Return of the Living SB Movie Experiment: Pontypool

[Deleted]

I'll stick with Cronenberg and suggest Spider(2002).

[SsnakeBite, the No1 Frenchman]

Network

Suggested by bob loves the Hurt Syndicate


Howard Beale, a news anchorman with nothing left to lose and whose glory days are long gone is fired by the network he's been working for for over a decade. he doesn't take it well - to say the least - and so during his last show, he announces his intention to kill himself live on television, and when the network gives him a chance to apologize and say farewell, he goes on a rant about the corruption in the media and society as a whole.

Needless to say, it is a deeply satirical film and I really enjoyed. However, I did not quite enjoy it for the reasons I thought I would. For you see, it's not just about the cathartic satisfaction of seeing some dude yell out loud what everybody has been thinking in whispers, but rather how the network reacts to it. It turns out their ratings spiked beyond imagination during his rants and so they decide to make the most of it by not only keeping him, but turning what is supposed to be a news show in one in which he is basically just ranting for a half-hour (insert your own jokes about YouTube V-logs here).

And that's what I found most interesting about this movie: Beale, as charismatic as he is, is not a hero. He's not a hypocrite, he genuinely does mean to do good and help people, that's not the problem, but at the end he is just a mad and surprisingly naive fool manipulated by the very people he believes to be fighting, as his show becomes increasingly tacky and heavily produced, it really shows the perverse way a business takes hold of a rebellion and uses it for its own gain and makes it fashionable, marketable. At times it really reminded me of the comic Transmetropolitan (if you haven't read it, you should), and more specifically when Spider-Jerusalem realizes that his message has been turned into a franchise, lamenting that "they made me into television".

When you see the live audience yell "WE ARE AS MAD AS HELL AND WE'RE NOT GOING TO TAKE THIS ANY MORE", a symbol of revolt turned into a corporate catchphrase, you realize that the entire thing is just a façade. It's just as superficial as superficial as it ever was, the big business managed to not only profit from their enemy but actually convince them that they are totally on their side.

Speaking of the audience, it is also a great satire of society, with people very quick and willing to rebel as long as it's glamorous and don't have to take risks, the "We are Anonymous" kind of rebellion, just chanting slogans and getting pissed, but suddenly lose interest when faced with the reality that they either need to actively change the system or accept to become its plaything. The most famous scene in the film has Beale tell people that they need to fight for their rights "but first, you've got to get mad! You've got to say, 'I'm as mad as hell, and I'm not going to take this any more!'" and he is right, but the problem is that people forgot that the most important part of that sentence was "but first" and stopped at yelling that they're mad.

And of course, it is obviously an incredible satire of the worst aspects of television. I mentioned earlier that Beale's show was supposed to be a news show, and the movie greatly shows how the network doesn't particularly care about actually showing news but rather entertaining the masses to get ratings and make money and of course you can't help but make parallels with actual TV. I mean, it's hardly fiction when in real life you have stuff like the Fox News channel that argued before a court that they are an entertainment channel and not a news one so they could legally lie to millions of people on a daily basis and of course, while they may be the most famous example, they are sadly not the only ones.


Coming soon (hopefully), we will take a look at a war epic with Zulu.

[SsnakeBite, the No1 Frenchman]

I am very sorry there's going to be another long wait, but tomorrow I'm going to London on Vacation and I highly doubt I'll be able to watch any of the films on the list, and even if I do I'm not sure I'll be able to post here anyway. So, see you in a week!

[bob loves the Hurt Syndicate]

I still think you'll get to this point in the backlog around Halloween so another classic horror film is suggested: A Nightmare on Elm Street (1984).

[SsnakeBite, the No1 Frenchman]

Jul 20, 2014 16:25:07 GMT -5 bob loves the Hurt Syndicate said:

I still think you'll get to this point in the backlog around Halloween so another classic horror film is suggested: A Nightmare on Elm Street (1984).

Already seen it (note to self: write a short review when I get back). I also saw 2 & 3. You can go ahead and suggest something else if you want.

[bob loves the Hurt Syndicate]

I still think you'll get to this point in the backlog around Halloween so another classic horror film is suggested: Stanley Kubrick's horror masterpiece The Shining (1980).

[ThereIsNoAbsurdistOnlyZuul]

Beyond the Black Rainbow

[bob loves the Hurt Syndicate]

Dracula (1931)

[SsnakeBite, the No1 Frenchman]

I am about to start watching Zulu but before that, since I have been to the cinema during my vacation and since you've all been so patient, have a bonus review! So what film did I go see?






The Purge: Anarchy



I heard about the original and it sounded very stupid so I avoided it. Then, I heard about the sequel and it also sounded very stupid, BUT it also sounded very fun (especially as the trailer made it look freaking insane), so I decided to check it out. First things first, you probably know or assume that already but you don't need to have seen the original to see that one as the story is unrelated.

Gotta say, I was pleasantly surprised and that seems to be the general consensus among people who have seen it, even (especially?) among those who watched the original. The big improvement is that they actually use the gimmick of the purge whereas the original, from what I could gather, was a rather generic home invasion movie and the purge itself was only an excuse for why the cops weren't an option. By the way, I should probably explain what the purge is in case someone has never heard of it:

in the near future (seriously, it's taking place like ten years from now), the US government, lead by "the new founding fathers", has passed a law creating one day during which, for twelve hours, all crime including murder is legal (they do have a few more rules, like killing members of the government is illegal and only weapons up to class 4 are allowed), which somehow leads to a crime rate the rest of the year of below 5% (5% of what?) and unemployment is under 1%. No, I don't know why one night when killing your neighbour or screwing donkeys is legal leads to less poverty, some people who saw the movies joke that all the unemployed people get killed during the purge because they can't afford protection and considering in this movie, there's a faction claiming the purge is an excuse to get rid of the poor, it might as well be canon for all I know. So yeah, stupid concept but if you get past that and just accept it, it could be fun.

Now, it's still stupid at times, and that's even when you ignore the fact that the concept of the purge itself makes no goddamn sense and would never happen even in the most dystopian of dictatorships. For example, there's that young, stereotypically rebellious teen girl who seems to be trying to do everything in her power to get herself killed as she is constantly taunting people with guns and who, let me remind you, can legally murder her, even when she is safely hiding and they have not spotted her.

Another example is that two of the characters end up stuck outside during the purge when their car breaks on their way home but while they're somewhat likeable, I can't really feel sorry because these clowns felt it was wise to go grocery shopping two hours before the beginning of the purge!! Why would anyone still be outside with such little time remaining before the beginning of the purge? Why would stores be open that day?! Why is ANYONE who isn't purging not barricaded inside their bullet-proofed houses? In fact, why are they still in the country to begin with? You know, when there's a day where it's legal for 12 hours to kill you and you can't do anything about it, maybe it's time to book a trip abroad. I hear London is a nice, non-murdery place this time of the year.

But still, I must admit it was not nearly as dumb as I feared it would be and... well it's just really freaking entertaining. I think the film's best asset is its main character who is genuinely badass and very fun to follow. It's amazing how much more smoothly a stupid movie goes when it has a good main character leading it.

Another point in the movie's favour is that I heard the original was plagued by rather pretentious undertones, making it one of these movies that's convinced it's very important and delivering a mind-bending truth to the masses when in reality it's just another exploitation film, well let me tell you Anarchy is nothing like that. It's a mindless fun action film and it knows it is, and I'm not saying that in the way some films try to be these days, with big ol' wink-wink nudge-nudge moments to make sure you got it that it's a joke, and frankly I'm not entirely sure how self-aware it exactly is, but my point is it aims at being an entertaining action film and it succeeds at that as it is very intense and very good. There are even a few moments it took me by surprise.

I've heard this film be compared to 80's B-movies and yeah, that's a pretty accurate comparison; that's really what it feels like. In fact, it does a better job of being an 80's throwback than most intentional attempts at 80's throwbacks. There are even quite a few bits of genuinely funny attempts at humour.

And finally, there's something weird about this film... look, I've said before and I'll say it again, the concept of it is stupid and it it has several moments of profound stupidity even once you accept the concept... and yet it's still kind of clever in some ways. For such a silly action movie, it's not as predictable as you'd think, throwing you a curve ball at several points and so, unlike the first movie, it avoids being a generic by the book flick. But also... there were actually some themes and satire I found rather interesting and actually kind of works, like how several people who purge yell out that "it's [their] right given to [them] by the new founding fathers!" as they cold-bloodedly attempt to murder people, acting as if trying to defend yourself or escape from them is a violation of their liberties, which of course you will probably be able to compare to rhetoric we've all heard before. There is also quite a lot of rather neatly executed foreshadowing, although i'm not going to give examples to avoid spoilers.

So yeah, surprisingly good movie if you can ignore the nonsense of the premise and accept that in this film's universe it somehow makes sense, and tolerate a few dumb moments. I wouldn't say rush to the theatres so you don't miss it, but it's a good film to go see with friends a Friday evening when you're all exhausted by a week of work and just want to relax by seeing some cathartic fun action and then have a good laugh at the stupid bits after the film is over.

[SsnakeBite, the No1 Frenchman]

Zulu

Suggested by Drillbit Taylor


This film depicts a somewhat fictionalized account of the battle of Rorke's Drift. I knew very little about the conflict prior to seeing this film so I really wasn't sure what to expect aside from British soldiers fighting Zulu soldiers. Then, again, it's pretty much what it is, as the British are dramatically outnumbered (4000 Zulu for slightly above 100 British, a third of which are injured or sick).

Now while the British seem to be the "heroes" of the film as it is seen from their point of view and they get a lot more character development, I was pleased to see the Zulus were not vilified. In fact, they were portrayed by actual Zulu tribesmen, most of which are descendants of those took part in the actual battle, who were gifted the animals used in the film to make for the fact that the apartheid laws forbid paying them the same wage as the White actors, and in general the makers of the film made sure the Zulus were depicted as accurately as possible.

It's not really my type of film but it was pretty good. I certainly was never bored while watching it and there are many intense moments where you wonder what's going to happen next. I also enjoyed the characters, as of course in a story like this you need to connect with them in order to feel invested in the actual conflict. Interestingly, this is also one of Michael Caine's first major roles and one of his first film roles, with the movie even proudly announcing "introducing Michael Caine".

The only problem I had with the film was the special effects. Yeah, I know, I know it's a 1964 film, special effects weren't as refined as they are today and didn't have modern technology but still, it IS distracting when in the middle of what is supposed to be a huge battle, you see characters blatantly swing spears or bayonets next to the side of their enemies in the hope that forced perspective will do the trick, or people fall over from gunshot wounds without so much as a drop of blood. And it's one thing when westerns did this kind of stuff as it was usually shown from a distance and shot in such a way that you could argue that the wound is obscured, but here we get close-ups of the action that only make the tricks more obvious. It's only a detail but it does drag you out of the film.

Still, for the most part the writing, acting and directing make the film work and keep you interested until the end so even though it gets cheesy at times, it remains an enjoyable watch.


Next time, we have a story about a drug addict, his dealer and the guy who manufactures their favourite drug going on "a massive three-day adventure" according to IMDb. Make of that what you will. It's Spun.

[Drillbit Taylor]

Yea for being one of Caine's first roles it is often overlooked, but its a good movie.

Going too add Black Book (2006) to the list.

[Deleted]

Oh this is gonna be fun...

[Deleted]

JCVD (2008)

[bob loves the Hurt Syndicate]

Sharknado 2: The Second One

[SsnakeBite, the No1 Frenchman]

Aug 2, 2014 21:40:49 GMT -5 bob loves the Hurt Syndicate said:

Sharknado 2: The Second One

Does it even have a release date yet?

[thetower52]

Teeth

[bob loves the Hurt Syndicate]

Aug 3, 2014 1:41:16 GMT -5 SsnakeBite, the No1 Frenchman said:

Aug 2, 2014 21:40:49 GMT -5 bob loves the Hurt Syndicate said:

Sharknado 2: The Second One

Does it even have a release date yet?

It was on SyFy a few days ago and it was glorious .

I don't know if it has a release date set yet but they might show multiple replays of it.

[SsnakeBite, the No1 Frenchman]

Spun

Suggested by cageking666

So I just finished watching one of the weirdest goddamn things I've seen in my life, and I've seen some shit. Now it's a film about drugs so it's to be expected... actually no, it's not a film about drugs. It's a film about... actually I'm not sure what it's about. I mean sure, drugs are the central element but it's not your classic drug story with gang wars, crooked cops (though there ARE crooked cops, more on that later), deals, etc...

It's more of a mixture of several small stories. You've got Ross, a broke-ass meth addict who desperately convinces himself that his life is still within his control and he still has a chance to get his ex-girlfriend back and tries to make ends meet by becoming his cook's driver (the meth kind of cook in case that's not clear), you've got the cook's girlfriend Nikki slowly realizing she's wasting away with him, you've got some nerdy meth-head who gets busted by cops and tries to get out of the mess he's in, you've got the borderline insane dealer whose explosive relationship with his girlfriend is somehow the most well-adjusted one in this film, etc...

This inevitably gives the film a disjointed film despite having a mostly linear timeline. In a strange way, it's almost a "slice of life "film but then you have the strange mixture of raw realism and over-the-top camp. You have intense scenes of characters getting high and going out of their mind followed by a wacky spoof of 70's cop shows that's ALSO a parody of C.O.P.S. hosted by two dirty cops who are also on meth.
You've got the very gritty cook trying to survive after his place blows up, and then you have a scene with Eric Roberts as the campiest of camp gaysin a giant wig and wearing a robe that Ric Flair would find loud while living in a posh place where he constantly has two muscular dudes wearing nothing but briefs and one of them juggling a ping-pong ball. It's really strange and I'm not gonna lie, these tonal whiplashes are probably going to put a lot of people off.

That said, the film definitely has a style and I really like what they did with the editing, using fast-motion and quick cuts to represent the boost of energy people get as they get high and overlaying several elements one over the other, all that occasionally mixed in with cartoon pornography. It can become exhausting as it pretty much assaults your senses and it happens A LOT in this film and again, that's probably going to put people off, but I've gotta admit it's effective in conveying the feeling of being high and losing your grip on reality.

I also appreciated the fact that, although man of them are kind of assholes (and some are downright assholes), the characters are a lot of fun to follow. Mickey Rourke as the cook is especially good and you can never tell if he's a streetwise jaded genius or just a self-important moron who was luckier than most. I also liked the two sassy Latina convenience store clerks because even though they're not very important, they're pretty much the only characters who seem somewhat sane.

So I'm not sure I liked it as there were times it became a bit overbearing and there are some aspects of it I just don't get (why does Ross feel the need to tie and gag April for no reason whatsoever, especially as he is obviously sober at that point? What's the deal with the random Ron Jeremy cameo? And some scenes are kind of pointless, aren't they?), but I know I certainly didn't dislike it and I'm glad I saw it. I have mixed feelings about it but I think if you can stomach one big mindf***, I'd still recommend it, just because it's so... different.


And we may leave the theme of drugs behind next time but we're still gonna go on a trip with Easy Rider.

[Joker]

Seeing as your about to get to my last suggestion, time for a new one

In the Heat of the Night

[Deleted]

Elite Squad (2007)