I'm back (for the time being)

[Scottie]

Hey all.

It's been a while but school is finally over and I've finally had time to sit down and watch some movies. It's been a tough semester for me having to contend with time commitments to a feature length film, a film festival, and 12 hours semester credit. But I'll tell you right now all of them have gone off beautifully. I'd like to take a quick second to thank Dean for sending in his three videos for submission to the film festival. Though they didn't arrive in time for official submission this year, we've talked and they will make it into next year's festival, of which I have been assigned the position of President. w00t. Also, I'd like to thank everybody on this site who has posted a review. It's refreshing to see so many reviews coming from this place even if I haven't had the chance to sit down and watch any of them. Since school let out exactly two week ago today, I've seen seventeen movies ranging from Jurassic Park to Freaks. Here we go:

The Crazies (1973) - George Romero directs a wonderful low budget film about a virus that breaks out in a town after a military plane crashes in the mountains and the virus leaks down in through the water and which drives anyone it comes in contact with to complete madness or mindless drivel. The film really captures the essence of the Vietnam era fear as well as undercurrents of the communist threats where you don't know who might be "one of them." I saw nice nods to the original Invasion of the Body Snatchers in this. In the DVD commentary with Romero, he comments that this is the first time he's been able to step away from the camera and direct the scenes as a director, not as a director/cinematographer/camera operator. The results show a very cohesive story with great background action to compliment the foreground stuff. I picked up the DVD for about $10 at Deepdiscountdvd.com. Comes with commentary with George Romero, an interview with star Lynn Lowery, trailers and spots, posters and stills, and a biography of George Romero. If you’re a fan of the ‘Dead’ series, you’ll appreciate the style of filmmaking and story line from Romero.

The Last Picture Show (1971) - Peter Bogdonavich directs a cast of unknowns in this story about small town high school graduates growing up to discover what roles they can play in other people's lives. Some of them don’t know how to cope with their own insignificance in life and resort to sexual deviance to fit in with a group they don’t belong in, while others try to run away from their life by driving to Mexico or chasing the girl of their high school dreams. Others merely escape to the world of the last cinema in town which is about to close down. The story incorporates the adults of the town as the high school graduates are forced to finally coexist with them on more than a student/teacher relationship. It usually ends in disparity. Found this at the school library. I liked this film a lot. I thought of this film as what George Lucas was trying to achieve through the kids in American Graffiti but without all the 60’s pop music and muscle cars. Some people assimilate well, which is what American Graffiti is all about, but then there are some who screw it up, which is what The Last Picture Show is about.

Jurassic Park (1993) â€" This time Steven Spielberg makes a movie about dinosaurs. He made some films about aliens, about sharks, and about action heroes before, and now he’s made a film about dinosaurs. If you can’t tell, I’m pretty apprehensive about this movie. I didn’t like this movie. No, actually, it was okay. It was just… too mawkishly sentimental for my tastes. Spielberg has obviously become the master at manipulating emotions as scene after scene barrages the viewer with images that breathe too sickly sweet in my face. Behind the excitement of a movie about nature running wild lies the heavy-handed morals of the film: stealing and double crossing is punishable by the innocent and unguided forces of nature, money is a corruptible power, sometimes nature might be better left untouched, and keeping the family unit intact is priority number one, as is always the case in all of Spielberg’s movies. But in the foreground of all of that morality is this awesome visual roller coaster ride filled with some of the most breathtaking computer video images and hand crafted puppetry I have ever seen. It’s a toss up. I can take those images of the “Jurassic Park” banner falling around the tyrannosaurus rex being attacked by raptors on one side and compare that to the image of a tyrannosaurus rex chasing one of the jeeps in the rear view mirror with the words “object in mirror may be closer than it appears” on the other. Those are some cool images, but one smacks of contrived metaphor and the other screams with raw power juxtaposed with situational irony. I’ll always respect Spielberg as one of cinema’s powerhouse figures, but there will always be something to disagree about. On the disc with the movie were a number of behind the scenes featurettes including Spielberg with his creative team planning out images from the movie in pre-production, as well as a perfectly matched stop motion animation mock up of the raptor hunt scene in the kitchen. I would personally love to see someone take the whole movie and turn it into this kind of filmmaking. Picked this up at the University library.

The Terminator (1984) â€" James Cameron makes his science fiction masterpiece about time travel, cyborgs, guns, chicks, and Arnold. Hot damn this was an awesome movie! I had never seen this before so I watched this with extreme scrutiny considering the heaps of praise everyone lavishes upon this movie, and I have to say nearly every bit of it holds up like a rock. Cameron tackles the subject of the past affecting the future through time travel without skipping a beat and barrels his movie down a slip and slide of action. Action splashed here, splashed there, action freaking everywhere. The stop motion was great as was the dark, almost black post-apocalyptic world of the future. We see tank machines rolling over dozens of skulls and bones, lasers, guns, battle armor, flying machines, this movie was so much fun. About the only problems I had with the movie were the Highlander-esque special lightning effects at the beginning of the movie. If I were going to update anything, it would have to be the way the lighting licked the metal pipes while the bum in the alleyway looked on unfazed at the storm of blue electricity. Either it was the bum’s lack of reaction that I didn’t like or it was the actual special effect. It’s hard to decide. Anyways, another classic film from the science fiction genre down thanks to the University library.

The French Connection (1971) â€" I wanted to watch something that would thrill me and William Friedkin’s hardboiled story about two detectives who will stop at nothing to bring down some French drug dealers was exactly what I wanted. You can’t get more exciting than a ten minute car chase that winds through the NYC transit system as Popeye smashes off buses, cars, walls, and whatever else he can sideswipe to keep moving. The particular car chase scene I’m speaking about had the same motivation to keep going that a concussion victim has to stay awake: to keep going as if your life depended on it. As Popeye wedged his way past intersections of crossing cars and off of walls that pointed his car kind of in the direction he wanted to go, we quickly become enthralled by the amount of drive he has. Past dump trucks, around lines of more cars, almost over a baby carriage, you slowly get sucked into his desperation and suddenly his passion for the chase translates into your passion to watch him chase. It’s ingenious how Friedkin used the in-car perspective of the chase and the jarring close-up shots of the car hitting the next object to glue you to the screen through visceral action. I’ve even begun to speak in first person plural, trying to include the rest of you in on my experiences watching this car chase. That is exactly how Friedkin entraps us and makes us watch. This is an excellent 70’s film. Picked this up at the University library.

Beyond the Valley of the Dolls (1970) â€" Russ Meyer and Roger Ebert team up to make the grooviest psych out film ever. I watched this both out of curiosity and because I needed to write a paper about a film from the 70’s for one of my cinema classes. My original choice was The Crazies that I wrote about above, but it came in the mail too late. This movie is just one big silly trip into an iconoclastic vision of the 60’s and 70’s Hollywood culture. I don’t care what anybody says, this movie does give Roger Ebert the right to judge other people’s movies as he sees them. What he has created is a movie that takes an idea and stretches it to the maximum. Without being side tracked or deviating from the general idea of 60’s and 70’s freak out, Ebert and Meyer have created a tightly wound movie where plot lines interconnect, characters are developed, and the story unfolds into an ultimate climax of hermaphroditic awkwardness. These are the essentials on which a good movie needs to be judged. If it meets these criteria, it’s already on its way to the public to decide if it’s going to be box office gold or yet another classic that gets tossed in the dumpster. Good lessons to be learned through this movie: don’t laugh at a hermaphrodite on peyote, don’t date a porn star [and subsequently have sex with her in a Rolls Royce (which as we all know is better than a Bentley!)], and don’t go to Hollywood for god’s sake. If this is a movie about these kinds of people, imagine what kind of sick and twisted people actually wrote and directed it! Picked this up at the University library. Watch this movie!

American Graffiti (1973) â€" I have to agree with my film professor when he claims this movie is George Lucas’ best film. The story is so tight it’s hermetically sealed. Four friends after graduation are only one night away from leaving each other to go on with the remainder of their lives. It’s up to them to decide if they’re ready to go yet or not. What makes this movie appealing to many is its soundtrack. Taking clips from the top 40 charts of the 1960’s and placing it alongside hot rodding muscle cars really sets this movie in a period and truly asks you the question on the poster “where were you in ’62?” Again, this is the kind of solid moviemaking that allows the director/writer to go on and do whatever else they want to do in the industry. It’s like a golden ticket into the studio system, and for Lucas it was his chance to rebound from the failure of THX-1138 and get back on his feet to make Star Wars. After that it’s the gravy train and as many remasters of your movie as you want to make because people are going to buy it, no matter how many times you jerk them around. O, Lucas, how thou art what thou despised as a film student. Picked this up at the University library.
Roger & Me (1989) â€" Roger Moore makes this documentary about trying to convince General Motors CEO Roger Smith to visit his hometown and observe for himself the amount of destruction the job cuts to plants in Michigan have done to the economy and to the people themselves in Flint, Michigan. It is also the beginning of Roger Moore’s quest as a filmmaker to be personally offended by everybody who doesn’t agree with his philosophy. Moore presents a good case for us to consider: why would General Motors cut thousands of jobs in the United States as well as strike deals with the UAW (United Auto Workers) to recover billions of dollars in benefit cuts, only to send those lost jobs off to Mexico? Well… uh… well, Moore never really answers that question. He implies the company is restructuring their business strategy to become more involved in the highly lucrative weapons manufacturing business, but he never expands on that line. Instead, his attention diverts away from the GM Company and towards the people of Flint in their struggle to get their lives out of the gutter as they lose their jobs by the thousands while plants close all around them. And so I’m confused by Moore. Is this movie an attempt to whistle blow on the GM Company for leaving the car industry to join the arms dealers of the world and then to address the issue implied there, or is this a sentimental story about the people of Flint and their sad attempts at picking themselves up out of the gutter of America? One subject has more power than the other and he clearly chose the wrong subject. This fact is what makes Roger & Me not nearly as successful as the highly focused film he made fifteen years later. Roger & Me was a tremendous starting block for Moore, but it wasn’t until Fahrenheit 9/11 that his filmmaking career found its plateau and his investigative nature found its home. Good early work for a first time filmmaker. Found this at the University library.

Pickpocket (1959) â€" This film is where my perspective of filmmaking took a sharp and very abrupt right turn towards a new appreciation of the art of making films. Robert Bresson is absolutely brilliant. His vision of how to make movies is so detailed and intricate I find it hard to believe how I ever made a movie without thinking about what he has done in his films to make his movies. In fact I’m ashamed to admit I’ve ever made films after seeing this film. To listen to how his actors describe him is like listening to a child describe how they were raised by their grandfather. With awe, with compassion, with respect that cannot be sown between two peers. Between two peers comes a rivalry very hard to overcome, but with Bresson and his movie and his actors, he is allowed to take his “models” by the hand and lead them through the movie on blind faith alone. To consider a movie where the director took a cast of actors who has almost exclusively never acted before, and told them only where to look in between delivering their lines while positioned at such and such a point is why I have reconsidered the way I make movies. Twenty, thirty, forty, sometimes fifty takes later Bresson would still be looking for a glimpse, a nod, or a movement that expresses what he feels inside him, and here I am telling people to do stuff over there while I fiddle with the lens a little more. I am in debt to his work. Robert Bresson was the father of the French new Wave and the epitome of filmmaking. Also be sure to watch A Man Escaped. Got this film at the University library.

Black Narcissus (1947) â€" Black Narcissus is what happens when you push the color capabilities of Technicolor to its most extreme. Shot entirely on the lots of Pinewood studio in London, Michael Powell and Emeric Pressburger’s film is the pinnacle of lush. There’s a popular anecdote that goes around when talking about this movie. The directors once commented that because of the power of Technicolor, the lips of the actors would appear to be too red on screen. It was then decreed the main actors must wear a beige toned lipstick to hide their natural redness. It makes the scene at the end of the film all the more powerful when Sister Ruth sheds her black and white nun’s clothing and paints the forbidden red across her lips and charges out of the building to the top, confronting Sister Superior Clodagh in a showdown swinging from the convent’s bell 9000 feet above the Earth. I loved this film for two things: color and expression. I felt while watching this to be a part of a living museum mixing the art of the German Expressionists and the hyper realistic colors of some contemporary art (sorry no examples, I’m terrible with most art movements). I was also enthralled by the actual Technicolor camera. Look at this true to scale image! It’s big. I picked this movie up at the University library. If you like color, watch Powell and Pressburger’s other Technicolor masterpiece, The Life and Death of Colonel Blimp.
http://www.widescreenmuseum.com/oldcolor/technicolor_giants_in_england.jpg

Badlands (1973) â€" This is one of the few films that director Terence Malick has made in his life as of today. In fact I can count his directing career on one hand, but what I can’t do is begin to contemplate the technical prowess that went into making this films. In Badlands, a young Martin Sheen (Kit) and Sissy Spacek (Holly) essentially roam the plains of Colorado killing people, usually to cover their tracks and to keep themselves from being caught. The story is simple enough, but it’s the characters and the photography that make this movie, hands down, the most intriguing films I have ever seen. Everything is an enigma, if not a pretense for a hidden desire or message. Take for example the scene where the two characters encounter their own images of death. Young Holly decides to throw out a sickly but curable catfish into the yard rather than to watch it die in the far too small bowl in her house. She later regrets doing it after being scolded by her two male role models, her father and Kit, but what does her initial decision speak about the innocence of youth.  Kit’s work on a cattle ranch leads him to come across a cow dead on the ranch floor. He looks at it and puts his arms on his hips. He halfheartedly taps it with his foot. Then he sort of kicks it. He looks around suspiciously and steps on top of it and walks over to the other side. Are Kit’s actions a byproduct of not being told what death is or are there other wheels turning in his head? Where is the father figure in this movie; the role to give explanation to the actions of the movie’s young characters. Well, there isn’t one, and this movie’s youthful explosion of freedom in a world where the characters don’t even know the rules makes this an intriguing character study. And finally there is the cinematography. Amongst the vast and nearly desolate plains rises the image of the mountains in the distance more than half way through the movie that serves as the maguffin of the film (any object or idea that inhibits the story’s central focus). But the mountains are only an illusion created out of desperation for hope by Kit in an attempt to free himself from his past. The mountains represent hope and opportunity to him, but in actuality, they represent and would solve nothing even if he had gotten to them. Cinematography works when the camera’s eye is focused on a central theme of the movie. By imbedding the ideas of the movie into the viewer’ brain, the images we are shown on screen are given new freedom for interpretation and personal analysis. Terence Malick knew what he was doing, and this was his first feature length film. I picked this up at the University library.

Mr. Death: The Rise and Fall of Fred A. Leuchter, Jr. (1999) â€" This is a documentary that feels like a compressed news broadcast. Errol Morris, the reason why Werner Herzog ate his shoe, makes this documentary about, well, the rise and fall of Fred A. Leuchter, Jr., also known as Mr. Death. During the 70’s and 80’s, Mr. Leuchter found himself in a successful niche improving upon and creating new machines to implement capital punishment. Though he was not a licensed technician, he sold blueprints and homemade machines to state penitentiaries as well as acted as a consultant on the lethal machines in prisons across the country. Where Mr. Leuchter went awry was when he was contacted to investigate the truthfulness to the claim that Nazis used lethal gas to exterminate thousands of people at concentration camps in Germany and Poland. His research found him knee deep in the ruins of Auschwitz, taking rock samples off the walls of gas chamber rooms to take back to the United States for arsenic analysis. His research turned up no traces of cyanide in the wall samples nor evidence of the structural integrity of the supposed gas chambers to safely contain the gases. He presented his findings to the trial of Ernst Zundel, a holocaust denier on trial in Canada for publishing documents refuting the Holocaust ever occurred, and was successively outcast from society as a fellow Holocaust denier. Through Morris’ ninety minute film, we are shown the relative success of a man quickly sink to the bottom of the world’s hating order through the publication of one research project. Mr. Leuchter is portrayed as objectively as possible in this film, sometimes even going to black while his voice continues, but the sheer tenacity of this man makes me grit my teeth with rage when I think of him. His lack of concern for human life and the sufferings of others and his ambivalence towards people as both models of death and financial gain is a horrifying example of what kinds of people do what kinds of things in this world. The movie was well made with nice interludes of beautifully shot slow motion 35mm as well as video footage from trials, video from Leuchter’s own research in the tombs of Auschwitz, and the interviews of Leuchter sitting and talking about his work as calmly as a dove coos. I picked this up at the local video store at a ½ price discount of $3 on VHS. Good quality.

Wings of Desire (1987) â€" German filmmaker Wim Wenders and his company Road Movies Produktion need to make a movie or else they will go bankrupt. Wenders decides he wants to set a movie in Berlin that tells the story of the people of Berlin. The movie follows the existence of angels as they follow humans around and influence what they think, how they react, and sometimes what they do. The angels are able to listen in to people’s thoughts through an ingenious cinematic trick where they merely lean their head against a man or woman’s and the thoughts begin to flow like rain. We hear their internal pleas for help, their self-doubts, their inner monologue, anything they might be thinking at the moment. Wenders shoots the majority of the film in black and white, but when an especially touching moment occurs, the movie switches to a beautiful and vibrant full color, almost Technicolor with extremely strong emphasis on reds and yellows. His camera is in constant motion, a sort of camera entfesselte or literally unfastened camera that moves about space without hinges or blockades. This unfastened style of cinematography seems to stick with Wenders throughout his career and becomes somewhat of a trademark for his films. Overall I thought the idea of this movie and its angels and people of Berlin was excellent, but there was something unsettling in the lack of focus in this movie. Picked this up at the University library.

Freaks (1932) â€" Tod Browning really really liked the circus. “Freaks” of all shapes and sizes fill the screen and pull off the image of a traveling circus in distress. When little person, Hans falls in love with a big woman who is only out to pull his leg, Hans’ ego clashes with Hercules the strong man. During Hans’ wedding to the big woman, she and the strong man ridicule all the little people sitting around the table after they accept the two into the limited but trusting circle (“One of us”). The Freaks take revenge, each with their own method of creepy stalking and eventually kill the strong man and outcast the big woman. This movie represents the pinnacle of the exploitation debate. Were these people being exploited for their looks or did Browning and the other people behind the creation of this film respect and honor these people’s particular disfigurements? It’s a difficult subject and one that is not without its conflicting viewpoints. Good film. I enjoy the work Browning did with Lon Chaney most of all. Greatest director/actor pair of all time.

The Thin Red Line (1998) â€" I remember seeing this movie playing in the background at my friend’s house when I was young and wondering how they got such beautiful shots of the grass blowing in the wind. The Thin Red Line is Terrence Malick’s third feature length film, yet it once again feels like he’s been doing this for a lifetime. A visual masterpiece that invokes the spirit of nature amidst all the death and violence that surrounds it makes this movie a classic. I was drinking when I watched most of this, so what I got out of it isn’t as detailed as some of my other reviews. However, I did like the way it looked. Picked this up at the University library.

The Buena Vista Social Club (1999) â€" Wim Wenders heads to Cuba with country music guitarist Ry Cooder to produce an album about traditional Cuban music as played and sung by those artists still alive to play the songs. With most of the artist’s ages topping the 80’s, the power with which they sing and play will knock your socks off. Each person has a story. One didn’t sing for ten years before this because there was no money in singing in Cuba. Another worked with a blind bandleader who would get uproariously drunk and chase after people in a blind, drunken rage. The movie was about more than just the music. The people themselves are the reason why the movie and the music is still around. True that can be said about all different kinds of music, but it’s these people’s spice to life that make their form of music all the more interesting. Would the Beatles be the Beatles today had Paul and John not been in fierce competition with each other? They all had the music in them, but sometimes it’s the people that make the music interesting. After the album, “The Buena Vista Social Club” reached popular success in the States, Cooder took the group on a worldwide tour to play in Amsterdam and finally in Carnegie Hall in New York City. Some of the movie takes place during these concerts, showcasing each artist’s particular addition to the band. This is then paralleled by a personal showcase of the artist playing their instrument as the camera swirls around their bodies, examining every part of them in an attempt to uncover and find out what makes them so great. This is probably my favorite Wim Wenders film as the topic is so nostalgic it fills my heart with grief to think of pre-50’s Havana as gone. And I was born in 1985. Picked this up at the University library on VHS. Would like to see Wim Wenders’ commentary on the film on DVD.

Loose Change (2005) â€" First time writer/director Dylan Avery tackles an incredibly touchy subject. In an attempt to debunk the government claims that the two World Trade Center towers were brought down by passenger airliners alone, that the Pentagon was attacked by a passenger airliner, and that Flight 97 crashed in Pennsylvania, Avery launches an exhaustive investigation into the facts that have been presented to the American people about that unforgettable day. Avery provides evidence to claim that the Trade Towers were brought down with controlled demolitions previously placed throughout the buidling rather than by the jet engine fuel alone weakening the steel in the towers. He gives evidence of buildings burning from around the world that never collapsed even after a full day of burning. He then speculates on eye witness accounts of secondary explosions followed by third and fourth and fifth explosions that could be felt and heard on the streets below. His reasoning is headstrong with the antiauthoritarian voice of a disillusion teenager. Narrated by Avery himself, I don’t know exactly what to make of this documentary. Though it’s still too early for the government to start releasing all the facts about September 11, 2001, this movie calls out to the United States government to start answering some of the questions that are presented here. Only a few days ago did the government release the surveillance footage of the plane hitting the Pentagon. I can almost begin to equate this sort of thought and rationale to the Holocaust deniers as of late. But it’s hard to say. The facts are compelling. Steel in a high-grade building such as the World Trade Center in truth doesn’t melt at jet fuel’s highest burning temperature. There are unexplained secondary and third and fourth explosions heard at the base of the Towers that no one can completely account for. More facts should be presented in a less skewed fashion however. I don’t agree with everything that was said in this movie, but I can say that my perspective has been altered a little. You can find this online here:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5137581991288263801&q=loose+change

[daveblackeye15]

That's one hell of a list!

Nice to see you back and with a vengenace!

[Herodotus]

Wow, Black Narcissus one of my absolute favorites. Just for the breathtaking cinematography alone its worth seeing, add in the performances and script and you have a classic. Its the one movie I can't leave in the DVD player because if I do I'll never take it out. The part where Sister Ruth loses it is amazing. The scene where she comes through the door and she's her nemesis is one that still sends chills down the spine.

[Scott]

Wow ! ! ! Scottie thats 17 fiilms. Sounds like you've been busy.

The Crazies (1973) - Watched this one last year and remember it well on Monster Movie Matinee in our area back in the 70's. Not as good as Romero's other film NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD. It has a similiar zombie feel as the towns people go crazy instead. Almost the same idea. Interesting fun film.

The Terminator (1984) - This will always be a great one.

The French Connection (1971) - Been trying to see this one from beginning to end without interruptions. Useually I catch 30 minutes here and 15 minutes there, but have never seen the whole film. I can tell it's a solid film.

Jurassic Park (1993) - It was good when it came out with the whole graphics and idea. Not sure it will be remembered. I always like the film idea of being on some strange island.

Beyond the Valley of the Dolls (1970) - Haven't seen this one. Only very small parts it. It's on my list.

Freaks (1932) - Great film

Black Narcissus (1947) - The whole film looks great way up on the cliffs and with an interesting story. Great film.

The Thin Red Line (1998) - Haven't seen many of the more recent WWII movies. Use to watch them all as a kid.

The Buena Vista Social Club (1999)  - Never saw this one.

The Last Picture Show (1971) - Another film I'm trying to watch from beginning to end.

American Graffiti (1973) - Neat film. Always like the cast and the similiar TV show Happy Days. I love the whole 50's thing, but somehow this film wasn't big for me.

Roger & Me (1989) - Good film. I just watched it during the last year on cable. I don't always agree with him, but he makes good points and in some cases doesnt' point out enough.

Pickpocket (1959) - Never saw it.

Badlands (1973) - One of my very favorites.

Mr. Death: The Rise and Fall of Fred A. Leuchter, Jr. (1999)  - Never saw it.

Wings of Desire (1987) - Never saw it.

Loose Change (2005) - I think we covered this subject. : )

[dean]

The Crazies (1973) - Borrowed from our own uni library, I quite enjoyed it as well, and it's nice to see a Romero film that was a bit different, yet oh so good.

The Terminator (1984) - Can't go wrong with a film about killer robots from the future who funnily enough have foriegn accents.  Maybe the film itself is a nudge against foriegn european technologies perhaps?

The French Connection (1971) - Great film!  Kept me engaged the whole way through

Jurassic Park (1993) - Enjoyed it, of course, and my fond memories of that is another one full of marketing strategies of figurines and tie-in promotions.  But I still like Lost World better if not for the fact that I'm partial to Jeff Goblum.

Beyond the Valley of the Dolls (1970) - Wanted to see this one at ACMI when they had their Russ Meyer screenings but unfortunately wasn't able to make it, but I recently rented Faster p***ycat Kill Kill to make up for it.

Freaks (1932) - A film we watched at Uni about good taste and some other topic that I fail to remember.  What I do know is that now I have it on dvd and use it to scare people if I'm in a funny mood.

The Thin Red Line (1998) - Have been wanting to see this one for a while.  Wouldn't mind seeing it in it's supposedly 6 hours long original cut.

American Graffiti (1973) - Also heard many good things about this but have never seen it all the way through.  I do however own the soundtrack for some odd reason [which is pretty fun!]

Wings of Desire (1987) - Watched this as part of the Surrealism in Cinema class we had, my tutor loved the magic of it, I enjoyed it but must admit to a certain degree of sleepiness through it and kind of blanked out part of the middle.


As for the rest of your goings on, I hope everything went well!  You sound like you could do with a break!