love

Author Topic: Oldkid's Ultimately Cool (And Long) Top 100 Marathon  (Read 75424 times)

Bill Thompson

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 17561
  • DOOM!!!!
    • Bill's Movie Emporium
Re: Oldkid's Ultimately Cool (And Long) Top 100 Marathon
« Reply #350 on: January 10, 2011, 09:43:06 AM »
I'll be looking forward to it, whenever you get the chance to restart.

oldkid

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 19044
  • Hi there! Feed me worlds!
Re: Oldkid's Ultimately Cool (And Long) Top 100 Marathon
« Reply #351 on: March 09, 2011, 06:11:11 PM »
The marathon returns!

I find it unfortunate that I took this winter break from my marathon.




 In some ways, it was necessary because I had an insanely busy winter.  On the other hand, it certainly didn’t mean that I was going to stop watching movies.  So now I have more than 20 films that should be on my marathon, but I didn’t do formal write-ups for.   I’m going to make up for that now.   My plan is to catch up on the writing of the films I have already seen, and to write on any other films that might qualify, and to have it done in the next month or so.  This might mean that I’m going to slack on quality, a bit.  Or it might mean that my writing skills will be honed.  But there it is, one way or the other.
"It's not art unless it has the potential to be a disaster." Bansky

Melvil

  • Godfather
  • *****
  • Posts: 9977
  • Eek
Re: Oldkid's Ultimately Cool (And Long) Top 100 Marathon
« Reply #352 on: March 09, 2011, 06:22:38 PM »
Hooray! I'm looking forward to your catch-up reviews, however they shape up.

oldkid

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 19044
  • Hi there! Feed me worlds!
Re: Oldkid's Ultimately Cool (And Long) Top 100 Marathon
« Reply #353 on: March 09, 2011, 06:25:58 PM »
The Big Lebowski



I hate re-writing reviews.  One of my biggest reasons for avoiding continuing my marathon was that I hadn’t posted my Big Lebowski review before my computer crashed, so it was lost, so I had to write it from scratch.  I hate that.

When I first watched Lebowski, I had high hopes for it.  It was a Coen comedy and I love Coen comedies.  It had Jeff Bridges and John Goodman, which is a great combination.  And it was a cult favorite.  All of which, added together, should mean that I would absolutely adore this film.  But when I watched it, it was completely forgettable to me.  Of no real consequence to my film world.  But due to the high acclaim, I figured that there must be something I’m missing, so I’d watch it again to see if I could acclaim it as much as others.   Let’s run it through my gauntlet of ratings…

Technical—5/5—A very well made film, as all the Coen’s films tend to be.  The camera work was interesting, the acting top notch and even the lighting was noticeably excellent.  

Interest—3/5—Frankly, there is no real grab for me in this film, nothing to capture my attention.  It’s funny enough and some of the characters are well done, but in the end I’m asking, “Why should I care?”  That’s not a good sign for me.

Tension—4/5—Lots of tension around Walter.  Almost every time Walter is on the screen, I’m waiting for something to go wrong.  And it does.  And it is wonderful, I must say.



Emotional—2/5—I didn’t hit any emotional highs or lows here.  It was just a movie.

Characters-5/5—There are plenty of characters that didn’t do anything for me.  Jesus is memorable, but more offensive than anything else.  It’s a shame that Steve Buscerni didn’t get more of a role, because he’s a great actor, but his character left me out in the cold.  Julianne Moore is good, but, again kind of offensive.  However, Jeff Bridges and John Goodman both give probably their best performances ever in this film.  Unbelievable.   The characters are so overwritten that it is almost imposible for them to be believable.  But they are.  The Dude and Walter are two of the greatest characters ever, and the pairing of this odd couple is one of the greatest cinema genius ideas.   The combination of the The Dude’s hippie, pot-hazed laid-backness and Walter’s paranoid, conspiracy-theory, gun-toting anger is simply perfect.    The movie should be watched if only for this alone.



Theme—4/5—It is often difficult to nail a theme to a Coen Bros movie, because there is the obvious theme and often another theme underneath it.   In the end, I think it is a celebration of being laid-back, of the Taoist humility, of being the water that flows over everything by conforming to each shape that comes it’s way, allowing it to flow.  The Dude truly abides, simply by letting everything else be.  All the other characters are trying to force, to manipulate, to control.  The Dude just is.  And thus, in the end, he saves himself a lot of heartache and pain.

Ethics—4/5—Again, I think the film celebrates a Taoist ideal, recommending it as a way to live.  And, in the best film tradition, it shows this life in the midst of turmoil instead of describing it conceptually.  

Personal—3/5—As much as I admire the Taoist tradition, it isn’t my personality type.  However, I can appreciate it.

I liked The Big Lebowski much more this second watching than the first.  However, a couple caveats:  the constant use of CINECAST really put me off.  I don’t mind it, usually, but the use of such language puts a tiny stress on me.  The word CINECAST was used 2.22 times per minute in the film.  It’s not a record, (which might fairly go to “Nil By Mouth” which uses the word 3.34 times per minute and isn’t directly about the topic of language  Chart of movies that use the word "CINECAST" the most), but it is enough for me to be put off by the language.  And secondly, as much as I appreciated the two main characters and the themes, almost every other character put me off of the film.  

Thus, in the end, although it has much to make it great, it will not be making my top 100.




Marathon change: I'm not going to give my list at the bottom of each review.  Takes up too much room.  In a bit, I'll have a list like sminoff's someone near the top of my marathon.  Links to come.
"It's not art unless it has the potential to be a disaster." Bansky

smirnoff

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 26251
    • smirnoff's Top 100
Re: Oldkid's Ultimately Cool (And Long) Top 100 Marathon
« Reply #354 on: March 09, 2011, 06:34:19 PM »
I always like reading your 'themes' and 'ethics' segments best. You have such an informed and unique take.

I hate re-writing reviews.  One of my biggest reasons for avoiding continuing my marathon was that I hadn’t posted my Big Lebowski review before my computer crashed, so it was lost, so I had to write it from scratch.  I hate that.

Argh, so frustrating! After I lost enough posts to various mishaps I started to get in the habit of writing anything longer than a paragraph in Google Docs (which auto saves as you go and stores the file to your account, not your hard drive. So not only will in me safe in the even of a meltdown, but you can access it from any computer too!). Anyways, just thought I'd mention it.

oldkid

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 19044
  • Hi there! Feed me worlds!
Re: Oldkid's Ultimately Cool (And Long) Top 100 Marathon
« Reply #355 on: March 09, 2011, 06:36:06 PM »
Thank, 'noff.   I'll consider that.  Google docs might make it easier for me to re post as well.
"It's not art unless it has the potential to be a disaster." Bansky

Bondo

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 23082
Re: Oldkid's Ultimately Cool (And Long) Top 100 Marathon
« Reply #356 on: March 09, 2011, 07:12:20 PM »
Yeah, I've always considered The Big Lebowski to be a couple of great characters/performances in great scenes in a fairly mediocre film. It is kind of at the median point for the Coens.

Bill Thompson

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 17561
  • DOOM!!!!
    • Bill's Movie Emporium
Re: Oldkid's Ultimately Cool (And Long) Top 100 Marathon
« Reply #357 on: March 09, 2011, 07:18:48 PM »
I love The Big Lebowski, it's a comedy about observing absurdity. The absurd things in The Big Lebowski are funny, but they aren't as funny as the reactions people have to the absurdity that is going on around them. That's what makes it a great comedy and great film period in my eyes.

Sam the Cinema Snob

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 26795
Re: Oldkid's Ultimately Cool (And Long) Top 100 Marathon
« Reply #358 on: March 09, 2011, 07:53:28 PM »
I'm with Bill. It's a brilliant little absurd comedy.

oldkid

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 19044
  • Hi there! Feed me worlds!
Re: Oldkid's Ultimately Cool (And Long) Top 100 Marathon
« Reply #359 on: March 10, 2011, 11:36:52 AM »
Synecdoche, New York



The final item Ferris was going to do before leaving Filmspotting was to watch SNY and make a line by line audio commentary on it.  We were supposed to get together and comment together, but it just didn’t happen, which is sad.   Ferris and I are both in our forties and we both could appreciate the considerations of late-life themes in the film and the struggles of the protagonist.  Ferris claimed that he had a specific concept of the theme of the film, which I never heard.  Perhaps it is not too late, but we shall see.

So I watched it on my own and I give my own thoughts of this film  I have to say that for about two years I was quite enamored of Charlie Kauffman, but this has become less so of late.  I still appreciate his unique approach to storytelling and his themes are significant.  However, as a unit, his films seem a bit whiney.   Certainly, though, Eternal Sunshine is going to make my top 100.  So what about Synecdoche?

Technical—5/5—For a first film, Kauffman did a fine job on this. Especially the creation of the town and the theatre as the town within the town was marvelously done.  The acting was top notch and the script was intellectually fascinating.

Interest—4/5—There is so much going on in this film that it is hard to turn away.  I’ve watched it almost three times and I feel that I would need to watch it three more times to even catch all the main themes.  There are allegorical pieces, like the house on fire, that seems to conflict with the more realistic approach, but that only increases the mystery of the basic question, “What the hell is this film about anyway?”



Tension—2/5—There isn’t really much tension in the script.  It is just one damn event after another, and while they are all connected on the surface, one thing doesn’t really lead to another.  Events come out of nowhere, unexpectedly.  Thus, no tension is really built.  The only tension, again, is the meaning of the film.

Emotional—3/5—While the structure of the film makes it difficult to feel emotionally connected to the events, still Phillip Seymour Hoffman makes an empathetic character.  Kauffman’s script doesn’t make this easy, however.

Characters—4/5—Like Ikiru, this is really a one character film.  It is about Caden’s experience of the second half of his life, and everything we see is from his perspective, and most of the lack of realism is because his perspective is so skewed by his constant vision of death.  Thus, in a sense, the entire film is about character.  But this character is so confused, so horrified by his dismantlement of all that was significant in his life, that it is hard to appreciate this perspective.



Theme—5/5—The whole movie is about theme, really.  It is about one’s life when death is at the forefront of it.  There is much made of a near-death experience that gives one a new perspective on life.  However, this film could show the opposite of that.  What if one becomes so focused on death that life becomes meaningless?  So concerned about guilt and regret and health and powerlessness that life itself is simply a regurgitation of itself?  SNY is the perfect example of how obsession, even on a general positive thing, can be taken out of balance so that it becomes destructive, sucking in not only your life but the lives of those around you.



Ethics—5/5—Caden’s self-focus is so complete in this film that no one else really matters (except, on occasion, Hazel, excellent portrayed by Samantha Morton).  Finally, even he himself doesn’t matter and he allows Dianne Weist to direct every action in his life.  What I don’t know is whether Kauffman is making a sad commentary on Caden’s life—this is what we should avoid—or whether he is saying this is what we all experience.  We will all, eventually, be directed by others to do what we do, we all, at times, obsess on death and we all make errors because of it along the way.  Whichever the case, it is thoughtful and encourages thought.

Personal—3/5—As important as I think SNY is, it doesn’t connect with my life as much as I would think it should.  I am the right age, but perhaps not the right temperament to really see myself as Caden.  Sure, I think about death, although usually in a way looking forward to the break than anything else.   

I think that Synecdoche is an important film about death and life, as important as anything that Bergman has done.  I also think it is a difficult film: it is often unpleasant, often confusing and sometimes seems masturbatory on Kauffman’s part.  It is like a distasteful medicine you take because its good for you, a difficult class in college you take because your major requires it, but there is little pleasure in it, except, perhaps the intellectual pleasure of obtaining a hard-won nugget of knowledge. 
"It's not art unless it has the potential to be a disaster." Bansky

 

love