|
The Riddle of Feel posted:It's about control. She's not the problem, he is, specifically his need to control her. The ghost problem is Of Katie but Micah offers no real help with it, he wants to dismiss it, to control her completely. His denial of the supernatural represents this. We must remember that within the fiction, the demon is real. Michah's rejection of isn't logical, it's incredibly stupid, but it's not motivated by typical horror character blindness- it's motivated by a strained, terrified defense of his sexual power and masculinity against the woman that rules his life. I'd agree with that as well, but still stand by my first view point that it is chauvinistic because it demonizes women literally and tries to makes us feel sorry for the man who basically abused his wife. SubG posted:I would've never guessed that anyone would read Paranormal Activity as implying that the problem is not the rear end in a top hat boyfriend who never loving listens or, you know, the literal loving demon from Hell. But here we are. It's the woman, huh? The more or less literally demonised woman. She was asking for it, basically. That's what you're saying here. Are you saying it's not chauvinistic? I'm not sure what you are argueing here man? I mean seriously. I think it's a chauvinistic film because it demonizes a woman literally. So I mean yeah, that's my read of it. It's a chauvinistic film. Hollismason fucked around with this message at 02:52 on Jul 6, 2013 |
#
?
Jul 6, 2013 02:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 18:14 |
|
|
So apparently Armond White posts on SomethingAwful Dot Com.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2013 02:34
|
|
|
Hollis posted:Are you saying it's not chauvinistic? I'm not sure what you are argueing here man? I mean seriously. I think it's a chauvinistic film because it demonizes a woman literally. So I mean yeah, that's my read of it. It's a chauvinistic film.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2013 02:42
|
|
|
Hollis posted:I'd agree with that as well, but still stand by my first view point that it is chauvinistic because it demonizes women literally and makes us feel sorry for the man who basically abused his wife. See, I would disagree that you're supposed to feel sorry for the guy. His death at the end is pretty much treated like a punchline or a moment of catharsis rather than a tragic moment. I know when he get's killed my reaction is more "gently caress yeah, finally a pay off" rather than "oh no!" It kind of reminds me of Audition. Maybe I'm just weird but in that film I reacted with glee to the guy getting his feet cut off with piano wire rather than any form of revulsion or disgust. I usually hate stuff like that in movies but in that film it's just so cathartic. It's what the entire thing is building towards.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2013 02:44
|
|
|
SubG posted:The film doesn't blame the woman. That's something you're doing. I don't think you are reading the same things that I am writing. I mean I know I am writing down things, but I think you are just completely off base with how you are interpreting what I am writing. When I was discussing abusive relationships I was talking about a article I read on it and that view point, then I expanded on it when someone asked a question in regards to my views that it's a chauvinistic film. I'm not sure what you're arguing with me that I am being chauvinistic because I feel the film is chauvinistic? Or are you just arguing with me to argue? I agree with the viewpoint that the woman is the protagonist in a abusive relationship, I hold the viewpoint and opinion that it's also a chauvinist film for presenting the woman as inherently evil and the cause of her abusive husbands problems. quote:See, I would disagree that you're supposed to feel sorry for the guy. His death at the end is pretty much treated like a punchline or a moment of catharsis rather than a tragic moment. I know when he get's killed my reaction is more "gently caress yeah, finally a pay off" rather than "oh no!" It kind of reminds me of Audition. Maybe I'm just weird but in that film I reacted with glee to the guy getting his feet cut off with piano wire rather than any form of revulsion or disgust. I usually hate stuff like that in movies but in that film it's just so cathartic. It's what the entire thing is building towards. I had the same reaction , and cleared it up to say that it tries. I did not have that reaction to Audition though. Hollismason fucked around with this message at 02:54 on Jul 6, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2013 02:48
|
|
|
Hollis posted:I'm not sure what you're arguing with me that I am a chauvinistic because I feel the film is chauvinistic? Or are you just arguing with me to argue? I agree with the viewpoint that the woman is the protagonist in a abusive relationship, I hold the viewpoint and opinion that it's a chauvinist film for presenting the woman as inherently evil and the cause of her abusive husbands problems.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2013 02:54
|
|
|
SubG posted:The film does not present the woman as inherently evil. It presents the demon as inherently evil. It is arguing not that women are demonic, but rather that they are demonised. This is not chauvinistic. I just , man those are words and they are just out there but I have no idea what to do with them or how to respond to that. I mean yeah okay, that's an opinion to have. Hollismason fucked around with this message at 02:59 on Jul 6, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2013 02:57
|
|
|
The theatrical thrown Micah/demon face ending is more easily read as chauvinist than the Paramount alternate ending or the original ending, in that Katie becomes the monster. The death of Micah and the demon face are in effect the beginning of an I Spit On Your Grave style revenge movie, but the movie ends because there's no one else that has wronged her and so she disappears into the aether of a try-hard spooky "~she's still out there~ THE END?" sequel hook. It's still wrong to read the entire film as chauvinistic, as even the chauvinistic theatrical ending is made sympathetic to women by the context; the revelation that she's the host for the demon is a metaphor for women being destroyed by the cycle of violence in a society that still takes the man's side in most domestic disputes where self defense is involved. With the Paramount ending, PA could even be read as a metaphor for a hypothetical sensationalist media circus trial of a battered woman, which justifies the found footage style. The only way to call the film a chauvinist film is to ignore all the subtext and take a very surface level reading that works to preserve the chauvinism. It would be chauvinist if it was clear that All Was Well in the Micah/Katie household prior to the supernatural happenings, but everything we see indicates that Micah has always been a controlling shithead. While the in-universe for the explanation for the demon is that it is of Katie, attached to her, it's Micah that's the problem and the poltergeist activity is externalized abuse directed at her from him. It can be argued that the demon originating in her childhood is a metaphor for victims of child abuse seeking abusive partners as adults. The demon is attached to her and follows her but didn't create it, just as the effects of being a battered woman will follow her even if she escapes Micah's grasp. The Riddle of Feel fucked around with this message at 03:01 on Jul 6, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2013 02:59
|
|
|
The Riddle of Feel posted:The theatrical thrown Micah/demon face ending is more easily read as chauvinist than the Paramount alternate ending or the original ending, in that Katie becomes the monster. The death of Micah and the demon face are in effect the beginning of an I Spit On Your Grave style revenge movie, but the movie ends because there's no one else that has wronged her and so she disappears into the aether of a try-hard spooky "~she's still out there~ THE END?" sequel hook. Yeah, that's why I kind of read it as a chauvinistic view of a abusive relationship simply because the only way out is through destruction. That's why I kind of see it as a transgressive horror film, it's all about violence against women and then having this nihilistic ending that the cycle of abuse would continue unending. I viewed it as chauvinistic to say that woman cannot break free of a cycle of abuse due to weakness. There's a inherent weakness implied towards her through out the film and foisted on her by her husband, also the obvious possession thing. In regards to the subtext I always felt the demon just kind of basically represented this mystic otherness view attached to femininity. Hollismason fucked around with this message at 03:14 on Jul 6, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2013 03:05
|
|
|
axleblaze posted:I was gonna respond to that post but I honestly haven't really thought about PA1 all that much, so I thought it would be best to leave it to someone else. I'm glad I did. My brother is an angry misogynist, and it's pretty entertaining to listen to him explain how any negative moment in a film ultimately stems from a female character's actions or lack of.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2013 03:11
|
|
|
The Last House on the Left is a movie in which Jesse from Breaking Bad and the guy from Raising Hope both stab Becca from Superbad while the blonde girl from Garfunkel and Oates watches.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2013 03:12
|
|
|
Hollis posted:I just , man those are words and they are just out there but I have no idea what to do with them or how to respond to that. I mean yeah okay, that's an opinion to have.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2013 03:14
|
|
|
Was it ever confirmed that the theatrical PA1 ending was suggested by Spielberg?SubG posted:Like I said, I think this is a legitimately interesting question, and the text itself doesn't look to me like one that's constructed simply to slake the audience's prurient appetites and that it's that thing that most complaints about the film appear to be centred around (although, obviously, not in those terms). I would have to go back a ways, but it's everything else I had a problem with because I definitely think there's a level of prurience that that movie has outside of The Thing That Happens at the end. That was actually my problem with it, I know what they're going for when they show me That Thing (and I think that changing the subject position or whatever in no way excludes that same titillation, identifying with the victim is part of a lot of paraphilias, for the lack of a better word). It has an atmosphere in which there's plenty of priming for the final act of the film, where you have a girl who's like fourteen graphically describing being promiscuous because of being molested, which IIRC she also graphically describes. The movie is permeated with that kind of atmosphere, for sure it's being deliberately unpleasant. In that way, the movie is aesthetically gratifying to someone, that person is not me, however.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2013 03:18
|
|
|
SubG posted:What parts are giving you problems. I don't feel like Paranormal Activity is a particularly subtle film, but your comments (`Well I mean the theme of the movie is "Woman as evil"', `[H]e doesn't realize that she is the problem'', `[The film] tries to makes us feel sorry for the man who basically abused his wife', and so on) seem to indicate that you missed most of it. The film doesn't say that the woman is evil. The film doesn't say that Katie is the problem. The film doesn't say that we should feel sorry for Micah. These are all things you have projected onto the film. For example, the film illustrates that Micah is wrong (e.g., when he writes it all off as being in her head) and that he makes bad decisions that hurt Katie (e.g., bringing a ouija board into the house despite being warned not to). The film doesn't show us anything that Katie does as being wrong or evil or anything. what the film shows us is her agency being compromised by external forces. E.g. Micah. The big thing that changes my viewpoint is that she is possessed by this other force as a child. That she has grown up her whole life with this, that's why I say the force becomes internalized not an external force but part of her very nature and her warnings to Micah are not about a external force but revealing of her true nature. That's why I say it's a blanket statement of women as evil. That her role in the relationship traps her into standing by her protector and knowing that she will cause his death eventually but is still to weak to leave. If she was a strong character then she would have left, but she is trapped into a subservient role. Her problem inherently is that she does not have the strength to leave him and it is ultimatley like that because that weakness or evil is part of her nature.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2013 03:22
|
|
|
Hollis posted:The big thing that changes my viewpoint is that she is possessed by this other force as a child. That she has grown up her whole life with this, that's why I say the force becomes internalized not an external force but part of her very nature and her warnings to Micah are not about a external force but revealing of her true nature. That's why I say it's a blanket statement of women as evil. ...Um saying that a woman not being able to leave an abusive relationship means she's weak and it's her fault for not being able to is an incredibly transgressive thing to say and shows no real understanding how abusive relationships actually tend to play out.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2013 03:29
|
|
|
Hollis posted:The big thing that changes my viewpoint is that she is possessed by this other force as a child
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2013 03:31
|
|
|
weekly font posted:Re: Megan Is Missing When people talk about the last fifteen minutes, rape is not the first thing that comes to mind. For a movie to be so brutal and depraved that the revolting rape sequence is NOT the first horrible thing I flash back to - that's certainly, well, good for you movie. I guess. Yeah, rape is not even close to the worst thing that happens to someone at the end of that movie. I wasn't even thinking about the rape thing when I was posting about it earlier.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2013 03:46
|
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:(and I think that changing the subject position or whatever in no way excludes that same titillation, identifying with the victim is part of a lot of paraphilias, for the lack of a better word) Like I said, I'd feel better about arguing this in a better film. Like say The Human Centipede II (2011), about which you could say the same things (e.g. about it potentially appealing to paraphilic viewing).
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2013 04:32
|
|
|
House horror: Hider in the House
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2013 05:11
|
|
|
foodfight posted:House horror: Hider in the House Sequel? HIDER 2: THERE'S NO PLACE LIKE HOUSE Gonz fucked around with this message at 05:18 on Jul 6, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2013 05:14
|
|
|
The Glass House. One way to know if a movie will be bad without fail: Does it star Leelee Sobeiski?
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2013 05:40
|
|
|
SubG posted:This, and the part where you say that she's `basically' asking for the abuse, look an awful lot like blaming the victim to me---the `problem' is not the demon itself, it's that she allowed herself to become possessed, it's not the shitheel boyfriend, it's that she's `too weak' to leave. I'm going to go out on a limb and assume you're not going to agree with this reading and if that's correct I'd love to hear how it's wrong. Let's be clear, this is a interpretation of film and a reading. I am not in anyway blaming her for what occurred, I'm saying there's victim blaming with in the film. This isn't my message it's how I interpret the views that are presented and the film can be "read", which is to show a fairly misogynistic and chauvinistic view of the situation because of the portrayals in the film by the characters and their actions. I also agree that there's some other readings possible of this film that I agree with. You can agree with two viewpoints you don't have to say " This is the only way this can be interpreted". So let's stop with the " You are saying this is what is occuring" and only this is the correct opinion. change it to " It's not that I don't agree with you it's that I am explaining my view of how the material can be interpreted as chauvinistic and mysgonistic. It's not an attack on anyones opinion or interpretation. I can be right , you can be right, other people can be right and at the same time, because these are interpretations. The film seems to show a woman as a weak character, physically and mentally unprepared for what is occurring to her. I don't think that's a great way to portray women in film. Which is why I feel it's chauvinistic and misogynistic. We see a woman who is literally not in control of herself. When she does gain the strength to confront it, with the crucifix scene specifically. It is taken away from her physically and mentally that causes her to surrender ultimately to that part of herself (again I feel it's become internalized because it's something she never directly confronts. That she doesn't even seem to be aware of at points which also seems to show this perverse sense of not having self awareness) and again a man helps her discover the truth about herself and even suggests that she needs to see another man to solve the problem. The fact that it shows us this, that she isn't self aware, that she can't overcome that power is what ends the film. By the way the traditional theatrical version not the alternative etc... Men are basically presented as the solution and the problem to women which I think is made clear when she holds a crucifix of a man Jesus Christ and he's taken away from her by a man. That men are the ones ultimately that have an affect on the environment and their surroundings and women are powerless within their environment is what leads to me saying it's chauvinistic and mysgonistic. The following is not related to the chauvinistic theme that I think is present. The reason I feel it's transgressive is because we see a character literally trapped in a gender role and her breaking free of this forced role. That really it seems the more she struggles with the gender role the more powerful this external force seems to gain power. Specifically power from these gender role conflicts in the film. Hollismason fucked around with this message at 05:53 on Jul 6, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2013 05:45
|
|
|
Hollis posted:The big thing that changes my viewpoint is that she is possessed by this other force as a child. That she has grown up her whole life with this, that's why I say the force becomes internalized not an external force but part of her very nature and her warnings to Micah are not about a external force but revealing of her true nature. That's why I say it's a blanket statement of women as evil. Katie's true nature is that of a woman who needs agency, respect, and love to function in a healthy way. When she has these things the monster is at least at bay, if not somewhere else. When she can't have these things, the monster comes back to torment her and her partner as it grows through exposure to the bad feelings that result from a toxic relationship. The monster is a parasite attached to her misery and not the secret spring of that misery. She knows that and tells Micha to leave it alone, because if they're in a happy, respectful relationship then they will be safe. You can't blame a victim of abuse for not having the strength of will to leave. The movie makes Micha look like poo poo for breaking Katie's will, because the alternative is that it makes Katie look like poo poo for not having an unbreakable will--and this in the same movie where Micha causes his own death by refusing to compromise with an unstoppable killing machine that gives him multiple chances to compromise before destroying him. How is Micha's toxic masculinity not the problem in that movie? Are you saying that the movie blames Katie for being abused? I'm not saying that you agree with the point of view you assign to the movie, by the way. I'm just saying that the movie doesn't seem to offer that point of view.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2013 05:51
|
|
|
Silly Hippie posted:Is the M you're referring to from 1931? I don't know why I've never heard of this, it sounds fantastic. Yes, with Peter Lorre. It is one of the most watchable films ever made and has some really, really brilliantly uncomfortable scenes.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2013 05:54
|
|
|
SubG posted:I'm not sure that I see how this is necessarily a bad thing for an exploitation film to do. Presumably going into the film you're aware that it is going to depict terrible acts of violence visited on young women. I find it...interesting...the number of complaints about the film that, presumably aware of this, are centred around the film being disturbing, being insufficiently stimulating, or (as you do) lacking a tidy message. That, as I read the film, is the point. I'm not blaming the movie for not offering a tidy message; I'm blaming the movie for promising a tidy message before offering an ending that undermines the promised tidy message. That's fine if the message were anything other than "people have dignity and deserve respect and nobody has the right to torture them to death for sexual gratification," because the inversion of that message is a nihilistic horror show. I also don't know that I went into the movie aware of what I would get, just that it was a strongly divisive film.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2013 06:00
|
|
|
Jack Gladney posted:Katie's true nature is that of a woman who needs agency, respect, and love to function in a healthy way. When she has these things the monster is at least at bay, if not somewhere else. When she can't have these things, the monster comes back to torment her and her partner as it grows through exposure to the bad feelings that result from a toxic relationship. The monster is a parasite attached to her misery and not the secret spring of that misery. She knows that and tells Micha to leave it alone, because if they're in a happy, respectful relationship then they will be safe. I absolutely believe that the film victim blames. Also, I'm not saying Micah's toxic masculinity isn't a problem, it's that it doesn't show that she has strength to withstand it. That masculinity is so strong that it overpowers her physically and mentally, placing the blame on them equally in terms of what occurs in the film when it shouldn't because that's chauvinistic. It's sort of like its saying " Well he was a bad dude and shouldn't have done that , but she totally had it coming" Edit: Can someone spoil the ending of what happens with Meghan is Missing, thanks. I have no desire to watch it but I want to know what happens. Hollismason fucked around with this message at 06:12 on Jul 6, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2013 06:04
|
|
|
I watched Hausu without knowing anything about it.  It's amazing but not scary.
UltimoDragonQuest fucked around with this message at 06:52 on Jul 6, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2013 06:37
|
|
|
Hollis posted:The film seems to show a woman as a weak character, physically and mentally unprepared for what is occurring to her. Jack Gladney posted:I'm not blaming the movie for not offering a tidy message; I'm blaming the movie for promising a tidy message before offering an ending that undermines the promised tidy message. I mean I can get not finding it palatable. And, as I've already said more than once, I would feel better about arguing this for a better film. But, as I said, I don't think the film's `point' is just empty nihilism or paraphilic wankery.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2013 06:50
|
|
|
Coffee And Pie posted:The Last House on the Left is a movie in which Jesse from Breaking Bad and the guy from Raising Hope both stab Becca from Superbad while the blonde girl from Garfunkel and Oates watches. They loving remade that movie? Did it keep the 'there is no hope, no redemption, no catharsis, and revenge and salvation are empty spiritually and emotionally themes at least?
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2013 07:00
|
|
|
Hollis posted:Edit: The guy who kidnapped Megan later kidnaps her best friend (the main character). He then rapes her and buries her alive in an oil drum with Megan's rotting corpse. There's a ten minute scene of just him digging a hole with her screaming for help from inside the drum.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2013 07:11
|
|
|
SubG posted:So you are blaming the victim. Because the film doesn't argue that Katie is weak. You're arguing that. The film depicts her as being victimised, but this doesn't necessitate a reading that she's weak or was asking for it unless we accept that being victims are necessarily weak or have it coming. No, the film doesn't argue anything we interpret the films, you have yours I have mine. My interpretation is that the film places equal blame on him as well as her for their problems and that is why I feel it's a weak portrayal of a woman on film and chauvinistic. It shows that a woman can be cowed by masculinity and does not have the strength to over come that masculinity with out surrendering her identity. In fact you could even argue that the demon with in her itself is masculine in nature, the voice, physical action etc.. which could lead to the reading that women can only exhibit "masculine" traits through violence.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2013 07:28
|
|
|
User-Friendly posted:
The worst part is when she stops screaming and starts confessing her love for him in a calm manner and promising to be better in bed in an attempt to win her freedom. That movie sure was something else, I can't say I hated it but I'll never recommend it to someone.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2013 07:48
|
|
|
The secret decoder-ring code to understanding Paranormal Activity and its sequels is to replace all references to the demon with 'patriarchy'.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2013 08:27
|
|
|
User-Friendly posted:
Is there anything redemptive to this movie, or is the rest of the movie pretty much a set piece built around that spoilered finale? Because from that description it kind of sounds like a nihilistic take on a reefer madness after school special written for parents about the dangers of meeting people online. From the synopsis I read it just sounds like "Suburban Dad's Worst Nightmare" and my guess is the brought to life fears of people who watch the nightly news are uninspired.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2013 09:05
|
|
|
Holy butts you dudes were right, Europa Report rules
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2013 09:09
|
|
|
Marketing New Brain posted:Is there anything redemptive to this movie, or is the rest of the movie pretty much a set piece built around that spoilered finale? Because from that description it kind of sounds like a nihilistic take on a reefer madness after school special written for parents about the dangers of meeting people online. From the synopsis I read it just sounds like "Suburban Dad's Worst Nightmare" and my guess is the brought to life fears of people who watch the nightly news are uninspired. It's basically something that builds up to that, and it comes out of leftfield as well. It's fairly middling and innocuous up until that point and then...that.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2013 09:10
|
|
|
Babe Magnet posted:Holy butts you dudes were right, Europa Report rules Thank you! This really needs to get discussed more since I have a feeling it's gotten lost in the past couple of pages discussion of why horror is better than all other genres put together because of callbacks. To reiterate: Europa Report isn't a gore type horror movies, it's more of 2001, Apollo 13, the first half of Sunshine, and the horrible sense of isolation from The Shining. It's just so exceptionally well done, especially for it's budget. Everything is logical, every choice makes sense, which makes it even more sad when something goes horribly wrong. One of the deaths actually hosed with me a little, just due to the sounds. Seriously, go see this movie. This is not Event Horizon, Apollo 18, Jason in Space, or hell even Pandorum (I loved Pandorum). It's unique and really needs more appreciation.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2013 09:17
|
|
|
The use of time skips to keep you out of the loop and unable to get comfortable or prepare for the inevitable is phenomenal. My next goal is to watch The ABCs of Death, but only kind of. Which ones should I avoid? I can't find a list anywhere that tells me what each one's about without spoiling the short story itself. Apparently "L" is pretty bad. I'm mostly looking to avoid situations where the big scary thing is just rape or child murder or something else stupid and edgy.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2013 09:28
|
|
|
Babe Magnet posted:The use of time skips to keep you out of the loop and unable to get comfortable or prepare for the inevitable is phenomenal. L is one of the good ones. They're mostly stupid.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2013 12:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 18:14 |
|
|
I've got no doubt that they're pretty dumb, but I am a sucker for horror anthologies and I've already seen V/H/S.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2013 12:14
|
|