Films Seen in 2005

Submitted by Conall on Sat, 05/07/2005 - 06:36
Tags: 
  • Delicious
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • Facebook
  • Google
  • Technorati
  1. Films on release:
  2. Gegen die Wand (Head-On) [Fatih Akin] 7
  3. Melinda And Melinda (Woody Allen) 5 Not terrible by any means, but pretty uninspired. I'd like to agree with the argument made by Roger Ebert and a few others that the film is always aware of its being a made up story, that it's in a way a self-critique, but if that were so, then why would the "frame" scenes, the scenes of the playwrights sitting around discussing their ideas, be just as bland and poorly scripted as anything else in the film? According to A.O. Scott, the new Allen film that debuted at Cannes, "Match Point", is a return to form, but then a lot of people said that about Melinda.
  4. La Mala Educacion (Bad Education) [Almodóvar] 7
  5. Mar Adrento (The Sea Inside) [Amenabar] 7
  6. The Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou [Wes Anderson] 5
  7. Les Choristes [Christophe Barratieu] 4
  8. The Incredibles [Brad Bird] 6
  9. Kinsey [Bill Condon] 5
  10. Million Dollar Baby [Clint Eastwood] 9
  11. Brodeuses (Éléonore Faucher, 2004) 7
  12. End of the Century: The Story of the Ramones [Jim Fields, Michael Grammaglia] 8
  13. Finding Neverland [Marc Forster] 6
  14. The Big Red One: The Reconstruction [Sam Fuller] 8
  15. Hotel Rwanda [Terry George] 6
  16. Birth [Jonathan Glazer] 7
  17. Ray [Taylor Hackford] 5
  18. The Hitch-Hiker's Guide To The Galaxy [Garth Jennings] 5
  19. Un Long Dimance de Fiançailles (A Very Long Engagement) [Jean-Pierre Jeunet] 7
  20. Feux Rouges [Cédric Kahn] 7
  21. Nobody Knows (Hirokazu Kore-eda) 6
  22. Vera Drake [Mike Leigh] 7
  23. My House In Umbria [Richard Loncraine] 4
  24. Boundin' [Bud Luckley, Roger Gould] (short screened before The Incredibles) 5
  25. Young Adam [David Mackenzie] 7
  26. Maria Full Of Grace [Joshua Marston] 6
  27. In My Father's Den [Brad McGann] 7
  28. Broadway: The Golden Age [Rick McKay] 7
  29. Closer [Mike Nichols] 5
  30. Travellers and Magicians (Khyentse Norbu)
  31. Landmines - A Love Story (Dennis O'Rourke) 6
  32. Steamboy [Katsuhiro Otomo] 6
  33. Sideways [Payne] 7
  34. I Heart Huckabees [Russell] 6
  35. Diarios de motocicleta (Motorcycle Diaries) [Walter Salles] 6
  36. Après Vous [Pierre Salvadori] 6
  37. The Aviator [Scorsese] 4
  38. Guerrilla: The Taking of Patty Hearst [Robert Stone] 6
  39. Being Julia [Istvan Szabo] 5
  40. Last Days (Gus Van Sant) 6/7
  41. De-Lovely [Irwin Winkler] 6
  42. 2046 (Wong Kar-Wai) 7
  43. 2046* [Second Viewing] 8 I still think it's the least great of the "trilogy" it loosely makes up with Days of Being Wild and In the Mood for Love, but it's a breathtaking film. I thought a second viewing would make it all clear to me, but it's as much of a mystery as it was the first time. In terms of its formal elements, it's perhaps Wong's least chaotic film, but it's his most chaotic in terms of narrative. Critics (Roger Ebert for one) and viewers who don't approve of "modernism" (this is a loaded term, and I mean it in only a certain way, but I do mean as distinct from post-modernism) in films except when it's played out in easily digestible ways by Tarantino or P.T. Anderson, still got behind ITMFL because it seemed restrained, both in its formal qualities and its narrative, and had the usual psychologically plausible characters that are easy to latch on to. Those same people, of course, dismiss 2046 as over-the-top, formless, self-involved, unengaging etc. I think much of one's feelings about this film will relate to what one thought of Su Lai-zhen (Maggie Cheung) and Chow Mo-wan (Tony Leung) and their relationship in that earlier film. If you think that ITMFL film was really about how those two characters were "different" from other people, as they both kept telling themselves over and over, then the fact that in this film Mr. Chow becomes a womanizer will probably turn you off. If, however, you consider the idea that, really, the couple in ITMFL were not different, but merely obsessed with the idea of being different, and in fact were much the same as the people they considered themselves different from, then a myriad of possibilities open up in regard to 2046. Despite all that, I still feel that this film is a closer companion piece to Days than to ITMFL, that in some ways the similarities to ITMFL were exaggerated, perhaps to capitalise on the success that film had at art-house cinemas around the world. When those strains of Xavier Cugat's "Perfidia" start up, one is instantly brought back to the world of that film. The most obvious linkage between the two films in terms of the narrative is the scene where Chow meets Carina Lau's character Lulu (or Mimi), and they talk about Leslie Cheung's character from that film (if I'm not mistaken, there's a brief shot of Leslie Cheung in that scene, though whether it was shot before his death, or edited in, or if I just imagined it, I don't know). Then there's the moment where Chow combs his hair in front of the mirror, which brings back Leung's cameo at the end of that film, and we realise that this is the same character he played then, 13 years earlier. The time between the release of these three films, the notorious amount of time it took for 2046 to be made, are all linked with the way time is used in this film and the earlier films. We witness Leung, Lau and Cheung age across these films, and we realise that all the efforts their characters make to alter this process will be unsuccessful. Chow won't make it to 2046, the place where things don't change, because such a place only exists in science-fiction. Philosophy may be the art of dying, but cinema, amongst other things, captures the process of aging and dying, as these films demonstrate.
  44. 2 Young (Derek Yee) 5/6 Ends up going for too long, is not a very original romantic drama etc., but basically it works. Like the other Derek Yee film I've seen, Lost In Time, it works from the basis of that old adage, "show don't tell": what makes this film successful within its pretty modest bounds are not the speeches where characters explain their feelings (although these are much better acted than equivalent scenes in an awful lot of films), but the scenes where the teenage couple are in their kitchen cooking together, moments like that. It's worth a look.
  45. House of Flying Daggers [Yimou] 7
  46. Cinémathèque, Retrospectives, Festivals, Re-Runs etc. [i.e. films seen on the big screen other than the ones listed above]:
  47. Blow-Up* [Antonioni, 1966] 9
  48. My Brilliant Career [Gillian Armstrong, 1979] 7
  49. Amarelo Manga (Mango Yellow) [Claude Assis, 2002] 3
  50. Ils se marièrent et eurent beaucoup d'enfants (...And They Lived Happily Ever After) [Yvan Attal, 2004] 5
  51. 14 Tex Avery Cartoons
  52. Hands Up! (Clarence Badger, 1926] 7
  53. Gas Pump Girls [Joel Bender, 1979] 2
  54. Winter Light [Bergman, 1963] 7
  55. The Silence [Bergman, 1963] 9
  56. Prima Della Rivoluzione (Before The Revolution) (Bertolucci, 1964) 8
  57. Eyes [Brakhage, 1971]
  58. Deus Ex [Brakhage, 1971]
  59. The Act of Seeing With One's Own Eyes [Brakhage, 1971]
  60. Modern Times (Chaplin, 1936)
  61. The Great Dictator (Chaplin, 1940)
  62. A Movie [Bruce Conner, 1965]
  63. Report [Conner, 1967] 9
  64. Hue & Cry [Charles Crichton, 1946] 7
  65. Meshes of the Afternoon* [Deren, 1943]
  66. The Queen Of Spades [Thorold Dickinson, 1949] 7
  67. The Parson's Widow [Dreyer, 1920]
  68. Night of the Comet [Thom Eberhardt, 1984] 4
  69. Horror of Dracula [Terence Fisher, 1958] 7
  70. La Femme de Gilles [Frédéric Fonteyne, 2004] 8
  71. Baraka [Ron Fricke, 1992] 5
  72. Hide & Seek [Su Friedrich, 1996] 5
  73. Horns and Halos [Michael Galinsky, Suki Hawley, 2002] 6
  74. Fear And Loathing In Las Vegas (Terry Gilliam, 1998) 5
  75. Charlotte et Véronique, ou, Tous Les Garçons S'Appellent Patrick (Godard, 1959)*
  76. Le Mépris* [Godard, 1963] 10
  77. The Dawn Patrol [Edmund Goulding, 1938] 5
  78. History Lessons (Barbara Hammer, 2000) 6
  79. Der siebente kontinent (The Seventh Continent) (Michael Haneke, 1989) 6
  80. Benny’s Video (Haneke, 1992) 5
  81. 71 Fragmente einer Chronologie des Zufalls (71 Fragments of a Chronology of Chance) (Haneke, 1994) 6
  82. Funny Games (Haneke, 1997) 5
  83. Das Schloß (The Castle) (Haneke, 1997) 7
  84. Code Inconnu: récits incomplet de divers voyages (Haneke, 2000) 8
  85. Morgiana (Juraj Herz, 1972) 6
  86. Marnie* (Hitchock, 1964) 8
  87. Comme une image (Jaoui, 2004) 8
  88. Dead Man (Jim Jarmusch, 1995) 6 The opening scenes are an interesting pop-culture take on Kafka, but it devolves into a really unnecessary narrative; my main problem with it is that most of the dialogue is these endless, empty, self-consciously clever lines that exist for the purpose of being repeated by fans, but that don't succeed in aiding the atmosphere of the film. The scenes without dialogue are on the whole very good, the b&w photography is fantastic, and the various cameo appearances are all good (particularly Robert Mitchum), but the bottom line is, genuine cult classics don't try this hard to become so.
  89. Paths of Glory (Kubrick, 1957) 8
  90. In The Mirror of Maya Deren (Martina Kudlácek, 2002) 6
  91. Sugata Sanshiro (Judo Saga) (Kurosawa, 1943) 7
  92. High and Low (Kurosawa, 1962) 9
  93. Les Soeurs Fâchées (Alexandra Leclère, 2004) 6
  94. L’Équipier (Philippe Lioret, 2004) 8
  95. The Love Parade (Ernst Lubitsch, 1929) 7
  96. Blue Velvet (David Lynch, 1986) 7
  97. Lost Highway (Lynch, 1997) 4
  98. Whisky Galore! (Alexander Mackendrick, 1948) 7
  99. Kitchen Sink (Alison Maclean, 1989)
  100. Persons of Interest (Maclean, Tobias Perse, 2003) 6
  101. Lo Strano Vizio della Signora Wardh (The Strange Vice of Mrs. Wardh) (Sergio Martino, 1970) 6
  102. Tell Me If It Hurts (Richard Massingham, 1934)
  103. Various Massingham Trailers (Massingham, 1942-46)
  104. Introducing the New Worker (Massingham, 1951)
  105. Vixen! (Meyer, 1968) 6
  106. Tales of the Taira Clan (Mizoguchi)
  107. Podium (Yann Moix, 2004) 5
  108. The Thin Blue Line (Errol Morris, 1988) 8
  109. Voyage au début du monde (Manoel de Oliviera) 6/7
  110. Cul-de-sac (Polanski, 1966) 8
  111. Rosemary’s Baby (Polanski, 1968) 9
  112. A Matter of Life and Death (Michael Powell, Emeric Pressburger, 1946) 9
  113. Buenos Aires Zero Degree: The Making of Happy Together (Kwan Pun-Leung and Amos Lee, 1999) 7
  114. The Princess Bride (Rob Reiner, 1987) 7
  115. Pas Sur La Bouche (Resnais, 2003) 7
  116. Place de L'Étoile (Eric Rohmer, 1965)* 7
  117. Ma Nuit Chez Maud (Rohmer, 1969) * 10
  118. Le Genou de Claire (Claire's Knee)* (Rohmer, 1970) 9
  119. L'Amour, l'après-midi (Rohmer, 1972)*
  120. Les Nuits de la Pleine Lune (Full Moon In Paris)* (Rohmer, 1984) 9 Astonishingly beautiful film that I hadn't fully appreciated the first time I saw it, on video, but really hit me seeing it on the big screen. Rivals Le Rayon vert and La Femme de L'Aviateur as the greatest of the Comédies et Proverbes.
  121. Le Rayon Vert (Rohmer, 1986)*9
  122. Les 4 Aventures de Reinette et Mirabelle (Rohmer, 1987)* 8
  123. Conte de printemps (A Tale of Springtime)* (Rohmer, 1990) 10
  124. Conte d'été (A Summer's Tale) (Rohmer, 1996)* 9
  125. Conte d'automne (Rohmer, 1998)* 8/9
  126. The Hero of the Dardanelles (Alfred Rolfe, 1915) [Reconstruction by Daniel Reynaud]
  127. Les Maîtres Fous (Jean Rouch, 1955)
  128. Chronique d'un été (Rouch, Edgar Morin, 1961)
  129. Raging Bull* (Scorsese, 1980) 10
  130. Underworld (Josef von Sternberg, 1927) 6
  131. Dishonored (Sternberg, 1931) 8 Seeing this film confirmed for me that Sternberg is simply one of the great filmmakers. I might even go so far as to say that, for sheer ingenuity and directorial talent, the only other Hollywood filmmakers on a par with him are Hitchcock and Welles. This film, indeed, does a lot of things that Welles wouldn't do for another 17 years, in The Lady From Shanghai. This isn't one of his most celebrated films, probably because its greatness lies in Sternberg's overwhelming style than in anything else. Of those I've seen, though, it's one of his greatest
  132. The Great McGinty (Preston Sturges, 1940) 7
  133. Jour de Fête (Jacques Tati, 1949) 8
  134. Play Time (Tati, 1967) 10
  135. Die Andere Frau (The Other Woman) (Margarethe von Trotta, 2004) 6 [screened with a short film that I think was called "Falling"]
  136. Fahrenheit 451 (Truffaut, 1966) 7
  137. Outer Space (Peter Tscherkassky, 1999) 8
  138. Instructions For A Light and Sound Machine (Tscherkassy, 2004)
  139. Il Gattopardo (The Leopard) (Visconti, 1963) 8
  140. As Tears Go By (Wong Kar-Wai, 1988) 6 The Wong Kar-Wai retrospective screening at ACMI cinemas in Melbourne at the moment has been a great opportunity for me; prior to this I'd only seen two of his films, on video. This is his first film, and obviously by far the least accomplished of those that I've seen. The film is very much a part of 80s Hong-Kong genre cinema (not that I'm at all expert in that area, but I have seen at least a handful of those films), though there are occasional moments that make one think of the auteur he would become (the repetitive use of particular pieces of pop music, the central theme of unspoken love, speeding-up and slowing-down of time, etc, and also a very interesting shot of a woman on a boat, who we see from behind, that appears twice in the film, seemingly unconnected to what else is going on; we presume the woman is Maggie Cheung's character, but the way it's used is typical of Wong's unusual way of dealing with time in his films). Still, even the most typical 80s HK action film is a funner experience to watch than just any other genre cinema: the jittery camerawork, the insane, kinetic editing, the ridiculously compressed sound, the over-the-top acting, the bad guys with maniacal laughs, etc. And the very young Maggie Cheung is wonderful, of course. Most interesting just to see where this major filmmaker started (and his next film, Days of Being Wild, was a huge step up from this), but overall an enjoyable movie-going experience.
  141. A Fei jing juen (Days of Being Wild) (Wong, 1991) 8
  142. Chong qing sen lin (Chungking Express)* (Wong, 1994) 7
  143. In The Mood For Love (Wong, 2000) 9 Finally saw this movie! Wong's most restrained and emotionally engaging film is at the same time his most Godardian, even though we tend to think of Godard in anything but those terms. Particularly reminiscent of Vivre Sa Vie in the shots of the backs of characters heads, and the haunting way we are drawn into this young woman's existence through the abnormal and alienating filmmaking techniques. Then there're the scenes where Leung and Cheung "rehearse" what they're going to say to their spouses, or what they'd say to each other if they really were having an afair. Also the repetitive use of particular pieces of music, which is true of every Wong film I've seen, right back to his first film As Tears Go By, which is reminiscent of both Vivre Sa Vie and Le Mépris. I don't want to say too much, as I know this is a film that a lot of people have seen many times and thought and written a lot about, but at any rate, at this point it's possibly my favourite Wong film
  144. Mong bat liu (Lost In Time) (Derek Yee, 2003) 6
  145. Master of Zen (Brandy Yuen, 1994) 6
  146. Huang gu shi jie (Yes, Madam) (Corey Yuen, 1985) 6
  147. 7 new French short films at Melbourne's French Film Festival
  148. about 5 new experimental short films
  149. TV/Video/DVD etc:
  150. What's Up Tiger Lily? (Woody Allen, 1966) 5 The idea for this film is a lot funnier than the film ends up being; the frustrating thing is that the original film looks like a lot of fun, and I suspect would actually be much better entertainment than the film we're left with. Every line of dialogue has to try to be hilarious, and at least half the time it doesn't work, for me anyway. The one great line I remembered was, when they're looking at a map of the bad guy's house, someone says "this is where [whatever-his-name-is] lives", and someone responds, "You mean he lives inside this piece of paper?" And the girls were all very cute, of course. I still give it a 5, because this kind of outrageous, wacky filmmaking has to be encouraged; a bad film of this kind is always superior to a film that just repeats the same old formulas.
  151. Take The Money And Run (Woody Allen, 1969) 6
  152. Bananas [Allen, 1971] 6
  153. Everything You Always Wanted To Know About Sex But Were Afraid To Ask [Allen, 1972) 4
  154. Love And Death (Allen, 1975) 5/6
  155. Annie Hall (Allen, 1977)* 8
  156. Broadway Danny Rose [Allen, 1984] 7
  157. Hannah And Her Sisters [Allen, 1986] 8
  158. Oedipus Wrecks (Allen, 1989) 5
  159. Crimes and Misdemeanors [Allen, 1989] 6
  160. Manhattan Murder Mystery (Allen, 1993) 7
  161. Deconstructing Harry [Allen, 1997] 6
  162. Women On The Verge of a Nervous Breakdown (Almodovar, 1988) 7
  163. Hable Con Ella (Talk To Her) [Almodóvar, 2003] 8
  164. M*A*S*H (Robert Altman, 1970) 4
  165. The Player (Altman, 1992) 8
  166. Short Cuts (Altman, 1993) 9
  167. Boogie Nights [P.T. Anderson, 1997] 5
  168. Rushmore [Wes Anderson, 1998] 6
  169. The Royal Tenenbaums (Anderson, 2001) 5 As Philip Marlowe once said about Ernest Hemingway, "[He's] a guy that keeps saying the same thing over and over until you begin to believe it must be good". Perhaps if I'd seen all of Anderson's films when they came out, at a distance of 3 years, I wouldn't have been so bored by this film, but as it is I think it might be worse than Life Aquatic, as that at least did have the occasional lovely moment, in amongst the crap. Jeff Goldblum's cameos are probably the best thing about both films. I still give it a 5 because I suppose you have to respect Anderson for just doing his thing regardless of the outside world, but I got nothing out of it apart from the very occasional laugh
  170. Blow-Up* (Antonioni, 1966) 9 Third time I've seen it, though I didn't watch through to the end, as I just happened to see it on television late one night. For what it is, this film is perfect. There's much that one could analyse, of course, which I'm not going to do. I no longer feel it has quite the profundity I thought it had the first time I saw it, but it manages to be both a brilliant observation of life in a particular time, place and milieu, and a genuinely successful study of the nature of perception. If someone made a film like that now, they'd be laughed at for their pretension, but it works here.
  171. Zabriskie Point [Antonioni, 1970] 8
  172. Requiem For A Dream (Darren Aronofsky, 2000) 6
  173. Harold and Maude [Hal Ashby, 1971] 5
  174. Babette's Feast (Gabriel Axel, 1987) 8
  175. Through A Glass Darkly [Bergman, 1961] 7
  176. Persona [Bergman, 1966] 9
  177. Shame (Bergman, 1968) 7
  178. Hour of the Wolf [Bergman, 1968] 6
  179. The Magic Flute [Bergman, 1975] 8
  180. Babes In Arms [Busby Berkeley, 1939] 6
  181. Il Conformista [Bertolucci, 1969] 8
  182. Tranceformer - A Portrait of Lars von Trier (Stig Bjorkman, 1997) 6
  183. I Am Curious, Film (Stig Bjorkman, 1995) 5
  184. À Ma Soeur! [Breillat, 2001] 5
  185. Dracula [Tod Browning, 1931] 7
  186. Carlton + Godard = Cinema [Nigel Buesst, 2003] 7
  187. Un Chien Andalou* [Bunuel, 1927]
  188. L'Age D'Or [Bunuel, 1930] 7
  189. Belle de Jour [Bunuel, 1967] 10
  190. Tristana [Bunuel, 1970] 9
  191. The Portrait of a Lady (Jane Campion)
  192. Le Jour Se Lève(Marcel Carné, 1939) 6 Liked it a little more than Les Enfants du Paradis, but at this point in time I really don't get what the big deal is about Carné; maybe someday. Apparently it was one of the first films to use dissolves to indicate flashbacks, so for that it's obviously very influential, and I was quite tired when I saw it, but on the whole, only vaguely entertaining.
  193. The Killing Of A Chinese Bookie [Cassavetes, 1976] 7/8
  194. The Night Porter (Liliana Cavani, 1974) 5/6
  195. Le Boucher [Chabrol, 1970] 8
  196. The Gold Rush [Chaplin, 1925] 7
  197. Tanguy* (Etienne Chatiliez, 2001) 5
  198. Raising Arizona [Coen, 1987] 7
  199. Three Dollars (Robert Connolly, 2005) 4/5 Maybe I'm unduly harsh about films made and set in my own home town, or maybe it's because I saw it on an airplane, but over-earnest films about social issues that toy half-heartedly with unusual narrative technique really don't do it for me. David Wenham plays David Wenham yet again, which is a shame, as he is capable of acting, as he showed when I saw in the MTC production of Cyrano de Bergerac. If your image of Australia is one of permanent sun and people going off to the beach every day, I suppose a film like this would be worth seeing to change your perspective, and I must say that it did pick up on certain aspects of life in Melbourne that are rarely shown on film or television, but, in the end, a lacklustre film.
  200. A Nightmare On Elm Street [Craven, 1984] 6
  201. Various early films by G.H. Cricks and J.H. Martin
  202. Dead Ringers (Cronenberg, 1988) 8
  203. Love Actually [Richard Curtis, 2003] 4
  204. Captain Blood [Curtiz, 1935] 6
  205. The Adventures of Robin Hood [Curtiz, 1938] 7
  206. Angels With Dirty Faces [Curtiz, 1938] 8
  207. Les Parapluies de Cherbourg (Jacques Demy, 1964) 8
  208. Carrie [De Palma, 1976] 7
  209. Derrida (Kirby Dick, Amy Ziering Kofman, 2002) 7
  210. Murder, My Sweet (Edward Dmytryk, 1944) 7
  211. On The Town [Stanley Donen & Gene Kelly, 1949] 7
  212. Pépé Le Moko [Julien Duvivier, 1937] 7
  213. Million Dollar Baby* (Clint Eastwood, 2004) 8
  214. High Plains Drifter (Eastwood, 1972) 7
  215. Strike [Eisenstein, 1924]
  216. There's Something About Mary [Farrelly, 1998] 6
  217. The Bitter Tears of Petra von Kant [Fassbinder, 1972] 6
  218. Ali: Fear Eats The Soul [Fassbinder, 1974] 7
  219. Satyricon [Fellini, 1969] 7
  220. Various early Lewis Fitzhamon & Cecil Hepworth films
  221. The Fireman's Ball (Forman, 1967) 9
  222. The Manchurian Candidate [Frankenheimer, 1962] 9
  223. The French Connection [William Friedkin, 1971] 8
  224. Pickup On South Street [Fuller, 1954] 7
  225. Shock Corridor [Fuller, 1963] 6
  226. Napoleon (Abel Gance, 1927) 7
  227. Sexy Beast [Jonathan Glazer, 2000] 7
  228. Le Petit Soldat [Godard, 1960] 7
  229. Une Femme Mariée [Godard, 1964] 7
  230. One Plus One [Godard, 1968] 5
  231. Le Gai Savoir [Godard, 1969]
  232. Tout Va Bien [Godard & Gorin, 1972] 7
  233. Numéro Deux [Godard & Miéville, 1975]
  234. Ici et ailleurs [Godard, Gorin & Miéville, 1976] 8
  235. Passion (Godard, 1982) 7
  236. Deux Fois Cinquante Ans de Cinéma Français (Godard, Miéville, 1995) 8 Stunning, beautiful, fascinating late-period Godard. He seems to require the presence of strong women to keep his acerbity (and arguably misogyny) in check, whether Anna Karina or Anne-Marie Miéville. Of course it would need several viewings to absorb fully (Rosenbaum wrote in his review that it took him 3 viewings to fully come to grips with it, and he's obviously a hell of a lot more knowledgeable about the cinema than I am), but really it's one of the more watchable Godard films of this period. Highly reccommended.
  237. JLG/JLG [Godard, 1995] 6
  238. Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch’s War on Journalism (Robert Greenwald, 2004) 7
  239. Way Down East (Griffith, 1920) 8
  240. Orphans of the Storm (Griffith, 1921) 7
  241. La Pianiste (Haneke, 2001) 8
  242. Wonder Boys (Hanson, 2000) 7
  243. Red River (Hawks, 1948) 8
  244. Get Carter (Mike Hodges, 1971) 8
  245. A Beautiful Mind (Ron Howard, 2001) 4
  246. The Outlaw (Howard Hughes, 1943) 5
  247. What I Have Written (John Hughes [Australian], 1995) 6/7
  248. The Breakfast Club (John Hughes [American], 1985) 7 For what it is, this is really a good film
  249. The Battle Of San Pietro (John Huston, 1945)
  250. The Treasure of the Sierra Madre (Huston, 1948) 8
  251. Beat The Devil (Huston, 1953) 6
  252. Yukinojo Henge (An Actor’s Revenge) (Kon Ichikawa, 1963) 9
  253. Le Goût des Autres (Agnès Jaoui, 2000) 7
  254. Delicatessen [Jeunet&Caro, 1991] 5
  255. The Meaning of Life (Terry Jones & Terry Gilliam, 1983) 6/7
  256. Adaptation (Spike Jonze, 2002) 7
  257. The Phantom of the Opera (Rupert Julien, 1925) 6
  258. Body Heat (Lawrence Kasdan, 1981) 6
  259. Close Up (Abbas Kiarostami, 1990) 9 So much could be said, but I don't feel up to explaining why I loved it so much right now. What I will say is that the prologue has some beautiful moments - the soldiers and the taxi driver sitting in the car chatting, the taxi driver getting out of the car and kicking the piece of rubbish along the street, the camera following it gracefully; and that's before the film even gets going. Also a beautiful, humanist (in the best sense) portrait of a troubled but very sympathetic man
  260. Riens du Tout (Cédric Klapisch) 6 Klapisch's little-known first film is quite charming; like L'Auberge Espagnol, it has no great depth to it, but the comedy is much better here than in that film, I found. A very good ensemble cast, including Eric Rohmer regular Fabrice Luchini. Worth looking out for, though I doubt you'd have much luck finding a subtitled version.
  261. L'Auberge Espagnol* (Klapisch) 5
  262. The Shining (Kubrick, 1980) 8
  263. Kumonodu jô (Throne of Blood) (Kurosawa, 1957) 9
  264. The Actress (Ruan Ling-Yu) aka Centre Stage (Stanley Kwan, 1992) 7
  265. Rancho Notorious (Lang, 1952) 7
  266. Brief Encounter (Lean, 1945) 7
  267. Brief Encounter*
  268. The Wedding Banquet (Ang Lee, 1993) 6/7
  269. Once Upon A TIme In America (Leone, 1984) 9
  270. Gold Diggers of 1933 (Mervin LeRoy, 1933) 7 To tell the truth I paid much more attention to the amusing dialogue and the gorgeous Joan Blondell than to what seemed to be an unusually strong and effective political statement for a film, especially a musical, of its time. But I just finished a whole pile of essays this week, so I didn't feel up to focusing my attention too much on that aspect. Ginger Rogers is always good, and Ruby Keeler too of course, but Joan really drives me crazy.
  271. Rain Man (Barry Levinson, 1988) 7
  272. Pandora and the Flying Dutchman (Albert Lewin, 1951) 8
  273. The Nutty Professor (Jerry Lewis, 1963) 8
  274. Gun Crazy (Joseph H. Lewis, 1949) 8 Damn this is one hell of a film! I don't know if it was the video I saw it on, but there's this amazing glare in the outdoor scenes, that looks like it could just be either a crummy video or a cheaply shot film (which I suppose it was), but seems to me to capture how the characters must be feeling as they drive around, before and after they go hold up a store, and also an influence on Godard; the piece in "1001 Movies" mentions Breathless, but it reminded me more of Bande à Part, particularly with those endless scenes of the characters driving around aimlessly, but also just something about the look of both films. The one-take scene in the car is sensational. And Peggy Cummins gives one of the great femme fatale performances
  275. The Servant (Joseph Losey, 1963) 8
  276. Various Lumière films
  277. The Elephant Man (Lynch, 1980) 8
  278. Les Sentiments (Noémie Lvovsky, 2003) 6
  279. Eraserhead (Lynch, 1977) 6
  280. The Ladykillers (Mackendrick, 1955) 9
  281. Safar e Ghandahar (Kandahar) (Mosen Makhmalbaf, 2001) 6
  282. The Naked Spur (Anthony Mann, 1953) 7
  283. Destry Rides Again (George Marshall, 1939) 7
  284. Duck Soup (Leo McCarey, 1933) 9
  285. La Voyage Dans La Lune (Méliès, 1902)
  286. Ostre Sledované Vlaky (Closely Watched Trains) (Jiri Menzel, 1967) 7
  287. Faster, Pussycat! Kill! Kill! (Russ Meyer, 1965) 5
  288. Mondo Topless (Meyer, 1966) 4
  289. Within Our Gates (Oscar Micheaux, 1920) 6
  290. All Quiet on the Western Front (Lewis Milestone, 1930) 7
  291. Mad Max (George Miller, 1979) 6
  292. The Bad and the Beautiful (Minnelli, 1952) 6
  293. Gigi (Minnelli, 1958) 7
  294. Princess Mononoke (Hayao Miyazaki, 1997) 8
  295. Ugetsu Monogatari (Mizoguchi, 1953) 10
  296. Roger & Me (Michael Moore, 1989) 4
  297. Fahrenheit 9/11 (Moore, 2004) 5
  298. Il Giorna Della Prima di Close Up (The Day Of The Opening of Close Up) (Nanni Moretti, 1996) Charming 5 minute film by Moretti, who as well as being a great director and actor, runs a little arthouse cinema in Italy. This film is a document of the day Kiarostami's Close Up premiered at his cinema, and watches Moretti and his colleagues sigh in frustration as few people come into the cinema to watch this masterpiece, whilst millions upon millions are going to the multiplexes to see The Lion King. Very light, not outstanding in any way, but a very sweet little film.
  299. La Stanza del Figlio (The Son’s Room) (Moretti, 2001) 9
  300. Die Letzte Mann (The Last Laugh)* (F.W. Murnau, 1924)
  301. Sunrise: A Song of Two Humans (Murnau, 1927) 10
  302. Ringu (Hideo Nakata, 1998) 7
  303. Four Weddings and a Funeral (Mike Newell, 1994) 6
  304. Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf? (Mike Nichols, 1966) 7
  305. The Graduate (Nichols, 1967) 7/8
  306. La Révolution en Russie (Lucien Nouquet, 1905)
  307. The Trout (Christopher Nupen, 1969) 7
  308. El Paraiso Perdido (Paradise Lost) (Jaime Marques Ollareado, 2000)
  309. Ohayô (Good Morning) (Yasujiro Ozu, 1959) 8 A departure from the typical Ozu film in the sense that it's from the kids' perspective rather than the adults', but at the same time it's a kind of distillation of all the essential Ozu elements, in terms of the themes, the mise-en-scène, the editing, the shooting (as always, no camera movement, shots through doorways etc. that appear over and over again). Not the greatest Ozu film, but another testament to his place as one of the great filmmakers
  310. Par le trou de serrure (Charles Pathé, Emile Pathé, 1901)
  311. Sweet Sweetback’s Baad Asssss Song (Melvin van Peebles, 1971) 5
  312. Scar of Shame (Frank Perugini, 1926) 6
  313. Être et Avoir (To Be And To Have) (Nicolas Philibert, 2002)* 7
  314. Repulsion (Polanski, 1965) 8
  315. The Gay Shoe Clerk (Edwin S. Porter, 1903)
  316. The Great Train Robbery (Porter, 1903)
  317. The Dream of a Rarebit Fiend (Porter, 1906)
  318. Laura (Otto Preminger, 1944)* 8 Rewatching Laura doesn't really give one new insights, it merely confirms its status as a true classic. Despite the chaotic circumstances of the shooting of it, it's an amazingly accomplished film in every way. Preminger is one of the most fascinating of all Hollywood filmmakers, specifically of that group (Wilder, Lang, Sternberg etc.) of European exiles who made such fascinating films in the 40s and 50s. I don't think this ever reaches the delirious heights of his later Angel Face, but it thoroughly deserves its place in Hollywood history. Gene Tierney is, of course, stunning, as are all the cast really, particularly the underrated Dana Andrews. I think my favourite scene, though, is the one with Laura and Ann in the make-up room. Or McPherson's line, "Too bad you didn't open that door Friday night, Carpenter".
  319. Angel Face (Preminger, 1952) 10
  320. Five Easy Pieces (Bob Rafelson, 1970) 8
  321. The Evil Dead (Sam Raimi, 1982) 6
  322. Johnny Guitar (Nicholas Ray, 1954) 7
  323. Pather Panchali (Satyajit Ray, 1955) 9
  324. Down With Love (Peyton Reed, 2003) 7
  325. Koyaanisqatsi (Godfrey Reggio, 1983) 7
  326. Night of the Filmmakers (Edgar Reitz, 1995) 4/5. A few of the interviewees had interesting things to say (Wenders, von Trotta, Herzog), but the film itself was quite annoying in a number of ways
  327. Une Partie de Campagne (Renoir, 1936) 8
  328. Hiroshima Mon Amour (Alain Resnais, 1959) 9
  329. Meet The Parents (Jay Roach, 2000) 6
  330. Withnail & I (Bruce Robinson, 1987) 8
  331. Don’t Look Now (Roeg, 1973) 8
  332. L'Amour L'Après-Midi (Rohmer, 1972) 9
  333. Paisà (Rossellini, 1946) 9
  334. Top Hat (Mark Sandrich, 1935) 7
  335. Drugstore Cowboy (Gus Van Sant, 1989) 7
  336. The King Of Comedy (Scorsese, 1983) 8
  337. Gangs of New York (Scorsese, 2002) 5
  338. Alien (Ridley Scott, 1979) 7
  339. She Done Him Wrong (Lowell Sherman, 1933) 7
  340. Ieri, oggi, domani (Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow) (de Sica, 1963) 6 [the version i saw was dubbed into English, which obviously didn't help]
  341. Sex, lies and videotape (Soderbergh, 1989) 5
  342. Giant (George Stevens, 1956) 6
  343. The Talk of the Town (Stevens, 1942)* 8/9 A uniquely beautiful film. All those clichés about how films used to be about ideas, about real people and how they interact etc., as compared with the jaded, spectacular movies of today, hold true with this film. Everyone should see it.
  344. Natural Born Killers (Stone)* 3
  345. Foolish Wives (Stroheim, 1922) 7
  346. Reservoir Dogs (Tarantino, 1992) 7
  347. Solaris (Tarkovsky, 1972) 8
  348. Les Roseaux Sauvages (André Téchiné, 1994) 7
  349. The Blue Kite (Tian Zhuangzhuang, 1993) 7/8
  350. François Truffaut: Portraits volés (Serge Toubiana, Michel Pascal, 1994) 7
  351. Cat People (Jacques Tourneur, 1942) 7
  352. I Walked With A Zombie (Tourneur, 1943) 7
  353. Out of the Past (Tourneur, 1947) 9
  354. Riget (The Kingdom) (Lars von Trier, 1994)5
  355. Le Dernier Metro (Truffaut, 1980) 7
  356. The Black Cat (Edgar G. Ulmer, 1934) 7
  357. Magic Bricks (Gaston Velle, 1908)
  358. Stella Dallas (King Vidor, 1937) 9
  359. The Thief of Bagdad (Raoul Walsh, 1924) 6
  360. High Society (Charles Walters, 1956) 7
  361. Picnic at Hanging Rock (Peter Weir, 1975) 8
  362. The Last Wave (Weir, 1977) 7
  363. The Public Enemy (William A. Wellman, 1931) 7
  364. The Ox-Bow Incident (Wellman, 1943) 9
  365. Frankenstein (James Whale, 1931) 7
  366. Bride of Frankenstein (Whale, 1935) 7
  367. The Major and the Minor (Wilder, 1942) 8
  368. Five Graves to Cairo (Wilder, 1943) 7
  369. The Lost Weekend (Wilder, 1945) 8
  370. Witness For The Prosecution (Wilder, 1957) 7
  371. One, Two, Three (Wilder, 1961) 6
  372. Kiss Me, Stupid (Wilder, 1964) 5
  373. The Fortune Cookie (Wilder, 1966) 7
  374. The Private Life of Sherlock Holmes (Wilder, 1970) 6
  375. Avanti! (Wilder, 1972) 4
  376. Buddy Buddy (Wilder, 1981) 4
  377. The Stone Killer (Michael Winner, 1973) 7 Admittedly I fell asleep before the end when I saw this on British TV in june, but what a film! Seriously, brainless genre trash from earlier decades of Hollywood cinema have been embraced by film geeks as masterpieces, it's about time the same thing happened to films like this. A beautifully demented film, that is so constantly aware of its own badness that you can't help liking it. Just try making a film like this today.
  378. Ashes of Time (Wong Kar-wai, 1994) 7/8
  379. Fallen Angels (Wong , 1995) 6
  380. Die xue shuang xiong (The Killer) (John Woo, 1989) 8
  381. A Night at the Opera (Sam Wood, 1935) 8
  382. Wuthering Heights (Wyler, 1939) 7
  383. Hong gao liang (Red Sorghum) (Yimou, 1987) 8
  384. Various early Ferdinand Zecca films
  385. The Amazing Adventure (Alfred Zeisler, 1936) 5
  386. Who Framed Roger Rabbit? (Robert Zemeckis, 1988) 7
Author Comments: 

* - asterisk denotes repeat viewing

RosieCotton05/10/2005

If you numbered this list, you could be a contestant in this contest.

Use an underline before your headers to keep them from being counted. Use an underline before your short films (less than 40 minutes). We don't count those, either.

Conall05/10/2005

Thanks, that's done.
The link you posted didn't work for me, it came up with this message: "You have passed an invalid content ID (the ID must be provided, and it must be numeric)."

jim05/10/2005

Fixed. Rosie, the problem seems to be that you have the closing quote around the URL in the link, but no opening quote.

Conall05/10/2005

Thanks for that, jim

lukeprog05/10/2005

So, would you like to play, Conall?

Conall05/11/2005

Oh, yeah, I would like to play. What do I have to do?

lukeprog05/11/2005

If you keep TV movies & short films unnumbered (prefaced with a '_'), it'll make my counting job easier. I'll just add you onto the list on the next update, probably in a week or so. Thanks for playing, the more the merrier!

Conall05/12/2005

Sure thing, thanks. I think I've unnumbered everything that ought to be; I guess one I'm not sure about is "Outfoxed". I think that was originally made for TV, but at least here in Australia it did screen at cinemas, although I ended up seeing it on TV; but I'll unnumber that if it makes sense to. Also, according to imdb, "The Other Woman" was made for TV, but I saw it at a cinema. Anyway, thanks for inviting me to play

RosieCotton05/10/2005

Thank you for fixing it for me, Jim. I was on my lunch hour when all this heck broke lose :). I'm sorry for the chaos.

jim05/12/2005

No worries, Rosie!

RosieCotton05/10/2005

Sorry about that.

Nice list.

lukeprog05/10/2005

Glad to see you liked Birth. I'm looking forward to seeing it eventually, but the critical consensus has me worried. What made it work so well for you? (spoilers tagged, please)

Conall05/11/2005

Wow, that's interesting; I'd read a couple of bad reviews, but had no idea there were that many critics who disliked Birth.
I can't claim not to have been influenced by a critic before seeing it, though, but in my case it was the very positive review given to it by Adrian Martin. He's probably the only Australian film critic widely known in other countries (he wrote a number of the pieces in "1001 Movies To See Before You Die", for instance), and I'm lucky enough to live in the city where he writes regular film reviews. His way of looking at Birth was that the film demonstrates, by introducing just one "surreal" element into the everyday lives of this wealthy group of characters, how tenuous the whole bourgeois society is, and the film sits back and watches it crumble. If I hadn't had that idea going into the film, who knows what I would've thought of it, but at any rate I did love the film.

lukeprog05/11/2005

Heh, thanks, now I have another ace up my sleeve to enjoy the movie despite all those bad reviews lurking in my mind!

192205/11/2005

Ah, Raging Bull a 10? VERY good!

Cosgrove05/20/2005

Where'd you get "71 Fragments"?

Conall05/21/2005

There was a Haneke retrospective at the Melbourne Cinematheque earlier this year, which showed pretty much all his films. I liked "71 Fragments" actually, more so than any of the other ones before he moved to France

0dysseus09/02/2005

Re: #252
The Graduate. '7'!? Hello darkness, my old friend, indeed!

Conall09/02/2005

Um.. are you saying it should have a higher or a lower grade? It's a good film, though the rather shallow, Hollywood appropriation of "art-house" techniques can become rather annoying. But very well scripted, and great performances by Hoffmann and Bancroft. I see no particular reason to give it a different grade

0dysseus09/02/2005

I'm certainly saying that I would give it a higher grade. There's no reason why our tastes should be equal.

I have no idea what you mean by "'art-house' techniques." I'm not that bright so any illumination that you could shine on the subject would brighten my day. (Goodbye darkness, my old friend.) I do know that The Graduate is almost forty years old and it remains a, perhaps "the", brilliant satire of both the G.I.1 and the Boomer generations. I don't know film well enough to know whether the movie is "Hollywood" or if Mike Nichols appropriated somebody else's techniques.

The Graduate is that rare perfect movie. Faultless casting, directing and acting. Every line is a polished gem. Every scene, every prop is full of symbolism. It's structured beautifully. There's not a wasted frame.

The Graduate manages to savage both the materialistic drive of the World War II generation and the directionless spiritual drift of their children. The parents know what the good life is ("Plastics"). It is an existence filled with artificial, empty possessions (and roles) which mask misery beneath. The children have no idea what it means to be an "adult" and achieve a (the?) good life. While they want for nothing they have no idea what they want and they lack the very tools to help them figure out where they are and where they're going. The Graduate is anything but "shallow."

The soundtrack was (to my knowledge) the first one to use rock music. Yes, back then Simon & Garfunkel were "rock 'n' rollers." The songs are flawlessy integrated and serve to advance the narrative both practically and symbolically. The wardrobe, scene design and cinematography all work together. The very structure, along with visual metaphors and themes, expose the disconnect between the two generations as well as their disconnection from reality. Even the props. And, again, the amazing script.

April Come She Will as the summer slips away. Mrs. Robinson's predatory outfits, her leading Ben into her artificial jungle and his lone, distant figure framed between her stockinged legs. Two shaving scenes, two lost divers, two scenes with soundless adults addressing Ben. Nothing beats the symbolism of Ben climbing down from his crucifixtion to wield the cross against the pre-free love wedding party. "Are you here for the Singleman party?" You name the scene and it is filled with meaning and vision... both literal and figurative.

Between the time The Graduate was filmed and its release date Berkley would explode with protest and hippies. In spite of the fact that the campus on screen bore little resemblance to the Berkley campus of the time the movie's relevance was (is) both contemporary and timeless. It is a movie about rebellion which gives the same clear-eyed, skeptical treatment to both rebels and those they rebel against. I think it is great.

1 'G.I.' stands for "'Greatest,' Ick."

Conall09/03/2005

Okay... you seem to have taken a lot more thought over this than I have, and obviously you know the film better than I do. I don't really disagree with anything you said, but I certainly don't think it's a masterpiece by any stretch.

Basically, I don't like the way the film takes ideas from the Nouvelle Vague, both in the highly self-conscious camerawork (as in the scene at Benjamin's welcome home party, and then in the scuba diving scene) and in the kids-against-adults storyline, adapting them to a mainstream Hollywood situation. It just seems facile to me. You can call it revolutionary, and I suppose in a way it was, but today it can at times just look dated.

And I really don't think there's anything too profound about the story. Yes, it's good that the film addresses the faults of the younger generation as well as the older, but it's all done through caricature. I think Benjamin's the only character who holds one's interest for the whole film.

But I like the film very much. Perhaps it deserves an 8, even, but I don't think I'm going to change my grade at the moment.

0dysseus09/03/2005

I actually didn't give much thought to it until I saw that darn '7', which doesn't mean that you are incorrect. You confuse me by not really disagreeing with anything I've said when I say that "The Graduate is that rare perfect movie" and you "certainly don't think it's a masterpiece by any stretch" Again, our tastes are (must be) different and my grade certainly wouldn't be equal to your grade.

I'm still not bright and don't know much about the history of cinéma. Don't know much about biology. I had to look up the term "Nouvelle Vague." Don't know much about a science book. At first it appeared to be a band but I soon found out that it is/was French New Wave. Don't know much about the French I took. Now that I know what you're talking about I must confess that I don't know anything about what you're talkin' 'bout. But I do know that....

If by "the highly self-conscious camerawork" you mean the camera taking on Ben's perspective, I think that's used to show the assault of confusing and mindless chaos of his parents' party and their gathered friends. Ben has no friends (there or at all.) The party is ostensibly thrown for him but it is, in fact, more about the parents need to show off their son (the literal and figurative return on their investment.) It has nothing to do with Ben's accomplishment and entry into adulthood. He runs from the party (and keeps running figuratively) and finds refuge in looking through the glass of the aquarium at the peacefully submerged diver.

Ben's parents show him (and their scuba suit gift) off to their friends again as Ben looks at them through a glass door. The adults are animated, oblivious to him and silent. Ben is literally (and figuratively) held down by his father, looking through the glass of the scuba mask. All that Ben can hear is the sound of his own breathing. The adults' frantic conventional banter is meaningless to him. Ben has become the diver in the aquarium SPOILER - highlight to read and he won't break through the glass until the final scene when he comes down from his crucifixtion.

I think it's unfortunate that, while willing and able (and eager?) to view the movie through the Nouvelle Vague glass, you are unwilling and unable (and reluctant?) to look through the cultural glass. All right, that's presumptive and sounds harsher than I intend. I fully admit that perhaps you have considered the movie on cultural terms and come to different conclusions. Or you don't like to consider culture when watching a movie. Or I'm confused. Or I have turned into a pod controlled by aliens. Some possiblities are more likely than others (but ultimately futile as soon you will be converted into your atomic components to serve our people.)

Perhaps you like to consider only your own reaction to a film... which I honestly think would advocate keeping in mind the reaction(s) of the original audience. If you don't it's no wonder that a forty year film might look dated. (as I said, it "looked" dated six months after it was made.) I find it hard to interpret (read? experience?) a film by looking for recurrent themes, metaphors, motifs or some-other-arty-word. For me I find it easiest to do with Hitchcock because he is so good at it... and because I don't really enjoy so many of his films.

I enjoy The Graduate so much that I'm able to think back and make up some-other-arty-words about it after the fact. I certainly didn't watch it in this manner until I saw that darn '7'. But I'm thankful to you for inspiring this babbling brook stream of consiousness collection of arty words. (I'd try to use mise en scène but I'm not sure what it means. For the longest time I thought it was "mise unseen.")

If there is any profundity to be found I think it is the fact that both generations are spiritually empty, it's just that the older generation has found something to fill the emptiness. (Alcohol, womanizing, SPOILER - highlight to read "Plastics" .) Ben is the only character in the movie, the only one who is internally affected by others and evolves because of it (with the possible exception of Elaine.) The rest of the roles are "caricature[s]" (I don't really like that word, I'd use "exterior unopposable conditions") because they are forces assailing a helpless and confused Ben.

I'm very glad to hear that you did "like the film very much." From what I pretend to know about the history of cinéma I think the movie was revolutionary. It's hilarious (to my taste) and the comedy comes totally from the situation and not from the actions/reactions of the characters (with the notable, even jarring exception of SPOILER - highlight to read the gas station scene. "Do you need any gas, Father." ) The Graduate is also the only movie that leaps to mind which treats the Boomer generation as it was/is: totally bereft of morality and spirituality even as it cloaks itself in the mantle of both. Goodness I hate them so.

SPOILER - highlight to read more

The movie starts with an anonymous Ben exiting unnoticed from a noisy crowded plane. Alone, he is carried along by a walkway. He has no purpose, no direction, no idea. He is empty. It ends with with Ben, no longer alone and anonymous, entering a silent bus noticed by everyone... old everyones.He (and Elaine) have no purpose, no direction, no idea. They don't talk. They don't touch. They are empty.

It is one of the great movie endings of all time...
it is a masterpiece.

highlight to read even more

I want to thank you again for the inspiration. If this boots on the ground response doesn't shock and awe you (and anyone else who might contribute) nothing will. I hope that isn't the case but if this scares you half as much as it does me then I am twice as frightened as you are. Thanks. Don't ever change at the moment.
This I gave some thought to.

Conall09/04/2005

When I said that I didn't really disagree with anything you'd said, I meant the evidence you gave to support the idea that The Graduate is a great film. I agree that all those things are present in the film, I just don't think it adds up to more than a very entertaining, enjoyable, though still somewhat flawed film. I don't have any particular thesis as to why I gave the film the rating that I did; it's just a general impression. I'm sure if you looked around this site you'd find someone who hated, or at least was indifferent towards the film; 7 out of 10 is really quite a high score. You seem to be looking for an argument that isn't really there. I still stand by the criticisms I made earlier, though they may not have been very well articulated.

And yes, I don't think there's any doubt that the film is greatly indebted to the French New Wave; in my opinion it's a far less interesting film than the best of those films. I certainly think it would be worth your while trying to see a few of these films, if only so that you can come back and prove me wrong again.

0dysseus09/04/2005

I do apologize. I didn't mean to search for any argument whether it exists or not and I'm sorry that I came across in a way that I did not intend.

While I had no interest in quarreling I did want to make my arguement as best I could. You were my inspiration and I will continue to appreciate that and respect your taste. I didn't mean to jump in with both feet in my mouth... well, after I dipped a Simon & Garfunkel toe in. I haven't read everything at this site and your darn '7' popped up when I was reading. I like practising communication (if you see what I mean.)... and I like theses... and I tend to write in one big tidal wave of the hand.

...and I go on too long. You've articulated your opinion well (although I'm not cultured enough to know exactly what's being said.) I see now how I more than answered what grade (and why) The Graduate deserves a different grade. But I still hope to learn more about French New Wave. I can't imagine something more interesting... but I'm intimidated by stuff that I don't know... so I don't think I'll swim in French New Wave. Besides, I know about as much French as Sam Cooke does... and he's been dead for four decades.

Again, I'm grateful for what you motivated me to write. I hope to be able to polish it and use it elsewhere... like a spork. And like a spork I never even imagined that this existed until I stumbled upon it. Don't ever change. (All right. If I ever change, what few films should I see?.. sorry.)

I hope that I haven't shot myself in the foot in my mouth.

Conall09/06/2005

I didn't mean to suggest that you were being aggressive or anything; perhaps I shouldn't have used the word 'argument'. I just meant that the difference in our opinion is really only a fairly minor one: you think that The Graduate is a masterpiece, I think that it is a very good film with certain flaws. To tell the truth I think I probably exaggerated what I perceived as its flaws for the sake of argument, and I think it's been a worthwhile discussion. I guess I was initially somewhat taken aback by your strong reaction to a mark of '7' as though it was a mark of disapproval.

"I'm not cultured enough to know exactly what's being said". This worries me; I strongly doubt that it's true, and I hope you didn't think that by invoking the New Wave/Nouvelle Vague I was trying to sound superior by linking my argument to European "culture" versus Hollywood "commercialism". If it came across this way I apologise. There's no doubt that the average New Wave filmmaker was more steeped in culture than the average Hollywood filmmaker, but there's nothing inherently more culturally significant about the New Wave films than Hollywood films. Personally I find that The Graduate tries to find a middle ground between these supposed opposites, and at times I find the results lacking. If I'd seen the film more than once and was more confident of the truth of my argument, I'd explain further, but I haven't and I'm not.

I'm not sure how serious you're being when you make comments like the one quoted above, but if you are being serious then, honestly, there's nothing scary about watching a European art-house film! If you're interested, just do it, and if you're not, this doesn't make you somehow lacking in culture. We are just talking about films here. In regard to which Nouvelle Vague films to see, if you do ever decide to, I suppose the one regarded as the most iconic of the whole movement is Jean-Luc Godard's Breathless (A Bout de Souffle). It's nowhere near Godard's best film, it's at times very misogynistic, the most famous scene has a couple lying on a bed, talking about nothing in particular for half an hour or more. But it gives you a general idea of what the French New Wave's about (although, if I hadn't had a lecture on it soon after I saw it, I probably wouldn't have understood that, so you might want to read some reviews on the internet or something after you see it). Then I guess there's Francois Truffaut's The 400 Blows, and Agnes Varda's Cléo From 5 to 7. I don't know if they've got any particular relevance with The Graduate, but I'd say they're the ones to see. Probably start with the 400 Blows; although personally my favourite of the new wave filmmakers is Eric Rohmer, as you'll see from this list, but he's a very different kind of filmmaker. Hope that helps.

0dysseus09/06/2005

I think I was pretty serious. I was using "culture" in the sense of educated and in the sense of being familiar with customs, conventions, etc. I know very little about French New Wave in sorta the same way that I know very little about Belgian culture.1 But I'm always willing to make things up.

I do very well (over)thinking and analyzing "low" culture. I find "high" culture intimidating or over-intellectualized (or both.) Although I have managed to pick up some knowledge about subjects that I like that could be considered "high" culture. (Like jazz, although that's an art form that moved from low to high... which is fascinating in and of itself. And a can of culture worms that shouldn't be opened here.) What I fear about "high" culture is exactly what you said: "if I hadn't had a lecture on it soon after I saw it, I probably wouldn't have understood..." I hate feeling dumb even worse than I hate being dumb. (And by "dumb" I mean uninformed, not "stupid"... which my niece isn't allowed to say. We say "silly" instead.)

So, no... I didn't think you were being snooty. What hi/lo culture I've managed to pick up usually comes from family, friends, assorted well-wishers explaining to me what they like and why. Which is why I appreciate the recommendations. Now all I need is follow-through. Hopefully The Graduate connection will provide some motivation. (Maybe not.) But that's my learning style... sort of an "oil-spot strategy."

My favourite example of this is the story I call "Doctor Strangehat - Or How I Learned To Stop Worrying And Love Thelonious." The music of Thelonious Monk used to annoy me. He was a genius. I could even hear that he was a genius. But I didn't like anything that he did... no matter how hard I tried. But I love Duke Ellington (as should everyone.) So I got the Monk Plays Ellington (on Riverside) album out of the library. It had Oscar Pettiford on bass and he played with Ellington in the '40s. And early in his career Monk played piano in one of Cootie Williams' small groups. So I had at least three connections/associations with Ellington to help me. But I didn't expect much.

Let me tell you, the album is fantastic. It's Ellington, but reimagined. I didn't think that was possible. I couldn't believe my ears. Now I could now hear the Ellington influence in Monk's playing... all of Monk's playing. I could hear Monk's humour (and he's a huge smartass), his creativity and his bruilliance. I now love everything that I've heard by him.

But the hats still confound me.

1 That one goes out to brunettes everywhere .

buddy09/08/2005

I just wanted to thank you both for calling my attention to so many different aspects of that film. It held a warm place in my heart because of Simon and Garfunkle, but I'd never thought about the film in much depth before. 0dysseus, that was a beautiful description of the components that build up to make the film great. And Conall, I'd never thought to compare the film to French New Wave (which I studied briefly in Film 300).

I would just like to say that now the comparison has been made to French New Wave, that even if The Graduate suffers in the comparison, I still have to commend the director for using those techniques to serve the point (which 0dysseus has described better than I can).

Conall09/08/2005

I can't really take credit for the idea that The Graduate is influenced by the new wave; certainly Jonathan Rosenbaum wrote about it in a review of the film, and probably there are others too. It's generally presented as a film that led Hollywood away from the studio era to the modern era in the way it depicts sex and the generational divide, but I think it's as much the case with the filmmaking as with the narrative. Not that you see this level of experimentation with camera techniques etc. in today's Hollywood, but The Graduate is a move away from the classical style towards something more modern, definitely. Thanks for the reply, I'm glad other people have been reading

0dysseus09/08/2005

I am also glad for the reply.

0dysseus09/08/2005

On behalf of Conall and myself... Thank you. That's very gratifying to hear. As I've said before, it wouldn't have happened without "that darn '7'." I knew it! Cinema 101 and Film 300 are prerequisites to Nouvelle Vague. Perhaps I'll get a French New Waiver from the professor.

Conall09/08/2005

Perhaps your story points to a difference in sensibility between you and I; though I do love Ellington, I've always cared more for Thelonious Monk. I guess it indicates that I'm more interested in things that are disjointed, kind of "beautifully ugly" as Billy Wilder once said, which I think is a phrase you could use to describe both Monk's music and many films of the New Wave. Yet evidently you know more about jazz than I do, so I think it's more a question of, as I said, sensibility than of cultural knowledge or understanding. Perhaps.

0dysseus09/08/2005

Kudos! (and my thanks) to you.

My Duke-Monk succession1 was intended to demonstrate my "Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon" learning-liking-loving style. I am so happy (and relieved) to learn that you love Ellington. If you didn't it could lead to something of a steel cage nudge match.

Which brings me back to: Kudos! (and my thanks) to you for your "beautifully ugly" nudgement. Quite sensible, quite cultural, quite knowledgeable and quite understanding.

1 The line continues through Count Basie, King Oliver, The Prince of Darkness, The First Lady of Song, Sassy, Lady Day, Prez and the Vice Prez.

WB09/09/2005

Thanks for the fine discussion.
I`m glad for Odysseus` views on the film, it certainly gave me something to think about. Imo the ending was a "happy" one, and the employment of Nouvelle Vague" technique was for me most evident in the end`s "car-chase-scene". It was the jump-cut editing Godard frequently used, but imo better than the original. But although for me the last 15 minutes of the film deserve an 10/10 rating, the rest of the film didn`t impress me at all. I know I need to see it again, but I too wouldn`t list it higher than 7, and agree with Conall, that the film was a bit obvious (shallow sounds too harsh), and the characters were caricatures (with the exception of Ben only).
Just my five cents. :-)