#political satire movie 2024

[recursive360]

Don't Change Horses

[rjalker]

apparently a bunch more people are coming to the Flatland fandom / tags because of gravity falls so PSA:

Flatland: A Romance of Many Dimensions, is public domain. It belongs to everyone. You do not need to buy a physical copy to read it. It has no copyright. It belongs to everyone.

It is free to read online. There are free audiobooks.

Here's another masterpost

Here's a link to it on Project Gutenberg where you can read and download it in many formats:

Here's an amazing free audiobook on the internet archive:

Here's where you can read the 2024 translation into modern English on the internet archive:

there are some typos that I need to fix but. I have covid I'm not doing that right now.

You can also read this translation here on tumblr at @flatland-a-2024-translation

There's an audiobook version on youtube as well now.

___

Here’s an animation from 1965

Here’s a stop motion film from 1982 in Italian with English subtitles

Here’s an animation from 2006

___

I do not recommend watching the free 2007 Flatland film which you can find on youtube until you've read or listened to the book unless you want to be really confused. The movie is an absurdist comedy. The book is a political satire. The movie is better appreciated after you've already read/listened to the book.

It also has a lot of flashing lights and motion-sickness inducing spinning. The timestamps for those can be found here. Please be careful if you have photosensitivity.

do not spend money on Flatland until you already know you like it. you do not need to spend money at all. It's public domain. it belongs to all of us.

Very important edit: The creator of the 2007 film that's free on youtube, Ladd Ehlinger is an extremely racist and misogynistic conservative. He made a political ad so blatantly racist and sexist that youtube has literally resstricted it, so that you can't share the link outside the site. Simply google his name and you will see dozens upon dozens of articles about how bigoted he is.,

Please be aware of what kind of person made that movie when you watch it. His bigotry is baked into the movie, and is why he refused to actually do anything with the original political commentary from the book.

You are not a bad person if you already watched the movie and enjoyed it, but you do need to be aware of what kind of person made it and how that affected the movie, and make sure others are warned.

[princemick]

THE KING’S HONOUR

16+, Released August 4 2024, 2h 11m, Action/Adventure/Romance/Comedy/Fantasy

Commander of the Kingsguard, Aonghus (Michael Schumacher) finds himself as Acting Regent when King Conall (Mika Häkkinen) falls to a curse in battle. Unable to search for a cure himself as the kingdom threatens to fall to outside threats and inner political schemes, he sends out his second in command, Fiachra (Lewis Hamilton) to find a way to save his king.

Where To Watch:

Rent The King’s Honour on Fandango at Home, Prime Video, Apple TV, or buy it on Fandango at Home, Prime Video, Apple TV.

Critics Consensus

Once you get past the horrendously unrealistic costuming, The King’s Honour becomes an admittedly predictable, but humorous, effortless evening watch.

Read Critics Reviews.

Critics Reviews View All (132)

Damon Hill TOP CRITIC

Newsweek

There are worse crimes than fan service but at least do it with a bit more effort and skill than this. 

Rated 1.5/5 | Aug 2 2024 Full Review

Will Buxton TOP CRITIC

Common Sense Media

To save the king, you must first break the curse. A very compact and concise film, but weak on the soundtrack and dialogue. Too many unnecessary monologues.

Rated 3/5 | Aug 4 2024 Full Review

Jenson Button TOP CRITIC

Vogue

Knocked off half a star because no one took their shirts off. Unrealistic. Some of those shirts were far too flowy not to have an ‘accidental’ nip slip.

Rated 4.5/5 | Aug 6 2024 Full Review

Audience Reviews View All (1500+)

Alexanderrr

new comfort movie unlocked i think

Rated 4.5/5 | Aug 23 2024

Prost

My husband spent half our date night bitching abaout every single thing he hated about this film. He always fucks better when he is angry so thank you.

Rated 4/5 | Aug 19 2024

George Russell

Well, that was truly delightful! The cast has amazing chemistry. Both between the lead mains and all the side characters! This is a film that knows what it is (and is not ashamed about it!): a light-hearted film that never takes itself too seriously, but manages not to become a satirical parod…

Rated 5/5 | Sep 5 2024 Full Review

----------------------------------------

The King’s Honour

16+ | Magical Realism, Historical Fiction, Romance | Directed by Niki Lauda

This is a truly a soulless and uninspired chickenshit explotation of queerness and the use of fantastical elements in a desperate attempt to prop up a flailing script that falls flat. Calling this ‘magical realism’ is an insult to Gabriel García Márquez’s memory.

Every single element of this film is subpar at best, lacking in colour and substance and a solid foundation of existence. While one would think the landscape the film is shot in, the Scotland highlands, would improve the viewing, but somehow the cinematography is so terrible, it is just another way everything and everyone gets lost. It is a backdrop of breathtaking opportunity and they don’t simply drop the ball but not even bother to pick it up. There is little to no directional awareness in the camera work and the script and the honestly incoherent cinematic flow of this piece. There is not even a NOD to authenticity of any kind, even on a satirical level as that would require a modiqum of thought not seen here.

I could not call this a categorical fail at hubris because I truly can not fathom what Lauda was aiming for here in this production. If someone held a gun to by head and told me to guess the director of this film correctly, my husband would be receiving my life insurance payout in the morning. How the mighty have fallen.

Everyone is a take away from a cigarette break, a sudden career exit, or at some points, a cliff’s face. And in knowing this, it is the only way I feel even remotely connected to what I see on screen.

By ARYTON SENNA

Sort By (BEST)       COMMENTS

James Hunt | 3 days ago

I feel fucking exhausted just reading this review. Chill the fuck out and smell the flowers, mate.

Esteban | 5 days ago

Woah.

Sebastian Vettel | 1 week ago

Framing this and putting it up on my fridge. Thank you!

-----------------------------

POPULAR REVIEWS MORE

Review by oscar ★★★★★ ♡ 🗨21

loved it yeah. schumacher’s pussy was OUT OUT so you know. cheers. and i Respect häkkinen’s dedication to serving face even while comatose. but like. it wasn’t very realistic because how in the fuck did no one shove the guy coulthard plays off a tower he was soooo annoying. took me out of the movie a bit can’t lie

❤ 5,581 likes

Review by Mick ★★★ 🗨19

A very funny film! Makes me want to go to Scotland! And I’m not just saying that because my Dad’s in it haha. :) Not his best work though :( 

❤ 1,647 likes

Review by Alonso ★ 🗨14

Schumacher ran over my dog and didn’t even stop. If any of you even care.

❤ 1,400 likes

@hypersoft-fest Week 1 Collab with @milflewis: Movie review + Historical Regency and Magical Realism

[salvadorbonaparte]

2024 in Films - Part I

I watched too many films again this year so here's some reviews from the first quarter of 2024

January

Kuch Kuch Hota Hai (1998) - Pretty much the opposite college experience as depicted in 3 Idiots and also there's a scene where a child spontaneously converts to Islam to keep a wedding from happening and that works

Rocky (1976) - I got a little too into that series this year

The Karate Kid (1984) - Turns out the original is actually pretty good and I just watched the bad reboot as a kid! Oops!

Face/Off (1997) - This feels like it should be a fake film within a different film. Why is the face transplant plan A? There are some great scenes though, like the wife not recognising her husband, that made me question if this is actually a really deep exploration of identity. And then it got silly again.

Theater Camp (2023) - Almost makes me wish summer camps were real

Gone are the Days! (1963) - I watched this for Alan Alda's terrible high pitched southern accent but stayed for Ossie Davis infectious energy

Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (2004) - Manic Pixie Dream Girl Amnesia. Joke aside, why is it that I can't stand Jim Carrey in comedies but love him in dramas

Moonstruck (1987) - This won an Oscar????

February

That Touch of Mink (1962) - homophobia stops insider trading apparently

Carol (2015) - This probably would have given me a sexuality crisis in 2015

Ay Carmela (1990) - no scene in any film will portray the horror of the civil war and fascism as well as the half eaten dinner table in the abandoned house

Rope (1948) - people only focus on the gay subtext (which is real) but can we pleeaaase talk about the politics of the film

Catch-22 (1970) - did a pretty good job in adapting a book that is really difficult to adapt

Platoon (1986) - This was another entry in my grad school watch list

Pan's Labyrinth (2006) - I wanted to watch this since forever but wanted to wait until I could understand it in Spanish. Well worth the hype.

Rocky II (1979) - a sequel that initially made me go "was this really necessary" but then brought me a lot of joy

Rocky III (1982) - Intricate Rituals

Rocky IV (1985) - A metaphor for the Cold War but also. Bad.

Rocky V (1990) - Bad

Rocky Balboa (2006) - Better but like what the fuck was that editing during the fight

March

Hannah Gadsby: Nanette (2018) - I love when stand up comedy is recommended to me with "this will make you cry and change your life" and then it's true

The Holdovers (2023) - Liked it so much I watched it twice but the guy playing Kountze looked too modern like he definitely knows what an iPhone is

The Zone of Interest (2023) - the banality of evil is kind of a cliché phrase by now but it's real

American Fiction (2023) - clever satire, if I say more it probably turns into an essay

Capote (2005) - Rip Truman Capote you would have loved true crime podcasts. Also this was a continuation of my Philip Seymour Hoffman haunting

An American Werewolf in London (1981) - I love when a werewolf film doubles as survivors guilt

Poor Things (2023) - Horrible

Creed (2015) - Pretty much just Rocky but with a 2015 soundtrack and I'm not mad about it

A Fantastic Woman (2017) - a wrote a long ass review on letterboxd about this film is about loss

Creed II (2018) - As haunted as a sports movie is allowed to get before having to add real ghosts (please tell me there's sports films with ghosts). It's about "like father like son". It's about legacy. It's about being defined by your family names. It's about fatherhood. It's about breaking the cycle.

Creed III (2023) - Finally a film that asks the brave question "what if Rocky V was good?"

Dune (1984) - I liked the worms

The Joel Files (2001) - the story of two families in the third reich and one of them happened to be Billy Joel's

Oppenheimer (2023) - Would have made me insufferable during my teenage physics phase

Shiva Baby (2020) - a film that's also an anxiety attack

Searching for Sugar Man (2012) - insane!!!

Menashe (2017) - first Yiddish film I ever watched

Fruitvale Station (2013) - haunted

I, Tonya (2017) - a film keenly aware of the unreliability and subjectivity of both interviews and biopics, this is a sports biopic but also a moving story about the human need for love and the cycle of abuse and it's also damn funny.

Nosferatu (1922) - both scarier and more boring than the novel and also uniquely blood libel flavoured

Mädchen in Uniform (1931) - people were right this is gay

Picnic at Hanging Rock (1975) - Lovecraftian horror for cottagecore lesbians

I do not care if we go down in history as barbarians (2018) - history repeats itself, first as a tragedy then as a farce

La Haine (1995) - I watched this because of my professor :)

A Most Wanted Man (2014) - Philip Seymour Hoffman Haunting Continuation

Ödipussi (1988) - "Mommy calls me Pussi" is an actual quote

13 Little Donkeys and the Sun Court (1958) - Yeehaw???

[edinburgh-by-the-sea]

people I'd like to know tag

tagged by @atu433b thank you for tagging me!

last song: "Earthly Delights" by Aurora

favourite colour: every shade of blue

last book: Authority by Jeff VanderMeer (second installment of the Southern Reach trilogy)

last movie: The Outrun (2024). Set in Scotland and starring Saoirse Ronan, about recovering from alcoholism through the healing power of nature. A refreshing and moving film, if only lacking drama. Ronan is effortlessly superb as always.

last TV show: watching Arcane Season 2 at the moment, although the last series I watched in full is Succession - without a doubt one of my fav shows of all time, came for the political satire, stayed for the Shakespearean tragedy of human nature

sweet/spicy/savory: sweet or savory, actually spicy will do too...

relationship status: have a cute boyfriend :3 he's penguin/teddy bear/golden retriever hybrid

last thing I googled: Edinburgh weather (because it's so cold!)

current obsession: quite obssessed with this Tumblr account. Editing photos for this blog is strangely therapeutic.

looking forward to: finishing the work at hand and having a little rest

tagging: @croakingravenstudio @londonadayatatime @adventuresofalgy @zou-san @marmarparadoxa @j-k-i-ng @wandering-jana

no pressure to do this, only if you feel like it! :)

[pers-books]

The Observer Peter Capaldi

‘The government has been too terrible to make fun of’: Peter Capaldi on satire, politics and privilege

📷 ‘I’ve had to pretend to be more amenable’: Peter Capaldi wears blazer by oliverspencer.co.uk; shirt by toa.st. Photograph: Simon Emmett/The Observer

Tom Lamont Sun 14 Jan 2024 08.00 GMT

One winter morning, a Doctor Who comes calling. The Glaswegian actor Peter Capaldi lives about an hour’s walk from me and instead of us meeting in some midway café, the 65-year-old wanders over (leather booted, woolly jumpered, cloaked in a dark winter coat that sets off his pale-grey hair) to have coffee at my kitchen table. My son is off school with flu, medicating on Marvel movies and barely able to believe his luck as the actorly embodiment of an alien superhero wanders through our flat. While we’re waiting for the kettle to boil, I ask Capaldi whether he ran into any other Doctor Whos on his walk through the actorland that is suburban north London.

He grins an unguarded grin you don’t often see on screen. Capaldi became famous as the permanently angry spin doctor Malcolm Tucker in the BBC comedy The Thick of It, which ran from 2005 to 2012 and, after that, between 2013 and 2017, he played the sternest, least imp-ish Doctor Who in decades. In his new Apple TV show, a police procedural called Criminal Record, which Capaldi co-produced with his wife, Elaine Collins, he stars as an ageing detective: another scowler. Now, coffee in hand, he smiles affectionately. So, did he bump into any other Doctor Whos this morning? “David [Tennant, 10th Doctor] used to live in Crouch End, near me. Matt [Smith, 11th Doctor] lives around here. Jodie [Whittaker, 13th Doctor] is nearby, Christopher [Eccleston, 9th Doctor] too, I think.” But no, no encounters with his fellow alumni this morning, Capaldi says.

📷 ‘You can’t be the cynical melancholic I naturally am’: Peter Capaldi wears coat by Mr P (mrporter.com); jumper by uniqlo.com; trousers by reiss.com; and shoes by johnlobb.com. Photograph: Simon Emmett/The Observer

“You do run into each other. You have a laugh, a gossip, you share. There aren’t a lot of people who have been in that role in the centre of that storm. Most people think the job is being on the Tardis and running around with Daleks. Which it is. That’s the fun part. But there’s a lot of other stuff you have to do, too. You’re kind of the face of the brand and the brand is very big. You can’t be the cynical melancholic I naturally am. You have to pretend to be a version of yourself that’s far more amenable.”

Is it a bit like being the Queen?

“Kind of,” he says. “You embody for a time this folk hero, this icon. I was able to comfort people in a way that would be beyond the powers of Peter. You could walk into a room and people gasped with delight. It doesn’t happen any more.”

Capaldi grew up in 1960s and 1970s Glasgow. His Italian-Scottish family lived in a tenement block. “We had nothing. We had zilch.” From a young age he exhibited signs of artistic talent, though he characterises himself, then and now, as a seven- or eight-out-of-10 at various crafts. “When I was young, I was good at drawing. My grandmother used to say that came from Italy. She felt that I was an absolute throwback to Leonardo da Vinci – her direct line to Michelangelo! It confused me because I wanted to do these other things, play music, act – which one was I supposed to do?”

📷 Great Scot: Peter Capaldi wears blazer by ralphlauren.co.uk. Photograph: Simon Emmett/The Observer

After graduating school at 18, this confused cross-artistic trajectory continued. “I tried to be an actor, but I didn’t get into drama school, so I went to art school. When I was at art school, I joined a band.” In his early 20s, Capaldi released a single as part of a group called Dreamboys; then he quit music and spent most of his 20s acting, getting small jobs in theatre and TV as well as a walk-on part opposite John Malkovich in 1988’s Dangerous Liaisons. In his 30s, he decided to concentrate on directing.

In 1993, a short film he directed, Franz Kafka’s It’s a Wonderful Life, won him an Oscar, industry recognition that launched Capaldi off on a heady but doomed sojourn in America. Well caffeinated and gripping the edge of my kitchen table to tell the story, he recalls what happened when he was courted as a hot prospect by the Weinstein brothers, Bob and Harvey, then the co-presidents of Miramax and at the height of their power and influence. Capaldi spent a year working on a screenplay for them, at the end of which Bob flew him out to Manhattan to discuss casting and production. As far as Capaldi was concerned it was a formality; bottles of champagne were cooling at home.“I thought I was off and away.”

📷 Feel the heat: in The Thick of it. Photograph: Everett Collection/Alamy

Miramax sent a limo to pick him up from the airport. “I fell into conversation with the driver, lovely man, Ralph. When I got out of the car I gave him a big tip. Because I was a big shot now, you see. Then Ralph said: ‘I’ve been told to wait for you here.’” Uh oh. “Inside, all the people in the office were avoiding my eye. Bob said, ‘I’ll come straight to it, we’re not gonna do the movie, my brother Harvey says he doesn’t know how to sell it.’ He said, ‘But we love you! You’re one of the family! You’ll always have a place here!’ Needless to say, I never heard from him again. Obviously, while I was in the air they’d had a discussion and changed their minds. I was so dumbfounded as I climbed back into the limo I just laughed. I had no money, because we’d bought a little house in Crouch End, and I had no career, because I’d turned my back on acting.”

In a gesture that Capaldi has never forgotten, Ralph the limo driver tried to give him back his big tip.

As we chat, the postman rings the bell, delivering packages. Council tree surgeons are working on the road outside. My son needs water, words of comfort, possibly he just wants another good long look at Capaldi. I’ve never interviewed anyone in my own home before and the limitations of the format are becoming apparent. But Capaldi seems to respond well to the setting and its lack of frills. His adult daughter and her family have been visiting, brand new baby in tow. When I apologise for all the noise and interruptions, Capaldi says it’s nothing compared to a newborn.

📷 Fun fact: in Paddington 2. Photograph: Supplied by LMK

He and Collins were young parents themselves when his directing career fell apart. Arriving back in London from the disastrous Manhattan trip, “The initial feeling was shock. Then a pragmatic survival instinct kicked in.” Capaldi rejoined the auditioning circuit. “I was a psychiatrist in Midsomer Murders. I was a beekeeper in Poirot – AN Other Actor. Someone else would have turned down these parts first.” Collins, until that point an actor, too, decided to pivot into development and production, a career move that has worked well for her.

Artists often do their best work while they’re at their lowest, perhaps because they feel they haven’t much to lose, little to be afraid of. Sloping into a Soho audition room in the mid-2000s to meet Armando Iannucci about a new political comedy, Capaldi remembers being in a foul mood. He’d just come from an unsuccessful audition for another BBC show, “being taped like I was Vivien Leigh reading for Scarlett O’Hara”. He remained grumpy when Iannucci admitted there wasn’t yet a script for The Thick of It, they were going to try improvising instead. “I knew Armando was supposed to be a comedy genius, but at that moment I was, like, ‘Yeah? Let’s see some of your comedy genius then. Fucking show me what you’ve got, you Oxbridge twat.’ My whole attitude that day was essentially Malcolm Tucker’s, and it informed the improvisation we did.”

📷 Folk Hero: in his new series Criminal Record. Photograph: Ben Meadows/Apple

When The Thick of It debuted, Capaldi entered the sitcom pantheon overnight. Revisiting episode one, what’s glaring is how fully formed, how exquisite a character Tucker is. Alan Partridge, Samantha Jones, Frasier Crane, David Brent … these creations had to be discovered over time by their actors and writers. With Tucker it’s all there from word one, the controlled fury, the foul-mouthed eloquence, that constant convenient deployment of hypocrisy. Capaldi played the part for seven years, winning a Bafta mid-run. It led to other memorable gigs, as a news producer in 2012’s The Hour and as Count Richelieu in a 2014 adaptation of the Musketeers story. He was Mister Micawber in Iannucci’s 2019 reimagining of David Copperfield, a fun role that was bookended by two equally fun Paddington movies, released in 2014 and 2017.

Promoting these projects, Capaldi would be asked to give a view on political events of the day, as seen through the eyes of the character who made his career. What would Malcolm Tucker think of Brexit, or the pandemic response, or the premierships of Johnson or Truss? Capaldi long ago stopped answering these questions. “For one thing, I need about 10 writers, Tony Roach and Jesse Armstrong among them, to supply Malcolm’s bon mots. But more than that, I think these [recent Conservative] governments have been too terrible to make fun of. I think they’ve been incompetent and corrupt and I’m not going to make jokes to give them time off.”

📷 ‘You’re the face of the brand and the brand is very big’: playing Doctor Who. Photograph: Everett Collection Inc/Alamy

We talk about how weird it is that political satire should have fallen into abeyance in the 2020s – perhaps because, as Capaldi says, “things have been too bad to make fun of. Making fun normalises situations I don’t think should be normalised. The planet is burning. They’re pumping shit into the rivers. I’m not gonna be part of making jokes about that… All this highfalutin life I’ve had,” he says, of the awards parties, the film roles, the immortal runs as a sweary spin doctor and an inscrutable Doctor Who, “is because I went to art school. My parents couldn’t afford to send me. I went because the government of the day paid for me to go and I didn’t have to pay them back. There was a thrusting society then, a society that tried to improve itself. Yes, of course, it cost money. But so what? It allowed people from any kind of background to learn about Shakespeare, or Vermeer, or whatever they wanted to learn about. Why did we lose this, this belief in ourselves?”

For Capaldi, the world of acting feels narrower now, meaner in a way that seems to mirror British society at large. He thinks of his industry as one in which subtle discriminations hold sway and “gatekeepers and Aztecs still decree who shall be admitted… I think there’s a real problem. There isn’t the funding or support for young people from poorer backgrounds to get into the theatre. And indeed there aren’t the theatres.” He wonders about the teenage Anthony Hopkinses out there, talented, without the obvious means or encouragement to train in the arts. And the inverse, actors who Capaldi, in his frank and acid way, characterises as privileged duds.

📷 Shared vision: with his wife and co-producer Elaine. Photograph: Trinity Mirror/Mirrorpix/Alamy

“This business is full of people who are not the real thing,” he says, “people I perceived to be artists ’cos they had posh accents, but who didn’t have it, they just sounded like they did.” He goes on to tell a tantalising but intentionally vague story about a major star he worked with, someone who revealed themselves through the course of an acting collaboration to be a dud hiding in plain sight. He won’t provide details (“Too easy to figure out. When everyone’s dead I’ll tell you”), but he says the experience changed him professionally, leaving him more aware of his own limitations, but grateful to have a little vinegar and grit in the mix. “There’s a kind of smoothness, a kind of confidence that comes from a good [paid-for] school. That’s what you’re struck by: they seem to know how to move through the world recognising which battle to fight, where to press their attentions. But it can make the acting smooth, which to me is tedious. I like more neurosis. More fear. More trouble, you know?”

I think this part of his skillset expressed itself well during the three-season run on Doctor Who, when Capaldi was prepared to come across as remote, a little unreachable. “I don’t set out to make the audience like me,” he says. “Because my characters don’t know an audience is there.” For me, his high point as the Doctor was an episode called Heaven’s Gate, a chronology-stretching tale written by Steven Moffatt in which the Doctor is set a sisyphean task of endurance that lasts about 50 minutes or so in screen time and several millennia in narrative terms. Capaldi didn’t play it as a hero. He wasn’t charming or boyish. In this episode especially, he was grim and patient and knackered. It was a rare occasion when the character, apparently alive for hundreds of years, seemed old.

📷 Burning bright: with John Malkovich in Dangerous Liaisons. Photograph: Everett Collection/Alamy

In the new TV show, Criminal Record, he explores a more mortal kind of ageing, life’s third act, its inevitable professional humblings. Capaldi plays a London DCI in his 60s, coming to the end of a career, already moonlighting as a private security contractor, intimidated by the thrust and purpose of a younger colleague at the Met played by Cush Jumbo. As Jumbo’s character grows in confidence, Capaldi’s shrinks. It is a paradox of experience he can relate to. “I find the older I get, the closer I am to who I was,” he says.

I ask him to explain.

“Like I’m returning to… ‘roots’ is the wrong word. I feel more and more like my mother and father, more and more keenly aware of the values they had.” He provides an interesting example, how he has become all thumbs around the act of tipping in restaurants: “I can be in a complete sweat about that.” He can imagine his parents, both dead now, in a similar muddle. “From the background we come from, you can have a bit of anxiety about coming across as grand. So you have to allay that by making sure you are communicating with everybody, all the time.”

Capaldi shakes his head, chuckling softly. He has finished his coffee. He’s about to put on his big coat, say goodbye to my son, and walk back through Whoville to his home and his family. Before he leaves we return to the subject of actors from privileged backgrounds. He says he feels mean, like he took unfair advantage of them in their absence. “It’s not their fault,” he says. “It’s just that there’s less and less of my lot in the arts.” And this concerns him, he continues, because “people of all backgrounds are sophisticated, are interesting, are equally prone to tragedy and joy. Any art that articulates that is a comfort. Art is the ultimate expression of you are not alone, wherever you are, whatever situation you are in. Art is about reaching out. So I think it’s wrong to allow one strata of society to have the most access.”

He nods, feeling he’s expressed himself better. I agree.

Criminal Record is streaming now on Apple TV+, with new episodes every Wednesday

Fashion editor Helen Seamons; Grooming by Kenneth Soh at The Wall Group using Eighth Day; fashion assistant Sam Deaman; photography assistants Tom Frimley and Tilly Pearson; shot at Loft Studio.

[thearkman360]

Tintin and the Chris Shaped Dream

I had a dream that I was at a library and found some nonexistent Tintin books one called Ibyl or Iybl and another called either "Tintin and the Chris Shaped Contraption/Transportation" or "Tintin: Professor Calculus and the Chris Shaped Contraption/Transportation". In my dream Chris was the British spelling for car.

In my dream, the Chris one was a semi-canon book like Tintin: Lake of the Sharks though it wasn't an adaptation of an animated movie like Lake of the Sharks was. Ibyl/Iybl was a licensed re-edit (that changed the plot) of a dream version of Tintin in the Congo or maybe a fictional book called Tintin in Egypt which wasn't the same as Cigars of the Pharaoh.

The Chris one involved a railroad track near a villa and a villa owned by some Tintin villains under aliases. If memory serves, it was Dr. Muller, Dawson from Blue Lotus, and some other third guy who was another villain under an alias but it wasn't clear, maybe Omar ben Salaad. I think Oliveira de Figueira was also there or maybe just a bad guy who looked like him. I was clearly mentally influenced by Tintin and the Alph-Art with Endaddine Akass and his villa and that name being an alias. It also involved the titular Chris Shaped Whatevermydreamsaid which was a vehicle created by Professor Calculus. I think the villains wanted it? And the Chris Shaped Whatevermydreamsaid was on the railroad track at one point near the end before Tintin encountered the villains at the villa

Iybl was a political satire that took place in 2024 about Tintin being hired (by a political org?) to do something in either Egypt or Congo. I think Egypt since I remember the pyramids of Giza. Iybl and the dreamified version of Tintin in the Congo fluctuated in my dream.

The Congo one (which wasn’t Iybl) at one point started with a first person thing where I was Tintin in a car driving across a freeway in a modern city. I remember looking out the window and seeing the reflection of the bright orangey-yellow sun. And I think either a scene (maybe the freeway one) or the cover or another panel was Tintin sitting in one of those high chairs that people carry that had some visual resemblance to this cover.

I remember Iybl's coloring and art style looking like the coloring of that colored version of Tintin in the Land of the Soviets while the Chris one looked like a standard Hergé story albeit maybe a bit more detailed? In my dream the Chris one I had had more paper pages than the plasticy pages of current Tintin printings.

Iybl was inbetween Tintin in the Congo and Cigars of the Pharaoh.

[ausetkmt]

The Daily Dot: Black People Question 'The American Society Of Magical Negroes'

The Sundance Film Festival’s recent screening of The American Society of Magical Negroes has stirred significant controversy. Natalie (@nataliethehero) discusses the hoopla, and its star’s recent comments in a trending clip with 289,000 views on TikTok. This satirical fantasy comedy, directed by Kobi Libii, has garnered many critical reactions, particularly from African American audiences and critics.

“This movie is a hard no,” said one of the commenters.

Others had words on star Justice Smith’s career. “I want Justice Smith to want more for himself lol,” wrote another person. Said another commenter: “Dude, I feel so bad for Justice Smith. He came out of the gate swinging w/ his career but has made/ been pushed into some bad duds.” “After “The Get Down” “Detective Pikachu” and “The Quarry” I thought Justice Smith’s career was going to take off :/ makes me sad,” wrote yet another person.

As mentioned by Natalie, journalist Robert Daniels, contributing to RogerEbert.com and renowned outlets like the New York Times, gave a scathing review, stating, “The American Society of Magical Negroes lacks politics, coherency, and the grand vision necessary for vast world-building.” His review paints a picture of a film with a promising start that ultimately fails to deliver a coherent message or meaningful critique of the anti-Black world it depicts.

As Daniels points out, the film begins on a high note but quickly descends into confusion, culminating in a hollow conclusion against its attempted humor. Daniels emphasizes the film’s failure in world-building and character development, particularly critiquing its protagonist, Aren, played by Justice Smith, for being frustratingly underdeveloped.

Smith revealed the film’s divisive reception from focus groups. In a discussion at Sundance, he highlighted the varying reactions among Black viewers, with some feeling triggered and others seeing reflections of their experiences. “Black people were triggered by seeing something that they weren’t ready to admit in themselves,” Smith shared, perhaps also defending Libii. He praised the film for showcasing the diversity within the Black community and pushing the boundaries of Black art.

However, reactions to Smith’s comments and the film have been mixed. Some viewers criticized the insinuated narrative that Black people who disliked the movie were too ignorant to understand it. Others expressed disappointment in the film’s focus on white-centric themes, hoping instead for a film that celebrated Black magic.

One viewer’s feedback encapsulates the general sentiment: “I saw the movie, and it’s just not as interesting as they think it is. It’s banal in its attempt at being provocative. It centers whiteness and placates the sensibilities of the group it claims to be critiquing.”

The American Society of Magical Negroes is billed as a satire of the Magical Negro trope, a concept widely criticized for perpetuating outdated and racist stereotypes in American cinema. The Magical Negro, typically a supporting character in film and literature, is often portrayed with mystical powers or unique insights, existing mainly to aid white protagonists. This trope, criticized by film director Spike Lee and others, is seen as a modern-day extension of racist archetypes like “Sambo” or the “noble savage.”

We've never seen microaggressive corporate racism?? Whaaat? WE have not only seen it, but lived it time and time again. What is unique about THIS rendition of surviving racism??— Denise – Pamela Denise Long (@PDeniseLong) January 21, 2024

The film’s intent to critique this trope and the anti-Black world seems lost in execution, as indicated by Daniels’ review and audience reactions. This disconnect raises questions about the effectiveness of satire in addressing complex racial issues and the responsibility of filmmakers in creating works that are both thought-provoking and respectful of the communities they represent.

Despite its star-studded cast, including David Alan Grier, An-Li Bogan, Drew Tarver, and Nicole Byer, critics say The American Society of Magical Negroes struggles to balance its satirical elements with meaningful commentary. The film’s tepid reception at Sundance and its polarizing impact on the focus group suggest a missed opportunity to thoughtfully engage with critical themes surrounding race and representation in cinema.

Doubling down on the tepidness, the Hollywood Reporter writer Jourdain Searles declared, “Ultimately, The American Society of Magical Negroes is a film bogged down by its filmmaker’s inability to make the central joke work.”

As the film gears up for its theatrical release by Focus Features on March 15, how wider audiences will receive it remains to be seen. The discourse in this TikTok video suggests a need for more nuanced and respectful approaches to storytelling, especially when dealing with sensitive topics like race and identity.

However, a review from BlackGirlNerds.com writer Catalina Combs suggests the satire had hit its target, calling it “a must-see satire about what it means for Black people to protect and care for ourselves and each other.”

The film serves as a case study of the challenges and responsibilities of creating art that aims to critique societal norms. Its reception at Sundance and online underscores the importance of authenticity and sensitivity in storytelling, particularly when exploring themes of race and identity. 

The American Society of Magical Negroes presents a tricky narrative that has sparked significant debate and reflection. While its intention to execute satire on a problematic trope is clear, its execution may leave much to be desired. As the film industry continues to grapple with issues of representation and diversity, this movie stands as a reminder of the importance of thoughtful and respectful storytelling. 

[giveamadeuschohisownmovie]

My thoughts on “Speak No Evil” (2024):

I hesitated to give my thoughts on this movie mainly because I don’t really have a ton to say about it. I’ve seen the original movie, and because of that, my review could be summarized as, “the original is better, but the remake is also pretty good”.

I mean, that’s essentially it. It’s a pretty decent horror film that satirizes societal norms regarding politeness and manners. Sure, you may feel uncomfortable by the actions of other people, but you don’t wanna “offend” them, especially if you’re the guest in their house. It takes that mentality and explores just how it could backfire on people. Basically, trust your instincts, even if you run the risk of offending others.

That theme is prevalent in both the original and the remake. Of course, the main difference is that the remake explores an optimistic, happier take on the subject while the original is full-on grim darkness. The good guys win in one while the bad guys win in the other. I guess it’s at this point, you’re probably expecting me to say, “The happy ending is what makes the new version not as good as the original”. To that, I say no.

For me, the new version isn’t as good as the original mainly because I saw the original and felt like I was just rewatching the same story. It didn’t really feel “new” or needed, so I walked away feeling like I should’ve watched something else in the theater. Even with the new ending, it still felt like rehashed material. But the new ending isn’t bad. I actually liked the new, more optimistic ending because:

1) it’s satisfying to watch evil people get their comeuppance (especially with how current events is just chaos, death, and despair everywhere)

2) it provides something different so you’re not getting a complete redo of the original

3) it’s a well-done climax, especially since it felt like the heroes could still lose the fight

Other than that, I have nothing else to say. As a stand-alone horror movie, it’s well-acted (McAvoy was acting his damn heart out as horror movie Andrew Tate), well-shot, the tension was there, and it delivers on a satisfying climax. As a remake, it’s not as good as the original, but it doesn’t hurt the original’s legacy in my opinion. In fact, I see them as companions, but with one having a more pessimistic view of humanity while the other has a more optimistic view.

Grade: 8 out of 10

[itsawritblr]

"‘Barbie’ is bad. There, I said it." Thank god, someone I can agree with!

Opinion by Pamela Paul for the NYT, January 24, 2024.

We can all agree 2023 was a good year for the movies. Critically and commercially, several movies did well, and only one of those successes took place within the Marvel cinematic universe. Even the 10 Oscar nominees for best picture, announced Tuesday, included nine actually good films.

Is it safe now to call “Barbie” the outlier? Can I say that, despite winsome leads and likable elements, it didn’t cohere or accomplish anything interesting, without being written off as a) mean, b) old, c) hateful or d) humorless?

Every once in a while, a movie is so broadly anticipated, so welcomed, so celebrated that to disparage it felt like a deliberate provocation. After “Barbie” so buoyantly lifted box office figures, it also felt like a willful dismissal of the need to make Hollywood solvent after a season of hell. And it felt like a political statement. Disliking “Barbie” meant either dismissing the power of The Patriarchy or dismissing Modern Feminism. You were either anti-feminist or too feminist or just not the right kind.

Few dared rain on Barbie’s hot pink parade.

Those who openly hated it mostly did so for reasons having to do with what it “stood for.” They abhorred its (oddly anachronistic) third-wave feminist politics. They despised its commercialism and dreaded the prospect of future films about Mattel properties such as Barney and American Girl dolls. They hated the idea of a movie about a sexualized pinup-shaped doll whose toy laptop or Working Woman (“I really talk!”) packaging couldn’t hide the stereotypes under the outfit.

For those who hailed it, there was a manic quality to the “Barbie” enthusiasm, less an “I enjoyed” and more of an “I endorse.” How fabulous its consumer-friendly politics, its I-can’t-believe-they-let-us-do-this micro-subversions, its prepackaged combo of gentle satire and you-go-girl gumption. They loved it for reclaiming dolls and Bazooka-gum pink, its Rainbow Magic diversity, its smug assurance that everything contained within was legitimately feminist/female/fine. They approved of the fact that Weird Barbie’s quirks could X out Stereotypical Barbie’s perfection on some unspoken political balance sheet. That by being everything to everyone, a plastic doll could validate every child’s own unique and irrepressible individuality. To each her own Barbie!

And now there is a new Barbie cause to rally around: the Great Oscar Snub and what it all means — and why it is wrong. Neither Margot Robbie nor Greta Gerwig was nominated for best actress or best director, respectively. “How is that even possible?” one TV host exclaimed.

“To many, the snubbing of the pair further validated the film’s message about how difficult it can be for women to succeed in —<em> and be recognized for </em>— their contributions in a society saturated by sexism,” CNN explained. Ryan Gosling, nominated as best supporting actor for his role as Ken, issued a statement denouncing the snubs and hailing his colleagues.

But hold on. Didn’t another woman, Justine Triet, get nominated for best director (for “Anatomy of a Fall”)? As for “Barbie,” didn’t Gerwig herself get nominated for best adapted screenplay and the always sublime America Ferrera get nominated for best supporting actress? A record three of the best picture nominees were directed by women. It’s not as if women were shut out.

Every time a woman fails to win an accolade doesn’t mean failure for womanhood. Surely women aren’t so pitiable as to need a participation certificate every time we try. We’re well beyond the point where a female artist can’t be criticized on the merits and can’t be expected to handle it as well as any man. (Which means it still hurts like hell for either sex — but not because of their sex.)

Robbie had far less to do in “Barbie” than she did in “I, Tonya,” for which she justifiably got an Oscar nod. In this movie, she was charming and utterly fine, but that doesn’t make it a rare dramatic achievement.

With “Barbie,” Gerwig upped her commercial game from acclaimed art house to bona fide blockbuster. She was demonstrably ambitious in her conception of what could have been an all-out disaster. She got people to go back to the movies. All of these are successes worthy of celebration. But they are not the same as directing a good film.

Surely it is possible to criticize “Barbie” as a creative endeavor. To state that despite its overstuffed playroom aesthetic and musical glaze, the movie was boring. There were no recognizable human characters, something four “Toy Story” movies have shown can be done in a movie populated by toys.

There were no actual stakes, no plot to follow in any real or pretend world that remotely made sense. In lieu of genuine laughs, there were only winking ha-has at a single joke improbably stretched into a feature-length movie. The result produced the forced jollity of a room in which the audience is strenuously urged to “sing along now!”

A few reviewers had the gall to call it. The New York Post described it as “exhausting” and a “self-absorbed and overwrought disappointment,” a judgment for which the reviewer was likely shunned as a houseguest for the remaining summer season.

In our culture of fandoms, hashtags, TikTok sensations, semi-ironic Instagrammable cosplay, embedded anonymous reviews, sponsored endorsements and online grassroots marketing campaigns, not every critical opinion is a deliberate commentary on the culture or the virtue-signaling of an open letter. Sometimes an opinion isn’t some kind of performance or signifier.

There’s a crucial difference between liking the idea of a movie and liking the movie itself. Just as you could like “Jaws” without wanting to instigate a decadeslong paranoia about shark attacks, you can dislike “Barbie” without hating on women. Sometimes a movie is just a movie. And sometimes, alas, not a good one.

[stephenjaymorrisblog]

Is Authoritarianism Justified?

(Don’t let religion or conservatism raise your kids)

Stephen Jay Morris

6/8/2024

©Scientific morality.

            For decades; no, make that centuries, all sorts of belief systems and religious dogma monopolized the parenting of children. “Spare the rod, spoil the child,” was the doctrine. Did it work? Hell to the no, it didn’t! Not only did beating your children not work, but it also turned them into future abusive parents.

            When the famous pediatrician, Doctor Spock, came on the scene in 1946, the political right felt threatened, as did the Evangelical Christians. When the good doctor published his book that year, “Baby and Childcare,” you’d have thought it was the communist manifesto; that this book was out to destroy Western Civilization. It wasn’t. It used the methodology of pediatrician psychology.  According to the right-wing freaks, changing your baby’s diapers promptly would inspire them to grow up and become lazy communists. This was the beginning of anti-science and anti-intellectual conservativism. The mothers of baby boomers didn’t know what to do when their babies wouldn’t stop crying. Their pastors would tell them to pray to Jesus to make Satan stop hurting their children. But Dr. Spock told the new moms to pick up their babies and cuddle them until they stopped crying. Simple. Many mothers followed that advice successfully. What did the religious nuts think of this advice? They hated it, of course. They wanted to condition white males to be heartless stoics. “If the baby cries, let him! The child will eventually stop.” In actuality, when parents did do that, their child grew up, repressing his emotions and developing bleeding ulcers. And when their ulcer did bleed, such males would pretend that nothing was wrong.

            You take a child that suffers from A.D.H.D., or other disorders like autism, dyslexia, and anxiety, and beat his ass until it’s bleeding, he won’t reform or behave. Violence never solves anything.

            Everything about child rearing that was considered left wing was blamed on the tutelage of Dr. Spock. We soon heard the phrases, “permissive parents” and “lenient teachers,” and others that were tossed around. Then came “helicopter parent” and “coddling court judges.” All who fell under those labels were blamed for the “fall of America!” So-called “liberal Hollywood” made movies like “Dirty Harry,” which was about a cop who stalked criminals released from jail because of lenient judges. He would kill them, and the audience would cheer. Easy for simpletons like Chuds.

            Now, we have the stereotype of “woke” males. This stereotype is not even funny anymore. If you really analyze it, the matter comes down to biochemistry. Female compassion versus male aggression. When you, as a male, are susceptible to the male hormone testosterone, you become a dupe of your right brain’s primal urges. Instead of using logic from your brain’s left side, you rely on your balls to act. You want to embrace stoicism? Try having sex first. It becomes like filling out your tax forms. How about using your stoicism to solve a mathematical problem? No, you just want to be a Sigmund Freud cliché. You hated your mom, so you resent femininity.

            Religion views itself as a tool of civilization. However, it’s real purpose is to bring out mankind’s animalism. All this lackluster satire of masculine women and sensitive males is proving to be a failure in theory. Leftist do not let their kids do what they want. Ask a kid that question. No one on the left advocates feelings over reason. When Russian communists shot Nazis during WWII, the red army didn’t shed a tear. When retailers cater to LGBTQ people, it’s not because they want to corrupt Judeo-Christian society. It is because they want to make money from that demographic. How many power tools they can sell to white Christian males anyway?

            I find it amusing how Christians are opposed to Stalinist communism because of its lack of freedom. But, according to Christian theocracy’s precepts and fundamentalist rules, it is very crypto fascist. The only reason they hate communists is because communists are atheists. That’s it!  However, what Christians do admire about Stalin’s communism is authoritarianism; controlling people over how they think and act. Take a walk at midnight on the streets of Communist China and nothing will happen. In authoritarian societies, the crime rate is low. So, you can sacrifice freedom for the sake of safety. Man is an animal and must be tamed by the authority of the police state!

            And that is the crux of authoritarianism. Safety! That is why Trump is so popular. Under his authority, for anyone who breaks the rules, the cops will shoot first and ask questions later. Is that the type of society you want? Then move to Iran or North Korea.

            The American political right, which embraces rugged individualism, would never survive in an Anarchist society. First of all, one must have a high I.Q. Second, they must have physical prowess. Third, they must embrace a cooperative attitude and solidarity with their fellow human beings. Living in a society where you must protect your parcel of land with a hunting rifle would stress the fuck out of you! Only the strong are anti-authoritarian leftists.

Christianity teaches that only the authority of God should rule your life. This is what we, in the anarchist movement, call “authority dependent.”  So, when they talk about freedom, it’s not free will, it is submission to God. Come to think of it, if God is perfect, why does he need people to worship him?

Many, many questions to ask. Many that will be ignored. The Anti-Authoritarian left is not the problem, the right is.

[arthurmorganshorsey]

i saw the garfield movie today. i am a sociology major. i am also unemployed. i made a political, insane, (satirical?) criticism of the film.

The 2024 film "The Garfield Movie" gave us a deep analysis of abandonment issues and the challenges faced in a strained father-son relationship. We learn about Garfield's difficult childhood, being abandoned by his father in an alley as a kitten. He was taken in by Jon Arbuckle at an italian restaurant.

It was action-packed, with Garfield being kidnapped early on in the movie by a British cat, held hostage, and eventually found by his absent father. He had to face the man who had traumatized him for the first time in many years.

The film provided anti capitalist commentary on the corporations taking over our nation. It provides insight on the loss of Mom and Pop, family owned businesses. Garfield and his father must retrieve milk to free themselves from the British cat. Yes, the father has come looking for the milk. They go to a dairy farm.

The dairy cow Ethel, who was part of this once small dairy farm with her husband, was separated from him when the farm was bought out by a big corporation. She was being exploited to generate profit by the larger corporations who did not care for her well-being. This is a criticism of large billion dollar corporations and their effects on small businesses.

Garfield, his father, and Odie must work together to help the husband free Ethel. Garfield and his father rekindled their relationship, talking things out.

We come to realize that Garfield's father was involved in criminal activity. He saw that Jon Arbuckle would provide a better life for Garfield. Further, this is an example of unequal wealth distribution and class division. Garfield's father Vic committed these crimes in order to make ends meet. He needed to do these things to make sure Garfield was fed. This is a common occurrence in a society with unequal wealth distribution. It is very hard to escape poverty.

Vic saw Jon as Garfield's escape. Jon could easily afford a down-payment on a mortgage by himself in this economy. He is clearly wealthy.

Unfortunately, the film featured Chris Pratt.

look at the plushy i got thank you amc

[trendagon]

Godzilla Minus One: Japan's Darkest Days Unveiled in New Live-Action Film

Godzilla, the iconic giant monster that emerged from the sea in Ishiro Honda's 1954 film, has long been regarded as a representation of Japan's postwar trauma. It's been interpreted as an allegory for the devastating impact of nuclear weapons, particularly following the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, or even as a symbol of vengeance and destruction tied to the USA.

In the upcoming live-action Japanese Godzilla movie, "Godzilla Minus One," produced by Toho and set to be released in U.S. theaters on December 1, this historical connection between Godzilla and Japan's darkest days takes center stage. The latest trailer for the film makes this link explicit by setting the story in the late 1940s, portraying Godzilla's attacks on a nation already reeling from its defeat in World War II. Toho explained the film's title by stating, "After the war, Japan’s economic state has been reduced to zero. Godzilla appears and plunges the country into a negative state."

The trailer doesn't shy away from depicting the postwar misery, transitioning from scenes of Godzilla-induced destruction to images of nuclear explosions, the aftermath of battles, emotional confrontations, and characters expressing their guilt and fear of the monster.

While "Shin Godzilla" offered a satirical take on Japanese politics and reimagined Godzilla in the context of the 2011 tsunami and Fukushima nuclear disaster, "Godzilla Minus One" seems focused on returning the monster to its original frame of reference and emphasizing its inherent terror.

Directed and written by Takashi Yamazaki, "Godzilla Minus One" marks Toho's 33rd Godzilla film and the first live-action installment since "Shin Godzilla." Toho's agreement with Legendary Pictures, the studio behind the American "Monsterverse" Godzilla films, prevents them from releasing a live-action Godzilla film in the same year as Legendary. Thus, Toho aims to release "Minus One" swiftly in the U.S. in 2023, ahead of Legendary's "Godzilla x Kong: The New Empire," slated for 2024.

For fans seeking even more Godzilla-related content, Apple TV Plus will debut the Monsterverse spinoff series "Monarch: Legacy of Monsters" in November, promising to expand the Godzilla universe further.

[cantsayidont]

There may not be a dance soiree, but there is hateration and holleration:

THE JETTY (2024): Exasperating new BBC miniseries, created by Cat Jones and directed by Marialy Rivas, about a detective constable named Ember Manning (Jenna Coleman), raising her teenage daughter Hannah (Ruby Stokes) in the small Lancashire town where she grew up, where everyone knows her and no one takes her very seriously. When Ember realizes that a recent arson might be connected to the past disappearance of a girl named Amy (Bo Bragason), who went missing when she and Ember were teenagers, Ember tries to reopen the case, and butts heads with a crusading true crime podcaster (Weruche Opia), who's also interested in the story and has information about it that she won't share. Ember also realizes Amy's disappearance may have something to do with her daughter's now-dead father, who got Ember pregnant when she was only 17. The story alternates between engaging if uncomfortable drama (like an ongoing flashback sequence about Amy's manipulative flirtation with her friend Kitty (Laura Marcus), who was shyly in love with her despite Amy using her as cover for her secret affair with a shitty older man) and a boatload of stupid pseudo-true-crime white libfem copaganda. It's hampered at every turn by Coleman, who's not nearly as good an actor as some of her costars and seems completely out of her depth playing a cop in what wants to be a socially conscious procedural. CONTAINS LESBIANS? Yes, and if the story had focused more on Amy and Kitty, it might have made its points without all the copaganda horseshit. VERDICT: Some of the segments not centering Coleman are compelling, but Coleman is awful, and the script's fundamentally reactionary mindset and its preoccupation with imputing carceral solutions to misogyny are both clumsy and distasteful (not least because Jones uses one of the story's only Black characters as a rhetorical prop). CWs apply for grooming and sexual violence.

THE LITTLE GIANT (1933): Edward G. Robinson branched out into gangster comedy with this comedy of manners about a notorious Chicago bootlegger, one Jim "Bugs" Ahearn, who decides to retire to Palm Springs with his most loyal stooge (Russell Hopton), where he crashes polite society and falls for ostensibly respectable society dame Polly Cass (Helen Vinson). Meanwhile, Bugs' new housekeeper/girl Friday Ruth Wayburn (Mary Astor), a bankrupt heiress whose family home Bugs has just bought, plays Cyrano de Bergerac while trying to bite her tongue about Polly, whose family is nearly as crooked as Bugs. Not nearly as silly or chaotic as Robinson's later turn in the conceptually similar A SLIGHT CASE OF MURDER, and its pre-Code indulgences are pretty modest, but it's an enjoyable romp with some amusing social satire. I ended up wishing the script had made more of the relationship between Bugs and Ruth, although Astor is great as always and her rapport with Robinson is one of the film's best features. CONTAINS LESBIANS? No, although Robinson does use the f-slur at one point. VERDICT: Enjoyable, but not as essential as the sillier A SLIGHT CASE OF MURDER.

MATINEE (1993): Delightful comedy about a shlock movie impresario named Lawrence Woolsey (John Goodman) — an obvious pastiche of real-life producer/promoter William Castle — who pulls out all the stops for the premiere of his new Grade-Z sci-fi/horror epic, MANT, at a movie theater in Key West, Florida, during the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis, setting into motion all manner of chaos. As with the tonally similar A CHRISTMAS STORY, MATINEE is sort of notionally a kids' movie, about two friends (Simon Fenton and Omri Katz) who have each managed to score a date with a cute classmate: horny good girl Sherry (Kellie Martin, who at this age could have plausibly played Sara Michelle Gellar's younger sister) and budding leftist Sandra (Lisa Jakub), who begins to movie by getting herself suspended for protesting that bomb drills would be useless in an actual atomic attack. However, the movie is really aimed as much as adults who nostalgically remember that age (and/or era), and it's an affectionate, in-joke-laden homage to a now mostly vanished genre of cheesy cinematic nonsense (embodied in the clips we see from the MANT film-within-a-film, which are very funny). Goodman is wonderful, as is Cathy Moriarty as his weary girlfriend/star. Robert Picardo pops up in a supporting role as the hysterical theater owner, who's built a bomb shelter in the basement because he's convinced the world is about to end. CONTAINS LESBIANS? Nah. VERDICT: Great fun.

[usagirotten]

Review: Watchmen Chapter One as an animated adaptation leaves us with the media

Comics have been around for many decades. Some take them seriously as literary material, and for others, they are just simple entertainment. The truth is that behind this, there is a lot of work to do. Hollywood from the beginning saw in this ninth art an opportunity to bring adaptations of these characters to the big and small screen, to make them more real with completely new and different stories to represent their adventures. In this medium it has stood out for having great writers and cartoonists, over the years this has been evolving and changing, they have adapted to each era reflecting in some cases the social and global problems that we have had, it is undeniable that one of the artists who has stood out in the medium is Alan Moore, outside of any controversy that may cause his contribution to the medium has been invaluable. One of the most representative contributions during 1986 and 1987 was giving a radical turn to the superhero genre. Watchmen marked a before and after. Moore used this story as a means to reflect contemporary anxieties, deconstructing and satirizing the concept by making political comments that bothered more than one. Watchmen as a comic explores the multiverse and its variants early on. This is an alternative story in which superheroes emerged between the 1940s and 1960s and their activity in society changed history so that the United States as a country and world power won the Vietnam War and the Watergate scandal was never exposed. Such power of these beings was abused and reached a very critical point in which the consequences could be devastating. There have been several reissues in the form of trade paperbacks, single issues, an animated film based on these characters, a movie, and a live-action series along with their respective sequels that have not been as good or recognized as their original. In 2024, the story is presented again in animated form by Warner Animation in 2 parts that explore in detail what has happened in each of its dialogues and vignettes. It is now the turn of director Brandon Vietti and writer J. Michael Straczynski to take us to this dystopian world where unexpectedly anything can happen.

What is Watchmen Chapter One about?

Watchmen Chapter One faithfully tells the story of the first 6 issues of the original 12-issue miniseries published by DC Comics between 1986 and 1987. A complex alternate world history set in 1985, the government-sponsored murder of the Comedian (Rick D. Wasserman) draws his outlawed colleagues out of retirement and into a mystery that threatens to upend their personal lives and the world they inhabit. If the right solution is not found, all of humanity is in danger. This fundamental story returns now in a 2-part animated film in animated form, 1986 Dave Gibbons and Alan Moore created one of the most innovative and shocking stories of that time, Watchmen in its 12 issues radically changed the panorama in comic book narration for generations to come and served as a starting point to develop this medium as something more serious and profound, with elements that addressed political issues, the superheroic irony of whether these beings deserved to have that place before everything and everyone, set in an alternative 1985 with the world on the brink of World War III, a more complex and mysterious conspiracy than we could all believe is slowly developing, reflecting the Cold War and the nuclear conflict that can put the entire planet at risk. Following this in 2008, a motion comic was presented with an impeccable production directed by Jake Strider Hughes, in 2009 a live-action film directed by Zack Snyder, and a sequel in 2019 as a television series, its story has been adapted again into an animated format and the question we ask ourselves now is: was this film necessary? The answer may be controversial and polarizing for some it will be a yes, for others it will be a no and for others, it will be an I don't care. Retelling this story is extremely risky, we are in a time where the lack of creativity of the studios in presenting new things is evident and this may or may not be a comfort zone in which once again they go for the easy way of telling us something that already had and still has its success, one of the aspects to highlight about the original material has always been the relevance of its story, what Watchmen Chapter One intends is to divide this story into 2 parts, first the 6 issues and in the next part the other 6 that concludes with everything. Retelling the same story from another perspective can be shocking and boring, but what enriches this work is its perspective and its animation, the cast of voices and the music, the fact that the important subplots are explored in more depth and detail, that of the boy reading a comic and Rorschach's diary, which are fundamental to complement the main story, what Warner Animation has done is not risk anything and is based on something that already exists but now with a more mature detail. The film itself does not risk much, neither in politics nor in its graphic violence, nor its sexual situations, it seems that it is for adults who are not very mature and who understand the important issues less, they are guilty of being purists in an era in which a whole generation dedicated more to the fast and the simple can result in a nostalgic work only for fans and connoisseurs, some of comics and others of animation.

We can question several things about this last point. Although the animation is good and impeccable, at times it doesn't seem to be as spectacular as we expected for a material of this quality. From a visual perspective, its animated work is very lacking in this first part, which leads us to an inevitable comparison with Marvel Animation in its series What If…? Although they have similarities in their strokes and backgrounds, what they present here is a pseudo-mature work for adults and it doesn't turn out to be a good decision. The fact that both look alike is undeniable, the use and abuse of its CGI have obvious flaws in the symmetry of its characters, its color palette, and the backgrounds, and even with this against it, it manages to capture the emotions and development of each character more effectively. Its CGI at times helps to understand this world by giving it a more elegant dark appearance that approaches the realistic in its environment and surroundings, the vehicles in the background are timeless and remain between something classic and modern justifying it with the fact that it is a different world than ours, the symmetry of its characters as human figures look rigid in some action sequences, its highest point is that they tried to emulate the colors that appear in its original material pretending that this is a comic that complies with the rule of animation. On this point, the studio has not understood that its creator Alan Moore, and its writer Dave Gibbons have insisted together and separately that their story in a 12-issue comic series has been impossible to take to another medium due to the complexity of its atmosphere that was created and designed to be presented in a format of Nite Owl, Nite Owl II, Silk Spectre, Silk Spectre II, Rorschach, Ozymandias, Comedian, and Dr. Manhattan as well-established and concrete characters achieve their narrative objective, their adaptations have failed when not respecting this rule and making freer versions that break the scheme and the essence of what it is. For example, the film directed by Snyder was not perfect. It does not faithfully adapt its story and much less respect the established rules by imposing its own rules of cinema. If the production design does a great job in its framing, costumes, and cast, in terms of story it falls far short of what was expected. Possibly one of the most difficult parts of adapting Watchmen to other media is the way of telling its story, as is the case of Tales of the Black Freighter, which acts as a moderator of the main plot and simply does not exist in this film.

This subplot is presented here in a not-so-successful way and refers to a few moments in which a few panels are shown leaving its narrative unfinished, the action is summarized in something too fast for the length of the film and its screen time that tries to cover a lot by telling everything and assuming that the viewers who have not read the original material understand what is happening and this hinders its main story and leaves us hanging, this is the reflection of poor planning and execution of what they have. This first part, in general, is a very dry and simple adaptation of the comic with an animation that could have given more, its opening scene has a different approach to the comic but captures its essence, two detectives investigating the death of a Comedian and try too hard to try and only try to recreate what its vignettes have been, another of its flaws is the duration, it's 84 minutes of duration are not enough to properly develop what it has, it goes very quickly from one sequence to another which makes the story too rushed which as viewers does not allow us to appreciate the greatness of what this could have been. Although the dialogue is a very important and essential point when telling this story, it is the voice talent that fails to live up to expectations and does what it can with what they have. Here, no one stands out with a bad performance that could have been much better if director Brandon Vietti knew and understood his source material and managed to convey the emotion of its essence and its message. Nothing justifies a bad job in a work that is complete and rounded in itself, that also does not need sequels or to be told anything more about what happens in this world. Some things should stay as they are, but we are facing a very uncreative and unoriginal industry. The voice cast includes Kelly Hu, Katee Sackhoff, Adrienne Barbeau, Gray Griffin, Titus Welliver, Matthew Rhys, Troy Baker, Jeffrey Combs, Yuri Lowenthal, Kari Wahlgren, Phil LaMarr, Dwight Schultz, Geoff Pierson, Michael Cerveris, Corey Burton, Jason Spisak, John Marshall Jones, Rick D. Wasserman and Max Koch. The music composed by Tim Kelly is an element that manages to frame this work very well, which does not emulate or try to imitate what Lennie Moore has done in the Motion Comic, Tyler Bates in the film, and what Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross did for the television series, composers with completely different styles who have a common harmony and who have given their personality to their works. This still does not have a conclusion and remains pending like the second part, this story will continue... Watchmen Chapter One is now available in a home format and on the Prime Video streaming platform. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j-s-cxTnH2Q Read the full article

[themovieblogonline]

"DEVO" Documentary Opens 55th Nashville Film Festival on 9/19/2024

On the opening night of the 55th Nashville Film Festival on September 19, 2024, "DEVO," a documentary about the 80s band directed by Chad Smith, was screened. The documentary premiered originally on January 21, 2024 at Sundance. DEVO, the band,  formed in 1973 in Akron, Ohio.  The band's formation stemmed from the political unrest at Kent State, Ohio, that led to the May 4th, 1970 deaths of 4 students (and the wounding of 30 others). The students of Kent State, including the Mothersbaugh boys, were demonstrators against the Vietnam War. Nixon had expanded the war in Vietnam without an act of Congress.  The war was killing an entire generation of United States youth via the draft in an unpopular unwinnable war. The students set fire to the ROTC headquarters and burned the building down. Nixon sent in the National Guard, which fired on the unarmed students. The chaos in the world caused band members to feel that, instead of progress, things were going backward. They used the term De-evolution, which was eventually shortened to DEVO. AHEAD OF THEIR TIME Through the years, the band worked to satirize society. They admit, “We did some absurd things.” In explaining the famous “energy hats" and the lacquered hair-dos that the band wore (based on JFK's hair, not Reagan's), the group admitted, “We like ironic humor. It was a cheap way to amuse ourselves---very Meta." The group was anti-punk rock. (“We’re the fluid in the punk enema bag.”) Over the years, DEVO saw the future of film in music and began making music videos, which were eventually shown on MTV (MTV didn’t exist when the band first formed).  This idea of merging film with music was ahead of its time, although the Monkees,  the Beatles, and the Velvet Underground inside Andy Warhol's studio were also moving in that direction. Not only was the band ahead of the curve in using music videos to promote themselves (most of which were directed by Gerard Casale), but DEVO contributed to the birth of electronic music. Jim Mothersbaugh created circuit bending before there was a name for that process. He went to a muffler shop to build a guitar that was a precursor of the Moog synthesizer. The film reminded me of the SXSW documentary “Resynator,” helmed by Alyson Tavel, recounting her father Don’s similar pioneering efforts to create the first Moog synthesizer. (Highly recommended). FAMOUS FANS After a video that the band submitted won an award at the Ann Arbor Film Festival, their fortunes improved. Famous fans included David Bowie, Iggy Pop, Jack Nicholson, Mick Jagger, Dennis Hopper, Leonard Cohen and Neil Young. Over the years, the band made appearances on “Saturday Night Live,” David Letterman’s “Tonight” show, daytime talk shows like Merv Griffin, “American Bandstand” and many others. Neil Young put them in a movie entitled “Human Highway” in 1977 (released in 1982) where the members of DEVO wrote their own parts and portrayed nuclear garbagemen. Q&A During the post-film conversation with three members of DEVO the trio shared some amusing details of what they term the “headache” solo.  This episode is shown in the film. The small audience of 12 people dwindled to 6 people when the band played only electronic high-pitched sounds.  As Mark Mothersbaugh said, “ The bit ran five times as long as we thought it would. It was Supreme Dada---like Andy Kaufman performance art.” CONCLUSION This documentary about a band that is best known for their #14 Billboard Hit “Whip It” contained so many film clips that assembling it must have been a gargantuan task. It is an object lesson in emphasizing the necessity of good marketing, good management, and good legal advice in the entertainment field. (The management and the legal advice seem to have been MIA). That, as much as anything else, led to the death of DEVO---(if they are really and truly dead, a debatable point.) As Mark Mothersbaugh said, “Somebody decided that DEVO should die.  We succumbed to the same reality we were satirizing.” He added, “DEVO didn’t officially end” and said, perhaps prophetically, “It’s better to burn out than to fade away.” DEVO, the band, has been nominated for the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame in 2018, 2021 and 2022. A solid opening for the 55th Nashville Film Festival on Thursday, September 19, 2024.         Read the full article