28 Film Discussion Threads Later

[Spun Lepton]

C and I watched Class Action Park last night. It had been on our radar for a while. About 20 minutes in she sits up and says, "I think I went there as a kid! I think my dad brought me there!!" She texted her dad and he confirmed that they had been there 2 times when she was young. She talked about how there were at least two times when she was legitimately scared for her life on those water rides. She also confirmed one of the more dangerous things at the park, the concrete Alpine Slide, a ride on which at least one person was killed, was the thing she loved the most. 8/10 because it was a pretty fascinating look at the park.

[Skitch]

Is that available to stream anywhere? Or just rent?

[Scar]

Is that on HBO Max?

[DFA1979]

I don't think that's what he's saying.

I'll let him tell me.

[Dukefrukem]

C and I watched Class Action Park last night. It had been on our radar for a while. About 20 minutes in she sits up and says, "I think I went there as a kid! I think my dad brought me there!!" She texted her dad and he confirmed that they had been there 2 times when she was young. She talked about how there were at least two times when she was legitimately scared for her life on those water rides. She also confirmed one of the more dangerous things at the park, the concrete Alpine Slide, a ride on which at least one person was killed, was the thing she loved the most. 8/10 because it was a pretty fascinating look at the park.

People forget Disney kinda had a similar park called River Country. It didn't have the looped water slides or anything, but it had the concrete water slide drop into a lagoon that was super dangerous.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qewT3SYFqNw&ab_channel=BrightSunFilms

[Scar]

Class Action Park is on HBO Max.

[Spun Lepton]

Is that on HBO Max?

Yarp.

[Scar]

Just paused it. My eyes are bulging out of my skull at the ‘ball in the ball’. Having a solid Calculus Based Physics background is making this horrifyingly awesome, ‘cause I know my crazy younger self would do this shit.

[Scar]

Yarp.

Swan!

[StuSmallz]

Putting aside blockbusters like The Lord of the Rings and Harry Potter films, since as has already been noted, blockbusters have always been longEh, not always; of course, there have been long top-grossers since at least the 1910's, but the length of the average blockbuster's runtime is still a cycle, one that varies depending on what period you're looking at. For example, if we look at the Classical period in the middle of its "bigger is better" mentality from 1956-66, the shortest #1 from that period was West Side Story, at "only" about 2 & 1/2 hours (with many of the other top-grossers being significantly longer), but when the late 60's brought about the transition to the New Hollywood era, we starting seeing much more standard runtimes. And, while there were still exceptions, even The Godfather becoming the highest-grosser of all time wasn't enough to inspire a major movement back towards extended lengths for the next 30-ish years, and it really wasn't until the 2nd half of the 90's, with the likes of ID4, Titanic, Saving Private Ryan, etc, that we saw a more consistent return to 2+ hour runtimes, for better or worse.

[Yxklyx]

Has anyone here watched the extended cut of Margaret? Any thoughts? Unfortunately, I just re-watched the short version a second time - even though both are available to me. I have no idea why adjectives like frustrating and troubled are used when discussing this film. For me, it's easily one of the greatest of this century.

[baby doll]

It matters in the context of the current discussion about LOTR and Jackson's influence on blockbuster filmmaking, which didn't exist as we understand it when some of these old-time movies were made.

I think the obvious differences, other than the ones you pointed out, involve intent and presentation. All those historical melodramas strived for some measure of authenticity along with their spectacle, and even though may have contained massive set pieces, those set pieces didn't drive the story.

Compare that to the Marvel universe, where the script is written to meet the needs of the set pieces, not the other way around.

[...]

The Academy has always had a bit of a hard-on for technologically ambitious movies. (Hence the eventual nod towards LOTR.)

People forget "The Exorcist" and "Star Wars" were nominated for Best Picture, or that something as currently trivial as Warren Beatty's "Dick Tracy" received 7 nominations and won 3 awards.

See also various forgettable craptaculars like "The Greatest Show on Earth" and "Forrest Gump." If something makes a lot of money, Hollywood lets shit slide if a movie has any technical ambition at all.I'm having a hard time reconciling the first part of this post with the second, since they seem to imply two irreconcilable positions: the first part that contemporary blockbusters privilege spectacle over story in a way that earlier blockbusters didn't; the second that Hollywood has always made films which privilege spectacle over story (e.g., the Busby Berkeley musicals of the 1930s) and some of them won industry awards for their technical virtuosity. I believe it was Janet Staiger in The Classical Hollywood Cinema who points outs that Hollywood producers have used spectacle as a form of product differentiation since the 1910s ("with a cast of thousands of extras"), and since Hollywood prides itself on its technical know-how as a marker of professionalism, it's unsurprising that technically complicated films would win industry awards. In short, Hollywood's own conception of a quality film is incoherent ("It's all about telling a good story... but also, you gotta give the people spectacle"), and has been since the beginning. I would say that one difference between the earlier blockbusters and those being made today is that spectacle used to mean historical accuracy in costumes and settings, whereas now it means "world-building."

[baby doll]

Eh, not always; of course, there have been long top-grossers since at least the 1910's, but the length of the average blockbuster's runtime is still a cycle, one that varies depending on what period you're looking at. For example, if we look at the Classical period in the middle of its "bigger is better" mentality from 1956-66, the shortest #1 from that period was West Side Story, at "only" about 2 & 1/2 hours (with many of the other top-grossers being significantly longer), but when the late 60's brought about the transition to the New Hollywood era, we starting seeing much more standard runtimes. And, while there were still exceptions, even The Godfather becoming the highest-grosser of all time wasn't enough to inspire a major movement back towards extended lengths for the next 30-ish years, and it really wasn't until the 2nd half of the 90's, with the likes of ID4, Titanic, Saving Private Ryan, etc, that we saw a more consistent return to 2+ hour runtimes, for better or worse.I haven't conducted a Barry Salt-style statistical analysis of average run times, but the important point here is that blockbusters are, by definition, longer than an average film of the same period, their length being in itself a form of product differentiation. If contemporary blockbusters are longer than those produced in the New Hollywood era (although The Godfather Part II and Heaven's Gate are just shy of three and a half hours), that's perhaps in part because the average contemporary feature is now much longer than in the 1970s.

Incidentally, I just happened to stumble upon an article (https://www.worldofreel.com/blog/2019/7/longest-hollywood-movies-of-the-2010s) claiming that only two studio films of the 2010s exceeded three hours (The Wolf of Wall Street and Avengers: Endgame; presumably The Irishman doesn't count because it was distributed by Netflix).

[StuSmallz]

I haven't conducted a Barry Salt-style statistical analysis of average run times, but the important point here is that blockbusters are, by definition, longer than an average film of the same period, their length being in itself a form of product differentiation.Again, that depends on the time you're looking at, if this writer's research (https://towardsdatascience.com/are-new-movies-longer-than-they-were-10hh20-50-year-ago-a35356b2ca5b) is anything to go on, since you can see that there are years where the average length of the most popular 10-30 films (the black/blue lines) are actually both lower than the overall average (the purple line), as seen in certain points during the early 70's/late 80's, even though the latter was well past the New Hollywood heyday:

https://i.ibb.co/xLJmdZx/1-Tn-I5pop9-RXNG8smp-g-Px-Zg.png (https://ibb.co/GpcsNmz)

[StuSmallz]

I'm having a hard time reconciling the first part of this post with the second, since they seem to imply two irreconcilable positions: the first part that contemporary blockbusters privilege spectacle over story in a way that earlier blockbusters didn't; the second that Hollywood has always made films which privilege spectacle over story (e.g., the Busby Berkeley musicals of the 1930s) and some of them won industry awards for their technical virtuosity. I believe it was Janet Staiger in The Classical Hollywood Cinema who points outs that Hollywood producers have used spectacle as a form of product differentiation since the 1910s ("with a cast of thousands of extras"), and since Hollywood prides itself on its technical know-how as a marker of professionalism, it's unsurprising that technically complicated films would win industry awards. In short, Hollywood's own conception of a quality film is incoherent ("It's all about telling a good story... but also, you gotta give the people spectacle"), and has been since the beginning. I would say that one difference between the earlier blockbusters and those being made today is that spectacle used to mean historical accuracy in costumes and settings, whereas now it means "world-building."I will agree you on this point, though, since there's nothing inherently superior about the kind of spectacle that Hollywood specialized in back in the day versus now; the former would utilize thousands of faceless background extras for a massive battle scene, and the latter would accomplish the same basic thing with a bunch of CGI, but neither method makes me actually care about the individuals involved in those battles. It all comes down to how you focus the story in the smaller moments; you can do it well, whether it be in Lawrence Of Arabia (https://letterboxd.com/stusmallz/film/lawrence-of-arabia/) or (like I mentioned) in LOTR, or you can do it poorly, like with Cleopatra or Justice League, and you can end up with empty spectacle or cinematic greatness just as easily either way.

[Irish]

I'm having a hard time reconciling the first part of this post with the second, since they seem to imply two irreconcilable positions

Well, I'm following you, ya know?


the first part that contemporary blockbusters privilege spectacle over story in a way that earlier blockbusters didn't; the second that Hollywood has always made films which privilege spectacle over story (e.g., the Busby Berkeley musicals of the 1930s) and some of them won industry awards for their technical virtuosity.

It's more like the intent is the same, but the approach is different.

Whereas decades ago an action climax might derive naturally from the story, nowadays the set pieces are written first, with the rest of the movie then stitched together with half assed motivations and exposition.

James Toback talked about this waaaay back in 2013, in an interview I wish I could find now. But basically he pointed out that if 4-5 set pieces take 20 minutes apiece, that doesn't leave much time for anything else. Maybe you have an hour? Maybe less? Characters, plot, subplot, themes, and story are all squeezed into a very small frame.

This is why so many superhero movies have such flat characters and narratives, playing like the Cliffs Notes versions of comic books. It's also why I think we're comparing apples to oranges. Epic films of yesteryear might have had similar runtimes to some Marvel movies, but the scope, ambition, and intent are completely different.

To put another spin on it: It took Warren Beatty 10 or 15 years to get the money for "Reds." Do you think anyone was that passionate about something like "Ant Man 2"? No, of course not, because "Ant Man 2" was made to meet the demands of the schedule, which was created to placate DISN shareholders, and announced on an earnings call meant to ensure Wall Street that Disney will absolutely make its Q3 2018 estimates.

Like, for example, "Cleopatra" might have been pure Hollywood folly and excess, and it might have bombed and almost bankrupted 20th Century Fox, but it wasn't created to serve the larger needs of Fox's Sword and Sandal Cinematic universe, and nobody viewed it as just another notch in the franchise bedpost.


since Hollywood prides itself on its technical know-how as a marker of professionalism, it's unsurprising that technically complicated films would win industry awards.

Right, so why this?


The most expensive and profitable films now are effects-heavy science fiction and fantasy films, and they've become increasingly prestigious over the last two decades, as evidenced by the Oscar nominations for films like The Dark Knight, Mad Max: Fury Road, and Joker. In other words, the industry's conception of what constitutes quality filmmaking has begun to shift from lavish historical dramas about white people on a boat and chatty rom-coms about Jewish neurotics hooking up with blonde shiksas to comic book movies and low-budget indies about gay black men.

Part of the reason why genre films get more noms now is because there's more of them and less of everything else. If the mid-budget drama still existed in any meaningful sense at the box office, the Academy would be blowing off the Superfriends in larger numbers.

[baby doll]

there's nothing inherently superior about the kind of spectacle that Hollywood specialized in back in the day versus nowI realize this is a matter of personal preference, but I do think watching legions of scantily-clad chorus girls forming shifting geometric patterns in time to music is inherently superior to watching vast computer-generated armies duking it out for hours.

[baby doll]

Again, that depends on the time you're looking at, if this writer's research (https://towardsdatascience.com/are-new-movies-longer-than-they-were-10hh20-50-year-ago-a35356b2ca5b) is anything to go on, since you can see that there are years where the average length of the most popular 10-30 films (the black/blue lines) are actually both lower than the overall average (the purple line), as seen in certain points during the early 70's/late 80's, even though the latter was well past the New Hollywood heyday:

https://i.ibb.co/xLJmdZx/1-Tn-I5pop9-RXNG8smp-g-Px-Zg.png (https://ibb.co/GpcsNmz)Of course, commercially successful isn't the same thing as a blockbuster. Love Story, Tootsie, and When Harry Met Sally made lots of money at the box office but I wouldn't call them blockbusters in that they lack expensive production values.

[Wryan]

Holy shit Shadow in the Cloud is so fuckin good. It's absolutely ludicrous and absurd, a total riot while being credibly tense at almost every moment. Fantastic lower-budget single-set creature feature pulp actioner. Makes outrageous use of its limited spaces and game cast. Stunning stuff packed into just 75 minutes!

If you like the Shatner Twilight Zone episode and love the moment in Executive Decision when Steven Seagal gets sucked the fuck outta the plane, you owe it to yourself to find and watch this asap. And don't watch a trailer first.

In fact, I'll do you one better. Here: https://123movies.net/watch/LxRlgVXd-shadow-in-the-cloud.html

[baby doll]

It's more like the intent is the same, but the approach is different.

Whereas decades ago an action climax might derive naturally from the story, nowadays the set pieces are written first, with the rest of the movie then stitched together with half assed motivations and exposition.

James Toback talked about this waaaay back in 2013, in an interview I wish I could find now. But basically he pointed out that if 4-5 set pieces take 20 minutes apiece, that doesn't leave much time for anything else. Maybe you have an hour? Maybe less? Characters, plot, subplot, themes, and story are all squeezed into a very small frame.

This is why so many superhero movies have such flat characters and narratives, playing like the Cliffs Notes versions of comic books. It's also why I think we're comparing apples to oranges. Epic films of yesteryear might have had similar runtimes to some Marvel movies, but the scope, ambition, and intent are completely different.

To put another spin on it: It took Warren Beatty 10 or 15 years to get the money for "Reds." Do you think anyone was that passionate about something like "Ant Man 2"? No, of course not, because "Ant Man 2" was made to meet the demands of the schedule, which was created to placate DISN shareholders, and announced on an earnings call meant to ensure Wall Street that Disney will absolutely make its Q3 2018 estimates.

Like, for example, "Cleopatra" might have been pure Hollywood folly and excess, and it might have bombed and almost bankrupted 20th Century Fox, but it wasn't created to serve the larger needs of Fox's Sword and Sandal Cinematic universe, and nobody viewed it as just another notch in the franchise bedpost.Although I don't disagree with anything you're saying, I think it's a bit limiting to understand the relationship between spectacle and story as necessarily antagonistic. It certainly can be (Jackie Chan's Police Story strikes me as a good example of a film where plot is subordinated to spectacle), but I can also think of cases where the two alternate without conflicting (again, the Busby Berkeley musicals of the '30s seem exemplary in this regard) and of cases where story and spectacle are mutually enhancing: In Titanic we don't care about the boat sinking; we care about the characters on the boat. Moreover, to suggest that contemporary super-hero movies privilege spectacle over story gives these films too much credit, since they don't do spectacle well either. Nobody working in Hollywood today can stage and shoot an action sequence anywhere near as well as Jackie Chan could in the '80s.

[Spun Lepton]

Well, my tour of the "Dirty" Harry Callahan movies is complete. I've watched The Dead Pool. I'd say all the sequels are about the same quality. Each of them entertaining, but nothing that I'd go crazy about. Magnum Force is probably the strongest, story-wise, even though they all have a certain level of ridiculousness to them. 7/10. Consider me surprised to see Jim Carrey as the first victim in the movie.

[DFA1979]

The Dead Pool is awful although Jim Carrey was great in it. Also how Harry defeats the villain is awesome and hilarious.

[Spun Lepton]

Also how Harry defeats the villain is awesome and hilarious.

This is true. I had a good laugh at that. What didn't you like about it? How was it different from the prior 4?

[DFA1979]

This is true. I had a good laugh at that. What didn't you like about it? How was it different from the prior 4?

I found it to be a parody of the other flicks. The toy car bomb is pretty cheesy.

[Spun Lepton]

The toy car bomb is pretty cheesy.

That's completely fair. That was probably the silliest part of the movie. I couldn't tell whether they were actually trying to make it silly or if they were trying to make it suspenseful.

[Yxklyx]

I found it to be a parody of the other flicks. The toy car bomb is pretty cheesy.

Kind of like Death Wish 3 then? I don't think they went out to make a parody but the third installment is pretty hilarious - probably the best of the bunch.

totally unrelated: Starz and their BS logo - that's one less customer for them...

[DFA1979]

Kind of like Death Wish 3 then? I don't think they went out to make a parody but the third installment is pretty hilarious - probably the best of the bunch.

totally unrelated: Starz and their BS logo - that's one less customer for them...

Death Wish 3 is hilarious and outlandish. The Dead Pool never reaches those heights. Now I'm dwelling on how many action franchises I've sat through over the years.

[Philip J. Fry]

1363493141639274506
Happy birthday you mad legend.

[Wryan]

It's a good thing that much of De Palma's Femme Fatale glides along deliciously and sensually without dialogue, because most of the dialogue that's there is simply awful. And the Butterfly Effect cum Final Destination ending is a straight howler. But it's so delighted with itself it's hard to not enjoy the ride at least a little.

[Mal]

I loathed Femme Fatale when it came out. Rewatched it early in quarantine and it was better, though all things considered, just ok- regardless of titillation.

[StuSmallz]

Martin Scorsese’s infinity war (https://film.avclub.com/martin-scorsese-s-infinity-war-1841004122):


And to return to Scorsese’s latest, actual, point: Curation should be celebrated, just as expertise should be appreciated and encouraged. And there’s a reasonable place for the algorithm. The rapacious capitalistic dictates of what kinds of movies get seen, streamed, and distributed shouldn’t be swept under the rug, any more than the grim economic realities of our current era that led to that predicament. Sure, we can well assure Scorsese that we know the difference between varying kinds of content: A Fellini film and a YouTube video of a cat falling out a window to AWOLNATION’s “Sail� are very different things, thank you very much. But it’s disingenuous to pretend we’re his intended target: The corporations and bottom-line-minded decision makers who dictate the value of content don’t give a fuck about qualitative differences, and certainly don’t care about the artistic merit of one over the other. Who controls our access to both art and entertainment is very much a matter of crucial importance, and the extremely rich people determining those matters do not need defending. They need the Martin Scorseses of the world to call them out; and rather than take umbrage at the suggestion that any movies we enjoy could be anything less than capital-A Art, maybe the rest of us need to support Scorsese, lest we eventually not even know what it is we’re missing out on.

[Skitch]

Man that guy picks odd hills on which to die. Like, who cares? Cinema evolves. It's a technically a relatively young art form.

[StuSmallz]

Man that guy picks odd hills on which to die. Like, who cares? Cinema evolves. It's a technically a relatively young art form.Speaking up against the continued commercialization of film at the expense of it remaining any form of personally-derived art is about the best hill a filmmaker could die on, if you ask me.

[Wryan]

That's silly. We'll always have non-commercial indie films. How else will we find the directors for the next Marvel movie?

[Irish]

Two main currents have risen to dominance in media during the 21st century as a result: 1) the demolishing of previous standards of elitism (often racist, sexist, and classist) via a mentality often loosely called “poptimism”; and 2) a broader cultural bias against elitism in any guise, fostered in part by a decades-long culture war waged by the right.

So despite the Culture Wars of the ’80s and ’90s, which saw the idea of multiculturalism emerge largely victorious against narrow-minded forces of Eurocentric panglossianism, it’s been a steady uphill battle to continue diversifying and broadening the scope of voices allowed into popular culture.

So it’s understandable why the old distinctions needed to be demolished: In many ways, they sucked. It’s all too easy to say “Atlanta is good, but it’s no Mad Men” and elide the long history of institutionalized racism that has traditionally devalued the work of BIPOC artists, especially because so much of these ideas were taught to us at the unconscious level.

So not only is this article glaringly ahistorical in too many places, it's also depressingly stupid.

The argument here is weak and the message muddled. You can't believe everything is art, with pop culture as net positive, and then propose that some elitism is good, actually.

[Ezee E]

Scorsese actually mentioned AWOLNATION "Sail?"

[Irish]

Scorsese actually mentioned AWOLNATION "Sail?"


As recently as fifteen years ago, the term “content” was heard only when people were discussing the cinema on a serious level, and it was contrasted with and measured against “form.” Then, gradually, it was used more and more by the people who took over media companies, most of whom knew nothing about the history of the art form, or even cared enough to think that they should. “Content” became a business term for all moving images: a David Lean movie, a cat video, a Super Bowl commercial, a superhero sequel, a series episode. It was linked, of course, not to the theatrical experience but to home viewing, on the streaming platforms that have come to overtake the moviegoing experience, just as Amazon overtook physical stores. On the one hand, this has been good for filmmakers, myself included. On the other hand, it has created a situation in which everything is presented to the viewer on a level playing field, which sounds democratic but isn’t. If further viewing is “suggested” by algorithms based on what you’ve already seen, and the suggestions are based only on subject matter or genre, then what does that do to the art of cinema?

Outside the opening and closing, the essay (https://harpers.org/archive/2021/03/il-maestro-federico-fellini-martin-scorsese/) is really just a paean to the genius of Fellini.

[Spun Lepton]

So not only is this article glaringly ahistorical in too many places, it's also depressingly stupid.

Depressingly stupid is par for the course at the AVClub.

[baby doll]

As far as I can tell, all Scorsese was arguing in his Harper's article was that people should take movies seriously as an art, which is something people have been saying for a hundred years--although there's something quintessentially 1950s about Scorsese's implication that film's significance as art rests on the work of a handful capital-A Auteurs who developed a consistent authorial persona in their films, and Fellini in particular. And by only citing either European art house directors or American directors of his own generation who specialized in ripping them off (Allen, Fosse, Mazursky) as Auteurs--as opposed to Ford, Hawks, Lubitsch, et al. (Hitchcock is mentioned once in passing as a "brand")--Scorsese does leave himself open to the charge of implicitly upholding a high/low art binary, a binary that, as the AV Club writer suggests, is grounded more in race, class, and sex than in aesthetics. Even worse, here and in his earlier dismissal of comic book movies as theme park attractions, Scorsese implicitly grants that contemporary mass culture is actually entertaining. Probably the single most depressing moment in the AV Club article is when the author describes a film as pleasurable as Parasite as though it were some rarefied high art that only a connoisseur could enjoy, which just goes to show how completely degraded the concept of entertainment has become by the culture industry's utter contempt for its audience. (Two years ago, when I told my wife that I thought Justine Triet's Sibyl was "entertaining," she thought it meant I didn't like it.) The problem with contemporary Hollywood cinema isn't that it's frivolous entertainment; the problem is that it sucks.

[Skitch]

Speaking up against the continued commercialization of film at the expense of it remaining any form of personally-derived art is about the best hill a filmmaker could die on, if you ask me.

I'm not saying hes wrong, hes allowed to feel that way, but has there ever been more room for indy filmmaking?

[Grouchy]

Outside the opening and closing, the essay (https://harpers.org/archive/2021/03/il-maestro-federico-fellini-martin-scorsese/) is really just a paean to the genius of Fellini.
Well, it's arguably the intent, but I also believe there is a lot of worth in what he says about "content".

[DFA1979]

I just want Marty to make that western he's been planning. I don't give a shit what he thinks about Marvel movies.

[Wryan]

Someone tell me how the fuck this isn't Martin Freeman in heavy makeup as Stalin but is, rather, someone else entirely named Adrian McLoughlin? Because that's fucking Martin Freeman in heavy makeup.

https://splatteronfilm.files.wordpress .com/2020/04/tumblr_p92i0ruoqr1qj6sk2o1_128 0.jpg?w=1024

From the moment I saw the trailer, I said, "That's Martin Freeman lol." He even sounds like him. I've never been more convinced of something in my life. BUT NO. It is not.

How???

[StuSmallz]

Well, it's arguably the intent, but I also believe there is a lot of worth in what he says about "content".Agreed, and while I understand the concerns about the "cult of the auteur" being taken too far, it's not an either/or dilemma; it's possible to acknowledge that just giving any self-described "auteur" creative freedom won't automatically result in better movies all the time, while also feel that Hollywood as it is doesn't give enough freedom to the right artists. That's the reason why I'm focusing on the latter here, not because I feel Hollywood is too artist friendly, but not artist-friendly enough.in its current state. If anyone else feels otherwise, I'd hear them out, but I'd have to hear a good case first to start putting credence in that viewpoint.

[StanleyK]

So, in Funny Games, Michael Haneke sets out to criticise audiences for watching violent thrillers. He decides that the best course of action is to make a violent thriller (a very good one I might add, with plenty of superbly-directed tension). After directly calling out the viewer for deriving pleasure from the torture of the innocent family, he then chastises us by denying the victims comeuppance on the villains. But doesn't that directly contradict his own thesis that we are voyeuristic sadists? Ultimately, it seems like the only way to 'beat' Haneke would be to not watch the film at all, or walk out when things start to get violent.

I'm going to say the p-word: Michael Haneke is pretentious. He thinks he's morally above violent cinema while making nothing but violent cinema (at least up to 1997) and that his audiences are vile for watching the movies he makes.

[megladon8]

Thank you. Yes. 100%.

I saw an interview with him where he said exactly what you suggested - he wanted people to be punished for not walking out of the film when things started to get unpleasant.

Head-up-ass of the highest order.

[Ezee E]

Pretentious? In other movies, sure. But I think Funny Games takes an approach that mutually resonates with the audience and was actually intended by Haneke at the same time.

I think he has other movies where he believes there's a lot more within his movie that what's actually there.

[Skitch]

I do not disagree.

Still a good movie lol

[Wryan]

"I'll tell you what. The day I need a friend like you, I'll just have myself a little squat and shit one out." --Mrs. Carmody, The Mist

One of the great wtf moments I can remember in "recent" memory. At least, that's what I thought before the events of the last few years. Now it just seems like an accurate portrayal of the melodramatic, self-victimizing, insane evangelical white woman. Now, after seeing so many videos of these folks in action calling the police on Black people and screaming about Jesus, this proto-Karen hits different, as they say.

[DFA1979]

I liked Funny Games but I wanted a movie that didn't feature any winking nods to the camera. When the flick is being relentless and brutal I was engaged. I feel that Scream did the meta thing better even if Funny Games has the superior ending.

[DFA1979]

"I'll tell you what. The day I need a friend like you, I'll just have myself a little squat and shit one out." --Mrs. Carmody, The Mist

One of the great wtf moments I can remember in "recent" memory. At least, that's what I thought before the events of the last few years. Now it just seems like an accurate portrayal of the melodramatic, self-victimizing, insane evangelical white woman. Now, after seeing so many videos of these folks in action calling the police on Black people and screaming about Jesus, this proto-Karen hits different, as they say.Oh absolutely. Especially since so many white women voted for Trump.

[baby doll]

I liked Funny Games but I wanted a movie that didn't feature any winking nods to the camera. When the flick is being relentless and brutal I was engaged. I feel that Scream did the meta thing better even if Funny Games has the superior ending.Aren't the winking nods kind of the whole point, that the film isn't relentless and brutal for the sake of being relentless and brutal but that it produces a reaction and then forces the spectator to think about their reactions? In that sense, Haneke's film is doing something rather different than Craven's film, which is playfully revising some of the conventions of the slasher film in order to produce a response without fundamentally questioning the genre's aims and means.

[Grouchy]

I think he has other movies where he believes there's a lot more within his movie that what's actually there.
Ironically, I feel this way about Funny Games but not about most of his other films.

[DFA1979]

Aren't the winking nods kind of the whole point, that the film isn't relentless and brutal for the sake of being relentless and brutal but that it produces a reaction and then forces the spectator to think about their reactions? In that sense, Haneke's film is doing something rather different than Craven's film, which is playfully revising some of the conventions of the slasher film in order to produce a response without fundamentally questioning the genre's aims and means.

I know, it's just that I liked that Haneke made a nasty slasher film with bite that wasn't afraid to go against Hollywood conventions. I never got the hate it received.

[Spun Lepton]

So, before I move forward with this, I first have to make an excuse for why I attempted to watch this. 1. It was late and I was tired. 2. I really wanted some popcorn, and I feel obligated to watch a movie when I eat popcorn. 3. I didn't feel like dedicating myself to a movie that would require much attention or thought.

Caveman (1981) -- It's funny because Ringo Starr is trying to rape Barbara Bach in her sleep, and he's just SO BAD AT IT! Haw haw!! Aside from the boys-club aesthetic, it also feels pretty lazy and predictable. The moment Starr and Quaid crack each others' backs to stand upright, you can see every "discovery" gag coming. Discovered fire? Check. Discovered music? Okay, whatever, movie. Check. In its favor, I will give them a little credit for the cartoony stop-motion dinosaurs, only because I love me some Ray Harryhausen. Left unfinished. An extremely generous 3/10, if only for the stop-motion and the giant bug being squished on Dennis Quaid's face (the only gag to give me a legitimate laugh). Boy, I bet he tries really hard to forget he was in this.

[megladon8]

The Dark Tower is...one of the worst movies I've seen in recent memory. The Naked Cage, a DTV quality 80s women-in-prison titty flick is a more coherent vision. I can't remember the last time a villain hit with such a thud.

What were they thinking?

[DFA1979]

I saw Caveman when I was younger via TBS. I recall it being pretty awful.

[transmogrifier]

The Dark Tower is...one of the worst movies I've seen in recent memory. The Naked Cage, a DTV quality 80s women-in-prison titty flick is a more coherent vision. I can't remember the last time a villain hit with such a thud.

What were they thinking?

Established IP + cinematic universe potential = $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

That would be the extent of it

[Skitch]

The Dark Tower is...one of the worst movies I've seen in recent memory. The Naked Cage, a DTV quality 80s women-in-prison titty flick is a more coherent vision. I can't remember the last time a villain hit with such a thud.

What were they thinking?

Goes to my theory that only a very select few can adapt King properly.

[Spun Lepton]

Goes to my theory that only a very select few can adapt King properly.

And that person was George Romero.

[megladon8]

Frank Darabont is the most successful King adaptor, in my books.

But The Dark Tower didn't even feel like an adaptation of King's work. It's like the writers looked over a couple of the cover art pieces and were like "cool. Got it. Let's write it tonight!"

It feels very YA in all the worst ways.

And good God McConaughey was awful. His performance, his look, his character, everything.

And all the people who worked for him, on an alien world, and apparently just showed up to filming wearing whatever they had on at the time.

What the hell was this?

[StuSmallz]

Frank Darabont is the most successful King adaptor, in my books.

But The Dark Tower didn't even feel like an adaptation of King's work. It's like the writers looked over a couple of the cover art pieces and were like "cool. Got it. Let's write it tonight!"

It feels very YA in all the worst ways.

And good God McConaughey was awful. His performance, his look, his character, everything.

And all the people who worked for him, on an alien world, and apparently just showed up to filming wearing whatever they had on at the time.

What the hell was this?Yeah, I didn't even bother checking it out once the reviews hit, and almost everyone agreed that they had butchered my favorite book series of all time in the process of adaptation; maybe in a just alternative world somewhere on The Path Of The Beam, some Peter Jackson type, one who was actually reverent to the books, was allowed by Hollywood to do the full, faithful adaptation the series deserved. At any rate, this conversation reminded me that I never got around to reading The Wind Through The Keyhole , so l think I'm going to order that now and fill that blind spot.

[megladon8]

I'm honestly not even one of those people who needs a 100% faithful adaptation of works I love.

I've said many times, if I want the exact same experience as the original, I'll go to the original.

I like when adaptations take liberties.

The problem with this film was that it was just terrible no matter how you slice it. Poor pacing, ugly, poorly acted by everyone except Elba, McConaughey is embarrassing. Awful effects. Completely incoherent.

It's a terrible movie.

[megladon8]

Best films starring Hedi Lamarr, please!

[Yxklyx]

Best films starring Hedi Lamarr, please!

I've seen a lot of films from the 30s and 40s but not one with Hedi Lamarr. Prime has Dishonored Lady but I doubt it's in any good condition to watch. Is Algiers a "remake" of Pépé le Moko?

[Spun Lepton]

Best films starring Hedi Lamarr, please!

https://michaelstvtray.files.wordpress .com/2013/02/harvey-korman.jpg

[DFA1979]

Has there ever been a case where both the original film and the remake were terrible? I was wondering that today.

[StuSmallz]

Has there ever been a case where both the original film and the remake were terrible? I was wondering that today.The various Doctor Dolittle​s?

[DFA1979]

The various Doctor Dolittle​s?

Hmm I kind of liked the Eddie Murphy one a little. I never saw the original.

[DFA1979]

I was looking through Tubi's "Leaving Now" section and I came across Runaway Train. That is one great macho driven picture that is probably one of the few times Eric Roberts turned in a note worthy performance. Jon Voight chews scenery like no one's business in that movie. The harsh Alaskan landscape is a much a character in this movie as the train is, and the score is pretty good, too.

[StuSmallz]

Hmm I kind of liked the Eddie Murphy one a little. I never saw the original.Although, while there's not necessarily a huge difference, I think the Murphy/Downey films were intended as "new adaptations" of the books, rather than remakes of the previous films specifically, so I don't know if they count. How about Friday The 13th 1980 & '09, then?

[Skitch]

Runaway Train is a GREAT film.

[Mr. McGibblets]

Has there ever been a case where both the original film and the remake were terrible? I was wondering that today.I wouldn't say 'terrible,' but I dislike both Thomas Crown Affairs.

[megladon8]

Although, while there's not necessarily a huge difference, I think the Murphy/Downey films were intended as "new adaptations" of the books, rather than remakes of the previous films specifically, so I don't know if they count. How about Friday The 13th 1980 & '09, then?

You're joking, right?

Friday the 13th? Terrible?

[Idioteque Stalker]

Can't say for sure because I haven't seen it, but Friday the 13th doesn't seem to enjoy the reputation of its major slasher peers like Halloween, Nightmare On Elms Street, and Texas Chainsaw Massacre.

[megladon8]

Halloween was only 1 genuinely great movie until 2018.

Likewise, NoES was 1 incredible movie and 2 decent sequels.

TCM is one great movie.

F13 may not reach the heights of the highest points of the other slasher mainstays, but I would strongly argue that the influence it had on the genre, film, and pop culture as a whole makes it hard to argue that the original film is objectively terrible.

[Skitch]

Hmm...maybe The Italian Job? I havent seen the remake in forever but the original was terrible.

[StuSmallz]

Can't say for sure because I haven't seen it, but Friday the 13th doesn't seem to enjoy the reputation of its major slasher peers like Halloween, Nightmare On Elms Street, and Texas Chainsaw Massacre.​It's true.

[Dukefrukem]

Has there ever been a case where both the original film and the remake were terrible? I was wondering that today.

The first two Thing / The Thing from Another World movies are not good.

[DFA1979]

Runaway Train is a GREAT film.

It was a long overdue first viewing. Also I rather like both Thomas Crown Affairs. The 1980 F13th is a good, solid horror movie. The remake was ok.

[DFA1979]

Hmm...maybe The Italian Job? I havent seen the remake in forever but the original was terrible.

I did not like the remake. I haven't seen the original.

[DFA1979]

The first two Thing / The Thing from Another World movies are not good.

What? The 1952 and 1982 The Thing flicks are great.

[megladon8]

The first two Thing / The Thing from Another World movies are not good.

Wait...

Duke...

Please, no. I know we've bad our disagreements in the past...but don't do me like this...

[Skitch]

I like the Pierce Brosnan Thomas Crown Affair quite a bit. I like both Things. I have seen the F13th remake twice and I couldnt tell you one damn thing about it...which to me is almost worse than being able to say it's terrible. It's clearly so mediocre it autodeletes from my brain the second its over.

[Skitch]

Wait...

Duke...

Please, no. I know we've bad our disagreements in the past...but don't do me like this...

Duke is officially in newborn phase. Nothing he says for the next 6 months to a year can be trusted because he'll be on max 3 hours sleep a night. By next week it will be completely incoherent babbling.

He did the correct thing by having another, though. Down the road he can yell, "go play with your brother", which is much preferred to parents being the only in house playmate. This is the way

[baby doll]

I haven't seen Carpenter's The Thing but the Howard Hawks original is a very tightly crafted piece of filmmaking.

[Skitch]

I haven't seen Carpenter's The Thing but the Howard Hawks original is a very tightly crafted piece of filmmaking.

I've seen the remake dozens of times, but only saw the original a year or two ago. Not being much of a fan of that era, I was surprised how effective it was. The monster (understandably more Frankensteiny than remake) was surprisingly scary. I kind of got Terminator vibes from it. Good flick.

[Dukefrukem]

What? The 1952 and 1982 The Thing flicks are great.

I said the first two.

[Skitch]

I said the first two.

I thought that was a trap.

[megladon8]

K, what movies are we talking about here Duke?

[Spun Lepton]

Horror Express?

[megladon8]

"You know who else was just following orders? Hitler."

The Nice Guys might become my #1 of the year.

[Dukefrukem]

Horror Express?

There ya go.

[Spun Lepton]

There ya go.

Never seen it. Almost started watching it a few times. I mean ... Christopher Lee, Peter Cushing, and Telly Savalas. But, general reviews of it are pretty poor.

[megladon8]

If I ever knew Horror Express was an adaptation of Who Goes There?, I'd completely forgotten.

I dig it though.

The Thing From Another World is fantastic.

[Yxklyx]

Never seen it. Almost started watching it a few times. I mean ... Christopher Lee, Peter Cushing, and Telly Savalas. But, general reviews of it are pretty poor.

Horror Express is watchable.

[Skitch]

Quite enjoyed Horror Express.

[DFA1979]

The Horror Express isn't a great film but it's one of my all time favorite horror movies.

[Skitch]

I would like to hear peoples thoughts on SFW.

[transmogrifier]

I would like to hear peoples thoughts on SFW.

Seoul Fashion Week is pretty cool, but it can be a little crowded.

[Idioteque Stalker]

I would like to hear peoples thoughts on SFW.

Ever since it split from LAW following their infamous debacle, San Francisco Wrestling just isn't what it used to be.

[Yxklyx]

I would like to hear peoples thoughts on SFW.

I'm not familiar with Seattle Film Works but maybe that's just because I'm not shooting any film.

[Lazlo]

I love to be Safe For Work so I don't get fired.

[Skitch]

No one has seen the film SFW. Got it.

[baby doll]

Sluts Fuck Werewolves is my favourite niche porn genre.

[Philip J. Fry]

Sluts Fuck Werewolves is my favourite niche porn genre.That sounds a lot like furry porn (Not that there's anything wrong with that, mind you).

[Idioteque Stalker]

Yeah, that must've been the film Skitch was talking about.

[Skitch]

Yeah, that must've been the film Skitch was talking about.

Slut Fuck Werewolves is a great flick, but its called Slut Fuck Werewolves. SFW is a filmed called SFW.

[Spun Lepton]

Never seen SFW because the buzz has always been very bad. Have never see Sluts Fuck Werewolves, either. I'd probably watch that before SFW, though.

Mouse Hunt -- Was in a bad mood after work yesterday and I needed a light comedy. I forgot how enjoyable this was. Very silly and a touch hammy, which is OK. Very obviously inspired by old slapstick movies, especially Laurel and Hardy. Christopher Walken steals the movie. Loved the whimsical production design. Gore Verbinski's movies always look so good. 8/10

[megladon8]

While overall my favorites of the MCU are the Cap movies, rewatching Iron Man 3 last night has solidified it as top tier MCU. Top 3, actually.

It also is the only Marvel movie thus far with real thematic depth and meat to the character(s). We actually see substantial growth and change in Tony throughout, and real insight into his character. Way above anything else that MCU has churned out, and impressive even when viewed outside of its superhero trappings.

Brilliant work incorporating the questionable Mandarin.

The writing is fantastic, both dialogue and plotting. The Shane Black-isms fit Stark and his world so well.

The weakest parts are when it gets superhero-y, which is kind of expected since Black's films are often weakest when they try to be action movies.

The journey Stark takes culminating in him repeating his signature "I am Iron Man" line before credits roll, imbues the line with so much more weight and a whole new meaning.

Great stuff. Doubt we will ever get a Marvel movie like this again.

[Dukefrukem]

While overall my favorites of the MCU are the Cap movies, rewatching Iron Man 3 last night has solidified it as top tier MCU. Top 3, actually.

It also is the only Marvel movie thus far with real thematic depth and meat to the character(s). We actually see substantial growth and change in Tony throughout, and real insight into his character. Way above anything else that MCU has churned out, and impressive even when viewed outside of its superhero trappings.

Brilliant work incorporating the questionable Mandarin.

The writing is fantastic, both dialogue and plotting. The Shane Black-isms fit Stark and his world so well.

The weakest parts are when it gets superhero-y, which is kind of expected since Black's films are often weakest when they try to be action movies.

The journey Stark takes culminating in him repeating his signature "I am Iron Man" line before credits roll, imbues the line with so much more weight and a whole new meaning.

Great stuff. Doubt we will ever get a Marvel movie like this again.

http://matchcut.artboiled.com/showthread.php?4704-Iron-Man-3-(Shane-Black)&highlight=Iron

[megladon8]

This is a general film discussion thread where people talk about what they've watched recently. What's the problem?

Plus, if I posted in a 7 year old archived thread, no one is going to see it.

[Dukefrukem]

This is a general film discussion thread where people talk about what they've watched recently. What's the problem?

Plus, if I posted in a 7 year old archived thread, no one is going to see it.

Everyone who hits the NEW POST button will see it. Like how most forums work.

[StuSmallz]

This is a general film discussion thread where people talk about what they've watched recently. What's the problem?

Plus, if I posted in a 7 year old archived thread, no one is going to see it.That's why I like having one big film thread on a forum...

: D

[Spun Lepton]

Don't make me pull this message board over, you two.

[megladon8]

I will continue to use this thread to post about whatever I've watched recently, whether it's arthouse, Marvel, or cock porn.

[Skitch]

I will continue to use this thread to post about whatever I've watched recently, whether it's arthouse, Marvel, or cock porn.

As long as you don't try to discuss a movie no one has seen.

[megladon8]

As long as you don't try to discuss a movie no one has seen.

Don't worry Skitch. I won't spoil Backdoor Sluts 9 for you.

[Dukefrukem]

I will continue to use this thread to post about whatever I've watched recently, whether it's arthouse, Marvel, or cock porn.

Do whatever you want. I'm just saying you'll get more people RESPONDING and CONVERSING to you (like me for example with anything Marvel) if you post in the appropriate thread. But if you just want to use this thread* as your personal bulletin board, be my guest.

[Peng]

That's why I like having one big film thread on a forum...

: D

Which, as deep-dive as posters there was, makes Corrierino so cluttered when everyone cross-posts to pieces, especially when it comes to TV, in which everyone-at-once discussion and excessive spoiler tags make that thread a mess.

[transmogrifier]

Top 3 Marvel:

1. Thor Ragnarok
2. The Guardians of the Galaxy
3. Iron Man 3

[DFA1979]

No one has seen the film SFW. Got it.

Sorry I kind of forgot it existed so I never saw it. I did just view Warlock (1989). Don't worry Duke I'll take about in the horror thread so as not to violate the all mighty sanctity of The Film Discussion Thread.

[DFA1979]

The Corrie is dead and gone. The Bear killed it.

[DFA1979]

Infinity War
Winter Soldier
Black Panther

[Spun Lepton]

My MCU Rankings

(https://letterboxd.com/grimstreet/list/my-mcu-rankings/)I don't know why I've dragged my feet on Iron Man 3 for so long.

[megladon8]

I still don't understand the dislike for Guardians 2.

[Spun Lepton]

Is there a lot of dislike for it? Letterboxd seems pretty happy with it.

[Ezee E]

Terrible villain is the thing for me.

[Spun Lepton]

When you have a problem with Kurt Russel, you have a PROBLEM WITH ME.

*flexes*

[megladon8]

Is there a lot of dislike for it? Letterboxd seems pretty happy with it.

I remember the consensus on MC being that it is bottom tier Marvel, with Iron Man 2 and Thor: The Dark World.

[StuSmallz]

Is there a lot of dislike for it? Letterboxd seems pretty happy with it.The critics liked it significantly less than the original, but I felt it was a pretty good sequel (https://letterboxd.com/stusmallz/film/guardians-of-the-galaxy-vol-2/); I mean, a lot of the novelty of the characters is gone, so it was never going to feel as fresh, but you can say that about a lot of sequels, and at least it was more visually impressive, with that amazing usage of color, and it still packed a lot of emotion into its runtime, as you can see:


https://youtu.be/8VulkN5OLEM

[DFA1979]

I love both of the GOTG movies.

[Skitch]

I liked it, but man, how do you follow up that first one? Its literally perfect.

[Spun Lepton]

"I'm Mary Poppins, y'all!"

[Idioteque Stalker]

"I'm Mary Poppins, y'all!"

Funniest moment in entire MCU.

[Skitch]

Part 2 also has one of those MCU moments that makes me insta-ugly cry.

[Wryan]

Also thought Vol. 2 was better, tho still flawed in places (a lot of it centered on its handling of Mantis). I extend a lot of courtesy for Kurt Russell.

[Wryan]

Oh yeah Taserface tho. Fuck all that stuff. Not one bit of that worked.

[StuSmallz]

Part 2 also has one of those MCU moments that makes me insta-ugly cry.You mean this one?:


https://youtu.be/Ce2a0wWtnJA

[Skitch]

I'm your daddy

[Wryan]

Laughing at this RT summary for Constantine:

"Despite solid production values and an intriguing premise, Constantine lacks the focus of another spiritual shoot-em-up: The Matrix."

Oh yes, RT? Constantine was trying to be like some kind of Matrix Exorcist? How weird. There's a whole lot to enjoy in Constantine, even with its flaws. It's got quite some style and is just plain well made.

[DFA1979]

Oh yeah Taserface tho. Fuck all that stuff. Not one bit of that worked.

I thought that part was hilarious.

[DFA1979]

"I'm Mary Poppins, y'all!"

Great bit.

[Skitch]

I like Constantine, and I agree.

[Wryan]

Taserface was so over the top for me, even in this movie. Even tho it's intentional to contrast the new captain with Yondu and his developments in this movie. It's like the Village argument: "Oh but their acting is so bad because they're like doing theater and aren't good at being old-timey!" It....still sucks tho. :)

[Irish]

Can anyone tell me if Letterboxd posters cripplegate and SODA CHAMP (aka brand-upon-the-brain aka KingPizzaFrog) are Match Cutters?

I think cripplegate is Stay Puft, but no clue about Soda Champ.

Any ideas?

[Idioteque Stalker]

Can anyone tell me if Letterboxd posters cripplegate and SODA CHAMP (aka brand-upon-the-brain aka KingPizzaFrog) are Match Cutters?

I think cripplegate is Stay Puft, but no clue about Soda Champ.

Any ideas?

cripplegate is Stay Puft. They have the exact same favorite films of 2020, posted around the same time. Not sure about the other one.

[megladon8]

Does an actor's salary factor into a film's budget, or are salaries separate from the production budget?

[Skitch]

Does an actor's salary factor into a film's budget, or are salaries separate from the production budget?

As far as I know they figure into the production budget.

[StanleyK]

Mamoru Hosoda:

The Girl Who Leapt Through Time - 5.5
Summer Wars - 2.5
Wolf Children - 7
The Boy and the Beast - 4
Mirai - 4



Out of all the anime movies I've seen, Hosoda's are the most anime, and consequently the most annoying.

[Idioteque Stalker]

Mamoru Hosoda:

The Girl Who Leapt Through Time - 5.5
Summer Wars - 2.5
Wolf Children - 7
The Boy and the Beast - 4
Mirai - 4



Out of all the anime movies I've seen, Hosoda's are the most anime, and consequently the most annoying.

That's like ordering fish and then complaining that it tastes like fish. Your highest and lowest ratings are the ones I haven't seen yet. Looking forward to Wolf Children especially. Like you, I'll probably skip the Digimon movie -- but I am eagerly anticipating his upcoming Belle.

The Girl Who Leapt Through Time - 8
The Boy and the Beast - 6
Mirai - 7

Along with Masaaki Yuasa, my favorite anime director currently working.

[Spun Lepton]

Woof, Jojo Rabbit has an extremely effective punch-in-the-gut moment in the middle. Did not expect to cry like that. 8/10

[DFA1979]

Woof, Jojo Rabbit has an extremely effective punch-in-the-gut moment in the middle. Did not expect to cry like that. 8/10

Yeah that part was a big surprise. Glad I saw it in theaters.

[Dukefrukem]

Can anyone tell me if Letterboxd posters cripplegate and SODA CHAMP (aka brand-upon-the-brain aka KingPizzaFrog) are Match Cutters?

I think cripplegate is Stay Puft, but no clue about Soda Champ.

Any ideas?

I'm not following any of Soda Champs accounts so they are likely not MCers.

[Idioteque Stalker]

Can anyone tell me, apart from My Winnipeg, which Guy Maddin movies are not silents?

[baby doll]

Can anyone tell me, apart from My Winnipeg, which Guy Maddin movies are not silents?Define silent. Even those without spoken dialogue have music and sound effects.

[Idioteque Stalker]

Define silent. Even those without spoken dialogue have music and sound effects.

Yeah, it gets tricky. I suppose I mean movies in which there is little-to-no spoken dialogue or diegetic sound in general. Sound added in post, like a score, is usually acceptable (and even the Tramp gets a slide whistle when his pants fall down). Basically movies that kinda/sorta/mostly adhere to the rules of the pre-sound era.

I'm not super familiar with Maddin, so it's quite possible he intentionally makes the distinction difficult on many occasions. But for my purposes My Winnipeg is a sound film, whereas The Heart of the World is a silent film. I'm wondering which others fall on one side or the other.

[StanleyK]

That's like ordering fish and then complaining that it tastes like fish.

I see your point but I have enjoyed a number of anime movies and these were critically acclaimed ones so I gave them a chance. But when you come at me with high school girls who acquire the power of time travel and use it to avoid awkward conversations or boys who get a kiss from their crush and start bleeding profusely from the nose, you've lost me.

[baby doll]

Yeah, it gets tricky. I suppose I mean movies in which there is little-to-no spoken dialogue or diegetic sound in general. Sound added in post, like a score, is usually acceptable (and even the Tramp gets a slide whistle when his pants fall down). Basically movies that kinda/sorta/mostly adhere to the rules of the pre-sound era.

I'm not super familiar with Maddin, so it's quite possible he intentionally makes the distinction difficult on many occasions. But for my purposes My Winnipeg is a sound film, whereas The Heart of the World is a silent film. I'm wondering which others fall on one side or the other.Most of Maddin's features have synchronized dialogue, the only exceptions I can think of being Dracula: Pages from a Virgin's Diary, Cowards Bend the Knee, and Brand upon the Brain!

[Wryan]

Feels like this would be enjoyed by people here who love Tarantino and those who are meh on him:

https://www.tiktok.com/@itsevanwilliams/video/6939912091365149957?is_copy_ur l=1&is_from_webapp=v1

[Yxklyx]

Most of Maddin's features have synchronized dialogue, the only exceptions I can think of being Dracula: Pages from a Virgin's Diary, Cowards Bend the Knee, and Brand upon the Brain!

It's unfortunate that he added voice-over narration to Brand upon the Brain (at least the versions I've seen), I think that film would work much better without it. It seemed more like a marketing gimmick as he had different versions done with narration by different people.

[Philip J. Fry]

That's like ordering fish and then complaining that it tastes like fish. Your highest and lowest ratings are the ones I haven't seen yet. Looking forward to Wolf Children especially. Like you, I'll probably skip the Digimon movie -- but I am eagerly anticipating his upcoming Belle.

The Girl Who Leapt Through Time - 8
The Boy and the Beast - 6
Mirai - 7

Along with Masaaki Yuasa, my favorite anime director currently working.For whatever is worth, Wolf Children is on my top 10 animated films of the past decade (and I've seen a fair share of them) so you're in for a treat. Really good film.

[Idioteque Stalker]

I was so ready to pop in my blu-ray of The Killer from Netflix. Turns out it's cracked and unplayable. As the service becomes less popular, this seems to happen more often. Bummer.

[StuSmallz]

I was so ready to pop in my blu-ray of The Killer from Netflix. Turns out it's cracked and unplayable. As the service becomes less popular, this seems to happen more often. Bummer.That sucks; would that have been your first time watching The Killer (https://letterboxd.com/stusmallz/film/the-killer/), by the way?

[Idioteque Stalker]

That sucks; would that have been your first time watching The Killer (https://letterboxd.com/stusmallz/film/the-killer/), by the way?

Yes. I don't have much experience with action movies from Hong Kong. I've ordered a replacement disc and added the 36th Chamber of Shaolin to my watchlist, mainly out of respect for the Wu-Tang Clan.

[Skitch]

I bought The Killer on dvd from Dollar Tree for a buck. I've never seen it.

[DFA1979]

The Killer is great. I'm not surprised that Netflix is neglecting their old DVD/Blu-ray in the mail service since they want people to use streaming instead.

[DFA1979]

Wild Bill is frustrating. Sure I liked it, and it's decent enough as far as 1990s westerns go, but man does the last act drag way too much. Solid cast helps a lot, headlined by the awesome Jeff Bridges, yet the movie is largely fantasy and offers very little if any interesting insights into Wild Bill. Oh well. Funny how Roger Ebert didn't like this or Dead Man even though Dead Man is excellent.

Viewed via Tubi, which if this service had existed years back I probably wouldn't have signed up for Netflix.

[StuSmallz]

Yes. I don't have much experience with action movies from Hong Kong. I've ordered a replacement disc and added the 36th Chamber of Shaolin to my watchlist, mainly out of respect for the Wu-Tang Clan.Well, I can't think of a much better place to start with HK Action movies than Woo's work (https://letterboxd.com/stusmallz/tag/woo/reviews/) from '86-to-'92 there, so keep at it, man!

[StuSmallz]

The Killer is great. I'm not surprised that Netflix is neglecting their old DVD/Blu-ray in the mail service since they want people to use streaming instead.Me and the rest of the family were pretty early adopters of the mail-in service back in the mid-2000's, and I used their streaming service a lot as soon it started back in '07 as well (back when all the movies were in 240P quality; no better way to watch Jaws for the first time right, haha), but I left both behind some time back, since I only rent/purchase movies one-by-one digitally these days for convenience, and I've only re-subscribed to Netflix streaming when they have some big exclusive I want, like The Irishman. Still, I'm glad to see them filling a bit of a niche for the auteurs of the world, as Hollywood keeps cutting out mid-budget efforts in favor of going either increasingly big or small by comparison.

[Spun Lepton]

AV Club says the restored 219-minute cut of Heaven's Gate is a masterpiece.

https://film.avclub.com/one-of-hollywood-s-biggest-flops-ever-is-a-masterpiece (https://film.avclub.com/one-of-hollywood-s-biggest-flops-ever-is-a-masterpiece-1846250001?utm_source=fark&utm_medium=website&utm_content=link&ICID=ref_fark)

[Wryan]

Nomadland was so good and natural it was almost frightening. I felt it down in my bones. Is there an Oscar for Entire Supporting Cast of Non-Actors? After this, it almost feels like there should be. But then how much of it is really acting and how much is just...being? existing? living? Hard to say, but this walloped me. In certain corners of the internet, much has been made of Zhao's background of privilege or how the book was more anti-Amazon/anti-capitalism, but I don't care much about that. This could have a bit more bite in its explanation of just how these folks got to be as unmoored as they are, but this is shooting more for elegiac and wanderlusty. And that part speaks to me quite well. Could pair nicely with Penn's Into the Wild, as long as you watch Nomadland second. You'd need some uplift at the end of that double-feature.

[baby doll]

AV Club says the restored 219-minute cut of Heaven's Gate is a masterpiece.

https://film.avclub.com/one-of-hollywood-s-biggest-flops-ever-is-a-masterpiece (https://film.avclub.com/one-of-hollywood-s-biggest-flops-ever-is-a-masterpiece-1846250001?utm_source=fark&utm_medium=website&utm_content=link&ICID=ref_fark)I've seen the film three times, it looks better each time I see it, and yet, it's ultimately a film I find easier to admire than love. It is so portentous and slow and sepia-toned, it's impossible to get very involved in the story.

Some four-hour movies that really are masterpieces, off the top of my head: Jacques Rivette's La Belle noiseuse, Edward Yang's A Brighter Summer Day, and Lav Diaz's The Woman Who Left.

[Spun Lepton]

It sounds like these other films you recommended have a faster pace, then? "Portentous and slow," 4-hour movies would definitely push me away. Honestly, I haven't had much interest in Heaven's Gate, restored version or not. The story for The Woman Who Left sounds appealing to me, but the trailer makes it look like it has a pretty languid pace, too. Does the story turn fast enough to justify 4 hours? Any 90-to-150 minute masterpieces you'd suggest?

Edit: I suppose by calling in a masterpiece, you are already suggesting it justifies its run-time. I guess I'm always just hesitant to jump into 4-hour movies.

[Idioteque Stalker]

Jacques Rivette's La Belle noiseuse

Watchlisted. My ~4hr favorites are Edvard Munch and Once Upon a Time in America.

[Idioteque Stalker]

Along with Masaaki Yuasa, my favorite anime director currently working.

Okay, add Naoko Yamada to this list. She hasn't made many movies, but both A Silent Voice and Liz and the Blue Bird are very good. I eagerly anticipate her next movie, but it's probably not coming out for a while after some asshole accusing Kyoto Animation of plagiarism lit the studio on fire, killing 36 people. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyoto_Animation_arson_attack)

[Philip J. Fry]

Okay, add Naoko Yamada to this list. She hasn't made many movies, but both A Silent Voice and Liz and the Blue Bird are very good. I eagerly anticipate her next movie, but it's probably not coming out for a while after some asshole accusing Kyoto Animation of plagiarism lit the studio on fire, killing 36 people. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyoto_Animation_arson_attack)T hey're so good.

[baby doll]

It sounds like these other films you recommended have a faster pace, then? "Portentous and slow," 4-hour movies would definitely push me away. Honestly, I haven't had much interest in Heaven's Gate, restored version or not. The story for The Woman Who Left sounds appealing to me, but the trailer makes it look like it has a pretty languid pace, too. Does the story turn fast enough to justify 4 hours? Any 90-to-150 minute masterpieces you'd suggest?

Edit: I suppose by calling in a masterpiece, you are already suggesting it justifies its run-time. I guess I'm always just hesitant to jump into 4-hour movies.Maybe slow was a poor choice of words; solemn is probably closer to the mark. The films by Rivette, Yang, and Diaz aren't exactly fast and Diaz's in particular mostly consists of lengthy scenes of the characters hanging out; what keeps the film fascinating is that the characters keep revealing new facets of their personalities that force us to revise our initial impressions of them. In the case of Yang's film, its length is justified by the profusion of characters and events that far outstrips the spectator's ability to keep track of them all in a single viewing. Of the three, Rivette's is probably the closest to a normal film; the duration of the painting sessions is justified primarily by verisimilitude, giving the spectator the impression of really watching a painter at work.

[baby doll]

Any 90-to-150 minute masterpieces you'd suggest?80 minutes or under:

A Corner in Wheat (D.W. Griffith, 1909)
The Cheat (Cecil B. DeMille, 1915)
Easy Street (Charles Chaplin, 1917)
Die Puppe (Ernst Lubitsch, 1919)
Sherlock, Jr. (Buster Keaton, 1924)
Battleship Potemkin (Sergei Eisenstein, 1925)
By the Law (Lev Kuleshov, 1926)
Page of Madness (Kinugasa Teinosuke, 1926)
The Docks of New York (Josef von Sternberg, 1928)
Man with a Movie Camera (Dziga Vertov, 1929)
Un chien andalou (Luis Buñuel, 1929)
Earth (Aleksandr Dovzhenko, 1930)
Vampyr—Der Traum des Allan Gray (Carl Theodor Dreyer, 1932)
Hard to Handle (Mervyn LeRoy, 1933)
Japanese Girls at the Harbour (Shimizu Hiroshi, 1933)
The Goddess (Wu Yanggong, 1934)
Wife! Be Like a Rose! (Naruse Mikio, 1935)
Le Crime de Monsieur Lange (Jean Renoir, 1936)
Sisters of the Gion (Mizoguchi Kenji, 1936)
What Did the Lady Forget? (Ozu Yasujiro, 1937)
I Walked with a Zombie (Jacques Tourneur, 1943)
The Seventh Victim (Mark Robson, 1943)
Detour (Edgar G. Ulmer, 1945)
Germany Year Zero (Roberto Rossellini, 1948)
Begone Dull Care (Evelyn Lambart/Norman McLaren, 1949)
Le Sang des bêtes (Georges Franju, 1949)
Duck Amuck (Chuck Jones, 1953)
Pickup on South Street (Sam Fuller, 1953)
Inauguration of the Pleasure Dome (Kenneth Anger, 1954)
Nuit et brouillard (Alain Resnais, 1955)
Free Radicals (Len Lye, 1958)
Pickpocket (Robert Bresson, 1959)
La Boulangère de Monceau (Éric Rohmer, 1963)
Mothlight (Stan Brakhage, 1963)
Nicht versöhnt oder Es hilft nur Gewalt, wo Gewalt herrscht (Danièle Huillet/Jean-Marie Straub, 1965)
The War Game (Peter Watkins, 1965)
La Noire de... (Sembène Ousmane, 1966)
Fuses (Carolee Schneemann, 1967)
Love Affair, or the Case of the Missing Switchboard Operator (Dušan Makavejev, 1967)
Wavelength (Michael Snow, 1967)
Sayat-Nova (Sergei Parajanov, 1969)
Serene Velocity (Ernie Gehr, 1970)
Zorns Lemma (Hollis Frampton, 1970)
Cuadecuc, vampir (Pere Portabella, 1971)
Fuji (Robert Breer, 1974)
Eadweard Muybridge, Zoopraxographer (Thom Andersen, 1975)
Ici et ailleurs (Jean-Luc Godard/Anne-Marie Miéville, 1976)
Killer of Sheep (Charles Burnett, 1978)
The Scenic Route (Mark Rappaport, 1978)
Foster Child (Gil Cardinal, 1987)
Un histoire de vent (Joris Ivens/Marceline Lordian-Ivens, 1988)
Virile Games (Jan Švankmajer, 1988)
Calendar (Atom Egoyan, 1993)
A Moment of Innocence (Mohsen Makhmalbaf, 1996)
Alone. Life Wastes Andy Hardy (Martin Arnold, 1998)
Outer Space (Peter Tscherkassky, 1999)
Kékszakállú (Gastón Solnicki, 2016)
The Green Fog (Evan Johnson/Galen Johnson/Guy Maddin, 2017)
Mi piel, luminosa (Nicolás Pereda/Gabino RodrÃ*guez, 2019)
(tourism studies) (Joshua Gen Solondz, 2019)

Just to name the first sixty that come to mind.

[Idioteque Stalker]

A Moment of Innocence (Mohsen Makhmalbaf, 1996)


I want to see this so bad. Not an easy movie to track down.

[baby doll]

I want to see this so bad. Not an easy movie to track down.I wonder if you can still borrow it on VHS from the Halifax Public Library.

[Spun Lepton]

Duck Amuck (Chuck Jones, 1953)

Can't argue this one.

[transmogrifier]

Ben Affleck
Henry Cavill
Amy Adams
Gal Gadot
Ray Fisher
Jason Momoa
Ezra Miller
Willem Dafoe
Jesse Eisenberg
Jeremy Irons
Diane Lane
Connie Nielsen
J.K. Simmons
Ciarán Hinds
Amber Heard
Joe Morton
David Thewlis
Kevin Costner
Billy Crudup
Robin Wright
Joe Manganiello
Jared Leto
Russell Crowe
Carla Gugino

vs.

Robert Downey Jr.
Chris Evans
Mark Ruffalo
Chris Hemsworth
Scarlett Johansson
Jeremy Renner
Tom Hiddleston
Cobie Smulders
Stellan Skarsgård
Samuel L. Jackson
Gwyneth Paltrow
Paul Bettany
Don Cheadle
Aaron Taylor-Johnson
Elizabeth Olsen
Anthony Mackie
Hayley Atwell
Idris Elba
Linda Cardellini
Thomas Kretschmann
Andy Serkis
Julie Delpy

?

[megladon8]

Uhhh...the Marvel players, for every one.

[Dukefrukem]

Ben Affleck
Henry Cavill
Amy Adams
Gal Gadot
Ray Fisher
Jason Momoa
Ezra Miller
Willem Dafoe
Jesse Eisenberg
Jeremy Irons
Diane Lane
Connie Nielsen
J.K. Simmons
Ciarán Hinds
Amber Heard
Joe Morton
David Thewlis
Kevin Costner
Billy Crudup
Robin Wright
Joe Manganiello
Jared Leto
Russell Crowe
Carla Gugino

vs.

Robert Downey Jr.
Chris Evans
Mark Ruffalo
Chris Hemsworth
Scarlett Johansson
Jeremy Renner
Tom Hiddleston
Cobie Smulders
Stellan Skarsgård
Samuel L. Jackson
Gwyneth Paltrow
Paul Bettany
Don Cheadle
Aaron Taylor-Johnson
Elizabeth Olsen
Anthony Mackie
Hayley Atwell
Idris Elba
Linda Cardellini
Thomas Kretschmann
Andy Serkis
Julie Delpy

?

Gal Gadot over Scarlet Johansson and Robin Wright over Haley Atwell but that's about it.

[megladon8]

No Hayley Atwell???

I just cried.

[Dukefrukem]

J.K. Simmons over Thomas Kretschmann.

[Dukefrukem]

No Hayley Atwell???

I just cried.

I'm not sure what we are doing. Is it a head to head match up? Roles reversed? Replaced? Career vs career?

[megladon8]

I'd take Hayley Atwell over most of my own relatives, to be honest.

Meow.

[transmogrifier]

I'm not sure what we are doing. Is it a head to head match up? Roles reversed? Replaced? Career vs career?

It’s the cast list for Snyder’s Justice League vs the cast list for Avengers: Age of Ultron. If you had to choose one of the two lists as a whole to cast your hypothetical movie, which would it be?

[Idioteque Stalker]

In a hypothetical world where the MCU didn't elevate so many careers and DC didn't destroy them, that DC cast is better on paper.

[Dukefrukem]

In a hypothetical world where the MCU didn't elevate so many careers and DC didn't destroy them, that DC cast is better on paper.

Yeh hard to leave Crowe, Simmons and Irons on the table.

[Idioteque Stalker]

Yeh hard to leave Crowe, Simmons and Irons on the table.

And Amy Adams, Willem Dafoe, and David Thewlis.

[Spun Lepton]

In a hypothetical world where the MCU didn't elevate so many careers and DC didn't destroy them, that DC cast is better on paper.

Is involvement in DC really destroying careers, though? Ezra Miller and Amber Heard's undoings seem to be by their own hands.

[Dukefrukem]

And Amy Adams, Willem Dafoe, and David Thewlis.

I can do without Amy Adams....

[Idioteque Stalker]

Is involvement in DC really destroying careers, though? Ezra Miller and Amber Heard's undoings seem to be by their own hands.

Fair. It would be more accurate to say MCU has elevated many careers, while DC has not (and that's being generous).

[Idioteque Stalker]

I can do without Amy Adams....

I can't.

[Ezee E]

Anyone remember when they had a DC Vs Marvel short comic series?

[Grouchy]

What that comparison shows is that DC grabbed more legendary actors from other eras - Costner, Lane, Thewlis, Irons, Crowe. Marvel aimed generally younger, but of course Anthony Hopkins is missing from that list.

[transmogrifier]

What that comparison shows is that DC grabbed more legendary actors from other eras - Costner, Lane, Thewlis, Irons, Crowe. Marvel aimed generally younger, but of course Anthony Hopkins is missing from that list.

I wanted to compare Justice League vs. The first Avengers originally, but I think JL won that easily, and JL vs. Endgame is a walkover for the latter because it has like a million actors in it. So JL vs A:AoU was the comparison to produce a roughly similar cast list length. Of course, I haven't seen JL and don't remember AoU much, so most of these actors are probably in them for like 10 seconds. :)

[megladon8]

https://i.postimg.cc/7ZH0WvCH/movie-memes24.jpg

[Ezee E]

Ingmar Bergman might be the director that needs the most focus from the viewer to appreciate his movies. Without it, you'd probably think he's one of the most boring directors alive.

Fanny & Alexander, meant to be a miniseries, is probably best viewed as one. Even the 3-hour version has very obvious breaks in between, and I appreciated it much better this way, with each hour being very special in its own way.

The first hour might be the most "Christmas" thing ever put on movie.
The second hour is really a perfect bridge for the two, with a culmination that is purely Bergman.
The third hour is Bergman at his best.

Not a ding against the movie, but I'm not really sure that Fanny serves any purpose to this movie, and I think has one dialog-less scene in the last third. FilmTwitter would be up in arms.

[Grouchy]

I wanted to compare Justice League vs. The first Avengers originally, but I think JL won that easily, and JL vs. Endgame is a walkover for the latter because it has like a million actors in it. So JL vs A:AoU was the comparison to produce a roughly similar cast list length. Of course, I haven't seen JL and don't remember AoU much, so most of these actors are probably in them for like 10 seconds. :)
Yeah, I couldn't remember who Julie Delpy played and it turns out it was the woman who trains Natasha Romanoff, probably setting her up for a more significant role in the Black Widow movie.

[Idioteque Stalker]

In the Soup (Alexandre Rockwell, 1992) warm

I really liked this too. Surprisingly low viewership on letterboxd. Seymour Cassel and Steve Buscemi work very well together -- loved the single take of Buscemi learning to cha-cha-cha. Jim Jarmusch and Carol Kane cameos were also a highlight.

[baby doll]

I really liked this too. Surprisingly low viewership on letterboxd. Seymour Cassel and Steve Buscemi work very well together -- loved the single take of Buscemi learning to cha-cha-cha. Jim Jarmusch and Carol Kane cameos were also a highlight.It's a delight. I was surprised how much energy Cassel had, given that the film was made almost twenty-five years after Faces. And I was surprised how much hair Stanley Tucci had; he looks like Phillip Roth. ("My wife eats me!") Also I never made the connection between Alexandre and Sam Rockwell until the latter turns up in this.

[DFA1979]

Lucky Number Slevin is a decent enough if kind of forgettable, movie. I liked the cast but the plot is a bit too by the numbers and there is a nice love subplot that I found more interesting than the rest of the movie. Maybe I would have liked this better back in 2006 but maybe not.

The Apartment lives up to its reputation as being funny, surprisingly dark at times and a reflection of 1960s sexual politics. Billy Wilder was really good at that sort of thing. Also the one liners are very memorable. "That's the way the cookie crumbles...cookie wise." "Shut up and deal."

[DFA1979]

80 minutes or under:

A Corner in Wheat (D.W. Griffith, 1909)
The Cheat (Cecil B. DeMille, 1915)
Easy Street (Charles Chaplin, 1917)
Die Puppe (Ernst Lubitsch, 1919)
Sherlock, Jr. (Buster Keaton, 1924)
Battleship Potemkin (Sergei Eisenstein, 1925)
By the Law (Lev Kuleshov, 1926)
Page of Madness (Kinugasa Teinosuke, 1926)
The Docks of New York (Josef von Sternberg, 1928)
Man with a Movie Camera (Dziga Vertov, 1929)
Un chien andalou (Luis Buñuel, 1929)
Earth (Aleksandr Dovzhenko, 1930)
Vampyr—Der Traum des Allan Gray (Carl Theodor Dreyer, 1932)
Hard to Handle (Mervyn LeRoy, 1933)
Japanese Girls at the Harbour (Shimizu Hiroshi, 1933)
The Goddess (Wu Yanggong, 1934)
Wife! Be Like a Rose! (Naruse Mikio, 1935)
Le Crime de Monsieur Lange (Jean Renoir, 1936)
Sisters of the Gion (Mizoguchi Kenji, 1936)
What Did the Lady Forget? (Ozu Yasujiro, 1937)
I Walked with a Zombie (Jacques Tourneur, 1943)
The Seventh Victim (Mark Robson, 1943)
Detour (Edgar G. Ulmer, 1945)
Germany Year Zero (Roberto Rossellini, 1948)
Begone Dull Care (Evelyn Lambart/Norman McLaren, 1949)
Le Sang des bêtes (Georges Franju, 1949)
Duck Amuck (Chuck Jones, 1953)
Pickup on South Street (Sam Fuller, 1953)
Inauguration of the Pleasure Dome (Kenneth Anger, 1954)
Nuit et brouillard (Alain Resnais, 1955)
Free Radicals (Len Lye, 1958)
Pickpocket (Robert Bresson, 1959)
La Boulangère de Monceau (Éric Rohmer, 1963)
Mothlight (Stan Brakhage, 1963)
Nicht versöhnt oder Es hilft nur Gewalt, wo Gewalt herrscht (Danièle Huillet/Jean-Marie Straub, 1965)
The War Game (Peter Watkins, 1965)
La Noire de... (Sembène Ousmane, 1966)
Fuses (Carolee Schneemann, 1967)
Love Affair, or the Case of the Missing Switchboard Operator (Dušan Makavejev, 1967)
Wavelength (Michael Snow, 1967)
Sayat-Nova (Sergei Parajanov, 1969)
Serene Velocity (Ernie Gehr, 1970)
Zorns Lemma (Hollis Frampton, 1970)
Cuadecuc, vampir (Pere Portabella, 1971)
Fuji (Robert Breer, 1974)
Eadweard Muybridge, Zoopraxographer (Thom Andersen, 1975)
Ici et ailleurs (Jean-Luc Godard/Anne-Marie Miéville, 1976)
Killer of Sheep (Charles Burnett, 1978)
The Scenic Route (Mark Rappaport, 1978)
Foster Child (Gil Cardinal, 1987)
Un histoire de vent (Joris Ivens/Marceline Lordian-Ivens, 1988)
Virile Games (Jan Å*vankmajer, 1988)
Calendar (Atom Egoyan, 1993)
A Moment of Innocence (Mohsen Makhmalbaf, 1996)
Alone. Life Wastes Andy Hardy (Martin Arnold, 1998)
Outer Space (Peter Tscherkassky, 1999)
Kékszakállú (Gastón Solnicki, 2016)
The Green Fog (Evan Johnson/Galen Johnson/Guy Maddin, 2017)
Mi piel, luminosa (Nicolás Pereda/Gabino RodrÃ*guez, 2019)
(tourism studies) (Joshua Gen Solondz, 2019)

Just to name the first sixty that come to mind.

I've seen only 10 of those. Gonna copy this list to my phone if you don't mind simply for the recs which are always welcome even if you and I don't always get along due to me being, well, me.

[Yxklyx]

It's a delight. I was surprised how much energy Cassel had, given that the film was made almost twenty-five years after Faces. And I was surprised how much hair Stanley Tucci had; he looks like Phillip Roth. ("My wife eats me!") Also I never made the connection between Alexandre and Sam Rockwell until the latter turns up in this.

Yeah, I really enjoyed In the Soup a lot as well. Cassel is back with Buscemi in Trees Lounge.

[StuSmallz]

https://i.ibb.co/pnzyP0B/ZERO-super-Jumbo.jpg (https://ibb.co/Wsyt3x4)

The greatest manhunt in history.

I don't think I have to remind anyone by now that, before it became the punchline for multiple Family Guy gags (some of them (https://youtu.be/Gi4Z06IbSek) even good!), 9/11 was the definition of a watershed, earth-shaking moment, not just in American history, but the entire world's as well. However, in addition to the tremendous historical impact of that September morn, it also holds a certain personal importance for me, as, while I fortunately didn't lose anyone in the attacks, it still happened after I had just become a teenager, which makes it feels like the unofficial dividing line between when I was a "kid", and when I became an "adult", as the world became a much] scarier place after it; I mean, how could I and an entire generation of Americans not be traumatized by what was our version of Peal Harbor, as we were pulled out of class to watch the firey deaths of thousands of our fellow countrymen on live TV? However, as our nation rushed to obtain some sort of vengeance, the fallout from that response has proved to be grotesquely overblown, as the deaths of 3,000 people doesn't justify the displacement of over 30 million, or the deaths of over half a million, many of whom were innocent, making the so-called "War On Terror" one without the relatively clear-cut good or bad guys of certain previous conflicts, and rendering it far more difficult for Hollywood's nuance-hostile industry to churn out its inevitable dramatizations. However, with 2012's Zero Dark Thirty, Kathryn Bigelow not only attempted such a dramatization, but also succeeded extremely well (although that's not a huge surprise, considering that her previous effort was The Hurt Locker), resulting in a film that's not only a superb, true-life espionage Thriller, but also the current peak of the director's late career renaissance.


It tells the story of the hunt for bin Laden through the lens of "Maya", a green CIA operative who was recruited fresh out of high school, who, over the course of the film's 2 & 1/2 hours, slowly grows from being just one more small cog in a massive bureaucratic machine, to being the main driver of the hunt herself, as she obsessively digs through mountains of digital data, goes from anonymous, grime-covered "black site" to anonymous, grime-covered black site, and becomes an increasingly willing participant in various, dehumanizing forms of physical & psychological torture, as the stakes become increasingly personal for her, and she comes to display a pathological, quasi-religious fervor for hunting bin Laden, one that borders on being just as fanatical as the actual religious fervor of the terrorists themselves.


Of course, I have to address the elephant that's been in the room since the film's release, which is that it takes a "pro-torture" stance, which strikes me as cherry-picking, and part of a justified backlash against the American war machine that has nonetheless been misdirected at the film itself. I think this is obvious when the film shows multiple times that beating, force-feeding, and waterboarding prisoners is not only unable to consistently produce reliable intel, but also fails to prevent an actual attack in one case, which feels like a defusal of the theoretical "ticking-clock" scenarios that right-wingers loved to spew on Fox "News". In addition, you also have to consider the film's portrayal of the torture itself, which, rather than glossing over it, chooses to magnify it instead, with the lingering close-ups of one detainee in particular's filthy, bloody face, especially as he violently vomits up water, making the film an extremely uncomfortable watch, especially if you viewed it in a packed theater like I did. And finally, while this is outside the "text" of the film itself, I'm still skeptical of the idea that the film's screenwriter, Mark Boal, intended it as some sort of pro-torture cheerleading, considering that he wrote it at the same time he was working on an article (https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/the-kill-team-how-u-s-soldiers-in-afghanistan-murdered-innocent-civilians-169793/) about American war crimes, with the humanization of Maya and her co-workers when they're off the job not feeling like an endorsement of their "on the clock" actions, but a way to emphasize the level of sociopathy required to torture people for a living, while still functioning as a human being.


Anyway, as for the film's overall portrayal of the manhunt itself, ZDT does a superb job of conveying just enough of the maddening minutiae so we can grasp how knotty and dizzying a tangle that the world's biggest needle in a haystack search was, while also avoiding becoming unnecessarily bogged down in those details, with the rapid-fire, globe-trotting jumps between locations, intense handheld camerawork, and Bigelow's sharp, tense direction helping to cut through all the potentially confusing intelligence community jargon and bureaucratic back room meetings, in order to create a engaging, thrilling experience on the whole, with references to shifts in the political landscape to keep us grounded in the timeline, as well as occasional asides to portray real acts of terrorism, driving home the urgency of hunting down the man who's continuing to inspire those acts.


Finally, as for the film's moral stance on the "War On Terror", its overall viewpoint is appropriately as muddy as the war itself, as it refuses to turn a blind eye to the brutality of the conflict, and never strings up easy strawmen, but presents multiple perspectives in a solid fashion, too solidly to be interpreted in good faith as taking any one side, as Maya, though portrayed as being admirably iron-willed at times, still seems to hunt for bin Laden less as an act of collective justice for 9/11, and more for the personal vengeance of a colleague of that was killed in a suicide bombing. And, even then, neither Maya or us get to feel any final sense of fulfillment, as the climatic, half-hour raid sequence, a masterclass in glacial, nerve-wracking tension on its own terms, still takes us back to square zero with the lingering, haunting image of another aircraft on fire, bringing the events full circle, and hinting at an endless, ever-perpetuating cycle of violence as a result. And, even after Maya has personally glimpsed the corpse of bin Laden himself, this closure still fails to bring her peace, with her hunt for him being all she's lived for the past decade, and, when a pilot asks her where she wants to go after, she tellingly doesn't (or can't?) answer his question, as she stares blankly off into space, and a tear runs down her exhausted face, as we abruptly cut to black.


Best Moment:


https://youtu.be/GoDVEYA7VXc


Final Score: 9

[StanleyK]

I'm Thinking of Ending Things feels like being stuck in a car with two insufferable dumb smart people for three days, broken up in the middle by Kaufman trying and failing miserably at replicating the dinner scene from Eraserhead. It gets mildly interesting in the last 15 minutes, but it's too little too late. Awful movie, and considering this and Anomalisa I think maybe Kaufman should have stuck to being a screenwriter.

[Ezee E]

I'm Thinking of Ending Things feels like being stuck in a car with two insufferable dumb smart people for three days, broken up in the middle by Kaufman trying and failing miserably at replicating the dinner scene from Eraserhead. It gets mildly interesting in the last 15 minutes, but it's too little too late. Awful movie, and considering this and Anomalisa I think maybe Kaufman should have stuck to being a screenwriter.

Think I said it somewhere else, but Synecdoche, NY might be the biggest "movie I should like, but absolutely hate it each time I try to rewatch."

That's quite the title.

A list of others off the top of my head:

-Andrei Rublev
-Satantango
-Being There

[Yxklyx]

Think I said it somewhere else, but Synecdoche, NY might be the biggest "movie I should like, but absolutely hate it each time I try to rewatch."

That's quite the title.

A list of others off the top of my head:

-Andrei Rublev
-Satantango
-Being There

Not a fan of Synecdoche and I can understand Satantango and Being There but Andrei Rublev is one of my favorite films - you just need to slow yourself down a bit before watching. Take some deep breaths, relax and take it all in.

[transmogrifier]

I blind bought Andrei Rublev on DVD in around 2005. I still haven't watched it.

[StanleyK]

Think I said it somewhere else, but Synecdoche, NY might be the biggest "movie I should like, but absolutely hate it each time I try to rewatch."

That's quite the title.

A list of others off the top of my head:

-Andrei Rublev
-Satantango
-Being There

I love all these movies. I liked Synecdoche, New York quite a bit, too, though it feels significantly inferior to Kaufman's screenwriter-only output.

[Yxklyx]

Rewatched Soderbergh's The Limey tonight (on Prime), I loved this one a lot this time. My viewing was a bit impaired though because I thought it was going to end up in Spain, as I got it confused with Frear's The Hit (also with Stamp) - and now I want to rewatch that one but have no idea where I can find it.

[DFA1979]

Rewatched Soderbergh's The Limey tonight (on Prime), I loved this one a lot this time. My viewing was a bit impaired though because I thought it was going to end up in Spain, as I got it confused with Frear's The Hit (also with Stamp) - and now I want to rewatch that one but have no idea where I can find it.

The Hit is on Criterion that's how I watched it. Good flick but The Limey is better.

[megladon8]

The Limey is an all time great.

[Grouchy]

I'm a huge fan of all three latest Kaufman-directed movies.

[Philip J. Fry]

1378158343387279362

[Irish]

Is it gauche to loathe Ken Burns? I dunno. But I sorta do.


“Hemingway� is undeniably comprehensive, but all that really takes is intense research. It’s not just the details unearthed here that make this a must-watch—it’s how everyone involved comes together to illuminate more than could be gained from a traditional biographical series. Hemingway himself often took simple sentence and storytelling structures and imbued them with an honesty and insight that his colleagues (and later imitators) couldn’t muster. He would have liked this series too.

This reads like an eighth grade book report. I legit don't get it. There's something soft and dumb and ill-conceived in every sentence of the closing paragraph (above).

Meanwhile, I fully intend to carefully hate-watch Burns' show and nitpick the hell out of it in my head for at least an hour.

Harrumph. :/

[megladon8]

Wow, looking at his filmography...I don't think I have ever seen a single film by Burns.

[Wryan]

This reads like an eighth grade book report. I legit don't get it. There's something soft and dumb and ill-conceived in every sentence of the closing paragraph (above).

Without Googling, I'm gonna guess...Berardinelli?

[Ezee E]

Wow, looking at his filmography...I don't think I have ever seen a single film by Burns.

Definitely take a look. Granted, they're all mini-series, so you can space it out, but I've always been interested in any of his movies. Civil War, Baseball, and the Jack Johnson ones have been my favorites.

[megladon8]

Definitely take a look. Granted, they're all mini-series, so you can space it out, but I've always been interested in any of his movies. Civil War, Baseball, and the Jack Johnson ones have been my favorites.

Thank you! I'll take a look!

[Skitch]

The only one I've seen from Burns is The Vietnam War, and I thought it was phenomenal.

[Irish]

Meanwhile, I fully intend to carefully hate-watch Burns' show and nitpick the hell out of it in my head for at least an hour.

Watching now and pausing every 2 minutes to scream into a pillow.


Without Googling, I'm gonna guess...Berardinelli?

Very good guess, but nope!

[baby doll]

The only Ken Burns film I've seen is The Central Park Five. It was okay.

[DFA1979]

I've seen some of the national parks one. That's it.

[Philip J. Fry]

1379914301809565701
Gimme five of them.

[transmogrifier]

1379914301809565701
Gimme five of them.

That's not the action I think about when I think about that movie.

[Philip J. Fry]

That's not the action I think about when I think about that movie.Those clothes look removable *wink* *wink*

[Irish]

Claire's Knee (Rohmer, 1970)

God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, courage to change the things I can, and wisdom to know why Éric Rohmer wrote screenplays and not stage plays.

This was very good, but I don't know how to rank it or where to list it. I think it's more stiff and artificial than the other two Rohmers I've seen, "Love in the Afternoon" and "Pauline at the Beach," and while the key scene in question (about the knee!) is perfect, and says something true about men and desire, everything around it feels a little forced. All those conversations between two friends about the nature of love kept me at a distance, and I never quite believed the lead actor when he spoke of his unending lust for this young woman (or really: girl, ew). The plotline seemed too much an intellectual game for them, too removed from anything sweaty or bloody or real. (In an odd way, these exchanges reminded me certain conversations in "Dangerous Liasions," where two people bloodlessly talk about seducing a third, but at least there the distance is the point.)

But still Rohmer is Rohmer so ... 4/5?

[Peng]

Daylight (1996) - On one hand, even with the disaster genre going steady, they don't make them like this anymore, where even the built-in hokiness feels sturdy throughout rather than graceless or sloppy. On the other hand, I doubt some of these performances would pass the muster to the screens these days, where their bigness seem to compete with explosions to be seen from outer space (the father especially puts me on the side of the disaster). Stallone gives good movie star performance though, and the special effects are consistently outstanding, especially the jaw-dropping opening explosion. 6/10


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=imD7u-1PW8Y

The Ballad of Narayama (1958) - With the caveat that I haven't seen the remake, I find the divisive incorporating of Kabuki theater really effective, both for its stunning, mythical visual and for just the right amount of alienation effect, which I feel helps keep the story from sliding straight into potential miserablism. Even with that distance, the finale still devastates me completely, thanks in no small part to the two leads' performances. 8/10

[Dukefrukem]

Daylight (1996) - On one hand, even with the disaster genre going steady, they don't make them like this anymore, where even the built-in hokiness feels sturdy throughout rather than graceless or sloppy. On the other hand, I doubt some of these performances would pass the muster to the screens these days, where their bigness seem to compete with explosions to be seen from outer space (the father especially puts me on the side of the disaster). Stallone gives good movie star performance though, and the special effects are consistently outstanding, especially the jaw-dropping opening explosion. 6/10


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=imD7u-1PW8Y

The Ballad of Narayama (1958) - With the caveat that I haven't seen the remake, I find the divisive incorporating of Kabuki theater really effective, both for its stunning, mythical visual and for just the right amount of alienation effect, which I feel helps keep the story from sliding straight into potential miserablism. Even with that distance, the finale still devastates me completely, thanks in no small part to the two leads' performances. 8/10

Classic 90s sillyness with daylight. I especially love the method in which Stallone enters the tunnel. Because they can't shutdown the power for a whole team to enter. And there's little red clocks in between each fan level.

[megladon8]

So before asking this question I'll just state that I have never seen Highlander.

But...

Is there a legitimate in-film reason why Sean Connery, who is arguably the most famous Scottish actor of all time, was cast as the Spanish guy?

Or was it some 80s pre-internet trolling?

[Skitch]

I have no answer for that.

But Highlander is top 100.

[Spun Lepton]

We Don't Deserve Dogs (2020) -- This title is very misleading. You think you're going into a movie about the simple and profound ways that dogs affect our lives, and you get a relatively unfocused mash-up of relevant and irrelevant stories. One story about a Vietnamese dog butcher is like, honestly, what the hell was the goal here? What are the filmmakers thinking when they include this story? Do they think the audience for a movie called "We Don't Deserve Dogs," want to see this? Then it goes to a segment about a holiday in Nepal where they celebrate dogs and it gets less attention than the fucking dog butcher. One atory about a sheep herder and his wife is really just her complaining about her life, and him just talking about how much he loves herding sheep. The dogs are barely an afterthought in their story. Just a mess of a movie. 4/10

[Irish]

Love in the Afternoon (Rohmer, 1972) - Saw this once decades ago, remembered my enjoyment, but none of the details (funny how that works). I liked this a little bit less than other recent RohmerVisions (particularly "Pauline at the Beach," and in some ways "Claire's Knee"). One thing I enjoy about these movies: The male hero is invariably a self-involved dumb-ass. I find this highly relatable as I, too, am a self-involved dumbass. That he never receives a comeuppance and remains blissfully pleased with himself makes the film's effect funnier, although from personal experience, slightly less life-like. Molly Haskell said (per Wikipedia) this final Moral Tale betrayed Rohmer's series because, unlike the others, it makes a judgement on the hero. I'm pretty sure I know what she meant, but I'd still like to read her review to confirm.

Django (Corbucci, 1966) - It's heresy to say this online, but I think Corbucci outdid Leone and making a Leone movie. A couple of days later and I'm still thinking about this --- but only about its images. The story is cartoonish, lazy, and obnoxiously violent. It's puerile trash, mostly. I don't know how I can think that and then gush about movies like "Texas Chain Saw Massacre" and "The Hills Have Eyes," or other films with similar 1970s, DIY, punk aesthetics that I admire. Maybe it's because I care about American westerns in a way that I've never cared about horror. Spaghetti westerns are interesting primarily because they're free of schoolyard history and 50 years of precedent, and this is exactly why I find myself loving and hating them in equal measure.

Between these 2 movies (and a few other recents), I've given up ranking old movies. It seems silly to assign a grade to such material, especially as I'm not a professional critic, and these dudes are operating at such a high level.

[DFA1979]

So before asking this question I'll just state that I have never seen Highlander.

But...

Is there a legitimate in-film reason why Sean Connery, who is arguably the most famous Scottish actor of all time, was cast as the Spanish guy?

Or was it some 80s pre-internet trolling?

They just didn't care in the 1980s. It was a different time heh. Also Highlander rocks.

[DFA1979]

Django is a badass western. I saw it thanks to Netflix in November 2015. I'm currently going through a best westerns list I found on another movie forum since I feel I still have much to watch from the genre. Also hey I also noticed I wrote a pretty decent review of Django Unchained back when it came out.

[Skitch]

Django is awesome.

[Idioteque Stalker]

Just finished A Moment of Innocence. Reminiscent of Close-Up. The ending makes me want to watch the whole thing over again, and I think I will (78-minute runtime helps).

[Idioteque Stalker]

Movie Intro Medley (Acapella):


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k4D7cuDAvXE

The Netflix one is unreal. They nailed it. Disney has the best intro music, so of course it's the most beautiful. And the Universal one is just hilarious.

[StuSmallz]

Movie Intro Medley (Acapella):


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k4D7cuDAvXE

The Netflix one is unreal. They nailed it. Disney has the best intro music, so of course it's the most beautiful. And the Universal one is just hilarious.Damn, those guys are good.

[Dukefrukem]

I always thought 20th Century Fox was the most epic.

[Irish]

Pulp Fiction (Tarantino, 1994) - First rewatch in many years a few new thoughts. (1) It was more interesting to me this time how the film doubles back on itself twice, which means we hear Jules' tiresome biblical quotation 3 times*. (2) I thought once this was one of Tarantino's best structured films, but now I'm not sure. Besides the double back, each story follows a similar template: Two characters exchange zippy observations (or "meaningless chit-chat" as Mia terms it), which is always followed by unexpected spectacle. A dance sequence in one story, but usually it's a fucked up level of violence. ("The Bonnie Situation," the most lackluster entry, reverses this and starts with violence, and follows it with inane conversation.) (3) The final story with Honey Bunny and Pumpkin in the diner is really meaningless, because Jules is a thin character and his spiritual transformation is entirely contained in the film's ending. Because of the structure, it feels like he has an arc but he actually doesn't. (4) Every actress with a speaking part appears barefoot. (5) Why is this movie 2 and a half hours long? (6) Several actors stutter over their lines and it sounds like a mistake, like somebody printed the wrong take. (7) The film pops with color and setting but the overall look is very much early 90s indie. (8) The dialogue still sings in places but in others ... yeesh. Corny, dated slang and casual use of racial slurs makes certain characters sound more improbable than they should. (9) The pop culture references are stilted and awkward and Tarantino uses them as a crutch. He has people talking about shit that was already 30 years old when this film was made. "Green Acres"? "Amos and Andy"? What kid today would pick up on that? (10) I've probably seen this movie a dozen times and I don't think I could tell anyone what it's about.

* PS: Quentin, ffs, "furious anger" is redundant.

ETA: (11) Vincent seems closely modeled on Mr Pink from "Reservoir Dogs," at least conceptually. Both are argumentative to the point of being obnoxious (ahem), with other characters rolling their eyes and generally ignoring them. But I get the sense that Tarantino is on their side, and believes the arguments they express to be right.

(12) The female characters are largely inconsequential, but I thought it was interesting each of them peddles a pet theory (comfortable silences, pot bellies, etc) and when they do it, they sound like mouthpieces for the director.

[Skitch]

Good film. My least favorite of QT.

[Irish]

Kill Bill, Volume 1 (Tarantino, 2003)

Colorful and kinetic but not nearly as interesting, fun, or well crafted as the movies that inspired it. The dialogue is perfunctory and often ridiculous. The fight scenes are choppy and full of close-ups and quick cuts. Four films in and Quentin still has no idea how to write transitions, so the story is non-linear and the film is littered with awkward title cards. The best thing I can say about Thurman is that she has a great deal of natural athleticism. Tarantino has huge balls slapping the Shaw Brothers logo in front of this, because it's nowhere near their level. Hell, it isn't near the level of the Korean and Hong Kong films from the same era ("Time and Tide"? "Ip Man"? "The Man From Nowhere"?).

ETA two more: (1) The film ends on a daytime soap opera level cliffhanger, which isn't necessarily out of place given the level of writing, but I still think it's dumb. (2) there's a weird form of orientalism throughout, where Tarantino applies American media aesthetics to a fantastical Japanese culture. Gordon Liu in a Kato mask is some serious cringe.

This was my first rewatch since the movie's opening weekend back in 2003. I liked it then, but like other recent rewatches I remembered little to nothing about it.

[megladon8]

Can't lie, I kinda hate the Kill Bill movies.

I have yet to see Hateful Eight or Once Upon a Time..., but in my books Tarantino has only made 3 good movies.

[Idioteque Stalker]

Hateful Eight is worth watching for the fun first half, but it's easily my least favorite Tarantino and the only one where the violence actually crosses my personal line rather than toeing it.