TV/Movies Megathread

[The Brain]

Wes Anderson always makes the same movie.

[Ideologue]

I can't decide whether to give Grand Budapest Hotel an A or an A+.

A++

Ah, sold.  I'll have to re-rate The Lego Movie at the end of the year.

Grand Budapest Hotel (2014)

Wes Anderson's best-looking, funniest film, and Goddamn is that better than good enough. Grand Budapest Hotel lacks the high emotion of Anderson's very best, but it remains what it is: exuberance and excellence incarnate.

This is a hotel for ants!

A+

Wait, you say that it isn't one of Anderson's very best, yet you give him the maximum grade? 

Since I already made CdM's list I'll say that I really don't like Wes Anderson, by the way, but I'm pretty alone on that.

I mean, the grading system only has nine points of articulation.  Out of a hundred, it's like a 97.562, and Zissou and Moonrise are 99.873s. 

Looking at his reviews of movies I've seen recently, he was pretty unfair to Body Double and Big Trouble In Little China as well.  I think by the mid-80s he was feeling embattled as a defender of old-school liberal values in the onslaught of new Hollywood productions, and tended not to really understand the more "postmodern" films of the period that shared stylistic elements of the slasher/action/etc. movies.

  Ebert had a decent appreciation for visuals, in my recollection, but always subordinated them to a "good" narrative, in the modernist understanding of the term.

I've evolved to be a bit more style-over-substance than most, but I'm pretty simpatico on that.  Narrative is still the most important part of a film (well, the most important part is not being boring, but narrative's a great way to ensure it isn't).

My problem with his review of The Raid (and a lot of reviews of The Raid, to be honest, even the good ones) is that they treat it as either the exploitation film par excellence, or swing the other way and claim it's some kind of art film.  Neither is wrong, but it does overlook the fact that The Raid does have a perfectly cognizable narrative, about two brothers separated by crime and family strife.

That story is maybe a little trite, but it becomes very interesting due to the style, and the bleak non-resolution of the ending is powerful.  Plus, there's an interesting irony that--despite Rama's superhuman efforts--the final victory truly belongs to the criminal, not the cop, simply because that is the way Indonesia is built to function.  It's a social issues movie and would make a great double-feature with The Act of Killing, were The Act of Killing a movie especially worth watching.

P.S. I was also unbelievably annoyed when Ebert complained that he didn't know what country it was set in, which is possibly the most ugly-American thing the kindly Chicago softheart had ever said.

[Ideologue]

Read the review and I actually completely agree with everything in it. Enjoyable review. 

Adrien Brody's first line in the movie is immaculate. 

I'd have to watch it again but it's probably my favorite Wes Anderson film. It's just so damn funny.

It is.  My favorite line in the movie was Brody's, when the patter degenerates fully into schoolyard taunting.

Dmitri says something about M. Gustave having sex with whores.  M. Gustave, calling back to Dmitri's earlier insult, "I thought I was a fucking faggot."  Dmitri stares glassily, and says, "You are.  But you're a bisexual."

Doesn't look like much on the page, but Brody nails that shit.

[Capetan Mihali]

It's a social issues movie and would make a great double-feature with The Act of Killing, were The Act of Killing a movie especially worth watching.

I thought The Act of Killing was fantastic.

[Ideologue]

It's a social issues movie and would make a great double-feature with The Act of Killing, were The Act of Killing a movie especially worth watching.

I thought The Act of Killing was fantastic.

I know.  That's why I said that.

It has a fair point, but I thought it was exploitative and too ready to indulge its monstrous subjects.  It doesn't help that they're so morally stupid that they're hard to relate to as human at all.  But documentaries are a hard branch of film to review.

[Capetan Mihali]

I know.  That's why I said that.

  Troll me once, shame on you.

It has a fair point, but I thought it was exploitative and too ready to indulge its monstrous subjects.  It doesn't help that they're so morally stupid that they're hard to relate to as human at all.  But documentaries are a hard branch of film to review.

I liked the movie precisely because it was willing to indulge its subjects, and let you see the panorama of attitudes (all banal) towards their crimes that they display.  I thought it was also an interesting commentary on the way cinema mediates violence -- "The Act of Filming," if you will.

For me, good documentaries can be really breathtaking.  The Thin Blue Line was the one I first remember blowing me away.  I'm always up for a good documentary, whether its the subject matter or the director/approach that interests me.

For all the ribbing it gets here (exclusively from Yi, I guess), the National Film Board of Canada has generously made a ton of their movies available for free streaming worldwide, and there are some very good docs on there.   I saw "Project Grizzly" on TV by chance 15 years ago in a hotel room on a trip to Toronto and was totally riveted.  It is both hilarious and moving -- the story of a man building a massively-armored suit that he can wear to withstand a grizzly attack, so that he can get up close to them. "Through A Blue Lens" shows some very nice Vancouver cops talking with junkies on the Downtown Eastside.  The archive is worth perusing.

[celedhring]

"Capturing the Friedmans" is one of the most breathtaking pieces of filmmaking I've ever watched. Wish I had more time to watch docs.

[Ideologue]

I know.  That's why I said that.

  Troll me once, shame on you.

Aw, it wasn't trolling, exactly, but rather needling.   I gave it a B initially--honestly, in part out of the pressure of its critical reputation--but on reflection lowered it to a C+.  I didn't like it, so a B is inappropriate.

I liked the movie precisely because it was willing to indulge its subjects, and let you see the panorama of attitudes (all banal) towards their crimes that they display.  I thought it was also an interesting commentary on the way cinema mediates violence -- "The Act of Filming," if you will.

True, but so is Videodrome, and that movie's good.

For me, good documentaries can be really breathtaking.  The Thin Blue Line was the one I first remember blowing me away.  I'm always up for a good documentary, whether its the subject matter or the director/approach that interests me.

Last year, I liked Blackfish and, despite some problems with its style, Leviathan.  Previously I've quite enjoyed Fog of War, and I am always a sucker for gross insect documentaries.

Still, documentaries are defined by their content and not their style.  As a result, in a way, they're not real movies.  I can't complain about the story in Act of Killing, or its characters.  So even if I don't find them elucidating or entertaining, even if I found it an exercise in ugliness and careerism, I'm open to charges of missing the point; and perhaps I did.  That's why I have issues with the whole medium.  Ultimately, except for the filmmaking techniques used to capture their subject (and in that regard, I think Act of Killing is a failure), you can only look at the content of a documentary and decide whether you found it interesting or informative.  With a real movie, there is a conversation.  With a documentary, there is a lecture.

I mean, if you liked Act of Killing, you surely aren't alone.  I mean, I fully concede that Blackfish is a lot less challenging and a lot more populist, a simple message delivered in an hour and a half.  Perhaps it's a matter of taste.

For all the ribbing it gets here (exclusively from Yi, I guess), the National Film Board of Canada has generously made a ton of their movies available for free streaming worldwide, and there are some very good docs on there.   I saw "Project Grizzly" on TV by chance 15 years ago in a hotel room on a trip to Toronto and was totally riveted.  It is both hilarious and moving -- the story of a man building a massively-armored suit that he can wear to withstand a grizzly attack, so that he can get up close to them. "Through A Blue Lens" shows some very nice Vancouver cops talking with junkies on the Downtown Eastside.  The archive is worth perusing.

I still want to see "Crack Shack or Mansion: The Motion Picture."

[Malthus]

As for documentaries, one I remember beimng particularly riveting is titled Fast, Cheap and Out of Control.

Despite its title, it was not, in fact, a porno.  It featured: naked african mole rats, topiary, and robots (and it all made sense at the time ... ).

[Capetan Mihali]

Errol Morris.

As I mentioned, watching The Thin Blue Line was just incredible for me, and is probably part of how I ended up interested in criminal defense...

His first documentary The Gates Of Heaven is great too, a hilarious but also moving and respectful look at the California pet cemetery business in the late 70s.

[Malthus]

Errol Morris.

As I mentioned, watching The Thin Blue Line was just incredible for me, and is probably part of how I ended up interested in criminal defense...

His first documentary The Gates Of Heaven is great too, a hilarious but also moving and respectful look at the California pet cemetery business in the late 70s.

Reminds me of The Loved One. Which isn't a documentary. I think. 

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0059410/

[Ideologue]

He also did Fog of War, which, as noted, I really, really liked.

McNamara.

[Ideologue]

Yo, Mihali, you might be interested in The Unknown Known.  That's Morris' new joint, about (obviously) Donald Rumsfeld.

[Syt]

The Atlantic had an article contrasting Fog of War and Known Unknowns:

http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2014/04/the-true-subject-of-errol-morriss-donald-rumsfeld-doc-smugness/360344/

"The True Subject of Errol Morris's Donald Rumsfeld Doc: Smugness"

[mongers]

He also did Fog of War, which, as noted, I really, really liked.

McNamara.

You're liking it for the wrong reasons.