Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Rushmore

  • Rank
    Angry at the sun for setting

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Previous Fields

  • Favorite visual art
    The whole argument from significant form stands or falls by volume. If you allow C├ęzanne to represent a third dimension on his two-dimensional canvas, you must allow Landseer his gleam of loyalty in the spaniel's eye.

Recent Profile Visitors

4,232 profile views
  1. I've been maintaining a spreadsheet with all the previous lists here. If you click twice on the 2006 column header, for example, you'll see all the films from 100 to 1 at the top.
  2. It makes me smile that Bergman and Malick are the two choices where everyone who voted had an opinion. (And, in my opinion, we made the right choice in both cases!)
  3. I'm hoping The Tree of Life wins out over A Hidden Life. I certainly have my personal bias here, since Tree of Life has been on my personal top 5 for years and I didn't really connect with A Hidden Life, and maybe it's just that when I saw Tree of Life at an impressionable age I was subconsciously ready for a rhapsodic Malick phase which is unrepeatable nine years later. It still seems to me that Tree of Life is a film of unfathomable depth and spiritual power, a film bursting with variety that can be explored endlessly and always remains surprising. A Hidden Life, beautiful as it is, seemed to exist in a space of lower dimensionality. I'm not sure I was surprised at any point or saw anything I haven't seen before. I don't like saying this about what I'm sure is a heartfelt tribute to a Catholic saint, but I felt like all the events were distant and ethereal, seen through a sort of spiritual haze, to the degree that it seems to show a narrower universe than Tree of Life, despite the relentlessly wide-angle cinematography. I have personal preferences about some of the other choices, but this is the one where I feel prepared to say that one film is really better and more profound than the other.
  4. Thanks for this. I'm coming down on the 2-films-per side for similar reasons, along with a growing feeling that changing course midstream is causing more confusion than it's worth.
  5. Rushmore


    I love Nightwish, which has been my introduction to symphonic metal. (I came to it via Tuomas Holopainen's extraordinary concept album The Life and Times of Scrooge McDuck, which has a quite different sound despite some recognizable stylistic similarities.) I'm not entirely sure that I approach it wholly on the level of artistic appreciation - the effect of this kind of music on my feelings and nerves is such that I've been known to say, not really joking, that Nightwish is my favorite recreational drug. I agree that Endless Forms is their best album.
  6. I understand this and sympathize. The problem is that I'm really in two minds here, afraid to choose either option for fear of regretting it later. Some compelling arguments have been made on both sides.
  7. Interesting. It's missing too many essential A&F favorites for me to really prefer this list to the regular one (apparently Dreyer isn't too divisive around here, who knew?), but there are some choices here that would have been fascinatingly provocative. Admittedly, this list also has most of the choices that I thought were bad, including the only nominated film I outright hate.
  8. Please do post that. It would be interesting to see the candidates "sorted by controversial". I'm happy to see Blade Runner (returning from the 2004 list!) on there. It strengthens the list to have a sci-fi entry beyond the two obvious choices of Stalker and 2001. I'm disappointed by the absence of Carol and Moonlight. I hoped at least one of those would make the cut, though Carol at least always seemed like a long shot.
  9. How many directors are on the list in the two-per-director version?
  10. Rushmore

    Carol (2015)

    If you have a video or slide presentation or some way to present this breakdown without a ton of extra work for you, I'd love to see it! I also love the film and consider it my favorite LGBT-themed film of the last decade (edging out Moonlight and Weekend).
  11. 12 Years a Slave (2013)
  12. For starters, add the Criterion Channel to your search space, even if you only subscribe for 1-2 months solely for A&F purposes. Cleo from 5 to 7 is currently there, for example.
  13. Rushmore

    Howl (2010)

    Now I'm trying to think of other examples of "on-screen textual analysis," and wondering if there's a whole genre of literary documentaries and poetic meta-films that's been escaping me. (Hmm...is there any in Poetry? It's been a long time since I saw that.)
  14. I like both of these ideas. One of the last films I struck off my nominations list was Todd Haynes' Carol, and I already kind of regret not leaving it in, probably as a substitute for one of the films that were almost certainly nominated by somebody else. This idea, though, I'm not crazy about. It seems borderline dishonest to "correct" the voting record just because we suspect that we may not like the actual voting results. If individual voters want to intentionally give higher scores to certain filmmaker demographics, that's fine, but at the end of it all I think we should be frank with ourselves and the outside world about what the vote looked like.
  15. Rushmore

    Howl (2010)

    The courtroom dialogue is reportedly lifted verbatim from the transcript of the actual trial, and I believe the interview-like segments all use Ginsberg's actual words (probably not from a single real-life interview, but I don't know about that). And of course the poem is the poem, slightly abridged and rearranged, as I recall, but otherwise unchanged. It's been years since I saw it, but I think those three elements account for the majority of the film's running time. So you could actually consider it a sort of documentary, if you wanted. Franco is good in this, yeah. His reading of the poem is not unlike the recordings I've heard of Ginsberg reading the poem, but I'm told that Ginsberg changed the way he read it over the years. At first, including the poem's premiere at the Six Gallery shown in the film, his reading was even more expressionless. So there's a slight compromise with historicity there, but a well-justified one, since Franco's reading works so well. It works on the level of characterization too: it's like the voice that must have been in Ginsberg's head when he wrote the poem. In any case, it's a much better film than Kill Your Darlings.
  • Create New...