criterionforum.org

thirtyframesasecond wrote:Letter from an unknown woman is almost certainly going to be in my top ten or thereabouts. It's an astonishing film. Domino mentioned Rebecca as Joan Fontaine's signature performance but I always consider it to be Lise in this. It's incredibly moving.

It's a great film and likely the only Ophuls from the decade to make my list-- unless the Exile is really something, that is

I just watched The Big Steal, and I agree with Domino that it's fun and well made piece of fluff- it's interesting, as it feels far more like an action movie than anything else I've seen under the noir banner, and it's also something of a vacation movie along the lines of To Catch a Thief. It seems to exist mostly as an excuse for banter, jokes about boorish American tourists, and fistfights.

I can't see myself voting for it, but I'm certainly glad to have watched it.

I've got a few lists in already, so I suppose it's time to start teasing. Though this will of course bear little resemblance to how the final list looks, the current top 10 doesn't have too many surprises...other than including two shorts, one of them only a point behind 1st place!

Just a reminder (and friendly warning): I'm making certain to watch at least one of everyone's Spotlight (I already have a few viewed and awaiting write-ups) before my final list... so if you're planning on paying it forward, now's the time to get to my two (And if you can only watch one, I recommend the Cavalcanti).

Planing on watching the Tourneur tonight actually. 19 000 to go.

I'll second the rec for Cold Bishop's spotlight They Made Me a Fugitive. It's definitely making my list. Try to pick up the R2 release if you can--the Kino leaves a lot to be desired.

And yes, proper list project etiquette is to watch as many of the spotlight titles as you can, especially if you suggested some yourself.

Does anyone know if the R2 The Boy with the Green Hair is any good. I figure I can maybe get the Cavalcanti if I go super cheap.

It's a rather mediocre transfer (of a rather mediocre - but certainly odd! - film), as I recall. But I got it dirt cheap from amazon.

If you're looking for super cheap cart fillers on Amazon UK, there's always my horror spotlight Katalin Varga, only £4.49!

I'd doubt it'd be better than the Warner Archives transfer (if not the same), it being a Technicolor film whose negative seems to be in bad shape.

As long as it were the same I'd be comfortable. With the questions though I guess I'll finally bite on Sammy Going South. Thanks for the pointer Swo.

I've only got the Kino of Fugitive, but I'll bump it and Went the Day Well? up to the top of my to-watch list. I'm a little annoyed, I picked up the Shimizu Eclipse set without noticing that the relevant spotlight titles aren't actually in there- I guess I'll have to go backchannels for those guys.

You won't regret the Shimizu purchase, 40s list or no 40s list.

Double what Zedz said. Mr. Thank You is one of the best films I've ever seen period and is worth MSRP alone. That's not even going into how great the others are (though for the reasons of this list I'd say it's one '40s film is it's weakest though that's like saying it's the worst tasting cheeto).

The spotlight reminder got me to go back for a few I'd missed earlier. I'll watch Juke Girl, Murderers Are Among Us, and I don't remember The Strange Woman very well so I'll give that one another spin.

Just finished La main du diable and while for the most part I have nothing special to say I was wondering if anyone else noticed a similarity between the man in black here and in Lost Highway amongst a few other odd similarities?

Tommaso wrote:Der verzauberte Tag (Peter Pewas, 1943). No one has ever heard about this director, right? That also included me before the German label absolut medien released a 2-disc-set of most of his works last year, a set which has provoked enthusiastic reactions by many people who have seen it and who didn't need subs (which the set unfortunately does not provide). Here is a master film director that was easily the equal of the best of his peers at the time, but who was totally neglected due to the man's uncompromising nature in an environment not exactly friendly to artistic films.

I watched this earlier and it definitely leaves up to the hype you and lubitsch gave it. Absolutely fanastic. Beautiful in-camera visuals, a touching realism combined with a melodrama that never feels overplayed. I'd love to really write more but I'd rather watch it again first. Brilliant, brilliant film. The Pewas set would have been worth it for that alone, so I'm really looking forward to the second disc!

Good to hear that, and well, I'd love to hear what you think of Straßenbekanntschaft, the main feature on the second disc. It's equally sensitive in its portrayal of women in immediate post-war Germany, has perhaps even more lyrical light-and-shade photography, and as a film about the life in a country in ruins (both physically and, more importantly, 'spiritually') it outdoes practically everything else I've seen on the topic made before Fassbinder's "Maria Braun" (all right, perhaps not exactly an ideal comparison...) by its capacity for simple observation without any moralising. In any case, please everyone forget Germania anno zero, it almost feels ridiculous in comparison.

Saw both versions from this decade of The Postman Always Rings Twice (what does that even mean in the context of this story) rather by accident and I have to admit I found the Hollywood version significantly better than Visconti's. Neither will make my list, but the difference I feel will at least provide some good conversation. Ossessione was pretty good (and very ambitious) for a first time with a camera director (I believe he was already seasoned on the stage by this point), but that really pales compared to the leaner, more concise, and more visually compelling Garnett version. It's also really well acted with Turner giving maybe her best performance and Garfield possibly doing the same.

knives wrote:Saw both versions from this decade of The Postman Always Rings Twice (what does that even mean in the context of this story?)...

A Rosenbaum (not him) has a go at explaining.

Roger Ebert just recently added Ivan the Terrible to his Great Movies list, though he sort of seems to hate it.

I'm baffled that he lists Nevsky as an unambiguously 'great' movie while shitting on this one as being empty pomp and visual grandeur- I'd definitely say it's the other way round.

swo17 wrote:Roger Ebert just recently added Ivan the Terrible to his Great Movies list, though he sort of seems to hate it.

That review is as equivocal as his review of Birth of a Nation (maybe more so, as he at least offers Birth of a Nation real praise). I think the penultimate paragraph reveals why he wrote it, or rather felt he had to write it, and you can tell from his tone that he somewhat begrudges the movie for not quite failing its reputation.

Perhaps he's right that few love Ivan the Terrible, but he's wrong if he thinks that means people don't love the experience of watching it. It's a wonderfully grandiose and lurid flight into phantasmagoria. The artifice of Tsardom and the Russian court recoiling further and further into its own fakery until the world itself becomes an artificial, unhuman nightmare. A hell of an experience.

matrixschmatrix wrote:I'm baffled that he lists Nevsky as an unambiguously 'great' movie while shitting on this one as being empty pomp and visual grandeur- I'd definitely say it's the other way round.

Where does he write about Nevsky? I don't see a reference to it in this review and I can't find a separate review by him. It would be baffling if he preferred it to Ivan given his criticisms of the later films here.

Brian C wrote:Where does he write about Nevsky? I don't see a reference to it in this review and I can't find a separate review by him. It would be baffling if he preferred it to Ivan given his criticisms of the later films here.

Oh, whoops, for some reason I misread the reference to Potemkin as a reference to it. That's less bizarrely inconsistent, at least.

I have to say, though, I really do love Ivan, without any kind of equivocations about anything. It genuinely feels like one of the best, most exciting, and most interesting works I've seen for the first time in years- I'd happily watch it again right now. I enjoy it the way I enjoy Touch of Evil, the way I enjoy The Godfather- yes, it's a portrait of the blackness at the center of the human soul, but it's such a gorgeously realized world that I don't mind the pessimism of it in the least.