Beltmann

Park Chan-Wook's vampire story Thirst is no Let the Right One In, but it's light years away from Dracula or, er, Twilight. It's a lunatic experience--philosophical, maddening, voluptuous, sometimes overtly silly--but I enjoyed it.

Thought about it, but we made other plans. I'm still feeling some pangs of regret, though.

Didn't see too much in 2009, but April's back-to-back Wilco shows at Milwaukee's Pabst Theatre would be at the top. I also very much enjoyed Neko Case, and a Gaslight Anthem/Heartless Bastards show, among others. Biggest disappointment? The National in July. One of my all-time favorite shows was The National in 2007, but this time around they felt lackluster--the band was off their game, for whatever reason.

Totally. I'm still pissed about the government interfering with their damn child labor laws.

As a Packers fan, I can't remember the last time I cheered so wildly for a Bears victory.

Thing is, it's not really a new phenomenon. In the big studio days--especially the Thirties and Forties--quickie remakes were actually far more common than even today (and they didn't wait 20 years before tackling a property over and over again). Directors were under contract, and sometimes the same man was assigned to make the same movie twice just a few years apart. (Heck, even Cecil B. DeMille made The Ten Commandments twice--once as a silent movie, once as a color spectacle.) Few of these churned-out pictures are remembered today, which is why it feels like the remake craze is unique t

Remaking bad movies isn't a bad idea--why not take another whack to get it right? Now, remaking good movies is often questionable. After all, since we already have a very good Taking of Pelham 123, why on earth do we need another? Exactly. And I'm unconvinced there are any "sacred texts" in cinema that cannot survive an assault. Even Psycho endured that awful Van Sant remake; who even remembers that the remake exists? Hitchcock's version is safe and sound. Even if someone was lunatic enough to remake Citizen Kane, I can't imagine that it would take the shine off the original--all a re

I use Microsoft Access (although the database actually originated in LotusWorks, which tells you how long ago I started cataloging this stuff!). I have no idea whether Access is a quality choice--I use it because I always have, and after nearly 20 years of adding data I'm pretty much stuck with it. Each database entry lists various elements which can then be individually sorted, such as director, year, or country. For example, I can use the index feature to show only the entries by, say, Scorsese, and then sort that narrow list by year or any other element. It's very simple, actually. T

Lazy Saturday = Two movies on DVD: Sin Nombre and Medicine for Melancholy, both enjoyable.

Same here. Loved it. A witty, mature, serious story featuring resonant, original characters--it's a throwback to a time when Hollywood regularly made smart movies for grownups, instead of just spectacles for 12-year-old boys.

I do that, too. I started keeping track many years ago when I was still reviewing movies for a newspaper, and had practical reasons for not forgetting--things like year-end best lists, director comparisons, etc.--and just never stopped. I actually log in a database every movie I see, whether in the theater or on DVD. It's a useful resource for someone who writes about movies (and I do still produce occasional pieces). I keep it simple, though, so that the cataloging/indexing never becomes an albatross! One year, I saw 556 different movies (but that includes short and experimental works).

This really ought to be somebody's sig line...

I'm genuinely surprised by this (and I mean that as a compliment). Spong is definitely a guy who I think you would respond to.

Minor point: I don't really think the Academy Awards are any more artsy/indie than the Grammys. Like the Grammys, the Oscars only nominate the most popular or visible indie flicks. I'd say that the Oscars are oblivious to what true movie geeks (like me) are watching and appreciating. When the Academy starts nominating titles like Private Fears in Public Places or Syndromes and a Century instead of the likes of Juno, then I might start taking the Oscars more seriously. (Not that I'm complaining. The Oscars are what they are, and they are perfectly fun on that level. It's always a mistake

Awesome. All four of those are genuine classics. Speaking of Woody Allen, a few nights ago I revisited Crimes and Misdemeanors for the first time in at least a decade. Man, that's a great film--definitely one of Allen's very best. So, if you're on a movie date with Neko, do you try out Boogie's popcorn box trick from Diner?

Yep. Had the good fortune of living in Green Bay when they last won the Super Bowl (that whole season I interned at the TV station where they filmed The Mike Holmgren Show.)

Maybe. It's pretty great, despite a few reservations. Tenenbaums defies classification, and its weird balance of deadpan farce, stylized pathos, and sincere emotion strikes a chord with me. But in hindsight it still feels like the movie where Anderson's inspired style was starting, ever so slightly, to sour. There are rare passages in Tenenbaums that make me cringe--but the curdling wasn't fully evident until Life Aquatic and Darjeeling Limited. Which is why I found the loose and groovy Fantastic Mr. Fox so refreshing, and why it might be my second favorite Anderson movie.

Hi Kate! What a nice surprise!

Now I agree.

After several of the characters were set on fire, my five-year-old daughter leaned over and dryly said, "Well, they need to stop, drop, and roll." That's fairly representative of her sense of deadpan humor, so I thought she'd be primed for Wes Anderson's typically wry tone. Unfortunately, a few minutes later she leaned over again and said, "Dad, is it almost over? I don't think I like this." She doesn't always like scenes of menace or danger, and I think that's what turned her off. But I really liked it, and so did my wife. We agreed that it is perhaps Anderson's best movie since Rushmo

Yet another year with this one. I am a creature of habit.

I've always had a love-hate relationship with Lars von Trier movies, and that ambivalency was thrown into sharp relief while watching Antichrist, which is his most provocative, most moving, most ludicrous, most gorgeous, and most maddening film yet. That bastard has made something, that's for sure.

Silent Light is a good film, but it's impossible to watch and not think of Dreyer's Ordet--and the new film suffers in comparison.

Excellent. Thanks for the link! This is a great track; I've probably watched the video a dozen times over the last few days.

I don't care for Community, either. It has no personality; in fact, it has nothing but the high-concept premise, which means that none of the characters are more than their cookie-cutter, one-sentence descriptions. Abed as Batman was pretty funny, though.