Movies Talk

after watching and enjoying the substance, i went back and crossed coralie fargeat’s first film, revenge, off of my to-watch list last night.

i liked it, but i’m not sure if i loved it. a lot of what i found so striking about the substance - its total lack of subtlety or grounding in reality, the way it immediately moves into the realm of abstraction - was present in this movie too. it was interesting to see how fargeat built her voice but it also made the choices feel a little less… compelling, somehow? like, her framework is so instantly recognizable and insistent that it felt like she’s applying that framework to different ideas, rather than letting the ideas inform her approach. or rather, that she simplifies the ideas down in order to fit them into her stylistic decisions.

i like the way that makes her movies feel - they’re very visceral, and very cinematic - but it also really makes me hope that she doesn’t ever feel tempted to try for nuance (given the reception to the substance, i think that’s a real risk -_-). at least, not within these techniques. i think her movies work primarily as edgelordy feminine sensorial experiences, but given all the critical ink spilled over the political valences of her movies - the “takedown of sexist beauty standards” and “feminist flip on rape-revenge” advertising loglines - i feel like people aren’t necessarily receiving them that way. i don’t really think she’s trying to make overtly political films.

still, it was worth a watch for the buckets and buckets and buckets of fake blood.

5 Likes

Every Frame a Painting is back, doing a short run of new things

6 Likes

I watched Megalopolis this evening, and now I want to talk to everyone about it.

I did not think it was good.

I want to know what people that genuinely praise it saw in it that I did not. When the credits started rolling I was left in disbelief at what I had just witnessed; this was dementia manifest.

It sucks, but perhaps it also is great in a way that we will never see again. I can never recommend this film to anyone; you are better served watching paint dry than enduring this mess. I feel for Copolla. This must be exactly the film he intended to release; it took so long and he spent so much on it that there is no way this is somehow compromised from his vision.

…but that confounds me. How could this be his intention?

My 3/10 review of it is just: “this debunks auteur theory”.

Wow

8 Likes

agreed on all counts, which is why i loved it.

7 Likes

I’m not sure if you read wickedcestus’s comments above, but I don’t have any smart way to articulate my (positive) feelings on the movie beyond what he said.

I was often awestruck by the images onscreen, or at how those images were cut together. I like to see someone doing split-screen compositions.

Incidentally, looking at the screenplay reveals Aubrey Plaza’s name was almost Wow Baltimore(??).

4 Likes

the WHAT???

I am also morbidly curious about mega-flop-olis (gottem) but re: aesthetics I need to know if this is accurate:

5 Likes

Not really, but this is pretty close:

7 Likes

this morning i watched earwig, directed by lucile hadžihalilović. it’s a kind of gothic surreal fantasy-horror joint about a man looking after a girl with ice for teeth - comparisons for general vibe are, like, eraserhead or louis malle’s black moon or the early jeunet/caro movies. it’s got some really viscerally upsetting images and then a lot of empty space where characters stare at cabinets of wine glasses or paintings of old buildings, or take laudanum and the screen gets overtaken by bokeh lighting. really awful (positive connotation) sound design too - a lot of gross mouth sounds on the audio track.

i don’t know if i’d call it a good movie, but it did work for me on some level - it felt like the nightmare logic was tuned properly, with enough grounding in real textures to feel really unsettling and eerie. it’s also super super slow and placid, broken by periodic violence. idk. very interesting to watch something so elliptical after seeing two coralie fargeat movies back to back, which are extremely blunt and obvious.

4 Likes

For my most favorite time of the year, aka the spooky season, am showing my all-time favorite spooky flicks, both replays of past banger & imho holiday classics that I’ve yet to stream until now.

Re: the former, if you haven’t seen One Cut of the Dead, now is your perfect chance! Especially since for part 2, am showing the sequel…

And I might have played THE best animated body horror flick via paper cutouts of all time more than once, so am hoping no one minds the insanity that is Violence Voyager a third time…

Third up will be the perfect opportunity for me detail how much I stan for Jeffrey Combs; I may even detail the time I was involved in a movie in which the low-key lone reason for it happening was to cast him so we could just hang out with him all day long…

Fourth up is the continuation of my low-key focus on Kiyoshi Kurosawa that I kicked off last week, and IMHO is the J-horror maestro’s GOAT…

Last but not least is the one horror film that I recommend the most to video game developers, so I suppose my mention of it here is especially appropriate…

The stream will again be via the alt account, starting around 8PM-ish EST…

6 Likes

watched The Substance sitting on the second row, and I loved it! a no holds barred twilight zone episode with deliciously disgusting body horror tightly gripped onto emotional truth, executed with flair. it is not subtle and that’s great. a real good time at the movies imho.

3 Likes

Thanks for the warning on this one, sounds like a movie I’d have to watch muted, and thus will skip!!

1 Like

I watched The Substance, and … lordy.
Cronenberg and Carpenter would be jealous. Or proud.

Severe misaphonia warning for this film. There aren’t many of them but the sequences where people are eating or drinking are so extreme that even I, a non-misaphonia sufferer, thought it was too much and gross. That was the point of those scenes, really. But still.

1 Like

I watched Scorsese’s After Hours for the first time last night after seeing your post and making a note of it.

I really enjoyed it. There’s so much intense symbolism around creation, death and art throughout. I loved the bookending at the office — was he changed by his late night journey through soho? Is he of it now or did he merely survive?

I read some reviews afterward, but I think I want to read some analysis.

Had me thinking of the surreal characters and logic of David Lynch, conspiracy and paranoia of Eyes Wide Shut, the man at the hands of larger forces and heightened reality of the Big Lebowski, ratcheting stakes and lack of closure of the Super Safdie Bros. I feel like this one should get more credit

5 Likes

Just watched The Substance as well! What a wild ass movie. Definitely recommend it. And I don’t typically like horror movies.

I’ve been watching lots of movies in the middle of the night because I have a newborn here who just wants to hangout on my chest and not in her bassinet.

Watched Alex Garland’s Civil War, which uses the civil war as a backdrop, having more in common with a zombie movie than one about politics. It’s actually kind of shocking how apolitical this movie ostensibly about politics is.

Then I watched Oppenheimer, which really demonstrates that Nolan is not interested in making movies about people or characters. Despite that, I do think it’s a good movie. Nolan is more a technician than a storyteller, so I think it makes sense he’s become what he’s become. Sort of a STEM kid’s idea of an auteur. Which maybe sounds like a backhanded compliment and I suppose it is, but the movie is delicious to look at and it has a compelling structure that carries you through. Add to that the star studdedness of the whole affair and you may never bother to ask yourself why no one in the movie has a conversation unrelated to the plot. It’s a biography where you come out of it knowing almost nothing about the subject of the film. And despite this seeming to be a showcase for Cillian Murphy, I actually think he was given very little to work with. I quite like Murphy! Have liked him for twenty years and think he’s one of the best actors around. But he didn’t deserve an Oscar for this.
This is also a strangely apolitical movie despite literally being about WWII and McCarthyism. I don’t know what to make of these two movies that are somehow absent of politics despite seeming to be completely about politics.

Megalopolis, on the other hand manages to be quite political.
@rejj

I watched Megalopolis this evening, and now I want to talk to everyone about it.

I did not think it was good.

I want to know what people that genuinely praise it saw in it that I did not. When the credits started rolling I was left in disbelief at what I had just witnessed; this was dementia manifest.

It sucks, but perhaps it also is great in a way that we will never see again. I can never recommend this film to anyone; you are better served watching paint dry than enduring this mess. I feel for Copolla. This must be exactly the film he intended to release; it took so long and he spent so much on it that there is no way this is somehow compromised from his vision.

…but that confounds me. How could this be his intention?

My 3/10 review of it is just: “this debunks auteur theory”.

Wow

I barely know what to think of Megalopolis. But I love it in ways that are difficult to explain. I talk more about it here, along with Civil War and Oppenheimer. But I think it feels like a movie from another dimension, an alternate America where our art and especially our movies never strayed from the operatic and silly, where realism was never seen as a choice worth making. I also think there’s a great beauty in something so ambitious yet so imperfect. It feels like humanity bursting from the screen. And I feel it all the more compared to Oppenheimer and Civil War, which aim so hard to be realistic, to make you feel the dirt, to hear the humming machines, to taste the foul air, whereas Megalopolis is a dream. Perhaps a dream about a dream, which does make it, at times, borderline unwatchable. And yet sandwiched between bizarre sequences will be one of breathtaking beauty or power, with sometimes insightful critique that is itself sandwiched between a blunt childlike view of the world that’s almost laughable to consider.

I watched Killers of the Flower Moon last night. That’s a long movie, fella. I don’t know that it earns its length. I also think it takes about as long to watch as it does to read the book. It is nice, however, that the book and movie are quite different and come at the story from sort of opposite directions.

My friends really wanted me to watch a movie called Terrifier, I guess because they hate me. I don’t particularly like these messes of gore and violence but it certainly has a deranged flair for the tasteless. Which is something, I suppose. My wife came into the room around the middle of the movie so I turned it off. My friends want me to fnish it, which I probably won’t, mostly because if I do finish it I’ll feel compelled to watch 50 more movies like this so that I can write a dumb 2,000 word essay about it. And probably I have better things to do with my time.

Though maybe I don’t.

5 Likes

it’s been the “cool people” Scorsese pick for a bit. the other “cool people” Scorsese pick (moving in the opposite direction) is the film he described as his “most violent”: Age of Innocence. FWIW I think Fran Lebowitz said After Hours was her favorite of Marty’s

I watched After Hours bc I’m a Joan Didion stan and Griffin Dunne, the main actor is her nephew and directed the documentary about her. He’s a fun actor - always pops up in random shows like one episode of Succession or two episodes of Search Party. Kinda wish he got more leads out of that role though…

This is a perfect sentence. Wow I’m gonna be thinking about this one for a long time

Can I say something insane? I know he’s like EVIL evil in Red Eye but… would.

4 Likes

I think I’ve mentioned on these boards before my dislike for Oppenheimer, and for Nolan’s works in general (I liked Memento).

My lboxd review of Oppenheimer

For whatever it is worth, I’m far more likely to want to watch Megalopolis again, rather than Oppenheimer. My dislike for it is not due to it being fantastical rather than aiming for “realism”. Some of it is technical – there were some shots and sequences that I thought just plain looked bad, and I could only imagine FFC was leaning over the desk of the editor/colourist/etc and forcing them to hit the confirm button. Some of it is structural – there are plot advances that I did not feel were earned; I was already thinking “I bet there’s a 4+ hour cut of this somewhere” while watching it in the cinema. I bet those plot-advancing montages were not supposed to be montages at all.

…and some of it is just that I did not think it was a good story. There may be the bones of an interesting story there, but I saw the movie that was produced, not the one that potentially was hinted at.

Also, I think this just confirms that I simply will not enjoy any movie with Adam Driver in it. I haven’t seen House of Gucci although I’m led to believe that will not do anything to change my feelings here.

2 Likes

+1 to the Oppenheimer hate

in a 3 hour film, the ethical implications of developing and using the atomic bomb are dispensed of in a ridiculous 3 minute info-dump of a scene, exactly halfway through:







then there’s the fact that most of the movie is actually court drama about whether, decades later, he should lose his access to military secrets or not??? who cares?? so fucking annoying. “STEM kid’s idea of an auteur” is right!

3 Likes

watch instead: Breakfast On Pluto

3 Likes

Tombo taking the forum in a new direction

4 Likes

Seeing this and The Winds that Shake the Barley the same week were what made me really like Cillian Murphy. He should’ve won his Oscar for one of those movies rather than Oppenheimer.

Again, that’s not a slight on Murphy, but so much of the characterization in Oppenheimer has to come through body language–because the script is terrible–but it’s hard to use your body to create a character when so much of the movie has the camera a foot from his face.

3 Likes