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

EvanDickson

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    35

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by EvanDickson

  2. Posted

     

    I would argue that the movie is actually arguing that Lorraine is happier in the "new" future with more confident George because their relationship is better -- as in, rather than starting because she felt "sorry" for him, it started based on mutual respect and admiration. Sure, there is a lot of "yadda yadda" for what happened in the intervening time (just like everything else in the movie), but I don't think the movie argues that it's solely based on George's virility.

     

     

    Agreed. I don't think it's a virility thing. I think him standing up for her laid the groundwork for an overall healthier relationship.

  3. Posted

    Off-topic note: Sorry to be the political crank, but early on in the episode there was some of the rehabilitation of Bush 43 going on. I know this isn't a politics podcast, and I really don't expect the best politics to come out of LA--sorry, the track record just isn't there--but this grinds my gears. Bush 43 put us into an unnecessary war based on a lie that resulted in the rise of ISIS and the outbreak of civil war in Syria. He normalized a surveillance state. Trump is a product of Bush 43. If you're not a fan of the blustering idiot, don't long for the previous jackass that made his ascension possible.

     

    I hear you. And I agree. I was speaking only to the relief I would feel w/r/t Donald Trump not having his finger on the button. If given a wide-ranging list of choices for a replacement, 43 would still likely be near the very bottom.

    • Like 3

  5. Posted

     

    The original LOTR is probably the greater trilogy.

     

    But of course they also couldn't leave well enough alone with that one and later made it into a six-movie series.

     

    I actually think BTTF 1 is better than any single film in LOTR. Though LOTR may be the better trilogy.

     

    But the overall question I meant to ask with that was -- "what is the last great original trilogy (not based on anything other than the filmmakers' initial script) that retained the same directing and writing team throughout?"

  6. Posted

    One counter someone mentioned was, "what about LOTR? They were all directed by Peter Jackson and they have his creative DNA all over them." While I think this is a valid point, they were also based on a huge best-selling trilogy. I'm trying to think of the last top-to-bottom big budget trilogy that retained the same writer/director throughout its entire course. In the episode I post that it's the BTTF trilogy, but I'm open to counterarguments on this.

    • Like 1

  7. Posted

     

     

    Then onto my thoughts about the movies themselves. I think Amy and Evan did a great job talking about all the ways that Part 1 is perfect, and I'll echo that the most important thing that distinguishes Part 1 from the sequels is that Part 1 is really just about Marty understanding that his parents were his age once. And even though that's a simple enough idea, so much great stuff is mined from that, from him recognizing that his mom was looking to get laid, to the realization that his dad was the kind of kid who climbed a tree with binoculars and looks into girls' windows: the kinds of stories that no parent would want to tell their child, and that no child would really want to know about their parent either. This arc is what makes the movie good, and to be honest, Crispin Glover is what makes this arc work as perfectly as it does.

     

     

     

     

    Well put! I was trying to get at this when I was talking about how the father/son stuff was the real story of PT1, but I wish I'd looked at that point from this angle as well.

  12. Posted

    If we're not getting JESSE JAMES, I nominate the "Nevermind" of 90's horror movies. People forget that the reason this movie worked isn't necessarily the references, it's the fact that it's actually a great mystery that works in every way. And it rides its mixed tone with incredible precision.

     

    Also... it spawned a bunch of shitty knock-offs.

    • Like 1

  13. Posted

    But that's why it shouldn't be a versus. If people haven't seen it, now they might and would be going in with an open mind as opposed to putting it against an already popular movie. I get the impression that versus episodes are for two very popular movies that are difficult to choose between, while stand alones are more for movies that either are critically acclaimed but lesser known or well known but debatable as to whether it is canon.

     

    Yeah, but I can understand the need to make sure people listen to the episode to begin with.

  16. Posted

    Great episode and a tough vote because both of these movies belong in The Canon, but I'm going with There Will Be Blood. I have a feeling in 20-30 years when we look back at PTA's output, we'll see it as the point when he started shedding his Altman/Scorsese influence and became a master in his own right. It doesn't seem like the "most PTA" movie right now, but I bet it will in the long run.

     

    I love TWBB but PUNCH DRUNK LOVE is every bit as singular/similarly sheds those influences.

    • Like 1

  17. Posted

    I started off thinking it was a little boring but by the end I was so into it that I immediately watched it a second time. Its honestly my favorite film from that year with There Will Be Blood and No Country for Old Men at numbers 2 and 3. I usually don't make lists but all 3 movies were amazing and stood out for that year.

     

    Agreed. It feels weird to call any one of these great films "better" than the others but I reach for jj the most.

  18. Posted

    This is a great movie but it's not great enough for me to vote yes without a major importance to it. I'm with Amy on this. I'd hate to cash in horror chips on Reanimator when we could still put An American Werewolf in London in

     

    Don't feel leveraged out of voting how you feel. I seriously doubt AWIL doesn't get in because of cashed in horror chips.

    • Like 2

  20. Posted

     

     

    Of course the film was infamously cut down to 160 minutes from something insane like 4 hours (though this article says that was kind of a myth - http://www.hitfix.co...t-in-half-a-day) and I believe a lot of what was cut was the post-murder aftermath of Ford's life. I'd be interested in seeing that restored.

     

    Yeah, that cut wasn't four hours. Assembly was probably. I've seen alt scenes from one of the cuts. And Dominik was, to my understanding, in the room for the changes made to theatrical version (not sure about that 100 minute version). I actually think the aftermath stuff plays perfectly. Hugely affecting.

  21. Posted

    It's got good imagery and performances but it's definitely overlong and is, in the end, basically a lot of dudebro self-mythologizing. It doesn't really have a lot to SAY other than "Legends, man, amirite?"

     

    Disagree. I think it's about neediness vs assuredness and how that dictates ones place not only in the masculine pecking order, but in the way the world at large defines people.

    • Like 1

  22. Posted

    I love RE-ANIMATOR and I voted YES.

     

    I often think Amy makes strong, interesting arguments. Over the course of the show, despite our differences in taste, I have come to agree with her more than I thought possible.

     

    But I really have to disagree with the notion that EVIL DEAD II and RE-ANIMATOR are interchangeable. ED2 (which certainly belongs in The Canon) has almost no narrative for the most part. It's more of a beautiful formal exercise. RE-ANIMATOR's main modus operandi is the twisted nature of its own narrative. And, while I side with her on stuff like JERRY MAGUIRE, I found some of her arguments about the horror genre in general to be very, very reductive.

    • Like 2

  23. Posted

    How about the 2007 remake of 3:10 to Yuma?

     

    While 3:10 TO YUMA made more than 10x as much money as JESSE JAMES I'm not sure it has (and this is with all due respect) any legendary ingredients. It has fantastic actors giving great performances, a really tight script and a good director doing good work -- but I just feel like it never becomes more than the sum of its parts.

×