Movies

This topic contains 280 replies, has 31 voices, and was last updated by  Richard L. 5 days, 2 hours ago.

Viewing 10 posts - 21 through 30 (of 281 total)
  • Author
    Posts Mark Topic Read  | 
  • 03 Jun 2012 at 12:21 pm #1462

    Candy Minx
    Member

    Edit posts…oh good god it’s a great question Richard…but I can’t help you because all my posts have capitals and I can’t edit them from this iPad…Erghhhh fuck editing blah hah hah hah

    Richard I believe you wre genitically designed to love tree of life. I can not believe you didn’t see it in the theatre lad!

    My darling cantons….although I suspect you arenot a darlinG heh heh heh, I understood perfectly well what way you meant. But incantatory narration began before tv commercials. It doesn’t bother me if a movie uses incantatory narration (like sacred texts do) and surely eventually…tv commercials will pick this up. Advertising uses sacred texts and any kind of language to sell. It’s a back and forth thing as old as camp fires and humans shooting the sit around them( that wou
    D be 4 million years)

    Logan’s run predicted the use of incantatory narratives in commercial ventures and total recall satirized such usage….

    But do we throw out the incantatory narrative style because corrupt forces co opt such language? I don’t know…maybe…but then we have to throw out the bhadagavida, the bible, Walt Whitman, cormac McCarthy, geophrey hill…

    I mean really, that commercial sounds like a McCarthy passage hee heh heh!

    Lee, my husband felt like tree of life was secretly revealing to him about his father. He was apeshit over that movie. The two of us us had such a powerful shared experience of that movie.

    But there isn’t really any movie that’s made for everyone…it’s okay to not like the same movies or books.

    I do think though…if I knew or met someone who didn’t like “it’s a wonderful life” I don’t think I could ever trust them…I think there would be something fundamentally wrong with that person. I would be wary …


      Quote
    04 Jun 2012 at 8:32 am #1470

    Richard L.
    Member

    Re: “Richard, I believe you were genetically designed to love Tree Of Life. I cannot believe you didn’t see it in the theatre, lad…”

    Well, my tree-of-life spirituality was hardly congenital. I spent many years as an H. L. Menckenly adamant atheist, thinking that religion’s only use was for superior minds to laugh at. I evolved from there to simple agnostic, aware of human limitations and no longer considering it fun to argue with believers of any stripe.

    My current floating unitarian/christian/buddhist/humanist/pantheist depends-on-what-day-you-ask-me-and-how-you-ask-the-question spirituality evolved not from the study of religion but from the study of the science of consciousness. I hold several ideas at once and can see the logic in different arguments and theories, depending upon where I happen to be standing when they are argued.

    The reason we did not see Tree of Life is that the movie did not make it to this neck of the Kentucky woods and the early reviews did not make it seem worth the trip to either Lexington or Louisville.


      Quote
    • This reply was modified 4 years, 11 months ago by  Richard L..
    • This reply was modified 4 years, 11 months ago by  Richard L..
    • This reply was modified 4 years, 11 months ago by  Richard L..
    • This reply was modified 4 years, 11 months ago by  Richard L..
    04 Jun 2012 at 12:08 pm #1476

    Anonymous

    Candy Minx: Seth, Ishtar is one of my face movies too..but we can’t possibly be talking about the same movie can we? I will have to google to see if there is another movie with same title, more lofty than the one I love with Beatty and hoffman….

    What you trying to say there Minxy? Are you calling me a smuck who is incapable of love for Ishtar? I’ve got a wardrobe of love in my eyes, Minxy. Take your time, look around and see if there’s something your size.

    Of course it’s the same Ishtar.

    I guess I come off like a real elitist prick here.

    My tastes are decidedly of all stripes. From Ishtar to Up in Smoke to Ghostbusters to Sweet Movie, The Fortune and all of Terry Malick’s movies – my love of films run the gamut, Good Lady.

    Richard,

    Now I know from reading your posts that you are a smart fellow. So tell me this amigo…What in heaven’s name are you doing listening to critics? When are they EVER right? I’m sad to hear you missed out on seeing Tree on the big screen. But fret not, sir, I have it on Good Authority that Mr. Malick’s next film, “To The Wonder” will be like Tree of Life on steroids.


      Quote
    05 Jun 2012 at 6:12 pm #1502

    Richard L.
    Member

    Re: Criticism

    I didn’t take it as criticism, and her suggestion that I so often write about the trinity (and that all three are one) in my literary interpretations is correct. The idea of the universal trinity is from Emerson (and long before that, it was expressed by Aristotle in his three stages of Man).

    Re: Longmire

    Despite a good cast, Longmire felt like the Cliff Notes of the novel, rushed and herky-jerky. They cut what should have been a two-hour pilot down to about forty minutes, interrupted by about twenty minutes of dumb commercials. It would have played much better on PBS Mystery where, at least, it would have been longer.

    Still, there were some interesting bits. I didn’t recognize the guy who played Longmire, but they say he previously starred in The Matrix. The actress from Battlestar Galactica was well cast as the deputy. We’ll see how the other episodes play out.


      Quote
    06 Jun 2012 at 10:03 am #1506

    Anonymous

    Maybe I need to revise my statement…

    “The reason we did not see Tree of Life is that the movie did not make it to this neck of the Kentucky woods and the early reviews did not make it seem worth the trip to either Lexington or Louisville.”

    That’s what I meant when I asked why are you listening to critics.


      Quote
    06 Jun 2012 at 1:15 pm #1509

    Richard L.
    Member

    Thanks. I should have seen that. Malick will probably get our attention on DVD soon.


      Quote
    07 Jun 2012 at 3:36 am #1523

    Bunny McVane
    Member

    In my opinion, which I believe echo’s Candy’s, Tree of Life is true reverence, whereas Hyundai is simulacra. We have seen this simulacra “prefigured” (Baudrillard)especially in the works of Dick, though I must say I’ve seen more movie adaptations of Philip K. Dick than I have actually read of him.

    Still trying to understand ten people leaving the theater when I saw it. I have a pretty good idea of what the film’s detractors have to say about that. Intuitively, though, it’s my impression there is something about a direct dose of sincerity people just can’t take anymore because advertisers, certain directors, etc. have been telling us how to feel. What I’m saying is probably oversimplifying the situation. Certainly people can and do sit through sincere art. Can someone think of an example of a recent cinematic success that was sincere, thought provoking, and did not involve glib irony? I’m asking this as a serious question, not rhetorical. And don’t say the movie Doubt; I’m not accepting that as an answer.


      Quote
    07 Jun 2012 at 6:59 am #1525

    Richard L.
    Member

    Re: ” Can someone think of an example of a recent cinematic success that was sincere, thought provoking, and did not involve glib irony?”

    A modest little film named THE DESCENDANTS, for one.

    A character study in which a man must examine his inner feelings and seek to transform his outer self to reflect his true inner self once he looks inward and discovers what it is. Shakespeare had it right: Love does not alter when alteration finds, even if that alteration is that the loved one no longer loves us back.

    The film is nicely shot, understated, sincere. No preview clip can do it justice. It says what it says without putting it into soundbites. It goes beyond the best words spoken for it, even by George Clooney when interviewed by Charlie Rose.

    Immature materialistic viewers who haven’t learned how to love except in the juvenile, possessive sense, see it but don’t get it. They’re liable to like the story of the daughters but completely gag on the love story at the heart of the film. It’s like Anna Karenina, where the emotionally immature think the true love story is between Anna and Vronsky, rather than Levin’s love for Kitty.

    What passes for love in this juvenile and materialist society is usually only the possessive love, which is more akin to property rights.


      Quote
    • This reply was modified 4 years, 11 months ago by  Richard L..
    07 Jun 2012 at 4:27 pm #1528

    Bunny McVane
    Member

    Thanks, Richard. I will add that to my queue.


      Quote
    08 Jun 2012 at 11:01 am #1536

    Rick Wallach
    Keymaster

    Prometheus: visually stunning, didn’t need the 3D shtick, definitely not for pregnant women. This Von Dainiken – Aliens created us stuff was already old before the aliens created us. I prefer the Lovecraft explanation anyway – that extradimensionals created us a joke. It falls flat at the end and like most prole sci-fi these days, it’s pretty predictable and you wish Bradbury had written it. Nice way to kill a rainy afternoon if you have some leftover weed from your wallflower geek kid’s nebbish party to use up before your paranoia takes hold and you flush it, but Blade Runner it ain’t.

    PS – my lack of regard for Tree of Life here is pretty well known so I’ll just repeat that, as far from anything like an impatient or materialistic viewer, I found very little in the way of “sincerity” about it, much in the way of cheap sentiment, sententiousness, atrocious pacing and thick gobbets of melodramatic pretense. Thank Buddha for the dinosaur scenes, or I would have bemoaned the loss of a great opportunity to take a three hour nap.


      Quote
    • This reply was modified 4 years, 11 months ago by  Rick Wallach.
Viewing 10 posts - 21 through 30 (of 281 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Comments are closed, but trackbacks and pingbacks are open.