rubberdingyrapids

Well-known member
viktoria was so incredible. best new film ive seen since tangerine. the whole one take thing was amazing to think about, but the main thing it had for me was energy (apart from brilliant acting, except for the slightly stereotypical european crime boss baddie). made me think a bit of pusher, or bleeder, or la haine. only british film i can think of that compares is maybe trainspotting (or something like neds maybe, or orphans - all scottish incidentally). shame the uk doesnt do many films like this. prob the most inspiring 'cinematic experience' ive had in ages.
 
Last edited:

droid

Well-known member
Verdict on High rise seems to be: superficial, but not as bad as expected. Has anyone seen it yet?
 

IdleRich

IdleRich
viktoria was so incredible. best new film ive seen since tangerine. the whole one take thing was amazing to think about, but the main thing it had for me was energy (apart from brilliant acting, except for the slightly stereotypical european crime boss baddie). made me think a bit of pusher, or bleeder, or la haine. only british film i can think of that compares is maybe trainspotting (or something like neds maybe, or orphans - all scottish incidentally). shame the uk doesnt do many films like this. prob the most inspiring 'cinematic experience' ive had in ages.
Yeah - Pusher maybe... UK films... Crank perhaps... perhaps not.
 

Leo

Well-known member
late to the game here but watched "the big short" this weekend, who would have guessed a film about subprime mortgages, credit default swaps and synthetic collateralized debt obligations would be so good! if you didn't already hate bankers, you certainly will after seeing it.

worst part: it all actually happened.
 
Last edited:

droid

Well-known member
Apparently Christian Bale simulated the glass eye by developing independent movement of his eyeballs.
 

rubberdingyrapids

Well-known member
i didnt hate bankers after watching it. well not more than i already did. i thought the film actually went too light on the guys who were the main heroes/protagonists. who actually scammed the system (hurray!) but also basically took money from the banks that might (unless my financial comprehension is worse than i already imagine it is) which public money ended up being used to replace. its just another film where it doesnt quite know whether to really stick the boot in or gently rub its toe into them a bit more gently. a fun watch, but seemed unsure of its tone. can you really make a film criticising the wider structure without criticising at all the people who profit from it?
 

Leo

Well-known member
films don't always have to make moral judgments about their characters, depicting and declaring one side as "right" and the other as evil. sometimes they just tell a story where everyone is morally corrupt to different degrees.

in the case of "the big short", it did a good job of capturing the moral quandaries and conflicts faced by bankers and investment houses, and how various parties handled those quandaries. most of the players didn't care at all, like the mortgage lenders in florida who boasted about not caring about an applicant's credit rating and pushed variable-rate mortgages on immigrants who didn't understand what they were getting into. while the steve carrell character was the one who had the most conscience and struggled the most with the reality of the situation, he too was flawed simply by being part of the game. this story didn't have any heroes, just a bunch of people with varying levels of greed and self-interest.
 

rubberdingyrapids

Well-known member
no, films dont have to make clear moral judgements. i wasnt expecting a clear cut condemnation.

but while yes it might point out some terrible behaviour, and steve carrells character might walk around the whole point with the same look of disgust on his face (i wondered if it was a prosthetic at one point), at no point does the film seem to actually consider them to be as much a part of the problem as everyone else they righteously shake their head over.

i mean, great, its showing that if you cant beat the worst of capitalist behaviour, then you might as well find a way to play the system at its own game, but the film basically wants you to identify with these apparent 'mavericks', rather than the people who were fucked over by 2008. of course, why would anyone want to see a film about the people who lost in the crash, rather than the victors who profited? the whole film has its extremely expensive cake and dollops it all over our faces. it gets to sneer at bankers and act as the sardonic voice of truth telling while just - yet again - reinforcing our great fascination with bankers, banking, money, and capitalism.

in its defence, it might work as a more effective, cleverer critique of the financial system for framing it as a comedy, and not making you hate its lead characters, if it gets people who hate the idea of regulation to watch it, but its also just a great advert for money.
 
Last edited:

Corpsey

bandz ahoy
45 Years

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt3544082/

I found this film pretty devastating. It's very underplayed and understated (so that you have numerous idiots on Rotten Tomatoes complaining that 'nothing happens' in it), but the emotions running underneath the surface are quietly harrowing.

The couple in it reminded me of my parents in some ways, and I feel I can't recommend it to them because it might cut them too closely. This idea that a marriage survives for decades because of secrets, because of compromises, and that a single truth coming to light could destroy that relationship, was disturbing to me.

Beautifully played by the two leads, too.
 

Corpsey

bandz ahoy
I saw 'Dredd' recently. If you like/d 2000AD, you will probably love it. Trashy exploitation cinema done proper...

Speaking of which, 'Dressed to Kill'. Hitchcock meets Giallo meets softcore porn. Utterly ludicrous but brilliantly directed and pleasingly sleazy.
 

luka

Well-known member
I didn't think dred was good for 2000ad fans. I thought they took the 2000ad out of it. The city looked drab whereas in the comics the city is a character itself
 

Corpsey

bandz ahoy
I didn't think dred was good for 2000ad fans. I thought they took the 2000ad out of it. The city looked drab whereas in the comics the city is a character itself

That's a fair point. I'd say budget limitations are a factor there. That's why it's limited to one location. I meant the ultraviolence, the scuzzy humour.

Mind you I've not read 2000ad in years so I'm probably not fit to back up my claims.
 

rubberdingyrapids

Well-known member
aferim. brilliant romanian film set in the 1800s. very droll, weirdly timely w/r/r xenophobia, nationalism, racism, and class, without ever being hectoring or obvious. just right for these times. recommend it highly.
 

empty mirror

remember the jackalope
i just watched Dracula AD 1972

it was fantastic. great black mass scene with music from White Noise (!).
dracula_ad1972_5.jpg

the music is good throughout. i even enjoyed the party band, Stone Ground.

pretty gory considering the PG rating (considered watching it with my young kids, but totally inappropriate). part of it is police procedural, but even the cops are pretty hip in early 70's london apparently.

you won't learn anything new about vampires but it has a bunch of memorable scenes. clockwork-esque hangouts, kids playing in londontown rubble, comic book-ish camerawork (positively doctor strange at times) and the actors all seemed to be fully into it.
 

empty mirror

remember the jackalope
Speaking of which, 'Dressed to Kill'. Hitchcock meets Giallo meets softcore porn. Utterly ludicrous but brilliantly directed and pleasingly sleazy.

i love dressed to kill. i have a soft spot for depalma.
i just watched Femme Fatale and enjoyed it despite it being kind of silly.
any kind of critical thinking goes out the window once the opening credits start.
you are totally at his mercy. dressed to kill has elements of Belle Du Juor or Mullholland Drive. all of it encapsulated by the opening image:

tumblr_ntbbpcOpQt1ue4wwmo2_1280.jpg
 
Top