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

T.D.

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    39

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by T.D.

  2. Posted

    I went in expecting to vote yes simply because Ghostbusters has been a pretty major cultural touchstone and it was a huge part of my childhood. But the more I've thought about it, beyond the "cultural impact" argument (which, for me, can be a significant factor in what I consider Canon-worthy), there's just not enough about it that really stands out to me as being especially notable. For me, Ghostbusters falls into a similar category as other "spooky comedies" like Gremlins and An American Werewolf in London. They are movies I like and enjoy and am happy to revisit on occasion, but not good enough on their own to bear the title of a Great Movie To Live on Forever.

     

    It's not dissimilar from arguments made against Labyrinth when it came up for vote; I personally love that movie and voted yes, but I can understand where people were coming from. That's pretty much how I feel about Ghostbusters.

     

    I do think this era is significant, though, but if I'm going to put a SNL/National Lampoon/Second City movie into the Canon, I'd sooner nominate Caddyshack and/or The Blues Brothers. And as far as Peak Murray goes, I'll take Groundhog Day every time.

     

    No for me.

    post-120489-0-60366500-1492485270_thumb.jpg

  3. Posted

    Seriously getting me teared-up over here, Amy. Thanks for keeping us posted.

     

    It's crazy how much two total strangers can feel like a big part of your life, but you and Devin through both your written criticism and through this podcast have truly had a significant impact on my artistic sensibilities (and, by extension, the ways those sensibilities have led me to evaluating things about my own character and my behavior-- which is one of the great functions of art). From the bottom of my heart, thank you for that.

     

    And for whatever it's worth from some random joe schmo, I hope Devin knows how much his words have meant to so many people over the years and how much he is valued. I certainly wish him the best on the hard road ahead.

    • Like 2

  5. Posted

    if you simply voice that you don't like something (whether it's because of quality or it just doesn't speak to you), then FUCK YOU you racist, homophobic misogynist.

     

    Because after nearly a hundred episodes of this podcast, everyone on this forum has been called a racist, homophobic, misogynist because they voted differently on a movie than Devin did?

     

    Sure pal.

    • Like 3

  7. Posted

    This knockout episode sounds way more interesting to me than, say, Cannibal Holocaust vs. Working Girl. If those two films were paired against each other, my argument is... a big shrug. They are both kinda lame-- I really couldn't give a crap which one goes and which one stays. I have zero passion or interest for either of those movies, and I also have zero interest in listening to ANOTHER episode about both of them.

     

    On the other hand, pitting 4 of the great, Canon science-fiction films against one another stokes discussion. The whole point of a Vs. episode is to create interesting contrast and allow you look at the films in a new light. "The Thing" vs. "The Fly" may have been an easy decision, but what if "The Thing" had gone up against "Big Trouble in Little China," and "The Fly" was a solo episode? What if "E.T." had gone up against "Jaws"? Or what if "Boogie Nights" had gone up against "Magnolia"? etc. The Canon would possibly look very different.

     

    The rules of The Canon are arbitrary and ever-changing to begin with, and this knockout episode simply provides a new way at looking at four films that have been discussed A LOT in the past.

     

    These wild gimmick episodes might be obnoxious if they were done often, but every 50 episodes or so seems fine

    • Like 1

  8. Posted

    I will certainly await more information and statements from the involved parties.

     

    I believe in empathy and understanding for victims, and I also believe in forgiveness and rehabilitation for perpetrators. Sometimes it can be difficult reconciling these two things when there is strong emotion involved (on both sides), but I'm troubled by both the silencing of victims ("It's in the past, let it go, it was such-and-such years ago, she's lying" etc.) as well as moral grandstanding against people who committed a crime ("What a hypocrite, once a bad person always a bad person, I knew all along he was a piece of shit, I told you so" etc.).

     

    I can't speak to anything more than my general feelings on the treatment of others based on my own experiences. I just hope those who have been sexaully assaulted can continue to feel safe to talk about their experience and heal, and that those who have committed assault can confront the vileness of their actions, do whatever they can to offer amends, and change.

     

    I hope The Canon will continue.

    • Like 12

  9. Posted

    If things can be removed, there will be more impulse Yes votes, knowing the decision could eventually be reversed.

     

    At this point, 79 films have been voted into The Canon so far across 95 episodes. I have a hard time believing that there's going to be any sort of noticeable increase in future "Yes" votes as a result of the knockout episode changing people's perception of The Canon's permanency. I don't think the "Second Chances" episode had any effect in that regard either.

     

    By the host's own admission, the rules of The Canon have been malleable and arbitrary from the start.

    • Like 2

  10. Posted

    I'd love to hear a "Dirty Dancing" episode.

     

    It's crazy how much better it holds up than virtually every other 80's teen movie-- nearly everything else from the era is chock full of racism, homophobia, and misogyny (usually played for laughs) whereas "Dirty Dancing" feels more progressive than most movies made today.

     

    Not to say that a lack of timelessness or problematic elements preclude something from being in the Canon (It certainly doesn't; Gunga Din is a favorite), but I do think it just serves to highlight how truly brilliant Linda Gottlieb's profoundly feminist script is, not to mention the direction from Emile Ardolino's who really makes it a female POV movie that never veers into male-gazey schlock (which we've all seen happen a million times in other movies).

     

    It's one of my absolute favorites. Great suggestion!

    • Like 1

  11. Posted

    I can't imagine what arguments exist against including "The Matrix" in the Canon. That movie's impact on the culture is almost incalculable, and on those grounds alone I think it's a slam dunk. Aside from that, I think it's just terrific entertainment, and even nearly 20 years later holds up incredibly well (I haven't thought too deeply about this, but I might say it's the best "hero's journey" movie since the original Star Wars).

     

    I'd also 100% go to bat for Speed Racer, which is one of my all-time favorite films and the Wachowski's best. It seems ripe for Canon discussion-- it's an overlooked masterpiece that many people are finally getting around to re-evaluating. Maybe Film Crit Hulk could guest again, as it's one of his favorite movies.

  13. Posted

     

    I prefer Hot Fuzz to Shaun of the Dead but I can accept that I'm in the minority there

     

    I actually do to! "Shaun" is technically my least favorite of the Cornetto films, but it's really just splitting hairs because all three of them are absolutely fantastic.

    • Like 1

  14. Posted

    Edgar Wright is a legitimate genius. The World's End is my favorite film of his-- It's his most thematically complex and emotionally powerful-- but everything he's done is brilliant, with the Cornetto films in particular standing in absolute masterpiece territory.

     

    I'd love to see a Shaun of the Dead vs. Hot Fuzz episode, even though I have no doubt Shaun would win.

    • Like 1

  15. Posted

    Why these two films? Seems like an odd pairing and I'm not sure the compare/contrast format of a versus episode would really benefit the discussion of either film.

     

    Despite its many virtues, I have a hard time imagining "Gone with the Wind" having a fighting chance against really any classic film from the era (as others have mentioned above, no doubt "Casablanca" would win in an absolute blow-out). It does loom large in film history, though, so I think it probably deserves its own episode.

    • Like 1

  16. Posted

    Interesting choice; if the logistics ever worked out, Devin and Amy should try and get the great TV critic Alan Sepinwall to guest on the episode. "Midnight Run" is his favorite film, and he's written about on several occasions.

  17. Posted

    how can we justify putting in a B+ genre movie when we have already eliminated an A+ picture from the conversation?

     

    We justify it using the same logic that justifies everything on the show-- the rules/definition/concept of "The Canon" itself is arbitrary and ever-changing, and really just exists as an excuse to talk about great movies.

     

    If Devin and Amy were really concerned about only including those A+ movies, then there would be no VS. episodes and the only people allowed to vote would be experienced critics and filmmakers. But since the Sight and Sound poll is already a thing, surely The Canon can function in a different manner.

  18. Posted

    Yes!

     

    My day has come to defend "Labryinth" as a Canon-worthy film... Here it goes:

     

    To start, I think there's a strong argument to be made for the film's Canon-status if only because more people have learned about Bowie through "Labryinth" than probably any other piece of media since its release. I think that will continue to be the case for generations to come. It's the gateway to turning people on the greatness of his music, and while the soundtrack is certainly not among his finest works (although I do like it a lot-- I'm a weirdo who loves 80's Bowie more than most), I think there's significance in recognizing that many, many people who only know a handful of Bowie songs are very likely to include "Magic Dance" next to "Space Oddity" and "Ziggy Stardust."

     

    Next, I think the film works wonderfully on several thematic levels that can resonate for people of all ages and walks of life. It's a lovely feminist fable and one of the rare, great coming-of-age films starring a female character (more on that in a second), but I also love what it says about the nature of that broken thing called fandom and our relationship to the fiction we love.

     

    I really like that Sarah is a geek; her room filled with fantasy books and games and action figures and dolls and paintings. I can imagine her being into D&D. But when she is thrust into the world of her story (whether this is literal or metaphorical, it makes no difference) she's confronted with not just the reality of the environment, but the reality of the *themes* and ideas that her stories represent ("You have no power over me").

     

    Consider how modern fandoms operate now— here we live in a world where people who allegedly love Batman, Superman, Captain America, or whoever are the very same people threatening violence over trivial, inane reasons; people that supposedly adore and admire characters and stories who espouse virtues that they have zero consideration or understanding of.

     

    And in some small way, that's what we have in Sarah; a character who has to learn the value of what being a hero in an adventure story really means, learning to not just love these things for the childish escapist fantasy they offer her, but for the ways they can shape her into a more responsible, emotionally-mature adult. Near the end, she’s even given the literal option of choosing between the worldly representations of her fandom, or rejecting the physical in order to accomplish the greater act of saving her brother (this moment, in particular, was mind-blowing for my 5 year old nephew when we watched "Labyrinth" awhile back; he really grappled with that, fearing for Toby's life and knowing it was the right thing for Sarah to save him, but at the cost of giving up EVERYTHING you own?! It was pretty cool to see that running through his head— This is a GREAT movie for kids, and it still works 30 years later).

     

    So in the end, when Sarah has become a woman in her own right, I love that the little coda acknowledges that growing up and no longer being childish doesn't mean you need to reject "kids stuff" entirely— because having fiction, fantasy, and fandom in your life, even as an adult, is a worthwhile, lovely thing... even if it’s only needed "every once in a while.”

     

    Now, I’m going to turn it over to my pal fursa saida from BMD; this is lifted from a discussion we had months back about the film, with her take on the film’s coming-of-age thematics:

     

     

    [in “Labyrinth”] Sarah is her own villain. Jareth is simply a representation of her problem, which is a kind of childish selfishness: she doesn't understand others as real people, only as obstacles or annoyances or obligations. (This isn't an insult to Sarah; everyone goes through it. That's why it's a coming of age story.) This fact of her consciousness means that every one of the villains--the stepmother, the inconvenient baby, and eventually Jareth--isn't really A Villain; they're just a projection of a person as she understands them. The villains are all inside her; it's she who makes them villains. Her whole arc with Hoggle is literally about learning empathy and give-and-take so that she can overcome Jareth, which is to say herself, in the end. This maps onto the larger geographic framing because it's about learning to value the world around her as much as her interior one--not just in the sense of fantasy but in the sense of giving weight to people as they are, not just as you imagine them.

     

    [You also have to view the film] as a fairy tale. Alice in Wonderland is not at all the first reference point, since that story too is a reference to fairy tales. Those become necessary here for two reasons: 1) they are mostly associated with liminal life moments (like coming of age), and 2) they foreground the interplay of consent when dealing with a catalytic otherworldly antagonist (in those stories, usually some kind of fairy, often the Queen; here, of course, Jareth). As Jareth himself points out, he did what he did because she asked him to. Even in the final showdown, he can't do anything without her consent. (This doesn't mean he can't make navigating that consent very tricky.)

     

    [such] stories aren't about the fairies but about what happens after, or rather what the encounter with fairies makes possible. If you understand both my points then a few things happen. First, the consent part underlines the degree to which the whole issue is Sarah's understanding of herself, the world, and her place in it. She is not nearly so oppressed as she imagines, and she has the power to change her life by changing how she understands her life. In order to see people as people and not as villains, Sarah has to realize that she has power over herself, her actions, her choices, her perceptions. Second, much of the journey along the way makes more sense, because as I said re: Hoggle, it's about learning to look past the end of her own nose—hence all the emphasis on manners, and on observing the beings she encounters so as to interact with them most usefully. Third, Jareth comes off much more sensical, because his only motivation is to allow Sarah not to grow. He's only a projection of this childishness of hers. His weird romantic fixation with her is the fantasy of a teenage girl more than the predation of an ageless being; of course Sarah's literal excuse for a villain is also fascinated with her and does everything he does for and because of her. He doesn't have to function as a proper agent because in fact all the agency is Sarah's.

     

    The line "Fear me, love me, do as I say, and I will be your slave" makes its best sense in this context: he's saying, don't grow, and I'll still do whatever you want. Don't grow and I'll help you not grow. So when Sarah says, "You have no power over me," it's a grasping of agency, but also--and the two are of course intimately connected--an acceptance of responsibility. In freeing herself of Jareth she binds herself into the social and familial web of responsibility, which is of course still a kind of freeing: she is freeing herself from the petulant cage of imagined oppression, to enter a more mature way of being that can navigate that web.

     

    This is also why in the end Hoggle and the gang are still there when she needs them, but Jareth is not. There's no need for a paper villain anymore. He doesn't represent the healthy, beloved parts of childhood we all need to revisit from time to time; he's just literally the emotional constipation of a fourteen-year-old, and there's no need for him now.

     

    Finally, I’d like to close with a few quotes from one of my favorite critics, Tim Brayton, who reviewed the film earlier this year:

     

     

    On Bowie:

     

    It's hard to imagine a better piece of casting for [Jareth] in this configuration: Henson apparently wanted Sting at first, and Michael Jackson was considered, but no-one, actor or singer or otherwise, could embody both sexuality and otherworldliness, as separate categories and as a single force, the way that Bowie did simply by virtue of being Bowie. His frame, his facial structure, the baggage about his career that the adults watching the film carry with them, and his uncomfortably probing examination of Connelly's face in their scenes together - all these things combine to present a perfect vision of sexual desire and sexual fear mingling. That's not even bothering to consider the extraordinary design of the Goblin King's costume and makeup, the latter giving him a leonine quality that only adds to the sense of watching a predator, sexual or otherwise. Nor the fact that Bowie's performance is pretty great in and of itself: most of the role is just standing there, but in the scenes where acting is necessary, he nailed everything required of him. Late in the film, he sings a fragment of a song, "Within You", expressing his disappointment at knowing that he'll never have Sarah as his consort, and the hauntingly sad look on his face injects an unexpected level of melancholy and sympathy for the villain. Particularly in a beautiful close-up that cinematographer Alex Thomson lights to leave Bowie's blue eye in light, his black eye in shadow, the shading wrapping perfectly around his downturned mouth.

     

    On the visuals:

     

    [The film] benefits immensely from a protagonist with exceptional screen presence and a villain thick with subtext, and beyond those things exists primarily to serve as a spine upon which visual conceits are supported. Ah, but what conceits! [The] film represents the physical manifestation of rich picture-book artwork to a massively impressive degree. From the moment Sarah leaves the grounding normalcy of her large suburban home, there's not one scene, and there's barely a single frame, that isn't a mesmerizing expression of impossible fantasy landscapes given tactile form, with the best-looking puppets and suits Henson's people had ever put together at that point in time populating them. For that matter, they never really would surpass the wide range of expressions seen on some of these characters, like the morally-grey dwarf Hoggle or the briefly-seen but insidiously thoughtful-looking Junk Lady, operated by Karen Prell.

     

    On the film’s legacy:

     

    Labyrinth creates an exceptional world to fall into, more confidently executed and ambitiously shot than anything in The Dark Crystal (there's an overhead shot during the "Magic Dance" musical number that's pretty much everybody's major point of reference for this movie, and it doesn't seem like much until you think of the engineering required to get every moving object in its right place), and perhaps more effective in its emotional appeal: though I am thinking less of the openly sweet moments than the legitimately distressing shifts into pretty straightforward horror (such as a pit of disembodied hands that form grotesque faces), It’s stuff that's hard to forget once it's been seen, and I can name no other fantasy movie from the genre-soaked '80s that matches it, for either quantity or quality of these primordially effective moments. What it can't do with clear or insightful storytelling, it enthusiastically does with stabs of dream imagery right in the heart… it’s one of the undeniable triumphs of pure fantasy in live-action cinema.

    • Like 6

  19. Posted

    I realize I'm cheating a bit here because the guests have always traditionally nominated their own film for the Canon, but this idea occurred to me after I got turned on to the podcast "My Favorite Murder" by Devin through Twitter.

     

    Kilgariff and Hardstark discuss real murder cases each week, and it's become one of my absolute favorite things to listen to. They are simply terrific hosts and it's an amazing podcast; anybody with an interest in true crime should check it out.

     

    So when I considered that Devin also just recently named "Zodiac" the best movie of the 21st century so far, and it all started to come together...

     

    I would love to hear this discussion.

    • Like 1

  21. Posted

    Bumping this for Brexit timeliness.

     

    Wow, good call there. I like when episodes are timed to commemorate or highlight a specific current event as it lends a unique perspective (such as the "what happened to Bryan Singer?" discussion during the Usual Suspects episode), and boy is "Children of Men" particularly timely right now.

  22. Posted

    The Fly/Thing and Let the Right One In episodes have touched upon the idea of remakes and their relationship with their source films, but I think the original Invasion of the Body Snatchers vs. the 1978 remake would make for a great episode (and while I love them both, I would vote for the remake no question).

  24. Posted

    Dirty Dancing or Bound-two of the few films that consistently fills me with joy.

     

    Dirty Dancing is 100% Canon, no question; I would LOVE to hear that episode.

     

    I imagine it would be a companion piece to the "Saturday Night Fever" ep for how it's often written off by those who haven't seen it as something that it isn't.

     

    People tend to just think of Travolta grooving down the street and wearing tight pants but are oblivious to the rape and suicide and exploration of masculinity. Likewise, people tend to think of Swayze in tight pants and "Time Of Your Life" while being oblivious to the botched abortion and the class tension and feminist themes.

    • Like 2
×