NathanGordon

The first fifteen minutes feel like they're on fast forward, or like it's missing a first act. It gets a little better after that but the beginning moves REALLY fast. What I don't get is why a vampire movie even bothers with world building exposition? Everyone knows how vampires operate, and you don't even need to stop and say "These are the bad vampires, they're called Strigoli, and we fight them because blah blah". Like, I get it, they have red eyes. This entire world works just as you would expect it to, it doesn't require voice over. I do like the lead actress -- bobo Ellen Page. She tries to make her lines zing as best she's able. The blonde girl with the bee sting lips is pretty awful though.

I hate to be pedantic here, but rap music precedes sampling. Rap was built on a DJ playing two copies of the same (usually disco) record and more specifically, Grandmaster Flash's pioneering use of the crossfader, which didn't previously exist in the modern sense. A DJ could play the 32 bar instrumental breakdown in the middle of Chic's "Le Freak" while cueing up the same breakdown on a second turntable and LP, fading between the two. (This is where "breakbeats" come from.) When it was time to record in the studio, instead of sampling (which didn't exist yet) a band was hired to play the same breakdown for 15 minutes straight. Also, while I think your sampling defense can be applied to Tarantino, as he literally quotes (less generously "rips off") dialogue, costumes, and other elements from the exploitation films he loves, it's not really relevant here. Not to mention that -- unlike in music -- Tarantino doesn't have to license or pay royalties to the filmmakers whose works he borrows. I think Amy has a legitimate criticism, but I don't think Khan's broad story concepts are so derivative. This film (and all good Trek) is character driven and the Trek characters, for the most part, possess their own strong identities that are applied to larger themes like "revenge" and "sacrifice". *I don't mean to come off condescending, insert smiley emoji here

Yes, that is the sort of spoiler (not really) mentioned above. It was a change to appease the censorship standards of the day. Actually, there are two things that happen; one is the ending, and then there's a bizarre moment during the credits.

I kind of hated it. It's super stylish but just didn't do anything for me. It's basically the logical end to the direction Refn pursued with Drive and then Only God Forgives. And I get what the film is trying to do -- offer this gorgeous and incredibly superficial world as a sort of parallel to the microcosm of high fashion and modelling, a fable about pursuing beauty. But that's unbelievably banal, and it offers this observation without further exploration or possibility. Like, we literally consume women in the quest for unobtainable standards of perfection? Okay, everyone understands this in 2016. It's not subversive to say that. But if Refn is saying anything beyond that, I don't see it. And in fact, I'm not sure he gets it. The idea of a successful (cis, white, hetero, blah blah so sue me) director like Refn sexually objectifying a 16-year old girl (Fanning is now 18) as some sort of editorial on objectification strikes me as tone deaf. It's a whole lot of having your cake and eating it, and to me, it didn't add up to anything. I don't mean to be a killjoy, feel free to enjoy the movie however you want. It is very beautiful, like a high end screensaver.

For the curious: He's probably talking about the comments on BirthMoviesDeath; we all know the Earwolf commenters have well reasoned, articulate opinions which make perfect sense.

But seriously, how about Spoorlos/The Vanishing vs Cape Fear?

Mother > Memories of Murder But that's like saying 14-year Laphroaig is better than 12-year. I honestly do believe it's his best, though.

Cape Fear vs Fear vs Primal Fear vs Wages of Fear vs Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas... I'm sorry.

...and that it was a brief and expensive trend that audiences eventually tired of due to market oversaturation, ever-inflating and unsustainable budgets, and a dearth of quality source material. Not unlike, say, the boom in musicals during the 1940s, led by MGM's popular and elaborate productions (the Marvel of their day, perhaps). The only thing I currently find more dull than the prospect of anticipating Important Capeman 4: The Pandering is the endless cultural soul searching that surrounds this franchise bloat. If I'm sick of superheroes, I'm even more sick of talking about them. I realize that art reflects life and these films are the lens through which our current timezzz..... ZZZZZzzzzzzz......

I'm surprised at people never seeing this or even aware of it, but I am an old. I am curious what newcomers think of the ending. The acting and direction is a little stagey at times; keep in mind that this originated as a play.

After watching Khan again last week, I think I have to vote no, despite how enjoyable I personally find it. Cronopio said it as succinctly as possible: there are many episodes of Star Trek (and TNG) that are orders of magnitude better than all of the films. Trek's imprint on culture is due to the television series, and this is not a television canon. But I do love how rich the theme of life and legacy is in this film. The contrast between Kirk's own son and their nonexistent relationship, with Khan's engineered inability to have children (as well as his own origins) makes for an interesting point of entry into the nature versus nurture discussion. That it ends with both a literal genesis of life and Spock's Jesus-like sacrifice makes for a uniquely Trek story. Roddenberry's vision of the future was so optimistic that it feels quaint. It's simple enough to be a fable, and for all of Neu Trek's crowd pleasing sound and fury, it lacks this humanist touch.

Oh man, I saw Vampire Academy on cable a while back and looked it up -- it's by the Waters brothers, who collectively wrote Heathers and directed Mean Girls. You can see hints of that teen girl snark in Vampire Academy, but not enough to elevate it from its trashy YA vampire crap that is entirely by the numbers. At one point, a character says something like "We're vampires but we DON'T sparkle in the sunlight", like it's aware that it needs to stand out from all the "me too" YA franchise non-starters. On one hand, I'm all for movies about teen girls that don't feature them getting naked and murdered; on the other hand, Vampire Academy is by the writer of Demolition Man(!) and Hudson Hawk(!!).

Oh yeah, it's the movie that decided it needed to show us a horse getting sliced apart. It's like Matthew Barney's Cremaster meets Silence of the Lambs. Jennifer Lopez is particularly bad in this, the role was way out of her range. Tarsem can't really direct actors very well but he creates some arresting visuals. Check out The Fall -- another Tarsem movie that looks amazing but also has a dumb story and is poorly acted.

When I was a teenager, I took my dad's army jacket. You used to see them at Goodwill and other thrift stores all the time, but I feel like they don't, anymore. Or maybe I'm not looking. I know you're in Canada, but in the states we have army surplus stores that sell all kinds of clothing and army gear, knives, camping and survivalist stuff. They're usually staffed by a really cool or really mean old Vietnam vet.

Snowtown Murders was good, but aside from last year's MacBeth -- also with Fassbender -- he's made a handful of small indie dramas. He's directed no action at all, which is what's going to drive this film (I assume these games aren't text adventures). I worry that, as is standard practice for new franchise starters, they grabbed an indie director and put them in suddenly way over their head, so that he could be a scapegoat when the movie flops. In a best case scenario, they brought in some action choreographers from Hong Kong to give this film the look it needs. Unfortunately it looks like a bunch of CGI gobbledygook with the camera spinning everywhere. Who knows, but I think this will do about as well as Warcraft did earlier in the summer, which is to say not a flop, but not a mega blockbuster. Sidebar: how cool would it have been to make something more like Hardcore Henry? Writing aside, that movie was exciting and felt like what a video game adaptation should be.

Yeah, people are shocked when crappy movies like this have high budgets, but you have to look at the production history. The longer a project goes on, the longer it sits unreleased, the more hands it changes, the bigger the budget gets. That's how stuff like Pluto Nash ends up having a $100 million budget. It changes studios, needs reshoots, gets a different edit, updated marketing, a million little things to ensure that the film can still eventually be released. It's a greater financial loss if it doesn't get released in some form. At a certain point, there's been so much money dumped into these productions that a studio can't just stop and shitcan the thing. They have investors they need to satisfy, and the only thing worse than a box office flop is a film that shuts down completely when money has been spent. Monster Trucks has no stars, so the most money is being spent on CGI. That can be a ton of money, but not $130 million. Like ElleB said, it really is too big to let fail.

Drink whenever you learn a little more than you wanted to know about the actresses Devin finds sexually attractive.

Oh god, this endless war between jaded gen-x cynicism and millenial empowerment culture makes me want to live off-grid. I'm so tired of what seems to be a complete inability for people to be centrist or empathetic or see things in shades of gray at all. It feels like culture is broken. Maybe this is just US electoral tensions/nihilism, but I feel like things weren't as crazy four or eight years ago. Like if you make a shitty movie with pretty clear weird racist casting and people call you out on it, you should be able to say, at the very least "huh, I don't see it that way, but I respect your perspective and I'll listen to you, if you promise to listen to me". Instead of being completely sarcastic and dismissive, which does no good to anyone, especially not you. I'm not even on social media but this fight over anti-PC/SJWs/Ghostbusters has colored everything on the entire internet for the last couple of years. "I don't have a facebook" is the new "I don't even own a tv", isn't it? ugh /rant

Chi-Raq is straight up not a great Spike Lee film. It bothers me that it's in because that there are so many better ones to talk about. I also think it was way too soon for that film to even be considered; they need to breathe a little bit within the culture.

For some reason, back in 2003 or so, I found myself running the sound at a Hammers of Misfortune show. Nicest bunch of people and they rocked my fucking face off. Good metal!

You know, I was almost asleep and couldn't remember what the other song was, so I decided to mix it up with a Comedy Bean Bag favorite. Once I pulled a similar prank and played $5.00 worth of "Que Sera, Sera" at a college bar. After about 20 minutes the bartender was demanding to know who did it, and then just turned off the jukebox. >

Wings of Desire is a classic for sure, although I think the sequel Faraway, So Close is even better. The tepid American remake (without Peter Falk!) should be nuked from orbit for unleashing the Goo Goo Dolls on an unsuspecting populace. Wim Wenders films -- the few good ones -- are, for me at least, overshadowed by the director's prolific output since the early 1990s, nearly all of which is turgid, boring, or slight. It leads me to believe that he was never a truly great filmmaker, only someone with a few good ideas.

1. What's New, Pussycat - Tom Jones 2. What's New, Pussycat - Tom Jones 3. What's New, Pussycat - Tom Jones 4. What's New, Pussycat - Tom Jones 5. What's New, Pussycat - Tom Jones 6. What's New, Pussycat - Tom Jones 7. What's New, Pussycat - Tom Jones 8. What's New, Pussycat - Tom Jones 9. Monster Mash - Bobby Pickett 10. What's New, Pussycat - Tom Jones

It's one of the great documentaries, for sure. I feel like the genre may be beyond the scope of this podcast -- maybe it should be? There's so much to discuss: Maysles brothers, Herzog, Errol Morris, Les Blank, Shirley Clarke, and on and on. I guess there was a Penelope Spheeris ep, which I appreciate, but the Decline films are kind of safe crowd pleasers. It's crazy that Paris Is Burning is on Netflix now, it was out of print forever. We used to rent the single scratchy worn out VHS from our local video store, in their tiny "cult/gay/other" section.