I just got Brigsby Bear and can hardly wait to see it. It sounds brilliant.
This past year I was watching IMDB to see when it was playing, and a few days before its listed release date, I checked my local cinema. They had been showing it for a whole week, at some wack time like only 11 AM, and it played its last day the day before I was checking. I swear that the movie distribution business exists mostly to bury movies.
So did I watch it? YES
Was it worth it? NO
But I guess at least now when people on the internet want to tell me their opinions and theories about it Iāll have some hope of knowing WTF theyāre talking about ā¦
It seems weird that the studio had a see thru dance floor, but then I guess it makes more sense than a club having one, come to think of it.
I may also be misremembering singing in EJ. But the idea is that it doesnāt heavily feature singing. I havenāt watched it in full in several years but I had it in the background for a half hour/hour last week and no singing in that span.
the cheap crappy OTA ones. I know Iāve seen it on Oldie Goldie and possibly others of that ikl.
His comedy can be really good and interesting, but Lorne/the writers will not give him any play, they donāt know what to do with him. They pushed bland-assed Taran Killam and then one-note Leslie Jones over him during his whole run. MOONEY IS MONEY!
Give a report on this, eh?
Both studios and clubs used to have them for the same reason ā they were considered cool. Itās hard to imagine now, but glass blocks used to be very chic.
hey, I grew up with Miami Vice, of course I think glass blocks are chic.
but I donāt think thatās what was in the movie? the seams are far apart,
and no distortionāyou get a clear image:
unless my version of glass block differs from the one you mean? image search shows that fully clear blocks exist, but theyāre still each ~a foot square.
The Miami Vice era was the resurrection of the glass wall/floor, which is when I learned about their history.
The still from the second video shows why they were so popular in the first place. I agree that looks too big to call a āblockā ā wonder what the proper architectural term is.
I donāt think the studio has a see thru dance floor. It has a very reflective dance floor, but the only time we see through it is in that one shot from underneath. Thatās basically a special effect, sheās dancing on a thick pane of glass for that shot.
Thatās plausible. Itās definitely not a musical, but Iām sure they gave Robeson the opportunity to sing at least a little in there. Perhaps most of the singing is in the early part which doesnāt come from the original play. Thereās a church scene and a chain gang scene. Perfect opportunity to let him sing a bit.
Jackie is just speeding away
Thought she was James Dean for a dayā¦
http://www.ubu.com/film/curtis_superstar.html
Superstar in a Housedress (2004) dir: Craig Highberger
Hour and a half documentary about Warhol superstar Jackie Curtis. The film actually spends more time on Jackieās underground theater work and life in general than the Warhol connection. Itās a very fun look at a crazy chaotic life, although it, as you might begin to expect as the show goes on, ends on a (somewhat surreal) downer. The producer/director/writer/editor really should have cut down some of his interviewees discursions (usually about themselves) and he didnāt convince me, based on the evidence presented, that Curtis was an unsung genius, but still a worthwhile view for anyone interested in the era/milieu. Narrated by Lily Tomlin, with interviewees Holly Woodlawn, Paul Morrissey, Taylor Mead, Harvey Fierstein, Penny Arcade, and Joe Dallesandro, among many others.
I wondered about that, too, but it looked like the seams matched in both shots. but after some thought, Iām pretty sure youāre right. since it was shot in a studio, that would be the logical way to shoot that part. It would only make sense to permanently install a see-through dance floor in an actual club where it would be an ongoing attraction and not just a few seconds in a movie.
A Hal Hartley film just played on TV that I hadnāt seen: No Such Thing. I mostly know Hartley because I randomly saw his Surviving Desire on PBS when i was in high school and was really taken with his style. NST is way different but still noticeably his hand. Sarah Polley was a perfect choice for a lead in a Hartley film. I forgot that she was in Go but I always remember her as the little girl in Baron Munchausen. I liked the film albeit the first several acts were glacially paced, even for me. Itās one of those āwhich is the monster, the Monster or mankind?ā kind of movies.
Probably more well-known than most of the obscure stuff I watch, but still somewhat un-distributed and unknown - perhaps not to people here, but the public at large:
Shin Godzilla - Seems to really polarize people in the US, I think itās one of the best Godzilla movies. Itās live-action, by Shinji Higuchi and Hideaki Anno, who are well-known for both anime and live-action. It aims for a serious, grounded interpretation of āWhat would it be like if we discovered Godzilla in real life, in Japan 2016?ā. Much of the imagery very strongly brings to mind the 2011 TÅhoku tsunami, and Fukushima meltdown. And the movie is very much concerned with what an administrative, bureaucratic, and humanitarian clusterfuck this would be. As a fast-paced political/science thriller it is great. The monster and its damage are IMO quite horrifying. The only thing I disliked is how physically large Godzilla is now, which I think goes beyond awesome scale and becomes silly.
Some describe Shin Godzilla as being a satire, and I must admit that I do not know enough about Japanese politics to understand if some characters are meant to satirize real-life figures. It feels very documentary, and makes little effort to offer relatable characters or personal drama, which is a choice I liked. It has some very pro-Japanese nationalistic themes, and at times plays like an ad for the SDF, which I think should not be a surprise to anyone. It makes a strong statement about Japanese cultureās relationship with disaster, adversity, and the rest of the world.
Incidentally - speaking of tokusatsu and Fukushima, in 1974 Toho released a huge ādisaster pornā movie called Nosutoradamusu no daiyogen (aka Last Days on Planet Earth) which was later banned/supressed and is almost unknown today. It eerily depicts the end of human civilization as starting with an offshore earthquake which causes the Fukushima nuclear plant to melt down. Yikesā¦
Professor Marston and the Wonder Women - This one played at my local cinema - but only at around 11:00 AM! They seem to pull this stunt with a lot of movies Iād like to see, so as usual I had to wait. As an openly queer poly kinkster, Iāve got to say that this is probably the most realistic treatment in movies have seen of a committed three-person unit. And in the early 20th century, no less. There was a great balance here of being sympathetic without being preachy, romantic without being cloying, sensuous without being spectacular.
Obviously, the āhookā is intended to be how this relationship informed the creation of Wonder Woman as a comic book character. This aspect of the movie I think is interesting and well-done, but less interesting than the relationships and events leading to this. At the risk of sounding elitist, I think itās a great window into how academics who often truly do āknow betterā still struggle to deal with societal norms which are ignorantly imposed upon us for ignorant reasons. Being a small-scale movie centered very much upon its immediate cast calls a lot of attention to them. The standout performance to me was Rebecca Hall as Elizabeth Marston, the brilliant would-be professor whose life is already curtailed by society. Hers is the character with the most substantial arc, and she who performs the greatest range of different experiences and attitudes.
My two parents like Wonder Woman as a character, and liked the Wonder Woman movie, which I am still looking forward to seeing. I would say that they are generally open-minded, but still a bit stuffy and conservative with regards to sexuality, specifically. I am on the fence of whether or not to recommend Professor Marston to them, because I really donāt know if they would find it thought-provoking/empathetic, or if they would simply be reactionary/annoyed.
They say thereās a war a-brewinā on the prairie. But no one seems to be too worked up about it.
I have just finished watching āHeavenās Gate.ā Heaven help me. No, this is not a misunderstood work of art that was ahead of its time and deserves a second chance. Itās Michael Cimino trying to outdo Erich von Stroheim and failing.
I have nothing against slow movies. Some of my favorite movies are slow. Take āSolarisā for example. Somehow Tarkovsky is able to use the cameraās slow observation of the characters as a way of building a deep, thoughtful story. But itās like Cimino told his cast āOK, Iām going to point the camera at you and weāre got three-and-a-half hours to kill, so donāt act. Move around with no motion, and make me feel nothing.ā
Let me summarize the plot for you:
A group of people graduate from college. Twenty years later, cattlemen are going to wage war against immigrants to Wyoming. All the immigrants appear to be from Eastern Europe. The immigrants appear spend their time stealing cattle or hanging around a brothel. Kris Kristofferson is some kind of sheriff or something. Heās in love with the madam of said brothel. Christopher Walken is also some kind of sheriff, or something. He too is in love with the same madam. This madam has to choose between them and also walk around naked. Jeff Bridges is a bar owner, maybe. Or maybe itās Kristofferson in a dual role, itās hard to tell. John Hurt is kind of there, some of the time. Horses are abused. The madam is raped. Walken is shot approximately 70,000 times. In the end, everybody dies. And then thereās a yacht.
I should have been sympathetic to the politics of this movie ā the rich and native-born oppressing the poor and immigrants ā but in general my reactions alternated between āwho the hell are these people?ā and āwhat the hell are they doing?ā I can only assume the original 5.5-hour cut made more sense.
Towards the end, the dramatic moments were so absurd and exaggerated that I was laughing at them. And Christopher Walken should never have a mustache.
The music was nice, if a bit repetitive.
Bah, I thought it was great. But, itās been too long since Iāve seen it to defend it with any details.
wasnāt there a roller rink, too? what am I thinking of?
I guess itās a movie that still divides opinion.
There was indeed. It was a charming well-directed scene.
Then Kristofferson dances alone in the rink with Huppert. The dance ends and they walk outside to the lake. They are standing by the shore, perfectly framed by light reflecting off the water, and throuh post-dubbing he ends the scene by saying āIām asking yaā to go with me.ā Which is exactly what he said 20 minutes earlier IN THE PREVIOUS SCENE!!!"
I actually ripped a copy of it to take with me to China, but the laptop died before I got around to such a long film. At least Iāve still got 1900, which I also havenāt gotten to.
Well, I have finally seen āāŖBlade Runnerā¬.ā
But thatās not exactly true.
I had seen Blade Runner before, during its first run in fact. Doing a bit of research, it seems I would have been 10 years old at the time. I canāt imagine why my mother took the family to see this violent, creative, sci-fi movie because violence, creativity and science fiction are three things that my mother usually tries to avoid.
I donāt remember much about it except that the movie was dark, confusing and that it really scared me. Here is a list of everything from the movie that I remember from my first viewing.
I remember:
Thatās about it.
So, you see, when I recently saw Blade Runner it was like seeing it for the first time. And what follows are my jumbled thoughts about it.
From the opening, echoing BOOOOMMMMOOmmmm it is evident that Ridley Scott owes a great debt to Vangelis. There is something about his sparse opening music that establishes the world in which the rest of the movie exists. I didnāt watch this movie so much as I inhabited it. This is, in my opinion, a movie where mood is more important than the story or acting. And thatās not a complaint. Iām always a fan of good production design, and this movie does not disappoint in that regard ā it truly looks and sounds great, if thatās not an understatement.
It seems that Los Angeles in 2019 will be much more interesting than it is today. Perhaps the secession does occur in the next year.
I was pleasantly surprised by how many visual references there were to āMetropolis.ā I would describe this movie as the book āFrankensteinā combined with the movie āThis Gun for Hire,ā set in the world of āMetropolis.ā And thereās one part taken from āThe Big Sleep,ā just for fun.
When I was a young child ā perhaps up until I was six years old ā I remember having dreams where I would be wandering through our house alone, and no matter how many lights I turned on I still couldnāt see anything. This movie immediately brought memories of those dreams flooding back. Blade Runner feels to me like it exists in the same reality I experienced in those dreams. Were these dreams or was I sleepwalking? Iāve often wondered.
It seems to me that Ridley Scott did not have a final script ready when he started filming. There seem to be two different attempts at introducing Deckard and defining his charater. I can only assume they filmed more than they needed, for coverage, and hoped they would figure it all out in the editing room ā this often happens.
I love the crackling and fuzzing sounds made by the VK machine. But why does it breathe? Itās not attached to anyone. There is no reason why it would need to do that.
Larry! That was my reaction when I saw William Sanderson appear. Heās a good actor. I have a feeling Riddley Scott had Elisha Cook Jr. in mind when he cast and directed the role of J. F. Sebastian. Watch āThe Killingā and you will see what I mean. Why did his character have to die? At least we didnāt have to see it happen.
I think the most prescient thing about the movie is Harrison Fordās haircut.
Deckardās interaction with the Espy machine is a great demonstration of why I never use Siri, or Amazon Echo, or whatever. Work can get done better and faster if you operate a computer with your hands.
There is an theory that Iāve heard from time to time, that Deckard is actually replicant himself. This is surprising because the movie makes it very clear that he is in fact merely human. I can point out two details that support this point: First, in low-light situations, the actors playing replicants are filmed with a light near to, or possibly in front of the cameraās lens. This causes light to reflect off their retinas and gives their pupils a distinct glow. This is the case with all the replicants, even the owl, but it is not the case with Harrison Ford. Second, if Deckard is a replicant, why does he get over-powered by the others so easily? Even Pris, a ābasic pleasure modelā is almost able to kill him while flipping around the room. With each replicant that Deckard encounters he is helpless without his gun.
So now, in the past couple months Iāve seen Blade Runner three times. This first time I was confused ā especially by the ending. Why was there suddenly a car commercial tacked onto the end? I didnāt get it. So, after a few weeks I watched it a second time and I was even more confused than the first time. I vowed never again would I waste my time watching it. But I did. And this time I got it. In fact Iāve seen it four times now and Iām now looking forward to seeing the Final Cut version.
However I have no plans to see Blade Runner 2049.
Thatās not true. Deckardās eyes get the glow treatment when he and Rachel are at his apartment. Itās around the time she asks if she ran away if Deckard would hunt her down, and he says no, but someone would.
As for Deckardās relative strength and fighting ability ā he hasnāt had to survive the incredibly harsh life they have in the colonies. Itās not design, itās experience.
Thereās also the whole unicorn thing, with Deckard dreaming of a unicorn and Dax leaving an origami one in the apartment corridor.
None of which is definitive, but it certainly makes it ambiguous.
Shame thatās worth watching.
I love the original Blade Runner, but my brain canāt get over the Ryan Gosling casting for 2049. My suspension of disbelief comes crashing down before it even gets off the ground.
ETA: and Jared Leto. Right. Iād memory-purged he was even in this one. Both of them in one film makes it hard to even get through the trailer.