In post 5, VashtaNeurotic wrote:1 question really, what counts as a film and why is the cutoff 40 minutes vs the 80 minutes for a tv show? I assume video essays count for nothing.
Yeah, the question of "what is a film?" is an interesting one because technology is certainly changing the definition. It can no longer be defined as "must have been released in a theater" anymore. So that opens it up to tv movies, straight to video/DVD, and streaming options. Then there are anthology series which can be a series of self-contained movies (Masterpiece Theater, Twilight Zone, Black Mirror). And there are tv series that can be considered an extended cinematic experience (an episode of 2010's Sherlock is basically an entire Sherlock Holmes movie). I can't limit it to having a narrative story, because plenty of avant-garde movies, documentaries, and yes, video essays might be discounted. So mostly everything counts as long as it has a moving image.
However... making it as open as "anything with moving images" does create a slight problem as it allows stuff like Zoom conferences, video games, or self-made videos to be allowed. So let me restrict it a little by saying it must be non-interactive and published in a format available to the public. Which might still have some grey areas, but I guess we can deal with those issues if they arise.
As far as the time limit goes, I do want to encourage movie-watching over anything else. So you can still watch episodes of TV, but you'd have to watch 3 episodes of a 30 min tv show to equal to 1 point.
I guess I should also add in the rules that you must watch it in full (bailing at the ending credits is ok), at single-speed, and only one movie at a time.
In post 7, xofelf wrote:I also got a question, what happens if you happen to watch a ton of things with someone you know is already participating here, and thus likely to end up having similar amounts of points? Does that me co-winners?
Sure, you can both participate and potentially both win. There is always going to be a possibility that one of you might watch something extra on the side to off-set your point totals.
The was from when the Universal Monsters franchise was lurching to an end. No more new monsters, just re-using the same old classic monsters (Dracula, Wolfman, Frankenstein's Monster) and coming up with excuses for why they are all converging. There are some good parts, though: a spooky discordant version of Moonlight Sonata plays as a nurse is enthralled, Lon Chaney Jr. is too good for the material, and I kinda liked the scientific explanations of the monster's ills, even if they made no sense.
I wasn't sure what I was going to get from a Matrix reboot, and I gotta say, I genuinely enjoyed what I got. It could have been better, but I had such a good time with what I was given. It was a nice way to start the new year.
I haven't seen it yet and I've heard mixed reviews. How would you rank it against the other movies in the Matrix quadrology?
In post 19, GeorgeBailey wrote:My only gripe is the romance and some of the story. The romance was super forced and telling someone "I love you because I saw you in my dream" is one of the creepiest things to ever hear. It also felt like it threw a lot of ideas around that never really turned into anything substantial. Robert De Niro was great in this though <3.
I was going to ask which ending you saw, but based on this I think I know. I think you'd prefer the other one.
2. The Life and Death of Colonel Blimp (Michael Powell, Emeric Pressburger-1943)
A very British and surprisingly slightly subversive epic romance. The intent is impressibly ambitious. Released during WWII, it chronicles the life and times of Clive Candy, a career soldier. After a lifetime of fighting in the Boer War and WWI, Candy eventually learns the lesson that the honorable "Gentleman's Rules of Warfare" are a thing of the past as the British must do everything they can to defeat the Nazis, an enemy without honor. As interesting as that war-time message is, it's just padded with so much melodrama and British stuffiness that the 2h 43min runtime is just way too much.
This was a perfectly good movie. Solid heart-strong story about family and acceptance and trust. Nicely animated and well-acted. Goofy at the right times and poignant at others. But I couldn't help feeling a little letdown. I had high expectations because Phil Lord and Christopher Miller had been the creative forces behind the LEGO Movie and Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse. I was hoping for something genre- and 4th wall-breaking. This wasn't. It was a conventional follow-up. It's a perfectly good conventional movie, but I wish it had taken more artistic risks.
4. Summer of Soul (...Or, When the Revolution Could Not Be Televised) (2021)
Questlove's directorial debut in a documentary about a little-known summer series of concerts in Harlem during the summer of 1969. There are plenty of fantastic snippets of the concert which featured Stevie Wonder, the 5th Dimension, BB King, Sly & The Family Stone, Mahalia Jackson, Nina Simone, Hugh Masekela, Aretha Franklin, and a few more. This footage is intercut is a variety of the attendees and performers sharing memories and giving context about the cultural significance. The underlying narrative is the fact that this concert series had some of the top names in entertainment and humongous crowds is virtually unknown compared to contemporary concerts like Woodstock or Altamont. The concert series was documented and parts broadcast at the time, but ultimately was shelved and forgotten in a basement for decades.
Meditative space procedural. I was actually kinda happy they didn't try to force too many twists and turns. The creeping inevitability of mathematical certainty is a powerful villain.
In post 52, VashtaNeurotic wrote:Random thought, would it be weird to change the tv show/other media rules to be 160 or 180 minutes per point going foward? Atm despite being similar runtimes, watching 4 movies of about 100 minutes each scores less than watching 10 40 minute episodes of a tv show. Not to mention watching a movie like seven samurai would count half as much as watching tv equal to its length.
I get this is a casual thing, and more for just sharing what we watch/opinions on it, but if this is meant to be more of a movie challenge than a media challenge the rules should probably reflect that more than charlie chaplin and shorter animated features always being counted?
I'm not super stoked about changing rules mid-challenge, but you make a good point. I wasn't sure how much interest there would be and I kinda feared restricting it to a more rigid definition of movies might discourage participation.
One of my backup ideas was scoring it as a point per minute. So watching 4 100 minute movies scores the same as 10 40 minute episodes since they both took the same time to watch. What do you think?
So, Spider-Man was made into such a terrible tv series that it was canceled and most of their episodes were edited together into some bad tv movies. This was the third one (and released theatrically in Europe). It's really terrible. Bad acting, bad writing, really cheap effects (oh wow, the 'webbing' is just string), and bad cinematography. It's just so dull and boring to watch in too many long stretches. Only reason to watch it is to appreciate how far things have come in the super hero genre. And wait, is that Ted Danson in a tiny role? Weird.
Presented in Italy as a sequel to Hitchcock's "The Birds", the Mexican movie is pretty much just a straight rip-off. The plot is basically "birds attack people. Repeat". There is an impressive number of slow-motion birds being thrown in people's faces but after a while it just it stops being shocking or scary or whatever it's supposed to be and your mind just wanders into feeling bad for the birds and the actors and everyone involved. The Rifftrax commentary makes the whole thing fun though.
I liked what it was going for and I like the use of video game language in cinema, but this felt really dumbed down. Plus, there's something just very wrong with the movie, like it was something else that got editing and changed. Or maybe I just don't buy that the entire world is united in cheering on a video game character who "does good".
No, this isn't the Spielberg one with Tom Cruise. No, this is the Asylum version. One of the first "mockbusters" (I like that as the genre name) where they make a similar movie to something big in theaters to try to trick people into accidentally buying it. This stars C. Thomas Howell in the modern re-telling of the public domain story. It's hokey and bad and Jake Busey really doesn't have his dad's goofy intensity.
I've updated the scores in the opening post. I think my math is right, but I'm also pretty tired so mistakes are possible.
For those that listed TV series, I did some checking on run-times to figure out the scores..
@Haschel Cedricson-
Only Murders In the Building = 315 min (3 points, 75 min carry-over. So you're about 5 min shy of a 4th point. This means if you watch a 5 minute short, you can score another point.
@Malkon05 -
NCIS 8eps at 44 min = 352 min (4 points, 32 min carry over)
American Dad! 22 eps at 21 min each = 462min (5 points, 62 min carry over)
Carry-overs - 32min + 62 min = 94 min (1 point, 14 mins still carrying over)
@Nero Cain -
South Park specials = 95 min (1 point, 15 min carry over)
@VastaNeurotic - Monument Mythos S2 = 105 min (1 point, 25 min carry over)
(I used a Youtube Playlist called ("Monument Mythos Season 2") that had 9 videos of varying lengths. I hope that's right. I don't know much about this series but it looks fascinating. )
@T3 - Lost in Space 2eps = 109 min (1 point, 29 min carry over)
Oh yeah, he's decent in most stuff I've seen him. But he has going for "unhinged low-ranking soldier declaring himself a general in the breakdown of order" but didn't really have the presence or gravitas to pull it off as Gary Busey would. He just wasn't intimidating.
In post 87, VashtaNeurotic wrote:On a more serious note, Kublai, if you are just going to do runtime calculations for people rather than taking what they give, you may as well just be like "40 minutes of movies is a point". I'm happy to find runtimes for my stuff btw, like it's a google away and I usually check the runtime anyway. Though I get how that can end up being way too much work for you for people who don't give runtimes.
No worries. This might sound dumb, but I kinda enjoy tracking/organizing data to a small extent.
In post 89, Nero Cain wrote:movies are about an hour and a half long but an hour+ is likely a pretty decent time frame to call it a "movie." doccies might be a bit shorter and doccy series on tv/youtube are like 40 mins. I wouldn't really count tv-shows...I mean maybe you could argue that a canceled/completed tv show that has an ending that brings its storyline (mostly? plot holes and cliffhangers are ok.) to an end is just like a really long movie. I mean one could certainly argue that short-form media is a short movie in its own right: a 45-minute episode of law and order completes its storyline when the bad guy or girl is caught and sentenced to jail. or when Bender is rescued from Robot Hell. There's a lot of subjectivity here. The easiest thing would be if we just all watched movies/documentaries but this is just for fun and not competitive besides none of us are going to beat Malk anyways.
My suggestion might be something like
1 hour 20 minute-1 1/2 hour movie=2 points but if you want to watch something like Matrjoschka it still counts for 2.
3 episodes of 40ish min show/video=2 points making each episode worth .6
6 episodes of a 20ish min show/video=2 point making each episode worth .3
and I just kinda wanted to give my opinion but lets all just have fun with it and not get caught up in scoring or anything. I myself here am here to show off my great taste in movies and learn about other movies I have not watched/heard of.
Totally agreed with that last line. Seeing what other watch (and get their opinions) is one of the big benefits of the challenge. The points are really just a thing to gamefy the whole experience and to drive people to watch the thing they wanted to watch instead of putting it off. This first round is just to kinda gauge interest and then from there we can discuss/adjust scoring.
In post 92, GeorgeBailey wrote:So, I came into this movie being told that Joker ripped it off and it's pretty much the same thing. The truth is... sort of? Joker is very much the same in multiple ways. But Joker focuses more on Mental health issues, while King of Comedy focuses more on the obsession the main character has with getting on the Talk show. I will admit that this was a lot better than Joker.
Yes! I definitely saw the bare bones of King of Comedy lurking under the Joker (along with Taxi Driver which you also watched).
It's been a while since I saw it though, but I think I did interpret DeNiro's character's obsession as being mentally unhealthy and the big scene at the end in the restaurant where he shows himself succeeding on TV as a fantasy sequence. I re-watched the ending on YouTube just to refresh my memory and I was surprised to read in the comments that people thought that he was funny. Which kinda threw me for a loop because I thought the stand-up was really hackneyed and bad on purpose, which juxtaposes with the laughs and informs the view that it can't be real. But maybe I misinterpreted it or it could go either way? I'm not sure. I agree that it's a great movie though.
In post 93, GeorgeBailey wrote:I've been told this is supposed to be one of the best movies ever made.
i'll be honest I did not really understand what happened in this film. Taxi driver is lonely, hits on girl, gets rejected, doesn't stop crimes happen, tries to fix one of the crime, then tries to kill a senator? Why the fuck did he try to kill the senator? I don't understand this movie but I loved some of the visuals. I'm just gonna post a bunch of the frames cause idk what else to talk about. Idk if it was a satire on noir? A lot of the monologues seem so over the top that it seems like satire, but that's also probably due in part that I don't understand what the film is trying to convey.
I really like Taxi Driver. Though I think it's one of the movies where it helps to watch with others and discuss it afterward because everyone who watches it seems to pick up on different things. I've always enjoyed it as a character study into a mind that disconnected from the rest of the mainstream. Like, I can't claim to understand the choices that he makes (bringing a first date to a porno?), but I do get the strong sense that the choices aren't totally random. He has some sort of internal consistency that I'm not totally privy to and that fascinates me. It's also possibly a bigger commentary on how war and PTSD can cause that disconnect from the mainstream since this is a post-Vietnam movie and the character is a vet.
The writer (Paul Schrader) has been one of my favorites for a while. But I do like him because all his movies seem to leave me feeling like I'm glimpsing into a great truth about human nature and maybe I'll understand it if I just keep staring head enough. (more of his credits I liked: Bringing Out the Dead, First Reformed, Last Temptation of Christ, Hardcore, Mishima: A Life in Four Chapters)
Oh, and don't worry about knowing the end to Sopranos. It won't compromise your enjoyment of it.
Russian movie from the late 1980s which was revolution for existing because it focused on how the youth is dissafected with the system and wanted systemic changes (which I guess later happend with the rise of Gorbashev taking power and capitalism coming in. It features actual Russian blacklisted musicians and the music is actually pretty good for 80's new wave and rock. I mighty actually track down the soundtrack.
This ending scene probably best encapsulates the movie. A bossy bureaucrat goes over the contract to hire a musician and they just leave and go rock.
Freaks (Zach Lipovsky, Adam B. Stein-2021)
A good slow reveal sci-fi story so I'm not going to talk too much about the plot. But I did enjoy this. It times it's time setting up the story, but once we know all the components, it satisfies.
The Choice (Ross Katz-2016)
What is going on with the accents? They just sounded so jarring and phony and just made all the characters so unlikeable in this romantic comedy.
Pajama Party (Don Weis-1964)
Oh man, this was really weird and fascinating. The 1960s had a genre of movies just called "Beach Party" because I guess teenagers just wanted to go to beaches and dance. This one featured an inept alien doing recon for a takeover of civilization, but falls in love with a local girl. Meanwhile a conman is trying to swindle millions for a local philanthropist with the help of Buster Keaton playing a really unfortunate Native American charicature. There is plenty of bikins, bad jokes and camera mugging and Don Rickles gets a paycheck. Just an amazing snapshot of American culture.
Zerkalo {a/k/a Mirror} (Andrei Tarkovsky-1975)
This is one of the best looking movies you'll ever see. Every scene is just composed, lit, and shot to perfection. Ranks high on so many critic's lists.
But it was just boring and I could not get into it. This has been my experience with every Tarkovsky movie. It's like a Joe Satriani album. Technically amazing, but I just don't find it engaging at all.
Boardwalk Empire - Season 2, Episodes 3-7
The novelty of it being a 1920s mafia story is wearing off. I'm only finding 60% of the character stories really compelling. I find myself really wanting Michael Kenneth Williams' character to go to war with the klansmen but I know it won't really happen because it's trying to stay true to the historical scenario.
In post 138, xofelf wrote:*gasp* what happened to new post for each thing?
(note: I am extremely only giving you shit in an affectionately sarcastic way)
I thought about spamming 6 new posts. Then I kinda realized that it's not really necessary.
Scores updated. Those watching whole seasons definitely have the advantage.
Mobile Suit Gundam I (Yoshiyuki Tomino, Ryôji Fujiwara-1981)
A classic anime from the early 1980s that I always knew about, but I've never been curious enough to investigate it until now. This is the first of three movies where they used tv show footage and re-edited it to tell the story slightly differently. The animation itself isn't great. It's very much an early 80's style where they don't really capture perspective accurately and there are lots of moments where moving makes everything look awkward. Because of the editing, the action sequences are repetitive and new units are being constantly introduced which felt very much like they were are trying to sell toys (which a lot of cartoons did at the time). I appreciate that it did have a more negative presentation of war, with characters being extremely reluctant to engage and seeing direct consequences like bystanders seeing loved ones die in front of them. But still, I don't think I'll bother with the sequels.
I love good satire and this is good satire. There is an impending disaster and this movie satirizes our culture's current inability to focus and deal with the disaster. It was intended to be prescient in describing our reaction to climate change, but instead it's a commentary on our inability to handle a pandemic. Recommended.
Yes! This is period romance done extremely well. A story about a brief romance between poet John Keats had with Fany Brawne just before he died. I have no idea about the historical accuracy, but everything about this felt right. Great performances by the main cast.
Weird that xofelf also watched this this month. Their review is pretty spot-on. It had beautiful cinematography and interesting camerawork, but Del Toro definitely prioritized style over substance. I definitely want to see more of Burn Gorham in weird interesting roles. He has such an interesting face and vibe to him.
Last edited by Kublai Khan on Sat Jan 22, 2022 4:37 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Women on the Verge of a Nervous Breakdown (Pedro Almodóvar-1988)
Foreign comedies can be a bit of a mixed bag because sometimes the comedy is very culture-specific. But Almodovar has a really good knack for having a well-paced comedic structure to his movies (along with the excalatingly silly comedic situations that are occurring. Also a bit of a thrill to watch young Antonio Banderas in comedic form (as a straight man).
A good low-budget sci-fi about a prison-like boarding school that is not what it seems. It uses a limited cast and location, but since the information is given out on such a slow burn, it really does a great job keeping you engaged. The final reveal is interesting and sadly plausible. On Netflix and worth a watch.
As an atheist, I have to admit that I really enjoyed the fact that this was an extremely popular movie in India. In a setup reminiscent of "The Invention of Lying", this is the story of an alien who comes to Earth and has a hard time understanding the concepts and message of religion until he figures out what lying is. It's a rebuke of religiousness, but it's a satirical rebuke. Though I admit I did spend most of the movie annoyed at Aamir Khan's exaggerated weirdness.
I don't remember ever seeing this or even hearing about this. Stars that later went onto acclaim (Ethan Hawke, River Phoenix), a recognizable director, a Spieblergian story of young boys finding solace and companionship in technology and each other in a world with disappointing role models and bullying peers? Shouldn't this have been a staple in my upbringing?
Then about two-thirds of the way through I figure out why nobody would recommend this. it has the goofiest, cringiest aliens I've seen in a long, long time.
Brutal, sort of. Well, I don't know. I'm still digesting this. It's a story about a couple attempting to end a relationship without acrimony, but failing. Both the husband and wife are not bad people but man, those resentments in a relationship can really built up and explode on you. It gets bitter, lawyers get involved, and while the frustration mounts, the movie does a good job avoiding melodrama. There's something about Baumbach's style that's almost procedural.
I enjoyed this, but I'm not sure I could watch it again. All the Oscar nominations were well-deserved.
A disfigured businessman gets a transplanted new face, but the new face leads to a change in personality.
Didn't really care for this. It's a very 60's art film so it's very slow and has meandering "meaningful" shots that I didn't really connect with. A great deal is made about how the protagonist is going to seduce his wife with his new identity and it's just obviously such a bad idea that it's cringy. Didn't enjoy.
A post-apocalyptic world where the super-rich who left the environmentally devastated Earth for Kepler return because they are no longer fertile, only to find that Earth has changed in their absence.
This was dull. The apocalyptic Earth is very foggy and confined to mostly dark featureless rooms. And any action is shaky-cammed up. So this was just dull, uninteresting, and become too convoluted to follow as I just didn't care about anyone.
Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings (Destin Daniel Cretton-2021)
This felt like a perfectly acceptable standard Marvel movie. It feels reductive to say, but at this point, I think the creative team behind Marvel has a formula and a long-term vision so they aren't taking very many risks or shaking up their style. The one thing that this movie does better than any other is that the martial arts fighting scenes are incredible.
I know most of this site enjoys Survivor and I'm rather late to it so this is why I'm watching stuff from 13 years back. But this season was tough to watch.
This is the first season I've watched since I watched Squid Games. Survivor (and the idea of people hurting themselves for a shot to win money) really came to mind when watching Squid Games. I know nobody has died, but watching two people get evacuated for medical reasons (including severe dehydration) was kinda sobering. I felt really bad for them. It didn't help that this was the season where Russell was a millionaire oil company owner who just enjoyed shitting on poor people who were not taking strong risks because they had more to lose. Literally one Russell is pulled from the game crying because his body gave out and he lamented his family was depending on him while a different Russell is chuckling because he doesn't even need the money.
The whole season just reminded me of class warfare and I kinda soured on the experience.
