Louise!
She’s my favorite silent-era movie actress. Cool to see a random mention.
Louise!
She’s my favorite silent-era movie actress. Cool to see a random mention.
A connection I’d never made before. Hope Sandoval is the real-life version of how Galadriel should’ve been portrayed in the LOTR films: fey, distant, ethereal, disconnected from mortal concerns.
I don’t mean Hope’s appearance. In the books, Galadriel is canonically described as tall with golden hair; Hope is quite short and very much dark-haired. I mean how they feel as personalities, as beings in the world.
Of the characters in the films, if it’s not obvious I was most disappointed by Galadriel1. She just lacked the gravitas and remoteness that are both well-described in the written version and that would befit someone who is about 8,300 years old. And I don’t think it was Cate Blanchett’s fault. She had poor direction and poor writing to work with. Though other parts of those films were excellent, the writers of the LOTR films just did not know what do with Galadriel.
The films completely miss her power, her pride, her strangeness, the fact that she’s one of the most dangerous beings in the world, no matter what her intent is. She seemed there like a lugubrious Renaissance fair refugee rather than someone who could’ve potentially taken on Gandalf and triumphed.
And that was a real failure.
What scene or scenes haunt you years or decades after watching the movie?
This scene in the American version of The Ring.
There’s just something about a situation going unexpectedly and wildly out of control despite your best intentions that gets to me. Also, Rachel did nothing to deserve the curse that’s attached to her, but cannot do anything to help herself. I think deep in my subconscious that reminds me of growing up in North Florida where I often felt the same way.
There are other scenes in the film that are creepier, but that’s the scene that haunted me.

I noticed that in the theater.
Went to a jam-packed midnight showing and it was indeed fucking awesome. That is the only film I’ve ever seen in the theater more than once. Watched it three times.
That’s one of the few — perhaps the only — movie showing that I’m glad was full. Experiencing the awe with others made it better.
Such a great opening scene and Thomasin Mackenzie is just excellent here (as she is throughout the film). It does three things that most movies struggle with:
1) It immediately establishes Ellie’s character. Who she is. What she values. What she wants. How she is.
2) It provides a context for her life and circumstances, allowing the viewer to avoid minutes of boring exposition. And it’s all so effortless.
3) It also sets up that Ellie is maybe a little more attuned to the invisible world — maybe a little bit presentient — because she knows before her caretaker yells her name that it is going to happen, and that the news is probably good. This establishes the context for the entire rest of the movie.
And because I’ve seen the “behind the scenes” of this bit, I also know that what you see there is all a set. That’s not a real house, and not a real place. It’s all in some massive warehouse-like studio lot. It makes the scene better, so this is not a criticism, but notice that the hallway is quite a lot wider than a normal hallway would be in a house like that, and the doors a bit shorter, the furniture a bit smaller. This is to give Thomasin (and the cameras) room to maneuver, room to dance, while making her seem larger than life in the scene. It makes Ellie the focus while still giving you the clues needed to understand her. And the newspaper dress is great.
Every moment in every film scene is chosen, and this one chose everything just right. Such a brilliant setup. This is exactly how you show without telling.
Stuff Stephanie in the Incinerator.
This has to be one of the worst movie titles of all time. And though I watched tons of trashy horror movies in the 1980s, this masterpiece was not among them. I think I will continue to pass on viewing this work.
All the people who didn’t like the movie Presence — jeez, put the crack pipe down. That was a great film. Get off your high horse and realize that not every movie has to be a cookie cutter “the whole world is at stake” action extravaganza. There’s nothing wrong with a little introspection and calm.
This film is how you use Rebecca Ferguson. Overall, Dr. Sleep was only ok. However, Rebecca as Rose the Hat…trรจs magnifique. Also, “Rose the Hat” is one of the best character names ever.
As I noted about the weirdo in Les chambres rouges, it’s hard for a beautiful woman to read as creepy. Our girl Rebecca has no problem with this, though. She’s demented and ghoulish and a real scumbag.
Kathryn Bigelow’s A House of Dynamite is a repetitive and unsatisfying film. I’d avoid it. It’s not wholly bad but it just feels like a TV show episode with a cliffhanger that got expanded into a film.
Did not care for it, and it gravely misused Rebecca Ferguson.
I love crash zooms.
The 1970s French version is good, but the American version of The Birdcage is such a great film. And I say that as someone who rarely enjoys farces.
That movie is just absolutely fun from end to end and never makes a false move. I was shocked by how much I liked it when I watched it soon after it came out. The casting choices were just perfect, and the chemistry between Nathan Lane and Robin Williams was unbeatable.
Recommended.
Whatโs the first movie you ever watched in theater?
The Black Hole (1979). Also one of my earliest memories.
And that was at a drive-in theater located approximately right here. That drive-in has been closed since the 1980s; no trace of it remains on the ground or on the internet.
The warm, natural color grading of 80s and 90s movies shot on film.
I’d like to point out that none of these movies have anything resembling “natural” color! The โwarm, naturalโ vibe people remember from a lot of โ80s and โ90s movies isnโt some untouched neutral image. Itโs just as crafted a look as any more modern film. Back then, the look and feel was created using the chosen film stock, lenses and filters, lighting, lab timing, and was optimized for the way those movies would’ve been viewed at the time. (In fact, many of those films would have had digital intermediates.)
How those films look is no more “natural” than the films created now. And those films were all produced using wildly different techniques and technologies.
By the way, of course there is NO SUCH THING as a “natural” image. It’s all constructed. It’s similar to philosophy. If you believe it’s pointless and shouldn’t exist, it just means you are then following someone else’s philosophy without even being aware of it.
The destruction that copyright causes.
One of Chantal Akermanโs films (among many others) cannot see the light of day because of music rights. This is true of many works that are unavailable due to copyright insanity.
Copyright should be destroyed.