Jan 5, 2016

@Charlie Strangelove I do see your point and I definitely have thought to myself that I'm probably watching too many new movies (My 2015 list is up to 76). Maybe one day I will break my compulsion to see all of the new releases.

With that said, to echo @FilmAndWhisky , I think new movies can often be more interesting to discuss, as everyone is discovering them at around the same time and they come without any pre-established reputation. With many of the seminal classics, it can be difficult to ever go in completely clean. Similarly, without the aid of time, the discussion is still ongoing and forming for recent films, whereas nothing at this point is going to knock 2001 or Citizen Kane from their perch, despite whatever new or intriguing takes one might have on them. Not to mention, new movies still come with the theatrical experience (at least they do currently), while one has to wait for retrospectives to catch classics on the big screen.

 

Jan 6, 2016

I really like that point. Thanks for the inspiration.

 

Jan 6, 2016

lol oh okay, i thought you were just making fun of him

 

Jan 6, 2016

I think it's essential to stay current with new releases. There are so many films that you must check off your list, if you're trying to watch everything, and doing that in addition to having to catch up with newer releases makes things even more difficult. So, if you're staying current, I feel like you can set aside the time to watch older films when you want to. I think this is a great time to be alive and experiencing/watching/movies movies. There is so much variety.

 

Jan 6, 2016

Would like to crystallize my thoughts when I can, but after initial viewing, I really dug Anomalisa...much more than I was expecting.

 

Jan 7, 2016

Room

 

Jan 7, 2016

Does a technical achievement drawing attention to itself mean that it failed? For instance, a flashy long take like Innaritu used to open The Revenant? Malick and Lubezki do a lot of crazy stuff, but it doesn't break my immersion. A counter point could be that being a technical minded spectator is the failure. What do you guys think?

 

Jan 7, 2016

• 
  88:88 2015
  ★★★★½ Watched 06 Jan, 2016
  
  [REVIEW] 89/100 - 88:88 (Isiah Medina, 2015)
  
  "The absence of reason; living without a sense of origin or destination. a meaningless search for finitude: for meaning in the lack of meaning, for structure in a lack of structure; the perennial experience of banality, of repetition. distortion. decay. To become shackled, imprisoned by the image of a life without reason."
  
  Read More:
  aestheticsofthemind.com/2016/01/07/8888-medina-2015/
  
  1 like
  
  
• 
  Symphonie diagonale 1924
  ★★★★ Watched 07 Jan, 2016
  
  So progressive and rhythmic!
  
  80/100 - Great.
  
  No likes
  
  
• 
  Joy 2015
  ★★★★ Watched 06 Jan, 2016
  
  Feminism (values) without being feminist. Truly a humanist tale of determination. Well shot and superbly performed.
  
  84/100 - Great.
  
  1 like
  

 

Jan 7, 2016

Looking forward to your thoughts because while I liked it overall I found it quite disappointing.

@Charlie Strangelove It really depends on the type of film and filmmaker. I typically consider that a 'technique' drawing attention to itself, or rather any element drawing attention to itself, as a form of vanity is a failure. In other words, if it draws attention to itself and the 'draw of attention' is its goal, then it is without substance. For example, most of Birdman and every Marvel movie action scene. But when a technique draws attention as a form of enhancing the narrative or emotional depth of the moment, it is a bravura moment wherein the technique is not celebrated for its technical fortuitousness but for its instrumental use in the film's narration. An example would be something like the slow zoom towards Anna Karina in Vivre sa vie, which draws a lot of attention but has a purpose and further depth beyond the mere technique. Or the circling camera in It Follows which certainly draws attention to its technical mastery but also helps in building a sense of tension and feeling of the unknown (where is IT? all around us!). That said, even when a technical achievement is narratively instrumental, I prefer subtlety.

 

Jan 7, 2016

Joy higher than Star Wars

 

Jan 7, 2016

I actually had It Follows in mind when I posted. I accept your reasoning for the pivot shots, they were ominous, but they still made me roll my eyes. Maybe because Malick really commits and sustains his style instead of treating the techniques like a garnish. Maybe I'm just digging my heels into my first impression.

 

Jan 7, 2016

Mmmmmmmm

 

Jan 8, 2016

Rowjay's back!!

 

Jan 8, 2016

Armond White's annual Better Than just dropped.
The Force Awakens is on it twice.

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/429435/movies-2015-best-and-worst

 

Jan 10, 2016

I forgot to post my movies to watch for January, but there isn't too much.

January 8- The Treasure (Corneliu Porumboui)
January 15- In the Shadow of Women (Philippe Garrel)
January 22- Aferim! (Radu Jude)

Also saw The Revenant...Ugliness beautifully rendered, but single-minded and familiar to a fault.

 

Jan 11, 2016

so the golden globes were a mess last night. didnt see that coming

 

Jan 11, 2016

akira kurosawa blu ray criterions are discounted on amazon right now

 

Jan 11, 2016

basically my initial thoughts when i saw it a few weeks ago, but since then (despite not having seen it again) it's only grown on me

i really want to watch it again in theaters

 

Jan 11, 2016

Just dropped on Netflix recently. No clue who planned on seeing it.

 

Jan 11, 2016

One of my favorite movies last year, for sure. Mainly for the kid's performance tbh