Jump to content
đź”’ The Earwolf Forums are closed Read more... Ă—

sycasey 2.0

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    1521

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    37

Posts posted by sycasey 2.0

  1. Posted

    So how long do we think Phil spent in the loop? I tend to agree with the higher estimates, just given the kinds of skills he picks up. I know Amy bagged on the kind of jazz they were playing at the end of the movie, but it seems to me that Phil's piano playing took some major skill and musical understanding there: he's embellishing the melody, doing fills and solos, leading a band of musicians who just met him . . . and doing it in front of an audience. To go from zero piano ability to that must have taken like five years at least. Then add in the ice sculpting, learning other languages, etc. I think he was in there for multiple decades.

  2. Posted

    The "cultural touchstone" part is what convinced me to vote yes. Some other movies/shows have tried this same idea (Russian Doll, Palm Springs) but of course they are all referred to as the "Groundhog Day premise." So let's put the original on the rocket.

  3. Posted

    One thing not discussed much in the episode is how much this movie has been interpreted and claimed by various religious scholars as a lesson in the tenets of various faiths: Buddhism, Catholicism, Judaism, etc.

    https://www.mentalfloss.com/article/55243/8-creative-interpretations-groundhog-day

    It does seem like there's some religious theme running through this movie: it opens with a shot of blue sky and clouds, peering into the heavens, Phil at one point thinks he might be a god, etc.

  4. Posted

    unspooled-groundhog-day.jpg

    Paul & Amy relive 1993’s Bill Murray time loop comedy Groundhog Day! They learn about the tempestuous relationship between Murray and director Harold Ramis, read an excerpt from the original script, and compare the film to another magical realist classic, It’s A Wonderful Life. Plus: Just how long was Phil stuck in that loop anyways?

    This is the third episode in our Couple Goals series; next week’s film is Groundhog Day…er, actually it’s A Place In The Sun! Learn more about the show at unspooledpod.com, follow us on Twitter @unspooled and Instagram @unspooledpod, and don’t forget to rate, review & subscribe to us on Apple Podcasts, Stitcher and Spotify. You can also listen to our Stitcher Premium game show Screen Test right now at https://www.stitcher.com/show/unspooled-screen-test, and apply to be a contestant at unspooledpod@gmail.com! Photo credit: Kim Troxall

  5. Posted

    On 1/23/2021 at 6:00 PM, ol' eddy wrecks said:

    Looking over there now, I don't even see the poll or discussion for Chungking Express, did you get a sense if the people voting have seen other WKW, this is a proxy vote for WKW as a whole, or even if amongst other WKW films, this one still really shines for people (voting)?  I think for the general level of me being positive on WKW and consider him an influential filmmaker in my early cinephile years, I think wrt to his other fans, I probably rank Chungking lower comparably (I use the fact that prior to the upcoming World of WKW blu-ray set that criterion is managing distribution in the US, the only WKW criterions were Chungking and ItMfL, I think).  I'm just trying to get a feel (out of curiosity).

    Here's the link: 

    https://www.facebook.com/groups/unspooledpodcast/permalink/1160376427753884

    There's some questioning if this is the right WKW (or other film of its type) to send up (including from me), but mostly the yes votes just seem to be from people who love the movie.

     

  6. Posted

    Interesting the division in results between here and the Facebook group. Both this and When Harry Met Sally each sailed through with a solid majority of yes votes there, but are being narrowly defeated here. (Granted, many fewer votes in this group than over there.)

  8. Posted

    This is definitely a movie where the whole appeal of it is in how it's shot, edited, set to music, etc. The stories/characters are very simple and stripped-down. So if you don't feel the style then you don't feel it.

    This one captured me really well the first time I watched it. Subsequent viewings have been slightly down from that high, but still I think it's a really well-made film. I voted yes here, though I do have some hesitation in thinking that In the Mood For Love might be the more worthy entry. The argument for Chungking Express in the Wong Kar-Wai canon is that (1) it was the major worldwide breakthrough for WKW and (2) it captures a particular time and place (Hong Kong pre-China takeover) that might not be better captured elsewhere. Anyway, it's a close call.

  9. Posted

    203.2-unspooled-chungking-express.jpg

    Paul & Amy dream of 1994’s Wong Kar-wai romantic diptych Chungking Express! They look at Wong’s influence on modern auteurs like Quentin Tarantino and Barry Jenkins, trace a metaphor through the film for a Hong Kong in transition, and ask why it was considered “too MTV” by some contemporary critics. Plus: What does this film have in common with Final Fantasy VIII?

    This is the second episode in our Couple Goals series; next week’s film is Groundhog Day! Learn more about the show at unspooledpod.com, follow us on Twitter @unspooled and Instagram @unspooledpod, and don’t forget to rate, review & subscribe to us on Apple Podcasts, Stitcher and Spotify. You can also listen to our Stitcher Premium game show Screen Test right now at https://www.stitcher.com/show/unspooled-screen-test, and apply to be a contestant at unspooledpod@gmail.com! Photo credit: Kim Troxall

  10. Posted

    I kind of enjoyed watching it because of Nolan's filmmaking technique making the individual sequences compelling, but as a story it didn't make me feel anything. There's just no grounding for anything that's happening for the bulk of the running time, because the film is deliberately trying to hide information from you. I don't know why characters are doing things or what they want, so I don't care that much. Does it eventually come together? Yes, I suppose so. But that's a long time for a movie to keep you in the dark.

    In general I like Nolan, but I think he has his little tics and flaws that are starting to become more obvious as his movies get bigger and more intricate in their plotting. For me he still hasn't topped Memento, where the small scale forces him to actually spend time with the characters and give you something to care about. I also thought his approach worked pretty well in Dunkirk, because the stakes are already pre-set (it's a war and the soldiers need to be rescued from the beach), so I don't need to know much more.

    • Like 1

  12. Posted

    I think this movie is great and I don't think of the Woody Allen comparisons as a particularly negative thing. The filmmakers have obviously been influenced by him, but the tone and worldview are completely different. Allen's movies tend to be skeptical of true love; this one looks to affirm it. I see When Harry Met Sally as Woody Allen influenced in the same way I see Wes Anderson as influenced by Orson Welles and Hal Ashby: the similarities are noticeable, but the techniques are also obviously used for very different aims and purpose.

    So why would people consider it "blander?" I think there is often a bias (especially among critics) in favor of negative emotion over positive, as if the life-affirming work is less "serious" and we have to prove our good taste by liking darker stuff; it's the "Kubrick vs. Spielberg" argument writ large. I've tried to free myself of this false dichotomy over time. I think that upbeat work has just as much to teach us as downbeat work.

    Anyway, I'm not one who has any particularly nostalgic feelings for WHMS, since I didn't watch it until well after its heyday and well after all of the 90s and early 2000s romcoms it influenced had all been released. Given that, I was actually probably predisposed to find it tiresome, as I did many of those lesser romcoms. Instead, I watched it and immediately saw: "Oh, THIS is the real deal, the thing all those other movies were trying to be." Most romcoms fail to replicate the careful character detail of this one and replace it with lots of silly plotting (someone made a bet, someone wrote a letter that got re-routed, etc.); in this one the only thing keeping our leads apart is themselves. This over-focus on plot also usually means the "happily ever after" romance feels rushed and implausible, but When Harry Met Sally takes its time, allowing the true love to gradually set in over many years. For me the ending has always worked for that reason, even though most of the time I'd be rolling my eyes at that kind of speech.

    I've also returned to the film several times and have never found it any less engaging. So yeah, given how much I like it and how influential it is I think it goes on the rocket ship.

  13. Posted

    Okay, at one point Jerry Orbach leaves his office with the woman cop to go discuss something, leaving Gnorm with the other skeevy rival detective (Kaminsky) to watch him. Then Gnorm escapes and Kaminsky is behind the desk . . . naked? Why did either he or Gnorm take his clothes off? I can think of several potential explanations for this, all of them disturbing.

    • Like 4

  14. Posted

    unspooled-WHMS.jpg

    Amy & Paul go to the airport for 1989’s quintessential romantic comedy When Harry Met Sally! They learn how director Rob Reiner helped Meg Ryan prepare for the orgasm scene, ask why Harry Connick Jr. doesn’t appear in the film, and discuss whether the film’s ending undermines the message that men and women can be just friends. Plus: Highlights from the scenes that didn’t make the theatrical cut.

    This is the first episode in our Couple Goals series; next week’s film is Chungking Express! Learn more about the show at unspooledpod.com, follow us on Twitter @unspooled and Instagram @unspooledpod, and don’t forget to rate, review & subscribe to us on Apple Podcasts, Stitcher and Spotify. You can also listen to our Stitcher Premium game show Screen Test right now at https://www.stitcher.com/show/unspooled-screen-test, and apply to be a contestant at unspooledpod@gmail.com! Photo credit: Kim Troxall

  15. Posted

    11 hours ago, RyanSz said:

    The talk about lack of support reminds me when I couldn't log back into my account for about two months as I had my password/username logged in and it got cleared when I updated my browser. Tried contacting support and got zilch for it, and was only able to get back on by process of elimination of my login combos. It's also kind of telling when this is really one of the only forums still going on the page as other shows have fallen off the map or haven't even been given one, like How Did This Get Played when I checked a few months back, though that could have changed.

    I had similar problems where I lost my password/username combo and just couldn't get back in no matter what I did. That's why my username has "2.0" on it now. I had to re-register and leave the old one behind.

    • Like 1

  17. Posted

    2 hours ago, AlmostAGhost said:

    I'm fine with this, because I just generally took the parents as 'evil.' Paul & Amy never really brought up this side of it, just how evil the parents are, which I find interesting. They kept saying it was universal and relatable, but I'm not sure that's the way to look at it? I get that there's all sorts of different metaphors you can take from the movie, but let's not miss that this is about two evil people doing horrendous things to their kids.

    Yes, I actually like that the parents' goals are unexplained. It's just an accepted circumstance about the world of the film, because of course all of the main characters have by now accepted it as the way things are. Lanthimos wants you to live in that space.

    • Like 1

  18. Posted

    I think it's a very good, interesting film, but I'm not sure it's quite rocket-ship worthy. If I'm looking at Lanthimos' films, then The Favourite is probably the more accomplished film overall and The Lobster maybe the more pure-grade Lanthimos effort. Voting no to table it for a bit.

  19. Posted

    Paul & Amy highway into Yorgos Lanthimos’ jarring family parable Dogtooth! They learn how audiences around the world interpreted the film differently, discuss how parents can radically shape their children’s world, and lament that more American films don’t use Lanthomos’ method of high allegory. Plus: A snippet of the younger sister’s real-life art punk band.

    This is the final episode in our Kinspooled series on “effed up families”; next week we kick off “Couple Goals” with When Harry Met Sally! Learn more about the show at unspooledpod.com, follow us on Twitter @unspooled and Instagram @unspooledpod, and don’t forget to rate, review & subscribe to us on Apple Podcasts, Stitcher and Spotify. You can also listen to our Stitcher Premium game show Screen Test right now at https://www.stitcher.com/show/unspooled-screen-test, and apply to be a contestant at unspooledpod@gmail.com! Photo credit: Kim Troxall

  22. Posted

    17 minutes ago, RyanSz said:

    As for the time jump, that just unfortunately falls into the same issue I had with Captain America jumping back to his present to live his life with Peggy Carter at the end of Endgame, unless there is mention in the Phase 4 of the MCU where things like Vietnam and 9/11 had different outcomes, basically Cap just held all that info in his back pocket so he could be with his first love, which is incredibly out of character for him.

    Yeah I had issues once I thought about that too, but at least Marvel had the courtesy to wait until the final scene of the final movie to do an uncomfortable ret-con about one of their main characters, so you don't spend the whole film wondering what is going on. WW84 was more like if Cap had come out in the first scene of Winter Soldier and said he hadn't actually been frozen, he'd just been hanging out playing solitaire at the North Pole and then got bored and froze himself.

    • Like 1

  23. Posted

    12 minutes ago, CaptainAmazing said:

    -I've heard about the "Macaulay Culkin has died" rumors. Someone hit the nail on the head as to why they exist- A lot of people sort of want him to have died so that they can have an excuse to go back and watch his movies.

    1f2a45f207cc3e1dbd22f93d0ec96258.jpg

  24. Posted

    Also, when Lord grants wishes to the entire planet, it seems like the movie is basically saying that EVERYONE made a selfish wish and that's why things are going to shit. But, really? No one made an altruistic wish to end world hunger or all wars or something? This is a pretty cynical view of humanity. (That's another of my problems with WW84; this cynicism seems entirely at odds with the hopeful ethos of the original movie.)

    Finally, it seems like the DC cinematic universe just doesn't care about continuity anymore. If Wonder Woman basically mass communicated with the entire planet in 1984, and no one's memories of this seem to have been wiped at all, why does it take Batman so long to figure out who she is in Batman v. Superman? Dumbest Batman ever.

    • Like 2

  25. Posted

    On 1/2/2021 at 12:35 PM, Elektra Boogaloo said:

    The music was a huge let down. 

    I think there was one 80s song during the gala scene where Diana meets the guy possessed by Steve Trevor (and boy do I have a lot of questions about THAT situation). But otherwise, nothing. It really doesn't make sense, because as I understand it, licensing a bunch of second-tier 80s hits for use in a movie shouldn't be all that expensive, as long as you're not trying to get Michael Jackson or Prince or something.

    I enjoyed the early tone of the movie, but as it went along I just had too many questions about the plot and couldn't get into it. I still don't understand how the "granting wishes" power is supposed to work. In retrospect I also had a lot of questions about what the heck Diana was supposed to have been doing in the 60+ years that elapsed between the first film and this one. The movie basically only shows you that she built a shrine to Steve. Maybe a little detail about the hero stuff she was up to in that time? She didn't just sit around moping for multiple decades, did she?

    • Like 2
×