Day #19 of the 30 Day Film Challenge

[shadowkat]

Day #19 of the 30 Day Film Challenge - a film made by a favorite director or a director you happen to like.

Thank you for all the comments - sorry, I've not been responding. I'm struggling with focusing at the moment and things..well...

Mine is Peter Weir - in case you don't know who directed the film provided below. Weir, an Australian director, is among my favorites. I've seen pretty much all of his films.

Watch on YouTube

Comments

[cactuswatcher]

My knowledge of directors is fairly limited so:

Alfred Hitchcock
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z5jvQwwHQNY

[shadowkat]

When in doubt, pick Hitchcock - always a good fallback route.

[cjlasky7]

From my early adolescence to my late 20s, Woody Allen was my favorite director.

I know that's not a popular sentiment these days, but his movies were a big part of my formative years. I especially liked his late 80s movies, which combined his love of directors like Ingmar Bergman with his particular style of comedy. Crimes and Misdemeanors (1989) is the best of this era, with a superb performance by Martin Landau as a doctor wrestling with his conscience--and wondering whether that battle has any meaning at all.

https://youtu.be/DYrEgEi2XSM

[shadowkat]

I'd agree "Crimes and Misdeamenors" was the best film of that era, and possibly one of his best period - because it is one of the few that isn't about him. It's about something else. Part of the problem with so many of Woody's films - is he puts himself in them - or makes them reflections of his own neurosis. His best films aren't about him at all.

I read all his plays in high school. Or all that had been published by 1984-85. He's an excellent playwrite, by the way. If a wee bit into himself - his plays are often about him too. His better ones - aren't.

Allen may be...a deeply flawed human being, but he also is a great filmmaker and playwrite. People aren't one thing and can't just be defined by their actions, lusts or immoral acts or any of that - no matter how much we want them to be. Too often we want to define others, stick them into a neat little box and put them on a shelf - but you can't do that with people or any complex entity.

Woody's directed some great movies. So too has Roman Polanski. Both are assholes. But that in no way diminishes their art. Any more than Cosby being a rapist means that his comedy wasn't good or interesting. You can be egotistic asshole, a pedofile, a rapist, an anti-semitic, racist, etc - and still a fascinating and remarkable artist. Picasso was an asshole. Not a nice guy, Picasso. But he was an excellent artist.

Also, he's still alive - so there's time for him to redeem himself. Assholes live long so they can redeem themselves.

[cjlasky7]

Exactly: what makes C&M so effective is that Woody's story is off to the side, commenting on the main plot with Landau. Allen gets a lot of solid laughs from Alan Alda, playing what could be considered a nasty parody of himself. That Alda's character "gets the girl" at the end was the perfect sour cherry on top.

There have been a few good Woody Allen movies since the 1990s, but for the most part, his movies have devolved into lazy nostalgia. Personal scandals aside, he's just not very interesting these days.

[shadowkat]

I agree, he kind of lost his mojo or burned out sometime after the 1990s. I haven't fond his films all that memorable since then. And kind of gave up after a certain point. I'd have to say I can't even remember the names of the Allen films I've seen since the 1990s. While I do remember the ones he made in the 20th Century.

Actors love him though - apparently because he's a very good "actor" director. Let's them improve, is flexible, and challenges them. Also he can write great dialogue when he wants to. I actually preferred the dialogue in his plays to Neil Simon's - which got repetitive. Both tended to write mainly about themselves though, except I felt that Allen branched out more. (I read all of Simon's plays in high school too.)

[petzipellepingo]

I'm going with Howard Hawks who directed this little gem and for a more contemporary director I'm going for Michael Mann .

[shadowkat]

I love Howard Hawks, who disliked High Noon so much - that he made two films with John Wayne in direct response to it - El Dorado and Rio Bravo. (Nothing against High Noon, loved that film too.) Haven't seen Only Angels Have Wings - will have to check it out.
It looks like a good movie - Cary Grant and Howard Hawks..

Also, I forgot Michael Mann did Last of the Mohicans - which is among my favorite films.
Mann is an interesting director - very stylistic, and moody.

[petzipellepingo]

"Angels" is worth checking out - different setting (South America), different story (pilots flying out mail in terrible conditions) and interesting casting (Cary Grant as a pilot, Jean Arthur as a vaudeville performer).

Mann studied art in college and it shows in the way he sets things up.

[atpo_onm]

Famous director first:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5_RsHRmIRBY

IMO, this is Eastwood's finest film, and that's saying a lot, seeing the many truly stunning ones he's made over his career. Caution-- not a film to watch if you're depressed or easily triggered into same. It's ultimately a film about salvation, and the heavy costs that all too often come along with that.

Much less famous, but great at her craft, has mostly done TV in recent years. Not many trailers out there for this obscure little gem from her early work:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PH54vnxpOmU

Missed that one? Here's a clip from the one she's most famous for:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_9XGQOUzOlY&list=RD_9XGQOUzOlY&index=15

[shadowkat]

Interesting, my favorite Eastwood film is Unforgiven. But I also appreciate and love the Western Genre.

Million Dollar Baby...is also a good choice - saw it ages ago, but still remember it clearly. Painful film.