General Movie Thread

[Martin]

As long as you mention what actress (or actor, don't judge) the director wants to fuck, obviously.

[Wes]

Get Larry in on this and I think Depravity's Rainbow could have itself a movie review segment.

Possibly called Siskel & Prevert.

[Martin]

Change Siskel into "Sick" something and you got a show.

[Sarah]

I'm not too fond of Hitchcock.  But I'm pretty sure I remember enjoying Rear Window more than many (hated Vertigo, for example).

[dave from knoxville]

Doesn't it have to do with perspective? And the fact that all the breakthrough stuff that Hitchcock did has been covered and re-covered by so many lesser directors over the years that you have been acclimated to his "tricks" that were original when he did them? Jesus, Andy, you sound like a damn Tea Partier.

On reflection, this doesn't come across as funny as I meant it. Or even funny at all. Andy, you have no reason to, but will you forgive me?

I stand by the 1st 2 sentences though.

[SJK]

Doesn't it have to do with perspective? And the fact that all the breakthrough stuff that Hitchcock did has been covered and re-covered by so many lesser directors over the years that you have been acclimated to his "tricks" that were original when he did them? Jesus, Andy, you sound like a damn Tea Partier.

I stand by the 1st 2 sentences though.

The first two sentences are very accurate, I agree completely.

[Andy]

I feel vindicated by the fact that no one has said "this is why I liked it" or "this is why it's good"

[Sarah]

I started watching Hitchcock movies over forty years ago, Dave, well before his tricks had become hackneyed.  And I've never loved him. 

Andy, I watched Rear Window around thirty years ago (at the Brattle Theatre in Cambridge, I think).  Damned if I can remember why I disliked it less than others.  Except for the fact that Grace Kelly is very pretty, of course.

[crumbum]

Is it just me or did The Social Network kind of stink? On the one hand I can appreciate David Fincher's ability to give just about any subject enough style and sheen to make it lots of fun to watch, and the acting was very good across the board. But I thought the script was hamfisted, with Zuckerberg in particular turned into a cipher and a monster, some kind of straw man stand in for everything Sorkin apparently loathes and doesn't understand about the internet.

Also, having seen very little of his TV work I can only conclude his reputation as a great writer of dialogue is overstated. His main trick -- having characters suddenly switch back and forth between topics mid-conversation, confusing each other and the audience -- got old fast for me. That opening scene patter was truly painful.

Maybe I'm just overreacting to all the hype. I did enjoy most of the film in the moment.

[SJK]

I feel vindicated by the fact that no one has said "this is why I liked it" or "this is why it's good"

So, below are a few words I had posted ages ago on this topic...I have to comment, my two cents.

Are there any The Birds fans up for defending it? It's been a long time since I've seen it, but I remember it not being one of my favorites. I want to know where you guys are coming from.

I haven't seen enough of his filmography to list definitive favorites, but I do love North by Northwest.

I saw Rear Window at an impressionable age(I was 12-13? in the mid 1980s) that made me think about what elements make a good movie other then car chase scenes, imperial storm troopers or massive explosions. I was young and my exposure to films was limited to family friendly blockbusters. Watching Rear Window, I could feel my brain expand. The whole story takes place in some guys apartment?! No special effects, straight story. I was amazed that I could be captivated by a film in such a deceptively plain setting. The next Hitchcock film I saw not too long after, The Birds. Again, it is the story keeping me glued to my seat. Tippi Hendren is a bit much to take in some scenes. The story upstages everyone which allows me to forgive the imperfections of the film. Hitchcock confines your understanding of why the birds are attacking, limits the information from outside the small town to almost nothing. He uses fear of the unknown adding panic and terror...mix with water=a fun film to watch. The ending leaves everything open. No neatly wrapped up conclusion, all the loose ends left to the imagination. Twenty+ years later I can see it is not his strongest film, I still love watching it.

I could add more about the atmosphere and style of Rear Window, the art direction and color grading are very good, the lighting is very ok for the time is was made. Technicolor! The restoration alone was quite an achievement considering the original negative(s) were in rough shape. If restoration had been left any longer, it might have not been possible to have such a good looking version available.  I like watching Jimmy Stewart become obsessed with his neighbors and how he changes almost everyone's orbit around him regarding his obsession. The ethical choices being made by Stewart, sticking his nose in other peoples private lives. A slow burn that builds to a lame attempt at self defense, light bulbs as you pointed out. Grace Kelly, stunning creature..that close up of her is one of my favorite shots in movie making history. I have to admit to some level of nostalgia, more then I would like to. I love the look and feel of the film, the time it was shot informs most of that.It is a slow film, best viewed on the big screen. Is it the best film ever made? No. It entertains me, I can't ask for more. 

[fonpr]

[

I could add more about the atmosphere and style of Rear Window, the art direction and color grading are very good, the lighting is very ok for the time is was made. Technicolor! The restoration alone was quite an achievement considering the original negative(s) were in rough shape. If restoration had been left any longer, it might have not been possible to have such a good looking version available.  I like watching Jimmy Stewart become obsessed with his neighbors and how he changes almost everyone's orbit around him regarding his obsession. The ethical choices being made by Stewart, sticking his nose in other peoples private lives. A slow burn that builds to a lame attempt at self defense, light bulbs as you pointed out. Grace Kelly, stunning creature..that close up of her is one of my favorite shots in movie making history. I have to admit to some level of nostalgia, more then I would like to. I love the look and feel of the film, the time it was shot informs most of that.It is a slow film, best viewed on the big screen. Is it the best film ever made? No. It entertains me, I can't ask for more.

YEP!

[Chris L]

As long as you mention what actress (or actor, don't judge) the director wants to fuck, obviously.

The whole point of DISTURBIA is that DJ Caruso wants to fuck Sleepy LaBeef!

[fonpr]

As long as you mention what actress (or actor, don't judge) the director wants to fuck, obviously.

The whole point of DISTURBIA is that DJ Caruso wants to fuck Sleepy LaBeef!

That is disturbing.

[cavorting with nudists]

That Hitchcock wanted to fuck Grace Kelly is demonstrable fact, but I don't agree that it's the whole point of Rear Window.

As for what you missed, Andy, I might mention off the top of my head: themes of impotence, sadism, masochism, the male gaze.  One of the greatest pieces of set design of the studio era. Hitchcock's agonizing awareness not only of his desire to fuck Grace Kelly but of his Catholic guilt over it.  Grace Kelly's wardrobe.  Hitchcock's canny implication of the audience in the thrill of cinematic voyeurism.  And the fact that despite his reputation as the Master of Suspense, Hitchcock's films are almost never mere thrill machines, but stories about conflicted sexual relationships, this case being (along with Vertigo, Psycho, and Notorious) among the most twisted.  Consider how Stewart's character fastens on the possible murder across his courtyard as a rationale for his fear of committing to a relationship with Kelly's.  And how he finally gets turned on by her only when she's in  mortal danger. Start there. If considerations like this really don't move you at all, I'll stand by my initial impression that it's responses like yours that typify the doom of cinema.

[Andy]

Nice regurgitation.