Sunset Blvd. (the pinnacle of the genre, imo)
Ace in the Hole (2nd favorite)
Double Indemnity
Out of the Past
White Heat
Notorious
Strangers on a Train
The Big Heat (very underrated)
In a Lonely Place (ditto)
Gilda (ditto)
Brute Force (man I’m on a roll here)
And also Blast of Silence (1961) and Angels With Dirty Faces (1939 I think) even though some of you will throw that “It has to be 41-58” argument at me.
^Damn, I would have sold you my copy of Straw Dogs but it just sold on Amazon this morning (for about $33).
In general, I don’t really buy Criterions. And when I use the word “buy” there, I don’t mean “purchase.” I mean “understand the fuss over.” There have been relatively few movies I’ve ever seen in their collection that I have deemed worth spending $20 on. These are basically the only Criterion films I’ve ever seen (of which I’ve seen probably about 125-150) that I thought I’d go out of my way to re-watch. I never blind-buy criterions.
Rushmore (1998) – my absolute favorite movie in the CC and probably my most watched movie ever
Ace in the Hole (1951)
Blast of Silence (1961)
La Haine (1995)
Youth of the Beast (1963)
Rashomon/Drunken Angel/Throne of Blood — only Kurosawas worth owning. Drunken Angel is best.
Charade (1963)
Rebecca/Spellbound/Notorious — Rebecca is a top three Hitchcock film
Brute Force (1947)
Umberto D — cheaper than and liked more than Bicycle Thieves (which I also liked)
Band of Outsiders/Alphaville — I also own Pierrot Le Fou, but I like it less
Wages of Fear (195x)
The Red Shoes (1948)
The Browning Version (1951) — actually blind-bought this because I want to be a teacher
Le Samourai (1966)
I used to own more, but I sold several hundred dollars worth of them because I find these films have limited replayability (when am I ever going to reach for that copy of Bicycle Thieves to show to other people?) and are worth $20-30 used.
Fellini might be the worst director I’ve ever had the displeasure of pursuing, and Bergman would probably be #2 right behind him if not for the truly miraculous Persona (1966) which is not part of the CC. Generally, all Kurosawa films have the same problem: each movie takes so long getting to where it intends to go that it severely waters down the film’s themes. Recent forays into Antonioni seem to indicate that he’s not for my collection, either.
I think of “gangster” as a sub-section of noir. The Asphalt Jungle strikes me as a particularly gangster film, but it’s regarded as a seminal noir. A lot of 50s noirs are pretty gangster (or heist-oriented).
Man, Cagney’s acting performance in White Heat is phenomenal. Love that movie.
Almost every Kurosawa film I’ve ever watched I thought was 30 minutes too long. “Stray Dog” and “High and Low” are probably the two biggest offenders of this, but even “Ikiru” (a film I rather enjoyed — enough to get an 8/10 rating out of me if we’re gonna put a numerical value on it) is a film I don’t see myself re-watching due to its slow pacing. Kurosawa films move entirely too slowly. I didn’t even finish “Ran” I found it so arduous.
My favorite Kurosawa film, as I mentioned, is Drunken Angel (1948), his “first” film. At 90 minutes, he accomplishes more here than in any other work. The plot is taut, the lighting is brilliantly used, the commentary on contemporary and historical Japanese society is thought-provoking, the symbolism is thick, the story has layers of thematic depth and receives two stellar acting performances from his favorite players (particularly the restrained performance given by Takashi), and the ending is delicate, phenomenal.
Barbara Stanwyck in Double Indemnity pretty much nails the prototype. I think of her as the quintessential femme fatale, but I really have to give a shout out to Rita Hayworth in “Gilda” also.
Of course, since I regard Sunset Blvd. as the greatest example of film-noir, then the breathtaking portrayal of Norma Desmond cannot be far down my list.
Sunset Blvd. is my vote for the best English language film ever filmed in black-and-white, by the way. I make the English language distinction due to Ingmar Bergman’s “Persona.”
Iron Man is the only movie I’ve ever walked out on. It was a completely uninteresting, generic comic book movie with the same hero, villain, plot, cheesy dialogue, and boring CGI as every other crappy comic book movie I’ve ever seen.
I would have also walked out on Hot Fuzz but my girlfriend had won two free tickets and she wanted to stick it through until the end.
“Pierrot Le Fou” is famous for its use of vivid color, particularly the colors of red and blue. What are your readings on this film?
Is the color ‘blue’ associated with Ferdinand’s character and the color ‘red’ associated with Marianne? Or is it too ambiguous to tell? Typically, I would associate ‘red’ with emotion and passion, but ‘blue’ is a much more nebulous color to me. The key conflict in this film (and many of Godard’s others) revolves around the inherent conflict and miscommunication between man and woman— does Godard’s use of color play into this conflict any?
What of the final shot of the film, with the camera resting on the convergence of blue sky and blue ocean? What of the use of yellow in this film? Also, what can be said of the “party sequence” toward the beginning of the film where different shots are tinted different colors?
This is a very complex film, any insight would be appreciated.
The colors red, white, and blue were a popular color combination from the 1950s and 1960s due to its association with BOTH the French flag and the American flag (see Vincent Minelle’s “An American in Paris” (1951) as well). This film definitely offers a lot of commentary on America/France, I think (references to Vietnam and Americans throughout).
The criterion essays also make a note of how important nature was to Godard and this film.
I know exactly the shot of which you speak, and I also strongly responded to it. Personally I just thought that was Godard’s way to circumvent the ‘rear projection’ tactic that many American studios (or at least Hitchcock) employed in that era. I thought of it as an extension of his “locations, not sets” approach. The criterion booklet, however, mentions that Godard used those lights (red, blue, green, and yellow) to represent Paris at night as it exists in a person’s memory: as flashes of light.
CLASSIC FILM NOIR over 3 years ago
Favorite noirs:
Sunset Blvd. (the pinnacle of the genre, imo)
Ace in the Hole (2nd favorite)
Double Indemnity
Out of the Past
White Heat
Notorious
Strangers on a Train
The Big Heat (very underrated)
In a Lonely Place (ditto)
Gilda (ditto)
Brute Force (man I’m on a roll here)
And also Blast of Silence (1961) and Angels With Dirty Faces (1939 I think) even though some of you will throw that “It has to be 41-58” argument at me.
Go to Comment
Criterion junkies here? over 3 years ago
^Damn, I would have sold you my copy of Straw Dogs but it just sold on Amazon this morning (for about $33).
In general, I don’t really buy Criterions. And when I use the word “buy” there, I don’t mean “purchase.” I mean “understand the fuss over.” There have been relatively few movies I’ve ever seen in their collection that I have deemed worth spending $20 on. These are basically the only Criterion films I’ve ever seen (of which I’ve seen probably about 125-150) that I thought I’d go out of my way to re-watch. I never blind-buy criterions.
Rushmore (1998) – my absolute favorite movie in the CC and probably my most watched movie ever
Ace in the Hole (1951)
Blast of Silence (1961)
La Haine (1995)
Youth of the Beast (1963)
Rashomon/Drunken Angel/Throne of Blood — only Kurosawas worth owning. Drunken Angel is best.
Charade (1963)
Rebecca/Spellbound/Notorious — Rebecca is a top three Hitchcock film
Brute Force (1947)
Umberto D — cheaper than and liked more than Bicycle Thieves (which I also liked)
Band of Outsiders/Alphaville — I also own Pierrot Le Fou, but I like it less
Wages of Fear (195x)
The Red Shoes (1948)
The Browning Version (1951) — actually blind-bought this because I want to be a teacher
Le Samourai (1966)
I used to own more, but I sold several hundred dollars worth of them because I find these films have limited replayability (when am I ever going to reach for that copy of Bicycle Thieves to show to other people?) and are worth $20-30 used.
Fellini might be the worst director I’ve ever had the displeasure of pursuing, and Bergman would probably be #2 right behind him if not for the truly miraculous Persona (1966) which is not part of the CC. Generally, all Kurosawa films have the same problem: each movie takes so long getting to where it intends to go that it severely waters down the film’s themes. Recent forays into Antonioni seem to indicate that he’s not for my collection, either.
Go to Comment
CLASSIC FILM NOIR over 3 years ago
I think of “gangster” as a sub-section of noir. The Asphalt Jungle strikes me as a particularly gangster film, but it’s regarded as a seminal noir. A lot of 50s noirs are pretty gangster (or heist-oriented).
Man, Cagney’s acting performance in White Heat is phenomenal. Love that movie.
Go to Comment
Criterion junkies here? over 3 years ago
Almost every Kurosawa film I’ve ever watched I thought was 30 minutes too long. “Stray Dog” and “High and Low” are probably the two biggest offenders of this, but even “Ikiru” (a film I rather enjoyed — enough to get an 8/10 rating out of me if we’re gonna put a numerical value on it) is a film I don’t see myself re-watching due to its slow pacing. Kurosawa films move entirely too slowly. I didn’t even finish “Ran” I found it so arduous.
My favorite Kurosawa film, as I mentioned, is Drunken Angel (1948), his “first” film. At 90 minutes, he accomplishes more here than in any other work. The plot is taut, the lighting is brilliantly used, the commentary on contemporary and historical Japanese society is thought-provoking, the symbolism is thick, the story has layers of thematic depth and receives two stellar acting performances from his favorite players (particularly the restrained performance given by Takashi), and the ending is delicate, phenomenal.
Go to Comment
CLASSIC FILM NOIR over 3 years ago
Why is The Killers (1946) not a true heist film?
Go to Comment
MOMENT OF TRUTH: HAVE YOU EVER GONE TO THE MOVIES AND FALLEN ASLEEP DURING THE FILM? over 3 years ago
The only movies I’ve fallen asleep to were actually action movies:
300
Quantum of Solace
Go to Comment
CLASSIC FILM NOIR over 3 years ago
Favorite femme fatale… oh that’s tough.
Barbara Stanwyck in Double Indemnity pretty much nails the prototype. I think of her as the quintessential femme fatale, but I really have to give a shout out to Rita Hayworth in “Gilda” also.
Of course, since I regard Sunset Blvd. as the greatest example of film-noir, then the breathtaking portrayal of Norma Desmond cannot be far down my list.
Sunset Blvd. is my vote for the best English language film ever filmed in black-and-white, by the way. I make the English language distinction due to Ingmar Bergman’s “Persona.”
Go to Comment
Army of Shadows over 3 years ago
This post made me decide not to sell Army of Shadows.
Apologies to Le Cercle Rouge, however.
Go to Comment
Which Movies Have You Walked Out On? over 3 years ago
Iron Man is the only movie I’ve ever walked out on. It was a completely uninteresting, generic comic book movie with the same hero, villain, plot, cheesy dialogue, and boring CGI as every other crappy comic book movie I’ve ever seen.
I would have also walked out on Hot Fuzz but my girlfriend had won two free tickets and she wanted to stick it through until the end.
Go to Comment
The use of Color in Pierrot Le Fou? over 3 years ago
“Pierrot Le Fou” is famous for its use of vivid color, particularly the colors of red and blue. What are your readings on this film?
Is the color ‘blue’ associated with Ferdinand’s character and the color ‘red’ associated with Marianne? Or is it too ambiguous to tell? Typically, I would associate ‘red’ with emotion and passion, but ‘blue’ is a much more nebulous color to me. The key conflict in this film (and many of Godard’s others) revolves around the inherent conflict and miscommunication between man and woman— does Godard’s use of color play into this conflict any?
What of the final shot of the film, with the camera resting on the convergence of blue sky and blue ocean? What of the use of yellow in this film? Also, what can be said of the “party sequence” toward the beginning of the film where different shots are tinted different colors?
This is a very complex film, any insight would be appreciated.
Go to Comment
The use of Color in Pierrot Le Fou? over 3 years ago
Adam:
The colors red, white, and blue were a popular color combination from the 1950s and 1960s due to its association with BOTH the French flag and the American flag (see Vincent Minelle’s “An American in Paris” (1951) as well). This film definitely offers a lot of commentary on America/France, I think (references to Vietnam and Americans throughout).
The criterion essays also make a note of how important nature was to Godard and this film.
Go to Comment
The use of Color in Pierrot Le Fou? over 3 years ago
R.S. Brown,
I know exactly the shot of which you speak, and I also strongly responded to it. Personally I just thought that was Godard’s way to circumvent the ‘rear projection’ tactic that many American studios (or at least Hitchcock) employed in that era. I thought of it as an extension of his “locations, not sets” approach. The criterion booklet, however, mentions that Godard used those lights (red, blue, green, and yellow) to represent Paris at night as it exists in a person’s memory: as flashes of light.
Go to Comment