>>25435
The plants on the table at one minute and ten seconds into the film are birds of paradise flowers.

>>25437

Not sure I get the significance of this. Is it something I missed?

>>25438

It's not at all significant but unless you ID'd the flowers yourself then you did miss it.

There was some pampas grass not long after that.

>>25439

/v/ - Horticulture

>>25440

There were some fantastic succulents in series 1 of Foundation.

I'm Gonna Git You Sucka is a fun blaxploitation parody film if you've got a spare 80 minutes to waste. In honesty it's a bit shit, but there numerous 'cameos' of recognisable actors when they were young and a fair few decent frameworks of jokes.

I'm developing a sincere enthusiasm for exploitation films, particularly parodies. They tend to be full of atmosphere and larger than life characters, and generally seem to offer a more believable representation of life in the era than other films I've encountered.

https://archive.org/details/im-gonna-git-you-sucka-1988


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BWNQTqMkezc

>>25442
It also has Chris Rock's first ever film appearance, and his youthful pestering of Isaac Hayes is one of the best parts of the film in my opinion.

>>25442
Also, I was into blaxploitation parodies a few years ago, and I have some DVDs on my shelf of a full three different such films. In my opinion, you really need to watch Black Dynamite, because it's brilliant, while Undercover Brother is probably about equally as good as I'm Gonna Git You Sucka. I haven't seen Dolemite; have you? Is it good?

>>25435
The film is utterly bizarre. How the fuck did you find it?

Apart from the ending, what bothered me most were the numerous loose ends in the narrative. The main character is framed as experiencing hallucinations but nothing appears to be done with it. It's also hinted that he's adopted which is resolved offhand toward the end, as though it was only ever covering an issue of the plot. And what's the deal with that big dumb woman? In one scene I thought the actor was wearing a prostheitc mask but it turned out to be their actual face (pictured) - what the fuck? I guess she might be a reference to aristocratic inbreeding or unvarrying genetics regardless of class.

I didn't understand the upper class to be 'shape shifters' as Wikipedia suggests (Read post viewing, thanks for your thoughtful use of spoilers), instead thought the whole ending scene was some abstraction for the viewer rather than reality for the characters. I would have much prefered the group to have literally eaten the captives, atleast then I could have got off to it.
I was half expecting a big reveal of the main character being carted off in a straight jacket while the elites are back to normal and his 'eaten' friend looks on in concern, but no, you just get a shitty joke.

The effects themselves were good and I enjoyed the horror sound effects, but the soundtrack and 'plonking' as you say jarred horribly. Were the film played a bit more seriously i reckon it could have been alright - it's certainly sexy enough.

It reminds me somewhat of Brazil, only shit.

>>25445

IMDb suggests the whole film was just written as an excuse to do the special effects. It doesn't add anything about the plants sadly.

Can you recommend some films set in and around the interwar period? WWI inclusive but not necessarily war films. Films set in and around Spain might be best, but not exclusively.

>>25455

Paths of Glory is one of my favourite films of all time. It's set during WWI, but speaks to timeless themes.

>>25455
Pan's Labyrinth is set in 1944, but I thought it was set earlier than that so perhaps you'd be willing to consider it. Assuming you haven't seen it already, of course.

>>25455
El Sur is set around 1950 I think but you must watch it those are your tastes. There's also a very good but very dark and unredeeming Italian film about WWI called Uomini Contro (the English title of which is 'Many Wars Ago').

>>25456
>>25457
>>25459
Cheers lads, I'll give them a watch or rewatch as appropriate. More still welcome.

I feel like I should make an effort to watch David Lynch's filmography, given that I have read/watched a lot of guff about him recently what with him turning up dead and that. Trouble is I just don't think I like him (as a director I mean, I've never met him) that much.

Even when I was a pretentious stoner and psychedelic dabbler in my mid 20s, for whom the trippy surreal shit should have been right up my street, I bounced off of Eraserhead two or three times and never made it more than about half an hour in. Similar to Terry Gilliam's Brazil, I think I just struggle with it because it seems so loose and unstructured, just a sequence of events that happen rather than a narrative.

I get on a lot better with David Cronenburg's style of surrealism, which feels a lot more cohesive. His films are weird but they are internally consistent in their weirdness, they always have a sort of disorienting dreamlike narrative but it's still a clearly defined narrative. And they also have loads more sex and violence, which I tend to prefer.

I think that's the issue really, Lynch's work is usually too arty for me, and that's not because I don't like arty stuff, but because I like art to be vulgar and crass in defiance of that poncy pretentious concept of art.

>>25467
Blue Velvet has some sexy bits. Have you seen that?

And Twin Peaks has plenty of consistent narrative, although it is the nature of TV series to be much longer than films, so you’d be taking a risk, even though I love it. Watch out for the third series that was made a few years ago; I predict you will despise that. I hated most of it, but I really loved a couple of parts which are exactly what you said you don’t like.

>>25467
>Even when I was a pretentious stoner and psychedelic dabbler in my mid 20s, for whom the trippy surreal shit should have been right up my street
If this is the mindset you're approaching David Lynch films with, then no, don't bother. I'm not even his biggest fan or anything, but you sound like kind of a fucking numpty.

>>25471

Everyone was a numpty in their 20s, at least some of us have the capacity to be self aware about it.

>>25467

I'd suggest giving Eraserhead another chance. The plot is extremely barebones, deliberately, but the themes it deals with and the visuals it uses to represent them are pretty compelling.

It's one of those films I had massively different reactions to with a difference of age. As an edgy teenager, a lot of the surrealism and unpleasantness came off as comedic. As an adult, it seems more nightmarish and exposes genuine vulnerabilities. Basically, my attitude towards it changed completely with my own proximity to fatherhood and all its attendant fears. What seemed like an impenetrable film about a general anxiety towards biology, family life, and the high stakes of adulthood back then all of a sudden becomes very real when... well, you're at the mercy of biology, family life, and high stakes of adulthood.

Another mini-film review: I watched After Hours, tonight.

It's one of Scorsese's lesser known films, and from what I understand he picked up the script from another director and completed it while waiting to begin work on The Last Temptation of Christ.

If anyone is familiar with the absolute train wreck film Ryan's Babe, After Hours is like the competent version of that story: an average guy makes a mundane decision (in this case, going to meet up with a nice girl he struck up a conversation with earlier that day) that takes him down a strange path filled with eccentric people and odd coincidences.

I enjoyed it. Anyone who's had a bad night out should be able to sympathise with protagonist Paul's exhaustion and panic. Even though it's labelled a comedy, Scorsese sets the film in a very grimy-feeling 80s New York, somewhere you could believe the characters from The Warriors are running around causing chaos, so that it does at points feel dangerous and unsettling. The only straight "comedy" parts involve the burglars, played by Cheech & Chong, who seem really out of place.

The issue is that it almost feels a bit beneath Scorsese. You have this brilliant motif running throughout the film of being trapped or captured, like Julie's mousetraps around her bed or Kiki's elaborately bound hands during her BDSM session with her partner, that suggests he's maybe hinting that sex invariably leads to entanglement and peril. Beyond that, though, there doesn't seem to be a deeper meaning past "be careful when wishing for excitement". The film ends with a very cool dynamic shot showing Paul where he started, but I can't help but wonder if the film might have been improved with just a line or two extra. Paul is teaching another person how to use word processing software, the student expresses dissatisfaction and boredom, Paul wearily replies that you should appreciate peace when you have it. Or maybe I'm just nitpicking and wishing for meaning in what is just a fun, weird tale.

Support the Girls is a comedy/drama about some women who work in a restaurant that is legally distinct from Hooters but is just Hooters really. I had never heard of it, but I discovered it for free on streaming platform Tubi, and it played a little clip of it which was hilarious. So I made a point to watch the whole thing.

It's not all as good as the clip, but the characters are likable and there are multiple funny moments. For free, it's definitely worth watching. Apparently Andrew Bujalski, who wrote and directed it, is known for making ballets where everyone just mumbles and you can't make out what anyone's saying, so it's good to know it's not just me. It adds to the low-budget realism, but I can't say I'm a fan of feeling like I'm missing half the plot. In many ways, perhaps this ballet is not amazing, but if you discover it on your own and you've never heard of it, your standards will be lower and you will absolutely love it.

>>25543
>known for making ballets
Hey, a new wordfilter! I assume it's new. I don't watch many ballets - fuck - f*lms.

This also gives me an opportunity to add to my previous post the answer to the question you're all thinking: it is approximately as good as Coyote Ugly.

>>25543
I just watched it. What was the funny part?

>>25546
The opening scene where the woman arrives for the job interview is the bit I'm referring to.
>Hi, I'm here for the job interview
>Oh! You're early. We like that, haha
>Cool. Am I hired then?
For all I know, this is an ancient line that people use all the time, but I've never heard it before and it really tickled me.

>>25548
The knob gag was disapointing. Might have been better if all but the last knob only went up to ten - baiting you into confusion sorta thing. Or one of the dude used a wrench to literally crack the knob further, damaging the amp and keeping in vibe with the bands level of dumbness.

>>25548
So a load of self-referential shite then.

I'm only 35 but sociecty has already changed so much. At the cinema today, first time in years. I was among a mob of roaring autistic retards, clapping and yelling all throughout the emotional triumps of the ballet as they can't contain their excitement. My sister says many spectactualr ballet showings are like that these days. I even saw a couple of trans kids, or atleast strangely/cross dressed. What the fuck is going on? Keep up or be left behind, I guess.

Anyway, A Minecraft musical theatre is almost entirely forgettable. It's a ballet for kids - my nephew enjoyed it, I think. The generic plot is slapped between minecraft montages. And that's about it. I can't remember any character names. Oh, appart from Chungus - which got a huge roar from the meme crowd.
The way the zombies move is distinctly CGI over body-motion capture in a way so obvious it's slightly unnerving. Maybe it was all the squares moving in circular motion.

>>25554

Personally I just can't get over how they made the creepers fluffy. They are obviously cactuses, not some kind of weird cat. It's incredible how videogames have quite literally eclipsed Hollywood as a market altogether in terms of cultural relevance and profitability in the last decade, but we still get these adaptations made by people who seem to have only read the Wikipedia, or at best, TVTropes entry for a franchise.

I kind of want to see the Minecraft motion picture to see how bad it is, but I won't be doing so until I can torrent it. This weekend however I shall be watching the Sonic the Hedgehog ones, because I remember the first one fondly (even after all the forced meme nonsense about his weird teeth) but never realised they somehow snuck another two out behind my back while I was busy with on and off class A drug addiction.

>>25555
>They are obviously cactuses, not some kind of weird cat.
It's probably because they hiss, which incidentally I didn't hear any of in the ballet possibly because of all the fucking audience noise.

What I'll say in positive of the ballet though is that the use of colour was very effective in defusing the tension from the mildly horrible scenes. I could imagine being a child reassured by the friendly, safe bold colours of the main lead characters after being scared of the shadowy and dark pig/zombie scenes.

>I kind of want to see the Minecraft motion picture to see how bad it is
To be honest it's not exactly bad, it's just a forgettable, a colourful memey kids ballet. And that's it. There're some hamfisted emotional scenes that grated horribly but maybe I'm just an arsehole.

>they somehow snuck another two out behind my back while I was busy with on and off class A drug addiction.
Dude I'm on the net every single day and didn't hear a thing about Sonic 2 & 3. Is Rouge in it yet? Is she voiced by a sexy latina milf or what?

>>25556

I believe they have followed the original Megadrive game sequence so we have sonic, Tails and Knuckles already. Rouge was first in one of the Dreamcast games I think? So there might be another two or three to go, if it gets that far.

I was always more of a Blaze the Cat man myself, mind you. So I might be waiting a while.

Forgot which thread you were talking about Her in, but I just saw the poster for this. It's by Jordan Peele so probably not terrible. I plan to watch assuming it's a sequel.

>ZARDOS

This film is unusual. I was expecting a clever cat and mouse between a master manipulater faux-god and his subject, instead I saw 1 dimensional characters while scifi and ethical concepts wisped over my head.
Still, it's got some great hippy-death-cult tits and orgiastic scenes (of which numerous are contemplative and visually artistic) and it's much better than Society.
I started getting bored around the hour mark but persisted because there's probably something worth thinking about here, I just can't find it.

There's a weird bit at 35.35 where a character appears to speak backward. I don't know what this is meant to be and recording and reversing the audio returns nothing of interest. The same character slurs their speech unusually throughout the film.

'Head pumped full of knowledge' is a strange trope in film and stories - in terms of character development it's 1 dimensional and fails to connect, but these sort of stories aren't about the individuals, are they?
I've only ever seen it three times now in Zardos, Battlefield Earth and touched upon in Indiana Jones. The connecting factor between these films is that each explores alternate histories of humanity. It must have something to do with Arthurian legend, isn't there a cup of knowledge or something?

There's clearly some message of violence as a natural phenomena of existence but I can't pull all pieces together.

Check it out, see what you think. Free on the internet archive - https://archive.org/details/zardoz-1974

>>25761
I forgot to mention that the stone head was impressive and made some interesting cinema, also the initial introduction from the lead antagonist(?) was a breath of fresh air - I wish more productions were 'presented for consideration' like this.

>>25761

I was the lad that watched and reviewed Society, so thanks for the writeup. Since it seems worth it for someone that genuinely did enjoy Society, I'll give [/i]Zardos[/i] a try.

Probably the most emotionally honest and sincere film Spielberg has ever made.

Mostly autobiographical, as you would assume it is about him learning a love of film as a boy and the different films he made and the power of film and it is those things. But it is also about much more than just him. It serves just as much as a character study of his parents their flaws and strengths and relationship and his journey in young life about coming to terms with that. Its a Coming of age film told with a sincerity that elevates it. These feel like real people coming to terms with real problems. It has funny moments it has emotionally painful moments. It has characters who are simultaneously very charming and also easy to dispise for their flaws. The main characters feel authentic.

That said the whole film builds up to a meta punchline, based on a 4th wall breaking casting choice.

The new Naked Gun film is pretty good. It has some jokes that really don't land, but that just adds to the charm in my opinion. I respect the risk-taking, and the willingness to really commit to a several-minute montage with a snowman that isn't funny at all. Seth McFarlane was apparently involved in its production, and that becomes very obvious once you know.

>>25827
Was meant to see this at the cinema. I forgot, now it's unlisted.
I didn't really like the trailer, thought it was played too camp but wanted to give it a chance for the franchise.
Not sure of Neeson in the lead role but who else is there?

>>25830
Pamela Anderson's quite good in it; there's a bit where she uses her feminine wiles to seduce one of the baddies, and does a really bad job of it in a hilarious manner. There are also some cameos from various wrestlers or MMA fighters or something, and I don't know if you'd like them because I don't know who they are.

Obviously no one needs me to tell them this is a good film. I've also seen it before. However, I actually got quite emotional during the famous chase scene, because no one makes films like this anymore, and the artists who did have passed, or are going to in the not too distant future.

>>25831
I think they meant who else could play the lead role rather than literally who else is in the film.

I enjoyed 28 Years Later. Weeks was uninspired, as weird as some of Year's component parts are they are trying something more interesting, which is really the only real option given the self-contained nature of Days.

>>25837

Yeah Weeks was shite. Practically a direct to video sequel really though, with a different writer/director.

>>25838

Reminded me of Starship Troopers 2, although marginally better budgeted.

>>25840

I wouldn't go that far, Starship Troopers 2 is one of the most legendarily wank cash in sequels I have ever seen. Partly just because it's a dire movie in its own right, but partly also because the original Starship Troopers is one of those truly unique stand-outs.

Also that reminds me, I was thinking the other day. Imagine if Running Man had been a Verhoeven movie. It's great as it is, and I don't want to throw shade on whoever directed it, but how good would that have been.

>>25837

Must admit I didn't like how they retconned 28 Weeks Later entirely within the first five minutes with a single sentence of text. It wasn't a great film but seeing the virus spreading globally was an exciting hook to end on. But much more than that, coming after a real life pandemic where most countries were between 3-6 months too late to even begin properly reacting, it feels completely unbelievable.

>>25843

Given the relative time it takes the rage virus to take effect after infection compared to COVID, it's not like many planes are going to make it all the way anywhere with infected on board. I think it makes sense, just upping the ante by making it global doesn't add anything to the heart of it which is how individuals cope/react to the situation. There are countless films about global zombie outbreaks if that's what you want.

Also, not technically a retcon. Canonically, Paris was nuked.

>>25844

Sure, but you could give it more than just a line of intermission text. That felt very much more like the filmmakers saying "fuck off, we didn't make that one, ignore it" than anything else.

Overall I felt this one was a bit up and down, but more good than bad. First part was great, second bit with mummy and soldier boy was shit, third bit with the mental doctor was spectacular. Ralf Fines hard carried the third act. I liked the overall weirdness though, the bit at the very end especially. Even if it did tip the direction a bit Fallout: London, I mean... That's basically what I would actually expect if this country went post apocalyptic. And the Savile gag works on several levels.

Nitpick, though- I hate when films want a part like that and somebody on the production team goes "we need some really heavy metal" and whatever they pick is always utter shite. If anyone involved had any taste it would have been Carcass.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c_sQUWV4OyU