BenjaminCornelius-Bates

Goddamn. I did not know what I was getting into this week.

I enjoyed this episode as I hadn't seen The Tingler since I was a kid. For me, the movie helped my suspension of disbelief with the sincerity in the performances. Movies like this really benefit from sincerity: b-movies often don't benefit from winking to the audience. While it is clear that Castle, crew, and cast knew exactly what they were making, they did it the best way possible. I was pretty on the fence, but the scene where the doctor and his wife are switching their drinks was so utterly convincing and well acted that I had to go yes. Soft yes. Just on the other side of the line between yes and no.

Oh man, I was going to add one more thought: when this movie came out I was spending a lot of time with evangelical christians and they ate this movie up. Their excitement about the imagery and the savior story; they were so cute! I couldn't see it except on the most superficial level. I just liked that Woo Ping did an American flick. Well said Cronopio.

What a great episode! I never thought of a queer reading of the film, which seems far more obvious in retrospect. I love learning things I don't know and I listened to the episode before rewatching the movie. Having a gay father who came out much later in life, after this film was released, made for an interesting re-contextualization and re-read of the movie. I love it. I loved rewatching this with new eyes. Something I feel missing from the discussion is the score and soundtrack. Both are par excellence in terms of Don Davis using many cues from John Adam's Short Ride in a Fast Machine for the score and the use of pusle pounding techno-rave and metal beats from various artists such as White Zombie and Rage Against the Machine (good lord I miss them). The score's aesthetic theme (it is not particularly melodic) uses two chords that vacillate back and forth, a representation of the action on screen. The use of electronica is perfectly blended into scenes that demand it, such as the slow motion gun battle or the ending when Rage comes in. IT IS PERFECTION. But, much as Amy and Cameron lamented about how this film set a trajectory for action films to come in all the wrong ways, the same happened to film scoring. It was like Hollywood learned the wrong lessons from what made the soundtrack and score successful. Techno and metal musical elements had been used before in action movies to far lesser success (Mortal Kombat tried so hard it was cute), but the success of the Matrix solidified the use of what I call "techno action drums". The obvious perpetrator of this is Hans Zimmer and his cronies. Zimmer has written some excellent scores, I won't deny that (Interstellar's score is better than the film itself), but the use and mix of electronica and orchestral has never left our scoring and soundtracking since. Just listen to the useless scores to Man of Steel or Batman v Superman. Go back and watch Die Hard or Robocop and I believe half of what makes those films work so well is the excellent scoring, all reliant on more traditional orchestral music. Heck, go watch some Alfred Hitchcock and to see why Bernard Hermann is so great at creating tension. I also do not want to imply that electronic scores are always bad, but the composer must have clear intensions. I eat up anything that Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross produce for film. But I feel that they treat film scoring in a highly traditional manner. Johnny Greenwood, whose score on There Will Be Blood is fantastic, is a rock guitarist who understands film aesthetic. Sheesh, The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou is half electronic and half orchestral. But it all stems from the director's vision; or in this case the directors' vision fully realized by Don Davis. I suppose this speaks to what I think makes this particular movie so special: all of the right elements were at play. Lightning in a bottle if you will. Even though the special effects were of their day, it still worked for me. The mix of CGI and practical is perfect; the dialogue is a bit stilted, but the performances are great; there are things that don't make sense, but I don't care because I find the world interesting enough to suspend my disbelief. I think this is where I admit that I am a professional musician and composer and have many opinions on the subject. Amy, you missed the secret weapon on first Mission: Impossible film which is its Danny Elfman score. It's so good! One of Elfman's best and does not have the typical Elfman sound. None of the other Mission: Impossible flicks have anything close to the first. FYI, I voted yes on that one. And I voted yes on this one. I can't express my absolute gratitude for this episode. It is so rare for me that a film I take for granted is so blown out of my realm of expectations. Thanks for helping me understand this art form better.

Good lord, this movie is great. I saw it four times in the theater because there was nothing else to do in Fairbanks, Alaska in 1999.

This is a movie that I had not seen before, but had heard of its controversies and importance. I'm glad I saw it and the discussion and comments above are really keen. I have been trying to decipher some sort of meaning out of the film. Is it about intimacy? Is it about age and the desire for youth? Is it more simply a story of people? Here is what I have: Paul is chaos and Jeanne is order. It is a trope, but I feel it fits. Paul's chaos is trying to overtake Jeanne's order, but ultimately, order destroys chaos. Even when the story shows Paul or Jeanne's life outside of each other, their respective chaos and order shows. Paul has lost his wife, Jeanne is getting married. Paul cusses and is rude, Jeanne tries at niceties. Etc. This idea is also reflected in the score, with the romantic themes fighting with the jazz, which is really excellent. It's the best kind of score, representing the actions and images on screen. That being said, I did not particular enjoy spending time with any of these characters. If I intend to spend time with some unpleasant characters doing unpleasant things, I want to feel that there is a point. (Like laughter, in the case of Arrested Development.) Or it should make me feel something other than, "why did I watch that?" (Looking at you Antichrist.) I'll second those who posit the discussion is worthy and not the film. Lastly, I can't help but feel that this is an Italian trash movie dressed up as an art film. Maybe it's just that aesthetic from Italian 1970s. Probably because I know Italian trash from the 70s better than non-trash. Ugh.

Rather than finding this movie boring, I find it a fun hang-out-with-some-fun-characters-movie. It's enjoyable and INFINITELY quotable. The film was criticized for being a movie that you can walk into the kitchen and grab a snack, but I don't necessarily think that's a bad thing or a disqualification for the Canon. Maybe this points to the trickier aspects of what makes a great comedy. I think this film is an excellent example of a laid back, low stakes comedy, that has the broad appeal to be a blockbuster film. For an African-American comedy to be successful in the mainstream seems important. AND it has a killer 90s soundtrack. After Top Gun and it's excellent soundtrack, this one gets high marks as well.

I am okay with the art having a different interpretation than the artist may have intended. This has come up in the show before and I agree with the idea that art and the artist live separate lives. In this case, there is a strong homosexual reading of Top Gun, though I would posit that it's from a non-homosexual perspective saying gayness is a choice. Or maybe it is saying that coming out is the best way to be and not to be stuck behind the facade of Charlie/Kelly McGillis, which is a more true to life depiction of some gay men's experience. I am the son of a gay man who came out years after his children grew up. It's such an interesting read of the film, which is why I find Minority Report an interesting film as a (clumsy) argument against pre-emptive military strikes in the pre-Iraq invasion of the Bush presidency. I seriously doubt that anyone intended that when the film was in preproduction, but that is what I got out of it, particularly as an explanation of the ending. Intention is such a dubious and difficult thing. Thanks for posting that video sycasey 2.0!

I so rarely post, but I couldn't stay away from this one. Four points: 1.) I have always felt that Minority Report is (unintentionally art imitating life?) a product of its time in that is about the pre-emptive strikes the Bush administration was to take on Iraq. The film came out prior to the invasion but during the discussions of invasion. It's hard for me to see the movie in any other way other than tackling that particular subject (and deciding that pre-emptive strikes are bad). It certainly handles the politics clumsily, but some of the decisions made by the director seem to be motivated by the politics of that moment. 2.) I am surprised that the Quentin Tarentino explanation of Top Gun didn't play into any part of the discussion. I have tried to get that out of my head, but when I rewatched Top Gun, it's really hard not to see that particular reading of the film. 3.) That being said, Top Gun is pop art. Pop art can be good. It often is not, but it can capture a moment or time in a way that only big budget blockbusters can. Top Gun achieves that remarkably better than Minority Report. The Top Gun soundtrack alone beats the heck out of most blockbusters of any era. 4.) Lastly, I am happy that there was some discussion of Minority Report as Philip K. Dick films are often poorly executed when his novels and stories are so excellent. Minority Report holds a place (at its time) where there were very few movies that achieved his ideas of perception and reality and its many complications. That being said, as it was commented in the podcast, Minority Report is a film that is not talked about at all. I always think of the moment when the theme to COPS shows up - the show was long gone in public conscience but someone decided to include it and that is one of its many not so great tone problems. We now have A Scanner Darkly and The Man in the High Castle that actually put forth Philip K. Dick's ideas, in film, in effective ways. While I have a fondness for Minority Report out of a desire to see good Philip K. Dick movies, (Next and Paycheck are so, so bad) Top Gun is a superior pop art film. I don't like it, but that's how I voted because it was the right thing to do.

Yes. I haven't watched this since it came out in the theater and it was a pleasure to revisit. I remember that my major complaint, being from Alaska, was that once you find a river, follow it downstream. That lead to the thought that these kids were idiots. Perhaps it's growing up in a remote place and having to always deal with the possibility of getting lost. But hearing the arguments about how we all deal with extreme pressure swayed me from thinking the film was okay, coupled with the re-watch, in light of its historical significance, to thinking the film really works. And in comparison to the myriad of crappy found footage films that don't work or barely work (looking at you Cloverfield), The Blair Witch Project is really well done. I have been listening to the podcast since it started and I think this may be one of the best episodes yet. Thanks gang!

I'm glad someone else is brought down to the music. There Will Be Blood is a more masterful film in regards to its music than Boogie Nights. I feel that the films use music in their own ways that is respective to the films but TWBB is unique in its musical qualities compared to Boogie Nights. Boogie Nights spends its music points much like a Martin Scorsese film rather than being its own thing like TWBB. It is less a complaint and more an observation that Boogie Nights imitates something rather than being individual like TWBB. Greenwood takes the cake and the vote.

Film Crit Hulk really swayed me on this one. I've always felt that Miyazaki transcends the stereotypes found in most anime. While his stories are certainly within the context of Japanese culture, the stories themselves appeal to a much broader human experience. It has been said on the podcast many times and elsewhere, a story that is told with specific and subjective views, its themes will be more relevant and applicable to a broader audience. Kiki's may be the most personal of the Miyazaki oeuvre.

Mine is a soft no. I don't find the cinematography or lighting as distractingly bad as Devin seems to think, but I agree that it isn't great. I wish this had been a versus episode - Menace II Society is such a great and superior movie. I saw both of these films in the early 90s and liked them both with a general preference for Menace II Society. On revisiting both, my biggest complaint to Boyz n the Hood, aside from the aforementioned directing issues, is that the score is terrible. TERRIBLE. Boo that soulful 80s sax. The movie also could benefit from some serious editing. It is probably a half hour too long. That all being said, Amy does an admirable job of defending the movie. I wish Devin had used the word mediocre instead of bad, that is a more apt description of the movie. And go watch Menace II Society; it is a better film.

I somehow missed this movie until now and it hits many points I like. The slow burn of a good thriller takes its time with the plot. And the payoff is so well earned. The cinematic imagery is even misleading by suggesting themes or ideas that really mean nothing. You all need to do a Hitchcock film one these episodes. Just throwing that out there.

A hardy HA HA! from me.

I always thought the Passion felt like a college student's experimental film. There is so little actual dialogue! I mean that the most derogatory way possible. Not that college student experimental films can't be successful, the Passion seems to be attempting one thing and achieves torture porn instead. And not even very good torture porn at that in comparison to Hostel, Saw, or the much earlier Audition. Not ineptly made, it just does not make the cut as a great "canonic" film. Especially when stacked against one of the greatest directors ever.