AlmostAGhost

NOthing was more antagonistic in anything I said than you going "But if you tell me it’s significantly different, then I’ll just take your word for it." There's no other way to read that. You started with "Taking the conversation back to the film itself..." and I apologize for following the conversation. Since when did I imply ANYWHERE that you were an idiot? Do not put those words in my mouth. If this is how discussions are taken on this board, I'm out.

And all I was doing was offering the counter-opinion to analogizing it to just another noir with nothing new to say. Is that not what we do here? I was hashing out the definition of noir and the quality of the film, I thought. What else is this forum for? I liked the movie and didn't want the only opinion on here to be "it's like Daredevil". How is this any different from any other thread? Apathy? OK, that was not coming across in your post either. I'd love to know if anyone here reads you as even remotely apathetic.

Uh putting the words "cinematographic film" in there doesn't tell anyone anything. What does that phrase mean to you? It definition just says 'marked by pessimism, fatalism, and menace.' It totally ignores and dismisses all the stuff you conveniently want to ignore and dismiss: the shadows, angles, voiceovers, black & white, but that's the cinematic language that needs to be included, as I think Chinatown subverts it to go somewhere new. Don't be rude. I'm not gonna take your word for it being a lame Daredevil movie either.

I could go deeper? There's a vast difference in showing one man being tempted by crime, and say, showing a whole corrupt society hidden in plain sight. To me, the main point is that society is fucked up; not one man being corrupt(ed). That's a huge difference to me, that classic noirs don't usually do. (I'm sure someone will 'well actually' that with some example, but in general.) By that vague definition you found though, almost anything could be noir (i'd argue Treasure of the Sierra Madre fits it). It totally ignores the cinematic conventions of a typical noir. We're talking about cinema. You have to include some cinema in the definition; and that is what Chinatown subverts and establishes its own self. What is the similarity here between this and Double Indemnity? There's very little besides the time period and a story centered on crime. I just don't see how it's the same key. Maybe you don't find it interesting, but it's not that similar. I would say it is Hendrix's "All Along The Watchtower", easy. Dylan's original is the best, but the cover goes places the original never imagined.

Chinatown totally deserves to be on the list, and it would wild for it to not be on a list of top-100. Maybe it doesn't break new ground, and no offense, but calling all the noirs the 'same dish' seems to be missing a lot about Chinatown, imo. I don't see it as the same as those other noir at all, and I'm not even sure it is one either. Regardless, I gather it may have started as one, but it dropped a lot of the main characteristics (voiceover, black & white, etc.) and it became its own individual film. That's why the filmmaking is impressive, imo; all those decisions that turned it into a masterpiece. (Not to mention the writing and acting which are all perfect too.) I think because of this, it's an even bleaker commentary on humanity than even the darkest noirs. Everyone liked the bleakness of man revealed in Sierra Madre; why not here? It's easy to distance yourself from Double Indemnity and be like, I wouldn't fall for this, it's just a character, etc. Here, you can't avoid it. *shudders* I loved the film before I listened to the pod, and interestingly, hearing Amy & Paul talk about it - even though they didn't love it, it seems - made me like it more! They did a great job bringing up all the details and layers I hadn't considered in first watch -- similarly to what they did that increased my enjoyment of All About Eve.

He stole that lyric from an Elvis song, but yea if I'm not being hypocrite here, maybe my test needs some reworking. Don't want to defend Lennon, he's not my favorite at all. But it does lead to a wider question though - do artists get to create characters? Is everything they write supposed to be heard or seen as autobiography? What if like George Harrison wrote a "Run For Your Life"? Can someone write a song about angry jealousy, or is it just verboten?

Yea, everyone can and should make their own threshold of tolerance for these things. But my line is generally: I can keep things separate for the most part, but I think about whether I'm participating in their perversion. For instance, Miles Davis and John Lennon don't actually write songs about domestic abuse, so it feels safer to enjoy their art -- their real and artist personas feel more separate, and their art can live on its own. R. Kelly, though, writes "Age Ain't Nothing But A Number." It's right there, and you can't avoid it and it's gross. There's a lot of examples now, and I guess basically I take it on a case-by-case basis. I definitely understand though if people can't listen to like Michael Jackson or watch Roman Polanski anymore though. (And I definitely agree, re: new media from anyone like this.) Right this is true, but I take it as the growing pains of a new cultural action, basically. We should get more nuanced. We may wrongly sweep some tolerable actions into the intolerable category, but maybe that's what has to happen here at the start of this valid movement. As you say it's not perfect, but I think it could and will move towards being more perfect in time. (Nothing's ever totally perfect.)

I already am! https://letterboxd.com/almostaghost/list/bond-james-bond-007/ I have two Bond films left in my ordered rewatch

Yea the worst Bond movie! (I know a few of you disagree.) I finally watched this last night/this morning, and I don't even know. It's just SO weird and unique, I can't even get my head around it. I enjoyed it though, probably because of that. If it was this story but trying to shock or be more frightening instead of just slightly askew, I wouldn't have enjoyed it half as much. I definitely do not consider it a horror film, but in looking up some things I see that "folk horror" is a thing and I am curious to see more of this. I'm not a horror fan but these definitely would be more my bag. Here's the definition: Folk horror films are typically Horror movies that focus on the fear of pagan folklore by a mostly orthodox Christian society. The heathen traditions are presented as enticing and liberating, in contrast to the puritanism of mainstream religion, but at the same time they degenerate into increasingly darker rituals, involving sacrifices to unspeakable entities, black magic and sexual obscenities. This brand of movies takes cues from other horror genres but is fundamentally different. Unlike Supernatural Horror films, folk horror movies very rarely feature actual paranormal events, in order to focus more on the actions of the people rather than on uncanny apparitions. The evil is usually entirely human and the horror is carried out by ordinary members of the society. The so-called "unholy trinity" of folk horror films are Witchfinder General (1968), The Blood on Satan's Claw (1971), and The Wicker Man (1973), the latter often cited as the most popular one.

Still chuckling over the Nikkis, they were a riot. Hope they come back sometime

4/25 - Chinatown 5/2 - Tootsie this feels like a really weird back-to-back to me, but not sure why lol

The one when the baby caresses Nikki Reed's face makes me laugh so hard

4/25 - Chinatown (haven't seen a post or comment yet with more future eps; but this is in this week's description. hopefully in the morning we'll get a bigger update.)

we're not talking enough about the creepy CGI baby apparently they considered an animatronic doll but it was even creepier http://entertainment.time.com/2013/11/05/this-terrifying-animatronic-baby-freaked-out-the-cast-and-crew-of-twilight/

Yea, I don't think the marriage is totally unrealistic or anything, it just changes the tone for me. Also it's possible if the whole thing was just better written, the marriage would have felt absolutely RIGHT. But yea I'm not sure what other alternate arc would satisfy there, because I guess marriage was the natural next step after the first two books.

You got anecdotal evidence about what anecdotal evidence is, haha! But yea, hearing something secondhand could be anecdotal, sure. But the opposite of anecdotal isn't 'my own experience' it's 'verifiable provable evidence.' That's why anecdotal is something to try to avoid. (I read about this stuff a lot, sorry.) Anyway I'm a little lost on the discussion here because I've been in and out today, so sorry if this is repetitive of earlier posts by others. But I did like the first two movies a lot because I thought the 'teen romance' side of Twilight was pretty good. Like, yes, early romance will be with the wrong guy, or there's a jerky 'friend' who wants you, or even just on a basic level -- young readers like Bella having to decide between two guys. (Even if they're both awful.) It's wish fulfillment. My take on liking that side of the romance was less to do with it being some perfect 'true love' and the fact that young 'love' is usually problematic, and therefore it all felt sort of real to me. I really did get sucked into the romance side of the story. Then when they get married and are parents, that changes the whole feel of the later books for me and I didn't enjoy them nearly as much.

Not to nitpick... but I need to point out that that's exactly what anecdotal evidence is - basing it on what you personally experience over actual research. But I will add, anecdotal can be valid as a form of interpretation, as it is here... it's not like you're saying 'well my cancer went away because I drank vinegar'.

Maybe this movie is just a response to Nihilist Arby's, since even if you die after roast beef, you can actually come back as your daughter

Please tell us some!

Geez you really truly believe it's real racism to note that Van Halen makes white people music? Racism and sexism are about power imbalances; we fight it when a majority targets hatred on a minority. That's not even remotely the same thing as pointing out white people like Van Halen. It's not even the same thing for a woman to dislike the state of the patriarchy. See how it works, and how Nicole isn't it? Probably not, because you're an idiot. All she did was mention race and you flipped your damn lid. White people are such snowflakes. Get over yourself. Haha "boldly and directly disparage everyone in the room" haha so ridiculous. I don't believe it to be possible that you're even remotely a fan of Conan O'Brien. Go away.

I've been meaning to watch this for a bit! Cool. I watched the Cage one for HDTGM but never the original. Is it a musical?

I think more likely they would have used that free time to go to the bone zone

Exactly our reaction when we were watching it as a group on Friday