Films you've seen lately

[jayne lee wilson]

Having a bit of a Jarman binge at the Moment. Jubilee last night, and before than the Eisenstein delowering in Mexico. I missed out on Vol. 1 of the BFI Blu-ray edition but Vol. 2 was delivered yesterday. I might give The Tempest a viewing tomorrow.

Apt choice for the Stormy Weather....

[Bryn]

Apt choice for the Stormy Weather....

Still awaiting a viewing. However, I am now eager to watch the full 108' 28" version of the Ken Russell/Derek Jarman/PMD The Devils (fairly low definition with prominent Spanish subtitles}.

[jayne lee wilson]

Still awaiting a viewing. However, I am now eager to watch the full 108' 28" version of the Ken Russell/Derek Jarman/PMD The Devils (fairly low definition with prominent Spanish subtitles}.

Never seen The Tempest before? Then you'll get the ref (much) later....
(It isn't about Shakespeare...)

[Bryn]

Never seen The Tempest before? Then you'll get the ref (much) later....
(It isn't about Shakespeare...)

Far from it. I first saw it In Brixton, back in the early 1980s. I have had the DVD for a decade or so, just not watched it for a while. Still kicking myself for missing out on Vol. 1 of the BFI Blu-ray box. I just hope they get round to re-issuing it. I guess they severely underestimated demand.

[jayne lee wilson]

I saw it at Norwich Cinema City on its release, with no idea what to expect.........

Jarman-Prospero certainly cast a spell on me...

[Bryn]

I saw it at Norwich Cinema City on its release, with no idea what to expect.........

Jarman-Prospero certainly cast a spell on me...

[jayne lee wilson]

Wonderful Bryn, thankyou ...still looks and feels very fresh....

Shame he didn't do more Shakespeare but then he never repeated himself, and we do have Caravaggio and Edward II, which are fairly Shakespearean (in the best, livid, living sense) themselves...

[kernelbogey]

Apollo 11 at the cinema

I had recently gorged on the BBC's offering on the moon landing - a 90 minute film, different from the above, and six 40-minute films.

This ninety minute film is beautiful - lots of original NASA footage, some of it not in the BBC films above, and including colour from the moon's surface. It is edited in a brisk manner, taking us in 90 minutes from early preparations to splash down, with astronauts' global tour run under the final credits. So it never sags for a minute.

Peter Bradshaw in the Guardian gave it five stars, and I agree. Perhaps hard to catch now, as it was released a few weeks back. But if you have admiration and nostalgia for this adventure, this is the one to see.

This may seem obvious to say - and I am mildly embarassed to recognise how I took it in my stride as a young man in 1969 - but the staggering detail of the technological achievement of putting two men on the moon takes one's breath away, even now.

[Serial_Apologist]

Apollo 11 at the cinema

I had recently gorged on the BBC's offering on the moon landing - a 90 minute film, different from the above, and six 40-minute films.

This ninety minute film is beautiful - lots of original NASA footage, some of it not in the BBC films above, and including colour from the moon's surface. It is edited in a brisk manner, taking us in 90 minutes from early preparations to splash down, with astronauts' global tour run under the final credits. So it never sags for a minute.

Peter Bradshaw in the Guardian gave it five stars, and I agree. Perhaps hard to catch now, as it was released a few weeks back. But if you have admiration and nostalgia for this adventure, this is the one to see.

This may seem obvious to say - and I am mildly embarassed to recognise how I took it in my stride as a young man in 1969 - but the staggering detail of the technological achievement of putting two men on the moon takes one's breath away, even now.

But, is that colour real? I admit to being ignorant, but I always thought that in order to have "colour" you had to have an atmosphere - or at least one such as Earth's?

[Richard Barrett]

But, is that colour real? I admit to being ignorant, but I always thought that in order to have "colour" you had to have an atmosphere - or at least one such as Earth's?

Ummm... where do you get that idea from?

[Serial_Apologist]

Ummm... where do you get that idea from?

Not sure...

[kernelbogey]

SA, the 'not real' challenge here is a bit risky, as the person who asked Buzz Aldrin if they'd really been to the moon or shot the whole thing in the Arizona desert found out. Aldrin decked him!

[Belgrove]

Quentin Tarantino's latest, 'Once Upon a Time... in Hollywood' follows the plan of his previous three films, a slow, self-referencing and episodic build-up; culminating in gratuitous, bloody, comic-book violence. But this time he's produced a masterpiece. Set in the Hollywood of 1969, it episodically follows the fading movie/TV star Rick Dalton (played by Leonardo DiCaprio in what could be an award winning performance) and his stunt-man double and odd-job man Cliff Booth (Brad Pitt, playing a likeable laid back charmer/tough-guy). Although rambling and picaresque, it's highly structured using different movie narrative techniques within and across the episodes, most prominent of which is the Western (even the title references Leone). These episodes touch or intersect upon members of the Manson clan, and we know how the film will end insofar as Rick lives next door to Sharon Tate (played by the luminously beautiful Margot Robbie). The countdown to that fateful night borrows from the climax of Goodfella's, and is even more intense. But it's a Tarantino film, so one shouldn't necessarily expect the expected.

It looks gorgeous, shot in 35mm (see it on a big screen) in saturated sun-drenched colour by day and luminous neon by night. The detail is staggering, and the soundtrack of popular music of the (slightly dislodged) time is skilfully integrated into the narrative. Some of the tracking camera shots take the breath away. As ever with Tarantino's films there is much to offend and take exception too if you are that way inclined, but also much to enjoy and admire. Stick around for the credits to role.

[Dave2002]

But, is that colour real? I admit to being ignorant, but I always thought that in order to have "colour" you had to have an atmosphere - or at least one such as Earth's?

I have come across some strange ideas about colour, particularly in relation to astronomy.
Sometimes false colour images are generated with the colours representing different attributes, and derived from a multiplicity of sensors. However, one statement which I have heard is that one can’t see colours when looking at the sky through an astronomical telescope. I would say this is complete rubbish.

I have a fairly simple telescope - not a great one - and I have seen quite a number of the fancy pictures from NASA and similar organisations. One night I set my telescope up and started looking at stars - and indeed most look more or less like white spots. I pointed it in the direction of Orion, and started to just “move around”, and saw more of the same ... until I came across some red and bluish patches, and also a dark shape, which I eventually identified as the Horsehead Nebula. So my eyes with my optical telescope most definitely were able to see colours. I have no idea why some people are suggesting this isn’t possible. it is the case that much of the sky does not appear very colourful, at least with a small aperture scope with limited magnification, but there are regions which show colour.

[vinteuil]

.

... Almodóvar's Pain and Glory. Loved it. Banderas magnificent. A generous love-letter to films and film-making, and a lesson in pain and forgiveness and memory. Gorgeous use of colour and framing.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pain_and_Glory

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ANBz73hVbtU.


.