Movies I must see . . .
- Return To Me - David Duchovny and Minnie Driver.
- Mesmer - Alan Rickman.
- City Of Angels - Nicholas Cage and Meg Ryan.
- Cinema Paradiso - Foreign Language masterpiece.
- Dark City - Kiefer Sutherland and Rufus Sewell.
- Short Utopia 7 - Seven Short Films in one.
- Over The Edge - Matt Dillon.
- The Saint of Fort Washington - Matt Dillon, Danny Glover.
- Gridlock'd - Tupac Shakur and Tim Roth.
- Biggie and Tupac - documentary on their deaths.
- Bent - Clive Owen.
- Kill Bill - Volume 2 - Uma Thurman, Lucy Liu.
- Watched since this list was compiled (so therefore deleted):
- 28 Days Later
- Threads
- (both 'end of the world' movies).
- Gattaca
- The Princess Bride
- Ever After
- An Ideal Husband
- The Importance of Being Earnest
- Gang Related - Tupac Shakur.
- Troy
- Benny and Joon
- Wilde
- Chocolat
- Spirited Away
These are not in any order of preference - I shall watch them in order of opportunity.
I've given this list to my wife to borrow from Blockbusters, as she usually borrows films that do not appeal to me, mainly for her and the children (but that's OK with me). I have discovered that she once previously borrowed 28 Days Later, but I watched a soccer match instead.
I am not a great movie fan / watcher, so it might take a while for me to get through this list. (I always have more time to watch movies around at Christmas, baceause (i) I usually take some time off work, and (ii) there are more interesting movies on TV at this time of the year.)
Recent additions:
Bent
The Saint of Fort Washington
I shall add more to this later.
- -
the
professor - -
I'll second "Cinema Paradiso" and "Dark City." Both great movies. When you do see those, be sure to tell me what you think.
We watched   28 Days Later   on DVD last week (thanks Blockbusters). Similar in theme to   The Omega Man,   which I saw on TV at the weekend.
funny I didn't really think all that much of 28 Days Later, though I hear the ending has been changed to a darker one, which is better suited to the flick.
Yep, I know what you mean. I thought it was OK but not great.
These are movies I would like to see for various reasons, but not having seen them I don't know if they are good or bad. I wanted to see 28 Days Later because the storyline is reminiscent of The Omega Man - which is a great film and was based on a favourite book of mine, I Am Legend by Richard Matheson.
There is on the DVD an alternative ending, but it is not very well presented.
28 Days Later is currently on UK satellite TV showing both endings on separate channels.
The Omega Man was on TV again yesterday (Christmas Day), but I only watched the first 45 minutes because it was time for my Christmas dinner, and anyway, I've seen it many times before.
I watched 'Threads' on TV on Friday night (late). Horrifying story, filled with ordinary people/characters as opposed to heroic or glamour stereotypes, the story of a nuclear war and attack on the northern industrial city of Sheffield. A little dated now in terms of production and political climate, as it was made in the early eighties before the breakdown of communism in the east.
Watched them both today on terrestrial TV (I am off work at the moment - 'resting' between contracts):
The Princess Bride
Gattaca (plot reminiscent in some ways to 1984)
I watched both of the following yetsterday on TV as Easter showings:
An Ideal Husband - Rupert Everett, Cate Blanchett, Minnie Driver, Jeremy Northam.
I also saw this play recently on a London Stage with Rupert Graves and Samantha Bond
(they were in the play - not with me).
Ever After - A Cinderella Story - Drew Barrymore.
Tonight on TV is another candidate (and a favourite book/play of mine):
The Importance of Being Earnest - Rupert Everett, Colin Firth, Judi Dench.
I watched The Importance Of Being Earnest on TV last night. There were many departures from the Wilde text, but they were sypathetically done, and it was great fun all-round.
I watched Gang Related last week with Tupac Shakur and James Belushi (they were in the film - not with me).
Tupac was OK, and the film was OK, but neither was anything special.
I went to the cinema to see Troy - Brad Pitt. The story of the Trojan War based on the book 'The Iliad' by Homer.
Excellent movie, and follows the book very closely ("inspired by the book"), with the following exceptions:
1. The timeline - the book tells the story of the siege of Troy taking ten years, whilst in the film it takes just a few days.
2. The film deliberately excludes most of the mythology from the book:
(i) Whilst we see Achilles' mother (played by Julie Christie) near the beginning of the film, their is no mention of her name, Athena, or of the fact that she was a goddess from the mount Olympus.
(ii) There is no suggestion that Achilles is (virtually) immortal.
(iii) I When he is killed at the end, and we see him shot by Paris in the heel with an arrow, we could easily be left with the impresssion that he died from the wounds from the other three arrows he received in the chest. In the book he is shot just once in the heel, and whilst his comrades believes he will survive such an injury, they do not know that it is his only weakness, and the life (blood) drains out of him over a matter of days through his Achilles' heel.
I was hoping that they would also be making a new version of Homer's other classic (The Oddyssey - one of my favourite books - better than The Iliad), but it is a story that I doubt can be separated from the mythology. The story of Oddyseus's (played by Sean Bean in Troy) ten-year journey home from the Trojan war, and his encounters with many mythological events and characters.
"the book tells the story of the siege of Troy taking ten years, whilst in the film it takes just a few days."
Well, I'm not sure if he's right, but my Latin teacher once told us that, while the full story between Helen's abduction and the end of the war spans about a decade, the actual siege on Troy took less than two months. The thing was, it took a few years for the Greek forces to get angry / prepared enough to retaliate for Helen's abduction.
Also, I think Achilles's mother is Thetis, not Athena.
But good review. I did think it was a bit strange how they took out all references to the gods, and agree that the Odyssey would be nearly impossible to do without the mythology. Certainly not without a huge cyclops - that would eliminate the most famous part of the book.
You are right about Thetis, and you're probably also right about the timeline - it was just what I remembered from the book which I have not read for a few years. My mind becomes more and more like scrambled egg as the years pass.
I suspect the exclusion of the mythology and gods is an attempt to make the story more suitable for modern audiences.
I watched "Benny and Joon" on terestrial TV last night. Pretty good, quirky movie. I'm not a fan of Johnny Depp but he was good in this.
I watched Wilde (starring Stephen Fry and Jude Law) on terestrial TV at the weekend. Good but not great.
Among the movies on your list, I have only seen two films: Chocolat: Yes, that's a great film, which is especially due to the excellent actors: Juliette Binoche, Lena Olin, Johnny Depp, Alfred Molina and, above all, Judi Dench.
and City of Angels: Tedious and disappointing, but perhaps I am the only one who thinks so.
Spirited Away and Cinema Paradiso are two films I'd really like to see once, too.
I'm certainly looking forward to seeing Chocolat, but I don't get to see too many movies, and that is why there is not a great deal of movement on this list.
I bought Cinema Paradiso on DVD a while back but haven't yet got round to watching it yet.
I'd be interested to read your comments on Gattaca and The Princess Bride.
I assume it was the recent version of The Importance of Being Earnest that you saw. Have you seen the version made in the 50s? If you have, how do they compare? I've seen the older version and I can't imagine the remake could be better.
I enjoyed Gattaca OK, but it was not great. The feel of the movie was too futuristically stylised, concentrating too much on the production rather than the story or the characters, which is always a let down for me. I feel that whilst a great production can cetainly add to a movie it cannot alone make it great, whilst a great story and/or great characters/characterisations can certainly make a great movie even from a lacklustre production.
I so wanted to like The Princess Bride, but it didn't capture my imagination, and it was only OK. I really didn't like the Mandy Patinkin character, and that put me right off, perhaps because he first appears as a villain and then he turns into a hero - that did not sit well with me, and I was unconvinced. I was always expecting him to revert back into being the villain.
Coincidentally, The Importance of Being Earnest (2002 version with Rupert Everett and Colin Firth) was on TV (UK satellite) again this Friday (3rd December), and yes it was this version to which I referred, and I re-watched some of it again. It does depart from the script of the play ocasionally, but it always stays in tune, motors along at a cracking pace and is great fun. The 'handbag' line from Judi Dench was disappointingly underplayed as if it was just another line. Perhaps she did not want to be accused of unoriginality. Not a great film, but great fun.
I've not seen the 1986 version with Paul McGann and Rupert Frazer (I must correct that).
I have seen the 1952 version with Michael Redgrave, but it was so long ago that I don't remember enough of it to comment meaningfully - for example, I always thought it was Margaret Rutherford who played Lady Bracknell, but I checked on IMDb and it was Edith Evans, whilst Margaret Rutherford played Miss Prism. (Perhaps I was confused with Miss Marple, or perhaps it is just senility setting in).
I can understand someone not liking Gattaca - it's hard sf, which is not to many people's taste. But we really part company on The Princess Bride which is a classic in my book.
You must see the '52 version of Importance again. I have it on DVD and it is highly re-watchable.
I can be hyper-critical sometimes (re The Princess Bride). I shall certainly keep my eyes open for the '52 version The Importance of Being Earnest.
I watched Chocolat yesterday (Christmas day evening), and whilst it was certainly well made and well-acted, I was a little put off by the fact that Juliet Binoche was putting drugs ('spices') into the chocolate. After watching it I read some other reviewers' comments (on Amazon.com), and many had reservations over the morality issue over temptation and marriage and religion, but none of the comments mention the drugs.
I also watched   King Arthur (Director's cut)   yesterday on DVD, a Christmas present from my son. I kept asking him when Dudley Moore and John Gielgud would appear, but he's too young to have seen their version. This should have appeared on my 'Movies To See list' if I'd remembered to add it.   I enjoyed the film, but it wasn't quite up to Lord of The RIngs or Troy.
I watched Spirited Away on UK satellite TV yesterday. It didn't live up to it's reputation in my view, and I was unsure of its target audience (adults or children), and if it was both then I felt it missed the mark.
Really? Actually it surprised me to get myself liking the film so much, especially since I am not a fan of Japanese animation.
P.S.: Gonna see Cinema Paradiso tonight.
Spirited Away: Given it's storyline I felt it had no warmth or soul.
I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on Cinema Paradiso.
If that is your problem with Spirited Away, then you will certainly love Cinema Paradiso. The whole film is so heartwarming, moving, involving, sensitive, intelligent, poetic...briefly BRILLIANT. I even taped it and will probably watch it tonight once more. It is fascinating and almost perfect.