Films you've seen recently and would unreservedly recommend:
- Thread starter Woebot
- Start date
-
- Tags
- beware the dog killer craner's got herpes damn well 'urts! don't be so basic eye-watering dick nailage gay cowboy death squad greek dudes herzog i went to oxford italo jamaican voodoo gang from marked for death jamaican voodoo gang from predator 2 rolling sultry voodoo sweat sex chicken stuff versioncore u know the score what's the frequency kenneth?
entertainment
Well-known member
that's right
entertainment
Well-known member
It came out, I think, right before the Indian independence happened, and there are signs that can be construed as commentary on the failure of British colonianism. The nuns who, through their ecclesistical inhabitance of a foreign place represent the colonies in a place with rules and realities they don't really understand. Up there in the mountains they can't shield themselves from these foreign elements and their place in this world slowly becomes a slur, with the natives rejecting their schools and hospitals, before the meaning of their existence begins to disintegrate.
Mr. Tea
Let's Talk About Ceps
Corpsey
bandz ahoy
I watched Tarantino's "Once upon a time in Hollywood" last night. I definitely wouldn't unreservedly recommend it but I was surprised by how much I enjoyed it. Seemed to have ever so slightly more depth to it than his usual stuff, but most of all its just really well made and makes me want to drive around LA listening to stoner rock.
The super violent bit left me feeling the usual confusion and distaste that Tarantino movies leave me with. Is it just straight up sadism, or is it supposed to be totally absurd? It was shocking though. I didn't think I'd be that shocked by it.
The super violent bit left me feeling the usual confusion and distaste that Tarantino movies leave me with. Is it just straight up sadism, or is it supposed to be totally absurd? It was shocking though. I didn't think I'd be that shocked by it.
Corpsey
bandz ahoy
I heard someone describe leo DiCaprio as a terrible actor once and ever since then I've not been able to work out if he is a bit shit or if I'm projecting that opinion I heard onto him. His accent is certainly dodgy in this one. Also he can never escape looking like a kid, so you can never take his anger seriously.
craner
Beast of Burden
I half-hardheartedly watched The Big Chill on Sony TV last night. It was shit but also totally fascinating because of the very specific period details and reference points that pervade every single aspect of the film and are all perfectly observed because the people making the film are basically making a film about themselves.
It's a period that is inherently interesting anyway, for all sorts of reasons: that is, the transition of American baby boomers from radical youth to materialistic middle age, which was both a personal, generational and national cultural and economic journey, from JFK and SDS to wealth, neurosis and Reagan (the film was released in 1983). One of the characters, for example, talks about leaving criminal legal aid to become a real estate attorney in Atlanta because she was tired of her clients always "being so damn guilty" and the money was better, and her ex makes a crack about her old self expecting to represent "Huey and Bobby".
It was like a combination of Thirtysomething and Destructive Generation. Like I say, all the good things about the film are now in the details of a generational nervous breakdown and how it expressed itself through reference points (e.g. the conversation above and also the 60s soundtrack) as well as material objects and obtainment (clothes, cars, careers, etc) and also the fallout of failures and addictions.
So I enjoyed this shit film in a very specific way.
It's a period that is inherently interesting anyway, for all sorts of reasons: that is, the transition of American baby boomers from radical youth to materialistic middle age, which was both a personal, generational and national cultural and economic journey, from JFK and SDS to wealth, neurosis and Reagan (the film was released in 1983). One of the characters, for example, talks about leaving criminal legal aid to become a real estate attorney in Atlanta because she was tired of her clients always "being so damn guilty" and the money was better, and her ex makes a crack about her old self expecting to represent "Huey and Bobby".
It was like a combination of Thirtysomething and Destructive Generation. Like I say, all the good things about the film are now in the details of a generational nervous breakdown and how it expressed itself through reference points (e.g. the conversation above and also the 60s soundtrack) as well as material objects and obtainment (clothes, cars, careers, etc) and also the fallout of failures and addictions.
So I enjoyed this shit film in a very specific way.
baboon2004
Darned cockwombles.
I felt like that about a few parts of The Irishman (which might be less shocking than the Tarantino, I don't know) - the periodic casual violence simply felt sadistic. It's not like he's making many kind of point any more because he's already made that film several times before. I couldn't believe people rated it...soooo boring once you got past the thrill of seeing De Niro, Pesci and Pacino together. Pacino phoned it in too, by his standards
Someone please watch Uncut Gems and tell me if it's good. Preferably someone who switched off the one with Robert Pattinson after 20 minutes
Corpsey
bandz ahoy
I didn't get that with The Irishman, really - in fact the violence was dealt with very perfunctorily in it, I thought, especially compared to Scorcese's typical approach. I think that worked in terms of showing how little violence really meant to DeNeiro's character.
(I loved The Irishman, and in many ways its a perfect companion to Once Upon a Time...)
What's truly disturbing about the violence in Tarantino's movie (aside from the grisly gore of it) is that it's happening to people that we're supposed to hate. SPOILER FOR ONCE UPON A TIME IN HOLLYWOOD: in fact it's happening to characters who in real life are infamous for committing a grisly murder of a pregnant woman.
Which makes me wonder how much we're supposed to enjoy these long drawn-out gruesome killings.
I suspect Tarantino would argue that it's "only a movie" - it's an imaginative object, drawing attention to its own artificiality, and so it's not the same thing as a document of real violence. It's a sort of catharsis (ditto Hitler being machine-gunned in Inglorious Basterds)
(I loved The Irishman, and in many ways its a perfect companion to Once Upon a Time...)
What's truly disturbing about the violence in Tarantino's movie (aside from the grisly gore of it) is that it's happening to people that we're supposed to hate. SPOILER FOR ONCE UPON A TIME IN HOLLYWOOD: in fact it's happening to characters who in real life are infamous for committing a grisly murder of a pregnant woman.
Which makes me wonder how much we're supposed to enjoy these long drawn-out gruesome killings.
I suspect Tarantino would argue that it's "only a movie" - it's an imaginative object, drawing attention to its own artificiality, and so it's not the same thing as a document of real violence. It's a sort of catharsis (ditto Hitler being machine-gunned in Inglorious Basterds)
IdleRich
IdleRich
Yeah it's exactly that. He's decided to re-write history with good guys winning; Jews beat Hitler, slaves beat plantation owners, Tate (kinda) beats Manson Family etc I guess it's a good thing to want but making films about it happening obviously doesn't change what actually happened... so.... why?