Jump to content

ol' eddy wrecks

Members
  • Content count

    235
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by ol' eddy wrecks

  1. ol' eddy wrecks

    Midnight Cowboy

    I think I'm being more disparaging than intended by saying, "ape." Mimicing another's technique (and allegedly, Resnais didn't believe in the concept of stealing. He had a line about ideas are in the air, no single person came up with them. Or something to that extent), but doing it well is justified. I think my big issue is the memories in Midnight Cowboy start off with the grandmother and mother seems connectable to a person who would think "I want to go to NYC to be a hustler," and ends with a traumatic event that just doesn't seem to connect with what we see in the present day. Anyhow, I also checked, the American, neo-noir, Point Blank (with Lee Marvin) came out in 1967 also had flashbacks triggered by what's currently happening. IIRC (and it's not a given that I do), they spend a longer time in the flashback, so, unlike Hiroshima or Midnight Cowboy, it feels less like a passing/immediate thought, and more like a flashback. But the random jumping/triggering does have that image association quality, quick cut, that is more implying transition of thought of the main character rather than transition of narration as presented by the director.
  2. ol' eddy wrecks

    Midnight Cowboy

    The walkman wasn't invented until 1979. You can't fault him too much for playing the radio on the bus. I guess it depends how loud he was listening to it. The flashback editing (associating memories with what they're seeing) seems to ape Resnais' style in at least Hiroshima mon Amour (1959) - though by the end you do get the full expository, traditional, flashback. I'd have to rewatch Muriel (1963); Je t'aime, je t'aime (1968) and Last Year in Marienbad (1961) to see if he also did that exact same technique in there. I want to say yes on Muriel. For Je t'aime, je t'aime think the flashbacks were more traditional in the transition (since there was a scientific device for time travel, so technically not flashbacks. Though they did separate other experimental things, such as change the actress who played his wife in different scenes, IIRC). And I don't think Marienbad had flashbacks. That said, I think the flashbacks were the most interesting part of the movie. That and the scenes of Buck's initial homelessness. And the transition from being a fake Texan coming to New York, to looking like he might be a fake New Yorker coming to Miami. I felt the stream of consciousness fantasy for Dustin Hoffman in Miami went on for too long, but overall my two biggest issues were raised in the Ebert review. 1. If you were to excise the flashbacks from the movie, you would barely have any indication that Joe Buck suffered what should have been an incredibly traumatic event. Like, in anything, like mannerisms... anything. The best explanation I could come up with was, he didn't know how to emotionally handle it, and just really, really repressed it, which makes the violence at the end actually make more sense. He would just be kind of not emotionally right inside in terms of violence, but gets by day to day in denial about everything (and not thinking about it). 2. I don't really get why him and Ratzo really bonded over anything other than being in proximity and time passed. And the next big issue is just, the turn of events by getting invited to the party just felt like such a sudden change of fortune, it seemed jarring, and not in the intended way. Though that's less of a fundamental problem I had than the previous two. I enjoyed this movie a fair amount actually. Listening to the episode afterwards though, hearing Ebert emphasize the problems I did have with it, makes me more iffy on saying yes or no if I'd put it on my hypothetical ballot for the list. That said, I liked it better as a movie than probably most things we've seen so far. But not Taxi Driver. Or Apocalypse Now. ETA: On the Overlook feedback, Paul said he didn't know if TCM was too... something (unpolished?) to be on the list. Maybe, compared to what else in on the list, but fwiw it's #183 on the BFI sight & sound critics list (The Shining and Don't Look Now are also somewhere in the 101-200 range. The Exorcist didn't get many mentions in the poll/i.e. low spot on the list).
  3. ol' eddy wrecks

    Horror & The AFI List: Live from the Overlook Film Festival

    I think intent has reasonably strong bearing. Like how "scared" might be limiting, intent to "scare" might also be limiting. Allowing in the disturb, unsettle, (I guess we could also include 'disgust' and 'wince in pain' for body horror - both cerebral and non-cerebral) also gets us closer. But I think there's also some other goals that filmmakers are going for with a lot of horror movies that is in some weird area. Lots of franchise sequels fall into this category. I think it's the blood/kills that makes one wince - which is the reaction I think someone said was in their criteria, is really what those movies are going for. Granted, I take a fairly expanded definition of horror, and also fine saying a film has horror elements. And talking how much of a horror film is it, while still classifying it as a horror film. I think David Lynch gets name-checked a lot on the, "horror elements" in movies that are not necessarily horror movies. I think a more interesting one to consider was Silence of the Lambs. I think the scenes where Clarisse goes down to talk to Lector, when examined would qualify as a horror movie. After a bit though, you get the sense she's playing with psychological fire which is a type of danger, she is not in physical danger from Lector, which is probably why it's difficult to cleanly define it as a horror film. And the physical danger, from Buffalo Bill, is undermined since Lector seems like the more supernatural presence. Making the craziness of his basement less horrifying. This might be apocraphyl, but I recall reading Tobe Hooper thought The Texas Chainsaw Massacre was hilarious and didn't get why people were so terrified by it - and I think that was why he did what he could to make TCM 2 so over the top, it would be more clearly ridiculous. I don't know if he thought that way about all of TCM or just the end or what, because the first couple of kills in that movie were disturbing to me in a way that I didn't really see in other slashers that would follow in the 80s.
  4. ol' eddy wrecks

    Horror & The AFI List: Live from the Overlook Film Festival

    Probably because most people, at least the ones at a horror convention, aren't really scared by the movies as adults and watching most horror movies as an adult, it doesn't feel like what they're actually going for is actually to scare you. Movies like Jaws, Psycho, and Blair Witch might have succeeded the most in causing fear in adults, in the sense they made some feel anxiety or vulnerable when doing every day things they always took for granted. Then there's the whole horror-comedy issue. Though, if we don't go with the whole categorical schema thing we do with everything, then I'd probably go with, "anything that would have scared me when I was 6, or as an adult disturbed, unnerved, or unsettled me." But I'm sure that's incomplete as well. How would psychological horror fit into this? i.e. the horror of losing one's mind? I know usually these either spill over into physical violence (Repulsion, The Driller Killer) or manifest the psychological uncertainty as a physical manifestation (Bug, Take Shelter, Repulsion). ETA: Trying to define horror movies in the abstract might be futile, but maybe taking more edge cases and debating those. Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer came up during the Silence of the Lambs discussion. I consider that a horror film. Running against your presented definition above, I'm not sure how much of a threat the main characters are under (except to each other) since they are the threat.
  5. ol' eddy wrecks

    Halfway There Special

    The two mash-ups that came to mind that no one said: 1. Martin Sheen's Willard from Apocalypse Now being the captain of the spaceship in 2001. What type of room the Monoliths might make for him would be interesting. 2. Hal piloting the ship in A Night at the Opera... which I guess would just be a more chaotic version of Wall-E. If we're taking this as a time to post our lists again, I might do three lists: The ranked list of the movies we've seen. An AFI ballot of the movies so far (ie, what movies I'd include on my ballot, unranked. top five movies, unranked, for tiebreaker purposes). And a BFI-like ballot (top 10 movies, unranked), while restricted to American movies, don't have to be what's been on the show.
  6. ol' eddy wrecks

    Vertigo

    I was answering the unasked question about Nashville, which I realize now, contextually, was not clear. It was intended as a joke. I watched Vertigo a number of times growing up on whatever size CRT I had. It was probably on cable (which meant there were also commercial breaks - though probably nothing was edited out, as would happen to more contemporary films - just cataloging yet other differences that come up in watching movies). I revisited it again for the first time in decades probably a few years ago on that afore-mentioned 65", and one of the things that stood out was the lusciousness - or at least boldness - of the Ernine's scenes, and also that the color of the faces were not overly pink as I would remember some older movies tended to be on those TVs growing up (which, as an adult, I associate with color settings on TVs being poorly configured - which is yet another possible difference/flaw in viewing). Rewatching it again this weekend*, I feel like my biggest gap between me and why I'm guessing a lot of critics love it, might be I just don't seem to get on the same wavelength with the movie on the obsession. At least not on a personal level - I think that's what critics are responding to. And I don't know why, because I feel like obsession is an emotional state I easily connect to in movies. But I don't really feel it strongly while watching Rear Window, either. Maybe it's Jimmy Stewart being obsessed I don't connect to? IDK. I have a few more thoughts, but it's late here. *: This time I found myself also really focusing on the rich browns, which is not a color you often think of being rich, but for example the wood in the structure in the scene linked to by Dan. ETA: morning after thought - imagine Vertigo's second half without the twist let alone the reveal, but everything playing out almost the same way (the main difference just being Jimmy Stewart having paranoid accusations over a necklace that looks somewhat the same, but isn't). That's a really dark movie. So I do wonder if the crime aspect is getting in the way of me enjoying it more. Though, that remake would leave the first half of the movie a little more confusing in terms of coherency.
  7. ol' eddy wrecks

    Vertigo

    Yes, but maybe only once. About 25 years ago. On VHS. On my 12" CRT in college. I'm sure something was lost. I liked it, but compared to other movies I saw that way and still loved - but would later see on a larger screen, something was lost on that small screen (either theater or even compared to my 65" tv now).
  8. ol' eddy wrecks

    Vertigo

    In terms of mood over plot, I'd also second WKW coming to mind. Maybe partially affected by knowing a co-worker is coincidentally also just started exploring some of his films recently. Fallen Angels is his most overtly stylistic, In the Mood for Love his most poignant (that has aged for me better than his others). (ETA: if you're going for something more sublime, since you said Kubrick, you might want to check out Tarkovsky if you haven't. My preferences are for Stalker over Solarys, and one of those are probably where you should start). As for the Vertigo remake Amy mentioned, I remember brought it up in the Indiana Jones thread due to its fan-made remake. Anyhow, I'll warn people, Guy Maddin is a very... um, stylized director. Primarily using my old-fashioned stuff. E.g. he does silent films. He does silent films with voice-over. I really enjoy his stuff, but I know it's not going to be for everyone here. I think The Saddest Music in the World is his most accessible. Maybe Brand Upon the Brain?
  9. ol' eddy wrecks

    Vertigo

    I think it was more - I didn't connect to this movie the first time I saw it, but since everyone says it's good, I'll give it multiple viewings, and try to appreciate what it is other people are seeing in it. Which I don't think is inherently an insult. It's a rumination on acclaim and how it affects how we interact with movies that I've posted on these forums myself. And I think in relation to talking about Vertigo in a previous thread, as well. I've still yet to find my connection to Vertigo that's clarifies to me at least why so many other people love it. But because it's the very top of the critics Sight & Sound poll, I want to give it at least a couple more tries (and I'm not talking about even loving it myself, I just want more of an emotional sense of, "yeah," I can see why people love this movie). Note - I still haven't rewatched yet for this episode. Hoping to squeeze it into Memorial Day weekend stuff.
  10. ol' eddy wrecks

    To Kill A Mockingbird

    Side note of some small things to point out: In the podcast, I think they refer to Cunningham as "someone who doesn't like to be thanked." Just to clarify, he doesn't like to be thanked because he's poor and is paying off a debt to Atticus that he doesn't have the money for (so he has to pay in goods he's growing). And being thanked for that payment effectively reminds him of this fact. Lots of the movie is about Scout being given social hints about how it hurts the pride of poor people and to be considerate of them (they point this out in the podcast better with the syrup scene). Another observation - Atticus struggling to shoot the gun with his glasses on. Seemed like a clear metaphor about how Atticus doesn't want to engage in violence, he wants to stick to the rational, but in the end, to take care of the rabid dog, he ultimately has to remove his glasses in order to kill it. The dog, I'll just assume is a metaphor for what happens with Ewell.
  11. ol' eddy wrecks

    To Kill A Mockingbird

    And when we see Ewell shadowed in darkness, clawing at their car, we learn the real horror movie isn't the scary monster trapped in the neighbors basement but the Native American genocide. I mean, the racism lying beneath the small southern town's picture of hospitality. (/was also going to work in a Blue Velvet reference there). Though, and I'd have to revisit the episode, when Paul said arthouse film, I think the referenced Italian neo-realism, which isn't a flashy style (more subject matter and keeping things no-frills. The commonly cited practice of using non-professional actors). But this was too polished as a drama to be that either, I feel. And neo-realism films are mostly focused on the challenges and situations of the common citizenry of post-war Italy (or a specific demographic for neo-realist styled films - e.g. African American population in Killer of Sheep). And while there was the issue of poverty. But subject matter-wise, it was a historical depiction of 30 years prior, and it was more of a coming of age of three children, realizing the underlying rot of her town. Anyhow, while watching it crossed my mind to check when other movies came out around this time that might have been tackling various, vaguely similar themes or images. Just to get a sense of what was swirling around at the time. To Kill a Mockingbird (book) 1960 To Kill a Mockingbird (movie) 1962 The Bicycle Thieves 1948 The 400 Blows 1959 Twelve Angry Men 1957 Shadows 1959 (Own this, but I still need to watch this one) Spartacus 1960 (I was wondering if either stand up scene might have influenced the other) In the Heat of the Night 1967 Killer of Sheep 1978 (I thought was an earlier film) Then just googling to see what else was going on cinema-wise about racism Black Girl - 1966 (haven't seen this one) West Side Story 1961 A Raisin in the Sun - 1961 Guess Who's Coming to Dinner - 1967 Imitation of Life - 1959 (hadn't heard of this one. I've only seen Kazan's two big movies) I'm not sure what to take away from this, but it's there. I guess I'm getting a bit of a mental block trying to think of another movie from the era exploring racism through the eyes of children in the south. I guess we could go back much further to Mark Twain. I guess I'm just trying to get a sense of was this really that groundbreaking or not. Oh well, to me it still feels like a polished drama, with an interesting credit sequence. It's kind of in the same situation as Silence of the Lambs, where I could see myself including this somewhere on a list of a 100 movies (especially when picking from 400 movies), but can easily imagine that I'd also come up with 100 movies that wouldn't include it (especially when not picking from a curated list of 400 movies). Just wondering, how do you feel about Twelve Angry Men?
  12. ol' eddy wrecks

    To Kill A Mockingbird

    I'm only 1/2 hour into this revisit (last time was probably 10th grade, so 25 years). In terms of camera work, I remembered the opening credits were supposed to be interesting (at least to high school students) - and that actually held up. That was interesting (visually). If Paul had no expectations going in, maybe that really stuck in his mind. I'm at the night time visit to the Radley place; the camera work has appropriately shifted to feel a bit like a horror movie - and the shadow of Radley on the wall seems like a direct allusion to Murnau's Nosferatu - which seems appropriate. I don't think that's that avante garde (if the rest of the film felt like the opening credits - which it doesn't so far, and in my memory, it doesn't - I could see that label a bit more). I'll post anything else that sticks out to me, but I don't think there's much.
  13. ol' eddy wrecks

    The Silence of the Lambs

    Aside comment - the podcast mentioned how this was the rare (only?) Oscar BP that was released in February. My recollection is, it came out in February, but then was re-released close to the end of the year when they felt they had a shot at the Oscars (admittedly a memory from when I was a teenager, and as I write it, it feels weird that that is something I think I remember). One of the more overt Oscar campaigning practices.
  14. ol' eddy wrecks

    The Silence of the Lambs

    In thinking of horror/thriller movies (well, horror) that I'd probably prefer to be on the list, Night of the Living Dead came to mind. If you're going for influence (e.g. true-crime craze), I would think NotLD would have to go on there, for (as far as everything I've heard, and have not see a counter-example) it invented what we think of as the zombie (apocalypse) genre. Of the movies that I do not necessarily want on the list, but also influential, Halloween is credited for starting the slasher craze we associate with the 80s (even though Black Christmas by all accounts was getting to it first, and I don't know how The Texas Chainsaw Massacre doesn't seem to get credit for that, despite being iconic and coming out in '73 - which is also a movie with the killer influenced by Ed Gein). But what came to mind: Night of the Living Dead, The Exorcist, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre; since the AFI is fine appropriating British films, I'd assume Canadian ones are also up for grabs, so something like Videodrome or The Fly (I'd already want enough Kubrick films, I wouldn't argue for The Shining). Psycho is already on the list. I did really enjoy Silence of the Lambs in this revisit, and it's well made, I just end up going through all these other films I'd prefer, I'd suspect I'd run out of space fast, so I guess, I'd be a "no," but at the same time, I'd say, compared to other films on the list, it doesn't make me scratch my head (after this revisit) as some other movies do. But then again, looking through the 400 films in the 2007 AFI ballot, maybe I'd have a really hard time coming up with 100 films from their curation.
  15. ol' eddy wrecks

    Tootsie

    He's chasing after a number of women at his birthday party (the point of the film, somewhat aggressively). I think the journey isn't supposed to be love, but rather the ability to empathize from her perspective and not just an object of desire or an abstract notion of love without a real concept of what's inside.
  16. ol' eddy wrecks

    Tootsie

    As a movie, my thoughts were, "it was alright, I guess. Some funny lines here and there. It felt like it was setting up some topic to be re-examined later (namely Sandy), which, well, it didn't." Which doesn't really stick out in my mind as great. This was a movie that I think I was only vaguely aware of its existence (didn't even know the basic premise) prior to the Criterion release. And when it did, I was like, "huh. I didn't realize/think there was anything that really set this 80's comedy apart any other movie of that era. It doesn't feel like I hear it get referenced that much." After watching it, I'm still feeling the same way. Not entirely sure what put it on Criterion's radar. Maybe Sydney Pollack being the director? I guess I'm just not getting the strong appeal of this one. Just checked, weirdly, Kenneth Brannaugh really likes it. https://www.bfi.org.uk/films-tv-people/sightandsoundpoll2012/voter/1020
  17. ol' eddy wrecks

    Tootsie

    I haven't listened to the episode yet, but all I could think of was in the All the President's Men and the part about the director complaining about Hoffman over-acting. As Michael, Hoffman is fine, but as Dorothy, all I could think was he's going full-on Chickenlady with his mannerisms and tics.
  18. ol' eddy wrecks

    Upcoming Episodes

    To mimic rolling a 50 sided die, they could also just divide the d100 roll by 2. Though the proper algorithm* for generating a random permutation requires decreasing n by 1 (of the, pick a random integer up to n) for each pick they make, so eh. *: So you didn't not have to worry a out re-rolling, and keeping the probability uniform for every possible pick (going to the nearest unpicked one increases the odds of selecting ones next to previously picked one, eventually resulting in clusters of numbers that are likely to be picked**). **: Back of napkin math reasoning, that has the possibility of being flawed.
  19. I was a little surprised they were doing this movie because it is by no accounts, a bad movie. Maybe it's just the reputation of sequels-in-name-only films, but I feel Prom Night 2 >>> Prom Night. (Admittedly, my memory is a little shaky here, I haven't watched either in about 6 months). When Paul said he liked how they mixed the 1950's and 1980's era stuff, my mind went to, "he should watch Night of the Creeps," and I was hoping someone was going to introduce themselves as "Tom Atkins' Mustache," but that probably would have been too oblique (and the 80s part anyways). On the portal shredding trope, as I was channel surfing, Demons 2 came one, and it also had a scene like that. And I was thinking, "man, they also did this in Demons." And then I come on here, read this, and think, "man, they were doing this a lot back then." For some weird reason, I kept thinking this was all somehow Alien chest-bursting influenced. But I don't know why. Especially breaking it down, I think there was a scene in The Stuff that also had a similar effect and was probably more akin (with the lack of blood). Man, it's been forever (decades) since I've seen The Stuff. I guess we should point out coming out of the tv, I mean the trunk, covered in liquid is probably copying the firm rules of interdimensional spirits established in Poltergeist. Another movie with a woman walking around for an extremely extended period of time without any clothes. I'm starting to think this movie just has every movie.
  20. ol' eddy wrecks

    All the President’s Men

    Well, it affects how I feel about the quality of a film overall, and how I feel about its various strengths or weaknesses. A lot of movies are concerned about depicting human beings in a way that seem human like (maybe not Tommy Wiseau movies, but most movies). Movies based on real events are also at least somewhat concerned about depicting those events accurately. In theory. In practice, I find that they usually don't. I think a line from the movie feels apt: Which, since I haven't read All the President's Men or know the details, I can't say the movie fails one of the very lines it gives. I find myself coming out of movies based on real events suspecting that they usually do. Especially as they start to resemble what resemble fictional films. This is actually my first time watching it, and with my usual reservations about the true-events based movies, I'm overall positive on this one. It probably helps that I do like the cinema verite style used in some of the 70s films. Some criticisms though: I was concerned about how much it flirted with being a political thriller (as it progressed it made sense, but the all-encompassing conspiratorial nature of it, thinking of the early librarian phone call, seemed a little dubious in how it was portrayed). Though, this weirdly does add another texture to my memory of The Conversation. Just the phrase, 70's paranoia. I think this is influenced by a growing sense of, "man, a lot of today's crooks just seem too... dumb. Just too dumb to pull of a conspiracy." I also wonder if we could have gotten some more background texture beyond news events for conveying the sense of the passage of time (unless I missed something throughout the film). e.g. changing of seasons. They were on this story for a few years. Watergate was probably too sprawling of a thing to do everything, but I believe there were more breaks in the story than just what Woodward and Bernstein covered (though, as the line goes, "Watergate wasn't an issue, until it was." I know we got the NY Times story on the banks, but I think long term, having slightly more of those in the movie probably would have given a better texture to it all. Though, maybe that would have gotten us back into sprawling territory that wouldn't have feasibly fit in a 3 hour movie or would have been too unfocused. Watching this has got me wanting to go back and re-listen to the Slow Burn, season 1, podcast, which I did listen to the first episode again.
  21. ol' eddy wrecks

    All the President’s Men

    I expect to see you back when they get to the Godfather movies.
  22. ol' eddy wrecks

    Snow White and The Seven Dwarfs

    I know this won't change any minds, but it's pronounced, bio-pic. It's a misle word. It's one I used to mispronounce. I kind of like the sound of the mispronunciation more, but it is a mispronunciation. I also used to use "nonplussed" incorrectly for years. Just mentioning that, because they use it incorrectly a lot on HDTGM.
  23. ol' eddy wrecks

    Snow White and The Seven Dwarfs

    I feel like one could also breakdown what they mean by most influential. I feel like there's a lot of, "most well known," or "referenced (in the Simpsons)" or is meme-able statements when that's being said. And people are free to care about what type of influence they care about, but I find for answering, "is this a good/great movie," I don't know how much currency that type of influence has with me. I don't want to say it has none, but I don't find myself consciously wanting to use it as an argument. Then there's actually altering how film goes about conveying its narrative or story. This can be such things as editing techniques that convey a certain mood (which I could say is subtle, but Breathless was not subtle in its editing - and also had a lot of shallow mimicry in its time). There's also a question of how incremental it was, was it going to happen with or without the film. I mean, I ultimately decided to vote "no" now as well, but even the latter version of "most influential," Snow White does pretty well.
  24. ol' eddy wrecks

    Snow White and The Seven Dwarfs

    I think this came up the last time we discussed animated films on the list, but I'm not really a Disney person. Though, the one early-ish Disney film (I'd be down for watching The Black Cauldron again, though, it doesn't come to mind as a top 100 film) is Alice in Wonderland. Fwiw, or context or perspective, I prefer Totoro to Spirited Away. The latter had higher production values, and that first night as dusk sets is truly amazing, but the actual character progression of the child protagonist in Totoro is more complicated and seems more interesting to me than character development through questing - which I guess contradicts picking Alice in Wonderland above, but honestly, I have a hard time thinking of major American animated films that go that route. AiW just has a kooky, fantastical world that I just enjoy.
  25. ol' eddy wrecks

    City Lights

    I'm holding off on watching this until the criterion channel launches next week because it's probably going to be on there (and doesn't make much sense for me to rent it in that time). It looks like I last saw this five years ago, so my memory is spotty, but I seem to remember thinking her response was more of an, "ooohhhh..." which was a likely precursor to rejection. But that's a vague memory to a movie that didn't really leave much of an impression on me. (If I were to vote for this movie, it'd be like The Searchers, mostly in deference to the critical consensus). I did want to throw out a couple of topics on silent movies though. One reason I've heard cited as to why they didn't want to move away from silent to sound was the international appeal. You can easily translate a silent film internationally without much if any loss of quality by just changing the intertitle cards. I can't help but wonder if some of Chaplin's lasting international popularity was... amplified by his major successes were probably amongst the last major US films that international audiences could easily watch. Just a thought. Based off of my recollection of Chaplin and the majority of this comes from that "recent" rewatch of City Lights, I'm not really that big on Chaplin, but did enjoy Buster Keaton shorts I watched (not so much The General, more-so the The High Sign sticking in my memory - mainly because I enjoyed his deadpan a lot more). Granted, I'm also recalling that some of my favorite silent film experiences were when they were accompanied with live music that was often anachronistic for the film (e.g. the afore-mentioned Buster Keaton shorts were accompanied by people playing blues-grass and I remember seeing a Lon Chaney film where he was a double-thumbed murderer/thief working at a circus where the band played amongst other things, an instrumental rendition of The Pixies' Where is my Mind?). I mention that with regards to how Paul tends to tune out after a bit while watching a silent film. I wonder how much the music choice might be affecting his viewing experience. Though I found Man with a Movie Camera, The Passion of Joan of Arc, and Cabinet of Caligari all really good regardless. Though, those are older silent films. I wonder if Paul likes Mel Brook's Silent Film. More modern silent films that I can think of are mainly Guy Maddin's films (e.g. Cowards Bend the Knee), but that's probably more arthouse than what a lot of people here would like (based on what I've seen people say they hate - Man with a Movie Camera would also probably fall into this category since it was consciously trying to be experimental).
×