|
Yea really it comes down to how much you want to consider impact and legacy. Because I think most people recognize that Frankenstein isn't perfect, it has amazing iconic moments but also flaws(Bride is a different story). Of course, "impact" or whatever term you want to use isn't just an academic thing, it's not just about being the first to do something. Pierces makeup and the performances of Karloff and Clive are still being discovered and enjoyed by people almost a full century after their creation and I think that's something that is just so so difficult to achieve. It's something that I think should definitely be recognized and reckoned with in a tournament like this.
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2020 15:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 20:23 |
|
|
Jedit posted:Everyone else is dubbed, in some cases from English to heavily accented English. I'm not sure where you're getting this impression from, perhaps because Oliver Reed and Mark Margolis chose to use accents? Debbie Does Dagon fucked around with this message at 16:00 on Aug 25, 2020 |
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2020 15:57
|
|
|
Putting aside the gross misogynistic attack, I just genuinely didn't enjoy P&P. I know Frankenstein is flawed and not what Bride is, but I still enjoy it quite a bit on its on and just really didn't care about P&P. I thought Henrickson's Torquemada was cartoonishly one dimensional, the story felt confused and thin, and Frances Bay felt she wandered in from a Mel Brooks film. But I got nothing to do today so I'm gonna try and do Half Human, Frankenstein, and I guess a Gordon rewatch. I watched it on a weird day where I was really out of it with sleep deprivation so maybe I didn't give it a fair go. I dunno.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2020 16:03
|
|
|
Basebf555 posted:Yea really it comes down to how much you want to consider impact and legacy. Because I think most people recognize that Frankenstein isn't perfect, it has amazing iconic moments but also flaws(Bride is a different story). You're definitely right. Every child knows the Karloff/Pierce Frankenstein design. It's ubiquitous to Halloween and monster movies. I can't name a Frankenstein design that has surpassed it, really. It's also hard to talk about Frankenstein and leave out Charles D. Hall's art direction and Herman Rosse's set decoration, but even that was improved by Bride. It's impossible to know because Craven's gone, but I wonder if this would have been applied to Freddy Kruger and David B. Miller. STAC Goat posted:Putting aside the gross misogynistic attack, I just genuinely didn't enjoy P&P. I know Frankenstein is flawed and not what Bride is, but I still enjoy it quite a bit on its on and just really didn't care about P&P. I thought Henrickson's Torquemada was cartoonishly one dimensional, the story felt confused and thin, and Frances Bay felt she wandered in from a Mel Brooks film. It's hard to deny the incredible watchability of Frankenstein. I used to throw it on when I wanted to draw stuff. Anytime a neat shot or close-up of a character came up, I'd pause it and draw it. It really fits any mood.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2020 16:13
|
|
|
Franchescanado posted:I'm just gonna say that I stopped reading as soon as you Then you just gave yourself a reason to never vote for Stuart Gordon here, because he certainly objectified Di Ricci and I object to that. I'm in agreement with you that reducing an actress to her body is a bad thing and that's a big part of why I think Gordon's Pit is a bad movie. If I wasn't adequately clear on that then that's my fault and I apologise.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2020 16:15
|
|
|
I'm terribly sorry Burk
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2020 17:29
|
|
|
STAC Goat posted:I just genuinely didn't enjoy P&P. I know Frankenstein is flawed and not what Bride is, but I still enjoy it quite a bit on its on and just really didn't care about P&P. I thought Henrickson's Torquemada was cartoonishly one dimensional, the story felt confused and thin, and Frances Bay felt she wandered in from a Mel Brooks film. I've found myself disagreeing with you much more often than not when it comes to tournament opinions, but I totally agree with you here. I sort of hated PnP, and it really coasts by only on the performance of some actors, plus the badass exploding witch bomb. It's easily the worst movie in this round (though I haven't seen Half Human or Body Double yet).
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2020 17:30
|
|
|
MacheteZombie posted:I'm terribly sorry Burk Nothing to be sorry about. Did I get people to watch Half Human who otherwise would never have in their entire lives? Then I have done my job.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2020 18:31
|
|
|
I even liked it!
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2020 18:47
|
|
|
I'm voting for Honda
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2020 19:13
|
|
|
As you may have gathered from my previous posts, I'm voting for The Pit and the Pendulum, and I suspect that I'm in the minority. With P&P, Stuart Gordon has crafted a loving tribute to Gothic horror, which is not only beautiful, but also terrifically performed by the entire cast, with startling practical effects, balancing extremely dark themes with light humour, and most importantly is a profoundly feminist film about reclaiming our bodies from patriarchical systems. So let's begin, won't we? At its core, Gordon's The Pit and the Pendulum is a romance about multiple converging and overlapping love triangles. We have the most obvious relationship between the young couple, Maria and Antonio. This relationship is complicated by the intervention of Lance Henrikson's Gothic horror staple, the mad monk Torquemada, who sees within Maria the spirit of the Virgin Mary and abuses his power as a member of inquisition to obtain her body. Lastly, and perhaps most easy to miss, is Henrikson's lover in puritanical zeal, Mendoza, played passionately by Mark Margolis. When we first see Mendoza and Torquemada together in private, Torquemada playfully penetrates Mendoza's fresh stigmata scar. Mendoza winces in both pain and pleasure, as Torquemada coos seductively. Later we see the couple in a metaphorical act of lovemaking, as Mendoza whips Torquemada into a state of ecstatic frenzy. Before the moment of climax, Torquemada sees a vision of Maria as the Virgin Mary. Suddenly the proceedings stop, and Mendoza is spurned. In the following scene, Mendoza attempts to exact revenge upon Maria, by advancing her torture beyond the bounds of the agreed schedule. In turn, this only acts to push Torquemada and Maria closer still. With Mendoza now spiraling out of control, he begins to see his struggle mirrored in the torment of Maria, and drawing from her strength is finally able to see Torquemada for the abusive, cruel lover that he is, freeing himself and Antonio in the process. What is Maria's strength, though? It would be easy to reduce her character to a doe-eyed innocent, or an excuse to push nudity into the film. Absolutely some filmmakers objectify women and reduce them merely to T&A, but that's not what's happening here. I don't want to become too sidetracked, but Maria's nudity is emblematic of the dehumanizing misogyny she experiences, and eventually overcomes. The Church sees her as nothing but a body to be abused, stripped, tortured, probed, and raped. The story of Maria, and the strength of Maria, is in her ability to maintain her sense of self throughout these multiple indignities, and to not allow herself to be reduced to the simplistic terms in which she is understood by the misogynistic church. Maria's mentor in this journey is Esmerelda, played by the ever wonderful Frances Bay. Maria and Esmerelda stand at opposite ends of the classic Triple Goddes, of Mother, Maiden, Crone. Maria is young and innocent, while Esmerelda is worldly but emotionally weathered by her experiences. It is within their synthesis that both discover strength from the other. There's a pivotal scene in which Esmerelda attempts to teach Maria to emotionally retreat from her pain whilst being assaulted, however Maria rejects this lesson, choosing instead to reconnect with her body, and in turn reclaim it from the ever grasping hands of the Inquisition. It is within this choice to not meekly surrender herself but instead to fight, despite the unfathomable pain, that sets off the chain of reactions which turn Mendoza against Torquemada, as he too stands up and reclaims control of his body from the probing fingers of the church. Maria's journey as a hero is atypical in that she does not embody some swashbuckling power fantasy. In fact, Gordon places those tropes in the hands of Antonio, and has his fail miserably on several occasions. Maria saves the day instead by maintaining her selfhood, navigating a world that is openly hostile to her, and inspiring empathy and solidarity in those around her. She's the kind of hero I'd love to see more often in film. All of this is without mentioning the beautiful sets and consuming. The visceral, inventive, and haunting gore. The incredibly deep cast of Lance Henriksen, Mark Margolis, Jeffrey Combs, Oliver Reed, Frances Bay, and Tom motherfucking Towles, who we last saw in the absolutely robbed Home Sick. It's just, for me, a perfect film, and an absolute joy to experience. On the other side of the round stands Frankenstein, which of course is a classic, but a flawed one. This would be a far different choice for me if Pit were standing against Bride of Frankenstein. Frankenstein on the other hand doesn't quite hit those same high notes, it doesn't have the same emotional depth, it isn't as engaging, and while you could say it has the greater influence, that's not something I personally trouble myself with. Influence says a lot more, for me at least, about where the status quo of horror is and has been. I'd much rather be off in the weeds with the other weirdos.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2020 20:56
|
|
|
Excellent write-up 3D; you've illustrated many themes and ideas that I noticed. To piggyback a little, and add more to Maria's profile: Maria is optimism incarnate. She is, ironic to being declared a witch, a Christ figure in many ways. Her arc mirrors that of Jesus. She comes from a humble background. She is a humble baker of bread loaves with her husband. Bread is a huge symbol for Jesus in the Bible; the loaf of bread as an act of charity, which Jesus miraculously multiplied to feed the starving masses; the loaf of bread as a show of faith, the Body of Christ used for communion. She spreads charity and is the creator of Faith, in that she can provide the Body of Christ for the masses. She is devout to her God, not to the Church. Her acts of defiance, which has her accused of witchcraft (which has been, and still is, a cultural symbol for the suppression of women's rights and control of women's body), is to defend the falsely accused, to ask for mercy for them. Her act of interrupting the display of torture is similar to Jesus's rage at attacking the Temple for becoming a den of thieves. She is pure. Her examination reveals no discernible marks that would provide proof of her being a witch. Not only is she physically perfect, Antonio becomes emotional in his defense about Maria's innocence. Her faith, her love for her fellow person, her kindness brings him to desperate tears. She cannot be touched. Torquemada, when given the opportunity to rape Maria, is rendered impotent. Other suggestions of assault are halted, and weirdly respected by the lecherous guards. The only time she is sexual, is from her own agency, out of love, towards her husband. She even loses her fear at being objectified by the guards in her examination, because her faith is so strong, her fear is instead strengthened towards outrage. Esmaralda even shows her that she has the ability to escape suffering, and as 3D mentioned, she chooses instead to suffer. (Much like Jesus could have escaped suffering from his execution with a miracle, but instead chose to accept the suffering as a sign of faith, and to remove the suffering from others.) She forgives the unforgiveable. Even after all of her suffering, when Antonio has his blade to Torquemada's neck, she tries to accept his lies as the truth. She tries, against better judgement, to offer forgiveness and understanding in the wake of his horrific evil. She even tries to suppress her hatred of Torquemada, and pities him (while, to be fair, trying to protect Antonio from death). She gives her love to the mistreated and disenfranchised. Her fear of witches is subsided within minutes of meeting Esmaralda, and turns towards love and trust. Her faith is unwavering. Even after the events of the film which should destroy her faith, it is her faith that ultimately rescues her and Antonio. And, of course, she rises from the dead after an unfair execution. This arc is fascinating, because it gives the whole film an optimism and respect towards True Faith. It could be so easy, maybe even obvious, to make the film anti-religion all the way down. And I'm not a religious person, but I have a respect and fascination with the story of Jesus (and how the Bible is used in literature, film, music, etc.). So I appreciate that it not only leaves room for the faith of the individual, that's actually the thing that saves the day. Franchescanado fucked around with this message at 21:34 on Aug 25, 2020 |
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2020 21:28
|
|
|
I really didn't see much of what you folks are saying, but you've put so much effort into it and I respect your opinions enough that you make me want to give it another try. Because i was sleep deprived when I watched it and maybe I just couldn't engage properly. Problem is I'm sleep deprived today too. I'm gonna try and nap and watch this and Half Human (and ideally Frankenstein) sometime in the next day and a half. I owe it to you folks and your tremendous efforts, if not Gordon and Honda.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2020 21:32
|
|
|
Takashi Mike's Imprint is just too much. I loved the special effects and brains et al but the spousal/child abuse stuff creeped me the gently caress out and not in a good way.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2020 01:26
|
|
|
Yeah, I always feel like Miike goes beyond what's "necessary" for the piece and just crosses that line where he's overtly trying to shock you. Its the film watching equivalent of adding more and more hot sauce to your food to see when you blink.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2020 01:47
|
|
|
STAC Goat posted:Yeah, I always feel like Miike goes beyond what's "necessary" for the piece and just crosses that line where he's overtly trying to shock you. Its the film watching equivalent of adding more and more hot sauce to your food to see when you blink. Who is to say what is necessary for his pieces? I don’t doubt that Miike’s extreme style rubs many people the wrong way (and I don’t blame anyone for avoiding his films for that reason) but I don’t think it’s done just for shock value, the brutality is always a central part of his storytelling. The causal way he will push the audience into an uncomfortable place is very deliberate. He constantly plays with the line between humor and horror and I think he knows exactly what he is doing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2020 01:59
|
|
|
I definitely didn't mean to undermine him. I agree he does it with purpose. I just always end up feeling he pushed it that extra step further. But maybe that's just me and my prudish sensibilities than some.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2020 02:10
|
|
|
I'm extremely happy that I streamed Body Double. Now there is a written record of my hating this piece of poo poo for a solid 105 minutes, and then suddenly loving it, with only a few scant seconds to spare before the credits rolled. I hope Dawn of the Dead stomps it into a sardine shaped hole, but I'm very glad that I wasted my time with it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2020 03:10
|
|
|
Debbie Does Dagon posted:I'm extremely happy that I streamed Body Double. Now there is a written record of my hating this piece of poo poo for a solid 105 minutes, and then suddenly loving it, with only a few scant seconds to spare before the credits rolled. I hope Dawn of the Dead stomps it into a sardine shaped hole, but I'm very glad that I wasted my time with it. Brian DePalma is a fascinating creator who has the best Phantom of the Opera under his belt and then a lifetime of loving with people
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2020 03:24
|
|
|
Yeah would have been real interesting to see how this round would have gone if DePalma drew Phantom.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2020 04:51
|
|
|
WeaponX posted:Who is to say what is necessary for his pieces? I don’t doubt that Miike’s extreme style rubs many people the wrong way (and I don’t blame anyone for avoiding his films for that reason) but I don’t think it’s done just for shock value, the brutality is always a central part of his storytelling. The causal way he will push the audience into an uncomfortable place is very deliberate. He constantly plays with the line between humor and horror and I think he knows exactly what he is doing. Maybe it was the shorter runtime and framing device that dragged it down for me. As is it feels like the ratio of torture porn to story/character development is listing rather badly to one side and from that it just feels like a whole lot of women hating and misogyny. A really good ending might have changed my feelings but alas.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2020 17:33
|
|
|
I'll be voting for Miike. First, I highly value his creative visual style, and it's beautifully put on display here. Second, I love splatter movies, I love abortion demons, I love evil conjoined twins, I love that Rashomon thing of showing the same story from multiple perspectives. Also, for once, the hosed up poo poo felt earned within the universe and wasn't just tacked on, given the hell theme. All that said, I'm expecting Castle to win. Deathdream is interesting, but is a bit baggy. Tingler on the other hand is just a wonderful crowd pleaser, only slightly muddied by Castle's "interesting" perspective on female psychology.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2020 18:20
|
|
|
Debbie Does Dagon posted:I'll be voting for Miike. First, I highly value his creative visual style, and it's beautifully put on display here. Second, I love splatter movies, I love abortion demons, I love evil conjoined twins, I love that Rashomon thing of showing the same story from multiple perspectives. Also, for once, the hosed up poo poo felt earned within the universe and wasn't just tacked on, given the hell theme. The more I think on it the more I'm convinced Miike was constrained by the limits of making a one hour TV episode aimed at American audiences. Imprints without a wraparound, extra time for the female characters to be in the story and be involved in active action would have caught me up in it. I really, really liked Over Your Dead Body and it has time and space to really breathe and become a psychological thriller I was an active watcher in. We didn't have that for Imprints outside of poor Billy Drago (RIP)'s awful character. I'm voting Deathdream as it hits a really unique sweet spot between Targets and The Deer Hunter, with a neat criticism of suburbia that would be perfected by later films (Blue Velvet jumps to mind for me).
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2020 18:49
|
|
|
I wish Billy Drago was in more horror films. He had such a unique screen presence.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2020 19:53
|
|
|
Body Double definitely gave Dawn of the Dead a run for its money.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2020 20:09
|
|
|
STAC Goat posted:I definitely didn't mean to undermine him. I agree he does it with purpose. I just always end up feeling he pushed it that extra step further. But maybe that's just me and my prudish sensibilities than some. At times it does feel like he goes that extra when he doesn't have to. I'm brainfarting on which film of his it was, but he'd well established how bad the bad guys were with torture and worse, but then there had to be the scene of a woman getting her nipples razorbladed off. It felt more like just in case someone blinked during all the other horrific stuff the bad guys had done so far, better toss in this to ensure everyone knows these bad guys are the worst. It's that sort of stuff that's pushed me away from watching the extreme stuff. I guess I'm at that stage in life where going the hardcore grue's just not going to cut it. Give me more like good atmosphere, good tension, good story, solid acting and now we're talking.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2020 20:28
|
|
|
Dawn of the Dead was one of those movies I'd never gotten around to seeing, but given all the praise it gets I was excited to finally watch it. I'm sad to say it was really kind of a disappointment. It's not so much that it was overhyped but that I think the flaws tend to not get mentioned. It rightfully can be praised for a lot of iconic imagery, and it certainly defined the zombie apocalypse (more so than Night) but the first hour or so really drags. The satire is okay but not particularly biting (even put in the context of its time). Also, the characters are so ill-defined and inconsistent that it's hard to stay with it. They aren't even acting on instinct, they're just performing actions consistent with what the plot demands (usually so there can be another great zombie attack sequence). I know there is the longer cut that supposedly adds more depth, but stretching it out is not what the film needs. If I didn't dislike de Palma so much I might not give it my vote, but there are enough fantastic moments in Dawn that I can feel okay with it. I just think there's quite a bit of dross there as well.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2020 22:32
|
|
|
Round one was full of blowouts and predictable races. Round two definitely has some tougher and more controversial matchups and I really like how it's playing out. Feels like Bob Clark is getting left behind in this three-way battle. I'm going Castle but it's interesting -- I almost expected Castle to be the weak man here but it seems he stands a real chance at beating Miike, who would be the third #1 seed to fall (calling into question how much seeding actually makes a difference in this particular tournament).
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2020 22:35
|
|
|
I've been threatening a Dawn effort post since the last thread, and I know if I attempt it it will turn into a scene-by-scene breakdown because Dawn is not only Romero's best film, it's one of the greatest films ever made. Even the 147-minute German cut doesn't have an ounce of fat on it, and if it weren't for the soundtrack, that would be my preferred version. As such, I recommend everyone watch the 127 minute 4k version I posted earlier in the thread. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XYKmM2OimaY Dawn has pathos, it has emotions, it character growth, it has quiet, reflective moments, it has busy moments of extreme action, it has gore, it has illness, it has meditations on politics, it has meditations on the role of science, it does everything Night does and tops it, it shows that all cops are bastards, it has an incredibly strong female lead, it has an incredibly strong black lead in KEN motherfucking FOREE... If Dawn were against my mother, I would have to apologise to my mother and vote for Dawn.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2020 22:58
|
|
|
I've always been kind of "Eh Dawn's ok but overrated" and I thought that would be my opinion here and DePalma would have a chance (until I hated Body Double). But like when I started writing my Letterboxd review for Dawn I just kept writing and writing. I just think its a very deep and nuanced film. Its odd. There's not a focused story and so much of what it did has been repeated ad nauseum by The Walking Dead and zombie stuff in general. But I think Dawn still works because its got depth.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2020 23:05
|
|
|
I love that you focused on Flyboy's "woo-ie!" I'm not sure about that line in particular, but there was a lot of adlibbing, especially between Roger and Ken Foree's Peter. The whole "too tall, too slow" exchange during the truck scene was based on conversations the actors had been having offscreen. It's one thing that I love about the film, it just oozes with personality. e: Lots of great analysis vvvv vvvv Debbie Does Dagon fucked around with this message at 00:10 on Aug 27, 2020 |
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2020 23:25
|
|
|
Dawn has a strange power to it. It's probably the weakest of the trilogy but it's the most mystifying, the one people always come back to and with the most iconic imagery. It's not just that it hits all the right notes in its political commentary and on the nose satire of consumerism -- it's the humanism that underlies it. There's so much empathy and sadness in the way the dead are portrayed, the brief, mid-film scene where the female lead looks at one of the zombies through the glass of a shop is heart wrenching. This is a movie that so deeply reaches from its heart to portray the most grotesque horrors. There's no glee in it whatsoever.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2020 23:28
|
|
|
Debbie Does Dagon posted:I love that you focused on Flyboy's "woo-ie!" I'm not sure about that line in particular, but there was a lot of adlibbing, especially between Roger and Ken Foree's Peter. The whole "too tall, too slow" exchange during the truck scene was based on conversations the actors had been having offscreen. It's one thing that I love about the film, it just oozes with personality. Yeah, I just love that line for some reason. To me it just personifies Flyboy's character as this dork desperately trying to prove himself "as a man" next to these two alpha male cops and a pregnant girlfriend. There's just a lot of great unspoken character between those four. How Roger and Peter don't know each other at all but they click with the same kind of reckless "lets go do it" instinct but over time its clear Roger is more reckless and losing it and Peter's holding it all together better. How Fran starts off very fragile and helpless but she gradually picks herself up and toughens up to be the true survivor of the bunch. Peter's end film crisis of what he wants to do or if he can keep going on and Fran's deep unspoken sadness about it. There's just a ton of detail and love put into the film and that's why I think it works and has so much of a following even though the story isn't really great and everything doesn't age awesome. I think its one of those films that on first watch you get kind of disappointed because of those flaws and the hype but the more you watch it the more you just kind of get it as you notice more and more depth.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2020 23:47
|
|
|
TrixRabbi posted:Dawn has a strange power to it. It's probably the weakest of the trilogy but it's the most mystifying, the one people always come back to and with the most iconic imagery. It's not just that it hits all the right notes in its political commentary and on the nose satire of consumerism -- it's the humanism that underlies it. There's so much empathy and sadness in the way the dead are portrayed, the brief, mid-film scene where the female lead looks at one of the zombies through the glass of a shop is heart wrenching. This is a movie that so deeply reaches from its heart to portray the most grotesque horrors. There's no glee in it whatsoever. That's a good assessment, but it's not an argument for Dawn being the weakest of the trilogy. Day lacks the very heart that you're lauding Dawn for possessing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2020 00:11
|
|
|
Day is actually the one I'm most "meh" on. Its mostly about gore and that depth is kind of lacking. Its great at the visuals and all that stuff, but that impacts and entertains me much less than Dawn's slow, meandering humanity.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2020 00:15
|
|
|
Day is probably the most cartoonish of the three, but it's oddly also the most serious. It's where Romero actually spends time digging into his own thoughts as to what the crisis is, and what the solution might be. Terry Alexander's John is possibly the most important character in the entire trilogy because he acts as that mouthpiece, and delivers the only happy ending in the entire franchise.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2020 00:36
|
|
|
Also Bub carries that movie on his shoulders
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2020 00:39
|
|
|
Its weird because I actually think of Day as the least hopeful of the films. Like in Night and Dawn people are at least tryng to fight and survive. I think that's where so much of that humanity comes from. You're on the ride with them as they struggle and do their best. Even if it ends badly. But Day is just everyone kind of giving up so even though it has a "happy ending" its just people saying "gently caress it." That kinda bugs me. But I guess that's a philosophical thing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2020 00:42
|
|
|
Dawn is my favorite of the trilogy. I'm due for a rewatch, so I don't have much to say about it right now.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2020 00:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 20:23 |
|
|
STAC Goat posted:Its weird because I actually think of Day as the least hopeful of the films. Like in Night and Dawn people are at least tryng to fight and survive. I think that's where so much of that humanity comes from. You're on the ride with them as they struggle and do their best. Even if it ends badly. But Day is just everyone kind of giving up so even though it has a "happy ending" its just people saying "gently caress it." That kinda bugs me. The question is of what they're giving up. The whole film is about this unstable marriage between an infinitely destructive military-industrial complex, and the scientific institutions which blindly improve its killing capacity. Then Romero goes beyond that and shows the bowels of this institution, which mindless catalogues and consumes all, growing exponentially with no reason or greater plan. The rejection of all that is the quiet revolution of an intersectional underclass uniting race, gender, and nationality. It's like Romeros version of The Conquest of Bread.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2020 00:55
|
|