Movies Seen in 2011

[doubleohfive]

CaptainCanada wrote:

---

George was born and raised in Britain, to parents born and raised in Britain, to a grandmother born and raised in Britain by a father born and raised in Britain by a father born raised in Britain by a father born and raised in Britain. "German" is a bit of a stretch, no?

I think he was referring to Hitler. And if he was, he'd still be wrong because Hitler was Austrian, not German.

In any event, people very much did care what he thought, so how is that a flaw in the film?

It isn't.

Huh?

I too am befuddled at this remark.

At no point was there the implication that his speech was crucial. It was his personal struggle to perform his duty, and that duty did indeed matter, even if it wasn't make-or-break.

George believed in divine right, like every royal of his generation (as does his daughter, by most accounts, though not her children and grandchildren). So what? And I would think that being much more responsible makes him better than Edward.

Too, the idea of the film (and, historically, actually) is that Bertie/George's speech roused the nation so and united them in common cause to fight Hitler. It's one thing to go to war, its another thing to go to war and believe in why you're doing so. As the film demonstrates, there were several people in England at the time who did not see Hitler's Germany as a threat or who basically agreed with him. Quite rightly, Bertie and his advisers saw the threat Hitler posed and knew they had to do everything they could to stop him. To do this, they needed the people of Britain on their side.

Did you actually watch the movie?

Indeed.

[Starbreaker]

Monsters (2010) ✭✭✭

It's just kind of there. A nice film, but overall a little disappointing.

[stj]

CaptainCanada wrote:

---

Did you actually watch the movie?

Much more closely than you did. The response of the crowd to the stutter displayed contempt for the speech, either directly or in assuming the prince was humiliated in public. The sadness over the fate of "Cousin Wilhelm" makes German princeling not a stretch.

The notion that modern audiences should share the adoration of monarchy is stupid. The bland assumption that we shouldn't even notice the obsequiousness of the characters toward the monarchy borders on the offensive. One of the most pressing questions about this movie is why does any of this matter to anyone except the man and his family? This question is not even addressed.

The real crux is the gullibility in assuming that the King's speech made any difference in public support for the war. Publics always support wars in the beginning, just because authority says they are in some fashion self defense. Worse, there was no morally principled opposition to Hitler on the part of the English government! Not when Hitler took over, not when Hitler intervened in Spain, not when Hitler took over Austria, not when Hitler carved up Czechoslovakia, and damn little when Hitler threatened Poland. The fucking English literally sent their diplomats on a slow boat to conduct negotiations with the USSR to present a united front. The English were so in sync with Hitler's antiCommunism that they were just about as tempted to go to war with the USSR over Finland, even though the Finnish dictator Mannerheim was another asshole buddy of Hitler.

No, the movie's revisionist take on the importance of the essence of Englishness being foes of Hitler is just drivel.

[CaptainCanada]

1. In the Heat of the Night (A)
2. The Passion of Joan of Arc (B)
3. The Passion of the Christ (A)
4. Mamma Mia! (B)
5. All About Eve (A)
6. Looking for Anne (C+)
7. 2001: A Space Odyssey (B+)
8. The King's Speech (A)
9. How Green Was My Valley (B-)
10. Black Swan (B+)
11. Made in Dagenham (B)
12. Gentleman's Agreement (A-)
13. Barney's Version (A-)
14. Out of Africa (B)
15. The Social Network (A-)
16. The Sound of Music (B)
17. Pulp Fiction (A)
18. Forrest Gump (A)
19. The Shawshank Redemption (A+)
20. The Illusionist (B-)
21. The French Connection (B+)
22. Network (A+)
23. Incendies (A+)
24. Mrs. Miniver (A)
25. A Fistful of Dollars (B+)
26. For A Few Dollars More (B)
27. WALL-E (A+)
28. Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? (A)
29. The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly (B)
30. Gigi (B-)
31. I Love You Phillip Morris (B+)
32. How To Train Your Dragon (A)
33. Tarzan (B+)
34. Oliver! (B+)
35. Gosford Park (A-)
36. The Princess Bride (B+)
37. All the President's Men (A-)
38. Oliver Twist (B+)
39. My Fair Lady (A+)
40. Hanna (A-)
41. The Godfather (A+)
42. The Godfather: Part II (A+)
43. The Godfather: Part III (A-)
44. Dog Day Afternoon (A)
45. Taxi Driver (A-)
46. Great Expectations (B+)
47. The Last Airbender (D-)
48. Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part 1 (A+)
49. Raging Bull (B+)
50. GoodFellas (A-)
51. Spartacus (A+)
52. The Deer Hunter (B+)
53. Reservoir Dogs (A)
54. A Clockwork Orange (A)
55. One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest (A+)
56. Gone With The Wind (A+)
57. On the Waterfront (A)
58. Thor (B+)
59. The Seventh Seal (A-)
60. Hamlet (A)
61. All the King's Men (A-)
62. Roman Holiday (A+)
63. Rebecca (A-)
64. Notorious (A)
65. American Madness (B+)
66. It Happened One Night (A-)
67. Mr. Deeds Goes To Town (C-)
68. You Can't Take It With You (B+)
69. Mr. Smith Goes To Washington (A-)
70. The Heiress (A+)
71. X-Men: First Class (A-)
72. Super 8 (B+)
73. Dr. No (B-)
74. From Russia With Love (A)
75. Captain Blood (A+)
76. The Best Years of Our Lives (A+)
77. The Adventures of Robin Hood (A+)
78. The Treasure of Sierra Madre (A+)
79. From Here To Eternity (A)
80. To Have and Have Not (B)
81. The Big Sleep (A-)
82. Barry Lyndon (B+)
83. The Snake Pit (B+)
84. Hoosiers (C-)
85. Rocky (A-)
86. Midnight in Paris (B+)
87. Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part 2 (B+)
88. Key Largo (B-)
89. Bridge on the River Kwai (A)
90. The Apartment (A-)
91. Captain America: The First Avenger (A-)
92. Ordinary People (A-)
93. Days of Heaven (B+)
94. Yojimbo (A-)
95. Tangled (A)
96. Cowboys and Aliens (B)
97. Crazy, Stupid, Love (A-)
98. Beginners (A-)
99. They Shoot Horses, Don't They? (A+)
100. Bonnie and Clyde (A-)
101. Rise of the Planet of the Apes (A-)
102. Elmer Gantry (B+)
103. Sanjuro (A-)
104. The Help (B+)
105. Dark Passage (B+)
106. Easy A (B)
107. Rob Roy (B+)
108. The Great McGinty (C+)
109. Christmas in July (B-)
110. The Tree of Life (B+)
111. The Lady Eve (A-)
112. Sullivan's Travels (B+)
113. The Palm Beach Story (A+)
114. A Passage to India (A-)
115. Glengarry Glen Ross (A-)
116. Hail the Conquering Hero (B-)
117. The Great Moment (C+)
118. Platoon (A)
119. Atonement (A+)
120. Patton (A)
121. Pan's Labyrinth (A+)
122. The Debt (B+)
123. Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb (A-)
124. The Pawnbroker (A-)
125. Double Indemnity (A)
126. Mildred Pierce (B+)
127. The Postman Always Rings Twice (C-)
128. The Great Dictator (A+)
129. La Belle et la Bete (B+)
130. Contagion (B+)
131. The Age of Innocence (B+)
132. The Remains of the Day (A+)
133. His Girl Friday (A)
134. Howards End (B+)
135. The Life and Death of Colonel Blimp (A)
136. The Lion King 3D (A+)
137. Paths of Glory (B+)
138. Big Fish (B+)
139. The Magnificent Ambersons (B+)
140. Dumbo (A-)
141. Smiles of a Summer Night (A)
142. The Ides of March (B-)
143. Moneyball (A-)
144. A Few Good Men (A+)
145. Some Like It Hot (A+)
146. The Talk of the Town (B-)
147. The Last Picture Show (A-)
148. Attack the Block (B)
149. The Awful Truth (A-)
150. Ben-Hur (B+)
151. Only Angels Have Wings (B)
152. Midnight Cowboy (B-)
153. Holiday (B+)
154. Modern Times (A+)
155. Singin' in the Rain (A)
156. A Star Is Born (1976) (C-)
157. A Star Is Born (1954) (A-)
158. Time Bandits (C)
159. Kagemusha (B)
160. Immortals (C+)
161. J. Edgar (B)
162. City of God (A)
163. Cinema Paradiso (B)
164. Three Colours: Blue (B+)
165. Three Colours: White (A-)
166. Three Colours: Red (A-)
167. The Muppets (B+)
168. Election (A)
169. Le Havre (C+)

170. Almost Famous: The Bootleg Cut (A+)
171. About Schmidt (A-)
172. Drive (B)
173. Hugo (A)
174. Ed Wood (A+)
175. Out of Sight (A)
176. Confessions of a Dangerous Mind (B-)
177. O Brother, Where Art Thou? (A)
178. Jackie Brown (A)

With this, I've now seen all the major Tarantino movies (which I define to mean "every Tarantino movie other than Death Proof"), and, on one watch, I would say this is probably my second-favourite of them after Inglourious Basterds. Tarantino's slowest-paced work, by far, and I imagine this threw a lot of his Reservoir Dogs fandom for a loop. Grier and Forster are very memorable.

179. Fanny and Alexander - Theatrical Version (A-)

You it's a Bergman project where you're an hour into a three-hour film before they identify Fanny.

Bergman's last theatrical release (he made a TV miniseries version of this same movie, which I'll watch at some later point), having reined in the pessimism considerably from some of his other work. Usually thoughtful, often ponderous, with many memorable scenes.

stj wrote:

---

Much more closely than you did. The response of the crowd to the stutter displayed contempt for the speech, either directly or in assuming the prince was humiliated in public.

Which was true to life. What's your problem?

The sadness over the fate of "Cousin Wilhelm" makes German princeling not a stretch.

Wilhelm II was descended from George's great-aunt, Princess Victoria of the United Kingdom, who married the Crown Prince of Prussia. My great-aunt may marry a Romanian, but that doesn't make me Romanian.

There's certainly plenty of intermarriage with German royal families in the history of the Windsors, but that hardly makes them "German" (particularly ludicrous with George V, who was the quintessential Little Englander).

The notion that modern audiences should share the adoration of monarchy is stupid. The bland assumption that we shouldn't even notice the obsequiousness of the characters toward the monarchy borders on the offensive.

Modern audiences do care about the monarchy, quite a few of them; you can see that in everything from the reaction to the death of Princess Diana to the recent royal wedding. Moreover, since the monarchy did/does exist, and George has a duty to perform, I don't see how it's some big problem to present a very relatable problem and ask the audience to care. Movies ask audiences to relate to and care about things not comparable to their own situations as a matter of course.

And you seem to have missed that one of the main themes of the movie is interactions between the isolated royal family and the down-to-earth Australian commoner, who is very uninteresed in many of the pretensions of the upper class.

One of the most pressing questions about this movie is why does any of this matter to anyone except the man and his family? This question is not even addressed.

I'd hardly call that a pressing question, but the movie raises that subject at least twice; George himself explicitly notes in one scene that if he were a private citizen, no one would care about his situation. And in the climactic discussion with Logue he points out that, as a constitutional monarchy, he has no real authority, and his main role is to speak as the head of state, something which, due to his situation, he cannot do. That's the whole crux of his situation.

Publics always support wars in the beginning, just because authority says they are in some fashion self defense.

That's complete nonsense, and demonstrably false from history. Heck, in this specific instance, the public was initially extremely hostile to the idea of another European war; that was the whole reason for appeasement.

No, the movie's revisionist take on the importance of the essence of Englishness being foes of Hitler is just drivel.

What on Earth are you talking about?

You aren't reviewing the movie, you're listing things you disagree with in reality and then complaining that the movie reflects this.

[stj]

CaptainCanada wrote:

---

Which was true to life. What's your problem?

First, in purely cinematic terms, the scene is not true to life. Which is a flaw in the drama, especially as this scene is meant to dramatize the stakes.

Second, movies that affirm the conventional views are making an artistic choice. An artistic statement in favor of the status quo is a message. There is no reason to withhold criticism on the specious grounds that it doesn't address the movie.

A man who wants a knighthood is not a down to earth commoner, Australian or not, and trying to pretend he is questioning the monarchy in some fashion is just the script phonying up the real story. Cf. The Madness of King George for a similar character.

Supporting a war is not at all the same as being eager for one. The relief at dodging the bullet over Czechoslovakia was real, but if the Poles hadn't supported the Nazis and war broke out, the population would have supported it. The notion that the king had diddly to do with inspiring support for the war is questionable in the extreme.

Third, the review was not very positive but it seems to me that the real sting is not about the movie but about its relations to the real world. Or is it possible there's another real world connection validating the movie? Is there a stutterer in your life? There is in mine, which is why I could tolerate watching this movie.

[CaptainCanada]

stj wrote:

---

First, in purely cinematic terms, the scene is not true to life. Which is a flaw in the drama, especially as this scene is meant to dramatize the stakes.

I really don't understand your objection here. George VI couldn't speak publicly, which caused him enormous pain and embarassment, and was well-known to the public. The opening scene really happened; read a biography of George.

A man who wants a knighthood is not a down to earth commoner, Australian or not, and trying to pretend he is questioning the monarchy in some fashion is just the script phonying up the real story. Cf. The Madness of King George for a similar character.

How is wanting a knighthood automatically a disqualifying factor? It's an honour bestowed by his country. They're distributed annually in the UK to the successful these days, whatever their class origins.

The notion that the king had diddly to do with inspiring support for the war is questionable in the extreme.

Whose notion? I didn't say the King had nothing to do with rallying support for the war, you did. That was the point of his speech, both in the movie and in real life, where he is recorded as having been a very important figure in the British war effort.

Third, the review was not very positive but it seems to me that the real sting is not about the movie but about its relations to the real world. Or is it possible there's another real world connection validating the movie? Is there a stutterer in your life? There is in mine, which is why I could tolerate watching this movie.

What?

I take issue with your review because you're not actually reviewing the movie, you're attacking it for not being an anti-monarchist polemic, and for some reason you think that the movie is presenting stammerers as cowardly and weak when that's the exact opposite of the movie's message. Heck, the movie was written by a man who had a speech impediment as a child and viewed the King as an inspirational figure.

[Captain Craig]

This is the first time I've seen such a heated discussion on, of all movies, Kings Speech. Then the point that's being so fervently discussed.

It was a good movie, it took a few dramatic liberties. End of story. What movie doesn't?

[CaptainCanada]

Captain Craig wrote:

---

This is the first time I've seen such a heated discussion on, of all movies, Kings Speech.

Not counting Social Network fans arguing aggressively that it shouldn't have won the Oscar, I assume?

[Captain Craig]

^^^
I guess so, I haven't seen Social Network yet either.
It's in the Netflix queue working it's way up.
My next film is Black Swan, I'm just now getting to that one.

[timothy]

Breaking dawn
immortals
bag of bones on a&e

[stj]

CaptainCanada wrote:

---

I take issue with your review because you're not actually reviewing the movie, you're attacking it for not being an anti-monarchist polemic,

I saw the movie. It definitely presents George as important for winning public support for the war, which is nonsense. Inflating his role makes it a pro-monarchist polemic, which is good grounds for criticism.

and for some reason you think that the movie is presenting stammerers as cowardly and weak when that's the exact opposite of the movie's message.

Again, I saw the movie. "You don't have to be afraid anymore." The whole notion that stutterers stutter because they're afraid is backwards, blame the victim nonsense. The opening scene may have happened but it was nothing like the movie. I guarantee you that somebody in that crowd was laughing (not suitable for a promonarchist polemic however, no matter how much it would have dramatized the point,) some were merely impatient, some were patient, and some were sympathetic. And there was a good chance there was somebody in that crowd saying, he stutters too. Showing the same reaction was a kind of loading the dice, trying to force an emotional response instead of honestly invoking one.

Heck, the movie was written by a man who had a speech impediment as a child and viewed the King as an inspirational figure.

If God's Chosen had such a problem and overcame it, it must be inspirational, right? This personal story is in fact interesting. But it would have been just as interesting if George had just needed to master public speaking for a job, say, teaching. Or, at least, it should have been. I don't think this movie really believes that which is why all the tripe about the importance for humanity of the King's speech.

[CaptainCanada]

stj wrote:

---

I saw the movie. It definitely presents George as important for winning public support for the war, which is nonsense.

It's important that the King be able to carry out his duties. George and Elizabeth were very significant figures in the British propaganda campaign; that's a matter of historical record. And the movie hardly polemical about anything; it takes the monarchy as an important British institution, which it was at the time of the movie, and still is today. It critiques some of the isolation and snobbery involved, but portrays the development of cross-class understanding.

This personal story is in fact interesting. But it would have been just as interesting if George had just needed to master public speaking for a job, say, teaching. Or, at least, it should have been. I don't think this movie really believes that which is why all the tripe about the importance for humanity of the King's speech.

But George wasn't a school teacher. He was the King of the Commonwealth & Empire.

And the stakes are much higher and much more public, which the movie acknowledges. The same way the stakes of FDR being crippled by polio are much higher than with someone who isn't a head of state.

[Starbreaker]

stj wrote:

---

I saw the movie. It definitely presents George as important for winning public support for the war, which is nonsense. Inflating his role makes it a pro-monarchist polemic, which is good grounds for criticism.

You're like the TrekBBS version of Armond White.

[Admiral_Young]

There was a heavy "King's Speech" debate in the film's discussion thread last year.

"Man in the Iron Mask" (1998) C +. This film has always been a guilty pleasure for me and I think a somewhat underrated movie. Leo DiCaprio is really good in this film playing the duo roles of King Louis and his twin brother Philip. John Malkovitch is exceptionally good as the aged Musketeer Athos. In fact all of the actors who play the famed Three Musketeers do a wonderful job. The Score is also well done.

[timothy]

the man in the Iron mask was ten times better than the new three musketeers movie that sucked.

just finished watching 30 minutes or less on amazon instant video.