love

Author Topic: List of Shame REVIEWS  (Read 209989 times)

Jeff Schroeck

  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 982
Re: List of Shame REVIEWS
« Reply #1520 on: March 25, 2017, 08:39:08 AM »
I read somewhere Ivan Reitman complaining about how bluray was going to ruin Ghostbusters because all the matte lines would now be clearly visible.

DarkeningHumour

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 10453
  • When not sure if sarcasm look at username.
    • Pretentiously Yours
Re: List of Shame REVIEWS
« Reply #1521 on: April 27, 2017, 05:49:32 AM »
Harakiri
Masaki Kobayashi (1967)


If you watch Kurosawa movies too much you run the risk of forgetting that period pieces, and samurai movies in particular, don't have to be about fighting. There is certainly enough in Japanese culture to fill many a bloodless film. In fact, you can use a single traditional ritual as your framing device for your entire film, even though Harakiri is not entirely bloodless.

I am having trouble writing about this film without this becoming an essay on the many ways in which it is excellent. I am oddly dispassionate about the while thing. I would love to know how much of the story is a reflection of life in post-war Japan and how much of that is me inventing parallelisms. I had the same thought when I was watching Ugetsu, so there is a good chance I am bringing something to these movies.

Beyond that issue, Harakiri says a lot about considering the entire humanity of people when dealing with them and the hypocrisy of self-righteousness, but again, not an essay. It also reminds us of the ever-present possibility that even the powerful may fall. Man, this not writing an essay thing is getting hard.

Let's try talking about what I didn't like. The movie's structure becomes seamless after the first few scenes but I found the beginning a bit disconcerting. The time jumps were unclear and there was one point where I had to readjust my understanding of what had just happened. It might be just me being thick, but it made it hard to dive into the movie. Good thing the rest of it was so good. There were also a few shots, among the generally glorious cinematography, that I didn't appreciate, notably a few over the shoulder ones.

The movie relies a lot on exaggeration. There is a brand of adamant stubbornness in the samurai that I have encountered in other Japanese films in the past and that feels somewhat extreme - but then, I don't know many swordsmen from the 1600s. The fight is also a bit slapsticky, but not necessarily in a bad way, because it is less about the realistic depiction of how the situation would play out than the conclusion of the movie's theme. It was still if ever so slightly ridiculous, and I wonder if some Kurosawa movies would feel like that too if I were to rewatch them now.

I don't think I could ever love Harakiri. Its intelligence is thrilling but a bit cold. The film only conveys emotion when it gets darkest (and it gets Grave of the fireflies dark), which makes it all about sober, humourless storytelling. Great storytelling certainly, but not very joyous stuff. The best compliment I can pay this film is that it is fascinating in what it teaches the profane about feudal Japan, and that might not even be the best thing about it.

8/10

Took me long enough. Maybe I should fill my list with movies that are less difficult to get.
« Society is dumb. Art is everything. » - Junior

https://pretensiouslyyours.wordpress.com/

Teproc

  • Elite Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3529
Re: List of Shame REVIEWS
« Reply #1522 on: April 27, 2017, 12:45:20 PM »
Harakiri
Masaki Kobayashi (1967)


I don't think I could ever love Harakiri. Its intelligence is thrilling but a bit cold. The film only conveys emotion when it gets darkest (and it gets Grave of the fireflies dark), which makes it all about sober, humourless storytelling.

I can see that, and I wouldn't disagree exactly if it weren't for Nakadai's performance. The contrast between his present-day self, sad but determined, and the warmth we see him display in the flashbacks... that was enough for me to connect with it, though i was initially having similar troubles.
Legend: All-Time Favorite | Great  |  Very Good  |  Good  |  Poor  |  Bad

Letterbox'd

Teproc

  • Elite Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3529
Re: List of Shame REVIEWS
« Reply #1523 on: August 25, 2017, 04:54:26 AM »
L'Atalante (Jean Vigo, 1934)

A charming little film. Which is not at all what I expected, given its stature in the canon... it's kind of a lower stakes version of Sunrise, not as impressive visually (there are a few scenes like the swimming scene or the first boarding of the Atalante but overall it's no match for it), with a very enjoyable Michel Simon and an adorable Dita Parlow as highlights. I suppose that's enough for people to love it. It has that quiet humanism and poetic mood of a Jarmusch film but, well, I like those better as they don't have the haphazardous editing found here, that makes it hard for that mood to ever really settle, despite a very nice score.

And then there's the fact that the central relationship is not one I really want to root for given how they treat each other... even the Atalante crew doesn't seem like the healthiest environment: it reminds me of Carné's celebration of small communities in films like Hôtel du Nord or Le quai des brumes... except I like the individuals more than the community here. I suppose the fact that they're only brought together by circumstance is part of the whole idea, but I never feel a stronger bond there like I do in those films. 

6/10
Legend: All-Time Favorite | Great  |  Very Good  |  Good  |  Poor  |  Bad

Letterbox'd

Antares

  • Godfather
  • *****
  • Posts: 5013
Re: List of Shame REVIEWS
« Reply #1524 on: March 14, 2019, 05:12:52 PM »
I don't think I could ever love Harakiri. Its intelligence is thrilling but a bit cold.

But give it at least one more viewing, it's like a newly opened bottle of red wine, it gets better once you let it breathe a bit. The first time I watched it, I liked it. The second time, I LOVED it.
Masterpiece (100-91) | Classic (90-80) | Entertaining (79-69) | Mediocre (68-58) | Cinemuck (57-21) | Crap (20-0)

Eric/E.T.

  • Elite Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3830
Re: List of Shame REVIEWS
« Reply #1525 on: December 05, 2021, 06:30:08 PM »
Sholay
The only things keeping this from getting a thumbs down on iCM are the actual musical numbers. When Sholay is actually being a musical, it's pretty good. The buddy duet at the beginning between Veeru and Jai was surprising in its sweetness given that we've just been introduced to them as outlaws with a particular proficiency in murder via arms. Veeru's invasion of Basanti's carriage is plenty of fun, although by today's standards it would seem that persistent men are harassers by default. Basanti's dance to save Veeru is mesmerizing, and Holi celebrations are just wonderful to film in general, this one given extra weight by the event that brings it to a halt with the swiftness.

Everything outside of the musical numbers, which is a huge part of this 3 hour, 15 minute film, is overdone, overcooked, and hard to watch. It's one where you feel yourself starting to make sweeping generalizations about film based on what it does wrong. In the case of Sholay: Can the zoom ever be artistic? Do people falling after being shot ever look real? Is there a right way to do an extended shootout/action scene, or are they all so mind-numbing and repetitive? It's a movie that has me needing to watch 5-10 more good movies to remember what makes movies good.

The final fight scene between our hero, Thakur, and the 2-dimensional, cartoonish villain, Gabbar, is possibly the most ludicrous thing I've seen in a movie. The way images are edited together to make it look possible for a man with no arms to jump off 8-foot rocks to give another man a beatdown, the cuts to close-ups of just his legs stomping out Gabbar in completely unrealistic fashion, and then having him somehow maintain his balance without simply wiping out is just silly.

And I get - to an extent - that the silliness gives this film its charm. But at some point, I think we get carried away with turning negatives into positives for the sake of inclusivity and artistic populism. Most of the quick zooms to show what a sneaky character is doing on-screen are bad artistic decisions. A lot of the dramatic musical flourishes come at the most obvious points and are too exaggerated. The shootouts never end and become needless spectacle, and the falls are as fake in appearance as the blood. I'd watch a musical-numbers-only version of this film, gladly. I would never sit through the whole thing again, but I'm glad enough I did it once, for the sake of education.

-----

Alright, one down in the Dictation/List of Shame Club! I need to start marathoning the films of 2021 now, but I am going to get back in the ring at some point in the next couple of weeks.
A witty saying proves nothing. - Voltaire

Bondo

  • Objectively Awesome
  • ******
  • Posts: 23082
Re: List of Shame REVIEWS
« Reply #1526 on: December 12, 2021, 08:57:19 PM »
The Life of Emile Zola

Basically all I knew of Emile Zola was that he was an author. I am not sure how much this film actually deepens my knowledge, as it ends up being more focused on the Dryfuss Affair (which again I knew about exclusively as a name) than a deep dive into Zola's life. We do get a broad brush progression, with him and Paul Cezanne rooming in some drafty garret in poverty and obscurity, but then Zola hits it big with works that seem to be in the same ilk as Upton Sinclair, calling out depredations of society...inequality and corruption and the like. Did any of his work fundamentally change society? Who knows, as here it is all about setting him up as a bleeding heart willing to risk all who becomes wealthy and established and as a result cautious when initially asked by Ms. Dryfuss to use his influence to try to correct her husband's legal injustice, having been wrongly accused of treason. We get peeks into the military and legal corruptions that favor image over justice or efficacy. While it was certainly interesting, and I do think Paul Muni is good in the role, splitting its attention between biography and the focus on the Dryfuss Affair makes it less effective at both.

There is of course the other detail that central to the actual incident was Dryfuss being Jewish and antisemitic sentiments in Europe in the late 19th Century, a detail deliberately excluded, apparently at Jack Warner's request, to not stir things up with Hitler's Germany. Worth noting Warner himself was Jewish, but it certainly gets into sticky territory similar to how major studies (perhaps Disney above all) are presently bending over backwards to avoid offending the Chinese Communist Party. I think this external context made it a more interesting film to watch right now.