Announcement

Join us on Discord: https://discord.gg/nf43FxS
SuperJail Warden
Gone Forever
+529|2894
Dune was boring. Nerds are refusing to acknowledge the pacing problems.
https://i.imgur.com/xsoGn9X.jpg
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+1,953|5946|USA

Maybe slow-paced, but still a sci-fi. Right, dilbert?
uziq
Member
+441|2626
isn't it supposed to be a trilogy but without the funding or studio approval secured for the follow-up films?

seems slightly insane, that. ending a huge and ambitious movie with no proper resolution, and a vague hope that there will ... someday ... be a chance to complete the story? that shit only works when the other movies are already in production/in the release pipeline.
KEN-JENNINGS
I am all that is MOD!
+2,931|5806|949

I heard the next installment has already been greenlit. But yeah, a bit insane
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+1,953|5946|USA

Planning for success maybe. Multiple Dune projects in the past might offer some confidence. I think nerds are well used to series with no resolution by now. Early cancels, no eyes blinked.
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,765|5280|eXtreme to the maX
GoT paved the way for a resurgence of fantasy films.
Birds Aren't Real
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+1,953|5946|USA

Lord of the Rings paved the way for GoT.
uziq
Member
+441|2626


9/10. stays with you for a while.
RTHKI
mmmf mmmf mmmf
+1,721|5911|Oxferd Ohire
Finally watched the new Dune.  8/10

Don't quite know what to say about it. Kinda wish it was a miniseries instead of 2 movies

Last edited by RTHKI (2021-11-20 13:36:44)

https://i.imgur.com/tMvdWFG.png
Larssen
Member
+82|1061
Well I finally got around to watching Come and See (1985).

For the time it must've been awfully shocking, particularly in the knowledge that the scenes aren't exxagerated. Having read some of the accounts of the infamous Dirlewanger Brigade, even this movie is fairly light fare to the reality of what transpired in parts of Belarus & Poland.

I can't actually rate a movie like this in 2021. I suppose it's a good look into late-soviet filmmaking, though today's audience might experience it as a bit of a bore at points and somewhat weirdly acted. Still, worth a watch if only to acquaint yourself with this part of WW2 history.
uziq
Member
+441|2626
it's a very good movie but i know what you mean. there's something about the russian/soviet mentality that doesn't feel right or flow in the western-centric view of movies. could almost even say a different experience of time's flow/historicity, if you wanted to get all 'cahiers du cinema' about it. lots of russian movies are ostensibly very boring and weirdly paced, and even the action or moments of drama come up to you at an oblique angle, making it seem semi-surreal for a western viewer who has been soaked in one's own tropes, assumptions, stock formulas, etc.

tarkovsky has several good movies that tackle lots of war memories, too, and it is similarly odd-as-fuck and kind of unrateable. they all stick with you, though, and lodge in your memory in a really special way.



Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,765|5280|eXtreme to the maX
Jesus Christ, the films you watch and music you listen to really are the equivalent of thrashing yourselves with stinging nettles.
Birds Aren't Real
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+1,953|5946|USA

You should watch the movies from start to finish, if you can find them. The first clip in particular is easy to take out of context. Movies as a form of the study of film or their subject matter.

Expand out from Wonder Woman and the unbearable MCU every now and then. I couldn't tell you most of which Spiderman villain goes to which Spiderman movie, but scenes out of odd old films like this can be much more striking.
uziq
Member
+441|2626

Dilbert_X wrote:

Jesus Christ, the films you watch and music you listen to really are the equivalent of thrashing yourselves with stinging nettles.
tarkovsky is considered one of the greatest film-makers of all time.



i very rarely watch movies at all. when i watch a movie, i want a certain sort of experience: something stirring, thought-provoking, profound, sublime, epiphanic, etc. it can be exhausting but i don't watch movies much. i'm not a grown man who wastes his time with superhero titillation and puddle-deep CGI spectacles.

i watch movies or tv shows or read novels to be challenged. i think good art should be challenging, not just in a superficial sense of 'it's difficult to grasp', but, rather, that it challenges your expectations or does something clever with given assumptions. often times that involves experimentation on the level of form, which is practically what defines all capital-A 'Art' from straightforward entertainment: entertainment normally focusses on content, i.e. fulfilling the expected scope of a genre, rather than on experimenting with form.

i know none of this interests you in the slightest, but to suggest that i'm the aberrant one here, and not you, wrapped in your usual ignorance, is just funny. people have been enjoying and discussing these movies for decades. no one is stopping you from enjoying your prettily wrapped little entertainment confections where good fights evil, good normally wins, and you can go home at the end of a night with a bellyful of cheap popcorn and clichéd ideas.

you can keep those; others will enjoy things like this, which experiments with the very idea of time, duration, attention, tolerance (and, yes, masochism, boredom, discomfort, historical calamity and tragedy – all of which are part of human experience and so should be probed in art). some of bela tarr's movies expostulate on these themes for running times in excess of 6 hours. that's because film as a medium is fundamentally concerned with time, and daring directors stretch and elongate – as well as compress and jump cut, in the action movie mode – with internal rhythms of time. watching a movie like this can really put you into an entirely different experience of time.



tarkovsky does much the same thing when he will hold a single tracked camera shot for 6 minutes without a cut or edit.



previously you spoke highly of ozu's tokyo story. well, what is that if not an experimental art film that, taken on a superficial level, is boring as fuck? a black-and-white 2-hr movie with 4 characters all sat around talking to one another in static frames? not exactly 10-pin bowling with the boys, is it? like a typical philistine, you aren't even consistent with your views, and simply knee-jerk react to anything you don't understand. as i tell you, almost three times a week, in any number of contexts: GROW UP. you're an adult. do try and think like one.

the funny thing is that philistines like you will enjoy a christopher nolan movie, or something with the surface veneer of being 'complex' and 'challenging', when really he explores weak piss ideas that everyone is made familiar with in the first week of film school (plot and story don't have to be synchronous! flashbacks and flashforwards!) you like to feel smug and satisfied over watching a 'clever' movie, just so long as it's not 'too clever'. spoken like every pub boor with the word 'pretentious' forever tucked inside his wallet.

Last edited by uziq (2021-11-22 03:38:07)

uziq
Member
+441|2626
minari - 8/10.

well put together drama. simple but hit all of its beats very well. surprisingly good performances from two child actors in two languages! talk about the director taking a challenge.
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+1,953|5946|USA

Noted.
uziq
Member
+441|2626
portrait of a lady on fire - 9/10.

another tightly written, perfectly executed minor masterpiece. more challenging and ambitious than minari, but tightly focussed on several key performances depending on poise, balance, and restraint. this movie is leagues ahead of the other movies by the director i have seen (e.g. girlhood). the historical setting was carried off with a bare minimum of detail – seemed more like a stage-play than a movie in that sense – but that only allowed one to all the more focus on the intense inter-personal drama.

a great theme: the female gaze, of looking, of being looked at, of making one another up in our own minds, of representing one another (of lying to one another and ourselves). the interaction between the two main characters is part tennis match, part musical duet made up of beautiful counterpoint.

think of it as a female equivalent of 'the lighthouse', if you will: period drama that depends on the dynamism between two charismatic characters.

the ending is astonishing.



director has a new movie out in cinemas currently, petite maman. based on the strength of this, i'll be seeing it.

Last edited by uziq (2021-12-07 17:53:54)

Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,765|5280|eXtreme to the maX

uziq wrote:

think of it as a female equivalent of 'the lighthouse'
OK thanks
Birds Aren't Real
uziq
Member
+441|2626
i think this movie is better than the lighthouse. more economical and more emotionally rooted.
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+1,953|5946|USA

"You didn't even see it, how dare you decide not to see it based on your preferences for movies." -dilbert, on cats
uziq
Member
+441|2626
dilbert doesn’t like movies that involve real human beings and their feelings. romance, family, or interpersonal drama is boring. you need world-threatening baddies and superhero’s, preferably skinny nerdy engineer types who implausibly are also alpha males who can save the world just in the nick of time. it never gets old!

oh and, implausibly, pop stars and famous actors CGI’d to have cats fur, singing nonsense songs. that too.
uziq
Member
+441|2626
dilbert doesn’t like movies that involve real human beings and their feelings. romance, family, or interpersonal drama is boring. you need world-threatening baddies and superhero’s, preferably skinny nerdy engineer types who implausibly are also alpha males who can save the world just in the nick of time. it never gets old!

oh and, implausibly, pop stars and famous actors CGI’d to have cats fur, singing nonsense songs. that too.
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+1,953|5946|USA

uziq wrote:

dilbert doesn’t like movies that involve real human beings and their feelings. romance, family, or interpersonal drama is boring. you need world-threatening baddies and superhero’s, preferably skinny nerdy engineer types who implausibly are also alpha males who can save the world just in the nick of time. it never gets old!

oh and, implausibly, pop stars and famous actors CGI’d to have cats fur, singing nonsense songs. that too.
"Well yes, but he didn't see Portrait, so how does he know for sure that he won't like it?" -reused dilb logic

Not good enough that the Cats '19 CGI and design is utterly off-putting and the story/music compromised as repeated in discussions and critic, industry reviews, or seen in horrifying clips. No, I have to see it to "know all that for sure" to validate my opinion. But Dilbert can decide not to watch a movie just because you compared it to another one he didn't see. Hurts my head.

No, I won't watch Cats '19 if Dilbert watches Portrait.
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,765|5280|eXtreme to the maX

uziq wrote:

feelings. romance, family, or interpersonal drama
Soap opera - you like soap opera
Birds Aren't Real
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,765|5280|eXtreme to the maX

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

"Well yes, but he didn't see Portrait, so how does he know for sure that he won't like it?"
I gave the lighthouse a try, no thanks.

Not good enough that the Cats '19 CGI and design is utterly off-putting and the story/music compromised as repeated in discussions and critic, industry reviews, or seen in horrifying clips. No, I have to see it to "know all that for sure" to validate my opinion.
You haven't seen it eh.
Maybe try watching stuff instead of bouncing around in the padded cell which is critic reviews.
Birds Aren't Real

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2022 Jeff Minard