Change Your Image
Trouter2000
10 - A special category for films which have directly influenced my worldview or changed my way of thinking. Could equally be given a 9/10 except for their personal influence.
9 - The greatest films ever made, outstanding examples of film as art. Timeless and enjoyable, these are the works of art which set themselves apart.
8 - A classic, these films often have multiple layers and showcase outstanding acting or direction.
7 - This is a very good film, usually the kind of thing that wins best picture. Engaging and probably will have lasting appeal for some time.
6 - This is an above average film, entertaining and engaging although not anything worth watching again.
5 - This is an average film, nothing stands out as particularly bad or particularly good. Not memorable but not bad either.
4 - Bad films which are still enjoyable. Nothing really worth your time but good for laughs or killing a rainy day.
3 - Films that really are a waste of time. Boring, poorly made and disappointing.
2 - The worst films, while a 3/10 might make you unhappy these films will genuinely piss you off.
1 - Another special category for films I find genuinely offensive. Probably should not have been made.
Theyshootpictures.com top 100 films. I have seen the ones in bold.
1. Citizen Kane
2. The Rules of the Game
3. Vertigo
4. 2001: A Space Odyssey
5. 8 1/2
6. The Seven Samurai
7. The Godfather
8. Tokyo Story
9. The Searchers
10. Singin' in the Rain
11. Sunrise
12. Battleship Potemkin
13. Lawrence of Arabia
14. The Passion of Joan of Arc
15. Rashomon
16. La'Atlante
17. Bicycle Thieves
18. The Godfather pt. II
19. Raging Bull
20. The Third Man
21. City Lights
22. Touch of Evil
23. La Dolce Vita
24. Les Enfants du Paradis
25. Casablanca
26. La Grande Illusion
27. The General
28. Sunset Blvd.
29. Psycho
30. Breathless
31. L'Avventura
32. Some Like it Hot
33. Jules et Jim
34. Persona
35. Dr. Strangelove
36. The Seventh Seal
37. The Gold Rush
38. Andrei Rublev
39. Taxi Driver
40. Chinatown
41. Ordet
42. Panther Panchali
43. It's a Wonderful Life
44. Apocalypse Now
45. Rear Window
46. Intolerance
47. Ugetsu
48. The 400 Blows
49. Contempt
50. Au Hasard Balthazar
51. The Magnificent Ambersons
52. The Night of the Hunter
53. M
54. Wild Strawberries
55. The Wild Bunch
56. Modern Times
57. The Wizard of Oz
58. The Conformist
59. La Strada
60. The Mirror
61. Nashville
62. Fanny & Alexander
63. North by Northwest
64. Greed
65. Metropolis
66. Blade Runner
67. Rio Bravo
68. The Earrings of Madame de
69. Sherlock Jr.
70. Pickpocket
71. Playtime
72. La age D'or
73. Ikiru
74. All About Eve
75. Voyage in Italy
76. The Apartment
77. Viridiana
78. Aguirre: The Wrath of God
79. Barry Lyndon
80. On the Waterfront
81. Pierrot le fou
82. The Man With the Movie Camera
83. Blue Velvet
84. Nosferatu
85. The Leopard
86. Notorious
87. Once Upon a Time in the West
88. Gone With the Wind
89. Sansho the Bailiff
90. His Girl Friday
91. Last Year at Marienbad
92. My Darling Clementine
93. A Clockwork Orange
94. Dekalog
95. Letter from an Unknown Woman
96. King Kong
97. Amarcord
98. Duck Soup
99. Stagecoach
100. The Man Who Shot Liberty Valence
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
Valhalla Rising (2009)
Excellent Ambiance but Ultimately a Vague Film
There seems to be a lot of negative reviews on what I thought was a well done film. In this review I will attempt to give it a fair treatment based on how it impacted me. This film is not high quality art like something from the French new wave. Neither is this film another 'artsy' film which attempts to be 'deep' while lacking any substantive message. Furthermore, this film is not another film like Zack Snyder's '300'. Valhalla Rising is kind of its own thing, having more substance than those 'artsy' films while falling short of being a truly phenomenal film. Lacking any education in art or psychology I can only comment on the film based on what I bring to it.
The film is divided into six different chapters, beginning with 'Wrath' and ending with 'Sacrifice'. Right from the beginning, this division into different thematic chapters should make it obvious that Valhalla Rising is not an action film. The film follows a one eyed warrior; the first half deals with his escape from captivity by pagans and his revenge on these pagans. The second half of the film deals with him joining a group of crusaders and their journey to Jerusalem. This journey does not take them to Jerusalem and the last two chapters 'Hell' and 'Sacrifice' are basically surreal portrayals of the breakup of this company. The film features very little dialogue, instead relying on imagery and closeups of the characters.
The message which the director seems to be giving is a bit unclear despite effective use of mood and imagery. I think the view present in the ambiance of the film was obvious: human beings are warlike, religion does not mitigate man's warlike nature and salvation comes in embracing death and the reality of war. However, this interpretation is largely rooted in my own academic background. I picked up on the subjective ambiance and was able to make sense of it in light of my own experience of reading authors like Plato or Jack London. The problem with this is that I have no idea whether this is what the film is trying to say or whether this is simply the subjectivity of the film being matched to my own subjective viewpoints. The major fault of this film is that it did not direct the ambiance into an objective stream; the director does not make any of these themes explicit in any way so there is no way to confirm or deny whether what it appears to be saying is what it is indeed saying. The film simply presents themes like war, religion and violence and expects the audience to interpret these vague ideas into something intellectually significant. While those who praise the film would praise it on this point - that its strength lies in its 'openness' - this seems to be lazy film making. Utilizing abstract ideas through strong ambiance does not take away the necessity to make the statement clear. In a film such as Tarkovsky's 'Stalker' or Malick's 'The Thin Red Line' what is being said explicitly is being enhanced with the implicit ambiance. In Valhalla Rising, what the implicit ambiance is trying to say is not explicitly made clear and so it remains vague upon completion.
Nonetheless, I did enjoy the film's ambiance and for anyone who doesn't mind the vagueness around what the film is specifically trying to say, the film will likely be enjoyable. If nothing else, it's a good exercise of critical theory and reading things into imagery regardless of the authors intent. It's clear that Valhalla Rising is presenting a vision of the violence of human beings, it just isn't quite clear what this vision is. Valhalla Rising has lots of depth and symbolism despite lacking an obvious statement, and it is a beautiful film if nothing else. I found it powerful; if you enjoyed reading Cormac McCarthy's 'Blood Meridian' this film has a similar flavor.
Mass Effect (2007)
Fourteen hours of unparalleled gameplay
As a fan of both bioware's Knights of the Old Republic and Jade Empire, I had extremely high expectations for Mass Effect, their latest RPG for the console. Although skeptical at first, I found that it surpassed either of the latter two games, and achieved something no other RPG had on the console.
Mass Effect revamps every aspect of bioware's typical games, improving it vastly, without changing their unique gameplay style. Rather then duplicating Knights of the Old Republic again, bioware has decided to branch off in a unique and interesting direction. The result of this is a game that will surely stand the test of time through the ages, being for the Xbox 360 what Morrowind was for the Xbox or Zelda for the Nintendo.
The combat system is probably the greatest change, taking away any codified system, and allowing it to become a third person shooter. This allows a lot more skill to develop over the course of the game; the AI is quite good, and you'll have to think about tactics. On any difficulty aside from easy you will probably die a lot getting the hang of it, but once you are accustomed, it is much more rewarding than any of the previous games systems. The weapon variation is a bit lacking, but this is balanced out by the biotics system, similar to force powers in KoTOR. However, rather than having good and evil powers, a character specializing in them has access to all of them. I found that the leveling system in relation to these powers was very well thought out, and improvements made were very obvious upon combat.
The class you choose, whether it be exclusively weapons, powers or mechanics, or a mix of two is very important in deciding the balance between weapons and powers you will be using. As a first time player the most obvious choice is a mix, but the game is flexible to accommodate anyone who gets the hang of their chosen gameplay style. I found that the character creation was much more developed and sophisticated compared to the latter two releases.
Another, and by far my favorite change, is the good/evil bar. Rather than make it a moral system, with clear definition of good and evil, bioware has introduced a system that is removed from moral reality. Every choice is just that, a choice, with given consequences you must live with for better and for worse. You can opt for a Machiavellian pragmatists style character, with consequences of your ruthlessness, or a humanitarian with just as many disadvantages for the more sympathetic choices. This is ideal for allowing the game to encompass a level of realism, and attaches deeper feelings for characters. Certainly a lot trickier than a simple good/evil bar, but bioware pulled it off, and the result is fantastic.
Overall I thought that Mass Effect succeeded with its characters (character development), storyline and combat system. The graphics are wonderful and the gameplay is easily up to the standard of any typical RPG. I found very few flaws, except the seemingly short length, and frankly didn't find any of it less than enjoyable. Give it a try, and savor bioware's newest gift to the console.
Chinjeolhan geumjassi (2005)
Disturbing, clever and original
When I was initially introduced to Park's first Vengeance film, Sympathy for Mr. Vengeance, I was expecting either a gory thriller reminiscent of David Cronenberg or an over the top violent flick often seen with Quentin Tarrentino. In my mind those were about the only two categories modern thrillers ever seem to fit into, they would either glorify violence blatantly or show it for what it was without allowing it to have an effect on the viewer. By the time I had finished that particular film I had already reconsidered by previous disposition. I had never viewed anything that was so stylish, yet at the same time so ugly and disturbing. Park was able to attain everything that Tarrentino likes to call his own, and then go beyond that and establish a sincere anti-violence statement, which was able to show the negative effects that violence has on all human beings involved.
The same occurred with Park's highly stylish sequel entitled Oldboy. While that film was much less powerful, and seemed to lack the political commentary, it offered another refreshing and original vision from a new and seemingly accomplished director. I won't go into detail in comparing the films, but they each offered highly stylized cinematography, as well as adequate substance to allow for an intellectual reward upon multiple viewings.
Admittedly I had some initial trouble with Park's third installment, he seemed to go in an entirely different direction, and it seemed as if he was uncertain where he was going. Lady Vengeance offered many of the same traits and characteristics of the two aforementioned films, but the substance seemed mismatched and ambiguous of point. I gave it a fair rating, and I admired it for a lot of what it tried to do, but never really understood the film. However, upon a subsequent viewing I was able to see how sophisticated and developed the film was, more so than its two counterparts, and much more so than anything from contemporary American cinema. The macabre style comedy was done in ways that tore you between laughter and genuine shock, the plot was both touching and disturbing and the overall cinematography, dialog and acting were all flawlessly encompassed in the plot.
I won't summarize it, as it has so often been done in other reviews, but it remains to be one of the best thrillers of the modern day, and perhaps even all time for that matter. Park gives us something that is both original, and fair to its predecessors.
Ningen no jôken (1961)
Possibly the greatest anti-war statement
When people think of anti-war films titles such as Platoon, All Quiet on the Western Front and Schindler's List almost immediately come to mind; such films have defined the genre in American culture. However very few directors have provided the perspective from the axis point of view, and fewer still were able to do so in a way that humanizes all countries, not just the protagonist's. Masaki Kobayashi, who is most well known for his samurai pictures such as Seppuku and Samurai Rebellion is able to form such a film, without even a hint of pretentiousness.
The series of films spans nearly ten hours, following a pacifist named Kaji (Tatsuya Nakadai), as he struggles to keep his principles during war times. First as an overseer of a P.O.W. camp, then as a soldier. Due to the length of the film, the level of character development and acting quality, we end up feeling his frustration, pain and triumphs, as each occasion leaves room for both a triumph of the human spirit and subjugation of it. Kaji despises both warfare and violence of all kinds, yet tries to rationalize it for the good of those around him. We become so attached to him and his struggle, that we begin to feel similarly, and as a result we are left with one of the most moving chronicles of the loss that war becomes. I won't spoil anything, but any viewer will be floored by the end, it left me utterly breathless.
So overall I recommend it quite highly, its one of the few great anti-war statements that has aged VERY well in the modern day, and possibly Kobayashi's greatest work. Never slow, yet at the same time never glorifying the action, it is a film that I eagerly await to see re-released.
10/10.
8½ (1963)
The complex nature of the human mind
At a popular level 8 1/2 is a film about the complexities the artist faces, and the complexities of the artist's mind. However, the film goes above and beyond being about one single type of person; it goes into detail on the complexities of the human mind in general. Through Fellini's voyeuristic, innocent almost adolescent look at life we experience a look into our own thoughts, and into the thoughts of all people.
The film is composed of a fairly simplistic plot: A filmmaker struggles to make his next film as its composition date nears, and delves deeper into his own past, dream and reality. On the surface this appears to be a plot lacking deep philosophy or ideas, but in truth it is one of the most profoundly insightful films detailing human nature. Through the use of surrealism the film is able to show how people think, through ambiguity of gender roles, expectations of work and a desire to be comfortable. We get a sense that this filmmaker isn't any different then we are. He isn't quite sure how to deal with stress, or how to deal with his estranged romantic life, so he develops fantasies based on how he thinks things should be. His problems are never entirely solved; he hasn't accomplished anything except the development of a positive mindset by the end of the film, yet things are okay because he accepts his problems rather then letting them run him. Essentially the film relates to everyone's life, because we all face similar problems and the solution is always the same. Our problems are part of us, and moving forward accepting them, rather then wallowing in them is something everyone can learn.
Though it isn't for everyone, 8 1/2 offers a lot for those who are willing to see beyond what is initially there. If we allow ourselves to connect it to our own lives, then it has the capacity to be a helpful and realistically implicit film for the modern age and generation.
Journal d'un curé de campagne (1951)
Worthwhile
Diary of a Country Priest is less about a quest for God within an individual's lifestyle, and more of a quest for meaning to which God seems not to give. The film revolves around a young, dying priest in Ambricourt, whose attempts to get close to the people have failed repeatedly. The people often are cold and spiteful towards the often passive priest; they view him as an outsider and unworthy to be amongst him. His many attempts to be open and available to them are shown in a sympathetic light, and we see this young man's yearning for people and ultimately for God. Touching less on God's silence and more on the individual's inability to hear, Diary of a Country Priest is able to attain one of the most touchingly real portraits of individuals without a real spiritual sense.
What stood out the most to me in this film was the slow pace, which brought in our ability to take the time to become familiar with this young man. He is often not very likable when we see him in public or amongst others, and generally speaking we don't relate to him directly. However, through his journal entries we get a sense of a tortured needy soul whom we relate to on a very personal level. This young man has a thirst and desire for God, and to give God to others, yet he cannot and the barrenness of his existence grows clearer and clearer.
Diary of a Country Priest is trademark of Bresson; it's slow and requires patience, but when you begin to form connections to the plot and characters it can be one of the most moving experiences you will ever have. It, in the very least is one of the greatest films to deal with the spiritually significant.
Ordet (1955)
Moving experience
Ordet, despite being among the all time 'great' films, is often neglected in face of the many masterpieces of Bergman, Kurosawa or Kubrick. In recent times it has fallen under an unpopular curtain. However, Dreyer's crowning achievement of sound cinema is easily on the same level as anything from Bergman or Kubrick, it has all the power those films have with the possibility of redemption and hope. It is rare for a film to be so dark and feature a redemptive edge powerful enough to actually redeem the darkness. Dreyer's Ordet achieves a level of positive power that moves without first depressing the viewer. So many films must take themselves to the level of dark agnosticism to achieve the power they have, and in the end usually ignore the divine, but in Ordet the power is achieved simply by allowing the ideas of the characters to contrast their own ideals and ultimately find solace in the affirmation of a medium of the two. There is a lot of dark, sometimes depressing nature to the film, but because it isn't made to look like the end or the absolute we get a sense of real hope, even before the divine becomes a thought.
In the beginning we don't have a real feel for the film, who are we in this film? Who do we sympathize with? Despite having an abstract strength in the way the characters play off each other, and the direction, Ordet does not materialize itself until the final third of the film. We begin thinking it to be a film about religious struggle and marriage between families, then towards family issues of loyalty to even the outsider son, and finally we begin to think it is about death, and loss. All these things take dark root, progressively each theme being darker then the last, but in the closing ¼ hour each of them from the small affair of marriage to the large of affair of life loss in turn redeem themselves, each in a grander way then the last. The way things play out is done so as to keep the viewer on his toes. You never begin to think deeply into any one given circumstance, as the next one materializes soon enough, and as a result the ending does two things: move you deeply and allow you to remain as virgin to the film as when you first watched it. After seeing it once it allows you to understand it only partially, and hence you must experience it again and again to impart real knowledge from it. Ordet's real power comes from its ability to not fall into any of the traditional cinematic problems of focusing to deeply on one aspect of the plot. Instead we are allowed to drift in the film, playing with ideas and facing thoughts as the characters face them. In the end we are not totally resolved, but we are affirmed spiritually, and the film becomes a very rewarding experience.
Though it may feel to drag in some instances, and often seems void of a direction I advise any viewers to stick with it. The direction and pace are deliberate, and in the end the result is an unrivaled film to which more and more must be imparted from upon multiple viewings. All good things go to those who wait, and Ordet is a real example of this. Highly recommended.
Andrey Rublyov (1966)
Nothing compares
To review Tarkovsky's crowning achievement one must realize that this is a film that goes above and beyond what anything from any other filmmaker is capable of. Andrei Rublev is a film that goes beyond the capacity of conventional cinema (art film or otherwise)and becomes the essence of film as art. Andrei Rublev ceases to proclaim a message as many other films, but rather offers what every filmmaker strives for: a look at why art exists, and its role in life for all beings. Andrei Rublev is a film that won't speak to everybody, it won't even speak to all artists, but to those it speaks to will become moved in ways unimaginable. The film captures not only the essence of the artist's purpose, but also our purposes as individuals.
The film begins with a short scene wherein a man tries to fly, but comes crashing down witnessed only by a horse. This short scene alone offers so much, the man representing the fall of all men or our need to become above other creatures, the horse representing life or loneliness and the barren countryside representing a world that is unfriendly to all men. This scene alone is up for multiple interpretations, many of which would be equally right. The film never tells you how to look at it, but allows you to bring your own philosophy and meaning to it. Ultimately its basic themes are vivid, but its many meanings remain as ambiguous as ever, countless viewings will bring more and more to the film, and in truth it is probably impossible to fully fathom the meaning of it. As with all great art it must be experienced and made to relate to one personally to find its meaning, it cannot just be viewed and admired.
The vivid themes of the film come from the ideas of art, man's need for art and the artist's role in history. Andrei Rublev is a film that deals with both the futility of being a Christian artist in a Godless world, and with the impact art can have to bring God to a more personal level. These themes are developed in seven stages, each one differing immensely from the other, with the core ideas and the artist Rublev being shared in every one. Though these themes seem to center around and deal exclusively with art, they are very implicit to every human being's lifestyle. Art can be used as an allegory for our gifts, the idea that we should not hide what we can offer the world, just as the artist should not hide his art from the world. Our gifts and talents can be used to glorify God and bring hope, even if the world does not have a lot of hope, despite the often felt futility of doing what we are gifted in, we bring goodness into the world through them.
Ultimately the film offers this at its core, however there are many more ideas and meanings the individual must bring out of the film to impart its full impact. Through patience and connections the viewer can make the film into a personal experience and in doing this may become moved deeper than ever before. After all isn't this every artists wish?
Nattvardsgästerna (1963)
Bergman's masterpiece
With Ingmar Bergman's recent passing I have been inspired to write this review, after holding off for quite some time.
I'm going right out and saying it: Winter Light is Bergman's masterpiece. Most critics, fans and lovers of the cinema will cite either Persona, The Seventh Seal, Fanny & Alexander or Wild Strawberries as the film that defined him, and while those are all masterpieces, none of them capture the internal struggle for faith and a need for God that he, and many of us face quite like Winter Light.
The film centers around a priest of a small country village who, recently begins to lose his faith, in God and human beings. He cannot offer any real advice to a depressed man, who is in need of reassurance, because he himself is not assured at all. With tragedy and hopelessness comes a truth about God, that ultimately affirms what many Christians believe. A truth that says he often is silent, and we all must face emotional doubt as Jesus did before we can become affirmed.
Its a depressing film, and it isn't easy to deal with on any given occasion due to its sheer emotional force. I found myself with a desire to turn it off because it was ringing true too closely to my own personal life. However, I persevered and was rewarded with an uplifting, yet subtle ending. It is a heavier film then any of his others, because it is a film that will most likely ring a bell with a lot of of people, whereas the ideas in his other great films can often be just viewed as ideas.
What makes Winter Light so great is its nature to cease being a piece of art, and a film and begin to become an experience to which both atheists and believers can relate. Atheists may relate to the uncertainty of God and the belief in his utter silence (he would have to be if he didn't exist), while Christians will be moved by the idea of hope amongst a world full of emotional suffering.
This is my honest review about a film that moved me deeply. I hope that you, the viewers are moved as deeply as I was by this masterpiece.
Ugetsu monogatari (1953)
A beautiful exercise of eastern film-making
Ugetsu is a film that separates itself from both period pieces of its time and from Japanese film of any era. It neither has the ferocious, exiting energy that Kurosawa successfully utilized, nor the slow mundane nature that Ozu became known for. Rather it attempts (successfully) to give a drawn out, slightly surrealistic atmosphere that exhibits images of lingering beauty throughout its short length. What drew me into the film deepest was the usage of not style or substance (if that makes sense), but rather these images that remained on your mind long after the film was finished. A sabotaged boat drifting away in the fog with nothing but a dead man aboard, an enchantress' seduction of a naive peasant and a landscape dotted with danger and war, all make up some of the most beautiful images, that would not be out of place in a painting. They alone say more then most films do in their entire message.
The film nonetheless has some very impressive subject matter to its credit, dealing with war, greed and the line between reality and the spiritual world. Throughout the film we see two peasants progressively grow to lust for the riches of the world, Genjurô desires to sell his wares and become wealthy, while Tobei desires to be a samurai and have power. In time they both get to a point where this is a reality, where one of them fulfills what he desires, the other is led into a surrealistic haze by a demonic seductress. In the end the loss of what was important all along becomes apparent, and a message of humility becomes the films point.
Though it is not nearly as accessible a film as Kurosawa's period pieces of the same time, Ugetsu succeeds on a level that they do not. It brings an element of sheer beauty I have not been acquainted with by any Japanese director. The camera moves much slower as to give you a sense of your surroundings, to allow the film to become part of you. In doing this Mizoguchi distances some viewers, while at the same time bringing many to a level impossible with any other director (Eastern or Western). He successfully does what all great artists do, he makes his art truly great and therefore truly subjective.
There is not a lot I can further say about this beautiful film except that it is best taken on an image by image base with the real plot as a second consideration. When one has experienced the images the plot becomes more meaningful, and the result is one of the most beautiful films one will ever witness. I gave Kenji Mizoguchi's crowning achievement a deserving 9/10. Ugetsu is a beautiful flawless example of the cinema that I sincerely recommend.
2001: A Space Odyssey (1968)
Impressive feat regardless of personal philosophy
2001: A Space Odyssey Very few films deal with humanity in an abstract verb very well, often despite trying to give a universal message about humans they end up giving a message about individuals. This is perfectly fine, and many of the truly great films deal with people this way, it is natural because we relate more deeply with individuals. However, Stanley Kubrick's crowning achievement is one of the best-regarded films at showing humans not in an individual sense, but rather as a species.
The film basically comes down to the core philosophy of evolution, about our need as a species to keep going, despite where we get ourselves. A short cut scene at the beginning of the film shows us as apes, wherein a black monolith (possible God allegory) reveals itself to us as we first begin to comprehend tools as hunting mechanisms. We proceed to separate ourselves from the apes that don't comprehend tools through harassing them and ultimately separate ourselves as unique. We then jump many years later to a theoretical 2001, wherein people have become lazy; they lack emotion and have mechanical usages for almost any regular job. What's implied is that we have evolved to a point of slothfulness due to a lack of this theoretical God. Most of the conventional story isn't the point; it is put in largely to begin the plot where the truly insightful message on human beings is revealed. An alien signal is picked up and a crew with a computer (Hal 9000) is sent to investigate. What is shown is that Hal 9000 is more human then the human beings, a creature stuck in a world void of life in a metaphysical sense. Ultimately he destroys all but one crew member in an attempt to keep things safe, through his own poorly figured sense of the situation. When the last member finally succeeds in unplugging him, he regains what it means to be human and what follows is one of the most impressive sequences ever revealed in any film.
What struck me at first with 2001 was its cold lifeless nature; though this comes off as the films nature it truly is only the coldness of space that gives it the sense. 2001 is a life affirming film because it shows that humans will keep going, we are still evolving and we will never really die. I don't connect with it like some individuals, because as a believer my theology is different, but the film is a moving sense of life and color, and it is affirming in many ways to know that were not done. We as a species have a long way to go, but we will ultimately make it.
2001 often lacks the philosophical qualities that make people connect with the cinema. It isn't easy relating to an abstract verb as oppose to an individual, but this quality alone separates 2001 as a truly significant piece of the cinema. Regardless as to how deeply anybody relates to the plot, the use of sound and color is unrivaled in any film, and lovers of the cinema will inherently appreciate this aspect alone. Truly nothing has ever surpassed it in terms of raw energy and beauty and any admirer of film will be impressed with this aspect regardless of philosophical merit to one's personal life.
Kubrick has left us with a masterpiece I think we will all grow to further appreciate in time, just as we will further evolve, our tastes will as well, and I see further recognition ahead of 2001. A true masterpiece and the film that defined a genius, I give 2001: A Space Odyssey a deserving 9/10.
Carnival of Souls (1962)
Not since The Shining has a film created such a primal sense of fear & foreboding
When I saw a copy of Carnival of Souls together with Night of the Living Dead for a measly buck, I figured I would go ahead and take advantage. After all, I could always use a backup copy of Night of the Living Dead, and this Carnival of Souls looked good for laughs. So I bought the set, having a bit of change on me, and that night I readied myself for some fun.
When I put Carnival of Souls into the player, I was at first a bit unimpressed. I mean, nothing really happened that related to any sort of plot. Then, about 25 minutes into the film I started feeling very uneasy, a feeling I was unfamiliar with in film with the exception of Stanley Kubrick's 'The Shining'. the story is simple, to put it short a woman survives a car accident, and delves into a dissolute surrealistic nightmare.
The surreal atmosphere, the sudden realizations of fear, and the general feel of the film gave a VERY foreboding atmosphere, which haunted me the entire following week. The film is just so foreboding, I could not help but remain uneasy, even the second time around.
The film also was also fairly technically impressive, at least more so then I thought. This film had come six years before George A. Romero's Night of the Living Dead, but the use of camera is very similar, and it is very evident that Romero has been influenced by this film's direction. It is a shame that Herk Harvey did not expand on his talent, this is his only feature, yet there is nothing amateur about it. It is very advanced considering what it is, and I was overtly impressed with it.
I suppose Carnival of Souls could, and maybe should warrant an 8/10, I gave it 7/10, but it is truly an original film, and one that I feel holds up very well in the present day. I think it is a must see for fans of surrealism, horror, or just experiences.
Warui yatsu hodo yoku nemuru (1960)
One of the best Hamlet adaptations
After viewing Ran my initial reaction was simple awe. I had never before seen such a stunning epic, and never had the story of King Lear been adapted so poetically and viscerally. There has not been a film since that has come close to the way I perceived Ran, I was simply blown away.
After viewing a few more Kurosawa pictures I came upon one entitled 'Throne of Blood'. While I felt it was defiantly one of Kurosawa's stronger pictures, it also seemed to lack the Shakespearian atmosphere that Ran had. I liked it, but felt it was closer to The Seven Samurai as oppose to Ran.
Then, later still, I came upon The Bad Sleep Well. I expected something similar to Throne of Blood, with Kurosawa's 50s-60s atmosphere rather then his 80s-90s atmosphere. Well it turned out that I was wrong. The Bad Sleep Well is easily Kurosawa's most underrated picture, overshadowed by Yojimbo & Sanjuro afterward, and The Hidden Fortress before. The Bad Sleep Well however, does not take the same ambiance as those pictures, rather it shows a flash of Kurosawa's elderly genius from such pictures as Kagemusha and Ran. I won't bother going into detail on the story, as most are already familiar with Shakespeare's Hamlet, and therefore would just be wasting your time. What I will tell you however, is how well it adapts to the story, and that its narrative is almost perfect.
The Bad Sleep Well features a great performance by Toshiro Mifune, playing the Hamlet character in a very interesting way, similar in some ways to Laurence Olivier's 1948 version. His performance is what steals the show; although I thought there were some interesting supporting roles, none really stand up to his sheer intensity.
The film stays as true to the play as possible in a modern Japan setting, keeping the essentials and retaking bits and pieces to give it a different, almost nihilist feel. The changes flow smoothly though, and the film can be nicely appreciated by both fans of both William Shakespeare and Akira Kurosawa.
I give the Bad Sleep Well 9/10. It's not Ran or Rashomon, but it is defiantly one of his strongest pictures that is not a masterpiece. Defiantly check it out, you will not be disappointed.