[LifeDistortion]

Originally Posted by Severian

Yep. There seems to be maybe one horror movie every five years or so that's truly great. Like the most recent one I can think of was "The Witch," and it was very atypical for a horror film. So much so that it's not even really "horror" — still, it's the kind of film that seeps into your bones.

The Witch is very much horror. Why it when a good horror movie comes out, people suddenly want to rebrand it something else? People need to be proud of being a horror movie. Non horror websites like to say if a movie is good it transcends the horror genre and doesn't need to be called a horror movie. Movies like The Exorcist, or Se7en get called psychological dramas. Fuck that, they are horror movies. IT is not written by Stephen King "the master of coming of age drama with scary elements" he's the "master of horror". I just hate this rebranding of successful horror movies as a way to sell it to audiences who don't want to see a horror movie.

[Severian]

Originally Posted by LifeDistortion

The Witch is very much horror. Why it when a good horror movie comes out, people suddenly want to rebrand it something else? People need to be proud of being a horror movie. Non horror websites like to say if a movie is good it transcends the horror genre and doesn't need to be called a horror movie. Movies like The Exorcist, or Se7en get called psychological dramas. Fuck that, they are horror movies. IT is not written by Stephen King "the master of coming of age drama with scary elements" he's the "master of horror". I just hate this rebranding of successful horror movies as a way to sell it to audiences who don't want to see a horror movie.

Uh. Ok.

Stephen King is no master of horror though. That's Lovecraft. Period. Stephen King is the master of fast book-writing. Like John Grisham and James Patterson but with more rape and monsters and, actually, veritable FUCK TONS of coming-of-age stories. Like, it's a bit baffling that you would choose the phrase "coming-of-age" to describe what Stephen King is not... He's almost as well-known for that very thing as he is for "horror."

Anyway, I think you know what I meant. There's a massive difference between a film like The Witch, or Antichrist, and the average slasher flick. A fucking world of difference. I guess I could say "high horror" and "low horror," but that sounds pretentious and stupid and fuck it I'm not doing it. You know what I'm talking about.

Genres are only useful to a certain point. It's possible for something to be terrifying and not be traditional horror. It's possible for genres to blend and merge and evolve. If "horror" is the tag we're using to describe everything from The Birds to Freddy V. Jason to the Witch, and there's no room to alter or modify the term, then it's an invalid label that is virtually meaningless.

[LifeDistortion]

That's what sub-genres are for, and frankly I have little use for sub genre titles. Is "Alien" any less of a horror movie cause the killer is non human? Most horror fans would say "Alien" is a horror movie every bit as much as it is a sci-fi movie. I also don't like this distinction of high brow horror and low brow/grindhouse horror. I enjoy Psycho just as much as I do The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, but because one movie is deemed more gross or violent people regulate TCM as a grind house movie. The Exorcist was a movie that blended both the high brow with the low brow. So you get all that creepy, thoughtful stuff, and you get a girl stabbing her vagina with a crucifix. I just don't feel the need for horror fans to justify any movie to the mainstream audience.

[!@#$%!]

Originally Posted by Severian

Road to Perdition was the next movie Sam Mendes made after the huge success of American Beauty. It was really hyped up, because the guy had just won all these Oscars, and people were excited about what he would do next. It got really good reviews but did not perform well at the box office, and was snubbed at award time.

It's a period piece about an Irish mob enforcer in the late-'20s/early-'30s whose son witnesses a hit and compromises the family's security. The guy has to make a decision... fight the family, give up his son, or bring his son into the bloody family business.

His choice ... well, it's not easy.

Tom Hanks, Paul Newman, Jude Law, Daniel Craig. A goddamn excellent and beautiful movie that was much more evolved and well thought-out and challenging than its predecessor. It's actually based on an obscure black and white graphic novel, but I didn't know that until after I saw it, and that's not why I like it.

American Beauty had its moments, but its depiction of teenagers was hilariously out of touch. No teenager has ever talked the way ANY of the teenagers in that movie spoke to one another. Except the teenagers who were literally acting IN that movie. I guess they talked that way, while on the clock.

It was too much. It doesn't hold up for me at all. Kevin Spacey is good, and his plot is interesting, but it takes some really pretentious side-roads and detours to Point-ville.

Road to Perdition is a masterclass. Everything is better. Down to the color palette and score.

there's a lot packaged here so i'll try to unwrap it

i didn't know road to perdition was a sam mendes thing. i'll try to watch it on that basis. i avoided it at the time because i couldn't stand tom hanks back then. now i do.

but trying to tout its merits by shitting on american beauty is kinda... it's not the most effective thing.

AB was a very good movie about midlife crisis. it wasn't really "about" teenagers, although teenagers are both characters in it and plot devices. annette benning was great in it, the marine dude chris something what's his name he was great in it. c.j. cregg as the braindead wife was great in it. everyone was great in it.

but anyway i don't know about this "no teenage ever" claim. maybe you never talked that way but... their dialogue wasn't an issue with me at all. i'd have to go look at old reviews and interviews and see who said what but i think it's the first time ever i hear this criticism (not saying it's false by virtue of that, just that i'd have to think about if this is true for me)

one could also say though "i've never heard a dead person tell their story." well sure. but that would be besides the point.

oh! lunchtime. gtg. will continue later

[dirty bunny]

I agree that the 1st Blair Witch was a good movie. And I didn't see the dang thing until a couple of years ago, and it still creeped me out.
Also yes the rebooted Blair Witch just didn't have the same punch. It's the kind of thing that makes me realize what worked so well for the 1st one: it was more about the stuff you didn't see. I think I felt it more viscerally in the first. It was almost like I was there with them. In the forest, hearing strange stuff.

Anyway.

I also want to see the new IT. I loved the novel, and am a huge Stephen King fan.

[demonrail666]

The Stephen King books I like I really like, and I'm willing to forgive his periodic dips in form just because when he does hit, he really does. Revival, his most recent horror novel, is one of the best horror stories I've read in a long time and absolutely not the work of someone cynically just churning it out, a la Patterson.

[!@#$%!]

re: teenagers in american beauty

http://ew.com/article/1999/09/28/sur...-american-pie/

there's more links but super-tired at the moment

eta:

here's a revisit at 15 that puts things into context

http://ew.com/article/2014/09/15/ame...h-anniversary/

funny thing she talks about the 10,000 babies because alan ball got that phrase from an actual teenage girl

anyway i agree with some things and disagree with others in that conversation, but would support the conclusion that it's "a classic, not a masterpiece". details aside, or who likes what/approves of what, seems about right. intersubjectivity is a difficult business.

[Severian]

Originally Posted by LifeDistortion

That's what sub-genres are for, and frankly I have little use for sub genre titles. Is "Alien" any less of a horror movie cause the killer is non human? Most horror fans would say "Alien" is a horror movie every bit as much as it is a sci-fi movie. I also don't like this distinction of high brow horror and low brow/grindhouse horror. I enjoy Psycho just as much as I do The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, but because one movie is deemed more gross or violent people regulate TCM as a grind house movie. The Exorcist was a movie that blended both the high brow with the low brow. So you get all that creepy, thoughtful stuff, and you get a girl stabbing her vagina with a crucifix. I just don't feel the need for horror fans to justify any movie to the mainstream audience.

Ok, well... fair enough and I'm on board with that for sure, but can we please agree that Stephen King is not the master of horror, and the H.P. Lovecraft, indesputably, is? Please?

[Severian]

Originally Posted by !@#$%!

there's a lot packaged here so i'll try to unwrap it

i didn't know road to perdition was a sam mendes thing. i'll try to watch it on that basis. i avoided it at the time because i couldn't stand tom hanks back then. now i do.

but trying to tout its merits by shitting on american beauty is kinda... it's not the most effective thing.

AB was a very good movie about midlife crisis. it wasn't really "about" teenagers, although teenagers are both characters in it and plot devices. annette benning was great in it, the marine dude chris something what's his name he was great in it. c.j. cregg as the braindead wife was great in it. everyone was great in it.

but anyway i don't know about this "no teenage ever" claim. maybe you never talked that way but... their dialogue wasn't an issue with me at all. i'd have to go look at old reviews and interviews and see who said what but i think it's the first time ever i hear this criticism (not saying it's false by virtue of that, just that i'd have to think about if this is true for me)

one could also say though "i've never heard a dead person tell their story." well sure. but that would be besides the point.

oh! lunchtime. gtg. will continue later

You're right. Probably not the best way to recommend a movie by crapping on another movie.

I saw AB in the theater and was very impressed by it initially, as most of us probably were, and moved by it as well. Kevin Spacey is brilliant. Annette Benning is brilliant. It stuck with me.

But on repeats viewings later on, the teenagers didn't really ring true for me. Like, any of them. Not saying it's right, because I went to school with some seriously posh kids who had similar stories to tell and did similar things, but something about the way these kids were characterized made the movie feel hamfisted to me later on. That's all.

I just really liked Road to Perdition and kind of resented the fact that it didn't get the same attention. But maybe I'd watch that now and have qualms too. Who knows? I'm just giving you my most recent opinion.

I'm probably due to rewatch both films.

[Severian]

Originally Posted by !@#$%!

re: teenagers in american beauty

http://ew.com/article/1999/09/28/sur...-american-pie/

there's more links but super-tired at the moment

eta:

here's a revisit at 15 that puts things into context

http://ew.com/article/2014/09/15/ame...h-anniversary/

funny thing she talks about the 10,000 babies because alan ball got that phrase from an actual teenage girl

anyway i agree with some things and disagree with others in that conversation, but would support the conclusion that it's "a classic, not a masterpiece". details aside, or who likes what/approves of what, seems about right.

Ok. Sure. I still think the teenage dialogue is flat and just plain "off" and trying too hard to be "on" even if it had the right direction. But it's definitely way better than freaking American Pie.

Yeah, classic, non-masterpiece.

[Severian]

Originally Posted by demonrail666

The Stephen King books I like I really like, and I'm willing to forgive his periodic dips in form just because when he does hit, he really does. Revival, his most recent horror novel, is one of the best horror stories I've read in a long time and absolutely not the work of someone cynically just churning it out, a la Patterson.

My favorite is "The Shining" and the first Dark Tower book. Also enjoyed "the Green Mile." Others, like the second Dark Tower book, or "Christine," are just so goddamn trashy. He is entertaining, and a deft enough writer (non-fiction wise, I think he's aces, really), but his overall style is simply not my cup of tea.

I've heard a lot of Gaiman/King comparisons over the years, and I guess if those two are comparable, then I'm a Gaiman guy. More of a flowery approach, sure, but more my speed. Also, sufficiently terrifying when he needs to be.

[!@#$%!]

alan ball went on to write six feet under which is another non-masterpiece classic of tv's golden age. very good, just not sopranos/the wire/breaking bad level

from then it was true blood. which started over-the-top great then turned into a preposterous cartoon. okay, maybe it was always a preposterous cartoon, i still enjoyed the earlier seasons.

hm, i wonder how the wire looks in retrospective. i'd like to rewatch it soon. classic? or masterpiece? (my money is on masterpiece)

eta: ricky's plastic bag was alan ball's plastic bag: http://aaspeechesdb.oscars.org/link/072-23/

last: i also reeeeeeally love the first 3-4 seasons of the west wing, when sorkin was still involved. a tv show that ages well is a rare thing, but i'll willing to take refuge in it again regardless.

[tw2113]

So I bit the bullet and will see IT in a few hours.

[Severian]

Originally Posted by !@#$%!

alan ball went on to write six feet under which is another non-masterpiece classic of tv's golden age. very good, just not sopranos/the wire/breaking bad level

from then it was true blood. which started over-the-top great then turned into a preposterous cartoon. okay, maybe it was always a preposterous cartoon, i still enjoyed the earlier seasons.

hm, i wonder how the wire looks in retrospective. i'd like to rewatch it soon. classic? or masterpiece? (my money is on masterpiece)

eta: ricky's plastic bag was alan ball's plastic bag: http://aaspeechesdb.oscars.org/link/072-23/

last: i also reeeeeeally love the first 3-4 seasons of the west wing, when sorkin was still involved. a tv show that ages well is a rare thing, but i'll willing to take refuge in it again regardless.

West Wing was GREAT.
Definitely aged well. As close to masterpiece-level as network tv got back then. West Wing and LOST were the last truly great network shows before the prestige tv and streaming boom started. I don't actually think there are any GREAT network (by which I mean "basic cable": NBC, ABC, CBS, Fox) shows anymore.

I loved True Blood season one but never watched season two. I should get back to that.

[!@#$%!]

Originally Posted by tw2113

So I bit the bullet and will see IT in a few hours.

i'll watch it on disc some day

Originally Posted by Severian

West Wing was GREAT.
Definitely aged well. As close to masterpiece-level as network tv got back then. West Wing and LOST were the last truly great network shows before the prestige tv and streaming boom started. I don't actually think there are any GREAT network (by which I mean "basic cable": NBC, ABC, CBS, Fox) shows anymore.

I loved True Blood season one but never watched season two. I should get back to that.

we should take this to the TV thread but HANNIBAL was an NBC show and it was *great*. looked and felt more like an HBO show but then it got cancelled. too smart for mainstream audiences? i dont know--american ninja is cheaper to produce i suppose, or whatever it is people watch.

you haven't still gotten into buffy/angel, eh? ha ha ha. man.

[Severian]

Originally Posted by !@#$%!

i'll watch it on disc some day



we should take this to the TV thread but HANNIBAL was an NBC show and it was *great*. looked and felt more like an HBO show but then it got cancelled. too smart for mainstream audiences? i dont know--american ninja is cheaper to produce i suppose, or whatever it is people watch.

you haven't still gotten into buffy/angel, eh? ha ha ha. man.

I tried really hard with Buffy. I watched several episodes... most of the first season. But when given the choice between that and other stuff, other stuff wins.

Didn't we go over this already? I feel like we left it at I'll watch the rest of Buffy when you read the rest of "The Sparrow." Er something. Which is actually a much better deal for you, because the sparrow can be read in a day, easily.

[demonrail666]

Originally Posted by LifeDistortion

 

Nobody seen this yet? I saw it last weekend. Damn good adaptation of the novel.

I haven't seen it yet but I'm sure I will. I don't understand, though, why studios are still trying to squeeze an 800 page novel into a feature-length movie when surely its natural domain is now TV serialisation.

[tw2113]

Originally Posted by demonrail666

I haven't seen it yet but I'm sure I will. I don't understand, though, why studios are still trying to squeeze an 800 page novel into a feature-length movie when surely its natural domain is now TV serialisation.

They only cover the days where they're kids. They don't touch on the adult years. Part 2 will be out next year or something.

[!@#$%!]

Originally Posted by Severian

I tried really hard with Buffy. I watched several episodes... most of the first season. But when given the choice between that and other stuff, other stuff wins.

Didn't we go over this already? I feel like we left it at I'll watch the rest of Buffy when you read the rest of "The Sparrow." Er something. Which is actually a much better deal for you, because the sparrow can be read in a day, easily.

no i wasnt trading ha ha. just asking if you did since for many people buffy is one of those shows that changed tv.

a day! who has a day to waste? i could die any minute.

anyway just here on a quick break.

i don't know what's happening w/ the threads lately. we're totally changing topics in every one of them ha ha ha

probably a good thing!

[Severian]

Originally Posted by !@#$%!

no i wasnt trading ha ha. just asking if you did since for many people buffy is one of those shows that changed tv.

a day! who has a day to waste? i could die any minute.

anyway just here on a quick break.

i don't know what's happening w/ the threads lately. we're totally changing topics in every one of them ha ha ha

probably a good thing!

Yeah, I noticed that too. Probs my fault.