Jordan Peele made a horror movie about racism

[Cassius Clay]

What a brilliant idea. Had been looking forward to this one but the election made me forget all about it.

[youtube]https://youtube.com/watch?v=sRfnevzM9kQ ... e=youtu.be[/youtube]

[Gendo]

Yeah I remember seeing this trailer a while ago, looked interesting.

[aels]

I've been keeping my beady eyes on this one, it looks really interesting. Daniel Kaluuya was in my favourite episode of Black Mirror and knocked it out of the park so I know he's going to be great.

[Cassius Clay]

Yea...he seems like a really likeable dude.

[Eva Yojimbo]

Could be very interesting. Is this the first thing he's directed?

[Islandmur]

Yea...he seems like a really likeable dude.

The sound of music is one of my all time favorite movies.

I have not seen it but I've read about it, I'm not your negro... have you heard of it?

[Cassius Clay]

@eva Peele had a comedy show, but I don't know if he's directed a movie before. That he decided to suddenly make a horror comedy was surprising, yet somehow not.

@mur My grandparents loved the sound of music and would make us watch it with them whenever they visited. I hated it then, but it was on tv the other day and I almost overdosed from the nostalgia feelings...and now that we have Nazis in power it was a little eerie. Captain Von Trapp IS my grandfather. I read something about I'm not your negro recently, but don't know much about it.

[Raxivace]

Key and Peele had some really great skits- watching a bunch of them, it really surprised me how well they were able to combine classical filmmaking ideas with their comedy.



It's pretty easy to draw a parallel between this video for example, and Hitchcock's bomb hypothetical in his theory of suspense.

There is a distinct difference between "suspense" and "surprise," and yet many pictures continually confuse the two. I'll explain what I mean.

We are now having a very innocent little chat. Let's suppose that there is a bomb underneath this table between us. Nothing happens, and then all of a sudden, "Boom!" There is an explosion. The public is surprised, but prior to this surprise, it has seen an absolutely ordinary scene, of no special consequence. Now, let us take a suspense situation. The bomb is underneath the table and the public knows it, probably because they have seen the anarchist place it there. The public is aware the bomb is going to explode at one o'clock and there is a clock in the decor. The public can see that it is a quarter to one. In these conditions, the same innocuous conversation becomes fascinating because the public is participating in the scene. The audience is longing to warn the characters on the screen: "You shouldn't be talking about such trivial matters. There is a bomb beneath you and it is about to explode!"

In the first case we have given the public fifteen seconds of surprise at the moment of the explosion. In the second we have provided them with fifteen minutes of suspense. The conclusion is that whenever possible the public must be informed. Except when the surprise is a twist, that is, when the unexpected ending is, in itself, the highlight of the story.

With this in mind, I think Peele's feature film will at the very least be worth checking out.

[Unvoiced_Apollo]

I've seen a the trailer for this quite a bit & really curious. If it gets good reviews I may go see it. If not, I'll redbox it.

[Eva Yojimbo]

@eva Peele had a comedy show, but I don't know if he's directed a movie before. That he decided to suddenly make a horror comedy was surprising, yet somehow not.

I know about Key & Peele and have watched several eps., but I didn't recall if Peele had any hand in directing it or anything else.

[Cassius Clay]

@Rax Yeah, a lot of their skits felt like scenes from major films. Juxtaposing high production values with the absurd content of the skits was something they often relied on for comedy.

[Gendo]

Sitting at 100% on rt at the moment: https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/get_out" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Cassius Clay]

I noticed the audience rating was around 80, and I guessed there were probably a bunch of salty white people screwing up the average. I guessed right.

[Derived Absurdity]

Isn't 80% really good for an audience rating?

[Unvoiced_Apollo]

[*]

Isn't 80% really good for an audience rating?

Yes, but read a few of the reviews making up the other 20%.

It's one thing to not like the movie based on quality. But a lot of reviews are upset at the content and theme in regards to the racial element of the movie.

[Cassius Clay]

It's unusual for the audience rating to be significantly lower than the critic rating. That sometimes happens with "pretentious art films" that the general audience was bored by. So, its easy to guess that the cause of the difference here is fragile white people. They do the same thing with ratings on black-centered films(or films where race is dealt with explicitly) on IMBD: spam-rating movies they haven't watched as 1/10.

I wonder if those white people just "misunderstand" reality.

[Derived Absurdity]

The audience rating is now 86%. The average rating for the critics is 8.3 out of 10. So...

I admit I don't really know how Rotten Tomatoes works, I haven't paid much attention to it for a while, so I guess I might be missing something.

[Cassius Clay]

It was 100 critic, 81 audience when I made the comment.

Edit: I see. You either get a good tomato or a rotten one, and there's a threshold. If all critics rate it 8/10, for example, I think it shows up as %100. I think it's same formula with audience. Either "liked it" or not...and there's some minimum individual rating to qualify as "liked it".

[Derived Absurdity]

I just saw the average rating for the audience (lol, I don't know why I missed it), and it's 4.2 out of 5, which translates to 8.4 out of 10, which is one decimal point above the average rating given by critics. Obviously a much better comparison.

Also it seems that the threshold for an audience liking the movie is harsher/higher than for the critics. It's at least 3.5 stars, and I would think you give a movie lower stars than that while still technically qualifying as a (barely) positive review.

[Gendo]

Yes most people are actually decent enough to rate the movie based on their enjoyment of the movie. But the point is that there are specifically comments saying things like "this was ok, but I'm giving it a 1 to counter all the ni**ers who gave it a 5".

[Cassius Clay]

Yeah...the average rating may be 4.2/5, but there are a bunch of people rating it 0.5/5, which registers as "not liking it" and lowers the percentage. Since the percentage is simply based on a "liked it" or not binary.

[Unvoiced_Apollo]

Just saw it. 7 out of 10. It's a satire of the black experience in the form of the suspense/thriller genre. Anyone with an ounce of wit wouldn't take the ending literally and understand it's more like mocking appropriation of black culture by white people. Why not an 8 or 9? Mainly because I just felt like it didn't quite make it to that level. Still good and I'd recommend it.

[Faustus5]

Well, of course the first and so far only Rotten review on RT, dropping the score to 99% favorable, would just have to come from that walking joke, Armond White.

[Raxivace]

Armond White is a weird dude with weird opinions though sometimes I agree with him.

[Unvoiced_Apollo]

Just read only part of White's review. The opinions are utterly insane and makes me think he was a victim of that suburb.

[Derived Absurdity]

It worked significantly better as a social commentary than as a horror movie. It brilliantly skewered... well, mostly people like me, and liberals who don't think they're racist but actually are. As opposed to mocking stereotypical "overt" racists and other easy targets which serve as convenient scapegoats and sin-eaters for all our racism, it set its sights on the types of people who (stereotypically) are most likely going to see it in the first place, which I think is smart and lulzy. The villains (SPOILER) aren't people with an overt dislike of black people (the only racism that exists!), but the performatively woke ones who subconsciously fetishize and objectify them while desperately signaling how exceedingly non-racist they are, a group that really needs a sharp zap of self-awareness which this movie might help a bit to bring. Also, the main actor was great.

I loved it. I might have more thoughts about it when I... think about it more.

(I also saw the Great Wall. For reactionary nationalist propaganda, it was okay.)

[Unvoiced_Apollo]

It worked significantly better as a social commentary than as a horror movie. It brilliantly skewered... well, mostly people like me, and liberals who don't think they're racist but actually are. As opposed to mocking stereotypical "overt" racists and other easy targets which serve as convenient scapegoats and sin-eaters for all our racism, it set its sights on the types of people who (stereotypically) are most likely going to see it in the first place, which I think is smart and lulzy. The villains (SPOILER) aren't people with an overt dislike of black people (the only racism that exists!), but the performatively woke ones who subconsciously fetishize and objectify them while desperately signaling how exceedingly non-racist they are, a group that really needs a sharp zap of self-awareness which this movie might help a bit to bring. Also, the main actor was great.

I loved it. I might have more thoughts about it when I... think about it more.

(I also saw the Great Wall. For reactionary nationalist propaganda, it was okay.)

This is probably why I rated it a 7/10. I really liked the social commentary but while the suspense was put together well, there werent as many tense moments as I was expecting.

[Anakin McFly]

I finally watched it! it was awesome.

[Cassius Clay]

Wasn't as scary as I expected, though there were some really creepy moments, but it was really good.

[Anakin McFly]

I love how it made well-meaning racism and social awkwardness more horrific than the actual horror. I think it's also the first time I've seen non-overt racism portrayed on screen to that degree.

And it made me realise what bothers me about the way some white people criticise racism, because it seems like it should be a good thing that they're aware and speaking out and everything. But they're just like the girlfriend in the film. I have a friend who's a lot like that, and I get the feeling she might be offended by this movie.

[Anakin McFly]

Lol

http://takimag.com/article/get_out_get_ ... z4m2FpIqmF

"People don't want intelligence in 2017, they want antiwhite animus."

"Made for less than $5 million, this film about vicious whites plotting to enslave blacks by implanting their cunning brains into superior—“stronger, faster, cooler"—black bodies brought in $31 million its first weekend."

...someone doesn't understand satire.

Extra points for his use of the term 'anti-gentilic', which I didn't know was a term until today

[Derived Absurdity]

Lol, I read that when it first came out. I didn't want to mention it because I didn't want to admit that I sometimes hate-read Steve Sailer. The posterboy for salty white people.