Movie Thread

[Sun_Worshiper]

My wife wanted to watch Starship Troopers for some reason. OK, so they have faster-than-light travel but not cellphones, drones, guided missiles, autonomous vehicles or any kind of AI or even friggin' tanks. I just couldn't take it seriously.

The movie is dumb fun on its face, but also a pretty sharp critique of fascism. Good double feature with Robocop (similarly ultra-violent and subversive by the same director).

[Stockmann]

My wife wanted to watch Starship Troopers for some reason. OK, so they have faster-than-light travel but not cellphones, drones, guided missiles, autonomous vehicles or any kind of AI or even friggin' tanks. I just couldn't take it seriously.

The movie is dumb fun on its face, but also a pretty sharp critique of fascism. Good double feature with Robocop (similarly ultra-violent and subversive by the same director).

If anything, it seemed to me to advocate for authoritarian rule - the government shown is authoritarian but is insistingly portrayed as mostly benevolent and competent - everyone who serves is a volunteer, people get promoted largely on demonstrated actual competence and, most unrealistically, the top guy quits when his plan fails instead of blaming it on underlings or on the people (as Fascists always did) or persisting with failed policies (cf. Russia, China). Also (and this is to me perhaps the most crucial point), humanity faced a genuine existential threat, so talk about the necessity of sacrificing some for the overall war doesn't ring hollow.

[Sun_Worshiper]

My wife wanted to watch Starship Troopers for some reason. OK, so they have faster-than-light travel but not cellphones, drones, guided missiles, autonomous vehicles or any kind of AI or even friggin' tanks. I just couldn't take it seriously.

The movie is dumb fun on its face, but also a pretty sharp critique of fascism. Good double feature with Robocop (similarly ultra-violent and subversive by the same director).

If anything, it seemed to me to advocate for authoritarian rule - the government shown is authoritarian but is insistingly portrayed as mostly benevolent and competent - everyone who serves is a volunteer, people get promoted largely on demonstrated actual competence and, most unrealistically, the top guy quits when his plan fails instead of blaming it on underlings or on the people (as Fascists always did) or persisting with failed policies (cf. Russia, China). Also (and this is to me perhaps the most crucial point), humanity faced a genuine existential threat, so talk about the necessity of sacrificing some for the overall war doesn't ring hollow.

Read about this film and you'll see that the director, Paul Verhoeven, intended it as a commentary on, and criticism of, fascism. The criticism may not have come through effectively, but it is the intent.

[Stockmann]

He's in good company - same thing happened to Milton with Paradise Lost - Lucifer comes across relatively sympathetically, even though that wasn't the intent. In both cases it's probably a matter of expectations - Lucifer is supposed to be the sum of all evil, so anything bad he does is just par for the course, but when he starts going on about the consent of the governed and freedom, you sit up and take notice. Likewise, this is a global military dictatorship at a time of genuine existential emergency - the leadership not being depraved puts it light years ahead of, say, Argentina's last military dictatorship; remember a chunk of the movie supposedly happens in Buenos Aires for some reason (it was a pretty good government by Argentine standards).

On the other hand, a lot of movies (and books and so on) and their intended message for me fall under "jerkass has a point" or "strawman has a point" - while on the topic of movies, the one with Robin Williams as an adult Peter Pan is a prime example for me - yeah, he wasn't Father of the Year material, and ought to have been nicer to his kids and not make promises he couldn't keep - but when his wife and Wendy criticize him, I mentally answered that his job was a family of four's sole source of income and therefore critically important to them, objectively more so than any single baseball game, and nobody makes any constructive suggestions of how to get other sources of income (like his wife getting a job) or how to spend less (trips to London for a family of four tend to be pricey). Also, with Wendy accusing him of being a "pirate" I have to wonder how she makes a living - she's retired in a big house in friggin' London so it seems more than a bit rich for her to criticize others for being in business.

[jimbogumbo]

Just finished the Kurt Vonnegut biographic documentary on Hulu. It was fantastic!

[hmaria1609]

"Spaceballs" (1987) on Kanopy
A comedic mashup!

[jimbogumbo]

My wife wanted to watch Starship Troopers for some reason. OK, so they have faster-than-light travel but not cellphones, drones, guided missiles, autonomous vehicles or any kind of AI or even friggin' tanks. I just couldn't take it seriously.

The movie is dumb fun on its face, but also a pretty sharp critique of fascism. Good double feature with Robocop (similarly ultra-violent and subversive by the same director).

If anything, it seemed to me to advocate for authoritarian rule - the government shown is authoritarian but is insistingly portrayed as mostly benevolent and competent - everyone who serves is a volunteer, people get promoted largely on demonstrated actual competence and, most unrealistically, the top guy quits when his plan fails instead of blaming it on underlings or on the people (as Fascists always did) or persisting with failed policies (cf. Russia, China). Also (and this is to me perhaps the most crucial point), humanity faced a genuine existential threat, so talk about the necessity of sacrificing some for the overall war doesn't ring hollow.

Don't know how much it's emphasized in the movie, but a big point in the book is that you can't vote unless you volunteered for government service and served a term honorably. Doesn't have to be military-any civil service job suffices.

[Hegemony]

Just watched "Weird: The Al Yankovic Story," which is on the Roku Channel. What an enjoyable movie. So many sly little jokes — especially good if you've watched any musician biopics, but also just inventive, funny, and good-hearted generally. Daniel Radcliffe does well. Just what I needed in these fraught times.

[Sun_Worshiper]

Glass Onion: A Knives Out Mystery (2022, Netflix)

Very enjoyable, if somewhat convoluted, murder mystery, bringing back only Daniel Craig's character from the first film to solve a new case. Glass Onion is not quite as sharp as its predecessor, but the performances are great and there is some sharp commentary on the ultra rich. I would welcome more Knives Out mysteries in the future.

Grade: A-


Emily the Criminal (2022, Netflix)

A debt-ridden millennial turns to petty crime out of desperation. It goes well for a while, but soon enough the dangers of the criminal life emerge. This was fine, with good performances, snappy pacing, and an interesting enough script. I doubt it will stay with me though.

Grade: B


Hustle (2022, Netflix)

A scout for the Philadelphia 76rs (Adam Sandler) discovers an unknown basketball phenom in Spain and tries to get him in shape for the NBA draft. This is a bit generic and the characters are not well developed enough, but it is  watchable and has lots of Easter eggs for basketball fans.

Grade: B


The Nanny (2022, Amazon)

Horror/thriller about a nanny from Africa who babysits for an obnoxious rich couple while simultaneously slipping into insanity. This movie is going for Get Out style social commentary, but with a more solemn and serious tone, and it succeeds in that regard. But it is not scary or thrilling.

I also think that horror movies have driven the "rich whites bad, poor minorities good" theme into the ground over the last few years. Don't get me wrong, I like social commentary in horror and I don't mind that theme, but with every movie trying to replicate the Get Out formula it is becoming a little too predictable at this point. It sort of reminds me of how every crime movie had to have slick dialogue and a nonlinear timeline for a few years after Pulp Fiction.

Grade: B

[ab_grp]

I have been looking forward to seeing Glass Onion so am glad if it is worth it.

We haven't seen any new movies lately but rewatched several during our recent trip that I will reiterate my love for: Silence of the Lambs, Everything Everywhere All at Once, Nobody.  (ETA: and Clue)

[Larimar]

Has anyone seen Kimi? I stumbled onto an online trailer and some reviews that made it sound intriguing - they compared it to Rear Window, which I liked, and the trailer also made me think of The Pelican Brief, which I also like (the book is better, but the movie is good). My one concern is that Kimi is rated R and I wonder how violent etc. it is. I'm not into that stuff.

Larimar

[jimbogumbo]

Has anyone seen Kimi? I stumbled onto an online trailer and some reviews that made it sound intriguing - they compared it to Rear Window, which I liked, and the trailer also made me think of The Pelican Brief, which I also like (the book is better, but the movie is good). My one concern is that Kimi is rated R and I wonder how violent etc. it is. I'm not into that stuff.

Larimar

Just read a review. Sounds like you would not like it. FWIW I just Googled is Kimi violent and got a description as the first hit.

[Larimar]

Thank you, Jimbogumbo. I followed your lead and googled the question, and probably saw the same description that you did. Yeah, I think I'm going to cancel my library hold on Kimi. I appreciate the warning.

Larimar

[ab_grp]

We have watched two new (to us) movies recently.  First was The Banshees of Inisherin, which I had somehow heard was a comedy.  It was not.  It was very funny at times, but it's a very dark tale of the end of a friendship on a small Irish island.  The phrase "that escalated quickly" comes to mind when I think of this movie.  I had heard that Colin Farrell did a wonderful job with his role, and I agree.  Brendan Gleeson is also great, as always.  The feel of the movie reminds me a lot of Calvary.  I'd certainly recommend it pretty highly, but it's not for the faint of heart and is also quite depressing.

Last night we watched El Camino, having watched Breaking Bad a while back and having finished Better Call Saul recently.  It was reasonably entertaining, but I realized that what was nagging me after was that I didn't feel as though I had watched a movie.  It kind of felt like I just watched a long TV show episode, and not a particularly exciting one.  I am not sure how it was also intended to be able to function as a standalone movie.  There didn't seem to be much explanation of how events got to be what they were.   From the standpoint of a fan of the show, I thought it was nice to have some closure on Jesse's story, but the focus was not at all what I had expected (following him into his future) but was more of the immediate aftermath with some flashbacks and very little of anything beyond that.  It wasn't bad, but it really left almost no impression, and that's kind of a strange feeling after spending two hours.  In the trivia, it was mentioned both that another idea was to make just a 15-20 minute minimovie, which I think would have been fine, and that the movie as made was originally three hours! Geez.  I am thankful that they made the edits they did, I guess.

[ab_grp]

We watched Nomadland last night.  As others here have mentioned, it's a beautifully shot movie.  I also thought that it felt longer than it actually was.  And I agree that it seemed to avoid some of the rougher aspects of the nomadic life.  The content wasn't as interesting to me as the movie-making was, I guess.  The IMDB trivia noted that some of the nomads did not know that Frances McDormand was an actress.  From what I read this morning, I guess the real-life nomads just thought they would be acting as nomads in a small film about the life? McDormand is a reliably great actress, but knowing that she fit in so well impresses me even more.  I think the trivia said she even lived in the van for a while.  As a statement on the tyranny of the almighty dollar, I think there were some good ideas but no real payoff.  My husband and I both thought it was a good movie, not great.  We were glad to have watched it but don't feel a need to rewatch in the future.