The Shotfather

The Movie Thread

448 posts in this topic

12 minutes ago, BrockSamson said:

Just saw mother! last night. I think I thought it was a pretentious piece of directorial masturbation. But there is a small part of me that thinks maybe I thought it was a bat**** crazy completely unique moviegoing experience that I'll  like more upon further consideration.

 

Steve Hyden tweeted that it was like Roman Polanski made a movie about Jesse Pinkman's house. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, mdrake34 said:

Steve Hyden tweeted that it was like Roman Polanski made a movie about Jesse Pinkman's house. 

I don't think this is a spoiler, but in any event, one review said:

"If Roman Polanski, Lars von Trier and Hieronymus Bosch were to collaborate on a fresh translation of the Bible, the result might be half as feverishly inspired."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, mdrake34 said:

Are they doing a reboot? The first was good, but the second wasn't great. 

Also, I've heard Mother is cray cray. 

like I said, David Harbour is Hellboy

Ian McShane will be the professor

Milla Jovovich is the blood queen (bad guy) 

Neil Marshall is directing and his credits include The Descent and GoT episodes Blackwater and The Watchers on the Wall. It is expected to be R rated

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Saw It last Tuesday. It wasn't scary like I expected it to be. It was actually pretty funny. Ritchie (kid from stranger things) and Eddie had me laughing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought It was really great, although I had two key concerns:

1) It REALLY highlights how television has overtaken film as the ideal story-telling vehicle for stories of any considerable heft. Theres just soooo much content in the novel that the movie felt a bit rushed. We didnt get to see the friendships bond organically in the movie the way they do in the book. Which was fine because the kids' performances were really strong. But a series would have been better, IMO. Two seasons and you're good. 

2) The director could have scaled back a good deal of his herky-jerk/loud noises scare choices. The movie was shot so well that slow rolling some of the creepier stuff would have worked better. 

 

I'm hoping to see mother! tonight. I'm a huge Aronofsky fan so I'm sure I'll dig it. I get the idea that its "masturbatory" because he has such a jarring style, but I've enjoyed everything the's done. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, DoYouSeeWhatHappensLarry said:

I thought It was really great, although I had two key concerns:

1) It REALLY highlights how television has overtaken film as the ideal story-telling vehicle for stories of any considerable heft. Theres just soooo much content in the novel that the movie felt a bit rushed. We didnt get to see the friendships bond organically in the movie the way they do in the book. Which was fine because the kids' performances were really strong. But a series would have been better, IMO. Two seasons and you're good. 

2) The director could have scaled back a good deal of his herky-jerk/loud noises scare choices. The movie was shot so well that slow rolling some of the creepier stuff would have worked better. 

 

I'm hoping to see mother! tonight. I'm a huge Aronofsky fan so I'm sure I'll dig it. I get the idea that its "masturbatory" because he has such a jarring style, but I've enjoyed everything the's done. 

I really enjoyed Black Swan and The Wrestler, but wasn't a big fan of Requiem for a Dream. I haven't seen The Fountain, Noah, or Pi. Even in Requiem, though, I recognize the sort of artistry and singular vision that we should celebrate in movies, even if the end result doesn't necessarily accord with my aesthetics.

As I thought might happen, mother! has stuck with me these past couple of days, forcing me to dig deeper into what I took away from it (leaving aside Aronofsky's and Lawerence's refreshingly explicit discussion of its meaning). I'm not sure I'll ever come to really enjoy it - I still think it's a bit too on the nose for me. But there's no doubt that, like with Requiem, I appreciate Aronofsky's vision and refusal to accept anything less. Also, kudos to Paramount for having the courage to support and release it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, BrockSamson said:

I really enjoyed Black Swan and The Wrestler, but wasn't a big fan of Requiem for a Dream. I haven't seen The Fountain, Noah, or Pi. Even in Requiem, though, I recognize the sort of artistry and singular vision that we should celebrate in movies, even if the end result doesn't necessarily accord with my aesthetics.

As I thought might happen, mother! has stuck with me these past couple of days, forcing me to dig deeper into what I took away from it (leaving aside Aronofsky's and Lawerence's refreshingly explicit discussion of its meaning). I'm not sure I'll ever come to really enjoy it - I still think it's a bit too on the nose for me. But there's no doubt that, like with Requiem, I appreciate Aronofsky's vision and refusal to accept anything less. Also, kudos to Paramount for having the courage to support and release it. 

I loved Black Swan and Requiem. Really liked Pi and actually liked Noah quite a bit. The Fountain is a cool little flick but nothing amazing. Actually havent watched all of the Wrestler which is sacrilege but, unfortunately, it never finds its way to streaming sources. 

I've been really interested in how they marketed mother! I wasnt even aware it was a thing, let alone a thing with significant star power attached. All of a sudden, a month before release, we start getting 70's-era scare trailers. I like that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, DoYouSeeWhatHappensLarry said:

I loved Black Swan and Requiem. Really liked Pi and actually liked Noah quite a bit. The Fountain is a cool little flick but nothing amazing. Actually havent watched all of the Wrestler which is sacrilege but, unfortunately, it never finds its way to streaming sources. 

I've been really interested in how they marketed mother! I wasnt even aware it was a thing, let alone a thing with significant star power attached. All of a sudden, a month before release, we start getting 70's-era scare trailers. I like that. 

So, marketing is a big reason why there has been such a backlash to the movie, and why it got an F on Cinemascore. Like a lot of difficult/strange movies, no one knew how to market it, so they went with a 70's era scare/psychological thriller theme. Viewers are thus going in, based on the previews and marketing, with some sort of preconception of what it is. When the movie didn't meet those expectations, they responded negatively.

Edited by BrockSamson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, BrockSamson said:

So, marketing is a big reason why there has been such a backlash to the movie, and why it got an F on Cinemascore. Like a lot of difficult/strange movies, no one knew how to market it, so they went with a 70's era scare/psychological thriller theme. Viewers are thus going in, based on the previews and marketing, with some sort of preconception of what it is. When the movie didn't meet those expectations, they responded negatively.

Interesting. I'll have more clarity on this tonight after I see it. But I think my favorite non-genre sub-genre is the divisive difficult/strange movie. I'm not surprised that Aronofsky finds himself there.....again. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/17/2017 at 9:56 AM, SpongeDad said:

IT got good reviews by critics. I don't want to go see it by myself cause the mrs hates horror movies. I guess I'll have to wait to stream it.

I wouldn't call it a horror, more like a thriller... the movie wasn't scary and it felt like action/thriller when the kids started fighting Pennywise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, DoYouSeeWhatHappensLarry said:

Interesting. I'll have more clarity on this tonight after I see it. But I think my favorite non-genre sub-genre is the divisive difficult/strange movie. I'm not surprised that Aronofsky finds himself there.....again. 

?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Billy Ocean said:

Whenever I see 'mother!' in print I think about Danzig.

I seent Danzig in concert a couple times.  He's a short, sweaty fella. His appearances on Portlandia and Aqua Teen were ******* hilarious.

 

giphy.gif

Edited by BrockSamson
Billy Ocean likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, BrockSamson said:

?

So......I'm not sure. 

It was sort of a mess. But it was also really interesting the way that allegories and allusions are piled on top of each other. I think thats part of what makes it a mess....that the larger allegory has so many things layered inside of it which kind of sends the central themes all over the place. I also thought some of the climax was unnecessarily excessive....particularly the one scene. I get pushing boundaries but that was a bit much, even for my tastes. 

I definitely read a ton about it after I saw it. And I'll definitely see it again. I agree, it was up its own ass quite a bit. Particularly when viewed in the context provided by his interviews after the fact. 

Right now, I'd probably give it a ~7.5/10. A flawed, audacious piece of film that doesnt quite stick the landing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, DoYouSeeWhatHappensLarry said:

It's totally worth watching, man. I'm telling you. It's so bad its enjoyable. A good group movie. 

it's so horrible it exits the other side into comedy gold

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@lostone

Plot

In the late 1970s, Barry Seal is a pilot for commercial airline TWA. A CIA agent, Monty Schafer, contacts him and asks him to fly clandestine reconnaissance missions for the CIA over South America using a small plane with cameras installed. Seal accepts.

Later in the 1970s, Schafer asks Seal to start acting as a courier between the CIA and General Noriega in Panama. During a mission, the Medellin Cartel picks Seal up and asks him to fly cocaine on his return flights to the USA. Seal accepts and starts flying the cartel’s cocaine to Louisiana. The CIA turns a blind eye to the drug smuggling, but the DEA tracks Seal down. Schafer warns Seal, who moves to a remote town in Arkansas called Mena.

Later, Schafer asks Seal to run guns to the Contras. Seal soon realizes that the Contras are not serious, so he starts delivering the guns to the cartel. The CIA set up a Contra training base in Mena and Seal flies the Contras in, but most of them disappear as soon as they arrive.

Eventually, the CIA shut the program down and abandon Seal to the FBI, DEA and other law enforcement. Seal escapes prosecution by making a deal with the White House, which wants evidence the Sandinistas are drug traffickers. They ask Seal to get photos that tie the Medelin Cartel to the Sandinistas. Seal manages to get the pictures and the White House releases them as propaganda against the Sandinistas. The cartel now want Seal dead. Also, as Seal is in the pictures himself, he’s arrested.

Seal is convicted, and given community service which means he has to report to the same Salvation Army hostel each night. Eventually, assassins shoot and kill him. The CIA then seize all the evidence to avoid being implicated in drug smuggling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Billy Ocean said:

@lostone

Plot

In the late 1970s, Barry Seal is a pilot for commercial airline TWA. A CIA agent, Monty Schafer, contacts him and asks him to fly clandestine reconnaissance missions for the CIA over South America using a small plane with cameras installed. Seal accepts.

Later in the 1970s, Schafer asks Seal to start acting as a courier between the CIA and General Noriega in Panama. During a mission, the Medellin Cartel picks Seal up and asks him to fly cocaine on his return flights to the USA. Seal accepts and starts flying the cartel’s cocaine to Louisiana. The CIA turns a blind eye to the drug smuggling, but the DEA tracks Seal down. Schafer warns Seal, who moves to a remote town in Arkansas called Mena.

Later, Schafer asks Seal to run guns to the Contras. Seal soon realizes that the Contras are not serious, so he starts delivering the guns to the cartel. The CIA set up a Contra training base in Mena and Seal flies the Contras in, but most of them disappear as soon as they arrive.

Eventually, the CIA shut the program down and abandon Seal to the FBI, DEA and other law enforcement. Seal escapes prosecution by making a deal with the White House, which wants evidence the Sandinistas are drug traffickers. They ask Seal to get photos that tie the Medelin Cartel to the Sandinistas. Seal manages to get the pictures and the White House releases them as propaganda against the Sandinistas. The cartel now want Seal dead. Also, as Seal is in the pictures himself, he’s arrested.

Seal is convicted, and given community service which means he has to report to the same Salvation Army hostel each night. Eventually, assassins shoot and kill him. The CIA then seize all the evidence to avoid being implicated in drug smuggling.

Good lord...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dago 3.0 said:

it's so horrible it exits the other side into comedy gold

Totally. And I typically don't get down with stuff like that. 

But this is sooooo poorly done that I cant help but enjoy it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now