criterionforum.org

Personally, I respect the man but I don't like what I've seen from him at all.

Granted, I haven't seen all of his films, but after sitting through North by Northwest and Psycho, and seeing bits of Rebecca, Rear Window, and The Trouble with Harry, I can safely say he is not my cup of White Russian. And the thing is, I want to like him, and I can certainly see why LOTS of people adore him, but his movies are just so damn boring to me that getting through them makes me feel like I just completed a marathon. I don't care for a lot of classic cinema in general, but from what classic films I do enjoy, they appeal to me much more than his resume. And I thought I was alone in this, until I read this little quote online:

"...Everyone treats Hitchcock like he's the Buddha of fucking cinema...I'm not really that reverential about Hitchcock at all. I mean, I'm not saying I don't like him – I'm not saying he's a bad director, okay, but you know what: fuck him. I don't care. He's not a religious icon."
-Quentin Tarantino

In pre-Holocaust Poland, a rabbi is trying to teach a Catholic priest how to love God. But the priest is uncapable of learning anything; he is lost in Satanic practices, perverse sexual intercourse, and murder. "Mother Joan of Angels" is probably the boldest, most uncensored Occult movie ever made. Enjoy the film yourself, but do not recommend it to the others.

0 of 10 people found the following review helpful:
onrop, September 28, 2004
By Jeff A. Sample "bluelip213" (tucson az) - See all my reviews
This review is from: Lost Highway [IMPORT] (DVD)
m manson are hot in this movie in the scene where every one is watching a onrop that gets 5 stars alone plus the road rage scene where the old man beats the butt nugget driver very cool

Though François continues his misbehavior by fighting classmates and spilling hot soup on Raoul, it occasionally seems he will be OK, like the scene where François endearingly listens to his “grandparents” swap stories about their biological children. But soon, he’s raising hell again.
Why? So many scenes throughout the film end in such abruption that it’s frustratingly unclear what causes François to go from calm conversation with his “grandfather” to tossing railroad spikes off an overpass. By dodging any true sociological questions and jerking around the audience’s hopes for the boy, Pialat often detaches us from both his subject and the story.
We end up not giving half of a damn about François because Pialat suggests that his life will be a cycle of entering and leaving foster homes and causing havoc. Antoine Doinel, the lost youth of François Truffaut’s The 400 Blows nine years earlier, at least had a purpose: to reach the sea. Even if Pialat’s story continued into four sequels, all his protagonist will ever want to do is kick a hole in the door.

All films that are taken from novels are crap (with the exception of Jurassic Park)

Spoiler

SINGIN' IN THE RAIN (1952)

AAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHH

Why, movie? Why? I was liking you so much! I was ready to put you so damn high on my top films list, and you had to go and be culturally insensitive! Thanks a lot.

After Cosmo said "The Duelling Mammy", I of course had to pause the film and look up the context of his statement, leading me to believe the only reason he said that was because the film mentioned The Jazz Singer, the first "talkie" which incorporated blackface, but was used by its actor not as racism but as the only means of invoking black music onto the big screen. He loved jazz and blues and wanted black culture to be relevant in cinema; and while I obviously think the blackface was highly unnecessary (esp. the song "My Mammy"), I can't say he had bad intentions. So yeah, that makes the line in Singin' a LITTLE more understandable, but then the fact hit me like a ton of bricks:

Where are all the black people?

The pioneers of dance were harshly ignored throughout this film, aside from the mention of The Jazz Singer. There was not, to my knowledge, one black dancer, one black singer, one black actor in this film. And I know, I know, I know, it's a product of the times. Well, that's a lame excuse. It's 2010 and while I think it's important to view things through a lens of the time sometimes, it's MORE important to look at it from a contemporary point of view.

So...Christ, I don't know about this one. I mean, the dancing, singing, and acting are phenomenal, seriously the best musical I've ever seen on screen, but I don't know. I'm considering keeping it at a pretty high spot regardless. It's a great film, but I seriously have to think about where it goes on MY personal list.

My God

what an insanely dreadful piece of shit [The American] was.

It was so insanely boring..

For the first 6 hours of the movie, i was thinking "you know, it is really really really slow, but i feel like it is leading to something, to something that will make that slow beginning worth it"

but the final 10 hours of the movie were so much worse. It dragged so much, there were shots in the movie that seemed like they would come into play at some point, yet never ever did.

NOTHING was explained in the movie at all... if you want to know the quintessential question: WHY... a question any movie should answer... you don't get it at all.

Also, what an AWKWARD movie to see in theaters.. this movie is so quiet that every sniffle or cough or sneeze or seat shift is heard very well throughout the theater.

The music Q's in this movie were so annoying, we go from utter silence to some semblance of a score, and that is when you're like "shit's about to get real" it doesn't.. it continues to suck.

Now before someone chimes in "Well it wasn't supposed to be Transformers"... i get that! And i can get down with quiet, character driven stories that have a slow pace but reward that slow pace with a concept that holds my attention (Breach is a PERFECT example of that type of movie)... this does none of that, it was just an insanely boring piece of shit.

After the movie let out, i heard nothing but contempt for the movie, it seems most people hated it.

The onyl compliment i can give it.. is the chick that plays the main female in the movie has some really nice boobage.

also...

Spoiler

that sex scene was fucking weird.. like it get it, he ate her out and then went around back... but what was the fucking point? To show that he must really love her, if he is willing to eat out a hooker (a deadly task if ever there was one)!

Avoid! Avoid! Avoid!

and don't let the trailers confuse you.. this has about as much in common with The Bourne movies as Harry Potter has to do with Debbie Does Dallas

I would also like to point out that I have enjoyed pretty much all of George Clooney's movies.. i LOVED Up In The Air and Good Night & Good Luck and Michael Clayton, those character driven movies.. and thoroughly enjoyed Syriana and even found enjoyment out of The Men Who Stare At Goats.

Clooney is a great actor.. but he could not save what was in essence the Director's massive failures as well as the editor's massive failures.

And im torn here, cuz the Director also directed 2 Metallica music videos... so he has to have SOME talent!

Markson wrote:Bob Odenkirk writes some of his own 'rediculous' reviews.

MisterEveryman wrote: "HUCLEBERRY FINN"? More like SUCKleberry SHIT!

Amazon reviewer wrote:This is the absolute worst book I've ever read in my life. I want to give it zero stars but the lowest it will let me go it one.I had to read it for a college English class, believe it or not, and if it hadn't been assigned reading I would have replaced my Charmin with Cities of the Plain if you know what I mean. There is nothing in this book that makes me care about the characters whatsoever, you can't follow it because the RETARDED writing style, with no puntuaction and spanish flung in wherever make it virtually impossible to figure out what's going on. I will never understand if I live to be a thousand years old why this guy is getting such great reviews, because this book is SOOOO bad it's no laughing matter. It's anticlimatic, and all the plot lines are inconsequential and lead to ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. This is a book where NOTHING happens. My professor insists that this is a retelling of the Bible. GIVE ME A BREAK! You are NOT going to tell me that some stupid cow poke who spends all his money in Mexican whore houses and spends his free time beheading dogs is a symbol for Jesus Christ! That's preposterous! Ooooh this book makes me SO angry! And don't even get me started on the epilogue of the book, which doesn't relate to the story whatsoever and does nothing but add to the confusion. Cormac McCarthy is an insult to American literature. I am now going to dig for a metaphor to write a paper on, wish me luck

Ishmael wrote:This little drop of poison is an Amazon customer review of Cormac McCarthy's Cities of the Plain:

Amazon reviewer wrote:This is the absolute worst book I've ever read in my life. I want to give it zero stars but the lowest it will let me go it one.I had to read it for a college English class, believe it or not, and if it hadn't been assigned reading I would have replaced my Charmin with Cities of the Plain if you know what I mean. There is nothing in this book that makes me care about the characters whatsoever, you can't follow it because the RETARDED writing style, with no puntuaction and spanish flung in wherever make it virtually impossible to figure out what's going on. I will never understand if I live to be a thousand years old why this guy is getting such great reviews, because this book is SOOOO bad it's no laughing matter. It's anticlimatic, and all the plot lines are inconsequential and lead to ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. This is a book where NOTHING happens. My professor insists that this is a retelling of the Bible. GIVE ME A BREAK! You are NOT going to tell me that some stupid cow poke who spends all his money in Mexican whore houses and spends his free time beheading dogs is a symbol for Jesus Christ! That's preposterous! Ooooh this book makes me SO angry! And don't even get me started on the epilogue of the book, which doesn't relate to the story whatsoever and does nothing but add to the confusion. Cormac McCarthy is an insult to American literature. I am now going to dig for a metaphor to write a paper on, wish me luck

I went to school with A LOT of people like this...despite their cluelessness, they were all awarded degrees in English.

aox wrote:Man...I really want to read this book now. Sounds great!