Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

BrookM wrote:Unforgiven and the Wild Bunch as two of the best de-constructive westerns ever in my opinion.

Ooh, good ones. I'm adding Unforgiven to my list above.

That said, I'd say Unforgiven it isn't a deconstruction (the theme that to protect itself from barbarians civilisation must turn to its own barbarians isn't really deconstructionist, its basically the premise of every great Western).

I have no idea if the same applies to The Wild Bunch, I've never really analysed it. It's just too much damn fun and I think it might be ruined a little by thinking about what its about.

The Wild Bunch is about the death of the Wild West. The introduction of the auto mobile, a machine gun mowing down hordes of soldiers, William Holden using an automatic pistol instead of a revolver for most of the movie, old men unable to do anything else, even though time has marched on not needing them any more.

As for Unforgiven, next to having stellar performances from Clint, Morgan and Gene, it's oddly about standing up for those with no rights (whores), that old habits don't die and that there are no real good guys. I especially liked the scene by the camp fire where William coldly said "We're just two guys, nothing more" and he said it with such a lack of conviction. Simply stellar.

I'm a bit of a movie nut so I have about 5000 but here's some off the top of my head

*Alien
*Star Wars
*Tora Tora Tora
*Long Riders
*LOTR (all three but two towers best)
*Caddyshack/Stripes/Meatballs
*Terminator II
*Saving Private Ryan / Schindler's List (I view them as Spielberg's Ode to WWII)
*The Thing (one and only original black and white)
*Creature from the Black Lagoon
*True Grit/Rooster Cogburn
*Glory
*Seven
*Platoon
*History of the World, Blazing Saddles, Young Frankenstein



Ran, 7 samurai etc, Unforgiven, are all excellent.

Reservoir Dogs is usually the first one that comes to mind, so i'll stick with that.

Manchu wrote:Have you seen Kagemusha? I liked that one better than Ran.

Wrexasaur wrote:I have seen all of Kurosawas work and by far the ones that stand out for me are:

RAN

-and-

7 Samurai

All others simply fail to stick in my mind.

I actually didn't care for Kagemusha that much. Ran is fantastic, better than its source material I think! The Bad Sleep Well I also like very much but you have to stick with it because it is the final scene that makes that film. Stray Dog, a Japanese Film Noir classic and an interesting view of post WWII (right after) Japan. Yojimbo as well, of course. You know, I have yet to see Sanjuro, is it worth it? Hidden Fortress is good but to me it isn't nearly as good as so many of his others. Throne of Blood is good just for the arrow stunts near the end and I saw it quite young so the moving forest freaked me out at first.

Seven Samurai I also saw quite young and it stuck before I ever realized its cinematic significance. If anyone cares, the newer (1-2 years old, I think) DVD release in the black box from Criterion Collection is really worth it. I was skeptical how much they could 'digitally restore' such an old film but I was quite shocked at the improvement over the older DVD. Totally worth it!

You know, I see a few people pick Lord of the Rings. I really think they are marginal at best (I can't be the only one), except possibly The Two Towers, that one stands out. I enjoy them but I think Jackson's earlier stuff is much better and I think his style lends itself much more to comedy horror. For me, Dead Alive is the pinnacle of Peter Jackson.

Top 5 (in no particular order):
*Fight Club
*Dumb & Dumber
*Empire Strikes Back
*Unforgiven
*Pulp Fiction

These are the 5 movies that I think at any point (regarding the situation) I could sit down and watch. Now you have to understand that I have this thing about watching movies. I am very particular because my mind is bear-trap when it comes to unimportant things. If I've seen a movie in the last 6 months to a year I probably won't want to see it again for a while. I just remember lines and the plot so well that I feel it's a waste of time to rewatch it. For me to be willing to view a movie at any point means that they have left an impression on me (not always a good thing).

True Romance.

Aliens
Alien
Black Hawk Down
Lucky Number Slevin
Wall-e
Dark Knight

GoFenris wrote:I actually didn't care for Kagemusha that much. Ran is fantastic, better than its source material I think! The Bad Sleep Well I also like very much but you have to stick with it because it is the final scene that makes that film. Stray Dog, a Japanese Film Noir classic and an interesting view of post WWII (right after) Japan. Yojimbo as well, of course. You know, I have yet to see Sanjuro, is it worth it? Hidden Fortress is good but to me it isn't nearly as good as so many of his others. Throne of Blood is good just for the arrow stunts near the end and I saw it quite young so the moving forest freaked me out at first.

Seven Samurai is undoubtedly a great film. So is Ran. I like both of them very much. The reason that I like Kurosawa so much is that he is a very sincere humanist. The reason that Hidden Fortress strikes me as so good is because it treats its characters with love and dignity. I like Kagemusha for the same reason. That's a weird thing to say, I know, but maybe it's worth thinking about. Red Beard and Ikiru are great examples of this, too, as is High and Low. Well, I'm not going to write a lecture on Kurosawa here but I would strongly recommend watching these films (or re-watching them, Wrex). And Sanjuro is at least as good as Yojimbo if you like Yojimbo for the right reasons.

Kurosawa's Ikiru was a strong movie, a completely different direction from his other, best known movies.

BrookM wrote:Kurosawa's Ikiru was a strong movie, a completely different direction from his other, best known movies.

I always thought of it as paired with Red Beard. Ikiru poses the questions: "How should we treat our fellow human beings?" and Red Beard answers "Like this and for the reason that they are our fellows."

Monty python and the holy grail. Followed by Napoleon Dynamite.

Wow, many great movies here. A couple I enjoyed myself that aren't mentioned here are the Cube series movies which goes as followed:

Cube
Cube 2: Hypercube
Cube Zero

They were definitely some odd movies, but enjoyable in my opinion.

BrookM wrote:As for Unforgiven, next to having stellar performances from Clint, Morgan and Gene, it's oddly about standing up for those with no rights (whores), that old habits don't die and that there are no real good guys. I especially liked the scene by the camp fire where William coldly said "We're just two guys, nothing more" and he said it with such a lack of conviction. Simply stellar.

A better line is "we all got it comin', kid." Devastating line. I've always viewed Unforgiven as an incredibly violent anti-violence film, and a bit of a mediation on the value of life in parts.

Hard to believe no one (IIRC) mentioned 2001 or The Usual Suspects. Personally I don't think Singer has distinguished himself since, but I can watch TUS again and again even though I'm aware of the twist ending. I recognize you might have to be in the right mood/state to fully enjoy 2001, but I still think it's a masterpiece. It's interesting how 2001's SFX (because they're going for realism and not Spitfires in space) hold up much better than Star Wars later in the decade.

The Great Escape also sucks me in every time it's on TV, which can put me in a bad state the next morning if it comes on at 11 pm or something similar. I dunno if it's one of my fave films ever, but that has to mean something.

Manchu wrote:

GoFenris wrote:I actually didn't care for Kagemusha that much. Ran is fantastic, better than its source material I think! The Bad Sleep Well I also like very much but you have to stick with it because it is the final scene that makes that film. Stray Dog, a Japanese Film Noir classic and an interesting view of post WWII (right after) Japan. Yojimbo as well, of course. You know, I have yet to see Sanjuro, is it worth it? Hidden Fortress is good but to me it isn't nearly as good as so many of his others. Throne of Blood is good just for the arrow stunts near the end and I saw it quite young so the moving forest freaked me out at first.

Seven Samurai is undoubtedly a great film. So is Ran. I like both of them very much. The reason that I like Kurosawa so much is that he is a very sincere humanist. The reason that Hidden Fortress strikes me as so good is because it treats its characters with love and dignity. I like Kagemusha for the same reason. That's a weird thing to say, I know, but maybe it's worth thinking about. Red Beard and Ikiru are great examples of this, too, as is High and Low. Well, I'm not going to write a lecture on Kurosawa here but I would strongly recommend watching these films (or re-watching them, Wrex). And Sanjuro is at least as good as Yojimbo if you like Yojimbo for the right reasons.

Yes, High and Low I also liked quite a bit. It's on my shelf and I forgot it and what's worse I actually got the end of that confused with The Bad Sleep Well. It is the final scene of High and Low that defines that whole picture.

I'll have to check out Sanjuro, Ikiru and Red Beard (I did see Red Beard but it was a long, long time ago). Netflix here I come...

gorgon wrote:

BrookM wrote:As for Unforgiven, next to having stellar performances from Clint, Morgan and Gene, it's oddly about standing up for those with no rights (whores), that old habits don't die and that there are no real good guys. I especially liked the scene by the camp fire where William coldly said "We're just two guys, nothing more" and he said it with such a lack of conviction. Simply stellar.

A better line is "we all got it comin', kid." Devastating line. I've always viewed Unforgiven as an incredibly violent anti-violence film, and a bit of a mediation on the value of life in parts.

Hard to believe no one (IIRC) mentioned 2001 or The Usual Suspects. Personally I don't think Singer has distinguished himself since, but I can watch TUS again and again even though I'm aware of the twist ending. I recognize you might have to be in the right mood/state to fully enjoy 2001, but I still think it's a masterpiece. It's interesting how 2001's SFX (because they're going for realism and not Spitfires in space) hold up much better than Star Wars later in the decade.

The Great Escape also sucks me in every time it's on TV, which can put me in a bad state the next morning if it comes on at 11 pm or something similar. I dunno if it's one of my fave films ever, but that has to mean something.

2001 is good but I have to be in the mood and uninterrupted, preferably with a good sound system.

Top of my list is Pee Wee's Big Adventure. The best comedy ever made, thanks to Phil Hartman (RIP)

#2 would be Dumb & Dumber

I love all the classic stuff like star wars, indiana jones, lord of the rings, etc.. but those are 2 movies I just never ever tire of seeing

Frazzled wrote:2001 is good but I have to be in the mood and uninterrupted, preferably with a good sound system.

What an incredibly overrated snooze fest. And I've heard all the "it was incredible at the time" nonsense. But riddle me this: if 2001 is such a great masterpiece why does it always come down to the special effects? By that standard Michael Bay is as great a director as Kubrick. Give me the The Shining, Dr. Stangelove, or even Paths of Glory--those are good movies. But 2001 . . . at least I didn't fall asleep through Star Trek: Nemesis.

The main problem I have with 2001 is staying awake through it. Man I hate that mellow classical music.

warpcrafter wrote:The main problem I have with 2001 is staying awake through it. Man I hate that mellow classical music.

Hey don't blame the great music that Kubrick ripped off (if you don't know what I mean, look up Gyorgy Ligeti) for his extremely boring sequences and too-long-to-be-eerie-and-so-just-awkward silences. That said, I agree: staying awake through that movie could be a contest.

Having read the book 2001 first, I have to agree. The movie moves a bit too slow even though it is a fairly accurate adaptation, despite the change-up on planets. I do somewhat enjoy the movie on its own merits although I don't go out of my way to see it and I believe Kubrick purposely made it somewhat vague. I would argue that most people that do not enjoy it simply don't 'get it' or don't care to. Which is okay because Kubrick isn't one that ever tried to please everyone.

Das Boot

GoFenris wrote:I would argue that most people that do not enjoy it simply don't 'get it' or don't care to.

Oh no, I get it. I gave the whole project the benefit of the doubt. I even read the book--which Clarke wrote, IIRC, at the same time that Kubrick made the film. There simply isn't that much to get and what is there is not very compelling to me.

Speaking of Kubrick,I have to add A Clockwork Orange to the favorites list.
Also,the first 3 Romero zombie films (Night,Dawn and Day of the Dead ).
And of course Blade Runner.

FITZZ wrote: Speaking of Kubrick,I have to add A Clockwork Orange to the favorites list.
Also,the first 3 Romero zombie films (Night,Dawn and Day of the Dead ).
And of course Blade Runner.

Yeah, I kind of had a clue you'd be into Romero's Zombie films, I don't know why?

Clockwork is a classic as is Dr. Strangelove. The Shining I saw when I was young and I couldn't sit through that stupid bathroom scene. I have since I've grown up but the movie is still creepy to me because of how it made me feel when I was younger. Silly, I know.

As far as Epics, I have a soft spot for Ben Hur (the Wiley version). Typing of Heston, Planet of the Apes is really great as well, I saw it again recently and I always seem to forget how good it is, especially compared to the sequels and re-make.

gorgon wrote:Hard to believe no one (IIRC) mentioned 2001 or The Usual Suspects. Personally I don't think Singer has distinguished himself since, but I can watch TUS again and again even though I'm aware of the twist ending. I recognize you might have to be in the right mood/state to fully enjoy 2001, but I still think it's a masterpiece. It's interesting how 2001's SFX (because they're going for realism and not Spitfires in space) hold up much better than Star Wars later in the decade.

I thought about mentioning 2001, and while it's a magnificent technical and artistic achievement, I couldn't ever say I love it because Kubrick's personal view is ultimately so cruel. Full Metal Jacket, The Shining, A Clockwork Orange, and Dr Strangelove are all just as brilliant, but similarly are films I couldn't say I love in the same way that I love films like Fargo.

I left out The Usual Suspects because I have sieve for a brain. I watched that film about two weeks ago and said then it was one of the best films of all time. Gyaargh. For the record, I think Singer distinguished himself with the first two X-Men films, a difficult property that could easily have ended up utterly inane summer movie filler (watch Singer's X-Men 2 then X-Men 3 immediately after, and you'll see how much difference a top flight directors makes). I thought Valkyrie was a very good film as well.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Manchu wrote:

What an incredibly overrated snooze fest. And I've heard all the "it was incredible at the time" nonsense. But riddle me this: if 2001 is such a great masterpiece why does it always come down to the special effects? By that standard Michael Bay is as great a director as Kubrick. Give me the The Shining, Dr. Stangelove, or even Paths of Glory--those are good movies. But 2001 . . . at least I didn't fall asleep through Star Trek: Nemesis.

It doesn't just come down to special effects. Effects are obviously important in a film that is largely visual, but the film isn't great because it had great effects. It's great because it is such a unique, powerful look at the concept of progress. It doesn't shy away from the ugly side of progress, it opens with the bones of the failed species, and is quite explicit in saying it was man's violence that put him ahead of the other animals, but it also shows the great achievements we are becoming capable of. Typical of Kubrick, he simply shows all sides of the concept, then invites us to form our own opinion.

But it is definitely slow and the ending is weird and full of immersion destroying symbolism that seemed so popular in the 1970s. And the film is so explicit and singularly focussed on its theme that you better be interested in exploring that idea because there is nothing else going on. So it isn't everyone's cup of tea, but it is one of the great artistic achievements of film.

sebster wrote:It doesn't just come down to special effects.

Yes, it usually does. But appreciate your attempt to defend it on different terms.

sebster wrote:But it is definitely slow and the ending is weird and full of immersion destroying symbolism that seemed so popular in the 1970s. And the film is so explicit and singularly focussed on its theme that you better be interested in exploring that idea because there is nothing else going on. So it isn't everyone's cup of tea, but it is one of the great artistic achievements of film.

Nah, it's really not. I know that's what everyone's heard (and so it's what everyone says) but it really is not that great of a film. It doesn't even explore that interesting of an idea. Perhaps the idea was more captivating in 1968--but who gives a crap? Herbert Spencer was everyone's favorite philosopher in the 1860s but who knows anything about him now? IMO, and let me make this clear that it is my opinion and doesn't have to be yours, this film has survived on hype alone since the seventies.

Manchu wrote:

sebster wrote:It doesn't just come down to special effects.

Yes, it usually does. But appreciate your attempt to defend it on different terms.

I have to disagree on this. Many of the 'better' examples of fantasy and more importantly, Science Fiction have rudimentary special effects yet superior writing. Doctor Who (the old series) is a great example of this. Part Sci-Fi, part fairy tale but all (well most of it) horribly low budget and often cheesy but it often asks some great questions.

Manchu wrote:...IMO, and let me make this clear that it is my opinion and doesn't have to be yours, this film has survived on hype alone since the seventies.

This is a great bit and true of SO many movies. It is how we remember them which leads to why we seek them out. I love Godzilla movies, even the newer ones, but they are all cheesy on some level. But they make me feel, "something I have not felt since...." Well, you get my point.

Manchu wrote:Nah, it's really not. I know that's what everyone's heard (and so it's what everyone says) but it really is not that great of a film. It doesn't even explore that interesting of an idea. Perhaps the idea was more captivating in 1968--but who gives a crap? Herbert Spencer was everyone's favorite philosopher in the 1860s but who knows anything about him now? IMO, and let me make this clear that it is my opinion and doesn't have to be yours, this film has survived on hype alone since the seventies.

Thing is, as a 13 or 14 year old, sitting there watching 2001 I was seeing a study on something I'd never really considered before (I knew about monkeys evolving into people and man heading into space but I'd never really thought that it's all really the same thing, and never thought about exactly what that thing is and what it really means). Or something, my summary there ends up sounding fairly banal, but that's another part of why 2001 is such an achievement... it's rare that film becomes the definitive exploration of an issue, to the point where the best start to discussing the concept isn't to summarise part of the movie, to watch the movie. So much of what it says is hard to put into words.

GoFenris wrote:But they make me feel, "something I have not felt since...." Well, you get my point.

You, sir, are awesome and get your point with what I feel must be the greatest accuracy.

sebster wrote:it's rare that film becomes the definitive exploration of an issue, to the point where the best start to discussing the concept isn't to summarise part of the movie, to watch the movie. So much of what it says is hard to put into words.

Okay: I'm not saying that the film has no merit. I simply don't think it deserves the amount of praise it constantly gets. It's not even as good as Blade Runner, for heaven's sake, but you don't hear people talking about Blade Runner as a major masterpiece of film. (Nor should they. It's good. It's just not that good.) Sometimes an incoherent book or film is actually just bad rather than "important."