|
M_Sinistrari posted:I hope something's worked out so the franchise can start living again. Sometimes dead is better.
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 19:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 14:43 |
|
|
The Skin I Live In & In My Skin double feature. Which order do I show them in?
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 19:24
|
|
|
Add Under the Skin and In My Skin
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 19:33
|
|
|
Also The Reflecting Skin and Lizard in a Woman's Skin.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 19:37
|
|
|
Also Mysterious Skin. Which at my local cinema was written up in their description as a science fiction movie, and kind of didn't mention the main plot of the film. That caused some walkouts.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 19:40
|
|
|
Kvlt! posted:Add Under the Skin and In My Skin So watch In My Skin twice?
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 20:04
|
|
|
IShallRiseAgain posted:I'd be fine with nothing more ever being done with the Friday the 13th franchise, except maybe video game stuff. These franchises from the 80s need to just die. It just leads to endless garbage sequels.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 20:07
|
|
|
Garbage sequels is what makes Friday the 13th wonderful
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 20:10
|
|
|
Megasabin posted:So watch In My Skin twice?
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 20:15
|
|
|
EL BROMANCE posted:Also Mysterious Skin. Which at my local cinema was written up in their description as a science fiction movie, and kind of didn't mention the main plot of the film. That caused some walkouts. so if you do the skin I live in and mysterious skin you have two really hosed up queerphobic movies, can we find ones hating on lesbians and bisexual people and go for the full package
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 20:20
|
|
|
The Senator Giroux posted:Garbage sequels is what makes Friday the 13th wonderful Yeah it was always a cynical cash in, that’s why it’s good.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 20:23
|
|
|
I haven't seen it in a while, but how is Mysterious Skin queerphobic?
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 20:25
|
|
|
King Vidiot posted:I haven't seen it in a while, but how is Mysterious Skin queerphobic? Eh, after looking into it more I was being a bit too hasty. Looks like it was actually written by a gay man, instead of just the common trope of "childhood rape makes you gay" often used to attack gay men. The Skin I Live in though, gently caress that jesus christ.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 20:28
|
|
|
are you realling out here calling movies X phobic when you havent even watched them lmao
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 20:31
|
|
|
I can see why someone would maybe think Mysterious Skin is a problem just based on synopsis alone, but yeah, the main character tells us that he was gay ever since he realized he had the hots for his moms boyfriends, well before he was molested.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 20:36
|
|
|
Kvlt! posted:are you realling out here calling movies X phobic when you havent even watched them lmao both movies match really, really horrifying stereotypes about queer people. I admitted I was having a kneejerk response to Mysterious Skin, but I know I'm right on the other.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 20:39
|
|
|
thats dumb as gently caress im not arguing about the specific movies but if you just read a plot summary and go X IS X PHOBIC you lose all the subtlety and nuance of a watching an actual film and will probably end up being wrong half the time (case in point: Mysterious Skin) sounds like you wanna be outraged more than you wanna watch movies
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 20:41
|
|
|
Kvlt! posted:thats dumb as gently caress im not arguing about the specific movies but if you just read a plot summary and go X IS X PHOBIC you lose all the subtlety and nuance of a watching an actual film and will probably end up being wrong half the time (case in point: Mysterious Skin) sounds like you have a bunch of privilege and don't want to engage with marginalized people being repeatedly hurt by bad creative works like the skin i live in's plot is one of the justifications my therapist used for performing conversion therapy on myself and other trans youth for decades, traumatizing me so you can gently caress off
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 20:44
|
|
|
Kvlt! posted:thats dumb as gently caress im not arguing about the specific movies but if you just read a plot summary and go X IS X PHOBIC you lose all the subtlety and nuance of a watching an actual film and will probably end up being wrong half the time (case in point: Mysterious Skin) Or maybe they just don't want to waste their precious time watching a bunch of bigoted films or encourage other people to watch films that reinforce bigoted ideas?
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 20:47
|
|
|
All this time I just assumed The Skin I Live In was a soft remake of Eyes Without a Face based on the poster.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 20:48
|
|
|
Drunkboxer posted:All this time I just assumed The Skin I Live In was a soft remake of Eyes Without a Face based on the poster. it is
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 20:48
|
|
|
Kvlt! posted:thats dumb as gently caress im not arguing about the specific movies but if you just read a plot summary and go X IS X PHOBIC you lose all the subtlety and nuance of a watching an actual film and will probably end up being wrong half the time (case in point: Mysterious Skin) Regardless of agreeing with the read on the film or not this is garbage mindset.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 20:49
|
|
|
I do think that taking a step back and taking more of an overview on a film is worthwhile, sometimes a few plot details aren't good enough to overtake a negative stereotype that's being presented by a film and that's probably also being absorbed by many in the audience. Cast in point, The Silence of the Lambs. It's been discussed many times about how Thomas Harris wrote Jame Gumb specifically to be someone who isn't actually trans, he just thinks he is because he hates himself so much. Well, is that really any better? In the end, does it change the fact that many many people came away from the movie with this image of Buffalo Bill as a crazed, violent transsexual?
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 20:51
|
|
|
Uncle Boogeyman posted:it is The brief plot description I just read really makes it seem way different, outside of the whole crazed surgeon angle. But then again I guess I haven’t seen it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 20:57
|
|
|
Drunkboxer posted:The brief plot description I just read really makes it seem way different, outside of the whole crazed surgeon angle. But then again I guess I haven’t seen it. The main difference is a huge spoiler that you can probably guess based on the context of this conversation.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 20:58
|
|
|
There is an argument to be made for actually experiencing the film before publicly lambasting it, though. Also one for making a distinction between films that actually are opposed to something, and those that which aren't, but do lead the people watching them to impressions which would result from the former. For example, I've known people who watched The Wall and thought that Pink and his hammer army were cool and desirable, when the film-makers' point with them is the exact opposite. See Fight Club for another popularly misconstrued instance. In both cases, basing assessment on a synopsis would likely miss the opposing intent.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 21:02
|
|
|
Drunkboxer posted:The brief plot description I just read really makes it seem way different, outside of the whole crazed surgeon angle. But then again I guess I haven’t seen it. Plot-wise yeah but it is 100% a tribute to/crypto-remake of that movie.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 21:03
|
|
|
Darthemed posted:There is an argument to be made for actually experiencing the film before publicly lambasting it, though. I absolutely agree that watching a film is important to criticizing it as an artistic work, but it's also worth balancing that against just how tiring it is to be a marginalized person and be continually poo poo on and not wanting to see this poo poo again just to call it out.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 21:07
|
|
|
I don't like the idea of having to tailor one's art according to the whims of the public, because the public is generally dumb as hell.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 21:09
|
|
|
What about to the whims of a madman? (I see your avatar and I think about speed)
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 21:09
|
|
|
its just dumb to come into a movie forum and lambast movies you havent even seen. like i poo poo on flanagan bc i earned it bc i sat thru his lovely movies.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 21:13
|
|
|
I believe this is different
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 21:16
|
|
|
Kvlt! posted:like i poo poo on flanagan bc i earned it bc i sat thru his lovely movies. same but for your posts
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 21:16
|
|
|
I'm kidding kvlt you're alright 
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 21:16
|
|
|
Darthemed posted:There is an argument to be made for actually experiencing the film before publicly lambasting it, though.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 21:17
|
|
|
Origami Dali posted:I don't like the idea of having to tailor one's art according to the whims of the public, because the public is generally dumb as hell. I think that's a false choice. Film is artifice, it's about putting images together to convey some sort of meaning to people who will see it. But the images don't have that meaning until you put them together in a specific way that you think conveys the meaning you want to convey. It's at the core of film as an art form, so why not consider things like marginalized people and how the audience might interpret your thoughts on those issues when they see the film? As a director you're doing that in a thousand different ways already, so to say that you're not going to consider how the audience will interpret the film in a social justice context is a cop-out in my opinion.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 21:17
|
|
|
one man's awful movie is another man's homoerotic horror friday night thrill session lookin at you NOES2
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 21:19
|
|
|
gey muckle mowser posted:same but for your posts shut up old man the future is now jk ull all prob outlive me
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 21:19
|
|
|
IShallRiseAgain posted:I'd be fine with nothing more ever being done with the Friday the 13th franchise, except maybe video game stuff. These franchises from the 80s need to just die. It just leads to endless garbage sequels. firstly: Miller winning would mean no video game stuff, either, and there's a reasonable chance that all the existing sequels would be found to be in violation and taken out of circulation. when i say he wants to kill the franchise, i'm not being figurative or hyperbolic. his active goal in this, from what I understand, is to remove Jason Voorhees from pop culture, because Jason Voorhees is a perversion of his ideas. secondly: F13 is probably the one franchise where you could just keep making endless sequels and have them not suck, because the base concept of "dude in hockey mask slaughters people" is pretty adaptable.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 21:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 14:43 |
|
|
STAC Goat posted:Sure, but at the same time if a film raises red flags to a prospective viewer its not the viewer's responsibility to watch it anyway just in case they got the wrong read. The OP deferred to the idea the film in question wasn't what they thought it was. Its not fair to accuse them of "just wanting to be offended" and that's a lovely toxic right wing mindset. Had someone who had actually experienced the work not stepped in to question the assumption, how many people (with little impetus to check Wikipedia, or who don't know Gregg Araki's background) would have come away from the exchange unfairly associating the title Mysterious Skin with homophobia?
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2019 21:35
|
|