I had not, but because of your post I checked it out. Good flick.
Weird, bizarre, absurd? I'm not sure. It's about a serial killing tire … sort of.
This was pretty cool.
Carol - Todd Haynes (2015)
Once again does Haynes show his affection for the fifties and for director Douglas Sirk, even though this is not a remake as Far from Heaven, this it is a pastis to that time.
The story is about society, here represented by ex-husband, that does not allow love, here portrayed as lust. Carol, mediocre acted by Cate Blanchett, is torn between the sexual attraction to a young girl and the motherly love for her daughter.
I've seen cate Blanchett a lot better in other movies, as an example Blue Jasmine. She is just fantastic in that one. Here, I expect more fra an actress in her league.
I think the movie is supposed to be a tragedy, but some women behind me in the cinema kept laughing, so I guess it's not obvious how this movie is viewed.
To me it seems so outdated. What is so remarkable about two female falling in love with each other? Nada.
I think this could have been a better story if it was not so oldfashioned and placed in a other planet where most of us live.
The movie also deals little with the class perspective; it is obvious that a love affair between an upperclass dame and a clerk never would work - this is not a point in this movie. What breaks the love/lust affair is Carols motherly feelings for her daughter. This without these values being debated.
Cinematicaly? It's a grainy movie, at least the copy I watched. It tries to be in the spirit of the fifties, and it is not unpleasant to watch - but on the other side, it does not bring anything new to cinema.
I still think that the best remake and homage to Sirk is done by Rainer Werner Fassbinder in his Fear eats the soul.
^I felt like Carol was all style, no substance (I still liked it a lot, especially among the Oscar season films). When seen on a big screen, the cinematography is quite beautiful, and the whole movie is really a study in and depiction of beauty. Contentwise I pretty much agree with you. I watched Blue is the Warmest Color a few weeks after Carol and found it way more interesting.
To me is Blue is the warmest colour the best gay movie I've seen so far. That is both the realism in the acting and the fact that the movie is set in present time, showing the diversity and the fluidness of sexual attraction, questioning the whole concept of homosexuality and thus on a deeper level the concept of identity - and the confusion that follows when a person starts behaving according to what they feels, not what they're supposed to feel. It takes in to account both the personal, psychological sides of suppression, and the society's reaction to this love affair.
Carol is, I agree, more of a study in the style from the fifties, (and I'm not that happy with this study) than a story about lesbians and gays present challenges. It's like Brokeback Mountain; sentimental and outdated and depicts a sort of gayness that belongs to the past. It says little about sexuality and little about relationships, but confirms a traditional gender and relationship stereotypes.
To me, the most interesting and challenging questions to day in this field is raised by the transsexual/transgender people; they are questioning what is gender and thus what is a human being.
I think that Cate Blanchett has a restricted way of acting in this movie, that she is too calculating and that her distant approach is making her part cold and detached. Even though the focus in the movie is on Carol, Rooney Mara has an other way of acting and I can sympathize more with her struggle and vulnerability. She does a better job than Cate in this movie, but then again her part is showing more development and she is given more to work with in the playwright; she is the one who goes through the longest journey of the two.
Night and the city - Jules Dassin (1950)
This film noir-ish beauty on the impossibility to climb out of your social class and that the american dream is actually a nightmare, uses close-ups and dramatic light to emphasize the leads impossible aspiration; get rich at any cost. The acting is so and so, but typical for the time.
The Asphalt Jungle - John Huston (1950)
What makes this heist movie is the very good act from Sterling Hayden, he's sharp and understated in his bitterness.
The story is told in a straight forward way, but I don't fancy the direction. The mise en scene is messy and the photos are often filled with too many details. I get bored with all the under angled shoots. Can say I ever have watched a John Huston movie that I really enjoyed. Compared to the Jules Dassin from yesterday, this is miles apart.
The Sixth Sense - M. Night Shyamalan (1999)
In this movie mr M. has a much better grip on the guilt complex than in Signs. Bruce Willies is not a bad actor, but he is certainly not a good one.
The filming is good (even if it is a bit boring and generic). The cutting is sometimes a bit confusing, but that can be just me.
House of Cards - James Foley (2013 - 2015)
I'm not a series-man, but started to see this today, and the three first episodes is quite interesting, most of all because the story, and not actually the cinematics. But I like the metaperspective when Frank speaks to us, which is more of a dramaturgical twist than anything else. He is just delicious cynical that man.