|
Post by ThirdMan on Dec 26, 2022 17:06:17 GMT -8
From the looks of it, I think I've only given 13 films a 5-Star rating on my Letterboxd page (which I haven't updated in years). Yeah, people online throw out 10s and 0s far too carelessly, IMO. Unless a film is completely incompetent on every level (acting, writing, camerawork is choppy and out-of-focus) and genuinely offensively bad in an annoying (and not "so-bad-it's-good") way, I ain't giving it a zero (a 3 or 4 would be more appropriate for your typical "bad" (in the binary sense) film. But as we all know, people's motivations for giving 10s and (more often) 0s are often simply to try to bring the aggregate score on a site up or down.
Heck, I even noticed that freelance (for RogerEbert.com and the NY Times) critic Glenn Kenny gave Glass Onion a 5-out-of-5, but it didn't make his Top 10 of the year. That's kind of nuts to me.
For the record, I'd also give, say, EEAaO a 4.5/5, and I'll let it reside in my subconscious for a few more years to see if I'll bump it up to the perfect score (probably not, because it kind of gets slightly overwrought and long-winded in the third act to completely nail it.)
I think the only film I gave a perfect 5/5 to in the previous decade was The Grand Budapest Hotel, which is pretty much a perfect film in my eyes (my only quibble with it was it containing a bit of a generic shoot-out towards the end, but that was done in an ironic way). As pure spectacle action films go (delivering on what they promise in spectacular fashion), Mad Max: Fury Road is close (I'd probably go 4.75/5). Most of my Top 10 of any year are just films that I'd given 4-out-of-5 Stars to.
And yes, Jeremy, I skimmed over your Letterboxd page. Mad God was a guess, because it seems as though you rank that as the best stop-motion animated film of the year, based on your Twitter comments?
I don't think I've seen enough 2022 films to compile a complete Top 10 yet. I really need to see Aftersun, though, as that seems like a cinch for a high position, based on my impression of the trailer. It goes without saying, of course, that the Top Gun sequel wouldn't even make my Top 20 (heh).
|
|
|
Post by Jeremy on Dec 26, 2022 18:14:02 GMT -8
J.C., I don't think you've ever given a half-star rating on Letterboxd either. You've got two one-star films (Jason X and Scary Movie 2), but nothing below that. (I only half a small handful of half-star ratings myself; might give out more if I was able to sit through more awful films from start to finish.)
It is definitely rare for modern films to get a five-star rating from me as well; Grand Budapest Hotel is one of the few exceptions. In order to achieve the perfect score, a film needs to really feel like a special viewing experience, something unique and of its own, with no glaring flaws to speak of. (Obviously, even the best films can have some flaw if you look closely enough, but I'm not that pedantic.) I've only got about two dozen five-star films in my viewing, and even that may be generous (haven't watched some of them in years and am going based on Younger Me's impressions).
Worth noting that I recently watched another of J.C.'s favorite films, Metropolis, and came close to giving it five stars. But it's tough to judge a film like that, in part because it's incomplete (the version I watched on YouTube is 2.5 hours, but still missing key footage that seems to have been lost to time), and also because it's really tough to judge a 1920s film through 2020s eyes, especially since I'm not super-familiar with the cinematic language of foreign silent films (or even American silent films). But I definitely liked it a lot, and the rating may go up in time.
Also, I think I made a slight error with that stop-motion tweet - it should've said that Marcel the Shell with Shoes On is the better film, but Mad God was more original. Gah. Anyway, I'm not sure if I'd technically classify Marcel as a stop-motion film (though it's eligible for the Oscars' Animated category), but it got me to cry over a little googly-eyed seashell voiced by Jean-Ralphio's annoying sister, and that's no mean feat.
|
|
|
Post by ThirdMan on Dec 26, 2022 18:59:50 GMT -8
You know, I *technically* "own" The Grand Budapest Hotel: bought a streaming version on my PS4 a while back for $5, but I haven't watched the film in years, because I'm slightly afraid it won't be quite as good as I remembered, so I kind of want to leave it frozen in my imagination as is. Anyways, Metropolis isn't the only favourite film of mine that has gone through multiple edits and may not be entirely "complete". There are three (!) different versions of Touch of Evil (possibly my all-time favourite film) on the DVD I own, and again, I haven't watched any of them in many years. The newest version was edited with Orson Welles' original notes in mind (prior to studio interference), but I kind of prefer the studio-mandated version, with the big melodramatic score (as opposed to live street music in the background) in the opening. Anyways, regarding Metropolis, it's hardly a "perfect" film (it's big and silly, and the big denouement at the end -- "THE MEDIATOR BETWEEN THE HEAD AND THE HANDS MUST BE THE HEART!" -- is super-corny), but it's such a grand, ambitious visual experience that's permanently wedged in my sub-conscious, and influenced so....many....notable films in the years that followed. It's just ridiculous (Fritz Lang actually hated the picture when he first finished it, but grew to appreciate it over time), and I love it. And I'm glad you saw the, uh, most complete version available, because despite the rough, stitched-together sections with so much visual degradation, it's definitely better than the shorter version that existed for years. And the original sections were pretty well preserved, and still look great today! Speaking of my favourite films and whatnot, I actually just ordered seven film posters the other day, because I was growing bored of what's currently on my bedroom wall, and I finally found a site that offered classic film posters (they're of course re-prints, but who cares?), and some original artist interpretations, for a somewhat-reasonable price. I ordered posters for Touch of Evil, Metropolis, A Clockwork Orange, La Dolce Vita, Brazil, and cool artist interpretations for The Third Man and Rear Window. Here are the links to the posters, as I have difficulty posting images on this board: www.redbubble.com/i/poster/Touch-of-evil-by-Antoniopape/56845023.LVTDI?ref=product-titlewww.redbubble.com/i/poster/Metropolis-Fritz-Lang-1926-vintage-movie-poster-bandamp-w-by-Alma-Studio/27284684.LVTDI?ref=product-titlewww.redbubble.com/i/poster/La-Dolce-Vita-by-BEGROTESQUE/41485403.LVTDI?ref=product-titlewww.redbubble.com/i/poster/Brazil-Movie-Art-by-CoconutMelon/106142170.LVTDI?ref=product-titlewww.redbubble.com/i/poster/The-Third-Man-Movie-Poster-by-FearlessCabbage/112819225.LVTDI?ref=product-titlewww.redbubble.com/i/poster/Rear-Window-by-williamshreve19/87516674.LVTDI?ref=product-titlewww.allposters.com/-sp/A-Clockwork-Orange-A-Stanley-Kubrick-Movie-Posters_i14788756_.htm?UPI=F8SZ2S0&sOrigID=175(You'll need to cut-and-paste the links in your address bar to see them, as they're blocked from linking directly.)
|
|
|
Post by Jeremy on Dec 26, 2022 19:33:10 GMT -8
I think in order to post images on this board, the image addresses themselves need to be pasted into the image URL bar. Don't think that website allows image URLs to be copied. In any event, cool posters. (Still gotta see La Dolce Vita and Touch of Evil; neither is on any of the prime streaming services.) Anyways, regarding Metropolis, it's hardly a "perfect" film (it's big and silly, and the big denouement at the end -- "THE MEDIATOR BETWEEN THE HEAD AND THE HANDS MUST BE THE HEART!" -- is super-corny), but it's such a grand, ambitious visual experience that's permanently wedged in my sub-conscious, and influenced so....many....notable films in the years that followed. It's just ridiculous (Fritz Lang actually hated the picture when he first finished it, but grew to appreciate it over time), and I love it. And I'm glad you saw the, uh, most complete version available, because despite the rough, stitched-together sections with so much visual degradation, it's definitely better than the shorter version that existed for years. And the original sections were pretty well preserved, and still look great today! It was definitely ridiculous in many spots, but I found that was all part of the film's old-fashioned charm. (I loved the way all the characters moved with 2x speed; and people claim silent movies are too slow!) The performances were a lot of fun, particulalry Brigitte Helm as the Machine Man - your erstwhile avatar, as I recall. The rough, blurry sections of the film were annoying, but it's better than not having them at all, and a lot of the picture quality does remain in healthy condition. There are multiple cuts of this film streaming on the Internet - an 84-minute version on Hoopla, a 135-minute version (with uniformly poor video quality) on Redbox. But I decided I might as well go for the longest available one I could find (even if it's still not as long as the original), and was glad I did.
|
|
|
Post by ThirdMan on Dec 27, 2022 9:30:24 GMT -8
You'll probably have some fun with Touch of Evil -- it's sort of ridiculous in its own way, and Charlton Heston plays a Mexican! (heh) -- but La Dolce Vita may test your patience, as it's about a tabloid journalist who wanders around rather aimlessly in Italy, filled with ennui. It's very much a languorous, atmosphere-driven film, and it's also fairly long.
|
|
|
Post by Jeremy on Dec 27, 2022 17:32:52 GMT -8
I haven't watched any of Fellini's films, but indeed he does not seem like the kind of director whose work I'd get invested in. Still, I've been meaning to check out at least one or two of his films - HBO Max has a healthy selection.
It seems the only way I can watch La Dolce Vita is with a FilmBox subscription. Maybe I'll spring for the free trial at some point (like I recently did with Mubi, to watch Decision to Leave), though I've got a lot of other films on my plate in the meantime.
|
|
|
Post by ThirdMan on Dec 27, 2022 20:19:40 GMT -8
I like films where characters wander around in exotic urban environments, so much of Fellini's most-recognized work clicks with me, as it's got a fair amount of eccentricity. I would imagine that Antonioni's films (L'Avventura, L'Eclisse), being dry and fairly humourless, would be much more of a chore for you.
Surely the New York Public Library system has a fair number of Fellini's Criterion DVDs in their collection? Or are you done with physical media altogether (heh)?
|
|
|
Post by Jeremy on Dec 28, 2022 5:58:44 GMT -8
Oh no, I'm still regularly watching DVDs from my library (and occasionally fighting with Quiara about how long I can keep them). My DVD player is a bit old and worn - it comes with a VHS slot, to give you a sense of how long I've owned it - but it still spins the discs with the best of 'em. Generally, though, when checking out films I've never seen before, I usually go the streaming route, since it's easier to watch films via an Internet connection than through a DVD (which can only be played on screens that have a workable player attached).
In any case, my library does have a few Fellini films, but not La Dolce Vita. (They do have Touch of Evil, though, which is good to know.)
|
|
|
Post by ThirdMan on Dec 28, 2022 11:22:50 GMT -8
La Dolce Vita is more ambitious, but Fellini's Nights of Cabiria might be more your speed, in that it has a genuinely sympathetic character at its center. I Vitelloni would probably be pretty palatable as well. His other most famous films are obviously 8 1/2 (not dissimilar to La Dolce Vita, but more abstract/dreamlike), La Strada, and Amarcord. Satyricon would probably be too weird for you.
|
|
|
Post by Jeremy on Dec 28, 2022 16:26:00 GMT -8
Thanks. A lot of those films you mention are on HBO Max (which is still the best streaming service, despite recent Warner Media restructuring - let's hope the Discovery merger doesn't screw up the film library), so I'll probably check out a couple of them in 2023.
Incidentally, I'm about to hit parity with the Letterboxd Top 250 - I've seen 124 of the films on the (current) list, and will probably check out a 125th (probably Barry Lyndon) later this week to reach an even 50%. It's kind of an arbitrary goal, but I've found that it is easier to motivate myself to check out new films if I set certain benchmarks, and getting halfway through the LB 250 by the end of 2022 was one of them. I'm also trying to finish all the 2010s Best Picture nominees that I had not yet seen by the end of December (the only one I still have to watch is Amour).
|
|
|
Post by Jeremy on Dec 29, 2022 10:43:45 GMT -8
And to round out the year, here are my picks for the 10 best films of 2022! Went a bit more ambitious with the header pic, combining four images this time, because I want to end the year on a high note.
|
|
|
Post by ThirdMan on Dec 29, 2022 13:42:31 GMT -8
It's good to set goals for oneself. And I was soooooo close in guessing your entire Top 10. DAMN YOU KIMI! DAMN YOOOOOOOUUUUUUUUU!!! I actually meant to watch Kimi when I had Amazon Prime a while back, but never got around to it. Anyways, I've put it on hold at the library, as I prefer the leaner Soderbergh pictures to his lengthier epics.
|
|
|
Post by Jeremy on Dec 29, 2022 14:32:11 GMT -8
The funny thing is that before you posted your predictions, Nope wasn't going to be in my Top 10 at all. But after considering the films I considered among the year's best, and weighing the ones that left the greatest impressions on me, Nope felt like something that just had to be there.
Also, Chip n' Dale: Rescue Rangers wasn't originally intended to be in the Honorable Mentions (since it's not exactly that great a movie), but I was on an inexplicable hot streak of putting films with colons in their titles in the HMs, so I had to make room for the chipmunks to keep the theme going.
|
|
|
Post by ThirdMan on Dec 30, 2022 2:44:40 GMT -8
The imagery in Nope left an impression on me, and that scene on the sitcom stage was indeed harrowing. The characters, aside from Keke Palmer's, not so much. So in some ways, I admired what the film was aiming for a bit more than I *liked* it, but I still might have it on my own personal Top 10, should I make one (after I've seen a few more big films). Chip n' Dale was fun. I had no real issues with it. And hey, you can't go wrong with body-modification horror in a "children's" film.
|
|
|
Post by guttersnipe on Jan 2, 2023 7:39:07 GMT -8
TLoT is definitely one of the more colorful Marvel films, and I can see why that would make it work for you. (I think we discussed a similar point a couple of years ago about Monsters University, which improves on Monsters Inc. through its use of color and character design, even if it really lags in story.) The palette was a big factor; I mean I don't really remember anything about The Dark World aside from it having a rather apropos title given that all I recall of it was a number of bland grey city backdrops. That's definitely not the case with a film in which a Viking longboat sails along a cosmic rainbow.
|
|