Cam Bert

What struck as a bit odd about the ending is that a few scenes earlier Florence gives this speech to Cosme about when she first started seeing St Clair and she hid bad reviews from him. Yet when he does it for her, and let's face it all the signs were there that's what he was doing, she goes and does it anyway. Dramatic licensing I'm sure, but having her talk about it the day before it happens just seemed like an odd choice to me.

In a weird way this movie remind me of song poems. It's kind of the reverse of the movie actually. Basically a company would advertise they are looking for poems to make into songs, and people could write whatever they wanted and submit it with a fee and in return they would receive a record of their poem/song being sung and set to music. This leads to some bizarre songs that people write, but there are collectors that enjoy them in the same way people enjoyed Florence Foster Jenkins. If anybody is curious there is a documentary about them called Off the Charts: The Song-Poem Story that PBS did years ago.

I agree with what has been said about just not caring that much. I think what it came to is I just found so much of the performances to be so hammy. Like the caricature of a hot young New Yorker second wife and almost everything Big Bang Theory was doing had me questioning things. I don't know how much of that is him or the director though. Like he decided to play him very, sorry if this is offensive, fey. I don't know Cosme's sexual orientation but the movie seems to imply and they way he decided to play him just read as a little questionable to me. The main thing it has nothing to do with the story but the performance so broad you can't help but focus on a non-issue. Again he's portraying a real person and maybe that's how he really was but at times I just felt like it was a little too much or a little too broad. I think in the end just the overall broadness of some of the performances prevented me from getting emotionally invested.

I took a film class in university in which the professor loved Kubrik. Like to him Kubrik wasn't a filmmaker but rather the second coming. As a result I think we covered all his films from 2001 to Eyes Wide Shut in class. Naturally we covered A Clockwork Orange and he went into a whole lecture about it and what it means and everything like it. He was also in the dark comedy camp as well. I remember him talking a bit how the message of the film is so obscure that people miss it and it is embraced for the wrong reason, kinda like Taxi Driver or Fight Club. There is a certain type of male that embraces these characters as examples of cool or what they should be while missing the point of the film. Needless to say I liked the movie. After university I watched several Kubrik films several teams again. 2001 and Dr. Strangelove I both really love and watched regularly. I was also one of those people that defends the second half of Full Metal Jacket. However Clockwork Orange never really got a rewatch. I would just regurgitate what my professor told me to people. Then for Unspooled I went back and watched the movie again, and for me it didn't hold up. This whole movie to me came down to a feeling of wanting to have its cake and eat it too. We are going extreme to prove a message or a point so why not push it as far as we can. It is also the like Amy was saying the hold of Alex up on a pedestal. I found him unlikable, as we are suppose to, but I just found him uninteresting as well. There is no real depth to his character. "He's a thug but he loves art and classic music." Great, that's not depth. And again how the whole thing goes out of its way to dehumanize the women they attack and have the victims "ask for it" yet when Alex as the victim is sympathetic. I get that this can be due to the unreliable narrator aspect of it. We just have to accept that this is all his twisty version of events start to finish, but since I don't care about Alex why do I care to hear his fantasy. I kinda want the shoe to drop if that was the case, but that's just me personally. I also don't know if it is also a lot of the ideas I've now seen done in other films that I enjoy more. While not the exact same I think American Psycho is a better example of a dark comedy with an unreliable narrator from an ultraviolent book.

Brett Hull? Really?

Another thing, I grew up around the time this movie takes place and the first dog my parents got after my sister and I were born was a terrier poodle mix named Benji. We put him in a bandanna just like Rocks. He had a few we cycled between but for all 18 years of his life (he was a stronger pupper that one) he wore a bandanna. The strange thing is the dog my parents had before him and the next dog we got and every dog since have not worn anything and we've had no desire to cloth them in any way. Was this just a thing people were doing in the later 80s early 90s with their dogs?

Now I'm kinda glad I killed him off in my fantasy. I remember in Canada, I don't know if this was a rumor or true, homeless could claim more welfare if they had a pet and that is why so many panhandlers had them. This article I think speak more truth.

Look Who's Talking Now I think is much better than Look Who's Talking Too. I think on pretty much level it works better. The conflict is better as is the pacing and use of the VO.

So I watched this film and loved most of it. Like most people here I had issue with the character of Stingo. There was something in my mind that was just telling me that while he may have been friends with Nathan and Sophie the sole reason he befriend them was his attraction to Sophie. That he was sort of waiting for the shoe to drop in which point he'd rush in and save Sophie from Nathan and they'd live happily ever after together. I guess the earlier discussed term of "white knight" does fit what I was thinking of him a bit. I couldn't tell if this stemmed from Peter MacNicole while holding his own just seeming flat compared to the dynamic performances around him or what. The scene that really hit it home to me was at the end when they are running away from Nathan they go to Washingto DC. Fair enough, get out of the city give them some time I thought but when Sophie asks what the next step is Stingo goes off about how they're going to get married and have kids. This is through me for a loop because it kind confirmed these "white knight" like ideas I was having about the guy. I didn't get why he'd just jump to that. Go from not dating to "marry me because I love you and that's what we have to do in the Christian South." It was such a leap in my mind at the time that I started going back and questioning his motivations the entire time. Was he comforting Sophie in that earlier scene because he loved her as a friend or was he going in because he romantically loved her. Did he stand up to Nathan in that scene for Sophie or for himself. So many thoughts like this that I soured on the character. Needless to say this is what I posted on Letterboxd in which Cameron H and tomspanks talked to me about it. I decided that I probably owed this movie and Stingo a second chance. So I rewatched the movie. While I am not fully team Stingo (I get the failed date/sex scene but it can absolutely be cut) I do see now that he is a more complex and needed character than I originally thought. I think it comes down to the fact like most I thought this was some sort of love triangle initially. However, upon rewatching it's not a triangle is just what it is. Stingo wants to be a writer but the only real experience he has in his life is his mother dying. He movies from the South to the big city to get life experience. He could easily be a writer in the South, it worked for others so why not him? No, he is young naive and thirsting for life. So on the first night in the city he meets these two larger than life characters going full chaotic drama immediately that he is sort of caught off guard. He has no idea how to react and respond to all of this. He is over his head. Then on top of that he gets the manic Nathan the next day on their Coney Island voyage and before. He seems these two complex people that have this view and take on life that is beyond him. When he watches them on the whirly thing he thinks that "he longed to escape. to pack his bags and flee but I did not." He was in love with both of them because he wanted to be them. Equally they got things out of their friendship with Stingo as well. So at this point I saw them not as a love triangle but almost a non-sexual polyamorous couple. They feed into each other and were happy being their unnamed thing that they were. Later when we see Nathan's brother reveal the truth to him he never confronts Nathan because now that he knows he feels he understands him better. He can help him. He doesn't want to violate his trust because he does love him. This leads up to the initial scene that vexed me so in Washington. I see now that in Stingo's mind he was merely continuing what he assumed they already had. Not such a leap as before. Like somebody mentioned earlier, he thinks that is what he wants but Sophie knows better.

Full disclosure, I was born and raised in Canada and have lived almost half my life in Japan, so I can only offer my take on this and sure I don't speak for all non-Americans. The issue of patriotism and pro-America/American imagery in film was brought up in this episode. As a non-American I feel that there are definitely good ways and bad ways to handle the whole patriotism and national pride thing. What it mostly comes down to is pride in one own's nation vs "superiority" of one's nation. In a film like this the character of Smith loves America and what it stands for. We see these things that he loves and we are suppose to be moved by them too. Then the scene at the Lincoln monument when he sees the elderly black man and the Jewish immigrant reflects the idea that "America is a great place and have great beliefs." While some of the imagery may be a tab much and boarder on cartoon-ish like the montage of great American sights and that it doesn't offend me just make me roll my eyes a bit. However in this film it is important because we see this and are inspired like Smith or roll our eyes and think "Yes this guy is a total boy ranger rube." But what the film comes down to is a character who loves where he is from and loves the beliefs and ideals that place has. Seeing as those are beliefs and ideals the majority of the world shares is moving and effective. So if a movie wants to tell me America is great because all people sound be equal and people should fight for the rights of their fellow men and women, I can get behind that. On the other hand some filmmakers, you know the ones, love nothing more to show American flags waving and having their country save the day not because it is the right thing to do but rather because they are the only ones that could do it. With giant speeches about the greatness of their nation and the might of their nation. If I saw this in any film, American or otherwise I would find it off putting. It just seems arrogant and sends a negative image of America and its people. Those are the kind of films when this stuff happens I feel eye rolling in disdain. Luckily since the 80s are over we don't see this as much anymore.

Before Mikey discovers the horrible truth about mall Santas two of Kirstie Alley's co-workers are leaving for the day. As they leave she wishes them good bye by saying "Good night Prancer, good night Dancer." Two things, one they are elves not reindeer. Santa has two reindeer named Prancer and Dancer but does he also have two elves that go by the same names as the reindeer? There is no denying that Prancer and Dancer do sound like elf names but when in relation to Christmas the first thing that pops in your mind when you hear those names are the reindeer. It's just confusing. Second, does Kirstie Alley not know her co-workers actual names? True, she hasn't been working there long but do you think people at Disney say "Good Night Mickey" to the kid in the costume as they are leaving for the day? What about the surly Santa? Is going to say "Good Night Santa" to him? Just learn their names.

I can't believe that they overlooked the real victim of this movie and that is the poor homeless busker that Rocks originally befriended. So this poor down on his luck fellow is minding his own business playing his guitar for nickles to busy New Yorkers when all of a sudden this small puppy wanders into his life. Even though homeless and short of money he freely gives up his food to this dog. What a nice guy. Then he gets the dog a neckerchief and raises him for what seems to be awhile. The dog gets bigger and helps this guy get food. They have a good thing going when all of a sudden the dog catcher snaps up Rocks leaving this poor man just sitting there waiting for his dog to come back. Day by day he waits in the same spot with his eyes open looking for his only friend. Soon the last remaining strains of joy and hope and happiness leave his body. He is left an empty husk of a human being. He doesn't even wish to pick up his guitar anymore. He stops eating because Rocks will be hungry when he gets back and needs the food for him. He clothes grow baggier and baggier. Then in the cold harsh winter as Rocks sits comfy and well fed in a heated New York apartment without a single thought of his old master that poor busker closes his eyes for the last time.

Speaking of which, isn't there a new season of MST3K?

I think I said this before, I sadly watch this as part of my yearly Christmas watching. Except with lots of fast forwarding.

I'm not seeing a lot of love for the Star Wars Holiday Special... First appearance of Boba Fett you guys! (I voted for Jingle All the Way)

It's doubly weird because even Terrance Howard at one point admits that Rooster is the next in line to take over. You think the other people would get behind that or think the same.

This movie took me awhile to track down so I'm getting to it late but to me the weirdest thing is the movie loses its sense of humor about halfway through. There are a lot of little throwaway jokes or comedy bits in the first half of the movie and they just slowly start to fade away and let the melodrama come more forward. I would have liked it if that stuff had stayed throughout the film a bit more. Also did Spats have nobody else who worked for him that was willing to stay loyal? Is Terrance Howard's crew Spat's old crew who just shifted loyalty 100% behind him without question?

I wasn't 100% sold on the movie with the first poster but I am 300% sold now!

In another case of this building just having lawsuits waiting to happen can we talk about how weak the windows were? Now the first window The Rock smashes is with the use of a crane. That's a lot of force, so fair enough that it breaks. Yet when we get up to Hong Kong Business Man's penthouse suite the windows are able to be smashed with the pure brute strength of The Rock holding a Chinese wood carving. The penthouse is by the turbines near the top of the building which according to the scale chart in the movie place them somewhere around the 3,000' mark. You think with strong fast moving winds at that height and environmental hazards at that elevation you'd use a much thicker stronger glass. If all it takes is one really hard whack and it completely shatters what's going to stop some idiot from running into them thinking it's funny and falling to their doom? Or worse yet a large flight of birds hitting the window? Cutting corners and installing cheap, thin glass just sounds like a disaster waiting to happen.

Robert Altman - MASH, Nashville Frank Capra - It's a Wonderful Life, Mr Smith Goes to Washington, It Happened One Night Charlie Chaplin - Modern Times, City Lights, The Gold Rush Francis Ford Coppola - The Godfather, The Godfather Part II, Apocalypse Now Michael Curtiz - Casablanca, Yankee Doodle Dandy Victor Flemming - Gone With the Wind, The Wizard of Oz John Ford - The Searchers, The Grapes of Wrath Alfred Hitchcock - Vertigo, Psycho, Rear Window, North by Northwest John Huston - The Maltese Falcon, The African Queen, The Treasure of the Sierra Madre Elia Kazan - On the Waterfront, A Streetcar Named Desire Stanley Kubrick - 2001, A Clockwork Orange, Dr. Strangelove David Lean - Bridge of the River Kwai, Lawrence of Arabia George Lucas - Star Wars, America Graffiti Sidney Lumet - 12 Angry Men, Network Mike Nichols - The Graduate, Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? Alan J. Pakula - Sophie's Choice, All the President's Men Martin Scorsese - Taxi Driver, Goodfellas, Raging Bull Stephen Spielberg - Jaws, E.T., Raiders of the Lost Ark, Schindler's List, Saving Private Ryan George Stevens - Swing Time, Shane Billy Wilder - The Apartment, Some Like It Hot, Double Indemnity, Sunset Boulevard William Wyler - Ben-Hur, The Best Years of Our Lives

I mean the voting rules could be that you are only allow to submit one film per director thus forcing the voter to decided which they such should be on. Then which one got the most votes if that level was enough that film makes the list and the rest of their titles forfeit. So for example if Jaws got 320 votes and ET got 300, both would qualify it for the list but because Jaws was the highest for that filmmaker, it goes on and E.T. and his other films stricken. Again just a silly theory to try to get a wider variety of things on.

The blue hypono beam works on them, and does seemingly change them somewhat. To do that I guess they have to have an understanding of human biology. They've been anally probably one farmer at a time for years, studying our DNA and physiology just to be ready for this full on assault. This does raise the bigger question of what was the aliens goal? Are they trying to destroy us or take over the planet? Is this like The Host and they need our bodies so their race can live?

Are they regular cheerios or honey nut? I heard there are new Maple Cheerios.

So "the Pearl" a.k.a Scaramanga's funhouse, has these giant panels that pop out of the ground. They can be a hall of mirrors or project and image of the outside. Cool. Aren't there like a whole bunch of these screens popping out of the floor? How are the bad guys in the climax not walking into them a lot more? Also when the public goes in when the place opens won't people just be walking into them? I mean if you make the whole pearl look invisible surely somebody will try walking around and walk into one of those things. That's just a liability lawsuit waiting to happen.

Edit: because I misread and thought you said it is the number one. I'll leave my comment as is. I mean people only go to giant buildings to do one thing and that is go to top and look around. But at this point in the movie the residential section, the garden section, and "The Pearl" aren't even open yet. So people are just able to go to the mall section which is what the first twenty floors it said? Are they that excited just to see the building and shop in it?Nobody wants to go to the world's tallest building and just go to the fifth floor. That's crazy.