I feel like a lot of these films are important because they did something first. The problem is that it doesn’t mean that film did it best.
I’ve always talked about The Rolling Stones like this. I respect what they did, but I was born when rock had really gone beyond it. The Beatles too for the most part. Even a lot of '80s punk. I wanted faster, heavier, more technical. All the old stuff just felt basic to me, but I know it’s a matter of perspective.
The Stones, The Who, Led Zeppelin, these guys were inventing the sound of rock. I think they’re fantastic musicians. But Rush and Pink Floyd stand out more to me as timeless art.
Those artists arrived much later than the invention of rock. It was invented by Chuck Berry and other black artists in the US during the 50s.
I didn’t think my point needed a “history of music” lesson attached. The rock bands of the 60s were taking the experiments of swing and blues musicians from the decade prior and refining them into the aggressive, over-driven and distorted arrangements. Not “rock & roll”.
And then, sometimes, you watch it years or decades later and it clicks. And other times you are just convinced everyone who likes it are saying so because critics like it.
Lord of the Rings
Books, sure. The books are dense as all fuck, and I get that a lot of people aren’t interested in things like the ancestry of a tree.
Movies, though, are way more efficient with the storytelling. Especially the theatrical version, despite how much is missed out compared to the extended.
It insists upon itself.
Blade Runner for me. Great themes, great plot, great visuals and music, horrendously boring and plodding. 2049 was better imo.
Wrong opinion. You can definitely enjoy 2049 more, but the better film is the first. I enjoy 2049 much more often, it is a very palatable movie that appeals to a greater, higher volume selling, family-friendlier audience than the original. It’s the lager vs a craft beer between the two, though.
He said “for me”. How could his opinion be wrong?
It just is. I cant let people be thinking it’s valid. I’m on a mission from god to defend blade runner.
Ugh, lord of the rings. I tried watching it alone, with friends, with a girlfriend… Nope, just boring
You poor son of a bitch
I know. They tried to watch it so many times, that must have been hell. I could not get through it and would never subject myself to that crap again.
On one level, if I like something and you don’t, we are both right. But there are times when I have to admit I just don’t have the background and knowledge to appreciate it. I can’t deal with Jazz. I don’t get it. I’m not going to say it’s not good, just because I don’t get it.
It’s interesting you say that because jazz bars aren’t exactly a roaring success anymore. I’m sure a lot of it has to do with the fact that jazz was considered counterculture, and people like that aspect of it. These days no one really cares about jazz and no one’s trying to ban it. And it’s interesting that now it’s less popular.
Maybe it wasn’t actually ever good?
You can try fusion genres of jazz with something you like, and see if it’s fun that way. E.g. you’ve posted about The Lords of the New Church, who seem to have been playing punk and post-punk:
Jazz with post-punk: James Chance & The Contortions
Jazz-mathcore: Needle Play
Instrumental noise-rock/math-rock/punk-jazz: Lanzallamas
I might be able to throw in more names if you name other genres. In particular, I have a bunch of various jazz-metal, e.g. jazz-grindcore/ska: Le Scrawl.
Thanks. I’ll take a listen to your suggestions. I know about myself that, regarding music, I’m a pretty shallow puddle.
Ah, and also check out Mamaleek’s ‘Come and See’. They’re my favorite band for the past five years after hearing this album.
2001 a space odisey or most of Tarkovsky films (even though I love the concept and I do consider them as groundbreaking for their time)… I can’t stand them. I tried.
For a minute I thought you meant Tartakovsky, was all ready to throw down for Samurai Jack n shit. Where’s my coffee at
Long live Samurai and Primal. I loved Dexter’s lab as a kid and the power puff girls!
It’s kind of weird, but I find that the higher a film is rated by film critics and websites, the less I tend to enjoy it.
A lot of film critique industry is based upon fart-sniffing snobbery.
It’s like a game of one-upsmanship on how much “meaning” you can
inventderive from dull, self-important drudgery and the more masochistic your movie-watching experience, the more “refined” you are.Source: had to study media crit and industry a lot in school.
Anybody ever read the Godfather book? It’s… kinda weird. Every time a new character is introduced, it’s goes into their sexual history. Like, do we really need to know Rocko is an attentive lover with a string of girlfriends that he has no trouble keeping satisfied before he goes and kills some dude?
And then there’s a part of the book that is about… How do I put this…
a woman getting a pussy tightening surgery.
It’s the bridesmaid that Sonny fucks in the closet at his sister’s wedding. She sought out Sonny, as did all the other women “with big mouths and wide hips” because he had a legendarily big cock and it was her only hope to get any pleasure, on account of her gigantic pussy and all.
After he dies, she tried to commit suicide. Not because she cared for him, she just figures she’ll always be alone because no one else in the world will have a cock that will be adequate to work with her ginormous pussy.
But much later in the book, she’s living at the family casino in Nevada, and her doctor boyfriend finally talks her into having sex and discovers her pussy is huge and convinces her that he knows a great plastic surgeon that can fix it. It walks through the consultation and surgery and everything. Not in explicit detail, but, like, it’s so weird.
And there’s weird comments like (not a quote) “Don’t worry, doll. I do great work. I’ll fix you up so nice he’ll be calling me every day to thank me.” Shit like that.
And it worked. After she has the surgery and they have sex, her doctor boyfriend immediately proposes to her.
So, anyway, yeah… I don’t know why they left the great pussy tightening subplot out of the movies.
Please, dont ever read Stephen kings IT.
Its…deeply fucked up. It includes a child group sex act that happens right before they confront IT directly, which empowers them to defeat it.
Like most his books back then, the byline should have said “Cocaine, with Stephen king.”
Pretty sure it’s after they fight It (the first time), but it’s not really important.
It is a good book that is well written. Just because you cannot handle it, don’t lie to people
Explains the island allegations
deleted by creator
So, anyway, yeah… I don’t know why they left the great pussy tightening subplot out of the movies.
well you know, I’m beginning to think this Coppola fellow simply didn’t know true art when he saw it, after reading all that. That could’ve been a wonderfully surreal addition to spice up the trilogy.
Time for a reboot!!
This time focusing exclusively on this character and her pussy struggles. Everything else should be mentioned in the background in passing. It should be four and a half hours, third of which is black and white for no reason.
You should watch 2001 A space Odyssey it is exactly like this.
It is a historical documentary set in the early days of AI and Space Travel before SpaceX and ChatGPT, it’s kinda neet to see how far we’ve came in such a short time though.
In 2006 I fell asleep watching that movie. Highly recommend falling asleep watching that movie. The background noise is artistically stunning and sleep-promoting soothing.
If you don’t care for it, don’t let people make you watch it.
No one (sane) will go “Oh! you have to go to this 4 hour 17th century italian Opera with me! You will love it!” .You don’t “have to” value any kind of art. If you don’t, you don’t. That said, it might be worth trying at least once, you never know if you find something that stays with you.
“Oh! you have to go to this 4 hour 17th century italian Opera with me! You will love it!”
So you’ve never been dragged to Swan Lake?
I think that most of Art needs a bit oft commitment to be consumed and understood, you cannot expect to immediately understand a piece oft Art just because you can see colour and hear sound. It boils down to education, as you need to learn most things in manageable steps. What im saying is: if someone offers to show you something they like, they are likely a good resource to guide you through the experience.
More likely than the average Joe but guiding, like teaching or storytelling, is a distinct skill. Lots of people are totally blind to their own biases and the hypothetical 4 hour opera without context would definitely make me doubt their advice.
I was like this with 2001: A Space Odessy. I love Kubrick, I love sci-fi, I even like art that may require a change in perspective/that is more abstract and I’m an old movie buff. Yet Space Odessy wasn’t for me for some reason. It’s long, streched-out and has some scenes you wish would already end by the second minute, yet they last for 20. I liked the surreal bits a lot but for the almost 3 hours it took to watch it I really can’t say I was entertained.
I ended up watching Interstellar later and while it’s far from Space Odessy in artistic value I ended up feeling that was more like the movie I wanted Space Odessy to be. Obviously they are not very similar but it had some concepts that without watching I hoped Kubrick already figured out for some reason.
Interstellar is a very plot driven movie, it’s leads you by the hand saying “these things are happening, in this order, and it’s interesting and engaging”, and when the movie is done you get it: the journey is at an end, and the good guys conquered the big problems, emotions were felt along the way, and you’re not really left with any lingering questions afterwards. It’s a great movie, but it’s also a rather easy movie to enjoy if you’re into space stuff.
Whereas 2001, aside from being an absolute visual feast, is more abstract and theme driven, about humanity’s place in the cosmos, and it makes you ask deeper questions, but you must actually pay attention and discover those questions and explore them in your own mind to actually engage with the movie. It’s not a passive experience, and your engagement with the movie can stay with you for days. It’s certainly a much more difficult movie to enjoy.
When I was in my 20s, I hated movies like 2001 and Bladerunner, I found them so tedious, because I wanted scifi like Aliens goddammit. Later, I learned to really enjoy these more cerebral movies that took effort to engage with, because they were so rewarding when that effort paid off.
easy ≠ bad
You know what my favorite food is? A plain pepperoni pizza. Absolutely love it.
You can take me out to dinner to the fanciest restaurant: five Michelin stars, the best trained chefs, the most expensive ingredients, the perfect ambience… and it would be utterly wasted on me. Because nothing beats a plain pepperoni pizza.
Some people are like that with movies. Even movies which are objectively some of the best ever produced in the history of cinema, will have people who don’t like them. And that’s perfectly fine.
Plain and pepperoni are two different things!
In a similar vein, I’m a sausage pie guy. Give me some ground sausage on pizza and I’ll eat that for life. Anytime I get together with people, there’s always the “what toppings” discussion, and people bring their fucking bullshit to the table, and I say get sausage, and people go mehhh mehhh mehhh, and you know what? Everyone eats the goddamn sausage, and were left with olives and mushrooms, and peppers and onions, and fucking Hawaiian.
So I appreciate it. The classics are classics for a reason.
You might want to actually try one of those fancy restaurants, you might be surprised.
But also maybe it’s better to not bother and be happy with what you gotOh I’ve been to some :D
One time our boss took us to a fancy restaurant that had a Michelin-starred chef owner. We did some ad work and publicity for him, so this was sort of a thank you, and a way for him to go all out and make a surprise menu to try things. Basically, we were dining for free there.
They go all out. Nine course meal. And as you’d expect, that means giant plates with tiny portions.
Now, thing is… our company is more of a steakhouse crowd.
Halfway through, they serve a perfect steak. Cooked to heavenly perfection. Best steak I’ve ever had in my entire life. And garnished with gourmet fries. They serve those in this tiny ramekin, intended to share. Basically, everyone gets a handful of fries.
One colleague sees the steak, grabs three ramekins and proceeds to load up his plate. He promptly flags the waitress and asks ‘hey, can you get some more fries?’.
Waitress comes back with some more. Colleague again: ‘hey uh, you wouldn’t happen to have a bottle of curry sauce?’ The look on her face was priceless. That was not a question this restaurant had ever had. ‘I’ll go ask… the chef’
Luckily the chef had a good sense of humor about him: out comes this wild, tattooed, giant bearded mountain of a man carrying the biggest kitchen knife I’ve ever seen. ‘WHO’S THE FUCKER WHO JUST ORDERED CURRY SAUCE IN MY RESTAURANT??’ Colleague meekly raises his hand. Chef hands him the bottle of curry sauce he was holding behind his back 😂
I think I nodded off like 3 times when watching Dune. It’s just so damn boring.
I love dune. I would never watch it with probably anyone ever.
I mean, which version?
I almost think the early low budget adaptations are better because of how zany they get with the art and effects.
The Timothee Chalamet version is just another action movie. But Lynch gets wild with it.
“Just another action movie” but the guy up the comment chain is literally dozing off. Part one actually has very little action in it, most of it is packed landscape shots, politics, and lore dumping. Which is very accurate to the source material. If you dislike Villeneuve’s adaptation, I can only assume you did not love the Herbert books because he was incredibly faithful to the tone, especially for material that was thought to be impossible to adapt to the big screen.
Lynch’s stuff is simply not comparable because he said “fuck the source material” and just kinda did whatever came to him in some acid trip or other. Fine if that’s your thing but that’s not what Dune is - especially not the first few books.
