i don’t think this is gonna be any good, coppola, as scorsese as spielberg, and as most movie brats has absolutely sold-out his imagination, he makes films because he can, not because he wants to…i will see tetro shortly too, but i dont think its gonna chane things…hopefully antichrist will.
I kept thinkin’ about 2 things, during the entire film: a) Tarkovsky (aka someone who knows how to shoot dreams…), and b) this was nothin’ but 10.000 lousy trailers stacked up together. Seriously unoriginal, dull, and predictable…loved a definition i read about a few threads back; Rush Hour 3 + a poor man’s Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (Thank You Roger Hayn)
I agree with VIc Pardo "I was on the outside looking in the whole time. Not once could I suspend my disbelief. Every time anyone opened their mouth, my reaction was, “That’s nonsense.” It was leave-your-brain-at-the-door Hollywood crap, at continuing a serious discussion about a film that is so flat and weak.
Side note: whoever wrote this: “Christopher Nolan achieved, after 114 years of movie art, something that was considered impossible…he changed the way we perceive storytelling.” should be hanged, on a very public square.
Go see Tarkovsky, and then call Inception brilliant (not) again…
Anything that is Nolan, sucks (except for Memento). Not my fault. It’s his. Stop rehashing, write something slightly original, shoot it with a 2-milllion dollars budget and surprise us…Hollywood is so dead, these days. Check Daddy Longlegs, to see what is good american cinema.
I agree with apursansar and rls in mubiland. We do identify with the original concept, this one, with all its inceptions and other crap—assed flicks just makes this look like IMDb, which sucks. Don’t know if it’s viable the creation of theauteurs, but a re-creation, surely sounds nice…the concept was raped. Don’t care about ads, as long as theauteurs as a concept don’t die…and we get to talk about films…really talk, abou real films, and not just comment nonsense about movies…there are plenty of sites for that, already. My two cents.
Actuaally i streamed the film, right about the time of the film festivals, and then i saw the theatrical release. I liked when i saw it online, but boy, i loved it when i saw it on the theatre…it was a stellar film, and not a remake, herzog is more of a reader than he’s a film buf…and he had not seen the original ferrara, he actually dismissed the comparisons between the latter with “i don’t know who ferrara is, and have not seen his film, i’m sure if we would drink some beers, the all matter would be soon forgotten”.Indeed. And it was a great film. Best nick cage since his work with Lynch.
Many Portuguese Directors missing: José Álvaro Morais (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0602480/)
Joaquim Leitão (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0500758/); José Fonseca e Costa (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0284642/); Jorge Silva Melo (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0798189/); Solveig Nordlund (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0635145/); António-Pedro Vasconcelos (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0890367/): only has Producer credits; António Campos (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0133195/); António Reis (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0718305/); Margarida Cordeiro (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0179440/); Raquel Freire (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0293865/), she’s already on MUBI as a user – http://mubi.com/users/180449;
Hope these will soon be added.
sandro AGUILAR
-lauro ANTÓNIO
-bruno de ALMEIDA
-rita AZEVEDO GOMES
-leitão de BARROS
-margarida CARDOSO
-jorge CRAMEZ
-antónio da CUNHA TELLES
-antónio FERREIRA
-ivo FERREIRA
-reinaldo FERREIRA
-josé FONSECA E COSTA
-raquel FREIRE
-joão mário GRILO
-tiago GUEDES
-joaquim LEITÃO
-antónio LOPES RIBEIRO
-antónio de MACEDO
-inês de MEDEIROS
-maria de MEDEIROS
-manuel MOZOS
-marco MARTINS
-josé ÁLVARO MORAIS
-josé NASCIMENTO
-joão NICOLAU
-*solveig NORDLUND
-jorge PAIXÃO DA COSTA
-jorge PELICANO
-regina PESSOA
-antónio REIS
-josé miguel RIBEIRO
-luís filipe ROCHA
-paulo ROCHA
-catarina RUIVO
-joão SALAVIZA
-joaquim SAPINHO
-alberto SEIXAS SANTOS
-frederico SERRA
-jorge SILVA MELO
-rui SIMÕES
-ernesto de SOUSA
-antónio-pedro VASCONCELOS
-fernando VENDRELL
-leonel VIEIRA
-hugo VIEIRA DA SILVA
-carlos VILARDEBÓ
-teresa VILLAVERDE
-ZEPE
Well, there are many issues here. I said not since WILD AT HEART, (ok to be fair i loved him on THE ROCK), have i seen such a great role by nicholas cage (he was great on ADAPTATION and, one or two more…), he was one of the best things about the film, one funny thing, is that he usually gets 30 mil per movie, and here he is working on a 30 mil budgeted film. That goes to show, that an actor needs roles. All of these superstar actors, seem to have forgotten what real acting is, but when the gilliam’s and the lynch’s and kubrick’s of our world, use them on a real film, their acting chops come out. Loved this film. It’s more than a re-boot. It uses a similar character, he’s similarly amoral.
My son, my son, what have ye done is more lynchian than herzoguian if you ask me. Lynchian characters, lynchian landscapes.Etc. Was more Lynch than Herzog. His american films, seem always small, less subtle, more compromisse, less art. Tend to like them a whole lot less than his european counterparts…it’s a nice film, but there is not a whole lot many herzog in there…
What is the canon exactly? The art-house is a canon in itself. Films and movies are both important. High-art and low-art. Experimental and the mainstream (that would make for an awesome film title don’t you think?). The canon tends to be self-imposed. The media do play a part in that too. All those stupid books about the (supposed) all-time best films, always with every 3 out 4 pics, on the cover relating to contemporary and mainstream moronic and American movies. Notice the list from AFI and the list “opposed” to it. Rosembaum’s one. I mean what is the canon here? I think they’re both a canon. Both have its merits and demerits. I don’t think one is commendable is one wanders away from the canon. The art-house/experimental/ world cinema niche is as much canonical as the mainstream one. Both have interesting stuff and people orking on it. My canon was always not to have a canon. I like to see a Brakhage and then a Michael Bay. It’s my way of not dumbing down, remain eclectic and unbiased. I always liked mainstream films, but i have a soft spot for art-house. My canon is to see pretty much every thing that comes my way. I mean what is canonical this days? What is alt-cinema (if there is such a phrase…) Lynch? Herzog? Noé? Marker? I don’t know where the virtue’s at, nowadays.
@ Mike Spence: Russel is canonical as well. Here on MUBI you are supposed to have seen it. So there’s a canonical art-house canon ruling here, too. The discussion is biased that way. For instance now, the shit is movies from down under, southeast Asia, and south America, not forgetting Africa. So i’d say the art-house canon is more flexible, whether the mainstream canon, has remained, well, canonical. But that’s good in a way. For instance how many people here on auteurs 2.0 (MUBI) still call Hitchcock (the most canonical of Directors) an auteur? Not many. For me Silent Films are the only canon i should get more familiar with. I prefer the classics. That was my canon. Nowadays I’m mixing it up, with contemporary and classic art-house. Shuffling it properly, is the secret. Me, I always see new films and old classics, art-house, and crappy Sunday flicks, at the very same time. I like to see the films the film.buffs are raving about, and the movies the common people are happy with. I try to balance it.
@ Kenji: I hear you. The flaws of THE canon (and THE refers to western movies, made in USA, for the most part, just check the “1001 films you should see before you die” and you’ll get my point ) is that it’s sellin’ something to an audience. The art-house is more free that way. Even if there are trends, there’s not one visible canon. But there are those films, MUBIans are supposed to have seen. So in that regard, there is one. I don’t know. I don’t like general consent or majority opinion. I still despise Citizen Kane, and it’s still lauded as the greatest ever. I always move away from the ever thing. Art-house is not necessarily better just because, it’s art and no one sees it. I see many films from the canon. But i’ve a hard time identifying it. Isn’t Oliveira canonical? And yet it’s pretty auteuristic. Is Godard still canonical or art-house? Can somethin’ be canonical and art-house. What is the canonical art-house flicks for you guys?
@ Kenji: but less so? There are 800 films out of 1001. I mean that’s not so so. The history film is not 80% american. I’m not talking about who makes more films per year, since the very begginin’; although that’s unfair to poor countries, such as mine. I’m sick of IMDb and it’s tops, to be fair. I tend to value more, the bottom, and the tasteless campy flicks than the movies loved by all. Which incidentally were all done in the last 30-40 years. I think MUBI has become a little too IMDbish and less and less auteur-ish. But hey, it’s the world as it is. Well english is the world’s lingua franca, for quite some time now. I don’t have a beef with anglo-saxonic culture as it is. But the mass media piss me off, in that their ability to market a “masterpiece” tend to twist people minds. Most people won’t ever see a art-house film, because it lacks the aggressive marketing. It’s a silent world, the cinephiliac one. I don’t see that changin’ any time soon.
@ Rosi: well we live in that world. Try tell to any average joe, who Oliveira, Gance, Apichatpong, or Tarkovksy or Maya Deren is and you’ll see the response.
Out 1 (the 15 and a half hour-long version), Satántango (7 hours), Near Death (6 hours), Le Soulier de Satin (6 hours), etc, etc. I like my films to be long. The more they last, the more I learn.
@ Odionvert: Whitehead’s remark may be insensitive but it is indeed a sentence that makes one wonder about, what a film is really about….was the audiovisual achievement of a decade….no one can get past those images…and that is cinema…
Not buildings, THE twin towers in NYC…not like imploding casinos in Vegas. I felt like I was watching a film, to be honest, could not believe my eye. Not talking about the act per se, talking about the images as images…and the fact that you cannot (or can you?) take those images out of its context, the stronger, they are…
He’s too high-brow and in love with himself (which in his case is a virtue) to like a common man film’s taste; on the other hand, one of the men whole loved more men and women, ever. I mean the sheer amount of quotes he has on his films, it’s wondrous, really. I wish he would say “je te kiffe andré”. Maybe. I’d love to interview him, for sure…
Aha I spent two weeks uploading every and each video of Dolan’s I found on YouTube. He’s indeed hot to death, and talented too. I dunno if I like him more when he speaks canadian-french (québecois) or english (his english is so yummy) I love the fact that he oftens eat whilst doing his interviews.
Sure he has the “hipster” look. but he his more than his look (listen to some of his YT interview’s and you’ll find out that for a boy – he’s stil a boy – that has barely left his teen years, he’s quite cultivated and has a good head on his shoulders). I dunno why people are so hard on him, he eats on occasion ‘cause he probably does like 30 interviews per day so he’s tired and hungry.I find him to be both sexy and cute yes, not a universal thing, though. Only a matter of opinion. Raquel Welch, for instance, does nothing for me. Xavier Dolan does nothing for you. To each his own, right? I find him to be very attractive. He’s not “eating”, he had one grape off of a fruit basket that was on the table, few inches from his hands, and he ate it. It’s the way he ate the grape that was both cute and hilarious, to me, that is.
I’ve not said he’s devastatingly attractiive. but I like him. And he does do things for me. I don’t know what’s the discussion here. Welch might be the funniest, cuttest, most amazing woman alive for you. I respect that. That’s not what I think of her. Not that it does mind the least bit. Your comment on a Xavier Dolan fan thread is not comprehensible. He’s not the epitome of THE model hot guy. He’s a guy some men and women fnd attractive. That is all. He’s read Musset he has seen quite a good dela of good films (http://www.criterion.com/explore/102-xavier-dolans-top-10) too. Do I have to discuss every detail of his personality in order to “gain” your approval? You have stated that you do not think him special, cute or cultivated…what’s the point in arguing further? I do not think he’s Eurotrash, an hipster is nothin’ but a look. He’s a known fashionista, he likes to wears those clothes, so let him be. I don’t judge people by the way he or she dresses him/herself. I merely stated that I do not find Welch attractive (only refered to her looks). I think he’s as enlightened as he is cultivated. He knows a couple of poets. I really don’t like this public defense of people we like, this can (and usually does) get ugly, that’s why I refrain from posting comments about anything here on MUBI. I don’t wish to discuss him, further. I like the man, I like the way he talks, I like the way he eats a grape, I like his teeth (reminds me of a bunny rabbit) and I like his films…and that’s that…
@ Mark. Not agreeing with you, does not mean I do not understand you or grasp your point, though. You don’t like his type. I get it. Personally I could not care less if someone is posing or is an hipster, does not affect me at all. I don’t socialize with hipsters. I don’t like Dolan’s type. I like Dolan. Only Dolan. I don’t like men or women, ‘cause they fit a pattern or are fashionistas or cool or hipsters…I just know I like him…I really couldn’t tell you why. Hipsters (or so-called hipsters) tend not to be my cup of tea. Don’t really like people who try too hard to dress in a certain way, though. Isn’t Rowdy Roy Piper the guy from Carpenter’s They Live? Why “risking to have is snot kicked out of him” is any way charming? If a man is fragile, or effeminate, or gay, does he stop beingf a man? If one can kick a man’s ass, he gets uglier or uninteresting in one’s eyes? Explain that to me…“His hair makes me want to kick his ass, and by the looks of him I could do so easily.”: w-h-a-t?
This is gonna sound odd, but nowadays. I value more seeing a film on screen, on a nice 35 (or 16) mm film print, rather than owning a digital copy of it. I don’t know. I don’t have that many DVDs. And I don’t see the ones I do buy. I have the complete Histoire(s) du Cinéma by Jean-Luc Godard, but I rather wait 10 years and see all of the episodes/parts on film, rather than seeing the whole thing in just one random sitting. I tend to value less and less the actual ownership and the collecting of dvds (if only I was collecting 16mm prints, now that would be rich). I tend to believe that if some director, film or cinematography is eluding me, there’s a reason behind it. There was a former Chairman of our National Cinematheque that bragged (and rightfully so) about not owning dvd’s at all (I don’t think he had a tv set either). That is the pinnacle of cinephilia for me. I wish I had never seen a film on tv, dvd or online/at the pc. That is the dream. That being sad. I love my edition (bought the best one on the market – it is my all-time favourite film) from Carlotta Films of F.W.Murnau’s “Sunrise – A Song of Two Humans”). Love too my Criterion Hitchcock Boxset. Those two love them. Hardly ever watch them though.
TETRO (Francis Ford Coppola, 2009) over 3 years ago
i don’t think this is gonna be any good, coppola, as scorsese as spielberg, and as most movie brats has absolutely sold-out his imagination, he makes films because he can, not because he wants to…i will see tetro shortly too, but i dont think its gonna chane things…hopefully antichrist will.
Go to Comment
Best movies filmed in the desert about 3 years ago
Fata Morgana
The Desert People
Desert
Greed
El Topo
Die Herrin Von Atlantis
El Cant dels Occels
Go to Comment
Inception: a truly great film? almost 3 years ago
I kept thinkin’ about 2 things, during the entire film: a) Tarkovsky (aka someone who knows how to shoot dreams…), and b) this was nothin’ but 10.000 lousy trailers stacked up together. Seriously unoriginal, dull, and predictable…loved a definition i read about a few threads back; Rush Hour 3 + a poor man’s Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (Thank You Roger Hayn)
I agree with VIc Pardo "I was on the outside looking in the whole time. Not once could I suspend my disbelief. Every time anyone opened their mouth, my reaction was, “That’s nonsense.” It was leave-your-brain-at-the-door Hollywood crap, at continuing a serious discussion about a film that is so flat and weak.
Side note: whoever wrote this: “Christopher Nolan achieved, after 114 years of movie art, something that was considered impossible…he changed the way we perceive storytelling.” should be hanged, on a very public square.
Go see Tarkovsky, and then call Inception brilliant (not) again…
Go to Comment
Inception: a truly great film? almost 3 years ago
Inception has the merits of the H-bomb. Weak as a Heist movie, too.
Go to Comment
Inception: a truly great film? almost 3 years ago
Anything that is Nolan, sucks (except for Memento). Not my fault. It’s his. Stop rehashing, write something slightly original, shoot it with a 2-milllion dollars budget and surprise us…Hollywood is so dead, these days. Check Daddy Longlegs, to see what is good american cinema.
Go to Comment
Inception: a truly great film? almost 3 years ago
Because I watch films regardless of my taste for the Director. Went to check it. Did not like it. Period.
Go to Comment
THE MUBI CONDITION OR: AS I WAS MUBING AHEAD OCCASIONALLY I SAW BRIEF GLIMPSES OF REFUSAL almost 3 years ago
I agree with apursansar and rls in mubiland. We do identify with the original concept, this one, with all its inceptions and other crap—assed flicks just makes this look like IMDb, which sucks. Don’t know if it’s viable the creation of theauteurs, but a re-creation, surely sounds nice…the concept was raped. Don’t care about ads, as long as theauteurs as a concept don’t die…and we get to talk about films…really talk, abou real films, and not just comment nonsense about movies…there are plenty of sites for that, already. My two cents.
Go to Comment
What do you think of Werner Herzog and Nick Cage's new movie? almost 3 years ago
Actuaally i streamed the film, right about the time of the film festivals, and then i saw the theatrical release. I liked when i saw it online, but boy, i loved it when i saw it on the theatre…it was a stellar film, and not a remake, herzog is more of a reader than he’s a film buf…and he had not seen the original ferrara, he actually dismissed the comparisons between the latter with “i don’t know who ferrara is, and have not seen his film, i’m sure if we would drink some beers, the all matter would be soon forgotten”.Indeed. And it was a great film. Best nick cage since his work with Lynch.
Go to Comment
The Auteurs Film & Cast Member Database almost 3 years ago
Many Portuguese Directors missing: José Álvaro Morais (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0602480/)
Joaquim Leitão (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0500758/); José Fonseca e Costa (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0284642/); Jorge Silva Melo (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0798189/); Solveig Nordlund (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0635145/); António-Pedro Vasconcelos (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0890367/): only has Producer credits; António Campos (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0133195/); António Reis (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0718305/); Margarida Cordeiro (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0179440/); Raquel Freire (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0293865/), she’s already on MUBI as a user – http://mubi.com/users/180449;
Hope these will soon be added.
sandro AGUILAR
-lauro ANTÓNIO
-bruno de ALMEIDA
-rita AZEVEDO GOMES
-leitão de BARROS
-margarida CARDOSO
-jorge CRAMEZ
-antónio da CUNHA TELLES
-antónio FERREIRA
-ivo FERREIRA
-reinaldo FERREIRA
-josé FONSECA E COSTA
-raquel FREIRE
-joão mário GRILO
-tiago GUEDES
-joaquim LEITÃO
-antónio LOPES RIBEIRO
-antónio de MACEDO
-inês de MEDEIROS
-maria de MEDEIROS
-manuel MOZOS
-marco MARTINS
-josé ÁLVARO MORAIS
-josé NASCIMENTO
-joão NICOLAU
-*solveig NORDLUND
-jorge PAIXÃO DA COSTA
-jorge PELICANO
-regina PESSOA
-antónio REIS
-josé miguel RIBEIRO
-luís filipe ROCHA
-paulo ROCHA
-catarina RUIVO
-joão SALAVIZA
-joaquim SAPINHO
-alberto SEIXAS SANTOS
-frederico SERRA
-jorge SILVA MELO
-rui SIMÕES
-ernesto de SOUSA
-antónio-pedro VASCONCELOS
-fernando VENDRELL
-leonel VIEIRA
-hugo VIEIRA DA SILVA
-carlos VILARDEBÓ
-teresa VILLAVERDE
-ZEPE
Thank you.
Go to Comment
The Auteurs Film & Cast Member Database almost 3 years ago
Yes i do know that, but she has few of her own films, i-e that she directed…I like her as a director…
Go to Comment
What do you think of Werner Herzog and Nick Cage's new movie? almost 3 years ago
Well, there are many issues here. I said not since WILD AT HEART, (ok to be fair i loved him on THE ROCK), have i seen such a great role by nicholas cage (he was great on ADAPTATION and, one or two more…), he was one of the best things about the film, one funny thing, is that he usually gets 30 mil per movie, and here he is working on a 30 mil budgeted film. That goes to show, that an actor needs roles. All of these superstar actors, seem to have forgotten what real acting is, but when the gilliam’s and the lynch’s and kubrick’s of our world, use them on a real film, their acting chops come out. Loved this film. It’s more than a re-boot. It uses a similar character, he’s similarly amoral.
My son, my son, what have ye done is more lynchian than herzoguian if you ask me. Lynchian characters, lynchian landscapes.Etc. Was more Lynch than Herzog. His american films, seem always small, less subtle, more compromisse, less art. Tend to like them a whole lot less than his european counterparts…it’s a nice film, but there is not a whole lot many herzog in there…
Go to Comment
When Did You Begin to Movie Away from the Canon? over 2 years ago
What is the canon exactly? The art-house is a canon in itself. Films and movies are both important. High-art and low-art. Experimental and the mainstream (that would make for an awesome film title don’t you think?). The canon tends to be self-imposed. The media do play a part in that too. All those stupid books about the (supposed) all-time best films, always with every 3 out 4 pics, on the cover relating to contemporary and mainstream moronic and American movies. Notice the list from AFI and the list “opposed” to it. Rosembaum’s one. I mean what is the canon here? I think they’re both a canon. Both have its merits and demerits. I don’t think one is commendable is one wanders away from the canon. The art-house/experimental/ world cinema niche is as much canonical as the mainstream one. Both have interesting stuff and people orking on it. My canon was always not to have a canon. I like to see a Brakhage and then a Michael Bay. It’s my way of not dumbing down, remain eclectic and unbiased. I always liked mainstream films, but i have a soft spot for art-house. My canon is to see pretty much every thing that comes my way. I mean what is canonical this days? What is alt-cinema (if there is such a phrase…) Lynch? Herzog? Noé? Marker? I don’t know where the virtue’s at, nowadays.
Go to Comment
When Did You Begin to Movie Away from the Canon? over 2 years ago
@ Mike Spence: Russel is canonical as well. Here on MUBI you are supposed to have seen it. So there’s a canonical art-house canon ruling here, too. The discussion is biased that way. For instance now, the shit is movies from down under, southeast Asia, and south America, not forgetting Africa. So i’d say the art-house canon is more flexible, whether the mainstream canon, has remained, well, canonical. But that’s good in a way. For instance how many people here on auteurs 2.0 (MUBI) still call Hitchcock (the most canonical of Directors) an auteur? Not many. For me Silent Films are the only canon i should get more familiar with. I prefer the classics. That was my canon. Nowadays I’m mixing it up, with contemporary and classic art-house. Shuffling it properly, is the secret. Me, I always see new films and old classics, art-house, and crappy Sunday flicks, at the very same time. I like to see the films the film.buffs are raving about, and the movies the common people are happy with. I try to balance it.
Go to Comment
When Did You Begin to Movie Away from the Canon? over 2 years ago
@ Kenji: I hear you. The flaws of THE canon (and THE refers to western movies, made in USA, for the most part, just check the “1001 films you should see before you die” and you’ll get my point ) is that it’s sellin’ something to an audience. The art-house is more free that way. Even if there are trends, there’s not one visible canon. But there are those films, MUBIans are supposed to have seen. So in that regard, there is one. I don’t know. I don’t like general consent or majority opinion. I still despise Citizen Kane, and it’s still lauded as the greatest ever. I always move away from the ever thing. Art-house is not necessarily better just because, it’s art and no one sees it. I see many films from the canon. But i’ve a hard time identifying it. Isn’t Oliveira canonical? And yet it’s pretty auteuristic. Is Godard still canonical or art-house? Can somethin’ be canonical and art-house. What is the canonical art-house flicks for you guys?
Go to Comment
When Did You Begin to Movie Away from the Canon? over 2 years ago
@ Kenji: but less so? There are 800 films out of 1001. I mean that’s not so so. The history film is not 80% american. I’m not talking about who makes more films per year, since the very begginin’; although that’s unfair to poor countries, such as mine. I’m sick of IMDb and it’s tops, to be fair. I tend to value more, the bottom, and the tasteless campy flicks than the movies loved by all. Which incidentally were all done in the last 30-40 years. I think MUBI has become a little too IMDbish and less and less auteur-ish. But hey, it’s the world as it is. Well english is the world’s lingua franca, for quite some time now. I don’t have a beef with anglo-saxonic culture as it is. But the mass media piss me off, in that their ability to market a “masterpiece” tend to twist people minds. Most people won’t ever see a art-house film, because it lacks the aggressive marketing. It’s a silent world, the cinephiliac one. I don’t see that changin’ any time soon.
Go to Comment
When Did You Begin to Movie Away from the Canon? over 2 years ago
@ Rosi: well we live in that world. Try tell to any average joe, who Oliveira, Gance, Apichatpong, or Tarkovksy or Maya Deren is and you’ll see the response.
Go to Comment
FILM DATABASE SUBMISSION SEPTEMBER 2010 over 2 years ago
Ulisse by Mario Camerini and Mario Bava is not on the database (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0047630/fullcredits#directors)
Profile Pic (pick the best one):
http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B00001ZWBJ.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg
http://www.covercaratulas.com/ode/new_serv8/carteles/Ulises_por_ronchy_%5Bcarteles%5D_80.jpg
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_RTh60MAQIas/TAreGboFDGI/AAAAAAAAAMo/iRNKPJx27fQ/s1600/Douglas+Ul.jpg
Go to Comment
The Auteurs Film & Cast Member Database over 2 years ago
@ Nohea: already deleted my posts, my bad.
Go to Comment
RUSSIAN GUILD OF FILM CRITICS BEST RUSSIAN FILMS PT 1 1908-1957 over 2 years ago
“A Mother’s Heart” is equally great. And yes Barnet’s By the Bluest of Seas, is a epic masterpiece…
Go to Comment
The longest movie you've ever sat through over 2 years ago
Out 1 (the 15 and a half hour-long version), Satántango (7 hours), Near Death (6 hours), Le Soulier de Satin (6 hours), etc, etc. I like my films to be long. The more they last, the more I learn.
Go to Comment
Art that goes too far; art that fails to go far enough about 2 years ago
@ Odionvert: Whitehead’s remark may be insensitive but it is indeed a sentence that makes one wonder about, what a film is really about….was the audiovisual achievement of a decade….no one can get past those images…and that is cinema…
Go to Comment
Art that goes too far; art that fails to go far enough about 2 years ago
Not buildings, THE twin towers in NYC…not like imploding casinos in Vegas. I felt like I was watching a film, to be honest, could not believe my eye. Not talking about the act per se, talking about the images as images…and the fact that you cannot (or can you?) take those images out of its context, the stronger, they are…
Go to Comment
If You Met Godard, Would He Approve of Your Taste in Films? about 2 years ago
He’s too high-brow and in love with himself (which in his case is a virtue) to like a common man film’s taste; on the other hand, one of the men whole loved more men and women, ever. I mean the sheer amount of quotes he has on his films, it’s wondrous, really. I wish he would say “je te kiffe andré”. Maybe. I’d love to interview him, for sure…
Go to Comment
Xavier Dolan is Hot To Death almost 2 years ago
Aha I spent two weeks uploading every and each video of Dolan’s I found on YouTube. He’s indeed hot to death, and talented too. I dunno if I like him more when he speaks canadian-french (québecois) or english (his english is so yummy) I love the fact that he oftens eat whilst doing his interviews.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v-6Wk71v7Po&feature=related
and
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6jXdxZ2qM7A&feature=related
Go to Comment
Xavier Dolan is Hot To Death almost 2 years ago
Sure he has the “hipster” look. but he his more than his look (listen to some of his YT interview’s and you’ll find out that for a boy – he’s stil a boy – that has barely left his teen years, he’s quite cultivated and has a good head on his shoulders). I dunno why people are so hard on him, he eats on occasion ‘cause he probably does like 30 interviews per day so he’s tired and hungry.I find him to be both sexy and cute yes, not a universal thing, though. Only a matter of opinion. Raquel Welch, for instance, does nothing for me. Xavier Dolan does nothing for you. To each his own, right? I find him to be very attractive. He’s not “eating”, he had one grape off of a fruit basket that was on the table, few inches from his hands, and he ate it. It’s the way he ate the grape that was both cute and hilarious, to me, that is.
Go to Comment
Xavier Dolan is Hot To Death almost 2 years ago
I’ve not said he’s devastatingly attractiive. but I like him. And he does do things for me. I don’t know what’s the discussion here. Welch might be the funniest, cuttest, most amazing woman alive for you. I respect that. That’s not what I think of her. Not that it does mind the least bit. Your comment on a Xavier Dolan fan thread is not comprehensible. He’s not the epitome of THE model hot guy. He’s a guy some men and women fnd attractive. That is all. He’s read Musset he has seen quite a good dela of good films (http://www.criterion.com/explore/102-xavier-dolans-top-10) too. Do I have to discuss every detail of his personality in order to “gain” your approval? You have stated that you do not think him special, cute or cultivated…what’s the point in arguing further? I do not think he’s Eurotrash, an hipster is nothin’ but a look. He’s a known fashionista, he likes to wears those clothes, so let him be. I don’t judge people by the way he or she dresses him/herself. I merely stated that I do not find Welch attractive (only refered to her looks). I think he’s as enlightened as he is cultivated. He knows a couple of poets. I really don’t like this public defense of people we like, this can (and usually does) get ugly, that’s why I refrain from posting comments about anything here on MUBI. I don’t wish to discuss him, further. I like the man, I like the way he talks, I like the way he eats a grape, I like his teeth (reminds me of a bunny rabbit) and I like his films…and that’s that…
Go to Comment
Last.Fm comunity.....someone in The Auteurs? almost 2 years ago
http://www.lastfm.com.br/user/musiky
Go to Comment
Xavier Dolan is Hot To Death almost 2 years ago
@ Mark. Not agreeing with you, does not mean I do not understand you or grasp your point, though. You don’t like his type. I get it. Personally I could not care less if someone is posing or is an hipster, does not affect me at all. I don’t socialize with hipsters. I don’t like Dolan’s type. I like Dolan. Only Dolan. I don’t like men or women, ‘cause they fit a pattern or are fashionistas or cool or hipsters…I just know I like him…I really couldn’t tell you why. Hipsters (or so-called hipsters) tend not to be my cup of tea. Don’t really like people who try too hard to dress in a certain way, though. Isn’t Rowdy Roy Piper the guy from Carpenter’s They Live? Why “risking to have is snot kicked out of him” is any way charming? If a man is fragile, or effeminate, or gay, does he stop beingf a man? If one can kick a man’s ass, he gets uglier or uninteresting in one’s eyes? Explain that to me…“His hair makes me want to kick his ass, and by the looks of him I could do so easily.”: w-h-a-t?
Go to Comment
Xavier Dolan is Hot To Death almost 2 years ago
Can a hairdo rape someone?
Go to Comment
Your most prized DVD (Blu-Ray) almost 2 years ago
This is gonna sound odd, but nowadays. I value more seeing a film on screen, on a nice 35 (or 16) mm film print, rather than owning a digital copy of it. I don’t know. I don’t have that many DVDs. And I don’t see the ones I do buy. I have the complete Histoire(s) du Cinéma by Jean-Luc Godard, but I rather wait 10 years and see all of the episodes/parts on film, rather than seeing the whole thing in just one random sitting. I tend to value less and less the actual ownership and the collecting of dvds (if only I was collecting 16mm prints, now that would be rich). I tend to believe that if some director, film or cinematography is eluding me, there’s a reason behind it. There was a former Chairman of our National Cinematheque that bragged (and rightfully so) about not owning dvd’s at all (I don’t think he had a tv set either). That is the pinnacle of cinephilia for me. I wish I had never seen a film on tv, dvd or online/at the pc. That is the dream. That being sad. I love my edition (bought the best one on the market – it is my all-time favourite film) from Carlotta Films of F.W.Murnau’s “Sunrise – A Song of Two Humans”). Love too my Criterion Hitchcock Boxset. Those two love them. Hardly ever watch them though.
Go to Comment