jmhimara

I enjoyed this episode, and while I love this movie, I agree with many of its criticism. For me this will always be a movie that had the potential for perfection but never quite reached it, no matter how many cuts of it they release. However, there's one thing that Amy and Paul neglected to mention in regards to this movie: Blade Runner was an essential work of art (in any format) that helped create the genre of Cyberpunk. Nothing quite like it existed before in the field of Science Fiction. Sure, there may be other works published before that could arguably fit into the Cyberpunk genre (a short story by William Gibson comes to mind), but Blade Runner has become the de-facto representative that defined the genre (again, not just in film, but in any art form). So, while I admit the film has flaws, I think it belongs on the links just because of its contribution to the field of science fiction. After all, how many films are there in the AFI top 100 list that define an entire genre.

I vote yes on this one, even though I rarely care for musicals, be it in film or in theater. Speaking purely on style, I think Cherbourg succeeds where a lot of other 'good' musicals fail to be good films. In many musicals the signing and dancing overshadows all the other aspects of a film, leaving them neglected (perhaps by the very nature of song and dance - they demand our attention). Cherbourg has no large and flashy choreography. The singing is subdued and resembles more a recitation rather than signing. This, accompanied by a bright, colorful visual style of the film brings a delightful and refreshing balances to the whole thing.

Speaking of accents and dialects of foreign languages, I think sometimes we (English speakers) have an advantage, and we can appreciate the movie without being tainted by an actor's faulty accent. According to my Chinese roommate, the effect is intensified for Chinese speakers, and it's much worse than the English equivalent. I was showing my roommate the last couple of movies of Stephen Chow that he did in Mandarin, which despite their flaws I find incredibly funny and entertaining. While I was laughing my ass off, my roommate was not enjoying them at all. He kept making comments along the lines of: "That's a northern actor trying to speak with a southern accent, and it ruins the whole thing" etc. Ultimately I'm happy that I can enjoy a movie like CTHD, or Journey to the West without having to worry about the actor's accents, but on the other I'm not sure if a fact like that must enter into my objective assessment of the film.

While I do enjoy this movie, and while I voted yes (because who knows when a Bong Joon-ho film will be next), it is my second least favorite of the director, with Okja having the honor of being my absolute least favorite (why people like Okja is totally beyond me). But speaking of The Host, I agree with many of the things Amy said. The tone is off, the music is out of place, and the special effects don't really hold up. Luckily, the monster doesn't appear that often in the movie (something that I noticed on my last watch) and therefore the bad cgi is tolerable. Despite it's shortcomings, however, the movie is never boring, and the acting in it is superb (Song Kang-ho is the lead, so no surprise there). I really hope the canon considers "Memories of Murder" at some point, Bong Joon-ho's previous movie, as I do think it's one of the best crime thriller ever made.

And I don't know how to delete a post.

Sadly this film is hardly shown in Greece anymore, even though its message is more relevant then ever (with the rise of the extreme right in the parliament). Definitely a yes. That was a really stupid argument. Of course you're not including everything in The Canon. You don't need leave out EVERY political thriller that has been made to achieve that. For every "Z" or "Three days of the condor" there's hundreds of just terrible movies that won't make it. You don't need to have just one movie of every genre.

I love both films and I'm glad we finally got a good Canon episode( although I still wish the episodes weren't recorded 4-5 weeks in advance, it sort of makes the forum discussions pointless). It's hard for me to vote against either film since I love them both, and also it is an odd versus since they've got nearly nothing in common. Both movies merit their own individual episodes. If I had to make a choice though, it would be City of God.

Also what was up with this week's guest? She really sounded high - or does she normally talk like that ?

I love the show but this was a really dumb episode. I really couldn't make it past the 30 minute mark.

Honestly, the trilogy was written as one novel, and shot as one film (even if PJ came back to fill in bits and pieces). And I think even the editing of each individual part was done with that in mind - it's one movie. I hate how they don't mention that in the podcast. Also, "Run Shadowfax, show us the meaning of haste," is probably the best quote of the entire franchise and it's on the third movie.

I think this makes a lot more sense if considered as a trilogy rather individual submissions. It's really one insanely long film (a good one at that). Peter Jackson filmed it as one and even Tolkien wrote it as one novel. It was the publishers that made him split it into three volumes.

Anyone else disappointed with the show's choice of films since the comeback ?