- This topic has 379 replies, 96 voices, and was last updated 10 years, 6 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
People of my generation grew up with Cat Stevens; I can remember exactly where I was when I first heard one of his songs [Andy Pococks flat at Hengar Manor in Cornwall!]…although I suppose I can remember the first time I heard Elton John [Matthew Bolton Tech College Police Cadets Disco..no idea why I was there] and I can’t stand him. May dip into a bit of Motown at some point but, as I was around when it first came out it makes me feel really old. Also, we were divided into those who liked Motown [my flat mate] and those who liked Tyrannosaurus Rex [sp]..me. But sorry, I digress from the films…Cinderella Man is superb, and must be watched from the beginning.
Anything for Her is a fine french thriller. Just doing rounds now
In the loop was a bit overrated and apart from some good performances (the MP and Tony Soprano) fell short of The Thick of it on TV
Seeing Motown (I’m a huge fan) mentioned in a film thread brings to mind a very decent film/documentary called Standing In The Shadows Of Motown. It foregrounds the session musicians who backed all those great ’60s tracks, such as James Jamerson and Benny Benjamin. It combines archive footage with performances from surviving members of ‘The Funk Brothers’, and even the vocals done by contemporary singers are excellent – Chaka Khan does a belting version of What’s Going On.
Well worth a watch, and of course it sounds fantastic.
Did you watch it Moe ?
Steerforth – i like a bit of Motown, but there are too many love songs. I’d prefer if there was more variety.
I watched another independant film called ‘Land of Plenty’. And yes, i got it for a quid from filmflex on Virgin Media. It was a good film i thought, and is pretty much in line with the last one with regards to raising the issue of prejudice. I’d say to anyone on here that you can’t get much for a quid these days, so give it a bash !!!
Got to admit, the independant film scene is good for a change !
I’ll need to take a look back through this thread and see what i can pick up on. Hopefully i would’ve saw what others have.
Not yet; having been desperate to see it for ages I’m now putting off watching it..tomorrow night should be the right time; I’ve got the house to myself and Wednesday is my day off……didn’t want to watch it when I might fall asleep or someone could possibly talk all the way through it!
That’s funny you say that Moe, i like watching films on my own aswell as i hate it when people always talk , especially my old man. Plus if there’s any one two buckle my shoe in the film it’s embarrasing, especially if there’s anyone sitting behind me !!!
I’m still obsessively listening to the new Kasabian album, and there’s a reference to a film/documentary called Sans Soleil which I’m desperate to see..it looks incredibly expensive to buy.
I hadn’t heard of it until you mentioned it Moe, but the cheapest for that film seems to be £12.43, and it always seems that it comes with another film called La Jette.
Well, I’m not sure about The Wrestler; perhaps if I’d found it by accident I would be raving about it but I seem to have suffered the same problem that my daughter had with Slumdog in that I was expecting something mind blowing and it wasn’t [enjoyed Cinderella Man far more]. However, realise why I couldn’t stop watching Sin City when it was on late one night; Mickey Rourke is just mesmerizing and I must see his earlier fims. His face is just fascinating; know what they meant in the Observer when they said that his reconstructed face suits him far more than his ‘original’ face; he sometimes reminded me of Richard Burton and sometimes he looked like Daniel Craig. But it was his eyes that did the acting.
I watched part of it again after seeing the interview with Mickey Rourke [that often happens but it’s best not to know too much about the film before you watch it]. He said he got the director to change a lot of the dialogue because from his experience of boxing it wasn’t ‘true to life. He had to put on about a stone; all of it muscle for the role, and the scenes in a real supermarket were very much ad lib…can you imagine going to buy some polony and being served by Mickey Rourke! It very much had a fly on the wall documentary feel to it, and it was interesting how a lot of the shots were of the camera following the back of his head,as if throughout the film we were following him around with a video camera. Wasn’t sure about the ‘love interest’ in the film, but I suppose it was meant to compare how a man feels when he is on a downward slope career and mortality wise with how a woman feels when she starts to lose her looks [a bit sexist, that I guess but, alas all too true!]. Also found the relationship with his daughter interesting, having lots of young people in my life who have lost parents either through marital break up or bereavement and seeing the profound effect it has on them. More to this film than meets the eye and worth a second viewing, I think.
I didn’t put as much thought into it as you Moe. I just saw it as a guy who had difficulty with the realisation that what he once had is slipping away. Not only did he love it, but the people in the game loved him, and once drugs took their toll the worst bit for him on a personal level was that he had nothing to fall back on. His love for a sport and way of life that defined him as a person was stronger than any any potential love he felt he could find for the remainder of his life.
I’d reccomend you buy Angel heart for about a fiver.It’s a film you might have to watch twice, well you will if you’re as daft as me.
Yes; he could cope with the physical pain of his wrestling, but not the mental pain of the ‘real’ world. Wierd that Nicholas Cage was supposed to play the lead when it was almost as if it was written about Mickey Rourke himself…..someone else has told me I must watch Angel Eyes as well..I haven’t got round to seeing Appaloosa yet, either! or Sweeney Todd for that matter……
"someone else has told me I must watch Angel Eyes as well"
Yeah, that was probably me a few pages back. De Niro is in it aswell. Have you saw Of mice and men from 1992 with John Malkovich ?
It was you but also my pal from Seattle told me as well! The thing about films I’ve realised is that when you’ve watched it on your own so nobody interrupts, you then have to talk to people about it..it’s not the same if you don’t. I suppose the whole point of a film is that it’s meant to be watched in the cinema from beginning to end with no interruptions, which is difficult at home, but you then have to discuss what you’ve seen; thank goodness for the internet! Same friend has got Sans Soleil on order as well; I may try to get it from HMV tomorrow. Bit scared that it will go way above my head and I will feel really dumb!
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.