I considered picking Heat or Nixon for the BP slot instead of Bridges; glad to see that I picked Bridges, since it's generated a lot of discussion.
Cinemanolis:
However i was disapointed that it replaced 'Sense and Sensibility' and not any other of that year's nominees.
Sense and Sensibility and Il Postino were the only two I could bump, and between the two, I prefer Il Postino.
Big Magilla:
The initial Warner Bros. DVD is a disgrace. Fortunately they are rectifying that with a Special Edition due May 6th, finally in widescreen.
That's true, although I did buy the initial DVD when I found it in the $5 bin. The full screen DVD shows more information in the frame than the widescreen version (I've seen it on TCM and on HDNet), but the widescreen version is tighter, and clearly the way it was meant to be seen. I do wish they'd release it in Blu-Ray simultaneously though. I know it's not an epic or an actioner--the main kinds of catalog titles that get Blu-Ray releases--but the cinematography is amazing, and it looked amazing on HDNet; It seemed to grow deeper and richer.
I was making a sarcastic statement, OG, using two films I know you liked a lot. If you can do it, I guess I can too:) While I have no interest in either film, I would not brush off either film as they may have merits I cannot imagine in them.
"Go into the world and do well. But more importantly, go into the world and do good."
- Minor Myers, Jr.
To write off The Bridges of Madison County without ever having seen it is, well, just beyond laughable. It's a gorgeous film featuring (again, as Penelope and others have already stated) one of Streep's best performances and most deserved nominations. Vintage Eastwood.
Edited By flipp525 on 1208320275
"The mantle of spinsterhood was definitely in her shoulders. She was twenty five and looked it."
You're using a double standard there, FilmFan. You say I'm not allowed to judge a film without seeing it, yet you judge two films I liked without even seeing them. So, I'm going to entirely ignore your opinion on this matter. And, just an FYI, Bridge to Terabithia sits only 3% under Bridges of Madison County. So, if you're going to call Terabithia shit, you may as well call Bridges shit since you equated Bridges as a critical success. Which is also contradictory...hmmm...
Edited By OscarGuy on 1208319899
Wesley Lovell
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." - Benjamin Franklin
All I'll add to this debate is this: The Bridges of Madison County is a wonderful film; in this case, Eastwood's usual leisurely pacing works in the favor of the story, building to a genuinely shattering climax, and featuring one of Streep's best performances. As Magilla indicated below, it would make a fantastic double feature with Brief Encounter.
"...it is the weak who are cruel, and...gentleness is only to be expected from the strong." - Leo Reston
"Cruelty might be very human, and it might be cultural, but it's not acceptable." - Jodie Foster
What an interesting Cahiers list...although anything with Twin Peaks gets my seal of approval?
I think the problem with Metacritic is that they are deciding where a film lies on this "sliding scale" for the critic. You can read a review and see if they recommend the film or not. With more and more unstarred reviews (thank god, I hate the star system), how in the world can you read someone else's opinion and say, oh, that is an 86, or a 79. What is the difference? If the person is a good critic, and a smart writer, it can be difficult to pinpoint exactly where they should fall on some ridiculous scale.
Rent "The Bridges of Madison County." It is surely better than Bridge to Teribitea and The Golden Compass, neither of which I ever need to see than to know are shit.
"Go into the world and do well. But more importantly, go into the world and do good."
- Minor Myers, Jr.
The Cahiers list dws was referring to, for those curious.
1. Carlito's Way (Brian De Palma)
Goodbye South, Goodbye (Hou Hsiao-hsien)
The Bridges of Madison County (Clint Eastwood)
4. Eyes Wide Shut (Stanley Kubrick)
Twin Peaks (David Lynch)
Close-Up (Abbas Kiarostami)
Unforgiven (Clint Eastwood)
8. Crash (David Cronenberg)
Edward Scissorhands (Tim Burton)
The River (Tsai Ming-liang)
Sorry, BJ, but these are also the people who called Fargo and No Country for Old Men masterpieces, so with everything, I must take their opinions with a grain of salt. I say I would never see it, but if I ever get around to doing my Best Actress and Best Actor nominees reviews series (at least three or four years off), then I'll have to take a look at it, but as it stands now, I'm not interested.
Wesley Lovell
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." - Benjamin Franklin
The Bridges of Madison County was the first Eastwood film I really, really liked. On one of my business trips to Des Moines I made a point of walking across one of the bridges. It was more gratifying than my visit to John Wayne's birthplace on the same trip.
The initial Warner Bros. DVD is a disgrace. Fortunately they are rectifying that with a Special Edition due May 6th, finally in widescreen.
Meryl Streep's Italian accent is a little disconcerting at first, but she wins you over with one of her warmnest charactizations. The ending is one of the best in recent Hollywood history. It's not a typical Eastwood movie, which is part of the reason the critics who usually fall in lock-step behind anything the man does, were less than enthused when they first saw it. It's one of those films that grows richer with each viewing. Comparisons to Brief Encoutner are not unwarranted.
OscarGuy wrote:There are thousands of classic films and modern films that I should probably see before adding a movie like Bridges of Madison County to the list.
I guess this is what I don't understand. "A movie like Bridges of Madison County?" You mean an Oscar-nominated Clint Eastwood-Meryl Streep film which, as Cinemanolis says, a lot of us around here hold in very high regard?
Maybe this is just me, but usually when a majority of people on this board really like something I always feel it's at least worth seeking out. Certainly I would never dismiss something sight unseen that so many people whose taste I respect really admire.
I'm not saying you should see it before a thousand movies you'd rather see. I just don't understand why you'd refuse to ever see it.
I don't give a damn about the Rotten Tomatoes or the MetaCritic reviews. However Wes, the fact that so many of us like the movie, should urge you to push it forward in your 'must-see' list. Count me in for the 'I like Bridges of Madison County' club. However i was disapointed that it replaced 'Sense and Sensibility' and not any other of that year's nominees.
FilmFan720 wrote:Can we take all the categories to 5 please? These 2 and 3 film categories are dumb enough.
Well, we discussed this initially, but the prevailing opinion of the time was that there weren't enough contenders to warrant more than 3 nominees, which I whole-heartedly disagree with, but there you have it. If those individuals who said no wish to change their minds, then we could change that, but as it stands, we cannot.
Wesley Lovell
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." - Benjamin Franklin
I really do, BJ. There are thousands of classic films and modern films that I should probably see before adding a movie like Bridges of Madison County to the list. So, yes, I think it would be a waste of my time to catch a film that from previews and reviews did not meet my desires of a movie that I would enjoy.
And, FilmFan, I find it bizarre that you would ridicule MetaCritic and not Rotten Tomatoes. RT's problem IS that it's positive or negative with no in-between. You're saying that there are only two degrees of opinion, Black and White...otherwise known as Like or Dislike. If anything, MetaCritic allows for those shades of appreciation. By rating a film from 0 to 100, they give their honest opinion of a film. 100 is a masterpiece, 0 is an unmitigated disaster then critics can weigh in on a sliding scale of opinion.
Let's say a film gets 2, 2.5 or 3 stars from a critic. Where does it fall in the like/dislike? Each critic is certainly different, but those are the kinds of quantitative measurements rottentomatoes eliminates. Someone who's blasé about a film can say "I liked it more than I hated it" and give it a positive, which scores it as Fresh. I would rather have the shades of gray sometimes than the flat-out "I like it"/"I don't like it".
And again, I think you're just trying to side with the source that rates the film currently in discussion higher.
Let's compare Crash and Bridges. On Meta Critic, they are close together. 69 and 66 respectively.
On RT, they are significantly farther apart on the Fresh meter at 75% and 87% respectively, a far wider margin. However, when you look at the Average rating, they are identical: 7.1.
I'm sure you can see why RT is far more contradictory than the more straight forward Meta Critic.
Wesley Lovell
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." - Benjamin Franklin
