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

gene_shallot

Members
  • Content count

    132
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by gene_shallot


  1. Having just seen this... YES. Given its pedigree, it's almost hard to describe how terrible this is (yet bizarrely entertaining!) Directed by the guy who wrote The Departed & Kingdom of Heaven! It's got Mark Wahlberg & Walton Goggins! Even Oscar Isaac is bad in it. OSCAR ISAAC, people! Yet oh so watchable.


  2. Does anybody else get frustrated with how extremely condescending Devin can be towards Amy on this podcast.

     

    I enjoy the podcast and enjoy listening, but Devin can be a "yuge" condescending dude a lot of the time.

    Don't mean to further derail this into the 'dump on Devin' thread (maybe we need a new Subforum! I kid.), but I do feel like he was in 75% troll/25% actual debate-mode in that argument. Kinda like with Working Girl. I get the feeling he's the type who likes to take the piss out of friends, but I can see how that might be grating.

     

    The only thing that actually gets to me is saying "you're not watching the movie right"*. There's no one specific, right or wrong way to interpret a movie, as long as you can back your argument up!

     

    * may not be exact quote


  3.  

     

    oh boy do i have to start justifying my name now that i've posted on more than one board?

     

     

    it's a reference to the earwolf show HOLLYWOOD HANDBOOK.

    Oh haha, just appreciating the comment/username synergy. I've heard that's a great podcast, gotta check it out.

    • Like 1

  4. This could be an interesting match up...

     

    LA Crime in the 90's vs. LA Crime in the 00's. De Niro and .Pacino in top for vs. Cruise (playing against type as the villain).

    As much as I think Collateral is unfairly slept on, I can imagine this would be a pretty one-sided vote. Maybe Heat vs The Town? Both botched heist movies with a great sense of place (but even then, I think it's still pretty one-sided). Heat is one hell of a movie is what I'm saying.


  5. I will reserve judgment until I see the movie, but just wanted to say I hope the eventual late-80's/early-90's follow up is "Birth Ritual". I just wanna see what Linklater does with that movie title. Or "Kuntz" (apropos to Devin's album recommendation).

     

    ... because the movies are named after era-appropriate song titles, you see.


  6.  

    Well, since they haven't OFFICIALLY covered it yet, it's not like they couldn't rectify their (Devin's) error by putting it up again.

     

    Really, I'm beating my drum here, but I'd like to see more borderline/controversial/unknown picks put up to the vote. Of COURSE The Third Man, or Psycho, or Casablanca, or Raiders of the Lost Ark, or Seven Samurai, or 8 1/2 are going to be voted into The Canon, if only they were selected. I am SO much more interested, and invested, in those episodes where the movies up for discussion aren't quite so clear. Head for the border(line) picks, and you'll get the best debates, I think. Ideally, I think the show should be about a constant effort to discern where the border even is, not just celebrating those flicks that are obviously Canon-worthy. If you really want to, throw an addendum to each episode. "So, let's vote on whether or not....'The Avengers' gets in...but, at the same time, let's acknowledge how '2001: A Space Odyssey' is such an obvious choice, we're not even going to put it up for a vote".

     

    Or something. If we all know it's going in, just put in it. LIke with Godfather I and II.

    While I totally get what you're saying and mostly agree, I love hearing Amy & Devin discuss and dissect those 'obvious choices' so much, I'd be sad to lose that.


  7. Texas might lose to Psycho, but itd totally hold its own against Halloween imo. I think its gotten more and more respect among cinephiles as time has gone on

    Yeah, I've noticed the same thing. Sorta like The Thing or Evil Dead 2, critical consensus seems to have (rightfully) settled on 'horror masterpiece'. And if it were Texas vs Psycho, I feel most would feel obligated to vote the latter... I mean c'mon, we're talking Hitchcock here! TCM and Halloween seem more the same wavelength; I'm not even sure which way I'd vote.

     

    First off, A Nightmare on Elm Street is canon-worthy. Don't a troll.

    The cheesiness of the sequels may have overshadowed how great the first Nightmare is. Agreed, it's totally Canon-worthy.


  8. I believe Amy actually mentioned that she would like to do it in an earlier episode. It seemed like she liked it.

    Oh, must've missed that! Either way, would love an episode on it. Even if it's not particularly cinematic, surely it must win by sheer virtue of being The. Most. Quotable. Movie. EVER.


  9. Isn't this, essentially, the Ecce Homo argument?

    Not necessarily. True, there is some of that (for example, the cheesy green screen roof scene in The Room... or basically the whole conceit of The Room in general) but you can find poorly crafted elements in good & bad films alike. Still, how many 'bad' movies have screenings to this day like The Room or Troll 2 do?

     

    It's hard to put into words, but I feel there's something more to these movies. You don't need someone cracking jokes over them - they are genuinely interesting to watch, and I don't that's true of all their ilk (like the aforementioned Birdemic, Transformers sequels, or, say, Manos: Hands of Fate, but ymmv).

     

    My theory is it's the cinematic equivalent of the uncanny valley. As pop-culture consumers from birth, we have an innate expectation of how movies should look and behave. These films refuse to conform to those expectations, while still resembling 'legit' cinema enough to keep stringing the viewer along. They're weird, and they keep finding new ways to be weird, sheerly through skewed perspective or approach. So kind of like how humor is basically expectation of a certain outcome followed by surprise, maybe the best of these movies tickle that same part of the brain. To me Holy Motors-by-accident is just as fascinating as Holy Motors.

    • Like 1

  10. I wouldn't mind them nominating this just for the conversation alone. Devin might frame his argument in a 'this is mean-spirited', or 'an insult to the filmmaker', or a 'how am I supposed to apply my semiotics to this?!' light, and maybe some people do watch purely for mean-spirited reasons (Birdemic springs to mind), but for me their appeal is something harder to quantify.

     

    I legitimately don't hate these movies, so "hate watching" doesn't feel apt. There's a huge difference between these and movies that are boring-bad or forgettable-bad. These aren't cynical crash grabs like Transformers - they're often passion projects, by artists with a slightly skewed point of view. It's outsider art. It's irreproducible. It's lightning in a bottle. When a "bad" movie somehow loops back around to being entertaining, what's wrong with celebrating that?

     

    I would feel totally comfortable voting a film like Plan 9, or The Room, or, say, Troll 2 or The Apple into The Canon.

    • Like 2

  11. Didn't make it: Empire Strikes Back. I've bitched so much about its exclusion. It never helps. The pain...festers.....And I really do think less of Devin and Amy as carbon-based lifeforms that both of them seem to to think it's utter crap. Which I don't wanna do, because I love them both. But still. They hate this movie. And so a part of me hates them.

    Whoa, what? When did either of them say they hated it? (Unless this is an elaborate joke? In which case, haha, good one!)


  12. No Batman without Superman? Not buying it. Even without Superman it is entirely conceivable a Batman movie would come along eventually. I don't think Batman took much from Superman either (except maybe that it needed an awesome score? I love both, actually); the film is so Tim Burton-y I could see it turning out exactly the same even without Donner's Superman.

     

    Amy & Devs are right, Burton is hyper-focused on visuals & style... just like a comic book! I'm a visual guy, so Batman 1 has always appealed to me for that exact reason. Even rewatching it recently (but before the episode), I didn't notice the "careless" mistakes y'all did at all; in fact, I think you're crazy. I just loved the bold way Burton frames shots and moves the camera. Well, any time Batman's on-screen (the whole chemical factory sequence especially)... the rest er, maybe not so much. Uh, did I mention the score?

     

    Sure, Batman Returns is probably better made, but it's just so unsatisfying on many levels, in ways the first isn't. Just like with The Dark Knight, the villian(s) take over the movie. Sure, Michelle Pfeiffer is amazing, but Batman just fades into the shadows. Batman fights actual penguins more than he does The Penguin. The whole last act is just sort of a bust for me. And how come Batman doesn't dance anymore?

     

    Superman - a good film, and the best version of Superman, but mostly hokey and just doesn't hold up for me. I'm voting Batman. Did the movie always make sense? No. Did Superman?

     

    And Arli$$ and Vicki Vale? Don't mind them at all. In Batman, everyone is either nuts or wants to get nuts. (C'mon! Let's get nuts)

×