Movies Serious Movie Discussion

[Bullitt68]

Hey, @Sigh GunRanger, I forgot to mention: I ended up catching Mission Impossible: Fallout in theaters a couple of weeks ago. I missed its IMAX run but I still got to see it on the big screen (first MI film I've seen in theaters). It was awesome, as they've all been since the third one, but, even though it was too awesome to justify calling it the "worst" of the latest batch, I do have to say that I think it's the "least awesome" of this latest awesome batch.

First off, Henry Cavill is just a bland vanilla nothing, so he sucked in his capacity. I also didn't like Angela Bassett, her relationship with Cavill, or the way any of their shit was integrated into the plot. It seemed both hackneyed, in that I could see the curves of that narrative road from miles off, and clunky, in that the obvious crap was carried off poorly. And then, in a more nebulous vein, I just didn't feel any of those extra adrenaline spikes that I've become accustomed to when I watch MI movies. None of the set-pieces had me on the edge of my seat or pumping my fist or anything. It was a top-of-the-line action movie for sure but it wasn't a top-of-the-line MI movie, if that makes sense.

What did you think of it?

 

[europe1]

Feel like I am the only person keeping the smd going lately lol, have the rest of yous not been watching any films

Yeah... I've drifted from the proper path. I just don't have the same inclination to bombard the SMD with mega-posts anymore, especially with me as the SMC president and all.... except today! So here are some movies I watched fairly recently and can... kind of remember having an opinion on.



The Grandmaster: Wow what a steaming piece of garbage this movie was! From time-to-time I always feel like checking out Kar-Wai Wong stuff like Chungking Express or In the Mood for Love and then I see a crap-tacular movie like this and wonder if he's all hype? I don't think I've ever seen a movie fail so grievously by taking itself so ultra-seriously as this one. Every sentence is this ultra-eloquent pseudo-bullshit, every moment this super-hyped gala-event. Yeah, the movie is pretty... I guess. But it all works into a whole heap of nothing since it prevents me from getting invested in the story being told. What is presented is so uber-stylized and scatterbrained that it's impossible to follow with any interest. The best I can figure is that the director worked so hard at making every moment uber-epic and uber-important so that we were supposed to feel some sort of mythological awe towards these characters?
Honestly... this is perhaps one of the most disappointing movies I've ever seen.

On the not disappointing end, I watched Sunrise. Didn't expect such a love story from a movie that begins with a man trying to kill his wife because he lusts after another woman! Kinda fucked up... The movie sort of jarred for having such a big climax mid-way through (the husband and wife re-falling in love with each other). But overall, the movie is just told with so much visual flair, pathos and comedy that it's easy to get seduced by it.

Broke into the Ozu filmography with Early Summer. Sort of what I expected. A family conflict between generations with said conflict always simmering under the surface. But really well done! The way Ozu just dropped that homosexual angle out of nowhere was really seamless and unexpected, the sort of revelation that makes you reinterpret everything you've seen up until that point (honestly, she seemed more asexual but hey, it was the 50's). Also, Satsuko Hara is one big charm ball.

The next piece of evidence in my Edward G. Robbinson is awesome case was The Red House (1947). One of those movies that just blindside you in what it's offering. On the surface-plot level, you have a horror movie with some really ur-typical tropes being played (haunted house in an evil forest with a shifty forest ranged and a pair of saint/seductress women and everything). However... the movie's atmosphere is nothing at all like a horror movie, more like a regular drama despite all the horror-stuff that keeps happening. This creates a really jostling mode where you're going back-and-forth on whatever there is something supernatural is happening or not, and the movie really delves into that line of questioning. One of those random rank-and-file movies from classical Hollywood that surprises you at how good it is. Did I forget to mention that Robbinson is great as the limping patriarch who keeps pestering the kids not to go into his forest? Oh shit I started by saying that!

Fuck everyone, I liked De Palma's The Black Dahlia! (2007). It has some major plot-issues, but darnit, De Palma just makes his movies pretty! Sometimes you just got to lean back and enjoy the style. One event stands out in my memory. When the protagonist gets knocked out with a blow from behind, the camera suddenly takes on a distorted fish-eyed lens before fully going black (as opposed to just blackening from the get go). It's such an intuitive way of depicting a Knock Out yet I've never seen it before! Well done De Palma.

The Lives of Others (2006). Just a classically great, heartfelt drama set in Soviet East Germany. Very basic emotions at play, like love and a desire to be free, but done very earnestly.

Didn't like Legends of the Fall (1994). The basic problem was just that it tried to feel like an epic story across time yet never nailed the sensation of actually transitioning through time. The protagonists leave home for half-a-decade and to the characters, his return is supposed to feel like a momentous occasion... but to the viewer, it's just a cut of the edit. Different eras just feel like a window-dressing instead of a transition into a new period.

In other news, I kickstarted my Bergman jihad with some baby-steps into his ouvere.

Dreams (weird that they didn't go with the Swedish title which is Woman Dreams) was pretty mediocre. Some of the drama worked well enough but it's one of those movies that doesn't really feel like they mean something more than what is on the screen. So some old rich guy misses his wife and starts pampering a model to relive his youth? So some woman still loves her ex-boyfriend even though he's married. Like... okay?

Wolf Hour was better but gave of the big impression of being major missed potential. A large part of the problem is that the protagonist's central anxiety is kind of whiny. He hates that these decadent, unpleasant aristocrats "own a piece of him" by having purchased his art. They are cannibals, because they eat his soul which is his art, not recognizing the art for what it is and instead just seeing it as another possession they greedily covet. Like... this doesn't really sound like that big an issue to me. I get that it can be frustrating and all... but this is really the wrong story for such a theme. The terrors and visions (which are more interesting) just fail to gain any momentum in all this claptrap. Liv Ullman's quasi-Norwegian accent was also baffling for me (which she used for this movie, even though she speaks perfect Swedish).

Through the Glass Darkly was more the sort of heavy-hitting stuff I would expect out of Bergman. Much more prescient themes about how you mentally approach a loved-on going insane, and the anxiety of insanity and religious visions intermingling. The way these experiences leads up to the final conversation between the father and Minus and their subsequent "connection" was really impactful. Though I find it kind of funny that when Bergman wanted to represent ultimate spiritual evil... he basically went the Tolkien/Steven King-route and made it a really scary spider.

Lastly... who the hell names their kid Minus? Seriously, Minus? As in subtraction? Weird.

 

[europe1]

Attempts to tell the story of the English Civil War and the foundation of the Cromwellian Protectorate. The main problem is that it is entirely and woefully inaccurate. Cromwell is the driving force behind literally everything that happens, whatever the reality. e.g. At the start he is included amongst the Five Members who were to be arrested by Charles I which immediately precipitated the Civil War (he was not), he is also shown as instigating Pride's Purge and forcibly removing opponents of the New Model Army from Parliament (he did not, the clue is in the name, it was Colonel Pride). There are other things that are simply wrong in terms of chronology, what battles happened when, who was doing what at what time etc. but I guess you can allow for some things on the basis that the film can't be overly long. They even cut out the entirety of the Second Civil War, but as I say you can forgive some condensing if you're trying to fit such a long period of time into 2 hours.

But I suppose that's the problem, the film tries to do too much and condense a long, complicated period into an overly simplistic story. That's the main issue for me, it's portrayal of Cromwell as a champion of the poor and oppressed, fighting for liberty and the founder of English democracy is just ludicrous. Then of course there is the fact that it portrays Cromwell as retiring to a quiet life in the country after the Regicide is pretty despicable considering the fact that in reality he was fighting a brutal campaign in Ireland and massacring civilians.

At first I was like "sweet! A Cromwell movie I've never heard of before!" But then reading that description pretty much made sure I'll never watch it. There is a special kind of unsavory sensation towards using history to lionize someone into a hero. That makes the movie sound like an especially disgusting example.

There's a lot of shouting

But that's how the Academy knows it's a good movie! How are the award-voters going to realize that it's a well-acted movie unless there is a lot of shouting involved!? Shouting means that it's a big and important movie!

First off, Henry Cavill is just a bland vanilla nothing, so he sucked in his capacity. I also didn't like Angela Bassett, her relationship with Cavill, or the way any of their shit was integrated into the plot. It seemed both hackneyed, in that I could see the curves of that narrative road from miles off, and clunky, in that the obvious crap was carried off poorly. And then, in a more nebulous vein, I just didn't feel any of those extra adrenaline spikes that I've become accustomed to when I watch MI movies. None of the set-pieces had me on the edge of my seat or pumping my fist or anything. It was a top-of-the-line action movie for sure but it wasn't a top-of-the-line MI movie, if that makes sense.

I thought it was a pretty good action movie, but nothing that left much of an impression. The Cruise-Fergusson dynamic wasn't there like it was in the last one to uplift it.

Mostly... I just remember being pretty disappointed at how some of the plot-points worked out. Like, for example, the skullduggery in the cellar. We have this big scene of some major double-crossings going on. However, it all just cultimates in Cavill running away... which greviously cheapens the entire moment which up until that point had been fun and engaging. Or the fact that a supposed super-terrorist like Cavill would idiotically jeopardize his entire mission by jumping from an airplane during a thunderstorm, almost getting himself killed before the mission even starts.

 

[Yotsuya]

Mostly pretty meh. Harris was intense but pretty uninspiring as Cromwell. There's a lot of shouting. Though I did very much like Alec Guinness as Charles I, most of the best scenes involved him. For one he seemed more like an actual human being.

For me the films greatest quality is it's visuals. Athough the plot is severely lacking it does a great job bringing the period to life. The battles, debates in parliament, the trial and execution of the King were all stunning. So I did enjoy watching it for that reason alone, it does a good job when viewed as something like a moving painting.

I've been thinking about giving Cromwell another chance, but this sounds too much like my first viewing. I saw The Vikings and The War Lord some time ago and really loved them because both were pretty small-scale and had interesting pagan leanings, but I don't really know what to follow them up with.

Well...I liked it on the whole, but I thought it was an extremely uneven film. It is an adaption of a book by John Fowles (who apparently hated the film, despite writing the screenplay?). I have not read it yet, though I had planned to, perhaps I should have read the book first. From what I have gathered the film has an extremely poor reputation.

Magus is one of those movies I'll probably never watch. I keep thinking, that some day I'll read the book, but it's like 700 pages or so, so it's very unlikely I'd even get started. On the other hand the movie seems so mediocre, that spoiling the book does not seem like a good idea either.

 

[ufcfan4]

Hey, @Sigh GunRanger, I forgot to mention: I ended up catching Mission Impossible: Fallout in theaters a couple of weeks ago. I missed its IMAX run but I still got to see it on the big screen (first MI film I've seen in theaters). It was awesome, as they've all been since the third one, but, even though it was too awesome to justify calling it the "worst" of the latest batch, I do have to say that I think it's the "least awesome" of this latest awesome batch.

First off, Henry Cavill is just a bland vanilla nothing, so he sucked in his capacity. I also didn't like Angela Bassett, her relationship with Cavill, or the way any of their shit was integrated into the plot. It seemed both hackneyed, in that I could see the curves of that narrative road from miles off, and clunky, in that the obvious crap was carried off poorly. And then, in a more nebulous vein, I just didn't feel any of those extra adrenaline spikes that I've become accustomed to when I watch MI movies. None of the set-pieces had me on the edge of my seat or pumping my fist or anything. It was a top-of-the-line action movie for sure but it wasn't a top-of-the-line MI movie, if that makes sense.

What did you think of it?

You make a lot of valid points. I actually like Cavill though and thought he did well with the role. Considering the character was meant more to make an impact in terms of physicality and brute force rather than nuanced personality, I think it makes sense that he wasn't particularly charismatic.

If it is the least of the MI films from 3 on, that's no shame. It's amazing that that franchise turned a corner a few films deep and then never looked back. I was watching some of the original the other day on TV and was thinking to myself, damn this shows very little of the awesomeness that was to come. III, Ghost Protocol, Rogue Nation, and Fallout were all really strong from an action movie perspective.

Cruise is a boss in this role and I think his doing a lot of these crazy stunts definitely adds an element to the films.

Which of the series is your favorite? I have many positive things to say about 3, 4, 5, and 6, but I'm leaning toward Ghost Protocol as my favorite.

 

[ufcfan4]

I really enjoyed First Man. Struck me as similar in spirit and intent to The Right Stuff, as it focuses on the inherent danger and the extreme risk that the men involved in the space program accepted as part of the job.

What The Right Stuff and this film both did a good job of is creating a sense of coherence regarding the way that specific moments of success were integral in laying the foundation for subsequent monumental achievements. So in the former film, you have that awesome opening where Yeager breaks the sound barrier and then we skip ahead in time to the beginnings of the Apollo program. I thought that was awesome how they highlighted Yeager's historic moment as being crucial to the work that NASA ended up doing. In First Man, there are some similar sequences and there is also the constant sense of danger that the astronauts faced.

Gosling's performance as Armstrong is intriguing. It is an introspective performance. Some might say the interpretation borders on inscrutable or guarded. And maybe that's the point. Armstrong comes across as a very unassuming man- one who wears his emotions, to a large extent, on the inside. There is a moment of legitimate emotional expression and pain in reaction to tragedy early in the film, but for the remainder of the film, we don't get to see much in the way of emotional register for him. Instead, we see him try to hide from the painful reality that a bunch of his friends have died in pursuit of the
mission they have chosen to be a part of and that he could very well experience the same.

Foy's performance is also quite nuanced though more assertive and emotionally expressive. I'm really digging her work lately. Hope she delivers in the Girl with the Dragon Tattoo film- though my expectations are low given the absence of Fincher and my love of the Mara/Craig film.

Technically, it's impressive. Sound editing and effects are great. The cinematography is strong as well. It's a long film that requires some patience, but it never dragged for me. I recommend it. Really like this Chazelle dude. 3 for 3 in my opinion.

 

[moreorless87]

Finally got around to watching Woman of the Dunes from 1964 a couple of days ago, like 8 1/2 the year before actually both feels very modern indeed and much more accessible than its arty reputation makes it IMHO. If you want a basic plot outline...

Spoiler

Japanese school teacher searching an area of sand dunes for insects for his collection gets entrapped by local villagers at the bottom of a sand quarry with a local widow, the unstable sand makes it inescapable and they need to keep quarrying it out to avoid being buried alive in her house as the social differences between them play out.

Again like 8 1/2 it does definitely feel like something who'se influence looms large, most obviously I spose in Polanski's Repulsion the year afterwards where I think the cracks in the apartment wall feel very like the use of crumbling sand here. Really though a great deal of thrillers in a strange hostile environment with a strong character focus, from something like say The Thing to the general sense of menace of a lot of Lynch.

Anakin Skywalker is hiding behind the sofa only peeping out to wish Portman had similar sleeping habits in a sandy environment.

 

[TheRuthlessOne]

I watched Prince of Darkness and its pretty damn good

Top 5 in regards to carpenter films

One of the best satanic movies I have ever seen

 

[moreorless87]

I'v not seen that for absolutely ages, I'v been holding off picking it up hoping that Arrow Video(basically the UK version of Criterion but with more focus on genre/pulp cinema) do a Bluray release of it as good as The Thing and Big Trouble In Little China.

Just ordered a few BR's direct from them on the Halloween sale, Buckaroo Banzai, Withnail and I, Ronin and To Live and DIe in LA.

 

[Plutoburn]

I gave "The Promise" a shot and was pleasantly surprised how good it is.



I passed when it first came out because it got below rating of 6 on imdb, but I just found out it had a ton of 1 rating when it wasn't even released yet due to political reasons. The movie is about the Armenian genocide in the Ottoman Empire during WW1 which the Turkish government still deny to this day. I guess a bunch of Islamic extremists gave 1 star rating.

 

[Rimbaud82]

Yeah... I've drifted from the proper path. I just don't have the same inclination to bombard the SMD with mega-posts anymore, especially with me as the SMC president and all.... except today! So here are some movies I watched fairly recently and can... kind of remember having an opinion on.

Broke into the Ozu filmography with Early Summer. Sort of what I expected. A family conflict between generations with said conflict always simmering under the surface. But really well done! The way Ozu just dropped that homosexual angle out of nowhere was really seamless and unexpected, the sort of revelation that makes you reinterpret everything you've seen up until that point (honestly, she seemed more asexual but hey, it was the 50's). Also, Satsuko Hara is one big charm ball.

I have Ozu downloaded, but still haven't got round to watching the films to my shame.

The Lives of Others (2006). Just a classically great, heartfelt drama set in Soviet East Germany. Very basic emotions at play, like love and a desire to be free, but done very earnestly.

Watched this several times in high-school, love this film.

In other news, I kickstarted my Bergman jihad with some baby-steps into his ouvere.

Dreams (weird that they didn't go with the Swedish title which is Woman Dreams) was pretty mediocre. Some of the drama worked well enough but it's one of those movies that doesn't really feel like they mean something more than what is on the screen. So some old rich guy misses his wife and starts pampering a model to relive his youth? So some woman still loves her ex-boyfriend even though he's married. Like... okay?

Wolf Hour was better but gave of the big impression of being major missed potential. A large part of the problem is that the protagonist's central anxiety is kind of whiny. He hates that these decadent, unpleasant aristocrats "own a piece of him" by having purchased his art. They are cannibals, because they eat his soul which is his art, not recognizing the art for what it is and instead just seeing it as another possession they greedily covet. Like... this doesn't really sound like that big an issue to me. I get that it can be frustrating and all... but this is really the wrong story for such a theme. The terrors and visions (which are more interesting) just fail to gain any momentum in all this claptrap. Liv Ullman's quasi-Norwegian accent was also baffling for me (which she used for this movie, even though she speaks perfect Swedish).

Through the Glass Darkly was more the sort of heavy-hitting stuff I would expect out of Bergman. Much more prescient themes about how you mentally approach a loved-on going insane, and the anxiety of insanity and religious visions intermingling. The way these experiences leads up to the final conversation between the father and Minus and their subsequent "connection" was really impactful. Though I find it kind of funny that when Bergman wanted to represent ultimate spiritual evil... he basically went the Tolkien/Steven King-route and made it a really scary spider.

Lastly... who the hell names their kid Minus? Seriously, Minus? As in subtraction? Weird.

Only seen Through a Glass Darkly out of these, which I really liked. In fact you threatened to go on your Bergman jihad back then! - http://forums.sherdog.com/threads/serious-movie-discussion-xlii.3352809/page-7#post-124159489

Very serious, and very interesting, study of the psychological impact of faith. Although it's also a well-made family drama on a different level as you say.

As someone with mild arachnophobia I can certainly understand it being the ultimate spiritual evil!

 

[Yotsuya]

Finally got around to watching Woman of the Dunes from 1964 a couple of days ago, like 8 1/2 the year before actually both feels very modern indeed and much more accessible than its arty reputation makes it IMHO. If you want a basic plot outline...

Spoiler

Japanese school teacher searching an area of sand dunes for insects for his collection gets entrapped by local villagers at the bottom of a sand quarry with a local widow, the unstable sand makes it inescapable and they need to keep quarrying it out to avoid being buried alive in her house as the social differences between them play out.

Again like 8 1/2 it does definitely feel like something who'se influence looms large, most obviously I spose in Polanski's Repulsion the year afterwards where I think the cracks in the apartment wall feel very like the use of crumbling sand here. Really though a great deal of thrillers in a strange hostile environment with a strong character focus, from something like say The Thing to the general sense of menace of a lot of Lynch.

Anakin Skywalker is hiding behind the sofa only peeping out to wish Portman had similar sleeping habits in a sandy environment.

I saw this pretty recently too for the first time and agree completly. Really accessible and modern! Made me wonder if Patrick McGoohan had seen it before making The Prisoner. Haven’t seen 8 1/2, but maybe I should give it a try too.

Btw, the book Woman of the Dunes is based on is excellent too and it compliments nicely the very visual movie, because it’s mostly the main character’s inner thoughts and observations.

 

[Rimbaud82]

Tonight I watched

Absolution (1978)

Pretty obscure film starring Richard Burton as a Catholic schoolmaster. To quote the synopsis:

"At a Catholic boys' school, domineering disciplinarian Father Goddard (Richard Burton, Look Back in Anger, The Spy Who Came In from the Cold) rules over his pupils with an iron hand. When one of his teenage charges confesses to murder, the dogmatic but deeply repressed Goddard finds his faith challenged and his life spiralling dangerously out of control."

I really enjoyed this little gem. There is something about British films from the 70s that appeals to me, and I like the school setting too. It is essentially a slow-burn psychological thriller with a fairly dramatic climax (which I won't spoil, as always). On the one hand it's a reasonably simple plot about one pupil reacting against the rigorous demands of an over-zealous schoolmaster, but there is a lot of depth there too. Neither Burton's schoolmaster nor the pupil are blameless in the whole ordeal. There's a few good twists and turns.

A solid film which looks at the stifling Catholic school-system, bullying, the nature of confession, as well as, on a psychological level, the nature of Richard Burton's faith in God and his subsequent crisis following the events of the film....

Plus it has Billy Connolly playing the banjo! What more do you want!

 

[FighterTwister]

As an enthusiast of military things, games and movies the soon release of the Hunter Killer with Gerard Butler sounds good to watch.

The movies story-line: Deep under the Arctic Ocean, American submarine Captain Joe Glass (Gerard Butler, Olympus Has Fallen, 300) is on the hunt for a U.S. sub in distress when he discovers a secret Russian coup is in the offing, threatening to dismantle the world order. With crew and country on the line, Captain Glass must now assemble an elite group of Navy SEALs to rescue the kidnapped Russian president and sneak through enemy waters to stop WWIII.

Only in theaters by Summit Premiere on October 26th, 2018.



An interesting press conference -

 

[Rimbaud82]

As an enthusiast of military things, games and movies the soon release of the Hunter Killer with Gerard Butler sounds good to watch.

The movies story-line: Deep under the Arctic Ocean, American submarine Captain Joe Glass (Gerard Butler, Olympus Has Fallen, 300) is on the hunt for a U.S. sub in distress when he discovers a secret Russian coup is in the offing, threatening to dismantle the world order. With crew and country on the line, Captain Glass must now assemble an elite group of Navy SEALs to rescue the kidnapped Russian president and sneak through enemy waters to stop WWIII.

Only in theaters by Summit Premiere on October 26th, 2018.



An interesting press conference -

I know I am a stuffy snob and all, but this sounds absolutely horrific

"Hunter Killer"

 

[Bullitt68]

@HUNTERMANIA, I saw you posting about the SMD. I'm @'ing you in here so you know where to find us

Yeah... I've drifted from the proper path. I just don't have the same inclination to bombard the SMD with mega-posts anymore, especially with me as the SMC president and all.... except today! So here are some movies I watched fairly recently and can... kind of remember having an opinion on.

The europe movie bombs of old

The Grandmaster: Wow what a steaming piece of garbage this movie was!

I don't have much love for it, but I wouldn't go that far. Maybe it's the martial arts bias, but I hate hating martial arts movies, so I almost never do. Plus, even if I wanted to hate it, the initial fight between Ip Man and Gong Er is the film's saving grace.

But obviously Ip Man >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Grandmaster.

From time-to-time I always feel like checking out Kar-Wai Wong stuff like Chungking Express or In the Mood for Love and then I see a crap-tacular movie like this and wonder if he's all hype?

If you haven't seen Chungking Express or In the Mood for Love, then I'd recommend trying the former but skipping the latter. The latter will be everything you hated about The Grandmaster except it's not even about something as cool as martial arts. Chungking Express, though, particularly the "second story," is too good to hate and definitely worth at least checking out.

On the not disappointing end, I watched Sunrise. Didn't expect such a love story from a movie that begins with a man trying to kill his wife because he lusts after another woman! Kinda fucked up... The movie sort of jarred for having such a big climax mid-way through (the husband and wife re-falling in love with each other). But overall, the movie is just told with so much visual flair, pathos and comedy that it's easy to get seduced by it.

Heh, we watched this in one of my MA classes at the University of Chicago and the other MA students in my group hadn't seen it before. Even though we're supposed to be in a film class studying film history and techniques and all that super nerdy/artsy stuff, we ended up just debating relationships and arguing about whether or not it's right to stay in a relationship like that when shit that crazy goes down.

Broke into the Ozu filmography with Early Summer. Sort of what I expected.

I have Ozu downloaded, but still haven't got round to watching the films to my shame.

To no filmmaker is the phrase "if you've seen one, you've seen them all" more applicable than Ozu. The dude literally just made the same movie over and over and over with the subtlest little shifts in character/narrative. How the man didn't bore himself I'll never understand.

The next piece of evidence in my Edward G. Robbinson is awesome case was The Red House (1947).

An Eddy G. movie I've never seen.

Fuck everyone, I liked De Palma's The Black Dahlia! (2007).

Never liked De Palma so I've never bothered with this one. Over/under on Hitchcock references/ripoffs? 10? 20?

In other news, I kickstarted my Bergman jihad

I tried to find a happy Muslim/jihad gif and this was the best that I could come up with:

I thought it was a pretty good action movie, but nothing that left much of an impression. The Cruise-Fergusson dynamic wasn't there like it was in the last one to uplift it.

Mostly... I just remember being pretty disappointed at how some of the plot-points worked out. Like, for example, the skullduggery in the cellar. We have this big scene of some major double-crossings going on. However, it all just cultimates in Cavill running away... which greviously cheapens the entire moment which up until that point had been fun and engaging. Or the fact that a supposed super-terrorist like Cavill would idiotically jeopardize his entire mission by jumping from an airplane during a thunderstorm, almost getting himself killed before the mission even starts.

You make a lot of valid points. I actually like Cavill though and thought he did well with the role. Considering the character was meant more to make an impact in terms of physicality and brute force rather than nuanced personality, I think it makes sense that he wasn't particularly charismatic.

He didn't even make a physical impact, though. There was no real sense of menace. Forget about how ludicrous it is that Ethan Hunt, the GOAT secret agent, can't beat up one Asian dude in a bathroom by himself, both Ethan Hunt, the GOAT secret agent, AND Cavill's super bad ass "I prefer a hammer" spy guy can't do shit? It would've been better if Ethan would've struggled for a bit and then Cavill just fucking Hulk Smashed him or something to establish a kind of "If you fuck with me, you'll lose" dynamic.

If it is the least of the MI films from 3 on, that's no shame.

True. And even though I was giving Fallout some shit I didn't want to lose this point. All of the MI films from 3 on are great and I was by no means sitting in the theater bummed out and sulking or anything.

Which of the series is your favorite? I have many positive things to say about 3, 4, 5, and 6, but I'm leaning toward Ghost Protocol as my favorite.

Before rewatching them ahead of seeing Fallout, I would've said 3, which definitely made a huge impression when I first watched it (thanks in large part to Hoffman's super heel villain performance and that opening scene starting you off right at the most intense moment), but now I think I'm with you on Ghost Protocol with 3 as a close second.

 

[europe1]

(Richard Burton, Look Back in Anger, The Spy Who Came In from the Cold)

I haven't actually seen Absolution, so I can't really comment on it. But you introduce Richard Burton by mentioning a mediocre borefesh like In From the Cold? C'mon, bruh. At least name-drop Virginia Wolf instead!

we ended up just debating relationships and arguing about whether or not it's right to stay in a relationship like that when shit that crazy goes down.

It certainly is an interesting case if you wish to observe how socio-cultural norms have evolved over time. People took "true-love" super serious back then, like an overriding factor for everything. And the husband's maddening infatuation with the City Woman is almost the sort of passion-insanity that you would see in Ancient Greek plays.

My basic injection would be that the movie just isn't realistic in its depiction of such characters. The movie would let us believe that the husband who gets so infatuated that he agrees to kill his wife then has a genuine 100% turn-around and now loves her wholeheartedly. In real life, such emotional flip-flopping indicate an extremely malleable persona prone towards opinions of the extreme (like killing your wife because horny). You cannot expect consistency out of such people (ie: them loving you in the future)

the initial fight between Ip Man and Gong Er is the film's saving grace.

That's just a tease so to fool you into thinking you're about to watch a good movie

The dude literally just made the same movie over and over and over with the subtlest little shifts in character/narrative.

Sounds like a good way to build a film-cult!

Over/under on Hitchcock references/ripoffs? 10? 20?

More like him gorging down all the Noir tropes he could get his hands on.

I tried to find a happy Muslim/jihad gif and this was the best that I could come up with:

Something more in your wheelhouse.

 

[ArtemV]

I haven't actually seen Absolution, so I can't really comment on it. But you introduce Richard Burton by mentioning a mediocre borefesh like In From the Cold? C'mon, bruh. At least name-drop Virginia Wolf instead!



It certainly is an interesting case if you wish to observe how socio-cultural norms have evolved over time. People took "true-love" super serious back then, like an overriding factor for everything. And the husband's maddening infatuation with the City Woman is almost the sort of passion-insanity that you would see in Ancient Greek plays.

My basic injection would be that the movie just isn't realistic in its depiction of such characters. The movie would let us believe that the husband who gets so infatuated that he agrees to kill his wife then has a genuine 100% turn-around and now loves her wholeheartedly. In real life, such emotional flip-flopping indicate an extremely malleable persona prone towards opinions of the extreme (like killing your wife because horny). You cannot expect consistency out of such people (ie: them loving you in the future)



That's just a tease so to fool you into thinking you're about to watch a good movie



Sounds like a good way to build a film-cult!



More like him gorging down all the Noir tropes he could get his hands on.



Something more in your wheelhouse.

Steven Seagall in Chechnya.. who would have thought..

 

[ArtemV]

Is anybody planning to watch Halloween?

 

[ArtemV]

This movie looks reasonably fun.