Watching Movies Alone with crumbsroom

Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 2957
RockI also got around to Moonlight, which I'm finding firmly in really good territory and brushing up against greatness but not quite making it there, but I'm thinking that's more from my preferences as a viewer than actual faults with the film. The reasons that are keeping me from embracing it fully I'm beginning to see as conscious narrative choices that probably do add to the strength of the film. There are perfectly good narrative reasons for Mahershala Ali's character to be absent from the second and third acts, but his performance is so good that I can't help but feel his absence negatively (the performances are generally pretty strong, but I don't think anyone else in the movie is on his level). And while I understand the movie's trying to show the character at three different stages of his life, I'm not sure I gelled to the film's approach of sliding sideways into the character's evolution rather than firmly defining it as an arc. It's been growing on me after my viewing, so I wonder if a rewatch might make me gel to these aspects more.

I recommend giving it another viewing. On my first viewing, I thought it was just a good film at best. However, my opinion of it grew after a couple more viewings. I loved Ali's performance, but I feel like the actors who played Chiron made up for his absence. I liked Jenkins' unique approach to Chiron's character arc though. I think it set the film apart from other films with multi-dimensional leads.
Aug 13, 2017 3:33 AM
0 0
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 20598
Janson Jinnistan
RockAntonio Campos directs much of it as borderline cringe comedy.

Hm. ?I didn't get this at all.

The emphasis is on cringe more than comedy, and it's mostly in the first half (perhaps "much" was an overstatement). Campos clearly isn't going for easy punchlines, but I think there are more than a few instances where Christine's interactions with her coworkers inspire laughs of recognition of the situation, rather than at Christine. This lessens as the sense of despair builds, and I don't think Campos's sympathy is in doubt at any point.
Aug 13, 2017 4:58 AM
0 0
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 20598
Popcorn Reviews
RockI also got around to Moonlight, which I'm finding firmly in really good territory and brushing up against greatness but not quite making it there, but I'm thinking that's more from my preferences as a viewer than actual faults with the film. The reasons that are keeping me from embracing it fully I'm beginning to see as conscious narrative choices that probably do add to the strength of the film. There are perfectly good narrative reasons for Mahershala Ali's character to be absent from the second and third acts, but his performance is so good that I can't help but feel his absence negatively (the performances are generally pretty strong, but I don't think anyone else in the movie is on his level). And while I understand the movie's trying to show the character at three different stages of his life, I'm not sure I gelled to the film's approach of sliding sideways into the character's evolution rather than firmly defining it as an arc. It's been growing on me after my viewing, so I wonder if a rewatch might make me gel to these aspects more.

I recommend giving it another viewing. On my first viewing, I thought it was just a good film at best. However, my opinion of it grew after a couple more viewings. I loved Ali's performance, but I feel like the actors who played Chiron made up for his absence. I liked Jenkins' unique approach to Chiron's character arc though. I think it set the film apart from other films with multi-dimensional leads.

Yeah, it's definitely something I plan on going back to after I've had some more time to mull it over.
Aug 13, 2017 4:59 AM
0 0
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 11056


Weakest film in the Flesh Trilogy. Where the first plays as a sleazy tone poem of burlesque dancers, frothing but seemingy tongue-in-cheek misogyny and hilariously stupid murders, and the second expands the character of the cucked weapons specialist and pathological murderer Richard Jennings into a master of disguise & theater impresario who is still as cucked and murderous as ever, the third is a decided step in the wrong direction. Seeming to simply rely on bad taste to get its point across and abandoning much of its tacky humor and moody low-budget cinematography, Kiss of Her Flesh leaves a different kind of bad taste in the mouth. Where the previous films don't seem to really commit to actually depicting the seedy woman-hating viewpoint of Jennings, this film has a meanness too it as if the filmmakers felt that the only place they had to go to build on the other two films was deeper into the sewer, instead of fleshing out some of the more surreal touches that the second film hinted at. Where in the Curse, Jennings employs poisoned pussy cats to do his dirty work (opening the door for an endless barrage of pussy double-entendres), in Kiss one of his methods of killing is his own sperm which he has somehow weaponized. Sure, the sleazy absurdity is intact, but it is hard for a film to create a playful distance from how ugly such a method of killing ultimately is when you are watching it in action. Even his farewell salute to his victim 'so long, sucker' hits below the belt. But being unpleasant is only one of the films sins. It's ultimately dull and even more flimsily made that the two films that preceded it. I was being silly when I actually thought this series had enough gritty imagination in it to carry a third movie.

At least we get to watch Jennings methodically eat a lobster in this one, even though the ski mask will make it a little difficult for him. And, yes, of course he can't help but ultimately turn the lobster into a merciless weapon as well. He is a weapons specialist after all, you know

Aug 13, 2017 11:58 PM
0 0
Joined: Feb 2015
Posts: 13321
RockThe emphasis is on cringe more than comedy, and it's mostly in the first half (perhaps "much" was an overstatement). Campos clearly isn't going for easy punchlines, but I think there are more than a few instances where Christine's interactions with her coworkers inspire laughs of recognition of the situation, rather than at Christine. This lessens as the sense of despair builds, and I don't think Campos's sympathy is in doubt at any point.

The presentation of her social awkwardness and limited affect is certainly cringey, but I didn't get the feeling that it was meant to be amusing. In fact, the most amusing scene in the film is when she's (awkwardly, of course) introduced to the anchor's therapy group, where the cringe-factor has less to do with her inhibitions.

I should also add that I'm very well aware of the true story, so I may be biased in how I interpreted the film. It would be interesting if, knowing little about it, I would have been more accepting of any humorous cues by not immediately dismissing the thought due to the inevitable subject matter. On the other hand, I'm now presuming that you had no knowledge of the true-life event, so I could be entirely wrong in reading your reaction as well.
Aug 14, 2017 2:30 AM
0 0
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 20598
Janson Jinnistan
RockThe emphasis is on cringe more than comedy, and it's mostly in the first half (perhaps "much" was an overstatement). Campos clearly isn't going for easy punchlines, but I think there are more than a few instances where Christine's interactions with her coworkers inspire laughs of recognition of the situation, rather than at Christine. This lessens as the sense of despair builds, and I don't think Campos's sympathy is in doubt at any point.

The presentation of her social awkwardness and limited affect is certainly cringey, but I didn't get the feeling that it was meant to be amusing. ?In fact, the most amusing scene in the film is when she's (awkwardly, of course) introduced to the anchor's therapy group, where the cringe-factor has less to do with her inhibitions.

I should also add that I'm very well aware of the true story, so I may be biased in how I interpreted the film. ?It would be interesting if, knowing little about it, I would have been more accepting of any humorous cues by not immediately dismissing the thought due to the inevitable subject matter. ?On the other hand, I'm now presuming that you had no knowledge of the true-life event, so I could be entirely wrong in reading your reaction as well.

Aside from some of her interactions, I was briefly amused by a few of her attempts at edgier reporting. I was aware of the true story to the extent of knowing the film's presence, but not really having the baggage of the event going into my viewing, so perhaps that sense of impending death didn't sink in with me the as early as it did with someone like yourself who was more familiar with the story. I do think as it becomes clearer and clearer how it's going to end and as Christine's distress becomes more apparent, the "humour" stops being funny.
Aug 14, 2017 2:50 AM
0 0
Joined: Feb 2015
Posts: 13321


Here's a crumbs-worthy curio that's fun for a PG-rated 80s horror film. Some Russian occultist has deceased, and police soon find his closet full of dead girls. He turns out to have been a "psychic vampire", feeding off of their vital adrenaline to fuel his electric voodoo. Adam West plays his son-in-law who does nothing except lure in viewers on his name recognition, drink brandy and disbelieve everything happening on screen. No, the real story, like a lot of 80s horror films, revolves around stupid teenagers, in this case a local bitch club called "Sisters" who are initiating sweet Meg Tilly (always the sweetest Tilly) by drugging her and making her spend the night in a mausoleum. The very mausoleum housing the corpse of a certain Russian occultist.

The film is very silly, but although the final 15 minutes or so has the FX budget of your local haunted house using wax mannequins on roller skates, I have to admit that it's pretty impressive considering such budget restraints, and the PG restraints as well. It's breezy fun from debut director Tom McLoughlin, who had starred as the killer bear in Prophecy and who would follow this film up with many people's favorite Friday the 13th, Part VI.
Aug 14, 2017 4:20 AM
0 0
Joined: Feb 2015
Posts: 13321
RockAside from some of her interactions, I was briefly amused by a few of her attempts at edgier reporting. I was aware of the true story to the extent of knowing the film's presence, but not really having the baggage of the event going into my viewing, so perhaps that sense of impending death didn't sink in with me the as early as it did with someone like yourself who was more familiar with the story. I do think as it becomes clearer and clearer how it's going to end and as Christine's distress becomes more apparent, the "humour" stops being funny.

I'm sure that if the humor is dry enough, it's quite possible I simply was unwilling to see the humor given the context. I did notice, somewhat, that the opening scene reminded me of King of Comedy, showing the facade of fame, as Christine practiced her interview skills in much the same way as Rupert Pupkin practiced his act.
Aug 14, 2017 4:33 AM
0 0
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 11056


Grim and starkly poetic film about the relationship between a gay dwarf with ties to the Mafia and a talent with dead animals, his lunk headed assistant and the bombshell who interrupts their relationship. Not a film that is wise to talk too much about, but it approaches its lurid and mildly surreal subject matter with such a straightforwardness it manages an emotional heft such surface Gummo-isms might make one initially feel would keep earnesty at arms length. It doesn't, and the prospect of little men with wanting grins crawling into your bed in the middle of the night just might haunt you, but more with its sadness than its perversity.

8/10
Aug 15, 2017 12:32 AM
0 0
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 11056
Janson Jinnistan

Here's a crumbs-worthy curio that's fun for a PG-rated 80s horror film. ?Some Russian occultist has deceased, and police soon find his closet full of dead girls. ?He turns out to have been a "psychic vampire", feeding off of their vital adrenaline to fuel his electric voodoo. ?Adam West plays his son-in-law who does nothing except lure in viewers on his name recognition, drink brandy and disbelieve everything happening on screen. ?No, the real story, like a lot of 80s horror films, revolves around stupid teenagers, in this case a local bitch club called "Sisters" who are initiating sweet Meg Tilly (always the sweetest Tilly) by drugging her and making her spend the night in a mausoleum. ?The very mausoleum housing the corpse of a certain Russian occultist.

The film is very silly, but although the final 15 minutes or so has the FX budget of your local haunted house using wax mannequins on roller skates, I have to admit that it's pretty impressive considering such budget restraints, and the PG restraints as well. ?It's breezy fun from debut director Tom McLoughlin, who had starred as the killer bear in Prophecy and who would follow this film up with many people's favorite Friday the 13th, Part VI.

This definitely looks as if it may just have some crumb riches to be found within. The cover looks really familiar and I'll see if I can track it down.
Aug 15, 2017 12:33 AM
0 0
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 11056
Janson Jinnistan
RockAside from some of her interactions, I was briefly amused by a few of her attempts at edgier reporting. I was aware of the true story to the extent of knowing the film's presence, but not really having the baggage of the event going into my viewing, so perhaps that sense of impending death didn't sink in with me the as early as it did with someone like yourself who was more familiar with the story. I do think as it becomes clearer and clearer how it's going to end and as Christine's distress becomes more apparent, the "humour" stops being funny.

I'm sure that if the humor is dry enough, it's quite possible I simply was unwilling to see the humor given the context. ?I did notice, somewhat, that the opening scene reminded me of King of Comedy, showing the facade of fame, as Christine practiced her interview skills in much the same way as Rupert Pupkin practiced his act.

I think I get where Rock is coming from on this. I personally wasn't aware of the real case much more than something I think I believed to be nothing more than an urban legend. Not only did I not know it actually happened, but even if I did, I had no idea this movie was about it going in. I didn't know it was based on a true story in any sense and I went into it completely blind.

The word comedy (even cringe comedy) might be going too far, as Rock has already mostly conceded. But there is a point when things become so despairingly awkward in the film, and Christine just seems so out of sorts with the world, it isn't so much as laughs that it evokes but uneasy titters. The audience was full of such noises at the theater (not that general audiences are a great way to judge anything considering how hilarious people found Full Metal Jacket when I went and saw that shortly before). Christine is that person at your workplace that, while you might have empathy for, and maybe even like in a skewed way, when you talk about her with your co workers you can't help but guiltily share stories about her that everyone suppresses a laugh of recognition over, because you just don't understand what is going on in that head. The film never loses sight of the humanity of this boxed in, helpless woman though, and it is ultimately a shaking experience. One of the best films I saw all of last year. Rebecca Hall was robbed of a nomination, that is if the the Oscars even had a lick of merit.
Aug 15, 2017 12:41 AM
0 0
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 20598
crumbsroomBut there is a point when things become so despairingly awkward in the film, and Christine just seems so out of sorts with the world, it isn't so much as laughs that it evokes but uneasy titters. .... Christine is that person at your workplace that, while you might have empathy for, and maybe even like in a skewed way, when you talk about her with your co workers you can't help but guiltily share stories about her that everyone suppresses a laugh of recognition over, because you just don't understand what is going on in that head.

Yeah, that's kind of what I was going for. These aren't guffaws, but uneasy laughs to attempt (in vain) to release tension, which cease when you realize where things are going.
Aug 15, 2017 2:17 AM
0 0
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 2407
?crumbsroom
I think I get where Rock is coming from on this. I personally wasn't aware of the real case much more than something I think I believed to be nothing more than an urban legend. Not only did I not know it actually happened, but even if I did, I had no idea this movie was about it going in. I didn't know it was based on a true story in any sense and I went into it completely blind.

Yeah, I think the humor is definitely there, and I was in the same boat as you. Kind of knew about the story, but didn't know the woman's name, or that this movie was about her. I think it's when she's gun-shopping that I thought "Wait, is this the woman that...(spoiler)", and that's when I stopped laughing. I think one of you said this already, but I thought Hall's performance was "funny" enough that I'd like to see her in a full-on comedy. I've had a thing for her for a few years now.
Aug 15, 2017 3:32 AM
0 0
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 11056


Anyone who picks up Lawrence Tierney hitchhiking on the side of the road deserves whatever they get. Just saying.
Aug 16, 2017 4:02 AM
0 0
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 11056


Eric Von Stroheim's plays Monte Carlos' suavest playboy, seemingly romancing every woman in the movie, promising marriage and swindling them of their money. It must be the monocle



The first million dollar movie ever made, it's a beautifully shot film, which unfortunately doesn't translate that well on the awful copy I watched. Still, you get a sense of the lavish detail and swooning deep focus of the compositions in spite of all of the scratches and defects on the print. Considering the time it was made, this was likely scandalous with how luridly it insinuates frivilous sex between all of the characters, Stroheim's sly smiles punctuating every innuendo. Full of sex and action and humor (one of the women sits on a verandah reading a books entitled "Foolish Wives" written by Eric von Stroheim, which may be one of the first meta jokes in the history of cinema), not even the fact that certain scenes seem to be missing hurt the simultaneously simple and ornate pleasures of this film

7.5/10
Aug 19, 2017 8:10 PM
0 0
Joined: Feb 2015
Posts: 13321
A shame that Greed is the only Stroheim film that I've seen.
Aug 20, 2017 3:51 AM
0 0
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 11056
Janson JinnistanA shame that Greed is the only Stroheim film that I've seen.

A shame I haven't seen Greed.
Aug 20, 2017 2:20 PM
0 0
Joined: Feb 2015
Posts: 13321
Touch of Her Flesh is now on Amazon Prime.

I wonder if an employee there might be a secret lurker of this thread.
Aug 25, 2017 12:16 AM
0 0
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 11056
Janson JinnistanTouch of Her Flesh is now on Amazon Prime.

I wonder if an employee there might be a secret lurker of this thread.

Well, somebody tell that fucker to rescue Eyes of Fire from oblivion already.
Aug 25, 2017 12:31 AM
0 0
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 11056
Not movie related but I just Googled "Insane Clown Posse Net Worth". It's thirty million. I was actually kinda happy because I thought it was probably more.
Aug 31, 2017 4:03 AM
0 0