WWWatching

[TheLastWolf]

Better Call Saul

5 episodes in 

 

Ok It's better than BrBa 

[Kalbear]

Yep.

I actually watched Breaking Bad for the first time all the way through. Before this I had seen an ep here and there, but nothing consistent. And I did this AFTER watching Better Call Saul. The experience was interesting - seeing some of the side characters get a lot more screentime in BCS helped things quite a bit - but what really struck me was how much more interesting Saul, Kim, and Mike are. The secondary characters are great too, mind you - Chuck and the Chuck/Jimmy dynamic is remarkable, Nacho is awesome, seeing Hector pre-stroke is pretty sweet - but Jimmy, Kim and Mike are just more compelling compared to Walt, Jesse and Skyler. Maybe if they had focused more on the DEA angle earlier and had Dean take more of a plot point that'd help some, but it's just not there.

It also helps that Jimmy is really, really funny. 

[Zorral]

Road to Perdition (2002) An incredible cast from the nearly last performances of an actor-king such as Paul Newman, to the then nobody, Daniel Craig.  In between Ciarán Hindes and Jude Law, with protagonist Tom Hanks, in a role I never would have thought of him in. However, there is heartwarmth as associated with him, as curdled as it may be perceived since this road trip of dad and son is provoked by murder after murder, including that of wife/mother, son/brother, as they are on lam to exact both revenge and keep from being killed themselves.

This takes place in a vague Midwest, starting in a what? Small city/town in the environs of Chicago.  Irish mob, not the mafia, but someone with the ring that rules them all, who isn’t going to protect Michael and son from taking their revenge.

It’s that lovely re-creation of honey-toned browns and sepia golds that scream these early decades of the 20^th C and the hyper period realism, from weather (snow on the ground) to kitchen sinks to stubbled fields, this thing that Hollywood movies have always done so well, which broadcast – “You are descending into entertaining, satisfying Movie. Even if it doesn't exactly make sense you aren't going to be bothered to notice."

[Quijote Light]

3 hours ago, Zorral said:

Road to Perdition (2002) An incredible cast from the nearly last performances of an actor-king such as Paul Newman, to the then nobody, Daniel Craig.  In between Ciarán Hindes and Jude Law, with protagonist Tom Hanks, in a role I never would have thought of him in. However, there is heartwarmth as associated with him, as curdled as it may be perceived since this road trip of dad and son is provoked by murder after murder, including that of wife/mother, son/brother, as they are on lam to exact both revenge and keep from being killed themselves.

This takes place in a vague Midwest, starting in a what? Small city/town in the environs of Chicago.  Irish mob, not the mafia, but someone with the ring that rules them all, who isn’t going to protect Michael and son from taking their revenge.

It’s that lovely re-creation of honey-toned browns and sepia golds that scream these early decades of the 20^th C and the hyper period realism, from weather (snow on the ground) to kitchen sinks to stubbled fields, this thing that Hollywood movies have always done so well, which broadcast – “You are descending into entertaining, satisfying Movie. Even if it doesn't exactly make sense you aren't going to be bothered to notice."

I don’t know if you’re aware, or care, but this is an adaptation. I just wanted to point it out because you often disparage “cape” comic adaptations as comic book movies. 

[Jace, Extat]

Westworld 

[Zorral]

17 hours ago, Quijote Light said:

I don’t know if you’re aware, or care, but this is an adaptation. I just wanted to point it out because you often disparage “cape” comic adaptations as comic book movies. 

Nope, not aware.  That explains why it didn't make sense. I guess? Also why there are no women, other than brief appearance before being killed?

Edited April 22, 2023 by Zorral

[Nictarion]

Beau Is Afraid is an absolute insanity laced bit of nightmare fuel. I haven’t had that much anxiety watching a film since Uncut Gems.

Ari Aster is 3/3 for me. 

[Ramsay B.]

31 minutes ago, Nictarion said:

Beau Is Afraid is an absolute insanity laced bit of nightmare fuel. I haven’t had that much anxiety watching a film since Uncut Gems.

Ari Aster is 3/3 for me. 

I was kinda turned off by the 3 hour runtime, at least to go see it in the theaters. Did it feel overly long or no?

[Nictarion]

1 minute ago, Ramsay B. said:

I was kinda turned off by the 3 hour runtime, at least to go see it in the theaters. Did it feel overly long or no?

I’m the wrong person to ask as I don’t really mind long runtimes, but i I thought it was paced pretty well. It’s so batshit crazy I can’t imagine anyone really being bored by it. There was maybe one sequence in the middle that kind of drug on a bit too long, but that was about it. 

It will definitely not be everyone’s cup of tea though. Easily his most divisive film to date. 

[Ran]

Binged Netflix's Transatlantic, starring Gillian Jacobs. It's a glamorous, rather lushly filmed limited series that is loosely inspired by the real-life Emergency Rescue Committee that worked out of Marseille to get notable artists, intellectuals, scholars, etc. (e.g Marc Chagall, Walter Benjamin,  out of Nazi-occupied Europe before the Americans had joined the war. It's quite pretty, but it's also rather slight. Still, it really is quite pretty to look at -- good costuming, a sense of whimsy (the Swiss duo who directed the first block of episodes discuss wanting to bring a sort of screwball aesthetic, which happens fitfully), a desire to give a modernized spin to WWII so that it doesn't feel like "heritage drama".  Lucas Englander as Albert Otto Hirschman makes a good impression.

It was filmed on-location in Marseille, and some of the vistas of the landscapes outside of the city are just gorgeously shot.

Edited April 22, 2023 by Ran

[Heartofice]

Given that Netflix tv shows are now almost universally a signal of something designed by algorithm, devoid of creativity and style, just a souless genre rip off… it’s amazing that Beef manages to find its way on there. 
 

Loved it. Great performances all round, engaging and seemed to actually get to the heart of the human condition in a way that other shows are just not interested in attempting.

Plus the last episode is nuts.

[BigFatCoward]

1 hour ago, Heartofice said:

Given that Netflix tv shows are now almost universally a signal of something designed by algorithm, devoid of creativity and style, just a souless genre rip off… it’s amazing that Beef manages to find its way on there. 
 

Loved it. Great performances all round, engaging and seemed to actually get to the heart of the human condition in a way that other shows are just not interested in attempting.

Plus the last episode is nuts.

Was it you who didn't like the start of it? So its worth sticking with? 

Edited April 22, 2023 by BigFatCoward

[Heartofice]

4 minutes ago, BigFatCoward said:

Was it you who didn't like the start of it? So its worth sticking woth? 

No, I liked it from the start. I thought it was good all the way through 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

The Thing (2011) prequel is a great reminder why you never listen to the scientist that is obviously going to get you all killed. 

[williamjm]

I watched Renfield, which I thought was a fun horror comedy. Nicolas Cage plays Dracula with all the subtlety and restraint that you would expect from him, and seems to be having a great time doing so. I think they perhaps tried to limit Cage's screentime a bit to avoid him overwhelming the film, so Nicolas Hoult has to carry most of the film and I thought he made a good Renfield. The action scenes were gleefully over-the-top in terms of the blood-letting, although the fight choreography wasn't great.

[TheLastWolf]

BCS S2

3eps in

treated myself owing to an unexpectedly decent exam performance 

[Spockydog]

Watched Ant Man Quantumania tonight. All I'm gonna say is that I'm currently hoping Kang is going to kick my fucking door down and obliterate the timeline where I actually sat through this shite.

 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

20 minutes ago, Spockydog said:

Watched Ant Man Quantumania tonight. All I'm gonna say is that I'm currently hoping Kang is going to kick my fucking door down and obliterate the timeline where I actually sat through this shite.

 

Kang's not doing too well...

https://people.com/movies/jonathan-majors-dropped-from-2-movies-brand-deals-following-arrest-report/

[SpaceChampion]

Mrs. Davis is a bit slow to get started, but the way the whole hilarious nightmare scenario of the world works is uncomfortably plausible.  But then there are scenes where the Nun Simone/Lizzie (Betty Gilpin) seems to have an unusual relationship with Jesus and I don't know what is going on with that.

Thematically rich, the way it contrasts sleight-of-hand magicians with con-men, cults, conspiracy-theorists, actors, storytellers, and people seeking meaning in ways that allow them to willingly be manipulated is all very interesting.  It throws in a heavy amount of personal backstory for the characters while veiling some things until the right moment to reveal it.  Fortunately while it is very absurd everyone feels like they're complicated people with real motivations.  I hope this doesn't derail in the back half.   It does give in passing an early suggestion that the reason Mrs. Davis is doing all this is something that will be ultimately horrific for Simone but plausible an algorithm might do:

Spoiler

it's following the hero's journey by giving her a chosen one quest and then making her a martyr.

which I do hope the show goes there, and beyond, to something like what I'm reminded of Rene Girard's idea that ultimately Jesus' story is a break from the hero's journey.

from here: https://www.realclearreligion.org/articles/2015/11/11/rene_girards_revelation.html

Quote

"In the second half of the 20th century, academics tended to characterize Christianity -- if they took it seriously at all -- as one more iteration of the mythic story that can be found in practically every culture. From the Epic of Gilgamesh to Star Wars, the "mono-myth," to use Joseph Campbell's formula, is told over and again. What Girard saw was that this tired theorizing has it precisely wrong. In point of fact, Christianity is the revelation (the unveiling) of what the myths want to veil; it is the deconstruction of the mono-myth, not a reiteration of it."

"He discovered that the Bible knew all about mimetic desire and scapegoating violence but it also contained something altogether new, namely, the de-sacralizing of the process that is revered in all of the myths and religions of the world. The crucifixion of Jesus is a classic instance of the old pattern. It is utterly consistent with the Girardian theory that Caiaphas, the leading religious figure of the time, could say to his colleagues, "Is it not better for you that one man should die for the people than for the whole nation to perish?" In any other religious context, this sort of rationalization would be valorized. But in the resurrection of Jesus from the dead, this stunning truth is revealed: God is not on the side of the scapegoaters but rather on the side of the scapegoated victim. The true God in fact does not sanction a community created through violence; rather, he sanctions what Jesus called the Kingdom of God, a society grounded in forgiveness, love, and identification with the victim. Once Girard saw this pattern, he found it everywhere in the Gospels and in Christian literature."

 

Edited April 23, 2023 by SpaceChampion

[Rippounet]

Finished Extrapolations last night.
It's a show that's both much better and much worse than I expected. It's better, because it approaches its topic (climate change) in the "right" way, i.e. by seeking to inform and raise awareness. Worse, because it ends up sending a debatable message.
The main problem of the show is that it goes all the way to 2070. So while what happens is relatively scientifically accurate, the further you go, and the more unlikely it becomes that humanity has remained on the exact same path as today, with no major social and cultural changes (save those brought by technology).
What I mean by that is that the showrunners have basically predicted the future based on the path we're on today, but imho failed to imagine how humans themselves would change in reaction to that path. The environmental activist/revolutionary makes a quick appearance in episode 1 to be properly dismissed and never be seen again. That is both the strength and the weakness of the show: its strength because it shows what will happen if we do dismiss the activists/revolutionaries, its weakness, because once shit truly hits the fan, it becomes unlikely that people do not react, i.e. that there is neither civil conflict nor wars between nations.
Because of all this, I found the first half of the show is rather enjoyable. As could be expected of this type of show, it has a lot of lecturing/exposition which gives it a documentary vibe at times, and is overly focused on the upper-class of developed countries (only one episode is a counter-example). So all in all it's clumsy and at first it relies on stereotypes/tropes to move forward. Still, I found that it somehow manages to ask the right questions while being mildly entertaining at times (the third episode was hilarious I think).
The second half of the show otoh, while being less clumsy, is closer to a season of Black Mirrors: loosely connected stories in a dystopian future.  And while the huit-clos in episode 7 has a nice brand of dark, cringy, humor, at this point the show seems to have lost track of its own story, which it rushes to conclude in episode 8.

All in all it's a decent show: episodes 3 and 7 are certainly memorable imho, and Kit Harrington as the mandatory evil multi-billionaire is great (Did Kit always have this duplicitous look to him? He's really good with it). Also liked Edward Norton in his role. Merryl Streep was also good, and I don't see why the media fussed over her voicing a whale, when the in-world explanation for this is perfectly convincing.

So about this message...

Spoiler

The major problem is, imho, that the first episodes properly establish that technology is the problem because of the ressources it uses and the comforts it provides - that are addictive.
And yet, the show fails to imagine how that could change. On the contrary, it gives nanobots to a random mid-level Indian gangster, a holodeck to the billionaire, and even suggests we can have uploaded consciousness - and thus, immortality.
Worse, in the end, climate change can be solved through technology, hurrah! It's not that technology was a problem, it's just that it was controled by the evil tech-bilionnaire and his evil cabal of friends. Uh... right.
So in the end, the show fails to imagine either "the end of capitalism" or "the end of the world." Instead, it settles for a middle route of blaming an evil cabal of rich fucks, though Harrington's character is allowed to remind us all that we are also all responsible - and he is initially acquitted after all. Urgh.
By reducing the story to individual choices (Bilton's or ours), the show misses the power of socio-economic systems or even of narratives. And manages to somehow criticize both capitalism and technology without offering any meaningful or useful analysis of the way they are connected. And thus doesn't tell us anything we don't already know.