[!@#$%!]

finished watching lars von trier's nymphomaniac (or "nymph()maniac" to make it more pretentious). what seems like the 4-hour version (vol 1. last week and vol 2 last night)

 

when i saw vol 1 it felt like a good and important movie, i loved the story and the digressions. vol 2 however felt a lot less fresh and propelled more by logical inertia than inspiration. i probably fucked up by watching them separately instead of together. the element of surprise was gone. unfortunately i cannot go back in time.

it's not really a horny movie at all. it's a fucking sad and depressing and weird movie-- at least the 4 hour version which doesn't have all the porno fucking.

it's still a good movie though-- charlotte gainsbourg as this twisted but very lucid creature and stellan skaarsgard as his nerd story sidekick make a solid pair. the girl who plays young joe does a good job acting. shia labeouf is adequate. uma will surprise you. the other guy from the 90s who plays the dad does great too.

the camera is, as usual with him, great & gorgeous-- and it even quotes other lars von trier movies from medea to kingdom hospital to antichrist and i'm sure i've missed others. if you watch it, do it all in one session or pretty close (e.g. 2 days) or some of the magic will be gone from it.

also try to watch the 5 hour version if you can-- not for the porno which i'm sure will only add to the sadness, but because in the 4 hour one it feels like the movie has some plot holes and disconnects. regrets...

[Rob Instigator]

what's the point?


That is what I think every single time I have to watch a Von Trier bullshit film.

[!@#$%!]

Originally Posted by Rob Instigator

what's the point?

the same point as the spinning of any yarn--to keep the audience entertained. plus in a movie like this you get the bonus

it's an intelligent movie! it has good characters! and the time passed quickly while watching. i liked it. honest. i was just recommend it people don't wait too long for the 2nd part.

speaking of spinning yarns, this movie now i realize parallels in many ways 1001 nights-- which actually gets a mention in the dialogue. holy shit it does. ha ha ha ha. awesome!!

thinking again, to confirm my first impression, i'll say it's a good and (somewhat) important movie. i think, anyway. for me, not for the politics, but for the style.

i'm looking forward to watching the director's cut.

i'm also looking forward to the day when (if) "until the end of the world", the wim wenders movie, finally get released in complete form. it's been like 2 decades! and it's still hard to figure out what happened with the dream machine.

Originally Posted by Rob Instigator

That is what I think every single time I have to watch a Von Trier bullshit film.

he can be a bit of a sadist towards both characters and audience, i'll give you that. i can handle it okay though at times i have to look away.

[SuchFriendsAreDangerous]

Originally Posted by !@#$%!

finished watching lars von trier's nymphomaniac (or "nymph()maniac" to make it more pretentious). what seems like the 4-hour version (vol 1. last week and vol 2 last night)

 

when i saw vol 1 it felt like a good and important movie, i loved the story and the digressions. vol 2 however felt a lot less fresh and propelled more by logical inertia than inspiration. i probably fucked up by watching them separately instead of together. the element of surprise was gone. unfortunately i cannot go back in time.

it's not really a horny movie at all. it's a fucking sad and depressing and weird movie-- at least the 4 hour version which doesn't have all the porno fucking.

it's still a good movie though-- charlotte gainsbourg as this twisted but very lucid creature and stellan skaarsgard as his nerd story sidekick make a solid pair. the girl who plays young joe does a good job acting. shia labeouf is adequate. uma will surprise you. the other guy from the 90s who plays the dad does great too.

the camera is, as usual with him, great & gorgeous-- and it even quotes other lars von trier movies from medea to kingdom hospital to antichrist and i'm sure i've missed others. if you watch it, do it all in one session or pretty close (e.g. 2 days) or some of the magic will be gone from it.

also try to watch the 5 hour version if you can-- not for the porno which i'm sure will only add to the sadness, but because in the 4 hour one it feels like the movie has some plot holes and disconnects. regrets...

I just think that entire premise was stupid and gratuitous and any attempts to claim it was a film with substance is wasted by the porno. It would have possibly been a brilliant flick sans the porno, but trying to make some kind of thought provoking film where graphic sex scenes are a major part of the plot and story seems trite at the least, and misogynistic at the worst.

Sure, the porno adds to the sadness but only because of how sad and utterly destructive porn is in real life. By the way, I'm not a prude, but having never even remotely seen this film it still really really bothers me..

[Rob Instigator]

porno only makes me sad when i get soft.....

[HenryHill51]

Originally Posted by !@#$%!

the same point as the spinning of any yarn--to keep the audience entertained. plus in a movie like this you get the bonus

it's an intelligent movie! it has good characters! and the time passed quickly while watching. i liked it. honest. i was just recommend it people don't wait too long for the 2nd part.

speaking of spinning yarns, this movie now i realize parallels in many ways 1001 nights-- which actually gets a mention in the dialogue. holy shit it does. ha ha ha ha. awesome!!

thinking again, to confirm my first impression, i'll say it's a good and (somewhat) important movie. i think, anyway. for me, not for the politics, but for the style.

i'm looking forward to watching the director's cut.

i'm also looking forward to the day when (if) "until the end of the world", the wim wenders movie, finally get released in complete form. it's been like 2 decades! and it's still hard to figure out what happened with the dream machine.



he can be a bit of a sadist towards both characters and audience, i'll give you that. i can handle it okay though at times i have to look away.

I think the complete "Until the End of the World" is out there. I got hold of a 5 hour version of the film several years ago. Honestly, I don't know if it adds anything to the film, though. I remember being much more impacted by the 2.5 hour version when I saw it ten years ago than the 5 hour version. There's ALOT of fluff towards the end between Von Sydow and Hurt that never really deepens the relationship. Still, as a Wenders completist, I was happy to finally find it.

[!@#$%!]

Originally Posted by SuchFriendsAreDangerous

I just think that entire premise was stupid and gratuitous and any attempts to claim it was a film with substance is wasted by the porno. It would have possibly been a brilliant flick sans the porno, but trying to make some kind of thought provoking film where graphic sex scenes are a major part of the plot and story seems trite at the least, and misogynistic at the worst.

Sure, the porno adds to the sadness but only because of how sad and utterly destructive porn is in real life. By the way, I'm not a prude, but having never even remotely seen this film it still really really bothers me..

have you watched it though?

[SuchFriendsAreDangerous]

Originally Posted by !@#$%!

have you watched it though?

I don't like Skinemax kind of movies no matter how critically acclaimed..

I also didn't watch 12 Years A Slave because I can't watch depressing as movies, so if Nympho is both Skinemax AND depressing? Fuck that shit I wouldn't bother.

[!@#$%!]

Originally Posted by SuchFriendsAreDangerous

I don't like Skinemax kind of movies no matter how critically acclaimed..

I also didn't watch 12 Years A Slave because I can't watch depressing as movies, so if Nympho is both Skinemax AND depressing? Fuck that shit I wouldn't bother.

lol i could tell from your comment that you hadn't seen it. you missed the mark big time.

this is why i refrain from commenting on the horror film posts-- i don't like watching them much hence i don't know them.

[SuchFriendsAreDangerous]

Originally Posted by !@#$%!

lol i could tell from your comment that you hadn't seen it. you missed the mark big time.

I very well may have, but I based my opinions on several well articulated reviews/analyses about it from reliable sources. To be sure, a lot of people thought it was good, but I understand that graphic sex scenes played a significant part of the movie and in all irony that is a turn off for me and movies..

this is why i refrain from commenting on the horror film posts-- i don't like watching them much hence i don't know them.

True dat, and I totally respect that. Indeed, that is why I said my critique was on the premise of the film itself and not any particulars about it because I hadn't and wouldn't see it.

To be sure, I understand it is a film with a lot of substance.

[!@#$%!]

yeah it's "heavy" and it delves into all sorts of stuff-- theology, fishing, mathematics, you name it. it's really pretty great but also pretty grim. not a feel-good movie. but an intelligent one. in spite of the surface brutality etc i think in the end it's pretty compassionate towards its main character. but i could't say. this is why i love european movies over americans-- it's never the goodies vs. the baddies and there is ample ambiguity and room for interpretation.

[Toilet & Bowels]

Originally Posted by !@#$%!

finished watching lars von trier's nymphomaniac (or "nymph()maniac" to make it more pretentious). what seems like the 4-hour version (vol 1. last week and vol 2 last night)

 

when i saw vol 1 it felt like a good and important movie, i loved the story and the digressions. vol 2 however felt a lot less fresh and propelled more by logical inertia than inspiration. i probably fucked up by watching them separately instead of together. the element of surprise was gone. unfortunately i cannot go back in time.

it's not really a horny movie at all. it's a fucking sad and depressing and weird movie-- at least the 4 hour version which doesn't have all the porno fucking.

it's still a good movie though-- charlotte gainsbourg as this twisted but very lucid creature and stellan skaarsgard as his nerd story sidekick make a solid pair. the girl who plays young joe does a good job acting. shia labeouf is adequate. uma will surprise you. the other guy from the 90s who plays the dad does great too.

the camera is, as usual with him, great & gorgeous-- and it even quotes other lars von trier movies from medea to kingdom hospital to antichrist and i'm sure i've missed others. if you watch it, do it all in one session or pretty close (e.g. 2 days) or some of the magic will be gone from it.

also try to watch the 5 hour version if you can-- not for the porno which i'm sure will only add to the sadness, but because in the 4 hour one it feels like the movie has some plot holes and disconnects. regrets...

What did you make of the character Liz?

[!@#$%!]

Originally Posted by Toilet & Bowels

What did you make of the character Liz?

liz… i can't remember that name… was that the receptionist at the print shop, i think?

eta: you mean the character or the actress?

i my version (4h) the character didn't have a big role (gatekeeper, then we're told about her, but her main role is briefly as jealous rival, kind of?)

[Toilet & Bowels]

Shia LeBouef's character's secretary, the one who interviews the young Charlotte Gainsbourg's character for her first job.

[Dr. Eugene Felikson]

I'm intrigued by Necromaniac. Never watched much Von Trier stuff or really got too into his schtick. I also prefer my movies to be a neat 90 minutes - 2 hrs at most. Still, I'm intrigued by Necromaniac. Must be the porn.

[!@#$%!]

Originally Posted by Toilet & Bowels

Shia LeBouef's character's secretary, the one who interviews the young Charlotte Gainsbourg's character for her first job.

yeah, "Good job, Liz!". i called her the print shop receptionist--hard to tell who was doing what in that office.

i didn't understand your question because it didn't seem to me a remarkable character in any way. perhaps i didn't notice something. the actress who played her did a great job reacting/relating to joe (great body language) but i don't have any thoughts about the character herself. what version have you seen?

i'm really curious about the longer version. for example, the posters show udo kier getting off with his eyes rolling behind his eyelids (great look for him ha ha) but in what i saw he's only a waiter. maybe something happens after that was cut out? or maybe the poster is just a gimmick. i wondering if the same thing happened to liz, or "the piano teacher".

Originally Posted by Dr. Eugene Felikson

I'm intrigued by Necromaniac.

ha ha ha ha. nice trollin'!

 

[evollove]

5 minutes of GET ON UP, the James Brown biopic.

Took that long to hit at least 3 major biopic cliches. Why do I get the feeling there will be little discussion of the music? Any scene where Brown tells the band the emphasize the one-beat to make it funky? Do we get to see the moment Clyde Stubblefield comes up with the "Funky Drummer" beat and the part where Brown takes credit for what turns out to be the most sampled beat of all time? Doubt it. But wouldn't that be an interesting flick?

[SuchFriendsAreDangerous]

Originally Posted by evollove

5 minutes of GET ON UP, the James Brown biopic.

Took that long to hit at least 3 major biopic cliches. Why do I get the feeling there will be little discussion of the music? Any scene where Brown tells the band the emphasize the one-beat to make it funky? Do we get to see the moment Clyde Stubblefield comes up with the "Funky Drummer" beat and the part where Brown takes credit for what turns out to be the most sampled beat of all time? Doubt it. But wouldn't that be an interesting flick?

Several people told me it was good but I detest biopics on principle, its a total waste of what could have been an otherwise great actual documentary.

[!@#$%!]

THE SEARCHERS

 

i had always rejected this unseen --- because i assumed it was just genocide apologist propaganda, and to an extent it is that... but not quite. amazingly beautifully shot film, great acting, compositions, dialogue-- goes from gut-wrenching to hilarious… john ford was amazing, really, and john wayne was pretty great here in spite of the often nefarious symbolism attached to his image.

i don't know how to explain this movie yet because to me it's not as clear-cut as people want it to be. it could be an acknowledgement of guilt, or it could be a justification for extermination, depending on how you read it. but it's definitely not a rah rah cowboys movie.

still, if you're willing to stomach such uncertainties for the sake of watching a masterpiece (way more entertaining than anything leni riefenstahl ever made), this is a great movie. epic in every sense.

[Rob Instigator]

Woodstock, the extra long version (6 hours?) I am only 3 hours in.

dang, Ritchie Havens still rocks harder than a magic kiss, Joan Baez is still boring as all fuck, ending her set to near silence from a crowd bored to tears, the Who still seem more engaging visually than musically (BORING FUCKING SONGS), Sha Na Na seem a little more like a fun gay camp take on what was oldies at the time than I remember as a kid, Wavy Gravy seems more like a CIA undercover disinformation agent than I remembered, Canned Heat still rock hard, and the hippies still look crusty and like they are having the fucking tgime of their lives.

(The squares who went just to be hip all left once the rain started, because it was just not "comfy" enough. fucking squares)