list sarcastig's Recent Activity - Spout http://www.spout.com/ sarcastig's Recent Activity - Spout Copyright 2005-9 Spout, LLC Spout RSS http://www.spout.com/images/SpoutLogoRSS.jpg sarcastig's Recent Activity - Spout http://www.spout.com/ 136 30 Spout Group:Spout Customer Care - Get answers to your questions here! http://www.spout.com/groups/Spout_Customer_Care/420/default.aspx Group Name: Spout Customer Care - Get answers to your questions here!
Group Description:

Have a general question? Need help with some thing on the site? Have a bug you would like to report? Well then, you have come to the right place. No matter what you are having trouble with, we would like to help you find a solution. And maybe, through your own experience with the site, you will want to help other users too. That's what communities are all about. 


Created: 8/1/2007
Number of Members: 79
Number of discussion posts: 513
]]>Mon, 31 Aug 2009 12:47:00 GMTSpout Customer CareWed, 01 Aug 2007 09:06:04 GMT790513Group Spout Group:HORROR MOVIES 101 - FOR ALL WHO LOVE HORROR MOVIES http://www.spout.com/groups/HORROR_MOVIES_101/222/default.aspx Group Name: HORROR MOVIES 101 - FOR ALL WHO LOVE HORROR MOVIES
Group Description:    " I bid you welcome...  Enter freely and of your own will..."
Created: 12/17/2006
Number of Members: 414
Number of Lists: 6
Number of discussion posts: 2333
]]>Sun, 30 Aug 2009 00:53:17 GMTHORROR MOVIES 101Sun, 17 Dec 2006 01:20:09 GMT41462333Group Spout Group:foureyedmonsters - Talk to Susan & Arin about the movie and those addictive podcasts. http://www.spout.com/groups/foureyedmonsters/338/endorsed.aspx Group Name: foureyedmonsters - Talk to Susan & Arin about the movie and those addictive podcasts.
Created: 6/4/2007
Number of Members: 322
Number of discussion posts: 56
]]>Fri, 28 Aug 2009 05:42:31 GMTfoureyedmonstersMon, 04 Jun 2007 15:28:43 GMT322056Group Spout Group:Weekly Theme - "Fighting off boredom with the Iron Fist of Variety" http://www.spout.com/groups/Weekly_Theme/625/default.aspx Group Name: Weekly Theme - "Fighting off boredom with the Iron Fist of Variety"
Created: 6/30/2008
Number of Members: 52
Number of Lists: 12
Number of discussion posts: 701
]]>Thu, 27 Aug 2009 20:20:23 GMTWeekly ThemeMon, 30 Jun 2008 15:13:45 GMT5212701Group Spout Group:Spout Mavens - Spout's best movie reviewers. Membership is limited. http://www.spout.com/groups/Spout_Mavens/366/default.aspx Group Name: Spout Mavens - Spout's best movie reviewers. Membership is limited.
Group Description:

A group of Spout's best reviewers.
Read the requirements.


Created: 6/20/2007
Number of Members: 36
Number of Lists: 9
Number of discussion posts: 451
]]>Wed, 26 Aug 2009 20:10:52 GMTSpout MavensWed, 20 Jun 2007 10:13:29 GMT369451Group Spout Group:missing a film - we'll help you find a film http://www.spout.com/groups/missing_a_film/263/default.aspx Group Name: missing a film - we'll help you find a film
Created: 3/5/2007
Number of Members: 131
Number of Lists: 1
Number of discussion posts: 234
]]>Wed, 26 Aug 2009 11:30:05 GMTmissing a filmMon, 05 Mar 2007 16:37:43 GMT1311234Group Spout Group:Friends of Foreign Flicks - Discussions of all films not American. http://www.spout.com/groups/Friends_of_Foreign_Flicks/591/default.aspx Group Name: Friends of Foreign Flicks - Discussions of all films not American.
Group Description:

At some point you just want more than what's right in front of you.


Created: 4/24/2008
Number of Members: 30
Number of Lists: 1
Number of discussion posts: 92
]]>Wed, 26 Aug 2009 04:05:26 GMTFriends of Foreign FlicksThu, 24 Apr 2008 11:44:11 GMT30192Group Spout Group:The Documentary - A place to talk about the much overlooked genre of the Documentary. http://www.spout.com/groups/The_Documentary/79/default.aspx Group Name: The Documentary - A place to talk about the much overlooked genre of the Documentary.
Created: 4/2/2006
Number of Members: 49
Number of Lists: 4
Number of discussion posts: 53
]]>Tue, 25 Aug 2009 21:05:39 GMTThe DocumentarySun, 02 Apr 2006 00:58:55 GMT49453Group Spout Group:Sound on Sight - Podcasts, movie reviews, interviews, news and more. http://www.spout.com/groups/Sound_on_Sight/529/default.aspx Group Name: Sound on Sight - Podcasts, movie reviews, interviews, news and more.
Group Description:

Sound on Sight proudly brings you two podcasts each week. Voted best podcast in 2008, these hard working hosts cover everything from mainstream Hollywood films to noir, horror, science fiction, cult cinema, documentary film making and more. Look out for a new show added every Tuesday and Thursday morning.

http://www.soundonsight.org/

 

 


Created: 1/6/2008
Number of Members: 104
Number of discussion posts: 150
]]>Tue, 25 Aug 2009 21:03:03 GMTSound on SightSun, 06 Jan 2008 21:24:34 GMT1040150Group Spout Group:Worst Movie Ever - The Group is dedicated to uncovering the bombs, so you don't have too. http://www.spout.com/groups/Worst_Movie_Ever/104/default.aspx Group Name: Worst Movie Ever - The Group is dedicated to uncovering the bombs, so you don't have too.
Created: 5/5/2006
Number of Members: 200
Number of Lists: 10
Number of discussion posts: 412
]]>Tue, 25 Aug 2009 16:43:26 GMTWorst Movie EverFri, 05 May 2006 20:20:45 GMT20010412Group Spout Group:Movie Polls - Vote in weekly polls and discuss http://www.spout.com/groups/Movie_Polls/657/default.aspx Group Name: Movie Polls - Vote in weekly polls and discuss
Group Description:

Each week I will post a new poll.  Please vote in the poll and reply to the discussion thread to discuss the question.  Please do not vote more than once.


Created: 11/25/2008
Number of Members: 66
Number of discussion posts: 414
]]>Tue, 25 Aug 2009 02:42:29 GMTMovie PollsTue, 25 Nov 2008 16:54:38 GMT660414Group Spout Group:Zombie Obsession - Zombie Lovers, Unite! http://www.spout.com/groups/Zombie_Obsession/329/default.aspx Group Name: Zombie Obsession - Zombie Lovers, Unite!
Group Description:

Join us to discuss your favorite or most horrifying Zombie Movies or just your most memorable Zombie Moments.  From Funny to Scary to Gory to Bizarre...

 


Created: 5/28/2007
Number of Members: 104
Number of Lists: 1
Number of discussion posts: 594
]]>Mon, 24 Aug 2009 17:29:56 GMTZombie ObsessionMon, 28 May 2007 02:04:45 GMT1041594Group Spout Group:A World of MSTies - Thank You, Won't We? http://www.spout.com/groups/A_World_of_MSTies/590/default.aspx Group Name: A World of MSTies - Thank You, Won't We?
Group Description:

Glorify the best show ever (MST3K) with wit, wisdom and downright wackiness!


Created: 4/23/2008
Number of Members: 10
Number of Lists: 2
Number of discussion posts: 23
]]>Mon, 24 Aug 2009 17:25:25 GMTA World of MSTiesWed, 23 Apr 2008 20:21:48 GMT10223Group Spout Group:It's a Wonderful Night for Oscar! - Devoted to everything nominated or snubbed by the Academy of Golden Guys http://www.spout.com/groups/It_s_a_Wonderful_Night_for_Oscar/46/default.aspx Group Name: It's a Wonderful Night for Oscar! - Devoted to everything nominated or snubbed by the Academy of Golden Guys
Group Description: Year after year, movie lovers and non movie lovers alike discuss ad nauseum the fate of films nominated for the utmost honor, the Academy Award. Some people watch it for the fashion. Some people watch for the haute couture. Some people watch for their fill of celebrity sightings. If you are a member of this group, you love everything about the Super Bowl of movies, especially the movies themselves! You love to make predictions, guess at the politics, discuss and dissect who should have been nominated and who should have won...or, you're just an avid movie lover that likes to pay attention. Come join the group!
Created: 3/4/2006
Number of Members: 41
Number of Lists: 58
Number of discussion posts: 226
]]>Mon, 24 Aug 2009 11:11:33 GMTIt's a Wonderful Night for Oscar!Sat, 04 Mar 2006 15:24:32 GMT4158226Group Spout Group:Movie Marathons http://www.spout.com/groups/Movie_Marathons/693/default.aspx Group Name: Movie Marathons
Group Description:

This is a group for members to start and organize movie marathons. Its primary purpose is to get more people exposed to more film. And to watch these films and discuss them as a group.

Anyone can start a marathon and marathons can be organized in many different ways to showcase the films of a director, actor, genre, theme etc...

Check the Guidlines and Suggestions discussion for ideas.


Created: 7/22/2009
Number of Members: 15
Number of discussion posts: 22
]]>Sat, 22 Aug 2009 16:33:02 GMTMovie MarathonsWed, 22 Jul 2009 01:35:58 GMT15022Group Spout Group:Movies we do not want to see - Try to convince us to see these movies! http://www.spout.com/groups/Movies_we_do_not_want_to_see/70/default.aspx Group Name: Movies we do not want to see - Try to convince us to see these movies!
Group Description: Want to be a member? Send me a message with a list of at least 5 movies that you do not want to see. There are many movies that I do not want to see. I'm not sure if its right of me to decide never to see a movie without seeing it. You know...like when a kid says they hate mushrooms even though they admit never trying them. So maybe this is a good spot for people to display movies they don't think they want to see, and see if anyone can convince us to try them out.
Created: 3/22/2006
Number of Members: 20
Number of Lists: 3
Number of discussion posts: 190
]]>Wed, 19 Aug 2009 00:31:56 GMTMovies we do not want to seeWed, 22 Mar 2006 14:27:50 GMT203190Group Spout Post: Control - first thoughts http://www.spout.com/blogs/sarcastig/archive/2007/10/29/21274.aspx Post By: sarcastig
Post To: As cool as a Fruitstand
Post Date: 10/29/2007 6:01:28 PM
Body: Is this film gorgeous or what? What else would you expect, of course, from Anton Corbijn, who surprisingly didn't act as his own DP here. I cannot find a right picture to illustrate it, but his compositions are amazingly simple, so stark, yet they work beautifully.I almost can't believe Sam Riley is a first time actor: he's great here. I'm not even talking about the mimicry - I'm not very familiar with Joy Division and until I searched youtube fifteen minutes ago, I'd never seen Ian Curtis dance - but simply about the intensity of his portrayal, the openness, too. The tragedy of Curtis' life is that it really wasn't all that tragic, but he couldn't take it, and Riley shows us the little boy he really still was. When he was my age, he was already married, with a kid, a band to lead and a lover. All of this happened more or less impulsively. Then, when he was one year older, he had one fatal impulse.I only have one gripe, really, and it's not even the predictable rise-and-fall structure inherent in biopics. There is one scene where Ian Curtis is -more or less- hypnotized, and Corbijn unfortunately resorts to the old method of repeating phrases he heard before in voice-over. It's such an unfortunate trick, and the scene would have been much more effective had we been able to fill in his thoughts ourselves: we've heard what's been said to him, it's even been filtered for us since this is a film, and we really don't need to be told explicitly what's in his head.Ok. I'm off to download Joy Division songs now. Originally posted on:As cool as a Fruitstand
]]>Mon, 29 Oct 2007 22:01:28 GMTsarcastigAs cool as a Fruitstand10/29/2007 6:01:28 PMIs this film gorgeous or what? What else would you expect, of course, from Anton Corbijn, who surprisingly didn't act as his own DP here. I cannot find a right picture to illustrate it, but his compositions are amazingly simple, so stark, yet they work beautifully.I almost can't believe Sam Riley is a first time actor: he's great here. I'm not even talking about the mimicry - I'm not very familiar with Joy Division and until I searched youtube fifteen minutes ago, I'd never seen Ian Curtis dance - but simply about the intensity of his portrayal, the openness, too. The tragedy of Curtis' life is that it really wasn't all that tragic, but he couldn't take it, and Riley shows us the little boy he really still was. When he was my age, he was already married, with a kid, a band to lead and a lover. All of this happened more or less impulsively. Then, when he was one year older, he had one fatal impulse.I only have one gripe, really, and it's not even the predictable rise-and-fall structure inherent in biopics. There is one scene where Ian Curtis is -more or less- hypnotized, and Corbijn unfortunately resorts to the old method of repeating phrases he heard before in voice-over. It's such an unfortunate trick, and the scene would have been much more effective had we been able to fill in his thoughts ourselves: we've heard what's been said to him, it's even been filtered for us since this is a film, and we really don't need to be told explicitly what's in his head.Ok. I'm off to download Joy Division songs now. Originally posted on:As cool as a Fruitstand Spout Post: Quick Thoughts - Trapped (1949) http://www.spout.com/blogs/sarcastig/archive/2007/10/18/20914.aspx Post By: sarcastig
Post To: As cool as a Fruitstand
Post Date: 10/18/2007 3:37:12 PM
Body: Ah, but how you can see the production code at work here. The sympathy of the film is clearly with its charming protagonist, played by Llloyd Bridges, an his smart, sexy girlfriend Meg/Laurie, but of course in the end criminals are never allowed to win. There are two great fights here, clumsy and nasty and just two bodies rolling on the floor trying to hurt each others - none of the effectiveness here of Bourne or Viggo, they don't really know how to fight, just that they want to get out looking better than the other guy.I'm not sure I liked the documentary voice-over, quite similar in fact to the one in He Walked By Night, and the end chase sequence is not all that captivating since it doesn't involve the main character, but all in all, this is a nice little noir.Image source Originally posted on:sarcastig's blog
]]>Thu, 18 Oct 2007 19:37:12 GMTsarcastigAs cool as a Fruitstand10/18/2007 3:37:12 PMAh, but how you can see the production code at work here. The sympathy of the film is clearly with its charming protagonist, played by Llloyd Bridges, an his smart, sexy girlfriend Meg/Laurie, but of course in the end criminals are never allowed to win. There are two great fights here, clumsy and nasty and just two bodies rolling on the floor trying to hurt each others - none of the effectiveness here of Bourne or Viggo, they don't really know how to fight, just that they want to get out looking better than the other guy.I'm not sure I liked the documentary voice-over, quite similar in fact to the one in He Walked By Night, and the end chase sequence is not all that captivating since it doesn't involve the main character, but all in all, this is a nice little noir.Image source Originally posted on:sarcastig's blog Spout Post: Top 50 - #2 - Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind http://www.spout.com/blogs/sarcastig/archive/2007/10/18/20913.aspx Post By: sarcastig
Post To: As cool as a Fruitstand
Post Date: 10/18/2007 3:37:11 PM
Body: I have a conflicted relationship with romance, and romantic movies in particular. Thing is, I'm kind of a cynic about "Love" with a capital, yet at heart I really am hopelessly romantic. I just don't put any stock in the formulaic, by the book kind of romance movies usually serve up. I don't buy two beautiful people being meant for one another just 'cause, I don't buy big romantic gestures, and that's not even mentioning the sneaky sexism often present, with many movies operating under the assumption that the main goal in a woman's life is to find "the one".My sister suggested, yesterday, that I draw out my studies because it's in college that you have the highest probability of meeting this mysterious "one", and I don't even think she was kidding. I laughed at her, of course, and it's true: I don't make any life decisions based on how they will affect my probability of finding a mate. I don't believe there is one person out there for me who's perfect. That doesn't mean, however, that I don't long to make a connection with someone, somehow, if only for a little while.All this is a much too long and personal detour to bring me to a simple point: I believe that aside from being a perfectly crafted and written masterpiece, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind is one of the most honestly romantic movies ever made. Not romantic like my #1. Not romantic in the sense that it makes you believe, for just a moment, in the magic Hollywood is so good at selling. But romantic in the sense that it doesn't let realism get in the way of hope.Carrey's Joel and Winslet's Clementine aren't "meant to be", not even particularly well-matched in certain respects. They know, at the end, that they have many fights and difficulties ahead, that their relationship will be flawed. And it's knowing that, that they say "okay" to going through all of it again.Charlie Kaufman is a brilliant screenwriter, I don't think there's anyone who'd deny it. I'd love to spend 15 minutes in his head, if not more. And I don't think he's heartless, either, his insecurities are much too close to the surface for that. His brain does however get in the way of his heart a lot of the time, leaving his films interesting, but a little cold, mental exercises that lead you to analyze them right away instead of getting lost in them. In this film, however, there's a perfect balance of the genius crazy idea and the feelings involved, and after the Science of Sleep I am inclined to give Gondry much of the credit for that. His imagery fills his film with wonder, but because he does most of his effects in camera the film never loses its footing in the real world. He managed to make this the best Kaufman movie to date, and that's no mean feat.Next up: well, no hints this time, since any hint would give it away. Any guesses? Originally posted on:sarcastig's blog
]]>Thu, 18 Oct 2007 19:37:11 GMTsarcastigAs cool as a Fruitstand10/18/2007 3:37:11 PMI have a conflicted relationship with romance, and romantic movies in particular. Thing is, I'm kind of a cynic about "Love" with a capital, yet at heart I really am hopelessly romantic. I just don't put any stock in the formulaic, by the book kind of romance movies usually serve up. I don't buy two beautiful people being meant for one another just 'cause, I don't buy big romantic gestures, and that's not even mentioning the sneaky sexism often present, with many movies operating under the assumption that the main goal in a woman's life is to find "the one".My sister suggested, yesterday, that I draw out my studies because it's in college that you have the highest probability of meeting this mysterious "one", and I don't even think she was kidding. I laughed at her, of course, and it's true: I don't make any life decisions based on how they will affect my probability of finding a mate. I don't believe there is one person out there for me who's perfect. That doesn't mean, however, that I don't long to make a connection with someone, somehow, if only for a little while.All this is a much too long and personal detour to bring me to a simple point: I believe that aside from being a perfectly crafted and written masterpiece, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind is one of the most honestly romantic movies ever made. Not romantic like my #1. Not romantic in the sense that it makes you believe, for just a moment, in the magic Hollywood is so good at selling. But romantic in the sense that it doesn't let realism get in the way of hope.Carrey's Joel and Winslet's Clementine aren't "meant to be", not even particularly well-matched in certain respects. They know, at the end, that they have many fights and difficulties ahead, that their relationship will be flawed. And it's knowing that, that they say "okay" to going through all of it again.Charlie Kaufman is a brilliant screenwriter, I don't think there's anyone who'd deny it. I'd love to spend 15 minutes in his head, if not more. And I don't think he's heartless, either, his insecurities are much too close to the surface for that. His brain does however get in the way of his heart a lot of the time, leaving his films interesting, but a little cold, mental exercises that lead you to analyze them right away instead of getting lost in them. In this film, however, there's a perfect balance of the genius crazy idea and the feelings involved, and after the Science of Sleep I am inclined to give Gondry much of the credit for that. His imagery fills his film with wonder, but because he does most of his effects in camera the film never loses its footing in the real world. He managed to make this the best Kaufman movie to date, and that's no mean feat.Next up: well, no hints this time, since any hint would give it away. Any guesses? Originally posted on:sarcastig's blog Spout Post: Eastern Promises (Cronenberg, 2007) http://www.spout.com/blogs/sarcastig/archive/2007/10/18/20912.aspx Post By: sarcastig
Post To: As cool as a Fruitstand
Post Date: 10/18/2007 3:37:11 PM
Body: It's impossible to say anything remotely meaningful or interesting about this movie without mentioning the (in)famous "bathhouse scene", so I won't even try. It is amazing. It's intense, it hurts, it's repulsive, yet you can't look away. It shows both how incredibly easy to harm a human body is, how tenuous human life, and at the same time in Viggo's sinewy body it shows how lean, mean, and resilient it can be at the same time. Malleable, too: all the tattoos make his body seem something manufactured, perfected, a symbol more than anything living, breathing, feeling pain.Also, yes, he's nekkid.Unfortunately, despite a few wonderful Cronenberg touches as described above, I'm not sure this film ultimately adds up to more than just a solid genre film. It's a bit unfair, of course: coming from an unknown I might have hailed this as a very promising debut, but coming from Cronenberg, especially just after A History of Violence, how could my expectations not be unfairly high? That movie was much simpler on the surface, but it could be read in so many ways that it got better the more you thought about it. This one? Well, there's a lot to it, and definitely a lot to say, but I'm not sure it'll yield much more on second viewing.Oh, but there are so many nice touches here. A lot of directors don't quite know what to do with Vincent Cassel: he's ugly, really, with his extreme features, but he's magnetic on screen, and there's a strange vulnerability lurking under the surface. This latter quality especially comes through in the character of Kirill, who's psychotic, sadistic, certainly, but ultimately just a boy who knows he'll never be able to satisfy his dad's expectations.And Viggo? Of course he's great. I often feel like resisting his self-seriousness, but his obsessive researching pays off. In just a simple sentence, "I'm the driver", he can reveal so much. The Shamus, who luckily keeps archives now, wrote memorably about him, and he makes a good point: you can see him think, but you're never told exactly what he's thinking. He's opaque, but not a cypher: he's someone who's learned not to show too much.The screenwriter, Steve Knight, also wrote Dirty Pretty Things, a film I love, but the script is not as good as the main character, due to a third act twist in particular, that should have either been left out or explored in a little more detail. He gets the subculture right, and the desire to belong there, but he is at heart too enamored with genre plot devices. In the case of Dirty Pretty Things I think it works, breaking through all the building tension with a neat thriller resolution, but here it seems out of place. There's a kiss, too, that could easily have been left out altogether, and in my opinion should have been. Luckily, Cronenberg ends with an amazing shot, where Viggo Mortensen shows that just sitting at a table staring into the distance is acting, too. Originally posted on:sarcastig's blog
]]>Thu, 18 Oct 2007 19:37:11 GMTsarcastigAs cool as a Fruitstand10/18/2007 3:37:11 PMIt's impossible to say anything remotely meaningful or interesting about this movie without mentioning the (in)famous "bathhouse scene", so I won't even try. It is amazing. It's intense, it hurts, it's repulsive, yet you can't look away. It shows both how incredibly easy to harm a human body is, how tenuous human life, and at the same time in Viggo's sinewy body it shows how lean, mean, and resilient it can be at the same time. Malleable, too: all the tattoos make his body seem something manufactured, perfected, a symbol more than anything living, breathing, feeling pain.Also, yes, he's nekkid.Unfortunately, despite a few wonderful Cronenberg touches as described above, I'm not sure this film ultimately adds up to more than just a solid genre film. It's a bit unfair, of course: coming from an unknown I might have hailed this as a very promising debut, but coming from Cronenberg, especially just after A History of Violence, how could my expectations not be unfairly high? That movie was much simpler on the surface, but it could be read in so many ways that it got better the more you thought about it. This one? Well, there's a lot to it, and definitely a lot to say, but I'm not sure it'll yield much more on second viewing.Oh, but there are so many nice touches here. A lot of directors don't quite know what to do with Vincent Cassel: he's ugly, really, with his extreme features, but he's magnetic on screen, and there's a strange vulnerability lurking under the surface. This latter quality especially comes through in the character of Kirill, who's psychotic, sadistic, certainly, but ultimately just a boy who knows he'll never be able to satisfy his dad's expectations.And Viggo? Of course he's great. I often feel like resisting his self-seriousness, but his obsessive researching pays off. In just a simple sentence, "I'm the driver", he can reveal so much. The Shamus, who luckily keeps archives now, wrote memorably about him, and he makes a good point: you can see him think, but you're never told exactly what he's thinking. He's opaque, but not a cypher: he's someone who's learned not to show too much.The screenwriter, Steve Knight, also wrote Dirty Pretty Things, a film I love, but the script is not as good as the main character, due to a third act twist in particular, that should have either been left out or explored in a little more detail. He gets the subculture right, and the desire to belong there, but he is at heart too enamored with genre plot devices. In the case of Dirty Pretty Things I think it works, breaking through all the building tension with a neat thriller resolution, but here it seems out of place. There's a kiss, too, that could easily have been left out altogether, and in my opinion should have been. Luckily, Cronenberg ends with an amazing shot, where Viggo Mortensen shows that just sitting at a table staring into the distance is acting, too. Originally posted on:sarcastig's blog Spout Post: Top 50 - # 3 - The Man Who Wasn't There http://www.spout.com/blogs/sarcastig/archive/2007/10/18/20911.aspx Post By: sarcastig
Post To: As cool as a Fruitstand
Post Date: 10/18/2007 3:37:11 PM
Body: Finally then! Craig was right again.One of the best cinematic experiences I've ever had was watching The Man Who Wasn't There on the big screen, 4 years after it came out, and after two or three viewings on DVD. Roger Deakins' own print was being shown, and the man himself was in attendance. I've never seen black and white more glorious, more crisp but at the same time also oddly warm, and this screening is when my love for this film turned to adoration.Deakins also did a Q&A afterwards. I didn't really understand half of the Q's and three quarters or the A's due to all the technical lingo, but I sat there fascinated anyway because he spoke with such enthusiasm about his craft. He was impressively modest. It wasn't any sort of false humility: he knows he's good at what he does. He clearly sees what he does as a craft though, something you need some talent for but mostly a lot of experience, and there was not an ounce of pretentiousness to detect. I really think he's on the best cinematographers working today, and it's ridiculous that he has yet to win an Oscar (he was nominated 5 times, but never got to take home that statuette).There's much more, of course, than just the cinematography. One of its greatest assets is Billy Bob Thornton as Ed Crane, the barber who rarely speaks except in his voice-over. He's the ultimate noir protagonist: essentially good, well, not evil, but cursed by his one flaw, which ironically enough is ambition.Ambition? You wouldn't say it from the way he flatly says "Me? I don't talk much. I just cut the hair", but there is a spark there. He doesn't want much, but he does want a little bit more. Just a bit of independence, a bit more than just cutting the hair. An escape: something undetermined, unplanned.There are too many great moments to mention. Ed shaving his wife's legs, carefully, then his legs getting shaved later on. The murder scene. The Riedenschneider speech, and the shadows of the bars. The UFO's. But the two that resonate most with me have to do with Birdie, played by Scarlett Johanssen before she got all glamorous. The first is when Ed's brought her to a fancy piano teacher. He asks him "How did she do?" and the piano teacher answers:"She seemed like a very nice girl. She plays, monsieur, like a very nice girl. Stinks. Nice girl. However: stinks."It's a crushing moment, and Thornton underplays it beautifully. Later, in the car, Birdie calls him an enthusiast, and it's an assessment both ridiculous and strangely accurate. He is an enthusiast, even if he never betrays any emotion more acute than slight surprise, he is someone who likes things in a quiet, but unwavering way.Or maybe I'm just reading things into him, because above all else, Thornton's Ed is a blank slate, someone everyone projects their own idea upon, like you can see images in clouds, or in the billowing smoke that comes from Ed's permanent cigarette. To his wife he's the reliable dud she married. To her brother he's a pillar of strength and a listening ear. To her lover he's harmless, an innocent. To Birdie he's a strange sort of sugar daddy, to the wonderfully named Creighton Tolliver he's a mark. Most memorably, to Riedenschneider, he's nothing less than "the modern man"."What kind of man are you?" Big Dave asks, repeatedly. What kind of man is he? The kind you can make an endlessly fascinating film about.Next up... a movie which ends memorably, with both main characters saying..."Okay" Originally posted on:sarcastig's blog
]]>Thu, 18 Oct 2007 19:37:11 GMTsarcastigAs cool as a Fruitstand10/18/2007 3:37:11 PMFinally then! Craig was right again.One of the best cinematic experiences I've ever had was watching The Man Who Wasn't There on the big screen, 4 years after it came out, and after two or three viewings on DVD. Roger Deakins' own print was being shown, and the man himself was in attendance. I've never seen black and white more glorious, more crisp but at the same time also oddly warm, and this screening is when my love for this film turned to adoration.Deakins also did a Q&A afterwards. I didn't really understand half of the Q's and three quarters or the A's due to all the technical lingo, but I sat there fascinated anyway because he spoke with such enthusiasm about his craft. He was impressively modest. It wasn't any sort of false humility: he knows he's good at what he does. He clearly sees what he does as a craft though, something you need some talent for but mostly a lot of experience, and there was not an ounce of pretentiousness to detect. I really think he's on the best cinematographers working today, and it's ridiculous that he has yet to win an Oscar (he was nominated 5 times, but never got to take home that statuette).There's much more, of course, than just the cinematography. One of its greatest assets is Billy Bob Thornton as Ed Crane, the barber who rarely speaks except in his voice-over. He's the ultimate noir protagonist: essentially good, well, not evil, but cursed by his one flaw, which ironically enough is ambition.Ambition? You wouldn't say it from the way he flatly says "Me? I don't talk much. I just cut the hair", but there is a spark there. He doesn't want much, but he does want a little bit more. Just a bit of independence, a bit more than just cutting the hair. An escape: something undetermined, unplanned.There are too many great moments to mention. Ed shaving his wife's legs, carefully, then his legs getting shaved later on. The murder scene. The Riedenschneider speech, and the shadows of the bars. The UFO's. But the two that resonate most with me have to do with Birdie, played by Scarlett Johanssen before she got all glamorous. The first is when Ed's brought her to a fancy piano teacher. He asks him "How did she do?" and the piano teacher answers:"She seemed like a very nice girl. She plays, monsieur, like a very nice girl. Stinks. Nice girl. However: stinks."It's a crushing moment, and Thornton underplays it beautifully. Later, in the car, Birdie calls him an enthusiast, and it's an assessment both ridiculous and strangely accurate. He is an enthusiast, even if he never betrays any emotion more acute than slight surprise, he is someone who likes things in a quiet, but unwavering way.Or maybe I'm just reading things into him, because above all else, Thornton's Ed is a blank slate, someone everyone projects their own idea upon, like you can see images in clouds, or in the billowing smoke that comes from Ed's permanent cigarette. To his wife he's the reliable dud she married. To her brother he's a pillar of strength and a listening ear. To her lover he's harmless, an innocent. To Birdie he's a strange sort of sugar daddy, to the wonderfully named Creighton Tolliver he's a mark. Most memorably, to Riedenschneider, he's nothing less than "the modern man"."What kind of man are you?" Big Dave asks, repeatedly. What kind of man is he? The kind you can make an endlessly fascinating film about.Next up... a movie which ends memorably, with both main characters saying..."Okay" Originally posted on:sarcastig's blog Spout Post: Hotel Chevalier http://www.spout.com/blogs/sarcastig/archive/2007/10/18/20910.aspxPost By: sarcastig
Post To: As cool as a Fruitstand
Post Date: 10/18/2007 3:37:11 PM
Body: I'm never quite sure what to think about Wes Anderson. Oh, he's brilliant, especially visually, there's no debating that; unfortunately, he knows it a little too well. Still, when iTunes was being infuriatingly local last night and I was unable to download Hotel Chevalier due to being outside the US, it ruined my evening.I managed to get a version. Low quality, and I believe the beginning has been chopped off (please tell me, my version starts with Jason Schwartzman opening the door of his room), but I was very happy with it nonetheless.It's a strange little movie. It's unmistakably Anderson, from the way it's shot to the small details in the set decoration, and even in the way the two characters talk. It never quite takes off, but I was left wanting more, and that can't be a bad sign, can it? Unusually enough for Anderson, it doesn't feel like the characters' whole world is contained on screen, like all they ever were and will be is here, it feels like they are fully realized characters with interesting stories beyond the screen. They breathe. And that's a welcome change.I'm looking forward to The Darjeeling Limited. The three brothers setup makes me hope it will be more Royal Tenenbaums than Life Aquatic. And to keep me entertained in the meantime, I just ordered Bottle Rocket, which I found clumsily charming the first time around. Originally posted on:sarcastig's blog
]]>Thu, 18 Oct 2007 19:37:11 GMTsarcastigAs cool as a Fruitstand10/18/2007 3:37:11 PMI'm never quite sure what to think about Wes Anderson. Oh, he's brilliant, especially visually, there's no debating that; unfortunately, he knows it a little too well. Still, when iTunes was being infuriatingly local last night and I was unable to download Hotel Chevalier due to being outside the US, it ruined my evening.I managed to get a version. Low quality, and I believe the beginning has been chopped off (please tell me, my version starts with Jason Schwartzman opening the door of his room), but I was very happy with it nonetheless.It's a strange little movie. It's unmistakably Anderson, from the way it's shot to the small details in the set decoration, and even in the way the two characters talk. It never quite takes off, but I was left wanting more, and that can't be a bad sign, can it? Unusually enough for Anderson, it doesn't feel like the characters' whole world is contained on screen, like all they ever were and will be is here, it feels like they are fully realized characters with interesting stories beyond the screen. They breathe. And that's a welcome change.I'm looking forward to The Darjeeling Limited. The three brothers setup makes me hope it will be more Royal Tenenbaums than Life Aquatic. And to keep me entertained in the meantime, I just ordered Bottle Rocket, which I found clumsily charming the first time around. Originally posted on:sarcastig's blog Spout Post: Quick thoughts - Shrek the Third http://www.spout.com/blogs/sarcastig/archive/2007/10/18/20909.aspx Post By: sarcastig
Post To: As cool as a Fruitstand
Post Date: 10/18/2007 3:37:11 PM
Body: The Shrek sequels are surprisingly inoffensive. Yes, they lack the freshness of the original, but whereas with the bloated, convoluted Pirates sequels this bothered me to no end, the Shrek movies keep it simple and short, without any more ambition than entertaining, and in that ambition they succeed, despite a falling lpm ratio. The Shrek-based humor is quite repetitive at this point in particular, but there are lovely little visual jokes - the trees using their branches as a parachute, for instance. Also, the celebrity voices are well-cast, I especially liked that after already using John Cleese in the second movie, they now also added fellow Monty Python alum Eric Idle as a somewhat loony Merlin. The subplot about villains taking back their stories could have been more interesting and fleshed out, but it feels petty to complain about a movie that knows to stay simple, short, and light.Of course I prefer originality, daring, and so on. But for an evening like yesterday, when I was spending the evening with a friend I hadn't spent time with in a while, there could not have been a more appropriate movie. Originally posted on:sarcastig's blog
]]>Thu, 18 Oct 2007 19:37:11 GMTsarcastigAs cool as a Fruitstand10/18/2007 3:37:11 PMThe Shrek sequels are surprisingly inoffensive. Yes, they lack the freshness of the original, but whereas with the bloated, convoluted Pirates sequels this bothered me to no end, the Shrek movies keep it simple and short, without any more ambition than entertaining, and in that ambition they succeed, despite a falling lpm ratio. The Shrek-based humor is quite repetitive at this point in particular, but there are lovely little visual jokes - the trees using their branches as a parachute, for instance. Also, the celebrity voices are well-cast, I especially liked that after already using John Cleese in the second movie, they now also added fellow Monty Python alum Eric Idle as a somewhat loony Merlin. The subplot about villains taking back their stories could have been more interesting and fleshed out, but it feels petty to complain about a movie that knows to stay simple, short, and light.Of course I prefer originality, daring, and so on. But for an evening like yesterday, when I was spending the evening with a friend I hadn't spent time with in a while, there could not have been a more appropriate movie. Originally posted on:sarcastig's blog Spout Post: Top 50 - # 3 - The Man Who Wasn't There http://www.spout.com/blogs/sarcastig/archive/2007/10/8/20637.aspxPost By: sarcastig
Post To: As cool as a Fruitstand
Post Date: 10/8/2007 4:27:00 PM
Body: Finally then! Craig was right again.One of the best cinematic experiences I've ever had was watching The Man Who Wasn't There on the big screen, 4 years after it came out, and after two or three viewings on DVD. Roger Deakins' own print was being shown, and the man himself was in attendance. I've never seen black and white more glorious, more crisp but at the same time also oddly warm, and this screening is when my love for this film turned to adoration.Deakins also did a Q&A afterwards. I didn't really understand half of the Q's and three quarters or the A's due to all the technical lingo, but I sat there fascinated anyway because he spoke with such enthusiasm about his craft. He was impressively modest. It wasn't any sort of false humility: he knows he's good at what he does. He clearly sees what he does as a craft though, something you need some talent for but mostly a lot of experience, and there was not an ounce of pretentiousness to detect. I really think he's on the best cinematographers working today, and it's ridiculous that he has yet to win an Oscar (he was nominated 5 times, but never got to take home that statuette).There's much more, of course, than just the cinematography. One of its greatest assets is Billy Bob Thornton as Ed Crane, the barber who rarely speaks except in his voice-over. He's the ultimate noir protagonist: essentially good, well, not evil, but cursed by his one flaw, which ironically enough is ambition.Ambition? You wouldn't say it from the way he flatly says "Me? I don't talk much. I just cut the hair", but there is a spark there. He doesn't want much, but he does want a little bit more. Just a bit of independence, a bit more than just cutting the hair. An escape: something undetermined, unplanned.There are too many great moments to mention. Ed shaving his wife's legs, carefully, then his legs getting shaved later on. The murder scene. The Riedenschneider speech, and the shadows of the bars. The UFO's. But the two that resonate most with me have to do with Birdie, played by Scarlett Johanssen before she got all glamorous. The first is when Ed's brought her to a fancy piano teacher. He asks him "How did she do?" and the piano teacher answers:"She seemed like a very nice girl. She plays, monsieur, like a very nice girl. Stinks. Nice girl. However: stinks."It's a crushing moment, and Thornton underplays it beautifully. Later, in the car, Birdie calls him an enthusiast, and it's an assessment both ridiculous and strangely accurate. He is an enthusiast, even if he never betrays any emotion more acute than slight surprise, he is someone who likes things in a quiet, but unwavering way.Or maybe I'm just reading things into him, because above all else, Thornton's Ed is a blank slate, someone everyone projects their own idea upon, like you can see images in clouds, or in the billowing smoke that comes from Ed's permanent cigarette. To his wife he's the reliable dud she married. To her brother he's a pillar of strength and a listening ear. To her lover he's harmless, an innocent. To Birdie he's a strange sort of sugar daddy, to the wonderfully named Creighton Tolliver he's a mark. Most memorably, to Riedenschneider, he's nothing less than "the modern man"."What kind of man are you?" Big Dave asks, repeatedly. What kind of man is he? The kind you can make an endlessly fascinating film about.Next up... a movie which ends memorably, with both main characters saying..."Okay" Originally posted on:As cool as a Fruitstand
]]>Mon, 08 Oct 2007 20:27:00 GMTsarcastigAs cool as a Fruitstand10/8/2007 4:27:00 PMFinally then! Craig was right again.One of the best cinematic experiences I've ever had was watching The Man Who Wasn't There on the big screen, 4 years after it came out, and after two or three viewings on DVD. Roger Deakins' own print was being shown, and the man himself was in attendance. I've never seen black and white more glorious, more crisp but at the same time also oddly warm, and this screening is when my love for this film turned to adoration.Deakins also did a Q&A afterwards. I didn't really understand half of the Q's and three quarters or the A's due to all the technical lingo, but I sat there fascinated anyway because he spoke with such enthusiasm about his craft. He was impressively modest. It wasn't any sort of false humility: he knows he's good at what he does. He clearly sees what he does as a craft though, something you need some talent for but mostly a lot of experience, and there was not an ounce of pretentiousness to detect. I really think he's on the best cinematographers working today, and it's ridiculous that he has yet to win an Oscar (he was nominated 5 times, but never got to take home that statuette).There's much more, of course, than just the cinematography. One of its greatest assets is Billy Bob Thornton as Ed Crane, the barber who rarely speaks except in his voice-over. He's the ultimate noir protagonist: essentially good, well, not evil, but cursed by his one flaw, which ironically enough is ambition.Ambition? You wouldn't say it from the way he flatly says "Me? I don't talk much. I just cut the hair", but there is a spark there. He doesn't want much, but he does want a little bit more. Just a bit of independence, a bit more than just cutting the hair. An escape: something undetermined, unplanned.There are too many great moments to mention. Ed shaving his wife's legs, carefully, then his legs getting shaved later on. The murder scene. The Riedenschneider speech, and the shadows of the bars. The UFO's. But the two that resonate most with me have to do with Birdie, played by Scarlett Johanssen before she got all glamorous. The first is when Ed's brought her to a fancy piano teacher. He asks him "How did she do?" and the piano teacher answers:"She seemed like a very nice girl. She plays, monsieur, like a very nice girl. Stinks. Nice girl. However: stinks."It's a crushing moment, and Thornton underplays it beautifully. Later, in the car, Birdie calls him an enthusiast, and it's an assessment both ridiculous and strangely accurate. He is an enthusiast, even if he never betrays any emotion more acute than slight surprise, he is someone who likes things in a quiet, but unwavering way.Or maybe I'm just reading things into him, because above all else, Thornton's Ed is a blank slate, someone everyone projects their own idea upon, like you can see images in clouds, or in the billowing smoke that comes from Ed's permanent cigarette. To his wife he's the reliable dud she married. To her brother he's a pillar of strength and a listening ear. To her lover he's harmless, an innocent. To Birdie he's a strange sort of sugar daddy, to the wonderfully named Creighton Tolliver he's a mark. Most memorably, to Riedenschneider, he's nothing less than "the modern man"."What kind of man are you?" Big Dave asks, repeatedly. What kind of man is he? The kind you can make an endlessly fascinating film about.Next up... a movie which ends memorably, with both main characters saying..."Okay" Originally posted on:As cool as a Fruitstand Spout Post: Hotel Chevalier http://www.spout.com/blogs/sarcastig/archive/2007/9/28/20638.aspxPost By: sarcastig
Post To: As cool as a Fruitstand
Post Date: 9/28/2007 3:06:00 PM
Body: I'm never quite sure what to think about Wes Anderson. Oh, he's brilliant, especially visually, there's no debating that; unfortunately, he knows it a little too well. Still, when iTunes was being infuriatingly local last night and I was unable to download Hotel Chevalier due to being outside the US, it ruined my evening.I managed to get a version. Low quality, and I believe the beginning has been chopped off (please tell me, my version starts with Jason Schwartzman opening the door of his room), but I was very happy with it nonetheless.It's a strange little movie. It's unmistakably Anderson, from the way it's shot to the small details in the set decoration, and even in the way the two characters talk. It never quite takes off, but I was left wanting more, and that can't be a bad sign, can it? Unusually enough for Anderson, it doesn't feel like the characters' whole world is contained on screen, like all they ever were and will be is here, it feels like they are fully realized characters with interesting stories beyond the screen. They breathe. And that's a welcome change.I'm looking forward to The Darjeeling Limited. The three brothers setup makes me hope it will be more Royal Tenenbaums than Life Aquatic. And to keep me entertained in the meantime, I just ordered Bottle Rocket, which I found clumsily charming the first time around. Originally posted on:As cool as a Fruitstand
]]>Fri, 28 Sep 2007 19:06:00 GMTsarcastigAs cool as a Fruitstand9/28/2007 3:06:00 PMI'm never quite sure what to think about Wes Anderson. Oh, he's brilliant, especially visually, there's no debating that; unfortunately, he knows it a little too well. Still, when iTunes was being infuriatingly local last night and I was unable to download Hotel Chevalier due to being outside the US, it ruined my evening.I managed to get a version. Low quality, and I believe the beginning has been chopped off (please tell me, my version starts with Jason Schwartzman opening the door of his room), but I was very happy with it nonetheless.It's a strange little movie. It's unmistakably Anderson, from the way it's shot to the small details in the set decoration, and even in the way the two characters talk. It never quite takes off, but I was left wanting more, and that can't be a bad sign, can it? Unusually enough for Anderson, it doesn't feel like the characters' whole world is contained on screen, like all they ever were and will be is here, it feels like they are fully realized characters with interesting stories beyond the screen. They breathe. And that's a welcome change.I'm looking forward to The Darjeeling Limited. The three brothers setup makes me hope it will be more Royal Tenenbaums than Life Aquatic. And to keep me entertained in the meantime, I just ordered Bottle Rocket, which I found clumsily charming the first time around. Originally posted on:As cool as a Fruitstand Spout Post: Quick thoughts - Shrek the Third http://www.spout.com/blogs/sarcastig/archive/2007/9/27/20639.aspxPost By: sarcastig
Post To: As cool as a Fruitstand
Post Date: 9/27/2007 8:05:00 AM
Body: The Shrek sequels are surprisingly inoffensive. Yes, they lack the freshness of the original, but whereas with the bloated, convoluted Pirates sequels this bothered me to no end, the Shrek movies keep it simple and short, without any more ambition than entertaining, and in that ambition they succeed, despite a falling lpm ratio. The Shrek-based humor is quite repetitive at this point in particular, but there are lovely little visual jokes - the trees using their branches as a parachute, for instance. Also, the celebrity voices are well-cast, I especially liked that after already using John Cleese in the second movie, they now also added fellow Monty Python alum Eric Idle as a somewhat loony Merlin. The subplot about villains taking back their stories could have been more interesting and fleshed out, but it feels petty to complain about a movie that knows to stay simple, short, and light.Of course I prefer originality, daring, and so on. But for an evening like yesterday, when I was spending the evening with a friend I hadn't spent time with in a while, there could not have been a more appropriate movie. Originally posted on:As cool as a Fruitstand
]]>Thu, 27 Sep 2007 12:05:00 GMTsarcastigAs cool as a Fruitstand9/27/2007 8:05:00 AMThe Shrek sequels are surprisingly inoffensive. Yes, they lack the freshness of the original, but whereas with the bloated, convoluted Pirates sequels this bothered me to no end, the Shrek movies keep it simple and short, without any more ambition than entertaining, and in that ambition they succeed, despite a falling lpm ratio. The Shrek-based humor is quite repetitive at this point in particular, but there are lovely little visual jokes - the trees using their branches as a parachute, for instance. Also, the celebrity voices are well-cast, I especially liked that after already using John Cleese in the second movie, they now also added fellow Monty Python alum Eric Idle as a somewhat loony Merlin. The subplot about villains taking back their stories could have been more interesting and fleshed out, but it feels petty to complain about a movie that knows to stay simple, short, and light.Of course I prefer originality, daring, and so on. But for an evening like yesterday, when I was spending the evening with a friend I hadn't spent time with in a while, there could not have been a more appropriate movie. Originally posted on:As cool as a Fruitstand Spout Post: The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford http://www.spout.com/blogs/sarcastig/archive/2007/9/25/20129.aspxPost By: sarcastig
Post To: As cool as a Fruitstand
Post Date: 9/25/2007 7:48:37 AM
Body: This film's not quite the masterpiece it wants to be, but I liked it, liked it a lot even. It's a western without many of the standard elements: no shoot-outs, here, no chases on horses, no cowboy hats, even, just bowlers. It's almost as much a period drama as a western, in fact. It's a movie I'd sooner recommend to my mother than to my little brother, which you don't expect from a western.I usually hate movies that are so self-serious and solemn, but I found myself entranced by this one, its slow pace and elegiac tone, maybe because it's content not to give any straight answers. We spend a lot of time with Jesse James and Bob Ford, we get the feeling that we know them, but their precise motivation remains opaque. There are a lot of themes here, from hero worship to celebrity culture, but luckily Dominik doesn't try to convey any specific message, and the assassination of the title is left wonderfully ambigious. Some of the symbolism is heavy handed (Jesse playing with and then killing the two snakes comes to mind), but while this bothered me to no end in The Brave One, here it seemed to fit.I know a lot of people dismiss Brad Pitt, and he does tend to pick lighter, easier roles he can just coast through on charisma, but he's perfect as Jesse James. Sure, he falls back on his familiar ticks, opening his mouth and showing his tongue, squinting, but who cares when it works? His Jesse is fascinating and charismatic, but you never forget that he is also dangerous and unpredictable.And then, Casey Affleck. I agree his is the knock-out performance here, keeping his Robert Ford exactly on the fine line between repulsive, sympathetic, and pathetic. He gives you the willies, as another character says at some point, but at the same time you want to put your arms around his protectively and yell out "he's just a kid!". Affleck is 32, but he is totally believable as a gawky 19 year old still finding himself (and imdb tells me he studied physics, which raises him a few points more in my esteem). I could go on about the supporting cast too, but I'll just point out that Garett Dillahunt from Deadwood and John from Cincinnati is great as well.Why not a masterpiece, then? Well, it's a pacing thing, I think. The coda feels too short, and other parts feel a little uneven. I think the elliptic storytelling works, but it just doesn't feel quite right. I also think the narration had some problems: I had a hard time getting used to it, and it is sometimes a little too explicit about what the characters are feeling. I'm not against it, and I believe the sectioning of the story into "chapters" by the narration was a good idea, but it feels like it could have used a little more tweaking.I know, this film has been tweaked with forever already, but just like in poetry you need the exact right word in the exact right place, a film can only be a masterpiece if every cut or shot feels like it couldn't possibly have been any different, and this film still feels too fluid for that, too wavering. Too many threads are left dangling.I do think it's a timeless movie, in the sense that it feels detached from any time and place, feels like it's on some different place, and I can imagine returning to it in ten years, in twenty, if only for some gorgeous images - like Jesse waiting for a train and disappearing in the fog - and the absolutely beautiful Nick Cave soundtrack. Originally posted on:
]]>Tue, 25 Sep 2007 11:48:37 GMTsarcastigAs cool as a Fruitstand9/25/2007 7:48:37 AMThis film's not quite the masterpiece it wants to be, but I liked it, liked it a lot even. It's a western without many of the standard elements: no shoot-outs, here, no chases on horses, no cowboy hats, even, just bowlers. It's almost as much a period drama as a western, in fact. It's a movie I'd sooner recommend to my mother than to my little brother, which you don't expect from a western.I usually hate movies that are so self-serious and solemn, but I found myself entranced by this one, its slow pace and elegiac tone, maybe because it's content not to give any straight answers. We spend a lot of time with Jesse James and Bob Ford, we get the feeling that we know them, but their precise motivation remains opaque. There are a lot of themes here, from hero worship to celebrity culture, but luckily Dominik doesn't try to convey any specific message, and the assassination of the title is left wonderfully ambigious. Some of the symbolism is heavy handed (Jesse playing with and then killing the two snakes comes to mind), but while this bothered me to no end in The Brave One, here it seemed to fit.I know a lot of people dismiss Brad Pitt, and he does tend to pick lighter, easier roles he can just coast through on charisma, but he's perfect as Jesse James. Sure, he falls back on his familiar ticks, opening his mouth and showing his tongue, squinting, but who cares when it works? His Jesse is fascinating and charismatic, but you never forget that he is also dangerous and unpredictable.And then, Casey Affleck. I agree his is the knock-out performance here, keeping his Robert Ford exactly on the fine line between repulsive, sympathetic, and pathetic. He gives you the willies, as another character says at some point, but at the same time you want to put your arms around his protectively and yell out "he's just a kid!". Affleck is 32, but he is totally believable as a gawky 19 year old still finding himself (and imdb tells me he studied physics, which raises him a few points more in my esteem). I could go on about the supporting cast too, but I'll just point out that Garett Dillahunt from Deadwood and John from Cincinnati is great as well.Why not a masterpiece, then? Well, it's a pacing thing, I think. The coda feels too short, and other parts feel a little uneven. I think the elliptic storytelling works, but it just doesn't feel quite right. I also think the narration had some problems: I had a hard time getting used to it, and it is sometimes a little too explicit about what the characters are feeling. I'm not against it, and I believe the sectioning of the story into "chapters" by the narration was a good idea, but it feels like it could have used a little more tweaking.I know, this film has been tweaked with forever already, but just like in poetry you need the exact right word in the exact right place, a film can only be a masterpiece if every cut or shot feels like it couldn't possibly have been any different, and this film still feels too fluid for that, too wavering. Too many threads are left dangling.I do think it's a timeless movie, in the sense that it feels detached from any time and place, feels like it's on some different place, and I can imagine returning to it in ten years, in twenty, if only for some gorgeous images - like Jesse waiting for a train and disappearing in the fog - and the absolutely beautiful Nick Cave soundtrack. Originally posted on: Spout Post: Buñuel blog-a-thon: Belle de Jour http://www.spout.com/blogs/sarcastig/archive/2007/9/25/20128.aspxPost By: sarcastig
Post To: As cool as a Fruitstand
Post Date: 9/25/2007 7:48:37 AM
Body: And now, for my contribution to Flickhead's Buñuel-a-thon:The title "Belle de Jour" is a strange one, and can be interpreted in many ways. The official explanation is that a "belle de jour" is a day lily, a flower that blooms only during the day, but I always associate "Belle de jour" almost automatically with its complement, 'Laide de Nuit'. The title can be translated as "beauty of the day", but also as "beautiful by day", and thus maybe implicitly ugly by night?The interesting thing is that Séverine is a prostitute during the day, a well-mannered (though apparently frigid) BCBG woman during the night. According to the rules of society, the former is ugly, the latter "beautiful", but if you interpret the name as I do, could it not be the opposite? Might it be that Buñuel is trying to say that's it's not her work in the brothel that's wrong, her masochistic desires, but just her repression of those desires, her lies and pretense?Buñuel invites us to be a voyeur in this film, to watch the pristine Catherine Deneuve get defiled, and we enjoy it. Are even aroused by it to some extent. The brilliance of the film, in my opinion, is that he never tells us how to feel, not just about Séverine, but also about our own feelings. I like to think that he's on her side, that all he blames her for is her shame, but it's equally possible to look at the film as a cautionary tale about what happens when you don't restrain yourself.I think the first interpretation is more plausible, though. See, he does stack the deck a little. Just watch the look on her face. It's almost impossible not to envy her in that moment.Nobody knew how to give the finger to the repressed bourgeoisie quite like Buñuel. And even 40 years later, few films have dared to be this sexy and provocative.For a more straight-up review, I've recently written one here. In Dutch, alas. So only for the privileged few ;-) Originally posted on:
]]>Tue, 25 Sep 2007 11:48:37 GMTsarcastigAs cool as a Fruitstand9/25/2007 7:48:37 AMAnd now, for my contribution to Flickhead's Buñuel-a-thon:The title "Belle de Jour" is a strange one, and can be interpreted in many ways. The official explanation is that a "belle de jour" is a day lily, a flower that blooms only during the day, but I always associate "Belle de jour" almost automatically with its complement, 'Laide de Nuit'. The title can be translated as "beauty of the day", but also as "beautiful by day", and thus maybe implicitly ugly by night?The interesting thing is that Séverine is a prostitute during the day, a well-mannered (though apparently frigid) BCBG woman during the night. According to the rules of society, the former is ugly, the latter "beautiful", but if you interpret the name as I do, could it not be the opposite? Might it be that Buñuel is trying to say that's it's not her work in the brothel that's wrong, her masochistic desires, but just her repression of those desires, her lies and pretense?Buñuel invites us to be a voyeur in this film, to watch the pristine Catherine Deneuve get defiled, and we enjoy it. Are even aroused by it to some extent. The brilliance of the film, in my opinion, is that he never tells us how to feel, not just about Séverine, but also about our own feelings. I like to think that he's on her side, that all he blames her for is her shame, but it's equally possible to look at the film as a cautionary tale about what happens when you don't restrain yourself.I think the first interpretation is more plausible, though. See, he does stack the deck a little. Just watch the look on her face. It's almost impossible not to envy her in that moment.Nobody knew how to give the finger to the repressed bourgeoisie quite like Buñuel. And even 40 years later, few films have dared to be this sexy and provocative.For a more straight-up review, I've recently written one here. In Dutch, alas. So only for the privileged few ;-) Originally posted on: Spout Post: The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford http://www.spout.com/blogs/sarcastig/archive/2007/9/25/20640.aspxPost By: sarcastig
Post To: As cool as a Fruitstand
Post Date: 9/25/2007 5:54:00 AM
Body: This film's not quite the masterpiece it wants to be, but I liked it, liked it a lot even. It's a western without many of the standard elements: no shoot-outs, here, no chases on horses, no cowboy hats, even, just bowlers. It's almost as much a period drama as a western, in fact. It's a movie I'd sooner recommend to my mother than to my little brother, which you don't expect from a western.I usually hate movies that are so self-serious and solemn, but I found myself entranced by this one, its slow pace and elegiac tone, maybe because it's content not to give any straight answers. We spend a lot of time with Jesse James and Bob Ford, we get the feeling that we know them, but their precise motivation remains opaque. There are a lot of themes here, from hero worship to celebrity culture, but luckily Dominik doesn't try to convey any specific message, and the assassination of the title is left wonderfully ambigious. Some of the symbolism is heavy handed (Jesse playing with and then killing the two snakes comes to mind), but while this bothered me to no end in The Brave One, here it seemed to fit.I know a lot of people dismiss Brad Pitt, and he does tend to pick lighter, easier roles he can just coast through on charisma, but he's perfect as Jesse James. Sure, he falls back on his familiar ticks, opening his mouth and showing his tongue, squinting, but who cares when it works? His Jesse is fascinating and charismatic, but you never forget that he is also dangerous and unpredictable.And then, Casey Affleck. I agree his is the knock-out performance here, keeping his Robert Ford exactly on the fine line between repulsive, sympathetic, and pathetic. He gives you the willies, as another character says at some point, but at the same time you want to put your arms around his protectively and yell out "he's just a kid!". Affleck is 32, but he is totally believable as a gawky 19 year old still finding himself (and imdb tells me he studied physics, which raises him a few points more in my esteem). I could go on about the supporting cast too, but I'll just point out that Garett Dillahunt from Deadwood and John from Cincinnati is great as well.Why not a masterpiece, then? Well, it's a pacing thing, I think. The coda feels too short, and other parts feel a little uneven. I think the elliptic storytelling works, but it just doesn't feel quite right. I also think the narration had some problems: I had a hard time getting used to it, and it is sometimes a little too explicit about what the characters are feeling. I'm not against it, and I believe the sectioning of the story into "chapters" by the narration was a good idea, but it feels like it could have used a little more tweaking.I know, this film has been tweaked with forever already, but just like in poetry you need the exact right word in the exact right place, a film can only be a masterpiece if every cut or shot feels like it couldn't possibly have been any different, and this film still feels too fluid for that, too wavering. Too many threads are left dangling.I do think it's a timeless movie, in the sense that it feels detached from any time and place, feels like it's on some different place, and I can imagine returning to it in ten years, in twenty, if only for some gorgeous images - like Jesse waiting for a train and disappearing in the fog - and the absolutely beautiful Nick Cave soundtrack. Originally posted on:As cool as a Fruitstand
]]>Tue, 25 Sep 2007 09:54:00 GMTsarcastigAs cool as a Fruitstand9/25/2007 5:54:00 AMThis film's not quite the masterpiece it wants to be, but I liked it, liked it a lot even. It's a western without many of the standard elements: no shoot-outs, here, no chases on horses, no cowboy hats, even, just bowlers. It's almost as much a period drama as a western, in fact. It's a movie I'd sooner recommend to my mother than to my little brother, which you don't expect from a western.I usually hate movies that are so self-serious and solemn, but I found myself entranced by this one, its slow pace and elegiac tone, maybe because it's content not to give any straight answers. We spend a lot of time with Jesse James and Bob Ford, we get the feeling that we know them, but their precise motivation remains opaque. There are a lot of themes here, from hero worship to celebrity culture, but luckily Dominik doesn't try to convey any specific message, and the assassination of the title is left wonderfully ambigious. Some of the symbolism is heavy handed (Jesse playing with and then killing the two snakes comes to mind), but while this bothered me to no end in The Brave One, here it seemed to fit.I know a lot of people dismiss Brad Pitt, and he does tend to pick lighter, easier roles he can just coast through on charisma, but he's perfect as Jesse James. Sure, he falls back on his familiar ticks, opening his mouth and showing his tongue, squinting, but who cares when it works? His Jesse is fascinating and charismatic, but you never forget that he is also dangerous and unpredictable.And then, Casey Affleck. I agree his is the knock-out performance here, keeping his Robert Ford exactly on the fine line between repulsive, sympathetic, and pathetic. He gives you the willies, as another character says at some point, but at the same time you want to put your arms around his protectively and yell out "he's just a kid!". Affleck is 32, but he is totally believable as a gawky 19 year old still finding himself (and imdb tells me he studied physics, which raises him a few points more in my esteem). I could go on about the supporting cast too, but I'll just point out that Garett Dillahunt from Deadwood and John from Cincinnati is great as well.Why not a masterpiece, then? Well, it's a pacing thing, I think. The coda feels too short, and other parts feel a little uneven. I think the elliptic storytelling works, but it just doesn't feel quite right. I also think the narration had some problems: I had a hard time getting used to it, and it is sometimes a little too explicit about what the characters are feeling. I'm not against it, and I believe the sectioning of the story into "chapters" by the narration was a good idea, but it feels like it could have used a little more tweaking.I know, this film has been tweaked with forever already, but just like in poetry you need the exact right word in the exact right place, a film can only be a masterpiece if every cut or shot feels like it couldn't possibly have been any different, and this film still feels too fluid for that, too wavering. Too many threads are left dangling.I do think it's a timeless movie, in the sense that it feels detached from any time and place, feels like it's on some different place, and I can imagine returning to it in ten years, in twenty, if only for some gorgeous images - like Jesse waiting for a train and disappearing in the fog - and the absolutely beautiful Nick Cave soundtrack. Originally posted on:As cool as a Fruitstand Spout Post: Buñuel blog-a-thon: Belle de Jour http://www.spout.com/blogs/sarcastig/archive/2007/9/24/20641.aspxPost By: sarcastig
Post To: As cool as a Fruitstand
Post Date: 9/24/2007 1:36:00 PM
Body: And now, for my contribution to Flickhead's Buñuel-a-thon:The title "Belle de Jour" is a strange one, and can be interpreted in many ways. The official explanation is that a "belle de jour" is a day lily, a flower that blooms only during the day, but I always associate "Belle de jour" almost automatically with its complement, 'Laide de Nuit'. The title can be translated as "beauty of the day", but also as "beautiful by day", and thus maybe implicitly ugly by night?The interesting thing is that Séverine is a prostitute during the day, a well-mannered (though apparently frigid) BCBG woman during the night. According to the rules of society, the former is ugly, the latter "beautiful", but if you interpret the name as I do, could it not be the opposite? Might it be that Buñuel is trying to say that's it's not her work in the brothel that's wrong, her masochistic desires, but just her repression of those desires, her lies and pretense?Buñuel invites us to be a voyeur in this film, to watch the pristine Catherine Deneuve get defiled, and we enjoy it. Are even aroused by it to some extent. The brilliance of the film, in my opinion, is that he never tells us how to feel, not just about Séverine, but also about our own feelings. I like to think that he's on her side, that all he blames her for is her shame, but it's equally possible to look at the film as a cautionary tale about what happens when you don't restrain yourself.I think the first interpretation is more plausible, though. See, he does stack the deck a little. Just watch the look on her face. It's almost impossible not to envy her in that moment.Nobody knew how to give the finger to the repressed bourgeoisie quite like Buñuel. And even 40 years later, few films have dared to be this sexy and provocative.For a more straight-up review, I've recently written one here. In Dutch, alas. So only for the privileged few ;-) Originally posted on:As cool as a Fruitstand
]]>Mon, 24 Sep 2007 17:36:00 GMTsarcastigAs cool as a Fruitstand9/24/2007 1:36:00 PMAnd now, for my contribution to Flickhead's Buñuel-a-thon:The title "Belle de Jour" is a strange one, and can be interpreted in many ways. The official explanation is that a "belle de jour" is a day lily, a flower that blooms only during the day, but I always associate "Belle de jour" almost automatically with its complement, 'Laide de Nuit'. The title can be translated as "beauty of the day", but also as "beautiful by day", and thus maybe implicitly ugly by night?The interesting thing is that Séverine is a prostitute during the day, a well-mannered (though apparently frigid) BCBG woman during the night. According to the rules of society, the former is ugly, the latter "beautiful", but if you interpret the name as I do, could it not be the opposite? Might it be that Buñuel is trying to say that's it's not her work in the brothel that's wrong, her masochistic desires, but just her repression of those desires, her lies and pretense?Buñuel invites us to be a voyeur in this film, to watch the pristine Catherine Deneuve get defiled, and we enjoy it. Are even aroused by it to some extent. The brilliance of the film, in my opinion, is that he never tells us how to feel, not just about Séverine, but also about our own feelings. I like to think that he's on her side, that all he blames her for is her shame, but it's equally possible to look at the film as a cautionary tale about what happens when you don't restrain yourself.I think the first interpretation is more plausible, though. See, he does stack the deck a little. Just watch the look on her face. It's almost impossible not to envy her in that moment.Nobody knew how to give the finger to the repressed bourgeoisie quite like Buñuel. And even 40 years later, few films have dared to be this sexy and provocative.For a more straight-up review, I've recently written one here. In Dutch, alas. So only for the privileged few ;-) Originally posted on:As cool as a Fruitstand Spout Post: They Drive by Night http://www.spout.com/blogs/sarcastig/archive/2007/9/24/20103.aspxPost By: sarcastig
Post To: As cool as a Fruitstand
Post Date: 9/24/2007 4:31:22 AM
Body: My 200th post, already, or so blogger tells me. Not taking this month into account, I'm kinda glad with the posting rhythm I have now, and the tone. Now, on to business.They Drive by Night really has no right to work as well as it does. It's a weird genre-blend, part social commentary/underdog story, part noir. The plot meanders: first it's about these truckers and their hard life, then it's about how they plan to make it, then about the danger of the road, then all of a sudden it's a noir with a murder and an attempted frame-up. A pre-High Sierra Bogie is one of the two main characters in the first half, then more or less ignored, or at least neglected, afterwards.Still, it works surprisingly well together. Part of it is because the characters are consistent through the tonal shifts. For instance, Ann Sheridan's Cassie might give in at some point, and go from hard-to-get to loving and trusting fiancee, but she never becomes so soft that we don't recognize her. Part of it is also simply that the dialogue is so good, sharp and witty, and it rolls off everybody's tongue. The cast, including supporting players, is also good, and look for our old pal Shapely in the small role of Irish.A classic this is not, by any stretch. But just as it's possible to enjoy an unremarkable, yet well-made and entertaining film made today, it's possible to enjoy a film like that made 67 years ago. Originally posted on:
]]>Mon, 24 Sep 2007 08:31:22 GMTsarcastigAs cool as a Fruitstand9/24/2007 4:31:22 AMMy 200th post, already, or so blogger tells me. Not taking this month into account, I'm kinda glad with the posting rhythm I have now, and the tone. Now, on to business.They Drive by Night really has no right to work as well as it does. It's a weird genre-blend, part social commentary/underdog story, part noir. The plot meanders: first it's about these truckers and their hard life, then it's about how they plan to make it, then about the danger of the road, then all of a sudden it's a noir with a murder and an attempted frame-up. A pre-High Sierra Bogie is one of the two main characters in the first half, then more or less ignored, or at least neglected, afterwards.Still, it works surprisingly well together. Part of it is because the characters are consistent through the tonal shifts. For instance, Ann Sheridan's Cassie might give in at some point, and go from hard-to-get to loving and trusting fiancee, but she never becomes so soft that we don't recognize her. Part of it is also simply that the dialogue is so good, sharp and witty, and it rolls off everybody's tongue. The cast, including supporting players, is also good, and look for our old pal Shapely in the small role of Irish.A classic this is not, by any stretch. But just as it's possible to enjoy an unremarkable, yet well-made and entertaining film made today, it's possible to enjoy a film like that made 67 years ago. Originally posted on: Spout Post: Top 50 - #7 - The Third Man http://www.spout.com/blogs/sarcastig/archive/2007/9/23/20084.aspxPost By: sarcastig
Post To: As cool as a Fruitstand
Post Date: 9/23/2007 2:08:07 PM
Body: Oh, do I love the Third Man's crooked frames, and the grin on Orson Welles' face when light is finally shed upon him. Do I love Joseph Cotton's sad, drunk Holly Martins, who despite his tough guy exterior really is just a naive romantic at heart. Do I love Valli's wistful looks and Vienna's corrupted, crumbling ruins.Did I hum Anton Karas' zither tunes all night after seeing this film again last Friday? Yes, indeed I did.There's just so much here. Though the chase through the sewers is a little repetitive and long when seen for the n'th time, the lighting is still amazing, and that shot of Harry Lime's fingers through the grate? Fantastic. The ferris wheel scene is perfect, full of tension and then, of course, that speech. And let's, of course, not forget the final shot: Valli walks towards the camera, towards Holly, for what seems like an eternity, and then, without even a glance, walks out of a the frame. Holly lights a cigarette. Throws away the match. The End.I won't write too much here as my next VersPers piece will be about this movie, but still: if you haven't seen it...what are you waiting for?Next up: after a movie about the third man, a movie about three men.Incidentally: if one of these "next-up" things makes you want to take a guess, feel free to do so in the comments. No prizes will be awarded, but it always nice to be right, right? Also, check out the link list -->And now, with due thanks to the Shamus Originally posted on:
]]>Sun, 23 Sep 2007 18:08:07 GMTsarcastigAs cool as a Fruitstand9/23/2007 2:08:07 PMOh, do I love the Third Man's crooked frames, and the grin on Orson Welles' face when light is finally shed upon him. Do I love Joseph Cotton's sad, drunk Holly Martins, who despite his tough guy exterior really is just a naive romantic at heart. Do I love Valli's wistful looks and Vienna's corrupted, crumbling ruins.Did I hum Anton Karas' zither tunes all night after seeing this film again last Friday? Yes, indeed I did.There's just so much here. Though the chase through the sewers is a little repetitive and long when seen for the n'th time, the lighting is still amazing, and that shot of Harry Lime's fingers through the grate? Fantastic. The ferris wheel scene is perfect, full of tension and then, of course, that speech. And let's, of course, not forget the final shot: Valli walks towards the camera, towards Holly, for what seems like an eternity, and then, without even a glance, walks out of a the frame. Holly lights a cigarette. Throws away the match. The End.I won't write too much here as my next VersPers piece will be about this movie, but still: if you haven't seen it...what are you waiting for?Next up: after a movie about the third man, a movie about three men.Incidentally: if one of these "next-up" things makes you want to take a guess, feel free to do so in the comments. No prizes will be awarded, but it always nice to be right, right? Also, check out the link list -->And now, with due thanks to the Shamus Originally posted on: Spout Member:The_MOW - Mickey Micklon http://www.spout.com/members/148616/default.aspx Identity: The_MOW
Name: Mickey Micklon
Interests: movies, sci-fi, professional wrestling
Occupation: Unemployed
Location: Salem, NH
Films listed: 369
Number of lists: 4
Number of groups: 2
Blog posts: 372
Blog post views: 11337
Number of times tagged: 25
Member since: 4/4/2009
Last login: 10/13/2009
]]>Sun, 30 Aug 2009 04:00:00 GMTThe_MOWMickey Micklon369Uberlister (>100)Sat, 04 Apr 2009 11:50:30 GMTMember Spout Member:horror http://www.spout.com/members/144661/default.aspx Identity: horror
Films listed: 1
Number of lists: 4
Member since: 1/17/2009
Last login: 1/17/2009
]]>Sun, 30 Aug 2009 04:00:00 GMThorror1Beginner (<10)Sat, 17 Jan 2009 10:27:41 GMTMember Spout Member:butterknife http://www.spout.com/members/127080/default.aspx Identity: butterknife
Films listed: 1
Number of lists: 4
Blog posts: 1
Member since: 4/2/2008
Last login: 4/2/2008
]]>Sun, 30 Aug 2009 04:00:00 GMTbutterknife1Beginner (<10)Wed, 02 Apr 2008 03:18:37 GMTMember Spout Member:rnt2630 http://www.spout.com/members/95208/default.aspx Identity: rnt2630
Number of lists: 4
Member since: 9/13/2007
Last login: 9/13/2007
]]>Sun, 30 Aug 2009 04:00:00 GMTrnt26300Beginner (<10)Thu, 13 Sep 2007 18:16:00 GMTMember Spout Member:dsalaski http://www.spout.com/members/94482/default.aspx Identity: dsalaski
Number of lists: 4
Member since: 9/10/2007
Last login: 9/10/2007
]]>Sun, 30 Aug 2009 04:00:00 GMTdsalaski0Beginner (<10)Mon, 10 Sep 2007 16:47:53 GMTMember Spout Member:jennkp http://www.spout.com/members/94443/default.aspx Identity: jennkp
Number of lists: 4
Member since: 9/10/2007
Last login: 9/10/2007
]]>Sun, 30 Aug 2009 04:00:00 GMTjennkp0Beginner (<10)Mon, 10 Sep 2007 13:45:31 GMTMember Spout Member:Don0262 http://www.spout.com/members/94195/default.aspx Identity: Don0262
Films listed: 2
Number of lists: 4
Member since: 9/9/2007
Last login: 9/9/2007
]]>Sun, 30 Aug 2009 04:00:00 GMTDon02622Beginner (<10)Sun, 09 Sep 2007 15:33:14 GMTMember Spout Member:martinluthar http://www.spout.com/members/93901/default.aspx Identity: martinluthar
Number of lists: 4
Member since: 9/8/2007
Last login: 9/8/2007
]]>Sun, 30 Aug 2009 04:00:00 GMTmartinluthar0Beginner (<10)Sat, 08 Sep 2007 15:58:58 GMTMember Spout Member:clwoolfe http://www.spout.com/members/93885/default.aspx Identity: clwoolfe
Number of lists: 4
Member since: 9/8/2007
Last login: 9/8/2007
]]>Sun, 30 Aug 2009 04:00:00 GMTclwoolfe0Beginner (<10)Sat, 08 Sep 2007 15:09:50 GMTMember Spout Member:XtreamDenny http://www.spout.com/members/93661/default.aspx Identity: XtreamDenny
Number of lists: 4
Member since: 9/7/2007
Last login: 9/7/2007
]]>Sun, 30 Aug 2009 04:00:00 GMTXtreamDenny0Beginner (<10)Fri, 07 Sep 2007 18:49:41 GMTMember Spout Member:bofo http://www.spout.com/members/93627/default.aspx Identity: bofo
Number of lists: 4
Member since: 9/7/2007
Last login: 9/7/2007
]]>Sun, 30 Aug 2009 04:00:00 GMTbofo0Beginner (<10)Fri, 07 Sep 2007 16:57:17 GMTMember Spout Member:seanjoneswrexham http://www.spout.com/members/93570/default.aspx Identity: seanjoneswrexham
Number of lists: 4
Member since: 9/7/2007
Last login: 9/7/2007
]]>Sun, 30 Aug 2009 04:00:00 GMTseanjoneswrexham0Beginner (<10)Fri, 07 Sep 2007 14:31:57 GMTMember Spout Member:nny921 http://www.spout.com/members/92277/default.aspx Identity: nny921
Number of lists: 4
Number of groups: 2
Member since: 9/3/2007
Last login: 11/20/2008
]]>Sun, 30 Aug 2009 04:00:00 GMTnny9210Beginner (<10)Mon, 03 Sep 2007 14:27:22 GMTMember Spout Member:mr_lol http://www.spout.com/members/92275/default.aspx Identity: mr_lol
Number of lists: 4
Member since: 9/3/2007
Last login: 9/3/2007
]]>Sun, 30 Aug 2009 04:00:00 GMTmr_lol0Beginner (<10)Mon, 03 Sep 2007 14:25:57 GMTMember Spout Member:fire1311 http://www.spout.com/members/91742/default.aspx Identity: fire1311
Number of lists: 4
Member since: 9/1/2007
Last login: 9/1/2007
]]>Sun, 30 Aug 2009 04:00:00 GMTfire13110Beginner (<10)Sat, 01 Sep 2007 21:48:24 GMTMember Spout Member:Argueta http://www.spout.com/members/91469/default.aspx Identity: Argueta
Number of lists: 4
Member since: 8/31/2007
Last login: 8/31/2007
]]>Sun, 30 Aug 2009 04:00:00 GMTArgueta0Beginner (<10)Fri, 31 Aug 2007 20:52:15 GMTMember Film:Funny Games http://www.spout.com/films/Funny_Games/288707/default.aspx Title: Funny Games
Year: 2007
Director: Michael Haneke
Times Tagged: 27
Number of Lists: 24
Number of blog posts: 14
Number of discussion threads: 8
SpoutRating: 3
]]>Mon, 31 Aug 2009 12:47:00 GMTFunny Games2007Michael Haneke27Tag Target (>10)241483http://www.spout.com/ProductImages/s288707.jpghttp://www.spout.com/films/Funny_Games/288707/default.aspxFilm Film:The Dark Knight http://www.spout.com/films/The_Dark_Knight/288704/default.aspx Title: The Dark Knight
Year: 2008
Director: Christopher Nolan
Times Tagged: 149
Number of Lists: 98
Number of blog posts: 156
Number of discussion threads: 55
SpoutRating: 4
]]>Sun, 30 Aug 2009 23:13:34 GMTThe Dark Knight2008Christopher Nolan149Tag Target (>10)98156554http://www.spout.com/ProductImages/s288704.jpghttp://www.spout.com/films/The_Dark_Knight/288704/default.aspxFilm Film:H2 http://www.spout.com/films/H2/397884/default.aspx Title: H2
Year: 2009
Director: Rob Zombie
Number of Lists: 1
Number of blog posts: 1
SpoutRating: 1
]]>Sun, 30 Aug 2009 08:45:58 GMTH22009Rob Zombie111http://www.spout.com/ProductImages/s397884.jpghttp://www.spout.com/films/H2/397884/default.aspxFilm Film:Eleanor: First Lady of the World http://www.spout.com/films/Eleanor_First_Lady_of_the_World/10331/default.aspx Title: Eleanor: First Lady of the World
Year: 1982
Director: John Erman
Number of blog posts: 1
]]>Sun, 30 Aug 2009 02:47:51 GMTEleanor: First Lady of the World1982John Erman1http://www.spout.com/images/no_image.jpghttp://www.spout.com/films/Eleanor_First_Lady_of_the_World/10331/default.aspxFilm Film:Black Test Car http://www.spout.com/films/Black_Test_Car/328181/default.aspx Title: Black Test Car
Year: 1962
Number of Lists: 2
SpoutRating: 4
]]>Sat, 29 Aug 2009 23:01:54 GMTBlack Test Car196224http://www.spout.com/ProductImages/u37747stl5z.jpghttp://www.spout.com/films/Black_Test_Car/328181/default.aspxFilm Film:Dumpster Baby http://www.spout.com/films/Dumpster_Baby/273527/default.aspx Title: Dumpster Baby
Director: James Bickert
Number of Lists: 1
]]>Sat, 29 Aug 2009 15:53:10 GMTDumpster BabyJames Bickert1http://www.spout.com/ProductImages/t76920jjhow.jpghttp://www.spout.com/films/Dumpster_Baby/273527/default.aspxFilm Film:Rick http://www.spout.com/films/Rick/235722/default.aspx Title: Rick
Year: 2002
Director: Curtiss Clayton
Times Tagged: 1
Number of Lists: 1
SpoutRating: 2
]]>Sat, 29 Aug 2009 14:32:48 GMTRick2002Curtiss Clayton1Slightly Tagged (1-5)12http://www.spout.com/ProductImages/t51978e8qnf.jpghttp://www.spout.com/films/Rick/235722/default.aspxFilm Film:Speed Racer http://www.spout.com/films/Speed_Racer/297765/default.aspx Title: Speed Racer
Year: 2008
Director: Andy Wachowski, Larry Wachowski
Times Tagged: 90
Number of Lists: 16
Number of blog posts: 41
Number of discussion threads: 16
SpoutRating: 3
]]>Sat, 29 Aug 2009 14:21:45 GMTSpeed Racer2008Andy Wachowski, Larry Wachowski90Tag Target (>10)1641163http://www.spout.com/ProductImages/s297765.jpghttp://www.spout.com/films/Speed_Racer/297765/default.aspxFilm Film:Speed Racer [Anime Series] http://www.spout.com/films/Speed_Racer_Anime_Series/32330/default.aspx Title: Speed Racer [Anime Series]
Year: 1967
Number of Lists: 1
Number of blog posts: 1
Number of discussion threads: 1
SpoutRating: 3
]]>Sat, 29 Aug 2009 14:20:43 GMTSpeed Racer [Anime Series]19671113http://www.spout.com/images/no_image.jpghttp://www.spout.com/films/Speed_Racer_Anime_Series/32330/default.aspxFilm Film:The Raven http://www.spout.com/films/The_Raven/317289/default.aspx Title: The Raven
Year: 2007
Director: Ulli Lommel
Number of blog posts: 2
SpoutRating: 1
]]>Sat, 29 Aug 2009 04:13:53 GMTThe Raven2007Ulli Lommel21http://www.spout.com/ProductImages/u08974fjkcg.jpghttp://www.spout.com/films/The_Raven/317289/default.aspxFilm Film:The Ballad of the Sad Cafe http://www.spout.com/films/The_Ballad_of_the_Sad_Cafe/2239/default.aspx Title: The Ballad of the Sad Cafe
Year: 1991
Director: Simon Callow
Number of blog posts: 2
SpoutRating: 2
]]>Fri, 28 Aug 2009 19:25:24 GMTThe Ballad of the Sad Cafe1991Simon Callow22http://www.spout.com/ProductImages/t54643em1b1.jpghttp://www.spout.com/films/The_Ballad_of_the_Sad_Cafe/2239/default.aspxFilm Film:New York, New York http://www.spout.com/films/New_York_New_York/24524/default.aspx Title: New York, New York
Year: 1977
Director: Martin Scorsese
Times Tagged: 23
Number of Lists: 12
Number of blog posts: 57
Number of discussion threads: 2
SpoutRating: 2
]]>Fri, 28 Aug 2009 19:22:40 GMTNew York, New York1977Martin Scorsese23Tag Target (>10)125722http://www.spout.com/ProductImages/u47828gvtpe.jpghttp://www.spout.com/films/New_York_New_York/24524/default.aspxFilm Film:St. Nick http://www.spout.com/films/St_Nick/402616/default.aspx Title: St. Nick
Year: 2009
Director: David Lowery
Times Tagged: 3
Number of Lists: 2
Number of blog posts: 5
SpoutRating: 5
]]>Fri, 28 Aug 2009 15:01:06 GMTSt. Nick2009David Lowery3Slightly Tagged (1-5)255http://www.spout.com/ProductImages/s402616.jpghttp://www.spout.com/films/St_Nick/402616/default.aspxFilm Film:We Are the Strange http://www.spout.com/films/We_Are_the_Strange/314016/default.aspx Title: We Are the Strange
Year: 2007
Director: M dot Strange
Number of Lists: 3
Number of blog posts: 3
SpoutRating: 4
]]>Fri, 28 Aug 2009 14:25:52 GMTWe Are the Strange2007M dot Strange334http://www.spout.com/ProductImages/s314016.jpghttp://www.spout.com/films/We_Are_the_Strange/314016/default.aspxFilm Film:The Sadist http://www.spout.com/films/The_Sadist/29811/default.aspx Title: The Sadist
Year: 1963
Director: James Landis
Number of Lists: 4
SpoutRating: 3
]]>Fri, 28 Aug 2009 14:08:29 GMTThe Sadist1963James Landis43http://www.spout.com/ProductImages/t27402rl1sl.jpghttp://www.spout.com/films/The_Sadist/29811/default.aspxFilm Film:The Alligator People http://www.spout.com/films/The_Alligator_People/50507/default.aspx Title: The Alligator People
Year: 1959
Director: Roy Del Ruth
Number of Lists: 2
Number of blog posts: 1
SpoutRating: 2
]]>Fri, 28 Aug 2009 14:04:19 GMTThe Alligator People1959Roy Del Ruth212http://www.spout.com/ProductImages/t46806zj8ua.jpghttp://www.spout.com/films/The_Alligator_People/50507/default.aspxFilm