Author Topic: Top 100 Club: Junior  (Read 464 times)

MartinTeller

  • FAB
  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 15399
  • martinteller.wordpress.com
    • my movie blog
Re: Top 100 Club: Junior
« Reply #30 on: January 08, 2018, 10:17:19 PM »
Oh man I want Sandy to watch Fanny and Alexander so bad

oldkid

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 17420
  • Hi there! Feed me worlds!
Re: Top 100 Club: Junior
« Reply #31 on: January 09, 2018, 01:53:50 AM »
Yes.  But only if she watches the full miniseries.
"It's not art unless it has the potential to be a disaster." Bansky

Sandy

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 10576
    • Sandy's Cinematic Musings
Re: Top 100 Club: Junior
« Reply #32 on: January 09, 2018, 08:22:28 AM »
Iíll see what I can do! Itís at my library, but I havenít checked to see which one it is yet.
"Inside you there's a strength that lies."

Junior

  • Bert Macklin, FBI
  • Global Moderator
  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 27320
  • What's the rumpus?
    • Benefits of a Classical Education
Re: Top 100 Club: Junior
« Reply #33 on: January 09, 2018, 08:40:46 AM »
If it's the Criterion edition it might have both. I would be interested in your thoughts either way.

Actually, if you were to pick 3 movies on my list to represent it, the ones you picked might be the best 3.
Check out my blog of many topics

ďIím not a quitter, Kimmy! I watched Interstellar all the way to the end!Ē

chardy999

  • Elite Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3537
Re: Top 100 Club: Junior
« Reply #34 on: January 10, 2018, 05:01:36 AM »
West Side Story Ė Robert Wise & Jerome Robbins (1961)



What plays amazingly in this opening, past of course the New York fly-by, is how a dance sequence sets up the rivalry between gangs with hardly a word. Itís a fantastic use of the musical medium. It felt right, it felt good, and if youíre not on board at that point you never will be.

The simplified Romeo & Juliet plot arc is less interesting than the living the two groups are doing, and how they are fighting. More interesting again is the manner they choose to express themselves: the dancing and singing in the ballroom scene is great when the Jets and the Sharks play roulette for a partner, and again when the Puerto Rican men and women oppose each other slinging opinions about living Ďin America.í Here the group dynamic is energetic and effective, as it is when the Jets express their anger by dancing to Ďstay cool.í When the two leads express their love either individually or to each other they feel too small for the space and the songs are forgettable.

You canít say enough good things about the set design and cinematography and thatís what Iíll remember most about West Side Story which is somewhat bittersweet in the end.

6/10.
Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have others.
- Groucho Marx

ses

  • Administrator
  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 14927
    • Sarah's Kitchen Adventures
Re: Top 100 Club: Junior
« Reply #35 on: January 11, 2018, 12:11:28 PM »
Sorry I've been absent so long.  I've been dealing with family issues, but I will get a review in for Junior (and make ups for DH and Dave) by the end of this month!
"It's a fool who looks for logic in the chambers of the human heart"

http://sarahskitchenadventures.blogspot.com/

Teproc

  • Elite Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2073
Re: Top 100 Club: Junior
« Reply #36 on: January 11, 2018, 04:08:46 PM »
Sleuth (Joseph L. Mankiewicz, 1972)

*SPOILERS*

Enjoyable, but not as much as I hoped for several reasons. The main one is that the film thinks it's much cleverer than it really is: the first act is rather good, and the conclusion of it is truly surprising and well executed... I was a bit iffy on Michael Caine and started to wonder if I just didn't care for his performances as a young actor, but he got much better later on. Once the film shows its hand though, you're always a step ahead of Laurence Olivier's character, which makes him seem particularly dumb... I wonder, did Mankiewicz actually expect people not to recognize Michael Caine there ? If so, he was sorely mistaken, and I wondered for a bit if the whole thing wasn't about to go completely meta (as in: this is all a TV show or something) to justify that, but nope, turns out Laurence Olivier is just blind.

Given that, it's fairly clear what's going on and the second act becomes a bit of a chore. The third act works much better: Caine has more fun with it, and the social commentary aspect, though it's pretty heavy-handed, starts working much better. Still, Olivier is just too much of an idiot all of a sudden: in fact it comes to mind that I found both actors to struggle when they're being fooled... I don't know if that says something about them or me. Regardless, it ends up still being entertaining overall, but doesn't quite live up to its fun premise for me.

6/10

1SO

  • FAB
  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 28412
  • Marathon Man
Re: Top 100 Club: Junior
« Reply #37 on: January 11, 2018, 04:45:26 PM »
I was young when I first saw Sleuth. I kind of knew who Michael Caine was and the turn fooled me. Watching it later, I donít think the film relies on you being fooled because it mirrors the first Act. Olivier was toying with Caine and because of his smug superiority he doesnít let himself believe what we easily detect. So thereís fun in watching the villain get played by his own gamesmanship.

That said, what puts Sleuth in my Essentials are the twists beyond those first two.

You remind me that Junior and I agree on Sleuth but donít agree on Deathtrap, which I think is cut from the same cloth.
« Last Edit: January 11, 2018, 05:03:44 PM by 1SO »

Junior

  • Bert Macklin, FBI
  • Global Moderator
  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 27320
  • What's the rumpus?
    • Benefits of a Classical Education
Re: Top 100 Club: Junior
« Reply #38 on: January 11, 2018, 09:42:52 PM »
I'm on a mini vacation right now. Will return for these late tomorrow. I love them even if you all don't love the movies as much as I do!
Check out my blog of many topics

ďIím not a quitter, Kimmy! I watched Interstellar all the way to the end!Ē

Junior

  • Bert Macklin, FBI
  • Global Moderator
  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 27320
  • What's the rumpus?
    • Benefits of a Classical Education
Re: Top 100 Club: Junior
« Reply #39 on: January 14, 2018, 09:28:13 PM »
West Side Story Ė Robert Wise & Jerome Robbins (1961)

What plays amazingly in this opening, past of course the New York fly-by, is how a dance sequence sets up the rivalry between gangs with hardly a word. Itís a fantastic use of the musical medium. It felt right, it felt good, and if youíre not on board at that point you never will be.

The simplified Romeo & Juliet plot arc is less interesting than the living the two groups are doing, and how they are fighting. More interesting again is the manner they choose to express themselves: the dancing and singing in the ballroom scene is great when the Jets and the Sharks play roulette for a partner, and again when the Puerto Rican men and women oppose each other slinging opinions about living Ďin America.í Here the group dynamic is energetic and effective, as it is when the Jets express their anger by dancing to Ďstay cool.í When the two leads express their love either individually or to each other they feel too small for the space and the songs are forgettable.

You canít say enough good things about the set design and cinematography and thatís what Iíll remember most about West Side Story which is somewhat bittersweet in the end.

6/10.

Yeah. As a guy who loves things in movies that only work in movies, the first hour or so of WSS is among the best of all time. Obviously it was a stage show first, but the way the camera creates the space in which the action takes place is really something. It's all these perfectly composed shots of the groups and their surroundings. I agree that outside of the "Wherefore art thou, Tony-o" scene the stuff between Tony and Maria on their own is a little lacking. I don't love "Cool" either, but damn if the rest of it isn't brilliant. What I love most about it as an adaptation of Shakespeare is how well it translates into the setting and time period. I think it works even better than the original because of that new setting and because it does such a great job of having both sides of the conflict feel like real, developed groups with issues that make sense and fit within the confines of the story. How does this fit into the musical genre for you? Do you like others of this era better, or are you just not a fan of this time for the genre?


Sleuth (Joseph L. Mankiewicz, 1972)

*SPOILERS*

Enjoyable, but not as much as I hoped for several reasons. The main one is that the film thinks it's much cleverer than it really is: the first act is rather good, and the conclusion of it is truly surprising and well executed... I was a bit iffy on Michael Caine and started to wonder if I just didn't care for his performances as a young actor, but he got much better later on. Once the film shows its hand though, you're always a step ahead of Laurence Olivier's character, which makes him seem particularly dumb... I wonder, did Mankiewicz actually expect people not to recognize Michael Caine there ? If so, he was sorely mistaken, and I wondered for a bit if the whole thing wasn't about to go completely meta (as in: this is all a TV show or something) to justify that, but nope, turns out Laurence Olivier is just blind.

Given that, it's fairly clear what's going on and the second act becomes a bit of a chore. The third act works much better: Caine has more fun with it, and the social commentary aspect, though it's pretty heavy-handed, starts working much better. Still, Olivier is just too much of an idiot all of a sudden: in fact it comes to mind that I found both actors to struggle when they're being fooled... I don't know if that says something about them or me. Regardless, it ends up still being entertaining overall, but doesn't quite live up to its fun premise for me.

6/10

I've gotta rewatch this one. I had so much fun with the twists and turns and the filmmaking adventurousness (the Caine dual role is a great conceit, especially given the fake name in the credits to sell it just a little bit). I didn't have the problem of thinking that Olivier was dumb, I just appreciated the audacity of the Caine character's plan and commitment. I have to say that I think I was also taken in by his disguise, even if only for a few minutes. That sold me enough on Olivier not catching on.

The other thing I really remember from the movie is the very fun set design. You've got this huge mansion filled with crazy stuff and much of it is used for one reason or another. That's part of why I don't like Deathtrap as much, the set isn't as exciting to look around at.

I should really rewatch both. Seems like a big year for people in houses movies.
Check out my blog of many topics

ďIím not a quitter, Kimmy! I watched Interstellar all the way to the end!Ē