It Follows

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

Sarchasm: Apr 14, 2002; So that explains why he did not answer. He had no mouth to answer with. There is nothing left of him but his ears.

Maarak posted:

Funny, I didn't notice a single so-called foot shot, but the way peoples hands were shot was captivating.

Thinking back on it I can remember a few shots of bare feet--Jay on the swing, Jay on the couch inching her toes closer to Paul, etc--but none of it ever seemed excessive. Like you, I was way more interested in the shots of hands and arms, but this might all be confirmation bias. I think the camera just tends to linger on Jay in odd ways. It's never lurid, but it likes to sneak peaks of her wherever it can.

# ¿ Mar 28, 2015 18:55

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 25, 2024 03:17

Sarchasm: Apr 14, 2002; So that explains why he did not answer. He had no mouth to answer with. There is nothing left of him but his ears.

HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:

It's not so much about there being inset shots of feet, the stuff with the hands is very intimate and very well done, textbook Sundance stuff. It's more about the way she is luxuriously posed whenever there are bare feet. It looks like an ad for a glossy magazine that some fetish burglar has taped up in his dark lair.

I'm pretty sure Maika Monroe is the kind of person who exists entirely in luxurious poses.

# ¿ Mar 28, 2015 19:39

Sarchasm: Apr 14, 2002; So that explains why he did not answer. He had no mouth to answer with. There is nothing left of him but his ears.

MisterBibs posted:

I don't think the quoted passage is necessarily disagreeing with you?

Not every post on the Internet is intended to be an argument. He was just elaborating on the reasons why It Follows isn't destined to be a box office smash.

# ¿ Mar 28, 2015 21:18

Sarchasm: Apr 14, 2002; So that explains why he did not answer. He had no mouth to answer with. There is nothing left of him but his ears.

j. alfred moonrock posted:

I think she did have sex with the boat guys. It's already been said, but what's the point of those scenes without that implication? Her crying in the car immediately afterward felt like an expression of shame for the act itself but also guilt for choosing those guys' fate for them. I also got the vibe that a decent chunk of time had passed between the boat and Paul's visit, since none of the girls (Jay or her sleeping friends) were manically "keeping watch"- as in, they knew it could show up eventually, just not necessarily in the immediate future.

I have to believe this is the correct read on this. As for why she wouldn't talk about it with Paul, why would you ever tell that story to anyone? "Yo by the way I got gangbanged on a boat and left those guys for dead. But I still have you as a backup lay, right?"

# ¿ Mar 29, 2015 01:16

Sarchasm: Apr 14, 2002; So that explains why he did not answer. He had no mouth to answer with. There is nothing left of him but his ears.

I am going to be the sole voice of dissent here and say that Teeth is an alright movie that people should watch.

# ¿ Mar 30, 2015 18:00

Sarchasm: Apr 14, 2002; So that explains why he did not answer. He had no mouth to answer with. There is nothing left of him but his ears.

Just to continue the discussion from the last page, It Follows took in about $4 million this weekend and placed number five at the box office overall. That's a long way from setting any records but is pretty goddamn amazing for an indie film with zero marketing.

No idea how the $4 mill take compares to VOD over a similar period, but I'm guessing the numbers are favorable because the movie is expanding into more markets this week.

# ¿ Mar 30, 2015 18:33

Sarchasm: Apr 14, 2002; So that explains why he did not answer. He had no mouth to answer with. There is nothing left of him but his ears.

wyoming posted:

You're literally the only person I've seen praise Oculus.

Oculus is not a bad movie. It's a solid effort, there's a lot going for it.

Full disclosure: I liked Teeth.

# ¿ Mar 31, 2015 20:28

Sarchasm: Apr 14, 2002; So that explains why he did not answer. He had no mouth to answer with. There is nothing left of him but his ears.

K. Waste posted:

All we see is a young man flirting with a young woman in a food court, in a context where she's with two other friends. I have no more reason to believe that this resulted in a successful hook up anymore than I do that Paul got it on with a mangy hooker. These scenes and images are illustrative of more than just the point of fact of whether or not the people involved actually do have sex.

Do you think it's a double standard to assume that the two male characters didn't hook up with random people but that Jay did? We're not given any more or less evidence about the respective situations, in fact they're all shot in basically the same way.

I think the movie has a lot to say about the trepidation people feel towards one another with regards to each other's perceived sexual history. The ambiguity in these scenes is intentional to bring that to the forefront.

# ¿ Apr 5, 2015 03:16

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 25, 2024 03:17

Sarchasm: Apr 14, 2002; So that explains why he did not answer. He had no mouth to answer with. There is nothing left of him but his ears.

IT BURNS posted:

So is this on VOD yet or what?

No, it's making way too much bank in theaters, VOD has been indefinitely postponed.

# ¿ Apr 5, 2015 17:06

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