|
Encryptic posted:And here I have no idea why I'm reading so deeply into loving Boondock Saints of all movies. Yeah, I think the answer here is "because the director/writer thought it would look cool."
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2008 22:59
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 00:52 |
|
|
Rake Arms posted:In There Will be Blood was Daniel using his pipeline to siphon oil directly from the Bandy tract? Or were the surrounding derricks draining the oil out from underneath it? If the latter is true, did he plan to do that from the start, explaining why he dismissed the Bandy tract near the beginning of the film? Not directly. Imagine that there's a large pool of oil that was underground, under both pieces of land. The derricks that he placed on his own land were tapping the entire oil patch, as I understand it. If only there was some easier way of explaining this...possibly involving some sort of frozen beverage.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 12, 2008 03:31
|
|
|
Rake Arms posted:Right, but I wasn't sure if the "straw" was part of the derrick or part of the pipeline. I get it now. Wasn't my intention to be demeaning, sorry if it came off that way.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 12, 2008 06:58
|
|
|
I saw the "milkshake" analogy more as a general "hah, I was pretty much stealing his oil, gently caress you" than as a detailed logistical explanation for how it happened. But, yeah, it wasn't entirely clear.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 15, 2008 06:40
|
|
|
Ape Agitator posted:We're exploiting them in their own way. Let's face it, exploitation films are about stereotypes and base emotions. So, I've got some questions about the terminology you're using here. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I was under the impression that blaxploitation and other films were intended to target their specific "blank-sploitation" audiences. Sweet Sweetback's Baadasssss Song is considered by some to be the founder of the "blaxsploitation" genre, and its pretty explicit in its appeal to a black community, not to whites looking to characterize the community in one way or another. Wikiepdia favors the following definition: quote:Films made with little or no attention to quality or artistic merit but with an eye to a quick profit, usually via high-pressure sales and promotion techniques emphasizing some sensational aspect of the product. In this case, the exploitation of blacks comes from a cheap movie that targets their interests. In the case of Arabs, I think you're missing the bigger picture here. I think in many cases, terrorists are filling the place of the Nazis of older films; generically "evil" characters that can be dispatched without much sympathy from the audience. Arabs in these films aren't uniformly evil in the same way that those who are ethnically German aren't uniformly evil. They just fulfill a filmic shorthand. Do you read, say, Indiana Jones as a film that demonizes a race? I'd argue not, but you could make that point. I'm not saying that these portrayals are completely fair. I know that they're not, nor can they totally be. Ascribing a bigger picture to a lot of these movies that we're talking about is probably a foolish pursuit.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 11, 2008 08:41
|
|
|
blindhaberdasher posted:So a while back there was this thread about pictures of great directors, and there was this one really cool picture of a director holding up a filmstrip and looking at it with sunglasses on and a cigarette in his mouth. I forget who it was (I keep thinking it was Fellini but I'm not sure) and if anyone remembers this picture and can tell me who it was or better yet post the picture here, that would be cool. I do this too — I keep thinking Fellini looked a lot cooler than he actually did. This is one of the nice parts about being able to cast a surrogate in your place. For comparison, here's a photo of Marcello Mastroianni looking totally badass in 8 1/2:  And here's a photo of Fellini:  I wish I could cast someone to play me.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 11, 2008 10:05
|
|
|
Ape Agitator posted:That's hardly true. Blaxploitation plays on stereotypes and base emotions just like any other exploitation genre. The difference being that they cast themselves as heroes, but it is still fueled in the same way as all of the other exploitation genres. They still are drug fueled, violent, jive talking toughs who hate whitey (who is universally evil). Like I mentioned, I'm more than happy to get corrected on this. What falls under the exploitaiton genre has always been a little obscure to me. That said, is Melvin Van Peebles exploiting his race because his film fulfills all of the above criteria? Or does the fact that his film was hailed by Huey P. Newton and embraced by a militant black community change that? It's been a while since I've seen Sweetback, but I recall the main character being extremely sexualized, growing up in a whorehouse. There's even a pretty affecting scene in How to Get the Man's Foot Outta Your rear end that portrays the importance of this scene to Melvin, pushing his son and even cutting his hair off to get the shot. If a white man had written that scene, it'd probably be pretty offensive. I don't mean to get into a "shades of racism" discussion here, but your argument practically demands it.  quote:There seems to be a feeling like if it's lazy or easy it isn't really racist, but it's one of the easiest ways that racism propogates. Nazis were very common as bad guys not only because it's easy to hate them, but because nobody will ever complain about it. Germans won't say "stop picking on us" because they've been cowed as a nation because of their actions in the war. First off, Marion Ravenwood is far and away the best female counterpart to Indy. Also, saying that she's tied for first (out of three) is basically just saying "Hey, Willie sucked." Which I think we can all agree on. Second, I think if writers, directors and studios portray Arabs as terrorists they're likely doing so in a misguided attempt to provide commentary on our times. It's definitely not fair to portray all terrorists as Arabs, but fear of extremists based in the Middle East is certainly a hot topic that could be explored in fiction. It's often not subtle, but 90% of everything is poo poo. Also, I think that if anything, the portrayal of Arabs in Hollywood films has gotten better since Sept. 11. I've been wracking my brain trying to think of films that explicitly portray terrorists; even the films mentioned before this post in the thread have all been pre-Sept. 11 (with the exception of Syriana, which, although you've argued that it's a racist movie, it's at least seemingly well-intentioned). quote:Should Indy movies be chided for their non-progressive stances? No, they're a throwback to a time where storytelling was loaded with it. Just like Jonny Quest and the newest King Kong are wonderfully racist because it's such a perfect reflection of classic high adventure where natives are evil savages deserving of being smited by white fists. Just like Quentin Tarantino movies aren't (in my opinion) deserving of chiding for their exploitation attributes because that's a conscious goal and he's naked about it. This just seems like cherrypicking. I mean, how are some things "wonderfully racist" and not worthy of chiding, but you off-handedly dismiss films that include a "good Arab" as a weak prop of semi-racist screenwriters? How is it that films that are "perfect reflections" of a racist past, without any revisionist commentary, are somehow morally superior to films that at least try to make a concession to a balanced perspective? Well, maybe not morally superior, but as you say, worthy of chiding vs. not worthy of chiding? This is the part of the post where I say that I'm not a conservative blowhard, have Arab friends, etc. I'd hate to think I'm coming off as insensitive or assholish, I just disagree with what you're saying. morestuff fucked around with this message at 11:50 on Oct 11, 2008 |
|
#
¿
Oct 11, 2008 11:42
|
|
|
Ape Agitator posted:I think The Abyss is one of those movies that has somewhere close to near unanimous support for the DC version. Are there any films that are ruined or diminished by a director's cut? Might be good to know in the future to know which ones to avoid. Personally, I didn't care for Apocalypse Now: Redux, except as a curiosity. And while I enjoy the director's cut of Aliens, if I was showing it to a person for the first time, I'd probably show them the theatrical. The DC tends to drag a bit. Also, the only version I've ever seen of Almost Famous was the Untitled version, which a few people swore to me was the only way to see it. I hated that flick, but don't think my problems with it have much to do with the length. Could be wrong, though.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 13, 2008 18:07
|
|
|
Ape Agitator posted:There are lots of "unrated" cuts, especially for comedies, that I don't like. Especially when they mess with the pacing. The Apatow movies suffer from this. The 40-Year-Old Virgin gets a little long on DVD.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 13, 2008 19:12
|
|
|
Encryptic posted:There also seems to be a Biblical meaning to it - though I'm not familiar enough with the Bible to be sure. The Wild Bunch is pretty great and fits right in with the type of movie you've been talking about (later period, revisionist westerns). Some more traditional westerns that might be worth checking out are The Searchers, High Noon, The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance and (depending on your categorization) The Treasure of the Sierra Madre. Your mileage will probably vary on the last four, though.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 23, 2008 19:51
|
|
|
Diligent Deadite posted:Yes, The Lady and The Lake is in first person Thanks for reminding me about this, I remember reading about this in a film textbook 10 years ago and I've always meant to check it out. It have any value beyond the novelty factor?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 6, 2008 23:19
|
|
|
twistedmentat posted:
You must love '80s horror movies.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 12, 2008 05:33
|
|
|
Detective No. 27 posted:I just got done watching My Favorite Wife on TCM, and they played this hilariously misogynistic by today's standards MGM serial about different wives and how they annoy their husbands. Does anyone know the title of this? Their site is actually ridiculously informative. This might be it. That's one of the reasons I really miss the channel - they go out of their way to really produce a full package.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 19, 2010 01:12
|
|
|
Tender Bender posted:Got it, thanks. I feel like I need to watch it again to really appreciate it because it totally wasn't what I expected and I think that distracted me. Just curious - what were you expecting?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2010 06:05
|
|
|
ZenMaster posted:Can someone explain box office mojo to me? Specifically, how to figure out how much a movie made/lost? I'm not an expert, but they'll also recoup some their budget on home video and television sales. If Box Office Mojo doesn't list foreign figures, it's probably because it either hasn't been released yet or isn't going to be. I don't know of any site that compiles advertising costs. I don't think that information is given out that often.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 29, 2010 16:59
|
|
|
So were the bug things in District 9 aliens or what?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 10, 2010 01:19
|
|
|
LesterGroans posted:I like it because of that. Does the fact that the Prawns aren't very smart(and really, they're 'workers' which doesn't mean they're completely devoid of any thought -- they did alright talking to Wikkus) ean they deserve to be treated the way they are? I don't think because a race may not be capable of bettering themselves is cause to opress them. Given how far the film goes to draw comparisons to real-life oppressed minorities, you don't find this problematic?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 10, 2010 21:40
|
|
|
Voodoofly posted:Maybe not mainstream known, but I don't know anyone who considered him a lovely actor. Hell, even in To Die For he got some recognition. I remember hearing people laughing about him just being Ben Affleck's brother in the Ocean's movies.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2010 17:54
|
|
|
...of SCIENCE! posted:These guys are great, but the rear end in a top hat from the EPA in Ghostbusters is probably my favorite because the idea of the EPA as a villainous entity is so ridiculously 80s. I thought about him, but he's more of an 80s pompous rear end than a tribute to 80s excess.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 18, 2010 17:35
|
|
|
Ularg posted:I didn't like the book much, but I'm just now going through the movie that I haven't watched in a year. I'm around the part where Neville meets other people. So wait, did you read the book or not? It sounds like you didn't, but you said that "I didn't like the book much."
|
|
#
¿
Aug 22, 2010 09:09
|
|
|
I liked the ending conceptually, but the execution "NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO" was a little lacking.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 27, 2010 17:10
|
|
|
kapalama posted:Thank you for saving a couple of hours of my life. That trailer made it seem like what you said. Looks like Dead Cert and a couple of TV movies.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2010 21:45
|
|
|
kapalama posted:As funny as yelling the N-word in a comedy club is, you don't get to do it anymore. Someone should tell this to Louis CK, David Cross, Zack Galifianakis, etc. etc.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 21, 2010 18:52
|
|
|
twistedmentat posted:Also, why the hell did people think this movie was too talky? There's tons of action, and there's probably about as much talking as Iron Man 1. My problem wasn't really with the amount of talking, just that Iron Man 2 was crammed with pointless bullshit talking and the first one at least made a passing attempt at character development.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 29, 2010 04:40
|
|
|
SubG posted:I saw Concorde...Airport '79 (1979) in the theatre. I saw The Warrior and the Sorceress (1984) in the theatre. I saw License to Drive (1988) in the theatre. I saw Crocodile Dundee II (1988) in the theatre. I got this scar watching Nutty Professor 2: The Klumps.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 20, 2010 23:18
|
|
|
NeuroticErotica posted:4:3 is really hard to compose for. As much as a disciple of The Wire as I am, it really did nothing for me cinemtographically with the possible exception of shooting in the vacants. The drab aesthetic is part of what makes the show so effective, though.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2010 19:28
|
|
|
Umbriago posted:Sorry if this isn't the right thread for asking about recommendations. Check out Wes Anderson's movies (if you haven't already) and what seems to be the grandaddy of that tone, Harold and Maude. Edit: Also, there's a recommendation thread here. morestuff fucked around with this message at 16:57 on Nov 12, 2010 |
|
#
¿
Nov 12, 2010 16:44
|
|
|
Zogo posted:It adds a few inconsequential scenes. Nothing really monumental. I've seen most of it on TV and the "Badder Santa" version. Wow, whoever maintains that site is seriously dedicated and probably crazy.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 13, 2010 06:39
|
|
|
Mr Arkadin is a famous example of this as well. Slightly outdated info via IMDB:quote:There are five versions of the film, Mr. Arkadin.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 15, 2010 07:50
|
|
|
SubG posted:...particularly since there is no `Southern accent'; there are at least a dozen, and that's if you're being conservative. The aristocratic Suthron gentleman drawl of the Virginia Piedmont accent would be completely out of place in the mouth of a cajun in south Louisiana (or southeast Texas), for example. I grew up in South Carolina, and live in Chicago. It's hard to believe how many people are surprised when I tell them where I'm from, just because I don't speak like I have a developmental disabilty.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 18, 2011 23:17
|
|
|
kapalama posted:But you do drop something of it when you leave, and pick it back up when you go home right? I have a really slight accent, but it only comes out in certain words (like, weirdly, Cheetos). The only thing I change up when I go home is mixing in a little more slang. Between growing up in a city, having a dad born in Germany, and having access to television, I just never developed a country twang.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 19, 2011 16:49
|
|
|
Spatula City posted:Disturbingly, a lot of people in Eastern Washington have Southern-ish accents. As do a lot of poor people in the suburbs for no discernible reason. I can only assume it's either an affectation, or they're children/grandchildren of emigrants from the South. What's disturbing about this? It's an accent.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2011 02:20
|
|
|
Glass Joe posted:Basil Rathbone is the classic movie Holmes in the eyes of many. Fair warning, though - the Rathbone movies update them to a then-current setting. You're not getting OG Holmes, but it's close.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2011 04:23
|
|
|
Rocket Ace posted:1. When Marty first arrives in the future, and he's wandering around town , some old guy comes up to him asking him to donate to save the clock tower. They briefly talk about baseball, and then the guy states that he wishes that he could go back to the beginning of the season and bet on the Cubs. This statement gives Marty the idea to go buy the Sports Almanac. A little googling reveals the answer. Does everything have a wiki these days?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 24, 2011 19:27
|
|
|
Magic Hate Ball posted:1. INT. BREAKFAST ROOM - DAY "Should I buy an iPad?" Charlie wonders. "No, I probably can't afford one right now."
|
|
#
¿
Jan 25, 2011 17:10
|
|
|
FitFortDanga posted:4. CHARLIE'S COMPUTER SCREEN There's nothing adult about what we do here.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 25, 2011 17:50
|
|
|
I'd like another crack at my draft, anyway. I realize now that a Kindle would be a lot more thematically potent than an iPad.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2011 05:51
|
|
|
Digital Scumbag posted:
There's a link to the list in the video description. It's Vampire's Kiss.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 28, 2011 06:13
|
|
|
Edit: wow, not even close to the right thread
morestuff fucked around with this message at 00:41 on Feb 28, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2011 00:30
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 00:52 |
|
|
codyclarke posted:What are some first films by well-known filmmakers that are admittedly bad or even disowned? For instance Tarantino's My Best Friend's Birthday, James Cameron's Piranha II, and Woody Allen's What's Up Tiger Lily?. David Fincher was upset with studio interference on Alien 3. Stanley Kubrick also wrote off Fear and Desire, his first narrative feature.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 2, 2011 22:23
|
|