What are we watching now?

Oh yeah, apparently that was part of what bombed this movie haha! The subtitles are only for some of the beginning of the film. I totally understand not being into subtitles, but unfortunatley that also shuts you out of a ton of great film. I always think just growing up in a different culture makes the directors', writers', and actor's perspectives way more interesting and potentially awesome.
Oh I am perfectly fine with subs in film. Are you saying this film doesn't have every non-English language dialog subbed? If so; that's dumb. Boo indeed!
 
haha! That was the most ironic thing ever. I had literally just posted about that in the other thread, came over here, and read it! Couldn't be more perfect! haha!
That term has been linked to most modern (A24) horror. And I generally speaking ABHOR the implications of what it means in regards to the films that get tagged with that descriptor. It can be awesome but it is NOT a badge of greatness simply by being applied to something.
 
That term has been linked to most modern (A24) horror. And I generally speaking ABHOR the implications of what it means in regards to the films that get tagged with that descriptor. It can be awesome but it is NOT a badge of greatness simply by being applied to something.

Oh crazy. I've only heard it from my wife, coming from social media accounts that talk about "elevated" interior design.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JT
Oh I misread you; it does have subtitles for all the non-English parts!
Oh good! I will give it a watch then. Huge pet peeve when movies flip flop on dialects but don't provide subs :hmm
Oh crazy. I've only heard it from my wife, coming from social media accounts that talk about "elevated" interior design.
With horror; it's attached to being socially conscious/more intellectually slanted in subject matter/nature. Which can be great. But can also be pretentious af :oops:
 
I will give it a watch then.

Just keep in mind it is a remake, and regarded really unfavorably overall haha! So if you are interested, I suggest maybe trying the original first, and try The Wages of Fear, which is streaming now on Max. I wish I had seen that first, because one thing I read is that Sorcerer is a pretty close remake!

Either way, Sorcerer is interesting, but to me it's like all the most harsh elements of filmmaking without the space and air you'd need to digest it. If you do go for it, I'm interested to know how it would hit you! I think we'll probably see The Wages of Fear tonight to have a direct comparison.
 
And just to be clear, The Wages of Fear, from the little I've gleaned, is supposed to be very good. But I always reserve judgement on that kind of stuff. I tried to watch the totally revered 8½, and I couldn't even make it through. There are plenty of critically acclaimed films I've hated haha.
 
Huge pet peeve when movies flip flop on dialects but don't provide subs

Man, you put me in mind of some specific films. Oh yeah, in one version of Twin Peaks Fire Walk With Me, the version I saw first a long time ago, this long scene in a bar where none of the dialog is intelligible was without subtitles, and I took it as an avant garde choice to fuck with the audience. And there are times where I think a purposeful lack of subtitles is meant to make the audience feel as foreign as the character on screen being talked about feels. To me it's contextual. And I'm really trying to remember other specific examples, but I just can't think of any right now.
 
Man, you put me in mind of some specific films. Oh yeah, in one version of Twin Peaks Fire Walk With Me, the version I saw first a long time ago, this long scene in a bar where none of the dialog is intelligible was without subtitles, and I took it as an avant garde choice to fuck with the audience. And there are times where I think a purposeful lack of subtitles is meant to make the audience feel as foreign as the character on screen being talked about feels. To me it's contextual. And I'm really trying to remember other specific examples, but I just can't think of any right now.
I can see that and it would actually be cool in some situations. But my own OCD is just too strong to be able to ignore that sort of intentional audience irritation :ROFLMAO:
 
The Wages of Fear: it's 2½ hours long, and the first hour is a poorly acted setup for the real film. From there it truly begins. I did love it, but I had to knuckle through the first part due to the stylized acting. This is from 1953, and this definitely had not been influenced by method acting.

But taken as a whole, the film was very cool, creative, and unique. The actors started really to shine as the film progressed, and that struck a nice chord with me, because I do like films that progress slowly, and really let you sit with characters long enough to see them develop, actually to change and evolve / devolve from the plot. That is what happened here.

It does not begin to approach the brutality of the Friedkin remake, and Friedkin executed a great idea to make the backstory of each character's predicament the beginning of his film, but Friedkin really did just want to crush your spirit with his film, whereas the original was filled with life and character.

My wife, who often has the best insight, said that elements of the original and the remake could be combined to make a stronger film than either on its own.

The version of The Wages of Fear I saw was what is streaming on The Criterion Channel, and it was a restored version including many scenes that had been censored from the original US release, due to whacked out perception of anti-American sentiment, homosexuality, racism, and worker exploitation. These scenes helped flush out the film greatly, especially those underlining the nakedly exploitative attitude of the company.

I'm still processing both films, but I'm happy to have seen them back to back. The Wages of Fear and Sorcerer are each strong in its own way. Sorcerer offered me the reflection that perhaps Friedkin was a big influence on Michael Cimino, that Friedkin was maybe the first true master of soul destroying brutality, and that Cimino carried and refined that mantel, before he started making utter shit like Desperate Hours later on.

Now that I think of it, Cimino and Friedkin are wildly varied in the quality of their films, on a more extreme level than I'm aware of in anyone else's body of work. On one hand you have The Deer Hunter and The Exorcist, and on the other you have Desperate Hours and Rampage. Hmmm...

From what I've gleaned, Cimino just lost his mind with the freedom he was given after The Deer Hunter, and squandered untold money for Heaven's Gate, killing his hopeful career, but Friedkin was just a raging dick, dubbed Hurricane Billy for his mercurial egomania. He had this disgusting tendency to blame any lack of financial return on his films on the actors he hired, as if the point of directing a film is not to guide the actors to great performances.

It's like both of these guys have that Shakespearean style inherent flaw that is the fundamental to their diminishment.

Next were going to try Becket, which I haven't seen since high school. Very excited for this one.
 
Neil Brennan’s new special “Crazy Good” on Netflix is great.

My plan was to watch 3 Body Problem next, but I started watching Baby Reindeer at random, and was instantly hooked by the performances of the two leads.

My kid’s on spring break this week and addicted to Survivor and The Inbestigators. (Ugh, ugh.) Any time I can sneak in a little dialog written by a fully functioning adult is like a breath of fresh air lol.
 
Neil Brennan’s new special “Crazy Good” on Netflix is great.

My plan was to watch 3 Body Problem next, but I started watching Baby Reindeer at random, and was instantly hooked by the performances of the two leads.

My kid’s on spring break this week and addicted to Survivor and The Inbestigators. (Ugh, ugh.) Any time I can sneak in a little dialog written by a fully functioning adult is like a breath of fresh air lol.
Good to know. I wondered about Neil. Helping Chapelle is one thing but not sure I'm interested in his own take on things. Or moreso his delivery of it? Will check it out!

Speaking of Chapelle adjacent; Danell Rawlings (sp?) special was very good. I've also been watching bits and pieces of Kill Tony and if you could get Casey Rocket to do a bit longer than a minute and maintain that oddball af "I'm on Robitussin!" material and energy; he would KILL.
 
I'm not gonna lie, though, every damn time my skinny ass 10 year old and his buddies yell this as if they are bout to go topple the universe, rather than hide their way to 9th place in a Fortnite battle Royale, I get all warm and fuzzy inside.
If you want to take this “let’s go” thing to the next level, hang around while your wife and kid binge-watch The Amazing Race, where everyone thinks they’re taking on the world, and they also happen to be going somewhere at all times.

On second thought, don’t do that.
 
Watched the 1st episode of Fallout last night. Not a gamer. Last game I dove deep
into was Pong. :idk

First 15 minutes I was getting sucked in. Then I got spit back out. Not sure if I have
the stamina for it or not. Not into waiting until episode 4 or 5 to find out whether
I dig it or not. :bonk

I actually enjoyed Twisted Metal more. It is more light-hearted and not as burdened
by its own sense of self-importance as Fallout feels so far.
 
Watched the 1st episode of Fallout last night. Not a gamer. Last game I dove deep
into was Pong. :idk

First 15 minutes I was getting sucked in. Then I got spit back out. Not sure if I have
the stamina for it or not. Not into waiting until episode 4 or 5 to find out whether
I dig it or not. :bonk

I actually enjoyed Twisted Metal more. It is more light-hearted and not as burdened
by its own sense of self-importance as Fallout feels so far.
I'd be watching because Walton Goggins. Really more than anything. Not sure if I'll take the plunge at this point.
 
Becket (1964): I love Richard Burton so much; I just can't help it. And now I can add that I love Peter O'Toole. O'Toole is weird and full of character, and just great. I feel like you can never quite tell what the hell he's about to do. I know what Richard Burton is about to do: sardonically spew contempt.

The mastering is brutal, with unreasonable dynamic range that forces you to max out the volume to make out dialogue then deafen you with low quality 60s upper midrange.

It's also all medieval politics told from the point of view of the players and their whims. The direction went something like this: "Do it haughty!"

I was excited to see more of Siân Phillips outside of the Lynch Dune, but she was barely in it, and not with the truly insane intensity that made me love her. I'll seek out more anyway.

But the takeaway is, I can eat up any Richard Burton as always, even though he's like an early Christopher Walken, always exactly the same but awesome, and Peter O'Toole is just one crazy and cool fucker.

My wife's insight: she pointed out that I love Richard Burton because he's very William Shatner. I... don't know [long pause] ...what to say. They're both so overfull of confidence their self esteem is utterly unstoppable. Burton is like the disdain version, and Shatner is just pure joy. I can kind of throw Rod Steiger in with this lot, and he's like the "so confident in my dramatics I come off as fucking insane" version, and believe me, I eat that up too. Just try to sit through the original Amytyville Horror for his hilariously over the top performance.
 
Back
Top