virphen wrote:

CookieJon wrote:

virphen wrote:Superb in lots of ways, but they date, oh do they date.

North by Northwest is timeless.

You have to admit, it has a plot hole or two. For instance, you want to kill a guy... and you have a way of getting him wherever you want him. So naturally, you get him out all on his own on a highway... so far so good... and attack him with a ... a... crop duster? WTF?

Well a crop duster with a machine-gun!

Yes, it's contrived, but so what - it's one of the best sequences in movie history!

Hardly a "plot hole".

CookieJon wrote:

virphen wrote:

CookieJon wrote:

virphen wrote:Superb in lots of ways, but they date, oh do they date.

North by Northwest is timeless.

You have to admit, it has a plot hole or two. For instance, you want to kill a guy... and you have a way of getting him wherever you want him. So naturally, you get him out all on his own on a highway... so far so good... and attack him with a ... a... crop duster? WTF?

Well a crop duster with a machine-gun!

Yes, it's contrived, but so what - it's one of the best sequences in movie history!

Hardly a "plot hole".

Plot hole or not, it is one of the greatest. You're right about that. And the pacing! It's astounding how long he let that tension build. I think it was a stroke of genius to set that in the middle of nowhere. Claustrophobic tension ratcheting up in the viewer, while staring at a big open space. Real cognitive dissonance. Considered another way, it allowed time to let the feeling of isolation really sink in: this guy is totally alone. Nobody around for miles. There are some wonderful directors around today, but I doubt any of them would dare to try something so still and empty for so long. Nor are there many actors who could achieve the combination of patience, impatience, frustration, discomfort, fear, and calculation that Grant manages so subtly.

In a way, it's typical virtuoso Hitchcock: a possible plot hole totally fucking outweighed by a scene so memorable that it doesn't matter.

Slightly off topic but I saw what I seem to recall was a pretty dreadful thriller which had one of the most chilling endings ever. A group of teenagers think they have escaped in their mobile home from a Ku Klux Klan type mob which has been terrorising them all through the movie - and so does the viewer. The final shots are taken from an increasingly elevated viewpoint above the mobile home and it is finally seen that the whole lynch mob has grown in size, surrounded them and is slowly closing in.

Anyone know what that one was? It's a long shot, I know.

Blip wrote:

orpheus wrote:

SafeAsMilk wrote:And what a beautiful bit of nothing it was

+1. Loved it. And it stands up well; I just watched some episodes a few months ago. Fresh and strange as when they first breathed the scent of pine in that air.

I'm beginning to suspect we have similar tastes in cinema, Orpheus.  I haven't seen the film of Twin Peaks but the series was mesmerising.  To this day, I occasionally speak of a 'damned fine cup of coffee'.

To be clear, though, I was disappointed with the film ("Twin Peaks- Fire Walk With Me"). The series was so much better.

orpheus wrote:

CookieJon wrote:

virphen wrote:

CookieJon wrote:

North by Northwest is timeless.

You have to admit, it has a plot hole or two. For instance, you want to kill a guy... and you have a way of getting him wherever you want him. So naturally, you get him out all on his own on a highway... so far so good... and attack him with a ... a... crop duster? WTF?

Well a crop duster with a machine-gun!

Yes, it's contrived, but so what - it's one of the best sequences in movie history!

Hardly a "plot hole".

Plot hole or not, it is one of the greatest. You're right about that. And the pacing! It's astounding how long he let that tension build. I think it was a stroke of genius to set that in the middle of nowhere. Claustrophobic tension ratcheting up in the viewer, while staring at a big open space. Real cognitive dissonance. Considered another way, it allowed time to let the feeling of isolation really sink in: this guy is totally alone. Nobody around for miles. There are some wonderful directors around today, but I doubt any of them would dare to try something so still and empty for so long. Nor are there many actors who could achieve the combination of patience, impatience, frustration, discomfort, fear, and calculation that Grant manages so subtly.

In a way, it's typical virtuoso Hitchcock: a possible plot hole totally fucking outweighed by a scene so memorable that it doesn't matter.

Well exactly.

However, there is something about that scene that rankles, and that's that Eva Marie Saint has just sent an innocent man to his death! Kinda detracts from the sympathy for her character, although I suppose she's a victim herself, so...

I should watch it again I think.

orpheus wrote:

Blip wrote:

orpheus wrote:

SafeAsMilk wrote:And what a beautiful bit of nothing it was

+1. Loved it. And it stands up well; I just watched some episodes a few months ago. Fresh and strange as when they first breathed the scent of pine in that air.

I'm beginning to suspect we have similar tastes in cinema, Orpheus.  I haven't seen the film of Twin Peaks but the series was mesmerising.  To this day, I occasionally speak of a 'damned fine cup of coffee'.

To be clear, though, I was disappointed with the film ("Twin Peaks- Fire Walk With Me"). The series was so much better.

Loved the first series, but the second one seemed like flogging a dead horse and I never even bothered with the movie, although I quite like most of his other movies.

However! We had a recent David Lynch binge at the cookie household (because the BF had never seen any) and rented Twin Peaks series 1... but it was the entire series edited down to about 3 hours. I mean, what was the point of that? I thought the whole purpose of the show was hours and hours over weeks and weeks of very little happening very repetitively. 3-hour edit was a travesty, and completely unwatchable.

And I'm probably going to get banned for this, but the greatest of all may be the late films of Brakhage. Especially ones like "The Dante Quartet". Stunning to realize that this was not done digitally, but by laboriously hand-painting images onto each frame of film. 8 minutes long; took six years to make. Once you let go of thoughts about what movies are normally like, and let yourself adjust to his pacing and esthetic, it's breathtaking. Towering.

CookieJon wrote:

orpheus wrote:

Blip wrote:

orpheus wrote:

+1. Loved it. And it stands up well; I just watched some episodes a few months ago. Fresh and strange as when they first breathed the scent of pine in that air.

I'm beginning to suspect we have similar tastes in cinema, Orpheus.  I haven't seen the film of Twin Peaks but the series was mesmerising.  To this day, I occasionally speak of a 'damned fine cup of coffee'.

To be clear, though, I was disappointed with the film ("Twin Peaks- Fire Walk With Me"). The series was so much better.

Loved the first series, but the second one seemed like flogging a dead horse and I never even bothered with the movie, although I quite like most of his other movies.

However! We had a recent David Lynch binge at the cookie household (because the BF had never seen any) and rented Twin Peaks series 1... but it was the entire series edited down to about 3 hours. I mean, what was the point of that? I thought the whole purpose of the show was hours and hours over weeks and weeks of very little happening very repetitively. 3-hour edit was a travesty, and completely unwatchable.

Yeah, that sounds dreadful.

CookieJon wrote:
Loved the first series, but the second one seemed like flogging a dead horse and I never even bothered with the movie, although I quite like most of his other movies.

I pretty much share this view. Although when was the Log Lady introduced? I liked her.

CookieJon wrote:However! We had a recent David Lynch binge at the cookie household (because the BF had never seen any) and rented Twin Peaks series 1... but it was the entire series edited down to about 3 hours. I mean, what was the point of that? I thought the whole purpose of the show was hours and hours over weeks and weeks of very little happening very repetitively. 3-hour edit was a travesty, and completely unwatchable.

The whole point was indeed the drawn-out mesmerising repetition and overall weirdness, I'd have thought.

Fire Walk With Me is grrrreat. I love all that deliberate obscuring of dialogue by revving engines and loud music, I love the dreamy quality of it, backwards talking dwarves are teh win. Love it.

Blip wrote:Slightly off topic but I saw what I seem to recall was a pretty dreadful thriller which had one of the most chilling endings ever. A group of teenagers think they have escaped in their mobile home from a Ku Klux Klan type mob which has been terrorising them all through the movie - and so does the viewer. The final shots are taken from an increasingly elevated viewpoint above the mobile home and it is finally seen that the whole lynch mob has grown in size, surrounded them and is slowly closing in.

Anyone know what that one was? It's a long shot, I know.

No, but since we're playing Name That Movie I'll get in on the action with an unanswered question from another thread...

CookieJon wrote:Re: Papillon...

I thought I'd seen this movie years ago when I was a lad, and had remembered (wrongly, as it turns out) a scene in which the governor of some isolated prison-island, starved for intellectual stimulation, asks if any of the convicts can play Chess. Our hero (who I thought was Steve McQueen) says he can, hoping to bunk off doing hard labour and sit in a cosy room sipping cognac instead. Of course, it transpires he doesn't know how to play and punishment ensues.

I had always thought this scene came from this movie, but it doesn't!

So, what movie was I thinking of?

virphen wrote:

CookieJon wrote:

virphen wrote:Superb in lots of ways, but they date, oh do they date.

North by Northwest is timeless.

You have to admit, it has a plot hole or two. For instance, you want to kill a guy... and you have a way of getting him wherever you want him. So naturally, you get him out all on his own on a highway... so far so good... and attack him with a ... a... crop duster? WTF?

And, sure, if you think of it logically it makes no sense. Cinematically (is that a word?), OTOH, it works beautifully.

Anyway, if you're talking absurdly implausible murder plots,

But, again, who cares?

Blip wrote:Slightly off topic but I saw what I seem to recall was a pretty dreadful thriller which had one of the most chilling endings ever. A group of teenagers think they have escaped in their mobile home from a Ku Klux Klan type mob which has been terrorising them all through the movie - and so does the viewer. The final shots are taken from an increasingly elevated viewpoint above the mobile home and it is finally seen that the whole lynch mob has grown in size, surrounded them and is slowly closing in.

Anyone know what that one was? It's a long shot, I know.

Sounds like 'Race with the Devil'

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0073600/

BlackBart wrote:

Blip wrote:Slightly off topic but I saw what I seem to recall was a pretty dreadful thriller which had one of the most chilling endings ever. A group of teenagers think they have escaped in their mobile home from a Ku Klux Klan type mob which has been terrorising them all through the movie - and so does the viewer. The final shots are taken from an increasingly elevated viewpoint above the mobile home and it is finally seen that the whole lynch mob has grown in size, surrounded them and is slowly closing in.

Anyone know what that one was? It's a long shot, I know.

Sounds like 'Race with the Devil'

You're a genius, BlackBart. That's it for sure and I'd have watched that because I'm a big Peter Fonda fan. This is time to mention the superlative Easy Rider, isn't it?

virphen wrote:I've watched both Notorious and Spellbound inside the last week or two. I don't think Notorious won even out of those two the plot was just so ridiculously outlandish, and that's in comparison to a film superficially based on Freudian psychoanalysis. Superb in lots of ways, but they date, oh do they date.

Spellbound-- is that the Gregory Peck one with the skiing and the Dali dream sequences? You thought that was better than Notorious! ?

No accounting for taste, I guess.
I like Hitchcock's taste in leading men.

Fallible wrote:Fire Walk With Me is grrrreat. I love all that deliberate obscuring of dialogue by revving engines and loud music, I love the dreamy quality of it, backwards talking dwarves are teh win. Love it.

Agreed. I think people don't like it because it doesn't have all the humor and mundane social aspect of the show, which is totally amazing, don't get me wrong. But I'm glad they took a different approach for the film. I do wish I could see all the footage that was cut out though

orpheus wrote:
In a way, it's typical virtuoso Hitchcock: a possible plot hole totally fucking outweighed by a scene so memorable that it doesn't matter.

Quoted for troof.

CookieJon wrote:
Loved the first series, but the second one seemed like flogging a dead horse and I never even bothered with the movie, although I quite like most of his other movies.

Though the cinematography wasn't as good, I thought the second season through the resolving of the main plot was still good. After that it turned into shit, damn James and damn the chess guy. But the last few episodes were pretty solid...there's about a second season 1's worth of quality there, I think, even if it doesn't quite measure up.

I only dimly remember the second series, to my shame. I was doing A Levels at the time it aired here in the UK, and I've had the complete box set for a number of years which we have attempted to watch straight through several times, but damned life keeps getting in the way somewhere in the middle of series 1.

I've watched the first series more times than I can count. Second one...maybe 3 times, with a lot of skipping.

hadespussercats wrote:

virphen wrote:I've watched both Notorious and Spellbound inside the last week or two. I don't think Notorious won even out of those two the plot was just so ridiculously outlandish, and that's in comparison to a film superficially based on Freudian psychoanalysis. Superb in lots of ways, but they date, oh do they date.

Spellbound-- is that the Gregory Peck one with the skiing and the Dali dream sequences? You thought that was better than Notorious! ?

No accounting for taste, I guess.
I like Hitchcock's taste in leading men.

I was saying that the plot and actions in Notorious were just so absurd that they made the plot of Spellbound look sensible in comparison. And the plot of Spellbound is laughable. Notorious has a group of spies so inept that they need to break in to the bad guys place by having her steal the cellar key of her husband's key ring in the middle of a party where he is guaranteed to need new booze, and having one escape this murderous bastard by snogging his wife right in front of him? And they can't find a bloody uranium mine by any other method than sending in a totally untrained and inexperienced women in for a honey trap? Nor much room left for suspension of disbelief after all that, I'm afraid.

They also compete very well on the silliness of the sexism which makes both now sometimes laughably quaint. "A woman in love is operating at the lowest intellectual plane" vs a plot which is essentially "send in the harlot!".