Film Socialism
Based
99.9999% of rock is crap
Posts: 2,557
Likes: 1,389
|
Post by Film Socialism on Jul 9, 2017 20:38:54 GMT
Spielberg's only two great films are:A.I and Munich, the rest pretty much sucks. Biutiful is Inarritus best film. Assassins Creed is a much better action film than Mad Max Fury Road The Martian is the worst film of 2015. David Thomson is a much better film critic than Brody, at least, Thomson doesn't take himself very seriously. James Gray has made only one great film: Two Lovers. Miami Vice is Mann's best work Godard hasn't made a single bad film in his career. i still can't get behind Munich's acclaim but it's alright ig, A.I. a goat tho not seen not seen but interested now tbh not quite but the worst big film ig nop not seen but i love The Immigrantagree this is unironically the most unpopular opinion i have ever read
|
|
|
Post by moonman157 on Jul 9, 2017 21:48:06 GMT
|
|
|
Post by moonman157 on Jul 9, 2017 21:48:26 GMT
b Spielberg's only two great films are:A.I and Munich, the rest pretty much sucks. Biutiful is Inarritus best film. Assassins Creed is a much better action film than Mad Max Fury Road The Martian is the worst film of 2015. David Thomson is a much better film critic than Brody, at least, Thomson doesn't take himself very seriously. James Gray has made only one great film: Two Lovers. Miami Vice is Mann's best work Godard hasn't made a single bad film in his career. i still can't get behind Munich's acclaim but it's alright ig, A.I. a goat tho not seen not seen but interested now tbh not quite but the worst big film ig nop not seen but i love The Immigrantagree this is unironically the most unpopular opinion i have ever read Not praising War of the Worlds is bad Praising anything Inarritu is very bad Not having watched Two Lovers is extremely bad
|
|
|
Post by moonman157 on Jul 9, 2017 21:50:16 GMT
I'll put forth the pretty unpopular one that people who read YA lit when they are no longer YAs are fucked
|
|
no
Badass
Posts: 1,071
Likes: 423
|
Post by no on Jul 9, 2017 21:55:21 GMT
What others have you seen? uhh Salo, Teorema, Gospel, Canterbury Tales, Arabian NightsSee Mamma Roma
|
|
|
Post by notacrook on Jul 9, 2017 22:02:04 GMT
The one that always comes to mind is that Lost in Translation is a terrible film in my opinion.
Napoleon Dynamite is one of the worst films ever made.
|
|
|
Post by notacrook on Jul 9, 2017 22:14:45 GMT
The one that always comes to mind is that Lost in Translation is a terrible film in my opinion. Napoleon Dynamite is one of the worst films ever made.is the second one an unpopular opinion at all? seemed like a few years after it released everyone at my school had grown to hate it which was strange but yeah. I know more people who like it than don't, and it got decent reviews. Go figure.
|
|
|
Post by notacrook on Jul 9, 2017 22:19:16 GMT
I know more people who like it than don't, and it got decent reviews. Go figure. By the way, I love your avatar, His character is my favorite within the movie. Thanks, I'd wanted to change it for a while. Mine's gotta be Betty/Diane, who is probably my favourite movie character(s?) ever, but Adam's just great, Theroux knocked it out of the park, and that shot is one of the best in the movie.
|
|
eliuson
Junior Member
Posts: 273
Likes: 55
|
Post by eliuson on Jul 10, 2017 1:59:53 GMT
-Film noirs are generally incredibly uninteresting and formulaic. -There is more bias for Hitchcock and Kubrick than any other director around. They get away with stuff other directors get their ass kicked for. On the opposite side of that coin, they also get criticized for some of the stupidest things. Tired of hearing "emotionally cold" for Kubrick as I am "entertainment but not art" for Hitchcock. Full Metal Jacket's 2nd act is superb, and the majority of Hitchcock's endings are fine for me, Psycho aside. -The Notebook doesn't do anything much different than what Gone With the Wind does. Both are sensationalist emotion-jerking movies designed to please sentiment. What's the difference again? -Macho actors (DeNiro, Pacino, Bogart, Eastwood, Bridges, maybe Cruise and even Wayne, Ahnuld, Stallone, and Willis) are the best. THE BEST. Displaying masculinity is the coolest thing anyone can do. -Avatar (6/10) is not in any way a great movie. But again, stupidest complaints ever. Calling it derivative is lazy, inarticulate, and does not narrow down the hundreds of other derivative movies. By calling it Dances With Navi....so? I'm pretty sure we all realize that. -McAdams > Hathaway -Waterworld (6/10) is also not great, but I don't see what the first two Mad Max movies do that's so different and better. -James Stewart and Marlon Brando aren't really OMG great. But they're very good. I admit brilliance and career changing performance in It's a Wonderful Life, and Brando did kill it in Last Tango in Paris. Brando also is a very underrated camp actor in Apocalypse Now, and Stewart fits the mold of screwball romps very well. But I just feel that "their act" starts to get revealed when you dig a little bit deeper into their filmography. I never know why people don't bash Stewart and Brando for that when they're always ready with their fists to slam Bogart for the same. Give me Bogart's act anyday. -Robert DeNiro remained at the top of his game into the 90s. In Cape Fear and Casino and Heat, he was capable of still playing exceedingly entertaining leading men, doing a maniac in Cape Fear way better than Hopkins did in SOTL, and his ability to make his characters closest to human as possible is on full display in Heat. -Richard Linklater is the cinematic equivalent of a mediocre indie rock band. A completely nothing special director and Before Sunrise is stupid 13 year old girl fantasmo with actors who look 16 serenading in a CD shop to some homemade pop music. I haven't seen Boyhood though. Come at me, ya bitches. Can't fully embrace these thoughts on Link later but kinda agree with you.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2017 2:09:52 GMT
The one that always comes to mind is that Lost in Translation is a terrible film in my opinion. Napoleon Dynamite is one of the worst films ever made. I agree about Lost in Translation (maybe not quite terrible tho), but I adore Napoleon Dynamite. I get why people wouldn't like it, but I think it's hilarious. I could watch it every night for a month and still have a ton of fun each time.
|
|
Film Socialism
Based
99.9999% of rock is crap
Posts: 2,557
Likes: 1,389
|
Post by Film Socialism on Jul 10, 2017 4:35:30 GMT
b i still can't get behind Munich's acclaim but it's alright ig, A.I. a goat tho not seen not seen but interested now tbh not quite but the worst big film ig nop not seen but i love The Immigrantagree this is unironically the most unpopular opinion i have ever read Not praising War of the Worlds is bad Praising anything Inarritu is very bad Not having watched Two Lovers is extremely bad War of the Worlds is gr8 i liked AP but it's already waned on me a lot super fast agree
|
|
no
Badass
Posts: 1,071
Likes: 423
|
Post by no on Jul 10, 2017 5:35:43 GMT
Just about everyone here has extremely limited range. I am no exception. It is more contrarian to like Spielberg on this board it seems, so I will say that he makes more good movies than bad ones, but makes more all right films than anything else. A lot of 6s and 7s, which is not a bad thing. He managed to make a few great films. However, he has also made some that are quite bad, and Crystal Skull ain't one of them.The Grand Budapest Hotel is Wes Anderson at his worst (so far). Arrival is Villeneuve's worst feature film. Not a particularly bad thing but the love it gets relative to his others is baffling. Propaganda is good. Paul Verhoeven's fanbase is much worse than Nolan's. Paranormal Activity is a good movie. Screensavers can be avant-garde. I mean look at this... Memes are a better art form than video games.©
|
|
|
Post by urbanpatrician on Jul 10, 2017 8:52:02 GMT
Just about everyone here has extremely limited range. I am no exception. It is more contrarian to like Spielberg on this board it seems, so I will say that he makes more good movies than bad ones, but makes more all right films than anything else. A lot of 6s and 7s, which is not a bad thing. He managed to make a few great films. However, he has also made some that are quite bad, and Crystal Skull ain't one of them.Propaganda is good. Paul Verhoeven's fanbase is much worse than Nolan's. Memes are a better art form than video games.© eliuson - It's not Linklater I'm bashing as much as its Before Sunrise. I just see it as a corny chick flick - and it's pretty damn YA to me. I think he can be interesting when he has quality material to adapt like A Scanner Darkly - he took me for a trip there, Before Sunset is at least.... a sweet song of adulthood, and its idyllic set of life values rang pretty substantial to me, and Boyhood is his most acclaimed movie which I haven't even seen. I expect it to be very good. The man himself I don't feel much anger for. There's nothing particular about his style and approach I hate. As opposed to hacks like Mike Mills or Barry Jenkins who just makes me fume. no I don't think it's true at all almost everyone here has limited range. I think even Hitchcock makes alright films most of the times. As for Spielberg, most of the times I agree he's just good, but he obviously has his greats, but his greats aren't as great as the greats of other greats. But for me, I have no complaints about The Last Crusade, Duel, Saving Private Ryan, A.I., and Catch Me if You Can. Those are all some of my favorites. (maybe I wouldn't go that far with A.I.) Propaganda is mind-numbing conformity. Definitely not a good thing to me. I rarely ever succumb to propaganda. Verhoeven is God. Can't help the issue you take with the people who like him though. Anybody who made an immersive masterpiece like Showgirls. And shows his subversive talents in Starship Troopers and Black Instinct, and makes great genre films like Total Recall and Robocop (which actually is merely an 8/10 flick and degraded tremendously last time I saw it) is deserving of what his fans say about him. Video games can be consuming and sometimes you just don't feel like playing. I'm always in a mood to watch movies, but not always to play video games. But some video games reaches real heights that certain films can't compare with, and there's usually a higher success ratio with video games (more good/great ones per total releases). Oh and..... Spider Man 3 > There Will Be Blood
|
|
|
Post by moonman157 on Jul 10, 2017 14:08:14 GMT
Just about everyone here has extremely limited range. I am no exception. It is more contrarian to like Spielberg on this board it seems, so I will say that he makes more good movies than bad ones, but makes more all right films than anything else. A lot of 6s and 7s, which is not a bad thing. He managed to make a few great films. However, he has also made some that are quite bad, and Crystal Skull ain't one of them.Propaganda is good. Paul Verhoeven's fanbase is much worse than Nolan's. Memes are a better art form than video games.© eliuson - It's not Linklater I'm bashing as much as its Before Sunrise. I just see it as a corny chick flick - and it's pretty damn YA to me. I think he can be interesting when he has quality material to adapt like A Scanner Darkly - he took me for a trip there, Before Sunset is at least.... a sweet song of adulthood, and its idyllic set of life values rang pretty substantial to me, and Boyhood is his most acclaimed movie which I haven't even seen. I expect it to be very good. The man himself I don't feel much anger for. There's nothing particular about his style and approach I hate. As opposed to hacks like Mike Mills or Barry Jenkins who just makes me fume. I don't really understand this criticism. Before Sunrise is entirely filtered through the mindset of two very young, idealistic people falling in love. To see Before Sunset as idyllic or sweet is to me both an oversimplification and a misreading. Sunset is supposed to be a crushing look at the death of youthful idealism that is so prominently on display in Sunrise.
|
|
|
Post by harlequinade on Jul 10, 2017 14:49:13 GMT
Baby Driver is straight up awful. I literally found only one person in the blogosphere community/other places I post on who thought that too
|
|
|
Post by urbanpatrician on Jul 10, 2017 19:16:00 GMT
eliuson - It's not Linklater I'm bashing as much as its Before Sunrise. I just see it as a corny chick flick - and it's pretty damn YA to me. I think he can be interesting when he has quality material to adapt like A Scanner Darkly - he took me for a trip there, Before Sunset is at least.... a sweet song of adulthood, and its idyllic set of life values rang pretty substantial to me, and Boyhood is his most acclaimed movie which I haven't even seen. I expect it to be very good. The man himself I don't feel much anger for. There's nothing particular about his style and approach I hate. As opposed to hacks like Mike Mills or Barry Jenkins who just makes me fume. I don't really understand this criticism. Before Sunrise is entirely filtered through the mindset of two very young, idealistic people falling in love. To see Before Sunset as idyllic or sweet is to me both an oversimplification and a misreading. Sunset is supposed to be a crushing look at the death of youthful idealism that is so prominently on display in Sunrise. I'm not sure which one you're so heavily applying "idyllic" or "sweet" to and think so definitively that it only applies to one. I think the whole series is build on being idyllic. And that's kind of part of its appeal, even if Sunset supposedly is about adulthood, but at the same time the idealism or the romantic happenings dripping from the pages of its portrayal of two people in their new adult phase is part of the appeal - if you think about it, Before Sunset has the backdrop of a certain paradise you can even call it. You can even think it's set in a certain part of heaven because it feels so perfect and ideal, and Paris has such a look of azure-like perfection, and you can even argue the way the bushes and trees are, it acts as some type of pearly gate into the world of these characters. It's set somewhere where nothing too bad can ever happen. I think everybody feels a little bit sweet watching either movies. We're simply looking at it at a different angle. Crushing? Well, obviously not everyone has the same reaction, but I wouldn't describe Sunset like that; I'm sure you can see what I mean.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2017 20:49:58 GMT
Wonder Woman is awful Wes Anderson is meh "Disturbing" is inherently a positive attribute in a movie Cries & Whispers is one of my least favorite films from Bergman Zodiac is only okay Psycho is only okay I disliked both Villeneuve films I've seen (Arrival and Polytechnique) Pinocchio is much scarier than The Conjuring
|
|
|
Post by moonman157 on Jul 10, 2017 21:24:53 GMT
I don't really understand this criticism. Before Sunrise is entirely filtered through the mindset of two very young, idealistic people falling in love. To see Before Sunset as idyllic or sweet is to me both an oversimplification and a misreading. Sunset is supposed to be a crushing look at the death of youthful idealism that is so prominently on display in Sunrise. I'm not sure which one you're so heavily applying "idyllic" or "sweet" to and think so definitively that it only applies to one. I think the whole series is build on being idyllic. And that's kind of part of its appeal, even if Sunset supposedly is about adulthood, but at the same time the idealism or the romantic happenings dripping from the pages of its portrayal of two people in their new adult phase is part of the appeal - if you think about it, Before Sunset has the backdrop of a certain paradise you can even call it. You can even think it's set in a certain part of heaven because it feels so perfect and ideal, and Paris has such a look of azure-like perfection, and you can even argue the way the bushes and trees are, it acts as some type of pearly gate into the world of these characters. It's set somewhere where nothing too bad can ever happen. I think everybody feels a little bit sweet watching either movies. We're simply looking at it at a different angle. Crushing? Well, obviously not everyone has the same reaction, but I wouldn't describe Sunset like that; I'm sure you can see what I mean. This is a very curious reading of the movie to me. The entire film is structured by a feeling of loss and missed opportunity. I would certainly see Sunrise fitting the description you've given, which is thematically appropriate because it is meant to capture the feeling of what it is like to be young and connecting with someone deeply. Sunrise feels so whimsical and idyllic because that is what it feels like when you're young and you somehow end up spending a night with someone wandering around feeling as though you're touching something inside each other. Sunset on the other hand is a look at what happens when those characters are trying to recapture that feeling but are struggling to do so because they've changed and they've lost the ability to connect in that same way. The sequence in the car offers the thesis of the film as both reflect on the wreckage left in the wake of the decade they spent wondering about the other. Hawke even talks about having possibly seen her on the way to his wedding but assumed he was just imagining things, metaphorically making clear that the reality of his humdrum marriage took precedence over the fantasy that he was struggling to make out. The awkward, deeply uncomfortable sexual tension of the whole film (eg. Hawke pulling Delpy on to his lap before fumbling through an apology to her) cuts through the elements that make it seem as though we're returning to the world of the first film. This all of course comes to a head in Before Midnight which is perhaps one of the least romantic films that is ostensibly about a romance. I could barely even bring myself to rewatch Midnight after it first come out as it's such a startlingly accurate depiction of the volatility that can enter something that once seemed idyllic. It's the perfect capper to what I see as a pretty stunning meditation on the stages of a relationship, particularly one that began in youth and became strained as the years passed.
|
|
|
Post by urbanpatrician on Jul 10, 2017 21:36:41 GMT
I'm not sure which one you're so heavily applying "idyllic" or "sweet" to and think so definitively that it only applies to one. I think the whole series is build on being idyllic. And that's kind of part of its appeal, even if Sunset supposedly is about adulthood, but at the same time the idealism or the romantic happenings dripping from the pages of its portrayal of two people in their new adult phase is part of the appeal - if you think about it, Before Sunset has the backdrop of a certain paradise you can even call it. You can even think it's set in a certain part of heaven because it feels so perfect and ideal, and Paris has such a look of azure-like perfection, and you can even argue the way the bushes and trees are, it acts as some type of pearly gate into the world of these characters. It's set somewhere where nothing too bad can ever happen. I think everybody feels a little bit sweet watching either movies. We're simply looking at it at a different angle. Crushing? Well, obviously not everyone has the same reaction, but I wouldn't describe Sunset like that; I'm sure you can see what I mean. Sunset on the other hand is a look at what happens when those characters are trying to recapture that feeling but are struggling to do so because they've changed and they've lost the ability to connect in that same way. The sequence in the car offers the thesis of the film as both reflect on the wreckage left in the wake of the decade they spent wondering about the other. Hawke even talks about having possibly seen her on the way to his wedding but assumed he was just imagining things, metaphorically making clear that the reality of his humdrum marriage took precedence over the fantasy that he was struggling to make out. The awkward, deeply uncomfortable sexual tension of the whole film (eg. Hawke pulling Delpy on to his lap before fumbling through an apology to her) cuts through the elements that make it seem as though we're returning to the world of the first film. You're making an excellent point here. They have an inability to touch each other now that so many years have passed, and their sexuality isn't automatic anymore; I could relate to that. And the element of "recanting on nostalgia" is strong in Sunset which does push it for a moment to reality. However, I think, however minimal, Sunset still has a degree of fancifulness and the films never lose that because that's part of the appeal. Let's say Sunrise has more of it, ok, but I don't think Sunset is completely free of it - because c'mon, it has romantic aspects. "Are they ever going to get back together?" "9 years... and they're together again, how sweet." "Please let's have a happy ending." (and they got exactly that) are common thoughts running through people's heads watching Sunset. That to me is definitely romantic. Also, while you're thinking I'm applying idyllic to the content, you might want to re-read what I said and notice I'm saying that the backdrop of Sunset is the real idyllic element in the film. You watch the film again and tell me it doesn't have a paradisiacal backdrop. That's the one thing that Sunset has more in the way of idyllic-ness than Sunrise, even though I think if you solely focus on the content - then yes, I'd agree with you Sunrise has more of it. I like most of what you say and I agree with your very articulate insight, you're right in noticing a few things about it.
|
|
|
Post by moonman157 on Jul 10, 2017 21:51:51 GMT
Sunset on the other hand is a look at what happens when those characters are trying to recapture that feeling but are struggling to do so because they've changed and they've lost the ability to connect in that same way. The sequence in the car offers the thesis of the film as both reflect on the wreckage left in the wake of the decade they spent wondering about the other. Hawke even talks about having possibly seen her on the way to his wedding but assumed he was just imagining things, metaphorically making clear that the reality of his humdrum marriage took precedence over the fantasy that he was struggling to make out. The awkward, deeply uncomfortable sexual tension of the whole film (eg. Hawke pulling Delpy on to his lap before fumbling through an apology to her) cuts through the elements that make it seem as though we're returning to the world of the first film. You're making an excellent point here. There have an inability to touch each other now that so many years have passed, and their sexuality isn't automatic anymore; I could relate to that. And the element of "recanting on nostalgia" is strong in Sunset which does push it for a moment to reality. However, I think, however minimal, Sunset still has a degree of fancifulness and the films never lose that because that's part of the appeal. Let's say Sunrise has it more of it, ok, but I don't think Sunset is completely free of it. Also, while you're thinking I'm applying idyllic to the content, you might want to re-read what I think and notice I'm saying that the backdrop of Sunset is the real idyllic element in the film. You watch the film again and tell me it doesn't have a paradisiacal backdrop. That's the one thing that Sunset has more in the way of idyllic-ness than Sunrise, even though I think if you solely focus on the content - then yes, I'd agree with you Sunrise has more of it. I like most of what you say and I agree with your very articulate insight, you're right in noticing a few things about it. I think your point about the actual physical surroundings of Sunset being idyllic is a real good one. Hell that sequence of glowing light pouring all over the garden looks almost literally as though it's set in heaven. I would say though that I think in a way it's Linklater leading us to connect it to the feelings of idealism that are so present in Sunrise, with its equally implausible storybook fable quality in the various setpieces that they travel through (that scene atop the ferris wheel being the most obvious one), all the while allowing us to see that it's no longer the same as the tension in their communication unfurls. It seems the same world is there to allow them to feel that way but the change that has occurred is within them and no matter how much they want to try to recreate that first night they can't anymore. Anyway, glad you like Sunset at least. I was huge on Sunrise when I was a teenager to the point that it at least partially inspired me to backpack through Europe at 18 but after that I kind of went cold on it for a few years until recently. I look at it now as a very pure distillation of a feeling that I can relate to and understand but won't experience again. That's what I love about a number of Linklater films, he has a very distinct ability to craft films that are for me hugely evocative of the emotions that the characters in front of us are experiencing, his best stuff makes me feel entirely immersed in the same headspace. Sunset is my fave of the trilogy btw.
|
|
oneflyr
Full Member
Posts: 566
Likes: 255
|
Post by oneflyr on Jul 10, 2017 22:13:13 GMT
Wonder Woman is awful Wes Anderson is meh "Disturbing" is inherently a positive attribute in a movie Cries & Whispers is one of my least favorite films from Bergman Zodiac is only okay Psycho is only okay I disliked both Villeneuve films I've seen ( Arrival and Polytechnique) Pinocchio is much scarier than The Conjuring Ok Based on having seen his first two features agreed Depends. Shock value by itself is never enough How is that possible They're both decent Arrival is gorgeous The Conjuring isn't even scary
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2017 22:23:56 GMT
Wonder Woman is awful Wes Anderson is meh "Disturbing" is inherently a positive attribute in a movie Cries & Whispers is one of my least favorite films from Bergman Zodiac is only okay Psycho is only okay I disliked both Villeneuve films I've seen ( Arrival and Polytechnique) Pinocchio is much scarier than The Conjuring Depends. Shock value by itself is never enough How is that possible Arrival is gorgeous The Conjuring isn't even scary I think there's a distinction between "disturbing" and "shocking" or "disgusting". When something's disturbing it causes prolonged uneasiness, and just thinking back to it is chilling. When something's shocking it might cause uneasiness at the time, but it isn't memorable and doesn't stick with you. But I agree it isn't enough for a good movie tbh I thought it was boring which is weird cuz I'm usually fully involved in Bergman films I thought Arrival was bland and uninteresting Completely agree
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2017 22:52:39 GMT
^ I actually would agree that Cries and Whispers is one of Bergman's weaker efforts. Not a bad film by any stretch of the imagination, but I find it a lot less interesting conceptually than most of his other work, and I wasn't moved by it at all. And something about the execution felt off to me.
Don't agree at all that Zodiac is only OK (and I'm generally not a huge fan of Fincher), much less Psycho.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2017 23:29:07 GMT
^ I actually would agree that Cries and Whispers is one of Bergman's weaker efforts. Not a bad film by any stretch of the imagination, but I find it a lot less interesting conceptually than most of his other work, and I wasn't moved by it at all. And something about the execution felt off to me. Don't agree at all that Zodiac is only OK (and I'm generally not a huge fan of Fincher), much less Psycho. Cries and Whispers is top kino, and Psycho is definitely only just good. To be fair, I do think the visuals in Cries and Whispers are pretty great. I don't know, it just fell flat for me overall. I'll give it a rewatch someday.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2017 23:31:26 GMT
Baby Driver is straight up awful. I literally found only one person in the blogosphere community/other places I post on who thought that too It looks pretty terrible to me. Probably won't see it. It seems like almost every year there's a movie like this that just explodes in popularity despite looking legitimately horrendous.
|
|