The Prestige's Prestigious films to immerse you

  • Thread starter Thread starter mark f
  • Start date Start date
You got exactly the same beef as me with Superman. Though like the camp of Terrence Stamp in Superman 2
 
Veronika Voss is actually the third part of the trilogy, after Lola, but I don't think it really matters what order you watch them in. Maria Braun, for all its flourishes, is the most naturalistic of the three films. Lola is shot in some bright pastels, occasionally resembling something similar visually to The Umbrellas of Cherbourg. On the other hand, I'd call the subject matter of Veronika Voss the darkest of the three, and it's shot in black-and-white to heighten the fact that it's a movie about an ex movie star and that her life turns into a nightmare.
 
I think the post in which I referred to New Queer Cinema may have made it come across as if I studied the movement in depth. I didn't mean that I studied New Queer Cinema in general, but basically gender and sexuality within cinema, just like you. Sorry about that.

However, we did touch on New Queer Cinema quite a bit in some of those modules. We basically studied stuff like how the introduction of AIDS in the 1980s shaped and changed the way in which homosexuality has been portrayed in film from onwards of that era. It was interesting stuff. I've still got some of those essays saved on my desktop, so if you want you're welcome to have a look, mate.


Oh, and I know I said I was gonna do a countdown of 15, but I have am planning on writing them in-depth, so that's why it's taking a lot longer than usual.
 
Lol cheers mate. I'm very surprised at how many people have seen and rate Frailty. I'm loving that you're loving it's getting some love

You think we have similar taste in film then? Which ones did you agree with the most?
 
Lol, yeah mate, Terrence Stamp in Superman 2 took camp to new heights . The funniest performance in the film.
 
Ok, the next film i'm about to put on my list is Half Nelson. It'sa film i've already reviewed on here so i'm just going to do a copy and paste job because i'm too damn lazy to re-write my opinions about it. I have modified it a little so that my reasons for it's VERY high place are specific.



17. Half Nelson (Ryan Fleck & Anna Boden, 2006)



If you take a 10 second glance at the synopsis Ryan Fleck & Anna Boden's Half Nelson, you could be forgiven for thinking that this is another one of those inevitable preacher-type films that's come off on the increasingly tired back of Dead Poet's Society, Dangerous Minds, Mona Lisa Smile and Coach Carter. However, if one takes a slighty closer look at Half Nelson, they'll find that Robin Williams hasn't' been reincaranated as a inner city school teacher.

Well, cynics get your wine coolers as, I, The Prestige, can officially say that Half Nelson is (thus far) the best film of 2007. This is saying a lot since with had some absolute gems this year. A film that bravely tackles the bazirre relationship between a crack addicted teacher and lonely inner city girl is a film that's got some serious balls, in my view. It's a new spin on the familiar concepts of the aforementioned Michelle Pfieffer vehicle. It's a film that's got no easy answers or pretentious preachy vibe that plagues these types of movie.



Despite losing out to Forest Whitaker at this year's Academy Awards; it's Ryan Gosling's arguably more superior performance as Dan Dunne that'll eventually be remembered as the most engaging, pained, nuanced and complex protagonist of 2007. Gosling takes on the performance like a man possessed; his eyes all watery and face almost emotionless half of the film. That said, he remains scarily charismatic and you can't help but really wonder what you'd do if you met a character like Dan Dunne.



Gosling may be getting most of the kudos, but one cannot over look the outstanding performance of one Shareeka Epps, who's Dre is the perfect counter balance to Goslings Mr. Dunne. Playing it similar to Gosling with subtle touches to the character and suggestion about internal aspects, it's fair to say that Epps should have been nominated for best actress (and should have won, too). She adds light and soul to Dan's dark heart. Dre and Dan's relationship is supposed to be cute and sweet, it's about two people genuinely yearning for a change in their life and the importance of man woman companionship. These aren't the only two to shine, though, the supporting cast is just as intense in smaller but pivotal roles. Anthony Mackie shows he can be likeble and exploitive all at the same time. His Mike is what i'd describe as a likable bastard who's motives may or may not be genuine.



Another interesting aspect to this movie is the not so subtle theme of dialectics; A Marxist term that Dan Dunne introduces to his class of amicable kids. The film enforces these ideas by creating as many opposites as possible between the two leads. Dan: Male, Caucasian, middle-class, teacher. Dre: Female, Black, working-class, student. Yes, these opposites are obvious, but they are also pivotal to the grand theme. Opposites not only attact, but they rely on each other.

They are defined by the limits, but Half Nelson suggests that by creating these limits theres a means to go beyond these limits and that EVERYBODY and EVERYTHING is a contradiction...it's which side dominates that's important. In Dan's case his druggy side tends to determine his actions throughout the remainder of the film, which lead to consequences. And that's what I love about Nelson. The way the theme is dealt with is interesting and forces you to consider your oppositions.



The awesome power tag team of Ryan Fleck and Anna Boden proves to be effective. They aren't interested in the why's and how's of their protagonists predicaments. They're more concerned in the character scrutinity and ably capture each emotion in their leads face. Fleck and Boden rely on every shot as if they're masterpieces, and as a result have produced one of the most important debuts since Christopher (genius) Nolan's outstanding noir Following. Fleck and Boden's characters aren't filled with quotable one-liners or sexy swagger...these people talk and act like REAL people and that's desired considering the Neo realist like way in which it's filmed.

So, I urge those to know what they are in for when they watch this film, because those after something that's a bit too kooky and sappy should just go and watch The Holiday or something because this is a completely different ballgame. If you're up for something challenging, then Half Nelson is the film to watch.
 
Nice write-ups again. Concerning The Maltese Falcon, have you seen the two earlier versions of the film? One was pretty much a straight adaptation of the Dashiell Hammett novel (one of my all-time fave novels), released in 1931 and called The Maltese Falcon and the other one, which was released in 1936, changed things all over the place and didn't keep much of the novel's dialogue. It was called Satan Met a Lady and starred Bette Davis as the femme fatale.



Huston's and Bogart's version towers over the previous ones and basically plays out as a textbook example on how to adapt an almost perfect novel by changing as little as possible. I'd say at least 95% of the dialogue in the movie is directly taken from the novel. Sam Spade is one of the greatest, earliest examples of the anti-hero, and not only is he a misogynist, but he's a "homophobe" too. The way he takes glee in "dealing with" Peter Lorre's Joel Cairo and Elisha Cook's gunsel Wilmer makes that plain as day. Now, I certainly don't condone the character's behavior, but most all of the characters are liars, thieves and murderers, so the world painted in the film is a very dark depiction of humanity. I'm only mentioning these details to reinforce that I liked your write-up on the flick. I'm not trying to start anything here, and I truly don't want to see any more posts off-topic with name calling. I just thought that since I was making a reply about this, that I'd mention some parts which might not be known to some film buffs.
 
There you go, mate. Expectations were too high so they were always going to fail no matter what. I know that the ending for Switchblade Romance is a bit out there to say the least, but weren't you at least surprised by it? I can see where you're coming from though. Thinking about it now, the twist does undermine it when it comes to repeat viewings. You're not scared anymore because of what the twist reveals about those scenes. I get that, but on initial viewing, it's an experience.

As for Wolf Creek, I recommend you watch it again, mate. I know it's got a very slow build up and I myself admit that it takes a bit of patience, but it's all done to reward you. Watch it again, if only for the blackest of black humour by psycho Mick
 
Fair do's. I don't think theres much chance in making you change your mind about it. Best I can say is to try and look as deep as possible into the identity theme. That's the most interesting aspect of the film, at least to me.

Got to say though, I do find it somewhat refreshing that there is somebody out there that DOESN'T like Blade Runner.

I'm wondering what you thought of Minority Report now..
 
Good point. As for getting a pro-American vibe from Superman, well, you know he does claim to fight for truth, justice and the American way.

This makes me think they should make a movie of the alternate-reality novel where Superman actually lands somewhere in Russia and becomes a Soviet legend. Then again, the character would probably stay the same. Oh, well.
 
Ok, that's a bit of a stretch, but it does feature some gay characters which was quite unusual and provocative at the time...
 
Ok, I admit I haven't seen all of Hawks films, but out of the ones I have watched, this one left a much bigger impression on me than his other ones did.
 
I may have exaggerated my point here, but then again, maybe not. I have seen the original Scarface at least six or seven times, and I've seen the DePalma version at least five times. The Prestige says he never has seen the original, so everybody else who's weighing in here, have you seen the original or not, and if so, how many times have you watched both films? I'll guarantee you that if I don't bring the original film to my students' attention, there are rarely more than one or two in any single year who have ever heard of it (the lead character is Tony Camonte). On the other hand, all my students know WTF Tony Montana is and love "say hello to my little friend!"
 
On the surface it may appear to be about homosexuality. I mean the film does deal with two men who are in a gay relationship afterall. But i'm talking in non-superficial terms. I really think that the homosexual aspect of the film is used as a metaphor for man's need for, well, male company.

I feel that Ang Lee was attracted by such a subtext because otherwise the film is too simple and would have read like some sort of liberal gay right's campaign. But the film is not that pretentious.
Homosexuality is clearly a theme, but ya gotta look deeper. As my by Nolan would say, watch closely.
 
I'm on it. Yeah, I am surprised as you that certain films didn't make it in the top ten. But it's just one of those things where you have to be true to yourself, innit. Hopefully my top 10 won't disappoint.
 
The bit in bold is why this isn't constructive, you've negated the fact that Prestige has said they are gay, when he was describing films as 'gay' (as i assume) he was referring to them being deemed as New Queer Cinema which Brokeback Mountain isn't. I'm not sure if you realise that you fail to take into account what other people say to make your arguments actually have some ground or just chose to ignore them. But it just goes round in circles, you fail to move onto any common ground even when Prestige has agreed that Brokeback Mountain IS is a gay film and continue to hassle him about his original statement:





If you noticed his use of grammar or misinterpreted this (as i said above) he's just saying he didn't feel it was part of the New Queer Cinema not it wasn't a gay film.

Key words:

Forget. Not that it doesn't exist which you seem to have put into his mouth. Followed by him saying this was what struck him the most. Again, not denying that it's there.


Now, we're both ruining his thread about his favourite films. So once and for all.



He has NEVER denied them their 'gay' prefix. And he has NEVER said it is not a gay film.

Stop being anal or just get laid. God knows you need to loosen up and stop putting words in people's mouth.
And there's a few puns there that i'm not going to make as well.
 
Exactly. That's why I hate Willow ten times less. But I didn't like it all the same, but then I don't like many fantasy films (and I mean fantasy in the D&D, witches and wizards way before someone gets smart and says all films are fantasy to some extent, etc, etc) so that shouldn't be a big suprise.

Looking forward to the next 50.
 
You're saying that the love between two men is more superficial than friendship?
Or maybe he was attracted by the tragic love story of two men ruined by society's prejudice and felt it was an important story to tell. Crazy I know.

Incidentally, do you see hetero love stories as stories about male-female friendships too?
 
Back
Top