|
Wild T posted:One thing that doesn't get pointed out often is that the marines make a huge show out of being hardcore killers, even if they aren't yet, as a coping mechanism. The entire argument over who had been in The poo poo could be easily compared to high school kids in the locker room bragging about who had gotten to third base with a girl.  ...and of course explicitly compare their rifles to their cocks...  And when they finally arrive in country, what's the first thing we see of Vietnam (we fade into this street scene immediately from the fade-out in the last scene with Pyle):  When negotiating a price with the hooker, Joker tells her that, `Five dollars is all my Mom allows me to spend'. When Joker meets back up with Cowboy (in his unit, the Lusthogs), how do they greet each other?  `Been getting any?' `Only your sister.' `Well my sister's better than my mother, and my mother ain't bad!' The only thing that could make this more suggestive would be if the round doorway behind them was either heart or vagina-shaped. This reunion is just before the first major death scene. Like most of them, they're shot from below, looking up from the perspective of the bodies to the faces of the marines:  This guy---whose nickname is Animal Mother---is responding to Rafterman's comment that they died for a good cause by saying, `If I'm gonna get my balls blown off for a word, my word is poon tang'. This framing is echoed later during the climatic scene, in which Joker gets his first kill, becomes another indistinguishable marine, and tells us that he's no longer afraid. Of course his first kill is a teenage girl, who we see lying on the ground, breathing heavily, and urgently whispering to him asking for it:  I mean there are plenty of other examples you can point to in the film:  ...and I'm just mentioning the most obvious ones. And a lot of this is just due to the subject matter---get a bunch of young men together and they'll talk a lot about sex and fighting. But the subversion of the adolescent male sex drive into violence is definitely an extravagantly overt feature of the narrative.
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2011 00:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 13:28 |
|
|
I like your post, but:SubG posted:Full Metal Jacket is easily the Kubrick film with the most overt sexual imagery Seriously? (NSFW)
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2011 05:55
|
|
|
The door behind Joker and Cowboy may not be vagina shaped, but it is hole-shaped, and the only things are their mind are gently caress holes and bullet holes. And possibly that 'nam is a poo poo hole.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2011 07:51
|
|
|
caiman posted:Seriously? (NSFW)
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2011 08:52
|
|
|
SubG posted:Seriously. Just as all the violence in Full Metal Jacket is sex, all the sex in A Clockwork Orange (1971) is violence. I never thought about it that way, mind is blown. And for the longest time I thought it was "Raptorman" not Rafterman.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2011 09:44
|
|
|
All this Full Metal Jacket talk reminds me that both The Short-Timers and its sequel, The Phantom Blooper are available for free online through Gustav Hasford's memorial webpage. They're both pretty good, quick reads, even if the formatting is a little off and there are a few typos. The first half of The Short-Timers is fairly close to the film adaptation, but definitely takes a turn for the weird as Joker begins to lose his grip on reality. Also, the climax of the book is definitely a big change from the film's. By the midpoint of The Phantom Blooper everything is just 
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2011 15:56
|
|
|
SubG posted:Seriously. Just as all the violence in Full Metal Jacket is sex, all the sex in A Clockwork Orange (1971) is violence. That's a valid (and interesting) point, but I still can't agree with the statement that FMJ has more overt sexual imagery than ACO. Sexual undertones, perhaps, but not sexual imagery.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2011 17:30
|
|
|
Wild T posted:All this Full Metal Jacket talk reminds me that both The Short-Timers and its sequel, The Phantom Blooper are available for free online through Gustav Hasford's memorial webpage. They're both pretty good, quick reads, even if the formatting is a little off and there are a few typos. Yeah, it's also interesting that everyone talks about R Lee Ermey's ad-libbing in Full Metal Jacket when at least 2/3rds of the really memorable quotes are taken from The Short-Timers (rough estimate, but it's the majority of his quotes).
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2011 23:37
|
|
|
SubG posted:Seriously. Just as all the violence in Full Metal Jacket is sex, all the sex in A Clockwork Orange (1971) is violence. I just know I'm asking for it, but what about Eyes Wide Shut? Is that not another Kubrick film in which sex plays a prominent role, if not a major starring role? I don't disagree with your above statements, and of the three, I really don't recall much of EWS, but to say that a movie with an on screen orgy has less sexual imagery than a war pic seems odd.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2011 23:46
|
|
|
caiman posted:That's a valid (and interesting) point, but I still can't agree with the statement that FMJ has more overt sexual imagery than ACO. Sexual undertones, perhaps, but not sexual imagery. There is no consensual sex in A Clockwork Orange, just rape. The closest to consensual sex we see is when Alex has sex with the underage girls (the William Tell Overture scene), which is still statutory rape. In Full Metal Jacket, when Pyle is having trouble getting over an obstacle, Hartman says, `Get your fat rear end up there! I'll bet if there was some pussy up there you would get up there, wouldn't you?' Pyle responds, `Sir, yes sir!' During PT when he looks bad, Hartman asks, `Do you feel dizzy? Do you feel faint! Jesus H. Christ! I think you've got a hard-on!' They march to a Jody cadence about pussy. During the scene in the head were Cowboy and Joker are talking about Pyle (who they earlier attacked---in his bed) Joker goes from talking about Pyle not being able to hack it to, without transition, talking about sex: `I wanna slip my tube steak into your sister. What'll you take in trade?' That first in-country death we see, the one the screenshot of Animal Mother above is from? The dead guy's nickname was Handjob. Cowboy says that he was going to be shipped home because he was `jerkin' off ten times a day'. Eightball throws in, `No poo poo...At least ten times a day.' In that scene where they name their rifles and sleep with them, here's what Hartman tells them: `Tonight, you pukes will sleep with your rifles. You will give your rifle a girl's name because this is the only pussy you people are going to get. Your days of finger-banging ol' Mary-Jane Rottencrotch through her pretty pink panties are over! You're married to this piece. This weapon of iron and wood. And you will be faithful. Port, hut!' Then when Joker gets his first kill, what are his thoughts? `My thoughts drift back to erect nipple wet dreams about Mary Jane Rottencrotch and the Great Homecoming gently caress Fantasy. I am so happy that I am alive, in one piece and short. I'm in a world of poo poo... yes. But I am alive. And I am not afraid.' I could keep going. Hartman is constantly belittling the recruits in explicitly sexual terms, for example. I haven't actually sat down to figure out if this is literally true, but I bet you can't find a single scene in the entire goddamn film that doesn't have some kind of overt sexual reference in it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2011 23:59
|
|
|
SubG posted:The dick in the image you posted? That's a murder weapon. When Alex sees it in the cat lady's place, his first reaction? Punch it. He then uses it to beat her to death. You are making very good points about the sexuality infused into the characters' thoughts and words. Definitely valid points. But I'm hung up on two things: first, few, if any, of the things you cited are imagery. Maybe the wrong choice of words? Secondly, if we're making lists that rundown the sexual references in all of Kubrick's movies, I'm quite confident that both A Clockwork Orange and Eyes Wide Shut will leave FMJ in the dust. Hell, sex is essentially what EWS is about. And as for ACO, why can something not be sexual if it's also violent? Is a man with a phallus on his nose holding a giant penis NOT sexual just because it's also violent? If that's the case, sleeping with a gun (the quintessential symbol of violence) named after a woman would most definitely NOT be considered sexual. But this is a pretty pointless argument. All that really matters is A, all of these movies are awesome, and B, Nichole Kidman's titties.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2011 01:04
|
|
|
CzarChasm posted:I just know I'm asking for it, but what about Eyes Wide Shut? Is that not another Kubrick film in which sex plays a prominent role, if not a major starring role? I don't disagree with your above statements, and of the three, I really don't recall much of EWS, but to say that a movie with an on screen orgy has less sexual imagery than a war pic seems odd. That said, almost all of the sex in Eyes Wide Shut isn't about sex so much as it is about sexual imagery, if you follow me. When Cruise's character first sets off on his quest for illicit sex, it isn't so much that he's suddenly overcome with the desire for more pussy as it is that he thinks that he should be. He's reacting to his wife telling him about her sexual desires, and his initial foray into the film's weird dreamlike sexual underworld is a response to that, not any desire of his own. He's reacting that way because he thinks that's how he should react...and (implicitly) because it will be a demonstration that he's in control. If you follow my line of reasoning above, the rest should be easy enough. Throughout the film there isn't much sexual desire so much as there is the form of sexual desire. Ziegler---the Sydney Pollack character---is a good example of this---exercising less sexual desire than raw acquisitiveness. His use of women, and his membership in the shadowy secret society, are expressions of his wealth, influence, and power, not his horniness. Consistently, sex isn't sex per se...it is the performance of sex, in which one party is going through the motions of the sexual acts and the other is consuming them. We see this when Cruise hires a prostitute, and we see it in the big orgy scene. The orgy is so sumptuous and extravagant that it becomes almost austere and inhuman. It's got to be the least `sexy' orgy ever recorded on film. This is mirrored by the holiday setting---the characters are surrounded by the trappings of Christmas, but they're so richly voluptuous that they take on a ceremonial meaninglessness. I think this is an intentional parallel---inside both the formalism of the holiday and the ritualism of the orgy are things which might be meaningful and fulfilling to the characters, but because they are so obsessed with the form and appearance of these things, they end being as lifeless as the masks they wear over their `real' faces. All of this is, I think, intentionally mirroring the audience's experience, and I think this is one of the film's major conceits. The audience goes into Eyes Wide Shut in the expectation of seeing sexy action between sexy couple Tom Cruise and sexy Nicole Kidman. But what the audience ends up getting isn't sexy action, because it's a film, and what's on the screen isn't sex but merely the image of sex. We want to belong to that elite inner circle of sexy people who have everything but we can't, because we can only watch, and we can only watch people performing the role of being sexy objects of desire.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2011 01:16
|
|
|
caiman posted:You are making very good points about the sexuality infused into the characters' thoughts and words. Definitely valid points. But I'm hung up on two things: first, few, if any, of the things you cited are imagery. Maybe the wrong choice of words? If you're watching some porn film and Ron Jeremy is standing there without any pants on, you're not seeing phallic imagery. You're seeing a cock. If you're watching some Hays-era romance and a couple kiss then you see a train driving into a tunnel, that's imagery because it's referring to sex without depicting sex. The same thing can happen entirely in dialogue. caiman posted:Secondly, if we're making lists that rundown the sexual references in all of Kubrick's movies, I'm quite confident that both A Clockwork Orange and Eyes Wide Shut will leave FMJ in the dust. Hell, sex is essentially what EWS is about. And as for ACO, why can something not be sexual if it's also violent? Is a man with a phallus on his nose holding a giant penis NOT sexual just because it's also violent? A really dramatic example of this is when we get to see and hear inside Alex's mind while he's masturbating (listening to Beethoven)---which is a pretty extreme example of getting a character to offer exposition that we have to accept at face value---and the first image he thinks of is of a death by hanging. I don't know how much more explicitly the film could make the point that, for Alex, sex isn't about sex but is instead about violence. caiman posted:If that's the case, sleeping with a gun (the quintessential symbol of violence) named after a woman would most definitely NOT be considered sexual.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2011 01:51
|
|
|
Most of Kubrick's films also deal with maturity, and sex is a great way to illustrate that. In FMJ you have young immature soldiers bursting with testosterone who are subjected to a highly structured system that attempts to turn every urge within them towards the desire for violence and then are released into the wild, where they struggle to disentangle the scrambled wires (which makes the sniper's orgasmic death all the more important). In ACO you have an immature delinquent who is surrounded by sexual imagery and stimulation (even the fashion and interior design is overstimulating) and whose only real output is violence. More sexually scrambled wires, aided by immaturity. EWS has a man whose wires are crossed via the influences of patriarchy, consumerism, and social stratification - an immature understanding of his place in the world (that the last word is "gently caress" isn't important, it's that it's spoken by his wife). In 2001 a giant penis visits earth and then, millions of years later, a giant sperm shoots off into space, travels through a giant, endless vagina, and then a giant space-baby pops out (I'm being reductive, but still).
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2011 03:29
|
|
|
Yeah, sex has always been a thing for him, but at the same time he consciously avoids "eroticism".
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2011 03:33
|
|
|
I was watching Cowboys and Aliens the other night and I was confused, what was up with the aliens little pink hands? Was it a secondary set of hands that were for doing more delicate things than their claws would allow, or was it like Independence Day were the big aliens were actually suits. It sure looked like they had a secondary mouth down there too.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2011 07:08
|
|
|
I can't believe it's been this long since I saw Green Hornet in theaters and I'm still wondering, how did they do that remarkably cool effect where a thug is kicked across a multiplying car?
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2011 07:14
|
|
|
Sorry for the dumbest question in this thread, but in The Guard, there's a scene where Brendan Gleeson is watching television. He's watching a film that looks like it has John Hurt in it, and a dude is screaming in one of those weird 70s ways and John Hurt is on a beach, tumbling to the sand like he's been shot, in super slow mo. WHAT loving movie is that?
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2011 21:34
|
|
|
ted_himself posted:Sorry for the dumbest question in this thread, but in The Guard, there's a scene where Brendan Gleeson is watching television. He's watching a film that looks like it has John Hurt in it, and a dude is screaming in one of those weird 70s ways and John Hurt is on a beach, tumbling to the sand like he's been shot, in super slow mo.
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2011 21:50
|
|
|
fenix down posted:http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0078259/
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2011 23:34
|
|
|
therattle posted:Yeah! I recognised that. It was the second film the producer I work for made. It won grand prix or Palme d'or at Cannes. Your boss has a very impressive resumé.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2011 04:29
|
|
|
Thanks. Given the review on imdb this looks like it's worth a watch for all the wrong reasons.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2011 11:02
|
|
|
Am I imagining things or does the Ministry of Magic in Deathly Hallows heavily influenced by the Ministry of Information in Brazil?
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2011 21:09
|
|
|
twistedmentat posted:Am I imagining things or does the Ministry of Magic in Deathly Hallows heavily influenced by the Ministry of Information in Brazil? It's probably drawing from the same sources, but Rowling apparently did want Gilliam to direct the first two Potter films, so she probably is familiar with his work. That would have been so amazing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2011 21:25
|
|
|
Maxwell Lord posted:It's probably drawing from the same sources, but Rowling apparently did want Gilliam to direct the first two Potter films, so she probably is familiar with his work. I never knew that, and that would have been amazing. I imagine they'd have the look of the 3rd one, even with the surrealist touches here and there.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2011 01:16
|
|
|
What's the easiest method of finding out who owns the rights to a particular movie? Let's say I come across an obscure movie on 16mm and want to transfer it to DVD/BD to sell, where do I go to find out who owns the movie, if anyone?
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2011 23:26
|
|
|
caiman posted:What's the easiest method of finding out who owns the rights to a particular movie? Let's say I come across an obscure movie on 16mm and want to transfer it to DVD/BD to sell, where do I go to find out who owns the movie, if anyone? If there are really no references to production companies or distribution companies etc. in the credits or the titles, then I think as long as you can prove that you made a decent effort to find the relevant people, you can use the film as if you had the rights. If someone isn't making any effort at all to defend their rights, I think they basically forfeit them as long as you make a reasonable effort to find that person. Assuming this is for business purposes, obviously you'll need to be thorough, but as a rule of thumb I believe that's accurate. In the UK anyway, but maybe it's similar elsewhere.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2011 23:57
|
|
|
Also movies before a certain year, like around 1920 are all public domain.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2011 00:00
|
|
|
caiman posted:What's the easiest method of finding out who owns the rights to a particular movie? Let's say I come across an obscure movie on 16mm and want to transfer it to DVD/BD to sell, where do I go to find out who owns the movie, if anyone? http://cocatalog.loc.gov/cgi-bin/Pwebrecon.cgi?DB=local&PAGE=First If the movie was made before 1976 and there's no copyright notice it's probably public domain. After that there's automatic copyright. Reasonable effort isn't in the US's copyright law.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2011 00:30
|
|
|
I've embarked on the journey of the 100 top rated movies according to imdb.com. Now I'm planning to watch Apocalypse now this w/e but I cannot decide which version to watch. I have never seen either, but I hear from alot of folks that the redux version is the one I should watch. However, the top rated version is the one from 1979. Any help guys?
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2012 22:48
|
|
|
Silica quartz sand posted:I've embarked on the journey of the 100 top rated movies according to imdb.com. Now I'm planning to watch Apocalypse now this w/e but I cannot decide which version to watch. I have never seen either, but I hear from alot of folks that the redux version is the one I should watch. However, the top rated version is the one from 1979. Redux is absolute poo poo by comparison. Do yourself a favor and watch the 1979 version. There's a bunch of extra scenes in the redux version which add nothing and take away lot of the eeriness and perfect pacing of the theatrical cut.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2012 22:49
|
|
|
Do not do not DO NOT watch Redux first. It's worth watching at some point, but not until you've experienced the awesomeness of the theatrical cut. AP is brilliant for many reasons, one of which is its near perfect editing. Redux diminishes that by a significant degree.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2012 23:24
|
|
|
Ok thanks for the replies. I am convinced. I hope the movie is as good as everyone says
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2012 23:26
|
|
|
Me and a Coworker were talking about Warrior, and how the antagonist isn't the normal sports movie villain, he's just another guy going for the win. But so many sports movie have them as literally the basketball team from Hitler High and if they win, the heroes will be tortured to death. We honestly could not think of any other sports movies that had the other team as just another team. I'm sure there are more.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2012 06:11
|
|
|
twistedmentat posted:Me and a Coworker were talking about Warrior, and how the antagonist isn't the normal sports movie villain, he's just another guy going for the win. But so many sports movie have them as literally the basketball team from Hitler High and if they win, the heroes will be tortured to death. We honestly could not think of any other sports movies that had the other team as just another team. I'm sure there are more. Apollo Creed is a pretty chill dude.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2012 06:25
|
|
|
twistedmentat posted:Me and a Coworker were talking about Warrior, and how the antagonist isn't the normal sports movie villain, he's just another guy going for the win. But so many sports movie have them as literally the basketball team from Hitler High and if they win, the heroes will be tortured to death. We honestly could not think of any other sports movies that had the other team as just another team. I'm sure there are more.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2012 10:10
|
|
|
twistedmentat posted:Me and a Coworker were talking about Warrior, and how the antagonist isn't the normal sports movie villain, he's just another guy going for the win. But so many sports movie have them as literally the basketball team from Hitler High and if they win, the heroes will be tortured to death. We honestly could not think of any other sports movies that had the other team as just another team. I'm sure there are more. In the movie Kung Fu Dunk, the home team is full of kung fu masters and the visiting team is supported by a mafia boss who literally wants to murder our hero. Check it out on Netflix Instant.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2012 11:28
|
|
|
twistedmentat posted:Me and a Coworker were talking about Warrior, and how the antagonist isn't the normal sports movie villain, he's just another guy going for the win. But so many sports movie have them as literally the basketball team from Hitler High and if they win, the heroes will be tortured to death. We honestly could not think of any other sports movies that had the other team as just another team. I'm sure there are more. Bring It On!
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2012 11:33
|
|
|
twistedmentat posted:Me and a Coworker were talking about Warrior, and how the antagonist isn't the normal sports movie villain, he's just another guy going for the win. But so many sports movie have them as literally the basketball team from Hitler High and if they win, the heroes will be tortured to death. We honestly could not think of any other sports movies that had the other team as just another team. I'm sure there are more.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2012 13:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 13:28 |
|
|
penismightier posted:Redux is absolute poo poo by comparison. Do yourself a favor and watch the 1979 version. There's a bunch of extra scenes in the redux version which add nothing and take away lot of the eeriness and perfect pacing of the theatrical cut. I only realized after a while that my high school film teacher showed "Redux" instead and that's the only version I've seen. Makes ya feel dirty. Like how I watched Goodfellas backwards the first and only time I've seen it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2012 17:38
|
|
