GrahamS.

Holy shit,This picture is nightmarish. It’s like he’s trying to mash Ziggy Stardust and Cats together.

I tried to rent this and couldn’t find it. It was a movie I saw in early childhood and have revisited throughout the years. It’s definitely an animated LSD trip (although since I’ve never taken LSD, I’m making an assumption and you know the old saying: when you assume, it makes you into an asshole. Or something like that).

Ford V Ferrari was actively OK, I just don’t give a shit about auto racing. basically, the academy has set up these awards to—surprise, surprise—largely be as bland as possible.

I’m legitimately excited to see Parasite get some love and I hope it takes Joker out. i don’t see how Joker was nominated for best adapted screenplay. I have not seen Little Women yet, but it clearly deserves the win here.

Haha, I’ve never seen it. A similar film that I can’t stomach based on previews (which I know is not fair) is Yesterday. Does not appeal to me and for a Danny Boyle film looks pretty bland.

What was the debacle you’re referring to?

Are you comparing them in terms of acting ability? Gotta side with Hutton here. Actually, any known celebrity is a better actor than Breen, that’s some sort of accomplishment, I guess.

I just saw Uncut Gems and I’m also adding it to my list of the best that came out this year. The previous movie by the Safdie brothers—Good Time—was also really good. For recommendations, I’ll also flash back to 2017 (I think) for Thoroughbreds. This is its last month streaming on HBO. I really liked that film.

Hi there! I know I’m late to the party, but... Here are two films from the 2010s that weren’t mentioned at all in the episodes. both really struck a chord with me. Both of these films I saw three times in the theater and would add to best of the decade. Guardians of the Galaxy. It is—by far—my favorite of the Marvel movies (although I really like Black Panther) because it helped me through a time in my life when I was really depressed. It is a goofy popcorn flick, but also has a genuine emotional core that gives it an additional layer that most Marvel films don’t have for me. Chris Pratt’s speech about the group being bound together through loss is a genuinely moving speech for me. It has a place in my heart right next to the original Star Wars trilogy because of that speech, and maybe even surpasses it, because I can’t think of a speech in Star Wars that is as well-written. I, Tonya. I did not expect this film to be as good as it was. You could accuse it of being too indebted to Scorsese, but the film transcends that comparison (in my opinion) because it found it’s own footing by just being really fucking well-made, from its amazing acting to its multiple POV narrative, writing, directing, etc. it’s a film that succeeded in showing how willing we are to write people off as one-dimensional, when real-life is much more complicated. And honestly, I liked it way better than Scorsese’s The Wolf of Wall Street (which I think is 90 minutes of a great movie, thirty minutes of a good one, then an hour of diminishing returns). That’s my belated two cents, for what it’s worth!

I have to ask: why doesn’t he name all of the characters he plays in all his movies Neil Breen? It seems like it would fit perfectly.

This film is SUPER unfindable. Before they did the Seattle show, they had to post a special link to Vimeo in order for the paying audience to watch it.

They were decent choices—better than what Green Book looked like (I can’t bash it because I never watched it). i always enjoy Ricky Gervais.

It’s a magical day!

i wonder if it’s available to rent from Netflix? Just a random thought (not stream—actually rent a disc).

This played at SIFF (Seattle International Film Festival) but was NOT shot here. It’s so cheaply made that I’d guess it was shot around Vegas, where Breen lives. Also, here’s an essay from Scarecrow Video’s blog (Scarecrow is a non-profit video store that has the nation’s largest collection of videos) analyzing Fateful Findings, for anyone who’s interested. It does an amazing job of summarizing the film for those who haven’t seen it: The Glorious Discomfort of Fateful Findings by Andre Couture It’s usually hard to begin sorting out your thoughts when it comes to cinema that challenges your understanding of how ideas are communicated through film. It is even harder to sort out those thoughts when the film in question is Fateful Findings. The film was written, directed, edited, stars and is distributed by Neil Breen, a man whose creative process proves enigmatic to many — even those who have been following him since 2005, when he released his first feature-length film Double Down. Fateful Findings, Breen’s third film thus far, has picked up traction as one of his most popular, and one of the most across-the-board eccentric storytelling experiences ever committed to film. And, of course, it’s his most accessible film. Remember this. The film opens on a boy and girl playing in the woods. The boy kneels in front of a mushroom and shows his friend. The mushroom turns into a box with a stone cube inside. The boy takes the stone believing it to be a lucky charm, where the girl comments that “you can’t leave a box empty, it’s bad luck!” and grabs a handful of gems that were somehow lying right next to the magic mushroom-box to fill it back up again. The children bury the box and run off. We then see the boy and girl parting ways, as she and her family are moving. The next sequence is a horribly drawn-out series of shots showing the boy and girl pretending to wave as if they were extraterrestrials miserably attempting to calibrate their limb movements to the gravitational pull of this strange, miserable planet. Later we learn the boy grows up to become our main character, Dylan, a brilliant novelist played by the talented Neil Breen. We first see him exiting a building, on the phone. He seems to be talking to someone, but he says nothing whatsoever. His wife is on the other end, talking to him. She acts as if he is conversing with her, but he is not saying anything. There is a feeling of a bizarre dreamlike state here, which leads Dylan to start crossing the street in front of the building. He stops and sees a car coming towards him slowly. He stands still. The car hits him. It’s hilarious. Welcome to the first 6 minutes of Fateful Findings. The story and order of events really don’t make any sense (another reason this movie is hard to write about). However, watching it unfold in front of you proves an entertaining unraveling of Neil Breen’s psychological tapestry. Breen’s films follow a main character that runs through mostly the same routine: misunderstood for his noble attempts to improve humanity and expose and/or overthrow the corrupt government establishment, the main character gains god-like powers to aid in his quest to restore the inner workings of the United States government and dole out true justice to the American people while achieving a celebrity status, to the satisfaction of all American people. Fateful Findings is a main offender to this formula, but I didn’t spoil the movie for you. Far from it. I’m merely warning those reading about the vague political messages conveyed throughout the film. So if you would feel offended by implications that the U.S. government would ever display unsatisfactory ethical behavior that some or most would contest or challenge, I would recommend avoiding this film. And I’m not keeping the film’s politics vague in order to maintain a neutral standpoint here; every film of Breen’s is devoid of details in the political realm. Each “startling discovery” consists of the unveiling of “secret documents” hidden from the public concerning “controversial issues.” I may have gotten more specific than Neil Breen ever has, at least in Fateful Findings’ case. But the film isn’t about the politics at all in the end. It tells its story while weaving through mysticism, alcoholism, and true love. How exactly Dylan earns his powers is a complete mystery, and one that you’ll likely give up on ten minutes into the movie. The strange stillness in spaces visited by characters evokes the same dreamlike quality from that first six-minute segment and makes you stare at the screen until you feel uncomfortable. Many shots include characters just standing there, waiting to recite a line. The aforementioned uncomfortable moments apply here as well, almost in a sneaking way, since we don’t know when this actor or actress is supposed to speak. In its moments of incompetence, it surprises us on a level of human spontaneity and indeterminacy, mixed largely with indecision. After a while, the movie makes you watch it in a different way, one that challenges you to accept the bizarre atmosphere as normal. Even if this happens, you still find moments that just make you want to claw your brain out. I have to be careful not to destroy a genuinely brand-new filmgoing experience by spilling too many details, because almost every other moment in this movie is pure gold. Long story short, the girl from the beginning of the movie grows up to work in the hospital that Dylan stays in after a car crashed into his face. This leads to a hilarious Phantom of the Opera-esque wound dressing, topped off by a mask and nose respirator on top of his half-face cast. His mystical stone powers allow him to heal and leave the tiny hospital for home, where he takes a shower with his wife. Much, much later in the film, Dylan speaks in front of the White House during a press conference (which only five or six very important people are attending) about what he has found in his solo government hacking project. This makes the five or six very important people ashamed that the American people know the truth, leading each to commit suicide one by one. Even when you least expect it, batshit insanity lurks behind every creative corner in Neil Breen’s masterpiece. There is a fascination to be had here about Neil Breen and his films. The most important thing to get across about him and his movies is that he truly is passionate about what he does, and each film he makes he tries to make better than his last. Jean-Luc Godard himself said “In order to criticize a movie, you have to make another movie.” Breen truly wants to make the best film he can make and he’s proving it to his fans and new filmgoers alike. It would be easy to watch just one of his movies and dismiss him as the next Tommy Wiseau or put him in a category of filmmakers who purposefully make midnight movies, but the difference in Wiseau and Breen is one of drive and passion and not desired commercial success or brand recognition. I for one am hanging on Neil Breen’s latest developments, truly curious to see what he comes up with next. It’s totally fine if it involves a formula that is 95% similar to his previous films. But in that other 5% lies the creative variety that Breen thrives on and excels in, the true unpredictable nature of his ordering of events. In Fateful Findings, you’ll find yourself strung along as you witness seamless links between a fatal accident, strong spiritual mystic powers, a failing marriage, true love decided at eight years old, a love triangle, another failing marriage, a drug overdose, a murder conspiracy, a social justice hacker discovering the truth by hacking the government’s mainframe via numerous blank-screened 20-year-old laptops, and a hyper-successful novelist gaining even more notoriety by appearing before the American people delivering a statement (presumably on live television?) denouncing the political system. Neil Breen has crafted a true American classic by masterfully melding everything great about American dramas, political thrillers and god-like super-powered character narratives. No wonder this film did so well at SIFF last year. So do yourself a favor and watch Fateful Findings. You can currently find it in Scarecrow Video’s Midnight Madness section, which is part of their Best of SIFF collection. André Couture is a known nerd living in the great city of Seattle. He watches ungodly amounts of failed cinematic works, writes music, self-produces the terrible, terrible, TERRIBLE Hamburger Theatre podcast, volunteers at the great Scarecrow Video, eats occasionally, reads incessantly, edits video & audio, plays way too many tabletop games, and sometimes goes to work. http://blog.scarecrow.com/the-glorious-discomfort-of-fateful-findings/

Ok, I HAVE SOME GENUINE QUESTIONS ABOUT THE MOVIE: In the opening—as I remember it—child Neil Breen and his future love interest find the magic stone/mushroom/whatever, but she eventually moves away. The cars that appear in this segment are MODERN DAY CARS (this is a very important detail to my eventual questions. Hang on. they’re coming. I’m laying the groundwork). The rest of the movie takes place when the characters are on their 30, 40s, or however fucking old Neil Breen is. The style of the cars HAVE NOT CHANGED. Neither have the houses, streets, wardrobe, etc. So my questions are these: is the bulk of the movie supposed to be set in the future, since it opens with modern day settings and vehicles, then proceeds to have its characters age decades? If so, why does everything look the same? Is this supposed to be some sort of commentary on how society doesn’t change, or how Neil Breen/Dylan is stuck in the past? Is that why none of his computers—or any screen in the movie—ever look like they’re on? Continuing down the rabbit hole, Did the magic open up some alternate universe where people dress in 90s jeans and carpet their ERs? Is this Neil Breen’s version of Brazil (the film, not the country, but I dunno, maybe both)? This is some mind-blowing shit, right?

I did watch this alone for the show, but I don’t know if that still counts as Herculean because I don’t normally get stoned and watch movies, but I’m pretty sure I did with this one.

I was at this show in Seattle and it was an amazing live event (and despite Paul’s insistence that this is a superhero movie, I honestly think this is what happened when Neil Breen tried to make a David Lynch/Stanley Kubrick film and failed. Epically.)! Unfortunately, the terribleness/brilliance of this film is so visual that when Paul and everybody try to analyze what’s going on, there are points where the episode is almost impossible to follow. There are a LOT of “look at this” moments that I don’t even remember, AND I WAS THERE. It has been fun to listen to this episode to relive that night, but the episode could have benefitted from an introduction that laid out the characters and events a bit more clearly. Note:I’m not saying it would make the film more coherent—there’s no way that that’s possible—but it would ground the podcast listeners in the absurdity of the “plot” and “characters” a bit more. I know all the live episodes have elements of the visual issue not translating to audio, so maybe I’m alone in feeling this episode had a lot of them. What did y’all think? P.S., I hope they release their episode of The Visitor soon. I was there for that one too and it was great (and that movie is a lot of fun)!

I’m curious why Under the Silver Lake was one of your top films. I saw it as well and wanted to like it, liked what it was trying to do with deconstructing P.I. Films, liked about half of it, but ended being having too many unsatisfying tangents for me. And I’m generally OK with weird tangents if it adds up to something interesting. I didn’t hate it but it was too long and self-indulgent to work for me. But it would be an interesting film to discuss!

Looks like the UFO work is on par with Close Encounters!

Holy shit, this is the whole movie on YouTube! Will have to watch at least some of it when I have time.