SHERDOG MOVIE CLUB: Week 32 Discussion - Enter the Void

[AgentSmecker]

I really liked it up to a point but to be quite honest... it did get a little bit fucking boring towards the end.

 

[Guestx]

*Tibetan book of the dead? Talk about a mission-statement. Yup, this will be a movie about reincarnation. It's even a bit crass I feel. It's such an unsuble way of stating your intentions as a filmmaker.

It's interesting you say that. On a particular movie podcast I like to listen to, they often decry movies as being too "on the nose," i.e. un-subtle.

But is there necessarily something wrong with slamming home your meaning? What precisely is more noble about dancing around it?

 

[Guestx]

HWhen I first saw that scene I was really struck with disgust, no, it was Advanced disgust, but it had nothing to do with Asia or toilet styles.

LOL "advanced disgust." Taking shit to a whole other level now.

 

[Guestx]

You guys watching that good shit lately. Haven't seen this in about 7 years when it came out but remember being so mind fucked. Soon the Spring Breaker, Black Swan, and this thread will be reupped by me. Better late.....very late....than never

Bruh, you need to catch up.

Remember: 3 week rule.

 

[BeardotheWeirdo]

I don't like films that rely on mood, dreamlogic or atmosphere as a principle. Those things are just methods. I like films that do that only if they actually manage to be good. Something like Cemetery Man or Valhalla Rising (despite it's contridictions) both has an immensly better atmosphere than this film and also has a hell of a lot more going on beneath their surface as well.

I thought the atmosphere in Enter The Void was better than Valhalla Rising. VR barely had anything going on under the surface.

I just don't understand how people would want to live in an area where you don't speak the native language.

It would be really hard at first, but even Bart was able to learn French in a few weeks

That's (sadly) probably the case. Someone like Tinto Brass always got a lot more artistic credit then his fellow sexploitation directors simply becuse he was an equal-oppertunity nudist.

I didn't think you were allowed to show hard-ons, but it would be a big stretch to label the movie as soft-core porn, despite the sex scenes being more advanced than soft-core films.

Well... it didn't "romanticize" it. But given the overaboundance of pornographic and exploitative imagery I'm sure there's a fair share of people that felt the allure of all this.

I think it was handled well. The characters were portrayed in a n honest manner. Drugs are fun, at first, but they can make you crazy if you go overboard. Right off the bat Oscar's subconscious was telling him that he's crazy, they made it clear he was far from stable.

Oscars lifestyle had it's perks, but it had it's problems also, as we all saw.

The thing is -- people don't always absord the message as they do the tone. It's the classic Scarface phenomenon. Scarface is an anti-crime film in its message yet everyone found Tony so cool that they all wanted to become criminals in-spite of that. Even that Alien halfwit showed that.

Sure, but Tony Montana had a mansion, money, power, respect, endless amounts of drugs, nice rides and clothes, cool accent etc.

Oscar lived in a cool apartment, but it was a mess, he was in love with his sister, he was going crazy, the only action he got was from his friends older, married, mother. He wasn't rich, he got to hang out back-stage in a strip-club but he couldn't take his eyes of his sister so I don't know who would be jealous of him, he was dead for 70% of the movie also.

I think calling it irresponsible is rather harsh.

That's the punk rocker in me.

That's more of an specific thespian-technique. Far from everyone goes all-out method. Though there is a sort of fad and romanticization of it these days.

Hell, sometimes it's even the reverse. When Leone was filming For a Few Dollars More, for example, he reworked the Man-With-No-Names mannerisms so to more closely match those of Eastwood's. There, the character was modeled after the actor, not the actor after the character.

We're both talking about opposite ends of the spectrum. At it's heart an actor is someone who is great at not being themselves... As a society we dislike fake people, yet celebrate those who are best at being fake, actors, politicians, pop singers, tv personalities, etc... I've always found the subject to be fascinating.

I mentioned in an earlier SMC thread that Marilyn Manson and the members of his band all chose the first name of a celebrity and the last name of a serial killer. The statement being that the media (thanks to their political correctness, and false objectivity) fail to differentiate between mass-murderers and celebrities, they treat them the same, they talk about them in the same manner... sometimes offensiveness is necessary...

I'm not sure If I agree that it was harsh either, actors sacrifice their mental health for their career/fame... Some of them do it to make people happy, which is fair, but for those doing it for fame... that's not healthy, imo.

Also, in some way shape or form aren't we all irresponsible?

I was more thinking of the fact that he and his buddies were constantly talking about sex. He also banged his friends mom. And also, even though he is a spirit, you sort of get the impression that the spirit watches what Oscar thought was important in-life, namely sex.

Yeah, good point about the spirit choosing to watch a lot of sex, and his orgy-heaven idea... and he did seem to spend a lot of time at the strip club... I guess he just couldn't act on his urges that much because he was obsessed with his sister

(EDIT: or gals like Lina Wertmuller for that manner, to pick a female example). Gaspar just doesn't have that "touch".

I just discovered Lina Wertmeuller a few months ago. I watched Love and Anarchy and Seven Beauties and enjoyed them both a lot. I might nominate Seven Beauties next time I'm up.

I don't think it's a fair comparison. Love and Anarchy did feature a surprising amount of nudity and sexuality for a film made by a woman, but the characters (even the prostitute) were very warm, loving characters. They weren't traumatized... presumably the prostitute had been through some hard times but she was over it, she'd been over it for a long time. She was perhaps the most well-adjusted prostitute I've ever seen in a movie.

The sex scenes in Enter The Void and in Love and Anarchy are filmed and acted differently because the characters are so different. The way we make love (in many ways) is a reflection of our personalities.

Also Love and Anarchy was saved by the ending, the pace was ridiculously slow, until the very end.

And despite the title there was almost zero talk of anarchy in the movie. The only Anarchist was pretending to not care about politics to impress the girl.

But I agree that Gasper doesn't have the same touch. The OP says that he didn't really even write a script since he doesn't speak English well... He wanted the visuals to carry the movie, and they were stunning, but it lacked a good script, and the idea of the reincarnation story wasn't very good to begin with.

First off, really, you guys have Bone Tomahawk and The Witch? Interesting. American Netflix does not have those.

But more to your general point, I'd simply have to disagree that they get most good films. I mean, let me just name 5 good movies that I might at random want to watch:

Jaws
Winter's Bone
Whiplash
Pulp Fiction
Tron: Legacy

Funny you should mention that. Last week instead of watching Krampus I watched Jaws 1-4 on Netflix. The effects in Jaws 3-D have to be the worst special effects I've ever seen.

 

[Guestx]

I wanted to see more of Tokyo, I hated the P.O.V. style of filming when Oscar and Alex were through Tokyo at the beginning. I wanted to see more of the scenery. That's a big part of why I like foreign movies, it's kind of like taking a mini-vacation sometimes.

I wanted to be a soldier... Predator made it look so cool, and I loved guns How times change...

Yeah, more Tokyo would be cool. It's always an awesome setting for a story. We need more of them.

I was pretty much obsessed with ninjas from about age 9 to about age 12. I'm not sure why precisely they appealed to me, but it was literally an all-out obsession. Anything about ninjas I was into: movies, books, video games, whatever. I had ninja weapons; I studied martial arts any way that I could and tried to train myself. I thought that when I got older I would go to Japan, find a master, and join a clan. And that would be my life.

There weren't any mind-numbingly annoying characters in Enter The Void

The inclusion of multiple (hard) penis shots in Enter The Void, makes it's nudity artistic... also, glowing privates. Spring Breakers was filmed in more of a soft-core style. Nudity can be either lewd or artistic depending on the artists vision... Some people think "David" is lewd, it's an interesting subject and you're not wrong. What is art? That question will always be debated.

First off, not sure if serious about boners somehow making nudity more artistic. But if serious, then I don't get the logic.

Second, to each their own of course, but no one in Spring Breakers really annoyed me, especially not Alien. He was crazy, but he had a sweet sincerity about him that made him likeable.

I'll forgive you for not remembering the main argument most of us made against Spring Breakers, as you're pick got destroyed that week so you were probably pissed off.

Yeah, fuck all y'all. But I'm not gonna lose sleep because 3/4 of the club are no-taste ass clowns.

Spring Breakers romanticized the lifestyle and failed to provide a concrete message.

Must a movie have a message? What is the message of The Mummy? Or Sleepy Hollow? Or Independence Day?

Sometimes movies are not morality plays. Instead, they simply tell entertaining stories and that is enough.

BUT with that said I disagree that the film didn't have a message, even if it's a message that each viewer has to interpret for themselves. It was clearly there.

Enter The Void failed to deliver a message and narritive, but it didn't romanticize the drug-riddled night-club lifestyle. Dumb teens could conceivably watch Spring Breakers and ruin their lives partying too hard, few people if anyone are going to watch Enter The Void then run out and look for some DMT...

As discussed, it both glamorizes the lifestyle while also criticizing it, all in the same breath. I found it an interesting approach.

Then again I could see teens and young adults watching Enter The Void and wanting to try DMT, LSD, GBH etc.

Bro, even while I was watching the movie I was thinking to myself, "This would be a lot better with drugs." The movie literally MADE ME WANT TO DO DRUGS!

After Oscars death when the movie started to jump all over the place, the first flashback was showing how Oscar got into the Tokyo drug scene. It was Oscar in that place with the model village. Oscar talked about heaven and this big orgy... I can't remember exactly what he said, it didn't seem particularly relevant at the time, but the orgy ending was showing us the spiritual journey that Oscars soul was taking turning from corpse to spirit, before being reincarnated and coming back as Linda and Alex's baby.

I don't remember that, but thanks for the explanation.

The fact that it was so long and graphic definitely makes me think it was made that way for shock-factor, and not for some grand artistic vision. Then again his point could just be that we're a bunch of prudes (as a society) and all of it could just be an attempt to make people feel more comfortable about their sexuality, since many of us were/are raised with a "sex is a sin" mentality.

I don't think that sex is sin, but I think that sex, like drugs, can lead to a lot of horrific shit. In the same way that people need to be cautioned about drugs, they need to be cautioned about sex.

Unfortunately, we're living in a society that has largely lost its sense of modesty and everything has become sexualized. I don't like that.

It depends. If they were just normal kids then yes, it's questionable... One could argue that raising your kids with lies about sunshine and lollipops is irresponsible true though, the truth lies somewhere in the middle, but "sugarcoating" everything is becoming a problem in modern society.

If the kids were already traumatized and acting from personal experience then it could be seen as therapeutic. The children were confronting their own fears and releasing pent-up emotional frustration through their acting.

Acting in general (regardless of age) is irresponsible. You're basically trying to convince yourself that you're someone else. Ideally you want to literally become the character you play... that's not the least bit healthy...

Well is there any reason to think that these little actors were anything other than just normal kids? What evidence exists that they had experienced some terrible trauma in their lives and this was their way of coping?

But regardless, I still think it's a highly questionable decision to put them in this movie. In 10 years, when they're in high school, people are going to be like, "Oh yeah, you were the kid in that movie with the CGI cock shooting cum into that druggy stripper in the Japanese love motel."

That's fucked up. They're too young to be able to make a proper decision about whether or not they want to be associated with this kind of film.

 

[Guestx]

Yeah, it's more of a personal thing in that instance.

The scene that made me hate the movie was when Alien was bragging about all his money and guns, and that was Shadow's favourite scene... That scene was integral to the movie, I understand it's relevance but nonetheless (for me) it was like listening to people drag their nails across a chalkboard. I just have no patience for people like that, and the fact that the girls could even pretend to like him in that instance...

I disliked all the characters, which I could overlook if there was a great message to the movie (like in "A Clockwork Orange" which also features a full cast of characters that I can't relate to) but there just wasn't.

@shadow_priest_x could've used your help that week, no one in the SMC liked Spring Breakers but him...

Yeah, @HUNTERMANIA. . . Could've used you that day. I was pretty much left to fight off the wolves alone.

@In The Name Of helped out as best he could. @MusterX said he liked the film overall, but he was a disappointingly passive force against the barbarian horde.

 

[HUNTERMANIA]

Yeah, @HUNTERMANIA. . . Could've used you that day. I was pretty much left to fight off the wolves alone.

@In The Name Of helped out as best he could. @MusterX said he liked the film overall, but he was a disappointingly passive force against the barbarian horde.

sorry bro!

 

[Guestx]

I read somewhere that siblings or other close-of-kin that do not actually grow up togheter and meet later in life are actually at risk towards developing strong attractions towards each other (maybe due to their similar genetics?) We have an automatic "do-not-fuck" detection built into us towards those we grow up with, but if we don't actually grow up with them then that does not operate.

Makes sense, really. If you didn't grow up with someone, then really, they're just a person.

I just don't understand how people would want to live in an area where you don't speak the native language.

The older I get, the more I agree with this. I have a brother and a friend who are always talking about living in some distant land where English is the not the native language, and I'm like, "Nah, fuck that, I'll just keep my ass right here in the good ol' U S of A.

An ironic euphemism, if you will. It's like in those old Bond movies, where Bond and the Bond Girl talks about how much they "love" each other, when in fact it's pretty clear that they desire to bang like rabbits and assume complicated gymnastic positions as they do so.

LOL

 

[Guestx]

sorry bro!

You should go find the thread and read through it. It's brutal.

The masterpiece that is Spring Breakers went thoroughly unappreciated.

 

[HUNTERMANIA]

You should go find the thread and read through it. It's brutal.

The masterpiece that is Spring Breakers went thoroughly unappreciated.

It's really a great movie. Disappointed that not many people saw it for what it was. That's why, when I put it in my selections, I emphasized: THIS IS A SATIRE. It's also beautifully shot and has great music.

 

[dissolved]

Delete, wrong thread

 

[Guestx]

I don't think I got a vote for this movie? When did the choices come out?

For THIS movie? You did. You voted for it.

 

[dissolved]

For THIS movie? You did. You voted for it.

I meant week 33. You were quick before I edited.

 

[Jesus X]

I have only seen irreversible I thought the story was written very rudimentary like something a college kid would write he seems like a poormans sadist version of Nicholas winding refn

 

[Guestx]

. . . he seems like a poormans sadist version of Nicholas winding refn

That strikes me as being perhaps not a terrible description.

Enter the Void is the first of his films that I've seen, so I don't quite feel qualified to pass a definitive judgment, but at least from this one film I can say that he's no Refn. There are some similarities in style, at least on some level, but Refn's work is far more interesting.

 

[BeardotheWeirdo]

I was pretty much obsessed with ninjas from about age 9 to about age 12. I'm not sure why precisely they appealed to me, but it was literally an all-out obsession. Anything about ninjas I was into: movies, books, video games, whatever. I had ninja weapons; I studied martial arts any way that I could and tried to train myself. I thought that when I got older I would go to Japan, find a master, and join a clan. And that would be my life.

That's funny.

First off, not sure if serious about boners somehow making nudity more artistic. But if serious, then I don't get the logic.

No one likes wieners, so to show them must make the film artsy.

Anyone can make a boob-fest movie that young males will enjoy regardless of the story.

To make a movie with wangs is a challenge and you have to justify showing wang to get the movie approved, whereas you can include boobs for any reason.

It's not the most rock-solid logic and I don't fully agree with it, but it makes sense, pretty much

Must a movie have a message? What is the message of The Mummy? Or Sleepy Hollow? Or Independence Day?

Those are action movies, I think. Never seen sleepy hollow, but I assume the message is "don't chop people's heads off"

The mummy is a love story, adventure, with a message that we shouldn't rob the dead. There's not much of a message but there's definitely a story.

Enter the void and spring breakers both lacked a message and a story. They just had vague themes.

Sometimes movies are not morality plays. Instead, they simply tell entertaining stories and that is enough.

It's enough assuming the story is entertaining. I didn't find either story entertaining tbh, but I could at least relate to the characters better than the teen girls in spring breakers.

BUT with that said I disagree that the film didn't have a message, even if it's a message that each viewer has to interpret for themselves. It was clearly there.

So what was it? There's no soul in party-culture?

As discussed, it both glamorizes the lifestyle while also criticizing it, all in the same breath. I found it an interesting approach.

How did Spring Breakers criticize the lifestyle, those girls had the time of their lives. Lived like kings for free. Got free cars, free money and free drugs. It had a happy ending. Alien died and they got all his money and his drugs, and his car. Where was the downside to their lifestyle. One of their friends scratched her arm, and they shared a jail cell for a day or two. Big deal.

Oscar and his friend had their lives ruined by drugs, and Alex and Linda were very lucky to get away from their lifestyle... if they did.

Bro, even while I was watching the movie I was thinking to myself, "This would be a lot better with drugs." The movie literally MADE ME WANT TO DO DRUGS!

At the beginning, but what about when you finished watching it?

it's been at least 3 days since you watched it, do you still feel that way, did you go out and get any drugs.

I don't remember that, but thanks for the explanation.

I kind of expected you to like it more considering the religious elements. Reincarnation doesn't do it for you?

I don't think that sex is sin, but I think that sex, like drugs, can lead to a lot of horrific shit. In the same way that people need to be cautioned about drugs, they need to be cautioned about sex.

No I don't know if anyone thinks it's a sin, but sex is a taboo topic to some. It used to be at least. It's still common for people to protest sex shops...

Few people are going to watch this movie and feel guilty about their sex life.

It's not acceptable to walk into your office on Monday and tell your coworkers you went to an orgy on the weekend. With this movie Gasper did his little part to chip away at the negative ideas associated with orgies and perhaps even incest. I don't know how freaky gasper is.

Unfortunately, we're living in a society that has largely lost its sense of modesty and everything has become sexualized. I don't like that.

I agree to an extent, but it's partly because sex is a taboo subject that people make movies like these.

And why is sex and nudity considered to be more offensive than language and violence? It's natural, it doesn't physically hurt people. Movies like these are (in a way) a protest against false morality.

Well is there any reason to think that these little actors were anything other than just normal kids? What evidence exists that they had experienced some terrible trauma in their lives and this was their way of coping?

There's very little evidence either way, but there is some to suggest that the girl had already been traumatized... people act from experience. I find it hard to believe they got such a believable performance from a child that had never been traumatized.

But regardless, I still think it's a highly questionable decision to put them in this movie. In 10 years, when they're in high school, people are going to be like, "Oh yeah, you were the kid in that movie with the CGI cock shooting cum into that druggy stripper in the Japanese love motel."

They showed us a scene just like that in grade 7 sex-ed class. Complete with ejaculation. Is normal in public school.

It's far from a black and white issue, but I tend to agree with you. I wouldn't put my kids through that. But what if that girl was like you but acting was her dream instead of being a ninja.

That's fucked up. They're too young to be able to make a proper decision about whether or not they want to be associated with this kind of film.

I went to school and played sports with a couple child actors growing up. All three had enough money to buy their own houses when they were 18, so it has its perks too.

You could argue that sending your kid to public school is fucked up, or catholic school, private school, or even home-schooling. All four methods have positive and negative effects on the students.

It depends on the children, the parents and the directors.[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]

 

[europe1]

It's interesting you say that. On a particular movie podcast I like to listen to, they often decry movies as being too "on the nose," i.e. un-subtle.

But is there necessarily something wrong with slamming home your meaning? What precisely is more noble about dancing around it?

Boy you've just opened up a whole can of worms there.

Umm... where to start?

So... subtlety is sort of an all-purpose buzzword among critics. It's used as a catch-all term. The problem with that, is that people don't often have a clear meaning what they mean when they say "subtlety". People just use it to signify something good. I belive that -- a lot of times -- people who use the term subtlety to describe something does so with the wrong word (even eminent critics).

For reference, I belive the most common definition of subtlety is that which is somehow difficult to detect or comprehend, something semi-hidden in some way, noticible but not fully understood, maybe even only noticed on a subconcious level.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/subtle


So... let's talk about subtlety in relation to Enter the Void. See... I called the "Book of the Dead" moment crass. But I wouldn't really say that it's a lack of subtlety that is the issue here. It's more that it's unorganic. Oscar just bluntly mentions it, without any build-up or series-of-events that would logically lead up to that moment.

Maybe it's best to illustrate the issue here by comparing it to another movie. Let's take the beginning of Shane as a comparison (and let's all take a few minutes to marvel at what a perfect film that was<cheer>). When Shane arrives at the Starrett's homestead, what happens? The kid gazes at Shane with awe. Shane spins around and readies his revolver when the kid cocks his rifle. Joe asks Shane to leave -- Shane is regretful. Ryker arrives with his posse to try and intimitate the Starrett family. Shane turns around and takes the families side.


This is an excellent opening. It establishes every character and relationship that will dominate the rest of the film. So it's a perfect set-up. But it isn't really "subtle". Every viewer understands all of these things that has been established. Not even a newborn would miss the fact that Shane has been set up as being ungodly good with a gun based on that reaction he gives.

So none of this is subtle. But everything is organic and indirectly said. There is no exposition that bluntly tells you "Shane is good with a gun". It is smartly shown. And the events that occur all feel natural and in-tune with everything else in the narrative, there is a series-of-events that logically follow each other and presents these things.

The diffrence between the "blunt" approach of Enter the Void and the "indirect" approach of Shane is the reaction that we (or at least I...) have towards this thing. When I saw Shane spin-around I had an "ah-ha!" moment. Something clicked in my brain, like I've just fitted two parts of a puzzle togheter. I reached the conclusion that Shane was a badass just what had been organically shown?

Can't we rewatch Shane next week in-stead?

Compare this to Enter the Void. Firstly, the "Tibetan book of the Dead"? It's like an overload, it's comically obvious, hitting you over the head with it. The movie tries to use the "Book of the Dead" as a symbol to communicate it's meaning but the symbol is so obvious. Secondly, there is a lack of satisfying build-up to this reveal, it doesn't really feel like there's a context to this. Honestly, considering this movies heavy emphasis on atmosphere, some sort of atmospheric communication of this theme would have been more appropriate. And lastly... it just isn't interesting or dynamic, just mentioning a book isn't anything special, it's not a cinematic way of saying something.

All of this adds-up and makes the statement feel unearned. It contasts so much that it feels jarring, and therefore crass. Now, I dislike absolutism. I'm pretty sure there are several instances of "bluntness" being used to introduce your films theme that is good somehow... but I can't recall any at the moment.


Going back to the subject of subtlety. The difference between subtlety and indirectness/organicness is a spectrum. To give an example of a film that I would consider contains both usages, take Fury Road as an example. Immortan Joe realizes that his wifes have gone missing. He storms into his harem, finds them gone, and words like "Our babies will not be Warlords" or "Who Destroyed the World" in penned in bright red letters on the walls. From this, it's pretty obvious that Fury Road is going to have themes of sexual politics and slavery (well... at least to me it was). So again, it isn't excactly subtle (it's written of the fucking walls!). But it is organic. Immortan Joe storms in and discovers these things during an event. He finds out about this as part of the narrative, in an organic chain-of-events, and thus it feels as an natural unveiling of what themes this movie is going to contain.

But then Fury Road contains more subtle themes as well. Things that are not so expressly stated, and dawn on you over a period of time rather than being something readily understood. Fury Road expressly discusses how the wives arn't "wives", they are slaves. It's part of the dialouge. Everyone in Fury Road is a slave on some level. Furiosa is his slave-general. Max is enslaved and his body used as a resource. Nux and the warboyz are brainwashed slave-soldiers. Fury Road says, that in absolute dictatorships, everyone is a slave -- that is to say a human dehumanized into some sort of resource (baby-making, soldiering, blood-bag, etc). All of this is in the narrative, but only the wives slavehood is expressely stated, highlighted for our notice, the rest of it is left to dawn in our minds as we think about the film.


To give another example of what I would call subtley in film, take Blade Runner. When Deckard and Gaff is searching through one of the replicants apartments, Gaff sits down with a piece of papper and folds it into an origami-figure of a human being. The implications are a bit obtuse at first. But since the film deals with the quesiton of humanity (are the replicants humans and how human are actual humans?), we can intone that Gaff crafting the figure of a human must mean that he's making a statement on this issue. Gaff making the origami illustrates the replicants yearnings to be human, and that he himself considers them humans (stating so through subtlety), and he's mocking Deckard's inability to fully-realize and acknowledge the replicants budding humanity. This isn't something that we (or at least I) fully understood in the moment that Gaff is making those origami's, but as the film goes on, explores it's themes, and we're left to think process these implications, the subtle theme slowly becomes cognizant to us.



So to summarize:

Organically showing -- leads to "ah-ha!" expriences.
Stating something bluntly -- often feels unearned, uncontextual, and jarring in comparison to the rest of the film.

 

[europe1]

I thought the atmosphere in Enter The Void was better than Valhalla Rising.

The starkness and naturalism of VR >>>>> The psychedelics of Enter the Void.

VR barely had anything going on under the surface.

The theme of VR was the contrast, clash and relationship of Christian and Norse religious doctrines that was going on underneath the films narrative (especially their dispositions towards violence). The problem of VR is that it (as far as we noticed) never really reached any conclusions or statements about this relationship. To put it in Bulllit68's words, it was a theme full of contridictions. The theme never "lead to anything". It was more a jumbled series of events and phenomenons that never formalized and lead to any conclusion on what had been shown.

As a society we dislike fake people, yet celebrate those who are best at being fake, actors, politicians, pop singers, tv personalities, etc... I've always found the subject to be fascinating.

Also, in some way shape or form aren't we all irresponsible?

Yes. But if you abstract the usage of the word to that level, it loses some of it meaning. "irresponsible" is supposed to highlight something that is abnormal, an irresponsible person doing stuff that is beyond the standards that we have set as society. If someone is irresponsible is a matter of degrees. If *everyone* is labeled as irresponsible, then no-one really is irresponsible, since the judgement of who is irresponsible is mesured in comparison to the standard of society.

I just discovered Lina Wertmeuller a few months ago

We talked about her a few months ago. She's the only female to ever have directed a Spaghetti Western film.

I watched Love and Anarchy and Seven Beauties and enjoyed them both a lot. I might nominate Seven Beauties next time I'm up.

I've never actually seen those two. Been meaning to watch Seven Beauties though.

I don't think it's a fair comparison. Love and Anarchy did feature a surprising amount of nudity and sexuality for a film made by a woman, but the characters (even the prostitute) were very warm, loving characters. They weren't traumatized... presumably the prostitute had been through some hard times but she was over it, she'd been over it for a long time. She was perhaps the most well-adjusted prostitute I've ever seen in a movie.

The sex scenes in Enter The Void and in Love and Anarchy are filmed and acted differently because the characters are so different. The way we make love (in many ways) is a reflection of our personalities.

Well I only really wanted to compare Lina and Gaspar to illustrate two directors who heavily bring their own sexuality into their films (or at least I thought Lina did so in films like Swept Away from 1974 or The Bella Star Story). The thing is that I think that Lina managed to do that sucessfully -- making an artistic statement and an intresting film as well -- while Gaspar failed. In Swept Away for example, the sexual theme about the relationship between sexuality and politics, and how the interaction of those two can make us into hypocrites. Lina brought some substantial conclusions to that theme, while Gaspar never really achieved anything similar to that.

The effects in Jaws 3-D

That film almost had an amazing title instead of that one.

"Jaws 3 -- People 0"

And yeah, those "special" effects where hilariously bad. But I quite like it. One of those bad films that are bad in a good way. Same goes with Jaws 4, to an lesser extent.

I was pretty much obsessed with ninjas from about age 9 to about age 12. I'm not sure why precisely they appealed to me, but it was literally an all-out obsession. Anything about ninjas I was into: movies

If there isn't some sort of Ninja-theme for your next round of nominations then I will be sorely disappointed in you.

No one likes wieners, so to show them must make the film artsy.

So cocks grow more artistic as they themselves grow?

I wouldn't set the standard for what is the definition of artistic that low. Intention, why you show them, matters. Only could show cocks just in an attempt to be obscene for obscentities sake. Vulgarity against societal norms is not in-and-of-itself an artistic statement. But one could certainly use vulgarity and obscenity to make such an statement, that our norms as somehow incorrect or unnatural or such-like.

 

[BeardotheWeirdo]

The starkness and naturalism of VR >>>>> The psychedelics of Enter the Void.

The naturalism of the that which is not natural...

The Scottish scenery was nice, I'll give it that.

The theme of VR was the contrast, clash and relationship of Christian and Norse religious doctrines that was going on underneath the films narrative (especially their dispositions towards violence). The problem of VR is that it (as far as we noticed) never really reached any conclusions or statements about this relationship. To put it in Bulllit68's words, it was a theme full of contridictions. The theme never "lead to anything". It was more a jumbled series of events and phenomenons that never formalized and lead to any conclusion on what had been shown.

And it had 3 different endings all of which were vastly different...

Yes. But if you abstract the usage of the word to that level, it loses some of it meaning. "irresponsible" is supposed to highlight something that is abnormal, an irresponsible person doing stuff that is beyond the standards that we have set as society. If someone is irresponsible is a matter of degrees. If *everyone* is labeled as irresponsible, then no-one really is irresponsible, since the judgement of who is irresponsible is mesured in comparison to the standard of society.

Buddhism 101.

If we use human society as the standard then you're right, but therein lies the flaw. If we compare ourselves to all the other animals then all humans are irresponsible. We live in excess and we're (slowly) destroying the planet.

Who sets the standards of society? In the Name Of The Rose showed us the dangers of letting the establishment decide what "responsible" is.

We talked about her a few months ago. She's the only female to ever have directed a Spaghetti Western film.

Really? What spaghetti western is that? Love and Anarchy was the only Wertmuller movie in my watch-list. I assumed I came across it while looking for movies with "Anarchy" in the title.

I've never actually seen those two. Been meaning to watch Seven Beauties though.

I don't know if you'd like Love and Anarchy or not. Seven Beauties is right up your alley though.

That film almost had an amazing title instead of that one.

"Jaws 3 -- People 0"

And yeah, those "special" effects where hilariously bad. But I quite like it. One of those bad films that are bad in a good way. Same goes with Jaws 4, to an lesser extent.

Yeah, it was fun for sure. Way better than that Samuel Jackson movie that it inspired. The one with the sharks

If there isn't some sort of Ninja-theme for your next round of nominations then I will be sorely disappointed in you.

Speaking of Ninja's, I watched Enter The Ninja with Franco Nero and Susan George the other month... I don't know how Menahem Golan mananged to take those three elements and turn them into a shitty movie, but he did.

He also directed Mivtsa Yonatan with Klaus Kinski about the incident at Intebbe, and somehow he managed to turn it into an absolute snoozefest.

So cocks grow more artistic as they themselves grow?

That's hilarious, but these two pictures speak for themselves.

If this artists rendition was life size, this woman wouldn't be sitting on it

Western and Asian society look at the issue through very different lenses.

I wouldn't set the standard for what is the definition of artistic that low. Intention, why you show them, matters. Only could show cocks just in an attempt to be obscene for obscentities sake. Vulgarity against societal norms is not in-and-of-itself an artistic statement. But one could certainly use vulgarity and obscenity to make such an statement, that our norms as somehow incorrect or unnatural or such-like.

Gaspar wants to be Stanley Kubrick 2.0, I don't think he's just showing them to impress young males.

The story could be so thin and pointless because you're supposed to watch the movie while tripping your balls off. and in such a state you can't handle too crazy of a story.

I think he's a very talented director, he's just not a story-teller.