December Film Journal
Boyfriends and Girlfriends* (Eric Rohmer, 1987)
No Country for Old Men (Ethan Coen and Joel Coen, 2007)
Grey Gardens* (Ellen Hovde, Albert Maysles, David Maysles, and Muffie Meyer, 1975)
Juliet of the Spirits (Federico Fellini, 1965)
Day for Night (François Truffaut, 1973)
Killer of Sheep (Charles Burnett, 1977)
White Christmas* (Michael Curtiz, 1954)
Salaam Bombay!* (Mira Nair, 1988)
Meet Me in St. Louis* (Vincente Minnelli, 1944)
It's a Wonderful Life* (Frank Capra, 1946)
Away from Her (Sarah Polley, 2006)
Streetwise (Martin Bell, 1884)
The Roman Spring of Mrs. Stone (José Quintero, 1961)
Love in the Afternoon* (Eric Rohmer, 1972)
The Little Girl Who Lives Down the Lane (Nicolas Gessner, 1976)
All the King's Men (Steven Zaillian, 2006)
3 Women* (Robert Altman, 1977)
Rebecca* (Alfred Hitchcock, 1940)
Anastasia (Anatole Litvak, 1956)
Lolita (Stanley Kubrick, 1962)
Heaven Can Wait (Ernst Lubitsch, 1943)
Harvey (Henry Koster, 1950)
*rewatch
theater
Labels: film journal (2007)
posted by Diane @ 10:20 AM
7 comments
7 Comments:
Happy New Year, Diane. Looks like you worked in some quality film viewing! Curious what you thought of 'All the King's Men,' as another fan of the novel, and compared to the Robert Rossen version. Also, 'No Country for Old Men,' which is coming to our little art theater next week and is tops on my list of films to see ...
Darn good month, it seems.
Indeed, Jason—it was an especially fine month. By the way, it's great to see you here!
Happy New Year to you, Mark! I remember our previous discussion about All the King's Men, and I pretty much agree with everything you said—I liked it more than the original film version, which really didn't do much for me, but Penn's histrionics got old, espeically all of the arm-waving. Yeesh, tone it down, already, even if you are playing Willie Stark! I thought the rest of the cast was fine, and I liked the look of the film. So it wasn't a bad watch, overall, but it wasn't a great watch, and it's not something I'll remember for all that long. That's a shame, considering the greatness of the book.
I'll come back with thoughts on No Country....
I recently saw the newer movie of All The King's Men with my folks, who had just read the book. They thought it was a big letdown as an adaptation, giving every plot point in the book the once-over-lightly treatment, like Masterpiece Theatre with Hollywood gloss. IT wa slike a waxwork of a book instead of a movie. By the end when Penn's blood and the assassin's flow together in the grooves of the state seal on the floor while a ponderous orchestra chugs away, my (very polite and genteel) parents were about to start throwing their popcorn at the TV.
I loved the old movie in college, but I need to reexamine it.
What did you think of Lolita? I love the novel, and have long been fixated on various attempts to adapt it.
('ve done almost no movie watching lately...
Mark, has No Country arrived in your city? Maybe you've seen it? I have a feeling you might like it. I found it interesting. We can email more about it if you want to, or discuss it more here when you've seen it (that's optimistic considering my job now...and what I'm about to get hit with during the next several months).
Aaron, I enjoyed Lolita. I really like Mason, and he was excellent here, as was Winters. I found the whole thing pretty fascinating. I've never read the book, and now I'm curious about the more recent film.
Diane, 'No Country' is playing in town now, for the next two weeks. If we can line up a babysitter before then, we'll take it in ... otherwise I'll be stuck watching it on DVD later.
So I'm *still* the only one willing to admit that I really, really liked Zaillan's adaptation of "All the King's Men"? It's two movies, really, and I liked the Penn portion much more than the Jude Law "half" of the movie the first time I saw it. However, it's the dynamic between the characters played by Law and Hopkins that gives the film, in he end, its power, and I realized that the first time I saw it. My impression of that half of the film grew on second viewing, while Penn's performance, which I had thought of very high caliber, diminished somewhat for me.
The film *looks* good, and the performances are good. I didn't see much to *not* like in this film. I was surprised at the univeral hate for it, but I also really liked "Freedomland" from that same year -- another movie that took a savage beating from critics, and met with little viewer response. I honestly questioned my taste and priorities for a time after realizing just how much in the minority I was on those two films.
That passed. And now I'm free to write my latest rave, for "Welcome Home Roscoe Jenkins," which I saw last week. (Just KIDDING! Terrible movie.)
Post a Comment
<< Home