so weird that Kim Novak was a star
― Exile in lolville (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 8 May 2012 21:22 (1 year ago) Permalink
I'm sure her tentativeness was part of her charm
Have you read Truffaut's Hitchcock book? I think he was mostly charmed by her sweaters.
― clemenza, Tuesday, 8 May 2012 21:26 (1 year ago) Permalink
that doesn't excuse Hitchcock though
― Exile in lolville (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 8 May 2012 21:29 (1 year ago) Permalink
no way are there any wooden performances in 'vertigo'!If you agree that it's as great as its reputation, I'm sure that's true.
If you agree that it's as great as its reputation, I'm sure that's true.
i kinda think that the whole distinction between 'wooden' and 'non-wooden' performances is flawed when you're talking about a director like hitch, who manipulated his actors to such an extent that they almost have a purely functional role in most of his films. it's a bit like the weird kids' performances in 'night of the hunter' -- they're not miscalculations on the director's part, they're part of the texture of the film. given what kim novak is asked to do in 'vertigo' i honestly cannot imagine any other actress doing a better job. whereas i don't think even ppl who think 'the searchers' is top 10-worthy think that jeffrey hunter and vera miles and, hell, half of the cast give particularly good performances.
― (The Other) J.D. (J.D.), Tuesday, 8 May 2012 21:47 (1 year ago) Permalink
but what the performance of Natalie Wood's makeup?
― Exile in lolville (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 8 May 2012 21:54 (1 year ago) Permalink
I know this is a minority (and then some) opinion, but I find everybody in Vertigo bland to one degree or another. I like its weirdness, like the music and the direction, and love the dream sequence. Because of the performances--whether they're functional or not--there's a limit to how much I like the film overall. (It's abstract speculation, but I can imagine a number of better actresses filling that role.) I realize no one who loves the film is going to agree.
― clemenza, Tuesday, 8 May 2012 21:55 (1 year ago) Permalink
ward bond gives a perfect performance in the searchers. i find the 'texture of the film' argument unconvincing
― these pretzels are makeing me horney (Hungry4Ass), Tuesday, 8 May 2012 21:59 (1 year ago) Permalink
Vertigo is not one of my top five Hitch films.
― Exile in lolville (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 8 May 2012 22:00 (1 year ago) Permalink
i find anti-'vertigo' sentiment much more bewildering than any other kind of great fillum challops so there's prob no place for me in this argument
― (The Other) J.D. (J.D.), Tuesday, 8 May 2012 22:10 (1 year ago) Permalink
I don't dislike it but it's not one I rewatch it and when I do my attention wanders, notably during Madeleine's zombie moments.
― Exile in lolville (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 8 May 2012 22:11 (1 year ago) Permalink
chris marker's long essay on vertigo ends...
"Obviously, this text is addressed to those who know Vertigo by heart. But do those who don’t deserve anything at all?"
which makes me smile.
ps, i have not seen Vertigo.
― jed_, Tuesday, 8 May 2012 22:17 (1 year ago) Permalink
One obvious thing that links Vertigo with The Searchers is the way Stewart and Wayne discombobulate their personas with such creepily obsessive characters--you can see blueprints earlier on (It's a Wonderful Life, Red River), but I can't remember them ever being so unpleasant. Between the two of them, I actually think Wayne gives the better performance...or at least the one I'd rather watch.
I hate the word challops. Vertigo's unassailable reputation is a relatively (as in the last 30 years) recent phenomenon--because of its longtime unavailability, it was hardly a revered film from the outset. I saw it for the first time around '82 or '83, a bootleg print, and I had mixed feelings then.
― clemenza, Tuesday, 8 May 2012 22:23 (1 year ago) Permalink
i saw it once, when i was a teenager, and i was bored by it. maybe i'd get more out of it now
― these pretzels are makeing me horney (Hungry4Ass), Tuesday, 8 May 2012 22:40 (1 year ago) Permalink
Vertigo is the best.
― bark ruffalo (latebloomer), Tuesday, 8 May 2012 22:51 (1 year ago) Permalink
Vertigo is astonishing, challops be damned. If nothing else it charted my own descent into cinephilia.
― ryan, Wednesday, 9 May 2012 01:46 (1 year ago) Permalink
clemenza apparently finds James Stewart, Necrophile "bland."
― World Congress of Itch (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, 9 May 2012 01:54 (1 year ago) Permalink
Well, I think I acknowledged directly above that Stewart playing against type makes an impression. It's just not one I ever feel compelled to go back to. Maybe bland is the wrong word. I just don't enjoy the performance very much. And it's not because the character's creepy; I could name dozens of creepy characters who've never stopped fascinating me. (Necrophiliacs are inherently interesting? Also, and sorry for being so literal, but does an obsession with someone who reminds you of someone who died make you a necrophiliac?)
― clemenza, Wednesday, 9 May 2012 02:12 (1 year ago) Permalink
If you put her in the corpse's clothes, could be. (But that's reductive anyhoo)
― World Congress of Itch (Dr Morbius), Wednesday, 9 May 2012 02:18 (1 year ago) Permalink
Cinema is death 24 fps et al
― jungleous butterflies strange birds (Eric H.), Wednesday, 9 May 2012 03:06 (1 year ago) Permalink
add me to the list of hitch lovers who is not esp keen on vertigo, beautiful to look at, i get all the fetishism and play w identity, but as an actual watching experience, i find it a bit on the dull side
― Ward Fowler, Wednesday, 9 May 2012 07:57 (1 year ago) Permalink
did we ever get a ruling on whether tv movies count before i submit my fake ballot?
― jesus christ (strongo hulkington's ghost dad), Wednesday, 9 May 2012 13:46 (1 year ago) Permalink
You can put a YouTube video on your ballot for all it counts.
― jungleous butterflies strange birds (Eric H.), Wednesday, 9 May 2012 13:51 (1 year ago) Permalink
if i really did get a ballot the temptation to be silly would be too great
― jesus christ (strongo hulkington's ghost dad), Wednesday, 9 May 2012 13:56 (1 year ago) Permalink
i think if queen of the dammed places we'll know which ilxor to blame
― Ward Fowler, Wednesday, 9 May 2012 13:58 (1 year ago) Permalink
Annie HallFanny and AlexanderNight of the HunterAguirre: The Wrath of GodJackie BrownBlade RunnerTouch of EvilWings of DesireNorth By NorthwestJules and Jim
― Look at how funky he is! (jer.fairall), Wednesday, 9 May 2012 13:59 (1 year ago) Permalink
Mostly I'd have to make the choice whether to have one token pick or go full-tilt gay. A ballot with one Pink Narcissus is fine. A ballot filled with Boom, Mommie Dearest, Un Chant d'amour, Showgirls and All About Eve is also fine. A ballot with 2 or 3 slots mixed in along with, say, Gertrud, Taste of Cherry and/or Rear Window looks a little weird.
― jungleous butterflies strange birds (Eric H.), Wednesday, 9 May 2012 14:26 (1 year ago) Permalink
A very big vote will take place in my grade 6 class sometime in the next few weeks. As I always do in conjunction with Welles' birthday (May 6), I showed them the first three minutes of Kane. They were definitely interested--a lot more than they were in MCA's death. I told them about the S&S poll, dramatically announcing that it was voted #1 in 1962, in 1972, etc. So I'll give them a choice soon as to whether they want to watch Kane, Bridge to Terabithia (we read the novel), or Where the Wild Things Are. Bridge will win, but I'm predicting three or four votes for Kane.
― clemenza, Wednesday, 9 May 2012 23:10 (1 year ago) Permalink
http://blogs.indiewire.com/pressplay/video-essay-the-sight-and-sound-film-poll-a-tribute-to-roger-ebert-and-his-favorite-films
― Count-Dracula-Down (Eric H.), Wednesday, 23 May 2012 15:54 (1 year ago) Permalink
A friend sent me a link this afternoon where a local critic writes about his first-ever invitation and shares his list. This critic used to write about pop music in the '90s; he's at a newspaper where music writers generally go on to something deemed more important, like film or politics or reality television. He was not a good music writer.
1. 2001: A Space Odyssey2. The Tree of Life3. In the Mood for Love4. Vertigo5. Metropolis6. Tokyo Story7. Playtime8. La dolce vita9. Apocalypse Now10. Sunrise
Each pick is accompanied by a brief one-sentence comment.
I know I shouldn't do this, but the truth is--largely based on my memories of him as a music writer--I don't trust this list at all. In the accompanying piece he writes, "'Cue panic,' tweeted British critic Guy Lodge, when he received his own invite. As a fellow Sight & Sound poll virgin, I know exactly how he feels: What if I screw this up?" I guess I should appreciate the self-deprecation, but that's exactly how the list strikes me: "I think this is what you want--do I get a gold star now?" I mean, what does "What if I screw this up?" even mean? How do you screw up what is supposed to be, as I understand it, a list of your favourite films? (It's probably telling that his list is titled "________________'s 10 Greatest Films." You can go around and around forever on the distinction, or whether there is one--and I have.)
― clemenza, Wednesday, 23 May 2012 21:56 (1 year ago) Permalink
as long as The Shawshank Redemption isn't on there, it gets a pass from me.
― ryan, Wednesday, 23 May 2012 22:09 (1 year ago) Permalink
Well, that's one more ballot in #teamvertigo's favor.
― Count-Dracula-Down (Eric H.), Wednesday, 23 May 2012 22:11 (1 year ago) Permalink
also, 2 votes for newest Malick, too. o_0
― Count-Dracula-Down (Eric H.), Wednesday, 23 May 2012 22:12 (1 year ago) Permalink
(with Ebert's)
― Count-Dracula-Down (Eric H.), Wednesday, 23 May 2012 22:13 (1 year ago) Permalink
i think as a list by and more importantly FOR film critics/academics/passionate laymen/etc yeah it's pretty boring, but that's a decent list for someone newly interested in older or classic films, and at least a few of those would hit home with most people. films like that are good landmarks for finding your way around to a more personal or even idiosyncratic relationship to movies.
― ryan, Wednesday, 23 May 2012 22:14 (1 year ago) Permalink
Still can't shake my hunch that S&S's big innovation for 2012 is a third list comprised totally of new media votes.
― Count-Dracula-Down (Eric H.), Wednesday, 23 May 2012 22:14 (1 year ago) Permalink
feel like the list after 20 or so is gonna be pretty interesting this time.
― ryan, Wednesday, 23 May 2012 22:17 (1 year ago) Permalink
I'm doing something I try not to do anymore (i.e., I used to do it), which is to start analyzing someone's motivations for liking/disliking something, rather than just accept what they say at face value. It's also the Kael part of me that I'll probably never shake--she once had a line to the effect that she didn't trust people whose tastes were too exquisite.
― clemenza, Wednesday, 23 May 2012 22:21 (1 year ago) Permalink
she was the proto-internet in many ways
― Fas Ro Duh (Gukbe), Wednesday, 23 May 2012 22:34 (1 year ago) Permalink
Picking 10 films wouldn't say much about my taste in films, just my taste in symbolism.
― World Congress of Itch (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 24 May 2012 00:17 (1 year ago) Permalink
ie, it's almost as much a fraud as the presidential election.
― World Congress of Itch (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 24 May 2012 00:18 (1 year ago) Permalink
was wondering how you were gonna work that in there. nice.
― flesh, the devil, and a wolf (wolf) (amateurist), Thursday, 24 May 2012 03:33 (1 year ago) Permalink
How many of you would shy away from voting for a film just because it's new(ish)? Do you feel that a film needs to gather a little dust and gain a little paunch before you would feel comfortable calling it one of the ten best films ever, or would you be comfortable declaring the all-time greatness of a film that just came out the previous year? I'm just asking in general, not specifically about the film whose title I'm obviously tiptoeing around (Green Lantern).
― Quiet Desperation, LLC (Deric W. Haircare), Thursday, 24 May 2012 03:40 (1 year ago) Permalink
that is yr most shameless troll evah
― World Congress of Itch (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 24 May 2012 03:57 (1 year ago) Permalink
i think it was a joke
yeah, i'd be reluctant to throw a brand-newish film on there. i think that's true of most folks. in the 2002 poll there were very few films from the mid-late 1990s on there.
― flesh, the devil, and a wolf (wolf) (amateurist), Thursday, 24 May 2012 04:39 (1 year ago) Permalink
i might vote for a 90s film. maybe even early 00s. last five years just seems iffy for reasons i cant even fully explain/defend.
― me so fat (strongo hulkington's ghost dad), Thursday, 24 May 2012 04:43 (1 year ago) Permalink
i'm waiting to see the raven at the local 2nd run theater before i finalize anything.
― flesh, the devil, and a wolf (wolf) (amateurist), Thursday, 24 May 2012 06:07 (1 year ago) Permalink
i am kinda with you in just fliply dismissing that guy's list as sorta boring, clemenza. i think i have made ilx lists and caved to pressure to include some canon titles so it doesn't look like i'm above them/so it looks like i know what i'm talking about.
who was the guy who made the weirdest list ever. i liked that guy. i'd be into including some recent stuff - didn't someone here refer to like millennial antiseptic arthouse, as a genre? that kinda thing. kiarostamis and tsais. there's gotta be some of the like internationally-fetishised breakout new international cinemas picks in the next poll.
― blossom smulch (schlump), Thursday, 24 May 2012 10:39 (1 year ago) Permalink
calling Kiarostami "antiseptic" is weird, Tsai too given all the stagnant water.
― World Congress of Itch (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 24 May 2012 11:01 (1 year ago) Permalink
no you're right. i'm just throwing them all in together as ambassadors of new-thoughtful-world-cinemas. i think i read antiseptic as pretty much referring to tsai, though, or at least very delicate & deliberate branches of contemplative new stuff.
― blossom smulch (schlump), Thursday, 24 May 2012 12:07 (1 year ago) Permalink