TrixRabbi posted:If Slumber Party Alien Abduction were it's own film, it'd have been one of the best of last year. Pure energy. I mean, on one hand "pure energy" is pretty accurate, but on the other hand it just wasn't well-developed enough for me, if that makes any sense. It felt too pared-down and simple. It would have been infinitely better with an extra 5 minutes to breathe.
|
|
#
¿
May 18, 2014 21:53
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 19, 2024 08:28 |
|
acephalousuniverse posted:Oh good, a guy from ABCs of Death is doing a short in this one. Since all the shorts in the first VHS are about crazy and/or evil women, and most of the shorts in ABCs of Death are about women making GBS threads, farting, or otherwise using the toilet, maybe his part will combine the two themes and we'll have a demon succubus pooping for 15 minutes in between tedious frame segments. I'm actually kind of curious if you watched ABCs of Death because there were exactly two shorts in it that were as you described, and one that had a toilet in it but wasn't really about bodily functions (other than being a pile of poo poo  ). And none of the above were by the guy who got tapped for VHS Viral.Looking it up, he actually made D is for Dogfight which was dope as gently caress so yeah I don't really see where your issue lies? e: That said, though, I've tried really hard to see the "good" gender politics in the original, and it still sounds like using Death of the Author to justify liking something that's  as gently caress. Yeah, the dudes do bad poo poo, but the shorts downplay the hell out of it and massively play up the evil-ness of the women; I suppose you could chalk that up to the point of view, but it's inarguable that the POV informs something's themes as much as everything else.I did like the movie, but seriously, holy poo poo people, you're allowed to like problematic things. You don't have to SMG it to justify not being morally outraged by it. SALT CURES HAM fucked around with this message at 20:45 on May 19, 2014 |
|
|
#
¿
May 19, 2014 20:31
|
|
acephalousuniverse posted:There's the farts one, the miscarriage one, and the living poo poo one. I guess the movie overall was so awful and mostly forgettable that recurring theme was the only thing that stuck out to me besides 9/11 boobs. That's... 3 out of 26. And the miscarriage one is only tangentially related to that theme (it's the one that I was referring to as a pile of poo poo). I honestly just feel really weird looking at ABCs of Death as a whole rather than just taking the shorts on their own individual terms, because not only do they vary wildly in quality (M is for Miscarriage sucks out loud, but D is for Dogfight is pretty much the best short film I've seen in quite a while and Y is for Youngbuck isn't far behind) but they also don't really have anything in common other than the general theme of death. SALT CURES HAM fucked around with this message at 22:23 on May 19, 2014 |
|
|
#
¿
May 19, 2014 22:21
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:I do think it "means something", I just you're bringing something different to it than I am, because I never get the impression she "turns into a dyke because he was mean to her". The casting of Joe Swanberg also prevents me from immediately identifying with the dude. I mean, the guy doesn't come off as a great guy, but the woman comes off waaaay worse because of how extreme the reaction to his comparatively mild actions is. It's really framed like we're supposed to sympathize with him, especially in the murder scene itself.
|
|
|
#
¿
May 19, 2014 23:59
|
|
Timeless Appeal posted:To me, what makes V/H/S feminist is that the violent women are not rooted in reality. The crazy lesbians, possessed girl, and succubus are not real things. A bunch of guys sexually assaulting a woman is. That's why the last shot of the film is the woman getting her top ripped off because it remains one of the most disturbing aspects of the film because it is real. It's not saying that men should be nice to women because they might turn out to be crazy killers or monsters. It's saying male fears of women--while making decent level surface horror--are ultimately irrational fears. Your wife probably isn't a bisexual serial killer and you're probably not going to be killed by a succubus. A bunch of dudes running up to and utterly humiliating you in a matter of seconds is a real fear for women. And that's incredibly hosed up. To make a movie in which women are terrifying to men, you have to be absurd and fantastical. To make a movie in which men are terrifying to women, you just have to reenact something that has happened numerous times today. "Beep boop, thing not real therefore thing cannot be used to otherize people" is a really dumb argument. If that were the case, Yellow Peril and the equivocation of gays with pedophiles wouldn't be harmful things, and WELP. I agree that the frame story is genuinely feminist, but the frame story is really crowded out by the shorts' gender politics, which (Sick Thing... aside) are unbelievably hosed up in this regard.
|
|
|
#
¿
May 20, 2014 00:58
|
|
Timeless Appeal posted:Listen, I'm willing to disagree on this, but I feel like you're really simplifying my argument. I'm saying that the made up stuff is feminist because of what it's being juxtaposed with. But yes, you're right that it still otherizes. I mean, I see your point (and in fact that's why I agreed that the frame story was legitimately feminist), but it's hard to forget that the shorts were all more-or-less made in a vacuum once you learn that tidbit.
|
|
|
#
¿
May 20, 2014 01:24
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:Maybe, but they aren't presented in a vacuum, they're presented together, and thus are generally going to be interpreted as such. The people who made them may not be feminist - they may be anti-feminist! - but the work they made may still be feminist as presented, depending on how you choose to interpret it. I get what you're saying, I'm just not entirely comfortable with looking at stuff like this from that point of view, because in every other context these films are looked at as a collection of shorts rather than as a cohesive whole. This argument really seems like a calculated effort to ignore or gloss over the lovely gender politics of the shorts themselves because none of us want to admit to liking something that promotes misogyny. Seriously, it's okay. You can like things that are problematic. Nobody will think less of you for it. Korak posted:I kind of hope this V/H/S has a short dealing with how toxic hook up culture can be. With the rise of Grindr and Tinder there's this whole generation of people that feel entitled to go from lover to lover as though its some sort of toy store for their personal enjoyment. I can't tell if this is a low-effort troll or if you're seriousposting, but either way eat poo poo
|
|
|
#
¿
May 20, 2014 22:35
|
|
|
Yeah I'm not really talking about you specifically when I say that, it's just an argument that's been thrown around regarding V/H/S pretty much since it came out.
|
|
|
#
¿
May 20, 2014 22:48
|
|
Magic Hate Ball posted:There's something to be said for seeing the protagonist in Tuesday the 17th gorily ripped apart. She looked for closure, she looked to beat the system, and was disassembled in full view, for the enjoyment of the audience. Punishment for knowledge. You know, even though I didn't really see Tuesday the 17th as having uniquely bad gender politics (other than that most of the characters' downfall is that they went along with what a woman said), this is actually super hosed up now that I'm thinking about it.
|
|
|
#
¿
May 21, 2014 05:38
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 19, 2024 08:28 |
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:It doesn't help that T17 is kinda poorly conveyed. According to the commentary, the evisceration transforms her into the (next?) supernatural killer. I realize this is basically what you're saying, but holy poo poo that makes absolutely no sense.  Like, I'm actually trying really hard to see it but I can't.
|
|
|
#
¿
May 21, 2014 10:32
|
|