Evan C

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Evan C

  1. Chungking Express - the first section of the film concludes on May 1st, and we see a calendar change to April 29th and 30th leading up to that.
  2. This one is pretty good.
  3. I agree with Film Crit Hulk's take wholeheartedly, both in terms of its strengths and weaknesses, and especially about how it suffers from the "Marvel fatal flaw." I think my biggest problem was the first hour was basically a repetition of the same idea: Peter want's to be on the Avengers, so he blows off his friends and chances to do anything at school, over and over and over and over and over again. Honestly, I felt at least half an hour could have been cut without any real loss. As regards Keaton's line about "Native Americans," I believe the preferred term has actually gone back to being American Indians, because Native Americans more accurately refers to the Inuit, or that's what I was told by scholars studying music traditions of American Indians, so in addition to the line not making sense in context, it was dating itself as well. The one scene that really stuck out to me as pointless and out of place was the gym scene where the three girls are playing Marry, F*ck, or Murder with members of the Avengers. I'm sure high-schoolers play that parlor game, but I'm equally sure that the high-schoolers who do don't censor the f-word when they play it, which of course had to be done to keep a PG-13 rating. And since that's the case, why script it in the first place? And speaking of needless crudity, I'm sure every middle-schooler with the name Peter is really going to hate the film, or at least the party scene at Liz's. On the plus side, Keaton is one of the best Marvel villains, the tie into Civil War was well done, and Holland is a very likeable Peter and Spiderman.
  4. Charade was at the top of mine, but I couldn't find the Blu-ray anywhere in the store, even though the computer said it was in stock, so I figured I'd wait until next sale.
  5. Sorry for the topic diversion, but since I had a generous gift card, which I had been saving for the sale, I picked up these as well.
  6. I went with these two.
  7. May he rest in peace. This will always be my favorite of all his performances. (NSFW clip)
  8. Well, I'm seeing it Wednesday, and I chose this screening over Dunkirk.
  9. I didn't start reading your blog until 2009, so no, I wasn't.
  10. Like last time, I'll do a series with a uniting theme, which will apply to this one as well. Jerry the Nipper, The Leopard Gang; they're no match For Swinging Suzy. An aging mother Confronts her crazy niece and Her son's troubled end. Sailing a steamboat Down the Nile proves a chance to Rise above nature. Two married lawyers - The worst kind of inbreeding - Argue the same case.
  11. I'd never even heard of this film before. And apparently, you're the only Letterboxd friend I have who's watched it.
  12. Wow. I don't know if I want to see this or avoid it all costs. Here's the first paragraph, but you've really got to read the whole thing:
  13. No, quite a bit older than that. Here's a hint: I'll know you'll know it When you know it, and you'll know I know you know it. Yours isn't Blade Runner, is it?
  14. Yes! I was surprised no one got that last time around. Any guesses for the one I just posted? Like your Apocalypse Now haiku, it is a quote from the movie, although I had to tweak the syllables slightly.
  15. I don't know why, but I thought someone had answered it. Apocalypse Now. EDIT: Wait, I said that last year. Is it something else? The Fugitive? How about this one? We are the breeders Of war; we carry it like Syphilis inside.
  16. I did not forget; the first DVD I got from the library a couple months ago was badly scratched, so I gave up on watching that, and then I got sidetracked with other things. Anyway, I thought Thirst was brilliant, even if I very slightly prefer The Handmaiden for its use of flashback, changing pov, and more elaborate production design. As a tragedy, horror film, and twisted love story, Thirst seemed fairly straightforward in how unchecked passions consume us. From the beginning, before the priest goes to the clinic, he lectures a women in confession about the gravity of suicide, and then seeks a sort of martyrdom for himself by participating in an experiment condemned by the Vatican, rationalizing his disobedience and reckless endangering of his life through his desire to help others. Aristotle defined virtue as being in the middle of two extremes, or between a deficiency and excess of a trait; Thirst seemed to be watching two characters fling themselves from one end to the other without ever thinking about that middle, with Fr. Hyun more often representing excess and Tae-ju representing deficiency, which is why they deserve one another. When they attempt to whitewash the magnitude of their crimes, they're building a literal tomb for themselves, and I really liked Park's way of depicting that. The final twist, like The Handmaiden, is rather predictable, but the journey to get there is exquisite.
  17. Has anyone seen this yet? I thought we had a few Park Chan-Wook fans around here. Anyway, it's one of his most effortlessly filmed movies. He clearly enjoys setting up and spinning all the elaborate wheels as he explores some of the darkest elements of humanity he's explored yet. As a warning, if you've struggled with the content in his other films, you should probably stay far away from this. I threw up some quick first thoughts on Letterboxd.
  18. Shoot. I thought it was July 14th too.
  19. Yeah, the ending and final twist really are kind of rushed; I think they could have worked better with just a little more time. But Guinness is wonderful.
  20. As we discussed, here is the thread for June. I nominated Last Holiday for the films on Waking Up, which I would describe as Ikiru in the style of The Ladykillers. I enjoy it immensely, but it seems that very few people have seen it. The Criterion essay is here. YouTube link is here; it's also available on Amazon.
  21. It was "meh" on watching, and becomes worse every time a Chris Pratt fangirl tells you it's better than Jurassic Park.
  22. Okay. Why am I just finding out about this now? Du Maurier's novel is one of my three favorite books, so naturally I'm very excited/nervous to see what is done with this. Weisz is a great choice for Rachel, but nothing in Michell's filmography fills me with confidence that he's the right director, but at the same time, none of his previous films suggest he would be a bad choice. International trailer here. The American one has some spoilers, and is basically a two minute summary of the book, minus the ending, but it's worth watching if you want to see how vastly different a tone it takes. Part of the novel's brilliance is the way it strikes a balance between the genre and tone of the two trailers.
  23. Well, it's certainly possible I missed something, and maybe I was influenced by the audience I saw it with, who strongly presumed Rachel was guilty. Or maybe I was too ticked off by rushing through plot points I considered crucial, but whatever the reason, I did not see that in the film.
  24. Well, I was trying to avoid spoiling the ending of the novel or the movie in the review, but yes, the way du Maurier ties that line into the conclusion is brilliant. You might be less disappointed than I was, but I think you made a good point about writing vs. directing.
  25. QUASI-SPOILERS I went into it in detail (sans spoilers) at Letterboxd, but the short answer is I felt it rushed through too many crucial plot points (Philip's uncritical adoration of Ambrose, Louise's unrequited love for Philip, and most importantly allowing Rachel to be a sympathetic figure), which in turn never allowed the atmosphere of uncertainty to ripen the way it needed to. Philip is admittedly an impetuous, rash character, but I felt the film was using that as a crutch not to develop him or explain the guilt and turmoil that plagues him after Ambrose's death, which directly influences his hatred then infatuation with Rachel. More problematically, even with the ante-penultimate scene of going through Rachel's belongings, the film doesn't really entertain the possibility that Rachel is innocent (the perpetual back and forth questioning of her guilt/innocence is one of my favorite aspects of the book), and therefore Philip just comes across as an impetuous fool being taken in by an eeeevil woman, which I think whitewashes his many faults (cavalier sexism, inflated self confidence, and hot-headedness).