. And I couldn't stop thinking about the likelihood that this was the first time a lot of them ever saw a queer character or queer love or HIV/AIDS depicted in a big movie like this.

???? -

a) it's not a "big" movie
b) loads of gay movies including many dealing with AIDS
c) gay characters and couples pretty much the norm even to teen movies and series like Riverdale. https://hornet.com/stories/queer-riverdale/

https://www.out.com/movies/2018/6/01/17 ... ry-media-2

Perks of Being a Wallflower .....there are lots ...it's to the point it's "not news".

Macdoc wrote:

. And I couldn't stop thinking about the likelihood that this was the first time a lot of them ever saw a queer character or queer love or HIV/AIDS depicted in a big movie like this.

???? -

a) it's not a "big" movie
b) loads of gay movies including many dealing with AIDS
c) gay characters and couples pretty much the norm even to teen movies and series like Riverdale. https://hornet.com/stories/queer-riverdale/

https://www.out.com/movies/2018/6/01/17 ... ry-media-2

Perks of Being a Wallflower .....there are lots ...it's to the point it's "not news".

Especially to the audience he's refering to.

yup

LucidFlight wrote:I saw Bohemian Rhapsody. It was pretty good, actually. Natalie Portman wasn't in it. However, Lucy Boynton was, and she did an excellent job of playing a female character.

Good grief! The guy who played John Deacon was the kid from Jurassic Park!

Well, a couple of things I would keep in mind. When compared to other notable LGBTQ films, it is a pretty big movie. That's why the author of the piece compares it to Moonlight and Call Me By Your Name. And that many other films and tv series feature a gay character is not quite the same thing, because they're not as often centred in the same way as they are here. Will and fellto are noting not just that this paints a bad picture of gay people and early gay culture, but also that it erases bisexuality. But those aren't just tropes of cinema. Those are the same ways of representing G and B people that bigots typically fall back on. I mean, they're literally the same stereotypes that get trotted out to justify hating us: gay culture is touted as toxic and diseased and bisexuality is erased in a hard dichotomy. If a movie treats LGBTQ people in the same way bigots do, then it's only fair to ask if it's also bigoted.

And to have queer people so marginalised back then was bad enough. But now to have a film that paints such marginalised people as almost uniformly awful next to a bunch of angelic straight people, well it also risks commenting on the actual history. And if it does that, it seems to say, "we were right to marginalise those people, because they were bad." That's some queerphobic stuff.

But me? I just don't plan to watch it. Ain't gettin' my money.

I kind of thought the stereotypical 80s gay tropes were part of the cheesy presentation of the film. It didn't affect my feelings towards the LGBQT community. Rather, it made me question the style and storytelling choices of the film makers. I do wish it was done less heavily, and I can understand the concerns of the LGBQT community about how this is a major film that - still, in 2018 – portrays them through a the trope-ish lens of 80s stereotypes.

In the end, I mostly remember the stuff about the band, the music, and the Live Aid concert. (Also, the cats... and Brian May.)

I was all ready to not see it until you mentioned cats. Who dun'in love cats?

I saw SOLO finally. It was ok, not great, not terrible. Yawnage. I also saw Fever Pitch finally. If I wasn't a Red Sox fan it would've sucked out loud, but it was tolerable because of that. Jimmy Fallon did the right thing going into tv instead. J/K

On to the Marvel Universe collection and was startled to see Stan Lee peering in the fridge in one of his cameos.

Hard to beleive it was 10 years since The Incredible Hulk.

Hehe Iron Man 2 ...global vision ....yeah right

For some reason Iron Man was not included in the collection so will watch that first.

You should have watched it before Hulk.

The_Piper wrote:I was all ready to not see it until you mentioned cats. Who dun'in love cats?

I saw SOLO finally. It was ok, not great, not terrible. Yawnage. I also saw Fever Pitch finally. If I wasn't a Red Sox fan it would've sucked out loud, but it was tolerable because of that. Jimmy Fallon did the right thing going into tv instead. J/K

So, Solo. It started off well enough. I even had myself believing that Alden Ehrenreich wasn't such a bad substitute for Harrison Ford. Even the speeder chase was somewhat enjoyable. I thought the attempts at humour were a bit lame, but not awful. We had that saucy little minx Emelia Clark playing Qi'ra, which was promising. I even stayed through the cringe-inducing, eye-roll moments of "Who are your people?", "I don’t have people. I’m alone.", "Han… Solo." But the straw that broke the bantha's back was Chewbacca supposedly being some pit monster. Oh, and, the bit when Han says Chewbacca is going to need a nickname. Ugh, ugh, ugh. Exposure, reveal, origin story pap. Pure pap. I fell asleep after that.

Willem Dafoe narrates this atmospheric docu ..excellent music, little narration...spectacular footage.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountain_(2017_film)

It's available in 4k but the footage is all over the place from 8 mm up. Would be terrific in an iMax environment...the opening sequence of a free solo climber on El Capitan is not for the faint of heart. It's on Netflix ...not sure of the feed but looks fine on the 4k screen ...serious mountain climbers are nutz
But I'm happy to watch.

The music quality os very good as he narrated to a live orchestra.. Piper I think you would enjoy this.

Doing their best to give me vertigo which is rare for me but lurking here in some sequences.

The Mountain was very enjoyable.

The Crew ...a dubbed French crime thriller ...what's surprising is the dub quality Netflix performed...so far flawless. So so reviews. Hehe they even dubbed the news cast on the car radio.

Depp was well cast for this and Redmayne is brilliant as are the dwellers in the suitcase ...some familiar some new.

Mixed reviews are understandable ...confusing at times not helped by my sleepiness but terrific impact on Imax

This is fair but may contain spoilers
https://www.cnet.com/news/fantastic-bea ... t-reviews/

And certainly there will be another.

The Ballad of Buster Scruggs. New Netflix movie from the Coen Brothers comprised of six shorts set in the wild West.

Highly entertaining.

If you like films that are visually stunning, and seem to be deliberately done in the style of a graphic novel, this is a must see.
The story itself is not very interesting, quite formulaic, this movie is all about the feel. What it does well it does very, very well.

I loved it, my wife walked away after 10 minutes or so.

Spinozasgalt wrote:

UncertainSloth wrote:hereditary has just arrived in the post - now to see what the fuss (on both sides) is about...

I'll be interested to hear what you two think. I watched it a couple of days ago myself and I haven't managed to form a hard opinion yet. I found it pretty interesting to look at and watch play out. Toni Collette gives it something remarkable. I've always enjoyed her work, but she floored me here. There are parts in the setup that hit similar notes to the original Halloween and I liked those. I don't know. This doesn't spoil anything concrete, but I'll hide it just so that it doesn't colour your reactions. It didn't play as horror in the usual sense for me. It was like metaphysical horror.

having just watched it, and really liking it, i can see what you mean....and toni colette is fucking awesome in it....also got that retro horror vibe we like, shades of rosemary's baby, don't look now etc...

and really not seeing what the fuss about the ending is...the only thing i thought may tickle some people was the body levitating up to the treehouse....but then, considering the clear influences, that wasn't wholly out of place....

but then i really, really like mother! so i'm probably wrong....

Interesting take on zombies. There's been an outbreak, but most have been "cured" of the virus. For about a quarter of the infected the cure doesn't work. The cured have been sort of reintegrated into society, but as 2nd class citizens.

Found this on accident:

Rock And Rule (1983)



Thought it was a Ralph Bakshi movie at first. Apparently made in Canada. Cool crazy character designs, lots of rotoscoping, dark and dingy looking. Dizzy looks like something out of a Dom Bluth film. Plot is ridiculous and fun. I enjoyed it!

UncertainSloth wrote:

Spinozasgalt wrote:

UncertainSloth wrote:hereditary has just arrived in the post - now to see what the fuss (on both sides) is about...

I'll be interested to hear what you two think. I watched it a couple of days ago myself and I haven't managed to form a hard opinion yet. I found it pretty interesting to look at and watch play out. Toni Collette gives it something remarkable. I've always enjoyed her work, but she floored me here. There are parts in the setup that hit similar notes to the original Halloween and I liked those. I don't know. This doesn't spoil anything concrete, but I'll hide it just so that it doesn't colour your reactions. It didn't play as horror in the usual sense for me. It was like metaphysical horror.

having just watched it, and really liking it, i can see what you mean....and toni colette is fucking awesome in it....also got that retro horror vibe we like, shades of rosemary's baby, don't look now etc...

and really not seeing what the fuss about the ending is...the only thing i thought may tickle some people was the body levitating up to the treehouse....but then, considering the clear influences, that wasn't wholly out of place....

but then i really, really like mother! so i'm probably wrong....

The more I think back on it, the more I like it. I think Collette's work is what made it work for me. She grounded it and brought it out of the typical acted mode that a lot of studio horror films suffer from. But she doesn't just seem to ground her character, she does it to the whole ensemble. Cos I mean, we're basically watching a family who are just doomed from the beginning, as they're gradually ripped out of their bodies and what they were is just destroyed. And then those bodies dance around for some obscene supernatural force and its followers who...win. I know I've seen horror do that kind of rough idea before, but I don't think the workings of it have ever been as effective as here. And I think it's because Collette turns it into an actual drama.

I guess the spoilered bit is also why a lot of the criticisms don't really land for me. I felt like the ridiculous coupled with the obscenity of it all is what that ending's all about.