I Just Watched...

[CinemaInternational]

I also tried watching HOWLS MOVING CASTLE, but checked out 45 minutes in.

The animation was gorgeous, and it was wonderful to hear Jean Simmons and Lauren Bacall voice their characters in what were probably two of their last roles, but holy s*** this movie was WWWWWeeeEeeIiiiIiiirrrrrrrd.

I see what you in re: HOWL'S MOVING CASTLE . I liked it (wonderful vocal performances, great animation and musical score), but the story is very odd, often extremely so, and it didn't let up on that front until the last few minutes....

God Bless you, Mr. International,

In the 11 months I was away, I maybe watched 5 or 6 movies because I COULDN'T BEAR not having anyone to talk about them with- and a subset of that is when you see something that is HIGHLY PRAISED (#158 IN IMDB'S TOP 200?) and you're just like "seriously, what the **** was that about, Alfie?"

ONE so NEEDS to have ALFIE chime in and offer that although he liked it, [WHEN IT CAME TO THE PLOT] frankly, he has no ****ing clue either...
and you feel a little better about the world.

IT IS BEAUTIFUL TO LOOK AT, and I think there might be something of a youth skew in terms of how people react to it (I can see younger people liking it more, while the over 40 crowd shouts at clouds about it)

seriously though, this movie made me really mad though. EVEN MORE SO after i read on WIKIPEDIA that it was meant primarily to be a criticism OF THE THEN-RAGING INVASION OF IRAQ in 2003...now, DON'T GET ME WRONG, I am not now or nor have I ever been a fan of that decision, but that's not why I'm mad. i'm mad because i have no ****ing clue exactly what part of this Victoria Era/steampunk/STAR WARS/dimension traveling through a wall-mounted SIMON GAME bullshit- i'm sorry, I meant to watch my language, but I can't because I'M STILL MAD- sorry- what part of this bull**** was supposed to be about the IRAQ INVASION!!!!!

If you told me with a straight face that FASTER PUSSYCAT, KILL! KILL! is actually advocating for ESPERANTO to be adopted as the UNIVERSAL LANGUAGE I could not be any more GOBSMACKED.

it is truly a powerful movie that can continue confusing you long after you checked out.

Few notes on this....

A) Didn't know that it was supposed to be a retort to the Iraq War and I am not exactly sure if there is anything in the film that directly points that way, unless its maybe the two witches who try to cancel each other out (the one voiced by Lauren Bacall later has a run-in with one voiced by Blythe Danner, that makes the former powerless and looking like a cross between a Jell-o mold and a human cousin of Jabba the Hutt). I know the animation director on this refused to go to the 2003 Oscars over the war issue, so maybe that's where all this started from. The bizarre story originated though from a British book.

B) I know you don't like Roger Ebert at all, but I think it says something that he rated this film as a near miss, a thumbs down, noting the beauty of the animation, but he thought the story was not up to par. And he usually adored this director's work, and I think this was the only bad review that Ebert ever handed the director.

C) I'm sorry that being cut off from the people here caused you to retreat from films. It seems such a pity to me, and I wish that the site had been more agreeable so you could have joined us earlier....( I hit the films and TV shows so hard this year that I might have watched enough for the two of us. I am currently gunning to finish up the series LA Law. I have 24 episodes left....)

D) Sigh, the IMDb top 250. It skews too modern, and part of the time I don't see what people see in some of the films. I know you said in the past that you retreated from new films after a crushing experience in 2007.... Well after a bad experience online, outside of doing Oscar duty every year, I rarely go beyond the late 90s. But there is too much flash, too little substance in the IMDb list. So many modern films are empty.... And I wish people on IMDb and Letterboxd would recognize that.

[Lorna]

I see where you’re coming from with regard to films of the 21st-century, not being up to par, all I can offer you is that while I have likewise been *so* deeply turned off and repelled by the modern films that I have disliked, there have been some films I’ve seen made in the last 20 years that I did like
And would even call excelllent, among them GET OUT, GOD’S OWN COUNTRY, DJANGO UNCHAINED, DAWN IF THE DEAD, THE KINGS SPEECH and some others.

But yes, you have to be careful because the bad films are so bad that they can give you trust issues when taking viewing risks

[Lorna]

And you know we have had some larfs talking about some of the bad films – I recall Kristen Stewart eating pearls in pea soup from a couple years back and I still chuckle to this day.

[Lorna]

I just remember that for an extended period of time “the Shawshank redemption” was one of ***the three highest rated films on IMDb*** and that always puts their whole “member ratings” system into perspective for me.

(Now, SMOKEY AND THE BANDIT I could see.)

[txfilmfan]

I just remember that for an extended period of time “the Shawshank redemption” was one of ***the three highest rated films on IMDb*** and that always puts their whole “member ratings” system into perspective for me.

(Now, SMOKEY AND THE BANDIT I could see.)

Top 10 on IMDb at this moment:

1) The Shawshank Redemption
2) The Godfather
3) The Dark Knight
4) The Godfather Part II
5) 12 Angry Men (1957 film)
6) Schindler's List
7) The LotR: The Return of the King
Pulp Fiction
9) The LotR: The Fellowship of the Ring
10) The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

I seem to recall back when the LotR films were coming out at the same time as all the new Lucasfilm stuff that the respective fanboy delegations were duking it out as to which films were better. I would have thought the overlap between the two groups would be massive, but perhaps not...

[HoldenIsHere]

I just remember that for an extended period of time “the Shawshank redemption” was one of ***the three highest rated films on IMDb*** and that always puts their whole “member ratings” system into perspective for me.

(Now, SMOKEY AND THE BANDIT I could see.)

Amen to that!

THE SHAWSHANK REDEMPTION - meh

SMOKEY AND THE BANDIT - opposite of meh (whatever the word or phrase may be)


I actually only saw SMOKEY AND TH BANDIT in the last year or so.
speedacer5 (the creator of this thread) always spoke highly of the movie, but I resisted because I'm not too keen on Burt Reynolds or Jackie Gleason. I'm sure glad that I trusted speedracer and gave it a chance.
What a fun movie!

[jamesjazzguitar]

I just remember that for an extended period of time “the Shawshank redemption” was one of ***the three highest rated films on IMDb*** and that always puts their whole “member ratings” system into perspective for me.

(Now, SMOKEY AND THE BANDIT I could see.)

Top 10 on IMDb at this moment:

1) The Shawshank Redemption
2) The Godfather
3) The Dark Knight
4) The Godfather Part II
5) 12 Angry Men (1957 film)
6) Schindler's List
7) The LotR: The Return of the King
Pulp Fiction
9) The LotR: The Fellowship of the Ring
10) The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

I seem to recall back when the LotR films were coming out at the same time as all the new Lucasfilm stuff that the respective fanboy delegations were duking it out as to which films were better. I would have thought the overlap between the two groups would be massive, but perhaps not...

How is the IMDB raking done? By users, by a select group of individuals, or based on rentals?

[txfilmfan]

I just remember that for an extended period of time “the Shawshank redemption” was one of ***the three highest rated films on IMDb*** and that always puts their whole “member ratings” system into perspective for me.

(Now, SMOKEY AND THE BANDIT I could see.)

Top 10 on IMDb at this moment:

1) The Shawshank Redemption
2) The Godfather
3) The Dark Knight
4) The Godfather Part II
5) 12 Angry Men (1957 film)
6) Schindler's List
7) The LotR: The Return of the King
Pulp Fiction
9) The LotR: The Fellowship of the Ring
10) The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

I seem to recall back when the LotR films were coming out at the same time as all the new Lucasfilm stuff that the respective fanboy delegations were duking it out as to which films were better. I would have thought the overlap between the two groups would be massive, but perhaps not...

How is the IMDB raking done? By users, by a select group of individuals, or based on rentals?

By users. You rate a title from 1 to 10, and they average the individual scores. A title's score isn't just the mean (average) though. They have some sort of weighted average algorithm to prevent unusual rating patterns from contaminating their database. They don't disclose the algorithm.

All the info on IMDb ratings can be found on this FAQ page:

https://help.imdb.com/article/imdb/trac ... TFYYP6TWAV

Edit: The Top 250 ranking is determined by taking only "regular voters" inputs from the voting database. For example, I've only submitted a handful of ratings since I've been a member (over 15 years). The Top 250 page tells me I've rated 24/250, or 10% of the Top 250. I doubt that makes me a "regular" voter. Also, a title has to receive at least 25,000 ratings before it can go on their Top 250 list.

[Lorna]

Top 10 on IMDb at this moment:

1) The Shawshank Redemption

[Lorna]

I mean, i will say this for THE SHAWSHANK REDEMPTION- I saw it a year or so after it came out (1994) and ALL THESE MANY YEARS LATER I can still recall a lot about it- good and bad (the JAMES WHITMORE subplot is really effective, whereas I recall the character of THE WARDEN is handled in much the same fashion as if it were a WB FILM of the 1930's**- he practically twirls his mustache.) there is also a scene where the hero is raped by three of his fellow inmates (male)- and while this is a fact of prison life, I recall thinking it was handled in a way that was...perhaps a little too "sensational"? also also, I recall feeling distinctly that while he is excellent in his part, there is something about MORGAN FREEMAN'S role that ventures into "magical minority" territory (not through any doing of his). '

also I thought the ending was ****ing ridiculous.

**did i accidentally steal this reference from INSIDE OSCAR 2?

[CinemaInternational]

I see where you’re coming from with regard to films of the 21st-century, not being up to par, all I can offer you is that while I have likewise been *so* deeply turned off and repelled by the modern films that I have disliked, there have been some films I’ve seen made in the last 20 years that I did like
And would even call excelllent, among them GET OUT, GOD’S OWN COUNTRY, DJANGO UNCHAINED, DAWN IF THE DEAD, THE KINGS SPEECH and some others.

But yes, you have to be careful because the bad films are so bad that they can give you trust issues when taking viewing risks

A few notes before I address your post on 21st century films...

Although you didn't get far, I'm glad you liked Black Cauldron all over again. I spoke of it a few days ago here, how much it meant to me. It's terribly underrated.

As for Howl's Moving Castle, before going in, I knew the story was odd, because years ago, someone had donated this comic book like publication which showed the whole unfolding of the story, and even there, it seemed weird and slightly incoherent..... I think it plays better unfolding on the screen, but maybe I was a bit too kind when I saw it a few years ago.....

It's not the only Japanese animated film with an unusual plot on the IMDb list. 2016's Your Name, which is in that top 100, starts as some sort of Freaky Friday clone with a girl and boy mysteriously switching places repeatedly, before revealing itself to be a youth romance/drama/sci-fi/ race-against-time/disaster movie. Seriously. It actually worked because the underlying emotions were so strong, but it is another film not to go into with the intention of expecting clarity or credibility.

Re, your earlier post on the Batman animated film, thank you for deconstructing it. I kind of thought that it sounded as though it couldn't live up to the hype, which is still strong for it. There actually was a (frustrating) book ranking TV series a few years ago which said that the animated TV series was one of the 100 best American series of all time. Sorry to hear that Dana Delany's vocal performance wasn't up to pitch; I have this utmost respect for her due to her brilliant, masterclass performance she gave on China Beach, my all-time favorite TV series. I only wish her subsequent career had been better, although it was great to see her on Desperate Housewives.

-----
But now the topic has to turn to the 21st century for films. Part of my aversion is due to purely personal issues: the years of this century have been hard, and I have a lot of past regrets dating back to 2007. (How I wish I could have been better than I was, to not have made some of those big mistakes).

The biggest personal reason is because I spent years with people I met on IMDb that mostly discussed new releases/Oscar films. When the boards closed there, I followed them to a Facebook group. It all started out so well. But my jitters stemming from an earlier internet trouble had its impact, as did my unyielding criticism of some "popular, praised" films combined with some degree of social naivete. And one day, feeling worn down from being dogpiled on several times and being repulsed by the sounds of the latest movie of the moment, I lost my cool, and tried to fight back. They banned me from the group for over two years before letting me back in. During the time of the ban, only about 15 of the 150+people even acknowledged my existence. I found I was the butt of jokes, that people I deeply cared for, people I had poured my soul out to, didn't even care, that some directly publicly scorned me and publicly said bad things about me in my absence. They mocked my love of older films. I did a lot for them in that four year period before being banned; I'm kind of back there now, but it will never be the same as it was before. I am so wary of being hurt, and some of them still don't give me the time of day. How I was treated there really made me reluctant to do anymore than I absolutely had to with post-2000 films. Almost every time I watch one from the 21st century (save maybe for some of those titles from 2000-2003), especially films from the 2010s, I become reminded of the past. And it still hurts.

But the other half of it comes from the films themselves. I keep track of the films I have seen, and about 13% come from 2000 onward. To my surprise, I really liked a good 45% of them. But the other 55% ranges from the bland to the inane, from the mediocre to the reprehensible. And what makes an impact also is how seriously some of the bad films were taken. Some were given some of the best press in the world, Oscars, and a big popular response. And they were still lacking. Every Oscar year brings at least one big clinker up for Best Picture. Netflix rarely produces a good film, the current indie scene is dominated by the sanctimonious, narcissistic duo of studios A24 and Neon (to be fair they have financed some good films, but also a whole lot of schlock), and the majors are lost to blockbusters. And I have so little patience for the blockbusters turned out by the score now. The films that are aimed at adults the past few years (2020- now) have the subtlety of a sledgehammer; even Stanley Kramer would say they tried too hard. Plus there are some that are plainly morally repugnant. And I am still furious that 20th Century Fox is now referred to as the meaningless 20th Century Studios....

To be fair, there are reasons to keep watching. Most of the films have been downbeat, but they come with some exceptional performances (like Glenn Close in The Wife or Charlotte Rampling in 45 Years). And every now and then, there is a film left for dead that is actually marvelous (A Quiet Passion, Film Stars Don't Die in Liverpool, Stan and Ollie, Motherless Brooklyn, Three Thousand Years of Longing). It's enough to make things a bit easier and more palatable. But my heart still belongs with the 20th century.

[CinemaInternational]

I just remember that for an extended period of time “the Shawshank redemption” was one of ***the three highest rated films on IMDb*** and that always puts their whole “member ratings” system into perspective for me.

(Now, SMOKEY AND THE BANDIT I could see.)

Top 10 on IMDb at this moment:

1) The Shawshank Redemption
2) The Godfather
3) The Dark Knight
4) The Godfather Part II
5) 12 Angry Men (1957 film)
6) Schindler's List
7) The LotR: The Return of the King
Pulp Fiction
9) The LotR: The Fellowship of the Ring
10) The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

I seem to recall back when the LotR films were coming out at the same time as all the new Lucasfilm stuff that the respective fanboy delegations were duking it out as to which films were better. I would have thought the overlap between the two groups would be massive, but perhaps not...

How is the IMDB raking done? By users, by a select group of individuals, or based on rentals?

It's based on the average vote that their users rated a film, but it is definitely influenced by pressure campaigns. When some hyped films come out, some "fanboys" urge their friends to vote the hyped film a 10, while handing another film a 1, so it could get on the list. So the results are skewed.....

[jamesjazzguitar]

Top 10 on IMDb at this moment:

1) The Shawshank Redemption
2) The Godfather
3) The Dark Knight
4) The Godfather Part II
5) 12 Angry Men (1957 film)
6) Schindler's List
7) The LotR: The Return of the King
Pulp Fiction
9) The LotR: The Fellowship of the Ring
10) The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

I seem to recall back when the LotR films were coming out at the same time as all the new Lucasfilm stuff that the respective fanboy delegations were duking it out as to which films were better. I would have thought the overlap between the two groups would be massive, but perhaps not...

How is the IMDB raking done? By users, by a select group of individuals, or based on rentals?

It's based on the average vote that their users rated a film, but it is definitely influenced by pressure campaigns. When some hyped films come out, some "fanboys" urge their friends to vote the hyped film a 10, while handing another film a 1, so it could get on the list. So the results are skewed.....

Thanks for the info (as well as Txfilmfan). I admit this ranking makes no sense to me. E.g. only two studio-era films, and the one that ranks in the top 10 is 12 Angry men. (instead of say Casablanca, Citizen Kane, Gone With the Wind, Best Years of Our Lives or other films).

I can somewhat understand the Eastwood film, but if a 60s film, I think more people would select Bonnie and Clyde instead of the Good, Bad, Ugly.

Lord of the Rings films and the two Godfathers make sense to me (i.e. I wouldn't select them, but I can understand why others would).

[CinemaInternational]

I mean, i will say this for THE SHAWSHANK REDEMPTION- I saw it a year or so after it came out (1994) and ALL THESE MANY YEARS LATER I can still recall a lot about it- good and bad (the JAMES WHITMORE subplot is really effective, whereas I recall the character of THE WARDEN is handled in much the same fashion as if it were a WB FILM of the 1930's**- he practically twirls his mustache.) there is also a scene where the hero is raped by three of his fellow inmates (male)- and while this is a fact of prison life, I recall thinking it was handled in a way that was...perhaps a little too "sensational"? also also, I recall feeling distinctly that while he is excellent in his part, there is something about MORGAN FREEMAN'S role that ventures into "magical minority" territory (not through any doing of his). '

also I thought the ending was ****ing ridiculous.

**did i accidentally steal this reference from INSIDE OSCAR 2?

I think you did borrow the phrasing from Inside Oscar, but that's OK....

I only saw Shawshank once (in fact, much like Pauline Kael, many films I have only seen once). I remember it being good, with fine work from Freeman, Whitmore, and Tim Robbins, but it's not best movie of all time material. It's not even the best film of 1994, which was definitely not a favorite year of mine, so Shawshank would still be top 20 for the year...

I am kind of curious as to how it got to the top, given that it was a box office flop in the theatres. Was it all word of mouth and video rentals that caused it to go so high?.

For the record, personal top 30 of 1994 (full disclosure, I know I liked a film you despised.... And I apologize in advance).... And no, I didn't much warm to Forrest Gump, Pulp Fiction, or The Lion King...


1 Quiz Show
2 The Browning Version
3 That's Entertainment! III
4 Widows' Peak
5 Ed Wood
6 Little Women
7 Crooklyn
8 Second Best
9 I'll Do Anything
10 Immortal Beloved
11 Corrina, Corrina
12 Four Weddings and a Funeral
13 Don Juan DeMarco
14 Serial Mom
15 Tom and Viv
16 It Could Happen to You
17 Guarding Tess
18 Pret-a-Porter
19 The Shawshank Redemption
20 Black Beauty
21 The Ref
22 Vanya on 42nd Street
23 Three Colors: Red
24 Nobody's Fool
25 The Hudsucker Proxy
26 The Adventures of Priscilla, Queen of the Desert
27 The Swan Princess
28 The Paper
29 Love Affair
30 Death and the Maiden

[CinemaInternational]

How is the IMDB raking done? By users, by a select group of individuals, or based on rentals?

It's based on the average vote that their users rated a film, but it is definitely influenced by pressure campaigns. When some hyped films come out, some "fanboys" urge their friends to vote the hyped film a 10, while handing another film a 1, so it could get on the list. So the results are skewed.....

Thanks for the info (as well as Txfilmfan). I admit this ranking makes no sense to me. E.g. only two studio-era films, and the one that ranks in the top 10 is 12 Angry men. (instead of say Casablanca, Citizen Kane, Gone With the Wind, Best Years of Our Lives or other films).

I can somewhat understand the Eastwood film, but if a 60s film, I think more people would select Bonnie and Clyde instead of the Good, Bad, Ugly.

Lord of the Rings films and the two Godfathers make sense to me (i.e. I wouldn't select them, but I can understand why others would).

None of it makes much sense. What is true is that classic era titles are often an unexplored territory for younger viewers, and they are often neglected , sadly. They should be given more credit.

Pre-1970 Hollywood films (three British films: Third Man, Bridge on the River Kwai, and Lawrence of Arabia also make the list, as do a few foreign language films, plus three Sergio Leone titles made in Italy, but filmed in English) on the list are....
The Kid (132)
Sherlock Jr. (201)
The Gold Rush (188)
The General (193)
City Lights (53)
It Happened One Night (245)
Modern Times (48)
The Wizard of Oz (229)
Mr. Smith Goes to Washington (204)
Gone with the Wind (161)
The Grapes of Wrath (237)
Rebecca (241)
The Great Dictator (66)
Citizen Kane (100)
To Be or Not to Be (232)
Casablanca (46)
Double Indemnity (104)
The Best Years of Our Lives (223)
It's a Wonderful Life (20)
The Treasure of the Sierra Madre (148)
Sunset Boulevard (60)
All About Eve (135)
Singin in the Rain (87)
Dial M for Murder (160)
On the Waterfront (192)
Rear Window (50)
12 Angry Men (5)
Paths of Glory (61)
Witness for the Prosecution (65)
Vertigo (103)
Some Like It Hot (129)
North by Northwest (102)
Ben-Hur (185)
The Apartment (99)
Psycho (35)
Judgment at Nuremberg (136)
To Kill a Mockingbird (112)
The Great Escape (153)
Dr. Strangelove (72)
The Sound of Music (239)
Cool Hand Luke (242)
2001: A Space Odyssey (95)