|
That's incredibly sweet and touching, in a way. Friends are awesome. e: What an awful, low-effort snipe.
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2020 00:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 11:01 |
|
|
STAC Goat posted:So with Lynch, Cronenberg, Miike, and Russell that's a lot of stuff I feel weirdly insecure about how I don't "get it." Lumping Miike in with those three Honestly Russell too Is kind of funny to me. But I guess I'm more predisposed to get what Miike is on about- it's just such a different wavelength than Lynch or Cronenberg. Though Cornenberg has always had a great sense of humor about himself. See his starring role in Jason X(Jaxon) for that. Miike is not so much an auteur and more, well, super excited and sincere kid wanting to show his boogers was a pretty apt metaphor. He is a professional shitposter who treats his work with the upmost sincerity and love, while also taking the piss out of everything all the time. If you know video games, he's a lot like Suda 51, which is fitting given his cameo in No More Heroes 2. It pretty much sums up everything about the man. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2G-E7fLq63M It's the first minute and 23 seconds. He comes the gently caress out of nowhere, is voiced by the man himself even in the dub, which this is, and speaks a whole bunch of self important sounding gibberish before doubling back on it with "I'm just rambling. Don't mind me." And then he gives you the most powerful weapon in the game. And then he's gone. Bong Joon Ho speaks in the cinematic language of awkward. Miike is the cinematic shitposter extordinare, the more you try to get it, the further away from the truth you end up. The unfair thing is when he's also simultaneously saying really good poo poo too because he interweaves that like a basket.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2020 00:41
|
|
|
Yeah, I didn't really mean to compare the four of them as directors. Just that they're all directors who I've been way on another page with than the majority during this tournament.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2020 00:45
|
|
|
Burkion posted:Bong Joon Ho speaks in the cinematic language of awkward. Miike is the cinematic shitposter extordinare, the more you try to get it, the further away from the truth you end up. The unfair thing is when he's also simultaneously saying really good poo poo too because he interweaves that like a basket.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2020 00:55
|
|
|
WeaponX posted:gently caress this Blade 2 whips so hard. I don’t give a poo poo about the eternally horny Ken Russell and his bullshit- Blade 2 is basically the perfect action-horror movie and if there is justice in the world it will win. I enjoyed Blade 2 for what it was, but it is indisputably one of Del Toro's worst movies - blatantly work for hire, with infamously lovely CGI, zero character development and lacking even the quotable quips of Blade Trinity. "But it's got Donnie Yen in it!" Cool - now tell me the name of his character without looking it up. I've seen the movie six times at least, and I can't. In fact the only members of the Bloodpack that I can name without looking it up are Verlaine because she's named for Tom Verlaine of Television, and Lighthammer because it's loving stupid. Up against that we've got an adaptation of an Aldous Huxley novel that broke any number of boundaries when it was first released and is widely considered to be the most important work of one of Britain's best directors. Vote for Blade 2 if you want, I can't stop you. But if you do, please don't pretend that you did it because it was the better movie. It was the movie you preferred. Jedit fucked around with this message at 01:25 on Sep 18, 2020 |
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2020 01:21
|
|
|
I don't know if I fully buy that Blade 2 is "work for hire". At least not fully. Like if nothing else del Toro reuses his vampire design for The Strain. I don't think Blade 2 was a labor of love and opus for del Toro or anything but I'm not sure I think he mails anything in. Which is not to say I expect it to win. But I've never seen Devils so I can't say how I'll go. But I could definitely see me voting Blade 2 over like Gothic and just accepting I'm a savage.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2020 01:25
|
|
|
To be fair, ask me to name any of the characters in The Devils and I can't do that. Oliver Reed fucks tho and that's what matters.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2020 01:28
|
|
|
TrixRabbi posted:To be fair, ask me to name any of the characters in The Devils and I can't do that. Oliver Reed fucks tho and that's what matters. Well, his rib certainly does get some action at least
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2020 01:32
|
|
|
Jedit posted:I enjoyed Blade 2 for what it was, but it is indisputably one of Del Toro's worst movies - blatantly work for hire, with infamously lovely CGI, zero character development and lacking even the quotable quips of Blade Trinity. "But it's got Donnie Yen in it!" Cool - now tell me the name of his character without looking it up. I've seen the movie six times at least, and I can't. In fact the only members of the Bloodpack that I can name without looking it up are Verlaine because she's named for Tom Verlaine of Television, and Lighthammer because it's loving stupid. This is all nonsense. The effects and visuals in that move have Del Toro’s stamp all over them. Are you confusing the CGI with Blade one? There are some shoddy shots but the vampires look awesome. Who gives a poo poo what the names of the Bloodpack were?? It’s about Blade and somehow Kris Kristofferson fighting cool looking monsters. Boo hoo there is no character development in my Blade movie what a shame. Also I don’t care if Aldous Huxley wrote the book a movie is based on- there’s been multiple poo poo Brave New World adaptions WeaponX fucked around with this message at 01:44 on Sep 18, 2020 |
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2020 01:37
|
|
|
Sometimes a movie is built around a memorable character whose name is said a ton and sometimes it's just built around a strong cast doing cool poo poo and that's fine too.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2020 01:40
|
|
|
Jedit posted:don't pretend that you did it because it was the better movie. It was the movie you preferred.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2020 01:50
|
|
|
Shrecknet posted:in the end, the first is the second, ergo Con Air is the greatest film ever made, gently caress you Bergman. But you see the good, cool, fun action movie you want to watch isn’t actually good it’s just your preference. The movie with Ken Russell furiously jerking off behind the camera is the real movie. It’s art.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2020 02:05
|
|
|
WeaponX posted:But you see the good, cool, fun action movie you want to watch isn’t actually good it’s just your preference. The movie with Ken Russell furiously jerking off behind the camera is the real movie. It’s art. ...Behind the camera? Are we watching different movies
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2020 02:09
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qnz-rX2kVYM who bought FilmCourage an account?
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2020 02:10
|
|
|
It's a shame we're so married to horror because Action Director Bracketology would be wild. Jackie Chan would win obviously
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2020 03:28
|
|
|
Debbie Does Dagon posted:It's a shame we're so married to horror because Action Director Bracketology would be wild. Jackie Chan would win obviously That's 100% who would win and voting against him would be a federal crime.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2020 04:01
|
|
|
TrixRabbi posted:That's 100% who would win and voting against him would be a federal crime. What if he's up against a top tier Schwarzenegger?
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2020 04:37
|
|
|
I want to have some kind of fantasy movie tournament where you pick directors and actors randomly and argue which would be the best Jackie Chan with Arnold as the lead/heavy would be amazing
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2020 04:42
|
|
|
married but discreet posted:What if he's up against a top tier Schwarzenegger? I think even top tier Arnie would struggle. It's easy to forget just how tight and supernaturally creative Jackie Chan's films are, and then on top of being visually spectacular, they're also hilarious and utterly charming. With Arnie too, he isn't directing, so really we're talking about James Cameron, John Milius, John McTiernan, or Paul Verhoven. Cameron probably has the best chance of reaching the final and coming face to face with Jackie, but then he might pull Avatar, or True Lies*, and then definitely strike out. *Which I love, but it isn't going to win that matchup. e: Assuming Action Director Bracketology. If we're just going fantasy actor/director/whatever, that could be interesting. Debbie Does Dagon fucked around with this message at 05:40 on Sep 18, 2020 |
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2020 05:37
|
|
|
TrixRabbi posted:To be fair, ask me to name any of the characters in The Devils and I can't do that. Oliver Reed fucks tho and that's what matters. Oliver Reed plays Urbain Grandier and Vanessa Redgrave plays Sister Jeanne of the Angels. Admittedly I know that because The Devils is a fictionalised version of the Loudun Possessions, but then again I've not watched the movie in a very long time.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2020 08:27
|
|
|
Honestly I'm ashamed you don't all remember Norman Reedus' turn as Scud and the immortal character of Lighthammer. Also Ron Pearlman playing Vampire Ron Pearlman. A masterpiece Ron Pearlman performance. Blade 2 is fun. I think I'm gonna watch it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2020 08:45
|
|
|
Jedit's secret plan to sink Ken Russell by stirring up the spite-vote going well I see
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2020 13:21
|
|
|
So I watched The Human Vapor last night. I think what is interesting about Honda's non-kaiju work is how, just like Godzilla, he's probing themes of mutation and physical corruption. We see it in Matango, The H Man, and we see it here. In fact, there's something particularly haunting in a post-war Japan context of a human being turning into vapor on whim and a fantasy in being able to harness and control it. Ultimately, the only thing that can destroy him is a bomb. I really dug the effects, it's got great pulp vibes and the use of the Noh performance as a critical setpiece feels kind of Hitchcockian in a way. Unfortunately, Audition is just in another league. Where The Human Vapor drags for long stretches of time, Audition is also fiercely active and disorienting. So much of Audition in the popular consciousness gets stuck on the torture sequences (for good reason mind you) it's easy to forget how deliriously surreal the whole adventure is. The last thing I expected watching it was those dream sequences that are not just horrifying, but dizzyingly active and chaotic. You absolutely see the same filmmaker of Ichi and Dead or Alive in there, in fact I'd say he's almost like a controlled Rob Zombie in some ways. I'm also recapping Audition from a viewing over a year ago, and it has a way of sticking with you and forcing you to stew over its imagery again and again. It goes so, so much further than needles and piano wire and it easily wins my vote.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2020 14:09
|
|
|
Debbie Does Dagon posted:I think even top tier Arnie would struggle. It's easy to forget just how tight and supernaturally creative Jackie Chan's films are, and then on top of being visually spectacular, they're also hilarious and utterly charming. With Arnie too, he isn't directing, so really we're talking about James Cameron, John Milius, John McTiernan, or Paul Verhoven. Cameron probably has the best chance of reaching the final and coming face to face with Jackie, but then he might pull Avatar, or True Lies*, and then definitely strike out. Don't forget Sammo Hung
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2020 15:21
|
|
|
Burkion posted:FAUST I don't particularly care for NoES 3 all that much, in general; I think it's weak, meandering and it straddles a weird line between where the series had started and where it ended up going. It's got a couple of cool dream scenes that show a lot of creativity (the puppeting scene, the hallway of mirrors scene), which makes the less interesting bits stand out as even more awkward and poorly put together (the flaming wheelchair down a backlit hallway looks so out of place compared to anything else). I know my opinion stands way the ways apart from the rest of the NoES fandom, and this forum in particular, but I consider The Dream Master to be the series' platonic ideal way, way more than The Dream Warriors would be. That said, I don't agree with this take at all. Faust is just cheap looking, badly acted (Divoff and Combs aside, obviously, even if Divoff is just doing a cheap knockoff of the "Wishmaster out of the costume" persona), nonsensical and kind of boring. I've been continuously surprised by how good Brian Yuzna's films have been doing in this tourney, but I think we finally hit a wall here, in terms of how his imagination can't overcome the budget limitations, or where the cast can't elevate the material. I know it's become thread consensus to pull for Yuzna to get into the Final Four; this was not the film to do so.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2020 16:44
|
|
|
Wheelchair ain't even on fire tho
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2020 17:33
|
|
|
Basebf555 posted:Don't forget Sammo Hung Oh man, we could have entered him into the horror duos bracket! I really need to watch more HK cinema though, I have huge gaps in my knowledge.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2020 17:34
|
|
|
Origami Dali posted:Wheelchair ain't even on fire tho It is when the Wizard Master blows it up with green magic. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2020 18:02
|
|
|
 TONIGHT! Debbie Does Dagon posted:
 COMING ATTRACTIONS Debbie Does Dagon posted:
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2020 22:55
|
|
Inland Empire vs Videodrome, FRIDAY, on the 
A very special SUNDAY CHILL STREAM on the 
|
I wish to start this post by saying once again how wrong i was about this tournament and how thankful I am for it and all of you. You were all right. I was focused on who won this tournament and how “fair” or “accurate” we’d be and that’s dumb. Instead you all created a great film watching club that has been my primary source of entertainment, a bonding social element in these difficult anti-social times, and exposure to directors and films I never would have given the time and attention I have without this and you. And this matchup is probably the best case of that since I doubt I ever would have given either of these guys this much time or chance without you and I’m so thankful that you’re all so cool about me not loving what you all love and this not being one of those places where I’m afraid to dissent for fear of the backlash. Thank you. And please be gentle. David Lynch’s Inland Empire vs. David Cronenberg’s Videodrome aka… “The Battle of Which David I’m Feeling Less” I don’t get Lynch. I thought I did partially. There’s this common theme in his work of him presenting very romantic elements of American lore like Small Town USA and Golden Age Hollywood and enjoying the idea of it while also turning over the rock to see the gross stuff living under the surface. He also gets weird and I don’t get that weird at all. I’m not against the weird. I enjoy some weird. I just don’t get Lynch’s weird much at all. And this one was SO MUCH. Not just in terms of percentage of the piece but in the 3 hours that I felt every minute of. If he was doing that rock turning thing on something like film making or Hollywood it felt way too esoteric and obscure to really follow or get a feel for. And the weird was just so disconnected and confusing to me that I could never engage or get comfortable with it. Laura Dern’s good but she feels like she’s playing 6 roles in different films in a demo reel. I don’t know what was going on. I don’t know if there was a plot. I don’t know if it came together. I don’t know if it said something. I felt like I was dozing off and waking up to a new movie. I didn’t get it. At all. I kind of hated it. I didn’t love Videodrome. Its got the problems I’ve felt with Cronenberg. A very cold feel, an odd amoral view of taboos, a focus on humanity being rejected for some kind of transformation, and women being abused and liking it. It was also provocative in a good way. Interesting and different and memorable. Unique visuals and body horror. Cronenberg’s amoral thing didn’t bother me as much here as it has in some of the other films, I guess because there were no real innocents or anything. Skeezeballs chasing skeezeballs and it going real bad for them. That whole “transformation” and “transcending” thing he seems obsessed with takes a weird turn here in a kind of suicidal way. I’m not sure how I feel about that. Which is basically where I always end up with Cronenberg. And there was some very prescient stuff in there about technology and how it would transform the way we socialize and work. Hearing Dr. O’blivion say his fake technology name would soon become common for all of us before posting about it in a place where I’m a “Goat” definitely struck me. I’m not really sure Cronenberg finished his thought since the film kind of turns into a weird sex and murder thing after that. But he was definitely onto something. Ultimately I had this little analogy that popped into my head tonight. My relationship with the Davids is like languages. Cronenberg speaks a language similar to mine. I speak Spanish and he speaks Portuguese. I catch a lot of it. I largely know what he’s saying. But some stuff definitely gets lost in translation. But Lynch is speaking German. And I just don’t speak German. There may be a word here or there I know or I might pick up some context clues but largely I’m just watching and trying to figure out why stuff is happening. Which I gather is kind of the appeal for some but I’m a boring normie and I like linear storytelling. But I know Lynch is winning this.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2020 09:46
|
|
|
David Lynch is overrated.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2020 15:50
|
|
|
David Lynch is underrated.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2020 16:12
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lrE9PHsbCXA
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2020 16:15
|
|
|
Debbie Does Dagon posted:David Lynch is underrated. This is the right one
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2020 16:17
|
|
|
The true posers are revealing themselves towards the end of the tournament. I will not say who it is, they know it in their hearts.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2020 16:27
|
|
|
Hollismason posted:David Lynch is overrated. Debbie Does Dagon posted:David Lynch is underrated.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2020 16:41
|
|
|
For your consideration, David Cronenberg's Naked Lynch
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2020 16:52
|
|
|
married but discreet posted:For your consideration, David Cronenberg's Naked Lynch https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XIcvTluLb2w
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2020 17:16
|
|
|
Videodrome vs Inland Empire My history with Inland Empire is that I walked in on my brother watching the film in his bedroom shortly after it came out. On the screen was the backyard barbeque scene, and my instant impression was that this film looked like poo poo, the acting was terrible, it just looked awful, I'm out. So while I am a massive fangirl for Lynch, I did not come into this matchup with high hopes. I thought it was going to be an easy win for Cronenberg. Of Cronenberg's '80s output, Videodrome is top-tier, perhaps second only to The Fly. Having now seen Inland Empire in full, I consider it such a daunting presence that I'm not sure it's a beatable film. What Lynch has achieved is perhaps the most accurate depiction of a nightmare ever captured on screen. It's dark, it's haunting, it's disturbing, and it's full of well-engineered deja vu and dream logic moments. Then, on top of all that, in the last five minutes, Lynch pulled a cord in my mind, which instantly pulled all of the disparate elements of the movie together and conjured into existence a coherent and verifiable plot before my eyes. Full disclosure, I don't think the film needs a plot, and it certainly doesn't need a single agreed-upon interpretation. That said, my thoughts are as follows. To confuse matters, I think this is a direct thematic sequel to Lost Highway and Mullholland Drive. Lost Highway is, for me, a film about the writing process. Mullholland Drive is a film about the pre-production process (I haven't revisited the film in over 20 years, though, so my thoughts may change). Inland Empire is a film about the acting process, about researching a character, getting into that character's headspace, and then what it means to have that character live with you once a shoot finishes. The movie also takes the form of a time-traveling ghost story about sex workers. Near the film’s opening, Grace Zabriskie's (the Sarah Palmer lady) character lays out precisely what we're going to see. She establishes that Laura Dern's character will be involved in a movie about infidelity and murder. It will contain confusing symbolic elements (unpaid bills), and that time will occur nonlinearly, so nonlinearly in-fact that the entire film happens within the pointing of her finger at a couch. The next pivotal scene occurs when Laura is at a line reading and begins to gain a feel for her character. This line reading is then interrupted, and we later discover that it is interrupted by Laura in the future. Skipping forward to the Laura of the future's perspective, this is the moment in which she is fully submerged in her character and becomes trapped within a hotel-like apartment with the sex workers. Laura then explores the past and story of her character, both in and out of character. This exploration includes the death of the character's son and being abandoned by her husband. We stay with Laura until the eventual demise of this character occurs, and then "cut" is called on the production. This “cut” signifies the end of the shoot for everyone else, but Laura still carries with her the emotions of her character. At which point, she goes within herself to defeat the character's abuser, reunite her with her son and husband, and free her. Laura Dern does for her character what alluded Laura Palmer, and that is to release her from her torment. Now that is a three-hour arthouse film reduced to a few overly long paragraphs, but it’s what I perceive to be the plot’s bare bones. What is missing from those paragraphs is the weight of emotion, the constant anxiety, the oppressive fear, and the fantastic humour and lightness of the script, the performances, and the direction. These, for me, are the most important elements of the film, and even if the film had zero to say and zero plot, I would still love it for taking me through that beautiful nightmare hellscape and then depositing me back into the light at the end. And what an ending! Every film should have a musical number over the credits. Videodrome, on the other hand, also has a lot of interesting things to say, and I echo STAC's reading of the film. When I was studying Social Anthropology, one of my favourite quotes was "culture is the stories we tell ourselves about ourselves.” Videodrome presents the reflection of that phrase, namely that who we are, and who we are allowed to be, is determined by the cultures we inhabit. Videodrome presents a world in which the manipulation of the culture is so advanced that the protagonist completely loses all semblance of autonomy, and can be commanded to kill, commit suicide, or be reprogrammed at a moment's notice. To say that it’s prescient would be an absolute understatement. Cronenberg presents all of the above, and then adds incredible surrealist gore on top, which ordinarily would be more than enough to get my vote. Unfortunately, there's a Lynch juggernaut rolling through, and it shows no sign of stopping. Lynch not only gets my vote, but he also gets my endorsement for the overall tournament. I'm convinced. I'm a true believer. This is Lynch's tournament to lose.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2020 19:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 11:01 |
|
|
An excellent post
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2020 20:10
|
|