What are your favorite shots in a movie?

[Naïve Old Fart 9,498]

Thanks, @Holko, I will.

 

[Holko 9,499]

20 years of technological advancements!

[Gruesome Son of a Bitch 6,488]

Looks great!

[Ollie 1,059]

I love this shot from Shin Gojira. The point of view of looking up while driving by Godzilla, showing the immense size of the beast.

 

 

 

 

 

The original Gojira’s first full shot of him is another favorite. The black and white film gives this scene a more realistic look as it combines live action of the people fleeing and the miniature set under Godzilla. Plus the scene taking place at night gives it a chilling feeling.

 

 

 

[Holko 9,499]

The original looks phenomenal when it's not the glove puppet.

[Gruesome Son of a Bitch 6,488]

God? Zilla. That's what Japanese sailors called him in song. A mythological sea dragon who filled their hearts with fear. He has become our modern day terror. Who is this Godzilla? Where did he come from? Why is he here? 

[Holko 9,499]

[The Illustrious Jerry 3,356]

2 hours ago, Holko said:

Spielberg agrees! In the HBO exploration of his career he notes that Lawrence of Arabia was a very influential film for him (he cites it as his favourite film), and that the above shot in particular really stuck with him, because it comes full circle with a scene earlier in the film where Lawrence views his reflection in his blade, before he becomes super conflicted and morbid. The second time he does he's a very different man of course, having just killed hundreds of men. He phrased it as something along the lines of "that's great directing/cinema".

 

A link to an informative article: https://www.top10films.co.uk/3244-lawrence-of-arabia-the-film-that-inspired-spielberg/

 

Turns out he was involved with the restoration!

 

Of course those are all legendary shots, the second being engraved in my mind for eternity, and the third also being immensely memorable. 

[Holko 9,499]

Speaking of Spielberg, where does he pay fun homage to the third shot? 

[John 2,032]

[Naïve Old Fart 9,498]

5 hours ago, Holko said:

Speaking of Spielberg, where does he pay fun homage to the third shot? 

Possibly the Cotapaxi sequence, in the S.E.

 

The third shot down is amazing: a literal ship of the desert. Rumour has it that the man who shouts "Who are you?!" is Lean.

[Holko 9,499]

I was thinking of this:

 

 

But the Cotopaxi kinda fits, too!

[Chen G. 3,943]

3 hours ago, The Illustrious Jerry said:

it comes full circle with a scene earlier in the film where Lawrence views his reflection in his blade, before he becomes super conflicted and morbid. The second time he does he's a very different man of course, having just killed hundreds of men.

 

But that’s the thing: that he’s not a different man. Unlike other tragic figures who lose themselves during the course of the story, Robert Bolt’s screenplay subtly suggests that Lawrence is a narcissistic, sado-masochistic, thrill seeking piece of work from the very start. He doesn’t get developed - he gets revealed.

 

He speeds on his motorbike, he extinguishes a match with his bare fingers, he makes a mess of the poll table, he wants to go the desert and later conceives of the quest of Aqaba, both out of sheer vanity and thrill-seeking (“or is it that you think we are something you can play with?”, “but in who’s name do you ride?”). The genius is that, during the first viewing, he initially comes across as endearingly quirky, before part two lays him bare as a rotten man.

 

Ali actually gets to tell him several times that he’s mad. For the first time, it comes across a throwaway line. In hindsight, though...

[Holko 9,499]

Hey, the speeding on the motorbike is his death!

[Chen G. 3,943]

And that’s the point of that ending: leaving Arabia with a sense of failure, Lawrence sees a bike blaze past him, and he finds something else to channel his thrill-seeking into, which would ultimately prove his undoing.

[The Illustrious Jerry 3,356]

22 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

But that’s the thing: that he’s not a different man. Unlike other tragic figures who lose themselves during the course of the story, Robert Bolt’s screenplay subtly suggests that Lawrence is a narcissistic, sado-masochistic, thrill seeking piece of work from the very start.

Be that as it may, Lawrence is no doubt different to the audience at the point when he first views his reflection in the blade than when he does it again after the massacre, granted that this may be a handicap of a single viewing. I mean, while it may have been suggested that he was an eccentric narcissist from the opening scenes of the movie, there's a difference between putting out a match with one's bare fingers and slaughtering a caravan of riders in cold blood. While these two acts suggest the same character trait, they are still vastly different scale-wise. But that there is the genius- the development of Lawrence's character from the subtle to the extreme. 

 

Spielberg describes the second occurrence as the moment Lawrence realizes what he has become, but we of course come to see that he can't seem to collect himself thereafter.

[Chen G. 3,943]

Sure, he escalates. But he’s a "nut" (in Lean's own words) and something of a despicable person from the word go. And unlike other tragic figures, we don’t get to see some kind of tragic past that haunts him: the origin of his sadism and thrill-seeking is meant to be something of an enigma, but there is one clue: that he’s the illegitimate child of the Baronet Chapman.

 

His foppish mannerisms early on were also meant to suggest homosexual tendencies. He also seems to have an obsession with cleanliness, not just in his admiration of how clean the desert is, but also in insisting on shaving while traveling through the desert, and in cleaning his clothes when Ali confronts him before the Deraa episode.

[Holko 9,499]

14 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

And that’s the point of that ending: leaving Arabia with a sense of failure, Lawrence sees a bike blaze past him, and he finds something else to channel his thrill-seeking into, which would ultimately prove his undoing.

Thank you for explaining what is onscreen in the movie I just watched a few hours ago. Still, you listed it as if it was an early evidence of his character being the same at the start, while it's actually the conclusion, being an early flashforward (I know, I know, technically the film is a big flashback from the opening, I'm not gonna let you get off on that, too).

[The Illustrious Jerry 3,356]

10 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

Sure, he escalates. But he’s a nut and something of a despicable person from the word go. And unlike other tragic figures, we don’t get to see some kind of tragic past that haunts him: the origin of his sadism and thrill-seeking is meant to be something of an enigma, but there is one clue: that he’s the illegitimate child of the Baronet Chapman.

Well, yes. I mean, Lawrence initially comes across as quirky and dandified, and his thrill-seeking is apparent from the very first scene. But how does that all come together to make him morbid enough to "enjoy" killing and revel in homicidal skirmishes? This radical development doesn't necessarily add up, but I suppose it contributes to that enigmatic nature you reference that is quite befitting to the rest of Lawrence's persona. It's certainly not a problem as far as the film goes, but it certainly makes for an intriguing and multi-layered character study. 

[Naïve Old Fart 9,498]

Well, this is all deep, for a wet Wednesday evening.

[Chen G. 3,943]

4 hours ago, The Illustrious Jerry said:

But how does that all come together to make him morbid enough to "enjoy" killing and revel in homicidal skirmishes? This radical development doesn't necessarily add up, but I suppose it contributes to that enigmatic nature you reference that is quite befitting to the rest of Lawrence's persona. It's certainly not a problem as far as the film goes.

 

Lawrence is also presented as a masochistic man: “the trick, William Potter, is not minding that it hurts.” Originally, the scene in which he comes up with the idea of the quest of Aqaba was going to show that he grasped that rock hard enough to draw blood from his own hand. So clearly the seeds for his sadistic enjoyment of killing (first with Gasim, then with the Turks in Mazril) are there, assuming that sadism and masochism tend to come hand in hand; which, of course, isn’t necessarily true, but it works for the film.

 

As for problems, I just think a couple of his decisions are too on-a-dime. I wouldn’t have minded more setup for him sympathizing with the inhabitants in Faisal’s camp before he hatches up the plan to take Aqaba. But my main issue in this regard is in the film’s second part.

 

In Part 2, I think Allenby convinces him to return to Arabia much, much too quickly. Lawrence of Arabia was originally 222 minutes, without any additional music. When it was restored, Lean had it recut to 216 minutes, and it seems much of the missing footage is from that scene, in which - originally - Allenby more gradually managed to convince Lawrence. I think it’s a shame we can’t see it today. They actually went through the trouble of redubbing it before they cut it back out. Outrageous!

[The Illustrious Jerry 3,356]

51 minutes ago, Chen G. said:

Lawrence is also presented as a masochistic man: “the trick, William Potter, is not minding that it hurts.” Originally, the scene in which he comes up with the idea of the quest of Aqaba was going to show that he grasped that rock hard enough to draw blood from his own hand. So clearly the seeds for his sadistic enjoyment of killing (first with Gasim, then with the Turks in Mazril) are there, assuming that sadism and masochism tend to come hand in hand; which, of course, isn’t necessarily true, but it works for the film.

Yes, I suppose that does entail the eventual occurrences, although as you said before it's in a subtle, hinting way, benefited by a second viewing. So with that I digress, and will perhaps spark up another discussion after a neccesary rewatch of this masterpiece in the near future. Good chat!

[John 2,032]

[Naïve Old Fart 9,498]

Shades of THE SEARCHERS.

[danbeck 123]

[Marian Schedenig 8,173]

9 hours ago, John said:

 

An absolutely brilliant conclusion to a great chapter, especially with the score.

 

Also:

 

[Fabulin 3,510]

.

 

[John 2,032]

4 hours ago, Marian Schedenig said:

 

An absolutely brilliant conclusion to a great chapter, especially with the score.

 

Also:

 

 

Yes! The opening sequence, with the terrific dialogue, score, and Waltz’s performance, could stand alone as a masterpiece of filmmaking. 

[danbeck 123]

[Oomoog the Ecstatic 314]

Window ghost b creepin. She might even b peepin but she definitely creepin.

[Gruesome Son of a Bitch 6,488]

4 hours ago, danbeck said:

 

That one is amazing. I've never figured out how they did it. Norman looks almost animated there.

[danbeck 123]

5 hours ago, Dieter Stark said:

 

That one is amazing. I've never figured out how they did it. Norman looks almost animated there.

I think the clouds are a mate painting/superimposed. 

It is a great shot that became the film’s poster, cover of the soundtrack, etc.

[A24 4,326]

 

13 hours ago, danbeck said:

 

From what movie is this?

[John 2,032]

Psycho II. 

[Naïve Old Fart 9,498]

Alex, I'm genuinely surprised that you did not know this.

[Jurassic Shark 12,030]

Well, it could have been from the original Psycho, or III or IV.

[Naïve Old Fart 9,498]

It could have been, JS, but it wasn't. It was, is, and always shall be...the one and only...your friend and mine...the man who wouldn't even harm a fly (but who will happily off old ladies with a shovel)... PSYCHO II.

[Marian Schedenig 8,173]

 

 

 

 

 

[A24 4,326]

9 hours ago, Jurassic Shark said:

Well, it could have been from the original Psycho, or III or IV.

 

Or the remake!

[Gruesome Son of a Bitch 6,488]

That shot is in color so I think that excludes the original movie. It's just a theory that I happen to agree with.

[A24 4,326]

It could have been colourised. It kinda looks like it has been.

[Jurassic Shark 12,030]

It could be poster art.

[Gruesome Son of a Bitch 6,488]

It is on the Psycho II poster, actually. It's also the climactic shot from the movie.

 

 

Stunning. Great music, too. Norman is the good guy in this movie and doesn't even kill anyone to this point, so this moment is a return to form where he comes full circle.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

It's from the second movie. Alex obviously isn't much of a fan.

[A24 4,326]

To be honest, that kitchen scene is the only scene I remember. Actually, I also remember a shot with a cola vending machine, but I'm not sure it's from Psycho 2.

[Bilbo 3,709]

[Naïve Old Fart 9,498]

Hmm. RYAN'S DAUGHTER. Criminally underrated. Thanks, Bil.

[Chen G. 3,943]

Great-looking film.

 

But for me, it unfortunately joins the "bore" camp with all of Lean's post-Lawrence epics, even in its current, truncated form. And the one thing movies should never do is bore.

 

Certainly didn't deserve the ribbing Lean got for it, though. Its the same shtick Lean pulled of with Doctor Zhivago.

[Bilbo 3,709]

I haven't seen the full film, only caught a bit of it on telly this afternoon but it's a gorgeous looking film. 

[Gruesome Son of a Bitch 6,488]

4 hours ago, Alexcremers said:

To be honest, that kitchen scene is the only scene I remember. Actually, I also remember a shot with a cola vending machine, but I'm not sure it's from Psycho 2.