Childe said:13 assassins and Vahalla Rising are two of my favorites. Vahalla Rising doubly so since it has a nice complex way of telling the story which is does nicely
I can't believe I didn't think of Ozu at first with this topic in mind, but I also consider "slow" in terms of a director's intention, not just to mean that there wasn't enough action or there was too much talking. Funny that when I think of Casablanca, and most major 40's movies, I think they're actually pretty snappily paced, even though they're driven by dialogue and often staged like plays.Johnny Novgorod said:Oh come on, you call these slow paced movies? Try watching something by Ozu. It makes Casablanca look like it was made by Guy Ritchie on cocaine.
Of course pace is still pretty subjective just in terms of what you're used to - I would call the first 45 minutes of 13 Assassins fairly slow and deliberate, especially considering this modern movie is billed as an action adventure. But I will say, having a man commit graphic seppuku straight off is a pretty great way of getting an audience's attention. It really triggers the old fight or flight instinct.
And as for Melancholia: I agree, I enjoyed that movie way more than I thought I would. It was one of those I thought a few minutes in I wouldn't make it through... but then I really got into it when I saw what it was doing. The sluggish feel works great with the theme, plus Kirsten Dunst is a treat to watch because she just doesn't get that many lead roles these days.