Oh man I was mostly with you on your list but I couldn’t stand Underground. The longest 3 hours I ever spent in a theater.
Movies Thread
- Thread starter Rock
- Start date
- Replies: 492
- Views: 11K
- Off-Topic
Much more than 100 years of questioning “is there a god?” and “what’s the meaning of life?” — what insight have we achieved after millennia of this? Are these also boring questions and discourse? If nothing else, the thought exercise per se is useful and worthy of energy. Even returning to questions like these at various stages of life can reveal new perspectives.
Just because you think you’ve exhausted the exercise and have all the answers doesn’t make it boring — it more so makes you boring, IMO.
Oscar Best Picture Nominee #4 - "The Substance"
My grade: B-
For the first two acts of this movie, it felt like a decent "Black Mirror" episode. Demi Moore was fine as the fading star, who is concerned about losing both her celebrity and her beauty. In some quarters, Moore is considered a lock for the Best Actress Oscar. I'm not so sure. If she does win, it won't be for this film. It will be a lifetime achievement consolation nod. Kind of ironic given the not-so-subtle themes of this nominated film.
The third act of "The Substance" slips and slides into an over-the-top gorefest. I know what the director was going for but it got to the point where it was more ridiculous than one of those blood-spurting skits on Saturday Night Live. The last scene, which was a bookend of the first, was a winner. But, my God, the literal blood and guts you had to endure to get to it.
I enjoyed the film, and like "Barbie", it was directed by a woman. It's refreshing to see a woman's perspective at the helm of a film about women's issues. I'd say the make-up award may be a lock and I wouldn't be surprised if Writer/Director Fargeat took home the Original Screenplay Oscar.
I agree on Rossellini. It’s great that she scored a high profile role but she didn’t do anything extraordinary IMO. But it’s not a strong category this year so who knows.
Fiennes was fantastic, probably better than Brody, but not quite as good as Colman Domingo.
Strongly disagree on Demi. The whole performance was excellent, but the “getting ready for her date” scene was one of the two strongest acting scenes I saw all year (the other came from a Sing Sing supporting actor). That’s the scene where she earned the award, and it won’t be just a feel-good comeback type of gift.
The ones I have left to see are Nickel Boys, A Complete Unknown, and I’m Still Here (won’t be seeing Wicked). Along with a few docs and internationals, including All We Imagine as Light, (which seems to have been robbed of a likely Oscars nom by the Indian selection panel of all men).
And Sing Sing and A Real Pain were robbed of a Best Picture nom. Dune has absolutely no business being nominated IMO. Leave that and Wicked in the popcorn category.
Fiennes was fantastic, probably better than Brody, but not quite as good as Colman Domingo.
Strongly disagree on Demi. The whole performance was excellent, but the “getting ready for her date” scene was one of the two strongest acting scenes I saw all year (the other came from a Sing Sing supporting actor). That’s the scene where she earned the award, and it won’t be just a feel-good comeback type of gift.
The ones I have left to see are Nickel Boys, A Complete Unknown, and I’m Still Here (won’t be seeing Wicked). Along with a few docs and internationals, including All We Imagine as Light, (which seems to have been robbed of a likely Oscars nom by the Indian selection panel of all men).
And Sing Sing and A Real Pain were robbed of a Best Picture nom. Dune has absolutely no business being nominated IMO. Leave that and Wicked in the popcorn category.
superrific
Master of the ZZLverse
- Messages
- 10,641
Fair point. I would say that there are a couple of distinctions. First, art is different from philosophy. It supposed to be novel. The whole point of the Duchamp piece was its novelty. That's gone. Second, those questions are integral to the human experience in a way that "is this art" really isn't, although I acknowledge this is a contestable point.
There are also a couple of responses:
1. I find "is there a God" to be a boring discourse. We've learned, I think, that it's not knowable. Every attempt at proof of God has failed. Every attempt at disproof of God has failed, for the same reasons. Did we need all that discourse to get there? That is, had I lived 150 years ago, would my understanding of the subject be meaningfully different? No idea.
2. I used boring on purpose -- it's a quasi-subjective term. I say quasi because there is, I think, generally a good deal of agreement on the nature of boring things, but it's very far from total and it's almost impossible to argue the point. If you find something interesting and I find it boring, what can we say to each other to resolve that difference? I would say, nothing. It's not a difference that can be resolved, or even needs resolving.
superrific
Master of the ZZLverse
- Messages
- 10,641
I will grant that the first part of the film -- i.e. the part before everyone gets fully trapped underground -- holds most of the appeal for me. The first 45-60 minutes are amazing, IIRC. It does run out of steam (at least for an American audience) and getting to the end does feel like dragging a dead body across the finish line.
In general, my views on film is that genius is rare. So if there's genius in a film but some of it sucks, I'm still going to like it for the genius part (depending also on the ratio). After all, you can skip over the crappy parts. Not in a theater, of course, but there needs to be some benefit to living in the post-TEVO age.
Sure, some modernist art and criticism contends that art is supposed to be novel. But that contention is certainly not uniform.
I agree with you on the "getting ready for her date" scene. That was good work. I agree—"Dune" had no place in the top 10. I'll reserve judgment on "Wicked." I've seen bits and pieces of it, but not the whole movie yet.
superrific
Master of the ZZLverse
- Messages
- 10,641
Fair enough. I really only look at or think about modernist/post-modernist art.
Oscar Best Picture Nominee #5 - "The Brutalist"
My grade: C-
Wow, was this a brutal slog! The picture was muddy, the dialog was mumbly, important yellow subtitles were rendered unreadable over white backgrounds, and the exposition was excruciatingly slow, with at least an hour of wasted scenes. The closest comp for this movie was last year's "Maestro". And that was perhaps a better movie. Only Felicity Jones' appearance after the intermission saved this trainwreck (pun intended) from complete disaster. She deserved a Best Supporting Actress nomination as she was the best thing about this production. Without her, this overblown mess might have been branded with a D grade (or worse).
Watched Conclave tonight. It was great and would give it an A.
The doc No Other Land is a really tough watch, but shines a very necessary light on the Israeli/Palestinian conflict in a way that most mainstream media have failed or neglected to do. It has a sharp focus on just the Israeli occupation and settlements in the West Bank, and how it’s affecting ordinary people in the region who had very little to begin with, and are callously and viciously being robbed of even that.
The creators are two Palestinians and two Israelis, all of whom risked a lot over several years to produce the doc. Serious bravery to bring this stuff to light. And the struggle continues since even though it has an Oscar nom and glowing reviews, they can’t get a distribution deal in the US because of gutless fear of offending the pro-Israel contingent.
The creators are two Palestinians and two Israelis, all of whom risked a lot over several years to produce the doc. Serious bravery to bring this stuff to light. And the struggle continues since even though it has an Oscar nom and glowing reviews, they can’t get a distribution deal in the US because of gutless fear of offending the pro-Israel contingent.
GoHeelsweeeehoooo
Esteemed Member
- Messages
- 587
I'm seeing the Brutalist tomorrow evening at the local Alamo Drafthouse
I fell asleep twice.
- Messages
- 1,598
1. I have very much enjoyed the discussions on this thread. Thank you to all who have posted your thoughts.
2. I have both read and enjoyed all the "Dune" books, prequels and sequels. I have never seen a Dune or Dune adjacent movie that I didn't enjoy. Even if the only thing I got out of the movie was, "Gee, well that's an interpretation I never saw coming."
2. I have both read and enjoyed all the "Dune" books, prequels and sequels. I have never seen a Dune or Dune adjacent movie that I didn't enjoy. Even if the only thing I got out of the movie was, "Gee, well that's an interpretation I never saw coming."
- Messages
- 1,942
My kids are dying to see it.
an0maly
Distinguished Member
- Messages
- 291
Wow. ***Actually laughing here***
I don't know, it may not even be possible to make a statement about films worse than this one. With the context of my views there, stating you those two Star Wars films over these new Dune films may be facetious, hyperbolic out of some anger about the latter, or a personal “bold strategy” but there is wrong and there is what some people called, "Not Even Wrong." it prompts my response and the following attempt to show that your preference, even the comparison,is to me absurdly wrong, as in out of any realm that can make basic sense.
While we have agreed on a large number of films over many years now, it's always been clear you have a bias against what I take to be important, and valuable as art: science fiction films. That is fine, as I recognize I have biases, like pretty sharply against standard romantic films, finding them thousands-of-times-over repetitive, and usually not truthful about the way people actually behave. I also think we differ in that I strongly see film as a visual medium, and have high regard for complexity of the task of presentation. I do not think films should be shots of two people talking at each other--that is theater. Film must accomplish visual art, in delivering narrative. So I am going to deal with this by offering a video to show the Dune films are on a far higher level than anything in the Star Wars films. I offer this, and if you care (to watch and learn about great visuals) you care, and if you don't, you don't, then we move on to narrative content. This is one example of dozens of what Villeneuve did in visual accomplishment, I don't think you can find in any film since Oppenheimer.
Narrative quality: In Star Wars stuff (I will use that collectively), you have an automatic good outcome because the good god (this is functionally what it is, even though thinly renamed as the “force”) is always going to win in the end over the bad god, the devil (the dark side of the force). This is magic, god(s) invocation to action, by its right name, is fantasy in which a set of people we root for are always going to win, because, and a set of people we hate are eventually always going to lose, because wrong god force is finally always inferior. This pablum appeals to what Kubrick called, with disdain, "a conception of an audience." A studio conception. But in Lucas's stuff the god force stuff is also random and completely nonsensical. Luke can lift a large space ship out of water with it, but can't just burst a tiny blood vessel in an enemy's brain which would drop him to the ground dead on the spot. In fact the god force is lots of fun to throw big heavy things at enemies. This kind of nonsense is continuous, and a connected problem of bad writing is often instead of characters thinking a way out of a problem, the instant fix, get out jail card of the god force is always used. There are skills in the Dune world that are beyond our current understanding, but they are skills, bred into humans and developed by humans beyond A.l. capacities, but they are skills, not god magic. Problems must be solved with minds, thinking and reasoning.
The Star Wars stuff is simplistic in part because it is derivitive. There is certainly material pilfered from samurai films, but also things stolen and trivialized and simplified from Herbert's Dune works. Those are far more face-palm inducing. The key though is as kids films for adults too, all the gravitas and meanings about the troubles of human instincts and power corruptions is dumbed down to the flimsiest melodrama, with no intent but to get sequential, repeated big applause from the audience. A million subsequent comic book films have traded on this form as a result, and they keep on coming. Dull Hollywood product like Gladiator II, which appallingly and inexplicably, you liked, do the same. I cut off your influence part of the Star Wars stuff in quote, because it matters less (especially now), but yes, this is a big and sad influence.
Let's just get to the truth on the basic failure of your comparison. Lucas slapped his first project together as his Buck Rogers type serial for the masses, but 25 years later and with a bigger budget. I don't dislike the first three Star Wars films, as fantasy “kids movies” designed to please an audience. They are fine for that. But the fact they are huge in pop culture popularity, are loved, and mined financially to an unprecedented and incomparable degree does not signify anything of real value to me. The fact that they have things like the little teddy bear ewoks who defeat storm troopers with laser weapons, and they have a Star Wars Christmas Special are other examples of what takes the measure of this. It is terminally unserious material no matter how you evaluate it, from the early domination of white males, and through all the stuff, of humans (let's be clear), to the constant domination of human forms over other“humanoid” ones, to dismissal of A.I. life as inferior. These things define the works as not about the truth of the human condition and not about basic reality. It is not about the great ideas of science fiction, nor even the great ideas that can work in fantasy.
I don't think you detect what I find of value in science fiction, nor its increasing importance in allowing educated people to think through the rapid tech changes we face. This thinking through part is essential to quality; the father of science fiction, H.G. Wells did foresee things like tanks, hand carried phones, automatic doors, but he also saw changes science understanding would foster, on social fronts like women's emancipation. Science fiction at its best deals with ideas just exactly that big, routinely, as A Clockwork Orange examines government controlling human behaviors, 1984, government control of what is truth, and all allowed thought, and with blazing pertinence to headlines today, what real artificial intelligence means morally to us at to it (a part of 2001: A Space Odyssey, and that specific part expanded later into the masterpiece Ex Machina). The people who dislike or dismiss science fiction can be blind and deaf to all this, but in point of fact there is not much more narrative fiction, regardless of genre, can ever possibly do in addressing important ideas. Ones that can only be brought up in realms like the future of our species and the conundrums and complexities of advancing technology (especially when our morality clearly does not seem to advance).
Good science fiction films of this kind are very rare. About 98% of science fiction films are garbage, and another 1% aren't science fiction films at all, but are called science fiction films, a problem you have in my view with seeing Star Wars stuff as such. It is not.
But wait, there's more, that's bad. Your comparison of them with the Dune films is akin to comparing a supermarket romance novel to War and Peace. You can like one more than the other but you can't call them the same level of seriousness or the same genre of fiction, and be taken seriously. Again, Star Wars is derivative of the Buck Rogers short serial movies, as hero melodramas, essentially to please kids. Works for adults too, as I said, I like them as kids stuff. That is a mostly unchanged template of what Lucas copied into seventies level special effects movies. There is death, but nothing carries any emotional gravitas at all. When Luke sees his only family as burned corpses, all that happens is he tilts his head down a moment and the forgets it and asks to become a Jedi. When Princess Leia has the same non-reaction--not just to her family being killed, but her home planet being destroyed--shortly thereafter she is cracking jokes with Han Solo. The acting reflects this triviality mode, and is blunted and cardboard, partly because a lot of them as talents are not up to much more, but at bottom because the material is written as just as cardboard. The whole story is haphazard and duct taped together, as when in the first film Ben tells Luke Vader killed Luke's father, then that was lie when in thee next film we have the contraption that Vader is Luke's father. This is a dumbed down version of bloodline complexities taken from Dune (a sad tactic Star Wars stuff did with a lot of things from other higher quality sources as well).
Your saying the Star Wars stuff is better, is an opinion I find absurd, but more objectively it's just a category error, in attempted comparison to Villeneuve's Dune films; that people will compare them does not mean that people should. It's deeply absurd for the reasons above in contrast to what is in the Dune films. I am not going into that. Instead, just as an open door, I offer a video below to address ideas going on in Villeneuve's Dune films, and this is on a completely different level. It's up to your ability to consider some actual ideas that it looks like you completely missed. What you write suggested you did not understand anything in Dune Parts 1 and 2 about humanity. Again, watch this if you care about learning one aspect of what Dune is about, that matters to truths about the human condition. If you want to stay cut off from it because science fiction (or whatever) then don't watch:
No doubt confronting this as I lay it all out may strike you has overly dismissive or harsh towards your opinions, and that is not the intent. The fact that I took some time to write this is a reflection that I respect your opinions on films in general.