The Movie Thread

Carolus

Sparrow
Protestant
I used to love Escape From LA as a kid, but I think it's an objectively bad movie. The surfing and basketball scenes are something else, why that kind of thing would be in a dark dystopian movie I have no idea.
They made it terrible on purpose. It was a cash grab for Carpenter and Russell due to constant nagging and offerings of financing for an Escape from NY sequel but no funding for original films. Both Carpenter and Russell dislike sequels... and time has proved them entirely justified.
 

BarrontheTigercat

Kingfisher
Other Christian
I honestly don't know what film people watched when they rave about Lighthouse. The Northman was not as pretentious, nor did it borrow as heavily from Jack London as Lighthouse did, but it was still very thin and mostly boring. I did like The Northman's depiction of the berserker trance / demon possession.
I feel I need to draw a peoples attention to an aspect of the movie "The LightHouse".

The Wikipedia entry for The Lighthouse 2019 tells us that the Jewish director Robert Eggers developed the film.

"The original idea of The Lighthouse was first articulated at a dinner between director Robert Eggers and his younger brother, Max Eggers. Max shared basic ideas from his screenplay, and his vision of a lighthouse-set ghost tale reflected his attempts to adapt Edgar Allan Poe's unfinished short story "The Light-House".[6] Adapting the short story proved troublesome, halting Max's progress on the script, then under the tentative working title Burnt Island.[6] Robert mused his own ideas to bolster the project's conceptualization at that point, and, with his brother's support, soon began investigating for source material.[6]

>>>One story that caught the director's attention in his initial research was a nineteenth-century myth of an incident at Smalls Lighthouse in Wales, wherein one of two wickies, both named Thomas, dies while trapped at their outpost by a destructive storm.<<<<

That both men were named Thomas, Robert recalled, compelled him to create a film with an underlying story of identity"

Furthermore (feel free to skip the next paragraph):

"To exploit his newfound credibility, he pushed The Lighthouse, one of several projects, in his negotiations with studio executives.[6] He and Max then resumed their work by exchanging drafts they revised accordingly. This coincided with more rigorous research of the period to develop the onscreen world: Robert immersed in photos of 1890s New England, 1930s maritime-themed French films, and symbolist art for visual reference.[6][8] The Eggers' study of literature with maritime and surrealist themes informed The Lighthouse characters' speech.[9] They looked into the writings of Herman Melville, Robert Louis Stevenson, H. P. Lovecraft, among others, before coming across literature from Sarah Orne Jewett, a novelist best known for her local color works set around the coast of Maine. Her dialect-heavy writing style provided the lead characters' cadences, rooted in the experiences of her own sailor characters and real-life farmers, fishermen and captains she had interviewed.[6][9] Robert and Max also deferred to a dissertation on Jewett's technique to guide their direction for intense conversational scenes.[6][9]
The Eggers' theater background was another force shaping The Lighthouse's creative direction. The two men sourced elements from playwrights that influenced their work as young teens, chiefly from artists such as Samuel Beckett, Harold Pinter, and Sam Shepard whose writings examine male-centric perspectives of existential crises and psychosis.[6]"

Theres only one thing missing here.

The film is based on the Smalls Lighthouse incident in Wales.

Hmm, if only there were another film about the Smalls Lighthouse incident made beforehand that Eggers and his brother could crib and copy from..?
well, look at that! A 2016 film about the Smalls Lighthouse Incident filmed in bleak monochrome made on a small budget >with the fact same dynamic to the relationship between the very similar characters< almost exactly..



Very humbly funded effort and yet a good film, well acted and commendable for its mis en scene.

So people are going to talk about how Eggers remade the film and worked with the same characters? And the original director is going to get some plaudits and his career is going to take off?

Or are Eggers Brothers and their jewey Hollywood friends going to dissemble and claim that it was just an accident that they made exactly the same film, give or take some very distasteful sexual themes?

Bear in mind that it is quite possible in the anglosphere movie world for films to come out at the exact same time with scenes in them that are identically shot. Why? Because the 2nd director has been sent the rushes of the first directors film on the sly and so copies his work whole sale whilst they are both filming at the same time.

The apologists claiming that they are two wholly unrelated films are trying to run cover IMO. What happened here is obvious.

Its basically the same film, complete with revealed hidden past to one of the characters, except that Eggers added unpleasant and unnecessary symbolism:

"The Lighthouse contains explicit depictions of male sexuality and primarily depicts two men alone in close quarters on an island. But when asked whether the film was "a love story", Robert Eggers replied:
Am I saying these characters are gay? No. I'm not saying they're not either. Forget about complexities of human sexuality or their particular inclinations. I'm more about questions than answers in this movie."
Sexual fantasy and masturbation are recurring themes in the film. For Dafoe, the androphilia in the film is blatant, but it is also used to explore what it means to be a man: "They have a sense of guilt, of wrong [...] it's got existential roots [...] about masculinity and domination and submission."[29] After beating Wake into submission, Howard assumes a dominant role, calling Wake "dog" and dragging him on a leash. Commenting on this scene, Pattinson said "there's definitely a take where we were literally trying to pull each other's pants down. It literally almost looked like foreplay."

So, thank you jews. Thanks for giving a humble Welsh made for TV budget movie a wider audience and at the same time introducing such "revolutionary" aspects.
I found the parts with the male sexual homo eroticism quite pretentious and the bits with Willem Defoe's interaction with the bright light quite ridiculous - it didn't add to the film.

"The film's mythological and artistic influences underscore its eroticism. Eggers acknowledged the visual influence of symbolist artists Sascha Schneider and Jean Delville, whose "mythic paintings in a homoerotic style," he said, "[became] perfect candidates as imagery that's going to work itself into the script."

And yet that whole use of blinding brightness in a scary scene in a black and white film also harks to the 2013 film "Computer Chess" made by a fellow Jewish director Andrew Bujalski.
And Eggers will never admit to borrowing that either.
He wants to be seen as someone taking inspiration from 19th century sources.
Not stealing from fellow directors who made washed out or black and white movies in the same decade in the way that he did.

The wikipedia entry for The Lighthouse (2016) is painfully thin.

Eggers is a thief.

I have no interest in watching The Northman.
I greatly enjoy Robert E Howards writing and his ability to conjure the "dust of ancient empires".

When I saw the Hollywood Conan remake in recent years I was bored to tears. So unimaginative and reduced to "ugh! he killed my father! I must kill him!" that's it.
By the end of the film I was watching CGI phantoms and CGI buildings that had nothing to do with Howards writing.

The Jews take our ancient history and make it .. boring.

The best thing anyone can do if they are interested in Viking Mythology is to go into big natural environments and read the Viking Sagas which are nearly all plot movement. Over a long book events build up a certain momentum and the emotional plight of their taciturn heroes affects the reader.

In Njals Saga the hero is given a dog the size of a man and just as intelligent. The dog sacrifices his life as the hero is surrounded and outnumbered. The Sagas are actually fascinating and full of vivid imagery and colourful scenes - but Also epic narrative arcs, character arcs and character development.
In contrast, the Northman looks incredibly one note.

As far as the witch sequences with Bjork, please.. spare me.
Bjork has always made hay pretending to quirky and strange and otherworldly ever since the late 80s.



She annoyed other celebrities sufficiently that she was lampooned on SNL whilst being a barely known C-list celebrity.



She pursued Black wannabe gangster stars like trickle and Goldie and at one time adopted the everyday accent of whatever ruff tuff bad boy she was dating whilst pretending to be a witch or a child.

The source material of the Northamn interest me but the very thin and (actually) UN-imaginative treatment it will display does not interest me at all.
 

Tom Slick

Kingfisher
Orthodox
Thanks for the insight to Eggers. I was not aware of the previous version of the film.

When I watched Eggers' Lighthouse, it struck me as so empty and pretentious that I expected it was based on someone else's work. Although I'm a big fan of Edgar Allen Poe, I don't think I knew anything about his unfinished short story of a lighthouse, but instead it reminded me of Jack London's short story "In a Far Country", which was about two lazy fools on their first adventure, who quit the gold trail to spend the winter in a cabin together. And while their imminent conflict is obvious to the more seasoned prospectors they abandoned, London makes their descent into madness interesting, while Eggers did not do so for me.

This general plot of two men who are isolated coming into conflict is adapted into many stories, for example John Boreman's 1968 film "Hell in the Pacific" used this premise, and so recognition of this idea in a story may not mean that the author has seen or read the same familiar story as you have, but while watching Egger's snooze fest I was waiting for an unmistakable London reference to drop that would signify to me the source of his idea, and it did. Or at least to me it did.

The reference that I took as confirmation that Eggers was relying on London's work was when the younger character mentions in a non sequitir that he wants a steak. Jack wrote a short story called "A Piece of Steak", which is about a boxer, so there is a parallel to two men who are isolated in conflict. To me this was a clincher, but it's admittedly kind of thin for people who either have no knowledge of London or have a much wider literary knowledge than I do, such that a small coincidence is meaningless without more context.

Anyway, IMO Eggers is a dreadfully boring director and his Lighthouse deserves no accolades. However, I am curious to see that there will be two separate reviews in the upcoming Decameron film festival of The Northman, one by Kevin MacDonald, and since The Northman has a significant historical context, its potential for analysis is much greater than Lighthouse, so I'd like to see what kind of discussion it incites.
 

Maddox

Woodpecker
Protestant
Have you guys ever seen Silence by Martin Scorsese?



Two 17th-century Portuguese missionaries, Father Sebastian Rodrigues (Andrew Garfield) and Father Francisco Garupe (Adam Driver), embark on a perilous journey to Japan to find their missing mentor (Liam Neeson). While there, the two men minister to the Christian villagers who worship in secret. If caught by feudal lords or ruling samurai, they must renounce their faith or face a prolonged and agonizing death.

I had never heard about this film until I caught it on cable recently. It has excellent performances by all of the main actors along with the usual outstanding direction from Scorsese.

In his own words, the director describes himself as a "lapsed Catholic." And he tells this story from an impartial view, which gives him the ability to not choose sides here. Instead, he gives the audience questions to ask themselves and then provides no easy answers. For instance, if a Christian is told that renouncing his faith in public would mean saving the lives of innocents, what should he do in the eyes of the Lord? Are we expected to experience suffering on the level that Jesus did when on the cross and hold true to our faith? Or can God forgive one of his children for apostatizing in public just as a mere formality in order to save others?

It's an interesting film that causes you to ponder what is expected of Christians as they spread the word of the gospel around the world.
 

renotime

Ostrich
Catholic
Gold Member
I watched "The Northman" a few weeks ago, it looks great but it has a thin plot. The only likable character was the antagonist. It's probably Eggers worst movie, but his worst is better than current Hollywood. Every frame held my attention at the moment but the majority of the movie was forgettable. If you want to watch something good with substance I would recommend Andrei Tarkovsky and Lars von Trier (specifically Melancholia and The House That Jack Built).

Plenty of great movies don't have any plot.
 

BarrontheTigercat

Kingfisher
Other Christian
Thanks for the insight to Eggers. I was not aware of the previous version of the film.

When I watched Eggers' Lighthouse, it struck me as so empty and pretentious that I expected it was based on someone else's work. Although I'm a big fan of Edgar Allen Poe, I don't think I knew anything about his unfinished short story of a lighthouse, but instead it reminded me of Jack London's short story "In a Far Country", which was about two lazy fools on their first adventure, who quit the gold trail to spend the winter in a cabin together. And while their imminent conflict is obvious to the more seasoned prospectors they abandoned, London makes their descent into madness interesting, while Eggers did not do so for me.

This general plot of two men who are isolated coming into conflict is adapted into many stories, for example John Boreman's 1968 film "Hell in the Pacific" used this premise, and so recognition of this idea in a story may not mean that the author has seen or read the same familiar story as you have, but while watching Egger's snooze fest I was waiting for an unmistakable London reference to drop that would signify to me the source of his idea, and it did. Or at least to me it did.

The reference that I took as confirmation that Eggers was relying on London's work was when the younger character mentions in a non sequitir that he wants a steak. Jack wrote a short story called "A Piece of Steak", which is about a boxer, so there is a parallel to two men who are isolated in conflict. To me this was a clincher, but it's admittedly kind of thin for people who either have no knowledge of London or have a much wider literary knowledge than I do, such that a small coincidence is meaningless without more context.

Anyway, IMO Eggers is a dreadfully boring director and his Lighthouse deserves no accolades. However, I am curious to see that there will be two separate reviews in the upcoming Decameron film festival of The Northman, one by Kevin MacDonald, and since The Northman has a significant historical context, its potential for analysis is much greater than Lighthouse, so I'd like to see what kind of discussion it incites.
Then he definitely lifted from Jack London.

The flashback to Robert Pattinsons betrayal of Jared Leto was set in some frontier logging setting.
Much like the world of "In a Far Country".
In the original, the Welsh film, there was a similar tale of guilt but obviously not in a North American setting and I believe it was more prosaic like the loss of a babe or something, a troubled marriage and guilt.

There in Eggers' copy was London's tale in both the flashback and the film itself.
 

renotime

Ostrich
Catholic
Gold Member
Jared Leto wasn't in The Lighthouse.

Most artists steal here and there. Just look at how often people have stolen the final scene in John Ford's Searchers.

I have yet to see the 2016 Lighthouse, but I doubt it's blatant plagiarism, otherwise they likely would have been sued. All these people have union reps so it doesn't even really cost them anything.
 

William Faulkner

Woodpecker
Orthodox


Interesting film from 1969. I have meant to watch for ages...probably finally did now that the letter Z has entered our political lexicon.
Prints of the film were acquired by the Black Panther Party and shown at underground screenings apparently. An advance copy of the film was also shown at the United Front Against Fascism conference in Oakland, 1969.
 

Maddox

Woodpecker
Protestant
...If you want to watch something good with substance I would recommend Andrei Tarkovsky and Lars von Trier (specifically Melancholia and The House That Jack Built).

So I watched Melancholia last night on the recommendation of you and another poster on here and I thought it was both ambitious and unique. Along with a great story and interesting characters, there was also some good acting in this indie film. Kirstin Dunst especially did an outstanding job. 7.5/10

If I had to nitpick, I'd say that there were times when the editing could've been better. But other than that, top marks.

Did anyone understand what happened with Kiefer Sutherland's character in the barn? Was he kicked by a horse in the stable as he tried to settle them down?
 

Hypno

Crow
Saw No Country for Old Men. Very violent film but if you can get past that it was mostly very good. First, I was engaged for the entire movie. Fairly suspenseful. Its one of those movies where a series of small decisions or compromises plausibly leads to serious consequences. Second, it was thought provoking. Has some themes that this crowd would enjoy - are our lives the result of our decisions, or are things predetermined. What is the role of chance? There is pure evil in the world - does one confront it or simply run from situations where one might encounter it?

These are some interesting questions, especially for younger people rather than older people (despite the title). I didn't love the film because it was much more ambiguous about these questions than I would have preferred. In their defense, though, the filmmakers followed the novel pretty closely.
 

RedLagoon

Woodpecker
Orthodox Inquirer
Saw No Country for Old Men. Very violent film but if you can get past that it was mostly very good. First, I was engaged for the entire movie. Fairly suspenseful. Its one of those movies where a series of small decisions or compromises plausibly leads to serious consequences. Second, it was thought provoking. Has some themes that this crowd would enjoy - are our lives the result of our decisions, or are things predetermined. What is the role of chance? There is pure evil in the world - does one confront it or simply run from situations where one might encounter it?

These are some interesting questions, especially for younger people rather than older people (despite the title). I didn't love the film because it was much more ambiguous about these questions than I would have preferred. In their defense, though, the filmmakers followed the novel pretty closely.

No Country For (((Old))) (white) men.

Great film.

Tommy Lee Jones. Tommy Lee Jones.
 

Nordwand

Pelican
Other Christian
I feel I need to draw a peoples attention to an aspect of the movie "The LightHouse".

The Wikipedia entry for The Lighthouse 2019 tells us that the Jewish director Robert Eggers developed the film.

"The original idea of The Lighthouse was first articulated at a dinner between director Robert Eggers and his younger brother, Max Eggers. Max shared basic ideas from his screenplay, and his vision of a lighthouse-set ghost tale reflected his attempts to adapt Edgar Allan Poe's unfinished short story "The Light-House".[6] Adapting the short story proved troublesome, halting Max's progress on the script, then under the tentative working title Burnt Island.[6] Robert mused his own ideas to bolster the project's conceptualization at that point, and, with his brother's support, soon began investigating for source material.[6]

>>>One story that caught the director's attention in his initial research was a nineteenth-century myth of an incident at Smalls Lighthouse in Wales, wherein one of two wickies, both named Thomas, dies while trapped at their outpost by a destructive storm.<<<<

That both men were named Thomas, Robert recalled, compelled him to create a film with an underlying story of identity"

Furthermore (feel free to skip the next paragraph):

"To exploit his newfound credibility, he pushed The Lighthouse, one of several projects, in his negotiations with studio executives.[6] He and Max then resumed their work by exchanging drafts they revised accordingly. This coincided with more rigorous research of the period to develop the onscreen world: Robert immersed in photos of 1890s New England, 1930s maritime-themed French films, and symbolist art for visual reference.[6][8] The Eggers' study of literature with maritime and surrealist themes informed The Lighthouse characters' speech.[9] They looked into the writings of Herman Melville, Robert Louis Stevenson, H. P. Lovecraft, among others, before coming across literature from Sarah Orne Jewett, a novelist best known for her local color works set around the coast of Maine. Her dialect-heavy writing style provided the lead characters' cadences, rooted in the experiences of her own sailor characters and real-life farmers, fishermen and captains she had interviewed.[6][9] Robert and Max also deferred to a dissertation on Jewett's technique to guide their direction for intense conversational scenes.[6][9]
The Eggers' theater background was another force shaping The Lighthouse's creative direction. The two men sourced elements from playwrights that influenced their work as young teens, chiefly from artists such as Samuel Beckett, Harold Pinter, and Sam Shepard whose writings examine male-centric perspectives of existential crises and psychosis.[6]"

Theres only one thing missing here.

The film is based on the Smalls Lighthouse incident in Wales.

Hmm, if only there were another film about the Smalls Lighthouse incident made beforehand that Eggers and his brother could crib and copy from..?
well, look at that! A 2016 film about the Smalls Lighthouse Incident filmed in bleak monochrome made on a small budget >with the fact same dynamic to the relationship between the very similar characters< almost exactly..



Very humbly funded effort and yet a good film, well acted and commendable for its mis en scene.

So people are going to talk about how Eggers remade the film and worked with the same characters? And the original director is going to get some plaudits and his career is going to take off?

Or are Eggers Brothers and their jewey Hollywood friends going to dissemble and claim that it was just an accident that they made exactly the same film, give or take some very distasteful sexual themes?

Bear in mind that it is quite possible in the anglosphere movie world for films to come out at the exact same time with scenes in them that are identically shot. Why? Because the 2nd director has been sent the rushes of the first directors film on the sly and so copies his work whole sale whilst they are both filming at the same time.

The apologists claiming that they are two wholly unrelated films are trying to run cover IMO. What happened here is obvious.

Its basically the same film, complete with revealed hidden past to one of the characters, except that Eggers added unpleasant and unnecessary symbolism:

"The Lighthouse contains explicit depictions of male sexuality and primarily depicts two men alone in close quarters on an island. But when asked whether the film was "a love story", Robert Eggers replied:
Am I saying these characters are gay? No. I'm not saying they're not either. Forget about complexities of human sexuality or their particular inclinations. I'm more about questions than answers in this movie."
Sexual fantasy and masturbation are recurring themes in the film. For Dafoe, the androphilia in the film is blatant, but it is also used to explore what it means to be a man: "They have a sense of guilt, of wrong [...] it's got existential roots [...] about masculinity and domination and submission."[29] After beating Wake into submission, Howard assumes a dominant role, calling Wake "dog" and dragging him on a leash. Commenting on this scene, Pattinson said "there's definitely a take where we were literally trying to pull each other's pants down. It literally almost looked like foreplay."

So, thank you jews. Thanks for giving a humble Welsh made for TV budget movie a wider audience and at the same time introducing such "revolutionary" aspects.
I found the parts with the male sexual homo eroticism quite pretentious and the bits with Willem Defoe's interaction with the bright light quite ridiculous - it didn't add to the film.

"The film's mythological and artistic influences underscore its eroticism. Eggers acknowledged the visual influence of symbolist artists Sascha Schneider and Jean Delville, whose "mythic paintings in a homoerotic style," he said, "[became] perfect candidates as imagery that's going to work itself into the script."

And yet that whole use of blinding brightness in a scary scene in a black and white film also harks to the 2013 film "Computer Chess" made by a fellow Jewish director Andrew Bujalski.
And Eggers will never admit to borrowing that either.
He wants to be seen as someone taking inspiration from 19th century sources.
Not stealing from fellow directors who made washed out or black and white movies in the same decade in the way that he did.

The wikipedia entry for The Lighthouse (2016) is painfully thin.

Eggers is a thief.

I have no interest in watching The Northman.
I greatly enjoy Robert E Howards writing and his ability to conjure the "dust of ancient empires".

When I saw the Hollywood Conan remake in recent years I was bored to tears. So unimaginative and reduced to "ugh! he killed my father! I must kill him!" that's it.
By the end of the film I was watching CGI phantoms and CGI buildings that had nothing to do with Howards writing.

The Jews take our ancient history and make it .. boring.

The best thing anyone can do if they are interested in Viking Mythology is to go into big natural environments and read the Viking Sagas which are nearly all plot movement. Over a long book events build up a certain momentum and the emotional plight of their taciturn heroes affects the reader.

In Njals Saga the hero is given a dog the size of a man and just as intelligent. The dog sacrifices his life as the hero is surrounded and outnumbered. The Sagas are actually fascinating and full of vivid imagery and colourful scenes - but Also epic narrative arcs, character arcs and character development.
In contrast, the Northman looks incredibly one note.

As far as the witch sequences with Bjork, please.. spare me.
Bjork has always made hay pretending to quirky and strange and otherworldly ever since the late 80s.



She annoyed other celebrities sufficiently that she was lampooned on SNL whilst being a barely known C-list celebrity.



She pursued Black wannabe gangster stars like trickle and Goldie and at one time adopted the everyday accent of whatever ruff tuff bad boy she was dating whilst pretending to be a witch or a child.

The source material of the Northamn interest me but the very thin and (actually) UN-imaginative treatment it will display does not interest me at all.

On the subject of Bjork, this is from 90's satire show Spitting Image:

 
I watched Wrath of Man with Jason Stratham yesterday. It's about a security cash van company that handles millions from various companies. It's quite unrealistic with how often they get robbed, but it's a very entertaining movie and really had a pre-SJW/pre-Woke feel to it. There is one "tough chick" character, but she's not annoying except at the beginning.

It's violent, but not gruesome. A lot of cursing as well, but a solid movie. If you haven't seen it, watch it without seeing the trailer as it gives quite a bit a way.

 
Top