Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
On 1/28/2026 at 7:28 AM, Motor City Sonics said:

I don't know why.   Maybe it's just the snow sweeping guy and the way he so perfectly delivers his lines here, but this may be my favorite scene in film history.  This stupid little scene with two characters who hadn't even appeared on screen yet 3/4 of the way through the movie.    It's endlessly quotable.   

 

 

This is also a scene my wife and I quote a lot.  

Posted
46 minutes ago, romad1 said:

Finally saw One Battle After Another.  I can definitely appreciate it.  I don't know if I loved it. 

Same here. I’m glad I saw it, but I can definitely wait to see it again.

Posted
1 hour ago, chasfh said:

Same here. I’m glad I saw it, but I can definitely wait to see it again.

Thinking in terms of comps...."Casablanca" was an amazing movie and still holds up because, of the "La Marseillaise" scene:  the point in the movie which really tears at the heart strings of the audience.  I'm not sure we ever got that point in One Battle After Another.  I thought we had hints with the Benicio Del Toro character and his enlarged operation and family but that seems incomplete. 

I saw similarities to "The Baader Meinhoff Complex" which was ultimately depicting the Revolutionaries as a disease of the otherwise stable West German society caused by the youth's reaction to the Nazi era and East Germany's exploitation of that youth dissatisfaction. 

"Antropoid" about the assassination of Heydrich in Prague has some comps. 

There is some of this same angle in "Deutschland 83-89".  

Not sure why I went to three different German examples. 

Posted
42 minutes ago, romad1 said:

Thinking in terms of comps...."Casablanca" was an amazing movie and still holds up because, of the "La Marseillaise" scene:  the point in the movie which really tears at the heart strings of the audience.  I'm not sure we ever got that point in One Battle After Another.  I thought we had hints with the Benicio Del Toro character and his enlarged operation and family but that seems incomplete. 

I saw similarities to "The Baader Meinhoff Complex" which was ultimately depicting the Revolutionaries as a disease of the otherwise stable West German society caused by the youth's reaction to the Nazi era and East Germany's exploitation of that youth dissatisfaction. 

"Antropoid" about the assassination of Heydrich in Prague has some comps. 

There is some of this same angle in "Deutschland 83-89".  

Not sure why I went to three different German examples. 

Andor is the comp.   Andor was better.  

Posted (edited)

Underrated movie

 

Hell Or High Water    (Chris Pine, Ben Foster and Jeff Bridges in one of the best roles in his career). 

Great writing

Great pacing

Great cinematography

Great acting

 

It was nominated for a few Oscars, I think it was better than Moonlight or La La Land.  Way better than both

Serious tone with a little room for humor

 

 

 

 

Edited by Motor City Sonics
Posted

Favorite ending to a movie?   

It's a lighter touch, not a dramatic one.   I guess you could have categories for endings

 

Mine is Say Anything.    Waiting for the No Smoking light to go off in the airplane (showing you how old the movie is, you could still smoke on planes in 1989).      There is something very satisfying about the way it ends.   

Say Anything is an extremely underrated movie. 

  • Like 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Motor City Sonics said:

Favorite ending to a movie?   

It's a lighter touch, not a dramatic one.   I guess you could have categories for endings

 

Mine is Say Anything.    Waiting for the No Smoking light to go off in the airplane (showing you how old the movie is, you could still smoke on planes in 1989).      There is something very satisfying about the way it ends.   

Say Anything is an extremely underrated movie. 

They couldn’t figure out what song he would be playing in the “ scene”.  Then Crowe heard In Your Eyes on something his wife had and he couldn’t believe how well it matched up.  Peter Gabriel wasn’t one to give up his music. Somehow they got a tape of the movie to him and they were told he would call after watching  He did call and said no.  Crowe was able to quickly ask “why” before he hung up and he said it didn’t fit in with the shooting up and then he OD’s.  Turns out Gabriel had been sent the movie about Belushi called Wired and thought that was the movie Crowe was asking about. .He agreed after seeing Say Anything but the cost was $600K. 

Posted
15 minutes ago, oblong said:

They couldn’t figure out what song he would be playing in the “ scene”.  Then Crowe heard In Your Eyes on something his wife had and he couldn’t believe how well it matched up.  Peter Gabriel wasn’t one to give up his music. Somehow they got a tape of the movie to him and they were told he would call after watching  He did call and said no.  Crowe was able to quickly ask “why” before he hung up and he said it didn’t fit in with the shooting up and then he OD’s.  Turns out Gabriel had been sent the movie about Belushi called Wired and thought that was the movie Crowe was asking about. .He agreed after seeing Say Anything but the cost was $600K. 

Cusack wanted a Fishbone song.    Um, no.   I love Fishbone, but not for emotional impact. 

Posted (edited)

Possibly my favorite film of all-time is Arrival. The ending is a real tearjerker, but also makes you think about the nature of time (the fact that her daughter’s name is a palindrome and the entire film is portrayed as a story where the ending is also the beginning) and also a difficult ethical dilemma about choosing to bring someone into the world with foreknowledge of the pain it will inevitably bring. Amy Adams is a fantastic actress.

I’m not much of a classical music aficionado, but the opening and closing song by Max Richter (On the Nature of Daylight) works so well in this movie. It never fails to move me deeply despite my having seen the film at least 5 or 6 times now.

Edited by StrangeBird
Posted
20 hours ago, Motor City Sonics said:

Cusack wanted a Fishbone song.    Um, no.   I love Fishbone, but not for emotional impact. 

It's weird you posted this now because I'm reading "You couldn't ignore me if you tried", a book about the 80's teen/brat pack movies, mostly John Hughes but Say Anything is in it too.  I'm exactly at this point where Say Anything is talked about.  It's such a different vibe, and I think more intelligent, than the Hughes ones.  That's not a criticism so much as I believe Cameron comes at it in a different way.  Crowe and James L Brooks didn't think the studio marketed it the right way, they thought it could be an Academy movie but the studio saw it merely as a teen flick.  Cusack didn't want to do it as he'd already done The Sure Thing (Very underrated!) and Weird Science, but John Mahoney was already on board, and during filming Eight Men Out he convinced him to do it.  Told him it's different.

In Crowe's book he shares the anecdote that he and Hughes had offices in the same bungalow on Paramount's lot but never really had a relationship.  They'd see each ohter often.  One night they stayed after and spent the night in the office together talking about movies and music.  Then that was it.  He never talked to him again.  Wasn't sure why.   Hughes was heavy into the British pop in the mid 80s and played a large part in making it popular here.  

  • 3 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...
Posted

I just watched Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy starring a load of famous actors from 2011. My life was so full of four children and travel and an exhausting work schedule I didn’t watch many movies back then so I hadn’t seen it until now.

It’s pretty tense and the plot is fairly complex and to fully understand what had happened I had to read a recap on Wikipedia after I finished it, but if I decide to watch it a second time I think I’ll enjoy it more but it’s still pretty good on its own. 

Posted
23 minutes ago, IdahoBert said:

I just watched Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy starring a load of famous actors from 2011. My life was so full of four children and travel and an exhausting work schedule I didn’t watch many movies back then so I hadn’t seen it until now.

It’s pretty tense and the plot is fairly complex and to fully understand what had happened I had to read a recap on Wikipedia after I finished it, but if I decide to watch it a second time I think I’ll enjoy it more but it’s still pretty good on its own. 

They brought LeCarre in as consultant with the British TV serialized TTSS - he'd had an on-again/off-again relationship with previous movies of his work - going back to not really liking the Richard Burton version of "the Spy Who Came in form the Cold" which first catapulted him to fame. But he was so taken with Alec Guiness' portrayal that he wrote "Smiley's People" expressly for Guiness. Gary Oldham is no slouch either, but having to do it 127 min instead of 350 made it a lot harder to get the complexity of the plot without it getting confusing.

  • Thanks 1
Posted
22 hours ago, gehringer_2 said:

They brought LeCarre in as consultant with the British TV serialized TTSS - he'd had an on-again/off-again relationship with previous movies of his work - going back to not really liking the Richard Burton version of "the Spy Who Came in form the Cold" which first catapulted him to fame. But he was so taken with Alec Guiness' portrayal that he wrote "Smiley's People" expressly for Guiness. Gary Oldham is no slouch either, but having to do it 127 min instead of 350 made it a lot harder to get the complexity of the plot without it getting confusing.

The movie director didn't quite understand the subtleties of the English class system either.  OR, modern audiences wouldn't have understood them. 

Posted
22 hours ago, gehringer_2 said:

They brought LeCarre in as consultant with the British TV serialized TTSS - he'd had an on-again/off-again relationship with previous movies of his work - going back to not really liking the Richard Burton version of "the Spy Who Came in form the Cold" which first catapulted him to fame. But he was so taken with Alec Guiness' portrayal that he wrote "Smiley's People" expressly for Guiness. Gary Oldham is no slouch either, but having to do it 127 min instead of 350 made it a lot harder to get the complexity of the plot without it getting confusing.

The depth of the storytelling behind the scenes between Ricky Tarr and Irena in the mini-series are so good.   Her talking about her faith and him getting her on the objective as a case officers should. 

Posted

OK, I am going to throw this out there as a potentially fun thought exercise. This comes off a conversation I had with a couple buddies of mine and we talked about it for at least an hour running, it was so interesting to contemplate. Maybe we have some fun with this here—maybe it goes nowhere. Let's see.

I believe most of us are big fans of the movie A Few Good Men. One of the all-time great courtroom scenes of all time, but really, just a terrific story all the way through, written and performed terrifically when it came out in 1992.

Now: imagine A Few Good Men is going to be filmed not in 1992, but in 1962.

Who are the actors you cast for it?

Why 1962? It was considered pivotal, watershed year in the evolution of Hollywood, often cited by film historians as a "last gasp" of the classic studio system and a crucial transition point toward the "New Hollywood" era. While the industry was facing a downturn due to television competition, 1962 produced a remarkable confluence of artistic, commercial, and critically acclaimed films that challenged existing convention. There was even a book written about the importance of 1962 in the evolution of Hollywood.

And, of course, a lot of the greatest films in history came out in 1962: Lawrence of Arabia. The Manchurian Candidate. To Kill a Mockingbird. Whatever Happened to Baby Jane? The Longest Day. The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance. Even the James Bond franchise was launched in 1962 with Dr. No. Definitely one of the greatest years in Hollywood history.

An epic like A Few Good Men would totally fit into the year that was 1962.

So: who do you cast in it?

I think it starts with Paul Newman as Lt. Daniel Kaffee (aka the Tom Cruise part.)

What do you think?

Posted (edited)
27 minutes ago, chasfh said:

So: who do you cast in it?

I think it starts with Paul Newman as Lt. Daniel Kaffee (aka the Tom Cruise part.)

What do you think?

yeah - Newman is a good fit for the hotshot, also Kirk Douglas - or Jason Robards, Laughton was probably already too old for Jessup, Ed Begley Sr maybe, Lee.J. Cobb or Robert Ryan, Trevor Howard could do that personality but he couldn't play American. The female lead would be really tough in 62. Fonda probably could have done it, but only an older Jane than in 62. Anne Francis maybe. I can think of some Brit females for it, Sean Philips, Judy Dench.

Edited by gehringer_2
Posted
2 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

yeah - Newman is a good fit for the hotshot - or Jason Robards, Laughton was probably already too old for Jessup, Ed Begley Sr maybe, or Robert Ryan. The female lead would be really tough in 62. Fonda probably could have done it, but only an older Jane than in 62. Anne Francis maybe. I can think of some Brit females for it, Sean Philips, Judy Dench.

I think Newman is the only real fit, really. Even thought he was already 36 that year, he could still came off as young and swaggering, like Tom Cruise was in the role. I don't think of Jason Robards that way. He may not have been that much older than Newman, but he seemed a lot older, more introspective and melancholy. The role needs a cocky, boyish energy, fast-talking, charming, glib. Kaffee is an immature nepo baby and I think Newman can pull that off.

Now, Robards for Markinson? That I could see.

Posted
23 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

Laughton was probably already too old for Jessup, Ed Begley Sr maybe, or Robert Ryan

As I think about it, Robert Ryan could work as Jessep. My question is, could he do the charming twinkle in his eye at the same time while being menacing like Nicholson?

hpWgaPTbBLGCdYXHcEVLIWaA3m0.jpg

 

Posted
3 hours ago, chasfh said:

I think Newman is the only real fit, really. Even thought he was already 36 that year, he could still came off as young and swaggering, like Tom Cruise was in the role. I don't think of Jason Robards that way. He may not have been that much older than Newman, but he seemed a lot older, more introspective and melancholy. The role needs a cocky, boyish energy, fast-talking, charming, glib. Kaffee is an immature nepo baby and I think Newman can pull that off.

Now, Robards for Markinson? That I could see.

That works. If you ever get a chance to see Robards in 'Long Days Journey into Night' with Hepburn, Richardson and Montgomery Clift you'd see him do a brasher persona pretty well. If the movie had actually been made in '62 Tony Curtis would absolutely have been up for Caffee. Would have been a different movie, but it's what Hollywood likely would have made!

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...