Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it,
follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given
their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!
Posts
I think a big part of it for me is the sheer length of it. You spend a lot of time either in an uncomfortable place, or trying to figure out if you've left an uncomfortable place or don't know you're actually still lost in there, somewhere inside it still. There's an extended feeling of unpleasant dread leaking always leaking under the door.
The first video wasn't too bad, except for the shitty-ass bro-step butchering of 'Knights in White Satin.' I hate any remix/cover/etc of a song where they play part of the piece and then do something pointless, like they're just letting to song do the heavy lifting and then they can interrupt it and take an electronic shit here and there over the melody and call it a day.
Second video I liked, actually. It seemed to do its own thing pretty well. I liked 'I think the wall is on my side,' quite a lot. Felt legitimately honest.
Inland Empire's extreme length is part of why I like it so much - the length lets you get lost in its world.
While Hannah didn't really have any social commentary, it did have style. The sets were always a treat to see. Music seamlessly flowed right through the narrative, dropping in and out at the right times. Hannah made a great unconventional action hero. The use of a teenage girl as an unstoppable action force was brilliant. A big "piss off" to stereotypes. Much is left unexplained in the narrative, but is instead implied, leaving room for interpretation. Really good overall.
It was watchable, but just barely, and I'm not sure I got anything out of the finished movie other than what was already in the trailer.
"Got a minute?"
"I don't have time for a girlfriend."
"High time he left town."
"I'd say your money or your life, but since your money is your life ... "
The loan agencies are called "Time Shares", the local charities are often "Out of Time", the local gangsters are "Minute Men"...
What I'm saying is, In Time gives Batman and Robin a run for its punny.
I still need to see The Secret World of Arrietty.
http://steamcommunity.com/id/BaronofBank/
Blog: www.blakesmisko.com
Portfolio: www.cargocollective.com/bsdesigns
I think the fact that it was booed at Cannes is a good sign.
It is certainly a harsher, less compromising version of Twin Peaks. Jarring in many ways. If you liked Inland Empire I think you may be all right with it though. You know the drill-dark room, no interruptions. Not a movie that will hold your hand. Definitely recommend seeing the series first, but keep in mind this will not be like the series.
-
Tonight I watched An Englishman in New York, a sort-of biopic with John Hurt starring as Quentin Crisp. It was a fascinating, if short (1 hr 14 minutes) look at who up until now was a rather overlooked individual in the New York scene from the seventies up until relatively recent. A rather beautifully shot movie, with John Hurt looking impossibly fly for much of it in a black jacket and a swoopy black hat. Crisp largely was someone who by and large was his own man, and at times could be viewed as cold. It was a rather interesting examination of a member of gay culture that said culture turned on for having unpopular, perhaps poorly-chosen opinions about the AIDS epidemic of the 80's, although his main point is largely viewed now as being that people should not let themselves be cowed by the disease. It also served well as an example of the individual fighting against conformity, be it from the world at large, or from the culture that formed 'for' people like him.
All said, I do have to mention it lacked a coherent story arc, and I couldn't help but feel that this particular man had more than enough of an interesting life to support a larger, more fleshed-out story. But what was there certainly wasn't poor by any means, and John Hurt gives an excellent performance. I can't say I'd be willing to trade one for the other, given what is there is actually quite good.
I think in some ways it's better than the series; it's certainly more full on. I jsut wish he'd had the opportunity to continue with Twin Peaks, cause there's a bunch of stuff that's started but never goes anywhere.
I love that movie though.
He could have done that in novel form since another tv series isn't an option.
that really was the worst part! a lot of the movie had awesome concepts, even those puns show some decent ideas but man did that movie fucking blow.
Office Space, so good
I wouldn't say it blew but it was a disappointment. Especially because it could've been so awesome. Instead it was just all "kinda". kinda fun. kinda interesting. kinda sweet. None of it really sucked, it just flat out didn't engage me. every time I got to the point where I would think "yeah I think this is something I want to see" the fucking film switches the style up and it's a completely new thing I'm now supposed to be interested in.
It had all the things I like. Awesome actors, cool idea but it somehow failed to really be anything. It brought up interesting topics and issues and then ignored them to chase a very basic love-story that they still somehow failed to make interesting because they can't fucking commit to it.. I am a fucking sucker for love-stories, if it had done that correctly I would've still liked it, but they didn't even manage that.
It was hilarious. Considering how many parts were improv material it could have been much, much worse.
I've kind of known people like that, so it's left me feeling quite odd. Plus I talk to my pet fish all the time, and for good or ill, Grizzly Man is one of those movies where if you see anything in yourself that reminds you of the subject, it's easy to worry you're on the safe part of the path that can lead you to the madness onscreen.
Oh, hey, Ghost Dog's on Netflix now. I'm gonna watch me some Ghost Dog.
Grizzly Man just made me very upset with the guy. He got himself killed, sure, but he got his girlfriend killed too. It was an interesting insight into what disrespecting nature means, and how it can happen even with the best intentions.
Talking to a pet fish and a grizzly bear are completely different things. Unless your pet fish is a Great White and you think it won't eat you when you get in the water. Then it's dinner time.
This is kind of how I feel (not really the Devito-Beatty thing, the other thing).
"It wasn't a great movie but it was worth spending your money on to waste several hours of your life!"
What kind of recommendation is that? That's like suggesting a terrible restaurant to someone because, hey, it didn't poison you and at least you put food in your mouth. Fuck people who would do such a thing.
Have you seen The Godfather? Or Casablanca? Or Blue Velvet? No? Then step away from the Redbox before you do something dumb like pay good money to sit through Burlesque or Season of the Witch. Or don't. I don't care. But if you think you're the kind of person who likes good movies, try to be the kind of person that actually seeks out good movies, even if they're old or artsy or "not your thing." Because whatever your "thing" is, if it got you to rent Abduction, your thing is broken.
Yeah, there wasn't anything right about that. Especially the whole bit on how he KNEW it was the wrong time of year to go back and he KNEW the bears that he'd basically trained to tolerate him were away to hibernate. No one even knows what they would've had to live on out there. They'd completed the annual summer thing without incident and then one freakout at the airport and he wants to go back to the wilderness in a time of year he's never been out in without any supplies to see him through it...
I doubt it occurred to him, but he basically put his girlfriend in a position where if she had let him go on his own she would've ended up feeling responsible for his death. And that's a horrible, horrible thing.
This will likely expose me as a horrible person, shocking everyone here, but I have to legitimately wonder about a person who would consciously choose to be in a relationship with and actively enable the behavior of an obvious psychopath.
Not that hardly anyone, save maybe Hitler, Pol Pot, and Santorum, should be eaten alive by bears, but at what point does your objectivity stop working? When your animal-nut boyfriend freaks the fuck out over wanting to live with the apex predator of the North American continent, you have the option to:
A) say, "Sure, honey, let me get my tent," or
B) realize that your significant other is deranged as a motherfucker
B.2) see about getting them some help
Option A almost always ends with becoming bear food.
it's not that simple, and I would definitely not call him an "obvious psychopath." maybe viewed through the lens of the documentary, sure, it's easily laid out for all of us to see. but for the people in his life, who loved him and wanted him to be happy, it would be much harder to see that and do what you say.
so go ahead and judge if you want I guess, I don't see the point of it nor do I think we are really in the best position to judge her actions, either.
but it's probably much more rare than how often you hear the phrase.
and even then, it would only apply to someone who has seen lots of movies and shouldn't just go and see something of higher quality (because, theoretically, they have)
that phrase might also kinda be subconscious code for "it's not great but someone else might like it more?"
I dunno
While I agree with this in general, I do think it needs qualifications; specifically, I'm not always in the mood for a "great" movie. Sometimes I do just want something solid and low-energy, or I have a specific reason for watching that makes the movie worth it. I don't necessarily regret watching In Time, for instance, because the premise was interesting and I got to see some actors I really like get some work (Matt Bomer, Vincent Kartheiser, and Cilian Murphy).
That said, most people's "deserves a rental" standard is waaaaay too fucking low. And unlike most people I've already seen The Godfather, Casablanca, and Blue Velvet. So it's still good advice generally (and advice I've given before) to slap the DVD of Pirates of the Caribbean 4 out of a person's hand and say "There are so many better movies you could be watching right now."
The poor girl was screwed no matter what she did. It's clear she was unable to control him enough to keep him safe, but it was far too late to stop caring about him by that point.
He seriously needed a good therapist, not a girlfriend to solve his problems.
yeah that makes sense
I have some ideas but I'd love to hear what others think (and sorry if it's been previously discussed, I don't keep up with every page). I enjoyed it and thought it was engaging, also I am stupid obsessed with Ryan Gosling so there's that, but I haven't gotten all my thoughts straight about the themes.
No, but I don't know if I've ever given someone a recommendation using the phrase, "Meh, it's good enough for a rental." There are some very interesting movies that aren't great, probably greater in volume than movies that are actually great. But I would say something like, "Oh, you should definitely check out Tarsem Singh's The Fall. The narrative is a little shaky, but the cinematography is astounding."
I think my thing is, if I want "low energy" entertainment, I'm probably going to watch something funny, not a serious drama. But I'll still require it to be good.
I guess I'm probably more walled off than that, and I'm honestly a very guarded and discerning person, probably to a fault at times.
The moment someone I loved started talking about living with bears, I'm asking my doctor to hook him up with a good therapist.