Jump to content
🔒 The Earwolf Forums are closed Read more... ×

AlmostAGhost

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    1382

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    59

Posts posted by AlmostAGhost

  1. Posted

    25 minutes ago, ProfessorRockstar said:

    I just don't see how they were portrayed as unlikeable. They didn't want to let Alex in, but what rational person would in that world? Maybe the second woman talked in a bit of a stuffy way, but her artwork proved she wasn't THAT stuffy.

    I think we're getting stuck on 'unlikable'.  I read Amy's statement as being about how the victims were portrayed as "upper crust" so  I think there was some reading of "sticking it to the man" in some of the violence, which is a form of justification in some ways.  I think that was the issue. 

    Albeit, we get this view through an unreliable narrator's eyes, so I don't think it should be seen as "the point," and it shouldn't be hard to dismiss that justification. 

  4. Posted

    Nah I dunno, I don't think anyone involved thought they were making 'art' here.  I think they knew it was comedy/irony/confrontational/basic, and were not trying to hide it under the guise of anything higher.  So yea in a way... it's punk rock.  (;))

    It's also, like Taxi Driver, only bro-core if you think you have to relate to Alex.  You don't.  You shouldn't.  Good lord, you shouldn't.  Is that how people watch this?  I had the same defense of Taxi Driver.  Who is doing this?  Is it that difficult to realize a movie where you do NOT have to relate to the main character?  If you're watching this and cheering Alex on, wtf.

    And I don't even particularly like Clockwork... but I do think it is more than just shock.

    • Like 1

  6. Posted

    10 minutes ago, Cameron H. said:

    I’m about to listen to the episode and just want to give everyone a heads-up that if anyone refers to this movie as “punk rock” my brain is going to explode.

    RIP

    • Like 2

  8. Posted

    It's weird, I'd probably defend this movie for a lot of what is in it, as a story, art, comedy, multi-layered, ironic, etc. There is a lot there and I thought it led to a great discussion via Amy & Paul - this may be my fave Unspooled ep yet!  

    But like Paul, I've also grown up and maybe away from the film and I don't find it particularly enjoyable anymore.  In the end, I think its points just maybe come off uninteresting to me, feel way too ironic, and perhaps too stylized. 

    I do have a vague, unworked-out theory that perhaps, as Alex is the narrator, that EVERYTHING we see in this movie, is entirely his delusion. Thus, the world consists fully of his world view: misogynist art, phallic symbols, the victims who seemingly deserve it (as Amy noted), the recurring idea that he's better than everyone else.  Or, like, take those two girls in the record store -- did he really pick them up?  Or did he just convince himself he did?  If we Rashomon'ed this movie, how would we see it from other characters' views?

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 1

  11. Posted

    That's a tough question.  Seeing this story from Sophie's point-of-view, though, would probably make it triple the level of depressing, no?  Probably better to view her through someone else's eyes.  While I agree with concerns that maybe Stingo was an odd choice for narrator, I'm not sure it should have been through her.

    36 minutes ago, DannytheWall said:

    Sophie is very un-manic and un-pixie, but she essentially serves as manic pixie dream girl for both Nathan and Stingo.  

    Hmm that's interesting.  What did she show Nathan?  If anything, he was the manic pixie one giving her (and Stingo) some sort of life.  

    I don't know, I just don't think this movie is quite the trope-filled story as everyone else seems to.  

    That said, Amazon Prime is suggesting all these sexy dramas to me "because I watched Sophie's Choice"... so maybe I should have found it more basic and romantic. 🤪

    • Like 2

  13. Posted

    I think the difference for me is the past/present is less a "juxtaposition" and more as a continuation. The later 'romantic' story is just as much a story of her surviving as the Holocaust scenes are.  That is tragic too.  And in the end, she didn't die in a concentration camp, she died trying to survive after the War ended and just could not get through it.  The stakes were still high, life or death.  I get the critique of Stingo, he is indeed syrupy and fairly weak, but I don't think halving the story in to parts A & B is how its meant to be viewed.

    • Like 3

  15. Posted

    21 minutes ago, Cameron H. said:

    Okay, now that we've defended Stingo from being categorized as some kind of angry, misogynistic creep there was another take I kind of had an issue with.

    While I agree fully he isn't the angry incel creep, if we want to go with modern internet terms, I think he qualifies as a bit of a 'white knight', which is a bit of a misogynistic thing itself.  I mean, it's tough, because almost certainly she needed saving. But that's not for Stingo to determine. It's also a fairly youthful, naive attitude, though, so it fits, imo.

    Also further, I just got to Amy describing Sophie and Nathan being so madly in love, but I truly don't think so there either. Nathan built their entire relationship on lies, and she was just trying to feel something different/bury her past. That's not love, and I have a hard time seeing it as romantic in any way, or getting over analysis that leans on that. *shrug*

    • Like 2

  16. Posted

    Yea, I haven't listened to the ep yet... I usually do it on my commute and today is off, so I'll refrain from too much commentary until I do listen. 

    But I agree with Cameron about the 'romance' and categorization of Stingo. I saw some description calling it a 'love triangle / holocaust movie' and I really think that misses the point entirely.  I'd argue Stingo wasn't actually in love with her, and I think Sophie knew this and he probably did too. He was just inexperienced and sucked in and wanted to give her an 'out'.  Maybe there's a little infatuation with 'the girl next door', but still, not love. I don't think 'love' was really in this movie at all, not real romantic love anyway, it was more like, intense relationships just to cover up or distract from feelings/life.

    • Like 5

  20. Posted

    I knew this would be a mixed bag in reaction when I picked it -- some of us will just be in the right mood and enjoy the hell out of it, and others will be confounded.  Maybe that's true for every movie, but I think melodramatic hiphop musicals set in the '30s can feel like there are way too many angles going on.

    I can see the low energy critique but for me, but I think, for Dre at least, that was a character choice.  Also thinking about it, the romance brings me in: I liked Dre and Paula together and felt their story.  If it wasn't there, I would've certainly felt more cut off from the story.

    • Like 4

  21. Posted

    43 minutes ago, grudlian. said:

    I'd like them to do All The President's Men sometime during Trump's impeachment trial. So, hopefully soon.

    Totally coincidentally, I swear, I am watching Bambi and clearly the forest fire at the end was because nobody raked the floors

    • Like 3

  22. Posted

    Yea, I think they use the die 95% of the time, but let other things dictate sometimes. I do think Mr. Smith was a coincidence though! 

    They implied once that they may do the two Godfathers back to back, so we don't have a situation where we we're watching the second one first. Wonderful Life is more than appropriate in December too, and if they force it this December we don't have to fight the die if they roll it next year before next Christmas.

    Are there any other situations like these on the list we should bring up to them?

    • Like 1
×