Films that left you with a sense of wonder and awe

[MissNathalieVintage]

Million Dollar Baby. Wonderful film but sad.
Precious. Wow, and did this really happened? Is all I can say.
Recent movie seen "In Darkness", still in awe. The one thing this movie could do without is the sex and nudity, it completely ruined the film for me.

This movie was based on a true story during WWII a group of Jewish people and two kids who spent 14 months living in hiding in the city sewer.

There is also a biography written by the last remaining survivor "The Girl in the green sweater". Looking forward to reading the book. This will hopefully fill in the missing gaps the film lacked.

 

[Sharpsburg]

I have to add the Wizard of Oz, for me. Before DVD/VHS, they played Oz ONCE a year, so when it came on it was a real event, which i never missed. I still remember runnign into my mother's arms when i got so scared by seeing the evil Wicked Witch of the West! I would dance around on the run with the munchkins and try to fly with the flying monkeys! Mom passed 2 years ago and i'll never look at that movie the same way again.

 

[Benzadmiral]

"Forbidden Planet," with Leslie Nielsen, Anne Francis, and Walter Pidgeon. Inspired by Shakespeare's "The Tempest" and a prototype for the original "Star Trek," it features concepts that movies couldn't begin to touch on for 20 years: a starship that deals with deceleration from speeds well beyond that of light; a long-dead race of beings who built a cubical power complex 20 miles on a side and then vanished in a single night; and more.

The thing that gets me to this day is the oddly-shaped doors in the complex, sort of squashed pentagons. Pidgeon's Dr. Morbius tells us to "consider them in light of our functionally designed human doors." We're never shown the long-dead race; we have to imagine them ourselves. (Did they look like giant crabs, wider than they were tall?) More than 60 years old, and the film is still grand stuff.

And the original "Star Wars" blew me out of my seat. Not only did it nod to many stories in written SF ("Dune" in particular), but the shots of the spacecraft were the most visually realistic ever up to that time. When Han and Luke are firing the ship's laser cannon at the little fighter ships, we don't see a shot of Han, then a shot of the cannon firing, then a shot of the ship roaring past or exploding. We see all of it in one apparent take, and Han or Luke cheering as the fighter blows up in front of him. Terrific moviemaking.

 

[Nathan Dodge]

Is "Sense of Wonder" Just a Code for Returning to Childhood?

"[If George Lucas] weren't so hooked on the crap of his childhood--if he brought his resources to bear on some projects with human beings in them--there is no imagining the result."

~Pauline Kael, writing about Raiders of the Lost Ark


"Pauline's biggest professional disappointment,' Mr Kellow writes, 'was that she lived to see the infantilization of the great moviegoing audience she had always dreamed of and believed in.'"

http://mubi.com/notebook/posts/pauline-kael

 

[Atomic Age]

I saw Lawrence of Arabia in its restoration release in 1989, at the Cine Capri in Phoenix. 70mm 6 track stereo...65 foot screen....amazing.

Also Forbidden Planet really grabbed my imagination.

Doug

 

[Atomic Age]

Is "Sense of Wonder" Just a Code for Returning to Childhood?

"[If George Lucas] weren't so hooked on the crap of his childhood--if he brought his resources to bear on some projects with human beings in them--there is no imagining the result."

~Pauline Kael, writing about Raiders of the Lost Ark


"Pauline's biggest professional disappointment,' Mr Kellow writes, 'was that she lived to see the infantilization of the great moviegoing audience she had always dreamed of and believed in.'"

http://mubi.com/notebook/posts/pauline-kael

My impression of Kael, after having read many of her reviews, and one of her books, was that she seriously lacked imagination, not to mention intelligence. She had an unforgivable lack of understanding movies, their history and how they developed. Not the brightest bulb in the pack.

How she ever became an "important" film critic, and why anyone ever paid attention to her, I'll never know.

Doug

 

[Nathan Dodge]

My impression of Kael, after having read many of her reviews, and one of her books, was that she seriously lacked imagination, not to mention intelligence. She had an unforgivable lack of understanding movies, their history and how they developed. Not the brightest bulb in the pack.

How she ever became an "important" film critic, and why anyone ever paid attention to her, I'll never know.

Doug

She wasn't on my Christmas card list either, but I agree with her regarding Lucas (and Spielberg, too).

 

[Edward]

Is "Sense of Wonder" Just a Code for Returning to Childhood?

"[If George Lucas] weren't so hooked on the crap of his childhood--if he brought his resources to bear on some projects with human beings in them--there is no imagining the result."

~Pauline Kael, writing about Raiders of the Lost Ark


"Pauline's biggest professional disappointment,' Mr Kellow writes, 'was that she lived to see the infantilization of the great moviegoing audience she had always dreamed of and believed in.'"

http://mubi.com/notebook/posts/pauline-kael

I am unfamiliar with this critic, but... Raiders is an undeserving target for her ire. That said, I often suspect that the fact Spielberg or Lucas ever made anything good was a serious case of monkeys, typewriters and Shakespeare.... Spielberg destroys almost everything he touches with cloying, mawkish sentimentality, while Lucas would be better sticking to creating video games as he has no concept of people, plot, script, dialogue, emotions....

 

[John in Covina]

The original King Kong the special effects were ground breaking.

I saw Super 8 just about a month ago and was really happy with the way the enthusiasm of the kids was captured and the period reproduced.

 

[John in Covina]

Is "Sense of Wonder" Just a Code for Returning to Childhood?

"[If George Lucas] weren't so hooked on the crap of his childhood--if he brought his resources to bear on some projects with human beings in them--there is no imagining the result."

~Pauline Kael, writing about Raiders of the Lost Ark


"Pauline's biggest professional disappointment,' Mr Kellow writes, 'was that she lived to see the infantilization of the great moviegoing audience she had always dreamed of and believed in.'"

http://mubi.com/notebook/posts/pauline-kael

There are people who spend their lives trying to show just how serious they are about a subject and in many ways remove joy from their lives. I'd rather be happy and enjoy things than be bitter. Movies i think that suck I am not going to demand their removal from history, if there is an audience to enjoy them let them enjoy them. I'm not going to go out of my way to poop on their likes, much.

 

[Atomic Age]

She wasn't on my Christmas card list either, but I agree with her regarding Lucas (and Spielberg, too).

No offense to you, but I just feel like anyone who can't enjoy Raiders of the Lost Ark, needs to learn to relax a little.

Doug

 

[Atomic Age]

I am unfamiliar with this critic, but... Raiders is an undeserving target for her ire. That said, I often suspect that the fact Spielberg or Lucas ever made anything good was a serious case of monkeys, typewriters and Shakespeare.... Spielberg destroys almost everything he touches with cloying, mawkish sentimentality, while Lucas would be better sticking to creating video games as he has no concept of people, plot, script, dialogue, emotions....

Raiders is actually the most serious of the Indy films, and the most realistic for one simple reason. They didn't give themselves the time or money to be self indulgent. Many of the things that people think are over the top in Temple of Doom, were actually in the Raiders script first, but were cut for time or money. The mine train "rollercoaster" was in the last 3rd of Raiders originally. The biggest laugh in Raiders, Indy shooting the swordsman, came from the fact that Harrison Ford had dysentery, and couldn't make it through the whole whip vs. sword fight. The truck that they put the basket, that supposedly contains Marian in, only rolls over on its side because of a mistake. It was supposed to flip end over end, but the explosive charge misfired. Spielberg was so desperate to get out of North Africa (they were shooting in the summer and it was 130 degrees in the shade) that he said that's good enough and wrapped the shoot.

Raiders is as straight as it is because of the conditions under which it was shot.

However I will disagree with you about Spielberg's other films. I don't find them overly sentimental at all. I understand that some people do, but I suppose that all depends on your taste. I suspect when it comes to Spielberg's films, those who feel that they are overly sentimental are in the vast minority.

Doug

 

[Nathan Dodge]

No offense to you, but I just feel like anyone who can't enjoy Raiders of the Lost Ark, needs to learn to relax a little. Doug

None taken. It just so happens I loved and still love Raiders. Star Wars was scared to me in my childhood, but I've seen it enough to last a lifetime, I guess. Both films are outstanding as technical achievements in their time and are unsurpassed as great entertainment. Those films are like candy and are great once in awhile. I just don't want to subsist on that stuff like so many of my generation have with their slavish devotion to those movies. It's like a boomer's obsession with, say, The Beatles or Woodstock.

I posted Kael's comment--she's a critic I almost never agree with--because her words have proven to be true about Lucas and Spielberg's careers (and which Edward succinctly detailed in one of his posts). At the time, Kael did come off as crotchety, but she's absolutely correct. I'll always be disappointed in George Lucas because he never fulfilled his oft-mentioned desire to produce independent films (not Star Wars prequels) and tell interesting stories. We never got those.

 

[sal]

I would have to say Saving Private Ryan would have to be at the top of my list.
Apocolypse Now and
The Deer Hunter a couple of others

 

[Edward]

Saving Private Ryan surprised me by how good I thought it was, all except for the tedious Hollywoodism of the guy who let the Wehrmacht trooper go rather than shoot him in cold blood later killing him, like a real man. That let the whole down. The opening sequence was wonderfully done, and hopefully did kill a lot of people's romantic notions of combat in WW2.

 

[DanielJones]

Seabiscuit had the awe effect for me. Raider of the Los Arc of course. I have to get my fix every few months. Recently Hugo an Midnight in Paris.

Cheers!

Dan

 

[Atomic Age]

None taken. It just so happens I loved and still love Raiders. Star Wars was scared to me in my childhood, but I've seen it enough to last a lifetime, I guess. Both films are outstanding as technical achievements in their time and are unsurpassed as great entertainment. Those films are like candy and are great once in awhile. I just don't want to subsist on that stuff like so many of my generation have with their slavish devotion to those movies. It's like a boomer's obsession with, say, The Beatles or Woodstock.

I posted Kael's comment--she's a critic I almost never agree with--because her words have proven to be true about Lucas and Spielberg's careers (and which Edward succinctly detailed in one of his posts). At the time, Kael did come off as crotchety, but she's absolutely correct. I'll always be disappointed in George Lucas because he never fulfilled his oft-mentioned desire to produce independent films (not Star Wars prequels) and tell interesting stories. We never got those.

I would agree with you to some extent on Lucas, but to be fair, at some point he realized that in order to keep his company going, and to keep his people employed, he needed to make films that put butts in the seats. In addition his films are what made things like Pixar possible. And now Lucas claims that he is going to be doing the sort of personal films he has been saying he wants to do for 30 years.

I feel the same way about Star Wars. I really have no desire to watch it again. I feel very differently about the Indy films. I could watch them any day of the week.

Doug

 

[Atomic Age]

Saving Private Ryan surprised me by how good I thought it was, all except for the tedious Hollywoodism of the guy who let the Wehrmacht trooper go rather than shoot him in cold blood later killing him, like a real man. That let the whole down. The opening sequence was wonderfully done, and hopefully did kill a lot of people's romantic notions of combat in WW2.

It may seem like a tedious Hollywoodism, but it was based on a real incident that was told to writer Robert Rodat by a World War 2 vet when he was doing research for the screenplay.

Doug

 

[Edward]

It may seem like a tedious Hollywoodism, but it was based on a real incident that was told to writer Robert Rodat by a World War 2 vet when he was doing research for the screenplay.

Doug

There we are - that I didn't know!

 

[Worf]

Interesting twist this thread switching to a discussion of Lucas, Spielberg and film critics. On the question of critics I find they fall into only a couple of three categories:

1. Those that do or have done what they criticize ie a musician critiquing music or a film maker doing the same.

2. Someone who has not or CANNOT produce a work of art or do a task but feels compelled to critique the work of others.

3. Someone who loves the art form for it's own sake and seeks merely to enlighten... but does not feel they are bigger than subject matter.

4. Someone who criticizes anything but feels THEY are bigger and better than the subject matter.

5. Fools that see nothing, know nothing but gleefully ban films they've not seen or throw books into the bonfire.

There may be others but these come to mind right now. I think you know which ones I listen to.

Worf