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

HoldenMartinson

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    334

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by HoldenMartinson

  3. Posted

    What is the point of the canon, if every movie gets in? I mean, will this end up as a list of 5000 random movies. What is the value here? Will we see The Seventh Seal alongside the fourth best Michael Bay movie in the canon?

    Depends if you want a big canon, or a small canon. If there were only one million films, five thousand in the canon would be .5%. Do you really need fewer films than that? Is one thousand still too many? Five hundred? Why does it matter?

     

    More than anything, The Canon an excuse to talk about great movies, as has been mentioned on the show. I mean, it's kind of a game, really. By no means is this definitive. Do I want a canon that would have There's Something About Mary, but not The Empire Strikes Back? Not really, but as a community that's the consensus. Does it matter? No. It's just a lot of fun to hear two incredible critics--and the occasional guest--have insightful conversations about all kinds of movies. The voting is fun, but not as much fun as the actual dialogue between Devin and Amy--which, again, is the crux of the PODCAST.

     

    I don't know. This sort of feels like a "Decker is an android" discussion.

    • Like 1

  4. Posted

    Pshhh!! Cannibal Holocaust is AMAAAAAZING, and is canon for its place among exploitation films, as well as the advent of found footage.

     

    But I'd probably go with Chi-Raq, Working Girl, or Two-Lane Blacktop. Or maybe we should vote out a slam dunk, because that's way more fun.

  6. Posted

    say that to my face and not on the internet, motherfucker

    I totally would. But really, that remark mostly reflects my similar feelings to both filmmakers. I like, and occasionally LOVE both of them--or hate one more than the other, depending which way you swing. They've both got a misfire or two, but they're worth celebrating, even if they're not my first picks.

     

    This is my six-year-old's second favorite movie (after My Neighbor Totoro) - I don't know if I could vote no.

    Right? These are a lot of fun to watch with young kids. I've shown some of these to my cousin, who's four, and she really adores them. They're real magical works, these movies.

  7. Posted

    I'm incredibly excited for these episodes--as I am for every episode of The Canon. So, if you could all pick some films to be discussed, which would you choose?

     

    I'd probably go with Inagaki's Samurai I: Musashi Miyamoto, maybe an early Kieślowski--maybe A Short Film About Love or A Short Film About Killing as a way of getting The Decalogue in, though Blind Chance clearly merits discussion--or a semi-forgotten art film like Paris, Texas or The Tin Drum.

     

    What does everyone else think?

  8. Posted

    I want anime, and I'm gonna vote yes on this, but I feel like a Bernie supporter having to vote for Hillary. Don't get me wrong: I like Kiki's Delivery Service. It's a fine film that encapsulates a lot of what Hayao Miyazaki does well. That said, I wouldn't even pick a Miyazaki film if we're going with anime. He's kind of like the Wes Anderson of animation. Yeah, his work is solid, and there are a few films of his that I adore deeply, but you're just inches away from better, lesser known filmmakers. And sometimes a Ponyo just can't make up for Howl's Moving Castle.

     

    Personally, I'd go with Ghibli's real champion, Isao Takahata. While Miyazaki has an eye for ornate design, and a deep optimism and humanity to him that informs nearly every character of his, I'm never blown away by anything he's done. The Wind Rises, Princess Mononoke, and Spirited Away are breathtaking achievements--I am personally not a fan of My Neighbor Totoro. But Takahata does more with storytelling and craft that is head and shoulders above what Miyazaki does. I prefer the ambition and experimentation. I prefer that, while Miyazaki may come up with better characters, Takahata lends more complexity and subtlety to his characters and their arcs. Takahata is far more daring, and willing to confront actual social issues, like class or gender politics--like in The Tale of the Princess Kaguya. I like that he allows his characters to fail, despite doing their best, something that Miyazaki would never do--see Grave of the Fireflies. I like that he'll talk about smaller things very candidly, like menstruation and flawed parent/child relationships--as seen in Only Yesterday. And the fact that there is nary a raccoon-dog testicle parachute in a single Miyazaki film--unlike Pom Poko--is an honest-to-God transgression against the medium.

     

    This, to say nothing of how Takahata will use something like pastel coloring to give an aged look to a film, or give a faint, computer animated tinge in order to suggest something lighthearted. Hell, the opening shot of Only Yesterday--which is of a reflection of a huge city off a tall, glass building--is more profound than most shots in live action films. We're not looking at the city. We're looking at a secondhand view of the city, which lends itself to the themes explicit ideas of memory, and also suggests that our main character reflects the world around her. That's in one five-second shot. Takahata then does things like animate flashbacks flatly, or allows for fantastical sequences to illustrate a specific sensation. Hell, we can even start arguing the veracity of how hard her dad hit her in that one scene, or how stupid her sister and mother thought she was. Takahata is never heavy-handed about this sort of thing, but he puts the pieces there. Also, it's a miracle of filmmaking that Takahata can give us a set of kids, as in Grave of the Fireflies, that are so goddamn annoying and frustrating, and yet, I still cry profusely when I get to the end of the film.

     

    When all is said and done, Takahata has more to say, and fits more in five films than Miyazaki does in twice as many. His films offer more on repeat viewings, and aren't just pretty and well designed the way Miyazaki's are--who does include a lot of references to Japanese folklore and history in meaningful ways, to his credit--but Takahata's style offers greater utility with simple choices. I hope we get to discuss him at some point, because he's as canon as they come.

     

    I hate to be a spoiled brat, because this could be the only chance we get to do something like this, but I don't know. I kinda wish we would be doing something else. THAT SAID, I love Film Critic Hulk, and I'm positive that he'll have really smart things to say about Kiki's Delivery Service--which is still a pretty good picture.

    • Like 3

  9. Posted

    Seeing as this touches everything from The Matrix, to The Wrestler, to the world of street art, yeah. This is canon. Does it reach Carpenter's dizzying highs? No, but it's campy and fun and frighteningly prescient. This movie has come to kick ass and chew bubblegum, but runs plum out of bubblegum.

  10. Posted

    Personally, I'd go with Stray Dog, because it's not as well known, but it more or less invents the buddy cop genre. Plus, it's absolute dynamite, and my personal favorite of Kurosawa's near-flawless filmography.

    • Like 1

  13. Posted

    I did not feel Boyhood at all. And I'm generally pretty receptive to Linklater's output, so it was pretty disappointing to me. Recognizing the limitations that Linklater was working with, there really wasn't a plot and not a whole lot to mark development in the movie, aside from the fact that the actors physically age throughout. It felt like the movie *relied* on that device, rather than developing something from it. Moreover, all of Amy's criticisms of Everybody Wants Some!!! resonated with me in Boyhood. There were only two characters of significance (Mason and Dad) and everyone else (i.e. female characters) was just window dressing. I found it especially surprising that Arquette won the supporting actress oscar for a role that was so woefully underdeveloped.

     

    As someone who merely liked Boyhood on first viewing, my experience is that it gets better with each outing. You just start to notice more things and find more significance in seemingly arbitrary places. Having seen it a dozen times, I totally see why it's hailed so thoroughly. What it comes down to is that you're jamming twelve years of life into two and a half hours. Linklater really makes it all count. Also, what a scary thought: You can condense the full scope of one's childhood into less than three hours, but in three hours, you've watched someone's entire life unfold. Gotta love it.

  14. Posted

    First, I'd like to point out that this is an wasome idea, and I remember vaguely it being already around back in the days of the old forum.

     

    Second, if I have to chose between Citizen Kane and Vertigo, it's pretty clear which one the only just answer is: Bicycle Thieves.

     

    Don't you mean Tangerine?

    • Like 1

  15. Posted

    Honestly? Not including anything that's been included from this decade...

     

    The Social Network

    Boyhood

    The Master

    Drive

    The Avengers (even though I kind of hate this film)

    Tangerine

    The Tree of Life

    Beasts of the Southern Wild

    Before Midnight

    Django Unchained

    Her

    Nightcrawler

    Gone Girl

    Under the Skin

    Exit Through the Gift Shop

    The Act of Killing/The Look of Silence

    The Lego Movie

    The Wolf of Wall Street

    It Follows

    The Witch

     

    I'm forgetting so many.

    • Like 2

  16. Posted

    @thejar, I'm sorry, but I think you're wrong about the scene in Keaton's apartment. It's about, how Devin and Amy mentioned, Verbal getting what he wants. The scene begins with Keaton in control, suppressing Verbal against a wall. Then Verbal gains the upper hand. What we see is Keaton freeing Verbal, and opening of to him, letting him into very specifically designed apartment. It's so much his taste, which is all that matters: That it's his. In the wide shot, we see Keaton give up his position, and Verbal casually places himself into Keaton's home, almost wherever, but not in a way that's too obvious. Meanwhile, Keaton is pushed to the side, against the wall. He's not even the center of his own personal space. Without totally realizing it, he willingly has allowed Verbal to take the reigns, by allowing Verbal to be more comfortable in Keaton's home than Keaton is. Within the visual text, Verbal's more comfortable and in his right place than Keaton is. That's why that scene is BRILLIANT.

    • Like 2

  17. Posted

    This is a film I've seen something like thirty times in my life, mostly as a young teenager. Having spent the last several months watching practically everything I've been able to get my hands on, and having spent a long time away from this in general, I wasn't sure if this was going to hold up. And yeah, there were some things that didn't quite work, but the film is so layered. Re-watching this last night, I had a lot of the same thoughts as Devin and Amy. This film not only works despite the twist, but it works better, because what you're looking for, and what the film is saying, is not only different, but much more complicated. And to see Kevin Spacey's character wanting to laugh in Palminteri's face, and messing with him, is way more interesting. Not only that, but this film is really so balanced and watchable. That has not changed at all. The Usual Suspects is just shy of two hours, but it feels like nothing.

     

    This is a 100% yes. This film holds up well. Every part works. There's not much action, but what action there is just puts you on the edge of your seat. The script is more captivating the more you dig into it. The ensemble is amazing. As an experience, it's as potent as ever Glad I'm not the only one who feels this way.

    • Like 1

  18. Posted

    Hey, I just revisited it. Good news: It is actually pretty tightly plotted and constructed, and way shorter than I remembered. The bad news: Bryan Singer doesn't know where to place that fucking camera. He makes the most boring and clichéed choices, which ads extremely to the predictability of the story. To me, the film works despite and not because of his directorial work.

     

    I'm glad I'm not the only one who feels this way, because that's something I struggled with for years. The look just wasn't right. Some of the cuts are really distracting, too. There's the scene in the line-up, where they're laughing. The next shot is a wide shot, but they're all stone-faced. It's really irritating, because they chose that first shot to establish the chemistry of the cast--which only happened because Benicio del Toro kept farting--which they undermine by not getting another shot of them having a good time. THEY WERE RIGHT FUCKING THERE. It wouldn't have been a hassle. This is from a film I adore, but that frustrates me, because it's not as good as it could be.

    • Like 1

  19. Posted

    As a 17-year old black boy, seeing Boyz N the Hood for the first time was a pretty big deal for me -- very impactful. But recent viewings have revealed it to be a preachy, melodrama with a few good performances (you're right Devin). However, what was missing from the podcast was the fact that black audiences in the mid-late 80s CRAVED this kind of one-to-one representational movie that clearly spoke the frustrations of the community (you're right Amy). Combined with the rise of hip-hop, we felt like we finally had the national bull horn we needed so that's why Do The Right Thing, Jungle Fever, Boyz, etc. were less concerned with subtlety and more concerned with clearly enunciating the things we had all been talking about with each other for years.

     

    That said, I don't want to knock Boyz all the way down because some of the on-the-nose moments actually rang true. I can't tell you how many times I've heard speeches about what "we need to do in the black community" that Furious Styles was clearly an avatar for.

     

    Last thought, it just occurred to me that "Friday" is a better version of "Boyz N the Hood." It hits on the random nature of violence in South Central while creating compelling characters who are just living their lives (hilariously). Of course, there is the third act "guns make you a punk" complete with a "deep speech" but I think my theory holds true.

     

    Anyway, great show. If you are looking to do more black films, please do 'love jones' -- it was the odd, boho antidote to hood films that I think still holds up today.

     

    This is so important. I don't know if either host really addressed this--whether intentionally, or because neither thought to bring it up. But this is meant as a voice for a specific part of our culture. Even if it doesn't quite work as well as other films, the deeper you go with the context with this particular film, the clearer it is that, despite its quality, it is a canon film.

  22. Posted

    This is a movie I watched a hundred times growing up. The Usual Suspects always felt exciting and edgy, even if there some things that didn't quite make sense. This is a film that I think holds up, because the twist ends up throwing out the entire film anyway. So, trying to see how that twist applies to the film before it is kinda useless. I like that kind of subversion. As for the film--is it any good? I have fond memories of it, but I'll need to revisit it. This kinda feels like one of those beloved films that's cool to shit on, but I'll keep an open mind either way.

  23. Posted

    If you did the trilogy of Valhalla Rising, Drive, and Only God Forgives, I think that could make for a compelling episode. Refn is a great filmmaker. Only God Forgives is a great film. I'd love to see it, or something by Refn, discussed at some point.

  24. Posted

     

    Re: that last sentence-perfect, I agree so hard, he does that all the time. His constant brush off of people who don't like that he consistently speaks highly of Woody Allen is pretty much that in a nutshell.

    Well, yeah. Woody Allen has made a bunch of great films. And while Allen is a very problematic subject, where do you draw the line? Because, depending on your standards, none of us should like most of modern music, because so much of that is owed to Phil Spector, who was famously abusive in the studio, and actually killed someone. Same with Errol Flynn. Are you going to say The Adventures of Robin Hood isn't canon-worthy because he was probably a rapist? This is not to justify anyone's behavior. By no means do I mean to do that. What I'm saying is that I think Devin is coming from the standpoint that Allen's work is great, even if he, as a person, is kind of a scumbag. Sometimes the stuff we like and want comes from bothersome places. If you're going on the principle that you can't support the product because of the producer, you're not gonna get very far.

×