"Cold Comfort Farm" (1995)

I stalled watching this movie, then wondered why I hadn't watched it sooner.  When the movie ended, I found that I had a smile across my face.  Where did that come from?

My best guess for the stall, I think, comes from two parts.  First, I read the novel sometime back--it was part of one of my early excursions into the English literature field--and I wasn't sure how much of the novel I remembered.  There was quite a bit of "how do I figure?" going on in that early excursion, and I'm sure it colored my perceptions of those first literature experiences.  Likely that I would have different views had that first round of literature come at any other time but first, but somethin's got to be first, so that lot was as good as any--and maybe the better for it.  So, reading the novel this movie was based on was back farther than I would like.  I would've liked the novel and movie watching to be a little closer together--or perhaps have re-read the novel.  But, I decided tonight was the night to watch the movie (before it was yanked off Netflix streaming).  Was just going to watch the beginning of it (to see if there were any random animal parts falling off like in the book), but I ended up watching the whole thing.  That's a good thing.

The second reason for the stall would have to be the "DVD cover".  It was not one that did anything for me.

Delightful music, including over the end credits.  With the understanding that it's been "ages" since I've read the book, I thought the movie was well done.  I recognized the actor's name Stephen Fry in the beginning credits.  Identified actress Miriam Margoyles (Professor Sprout of the Harry Potter movie series) as Mrs. Beetle in this film.

I suppose that the ending was changed some (gotta make that book fit), but if you didn't know the novel (or if you'd forgotten most of it), then what's it matter?  Ending worked for me.

"Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End" (2007)

I think my mistake with this movie series was to think of it as 4 separate movies.  That really isn't the case.  It's just one big movie coming out in four parts Charles Dickens' style.

I also think that this movie in particular works better to see it on the big screen in theaters when a person has made an event of "going to the movies".  The only advantage home viewing has is the ability to rewind when you find yourself going "What did they say?", especially when deciphering some of the spoken accent lines and plot twists that happen in concentrated moments.

It's really a movie, I-I think, that a person needs to be in the mood for.  If you're not in the mood for it, it's not going to sit well and certainly isn't going to persuade you (ur, me) that it's any good.  If you are in the mood for it, then it can suit admirably.

I rented this movie when I was in the mood for it, but then was delayed in watching it both for schedule and health reasons.  Yesterday when I started watching it, it was because I figured it was time to get it sent back, not because I was in the mood for it.  Therefore, yesterday my sentiments were along the line of "subtitle:  How to take a simple story with a love interest and stretch it out into soap opera proportions".  However, I didn't finish it before it was time to turn in.  Today in finishing it, I was definitely in the mood for the movie and have a much different view of it.  Today it is "This is a movie that needs to be seen on the big screen.  Well done."

And I'm glad the movie music has been marketed.  It is really rather wonderful.  And I love the way the music theme was established at the beginning, threaded in places in the middle, and then used for the end credits.  To me, that is a solid use of music in a movie.  Why should the end credit music have a different character than the rest of the movie?  It shouldn't.  And the music for this one was done well.

Sure seems that the costumes and set people should have had a lot of fun creating for this series.

Now, how is this one-movie-in-four-parts going to end?  In a way that satisfies my tastes (hardly the creators' criteria) or in a general way (rather loose, technically finished, but unsatisfactory).  I predict there is a fair chance of the first option, considering the record of tight plot maneuvering so far.  I will see when I watch what I assume will be the conclusion in the next movie.

SPOILER ALERT:  A lady as the pirate king?  How cool is that!  Jack Sparrow in the other world was an interestingly creative sequence.  Surreal?  And at least one other lady pirate lord--fair enough.  And a bit of a teaser, female tidbit, reward for watching all the way through the credits.  Hmm....

"State Fair" (1945)

Sweet, sweet story.  Light and fluffy.  Any lighter and fluffier and it would be whip cream.  Nice music, except for the "Iowa" song--that was just corny (for lack of a better word).  One scene I kept going, "Something familiar about that character."  Good grief, it was a very young Harry Morgan (MASH);  all the more interesting since State Fair is a film one of the MASH episodes centers around.  Dick Haymes (as "Wayne Frake") reminds me of the strong features of face of the men on my mother's side of the family.

Overall, very much enjoyed this musical.  (Still puzzling over that Iowa song, though)

"All I Want for Christmas" (2007)

Like a nice Christmas chick flick?  This one will do.

End Credits lists a "livestock trainer".  Trying to remember what in the world kind of livestock was even in this movie.  Perhaps horse-drawn carts, I suppose, but I don't remember 'em.  I don't remember any animals.  hmm.

huh.

"Crazy for Christmas" (2005)

A person has to suspend beliefs about some of the character's motivations and reactions.  But once you do that, this is a nice little Christmas movie/quasi romance movie.  Light-hearted, mostly.  One very memorable line from early in the movie from one disappointed little boy:  "That's a Charlie Brown Christmas tree."  Otherwise, just a nice Christmas movie with a happy ending.

"Galactica 1980" (1980)

I have watched 6 of the 7 episodes that exist of this TV show (skim watched episode 7).  Kinda fun.  Was just what I was in the mood for.  Kent McCord (Adam-12)  :)   Definitely low-budget--you could see the fly wires for one of the moving-through-outer space scenes.  Still, the plot was nice--a little bit of humor without being ridiculous, a little bit of action without having a heart-attack about it.  I liked.  Too bad there's only 6 episodes.  [I don't count the 7th one.]  Ah, 1980s television.  :)

"The Finder" (2012)--Season 1

I don't do many TV shows on here for one blurry reason.  How do I stay consistent?  Movies last anywhere from an hour to three hours.  You watch it and it's done.  One impression, in tact.  But when do you do TV shows?  After the first episode to capture the first true impression?  After the first 3 episodes to give a more rounded first impression (set-up to show episode, finish set-up episode, 1st real typical episode)?  Or do watch the whole 1st season?  Or all the seasons until it is done airing?  But a show can change over a season--or especially after several seasons.  So, when do you sit back and speculate about a TV show.

I am writing this particular post after 6 episodes and a snitch of the 7th episode of season 1.  The reason I'm writing now is that the words want to spout out.  So, I am writing.

The opening music reminds me of The Dukes of Hazzard, and I think there could be some arguments toward this show be a descendent of it--but not a direct descendant--less graphic (at least compared to others), episodes aren't about save-the-world or save-the-nation kinds of save the day things (which is refreshing).  The lead character "Walter Sherman" reminds me of the fun I had of watching "H. M. Murdock" of the A-Team TV series, only slightly less crazy.  And the show manages to keep the tension and stress moments down to a low level (a bonus to me) while still included (necessary to good plot).  It also includes those random funny lines/funny moments that make you laugh, while including those serious moments and touching moments that keep it real.

A nice find--enjoyable enough to watch multiple episodes of.  Unique enough to potential watch episodes a 2nd time.  But not so addictive that I "have" to put my life on hold to see what the next episode holds.  (Having a very, very limited amount of show cliff hangers, helps too.  That doesn't mean there aren't also minute episode to episode connections/continuity.)

"Lara Croft: Tomb Raider" (2001)

Plot is ho-hum.  Nothing much worth mentioning there.  The fight sequences are a lot of fun; those are the main reasons to watch.  The plot just provides the reason to watch the fights.  Having a female lead was also kind of fun.  Other than one or two "notes" (descending vocals) choices, the end credit music worked.

SPOILER ALERT:  So, the first fight is in her pajamas--or close enough to pajamas.  Hmm.  Somebody analyze that to pieces.  I like the line, "I just found my car keys."  Of course, the context makes the line.  The premise to the character Lara's attitude towards fights--practice and real--is appealing ... but is it appealing just to me or is it the smoothness of attitude a something that appeals to all genders?  It's an escapist empowerment that says, "If I could do everything, it would look like that.  That's how I'd imagine it would go."  And weirdly, seems to mimic what I do to counteract the occasional nightmare--empowering what I imagine to take over the nightmare and make it my own slow-motion, in-control victory.

(yeah, still spoilin' here...) And then there are the watches.  The fight for an all-powerful "watch", with a watch for a key, finally destroyed, and topped with an icing-on-the-cake fight for an emotional watch--after giving up a bigger emotion.  That's begging to be analyzed, too.

I suppose the fight in pajamas was to say, "Because I can."

And, of course, if a movie is going to have any quest for an ancient artifact, you have to be sure to destroy the entire temple/city in the process (c.f. Indiana Jones movies).  What kind of ancient artifact action movie would it be without that?  : /

"Now You See Me" (2013)

The plot left me guessing, pretty much anyway.  That's a good thing.  End credit music:  Didn't like the first song choice at all.  Didn't seem like a movie that should have end credits with lyrics.  The 2nd and 3rd choices (or 2nd and 3rd parts, whatever) were better--an improvement at least.

Morgan Freeman.

I think I would watch this movie again--but not so much for an enjoyment of the characters or scenes again--but just to take it in again.  The tone set at the beginning left me skeptical--but never once did I have to argue with myself to keep watching.  I not only wasn't sure where exactly the plot was going, I also wasn't sure about what kind of flavor of tone the show was going to have.  That left me guessing all the way through, too.  I will give the plot a "well-written" even if the characters had questionable endearments.

So, if you like to be kept guessing, it's a good watch.

"Standing Up" (2013)

The main characters are two young kids, but I don't know that I'd call it a kid's movie.  It's apparently based on a novel called The Goats.  It's kind of a reflective movie in that there's a bit of talking, but the location changes often, so that's alright.  Am trying to decide if this movie would be considered a coming-of-age film/story, but I don't know enough about the genre term to decide.  There's a enough story events to keep you guessing, but they also keep the audience in the know so that there aren't a lot of loose ends at story's end, and you don't have to wait long to find out.  Makes the audience both omniscient and sympathetic.  There's also a slight delay in the knowledge, so you can experience the wonder of 12?-year-old problem solving before you get "all" the answers, and know the truth when the boy and girl don't.  Then end credits starts with a solo female singer and an acoustic guitar which is the perfect sound to transition out of the story.  The setting is "summer" (I guess) camp, but the scenery is in fall with all the leaves changing colors, but still on the trees.  Plot-wise, I think this movie fits right in with The Outsiders.  Yeah, kinda of a reflective movie, not super deep, but things to think about.  I laughed once during the dance.  But, this is not a comedy movie.  Not a dark drama either, but there's nothing funny about the topics this movie mulls over.  Some sweet people, and some not so nice characters.

"New Hope" (2012)

SPOILERS!:

Great movie!  That's a win.  Not so fast that you're breathless, but a nice relaxing pace that keeps you interested.  The dinner--that was a disaster (plot-wise, that's a good thing).  The plot:  well-played!  Enough basketball to keep it as a main part of the movie, but not so much that I would call it a basketball movie.  It was refreshing to see families that had husbands and wives who were human but not divorce-dysfunctional--families that stick together even when they struggle.  Wonderful movie!

The only bad thing for me was the movie cover--the picture that is used on the "DVD" cover.  That cover didn't work for me.  Lousy cover.  It also was only God.  No Jesus.  At all.  Fairly accurate, but no Jesus.  urmmm...

The ending--and how it put the pieces together--was stitched together very well--skillfully woven--so well, that they didn't have to choose this side or that side.  They chose both sides.

Written well.  I liked it.  A lot.

AND IT HAD A "FEMININE" ENDING!!!!  When the credits roll and you go "then what happened?  You're not stopping now are you?"  They had an in-genius way of solving that--ending the movie but still letting the story go on--a photo album next to the credits of all the answers to the "then what?"  OH so nice!!!  That makes it feel finished to me.

And how you get there is not so obvious that you get bored, but also certain to get to where you are expecting.  And even a moment or two when you go "oh boy, this is bad" but you're not sure how, or if; and then there are a couple of surprises, too, but then they make sense after see them, so they're believable.  Keeps ya watchin'.

Yeah, I'd watch it again.  :)  And a repeat:  Ben Davies from Courageous.  Nice choice.  :)

And there were crutches.  And shiners.  And personality/story tensions ("I do not want to be here"  "Why me?" and hold your breath and watch, and ... and ????)

"Speak" (2004)

Art.  Growth.  the effect of others--their words and deeds--on the silence of pain.

Very good.

Just too abrupt an ending--it's a "male" ending of the movie

as usual




Recommended.


music is light.  subtle.

"The Ghost Goes West" (1935)

I found this movie quite amusing, and therefore, I enjoyed it.  The plot early on reminded me of a comic rendition of parts of Henry IV--part 1, just small bits of it.  After that, the plot seemed cartoon comic to me.  The music, too.  The comments about Americans by the Scottish characters made me laugh--a laugh in a smirk and one raised eyebrow kind of way.

The movie is short and family--friendly.  So, quite a nice choice for Halloween if you're not into scary.

Okay, an example of the smirk-laugh and raised eyebrow (and yes this is from the movie, it doesn't give anything away, but if you don't want to know even that, then stop reading, 'cause I'm telling it):  In Scotland, the Americans are introduced to music at meals via bagpipes.  In America when they attempt to duplicate it, you get to watch a marching double string bass.  What?  A marching double string bass?  Who can play a jazz bass line on a double string bass when you're booking it around the table?  There's your smirk-laugh and raised eyebrow.

And, ah yes, the early "we don't have a budget for this" solutions--ocean liner in a tub of water for a camera shot.  Okay.  You do what you gotta do.

So there you have it.  A family-friendly Halloween romance.

"Green Lantern" (2011)

A bit slow in places, but good enough to keep watching.  The early story elements that I thought would foreshadow later obstacles to the story line turned out to not be the case.  Instead of it being the obstacle, it turned out to be the key to saving things.  That was a nice twist.  The rest of it seemed basic.

I fast forwarded through some parts, but not very much of it.  Mostly for clock reasons.

Half expected to see "Filmed on location on planet Oa" in the film credits.

End credit music is kind of nice.  I liked it.  I could listen to it again.

Green is a soothing color to the eye.  And the coming and going of the face mask was cool.

There's a few nice quotes out of this movie, nothing outstanding or humorous, but milestone quotes to bring up when thinking back over the movie.

(SPOILER):  The quote I like:  "You don't think I would recognize you because I can't see your cheekbones?" (IMDB.com)  Ah, the pokes at so many superhero costumes!

"Overcome" (2008)

If you think of this as a modernization of the Saul to Paul story from Acts, then it's a pretty good story.  It's fairly non-denominational Christian--for sure, not Lutheran--but it's not overtly anything else.  In fact, the place the Bible is pretty much in the back ground and God and Jesus pretty non-existent.  So, if you're looking for something with strong themes that way, you may be disappointed.  However, if you see it as a modernization of a Bible story (without the "becomes an apostle" ending) then they do well with it.  That makes it hard to figure.  If just looking for a good, decent story, then it succeeds.  If you're looking for something with strong Christian or Christ themes, then it's not quite there.  I don't know that I like calling that failing though.  Can it be okay to just go part of the way?  I know when it came to books, I disliked tales that just slapped a verse here and there and just left out the whole salvation story.  Why bother calling it Christian if it is only barely that?  In that way, this movie risks the same criticism--why bother putting it in there at all if it is only going to be in there minimally.  If you try not to offend any branch of Christian, then won't you risk offending all of them?  Or is it a statement that maybe movies aren't the best place to get into the depths of where change comes from?  I think I'm going to be guilty of playing both sides--I think that the movie should've added more than it did.  At the same time, I think that the moment it would've added more, it would've felt forced and unrealistic.  So, where is that happy medium?  If you're going to put any in there, then put it in boldly.  I think part of the fact might be that I am Lutheran.  Being vague about beliefs, about doctrine, about how Christ is integrated into my life is very different from those who grow up going to church but don't know what it is they are going for.  That 2nd way of thinking is foreign to me.  So, perhaps this needs a non-Lutheran Christian to tell me if this is more relateable to their high school experiences?

I think this movie does an accurate job of portraying high school life.  I think it does a nice job telling a story.  And I think it does a fair job of modernizing Saul-Paul; (I'll rate that 73% success with that)--so passing, but not outstanding.

SPOILER ALERT:  Story elements--includes the girl playing tennis--character Sarah.  The guy plays hockey, but hockey really only shows up a little at the beginning.  Youth events--volleyball, Frisbee (ultimate frisbee?).  Prayer is shown, but mostly not heard.  Colton has a vision--done through image collage, but nothing is heard--though he reports something heard.  Sarah's knee gets bunged up.  Colton's arm is in a sling for a little while.  Not everyone comes around by the end of the movie.  It does show quite a turn around from Colton before and Colton after.  Music present, but nothing outstanding.  Church is gone to, but not shown at all.

"Ocean's Twelve" (2004)

Was told "it's not as good as the first one"--they were right, but still had a surprise or two and some nice moments.  (SPOILERS), the music under the extradition exit was as close as you could go without going over the top--well, that, and knowing it wouldn't be a "good" movie if they didn't pull it off.

I still like Matt Damon's character "Linus"--family criminal.  Love it.  Makes me smile big.  And I dig "Rusty Ryan"'s hand tattoo.

It's not a 10 out of 10 movie (maybe an 8 or 9), but I still enjoyed it and am glad to have watched it.  And Linus's mom was a nice surprise.  Like the first Ocean movie, there is Tom Jones humor in there--some things are even funnier the 2nd time than the first time.  Tom Jones humor isn't in there a lot, but there's a little of it there.

"South Pacific" (1958)

May be a slight hint at spoiling here:

In my opinion--and even if its sounds far fetched--this musical seems to me like a more "modernized" and more musical version of Taboo with a slightly happier ending, a semi-happy ending.  (There's one of your slight spoilers.)

And maybe 'cause we just finished studying it, Billis has reminiscences of Falstaff when it comes to war.  And there, too, both stories have a couple of people in love with each other who can't hardly speak a lick of each other's language; and yet they are married or pretty close to it.  Sure.

Of course, the music is very nice, very wonderful.  Part of what is so well-known about this musical.  I don't have any argument there.  And the scenery is lovely.  Just not quite my line of story-telling.  But now I can say I've seen this musical.  I like the opening number--but that might be because it's a little more light-hearted, and I like bass voices--they don't use 'em enough, in my opinion.  Don't get me wrong--nothing wrong with baritones or tenors.  You need a tenor for that "Some Enchanted Evening".

"Ocean's Eleven" (2001)

Oh my, Oh my, Oh my!  If there ever was a "Cad" movie, this is it.  This movie catches that spirit.  My only regret is that there are only 2 people in the whole world who know what I mean by that phrase--so, for the rest of the world out there, don't guess at what I mean by "Cad" and let me explain the long way.

So, what do I mean by "Cad"?  It's a combination of things.  It's that slight of hand, in-your-face, breaking the rules, this shouldn't work kind of a deal that cracks a joke and boom whatever it was that wasn't possible, happens.  And you find yourself pondering where the skill comes from, where it was hiding, or if it was the humor that powered it into happening.



And then there's that fact that I like many of the characters that I've seen Matt Damon play.  I have watched the first three Bourne movies more times than I can count.  I like Matt Damon.

There it is.  There's what I think of this movie.  What more can I say?  Oh, perhaps, don't take my "Cad" phrase.  That's mine.  Okay, so maybe I didn't explain everything about what I meant by "Cad", but I don't want to write this blog without it.  To me that would make this post bland.  It would also take away one of the reasons I write these--as a record to myself of what I thought.  And I was laughing at the movie and thinking about this phrase.  And I still dream that some day my created story will get written or produced or something in a form beyond that beginning's script that I've already mailed to myself.  I'm digressing ...

I was skeptical when I read the description of the movie, but I also knew it had a couple of sequels, so I was curious.  Definitely wasn't disappointed.  A smooth movie that I would enjoy watching a second time.

And if I digressed too much in my review this time?  Then here:  I liked it.  It made me laugh and smile.  I'd watch it again.  And I enjoy many of Matt Damon's characters.  And the movie has some great lines in it.

"Upside" (2010)

SPOILER ALERT:  Solomon White is a high school lacrosse player.  He receives an injury at a game that threatens getting a lacrosse scholarship to college.  The injury is visual; he sees everything upside down.  In the process of dealing with this injury he meets a girl who is blind.  Through her and through a couple of teachers working with him on his writing, he works to figure himself out, to decide what he wants, and comes to hear about the Christian faith.  When the blind girl, who he has been dating, takes him to a church for the first time, his vision rights itself after he joined in prayer at the church.

The movie doesn't play up the faith healing angle at all.  I enjoyed exploring with "Sol"/"Solly" how he copes with his upside down vision.  These include looking at other people through reflections such as a mirror or reflective surface of a cell phone.  Shaking hands with another person was also a trick.  Reading, a challenge.  These are minor details to the story.  The focus of the story is first dealing with others who are pushing for his life to go in a particular direction, and second, spiritual, but nothing past basic salvation--and a prayer to take a step farther with it.

Haven't figured out if the poem repeated throughout was written specifically for the movie, or if it is a quotation from somewhere else.  Either is possible.

The church scene is filmed in a Lutheran Church in Georgia.

I gave this film 5 out of 5 stars based on personal interests in particular scenes, but it is a 4 star quality film otherwise.  It's a nice relaxing spiritual quest/love story that suits well a low-key Sunday afternoon/evening.

"Cadet Kelly" (2002)

When I started watching this movie, I was hoping that it would be at least tolerably enjoyable.  I like the teen genre, but so much of it seems to miss the mark for me.  Maybe I'm over-estimating the abilities of the target audience.  Maybe they tend to under-estimate their target audience.  Maybe it's a little of both.  Much to my delight, not only did I thoroughly enjoy the movie (a 4 out of 5 rating), but this got one of my rare 5's.  It did pull early story elements into later parts of the story, but sometimes it wasn't quite in the way expected--both in regards to plot and in regards to how the story was told.  I found myself expecting the story to fall into a particular pattern, to let itself be ruled by typical story patterns.  Yet, it found to abide by those patterns in a style that didn't make it completely predictable.  So, it both didn't let down my expectations and it called my bluff when I found the story didn't go down like I expected.  Utterly and truly, it did both.  I think part of the misleading might have been the cover that they chose to put on the movie play list chart.  I think that is part of what mislead me.  This was a good movie, and an enjoyable one.

I think movie makers know how to make movies for critics, for academics, for adults of all preferences, and even for children--movies in all cases that could be real quality classics.  I don't know that a quality classic as been created for teens--for teens, with teens--and also be set in a "real world" setting.  The only movie, or more accurately movies, that I can think that would qualify for this, would be the Harry Potter series, and that is set in a fantasy world.  So, is that the only way a believable, classic-quality teen movie can be done?  Can you seriously think of any other?  A teen-centered story for a teen audience that has the ability to be labeled "that is quality, that is not treating the teen audience like dunces".  A movie that as a teen you go "wow, great movie" and you can re-watch as an adult and not only have the same reaction, but realize that it has depth, and can make you think or ponder over something, even if it's something unnamed.  The feeling that there ought to be something more to say about it than what you thought before, but might take some time to put it down, because the thoughts are still forming.

And, yeah, only one slight after affect.  It will be interesting to see how long the short-clipped teen "scream" back and forth exchange stays in my ears.  That sound, um, sticks.  :/     :)

"The Hollow Crown: Richard II" (2012)--thoughts a week later

I've been thinking about that coffin across that marble floor off and on all week.  You know, it's not surprising to have a song from a movie stuck in your head; that's usually a tribute, something strived for.  And I'm sure there's all sorts of top lists--top lists for movie soundtracks, for movie songs, etc.  And I know they win awards for sound editing and such.  I'm also sure there's lists of favorite scenes, favorite moments, favorite lines...

What about favorite sounds?  Does that list exist somewhere?  I mean, I know people have favorite lines.  I remember playing card games in college where the winner (or was it the loser?) had to quote a line from Monty Python before we played the next game/round.

So where are the sounds?  I remember loving the TV specials of best bloopers from filming TV episodes or best/favorite commercials.  Where are the sounds?

I keep hearing that sound of the coffin scraping across that marble floor.  It's like the sound equivalent of encapsulating the whole entire play.  The King and the rights of legitimate kingship is the marble floor, and King Henry IV is not only the coffin scraping his desires across any rightful rights of kingship, but he's the one that put the coffin there.  It was his words, his actions, his doing.  And he scraped and grated and noisily trashed everything he was going for.  Brought death into what was prime.

There might be many a line or soliloquy or monologue that would summarize the entirety of Richard  II and all its themes, but my vote is for that one unforgettable sound.

"The Hollow Crown: Henry IV Part I" (2012)

I like this movie.  And I like how they did this version of this play.  It sets up the contrast well for rabble-rousing Prince Hal to I-can-do-this-Dad Prince Hal, as well as the friendship he has with Falstaff.  The confrontation between King Henry and Prince Hal at court is strong.

I'm sold.

I'm afraid the only thing that bugged me was Hotspur's nose.  That's not anybody's fault.  I just had a hard time not being distracted by it.  Bad me.  To the actor's credit (Joe Armstrong), the fiery temper/hot-blood of Hotspur was done well.  The Welsh singer was pretty, but not too long of a song.  And I think Prince Hal (Tom Hiddleston) did a great job with Prince Hal.  Wonderful job.

It's a win.

"Catch That Kid" (2004)

Definitely geared for a middle school or younger audience.  Aside from that, it's actually a decent movie.  The toddler has a cute voice.  For perceptive minds, there's nothing surprising about the plot, but still nice to watch it all come together.

"The Book of Esther" (2013)

This movie was edited to a G-rating style story.  So, you don't have to worry about any violent or risque' bedroom scenes if you're looking for something kid-safe.  And pretty much all the parts are there, but some of them are described instead of shown.  I'm attributing this to wishing to keep sets simple so that they could stay under budget.  The number of locations shot at is small, but I think the acting was just fine.  This story has plenty going on in it that it would be nice to see a new current one that included some of the adult parts of the story in it.  The follow your heart, follow your conscience lines seemed out of sync to me.  There was a little music included, but off hand, I don't remember much distinctive about the sound.  Overall, I'd watch it again.

"The Hollow Crown: Richard II" (2012)

Does one write "SPOILER ALERT" on Shakespeare plays?  I mean, wouldn't older historical plays kind of be an exception to that practice?  Well, if not, then take for yourself a Spoiler Alert for the presentation/effects.

I didn't find time to read the play first (which I sometimes like to do with Shakespeare plays), but that was okay this time.  David Bradley (the actor who plays Argus Filch in the Harry Potter movies) played the gardener, and Patrick Stewart played John of Gaunt.  They played up the Richard II as Christ imagery, but I don't think it was in a "he's a Christ-figure" way as much as a "he thinks he is Christ" way.  It wasn't too pushy with it, so it was easy to skim past it, most of the time; but it won't be hard to skim past if the movie were to be analyzed closely.  : /  This was my first contact with this play.  Shakespeare does do quite well with presenting the "You treat the (original) King like this, and you've got trouble on your hands."  A couple of border-line-gruesome moments--just look over you glasses to make the TV fuzzy, then they're over.  Not sure if it was intentional (aka in Shakespeare's script), but staging one the "Richard II, I've got bad news for you" scene on the beach and in the surf was interesting, especially on a bright sunny day.

The sound of the coffin at the end grating across the marble floor is memorable.  Nothing else about the sound stands out for me.  But that wood coffin on that marble floor does.  That's a moment.

"The Avengers" (2012)

Well, it was a few weeks ago when I started watching.  Then, I had to turn in.  I’m just now finishing watching.  There’s a few good humorous lines and moments.  SPOILER ALERT:  Hulk beats Loki like a rag doll.  Loki eeks out a noise.  Hulk:  (snuff) “Puny god.”    That’s one of the ones that made me laugh.  The end credit music’s very nice to listen to.  I like it.  I liked Captain America giving out the last battle plan.  You, do this.  You, do this.  and the last piece, “Hulk” (pause) “Smash.”  Simple.  Direct.  and a contrast in the length of directives.  Answered by a Hulk smile.  There were a couple of scenes I fast forwarded through, or was fine with skipping, but they were few.  Yea-Eh.  They did fine.  Sure.  Go see it.

"Courageous" (2011)

Nice, faith-filled local story.  Nobody saving the word from a blue alien that does everything perfectly except plug air vents and be nice to gal in the background.  This is a wonderful story.  Be sure to watch it with a pause button and a box of kleenexes if you don't want to miss anything.  A few light-hearted moments to break up the tension, but the tension isn't overly thick.  It's still a movie that's going to smack your emotions between the eyes, and 'cause the 4 of the main characters are cops, there's a little bit of action to it, too.  This movie pulled all together, which was nice to enjoy.  And a few well-placed French horn moments to round out the edges.  Highly recommend this movie.

"Deadliest Volcanoes" (2012)

Nova episode.  Other than the unsurprising evolutionary years-figures (it's "post-Noah's flood" in my book) and the "If this erupts, there will be mass destruction and we'll all die", the science parts were pretty interesting.  It kept my interest enough to hear what different detection technologies have  been developed.

And it was pretty cool to watch erupting volcanoes while I'm sitting in the air conditioning deep in the Midwest.

"The Phantom" (2009)

Watched most of this movie, or at least the better part of it.  I watched the beginning--slow beginning, but thorough.  Then I watched the ending.  Then I backed up and watched part of the movie that led to the climax.  Parts of it pretty gruesome.  Yeah, no thanks.  The integration of parkour into the action moves was nice.  I enjoyed that.  Still a bit gruesome for my taste.  Not that there's a lot of it, but what was done I really could've done without.  REALLY.  Sooo, overall?  eh.  And, yeah, (SPOILER ALERT) this one keeps up the pattern that superheroes aren't allowed to keep their biological parents.  And, in this one, they're not allowed to keep their foster parents either.  Hm, yeah.  And the bad guys' weapon?  TV.  okay.  Go have fun adding this to your "TV is bad" analysisalogical mix.  (Yes, I just put together that word.  I'm mostly German.)

I am now ready to watch something light and fluffy, with bright cheerful colors.

"Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest" (2006)

Story wise--eh.  Parts of it seemed slow to me, even during some of the action scenes.  Some of the crucial pieces of dialog were impossible for me to make it no matter how many times I rewound it.  It may have been authentic dialect, but if the audience misses it or has trouble understanding it, it does you no good in your story telling.  And if the audience has to go "What did he say?", then they've been pulled out of the story world.  Not effective.  Does that mean I regret watching this movie?  Not in the least.  It's pirates after all.  That's just fun--or that's the character of these pirate movies.  But this one's not a re-watcher movie.

SPOILER ALERT:  The 3-way sword fight and the sword fight on the run-away water wheel was kind of fun.

Have I mentioned I'm not keen on cliff hanger stories?  I suppose this one gets away with it.  I'm still not keen on them.  This one gets away with it partly because, well, who wants a 4 - 5 hour movie without knowing what they're getting.

"The Prince of Egypt" (1998)

It had a disclaimer at the beginning warning about the artistic and historical license taken with the story.  I thought that was important to do, and important to do at the beginning.  It then pointed out for the true story to go read it in the Bible.  yes.  that.

Therefore, I enjoyed it.

It is a musical.  It has a nice balance of character drama.  And they did a nice job of condensing the plagues without leaving any of them out.

I don't know that I find the music any kind of special (other than subject matter).  I liked the story between brothers (Moses and Ramses) that they had in the story, and I liked Moses's various expressions, especially in the later part of the story.

"Smurfs 2" (2013)

2nd feature of a double-feature at the drive-in.  Not sure I would've chosen to go to this movie by itself, but that's the nice thing about features--you can find some pleasant surprises that way.  I hadn't seen the first Smurfs movie, but it wasn't difficult at all to follow the unique bits about this storytelling style.  The movie was nice.  I grew up watching the Smurfs as one of the cartoons we watched.  They did a nice job of the movie, I thought.  It was a mix of live-action and live-action-like animation (not sure how they did it).  Loved the cat Azrael.  It's worth it to see the movie just to hear and watch the cat--not that the other parts are bad.  They're nice, too; but Azrael is a treat.

"Percy Jackson: Sea of Monsters" (2013)

Watched it at the drive-in, the first movie of a double feature for a great price.  I was fine with how they did the adaptation.  They had to make Tyson the cyclops a little less politically objectionable, but they kept his characterization pretty close to the book otherwise.  Doing such may have made less objections to him (by people who haven't read the book), but it took away some of the book's humor.  Nevertheless, it was understandable because if they'd stayed identical to or closer than they did to the language patterns in the book, there would've been some misunderstandings by part of the audience--and very understandable "objections" at that.  I'm attributing it to translating the story from one medium to another.  The book had to rely on speech patterns to convey some of the characterization.  Those speech patterns would've come across all wrong in the movie.

I liked the movie.  They finally had Clarisse in there.  (I know this is only Percy Jackson #2, but she should've been in movie #1.)

I liked it.  Yep, I'm still a Percy Jackson fan.

"Secrets of the Viking Sword" (2012)

This documentary had less research mystery and more skill/process sharing.  There were a few hints about trading speculation, but most of the mystery involved how it was made.  And the documentary wasn't so much problem solving that process as much as showing the trial run of testing that process out.  Very interesting.

"Mystery of a Masterpiece" (2012)

Is it a newly discovered portrait by Leonardo DaVinci or isn't it?  :)  Nova does it again.

"Mystery of Easter Island" (2012)

Because this is a Nova episode from PBS (that is, no commercials), the build up and hype to keep the audience wasn't needed.  This particular episode also managed to avoid both evolutionary ideas and "primitive" vs. "modern" culture competition.  It kept a nice flow of "here is what our questions were at this point; here is what we tried", "that failed; here's what we tried next", and "here was our next set of questions".  It also seemed to attempt to fairly present various theories--theories that disagreed with others presented and theories that supplemented other views with variations and additions.  I like how they kept going back to one of the oral traditions that dealt with the matter; of course, it involved the subject matter of what the whole episode was about.  The episode focused on two questions:  "How did they move the statutes (moi)?" with the theory as touched on in oral traditions of "walking" and "What was the cause or causes that lead to the decline of the population of Easter Island?"  Under an hour and nicely interesting.

"The Librarian: Quest for the Spear" (2004)

If you can get past the "stupid humor" aspects of the plot, it's actually a decent movie and can be pretty enjoyable.  If you're not in the mood for "stupid" plot/storyworld beyond believing, then it may just end up annoying you more and more as you go on.  Know what you're getting in for.  Having the brawn be female was a nice change.  Music in end credits was nice (but short).  Sexy saxophone music was predictable--been there, done that.

Why watch the movie?  The leading guy is kinda cute, and by the time he heads on his adventure, it's possible to be used to him by then.  Why else watch this movie?  Think of it as an action romance instead of an action movie or instead of a romantic comedy.  An action romance would bill it better.

As for its angle on humanity:  Seems to say that brainiacs are okay in their own circles, but the outside world will never get them.  Not sure I like that message.  It may be partially accurate.  It may even be presently accurate.  But I don't know that it means it's a message that should be perpetuated as "that's just the way it is".  Maybe there's no answer.  If you say other than what is, then you're dreaming and writing sugar-coated happy endings that aren't accurate.  If you say exactly what something is, then you're perpetuating the erroneous way of looking at things.  People who thrive on learning may be a minority of the population, but we should be working more to learn who they are, not relegating them to the margins because they're not the majority.

As for "Sherry, it's just a movie", that's how erroneous thinking happens.  It sneaks into things that are just for fun, or aren't that big a deal, until it IS how we think and it IS a big deal.  I don't think that means we should "avoid it like the plague" and not watch those movies or whatever.  I just think a person should be aware of what's being said and not get suckered into that line of thought.  Guard your thinking.  Ground yourself daily in the Truth.  Then go out and enjoy yourself, knowing how and where you stand.  Because that stand will show through when it's time to not budge and say back, "No, this is how it is."  It's one thing to criticize a movie.  But until you can produce something to answer back--with or without an audience--I question how much room there is to complain.  Produce something that keeps within your ideals, that also entertains, and that is a quality product--that's not as easy as it sounds to do.  And, no, "If they would just tweak ______, then it would be okay" doesn't count.

"Into the Great Pyramid" (2002)

A National Geographic documentary--seems to be built for a TV audience, meaning places for commercials to happen and a lot of hype to try to keep the audience watching past the commercial.  One of the documentary's assumptions is a typical train of thought; it's the thinking that human civilization has gone from simple, primitive thinking and slowly advanced to more complex thinking to our present age.  I tend to favor the reverse.  I think the past was more intelligent than we are and we tend to lose that knowledge the more time progresses on.  At very least, post-flood folks are going to be just as intelligent as we are, not less.  It's a common assumption in thinking, but one I find erroneous.  If a person can ignore the several erroneous assumptions that show up in documentaries, this being one of them, then the rest of the information they present can be quite interesting.  In this documentary, the show surrounded 3 aspects.  Two of this were hype "we are now going to open/look for the first time ever..." types of things.  I don't doubt they were exciting discoveries--quite agree in fact--but could've been done without the hype.  The third aspect of the show didn't involve this, and I found a little more tasteful.  It was a play by play report of discoveries made across the grounds.  I liked it because it included the questions being asked at each point before more discoveries were made, then shows the next set of discoveries made.  This process repeats itself up to the date of the documentary's filming.  It presents the questions along the way, but fast forwards through the archaeological process.  I know that process takes time--I don't pretend it doesn't--but it was more conversational to hear than the other 2 parts.  The other 2 parts were framed like someone getting ready to bang open a pinata which may or may not have anything in it, by a person who has never hit or seen a pinata before.  The 3rd part was like a chap sitting next to you around a fireplace talking about what he's thought and been up to for the last few years.  I much prefer the fireplace chap.  Documentary includes reenactments and computer models to help explain a few things.

"Alice in Wonderland" (2010)

How much have I enjoyed this movie?  I don't even care on the first watch-through to form any sort of opinion about how it is as an adaptation because I thoroughly enjoyed it.  Very colorful.  Music was nondescript, but that's okay this time.  I like how they tied it in with her life in London--the context of the stories anyway.  Very colorful.  (And, yes, I know I said that once already.)  How they changed Alice's dress/costumed her was intriguing to watch.  I still like the Cheshire cat as one of my favored characters in this tale.

And how come potions never have ingredients like sausage, or sugar, or ketchup??

"Soul Surfer" (2011)

Typical inspirational story based on a true life one.  What made this movie nice was, first, the family wasn't a dysfunctional one--normal emotional reactions and faith struggles, but nothing overdone.  Second, who doesn't love gorgeous waves being surfed on?  The theology favors commercial-inspirational; look past it and just enjoy the movie as entertainment.  Some pretty infectious characters; I want to hang out with all of them.  It was also nice to get to know Bethany for quite a bit of movie before the shark attack--that they didn't put the shark attack right at the very, very beginning.  Nice movie.

"Iron Man" (2008)

I didn't know what to expect going into this movie.  Had seen no previews, read practically zilch, and only knew that a number of sequels had been made.  Definitely grittier world background than I expected.  (Though, if I had no expectations, what was I comparing it to?)  Yet, the final battle lived up to the "larger than life" part of superhero movies.  This was definitely a visual movie.  Maybe that goes hand in hand with technology-and-mankind type investigations.  That doesn't mean sound wasn't there, or that there was only the occasional diegetic song.  That means the music and the sound was successfully invisible to the predominance of the visual stuff.  It also means that for me to hear it, I'd at very least need to watch it a 2nd time--and very likely, watch it with my eyes closed.  At least that's what it would take for me right now until I develop faster ears for listening to invisible sound.  It's very likely that in a movie like this, sound that was more visible would detract from the attempt to make this superhero world more likely, more "real"--a detraction that might make it seem more cheesy.  A good balance of action and soft, of I-gotta-figure-this out and people maneuvering.  And enough sustained suspense that I had to pause it a time or two, but only for a moment.  That's a good thing for me, and the sign of a good balance of things in a decent movie.  Nice job.

SPOILER ALERT:  Sound did make one story appearance.  The device that Obie used to paralyze people for all appearances just made a sound--a sound that told the audience it was a bad thing.   Meanwhile, there was no sound that story-wise said this was a good thing.  Granted such may not have fit into the plot, but it bears mentioning.  In a highly visual movie like this with nearly invisible sound, is sound totally a bad guy weapon?  I can think of other superhero movies and TV episodes where sound was a bad guy's weapon--several easily.  But sound as a good guy's weapon?  Nope, only cotton and earplugs.  Aren't there any good guys that use sound?  Perhaps one.  Wasn't there a cartoon space team of humans made part robots where one was a Texan?  Seems he might have fought with a guitar.  Maybe.  Not sure.  But that's the only one I can think of compared to all of the bad guy examples.

"Raiders of the Lost Ark" (1981)

The music (so well known, especially in band circles) is definitely in the spirit of The Adventures of Robin Hood.  It keeps things rousing yet light-hearted without getting too hokey.  It was fun hearing the French horns get to be part of the truck chase scene along with the trumpets (which play throughout).  I've already seen a couple of the other Indiana Jones movies, but it was nice to finely see the first.  Harrison Ford was definitely a little younger then.  The movie is good, but I think the music is part of what made the movie great.  Honestly, picture the movie with a radically different sound track.  I don't think it would've had the same pizzazz.

"The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen" (2003)

This movie was kind of fun, especially as an English literature person.  Easy enough to follow if you've not read anything, but all the more fun the more of the different characters/books you've read.  I'd read Dr. Jekyl and Mr. Hyde and Tom Sawyer, and I'd seen movies done up with Captain Ahab (20,000 Leagues Under the Sea) and Dorian Gray.  The others, while not read or seen, were easy enough to peg--the African adventurer (Allan Quatermain), an invisible man (Rodney Skinner), and a vampire (Mina Harker).  I imagine the feminist critiques should have fun with the Harker character.  Movie, action movie, was a lot of fun to watch.  And great music, especially--as always--the end credits.  (Music by Trevor Jones.)  Apparently the movie was based off a graphic novel.  Good music, not necessarily anything new, but I like it nonetheless.

"Batman & Robin" (1997)

I couldn't remember if this was a movie I'd seen before, and after it arrived I realized I had--probably when it first came out.  I watched a number of the Batman movies during that strip of time.  This is much closer in style to the Batman TV series I grew up with--overdone/melodramatic props and actions--which I didn't mind as a kid.  Made it "safe"--as in not real.

"The Three Musketeers" (2011)

Not having read the book, but have having watched the 1993 adaptation, it was interesting noting the similarities and differences between adaptations and deducing the touchstone story elements from the book.  This adaptation seemed to be quite liberal in extending current day action devices under the umbrella of DaVinci inventions.  This made the film seem more like the 17th century musketeers meet James Bond.  This includes a Milady DeWinter who is very much not your just-a-wall-flower, pretty to look at character.  Gutsy action packed woman--who still manages very attractive clothing.  And the costumes/outfits of the 3 musketeers and D'artagnan are very nice looking, too.  If you're looking for period authenticity, this film isn't likely it; but, for a fictitious story excursion, it does the trick nicely.

Logan Lerman ("Percy Jackson" from Percy Jackson, this was his very next film after Lightning Thief) was a surprise to me.  So was finding Orlando Bloom in the end credits ("Duke of Buckingham").  I'm not in the habit of looking at the cast list, or even featured actors/actressess, ahead of time.  But, maybe I should just look down the list of Orlando Bloom films since I seem to be on a roll of watching them (3 Orlando Bloom films three nights in a row; that's unplanned).

The 1993 version had sections of story needed the first time through the film, but deemed slower parts that I often fast-forwarded through on later viewings; but, it also seemed a much wittier adaptation.  I still recall a number of it's lines fondly.  ("The cardinal recommends [champaign?] ..." "Porthos, we're in the middle of chase." "You're right. Something red.")  This adaptation had less wit, but moved the action along quite a bit.  Not likely any fast-forwarding here on a rewatch.  Then again, without the wit, there's less of an enticement to watch a 2nd time, at least not right away.

"The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King" (2003)

I still find my most enjoyed movies to be ones with few words after the first watching.  Too much I'm still savoring to spoil by analysis.  I will say this, I still thoroughly enjoy the character of Legolas.

And I need to stop staying up past 2 a.m. so many nights in a row.

"Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl" (2003)

I enjoyed this.  Escaping into another world is fun to do for awhile.  And seeing Orlando Bloom just reminds me that I would love an excursive tale into the world of Legolas.  Anyways ...

The end credit music is especially a dream.  I love that music--soundtracks that actually include the film score's music, and end credit music is often especially rich.  Sigh, ah, if my creative writing fingers would spin a tale of words as rich as it is in my mind and such that others would enjoy it, too.  Too low in the ranks to be honed as a practice, I'm afraid, but I don't give up toying with the idea from time to time.  This movie's tale had all that is promised to a story of this genre, yet spun in a way to keep you watching and interested.

"The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey" (2012)

Mmmm.  Happy.

And of course, the noble moments had to include a French horn sound.  :)  I was glad to see they include at least one song from within the world of the story--the dwarfs singing around Bilbo's fireplace--since Tolkien included so much song inside the books himself.  And it was well-chosen--men's voices, heartbeat tones to the melody, undercurrent providing current for the emotion the jolly brashness tried to cover.

And the throwing the dishes scene held a strong link to one of my own creative writing creation's traits.  :)

Well-done.  The whole thing.

I like.

"The Sea Hawk" (1940)

An Errol Flynn movie again with music by Erich Wolfgang Korngold.  Grand, rich, exciting music.  Interesting music spots:  The music leading up to the jungle ambush didn't use foreboding music.  It was almost light-hearted.  Maybe because the audience already knew the ambush was coming.  I liked that better because it helped to dispel the tension some.  I don't care for high-tension necessarily.  So, this gave me a chance to keep just enjoying it.  The end sword-fight was an interesting whirlwind of music choices--liked that, too.  Black & white movie.  The end-speech was the only direct indicator of its 1940s historical release (noble-ness inspiring, going to war and all that).

"Things to Come" (1936)

Boy!  A person could really have a hey-day practicing different literary/film criticisms with this movie--feminist, Marxist, colonist, ecology, modern/postmodern, technology, political/power, cinema/media, even a smidge of education.  You name it, and I'm sure there will be at least a little piece in there that would give you something to chew on.  MacDonald said that this was a movie whose music (Arthur Bliss) has been short shrifted.  If it has been short shrifted, then I agree with MacDonald that this music needs some attention.  The montages feel like concerts with pictures at times, but hello, it was 1935.  MacDonald says that some of the music was composed (and recorded?) before the filming was shot, and is a "milestone" picture when it comes to sound synchronization.  The opening piece is especially interested to hear and watch the juxtaposition of the march-like war music with the sounds of Christmas.  I've not read the H.G. Wells story this is based on, so I don't know how much of the ideas are Wells's and how much is additions to the movie adaptations; but, it is fascinating to see this 1935 view of the next world war.  Semi-SPOILER ALERT:  The war lasts from 1940 - 1970.  The end of the movie is set in 2036.  Also, one place that fascinated/amused me is early on a portion of the people are infected with "wandering sickness".  Sure looked to me like zombies. Maybe before the concept idea of "zombies" came around?  They treated the "problem" about the same:  "shoot 'em!"  Either way, the people infected with wandering sickness walked around half out of it with there arms sticking out in front of them.  I have been trying to figure out some of the accents that some of the characters use.  Some German?  More British?  Doesn't seem American to me, unless it's German-American--which WWII kind of squelched.  Not sure what the accent is because there wasn't a lot of it that was strong.  The more prevalent accent was more subtle.  The only annoying thing about this movie was the sound at the end seemed like it was missing the final I chord.  Maybe that was something missing from the film when they went to restore it?  At any way, I keep trying to hear/get that last I chord sound there in place in my head.  Note some of the 2036 architecture and technology.  Not far off, even if the names were quite different from what we now call them.  Okay, maybe the 2036 costumes could be chuckled at.  That I admit.  Unless, of course, you compare them to early/original Star Trek.

"42nd Street" (1933)

I recognize one of the actors (Dick Powell as "Billy Lawler") which possibly means I've seen it before.  If so, it's been long enough ago that I didn't remember much else from the show.  And it would've been far enough back that it was before I started this film watching quest.  MacDonald says this is the show that started the backstage story of a stage performance show storyline--and I've already seen a number of those.  If I have seen it before, it was still nice to see it again.  And "42nd Street" (the song) is still as infectious as ever.

"Citizen Kane" (1941)

 A lot of history behind this film.  Maybe there is something behind studying the production and distribution of films.  MacDonald says this was the first film to use music as sound bridges in the transitions.  While music was used to transition, there were also places where the sound was abrubt.   Death comes, then instead of a smooth bridge, there's an abrupt sound cut to bouncy jaunty music; or the parrot screech.  Definitely  themes of death throughout the movie.  There's also some other sound themes that it would be nice to look closer at:  stomped on lines (though, not likely to find anything surprising), placed sounds of rain, use of laughter, use of reverb, point of audition--especially in relation to the opera premiere--or maybe it was deliberately out of balance (acc. more over-powering than the melody that couldn't keep on top of the power balance), and sudden crashes in sound (also not likely to have any surprising correlations/commentary here).  There were sounds that, at least today, are not surprising any more--the noisy discordant music accompanying the montage of "you're going to keep singing opera" or the impassioned strings at the end.  And sounds done "different"--the heavy breathing during the suicide attempt and hearing the breaking in of the door from the inside from Mrs. Kane's point of view--although, she likely wasn't hearing anything, even though we were hearing things from her point of view.  [Okay, I took notes this time.  Can you tell?]  It's a shame I haven't had a chance to read the article of use of silences before watching this; the slander scene (between the two politicians and the former and future wives).  Then there's the play of reality--both the mirrors of mirrors of mirrors with Kane; and the scream in the background when Mrs. Kane "should" have screamed and didn't after being slapped.  Other than the mirrors, there were some visual things that I noticed, too.  There's the foreground/background and size of figures/people in relation to other people. There's the camera angles between the drunken Jedediah and Kane show-down (the first one--where Jed asks to get sent to Chicago).  The ending image of Susie's first opera also struck me as being very similar to some of the shots from the original King Kong; the story parallels are incredibly close, too.  I read in MacDonald the analogy of the sound as a jig saw puzzle like the story was.  What about the analogy of Kane as an opera singer.  Susie makes the remark that the "whole audience doesn't want you" and that fits a description of Kane, too.  So, is he an inept "opera singer"?  trying to sing a melody that's too high for him [MacDonald of Susie], trying to make it in something that's out of his league--like the opera (the Olympics of voice) is for Susie?  He doesn't come across as being out of his league except for the accusations Susie makes of his lack of ability to love.  Then there's the whole aspect of the audience finding out and knowing who/what Rosebud was and the world of the film never finding out.  What does that say about reality and what is representative and telling or not, or who has power?  I'm not sure I agree with the distorted "Dies Irae" theme [Hermann calls it a "variation" which is probably more accurate than a distortion] as being about "futility"--but it's kind of dangerous ground to disagree with a quote from the composer himself.    I think it's more about death than futility; although, in the case of this movie, I don't think they're divorced from each other.  Then there's the title:  Citizen Kane.  Is it saying that being a citizen is "futile"?  And there's the analysis in connecting the film to Coleridge's poem--though I'm assuming that's been "done".  There's the deliberate voiceover in the newsreel bringing in Noah, but unless there is further commentary on being a citizen by that reference, I can't see it saying anything between Kane and Noah--and I don't think it's just about there being a lot of animals; although, that might have been the original intention.

Hmm, wonder if I'd generate this many thoughts all the time if I took notes on a film?

"Batman Begins" (2005)

(Sigh), I like superhero movies.  I liked it.  I thought it was well done.  I forgot to look and see how long it was before I started it--2 hours 20 min.--which isn't bad, but now I'm up later than I thought--which is a good sign because it means I really didn't want to stop the movie, or at least not permanently stop it.  (I had to pause it a few times to deal with prolonged suspense or plot elements I didn't like--but that's quite normal for me.  One of the reasons I like DVDs.)  I like how the story took it's time with the different story elements--the transformation into Batman and the coming together of the Bat Cave and other elements; shied away from doing it strictly montage as much as it could.  Kind of like having 2 movies in one--I don't mind that--some of Grace Livingston Hill's books do that.  Found myself wondering if there are any super heroes that haven't lost their parents:  Spiderman not only doesn't have his parents, but loses his uncle, too; Daredevil loses his dad, no mom in the picture; Superman had foster parents, whether knowingly growing up or not.  So, now something I'm watching for--does any super hero still have his or her parents around?  And the Bat mobile?  Cool car!  I like chase scenes.

"The Bride of Frankenstein" (1935)

Not sure that this post qualifies for a "spoiler alert" notice--what's to be spoiled?  Even if you've never seen the movie, what do you expect when you go to watch it?  Nevertheless, if you like warnings, then there are subtle references included in this post.  MacDonald wasn't kidding when he said that the Bride's musical motif was the same as "Bali Hi" in South Pacific.  Can't miss it.   Can't miss the kettle drums from the creation of the heart all the way through the end of the movie either.  Yeah, the music is rich.  The acting is almost comedic in places.  Almost.  The plot takes very distorted and extremely fragmented pieces of what was cut from the original story to fashion this new movie from.  Story moves quickly--so, it seems to me it would survive well in today's plot moving.  I didn't ever latch onto the Monster's musical motif--not on the first listen through, anyway.  The little people in a bottle was disturbing until I saw that there was a variety of figures.  Franz Waxman music.  Interesting that the sustenance of choice was bread and wine.  That's not accidental.

"King Kong" (1933)

While I haven't seen it (yet), the premise of the movie sure sounds like a predecessor to Jurassic Park.  L. MacDonald says this is the movie that demonstrated what the impact music underscoring could do to enhance the dramatic impact of a movie.  Also, if they haven't already, Colonialism Theory would shred this movie to pieces.  King Kong is also gotta be an older cousin to the Abominable Snowman in Rudolf the Red-Nosed Reindeer.  You can also tell that this is early story-telling.  The "horror" aspect to this movie is okay because it wouldn't "really" happen, which makes it interesting to watch.  And one can't forget the whole camera aspect to the film--both with Hollywood's intrusion (the colonialism I've already mentioned) and it's commentary on the making of movies in general (spectator/who's behind the camera/camera as weapon).

"The Broadway Melody" (1929)

I've already seen some of the later early-musicals that run a similar plot pattern, but this one claims to be one of the originals.  Within it, you can see traces of the earlier vaudeville acts, cameras shots as if just filming theater scenes, and inter-titles for some of the time and place changes.  The novelty of sound also demonstrates itself in this:  the very beginning includes a cacophony of sounds happening simultaneously (different rehearsals in different rehearsal rooms).  The movie showcases some of the intriguing things silent films couldn't show:  hearing and seeing the feet of tap/tap-ballet dancer(s), stuttering, the clatter of something suddenly dropping.  The movie is also very 20s; besides the fashions, there are some risque' bordering shots.  The 2 lead females spend a lot of time in bathrobes in their apartment and undressing.  The story also puts the lead of the female deemed "gorgeous" on top of a literal pedestal.  Ukulele was mimed, but just with the leads.  The other live instrumentalists were the real deal.  The ending was kind of mixed.

"Metropolis" / "Metropolis Restored" (1927)

Long movie.  There's a lot that is going on with this movie.  Setting wise, it would be interesting to do a comparison with The Hunger Games.  Brings in Biblical themes from the tower of Babel and Revelation.  Marxist and Gender criticism would have a hey day with this.  The involvement of a mechanical person would add to that as well as those who look at machines in movies.  For a 1920s movie, the special effects were pretty amazing.  I can see why it went over budget.  This movie is marked as an example of German Expressionism.  I don't think I mind German Expressionism either.  I don't know that the music was anything special, but that's just me.  One late scene in the cathedral has strains reminiscent of the Dies Irae.  One or two plot logic holes--minor in comparison with the over all "message".  One of the top honcho's right-hand man ("Thin Man") reminds me of Lurch.  Also a plot element of The Prince and the Pauper.  1925--the movie has the concept of communicating via computer monitor.  That amazes me--well before Star Trek.

"The Battleship Potemkin" / "Potemkin" (1925)

This was a Sergei Eisenstein, Russian montage movie.  If the music doesn't already stand by itself in concert somewhere, it should.  This reconstructed version says its music is composed by Edmund Meisel in 1926 and its adaptation and instrumentation in 2005.  Regardless, the music is just fantastic.  The plot:  yep, supportive of the Russian Revolution.  Still, I liked the look at the end of the battleship gearing up--a team working together, people and machines in harmony, and a glimpse into the workings of a 1920s battleship.  (I won't spoil the context for it or result of it.)  Montage is an interesting way of constructing things.  Wouldn't mind watching more of that style, ...  , I think.  It's hard to distinguish Russian montage from Russian movie.  Might have to see a non-Russian montage picture first--or a montage picture on the other side of the political spectrum--, in order to know better.

"The Apartment" (1960)

Romances, especially romantic comedies, are a hard sell for me, but I actually enjoyed this one.  In fact, I rate it top notch.  It's comedic without being corny or over the top.  Yet it has serious moments--heart-touching ones--which keeps it realistic and well-balanced.  Nice theme-song.  Black and white picture; you don't miss the color at all.  It would be a nice movie to watch, or re-watch, during the winter holidays.

"Exodus" (1960)

While I was growing up, I remember playing on Grandma's electric organ.  She had a book or two that you played chord keys with the left hand while you played the melody with the right hand.  I imagine at one point or another I played all the way through all those songs at least once, but there was bound to be a couple of songs more favored than the others.  I remember "Alley Cat" being one of those favored.  "Exodus" had to be the other.  I don't know that I remember even any other titles.  I think that the appeal of "Alley Cat" was it's jazzy rhythms and boogie melody.  It was also certainly something relate-able; to a kid, a song about cats is about cats, and only about cats.  As for "Exodus", that had to be something Biblical, right?  But it also had those low notes scattered throughout the melody.  Playing ledger notes was cool.  And there's something contagious about that melody.  But, I could never figure out why I never noted it in the movie.

I know now why.  I was familiar with the movie "Ten Commandments" and wasn't aware that "Exodus" was a completely different movie.  And even if I was aware of that, I figured it was just a "less popular" version of the same story.

Tonight, I put this movie in the player, and from the start, there was that song that I knew so well.  Tonight, I remembered Grandma's organ.  And realized that I didn't know the movie at all.  Just that contagious song.

The movie put that song to good use.  Used that melody like a theme and variations song--now somber, now miltaristic/march-like, now reflective, now bold.  Only thing missing was hearing it one more time through the end credits.  Yeah, no end credits.  They're all at the beginning, I guess.  Well, that, and the movie is before end credits become quite so long (which I usually don't mind).

The movie has a slow start.  Or maybe if you're more prepared for a slow-paced movie, then it isn't a slow start.  Just a slow paced movie.  Admittedly, that's probably from today's standards, which I shouldn't do.  Even the action sequences, though aren't hold-your-breath-fast.  But, the story is interesting enough, once the story gets going, and if you give it a chance.

You should be aware that this is a long movie by time standards.  3 hrs. and 28 minutes.  The subject of the film is founding of the modern-day nation of Israel.  Apparently based on a book.  It's not an action flick.  It's not entirely a reflective flick either.  It does do a good job of capturing the spirit of the people--not that I was there (obviously)--but, I say that, because that's what strikes me as one of the movie's strongest points:  that determined look on Ari Ben Canaan's face (Paul Newman), the old man on the left of the chess board who shouted back at Canaan's options, the concentration of many other characters playing the extras or minor roles.

I debated with myself hanging in there to watch such a long "lazy" movie, but I am glad that I watched it to the end, even considering it's ending (though, I can't imagine what other ending you would put.  No other ending would fit).

"The Big Sleep" (1946)

Another Humphrey Bogart private eye movie.  Again, well written plot that keeps you watching.  I had to do a shout out when he asked the book salesgirl to take her glasses off.  What's wrong with glasses??!!  Good-looking girls can't have glasses, huh?  Okay, I know.  That's a "thing"--girls with glasses don't get the lead; or if they do, they end up ditching the glasses part way through the story.  Yeah, minor thing--and nothing surprising.  It was just interesting to see it so blatant in the movie.  The same line of thinking exists in later movies, but they're more subtle about it.  Not sure which I prefer--be blunt yet open about a stereotype or perpetuate it but pretend it doesn't exist.  And I know doing this with any stereotype isn't new either.  Lauren Bacall.  Got to hear her sing a little piece of a song--back when alto leads were okay to enjoy.  Max Steiner music.  Almost have to watch the movie a second time to make sure I got all the Who-Dun-It-To-Who straight.  This Bogart's character (Philip Marlowe) was still gruff/blunt and good at thinking on his toes.  Not sure I see much difference between this character portrayal and the character of Sam Spade.  So, why bother changing the name?  Variety, I guess.

"The Maltese Falcon" (1941)

Forgot that I had seen this before.  Humphrey Bogart as the character Sam Spade.  This is the movie (or one of them) that all the detective/private eye spoofs (trench coats, dames in distress, lots of cigarettes) is based on.  Even with having seen it before, it was a pleasure to watch it again--partly because of all the twists and turns of the plot, partly because of the way Spade's character was portrayed (gruff voice, mysterious--well sorta, trying to guess what he'll say next).

"Sayonara" (1957)

(1st 40 min. & selected scenes)  Secondary story line is "Romeo and Juliet" goes to Japan combined with cultural documentary.  Primary story runs commentary on secondary story; also runs parallel, except with a "happy" ending (I guess you'd call it that).  Music:  Franz Waxman.  Marlon Brando, Red Buttons, and James Garner.

"K-9000" (1991)

A bit of a "lame" movie, yet this one has enough "hmm" in it to keep watching.  The special effects and computer scenery is a bit melodramatic--which goes along with the "lame" part--and makes it feel very 80s.  The "blood and guts" was a bit melodramatic too--and maybe some surprising since it is a TV movie.  Overall, I ended up watching the whole thing (though I did debate with myself part way through), but it come up to "eh".  I suppose that's what I get for listening too close to the one line description of the plot--yeah, that set up different expectations for the movie than what I actually got delivered.

"Thou Shalt Laugh" (2006)

A line-up of Christian stand-up comedians. Started strong and ended well. I laughed at Thor Ramsey. I really laughed both at Jeff Allen and the audience involvement Taylor Mason did. The rest were fine, but those were the ones I enjoyed the most.

"Captain America: The First Avenger" (2011)

Likeable hero.  Nice moment when Captain America was sitting outside a tent at his first(?) front line/field show.  Likeable hero.  Movie just misses what I like for in a 5-star movie (which is hard to find), but it's really not a bad picture.

"Boy Wonder" (2010)

Wow.  Some story.  A good-bad protagonist.  I thought there were plenty twists to keep you wondering what's next.  I certainly didn't see the ending coming, yet knew exactly what happened when the ending came, because all the pieces were there, carefully laid out in the telling of the story.  Brief flip-clips of here's what I see/here's what really is happening--super brief.

"M" (1931)

German.  While the crime perpetrated is quite serious--and the film treats it so--there are humorous moments in this film and it is quite fascinating to watch.  Keep in mind this isn't slapstick or anything obvious like that.  It's quite buried.  Quite.  But it's there.  Irony, for sure.  [Maybe that's my sense of humor.  Irony?]  Definitely an academic humor sparsely scattered in the [social? society?] commentary--subtle and not so subtle--on the things the movie touches on.  And the sound--"the killer's distinctive whistled tune" is all my film history book says--they leave out the best part!  It's "In the Hall of the Mountain King"--How many layers that adds to things!!!!  And the other sounds--definitely on the "create art" side of things instead of atmosphere.  Oh, and there's visual irony, too.  Definitely.

"Vampyr" (1932)

An interesting watch.  Storyline is in the spirit of "Legend of Sleepy Hollow"--at least the start of the movie and the end of the book.  Music is great--especially the string bass--a mix of "In the Hall of the Mountain King" and romantic-Berlioz--again in the spirit of, not similar in sounds to.  Almost entirely string sounds, though there was one place with brass horns, and one stringed ... banjo?  That doesn't fit for Germany--but that is the closest I could come up with.  Sounded like a banjo, looked the same shape except it seemed all wooden--like a round bodied ukelele.  Enough similarity to later vampire stuff (which of course, probably built on this), that you think you know what's coming; yet, different enough that you find yourself going, "What are they doing now?" [Yeah, I know that was in 2nd person.]  It's, of course, slower--doesn't have the fast pacing of current day, but it's not badly paced--and it's only an hour and 15 min. long.  Great early special effects--camera tricks and early basic editing.  It's a visual quality that today's CGI don't mimic; it's a nice quality of its own.  You "gotta" watch the shadows.  In German, English subtitles.  Though, I'm not so sure there wasn't at least one French scene.  (The original English version is lost.  So, this is a restored version.)  Not bad.  Almost "amusing", but even I caught myself holding my breath at one point (briefly), and keenly interested to see how things would resolve.

"The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers" (2002)

Very nice.  Pleased.

It's an adaptation--cut it some slack.

"The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring" (2001)

Very Nice. big smile. Very nice adaptation.

Is it true that the best movies need few words said? They are movies that defend themselves. More bluster does little to enhance what speaks so well for themselves. For only experiencing them, does them any justice. It is only those in the class below that need the bluster of Apologia.

"Man with a Movie Camera" (1929)

Soviet montage. Visually, I kind of liked watching this. Wouldn't mind watching the visual part again sometime--maybe not right away. (Though I wouldn't watch this with young kids, and maybe not even young teenagers, without previewing it first!). Audio-wise, I couldn't tell if the sound was original to the film or not--I could do without the sound track. Music minimalism. I thought about muting the sound half way through the movie, but I couldn't imagine the movie as silent either because the music was kind of integral to the feel of the thing. Part of the time it was minimalist music that reminded me of the honky jazz style that plays in the alto saxophone's altissimo register (can't remember which song and jazz musician does that that I'm thinking of), except it was more of a tenor saxophone playing in it's low register. All of the sound track was definitely 20th century art music. And while most of the movie is okay, yeah, no young kids for those couple scenes, unless you want to answer questions you weren't intending to answer for a least another decade or so.

"Hansel & Gretel: Warriors of Witchcraft" (2013)

teen-flick, "B-Movie".  enough curiosity in the storyline to watch all of it, not much else to recommend of it except the 2 good-guy leads were attractive/nice looking.  And I'm intrigued by an actor's first name being "BOOBOO".  Otherwise, this movie:  eh.

"The Dead Man Who Killed" (1913)

Fantomas is the recurring villian in this silent movie series.  The story is in the  spirit of Sherlock Holmes or the old Batman TV series; better yet, it's a mix of the two.  Hard telling if the music is original or a close imitation, but it's just as interesting.  Even though this is a silent movie, the storyline is quality and well worth watching.

"Steamboat Willie" (1928)

"Vintage Mickey" (1929--Netflix catalog) A collection of early Mickey films including:  "Steamboat Willie" (1928) First cartoon with original sound, "Plane Crazy"--First Micky cartoon produced.  First Micky & Minnie Mouse appearances. (1928), "The Karnival Kid" (1929)--First cartoon where Mickey speaks, "The Birthday Party" (1931), "The Castaway" (1931), "Mickey's Orphans" (1931), "Mickey's Revue" (1932)--First appearance of Goofy, "Building a Building" (1933), and "Mickey's Steam Roller" (1934).  I can see the "mostly music" cartoon style.  It still is from a very different time (obviously) with some humor that I wouldn't have seen in my childhood.  Then there's some of the cultural differences:  spittoons, girdles, how the door bells apparently worked, out houses, "button me up" underwear, box lunches (for 15c, no less), steam rollers, and of course, a horse's collar.  And, yeah, some of the humor raised my eyebrows--didn't drop my jaw--but did raise my eyebrows, probably mostly because now there are slightly different ideas about what a "cartoon" is--or maybe it's not that it's a cartoon, but the humor was different.  The music is definitely vaudeville influenced.  Seems also a mix of city and country influences--okay so it was a mix, but it seemed more of the country than what you see today.  Or that may just be my perception again.  All the sounds seemed to be in the higher pitched ranges of things.  Only the gorilla playing the piano in "The Castaway" seemed to play lower notes.  Or maybe it's not higher pitch but squeakier tones in general.

Or I could be tired and out of practice.

"Charlie St. Cloud" (2010)

It's okay.  Sorry.  Love stories sometimes have a hard sell to me.  That's why I have only 2 of them on my shelves--and both of them are more for other reasons than as a love story.  Anyways--decent adaptation.  Might be interesting to see if I would've thought any different about it if I'd seen the movie first.  Unfortunately, that's one thing you can't test out both ways.  They did pretty good with the adaptation.  Guess I don't have much more to say about that.

"Amazing Love" (2012)

Works in a speculated story of Hosea. A tiny bit of decision theology in there, but it's very small. Well done, I thought, and kind of what I needed tonight ... a new version of the same truths: God loves us/me a lot.

"Thor" (2011)

Liked it. Yep. 4 out of 5 stars.

"Peeping Tom" (1960)

A well-done creepy film. Creepy. But, well-done. We can safely say that I'll probably not specialize in psychological thrillers/horror movies such as this one. I will say the sound choices were as much a plot element of the film as anything else. Definitely not invisible sound. Piano, plain and simple, but very pronounced. Latin music from a recording played live on film. Not only is there a camera man filming a mad camera man filming other camera operators, but a sound man recording the sound of a recording--okay not as many layers as the camera, but the same levels are implied and exist along side the camera bits. It's still a creepy film.

Creepy along the same lines as the German film ''The Testament of Dr. Mabuse".

"A Nous la Liberte'" (1931)

I'm afraid I'm listening to this with too modern of a set of ears to hear the novelty of what was going on with sound with this movie.  Nevertheless, I thoroughly enjoyed this one.  In my opinion, the plot isn't as predictable as many movies are--and it's not a mystery movie either.  It's a light-hearted movie; I wouldn't call it a musical, but it's not far from it.  I did catch at least one musical joke that prompted me to laugh out loud (the dinner entertainment).  This movie is also in the same spirit as Chaplin's "Modern Times".  There is some social critique going on, but it doesn't make for somber movie-viewing.  French film.

Upon thinking further:  I think the fact that the factory is a phonograph factory and that this is an early sound film is intended to speak something really loudly.

"Le Million" (1931)

an absurd, but funny/amusing, surrealist French comedy.  Even the sound contributed to the surrealism.  It intro'd the beginning with the ending, so that the rest of it was how it got from one end to the other and "turned out all right".  Definitely used up a chunk of my suspense rations watching it, but that was mostly all right.  It was also a musical--a few of the pieces were operatic; they were a nice touch.  The movie is worth the watch.

"Spartacus" (1960)

I like the beginning of this movie. (It's a 3+ hr. movie.) Lots of featured French horn sounds (not surprised). I cheated and read a synopsis of the ending. So, likely won't watch it all the way to the ending, because I'm in the mood tonight for a happy ending--and I'm also not in the mood to see a "slaughter of thousands" and mixed mood ending. So, I'm going to stop after one of the high points and call it good.

 I did sneak a peek through a few other scenes within the last hour, and a few seconds of the ending.  I still call it a good movie, even though I didn't watch most of the last hour.

"The Diary of Anne Frank" (1959)

Filmed in the actual location (I think it said). Black & White. Well done. Did watch the first 2 hours, but didn't have time to watch the last hour--so jumped to the last 5 -10 minutes to finish it out.

"Gigi" (1958)

A delightful Lerner & Loewe musical. While the story is set in 1900, the fact the movie happens in the late 50s adds an interesting extra twist. But analytics aside, it's an enjoyable musical, with pleasant lovely songs and delightful to look at. Songs include "Ah, yes, I remember it well".

"X-Men Origins: Wolverine" (2009)

Yeah, I like "superhero" movies. :)

"The Old Man and the Sea" (1958)

Once again I ended up watching the movie before reading the book/story (Hemingway), so once again I can't speak to the adaptation. I will say that after an hour and a half of watching that old man on the sea, my laptop is now moving like the ocean. I will also say that assuming "The Old Man and the Sea" would be written in the same Hemingway style as "The Sun Also Rises", then the use of a voiceover narrator was a good choice; it helped to create the same close distance as his writing style. Music (which is what won the Oscar)--when you think of horses running, you will bring music to mind, or scaling a mountain or flying on a bird. But fighting a fish? Indeed, what music do you compose for that? Dimitri Tiomkin, composer. Early on, and over the credits, there is singing like a cowboy ballad, but I couldn't make out what language--and I'm not sure it matters (adds to the affect). Most of the rest was "movie music" but it was integral enough that when the planned silences came, you noticed. Overall, interesting...as in thoughtful.

I have to add since then, the old man's "I'm sorry fish." has plunked itself down in the middle of my brain. It's not a bad thing, but definitely not one that will be passed over.

"Vertigo" (1958)

Alfred Hitchcock. I continue to see why Hitchcock movies are written about, and why a person can write about their music/sound, and with this one in particular, about girls looking at guys looking at girls on a screen with more guys and girls looking. Music by Bernard Hermann. Leading man, James Stewart.

"Love Is a Many-Splendored Thing" (1955)

I've long been familiar with the song. So it was interesting to watch the movie it was from. I never would have imagined that it was a movie with such strong ties to Asia, and a few small ties to the Korean War. Undercurrents of questions about mixed race in this story of a love affair. Oscar for music--and music by Alfred Newman, of course--masterfully mixes western and Hollywood music practices with Asian music/sounds--and always the song as the on-going love theme. Only in the last minutes or two of the movie does the song get words. Doesn't come out and pose any answers to the mixed-race-love question, just asks it. If you like romance/love affair movies, it's worth a watch.

"The Bridge on the River Kwai" (1957)

I gave the movie a solid shake--and can tell the movie was done well. The problem is I have personal issues with war movies--realistic war movies. I put the movie on pause and read an only synopsis--yep, this is not a movie I can handle at this time, not even in fast forward.

Given all that--POW whistling "Colonel Bogey" is surreal--which is part of the point.

"Around the World in Eighty Days" (1956)

I can't speak to the adaptation part--partly because I haven't finished reading the book, partly because the part I have read has been so long ago, I remember very little of it. 4 1/2 hour movie--partly due to adapting a novel, partly because they took the opportunity to have mini-travelogues--scenery, music, and culture snapshots of their travels and encounters. The movie seems well-done to me. Cinematography--seems the movie--especially the opening shots were meant for curved projection screen. I didn't notice that so much as the movie went on, but seeing what normally would be straight lines (columns, walls) curve into the center was slightly disconcerting. Tricky camera shots with a bull, and few "hmm, interesting place to mount a camera" shots, and beautiful scenery, of course. Music--Very overture-ish all the way through--when it wasn't doing "local color". Don't get me wrong, it was well-done--it was just very present. The credits: What a fun way to do credits! That was nice. I also hadn't realized there were so many cameo appearances--mostly because I didn't know most of the celebrities. I caught a couple--Victor McLaglen (though, I had to look up his name--"guy from 'The Informer'"), Frank Sinatra--but there were a bunch. A person in the know could play a regular "I spy" with this film--they'd have lots of fun surprises. Color film--and fun to watch in color at that.

"Somebody Up There Likes Me" (1956)

Turns out to be a boxing movie. After some of my previous "I'm not crazy about this" experiences with previous boxing movies, I was skeptical about this one. Turns out, this one was actually quite good. About a boxer named Rocky Graziano. Good movie. And more going on than just "Can he win the top championship?" and the other story line ain't love/romance--which is also a nice change (that that there aren't smidges of that too; after all, it's a "biopic"). Movie starts and end with a Perry Como song--only music forefronted; Not sure about the rest--which means it was either skillfully invisible, or wasn't there. I suspect it's the first one. Yeah, I'd recommend this--I'd even watch it again--and for me about a boxing movie, that's saying something. Paul Newman starts as Rocky. Black and white picture.

Maybe cinematography Oscar for all the punches at the camera/fight close-ups???

"All That Heaven Allows" (1955)

Rock Hudson. Challenges 50s ideas. Set in it's own present day. Good visual symbolic/symbolic inclusions . Tie ins to Thoreau's Walden. Netflix description also clued into the use of "expressionistic colors"--yep. Early parts of the movie used Chopin preludes--a nice ambiguous, melancholy mirror to what was going on. No Chopin in the middle and later parts of the movie. And the mill/house? I want live in that.  Some obvious but clear use of lighting--the darkly lit scene in the conversation between mother and son, for example.

"The King's Speech" (2010)

Very well done; captivating to watch. Definitely a movie I wouldn't mind rewatching.

"To Catch a Thief" (1955)

Alfred Hitchcock.  Cary Grant.  Grace Kelly.  There's a reason Hitchcock is so well known--if the action slows down or a scene needs to be slow, he gives you subtle things to look at.  THAT's the way it should be done.  And at least some of the shots that likely contributed to the cinematography Oscar is likely the same shots that reminded me of visiting the Incredidome at Worlds of Fun--wheee-uuu!!!  Oh, and nice image/romance scene splicing.  Yeah, and nice intriguing touches with some of the music/sound.  Well done.  Hitchcock's scene of significance? (aka his appearance)  I spotted (at least I think I did), but I didn't figure it out.

"Picnic" (1955)

Set in then present day.  Slow pacing--at least compared to my tastes.  1950s romance issues, that is, "Is it better to be pretty and dumb?  or smart and not-so pretty?" in a context of getting a boy/getting married before you become an old-maid.  I stopped watching after 40 minutes.

"The High and Mighty" (1954)

The movie introduction called this the first disaster film (movie about a disaster, not a movie that was a disaster). John Wayne. Proof of the power of a simple yet catchy melody motif. Interesting enough movie to watch. Interesting enough. Did I mention the melody was catchy? The intro said that later the melody was made into a radio? song. I can see why. Because it's pretty and it's catchy. :)

"The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian" (2008)

I sent for this movie as a Christmas break treat. :D Very much enjoyed it. Just what was needed. Filmed in 4 countries. I enjoyed it. I liked it. I can repeat that a few more times, if you like. I'm a sucker for C. S. Lewis's Chronicles of Narnia. :)

"Carousel" (1956)

Rodgers and Hammerstein musical. Very nice dance numbers. Cock-a-may-mie ideas about how to respond to domestic violence--uhm, yeah. This is the musical with the song "When you walk through a storm, hold your head up high".

"Meshes of the Afternoon" (1943)

Sound (mostly) not from within film; black and white. My book calls "American avant-garde" and "psychodrama". Yeah, those fit. SPOILER ALERT: Perhaps also schizophrenic encounters herself, or what happens when bad dreams come to life. And, may I say, when a knife falls by itself out of a loaf of bread from an odd angle, that that's some bit of foreshadowing/omen.

"Call Me Madam" (1953)

First, a clarification: I don't see any fault with the singing, dancing, plot of this musical. If you enjoy the dance sequences in musicals, this are just fine. The leading lady, Ethel Merman, I'm sure is quite well known and in fine form. I did enjoy George Sanders singing, Donald O'Connor's singing and dancing and the sets. However: There's only one way I can think to explain the "However" part. In theater, I remember being taught when you are directing comedy, if you try to be funny, then often you take away the humor. To get the humor out, often you can't do it deliberately. The situation or line is funny enough as is without you Trying to be funny. This concept is my "however" to the movie--they're "trying to be funny"; only I'm not talking about the musical's light-hearted moments. They're "trying to do a musical"--it's like they're trying too hard. It's an Irving Berlin musical--which some how seems to be out of place--or they're trying too hard. Maybe trying to keep "what has always worked in the past" going after a point when things needed to change. Again, other than this between-the-lines quality, I have no fault with the movie. Okay, maybe I didn't quite care for Ethel Merman's vocal qualities--a little hard line for my taste--but that's likely more a personal preference than any fault. Cute story, otherwise--maybe make a good high school musical.