AlmostAGhost

Yea really. I mean I knew the basics of like who Meghan and Harry are, but even in this very very cursory Google searching I've done, everything around the Royal Family is just crazy. I might now watch The Crown haha

Sure, that's the whole point of Rabbit! I'd certainly be interested if it's something I haven't seen and I'm free.

also interestingly this hit the news today https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1094084/meghan-markle-news-samantha-markle-meghan-markles-family-war-channel-5

I was googling this, kind of like Paul said he did -- also immediately after the frog costume scene. Like he said, stuff like that is just a rumor. There's rumors that he spent Halloween with her in Toronto, and it sort of seems sourced but it's always written up in weird gossipy type articles. https://www.thestar.com/entertainment/2016/11/01/prince-harry-meghan-markle-spotted-together-at-toronto-halloween-party.html I think that's the main "reporting" about it. Also there's a quick bio about Markle that may be sourcing a lot of things in this (though it also appears to be a bit gossipy tbh) https://www.thestar.com/entertainment/2016/11/01/prince-harry-meghan-markle-spotted-together-at-toronto-halloween-party.html

Oh OK yea. I was listening but still catching up with eps. I'll watch it on my own!

Wait, isn't Leprechaun: In The Hood the next film in order?

3/7 - Saving Private Ryan 3/14 - A Night At The Opera 3/21 - West Side Story 3/28 - City Lights 4/4 - Snow White And The Seven Dwarves 4/11 - The Treasure Of The Sierra Madre

That'd be convenient

Probably, yea though I feel like this sort of reads things in to get the answer we want here, a bit. But that's fine, it's just a stylistic difference in criticism. I think Paul said he wasn't watching this about 'the times' or anything, just purely about a guy, which maybe that's the best thing for me to try to do. I don't know, I'm not even sure anymore what I'm trying to say. I feel like the more I think about it, the more muddled I believe it to be, even if we can micro-focus on particular scenes and find clarity in those - the sum total is messy. I'll just leave it at that.

Right, and that's why I like the ending the best out of anything. I know why she went with him, to escape. My question still goes back to "why Ben?" because she can run out on that wedding without him too, no? She still does, even momentarily, choose him. I'm sure she'll run out as soon as that bus hits the next stop sign. But I'm not sure if it's enough for me here, that's what I'm struggling with.

Sorry, no not trying to twist. I just don't know what's here otherwise besides these two relationships, which have both been branded as predatory. What else is in this besides that? I'm not talking about being literally called out. I don't think the film does it either. I don't see how the film is like "Mrs. Robinson = horrible." Ben says he's going to marry Elaine out of nowhere, and shortly thereafter he wins her over. She doesn't welcome him to Berkeley, literally runs away from him numerous times, and in the end she still chooses him. Doesn't she say she loves him at some point? The destructive side of these choices is being written in by viewers, and I'm not sure it's really there. I guess this is my ultimate question that I'm missing. What is it saying?

This has been in my head since I watched the movie

Yea, it's not not there for me, but to what level I'm not sure - maybe that's my fault/bias, maybe it's the movie's. How so? I don't get that at all, to be honest. He's not called out for anything. Is it solely the ending being ambiguous? But we seem to have flipped places from Letterboxd. How do you like the movie so much if it's all based around unaddressed sexual predation? What comment is it making? If it's simply "embrace the moments" -- does sexual predation count? What makes this story good? As I start to agree with you guys that it's higher-level predatory than I initially took it, I'm thinking of dropping my rating down even more...

Well as the person who asked 'why Ben?' (along with Amy), it's not because 'only certain people get assaulted' that led me to ask that. I wrote on Letterboxd how I didn't particularly love the film, but I will defend the initial relationship with Mrs. Robinson. I think they're two depressed people, and I can get that they would fall into a connectionless sexual relationship, so I guess I've answered my own question. But it was a bit of a comment on how hollow he is, how bland, rude, mechanical, dry. The character gives us so very little. Anyway, he's using her too! I don't think it's all one direction to be honest. So maybe I'm awful, but I actually see it as a relationship and somewhat less predatory than you guys; that's why I was like 'why choose Ben?' But then on the other hand, we can't not talk about Ben's predatory nature towards Elaine -- a much more problematic situation, though I guess maybe it is all just a vicious cycle. But I agree with Taylor that isn't the film's point either, so I dunno. The whole movie feels like a mess to me because of all this.

I'm not quite so bothered with Mrs. Robinson, I get her anger and I think re: their relationship -- I can see two people in their situations falling into like that. I think there's enough of her story to get her, though like Amy said, still not answer the "why Ben" question. But yea, generally all the negging and stalkery persistence (I mean there's scenes when Elaine literally gets up and RUNS away from Ben) haven't aged well and are a bit skeevy and I had a tough time looking past them. I also was thinking of this in relation to Taxi Driver, but I'm not sure quite how to elucidate those thoughts yet. Maybe I'll give it another watch this weekend

Yea to be perfectly honest, I found it on a torrent site. I'm not paying for this one.

Bumping as a quick reminder since, if I'm not mistaken, they didn't mention it during any of the Oscar side-eps.

For the film! Byrne has said he got the Talking Heads to indulge in his new songs for his movie

I'm still blown away how fast the War On Drugs blew up. Like 8 years ago I saw them in a club with like 300 people. Then in 4 years ago, main stage on Coachella. They are epic though. Lost In The Dream is to me their masterpiece (so far), but all 4 of their albums are pretty great. Oh yea, if it's going to come back without Ritter I won't care at all. I didn't even know that was a possibility.

Her husband/partner is awesome too, one of the best guitarists alive! Bummed Netflix has cancelled Jessica Jones, but hoping it can live on some other way

I almost made my Letterboxd review "another film about buildings and food"

Yea tho apparently Byrne rewrote almost all of his work on it. I think the story is, Tobolowsky and his wife came up with the 'sesquicentennial' idea and a few other things, but basically Byrne rewrote it all, but wanted to leave their names on it so it wasn't just a 'vanity project'.

I also loved this, just the overall feel of it. I did sense maybe it would reward multiple viewings and perhaps my rating will easily climb if I do, being able to make more connections and little ideas and visuals. It's sort of a shame Byrne never wrote any other movies! Also there's SOO many Talking Heads songs that absolutely fit this movie's message / style / imagery.

Maybe I'll watch Valley of the Gwangi instead, that looks awesome