films you've seen recently and would NOT recommend

[Clinamenic]

mental how shit this was not even an actual film imo

We were talking about John Wick in the action films thread, and this I think is another case of a film being made for a certain audience. I enjoyed it, didn't think it was especially good, but ultimately I think it was aiming more for fun than depth or serious meaning or anything. Another slice-of-life, ensemble (padraig was right to point out the "robert altmanisms" along the lines of Boogie Nights), nostalgia-forward bit of fun.

Boogie Nights was similarly fun and nostalgia-forward, but had a better cast and, I found, more tragic depth across the ensemble of characters.

 

[Clinamenic]

I don't know, I'd rather try to be hermeneutically accommodating on my end, rather than hold film in general accountable to anything approaching a monolithic standard. A bit schizo, and it complicates criticism a bit, but it sure does seem to let one derive greater meaning and pleasure from film.

Sure, Wes Anderson is a bit waspy and his casts aren't always diverse - but thats likely just a reflection of his own experiences, and as long as he's not being derogatory or bigoted or anything, I don't see why thats necessarily a problem. The problem of DEI in film, to me, is not one of enforcing diverse castings for films in which a more diverse cast wouldn't make sense (EG The Grand Budapest Hotel). Rather, the problem is more on the business/financing/distributing side, namely making sure that diverse filmmakers are getting opportunities to tell their story, with whoever they want in it.

 

[IdleRich]

Sure, Wes Anderson is a bit waspy and his casts aren't always diverse - but thats likely just a reflection of his own experiences, and as long as he's not being derogatory or bigoted or anything, I don't see why thats necessarily a problem. The problem of DEI in film, to me, is not one of enforcing diverse castings for films in which a more diverse cast wouldn't make sense (EG The Grand Budapest Hotel). Rather, the problem is more on the business/financing/distributing side, namely making sure that diverse filmmakers are getting opportunities to tell their story, with whoever they want in it.

Fair points. As MB said we will look back on this era of films aghast at the number of magic warriors in tight costumes, but I think we'll also look at the demand for forcing incongruous diversity where it does not fit. Now that is well-intentioned and ultimately I think it will be calibrated correctly, but at the moment it's off and causes problems.

 

[mixed_biscuits]

I don't know, I'd rather try to be hermeneutically accommodating on my end, rather than hold film in general accountable to anything approaching a monolithic standard. A bit schizo, and it complicates criticism a bit, but it sure does seem to let one derive greater meaning and pleasure from film.

Sure, Wes Anderson is a bit waspy and his casts aren't always diverse - but thats likely just a reflection of his own experiences, and as long as he's not being derogatory or bigoted or anything, I don't see why thats necessarily a problem. The problem of DEI in film, to me, is not one of enforcing diverse castings for films in which a more diverse cast wouldn't make sense (EG The Grand Budapest Hotel). Rather, the problem is more on the business/financing/distributing side, namely making sure that diverse filmmakers are getting opportunities to tell their story, with whoever they want in it.

I'm not referring to that sort of Victorian gentleman human zoo diversity but the fact that every one of the characters is basically Wes Anderson with a different face.

 

[mixed_biscuits]

Fair points. As MB said we will look back on this era of films aghast at the number of magic warriors in tight costumes, but I think we'll also look at the demand for forcing incongruous diversity where it does not fit. Now that is well-intentioned and ultimately I think it will be calibrated correctly, but at the moment it's off and causes problems.

I don't see how it's ever going to be dialled back because any movement in the opposite direction will just be 'called out' for white supremacism or something.

 

[Clinamenic]

I'm not referring to that sort of Victorian gentleman human zoo diversity but the fact that every one of the characters is basically Wes Anderson with a different face.

Oh I see, yeah I wouldn't say character depth or variety is a particular strength of his (he tends to co-write with a couple others, like Roman Coppola and Owen Wilson, maybe Jason Schwartsman and Noah Baumbach a couple times too, not sure).

But yeah, this upper-class lost soul type, at once austere and eccentric, does seem to fit many of his characters, with the female mother/lover/anima role usually being some kind of despondent/detached, independent, often emontionally unstable type (EG Angelica Huston as mother figure, Gwyneth Paltrow in Tenenbaums, the love interest in Moonrise, etc).

A friend of mine, who produced the one short film I wrote, pointed something interesting out to me here: that the irony-laced flatness of these characters can be seen as a reflection of how difficult it can be to express sincerity and emotion. Not sure if this is especially salient to younger generations, IE generations jaded by ironic postmodern culture. Not sure Anderson has this in mind, but even if he doesn't, its still a substantial interpretation in my mind.

 

[Clinamenic]

Just watched Happiness, mainly because Philip Seymour Hoffman is in it, but ultimately even he couldn't quite save this one for me. I think it was decent enough, at what it was going for, a kind of morbid and transgressive dark comedy about happiness and loneliness, but its just not something I can find a real reason to recommend.

Spoiler: some of the really dark humor I thought was effective, such as the pederast father telling his curious 11-year-old son why he molested two of the other kids in his class, and the son asked if the father would molest him, to which the father replied "No, I would just jack off." One of those scenes which aims to prompt laughter out of sheer discomfort, and I think there was enough character development for the father (who also has dreams about going on shooting sprees at the park), to make this darker than just facile edgy content. Certainly nothing profound, but at moments like this I thought the film achieved what it was going for.

Anyway, wouldn't recommend it, even for PSH admirers.

 

[Clinamenic]

Its not a contender for my favorite thousand films list, is what I'm saying.

 

[shakahislop]

going through a phase of watching 90s film at the moment, and as annoying as the diversity etc stuff is, i mean it is annoying, it's so easy to complain about all of that, it's better than the very shitty ways that representation worked 30 years ago. its incomparably better. i watched Bulworth a few weeks ago and it was like an outright smacking you in the face racist portrayal etc etc. and that's a highbrow-ish mainstream-ish film from 1998, like its not ancient history

repeating myself for the thousand millionth time but the totally blatent thing with film is how it's almost exclusively rich or otherwise elite people who get to have anything to do with making them, and that really informs the values that are pushed out into the world from cinema taken as a whole

 

[Clinamenic]

going through a phase of watching 90s film at the moment, and as annoying as the diversity etc stuff is, i mean it is annoying, it's so easy to complain about all of that, it's better than the very shitty ways that representation worked 30 years ago. its incomparably better. i watched Bulworth a few weeks ago and it was like an outright smacking you in the face racist portrayal etc etc. and that's a highbrow-ish mainstream-ish film from 1998, like its not ancient history

repeating myself for the thousand millionth time but the totally blatent thing with film is how it's almost exclusively rich or otherwise elite people who get to have anything to do with making them, and that really informs the values that are pushed out into the world from cinema taken as a whole

Yeah and while now its very accessible to make films, getting them distributed is still probably inaccessibly expensive.

This to me gets back to the complaints people have about systemic inequity. If you really think about it, its as if people are complaining that rich people simply aren't more philanthropic, IE its just naive to expect any significant amount money to routinely flow where it won't yield returns to those from whom it was issued. The alternatives seem to be philanthropy, or coercion/taxation.

 

[shakahislop]

Yeah and while now its very accessible to make films, getting them distributed is still probably inaccessibly expensive.

This to me gets back to the complaints people have about systemic inequity. If you really think about it, its as if people are complaining that rich people simply aren't more philanthropic, IE its just naive to expect any significant amount money to routinely flow where it won't yield returns to those from whom it was issued. The alternatives seem to be philanthropy, or coercion/taxation.

just tax everyone loads and give it to me so i can piss around making films, like they do in france

 

[Clinamenic]

Shaka Hislop, noted auteur.

 

[version]

going through a phase of watching 90s film at the moment, and as annoying as the diversity etc stuff is, i mean it is annoying, it's so easy to complain about all of that, it's better than the very shitty ways that representation worked 30 years ago.

It doesn't have to be one or the other though. Look at the Fast and Furious films. They have a diverse cast, but it isn't the selling point like it is with the annoying stuff.

 

[Clinamenic]

It doesn't have to be one or the other though. Look at the Fast and Furious films. They have a diverse cast, but it isn't the selling point like it is with the annoying stuff.

Yeah the diversity in F&F really doesn't feel forced, you're right. Theres actually a pretty organic emphasis on latin-american culture in those films, which some might find cheesy but which doesn't strike me as insincere (as far as those films go).

 

[WashYourHands]

Happiness is a master class in staying just the right side of its taboo-laden subjects

The father’s grooming, his exhilaration at landing his son’s friend as potential prey, the utterly fucked up conversations he has with his son about sex, it’s rare to find a balancing of this degree of monstrous horror and nuance and that’s not even including PSH’s line of wanting to fuck someone so hard cum would spuirt out of her eyes

 

[mixed_biscuits]

Yeah and while now its very accessible to make films, getting them distributed is still probably inaccessibly expensive.

Yes, it's just impossible:



And even if one manages somehow to 'upload' this 'file' one then needs millions of dollars to bring it to people's attention; media never just spreads of its own accord like some sort of 'virus'.

 

[Clinamenic]

Well sure, on a video content level. I thought we were talking about theatrically distributed films, even just indie films on streaming services. EG for films to be Oscar-eligible, I believe there is some minimum requirement of theatrical release.

 

[WashYourHands]

tough work debating with a man who can’t upload his holiday vids to YT

 

[mixed_biscuits]

Well sure, on a video content level. I thought we were talking about theatrically distributed films, even just indie films on streaming services. EG for films to be Oscar-eligible, I believe there is some minimum requirement of theatrical release.

hmm maybe there should be an attempt at a distribution-blind Oscars alternative with a signal-boosting mechanism for promising films released through informal means

 

[luka]

tried watching valhalla rising; boring as fuck fell, asleep
tried watching dinner with andre; boring as fuck, fell asleep