jt4logos
Joined Aug 2005
Welcome to the new profile
Our updates are still in development. While the previous version of the profile is no longer accessible, we're actively working on improvements, and some of the missing features will be returning soon! Stay tuned for their return. In the meantime, the Ratings Analysis is still available on our iOS and Android apps, found on the profile page. To view your Rating Distribution(s) by Year and Genre, please refer to our new Help guide.
Badges2
To learn how to earn badges, go to the badges help page.
Reviews6
jt4logos's rating
Philip Baker Hall is beautiful in this delightful home-made treasure. Loved the Landlord! Would have liked to see a bit more Ending, a bit more of the clearly budding relationship of the man with the dog and the man with the duck. Just a bit more; not much. I was puzzled by the societal breakdown: why was the social worker unable to do anything at all?? Of course, if she had been able, there would have been no story. Watch this film! I would love a sequel.
I noticed the colors of the film about half-way through. The muted, neutral beiges and browns, with an occasional soft blue or red, of the people's clothing seems so natural that I was suddenly and happily made aware that everything worked together: each scene's color scheme was deliberate. The Temple scenes with the beige crowds and the sharp contrast of the navy-and-crème Pharisees, and the crème-white of the Christ's clothing. The wedding banquet with the reds, oranges, deeper browns and blues -- any frame of any scene could stand alone as a classic painting. The music, the acting, the casting -- this is a first-rate film regardless of how you personally believe the message of John's Gospel.
I'm really sorry this movie had so much Sleaze (in the opening ten minutes, and in the language throughout) because the story, the premise, and the film-making itself were so outstanding. It should be a movie for all people who love movies, and not of necessity limited to those who really don't mind, or who actively delight in, Sleaze. A behind-the-scenes, left-to-the-intelligent-viewer's-imagination depiction of the sophomoric activity in this story would have made this a classic film. Duel is classic, this is not. (If you can't show it to grandmothers and junior high kids, it ain't classic.) That said, the casting and acting, the atmosphere and the terror so well done, and the interest sustained throughout so complete, I hope someday to see a remake with the Sleaze cut out and the language cleaned up. The screen writing was good; aside from the writer's inability to think up synonyms for "damn it", the conversation kept moving towards revealing the characters' inner selves and the changes their terrifying experiences were causing. The lighting was really impressive. Though the film took place entirely at night, and the sense of darkness and cold were maintained, the lighting made all that was happening, all emotions, very clear to the viewer: an actor's dream. This is another reason I wish the film had been Classic instead of Transient -- it is an actor's film. The actors made me care, made me listen, made me watch for their individual reactions. A fine film . . . . but.