Recommend a frog a film?

[TinCow]

The fact you hated Kill Bill leads to believe that you won't like any of Quentin Tarentino which to me screams, "snobby" since his films are truly the best of quality. Sadly, people don't seem to recognize the different between a plot based on violence and a plot driven by violence.

I don't necessarily think this is true. I did intentionally exclude all Tarantino films from my list due to her comment about Kill Bill, but at the same time that particular film (particularly Volume I) is essentially a massive homage to a whole bunch of films and genres that froggie specifically isn't keen on. Kill Bill has far more to it than just dialog, in fact I'd say it's one of his weaker films on a dialog level, particularly Vol II. Kill Bill Vol I is a brilliant film, but I think a lot of it is lost on someone who doesn't have a lot of experience with the kinds of films that Tarantino is paying his respects to. Contrast that with Reservoir Dogs, Pulp Fiction, Jackie Brown, and Inglourious Basterds, which are largely pure dialog with only little bits (admittedly extreme) violence tossed into the mix every once in a while. I really think the best test of whether a person would like Tarantino in general would be Pulp Fiction.

That said, there's still no reason she absolutely must watch any of them. There are plenty of superb films out there in the world that are every bit as good or better than Tarantino's. He may be the modern master of dialog, but I wouldn't say he can compete with Charlie Kaufman as an overall screenwriter. Tarantino is excellent with the set-piece conversations, but sometimes he struggles in between them.

Also, calling her snobby for not liking Tarantino is bass ackwards. Tarantino is very much a film artist, he's not a blockbuster guy. If anything, Tarantino fans (like you and me) would be the snobs. I sure know I'm a film snob, but that's a label I wear proudly.

[Hamata]

this one is prety good it's a chinese one it's about a warlord who becomes a monk and learns that what he did in the past was wrong and then reaches martial zen for his compassion for the other monks and for respecting and paying homage to budah http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaolin_(film) that's all i am spoiling ;P

[drone]

Kill Bill was made for people who watched poorly dubbed kung fu movies growing up.

And TinCow, you are a film snob. The fact that you listed Big Night proves it! I didn't think anyone else in the US had ever even heard of that movie. The last scene is superb.

[TinCow]

And TinCow, you are a film snob. The fact that you listed Big Night proves it! I didn't think anyone else in the US had ever even heard of that movie. The last scene is superb.

And so are you for knowing it. I agree with you about the last scene. I think that final shot is one of the best single scenes ever in a film; so much emotion without a single word spoken. It's also got the one of the best tracking shots I've ever seen.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Also, calling her snobby for not liking Tarantino is bass ackwards. Tarantino is very much a film artist, he's not a blockbuster guy. If anything, Tarantino fans (like you and me) would be the snobs. I sure know I'm a film snob, but that's a label I wear proudly.

Everyone I know who is in film (industry or major) loves Tarentinto, everyone I know who isn't but likes to tout about about how much they love/know film always lump him in with grotesque violence movies. The reason I say snobby is because the fact that it is a homage should affect how you view the violence. The violence is respected because it is channeling a certain type of "bad" film that people love to watch. The violence is there because it is in many ways the star. The kung fu is what is being put on the pedestal there.

The fact that Kill Bill is lacking dialogue is not in any way a flaw in my opinion. Violence for the sake of violence in the most arbitrary manner, such as 300, or The Expendibles or any terrible action movie is stupid and I would agree with her view of those movies. Kill Bill is not in any way arbitrary. The violence is there because the movie demands it. You can't homage a kung fu movie without kung fu (or even a kung fu master, god I loved that guy and his beard).

Idk, this is a matter of taste, so my opinion means jack all here. But personally I think there is an ability to recognize the whats and whys and if you are looking for reasons in your movies than a movie with violence with a good "why?" is "good" violence and still makes the movie a "good" movie. If there is a good reason for it, you should be able to enjoy it in my opinion. I never watched too many kung fu movies, the only "old" kung fu movies I think I ever saw actually were Bruce Lee films. However, I could tell just from the settings and the sets where a lot of it is coming from. The kung fu genre is very old and everyone knows a little about it. I don't think you need to watch all the movies it is paying an homage to to get where the violence is coming from.

I like Die Hard. It is rated high on rotten tomatoes. All the sequels are not rated so high. Why is this? Well imo, judging from me watching all the Die Hards numerous times is that the thing that separates 1 from the rest in terms of quality is the arbitrariness of the violence. The last one had **** exploding for no reason, people being killed for no reason (why did the bad guy kill off all his Geek Squad except for the one dude?). However, all of Die Hard 1 is John McClane surviving. In all the others he is going off to fight a war with the bad guy. In the end Die Hard is all violence almost every scene and yet it is a great movie that I think most people should enjoy and like because none of it is arbitrary. Except for maybe of course the "super cool finishing move" that all action stars do in every movie.

EDIT: Maybe I overrated in my first post. But excuse me for getting a bit defensive when frog used the same word (horrid) to describe both Kill Bill and Blade. As if they are even remotely on the same level.

[Arjos]

As much as I like Die Hard, the thing about it is that it doesn't have anything to say beside its story...
Is a fun ride on the rollercoaster, but ends there...
Tarantino explores a lot of themes and ideas, going beyond the screen...

[TinCow]

Everyone I know who is in film (industry or major) loves Tarentinto, everyone I know who isn't but likes to tout about about how much they love/know film always lump him in with grotesque violence movies. The reason I say snobby is because the fact that it is a homage should affect how you view the violence. The violence is respected because it is channeling a certain type of "bad" film that people love to watch. The violence is there because it is in many ways the star. The kung fu is what is being put on the pedestal there.

The fact that Kill Bill is lacking dialogue is not in any way a flaw in my opinion. Violence for the sake of violence in the most arbitrary manner, such as 300, or The Expendibles or any terrible action movie is stupid and I would agree with her view of those movies. Kill Bill is not in any way arbitrary. The violence is there because the movie demands it. You can't homage a kung fu movie without kung fu (or even a kung fu master, god I loved that guy and his beard).

Idk, this is a matter of taste, so my opinion means jack all here. But personally I think there is an ability to recognize the whats and whys and if you are looking for reasons in your movies than a movie with violence with a good "why?" is "good" violence and still makes the movie a "good" movie. If there is a good reason for it, you should be able to enjoy it in my opinion. I never watched too many kung fu movies, the only "old" kung fu movies I think I ever saw actually were Bruce Lee films. However, I could tell just from the settings and the sets where a lot of it is coming from. The kung fu genre is very old and everyone knows a little about it. I don't think you need to watch all the movies it is paying an homage to to get where the violence is coming from.

I agree with you on most of this, but the point is that a person cannot really appreciate an homage if they do not have experience with the original genre/films. A film homage is the film equivalent of an inside joke. It's great artistry and entertainment for those of us in-the-know, but it's totally lost on someone who wasn't in on the joke in the first place. So, in order for an homage to be appreciated as it was intended, the viewer first has to have watched everything to which it makes reference. Setting a bar like that for the viewer is inherently artistic and is not designed for the masses.

[a completely inoffensive name]

As much as I like Die Hard, the thing about it is that it doesn't have anything to say beside its story...
Is a fun ride on the rollercoaster, but ends there...
Tarantino explores a lot of themes and ideas, going beyond the screen...

A movie doesn't necessarily have to say much. One of the things I like about Die Hard is that it is just a story. There once was a tale of a cop stuck in a building with terrorists trying to rob the vault inside. Isolated, cut off from communication, how does the cop thwart them and save the day? It catches you and does its job, it takes you along on the journey of him trying to survive and stop the bad guys.

[a completely inoffensive name]

I agree with you on most of this, but the point is that a person cannot really appreciate an homage if they do not have experience with the original genre/films. A film homage is the film equivalent of an inside joke. It's great artistry and entertainment for those of us in-the-know, but it's totally lost on someone who wasn't in on the joke in the first place. So, in order for an homage to be appreciated as it was intended, the viewer first has to have watched everything to which it makes reference. Setting a bar like that for the viewer is inherently artistic and is not designed for the masses.

Yes, I agree. I may have overreacted as stated in my edit for my last post.

However, when I hear about a great movie that is an homage I usually take the time to do the research in order to get the in jokes. I guess I shouldn't assume other people do that as well.

[Arjos]

Ofc is not mandatory, and I like it myself, but is short-lived and not as inspirational...
Just different forms of movies, but one can evolve into different artistic areas, shape ideas and minds, many more; while the other only entertain...
And for example the homages are a very nice instrument to acculturate people, if the movie manages to reach their curiosity...

[Moros]

Fragony, you're surrounded!

[Subotan]

4. American comedy is not my idea of comedy.

You mean jokeless comedy?

I noticed Watchmen was mentioned a few times; I don't recommend it. I'm a big fan of the comic, and I don't dislike the film because it was different from the comic - far from it. The comic's influence is suffocating, in that whole lines of dialogue, art design and even camera shots are just lifted straight from the book. It doesn't work, and the result is a disappointment, whether you like comics or not. It was always unfilmable anyway.

I'm a bit of a film buff, and these are all films I loved that fulfil all of your criteria:

Mesrine: It's a two-parter biopic of the French gangster Jacques Mesrine, it covers his rise and fall in 50-70s France. It's not glamorised at all, and is as gritty as any film of the past decade. Vincent Cassel's acting as Mesrine is just absolutely superb, flawless even, and he'll lead you to sympathise, like, and be repulsed by Mesrine in that order, multiple times.

There Will Be Blood: Daniel Day Lewis' acting as Henry Plainview is probably the best I've ever seen - I found myself holding the character in equal parts contempt and respect at the end of the film. The plot of the film is probably that of a four star film, but Day Lewis' acting pulls the film as a whole up to about five. Also, the soundtrack was composed by Johnny Greenwood, a member of Radiohead, if that's your thing.

Princess Mononoke: This was probably the film that really got me interested in animé for the first time - unlike a lot of similar stuff, the plot is completely clear to us Westerners, whilst still keeping a lot of Japanese themes present throughout. It's violent enough to be exciting, but the one incident at the very start when Ashitaka is riding his deer (?) is the worst of it - you'll know what I mean when/if you see it.

Tora! Tora! Tora!: Probably one of the best films ever made about the Second World War, and definitely the most underviewed. Historically accurate to a point that bigoted American audiences in 1970 wouldn't go and see it, it has aged extremely well, both in terms of its pre-CGI special effects and in its treatment of the Japanese account of the bombing of Pearl Harbor. Superior in every single way to Michael Bay's account, most notably for the lack of Michael Bay.

The first two and the last all took pains to be historically accurate, whilst the third is a fantasy film set in a historical location.

Other films which leap out at me from the thread:

The Lives of Others,
Das Boot
Run Lola Run

(Huh, those are all German for some reason. Strange.)

The Triplets of Belleville/Belleville Rendezvous
District 9

Watch Moon, if you don't like it, then you have no taste in movies.

My parents hated it, and would probably go bat**** if you said that to them

[frogbeastegg]

I get the difference between driven by violence and just violent. I have read and enjoyed a lot of books which are driven by violence, I've written the odd bit of fiction in that style myself, and I've played a few games which fit into this category as much as a game can.

The problem is that I don't really like excessive violence full stop, in any medium. I don't find it interesting to watch, in the same way that I don't find horror scary. I'm far more of a character focused person - I like to see what makes people tick. Violence can be a part of that, and can be valid as part of that, yet it can very easily drown out the aspects I'm interested in. There comes a point where it's too much and I lose interest. Away from characters, I'm partial visual beauty. Blood and guts doesn't qualify. If something is riven by violence then it's very easy for it to lose me.

When it comes to films, I dislike hand-waved violence as much as the overly gratuitous stuff. All of those people who die in a neat little pile without a spot of blood or hint of distress are as bad as the loving shots of slow-mo dismemberment. That's one thing I appreciated with Red Cliff. The battle scenes are disturbing; people are maimed, impaled, sliced, diced, trampled, and hacked apart. There are scenes which focus specifically on this. Yet it's always handled in such a way that the film is saying "War is hell" rather than "Did you see how far his head went? Cool!" To continue the example, if Red Cliff had a few more big battle scenes in it at the expense of the quieter scenes then it would be starting to tip the balance towards the point where I lose interest.

Where I live claiming to like Tarentino is one of the critical steps to proving that you are a cut above the regular film viewer. Saying that I don't like him lumps me in with the unsophisticated crowd, one perilous step away from finding Jar Jar Binks hilarious.

I haven't heard Killbill referred to as a homage before. Rather the opposite. It's always been tagged as the amazing, inventive masterpiece which looks like pulp ultra-violence but is actually really deep if only you are sophisticated enough to understand it. According to those people, it's in a genre of its own.

[a completely inoffensive name]

My parents hated it, and would probably go bat**** if you said that to them

I would go bat**** as soon as they said they didn't like it. I literally don't see why anyone could not get enjoyment out of it except for it being too slow paced... maybe. Everything else about it was solid. Not super great film of the year kind of stuff, but solid, enjoyable work all around.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Just to clarify, I think there are only two people that are just plain wrong about movies. Everyone has a taste and I accept that. But two people are always wrong.

1. The Academy Awards voters.
2. Armond White.

I'm gonna shut up now.

[naut]

I know just the thing. 'Let the right one in', Swedish love movie but it includes vampires. It's one of my favorite movies, genuinely moving, and, well vampires.

^^^

This movie is awesome.

I'd also recommend for you:

Brick.
Nine Queens.
The Lives of Others.
Rango.
Plus everything TinCow mentioned (minus a few).

Bienvenue chez les cheutemis. It's of course a parade of French cliché views about that part of France, but the thing is it's also rather sweet. Very feel good. And it's all in French.

I have it, but the DVD doesn't have English subs, and I can't find a set that syncs on the web... so I've never managed to watch it. =(

[Moros]

Run Lola Run

Highly overrated if you ask me. Better than watching the ads, but no interesting characters, no plot, no emotion, no appeal in style,... So what's left? Not to forget that the music is horrible as well.

Das Leben des anderen indeed is a very good film. Das experiment is great as well. And Gegen Die Wand as well.

Edit: I'd go for Eternal sunshine of the spotless mind.

[Memnon]

I'm going to suggest the Usual Suspects, although its a gangster movie, it has a really nice progression and a twist, the only unfortunate thing is that they kind of spelled it out for you at the end, rather than leaving it up to me, but whatever. I also loved the Boondock Saints, but thats more due to that vigilante urge I get sometimes. The Rock is a good movie, although I really really hate Nick Cage, specifically for National Treasure. If you like the history of the USSR, you could see Stalin, which is one of the greatest movies I was ever forced to watch.

[Arjos]

Just realized that there aren't any (or I missed them :P) by Kubrick, so yes:

Dr. Strangelove, Barry Lyndon, Full Metal Jacket, Paths of Glory, 2001: A Space Odyssey ^^

[Louis VI the Fat]

Where I live claiming to like Tarentino is one of the critical steps to proving that you are a cut above the regular film viewer. Saying that I don't like him lumps me in with the unsophisticated crowd, one perilous step away from finding Jar Jar Binks hilarious.

Tarantino? Hollywood's village idiot. A gifted movie maker, but with little of interest to say. The themes he explores are the fantasies of nine year old boys stuck in the phase where they torture pets and kill off their toys in gore fantasies.
I'm stuck in that phase as well but my psychiatrist has this new medication and we're quite hopefu



Some films that have not been mentioned before:

La Gloire de mon père
Le Château de ma mère
I can watch them forever. The second one makes me cry. Gentle elegies to a previous time, to youth, to growing up. An ode to your parents.

La meglio gioventù
Italian. The difference between American and Italian pizza is the difference between the Godfather and this Italian family epic. Six hours of pulling your hair out in despair you were not born Italian, everything is so beautiful. The first hour is great, the middle is sometimes a bit slow, but the final rewards are truly touching.

[Fragony]

Tarantino is overrated, he made two good movies, Pulp Fiction and Resevoir Dogs. His latest, Inglorious Bastards bored me to tears. The Coen brothers do the same and do it much better. So does Roderuigez (Planet Terror rofl it's madness I almost coughed up my lungs laughing)

[rajpoot]

I'm surprised that people and talking about Tarantino and no one's mentioned 'From Dusk till Dawn' yet...

[Andres]

The Devil's Advocate.

I promise you won't regret it.

[Visor]

As stated before, Moon is a great choice.

I also enjoyed District 9, Faster (maybe not your kind of thing?), No country for Old Men (Hated the ending though).

[Fragony]

I'm surprised that people and talking about Tarantino and no one's mentioned 'From Dusk till Dawn' yet...

Wasn't made by Tarantino but Roderuigez. Tarantino also plays in Planet Terror (again, watch it, it's absolutely hilarious and the jokes always catch you by surprise, plus best soundtrack ever)

[frogbeastegg]

I managed to get him to name the films he is thinking of. Hard work - usually he refuses to say so that I have less change to escape the surprise isn't ruined. He's brought out the phrase "You'll definitely like this one" and that is usually a cast iron guarantee of impending disaster. However ...

Batman Begins, The Dark Knight

... that's the films. Are they really likely to suit a frog who knows next to nothing about Batman, and who does not care for the concept of superheroes? Having survived all of his other superhero films I'm wary to say the least. Although I suppose I did like Batman: Arkham Asylum ... mostly because of the gameplay, the setting I could take or leave.

[Fragony]

Can't go wrong with either, Batman begins is great, The Dark Knight is simply fantastic. Dark indeed, really memorable. The villains chill you to the bone

[LazyMcCrow]

In no particular order:

****
That should get you off to a good start, let me know if you need more.

Wow. What you said. For a metal bovine, you have excellent taste.

[Zim]

I can't guarantee you'll like them but I can vouch that they're worlds above the Fantastic 4 or X-Men movies. I enjoyed them a lot and I think my wife liked them better than I did, despite not reading comics as a kid like I did and having generally better taste than I do in movies.

It's probably too late now if he's already named the movies he's planning on watching but here are a couple I haven't yet noticed being posted (which isn't to say they haven't, only that my aging eyes probably missed them. ).

Lawrence of Arabia
One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest
Taxi Driver
Spirited Away (Also, Howl's Moving Castle is almost worth it just to hear what Christian Bale sounds like happy, in addition to being a pretty good movie)
Haven't seen it but my wife swears by Roman Holiday

I also second Tora Tora Tora! and add to some of the previous posts that knowing Kill Bill is an homage and having a decent knowledge of the subject matter it references is not a guarantee you'll enjoy it. I didnt.

I managed to get him to name the films he is thinking of. Hard work - usually he refuses to say so that I have less change to escape the surprise isn't ruined. He's brought out the phrase "You'll definitely like this one" and that is usually a cast iron guarantee of impending disaster. However ...


... that's the films. Are they really likely to suit a frog who knows next to nothing about Batman, and who does not care for the concept of superheroes? Having survived all of his other superhero films I'm wary to say the least. Although I suppose I did like Batman: Arkham Asylum ... mostly because of the gameplay, the setting I could take or leave.

[therother]

Some great suggestions here. In particular TinCow's list: I'd agree with most of his suggestions.

I'll throw a few more out there. I thought Exit Through The Gift Shop was hilarious, whether as a geniune documentry or a mock/prankumentary. I'd highly recommend the Infernal Affairs triology, of which Scorsese's The Departed is a remake. I've not seen it, but I've heard from a number of friends that The Illusionist is a great film. The Last King Of Scotland, Ghost Dog: The Way of the Samurai, L.A. Confidential, and The Kite Runner also spring to mind. Twelve Angry Men (Fonda version) is a timeless classic.