|
Post by ingmarhepburn on Apr 7, 2020 13:18:22 GMT
I had fun watching The Searchers, but the way how it portrays native americans made me uncomfortable at certain times.
|
|
|
Post by jimmalone on Apr 7, 2020 14:39:59 GMT
Atonement is in fact about a lie that arbitrary destroys two people's life.
|
|
|
Post by jimmalone on Apr 7, 2020 14:48:09 GMT
Dirty Harry is always the first thing that leaps to mind for me here. Love it but completely disagree with the politics, it's basically pro-police state and anti-due process. I agree it's problematic, but I always think that Scorpio just got what he deserved. So in the end it's morally okay for me.
Also it's not really pro police state, cause the police itsself doesn't go the way of Dirty Harry himself. Of course there is one really morally questionable scene, well not only questionable, it definitely crosses the line. And that is the one in the stadium.
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Apr 7, 2020 14:55:21 GMT
Dirty Harry is always the first thing that leaps to mind for me here. Love it but completely disagree with the politics, it's basically pro-police state and anti-due process. I agree it's problematic, but I always think that Scorpio just got what he deserved. So in the end it's morally okay for me.
Also it's not really pro police state, cause the police itsself doesn't go the way of Dirty Harry himself. Of course there is one really morally questionable scene, well not only questionable, it definitely crosses the line. And that is the one in the stadium.
...........and that's of course why the 1st sequel - Magnum Force - addressed the "what if" it was a police state was in play and to differentiate the character from them. A very shrewd response to the criticism of the first film (written by Milius and Cimino).
|
|
|
Post by jimmalone on Apr 7, 2020 14:56:49 GMT
I agree it's problematic, but I always think that Scorpio just got what he deserved. So in the end it's morally okay for me.
Also it's not really pro police state, cause the police itsself doesn't go the way of Dirty Harry himself. Of course there is one really morally questionable scene, well not only questionable, it definitely crosses the line. And that is the one in the stadium.
...........and that's of course why the 1st sequel - Magnum Force - addressed the "what if" it was a police state was in play and to differentiate the character from them. A very shrewd response to the criticism of the first film (written by Milius and Cimino). Indeed. I just wished they had stopped the series after those first two very strong films.
|
|
|
Post by mikediastavrone96 on Apr 7, 2020 15:02:20 GMT
I love Apocalypto but I always saw the ending as a little, umm, weird, what with the arrival of the white Europeans, bathed in an angelic glow carrying their holy tomes, destined to bring civilization to the "savage" world we've inhabited throughout the film. I haven't seen the movie in many years, so maybe that's a misinterpretation, but given who wrote and directed it maybe not... You should check the movie out again because 1) it's a masterpiece, and 2) the Europeans aren't bathed in an angelic glow but are shot amidst a gloomy, dour rainy day while Horner's foreboding music ramps up.
|
|
Film Socialism
Based
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_lavender.png) ![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_lavender.png)
99.9999% of rock is crap
Posts: 2,571
Likes: 1,409
|
Post by Film Socialism on Apr 7, 2020 17:06:05 GMT
curious on the brakhage mention here Mainly starting to view a chunk of his films as bordering into misanthropic territory through the absence of humans and what he chooses to show as beautiful of above humans. This still developing shift of perspective kinda from his corpse-ploitation picture shot at the morgue, the Act of Seeing With One's Own Eyes is just like a bit much especially and really exemplifies my objection. There's probably a good counter to this claim of course and I do recognize he's made a number of films dealing specifically with positive human relations. But he's also doing us a disservice by stripping sound from film and leaving images isolated in their ugliness/beauty because it's revoking a crucial component of human experience and element obviously integral to the trajectory of film's evolution. It's regressive in some ways. This is why the films in I... Dreaming and Kindering are among my favorites, as they not only are humanist but contain sound as they morally should. interesting view, my concern is that this can generally be extended to a lot of non narrative stuff with similar content although admittedly few of those have the same silent treatment. but something to think about anyways.
|
|
Lord_Buscemi
Full Member
Posts: 844
Likes: 954
Member is Online
|
Post by Lord_Buscemi on Apr 7, 2020 17:34:06 GMT
I've thought of another one, which was so obvious I can't believe I forgot to mention it - Cannibal Holocaust.
This should be a great horror film, it's got all the right ingredients - the visual innovations with how horror could be done (the first found footage movie), the strong command of atmosphere (I love jungle settings, it's just inherently mysterious and vast to me, and Riz Ortolani's score only enriches this further), the grisly imagery....but, in an attempt to add extra authenticity, the exploitation of the actors/natives as well as the unbelievably hypocritical animal cruelty is counterproductive to the film's core message and makes it come off as insincere.
I liked Schindler's List years ago, although I'm unsure whether or not it will have aged well in my eyes now, but even then I always found the shower scene to be a tasteless exercise in cheap suspense, trying to elicit a reaction from the audiences' foreknowledge that these people could die.....only for it to be a regular shower.
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Apr 7, 2020 17:46:06 GMT
I liked Schindler's List years ago, although I'm unsure whether or not it will have aged well in my eyes now, but even then I always found the shower scene to be a tasteless exercise in cheap suspense, trying to elicit a reaction from the audiences' foreknowledge that these people could die.....only for it to be a regular shower. Not to be a contrarian with everything posted in this thread or anything like that and I'm not a big Spielberg guy in general (at all) but that scene to me is a brilliant device of the screenplay (shout out Steve Zaillian). You know that they will soon die from our real life knowledge of the camps but they could not have known that at that time - they must have thought there was still a chance .................... so the movie subverts our knowledge against us - we know too much and the knowing is the horror. The reaction it's eliciting is as close as a viewing audience in 1992 could come to a true feeling of someone in the camps - it's genuine not tasteless imo. But I've certainly heard the complaint before too.
|
|
no
Badass
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_skyblue.png)
Posts: 1,071
Likes: 423
|
Post by no on Apr 7, 2020 18:29:32 GMT
Mainly starting to view a chunk of his films as bordering into misanthropic territory through the absence of humans and what he chooses to show as beautiful of above humans. This still developing shift of perspective kinda from his corpse-ploitation picture shot at the morgue, the Act of Seeing With One's Own Eyes is just like a bit much especially and really exemplifies my objection. There's probably a good counter to this claim of course and I do recognize he's made a number of films dealing specifically with positive human relations. But he's also doing us a disservice by stripping sound from film and leaving images isolated in their ugliness/beauty because it's revoking a crucial component of human experience and element obviously integral to the trajectory of film's evolution. It's regressive in some ways. This is why the films in I... Dreaming and Kindering are among my favorites, as they not only are humanist but contain sound as they morally should. interesting view, my concern is that this can generally be extended to a lot of non narrative stuff with similar content although admittedly few of those have the same silent treatment. but something to think about anyways. It is applicable which may be in part why I'm less interested in that type of filmmaking lately. Of course I can counter my own developing argument here and agree with that too. Misanthropy isn't all bad either and there are definitely things to appreciate in the world beyond the human experience, the beauty in the world and what not. I think how Brakhage stands out in particular is that most people don't go around filming dead bodies for their art. Perhaps Window Water Baby is a good antithesis to that film though (I sorta wish there were an alternative version of that with sound)
|
|
no
Badass
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_skyblue.png)
Posts: 1,071
Likes: 423
|
Post by no on Apr 7, 2020 18:38:42 GMT
I've thought of another one, which was so obvious I can't believe I forgot to mention it - Cannibal Holocaust. This should be a great horror film, it's got all the right ingredients - the visual innovations with how horror could be done (the first found footage movie), the strong command of atmosphere (I love jungle settings, it's just inherently mysterious and vast to me, and Riz Ortolani's score only enriches this further), the grisly imagery....but, in an attempt to add extra authenticity, the exploitation of the actors/natives as well as the unbelievably hypocritical animal cruelty is counterproductive to the film's core message and makes it come off as insincere. I liked Schindler's List years ago, although I'm unsure whether or not it will have aged well in my eyes now, but even then I always found the shower scene to be a tasteless exercise in cheap suspense, trying to elicit a reaction from the audiences' foreknowledge that these people could die.....only for it to be a regular shower. Actually I would argue that Cannibal Holocaust supports its ideas through these supposed contradictions. It's reinforcing its thesis through morally objectionable means. Though, I agree it really does make it come off as insincere, or at the very least it's not really countering its misanthropy in favor of something better. Interesting film regardless. More or less agree. The scene in Schindler's List is good and tasteful and strengthens the film that falls short taste wise in other ways. Not sure the point of parroting mega hypocrite Haneke.
|
|
|
Post by countjohn on Apr 7, 2020 19:47:05 GMT
Dirty Harry is always the first thing that leaps to mind for me here. Love it but completely disagree with the politics, it's basically pro-police state and anti-due process. I agree it's problematic, but I always think that Scorpio just got what he deserved. So in the end it's morally okay for me.
Also it's not really pro police state, cause the police itsself doesn't go the way of Dirty Harry himself. Of course there is one really morally questionable scene, well not only questionable, it definitely crosses the line. And that is the one in the stadium.
That's the point, though. The movie uses an over the top loathsome antagonist like Scorpio to try and manipulate the audience into being okay with police brutality and coerced confessions.
|
|
|
Post by jimmalone on Apr 7, 2020 20:12:32 GMT
I agree it's problematic, but I always think that Scorpio just got what he deserved. So in the end it's morally okay for me.
Also it's not really pro police state, cause the police itsself doesn't go the way of Dirty Harry himself. Of course there is one really morally questionable scene, well not only questionable, it definitely crosses the line. And that is the one in the stadium.
That's the point, though. The movie uses an over the top loathsome antagonist like Scorpio to try and manipulate the audience into being okay with police brutality and coerced confessions. Yeah, but you need to always to treat every case in a special way and set it in relation. Not sure in which book I read this lately, but there was a phrase in which it said that you should prioritize the special case over the the general one.
For example: I'm usually against the death penalty. But in some cases like Saddam Hussein I'm fine with it. And you can see this as a parallel to Dirty Harry as well.
If the police has no other choice to get a sadistic killer than to shoot him, it's fine with me. The requirement is and that's a big if: IF there's definitve knowledge about his guilt. And in this film that's the case for the viewer. Of course Calahan could have acted in another way. After he knows who needed a doctor with a stab wound and the killer was identified, he should have got a warrant and later on an interrogation. There would have been enough evidences for prosecution. And even here by the way the police follows the official way and refuses the evidence because of the way Harry got to them. So saying it's pro-police state is just wrong IMO. But it's okay to say that Harry crossed law (and moral) too far.
But obviously that's one of the flaws of the law that you can only do this to a limited extent. But we are talking about moral here and not law. That's two different things.
That's generally a problem with moral (which for me has a very, very high value): everybody has another code of moral.
|
|
|
Post by jimmalone on Apr 7, 2020 20:56:51 GMT
I liked Schindler's List years ago, although I'm unsure whether or not it will have aged well in my eyes now, but even then I always found the shower scene to be a tasteless exercise in cheap suspense, trying to elicit a reaction from the audiences' foreknowledge that these people could die.....only for it to be a regular shower. Not to be a contrarian with everything posted in this thread or anything like that and I'm not a big Spielberg guy in general (at all) but that scene to me is a brilliant device of the screenplay (shout out Steve Zaillian). You know that they will soon die from our real life knowledge of the camps but they could not have known that at that time - they must have thought there was still a chance .................... so the movie subverts our knowledge against us - we know too much and the knowing is the horror. The reaction it's eliciting is as close as a viewing audience in 1992 could come to a true feeling of someone in the camps - it's genuine not tasteless imo. But I've certainly heard the complaint before too. Well, I totally disagree with your comments about Chinatown in the other thread, but agree with you here. Actually it's the job of a director to get emotions out of his viewers. And the showers in the camp were a permanent fear and threat for them they had to live with, so it's absolutely okay to show such a scene.
|
|
chris3
Badass
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_skyblue.png)
I just ordered a slice of pumpkin pie...
Posts: 1,057
Likes: 1,055
|
Post by chris3 on Apr 7, 2020 23:11:25 GMT
You should check the movie out again because 1) it's a masterpiece, and 2) the Europeans aren't bathed in an angelic glow but are shot amidst a gloomy, dour rainy day while Horner's foreboding music ramps up. That's good to hear. Like I said, haven't seen it in many years (over a decade), and I did love it, but that ending always sat wrong. I guess I was letting my preconceptions of Mad Mel color my interpretation. Guess it's due for a rewatch!
|
|
|
Post by dadsburgers on Apr 8, 2020 2:06:24 GMT
I didn't quite get all the blowback against Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close and Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri. I certainly see the flaws, but I don't think they're quite enough to write off the movies entirely
|
|
|
Post by taranofprydain on May 31, 2024 7:51:19 GMT
Well, I went back to the 1991 list thread and had to put a qualifying statement beside it because the ending where the film's primary antagonist (played by Cathy Moriarty) is exposed as transgender on nationwide TV by a writer (played by Whoopi Goldberg) would get into a lot of hot water today. I should point out though that the writer who came up with that plot twist is gay in real life and he included a few subtle tip-off lines before in the film, so I don't know what to say about that.
But as I pointed out, nearly all the characters in that film are ruthless egomanics....and frankly, if you can get past that ending, the rest stands as probably one of the best Hollywood comedy films of the last 35 years.
|
|