i agree. it's one of those Buffalo 66 or Taxi Driver situation movies. the outcast hero im cool in some jacket bullshit that's been played to death. it was alright i guess. i loved the soundtrack at the time. now maybe not so much.

you always find something political in something don't you? you should start yr on lib conspiracy podcast a la Alex Jones style. have yrself a board with complete with magik markers like Glenn Beck ready to connect the dots.

haven't seen Neon Demon yet, but even from a poster I can see it must be packed symbolism compared to Drive, probably much darker (story wise) too.

there's always something political/ideological in everything because we live in a political/ideological world. even when someone says "there's no politics there"--that's a political statement, meaning, "shut up and take it". politics is not the ONLY thing, but it's always there, like shit on your shorts. yes, some times you want to ignore it because it gets tiring-- other times you just can't. especially when beethoven is used for the baddies and bad christmas music represents the goodies, over & over, you notice. "it's good to be dumb".

Unrealistic doesn't seem like a legitimate qualm to have with a movie that so openly pulls its inspiration from arthouse, film noir and surrealism. I mean, you're right that it's not an exercise in realism. It doesn't play out like it's happening in front of you, or even like something you'd read about in the news. But part of the point of the film's aesthetic is to give you a singular perspective (Driver's) and his perspective is very obviously warped by arrested development, Hollywood livin', and a social isolation.

It's a movie that lingers on Ryan Gosling and Carey Mulligan looking at each other silently for, like, 3 minutes. Microexoressions offering the only change of scenery during that period. It's also about a guy (no name, no past, no future) who successfully and single-handedly takes down a formidable LA mob faction. I really don't think it's supposed to be realistic.

Honestly, the Dark Knight movies are more realistic than Drve, and they're about a guy who dresses up like a bat and fights crime. So I wouldn't maybe evaluate it based on realism. But what do I know.

I've heard it's a borderline horror film. With some vampiric cannibal bullshit or something. Yikes. Sounds a bit like Black Swan.

Winding Refn has a great talent for filmmaking, but I think Drive has been his only real home run so far. For all the silence and tension, there was enough catharsis and release; for all the alienated, singular perspective there was plenty of emotion. It worked. Only God Forgives was just plain painful, though still good enough. I don't know if I have it in me for another glacial pace tension movie, this time without Gosling and (ugh) about the fashion industry. Someone tell me if it's worth my time.

my main objections to Drive were the unrealistic portrayals of most of the characters, both major and minor. It works as a fantasy, I guess, but it was so close to being sorta real that it jarred badly for me. I have a fairly intimate and wide knowledge of those types, so it just didn't work... it reminded me of a sort of Fellini-esque look at those lives, like as if it were viewed by a catholic schoolboy, idealized? And, most of the people occupying those realms are just banally evil.

I have all the OA's and intend to watch them soon. Sounds like they are a recco from you?

yeah, it's totally a fantasy, and it's a nice and glossy and very aesthetic fantasy

this isn't cinema vérité for sure

it's more about... mood and color and slowed-down visuals and great light

the fairytale at the core of it is pretty standard

so it doesnt blow your mind, but rather your senses; and in that way it does blow your mind in the end-- but via the senses. kinda like a ralph lauren magazine ad ha ha ha. "otherwordly". you know what i mean? im asking cuz im not sure im being clear here--im not findimg the right words

its sort of psychedelic in a way. in a non-hippy way. its like melville's le samourai-- a dream.

Well, we're on episode 3 right now.

So far, I give it a resounding YES as a recommendation. But know that I'm still just getting started really.

When I say "Gaimanesque," I really mean it. Are you into Neil Gaiman? If not, what I mean is that it's a modern dark "fantasy" with connections to specific world cultures and their mythologies and fairy tales. It's a bit slow, but sweeping and cinematic. Might be a little rough to get through the early bits, but I'd say wait until the end of episode one before you make a decision.

Just so you know, it gets dark fairly suddenly, in a specific way that I find particularly disturbing. I won't spoil it -- I think the sensitivity to this kind of subject matter is a personal thing for me, so it may not be unsettling to anyone else, but it's VERY jarring for me so I feel I have to mention it.

But yeah man, do it.

Ooookaaay... so... The OA... thinking about rescinding my recommendation.

Girlfriend and I just spent the day binging on the whole bloody thing. She was crocheting, I was absent-mindedly working on a story, so it didn't get 100% of our attention, but after an engrossing first several episodes things got super weird in a way I can't in good conscience throw my support behind. It plays out like a movie. Leaves you with an extremely open-ended idea of what is/isn't happening.

I don't know man. I'd be interested to hear what other people thought of it. But fair warning: it contains interpretive dancing, and the cool Gaiman vibe about halfway through.

Not sure what to think, but definitely not a big fat thumbs up.

Krampus

It was going cheap in the supermarket so I let curiosity get the better of me ...

It's not terrible, even though it obviously can't decide what kind of movie it wants to be. So it comes over as a bit of a mess, trying to shoe-horn Gremlins, Home Alone and Poltergeist into the same box. But the Krampus itself was pretty cool. Just a shame he wasn't in it more.

^^ yeah, the krampus itself was a bit dr seuss-like i thought. and a great show of effects in itself. but the movie pastiche didn't transcend it's pasticheness.

btw last nite watched SOAPDISH



it was fucking hilarious. great cast too. really enjoyed it.

i'm suprised that i had never seen or heard of it till recently (and i think i was demonyo that recommended it)

^^ This.

It was good. A good, well made thriller with some crazy shit too. Nice cinematic nods to Hitchcock. Not a masterpiece at all, but a pretty good way to spend an evening. An above-average thriller for sure. Recommend.

(Yeah, we're just straight up binging today. Got fuckall else to do, and we're certainly not going anywhere near a ball drop.)

Yeah, the movie was shit but Krampus was cool. Should have been R-rated with no henchmen and only Krampus jumping around like yeti Santa.

Again, I submit to you this pic from the movie (which convinced me to watch in the first place);



^^ Is that not fucking COOL as hell?!

I agree. I liked it without thinking it was any kind of masterpiece. It'll be interesting to see if they turn the whole Cloverfield thing into a loose mythos. I hope they do.


In the right hands it could've been pretty good. Spielberg would've made the family tensions more fun than irritating/cliched, while someone like Tim Burton could've done something far more interesting with the Krampus myth.

And yeah, that pic suggests a far better film than we actually got.

Also watched ...



Vamps

I really liked it even though nothing about it is actually that good. In fact it's pretty terrible, but really really enjoyable.

Inside Llewyn Davis.

6.5/10

Found it a bit boring and disappointing.

my last movie of 2016



criterion just put out a new blu-ray release, and it's fucking glorious. what is it about fellini that has such potent magic?

reminded me at the same time of amarcord and satyricon, but it was something completely different-- documentary, satire, memoir, political commentary, all at the same time. spectacular visuals of course.

brilliant features on the disc as well (interview w/ the guy who did the great beauty, etc)

^ it's one of those slow, melancholy Coen movies, like Serious Man. I think its a pretty good one. I think it's a pretty good look at the early 60's before psychedelics and Vietnam, I also thought Oscar Issac was really good in it.

It is quite divisive. The first half of the film is so utterly weird- full of exquisitely framed images, harsh lighting (with strobe effects) and to top it off, every word from every actress is mumbled in this half-druggy state of awareness. It's hard to make sense of it and then, yes, it does turn into a bit of a horror film whose second half doesn't quite live up to the first. You have to give Refn credit for trying something bold, though. He seems to be one of the few out there given green lights for stuff and then experimenting heavily to see how far he can push it.

Ok, I want to see it now. Thank you.

I remember, when Only God Forgives first premiered on the festival circuit, reading a review that said it was the most polarizing film the reviewer (I forget his/her name) had ever seen. That at the end, about half of those who hadn't walked out booed furiously, and and the other half literally stood and cheered.

I'll admit that while I was watching it, I felt as though I'd been baited and fucked with by Refn. He follows up Drive (already a pretty divisive film, but a huge hit with critics and a cult smasharoo) with another stylized Gosling flick, which he says is about a man who "wants to fight God." Sounded like another anti-hero flick. What did he give us? An unlikable weakling -- the embodiment of physical impotence, some weird ass Oedipal shit, and one long anti-climax extending over 2½ hours. I still respected it, liked it even, but damn.

Now I'm hearing that Neon Demon makes Only God Forgives look accessible.

I will watch, with caution, based on your recommendation. I do respect Refn as a filmmaker and I want him to be able to continue pushing buttons, but I'm more intrigued by how much he seems to be trying to get me to NOT watch than I am genuinely interested in watching.

I thought Krampus was horrible.

It was. But that image I posted is badass. Fact.

If the movie had been anything like what I thought it was going to be based on seeing that, it would have been legit.

Also I just watched DEADPOOL again.

Before that, Barry (the Netflix movie about Obama's time at Columbia.

Deadpool is fucking amazing.

Roma always disappoints me a bit. Given the subject matter it should've been the ultimate Fellini film (and it does have some of his greatest scenes) but it never quite holds together for me in the way that his best films do. Not saying I don't like it, I just wish it was better.

Anyway ...



Anger Me

A documentary about Kenneth Anger. Mostly him talking through his life and films. Not a great documentary in its own right but a must for any Anger or Underground film fans.

you're right that as a whole it lacks a glue, it's a bunch of moments pieced together, but some of those moments are so amazing! the people eating in the trattoria, the arrival by modern highway, the wartime brothels, the subway tunnel scene, the fashion show, the motorcycles (speaking of anger)... oh man... the variety show was a bit too long for me, but the social interactions that happen in it are great (and it reminds me of altman's usual chaos). but yeah, as a memoir for example, amarcord is better. still, fellini fails better than 99% of other filmmakers succeed, so it's kind of a contest with himself at that point (for me anyway--i'm a huge fan).

the other thing is that here he has such tremendous creative freedom! maybe it's the excess freedom that makes it fall apart a bit, but the freedom itself is amazing to witness. things like his own role in the film are not surprising in out post-python super-meta age, but when he's interrogated by the students and he decides to do the variety show instead ("i'll do it my way")... that-- did something to me. it's the vision of the poet over the ideologist.

i'll check out the anger movie. that still looks great!

Cant wait to see this one. I got the Satryicon blu ray for Xmas. Fellini is truly a master and the transfer is unbelievable. Very happy criterion is taking a crack at his mid-period works where he had all the freedom he wanted.

Kicked off the new year with two new ones for me!

June Night with Ingrid Bergman. Blind bought this with no reference. It was her last Swedish film before moving to Hollywood and of course she is an angel. It is an okay movie itself but for a blind buy I didn't expect much from I thoroughly enjoyed it. One of her many roles of playing a mysteriously detached but passionate woman. The DVD I got though had some hilarious dubbing they must of added? The music is obviously not from 1940 and some foley is way too crisp and high in the mix.

One Eyed Jacks. Damn. Shouldn't work but it does. I'm on a bit of a Brando kick and this is one I hadn't seen. Plus westerns are a go-to genre for me and this more than satisfied an itch. Absolutely gorgeous in parts and of course Brando is a mad man. Would have loved to see more directors by him, though maybe he got lucky wth how good this one is? Very very highly recommended. Great performances all around too, not just the almighty Marlon. Got a sealed blu ray copy for $10 at a used book store too!

Nosferatu

For me it's still the greatest, if the most atypical, 'dracula' film of them all. A masterclass in eeriness.

Oh man, it's so goddamn good.

i was meaning to rewatch it this past halloween season. now i'm in the middle of the farces.
speaking of farces (voluntary or involuntary ones) have you seen SHADOW OF THE VAMPIRE? it's about the making of nosferatu. some indie/malkovich thing. i did, didn't like it much, though some people might. don't wanna throw spoilers yet so i won't comment why in this post (maybe in another one i might)


i got the rentals-- netflix is great for that. i got it like the day after it was released & held on to it for a proper occasion.

as for the transfers--- it's this place in bologna called "l'immagine ritrovatta" that's doing amazing work with these films. like, seriously madly great. they're my cultural heroes for 2016. the image quality in the roma bluray is simply spectacular. THAT FASHION SHOW. will haunt your dreams.

i'm making a note of your other movies to watch later in the year. i'm focused on farces and satires at the moment, due to some lunatic seasonal scheme i've adopted. yeah...

!@#$%! - I highly recommend One-Eyed Jacks. I remember years ago I watched The Wild Bunch due to yr discussion about it in this thread and it is like a bridge point between something like the romantic westerns of the 40s and 50s to The Wild Bunch.... but with the madness of Brando.

I haven't, but I've always wanted to. Straight on the to-watch list.

I saw it way back when but don't recall much. I remember hearing great things about Malcovic's performance, but to me it didn't measure up to Martin Landau's morphine-addicted Bela Lugosi from Ed Wood. I'm sure the films have almost nothing in common and my comparison was trivial, but that's how I felt at the time.

Haven't seen the movie, but what's the deal with the "Krampus" idea being pushed as some sort of new anti-Christmas holiday? Perhaps because it was our own holidays last week, the idea seemed to get lots of publicity from stories I heard both on TV and a long segment on "Coast to Coast" radio about these Krampus festivals in Europe where everyone dresses up and marches in costume. And now they've started several here in the U.S. The fuck is up with people?

There's a big article in this month's Fortean Times. Krampus is obviously the new 'bad clown'.

Anyway, just watched Alien v Predator 1 & 2

I quite enjoyed the 1st one, mainly for its back story, but ended up barely able to finish the 2nd one.

I actually preferred the second AvP haha. Oh well. Are you going to watch Predators next? I loved that one... but I don't think that necessarily means you will.

I never liked any of the Predator films. I've never been that into the Predator itself. The alien in the Alien films was always more interesting to me and was my only real incentive to watch the AvP films. Problem is I just wanted the aliens to win: against the predators in AvP1 and everyone in AvP2.

It'd be cool if they did a Planet of the Apes style Alien film, where the aliens have completely taken over.

Wait, there's a second Alien vs. Predator movie?!

Sweet merciful Christ.

Rogue One: A Star Wars Story

6.5/10 I guess.

Y'know, it's Star Wars, and there was nothing BAD about it. It was well made, so overall it was definitely worth seeing. But there was something missing that made it feel sort of detatched and dragging. I noticed this almost immediately and spent a lot of the movie trying to zero in on exactly what that missing piece was. I came up with some thoughts:

First, I think the absence of a John Williams score had a much bigger impact on the way this movie felt than anyone would have guessed. I've actually always considered his SW score to be overrated. But, like, when the "Long ago, in a galaxy far away" line appeared on screen, it felt REALLY WEIRD to not have that music kick in, accompanied by the vertical scrolling expository text! It was like the whole theatre was ready and raring to go, and then... bloop, we're on this planet. This had an actual physical effect on me, making my stomach sink a little. So I guess the Williams music really is an extremely important thread for the series, and it as more variation than I give it credit for. I missed it.

Also, this really wasn't a character-driven story at all. Star Wars has always been about these huge characters... what's next for them, what they are to each other. This one played out more like military science fiction (which I respect), but in that respect, I can see how it disappointed some people.

I appreciated the story. They built an entire stand-alone film based on one stupid inexplicable plothole in the original Star Wars. Rogue One presented a backstory for it and "explained" it in a way that at least kind of made sense.

But honestly I felt that it was a bit dark. Not in tone necessarily, but.. like.. visually. It was hard to see at times, kind of an eye strain. I got tired. Zap zap boom! Ugh. All of the Star Trek reboots have held my interest straight through, and The Force Awakens kept me glued to the screen. This one, not so much. Makes me nervous about future standalone films. I don't care about young Han Solo. I think they could easily overdo it with too much of this kind of thing.

One thing that was GREAT about it was Darth Vader. Not to spoil anything, but he's only in it for a few moments, but they make those moments count big time. They finally have the technology to show Vader as the ominous, unstoppable, badass motherfucker that he was always supposed to be.
It's probably (hopefully) the last time we'll ever see him in a movie, but MAN did he go out on a high note. Best Vader scene ever.

Overall, it wasn't terrible, but it was no Force Awakens. I don't feel any need to rewatch it, but I'm glad I went.

Still made me think of how much we Whovians are getting the shaft from Hollywood. One episode in the past year, no movies. I'd freaking kill to have just ONE big, well-made Doctor Who movie. Just one. This is the TENTH Star Wars movie (if you count the Ewok abortions, which you kinda have to). It pisses me off from time to time, thinking about it.

fair enough. I love both franchises, but definitely prefer Alien stuff. Are you going to watch Prometheus now? Or did you already? I Feel like you did. I'm getting confused now.