampyr. It is a short scene in which it is used, but creates a great sense of claustrophic fear. A couple of films that go hand-in-hand in terms of use of POV are Being John Malkovich and Diving Bell and the Butterfly. BJM flawlessly portrays being inside the head of someone else, from the sound effects to the imagery. You ARE walking around in someone else's shoes, and it's amazing. DB&tB also uses this technique of seeing the world through someone else's eyes. Schnabel meticulously recreates the feeling of being confined within one's mind, with no escape and no possible sense of escape. It is a beautiful technique used in an absolutely beautiful film, and it heightens the unending and unavoidable sadness of the film. In a convoluted way, the film also makes great use of the profile shot--from the eyes of Bauby. The lighting and camera effects used illustrate the beauty of his nurse's faces unlike anything I have ever seen, framing them in his one eye with the foggy edges. The camera examines their features as though you are Bauby, longing to reach out and touch them, but you can't and it is near torture. For the most part, it is foreign directors that use these sort of simple shots to greatest effect--I feel as though they typically can emphasize beauty better than any American director ever could, not only through profile and POV but also through beauty of landscapes. Now, I know I must address that nearly every movie uses these sorts of methods, and my film repertoire may not permit me to do a full elucidation on such topics. However, I have always been taken aback by the immense possibilities of film-making. As I have dreams of becoming a film-maker, I can't help but analyze such things when I watch movies, and take them to mind when imagining camera angles and writing ideas. And the things that I have always marveled at are the simple things that can be done by anyone with an idea, a camera, and subject. That's where the true beauty of film-making lies, in its simplest artistry.
]]>Mon, 28 Jul 2008 18:21:02 GMTSmooth_JSmooth_J Blog7/28/2008 2:21:02 PMThe idea for this analysis came to mind when I recently saw Bergman's The Seventh Seal. While I was not quite as blown away by the film as most accolades of the film would suggest, I still found it to be an excellent movie, and could see very clearly the influence it has had on so many films that have come after it. The one scene that I especially noticed a direct legacy in later films was a short, almost gimmicky little snippet during the medieval religious cult scene in the town--where the drums are beating loudly, people are screaming in agony as whips crack, and monks and other repenters are carrying enormous crosses on their backs. There is a short string of profile shots: Antonius, Jons, and "The Girl" (the only specific name I could find for her anywhere on the internet). The cuts between the faces are done with the beats of the drums; they are perfectly centered, with mist or smoke rising in the backgrounds, adding to each image's raw, black-and-white imagery; and each face perfectly describes what each character is feeling in the specific scene. Antonius stares onward at the happenings, in the middle of an intense existential dilemma, scrutinizing the scene and attempting to sort out what it all could mean. Jons observes with amused (yet somewhat disturbed) contempt for not only the people of the scene, but for all of humanity. And The Girl stares ahead in fear, the only one of them who truly realizes the oncoming apocalypse at such an early stage. At first glance, it seems like an empty trick thrown in for effect by Bergman. But such use of tone and the profile shot have been used countless times, seemingly originated by Bergman and his equals at this time of cinematic experimentation. For example, this technique of switching profiles to the beat of something is used pretty much verbatum in the film I'm Not There, where Todd Haynes switches between all the faces of Bob Dylan to the sound of gunshots--all in misty black-and-white photography. What makes a profile shot so effective is that (sorry for this cliche...) every face tells a story, and it only takes a skilled actor, a good director, and a camera with the right film to turn it into a work of art. But I mean, portraits and sculpture dating back to prehistoric times make use of the nuances of the human face, from Egyptian sculptures of pharaohs, the stone heads of Easter Island, and technically even Native American tikis. Different societies and different mediums of art have used the face for various forms of expression, and it is probably one of the most common depictions in art. Look at the Mona Lisa--it's one of the most famous works of art ever created, and it is a painting of a woman's face. It's the mystery behind her expressions, her features, her true identity that makes the work so timeless and so debatable. However, there's something about seeing the human face framed in a camera--especially on a black-and-white one--that is so beautiful and so perfect. In my mind, who cares about Joe Wright's five minute tracking shot. Hundreds of extras, thousands of dollars, all to capture a vast expanse of imagery without any empathy involved. For a well-done profile shot, all one needs an actor, a director, and a camera--nothing else. I'm not necessarily saying that a tracking shot would not be a work of art, since it is one in itself, but I feel as though such broadness cannot capture the undeniable intimacy of human emotion that is shown on any person's face. Even one's eyes, shifting crazily during a "trip" through time and space (2001: A Space Odyssey) have the ability to captivate a viewer, and give them a glimpse into a character's psyche. Last night, while running through this topic in my head, I came up with several movies and genres that utilize the human profile extensively. The first that came to mind was the film-noir genre, with its fims' personal, close feel. Who can forget the faces of the tortured heroes of these films, driving around puffing on their ever-present cigarettes? While my knowledge of this genre is pretty limited, I know enough to recognize the faces of the classic noir heroes. Neo-noir and crime films have taken up these techniques, especially films like Pulp Fiction (and other Tarantino) and Chinatown (which is pretty much classic noir). Another film that really sticks out in my mind is The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly, with its infamous final shoot-out of only profile shots and guns. Leone had a gift for the small touches of the human face, as he also demonstrates his penchant for this in Once Upon a Time in the West. He perfectly illustrates the dirtiness and inherent wickedness in a lot of his characters through perfectly staged shots of their sweaty, grizzled faces. Kubrick was an auteur in many ways, and one that I have especially noticed is his perfect use of a framed, still camera shot. One of my favorites occurs in Dr. Strangelove, with the shot of General Jack Ripper during one of his monologues, where the camera is beneath his face and it basically looking right up his nose at a crooked angle. Just the staging of this shot gives the viewer a perfect sense of how unhinged the man really is. It's hilarity through just good direction. Now, I hate to stray off of my established topic, but I feel as though I can't discuss the profile shot without talking about its cinematic opposite, the subjective shot. While not nearly as popular, in the right hands, it can be nearly as effective as the human profile. David Lynch has pretty much mastered this craft, and he uses it flawlessly to create almost unbearable terror in Inland Empire. One of the most terrifying experiences I've every had while watching a movie happened when I watched Mulholland Dr. for the first time, when the man in the restaraunt is walking to face the monster in the alley--Lynch uses the man's point of view to emphasize the horror being faced. I pretty much shit my pants. Did that aspect of the film really serve much of a purpose? No, not really. But it has an undeniable finesse and effectiveness that makes it essential to the overall tone of the movie. Another film that uses the subjective point of view to enhance horror is one that I watched recently, Dreyer's Vampyr. It is a short scene in which it is used, but creates a great sense of claustrophic fear. A couple of films that go hand-in-hand in terms of use of POV are Being John Malkovich and Diving Bell and the Butterfly. BJM flawlessly portrays being inside the head of someone else, from the sound effects to the imagery. You ARE walking around in someone else's shoes, and it's amazing. DB&amp;tB also uses this technique of seeing the world through someone else's eyes. Schnabel meticulously recreates the feeling of being confined within one's mind, with no escape and no possible sense of escape. It is a beautiful technique used in an absolutely beautiful film, and it heightens the unending and unavoidable sadness of the film. In a convoluted way, the film also makes great use of the profile shot--from the eyes of Bauby. The lighting and camera effects used illustrate the beauty of his nurse's faces unlike anything I have ever seen, framing them in his one eye with the foggy edges. The camera examines their features as though you are Bauby, longing to reach out and touch them, but you can't and it is near torture. For the most part, it is foreign directors that use these sort of simple shots to greatest effect--I feel as though they typically can emphasize beauty better than any American director ever could, not only through profile and POV but also through beauty of landscapes. Now, I know I must address that nearly every movie uses these sorts of methods, and my film repertoire may not permit me to do a full elucidation on such topics. However, I have always been taken aback by the immense possibilities of film-making. As I have dreams of becoming a film-maker, I can't help but analyze such things when I watch movies, and take them to mind when imagining camera angles and writing ideas. And the things that I have always marveled at are the simple things that can be done by anyone with an idea, a camera, and subject. That's where the true beauty of film-making lies, in its simplest artistry. http://www.spout.com/groups/Top_5/Re_Top_5_weirdest_movies/190/32464/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: indieabby88
Post To: Top 5
Post Date: 7/12/2008 2:09:17 PM
Body: [quote user="Smooth_J"] Surreal, absurd, disturbing, or just plain strange movies. I got this idea from a discussion on IMDB, and I believe some movie website or magazine released a list of the top 20 a while back. In terms of overall weirdness, here it goes: 1. Un Chien Andalou The old Bunuel-Dali collaboration. This had me at the part where the eye gets sliced with a razor-blade. It is quite possibly one of the most disturbing images I have ever seen, and it was made in 1929. It is almost unsettlingly bizarre. This easily takes the cake at a whopping 16 minutes. Watching this film makes you realize how warped the human mind can be, and it's amazing. It is where every David Lynch film is originated, and really where the surrealist genre was created. 2. Eraserhead Not much about this film can be explained that hasn't already been said a million times. It is adequate to say that never has anything like it ever been seen, and it began a long and illustrious career of nightmares and dreamscapes. 3. The City of Lost Children This one is not quite surrealism, more like a plot-driven sci-fi nightmare that more than delivers on the absurdities. However, it also makes up for such strange detachment with likeable characters and genuine horror. 4. Brazil Also one of my favorite movies, it is the crowned jewel of Terry Gilliam's catalogue. The way in which the dream sequences are paralleled by Lowry's just as bizarre existence makes this a masterpiece of surrealism. 5. So many to choose from!!!!!! I can't pick this last one. So, I'll make a list of honorable mentions: Inland Empire, Mulholland Drive, Videodrome (and other Cronenberg), Dead Man, The Adventures of Baron Munchausen, Time Bandits (and most other Gilliam), 2001, Donnie Darko, all of Guy Maddin's shorts (some of which aren't in the Spout database......), Pi. Considering this is labeled "Top 5 Weirdest movies", I'm afraid to include 8 1/2, since it's not per se "weird", but more dreamy and surrealist, which does not necessarily mean weird in my book. All of the surrealist films I mentioned were really by-the-book WEIRD. Am I wrong here? [/quote] For some reason I don't like putting Giliam in the "weird" category, although I know his stuff generally is pretty off-the-wall. I grew up watching "Munchausen" and "Time Bandits," so I guess that kind of thing is just part of me. I've been sporadically watching "Fantastic Planet" lately. Now that is a weird movie. It actually feels like I'm watching a feature-length Gilliam animation from the old Monty Python series.
]]>Sat, 12 Jul 2008 18:09:17 GMTindieabby88Top 57/12/2008 2:09:17 PM[quote user="Smooth_J"] Surreal, absurd, disturbing, or just plain strange movies. I got this idea from a discussion on IMDB, and I believe some movie website or magazine released a list of the top 20 a while back. In terms of overall weirdness, here it goes: 1. Un Chien Andalou The old Bunuel-Dali collaboration. This had me at the part where the eye gets sliced with a razor-blade. It is quite possibly one of the most disturbing images I have ever seen, and it was made in 1929. It is almost unsettlingly bizarre. This easily takes the cake at a whopping 16 minutes. Watching this film makes you realize how warped the human mind can be, and it's amazing. It is where every David Lynch film is originated, and really where the surrealist genre was created. 2. Eraserhead Not much about this film can be explained that hasn't already been said a million times. It is adequate to say that never has anything like it ever been seen, and it began a long and illustrious career of nightmares and dreamscapes. 3. The City of Lost Children This one is not quite surrealism, more like a plot-driven sci-fi nightmare that more than delivers on the absurdities. However, it also makes up for such strange detachment with likeable characters and genuine horror. 4. Brazil Also one of my favorite movies, it is the crowned jewel of Terry Gilliam's catalogue. The way in which the dream sequences are paralleled by Lowry's just as bizarre existence makes this a masterpiece of surrealism. 5. So many to choose from!!!!!! I can't pick this last one. So, I'll make a list of honorable mentions: Inland Empire, Mulholland Drive, Videodrome (and other Cronenberg), Dead Man, The Adventures of Baron Munchausen, Time Bandits (and most other Gilliam), 2001, Donnie Darko, all of Guy Maddin's shorts (some of which aren't in the Spout database......), Pi. Considering this is labeled "Top 5 Weirdest movies", I'm afraid to include 8 1/2, since it's not per se "weird", but more dreamy and surrealist, which does not necessarily mean weird in my book. All of the surrealist films I mentioned were really by-the-book WEIRD. Am I wrong here? [/quote] For some reason I don't like putting Giliam in the "weird" category, although I know his stuff generally is pretty off-the-wall. I grew up watching "Munchausen" and "Time Bandits," so I guess that kind of thing is just part of me. I've been sporadically watching "Fantastic Planet" lately. Now that is a weird movie. It actually feels like I'm watching a feature-length Gilliam animation from the old Monty Python series. http://www.spout.com/groups/Top_5/Re_Top_5_weirdest_movies/190/32363/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: chrismorrell
Post To: Top 5
Post Date: 7/9/2008 7:06:05 PM
Body: [quote user="Smooth_J"] [quote user="TheWorkingDead"] Inland Empire You had this as an honorary mention, and I'm putting it here because, well, it was the one time where David Lynch out-weirded me. I mean to say, I usually fall in love with all of his films and all of his surrealism, but Inland Empire kept shaking me loose faster than I could keep up with it. [/quote] I remember feeling like that after I watched it as well. It was the first Lynch film that I had felt oddly detached from, and I really didn't understand much of what was going on. It begins to make more sense after a second viewing, but it's still such a bizarre movie that it seems to me that really "getting" it means you partially know what's going on for about half of the movie. The thing i've found is that i want to watch this again and again,like Mulholland Drive.. I have seen "Inland Empire" three times but,it's just SOOO dark,that i am genuinely afraid of "going there"..Am i just a woos,or when the "actress" character finds herself in what looks quite a bit like "Henry's" corridoor ,and "confronts" the big Russian bloke..we get ,quite simply one of THE most grotesque and genuinely horrifying images EVER Chris Morrell
]]>Wed, 09 Jul 2008 23:06:05 GMTchrismorrellTop 57/9/2008 7:06:05 PM[quote user="Smooth_J"] [quote user="TheWorkingDead"] Inland Empire You had this as an honorary mention, and I'm putting it here because, well, it was the one time where David Lynch out-weirded me. I mean to say, I usually fall in love with all of his films and all of his surrealism, but Inland Empire kept shaking me loose faster than I could keep up with it. [/quote] I remember feeling like that after I watched it as well. It was the first Lynch film that I had felt oddly detached from, and I really didn't understand much of what was going on. It begins to make more sense after a second viewing, but it's still such a bizarre movie that it seems to me that really "getting" it means you partially know what's going on for about half of the movie. The thing i've found is that i want to watch this again and again,like Mulholland Drive.. I have seen "Inland Empire" three times but,it's just SOOO dark,that i am genuinely afraid of "going there"..Am i just a woos,or when the "actress" character finds herself in what looks quite a bit like "Henry's" corridoor ,and "confronts" the big Russian bloke..we get ,quite simply one of THE most grotesque and genuinely horrifying images EVER Chris Morrell http://www.spout.com/groups/Top_5/Re_Top_5_weirdest_movies/190/32183/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: Smooth_J
Post To: Top 5
Post Date: 7/6/2008 12:05:53 PM
Body: [quote user="TheWorkingDead"] Inland Empire You had this as an honorary mention, and I'm putting it here because, well, it was the one time where David Lynch out-weirded me. I mean to say, I usually fall in love with all of his films and all of his surrealism, but Inland Empire kept shaking me loose faster than I could keep up with it. [/quote] I remember feeling like that after I watched it as well. It was the first Lynch film that I had felt oddly detached from, and I really didn't understand much of what was going on. It begins to make more sense after a second viewing, but it's still such a bizarre movie that it seems to me that really "getting" it means you partially know what's going on for about half of the movie.
]]>Sun, 06 Jul 2008 16:05:53 GMTSmooth_JTop 57/6/2008 12:05:53 PM[quote user="TheWorkingDead"] Inland Empire You had this as an honorary mention, and I'm putting it here because, well, it was the one time where David Lynch out-weirded me. I mean to say, I usually fall in love with all of his films and all of his surrealism, but Inland Empire kept shaking me loose faster than I could keep up with it. [/quote] I remember feeling like that after I watched it as well. It was the first Lynch film that I had felt oddly detached from, and I really didn't understand much of what was going on. It begins to make more sense after a second viewing, but it's still such a bizarre movie that it seems to me that really "getting" it means you partially know what's going on for about half of the movie. http://www.spout.com/groups/Top_5/Re_Top_5_weirdest_movies/190/32181/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: TheWorkingDead
Post To: Top 5
Post Date: 7/6/2008 4:34:32 AM
Body: Gozu/Izo: I know, I'm cheating by putting two films on here in one spot, but I can't decide which is weirder, and they're both by Takashi Miike. So if you're #5 spot can contain a whole list of movies, than I can include one tie. Gozu is a weird road trip as a yakuza tries to find and dispose of the body of his mentor in the weirdest small town this side of Twin Peaks. A man who collects the skins of dead Yakuza members for their tattoos, a woman who runs an inn and sells her breast milk to the town, and a giant minotaur demon are only three of the increasingly strange people he runs into. Izo is the tale of one man's rampage as he kills his way towards heaven, moving through time and space with every camera angle. There is not one 5 minute stretch of the film that takes place in one time period, and often past and future exist in the same setting. And, I have to be uncool and admit, I don't understand a lick of it. Inland Empire You had this as an honorary mention, and I'm putting it here because, well, it was the one time where David Lynch out-weirded me. I mean to say, I usually fall in love with all of his films and all of his surrealism, but Inland Empire kept shaking me loose faster than I could keep up with it. Soul Vengeance A pimp goes to prison, and while he probably deserved it for other crimes, he was basically railroaded by a racist cop(who tries to castrate him), judge and legal system. After he gets out of prison, he wreaks vengeance on those who wronged him by strangling them with his penis, which he discovered how to grow to a length of several yards. Seventies blacksploitation at it's craziest. The Monkees Head This movie is surprising even to the people who appreciate the surrealism and subversiveness of the Monkees TV show. For a band put together as a spoof, and mainly for commercial purposes, this movie is blisteringly anti-corporate. Wacky and silly like the show, but without the humor(intentionally so), with a script co-written by Jack Nicholson, Head is stranger than you could imagine. With some of the greatest music the Monkees ever produced, and a very funny Frank Zappa cameo. Watch it and marvel at what a G rated movie USED to be. Riget I & II Maybe this is cheating as well, since it's a Danish miniseries and it's technically two movies, but this deserves mention. There are certainly more surreal and bizarre things out there, but this one covers so much ground in it's run. You need only to watch it and witness Udo Kier's introduction to the series(towards the halfway point) to see that this movie deserves it's inclusion. A series about a haunted hospital that is one of the coolest things I've ever seen, and the only downside to it is that they will never finish the series as many of the principal cast members died after the second miniseries aired. There was an american remake, Kingdom Hospital, but it is no overstatement to say that it was a travesty on all accounts.
]]>Sun, 06 Jul 2008 08:34:32 GMTTheWorkingDeadTop 57/6/2008 4:34:32 AMGozu/Izo: I know, I'm cheating by putting two films on here in one spot, but I can't decide which is weirder, and they're both by Takashi Miike. So if you're #5 spot can contain a whole list of movies, than I can include one tie. Gozu is a weird road trip as a yakuza tries to find and dispose of the body of his mentor in the weirdest small town this side of Twin Peaks. A man who collects the skins of dead Yakuza members for their tattoos, a woman who runs an inn and sells her breast milk to the town, and a giant minotaur demon are only three of the increasingly strange people he runs into. Izo is the tale of one man's rampage as he kills his way towards heaven, moving through time and space with every camera angle. There is not one 5 minute stretch of the film that takes place in one time period, and often past and future exist in the same setting. And, I have to be uncool and admit, I don't understand a lick of it. Inland Empire You had this as an honorary mention, and I'm putting it here because, well, it was the one time where David Lynch out-weirded me. I mean to say, I usually fall in love with all of his films and all of his surrealism, but Inland Empire kept shaking me loose faster than I could keep up with it. Soul Vengeance A pimp goes to prison, and while he probably deserved it for other crimes, he was basically railroaded by a racist cop(who tries to castrate him), judge and legal system. After he gets out of prison, he wreaks vengeance on those who wronged him by strangling them with his penis, which he discovered how to grow to a length of several yards. Seventies blacksploitation at it's craziest. The Monkees Head This movie is surprising even to the people who appreciate the surrealism and subversiveness of the Monkees TV show. For a band put together as a spoof, and mainly for commercial purposes, this movie is blisteringly anti-corporate. Wacky and silly like the show, but without the humor(intentionally so), with a script co-written by Jack Nicholson, Head is stranger than you could imagine. With some of the greatest music the Monkees ever produced, and a very funny Frank Zappa cameo. Watch it and marvel at what a G rated movie USED to be. Riget I &amp; II Maybe this is cheating as well, since it's a Danish miniseries and it's technically two movies, but this deserves mention. There are certainly more surreal and bizarre things out there, but this one covers so much ground in it's run. You need only to watch it and witness Udo Kier's introduction to the series(towards the halfway point) to see that this movie deserves it's inclusion. A series about a haunted hospital that is one of the coolest things I've ever seen, and the only downside to it is that they will never finish the series as many of the principal cast members died after the second miniseries aired. There was an american remake, Kingdom Hospital, but it is no overstatement to say that it was a travesty on all accounts. http://www.spout.com/groups/Top_5/Top_5_weirdest_movies/190/32168/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: Smooth_J
Post To: Top 5
Post Date: 7/5/2008 11:01:33 PM
Body: Surreal, absurd, disturbing, or just plain strange movies. I got this idea from a discussion on IMDB, and I believe some movie website or magazine released a list of the top 20 a while back. In terms of overall weirdness, here it goes: 1. Un Chien Andalou The old Bunuel-Dali collaboration. This had me at the part where the eye gets sliced with a razor-blade. It is quite possibly one of the most disturbing images I have ever seen, and it was made in 1929. It is almost unsettlingly bizarre. This easily takes the cake at a whopping 16 minutes. Watching this film makes you realize how warped the human mind can be, and it's amazing. It is where every David Lynch film is originated, and really where the surrealist genre was created. 2. Eraserhead Not much about this film can be explained that hasn't already been said a million times. It is adequate to say that never has anything like it ever been seen, and it began a long and illustrious career of nightmares and dreamscapes. 3. The City of Lost Children This one is not quite surrealism, more like a plot-driven sci-fi nightmare that more than delivers on the absurdities. However, it also makes up for such strange detachment with likeable characters and genuine horror. 4. Brazil Also one of my favorite movies, it is the crowned jewel of Terry Gilliam's catalogue. The way in which the dream sequences are paralleled by Lowry's just as bizarre existence makes this a masterpiece of surrealism. 5. So many to choose from!!!!!! I can't pick this last one. So, I'll make a list of honorable mentions: Inland Empire, Mulholland Drive, Videodrome (and other Cronenberg), Dead Man, The Adventures of Baron Munchausen, Time Bandits (and most other Gilliam), 2001, Donnie Darko, all of Guy Maddin's shorts (some of which aren't in the Spout database......), Pi. Considering this is labeled "Top 5 Weirdest movies", I'm afraid to include 8 1/2, since it's not per se "weird", but more dreamy and surrealist, which does not necessarily mean weird in my book. All of the surrealist films I mentioned were really by-the-book WEIRD. Am I wrong here?
]]>Sun, 06 Jul 2008 03:01:33 GMTSmooth_JTop 57/5/2008 11:01:33 PMSurreal, absurd, disturbing, or just plain strange movies. I got this idea from a discussion on IMDB, and I believe some movie website or magazine released a list of the top 20 a while back. In terms of overall weirdness, here it goes: 1. Un Chien Andalou The old Bunuel-Dali collaboration. This had me at the part where the eye gets sliced with a razor-blade. It is quite possibly one of the most disturbing images I have ever seen, and it was made in 1929. It is almost unsettlingly bizarre. This easily takes the cake at a whopping 16 minutes. Watching this film makes you realize how warped the human mind can be, and it's amazing. It is where every David Lynch film is originated, and really where the surrealist genre was created. 2. Eraserhead Not much about this film can be explained that hasn't already been said a million times. It is adequate to say that never has anything like it ever been seen, and it began a long and illustrious career of nightmares and dreamscapes. 3. The City of Lost Children This one is not quite surrealism, more like a plot-driven sci-fi nightmare that more than delivers on the absurdities. However, it also makes up for such strange detachment with likeable characters and genuine horror. 4. Brazil Also one of my favorite movies, it is the crowned jewel of Terry Gilliam's catalogue. The way in which the dream sequences are paralleled by Lowry's just as bizarre existence makes this a masterpiece of surrealism. 5. So many to choose from!!!!!! I can't pick this last one. So, I'll make a list of honorable mentions: Inland Empire, Mulholland Drive, Videodrome (and other Cronenberg), Dead Man, The Adventures of Baron Munchausen, Time Bandits (and most other Gilliam), 2001, Donnie Darko, all of Guy Maddin's shorts (some of which aren't in the Spout database......), Pi. Considering this is labeled "Top 5 Weirdest movies", I'm afraid to include 8 1/2, since it's not per se "weird", but more dreamy and surrealist, which does not necessarily mean weird in my book. All of the surrealist films I mentioned were really by-the-book WEIRD. Am I wrong here? http://www.spout.com/blogs/cinemarian/archive/2008/5/12/28670.aspx Post By: CinemaRian
Post To: CinemaRian Blog
Post Date: 5/12/2008 4:06:18 PM
Body: Every once in a while, a movie comes along that I know that if I write an honest review of it, I will receive hate mail. These are usually extremely popular and/or critically respected films that I feel just don't deserve the reputation. Although I saw some of these before I started writing reviews, let's take a stroll down memory lane at some of these movies: The Tin Drum, Rushmore, The Deer Hunter, The Usual Suspects, Nosferatu: Phantom of the Night, Juliet of the Spirits, Kiss Me Deadly, sex, lies, and videotape, The Shawshank Redemption, Paris, Texas. I have a strange feeling that I can add Inland Empire to the list. So what can I say about this movie? It's from David Lynch, whose made some great films (The Elephant Man, Blue Velvet), and some really bad ones (Dune). It's certainly not commercial- a three hour avant garde piece with only the barest threads of a story, shot on ugly DV. And for me, it was really, really boring. Not that I have anything against the avant garde or non-narrative cinema (I loved Harmony Korine's Gummo and Lynch's own Eraserhead, for example). I just want it to be interesting. Too often (like almost all the time) Inland Empire just isn't anything it all, just Lynch throwing up weird stuff on the screen. The movie seems to hold promise at the beginning, when it appears to be setting up a plot. Laura Dern plays an actress starring in a film directed by Jeremy Irons. She learns that the project is being produced and under mysterious circumstance and a previous attempt to make resulted in the murder of its two stars. So far, so good, aside from the fact that Lynch has made the film in very poor quality digital video and uses many (presumably intentional) out of focus close-ups. But then we get into jerk-around territory that has already been mined as well as anyone can by Bergman in Persona. The boundary between actress and character is lost, and most of the rest of the involves Dern wandering endlessly around as weird stuff happens to her. There's also some stuff involving a bunch of Polish people and a family of rabbits that I didn't understand, but was not interested enough to care. Now, I know that if I watched this movie a bunch of times I would probably be able to figure out who everyone is and put all the pieces of the puzzle together. But I didn't care. If you're going to go in a weird direction, you probably shouldn't set up a plotline that's actually interesting and then abandon it. And you shouldn't make everything so darn ugly. I had a flashback to Soderbergh's dreadful Full Frontal, which I thought was a lesson to every director that if you are going to use digital, it should at least look like something semi-professional. Unlike some other hate mail movies I've seen I can at least understand why this might work for some people- at ninety minuets. At three hours, I have trouble seeing how anyone could make through the whole thing without copious amounts of caffeine- or more. I would rather see Lynch's best film, The Elephant Man, five more times before I see this picture again. Inland Empire (2006)
]]>Mon, 12 May 2008 20:06:18 GMTCinemaRianCinemaRian Blog5/12/2008 4:06:18 PMEvery once in a while, a movie comes along that I know that if I write an honest review of it, I will receive hate mail. These are usually extremely popular and/or critically respected films that I feel just don't deserve the reputation. Although I saw some of these before I started writing reviews, let's take a stroll down memory lane at some of these movies: The Tin Drum, Rushmore, The Deer Hunter, The Usual Suspects, Nosferatu: Phantom of the Night, Juliet of the Spirits, Kiss Me Deadly, sex, lies, and videotape, The Shawshank Redemption, Paris, Texas. I have a strange feeling that I can add Inland Empire to the list. So what can I say about this movie? It's from David Lynch, whose made some great films (The Elephant Man, Blue Velvet), and some really bad ones (Dune). It's certainly not commercial- a three hour avant garde piece with only the barest threads of a story, shot on ugly DV. And for me, it was really, really boring. Not that I have anything against the avant garde or non-narrative cinema (I loved Harmony Korine's Gummo and Lynch's own Eraserhead, for example). I just want it to be interesting. Too often (like almost all the time) Inland Empire just isn't anything it all, just Lynch throwing up weird stuff on the screen. The movie seems to hold promise at the beginning, when it appears to be setting up a plot. Laura Dern plays an actress starring in a film directed by Jeremy Irons. She learns that the project is being produced and under mysterious circumstance and a previous attempt to make resulted in the murder of its two stars. So far, so good, aside from the fact that Lynch has made the film in very poor quality digital video and uses many (presumably intentional) out of focus close-ups. But then we get into jerk-around territory that has already been mined as well as anyone can by Bergman in Persona. The boundary between actress and character is lost, and most of the rest of the involves Dern wandering endlessly around as weird stuff happens to her. There's also some stuff involving a bunch of Polish people and a family of rabbits that I didn't understand, but was not interested enough to care. Now, I know that if I watched this movie a bunch of times I would probably be able to figure out who everyone is and put all the pieces of the puzzle together. But I didn't care. If you're going to go in a weird direction, you probably shouldn't set up a plotline that's actually interesting and then abandon it. And you shouldn't make everything so darn ugly. I had a flashback to Soderbergh's dreadful Full Frontal, which I thought was a lesson to every director that if you are going to use digital, it should at least look like something semi-professional. Unlike some other hate mail movies I've seen I can at least understand why this might work for some people- at ninety minuets. At three hours, I have trouble seeing how anyone could make through the whole thing without copious amounts of caffeine- or more. I would rather see Lynch's best film, The Elephant Man, five more times before I see this picture again. Inland Empire (2006) http://www.spout.com/groups/Female_Hysteria/Re_The_idea_of_female_hysteria_in_films/27/27292/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: chrismorrell
Post To: Female Hysteria
Post Date: 4/14/2008 6:05:17 PM
Body: [quote user="patches"]There are several films that have portrayed women as these ranting, insane, unstable creatures. The characters lose control of their emotions and need to be slapped. The phrase "Get ahold of yourself!" might be uttered. And it's pretty incredible. Wikipedia writes: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_hysteria[/quote] Black and White images of Barbara Stanwick ,Joan Crawford and Bette Davis ,screaming,with mascara running down ... The current top hysteria gal,must surely be Naomi Watts.(my all time fave).she does runny-nosed crying soo well..."Mulholland Drive" spoilt me for movie watching for ages,has anyone ever ,before or since given such a gut-wrenching total,turning inside out performance?.. "21 grams" gave her another grief- stricken sob of a workout. Even in her "bad" films,(like"Ring" and "Funny Games" )we know we are getting some masterly screaming etc... Thinking back...check out all that screaming at the start of "Kiss Me Deadly",courtesy of Cloris Leachman ,totally ace..ah,then what about Madeliene Khan in High Anxiety?..back to David Lynch,and wigg-out duties are taken up by Laura Dern in "inland Empire" parts of which i worry about seeing again... A definite Queen of the Hysterics is Carmen Maura (more recently found hiding from Penelope cruz in "Volver",along with the other Tomato cocktail drinkers in "Women on the verge of a nervous breakdown" ,but, dont you think everything sounds more hysterical when it needs subtitles.. cheers Chris M
]]>Mon, 14 Apr 2008 22:05:17 GMTchrismorrellFemale Hysteria4/14/2008 6:05:17 PM[quote user="patches"]There are several films that have portrayed women as these ranting, insane, unstable creatures. The characters lose control of their emotions and need to be slapped. The phrase "Get ahold of yourself!" might be uttered. And it's pretty incredible. Wikipedia writes: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_hysteria[/quote] Black and White images of Barbara Stanwick ,Joan Crawford and Bette Davis ,screaming,with mascara running down ... The current top hysteria gal,must surely be Naomi Watts.(my all time fave).she does runny-nosed crying soo well..."Mulholland Drive" spoilt me for movie watching for ages,has anyone ever ,before or since given such a gut-wrenching total,turning inside out performance?.. "21 grams" gave her another grief- stricken sob of a workout. Even in her "bad" films,(like"Ring" and "Funny Games" )we know we are getting some masterly screaming etc... Thinking back...check out all that screaming at the start of "Kiss Me Deadly",courtesy of Cloris Leachman ,totally ace..ah,then what about Madeliene Khan in High Anxiety?..back to David Lynch,and wigg-out duties are taken up by Laura Dern in "inland Empire" parts of which i worry about seeing again... A definite Queen of the Hysterics is Carmen Maura (more recently found hiding from Penelope cruz in "Volver",along with the other Tomato cocktail drinkers in "Women on the verge of a nervous breakdown" ,but, dont you think everything sounds more hysterical when it needs subtitles.. cheers Chris M http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/horror/MemberTagFilms.aspxhorror
Number of films tagged: 260

Number of people who tagged: 110

Number of times used: 346

]]>Tue, 15 Dec 2009 16:38:30 GMT260110346Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/overrated/MemberTagFilms.aspxoverrated
Number of films tagged: 152

Number of people who tagged: 106

Number of times used: 240

]]>Fri, 20 Mar 2009 23:37:37 GMT152106240Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/Boring/MemberTagFilms.aspxBoring
Number of films tagged: 177

Number of people who tagged: 105

Number of times used: 207

]]>Tue, 29 Sep 2009 23:44:27 GMT177105207Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/film/MemberTagFilms.aspxfilm
Number of films tagged: 657

Number of people who tagged: 82

Number of times used: 190

]]>Tue, 22 Sep 2009 20:35:41 GMT65782190Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/true/MemberTagFilms.aspxtrue
Number of films tagged: 42

Number of people who tagged: 37

Number of times used: 51

]]>Mon, 26 Oct 2009 03:25:13 GMT423751Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/acting/MemberTagFilms.aspxacting
Number of films tagged: 66

Number of people who tagged: 22

Number of times used: 36

]]>Mon, 24 Aug 2009 11:14:17 GMT662236Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/gorgeous/MemberTagFilms.aspxgorgeous
Number of films tagged: 18

Number of people who tagged: 22

Number of times used: 25

]]>Sat, 02 Aug 2008 12:39:09 GMT182225Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/rabbit/MemberTagFilms.aspxrabbit
Number of films tagged: 145

Number of people who tagged: 22

Number of times used: 38

]]>Tue, 04 Aug 2009 13:05:14 GMT1452238Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/reality/MemberTagFilms.aspxreality
Number of films tagged: 612

Number of people who tagged: 20

Number of times used: 33

]]>Wed, 12 Aug 2009 13:02:59 GMT6122033Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/director/MemberTagFilms.aspxdirector
Number of films tagged: 472

Number of people who tagged: 17

Number of times used: 26

]]>Fri, 10 Jul 2009 13:03:08 GMT4721726Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/filmmaker/MemberTagFilms.aspxfilmmaker
Number of films tagged: 1675

Number of people who tagged: 17

Number of times used: 30

]]>Tue, 24 Nov 2009 19:12:17 GMT16751730Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/Lynch/MemberTagFilms.aspxLynch
Number of films tagged: 14

Number of people who tagged: 17

Number of times used: 32

]]>Mon, 29 Jun 2009 22:49:38 GMT141732Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/Pretentious/MemberTagFilms.aspxPretentious
Number of films tagged: 16

Number of people who tagged: 17

Number of times used: 22

]]>Mon, 28 Jul 2008 00:48:00 GMT161722Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/sucks/MemberTagFilms.aspxsucks
Number of films tagged: 14

Number of people who tagged: 15

Number of times used: 15

]]>Fri, 07 Mar 2008 01:00:25 GMT141515Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/actress/MemberTagFilms.aspxactress
Number of films tagged: 22

Number of people who tagged: 12

Number of times used: 25

]]>Mon, 16 Nov 2009 19:17:06 GMT221225Tag