Movie recommendation thread

[bertram]

Recommend kinos, brief or no summaries, don't have to be recently seen

Here are some of my favorites:

Night of the Hunter(1955)
Withnail & I(1987)
Dead Ringers(1988)
Cruising(1980)
The Boondock Saints(1999)
Fargo(1996)
Pi(1998)
Natural Born Killers(1994)
James and the Giant Peach(1996)
Wise Blood(1979)
Dog Day Afternoon(1975)
Prometheus(2012)

[bertram]

Watched Gattaca the other day, enjoyed it quite a bit as it's a glimpse into the eugenics-perfected basedworld but it also revolves around the triumph of the human will against all odds.

Wheelchair Brit and his mannerbund with the prot saved the movie. I only watched it because of that one meme chart about le typical guy movies orsmth, but it wasn't a bad movie at all; a little too feel-goody and shallow perhaps.

[GraphWalkWithMe]

Steve Buscemi's Tree's Lounge [1996] is an entertaining and accurate account of listless alcoholic lowlifeism.

[anthony]

Damn, when did this thread get made?

[Image: https://i.ibb.co/Z1qQsQq/LOVE-EXPOSURE-a...-56-37.jpg]

Anyway watch Love Exposure. That's a safe call for an interesting time.

[zazzle]

movie from japs:

memories 1995

redline

[FrenziedFish]

New to the 'na 'm so thought I'd post some film recommendations, expect some activity in the Kino Diary thread also:

Windtalkers (2002)

Harry Brown (2009)

Waterloo (1970)

Affliction (1997)

Green Zone (2010)

The American (2010)

The Bad Lieutenant: Port of Call New Orleans (2009)

The Conversation (1974)

The Fugitive (1993)

Primer (2004)

[anthony]

Let's revive this thread. I was thinking of making a letterboxd today, will also post here. I'm writing this to distract myself from other things so it may be a bit incoherent.

The last movie I saw was 'Way of the Gun'. It made me think of a few things.

[Image: https://i.ibb.co/K55MrSR/image.png]

[Image: https://i.ibb.co/6FQ8B67/image.png]

[Image: https://i.ibb.co/Tmcm9zs/image.png]

[Image: https://i.ibb.co/pj83Gw1/image.png]

This movie came out in 2000 and was written and directed by Christopher McQuarrie, who wrote The Usual Suspects. He won an Oscar for that near the start of his career, but still struggled to get anything he really cared about made. This movie was kind of his one real go at doing close to exactly what he wanted to do.

After winning an Academy Award for The Usual Suspects, Christopher McQuarrie assumed that he would have no problem making his next movie "and then you slowly start to realize no one in Hollywood is interested in making your film, they're interested in making their films."[3] He spent years as a script doctor while trying to get financing for an epic biopic of Alexander the Great for Warner Bros. before finally realizing that he "had to make a film with some commercial success to be taken seriously."[4] He approached 20th Century Fox and told them that he would be willing to write and direct a movie for any budget they would be willing to give him as long as he had complete creative control. "Fox told me to get fucked. No money. No control. No nothing. They didn't want my input, they just wanted me. For nothing."[4]
Over coffee, Benicio del Toro asked McQuarrie why he had not made another crime film. McQuarrie replied that he did not want to be typecast as "a crime guy"[4] but realized that he had nothing to lose, "unemployed and ready to make trouble".[4] Del Toro convinced him to write a crime film on his own terms because he would get the least amount of interference from a studio. McQuarrie was interested in making a movie "that you can follow characters who don't go out of their way to ingratiate themselves to you, who aren't traditionally sympathetic."[3]

This movie is kind of tragic. In this time when everyone was trying to be edgy and cool like Tarantino this movie stands out clear above all the rest. The best successor/imitator by far. It kind of got lost in the crowd in its time, but it's still watchable now. Much better than it got credit for. Several things it was doing were kind of overlooked or not desired in its own time, but caught on a few years later. McQuarrie's brother was a Navy SEAL (allegedly, cannot confirm). The gun stuff in this movie is awesome. Lots of violent, technical details that give the action a raw edge that's all the rage now. John Wick style focusing on reloads. Only instead of warehouse power fantasy it's evil criminals trying to get the job done.

This movie has a very real and visible human edge all over it. McQuarrie obviously has it in him to be a real artist, but this seems to have been the one time things aligned and he really got to do what he wanted to and is really capable of. He still writes and directs, but he just makes vapid glory-work for big names. He did Jack Reacher and the last few Mission Impossible movies. He's able to exercise some impressive craft and skill, but it's all limp now compared to Way of the Gun. Tom Cruise just wants to show off for Indian and Chinese peasants.

Way of the Gun is John Wick without the warehouse. It's an action movie about timeless male issues. It's a movie about what people are and what people want. It's a movie with a human heart that actually feels alive. And 23 years ago this could just pass us all by completely unnoticed. We used to have much nicer things.

[Guest]

Let's revive this thread. I was thinking of making a letterboxd today, will also post here. I'm writing this to distract myself from other things so it may be a bit incoherent.

The last movie I saw was 'Way of the Gun'. It made me think of a few things.

[Image: https://i.ibb.co/K55MrSR/image.png]

[Image: https://i.ibb.co/6FQ8B67/image.png]

[Image: https://i.ibb.co/Tmcm9zs/image.png]

[Image: https://i.ibb.co/pj83Gw1/image.png]

This movie came out in 2000 and was written and directed by Christopher McQuarrie, who wrote The Usual Suspects. He won an Oscar for that near the start of his career, but still struggled to get anything he really cared about made. This movie was kind of his one real go at doing close to exactly what he wanted to do.

After winning an Academy Award for The Usual Suspects, Christopher McQuarrie assumed that he would have no problem making his next movie "and then you slowly start to realize no one in Hollywood is interested in making your film, they're interested in making their films."[3] He spent years as a script doctor while trying to get financing for an epic biopic of Alexander the Great for Warner Bros. before finally realizing that he "had to make a film with some commercial success to be taken seriously."[4] He approached 20th Century Fox and told them that he would be willing to write and direct a movie for any budget they would be willing to give him as long as he had complete creative control. "Fox told me to get fucked. No money. No control. No nothing. They didn't want my input, they just wanted me. For nothing."[4]
Over coffee, Benicio del Toro asked McQuarrie why he had not made another crime film. McQuarrie replied that he did not want to be typecast as "a crime guy"[4] but realized that he had nothing to lose, "unemployed and ready to make trouble".[4] Del Toro convinced him to write a crime film on his own terms because he would get the least amount of interference from a studio. McQuarrie was interested in making a movie "that you can follow characters who don't go out of their way to ingratiate themselves to you, who aren't traditionally sympathetic."[3]

This movie is kind of tragic. In this time when everyone was trying to be edgy and cool like Tarantino this movie stands out clear above all the rest. The best successor/imitator by far. It kind of got lost in the crowd in its time, but it's still watchable now. Much better than it got credit for. Several things it was doing were kind of overlooked or not desired in its own time, but caught on a few years later. McQuarrie's brother was a Navy SEAL (allegedly, cannot confirm). The gun stuff in this movie is awesome. Lots of violent, technical details that give the action a raw edge that's all the rage now. John Wick style focusing on reloads. Only instead of warehouse power fantasy it's evil criminals trying to get the job done.

This movie has a very real and visible human edge all over it. McQuarrie obviously has it in him to be a real artist, but this seems to have been the one time things aligned and he really got to do what he wanted to and is really capable of. He still writes and directs, but he just makes vapid glory-work for big names. He did Jack Reacher and the last few Mission Impossible movies. He's able to exercise some impressive craft and skill, but it's all limp now compared to Way of the Gun. Tom Cruise just wants to show off for Indian and Chinese peasants.

Way of the Gun is John Wick without the warehouse. It's an action movie about timeless male issues. It's a movie about what people are and what people want. It's a movie with a human heart that actually feels alive. And 23 years ago this could just pass us all by completely unnoticed. We used to have much nicer things.

Speaking of Tarantino, what do you think of Once Upon A Time in Hollywood? Do you think Tarantino realizes the significance of that film? I really enjoyed a bit in CR episode on the topic, but I can't help but feel that the Pervert could've gone more in depth with his opinions regarding the topic. 

Tarantino is an interesting character, even with all the 'gro/'stie-worship inherent to many of his mid-career films. But watching the Charlie Rose interview gave me a window into the mind of someone with an inborne, innate talent; an innate talent that could've been utilized in a much more productive fashion in more meritocratic times.

[combiner]

Pls watch Brat 1 and 2. Drive but Russian.
2 usually gets rec'd more often but 1 is excellent as well.


[Video: https://youtu.be/PxikgskddQs]

[BillyONare]

Tarantino is a genius. Only 4trannies disagree!

[FrenziedFish]

Let's revive this thread. I was thinking of making a letterboxd today, will also post here. I'm writing this to distract myself from other things so it may be a bit incoherent.

The last movie I saw was 'Way of the Gun'. It made me think of a few things.

Quite liked the film: Good and fitting performances from all, the style of 'Just-off reality' was maintained throughout mainly thanks to them, del Toro's  "You know what I'm gonna tell God" line ought to be iconic; The action's refreshing, it was punchy yet still properly fluid (most films only really manage one), the images you've chosen represent this better than I can describe it; The themes and motivations were well done as far as they were internally consistent with interesting payoffs but the plotting of the film did confuse me to who knew what at each stage; I felt the film was poorly paced and dragged in the middle with all the exposition and lack of distinct locations led it to feel like a sequence of rather unconnected scenes.

I've not seen much from McQuarrie, I saw the usual suspects a long time ago and remember enjoying it, Jack Reacher was a serviceable film but not something I'd watch again or bother to peer into and I've seen Edge of Tomorrow, which he co-wrote, I thought was a great film only marred by some plot holes brought up via the exposition. If he went his own way following on from The Way of the Gun he'd of been a much more interesting filmmaker, it's an impressive directorial debut that has some obvious lessons to be taken into following projects of a similar kind.

[anthony]

Quite liked the film: Good and fitting performances from all, the style of 'Just-off reality' was maintained throughout mainly thanks to them, del Toro's  "You know what I'm gonna tell God" line ought to be iconic; The action's refreshing, it was punchy yet still properly fluid (most films only really manage one), the images you've chosen represent this better than I can describe it; The themes and motivations were well done as far as they were internally consistent with interesting payoffs but the plotting of the film did confuse me to who knew what at each stage; I felt the film was poorly paced and dragged in the middle with all the exposition and lack of distinct locations led it to feel like a sequence of rather unconnected scenes.

I've not seen much from McQuarrie, I saw the usual suspects a long time ago and remember enjoying it, Jack Reacher was a serviceable film but not something I'd watch again or bother to peer into and I've seen Edge of Tomorrow, which he co-wrote, I thought was a great film only marred by some plot holes brought up via the exposition. If he went his own way following on from The Way of the Gun he'd of been a much more interesting filmmaker, it's an impressive directorial debut that has some obvious lessons to be taken into following projects of a similar kind.

It does get a bit twisted up in the middle. I appreciate what he was doing, and thinking back I like it all, but it's a bit much to take all in succession. We get our cool, violent setup, then everyone spends an hour learning where they actually stand as relationships and motivations are revealed, then we get a cool, violent resolution. Nothing felt pointless, or like my time was being disrespected, I didn't get anxious or bored or want to stop watching, but I will still agree that the middle act loses energy for a fair while. Thinking back upon the movie I appreciate that there's intention behind everything that we see, I don't think I'd go cutting the film up. It's just a bearable structural weakness innate to this story.

McQuarrie's later films are unfortunately just not that interesting. After Way of the Gun his career dropped off in realised projects for several years until he finally broke into a new niche as Tom Cruise's slave. A cruel fate considering Cruise apparently has no regard for McQuarrie's unique strength, his ability to imbue stupid action tropes with human edge and pathos. Cruise just throws that out almost entirely and uses him as a pair of hands to assemble his new class of movie.

I was just discussing this with some people lately, and the more I think about it the more true it feels, that since 2008 Tom Cruise has become Mister Beast for boomers.

[Image: https://i.ibb.co/7V7kWKF/image.png]

[Image: https://i.ibb.co/Wkx3gXk/image.png]

[Image: https://i.ibb.co/S3JSGX4/image.png]

[Image: https://i.ibb.co/CPqwBhD/image.png]

Tom Cruise now fills his time serving as an aspiration figure for stupid people and creating shallow, meaningless, novelty shows with some kind of extreme experience he's actually going through being used as a hook. "I CLIMBED THE TALLEST TOWER IN DUBAI WITH NO ROPES". "I FLY A REAL AIR FORCE JET". "I BROKE A BONE DOING THIS".

Cruise's work is considered more respectable, watchable by older people, done within a more established form that carries a certain prestige, but he's not using film for its strengths. He's using it as a vehicle for these brief episodes of action made to excite old people and Indian 10 year olds searching "BESST ACTION MOVIE SCENE 2022" .

Misterbeast is making late hollywood "action" movies, just in a far more honest way. The displays of wealth and superiority are as direct as could be, he just poses in front of piles of money. The delivery of action and novelty is done without pretense. He has his videos edited how an Indian 10 year old would skip through youtube videos uploaded by anybody else.


[Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YLt73w6criQ]

Just look at a few seconds of this and you'll immediately get it.


[Video: https://youtu.be/91V6Xasps00]

I can't shake the feeling that Mission Impossible: Fallout is chasing the same appeal, but is simply too bound by convention to be as sharp as Misterbeast. This is of course a strength as much as a weakness, because a significant part of the global audience is also bound by convention. They'd find it weird just watching original movie-like scenarios strung together without a pretense of narrative. But those same stupid, absurd, pointless scenarios, worked into a meaningless throwaway story about Tom Cruise having to stop cyberterrorists from threatening are democracy, now it's worth a billion dollars at the box office.

Why I consider these thoughts relevant is the question of how Hollywood is using Christopher McQuarrie. The Way of the Gun is a 20 year old movie that people still care about today. I could plausibly see people still taking some interest in another 20 years. It has this essential human edge which imbues every frame of it with meaning. The film is the world refracted through minds and craftsmanship. The same cannot be said of Mission Impossible: Fallout. That movie barely even deserves to be called a movie. It's Misterbeast videos framed by movie conventions so that boomers know it's for them and don't get uncomfortable thinking they might accidentally be seeing something new. It exists to please a certain kind of person in a certain time and place. It's entirely temporal. It means nothing to anybody. It will not last.

Chris McQuarrie is a man capable of making things which will last, so it's a horrible shame to see him reduced to this.

I think the nadir of this partnership was definitely Top Gun: Maverick. McQuarrie wrote that, but didn't direct. I can see McQuarrie's touch. I can see him approaching ideas which are almost human. And I can see how Tom Cruise's ego made this ultimately impossible.

The Way of the Gun is a film rooted in the history of film. It's self conscious. Aware that the glory days are in the past and that it's a different world to come up in now to try and succeed that. It's a film about that. James Caan is in the film. He's not playing his character from Michael Mann's Thief, but he might as well be.

[Image: https://i.ibb.co/QXds6KR/image.png]

This film is able to do what Maverick completely failed at. It reaches honestly across generations and recognises continuity, differences, aspirations, influences, the honest state of everyone is respected.

[Image: https://i.ibb.co/LYXtxYy/image.png]

James Caan suggests to Benecio Del Toro that he get out of violent crime for his own sake. His answer, which is accepted; "What else would I be?"

Maybe these two aren't the same, but there's a fundamental human drive they share which has gotten them to where they are. There's influence and respect from above, but the base drive is innate each time.

This dynamic almost plays out again in Top Gun: Maverick, but in a completely demented form.


[Video: https://youtu.be/EiFWUUUjhDQ]

Nothing says authentic 21st century young person quite like playing Great Balls of Fire on a piano. I get it, his father played this in the last movie and he wants to be like him. But that's all we get out of this character, and in fact everyone who is younger than Tom Cruise in this movie. There is no original Maverick or even Goose-like drive within these people to be recognised and respected, which will flower into its own unique individual and generational forms. As far as Tom Cruise is concerned, young people are gay, plastic, knockoffs of himself.

Again, the felt human edge is gone. The only humanity one can read through this film is the will of Tom Cruise to build a synthetic image of the world in which he is immortal and perfect. Christopher McQuarrie's contribution is to attempt to lend a veneer of humanity and authenticity to something which can only be essentially fake.

[Sanae]

Ayo we kinoposting now?

12 Monkeys (1995)

Hard Boiled (1992)

In Bruges (2008)

Soy Cuba (1964)

Nausicaä of the Valley of the Wind (1984)

Lock, Stock & Two Smoking Barrels (1998)

Lupin III: The Castle of Cagliostro (1979)

Casino (1995)

[Unformed Golem]

Barry Lyndon (1975)

The Duellists (1977)

Andrei Rublev (1966)

High Plains Drifter (1973)

Once Upon a Time in the West (1968)

Bonus Way of the Gun content:
[Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5xsaMcw69D8]

[Zmey]

I recommend The 400 Blows.

It is a film which I love and which speaks directly to me. The story is about Antoine, a misunderstood boy that runs into trouble everywhere he goes. The series of unfortunate events in his life and the bad consequences of his otherwise innocent choices ultimately lead him down a path of societal alienation and delinquency. Throughout the film you can see from his actions that he is not a bad kid and that he is actively trying to improve his position and fit in but it seems as if nobody is ready to give him a chance and accept him for who he is. The movie also does a great job at showing child-like naivety. Both Antoine and his friend know that their families are dysfunctional but do not understand the consequences of it. 

It is a beautiful story about broken families, children being let down by the adults around them, finding your place in the world and rebelling against society. 

Watching the film will also show you a lot of fascinating street scenes from a clean, French, and white Paris. A Paris that sadly no longer exists and can only be observed through fragments of the past such as this one.

[FrenziedFish]

Just saw: The Card Counter (2021)

Overall a good film. Well acted, properly structured, technically sufficient. The film is what you'd expect from the director, Paul Schrader, another story of another one of God's lonely men. Schrader being the only filmmaker I've seen so far (not that I've watched too many films) that has managed to properly explore strong feelings of disconnection, externally and or self imposed.

I would recommend the film to any fan of Schrader, I've seen five of his so far: Dog Eat Dog, Light Sleeper, The Walker, Affliction, and this. For the specifics of the film that may interest those unfamiliar with Schrader: The card playing aspect was well executed but isn't the draw or driver of the film, it is not a gimmick nor distracting; There's enough substance to get your teeth into but Schrader's style does prevent a more total understanding; If you are interested in Schrader I feel it'd be a good film to start with. I don't want to spoil anything or paint the viewing experience of those who choose to watch it so I'll stop here, though I would be happy to discuss it or Schrader a little more if any are interested.

[Ralphthemoviemaker]

Just saw: The Card Counter (2021)

Overall a good film. Well acted, properly structured, technically sufficient. The film is what you'd expect from the director, Paul Schrader, another story of another one of God's lonely men. Schrader being the only filmmaker I've seen so far (not that I've watched too many films) that has managed to properly explore strong feelings of disconnection, externally and or self imposed.

I would recommend the film to any fan of Schrader, I've seen five of his so far: Dog Eat Dog, Light Sleeper, The Walker, Affliction, and this. For the specifics of the film that may interest those unfamiliar with Schrader: The card playing aspect was well executed but isn't the draw or driver of the film, it is not a gimmick nor distracting; There's enough substance to get your teeth into but Schrader's style does prevent a more total understanding; If you are interested in Schrader I feel it'd be a good film to start with. I don't want to spoil anything or paint the viewing experience of those who choose to watch it so I'll stop here, though I would be happy to discuss it or Schrader a little more if any are interested.

Dog eat dog isn't good

t. Ralph Sepe

[Guest]

Pure Kino:

Wake in Fright
Days of Heaven
Birth
Sexy Beast
Picnic at Hanging Rock
The Long Goodbye
The Sweet Hereafter
Demonlover
King of New York
Bad Lieutenant (1992)
Buffalo 66
The Shout
The Leopard
Come and See
Aguirre, the Wrath of God
Nosferatu the Vampyre (1979)
Fitzcarraldo (1982)
Godland
The Vanishing (1988)
Twentynine Palms
Henry, Portrait of a Serial Killer
Hagazussa
Suspiria (1977)
Mishima: A Life in Four Chapters
Excalibur (1981)
Don’t Look Now (1973)
The Man Who Fell to Earth
The Ninth Configuration
Naked (1993)
The Night Porter

[JohnnyRomero]

Just watched Seven Years in Tibet. Very good movie, good propaganda for Total Chink Death. Also an excellent companion piece for Bronze Age Mindset, IMO.

[Guest]

Chinatown not mentioned in this thread but a truly great film