“Perfect“ films
- Thread starter Elpenor
- Start date
ATOMIC SUPLEX
Member Since: 1985 Post Count: 3
I don't think any film is perfect and for many it might have been perfect at the time and perhaps not so much any more.
I've just watches once upon a time in Hollywood for the second time and I think it could be a contender. I don't like all of Mr Ts work but this one is pretty solid on the tension, intrigue and reward. It looks great and has lots of nice touches that make it sing. There are a couple of bits that I'm not so keen on or sag a little, but I'm being picky to call them out.
Bit mainstream perhaps, but it is good. I like some of his other flicks but not so much. . . Death Proof was terrible.
I also dig the good the bad and the ugly and have done since I was a young lad.
I've just watches once upon a time in Hollywood for the second time and I think it could be a contender. I don't like all of Mr Ts work but this one is pretty solid on the tension, intrigue and reward. It looks great and has lots of nice touches that make it sing. There are a couple of bits that I'm not so keen on or sag a little, but I'm being picky to call them out.
Bit mainstream perhaps, but it is good. I like some of his other flicks but not so much. . . Death Proof was terrible.
I also dig the good the bad and the ugly and have done since I was a young lad.
Gromit
International Man of Misery
Orang Utan
Psychick Worrier Ov Geyoor
Minus one point for lack of dinosaurs, so not perfect
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
I was a bit dubious after the mention of, the perfect fine but no better, Fantastic Mister Fox, but those last two are stunners, so I decided to look up Excision. Traci Lords! Malcolm McDowell. John Waters!! 75 minutes of weird comic genius. But five minutes of disappointing ending.
Still worth seeing tho, so, ta.
stdP
One Swiss dinosaur in Polly Gosling's anorak hood
I think I'd have to disagree in fairly strong terms (but I would, because I've always been lukewarm on most Tarantino). It's an absolute mess of a film in my opinion and if you didn't have a clue who/what Sharon Tate/Spahn Ranch were when you watched it (I didn't, and it's never stated in the film itself), then you'll probably have absolutely no clue what's meant to be going on, and I certainly didn't. The rest just seemed to be a threadbare patchwork of self-congratulatory vignettes, movie nostalgia, or feet. Whilst I'm not disputing the film had some great touches, it just came over as even more sprawling and messy than most of Mr. T's latter day output. I pity the fool.
A classic and no mistake. Us movie-loving oldsters at the office maintain a whiteboard which is basically a nostalgia-laden list of movies from the 70s, 80s and 90s that we recommend to the younglings* to watch, with marks out of 10 written next to them as and when they get watched. Robocop's consistently one of the best-ranked; despite the occasional ropey special effect and the ludicrous zig-zagging in tone, it's far greater than the sum of its parts and the completely bald-face satire of 80s-flavour capitalism strikes a chord with a lot of them.
As someone said in their definition of the thread above though, "perfect" being "I can't think of any way to improve it" - I can think of a way of improving it, which'd be fixing Dick Jones' arms. That is all it needs, but that makes it imperfect I guess.
* The company feels a bit like Logan's run at times. I'm ten years older than my boss and there's at least twelve people in the office that were born this century. Grosse Point Blank is also very popular (I have to wonder how much of that is due to the excellent soundtrack though).
ATOMIC SUPLEX
Member Since: 1985 Post Count: 3
I can't say I am a big fan. Though I have enjoyed a few of his films.
I don't think that is true at all. I think it just adds another layer. It's really not important.
I don't know about threadbare, but yes. A few enjoyable vignettes. I think that's what is good about it. Nicely threaded together and with some fantastic tension.
I didn't really get a huge sense of that other than the time it was set and the subject matter. I don't remember any feet.
I thought it was quite tight apart from the bruce lee bit and the fast forward time jump just before the end. A simple, not overly complicated tale.
What I really liked was that cinematicly it told that simple story very well and in an engaging way. On paper it sounds shite, but as a film I was all in.
Nanker Phelge
Leave the gun. Take the cannoli.
There is a lot of feet in Once Upon a Time in Hollywood.
It's a very very good film despite this. Not perfect, but very very good.
ATOMIC SUPLEX
Member Since: 1985 Post Count: 3
Yeah it's not 'perfect'. I'm not sure anything is. I did thibk it was a very good example of inserting intresr, intrigue and tenstion into almost every scene. I'm not usually one to applaud Quentin's work, but I can imagine the whole film falling completely flat if the script had been in the hands of another director.
