We are Brilliant!
Find Me On:
This is like WMOAT: Date Movie edition. I suspect this may lead to the addition of new rules in the next round.
My 13 yr old nephew chose this film for our viewing over the holidays last year. I do not know what he was expecting, but he spent much of the movie squirming in his seat with bursts of irritation and indignation about the ‘romance.’ Maybe he was expecting elf porn.
its true. hilarious and possibly ominous.
I really liked Funny Games and Funny Games Redux. They were satisfying and thought provoking. However, I do take some issue with Haneke focusing his admonishment on American audiences. Violence, particularly gratuitous violence exacted for the viewer that Funny Games finds so corrosive, is not constrained to American film. I think the argument that American consumers are somehow less aware or contemplative of film violence seems really reductive. Why are American audiences more desensitized to violence than British, Korean, or Swedish audiences?
The torture porn subgenre that seems to be invoked as the target of Haneke’s ire did not yet exist when he made the film (Funny Games was released in 1997; Saw in 2004). It is more like he is taking issue with our desire to watch people under duress–that we are lustful for watching people at the worst moments and complicit in creating those horrible moments. So, you know, we should be ashamed of Die Hard.
I am not certain I agree with him, but I certainly disagree that this is an American convention (or even more common in American entertainment.) I think, in that way, Irreversible seems a more effective indictment of our thirst for violence and vengeance. Noe is not afraid to show audiences what they ‘want’ to see (and much, much more). So, you are horrified by the end, the same way we are horrified by the close of Funny Games, but where Haneke shows us senseless violence so we will condemn ourselves for liking violence, Noe shows us violence that has some justification- and we are horrified by the both the violence and the justification. Plus, you have these haunting visuals-not so much with the offscreen violence. yikes. I can watch Funny Games again; it becomes academic. I could not (and will not) watch Irreversible again. nope.
That this seemed like a good idea to anyone is why meaningful (successful) reform will fail. Being right is a necessary but not sufficient condition to win this debate. You have to.. debate about it.
Also, Public Option = Heather Graham seems problematic as Heather Graham = Kind of an Idiot. At least, she has made a semi-lucrative career playing a variety of different idiot archetypes. I certainly don’t think Heather Graham is a good idea.
Not to be professor showtime or anything, but don’t they normally do this? I know they offered the first episode of that Tara show and Nurse Jackie. Still, Dexter looks great.
He is going to give her the go-around her until one day he walks her to the lobby, unclips her leash, and never speaks of her again. R.I.P. Chauncey.
Irreversible may be the counter to your argument, but I have trouble recommending that film because, you know, yikes. Still: suspense about not seeing them hurt (or further hurt) is absent.
wasn’t driven by career and greed? tell that to Jimmy Carter.
The health care bills are small variations on a shit sandwich, so, you know, reversion to the status quo shit sandwich may not be bad. But, there are far better things to yell at Barney Frank about than this. He is the Chairman of Financial Services, douchbags. Dress him down for the policies he has been integral to pushing through (tarp, anyone?). Yelling at him about health care seems pretty pointless.
A movie that works for the few hours and then you go on with your evening may suffer under greater scrutiny; scrutiny required when writing about it or recounting the story for others. Not sure this is intellectualizing versus some emotional response, which seems a little arbitrary and does marginalize the considered response as somehow less genuine and visceral.
The film may actually suffer more emotionally after consideration because the emotional arc of the film fails (for some), while the dick jokes are presumably still funny. Just not enough to compensate for the dissatisfaction with the story/perspective of the film.
maybe you could give me enough champagne to do this in a church with your Aunt Doris watching, but no amount of booze could get me to do this on the Today Show. Not even the intoxication of YouTube fame. That’s somebody’s Dad.
Atleast she doesn’t act like she is ‘nice.’ I think at best, she might try to downplay all her shit talk as being ‘outspoken.’ This is preferable to the treacly patronizing tone of most Hollywood actresses. Ofcourse, they should all just shut up and look pretty.
I don’t know why people engage in trying to ‘reason’ through time travel hijinks in film and television. It is time travel: suspend your disbelief. Not arguing this redeems the film, but this isnt physicistgum.
I think the choices about what to omit seem curious–why remove the battle at the end? Why not explain Snape’s storyline? Why not explain the Gaunts and all that muggle/half-blood (racism) theme? This is what the books are about. And, they know the ending now– the filmmakers know what happens next.
They have stripped alot of the mounting fear (and heroics) in favor of the important lesson(?) of the book (teenage boys choose the path of least resistance) and old people never explain anything. It seems like this is gonna present problems in the last two–and not just of the “who the f is this character and why should I care they died?” variety. e.g. why is the waiter gonna be the hero? Are we even gonna recognize that kid at this point?
it was pretty though.
Sorry, book adaptations are the worst.
The American version has Tim Roth, Naomi Watts and Michael Pitt in it. Same writer/director of the Austrian version. It is also shit-scary. But there has been a lot of torture porn in the intervening years.
That movie and Irreversible both had me sleeping with the lights on. People are evil.
I respectfully disagree: proposing at Disney World = Not Fine. Odd. The only POSSIBLE redemption may be the prospect of getting a free wedding or something from Disney. These hard economic times call for creativity. Though I fear the proliferation of these grotesque proposals if Disney kicks in the cash.
This manages to make Disney World creepier. Well Done.
It seemed like a good trashy snarkfest until this paragraph where he starts getting personal: “There are many great-looking babes in the film, who are made up to a flawless perfection and look just like real women, if you are a junior fanboy whose experience of the gender is limited to lad magazines.”
What is wrong with Transformers 2 is wrong with America.
I grade Meghan McCain on a curve — while she is a bit dim, she does not seem hopelessly disturbed or catatonic. I feel like that is all I can hope for from conservatives rights now.
Bill Maher is a douchebag on any metric, though.
While I think Margot at the Wedding is the worst, and the Royal Tennenbaums is great, they are both filled with insufferable assholes. However, the the assholes in Margot at the wedding are terribly pedestrian. The lesson of these films is simple: if you are going to be an asshole, you better be an entertaining one.
I dont know. I will believe Americans will watch any Vampire-related fare when “Let the Right One In” becomes a sensation. When Americans are watching vampires in Swedish we will know… the vampires have won. Until then, we are simply provincial vampiphiles.
Seriously, though. True Blood is bad.
Sign that show has failed to capture my interest: when I think “No way that blood is going to come out of Grandma’s white bedspread” during a rather elaborate love scene.
Glad I am not alone.