The Prestige's Prestigious films to immerse you

  • Thread starter Thread starter mark f
  • Start date Start date
Definitely because I think it's a big achievement for the comic book sub genre. Despite my feelings towards the character, I just couldn't dispute lengths Donner went into making this film as epic as it possibly can be. I don't think there was a film quite like it at the time. If I were a fan of the character, I would have rated this film much higher.

That said, I do realy like Gene Hackman's Lex Luthor. I've always admired Hackman and his Luthor is the definitive thus far, imo.
 
Definitely because I think it's a big achievement for the comic book sub genre. Despite my feelings towards the character, I just couldn't dispute lengths Donner went into making this film as epic as it possibly can be. I don't think there was a film quite like it at the time. If I were a fan of the character, I would have rated this film much higher.

That said, I do realy like Gene Hackman's Lex Luthor. I've always admired Hackman and his Luthor is the definitive thus far, imo.
 
Do you? See, I couldn't really get into Lock Stock for some reason. I was distracted when watching it mind, so i'll have to check it out again. I did like Snatch in a two or three star kinda way, though.
 
Oh, I'd like to see this list of gay British films too. It's in my top 5 but to be honest I can't think of many more. Maybe we could get a good list of gay films for the mofo lists section (and Prestige can tell us all why they're not really gay films... )
 
Well then I'm sure you won't have a problem explaining to me (and anyone else that's not still lol-ing their ass off) what makes a gay film, and why Araki and Haynes have made gay films, but not Ang Lee (incidentally, although I'm sure you knew this, being a bit of an expert on gay cinema and all, gay films have and do exist outside of the New Queer Cinema "movement" )
 
Nah, he really grinds on me. And when you say scene stealing, is that in the same scene stealing way as Heather Graham? Anyway, your write up has encouraged me to give it another go.
 
Lol, nah mate, Thomas Jane's more or less the only one who gets to keep his kit on. But he does have a couple of memorable scenes. Glad you're gonna give it another go.
 
I enjoyed Following well enough, but I took it as a modest experiment which led to another, perhaps less-modest experiment and then to a pretty decent career, so maybe you're correct in seeing more in it than I did.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5q8bBAKNSA8&feature=related[/youtube]
 
16. Ginger Snaps (John Fawcett, 2000)




Ok, I know I have a LOT of explaining to do but for the sake of sounding repetitive, i'll explain some other time! All I will say, however, is sorry to those who have been waiting patiently for my next update. I'm extremely flattered that people even cared about my updates! So yeah, I am terribly sorry.

Joss Whedon's Buffy The Vampire Slayer often alluded to the fact that high school was hell on earth - literary what with the school being on the hellmouth. But what was even more evident was how Whedon suggested that high school was even more hellish for females in particular. Y'see, Whedon had grown disappointed and frustrated with horror films, especially the depiction of female characters.

When speaking about the origin of the Buffy concept, you'll often find Whedon saying he wanted to take the cliched 'hot blonde victim' and turn her into a kick ass action figure, turning the formula on it's head a little. With Buffy he also found the horror element in the nightmare of teenage girls (and sometimes boys) trying to figure out who they were. John Fawcett took a similar approach with Ginger Snaps, a sharp, quirky reinterpretation of the werewolf myth.



The synopsis is basically about a pair of 14-15 year old sisters, social outcasts who are attracted to the morbid and the disturbing things in life by which they pride themselves on. Then one night, the slightly older sister survives an attack from a certain big hairy beast thing whilst simultaneously commencing her ascent to adolescencse..

What's most interesting about Fawcett's Ginger Snaps is that unlike similarily themed werewolf films (Teen Wolf) it is told from a distinctively female perspective. Yes, Fawcett directed and co wrote it but I understand that Karon Walton came up with the concept and wrote a majority of the script. It's a horror film that's based on very human (ish) relationships and young girls growing up. Whedon did the same thing with Buffy, but that was television. I hadn't really seen a horror film go to the depths to show young girls in such a light.



After the attack, the films charts the next 28 days in Ginger's life. When Ginger first starts to see changes in her body, they are disturbingly similar to what every 15 -16 year-old girl would go through during adolences. But asthe film progresses, it becomes apparent that she is transforming into a big hairy nasty lycanthrope.
This is where the film gets more and more interesting. Fawcett and Walton go out of their way to use the mythical notion of werewolf transformation as a deliberating over the boundaries of "ordinary" and strange experiences of adolescences. Obviously, the parallels are striking.

The scenes that mostly affected me, however, were the increasingly deterioating relationship between Ginger and her younger sister Bridgette. Bridget's interpretation of her sister's sexual blossoming carries with it a sense of abandonment and lonliness. The earlier transformation scenes in which Ginger complains about period pains along with being checked out by the jocky high school sleaze Jason demonstrate that her sexual maturity is already breaking the bond they so once prided themselves on.



I don't know if any of you lot have read Barbara Creed's The Monstrous Feminine, but when I did film studies, we were able to link Creed's theories with Ginger Snaps, and that's how I realised how truly psychoanalytical and layered this film was. Creed's theories work by being linked to Julia Kristeva's concept of the abject. If Bridgette and Ginger and miserable and depressed human figures then they fit perfectly into Kristeva's abject theory. The abject is also considered to be a motherly figure who refuses to let go of her hold of her daughters and their bodily functions. In this case, Ginger's mother can be considered abject due to her being a paradigm of that. But then, I figured that everybody experiences abjection from time to time so I will spare you guys the lecture

I know I keep referring to Buffy a lot but I feel the parallels are impossible to ignore. Buffy also dealt with the issue with a teenager, at the onset of puberty, discovers she's 'not human'. In that sense, she is no different to Ginger and (in latter, lesser sequels) Bridgette. Sidney in Scream is also amongst the line of powerful contemporary horror protagonists who's sexuality is linked to extreme measures of violence. The irony of Scream being that it's the sexually liberated female who becomes Carol Clover's 'Final Girl'.



The million doller question in Ginger Snaps is whether or not it is a feminist picture. What do YOU guys think? Me personally, I think it is a feminist picture. I think that there are enough Freudian references and fairly explicit references to the vagina detenta to suggest that it is a feminist film, even if it was directed by a bloke. I mean, much of Ginger's aggression is targeted at males, especially ones she claims are sexually attracted to her sister. If you look at the way she kills the males, a lot of the time it's done through off-camera impalement, suggesting it's below the mid-section..



There are thousands of other reasons why I love this film and rate it so highly, but in all honesty, it would take up to an entire page. All I can say is I feel this film is fantastic in it's depiction of adolescence. Despite the mythical analogies, the film does a far better job at depicting teenage angst than that flippin' TV show where all the FIFTEEN year old characters used suspiciously long words...Dawson Creek, right? It might be the OC, I can never tell these days. Either way, they both suck.
 
I disagree with The Usual Suspects (and with lumping Kubrick in with Singer) but Dead Man's Shoes is amazing. Paddy Considine is a force of nature. Such an intense performance.
 
I think Prestige was referring to Gay films as films that are generally considered to be part of the New Queer Cinema movement. I haven't studied the particular movement as they started it year after mine but i think. I can understand why Prestige doesn't want to answer Adi as it's not particularly constructive attempting a conversation on the subject with him. When he says not a 'gay film' i think he means not considered within the aforementioned movement (Brokeback not necessarily being part as it wasn't independent) or from one of the more prominent auteurs involved with it, who has more of a personal level of involvement with the subject matter.
 
Good man on purchasing Wolf Creek. Hopefully you'll like it even more afterwards. I must admit, though. John Jarrett adds at least half a star to this film. Try and watch it with some mates and observe how they react to it.

Chinatown's photography, whether it's meant to be ironic or not, is just downright dodgy looking. Seriously. I don't like the photography at all. I don't care if it's self concious. It just looks wrong to me. Christopher Nolan's Insomnia did a far better job at at using light as irony in a noir film, imo.

And do watch Confidential. That should NEVER have left your position, bruv. It's a tremendous film.
 
You're right, Iro. He ain't worth it and i'm sure he'll be a good boy now. I'll continue with my list.

49. Switchblade Romance (Alexandre Aja, 2003)



Alex Aja, the french horror maestro, clearly spent his earlier life being hypnotized by the gory and exploitative VHS nasties of the 70s and mid-80s. Well, in this disturbing piece of horror, he delivers a ferocious tour de force of genuine fear that is reminiscent of those blood splattered classics than the more contemporary over sexed teens that fill out the genre today. And he delivers with precision.

Aja's craftmanlike use of widescreen camera work and unbearable creepy sound design make this horror much more technically superior to anything else Aja pays homaage or tribute to or the so-called 'post modernist' marlarky that seems to be played for laughs rather than actual horror. It's a technical accomplishment on his part that Switchblade Romance has some stunning cinematography to boot.

I know that a lot of people found the twist to be dodgy and create a whirpool of plot holes and such, but I honestly don't think it matters in the end. At least during the initial experience. But yeah, it doesn't matter because the cat and mouse chase sequences alone cement Aja's film as one of the more unforgiven films of the genre.

48. Wolf Creek (Greg McLean, 2005)



I had an absurdly difficult time deciding where to place Wolf Creek. It was either going to be ranked 49 or 48, so I had to decide which was the stronger out the two films. After much debate, I, as you can see, went with Greg McLean's atmospheric gem. This just pips Switchblade Romance because of it's surprising and effective shift of tone.

At first, this near masterful horror masquerades as some sort of big screen version of Home and Away. Calm and assured, the slow build of the first half still manages to charm you with a trio of likeable characters. No cliched sex mad and obnoxious teens here, you grow to respect and care about these backpackers. But with a set up that includes some absolutely STUNNING establishing shots of deserted parts of Australia, you just know that there inevitable is going to be harsher than you could possibly imagine.

Mick, possibly the creepiest and nastiest and funniest horror icon to emerge in years, is the catalyst for the film transforming into a ferocious survival horror where the tension is beyond excruciating and the violence remorseless. This film just doesn't muck about. It's disorientating stuff when it shifts tone and it really does make you question how far the film will go.

I really want to talk a lot more about Jeff Jarrett's villainous turn as the sick yet funny Mick. He's one of the best antagonists you'll ever see. Up there with the best of them. I always feel guilty when he makes me laugh because the stuff he pulls in the film is despicable. But i'll stop with him there because that's for another thread.

This film is concious in its exploition of violence but not to the extent where it seems like some self absorbed lecture. That pretentious so-called 'auteur' Michael Haneke can spat his self-righteous views about sanitised violence all he wants, because this film made me wince when it needed to. And as a result it told me far more about why and how I watch horror films than either version of Funny Games ever could.

47. Scarface (Brian DePalma, 1983)



Tony Montana does and sells drugs, kills people, keeps full grown tigers as pets and curses at his wife with some of the most cruel and abhorrent misogynistic slurs your eardrums have ever heard. Yet, for all his sins, the character still remains one of the most iconic anti-heros today.

Everybody from rappers to even high ranking solicitors (like my mate's brother) idolise Pacino's portrayal of Montana. And so they should because he represents you and me. Y'see, the American Dream isn't just applied to those within the states...every nation in the entire world has taken the concept to some degree but with mixed results.

This film is about the American Dream gone utterly wrong. And it's all due to excess, one of the films most prominent themes. **** Michael Corleone, from the get-go, Pacino relishes being Montana. From every syllable to the way he says 'yayo', Pacino has the accent and character down to a T and has been Montana ever since. Excess baby, it will kill ya.

46. The Fly (David Cronenberg, 1986)



Although I much prefer the evovled David Cronenberg who's become the maestro of crime dramas, I cannot ignore this beautifully crafted remake from his 'body horror' years.

The Fly is gruesome cinema, and despite Cronenberg's insistance that AIDS wasn't a theme during the production process, you have to imagine that he was at least conscious about it, especially considering the era in which the film was made.

Cronenberg obviously displays a lack of interest in the generic sci fi mise en scene of the film. He really doesn't give a **** about teleportation. Cronenberg is interested in the theme of fusion. That is fusion of all forms. The fusion between man and woman and, of course, the fusion between man and insect.

A recurring theme in a lot of Cronenberg's work, the theme of fusion is explored best in the form of Jeff Goldblum and Gina Davis' relationship. Their relationship being both touching and eventually tragic as he deteriorates, which is why the first act built so heavily on the undeniable chemistry between Goldblum and Davis.

As a result, the latter sequences encompasses all ranges of human/insect emotions: Sadness, disgust, fear - but never hatred. Classy and superior remake from one of the most intelligent artists.

45. Pieces Of April (Peter Hedges, 2003)



If you dislike Katie Holmes, chances are this film won't change your mind that much. However, if you're one of the very few who can at least tolerate Mrs Thomas Cruise, then this film should move you - a lot.

For those who are not familiar with this little seen and vastly underrated title, Holmes plays April, a rebel estranged from her family and living in New York with her boyfriend. Well it's Thanksgiving Day and the family go on a road trip to see her. Her terminally ill mother hates her though, so along the way to see her daughter, she questions whether it's worth it all. All this intercutted with April and Bobby getting into lots of arkward and funny situations with the doomed thanksgiving turkey..

Theres very little in the way of plot or story with Pieces. But that's ok though as I think it's a wonderfully rendered drama with with some really striking and thought-provoking human observations. It's almost like an extended TV sitcom episode, but FAR grittier and wittier in style. That would be thanks to Hedges simple yet bold use of digital DV camcording. It may sound like unattractive cinematography, but it does add to the raw and uncolourful life that April leads and makes it all the more effective too.

Theres such a strong, healthy balance between poignancy and humour, and this is all delivered with subtle conviction by Holmes and the always excellent Patricia Clarkson. The latter, getting the most praise from the film with her oscar nominated turn. But don't be fooled, Holmes is no slouch here aswell, and actually holds her own.

Holmes has gotten a lot of stick for being associated with Tom Cruise, her half smile and her lackluster turn in Batman Begins, but she delivers a nuanced, funny and touching performance that never strays into cliched rebelliousness or exaggerated sentimentality. It's a warm film and extremely heartfelt in all the right moments.

It's even better than Ang Lee's very good Ice Storm and up there with Little Miss Sunshine as an indie drama deconstructing the nuclear family and their black sheeps. A brilliant drama.
 
Nah mate, I haven't been able to see any of his other stuff. I've always been meaning to, but just never got around to it. But i'm def. gonna make the effort and just order some stuff off Amazon if I can't find it for a reasonably cheap price in HMV.

But thanks for the recommendations. The Double Life Of Veronique sounds really interesting and i've just read a sypnosis on it. I'm def. gonna check it out. Cheers mate.

What about this Dekalog? Isn't it based on the commandments or something?
 
Back
Top