1 - Number of Werner Herzog documentaries I've seen. Grizzly Man for the curious. I was struck by how much like a mockumentary it felt. Timothy Treadwell, the tragic figure at its center, seems like a Christopher Guest creation, which oddly, made the whole thing more troubling for me.
2 - Number of times I've seen Aguirre, the Wrath of God.
5 - Number of times I saw Star Wars in the theatre. I now find myself in the same place as so many others of my generation: Uninspired and unimpressed with the trilogy, and wondering why I ever was in the first place.
2 - Number of times I saw Empire Strikes Back in theatre.
1 - Return of the Jedi.
3 - Return of the King, third in the Lord of the Rings trilogy. The youngest son absolutely loved it and had to keep seeing it. I liked it, but by the third time, I wanted to die, and I couldn't tell him that.
24 - Age I was when I first saw The Man Who Would Be King, on television as it turns out. I loved it and it became one of the first movies I ever bought on DVD.
107 - Number of DVDs I own of movies from the thirties and forties. Would like to make it around 10700.
*** - Number of DVDs from the nineties on that I own that I'm too embarrassed to publish. For the first ten years or so of the existence of DVDs I simply bought any new movie to watch it, whether good or bad. Many are being donated now to the local library.
1 - Number of posts, reviews or write-ups I've done of movies made in the nineties. It was the atomic bomb documentary Trinity and Beyond (1997).
1 - Number of comments that review got, on the old Haloscan commenting system. It was from Sheila. I responded to make it two.
235 - Most comments I've ever gotten on a post. It was The Tin Drum post and thus expected to be big with everyone watching it and discussing it as part of the TOERIFC February selection.
308 - Current number of comments on the Siren's latest post, done over a week ago, and last responded to by the Siren days ago and yet the comments keep coming in. And it wasn't a part of any film club discussion. Just so we all know where we stand.
478 - Estimated number of times Fox has made me slap my forehead or roll my eyes with a comment he has posted.
17 - Estimated number of times Bill has said in the comments that he was going to punch Fox in the mouth.
587 - Estimated number of times that Bill or I have feared we offended Marilyn. Also estimated number of times Bill or I have assumed we are no longer liked by the blogging community.
2 - Number of movie blogs my wife reads. Me and Arbo. Sorry guys, it's nothing against any of the rest of you, it's just her thing. What can I say.
??? - Number of movie blogs I read. I've lost track.
112 - Estimated number of times Kimberly or Peter has written up a movie I am completely unfamiliar with, even by reputation. I am continually impressed.
237 - Estimated number of movies Ed Howard reviews a week. His blog should get a speeding ticket.
1 - Number of blogs I know of with Coosa in the title.
1 - Number of blogs I know of with Infield Fly Rule in the title.
1 - Number of gratuitous plugs for The Invisible Edge in this post. And it's this one.
*No actual movie stats, just personal ones.
54 comments:
Would like to make it around 10700.
So ... did you just put a couple of zeros on 107 or is that really the number you want to own?
And I still enjoy the original Star Wars movies from time to time, but then again, the amount of taste I have is O. Let me count the ways.
Interesting: by the time I saw Return of the King a second time I wanted to die. And I liked it the first time.
And didn't I comment on one of your atomic-bomb-movie posts?
587 - Estimated number of times that Bill or I have feared we offended Marilyn. Also estimated number of times Bill or I have assumed we are no longer liked by the blogging community.
You're being pretty frugal there, I think.
And I try not to think about the reviews put up by Kimberly or Peter or Marilyn or Rick or you or Fox or Ed or whoever of films I've never seen or heard of. It makes me cry when I do.
Rick, I'd love to have 10,700, it was no mistake. I still enjoy the Star Wars movies enough but they don't pull me in like they once did.
You may have commented on an atomic bomb doc but not that one. That one was dead in the water, except for Sheila (who I mention in the review). If I hadn't I think it would have been zero.
Bill, I think I was being frugal on the punching Fox in the mouth thing too. And for all we know, Ed may be the all time champ of reviewing movies I've never heard of but it's all such a speed blur I couldn't be sure.
483,284 - The number of gray hairs on my head thanks to this "Greg" imposter.
Greg, must have been a different atom-bomb film.
Jonathan -- it's over, man. Face it.
Bill -- if you think that makes you feel like crying, go over to Kimberly's site and see the second half of her best DVDs of last year.
0 - the number of them I've seen.
ok, that's not entirely true ... I've seen "Pierrot le fou"
Flickhe... I mean, Jonathan, you must accept that I'm Greg now. You wouldn't want Jim Nabors to start spamming you would you? Cause I can make it happen you know.
Rick, Kimberly's DVD picks are amazing. If I did one you'd probably have seen 20 out of 20.
I wouldn't care if Nabors spammed me, as long as he didn't sing "To Dream the Impossible Dream."
OMG! How'd you guess??
To Jonathan Lapper,
Are you saying that you now dislike the Star Wars films or are you simply implying that you just outgrew them?
I agree that the first Star Wars film from 1977 might look dated to today.Since,the acting is amateurish,the writing is very pulpy and the special effects aren't as dazzling as they seemed back in 1977.However,I will have to see again to find.
I will say that The Empire Strikes Back looks better than when it first came out and has become my(mostly everybodys)favorite in the series.The actors became more comfortable in their roles,the production design and special effects are richer,rhe dialogue is wooden and it seemed more imaginative and darker.
Yet,if there is one Star Wars movie that I know is dated it is Return of the Jedi because it has very much a toyish feel to it and th ewoks add an unnecessary sense of kitch as if the film is trying to promote stuffed animals.It used to be my favorite Star Wars film when I was a kid because it was the one where the good guys finally win but as I've gotten older it doesn't look very good.
Greg,
My mistake forget what I said it was you who posted the blog not Jonathan Lapper so you can forget what I said.It wasn't until I saw the words "Posted by Greg" that I knew I made a mistake. So everyone can forget what I said
I still like when Darth Vader kills the Emporer, though (SPOILER!!). That was a big moment in my early movie-going experience, and I still like it.
I think I saw Kimberley's "20 DVDs" thing, and thinking that clearly she'd made up most of those films. I hadn't heard of them, so they must not exist, right?
Sam, Bill, everyone else - I still like Star Wars, just don't love it. I think it's a fun adventure trilogy that has been somewhat retroactively ruined for me by Lucas' second trilogy. That said, I've seen it enough for a lifetime and probably won't revisit for several more decades.
And yes, I do like Empire the best and I love the Vader/Luke/Emperor moments in Jedi. In fact, that's the whole movie for me.
Flickhead - Mwahahahahaha!!!
Rick, I'll send Jim right over.
Sam, you know I'm Greg now right? You might have missed a previous post or two. I've dropped the Jonathan Lapper pseudonym and go by my real name now, Greg.
To quote Pacino in The Insider, "the cat is SO out of the bag..."
Good thing, too: I was getting bored. Which is what started this nonsense in the first place.
Flickhead, I shall endeavor to fascinate you more consistently so you will not feel obliged to engage in such activities out of boredom again.
~(;-}~ kewl!
Return of the King, third in the Lord of the Rings trilogy. The youngest son absolutely loved it and had to keep seeing it. I liked it, but by the third time, I wanted to die, and I couldn't tell him that.
Oh God, I can identify with that. I went to go see it a second time one day, and about half way through the movie died on us. My friends and I were like the only people in the theater, so they sent us across the hall. Then I had to watch the whole damn thing again from the beginning! I don't think I've watched it once since.
Domain addresses never lie.
Ryan, you saw it one and a half times in the same day? I don't know if I could do that. My son also made me take him to the 10 pm extended edition of The Two Towers and by one in the morning I was struggling to keep my eyelids open. Somehow I stayed awake until 2:30 but lord, it wasn't easy.
Rick, mine lies to me all the time, but I don't mind. It tells me I'm brilliant and handsome.
I really like the Lord of the Rings films, but I think it's pretty clear that the one that has the most casual rewatch value is the first one, which is about as perfect a film of that type I could ask for.
Ryan, you saw it one and a half times in the same day?
Alas, I unfortunately did. I mean, once I went to go see A Space Odyssey two nights in a row when it was playing here in NYC last June...but that's 2001!
In spite of that unpleasant experience with Lord of the Rings, I went to that same theater and dared subject myself to Jackson's Kong.
. My son also made me take him to the 10 pm extended edition of The Two Towers and by one in the morning I was struggling to keep my eyelids open.
You are a brave soul! I've only been brave enough to sit through the first extended edition, which I thought was interesting, but most of the added material didn't seem like it added much to the whole affair. I'll get around to the other 2 extended cuts sometime.
Bill and Ryan - I liked the LOTR trilogy too, I've just overseen it now thanks to my son who was obsessed with it. I've seen every one, in the theatre, three times, and seen all the extended editions as well. At this point, I simply cannot watch it again for the rest of my life.
I really like the Lord of the Rings films, but I think it's pretty clear that the one that has the most casual rewatch value is the first one, which is about as perfect a film of that type I could ask for.
That's been my sentiment for a long time now, though I honestly grow fonder ofThe Two Towers in hindsight. But the first film really doesn't miss a beat.
I think the third is by far the silliest and the weakest. The army of the dead doesn't fit in with Jackson's vision of the trilogy at all.
Also, in hindsight (and at the time too), for me at least, I thought the cgi sucked. Half the time Gollum took me out of the movie because he didn't look three-dimensional to me. And the army of the dead swarming at the end just looked fake. To me anyway. I still think everyone pounced on cgi waaaay too early, before it had a chance to really work out all the kinks. They're finally getting there but still not yet.
Oh, the CGI didn't suck. It wasn't always perfect, but it was often amazing. When Gollum worked, which was most of the time, for me, I thought he was amazing. And Kong in Jackson's remake is, to me, the pinnacle of CGI so far.
My problem with the cgi in the trilogy has little to do with the actual texturing and more to do with movement. I saw some of it on cable a few months back, the first time I had seen it since the marathons I went through during their initial releases. Anyway, I watched a few minutes before changing it and was taken again by how unrealistic the movements of moving objects (catapulted stones, flying creatures, leaping things) were. That's what I mean about the army, swarming forward or Gollum hopping about. To me it suffers from the Hulk syndrome where the eye knows it's not watching realistically depicted movement.
Although, the few minutes I saw (it was the final battle in Return of the King) also revealed how badly drawn the trolls were. Seriously, give it another look. To me it looks pretty bad now.
And the army of the dead swarming at the end just looked fake. To me anyway.
Beyond the army of the dead looking fake, it also went completely against the big climax that the billion hour trilogy was leading up to. Tolkien's work had a more allegorical nature, but Jackson's movies are about as straight-forward as they come, so the whole thing seems especially out of place. Jackson even admitted that he only did it to appease fans. He openly pussed out.
I don't honestly recall Gollum striking me as fake looking, but again, I haven't seen it since theatrical release. But the CGI on the whole struck me as a little more fake looking than in the other two, but the movie's also more audacious in the effects department, so it's understandable that it's a little less seamless.
Greg, I've seen them plenty, and I just don't agree. Oh, at times I do, but if we're going to get into unrealistic movement, then Ray Harryhausen needs to be taken down a peg, too. The eye knows the same thing when watching his films.
But I do agree about the ghost army, although my problem has less to do with the effect (although it's not great) than with the storytelling. That was just too easy.
But Harryhausen couldn't make it any more realistic. The cgi guys can and don't. That's what bugs me. There's no need to have a catapulted object or the Hulk race up to their zenith point then race back down when the eye knows things slow as they approach their zenith then hover momentarily before beginning freefall and gradually increasing speed.
Anyway, I'm sure a part of it is I just don't think cgi looks that great yet and wish they'd strive for more accuracy with movement.
And the army sweeping through is pretty damn easy isn't it?
The cgi guys can and don't.
Are you sure? The improvements to the technology over the years would imply otherwise, to me. It's not there 100 per cent, but the good ones, like WETA and whoever works with Guillermo del Toro, are trying, and doing great work.
Yes, the ghost army is way damn easy. It really bugs me.
The hubby doesn't read my blog, so at least you're one up on me, Greg.
And that offends me.
And I love Kimberly's Top DVDs feature. Some of those aren't at all obscure, though, like The Anderson Tapes, The Nanny, and Pierre le fou. I just saw Ludwig at the Siskel Center a couple of months ago.
Greg, you should watch some more Herzog documentaries. They're awesome. Plus you get to hear lots of Herzog voiceover, which is even more awesome.
Kimberly's DVD list is great. My favorite pick: Saul Bass' weird, unforgettable Phase IV.
And for the record, your count is a little off. Last week I reviewed 238 movies.
Has Phase IV been re-released??? You can get the old DVD on Netflix, but buying it will sat you back a pretty penny. I love that movie. I hope it's back on DVD...
Bill, I didn't know there ever was an old DVD of Phase IV. It was released last year by a company called Legend Films, on a very good quality DVD. Amazing movie, it really deserves more attention. So many unforgettable images of those creepy ants.
Bill, how could the speed at which a computer animated object moves be out of the control of the animator? If so, in say Jurassic Park, the T-Rex would jump between multiple speeds as it chases the jeep, instead of coming out of the trees and picking up speed as it pursues only to eventually give up and reduce speed. I can't imagine the animator says, "hey, that thing shooting up there at the speed of light bothers me too but it's out of my hands."
Besides, talk like that offends Marilyn. Be careful.
Marilyn, I can't believe hubby doesn't read your blog. And I apologize for Bill making me offend you.
I think I'm going to start calling my wife, "Wifey."
And Kimberly's picks are not all obscure, I agree, it's that throughout the year she chooses, like you do as a matter of fact, movies not just off the beaten path, but usually off everyone's radar. Not always, and I wouldn't want it to be because I like to know what all of you think of movies I know very well too. But more than most.
Ed, I agree, I love Herzog's narration in Grizzly Man. I'm sorry I miscounted your movie reviews. I promise I'll catch up on the latest four you've posted since I began typing this comment.
I haven't seen Phase IV in forever and am excited to get it on DVD. Plus, apropros of nothing, I watched The Invisible Boy again yesterday and it remains one of the most entertaining movies ever made.
I recently came accross your blog and have been reading along. I thought I would leave my first comment. I dont know what to say except that I have enjoyed reading. Nice blog. I will keep visiting this blog very often.
Sarah
http://laptopseries.net
The Invisible Boy? Sounds entertaining. That's one I haven't seen.
I take the forehead slapping as a compliment, but... the eye rolling?? I need to work on that.
Peter, it's quite a romp. Made after Forbidden Planet the producers got a hold of the Robby the Robot costume hoping to cash in. The story is a super-computer hoping for world domination who turns the son of the scientist who built it invisible and sends Robby to torture him so ... so... I don't know really. None of the movie makes much sense but the computer is great and it's final scene is fittingly dramatic. It gets a 4.9 rating on IMDB and realistically should probably get a zero but that 4.9 is a testament to just how entertaining it all is.
Fox, they're both compliments. I love your comments. If I didn't I wouldn't have put your name in two banners and given you the Third Man post.
Number of references to me in this post: a shameful 0.
I really like Jackson's KONG-- I find it far more interesting than any of the LOTR films, and the first hour or so is the best thing he's ever done. I also really like THE FRIGHTENERS, a comedic horror film he did in '96 that never got the attention it deserved.
I also really like THE FRIGHTENERS
See, that's why you didn't get a reference Brian. Just kidding. About the reference, not the movie. The movie I find entertaining at times but nothing special. And I actually just saw it again on cable about two months ago so it's fresh in the memory. The reveal of the mysterious killer falls flat for me and the screwed-up Federal agent, scarred by too many cult infiltrations, takes the whole ending into the "too many villains" syndrome that I find tiresome with so many modern films.
Had they made Jaws in the nineties or 2000's it would've been four sharks, a barracuda, and a rogue remote controlled U-Boat at the climax, all bearing down on Brody.
But I agree about the first hour of Kong. I thought that was the best part of the movie.
Post a Comment