What Are You Watching Right Now? Episode 3 - Turtles in Time

[Buscemi2]

Back when South Park was funny. Though some of the references firmly date it in the 90's, the general concept of the film still holds up today. Funny that a lot of the more die-hard fans of Trey & Matt will miss how anti-fascist a lot of this film really is. Yes, South Park was always about pushing the envelope but here, a lot of the social elements are more subtle than the show was. It could be seen as the turning point (rather than after Isaac Hayes left the show) of South Park getting more political. But the difference is that Trey & Matt are a lot less bitter and filled with hate. The film is having fun with skewering its critics instead of being the critics themselves. And to do it as a musical? Brilliant.

Up next: Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas.

[Buscemi2]

Much like how Ghost World felt like a eulogy for the 90's, this is a eulogy of the 60's. Terry Gilliam's head trip is perhaps the only time any filmmaker will get Hunter S. Thompson right (The Rum Diary was good but a little too restrained while Where the Buffalo Roam was your typical "producers think they know their audience but don't" item). Despite being from Universal, this is far from a mainstream film and that the fact that Gilliam was able to make the film basically how he wanted is pretty amazing. Johnny Depp is basically a joke now but Raoul Duke is not only his best performance but also a reminder of what he could do before he became a parody of himself. And you have to admire the dedication that Benicio del Toro had in getting into Dr. Gonzo. Also, the series of cameos might be as bonkers as the general style of the film and feels kind of like the cast Tarantino has assembled for his new one (also somewhat of a "death of the 60's" movie).

It's not a surprise this was detested when it came out. It's not for everyone. But they can have their traditional Hollywood fare and I'll love this one.

Up next: Trainspotting.

[Buscemi2]

#38 in my Criterion theatrical challenge (#37 was the one above).

I hadn't realized how short this film is until before I went to the showing. For some reason, I thought it was longer. But maybe that's because Danny Boyle really stretches out what it's like to be an addict stuck and unable to get out of a bad situation. Trainspotting is a film of catharsis: its storyteller wants out of his self-made depression caused by heroin addiction, among other things, and tries hard to release those bad influences but keeps getting drawn in by his enablers. And much like Requiem for a Dream, the scenes of addiction are terrifying. But unlike Requiem, there is a sort-of happy ending for our antihero. Also, when I come to realize it, Trainspotting is kind of like a gangster film in how the relationship of the five characters and their connections are depicted. But instead of violence and guns, it's heroin and needles.

And that baby still gets to me. Also, what's with Boyle and people getting into shit?

Up next: Babe.

[Buscemi2]

From Scottish junkies to an Australian pig. One of the more unlikely Best Picture nominees, Babe still holds up as a movie both kids and adults can enjoy. If you can't find something to like about this film, you might not have a soul (sorry, Chien). Though some of the Oscar-winning visual effects don't hold up (mainly in the CGI, but the animatronics still look good), pretty much everything else still works. And that duck's pretty hilarious.

Up next: Misery.

[Buscemi2]

Rob Reiner had a good run between 1984 and 1992, didn't he? And he rarely seemed to do the same kind of movie twice during that time. This time he did horror and it was a reminder that horror didn't need to be all about gore and boobs. This is one of the scarier films of the late 20th century because it could very well happen in real life, especially with the obsessive world of fandom. Stephen King was warning us. There are Annie Wilkeses everywhere.

Up next: Blade Runner.

[Buscemi2]

#39 in my Criterion challenge.

I don't get how there are people who can say the sequel was better. This is the perfect dystopia film. A mix of sci-fi and film noir, Ridley Scott's film is built on atmosphere and reinventing the cliches typically seen in 1940's mysteries. When you think about it, it's kind of like The Maltese Falcon but in the future. What's also amazing about this film is the atmosphere and the practicality of the production. You really don't see science fiction built around mood. It's usually concepts but for a big film like this one, it's very intimate. Among the chaos, it's really a story of a man's struggle of himself and his mission. As for the production, you really don't see a world like this that's so real anymore. The last sci-fi film I can recall that had a commitment to making everything feel authentic was Mad Max: Fury Road.

Lastly, this showing was of The Final Cut. Comparing the theatrical cut, the director's cut, and the final cut, I find myself leaning towards the director's cut for minor reasons. First, the final cut had some redone footage (mainly CGI and pickup shots) that sometimes didn't match. Second, I find myself preferring "I want like, facker" over "father". But it's no big deal, to be honest.

Up next: Best in Show.

[Buscemi2]

Christopher Guest does dog shows. Though I might like Waiting for Guffman the most in terms of the films he's directed, it's not hard to see why a lot of people gravitate towards this one. It's his most accessible film and still pretty hilarious. To make a film like this one, you need some talented improv artists and Guest certainly found some. I'm not sure the film would have had the same effect had everything been scripted.

To me, the best character in the story is Guest's character. The role not only shows Guest's versatility but he's also a rather endearing character with his Southerness and eccentricity. I remember when I first saw the film, I wanted him and the bloodhound to win. Also, cute dogs and plenty of them!

Up next: The Princess Bride.

Meanwhile, the final January tally:
- 17 films (6 new, 10 old, 1 pre-release)
- 3 Criterions (39/50 for planned goal)
- 5/10 decades of sound (1940's, 1980's, 1990's, 2000's, 2010's)

[Buscemi2]

#40 in my Criterion challenge.

Before fantasy became about selling franchises, they were simple stories where charm outweighed merchandising opportunities. I have a feeling this couldn't be made today, not just because of being based on a best-selling novel but because it's sort of a satire of the fantasy genre. You have all the traditional themes but it's done in a playful and non-serious way. Also, the studio would want too much say in such a film (it should be noted this was an independent film that Fox ended up releasing in the US).

So when exactly did the fantasy genre lose its way and cause films like this to become out of vogue? I guess expensive tastes outweigh charm and intelligence nowadays.

Up next: Groundhog Day.

[Screen203]

Saw the early screening of How to Train Your Dragon. It was okay, the animation was great. I'm not big on animated movies in general, but it was cute.

The theater was packed, though. Both showings sold out, and there was a decent amount of applause at the end.

[Shrykespeare]

Good to know, Screen.

Just watched Polar on Netflix, starring Mads Mikkelsen. Maybe the most cartoonishly violent movie I've ever seen. It reminded me a lot of Kill Bill (elite assassin squad sent to take out a former member), but not nearly as cool. The gore and blood was so OTT, I couldn't really enjoy it. If that's your thing, though, you'll probably enjoy it.

[Buscemi2]

I think the dreadful reviews on Polar are enough for me to stay away from it.



Probably the most famous movie about time loops. Is Phil's predicament metaphysical, psychological, or all in his head? And how long was he in it? We never know but thinking about it part of the fun. It's also somewhat of a 90's It's a Wonderful Life. Except for the nice guy who's been brought down a few too many years, it's a jerk that needs to brought down a peg. Just the concept alone (a comedic version of the short film 12:01 PM) has many different ideas to make it work and Bill Murray's performance is multi-layered enough to let the character build.

It was sad however that no one else recognized a young Michael Shannon.

Up next: Fish Tank.

[Buscemi2]

#41 in my Criterion challenge.

After seeing Shoplifters, I stayed for a free (as I'm a member of my nearest non-profit arthouse) showing of for me, the last good film Andrea Arnold has made (I believe she should have never left the council estates and continued her career trajectory of being the new Mike Leigh). While the Kingsman series and various straight-to-DVD films (some featuring the same actress who played the mother in this) tend to glorify Chav culture, this feels like a condemning of it. These characters are stuck in go-nowhere lives, some of their own undoing. I believe the title refers to both a state of mind (the characters are trapped, much like fish in a tank) and the Academy ratio it was shot in. The claustrophobia of the narrow 1.37 format is much like the prospects of the characters growing dimmer and dimmer.

And despite being a UK production, accents and all, I think an American viewer could easily see this as being something close to them. There are people like this everywhere in the States. Also, I'm amazed Katie Jarvis hasn't gone on to do more stuff. I saw that she's been on EastEnders in recent years but with all of the acclaim she got for this one (as well as kind of resembling Emma Stone), you think she would have been in more movies in the past decade. Michael Fassbender did pretty well (though it could be said that he wasn't really acting) but I thought the same would happen for Jarvis.

Up next: Predator.

[Ron Burgundy]

Ok Boosh, you are on a rampage.

Give me some time, a week or two and ill start posting my daily movies.

Fish Tank is a good movie, seen it twice, Fassbender not acting though? Keen to elaborate there?

I love Groundhog Day too, prob in my top 20 of all time. That said, last week i watched my favorite Bill Murray movie-


The Man Who Knew Too Little

BIll Murray plays a tourist in England who on his own birthday, decides to surprise American businessman brother. Nice. But oh, gosh darn, the brother (Peter Gallagher-perfectly cast) has a big business dinner with some bigwigs from overseas. Murray ends up being ushered into the "Theatre of Life" which runs 3.5 long, just enough to get ol annoying merican murray outta the house, for then they get to spark up a couple of Cubans on the stroke of midnight and happy birthday.

Enter plot device no. 1. A Phone booth, its supposed to be calling for Bill Murray which initiates the Theatre of Life (you play an actor for a night, no lines, just go with it) HOWEVER- the phone which calls a touch early- is from some british secret spy agency. Murray ends up "playing" a secret agent (blissfully) in a world where you should be pissing your pants. Some russian rival agents get in the mix to spice things up, lead masterfully by Alfred Molina. Murray constantly bumbles about in just the right way to erupt chaos, and best of all, unwittingly- and then takes all the credit when things go illogically smooth.

For me, this movie is some of my fav type of humor. I laugh out loud in this often, for a movie gone under the radar for 20 odd years, i think its still under rated.

7.5/10

(for Bill Murray fans, go see it asap)

[Buscemi2]

There have been allegations that Fassbender beat one of his exes. Also, he has a thing for younger women (he and Zoe Kravitz dated for a while after making X-Men: First Class).

[numbersix]

More than allegations, he did beat his ex and they settled in court.

And he's married to Alicia vikander, whose 11 years younger than him. But hey, if they're happy who are we to judge? Oh yes, we're we.