leanderman
Street Party: July 2
You get your money back on watching three films a year (roughly).
In my case, cinema nights are largely unaffordable because of babysitting costs.
So I have taken to going alone for the midday film.
Brixton Ritzy - upcoming films, reviews and opinions
- Thread starter Gramsci
- Start date
You get your money back on watching three films a year (roughly).
In my case, cinema nights are largely unaffordable because of babysitting costs.
So I have taken to going alone for the midday film.
CH1
"Red Guard"(NLYL)
Sorry to deviate (slightly), but the thread has been a bit dead lately.
I broke with habit to watch Werner Hertzog's Nosferatu the vampyre on Film 4 last night.
Last time I saw this it was in the old Ritzy around 1982. The TV screening reminded me what an atmospheric film it is. It also reminded me of the atmosphere at the "Little Bit Ritzy" with a full sized auditorium (including the back 4 rows, now converted into a bar).
I seldom scan the current Ritzy schedules because they presuppose constant viewing of film shows to know which (generally) Hollywood "product" you might be paying £14 to watch.
In the early 80s chocolate brownies were 50p, tea was 30p and there was NO POPCORN. And if they showed a film there was generally artistic merit.
I broke with habit to watch Werner Hertzog's Nosferatu the vampyre on Film 4 last night.
Last time I saw this it was in the old Ritzy around 1982. The TV screening reminded me what an atmospheric film it is. It also reminded me of the atmosphere at the "Little Bit Ritzy" with a full sized auditorium (including the back 4 rows, now converted into a bar).
I seldom scan the current Ritzy schedules because they presuppose constant viewing of film shows to know which (generally) Hollywood "product" you might be paying £14 to watch.
In the early 80s chocolate brownies were 50p, tea was 30p and there was NO POPCORN. And if they showed a film there was generally artistic merit.
snowy_again
Slush
I think Artistic Merit might have been a little stretched on the gore / slasher / kung fu all nighters.
CH1
"Red Guard"(NLYL)
This was the era of "the 50 worst films of all time"!
My favourite blockbusters were:
"Renaldo and Clara" a 4 hour Bob Dylan film, subsequently withdrawn, though it seems to be available again now on the internet.
Syberberg's notorious film of Wagner's Parsifal - with the sex-change lead character. Also more than 4 hours.
Those were Sunday all-dayers though.
friendofdorothy
Solidarity against neoliberalism!
I saw thet in 1982 too, at the Scala - a right old flea pit then. Very interesting film - shown as part of a silent horror bill. At the time I wondered why all the night time scenes were so light, like bright day light, wondered if there was some technical problem with low light scenes . Only found out this year they used to hand tint the film back then - so the sky would have been dark blue. Was it tinted on Film 4?
friendofdorothy
Solidarity against neoliberalism!
Back on topic I went to see Ex Machina today. About young techie doing the Turing test on a female AI - great looking robot. Any one else seen it?
Last film I saw was the Imitation Game about Alan Turing. He's all the rage now.
Last film I saw was the Imitation Game about Alan Turing. He's all the rage now.
CH1
"Red Guard"(NLYL)
I think you saw the original Murnau silent film?
The Herzog version of Nosferatu was made around 1979 as a "tribute", and was a normal colour film with sound. Halliwell's Guide complained that the English language version had very poor colour - but Film 4 showed the German version yesterday so no probs!
Rushy
basically a scrotum
I saw it at C4s cinema. It was a bit weird as it was the day before release and we were watched throughout by security wearing infra red glass to ensure we were not recording it. I enjoyed it. It was entertaining. Agree the robot was fantastic. But I didn't feel there was anything all that new about it. Perhaps a little too superficial. And whilst I rated the robot and apprentice, I felt the inventor was a little unconvincing. Especially the drunken scenes. Three and a half stars from me.
brixtonblade
Well-Known Member
I went last week and really liked it. Had just enough substance to make it interesting without being too much brain work to enjoy. I agree that there weren't too many new ideas in it but didn't think it felt too cliched for that.
Rushy
basically a scrotum
Agree. I think I just heard too much hype and expected something a little more challenging.
brixtonblade
Well-Known Member
I was fairly hype free, got the chance to go to pictures and looked at website to see what was on and thought this looked interesting.
Rushy
basically a scrotum
Yep. Hype never bodes well!
friendofdorothy
Solidarity against neoliberalism!
The inventor was a psychopath, but then so was his robot. The fact his robots were all 'fantasy' women was rather annoying, the demeaning way he treated Kyko. I wondered if Kyko was a robot or a slave when I first saw her.
As the 'apprentice' was there to do a Turing test - surprised he didn't ask her more questions about feelings / moral issues. Ava was programmed to see his lies, whereas he was too male to see hers. Why didn't he pick up on what Ava said about 'going on a date' - didn't he notice that it didn't include him? Was he supposed to be that naive?
Convincing A1 robot or not I doubt she would get far without a passport.
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
I saw "Selma" today at Ritzy. Have not been to Ritzy for a while since they put there prices up.
Its about one part of Martin Luther Kings equal rights campaign. It starts when he get the Nobel prize and his further campaigning to get the right to vote for African Americans. In law they had the right to vote but in Southern States its was made difficult to register to vote. In practise only whites got to vote.
It is a great performance by David Oyelowo as King. The film builds up and holds one attention. This is apparently the first film with King as main character. This surprised me as he is such a famous person in recent American history.
I am not always keen on biographical films of famous heroes. The film almost goes into Hollywood worthiness at times. The music indicating when you should get emotional. Perhaps as its not my history ( Its the US) is why it grates a bit. Unlike with "Pride" which I saw a recently.
I think I wish it could have drawn parallels with now. The equal rights campaign of 60s was successful but as recent events in US show there is still a long way to go for African Americans. Its interesting as a part of American history but its not a controversial subject now.
Maybe having a woman directing the film made a difference. Women in the film are shown to have important role in the civil rights movement. Kings wife is represented as an important character in her own right.
What the film does show is how dangerous it was then to campaign in deep South. People did get beaten up and killed.
What I also liked about the film is that its got top notch performances from all the actors. This is an actors movie. Its got a great script and is quite talky. A lot of political maneuverings and backroom dealing. Which in fact are riveting viewing. Reminded me a bit of Spielbergs "Lincoln". The President is a great character in this film.
The script is exceptional as they could not use Kings original speeches in this film. It appears that Dreamworks have the rights to them. Which is somewhat bizarre.
Its about one part of Martin Luther Kings equal rights campaign. It starts when he get the Nobel prize and his further campaigning to get the right to vote for African Americans. In law they had the right to vote but in Southern States its was made difficult to register to vote. In practise only whites got to vote.
It is a great performance by David Oyelowo as King. The film builds up and holds one attention. This is apparently the first film with King as main character. This surprised me as he is such a famous person in recent American history.
I am not always keen on biographical films of famous heroes. The film almost goes into Hollywood worthiness at times. The music indicating when you should get emotional. Perhaps as its not my history ( Its the US) is why it grates a bit. Unlike with "Pride" which I saw a recently.
I think I wish it could have drawn parallels with now. The equal rights campaign of 60s was successful but as recent events in US show there is still a long way to go for African Americans. Its interesting as a part of American history but its not a controversial subject now.
Maybe having a woman directing the film made a difference. Women in the film are shown to have important role in the civil rights movement. Kings wife is represented as an important character in her own right.
What the film does show is how dangerous it was then to campaign in deep South. People did get beaten up and killed.
What I also liked about the film is that its got top notch performances from all the actors. This is an actors movie. Its got a great script and is quite talky. A lot of political maneuverings and backroom dealing. Which in fact are riveting viewing. Reminded me a bit of Spielbergs "Lincoln". The President is a great character in this film.
The script is exceptional as they could not use Kings original speeches in this film. It appears that Dreamworks have the rights to them. Which is somewhat bizarre.
Last edited:
It's my film of the year, just edging out Birdman.
DJWrongspeed
radio eros
Waited for about 10mins yesterday to get served at the upstairs bar while some posh luvies ordered food and then pondered the wine list. It was all 'darling' and 'best cabernet sauvignon' 
Meanwhile the queue lengthened......can't these people fuck off to Clapham?
Meanwhile the queue lengthened......can't these people fuck off to Clapham?
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
The Ritzy has writer and director Peter Strickland’s latest film "The Duke of Burgundy" on this week. I am a fan of this directors work. His previous films I have seen are "Katalin Varga" and "Berberian Sound Studio".
Like Tarantino his films are partly homage to older cinematic traditions. In this case the arty euro-smut of 70s. In the 70s there was a overlap between soft porn and the "art" cinema. Or depending on your view dressing up soft porn as high brow entertainment.
As cinema audiences numbers were threatened by increasing TV use one way to get keep cinemas going was relying on the dirty mac brigade who would go to see arty foreign films for a bit of smut.
Nothing wrong with that.
Back to Strickland. Here he mentions some of his influences.
This homage to euro smut is based around a sado masochistic lesbian relationship involving a lot of expensive lingerie and knee high stiletto boots. All beautifully shot in long slow camerawork. Included are some trippy psychedelic sequences.
The film, surprisingly, holds together and works. Why I am not quite sure.
Why does it work? Like cinema it takes one into a closed world that is not realistic. In this closed world there are no men. Everyone appears to live in old country houses with large slightly decaying gardens but only met at the library. The library being about moths.
After a while I got drawn into this world. A bit like the moths attracted to light. The film works as it has an hypnotic quality to it. The repetitions of the sex are not boring as each time they are done there are slight differences.
The study of moths is as much an obsession as the ritualized sex. The library has lectures where the women give talks on moths. How to distinguish between almost identical moths. Like the study of moths the sex is studied and enacted down to the last detail.
The film also works as its a psychological study of two people in this unreal world they inhabit. They both strive to a perfection that is unrealizable but which they will continue.
Why do they do it? I would say like many of the films in 70s that this film pays homage to its putting off fear of ageing and death. At one point one of the women complains of ageing. A dream sequence features a skeleton.
friendofdorothy
Solidarity against neoliberalism!
Sounds lovely. Looks so much better than 50 shades
sparkybird
ask the bird...
Flipping heck - what's happened to the Ritzy's website. It's horrendous!
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
Does seem easier to find info.
ie the the ticket prices. Which are really winding me up. Ritzy is more expensive than other Picturehouse cinemas in London.
I noticed this when I looked up a film that was not at Ritzy.
Stratford East
peak price £9.50
Ritzy peak price £12.60
Why? Stratford East is a new complex But its still cheaper than Ritzy. Someone I know said its because with the changing demographic in South London Picturehouse know they can charge more and still get the punters in. Stuff the less well off residents who loyally used Ritzy all these years.I heard Clare Binns, who is now big noise at PH, who started off in the old Ritzy saying that cinema is now marketed by PH as an "experience" where people spend out on wine etc. ie its now aimed at those with high disposable income. Not me Clare.
I was talking to a local parent about Lambeth Culture2020 consultation , which makes great play about everyone being 20mins from cultural activities, that she cannot afford it.
A criticism of Lambeth Culture2020 consultation is that it does not deal with making culture affordable. Some think that Lambeth Labour are quite happy with Picturehouse.
Last edited:
sparkybird
ask the bird...
yes but tickets impossible to book on your phone... gave up and fired up the laptop.
The tickets I booked were for for Still Alice. Both of us came out a bit shell shocked, that's how powerful the film and Julianne Moore's performance was.
You'll need to take a box of tissues.
The tickets I booked were for for Still Alice. Both of us came out a bit shell shocked, that's how powerful the film and Julianne Moore's performance was.
You'll need to take a box of tissues.
CH1
"Red Guard"(NLYL)
I feel very tempted by the prices at the Cinema Museum in Dugard Way (some of the screenings are only £3 - but the titles are somewhat esoteric. Even I find it hard to be nostalgic for the 1910s!)
OvalhouseDB
Well-Known Member
I love the Cinema Museum.
email them and tell them what you'd like to see - I bet they will oblige if they can!
Gramsci - I also love they way you write about film - for some reason I missed this thread when I saw Selma at the Ritzy. I didn't know that DreamWorks own the speeches - how shocking, that the words of a public statesman can be owned. I wonder how King would have felt about that? I assumed that it was a writer's choice, to avoid the well known, the what we think we are familiar with about King, and I thought it was a brave and effective decision, to manage without the 'Dream' speech. No danger of cliché, or sentimentality which can come with the familiar. Also, seeing it at the ritzy - I loved the audience participation: when Amelia Boynton talked of coming from strong stock there was a resounding 'Amen', harmonies were sung, there was a standing ovation. And seeing Tulse Hill school boy Tim Roth play George Wallace...so chilling.
It was , as you say, an actors film.
email them and tell them what you'd like to see - I bet they will oblige if they can!
Gramsci - I also love they way you write about film - for some reason I missed this thread when I saw Selma at the Ritzy. I didn't know that DreamWorks own the speeches - how shocking, that the words of a public statesman can be owned. I wonder how King would have felt about that? I assumed that it was a writer's choice, to avoid the well known, the what we think we are familiar with about King, and I thought it was a brave and effective decision, to manage without the 'Dream' speech. No danger of cliché, or sentimentality which can come with the familiar. Also, seeing it at the ritzy - I loved the audience participation: when Amelia Boynton talked of coming from strong stock there was a resounding 'Amen', harmonies were sung, there was a standing ovation. And seeing Tulse Hill school boy Tim Roth play George Wallace...so chilling.
It was , as you say, an actors film.
CH1
"Red Guard"(NLYL)
I notice from the Evening Standard magazine that Harriet Harman, who says she has lived in Herne Hill for 30 years, lets her hair down by going to the Ritzy. "I recently saw Birdman, which was so surprising and clever." she is quoted as saying.
The only celebrity I've seen recently in a place of public entertainment is (Lord) Jeffrey Archer. I must go to the Ritzy more - though it always seems to be American pulp fiction whenever I bother to get the leaflet.
P.S. Harriet's favourite pub is the Sun of Camberwell. I wonder if she thinks it is better having been foreclosed on and bought out by Antic?
The only celebrity I've seen recently in a place of public entertainment is (Lord) Jeffrey Archer. I must go to the Ritzy more - though it always seems to be American pulp fiction whenever I bother to get the leaflet.
P.S. Harriet's favourite pub is the Sun of Camberwell. I wonder if she thinks it is better having been foreclosed on and bought out by Antic?
Orang Utan
Psychick Worrier Ov Geyoor
David Clapson
Well-Known Member
There's a free members' preview of The Falling on Sunday at 11.00 https://www.picturehouses.co.uk/cin...opy=2&_m_utk=5453d01e8ac4d64679d30787b6b7f3b6
299 old timer
Well-Known Member
As these prices before or after the industrial action that raised the workers salaries?
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
They were after Cineworld took over Picturehouse. A different pricing policy.
Wages have nothing to do with it. Cineworld is a large profit making concern.
David Clapson
Well-Known Member
Going to the Ritzy doesn't make sense unless it's before 5pm on a weekday with a members' discount and you sneak in chocolates from Iceland and a decent coffee from Rosie's.
sparkybird
ask the bird...
I've just had an email from Picture House apologising for their new website and saying that they will be fixing it
Yah!
Yah!
Similar threads
