Grex Cinema Conference

Item 37: The Spring 2000 Movie Item

Entered by md on Tue Mar 21 14:01:28 2000:

44 new of 326 responses total.


#283 of 326 by goose on Sun Jun 18 05:36:34 2000:

which will be bought my Time-Warner.


#284 of 326 by other on Sun Jun 18 05:37:58 2000:

which will be acquired by the new Seagram's/SBC Communications partnership


#285 of 326 by mcnally on Sun Jun 18 06:58:32 2000:

  Saw tonight:  

    "Rules of Engagement" -- (C+)  No surprises in this military coutroom
    drama, except perhaps the performances phoned in by Tommy Lee Jones
    and Samuel L. Jackson, both of whom can do better.  I won't go off on
    another implausibility rant, but I will say that sensible plotting is
    a lot more important to a movie that's not going to have any car chases
    and the writers would have done well to have considered that.  I will
    also admit that I'm looking forward to the time, not long from now,
    when military dramas set in the present day will no longer be able to
    feature characters who suffer from Vietnam flashbacks..

    "Mission to Mars"  -- (unratable)   I may have thought that "Rules of
    Engagement" didn't feature the two leads' best performances, but I
    wouldn't have said, either, that they were their worst.  There's nothing
    stopping me from saying that about "Mission to Mars", though.  Terrible
    script, numbing performances, and a monstrously intrusive and annoying
    sountrack are the substantial downsides here.  Unintended humor is the
    only upside, but things were so laughable that I nevertheless managed
    to enjoy the movie at least enough not to be bitter about two hours of
    my life that are now gone forever..


  Has anyone seen "Chicken Run" yet?


#286 of 326 by jmsaul on Sun Jun 18 14:45:50 2000:

Nope, but I've seen the HBO special on the making of it.  Worth seeing.  They
show how they animate the characters.

Trays and trays of plasticine(?) chicken mouths in different positions.


#287 of 326 by tpryan on Sun Jun 18 18:15:15 2000:

        I just read Dave Stein's review from the stilyagi mailing list.
He says it's a hoot!, worth seeing.


#288 of 326 by omni on Mon Jun 19 05:39:07 2000:

Saw 2 good flix tonight:

Rear Window- What else? 4 stars. Hitchcock didn't make dogs.

I never saw this one before and all I can say is OH MY GOD. The movie is
completely awesome, even for being made in the early 50's. You know the story,
so it is pointless to recap it here, but the last half hour was so intense, I
wouldn't have left the house if it was on fire. I was on the edge of my seat,
paralyzed with fear that something really bad would happen to Jimmy Stewart.
Fortunatly, I had the presence of mind to record it from AMC. Hitchcock, when
you're speaking about movies, is God. The cast was great: Jimmy Stewart, Thelma
Ritter, and Grace Kelly, not to mention Raymond Burr.

Then on TCM came:

Father of the Bride-4 stars In my opinion, Spencer Tracy never made a bad film.
He was very funny as the Dad Who Paid For The Wedding. You had to start feeling
bad for the guy when all the bills begin rolling in, then the bride decides she
can't possibly get married, and from there it only gets worse. Soon, it is time
for the main event and... I won't spoil the ending. An excellent cast:
Elizabeth Taylor and Russ Tamblyn, as well as Spencer Tracy.

Can't wait to see "Father's Little Dividend" which is the sequel.

Another very funny wedding movie was "Betsy's Wedding" which borrowed a bit
from FOTB.

I'm getting to like old movies. :)


#289 of 326 by lelande on Mon Jun 19 07:37:47 2000:

hot damn . . .
got 'crumb' and 'rope' and a documentary on dietrich bonhoeffer on tape.


#290 of 326 by edina on Mon Jun 19 14:09:52 2000:

Re Dogma:  Joey Lauren Adams was supposed to be in the movie, but becasue the
movies was financed heavier, Kevin Smith lost some control - she was supposed
to play Linda Fiorentino's part.


#291 of 326 by jep on Mon Jun 19 14:54:45 2000:

I finally saw "Gone with the Wind" yesterday.  I'd never watched it 
all the way through.  I also finished the book yesterday.

As my wife said, the movie was over-acted.  There was no subtlety; if 
you were supposed to think "Scarlett is self-absorbed", the movie 
banged you on the head several times and shouted at you "Self 
absorbed!!!"  As anyone could tell you, it was very long.  It was 
probably the most faithful reproduction of a book I've ever seen in a 
movie.  Many things were left out of the movie, but almost nothing was 
added or changed.  I thought it was a great movie.  I don't know how it 
could have been improved in any way.

I guess there's no point in saying much.  If you're interested, you've 
seen this movie 100 times.  If you don't know about it, it's because you 
want it that way.


#292 of 326 by remmers on Mon Jun 19 17:16:21 2000:

Re Dogma:  Some of the financing could have been spent on a good
script doctor, in my opinion.  A promising start and a few clever
bits, but the thing became insufferably talky after a while and
went on much too long.


#293 of 326 by mcnally on Mon Jun 19 19:30:57 2000:

  That's probably a fair criticism..

  re #288:  Actually, Hitchcock made a number of films which are 
  mediocre at best..  They're just generally swept under the rug
  whenever his films are discussed..


#294 of 326 by jerryr on Mon Jun 19 19:57:45 2000:

re: gwtw - my gawd what an overblown, over acted cornball flick.  every actor
in it chews the scenary.  from "superman" on the steps of tara to rhett butler
who cares more about how he stands visa vis the camera than how he "acts."

far more entertaining is the pbs documentary "the making of gwtw."


#295 of 326 by iggy on Mon Jun 19 21:33:13 2000:

<i'm a sucker. i liked the book and movie>


#296 of 326 by slynne on Mon Jun 19 21:39:34 2000:

me too, iggy, me too


#297 of 326 by otaking on Mon Jun 19 22:03:43 2000:

GWTW is great, but not something I'd want to watch repeatedly.


#298 of 326 by lelande on Mon Jun 19 22:24:35 2000:

the 39 steps still kick ass.

can't swallow dogma, or any other kevin smith movies -- the problem, for the
most part, is the color. kevin smith can't keep his colors under control. his
flics (except clerks, course, cuz it's black & white, which he obviously has
better control over) come off like sloppily thrown together crayon drawings.
he has no respect for shade, no respect for shadows and darkness, he has no
evident interest in blank space -- just busy busy busy color color color, no
symmetry, no decent portraiture, no motherlovin feng shui.

i watched 'mallrats' 7 times because jason lee is a doggone funny boy. but
the movie was still an acrylic array of crap.
is it because smith grew up so close to comics that he can't direct anything
but contrived spunk? every time i go into a comic store these days i have to
put up with his cartoons everywhere. he wrote daredevil for a while, and a
really good story at that, with really long, slow, sometimes pathetically dull
dialogue.
i wish he'd stick to movies rather than contribute to the quickening decline
in the quality of comic books.
i bet tim burton thinks he's an asshole, and signed him up to write the
superman script just so burton could reject it. tim burton isn't the greatest
director in the world, but, christ, at least he knows how to deal with
something as basic as COLOR.


#299 of 326 by mcnally on Tue Jun 20 01:02:06 2000:

  (by making everything a murky grey and claiming it's "artistically moody"?)


#300 of 326 by omni on Tue Jun 20 04:23:08 2000:

  I liked GWTW, although it was a bit too long. There are a number of 
fine performances given by: Jane Darwell, Clark Gable, Butterfly McQueen, and
Hattie McDaniel. I particularly liked Olivia DeHavilland's role. I have always
like Ms DeHavilland. 
  Ok the movie is cheesy, but it does tell a good story.


#301 of 326 by lelande on Tue Jun 20 17:47:22 2000:

resp:299
i know it may be more work than you're willing to take on, but if you can
manage to think about more than 'sleepy hollow' you might be able to
contribute to discussion rather than muck it up.
i used burton as an example because he's recent, well-known, and has
extraordinary control over the pallette of his flix. most of the time his
movies have a synthetic look to them: very plastic as in edward scissorhands'
suburban setting, the miniature model town in beetlejuice, the hokey alien
invasion in mars attacks, etc. etc. yadda yadda. maybe one can criticize
burton for always employing such an artificial look to his movies, but since
burton seems to strive for said artificial look in accordance with the
characters and the places in which they exist in the movies, without trying
to pull wool over the audience-eye, it wouldn't be criticism, it would be a
matter of difference in aesthetic opinion. a buddy of mine is severely
anti-formalist, so he'd fall into the bracket of cats that despise burton for
this reason (and others); beyond aesthetic difference, it's impressive stuff
that he does with his colors.
then look at kevin smith, who also has very unrealistic arrays of colors, but
i get the feeling that smith doesn't want his colors to look unrealistic, but
that he wants his scenes and characters to look authentic, real,
real-life-like. so he uses generic shirts, unprovocative lighting, and
striaghtforward camera-angles. metatron and what's-her-name drink tequila in
a mexican restaurant: i saw only one angle of this mexican restaurant, making
it seem very much like a stage dressed up to be the quintessential small
mexican restaurant. snore. snore.

boy ain't no FENG SHUI, that be fo damn shur.


#302 of 326 by jazz on Tue Jun 20 18:27:16 2000:

        Kevin Smith is arguably influenced by four-colour layout comics,
though, and in accordance with that theory, his not-quite-real colour schemes,
staging, and dialogue, make considerably more sense.  He's also directing on
a very small budget, unlike Burton, and the combined budgets of all of the
Kevin Smith films put together wouldn't begin to approach the special effects
budgets of one Burton film.

        My beef with Burton is that he's a one-trick pony.  His ideas were
fresh and creative in Beetlejuice, but by the time Edward Scissorhands rolled
out, the "Burton feel" was beginning to get a bit dated.  Sleepy Hollow
deviated enough from the traditional "Burton feel" that I didn't mind it at
all, but it was still obviously a Burton film.


#303 of 326 by jor on Tue Jun 20 22:08:32 2000:

        omni . . Rear Window . . that was Raymond Burr!

        sheesh I wasn't paying attention.

        Yes the Hitchcock mass showing on AMC is irresistable . .

        I made the mistake of watching The Birds in it's entirety.
        Their entirety. The Great Gasoline Accident is 
        still great, but I found myself being very critical
        of much of the film, e.g., the superficial  romance that
        is the premise for the leading lady's visit to
        Bodega Bay. Yes I was just pecking it apart, I've
        seen it too many times.

        I've always wanted to visit Bodega Bay.

        So since then I've just watched chance segments. A bit
        of Miss Froy in The Lady Vanishes. The very end of
        Suspicion. The climax of Rear Window. The light and
        shadow, shadow, shadow, let's colorize it all and
        erase all the shadows.



#304 of 326 by remmers on Tue Jun 20 22:59:43 2000:

I think the problem with the superficial romance in The Birds
wasn't that it was superficial but rather that the actors
weren't up to making the audience forget that.  Rod Taylor
and Tippi Hedren were no substitute for Cary Grant and Grace
Kelly.


#305 of 326 by mcnally on Tue Jun 20 23:10:47 2000:

  Believable rumor has it that Hitchcock's interest was not primarily in
  Tippie Hedren's acting skills..


#306 of 326 by omni on Wed Jun 21 01:25:22 2000:

  I've seen enough Perry Mason to know that it was Raymond Burr. He did a
great job, nonetheless. Didja see Hitchcock in Dial M For Murder and The
Birds? He's easy to spot in The Birds, but you have to be closely watching
to see him in Dial M.


#307 of 326 by iggy on Wed Jun 21 01:32:27 2000:

what did billy joe throw off the tallahatchie bridge?


#308 of 326 by cyklone on Wed Jun 21 01:40:15 2000:

Omni is right about Burr. And Hitch's trademark was to sneak a cameo
appearance in all his movies, so keep an eye out next time . . . .



#309 of 326 by mcnally on Wed Jun 21 01:44:17 2000:

  re #308:  not quite all, but most anyway..  my favorite was the 
  "appearance" in 'Lifeboat'


#310 of 326 by cyklone on Wed Jun 21 01:53:49 2000:

Was that one a dead body?


#311 of 326 by richard on Wed Jun 21 01:59:33 2000:

Hard to believe but there were huge protests about GWTW when it came out
because when Clark Gable leaves at the end, he tells Scarlett, "Frankly my
dear, I dont give a damn"  A four letter word in a movie?!?!  The studio
wanted to change that last line to "frankly my dear, I dont care" or
something weaker.  Gable, to his credit, absolutely insisted that line
stay in as is, and almost quit over it.  


#312 of 326 by cyklone on Wed Jun 21 02:07:48 2000:

Frankly, I don't give a damn


#313 of 326 by jerryr on Wed Jun 21 02:37:52 2000:

i remember when you couldn't say pregnant or bathroom on tv.


#314 of 326 by mcnally on Wed Jun 21 02:38:48 2000:

  re #310:  Not a body, no..

  If I recall correctly, one of the characters is reading a newspaper
  that has somehow survived the shipwreck and Hitchcock's image appears
  in an advertisement for some sort of weight loss method.


#315 of 326 by goose on Wed Jun 21 03:42:16 2000:

Hedren has aged well (surgically enhanced no doubt).


#316 of 326 by omni on Wed Jun 21 21:56:06 2000:

  The best thing is to let people look for themselves. I've yet to see him
in Psycho, and Rear Window.


#317 of 326 by lelande on Fri Jun 23 23:10:13 2000:

resp:303
it doesn't take much money to make good colors, even when influenced by
comicdom's classic flatness. by the time he was making movies most good comics
had either improved their color schemes or stuck w/ black & white, and long,
long before then, when he was still shaving with an abrasive washcloth, comics
had much better use of flat color schemes, beginning over in europe. it might
be better argued that he learned how to be a director from watching gap and
mcdonalds commercials.


#318 of 326 by gelinas on Sat Jun 24 03:00:03 2000:

I have seen him in Psycho, but I missed him this time.  I did spot him in
Rear Window.  We saw him in one or two of the others, but I've forgotten
the details.

Re the "romance" in The Birds: There wasn't one.  Mother and former
girlfriend *assumed* there was a romance.


#319 of 326 by jor on Sun Jun 25 18:23:04 2000:

        Are we assuming that we share an
        unambiguous definition of "romance"?


#320 of 326 by gelinas on Thu Jun 29 03:00:55 2000:

Probably.  She visited Bodega Bay because she was a practical joker with
no reason to limit herself.  'Twould be interesting to know what was in the
original note, the one she destroyed when replacing it with a note to the
sister.


#321 of 326 by omni on Sat Jul 1 08:12:42 2000:

  Where was he in Rear Window? I watched it really close and still must have
missed it.


#322 of 326 by remmers on Sat Jul 1 15:26:24 2000:

Early in the film he can be seen in one of the apartment windows,
doing some repair work or something.


#323 of 326 by lelande on Sat Jul 1 21:14:55 2000:

are there any hitch movies where he makes his sole appearance anywhere 
beyond 'early in the film'? i understand he tried to get the tradition 
out of the way quickly so viewers wouldn't spend the whole movie 
searching for him while ignoring the flic.


#324 of 326 by gelinas on Sat Jul 8 09:27:16 2000:

Actually, he was visiting the piano player.

I heard that he moved his appearances to earlier in the films after people
started looking for him.


#325 of 326 by iggy on Sat Jul 8 14:39:11 2000:

i just saw an episode of the simpsons where they did a brief
sendup of 'the birds'.  homer lisa and bart walked into
a daycare to get maggie, and all the babies were sucking
pacifiers in an eerie way. tons of them.
like they were ready to attack and just waiting to be provoked.
after homer grabbed maggie, he slowly backed out of the daycare and
shut the door.
alfred hitchcock made a cameo walking a dog outside.


#326 of 326 by remmers on Sat Jul 8 14:43:00 2000:

(It was the Ayn Rand Daycare Center, if I remember correctly.)


There are no more items selected.

You have several choices: