Hah, ok, I'll allow it! :) yes, you're absolutely right.

But now I kind of have less respect than I did before for the movie, which bums me out a bit.

haha, I liked Igby Goes Down, even own the DVD, been awhile since I've seen it, might have to rewatch it soon. Some damn good actors in that. Jeff Goldblum, Bill Pullman, Jared Harris.

"Izbi" is a term for highly evolved beings from the future who communicate with us psychically. I'm pretty sure I read it in David Wilcock's The Synchronicity Key and a woman I know in my building on disability who experiences psychic psychosoma in her body mentioned it last week

White Bird in a Blizzard.

Not one I'm rushing to re-watch, but would again if nothing else on. Has a good plot twist at the end, in my opinion.

Following it up with Bill and Ted's Bogus Journey, which I'll forever find underrated by the masses.

The Exorcist - First time seeing it! I've put off seeing it for years because horror is really not my thing (tho recently I've been trying to change that) and to be honest the subject matter actually scares the shit of me. With that said it is an extraordinarily well made film. Very short in gimmicks and actually had depth to it. Honestly a little surprised by how good it was. The "scary" scenes weren't so much scary as they were intense on a psychological level. Pleasantly surprised and I'm glad I finally sat down to watch this one.

It is a great film, although the more infamous scenes have actually become its weakest. The most effective scenes for me are mainly those that involve Father Karras rather than Regan.

Watched last night



Blue Jasmine

One of Woody Allen's best and bravest late-period films. It can't be easy making a film in which the lead character is so totally unsympathetic.

I agree. Some of the better moments even reminded me a little of Bergman.

i missed replying to this and yes-- "cute".his forays into europe are always from a rich white american perspective-- maybe under the influence of henry james or something? but it's always that---never henry miller, starving. hence the particular look, yes.

why less respect? someone had to bring that story to the screen and salingers only public activity in his late days was filing copyright lawsuits. plus, what was transgressive in the 50s is nothing today and as a period piece it would be a bit shit. eg cant be complaining that people are"flitty". so it was really a great way to do all that---have the older brother instead of the rommate fuck the girl, the mental illness goes to the dad instead of the mom, etc. i think it was awesome if anything precisely for that.

It's been a long, long time since I last saw the Igby, so I should definitely rewatch. But, I actually kind of thought I was seeing Catcher parallels because I wanted to see them. Between the ages of about 13 and 26, I viewed the world through very Salinger-colored glasses. I remember calling my (sometimes haughty, academic, lit professor) mother and telling her about Igby after I'd seen it — recommending it as a cinematic ode to Catcher. She dismissed it, and thought it was a sneering and cynical, soulless Hollywood product. Almost the antithesis of Catcher, which she tends to see as a story about angelic beauty and warmth. So ... I thought it was just me, that I was projecting Holdenisms onto Igby.

To hear you say that it's an obvious adaptation in everything but name makes me think less of it as its own creature. But, like I said, I don't know how it holds up. Maybe it stands on its own two feet. But if it's really such an obvious and unrepentant theft of a book that I love so much, then I think it's pretty natural for me to be a bit put off.

But I don't know! I really want to watch it again now, and see if it works or doesn't work. So I'll refrain from spitting venom on the movie until I have time to re-evaluate it with your points in mind. Fair?

Also... I'm not sure I agree that it needed to be brought to the screen. In fact, I guess I've always felt that it was unadaptable. Sacred ground, maybe. I'm biased as hell, because my family is ... Jesus... honestly, kind of like a real-life Glads family at times, and most of us feel deep and profound connections to Salinger. But we're all haughty academics and eggheads, so... y'know... we're full of shit. Seriously. Not being sarcastic.

I think you're right that there needs to be a Holden Caulfield of cinema, though. But I think other films had already managed to tastefully bring the character to the big screen before Igby. The Graduate, Ordinary People, hell... even Rushmore, to some warped and cartoonish degree.

I don't know. I guess what you said about it being just shy of plagiarism made me think ... well, this:

one of my wife's faves. watched it this weekend. disney used to make intelligent movies for the family.....

no, no... dude. no. igby is a good movie. at least on first view, i was impressed and saw the obvious connection to catcher in the rye. in fact i plan to see it again soon.

to your mom, with respect, i'd suggest she idealizes holden. holden has a nice side and loves his little sister, sure.

but holden is also an asshole. a little fuck. he looks down on people-- particularly those of the lower classes. he's a shit to his friends. he's being kicked out of school not because he's too pure but because he's fucking lazy. by today's standards, he's also a homophobe. he's a fucking spoiled brat who doesn't want to grow up-- he wants to be taken care of forever.

but maladjusted in the early 2000s has to be different from 1950. adventures and strange experiences have to change. who the fuck goes to prostitutes anymore?

some reviewer i saw last night after i wrote this called it "holden on crack" or something, and-- yes. right. the 90s had crack (and heroin). worst thing holden could do without going into harlem (he was never gonna go) was get shitfaced.

i think igby captured the spirit and situations of the original book, meaning, "here's a rich white miserable maladjusted teenager", while making it a contemporary story. i'm sorry if other people can't appreciate that or see value in commercial hollywood productions, but i do.

film adaptations of novels usually have to make a ton of compromises because obvious reasons of time, format, medium, etc. so people complain "that wasn't my novel." novel gets better adapted to tv series.

so, catcher is a short novel, needs to be made visual instead of a long verbal rant (i fucking hated when that dude talks to the camera in that music movie, what's it called, the author is nick something, and the actor was in say anything, jack black was in it too, and the glorious zeta... but stfu and show me somthing, movie-- not just yap yap yap).

the only one who can do a long monologue in film was spalding gray. grey? gray? that guy. yeah.

so yeah the spirit of the thing is made flesh (long live the new flesh) and the story gets updated. applause, from me. igby goes the fuck down in history.

btw, speaking of books and teenage movies-- cruel intentions is a more straightforward adaptation of that glorious novel les liaisons dangereuses but made for teenagers instead of old perverts. nothing to do with post-revolutionary france, and rhetorical flourishes, and letter exchanges, but bravo because the little movie works-- as a movie and a cautionary tale for naive teens.

I hated Catcher in the Rye the two times I read, it. i found it the very boring ansgty troubles of a sefl-important and deadly dull trust fund asshole.

well, yes, but he had a hormone problem. the twinky defense!

Train to Busan. Korean zombies. Yeah, does have about the cutest little 7 year old ever in it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pyWuHv2-Abk

You're talking about High Fidelity. And I loved that movie. Least I did when I was young and dumb. Probably wouldn't now.

I do like Say Anything though.

Still love High Fidelity, book and movie.

Still love Cruel Intentions too haha.

Pasolini's Medea. Truly something but I am really conflicted about it. It really tries my patience at points even though I love slow burns. Some shots were absolutely gorgeous but others were so amateurish. Will have to keep marinating at this one. For now I admire the atmosphere and what he was going after with it but I think it warrants a re watch.

Anatomy of a Murder. This was a blind pick up from the library and it was an incredible court room film. The Duke Ellington score, an on fire Jimmy Stewart and an equally great George C Scott. The 2 hrs 40 min went by in a breeze. Pretty ballsy shit for 1959. It really takes you and makes you question everything the film throws at you. I don't want to ruin the way the plot moves for anyone but I highly recommend this one for any fans of law based films or even taboo-pushers.

I love Anatomy of a Murder!! Good pick man! Classic!

Yeah it was fucking good. The judge started getting on my nerves because I thought his performance was hindering on some of those scenes. Come to find out he's the judge that called out McCarthey!

yes! high fidelity! fucking, annoying. yapyapyapyapyapyapyapyap--to the camera. ugh. SHUT UP DUDE.

say anything is better. speaking of which-- i have the grifters and grosse point blank on the way.


pasolini is great but can often put me to sleep. the look of that movie is awesome though-- not sure what you mean by amateurish?

for a different medea, check out the lars von trier version if you can find it. it's slightly bizarre and i really liked it. bad dvd transfer from a 16mm print? but the great visual language comes through regardless.