[quote]Big Kahuna wrote:
Well in Ebert’s passing, there can be no doubt that he didn’t forget to leave some of us behind.
The ending was perfect, her character is so soulful and genuine that Ozu could not have planned a better outcome for the final scenes than the one he filmed. I look forward to seeing her in Late Spring also, it interests me to see the earlier pre-married life of Nariko’s character and later married in Early Summer, she seems to definitely be an actress that gave all her heart to the cinema, there are very rare photos on the internet of (apparently) her at ninety, still alive and still smiling vividly. To be out of the public eye for so long is incredible, it seems she is as humble in reality as she was in character.
I should also recommend a film called Ugetsu, apparently not quite so popular in Japan as it was outside of it. But of all films, Ugetsu has among it some of the best cinematography I’ve ever seen in a film, in particular the opening and closing scenes, they leave a mark on me so profound that I find them mostly unable to compare to other great works. It takes place in 16th Century Feudal Japan, a cultural time period I find incredibly intriguing. I would urge you to see it if you haven’t already, the premise sounds rough and brutal, but I promise that the film is ceaselessly beautiful from beginning to end.
And please, call me Sam.[/quote]
Thanks for the suggestion BK. I know of Ugetsu but have not seen it. I certainly will, now.
I also did not know about there actually being photos of present day Hara Setsuko. I think I may not want to see them, though, actually. I prefer to know and remember her as she is in her movies.
[quote]RATTLEHEAD wrote:
Gutted that he is no longer here to hate on Roland Emmerich’s atrocious films.[/quote]
Watching Emmerich films are like crawling up a children’s play park slide covered in vaseline constantly with no rest for two hours, only to reach the top, look back, and see that none of the other children care. And now you’re just a big kid that feels stupid, tired, and is covered in masses of gloopy petroleum jelly.
[quote]RATTLEHEAD wrote:
Gutted that he is no longer here to hate on Roland Emmerich’s atrocious films.[/quote]
Watching Emmerich films are like crawling up a children’s play park slide covered in vaseline constantly with no rest for two hours, only to reach the top, look back, and see that none of the other children care. And now you’re just a big kid that feels stupid, tired, and is covered in masses of gloopy petroleum jelly.[/quote]
[quote]Karado wrote:
Well Cortes, I figure if a guy that wrote the immoral, trashy but enjoyable “Beyond The Valley of the Dolls” makes it to heaven like you believe he will, I think we’re all a shoe in to paradise by comparison.
Roger never was unrepentant about making that film, in fact 'last I heard he was still pretty proud of it.
I liked Roger anyway, he was cool.[/quote]
Hope you’ll read this to the end. It answers your post perfectly, and is an excellent article, to boot.
[quote]DarkNinjaa wrote:
Aww Shit. Why am I feeling sad about this? I had a love/hate relationship with him.
RIP, old fart.[/quote]
You should appreciate him. He always spoke his mind and said exactly what he believed, popular or unpopular.
No facetiousness implied. He was by FAR my favorite critic and will be sorely, sorely missed.
This one hurts a lot more than usual. [/quote]
Don’t get me wrong. Although there are some issues I disagreed on with Roger, I’d liked the old fart. The fact that he spoke his mind without fear of repercussion was what made him fucking awesome to me.
He was a great writer and thinker and his sentences were always constructed so eloquently. I was sad when he lost half his jaw but, he dusted himself off and lived on his life like a warrior. He’ll be greatly missed by many.
[quote]Karado wrote:
R.I.P. Roger Ebert. I’m glad Ebert retracted on BLADE RUNNER, but IMHO he was wrong
not recommending FULL METAL JACKET, and Gene Siskel was right back then, because FMJ is considered a classic
now as well.
[/quote]
Amen! My number one disagreement with Ebert was FMJ.[/quote]
Given Ebert’s diatribe starting at the 5:58 mark, it’s a wonder he rarely applied the same vitriol or criticism to Tarantino, whose films are as filled with recycled cliches as any in recent memory.
[quote]DarkNinjaa wrote:
I was sad when he lost half his jaw but, he dusted himself off and lived on his life like a warrior. He’ll be greatly missed by many.
[/quote]
Amen. The fact that his output, style and attitude pretty much did not change after all that happened to him is deserving of the utmost respect. What a badass.
Armageddon - “Here it is at last, the first 150-minute trailer. “Armageddon” is cut together like its own highlights. Take almost any 30 seconds at random, and you’d have a TV ad. The movie is an assault on the eyes, the ears, the brain, common sense and the human desire to be entertained. No matter what they’re charging to get in, it’s worth more to get out.”
Pearl Harbor - “It’s a two hour movie squeezed into three hours.”
Silent Tongue - “I have seen WHOLE movies that seemed shorter than the last half hour of this one.”
The Village - “It’s so witless, in fact, that when we do discover the secret, we want to rewind the film so we don’t know the secret anymore. And then keep on rewinding, and rewinding, until we’re back at the beginning, and can get up from our seats and walk backward out of the theater and go down the up escalator and watch the money spring from the cash register into our pockets.”
“Why must a film explain everything? Why must every motivation be spelled out? Aren’t many films fundamentally the same film, with only the specifics changed? Aren’t many of them telling the same story? Seeking perfection, we see what our dreams and hopes might look like. We realize they come as a gift through no power of our own, and if we lose them, isn’t that almost worse than never having had them in the first place?”
From his final review, of To The Wonder by Terence Malick
[quote]MytchBucanan wrote:
Some of Ebert’s best jabs at bad films…
Armageddon - “Here it is at last, the first 150-minute trailer. “Armageddon” is cut together like its own highlights. Take almost any 30 seconds at random, and you’d have a TV ad. The movie is an assault on the eyes, the ears, the brain, common sense and the human desire to be entertained. No matter what they’re charging to get in, it’s worth more to get out.”
Pearl Harbor - “It’s a two hour movie squeezed into three hours.”
Silent Tongue - “I have seen WHOLE movies that seemed shorter than the last half hour of this one.”
The Village - “It’s so witless, in fact, that when we do discover the secret, we want to rewind the film so we don’t know the secret anymore. And then keep on rewinding, and rewinding, until we’re back at the beginning, and can get up from our seats and walk backward out of the theater and go down the up escalator and watch the money spring from the cash register into our pockets.”[/quote]
Lolling at ALL of these. He had such wit. I love it.
Yuck, the ‘twist’ in THE VILLAGE was that they were in the Modern times rather than the
1800’s…there, if I just spoiled it for someone I really didn’t because I just saved you
about 2 hours I wish I could get back. THE VILLAGE is also a sure cure for Insomnia… I’ve seen
a better film on teeth.