Random Movie Thoughts Thread

[Totenkindly]

 

[The Cat]

So I keep seeing what I think is supposed to be rage bait about dont see furiosa see the road warrior instead, snd I cant help but notice that these are people fighting for who gets to suffer more in the apocolypse. It feels kinda ironic. But I dont think anyone fighting for the gas has realized there's no gas in the argument. See Mad Max, See Furiosa. Its all just gonna be crazy shit in the desert. Let it wash over you. No one is gonna win any oscars or culture points for liking one over the other. Its all just fun trash. Embrace it. Eat the trash. This is the apocolypse. Watch Fallout. Better yet... Watch Razorback and the Howling series. Just for fuck sake whatever you watch, just have fun.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

So I keep seeing what I think is supposed to be rage bait about dont see furiosa see the road warrior instead, snd I cant help but notice that these are people fighting for who gets to suffer more in the apocolypse. It feels kinda ironic. But I dont think anyone fighting for the gas has realized there's no gas in the argument. See Mad Max, See Furiosa. Its all just gonna be crazy shit in the desert. Let it wash over you. No one is gonna win any oscars or culture points for liking one over the other. Its all just fun trash. Embrace it. Eat the trash. This is the apocolypse. Watch Fallout. Better yet... Watch Razorback and the Howling series. Just for fuck sake whatever you watch, just have fun.

Fury Road was pretty great. The rotten tomatoes scores are good, so I'll see if I can drag my sister with me to see Furiosa. If I didn't have a zillion other things to watch I'd check out the older movies; I've seen pieces of the second film, and that's it.

 

[The Cat]

Fury Road was pretty great. The rotten tomatoes scores are good, so I'll see if I can drag my sister with me to see Furiosa. If I didn't have a zillion other things to watch I'd check out the older movies; I've seen pieces of the second film.

the first three are cool from the perspective of where they fall in the apocolypse. the first mad max is its fairly recent occurance, the roads are getting more dangerous, but there's still safety in cities, still places people can be to not have to think about it. By Road Warrior that's gone. The only reason the people have gas is because its at a refinery, and they're at the place where even that isnt gonna cut it. By Beyond Thunderdome. This is the "new normal" Barter town is the height of civilization, they run on steam and methane and an entire generation has grown up without having known anything but the apocalypse. Max cant go with the kids to paradise because he can no longer believe in it. He'll never put down roots because he died when his family did, he's just too much of a survivor to just roll over and die. Fury Road felt like a comic book that takes place at a random place between road warrior and beyond thunder dome. (strictly because he's more beat up and older in beyond thunderdome. There's not really anywhere else for them to take Max apart from making him some sort of wandering mystic or mentor for a new wanderer. The world building is solid, and the only way for the franchise to continue is to bring in other stories apart from max, people who have been affected by meeting him and then going off on their own adventures. The key to flourishing this franchis is gonna be to do a Max movie like Fury Road, then do a branch off like Furiosa, rinse and repeat. Then the studio increases the audience for the property and it can expand until it becomes a frankenstein's monster of itself where everything is there, but it just doesnt add up. We've got at least 10 years before that happens, so I think we should have fun with the novelty while we can get it.

 

[The Cat]

If they dont bring in other stories to the world they risk turning Mad Max into Scorcher:

 

[Totenkindly]

Fury Road was pretty great. The rotten tomatoes scores are good, so I'll see if I can drag my sister with me to see Furiosa. If I didn't have a zillion other things to watch I'd check out the older movies; I've seen pieces of the second film, and that's it.

I'm bummed I didn't get to see Furiosa. I had tickets but canceled when I was sick that weekend. Now i just don't feel like going to the theater. But I will probably buy the film when it releases in August. I'm getting really tired of the shithead fan base lately -- it's not just this film, it's so many films and TV shows lately where people just scream and rage without even seeing them, based sometimes on superfluous details. It doesn't help that sometimes the shows and films are NOT good regardless, but I always think something should be judged on its own merits versus simply judged out of personal outrage and prejudice. Some of this prejudice just comes because things change over time (change, grow, transform) but people have the old approach stuck/rigid on it as if it were a ten-foot-pole shoved up their ass.

I know I'm weird, but I was kind of indifferent to Mad Max and the earlier films. I need to rewatch Thunderdone, it's been decades. But I really really love Fury Road.

 

[The Cat]

I'm bummed I didn't get to see Furiosa. I had tickets but canceled when I was sick that weekend. Now i just don't feel like going to the theater. But I will probably buy the film when it releases in August.

I know I'm weird, but I was kind of indifferent to Mad Max and the earlier films. I need to rewatch Thunderdone, it's been decades. But I really really love Fury Road.

Fury Road turned it from a bleak dystopian sci fi to a comic action oasis in a wasteland of potential missed opportunities. Fury Road knew what it wanted to be, and went all in. Which harmonized with the aesthetic and tone of the movie. It got to tell as many stories as the old ones, but it had a sense of humor about itself in a more grandiose way that I tend to think the 80's would have pushed for had the technology been available to produce it. Fury Road has less slow burn tension, everything is souped up like the cars, and is pretty to the senses, even the gross stuff is gross in a captivating way while the previous three have more of a snuffy feel to them.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

Fury Road turned it from a bleak dystopian sci fi to a comic action oasis in a wasteland of potential missed opportunities. Fury Road knew what it wanted to be, and went all in. Which harmonized with the aesthetic and tone of the movie. It got to tell as many stories as the old ones, but it had a sense of humor about itself in a more grandiose way that I tend to think the 80's would have pushed for had the technology been available to produce it. Fury Road has less slow burn tension, everything is souped up like the cars, and is pretty to the senses, even the gross stuff is gross in a captivating way while the previous three have more of a snuffy feel to them.

You don't think they would have done a Doof Warrior?

 

[The Cat]

You don't think they would have done a Doof Warrior?

I do not know what it is of which you speak.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

I do not know what it is of which you speak.

guitar flamethrower

 

[The Cat]

guitar flamethrower

Oh yeah. I always thought he looked like a Kyle.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

Oh yeah. I always thought he looked like a Kyle.

I got Chet vibes.

 

[The Cat]

I got Chet vibes.

Chet strikes me as the name of a more husky gentleman. The Bullet Farmer looks like a Chet to mine eyes

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

Chet strikes me as the name of a more husky gentleman. The Bullet Farmer looks like a Chet to mine eyes

No way. That's an Edgar.

 

[Totenkindly]

Watched "Across the Spider-Verse" again. Just such an excellent film in all ways. Literally the only criticism I can think of is that the pacing is slightly off -- the film feels like it should end naturally about 10-15 minutes before it does. But that decision was made on purpose, because it sets the film up for the third installment (the final one), and that added ending also allows the film to come literally full circle in terms of how Gwen opens and ends the film, so that even if the main story is not resolved, there is a resolution for Gwen's arc that makes the film feel more self-contained. It was simply a trade-off and I think it was the correct decision.

Also, that whole 10-15 minute opening is much better than many full-length films. It makes you forget the main title and Miles Morales' storyline hasn't yet started.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

On Furiosa:

We were at most five minutes late and missed some type of opening sequence about how the world fell. The first thing I will say is that the world-building is quite good. I'm digging all these weird vehicles and contraptions. I liked the History Man, who is sort of like a wizard. It reminds me that I might have a shot in this kind of world.

The second thing I'll say is that Anya-Taylor Joy is in this much less than I thought. It's not a criticism, just an observation.

The third thing I'll say is that Chris Hemsworth stands out as Dementus. I think I'll save more of a discussion of this when I get to the end.

The fourth thing is that seeing this in the theater, with all the bass rumbles of the vehicles was a real treat. Seeing the says of Dementus's biker horde at its height was also incredible

The plot is pretty simple. Furiosa is kidnapped from her home by Dementus's gang, her mother tries to rescue her but is executed by Dementus, Furiosa tries to survive in the service of Immortan Joe to enact her revenge.

There is a cool subplot about the power struggles between the various wasteland settlements which are interesting and reminiscent of the good seasons of Game of Thrones.

My only complaint is that the relationship between Furiosa and Praetorian Jack. Why does Furiosa trust Praetorian Jack exactly? It feels like something was left on the cutting room floor. They seem indifferent to each other, and then somehow become "ride or die." I must have missed something. How did that happen? I suppose this is supposed to foreshadow Max, but it didn't work for me.

The ending of this movie is great. Tremendous acting; Hemsworth exudes sympathy while being loathsome. Are him and Furiosa the the same? They both have the tragic backstory. This movie seems to suggest that after Furiosa gains control of the Citadel at the end of Fury Road, she does not "break the wheel". Or maybe that's what just what think, because I'm in a much more cynical place than even in 2015. The idea of Furiosa is the idea of someone who can be brave enough, and smart enough, and strong enough, and tough enough, and ruthless enough to survive, but has retained compassion and some sense of morality and justice and humanity. I'm more cynical about someone like that even existing, about someone who would feed one side without drowning the other, which might be my failing. If you live a large chunk of your life seeking revenge, and you achieve that revenge, what happens next? Does revenge go away, or does it get displaced to other things? My speculations unfortunately lead me to the idea that the tightrope is just too narrow for anyone to walk, and the brutality that is revealed suggests that. It's like something a vengeful, evil-aligned druid would come up with.


Note: I haven't really seen the Mel Gibson Mad Max movies, not because Mel Gibson is in them, but simply because I have never gotten around to it. Perhaps there is more to say on the subject of revenge there; I don't mean to imply that revenge is only wrong when women do it because that would be ridiculous.

 

[The Cat]

Well hell yes. I love this directors slow burn, clean and smooth pacing.
He's a sharp writer too.
Might actually go to the theaters for this one.​

 

[The Cat]

Still gonna see this for myself, I'm sort of compelled to given the story, but this reviewer mentions some things Ive noticed lately, and some of my other movie head friends at work have noted this too...
Exposition is 1000% needed for world building for the author/writer...but how much does the audience need really? To be clear, I dont hate exposition, I like world building and I'm autistic, I'm just happy for the extra context, I like to think about the worlds that movies and stories take place in. So I eat it all up...but at the same time, especially in horror, I like as little context and exposition as possible. I cannot tell you how comforting it is to be able to explain something scary. But to not have that, to never know why the slasher slashes, or what the monsters are...The unknown and the unknowable are terrifying. Hell just going through the movie and experiencing everything it has to offer, and walking away without the comfort of understanding....That's scary. Session 9 was like that for me. It was great.

But there seems to be this expectation from especially up and coming directors/writers they want to spoon feed you every last bite and drop, almost to the point of pausing the picture to make sure we're keeping up...its almost like they dont have any faith in the audience's ability to read between the line, figure things out, or capable of letting a question or two remain unanswered...

I get why they would have that lack of faith. But wouldnt it be preferable as an artist, to deal with the potential flack from people who just would never get it, to get some actual good stuff out there?

At the end of the day I'm fine with exposition, but I understand there is a flow to a piece, should we not strive to strike that balance even at the potential risk of being misunderstood by some who may not even be the target audience?​

 

[Totenkindly]

Still gonna see this for myself,

I will watch it at some point too. Just am disinclined to pay for a theater ticket.

I'm sort of compelled to given the story, but this reviewer mentions some things Ive noticed lately, and some of my other movie head friends at work have noted this too...
Exposition is 1000% needed for world building for the author/writer...but how much does the audience need really? To be clear, I dont hate exposition, I like world building and I'm autistic, I'm just happy for the extra context, I like to think about the worlds that movies and stories take place in. So I eat it all up..

I like world-building but it's sometimes not worth it past the point of relevance to the story. The writer needs to position themselves for future plot arcs and it's intriguing for an audience if they start to speculate based on prior world-building OR recognize something in the future and wonder if it's connected to something they already know... but after a certain point, it can deaden the film's impact.

Great example is in Aliens, where Cameron reinserted the Hedley Hope sequence. Most of his reinsertions were good ones, but this one exists simply to add more world-detail and plot explanation and in the process really kills some of the suspense. the film is actually scarier and IMO better with no actual revelation of what specifically happened -- it's eerier to show up at a ghost facility with a lot of damage apparent and only one child left to tell the tale.

This is also similar to DOnnie Darko's DC, which tries to make the film less confusing and in the process restricts the possibilities + is kind of heavy-handed about it. I prefer the original where it's ambiguous whether Donnie is experiencing psychosis or actual time travel. It was a case where a few small tweaks might have been helpful but way too much exposition/explanation was added and thus what was the point? I never really watch the DC anymore.

And then i guess you get into Jordan's Wheel of Time, which I've never read, but I can only assume its 12K pages are mostly exposition and world-building. Which led to me reading 20 pages in my 20's and then never continuing.

.but at the same time, especially in horror, I like as little context and exposition as possible. I cannot tell you how comforting it is to be able to explain something scary. But to not have that, to never know why the slasher slashes, or what the monsters are...The unknown and the unknowable are terrifying. Hell just going through the movie and experiencing everything it has to offer, and walking away without the comfort of understanding....That's scary. Session 9 was like that for me. It was great.

You want the audience to fill in the gaps. THe frustration of not knowing something for certain also contributes to the intrigue.

But there seems to be this expectation from especially up and coming directors/writers they want to spoon feed you every last bite and drop, almost to the point of pausing the picture to make sure we're keeping up...its almost like they dont have any faith in the audience's ability to read between the line, figure things out, or capable of letting a question or two remain unanswered...

Well, they don't. And fan bases are terrible nowadays. TOo much social media, too much ability to scream and stifle creativity.

And they only care about the money, to keep the franchise going. Very few people get funded for more films when they aren't making money or at least drawing crowds.

I think Session 9 is great. It was made on $1.5 million, which is not that much at all. It's a prime example of how to make a great horror film with little budget -- first of all, get a great location, second of all know how to create ambiguity in your story and surroundings and curiosity in the backstory. The recordings are a bit of genius, they are much cheaper to make than visuals and/or CGI, and it's almost more horrific if you get great voice artists to do the vocals, so your mind is left to fill in everything happening. It's like being trapped under your covers in bed in the dark hearing things go bump in the night, too scared to go see what it might be -- and then those bumps suddenly become shrieks. We don't really know if the "possessing spirit" is actual or imagined, we can just see the outcome left when someone's psyche breaks.

 

[The Cat]

I will watch it at some point too. Just am disinclined to pay for a theater ticket.


I like world-building but it's sometimes not worth it past the point of relevance to the story. The writer needs to position themselves for future plot arcs and it's intriguing for an audience if they start to speculate based on prior world-building OR recognize something in the future and wonder if it's connected to something they already know... but after a certain point, it can deaden the film's impact.

Great example is in Aliens, where Cameron reinserted the Hedley Hope sequence. Most of his reinsertions were good ones, but this one exists simply to add more world-detail and plot explanation and in the process really kills some of the suspense. the film is actually scarier and IMO better with no actual revelation of what specifically happened -- it's eerier to show up at a ghost facility with a lot of damage apparent and only one child left to tell the tale.

This is also similar to DOnnie Darko's DC, which tries to make the film less confusing and in the process restricts the possibilities + is kind of heavy-handed about it. I prefer the original where it's ambiguous whether Donnie is experiencing psychosis or actual time travel. It was a case where a few small tweaks might have been helpful but way too much exposition/explanation was added and thus what was the point? I never really watch the DC anymore.

And then i guess you get into Jordan's Wheel of Time, which I've never read, but I can only assume its 12K pages are mostly exposition and world-building. Which led to me reading 20 pages in my 20's and then never continuing.


You want the audience to fill in the gaps. THe frustration of not knowing something for certain also contributes to the intrigue.


Well, they don't. And fan bases are terrible nowadays. TOo much social media, too much ability to scream and stifle creativity.

And they only care about the money, to keep the franchise going. Very few people get funded for more films when they aren't making money or at least drawing crowds.

I think Session 9 is great. It was made on $1.5 million, which is not that much at all. It's a prime example of how to make a great horror film with little budget -- first of all, get a great location, second of all know how to create ambiguity in your story and surroundings and curiosity in the backstory. The recordings are a bit of genius, they are much cheaper to make than visuals and/or CGI, and it's almost more horrific if you get great voice artists to do the vocals, so your mind is left to fill in everything happening. It's like being trapped under your covers in bed in the dark hearing things go bump in the night, too scared to go see what it might be -- and then those bumps suddenly become shrieks. We don't really know if the "possessing spirit" is actual or imagined, we can just see the outcome left when someone's psyche breaks.

Session 9 Was such a compelling mystery to watch for the first time, I didnt even realize it was a horror movie until about a month later when I woke up in the middle of the night and all the horror of the movie just sort of trickled down my body. It gave me the screamin willies.

This affected me the same way. I was just impressed by the over all interest this gave me in the concept, I didnt think of it as horror beyond a little shiver at a certain point... But a few weeks later. I woke up to the sound of someone screaming in the distance(I had my windows open) And suddenly I'm like a nervous cat when its time for me to load up my car for work(at 330 in the morning, when the streetlight just shuts off((it flickers on and off at random, which is a lot of fun))) It's a great feeling and I always appreciate when something can give that to me.

I tried to get into wheel of time, I was prepared for the slog. But what I wasnt prepared for...

​

Agree with your other insights. Man Aliens was just such a special movie to see for the first time. I wrote so much fan fic because the cinematic world building was just so inspiring and accessible by way of presentation. I think I actually learned a lot about writing by trying to copy what I saw and translate it to the page while still giving the feeling of the scene which i didnt know at the time was called narrative pacing and showing vs telling and atmosphere and theme.

​