Vinyan

[ruthy]

Yes, AH has been a lazy boy in recent years. It's such a shame he turned his back on theatre and on roles like this ('Lion in Winter' also now comes to mind). Where they differ as individuals is that AH had a lot of deeply ingrained self-doubt and serious personal demons which he tried to conquer through drink before eventually realising this was not possible.

Rufus, though also a highly intelligent, sensitive and multi-lateral man, appears to have had his head screwed on from an early age and doesn't take life too seriously. He has a wisdom at 39 that some people never find, often because their head is so far up their own arse they simply can't find it. Maybe he works his demons through at the studio and then leaves them at the door.

[etherealtb]

maxx02 said:

I hope Rufus doesn't decide he loves America and comes to live in the US. To me it seems as if the day AH decided to become a US citizen was the day he stopped acting.

Okay, I'm not sure it is relavent, but would it make you feel any better, I saw an interview with AH years ago where he said he dreamed of becoming an American citizen since he was a little kid. So, unless Rufus has declared similiar leanings, I think he's pretty safe. ;D

[maxx02]

etherealtb said:

Okay, I'm not sure it is relavent, but would it make you feel any better, I saw an interview with AH years ago where he said he dreamed of becoming an American citizen since he was a little kid. So, unless Rufus has declared similiar leanings, I think he's pretty safe. ;D

LOL! I think he's said that often. I know I've read it before.

I wonder if anyone offered Roof the "really big bucks" if he'd sell out-- perhaps for Billy... He seems so resolute. I admire that about him, but I'm practical too and he does have a child now. The temptation would be huge.

[maxx02]

Well I've just watched Calvaire and I think it's safe to say Rufus is over his "I'm such a good boy" phase if Vinyan is anything similar.

You won't want to watch this if you are disturbed by... well a lot of things, but I'll get to that later. First off this IS NOT a horror film in any way shape or form. Think more of something like Deliverance (Rufus are you reading this board?) if it wasn't governed by the MPAA. And this director has a powerful message to make in this film. I wish Roof were here to explain it in fact. Quite a bit of it is clear but there are other things going on that it will take days to sift through. The long and short of it is, if Vinyan is anything like this film which was complex and riveting, it should be an excellent vehicle for him.

As to disturbing images... well... most of the really disturbing ones are probably too graphic to talk about on this board. They aren't as they would be in an American picture were you see every blood spatter, they are worse because you view them as you might in real life with shadow and light and imagination. Let's just say that nailing the protagonists wrists to a cross in the barn to keep him from running away was one of the milder ones.

One of the foremost things you should understand about this film is the premise that they treat a man, a man that everyone in the film insists is a woman named Gloria, as a picture like this might treat a woman. It's... I don't really know what to say about it yet. Frightening barely begins to describe it...

I'm impressed Rufus. I hope Vinyan is as explosive. And I'm very happy to be led to this director who is obviously not your run of the mill Hollyweird hack.

. Again if Vinyan is anything like this piece it should satisfy all of the calls from this board for more grit.

[etherealtb]

Sounds really interesting, Maxx!

[mcr5137]

etherealtb said:

mcr5137 said:

If it's a true "horror" film......I"m not so sure. I just don't do horror, I don't like slasher, gore, or anything like that. If it's mostly mind games of the couple while they are in the jungle..........THAT sounds very interesting!

We'll have to wait and see. The "horror" film tradition is long and until the past couple of dozen years, did not always involve slashing or gore. One movie that comes to mind is the orginal "Cat People" from 1942. You literally see NOTHING, but the movie is creepy and scary as hell. So it depends really on how a horror movie is done, you know? There's also "The Univited" (1944), "The Innocents" (1961), "The Haunting" (1963) and I think even "The Others" (the one with Nicole Kidman) is a more recent good example of more traditional "horror". Its very possible to do a great horror film without blood and guts, it just hasn't been done in a very long time.

I really kind of liked "The Others"......I haven't seen any of the older films you spoke of though. I realize that this could all be semantics.........what you think of as horror, I think of as gore and slasher and what I think of as thriller is what you would call horror!!! It's not the first time around here that I've talked and just not been on the same page as others!

I don't have a problem with psychological, or thriller.......and though I may have a serious headache after it's over from getting myself all in a knot about what's going on in the film........I generally enjoy it, when it's all said and done! I like the mystery aspect of it. I can even take a ghost or two........as long as it's not just creepy ghosts thrown in to make you spit out your drink but have no real value in the story!!!!!

So far this sounds interesting and I look forward to it.

[pattirose]

Calvaire?
You've sparked my interest Maxx, I'll have to hunt that one down it sounds positively creepy!

[rai]

Here is the link to the trailer for Calvaire (The Ordeal).

Rai

www.apple.com/trailers/independent/calvaire/trailer/

[maxx02]

this is another one of those Hollyweird studio bait and switch things where they are trying to get 15 - 35 year old males to tune in. Calling this horror is completely misleading. The trailer is misleading. There is no supernatural element. There is no crazy mysterious killer type stalking anyone. There is no real gore just imagination. It is a psychological thriller if not a particularly sterile one as films usually turn out when the Americans or the Brits make them. I'm thinking of The Collector if anyone has ever seen it. If you think that's horror you'll think this is.

I understand why Rufus would want to work with this director after seeing this film. This guy has a lot of potential and he actually has something to say.

I don't know how creepy it is, pattirose, what it is is frightening. I don't know. I want someone else to watch it so I can hear their take on it. It's really a film that bears a lot of talking about to understand what is being said. But to do that you'll have to get past the despicable things that are being done which is why I suggest if you're sensitive you skip it.

[etherealtb]

maxx02 said:

It is a psychological thriller if not a particularly sterile one as films usually turn out when the Americans or the Brits make them. I'm thinking of The Collector if anyone has ever seen it. If you think that's horror you'll think this is.

I'm assuming you mean the one with Terrance Stamp? I don't know if I personally would call that horror, more CREEPY and disturbing.

Well, I guess maybe that COULD a type of horror, eh? I think that's what we're trying to say here, mcr5137. Not that you have the wrong idea of what a horror/thriller movie is, but that those terms are just catch all phrases to describe types of movies, but that there is a lot of room in those genres for very different types of films other than slashing blood and gore.

[maxx02]

I don't consider The Collector horror, but if I ask how many people think Misery is horror, what will be the response? Will people assume just because Stephen King wrote it, it must be horror? Psychological Thrillers are usually much more complex than horror and have something pertinent to say about the human condition. That's where I would class Calvaire. This director is trying to leave you talking about the film, not off for a burger and beer while you try to decide if you're going to stand on line all week to be the first to see the sequel to "300"

I think most "fan boys" would be so revolted by this film they wouldn't make it through. It's okay to watch these things done to a woman but a man is another story. It's also very much a French film in the first 25 minutes or so and as such is very languorous and arty.

[etherealtb]

maxx02 said:

I think most "fan boys" would be so revolted by this film they wouldn't make it through.

LOL. If the fans boys will hate it, the chance of me liking it improve ten-fold. ;D

[maxx02]

etherealtb said:

LOL. If the fans boys will hate it, the chance of me liking it improve ten-fold. ;D

says the person with the animated 300 avatar.

[etherealtb]

maxx02 said:

etherealtb said:

LOL. If the fans boys will hate it, the chance of me liking it improve ten-fold. ;D

says the person with the animated 300 avatar.

Yeah, but I'm sure my reasons for having that avatar are VERY different from theirs! (*points left to current avatar*) LOL.

[pattirose]

One can never have too much Gerry Juice!