Interference Random Movie Talk V: The Final Frontier

[Lancemc]

Whatever you say.

 

[u2popmofo]

Could you at least try to explain your opinion on this?

 

[bono_212]

The same could be say of any sort of violent movie though, unless I'm not understanding what he is arguing is similar to porn. To each their own, I love horror movies as I don't feel the need to be pretentious about being entertained. Sure, the films generally suck ass, but that's the whole point.

I think there are good horror films out there. Films that are genuinely scary, they just don't seem to come around too often any more. Hence, I am on a journey, my attempt at the end of which to find the worst horror movie ever made. I have, therefore, in my life, seem some REALLY crappy horror film.s

 

[Lancemc]

I'd rather not. A deconstruction of an entire genre is a fairly big task. However a lot of it has to do with the style and form of filmmaking/storytelling the genre encourages. Horror is driven by the presentation of the depraved or grotesque act. It's success is almost entirely perceived by the intensity or quantity of said depravity and little else. It's nearly the only genre than is encouraged to forgo things like story, character, expression and depth in lieu of cramming more "horror" into it. Sure, there are examples of horror films that reach for a certain level of "art", by they're few and far between, since people who go see horror film are only there to be entertained by the explicit content.

Why is it that so many amateur filmmakers end up deciding to make a horror movie, or a horror comedy or spoof or whatever? Because it's easy. Really fucking simple. And I actively avoided the pornography analogy here, because I don't want to misrepresent my professor's opinions since I already attributed it to him. But the superficial similarities are pretty obvious. What does porn require to be successful? Tits and intercourse. It will never be considered legitimate "filmmaking" with respect to the rest of the industry because it actively forgoes any real attempts at expression for fear of not filling every second with a bare ass.

 

[u2popmofo]

Fair enough. Truthfully, I typically hate the type of "gore" movies you're talking about as well, so I agree with you from that stand point. That said, I think labeling all "horror" movies as falling into the gore/blood category is a bit off and I disagree that "more grotesque acts" make a horror movie better or scarier.

I do get the point of the porn argument, but I still think the same could (and has been) said for any sort of violent or explicit movie. What makes an R comedy better? More dirty language and crude humor. What makes an action film better? More shooting, car chases, and violence. Etc. Just seems a bit shallow and simplistic, it could honestly be applied to any and everything.

At the end of the day for me, not all entertainment needs to be arty and not all art needs to be entertaining. I like to hope there's not something wrong with me if I can enjoy something for having beautiful cinematography, and something for being absolutely hilarious. I can completely understand not caring for certain genres, but I have never understood associating "not liking something" with something being "inherently bad", as it all comes down to personal opinion and preference.

 

[Lancemc]

That said, I think labeling all "horror" movies as falling into the gore/blood category is a bit off and I disagree that "more grotesque acts" make a horror movie better or scarier.

Well, implicit or explicit that's still what 99% of horror movies are about. If it doesn't necessarily revel in the blood and gore, it likely more subtly implies it, and that's the result of which the fearful act is destined toward. Isn't the typical horror film about human beings meeting grotesque or despicable deaths or being transformed or stripped of their humanity (hauntings and such apply here). As a genre I simply don't feel it can deviate from that fundamental content, and thus the meat of every film lies in the exposition of that content or in the suspense of it, but either way it's severely limited. [Touching back on porn for a minute, and where the horror connection becomes a bit more exclusive... porn is essentially built on the same kind of limitation. There's the explicit sexual content that dominates the film, or the suspense/anticipation of the content, like the expository "plot" of porn film or fore-play. Additionally, the emotional and more importantly physical response elicited by horror and pornography are extremely similar in ways that don't really apply to other film genres]

Does that mean there can never be truly creative or effective horror films made? Of course, not, but it seems remarkably more difficult because of those content boundries, and many films in trying to separate themselves from the dreck tend to fall back on merely either pushing the envelope of how extreme they can make the content (which is why we see so much lousy "torture porn" these days) or play with the expectations of the plot or settings, which usually seems to result in the same old thing dressed up with a lousy plot twist or set in space or something bizarre. I think the most successful examples in the genre tend to be films that essentially reject it to begin with, and dress a completely separate kind of film in "horror" ornaments, thus satisfying the horror crowd. (I'm thinking something like Alien which is a really intelligent sci-fi story driven by a classic horror plot device, or The Shining which is essentially a psychological marriage drama set against a haunted house backdrop.)


So then I guess the question of judgement and quality falls back on me, which I can't really answer without supporting that all those limitation I discussed really just tend to degrade the depth and value of the genre as a whole, though as I said, examples do exist that reject those limitations. But I think that quote from your earlier post is pretty telling. About how they tend to suck, but that it's somehow the point? No film's value is in its lack of quality, and if you find great entertainment in the genre, that's fantastic and I don't want to appear like I'm criticizing that in itself.

 

[impy13]

A friend's sorority sister's actual sister is Wes Anderson's new assistant working on The Fantastic Mr. Fox.

Boomshakalaka.

 

[LMP]

A friend's sorority sister's actual sister is Wes Anderson's new assistant working on The Fantastic Mr. Fox.

Boomshakalaka.

I heard she saw him pass out at 31 Flavors last night. They say it's pretty serious.

 

[No spoken words]

I'm watching Ghandi for the 2nd time ever, 1st time since it was released. Then Darjeeling.

India FTW.

 

[GirlsAloudFan]

I really enjoyed Darjeeling Limited but it got pretty lukewarm reviews didn't it? That's a shame. The three lead performances were perfect, and it had all the great trademark Wes Anderson stuff...the mix of humor and poignancy, the bright colors, the music. That guy just makes flat-out likable movies.

 

[LMP]

I really enjoyed Darjeeling Limited but it got pretty lukewarm reviews didn't it? That's a shame. The three lead performances were perfect, and it had all the great trademark Wes Anderson stuff...the mix of humor and poignancy, the bright colors, the music. That guy just makes flat-out likable movies.

Definitely. I would say it was a step up from The Life Aquatic in how it approached the dramatic elements of the film. I mean, compare the child's death sequence to Ned's in TLA... the former was far more poignant and well-handled, in my opinion. I think critics love Anderson's style, but don't think he's stretching himself as a filmmaker, so they give him that sort of shit that you'd give the genius underachiever or something. I don't know.

 

[LMP]

So I got Full Metal Jacket and 8 and 1/2 from NetFlix today. My inner film snob is creaming his pants right now.

 

[lazarus]

Don't get your hopes up for the former. Kubrick didn't exactly add much to the Vietnam On Film experience, save for the first section in basic training.

And wash your damned pants.

 

[LMP]

Don't get your hopes up for the former. Kubrick didn't exactly add much to the Vietnam On Film experience, save for the first section in basic training.

And wash your damned pants.

Everyone's opinions are so divided on Kubrick's work, save for Clockwork, Strangelove, and The Shining, that I really don't know what to expect.

For example, I've gotten about 5 people telling me how much Lolita sucks, and another 5 telling me how much it rocks... same for Full Metal Jacket and Eyes Wide Shut. Everyone does say that Barry Lyndon's fantastic, but boring as shit.

 

[lazarus]

There are a lot of people divided on Clockwork as well. I know many who like it less with each repeat viewing, whereas it's actually grown on me. There are dissenters on 2001 as well, though you didn't mention that one.

Lolita DOES suck, in relation to the source material. And Barry Lyndon IS boring, but it is still a pretty impressive work, as you've noted.

 

[No spoken words]

Clockwork and 2001 get better and better for me. Barry Lyndon was not boring to me, at all, but not necessarily the most exciting film of all-time, either. Lolita was a disappointment.

I adore the first half of Full Metal Jacket but can do without the second half.

That is all, goodnight.

 

[LMP]

There are a lot of people divided on Clockwork as well. I know many who like it less with each repeat viewing, whereas it's actually grown on me. There are dissenters on 2001 as well, though you didn't mention that one.

Lolita DOES suck, in relation to the source material. And Barry Lyndon IS boring, but it is still a pretty impressive work, as you've noted.

Then it's just safe the say the guy's whole body of work is fairly divisive. I've loved everything I've seen of his thus far, so that's good. I'm really excited for The Killing as well.

But how is Lolita based on its own merits?

And your thoughts on 8 1/2? Anything I should know going into it?

 

[monkeyskin]

Count me in as another one who doesn't find Barry Lyndon at all boring. It's certainly slow, but with the stunning photography I was enthralled throughout. I also enjoy A Clockwork Orange more with each viewing, but 2001 is still a hard one to really engage in emotionally. As for the rest:

The Killing: an enjoyable and well executed noir / heist
film, but not really 'Kubrick'.
Paths of Glory: fantastic film that highlights how war affects those involved and the beauracracy of patriotism.
Spartacus: meh. Director-for-hire.
Lolita: not really that bad at all, but take away the notoriety and there's not much of note left (besides Peter Sellers).
Dr Strangelove and The Shining: well...
Full Metal Jacket: unforgettable first third but the final two don't attain nearly the same level of quality, necessary as they are.
Eyes Wide Shut: while I found this not nearly focussed enough, it had an etheral dreamlike quality that you don't see often. A second viewing may make me enjoy it more now I've got the plot out the way, but right now not one of my favs.

As for 8 1/2, I got a bit bored as I did with the other Fellini's I've watched. I'll give it another go sometime and there's stillLa Strada and Nights of Cabiria for him to get on my good side.

 

[No spoken words]

Count me in as another one who doesn't find Barry Lyndon at all boring. It's certainly slow, but with the stunning photography I was enthralled throughout. I also enjoy A Clockwork Orange more with each viewing, but 2001 is still a hard one to really engage in emotionally. As for the rest:

The Killing: an enjoyable and well executed noir / heist
film, but not really 'Kubrick'.
Paths of Glory: fantastic film that highlights how war affects those involved and the beauracracy of patriotism.
Spartacus: meh. Director-for-hire.
Lolita: not really that bad at all, but take away the notoriety and there's not much of note left (besides Peter Sellers).
Dr Strangelove and The Shining: well...
Full Metal Jacket: unforgettable first third but the final two don't attain nearly the same level of quality, necessary as they are.
Eyes Wide Shut: while I found this not nearly focussed enough, it had an etheral dreamlike quality that you don't see often. A second viewing may make me enjoy it more now I've got the plot out the way, but right now not one of my favs.

As for 8 1/2, I got a bit bored as I did with the other Fellini's I've watched. I'll give it another go sometime and there's stillLa Strada and Nights of Cabiria for him to get on my good side.

I had mentioned to Laz that Eyes Wide Shut was a hard watch for me, since NYC looked so very fake to me, doubly so being a NY'er and all....and he said that if you ascribe that dreamlike quality to the surroundings, then it's easier to accept. I have not seen the film in quite some time, should buy/re-watch.

There's something about 2001 that's just utterly compelling to me. Agreed that on the emotional front, there's not a ton there.....

 

[elevated_u2_fan]

The lack of emotion in 2001 is intentional though - it's no coincidence that the most "emotional" character in the whole film is HAL...

 

[No spoken words]

The lack of emotion in 2001 is intentional though - it's no coincidence that the most "emotional" character in the whole film is HAL...

Intentional or not, the lack of it could be a major turn-off for viewers.

 

[elevated_u2_fan]

that and the first 20 minutes is about monkeys...

 

[No spoken words]

that and the first 20 minutes is about monkeys...

I hate people sometimes.

 

[elevated_u2_fan]

stupid people and their lack of good taste

 

[No spoken words]

stupid people and their lack of good taste

No, you know me, I'm don't think that my taste is "good" and that people that disagree have bad taste.....but you're right, there are plenty of people that might turn that film off early on cos it's just a bunch of apes hopping around, as opposed to paying attention and seeing that there's a point.

 

[elevated_u2_fan]

I know people who have turned off 2001 because it was about monkeys

It's getting worse now as well, what with all these kids attention spans less than 30 seconds...

 

[monkeyskin]

The dawn of time segment is my favourite part

I agree with you elevated that the lack of emotion is intentional, as shown in every scene with human interaction, but I meant it in the sense that I just never feel excited, or scared, or anything during the film except for cold interest. One I'm keen to revisit every five or so years and se how my reactions change.

And NSW, I get what you mean about seeing your everyday surroundings faked onscreen and getting pulled out of the film, it's a bitch alright.

 

[No spoken words]

And NSW, I get what you mean about seeing your everyday surroundings faked onscreen and getting pulled out of the film, it's a bitch alright.

It was so obvious, though, you know?

How many TV shows are set in NYC but shot in Hollywood? A lot, but, it rarely feels wildly inauthentic. This, though, did indeed take me out of it....but I like what Laz said about it, so I think that it will hardly matter the next time I see it.

 

[lazarus]

I forget where he supposedly enters the "dream world", but it's probably right after his wife's stoned confession.

 

[GirlsAloudFan]

I just rented The Boxer starring Daniel Day-Lewis and Emily Watson. Directed by Jim Sheridan of In America fame. I know some of you guys have a serious man-crush on DDL...so have you seen this? Is it any good?

I also picked up Iron Man and The Illusionist. And The Spiderwick Chronicles.