วีดีโอ

West Country Girl is about PJ Harvey, I think... superb!

Genialna płyta - moje absolutne top 5 - na równi z "wildhoney" Tiamat, zapomniana , bo zbyt chrześcijańska .....

🖤🖤🖤

YEAH EXACTLY!

The major difference of G1 & G2 is that Russell was really mindful of the script. He wasn’t just an actor, he wasn’t just coming in like a Hollywood type ego. Russell genuinely cared about making a good movie. Having a cohesive narrative and story. He put the reigns on Ridley Scott. Ridley is a very brave, very driven and focused filmmaker. On a round table talk with other directors. Ridley admitted that movies like the Martian with huge sets etc. were not a problem for him. Ridley has crews, friends and all kinds of Hollywood resources. In a way that’s what makes him an effective filmmaker. But when Ridley doubles down on production, on story or whatever. He has his people. But most of his later movies have been nothing but Ridley 100%. But working with Russell, Russell cares, Russell’s educated. A lot of the minutiae that give Gladiator it’s universal appeal (spirituality…the little figures that represent his son and wife that he prays to), the demeanor (the whole grabbing dust from the ground like a farmer, him missing his wife, and wanting to see her in the afterlife), that whole storyline and even certain scenes. Like when he finds the bodies of his wie and son (going full snot is what Russell called it). Russell was a full collaborator. Even the whole strength and honor bit. A lot of that was Russell investing himself in the story, the script and the production. Gladiator 2, feels like Ridley unhinged. I’m not saying there wasn’t any kind of interaction or collaboration. Ridley put so many things on screen in G2 it’s exhausting and even goes above and beyond that make the movie magic. Which seems like too much and you lose the suspended belief…G2 felt like it was too eager to please. G1, felt like an ode to a barbaric era. And Maximus was the contemporary center. “Are you not entertained”, or even when Proximo (Oliver Reed) speaks to Maximus and Maximus figures out he was a Gladiator. And they speak of the nuisances of that world, live and death, performance behind gladiator executions; you believe it. Maximus tired of Rome, of that world. He doesn’t care. But hadn’t he loved Marcus Aurelius and if he hadn’t asked Maximus to help him transition into a new world order. Maximus’ revenge is not just revenge but its true to the service that Marcus Aurelius instilled in Maximus. When he adopted him as his own (Russell says this here in his own admission) military general. It made Maximus feel responsible and it makes the audience care for Maximus and his fate. And as an audience we understand Maximus and his motive and that’s what drives the movie. And that’s how Russell Crowe won the Oscar. G2, Russell could have easily been collaborator just to keep that tone, those nuisances in G2. Instead it’s just a spectacle the very opposite of what G1 was. I mean with all the movie geeks asking him about G2 lately and him saying “he should have gotten paid for all the times he’s been forced to answer G2 questions, lol. G2 assumes too much and a lot of the actions moving along feels like a plot hole. Lucius devotion to Rome etc…a lot of G2 doesn’t make sense, lol. And Ridley I doubt you’ll ever read this. Yes, the Rhinos sequence was a scrapped G1 sequence and well sure. I get it now you get the chance to do it. But just because you can do it, it doesn’t mean it should be done. And just like the original script talks about commercialism (gladiators promoting olive oil etc), and the whole thing about gladiator chariots being compared to Ferrari’s. Russell put the breaks on a lof of the ridiculousness. This time there was no narrative voice or perspective that Russell brought to the genius that is Gladiator…c’mon now. Sharks in the coliseum? Lucilla’s execution? Yes it’s a movie yes it’s entertaining but you cheapened things Ridley. Gladiator 2 feels less special, feels bloated and Denzel fighting Luscius? At that point I walked out of the theater. I didn’t like Martin Scorsese’s Flowers because its never explained how the Indians became rich. You see it. But you dont understand it. The Osage Indians tried to be as legitimate as possible. So they bought lands as possessed land deeds to make sure they dont lose the lands they had originally been kicked out of. But the Oil boom, made them rich. That little amount of context would have won Martin Scorsese an Oscar. He did try though the last scene with the radio show narrating the ending but it would have worked better in the beginning. That’s what’s wrong with G2 all the actions and motives are out of context. And while the audience is taken out of context G2 gets more and more ridiculous and less believable and it becomes apparent for what it is a cash grab. No respect for what made the Gladiator special, for what it built. Even how the beginning of Luscius journey mirrors that of his dad…why? His mom becoming estranged from him? Negating the sacrifice Maximus did….yeah, G2 is plain horrible.

Carpenter"s recall of everything is phenomenal

I was watching this with commentary but I had to stop the commentary half-way through cause I was getting so engrossed with everyones performance lmao. I cut them loose!

Man, what a great film this is. I remember it so well, 20 some years later.

Carpenter seems like a very nice dude. He keeps complementing people in a very real way.

dawaj całość pan

Hope Everyone is seeing The BEAT tour. Beyond words on how awesome it is.

Breathtaking documentary. Thank you so much for posting it.

For an alternative opinion, my review of a few years ago " Saw THE THIRD MAN yesterday for only the second time. Last viewing was maybe 35 years ago. For those of you who have not seen the film here is Wiki's synopsis--" The Third Man is a 1949 British film noir directed by Carol Reed, written by Graham Greene, and starring Joseph Cotten, Alida Valli, Orson Welles, and Trevor Howard. The film is set in post-World War II Vienna. It centers on Holly Martins (Cotten) an American who is given a job in Vienna by his friend Harry Lime (Welles) but when Holly arrives in Vienna he gets the news that Lime is dead. Martins then meets with Lime's acquaintances in an attempt to investigate what he considers a suspicious death. This is quite a famous film and has received many accolades, including in 1999, the British Film Institute voting The Third Man the greatest British film of all time. In 2017 a poll of 150 actors, directors, writers, producers and critics for Time Out magazine saw it ranked the second best British movie ever. On this film noir site it is almost universally praised. There's no denying the film takes you on an unforgettable trip. The Green story is complex, really making one think about the three main characters. Where do our sympathies lay--with any of them, or none? The acting is uniformly excellent and the dialog is very well written. High contrast cinematography by Robert Krasker on location in post war Vienna is outstanding, with of close-ups, mysterious glistening streets, ubiquitous shadows and intricate sewer labyrinths. This brings me to the two problematic issues. The direction and the soundtrack. IMO the distorted Dutch angle compositions are overdone. I realize they give emphasis to a cynical, uneasy post war Vienna, but when there's so many they lose their potency. IMO Welles handled these off kilter camera angles to better advantage than Reed, whom I think was obviously influenced by Orson. And yet there's no denying that The Third Man is a visual treat. The music. Aaah....the famous zither soundtrack by Anton Karas which eventually became a best seller in both England and America. It is certainly an attention grabber in the film, too much so. It is disconcerting at times and way too protruding in two instances when the volume is jacked up. And yet, when the music returns in the truly wonderful last scene, it sounds just about perfect. (And thank heaven Greene relented to Reed and didn't use his preferred happy ending) Don't get me wrong. There is an unmistakable director's stamp on this movie and that I'm always in favor of. Visually it is striking, but is it everything and the kitchen sink striking? Here is a quote from the legendary American critic Manny Farber. "But it bears the usual foreign trademarks (pretentious camera, motorless design, self-conscious involvement with balloon hawker, prostitute, porter, belly dancer, tramp) over-elaborated to the point of being a monsterpiece. It uses such tiresome symbol-images as a door which swings with an irritating rhythm as though if had a will of its own; a tilted camera that leaves you feeling you have seen the film from a fetal position; fiendish composing in Vuillard’s spotty style, so that the screen crawls with patterns, textures, hulking shapes, a figure becoming less important than the moving ladder of shadow passing over it." All this I agree with to some extent, yet the film still stays in my mind. But will it resonate with me a week, a month or a year from now. That I don't know. It reminds me of when I was a kid playing in arcades. There was a game where you rolled a ball and tried to land it in holes that had different scores. If you got a good score you got coupons that you could redeem for gifts. I remember spending a lot of money to get a lot of coupons and excitedly going to redeem them. I would usually get a lighter or a key chain or something like that. I was very excited. Only later, when I got home I realized that I had probably spent $20 to get something worth $2. It was all the intoxicating excitement of the game as it went down. So for now, a few hours after seeing The Third Man, I've got very mixed feelings"

Thank you

Mentirosos

Mój los to moje zatracenie

Kiedyś , gdy byłem małolatem , uważałem to za satyrę. Dziś wiem że dużo w tym prawdy. Niestety...🤯🤯🤯

Russel's voice when he said "And you know that I know, don't you kiddo?" 💕

The world hat caught up to how brilliant a songwriter Nick Cave is now, with a huge gospel band or like this. Chrissie's voice melts me too.

Max cady ,not candy.

I hated ET, stupidest film ever made. I prefer the thing its a better film as gets slot of unnessary hate...its bloody yes, because its realistic in its approach to an alien life form...Alien comes in a big second place on my list..

Martin Ain isn't dead; he lives in TH-cam.

Love he fact Russell still called them Sweden, 🇸🇪

I take great pride in the fact that I supported this excellent film during its original release, and thoroughly enjoyed it.

Love this doco - I've seen it four times, you don't see story telling like this on the screen anymore

I saw John Cale in San Francisco in '80/81. I wound up getting the seat directly in front of him; I was the closest person to him. It was a great show…

he's creepy

zakazana piosenka

John Carpenter,_ is the best horror film director ever.

Everyone loved this movie. Except for a few hundred old ass boomer Alien fans, who were dissapointed that it wasn't a clone of the last few shit movies 😂👍

Me: the only mfer who actually searched for this

This is fantastic but the end commentary makes the real movies ending much more deeper and personal.

The engineers worshipped themselves it's very much influenced by the book of revelation. Men becoming gods flaunting their fall from grace . It's a battle of good and evil the Nadia of the Bible but someone got cold feet and blurred the lines of engagement . We are still left with wondering where we came from . Woke and anti Christian opinions kill this film from reaching it's true end . It's a money spinning franchise now with Ridley sneaking in private jokes and scenes proving how clever he is .

Cale is a legend

Storyline, acting, cinemtography, special effects, musical score, stunts, sets, locations - J.C. and the crew delivered. He makes films seem like so much fun to create.

WELL.....I WISH THE MOVIE WAS PLAYING!😢

Christopher Lee is my favorite actor of all-time. It has changed over the years, but at 53 I have settled on Sir Christopher Lee. I'm still in the process of watching more of his films. I feel like writing about it, but a long way to go. But I have watched all of the Dracula films. I was around 12-years old when I came into these films. They struck fear into my heart. My father would say don't watch them. To me Dracula: Prince of Darkness is the best one of them all. The first one is probably the best however. It's those two though. I have yet to listen to the entire commentary here, but I will, but felt this is the best place to make that comment. Helen--Barbara Shelley was sensational in the movie. She played the two characters. The staking scene might be the best scene of the entire series. She was so good. As a kid seeing this for the first time, I'm with Helen, that was mind job when Dracula turned her. I felt terrible. Lee was great. He'd not say one word in this. He had his reasons. And it worked very well. His animalistic hiss gave him this incredible aura. They are all good. The first one is an all-time classic.

Zbliża się uśmiechnięta polska rudego szwaba😂

Rip Martin you are sorely missed....... Frost changed my life full stop. ....can still remember listening to hell hammer and morbid tales at the same time after a record buying trip.....that was it hooked for life.....thanks TOM G AND ALL FOR YEARS OF EXELLENCE AND BRUTALITY.....CROWEMAN IN THE UK EX GENITAL DEFORMITIES

I was hoping to read the book but It seems it's only a screenplay. Nonetheless just as interesting.

So many negative comments about this commentary track, to dissing John!? What the hell guys just enjoy it.

I love how the pair of them are cracking up over every scene. Not msny atcors have that relationship with the director

got drunk with a bush pilot in Alaska and yeah if there is a modern wild man thats it.

Eloquently spoken, I'm glad with the passing of time these films are still being looked at and studiously discussed.

I’ve never seen a movie have so many scenes that were deleted that actually greatly benefitted the story by leaving them in. Ridley and the editor went absolutely nuts in the decision making there.

Lindelof says he loves not to explain things, and how it’s much better to leave it up to the imagination. While I agree to an extent, he fails to understand that that can be done in the details not the overall plot. Also the complete irony of stating that it’s better to not explain things while he is writing a script for a movie that’s entire basis is explaining elements from another movie.

Habs mir inzwischen mind. 5x angesehen bzw. -gehört. Wird mit den Jahren immer besser. Thank a lot.

It was incredible that a 30-year later remake offered NOTHING over the original, minus the tension and great acting/actors to boot. CGI is not a magic bullet that makes every movie better, even though in theory you should be able to fake more realistic or even scarier monster effects. Audience still can see the difference between location shooting and green screen. I feel that John Carpenter has not received the recognition or credit that he deserves. He not only directed, but also wrote and did the music for a lot of these pioneering films on shoestring budgets that often proceed to be remade (some successfully than others) by big Hollywood productions, and as he reveals here, The Thing though it has horror elements and deservedly so, is really a thriller or psychological film about paranoia...Assault on Precinct 13, Halloween, Escape from New York, Big Trouble in Little China (no way they remake that one now, too much humorless PC pervades our culture these days). They're not just cheap entertainments (though there is nothing wrong with that if you do it right), but had deeper themes and ideas. Nobody does that anymore these days.

This is called a "documentary", but in many ways it's a tone poem to Ellroy's body of work. Like it's main subject, this video is one of a kind and, it's own peculiar and eccentric way, fantastic.

Am looking for the dvd that had the pit and the pendulum along with other movies...a particular movie, two twin red headed girls who were psycotic. Could anyone let me know about it if they know, please?