Amph What was the last movie you saw? (Ver. 2)

As much of a technical triumph that Raging Bull is I find it very hard to care about Jake LaMotta. He's a sadistic, misogynist, racist, bully that continually hurts everyone around him. His penance is only found while being punished in the ring. The film is constantly mentioned as undeservedly losing the Oscar to Ordinary People but I think the voters got it right. Mary Tyler Moore's character is every bit as mean as DeNiro's but she hides it well and with more devastating results to those around her. Both are great performances but I find Moore's far more relatable and relevant.

 

Raging Bull is a very depressing watch. It is well made and acted, no doubt, and deserves its reputation, but it is not enjoyable to watch for me.

I've seen it a few times and always have to prepare myself for the negativity.

 

Raging Bull and Ordinary People are both great. And probably the 2 most depressing movies ever.

 

I've never completed Ordinary People, but I shall try again from the beginning. I have a copy. Couldn't get into it last I tried.

I did really enjoy Somewhere In Time for some reason. Romance is not my genre usually, but SIT is really good.

 

We read the book Ordinary People in high school. It's a hard movie to watch. It's a great performance by Mary Tyler Moore, who was so likeable in her TV roles. She is such an ice queen in the film.

 

Thanks I too hate Raging Bull as a story.

 

A lot of people forget Robert Redford directed Ordinary People.

 

The wind. The only thing cheaper thing I can think of would be low humidity.
The rented industrial fan just off camera is coming for us
This movie is really terrifying to people who suffer from hay fever

 

High praise.

 

The Best Years of Our Lives (1946)
Three veterans return home and try to adjust to civilian life after combat duty in WW2. This one really hits home for me. As you'd expect for a movie in '46, it was obvious that the writers and actors were quite familiar with the trials of returning soldiers; these people and their words rang true. One of the characters was a sailor who had lost both hands in combat, played by a veteran with two prosthetic hands, acting in his first role, and he knocked it out of the park. Myrna Loy was wonderful as a good wife, and Virginia Mayo was perfectly horrible as a shallow war bride. Dana Andrews got the scene that I identified most with: as a former B-17 bombardier out of a job, he wanders through an enormous field filled with scrapped airplanes, most of them stripped of their propellers and engines, crippled and helpless. Yeah, that's some mighty powerful imagery for me. And apparently for the Academy too; they handed out 7 Oscars: best picture, best director, best screenplay, best actor, best supporting actor, best editing, best original score. Which reminds me, Hoagy Carmichael is also in there to tickle the ivories, and plays a duet with Harold Russell who picks out Chopsticks with his hook-hands. It's beautiful.

 

Mommie Dearest. It is a bit unexpected to see Hollywood put out what is basically a hit piece on a big Hollywood star, especially shortly after she died. You can generally count on Hollywood to protect its own glamor. It’s especially personal, as it comes from a tell-all book by Joan Crawford’s daughter about how her mother was a vain, abusive, drunk psycho. It’s pretty much impossible to tell what’s actually true, but much of it has the flavor of score-settling by an aggrieved family member. It gives the whole thing a tawdry, sleazy feel; even if the stories are all true, do I really want to watch two hours of mudslinging-as-family-therapy, gawking at dirty laundry?

If it’s not going to simply be exploitative, there needs to be some character-study throughline behind it that justifies not just publicizing the accusations, but dramatizing them. There are some hints of this in the early going, with Faye Dunaway’s Crawford depicted as a narcissistic, vain perfectionist whose regimented life and obsession with success make her ill-equipped to offer warmth to a child. But perhaps because its source material is entirely from the daughter’s point of view, there’s little beyond that, no deeper sense of what’s going on. This becomes increasingly significant as the film becomes increasingly unhinged, leaving the subtlety behind in favor of a cartoonish, monstrous Crawford who appears with little sense of motivation. It simply becomes Christina Crawford’s tale of woe, also without any particularly deep insights to offer into her experience. I think Frank Perry is trying, but without a more insightful script, the film can’t help but become untethered, little more than a showcase of camp mania in the face of Dunaway’s frenzied, bombastic performance. It doesn’t work.

 

Ironically, Crawford thought that Dunaway would be a good choice to play her if they ever made a film about her.

 

The Spirit of the Beehive (El Espíritu de la Colmena) (dir. Víctor Erice, 1973).

The setup: 1940, Spain--the year after the Franco takeover. In a small Spanish village, a dubbed version of the 1931 American film Frankenstein is presented to the locals; two young sisters go and watch the film and are engrossed, especially the younger one, Ana. Later that night, in their bedroom, Ana wonders to her sister why the monster killed the little girl, and why the villagers then killed the monster; at first, her sister replies that nothing in the movies is real and the little girl and the monster aren't dead; then, she claims that the monster is a spirit and that she's seen him, and that Ana can call him. What follows is a very slow-moving but very beautifully filmed tale where Ana's amazingly expressive eyes play the main role, in which we experience the contrast between the child's inner life and the realities of Franco's fascist Spain.



According to several reviews I read it's one of the masterworks of Spanish cinema. And I bet Guillermo del Toro really loves this one; sure it's nowhere near as fantastical and dramatic as Pan's Labyrinth, but there's a clear influence, and certain shots are near-literally copied (e.g., the police captain shaving and playing with a pocket watch), and the themes and setting do overlap to a large extent.

Gorgeously filmed, but I'm guessing a little too slow-paced for some people. The story picks up at the final 25 minutes, though. I'm going to rate this 4.5 bees out of 5.

Side note: I watched this on YouTube. Ladies and gentlemen at Criterion, it would be great to watch this at a higher resolution than what is currently available.

 

Under Suspicion (2000) Attorney Jean Hackman is about to give a speech at a charity event, but on the way is called to the local police station by the Captain, Morgan Freeman, to answer some questions about the body of a girl that Hackman had found whilst out running. With the help of a detective (Thomas Jane) they pick apart Hackmans story as suspicion falls on him as the murderer. They delve deeper into his life and his relationship with his estranged wife Monica Belucci and reveal some seedy secrets that hes been hiding..........Spoilers ahead for a 20 year old film.............. Culminating in her also believing him to be guilty and Hackman eventually admits to the murders, which is then thrown out in the final scene as its revealed they have now caught the culprit.

Most of the film takes place in the captains office, with the murders and recollections being told in flashback, this allows Hackman and Freeman to bounce off each other and I enjoyed that aspect of the story. I was sure I'd seen this before, but I couldn't remember the ending, which confused me at first. Why would he admit to the murders when he didn't do them? However up until that point I thought that its was a decent litle thriller to be fair.

 

can't believe I spelt Gene Hackman wrong

 

it's like Jean/Gene Simmons

 

Crocodile Dundee Paul Hogan is brilliant as Australian bushman Mick Dundee, the man comfortable going walkabout in the Aussie outback with visiting New York journalist Sue Charlton (Linda Kozlowski) who is writing a story about his legendary crocodile wrestling exploits. But he is out of his element when she takes him back to NY to add a finish to the story, where he hasn't experienced anything that modern New York life throws at him.

Its the classic fish out of water tale that (for me anyway) is one of the films that defines the era, two very good halves to the film with each of them out of their comfort zone whilst the other is in their element. Theres lots of memorable scenes, 2 good leads (who even got married after this). And whilst it may go against common consensus I even enjoyed the sequel a couple of years later, but I must add that I've never seen the other films in the series and I don't want to.

 

Gene Hackman’s French equivalent, Jean Haqueman.

 

Morgan Phreeman was good in that film as well.

 

Ah, he was great in Voleur.

 

Gotta say, I might disagree with even that. I don't think there's even a smidge of redemption in Jake LaMotta's story. Astonishingly great movie. Ordinary People is as well. Donald Sutherland is also really great in it; understated, but brilliant. They're both really harrowing watches. I'd probably go with Raging Bull as the better film if forced to make a decision, but I'm not an Oscar voter from 1980, so I don't have to and I won't. They're very different films and both entirely successful in my estimation.

I don't think that Ordinary People inspired anything like this though and take that for what it's worth:



The "you **** my wife" conversation at the end makes me laugh every time. I'm . . . a little strange.

 

I don't think LaMotta is ever redeemed but he does seek it via punishment in the ring. Almost a form of self flagellation, especially in the fight where he just lets himself get pummeled. Scorsese's Catholicism via the streets shows up here and several of his other early films. The film is brilliant with standout efforts in cinematography, editing, music and DeNiro's tour de force of method acting yet by the end of it I just feel hollow. I know as a younger film goer I would say this film was robbed of the Oscar but now as an older man I find Ordinary People far more poignant and relatable. I know far more families with mothers like Mary Tyler Moore than men like DeNiro's Jake LaMotta.

I do think Scorsese was robbed for Goodfellas.