Red Mosquito

epilogue wrote:

Ms Harmless wrote:"elevated horror" movies tend to be my favourite horror movies, but what people have to understand is that "elevated horror" stories have existed since Mary Shelley wrote Frankenstein; horror is founded upon social commentary

Exactly!

It's the social commentary that I feel like I'm missing from Weapons. Which is why I feel like an idiot.

I have a theory, but it'll be a while till I can see it to confirm; it seems to me that social commentary is possible to interpret in Weapons but not necessary, which is OK if I enjoy the film

Watched ET for the first time last night. Wonderful. Was Drew Barrymore the cutest kid of all time?

Ms Harmless wrote:"elevated horror" movies tend to be my favourite horror movies, but what people have to understand is that "elevated horror" stories have existed since Mary Shelley wrote Frankenstein; horror is founded upon social commentary

im going to tattoo this

epilogue wrote:

Ms Harmless wrote:"elevated horror" movies tend to be my favourite horror movies, but what people have to understand is that "elevated horror" stories have existed since Mary Shelley wrote Frankenstein; horror is founded upon social commentary

Exactly!

It's the social commentary that I feel like I'm missing from Weapons. Which is why I feel like an idiot.

this is a good read joe

https://www.avclub.com/america-weaponiz ... n-violence

VinylGuy wrote:

epilogue wrote:

Ms Harmless wrote:"elevated horror" movies tend to be my favourite horror movies, but what people have to understand is that "elevated horror" stories have existed since Mary Shelley wrote Frankenstein; horror is founded upon social commentary

Exactly!

It's the social commentary that I feel like I'm missing from Weapons. Which is why I feel like an idiot.

this is a good read joe

https://www.avclub.com/america-weaponiz ... n-violence

I appreciate this. But I have a lot of gripes with it, too. I don't think the author's premise hangs together very well given the text of the film. It's a good *idea* but I don't think the film does much to back it up, at large. It does help with some of the nuance and nitpicks that I had though. So, that's cool.

I kinda wonder if the people who liked the movie are smarter than the guy who made it.

I really cant follow this when i just saw you were praising The Bear´s last season.

I still love ya

VinylGuy wrote:I really cant follow this when i just saw you were praising The Bear´s last season.

I still love ya

epilogue wrote:

VinylGuy wrote:

epilogue wrote:

Ms Harmless wrote:"elevated horror" movies tend to be my favourite horror movies, but what people have to understand is that "elevated horror" stories have existed since Mary Shelley wrote Frankenstein; horror is founded upon social commentary

Exactly!

It's the social commentary that I feel like I'm missing from Weapons. Which is why I feel like an idiot.

this is a good read joe

https://www.avclub.com/america-weaponiz ... n-violence

I appreciate this. But I have a lot of gripes with it, too. I don't think the author's premise hangs together very well given the text of the film. It's a good *idea* but I don't think the film does much to back it up, at large. It does help with some of the nuance and nitpicks that I had though. So, that's cool.

I kinda wonder if the people who liked the movie are smarter than the guy who made it.

how do you feel about David Lynch if it's important to you that certain readings line up with authorial intention? that's virtually not possible with most of Lynch; personally I think part of good storytelling is giving people a range of interpretive possibilities; if the range is limitless then you've done a bad job but arguably it's just as bad if you've spoonfed the "right" meaning

also I'm smarter than most guys who make movies, that's no deal-breaker

Ms Harmless wrote:

epilogue wrote:

VinylGuy wrote:

epilogue wrote:

Ms Harmless wrote:"elevated horror" movies tend to be my favourite horror movies, but what people have to understand is that "elevated horror" stories have existed since Mary Shelley wrote Frankenstein; horror is founded upon social commentary

Exactly!

It's the social commentary that I feel like I'm missing from Weapons. Which is why I feel like an idiot.

this is a good read joe

https://www.avclub.com/america-weaponiz ... n-violence

I appreciate this. But I have a lot of gripes with it, too. I don't think the author's premise hangs together very well given the text of the film. It's a good *idea* but I don't think the film does much to back it up, at large. It does help with some of the nuance and nitpicks that I had though. So, that's cool.

I kinda wonder if the people who liked the movie are smarter than the guy who made it.

how do you feel about David Lynch if it's important to you that certain readings line up with authorial intention? that's virtually not possible with most of Lynch; personally I think part of good storytelling is giving people a range of interpretive possibilities; if the range is limitless then you've done a bad job but arguably it's just as bad if you've spoonfed the "right" meaning

I adore David Lynch. He's one of my all time favorite film makers. Probably #1.

Authorial intention isn't all that meaningful to me outside of my own personal understanding. I like to know where a person is coming from, but it doesn't really weigh on how I receive a given piece of art, necessarily.

Watching Fight or Flight. This things a blast.

epilogue wrote:

Ms Harmless wrote:

epilogue wrote:

VinylGuy wrote:

epilogue wrote:

Ms Harmless wrote:"elevated horror" movies tend to be my favourite horror movies, but what people have to understand is that "elevated horror" stories have existed since Mary Shelley wrote Frankenstein; horror is founded upon social commentary

Exactly!

It's the social commentary that I feel like I'm missing from Weapons. Which is why I feel like an idiot.

this is a good read joe

https://www.avclub.com/america-weaponiz ... n-violence

I appreciate this. But I have a lot of gripes with it, too. I don't think the author's premise hangs together very well given the text of the film. It's a good *idea* but I don't think the film does much to back it up, at large. It does help with some of the nuance and nitpicks that I had though. So, that's cool.

I kinda wonder if the people who liked the movie are smarter than the guy who made it.

how do you feel about David Lynch if it's important to you that certain readings line up with authorial intention? that's virtually not possible with most of Lynch; personally I think part of good storytelling is giving people a range of interpretive possibilities; if the range is limitless then you've done a bad job but arguably it's just as bad if you've spoonfed the "right" meaning

I adore David Lynch. He's one of my all time favorite film makers. Probably #1.

Authorial intention isn't all that meaningful to me outside of my own personal understanding. I like to know where a person is coming from, but it doesn't really weigh on how I receive a given piece of art, necessarily.

I look forward to seeing Weapons then coming in here with my trans and queer-centric readings of it; if my hunches are correct it's a doosie

Ms Harmless wrote:

epilogue wrote:

Ms Harmless wrote:

epilogue wrote:

VinylGuy wrote:

epilogue wrote:

Ms Harmless wrote:"elevated horror" movies tend to be my favourite horror movies, but what people have to understand is that "elevated horror" stories have existed since Mary Shelley wrote Frankenstein; horror is founded upon social commentary

Exactly!

It's the social commentary that I feel like I'm missing from Weapons. Which is why I feel like an idiot.

this is a good read joe

https://www.avclub.com/america-weaponiz ... n-violence

I appreciate this. But I have a lot of gripes with it, too. I don't think the author's premise hangs together very well given the text of the film. It's a good *idea* but I don't think the film does much to back it up, at large. It does help with some of the nuance and nitpicks that I had though. So, that's cool.

I kinda wonder if the people who liked the movie are smarter than the guy who made it.

how do you feel about David Lynch if it's important to you that certain readings line up with authorial intention? that's virtually not possible with most of Lynch; personally I think part of good storytelling is giving people a range of interpretive possibilities; if the range is limitless then you've done a bad job but arguably it's just as bad if you've spoonfed the "right" meaning

I adore David Lynch. He's one of my all time favorite film makers. Probably #1.

Authorial intention isn't all that meaningful to me outside of my own personal understanding. I like to know where a person is coming from, but it doesn't really weigh on how I receive a given piece of art, necessarily.

I look forward to seeing Weapons then coming in here with my trans and queer-centric readings of it; if my hunches are correct it's a doosie

I can't wait to read that review!

Like I said, I feel like I just fully missed something as far as the political/social commentary goes. I'm looking for that insight. I can't wait to hear/read you take. I feel like that will illuminate this thing for me, big time.

Valkyrie was good. Still wish someone other than Cruise was in the role. Nice to see true Nazi heroes though. Great group of guys.

Team lv and dtc on Weapons, though they are coming at it from different directions, I agree with both. I don't really like these movies.

Booooo. Boo.

I saw Honey, Don't. It's really too bad this movie is kind of boring. Margaret Qualley is great, Chris Evans is great, I think back on some moments with happiness, I don't think was actively bored while watching it, but boring really kind of is the best word for it. Just not enough there, unfortunately. maybe too random and no follow-through on some of its better elements or bigger themes. Feels a bit empty

Would those two fucking idiot brothers just work together again

ethan has to make one more gay movie with his wife first

Weapons was really good. Jorge used the word "fun" but I don't think that's the right word. It's often funny and I was always on the edge of my seat but I wouldn't say I was ever having fun