The Film Reviewer

[Graham Breeze]

After Pulp Fiction of course

Every decade Sight & Sound, which is arguably the most prestigious film magazine in the world, has a poll to dermine the "greatest film of all time"

In 1952 the winner was Bicycle Thieves (De Sica 1948).

In 1962/1972/1982/1992/2002 the winner was Citizen Kane (Welles 1941).

In 2012 the winner was Vertigo (Hitchcock 1958) and Kane was 2nd. I think those who voted had just got bored with voting for Kane every decade.

I think Vertigo is an over-clever, complicated and rather unpleasant film - but then Hitchcock was an unpleasant man.

Three months ago Sight & Sound published the Top 100 of the 2022 poll. Vertigo was 2nd and Citizen Kane was 3rd. Alas Pulp Fiction does not appear.

I have seen most of the films on the list which goes back to the 1920s and is international. For some reason and a sign of the times, Sight & Sound tinkered with the electorate and I had scarcely heard of the film which came first in 2022 although it was made in 1975, is not rentable on DVD and was only 36th in 2012.

It is Jeanne Dielman, 23 Qui Du Commerce 1080 Bruxelles. directed by Chantal Akerman and was produced in Belgium/France.

Polls are funny things, electorates get bored so there is still hope for Pulp Fiction down the line.

[Mossdog]

Went to see The Boys in the Boat at the Rheged Centre today. https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/t...ie-review-2023

What a fantastic film, particularly if you appreciate the fine art of rowing as a team.

I knew it was going to enjoy it as The Guardian only awarded it 3 stars.

[Graham Breeze]

Went to see The Boys in the Boat at the Rheged Centre today. https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/t...ie-review-2023

What a fantastic film, particularly if you appreciate the fine art of rowing as a team.

I knew it was going to enjoy it as The Guardian only awarded it 3 stars.

Mmmh.

Good looks and an attractive wife do not a film director make.

The Times gave it **, described it as a dud and went on to ask about Clooney (rhetorically I assume) "Is there any genre that he can’t do … badly?”)

[Mossdog]

Mmmh.

Good looks and an attractive wife do not a film director make.

No, but then I don't expect that there are many people who are labouring under the misapprehension that such attributes to one's life might correlate with directorial prowess. Anymore, than being able to make a splendid omelette; owning a cat; having a penchant for Geography; or being a whiz at flinging a frisbee, might contribute to one's ability in that area.

Whatever, this is a thoroughly entertaining film. George has worked some magic here. Although that's only my lowbrowed, philistine opinion.


“No film critic’s going to say it, but Madagascar 3 is better than The Artist.”
―Chris Rock

[Graham Breeze]

No, but then I don't expect that there are many people who are labouring under the misapprehension that such attributes to one's life might correlate with directorial prowess. Anymore, than being able to make a splendid omelette; owning a cat; having a penchant for Geography; or being a whiz at flinging a frisbee, might contribute to one's ability in that area.

Whatever, this is a thoroughly entertaining film. George has worked some magic here. Although that's only my lowbrowed, philistine opinion.


“No film critic’s going to say it, but Madagascar 3 is better than The Artist.”
―Chris Rock

Dunno about Madagascar 3 but I thought The Artist was "a one hit wonder" and overrated.

Tar on the other hand I paid money twice to see last year.

PS The Times today has an article about the awfulness of Jeanne Dielman, 23 Qui Du Commerce 1080 Bruxelles directed by Chantal Akerman and which was voted the best film of all time or some such rubbish a year ago.

Modesty prevents me referring you to my April 2023 post.

[noel]

Thankfully this thread is so infrequently visited, your previous post is still on the same page.

Next on my list is La Haine. My son has recommended it, but it's one I'm saving for when Mrs Noel is out - I doubt it's her cup of tea.

[Graham Breeze]

Thankfully this thread is so infrequently visited, your previous post is still on the same page.

Next on my list is La Haine. My son has recommended it, but it's one I'm saving for when Mrs Noel is out - I doubt it's her cup of tea.

Probably not.

It's a film, even thirty years on, I have not found the time to revisit despite Time Out's "a vital scalding piece of work".

[Mossdog]

Dunno about Madagascar 3 but I thought The Artist was "a one hit wonder" and overrated.

Tar on the other hand I paid money twice to see last year.

Ah yes. Agree. Tár is splendidly disturbing and I admired its attempts to puncture some prevailing popular 'liberal' narratives (Christ! That sounds pretentious. I must visit our chippy this evening for some right proper grounding).

The only film I've viewed twice recently was The Banshees of Inisherin, which, unfortunately, proved to be fashionably popular, consequently reaffirming my tastes as just solidly hoi polloi.

Previously, the film I'd seen twice was The Warriors, which according to Wikipedia "Sean Egan summarized its appeal: "Whereas the milieu of The Warriors was one normally only depicted in motion pictures as an examination of a social problem, this movie portrayed life from the street gang's point of view. It was an obvious but revolutionary approach that struck a chord with the urban working class, especially its adolescent subset.""

Yeap. Sean nailed it, although we rural working class chavs were equally entertained!

Even RottonTomatoes gave it a thumbs up.

https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/102...ritics-reviews

[Mossdog]

Tar on the other hand I paid money twice to see last year.

Ah yes. Agree. Tár is splendidly disturbing and I admired its attempts to puncture some prevailing popular 'liberal' narratives (Christ! That sounds pretentious. I must visit our chippy this evening for some right proper grounding).

The only film I've viewed twice recently was The Banshees of Inisherin, which, unfortunately, proved to be fashionably popular, consequently reaffirming my tastes as just solidly hoi polloi.

Previously, the film I'd seen twice was The Warriors, which according to Wikipedia "Sean Egan summarized its appeal: "Whereas the milieu of The Warriors was one normally only depicted in motion pictures as an examination of a social problem, this movie portrayed life from the street gang's point of view. It was an obvious but revolutionary approach that struck a chord with the urban working class, especially its adolescent subset.""

Yeap. Sean nailed it, although we rural working class chavs were equally entertained!

Even RottonTomatoes gave it a thumbs up.

https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/102...ritics-reviews

[Graham Breeze]

Ah yes. Agree. Tár is splendidly disturbing and I admired its attempts to puncture some prevailing popular 'liberal' narratives (Christ! That sounds pretentious. I must visit our chippy this evening for some right proper grounding).

The only film I've viewed twice recently was The Banshees of Inisherin, which, unfortunately, proved to be fashionably popular, consequently reaffirming my tastes as just solidly hoi polloi.

Previously, the film I'd seen twice was The Warriors, which according to Wikipedia "Sean Egan summarized its appeal: "Whereas the milieu of The Warriors was one normally only depicted in motion pictures as an examination of a social problem, this movie portrayed life from the street gang's point of view. It was an obvious but revolutionary approach that struck a chord with the urban working class, especially its adolescent subset.""

Yeap. Sean nailed it, although we rural working class chavs were equally entertained!

Even RottonTomatoes gave it a thumbs up.

https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/102...ritics-reviews

I liked the The Banshees of Inisherin and I see all McDonagh's work.

Fashion is strange. I was asked to accompany someone to Saltburn which I thought was (mostly) excruciatingly awful and silly. But the gratuitously "shocking" moments introduced by the director - to be shocking - have captured the public imagination and it is now the most referenced film of the year. Quite bizarre.

A case of a film becoming famous through being infamous I suppose.