|
The Holy Mountain - 89/100 Probably the most scathingly anti-capitalist film I've ever seen. Bravo.
|
#
¿
Sep 17, 2017 08:27
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 12:57 |
|
|
mary had a little clam posted:Mother! - Dir. Darren Aronosfky, starring Jennifer Lawrence, Javier Bardem, Ed Harris, Michelle Pfeiffer I feel confident saying that Mother! has some of the most atheistic (and frankly audacious) religious allegory I've come across in film.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 17, 2017 21:29
|
|
|
I Before E posted:I wouldn't call it atheistic, more Deistic or anti-theistic. Bardem, the I Am, is alternately indifferent to Lawrence's pain and unable/unwilling to act or actively hostile to her while excusing his cruelty with platitudes about pain being necessary for creation. In this theology, it's not that God doesn't exist, it's that his values are abhorrent. I interpreted I Am I more as a pattern of natural behavior or inclination that is rationalizing/paternalistic in the extreme (perhaps nature's male instinct, or a patriarchal manifestation within the cogs of creation) but also a self-acknowledged in it's inability to properly assess morality, therefore somewhat indifferent to the more abstract pain, passivity, subtlety of feeling, and slow labor of Gaea/Home. The remarkable thing is how coherently it weaves together chaotic, displaced visual references to the timeless overindulgence of society, material excess, manipulation of iconography, and the inability to finish even the smallest complete thought in our age of immediate information/disaster capitalism/terror war (with the extended horror sequence owing some of its visual motifs to Children of Men). The movie is an incredibly abstract fever dream of the human compulsion to despoil. Now, it's all told within the framework of numerous religious parables from across the spectrum (christian symbolism, talmudic reference), but the focus is ALWAYS on Gaea's emotional reaction to perpetual horror, that is, Jennifer Lawrence's face. So even though the cinematic allusions to final-girls and 70s horror movies are spread on pretty thick...the focus is nearly always on this sort of reaction shot of the acquiescent victim, as if to force the viewer to finally personalize their destruction of nature. AND...at the same time it's entirely cyclical and infinite. Very thought provoking. Sorry for  edit; At this point I'm not even sure I would call it a horror movie, even though it both has scenes that are horrifying and appropriates horror tropes. I feel like it transcends the genre. BeanpolePeckerwood fucked around with this message at 23:55 on Sep 17, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Sep 17, 2017 23:49
|
|
|
Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets - 67/100
|
|
#
¿
Sep 20, 2017 22:07
|
|
|
TychoCelchuuu posted:Hey do I look like I'm made of money here? They're not streaming for free anywhere, I have to buy those things if I want to watch 'em! Blade Runner 2049 - 85/100 Absolutely mind-boggling visuals (the credits are literally 10 minutes long), but not a whole lot going on under the hood, and some people's fears about it getting too plot-focused are justified. Good performances, spot-on casting and score, though having to follow in the footsteps of a sci-fi legend proves too tall an order. As with Villanueve's version of Arrival...2049 is a respectable riff on its superior source material, it's just a bit too respectable. Interestingly enough, the visual production design in many places reminded me of Tron: Legacy, especially near the end. I suppose that's fitting, as we're dealing with copies of copies of copies...
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2017 17:14
|
|
|
Bottom Liner posted:Blade Runner 2049 - 5/5 Don't be a fucker, I specifically said visually. There's a lot of red neon striped cars flying through fog...I think you get my drift. edit; and to be fair, they're both very cleanly shot, minimalist digital mock-ups of 35mm predecessors. BeanpolePeckerwood fucked around with this message at 17:51 on Oct 6, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2017 17:40
|
|
in comparing it to the Tron sequel 
|
Ewar Woowar posted:Haven't seen Bladerunner 2049- still nervous about it as Bladerunner is one of my absolute favouites. I think it's a bit underrated, too. It's a pretty earnest attempt at following up on one of the tackier pieces of 80s nostalgia, and I think the visual presentation and sound design are excellent. The middle act struggles a bit with pacing, I think, but I had a good time overall. I really like Oblivion, too. I wonder when Kosinski will make another film
|
|
#
¿
Oct 8, 2017 23:44
|
|
|
I know Milo and Otis sure as hell does.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 11, 2017 03:24
|
|
|
Punch Drunk Drewsky posted:
I find that to be a bit insane. If there's any demographic that his films are sympathetic to it would be that of women. I can hardly comprehend how films like Polytechnique, Incendies, Enemy, and Arrival could be seen to promote an agenda of hatred or suppression of women. Hell, even Sicario is dead set on demonstrating the moral decay at the heart of paternal systems of control. I'm not convinced most people even know the meaning of the term misogynistic any longer, it's been so diluted by misapplication. BeanpolePeckerwood fucked around with this message at 02:43 on Oct 16, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2017 02:37
|
|
|
Bottom Liner posted:Blade Runner 2049 was one of the best pro-feminism movies I’ve seen in a long time and I’ve yet to see anyone calling it misogynistic say anything deeper than “but boobs”. This, but mother!
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2017 02:46
|
|
|
Egbert Souse posted:The Misfits (1961, John Huston) [Blu-ray] - 4/5 Always love to hear about this one.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2017 19:17
|
|
|
Yeah, mother! and Blade Runner for sure
|
|
#
¿
Oct 24, 2017 03:30
|
|
|
Samuel Clemens posted:Tell me about Loving Vincent because I'm still mad no theatre around here shows it. The theater in PDX that I work at has it. It's been very popular here, especially with 'the olds'. It's beautiful to look at, sure, but otherwise dull as dishwater. It has a very generic score and flashback structure, and it feels like you're watching extremely beautiful PBS bio-pic programming. Scenes that involve animating during a pan look incredible, but most of the film is animated faces against completely still backgrounds which definitely feels less impressive. Honestly, if they'd made it a short film rather than a feature they could've focused all their time and budget to keep the quality more consistent.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2017 23:28
|
|
|
zer0spunk posted:Can we talk about killing of a sacred deer??!? It's amazing, funny, and brutal, with Kubrick-level tension, photography, and social commentary.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 28, 2017 09:09
|
|
|
In some ways it's even more alienating than mother!, though I do still think that mother! is the feel bad movie of the year.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 28, 2017 10:40
|
|
|
warez posted:
I assumed body-weight had something to do with onset, as it often does in the medical realm. Or at least that was the implication, but much of the movie is metaphorical, too. TychoCelchuuu posted:Is The Killing of a Sacred Deer scary at all? I can't really handle scary movies but I like the director so I'd like to see it if I could refrain from peeing my pants. It's not particularly scary or startling so much as psychologically probing and profoundly discomfiting.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 28, 2017 16:28
|
|
|
zer0spunk posted:I can't stop thinking about the spinning scene. Jesus christ. I mean, it doesn't say that much about you really. The film makes a special effort to associate the family's wealth and elite social status with actual perversion as well as an unemotional sense of logical imperative that verges on sociopathy. It's an unsparingly political film.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 29, 2017 20:03
|
|
|
DLC Inc posted:as someone who liked mother! and absolutely adored Dogtooth and The Lobster, I'm supremely excited to see Sacred Deer tonight now I don't think we've had as many walk-outs for Deer as we did for mother! but we've had a good number, and some people definitely have been approaching us while cleaning the theater to make sure we know they "hated this movie."  We even had a girl pass out the other day from the stress of watching it 
|
|
#
¿
Nov 1, 2017 18:40
|
|
|
The Conformist - 88/100 Twin Peaks: The Return - 89/100 Jane - 92/100 Blade Runner 2049 (rewatch) - was 85/100 now 87/100 The Killing of a Sacred Deer - 90/100 The Square - 89 Nocturama - 83/100 Lucky - 71/100 Take Every Wave: The Life of Laird Hamilton - 80/100 HyperNormalisation - 88/100 *Spiderman: Homecoming - decent/marvel *Guardians of the Galaxy vol 2 - decent+/marvel Ex Libris: The New York Public Library - 80/100 Manolo: The Boy Who Made Shoes for Lizards - 57/100 Loving Vincent - 70/100 Logan Lucky - 72/100 Noah - 71/100 Dark Star - 72/100 Dawn of the Planet of the Apes - 80/100 The Room - plastic spoon/rose petal *Done rating Marvel/DC universe movies on a number scale because they're all the same kind of homogenized chow that goes down easy with beer.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2017 02:50
|
|
|
Blade Runner?I liked it more on the second viewing because I was able to relax and put the marketing and my suspicions for the plot aside and accept the movie for what it was. The environment sort of sank in a bit more as I concentrated on the film's vibe, symbolism, and character subtleties rather than on its narrative destination. The presentation was better in the second theater, at least as far as sound goes, so that made a bit of a difference as well with respect to some of the sound mixing in the third act.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2017 03:04
|
|
|
Gut feeling. I don't exactly believe in rating movies per se but I think the 100 pt scale just works in my brain. So in absence of a conversation about influence, impact, and pros/cons I usually rely on how I think it compares to the films I've seen in a single year, then how I think it compares to other films in its genre, how well it has aged (if it's an older film) and whether it influenced other films, and if I've seen it before I finally compare it to all movies I've ever seen. I don't think I've ever given a film a straight 100. Most of the time all this irrational headiness seems to add up to a discrete number in my head. So films like Andrei Rublev, Pather Panchali, Vertigo, Days of Heaven, etc I've seen multiple/many times and reward multiple viewings as they have gotten better with age. Most movies that score 60-80 aren't a waste of time to me by any means but I'm unlikely to watch them multiple times. Most things 87-100 I would consider among the best films I've seen. BeanpolePeckerwood fucked around with this message at 03:34 on Nov 4, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2017 03:27
|
|
|
LORD OF BOOTY posted:What would Vertigo rank on your marvel scale pursuit of the glorious ideal/marvel
|
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2017 21:05
|
|
|
FancyMike posted:
God I would love a Criterion box of some of the more obscure WKW films. Days of Being Wild, Happy Together, and Chungking Express (released last year and almost immediately out of print) all in one box.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 6, 2017 19:18
|
|
|
FancyMike posted:That doesn't seem quite right, I bought my Chunking Express blu-ray in 2009, not sure when it went out of print though but I think it's been quite a while. Chungking bluray was apparently printed in 2008 and 2015, both rapidly unavailable. Leaves me hope for another shot.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 6, 2017 20:17
|
|
|
Egbert Souse posted:Criterion apparently got the rights back, along with other films of his and are doing new 4K restorations. My dream came true today.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 6, 2017 20:25
|
|
|
mary had a little clam posted:THE KILLING OF A SACRED DEER (2017) - Yeah, with mother!, The Square, and Sacred Deer...2017 has been a stellar year for bleak as gently caress critiques of paternalism, capitalism, and class. The last time poo poo felt this dark to me was 2007, which was an especially strong year for film all around.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2017 05:19
|
|
|
F_Shit_Fitzgerald posted:Yes she is. The reason I kept watching the movie was that her character was so interesting. You really feel for her throughout the movie because her acting seems so real. Anyone seen Love with the Proper Stranger? Natalie Wood and Steve McQueen together seems like an awesome prospect, but I guess chemistry would be a big requirement.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2017 05:06
|
|
|
got any sevens posted:Killing of a Sacred Deer: 1/1, white people are banal and crazy. The mashed potatoes outburst said it all, really. How's your relationship with symbolism these days?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 17, 2017 01:05
|
|
|
Rick posted:
Except apparently there is internet clamor for the 'Snyder Cut' 
|
|
#
¿
Nov 20, 2017 21:07
|
|
|
I'd rather watch B v S than Age of Ultron, but that's not saying much. Comic book movies are garbo.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 24, 2017 20:52
|
|
|
For some reason, bad as they are, the DC movies stick in my head...whereas the Marvel movies are forgotten at the door.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 24, 2017 21:03
|
|
|
I don't know how people watch Marvel movies more than once, except maybe Winter Soldier because of the fight choreography. Those movies are agitprop to the loving extreme.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 25, 2017 05:20
|
|
|
Bottom Liner posted:Yes, the Marvel cinematic universe is overt political propaganda Yes.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 25, 2017 05:32
|
|
|
They promote fascist technocratic savior ideals, unilateral economic and militaristic intervention, and brand-associated universal monoculture, while equating civil governance as a waste of time in the face of world catastrophe. They are films that are generated by a media corporation which currently owns 1/5th of the total cinema marketshare, benefits from (currently and for many decades prior) a revolving door of corrupt hoorah business elite fuckheads, direct and indirect ties with the national security state, financial and federal regulators, etc, etc, that allows script supervision by the military whenever military assets are depicted on screen (which is often), and that puts pressure on journalists with regard to affiliated news stories regarding lovely practices by the parent company. edit; Disney has also been directly involved in the creation of legit wartime propaganda (as distinct from agitprop) and since we're, well, perpetually at war... Seriously, were you born yesterday? BeanpolePeckerwood fucked around with this message at 06:07 on Nov 25, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Nov 25, 2017 06:01
|
|
|
Yes I agree that the movies drip-feed counterpoints on the occasion, and yet... In fact, the technocratic natsec spy state motif in Winter Soldier is completely sold up the creek and nullified by the overblown illuminnazi story beat.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 25, 2017 07:06
|
|
|
I Before E posted:Marvel movies, like all films, are a land of contrasts. Fair enough. 
|
|
#
¿
Nov 25, 2017 07:19
|
|
|
glam rock hamhock posted:Probably because it's not very good Comic book movies are bad. Bottom Liner posted:Wonder Woman is a good but not great super hero film that stands out among it's contemporaries for being the first female led super hero film and being the first good DC film. It has a lot of issues though and doesn't hold up well on repeat viewings. I'd put it as a firm 3/5. Bingo.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 28, 2017 06:03
|
|
|
FancyMike posted:
Yes, please!
|
|
#
¿
Nov 28, 2017 06:27
|
|
|
Bottom Liner posted:Coco - 4/5 Yeah, Disney seems to be using Pixar to fill the gaps between their flagship animation titles these days, stuff like Moana and Frozen...which in my opinion are absolutely inferior to Pixar offerings at their best. I really think Pixar now is just a shadow of what they were 10 years ago, when they had properties like Monster's Inc, Toy Story, etc filling out their established reputation...and proceeded to release a string of consecutive 'weird' masterpieces like Wall-E, Ratatouille, and Up. Other than Inside Out (which almost felt like a sleeper hit in 2015)... I think Pixar has been sent out to pasture making bad sequels. I doubt the general public even recognizes the difference between a Pixar film and a Disney joint now, which is probably how Disney wants it but is a goddamn shame.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2017 08:33
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 12:57 |
|
|
Fifteen of Many posted:My sister believes that Pixar made The Emoji Movie so it’s also possible people with only passing interest in movies just imagine one studio is responsible for all animated features? I can’t wrap my head around why she would think that otherwise. Yeah, I took the nieces to see it and I'd say it's mid-tier Pixar, not bad like some of the sequels that they've put out and not nearly as good as their most renowned offerings. It's pretty to look at and has a lot of heart, but a late-movie switcheroo really felt quite manipulative, and there's a bit of weird immigration security state imagery that seems too on-the-nose for my taste. You know what's worse though? The 20 minute Frozen 2 teaser animation that they play beforehand, jesus, what interminable drudgery. What happened to tasteful animated shorts before a movie, you know, the kind that don't undermine the artistic intentions of the main feature? Sort of confirms my earlier posts about Disney running Pixar into the ground. BeanpolePeckerwood fucked around with this message at 02:16 on Dec 4, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Dec 4, 2017 01:59
|
|