Welcome to the ICM Forum. If you have an account but have trouble logging in, or have other questions, see THIS THREAD.
Polls: Directors (Results), 2019 (Feb 16th), 2009 awards (Feb 21st), Mini-series (Feb 29th)
Challenges: Academy Awards, Africa, African American/Blaxploitation
Film of the Week: The Good Fairy, March nominations (Feb 28th)
World Cup S4: Round 1 schedule, 1D: Australia vs Hungary vs Portugal vs Tajikistan (Mar 1st), 1E: Czechia vs France vs Georgia vs Mexico (Mar 18th)

Last Movie Seen

Post Reply
Ally Theater
Posts: 69
Joined: Oct 11, 2019
Contact:

Re: Last Movie Seen

#1961

Post by Ally Theater » October 11th, 2019, 11:18 pm

Taxi Driver is my all time favorite movie. I wasn't that keen on The King of Comedy.

Anywho, as I was saying, I was on the fence about seeing Joker but this article has convinced me to check it out:

https://www.truthdig.com/articles/neoli ... -of-joker/
Last edited by Ally Theater on October 12th, 2019, 12:13 am, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
RBG
Posts: 6176
Joined: Feb 13, 2016
Location: desert usa
Contact:

#1962

Post by RBG » October 11th, 2019, 11:19 pm

sandra bernhard forever

Image
icm + ltbxd

NO GODS NO MASTERS

User avatar
Ebbywebby
Posts: 2859
Joined: Sep 10, 2012
Location: Orange County, CA
Contact:

#1963

Post by Ebbywebby » October 12th, 2019, 1:14 am

I saw "Joker" last night. My girlfriend's choice, NOT mine. I thought the storyline involving Fleck's relationship with the Robert De Niro character was so entirely implausible from beginning to end that
SpoilerShow
I expected there to be an "A Beautiful Mind"-type twist where it's revealed to be just a subjective fantasy/delusion. Just as Fleck imagined having a romance with the black mom across the hall. But...no. Ridiculous. I also thought the idea of a triple subway murder causing a riotous, citywide, ideological "movement" just because the victims happened to be rich was equally silly. And oh sure, as if everyone would be so thrilled about a popular talkshow host being brutally murdered on camera. Our hero!
Bleh. I also get weary of Joaquim Phoenix's flamboyant "Look at this crazy shit I'm doing with my body...I am ACTING!!!!" approach to his craft. Not a movie that meant anything to me.

I also agree with a review I read somewhere that complained about how unsubtly "on the nose" the music choices were. "Smile," "Send in the Clowns," "White Room" (because the scene was about to change to a sanatorium), "That's Life"...POW, so heavy-handed.
Last edited by Ebbywebby on October 12th, 2019, 1:43 am, edited 1 time in total.

Ally Theater
Posts: 69
Joined: Oct 11, 2019
Contact:

#1964

Post by Ally Theater » October 12th, 2019, 1:40 am

Sometimes heavy handed music is required. For example it beggars belief that Kryptonite by 3 Doors Down was never used in a Superman movie.

User avatar
fori
Posts: 1255
Joined: Aug 24, 2014
Contact:

#1965

Post by fori » October 16th, 2019, 6:54 am

I saw The Adventures of Tobisuke (1949) today at a local art gallery, and it was really good. Could almost be described as Nobuo Nakagawa’s take on “Alice in Wonderland”. Great effects, atmosphere and an adorable child actor.

User avatar
Coryn
Posts: 1084
Joined: Dec 05, 2018
Contact:

#1966

Post by Coryn » October 16th, 2019, 7:39 am

Finally got around to see The Terminator (1984) and was pleasantly surprised by it. Would rate it 7/10 which is good in my book but people that know me that score is probably the highest I've given to an action movie.

This month I've been working down my list to finish all movies on 20+ top lists and it was with mixed feelings really. A lot of okay movies and no real new very good ones (8+/10) sadly. Viridiana, It happened one night and Ran are also 7/10's.

The Deer Hunter came close with the middle act but I wanted more which is kind of unlike me.

A lot of movies are overly long too, looking at you Gone with the Wind and Ben Hur.
I saved Latin, what did you ever do ?

User avatar
flaiky
Posts: 1463
Joined: Feb 04, 2017
Location: London UK
Contact:

#1967

Post by flaiky » October 16th, 2019, 12:33 pm

How did I not know there was a Breaking Bad movie?? Wow. Interesting.

(Edit: late response to RGB's comment)
Let the ashes fly
ICM | Letterboxd | All-time stats

User avatar
GruesomeTwosome
Donator
Posts: 2916
Joined: Feb 03, 2017
Location: Industrial Wasteland, USA
Contact:

#1968

Post by GruesomeTwosome » October 16th, 2019, 12:57 pm

flaiky wrote:
October 16th, 2019, 12:33 pm
How did I not know there was a Breaking Bad movie?? Wow. Interesting.

(Edit: late response to RGB's comment)
I rather liked it, it was a little better than I expected and Robert Forster's last role really made it worth seeing, he's a real scene-stealer here.
I’m to remember every man I've seen fall into a plate of spaghetti???

My IMDB profile
ICM
Letterboxd

Ally Theater
Posts: 69
Joined: Oct 11, 2019
Contact:

#1969

Post by Ally Theater » October 16th, 2019, 7:46 pm

El Camino. I enjoyed it. But I felt like some of the references to the show went over my head because I'd forgotten some of the details.

Ally Theater
Posts: 69
Joined: Oct 11, 2019
Contact:

#1970

Post by Ally Theater » October 17th, 2019, 10:13 am

JOKER: Still in the cinema as the credits are rolling
FAN-FUCKING-TASTIC

User avatar
peeptoad
Posts: 1658
Joined: Feb 04, 2017
Contact:

#1971

Post by peeptoad » October 17th, 2019, 12:17 pm

Mandy (2018)
Decent enough follow up to Beyond the Black Rainbow, but the director really just stayed in the box for this one and the conscription of Nic Cage (on his downward career trajectory) and the recognizable guy from Predator probably aided his cause.

User avatar
joachimt
Donator
Posts: 30634
Joined: Feb 16, 2012
Location: Netherlands
Contact:

#1972

Post by joachimt » November 4th, 2019, 12:44 pm

Just watched The Santa Clause (1994), because it's a random official check available on Disney+, but when I checked it I realized that it's on the lower part of All Time Box Office, which will be cut very soon. Wouldn't be terrible if the movie was okay, but it was plain awful. :(
ICM-profile
Fergenaprido: "I find your OCD to be adorable, J"

User avatar
Ebbywebby
Posts: 2859
Joined: Sep 10, 2012
Location: Orange County, CA
Contact:

#1973

Post by Ebbywebby » November 5th, 2019, 2:24 am

TCM showed "Capricious Summer" (Jiri Menzel, 1968) last night in the "TCM Imports" slot and, man, that was a delight. And it features THIS guy, yet again...I think he may appear in every Czech movie.

https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0398703/

User avatar
St. Gloede
Moderator
Posts: 10291
Joined: May 06, 2011
Contact:

#1974

Post by St. Gloede » November 5th, 2019, 6:58 am

Hrusínský was the first person I thought of when you said that. :D

(I only like Capricious Summer I'm afraid, Menzel and I are rarely on the same wavelength, but lots to appreciate).

matthewscott8
Donator
Posts: 1676
Joined: May 13, 2015
Contact:

#1975

Post by matthewscott8 » November 6th, 2019, 10:45 am

I saw Urusei Yatsura 2: Beautiful Dreamer last night. First film I have seen for a couple of years that has debuted into my top 20 films. I really needed that, a shot in the arm. Good advertisement for the ICM 500 < 400 list.

User avatar
OldAle1
Donator
Posts: 3883
Joined: Feb 09, 2017
Location: Dairyland, USA
Contact:

#1976

Post by OldAle1 » November 6th, 2019, 1:07 pm

matthewscott8 wrote:
November 6th, 2019, 10:45 am
I saw Urusei Yatsura 2: Beautiful Dreamer last night. First film I have seen for a couple of years that has debuted into my top 20 films. I really needed that, a shot in the arm. Good advertisement for the ICM 500 < 400 list.
I was thinking you had more movement than that - perhaps you used to. In any case I think your lists are less static than mine, but you got me curious. I have 3 debuts within my top 20 in the latter half of this decade -

Evolution of a Filipino Family - seen January 2015
As I Was Moving Ahead Occasionally I Saw Brief Glimpses of Beauty - August 2015
La La Land - first seen December 2016, instant top 100, elevated to #1 after 4 or 5 viewings by February, 2017; in fact this prompted the most serious re-ordering of my list to date and I've continued to be a little more focused on keeping lists "current" since

matthewscott8
Donator
Posts: 1676
Joined: May 13, 2015
Contact:

#1977

Post by matthewscott8 » November 6th, 2019, 5:38 pm

OldAle1 wrote:
November 6th, 2019, 1:07 pm
matthewscott8 wrote:
November 6th, 2019, 10:45 am
I saw Urusei Yatsura 2: Beautiful Dreamer last night. First film I have seen for a couple of years that has debuted into my top 20 films. I really needed that, a shot in the arm. Good advertisement for the ICM 500 < 400 list.
I was thinking you had more movement than that - perhaps you used to. In any case I think your lists are less static than mine, but you got me curious. I have 3 debuts within my top 20 in the latter half of this decade -

Evolution of a Filipino Family - seen January 2015
As I Was Moving Ahead Occasionally I Saw Brief Glimpses of Beauty - August 2015
La La Land - first seen December 2016, instant top 100, elevated to #1 after 4 or 5 viewings by February, 2017; in fact this prompted the most serious re-ordering of my list to date and I've continued to be a little more focused on keeping lists "current" since
I still re-order my list a fair bit so there's some liquidity there. I don't want to be someone who doesn't add to my list because they don't want to put an icepick into the glacier of their nostalgia. Also, obviously in year 2 of being a film buff, you probably have 10 new entries into your top 20, and I am on year probably 18 of formally seeing myself as a film buff (though I was less self-awarely fascinated by movies for an additional 10 years), so it's probably natural to only have 1 new entry per year. I've probably been posting with you for about 15 years now lol. Also last 2 years I'm seeing less films, 2018 I finished with a top 50 first time views, this year I am struggling to get there with 50, went through a long period where I was seeing 100 great first time views a year.

I do also consciously do some sort of a rationing system, I mean I have several unwatched Marguerite Duras movies sat on a hard drive. And I am pretty sure if I watched Umbrellas of Cherbourg or Les Demoiselles de Rochefort that they would make some sort of immediate very high debut. Godard gets rationed as well. I watch stuff I am not expecting to like a lot a fair bit now (ICM's negative influence, stuff with a lot of official checks, but also helps me to become more rounded and knowledgeable), whereas I went through a long period of only watching stuff where I had high confidence in the team involved and the film's associated teasers and reviews.

Mekas is rationed for me as well, I have "As I was moving ahead", and it will be watched too. It is good to have landmarks to look forward to! I have got a bit annoyed with Diaz, but I still haven't seen a lot of the most acclaimed ones. I kind of want to sick an editor on him. Because I tend to forget that a story is even going on, and then it does actually matter.

User avatar
Coryn
Posts: 1084
Joined: Dec 05, 2018
Contact:

#1978

Post by Coryn » November 7th, 2019, 9:19 am

So, my gf wanted to see a horror flick once yesterday and we picked out It Follows (2014). Honestly, it scared the shit out of me. I can't remember having seen such a scary movie ever. The story itself is kind of ridiculous but the score and the whole creepiness and claustrophobic feeling throughout it is amazing.
I saved Latin, what did you ever do ?

Bia
Posts: 30
Joined: Nov 16, 2019
Contact:

#1979

Post by Bia » November 19th, 2019, 6:51 am

‎Border (2018) directed by Ali Abbasi
I thought this was going to be a quirky arthouse film about a woman who puts her talent for smelling people's feelings to good use as a customs officer and manages to fall in love along the way But it's much darker than that. Also features one of the most impressive sex scenes I've seen in a long time. It had shades of a Harmony Korine film about it, which was probably due to the main characters looking like the people in Trash Humpers. It's worth checking out if you're in the mood for something twisted.
"We live like animals and die like animals because we're nobodies to each other."

User avatar
joachimt
Donator
Posts: 30634
Joined: Feb 16, 2012
Location: Netherlands
Contact:

#1980

Post by joachimt » November 25th, 2019, 1:58 pm

I haven't finished it yet, but I'm in the middle of a movie with a 10 year old kid who rips open the pants of Bill Cosby and is being French kissed by the nanny and he's allowed to grab her butt. :blink:

Guess which movie?
ICM-profile
Fergenaprido: "I find your OCD to be adorable, J"

User avatar
maxwelldeux
Donator
Posts: 7640
Joined: Jun 07, 2016
Location: Seattle-ish, WA, USA
Contact:

#1981

Post by maxwelldeux » November 26th, 2019, 1:01 am

joachimt wrote:
November 25th, 2019, 1:58 pm
I haven't finished it yet, but I'm in the middle of a movie with a 10 year old kid who rips open the pants of Bill Cosby and is being French kissed by the nanny and he's allowed to grab her butt. :blink:

Guess which movie?
Ghost Dad?

Only Cosby movie I can think of off the top of my head. And I don't even want to know if it's Cosby or the 10yo who's kissing the nanny... (D:)

User avatar
Kublai Khan
Posts: 929
Joined: Nov 09, 2014
Location: Sarasota, FL
Contact:

#1982

Post by Kublai Khan » November 26th, 2019, 1:19 am

Leonard, Part VI?

(Never actually seen it, heard it was terrible)

User avatar
joachimt
Donator
Posts: 30634
Joined: Feb 16, 2012
Location: Netherlands
Contact:

#1983

Post by joachimt » November 26th, 2019, 5:43 am

It was Jack (1996). Robin Williams plays a 10 year old boy who's body grows four times as fast as a normal body, so he looks 40. Bill Cosby is his teacher. The mother of his best friend is played by Fran Drescher, who is best known for her role in the TV series The Nanny.
ICM-profile
Fergenaprido: "I find your OCD to be adorable, J"

User avatar
maxwelldeux
Donator
Posts: 7640
Joined: Jun 07, 2016
Location: Seattle-ish, WA, USA
Contact:

#1984

Post by maxwelldeux » November 26th, 2019, 6:06 am

joachimt wrote:
November 26th, 2019, 5:43 am
It was Jack (1996). Robin Williams plays a 10 year old boy who's body grows four times as fast as a normal body, so he looks 40. Bill Cosby is his teacher. The mother of his best friend is played by Fran Drescher, who is best known for her role in the TV series The Nanny.
Oh my god. Your earlier description of Jack might be the best one I've ever seen for that film. :worship:

User avatar
Ivan0716
Posts: 1192
Joined: Feb 05, 2012
Contact:

#1985

Post by Ivan0716 » November 27th, 2019, 4:54 pm

Knives Out (2019, Rian Johnson)

I knew when I saw Miike's First Love that it was going to be the most fun I'll have in the cinema all year, but this came pretty damn close. Can't wait to see de Armas and Craig in the new Bond now.

Take note Bong Joon-ho, this is how you do heavy-handed political statements PROPERLY.

User avatar
Ebbywebby
Posts: 2859
Joined: Sep 10, 2012
Location: Orange County, CA
Contact:

#1986

Post by Ebbywebby » December 2nd, 2019, 12:21 am

https://www.icheckmovies.com/movies/the+pyramid/

Just watched this. It was in the TCM Underground slot on Friday night. At the time, I was really curious to see this film because it had ZERO CHECKS! But within the past day or two, two other TCM fans checked it before I did.

Wow, this film could not be more "New Age." It's all about a TV cameraman who becomes disillusioned with TV's ratings-seeking exploitation and goes on a personal path to enlightenment. Vintage space-cadet issues brought up like ESP, Kirlian photography, the secret life of plants and, of course, the power of the pyramids. It wasn't a terrible film, but it made me think of dubious, preachy, contemporary items like Neil Breen films and the "Left Behind" series.

Director Gary Kent basically made just two other films, but IMDb indicates he had more success as an actor.

The only other time I noticed TCM showing a film with ZERO CHECKS was "All Neat in Black Stockings" (1969) a couple of years ago.

User avatar
OldAle1
Donator
Posts: 3883
Joined: Feb 09, 2017
Location: Dairyland, USA
Contact:

#1987

Post by OldAle1 » December 2nd, 2019, 12:10 pm

That looks like something that would fit alongside all those Sunn Classic pics from the same era - In Search of Noah's Ark and suchlike. I love those kinds of things, well I love them for a few minutes anyway, usually they become so stupid and tedious after a while that it's a chore to finish them.

User avatar
Ebbywebby
Posts: 2859
Joined: Sep 10, 2012
Location: Orange County, CA
Contact:

#1988

Post by Ebbywebby » December 2nd, 2019, 8:40 pm

OldAle1 wrote:
December 2nd, 2019, 12:10 pm
That looks like something that would fit alongside all those Sunn Classic pics from the same era - In Search of Noah's Ark and suchlike.
That's pretty accurate. I remember seeing "Noah's Ark" at a drive-in theater with my family! Though "Noah's Ark" didn't have any scene as "adults only" as
SpoilerShow
a newsman shooting himself in the head on the air.
There also was a bit of dark, silhouetted nudity.

User avatar
RedHawk10
Posts: 497
Joined: Feb 06, 2017
Contact:

#1989

Post by RedHawk10 » December 3rd, 2019, 5:04 am

The Irishman - great, bleak film. The last thirty minutes or so is one of the best stretches Scorsese has ever directed, and possibly the most upsetting. Surely one of the densest movies he's done.

I think I still favor Silence as his best work of the decade, but this is pretty close.

User avatar
outdoorcats
Posts: 936
Joined: Feb 03, 2017
Contact:

#1990

Post by outdoorcats » December 3rd, 2019, 6:13 am

It's maybe his most graceful ending yet. I don't know I thought it was completely bleak though. Unlike most of his previous gangster films, Scorsese seemed more interested in the possibility of redemption before death (he's always been a religious filmmaker, but it's a little more pronounced recently). My impression is that Frank was essentially a good person at heart who was heavily desensitized to killing and who became conditioned to think of it as just another job to do. We almost never see him do anything out of greed or self-interest, but only to prove his loyalty and serve others.

[a LION eats GOD. Gunshots ring out. MATT turns around]
MATT: That's the guy I was telling you about.

User avatar
RedHawk10
Posts: 497
Joined: Feb 06, 2017
Contact:

#1991

Post by RedHawk10 » December 3rd, 2019, 6:57 am

outdoorcats wrote:
December 3rd, 2019, 6:13 am
It's maybe his most graceful ending yet. I don't know I thought it was completely bleak though. Unlike most of his previous gangster films, Scorsese seemed more interested in the possibility of redemption before death (he's always been a religious filmmaker, but it's a little more pronounced recently). My impression is that Frank was essentially a good person at heart who was heavily desensitized to killing and who became conditioned to think of it as just another job to do. We almost never see him do anything out of greed or self-interest, but only to prove his loyalty and serve others.
That's an interesting reading of it, though I can't say it's close to mine -
SpoilerShow
to me, Frank grew old in deeply puzzled loneliness (even by the end, he doesn't truly understand why he lost Peggy) and pain. He acted as a mindless pawn throughout the whole film, and his hypocrisies come to light towards the end (he's so afraid of finality, yet hardly flinched taking the lives of so many, etc.). He was just following orders, sure, just like in the army. "I know this'll sound crazy, but a higher power told me to kill Jimmy Hoffa". I don't think the film looks at him in a favorable light...at all, and certainly doesn't redeem him by the end. He missed the point of his whole, sordid life, and it's no one's fault but his own.
Last edited by RedHawk10 on December 3rd, 2019, 7:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.

blocho
Donator
Posts: 2603
Joined: Jul 20, 2014
Contact:

#1992

Post by blocho » December 3rd, 2019, 8:18 am

We should really go to spoilers for these Irishman comments.
SpoilerShow
People are making some really salient points about the character of Frank Sheeran, and it's helping me see some of the depth that I perhaps missed when I saw it last week. I just want to add one more point: He refuses to make any amends at the end of his life, toward his family or toward the families of those he killed, or toward his god. The only reason he speaks to his daughter or the FBI or a priest is clearly because of his loneliness. His only operative motive is loyalty. He mentions money at one point, but it seems like an afterthought. The only time he expresses regret is with regard to Hoffa, and that's clearly an example of one loyalty crossing another. Because of loyalty, he killed for the mob. Because of loyalty, he killed for his government.

As an aside, I should mention that the particularities of the history in the movie should not be taken as factual. I sort of got a hint of this when the Pesci character said that the mob killed JFK (bullshit sirens went off in my head). That's a sign of the historical accuracy of this movie. I've since done a little background reading, and it appears that there are many doubts regarding whether Sheeran was actually responsible for killing Gallo and Hoffa.

User avatar
Onderhond
Posts: 3333
Joined: Dec 23, 2012
Contact:

#1993

Post by Onderhond » December 3rd, 2019, 8:21 am

Regardless of what people think of the film, I really don't get the critical reception of The Irishman. It's completely out-dated, dusty, yesteryear's cinema that seems oblivious of anything that happening for the past 25 years. Which is understandable if you've read anything Scorsese has to say, he's just an old man making old man cinema, but to see almost universal critical praise for this just boggles my mind.

Makes you wonder how many critics just slapped on a 4/5 star rating on their reviews, took some random Scorsese praise from their drawer and cashed in their paycheck. It's probably easier than actually being critical of the man's work for a change.

At least I could appreciate the irony of the film. So many millions of dollars spent on de-aging a bunch of old farts, while it was the film/director that should have gotten a good polish instead.

blocho
Donator
Posts: 2603
Joined: Jul 20, 2014
Contact:

#1994

Post by blocho » December 3rd, 2019, 4:58 pm

Onderhond wrote:
December 3rd, 2019, 8:21 am
Regardless of what people think of the film, I really don't get the critical reception of The Irishman. It's completely out-dated, dusty, yesteryear's cinema that seems oblivious of anything that happening for the past 25 years. Which is understandable if you've read anything Scorsese has to say, he's just an old man making old man cinema, but to see almost universal critical praise for this just boggles my mind.

Makes you wonder how many critics just slapped on a 4/5 star rating on their reviews, took some random Scorsese praise from their drawer and cashed in their paycheck. It's probably easier than actually being critical of the man's work for a change.

At least I could appreciate the irony of the film. So many millions of dollars spent on de-aging a bunch of old farts, while it was the film/director that should have gotten a good polish instead.
I liked the movie, but I agree that Scorsese praise has become rote and mindless over the past two decades. He's both a great director and a tad overrated.

User avatar
Onderhond
Posts: 3333
Joined: Dec 23, 2012
Contact:

#1995

Post by Onderhond » December 3rd, 2019, 6:47 pm

blocho wrote:
December 3rd, 2019, 4:58 pm
I liked the movie
Well sure, it's not even about personal taste for me. I get that people like/love this, especially if slower gangster epics are your thing. It's just that I expect more from critics than a mere expression of personal taste (and then it seems even weirder, because a 96% score on RT seems very unlikely). Instead they seem to be hallelujah-ing a film that could've been made 30 years ago, by a director who has been complaining that movie theaters are showing too much of the same thing these days.

User avatar
RedHawk10
Posts: 497
Joined: Feb 06, 2017
Contact:

#1996

Post by RedHawk10 » December 3rd, 2019, 7:28 pm

Onderhond wrote:
December 3rd, 2019, 6:47 pm
blocho wrote:
December 3rd, 2019, 4:58 pm
I liked the movie
It's just that I expect more from critics than a mere expression of personal taste
What's that supposed to mean? Do you think there's an objective way to measure the quality of a film? Or are you just saying you think these critics are being dishonest with their taste as well as not writing well enough on the subject of the film? The latter makes sense, the former...uh.

And Blocho, I think your reading is pretty spot on.

User avatar
Onderhond
Posts: 3333
Joined: Dec 23, 2012
Contact:

#1997

Post by Onderhond » December 3rd, 2019, 9:46 pm

RedHawk10 wrote:
December 3rd, 2019, 7:28 pm
What's that supposed to mean? Do you think there's an objective way to measure the quality of a film? Or are you just saying you think these critics are being dishonest with their taste as well as not writing well enough on the subject of the film? The latter makes sense, the former...uh.
Definitely not the former. Someone with my taste in films learns early on that there's really no objective measure of quality for anything art-related. The hard way :D

But I do expect critics to look at things that go beyond their own, personal taste. Like what does a movie add to the broader cinematic landscape. Is a director just repeating himself? And how does this film relate to statements the director made recently about other films (in the case of Scorsese). I feel many are maybe not so much dishonest, but definitely lax, maybe a little afraid to write against the popular (or expected/establish) opinion? Is this really (one of the) most notable film(s) of the year? Did we really NEED to see this on the big screen? It this a film that deserves to be hyped so half the country goes out of their way to spend 3.5 hours watching it?

Not singling out specific writers or outlets, but 300 top critics can't all truthfully agree this is one of the best films of the year. If they do, it's just an extra reason to question their authority on film (and as extension, the lists people focus on so much here).

User avatar
RedHawk10
Posts: 497
Joined: Feb 06, 2017
Contact:

#1998

Post by RedHawk10 » December 3rd, 2019, 11:19 pm

Onderhond wrote:
December 3rd, 2019, 9:46 pm
RedHawk10 wrote:
December 3rd, 2019, 7:28 pm
What's that supposed to mean? Do you think there's an objective way to measure the quality of a film? Or are you just saying you think these critics are being dishonest with their taste as well as not writing well enough on the subject of the film? The latter makes sense, the former...uh.
Definitely not the former. Someone with my taste in films learns early on that there's really no objective measure of quality for anything art-related. The hard way :D

But I do expect critics to look at things that go beyond their own, personal taste. Like what does a movie add to the broader cinematic landscape. Is a director just repeating himself? And how does this film relate to statements the director made recently about other films (in the case of Scorsese). I feel many are maybe not so much dishonest, but definitely lax, maybe a little afraid to write against the popular (or expected/establish) opinion? Is this really (one of the) most notable film(s) of the year? Did we really NEED to see this on the big screen? It this a film that deserves to be hyped so half the country goes out of their way to spend 3.5 hours watching it?

Not singling out specific writers or outlets, but 300 top critics can't all truthfully agree this is one of the best films of the year. If they do, it's just an extra reason to question their authority on film (and as extension, the lists people focus on so much here).
At the end of the day though, isn't a lot of that fairly subjective? What constitutes a filmmaker repeating themselves? You'd get all sorts of arguments over that. What makes a film one of the most notable of the year (outside of personal preference? Innovation and influence? General popularity? Surely we don't want to go down that route). Who knows who wants to see what on the big screen? Good movies, I'd guess. 3.5 hours isn't all that different from a football game, so if you love movies (which I'm assuming most people reading film criticism do, to some extent) why would that even be a problem? Unless you're one of those who simply don't like 3+ hour films aimed at adults, which is fine, but in that case, why does a critic then need to tell you that?

Why can't they all agree it's one of the best films of the year? I'm not saying some critics aren't dishonest with their taste, but it seems like you're suggesting that *most* of them are, which is...extremely cynical.

User avatar
Onderhond
Posts: 3333
Joined: Dec 23, 2012
Contact:

#1999

Post by Onderhond » December 4th, 2019, 7:28 am

RedHawk10 wrote:
December 3rd, 2019, 11:19 pm
At the end of the day though, isn't a lot of that fairly subjective?
There's always going to be a level of subjectivity, but if critics are just "boys 'n girls with opinions that happen to be good writers", what weight do they carry? If they can't offer some broader, more objective insights, then we're down to "everybody's opinion is equal" and a list like TSPDT or S&S becomes completely worthless and we're better just sticking to IMDb lists, no? At least more people voted for those.
RedHawk10 wrote:
December 3rd, 2019, 11:19 pm
I'm not saying some critics aren't dishonest with their taste, but it seems like you're suggesting that *most* of them are
I'm saying that with certain films from certain directors it's probably much easier to stay in line rather than write truthfully. And as to why collectively everyone can't agree on something? Exactly because taste is subjective, no? Unless you sample really, really carefully, finding a group of 300+ people of which 96% will like something is quite rare indeed.

User avatar
outdoorcats
Posts: 936
Joined: Feb 03, 2017
Contact:

#2000

Post by outdoorcats » December 6th, 2019, 2:35 am

I just got back from Waves. Thoughts a jumble, and I am very tired, so some random stream of consciousness. Spoiler free.

-It is not an easy watch, but it is a truly Great film
-Reminded me a little of The Place Beyond the Pines. In the sense that it's very ambitious "Big" filmmaking that actually hits the mark, plus a similarity in how the story is structured (which I won't spoil as the second half of the film in particular would be best gone into as blind as possible)
-It is highly psychological and how much you get out of it (or are just bored) depends on how much you get into the characters' headspace. The heavily anxiety-inducing Nine Inch Nails soundtrack (one of Reznor and Ross' best scores IMO) helps. But I also think working in human services helped me empathize with all of the characters deeply and painfully even as they inflicted devastating pain on each other.
-The story is deceptively simple; if I were to describe it to you with just text, you'd wonder what the hoopla was about. If it had been directed by anyone but Shultz it would have been...a solid drama I suppose? But his filmmaking style* makes everything seem more epic. The film is 45 minutes shorter than The Irishman but feels like it's packed with 4 hours worth of story. I left the theater emotionally exhausted. But I also want to see it again.


*which this time around I realized sharply contrasts incredibly cinematic and "subjective" camerawork (constantly channeling characters' moods) with nautralistic, often non-dramatic and improvised dialogue and performances...which makes him sort of like Malick? Except swooping camerawork aside nothing about his films feels like Malick.

[a LION eats GOD. Gunshots ring out. MATT turns around]
MATT: That's the guy I was telling you about.

Post Reply