Jump to content

Jazzaloha

Member
  • Content count

    168
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Jazzaloha

  • Rank
    Member

Contact Methods

  • ICQ
    0
  1. Crazy Heart - Scott Cooper (2009)

  2. The New World (2005)

    Got it. Films are linear in that scenes follow one another in a particular sequence, even if they occur in different times. Still. there's at least one film that sort of breaks that down. I'm thinking of Last Year at Marienbad. Nevermind, this is totally off topic.
  3. The New World (2005)

    So does anyone know which is Malick's final and preferred version? That's the one I want to see. I also agree with Peter that films do not need to have or be about a strong narrative. I don't even know if they have to be linear, depending what we mean by that.
  4. The New World (2005)

    There are only two other films that compare to this film in terms of artistry, ambition and acheiving that ambition, and those films are 2001: a Space Odyssey and L'Avventura. I think I like The New World the best, mainly because of Malick's vision and themes in this film. It's a work of art of the highest order, and should be seen on the biggest screen with the best sound system possible. The composition, cinematography, editing, sound and score all come together wonderfully. But it's not just the images that are poetic and beautiful, but the ideas and meaning that is conveyed by the poetry and cinema. I'm not finished writing all my thoughts down yet, so I'll try to post back when I have time. Just a wonderful film in a class by itself, and one of the best aesthetic experiences I've ever had. I'm glad there are other people who are enthusiastic about this film. But what's this about two different versions? I'm really aghast about this. I have no idea which version I've seen, but I have seen in February, so I assume I saw the shorter version. Has anyone seen both? What's the difference? Is the second version truly Malick's version, something he preferred? Dang, I'm really frustrated here folks. Oh, can someone tell what are the other two films Malick is working on?
  5. The Piano

    mrmando, Yes, Baines intially bribes her for sex--this is what I meant by "fumbling to get that 'thing' only women can give"--but he realizes that he can't get this 'thing' that way. Yes, what he wants is sexual, but he wants something more (i.e. intimacy). Ada understands this, and this is what allow her to choose Baines. It's also what makes Baines a more likeable figure, imo. I agree with Gigi when she says, And later But I also think the film is about two men who are drawn to a woman, and want something from her. Both struggle and clumsily try to get that "thing."
  6. fellini's nights of cabiria (1957)

    Giulietta Masina gives a great performance and creates one of the all-time great characters in film. Cabiria is not just spunky, she can be downright fierce at times. Yet, she also showed this tender, vulnerable and innocent side. Masina juxtaposition of toughness and fragility was really something to behiold. I really liked the film, except I had a problem with the ending. Spoilers Crow said that "she was bruised but not broken," and that's precisely what I found so hard to believe. I was devasted (apparently more than she was) by the revelation at the end. I really had hope for her and wanted her to be happy. The fact that she fell for the con man and that she sold everything would have been too much, I thought. I feared that she would jump off the cliff, which would have been more believeable for me. At least her recovery would have taken a lot longer than it seemed to in the film. Otherwise, I really enjoyed this film.
  7. The Piano

    Both Alisdair (Sam Neil) and George (Harvey Keitel) want that thing that only a woman can give, but both fumble at getting this "thing." Ultimately, Ada accepts George because George realizes that he does not want or cannot have this thing by bribery. Ada realizes this, and that's what helps her accept him. Alisdair never gets this, and so Ada rejects him. I read the film as a story about men and women wanting to connect, but struggling to do so. In a way, this reminds me of L'Avventura. But The Piano is also about Ada and her fierce independence and wanting to live on her own terms. I haven't seen the film since it first came out, but I thought it was terrific.
  8. Crash

    Peter said, "...But you know, I can't say that two hours of watching random people talk about stereotypes as they coincidentally keep bumping into each other does all that much for me. If you changed all the racial topics to religious topics, I would probably still find the film a little dull. I find these sorts of issues more interesting when they lurk within a film's subtext; I like being able to pull at them and unravel them and see where they go. When these sorts of issues are brought to the fore and spelled out within the text itself, it doesn't work so well -- especially when a film is so ambitious as to throw dozens of relatively minor characters at us and so diligently fair-minded as to try to show how complex all of them can be." I want to respond to this because, on one level, I sympathesize with some of these views. I don't generally like films that seem to care more about giving a lecture on social relations more than developing an interesting story with interesting characters (See Spike Lee.) Moreover, I think there is some validity to the claim that Haggis didn't do a good job of creating characters. However, on another level, I think the film does more than show that people are complex--specifically, that people are neither good nor bad, but a mixture of the two. Yes, the film shows us that, but it also explores stereotypes in a complex way, too--specifically, thinking in stereotypes is not necessarily bad. There are sound reasons for thinking in stereotypes: should we always prevent ourselves from thinking this way? Can we stop ourselves? The fact that Haggis does not give us a black-and-white answer to this issue is what makes this film special. I know I haven't seen this in any film. But he doesn't stop there. He goes on to show that thinking this way--for sound or unsound reasons--really alienates people from each other. He shows the frustration that this causes in people and the difficulty of the situation. Sandra Bullock's character and situation really show this frustration and complexity. She doesn't want to think of the black characters in a stereotypical way, yet her gut tells her she should be on guard. She ignores that and gets mugged. We see her anger and frustration afterwards, and to me it was over this tough situation. Do you ignore your gut feelings and then put yourself at risk? Or do you act on your gut feelings and then feel guilty about that? This complex situation causes alienation and frustration has explosive consequences (crashes). I also think the crash metaphor refers to the fact that we are so alienated from each other that we need a jarring event like a crash, to connect with one another. (I believe Don Cheadle's character says something to that effect in the beginning.)
  9. Spanglish

    I don't think Leachman or Leoni were problems. The problem had more to do with a lack of time, a lack of clarity on who these characters were or both. I think Brooks had too many characters and relationships and possible stories to deal with in one film, unless it was fours long. That's why I thought this might make an interesting TV series. I liked the manic, quirky quality Leoni brought to the film. But I didn't think Brooks had enough time or gave enough time to let the audience know what made her tick. If any actors were problematic, it was Sandler and the actor who played Flor. She was just way too hot for the role. I think the actor in *Like Water for Chocolate* and *Bottle Rocket* would have been better suited for the role. She's very attractive, but not in such a sexy way. And while Sandler is likeable, an actor better chops would have been better, say someone like Ed Norton. The whole cultural differences seemed kind of phony, too.
  10. Please someone help me with Dogville

    I want to weigh in the discussion between having keeping the discussion of a film in one thread or allowing for many. Conceptually, I like the idea of keeping all discussions about a film in one thread. This just makes the message board more organized, and easier to navigate and manage when looking for information on a film. I like the idea of going to ONE thread to read all the thoughts, opinions and discussions about a film. On another message board I'm involved in I try to keep the discussions of a particular film or topic in one thread. Having said that, in practice, limiting all discussions of a film to one single thread doesn't work very well because it can stifle both participation and discussion, especially to those who were not involved in the discussion when the thread. Good discussions depend on a natural flow and momentum. Acheiving this when you try to keep all the posts in one thread is very difficult. For example, if a person wants to jump into a thread where the last post was made a year ago, that person will have a better chance of generating a discussion by starting a new thread, imo. I think there is a relatively simple solution (at least conceptually) which Peter mentioned: just link the threads together. I think having some index of film titles that you could click on and see a list of all the existing discussions of a film would be a cool thing. I don't know how difficult this would be to do, but I think it would address both concerns raised by Peter and Ken.
  11. The Return

    "But there are so many unanswered questions for me. I have never understood what Jesus' death on the cross meant." I am not a theologian. I can only say what Jesus' death on the cross means to me. "Our sins" signifies everyone is sinful. Sin, to me, is an intense selfishness and pride. Truly loving another person is the opposite. People, at their core, are selfish and prideful. Jesus died in part because of this sinful nature--so that we wouldn't have to die. He took the punishment we deserved on Himself. God allowing Jesus to die showed His unbelieveable love to all of us. But if you studied theology for 4 years, you probably know this. Still, I felt I should try to answer your question.
  12. Dogville

    Michael, Just to add to your interpretation, I believe Paul Bettany's character in the beginning says something about wanting to teach an object lesson to the townspeople, about accepting a *gift*.
  13. Broken Flowers - new Jarmusch

    I liked this film, too, even though I don't care for Murray's acting (in this persona). Spoilers I don't know if I buy the possibilitiy that Don worte the first letter, not until I hear some other evidence for this anyway. It's an interesting idea, though.
  14. Dogville

    Did anyone talk about the possibility that the conversation between Grace and the "Big Guy" represents a liberal and conservative perspectives, respectively? Matt has a partial trascription of the conservation, and the Big Guy sounds like a political conservative while Grace sounds like a liberal. A part of me (I'm not totally convinced) feels like the conversation can be seen as a criticism of liberals, particularly those in America (the West) in the following ways: 1. "Forgiving" criminal behavior (because of environment, etc.) is arrogant and condescending. The liberal stance is more about condescension than actual forgiveness; 2. The Grace changing her mind siding with her father represents liberals gave in to the ideology of the right, particuarly in the case of the Iraq war. Again, I don't know if I totally buy this, but the conservation did make me think of a discussion between a liberal and conservative.
  15. Code Unknown

    Some thoughts after having skimmed through the film a second time... (spoilers) 1. One of the big themes in the film seems to be the way we--particuarly those that are priveleged--ignore people in need--particularly children--and how terrible that is. I see that as consequence of the lack of connection we have with each other. 2. The film could also be speaking about the way we experience life through media (i.e. George through his photographs and Anne through film) more than actual life itself. 3. Is there a bit of the "noble savage" concept working through the film? The refugees seem more noble than those characters from Western civilization.
×