The (Now-Overrated) ILX Top 100 Films of the 2000s Poll Results

"also ratatouille is a bizarre food to be the focus"

Uh.

One of the things I like best about Far From Heaven is that it's able to function as a perfectly engaging, emotionally rich narrative apart from its essentially gimmicky conceit.

Also: what do you think happened between Quaid and the boy who picked him up by the pool? Did he help him take off his bathrobe?

Thank god Sirk's dialogue was written by, um, wankers then.

Where did it say in the question that it had to be an original character?

my point is that Mr. Potato Head is a memorable character in and of itself, independent of Toy Story. So saying you can draw him from memory has zero reflection on the actual quality of the character design in Toy Story, because the image is pretty well burned into the retina of popular culture after 50 years of being one of the most popular toys ever. If yr evaluating the memorable qualities of character design in Toy Story, maybe stick to referring to characters that were actually designed for the movie.

re: fantastic mr fox, turn the crossfader all the way to the right so that the audio is coming from the lynch short to get the effect:

http://twoyoutubevideosandamotherfuckingcrossfader.com/#1v6-T52zLO0/_qWIlgemp9k

enjoyed far from heavens reserved warmth - irl sympathetic people in a shit spot - it was kinda too reserved tho, mannered even - didnt vote for it but you know i couldve

How many characters from Far From Heaven can you draw from memory?

btw, I like "academic" movies, what do you think Kubrick is? It is not equivalent to "unfeeling."

jaymc OTM

also ratatouille is a bizarre food to be the focus.

maybe for today's extreme nacho generation, but even if you grew up in middle america on pop-food stalwarts like julia child/jacques pepin/joy of cooking, this isn't exactly andrew zimmern territory.

thought the characters in ratatouille were pretty darn boring except for the crit. wish i'd liked it more tbh, it seemed made for me :(

Kubrick never remade Ozu remaking McCarey, iirc.

He just made Eyes Wide Shut.

maybe for today's extreme nacho generation, but even if you grew up in middle america on pop-food stalwarts like julia child/jacques pepin/joy of cooking, this isn't exactly andrew zimmern territory.

― ┌∩┐(◕_◕)┌∩┐ (Steve Shasta), Friday, February 5, 2010 1:35 PM (3 seconds ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

ya i agree, what is weird about ratatouille being the focus?

what else could they have called it?

"the great mouse-steak"?

extreme nachos, kayaking

con: i don't like sirk, fassbinder, or 'far from heaven'

pro: i like julianne moore

btw Shakey, Eric was referring to one specific Fassbinder film, Fear Eats the Soul, which is a tonal 180-degrees-different remake of All That Heaven Allows, which FFH also somewhat is.

Kubrick sorta remade Max Ophuls a couple times (or at least for a reel or two).

should have been about french fries imo

Kubrick never remade Ozu remaking McCarey, iirc.

must...not...mention...De Paaaaaaaaallll.....

yeah man, ratatouille was the shit i was brought up on.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v212/etienne_saint/elephant.jpg

the cinema is not real life. versimilitude is only that: an approximation. a shadow. stylization is one way "around" this concern but it is really not a way around it at all, just a different way of approaching it.

the massacre happened, it was awful, some victims are now disabled or spent years recovering...not to mention the friends and relatives of those killed. the film in reenacting much of the event (van sant says it isn't strictly columbine-aspired but that's b.s.) raises a moral question for me.... it inevitably (despite all attempts) somewhat reduces the event, cartoonizes it. that's what art does, i think, most of the time. which can be useful and didactic (not in the pejorative sense)...it can clear unnecessary things away. b ut in this case it seemed to take an event with a lot of real pain and then declare, "all glory to aesthetics!"

obv. i didn't HATE the film...i liked much in it...but would that van sant could have just made a portrait of an american high school w/o the massacre stuff.

― amateurist

what i disliked mainly was the actual school violence. i found it somewhat trite. i never felt like i was being offered anything to think about and just something to look at. the idea of the maladjusted, misunderstood youth was (for me) exhibited much more strongly in the beginning of the film. plus, if you know anything of the film (which presumably, everyone going to see it does) you are just waiting for the shooting to begin and it becomes a lame eventuality.

― Dean Gulberry

I thought it was great, despite the silly parts that were already mentioned by many (bulimia, video game, and shower scenes). It did seem a little consciously contrarian, like it was trying to be exactly the opposite of what anyone would expect from a Columbine movie. And as others said, it might have been a better movie without the actual killings. But then I usually feel that way about teen horror movies too (which are nice sub-Dazed and Confused slices of teenage life until the slasher comes along).

I loved how positive the killers were. The little pep speech about "staying focused" was amazing.

― Chris H.

Come anticipate Elephant with me

#68

Elephant
Gus Van Sant
2003
United States
(267 points, 12 votes, 1 first place)

Haynes remaking Ratatouille.

Pro: Everything!
Con: The comments to follow.

after Safe and Velvet Goldmine, Far From Heaven was a little bit of a letdown for me. I think I would enjoy it now more, having lower expectations

Paranoid Park >>>>> Elephant (though distinctions not cost-effective, as Christgau used to say)

If I'd seen Elephant at any other time of day than 3 in the morning, I'd probably have not liked much about it. It strikes a real chord in the middle of the night, though.

btw Shakey, Eric was referring to one specific Fassbinder film, Fear Eats the Soul,

ah - I have been curious about that one (cf. primal scream ref lolz)

pro: it's named after a really awesome animal
con: it sucks

hmmm never saw Elephant, gave up on Van Sant so so long ago

only saw bits of elephant, but what was that about it having cross-promotional ties with an elephant video game or something?

elephant, not fantastic mr fox i mean

xpost to self

http://www.babble.com/CS/blogs/strollerderby/2008/12/happy-elephant-01.jpg

A Gerry video game, iirc.

xxposts

It's named after the Clarke flick right? And I don't think the title works properly in its new context.

pro: it's named after a really awesome animal
con: it sucks

haha otm

A Gerry video game would be even more perverse than an Elephant video game!

pro: 360-degree shot in Gay-Straight Alliance meeting (tho then he used it in a better film, Milk), gliding Steadicam

con: aura of significance, typically unreadable pretty skaterboy at center, kiss of killers

digging omar's selection of comments.

'sucks' is maybe harsh on 'elephant', but i can think of way better ways to pass 90 minutes -- hanging out on ilx, for example. it's just kind of meh, to use a word from 2004. also the alan clarke original pisses all over it.

sort of ok, not great overall

Elephant_ The "In" Animal Crush of 2003

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/418tNZ7nksL._SS500_.jpg

hmmm never saw Elephant, gave up on Van Sant so so long ago

― The Tommy Westphall Universe Hypothesis (Shakey Mo Collier), Friday, February 5, 2010 1:44 PM (1 minute ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

it's basically "finding forrester 2"

haven't seen either but how does this fake columbine movie compare with that fake kurt cobain movie?

theyre pretty simillar

shakey, that is probably one of the better fassbinder films to start with...

i liked elephant!!!

Fake Cobain movie is the worst Van Sant I've seen so far except that Matt Damon one.

Have you seen Finding Forrester though?

hey 2 in a row i voted for. elephant is one of those that i thought was "good" the first time i saw it but took some time to sort of gel for me afterward. by the time i saw it again it seemed really pretty great. there's so much tension between how little he lets you into the characters but how close he forces you to them physically and p.o.v.-wise.

u d man now dg