Really depressing to think about all the films I have watched that David Cronenberg didnāt direct. Pretty stupid when you think about it.
Dawn of the Dead (1978)
Shrug. I had my fears that I wasnāt going to necessarily love this one, given that I liked Night of the Living Dead but definitely felt that my reaction was noticeably less enthusiastic than its reputation would lead me to expect. Unfortunately, I spent much of this watch doing a couple of things: (1) trying to talk myself into this movie; and (2) thinking, āman, I think maybe Iād rather just be rewatching Night of the Living Dead, that was definitely better than this one. I should probably upgrade my opinion of that one.ā
This is fine; itās not bad. I very much liked the way the movie started, and some scenes landed well along the way, but there were too many slow patches of the movie for me to be all that complimentary of it.
3/5
I like Day Of The Dead more than Dawn
ducks
I enjoyed the Zack Snyder remake of Dawn
also ducks
Iām not usually a big fan of āitās bad on purpose !ā arguments, but in this specific case I think itās pretty clear that the fact that living in a mall is kinda boring is very much (one of) the point(s) of the movieā¦ so even though itās hard to not get bored during the middle act this only elevates the movie in my opinion ā¦
reminds me of the great Chantal Akerman quote
When people are enjoying a film they say āI didnāt see the time go byāā¦ but I think that when time flies and you donāt see time passing by you are robbed of an hour and a half or two hours of your life. Because all you have in life is time. With my films youāre aware of every second passing through your body
High school me loved it, one of the few movies Iāve seen multiple times in a theater.
Iāve never seen a Zach Snyder film. Odd for a director so famous but just looked at his filmography and I guess it makes sense Iāve never seen one.
Not that weird. Day Rocks. Long live Bub!
This is not making me more excited to watch Heavenās Gate.
The original DVD had a pandemic breakout piece on it that was hilarious because of all the cameos and name drops of a lot of people I worked with. Iām not into that kind of movie at all, but it ended up being a fun title.
Its actually regarded pretty universally as a pretty good remake. It certainly removes a lot of the slow ploddigness of the original that LKJ didnt like.
I was so pleasantly surprised by The Killing that I decided to follow it up with Kubrickās Paths of Glory (1957). Another tight 85 minute or so movie, and this one was excellent as well. I like Ebertās description:
The film, made in 1957, is typical of Kubrickās earlier work in being short (84 minutes), tight, told with an economy approaching terseness.
An economy approaching terseness: exactly right. I went into the movie thinking that it was a war (anti-war?) movie, but it was as much of a courtroom drama as a war movie imo. What Iām having trouble articulating is why I liked this so much. None of the individual pieces (acting, story, imagery) stood out as being exceptional, but the straightforward final product just cooked.
I do have to mention Tim Carey who, as in The Killing, gave an absolute bonkers performance. In both cases, it was the kind of performance that led me to think, āI think this person is probably legitimately insane in real life.ā And I think thatās actually true? (He was apparently Coppolaās first choice for Luca Brasi in The Godfather, and then Don Fanucci in part 2. On Blank Checkās The Killing episode, they told a story about how he showed up to the rehearsal with a gun loaded with blanks, and then just started shooting up the room.)
Anyway, now Iām not sure where to go next with Kubrick. Looking at his portfolio chronologically, I donāt have any desire to rewatch Spartacus (even though I barely remember it) and I have even less desire to watch Lolita***. I just rewatched Dr. Strangelove this summer, so that would mean 2001 is next. And maybe I should try that again, even though it really didnāt work for me the first time. Or maybe Iāll just jump to Barry Lyndon, which would be the only remaining one I havenāt seen.
***Funny Letterboxd comment on Lolita:
This asshole ruined it for anyone who wanted to name their kid āHumbert Humbertā
Letās get LKJ to watch Jeanne Dielman if he hasnāt.
Itās on the list.
You should watch the moon landing next
Completely random, but I am repeatedly shocked when Iām reminded that no one has walked on the moon during my lifetime. (12 men total, last in December 1972.)
The biggest reason I definitely intend to watch this is that I saw someone compare Perfect Days to it. I was going to say that āitās actually more awesome because of its boring parts,ā the same defense people trot out in defense of boring-ass Boyhood, has probably never resonated with me in any instance. However, Perfect Days is by all means a very slow-moving film where basically nothing happens, and I thought it was absolutely excellent. I never felt bored by it because I was stunned by how beautiful it was the whole time, but surely some people would call it dull, and I in turn would trot out the damn Boyhood defense on its behalf. Granted that it doesnāt have Jeanne Dielmanās runtime, but if that movie is actually beautiful on anywhere near the Perfect Days level, Iāve gotta see it.
In the meantime, everyone who has Hulu and has skipped Perfect Days should get a reminder that itās absolutely a film to watch. Unfortunate that it ran into Zone of Interest this past year; in many years I expect it would have won Best International Feature (and it would have had my vote for sure even given the competition).
