|
This one flew under my radar but this Bowie documentary, Moonage Daydream, looks interesting https://faroutmagazine.co.uk/watch-trailer-david-bowie-film/
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2022 15:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 08:15 |
|
|
I should definitely see anything that the June 17th, 1994 guy directs
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2022 15:23
|
|
|
Coaaab posted:I should definitely see anything that the June 17th, 1994 guy directs Was this sarcastic or genuine? I enjoyed that 30 for 30 episode a great deal so I assume the former?
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2022 15:41
|
|
|
1 billion percent genuine, I liked Jane too, probably should get around to his Cobain doc
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2022 15:44
|
|
|
Yeah, it fuckin rules. I'm all in.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2022 15:44
|
|
|
Coaaab posted:1 billion percent genuine, I liked Jane too, probably should get around to his Cobain doc Right on. I didn't know he did a Cobain doc. Have to look that up. Moonage Daydream looks like it has a lot of new and pretty candid stuff. For a second, I thought this was the film that couldn't get access to Bowie's music but I think was the fictional biopic and I got them confused. Because a documentary about a musician without their actual loving music is guaranteed to suck. I heard Netflix is working on a Prince documentary (or series) but all the news I hear about it seems to come in fits and starts where it's on one minute and in limbo the next. I can't help but wonder if access to the music is holding it up. Prince didn't leave a will and was notoriously protective of his work, plus the estate has like 5 family members or something all vying for...well, money. Speaking of music docs (and sorry if it came up previously) but Amy was really loving good and I just recently got around to seeing it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2022 16:17
|
|
|
Kurt Cobain: Montage of Heck is his best film imo but Moonage Daydream looks like a contender. He's been making it for like eight years.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2022 16:41
|
|
|
Buzz Osborne said that Montage of heck doc is pretty much fiction but it’s still very compelling stuff.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2022 22:09
|
|
|
you should running to your local theater to watch ‘fire of love’. excellent, excellent work.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2022 21:51
|
|
|
abelwingnut posted:you should running to your local theater to watch ‘fire of love’. excellent, excellent work. Is that the movie with the couple who climb Volcanos?
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2022 01:56
|
|
|
I watched The Rescue yesterday. Didn't realise it's been out for nearly a year. Same directors as Free Solo and a goddam incredible story (the cave rescue of the boys soccer team in Thailand) that makes you feel good about humanity. It was originally on Nat Geo, but is on Disney+ now (at least it is in Australia, not sure about the rest of the world)
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2022 02:04
|
|
|
Looten Plunder posted:Is that the movie with the couple who climb Volcanos? yes.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2022 05:29
|
|
|
abelwingnut posted:you should running to your local theater to watch ‘fire of love’. excellent, excellent work. Agreed, it’s a really good doc for the big screen. The volcano imagery they captured is consistently astonishing
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2022 12:25
|
|
|
I've mentioned a few times that I like true crime stuff. At least good stuff. I happened upon an HBO doc called "Who Killed Garrett Phillips" and am about 75% through it so I haven't drawn any conclusions or formed an opinion yet but I had to pause it just now because one thing I just saw really stood out to me. During jury selection at the accused's trial, the DA said she thought "voire dire went really well" and went on to say that she KNEW one of the jurors, who she thought "he would do a very job and give both sides a fair shake" on the basis that she knew that man. Now, correct me if I'm wrong but wouldn't a prosecutor/DA personally knowing a potential juror automatically waive that person from selection? That's assuming also that the defense was even aware of this fact which, if they were, I would think they would move to immediately strike that individual from jury consideration, no? Maybe this will get brought up again because it looks like the suspect wasn't convicted but what the hell? Am I mistaken here? BiggerBoat fucked around with this message at 17:16 on Aug 6, 2022 |
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2022 17:12
|
|
|
I cheated and looked the case up, and it may or may not come up. Little spoiler It could just be setting the scene giving the outcome and you're supposed to be thinking that. My not a lawyer knowledge of it is that they allow jurors to stay even if they know the lawyers involved as long as it's not a close relationship. They push "but will this relationship bias your decision/Can't you look past your prior knowledge of this person?" hard. I've just heard it come up before since a school I went to had a few prominent lawyer parents and non-lawyer parents were kind of bummed that they couldn't use the "'We worked a charity thing together" excuse to get out of jury duty. If the prosecutor knows them well enough to make sincere character judgments, then yeah, it's kind of hosed and probably over the line and the defense probably didn't know.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2022 07:01
|
|
|
Having just finished a long true crime podcast in which jury selection was a central issue, knowing one of the lawyers involved doesn’t necessarily disqualify you. Basically as I understand it there are two rounds of jury selection: a first round removes people based on serious issues that come up in the questionnaire they have to fill out ahead of time (I.e. having committed a crime in the past); the second then involves what are called peremptory strikes, in which either side gets a fixed number of opportunities to strike people for basically any reason short of openly discriminatory ones. My understanding is that if the relationship isn’t specifically brought up in questioning, it wouldn’t necessarily be an issue. Also, in a lot of small communities everyone knows everyone, including prosecutors and public defenders, so it can be almost impossible to avoid that kind of connection.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2022 11:57
|
|
|
Parakeet vs. Phone posted:I cheated and looked the case up, and it may or may not come up. Little spoiler It could just be setting the scene giving the outcome and you're supposed to be thinking that. I finished it up and it turns out the juror didn't come up, for reasons I won't spoil, but I think that any lawyer on a case who knows a juror should disqualify that person from the box. That just seems like common sense. I gotta say that I think in this case of Who Killed Garrett Phillips and Nick Hillary, I have to lean towards thinking he's good for it BUT that the prosecution absolutely did not prove their case. I often go to message boards and discussion groups for true crime cases that draw my interest, especially those that are unsolved or where it looks like they got the wrong person, and one thing that always freaks me out is the...I dunno...blood thirst and aggression I see from so many people who are so sure of themselves, rush to judgement and immediately start calling for gallows. I'm not sure, were I ever in trouble like this, that I would want a jury of my "peers" deciding my fate. The supposition seems to automatically lean towards guilt instead of the other way around. MeinPanzer posted:Having just finished a long true crime podcast in which jury selection was a central issue, knowing one of the lawyers involved doesn’t necessarily disqualify you. Basically as I understand it there are two rounds of jury selection: a first round removes people based on serious issues that come up in the questionnaire they have to fill out ahead of time (I.e. having committed a crime in the past); the second then involves what are called peremptory strikes, in which either side gets a fixed number of opportunities to strike people for basically any reason short of openly discriminatory ones. That still seems hosed up to me. If I personally know the defense attorney or the prosecutor, right away my judgement is slanted whether I want it to be or not, right? It's like interviewing for a job against and equally qualified applicant but I happen to have gone to school or worked with Mary so I have an edge there.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2022 16:28
|
|
|
I've been really enjoying having this channel on in the background. They are able to present in a pretty engaging way and have a truly wide range of topics. They also have a new episode daily. Worth checking out! https://www.youtube.com/c/FreeDocumentary/videos
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2022 14:44
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:I'm not sure, were I ever in trouble like this, that I would want a jury of my "peers" deciding my fate. The supposition seems to automatically lean towards guilt instead of the other way around. Absolutely, it’s something I’ve thought about a bunch too. Shows why rich people paying for super expensive attorneys is such a thing, because they have the ability to sway the dummies who decide your fate regardless of the facts. For the regular rear end person who ends up in court, how many of those jurors actually want to be there, and for the right reason? People always seem to be pissed to be called and half of me thinks they’ll have the mindset that’ll want to send the guy down for ‘wasting their time’ from the outset.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2022 15:34
|
|
|
EL BROMANCE posted:Absolutely, it’s something I’ve thought about a bunch too. Shows why rich people paying for super expensive attorneys is such a thing, because they have the ability to sway the dummies who decide your fate regardless of the facts. I've heard from people who have served that "their job is to convict" and think that eyewitness testimony is unimpeachable, police would never lie, anyone who is arrested must have done something and that, someone with a criminal record or who is a sex worker is automatically lying. They don't think that false confessions are real. People like that are not my "peers" in any sense of the word.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2022 16:00
|
|
|
In the US, you can waive your right to a jury and have a judge decide your fate, instead.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2022 04:33
|
|
|
I've been watching the Bill Cosby rape documentary on Amazon/Showtime. Dude sure liked raping.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2022 08:15
|
|
|
Anyone watching The U.S. and the Holocaust on PBS? It’s surprisingly honest and critical of the xenophobia, antisemitism, and racism that led to a lot of inaction by the US government prior to its entry into WWII. And as usual, Ken Burns is an excellent storyteller.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2022 02:02
|
|
|
Waltzing Along posted:I've been watching the Bill Cosby rape documentary on Amazon/Showtime. Dude sure liked raping. Is this the one W.Kamau Bell made?
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2022 21:32
|
|
|
Mahoning posted:Anyone watching The U.S. and the Holocaust on PBS? I'm not a fan of Ken Burns generally and I watched it straight through. Didn't pull punches and the bit about the two people recounting seeing the Statue of Liberty has stuck with me. Burns makes the explicit connection at the end but I was already thinking about how reactionaries view refugees even today and how incongruent it is with the joy especially the gentlemen felt at knowing he would be able to live and grow old.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2022 19:05
|
|
|
Anyone seen the new David Bowie thing yet?
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2022 23:16
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:Anyone seen the new David Bowie thing yet? It's supposed to be really good.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2022 01:00
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:Anyone seen the new David Bowie thing yet? I liked it a lot with some caveats based upon I guess how much you know about Bowie already going in. But as a visually stunning experience that lets him speak for himself and would be great to get high and watch in IMAX it absolutely succeeds. It's also got like a very inspiring bent to it as well.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2022 21:34
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:Anyone seen the new David Bowie thing yet? I thought it was a fantastic. It’s not your typical artist documentary with lots of people telling you how important and fantastic so and so was, but just beautiful and partly bonkers Bowie extravaganza. I’ve been a big fan since I was a teen, and I’m not sure I would have liked it as much if I didn’t know much about him - but I guess I probably wouldn’t have gone to see it if that was the case either. The movie was also oddly inspirational and even uplifting, and that wasn’t something I would have guessed beforehand. Oh, and watch it in a theatre if you can.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2022 23:00
|
|
|
I just watched the gamestop thing. It was interesting. It's only about 2 hours if you are curious about the whole saga.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2022 23:04
|
|
|
Xabi posted:I thought it was a fantastic. It’s not your typical artist documentary with lots of people telling you how important and fantastic so and so was, but just beautiful and partly bonkers Bowie extravaganza. I’ve been a big fan since I was a teen, and I’m not sure I would have liked it as much if I didn’t know much about him - but I guess I probably wouldn’t have gone to see it if that was the case either. The movie was also oddly inspirational and even uplifting, and that wasn’t something I would have guessed beforehand. Oh, and watch it in a theatre if you can. 100% exactly what I thought too.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2022 23:30
|
|
|
Waltzing Along posted:I just watched the gamestop thing. It was interesting. It's only about 2 hours if you are curious about the whole saga. there's a documentary on gamestop? i didn't know there was a reason for a documentary on gamestop. i'll have to check this out.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2022 00:37
|
|
|
abelwingnut posted:there's a documentary on gamestop? i didn't know there was a reason for a documentary on gamestop. i'll have to check this out. To be clear, it's on Netflix and it's about the GME stock pump via reddit.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2022 00:42
|
|
|
ohhhhhh. that...i'm less interested in.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2022 00:50
|
|
|
Adam Curtis' new seven-part documentary, TraumaZone, about life in the Soviet Union and Russia from 1985-1999, will be made available on BBC iPlayer on Oct 13: https://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/2022/adam-curtis-russia-1985-1999-traumazone Apparently Curtis was given access to a huge trove of unused BBC archival footage from that period, so it looks like it'll be a great examination of the lived experiences that led to the Russia we know today.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2022 11:12
|
|
|
you know how at the beginning of COVID there were people who watched Contagion nonstop? i'm like that with All Watched Over By Machines of Loving Grace. drat that thing is so on point
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2022 14:12
|
|
|
I finally caught Moonage Daydream last night. I don't know if I have ever heard a more impressive sound mix in my life. It was loud but not piercing, and the panning work was insanely immersive. It took every fiber of my being to resist belting out the lyrics along with the movie. Absolutely a must-see in theaters.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2022 16:18
|
|
|
Groovelord Neato posted:I'm not a fan of Ken Burns generally and I watched it straight through. Didn't pull punches and the bit about the two people recounting seeing the Statue of Liberty has stuck with me. Burns makes the explicit connection at the end but I was already thinking about how reactionaries view refugees even today and how incongruent it is with the joy especially the gentlemen felt at knowing he would be able to live and grow old. What do you not like about Ken burns movies? Genuine q, I’ve only seen one of his movies years ago, but he seems to be the go-to documentarian for all things Americana at this point.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2022 21:15
|
|
|
This looks like it might be good https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W4t58Yruhds
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2022 21:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 08:15 |
|
|
Kull the Conqueror posted:I finally caught Moonage Daydream last night. I don't know if I have ever heard a more impressive sound mix in my life. It was loud but not piercing, and the panning work was insanely immersive. Absolutely a must-see in IMAX.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2022 22:24
|
|