MovieChat Forums > prayformojo > Replies
prayformojo's Replies
This has to be a troll of some kind. Have you ever watched Apocalypse Now? Brando is CLEARLY a land whale in the film.
From what I have read / heard, the original scripted ending was entirely different, but Brando was too fat and out of shape to pull off the scenes as written.
So Copolla adjusted and reshot the ending on the fly, dressing Brando in all black instead of military fatigues and focusing on closeup face shots to play down how fat he was.
At the time, Brando's role was the highest paid acting gig ever. He was not paid that much to loaf around and read poetry, he was originally supposed to be doing a lot more.
I think "woketards" come in all ages, otherwise I agree. Probably because they either forgot, or don't realize that real comedy ever existed (back when people were actually allowed to make jokes). Now all "jokes" must revolve around political topics and must only fall on the side of "wokeness." I think the real subtext of this film's popularity is that Hitler and Trump are interchangeable in the minds of the ultra-woke.
The real history of WWII is brutal, complex, nuanced, and carries many lessons. All the idiots are learning from JoJo Rabbit is "Moustache man bad!!" just like "Orange man bad!!" These people like JoJo Rabbit not because of any aspects of filmmaking, but rather because it re-affirms for them that they are on the "right" side.
I came here to say that same thing so I will just reply to this post. This is definitely in the top 5 of worst films ever made, based on effort put into it versus how bad the final product is. I even spent some time poking around trying to find some justification of why people think it's great, and just found idiots blathering about nothing, typically some mumbling about "class differences."
- It is one of the ugliest movies I've ever seen. Everything looks ugly. Even the star actors look ugly. And this was watching the cleaned up version without the sepia. Imagine watching the shitty original. No wonder it got pulled.
- The sound is so bad I had to turn on subtitles to understand anything.
- The editing is god awful. I laughed out loud when in the opening credits it cycled though about 5 editors. I knew what I was in for: a jump-cut fest, and it did not disappoint.
- The acting is ridiculous. Only Kristopherson pulls out a credible performance, but you still don't like or care about his character.
- The plot is ridiculous and pointless.
- The whole movie is a joke in many ways. One of my favorite quotes about Heaven's Gate is the guy who said there are not that many people in Casper, Wyoming TODAY let alone in the 1800s. Seriously, the shoulder to shoulder mobs in this film were unintentionally hilarious. It was obviously made by an Easterner who had zero sensibilities of the west, and what a western should entail.
But let's be honest - Cimino was not a good filmmaker. Deer Hunter was a success in spite of him, not because of him. And Heaven's Gate proves it.
I will finish with a Pauline Kael quote:
“Heaven’s Gate” is a numbing shambles. It’s a movie you want to deface; you want to draw mustaches on it, because there’s no observation in it, no hint of anything resembling direct knowledge—or even intuition—of what people are about. It’s the work of a poseur who got caught out.
Virtually no woman looks better with short hair than with long hair. There are only women that still look good with short hair, key word being "still." The only actress that comes to mind who still managed to be sexy with short hair was Charlize Theron, but she is still better looking with long hair.
With short hair and no make up Scarlett looks like a man. The film seemed to acknowledge this by constantly having her dress up a man in costume. I think she is also playing a trans character in a coming film.
Her beauty is quite overrated in my opinion, and is mostly a result of being in roles that heavy on makeup, airbrushing, and CGI (superhero films).
What I would find to be more interesting thing to think about is why the deliberate choice of the filmmakers to make her look less sexy and more aggressive and male. If she were a feminine woman, it would have been a totally different film.
Dern got a lot more screen time. As good as he was, Loitta's character was too small to be considered a supporting actor.
Though I do question if the Dern performance was really Oscar worthy. It was basically the same character Dern always plays.
PS: she will always be "Admiral Holdo" to me
This post is satire right? You actually hated it and believe the exact opposite of everything you said?
We must have watched different films. The dialogue was one of the best parts, and Sandler created his most interesting character since "Punch-Drunk Love."
Though it was very fast dialogue, often with jarring music in the background (intentionally jarring), so the slower among us probably would not be able to keep up. The whole point was to create a sense of unease and tension throughout the film, and I thought they did a great job of it.
The goons don't escape. Howard's wife is calling the cops in the last scene they show of her. Odds are the cops would show up before the goons figure out how to get out.
That was very encouraging to read. There's hope for the future yet. Don't give up.
Answers to 1, 2, and 4:
Because a modern woman 'don't need a man for nothing,' never shows weakness, can never be defeated. Don't you know that?? It's the "Mary Sue" principle that was applied to great effect on the Daisy Ridley character in Star Wars.
>Not one single solitary sympathetic male character.
Because masculinity is toxic. Don't you know that??
I would love to hear from an actual woman on this (because obviously I am not), but do they actually like this shit? Pretending to be a woman for a second, I would find it to be pandering, treating me like an idiot, and actually a bit dehumanizing as opposed to doing what movies used to do by treating women like real people (remember Ripley from Alien or Sarah Conner from Terminator?" - they were not set up as flawless Mary Sues that's why they are some of the most iconic film characters of all time).
It's this year's "woke" film choice. When they encounter a "woke" film, today's modern critic instantly realizes that such a film is completely immune from any and all criticism, otherwise there could be serious repercussions to one's career. Other critics would pile on and say "hey, look at this NAZI over here who doesn't like JoJo Rabbit." So you get an "emperor with no clothes" situation where everyone gushes over how great the film is, but nobody actually likes it.
JoJo Rabbit is stupid, insipid, low, and above all, not funny.
And I completely agree that every single thing in this film is simply ripped off from something else that came before it. Literally every joke / gag can be traced back to some other work.
It doesn't deserve 26 and that will certainly fall once the hype wears off. I think you need to put the film into context - we are in a period of quite weak filmmaking where TV shows and streaming are in a tug of war with Hollywood, which itself has been afflicted with "woke" culture that is churning out mostly crap.
So "Parasite" feels like something a bit special in this context - it's a very well crafted traditional film, that goes that route of being subtle and open to interpretation instead of the "woke" way hollywood would have told this story (and thus destroyed it).
Also those themes of "classism" are very relevant to most people in today's increasingly stratified world.
Actually the film implies this very subtly by including Howard E. Hunt as an intelligence asset who seems to wrapped up in the whole thing. Many JFK conspiracies surround him.
But I agree with you that it was a total inside job. The driver slowed down for the shooting.
I see, they made it before the acquisition. Let's just say a "corporate" approach to filmmaking was applied regardless.
Good list, Rouge One is definitely underrated by most people, I think it got thrown out with the bathwater of the terrible Disney trilogy. I watched it over xmas for the third time and if anything, it's getting better not worse. There are a few little "quirks" where the filmmakers neglected to respect OT cannon, but it feels like Star Wars.
I also agree that the Lucas Prequel trilogy goes from best to worst (most people have elevated ROTS for some reason, but it's the same trash, IMO).
Look up who owns Marvel.
It's the best NEW Star Wars by a mile. A solid #4 behind the original trilogy, just edging out the Phantom Menace for that spot (which I actually like if you take a bathroom break during the endless pod racing scenes). It definitely held up on a rewatch. You couldn't even pay me to re-watch any of the other Disney Star Wars film.
It's interesting that Jinn is a more interesting and likable character than Rey.
It's really hard to say, but fun to think about. Heath Ledger's Joker was terrifying. Pheonix's Joker was too sad and pathetic to be terrifying. While I liked "Joker," I think I would preferred a stronger, less pathetic portrayal, or perhaps a stronger transition from sad Joker with mental problems to that angry, sociopathic, yet incredibly driven Joker of Ledger. So in that vein, I think Ledger would have pulled it off it better.
"Incels" don't exist. The word is a weaponized, political creation used as a tool to divide and demonize (mostly targeted at straight white men). Notice that a homosexual cannot be an incel, a woman cannot be an incel, people of other races cannot be incels, and yet I can find you people in all of these groups who want to have sex but don't. The word incel is really projection at it's core: EVERY SINGLE HUMAN has at one time or another been rejected by a potential love interest. But in the twisted mentality of today, this feeling has been projected outward: that only happens to "incels."
Look very carefully at anyone who uses the word incel as you are likely dealing with somebody with an agenda.