TV/Movies Megathread

[Ed Anger]

Th Shape of Water II: Fucking SpongeBob

[Eddie Teach]

Which half is China in?

[Oexmelin]

The joys of being an American. One half of the world thinks we are disgusting and degenerate perverts. The other half thinks we are so against fucking that having a hook-up in a film is considered a bold political statement to break up our puritanical values.

That has nothing to do with my opinion of "the Americans", but rather the depiction of sex and female masturbation in Hollywood movies. I can't think of many examples of it being portrayed as positive, natural, and not worthy of lengthy cinematographic "comment" - so, yeah, I think it is a political point. If this was routine, then yes, it wouldn't have been worthy of comment.

But perhaps you have more examples in mind, that I may have missed?

[Razgovory]

Yeah, the fish-fucking came a bit too quick and too casually.

Well, I didn't expect to read that today.

[Maladict]

Yeah, the fish-fucking came a bit too quick and too casually.

Well, I didn't expect to read that today.

Nobody expects the Spanish incoitusichthusition.

[garbon]

The joys of being an American. One half of the world thinks we are disgusting and degenerate perverts. The other half thinks we are so against fucking that having a hook-up in a film is considered a bold political statement to break up our puritanical values.

That has nothing to do with my opinion of "the Americans", but rather the depiction of sex and female masturbation in Hollywood movies. I can't think of many examples of it being portrayed as positive, natural, and not worthy of lengthy cinematographic "comment" - so, yeah, I think it is a political point. If this was routine, then yes, it wouldn't have been worthy of comment.

But perhaps you have more examples in mind, that I may have missed?

I don't think I will see this film. I don't care for the idea of a film where the main sympathetic characters include a mute, her gay friend and her black friend then on the same sort of level as her fishman. I'm sure it doesn't play out that way at all but fail the see the necessity of having a 'freakshow' element to humanize those prior 3 groups.

[celedhring]

I thought that too initially... but then again, I also appreciated that Elisa was shown as having a libido; in need of acceptance, yes, but one that came with physical desires too, shown from the beginning. Considering that such a situation is usually depicted in Hollywood as either comedic relief, character assassination, or as a misstep towards proper romance, I thought it was a welcome change (and a political point).

That's fine, but that was no ordinary sexual relationship. A sexual romance with a different species feels momentous enough that it should have been "sold" with more detail and buildup. Particularly since - as Malthus says - that's the main drive of the film (an interspecies romance, seeing beyond the apparent "faults" of people).

My only other "but" is that the research institute they work in has really shitty security, given this project is such a big deal.

And here again, I thought it great as a counterpoint: the "research institute" is shown as a workplace appropriate to the Hollywood golden age - it is our own time that is obsessed with the depiction of security.

It was just a necessity of the plot. Security had to be shit in order for two cleaning ladies to be able to pull off the heist, and for Hawkins' character be able to interact with the specimen with such freedom and absolutely nobody noticing. That threw me off the film a bit. Again, a relatively minor quibble.

[The Brain]

I thought that too initially... but then again, I also appreciated that Elisa was shown as having a libido; in need of acceptance, yes, but one that came with physical desires too, shown from the beginning. Considering that such a situation is usually depicted in Hollywood as either comedic relief, character assassination, or as a misstep towards proper romance, I thought it was a welcome change (and a political point).

That's fine, but that was no ordinary sexual relationship. A sexual romance with a different species feels momentous enough that it should have been "sold" with more detail and buildup. Particularly since - as Malthus says - that's the main drive of the film (an interspecies romance, seeing beyond the apparent "faults" of people).

My only other "but" is that the research institute they work in has really shitty security, given this project is such a big deal.

And here again, I thought it great as a counterpoint: the "research institute" is shown as a workplace appropriate to the Hollywood golden age - it is our own time that is obsessed with the depiction of security.

It was just a necessity of the plot. Security had to be shit in order for two cleaning ladies to be able to pull off the heist, and for Hawkins' character be able to interact with the specimen with such freedom and absolutely nobody noticing. That threw me off the film a bit. Again, a relatively minor quibble.

Working class women are unable to pull off sophisticated stuff? OK 19th century.

[celedhring]

In other news: Jessica Jones 

[Malthus]

I thought that too initially... but then again, I also appreciated that Elisa was shown as having a libido; in need of acceptance, yes, but one that came with physical desires too, shown from the beginning. Considering that such a situation is usually depicted in Hollywood as either comedic relief, character assassination, or as a misstep towards proper romance, I thought it was a welcome change (and a political point).

The libido part was handled very well, I thought.

Indeed, many aspects of her character were handled very well.

This just made the gap in the romance aspect more notable.  Unless that was part of a point the film was making that I missed.

My thought was that we were supposed to understand how these two isolated souls recognize in each other a beauty and sensuality that the outside world has missed, and connect across the barriers of language and species.

The problem is that we aren't shown enough of why that happens. It seems like one moment he's eating her cat, the next they are screwing.

[Habbaku]

It seems like one moment he's eating her cat, the next they are screwing.

Seems like a natural progression to me. 

[frunk]

Seems like a natural progression to me. 

The ALF school of alien relations?

[Savonarola]

War for Planet of the Apes (2017)

Hollywood made not one, but two monkey Apocalypse Now movies in 2017; Kong Skull Island and this one.  I'm just going to go ahead and blame this sad state of affairs on Donald Trump.

(War for Planet of the Apes actually has "Ape-ocalypse Now" written on a wall, in case there was any way you missed the obvious parallels.)

This monkey Viet-Nam war movie suffers from poor writing throughout.  The plot requires that the villains be unbelievably stupid.  The resolution requires both the cavalry and a deus ex machina.  The middle of the movie seems to drag on and on and go nowhere.  Woody Harrelson plays Colonel Kurtz in this one; unlike Samuel L. Jackson in Kong, he tries to do a Marlon Brando impression.  That was really not a good idea.  Worst of all, though, the movie is done in dead earnest without a scrap of fun.  The filmmakers didn't even get the sheer ridiculousness of the premise.

The make up and visual effects are well done and they play the Fox fanfare on conga drums and horns, that was kind of clever.  Overall, though, Kong Skull Island is a much better choice for your monkey Viet-Nam dollar.

[Savonarola]

Despite the film being a comedy, there are a lot laughs.

Probably an accident.

Sometimes things just get through quality control.

[KRonn]

War for Planet of the Apes (2017)

Hollywood made not one, but two monkey Apocalypse Now movies in 2017; Kong Skull Island and this one.  I'm just going to go ahead and blame this sad state of affairs on Donald Trump.

(War for Planet of the Apes actually has "Ape-ocalypse Now" written on a wall, in case there was any way you missed the obvious parallels.)

This monkey Viet-Nam war movie suffers from poor writing throughout.  The plot requires that the villains be unbelievably stupid.  The resolution requires both the cavalry and a deus ex machina.  The middle of the movie seems to drag on and on and go nowhere.  Woody Harrelson plays Colonel Kurtz in this one; unlike Samuel L. Jackson in Kong, he tries to do a Marlon Brando impression.  That was really not a good idea.  Worst of all, though, the movie is done in dead earnest without a scrap of fun.  The filmmakers didn't even get the sheer ridiculousness of the premise.

The make up and visual effects are well done and they play the Fox fanfare on conga drums and horns, that was kind of clever.  Overall, though, Kong Skull Island is a much better choice for your monkey Viet-Nam dollar.

On Kong Skull Island I agree with you. I've said before that the helos all going down was lame; some of them still flew within arm reach of Kong after seeing what was happening to the other helos. Samuel Jackson, or whoever played that character, was over the top gung ho like you say. They should have done a scientific mission rather than a search and destroy, given that they were in such a unique area. That was just more over the top stuff when they could have made a more believable and likeable story.