|
WENTZ WAGON NUI posted:Something I find myself disagreeing with was the decision to make Wallace into this comic book badguy who by turns evokes Satan and Magneto. Remember how in the first one the Evil Corporate Mastermind is just this harmless old Japanese grandpa who likes playing games? yeah, I thought Wallace was a bit too cartoony for the film
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 01:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 00:28 |
|
|
BarronsArtGallery posted:It must really suck having to go into a movie and obsessing / fixating on this type of poo poo. It must really suck to find "ten seconds of counting" so difficult it requires an obsessive fixation. Don't ever look into 'cinematography', it'll turn your movie watching experience into a civil service exam. WENTZ WAGON NUI posted:He's mad because he can't make a Replicant what can make babies so he's doing like an angry child scribbling over his own artwork. This is a good reading, especially the connection to K's behavior; it also touches on the ambuigity of Luv's tears there. Is she grieving for the murdered replicant, or for her 'father's' frustration and the glory of his ambitions?
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 01:14
|
|
|
Kithyen posted:I get where he is going with this, but my issue is that he doesn't really seem to say anything about it. He just portrays it.        
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 01:39
|
|
|
Percy Shelley posted:I met a traveller from an antique land Ersatz fucked around with this message at 01:52 on Nov 27, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 01:44
|
|
|
General Battuta posted:I liked Emily Blunt's character in Sicario a lot, felt she was quite well handled. Neither passive and weak nor superhumanly mighty and brave. I️ watched that with a good friend of mine who couldn’t even finish Sicario because of how Blunt is consistently shunned and disrespected (part of the point of the film, but also, very much a dude’s style of storytelling). Blunt is a good character with depth, but she’s essentially powerless in the film all the way to the end. It’s similar, though hardly the same, with Blade Runner. Guys can escape into that with ease, while women might come to a movie theater and oh, great, it’s the bullshit they regularly put up with as a focal point of storytelling again. It’s a perspective that’s made more sense to me over time, and really elucidates how much of a sausage fest these collaborations are. It’s a little beyond right and wrong, more just another case that cinema can always benefit from a diversity of creative perspectives.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 02:38
|
|
|
Kull the Conqueror posted:I️ watched that with a good friend of mine who couldn’t even finish Sicario because of how Blunt is consistently shunned and disrespected (part of the point of the film, but also, very much a dude’s style of storytelling). Blunt is a good character with depth, but she’s essentially powerless in the film all the way to the end. It’s similar, though hardly the same, with Blade Runner. Guys can escape into that with ease, while women might come to a movie theater and oh, great, it’s the bullshit they regularly put up with as a focal point of storytelling again. It’s a perspective that’s made more sense to me over time, and really elucidates how much of a sausage fest these collaborations are. It’s a little beyond right and wrong, more just another case that cinema can always benefit from a diversity of creative perspectives.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 02:43
|
|
|
Kull the Conqueror posted:I️ watched that with a good friend of mine who couldn’t even finish Sicario because of how Blunt is consistently shunned and disrespected (part of the point of the film, but also, very much a dude’s style of storytelling). Blunt is a good character with depth, but she’s essentially powerless in the film all the way to the end. It’s similar, though hardly the same, with Blade Runner. Guys can escape into that with ease, while women might come to a movie theater and oh, great, it’s the bullshit they regularly put up with as a focal point of storytelling again. It’s a perspective that’s made more sense to me over time, and really elucidates how much of a sausage fest these collaborations are. It’s a little beyond right and wrong, more just another case that cinema can always benefit from a diversity of creative perspectives. I think it differs from Blade Runner in that it centers her perspective - although she's still a woman isolated in and constantly confined by a men's world, and the best she can do at the end is refuse to be utterly destroyed, it's definitely her story and she's nobody's narrative accessory or component. Which, yes, is something I imagine would be exhausting to watch if you put up with it all the time already (as women do).
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 05:25
|
|
|
You could read his ouvre as educational films about women for men, if you were so inclined.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 06:22
|
|
|
Magic Hate Ball posted:You could read his ouvre as educational films about women for men, if you were so inclined. It's very Refn in that way, but Refn (admittedly) is far less comfortable with women in his films.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2017 17:25
|
|
|
Blunt in Sicario is as constrained by her own ideology as she is by the chauvanistic world she enters. She wants to be a cop fighting the drug war "ethically"...it's laughable. In the feminist version of the film, she'd quit her job and join a nonprofit or something.
Mechafunkzilla fucked around with this message at 12:16 on Nov 29, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2017 12:13
|
|
|
BarronsArtGallery posted:I love how feminists expect every single film to be about feminism and when it isn't, it's supporting the patriarchy. It's more that people who are passionate about equality and social justice are aware of when films do or don't prop up toxic systems. You can argue whether, say, The Lego Movie comments on society but I think it's pretty obvious BR2049 is explicitly commenting on social systems and norms. Thus, it invites the question as to whether it is advocating for or against a harmful status quo. Your comment is a little reductive too because, as I understand it in my own limited capacity, Feminism is at its heart a study of unequal power dynamics. Given the rash of sexual assaults uncovered against hundreds of influential men this year, one can hardly blame people for being attuned to how power dynamics are portrayed. BR2049 is so explicitly about power dynamics it would be silly NOT to have this discussion don't you think? It's fine and congrats if you feel privileged enough not to care about power dynamics but it's kind of a whack attitude to turn up your nose at people asking probing questions about the media that influences society.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2017 14:55
|
|
|
Mechafunkzilla posted:Blunt in Sicario is as constrained by her own ideology as she is by the chauvanistic world she enters. She wants to be a cop fighting the drug war "ethically"...it's laughable. In the feminist version of the film, she'd quit her job and join a nonprofit or something. Does the movie agree with her ideology, or is the point that she's constrained by her ideology? If it's the latter than I don't think that makes the film not-feminist. That just makes it about somebody who, from a feminist perspective, is looking at things the wrong way. Which seems like a fine subject for a feminist film actually. Magic Hate Ball posted:You could read his ouvre as educational films about women for men, if you were so inclined. I have a dumb pet theory that Pacific Rim is this, aimed at the boys who will think a giant robot movie is rad.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2017 15:48
|
|
|
sean10mm posted:Does the movie agree with her ideology, or is the point that she's constrained by her ideology? If it's the latter than I don't think that makes the film not-feminist. That just makes it about somebody who, from a feminist perspective, is looking at things the wrong way. Which seems like a fine subject for a feminist film actually. It's not a dichotomy between feminist or anti-feminist. Feminism is a philosophy of empowerment and social change, not just lamenting the status quo. Presenting a woman as powerless within a patriarchal (abusive, capitalist) system might be valuable social critique, but for me, a film has to also explore to avenues or models of change to clear the bar of being a feminist work. In psychotherapy, exploring internalized and externalized gender role expectations and societal power structures does not mean you're engaging in feminist practice. You can do all of that and help the client to develop skills for coping with the effects of injustice -- and that might be very helpful, in terms of their day-to-day quality of life -- but you'd still be acting as an agent of social control by making powerlessness more tolerable. Feminist practice means going further and using that awareness and social context to develop a sense of agency, where the client is empowered by an increased ability to self-advocate, engage with a larger community, and affect their social environment on a mezzo/macro scale. This is just my take, which is obviously highly informed by my background and education. But I do think that this idea that any media that presents women as human beings is feminist really dilutes the meaning of the word, as does the idea that if something isn't a feminist work, that means it's misogynist or anti-feminist.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2017 16:12
|
|
|
Sicario was the most underwhelming Villeneuve for me. Partially because the protagonist was so impotent and pointless to the overall story, but also for turning into another "Hard men doing hard but necessary things" kinda tale that I'm really tired of.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2017 22:24
|
|
|
Mantis42 posted:Sicario was the most underwhelming Villeneuve for me. Partially because the protagonist was so impotent and pointless to the overall story, but also for turning into another "Hard men doing hard but necessary things" kinda tale that I'm really tired of. I don't think of Sicario as taking the position that what they did was necessary.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2017 22:34
|
|
|
In fact that is what the film is critiquing.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2017 22:35
|
|
|
Probably, it didn't hold my interest for whatever reason so I didn't watch it closely. I've loved every else the man has done so go figure.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2017 22:36
|
|
|
As it's Villenueve's best film, you should watch it again.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2017 22:37
|
|
|
Sicario is amazing. I would say the "weakest" Villeneuve movie is Arrival but even that is kind of amazing the way a fantastically detailed huge ice sculpture is amazing---it's pointless but there's even a point to the pointlessness, somehow.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2017 22:41
|
|
|
Yeah, Sicario is extremely good, and I have great sympathy for your tiredness with the theme you mention, which is precisely why you might like it if you engaged with it more. Arrival is an absurd misfire by his standards, but is still nice to look at.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2017 22:42
|
|
|
Arrival is a masterpiece.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2017 22:46
|
|
|
I like it but I like nihilistic art generally.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2017 22:50
|
|
|
Mantis42 posted:Sicario was the most underwhelming Villeneuve for me. Partially because the protagonist was so impotent and pointless to the overall story, but also for turning into another "Hard men doing hard but necessary things" kinda tale that I'm really tired of. Like people said, Sicario is about the extraordinary stupidity of this approach and the all-corrupting vortex of violence surrounding the drug war. The movie basically calls the hard men rapists. I'm really uninterested in a sequel focusing on the Brolin/Benicio Del Toro pair (I wrote this as Brolin/Guillermo Del Toro which I *would* watch the hell out of)
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2017 22:54
|
|
|
Arrival is probably my least-favourite Villeneuve, but I still like it. Sicario and Enemy are the all-timers.General Battuta posted:I'm really uninterested in a sequel focusing on the Brolin/Benicio Del Toro pair (I wrote this as Brolin/Guillermo Del Toro which I *would* watch the hell out of) Another Detective Loki movie seems like the way more interesting Villeneuve continuation.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2017 22:56
|
|
|
I would enjoy an unironic hard men make hard choices decision points style drug war memoir movie featuring a return of those two characters but WENTZ WAGON NUI posted:I like nihilistic art generally. e: Has Michael Bay done a drug war movie? Would Bad Boyz II count? Harime Nui fucked around with this message at 23:01 on Nov 29, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2017 22:56
|
|
|
Not drug war, but there was Pain and Gain
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2017 23:45
|
|
|
Magic Hate Ball posted:Arrival is a masterpiece. In the same way The Da Vinci Code is a masterpiece, sure.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2017 00:50
|
|
|
wyoming posted:In the same way The Da Vinci Code is a masterpiece, sure. I disagree.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2017 00:57
|
|
|
Sicario is absolutely better than BR2049. It's kind of hilarious to me that someone would even pose the question.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2017 07:47
|
|
|
I'm rewatching it rn just noticed Alejandro at one point calls the drug lord El Verdugo (The Executioner) and it's not translated. Also a bunch of cool stuff I missed the first time like the big sign saying NO MORE GUNS PLEASE pointed at America lol.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2017 07:48
|
|
|
Blisster posted:I don't necessarily agree with all your criticisisms of 2049, but this is quite on point. If you agree with that, though, then you must certainly also agree that Blade Runner 2049 is rather politically inapt/inept. In Scott’s film, we are presented with a variety of different reasons for why blade-running is a thing. Batty’s rebels allegedly killed 23 people, of course, but nobody gives a poo poo about that. Bryant’s goal is simply to cover up the ‘embarrassment’, that a shuttle was was allowed to land on Earth undetected. Blade Runner’s script is so careful and concise that just the word “embarrassing” tells us everything we need to know about the government in 2019: they are more concerned with keeping up the appearance of stability than actually accomplishing anything and, to that end, that they have a well-advertised populist ‘anti-immigration’ policy. In other words, the storied BLADE RUNNER UNITS are largely what we understand today as security theatre. There are a ton of such vital, fascinating details that Blade Runner 2049 simply lacks. For example: Tyrell Corporation is only one of dozens of competing robotics corporations. Deckard, despite being ostensibly the best blade runner in the biz, has zero familiarity with Tyrell Corp’s Nexus 6’s - because the Nexus 6 is just one product line among many. The events of the film are fairly banal; this ‘worst event in the history of robotics’ is merely six replicants landing in LA, potentially causing embarrassment - none of this fate-of-the-world comic-book stuff of the sequel. In opposition to Villeneuve’s film, the horror of the original Blade Runner is that nobody is in control. Deckard is just a minor stooge, doing his job, against the background of a major corporate debacle. The entire plot stems from the fact that the reduced lifespan intended to pacify the replicants had the opposite effect; Batty’s awareness of his mortality caused the rebellion. And this means that, before Scott’s film even begins, Tyrell has already abandoned the Nexus 6 design for being too dangerous. Rachel‘s prototype model is already prepped and ready to be introduced as a safer, ‘merely-human’ alternative - because humans tend not to rebel. That is why Deckard is, allegedly, designed to be weak, to experience pain.... Tyrell’s motto of “more human than human” does not mean ‘creating superhumans’. That’s a common misinterpretation. What it actually means is that Tyrell’s goal is the elimination of both ‘superhuman’ and ‘inhuman’ traits from the human animal, so we are left with a ‘pure’ liberal-humanist subject who is crucially unaware of the possibility that he or she is (we all are) potentially homo sacer. (“How can it not know what it is?” The basic answer is that Rachel is not allowed to know; once she does know, she ceases to be human and becomes a potential threat.) I hope that, by now, you’ve already noted more discontinuities in this sequel film - the first being that there shouldn’t be any Nexus 8s. This is fairly true on a plot level, but even moreso thematically. Tyrell had long ago realized his gently caress-up, and abandoned the Nexus line: “I’m surprised you didn’t come here sooner.” In Blade Runner, Batty is among the last of a dying race - a failed experiment, because humans are far more obedient. So all this rushed expository text about ‘Nexus 8’s with open-ended lifespans who are still being hunted’, dumped at the start of Blade Runner 2049, serves a purely utilitarian function: it allows the film to begin dramatically with the hunting down of the last Nexus 6’es, but without the troublesome fact that they’ve certainly already died off a decade ago. And this choice is not merely a ‘retcon’ - it effects a narrative regression, back to at least the midpoint of the 1982 film. Or even earlier, to before the introduction of Rachel. In following up on plot points, the filmmakers of Blade Runner 2049 seemingly overlooked the original’s basic narrative allusions to Paradise Lost, with Deckard and Rachel likened to Adam and Eve: mankind is God’s favourite creation. Rachel is the future of Tyrell Corporation, not two more generations of barely-upgraded Nexus models. (Sure, you can say that Tyrell took his plan to the grave and the shareholders just halfassedly scrambled for profit - but that sort of plot explanation doesn’t fix the regression of the narrative, this retreat from Blade Runner’s full implications.) And this leads into the second problem: Joseph’s journey to ‘becoming human’ is exactly in line with Tyrell’s ideology. His lying in the snow is, in a way, a pseudo-redemption of the evil Batty, the ethical regression of Batty. Where Scott’s film is harshly critical of liberal humanism, and of Tyrell, Villeneuve (perhaps-unwittingly) argues that Tyrell was killed too soon, that things would not have gone awry if he had simply been allowed to finish his work. Blade Runner 2049 mourns the kindly old CEO in much the same way Jurassic World mourns John Hammond. Although it may resemble Jew-Hunter imagery (e.g. Inglourious Basterds) Blade Runner 2049’s opening scene is much much more evocative of and better understood as Nazi-Hunter imagery (e.g. X-Men: First Class). The robot underground are presented as reactionary, fundamentalist types. They’re the ‘almost as bad’ flipside of Wallace. And so, as Zizek notes, the film is characterized by a ‘neutral’ refusal to ‘take sides’ because its implicit answer is somewhere in the liberal center. Its answer is in the union of the good (‘true’) father/maker and the daughter. Deckard becomes Tyrell’s thematic successor, taking human Stelline away from her false adoptive parents - i.e. from both misogynist libertarian Wallace and from the spooky Freysa.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2017 14:37
|
|
|
I may be alone here, but I think 2049 is his best film. Don't understand the hate for Arrival though. I thought it was the best picture last year. It had one unnecessary side plot that annoyed me at the time (the idiot watching Alex Jones and almost starting an interstellar war) but it ended up making the film age well (because loving Trump won and we've still got a ways to go before we hit bottom).
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2017 02:23
|
|
|
BarronsArtGallery posted:I may be alone here, but I think 2049 is his best film. 2049 is up there--I definitely need to re-watch it--but I just think it might have been a bit too bloated for its own good, and I'm not at all convinced Deckard needed to be in it. There's a lot of half-baked weirdness in the movie that's difficult to absorb on a first viewing (which, in fairness, can be said for the original), and I think I liked it, but I'm not sure it's all there.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2017 03:54
|
|
|
LORD OF BOOTY posted:Sicario is absolutely better than BR2049. It's kind of hilarious to me that someone would even pose the question. Oh come on. Blade Runner 2049 is vastly superior to Sicario in every way and I love Sicario. Yaws fucked around with this message at 09:29 on Dec 1, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2017 09:20
|
|
|
Aren't they really the same movie?
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2017 09:22
|
|
|
It's a testament to Villeneuve that people are arguing which of the movies that were my favorite film the year they came out is his best. Go Denis Go!
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2017 13:10
|
|
|
Aren't they both just a remake of The Star Wars prequels (the best movie ever)?
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2017 14:26
|
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:As it's Villenueve's best film, you should watch it again. I couldn’t possibly choose between Sicario, Enemy, and Polytechnique. An embarrassment of riches
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2017 20:38
|
|
|
Monglo posted:Aren't they both just a remake of The Star Wars prequels (the best movie ever)? The Star Wars prequels were a return to our origins, and by this I mean that they depict a bunch of hominids throwing feces at each other.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2017 23:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 00:28 |
|
|
It's Incendies for me, though that was also the first movie of his I ever saw.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2017 00:05
|
|
