A movie thread for twickster

So, in this thread twickster complained that most of the Oscar movies (and, it seemed, most movies in general) are too damned depressing, and she ignored my post listing all the movies from 2007 that weren’t, so here’s a thread just for you twickster. Movies that you could choose to see instead of complaining this time next year that there wasn’t anything you could see that didn’t want to make you slit your wrists.

Obviously, as time goes by these will leave the theater and others will take their place, but right now they’re in the theater, and I’ll add more as I see them.

Penelope - A charming little fairy tale of a movie starring Christina Ricci as a poor little rich girl whose family was cursed generations before. The curse is that any female child born would have the nose of a pig, and the only way to break the curse was to find true love with one of her own kind (a blueblood, not a guy with a pig nose). It man James McAvoy plays Max, a down-on-his-luck blueblood (he lost all his money gambling) is eager to try where many have failed (failed to fall in love with Penelope because they get one look at her and run screaming). It’s a very very sweet movie that all girls (and boys) should see, because it has important but not cloying lessons about being true to yourself, liking yourself, and accepting other people for who they are, not what others think they should be. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and all that jazz. Grown-ups should like it too. My husband and I both enjoyed it.

Miss Pettigrew Lives For A Day - Finally, a (quite delightful screwball comedy of a) movie starring a 50+ woman (Frances McDormand) and it’s going to die a quick ugly death at the box office. Why? Because older women who complain that “they don’t make movies for me” are not going to go see it to support it, and it probably won’t appeal to other demographics, so if the older women don’t go out in force and see it, it’s curtains. So we won’t get another Miss Pettigrew-type film for 10 years. Sure, it might make its money back on DVD, but these things usually get greenlit if they did at least decent business in the theater. Long ago and in another age, this movie might have hung around and found an audience among people who don’t rush right out to see movies on opening weekend, but now movies like this aren’t given a chance to breathe.

Charlie Bartlett - another delightful film that isn’t finding an audience and is suffering terribly because of it. CB is a small movie about a kid who on the outside looks like he’s got everything under control and is the smartest guy around, while inside he’s a wounded little boy who doesn’t know what life is supposed to be about. It’s a comedy, but has some depth to it.

Definitely, Maybe - an unusual but satisfying rom-com where the emphasis is on a father-daughter relationship, with the daughter, by making her father tell her the story of how he met her mother (without knowing which of the girlfriends in the story ends up being her mother) helping her father come to grips with his divorce and current situation. Much better than the trailer would lead you to believe.

Be Kind Rewind - No where near as stupid as the terrible trailer would lead you to believe, but still lesser Michel Gondry. I was a bit disappointed in this, and consider it my least favorite of his films, but it still has many delightful moments and I’m glad I saw it. Danny Glover plays a convenience store owner who realizes he needs to upgrade from renting VHS tapes to DVDs, so while he goes off to research what it would take to turn his store into a DVD rental place, he leaves the store in the hands of his sweet-natured but dim-witted employee Mike (Mos Def). Mike’s loonball best friend Jerry (Jack Black) gets magnetized (it’s a fantasy, ok?) and ruins all the VHS tapes, so Mike and Jerry decide to “swede” the movies. Sweding is when amateur filmmakers make their own copies of famous movies for fun. It’s easy and fun to do and in this age of YouTube, you can actually have an audience for your films. Anyway, the people of the neighborhood like Mike and Jerry’s sweded films and they become famous. Until the FBI warning comes back to haunt them, and the building the store is in is condemned and they have to try to save it. It’s a very silly movie, but with a lot of heart and even some soul.
All five of these movies are doing poorly at the box office for no real good reason. People say they want movies that are fun and uplifting without being stupid and predictable, but when movies like that are made and released they don’t go out to see them. No wonder Hollywood goes so often with bankable sequels, horror and action flicks.
Coming up: Under The Same Moon - A sweet Spanish-language film about a boy who lives with his grandmother in Mexico while his mother works in Los Angeles to save money to bring him to the states to be together again. When the grandmother dies, the kid decides on his own that he’s going to go to Los Angeles rather than stay with strangers who will probably take the money his mom sends to help pay the bills and spend it on themselves. Cute situations ensue. Well-worth seeing. I don’t know when this opens. I saw a free screening a few weeks ago.

A bump. And a “HI twickster!”.

EW gave Penelope an F, calling it "ineptly cynical. " I’ll pass. Charlie Bartlett doesn’t interest me. The other three are on my “want to see” list.

As far as ignoring your post in the other thread – my apologies. I found your tone condescending and couldn’t come up with a response that didn’t sound pissed off.

I haven’t read the EW review, but right off the bat I’d say that any review that called a movie as sweet and innocent as this one “ineptly cynical” and gave it a grade of F is itself ineptly cynical, as if they didn’t believe that in this day and age, a charming and unusual fairy tale could fly.

I like EW, and have been turned on to many good-to-great films through them, but I’ve been wary of negative EW grades ever since they gave the funny and amazing O Brother Where Art Thou? an F. An F!! Have you seen O Brother Where Art Thou?? It’s an A+, in my mind. Not that Penelope is an A+ in my mind. I’d give it a B+ perhaps. I thought it was adorable. Christina Ricci is adorable. James McAvoy is adorable. If nothing else, it would be worth seeing for those two.

Just sayin’.

That’s cool. I was just giving a range of different films.

If I sounded condescending it was taking a cue from you. You were the one who had only seen three movies in the theater during 2007 because…

That’s ignoring or slapping down a whole bunch of films, which I then went on to list. Your tone was much worse than mine, but instead of taking it to the Pit, I gave you a list that put lie to your own cynicism toward movies. I wouldn’t have bothered if you hadn’t been a moviegoer at all, or if you lived in a small town with no decent movie theaters within reasonable distance. Some people DO only see 2-3-4 movies a year, and some live in movie theater-deprived places like Trixie, Kentucky or Chilly, Idaho, and that’s fine. But you’re not like that. You used to be a moviegoer, and you’re interested in movies, and you live in a large, cosmopolitan city that has plenty of movie theaters of all types.

If you’d said “I’m just not as into movies as I used to be,” fine, or “I really can’t afford movies the way I used to,” fine, but you didn’t. You said there wasn’t anything to see that wasn’t violent or depressing or a stupid blockbuster, to get you out to the movie theater. I’m sorry, but that’s flat out, plain and simple wrong. So forgive me if I sounded condescending or snippy, but, and I hate to say it, you started it.

I think you’re very cool, and I hate to be on your bad side, but the movies you slapped down didn’t deserve it, the Academy that picked such fine movies to honor with Best Picture nominations didn’t deserve it, and the movies you missed deserved to be seen or at least acknowledged and not dismissed with a “there’s nothing out there to see.”

No, I haven’t – got through about the first 15 minutes of it once, but – despite my abiding passion for George Clooney – decided I didn’t want to watch it. I don’t care for most of the Coen Brothers’ work, which in general I find cynical (if eptly so) and, well, mean-spirited, and the first 15 minutes didn’t lead me to think I’d enjoy it any more than other films of theirs I’d seen. (Those would be Fargo, Barton Fink, Hudsucker Proxy, Raising Arizona, and The Man Who Wasn’t There all the way through, and Bad Santa, which I also turned off at the 15-minute mark.)

In my OP in the other thread, I was expressing my own astonishment that I’d seen so few films in 2007, because I think of myself as a moviegoer (not to the extent that you or ArchiveGuy or others are, perhaps, but more than most people). There were a variety of factors – including the fact that the movies I was bitching about didn’t get me off my ass, but also including changes in my schedule and changes in who I was doing what activities with – behind that fact. I left out some of these other elements as not being relevant to my main point, which was that there were a hell of a lot of much-lauded films last year that I had zero interest in seeing.

Clearly we were taking each other’s comments in ways that the person making them may not have intended, so I’d be happy to call a truce and let it go at that.

I took my girlfriend to see Miss Pettigrew last night, and we both found it funny and charming. (We’re 29 and 30, and I love action movies, film noir, crime dramas, and superhero adaptations, so that tells you a lot.) We were the youngest people in the theater by a few decades, and it was a packed house. Of course, we’re both big Amy Adams fans thanks to Enchanted, another one of your favorites, which I also ended up loving. And it was cool seeing Julius Caesar from Rome playing Joe, the nice older fashion designer guy.

Oh, I actually thought Be Kind, Rewind had a hilarious and cool-looking trailer, but since so many people have given it lukewarm reviews, I’m waiting to see it in the $1 second-run theater.

That’s too bad, because I think it’s the best thing George has done (I’m a huge George fan, so I’m not putting down any of his other work) and he rightly got a Golden Globe award and was robbed of an Oscar nomination. I probably love this movie much much more than the average person and have seen it several times. I think it’s a wonderful film that is funny, zany, has great music (really, a stunning soundtrack that even appeals to people who’ve never liked that type of music before), incredible and quotable dialogue, and I never get tired of watching it over and over. I wish you could have watched it all the way through at least once, but if you’re not into the Coen Brothers’ comedy films (especially Raising Arizona, my 2nd favorite film by the Coens), then I understand.

:confused: Bad Santa isn’t a Coen comedy, either written or directed. It was directed by Terry Zwigof (Crumb, Ghost World). IMDB says that the writers were Glenn Ficarra & John Requa. I don’t know any of their previous work. I think Bad Santa is gut-bustlingly hilarious, but I can understand how others wouldn’t like it. It’s so highly irreverent, raunchy and profane it’s certainly not for everyone.

That’d be great.

I’m glad you liked it, and it was nice to hear that your theater was packed. That’s encouraging. It’s a trifle of a movie, but I love movies set in that time and place (with Art Direction and music to die for), I love Amy Adams as you know (and she looked like she was having a ball channeling Carole Lombard) and it’s nice to see Frances McDormand in a role that isn’t the best friend or wife or mom.

Me too, yes, and yes!

:smack: Sorry – not sure what I was thinking. Should’ve checked IMDb when I was writing that list.

Glad we’re pals again …

Hang in there, twicks. Good movies are coming. May will see the release of both Iron Man and the new Indiana Jones movie. August brings Tropic Thunder.

Screw the Oscars. They have forgotten what business they’re in: Entertainment. I haven’t wanted to see an Oscar-nominated movie in years (with few exceptions).

The Oscars aren’t about celebrating entertainment, and never have been. Sometimes the two overlap, but in general, the Oscars are about celebrating the ART and CRAFT of filmmaking/acting, not the box office. That’s why they have categories such as Art Direction and Cinematography and Editing. That’s also why occasionally movies such as Norbit can be nominated for an Oscar. In that particular case, the Makeup artists nominated the film for the Makeup award. In the artistic categories, they’re not judging the worth of the film as a whole, they’re nominating one specific part of it, in this case the incredible (if sometimes disgusting) Makeup job.

Movies as pure entertainment have their own awards, it’s called the People’s Choice Awards. There’s room for both.

That’s one of the saddest things I’ve ever read. You’ve missed out on so many amazing movies.

Looking back on the last few years:

2000

American Beauty*
Cider House Rules*
The Green Mile*
The Insider – missed it
The Sixth Sense – refuse to watch anything M. Night Sheboygan has anything to do with

2001

Gladiator*
Chocolat*
Erin Brokovich – Can’t stand the lead
Traffic – hate everybody involved, plus the plot
Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon*

2002

A Beautiful Mind – Crowe bores me mostly
Gosford Park – who cares?
LotR1*
In the Bedroom – never heard of it
Moulin Rouge*

2003

Chicago* - hated it
Gangs of New York – don’t like the actors, don’t care about the story
The Hours – who cares?
LotR2*
The Piano – who cares?

2004

LotR3*
Lost In Translation* - I liked this effort
Master and Commander* - This is a movie (even with Crowe in it)
Mystic River* - Liked it
Seabiscuit – who cares?

2005

Million Dollar Baby* - like Clint, hate Swank
The Aviator
Finding Neverland
Ray* - amazing movie
Sideways* - ok
2006

Didn’t see any of them; didn’t care to.
2007

Didn’t see any of them; didn’t care to.
2008

Didn’t see any of them; want to see Juno
Seems like it’s been the last couple of years that have bored me to tears. 2004 was the last year they had a slate of movies I cared the least little thing about.

Well, he missed some movies that you thought were amazing, and some that the members of the Motion Picture Academy thought were amazing – but if the story, actors, genre, theme, presentation, director, whatever of the movie didn’t appeal to him, then, well, actually, maybe he didn’t miss much of anything. Most of us, by the time we’re adults, have seen enough movies that we have identified the kind that we enjoy as well as the kind we don’t enjoy.

And “enjoyment” is a perfectly reasonable criterion for choosing a movie, however the individual may define it. There’s no point to seeing movies we don’t enjoy just because someone else considers them amazing.