Third Eye Film Society ~ View topic

Author

Message

< Third Eye Film Forums ~ Current Film Talk

Rod

Posted: Mon Jun 23, 2008 12:19 am

Joined: 21 Dec 2004 Posts: 2944 Location: Lithgow, Australia

billyweeds wrote:

What I have little tolerance for is totally inept acting like Ms. Sydney Poitier's, and misplaced, inartful feminism like that espoused by Tarantino in his writing and direction of these grrrrls.

This is in itself pretty lame. You went to see a rocketing, racing ride, so you're bothered by feminsim that manifests itself in beating the shit out of the bad guy? What the fuck did you expect, The Women's Room? So yes, I'm still intrigued. More to the point, the generational split on appreciating the film is quite marked, and Gary has repeatedly indicated that a large part of his botheration with the film was the girls' swearing - suffice to say they reminded me of a lot of my female friends. Our difference on the film is so strikingly marked that I'm forced to look for reaons. Gary's stooping to bash the film at any and every opportunity feel forced and suspicious. Focusing on Poiter's performance, which is far from the most important in the film, also has a fishy feel to me. Myself, I liked her a lot. Not as much as Vanessa Ferlito, who struck me as a force of nature. But Poitier did a great job at presenting the undercurrents of aggression under the breezy exterior that perfectly presented one of those people whom people are drawn to but is actually a bit of jerk. I laughed and was exciting all the way through Death Proof. And yet I've got people telling me left right and center what shit it was. I'm bemused, and I'm also a bit angry. And I suspect at lot of it is because of the film's pointed take on middle-aged-male narcissism. Most films are set up to appease that.

_________________
A long time ago, but somehow in the future...It is a period of civil war and renegade paragraphs floating through space.

jeremy

Posted: Mon Jun 23, 2008 3:04 am

Joined: 21 May 2004 Posts: 6794 Location: Derby, England and Hamilton, New Zealand (yes they are about 12,000 miles apart)

Some of my best friends are feminists.

Tarantino comes across as a perpetual adolescent both fascinated and in awe of women. Given that he's in his mid-forties, he must either be gay or enjoys having a nononesense blonde walk up and down his back in high heels.

Doon't get me wrong, I enjoy Tarantino's work, his subversive playfulness, his wit and his love of film and pop culture. He strikes a chord. But just because he has a thing for strong women dishing it out to midle-aged losers doesn't make him a feminist. Tarantino's version of the femme fatale has much more to do with the male gaze than with female empowerment.

_________________
I am angry, I am ill, and I'm as ugly as sin.
My irritability keeps me alive and kicking.
I know the meaning of life, it doesn't help me a bit.
I know beauty and I know a good thing when I see it.

jeremy

Posted: Mon Jun 23, 2008 3:17 am

Joined: 21 May 2004 Posts: 6794 Location: Derby, England and Hamilton, New Zealand (yes they are about 12,000 miles apart)

I like Rod's list, though I'd sooner admit to being a contrarian than ascribing my taste to a kick-ass sensibility.

Actually, and I'm sure Rod will hate being lumped with any grouping, I think that in terms of the way they view the world, Australians are much more in tune with the British rthan Americans. I mean to say, if they didn't secretly love us, why have they got a Union Jack on their flag and a picture of the queen on their money.

Now Canadians on the other hand...

tirebiter

Posted: Mon Jun 23, 2008 7:19 am

Joined: 20 May 2004 Posts: 4011 Location: not far away

Went to see Mongol with the fambly yesterday. We all liked it a lot. Beautiful imagery and epic sweep. It's the first of three-- I look forward to the next two.

billyweeds

Posted: Mon Jun 23, 2008 7:29 am

Joined: 20 May 2004 Posts: 20618 Location: New York City

tirebiter wrote:

Went to see Mongol with the fambly yesterday. We all liked it a lot. Beautiful imagery and epic sweep. It's the first of three-- I look forward to the next two.

The trailer/preview/whatever made it look pretty eye-popping, and very good. However, it's the kind of movie--epic, sprawling, etc.--I generally have to be dragged kicking and screaming to go and see, so it may be a while. It's definitely on my list.

jeremy

Posted: Mon Jun 23, 2008 7:34 am

Joined: 21 May 2004 Posts: 6794 Location: Derby, England and Hamilton, New Zealand (yes they are about 12,000 miles apart)

I read it was a revisionist take on Genghis Khan, not portraying him as the bloodthirsty tyrant of popular imagination, but rather as a somewhat reluctant and thoughtful ruler, who, along with his restrained and well intentioned hordes, just happened to conquer a a large chunk of the known world and have the rest of it quake at the mention of his name. I'm in no position to suggest that this take is inaccurate, but it sounds a lot less fun than the boil-your-enemies-alive Khan of Gibbon's history.

tirebiter

Posted: Mon Jun 23, 2008 7:57 am

Joined: 20 May 2004 Posts: 4011 Location: not far away

It's much more true to history than The Conqueror, though John Wayne made a really kick-ass Genghis Khan. "I feel this Tartar woman is for me, and my blood says: Take her! There are moments for wisdom and moments when I listen to my blood: my blood says, Take this Tartar woman!" Just imagine John Wayne biting into that line-- THAT'S a Mongol to believe in!

Yeah, Mongol is clearly a work of hagiography-- to the degree that on several occasions God Himself comes to his aid! But swing with it-- it's pretty cool.

My problem is that I'm two volumes into a series bio of Genghis called-- wait for it-- Genghis. It's also created as a narrative with lots of drama, so you wonder what's "real" and what's fictional. The history is improbable enough that you can believe almost anything about Genghis.

mo_flixx

Posted: Mon Jun 23, 2008 8:03 am

Joined: 30 May 2004 Posts: 12533

I also highly recommend MONGOL and wrote about it a few months back.

lady wakasa

Posted: Mon Jun 23, 2008 9:52 am

Joined: 21 May 2004 Posts: 5911 Location: Beyond the Blue Horizon

I totally think that you're normally very very observant of what goes on in movies, Rod, - much moreso than I am - but the only movie I've totally disagreed with you on is with No Country for Old Men.

Rod wrote:

modern-life-is-rubbish points far more efficiently than NCforOM

I started going into this on Marilyn's blog, but that's not really set up for a good back and forth (and it's blocked from work). I really don't think that "modern-life-is-rubbish" is the true message; in fact, Ellis's "that's vanity" shoots a hole in that. The movie covers a lot of ground, but if anything, it's more about how Bell thinks that's modern life is rubbish, when the issue is more that he's the one who's changed - become an old man - and the myths he's crafted for himself, which were crumbling before, have been demolished by Chigurh's passing.

There's also a very good case to be made that the movie deconstructs the entire Western / cowboy myth, showing that to be rubbish as well, although I can't claim coming up with that.

The biggest "fault" I saw in the movie is that it really requires multiple viewings. It's almost impossible to go into it cold and pick up everything that's going on, although anyone who's read the book first may have a fighting chance.

_________________
===================
http://www.wakasaworld.com

whiskeypriest

Posted: Mon Jun 23, 2008 12:11 pm

Joined: 20 May 2004 Posts: 6916 Location: "It's a Dry Heat."

lady wakasa wrote:

Rod wrote:

modern-life-is-rubbish points far more efficiently than NCforOM

I agree with this: the whole "modern life sucks" argument cannot survive Uncle Ellis, or the final two dreams. Evil is a constant, even as its face changes, and Bell's decision to abdicate his responsibilities is based upon his false understanding of the situation.

i have argued elsewhere (imdb) that the key to understanding NCfOM is Sailing to Byzantium - not just the first line it takes the title from, but the entire poem, including this last verse:

Once out of nature I shall never take
My bodily form from any natural thing,
But such a form as Grecian goldsmiths make
Of hammered gold and gold enamelling
To keep a drowsy Emperor awake;
Or set upon a golden bough to sing
To lords and ladies of Byzantium
Of what is past, or passing, or to come.

The narrator of Byzantium believes in the possibility that he is leaving a corrupt world behind and sailing to a world where age is honored, but understands at some level the possibility that it is all a sham. Compare Bell's second dream, which ends with the funereal "And then I woke up." Not even death is going to provide Bell the comfort he seeks. What the Byzantium narrator - and Bell who is after all the narrator of NCfOM - sees as sort of a fall back position is the transformative power of art; even if there never is a country for old men, the singing of it is (like aurochs and angels, the secret of durable pigments, and prophetic sonnets) an artistic immortality, and possibly the only one we may share.

The same thought is a key to my understanding of some aspects of Atonement that have troubled others, by the way.

Quote:

There's also a very good case to be made that the movie deconstructs the entire Western / cowboy myth, showing that to be rubbish as well, although I can't claim coming up with that.

Not easypz, then?

_________________
I ask you, Velvel, as a rational man, which of us is possessed?

whiskeypriest

Posted: Mon Jun 23, 2008 12:12 pm

Joined: 20 May 2004 Posts: 6916 Location: "It's a Dry Heat."

I still haven't gotten to the bottom of what I think of No Country for Old Men, but it is the best movie I've seen since Fargo, which makes me seem like way more the Coen Bros fanboy than I actually am.

_________________
I ask you, Velvel, as a rational man, which of us is possessed?

Nancy

Posted: Mon Jun 23, 2008 12:34 pm

Joined: 20 May 2004 Posts: 4607 Location: Norman, OK

I saw a trailer for Mongol a few months ago, and have been waiting to see it ever since. I just hope it finally gets to a theater around here.

_________________
"All in all, it's just another feather in the fan."

Isaacism, 2009

whiskeypriest

Posted: Mon Jun 23, 2008 12:46 pm

Joined: 20 May 2004 Posts: 6916 Location: "It's a Dry Heat."

Nancy wrote:

I saw a trailer for Mongol a few months ago, and have been waiting to see it ever since. I just hope it finally gets to a theater around here.

They are actually advertising it on TV here, which has to be a first for a movie from Kazahkstan. ACTUALLY from Kazahkstan, that is.

_________________
I ask you, Velvel, as a rational man, which of us is possessed?

lady wakasa

Posted: Mon Jun 23, 2008 1:19 pm

Joined: 21 May 2004 Posts: 5911 Location: Beyond the Blue Horizon

whiskeypriest wrote:

Not easypz, then?

No, unfortunately not. If I wrote analysis that well I'd be out of this one-horse town I'm currently calling a job.

Although I think I've figured out who you are - and it's a good thing it's not kenny-164, because then I'd have to lose all respect for you.

_________________
===================
http://www.wakasaworld.com

shannon

Posted: Mon Jun 23, 2008 2:11 pm

Joined: 21 May 2004 Posts: 1628 Location: NC

I hope Mongol is better than Nomad, which I found insufferable.

All times are GMT - 5 Hours

View next topic View previous topic Page 1855 of 3196 Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 ... 1854, 1855, 1856 ... 3194, 3195, 3196 Next Third Eye Film Society Forum Index ~ Third Eye Film Forums

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum