I think he particularly likes the muscular Austrian male lead.
(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 11:50, archived)
(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 11:52, archived)
But it is a good film. It just doesn't stand up to repeated watching.
(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 11:53, archived)
and it stands up to repeated watching just fine I'll have you know. But then I suppose that depends on whether you like it in the first place.
(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 11:57, archived)
I've only seen it a couple of times and I wouldn't mind seeing it again, but I get what Bud's saying here. It just doesn't have the same raw entertainment factor of technically much worse films like Raiders of the Lost Ark or Ghostbusters. I could watch those every year.
(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 12:09, archived)
Must confess I didn't like it much at all.
(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 12:23, archived)
but that's not necessarily a bad thing. It's hardly a chick flick.
Films that are both good, AND I could watch over and over include:
Brazil
Goodfellas
The Shining
(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 12:28, archived)
The other two, no.
Brazil is silly. The first time I saw it I thought it was really good. The second time I saw it, I sat cringing throughout it.
This is the difference made by ten years between viewings.
(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 12:31, archived)
and yes, it is a bit silly. Well that's Terry Gilliam for you, Monty Python's darker side. I was torn between that and Twelve Monkeys, which is certainly more professionally produced but lacks the quirky visualisation element that I quite enjoy.
What's wrong with Goodfellas?
(I was reminded of it by a picture in a charity shop window the other day - one dog looks one way, the other dog looks the other way)
(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 12:35, archived)
However still better than Chicago Town
(, Wed 27 Aug 2008, 12:38, archived)