|
I think the basic Netlfix account doesn't include HD anymore, you have to pay $1 more if you weren't a subscriber before the price hike. Check what kind of account you have.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 17:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 02:16 |
|
|
Filth is ridiculous and amazing. I watched it two nights in a row just to fully embrace all the insanity that takes place in it. Highly recommended for fans of black comedy.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 17:31
|
|
|
Chichevache posted:Filth is ridiculous and amazing. I watched it two nights in a row just to fully embrace all the insanity that takes place in it. Highly recommended for fans of black comedy. Yeah I have to watch it a second time this week just to verify I was truly seeing some of the things I was seeing, especially with some of the color schemes etc. as things got really heavy in the second half of the film. I feel like this film has gotten zero press in the U.S., maybe because it hasn't had a theater release there? Definitely one of the things I'm thankful for Netflix streaming for, something I likely never would have seen if it weren't stuck right up in my face on the website. Did you agree with my assessment that the director's visual style calls Terry Gilliam to mind? (Although a lot of that is the source material too, apparently.) Edit: Also, is that TV show that he was always watching while making the obscene phone calls (guy with the big fake head and weird voice) a real British show, or some other twisted weird poo poo generated from the the depths of a diseased mind? Zwabu fucked around with this message at 17:41 on Sep 29, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 17:39
|
|
|
Absolutely. I misread your original post and I actually was convinced Gilliam was involved. All of the hallucinations strongly reminded me of his more recent work (Imaginarium of Dr. Parnassus) and the scenes with god/psychologist/conscience? were reminiscent of him as well.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 17:44
|
|
|
Chichevache posted:Filth is ridiculous and amazing. I watched it two nights in a row just to fully embrace all the insanity that takes place in it. Highly recommended for fans of black comedy. My wife an I tried to watch it Friday and turned it off after a while since we were both exhausted and the quick pace was hard to follow. I went back and watched it all the way through yesterday, and yeah, totally worth watching. I'm not sure if it's a re-watch kinda movie though, with the exception of trying to figure out any other indications of the "twist" regarding his wife. I thought it was going to be another by-the-numbers "lovely cop works his way up the promotional ladder despite his awfulness/criminality due to clueless leadership/political process " story. Enjoyed that it did some not-so-cliched stuff with that set up.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 17:47
|
|
|
Zwabu posted:I feel like this film has gotten zero press in the U.S., maybe because it hasn't had a theater release there? Same thing happened with Choke, which was a very good adaptation of a pretty bad Pahluniak novel. It seems like some kind of trend that hip indie films made from novels get done and then nobody really notices.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 17:50
|
|
|
precision posted:Same thing happened with Choke, which was a very good adaptation of a pretty bad Pahluniak novel. It seems like some kind of trend that hip indie films made from novels get done and then nobody really notices. Choke had a very limited release. Despite having a really good cast for the movie, I thought that it was an okay adaptation of one of Palahniuk's best/most readable books. I'm one of those losers that like to read the book before watching the movie. Has anyone read Filth? And more importantly, will I lose anything by watching the movie before reading the book?
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 18:23
|
|
|
Zwabu posted:Yeah I have to watch it a second time this week just to verify I was truly seeing some of the things I was seeing, especially with some of the color schemes etc. as things got really heavy in the second half of the film. That, my friend, is the fantastic Frank Sidebottom, who was a very real television personality in Britain in the 80s. It's been ages since I saw the film in the cinema so I've forgotten which show he was watching in Filth but hopefully it was the shed one. here's the creator's Wikipedia page but I'm sure you can find an episode on youtube or something. You won't understand most of it but it was hilarious at the time. stickyfngrdboy fucked around with this message at 18:26 on Sep 29, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 18:24
|
|
|
stickyfngrdboy posted:That, my friend, is the fantastic Frank Sidebottom, who was a very real television personality in Britain in the 80s. It's been ages since I saw the film in the cinema so I've forgotten which show he was watching in Filth but hopefully it was the shed one. here's the creator's Wikipedia page but I'm sure you can find an episode on youtube or something. You won't understand most of it but it was hilarious at the time. Jon Ronson wrote a script partially based on his time playing with Frank and it was made into a film, called Frank, that you can rent on demand currently. Can't speak to the quality, since I haven't seen it yet.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 18:29
|
|
|
Franchescanado posted:I'm one of those losers that like to read the book before watching the movie. Has anyone read Filth? And more importantly, will I lose anything by watching the movie before reading the book? Welsh is one of my favorite writers. Filth is one of his best novels, though it's quite different to the Trainspotting-setting novels. The film is a lot different from the novel; the broad strokes of the plot are the same, but in the novel the main character is not likable or funny like in the film, he is just a total unrepentant dick. I thought the film telegraphed the twist a lot more, in the novel there's basically no way at all to see it coming, to the point that it wasn't a twist anymore, just "and then there's this" out of nowhere. The novel has a sequel (of sorts) called Crime which a lot of Welsh fans disliked for not being funny, set in Scotland, or anything. In fact, it's a really depressing look at some things in America, particularly pedophilia, and it's a really uncomfortable book but I thought it was well done and it's always nice when Welsh does something that's not "Trainspotting, again". For instance, I thought Bedroom Secrets of the Master Chefs was infinitely more worthwhile than Skagboys, because I just didn't need a long exhausting backstory for Renton and Sick Boy.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 18:51
|
|
|
Aside from the great cover, I'm really not into Skagboys. I guess I better take a look at Crime, huh?
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 19:07
|
|
|
Crime is very well-done, and if it were written by anyone other than Welsh I don't think anybody would have criticized it. It's very out of the comfort zone of his usual writing and settings. Skagboys really was just totally unnecessary. I don't regret reading it but I wouldn't recommend it either, and in a lot of ways it actually kind of ruined the characters of Renton and Sick Boy by essentially making them totally different people than how they're portrayed in Trainspotting, Porno, and Glue.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 19:10
|
|
|
Is Battlestar getting taken off netflix for good? Or is it just one of those glitchy things that happens sometimes where it lists it as to be taken down, but it never happens?
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 19:11
|
|
|
Anyone knows good classic movies that are up on the Canadian Netflix? Anything from early silent to just before recent. I'm trying to watch all kinds of movies I never got around to watching before.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 19:36
|
|
|
precision posted:Welsh is one of my favorite writers. Filth is one of his best novels, though it's quite different to the Trainspotting-setting novels. The film is a lot different from the novel; the broad strokes of the plot are the same, but in the novel the main character is not likable or funny like in the film, he is just a total unrepentant dick. I thought the film telegraphed the twist a lot more, in the novel there's basically no way at all to see it coming, to the point that it wasn't a twist anymore, just "and then there's this" out of nowhere. I really love Welsh too. I was curious how the film was going to handle the tapeworm segments from the novel, and they didn't really do it all besides some nods to it in the background of some dream sequences.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 20:28
|
|
|
King Vidiot posted:Well no, the fact that The Human Centipede exists doesn't make it bad, the fact that it's only barely-competently made makes it bad. It does its job at being a movie, but if you come up with a premise like that you really need to back it up with decent writing and better production than what we got with The Human Centipede.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2014 21:53
|
|
|
coyo7e posted:I love Human Centipede, but I was laughing out loud within the first 60 seconds and still feel that it's a satire of the genre. I'll still never understand what makes people think the rear end-to-mouth horror movie was intended seriously. Then again, you can still think it's crap as satire. But that's why The Human Centipede 2 exists. It's the rare sequel to a relatively mediocre movie that is leaps and bounds better than the original. EDIT: Then again, again, Tom Six is kind of a poor man's Jörg Buttgereit. The Human Centipede is okay, and Full Sequence is pretty good, but Nekromantik is one of the greatest movies of all time. K. Waste fucked around with this message at 00:50 on Sep 30, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2014 00:46
|
|
|
People assume it's serious because they think about the concept and go "Eww, that sounds horrible"
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2014 01:13
|
|
|
Hat Thoughts posted:People assume it's serious because they think about the concept and go "Eww, that sounds horrible" Most of the people I know who watched or tried to watch it, "couldn't handle the subject matter" and were happy to tell me how they couldn't sit through it despite watching Saw etc all day long.. I usually have some serious body-horror aversions to surgery-based gore porn movies but I was simply laughing too hard. I think the funniest part of the movie was when the woman gets free and falls in the pool and herr doktor triumphally exclaims "and now I know who shall be ze center of the centipede, for your experience shall be T-VICE as intense!" I am holding out on the second one because I don't see how you could do a sequel and keep the level of hilarity without just jumping the shark. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2014 01:52
|
|
|
Human Centipede is very funny, Human Centipede 2 is one of the most effective and horrific movies I've seen in years. However, the last act is so grotesque that it becomes absurd self-parody. That said, I don't recommend HC2 unless you're in the mood for the grotesque oppressive darkness and nausea. I put it up there with Cannibal Holocaust and the original I Spit On Your Grave. Just bleak movies.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2014 02:16
|
|
|
Franchescanado posted:I put it up there with Cannibal Holocaust and the original I Spit On Your Grave. Just bleak movies. Cannibal Holocaust really isn't that bleak a movie. It doesn't say that there's no hope for mankind, it ends explicitly with, "There might be hope for mankind if people are willing to break the law." I haven't seen I Spit On Your Grave, but from what I understand it's just kind of a lovely movie. HC2 and Cannibal Holocaust are both good.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2014 02:26
|
|
|
K. Waste posted:I haven't seen I Spit On Your Grave, but from what I understand it's just kind of a lovely movie. HC2 and Cannibal Holocaust are both good. I did learn however, that the exploitation horror genre is enormous and has a lot of wild and groundbreaking and psychedelic video work going on a lot of the time which moved movies forward as a genre, despite most of the movies those things were pioneered in, being unforgivably boring horror involving halter-topped italian women getting lost in ruins the size of a doghouse, while being chased by the slowest undead in the world (my favorite were the ones where the scary, clumsy, slow undead were also blind and yet the women still couldn't manage to escape). I tried watching the new I Spit on Your Grave and got the same vibe - I can read about it, but I can't sit through 10-20 minutes of someone being abused to that extent, with the only payoff being a non-enjoyable and protracted revenge sequence.
coyo7e fucked around with this message at 02:43 on Sep 30, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2014 02:38
|
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:Aside from the great cover, I'm really not into Skagboys. I guess I better take a look at Crime, huh? precision posted:Welsh is one of my favorite writers. Filth is one of his best novels, though it's quite different to the Trainspotting-setting novels. The film is a lot different from the novel; the broad strokes of the plot are the same, but in the novel the main character is not likable or funny like in the film, he is just a total unrepentant dick. I thought the film telegraphed the twist a lot more, in the novel there's basically no way at all to see it coming, to the point that it wasn't a twist anymore, just "and then there's this" out of nowhere. Ersatz fucked around with this message at 02:59 on Sep 30, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2014 02:53
|
|
|
mysterious frankie posted:Jon Ronson wrote a script partially based on his time playing with Frank and it was made into a film, called Frank, that you can rent on demand currently. Can't speak to the quality, since I haven't seen it yet. I've seen Frank and really liked it, it's a good dark comedy and Michael Fassbender is great as Frank. Some of the songs are actually pretty decent, too. I'm not familiar with the original Frank Sidebottom character beyond skimming his wiki page but apparently the movie has basically nothing to do with him besides the head.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2014 03:17
|
|
|
coyo7e posted:I tried watching the new I Spit on Your Grave and got the same vibe - I can read about it, but I can't sit through 10-20 minutes of someone being abused to that extent, with the only payoff being a non-enjoyable and protracted revenge sequence. You should see Walerian Borowczyk's The Beast. While not technically a rape-and-revenge movie, it has the distinction of being the only film I've ever seen where the rapist literally dies of impotence. It's also a disquietingly beautiful movie with a good sense of humor about it self. Also, the only truly great porno chic movie.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2014 03:38
|
|
|
K. Waste posted:it has the distinction of being the only film I've ever seen where the rapist literally dies of impotence. It's also a disquietingly beautiful movie with a good sense of humor about it self.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2014 04:00
|
|
|
Oh hey, The Double just got put up. I've been meaning to watch that so I can complete my doppelganger duo with [b]Enemy[/b.]
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2014 05:06
|
|
|
Human Centipede 2 is one of the most thoroughly unpleasant, truly horrible movies I've ever watched. I don't recommend it. The first one was terrific as a satire and for Dieter Lazer's performance, which was absolutely phenomenal. There is also no way that anyone would be "grossed out" by it; compared to Cronenberg it was positively tame when it came to the "body horror" aspects of the story. edit: Uh... quote:Curator Siggi Hjartarson works to complete his collection of specimens at the Icelandic Phallological Museum: the world's only penis museum.  OK then!precision fucked around with this message at 05:24 on Sep 30, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2014 05:13
|
|
|
I'm almost afraid to find out...
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2014 05:35
|
|
|
Is the version of Human Centipede 2 on Netflix the cut or uncut one? That is, is it the version that leaves the baby getting crushed underneath the brake pedal of the car at the end intact or the one that omits it completely?
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2014 06:10
|
|
|
Rageaholic Monkey posted:Is the version of Human Centipede 2 on Netflix the cut or uncut one? That is, is it the version that leaves the baby getting crushed underneath the brake pedal of the car at the end intact or the one that omits it completely? It's been years since I watched it but it was the uncut one back then!
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2014 06:15
|
|
|
K. Waste posted:Cannibal Holocaust really isn't that bleak a movie. It doesn't say that there's no hope for mankind, it ends explicitly with, "There might be hope for mankind if people are willing to break the law." Cannibal Holocaust is literally a movie about people finding savages who rape and torture each other to film them raping and torturing each other. When the film crew doesn't get enough rape and torture, they manipulate the cannibals into violent extremes, causing them to ironically be raped and tortured, then eaten. The main characters are all detestable and have no value for life. The savages, while ignorant, are still very cruel to each other. It's only the last the last few minutes of the movie where there are people saying "wow, this was hosed up, aren't people crazy?" Then there's the fact that there are several visceral scenes with actual animals being captured and killed and then eaten by the actors for shock value (again, yes, it shows that the 'civilized people are more savage than the actual savages' and continues that theme) on screen. I think it is a good movie. It has a very interesting message, it was well made, it's very effective, but it's very much a bleak movie about human nature.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2014 06:17
|
|
|
Franchescanado posted:I think it is a good movie. It has a very interesting message, it was well made, it's very effective, but it's very much a bleak movie about human nature. Yeah, agreed. It's nihilistic and unforgiving. I've only watched it three or four times, but it never gets much easier. And the thing is, the most graphic scenes in it aren't actually the most disturbing scenes.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2014 06:38
|
|
|
Is there a website where you can see the new releases on Netflix? All kinds of (I'm using Switzerland one)
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2014 07:14
|
|
|
Franchescanado posted:Cannibal Holocaust is literally a movie about people finding savages who rape and torture each other to film them raping and torturing each other. When the film crew doesn't get enough rape and torture, they manipulate the cannibals into violent extremes, causing them to ironically be raped and tortured, then eaten. The main characters are all detestable and have no value for life. The savages, while ignorant, are still very cruel to each other. It's only the last the last few minutes of the movie where there are people saying "wow, this was hosed up, aren't people crazy?" I disagree. The indigenous peoples being depicted as 'savages' needs to be fundamentally understood with two givens that the film makes explicit: 1) Diegetically, the civilized characters - both the filmmakers and the military - act out savage violence on these peoples before any of them actually do in the context of the film. Obviously we're meant to take the practices of the natives as static and primordial in some sense - an unchanging holdover from bygone eras. But to say that the indigenous, isolated peoples acting like savages is fundamentally analogous to the way they are treated by their colonial oppressors is a false equivalency. My reading of Deodato's film is much more anti-Western than this. He is indeed proposing that we should understand and accept that the so-called savages have a inalienable right to live the way they do, and it is in fact our naive liberal impositions which are oppressive. This is pointed up by the fact that... 2) Despite the liberal, Western characters eventually all agreeing, "Wow, the filmmakers who we all acknowledged staged footage and passed it off as genuine were really hosed up people," their solution to this is not to, like, distribute information about what the film contains, but to burn it outright, thus destroying all evidence of our colonial crimes against these indigenous peoples. Monroe naval-gazingly wonders "who the real cannibals are," but he is overtly satisfied with the conclusion where Alan's legacy as an ethnographic trailblazer is preserved and nobody actually confronts the extent of human suffering. It's clear that the real savages are the ones that coin the terms and pass the judgments. Furthermore, Deodato's conclusion is optimistic in the fact that he shows that this information is impossible to repress, not necessarily because we have noble values, but because ironically our drive for personal gain inevitably betrays the corrupt interior of our value systems. I don't see this as bleak, because, again, the point is not that man is fundamentally cruel and savage, but, rather, that the experience of the oppressed is legitimized. Death means something again, whereas Monroe clearly sees it as just obscenity to be repressed. The bleak ending is the one where all values are meaningless and death means nothing. In Cannibal Holocaust, the values of the natives are continually vindicated, and their suffering is framed as abjectly tragic.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2014 07:18
|
|
|
I'm not disagreeing with any of this, and it's well thought out. However, I've watched an hour of people being violently cruel to "savages" just to create entertainment. And the movie ending with people, much like the viewer, acknowledging the evil they have just watched, feeling disgusted, and agreeing to burn the footage, in my eyes, isn't optimistic. The evil is still done. The fact that they destroy it to cover everything up, to me, doesn't spin things in a positive light. I've still seen the depths of cruelty people can sink in. Lives were still ruined. It has happened, and can easily happen again.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2014 18:03
|
|
|
Le0 posted:Is there a website where you can see the new releases on Netflix? All kinds of (I'm using Switzerland one) I use Moreflix (moreflicks?), it works great
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2014 18:22
|
|
|
Franchescanado posted:I'm not disagreeing with any of this, and it's well thought out. However, I've watched an hour of people being violently cruel to "savages" just to create entertainment. And the movie ending with people, much like the viewer, acknowledging the evil they have just watched, feeling disgusted, and agreeing to burn the footage, in my eyes, isn't optimistic. The evil is still done. The fact that they destroy it to cover everything up, to me, doesn't spin things in a positive light. I've still seen the depths of cruelty people can sink in. Lives were still ruined. It has happened, and can easily happen again. They don't destroy the film. They want to, but they demonstrably don't succeed. The final evil, in which truth is repressed, is subverted and truth survives. Portraying the fact of irrevocable cruelty is not in and of itself bleak. Bleakness inspires no hope for vindication of the oppressed. The 'savages' of Cannibal Holocaust are vindicated. They succeed in enacting ritualized, symbolical reparation-revenge upon their oppressors and in sending the cursed object (the film) back to the oppressor. And the cursed object survives despite attempts to destroy it, through a black magic that we know as the black market. The cannibals have successfully 'crossed' themselves and returned the curse of the oppressor. This doesn't mean that the cruelty and its consequences magically go away, or that oppression won't continue, but these are naive fantasies, reducing vindication to a fantastic, unachievable endgame of egalitarian justice. The hope that the cannibals have is in a justice that is pertinent to them, not one that is palatable to their oppressors. To say that this is bleak because we have witnessed people staging violent cruelty to create entertainment ignores the question of whether or not the oppressor deserves any kind of vindication. We are the ones capitalizing on suffering, we are the bad guys. When we are exposed as hypocrites and sadists and the oppressed are vindicated by their own actions, this is not bleak. We have not earned the right to our progressive liberal self-conception. This is a good thing. The militant oppressed vindicate themselves. This is a good thing.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2014 19:07
|
|
|
Turfahurf posted:I've seen Frank and really liked it, it's a good dark comedy and Michael Fassbender is great as Frank. Some of the songs are actually pretty decent, too. I'm not familiar with the original Frank Sidebottom character beyond skimming his wiki page but apparently the movie has basically nothing to do with him besides the head. I think Ronson said the film's Frank was more Daniel Jonson meets Captain Beefheart. He did end up writing a non fiction book chronicling his time in Frank Sidebottom's band, if anyone is interested in that.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2014 19:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 02:16 |
|
|
God loving damnit. I was going through the entire series of Criminal Minds before watching the new season premiere (which airs tomorrow) and I was on season 9 of 9. I watched episode 1 of that season last night, which was a 2-parter, and today I tried to watch the next part but it appears that they removed season 9 from Netflix. It just keeps playing the season 8 finale for me, which I've already seen 
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2014 20:20
|
|