It Follows

The Something Awful Forums > The Finer Arts > Cinema Discusso > It Follows

Uncle Boogeyman: Jul 22, 2007

morestuff posted:

The clamshell muddies up the timeframe and underlines how universal the themes of the movie are, no matter when you grew up.

movies go for the muddy time period thing a lot - especially horror movies, especially lately - but it feels like a long time since one did it as well as this.

i forget, does the clamshell ever exhibit any smartphone-ish abilities or is it only ever used as an e-reader? i'm pretty sure she uses it as a flashlight at one point, but that's all i can remember.

Uncle Boogeyman fucked around with this message at 23:44 on Aug 3, 2015

# ¿ Aug 3, 2015 23:41

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 25, 2024 09:49

Uncle Boogeyman: Jul 22, 2007

critically, there are adults though. the scene of Maika Monroe's mom discussing her date rape (i mean, that's basically what it is) with a friend is crucial.

# ¿ Aug 4, 2015 20:08

Uncle Boogeyman: Jul 22, 2007

Cole posted:

for some people who don't seem to have jobs they sure do have a lot of fuckin gas money to burn

don't we see at least two of them working at their jobs

# ¿ Aug 17, 2015 01:22

Uncle Boogeyman: Jul 22, 2007

Cole posted:

sorry, i forgot about the high rolling ice cream shop job.

...is this a real complaint? cause i assure you, many teenagers both work lovely food service jobs & drive cars

# ¿ Aug 17, 2015 01:28

Uncle Boogeyman: Jul 22, 2007

i dunno, i thought It Follows was pretty good, but I really had to suspend my disbelief for the central conceit of teenagers driving cars. i mean, *scoff*, where do they get the gas money?

# ¿ Aug 17, 2015 01:36

Uncle Boogeyman: Jul 22, 2007

i mean what i really wonder is, how does the lead character's mom afford their house? i mean, we never see her work. surely they should all be homeless.

# ¿ Aug 17, 2015 01:44

Uncle Boogeyman: Jul 22, 2007

wyoming posted:

Also the hands clapping scene in the Conjuring was way scarier than anything in It Follows.
The Conjuring owns.

i dug the Conjuring, but i thought that particular jump scare was telegraphed a bit too hard.

i'd rate the first appearance of The Very Tall Man in It Follows as scarier than anything in either of James Wan's good flicks

# ¿ Aug 26, 2015 19:55

Uncle Boogeyman: Jul 22, 2007

DeimosRising posted:

It's telegraphed, but that's Wan's schtick. I kind of think the hand-clap trailer is a better movie than The Conjuring itself.

if anything, i think the thing that sets The Conjuring and Insidious apart isn't that they're particularly scary - they're not, not to me anyway - but that they're written with such attention to character detail. very few horror movies have well-written, smart adult characters.

# ¿ Aug 27, 2015 00:15

Uncle Boogeyman: Jul 22, 2007

HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:

Totally agreed.

i'd almost go so far as to say that Patrick Wilson is that dude's muse

# ¿ Aug 27, 2015 00:20

Uncle Boogeyman: Jul 22, 2007

SuperMechagodzilla posted:

If Holmes hadn't explained that it was a dog covered in phosphorescent paint, would y'all be terrified of the phantom Hound?

you were about this close to using the word "sheeple" in this post weren't you

# ¿ Aug 29, 2015 15:56

Uncle Boogeyman: Jul 22, 2007

HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:

How do you all get so easily riled by the standard interpretation of "dream logic"?

i think it's more that SMG takes things that could be read as implied or subtextual and states them in the most blunt, literal way possible. and when anyone disagrees or even voices confusion, he immediately 180s into talking to them like they're a moron.

not to start an SMG derail tho

# ¿ Aug 29, 2015 18:27

Uncle Boogeyman: Jul 22, 2007

HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:

You also post like an abrasive dickhead, which is what blows my mind. There is nothing even remotely bizarre about that argument, none more so than talking about what would happen if you tried to duck the invisible shapechanger by flying on a plane to Switzerland and loving somebody in the dark in a hostel or whatever to see if that gets rid of it.

to be fair i also object to the idea that "we all know" Tina was murdered by her boyfriend because c'mon son that's just what Freddy wants you to think, closed-minded haters like you are why he got strangled to death in his cell #JusticeForRod

# ¿ Aug 29, 2015 18:37

Uncle Boogeyman: Jul 22, 2007

SuperMechagodzilla posted:

Remember that, when we see a sheet come to life and strangle Rod, and when we see his girlfriend stabbed to death on the ceiling, these events are not happening in 'the dream world'. But we also know full well that they aren't what actually happened. Rod killed his girlfriend accidentally, and then killed himself.

what, because he has a leather jacket & a switchblade? i'll bet if it were up to you the West Memphis Three would still be locked up, or those poor innocent kids from Blair Witch 2: Book of Shadows

# ¿ Aug 29, 2015 20:49

Uncle Boogeyman: Jul 22, 2007

SuperMechagodzilla posted:

No, you can tell It Follows is a bad movie because critics are like "wow, it's a truly great film! about STIs."

The film has nothing to do with STIs.

# ¿ Aug 30, 2015 01:12

Uncle Boogeyman: Jul 22, 2007

SuperMechagodzilla posted:

Outside the very rudimentary concept of sex being dangerous, there is nothing about disease in the film - textually, subtextually, or otherwise.

you're right, there's nothing textually, subtextually, or otherwise about the scene where Maika Monroe stands in front of the bathroom mirror and looks down the front of her underwear in horror after being date raped that could be construed as being about STIs. i mean, where do they get this stuff? clearly these film critics are overthinking things. it's not like the movie is literally about something that is transmitted sexually and then kills you or anything.

# ¿ Aug 30, 2015 01:27

Uncle Boogeyman: Jul 22, 2007

wyoming posted:

How do you get STDs out of a raped girl looking at her body in the mirror? And you know, not fear of sexuality.
The movie was about the trauma of rape, no one even mentioned a slight worry of STDs.

as good a job as you're doing at being SMG's echobox, i don't believe you're actually so obtuse as to not get how someone could interpret a movie about teenagers passing on a lethal virus sexually as having STIs on its mind.

# ¿ Aug 30, 2015 01:37

Uncle Boogeyman: Jul 22, 2007

SuperMechagodzilla posted:

The point of that scene is that there's nothing physically wrong with her. The hospital gave her a clean bill of health, and all that. There's little or nothing that contradicts her claim that no rape occurred, that she was simply kidnapped afterward.

Also, there's no disease that only affects one person at a time, that you can cure yourself of by passing on. (And if that were the case, we'd have a film where the protagonists go around deliberately infecting everyone with AIDS or whatever).

there's also no disease that causes a shape changing apparition to follow you down the street you jackass

# ¿ Aug 30, 2015 01:50

Uncle Boogeyman: Jul 22, 2007

"man i dunno what's with all these people saying Alien is about rape. i mean, when you rape someone in real life, an eyeless bug monster doesn't claw its way out of their chest. these film critics are really reaching."

# ¿ Aug 30, 2015 01:54

Uncle Boogeyman: Jul 22, 2007

wyoming posted:

I've been posting that's about rape long before SMG ever posted in here, but you know, feel free to poo poo post because you have nothing to say.
Or just go gently caress yourself.

The rapist tells Jay about the rules, he "passes" it to her because "it's easier for girls" How is that about STDs?
The only person we actually see die is Greg, and as SMG pointed out, at the point he was just dead to Jay for being a mother fucker.
There's also the fact, that for a teenager being found mutilated in his bedroom, it's kinda odd there's only a lone cop car there later. Or perhaps that was about the broken window?

The whole loving movie is about men being rapists, the one guy drugs and ties up a girl, the other two take advantage or coerce their friend. Hell, a boat full of three dudes gently caress a girl that's obviously in distress.
I mean, you could argue it's about STDs, because no one seems worry in the film, but that's pretty weak.
It's just about a rapist trying to make his victim feel guilty.

the question is, why can it not be about STIs just cause it's also about rape?

the movie's about sexual horror of all stripes. it's dripping with it. date rape, chloroform soaked rags, mother-on-son incest, father-on-daughter incest, too-nice "nice guy" friends, oceanfaring gangbangs, and yes, STIs.

# ¿ Aug 30, 2015 02:12

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 25, 2024 09:49

Uncle Boogeyman: Jul 22, 2007

SuperMechagodzilla posted:

Because there's no textual evidence to support that interpretation.

i'll concede we just have very different views of the film, but this seems entirely arbitrary to me.

# ¿ Aug 30, 2015 02:43

The Something Awful Forums > The Finer Arts > Cinema Discusso > It Follows