28 Film Discussion Threads Later

[B-side]

I get some enjoyment out of the Rush Hour films. Haven't seen the 3rd yet.

[Raiders]

I'm pretty amazed at how insulting the film is. And not from a racial point of view, although the litany of black/asian jokes ("jokes") is impressive. It's just an ugly ass plodding piece of shit with no timing. And it is only when in the presence of those that I get offended.

Well, that's typically where white people draw the line.

[Henry Gale]

So last week I watched the original Halloween for the first time since I was pretty young, and though it's obviously an extremely well-made and influential horror movie, I've been struggling to pinpoint why I didn't have a strong reaction to it.

Aside from his use of pretty much the same two (now pretty iconic) themes in his score, Carpenter has such a tight grip on the material as a director as to what makes the use of location and pacing so effective in a film like this. He gives each scene something very different, making them seem realistic or morbidly comedic, whether they be scenes of conversations over the phone or death scenes.

What I think the problem is for me, watching it mostly fresh eyes at this point in time (the year, the decade, the current state of horror), is that so many of the key things that the film is made up of have been endlessly copied and retreaded without any unique touches to them, often in far less effective films to support them. Usually the things that become cliché over time is due to the fact that at one time they were brand new and worked brilliantly enough to be done again. But when it comes to something like a horror movie, which relies so much on your reaction to the unexpected as a viewer (as much as laughs function in comedies), I hate to think that it's really gotten to a point for me that so much of what's done here has been done so closely and soullessly in the thirty-plus years since its release that it's retroactively made them less effective.

It still stands on its own as a quality film, maybe as the only one in the series, but I still wish it had a little bit more of an identity to its beyond the titular setting, Jamie Lee Curtis and The Shape itself. I know it may not have been made to be looked at so critically so long after the time of its production and release (especially considering its budget and general tone), but I mostly just admired it as I watched it instead of being completely engrossed by it, and sadly I don't find that as immediately entertaining.

[Milky Joe]

I'm listening to this podcast with Armond White about Inception.

This guy is awesome.

[balmakboor]

I'm listening to this podcast with Armond White about Inception.

This guy is awesome.

Link?

I really should see Inception some day.

[Milky Joe]

http://slashfilm.com/filmcast/?p=281

[megladon8]

I actually don't half mind Robocop 2.

It's much more of a straight-forward action movie than the first, but it's fun. I like it.

[baby doll]

I really should see Inception some day.

It's no hurry.

[Dead & Messed Up]

I'm listening to this podcast with Armond White about Inception.

This guy is awesome.

Also, the Slashfilm guys suck at debate.

[baby doll]

I'm listening to this podcast with Armond White about Inception.

This guy is awesome.

I thought it was funny that he couldn't name a single other film reviewer he liked, and it's perhaps telling that he acts as if film criticism in its entirety was mainstream journalists (people like himself and Ebert) and internet fanboys with no mention at all of academic film criticism whatsoever.

And while his points were mainly dead-on (reviewers shouldn't simply be shills for product, and they should be able to analyze a film, and talk about it from a political standpoint--the moral thing I'll have to think about, but it's at least a position worth thinking about), it doesn't change the fact that White is a terrible writer. Even his spelling and grammar are bad, so it's hard for me to believe that he takes his craft as seriously as he claims to.

[Milky Joe]

I don't think he's a bad writer at all, certainly not compared to, say, recent Roger Ebert reviews. I occasionally wonder who takes care of editing his stuff, though. Sometimes the typos seem almost wantonly unprofessional.

Also, I think he was being asked about mainstream film reviewers, not academic film criticism, which I gather those dimwits running the podcast barely even had a conception of. White often quotes other critics, so I doubt there's literally no one he finds worth reading.

[Sven]

"Free-for-all of enthusiasms rather than criticism." Yes.

[Sven]

Relating the proliferation of books in the 17th century... oh man. These guys make SO much less sense than they want to.

[Boner M]

Those /film dudes come across as complete peabrained fanboy assclowns on that podcast. They unintentionally managed to make Armond's presence in the cineverse more crucial.

[number8]

Sigh.

[Skitch]

Sigh.

Will you please start an official Armond White thread? Pretty please?

[number8]

Will you please start an official Armond White thread? Pretty please?

Even if there wasn't already one, why would I do that?

[megladon8]

I was watching Jaws last night.

It's an immaculately made movie.

[StanleyK]

Dog Star Man, at least the prelude, wasn't boring at all; in fact, I had lots of fun identifying what constituted the vague shapes, quick flashes and small details that Brakhage shows us ("That's a snow-filled landscape." "Hey, a woman's crotch!" "Solar eruption, cool." "Whoa, now they're merging into each other!"); fascinating way of seeing our perception of things. Yeah, it's a bit too long at 25 minutes, but now I'm excited for the other parts.

[transmogrifier]

I was watching Jaws last night.

It's an immaculately made movie.

The first hour or so is almost Altmanesque in it's introduction of the island and its inhabitants. Such a well-directed movie.

[megladon8]

The first hour or so is almost Altmanesque in it's introduction of the island and its inhabitants. Such a well-directed movie.

It's the first time I've watched it with a critical eye - in fact, it's the the first time I've actually sat down and watched it since I was about 12.

Spielberg's use of the camera is sublime. Even the simplest of movements and transitions is carried out with such fluid ease. And then there are some spectacularly inventive sequences, such as the part on the ferry where the Mayor tells Scheider he can't close the beach.

[D_Davis]

And then there are some spectacularly inventive sequences, such as the part on the ferry where the Mayor tells Scheider he can't close the beach.

Yes. One of my favorite sequences in cinema.

I love the first 1/2 of the film, but I almost always lose interest once the chase begins. I think it goes on for far too long.

[Scar]

I love the first 1/2 of the film, but I almost always lose interest once the chase begins. I think it goes on for far too long.

As one can imagine, I'm going to completely disagree with this statement.

[Qrazy]

Dog Star Man, at least the prelude, wasn't boring at all; in fact, I had lots of fun identifying what constituted the vague shapes, quick flashes and small details that Brakhage shows us ("That's a snow-filled landscape." "Hey, a woman's crotch!" "Solar eruption, cool." "Whoa, now they're merging into each other!"); fascinating way of seeing our perception of things. Yeah, it's a bit too long at 25 minutes, but now I'm excited for the other parts.

Haha. Classic.

[Yxklyx]

I was watching Jaws last night.

It's an immaculately made movie.

I love the shot where they're on the boat and the camera is looking up with Scheider in the frame and a shooting star streaks across the sky.