list http://www.spout.com/ Recent community activity around Wendy and Lucy 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/Wendy_and_Lucy/373895/default.aspx Title: Wendy and Lucy
Year: 2008
Director: Kelly Reichardt
Plot: Old Joy director Kelly Reichardt crafts this intimate tale of Wendy, an alienated Indiana woman who packs up her car and sets her sights on Alaska, but finds herself stranded in a small Oregon town with no money and only her faithful dog Lucy to keep her company. When Wendy realizes that there's nothing keeping her in her home state of Indiana, she makes the decision to relocate to Alaska and seek out work at the local fish cannery. Her four-legged friend Lucy in the passenger seat next to her, Wendy stops off to get some rest in a small Oregon town. The following morning, when Wendy attempts to start her car, the engine fails to respond. But this is only the first in a series of snowballing events, because as Wendy waits for the local garage to open she heads to the supermarket to pick up some dog food for Lucy. Opting to shoplift the puppy chow since she doesn't have much cash to speak of, Wendy subsequently finds herself in the local jail thanks to an overzealous employee. By the time Wendy pays her fine and gets back to the supermarket, Lucy is gone. Unfortunately the dog pound doesn't open until the following morning, and after receiving some help from a kindly local Wendy gets some particularly bad news about her car. ~ Jason Buchanan, All Movie Guide
Times Tagged: 87
Number of Lists: 16
Number of blog posts: 10
Number of discussion threads: 4
SpoutRating: 4
]]>Wed, 12 Aug 2009 17:11:54 GMTWendy and Lucy2008Kelly Reichardt<a href="http://www.spout.com/films/277115/detail.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Old Joy</a> director Kelly Reichardt crafts this intimate tale of Wendy, an alienated Indiana woman who packs up her car and sets her sights on Alaska, but finds herself stranded in a small Oregon town with no money and only her faithful dog Lucy to keep her company. When Wendy realizes that there's nothing keeping her in her home state of Indiana, she makes the decision to relocate to Alaska and seek out work at the local fish cannery. Her four-legged friend Lucy in the passenger seat next to her, Wendy stops off to get some rest in a small Oregon town. The following morning, when Wendy attempts to start her car, the engine fails to respond. But this is only the first in a series of snowballing events, because as Wendy waits for the local garage to open she heads to the supermarket to pick up some dog food for Lucy. Opting to shoplift the puppy chow since she doesn't have much cash to speak of, Wendy subsequently finds herself in the local jail thanks to an overzealous employee. By the time Wendy pays her fine and gets back to the supermarket, Lucy is gone. Unfortunately the dog pound doesn't open until the following morning, and after receiving some help from a kindly local Wendy gets some particularly bad news about her car. ~ Jason Buchanan, All Movie Guide87Tag Target (>10)161044http://www.spout.com/ProductImages/s373895.jpghttp://www.spout.com/films/Wendy_and_Lucy/373895/default.aspxFilm http://www.spout.com/blogs/risselada/archive/2009/8/12/43495.aspx Post By: Risselada
Post To: Risselada Blog
Post Date: 8/12/2009 12:53:35 PM
Body: I have asked certain users on Spout to recommend a movie to me. I will be blogging about these films as I watch them. This film was recommended to me by laurabot Wendy and Lucy I do not know laurabot all that well, but have conversed with her about movies on a couple occasions. She has her own distinctive taste which I appreciate. She gave me quite a few different suggestions for films to see, many of which I had heard of and have wanted to see anyways, so I kind of felt like she was in tune with what I was looking for. I was considering seeing Labyrith since I hear so many cultural references to it, even today and feel embarrassed I still have never seen it. And laurabot urged me so much that I do need to see it. I did however ultimately chose Wendy and Lucy since it had been stuck in my head ever since I saw the trailer for it. The sad scenario of a person with few friends, and apparently no real good friends, no home, and not many possessions striking out on a last hope to make a new life for themselves I found appealing. Of course in this society one little thing going wrong can cause a sequence of that show just how fleeting possessions can be. The movie turned out to be mostly what I expected, which was a good thing in this case. *SPOILER* The biggest surprise to me was that Wendy did make a major mistake of her own that could have been avoided, that being shoplifting. I can see why she would do it and the desperation of her situation. But now that I think about it, knowing was really wrong with her car, maybe the outcome would have been the same in the end whether she had shop lifted or not. *END SPOILER* One thing that I've been trying to come to terms with is the acting style in this movie. Although I sense that the movie is trying to be very realistic, some of the dialogue sounds a bit strange, or maybe the way it's delivered is strange. I'm not sure if it's just bad acting or writing, or if it's a deliberate attempt by the writer/director to write and direct actors in a way that is just kind of strange. Some of my favorite directors like Hal Hartley for instance do have very specific ways of writing and directing actors that gives them a deliberate style. I can't tell if it is deliberate in this case. Sometimes it is a bit charming, and sometimes it is a bit off putting. Either way, Michelle Williams stands out as a much better actors than the rest of the cast. Which although I'm guessing is quite true in general, I would think that the director would want everyone to fit together a bit better. Or maybe this too was deliberate to make her stand out and the other characters feel just slightly more alienating. This movie just goes to show how much more important strong human relationships are rather than money and possessions. Even though a dog is a nice friend to have, one is lost in the world without good human friends. Rating: 9/10
]]>Wed, 12 Aug 2009 16:53:35 GMTRisseladaRisselada Blog8/12/2009 12:53:35 PMI have asked certain users on Spout to recommend a movie to me. I will be blogging about these films as I watch them. This film was recommended to me by laurabot Wendy and Lucy I do not know laurabot all that well, but have conversed with her about movies on a couple occasions. She has her own distinctive taste which I appreciate. She gave me quite a few different suggestions for films to see, many of which I had heard of and have wanted to see anyways, so I kind of felt like she was in tune with what I was looking for. I was considering seeing Labyrith since I hear so many cultural references to it, even today and feel embarrassed I still have never seen it. And laurabot urged me so much that I do need to see it. I did however ultimately chose Wendy and Lucy since it had been stuck in my head ever since I saw the trailer for it. The sad scenario of a person with few friends, and apparently no real good friends, no home, and not many possessions striking out on a last hope to make a new life for themselves I found appealing. Of course in this society one little thing going wrong can cause a sequence of that show just how fleeting possessions can be. The movie turned out to be mostly what I expected, which was a good thing in this case. *SPOILER* The biggest surprise to me was that Wendy did make a major mistake of her own that could have been avoided, that being shoplifting. I can see why she would do it and the desperation of her situation. But now that I think about it, knowing was really wrong with her car, maybe the outcome would have been the same in the end whether she had shop lifted or not. *END SPOILER* One thing that I've been trying to come to terms with is the acting style in this movie. Although I sense that the movie is trying to be very realistic, some of the dialogue sounds a bit strange, or maybe the way it's delivered is strange. I'm not sure if it's just bad acting or writing, or if it's a deliberate attempt by the writer/director to write and direct actors in a way that is just kind of strange. Some of my favorite directors like Hal Hartley for instance do have very specific ways of writing and directing actors that gives them a deliberate style. I can't tell if it is deliberate in this case. Sometimes it is a bit charming, and sometimes it is a bit off putting. Either way, Michelle Williams stands out as a much better actors than the rest of the cast. Which although I'm guessing is quite true in general, I would think that the director would want everyone to fit together a bit better. Or maybe this too was deliberate to make her stand out and the other characters feel just slightly more alienating. This movie just goes to show how much more important strong human relationships are rather than money and possessions. Even though a dog is a nice friend to have, one is lost in the world without good human friends. Rating: 9/10 http://www.spout.com/blogs/jimbell/archive/2009/7/31/43345.aspx Post By: JimBell
Post To: JimBell Blog
Post Date: 7/31/2009 2:44:24 AM
Body: I really liked this movie--barely--but I would not expect a lot of other people to like it. Wendy and Lucy (2008), the story of a young woman and her dog, is unlikely to have much of an impact on your average movie goer. The plot provides little excitement: As one blogger cried, who wants to spend an hour and half watching some girl look for her bleepin’ dog!? Rather strangely, the central character does not provide much excitement either. We do not know who she is, what she has done, why she left Indiana or Illinois—we know zilch about her background aside from a depressing phone call she makes to her dismissive sister and brother-in-law. Nor does Wendy grow in any way that traditionally interests viewers. Yet for some people--including me--this slow-paced picture about not much can pack a powerful punch. Unlike the many films which pander to their audience, this film does not reach out to you--you have to reach out to it. You have to find some way to identify with the lost young woman. Have you been alone and poor? I remember arriving in Adelaide at 6:00 in the morning with 20 cents to my name and wondering if I should steal a morning paper to find out what was going on in town. Have you been a vulnerable young female accosted? No, but I remember riding an old train where a young punk came into my compartment so many times I thought it best to pull out my switchblade to cut my cheese and bread. For this movie, it also helps if you love dogs. It would help if you had one who dearly loved to fetch a stick. For the ending to have its full power, I think you have to appreciate ahead of time the powerful bond that can exist between person and dog. But also, as your heart is breaking, you have to figure out quickly what the film was all about. I was left asking, “What was the purpose of that film?” Five minutes later as I searched the web, it hit me. Without giving away the story, I’d say the film is about poverty and the fine line between being a member of society with an address and money and being down and out and off the grid. Director Kelly Reichardt said in an interview with Spout that the movie did not have a point but certainly had a question: “Are we related and do we owe each other anything? . . . Are we supposed to do anything for each other, or is it every man for himself?” But even if you do figure out the purpose of the film, you may not have sympathy for the young woman. Why’d she shoplift when she had enough money to buy dog food? That’s were all the trouble started. Similarly, you might make short shrift of the director’s question. Of course we are supposed to do things for each other, and this girl probably had lots of help in the past and she got a reasonable amount of help in the present. What more can you expect? But a small number of people, including me, feel terrible for the young woman and would love to help.
]]>Fri, 31 Jul 2009 06:44:24 GMTJimBellJimBell Blog7/31/2009 2:44:24 AMI really liked this movie--barely--but I would not expect a lot of other people to like it. Wendy and Lucy (2008), the story of a young woman and her dog, is unlikely to have much of an impact on your average movie goer. The plot provides little excitement: As one blogger cried, who wants to spend an hour and half watching some girl look for her bleepin&rsquo; dog!? Rather strangely, the central character does not provide much excitement either. We do not know who she is, what she has done, why she left Indiana or Illinois&mdash;we know zilch about her background aside from a depressing phone call she makes to her dismissive sister and brother-in-law. Nor does Wendy grow in any way that traditionally interests viewers. Yet for some people--including me--this slow-paced picture about not much can pack a powerful punch. Unlike the many films which pander to their audience, this film does not reach out to you--you have to reach out to it. You have to find some way to identify with the lost young woman. Have you been alone and poor? I remember arriving in Adelaide at 6:00 in the morning with 20 cents to my name and wondering if I should steal a morning paper to find out what was going on in town. Have you been a vulnerable young female accosted? No, but I remember riding an old train where a young punk came into my compartment so many times I thought it best to pull out my switchblade to cut my cheese and bread. For this movie, it also helps if you love dogs. It would help if you had one who dearly loved to fetch a stick. For the ending to have its full power, I think you have to appreciate ahead of time the powerful bond that can exist between person and dog. But also, as your heart is breaking, you have to figure out quickly what the film was all about. I was left asking, &ldquo;What was the purpose of that film?&rdquo; Five minutes later as I searched the web, it hit me. Without giving away the story, I&rsquo;d say the film is about poverty and the fine line between being a member of society with an address and money and being down and out and off the grid. Director Kelly Reichardt said in an interview with Spout that the movie did not have a point but certainly had a question: &ldquo;Are we related and do we owe each other anything? . . . Are we supposed to do anything for each other, or is it every man for himself?&rdquo; But even if you do figure out the purpose of the film, you may not have sympathy for the young woman. Why&rsquo;d she shoplift when she had enough money to buy dog food? That&rsquo;s were all the trouble started. Similarly, you might make short shrift of the director&rsquo;s question. Of course we are supposed to do things for each other, and this girl probably had lots of help in the past and she got a reasonable amount of help in the present. What more can you expect? But a small number of people, including me, feel terrible for the young woman and would love to help. http://www.spout.com/blogs/kevynknox/archive/2009/7/12/43010.aspx Post By: KevynKnox
Post To: KevynKnox Blog
Post Date: 7/12/2009 12:24:03 AM
Body: (this review was first published at www.thecinematheque.com on 12/17/08) Kelly Reichardt's latest ode to the Pacific northwest, Wendy and Lucy, much like the filmmaker's previous work, Old Joy, is a veritable paean to the disenfranchised of America. To all those who are eaten up by the system and who never, for whatever reason (and none is ever given here) become what society expects them to be. To those on the fringe of America. Outcasts and throw-aways. Not bad people. Not lesser people. Simply people who do not know where they belong, where they fit in. This film, like Old Joy is a sad love song of sorts, sung to those for whom the idea of the American dream simply does not exist. It is one of these wayward "untouchables", a young woman named Wendy, who we follow along her path of disillusionment. With the most grotesque and quite perverse curiosity, like watching a strange exotic animal in a zoo, never daring to think, there but for the grace of God go I, we watch. We watch as she meticulously, and quite methodically, keeps track of every cent she spends in a pocket notebook, only to see it all be for naught once her car, the very thing she has been living in for God knows how long, breaks down and she becomes trapped once again by society. We watch as Wendy is nabbed for shoplifting by a strangely overzealous stock boy and in the process of being arrested and booked, loses the one thing that means more to her than her car, her faithful companion, her dog Lucy. We watch as this lost little girl searches for her Lucy in what seems like such an overpowering, suffocating world full of profiteering auto mechanics and bureaucratic red tape - as well as one of the most harrowing dog pound scenes I have ever seen (this critic had a hard time making it through as those sadly hopeful eyes peered out at us from behind their chainlinked cages). The very society from which Wendy is supposedly making her escape is the very society that has again ensnared her within its web. Though we may feel like voyeurs at first, like ravenous vultures impatiently awaiting their inevitable carcass, in time, Reichardt's film ensnares us within its web as well, and we to are trapped. Where Old Joy kept a rather safe distance from its audience, almost as if viewing a sad but mesmerizingly intricate impressionist painting within the relatively safe confines of an art museum, Wendy and Lucy, much in the vein of the expressionist school, becomes all the more personal and up close. Where we merely sat back and absorbed the oft-silent chirpings of Will Oldham's Kurt in Old Joy, we are pulled in as close as we can get, and are forced to get, to Michelle Williams' brilliant turn as Wendy - almost as if we ourselves are an actual participant in her bitter, lonely reality. Where Kurt was lonely and lost, his hapless hippie throwback is seen in an almost comical way at times - the sad clown so to speak, easy to stay detached from - Wendy seems all the more real and therefore all the more terrifying to behold. And it is the bravura performance of teen TV star turned alternative actress par excellence Williams that captures this terrifying emptiness, this desperation as it were, and makes it such an intimate connective to the audience, whether we want it or not. Remember, there but for the grace of God, go we. Though filmed with the sublime picturesque, and quite auteuristic eye of Ms. Reichardt (no one in American cinema today does better the haunting melancholy of the disembodied outdoors than Kelly Reichardt), this film is tripled, quadrupled, quintupled even, in blatant puissance by the subtly explosion-precipiced performance of the Oscar nominated former Dawson's Creek star. An actress who over the past few years, in films ranging from The Station Agent, Land of Plenty, Brokeback Mountain, The Hawk is Dying, I'm Not There and Charlie Kaufman's current mindfuck, Synecdoche, New York, has become the veritable darling of American independent cinema. It is Williams' ascendancy to this preeminence, her Vormachtstellung if you will, that takes an already exceptional film and raises it to a whole other realm completely. For Williams gives the most heartwrenching performance by any actor, male or female, since, ironically enough, her former love and father of her child, the late Heath Ledger handed in the performance of his sadly shortened lifetime in Brokeback Mountain near three years ago. The final scene, wherein Wendy is forced to make a decision that will seriously impact two lives, though rather obvious in its forthcoming, is still quite more than enough to tear a person to pieces. To leave them a shattered, withering husk on the figurative theater floor. The scene, emotionally speaking, is much like Ledger's own heart-breaking epic closure to Brokeback. This is the power of Reichardt's film and this is the power of Williams' performance.
]]>Sun, 12 Jul 2009 04:24:03 GMTKevynKnoxKevynKnox Blog7/12/2009 12:24:03 AM(this review was first published at www.thecinematheque.com on 12/17/08) Kelly Reichardt's latest ode to the Pacific northwest, Wendy and Lucy, much like the filmmaker's previous work, Old Joy, is a veritable paean to the disenfranchised of America. To all those who are eaten up by the system and who never, for whatever reason (and none is ever given here) become what society expects them to be. To those on the fringe of America. Outcasts and throw-aways. Not bad people. Not lesser people. Simply people who do not know where they belong, where they fit in. This film, like Old Joy is a sad love song of sorts, sung to those for whom the idea of the American dream simply does not exist. It is one of these wayward "untouchables", a young woman named Wendy, who we follow along her path of disillusionment. With the most grotesque and quite perverse curiosity, like watching a strange exotic animal in a zoo, never daring to think, there but for the grace of God go I, we watch. We watch as she meticulously, and quite methodically, keeps track of every cent she spends in a pocket notebook, only to see it all be for naught once her car, the very thing she has been living in for God knows how long, breaks down and she becomes trapped once again by society. We watch as Wendy is nabbed for shoplifting by a strangely overzealous stock boy and in the process of being arrested and booked, loses the one thing that means more to her than her car, her faithful companion, her dog Lucy. We watch as this lost little girl searches for her Lucy in what seems like such an overpowering, suffocating world full of profiteering auto mechanics and bureaucratic red tape - as well as one of the most harrowing dog pound scenes I have ever seen (this critic had a hard time making it through as those sadly hopeful eyes peered out at us from behind their chainlinked cages). The very society from which Wendy is supposedly making her escape is the very society that has again ensnared her within its web. Though we may feel like voyeurs at first, like ravenous vultures impatiently awaiting their inevitable carcass, in time, Reichardt's film ensnares us within its web as well, and we to are trapped. Where Old Joy kept a rather safe distance from its audience, almost as if viewing a sad but mesmerizingly intricate impressionist painting within the relatively safe confines of an art museum, Wendy and Lucy, much in the vein of the expressionist school, becomes all the more personal and up close. Where we merely sat back and absorbed the oft-silent chirpings of Will Oldham's Kurt in Old Joy, we are pulled in as close as we can get, and are forced to get, to Michelle Williams' brilliant turn as Wendy - almost as if we ourselves are an actual participant in her bitter, lonely reality. Where Kurt was lonely and lost, his hapless hippie throwback is seen in an almost comical way at times - the sad clown so to speak, easy to stay detached from - Wendy seems all the more real and therefore all the more terrifying to behold. And it is the bravura performance of teen TV star turned alternative actress par excellence Williams that captures this terrifying emptiness, this desperation as it were, and makes it such an intimate connective to the audience, whether we want it or not. Remember, there but for the grace of God, go we. Though filmed with the sublime picturesque, and quite auteuristic eye of Ms. Reichardt (no one in American cinema today does better the haunting melancholy of the disembodied outdoors than Kelly Reichardt), this film is tripled, quadrupled, quintupled even, in blatant puissance by the subtly explosion-precipiced performance of the Oscar nominated former Dawson's Creek star. An actress who over the past few years, in films ranging from The Station Agent, Land of Plenty, Brokeback Mountain, The Hawk is Dying, I'm Not There and Charlie Kaufman's current mindfuck, Synecdoche, New York, has become the veritable darling of American independent cinema. It is Williams' ascendancy to this preeminence, her Vormachtstellung if you will, that takes an already exceptional film and raises it to a whole other realm completely. For Williams gives the most heartwrenching performance by any actor, male or female, since, ironically enough, her former love and father of her child, the late Heath Ledger handed in the performance of his sadly shortened lifetime in Brokeback Mountain near three years ago. The final scene, wherein Wendy is forced to make a decision that will seriously impact two lives, though rather obvious in its forthcoming, is still quite more than enough to tear a person to pieces. To leave them a shattered, withering husk on the figurative theater floor. The scene, emotionally speaking, is much like Ledger's own heart-breaking epic closure to Brokeback. This is the power of Reichardt's film and this is the power of Williams' performance. http://www.spout.com/groups/HORROR_MOVIES_101/Re_Trailers_good_or_bad/222/42985/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: Risselada
Post To: HORROR MOVIES 101
Post Date: 7/10/2009 1:32:44 PM
Body: [quote user="divinemsjunebug"] There are times I just can't wait to see the Trailers for new movies coming out that I have been dying to see. There are also times that I get so mad that these people who make the trailers give WAY too much of the movie away, including the endings. Now this really isn't a SPOILER because it was on the trailer but when I watched the trailer for Quarantine, I knew exactly what was going to happen...when you see the lead actress being pulled extremely fast backwards in the dark...you know it's not going to end well. Anyway, what are some trailers that you have seen that just gave away TOO much information. If you are going to reveal endings of movies, make sure you put a spoiler alert before it just in case someone hasn't seen it yet. [/quote] I know what you are saying June. I actually don't watch too many trailers. Every once in a while though I'll get bored and go to Apple's trailer site and just watch a plethora of trailers for a while. But a lot of times I end up seeing trailers for movies after I've watched the movie because I'll watch the movie on DVD and then check out the trailer in the special features. I am many times appalled at how much info is revealed in trailers, and am extremely happy that I had NOT seen the trailer first. One that I'm thinking of that I saw recently was a Japanese film about a real life serial killer called Vengeance is Mine. Possibly if you were familiar with the real story before you saw the movie, you would know who he killed. But after I watched the movie and saw the trailer I was shocked that it showed what I considered big suprises in the movie. Then again, sometimes I think knowing what will happen from seeing the trailer is a benefit. For example I recently saw the movie Wendy and Lucy. *SPOILER* In the trailer you find out that her car will break down and she will lose her dog and a couple other developments too. Now maybe the movie was pretty good at building a certain kind of apprehension and feeling of inevitability itself. But still, knowing these things would be happening gave me a different feeling at the beginning of the movie. And extra emotion that might not have been there. And it wasn't a bad thing.
]]>Fri, 10 Jul 2009 17:32:44 GMTRisseladaHORROR MOVIES 1017/10/2009 1:32:44 PM[quote user="divinemsjunebug"] There are times I just can't wait to see the Trailers for new movies coming out that I have been dying to see. There are also times that I get so mad that these people who make the trailers give WAY too much of the movie away, including the endings. Now this really isn't a SPOILER because it was on the trailer but when I watched the trailer for Quarantine, I knew exactly what was going to happen...when you see the lead actress being pulled extremely fast backwards in the dark...you know it's not going to end well. Anyway, what are some trailers that you have seen that just gave away TOO much information. If you are going to reveal endings of movies, make sure you put a spoiler alert before it just in case someone hasn't seen it yet. [/quote] I know what you are saying June. I actually don't watch too many trailers. Every once in a while though I'll get bored and go to Apple's trailer site and just watch a plethora of trailers for a while. But a lot of times I end up seeing trailers for movies after I've watched the movie because I'll watch the movie on DVD and then check out the trailer in the special features. I am many times appalled at how much info is revealed in trailers, and am extremely happy that I had NOT seen the trailer first. One that I'm thinking of that I saw recently was a Japanese film about a real life serial killer called Vengeance is Mine. Possibly if you were familiar with the real story before you saw the movie, you would know who he killed. But after I watched the movie and saw the trailer I was shocked that it showed what I considered big suprises in the movie. Then again, sometimes I think knowing what will happen from seeing the trailer is a benefit. For example I recently saw the movie Wendy and Lucy. *SPOILER* In the trailer you find out that her car will break down and she will lose her dog and a couple other developments too. Now maybe the movie was pretty good at building a certain kind of apprehension and feeling of inevitability itself. But still, knowing these things would be happening gave me a different feeling at the beginning of the movie. And extra emotion that might not have been there. And it wasn't a bad thing. http://www.spout.com/blogs/meoww/archive/2009/5/19/42321.aspx Post By: Meoww
Post To: Meoww Blog
Post Date: 5/19/2009 1:08:34 AM
Body: One of the worst movies i have ever seen.Dry,boring and unrealistic script.
]]>Tue, 19 May 2009 05:08:34 GMTMeowwMeoww Blog5/19/2009 1:08:34 AMOne of the worst movies i have ever seen.Dry,boring and unrealistic script. http://www.spout.com/blogs/laurabot/archive/2009/5/4/42025.aspx Post By: laurabot
Post To: laurabot Blog
Post Date: 5/4/2009 7:36:29 PM
Body: Sublime.
]]>Mon, 04 May 2009 23:36:29 GMTlaurabotlaurabot Blog5/4/2009 7:36:29 PMSublime. http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2009/1/9/39313.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 1/9/2009 1:00:40 PM
Body: We’re less than two weeks away from receiving this year’s Oscar nominations, and though none of the major categories are completely predictable just yet, each has at least three or four certain favorites. Meanwhile, the final slots for Best Picture, Best Director and the acting and screenwriting categories may be simply a random grab from small handfuls of rotating contenders. As of now, it doesn’t appear we’ll be seeing any huge surprises come the morning of January 22nd, when the Academy announces the nominees. The Dark Knight is sure to become the first comic book film up for Best Picture, and it won’t even be a shocker if animated feature Wall-E is listed alongside it in the same category. But the ballots don’t need to be mailed out until Monday, so I’m taking one last chance to reach out to the procrastinators within the Academy membership. If you still don’t know who and what to write in, and you’re unwilling to go the safe route and nominate the expected bunch of films and talent, then consider some of these underdogs, under-appreciated and pretty much unlikely possibilities: Best Picture: Rachel Getting Married There was a time when Jonathan Demme’s “Altmanesque” family drama was thought a frontrunner for the Academy’s top prize, but now it looks like it may not even garner a much-deserved Original Screenplay nod for Jenny Lumet, let alone Best Picture. Anne Hathaway is still a good bet in the Best Actress category, though she’s perhaps the least worthy element of the film. Demme deserves his first Best Director nomination in 17 years for reinventing and revitalizing his career with such a rich ensemble piece, while editor Tim Squyres needs to be recognized for piecing together the ingredients so perfectly. I could go on and on about more individual achievements that need be honored (I’ve already spotlighted Robyn Hitchcock’s worth), so let’s just sum it all up and say Rachel Getting Married is highly worthy of being nominated for Best Picture. Best Director: Mike Leigh, Happy-Go-Lucky Like Jonathan Demme, Mike Leigh is one of the finest living directors in terms of working with actors. They both constantly get Oscar-worthy (if not Academy-recognized) performances from otherwise serviceable thespians, yet Leigh is typically more regarded for his screenwriting, for which he’s received three Oscar nominations against two directorial nominations. With Happy-Go-Lucky, it’s more his directing skill that shines through, and if the Academy can’t find room to honor either Sally Hawkins or Eddie Marsan (respectively for Best Actress and Best Supporting Actor) they might want to nominate Leigh, since neither would have been so remarkable without his leadership. Best Actress: Michelle Williams, Wendy and Lucy For the minimalist kind of films that Kelly Reichardt makes, most filmmakers would rather go with an unknown lead than with a familiar, gossip magazine-friendly actress, even one as talented as Michelle Williams. Yet the former Oscar nominee disappears into the role of Wendy in Wendy and Lucy, so much that it’s easy to forget that she’s a famous movie star. She seems as fresh and unknown as any actor in a De Sica or, more currently, a Ramin Bahrani film. The Academy will likely overlook Williams this year, not so much because the film was barely distributed, but because she doesn’t give a particularly flashy performance. Plus, although the actress appears relatively unfamiliar on screen, it isn’t the kind of “unrecognizable” transformation that Oscar prefers with beautiful young starlets. Best Supporting Actress: Bette Midler, Then She Found Me If a performance is great and nobody sees it, is it still Oscar-worthy? Of course, but it’s not likely to be nominated. I don’t foresee any Academy members scrambling to rent Helen Hunt’s terrific directorial debut, Then She Found Me, this weekend, which is too bad. Bette was back this past year and just as good as, if not better than, before. She was lively yet somewhat reserved compared to what we expect from her. The two-time Best Actress nominee will hopefully receive her due win one day, probably in the supporting category and as a career-honoring nod, but it may not be as deserving as this. Best Actor: Josh Brolin, W. I’ve already written a whole column about why Brolin should receive a Best Actor nomination for W., so I needn’t devote too much more space here. Apparently he’s gained more heat for his supporting role in Milk, though, and while that should be plenty recognition for him this year, I continue to hope for a double nomination. His two performances this year are equally amazing, and they couldn’t be more different, despite how they may both be deemed villainous roles. Best Supporting Actor: Mark Walton, Bolt Let me first acknowledge that I got this idea from Bolt’s biggest fan, Kristopher Tapley of In Contention, who called Mark Walton’s voice acting, “the closest I’ve ever come to considering a vocal performance Oscar-worthy since Ellen Degeneres in ‘Finding Nemo.’” I don’t necessarily agree with Tapley’s decision to put Bolt at #2 on his Best of 2008 list, but I would love to see a non-actor like Walton be recognized non-traditionally for vocal work, a form of acting that doesn’t garner enough consideration. Who needs big name casting in an animated film when a storyboard artist gives a more hilarious vocal performance than even Jack Black? Best Original Screenplay: Charlie Kaufman, Synecdoche, New York Kaufman may need some fine-tuning in the directorial department (though he did a pretty good job for a first-timer), but his latest screenplay, for Synecdoche, New York, is every bit as brilliant as his three Oscar-nominated scripts (one of which, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, was a winner). There’s not much originality in the attempt to put everything into a screenplay — in fact, it’s a common mistake for narcissistic novices — but Kaufman is quite original for having been the first to be successful at it. Best Adapted Screenplay: James Marsh and Philippe Petit, Man on Wire There is no screenwriter credited for Man on Wire, but there had to have been some sort of adaptation involved, even if it was simply a single-page treatment and some notes about how to turn Petit’s unexceptional (though fairly enjoyable) book To Reach the Clouds into one of the most riveting documentaries of all time. Unfortunately, the lack of credit means that the Academy will certainly overlook this, the greatest cinematic storytelling of the year. And now, some extra-long shots in two of the non-major categories: Best Cinematography: Jeremy Lasky, Martin Rosenberg, Danielle Feinberg, Roger Deakins, Wall-E I almost chose Wall-E, which I don’t think should be given a Best Picture nod, for the Best Director slot, for Andrew Stanton. But if any animation filmmaker is going to break such ground, I’d rather first see Brad Bird recognized in that category. Besides, much of the innovative camera work in Wall-E is courtesy of new concepts in cinematographic technique for animation. Even if the Academy blew our minds and nominated Wall-E for Best Cinematography, Deakins, whom Pixar hired for some uncredited consultation, wouldn’t be named as one of the nominees. But since the guy is so deserving of an Oscar, why not just name him in some additional slots this year (a repeat of his double duty from 2007, he’s expected to receive two nods, for Doubt and Revolutionary Road)? Best Foreign Language Film: Tony Manero Pablo Larrain’s Tony Manero, which is Chile’s official submission to the foreign language category, is currently without a distributor in the U.S. How might that change? An Oscar nomination. Sure, not every Oscar nominee for Best Foreign Language film is guaranteed distribution, but it could help a film as highly praised as this one — recently it placed third on indieWIRE’s Critic’s Poll of the best undistributed films of the year. Currently, it’s a strong contender, though it may be just on the outside of the Academy’s top choices (it’s up against either Sweden’s Everlasting Moments or Germany’s The Baader Meinhof Complex for that last spot). Personally, I haven’t actually seen Tony Manero, but I’d really like to, and that is why I wish for it to be recognized. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Fri, 09 Jan 2009 18:00:40 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com1/9/2009 1:00:40 PMWe’re less than two weeks away from receiving this year’s Oscar nominations, and though none of the major categories are completely predictable just yet, each has at least three or four certain favorites. Meanwhile, the final slots for Best Picture, Best Director and the acting and screenwriting categories may be simply a random grab from small handfuls of rotating contenders. As of now, it doesn’t appear we’ll be seeing any huge surprises come the morning of January 22nd, when the Academy announces the nominees. The Dark Knight is sure to become the first comic book film up for Best Picture, and it won’t even be a shocker if animated feature Wall-E is listed alongside it in the same category. But the ballots don’t need to be mailed out until Monday, so I’m taking one last chance to reach out to the procrastinators within the Academy membership. If you still don’t know who and what to write in, and you’re unwilling to go the safe route and nominate the expected bunch of films and talent, then consider some of these underdogs, under-appreciated and pretty much unlikely possibilities: Best Picture: Rachel Getting Married There was a time when Jonathan Demme’s “Altmanesque” family drama was thought a frontrunner for the Academy’s top prize, but now it looks like it may not even garner a much-deserved Original Screenplay nod for Jenny Lumet, let alone Best Picture. Anne Hathaway is still a good bet in the Best Actress category, though she’s perhaps the least worthy element of the film. Demme deserves his first Best Director nomination in 17 years for reinventing and revitalizing his career with such a rich ensemble piece, while editor Tim Squyres needs to be recognized for piecing together the ingredients so perfectly. I could go on and on about more individual achievements that need be honored (I’ve already spotlighted Robyn Hitchcock’s worth), so let’s just sum it all up and say Rachel Getting Married is highly worthy of being nominated for Best Picture. Best Director: Mike Leigh, Happy-Go-Lucky Like Jonathan Demme, Mike Leigh is one of the finest living directors in terms of working with actors. They both constantly get Oscar-worthy (if not Academy-recognized) performances from otherwise serviceable thespians, yet Leigh is typically more regarded for his screenwriting, for which he’s received three Oscar nominations against two directorial nominations. With Happy-Go-Lucky, it’s more his directing skill that shines through, and if the Academy can’t find room to honor either Sally Hawkins or Eddie Marsan (respectively for Best Actress and Best Supporting Actor) they might want to nominate Leigh, since neither would have been so remarkable without his leadership. Best Actress: Michelle Williams, Wendy and Lucy For the minimalist kind of films that Kelly Reichardt makes, most filmmakers would rather go with an unknown lead than with a familiar, gossip magazine-friendly actress, even one as talented as Michelle Williams. Yet the former Oscar nominee disappears into the role of Wendy in Wendy and Lucy, so much that it’s easy to forget that she’s a famous movie star. She seems as fresh and unknown as any actor in a De Sica or, more currently, a Ramin Bahrani film. The Academy will likely overlook Williams this year, not so much because the film was barely distributed, but because she doesn’t give a particularly flashy performance. Plus, although the actress appears relatively unfamiliar on screen, it isn’t the kind of “unrecognizable” transformation that Oscar prefers with beautiful young starlets. Best Supporting Actress: Bette Midler, Then She Found Me If a performance is great and nobody sees it, is it still Oscar-worthy? Of course, but it’s not likely to be nominated. I don’t foresee any Academy members scrambling to rent Helen Hunt’s terrific directorial debut, Then She Found Me, this weekend, which is too bad. Bette was back this past year and just as good as, if not better than, before. She was lively yet somewhat reserved compared to what we expect from her. The two-time Best Actress nominee will hopefully receive her due win one day, probably in the supporting category and as a career-honoring nod, but it may not be as deserving as this. Best Actor: Josh Brolin, W. I’ve already written a whole column about why Brolin should receive a Best Actor nomination for W., so I needn’t devote too much more space here. Apparently he’s gained more heat for his supporting role in Milk, though, and while that should be plenty recognition for him this year, I continue to hope for a double nomination. His two performances this year are equally amazing, and they couldn’t be more different, despite how they may both be deemed villainous roles. Best Supporting Actor: Mark Walton, Bolt Let me first acknowledge that I got this idea from Bolt’s biggest fan, Kristopher Tapley of In Contention, who called Mark Walton’s voice acting, “the closest I’ve ever come to considering a vocal performance Oscar-worthy since Ellen Degeneres in ‘Finding Nemo.’” I don’t necessarily agree with Tapley’s decision to put Bolt at #2 on his Best of 2008 list, but I would love to see a non-actor like Walton be recognized non-traditionally for vocal work, a form of acting that doesn’t garner enough consideration. Who needs big name casting in an animated film when a storyboard artist gives a more hilarious vocal performance than even Jack Black? Best Original Screenplay: Charlie Kaufman, Synecdoche, New York Kaufman may need some fine-tuning in the directorial department (though he did a pretty good job for a first-timer), but his latest screenplay, for Synecdoche, New York, is every bit as brilliant as his three Oscar-nominated scripts (one of which, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, was a winner). There’s not much originality in the attempt to put everything into a screenplay — in fact, it’s a common mistake for narcissistic novices — but Kaufman is quite original for having been the first to be successful at it. Best Adapted Screenplay: James Marsh and Philippe Petit, Man on Wire There is no screenwriter credited for Man on Wire, but there had to have been some sort of adaptation involved, even if it was simply a single-page treatment and some notes about how to turn Petit’s unexceptional (though fairly enjoyable) book To Reach the Clouds into one of the most riveting documentaries of all time. Unfortunately, the lack of credit means that the Academy will certainly overlook this, the greatest cinematic storytelling of the year. And now, some extra-long shots in two of the non-major categories: Best Cinematography: Jeremy Lasky, Martin Rosenberg, Danielle Feinberg, Roger Deakins, Wall-E I almost chose Wall-E, which I don’t think should be given a Best Picture nod, for the Best Director slot, for Andrew Stanton. But if any animation filmmaker is going to break such ground, I’d rather first see Brad Bird recognized in that category. Besides, much of the innovative camera work in Wall-E is courtesy of new concepts in cinematographic technique for animation. Even if the Academy blew our minds and nominated Wall-E for Best Cinematography, Deakins, whom Pixar hired for some uncredited consultation, wouldn’t be named as one of the nominees. But since the guy is so deserving of an Oscar, why not just name him in some additional slots this year (a repeat of his double duty from 2007, he’s expected to receive two nods, for Doubt and Revolutionary Road)? Best Foreign Language Film: Tony Manero Pablo Larrain’s Tony Manero, which is Chile’s official submission to the foreign language category, is currently without a distributor in the U.S. How might that change? An Oscar nomination. Sure, not every Oscar nominee for Best Foreign Language film is guaranteed distribution, but it could help a film as highly praised as this one — recently it placed third on indieWIRE’s Critic’s Poll of the best undistributed films of the year. Currently, it’s a strong contender, though it may be just on the outside of the Academy’s top choices (it’s up against either Sweden’s Everlasting Moments or Germany’s The Baader Meinhof Complex for that last spot). Personally, I haven’t actually seen Tony Manero, but I’d really like to, and that is why I wish for it to be recognized. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/groups/Community_Recommendations/Re_Collaboration_Best_Films_of_2008/643/38519/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: rjsprague
Post To: Community Recommendations
Post Date: 12/17/2008 11:48:42 PM
Body: [quote user="seely"] Maybe this is old news already, but AFI just release their Top 10 of 2008, which I've copied and linked-up below. I have a thread about it going over in Its a Wonderful Night for Oscar, but thought it might add some fuel to the discussion here too! [quote user="seely"] Just came across this page over on AFI's site... its their top 10 of 2008. AFI MOVIES OF THE YEAR-OFFICIAL SELECTIONS THE CURIOUS CASE OF BENJAMIN BUTTON THE DARK KNIGHT FROST/NIXON FROZEN RIVER GRAN TORINO IRON MAN MILK WALL•E WENDY AND LUCY THE WRESTLER Theres a few rather obvious selections on there but a few I find rather baffling. AFI offers no explanation/rationale for the selections but Ironman and The Curious Case of Benjamin Button? I saw Iron Man, and thought it was good, but not exactly what I would consider to be a truly "great" film. I haven't seen Benjamin Button, but its gotten mixed reviews at best and not what I would consider a runaway pick for a best of list. Any thoughts? Maybe a few titles that should have been on here but arent?[/quote] [/quote] All I could think was "What the hell? Iron Man?" Who are these idiots? Iron Man was NOT a great film. It was a mediocre action film based on a marvel comic book series, which basically guarantees its mediocrity. Who is this AFI person anyway!? (=D)
]]>Thu, 18 Dec 2008 04:48:42 GMTrjspragueCommunity Recommendations12/17/2008 11:48:42 PM[quote user="seely"] Maybe this is old news already, but AFI just release their Top 10 of 2008, which I've copied and linked-up below. I have a thread about it going over in Its a Wonderful Night for Oscar, but thought it might add some fuel to the discussion here too! [quote user="seely"] Just came across this page over on AFI's site... its their top 10 of 2008. AFI MOVIES OF THE YEAR-OFFICIAL SELECTIONS THE CURIOUS CASE OF BENJAMIN BUTTON THE DARK KNIGHT FROST/NIXON FROZEN RIVER GRAN TORINO IRON MAN MILK WALL&bull;E WENDY AND LUCY THE WRESTLER Theres a few rather obvious selections on there but a few I find rather baffling. AFI offers no explanation/rationale for the selections but Ironman and The Curious Case of Benjamin Button? I saw Iron Man, and thought it was good, but not exactly what I would consider to be a truly "great" film. I haven't seen Benjamin Button, but its gotten mixed reviews at best and not what I would consider a runaway pick for a best of list. Any thoughts? Maybe a few titles that should have been on here but arent?[/quote] [/quote] All I could think was "What the hell? Iron Man?" Who are these idiots? Iron Man was NOT a great film. It was a mediocre action film based on a marvel comic book series, which basically guarantees its mediocrity. Who is this AFI person anyway!? (=D) http://www.spout.com/groups/Community_Recommendations/Re_Collaboration_Best_Films_of_2008/643/38442/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: seely
Post To: Community Recommendations
Post Date: 12/16/2008 11:25:25 AM
Body: Maybe this is old news already, but AFI just release their Top 10 of 2008, which I've copied and linked-up below. I have a thread about it going over in Its a Wonderful Night for Oscar, but thought it might add some fuel to the discussion here too! [quote user="seely"] Just came across this page over on AFI's site... its their top 10 of 2008. AFI MOVIES OF THE YEAR-OFFICIAL SELECTIONS THE CURIOUS CASE OF BENJAMIN BUTTON THE DARK KNIGHT FROST/NIXON FROZEN RIVER GRAN TORINO IRON MAN MILK WALL•E WENDY AND LUCY THE WRESTLER Theres a few rather obvious selections on there but a few I find rather baffling. AFI offers no explanation/rationale for the selections but Ironman and The Curious Case of Benjamin Button? I saw Iron Man, and thought it was good, but not exactly what I would consider to be a truly "great" film. I haven't seen Benjamin Button, but its gotten mixed reviews at best and not what I would consider a runaway pick for a best of list. Any thoughts? Maybe a few titles that should have been on here but arent?[/quote]
]]>Tue, 16 Dec 2008 16:25:25 GMTseelyCommunity Recommendations12/16/2008 11:25:25 AMMaybe this is old news already, but AFI just release their Top 10 of 2008, which I've copied and linked-up below. I have a thread about it going over in Its a Wonderful Night for Oscar, but thought it might add some fuel to the discussion here too! [quote user="seely"] Just came across this page over on AFI's site... its their top 10 of 2008. AFI MOVIES OF THE YEAR-OFFICIAL SELECTIONS THE CURIOUS CASE OF BENJAMIN BUTTON THE DARK KNIGHT FROST/NIXON FROZEN RIVER GRAN TORINO IRON MAN MILK WALL&bull;E WENDY AND LUCY THE WRESTLER Theres a few rather obvious selections on there but a few I find rather baffling. AFI offers no explanation/rationale for the selections but Ironman and The Curious Case of Benjamin Button? I saw Iron Man, and thought it was good, but not exactly what I would consider to be a truly "great" film. I haven't seen Benjamin Button, but its gotten mixed reviews at best and not what I would consider a runaway pick for a best of list. Any thoughts? Maybe a few titles that should have been on here but arent?[/quote] http://www.spout.com/groups/It_s_a_Wonderful_Night_for_Oscar/AFI_s_Top_10_of_2008/46/38400/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: seely
Post To: It's a Wonderful Night for Oscar!
Post Date: 12/15/2008 2:40:55 PM
Body: Just came across this page over on AFI's site... its their top 10 of 2008. AFI MOVIES OF THE YEAR-OFFICIAL SELECTIONS THE CURIOUS CASE OF BENJAMIN BUTTON THE DARK KNIGHT FROST/NIXON FROZEN RIVER GRAN TORINO IRON MAN MILK WALL•E WENDY AND LUCY THE WRESTLER Theres a few rather obvious selections on there but a few I find rather baffling. AFI offers no explanation/rationale for the selections but Ironman and The Curious Case of Benjamin Button? I saw Iron Man, and thought it was good, but not exactly what I would consider to be a truly "great" film. I haven't seen Benjamin Button, but its gotten mixed reviews at best and not what I would consider a runaway pick for a best of list. Any thoughts? Maybe a few titles that should have been on here but arent?
]]>Mon, 15 Dec 2008 19:40:55 GMTseelyIt's a Wonderful Night for Oscar!12/15/2008 2:40:55 PMJust came across this page over on AFI's site... its their top 10 of 2008. AFI MOVIES OF THE YEAR-OFFICIAL SELECTIONS THE CURIOUS CASE OF BENJAMIN BUTTON THE DARK KNIGHT FROST/NIXON FROZEN RIVER GRAN TORINO IRON MAN MILK WALL&bull;E WENDY AND LUCY THE WRESTLER Theres a few rather obvious selections on there but a few I find rather baffling. AFI offers no explanation/rationale for the selections but Ironman and The Curious Case of Benjamin Button? I saw Iron Man, and thought it was good, but not exactly what I would consider to be a truly "great" film. I haven't seen Benjamin Button, but its gotten mixed reviews at best and not what I would consider a runaway pick for a best of list. Any thoughts? Maybe a few titles that should have been on here but arent? http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/family/MemberTagFilms.aspxfamily
Number of films tagged: 6288

Number of people who tagged: 226

Number of times used: 1138

]]>Thu, 03 Dec 2009 20:09:21 GMT62882261138Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/friendship/MemberTagFilms.aspxfriendship
Number of films tagged: 6791

Number of people who tagged: 154

Number of times used: 979

]]>Wed, 09 Dec 2009 05:08:37 GMT6791154979Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/drama/MemberTagFilms.aspxdrama
Number of films tagged: 525

Number of people who tagged: 102

Number of times used: 624

]]>Tue, 08 Dec 2009 22:39:10 GMT525102624Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/journey/MemberTagFilms.aspxjourney
Number of films tagged: 1175

Number of people who tagged: 50

Number of times used: 124

]]>Fri, 17 Jul 2009 13:02:52 GMT117550124Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/dog/MemberTagFilms.aspxdog
Number of films tagged: 1373

Number of people who tagged: 47

Number of times used: 161

]]>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 19:00:53 GMT137347161Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/money/MemberTagFilms.aspxmoney
Number of films tagged: 508

Number of people who tagged: 46

Number of times used: 145

]]>Tue, 24 Nov 2009 21:03:25 GMT50846145Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/poverty/MemberTagFilms.aspxpoverty
Number of films tagged: 1505

Number of people who tagged: 38

Number of times used: 70

]]>Wed, 11 Nov 2009 20:28:37 GMT15053870Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/police/MemberTagFilms.aspxpolice
Number of films tagged: 3104

Number of people who tagged: 37

Number of times used: 172

]]>Tue, 24 Nov 2009 20:56:49 GMT310437172Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/smalltown/MemberTagFilms.aspxsmalltown
Number of films tagged: 913

Number of people who tagged: 37

Number of times used: 86

]]>Sat, 22 Aug 2009 10:20:15 GMT9133786Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/friends/MemberTagFilms.aspxfriends
Number of films tagged: 157

Number of people who tagged: 36

Number of times used: 181

]]>Fri, 04 Dec 2009 00:50:40 GMT15736181Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/loneliness/MemberTagFilms.aspxloneliness
Number of films tagged: 416

Number of people who tagged: 33

Number of times used: 68

]]>Mon, 14 Sep 2009 21:01:02 GMT4163368Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/car/MemberTagFilms.aspxcar
Number of films tagged: 1316

Number of people who tagged: 32

Number of times used: 99

]]>Tue, 24 Nov 2009 20:32:16 GMT13163299Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/lost/MemberTagFilms.aspxlost
Number of films tagged: 316

Number of people who tagged: 32

Number of times used: 54

]]>Sat, 12 Sep 2009 00:36:46 GMT3163254Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/train/MemberTagFilms.aspxtrain
Number of films tagged: 66

Number of people who tagged: 32

Number of times used: 80

]]>Wed, 11 Nov 2009 20:52:46 GMT663280Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/rescue/MemberTagFilms.aspxrescue
Number of films tagged: 4080

Number of people who tagged: 31

Number of times used: 142

]]>Mon, 03 Aug 2009 18:39:36 GMT408031142Tag