Leaderboard

There are some things money can’t buy. For everything else, there’s money.

I now work with one British guy and am very close friends with a few more that live here in Japan. I was explaining this movie to them, none of them had heard of it, but most thought it sounded like a ploy to get a typical pub going musical avoiding type of gentlemen interested in musicals.

But my point is that the 70s movies it's trying to emulate DID flesh out the supporting characters. Taxi Driver plays with distorted reality too, but not at the expense of the other characters. I still have a strong sense of who they are in a way I don't in Joker. I would argue that having the "snap" come so early actually does hurt the pacing. If it's a slow-burn approach then actually do that and don't get nervous and feel like you have to get to the "money shot" right away. If it's well-made enough then the audience will come along -- again, see Taxi Driver.

"Beggars can't be choosers!" yelled the bum outside the Hooters

Yeah, we may as well talk about the Coppola/Scorsese comments about superhero movies. I think they're kind of right and kind of wrong. They're right that there is a problem and that Marvel movies are the most obvious example of it, but I think they're wrong in diagnosing the problem (or at least how they phrased it, which may have something to do with the kinds of questions they were asked in interviews). The superhero genre itself is not the problem. It's a genre like any other, including those Coppola and Scorsese themselves have worked in, and even more so those that their contemporaries like Spielberg and Lucas worked in. Some of the movies are good and some are bad. People will try to replicate the hits, to varying degrees of success. That's no different than westerns or musicals or gangster movies or sci-fi or horror or anything else. I think to say the genre itself is the problem and somehow "not cinema" is a reductive argument that hurts dialogue about the art form. The problem is more about franchising, and franchises being almost the only thing studios want to pay for these days. Franchising is nothing new either, of course, but the degree to which it dominates has certainly changed in the last couple of decades. https://www.filmsite.org/boxoffice2.html If you look at the top hits from 2000 onward they tend to be dominated by franchise entries, in a way that they were not in the previous decades (more of a mix of original stuff and sequels). That is a genuine concern about the health of the art form, if original work can no longer break through and we're just recycling the same material for higher profits. Marvel isn't even necessarily the worst example of this, just the most visible. I would hope that someone like Scorsese would probably acknowledge this if you could have a real back-and-forth dialogue about it, because his history of supporting a wide variety of cinema would not suggest a person with a reductive viewpoint about what great art can be.

I’m so thirsty for more Mitra

Again—following up what I said previously—I had no real expectations for this movie, so I didn’t “envision” anything for it. The movie developed the potential for a half-brother subplot all on its own and it really got me excited because I felt like the film truly could subvert the Batman story and build into an even more interesting direction (and at this point in the movie, I was still on-board) by painting Arthur Wayne as corrupt. Nothing about my expectations for this subplot were “calculated” because I truly did not expect the film to go there. The fact that it didn’t end up going there—after a fair amount of build-up— felt like the filmmakers were ultimately afraid of fucking with the brand and so the movie doesn’t really subvert anything.

Wow. What an episode. I'm totally "team Fred" in the sense that I think Jason and June have interpreted the intent of the film correctly. Fred is clearly a representation of the childish personality that Elizabeth (Phoebe Cates) was forced to repress. For most of us, as we grow into adults we learn how to restrain our childish emotions and impulses. But, that is not the progression allowed for Elizabeth: her mother expects her to behave like an adult before she knows how. As a result. So, instead of integrating these childish parts of ourselves, she literally and figuratively boxes them up. As an adult, Elizabeth is trapped in a pathological state of self-repression (which is just as "insane" but more acceptable than a total lack of control.) But, trauma strains the psychological walls she built to contain her adolescent impulses and when those walls come down those parts of herself she'd repressed come crashing back into life, as represented by Fred. She fights these impulses and tries to put them back in a box, but ultimately she learns to love and integrate those aspects of her childhood personality into her adult self. Is the movie perfect? Absolutely not. But, June & Jason are spot on about the psychology underpinning it--if not the political message. Jason is surprisingly insightful about childhood psychology. I share his resentment of the way adults view children in this unrealistic state of total innocence. Kids are aware of "adult" things like death, violence, and sex. They may not have an adult understanding of them, but they're aware of and certainly curious about them. That's what Fred is. He doesn't want to hurt Elizabeth and he's not really interested in sex, but he's playing with these concepts as a kid would. The "kiss" at the end was not sexual. It was just a visual way to show that Elizabeth had come to appreciate the feelings and desires she had as a kid. She had learned that being an adult doesn't mean you have to completely repress all "childish" emotions, but it also doesn't mean indulging them without any restraint at all. Listening to the HDTGM episode, I was baffled at why Paul and Casey (and apparently a lot of the audience) couldn't wrap their heads around the idea that Fred and everything he appeared to do was a product of Elizabeth's imagination. Everything we see in the movie, including other peoples' imaginary friends, is merely what Elizabeth imagines.

I was watching Electric Boogaloo: The Wild, Untold Story of Cannon Films (I documentary I highly recommend btw) and I was reminded of this movie. So Porky's was very successful and the brothers that ran Cannon Films had a really successful franchise that was in the vein of Porky's called Lemon Popsicle. Which is a whole bunch of teen boys try to get laid. For the American version they brought the story into the 80's and Los Angeles. The young cast features Steve Antin (aka Troy from the Goonies) Karen Franklin (Better Off Dead) and a really young Kimmy Robertson (Twin Peaks). It's got a lot of the qualities that I think HDTGM is known for. Plus I'm pretty sure there is some nudity as well so Jason will be happy. The soundtrack is full of classics including a U2 song at the worst possible scene. I think this movie is like the unwanted cousin to Fast Times at Ridgemont High.

I watched "Electric Boogaloo: The Wild Untold Story Of Cannon Films" (which is a documentary of every film that HDTGM should do), and this was in it, being a shot-for-shot remake of the Isreali "Lemon Popcicle" movie... Measuring scene and all...

This movie was Amazing simply amazing. i give it 5 stars, it was that good. I needed this movie last night. because I was having a bad day and this movie give me a smile on my face and made me laugh, i enjoyed it. it's a fun movie. Baby likes his milk, as soon as baby gets his milk I knew i was going to like this movie. You see, Babys got a good little racket going on for him self, Good for baby. I didn't know if a breast feeding scene was going to even happen in this movie but it got delivered. Ohh and baby's birthday party was a blast. I love the dope smoker who answers the door and hits on woman with the line. "You've got nice skin!" That was an ace move I was thinking. nothing creepy about that. Welcome to the party, Come on in!. nothing bad going to happen to you sweet heart. I love the adult size crib, that was amazing too. Seeing that Paul and June just had a kid, it would be fun to see them do baby themed movie's. as a film it's self it's really good fun to watch and I would love to hear the reactions of the hosts of HDTGM. But don't wait around for them to review this movie . go watch it now on Youtube, it's worth your time.

I remember when we used to come here just to laugh at dumb movies.

You know what bugs me? People who who insist on taking a word that is perceived to be bad and making it the "first letter"-word. That alone is passive aggressive. Like Louis C.K has brought up on stage, you abbreviate but we're all still thinking it. Can't we discuss the word and use the word we're discussing? Midget was once the actual term used to describe severely small people who had regular proportioned bodies. Like a hobbit. P.T. Barnum used the term for people living with Dwarfism and obviously was degrading those people as well. The rest of society didn't get the memo and most of us don't know when to use which term. Do you want dwarf? Do you want "little person"? How about I ignore it all together and don't call you anything. Except for when I'm watching a movie wherein actors living with dwarfism (or kneeling down and pretending to) are referring TO EACH OTHER as all three! So cut everyone some slack. Nobody wants to hurt anyone's feelings here. You should all be just as equally offended that this god damned movie exists. I have a son with autism and if there was a Tiptoes movie about living with Aspergers I'd be upset. Unless I wrote it. I should write that.