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 (Results), Mini-series (Feb 29th), 2009 awards (Mar 3rd), Favorite Movies (Mar 21st), Doubling the Canon (Mar ??)
Challenges: Academy Awards, Africa, African American/Blaxploitation
Film of the Week: Doa al karawan, 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)

The Film Lounge

User avatar
mightysparks
Site Admin
Posts: 30100
Joined: May 05, 2011
Location: Perth, WA, Australia
Contact:

Re: The Film Lounge

#18801

Post by mightysparks » December 27th, 2019, 3:23 am

I'm tidying up my film spreadsheet. For films whose countries are listed as Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia etc on IMDb, should I leave them listed with those countries or should I update them to reflect the 'new' countries? I don't really know how those kinds of changes work so I'm not sure how to handle them.
"I do not always know what I want, but I do know what I don't want." - Stanley Kubrick

iCM | IMDb | LastFM | TSZDT

Image

User avatar
maxwelldeux
Donator
Posts: 7666
Joined: Jun 07, 2016
Location: Seattle-ish, WA, USA
Contact:

#18802

Post by maxwelldeux » December 27th, 2019, 3:41 am

mightysparks wrote:
December 27th, 2019, 3:23 am
I'm tidying up my film spreadsheet. For films whose countries are listed as Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia etc on IMDb, should I leave them listed with those countries or should I update them to reflect the 'new' countries? I don't really know how those kinds of changes work so I'm not sure how to handle them.
What is the purpose of your spreadsheet, specifically as it relates to country storage?

If you want to reflect IMDB data, use the original.

If you want to use it for country polls, use the updated country.

If you have other reasons, TBD. Really, my advice is to store the data in a way that makes what you want to do with it as easy as possible.

User avatar
Ivan0716
Posts: 1196
Joined: Feb 05, 2012
Contact:

#18803

Post by Ivan0716 » December 27th, 2019, 3:44 am

Letterboxd uses the new countries, going by language or filming location usually works too.

In my experience films from these regions are surprisingly easy to differentiate, especially compared to ones from USSR.

If you're not sure about any just ask, I'm sure someone can help.

User avatar
mightysparks
Site Admin
Posts: 30100
Joined: May 05, 2011
Location: Perth, WA, Australia
Contact:

#18804

Post by mightysparks » December 27th, 2019, 3:55 am

maxwelldeux wrote:
December 27th, 2019, 3:41 am
mightysparks wrote:
December 27th, 2019, 3:23 am
I'm tidying up my film spreadsheet. For films whose countries are listed as Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia etc on IMDb, should I leave them listed with those countries or should I update them to reflect the 'new' countries? I don't really know how those kinds of changes work so I'm not sure how to handle them.
What is the purpose of your spreadsheet, specifically as it relates to country storage?

If you want to reflect IMDB data, use the original.

If you want to use it for country polls, use the updated country.

If you have other reasons, TBD. Really, my advice is to store the data in a way that makes what you want to do with it as easy as possible.
It's a bit of all of them lol, I generally try to stick close to IMDb data since that's where I pull all my info from so that's what I'm leaning towards. But I also use it for country polls and just general stats. There weren't too many countries with issues; Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia and Soviet Union (and Taiwan seems to have some weird stuff going on), so at the moment I'm just keeping them but I don't know if it'll cause me issues in the future.
"I do not always know what I want, but I do know what I don't want." - Stanley Kubrick

iCM | IMDb | LastFM | TSZDT

Image

User avatar
maxwelldeux
Donator
Posts: 7666
Joined: Jun 07, 2016
Location: Seattle-ish, WA, USA
Contact:

#18805

Post by maxwelldeux » December 27th, 2019, 5:53 am

mightysparks wrote:
December 27th, 2019, 3:55 am
maxwelldeux wrote:
December 27th, 2019, 3:41 am
mightysparks wrote:
December 27th, 2019, 3:23 am
I'm tidying up my film spreadsheet. For films whose countries are listed as Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia etc on IMDb, should I leave them listed with those countries or should I update them to reflect the 'new' countries? I don't really know how those kinds of changes work so I'm not sure how to handle them.
What is the purpose of your spreadsheet, specifically as it relates to country storage?

If you want to reflect IMDB data, use the original.

If you want to use it for country polls, use the updated country.

If you have other reasons, TBD. Really, my advice is to store the data in a way that makes what you want to do with it as easy as possible.
It's a bit of all of them lol, I generally try to stick close to IMDb data since that's where I pull all my info from so that's what I'm leaning towards. But I also use it for country polls and just general stats. There weren't too many countries with issues; Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia and Soviet Union (and Taiwan seems to have some weird stuff going on), so at the moment I'm just keeping them but I don't know if it'll cause me issues in the future.
So, my approach is to keep the spreadsheet for what I use for polls and personal stats purposes. I assign a film to a country manually, and that's the only thing I record. For other historical purposes, I'll download my IMDB etc. data when I need it, but for the forum here, I keep all my data I can't easily sort in a spreadsheet. I would argue that if you're keeping up with IMDB ratings, it's better to gear your spreadsheet towards other purposes.

And yeah - the biggest issue you're going to see is with Soviet Union.

Cippenham
Donator
Posts: 12968
Joined: May 09, 2011
Location: Dorset England
Contact:

#18806

Post by Cippenham » December 27th, 2019, 10:51 pm

Sam Mendes and Steve McQueen, film Directors have just been knighted so become Sir Sam Mendes and Sir Steve McQueen.

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

#18807

Post by Kublai Khan » December 27th, 2019, 11:35 pm

Just my 3000th personal check with the 1000th site check of Diary of a Lost Girl (1929). Beautiful film.

User avatar
Onderhond
Posts: 3354
Joined: Dec 23, 2012
Contact:

#18808

Post by Onderhond » December 28th, 2019, 9:40 pm

joachimt wrote:
December 23rd, 2019, 5:04 pm
Everytime I saw Dench's hands, I saw normal human hands.
Well yes, but everyone had human hands really. And Dench was wearing a fur coat for most of the film, so they stuck out like regular hands. When she was in her basket ( :turned: ) they were like the rest of the cast. Human hands with CGI on the wrist to make it blend with the arms.

I don't like musicals, because of that I wasn't a big fan of the film. But it sure was pretty bonkers for a big budget production. People whine and nag a whole year about Disney dominating the box office and films being boring, but when something wacky is made everyone trips over each other to tweet the funniest dis. Bit sad that.

User avatar
joachimt
Donator
Posts: 30660
Joined: Feb 16, 2012
Location: Netherlands
Contact:

#18809

Post by joachimt » December 28th, 2019, 9:46 pm

Onderhond wrote:
December 28th, 2019, 9:40 pm
joachimt wrote:
December 23rd, 2019, 5:04 pm
Everytime I saw Dench's hands, I saw normal human hands.
Well yes, but everyone had human hands really. And Dench was wearing a fur coat for most of the film, so they stuck out like regular hands. When she was in her basket ( :turned: ) they were like the rest of the cast. Human hands with CGI on the wrist to make it blend with the arms.
Sure, you're right, but that doesn't explain the ring on her hand changing from left to right. Did you see that when you watched it?
ICM-profile
Fergenaprido: "I find your OCD to be adorable, J"

User avatar
Onderhond
Posts: 3354
Joined: Dec 23, 2012
Contact:

#18810

Post by Onderhond » December 28th, 2019, 9:48 pm

Not really. It was a film with multiple human/cat/furry hybrids in every scene, I was looking at other things :D


User avatar
Onderhond
Posts: 3354
Joined: Dec 23, 2012
Contact:

#18812

Post by Onderhond » December 29th, 2019, 8:16 pm

Watched Parasite. Decent but I'm completely clueless what the fuss is about. A pretty average South-Korean film, decent direction and ... I dunno?

User avatar
PeacefulAnarchy
Moderator
Posts: 23799
Joined: May 08, 2011
Contact:

#18813

Post by PeacefulAnarchy » December 29th, 2019, 9:07 pm

The social commentary.

User avatar
Onderhond
Posts: 3354
Joined: Dec 23, 2012
Contact:

#18814

Post by Onderhond » December 29th, 2019, 11:16 pm

Yeah, there's really a lack of social commentary in film these days ...

blocho
Donator
Posts: 2627
Joined: Jul 20, 2014
Contact:

#18815

Post by blocho » December 29th, 2019, 11:57 pm

Onderhond wrote:
December 29th, 2019, 11:16 pm
Yeah, there's really a lack of social commentary in film these days ...
I almost never feel this way, but I'm with you Ondy.

User avatar
weirdboy
Donator
Posts: 3574
Joined: Jan 03, 2016
Contact:

#18816

Post by weirdboy » December 30th, 2019, 4:35 am

In preparation to moving across the globe to a smaller living space, I've been reducing the storage space of hundreds of DVDs into binder organizers. I thought I knew how many binders I'd need, but it turns out my estimate was off by a substantial margin. I just ordered enough additional binders to double my initial estimate, which hopefully will cover it.

blocho
Donator
Posts: 2627
Joined: Jul 20, 2014
Contact:

#18817

Post by blocho » December 30th, 2019, 5:02 am

More than a year ago, I mentioned that my mother's movie was premiering at DocNYC. For the past year, it has played the festival circuit around the United States. Now I'm happy to announce that it is going into limited release in a couple of weeks. You can find all the details, including a trailer, here. But to summarize the screening schedule:

Jan. 10-16 New York City
Jan. 13 Various locations around Phoenix
Jan. 17-23 Columbus, Ohio and Boca Raton, Florida
Jan. 20-21 Various locations around Los Angeles
Feb. 2 Austin, Texas
Feb. 11 Salt Lake City

If anyone is in those locations and interested, please check it out.

tommy_leazaq
Donator
Posts: 3523
Joined: May 18, 2011
Location: Chennai, India
Contact:

#18818

Post by tommy_leazaq » December 30th, 2019, 6:48 am

Onderhond wrote:
December 29th, 2019, 8:16 pm
Watched Parasite. Decent but I'm completely clueless what the fuss is about. A pretty average South-Korean film, decent direction and ... I dunno?
Same feeling here.
The "subvert-audience-expectation-at-the-end-to-evoke-shocking-response" routine in Modern Korean cinema is getting bit redundant

User avatar
PeacefulAnarchy
Moderator
Posts: 23799
Joined: May 08, 2011
Contact:

#18819

Post by PeacefulAnarchy » December 30th, 2019, 7:32 am

The Irishman is a good movie, but it belongs in 1983, maybe 1993 (and it could have been made with the same actors for a fraction of the cost). In 20 fucking 19 it is completely irrelevant and unnecessary. Still entertaining to watch and surprisingly brisk feeling for being three and a half hours long, and it's nice to see these guys give real performances again, but if this wins best picture there's gonna be a big dose of irony contrasting the film itself, an old throwback, with a win for Netflix, the big scary new production paradigm.

User avatar
mightysparks
Site Admin
Posts: 30100
Joined: May 05, 2011
Location: Perth, WA, Australia
Contact:

#18820

Post by mightysparks » January 6th, 2020, 2:20 pm

I've given three 7/10s in a row, am I broken :/
"I do not always know what I want, but I do know what I don't want." - Stanley Kubrick

iCM | IMDb | LastFM | TSZDT

Image

User avatar
OldAle1
Donator
Posts: 3917
Joined: Feb 09, 2017
Location: Dairyland, USA
Contact:

#18821

Post by OldAle1 » January 6th, 2020, 2:47 pm

PeacefulAnarchy wrote:
December 30th, 2019, 7:32 am
The Irishman is a good movie, but it belongs in 1983, maybe 1993 (and it could have been made with the same actors for a fraction of the cost). In 20 fucking 19 it is completely irrelevant and unnecessary. Still entertaining to watch and surprisingly brisk feeling for being three and a half hours long, and it's nice to see these guys give real performances again, but if this wins best picture there's gonna be a big dose of irony contrasting the film itself, an old throwback, with a win for Netflix, the big scary new production paradigm.
I largely felt that way after one viewing, but talking with a friend about it, reading a couple of key reviews, and seeing it again a couple of weeks later really changed my feelings and at the moment I'd say it's the only great film from 2019 I've seen, and up there with Scorsese's best. Perhaps it helps that in many respects it's reminiscent of Once Upon a Time in America, which remains my favorite gangster film, and I suspect also that I really resonate with it's despairing and lonely tone. But in any case I'm really happy that I saw it a second time - the only 2019 film I managed to repeat on so far.

I don't really think it'll will BP though - I think the Academy is still rather anti-Netflix, and I also think that they may be still on a "let's pick something NICE' kick. Yeah there have been depressing films winning previously - Moonlight being an obvious recent example - but I just get the sense that films like this one or Joker aren't going to cut it at this moment. Haven't seen 1917 but if it's at least slightly "hopeful" or at least not cynical, I think it's a strong shot.

User avatar
joachimt
Donator
Posts: 30660
Joined: Feb 16, 2012
Location: Netherlands
Contact:

#18822

Post by joachimt » January 6th, 2020, 5:22 pm

mightysparks wrote:
January 6th, 2020, 2:20 pm
I've given three 7/10s in a row, am I broken :/
Yay!! Lauren is finally starting to like movies! :banana: :party:
ICM-profile
Fergenaprido: "I find your OCD to be adorable, J"

User avatar
brokenface
Donator
Posts: 13254
Joined: Dec 29, 2011
Contact:

#18823

Post by brokenface » January 6th, 2020, 7:15 pm

OldAle1 wrote:
January 6th, 2020, 2:47 pm
I don't really think it'll will BP though - I think the Academy is still rather anti-Netflix, and I also think that they may be still on a "let's pick something NICE' kick. Yeah there have been depressing films winning previously - Moonlight being an obvious recent example - but I just get the sense that films like this one or Joker aren't going to cut it at this moment. Haven't seen 1917 but if it's at least slightly "hopeful" or at least not cynical, I think it's a strong shot.
Little Women could be the choice if they're after a 'something nice' choice. It's got that heartwarming thing going on. Might make it stand out this year

Haven't seen 1917 yet but in oscar-types it sounds in the Gravity/Dunkirk mix of tension + technically showy. Definitely could win a few categories like they did. But both of them didn't win best picture

User avatar
mightysparks
Site Admin
Posts: 30100
Joined: May 05, 2011
Location: Perth, WA, Australia
Contact:

#18824

Post by mightysparks » January 7th, 2020, 12:25 am

joachimt wrote:
January 6th, 2020, 5:22 pm
mightysparks wrote:
January 6th, 2020, 2:20 pm
I've given three 7/10s in a row, am I broken :/
Yay!! Lauren is finally starting to like movies! :banana: :party:
Probably won’t last long tehe My average rating so far this year is the highest it’s been since 2007 (though I’m only like 5 films and one miniseries in).
"I do not always know what I want, but I do know what I don't want." - Stanley Kubrick

iCM | IMDb | LastFM | TSZDT

Image

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

#18825

Post by Kublai Khan » January 7th, 2020, 2:55 am

Anyone know if this is some weird in-joke?

https://www.imdb.com/name/nm10897825/

User avatar
funkybusiness
Donator
Posts: 10613
Joined: Jan 22, 2013
Contact:

#18826

Post by funkybusiness » January 7th, 2020, 4:29 am

Kublai Khan wrote:
January 7th, 2020, 2:55 am
Anyone know if this is some weird in-joke?

https://www.imdb.com/name/nm10897825/
that's a pretty wide variance of productions tho

User avatar
Pretentious Hipster
Donator
Posts: 19598
Joined: Oct 24, 2011
Contact:

#18827

Post by Pretentious Hipster » January 9th, 2020, 2:35 pm

Thoughts on this thread (click on it to see all of it) that became viral? Women do need more recognition for directing but I dunno wtf this guy is smoking. It comes off as gender essentialist views as well which is also bullshit.


User avatar
GruesomeTwosome
Donator
Posts: 2920
Joined: Feb 03, 2017
Location: Industrial Wasteland, USA
Contact:

#18828

Post by GruesomeTwosome » January 9th, 2020, 2:55 pm

Pretentious Hipster wrote:
January 9th, 2020, 2:35 pm
Thoughts on this thread (click on it to see all of it) that became viral? Women do need more recognition for directing but I dunno wtf this guy is smoking. It comes off as gender essentialist views as well which is also bullshit.

Yeah that's a rather "men be like this, but women be like THIS" distillation that seems to cloud the point this random dude is trying to make.
I’m to remember every man I've seen fall into a plate of spaghetti???

My IMDB profile
ICM
Letterboxd

blocho
Donator
Posts: 2627
Joined: Jul 20, 2014
Contact:

#18829

Post by blocho » January 9th, 2020, 5:36 pm

Pretentious Hipster wrote:
January 9th, 2020, 2:35 pm
Thoughts on this thread (click on it to see all of it) that became viral? Women do need more recognition for directing but I dunno wtf this guy is smoking. It comes off as gender essentialist views as well which is also bullshit.

Dear god this is stupid. I regret reading it.

User avatar
St. Gloede
Moderator
Posts: 10316
Joined: May 06, 2011
Contact:

#18830

Post by St. Gloede » January 9th, 2020, 7:25 pm

There are a lot of statements there that are so absolutist that they just spin right back around in his face, and it is funny how he describes the feminine directorial touch to be invisible and then cites people like Denis ... However, the overall point should perhaps not be dismissed so thoroughly. (Not seen the film, liked Lady Bird, but nothing too special in direction - but then I very much like the flash he's describing as masculine).

I think that there is a certain degree of truth in the very generalized statement that men and women often express themselves in different ways through art, and find different points of interest. It would be very surprising if this was not the case as gender roles, including expectations and general experiences differ (to varying extents).

The idea that film has been a very male-driven from its inception is a very obvious fact. Women did play a larger role in the earliest days, but went on to almost disappearing until the 50s-60s, and even in the decades that followed they barely having a place - we have seen our director polls and we can track active female directors in decades past with a rather depressing ease).

What can be considered a masculine film or masculine traits in cinema as a whole can obviously be interpreted and measured in wildly different ways, but I do not think the proposition that film has been driven by very masculine traits to be silly. If we consider the characteristics generally expressed by men to be generally masculine, and vice versa (there is obviously overlaps, contradictions, etc.) we have to consider that the former has clearly dominated.

Considering the imbalance of men/women in the director's chair, and even in the critic's chair, if we grant that there are certain differences in expression/interests, the overall idea (that more specifically "masculine" expressions have been normalised and is viewed more favourable) is a fairly logical and believable premise - especially when we look at the utterly massive gender gap between cinephiles and bibliophiles. Clearly cinema, for some reason or another, attract far, far more men and women (at least judging by every single film forum/group I have ever been a part of).

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

#18831

Post by RedHawk10 » January 9th, 2020, 9:21 pm

That guy is an idiot, but the Academy certainly has inclusion issues - it's because they have very limited taste, though (for Christ sake, they separate Best Film and Best Foreign Language Film into two different things - this should be utterly baffling to everyone, and I'm shocked it isn't brought up more), and are generally extremely close-minded. I don't think it's run by a bunch of sexists/racists...but it is run by a bunch of people who maybe don't see that much of a variety of films, which is...something.

User avatar
St. Gloede
Moderator
Posts: 10316
Joined: May 06, 2011
Contact:

#18832

Post by St. Gloede » January 9th, 2020, 10:44 pm

RedHawk10 wrote:
January 9th, 2020, 9:21 pm
That guy is an idiot, but the Academy certainly has inclusion issues - it's because they have very limited taste, though (for Christ sake, they separate Best Film and Best Foreign Language Film into two different things - this should be utterly baffling to everyone, and I'm shocked it isn't brought up more), and are generally extremely close-minded. I don't think it's run by a bunch of sexists/racists...but it is run by a bunch of people who maybe don't see that much of a variety of films, which is...something.
Yeah, the academy is really just a strange concoction of strange political reasoning, odd loyalties and, as you hint at, a very limited scope. Doesn't help that https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainme ... d/284163/

The average of 63 would imply that over half are over 63 as younger members would drastically pull down the average (unless all the others are in theirs 40s and 50s). Explains a lot.

No wonder two films mimicking the styles of 60-90 year old films won.

blocho
Donator
Posts: 2627
Joined: Jul 20, 2014
Contact:

#18833

Post by blocho » January 10th, 2020, 5:00 am

I've been playing around with the idea that this twitter blowhard did not mean "since inception" but rather "since Inception." Unfortunately, I don't think that makes his ideas any more worthy.

tommy_leazaq
Donator
Posts: 3523
Joined: May 18, 2011
Location: Chennai, India
Contact:

#18834

Post by tommy_leazaq » January 10th, 2020, 8:19 am

funkybusiness wrote:
January 7th, 2020, 4:29 am
Kublai Khan wrote:
January 7th, 2020, 2:55 am
Anyone know if this is some weird in-joke?

https://www.imdb.com/name/nm10897825/
that's a pretty wide variance of productions tho
Angry Rantman is an Indian youtuber who tries to "review" films in angry ranting style. May be these are the films where he has given positive reviews.

User avatar
joachimt
Donator
Posts: 30660
Joined: Feb 16, 2012
Location: Netherlands
Contact:

#18835

Post by joachimt » January 13th, 2020, 6:22 pm

I started using justwatch.com. Very useful to figure out what's available on my multiple subscriptions that I haven't seen yet.
I just used the option to pick a few movies that I like and this was the result: :facepalm:

Image
ICM-profile
Fergenaprido: "I find your OCD to be adorable, J"

User avatar
OldAle1
Donator
Posts: 3917
Joined: Feb 09, 2017
Location: Dairyland, USA
Contact:

#18836

Post by OldAle1 » January 13th, 2020, 7:28 pm

I actually had a - very brief - part-time job in a very, very early movie-prediction company; this would be back in 1994-96, somewhere in that time frame though I think I was only there for 3-4 months; but my girlfriend at the time ended up essentially becoming the company eventually - I think she was the president and last employee when it finally died. It didn't work of course, I've never seen any of these programs that work. Perhaps they do work better for people who haven't seen so much, and certainly don't know as much and do as much research as those of us here - people who are also fairly easily pleased. I dunno. My brother actually watches stuff according to RT scores and seems happy with it, maybe this kind of site would work for him. But I have to laugh whenever I see recs coming from an algorithm - even when they're relative accurate they're always the obvious choices that I already know about.

User avatar
joachimt
Donator
Posts: 30660
Joined: Feb 16, 2012
Location: Netherlands
Contact:

#18837

Post by joachimt » January 13th, 2020, 7:31 pm

OldAle1 wrote:
January 13th, 2020, 7:28 pm
Perhaps they do work better for people who haven't seen so much
Might be the case here indeed. These are the recommendations of the movies that are available on my subscriptions (Prime, Disney, MUBI) and I already spent a lot of time yesterday and today clicking "seen" for lots of movies so all the good stuff is already filtered out, because I have already seen it.
ICM-profile
Fergenaprido: "I find your OCD to be adorable, J"

blocho
Donator
Posts: 2627
Joined: Jul 20, 2014
Contact:

#18838

Post by blocho » January 13th, 2020, 7:58 pm

joachimt wrote:
January 13th, 2020, 6:22 pm
I started using justwatch.com. Very useful to figure out what's available on my multiple subscriptions that I haven't seen yet.
I just used the option to pick a few movies that I like and this was the result: :facepalm:

Image
It makes perfect sense.
- McFarland USA is about running, and Casablanca is about people running (from Nazis or from their own pasts or from their true feelings).
- Casablanca has flashbacks, and This Is Us is all about flashbacks.
- Marmaduke's jowls are almost as prominent as Bogart's jowls. And if any word describes Bogart's sad face in Casablanca, it's hangdog.
- "I have the feeling this is the beginning of a beautiful friendship" perfectly describes both Rick/Louis and Huck/Jim.
- Both Casablanca and The Wild won Best Picture at the Academy Awards and are widely acclaimed as one of the greatest movies ever made.

max-scl
Posts: 674
Joined: Jun 20, 2015
Location: Santiago, Chile
Contact:

#18839

Post by max-scl » January 13th, 2020, 8:40 pm

The algorithm looks like this: You liked Casablanca, Casablanca is a movie, therefore you might like these other randomnly chosen movies.

Except there is a TV show thrown in there.

blocho
Donator
Posts: 2627
Joined: Jul 20, 2014
Contact:

#18840

Post by blocho » January 13th, 2020, 8:48 pm

I saw this really cool exhibition at the Poster House ( a new museum) in New York a couple of weeks ago. The exhibition displays hand-painted movie posters that were made in Ghana in the 1980s and 1990s. Based mostly on vhs covers, they were painted on repurposed burlap sacks and usually toured with movies that exhibited across the country. Is it "good" art? No. But it's an interesting look at what happens when movie marketing is adopted, co-opted, and modified by regional traditions.

Here's an example of one of the posters:
Image

Post Reply