Fil review: Inglourious Bastwerds

But it was because you didn't *capitalise* "Grindhouse" that I
subliminally glossed over it. )

Quite. At that point I'll have three and half hours of work left
before packing and heading off to Vegas.

 

Agreed, but I had the good sense to only watch it once. I was expecting
some great mystery to be unravelled, what a disappointment. And if that
was Welles' finest hour, I'll not bother watching anything else he's done.

 

Welles' "finest hour" was the radio version of "War of the Worlds".

 

Well, at least you've watched it. I wonder if Claudia Winkleman(sp?)
has.

 

Like **** it was. A Touch of Evil wins hands down.

 

What a curious thing to wonder. Presumably this isn't completely random.
Has she written a "review" or something?

 

She's the new presenter of Film 2010
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/8593066.stm

 

There's a long thread of theatrical fantasy that Salieri murdered
Mozart, starting with Pushkin. I don't think Pushkin actually thought it
was true, but it made a good story. Amadeus is just a rather
anachronistic traetment of the idea.

 

(ts) wrote in :

The scene with Mozart dicatating part of the Requiem to Salieri was
superb.

 

A long time ago when I used to go to the cinema a lot, I tried for a
while to avoid seeing any films with a gun in them. That cut down my
cinema-going pretty drastically.

 

Fuckin' wimmin. Getting everywhere these days.


--
Beav

VN 750
Zed 1000
OMF# 19

 

she reminds me bizarrely of Jenny Powell (whom I used to have a "bit
of a thing for" back in the late '80s when she was on "No Limits").

I'd have to try them both to see which one was better. Both horrible
old cougars these days, but hey...

 

Like **** it does. The Third Man is one of the best films ever made.
Although not particularly because of Welles' performance, or really
anyone's except maybe Trevor Howard's.

 

Wow, Wossy's let himself go.

 

Bah. Harry Lime was a pantomime baddy.

 

hey, so do I - doesn't mean I have to like the film.

Having said that, I provoked (not really deliberately...OK...sort of
deliberately) a big argument during one of the "look how fucking good
Mozart was - he can play the instrument without even looking at the
keyboard" bits by mentioning that good as he may have been, he wasn't
nearly as talented as Bach.

That "debate" lasted nearly 15 minutes! It ended thus:

me: "let's see Mozart compose a 3 part fucking fugue on the fly in
front of Frederick II of Prussia, like Bach can"
her: "they're both dead".
me: "right - un-pause?"

 

didn't you hear he'd been nicked for shop-lifting kitchen accessories
from Tescos?

apparantly he said he thought it was "worth the whisk".

 

I know. It's the gothic sets and lighting that make it. Trevor Howard is
pretty good, too, although he's a bit of a pantomime goody.

 

By that measure most composers weren't nearly as talented as Bach. He was
brilliant at extemporizing counterpoint, but that was a skill that was
already on the way out. Although if there were one well-known composer
later who was as good, it probably was Mozart - he did have a reputation
for extemporizing.

Incidentally, I thought I remembered it was a six part fugue, so I looked
it up. Wikipedia says three parts, but Johann Nikolaus Forkel, quoted in
"Godel, Escher, Bach", says six, but on a theme Bach chose himself as the
theme Ludwig supplied wasn't suitable.

 

it was three parts on the fly (FFS, the bloke only had two hands), but
he later presented a six-part augmentation on the same theme.