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

andyradicalpossumtackler

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    28

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by andyradicalpossumtackler

  1. Posted

    I don't understand what this call-in show is. Any of those options are interesting to me, but I don't know which one is going to be used.

     

    Fair point. If this is a five-contender, only one wins scenario - that's not much incentive to nominate our favs. That leads to less discussion time for each, and 4 movies that are then presumably put on ice/won't be up for their own episode anytime soon.

  4. Posted

    What an incredibly frustrating episode.

     

    I felt this way but for the opposite reason - I felt like Amy was trying harder to consider the merits of both films, while Adam was presenting some bad faith arguments against "Hairspray" in order to boost his own pick. Still a good listen, though, and an exciting pairing of films.

     

    I have to vote "Hairspray". Both films are distinct and worthy, but with "Grease" I think you have to squint harder and mentally fill in gaps to find much depth. It's a shiny, Hollywood musical - a fine example, but I don't see it as especially unique to the genre. "Hairspray" is its own thing, for better and worse; and Waters bringing some grit, quirk, and even politics to a more mainstream-friendly form is noteworthy.

    • Like 2

  5. Posted

    if I wanna watch a decent academy award winning film musical from the 60s, I prefer Oliver! by a mile. That film will surprise you with how well it holds up, and is much tighter edited. Oliver! vs. a space odyssey, that would have been a bonkers episode ;)

     

    Oliver! is marvelous, and it's a shame that no one really talks about it much anymore. I think it gets swept under the rug for being old-fashioned, but the scope and execution is so impressive. I'd probably pick "The Lion in Winter" for best picture that year, but "Oliver!" is still top 5.

    • Like 1

  6. Posted

    Tough, tough call. I think "Lady Bird" is my personal favorite, but I would concede that it's less original than "Florida" or "get Out".

     

    I think we can all agree on one thing, though: "mother!" is just plain awful. It's a freshman year writing project with the caps lock left on.

    • Like 1

  7. Posted

    I was a #SweatpantsKid.

     

    TGIF confession - as a kid I didn't understand the premise of "Perfect Strangers" and thought Balki was from outer space. Mypos sounded like a planet, and he didn't understand anything, so I assumed it was like an ALF situation.

    • Like 1

  9. Posted

    Enthusiastic yes vote for "Whorehouse", and I would say yes even if it wasn't half of a versus. It's breezy fun, comes from an underrepresented time in film history (in between the auteur 70s and the blockbuster 80s), is a good example of the musical, the star vehicle, the mid-budget studio film, and it was a popular hit in its time. All that, plus it's surprisingly satirical and subversive. The first iteration of The Canon admitted plenty of 80s cult favs, and I don't see why this shouldn't get in as well.

    • Like 1

  11. Posted

    Marginal yes, but this is definitely a flawed movie.

     

    I can never get past part of the central conceit: I really want to hear the cast actually sing! It's Peters, Harper, and Martin - the talent is there, and I don't think the lip syncing adds too much more to the proceedings, so I'm always frustrated that they denied us that. If we got real musical numbers I'd rate the movie way higher.

     

    I think Devin's questions about POV are fair-ish, but I also think that the whole "real or imagined" approach to musicals is something we have all over-valued ever since "Chicago". Just because one film utilized that frame doesn't mean we need to retroactively interrogate all prior musicals on those grounds. And I still think the "Pennies" approach to fantasy works even if it's not strictly rooted in any one character's psychology. Films rarely take place in the subjectivity of only one character, and it's not at all uncommon for movies to blur the lines for the benefit of an audience.

    • Like 1

  13. Posted

    Both are great, but I think "Boogie Nights" is the clear choice. The heart, the sense of discovery, the ensemble, the playful validation of unlikely subject matter, the time spent with characters who would usually be underestimated or stereotyped, the "holy shit, this was in 1997, who was doing things like this in 1997?" factor.

     

    "Blood" is an accomplishment but has the weight of an auteur behind it, a blank-check factor that makes it slightly less remarkable to me than what PTA managed so early with "Boogie".

     

    Also, after last week's call to arms over where "fun" films belong in The Canon, I would hate to see "Boogie" lose out for feeling less important than the, frankly, overly self-important "Blood". I would actually dock points for "TWBB" being so damn portentous at all times.

  14. Posted

    Edited post because now I feel bad for criticizing. Film aside, I was frustrated with Devin's argument style. I did go and rewatch "Re-Animator" after this, and would still vote no. It's fine, but I disagree about the pacing - not enough actually happens in the film.

  16. Posted

    Yeah, the ASMR bit is one of my least fav things this show has ever done. Mainly because I found it so repellent I couldn't finish the episode - I never want to hear a grown man talk in a cloying. whispery baby voice, ever. But also because it was picking on a basically harmless subculture and made it seem even stranger. Ah well, there's always next week.

  17. Posted

    Loved this, but I feel like they glossed over the one plot twist I NEVER saw coming: the scene where Stallone he wants to just be a country singer from now on. Just: "I am good enough, and this is my life now". I am forced to assume that one month before this movie, someone made a bet that they could turn Stallone into a cab driver, and Stallone just decided to stick with it. I think that would explain a lot, if everything we know about him is a product of a series of bets where he always ends up barely passable at something he decides is his life's calling.

    • Like 6

  23. Posted

    This is turning into a really interesting competition, although I wonder what other themes they'll have for upcoming challenges. But the one podcast that I find unappealing right now is the F Plus. It's an inherently judgmental premise that could turn mean spirited in a hurry. Why do these guys get to decide what's normal? Are hand fetishists hurting anyone? I guess a lot depends on the execution and I'd have to hear more to fully get what they're going for, but it just feels like negative vibe.

×