Were they playing them as white, or were they made up? (I am going out on a limb here, to risk saying that the day will come when we have healthier attitudes to race, and "blacking up" won't be seen as a racist act.)
It is a bit of both. IMO, blacking up will always be racist. There is never a need.
Why will it always be racist? Actors play people they are not; costume and makeup help them do this. If racial discrimination was a thing of the past (which, God willing, will happen one day) why shouldn't an actor change the colour of their skin?
If al actors have equal opportunity to get work, then black actors can play black people if the having colour matters to the part. If it is a play, a white actor could play it whilst maintaining his own colour. I don't think blackface will ever shake its past. NOt unless the memory of discrimination fades completely.
Honestly, I don't think that will ever happen. At best, we will get to a place where most people aren't fussed by colour. We will always have racists.
Rather than derail this thread, I will leave you with a link and a short quote.
Blackface is part of a history of dehumanization, of denied citizenship, and of efforts to excuse and justify state violence. From lynchings to mass incarceration, whites have utilized blackface (and the resulting dehumanization) as part of its moral and legal justification for violence. It is time to stop with the dismissive arguments those that describe these offensive acts as pranks, ignorance and youthful indiscretions. Blackface is never a neutral form of entertainment, but an incredibly loaded site for the production of damaging stereotypes...the same stereotypes that undergird individual and state violence, American racism, and a centuries worth of injustice.
I would note that this is not limited to an American context.
Has anyone seen the new Little Women? I’ve heard good reports about it.
I saw Little Women a few days ago and must admit that I was underwhelmed. The acting, costumes and scenery were all admirable, but the construction of the story was appalling. I don't know who decided to have the action flip backwards and forwards in time, but I found it extremely irritating. There seemed to be an attempt to turn the story into multiple romances rather than a family saga. There were also mistakes made such as showing a Christmas tree when the story was set pre the use of Christmas trees, plus John Brooke was depicted as well and truly alive when according to the true story he died early in his marriage.
I guess that film goers who haven't really read the books would enjoy the film, but those who know the books well, I would say 'give it a miss'. I rate it 2/10.
Hm, thanks for that. I'm a pretty huge fan of Greta Gerwig(hat tip to Bunny With An Ax for pointing her out on these forums), but not quite to the point where I'd be a compleatist. And I generally dislike period pieces set before the industrial age, and I REALLY am not a fan of movies where the narrative jumps around in time. (That often seems like it's being used to add artificial gravitas to the story).
Haven't fully made up my mind that I won't see it, but your post has been duly entered into the record.
Yeah, okay. Saw it a couple of days ago, and was NOT swept off my feet. I found it hard to keep track of what time period things were happening in, which sister was interested in which guy, etc.
Also(and this might be a fault of the source material rather than the script), but, apart from mentioning the dad's absence and the mom being away for a bit, the characters seemed curiously unaffected by the cataclysmic bloodbath taking place a few days' southward. I got the impression that maybe the novel was written as escapist literature, to portray a rosier image of the period of national trauma everyone had just been through?
I just rented and rewatched Ladyhawke, and I had forgotten just how much I loved it. Such a visually beautiful move, and all the casting is so perfect. I loved Rutger Hauer as an actor, and he was perfect in this.
Last night I saw Parasite, which was amazing: brilliant, funny, creepy, sad, and deeply thought-provoking.
The cinema here put it back on for a few nights after it won the awards; exactly as Ruth wrote. Loved it. Raved about it so much a colleague (naughtily) found it in corners of the internet and watched bits at lunch!
I finally saw Knives Out
Well written and well acted homage to old-school whodunits. If you like Agatha Christie and Cluedo (Clue)
then go see this film. Beautiful sets as well.
Solid cast, Ana de Armas was adorable. One cast quibble and that was
Chris Evans. IMO, he just didn't pull off the bits where he was derisive. It was off enough to be distracting.
I loved the flashbacks filling out the story and the misdirections that allow one to be lost if one so wishes. The film was very self-aware, one bit was a little too much so. Minor quibbles, the film was solid and fun.
Back from seeing "Birds of Prey". The last third was funny and fast moving; the first two-thirds dull and slow. Given the title (which I gather is being changed) why did it take so long for the women to get together?
Back from seeing "Birds of Prey". The last third was funny and fast moving; the first two-thirds dull and slow. Given the title (which I gather is being changed) why did it take so long for the women to get together?
It is difficult to write a group origin story without the film become burdened by exposition. That is one area where Suicide Squad failed.
Couple this with Harley Quinn being the one fairly well know character and a popular one at that, it makes sense that she would be the focus and the story told through her voice. (Literally and figuratively)
I didn't think the first parts to be slow at all. I thought it was a well paced and well told telling of the characters stories and intersections. But then, I am not a fan of the gettothegoodstuffnowNowNOW! trend in film-making that has become the norm.
Took the kids (or they dragged me, you decide) to see the Sonic Movie
it was okay, especially for passing a wet weekend afternoon. the kids enjoyed it, and there were plenty nods to the original games and other things for the adults to spot
funniest bit was in the end-credits sequence which seems to set it up for a sequel
where the entire under-9 year old population of the screening, as one, said "look, it's TAILS!" as if Tails was more exciting than Sonic
Also just came back from seeing Birds of Prey. Mostly liked it, though it was a bit too manic in parts for my taste. My brother, who I saw it with, loved it.
Last night I saw Parasite, which was amazing: brilliant, funny, creepy, sad, and deeply thought-provoking.
The cinema here put it back on for a few nights after it won the awards; exactly as Ruth wrote. Loved it. Raved about it so much a colleague (naughtily) found it in corners of the internet and watched bits at lunch!
Parasite first showed here only as a late-night special, but since it won an Oscar as "best Picture" , it has received more extensive screening. Saw it at the local multiplex this afternoon, notwithstanding its "adults only" rating.
Can now see why it won the Oscar and also why it has that rating. The second half is hardly child-friendly. Mrs T took some persuading to see it, not because of subtitles (old hat to her) but because of the violence rating. But she too was impressed.
I am left wondering what they will leave out in the inevitable Hollywood remake. I suspect they will retain the first half "comedy" ., reset in California with Mexicans as the poor family, but heavily clean up the second "thriller" half -
perhaps omitting the second family in the basement, and finishing with the Mexicans being chased out of the big house, but without the gore.
(No spoiler shields, since the events portrayed in this film are a matter of historical record.)
About the feminist disruption of the 1970 Miss World pageant. This being an event I don't believe I was directly aware of, though I knew about something similar happening in Canada around the same time.
With the usual caveat about my being a sucker for anything political, as well as for anything set in the 1970s, I'd give this a strong recommendation. It has a good sense for its time and place, and genuinely seems to care about the issues it explores.
Which is not to say that it's a particularly groundbreaking exploration. I doubt there are too many people reading this who won't be able to anticipate the women's objections to Miss World. The film does strive to show both sides(eg. pointing out that seeing a black woman crowned Miss World could have a salutary impact on the self-confidence of young black girls), but even this comes off as rather textbook.
As well, some of the issues examined seemed possibly related more to a contemporary idea about what 1970s feminism was concerned with, rather than the reality of that era. For example, at a rally, a speaker cites "abortion on demand" as a goal of womens liberation, whereas my impression has always been that abortion ceased to be a significant issue for British feminists following the 1967 reform act. (I'm open to correction on this one.)
Apart from all that, pretty much everyone turns in a credible performance. Some of the characterizatons, especially of the pageant promoters, do veer into the territory of farce, but this is pretty forgivable, given the demands of portraying the differences in generation and worldview.
And Greg Kinnear delivers a great rendition of the well-known celebrity emcee. He doesn't quite disappear into the role, but arguably he didn't need to, given his mastery of the man's tics and mannerisms.
In Australia we now no longer have death by coronavirus stalking the land, so I felt up to watching On the Beach when it appeared on local commercial television last night. For those that don't know, this is the 1959 adaptation by Stanley Kramer of a novel by Nevile Shute about all the people in the world are killed by radioactive fallout from a nuclear war. Because the war was in the northern hemisphere, the last people left are those in southern Australia; the film depicts how they adapt to this prospect. Although they are all dead or dying by the finish, there are no deathbed scenes or piles of dead bodies, but it is a pretty sobering warning about the dangers of a nuclear war nevertheless - and a well made film in my opinion.
Incidentally, There is a saying apocryphally attribute to Ava Gardner (one of the stars of the film) that "Melbourne [in the 1950s] feels to me like the right place to make a film about the end of the world". A report of this did not make her very popular in Melbourne!
Just finished watching "Pandora's Box" (1929) with Louise Brooks. A very complicated film. The central character is Lulu, a "kept" woman of a publisher. There is Schigolch who seems to be her pimp, although she indicates that she has not seen him for some time (before she got involved with the publisher) and later reers to him as her father. And then there is the character of the Countess, a lesbian attracted to Lulu much the same way as men are--and whom Lulu exploits for her own benefit much the same way as she exploits men. And then the film gets more complicated from there.
When I first saw the film, I could not understand the ending. Then Criterion issued a version that was some 25 minutes longer than the version I had. It turns out that the US version of the fil was severely edited and changed for US audiences (eliminating the lesbian angle and even changing the character of Alwa from being the son of the publisher to the secretary of the publisher, presumably to get away from incestuous issues between the publsiher and his son--but unintentionally creating homosexual issues when the publisher shows great love for his "secretary")(actually some prints even changed the ending of the film--silent films could be so edited by simply adding different title cards and cutting out scenes that did not fit the editors' concept of how the film should end, regardless of how the director or producer thought it should end.)
The Criterion Collection version runs 2h 11 minutes and is the version you must see. Avoid anything shorter. Criterion issued a DVD of this version but, sadly, by the time I could afford it, it was out of print. Then, for my birthday, my brother gave me a one-year subscription to the Criterion streaming service (the "Criterion Channel") which currently carries the full version of "Pandora's Box." I strongly recommend the Criterion Channel to those who can afford it, and strongly recommend watching the 2h, 11m version of "Pandora's Box" to any movie fan. Sadly, I cannot go into more detail without using a massive Spoiler box and, frankly, cheat you of the pleasure of the film. It is a very complex film.
If you haven't seen it, a fun film is Easy A, an early Emma Stone movie. Emma as Olive becomes entwined in her own lies (mostly quite well-meaning ones) about her sex life in aid of guys with their own social reputation problems. She becomes the virgin with the sluttiest reputation in school. Oh, well, what the hell? She starts wearing sexy clothes with the letter A sewn on. But she eventually realizes her lies have made her pretty lonely and sets out to right her wrongs as is appropriate to a romantic comedy.
I just saw “ Blinded by the Light.” Short version— Teenage Pakistani/ British boy is converted to Bruce Springsteen during the Thatcher years. To my mild embarrassment, I frequently teared up. To my extreme embarrassment, I loudly belted along with the soundtrack.
If you haven't seen it, a fun film is Easy A, an early Emma Stone movie. Emma as Olive becomes entwined in her own lies (mostly quite well-meaning ones) about her sex life in aid of guys with their own social reputation problems. She becomes the virgin with the sluttiest reputation in school. Oh, well, what the hell? She starts wearing sexy clothes with the letter A sewn on. But she eventually realizes her lies have made her pretty lonely and sets out to right her wrongs as is appropriate to a romantic comedy.
That was a cute film, "with some good messages", to make myself sound like someone's socially-conscious grandmother.
SPOILERS
I did think the script somewhat overestimated how relaxed her parents would be upon finding out about what she'd been doing. I mean, not that parents SHOULD go into a panic about something like that(especially given that a boy lying about his sex life would likely just be shrugged off), just that it would probably have been the more predictable reaction.
I just saw “ Blinded by the Light.” Short version— Teenage Pakistani/ British boy is converted to Bruce Springsteen during the Thatcher years. To my mild embarrassment, I frequently teared up. To my extreme embarrassment, I loudly belted along with the soundtrack.
“It ain’t no sin to be glad you’re alive.”
Another good one.
I was truly flabbergasted at how many times the real-life guy had seen Springsteen live, according to the end-credits.
About the downfall of Fox News honcho Roger Ailes a few years back. Interesting, if rather depressing, portrayal of conservstive media around the time of the 2016 election, but otherwise I found that this didn't really strike a lot of sparks.
Somewhat sludgy script, with plodding dialogue that fails to captivate. Even though I do tend to find the guy rather gimmicky these days, this is one project that could ptobably have made good use of an Aaron Sorkin screenplay.
And I never really had the feel that I was watching something set in the fast-paced world of New York media: the movie could just as easily have been set in Columbus Ohio, as far as mood and atmosphere went.
The performances are generally adequate, though the female leads all tend to blend into Faceless Blonde. Admittedly, this probably has as much to do with the Fox aesthetic as with the movie, though the writers could probably have done a better job of differentiating them.
As for the dudes, John Lithgow is pretty good as the decrepit old lecher, and one wonders if we were actually supposed to feel sorry for him, or if that effect was just a result of the natural sympathy that tends to accrue to the aged and infirm.
And hey, you can't go wrong casting the Emperor Caligula as everyone's favorite right-wing media mogul!
I just saw “ Blinded by the Light.” Short version— Teenage Pakistani/ British boy is converted to Bruce Springsteen during the Thatcher years. To my mild embarrassment, I frequently teared up. To my extreme embarrassment, I loudly belted along with the soundtrack.
“It ain’t no sin to be glad you’re alive.”
Another good one.
I was truly flabbergasted at how many times the real-life guy had seen Springsteen live, according to the end-credits.
Loved this movie ... and yes, also the "real life" bit after the end credits. Whenever a movie is "inspired by a true story" I always want to know more about that.
If you haven't seen it, a fun film is Easy A, an early Emma Stone movie. Emma as Olive becomes entwined in her own lies (mostly quite well-meaning ones) about her sex life in aid of guys with their own social reputation problems. She becomes the virgin with the sluttiest reputation in school. Oh, well, what the hell? She starts wearing sexy clothes with the letter A sewn on. But she eventually realizes her lies have made her pretty lonely and sets out to right her wrongs as is appropriate to a romantic comedy.
That was a cute film, "with some good messages", to make myself sound like someone's socially-conscious grandmother.
SPOILERS
I did think the script somewhat overestimated how relaxed her parents would be upon finding out about what she'd been doing. I mean, not that parents SHOULD go into a panic about something like that(especially given that a boy lying about his sex life would likely just be shrugged off), just that it would probably have been the more predictable reaction.
Well, we do get her mom's revelations about her own high school reputation. Her folks are definitely a pair of retired hippies. They are probably kind of tickled by Olive's subversion, and knowing that what she did didn't involve pregnancy and STDs might have helped, too.
In honour of the death of Olivia de Havilland, I watched Captain Blood last night - the first time Olivia de Havilland and Errol Flynn co-starred. She was only 19, and very self assured in front of the camera. I'd also forgotten just how much fun the film is - sea battles (a mix of real ships and models), romance and an epic swordfight between Errol Flynn and Basil Rathbone!
If you haven't seen it, a fun film is Easy A, an early Emma Stone movie. Emma as Olive becomes entwined in her own lies (mostly quite well-meaning ones) about her sex life in aid of guys with their own social reputation problems. She becomes the virgin with the sluttiest reputation in school. Oh, well, what the hell? She starts wearing sexy clothes with the letter A sewn on. But she eventually realizes her lies have made her pretty lonely and sets out to right her wrongs as is appropriate to a romantic comedy.
That was a cute film, "with some good messages", to make myself sound like someone's socially-conscious grandmother.
SPOILERS
I did think the script somewhat overestimated how relaxed her parents would be upon finding out about what she'd been doing. I mean, not that parents SHOULD go into a panic about something like that(especially given that a boy lying about his sex life would likely just be shrugged off), just that it would probably have been the more predictable reaction.
Well, we do get her mom's revelations about her own high school reputation. Her folks are definitely a pair of retired hippies. They are probably kind of tickled by Olive's subversion, and knowing that what she did didn't involve pregnancy and STDs might have helped, too.
Point taken. Though one of my generational stereotypes is that aging hippies are the most uptight demographic going.
In honour of the death of Olivia de Havilland, I watched Captain Blood last night - the first time Olivia de Havilland and Errol Flynn co-starred. She was only 19, and very self assured in front of the camera. I'd also forgotten just how much fun the film is - sea battles (a mix of real ships and models), romance and an epic swordfight between Errol Flynn and Basil Rathbone!
I have a DVD of Captain Blood, but my own [DVD] viewing in honour of Olivia de H was The Adventures of Robin Hood, also with Errol Flynn (as the goodie) and Basil Rathbone as the baddie. Her good looks and soft English accent (her real voice I think based on later interviews) come over very well, even 80 years later. And the film as a whole (one of the first in technicolor) is a splendid swashbuckler, with lighter touches not matched in some of the more recent versions.
Saw Saint Francis at the weekend and strongly recommend it.
It does address abortion but it isn’t an “issue” film. The young girl’s performance has very rightly be praised in reviews.
Tukai - I love The Adventures of Robin Hood. Errol and Olivia have such wonderful scenes together. But Captain Blood was when they first worked together and I hadn't watched it for a long time. I'm thinking of getting Dodge City out, too, though Olivia de Havilland said she hadn't enjoyed working on that film.
I finally got to see Burn After Reading (the Coen brothers) on Friday night. I missed it when it came out in 2008. Shame on me. It's bleak, oh, so bleak, but I found it tremendously funny. The cast is uniformly excellent. (Brad Pitt would get more respect as an actor if he weren't so good looking.) If you can tolerate a film in which all characters are monumentally stupid while thinking that they're ever so clever, and nothing - nothing - ends well, this is the film for you.
Not somuch a movie as such, but a 6 part tv series, but i watched the anglo french recent series of War of the Worlds and found it engrossing. But my wife refusec to watch after about 3 episodex - too many corpses ,literring the streets. Sseries follows 3 small groups of survi vors, 2 of which helpfully include scientist who may be able to work out how to foil the alien invaders. But the series finished before they had it figured out. Probably that means the producers plan a follow up series.
Not a movie as such but a tv miniseries , namely War of the Worlds. This wwas an anglo french production, so it featured two groups of survivors of the alien invasion. Also showi g lots of corpses in ever street and some feasome giant mechanised ants who were trying to kill off any remaining humans. I found it engrosxing but the series fi ished after 6 episodes with the aliens still running rampant.
Not a movie as such but a tv miniseries , namely War of the Worlds. This wwas an anglo french production, so it featured two groups of survivors of the alien invasion. Also showi g lots of corpses in ever street and some feasome giant mechanised ants who were trying to kill off any remaining humans. I found it engrosxing but the series fi ished after 6 episodes with the aliens still running rampant.
I'm finding this series aggravating because hardly anything happens episode after episode. The only thing going for it is those giant mechanized ants. I consider them "The Revenge of the Boston Dynamics Robots"
Not somuch a movie as such, but a 6 part tv series, but i watched the anglo french recent series of War of the Worlds and found it engrossing. But my wife refusec to watch after about 3 episodex - too many corpses ,literring the streets. Sseries follows 3 small groups of survi vors, 2 of which helpfully include scientist who may be able to work out how to foil the alien invaders. But the series finished before they had it figured out. Probably that means the producers plan a follow up series.
I gave up about halfway through, partly because it was beginning to look like it wasn't really War of the Worlds (and partly because there was too much waiting for something shocking/gruesome to happen for my tastes).
I then read ahead, found out about Season 2 and thought yep, this really isn't War of the Worlds at all. It is at the very beginning, but after that it feels like they licensed the title and little more. I had high hopes from the cast (on both sides of the Channel) but ended up dissatisfied.
Daughter-Unit arranged for me and some of her friends to watch "Mulan" at her house yesterday. This is the new live action version.
It was an entertaining couple of hours. It did remind me of long ago when I watched Chinese soap operas with friends. People were flying through the air and running up walls. Those soap operas were all in Mandarin, which I don't understand at all, but my friend and I would make up our own dialogue to go with them. Many times, her husband, who was raised speaking Mandarin would look at us and say, "That's exactly what they're saying!" Body language speaks volumes, I guess!
Mulan's mother looked familiar, then I realized she played Keiko O'Brien in the Star Trek series!
So, back to "Mulan", it's not worth paying $30 for unless you can split it between several people! But, I'm glad we could watch it. It's a good story.
If you haven't seen it, a fun film is Easy A, an early Emma Stone movie. Emma as Olive becomes entwined in her own lies (mostly quite well-meaning ones) about her sex life in aid of guys with their own social reputation problems. She becomes the virgin with the sluttiest reputation in school. Oh, well, what the hell? She starts wearing sexy clothes with the letter A sewn on. But she eventually realizes her lies have made her pretty lonely and sets out to right her wrongs as is appropriate to a romantic comedy.
That was a cute film, "with some good messages", to make myself sound like someone's socially-conscious grandmother.
SPOILERS
I did think the script somewhat overestimated how relaxed her parents would be upon finding out about what she'd been doing. I mean, not that parents SHOULD go into a panic about something like that(especially given that a boy lying about his sex life would likely just be shrugged off), just that it would probably have been the more predictable reaction.
Well, we do get her mom's revelations about her own high school reputation. Her folks are definitely a pair of retired hippies. They are probably kind of tickled by Olive's subversion, and knowing that what she did didn't involve pregnancy and STDs might have helped, too.
Point taken. Though one of my generational stereotypes is that aging hippies are the most uptight demographic going.
A little late, but have you been to Ojai? It is a lovely artsy-fartsy town in Ventura County, CA. LOTS of unrepentant hippie types there.
In honour of the late Sean Connery my dear Wife decided we should watch Thunderballs. I'm not sure if I've seen a much worse film in my life. It was the kind where you can leave to get a mug of coffee or go the bathroom and you don't miss anything. Once in a while there's a passing reference to an improbable plot of some kind, but it hardly intrudes on the parade of female type persons in swimsuits and brutal fight scenes where nobody really gets hurt (apart from the ones who are killed). They never explained the title.
In honour of the late Sean Connery my dear Wife decided we should watch Thunderballs. I'm not sure if I've seen a much worse film in my life. It was the kind where you can leave to get a mug of coffee or go the bathroom and you don't miss anything. Once in a while there's a passing reference to an improbable plot of some kind, but it hardly intrudes on the parade of female type persons in swimsuits and brutal fight scenes where nobody really gets hurt (apart from the ones who are killed). They never explained the title.
Minor correction, but it's Thunderball, with no "s".
I think the title was taken from the Ian Fleming novel, without including whatever aspect of the book that made the name relevant.
Apart from that, all I remember about the film is the opening, where some henchman gets executed in his chair for trying rip off the Evil Mastermind. I'm wondering to what extent the stuff you describe as demerits to the movie are just typical features of Bond in general. The "parade of female type persons in swimsuits" certainly does ring a bell"!
Horror-comedy that manages to strike a pretty decent balance between the two genres, though somewhat tilted toward the comedy.
You don't have to be a huge fan of the targeted slasher subgenre to enjoy this(I'm not), but it does help to know the conventions, which this script mines extensively, and to fairly good effect. And while not a horror-reference per se, the title alone pretty clearly indicates the main plot device.
Commendable performances from most of the cast, and it was especially cool to see Vince Vaughn back in my range of cinematic vision(don't think I had seen him in anything for a while). Granted, it's hard to top Rob Schneider's rendition of the same schtick in The Hot Chick, but taken on its own terms, Vaughn's effort is carried off pretty well.
One minor complaint...
The opening contains a racist joke made by one of the characters. Obviously, it's meant to reflect the viewpoint of the character, not the screenwriters, but given that this character is meant to be viewed overall as one of the good-guys, I don't think the script did good enough job of rebutting his attitudes.
I finally got round to seeing The Mummy - the one with Brendan Foster which everyone says is the good one, and which has the classic line from Evie "I may not be an explorer, or an adventurer or a treasure-seeker or a gunfighter, but I am proud of what I am - I am a Librarian!"
It was a lot of fun, though I am slightly worried now about creepy scarab beetles running around under my skin....
I'm sure you're both right! Actually, I liked Evie's brother better. he may have been an unreliable drunk, but he was loyal to his sister and he was brave where it counted.
Another horror, this one more seriously-toned than Freaky. Basically, a garden-variety gothic featuring the family dynamics of Night Mother, overlaid onto the rough plot outline of Whatever Happened To Baby Jane?
The director, Aneesh Chaganty, previously helmed Searching, which I though scored a bit better in the originality department. Run, for the most part, depends for both its novelty and its shock on audiences being newcomers to the family-gothic thingamabob. You can pretty much see where everything is going from the first "shocking" plot turn that hits the screen, about ten minutes in.
And two perhaps idiosyncratic observations on my part...
1. This would have to be the most asexually themed messed-up-family gothic thriller since, well, forever. There isn't even a hint of the characters having libidinal or even romantic impulses, or anxiety about thereof. That aspect being an almost universal part of the genre.
2. Kudos to the screenwriter for making the psycho-mother a more educated and accomplished woman than is normal for this sort of thing(compare, say, the religious fruitcake in Carrie or the helpless woman-child in Night Mother). I'm not sure if this was a conscious departure from genre-convention, but it does have an inteteresting effect on our emotional response to the character.
Comments
Honestly, I don't think that will ever happen. At best, we will get to a place where most people aren't fussed by colour. We will always have racists.
Yeah, okay. Saw it a couple of days ago, and was NOT swept off my feet. I found it hard to keep track of what time period things were happening in, which sister was interested in which guy, etc.
Also(and this might be a fault of the source material rather than the script), but, apart from mentioning the dad's absence and the mom being away for a bit, the characters seemed curiously unaffected by the cataclysmic bloodbath taking place a few days' southward. I got the impression that maybe the novel was written as escapist literature, to portray a rosier image of the period of national trauma everyone had just been through?
Whose bloody idea was it to cast Chris Cooper as New England gentry?! Talk about terrible miscasting.
Well written and well acted homage to old-school whodunits. If you like Agatha Christie and Cluedo (Clue)
then go see this film. Beautiful sets as well.
Solid cast, Ana de Armas was adorable. One cast quibble and that was
I loved the flashbacks filling out the story and the misdirections that allow one to be lost if one so wishes. The film was very self-aware, one bit was a little too much so. Minor quibbles, the film was solid and fun.
Couple this with Harley Quinn being the one fairly well know character and a popular one at that, it makes sense that she would be the focus and the story told through her voice. (Literally and figuratively)
I didn't think the first parts to be slow at all. I thought it was a well paced and well told telling of the characters stories and intersections. But then, I am not a fan of the gettothegoodstuffnowNowNOW! trend in film-making that has become the norm.
it was okay, especially for passing a wet weekend afternoon. the kids enjoyed it, and there were plenty nods to the original games and other things for the adults to spot
funniest bit was in the end-credits sequence which seems to set it up for a sequel
Parasite first showed here only as a late-night special, but since it won an Oscar as "best Picture" , it has received more extensive screening. Saw it at the local multiplex this afternoon, notwithstanding its "adults only" rating.
Can now see why it won the Oscar and also why it has that rating. The second half is hardly child-friendly. Mrs T took some persuading to see it, not because of subtitles (old hat to her) but because of the violence rating. But she too was impressed.
I am left wondering what they will leave out in the inevitable Hollywood remake. I suspect they will retain the first half "comedy" ., reset in California with Mexicans as the poor family, but heavily clean up the second "thriller" half -
(No spoiler shields, since the events portrayed in this film are a matter of historical record.)
About the feminist disruption of the 1970 Miss World pageant. This being an event I don't believe I was directly aware of, though I knew about something similar happening in Canada around the same time.
With the usual caveat about my being a sucker for anything political, as well as for anything set in the 1970s, I'd give this a strong recommendation. It has a good sense for its time and place, and genuinely seems to care about the issues it explores.
Which is not to say that it's a particularly groundbreaking exploration. I doubt there are too many people reading this who won't be able to anticipate the women's objections to Miss World. The film does strive to show both sides(eg. pointing out that seeing a black woman crowned Miss World could have a salutary impact on the self-confidence of young black girls), but even this comes off as rather textbook.
As well, some of the issues examined seemed possibly related more to a contemporary idea about what 1970s feminism was concerned with, rather than the reality of that era. For example, at a rally, a speaker cites "abortion on demand" as a goal of womens liberation, whereas my impression has always been that abortion ceased to be a significant issue for British feminists following the 1967 reform act. (I'm open to correction on this one.)
Apart from all that, pretty much everyone turns in a credible performance. Some of the characterizatons, especially of the pageant promoters, do veer into the territory of farce, but this is pretty forgivable, given the demands of portraying the differences in generation and worldview.
And Greg Kinnear delivers a great rendition of the well-known celebrity emcee. He doesn't quite disappear into the role, but arguably he didn't need to, given his mastery of the man's tics and mannerisms.
Incidentally, There is a saying apocryphally attribute to Ava Gardner (one of the stars of the film) that "Melbourne [in the 1950s] feels to me like the right place to make a film about the end of the world". A report of this did not make her very popular in Melbourne!
When I first saw the film, I could not understand the ending. Then Criterion issued a version that was some 25 minutes longer than the version I had. It turns out that the US version of the fil was severely edited and changed for US audiences (eliminating the lesbian angle and even changing the character of Alwa from being the son of the publisher to the secretary of the publisher, presumably to get away from incestuous issues between the publsiher and his son--but unintentionally creating homosexual issues when the publisher shows great love for his "secretary")(actually some prints even changed the ending of the film--silent films could be so edited by simply adding different title cards and cutting out scenes that did not fit the editors' concept of how the film should end, regardless of how the director or producer thought it should end.)
The Criterion Collection version runs 2h 11 minutes and is the version you must see. Avoid anything shorter. Criterion issued a DVD of this version but, sadly, by the time I could afford it, it was out of print. Then, for my birthday, my brother gave me a one-year subscription to the Criterion streaming service (the "Criterion Channel") which currently carries the full version of "Pandora's Box." I strongly recommend the Criterion Channel to those who can afford it, and strongly recommend watching the 2h, 11m version of "Pandora's Box" to any movie fan. Sadly, I cannot go into more detail without using a massive Spoiler box and, frankly, cheat you of the pleasure of the film. It is a very complex film.
“It ain’t no sin to be glad you’re alive.”
That was a cute film, "with some good messages", to make myself sound like someone's socially-conscious grandmother.
SPOILERS
I did think the script somewhat overestimated how relaxed her parents would be upon finding out about what she'd been doing. I mean, not that parents SHOULD go into a panic about something like that(especially given that a boy lying about his sex life would likely just be shrugged off), just that it would probably have been the more predictable reaction.
Another good one.
(I hope your mama is doing well.)
About the downfall of Fox News honcho Roger Ailes a few years back. Interesting, if rather depressing, portrayal of conservstive media around the time of the 2016 election, but otherwise I found that this didn't really strike a lot of sparks.
Somewhat sludgy script, with plodding dialogue that fails to captivate. Even though I do tend to find the guy rather gimmicky these days, this is one project that could ptobably have made good use of an Aaron Sorkin screenplay.
And I never really had the feel that I was watching something set in the fast-paced world of New York media: the movie could just as easily have been set in Columbus Ohio, as far as mood and atmosphere went.
The performances are generally adequate, though the female leads all tend to blend into Faceless Blonde. Admittedly, this probably has as much to do with the Fox aesthetic as with the movie, though the writers could probably have done a better job of differentiating them.
As for the dudes, John Lithgow is pretty good as the decrepit old lecher, and one wonders if we were actually supposed to feel sorry for him, or if that effect was just a result of the natural sympathy that tends to accrue to the aged and infirm.
And hey, you can't go wrong casting the Emperor Caligula as everyone's favorite right-wing media mogul!
Loved this movie ... and yes, also the "real life" bit after the end credits. Whenever a movie is "inspired by a true story" I always want to know more about that.
Well, we do get her mom's revelations about her own high school reputation. Her folks are definitely a pair of retired hippies. They are probably kind of tickled by Olive's subversion, and knowing that what she did didn't involve pregnancy and STDs might have helped, too.
Point taken. Though one of my generational stereotypes is that aging hippies are the most uptight demographic going.
I have a DVD of Captain Blood, but my own [DVD] viewing in honour of Olivia de H was The Adventures of Robin Hood, also with Errol Flynn (as the goodie) and Basil Rathbone as the baddie. Her good looks and soft English accent (her real voice I think based on later interviews) come over very well, even 80 years later. And the film as a whole (one of the first in technicolor) is a splendid swashbuckler, with lighter touches not matched in some of the more recent versions.
It does address abortion but it isn’t an “issue” film. The young girl’s performance has very rightly be praised in reviews.
I gave up about halfway through, partly because it was beginning to look like it wasn't really War of the Worlds (and partly because there was too much waiting for something shocking/gruesome to happen for my tastes).
I then read ahead, found out about Season 2 and thought yep, this really isn't War of the Worlds at all. It is at the very beginning, but after that it feels like they licensed the title and little more. I had high hopes from the cast (on both sides of the Channel) but ended up dissatisfied.
It was an entertaining couple of hours. It did remind me of long ago when I watched Chinese soap operas with friends. People were flying through the air and running up walls. Those soap operas were all in Mandarin, which I don't understand at all, but my friend and I would make up our own dialogue to go with them. Many times, her husband, who was raised speaking Mandarin would look at us and say, "That's exactly what they're saying!" Body language speaks volumes, I guess!
Mulan's mother looked familiar, then I realized she played Keiko O'Brien in the Star Trek series!
So, back to "Mulan", it's not worth paying $30 for unless you can split it between several people! But, I'm glad we could watch it. It's a good story.
A little late, but have you been to Ojai? It is a lovely artsy-fartsy town in Ventura County, CA. LOTS of unrepentant hippie types there.
Minor correction, but it's Thunderball, with no "s".
I think the title was taken from the Ian Fleming novel, without including whatever aspect of the book that made the name relevant.
Apart from that, all I remember about the film is the opening, where some henchman gets executed in his chair for trying rip off the Evil Mastermind. I'm wondering to what extent the stuff you describe as demerits to the movie are just typical features of Bond in general. The "parade of female type persons in swimsuits" certainly does ring a bell"!
POSSIBLE SPOILERS VIA ALLUSION
Horror-comedy that manages to strike a pretty decent balance between the two genres, though somewhat tilted toward the comedy.
You don't have to be a huge fan of the targeted slasher subgenre to enjoy this(I'm not), but it does help to know the conventions, which this script mines extensively, and to fairly good effect. And while not a horror-reference per se, the title alone pretty clearly indicates the main plot device.
Commendable performances from most of the cast, and it was especially cool to see Vince Vaughn back in my range of cinematic vision(don't think I had seen him in anything for a while). Granted, it's hard to top Rob Schneider's rendition of the same schtick in The Hot Chick, but taken on its own terms, Vaughn's effort is carried off pretty well.
One minor complaint...
The opening contains a racist joke made by one of the characters. Obviously, it's meant to reflect the viewpoint of the character, not the screenwriters, but given that this character is meant to be viewed overall as one of the good-guys, I don't think the script did good enough job of rebutting his attitudes.
It was a lot of fun, though I am slightly worried now about creepy scarab beetles running around under my skin....
I think perhaps you mean Brendan Fraser?
🤣 at the thought of Brendan Foster acting in the Mummy.
BROAD SPOILERS
Another horror, this one more seriously-toned than Freaky. Basically, a garden-variety gothic featuring the family dynamics of Night Mother, overlaid onto the rough plot outline of Whatever Happened To Baby Jane?
The director, Aneesh Chaganty, previously helmed Searching, which I though scored a bit better in the originality department. Run, for the most part, depends for both its novelty and its shock on audiences being newcomers to the family-gothic thingamabob. You can pretty much see where everything is going from the first "shocking" plot turn that hits the screen, about ten minutes in.
And two perhaps idiosyncratic observations on my part...
1. This would have to be the most asexually themed messed-up-family gothic thriller since, well, forever. There isn't even a hint of the characters having libidinal or even romantic impulses, or anxiety about thereof. That aspect being an almost universal part of the genre.
2. Kudos to the screenwriter for making the psycho-mother a more educated and accomplished woman than is normal for this sort of thing(compare, say, the religious fruitcake in Carrie or the helpless woman-child in Night Mother). I'm not sure if this was a conscious departure from genre-convention, but it does have an inteteresting effect on our emotional response to the character.
If you like the first film, it's worth seeing the sequel (and then pretending the third film doesn't exist.