The Prestige's Prestigious films to immerse you

  • Thread starter Thread starter mark f
  • Start date Start date
No worries, man. I'm always getting the wrong idea about every other text i read. Yeah, theres a lot I could get into because as I said it's a deeply layered film and if anybody wants to challenge me on it i'm more than happy to do so.

I'm just writing up the next film on the list!
 
It's a good performance, but not more than that. Not worth all the praise it received, probably not worth an Oscar nom (though it was a bad year) and certainly not worth an Oscar win. At least, it wouldn't have been if he was still alive.

I want to be clear in this, I don't dislike the performance, it's a good performance, but I expect an actor of his ability to give a good performance with a character like that, which allows for such scope and a good bit of scenery chewing. Psycho's are easy to play if you've got some talent, that's one of the reasons all the good actors love to play them. They're fun too and people love to see it. Hopkins and Lector. That's a really hammy performance, you can see Hopkins' is having such fun with it. I bet he couldn't believe it when he was Oscar nominated and as for winning it? I'm not sure he's taken too many roles seriously since. Why would you when you've been so well rewarded and praised for that?

Gary Oldman is another one. The Hollywood king of OTT performances. When he's a baddie, he's really a baddie. Dracula, Leon, Air Force One, The Fifth Element, the list goes on and on. In fact, I was quite impressed with him in the Batman films, because I'd forgotten that he could act like that. Y'know? Sensiblely, understated, calmly.
 
Dude. Looking past the obvious gay themes of a film in search of any other themes and ideas present does not equal denying they're there. If anything, just thinking of Brokeback Mountain as "just a gay movie" seems to be a very blinkered look at it. You seem just as bad as the people who write this film off as nothing but "a gay movie" by trying to pigeonhole it as such.
 
I can understand what you're saying, but how many people do you think will stick with the movie to get to the most significant parts which you relate to the most? I'm just trying to say that if you want someone to buy into your artistic expression, they have to feel that it's worth it. They have to have a reason to watch it in the first place and to keep watching it once it's on. I thought it was worth it, but I also felt that almost no one else I personally know could handle the movie past the 30 minute mark, and no, I don't hang out with idiots either. Anyway, great post. That curtain is getting pulled back, if only very slowly.

P.S. When I have friends I haven't seen for awhile come over, I like to play my newest music for them while we catch up on things, but I also enjoy putting on silent movies too. It's amazing how well Spoon, Les Savy Fav and Mission of Burma go with Harold Lloyd (sorry, I'll bite my tongue again...)

Sorry Prestige for the hijack.
 
I definitely think Sin City should be higher on the list (what a shock, right? ), definitely higher than things like Casino Royale and *gasp* X-Men 2.

Nevertheless good list so far.
 
Ok, so I guess I should continue with business as usual.

30. Aliens (James Cameron, 1986)



Poor Jimbo. You can imagine James Cameron's state of mind when he chose to write and direct the follow up to Ridley Scott's claustrophobic nightmare. The hip, young director had a tough road ahead of him. First, he had to convince original heroine, Sigourney Weaver, that his sequel would further develop her character, and even more so than Ridley Scott's film.

He then found himself working alongside Ridley's old (British) crew, most of whom were personal friends of Scott. While Cameron did his best to be a leader, he still had to endure altercation after altercation until the production stopped for bit and everybody regrouped.



How surprising is it then that Aliens, with it's excruciating production, emerged as the best film in the highly acclaimed series. Jim Cameron's a smart bastard. He knew that if his sequel was to succeed, he would have to take an entirely different approach to Scott. And that he did. Gone were H.R. Giger's Freudian sets and phallic symbols, in come apocolyptic style planets and hi-tech space ship scenary. Cameron wasn't messing around and essentially updated the original concept.



Where Ridley Scott started off his story with a slow burning plot that transformed into a stalk 'n' slash horror, Cameron used a similar device with the slow build up, only to spontaneously combust and go all out just before the half way mark with his 'more is more' philosophy. He ups the ante with more state of the art weaponary, (much) more aliens than ever before whom face off against a larger, military style human group. There's obviously a vietnam subtext there, so cue spills of blood, green acid, mighty heroism and even robots.

However, as great as that stuff is, (and it's ****ing epic great) I cannot deny that the most remarkable thing I found in this outstanding film is Cameron's ability to develop multi-dimensional and interesting characters admist all the vietnam style extra terrestrial chaos. You get to know the commandos who are all quite an endearing bunch, with Michael Biehn's Private Hicks being a personal fav. The other commandos are made up of mostly macho male types with very little women. But that's another interesting thing about Cameron. He has always had this uncanny ability to create tension between men's masculine qualities and female's feminine attributes. In that sense, he's more provocative than people give him credit for..



And of course, we get to grow with Ripley and see her evolve from a mentally scarred survivor, to an almost fearless surrogate mother who will risk everything and anything to protect Newt. I've got to say that the Ripley character was the first time were I didn't feel embarrassed about being wanting to be as tough as a female character. She's makes for a very effective heroine, and I think she's inspiring to both gender groups. I consider her one of my favourite heros in a fiction film. The scene where she gets in that robot thingy and says her signature line, 'stay away from her you bitch!' is just a huge mark out moment for this Ellen Ripley fan. And trust me when I say that that scene is the mother of all battles.

29. Falling Down (Joel Schumacher, 1993)



A vigilante film in which the vigilante has no specific reason to avenge? Nah, Falling Down is a lot more profound than those traditional 'revenge' flicks which themes go as deep as exploring the differences between right and wrong.

For those that don't know about this fantastic film, it takes place in less than 24 hours on a blazing hot day in sunny California. Michael Douglas is 'D-Fens', a man who finally snaps during the middle of a traffic jam. He's had enough and he's not taking anymore! He'll refuse to take a **** in the toilet, he'd rather **** on the sidewalk, point at the nearest pedestrian, and force them to eat it. D-Fens ain't playing by the rules anymore, tinkerbell. Cue anarchic scenes in which D-Fens bulldozes his way through random targets such as foul-mouthed drivers, by-the-book McDonalds employees, mexican gangsters, militant neo nazis and capitalist Korean shop workers. Jack Bauer would have a field day with this bloke.



I like Schumacher's direction a lot. It's a fine job, but this is The Michael Douglas Show, and he delivers what is, in my opinion, his greatest performance in his long and illustrious career. Even better than his performance in War of The Roses. Looking like an ex army reject, his D-Fens oscillates between sympathetic saddo, to psycho maniac. He is often touching, often halirious - but always unnerving.



It's also a blackly comic film yet it's a seemingly relevant portrait of middle class life in America and how the function in the inner city. It's not just America, but it's relevant to life in England too.

You can imagine that this splendid character study didn't go down too well with a lot of studio bosses, but it's to Schumacher's credit that he got the finance for this film and refused to compromise. If anyting, I think that reflects the insecurities of middle class society in America. And in a stange way, I don't blame them for being insecure because, truth be told, the very notion that even a seemingly normal citizen can spontaneously lose all social boundaries and go on a killing spree is disturbingly feasible. Not everybdy can control their ID...

which brings me too..


28. Hulk (Ang Lee, 2003)



I can tell what you're all thinking. You're all thinking that this is an unexpected edition. I know that this one is bound to stir up some controversy. But I love controversy. Controversy is my middle name. I'm not holding back, though. I don't mind taking whatever you lot throw at me because i've said it before and I WILL say it again: Ang Lee's Hulk is a beautifully composed piece of cinema and one of the greatest films I have ever seen in all of my 23-year-old life. I'm not joking either.

It's position on my list is more than justified. Yes, I think Hulk is better than The Godfather, and yes I think it's a more rewarding filmic experience than Goodfellas. It's a brilliant and brave piece of filmmaking that will forever be underappreciated because people aren't willing to look at the film beyond it's source material. In fact, I was hopeful that Louis Lettier's The Incredibly Average Hulk would force people to see Ang Lee's film in hindsight. However, it appears I was overly optimistic.

Ang Lee's Hulk plots through an origin story that differs quite a bit from it's source material. It's a radical reinterpretation of the character, and a cerebral one at that. It's a Dr Jekyll and Hyde tale in which it mostly concentrates on the Dr Jerkyll aspect, which means that it's a dark psycho drama about fractured relationships between ego sons/daughters and their superego fathers, repressed rage and lonliness.



This is Ang Lee doing things HIS way and these are themes you'd expect from him. I think where people are put off is that this is a dark drama that also shares screen time with some action packed sequences and a huge big green CGI beast that chews up missiles and spits it back out. But seriously, I do understand why people would have hated Hulk in the beginning. I went into this prepared to watch a typical summer blockbuster CGI fest. The marketing for this film was deceptive as it's not the action flick Universal would have you believe. But looking back, how would YOU have marketed this?

Straight from the set up, Lee makes his intentions clear. He's setting out to make an Ang Lee film. An art house film first, action spectacle later. And it's my opinion that he balances both with incredible results. It's intelligent, thought provoking and beautifully odd too.



As i'm sure you're aware, I mean odd in the good sense. Ang Lee's langurous and symbolic shots give the film a really disorientating feel. That disorientation is amplified by Lee's very effective use of split screen techniques that gives the picture a pretty innovative comic book framing look, which consists of mutliple shot angles. This visual inventiveness gives the film a real sense of distinction from all the other comic book film adaptations and has yet to be replicated. It also boosts one of my favourite scores to a film ever. It matches the scope of the film and is tense and exhilirating in every sense. Proper heightens certain scenes, including the first Hulk Out. My favour symbolic shot has to be when he's falling from the surface of outer space back to earth where he has that weird dream.

The best thing about this arty superhero (a term i'm using loosely at this point) film is the CGI Hulk brought to life. Yes, there are times were the CGI doesn't look 100% convincing, but after awhile, I always accept that it's Hulk and the design to his face features makes him appear to be as vulnerable as he is dangerous. He's a really sympathetic creature, and I find myself relating to him on almost every level. Except physically, of course



He's quite removed from the reluctant heroics of Bill Bixby/Lou Feringo's green smeared wild man. His 'hulk outs' aren't caused by the odd slap in the face. It's caused by a whole range of complex human emotions that Lee suggests are closely linked with anger: fear, anxiety and desire.

All of these are agents of Banner's ID. The Hulk is the very thing that people dream of being, whether they want to admit it or not. It's the very thing that we try to control. Every now and again, we are all faced with the human reluctance to 'lash out' and become violent/aggressive or whatever, and wen hide it because it's so ugly and banal that we're usually ashamed of ourselves after releasing it. Yet at the same time, there is this underlining sense of pleasure - an espacism from the norms of society. Ang Lee suggests this with this piece of dialogue from the film:



" Even now I can feel it, buried somewhere deep inside, watching me, waiting... But you know what scares me the most? When I can't fight it anymore, when it takes over, when I totally lose control... I like it. "

Do you see Spiderman or Superman reciting that? Hell to the no. This is too dark for them. None of this 'with great power comes great responsibility' ********, Bruce Banner is fully aware of how seductive his ID's freedom is. It's disturbing stuff, actually. A true Greek tradegy.

The only beef I have is the STUPID scene with the mutated dogs. Just dodgy. Apart from that, a near masterpiece as far as i'm concerned.

Hulk may be destined to be the most underrated film of the noughties. And we'll have to diss it whenever it's mentioned. Because it's the superhero film we deserve, but not the one we need right now. So we'll ridicule it. Because it can take it. It's a dormat masterpiece, a work of art....an incredible film .
 
So moving on

I think Willow is the only one out of all those 80s fantasy films that i haven't seen. I rate Labyrinth and Princess Bride highly enough to have them on my list, along with Warwick Davies alter ego of films- Leprechaun so probably should give that one a shot.

I personally give Night the edge over Dawn if purely for pacing reasons. Though Dawn does have Tom Savini so extra props there.

Actually rewtched Groundhog Day recently as figured if one Bill Murray film would make my list, that would be it. Didn't find it as good as i remembered

Looking forward to next update, keep 'em coming mush! (Even if the Nolan love orgy is inevitable)
 
I've seen the original once and the remake...? God knows how many times. I really wasn't that impressed with the original tbh. Not that that would stop me watching it again.
 
Nah you're alright Mark geezer.

Glad to see you like Hulk as well, Lines. You're always gonna get people that are gonna raise an eyebrow if you even defend the film, but I am confident that it'll be highly regarded in a few more years. The transitions and just the sheer symbolism in that film really give it that extra zing.

What do you think is Ang Lee's best picture then? Because I can honestly say that this is it for me.

Anyways, i'm gonna continue with the countdown.

"Why don't you ask "Tom" how he tried to rip my eye out with barbed wire. And ask him, Edie, how comes..he's so good..at killing people."

23. Pulp Fiction (Quentin Tarantino, 1994)



The one film I struggled placing on this list. It's the one film I simply couldn't ignore. It's has to be said that this isn't a film I watch a lot simply because I feel it gets overplayed. I had originally planned to place it somewhere between the 100 - 90 mark. But after further consideration, I decided that the strength of the film's incluence on cinema merited a strong top 30 position. There really was no other film like it at the time (Except the inferior Reservoir Dogs). There is no denying Pulp Fiction's ability to influence and the way in which it's shaped the crime genre.

Fiction, whether Tarantino haters want to admit it or not, is such an iconic film; such a key film of the 90's that it's fair to say that it's spawned a genre of it's own. Tarantinoesque thrillers have been dominating crime pictures ever since, ffs. One only has to look at The Rules Of Attraction, Snatch, Things To Do In Denver When You're Dead and Lucky Number Slevin to know that their makers grew up watching the geeky Quentin strut his stuff.



One of the most notable things about Pulp is the way in which Tarantino depicts his protagonists. John Travolta and Samuel L. "Mother****ing" Jackson are quickly established as pretty violent hitman, but are also shown to be ordinary blokes who converse about a whole range of topics shifting from food to foot massages and so on. These are the type of lads you'd find talking in your local pub.

But this is a nice bit of genre twisting, see. This is Tarantino skillfully playing with our expectations of the 'gangsta' genre. We are supposed to loathe these men given their occupational choices, but instead, we find ourselves relating to them because they talk and are generally ordinary joes. Ordinary joes doing violent ****. And the way these characters can appear in any of Tarantino's earlier and subsequent films is a testament to his authorship.



There are very few films that capture a strong interconnected crime community, save for Martin Scorsese's 'gangsta' outings. This community is a lot more expansive than the casual film goer realises. For example, Mr Blonde is actually supposed to be related to John Travolta's character. The result of these direct references to his other films suggest a wave of organised crime which could expand beyond films and into television, perhaps. It's pretty clever thinking.

The other striking aspect about PF, besides it's a admittedly slick interlocking narratives, is it's mother****ing awesome dialogue. Giving new meaning to the the term, 'killer dialogue' Tarantino writes as if he's on crack. It's one of the most perpetually quotable films and it should be with Sammy L. "Mother****ing" Jackson's signature rant.



Anyways, there's not much I say about this film that hasn't already been said, but yeah, it is all that and a bag of chips.

22. The Bourne Ultimatum (Paul Greengrass, 2007)



Remember that line during the beginning sequence of The Dark Knight? I think it's Grumpy, one of the masked thugs, who says 'We don't want you doing anything with your hands other than holding on to dear life'. That exact statement should be applied here. Aptly as well.

There's really not much to say about Paul Greengrass' Bourne Ultimatum. It's placing might be a bit TOO high for a 'popcorn flick', and I won't pretend that it is anything more than that. But man 'oh man is it one of the sweetest popcorn flicks to ever grace the cinema in recent times. In 2007, everybody said that Transformers was going to be the summer blockbuster of the year. And while I quite liked Michael Bay's fun CGI action fest,it just couldn't compete with Greengrass' pulse-pounding and inhumanly frenetic chase thriller. Sometimes there are certain aspects of filmmaking that transcend stuff like symbolism, political allegories and profound themes. This rarely happens but in this masterpiece of action cinema it does so.


Greengrass uses his drama documentary background to astonishing effect, give the approach giving Ultimatum an even grittier feel and sense of emergency. In fac the feel is so gritty that my ex girlfriend was a bit uncomfortable watching the opening sequence. I know that nothing majorly violent happened in that scene, but Greengrass' urgent immediacy and his too close for comfort camera compositions made her feel uneasy and brought a star realism to it. And I do see what she means. In fact, it's not entirely unfair to say that the film has dangerous levels of tension.

And y'know, the south park team can make fun of Matt Damon all they want, but it won't cloud the fact that Damon's Jason Bourne is now one of the most iconic action heroes in modern cinema. After three films, he's up there with a certain 007. In fact, it can be argued that the Bourne films forced the Bond films to reinvent themselves into moodier and grittier affairs.



And i've said it before and i'll say it again - the action in this film is just so ****ing brilliant. It's all real too. No CGI at all, people get hurt and stuff is blown up for real. Them people did things I never thought was possible to do without CGI. It's the action that tells the story and that's more than enough to justify this films high ranking.
 
I just caught Rear Window on TCM and it definitely lives up to its reputation.

But the ending is so lame. It's hokey and disappointing and lame. I realize the whole point of the movie is to ratchet up the suspense and the climax is an afterthought, but the climax is just really lame. Raymond Burr delivered one of the all-time stiff performances as the killer, Thorwald. Seriously, I cringe so hard when Jimmy Stewart uses the flash on his camera to blind Burr. He does it like five times! Close your eyes killer! Run at the crippled Jimmy Stewart, don't just lumber towards him with your arms frozen to the sides of your body like a gorilla!

I mean, I know it's from 1954, but come on.

Nice list.
 
Great post, mate.

I know you're not trying to start anything, mate. Don't worry, I don't tread these boards thinking that everyone's 'out for me'.

About Falcon. Yes, I am aware of the first two adaptations but i've seen neither of them. I'm sure seeing them won't spoil my enjoyment of the definitive version, but I am still reluctant to see it. I think it's because I feel that it's at an disadvantage with me. I've seen the masterful version, so any other version can't helped but be met with fierce criticism.

I also agree with your points about it's depiction of a dark humanity. It's just a paradigm of pure noir. The post-war anxieties and sense of a hopeless world is very prevalent. I completely concur.
 
Alright, Casino Royale better than Deer Hunter? It's obvious that you enjoy action films and the like, but when creating a list of the greatest films ever made, you have to suspend your tastes and judge the film based off its directing, screenplay, message, etc. The Deer Hunter is a serious, moving essay on patriotism, blue collar exploitation and the War in Vietnam. Casino Royale is simply a reimagining of the James Bond character...

I think I made my point.
 
Oi, who said you could review films in my thread . Just kiddin', yeah, to be honest, I have to go and watch Voss again as I haven't seen it in years, but I remember it being slightly disappointing compared to Fassbinder's other efforts. I always thought it was the 2nd in the trilogy though?? Meh, it don't matter. Your little analysis of the film has definitely made me want to revisit it with clearer eyes though.
 
I really think I understand what mark is getting at and I also don't think he's saying he doesn't like or "hates" Blade Runner. I have often felt that there is something empty about the movie and yet I still hold it on a very high pedestal simply because I'm a Sci/fi nut. That (emptiness) doesn't take anything away from it or make it less "watchable", maybe that was intentional, I don't know. The movie is what it is now and nothing we say about it really matters.

Re: Deathproof, I wish you would have been around a few months ago when just about everyone on this board was ripping this flick up and down and I was one of the very few that were supporting it. I agree with you in that I think its superior to Planet Terror. I was also completely blown away by Zoe Bell. If you really like the flick then I'm sure you took the time to look it up and found out that in fact that was her the whole time on the hood of that great old car. I thought for a stunt woman she showed pretty damn decent acting chops and I liked her parts the best when she and Tracie Thoms (Kim) were going back and forth. I thought her lines flowed pretty smoothly and I really hope we get to see more of her soon.
 
Pyro pretty much took the words right out of my mouth and expressed it in a way I could only hope to. I hope you're reading Adi and reading well. Like he highlighted, calling a film 'gay' is a very loose statement.

All I did was offer my own opinions of the film and came to my own conclusions as to what Ang Lee was trying to say, but you an saw fit to use one small sentence of mine and blow it up to be something that it wasn't. I never denied the gay theme of the film and why would I when it's crystal clear for everybody to see?

I simply felt that the game theme was USED as a SUBTEXT, METAPHOR or whatever to explore male companionship. That's all I said! But you clearly think just because you're gay you have the right to make these absurd and random arguments that have no real genuine goal to them other than to provoke people for no reason.

Face it, Adi...you were looking for ANYTHING related to homosexuality just so you could have a go. But the fact remains buddy that being gay doesn't make your points or thoughts any more valid than a hetrosexuals. Think about that the next time you feel like 'debating'.
 
Back
Top