What is the Last Film You Watched? - Part II

[Henry B 50]

Just watched Raiders. What a great film. I'll follow it up with the sequels, but they won't match it. Such raw energy and talent from all of the cast and crew.

[indy4 155]

Saw Dial M for Murder, and I must say it was one of Hitchcock's best. Great plot, great everything.

Now, about the score. There was one cue, played when Tony's watch stopped working, and he realises it's past eleven, and he hurries to get to a telephone to call home. On Amazon, this CD seems like it has this cue:

http://www.amazon.com/History-Hitchcock-Vo...0803&sr=1-1

On Soundtrack Collector, track six is called :

Dial M For Murder (1954) - Suite (07:15)

(Dimitri Tiomkin) Main Title/The Telephone/The Trap/Finale

Anybody who owns this CD and has seen the movie, do you know if this is the cue I'm thinking of? Thanks!

[A24 4,359]

Just watched Raiders. I'll follow it up with the sequels, but they won't match it.

Indeed, they weren't even close. Especially the second movie made me want to leave the theater.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

Racing Stripes.

This movie was absolute shit. It was so bad, I found myself enjoying it!

[AI 0]

Do you have a job or family?

I have neither, thank god.

Do I watch too many films?

Why does it matter to you?

[Red 75]

I wasn't asking you.

[Melange 446]

Spygame (2001) with Robert Redford and Brad Pitt.

I enjoyed it.

[Koray Savas 2,251]

Hotel Chevalier.

Short film written and directed by Wes Anderson, Part 1 to The Darjeeling Limited.

You can find it for free on iTunes. I thoroughly enjoyed it. Wes Anderson is an amazing writer, I wish I could write dialogue as well as he does. He also has a great taste of music and the songs always work well in his films. All his movies end in slow-motion, however it always works to perfection, although it can be a bad fact to know considering I know the end to The Darjeeling Limited just by watching the trailer.

[Morlock 11]

Okay, now- tell the truth.....you only watched this for Natalie Portman's bare ass, right?

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

Okay, now- tell the truth.....you only watched this for Natalie Portman's bare ass, right?

It's always in the movies with funny titles.

[A24 4,359]

The Host (Gwoemul). The critics are wrong. Don't see it. This is not the best monster film since Jaws, not by a long shot! Korean drama is weird. If it's meant to be a satire then the humor is weird too. Some of the monster scenes are impressive though.

Alex

[Morlock 11]

I thought the first half was funny enough. The second half was all over the place, the anti-American stuff was just badly done. The early monster scenes were fantastic.

[BurgaFlippinMan 7]

Okay, now- tell the truth.....you only watched this for Natalie Portman's bare ass, right?

This has Natalie's bare ass?!

[John Crichton 4]

Sounds like a perfectly legitimate reason to watch a movie to me.

[Koray Savas 2,251]

Okay, now- tell the truth.....you only watched this for Natalie Portman's bare ass, right?

Honestly, I didn't even know about this short film until a friend told me that it was on iTunes, when which he hadn't even seen it. So I watched it knowing nothing about it.

Still great though...and I mean the film not her ass, but that was great too.

[AI 0]

I wasn't asking you.

I wasn't speaking to you either.

[Morlock 11]

Superbad. Felt like a weak tea. Sure, there are some laughs in there, but Knocked Up was much, much better. Actors are fine. End credits are disturbing and hillarious in about equal measures.

Stardust. Loved it. The only film I've seen so far this year that was not at all dissapointing. Of course, I'm a huge Neil Gaiman fan, so I probably liked it more than most. DeNiro's role is absoluately hillarious, one of the funniest walk-ons (even though it's rather long) I've seen.

I liked the score in the film. It certainly suffers, like all works of new composers, from excessive temp-score mimicking, but it was a pleasure to hear a fully orchestral score at full volume (it was too loud at times).

Wonderful fairy-tale film. Probably my favorite main-stream movie from 2007 so far. ***1/2/****.

A Beautiful Mind. On the one hand, it is false in a particularly despicable way (IMO). On the other hand, it does some things with great skill. Mainly, getting an audience to get the slightest glimpse of the inner world of a Schizophrenic. I think it was phenominal in that sense. It's got some terrific scenes and sequences (the closing sequence of Nash at school is lovely). Great performance by Crowe, good one by Connelly, Christopher Plummer is solid as always, Paul Bettany is quite good. Ed Harris is a bit comatose for most of it, but his last scene, with "You're still talking to me, Soldier!" is fantastic.

One of Roger Deakins most subdued works on the screen, the film evokes and era and feel very well, though it is nto as impressive as his best work.

And Horner's score is absolutely fantastic in the film. The tragic madness motif, irrelevent of where it's from, its excellent, and he makes deft use of the piano.

Overall, a good story turned into schmaltz in a particularly disgusting Hollywood fashion, but still survives with some excellent craft and vignettes of filmmaking.

**1/2/****.

Used Cars. I really like this film a lot. Many comedies pride themselves on being irreverant. This is one that is truely irreverant. It is often hillarious, with many surprisingly great jokes arising from really dumb and surprising situations. Kurt Russell is perfect as the least honest used-car salesman ever, and the supporting cast is very solid. Even the totally over-the-top messy ending has it's pluses, how it photographs cars as if they were horses in a John Ford movie. Where did all of Bob Zemeckis's dark humor go? ***/****.

Last, but not least- at long last, I saw Kenneth Branagh's Hamlet. And I absolutely 100% loved it. I must offer a disclaimer, that I am no huge Shakespeare person (even though I am a fan). I have never seen Hamlet on stage or screen before, and never really followed the play as I read it. And, with that, I am a huge sucker for Shakespeare. And, I am very fond of Branagh's work. The chances were very slim of me not liking this film.

Yet, with that, I approached it with terpidation. Obviously, the length was fearsome. And the dialogue. And the pressure of worrying whether or not I would 'get it' (Which is not to say I understand it in any deep way, but I get the basics of it, and understood Branagh's take on it).

None of those were problems at all. The length made it engrossing, but it never felt long, and (far more impressively), never dragged. The actors, from top to bottom, spoke the dialogue with such clarity, and seemed so natural, that the meaning was always clear, even if the words were not (Still, thank GOD that this had subtitles. Henry V was a hard film to get through without them).

There is so much to talk about in the film.....the performances were almost uniformly superb.

Branagh was thrilling. I cannot compare him to anyone else, but he was thrilling out of historical context.

Derek Jacobi, who is an actor I like, but have never seen give a great performance, totally won me over. From the little I did know of the play, I was expecting a far more villainous and two dimensional Claudius. This Claudious is fascinating, an essentially kind and loving man, with one horrible act in his past that sits on his concious.

The actor who played Horatio was excellent. I loved how one sees the friendship between him and Hamlet grow stronger.

Richard Briers was good as Polonious....but the role is so without redeeming features (other than the fact that he is more a fool than villain).

Of the international cast, I feel that most were very good.

Charlton Heston gives one of the most impressive performances I've seen him give as the Player King.

Billy Crystal initially seemed a bit out of place....but as the scene progressed, he seemed more and more right for the role. In the end, he is terrific.

Gerard Depardieu is very nice in his small, oily cameo.

The only ones I disliked were Robin Williams and Jack Lemmon. Williams is just too out of place, although he does get less offensive in the last sequence. Lemmon is the only total misfire. One never gets over the shock of recognition, and aside from him saying 'There's something rotten in the state of Denmark', he has nothing to do, so he seems very much out place.

The film looks positively glorious. It's cold, but not at all dark and gloomy. In fact, it's probably the brightest set I've ever seen. And when filled with people, the palace looks a place that could potentially be warm, and has potential for happiness. Many striking images, but none as beautiful as the white rose pedal at the Wedding in the begining. And the costumes are quite attractive.

The music is quite good. Doesn't have quite as much to do as it usually does, and the main themes did get a bit tiresome. But I did grow to like the melodies that make up 'In Pace' by the end of it. Loved the exciting string work for the Ghost and the duel.

Beyond the craft that went into it, I am really not equiped to talk about it. I understand that the full text changes a great deal from the shortened ones, but I have little to compare it to. Must get the Burton and Olivier ones. I will say, though, that on it's own, it is a singularly successful film, that plays less like the depressing chracter piece one expects, and more like a fantastic, twisting story full of everything, with fascinating characters and magnificent dialogue. I understand it's optimism was a controvercial points with shakespeare experts, but it fit like a glove for me.

****/****.

P.S. I fully concede that this review is so full of superlatives as to make it totally unreliable. I do my best to clearly express and excuse my enthusiasm, so that not every movie I like gets 20 thumbs up, but this is one that really swept me with it's telling. Do with it as you will.

[QMM 4]

Sleepers

A very 'meh' picture. Hoffman and DeNiro were the only real standouts for me. Score was....interesting.

[Morlock 11]

Uneven, like all Barry Levinson movies. For me, the real standout was Vittorio Gassman. I liked the score a lot in the film.

[A24 4,359]

Sleepers

A very 'meh' picture. Hoffman and DeNiro were the only real standouts for me. Score was....interesting.

The second and the third time I thought it was better than "meh". There's is something "rewatchable" about this movie.

[Marian Schedenig 8,238]

None of those were problems at all. The length made it engrossing, but it never felt long, and (far more impressively), never dragged. The actors, from top to bottom, spoke the dialogue with such clarity, and seemed so natural, that the meaning was always clear, even if the words were not (Still, thank GOD that this had subtitles. Henry V was a hard film to get through without them).

Yes, subtitles will be helpful... I had to watch the Zefirelli version without any, and while I was able to follow the action nicely, I'm sure it'll be easier with the Branagh release.

Derek Jacobi, who is an actor I like, but have never seen give a great performance, totally won me over.

Not even in Henry V? Considering his role, I could understand if you don't want to call it a great *performance*... but it's certainly damn impressive.

Richard Briers was good as Polonious....but the role is so without redeeming features (other than the fact that he is more a fool than villain).

I loved Briers in Much Ado. I don't remember him from Hamlet, so I'm looking forward to comparing him with Holm.

Lemmon is the only total misfire. One never gets over the shock of recognition, and aside from him saying 'There's something rotten in the state of Denmark', he has nothing to do, so he seems very much out place.

Oh, I'm looking forward to that. If nothing else, he can't help being much better than in the German dub. His German comedy dubber just isn't capable of uttering the Denmark line in any satisfactory way.

The film looks positively glorious.

I don't remember much. I remember there was a nasty cut in the scene where Polonius says farewell to Laertes. And a brilliant, lenghty zoom out over Branagh monologuing with an army marching in the background.

The music is quite good. Doesn't have quite as much to do as it usually does, and the main themes did get a bit tiresome.

I found the CD quite tedious in the beginning. In a way, it still is, but there's such a wonderful melancholic quality to it.

Yes, I really have to pick up the DVD soon...

[Elmo Lewis 6]

there was a nasty cut in the scene where Polonius says farewell to Laertes. And a brilliant, lenghty zoom out over Branagh monologuing with an army marching in the background.

The infamous close-up of the arrow flying towards Hamlet (I think) right at the end was also a poor decision in an otherwise flawlessly classy film.

[Morlock 11]

I don't recall any arrow...however, when Hamlet's body is being taken at the end, he blinks. I'm quite surprised they didn't do another take of that.

The film still hasn't left me. It really was a moving experience. I must own this one.

Saw Robocop. I know I've seen it before, but didn't really recall. It's good, trashy fun with an edge. The humor in the film takes one off guard. The acting is not bad for a film of this type, and the scripting is also not bad. The film I saw looked pretty bad. I'm sure it is partly because of the old print, but also, the cinematography is very unimpressive and uninteresting. And I can't believe anyone ever believed Phill Tippet stuff. It's ambitious stop-motion stuff, but still, it's stop motion. Why didn't they get Stan Winston?

Score's fantastic, love that main theme that could only really created in the 80's.

Still not a big Verhoven fan, but there is something charming about his wit.

**1/2/****.

Enemies, A love story. Never seen a Paul Mazrusky movie before. This one is certainly interesting...Ron Silver plays a Holocaust survivor in New York who married the Polish girl who hid him during the war. At the same time, he has an affair with another survivor (the extremely attractive Lena Olin), and marries her because she's pregnant. And than he finds out that his wife before the war (played by Anjelica Huston), who he was sure had died, is still alive, and in New York. The film balances the comedic element of having three wives, together with the dramatic issues of love, being loved, and survivor syndrom. I was never quite sure where it was going, and felt like it was missing something....but I liked it. Good kind of happy ending. Good performances by everyone.

I liked Maurice Jarre's score...not all that much of it, but basically all of it is lively Klezmer music. I'm not generally fond of Klezmer music, but I did like this stuff.

***/****.

[indy4 155]

Saw Bourne Ultimatum a few months ago. I didn't really like it, but maybe that was because I haven't seen Identity and Supremacy

[publicist 4,643]

@Marian:

Don't fear the german dub of Jack Lemmon; his famous dubbing voice (Georg Thomalla) is long gone, sadly.

[A24 4,359]

Zodiac. Eventually the film lost me because it went on too long without anything interesting going on. I expected more. In fact, I expected something different than just another movie about another serial killer. This should have been made 15 years ago when the subject was still hot.

Alex

[Elmo Lewis 6]

It's like a poorly paced, unengaging and overlong All The President's Men. What with the obsession for matching all real-life details, pointless as they may be.

But it has Robert Downey Jr for a bit, which makes it all more bearable.

[A24 4,359]

It's like a poorly paced, unengaging and overlong All The President's Men. What with the obsession for matching all real-life details, pointless as they may be.

But it has Robert Downey Jr for a bit, which makes it all more bearable.

It's funny you should mention All The President's Men. I too thought about this film a couple of times when the journalists we're trying to crack the Zodiac case. But Pakula's classic is way more on target. Three hours is too long.

Yes, Robert Downey Jr. was very funny. The recreation of the 70s is also very well executed.

[Elmo Lewis 6]

Alex, you're all right. I think you should enjoy reading this if you ever have the time.

[A24 4,359]

[Marian Schedenig 8,238]

Don't fear the german dub of Jack Lemmon; his famous dubbing voice (Georg Thomalla) is long gone, sadly.

He wasn't dead when Hamlet was dubbed, and I clearly remember him voicing Lemmon in that.

Besides, I have nothing against Thomalla, but he's just the wrong man for the material. Just like Tom Hanks' dub voice might have been good for those early comedies he made, but it's impossible for me to take Tom Hanks seriously in a serious role when watching him dubbed.

And ultimately, even the handful of truly great dubbers (I don't know any names, but Ben Kingsley's German voice comes to mind) invariably fall short of the original version due to the nature of translation and dubbing.

[Morlock 11]

It's like a poorly paced, unengaging and overlong All The President's Men. What with the obsession for matching all real-life details, pointless as they may be.

But it has Robert Downey Jr for a bit, which makes it all more bearable.

I was not a fan either. Gyllenhall was not very good either. And the make-up seriously pissed me off. They may have convinced me of the 70's, but they neve convinced me that these characters were real, or that they aged.

[Jacob 0]

Heartbeeps. Perhaps the oddest film I've ever seen (I'm sure watching it at 2 in the morning didn't help). Like a cross between Blade Runner and The Wizard of Oz.

The score, Catskil and Crimebuster were highlights as well as the hour-and-a-half runtime.

[Kendal_Ozzel 36]

Bicycle Thieves. Incredible.

[indy4 155]

Bicycle Thieves. Incredibl

y good or bad?

[Kendal_Ozzel 36]

Good. Very very good.

[Morlock 11]

Okay now.

Let's start with a couple of films I saw in the theater.

The Brave One (2007). I often like Neil Jordan's work, and Jodie Foster's, too (although not recently). But this one was just meh. It may have some cheap philosophies attached to it, but if it has any value, it's as a revenge flick. And it is okay as such, with the ending (although inapropriate), delivering the rush one might expect from said genre. But I frankly was not that interested in Terene Howard's character, who seems to go from total fool to helpfull tool as if a lightbulb turned on. The last scene with his character did not seem to me at all true to the character.

Please, feel free to miss this one. **/****.

P.S.- Is it just me, or is Mary Steenburgen getting much more attractive as she gets older?

A Mighty Heart (2007). It should be subtitled 'The questionable importance of being earnest'. I did not like it. The only section of it that has interest is the police procedural section.

A lot has been aid about Angelina Jolie's performance. I don't understand the hubbub. To me, while hte performance does not seem bad, I constantly got the sense of 'Look at me- Angelina Jolie, super-hot Tomb Raider, is doing something real! Look! I'm actually acting! Look- Emotion! Look! Look! LOOK!'. I did not believe her for an instant. Her character in the film seemed to me very much Mrs. Pearl's unnecessary and unconvincing wish to explain herself. I don't think the film can explain it, and should not. I did not believe the schmaltzy theme of the film, but, then again, who am I to judge or question? It cheapens the story, in my mind.

Coupled with that, an inevitable down-side to the film, is that everyone knows the end. So even the interesting part of the film, of the Pakistani's desparate and forceful attempts to find Pearl, is doomed from the get-go.

I'm not sure the material should have been handled at all, and, if it should, it needed a far more skilled and even director. Winterbottom's documentry approach is not good for the material as a whole. It enhances the procedural element to a fault (making us believe for some instances that they will most certainly find Pearl), but significantly weakens the 'mighty heart' narrative.

Faulty script, direction, and casting all mark this film as a mediocre effort, as noble-minded and earnest as it is.

**/****.

Now, on to more pleasant fair.

Day for Night (1973). A treat for people in love with movie-making. I loved it. Jacqueline Bisset sure is a looker. ***1/2/****.

Long Day's Journey Into Night (1963). Ralph Richardson, Katherine Hepburn, Jason Robards and Dean Stockwell acting out a play by Eugene O'Neill, directed by Sidney Lumet. This was a film that could not go wrong. And not only did it not go wrong, it even managed to escape the shackles of 'filmed play', which is especially difficult, concidering how few sets are used, and how obviously theatrically minded the material is.

This is really a tour-de-force of acting, of a practically unparalleled level. All four of the leads (the only speaking roles, with the exception of the maid) are absolutely spell-binding. I have never read O'Neil, but I was enthralled by the relatively simple presentation of conflicts in this play- the four characters- Father, Mother, Older brother, Younger brother, are pitted against each other at various points, in various configurations, and have an emotional roller-coaster of a conversation.

All four leads are sensational. While seeing Jason Robards dishevelled and drunk is nothing new, it is quite astonishing to see Ralph Richardson and Katherine Hepbrun delve into their flawed characters with such daring. I never thought that Richardson could be anything less than saintly authority. And Hepburn is so unglamorous, so real, looking almost like a decaying corpse at time. I can't say I've seen Dean Stockwell in all the much (I know him mainly from Quantom Leap), but he is also terrific as the catalyst of the emotional showdowns.

As I said, as intimate and limited space-wise as the film is, it never feels like a filmed play. Lumet and DP Boris Kaufman (who also shot Lumet's 12 Angry Men) do a great job of underlining the emotion without over-dramatizing it. And the final shot is such a sad piece of work. The four members of the family, sitting around the table, all lost in their worlds of alcohol and morphine.

There is a score, by Andre Previn, but there can't be more than 7 minutes of music in this 3 hour film.

Since so, so much of the film is O'Neil, one must not take away too much credit when praising the work of the filmmakers. But this film is some kind of masterpiece. ****/****.

On the other side of the specturm of Lumet films, also saw The Murder on The Orient Express (1974). I found it's flaws more evicent this time than in the past. The opening portion of the movie, after the whole montage of the kidnapped kid, is very slow. The murder investigation is a bit too complex, only rarely allowing the audeince to figure something out for themselves. And one wishes for more from all the stars there. But that's pretty much a necessity of the film.

But, really, none of those flaws stop one from being thuroughly entertained by the film. A most luxurious, yet fluffy piece of entertainment, lead by a Albert Finney in a performance that amazes me every time. No matter how well I know that this is Albert Finney, I always, always totally forget about that, and am convinced by this Hercule Poirot. A lot of that is due to impeccable wardrobe and makeup work (aging Finney by 20 years in a makeup job as convincing as any I've seen). In general, of course, everything in the film looks great. Tony Walton's sets and costumes are wonderfully romantic and opulent (Lumet has said that 'Nostalgia' was the key word in this production.

The score, by Richard Rodney Bennet, is also perfectly romantic and opulent. The famous waltz, which thrillingly sets the fluffy tone of the film when the train majestically leaves the staton, also serves as a great coda to the film, intoning that one has just watched a wonderful, classy romp of a murder mystery, excatly in tone of Ms. Christy. Bennet is given a rather big place in the documentry on the DVD, and Nick Meyer tells the famous Herrmann story.

A good piece of carefree entertainment of a sort long gone from the world.

***/****.

In addition to these two, I also rented two more Lumet films, two I've never seen before- The Offence and The Hill, both with Sean Connery. I know that Woody Allen conciders The Hill to be one of the greatest American films ever....we'll see.

Odd Man Out (1948). A striking British film, directed by Sir Carol Reed and starring James Mason. Mason plays an IRA man recently escaped from prison, who, after freezing up while leaving a robbery scene, is left by his companions and, wounded, walks the streets, trying to get help and avoid the police. An interesting film, with obvious influences on Reed's direction of The Third Man (In particular the huge shadows running men cast), but more stylistically interesting than dramatically so. The Mason character seemed distant.

[Hitch 57]

Superman II: The Dick Donner Cut - Should have stayed in the Warner vaults for another 1000 years. Richard Lester.....you are forgiven, my child.

[pixie_twinkle 48]

"Perfume": Excellent film. A completely different approach to the serial killer movie. Everyone should see this. Imagine a cross between "Henry Portrait of a Serial Killer", and "Amelie"!

"Fracture": Quite poor. Anthony Hopkins was brilliant as ever, but the script was dull, too familiar, weak, and had far too many plot holes.

[A24 4,359]

Superman II: The Dick Donner Cut - Should have stayed in the Warner vaults for another 1000 years. Richard Lester.....you are forgiven, my child.

Is it that bad? So Lester didn't ruin Donner's masterpiece like every one has been claiming for decades? In fact, he saved it? Amazing.

[Elmo Lewis 6]

After two weeks of intense marathons, I finally watched the Twin Peaks series finales last night.

What the fuck...?

[A24 4,359]

Lynch will be very happy with your response. I've heard Inland Empire is his most bizarre one to date. Even more experimental than Eraserhead.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

Superman II: The Dick Donner Cut - Should have stayed in the Warner vaults for another 1000 years. Richard Lester.....you are forgiven, my child.

Ahh, that's mean. Had Donner finished the movie in 1980, it would have been fine.

[Elmo Lewis 6]

Lynch will be very happy with your response. I've heard Inland Empire is his most bizarre one to date. Even more experimental than Eraserhead.

Never been a fan of Lynch's. The show was wonderful, though. But I'm not sure how I feel about the fact that he returned to direct the final episode - sure, it gave the finale a much-needed injection of high-quality surrealism (which had been lacking since the first season) but he had abandoned it for almost a year and the show had taken a different direction long ago.

But you can't not like the Black Lodge sequence. Just can't. And Lynch's touch had been sorely missed anyway.

And I'm no fan of Lynch at all.

[A24 4,359]

And I'm no fan of Lynch at all.

Then you don't love film.

[Luke Skywalker 1,801]

I rewatched A.I.

I just cant believe people hate this movie.

[Neimoidian 14]

"Perfume": Excellent film. A completely different approach to the serial killer movie. Everyone should see this. Imagine a cross between "Henry Portrait of a Serial Killer", and "Amelie"!

I haven't yet seen the movie, but I know the soundtrack which is simply fantastic - one of the best ones of the previous year. It's in fact my number 2, since I already had got a bigger crush on "Pan's Labyrinth".

[Luke Skywalker 1,801]

Speaking of Pan's Labyrinth score.

I have great news for you. The Oscar promo has leaked and is available.

The really good news is that the OST runs for 20 minutes longer, since it contains unused music. And in chronological order.

I think this makes it one of the best soundtrack releases as defined in the other thread: Good music, Chronological, complete and more music than the movie...

The oscar promo contains 33 tracks, but its just the OST tracks splitted (you know the OST has some one second gaps in most tracks, sepparationg cues) but it just features them usic in the movie.

[Elmo Lewis 6]

And I'm no fan of Lynch at all.

Then you don't love film.

That is correct.

I've always been more attracted to the more "theatrical" and "literary" aspects of movies (plot, dialogue, character development) than to the purely cinematographical ones (mood, subtext, visual juxtaposition, pacing). Of course, I deeply enjoy how spectacular and engaging the aforementioned "theatrical" and "literary" aspects can be in a film, but no, you won't find me dissecting Eisensestein or other cinematographic geniuses that are difficult to swallow.

You might say these grave contaminations of other arts only enrich the cinematographic possibilities. But I don't fully agree to that, Alex. I think that it's only using "film" as a medium to transport a theater play or a gothic novel and make it easier on the eyes, not as a message, or art form, in itself. I may be too radical, but I firmly believe this.

That being said, enjoy your Stachka.

[Morlock 11]

"Perfume": Excellent film. A completely different approach to the serial killer movie. Everyone should see this. Imagine a cross between "Henry Portrait of a Serial Killer", and "Amelie"!

I haven't yet seen the movie, but I know the soundtrack which is simply fantastic - one of the best ones of the previous year. It's in fact my number 2, since I already had got a bigger crush on "Pan's Labyrinth".

The soundtrack and film have been hotly debated in the past in various places. I am definitely in the category of hater of both. The soundtrack sound to me like an ineffective Hannibal rip-off, I hated it. But, of course, that was after seeing the film.

And I'm no fan of Lynch at all.

Then you don't love film.

I can really speak pertaining to Lynch- only seen Mullholland Drive and The Straight Story, and I didn't get any of the former, and loved the latter. The cinemateque is doing a retrospective of his films, with Mr. Lynch himself on hand to answer some questions. Would be a perfect opportunity to bone up on my Lynch (as well as meet the guy), but, alas, I will be abroad. I know I'd Elephant Man at the very least......