Muthsarah

It would take a long, long episode to cover these three movies. Despite their stylistic similarities, they're each about very distinctive parts of Jesse and Celine's relationship, and about how people can change over 15-20 years. It's a magNIFicent trilogy, but.... They'd prolly do Slacker long before they got around to the Befores. Still, I give this petition my signature, and my blessing. And I wouldn't mind the excuse to marathon them. Only seen them once each. On that note, have you seen them more than once? Do they hold up? To me, the most attractive thing about watching these films was how it felt like we were following Jesse and Celine. They met (at least in the first two) somewhat/entirely by chance, and followed them, generally live, as they spent a couple hours together. More than almost any other film, it felt like we were with them, following them, not just watching something written and edited. Without the slightest idea what was going to happen, as who among us can see the future? To RE-visit them would feel like taking an entirely different approach to the material, and, above all, the characters. What's it like going back a second time?

As far as 80s cheese (especially "patriotic" cheese) goes, I still think Rocky IV is one of the better-made. It's not Cannon. Two Ns. I'm wondering right now, is there space in The Canon for "bad" movies? Good bad movies, that is. Movies that, whatever you want to say about their plots, acting, message, whatever, nonetheless left an impact on pop culture, are fun to watch, and are, perhaps above all, a sign of their times. To me, Rocky IV is an iconic 80s movie, same as Back to the Future, The Breakfast Club, or Robocop. And, FWIW, I hadn't seen it until very, very recently, so I have no nostalgia goggles.

IV makes III look restrained. That's why IV is better. (Though both are fantastic cheese that EVERYONE has to see to understand pop culture in the 80s.) Rocky IV is the anti-Rocky, but it's also the Rockyest thing ever made. There are two Rocky series: I, II, and VI, and III and IV. Creed's...obviously highly-related (especially to IV), but really, it's the first Creed.

I have to vote NO. No, I CHOOSE to vote "NO". It's not a film made without talent. But (all Scalia-like) I gotta go back to the original meaning of "The Canon". Is this a film ANYONE has to see to understand the history of cinema? Clearly, no. This is, from the start, a very, VERY niche arthouse flick. Is this a film that has been very influential on future movies? Evidence is very, very wanting. Is this a film that represents a significant stepping stone in the gradual progress of moviemaking? Again, there is no evidence pointing to this. Does this film represent the very best work of a significant figure in cinema? No. This isn't even Von Trier's best film. I'd take Breaking the Waves or Melancholia over this one, no question. OK, so I don't know all the categories of the "original meaning of 'The Canon'". But I think these four points are illustrative enough. Small Canon voter votes NO. It's not an especially notable film, it's not an especially (or even remotely) popular film, it's not a film of its time, it's not a career best. It's not really that notable. It's just hardcore arthouse. And, no, that's not enough. Yeah, I have to concur with this. I've only been active in Greater Internetsylvania's forum community since maybe 2003, but the Wolfpop forums were my very first experience with non-editable, non-image-posting, weird bottom-to-top forum....whatevers. I didn't pick up a 1990s vibe (obviously, because I couldn't), but it was fifty shades of wrong all the same. Forums need to be flexible, and Earwolf looks like a major improvement. I look forward to being able to create many far more intricate and meaningful posts here, now that I can actually post, then edit. Seriously, I can't function without that. And thirteen (at least) year old technology. Not hating. I don't know what the tech restrictions were on Wolfpop. But....long-term, it just couldn't survive for long. The move to Earwolf is a godsend. That said, let's move this ***** further up. The Canon was second-from-the-top on Wolfpop. Let's all fight to get it moved up on Earwolf. The Canon was EASILY the most popular forum on Wolfpop. How does it compare on Earwolf? I'm thinking - give it a couple weeks for the transition - it'll be one of the most popular here too. Give it some prime real estate, Earwolf! It'll be SOOOO worth it.

EDIT: Apologies, I'm new to this forum. It seemed it wouldn't let me start new threads/topics. So I bounced off something you said in this week's episode to launch into a recommendation here. I don't see a Delete option. So I'll just edit this. To this. I had nothing especially relevant to add. IS there a way to delete posts on this forum...?

1. I have not and will not see Antichrist. I will exercise my right as a human being to not subject myself to something I feel confident will not be to my liking. Love the show. But I must feel free to exercise discretion regarding which episodes to actually watch. No watch. No vote. S'cool 2. Amy, I 100% agree with something you said in this episode. At least I THINK you said it. Maybe I was crazy. I just rented Rocky III and Rocky IV from my local video store. Yeah, video store. I have one of those. Jealous????? Prolly not. You're all Hollywood and fancified and....... Anyway, I rented them just so as to catchup on my 80s cheese. And, yeah, you (I think....) suggested maybe putting Rocky IV into The Canon. To that, I say YEAH!!!!. It's beyond cheesy. It was prolly cheesy in 1986 or whenever. Now it's camp. But it's super-80s camp. Take a step back from your serious arthouse movie conversations. Go pop. Go shallow. Go of-the-time. Pick movies that were the most (retrospectively) obviously of-their-time. Pick the most off-beat rebellious 70s flicks. The most shallowly Reagan-esque 80s flicks. The most cynical 90s-esque. The most conservative, safe-ish but colorful (in a white way) 50s films. Whatever. Give the shallow their due. And start with Rocky IV. It's ridiculous. But how can one appreciate pop cinema of the 80s without appreciating something like this movie? It's delightfully dumb. But it still has depth. In its context/setting at least. You've had your arthouse, lets go mainstream and silly. Soon, at least. Cinematic fluff doesn't usually get its due, but it's nonetheless the stuff so many grow up with. Please count it.