Welcome to the ICM Forum. If you have an account but have trouble logging in, or have other questions, see THIS THREAD.
NOTE: Board emails should be working again. Information on forum upgrade and style issues.
Podcast: Talking Images (Episode 22 released November 17th * EXCLUSIVE * We Are Mentioned in a Book!!! Interview with Mary Guillermin on Rapture, JG & More)
Polls: Japan (Results), Essential Cinema (Jul 18th), 1978 (Jul 22nd), Western (Jul 30th)
Challenges: Run the Actor, Travel the World, Iran and Central Asia

TSPDT updates

Post Reply
User avatar
Lakigigar
Posts: 2110
Joined: October 31st, 2015, 6:00 am
Location: Belgium
Contact:

#1561

Post by Lakigigar »

These are 3 users i have a close and similar taste with that I follow

https://www.moviemeter.nl/user/160512/votes

Profile: lunpluvia - Rate Your Music - rateyourmusic.com

unrealnoises’s

yeule’s profile

1. Dutch user on MM who is a bit closer to Onderhond, very much into Noé, DuWelz and Refn. Probably the closest match on MM for movies for me.
2. A Tumblr lady i've learnt to know through our shared interest for yeule. We both think she is one of the greatest artists of all-time, in terms of music she's by far the closest match on the entire internet for me. She has rated like 5000 to 6000 albums and her tumblr is called "unreal noises". We have an eerily similar taste.
3. But she watches movies too, and it turns out we have a match too. I just watch more movies and more broader, she watches more horror stuff than I do.
4. Yeule herself, but she also has a great movie taste, apparently she has a weakness for woke / LGBT movies, and she watches lots of contemporary Asian stuff and weird stuff too. Probably my greatest idol and biggest influence too. Even in terms of personality, we're very similar (which is the case of lunpluvia too).
User avatar
Onderhond
Posts: 7239
Joined: December 23rd, 2012, 7:00 am
Contact:

#1562

Post by Onderhond »

OldAle1 wrote: February 22nd, 2021, 8:33 pm hard to imagine a Remo Williams or Buckaroo Banzai getting made today on the equivalent budgets.
Not sure what budgets we're talking about, but these films like pretty basic compared by some of the odder titles that were made in the past decade.
User avatar
tobias
Posts: 505
Joined: February 4th, 2017, 7:00 am
Contact:

#1563

Post by tobias »

Lakigigar wrote: February 22nd, 2021, 8:30 pm I've only seen Carrie and Scarface from De Palma. I like Carrie a lot (just outside top 50), but I thought Scarface was only average or slightly above average and a bit too long. Couldn't concentrate on it very well. Haven't seen the ones you mentioned, but someday i'll explore it.

Not seen a movie from Denis and Assayas. Personal Shopper is on my watchlist. I've seen Clouds of Sils Maria also being mentioned here a lot. Claire Denis is not someone i was going to delve in soon.

I'm also starting to really like Cronenberg!
Scarface was the first De Palma film I watched and afterwards I thought he was a hack because of how boring and contrived it is for long stretches (it has a few good sequences though). I think Untouchables is even worse in that regard (outside a couple of great scenes with Connery). De Palma's big studio efforts tend to suck away all the experimental nature that makes him so good. So I'd definitely encourage you to check out some of those that I've mentioned. Most of his films are much more like Carrie (which I also like a lot) than Scarface. But if you didn't like Scarface, I'd definitely avoid Untouchables, for now at least. I personally turned away from thinking De Palma was a hack when I watched a double feature of Mission Impossible and Blow Out one night with my brother. Mission Impossible has a weak script but stylistically it's actually a lot of fun. Blow Out is an absolute masterwork. It's funny how different it is. Scarface is one of the most stylistically void films made by a New Hollywood director, stuff like Blow Out or Phantom of the Paradise in turn is some of the most experimental. It feels really close to a lot of the stuff you like. Also Carlito's Way as I've already said is amazing.

I didn't mention Body Double yet but it's also very good. I can also recommend Sisters, Snake Eyes, Passion and The Fury. De Palma also loves long takes btw. There are some really, really great ones in like half of his films. One of my favourites is actually the first scene in Bonfire of Vanities, unfortunately the film takes a complete nose-dive afterwards.

As for Assayas the 2 films I was actually thinking about were Irma Vep and Demonlover, perhaps also Summer Hours. Assayas for me funnily is similar to De Palma, as I started out by watching Clouds of Sils Maria (before Personal Shopper came out this seemed like his most famous film) which I disliked. It was on German/French TV (ARTE) as a double feature with Irma Vep and I was that close to just turning of the TV but somehow I stayed and Irma Vep turned out to be absolutely remarkable, everything I'd missed in Clouds of Sils Maria (which feels incredibly stale, whereas Irma Vep is experimental and free form). Personal Shopper is good fun though, a kind of digital ghost story.

With Denis I was thinking about Trouble Every Day, maybe High Life.
User avatar
GruesomeTwosome
Donator
Posts: 3575
Joined: February 3rd, 2017, 7:00 am
Location: Industrial Wasteland, USA
Contact:

#1564

Post by GruesomeTwosome »

Lakigigar wrote: February 22nd, 2021, 8:30 pm
tobias wrote: February 22nd, 2021, 8:07 pm @ Lakigigar - Really didn't expect Kreuzweg, lol. I've actually seen it. I remember liking it, especially the way it made small observations along the way but I found Brüggeman's approach quite conservative. I definitely prefer someone like say Maren Ade myself.

I think we're actually similarly old (I was born in '96) but it seems we have very different tastes. I also got into film when I was 16 but my entry drugs were Kubrick, Murnau, Chaplin, Lang, Tarkovsky, even some Griffith and Ophüls (I was also very enamoured with visuals then). I was one of the guys who thought the Excorcist was boring (I also watched it when I was 16) and I was disappointed by City of God too. I'm also not a big fan of Victoria, really, though that's mostly the script and the direction (it feels very conveniently cobbled together and falls apart quickly for me), I think Grøvlen does a really good job as a DP (I actually met him twice last year). His career is going very strong too.

However Eyes Wide Shot is actually also in my top 5 and I also like some of the others you mentioned. I watched Spring Breakers with a friend around the time we finished school. That was a lot of fun.

Btw what's your thoughts on De Palma? It feels like you'd like his stuff a lot (stuff like Blow Out, Carlito's Way, Femme Fatale, Phantom of the Paradise, Dressed to Kill). He's long been my favourite of the movie brat guys. I also could see you liking Assayas and Denis.

Oh yeah and I also like Soulavki a lot.
Nothing wrong with different tastes. On ICM i think Onderhond comes closest to me (could not have noticed someone else), and Onderhond's taste is so apart that the difference between me & him is still insanely large, so i feel out of place here (but I still like it). My biggest annoyance is that there's not a single good official list for me. Ironically the list I like the most I've ever seen made by people is ICM's Favourite Unofficial Movies (lol), but I might have had unexpectedly a strong influence on that list, and luck (always 1 or 2 other people helping me voting a movie up, making it appear in the list, and because there's such a large pool of unofficial movies to choose from it's usually enough to have 2 or 3 voters.

I like Kubrick, but haven't explored the others. I hope i'll like Solyaris, which is going to be my first Tarkovsky for sure, but I'm afraid I won't like it. I'm less interested in the others.

I've only seen Carrie and Scarface from De Palma. I like Carrie a lot (just outside top 50), but I thought Scarface was only average or slightly above average and a bit too long. Couldn't concentrate on it very well. Haven't seen the ones you mentioned, but someday i'll explore it.

Not seen a movie from Denis and Assayas. Personal Shopper is on my watchlist. I've seen Clouds of Sils Maria also being mentioned here a lot. Claire Denis is not someone i was going to delve in soon.

I'm also starting to really like Cronenberg!
I agree with tobias regarding Assayas: looking at your tastes, I’d probably start with Demonlover instead of Personal Shopper. Demonlover remains my favorite out of the handful of Assayas films I’ve seen; to me it’s like a hybrid of De Palma and Paul Verhoeven. It was claimed as part of the so-called “French New Extremity” of the early 2000s, which is probably fair.
I’m to remember every man I've seen fall into a plate of spaghetti???

My IMDB profile
ICM
Letterboxd
User avatar
Lakigigar
Posts: 2110
Joined: October 31st, 2015, 6:00 am
Location: Belgium
Contact:

#1565

Post by Lakigigar »

https://letterboxd.com/lakigigar/list/l ... watchlist/

I've added some to the short watchlist of Letterboxd (Irma Vep, Demonlover, Blow Out, Phantom of the Paradise and Trouble Every Day), and a few others on the longer watchlist of IMDb
User avatar
Onderhond
Posts: 7239
Joined: December 23rd, 2012, 7:00 am
Contact:

#1566

Post by Onderhond »

Trouble Every Day was quite disappointing watching it back. Still one of the best things I've seen Denis do though.
User avatar
tobias
Posts: 505
Joined: February 4th, 2017, 7:00 am
Contact:

#1567

Post by tobias »

Lakigigar wrote: February 22nd, 2021, 9:11 pm https://letterboxd.com/lakigigar/list/l ... watchlist/

I've added some to the short watchlist of Letterboxd (Irma Vep, Demonlover, Blow Out, Phantom of the Paradise and Trouble Every Day), and a few others on the longer watchlist of IMDb
Curious to hear wheter you end up liking them. Dropped you a follow on Letterboxd.

:cheers:
User avatar
St. Gloede
Moderator
Posts: 12585
Joined: May 6th, 2011, 6:00 am
Contact:

#1568

Post by St. Gloede »

OldAle1 wrote: February 22nd, 2021, 8:33 pm But I don't think the 80s are "better" in any sense than any other decade, and in fact they are a decade that seems a little weak compared to most, in most countries and perhaps most genres. There was something of a sequel to the French New Wave going on, with the arrival of filmmakers like Carax and Beineix among others in France; in the USA there was the rise of a new independent film movement; the Kiarostami-led Iranian New Wave (or second New Wave after the 60s) got started towards the end of the decade, but... I'm not sure it was a decade of top-notch level in any major film country. I guess it was a good decade for SF and fantasy; it was the decade where theatrically-released anime really got a boost in 1988, and with American animation recharging somewhat with the Disney renaissance at the same time, but it was also the worst decade ever for the western and as bad as any for the musical. What I actually cherish about the decade was that it feels in retrospect like the last period when studios were actually willing to take some chances on totally weird and unproven stuff; hard to imagine a Remo Williams or Buckaroo Banzai getting made today on the equivalent budgets. This willingness to take a few risks - particularly if it was on stuff that was at least vaguely fantastic - lasted into the early 90s I'd say, but it seems pretty dead now.
The 80s is a pretty interesting decade as, in terms of general assessment, it went from being one of mindless action blockbusters, to one of an incredible international arthouse scene. Both are of course true. Not quite gotten to 1,000 films from the 80s yet, and there is a massive post-70s dip that undoubtedly ties in with the general decrease in eagerness/optimism - however - still a decade with a massive number of great film - and with my present viewings, more top favourites from then than the 90s, 00s and 10s - despite seeing an equivalent amount or more.

To me the 80s first and foremost represents a long line of comebacks, be it of individuals, movements or types of cinema that had suffered during the 70s. The most notable highlights being Czechoslovakia, where, after the Soviet invasion in '68 (of which Forman escaped and ended in the US) most of the big names had either been entirely censored or put to use on low budget/TV. However, suddenly Jakubisko, Chytilova, Kachyna, etc. were back.

A similar, less overtly oppressive situation had developed in Japan, where due to the financial crash the film industry had been hit hard. Again you had a low budget/tv or no films at all scenario, with people like Masumura ending in exploitation, Suzuki was pushed out, etc. This all changed with the Art Theater Guild, which financed Yoshida (granted, 70s), Suzuki and a long list of others.

Oddly enough, a similar trend happened in France - though the French New Wave directors had not really been hit, we see Godard return to critical praise after a decade most write off (I disagree - viewtopic.php?f=1&t=5136) and he produced some of his very greatest work - similarly Varda returned - after an odd decade - to make some of her best work - Rohmer too for that matter -putting out his entire Comedies and Proverbs cycle - arguable his best work - and the same can even be said for key French directors of the 60, like Malle (Au revoir les Enfants, Altlantic City, My Dinner with Andre).

While Fassbinder died in the early 80s causing an artificial bookend on New German Cinema, Wenders, Herzog, Ottinger, von Trotta, etc. also made what could arguably be said to be their very best work in the 80s.

And then - of course - you had a cinematic explosion in Asia. You mentioned Iran (which really took off in the 90s), but China and Taiwan had an incredible period, with Fifth Generation and the First Taiwanese Wave - tough both spilled into the 90s.

Was any country at their best? Probably not. Someone could probably make a case for Taiwan if they love both Hou and Yang - but a lot of countries were doing really well at the same time.

(I'd also feel guilty if I did not mention Peter Greenaway - who probably had his best decade as well)
User avatar
cinewest
Posts: 2342
Joined: February 15th, 2017, 7:00 am
Contact:

#1569

Post by cinewest »

xianjiro wrote: February 22nd, 2021, 8:12 pm
cinewest wrote: February 22nd, 2021, 8:58 am
St. Gloede wrote: February 22nd, 2021, 8:13 am I don't think I ever felt out of place, as every generation creates a massive number of great films. The only difference with the 60s/70s, based on my preferences and what I have seen - the rate was much higher. I'd also never bemoan coming in at a time when we quickly got access to all these great films.

If I were ever to bemoan missing the 60s/70s it would be for the music, as there are so many bands and musicians I could not see live.
It wasn't just the music of that time, but the entire countercultural movement, and general rebellion of youth around the world. As with film, during the 80's my own explorations led me to various niche interests (I was able to catch, for example, many of the great jazz ensembles of the 50's and 60's in small clubs before they passed on), and I was able to see pre-80's classic films in a multitude of revival movie theaters that existed around San Francisco prior to video stores putting most of them out of business by the end of the decade.

What was missing for me wasn't the access to what I was interested in but the lack of a social context that was buzzing with excitement for something (like a social, cultural, intellectual, or political movement) that was "happening" at that time. My own youthful passions just didn't jibe with what was fashionable or even "hip" at the time.

I don't mean to make too much of this, as I have connected to people and cultures, and cultivated interests contemporaneously all over the world since, and perhaps in part because I felt somewhat estranged from my own peers and cultural context of my early adulthood.
You were in San Francisco in the 80s "but the lack of a social context that was buzzing with excitement for something (like a social, cultural, intellectual, or political movement) that was "happening" at that time."

I'm really not sure what to make of how you were able to insulate yourself from that epidemic. And it's not like AIDS was the only thing happening at the time either. There was a honest backlash against Reagan and I have to believe San Francisco didn't sit that one out since it can't be divorced from AIDS.

Sorry, guess "fighting for our lives" and "Silence = Death" just wasn't nearly as hip and cool as the Summer of Love and Haight-Ashbury but counter-cultural movements were quite alive and well in the 80s. Maybe if you'd ventured south of Market a bit ... I don't really mean this to read like a personal attack, but your post does feel a bit dismissive of my formative years and I didn't have anything like the luxury of living in a place were social movements and counter-culture were accepted let alone celebrated. I had no choice but to be immersed in the straight world. I could have easily chosen to make that world very Anglo as well as lots of people living on the border in Texas still do.

Could it be that by choosing to focus on the niche interests you ignored or forgot about what was actually happening in the world at the time? I think people have been doing this as of late - by immersing themselves in superhero fantasies and mega-conspiracy theories they can escape from the real-world ordeals of political and viral upheaval.

Honestly, I can't think of a time in my entire life that wasn't happening.
My post isn’t about you and your formative years.

It isn’t about being a whole lot of people- not about being black in white America, not about being an immigrant (legal or illegal), and not about being a Christian in devilish America, not about being a white nationalist in increasingly diverse America, not a rancher or farmer, nor a wage earner in a formerly unionized industry.

There were a lot of social issues at that time, for sure. there always are. In fact I would say that many of America’s problems now were seeded and given impetus during the Reagan years.

My first job out of college was working with juvenile delinquents during the crack epidemic that was also taking place in America’s cities during the 80’s and early 90’s, which led to turf wars and the like. If you watched The Wire, I would say that my job was immersed in that reality for about 5 years, and, yes, the AIDS scare was right there in the background of my reality, but as I wasn’t single at the time, and am not gay, it was more of a backdrop to my reality- something I had to be careful about, especially since I was working with an “at risk” population, but not something that was front and center for me.

I did have one gay coworker / friend who got AIDS, but I lost contact with him when I began my job as a youth counselor. I was happy to run across him years later and know that he had survived, unlike 30 or 40 of the juveniles I had worked with.

Sorry if that sounds dismissive, but I wasn’t really thinking about you. We’re you thinking about me, or the various other groups of people and their life issues listed above?

These things weren’t the context of my post in any event, which was a discussion a interests in movies that Was expanded to other cultural interests like music, and then extended to social and political movements as they related to the initial context of what we connected to and didn’t.
Last edited by cinewest on February 23rd, 2021, 3:22 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
cinewest
Posts: 2342
Joined: February 15th, 2017, 7:00 am
Contact:

#1570

Post by cinewest »

tobias wrote: February 22nd, 2021, 8:37 pm
xianjiro wrote: February 22nd, 2021, 8:12 pm You were in San Francisco in the 80s "but the lack of a social context that was buzzing with excitement for something (like a social, cultural, intellectual, or political movement) that was "happening" at that time."

I'm really not sure what to make of how you were able to insulate yourself from that epidemic. And it's not like AIDS was the only thing happening at the time either. There was a honest backlash against Reagan and I have to believe San Francisco didn't sit that one out since it can't be divorced from AIDS.

Sorry, guess "fighting for our lives" and "Silence = Death" just wasn't nearly as hip and cool as the Summer of Love and Haight-Ashbury but counter-cultural movements were quite alive and well in the 80s.
I'm by no means a great authority on 80's USA but coming of age under Reagan in a country that is overwhelmingly content with him (who I think is in debate for worst US president of all time) sounds fucking depressing. To me it doesn't read like cinewest says there was no counterculture but rather that there wasn't any big hope of major systemic change. I mean Reagan won so fucking hard, it's unbelievable. There was a massive shift to the right in that time, in much of the world even. I mean compare Reagan to Nixon, it's night and day (some of this is also in the congress elections of course but still). In the USA, UK and Germany it was all the same, neo-con's for over a decade and then the third way afterwards in the 90s, really devastating... (but at least Schröder said no thanks to invading Iraq). To be fair though, it's not like the social climate today is uplifting at all either.
Reagan as president pretty much summarizes that decade and my dislike of it. And you are correct that the machinations he got underway was just the beginning of what we are experiencing now with the right wing squash of the middle class, and white nationalism.

As for 80’s films, I divided my time between watching older stuff and films from the 80’s, and didn’t see many of my favorites from that decade until much later, when they became available in the U.S.
User avatar
xianjiro
Donator
Posts: 9730
Joined: June 17th, 2015, 6:00 am
Location: Kakistani Left Coast
Contact:

#1571

Post by xianjiro »

@cinewest: Thanks for sharing a bit more context about how you spent the 80s outside of old film and music. :) See, it clearly wasn't an uneventful decade for you either! And if we circle back to the topic of 80s film, after the contributions you, me, and tobias shared, maybe one of the "problems" with 80s American cinema was it's very escapist, juvenile nature because of the society's inability to address the very real problems created by the divide between "middle" America and those on the periphery. Certainly American cinema was bereft of quality portrayals of LGBTQ characters and probably only did marginally better with POC ostensibly since neither were considered box office, especially to the mainstream movie goer who either wanted to reinforce or escape whatever were the Reagan years (and then Bush I), but we did have the emergence of Eddie Murphy as a major box office draw for whatever that's worth.

IDK, I can't say that I particularly identify with any movie era based on something as arbitrary as decades: I can't imagine writing something like "the 30s were so much weaker/stronger than the 50s". To me this would be akin to saying something like Tajikistan is so much stronger/weaker than Uzbekistan in whatever broad context. Maybe it's the whole desire to reduce a given time-span, generation, region, or ethnic background to something that can be more easily pigeon-holed that I reject. And while most will think of the music of the 50s as the birth of Rock and Roll, it's not like the whole lot of other things ceased to be happening, but then again, the media and marketing machines had turned away from the jazz scene and focused on what the kids were starting to scream about. And yes, in one very serious sense, the 50s were when American money 'discovered' youth.
User avatar
cinewest
Posts: 2342
Joined: February 15th, 2017, 7:00 am
Contact:

#1572

Post by cinewest »

xianjiro wrote: February 23rd, 2021, 3:20 am @cinewest: Thanks for sharing a bit more context about how you spent the 80s outside of old film and music. :) See, it clearly wasn't an uneventful decade for you either! And if we circle back to the topic of 80s film, after the contributions you, me, and tobias shared, maybe one of the "problems" with 80s American cinema was it's very escapist, juvenile nature because of the society's inability to address the very real problems created by the divide between "middle" America and those on the periphery. Certainly American cinema was bereft of quality portrayals of LGBTQ characters and probably only did marginally better with POC ostensibly since neither were considered box office, especially to the mainstream movie goer who either wanted to reinforce or escape whatever were the Reagan years (and then Bush I), but we did have the emergence of Eddie Murphy as a major box office draw for whatever that's worth.

IDK, I can't say that I particularly identify with any movie era based on something as arbitrary as decades: I can't imagine writing something like "the 30s were so much weaker/stronger than the 50s". To me this would be akin to saying something like Tajikistan is so much stronger/weaker than Uzbekistan in whatever broad context. Maybe it's the whole desire to reduce a given time-span, generation, region, or ethnic background to something that can be more easily pigeon-holed that I reject. And while most will think of the music of the 50s as the birth of Rock and Roll, it's not like the whole lot of other things ceased to be happening, but then again, the media and marketing machines had turned away from the jazz scene and focused on what the kids were starting to scream about. And yes, in one very serious sense, the 50s were when American money 'discovered' youth.
I pretty much agree with everything you say, here, and while I sometimes compare time periods and connect more to some than to others, I agree that on a deeper level time is a continuum and one thing is the result of another, and also comes from something prior.

All we really have is our time, but it is enriched by knowledge of the past as well as imagination about the future, don’t you think?
User avatar
xianjiro
Donator
Posts: 9730
Joined: June 17th, 2015, 6:00 am
Location: Kakistani Left Coast
Contact:

#1573

Post by xianjiro »

cinewest wrote: February 23rd, 2021, 3:30 am I pretty much agree with everything you say, here, and while I sometimes compare time periods and connect more to some than to others, I agree that on a deeper level time is a continuum and one thing is the result of another, and also comes from something prior.

All we really have is our time, but it is enriched by knowledge of the past as well as imagination about the future.
so true - it's like the people I've known who worship Tarantino as someone who seemingly sprang fully-formed from nothing and was completely original. I think we all, around here that is, know what isn't the case and Tarantino has been clear about his influences and touchstones.

Sometimes I've wanted to believe that somehow Americans are more "a product of their time" than other peoples and again, I point to the increasing reach of media into our lives. This is the world I know best and the other cultures for which I have direct comparisons are much harder to understand since it's so much harder to become immersed in the totality of living in given place and time. It's probably safe to say that most of the peoples living outside of the Iron Curtain have grown up with a heavy dose of American culture, but can we say that people living on the other side didn't have a similar dose of Soviet culture?

Until we explore outside of our unique comfort zones, it's hard for us to see, da-da-dum, THE BIGGER PICTURE.

I know that throughout the 80s, besides being connected in various ways to the contemporary zeitgeist, I would have talked more about the 40s than probably any other period (though I did enjoy a healthy dose of 60s folk music, mostly during the 70s); but during the 70s, nostalgia for the 50s was pretty intense with the whole phenomena that was Happy Days. So why was I more tethered to the 40s? Probably because that's what I was exposed to in terms of movies running on TV. I had no access to "alternative" cinema in the suburbs.

Are other periods similarly tethered? And just thinking about such tethering should help reinforce the ideas that one period is influenced by those that preceded it, but there is something of time delay. At least with our modern world, there is generally a desire to rebel against and reject the period immediately prior, probably mostly in an artificial way since that period is so influential no matter how much one choses to rebel. Heck, the act of rebellion is because of the influence. But if we're going to say, okay, I reject this decade minus 1, we still need to look somewhere for inspiration and so we go to decade minus 2 or 3. So the earlier discussion isn't so much of surprise.

But an interesting question is what do we expect from Viral 20s?
User avatar
Onderhond
Posts: 7239
Joined: December 23rd, 2012, 7:00 am
Contact:

#1574

Post by Onderhond »

The casual disdain for the boom of 80s genre cinema and its continuing influence is certainly interesting.
User avatar
xianjiro
Donator
Posts: 9730
Joined: June 17th, 2015, 6:00 am
Location: Kakistani Left Coast
Contact:

#1575

Post by xianjiro »

I wasn't thinking about 80s genre cinema in any form - more the oft acknowledged disdain for 80s mainstream cinema, but also music and TV. Not sure I can think of much 80s literature or even signature artwork. And where does one start with the frequent lambasting of 80s fashion (probably only the 90s has faired less well). But once again, all this suffers from the same issue: gross generalization. Back to the Future, while a favourite franchise for many, is the highest rated 80s film according to IMDb, followed by Cinema Paradiso, Raiders of the Lost Ark, The Shining, Once Upon a Time in America, Aliens, Das Boot, Amadeus, Return of the Jedi, and Full Metal Jacket round out the top 100. Actually The Empire Strikes Back was released in 1980 (but made in 70s) so one could argue it's part of both. It's 25 places ahead of B2theF. Compare that list with the Top 30 by gross for the decade.

However, that said, I'm not sure mainstream culture has ever not been the subject of debate and derision and the ultimate aim of such really depends on the purpose for which the argument is made.
User avatar
St. Gloede
Moderator
Posts: 12585
Joined: May 6th, 2011, 6:00 am
Contact:

#1576

Post by St. Gloede »

Onderhond wrote: February 23rd, 2021, 6:08 am The casual disdain for the boom of 80s genre cinema and its continuing influence is certainly interesting.
Casual?

:lol:

(Probably one of the saddest turn of events in film history)

Though crappy action blockbusters is not really the same as genre cinema.
User avatar
Onderhond
Posts: 7239
Joined: December 23rd, 2012, 7:00 am
Contact:

#1577

Post by Onderhond »

St. Gloede wrote: February 23rd, 2021, 1:32 pm (Probably one of the saddest turn of events in film history)
:lol:

I'm not a big fan of the 80s genre boom myself, but like most crappy evolutions in cinematic history, I do recognize its importantance and impact on what makes contemporary cinema great. Standing on the shoulder of midgets. :whistling:
Last edited by Onderhond on February 23rd, 2021, 2:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
St. Gloede
Moderator
Posts: 12585
Joined: May 6th, 2011, 6:00 am
Contact:

#1578

Post by St. Gloede »

Onderhond wrote: February 23rd, 2021, 2:08 pm
St. Gloede wrote: February 23rd, 2021, 1:32 pm (Probably one of the saddest turn of events in film history)
:lol:

I'm not a big fan of the 80s genre boom myself, but like most crappy evolutions in cinematic history, I do recognize its important and impact on what makes contemporary cinema great. Standing on the shoulder of midgets. :whistling:
:lol: :lol: :lol:

Hmmmm, maybe.

I think it is more the crash of Heaven's Gate and One From the Heart, killing most director-driven films in mainstream US cinema, which went on to be replaced by the lazy action blockbusters I lament. Not sure if, based on my own preferences, this lead to anything great (overall) but certainly impactful to this day - changing the landscape of how studios push films.
User avatar
Onderhond
Posts: 7239
Joined: December 23rd, 2012, 7:00 am
Contact:

#1579

Post by Onderhond »

St. Gloede wrote: February 23rd, 2021, 2:13 pm I think it is more the crash of Heaven's Gate and One From the Heart, killing most director-driven films in mainstream US cinema, which went on to be replaced by the lazy action blockbusters I lament. Not sure if, based on my own preferences, this lead to anything great (overall) but certainly impactful to this day - changing the landscape of how studios push films.
Personally I like the clearer separation between big budget/studio and indie/auteur it seems to have caused. The 70s have quite a few big films that feel like the worst of both worlds. Directors held back because their films had to be somewhat marketable and blockbuster lacking fun because the director felt he had something important/serious to communicate. That led to guys like Scorsese, Coppola and similar to rise to the top. Master of none cinema imo.

I guess that brings us back to the Casino Royale discussion we had last week though. You seem to like that kind of thing, I find it quite dull.
User avatar
St. Gloede
Moderator
Posts: 12585
Joined: May 6th, 2011, 6:00 am
Contact:

#1580

Post by St. Gloede »

Well, I'm not sure we can compare Casino Royale to Scorsese or Coppola - but certainly, Scorsese and Coppola both have a claim on making some of the greatest films of all time in the 70s (and those stretches of theirs are generally held to be among the best in cinematic history). For Coppola my favourite is actually One From the Hear - which is once he let loose - but I do think the kind of cinema they produced are not only by no means dull - but the greatest "mainstream cinema" can achieve - and holding a pretty good candle to arthouse as well.
User avatar
St. Gloede
Moderator
Posts: 12585
Joined: May 6th, 2011, 6:00 am
Contact:

#1581

Post by St. Gloede »

*Of course, I like classic Hollywood as well. from Wyler to Hawks to Kazan. I have absolutely nothing against narrative cinema, and while I may have a slight preference to films playing with the medium as opposed to "just telling a story" - stories/narratives - when told well (or as in Scorsese/Coppola's case, told to near perfection) there is nothing holding them back from being up there with the best films of all time.
User avatar
Onderhond
Posts: 7239
Joined: December 23rd, 2012, 7:00 am
Contact:

#1582

Post by Onderhond »

Myeah, I have no real internal frame of reference that helps me to define what "a story well told" is. I wouldn't even know where to start. The only thing I can say about that is that I generally dislike it when every narrative strand is given closure, which is something most people seem to prefer (a well-rounded story). To me that's usually just a lot of wasted time on generic details.

I also wouldn't want to compare Casino Royale to the 70s work of Scorsese/Coppola directly, but there's quite a bit of common ground between what detracts me from these films. They both try to bring two worlds together where I think the result is way less than the sum of its parts. A bit like throwing fries in soup and expecting it to be twice as tasty :)

I will say I like Coppola better, then again he did get a bit weirder than Scorsese.
User avatar
joachimt
Donator
Posts: 34182
Joined: February 16th, 2012, 7:00 am
Location: Netherlands
Contact:

#1583

Post by joachimt »

PA updated 21st century.
ICM-profile
Fergenaprido: "I find your OCD to be adorable, J"
Obgeoff
Posts: 627
Joined: May 29th, 2019, 9:23 am
Contact:

#1584

Post by Obgeoff »

29 newly official checks as a result. Not sure how many of the exiting 60 have lost official status.
Image
User avatar
St. Gloede
Moderator
Posts: 12585
Joined: May 6th, 2011, 6:00 am
Contact:

#1585

Post by St. Gloede »

Onderhond wrote: February 23rd, 2021, 4:00 pm Myeah, I have no real internal frame of reference that helps me to define what "a story well told" is. I wouldn't even know where to start. The only thing I can say about that is that I generally dislike it when every narrative strand is given closure, which is something most people seem to prefer (a well-rounded story). To me that's usually just a lot of wasted time on generic details.
In the context of "the invisible director", it would be telling the story in such a way you are gripped by it and its characters, rather than the style on its own.

(If you like open-ended endings, or films without clear closure, I'm surprised late-60s and 70s Hollywood is put down - as this was likely the period in American cinema with the largest amount of wayward characters put to the screen - with bittersweet endings that leaves much to the imagination)
User avatar
beavis
Posts: 3035
Joined: June 20th, 2011, 6:00 am
Location: Amsterdam, Netherlands
Contact:

#1586

Post by beavis »

it seems I went from 777 check to... 777 checks!
User avatar
tourdesb
Moderator
Posts: 2182
Joined: May 7th, 2011, 6:00 am
Location: Puteaux, France
Contact:

#1587

Post by tourdesb »

Went from 808 to 786.
Image Image Image
User avatar
Onderhond
Posts: 7239
Joined: December 23rd, 2012, 7:00 am
Contact:

#1588

Post by Onderhond »

St. Gloede wrote: February 23rd, 2021, 5:07 pm In the context of "the invisible director", it would be telling the story in such a way you are gripped by it and its characters, rather than the style on its own.
Well yes, but that is something I simply cannot imagine. In my experience, a director can take the dumbest script and turn it into a true masterpiece, while dull direction kills whatever story and characters are present. I'm sure there must be some exceptions I can't think of right now, but I couldn't name you a film where characters and/or plot excited my in any way, regardless of the direction.

And it's not so much that I like open-ended endings, I just don't need every "plot hole" to be covered, every action to be explained and every narrative sidetrack to have closure.

Edit: went from 567 to 561. I've actually got a pretty decent like/dislike ratio on this one (19.75%/16.40%), but I also have the feeling I've seen everything of worth on that list already.
User avatar
Lakigigar
Posts: 2110
Joined: October 31st, 2015, 6:00 am
Location: Belgium
Contact:

#1589

Post by Lakigigar »

I went from 241 to 239... But i've only seen WolfWalkers from movies produced in 2020.

My ranking went up a bit though (perhaps because of more inactivity on ICM)
User avatar
Ebbywebby
Posts: 4197
Joined: September 10th, 2012, 6:00 am
Location: Orange County, CA
Contact:

#1590

Post by Ebbywebby »

I lost four checks...did someone post a list of the drop-offs?
User avatar
Fergenaprido
Donator
Posts: 5803
Joined: June 3rd, 2014, 6:00 am
Location: Canada
Contact:

#1591

Post by Fergenaprido »

Ebbywebby wrote: February 23rd, 2021, 8:57 pm I lost four checks...did someone post a list of the drop-offs?
Lakigigar wrote: February 20th, 2021, 3:39 pm Here's what left:
Spoiler
300 (2006, Zack Snyder)
13 ASSASSINS (2010, Takashi Miike)
ALL OR NOTHING (2002, Mike Leigh)
AT SEA (2007, Peter B. Hutton)
BARBARA (2012, Christian Petzold)
BLACK SUN (2005, Gary Tarn)
BLANCANIEVES (2011, Pablo Berger)
CLIMAX (2018, Gaspar Noé)
DAY NIGHT DAY NIGHT (2006, Julia Loktev)
THE DEEP END (2001, Scott McGehee & David Siegel)
THE DEVIL'S REJECTS (2005, Rob Zombie)
THE DITCH (2010, Wang Bing)
ENOUGH SAID (2013, Nicole Holofcener)
THE FITS (2015, Anna Rose Holmer)
FLANDERS (2006, Bruno Dumont)
FRANK (2014, Lenny Abrahamson)
THE FUTURE (2011, Miranda July)
THE GATEKEEPERS (2012, Dror Moreh)
GIRLFIGHT (2000, Karyn Kusama)
GRADUATION (2016, Cristian Mungiu)
HAT WOLFF VON AMERONGEN KONKURSDELIKTE BEGANGEN? (2004, Gerhard Benedikt Friedl)
THE HOUSE I LIVE IN (2012, Eugene Jarecki)
HOW TO SURVIVE A PLAGUE (2012, David France)
HUSTLERS (2019, Lorene Scafaria)
I, TONYA (2017, Craig Gillespie)
THE IMPOSTER (2012, Bart Layton)
UN LAC (2008, Philippe Grandrieux)
LAGE RAHO MUNNA BHAI (2006, Rajkumar Hirani)
LEBANON (2009, Samuel Maoz)
MARCH OF THE PENGUINS (2005, Luc Jacquet)
MARGOT AT THE WEDDING (2007, Noah Baumbach)
MONDAYS IN THE SUN (2002, Fernando León de Aranoa)
MY ARCHITECT (2003, Nathaniel Kahn)
NIGHT ACROSS THE STREET (2012, Raúl Ruiz)
OKJA (2017, Bong Joon-ho)
OPERAI, CONTADINI (2001, Jean-Marie Straub & Danièle Huillet)
AN OVERSIMPLICATION OF HER BEAUTY (2011, Terence Nance)
THE RAID 2 (2014, Gareth Evans)
RAY (2004, Taylor Hackford)
THE RING (2002, Gore Verbinski)
ROAD TO PERDITION (2002, Sam Mendes)
SHATTERED GLASS (2003, Billy Ray)
THE SKY TURNS (2004, Mercedes Álvarez)
SNOWTOWN (2011, Justin Kurzel)
SOBIBÓR, OCTOBER 14, 1943, 4 P.M. (2001, Claude Lanzmann)
SON FRÈRE (2003, Patrice Chéreau)
SPRINGTIME IN A SMALL TOWN (2002, Tian Zhuangzhuang)
STUCK ON YOU (2003, Bob Farrelly & Peter Farrelly)
TEZA (2008, Haile Gerima)
TOKYO SONATA (2008, Kiyoshi Kurosawa)
A TOWN CALLED PANIC (2009, Stephane Aubier & Vincent Patar)
TURTLES CAN FLY (2004, Bahman Ghobadi)
VA SAVOIR (2001, Jacques Rivette)
VICTORIA (2015, Sebastian Schipper)
LA VIE NOUVELLE (2002, Philippe Grandrieux)
VIOLA (2012, Matías Piñeiro)
WORLD OF TOMORROW (2015, Don Hertzfeldt)
YOUR NAME (2016, Makoto Shinkai)
ZIDANE: A 21ST CENTURY PORTRAIT (2006, Douglas Gordon & Philippe Parreno)
User avatar
Ebbywebby
Posts: 4197
Joined: September 10th, 2012, 6:00 am
Location: Orange County, CA
Contact:

#1592

Post by Ebbywebby »

Thanks.
User avatar
Ebbywebby
Posts: 4197
Joined: September 10th, 2012, 6:00 am
Location: Orange County, CA
Contact:

#1593

Post by Ebbywebby »

The Grand Bizarre has a lot of checks for an obscure, recent film...79? Is this on Netflix or something?
User avatar
Lilarcor
Donator
Posts: 3112
Joined: June 14th, 2011, 6:00 am
Contact:

#1594

Post by Lilarcor »

Ebbywebby wrote: February 23rd, 2021, 9:34 pm The Grand Bizarre has a lot of checks for an obscure, recent film...79? Is this on Netflix or something?
It was on Mubi (at least in Europe) a while ago.
User avatar
St. Gloede
Moderator
Posts: 12585
Joined: May 6th, 2011, 6:00 am
Contact:

#1595

Post by St. Gloede »

Onderhond wrote: February 23rd, 2021, 6:26 pm
St. Gloede wrote: February 23rd, 2021, 5:07 pm In the context of "the invisible director", it would be telling the story in such a way you are gripped by it and its characters, rather than the style on its own.
Well yes, but that is something I simply cannot imagine. In my experience, a director can take the dumbest script and turn it into a true masterpiece, while dull direction kills whatever story and characters are present. I'm sure there must be some exceptions I can't think of right now, but I couldn't name you a film where characters and/or plot excited my in any way, regardless of the direction.
Yes, that's true for anything though. Replace Hawks or Kazan with Sam Wood, and the film won't be as good anymore - replace Wood with someone we don't remember anymore - a completely different film. It is more about crafting stories, putting the right emphasis, tone, etc. I was never overly plot-driven either and I used to have a preference specifically for craft, i.e. the emphasis places by the director, what they chose to show, how, etc. The divide I'm talking about is more in terms of whether these tools serve to elevate the story, and make the film work as a narrative - or elevate the film as form. There is an inbetween - sure - when we talk about Citizen Kane both storytelling and craft comes into play - while when we talk about say Godard, we usually want to talk about form above anything else - while when we talk about Casablanca we talk story/plot/lines - possibly craft - but rarely form. To me, both work, and I don't think the latter needs to be dull.

But yes, I suppose that is just a general difference in taste - especially if characters or plot never matter to you at all (barring potential exceptions). That's quite interesting. Is it the same when you read books?

-

I have no idea what number of checks I used to have.
User avatar
Onderhond
Posts: 7239
Joined: December 23rd, 2012, 7:00 am
Contact:

#1596

Post by Onderhond »

St. Gloede wrote: February 23rd, 2021, 10:45 pm But yes, I suppose that is just a general difference in taste - especially if characters or plot never matter to you at all (barring potential exceptions). That's quite interesting. Is it the same when you read books?
I guess so. I loved to read when I was younger, but I quickly ended up with horror (James Herbert), sci-fi and comedy (Terry Pratchett) novels, which I enjoyed more for their genre tropes than for their stories or characters. And then landed on someone like Jeff Noon, whose writing is somehow extremely sensory while still doused in genre influences.

I see plot and characters more as enablers, empty vessels that make it easier for a director to have fun with a film. If that means cutting down on coherence and even internal logic, I have no problem with that at all. That's not to say I can't be moved my characters and/or plot, but it's mostly through the right audiovisual delivery. I just get easily bored when things are done in function of plot and characters.

Do we have a psychologist in the room? :D
St. Gloede wrote: February 23rd, 2021, 10:45 pm I have no idea what number of checks I used to have.
If you click on the little graph symbol top/right, you should be able to select the previous version to compare :)
User avatar
Lakigigar
Posts: 2110
Joined: October 31st, 2015, 6:00 am
Location: Belgium
Contact:

#1597

Post by Lakigigar »

Onderhond wrote: February 23rd, 2021, 10:59 pm
St. Gloede wrote: February 23rd, 2021, 10:45 pm But yes, I suppose that is just a general difference in taste - especially if characters or plot never matter to you at all (barring potential exceptions). That's quite interesting. Is it the same when you read books?
I guess so. I loved to read when I was younger, but I quickly ended up with horror (James Herbert), sci-fi and comedy (Terry Pratchett) novels, which I enjoyed more for their genre tropes than for their stories or characters. And then landed on someone like Jeff Noon, whose writing is somehow extremely sensory while still doused in genre influences.

I see plot and characters more as enablers, empty vessels that make it easier for a director to have fun with a film. If that means cutting down on coherence and even internal logic, I have no problem with that at all. That's not to say I can't be moved my characters and/or plot, but it's mostly through the right audiovisual delivery. I just get easily bored when things are done in function of plot and characters.

Do we have a psychologist in the room? :D
St. Gloede wrote: February 23rd, 2021, 10:45 pm I have no idea what number of checks I used to have.
If you click on the little graph symbol top/right, you should be able to select the previous version to compare :)
I'm planning to study next year. It will be a choice between psychology, audiovisual art - film, politicology and sociology. An an outside chance for a different study direction (Japanology or history are among two of them). Likeliest will be psychology. I will perhaps try an attempt for audiovisual art - film, but it has tough access requirement (the first part: choosing between 5 and 8 art pieces and elaborate on them will be easy but the second part: creating a short movie of less than 3 minutes, without access to actors, equipment and with no experience of art, filming, post-production, editing, it's all doomed to fail. I have also no ideas. But i'll think more about it. Psychology however seems best suited for me, so in that regard perhaps. I read people very well.

I also checked the contents of film history. Apparently the movies they watch are Triumph des Willens, Battleship Potemkhin (that one from 1925), Sunrise, A Bout de Souffle, Taxi Driver and a few more. From the newer ones, they have Home (2016), Parasite, Le jeune Ahmed and a European one I never heard about from 2019 as well. Home and Parasite are two movies that are among my favs.
User avatar
Lonewolf2003
Donator
Posts: 11763
Joined: December 29th, 2012, 7:00 am
Contact:

#1598

Post by Lonewolf2003 »

Onderhond wrote: February 23rd, 2021, 10:59 pm
St. Gloede wrote: February 23rd, 2021, 10:45 pm But yes, I suppose that is just a general difference in taste - especially if characters or plot never matter to you at all (barring potential exceptions). That's quite interesting. Is it the same when you read books?
I guess so. I loved to read when I was younger, but I quickly ended up with horror (James Herbert), sci-fi and comedy (Terry Pratchett) novels, which I enjoyed more for their genre tropes than for their stories or characters. And then landed on someone like Jeff Noon, whose writing is somehow extremely sensory while still doused in genre influences.

I see plot and characters more as enablers, empty vessels that make it easier for a director to have fun with a film. If that means cutting down on coherence and even internal logic, I have no problem with that at all. That's not to say I can't be moved my characters and/or plot, but it's mostly through the right audiovisual delivery. I just get easily bored when things are done in function of plot and characters.

Do we have a psychologist in the room? :D
Knowing your taste and preferences and the importance of the audiovisual experience of a movie above plot/characters has for you, have you ever thought about venturing more into experimental/avant-garde movies? I'm absolutely not an expert on those, but there probably will be some interesting stuff for you there, I'm thinking mostly about ones that are about complete audiovisual immersion. Maybe some others better versed in experimental cinema can give you some good tips?
User avatar
xianjiro
Donator
Posts: 9730
Joined: June 17th, 2015, 6:00 am
Location: Kakistani Left Coast
Contact:

#1599

Post by xianjiro »

Lakigigar wrote: February 23rd, 2021, 11:09 pm creating a short movie of less than 3 minutes, without access to actors, equipment and with no experience of art, filming, post-production, editing, it's all doomed to fail. I have also no ideas. But i'll think more about it.
While I see no reason to discourage/encourage any of the choices mentioned, unless they state requirements for what the 3 minute movie would need (for example, does it have to be narrative or documentary) then they're probably just interested in how creative you can be with the tools at hand.

If you've delved much into the various short and experimental lists on the site, you can see how many aren't more than a study: how light moves, how light affects, things like that. Even something as simple as shooting a bus or tram stop for 30 minutes during rush hour then condensing a portion to come in under 30 minutes could work. Add a bit of music you think goes with it. Or filming a local event.

It's about how you solve the problem and your creativity. They might look at things like lighting or camera angle or if you find something original to do with a TikTok type video. So if you really are interested in that program, start looking at your world with the question: could I make a 3 minute film of this? If yes, how do I do it to make it interesting?

Can't remember for certain, but thinking Mighty probably did something similar. She might have suggestions. Also, I'm sure people here would provide feedback or could help you choose between alternatives.

But if it's what you really want to do, ignore the things you haven't got, think about what you have and how it could work. :thumbsup:
User avatar
Onderhond
Posts: 7239
Joined: December 23rd, 2012, 7:00 am
Contact:

#1600

Post by Onderhond »

Lonewolf2003 wrote: February 24th, 2021, 12:08 am Knowing your taste and preferences and the importance of the audiovisual experience of a movie above plot/characters has for you, have you ever thought about venturing more into experimental/avant-garde movies? I'm absolutely not an expert on those, but there probably will be some interesting stuff for you there, I'm thinking mostly about ones that are about complete audiovisual immersion. Maybe some others better versed in experimental cinema can give you some good tips?
I know it sounds like a match made in heaven (and you're certainly not the first to tell me), but I've hadn't had much luck with it so far. Either these films are very conceptual (I have this one idea that is supposed to question the nature of cinema and I'm gonna lean on that for 30 minutes), or the aesthetic is very oldskool/technically amateurish (like Godard's contemporary films). ICM has been no real help so far since they either focus on older films or contemporary cinema that invokes oldskool aesthetics.

There also seems to be very little in the feature-length realm. But I'm sure I'm missing some true gems there, I just haven't found a way to them. I do have Umfeld in my Top 10, sadly that proved to be a dead end in terms of gateway project.
Post Reply