Wooley Watches Movies, Makes Thread

Discuss anything you want.
Post Reply
User avatar
Wooley
Posts: 2368
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2017 2:25 am

Re: Wooley Watches Movies, Makes Thread

Post by Wooley » Wed Apr 03, 2019 4:00 am

crumbsroom wrote:
I'm obviously no shirking violet to the most obscene of obscene films. And for me it's not a question about if the violence is justified, or paid back. I am entirely fine with films that trade in completely unjustified exploitation. If that is the world view of the filmmaker, whether it be straight nihilism or a cheap way to make a mark, I can accept it. Sometimes enthusiastically. I have some absolutely shameful favorite movies. But every once and awhile a specific scene just really rubs me the wrong way. This one, the pissing scene in Last House, probably no more than a handful of others. I just found myself really resenting the movie for bringing me to the place it was bringing me, and I can't even specify any particular reason why one scene will aggravate me, while another I will just chalk up to a director trying to rub its audiences nose in the filth. It's possible there isn't even a distinction, just maybe I watched those scenes on a day when I wasn't up for such transgressions.
I can absolutely understand that.
I've been watching a string of these movies since September and almost all of them contain at least one transgressive scene that can potentially throw viewers out of the movie. Tthe first on this run for me was Class of 1984 which was just hard to finish, even though I thought they did a great job on the budget, after
the gang-rape of the main character's wife in their home
. That was just hard for me to take and still watch the rest of the movie. But, for better or for worse, probably worse, I have come to take these as par for the course in this genre and have pressed on through the stripper doused in gasoline and burned alive in-frame, the pregnant bride thrown off an overpass, the teenage prostitute repeatedly branded by the sexual-deviant politician, etc., which "justifies" the gang-leader hung by the neck on a chain in the school gymnasium, the man slowly lowered into a meat-grinder, the man flame-throwered at point-blank range, or the villain just rammed between a car and a concrete wall over and over again until he just coughs up blood and stops. It's a fucked up sub-genre, and I don't know what it says about me that I am drawn to it, or especially what it says that these are all re-watches from when I was a teenager.
User avatar
Wooley
Posts: 2368
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2017 2:25 am

Re: Wooley Watches Movies, Makes Thread

Post by Wooley » Tue May 14, 2019 12:18 am

Image
I went into this (a couple months ago) with such high expectations that I actually had to re-lower them because it was absurd. How good could an animated Spider-Man movie really be? I mean, really, how does one silly little thing like this get this much adulation? It's just over the top.
Go figure.
It's every bit as good as anyone told me. It's probably a little better because you really can't quite prepare people for it, they just have to see it. Like me. Is it instantly the best animated Super-hero movie I've ever seen? Probably. I'm really struggling to think what was better. It was certainly better than any Marvel animated movie I've seen. I'm pretty sure it was better than all the DC ones, including Mask Of The Phantasm.
Image
Which pretty much puts it up against The Incredibles. I'll let everybody call that one for themselves.
But, truly, this movie surprised me in ways I didn't know I could be surprised (suprise!) and left me with a massive shit-eating grin when it was all over. As Marvel has become so famous for doing now, they tried things no one tries and no one thinks they would even try and it just does them, without blinking, and it pays off. Again.
I'm going to avoid talking any plot in case there is anyone who hasn't seen it, but it certainly foreshadows what we've seen on the big screen (in feature films and trailers) since it came out and makes one wonder how far Marvel will go in their Cinematic Universe.
User avatar
Popcorn Reviews
Posts: 1482
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2017 7:22 pm
Location: Michigan

Re: Wooley Watches Movies, Makes Thread

Post by Popcorn Reviews » Tue May 14, 2019 12:25 am

Good to see this thread is back again. I'm looking forward to reading your future write ups. As for Spiderverse, I need to revisit it. A couple of my friends saw it with me, but the version we saw was pretty crappy as it consisted of a guy pointing his camera at a movie screen. Ugh. I want to give it a fair chance.
User avatar
Slentert
Posts: 905
Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2017 8:23 am
Location: Belgium
Contact:

Re: Wooley Watches Movies, Makes Thread

Post by Slentert » Tue May 14, 2019 8:17 am

Wooley wrote:
Tue May 14, 2019 12:18 am
Image
I went into this (a couple months ago) with such high expectations that I actually had to re-lower them because it was absurd. How good could an animated Spider-Man movie really be? I mean, really, how does one silly little thing like this get this much adulation? It's just over the top.
Go figure.
It's every bit as good as anyone told me. It's probably a little better because you really can't quite prepare people for it, they just have to see it. Like me. Is it instantly the best animated Super-hero movie I've ever seen? Probably. I'm really struggling to think what was better. It was certainly better than any Marvel animated movie I've seen. I'm pretty sure it was better than all the DC ones, including Mask Of The Phantasm.
Image
Which pretty much puts it up against The Incredibles. I'll let everybody call that one for themselves.
But, truly, this movie surprised me in ways I didn't know I could be surprised (suprise!) and left me with a massive shit-eating grin when it was all over. As Marvel has become so famous for doing now, they tried things no one tries and no one thinks they would even try and it just does them, without blinking, and it pays off. Again.
I'm going to avoid talking any plot in case there is anyone who hasn't seen it, but it certainly foreshadows what we've seen on the big screen (in feature films and trailers) since it came out and makes one wonder how far Marvel will go in their Cinematic Universe.
I love this movie. The more I think of it, the more I'm certain that it is one of the best superhero movies ever.
Also, the MCU has nothing to do with it, for once Sony did the right thing.
User avatar
Slentert
Posts: 905
Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2017 8:23 am
Location: Belgium
Contact:

Re: Wooley Watches Movies, Makes Thread

Post by Slentert » Tue May 14, 2019 8:19 am

I was really fed up with my comic book friends at the time of its release, since they didn't want to go see it "cause it is animated"...
They go see every superhero movie under the sun, even when it is widely trashed like Venom, but somehow these comic book fans don't want to see something because it is "drawn". How ironic.
User avatar
Wooley
Posts: 2368
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2017 2:25 am

Re: Wooley Watches Movies, Makes Thread

Post by Wooley » Tue May 14, 2019 10:58 am

Slentert wrote:
Tue May 14, 2019 8:17 am
Also, the MCU has nothing to do with it, for once Sony did the right thing.
I didn't mean that they did, but I meant, especially in light of revelations in the Far From Home trailer, after the events of Endgame, and considering their willingness to put a raccoon with a machine-gun in a talking tree, this movie perhaps opens the door for Feige and company to stretch things further than they ever have.
User avatar
Wooley
Posts: 2368
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2017 2:25 am

Re: Wooley Watches Movies, Makes Thread

Post by Wooley » Tue May 14, 2019 11:00 am

Slentert wrote:
Tue May 14, 2019 8:19 am
I was really fed up with my comic book friends at the time of its release, since they didn't want to go see it "cause it is animated"...
They go see every superhero movie under the sun, even when it is widely trashed like Venom, but somehow these comic book fans don't want to see something because it is "drawn". How ironic.
I enjoy the ironies.
User avatar
Jinnistan
Posts: 2649
Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2015 5:47 pm

Re: Wooley Watches Movies, Makes Thread

Post by Jinnistan » Thu May 16, 2019 11:51 pm

I eagerly await the Spider-Ham standalone film.
User avatar
Wooley
Posts: 2368
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2017 2:25 am

Re: Wooley Watches Movies, Makes Thread

Post by Wooley » Tue May 21, 2019 3:20 pm

Image
A film that appears on many Top 100 A-T lists, it's taken me forever to get around to it and it is certainly a very good movie.
Here we have a fairly early (1952) anti-Western a film that of course contains the righteousness and virtue of the Western Hero and the simple dichotomy of the good versus the bad, but it is subverted throughout by moral ambiguity from every direction.
The story concerns a marshal (Gary Cooper) who is retiring to get married and settle down with a beautiful young Amish bride (Grace Kelly). On the day of their wedding he is feted by the town as a hero and the pillar of the community, loved by all. But when a telegraph comes through that an old nemesis of his, a deadly gunslinger, has been released from jail and is on his way to the town with a gang of gunman to kill the marshal for sending them to jail, a different tune begins to be sung. Insisting that he face the gunmen personally he alienates his young bride whose religion abhors violence and she abandons him. Assuming that the town will back him and together they will easily handle the gang, the marshal begins recruiting only to learn that the town is full of cowardice, agendas, and lies, even that he is resented by many in the town in which he thought he was beloved, who think they are less prosperous under his law and order than they were under the chaos when the gunmen ran the town. This culminates in a surprising town meeting in the church as the marshal learns that he might be the only person of real virtue in the whole town.
Meanwhile, as desperation mounts and he realizes that he will likely be dying alone in the street, the clock is always ticking, ticking toward High Noon when the gunmen's train will arrive.
The film is very effectively built and succeeds both with its narrative execution and its subversion of the genre (for the time). Much has been made of the innovative cinematography by Floyd Crosby, which caused producers to nearly fire him mid-shoot.
Image
Notably, the recurring song, written for the film, "Do Not Forsake Me, Oh My Darling" is often cited as the progenitor of theme songs to films. The film was nominated for seven Academy Awards, including Best Picture. Gary Cooper won Best Actor for the role of Will Kane, the marshal, a role which had been turned down by John Wayne, Gregory Peck, Marlon Brando, Montgomery Clift, and Charlton Heston. Wayne, an aggressive supporter of blacklisting in Hollywood, who had turned down the role because of the obvious anti-blacklisting overtones of the film, accepted the Oscar on Cooper's behalf, disingenuously quipping that he was going to go talk to his agents about why HE hadn't played Will Kane.
Wayne, an obvious asshole, later said he considered High Noon "the most un-American thing I've ever seen in my whole life", making Rio Bravo in response to the film. What a dick.
Finally, one cannot talk about High Noon without mentioning that the film's run-time is exactly the story's run-time, frequently pointed out by shots of clocks around town making it clear that we are seeing the story unfold in real time, quite an innovation for the time.
In summation, despite Roger Ebert's assertion that the film is extremely overrated, I found that this was yet another Classic that yielded the desired result when I finally brought myself to see it and that it has helped to continue opening the door for me to watch these films more readily.
User avatar
Captain Terror
Posts: 1606
Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2017 12:06 pm
Location: New Orleans, LA

Re: Wooley Watches Movies, Makes Thread

Post by Captain Terror » Tue May 21, 2019 8:27 pm

I just got around to High Noon in the past few years also, and thought it was great. Felt very "modern".
I recognize Floyd Crosby's name from all of Corman's Poe movies, didn't realize he did this one. Cool. What's the story about him almost being fired?
User avatar
Wooley
Posts: 2368
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2017 2:25 am

Re: Wooley Watches Movies, Makes Thread

Post by Wooley » Wed May 22, 2019 1:05 am

Captain Terror wrote:
Tue May 21, 2019 8:27 pm
I just got around to High Noon in the past few years also, and thought it was great. Felt very "modern".
I recognize Floyd Crosby's name from all of Corman's Poe movies, didn't realize he did this one. Cool. What's the story about him almost being fired?
I can't remember where exactly I read it, I read a buncha stuff about the movie after, but apparently it had to do with the lighting he was filming with, they actually accused him of being incompetent and were gonna replace him but he turned out to be right in the end.

Oh wait, here it is (from Criterion):
"The photography of High Noon has also been controversial, and its cinematographer, Floyd Crosby, was almost fired for what his bosses saw as 'incompetent work'. Actually, Crosby and Fred Zinnemann had carefully studied the look of Matthew Brady’s famous Civil War still photographs, with their lack of filtering and high contrast between light and dark, and had sought to achieve a similar look on film. Today, High Noon is studied in film classes as an example of the power of black-and-white photography."
User avatar
Captain Terror
Posts: 1606
Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2017 12:06 pm
Location: New Orleans, LA

Re: Wooley Watches Movies, Makes Thread

Post by Captain Terror » Wed May 22, 2019 2:27 pm

Wooley wrote:
Wed May 22, 2019 1:05 am
I can't remember where exactly I read it, I read a buncha stuff about the movie after, but apparently it had to do with the lighting he was filming with, they actually accused him of being incompetent and were gonna replace him but he turned out to be right in the end.

Oh wait, here it is (from Criterion):
"The photography of High Noon has also been controversial, and its cinematographer, Floyd Crosby, was almost fired for what his bosses saw as 'incompetent work'. Actually, Crosby and Fred Zinnemann had carefully studied the look of Matthew Brady’s famous Civil War still photographs, with their lack of filtering and high contrast between light and dark, and had sought to achieve a similar look on film. Today, High Noon is studied in film classes as an example of the power of black-and-white photography."
heh...Studio Execs: Ruining films since 1920.
User avatar
Wooley
Posts: 2368
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2017 2:25 am

Re: Wooley Watches Movies, Makes Thread

Post by Wooley » Wed May 22, 2019 6:16 pm

Captain Terror wrote:
Wed May 22, 2019 2:27 pm
heh...Studio Execs: Ruining films since 1920.
No shit.
User avatar
Wooley
Posts: 2368
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2017 2:25 am

Re: Wooley Watches Movies, Makes Thread

Post by Wooley » Mon Jun 03, 2019 12:51 am

Image
Oh.
My.
God.
Every time I think the DCEU can't possibly make another historically atrocious film... that they have to - even accidentally - make something that isn't complete dogshit on the level of Ultraviolet but without the excuse of being a low-budget attempt at sci-fi... they prove that it doesn't matter who they put in charge, it doesn't matter who they cast, and it doesn't matter what they spend, there's just something in the fucking WATER at DC/WB that turns everything they do into startling examples of how to make $300M look like shit.
I am astonished. How can they just keep making shit this bad? And somehow the critics, and I said this after Wonder Woman, which was MUCH better than this and actually as good as like bottom-third Marvel, have started giving pity-reviews, fooling me into thinking maybe there was some kind of slow recovery occurring.
But getting to the real points, it has the worst script... I mean, worse than my worst fears going in, the story when it's not simplistic beyond imagination, it's derivative beyond imagination (or just utterly lacking imagination: look, we're in Speed Racer, look, we're in National Treasure, look we're in The Bourne Identity, look, we're in Jurassic World...). The dialogue is atrocious when it isn't just minutes at a time of straight exposition. Which is how EVERY "character" in the movie is developed, not by action or story, but by exposition (he's bad, you're good). It's hard to say if it's horribly miscast (which I felt strongly it is, Patrick Wilson) because Laurence Olivier and Meryl Streep could have salvaged nothing from this dialogue; they even manage to make Willem Dafoe and Nicole Kidman look bad. The shocker is the effects. On this budget?! The green-screening is ubiquitous, I mean I don't think a single shot was filmed on a set or a location, and it's among the worst I've seen, almost burning your retinas with it's two-dimensionality. In general, the CGI is just slightly better than Justice League... which was the worst I'd seen in a tentpole film in ages...
I'm kind of at a loss for words. For it to make all the money it did, people had to go back and see it twice. And I can barely stand to watch it once. At least I sat through Justice League to see just how bad it could get, but having already seen it, I don't need to see how much worse this can.
Really, it's hard to believe that one studio, in one genre, has managed to produce the three worst theatrical release films I've seen in the last five years, but Aquaman, almost as good as its tagline, completes the trifecta.
Post Reply