Raxivace's 2019 List of Movies or: (Goodbye to Neo-General Chat 3D)

User avatar
Raxivace
Ultimate Poster
Posts: 2829
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2017 6:35 am

Re: Raxivace's 2019 List of Movies or: (Goodbye to Neo-General Chat 3D)

Post by Raxivace »

69. The Image Book (2018, Dir. Jean-Luc Godard) - Another one of Godard's collage films, combining film clips, news broadcasts, paintings, drawing, and even internet pornography into bizarre and unrecognizable forms and juxtapositions.

Structurally at least it really does feel like a sequel of sorts to Histoire(s) du cinema, though even after digging through some of the special features I'm not quite seeing the larger picture of The Image Book. At times, Godard seems fascinated by how certain ideas keep being repeated in cinema (Such as people falling in bodies of water, or trains which have been a part of cinema since the time of the Lumieres). A long, Edward Said-esque section of the film focuses on how the west has depicted the Middle East over time, and very much goes into the idea of these depictions being a kind of violence in their own right as having little to nothing in common with reality (And the fact that many countries with diverse histories are even grouped together as a monolithic "Middle East" is something Godard directly criticizes though I currently lack a better way to talk about this topic).

Another memorable bit of the film pokes fun at the Kuleshov effect, by having one of the kids from Todd Browning's Freaks “watch" some rimjob video Godard probably found on Pornhub. It's an interesting sequence not only as an audacious joke about film theory but actually reflects back onto the themes of Browning's film about inner and outer beauty, even if Godard does it in a kind of vulgar way.

How any of this stuff is meant to tie together, if at all, is what eludes me at the moment- I'm not quite sure I see a kind of throughline connecting the Freaks/rimjob bit and the Middle East for example. Still, just on aesthetic I found Image Book to be very absorbing, similar to the affect that Histoire(s) (And from what I can tell Image Book doesn't seem to have quite as shaky of a thesis as Histoire(s)'s “All of film is tainted forever because of the Holocaust" but that's a discussion/debate for another time).

One of the special features on the blu-ray mentions that Godard watches a lot of TCM, apparently. That shouldn't be surprising but oddly enough I found learning that fact to really humanize the man for me.

70. La Chienne (1931, Dir. Jean Renoir) - Oh Renoir, how I've missed you. A prostitute and her pimp con a painter out of his money and his work. Meanwhile the painter puts up with his wife who still pines for her first husband- a war hero.

Things get complicated in that way only the French can complicate things when the dead husband turns out to be not so dead and has merely been avoiding his wife this for years now and the painter seems to cause the death of the prostitute, though whether it was an accident or a deliberate attack is left ambiguous.

I'd have to imagine that Jean Renoir was particularly interested in the painter angle of this film considering who his father was, though I don't know enough to say how much of it, if anything, is particularly biographical.

Fritz Lang remade this in the 40's in Hollywood with Edward G. Robinson of all people as a film called Scarlet Street. I'm not familiar with the remake though I'm very curious about it.

71. Thief (1981, Dir. Michael Mann) - I haven't seen too many of Mann's films (Other than this I've watched Collateral which I think is great and Blackhat which…isn't) but Thief is excellent. This is stylish as hell (Some the neon, rain-soaked nighttime streets of Chicago even seem to predict Blade Runner coming a year later as many critics have pointed out) and James Caan kills it as the lead. And the actual heist scenes themselves are super cool.

The whole thing really reminded me of something like Drive (Vaguely neo-noirish, electronic-ishs soundtrack etc.), and while I really liked Drive I feel like this one-ups it in nearly every way.

72. Le coup du berger (1956, Dir. Jacques Rivette) - This is the first Rivette I've ever seen (And it was cowritten by Claude Chabrol as well, another New Wave disciple I just don't have any familiarity with outside of a cameo appearance in Welles' The Other Side of the Wind). The story follows a woman receiving a fur coat from her lover as a gift but trying to make sure her husband doesn't find out, but there may be more going on than she realizes. I have to be honest though, this left basically no real impact on me.

Still, its only a short film at the beginning of Rivette's career so I'm sure his later stuff is better. Godard's early short films weren't the best either.

73. The Mule (2018, Dir. Clint Eastwood) - It's a shame that this film is a victim of being mismarketed a thriller and a rather bad SNL bit, because I found it to be a rather good drama about ageing, trying to make amends, and trying to be decent despite the biases you've grown up with.

The story revolves around Eastwood's character, a horticulturist who has become estranged from his family and has lost his business, becoming a drug mule for the cartel. This is the kind of film that focuses more on the driving itself and what Eastwood does on his trips (Such as, say, listening to Johnny Cash music on the radio or stopping to help troubled drivers on the road) than it is about typical gangster drama about betrayals or cops hunting after dealers. That isn't to say that stuff isn't in the film, because it absolutely is and yet it is secondary to Eastwood's thematic interests about trying to be decent and grow even when you've been left behind culturally for decades and still carrying troublesome biases and faults from the past.
"[Cinema] is a labyrinth with a treacherous resemblance to reality." - Andrew Sarris
Lord_Lyndon
Super Poster
Posts: 318
Joined: Thu Nov 23, 2017 2:48 pm

Re: Raxivace's 2019 List of Movies or: (Goodbye to Neo-General Chat 3D)

Post by Lord_Lyndon »

Raxivace wrote:71. Thief (1981, Dir. Michael Mann) - I haven't seen too many of Mann's films (Other than this I've watched Collateral which I think is great and Blackhat which…isn't) but Thief is excellent. This is stylish as hell (Some the neon, rain-soaked nighttime streets of Chicago even seem to predict Blade Runner coming a year later as many critics have pointed out) and James Caan kills it as the lead. And the actual heist scenes themselves are super cool.

The whole thing really reminded me of something like Drive (Vaguely neo-noirish, electronic-ishs soundtrack etc.), and while I really liked Drive I feel like this one-ups it in nearly every way.


I'm glad you liked Thief. Michael Mann was one of my favourite directors back in the day (about 7 years ago). I love nearly all of his films. Definitely check out Manhunter, Heat, Insider, Last of the Mohicans, Miami Vice and Public Enemies. I would like to hear your thoughts on every one of them.
Here is how my list of favourite directors looked back then:
Terrence Malick
David Lynch
Michael Mann
Wong Kar-wai
Michelangelo Antonioni

Today most of my favourite directors are Japanese.
Lord_Lyndon
Super Poster
Posts: 318
Joined: Thu Nov 23, 2017 2:48 pm

Re: Raxivace's 2019 List of Movies or: (Goodbye to Neo-General Chat 3D)

Post by Lord_Lyndon »

I finished two anime series.
1) Guilty Crown (2011)
This one doesn't have a great reputation. People have complained that it has poor character development and that it is too convoluted. But I must say that I really liked it. It combines familiar concepts in its plot like: virus that attacked population of Japan, government organization that fights rebels, kids with magical powers, people in robots fighting. What I liked the most is its beautiful animation and great fight scenes. Two last episodes were really fantastic. They really affected me emotionally. Anyway... It was a really good watch.

2) Fullmetal Alchemist: Brotherhood (2009-2012)
Some points on this mega-popular show:
1. I generally liked it. It is a solid mix of darkness and more lighthearted moments.
2. It uses a basic idea of alchemy, of people trying to become gods, of people meddling in the mysteries of life, to tell an entertaining story.
3. First four episodes were fantastic. They explored morality of using alchemy to meddle in the mysteries of life (see: human transmutation). But after that series never reached these heights again. It settled for entertainment rather than exploring something of substance. Shame. It really had potential.
4. What annoyed me the most about these series is that the final battle lasted for almost 15 episodes. Yes. You heard me. 15 episodes. It was nearly excruciating for me to go through this. But I made it. Somehow.
5. Overall... I liked it. But nowhere nearly as much as others did. Someone said that this series is mainstreamy (is this a word?) or something like that and I agree. I would have preferred something more artistic. Hope that doesn't sound too pretentious.
6. It did have some nice visuals towards the end.
User avatar
Raxivace
Ultimate Poster
Posts: 2829
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2017 6:35 am

Re: Raxivace's 2019 List of Movies or: (Goodbye to Neo-General Chat 3D)

Post by Raxivace »

Lord_Lyndon wrote:Definitely check out Manhunter, Heat, Insider, Last of the Mohicans, Miami Vice and Public Enemies. I would like to hear your thoughts on every one of them.
I do have a blu-ray of Heat and I think I have a DVD of Manhunter sitting around somewhere. Whenever I get around to watching them I'll make sure to post about them.
Here is how my list of favourite directors looked back then:
Terrence Malick
David Lynch
Michael Mann
Wong Kar-wai
Michelangelo Antonioni
I do quite enjoy Malick and Lynch. I haven't seen too much Antonioni or Kar-wai but I like what I've seen from them.
Today most of my favourite directors are Japanese.
Any particular standouts?
"[Cinema] is a labyrinth with a treacherous resemblance to reality." - Andrew Sarris
User avatar
Raxivace
Ultimate Poster
Posts: 2829
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2017 6:35 am

Re: Raxivace's 2019 List of Movies or: (Goodbye to Neo-General Chat 3D)

Post by Raxivace »

Lord_Lyndon wrote:I finished two anime series.
1) Guilty Crown (2011)
This one doesn't have a great reputation. People have complained that it has poor character development and that it is too convoluted. But I must say that I really liked it. It combines familiar concepts in its plot like: virus that attacked population of Japan, government organization that fights rebels, kids with magical powers, people in robots fighting. What I liked the most is its beautiful animation and great fight scenes. Two last episodes were really fantastic. They really affected me emotionally. Anyway... It was a really good watch.
I haven't seen this one but I'll keep an eye out for it.
2) Fullmetal Alchemist: Brotherhood (2009-2012)
Some points on this mega-popular show:
[...]
4. What annoyed me the most about these series is that the final battle lasted for almost 15 episodes. Yes. You heard me. 15 episodes. It was nearly excruciating for me to go through this. But I made it. Somehow.
Ha, that's nothing. Dragon Ball Z had fights that lasted like twice as long as that. :P
5. Overall... I liked it. But nowhere nearly as much as others did. Someone said that this series is mainstreamy (is this a word?) or something like that and I agree. I would have preferred something more artistic. Hope that doesn't sound too pretentious.
"Mainstreamy" sounds like the kind of neologism I would use lol.

Yeah I couldn't really get into Brotherhood or the original manga because that lighter feel seemed really at odds with what I liked about the 2003 anime, which for the most part aimed for a darker tone (In a way I might even call FMA 2003 the mainstream, funhouse mirror version of Texhnolyze. Or perhaps its better to say that Texhnolyze is the arthouse twin of FMA? They're kind of linked in my mind since they both came out in 2003, have a central protagonist with missing limbs, mysterious world, darker tone than other shows of the time etc. but the styles of the two shows are radically different). Some of the stuff that seemed kind of rushed in what I saw of Brotherhood (Like the Nina storyline) seemed to take a bit more time in the 2003 version to develop too, which I personally liked.

Now that being said I haven't seen the 2003 anime in years and years so I don't know how much nostalgia is clouding my memory and propping the show up in my mind. Still, you may be interested in going back and checking it out at some point.
"[Cinema] is a labyrinth with a treacherous resemblance to reality." - Andrew Sarris
User avatar
Gendo
Site Admin
Posts: 2882
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 7:38 pm

Re: Raxivace's 2019 List of Movies or: (Goodbye to Neo-General Chat 3D)

Post by Gendo »

I really liked Manhunter, I think even more than Red Dragon. And I'm a big fan of Collateral. I didn't realize that Mann did Heat, Ali, and The Last of the Mohicans. I've seen those but don't remember a whole lot about them.
User avatar
Raxivace
Ultimate Poster
Posts: 2829
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2017 6:35 am

Re: Raxivace's 2019 List of Movies or: (Goodbye to Neo-General Chat 3D)

Post by Raxivace »

Oh he did Ali too? I think I have a DVD of that somewhere as well.
"[Cinema] is a labyrinth with a treacherous resemblance to reality." - Andrew Sarris
User avatar
Raxivace
Ultimate Poster
Posts: 2829
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2017 6:35 am

Re: Raxivace's 2019 List of Movies or: (Goodbye to Neo-General Chat 3D)

Post by Raxivace »

74. Mobile Suit Gundam Narrative (2018, Dir. Shun'ichi Yoshizawa) - A loose sequel to the Mobile Suit Gundam Unicorn OVA's (And apparently ignoring that the Twilight Axis ONA's ever happened), this film follows the story of the hunt for the “Phenex", a mysterious Gundam that was thought to have disappeared.

This film is alright. The spectacle of some of the mecha battles are on par with some of the better moments of the Unicorn OVA's, but the actual character stuff (Involving three orphans, one of whom is psychic, who were sold out to an evil science lab, one of whom betrayed the other two, and then later on in life all three got involved with Gundam shenanigans) seems a bit underwritten. Not a whole lot else to really say about it.

75. Passion (1982, Dir. Jean-Luc Godard) - Eh. This is a film about a director trying to make a non-narrative film and getting mad that he can't get it financed because it “doesn't have a story". Clearly a tinge of autobiography there.

Not one of my favorite Godards. It feels like another lesser version of Contempt, and it wasn't even that long after Comment ca va?.

76. His Kind of Woman (1951, Dir. John Farrow & Richard Fleischer) - A very underrated noir. The story follows Robert Mitchum being asked by the mob to visit a Mexican resort- he does so and gets involved in crime shenanigans which culminate in Raymond Burr trying to steal his identity so he can re-enter the United States.

The real draw here though is the sort of love triangle between Mitchum, Jane Russell as a singer, and Vincent Price of all people playing a movie star who fancies himself as a sort of manly adventurer and hunter and such (But because its Vincent Price there's still a charming campiness to the whole performance). They bounce off of each other super well, though Price alone makes this worth watching.

77. The Most Dangerous Game (1932, Dir. Irving Pichel & Ernest B. Schoedsack) - People get shipwrecked on island of a crazy millionaire who likes to hunt humans as game.

I knew the basic premise of this film has been parodied and referenced to death and back (Apparently it inspired the Zodiac Killer as well), but I had never actually seen the film version before. The only thing I really knew for sure about it was that it used some of the same island sets from King Kong, though perhaps it shouldn't have been a surprise that it actually had a decent amount in common thematically with Kong in terms of man's relationship with nature.

I think the other thing that surprised was how short it was (It's barely over an hour), and how most of the film isn't even about the hunt- the first 40 or so minutes is mostly dialogue about the nature of hunting animals and such.

78. The Green Room (1978, Dir. Francois Truffaut) - Truffaut's final performance as an actor. This film follows him playing a character obsessed with people he's known who have died, to the point he dedicates a room in his house to them. After a fire breaks out there, he funds the remodeling of a bombed out church to create a sort of mausoleum to them.

It's alright. I like that Truffaut is trying to handle more “adult" material but the character itself never seems THAT interesting. I'm pretty sure his obsession is brought on more because he's a veteran of World War I more than anything, but we get that in the first five minutes of the film. Truffaut's kind of messed up relationship with his lady friend is a little better but the film still feels a bit lacking in the end.
"[Cinema] is a labyrinth with a treacherous resemblance to reality." - Andrew Sarris
User avatar
Raxivace
Ultimate Poster
Posts: 2829
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2017 6:35 am

Re: Raxivace's 2019 List of Movies or: (Goodbye to Neo-General Chat 3D)

Post by Raxivace »

79. Body Double (1984, Dir. Brian De Palma) - De Palma's crappy mashup of Rear Window and Vertigo.

I think I realized what it is that I find so offputting about De Palma's Hitchcock imitations now- for as much interest as he has in photographing sexy women he's got like no interest in giving them any sort of personality whatsoever, let alone any kind of complex characterization at all. Hell actual pornography often has better written women characters.

For all that people deride Hitchcock as supposedly being some kind of misogynist (Claims I find specious at best, especially compared to someone like De Palma), the personalities and desires and contradictions of his female characters are still huge parts of those movies beyond them just being pretty. In Rear Window and Vertigo, Grace Kelly and Kim Novak are huge presences in those films, and their desires, actions, goals etc. are large parts of why those stories even happen (Maybe less so in Vertigo but that's also part of what that movie is about).

For comparison's sake, does anybody really give that much of a shit of any of the female characters in Body Double or Blow Out or Dressed to Kill? Blow Out probably fares the best of the three but the female lead in that film is still a farcry from Novak in Vertigo.

To be slightly fairer to De Palma his male leads kind of suck too- Craig Wasson's buffoonish performance here in Body Double is nowhere close to a legend like James Stewart, but when De Palma is so blatant about bringing to mind such iconic performances I feel like you're inviting the sort of criticism.

I think I really do agree with that one Godard quote now- De Palma really is wasting his talents on awful awful awful scripts.

EDIT: Also, how I could forget to mention that De Palma lifts the "serial killer carrying drill between his legs so it looks like male genitalia lol" shot from The Slumber Party Massacre, which only came out like two years before this? Because that's a thing that happened.

80. John Wick (2014, Dir. Chad Stahelski & David Leitch) - I'm really late to the party on the John Wick movies but this was pretty good. Slick and stylish, Keanu is cast pretty well, Alfie Allen is good as his princely villain etc. Not much else to really say about it but it's a really fun watch.

81. In Our Time (1982, Dir. Tao Te-chen, Edward Yang, Ko I-chen, & Yi Chang) - An anthology film consistenting of four short films that it seems kicked off the Taiwanese New Wave.

The first short by Te-chen was about a boy who had trouble at school because he was more into his toy dinosaur instead of doing his homework. His parents eventually throw his dinosaur toy away but a friend helps him find it.

Yang's short follows a girl who feels sexual awakening for the first time as she and her sister both get the hots for a hunky college boy that's renting a room in their mother's house. The younger daughter also feels betrayal for presumably the first time when she walks in on the older sister sleeping with the guy. The whole thing ends up as a compact coming of age story.

This short was probably my favorite of the bunch. From what I can tell it was Yang's first film as well, so it's worth checking out for that at least.

I-chen's short is about a young man's zany college adventures involving disappointing his father, this neighbor woman that seems to be into him, driving cars, and swimming. I found this one to be pretty haphazard and unfocused, but perhaps that's the point.

Chang's short follows a guy getting locked out of his Taipei apartment in his underwear. It's more explicitly comedic than any of the other four, and ended up being my least favorite of the bunch.

Overall I found the first two shorts to be far better than the latter two, with Yang's in particular being the standout. I think it's also the best works as a short film on its own, though as reviewers before me have noted the way these shorts chronologically progress from each other (The shorts are set in the 50's, 60's, 70's, and 80's respectively. We also go from a young child protagonist, to an older kid/young teenager, to a college student and then end on a couple living together.) is kind of neat.

Also lastly I have to say I had a hell of a time even finding a copy of this film. I ended up having to go on a shadier than usual site to even find a download of this.
"[Cinema] is a labyrinth with a treacherous resemblance to reality." - Andrew Sarris
Lord_Lyndon
Super Poster
Posts: 318
Joined: Thu Nov 23, 2017 2:48 pm

Re: Raxivace's 2019 List of Movies or: (Goodbye to Neo-General Chat 3D)

Post by Lord_Lyndon »

The only thing I remember from Body Double is that I really liked 'Frankie Goes to Hollywood' sequence. I haven't seen it in a long time.

I agree about your John Wick thoughts. I quite liked the first one, but I absolutely loved the second one.

Regarding the Taiwanese film; I've heard about it. I was even planning to see it, but I only ended up seeing Edward Yang's two most famous films. His Yi Yi is probably my favourite film at the moment.

Here are some Japanese directors I like:
Hideaki Anno
Hayao Miyazaki (sorry about that)
Makoto Shinkai
Hirokazu Koreeda
Shunji Iwai
Sion Sono
Naomi Kawase
Yoji Yamada
Takashi Miike
Takeshi Kitano
Jun'ichi Mori

Sorry for the very late response, Rax.
Last edited by Lord_Lyndon on Wed Jun 19, 2019 8:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Lord_Lyndon
Super Poster
Posts: 318
Joined: Thu Nov 23, 2017 2:48 pm

Re: Raxivace's 2019 List of Movies or: (Goodbye to Neo-General Chat 3D)

Post by Lord_Lyndon »

Films I saw after Fullmetal Alchemist:

Roma (2018; Alfonso Cuaron)
Call Me by Your Name (2017; Luca Guadagnino)
Solo: A Star Wars Story (2018; Ron Howard)
Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 (2017; James Gunn)
The Usual Suspects (1995; Bryan Singer) (rewatch after nearly 10 years)
Repo Man (1984; Alex Cox)
Deadpool 2 (2018; David Leitch)
Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse (2018; Bob Persichetti, Peter Ramsey, Rodney Rothman)
Instant Family (2018; Sean Anders)
Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri (2017; Martin McDonagh)
Eureka (2000; Shinji Aoyama)
13 Assassins (2010; Takashi Miike)
A Perfect World (1993; Clint Eastwood)
Children of Paradise (1945; Marcel Carné)
Children of Heaven (1997; Majid Majidi)
Milk (2008; Gus Van Sant)
Cinema Paradiso (1988; Giuseppe Tornatore)
Jaws (1975; Steven Spielberg)
Shame (1968; Ingmar Bergman)
El Topo (1970; Alejandro Jodorowsky)
The Great Silence (1968; Sergio Corbucci)
Jeremiah Johnson (1972; Sydney Pollack)
Lord_Lyndon
Super Poster
Posts: 318
Joined: Thu Nov 23, 2017 2:48 pm

Re: Raxivace's 2019 List of Movies or: (Goodbye to Neo-General Chat 3D)

Post by Lord_Lyndon »

Air Doll (2009; Hirokazu Koreeda) 8/10
I loved this one. Great film. I think that Koreeda used this slightly bizarre premise to share some insights on life in general. The film is very poetic and melancholic, sad and beautiful at the same time. I would even say it is somewhat underrated, at least based on its imdb rating. And of course, great pleasure watching Doona in a starring role in this one. She was fab in it. I adore her.

The Drug King (2018; Woo Min-ho) 8/10
Surprisingly entertaining gangster film. Looks like no one liked it but me. Nevermind. Basically a Korean version of American Gangster. What I liked the most about this one is that it didn't take itself too seriously (unlike the Scott film which is superior nonetheless). Great cinematography. Doona stars in a supporting role. She isn't really required to do anything in this one but look beautiful and wear some nice dresses. Good enough for me, though.
User avatar
Raxivace
Ultimate Poster
Posts: 2829
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2017 6:35 am

Re: Raxivace's 2019 List of Movies or: (Goodbye to Neo-General Chat 3D)

Post by Raxivace »

Lord_Lyndon wrote:Regarding the Taiwanese film; I've heard about it. I was even planning to see it, but I only ended up seeing Edward Yang's two most famous films. His Yi Yi is probably my favourite film at the moment.
I'm going through the Yang's I haven't seen in chronological order, so Yi Yi will be the lasts one I watch. I have the Criterion blu-ray of it and am really looking forward to it.
Here are some Japanese directors I like:
I don't think I've seen any films from directors on this list after Shinkai, so I probably should branch out more.
Sorry for the very late response, Rax.
Don't worry about it.
Last edited by Raxivace on Thu Jun 20, 2019 12:26 am, edited 1 time in total.
"[Cinema] is a labyrinth with a treacherous resemblance to reality." - Andrew Sarris
User avatar
Raxivace
Ultimate Poster
Posts: 2829
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2017 6:35 am

Re: Raxivace's 2019 List of Movies or: (Goodbye to Neo-General Chat 3D)

Post by Raxivace »

Lord_Lyndon wrote:Films I saw after Fullmetal Alchemist:

Roma (2018; Alfonso Cuaron)
Call Me by Your Name (2017; Luca Guadagnino)
Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse (2018; Bob Persichetti, Peter Ramsey, Rodney Rothman)
Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri (2017; Martin McDonagh)
Jaws (1975; Steven Spielberg)
Of these I've seen and liked these.
Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 (2017; James Gunn)
This one fell almost entirely flat for me though.
"[Cinema] is a labyrinth with a treacherous resemblance to reality." - Andrew Sarris
User avatar
Raxivace
Ultimate Poster
Posts: 2829
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2017 6:35 am

Re: Raxivace's 2019 List of Movies or: (Goodbye to Neo-General Chat 3D)

Post by Raxivace »

Lord_Lyndon wrote:Air Doll (2009; Hirokazu Koreeda) 8/10
I loved this one. Great film. I think that Koreeda used this slightly bizarre premise to share some insights on life in general. The film is very poetic and melancholic, sad and beautiful at the same time. I would even say it is somewhat underrated, at least based on its imdb rating. And of course, great pleasure watching Doona in a starring role in this one. She was fab in it. I adore her.
I haven't seen this one, but IIRC Jimbo liked it. I should watch it at some point.
"[Cinema] is a labyrinth with a treacherous resemblance to reality." - Andrew Sarris
User avatar
Raxivace
Ultimate Poster
Posts: 2829
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2017 6:35 am

Re: Raxivace's 2019 List of Movies or: (Goodbye to Neo-General Chat 3D)

Post by Raxivace »

82. Us (2019, Dir. Jordan Peele) - Peele returns to horror, though whereas Get Out was pretty clear about its themes I find it much harder to get a read on this one. I think that actually makes it fairly interesting, though I'm kind of disappointed that people online seem to not like it as much because of it.

The only real complaint I personally had about the film was that I think we get just a little too much explanation about the Tethered I.e. the government conspiracy stuff. I think its fine to exist as a possibility (The actual explanation already reflects on the earlier scene where the daughter talks about the government using fluoride in drinking water as a form of mind control, which honestly is the only bit of explanation that I think you need, even if it isn't blatant exposition and still just one possibility).

83. Murder Mystery (2019, Dir. Kyle Newacheck) - Adam Sandler and Jennifer Anniston are a married couple who solve a murder mystery. It's okay for what it is, it has a few gags that work, though this is hardly the second coming of Nick and Nora Charles.

84. John Wick: Chapter 2 (2017, Dir. Chad Stahelski) - About as good as the first one. I don't have much to add since other than the more open, oppressive ending I'm not sure its really that different than the first film. Still, it's a fun ride, I like the weird elements about the criminal culture that are never fully explained (Kind of made me think of Highlander of all things, especially with the whole idea of not committing violence in certain “sacred" spaces.), and Laurence Fishburn really steals the show in his few scenes.

85. Sabrina (1954, Dir. Billy Wilder) - A love triangle movie where Audrey Hepburn pursues the younger brother in a rich family (William Holden) but ends up falling for the older brother (Humphrey Bogart).

I really found this to be an enjoyable film- I'm always impressed by how Wilder can shift between romantic comedy and heavier drama- the suicide talk in particular made me think of his later film The Apartment in some ways, almost as if Wilder was dipping his toe in the water here before diving in with that film.

I have to say it was really unusual seeing Bogart in such a light-hearted role (Well, light-hearted besides the suicide talk). Despite his age I think he actually works here pretty well.

----

Armor Hunter Mellowlink (1988-1989) - A spinoff from Armored Trooper VOTOMS. After being surviving in the “Planbandol Scandal", an incident where a battalion of soldiers were sent on a doomed mission so military higher-ups could plunder resources, Private Ariety Mellowlink has gone on a revenge tour to kill absolutely everyone responsible for the deaths of his comrades.

What's interesting about this one is that this is the rare mecha anime where the main protagonist is not any kind of mecha pilot at all- he fights AT's onfoot with nothing a rifle, some traps, and his wits. The closest point of comparison I can think of is the Metal Gear games, specifically the Metal Gear fights themselves that always come at the end. I guess that makes Mellowlink a kind of Solid Snake.

The only real complaint I have about this show is that the ending episodes drag a little bit- I ultimately preferred the earlier “monster of the week" episodes where Mellowlink had to figure out how to exploit some gimmick of a new mecha in order to ultimately murder the pilot. Still a fun show overall.
Kikou Ryouhei Mellowlink 01 (DVD 640x480 x264 AAC).mkv_snapshot_22.18_[2019.05.11_14.49.01].jpg
Kikou Ryouhei Mellowlink 01 (DVD 640x480 x264 AAC).mkv_snapshot_22.18_[2019.05.11_14.49.01].jpg (174.61 KiB) Viewed 10682 times
Last edited by Raxivace on Fri Jan 10, 2020 8:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"[Cinema] is a labyrinth with a treacherous resemblance to reality." - Andrew Sarris
User avatar
Raxivace
Ultimate Poster
Posts: 2829
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2017 6:35 am

Re: Raxivace's 2019 List of Movies or: (Goodbye to Neo-General Chat 3D)

Post by Raxivace »

Fuck Harmony Gold and fuck the 35 years of Not Getting Any Macross on Blu-Ray in the West that now begins.

YES I'M MAD >:(
"[Cinema] is a labyrinth with a treacherous resemblance to reality." - Andrew Sarris
User avatar
Raxivace
Ultimate Poster
Posts: 2829
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2017 6:35 am

Re: Raxivace's 2019 List of Movies or: (Goodbye to Neo-General Chat 3D)

Post by Raxivace »

No movies today, but some series.

Fate/Zero (2011-2012) - A prequel to Fate/stay night, set about 10 years before and covering the events of the Fourth Holy Grail War.
This is a series with a lot of highs and a few baffling lows. The biggest problem is honestly the first episode- it's 45 minutes of straight exposition, which I'm not sure anyone who hadn't already played F/SN could even follow pretty well (All of the same information is not only in the game, but dripped out over the course of hours and hours). Despite weirdly bumpy opening though its pretty well paced after that- I found myself whipping through episodes to get to the next one despite already knowing how the story would end.

I also wish it didn't quite have so many battles with with 4-5 participants and a few smaller ones- the giant squid monster was one thing, but having the kind of out of place aerial dogfight at the same time was a little much. Also I wish it didn't quite spoil things so early on that F/SN kind of went out of its way to hide- one example being that in the VN, they never directly tell you who Illyasviel's biological father is, you're left to infer it based on some kind of vague things she says and she talks to and talks about certain characters. In this anime, that's spoiled within the first 10 minutes of the first episode.

Being a prequel to some extent that can't be avoided, though it does mean I'd recommend this anime only to people that have played the game already. Still its a fun, exciting ride.

Stranger Things 3 (2019) - This is fun as a throwback to goofy 80's genre stuff, it would just be nice if the Duffer Brothers had any kind of point of view to express on 80's American culture instead of just kind of lazily inserting contemporaneous millennial views into the show.
Like the scene where they discuss how My Little Pony uses “nerd tropes". Who the fuck was talking like that in the 80's?

Or the way that Steve was quickly accepting of Uma Thurman's daughter being a lesbian. Listen, I grew up in Indiana and even in the early 2000's people were NOT so quickly accepting of homosexuality, especially not the generation that were Steve's age back then.

On a lighter note, the kids see Romero's Day of the Dead at the theater in the first episode of the season. That's a great movie but was it ever so popular that it would be playing to a crowded theater? Especially in fuckin' Indiana?

It just gets to a point that I don't understand why this show is set in the 80's at all. Ostensibly you could say its because it's the major point of reference for the Duffer brothers (Though they still reference more modern things like Jurassic Park and have talked about how the anime series Elfen Lied was an inspiration too), but its not like you actually need to be set in the 80's to do that.

Of course none of this matters that much because its still a fun, bingeable ride. I just wish that Stranger Things' nostalgia for the past was slightly less sanitized.

Armored Trooper VOTOMS: Shining Heresy (1994) - An OVA that is the first genuine sequel to the original VOTOMS tv anime. I liked it well enough for the most part, but after multiple prequels and sidestories its a little disappointing that the first genuine sequel to the TV show feels a kind of slight for most of its run, and I'm not super fond of the actual ending.

In some ways it feels more like a soft reboot a la New Story of Aura Battler Dunbine to me, not only in how you can parallel Old Man Rochina with Old Man Shot Weapon, the way characters are now in "the future", but also the way that it ends up just being kind of a retread of plot elements of the older show- in this case its "Oh noes Fyanna got kidnapped again, better go rescue her again" with the unfortunate ending of more or less killing her off, which really doesn't sit well with me as an idea to begin with, especially after she spends most of the show in a Sleeping Beauty/Snow White kind of a role. In a way it kind of cleans the slate too to throw Chirico into new adventures with new characters, though I'm not sure that's even particularly a good idea to begin with. Why not just make more new casts a la Mellowlink at that point?

Still, I like the general idea of the theocracy and treating Chirico as a genuine sort of religious figure that no one quite knows what to do with, and there is a certain appeal to getting to see Chirico run around in a 90's anime (Even if this is his only outing here in this decade). Also the heavy use of faux-static Nextant goofery with Titania was a cool choice, and must have been particularly neat in the VHS era.

I just wish the OVA as a whole was a little more substantive, and that the ending didn't basically undo what I liked about the ending to the original TV show.

Armored Trooper VOTOMS: Pailsen Files (2007-2008) - I'm kind of torn on this one.

I'm not sure there was a need for yet another prequel about Chirico's past, but the stuff we did get was mostly pretty solid. Sort of like the Kummen Arc in the original anime, I think I would say Pailsen Files also does Mobile Suit Gundam: The 08th MS Team better than 08th MS Team did- though in this case it's less about "Gundams/giant robots in Vietnnam" as much as the "small battalion in way over their heads" factor I'm thinking of.

I think the big point of contention for me with this OVA are the mecha battles themselves. On the one hand, in terms of pure choreography I think are some of the best Scopedog scenes this franchise has produced yet. Some of these battles are pretty dynamic looking- like I enjoyed the "D-Day" battle in the opening battle and the goofy shit it had like the mat with tracks that could allow the Scopedogs to travel up hills and cliffs. On the other hand the CG mechs themselves (Which presumably are a bit part of why they were able to get away with some of what they were able to, I'd imagine) are honestly kind of terrible looking. Like, to a point where its distracting. At times it feels like I'm watching cutscenes from a PS2-era video game or something.

Watching them back to back I think I enjoyed Pailsen Files more than Shining Heresy all things considered but man. I can't get over the CG Scopedogs.
"[Cinema] is a labyrinth with a treacherous resemblance to reality." - Andrew Sarris
User avatar
Raxivace
Ultimate Poster
Posts: 2829
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2017 6:35 am

Re: Raxivace's 2019 List of Movies or: (Goodbye to Neo-General Chat 3D)

Post by Raxivace »

86. Evangelion AVANT 1: 0706 Version (2019, Dir. Hideaki Anno, Masayuki, & Kazuya Tsurumaki) - Rebuild of Eva is BACK!!!!!! Well the first ten minutes of the last Rebuild movie is here at least, released as part of a promotional thing with the finished film not coming out until next year. Still, I'm mad excited after having a lot of fun with this preview. I'm not quite sure what direction the film is going to go, though I don't think you can judge where 2.0 and 3.0 were going to go based on their first ten minutes either.

87. First Name: Carmen (1983, Dir. Jean-Luc Godard) - I liked this better than Passion, but I still feel pretty mixed on it. I liked the robbery bit in the beginning and Godard playing an institutionalized version of himself is pretty fun. However I feel like the stuff with Carmen and Jonathan just hanging out in the hotel doesn't actually work too well, not really as comedy or a Breathless-style examination of relationships.

That isn't to say the scenes are a complete disaster but they're not the most engaging Godard has ever been.
Prenom Carmen 1983.mkv_snapshot_00.10.24_[2019.07.09_16.27.30].jpg
Prenom Carmen 1983.mkv_snapshot_00.10.24_[2019.07.09_16.27.30].jpg (219.18 KiB) Viewed 10633 times
^Gotta say I love Godard cosplaying as Radio Raheem though.
Prenom Carmen 1983.mkv_snapshot_01.24.32_[2019.07.09_16.25.58].jpg
Prenom Carmen 1983.mkv_snapshot_01.24.32_[2019.07.09_16.25.58].jpg (17.79 KiB) Viewed 10633 times
^Ain't that the truth.

88. Resolution (2012, Dir. Justin Benson & Aaron Moorhead) - Mike is a guy who receives a weird video email about his friend Chris, which depicts Chris doing drugs. The video comes with a map, so Mike follows it to a Podunk house in the forest where he finds Chris high out of his mind. Mike comes up with the genius plan to detox Chris by chaining him to a bar in his house and more or less keeping him prisoner until Chris agrees to start attending rehab. As this is going on, Mike keeps finding mysterious photos and videos of both him and Chris, which eventually show the both of them dead. At first they think its just somebody messing with them, but supernatural forces may be afoot…

Yeah in a way its basically Cabin in the Woods meets Cache, though it actually kind of works mostly because the stuff between Chris and Mike is pretty decently written and acted. It really feels like a drama about drug addiction first and foremost (And one that doesn't veer away from Mike handcuffing Chris as being a pretty fucked up thing to do to begin with), though one that veers into weird Cache in the Woods territory as it goes on.

This film actually generated some kind of a sequel believe it or not, which I'll probably watch in a day or two.
"[Cinema] is a labyrinth with a treacherous resemblance to reality." - Andrew Sarris
Lord_Lyndon
Super Poster
Posts: 318
Joined: Thu Nov 23, 2017 2:48 pm

Re: Raxivace's 2019 List of Movies or: (Goodbye to Neo-General Chat 3D)

Post by Lord_Lyndon »

Films I saw and a short comment on some of them:

The Mermaid (2016; Stephen Chow)
Gigli (2003; Martin Brest)
The Fall (2006; Tarsem Singh)
Battle Royale (2000; Kinji Fukasaku)
Adrift in Tokyo (2007; Satoshi Miki)
The Hidden Blade (2004; Yôji Yamada)
The Happiness of the Katakuris (2001; Takashi Miike)
Swing Girls (2004; Shinobu Yaguchi)
Shinobi: Heart Under Blade (2005; Ten Shimoyama)
Dororo (2007; Akihiko Shiota)
Ghajini (2008; A.R. Murugadoss)
Hum Aapke Hain Koun...! (1994; Sooraj R. Barjatya)
Dil Se.. (1998; Mani Ratnam)
Andaz Apna Apna (1994; Rajkumar Santoshi)
Baazigar (1993; Abbas Alibhai Burmawalla, Mastan Alibhai Burmawalla)
Barfi! (2012; Anurag Basu)
Delhi-6 (2009; Rakeysh Omprakash Mehra)
Hazaaron Khwaishein Aisi (2003; Sudhir Mishra)

I really enjoyed The Mermaid. Shinobi is an amazing fantasy film. Hidden Blade is one of the best samurai movies I have ever seen.
I think you should really see Barfi!, Rax. It is not your typical Bollywood film (it does not contain song and dance sequences), but it is not something I would call an art film either, especially considering that such major stars like Ranbir Kapoor and Priyanka Chopra are in leading roles. I am really interested if you would like it.
User avatar
Raxivace
Ultimate Poster
Posts: 2829
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2017 6:35 am

Re: Raxivace's 2019 List of Movies or: (Goodbye to Neo-General Chat 3D)

Post by Raxivace »

Lord_Lyndon wrote:I think you should really see Barfi!, Rax. It is not your typical Bollywood film (it does not contain song and dance sequences), but it is not something I would call an art film either, especially considering that such major stars like Ranbir Kapoor and Priyanka Chopra are in leading roles. I am really interested if you would like it.
I'll make a note to check it out.

I really should watch some of the major Bollywood films at some point anyways. For as huge of an industry as it is, I've seen criminally little of it- not more than a few clips.
"[Cinema] is a labyrinth with a treacherous resemblance to reality." - Andrew Sarris
User avatar
Raxivace
Ultimate Poster
Posts: 2829
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2017 6:35 am

Re: Raxivace's 2019 List of Movies or: (Goodbye to Neo-General Chat 3D)

Post by Raxivace »

Some arsonist nut attacked Kyoto Animation.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/07/18/asia/kyo ... index.html

At least 33 dead and 35 injured as of now.

I gotta say I'm pretty torn up about this. KyoAni has done a lot of stuff I really liked (Most notably Full Metal Panic Fumoffu and FMP The Second Raid, and The Melancholy of Haruhi Suzymiya, as well as last year's Violet Evergarden which I've recommended in this thread previously), but even just the fact that someone would try and burn artists alive like that is incredibly disturbing. And for no real reason from the looks of it, dude wasn't even a former or current employee or anything (Not that would at all justify this atrocity but still).
"[Cinema] is a labyrinth with a treacherous resemblance to reality." - Andrew Sarris
User avatar
Raxivace
Ultimate Poster
Posts: 2829
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2017 6:35 am

Re: Raxivace's 2019 List of Movies or: (Goodbye to Neo-General Chat 3D)

Post by Raxivace »

89. The Graduate (1967, Dir. Mike Nichols) - One of the more famous films I haven't seen, not sure why I didn't get to it until now.

Anyways you can really tell that even moreso than in Who's Afraid of Virigina Woolf? that Nichols is combining stuff from European art cinema of the 60's with more traditional Hollywood genre stsuff- in this case its romantic comedies being combined with the ennui dramas that people like Antonioni made. In a sense this movie really foreshadows the prevalence of those movies that would follow in the rest of the 60's and through the 70's- the BBS Productions movies like Easy Rider and Five Easy Pieces immediately come to mind, even if they deal with a different kind of person than Hoffman's character here.

There's some clever use of form here too- the use of quick montage when Mrs. Robinson first tries to sexually engage Ben that doesn't quite let you see any of her body long enough as Ben consciously tries not to look at her is pretty clever- kind reminds me of the suggestive cutting in Psycho's shower scene in a way. Another clever one I really liked is the cut from Ben swimming in the pool (A place Ben is often either forced into (Such as with the diving suit bit) or inescapably surrounded by his parents in) to him climbing into bed with Mrs. Robinson later on.

This movie became popular and influential for a reason. I know some people think the second half of the movie focusing on Elaine drags a little and it does, though considering the implications behind the ending shot of the film I think that's part of the point- that these people really probably shouldn't be together and probably won't stay together for long when all is said and done.

90. Fate/Prototype (2011, Dir. Seiji Kishi) - This is an odd one. So basically this takes what was the original premise for Fate/stay night (The core difference seeming to be the main character being a girl with a male Servant, which is a reversal of what ended up in the actual game) and turns it into a 12 minute short film, except instead of a traditional short its like an extremely compressed barely coherent cliffnotes version of what the story of the original game would have been.

There's a bizarre amount of work done for this short for something that is at best a curiosity for super fans of the original VN. The thing is voice acted with plenty of spoken parts, the actual animation itself seems pretty good, there are plenty of unique character designs not seen in the original game (I'm not sure how many of these designs existed beforehand but still. Even characters that actually seem to have direct counterparts in the game, such as Cu Chulainn, have unique looks here), but it doesn't really work as a narrative at all.

It's a bizarre little curiosity that does make me wonder what could have been, though I almost wish they just turned into a full feature. Or released a text document or something to contextualize this thing a little more with more insight into various plans for this “Prototype", larger story arc ideas etc.

91. The Endless (2017, Dir. Justin Benson & Aaron Moorhead) - The sequel to Resolution, though it doesn't seem like it at first. The film primarily follows brothers Justin and Aaron- they're survivors of a "UFO death cult" and have spent 10 years trying to make sense of their lives. One day though they receive a strange video in the mail and decide to return to the cult, which challenges the brother's relationship with each other as strange supernatural shit starts happening.

Like with Resolution I think this is a solid film (If formally unremarkable and having too much shaky cam at times for my taste). The supernatural elements are fun (And it ends up explaining some of but wisely not all of what happened in Resolution), but I think Benson and Moorhead (Who play Justin and Aaron as you've probably guessed by now) are not as good as actors as the guys in Resolution. Still I think the brother's relationship works well enough dramatically.

I'd be curious to see what this duo ends up doing in the future. I liked these two movies from them and if they can find a really solid DP to work with in the future they might end up making an extraordinary film one day. As they are now though, they're solid low budget genre guys.

92. The Book of Mary (1985, Dir. Anne-Marie Miéville) - A short that serves a prologue to Godard's Hail Mary. Mary (Who from what I can tell is meant to be a district character from the "Mary" in Godard's film) is a little girl whose parents are fighting, and the short primarily about she reacts to that- through dancing, music, talking about the human eye, and apparently watching Contempt on television (Which of course is also about a couple who is fighting). While more conventional than Godard goes for it is a decent film in its own right and is echoed a few times in Hail Mary.

93. Hail Mary (1985, Dir. Jean-Luc Godard) - THE FILM THE POPE DOESN'T WANT YOU TO SEE!!! For real, the Pope back in the 80's publicly condemned Hail Mary. It's a shame too because this is a very good film that actually tries to take the Joseph and Mary story seriously and not as something to mock or whatever.

Here Godard tries to bring the story of Mary and Joseph into a modern context, with Mary as the daughter of a gas station owner and Joseph as a taxi driver. More importantly though, they're not taken as figures we're distanced from by myth but rather as characters with actual psychologies. I'd imagine this is where the point of contention from the Pope and his cohorts came from because Godard is frank about how sexual desire and suspicion would have factored into such a relationship. Mary and Joseph have frank talks about sex, Joseph thinks Mary is sleeping around with another man when she ends up pregnant despite claims of virginity etc.

The whole thing reminds me of Scorsese's approach to Jesus in The Last Temptation of Christ, which faced similar criticisms when it came out a few years later in 1988 for depicting Jesus as having "sinful" desires and such. And like with Scorsese's film I don't feel Hail Mary is really trying to be disrespectful at all- for Scorsese, Jesus having human desires makes him overcoming those temptations as Christ all the more inspiring. For Godard, I think he really highlights how radical it really is for the son of God to come from "lowly" society really is when you actually try to relate it to something contemporary and not simply as something from a comic book origin story you don't have to think about too hard. Perhaps that is his Marxist side shining through again- if people find the idea of a gas station owner's daughter birthing the son of God to be ridiculous, well, why? What is really different about that from what the Bible says?

Also I'll post Jimbo's old review here since he had a good take on how this related to The Book of Mary.
Eva Yojimbo wrote:Hail Mary - Jean-Luc Godard - 8/10

Like Prenom: Carmen loosely retold Bizet's Carmen, this film loosely retells the story of the Virgin Mary, situating it in modern times and decidedly earthly terms (no wonder it drew such ire from the Pope and protests from Christians). Religion and spirituality are not themes that spring to mind when thinking of Godard, which makes Hail Mary a unique entry into his canon. Besides the subject, it's also unique in being a diptych film, with Anne-Marie Miéville's short film, The Book of Mary, preceding it. Mieville's film is, predictably, more straightforward: closer to Pialat's familial realism than Godard's restless montage, fractured narrative, and Brechtian distancing techniques. That said Mieville's Book... echoes Godard's in both obvious and subtle ways. When Mieville's Mary uses an apple to illustrate the physiology of sight she places a nut inside it, saying "it looks like a womb" and noting that it's made mostly of water. Water will become a major motif in Godard's film, as of course will the notion of a creator inexplicably placing life inside a womb. In subtle ways, Mieville's film presents sight, language (Mary playing "teacher" to her invisible audience), and music (Mary dancing to Mahler) distinctly: the narrative "divorce" of her parents will become Godard's "divorcing" of these concepts from each other in his film.

Godard's Mary is both similar and dissimilar to his other 80s films. The similarities lie in his relentless stop-start music, dialogue, and sound, which may or may not synch with the images on screen. It's similar in essentially being about interpersonal relationships and characters desiring love and intimacy but finding only loneliness and separation. It's similar in its montage that frequently returns to visual motifs, here the sun, moon, and water are most prominent, strongly recalling Malick's use of them in his own films of spirituality. However, Mary is dissimilar in that it's probably Godard's most overtly emotional film ever, or at least since Vivre sa vie. There's an existential, yearning anxiety throughout that feels like a culmination of Godard's 80s aesthetic pushed to an extreme. Myriem Roussel gives a brave performance here, as emotionally naked as she is frequently physically naked on screen. Her nudity stresses the earthly, physical aspect of her inexplicable pregnancy, just as the frequent images of nature represent the transcendental sublimity of it.

As fine and frequently beautiful--both visually and tonally--as the film is, it's also one Godard film in which I wish he could've reigned in his idiosyncratic "distancing" techniques. The constant uniting/divorcing of music, dialogue, and sound with images works in films about filmmaking, where much of the theme is about how manipulative filmmaking is, a kind of cubist revelation of how differently scenes and images can play when combined or not combined with music; but it seems out of place here. While one can argue that Mary's immaculate conception is metaphorically related to that of the artist, thus making this just another Godard film about filmmaking, I also think it diminishes what makes this film unique. This is just one film where Godard didn't need all of the Brechtian techniques. Despite this, Hail Mary is still an excellent film that stands out as something unique and valuable in Godard's canon, a film that proves he was more than just a provocative and experimental theoretician, that there is (always was) an emotional and even spiritual undercurrent there.
The only thing I really disagree with Jimbo's review here is about the times Godard actually uses distancing techniques (Like the title card interruptions) here- they didn't really bother me at all here though it might be because I watched Hail Mary as a part of this huge Godard marathon I've been doing over the last few years.

94. Notes on “Hail Mary" (1983, Dir. Jean-Luc Godard) - A short film that explains the basic concept behind Hail Mary, and it seems mainly made for Godard to secure financing from investsors (With Godard quite directly asking for money at the end of it). It's similar to that one for Every Man for Himself- nice to have for completion's sake, but nothing too essential.
"[Cinema] is a labyrinth with a treacherous resemblance to reality." - Andrew Sarris
User avatar
Raxivace
Ultimate Poster
Posts: 2829
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2017 6:35 am

Re: Raxivace's 2019 List of Movies or: (Goodbye to Neo-General Chat 3D)

Post by Raxivace »

95. Police Story 2 (1988, Dir. Jackie Chan) - More Jackie Chan greatness. While Chan of course is known for his intense acrobatics, I have to say I'm continually impressed with him as a director (At least between these first two Police Story films)- he really gets how to film action in a coherent way- it's all that Buster Keaton influence shining through. The two big standout setpieces here (The playground fight and the larger warehouse fight at the end) are able to maintain a sense of movement without sacrificing clarity that puts most of what modern Hollywood to shame.

The story is still pretty basic stuff, though Chan's Ka-kui character remains as much of a delightful dork as he was in the first film and the other characters (The fellow officers, Ka-kui's girlfriend) remain enjoyable to watch. I'm not entirely sure how well some of the more dramatic beats with these side characters really land (The main one being the girlfriend wanting to leave Ka-kui) but I never felt it really got in the way of the film at least. At the very least such bits keep Ka-kui a little more down to Earth.

96. Zodiac (2007, Dir. David Fincher, Rewatch?) - I think I saw most of this film before? I can't remember for sure. Anyways this one is so popular and recent that it doesn't need me to expand on its accolades but it's a very well executed thriller.

I found myself thinking of Spotlight again while watching this, and particularly how much better of a film Zodiac is. They have similar setups (Newspaper reporters, famous historical crime, ensemble cast etc.) but there's constantly tension and dread throughout the whole of Zodiac (Even if you take out the murder scenes, stuff like the debate about whether Zodiac's letters should be published or not still make you debate about what the right thing to do is), while there just…isn't any in Spotlight.

In addition, the cast in Zodiac just seems way more characterized than in Spotlight. Just compare Mark Ruffalo's characters in both movies- he has an actual an arc in Zodiac whereas he might as well be a nameless figure in Spotlight that occasionally just gets sort of mad about the situation. I think Ruffalo puts in a commendable effort to make his Spotlight character work but he glides so much more effortlessly in Zodiac where he has actual good material to work with.

Lastly I thought it was interesting how much of Robert Downey Jr.'s modern Tony Stark star persona was already in place here, despite Iron Man not coming out until a year later. I'm not familiar with Downey's work before this really but I had I always heard Iron Man was where he basically reinvented himself and revived his career.

Anyways Zodiac is just a very solid film. Fincher needs to put out a new feature dammit.
"[Cinema] is a labyrinth with a treacherous resemblance to reality." - Andrew Sarris
User avatar
Eva Yojimbo
Ultra Poster
Posts: 995
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2017 5:34 pm
Location: The Land of Cows and Twisters

Re: Raxivace's 2019 List of Movies or: (Neo-General Chat III: Dream Warriors)

Post by Eva Yojimbo »

Let's see how short I can keep this...
Raxivace wrote:
It's definitely possible to do deep-dive analyses into just about anything. Are you aware of that "Pokemon is just a dying dream of Ash" that was on the internet years ago? What I find that most such interpretations of seemingly-popular, shallow entertainment has in common is that they tend to take a small detail and then proceed to make a huge mountain of interpretation out of it and viewing everything through that one myopic lens without trying to account for alternate explanations. The difference between something like that and, say, NGE, is that with the latter it's possible to use dozens, even hundreds, of examples from the actual narrative or plot or style that supports an interpretation, too many for them to be coincidences or without meaning/significance. Of course, one can question exactly how many such examples it takes to make a case, but when your entire case rests on a detail or two that could have dozens of other possible reasons, you're probably on shaky ground. I don't know if all that applies to Bay, but it's just a trend I've noticed with similar interpretations.
Yeah I've heard that Pokemon example before. I think it doesn't hold up obviously but what's frustrating about it to me is that the lesson internet people took away from that is that all "It's a dream" interpretations are equally worthless. There are very much times where I think such interpretations seem applicable (As, at least, one mode of understanding a work) but "fans" dismiss them entirely because of an aversion to the idea.

There was an anime I saw last year called SSSS.Gridman which I did not particularly enjoy at an initial glance. The surface level plot revolves around people living in a computer world. As a part of the plot a girl realizes she needs to leave the computer world and at the end she does so- however the final shot of her is not becoming unplugged from some Matrix-esque device or anything like that, but its a LIVE ACTION scene of her waking up in her bed.

Of course you can argue a metaphorical reading of the live action scene (I.e. putting escapist adventures in the computer world behind you is like waking up from sleep. That's fine, though I would ask why the shot is done in live action in that case though), but I think that's hardly the only way to interpret such an ending.

For an artier example I've seen people very resistant to similar interpretations of Mulholland Dr....
I think, to be fair, the "it was all a dream" is something that's been overused a lot in fiction and there are many notable, even notorious, bad examples out there. Two that immediately spring to mind are Dallas and Roseanne, which both used the "dream" premise to erase an entire season's worth of episodes that fans didn't like. So I think that distaste for even "it was a dream" interpretation stems a lot from how lazily it's actually been used as a plot device.

Never heard of SSSS.Gridman, but that ending definitely sounds interesting, and I agree that it sounds like there would be multiple ways to interpret it. Mulholland Drive is, of course, the perfect example of HOW you do an "it was all a dream" premise precisely because Lynch is utilizing it to contrast the characters' dream/fantasies with her reality. That film simply doesn't work without understanding that relationship, and it's perhaps the best usage of it in the history of fiction (at least, I can't think of any better ones).
Raxivace wrote:BTW I heard an interview with Armond White the other day where he was talking about Godard. Apparently a theater in New York or someplace was holding a retrospective on the Dziga Vertov films, and White was whining that none of the "woke" young people of today went to see them. Having actually seen these films myself now this is the funniest fucking thing I've ever heard. Real mystery why young people aren't rushing out in doves see 50 year old agitprop, I just can't figure out why.
Have you ever seen Sullivan's Travels? Only reason I ask in response to this is that I think, as silly as that film is, that it contains a really profound lesson that I wish Godard had learned. I don't want to spoil it if you haven't seen it, but I think it provides the perfect riposte to the notion that superficially entertaining filmmaking is only useful for maintaining the social status quo. It seems to me that in the 70s Godard was very drunk with the idea that by making films with any semblance of Hollywood-esque entertainment value that he would be kowtowing to all the unfair social evils that he saw around him, and I just think that's the wrong way of thinking about how people--all people, not just conservatives and people who want to maintain the status quo--interact with art.
Raxivace wrote:
So... how do you feel about the relationship of text and images? [laugh]
Well you see Jimbo, sometimes the words and pictures go together. But other times? Other times they don't and that's fucked up...
Man, that was a great little essay! I wish I had more to say about it but I think we're in absolute agreement on everything. What you say about words and images being "tools" is absolutely right, and it reminds me of people who try to blame science because of all the evils that were only made possible thanks to scientific discoveries; but probably the best lesson of 2001:ASO was precisely that tools can be used for great good and great ill, and the difference comes down entirely to the intent of those wielding it. This feeds into your point about the conspiracy theorist VS you in that, yes, the tools/methods are the same, but the intentions are completely different. There are people concerned with the truth, and then there are people that only care about the truth so long as it supports their values and biases (and that sums up a big difficulty I have with discussing politics, in general). I'm also sympathetic to Godard's skepticism over images but agree that he took the wrong path with trying to emphasize language and constantly trying to make people aware of how images/text was used to manipulate them.

What you say about people prioritize dialogue over images in fiction is good stuff too. It very much reminds me of the discussion we had of Rear Window in how it starts with this montage of images that are telling us a story, but as soon as Jeff starts talking we conveniently forget what the images were telling us. I think part of the reason this happens is that words just seem more "concrete" than images, and people's minds tend to like when ambiguities are resolved. So if we see an image or a sequence of images that can be interpreted multiple ways--and most all images/sequences can, at least on some level--then if someone comes along and tells us something about them, or about someone involved, and we have no immediate reason to distrust them, we probably find that resolution comforting even if it's not actually the truth, or even contradictory to how we would've interpreted those images/sequences on our own. It's probably a reason why people are so easily misled even by obviously ridiculous stuff like Scientology.

It's great to say that more critical thinking is what's needed, but the problem is that we're essentially instinctual monkeys on a base level and it's difficult to be so vigilant that we don't give into the various easy shortcuts that our brain has of dealing with and interpreting reality when we encounter it. One way is undoubtedly to just follow, especially when following seems to confirm our biases and values to begin with.
Raxivace wrote:
He also saw a parallel with prostitution and Capitalism in general. I don't think Godard was every really interested in prostitution (or perhaps even sex, really) in itself or on any kind of personal/moral level.
That might be me putting too much emphasis on a feminist interpretation I read then (I think it was the Amy Taubin piece that comes with the Criterion blu-ray? It's been a while at this point since I read it at this point), which argued that it was meant to be seen negatively. IIRC the logic was something like this:

1)The Godard character is an asshole who talks about pedophilia
2)The first guy we see using a prostitute partway through a film explictly has the prostitute talk to an invisible "mother" and do various lewd things in front of her. This links this first guy to the Godard character's comments of pedophilia
3)Therefore we should understand the "Now let's add the sound" (Or whatever the line was) guy as also being an asshole because he's also hiring a prostitute to act out weird fantasies, and if the dude in 2 as sexually deviant and then we should understand this guy in 3 as that way too.

I seem to recall something about the prostitute being a hero for being stonefaced through all of this and being more interested in renting the apartment too.
It's been to long since I've seen the film to say much about this, but on its face that seems like a really tenuous connection to me...
Raxivace wrote:63. Blonde Venus (1932, Dir. Josef von Sternberg) -
One of the few of theirs I haven't seen. Seems we share a general disinterest in von Sternberg, though.
Raxivace wrote:65. The Caine Mutiny (1954, Dir. Edward Dmytryk) -
I loved this film. One of the few my parents recommended that I ended up loving. My dad was a navy man so that probably explained part of his love for it, but of all the ones he had me watch this is definitely one that stood out. Just great writing/characterizations and performances all around. Been too long since I've seen it to comment on the "Bogart is a hero" stuff, but it does sound similar to A Few Good Men and I'd probably agree with you now.
Raxivace wrote:66. An Autumn Afternoon (1962, Dir. Yasujiro Ozu)
The only late Ozu film I haven't seen. Been putting it off for ages because I really don't want to be finished with his filmography...
Yeah, I'm pretty much fine with the existing blu-ray release of this too and I'm one of those who find it a bit annoying when directors feel the need to release a billion different cuts of their films. At some point it does start to smell like shameless cash grabbing.
Raxivace wrote:69. The Image Book (2018, Dir. Jean-Luc Godard) -
Obviously on my list, but I still have the rest of Godard's 90s and 00s films to get through. Interesting how often he seems to being doing the collage/essay films these days, though.
Raxivace wrote:70. La Chienne (1931, Dir. Jean Renoir) -
I've seen this but don't remember much. Oddly enough, the Renoir I seem to remember most outside of Rules of the Game and The Grand Illusion is one of the first I ever saw from him: Boudu Saved from Drowning. It was such an odd duck of a film that I don't think I even appreciated how weird it was at the time. Didn't know Scarlet Street was a remake of La Chienne. I seem to recall Scarlet Street (it's excellent, definitely worth seeing) a bit better.
Raxivace wrote:72. Le coup du berger (1956, Dir. Jacques Rivette) -
Earliest I've seen from Rivette is his feature debut (Paris Belongs to Us). I never really clicked with Rivette. Many of his films have this really bizarre mixture of fantasy with a really banal realism... I guess you might say fantasy depicted as if it was banal realism. He kinda reminds me of what I didn't like about Louis Malle's Black Moon in that they seem to be (in the paraphrased words of Pauline Kael) insane films by sane filmmakers. I really loved his La Belle Noiseuse though as I think his style fit that kind of quietly intense character study much better.
Raxivace wrote:75. Passion (1982, Dir. Jean-Luc Godard) -
This maybe the first Godard we've genuinely disagreed on! I loved it, and it's very close with Sauve qui peut and as my favorite 80s Godard. Part of my love was just in how visually gorgeous I found it, and part of that was, I think, because of how much time Godard spent replicating classical paintings. I've always found the idea of using film to visually reference paintings fascinating, especially in how much can be suggested by doing so. Wikipedia actually has a darn good entry on the paintings referenced and their significance to the film. That sequence near the end with everyone departing, the one of the fields/woods echoing the Watteau painting IIRC, is perhaps my favorite visual sequence of any of Godard's 80s films. I'd also say that of all his 80s/90s films, this is the one I'm most looking forward to seeing on blu-ray (assuming it ever gets a blu-ray release). Thematically, I would agree it's essentially another Godard film about filmmaking, but it feels very different in tone to Contempt--which is as much a relationship film as it is a film about filmmaking--and is far more visually appealing than Comment ca va? Yeah, it's not the masterpiece that contempt is, but not many films are.

Here's what I wrote about it:
Passion - Jean-Luc Godard - 8/10

Passion is a Godard film in the tradition of Contempt and Comment ca va? being a film about
filmmaking, the clash between art & business, work & love. As its starting point it takes a director
making a film called Passion involving tableaux vivants while being pressured by his producer(s) about
the "story," while these filmed paintings are used to symbolically express events and relationships in
the director's own life, particularly those between the sophisticated wife of a hotel owner, and a
young, naive, factory worker girl, who tries to rally a union for not getting paid for her work. It also
marks the reunion between Godard and cinematographer Raoul Coutard and as a result may be the
singularly most beautiful film in Godard's filmography to this point. Especially towards the end there is
shot--after--shot, scene--after-s-cene that is heart--stoppingly gorgeous.

While Godard can still be disorienting with his varied experimentation--, here it's mostly the pervasive
use of out--of--synch sound that renders dialogue closer to voiceovers, --this film is closely related to its
predecessor, Sauve qui peut, in developing and maintaining a strong narrative thread as the film
progresses. It's also similar to that film in its overriding tone of subtle melancholy (but with occasional
snatches of self--effacing humor here as well). You can feel in these 80s films a Godard more
interested in the personal and interpersonal than the political and theoretic, even when these films are
still tackling questions about the relationship between, eg, work & love, which Godard seems to equate
and contrast to the impersonal, mechanistic nature of business (both Isabelle's factor job/boss, and the
director's pestering producers). The final tableaux -vivant, the only staged outside, is Watteau's The
Embarkation for Cythera, itself a symbolic of the transitory nature of love, which fits both the
director's leaving the film production (and the country) while Hanna, the hotel girl, wanders through
the painting in search for him.

Ultimately, due to Godard's semi--esoteric usage of the paintings (and classical music) as a symbolic
structuring device, this film isn't as accessible as his previous, Sauve qui peut, nor are the characters
and relationships quite as compelling, but it is arguably a more thematically complex film as well as
being even more beautiful. These 80s Godard films may no longer possess the dynamic energy of the
60s, or the radical experimentation of the 70s, but in their place is a somber tonal and visual beauty,
as well as characters that feel closer to humans than symbolic models.
Raxivace wrote:78. The Green Room (1978, Dir. Francois Truffaut) - I like that Truffaut is trying to handle more “adult" material but the character itself never seems THAT interesting. I'm pretty sure his obsession is brought on more because he's a veteran of World War I more than anything, but we get that in the first five minutes of the film. Truffaut's kind of messed up relationship with his lady friend is a little better but the film still feels a bit lacking in the end.
This seems to sum up my feelings on a lot of Truffaut's films. Whenever he tried to handle adult material it usually ended up feeling extremely shallow. Two English Girls might be the only exception and, even there, I think a good chunk of that film's greatness is just in how beautiful it is.
Raxivace wrote:79. Body Double (1984, Dir. Brian De Palma) - De Palma's crappy mashup of Rear Window and Vertigo.
Pretty much, and you're dead on in your De Palma/Hitchcock comparison. Hitchcock's women are often far more interesting than his men even when they aren't the primary protagonists, and you gave the perfect examples with Vertigo and Rear Window... but there's even lesser stuff like the ensemble cast in Lifeboat where the women seem to dominate in terms of how interesting they are, or Notorious in how most everything revolves around Ingrid Bergman's character. Of course, Marnie is probably the ultimate Hitchcock example of a great female protagonist. No matter how troubling one might find the themes in Marnie (and as I've discussed at length, it's really open to interpretation), the character is undoubtedly 1000x more interesting and complex than all the females in De Palma's cinema combined.
Raxivace wrote:85. Sabrina (1954, Dir. Billy Wilder) -
I also really enjoyed this. I don't remember a whole lot about it other than it being a really solid 8/10 or so.
Raxivace wrote:87. First Name: Carmen (1983, Dir. Jean-Luc Godard) -
I definitely didn't like it better than Passion, but I agree on my reactions being mixed. I also appreciated the humorous bits like the robbery, but also felt the relationship bits felt like a duller Breathless. It's a shame as I feel like this could've been a really good comedy if Godard had just tried to play it like that... far better than the trash that was Keep Your Right Up anyway.
Raxivace wrote:89. The Graduate (1967, Dir. Mike Nichols) -
One of those I've seen multiple times and liked it better each time. First time I saw it I think I was too young to appreciate the subtle humor and awkwardness, but as I got older I really started to enjoy how really strange the film was. It's hard to explain, but it's a film that seems like, on paper, nothing really goes together or should fit, but it's precisely that "not fitting right" aspect that makes it so unique. I think you nail a lot of these in your description: European art cinema, Hollywood genre stuff, romantic comedies, ennui dramas... but even down to the nature of the characters and the inclusion of Simon & Garfunkel. It all adds up to this tone and atmosphere that is intoxicating in how awkward and contradictory it is.
Raxivace wrote:92. The Book of Mary (1985, Dir. Anne-Marie Miéville) -

93. Hail Mary (1985, Dir. Jean-Luc Godard) -
I think our takes on these films were also similar. Strangely enough, as much as I liked Hail Mary at the time, it's probably the 80s Godard that's stuck with me the least, which is doubly strange given that I watched it twice (once with commentary). In retrospect, I think Godard did this mixing of the divine/earthly better in Helas pour moi, and while I still do think that Hail Mary was an unusually emotional film for Godard, I still think what made his 80s/90s films special was their visual beauty and tonal elegance and I think Hail Mary wasn't quite up to the standard set by the others (though by no means ugly or tonally bland). I'd still probably give it a 7.5/10, but in comparison I'd now have Passion and Helas pour moi at an 8.5.
Raxivace wrote:95. Police Story 2 (1988, Dir. Jackie Chan) - More Jackie Chan greatness.
Indeed, though I don't think he ever really bettered (maybe even equaled) his Police Story films.
Raxivace wrote:96. Zodiac (2007, Dir. David Fincher, Rewatch?) -
Yeah, it's just a great thriller, and interesting comparison with Spotlight. I think these two films really show what a huge difference can be made with similar material in the hands of a talented director and good editor. Zodiac is just a mastercourse in how to build and maintain tension/dread and Spotlight is an amateur class in how to keep things as bland as possible.
"As far as we can discern, the sole purpose of human existence is to kindle a light in the darkness of mere being." -- Carl Jung
User avatar
Eva Yojimbo
Ultra Poster
Posts: 995
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2017 5:34 pm
Location: The Land of Cows and Twisters

Re: Raxivace's 2019 List of Movies or: (Goodbye to Neo-General Chat 3D)

Post by Eva Yojimbo »

Lord_Lyndon wrote:Films I saw after Fullmetal Alchemist:

Children of Paradise (1945; Marcel Carné)
Children of Heaven (1997; Majid Majidi)
Milk (2008; Gus Van Sant)
Cinema Paradiso (1988; Giuseppe Tornatore)
Jaws (1975; Steven Spielberg)
Shame (1968; Ingmar Bergman)
El Topo (1970; Alejandro Jodorowsky)
I've seen these. Children of Paradise is one of my all-time favorites. Still stuck in my head even after a decade plus since I saw it. Children of Heaven is a beautiful little film. Milk was a pretty solid drama, mostly just worth it for Penn's performance. Cinema Paradiso didn't do much for me... it felt more mawkish/sentimental than the worst of Spielberg but without the directorial imagination. Jaws is great, of course. Shame isn't one of my favorite Bergman's, but it's pretty solid and very intense. El Topo is my favorite of the Jodorowsky's I've seen. Really cool surrealist stuff.
Lord_Lyndon wrote:Air Doll (2009; Hirokazu Koreeda) 8/10
I loved this one. Great film. I think that Koreeda used this slightly bizarre premise to share some insights on life in general. The film is very poetic and melancholic, sad and beautiful at the same time. I would even say it is somewhat underrated, at least based on its imdb rating. And of course, great pleasure watching Doona in a starring role in this one. She was fab in it. I adore her.
I also liked Air Doll. Let me see if I can find my review... Here it is:
Air Doll - Hirokazu Koreeda - 8.5/10

Air Doll is one of those films that has no business working as well as it does. From its absurd premise about a
blow-up sex doll, named “Nozomi," that comes to live and takes to exploring the world with a wide--eyed
naivety, Koreeda crafts one of the most poignant, poetic, and humanistic films about modern alienation and
loneliness.

The film is almost plotless. The first hour--or--so involves little more than Nozomi wandering around the
neighborhood, being introduced to the locals, playing with children, and eventually getting a job at a video
rental store where she falls in love with a coworker, Junichi. The first conflict is introduced with her not
wanting to be just a “substitute for sexual desire" anymore for her owner.

However, this conflict leaves far less of an impression than does the light-as-air, ephemeral, free--floating form
that stresses the beauty and sadness of moments rather than the head--long drive of plot.

Koreeda is blessed with two tremendous talents here: Bae Doona as Nozomi, and one of the greatest living
cinematographers, Mark Lee Ping Bin. Doona is tasked with slowly transforming from a stiff, emotionless,
plastic doll into a 3--dimensional human being—not to mention being frequently and casually nude—and she
does it superbly. Mark Lee's languorous takes and delicate sculpting of light is reminiscent of his work with
Hou Hsiao--hsien and suits Koreeda's contemplative mood. The scene where Nozomi first comes to life is as
visually beautiful as it is narratively magical.

The film is not without its substantial problems, however. Nozomi visiting her maker lacks the profundity and
tension Spielberg achieved in A.I. The “tragic" conclusion to the Nozomi/Junichi relationship is terribly out of
place. Koreeda also tends to hammer on his themes too hardly, as if he's afraid the audience might miss the
various allegorical points (“Nozomi is literally empty inside, while modern humans are figuratively empty
inside"). The film also prematurely (emotionally) climaxes around the 1--hour mark with a wonderful voiceover
montage of Nozomi meditating on what she's learned about life, and the film never really recovers from this
apex.

Despite its flaws, this is still one of the most moving films I've seen in a while, and deserves bonus points for
finding that emotional core in a premise that could've easily been embarrassingly exploitative.
"As far as we can discern, the sole purpose of human existence is to kindle a light in the darkness of mere being." -- Carl Jung
User avatar
Raxivace
Ultimate Poster
Posts: 2829
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2017 6:35 am

Re: Raxivace's 2019 List of Movies or: (Neo-General Chat III: Dream Warriors)

Post by Raxivace »

Eva Yojimbo wrote:Let's see how short I can keep this...
As far as Wall o' Texts from you go this is actually pretty short. [laugh]
I think, to be fair, the "it was all a dream" is something that's been overused a lot in fiction and there are many notable, even notorious, bad examples out there. Two that immediately spring to mind are Dallas and Roseanne, which both used the "dream" premise to erase an entire season's worth of episodes that fans didn't like. So I think that distaste for even "it was a dream" interpretation stems a lot from how lazily it's actually been used as a plot device.
Oh believe me I'm sure there are things Roseanne wishes she could convince us was all just a dream now. [laugh]

I just don't think shows like Roseanne doing it badly means people should react so negatively against other things being read that way.
Eva Yojimbo wrote:Never heard of SSSS.Gridman, but that ending definitely sounds interesting, and I agree that it sounds like there would be multiple ways to interpret it.
The thing about Gridman is that I think it only has much merit if read as a dream of some kind. If taken as a literal narrative most of the cast is incredibly shallow and bland but if read as aspects of a single central character then they're a lot more defensible.
Eva Yojimbo wrote: Mulholland Drive is, of course, the perfect example of HOW you do an "it was all a dream" premise precisely because Lynch is utilizing it to contrast the characters' dream/fantasies with her reality. That film simply doesn't work without understanding that relationship, and it's perhaps the best usage of it in the history of fiction (at least, I can't think of any better ones).
I agree, it just frustrates me when even in the case of a movie like Mulholland Dr. (Where you get stuff like the pov shot going into the pillow) internet dorks still get weirdly resistant to reading it that way and still insist it isn't a dream narrative of some kind.

Hell one podcast I used to listen to did an entire episode on Mulholland Dr. where they declared the movie pointless if its a dream. I just find that attitude so dumb and silly.
Eva Yojimbo wrote:Have you ever seen Sullivan's Travels? Only reason I ask in response to this is that I think, as silly as that film is, that it contains a really profound lesson that I wish Godard had learned.
I have not seen it but you have me curious about it now.

I'll be house/babysitting over the next week so I might have some time to marathon that, The Haunting, and this Barfi! movie that Lyndon wants me to check out.
Eva Yojimbo wrote:Man, that was a great little essay! I wish I had more to say about it but I think we're in absolute agreement on everything. What you say about words and images being "tools" is absolutely right, and it reminds me of people who try to blame science because of all the evils that were only made possible thanks to scientific discoveries; but probably the best lesson of 2001:ASO was precisely that tools can be used for great good and great ill, and the difference comes down entirely to the intent of those wielding it. This feeds into your point about the conspiracy theorist VS you in that, yes, the tools/methods are the same, but the intentions are completely different. There are people concerned with the truth, and then there are people that only care about the truth so long as it supports their values and biases (and that sums up a big difficulty I have with discussing politics, in general). I'm also sympathetic to Godard's skepticism over images but agree that he took the wrong path with trying to emphasize language and constantly trying to make people aware of how images/text was used to manipulate them.
Thanks for the compliment. I was a bit worried that whole bit would come off like complete nonsense. [laugh]

2001 is an interesting comparison both not only in the themes of the movie itself, but even in how some people just assume the novel (I.e. words) will provide answers to the film as if they were the same thing.

And yeah it can also (Understandably) be an issue with politics, especially if people on your "side" of any given issue perceive your disagreement as an ideological attack and not merely disputing a matter of fact.
Eva Yojimbo wrote:What you say about people prioritize dialogue over images in fiction is good stuff too. It very much reminds me of the discussion we had of Rear Window in how it starts with this montage of images that are telling us a story, but as soon as Jeff starts talking we conveniently forget what the images were telling us. I think part of the reason this happens is that words just seem more "concrete" than images, and people's minds tend to like when ambiguities are resolved. So if we see an image or a sequence of images that can be interpreted multiple ways--and most all images/sequences can, at least on some level--then if someone comes along and tells us something about them, or about someone involved, and we have no immediate reason to distrust them, we probably find that resolution comforting even if it's not actually the truth, or even contradictory to how we would've interpreted those images/sequences on our own. It's probably a reason why people are so easily misled even by obviously ridiculous stuff like Scientology.
Oh wow yeah that Rear Window conversation we had is pretty similar.

I wonder why exactly words seem so much more "concrete" to so many people- language has always seemed malleable to me to some extent by default, perhaps because of love of groan-inducing puns and such.
Eva Yojimbo wrote:It's great to say that more critical thinking is what's needed, but the problem is that we're essentially instinctual monkeys on a base level and it's difficult to be so vigilant that we don't give into the various easy shortcuts that our brain has of dealing with and interpreting reality when we encounter it. One way is undoubtedly to just follow, especially when following seems to confirm our biases and values to begin with.
This is true, but decent education can still reduce chances of people falling into some of these easy shortcuts, especially when they lead to believing racist lies and such like that meme.
Eva Yojimbo wrote:One of the few of [von Sternberg and Dietrich]'s I haven't seen. Seems we share a general disinterest in von Sternberg, though.
Yeah, kind of. I still want to finish this boxset at some point at least, though I'm afraid I still don't quite get the passionate love for this duo that some people have. I will get liking Dietrich as a star at least.

BTW did you see that Criterion is doing an Underworld/Last Command/Docks of New York blu-ray set? Since you said those were better I might check them out at least.

There's that rumored Godzilla boxset from Criterion too... I wonder what a Godzilla film by von Sternberg would have looked like.
Eva Yojimbo wrote:The only late Ozu film I haven't seen. Been putting it off for ages because I really don't want to be finished with his filmography...
Well hey, since so many of his films are lost you can watch An Autumn Afternoon and be content you haven't seen everything yet. [razz]

[none]

[sad]

Eva Yojimbo wrote:This maybe the first Godard we've genuinely disagreed on! I loved it, and it's very close with Sauve qui peut and as my favorite 80s Godard. Part of my love was just in how visually gorgeous I found it, and part of that was, I think, because of how much time Godard spent replicating classical paintings. I've always found the idea of using film to visually reference paintings fascinating, especially in how much can be suggested by doing so. Wikipedia actually has a darn good entry on the paintings referenced and their significance to the film. That sequence near the end with everyone departing, the one of the fields/woods echoing the Watteau painting IIRC, is perhaps my favorite visual sequence of any of Godard's 80s films. I'd also say that of all his 80s/90s films, this is the one I'm most looking forward to seeing on blu-ray (assuming it ever gets a blu-ray release). Thematically, I would agree it's essentially another Godard film about filmmaking, but it feels very different in tone to Contempt--which is as much a relationship film as it is a film about filmmaking--and is far more visually appealing than Comment ca va? Yeah, it's not the masterpiece that contempt is, but not many films are.
I don't have much experience with painting at all so that's probably where the disconnect for me is. If I ever rewatch the film (I probably will rewatch every Godard again at some point, even if its 20-30 years from now) I'll have to remember to check out that Wikipedia page.
Eva Yojimbo wrote:Pretty much, and you're dead on in your De Palma/Hitchcock comparison. Hitchcock's women are often far more interesting than his men even when they aren't the primary protagonists, and you gave the perfect examples with Vertigo and Rear Window... but there's even lesser stuff like the ensemble cast in Lifeboat where the women seem to dominate in terms of how interesting they are, or Notorious in how most everything revolves around Ingrid Bergman's character. Of course, Marnie is probably the ultimate Hitchcock example of a great female protagonist. No matter how troubling one might find the themes in Marnie (and as I've discussed at length, it's really open to interpretation), the character is undoubtedly 1000x more interesting and complex than all the females in De Palma's cinema combined.
Yeah. I only focused in on Rear Window and Vertigo because of how heavily Body Double references them but stuff like Lifeboat/Notorious/Marnie are way better there too. Rebecca might be another one that immediately comes to mind.

I still need to get around to that Marnie rewatch... I even have the blu-ray now!
Eva Yojimbo wrote:far better than the trash that was Keep Your Right Up anyway.
Haven't seen this yet, though I did get the blu-ray since I couldn't figure out a way to pirate it. Now you make me wonder if I should have tried a little harder. [laugh]
Eva Yojimbo wrote:It all adds up to this tone and atmosphere that is intoxicating in how awkward and contradictory it is.
Agreed.

Do you buy into these arguments that The Graduate glorifies stalking and such?
Eva Yojimbo wrote:Yeah, it's just a great thriller, and interesting comparison with Spotlight. I think these two films really show what a huge difference can be made with similar material in the hands of a talented director and good editor. Zodiac is just a mastercourse in how to build and maintain tension/dread and Spotlight is an amateur class in how to keep things as bland as possible.
Wait a second, wouldn't an amateur at making things bland end up making good things by mistake? [biggrin]
"[Cinema] is a labyrinth with a treacherous resemblance to reality." - Andrew Sarris
User avatar
Raxivace
Ultimate Poster
Posts: 2829
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2017 6:35 am

Re: Raxivace's 2019 List of Movies or: (Goodbye to Neo-General Chat 3D)

Post by Raxivace »

BTW Jimbo did you see that Mark Robson got a TSPDT page now?

I don't think I realized he did Valley of the Dolls before.
"[Cinema] is a labyrinth with a treacherous resemblance to reality." - Andrew Sarris
User avatar
Eva Yojimbo
Ultra Poster
Posts: 995
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2017 5:34 pm
Location: The Land of Cows and Twisters

Re: Raxivace's 2019 List of Movies or: (Neo-General Chat III: Dream Warriors)

Post by Eva Yojimbo »

Raxivace wrote:
Eva Yojimbo wrote:Let's see how short I can keep this...
As far as Wall o' Texts from you go this is actually pretty short. [laugh]
I know! I was pretty proud of myself! [laugh]
Raxivace wrote:
I think, to be fair, the "it was all a dream" is something that's been overused a lot in fiction and there are many notable, even notorious, bad examples out there. Two that immediately spring to mind are Dallas and Roseanne, which both used the "dream" premise to erase an entire season's worth of episodes that fans didn't like. So I think that distaste for even "it was a dream" interpretation stems a lot from how lazily it's actually been used as a plot device.
Oh believe me I'm sure there are things Roseanne wishes she could convince us was all just a dream now. [laugh]

I just don't think shows like Roseanne doing it badly means people should react so negatively against other things being read that way.
LOL. You know, the sad thing about the whole Roseanne fiasco is that her original show probably had the best episode of any TV show I'd ever seen dealing with racism, precisely because they dealt with the kind of "under the surface" "ambiguous" racism that's far more prevalent today than the overt racism of the past. I actually watched a really great YouTube analysis of that entire series that featured a long bit on that episode that you can watch here:
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRwIosijD3A&t=1s[/youtube]
(53:05-1:02)
That last scene at the restaurant is just a perfect encapsulation of this issue through a modern lens, precisely because you can see it from both sides. Most other examples I've seen of similar things just hammer you over the head with overt, unambiguous racism. Fresh Prince had a really good episode on this as well when Will and Carlton were arrested for "driving while black," but even there the racism was so much more overt/obvious than it was in the Roseanne episode.

No, I agree that just because some shows/movies have done it bad/lazily that's an excuse to hate the device itself. To paraphrase the old saying, blame the craftsman, not the tools.
Raxivace wrote:
Eva Yojimbo wrote: Mulholland Drive is, of course, the perfect example of HOW you do an "it was all a dream" premise precisely because Lynch is utilizing it to contrast the characters' dream/fantasies with her reality. That film simply doesn't work without understanding that relationship, and it's perhaps the best usage of it in the history of fiction (at least, I can't think of any better ones).
I agree, it just frustrates me when even in the case of a movie like Mulholland Dr. (Where you get stuff like the pov shot going into the pillow) internet dorks still get weirdly resistant to reading it that way and still insist it isn't a dream narrative of some kind.

Hell one podcast I used to listen to did an entire episode on Mulholland Dr. where they declared the movie pointless if its a dream. I just find that attitude so dumb and silly.
The most obvious clue in Mulholland Dr. is that The Cowboy literally tells her "it's time to wake up." Did that podcast bother to argue why they felt the film would be pointless if it was a dream?
Raxivace wrote:
Eva Yojimbo wrote:Have you ever seen Sullivan's Travels? Only reason I ask in response to this is that I think, as silly as that film is, that it contains a really profound lesson that I wish Godard had learned.
I have not seen it but you have me curious about it now.

I'll be house/babysitting over the next week so I might have some time to marathon that, The Haunting, and this Barfi! movie that Lyndon wants me to check out.
Awesome. Really, I'd recommend all of Preston Sturges's films from The Great McGinty to Unfaithfully Yours. He was just a phenomenal director of screwball comedies. Sullivan is probably as close as he came to making a film with any substantial themes, and even it's done in a thoroughly silly way. The fact that he made it, Christmas In July, The Great McGinty and The Lady Eve all in the same year (1941) is just mindblowing to me. Really, four of the best comedies in Hollywood history, all from the same director in the same year!
Raxivace wrote:
Eva Yojimbo wrote:Man, that was a great little essay! I wish I had more to say about it but I think we're in absolute agreement on everything. What you say about words and images being "tools" is absolutely right, and it reminds me of people who try to blame science because of all the evils that were only made possible thanks to scientific discoveries; but probably the best lesson of 2001:ASO was precisely that tools can be used for great good and great ill, and the difference comes down entirely to the intent of those wielding it. This feeds into your point about the conspiracy theorist VS you in that, yes, the tools/methods are the same, but the intentions are completely different. There are people concerned with the truth, and then there are people that only care about the truth so long as it supports their values and biases (and that sums up a big difficulty I have with discussing politics, in general). I'm also sympathetic to Godard's skepticism over images but agree that he took the wrong path with trying to emphasize language and constantly trying to make people aware of how images/text was used to manipulate them.
Thanks for the compliment. I was a bit worried that whole bit would come off like complete nonsense. [laugh]

2001 is an interesting comparison both not only in the themes of the movie itself, but even in how some people just assume the novel (I.e. words) will provide answers to the film as if they were the same thing.

And yeah it can also (Understandably) be an issue with politics, especially if people on your "side" of any given issue perceive your disagreement as an ideological attack and not merely disputing a matter of fact.
Yeah, that's a great point about 2001:ASO in how people look to the book to explain the film.

That's why Yudkowsky called politics the mind-killer. To quote the most relevant bit that's always stuck with me: "Politics is an extension of war by other means. Arguments are soldiers. Once you know which side you're on, you must support all arguments of that side, and attack all arguments that appear to favor the enemy side; otherwise it's like stabbing your soldiers in the back—providing aid and comfort to the enemy."
Raxivace wrote:I wonder why exactly words seem so much more "concrete" to so many people- language has always seemed malleable to me to some extent by default, perhaps because of love of groan-inducing puns and such.
Probably because we structure language closely to the structure of thought, so that we have the ability to use language to direct our focus and thoughts in one direction rather than trying to take in all the possible angles through just our senses. It's a bit like standing in front of a branching road. If you're just using your senses you may not be able to distinguish a difference among your options, but if someone starts talking about things they see/think about one direction, suddenly it might seem like the best option. Or, maybe to make things more accurately, imagine standing in front of an expansive landscape with so much to take in, and then someone starts describing it and instead of trying to take it all in you're just focusing on whatever aspect of it they're describing.
Raxivace wrote:
Eva Yojimbo wrote:It's great to say that more critical thinking is what's needed, but the problem is that we're essentially instinctual monkeys on a base level and it's difficult to be so vigilant that we don't give into the various easy shortcuts that our brain has of dealing with and interpreting reality when we encounter it. One way is undoubtedly to just follow, especially when following seems to confirm our biases and values to begin with.
This is true, but decent education can still reduce chances of people falling into some of these easy shortcuts, especially when they lead to believing racist lies and such like that meme.
Education helps, vigilance helps, an understanding of the pitfalls of human cognition and placing a high value on truth/rationality certainly helps; but it's still difficult to overwrite billions of years of evolutionary programming.
Raxivace wrote:
Eva Yojimbo wrote:One of the few of [von Sternberg and Dietrich]'s I haven't seen. Seems we share a general disinterest in von Sternberg, though.
Yeah, kind of. I still want to finish this boxset at some point at least, though I'm afraid I still don't quite get the passionate love for this duo that some people have. I will get liking Dietrich as a star at least.

BTW did you see that Criterion is doing an Underworld/Last Command/Docks of New York blu-ray set? Since you said those were better I might check them out at least.

There's that rumored Godzilla boxset from Criterion too... I wonder what a Godzilla film by von Sternberg would have looked like.
I get why people like Von Sternberg's style, and Dietrich is a magnetic presence, it's mostly that those films just fail to generate much of any dramatic power or thematic substance. I can kinda enjoy them as exercises in surface style, but that's about it (similar to how I react to Wong Kar Wai films in a way).

I did see that Criterion announcement. I'll definitely be checking out those on blu-ray.

LOL, I can't imagine a von Sternberg Godzilla! Hard to light a giant lizard to make it look seductive and sexy!
Raxivace wrote:
Eva Yojimbo wrote:Pretty much, and you're dead on in your De Palma/Hitchcock comparison. Hitchcock's women are often far more interesting than his men even when they aren't the primary protagonists, and you gave the perfect examples with Vertigo and Rear Window... but there's even lesser stuff like the ensemble cast in Lifeboat where the women seem to dominate in terms of how interesting they are, or Notorious in how most everything revolves around Ingrid Bergman's character. Of course, Marnie is probably the ultimate Hitchcock example of a great female protagonist. No matter how troubling one might find the themes in Marnie (and as I've discussed at length, it's really open to interpretation), the character is undoubtedly 1000x more interesting and complex than all the females in De Palma's cinema combined.
Yeah. I only focused in on Rear Window and Vertigo because of how heavily Body Double references them but stuff like Lifeboat/Notorious/Marnie are way better there too. Rebecca might be another one that immediately comes to mind.

I still need to get around to that Marnie rewatch... I even have the blu-ray now!
Rebecca's a great mention too. I can't wait to hear your thoughts on Marnie!
Raxivace wrote:
Eva Yojimbo wrote:far better than the trash that was Keep Your Right Up anyway.
Haven't seen this yet, though I did get the blu-ray since I couldn't figure out a way to pirate it. Now you make me wonder if I should have tried a little harder. [laugh]
It's truly not worth owning, but I'll probably get it anyway just because I'm a completist. I also noticed they're releasing Detective, Helas Pour Moi and Prenom: Carmen on blu-ray.
Raxivace wrote:Do you buy into these arguments that The Graduate glorifies stalking and such?
Never actually heard those arguments... I'd probably have to think on it a bit but my first instinct is that it's a stretch.
Raxivace wrote:
Eva Yojimbo wrote:Yeah, it's just a great thriller, and interesting comparison with Spotlight. I think these two films really show what a huge difference can be made with similar material in the hands of a talented director and good editor. Zodiac is just a mastercourse in how to build and maintain tension/dread and Spotlight is an amateur class in how to keep things as bland as possible.
Wait a second, wouldn't an amateur at making things bland end up making good things by mistake? [biggrin]
LOL, I guess it depends on how you read it. ;P
Raxivace wrote:BTW Jimbo did you see that Mark Robson got a TSPDT page now?

I don't think I realized he did Valley of the Dolls before.
Nope, didn't notice it. Not surprising the Lewton films are on top of the Recomended list. I didn't know he did Valley of the Dolls either...
"As far as we can discern, the sole purpose of human existence is to kindle a light in the darkness of mere being." -- Carl Jung
User avatar
Raxivace
Ultimate Poster
Posts: 2829
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2017 6:35 am

Re: Raxivace's 2019 List of Movies or: (Neo-General Chat III: Dream Warriors)

Post by Raxivace »

Eva Yojimbo wrote:Roseanne
You know, despite my jokes I was really saddened by Roseanne's comments since I grew up on her show. I don't remember that particular Roseanne episode from that clip but it seems surprisingly solid, though it makes it all the more rough that Roseanne would go on to make the comments that she did.

I do remember that Fresh Prince episode though, good stuff. I know people often knock the "very special episodes" of these 80's/90's comedies (Hell the entire ethos of Seinfeld as a show was Jerry Seinfeld and Larry David's refusal to ever have the characters "learn a lesson" like on these other shows), but some of them could be really moving and thoughtful. I remember as a kid seeing the Fresh Prince episode where Will meets his real father again and being shocked by some of what I was seeing. The one where Carlton thinks about getting a gun was another one.

Perhaps that's why I'm slightly more sympathetic than others to a movie like Gentleman's Agreement since in a way I see it as just another one of these "very special episodes"- though I don't think is as well constructed as drama as that Roseanne episode seems to be or some of these Fresh Prince episodes. I mean the whole thing with Gregory Peck pretending to be Jewish is still kind of goofy.
Eva Yojimbo wrote:The most obvious clue in Mulholland Dr. is that The Cowboy literally tells her "it's time to wake up." Did that podcast bother to argue why they felt the film would be pointless if it was a dream?
It's been a good 6 or 7 years since I heard, but I seem to recall most of the argument boiling down to them just not liking the idea of a lot of the film being so tied to a character's subjectivity.
Eva Yojimbo wrote:Awesome. Really, I'd recommend all of Preston Sturges's films from The Great McGinty to Unfaithfully Yours. He was just a phenomenal director of screwball comedies. Sullivan is probably as close as he came to making a film with any substantial themes, and even it's done in a thoroughly silly way. The fact that he made it, Christmas In July, The Great McGinty and The Lady Eve all in the same year (1941) is just mindblowing to me. Really, four of the best comedies in Hollywood history, all from the same director in the same year!
I don't think I've seen any of Preston's films anyways, so it looks like a good place to start.

Eva Yojimbo wrote:That's why Yudkowsky called politics the mind-killer. To quote the most relevant bit that's always stuck with me: "Politics is an extension of war by other means. Arguments are soldiers. Once you know which side you're on, you must support all arguments of that side, and attack all arguments that appear to favor the enemy side; otherwise it's like stabbing your soldiers in the back—providing aid and comfort to the enemy."
Did you ever see the documentary O.J.: Made in America? I feel like it looks at the results of trial through a similar kind of lens as the point Yudkowksy is making here.

Still probably the best true crime documentary in last 5 or so years anyways, its worth a watch for that alone.

Eva Yojimbo wrote:It's truly not worth owning, but I'll probably get it anyway just because I'm a completist. I also noticed they're releasing Detective, Helas Pour Moi and Prenom: Carmen on blu-ray.
At the very least I want Helas Pour Moi on blu-ray- that's just such a beautiful looking movie and the subtitles on the version I watched seemed a little weird to begin with. Hopefully the subs on this release are good.
Eva Yojimbo wrote:Never actually heard those arguments... I'd probably have to think on it a bit but my first instinct is that it's a stretch.
[/quote]It was something that got brought up a fair amount a year or so ago when people were really going after Dustin Hoffman for sexual assault accusations. IIRC the argument basically goes after the college portion of the film where Ben is pursuing Elaine, and that the film "rewards" Ben by having him end up with Elaine ultimately.

Of course this kind of take ignores the famous final shot on the bus.
"[Cinema] is a labyrinth with a treacherous resemblance to reality." - Andrew Sarris
User avatar
Eva Yojimbo
Ultra Poster
Posts: 995
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2017 5:34 pm
Location: The Land of Cows and Twisters

Re: Raxivace's 2019 List of Movies or: (Neo-General Chat III: Dream Warriors)

Post by Eva Yojimbo »

Raxivace wrote:
Eva Yojimbo wrote:Roseanne
You know, despite my jokes I was really saddened by Roseanne's comments since I grew up on her show. I don't remember that particular Roseanne episode from that clip but it seems surprisingly solid, though it makes it all the more rough that Roseanne would go on to make the comments that she did.

I do remember that Fresh Prince episode though, good stuff. I know people often knock the "very special episodes" of these 80's/90's comedies (Hell the entire ethos of Seinfeld as a show was Jerry Seinfeld and Larry David's refusal to ever have the characters "learn a lesson" like on these other shows), but some of them could be really moving and thoughtful. I remember as a kid seeing the Fresh Prince episode where Will meets his real father again and being shocked by some of what I was seeing. The one where Carlton thinks about getting a gun was another one.

Perhaps that's why I'm slightly more sympathetic than others to a movie like Gentleman's Agreement since in a way I see it as just another one of these "very special episodes"- though I don't think is as well constructed as drama as that Roseanne episode seems to be or some of these Fresh Prince episodes. I mean the whole thing with Gregory Peck pretending to be Jewish is still kind of goofy.
I also grew up with Roseanne but I don't think I really appreciated how good it was until I started watching the reruns in my 20s. Hell, not that long ago I caught the episode where Darlene reads her poem at school and found myself tearing up and thinking how perfect that scene was, from the fact that the poem sounded like it could be written by a 13-14 year old, to it being utterly perfect for her character with that combination of brattiness and vulnerability, to the actual reading/performance that's so underplayed that it makes it all the more poignant... and the series was full of those kinds of moments.

Like with anything else I think the "very special episode" syndrome completely comes down to how well they do it. With something like Full House it was as subtle, complex, and well-done as a brick through plate glass. Fresh Prince could get a bit too much at times, but I think it stayed on the well-done/realistic/believably dramatic line enough. That episode with Will's father being a perfect example in how it just went for dramatic involvement without much (if any, really) "lesson"ing. Funnily enough, the ending of that one has cropped up multiple times on that "Try Not to Cry" challenge that FBE/React YouTube channel does and it tends to usually get people. With something like Roseanne, I don't think they ever really did much preaching or "lessons," and if they approached anything like it was always done from the perspectives of the characters and was believable as something they felt and were just expressing. The ending of that racism episode being the perfect example with Jackie reassuring Roseanne that she did what everyone else would've done, and Roseanne saying "well isn't that just great." How much of that is Roseanne being somewhat comforted, and how much of it is reflective self-criticism of what she did (without consciously thinking about it at the time), and how much does it become a bit of a meta-commentary about how, yeah, most everyone does indeed engage in this kind of unconscious, casual racism? It's hard to tell, and that hard-to-tell-ness is just so true to reality. Definitely seek that ep. out if you haven't seen it.

So, yeah, I think the entire problem with Gentlemen's Agreeement is that it comes off far closer to Full House "very special ep." than it does to Fresh Prince or Roseanne, even though I can appreciate what it was trying for.
Raxivace wrote:
Eva Yojimbo wrote:The most obvious clue in Mulholland Dr. is that The Cowboy literally tells her "it's time to wake up." Did that podcast bother to argue why they felt the film would be pointless if it was a dream?
It's been a good 6 or 7 years since I heard, but I seem to recall most of the argument boiling down to them just not liking the idea of a lot of the film being so tied to a character's subjectivity.
That seems crazy to me. One of the most interesting thing fiction (film included) can do is to tie itself to characters' subjectivity. There's just so much to be explored in the old "reality VS perception" duality with subjectivism that you just can't if you maintain an objective perspective.
Raxivace wrote:Did you ever see the documentary O.J.: Made in America? I feel like it looks at the results of trial through a similar kind of lens as the point Yudkowksy is making here.

Still probably the best true crime documentary in last 5 or so years anyways, its worth a watch for that alone.
I have not but I've heard a lot about it. It's definitely on the list and, being a documentary, I probably don't have to worry about getting my whole AV system set up before I watch it.
Raxivace wrote:
Eva Yojimbo wrote:Never actually heard those arguments... I'd probably have to think on it a bit but my first instinct is that it's a stretch.
It was something that got brought up a fair amount a year or so ago when people were really going after Dustin Hoffman for sexual assault accusations. IIRC the argument basically goes after the college portion of the film where Ben is pursuing Elaine, and that the film "rewards" Ben by having him end up with Elaine ultimately.

Of course this kind of take ignores the famous final shot on the bus.[/quote]I'd just have to watch it again and think about it, but "stalking" sounds rather extreme from what I can remember.
"As far as we can discern, the sole purpose of human existence is to kindle a light in the darkness of mere being." -- Carl Jung
User avatar
Raxivace
Ultimate Poster
Posts: 2829
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2017 6:35 am

Re: Raxivace's 2019 List of Movies or: (Neo-General Chat III: Dream Warriors)

Post by Raxivace »

Damn, Jimbo. Your quote tags are off today. [sad]
Eva Yojimbo wrote:I also grew up with Roseanne but I don't think I really appreciated how good it was until I started watching the reruns in my 20s. Hell, not that long ago I caught the episode where Darlene reads her poem at school and found myself tearing up and thinking how perfect that scene was, from the fact that the poem sounded like it could be written by a 13-14 year old, to it being utterly perfect for her character with that combination of brattiness and vulnerability, to the actual reading/performance that's so underplayed that it makes it all the more poignant... and the series was full of those kinds of moments.
Man I don't remember that episode either.

This whole conversation really makes me long for days when I would watch these shows in large chunks on Nick@Nite and the like when I couldn't get to sleep.
Eva Yojimbo wrote:That episode with Will's father being a perfect example in how it just went for dramatic involvement without much (if any, really) "lesson"ing. Funnily enough, the ending of that one has cropped up multiple times on that "Try Not to Cry" challenge that FBE/React YouTube channel does and it tends to usually get people.
I know it always gets to me. [sad]
With something like Roseanne, I don't think they ever really did much preaching or "lessons," and if they approached anything like it was always done from the perspectives of the characters and was believable as something they felt and were just expressing.
I vaguely remember one episode where Jackie has a shitty boyfriend or something that beats her in one episode so Dan tracks him down, decks him, and ends up in jail for a while because of it. I seem to remember the show being kind of ambivalent in regards to whether it was right or not for Dan to do that even if it was still sympathetic to all the main characters involved besides the boyfriend.

Man I never expected to want to go on a Roseanne binge anytime soon but this really does make me want to rewatch some of these key episodes.
So, yeah, I think the entire problem with Gentlemen's Agreeement is that it comes off far closer to Full House "very special ep." than it does to Fresh Prince or Roseanne, even though I can appreciate what it was trying for.
So are you saying when it comes to these episodes that Full House needs to...CUT. IT. OUT.? [blah]

But yeah I do agree GA is closer to the worse examples of these in execution.
Eva Yojimbo wrote:That seems crazy to me. One of the most interesting thing fiction (film included) can do is to tie itself to characters' subjectivity. There's just so much to be explored in the old "reality VS perception" duality with subjectivism that you just can't if you maintain an objective perspective.
I'm trying to remember some more, and I think they just didn't care about what it actually said about the characters, just that the idea of subjectivity/dream nature as an "answer" itself to the mystery of the movie was dumb and the buck stops there I guess.

You can download the episode here if you want to beat your head against a brick wall or something for a few hours. In fact I'm tempted to dare you to do it.

Something I want to say is that I knew some of these people as internet friends for a while (They even asked me to guest star on one episode but I declined on account of how I hate my speaking voice) and most of them are nice and good as people, but by time this episode came out I was already starting to drift away from the points of view of people like this and into something more like I am now. If you remember that period in the IMDb days of yesteryear before I rewatched MD and said I hated it, it was because of the influence of these kinds of attitudes on me.

There's a reason I keep saying I was a complete idiot when it came to film before I finished college. [laugh]
Eva Yojimbo wrote:I have not but I've heard a lot about it. It's definitely on the list and, being a documentary, I probably don't have to worry about getting my whole AV system set up before I watch it.
It's a long but good watch. Maz liked it a lot too.
Last edited by Raxivace on Wed Jul 24, 2019 8:17 pm, edited 3 times in total.
"[Cinema] is a labyrinth with a treacherous resemblance to reality." - Andrew Sarris
User avatar
Raxivace
Ultimate Poster
Posts: 2829
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2017 6:35 am

Re: Raxivace's 2019 List of Movies or: (Goodbye to Neo-General Chat 3D)

Post by Raxivace »

RIP Rutger Hauer.
"[Cinema] is a labyrinth with a treacherous resemblance to reality." - Andrew Sarris
User avatar
Gendo
Site Admin
Posts: 2882
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 7:38 pm

Re: Raxivace's 2019 List of Movies or: (Goodbye to Neo-General Chat 3D)

Post by Gendo »

Indeed. I can't say I really knew him from many things; but I just looked it up and realized he was the guy from Blind Fury. I loved that movie as a kid!

But Blade Runner is totally overrated.
User avatar
Raxivace
Ultimate Poster
Posts: 2829
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2017 6:35 am

Re: Raxivace's 2019 List of Movies or: (Goodbye to Neo-General Chat 3D)

Post by Raxivace »

Gendo wrote:But Blade Runner is totally overrated.
[gonemad]
"[Cinema] is a labyrinth with a treacherous resemblance to reality." - Andrew Sarris
User avatar
Raxivace
Ultimate Poster
Posts: 2829
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2017 6:35 am

Re: Raxivace's 2019 List of Movies or: (Goodbye to Neo-General Chat 3D)

Post by Raxivace »

97. GoldenEye (1995, Dir. Martin Campbell, Rewatch) - Been a while since my last Bond post. Again another solid one, I like Brosnan in the role, Sean Bean is great, Judi Dench is the best, “I am invincible" etc. The opening sequence in particular is one of the better ones these movies have had in a while.

The only thing I'm kind of iffy on is if the actual commentary on Bond as a character/franchise goes anywhere in this film. We get Bond being accused of being out of date as an agent/character in an age of electronic warfare, he's accused of sexism and misogyny by Dench, I think Bean says he only drinks his martinis to forget the killing and embraces all these different women so he doesn't have to think about the ones he couldn't save etc. These kind of underminings of Bond as a concept are all over the film but I'm not quite sure what they're meant to build up to. I guess its supposed to be Bond finally defeating Bean if only because that's the climax of the plot but thematically it never quite feels like these criticisms of Bond are ever really resolved.

Even so it's a fun ride the whole time through.

98. The Haunting (1963, Dir. Robert Wise) - I'll just copy what I posted in DA's thread.
Raxivace wrote:So I watched The Haunting (1963) and found it to be pretty good. In a lot of ways it reminds me of the horror films from producer Val Lewton (Of which Robert Wise directed a few) that generated horror through ambiguity more than anything.

I don't really agree that there was too much narration here. This is a psychodrama first and foremost- the narration largely keeps this within the Eleanor character's point of view and seems like a perfectly valid choice for this kind of story about deteriorating psychology to me.

Also there's plenty of story information that the narration doesn't tell us. Like the fact that the Harris character is some kind of self-loathing bisexual- she clearly had a thing for the married idiot doctor and resented his wife, yes, but she was also pretty obviously attracted to the Theo girl as well (She styles her hair the way Theo told her to. They even share a bedroom together!). She seems to have some amount of self-hate over it though- hence calling Theo a "freak of nature" (She's not talking about the Theo's ESP nonsense- I think they're still dancing around the final days of the Hayes Code here).

If anything you can say the house is just a scapegoat for this unresolved sexual tension from Eleanor. There's even that scene where they read about the sin of Lust from that library book and how it will damn people and cause them to hear screams or whatever.
"[Cinema] is a labyrinth with a treacherous resemblance to reality." - Andrew Sarris
User avatar
Eva Yojimbo
Ultra Poster
Posts: 995
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2017 5:34 pm
Location: The Land of Cows and Twisters

Re: Raxivace's 2019 List of Movies or: (Goodbye to Neo-General Chat 3D)

Post by Eva Yojimbo »

Gendo wrote:But Blade Runner is totally overrated.
You go sit down in the corner and think about what you said.
"As far as we can discern, the sole purpose of human existence is to kindle a light in the darkness of mere being." -- Carl Jung
User avatar
Eva Yojimbo
Ultra Poster
Posts: 995
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2017 5:34 pm
Location: The Land of Cows and Twisters

Re: Raxivace's 2019 List of Movies or: (Neo-General Chat III: Dream Warriors)

Post by Eva Yojimbo »

Raxivace wrote:Damn, Jimbo. Your quote tags are off today. [sad]
Yeah, I was in a rush and didn't do a preview. Lesson learned.
Raxivace wrote:
Eva Yojimbo wrote:I also grew up with Roseanne but I don't think I really appreciated how good it was until I started watching the reruns in my 20s. Hell, not that long ago I caught the episode where Darlene reads her poem at school and found myself tearing up and thinking how perfect that scene was, from the fact that the poem sounded like it could be written by a 13-14 year old, to it being utterly perfect for her character with that combination of brattiness and vulnerability, to the actual reading/performance that's so underplayed that it makes it all the more poignant... and the series was full of those kinds of moments.
Man I don't remember that episode either.

This whole conversation really makes me long for days when I would watch these shows in large chunks on Nick@Nite and the like when I couldn't get to sleep.
You can watch clips of her reading the poem online, but the whole episode is pretty good for context and setup, because it was basically about her not wanting to read it at all and Roseanne forcing her to, until probably realizing during the reading why Darlene didn't want to.

I know they still show reruns, though I'm not sure on what channel. I think CMT was the last channel I saw an episode on.
Raxivace wrote:I vaguely remember one episode where Jackie has a shitty boyfriend or something that beats her in one episode so Dan tracks him down, decks him, and ends up in jail for a while because of it. I seem to remember the show being kind of ambivalent in regards to whether it was right or not for Dan to do that even if it was still sympathetic to all the main characters involved besides the boyfriend.

Man I never expected to want to go on a Roseanne binge anytime soon but this really does make me want to rewatch some of these key episodes.
Yeah, Fischer was the guy. Another great thing about the show is that there were weren't many "character-continuity" gaffs, because Jackie's psychology of "deserving it" when she got beat by Fischer, and how that stems from her childhood of abuse from her father and criticism from her mother, is a running thing throughout the series, even when she got involved with other guys in much later episodes. Even when it came to good guys like Fred she'd be so submissive and do anything not to upset him, and there was even a whole episode of him trying to get her to assert herself/her opinions more.
Raxivace wrote:
So, yeah, I think the entire problem with Gentlemen's Agreeement is that it comes off far closer to Full House "very special ep." than it does to Fresh Prince or Roseanne, even though I can appreciate what it was trying for.
So are you saying when it comes to these episodes that Full House needs to...CUT. IT. OUT.? [blah]
You got it, dude.
Raxivace wrote:
Eva Yojimbo wrote:That seems crazy to me. One of the most interesting thing fiction (film included) can do is to tie itself to characters' subjectivity. There's just so much to be explored in the old "reality VS perception" duality with subjectivism that you just can't if you maintain an objective perspective.
I'm trying to remember some more, and I think they just didn't care about what it actually said about the characters, just that the idea of subjectivity/dream nature as an "answer" itself to the mystery of the movie was dumb and the buck stops there I guess.

You can download the episode here if you want to beat your head against a brick wall or something for a few hours. In fact I'm tempted to dare you to do it.
I might give it a listen when I have some time. My schedule's been getting wonky lately so I'm trying to cram everything in while having less time than usual.
Raxivace wrote:Something I want to say is that I knew some of these people as internet friends for a while (They even asked me to guest star on one episode but I declined on account of how I hate my speaking voice) and most of them are nice and good as people, but by time this episode came out I was already starting to drift away from the points of view of people like this and into something more like I am now. If you remember that period in the IMDb days of yesteryear before I rewatched MD and said I hated it, it was because of the influence of these kinds of attitudes on me.

There's a reason I keep saying I was a complete idiot when it came to film before I finished college. [laugh]
I'm sure we all have good chunks of our pasts, especially in terms of our thinking, that we'd disown. Hell, I'd disown a good chunk of what I wrote about NGE back when I got into it, and my views on film/art and philosophy in general have radically changed over the last 10 years. Of course, much of that is due to just how much I engaged on these issues, so you kinda have to do a trial by fire when it comes to working through different idea to get to wherever you ultimately end up at.
Raxivace wrote:97. GoldenEye (1995, Dir. Martin Campbell, Rewatch) -
I essentially agree here. It's a favorite Bond of mine if only because my memory of it is so tied to the N64 game I spent so much time with. That game just changed everything when it came out, and it made the movie seem so much more relevant, to the point where I'm not even sure how I separate them in my mind anymore. In a way, Goldeneye reminds me a lot of The Living Daylights in how it's just a really well constructed genre film even if it doesn't really go beyond that (even when it tries to with all the references to Bond being archaic).
Raxivace wrote:98. The Haunting (1963, Dir. Robert Wise) -
I really liked this one too, but it's been a while. Funnily enough I don't remember there being so much talking in it, at least not enough to complain about it being excessive. I mostly just remember the really cool atmosphere and, in retrospect, it is very much like a Lewton film.
"As far as we can discern, the sole purpose of human existence is to kindle a light in the darkness of mere being." -- Carl Jung
User avatar
Raxivace
Ultimate Poster
Posts: 2829
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2017 6:35 am

Re: Raxivace's 2019 List of Movies or: (Neo-General Chat III: Dream Warriors)

Post by Raxivace »

Eva Yojimbo wrote:Yeah, Fischer was the guy. Another great thing about the show is that there were weren't many "character-continuity" gaffs, because Jackie's psychology of "deserving it" when she got beat by Fischer, and how that stems from her childhood of abuse from her father and criticism from her mother, is a running thing throughout the series, even when she got involved with other guys in much later episodes. Even when it came to good guys like Fred she'd be so submissive and do anything not to upset him, and there was even a whole episode of him trying to get her to assert herself/her opinions more.
That episode about Jackie asserting herself sounds kind of familiar...
Eva Yojimbo wrote:You got it, dude.
[laugh]
Eva Yojimbo wrote:I might give it a listen when I have some time. My schedule's been getting wonky lately so I'm trying to cram everything in while having less time than usual.
At the very least it might give a clearer idea of the kind of background I come from if you ever decide to listen to it. I always got the impression that my own past comes off as a bit vague.
Eva Yojimbo wrote:I'm sure we all have good chunks of our pasts, especially in terms of our thinking, that we'd disown. Hell, I'd disown a good chunk of what I wrote about NGE back when I got into it, and my views on film/art and philosophy in general have radically changed over the last 10 years. Of course, much of that is due to just how much I engaged on these issues, so you kinda have to do a trial by fire when it comes to working through different idea to get to wherever you ultimately end up at.
The Summer of 2009 is actually when I first became a cinephile, really. Back then I thought Nolan was the BEST EVAR and I thought NGE's ending was dumb- and by that I meant EoTV, hadn't seen EoE, and had only seen like half of NGE and somehow saw 26 before 25. Things sure change.

You really should write that NGE book already, to get the updated take out there in full. Especially in light of the Netflix release, as with it tons of old nonsense has come back from the grave.

Like Jimbo, did you know that Anno said all the religious imagery was meaningless and just there to look cool? It must be true, I saw several people online say that in the last week and a half.
Eva Yojimbo wrote:I essentially agree here. It's a favorite Bond of mine if only because my memory of it is so tied to the N64 game I spent so much time with.
I didn't like the N64 game when I was young, but part of me wants to go back and give it a proper playthrough if only because it is a historically significant game now (Surprisingly so for a licensed game).

Even back in the day though I couldn't do FPS's on the N64 and the idea of trying to play one on the original hardware is a bit frightening. I could probably get a copy pretty cheap though.
"[Cinema] is a labyrinth with a treacherous resemblance to reality." - Andrew Sarris
User avatar
Gendo
Site Admin
Posts: 2882
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 7:38 pm

Re: Raxivace's 2019 List of Movies or: (Goodbye to Neo-General Chat 3D)

Post by Gendo »

Jumping in just to say that yes, Roseanne is one of the all-time great sitcoms.

Watching through Fresh Prince right now; had only seen about 1/2 of the episodes previously it seems. Also very good, and had certain moments that were amazingly great. But enough forgettable episodes that it isn't quite up there with Roseanne. Or Boy Meets World, or Scrubs.
User avatar
Raxivace
Ultimate Poster
Posts: 2829
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2017 6:35 am

Re: Raxivace's 2019 List of Movies or: (Goodbye to Neo-General Chat 3D)

Post by Raxivace »

So Criterion finally officially announced their Godzilla: The Showa Era boxset.

I've been wanting to go through all of the Godzillas anyways after Shin and the Netflix trilogy, and this seems like the perfect way for the Showa films.

Some of these I saw before as a kid...can't wait to revisit movies like King Kong vs. Godzilla in all their campy glory.
"[Cinema] is a labyrinth with a treacherous resemblance to reality." - Andrew Sarris
User avatar
Raxivace
Ultimate Poster
Posts: 2829
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2017 6:35 am

Re: Raxivace's 2019 List of Movies or: (Goodbye to Neo-General Chat 3D)

Post by Raxivace »

Raxivace wrote:Fincher needs to put out a new feature dammit.
So apparently Fincher already announced his next film, set to come out in 2020 on Netflix.

It's...a Herman Mankiewics biopic, specifically about "[his] tumultuous development of Orson Welles' iconic 1941 movie Citizen Kane".

I want to have faith in Fincher that this won't be just a dramatization of Pauline Kael's "lol Orson didn't work on the script for Kane at all, it was a solo Mankiewicz project" lies that have persisted since the fucking 70's at this point, but that description from IMDb doesn't sound promising.
"[Cinema] is a labyrinth with a treacherous resemblance to reality." - Andrew Sarris
User avatar
Gendo
Site Admin
Posts: 2882
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 7:38 pm

Re: Raxivace's 2019 List of Movies or: (Neo-General Chat III: Dream Warriors)

Post by Gendo »

Eva Yojimbo wrote:I actually watched a really great YouTube analysis of that entire series that featured a long bit on that episode that you can watch here:
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRwIosijD3A&t=1s[/youtube]
Why'd you have to post that? I already had a backlog of YouTube content I'm trying to watch; and now I've spent 2 hours watching that (both parts) instead of the stuff I was waiting to watch!

Great videos.
User avatar
Raxivace
Ultimate Poster
Posts: 2829
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2017 6:35 am

Re: Raxivace's 2019 List of Movies or: (Goodbye to Neo-General Chat 3D)

Post by Raxivace »

Raxivace wrote:Some arsonist nut attacked Kyoto Animation.
So to update on this, Yasuhiro Takemoto has been confirmed among the dead. He was one of the directors on The Disappearance of Haruhi Suzumiya, which remains a pretty beloved film to this day and has the special distinction of currently being the second longest animated feature film ever made in history.

Makes me wonder what Takemoto and everyone else could have gone on to do. This whole bit of news just continues to be incredibly sad to me.
"[Cinema] is a labyrinth with a treacherous resemblance to reality." - Andrew Sarris
User avatar
Raxivace
Ultimate Poster
Posts: 2829
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2017 6:35 am

Re: Raxivace's 2019 List of Movies or: (Goodbye to Neo-General Chat 3D)

Post by Raxivace »

On a lighter note...

99. Barfi! (2012, Dir. Anurag Basu) - This is a love triangle romantic comedy movie between Barfi, a goofball of a man who is deaf and mute, a woman Shruti, and Jhilmil- an autistic girl. It's a pretty good movie overall, basically being an update on Chaplin's Tramp character with influence from others like Buster Keaton thrown in.

The only real problem I had with the film is that the handheld camerawork + rapid editing in first chase sequence seemed like a bit much to me, though to be fair this is often a problem I have with modern Hollywood as well. The shot compositions themselves often look quite good though.

The Chaplin/etc. homage works so well here though, I think, because unlike say how De Palma only copies superficial aspects of Hitchock, Basu not only replicates classic gags from silent comedians, but he really captures the kind of tone bittersweet tone that Chaplin was often going for as well, in addition to a degree of social commentary on the experiences of the deaf/mute and the like.

Barfi! might make an interesting contrast with The Artist, which is similarly a silent film homage that came out the year before though I think is way more self-conscious and postmodern about what its trying to do.

100. Sullivan's Travels (1941, Dir. Preston Sturges) - Well I see why Jimbo considered this a riposte to 70's Godard. This is certainly a defense of the purpose of light entertainment in life, and more specifically why people seek that out. It's kind of ironic though, since this is a message movie disguised as a light comedy about a film director character who learns its okay to make light comedies instead of message movies- that sentence along makes me realize why this seems to have been such a huge influence on the Coen brothers.

Not much else to say about it but I quite liked this film. I do need to make a correction here though- I thought I hadn't seen any Struges films before but it turns out he was a writer on that film Thirty Day Princess with Cary Grant.

----

Bah, July is nearly over and I'm only now at 100 films seen. Terrible year of film watching for Raxivace.
Last edited by Raxivace on Thu Jun 11, 2020 12:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"[Cinema] is a labyrinth with a treacherous resemblance to reality." - Andrew Sarris
User avatar
Eva Yojimbo
Ultra Poster
Posts: 995
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2017 5:34 pm
Location: The Land of Cows and Twisters

Re: Raxivace's 2019 List of Movies or: (Neo-General Chat III: Dream Warriors)

Post by Eva Yojimbo »

Raxivace wrote:At the very least it might give a clearer idea of the kind of background I come from if you ever decide to listen to it. I always got the impression that my own past comes off as a bit vague.
I guess my past is more of an open book given the trail I left behind at EGF and stuff. Not that that was my first forum or anything, but it was mostly the first where I got really into reviewing/talking about films and stuff. Most everything before that was much more casual.
Raxivace wrote:
Eva Yojimbo wrote:I'm sure we all have good chunks of our pasts, especially in terms of our thinking, that we'd disown. Hell, I'd disown a good chunk of what I wrote about NGE back when I got into it, and my views on film/art and philosophy in general have radically changed over the last 10 years. Of course, much of that is due to just how much I engaged on these issues, so you kinda have to do a trial by fire when it comes to working through different idea to get to wherever you ultimately end up at.
The Summer of 2009 is actually when I first became a cinephile, really. Back then I thought Nolan was the BEST EVAR and I thought NGE's ending was dumb- and by that I meant EoTV, hadn't seen EoE, and had only seen like half of NGE and somehow saw 26 before 25. Things sure change.

You really should write that NGE book already, to get the updated take out there in full. Especially in light of the Netflix release, as with it tons of old nonsense has come back from the grave.

Like Jimbo, did you know that Anno said all the religious imagery was meaningless and just there to look cool? It must be true, I saw several people online say that in the last week and a half.
Hard to pinpoint where I became a cinephile... I mean, I can't remember a time in life where movies weren't a big part of it, and I think when I became conscious of loving films and wanting something more than the usual fair was around '98-'99 or so. I went through a few periods after that where I watched a lot of films, but it was really seeing NGE in '06-or-so that took my interest to another level. Of course it helped that by then there was Netflix, which made exploring classic/foreign films much easier than the old rental store & TCM method.

I don't even know if I could write that book anymore. I've probably forgotten so much about the series that I'd have to spend a good amount of time rewatching it and reading through a lot of EGF threads where we discussed it. I'd certainly like to produce something in a more singular, condensed, and definitive form someday (compared to the bits-and-pieces scattered across EGF), but, man, thinking about actually doing it just makes my procrastination demon start snarling angrily in my ear.
Raxivace wrote:
Eva Yojimbo wrote:I essentially agree here. It's a favorite Bond of mine if only because my memory of it is so tied to the N64 game I spent so much time with.
I didn't like the N64 game when I was young, but part of me wants to go back and give it a proper playthrough if only because it is a historically significant game now (Surprisingly so for a licensed game).

Even back in the day though I couldn't do FPS's on the N64 and the idea of trying to play one on the original hardware is a bit frightening. I could probably get a copy pretty cheap though.
I don't know if it'd be worth revisiting or not--probably mostly for historical interest than the actual gameplay. It was revolutionary when it came out, and it's the first game I remember where almost everyone in school was talking about it. My friends and I spent hours on the multiplayer, and completing the game on the hardest level is definitely one of the more difficult things I've done in gaming. Honestly, Perfect Dark, which came out a bit after Goldeneye, was probably the better game all-around, but it had nowhere near the impact only because it wasn't first.

Why couldn't you do FPSs on the N64? Maybe it was just because we didn't have anything else at the time, but they seemed perfectly, errr, doable.
Raxivace wrote:So Criterion finally officially announced their Godzilla: The Showa Era boxset.

I've been wanting to go through all of the Godzillas anyways after Shin and the Netflix trilogy, and this seems like the perfect way for the Showa films.

Some of these I saw before as a kid...can't wait to revisit movies like King Kong vs. Godzilla in all their campy glory.
I've never actually seen the earliest Godzillas, but I remember briefly getting into some of the films around the time I played Super Godzilla on SNES (it was a pretty awful game, but I still got into the franchise). Checking out that box set it looks like I've seen around half of them. Even back then I don't remember thinking any of them were actually that good, but they could be silly fun.
Raxivace wrote:So apparently Fincher already announced his next film, set to come out in 2020 on Netflix.

It's...a Herman Mankiewics biopic, specifically about "[his] tumultuous development of Orson Welles' iconic 1941 movie Citizen Kane".

I want to have faith in Fincher that this won't be just a dramatization of Pauline Kael's "lol Orson didn't work on the script for Kane at all, it was a solo Mankiewicz project" lies that have persisted since the fucking 70's at this point, but that description from IMDb doesn't sound promising.
Even if it turns out not to be accurate, it still sounds like interesting subject matter, and definitely unlike anything Fincher's worked on so far. I still think he's at his best in suspense thrillers, but Social Network really showed how well he could do character-driven stuff.
Raxivace wrote:
Raxivace wrote:Some arsonist nut attacked Kyoto Animation.
So to update on this, Yasuhiro Takemoto has been confirmed among the dead. He was one of the directors on The Disappearance of Haruhi Suzumiya, which remains a pretty beloved film to this day and has the special distinction of currently being the second longest animated feature film ever made in history.

Makes me wonder what Takemoto and everyone else could have gone on to do. This whole bit of news just continues to be incredibly sad to me.
Well that sucks. I never saw anything of Haruhi Suzumiya, but it sucks all the same.
Raxivace wrote:100. Sullivan's Travels (1941, Dir. Preston Sturges)
Here's what I wrote about ~10 years ago:
Here's a film that's self-aware, a film that comments on films and filmmaking at the same time it's attempting to work as a fictional film itself. It's a rambling, almost picaresque melodramatic comedy satire as full of cynicism as it is sentimentality. It's an illusive and allusive odyssey, borrowing and citing from films of the past, and incorporating a rich array of genres, styles, tones and cinematic devices. It has a little bit of everything: romance, drama, action, comedy, sharp writing, metafiction, montage, screwball, socio-cultural substance—all wrapped up in a kaleidoscopic enigma that never makes it quite clear if it's winking at us knowingly, or attempting to take itself seriously. No, it's not a Tarantino film, or even a Godard film; it's a masterpiece from the golden age of a hollywood by the name of Sullivan's Travels, from a director that was light years ahead of his time, Preston Sturges.

The film opens with what must surely be one of the most audaciously original concepts ever: Sturges thrusts us right into a fistfight on a speeding train. Eventually, the two combatants fall into the river, and a “The End" title card emerges from the water. What's happened? Did my DVD player somehow skip to the last chapter or, if I was in a theater, did they put the wrong reel in? No, it is, indeed, the end of director John Lloyd Sullivan's (Joel McCrea) latest film, O Brother, Where Art Thou? as it is being screened for the studio. Sullivan, a lifelong director of light comedies, has finally been inspired to create a serious tragic drama about the war, full of symbol of how greed can destroy a society. The bad part is, the studio isn't buying it.

The studio heads believe Sullivan has no connection with the poor and needy, and couldn't possibly make a film depicting their condition. Sullivan objects, but soon realizes that they're right. So he comes up with an ingenious (or crazy) plan to “go undercover" as a hobo and explore the life of poverty. Even though everyone objects, they ultimately can't stand in his way. Near the start of his journey, Sullivan meets a mysterious but drop-dead gorgeous woman (Veronica Lake, who's never given a proper character name) who buys him some ham and eggs, and tells him how she's had enough of Hollywood and wants to go home. But Sullivan convinces her to let him take her to his place, and when she finds out his plan and who he is, she insists on coming with him.

Sturges has often been praised as one of the first writers to successfully make the leap to directing, though that legacy is a bit overhyped. Charlie Chaplin was obviously the first great cinematic omni-auteur who was involved in nearly every aspect of the filmmaking process. Howard Hawks, Frank Capra, and Billy Wilder all preceded Sturges in the leap. But of that trio, Wilder was the only one that was equally successful as a writer and director, as both Hawks and Capra only wrote a handful of their best films. But this hardly diminishes Sturges achievement, and certainly no writer/director had a more brilliant output from 1940 to 1944. That five-year period was an explosive one for filmmaking in general, but Sturges unleashed a concentrated creative outburst during it the likes of which has never been seen before or since, ultimately resulting in a filmography more substantial than most filmmakers achieve over a lifetime.

During that period of creative eruption, Sullivan's Travels stands alongside The Lady Eve as Sturges most highly praised and acclaimed film. But if their eminence is in doubt, there's little doubting which is the more complex effort. Sullivan's Travels is Sturges shooting at the moon in an attempt to transcend the industrial homogeneity of the Hollywood studio system in an attempt to produce a genuine piece of art that still fits inside that system. The first third alone encapsulate the film's heterogeneous and ambitious blending of ideas, styles, and genres, shifting from the film-within-a film, to Sturges' lightning dialogue exchanges, to the farcical comedy, to a screwball action chase, to the first romantic encounter. In that context, Sullivan's Travels is no small miracle; it's a film that works as as a superior slice of classic Hollywood entertainment but with unprecedented artistry and sophistication that, along with directors like Wilder, paved the way for the writer/director centric auteur theory some 20 years later.

There's little denying Sturges' talent as a writer, and, from the era, perhaps only Wilder and Herman Mankiewicz could challenge him. The narrative pacing of the screenplay proves deceptively twisty, almost counter-intuitive in its refusal to go where one would expect. But one thing that especially marks all of Sturges' scripts is a remarkable naturalness; Sullivan's Travels (and all of Sturges films from the era) are full of dialogue that would work as well if they were written today. But, beyond the dialogue, Sturges has an unprecedented ability to seamlessly meld genre and styles while keeping them anchored to wonderfully funny, humanistic, and sympathetic character, all while keeping an eye on the film's subtext and themes, which can shift from the subtle and nuanced, to the expositional moments that spell out their message. It's in the latter moments that Sturges seems to be playfully mocking such “message films", while still perhaps believing in the message that's being delivered.

Indeed, the film's themes seem embedded in its cinematic amalgamation, constantly expressing the conflict between serious artistic ambition and the need to make films as economically sound pieces of mass entertainment. But Sturges' greatest feat may be in the ambiguousness with which that idea is embodied in the film itself. Like Sullivan, Sturges is concerned about the limitations of film to effect any real change, yet that hardly erases the desire of the artist to try and speak profoundly about life and society. But how is it possible to do that through a medium that needs money to finance when high art doesn't sell to an audience? In the same way that Sullivan concludes that laughter is a great gift that brings relief to those who are genuinely suffering, Sturges seems to realize that too, choosing to create a film that's comedic about its seriousness, or, perhaps, serious about its comedy.

If Sturges writing has been praised it's often been at the unfair expense of his direction, which, in truth, could be as cinematic as anyone in Hollywood when he wanted it to. Sullivan's Travels perhaps displays his directorial talent better than any of his other films. The next-to-opening scene has Sturges orchestrating a four-plus minute long-take—a technique that Welles would be praised for using the same year in Citizen Kane. A superb six-plus minute montage closes the second act, finding Sullivan and Lake making their way through the impoverished community of hobos, drifting from the streets to the cramped sleeping homes to the dumpsters in search of food. Sturges even injects a little noir-thriller lighting into the scene that has Sullivan being stalked by a greedy hobo. In truth, his nuanced touch can be seen throughout, but, like with most examples from classic Hollywood, its rarely ostentatious enough to draw attention to itself.

Sturges always stuffed his films with the finest talent from top-to-bottom and had a knack for selecting just the right pieces amongst many choices. In Joel McCrea Sturges smartly picked a likable everyman instead of a more urbane actor that would have been a closer analog to Sturges' own persona. McCrea is the type of actor who can utter a single line and you instantly feel his down-to-earth genuineness. Veronica Lake serves a double role as both a knockout sex-bomb, but also as an accomplished comedienne. In the laugh department she serves as a catalyst for much of the film's events, and is arguably even more naturally funny than McCrea. Yet her levity provides a wonderful contrast to McCrea's sincerity, and the two's chemistry is consistently pitch-perfect.

Any attempts at negative criticism seem superfluous in the face of such brilliance, but it is possible. For all of Sturges' naturalism he does offer some rather caricatured black characters. The film's third act doesn't work quite as well as its first two, perhaps because it's the only section that feels contrived and implausible, and because it separates the great pairing of Lake and McCrea. The story can seem meandering to the point it borders on discursiveness. But all of these elements also play into many of the film's strengths, and would likely be more detrimental if Sturges hadn't done everything possible to solicit and gain our sympathies while providing a wealth of entertainment.

Much like the film Sullivan was pitching, one wonders how Sturges sold the idea of this film to the studios. Ostensibly, he probably pitched it as a comedy. But the deeper truth is that Sullivan's Travels is a distilled explosion of one of classic Hollywood's singular geniuses. It may not have been the first film about Hollywood and filmmaking produced in Hollywood, but it may very well be the best. Unlike its hero, Sturges may ultimately realize that he needn't choose between drama and comedy, or even between sophisticated artistry and superficial entertainment, between genres, or between anything. Film proves to be a medium in which a talented director can synthesize it all, and Sullivan's Travels is one of the greatest pieces of cinematic synthesis in film history.
"As far as we can discern, the sole purpose of human existence is to kindle a light in the darkness of mere being." -- Carl Jung
User avatar
Eva Yojimbo
Ultra Poster
Posts: 995
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2017 5:34 pm
Location: The Land of Cows and Twisters

Re: Raxivace's 2019 List of Movies or: (Goodbye to Neo-General Chat 3D)

Post by Eva Yojimbo »

Gendo wrote:Jumping in just to say that yes, Roseanne is one of the all-time great sitcoms.

Watching through Fresh Prince right now; had only seen about 1/2 of the episodes previously it seems. Also very good, and had certain moments that were amazingly great. But enough forgettable episodes that it isn't quite up there with Roseanne. Or Boy Meets World, or Scrubs.
I'd also put Roseanne ahead of Fresh Prince. Scrubs I've only occasionally watched, and while I liked it I don't know if I've seen enough to really judge it. Boy Meets World is a weird one because it started out pretty cheesy, developed into something really good, and then ended as something absurd. You can tell that they must've had a major turnover of writers at some point (or multiple points) because the characters and type of comedy they did became completely different. I'd probably put Fresh Prince and BMW about equal, but FP was never as bad as BMW at its worst.
Gendo wrote:Why'd you have to post that? I already had a backlog of YouTube content I'm trying to watch; and now I've spent 2 hours watching that (both parts) instead of the stuff I was waiting to watch!

Great videos.
Ha! You're welcome. :)

What YouTube content are you watching? I've been desperately trying to find something to fill the hole that Critical Role has left and having no success. I'm seriously thinking of just starting that series over again...
"As far as we can discern, the sole purpose of human existence is to kindle a light in the darkness of mere being." -- Carl Jung
User avatar
Gendo
Site Admin
Posts: 2882
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 7:38 pm

Re: Raxivace's 2019 List of Movies or: (Goodbye to Neo-General Chat 3D)

Post by Gendo »

Eva Yojimbo wrote:What YouTube content are you watching? I've been desperately trying to find something to fill the hole that Critical Role has left and having no success. I'm seriously thinking of just starting that series over again...
Mostly video game stuff; primarily Mario Maker streamers. Grand Poo Bear, Barbarian, Carl Sagan. With the release of Mario Maker 2 recently; the amount of videos those guys are putting out shot way up. Also finally just now got around to watching from SGDQ stuff from last month.
User avatar
Raxivace
Ultimate Poster
Posts: 2829
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2017 6:35 am

Re: Raxivace's 2019 List of Movies or: (Neo-General Chat III: Dream Warriors)

Post by Raxivace »

Eva Yojimbo wrote:I guess my past is more of an open book given the trail I left behind at EGF and stuff. Not that that was my first forum or anything, but it was mostly the first where I got really into reviewing/talking about films and stuff. Most everything before that was much more casual.
Tbh it's probably high time for me to admit that our entire friendship has been nothing but an elaborate attempt by me to steal your credit card information after building a psychological profile of you based on your EGF posts. Any day now I'll get that PIN from you.
Eva Yojimbo wrote:Hard to pinpoint where I became a cinephile... I mean, I can't remember a time in life where movies weren't a big part of it, and I think when I became conscious of loving films and wanting something more than the usual fair was around '98-'99 or so. I went through a few periods after that where I watched a lot of films, but it was really seeing NGE in '06-or-so that took my interest to another level. Of course it helped that by then there was Netflix, which made exploring classic/foreign films much easier than the old rental store & TCM method.
For me I just got bored and started watching a bunch of old DVD's and VHS tapes lying around the house.

First thing I watched was Demme's Philadelphia of all movies.
I don't even know if I could write that book anymore. I've probably forgotten so much about the series that I'd have to spend a good amount of time rewatching it and reading through a lot of EGF threads where we discussed it. I'd certainly like to produce something in a more singular, condensed, and definitive form someday (compared to the bits-and-pieces scattered across EGF), but, man, thinking about actually doing it just makes my procrastination demon start snarling angrily in my ear.
Dude just think of it as a bunch of walls of text. And what do you get when you a bunch of walls together? A house. A house of text.
Eva Yojimbo wrote:Why couldn't you do FPSs on the N64? Maybe it was just because we didn't have anything else at the time, but they seemed perfectly, errr, doable.
At the time something about the controls just did not click with me for some reason- it wasn't until the dual stick setups of the next generation that FPS's really clicked with me.

It's kind of irrelevant now though since I ended up getting the game anyways (You can tell I got a used copy due to all the bite marks on the cartridge. I'm amazed it even works.) but surprisingly the game is actually clicking with me this time.
Eva Yojimbo wrote:I've never actually seen the earliest Godzillas, but I remember briefly getting into some of the films around the time I played Super Godzilla on SNES (it was a pretty awful game, but I still got into the franchise). Checking out that box set it looks like I've seen around half of them. Even back then I don't remember thinking any of them were actually that good, but they could be silly fun.
Lol I had that same SNES game. I remember having fun with it as a kid, but I haven't gone back to try it at all.
Eva Yojimbo wrote:Even if it turns out not to be accurate, it still sounds like interesting subject matter, and definitely unlike anything Fincher's worked on so far. I still think he's at his best in suspense thrillers, but Social Network really showed how well he could do character-driven stuff.
Yeah if it's a good movie I'll call it a good movie (Fincher seems to have a pretty solid trarck record anyways), but this particular bit of misinformation has been has been driving me crazy for years. Me and my father nearly went to fists over it once just because he believed Ben Mankiewicz on TCM over me.
Eva Yojimbo wrote:Well that sucks. I never saw anything of Haruhi Suzumiya, but it sucks all the same.
Yeah it's a real shame. The Haruhi TV series did some pretty neat things too- I don't think I've seen another serialized show where the episodes were designed to be seen in multiple different orders.
Eva Yojimbo wrote:Here's what I wrote about ~10 years ago:
That's a great review.

You mention the black characters falling into caricature and I agree that's a flaw in the film. However it did make it all the more surprising to me that the big emotional climax of the movie took place in a black church. The priest character at least seems to stand in contrast to the earlier black characters and for someone who is only in a single scene or so he seemed reasonably well characterized to me.
"[Cinema] is a labyrinth with a treacherous resemblance to reality." - Andrew Sarris
User avatar
Raxivace
Ultimate Poster
Posts: 2829
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2017 6:35 am

Re: Raxivace's 2019 List of Movies or: (Goodbye to Neo-General Chat 3D)

Post by Raxivace »

101. The Scarlet Empress (1934, Dir. Josef von Sternberg) - I think this was probably the Dietrich/von Sternberg I liked the most, if only because of how big and bold the expressionistic set design here.

This was probably the strongest character arc Dietrich has had yet in any of these movies, going from feeble waif to a very Machiavellian version of Catherine the Great. I don't know how naturally I buy the actual transformation (Tbh I'm not sure its earned, it kind of seems like she just becomes a genius once she feels ultimately betrayed by that Fabio looking guy), but it lead to some good scenes at least.

Also, the number of title cards here was very unusual for a sound film in 1934. I still expect them in early sound films from like, 1928-1930ish, but this to not only have them this late but have a lot of them seemed very odd for an American film.

102. Playful Pluto (1934, Dir. Burt Gillett) - The Disney short that was featured at the end of Sullivan's Travels. Pretty cute, apparently one of the first cartoons to feature Pluto as a major character.

103. The Woman is a Devil (1935, Dir. Josef von Sternberg) - The last of these Dietrich/vovn Sternberg's and it's…kind of eh again. Production design here is as a good as it was in Scarlet Empress (Love the Carnival setting, as well as the rain and mud of the duel scene), but like in Morocco it's not enough to save the actual love story for me. Cesar Romero was a nice surprise here though.

Knowing that von Sternberg and Dietrich's relationship together was deteriorating at this point and the fact that this is a story about a woman manipulating men, it makes me wonder if von Sternberg's own negative views at this point about Dietrich weren't heavily leaking in.

Anyways I wish I had more to say about these films but with Scarlet Empress as the exception they all have a similar languid pace that does little for me.
"[Cinema] is a labyrinth with a treacherous resemblance to reality." - Andrew Sarris
Post Reply