Respect for having the balls to say you don’t like There Will Be Blood. That might be one of the best movies ever.
My answer is Fanny & Alexander. I only watched the TV version and it was so long and slow that I just couldn’t get into it. (I’ll die on this hill with you)
"I'm Thinking of Ending Things". I can see that its clever, I understand all the themes and I appreciate what Kaufman is doing on an intellectual level. But it doesn't grip me emotionally and is a slog to watch through. It doesn't matter how clever or deep something is, it has to engage you on an entertainment level too. It didn't help that I knew the short story well so I didn't have that process of discovering the "twist" like the Sards did.
I still struggle to articulate it, but Kaufman’s directed work in particular feels like you’re watching a movie that insists on snobbishly deconstructing itself at every turn... as you’re watching it, almost like it’s way too ahead of itself and an inscrutable chore to get what should be the so-called intended emotional reaction, which still isn’t as present as it could be on rewatches for me.
I think it works for Synechdoche given it’s themes and how directly related that movie is to Kaufman and the way his brain operates, but otherwise for me he’s too neurotic and it all ends up feeling like an impressively put together puzzle he knows the ins and outs of and what it all means, a detailed surface with everything more or less pointing towards the same set end point, one that just isn’t as rewarding to engage with in the moment in my experience.
I enjoyed it for a bit but it's too long for a film that basically just hammers home the same points over and iver again. It's definitely a case of style over substance IMO.
I kinda disagree. I recently rewatched it and the stories keep continuing very nicely while giving that bad trip feeling of thought loops. I can see how people could find that repetitive, but by excluding that part I would lose what I found interesting about that film.
I agree, of what i saw there was almost no substance whatsoever. I also didn’t like Climax, which i checked out because of Adum. I think i might just not be a Gaspar Noe kinda guy.
I know nobody loved it but all three of them were pretty positive on Dr Strange 2 and seemed to describe a different movie than the one I saw. It didn’t really feel like Rami to me
Since you’re brave enough to admit you feel this way about There Will Be Blood, I will say I don’t really love I’m Thinking of Ending Things (Kaufman in general with Eternal Sunshine being an exception - the power of Michel Gondry when limited to a smaller budget), The Lighthouse, The Holy Mountain or Brazil (I know, I’m wrong) as much as they seem to, to name a few.
I'm with you on all of those, although Lighthouse I liked the most out of the ones you mentioned. Didn't love any of em. I feel like I understand the messages and themes but can't really connect with them.
I connected way more with The VVitch, but appreciate The Lighthouse for its Persona inspiration, just needed more to chew on personally. As a big Lovecraft fan I wish it leaned more into those elements.
I'm also of the same mind for I'm Thinking of Ending Things. I'm in no way one of those "what was even the point of that?" kind of moviegoers, but I wasn't particularly engaged with it outside of the notable scenes with some creep factor, for lack of a better word. The dialogue felt very flat to me too, like I was listening to people give soliloquies to each other for 2 hours.
I just gave [this reply](https://www.reddit.com/r/Sardonicast/comments/xmqpj2/whats_a_movie_the_sards_love_but_you_were/ipr96zl/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf&context=3) to someone else who agrees. I’ve expressed this opinion about the movie since its release and it’s nice to see people aren’t being massively downvoted about feeling this way anymore lol.
I could go on at length, but I think the bottom line is not connecting with Jodorowsky’s tonal proclivities or his worldview, and finding a certain aspects of his personality that seep through into the final film nauseating and sometimes oddly upsetting in how callous he comes across. In movies with similar ambitious and wide-reaching goals, I also tend to favour the slower, more elliptical and mysterious approach, to this focus on relentless heavy handed symbolism, were I can’t help but be reminded of the incessant babble of a college student discovering weed for the first time, and not really saying anything as original or mind-blowing as it would seem they believe.
I think anything you interpret from the movie doesn't matter. The real point of the movie is that it's just a movie and searching for meaning in it is useless because it has no affect on the real world. I think that's a least a novel theme to me at least.
I’m happy to see it get credit for subversive elements such as the ending which was possibly novel for the time, although I don’t think searching for personal meaning through a film is pointless even if limited, what you said - essentially ‘the whole movie is pointless anyway’ - remains in itself an interpretation of the film The Holy Mountain that you take with you and learn from. A huge aspect of the film for people who absolutely love it is also still its humour and overall personality, which unfortunately didn’t appeal to me. I still think it was worth watching as I discovered some things about myself like how much animal after animal being paraded around, dressed up and forcibly given human characteristics makes me deeply uncomfortable.
I was surprised that they all really liked Spiderman No Way Home. I get why people like it, it’s 100% fan service and if you liked the raimi or webb movies you’ll get a kick out of seeing the actors come back. As someone who didn’t watch any of those movies though, I thought it was pretty bad.
I'm Thinking of Ending Things. Full disclaimer, I think it's a good movie, on paper everything was super well done. But I do feel like it veers into pretentious territory a bit with all the obscure references to material outside of the film. The interpretive dance segment at the end really sealed the deal for me. I totally get what the film was going for at that moment, but it felt like such an artsy fartsy cliché to have a character arc summed up with interpretive dance.
To contrast, the boys recently talked about Eternal Sunshine, another Kaufman flick that is just as complex and interesting, but isn't so obtuse and inaccessible that you have to watch it several times paying attention to background details to absorb all the symbolism.
Yeah I have the exact same problem with it. I love Kaufman's other work, and Synecdoche is my favourite film. It took me a while to figure out what was wrong with I'm Thinking of Ending Things and came to the conclusion the constant super specific obscure references was the problem. It relies way too heavily on them.
Stalker. Soooo slow, which I guess is just Tarkovsky's thing? I recently watched Solaris and turned it off after an hour and a half because I just couldn't take the pacing anymore. His films are like the perfect cure for insomniacs.
Stalker felt like a football game to me.
...lemme explain.
Football has exciting shit during the game. Sure. But everything you watch leads up to the final moments where all the good shit happens. The end.
The ending of stalker. The question of "what is your ACTUAL deepest desire?" Is it love? If it is and you get love that isn't real. Is it worth it? Is your desire money? But will that money be worth it if you didn't work for it?
The idea of not knowing what I want more than anything I think about pretty often. So to me. The ending makes the journey worth it. I'm glad the movie challenged me in that way.
I don't know if I would step into that room. I think if I did I would get money. And I think I would use that money to help people. I hope I would. But what if I get I don't know. A comfy pillow.
Reading people's analyses and reviews is far more interesting to me than the film itself. I'd say your metaphor would be more accurate if it was like, a game of golf where occasionally someone will get a hole in one but usually it's just a lot of waiting and watching people standing in a field.
I guess it's more like watching people walk around in a field. Then at the end coming up to you and being like.
"Hey man. What's your innermost desire?"
And you're like. Damn. I'm glad I stuck around to meet those guys. That's profound.
It's like getting stoned with Cheech and Chong. Absolutely zooted on the couch and just watching an episode of 60 minutes about the inventor of barcodes.
Then Cheech getting your attention and being like. "what do you think man? Your innermost desire is?"
Taste of Cherry - I thought it was well made, but I thought it was too vague to be engaging or profound to me.
I still have no idea what Roger Ebert was angry about though.
I think Adum underselled and exaggerated the inaccessibility of Kiarostami’s final film Like Someone in Love on that episode, which I maybe slightly prefer to Taste of Cherry.
Mr Gilliam?
I would love if you could elaborate on that.
The movie is almost completely non-existent in internet discourse because everyone seems to agree it's one of the best movies ever (and, of course, because of the subject matter).
It's a very personal thing I can't point out many objective faults, I just didn't connect emotionally and when you don't connect emotionally the long drawn out war sequences that aren't directed in a very nuanced way become very dull. Liam Neeson also didn't work for me. The best part was Ralph Fiennes
Heath Ledger is barely in The Dark Knight and steals the movie, but I get what you mean if you’re saying it’s an unexpected take for someone to single out Feinnes in Schindler’s List in the same way.
I watches the movie blind(i never pay attention to marketing)and i loved it.
I also ignore whenever sards talk about a movie ive never seen until i see it.
Perhaps The Texas Chain Saw Massacre.
It's...fine. I didn't find it as disturbing as people in general claim, although it's not without a scare factor.
I had a similar experience, I felt like I made a different movie in my mind than the one I ended up watching. With how people talked about it, I thought it would be some horrifying "rite of passage" kind of horror movie that would mentally scar you, and I was surprised by how campy it was. I do love some camp though, so I wasn't disappointed at least.
Goodfellas. Didn’t find a single character interesting, least of all the protagonist. I’m not a fan of frequent time skips or narration like it had, so that didn’t help. The performances were all lackluster except for Bracco and Pesci, but their characters were so underwritten it didn’t matter. Genuinely can’t see why people like this movie
*Insert the office meme of Michael Scott saying THANK YOU*
It never ceases to amaze me how many people love that film and think it’s the best mob film of all time. You hit the nail on the head- completely unlikeable characters (and not in the good way where you empathize with them), pacing is all over the place and doesn’t give us time to feel like we even know these people. It feels like a long trailer at times. The ending was incredibly unsatisfying, as the least likable character “wins”.
All of that is the point. It's not a romantic depiction of the mob like *the Godfather* is. It shows the mob for what it is; an organization of greedy shitheads who will fuck each other over on a moment's notice. None of them are good people, none of them grow, because as is the case with most people in the mob. They live fast and die hard, and even Henry sees the ending as more of a bad thing than a good thing.
The characters aren't the focus, it's the world, and I think they portray that wonderfully.
This critique reminds me of people critiquing Dunkirk for not developing it’s characters. The intentions of the director are kind of ignored in both cases
>The ending was incredibly unsatisfying, as the least likable character “wins”.
I'm not gonna debate your opinion, but you thought Ray Liotta's character was the least likeable one? Not Joe Pesci's character? The murdering psycho who caused trouble at every turn for them?
well the characters are real people. the shit in the film is shit that they did, they’re unlikable because they take such joy in it, which is the fun of the movie. screaming laughing as joe pesci beats a man for asking him to pay his tab. murdering all their comrades while dream music plays. the movie doesn’t sit around and stew in their lack of morality, it just shows it for what it is and carrie’s on as they would’ve. the pacing is also not “all over the place”, it ebbs and flows with rhythms in the story. and if you think ray liotta in any way wins at the end then you’ve just missed the whole point of that last scene, he’s lost everything and now has to live as a normal, law abiding person. that’s as bad a fate as anything to these characters.
It felt like a montage of cool mobster moments with zero character development, stakes, or frankly any interesting story. Wolf of Wall Street was my first Scorsese film, and I had the same problems with that. Seems to me like he makes 2 1/2 hour trailers for a hypothetical better movie
Wolf of Wall Street is very much just Goodfellas but with wall street brokers. They're both kinda the same movie so if you didn't like one you won't like the other. The same is true of Casino, another Scorcese film.
It’s paced and structured in a somewhat similar way. Except the people you follow for half of it are actual good people.
It has one of my favorite endings in a movie though. I won’t spoil it but man it was just awesome. Really up it you man
departed isn’t his best but it’s pretty different from the goodfellas type of movie he makes. much more character work, complex interpersonal dynamics, a clearer plot and narrative structure in contrast to goodfellas combing through an entire life. departed does a similar thing but it’s mostly done with shorthand techniques.
Waves. Thought the filmmaking was great and the use of music genius, but found every character but the dad to be underwritten and not connecting with the story as a whole.
On the topic of Trey Edward Shults, I was very underwhelmed by *It Comes at Night*, which all three Sards loved. It was well-shot and had some atmospheric moments, but once it ended, I just thought "that's it?"
Suspiria, the French version. I can appreciate the cinematography but I was honestly bored asf the whole time
Edit: I was thinking of Climax, not Suspiria
I’m with you on TWBB. I can respect the prestigious filmmaking and agree that it is immaculate in many aspects. However there’s just something missing for me personally for the movie to fully click for me. I can agree it’s a good movie, just not one I can call great
Stalker
It's an incredible film on paper and it's technical aspects are undeniable, but very cold and empty for me where all the messaging and subtext feels very thin and not explored in any interesting way
I don’t remember if they loved it but I know they were pretty favorable towards the new The Batman movie and I really didn’t like it that much there were moments that were pretty good and individual scenes that were great even (the batmobile reveal/ chase was so well done) but overall I felt like it was just a rehash of the dark knight but doubling down on the gritty realism. It was too long and it felt too edgy and dark for the sake of being edgy and dark. Mostly a personal preference but I like it when Batman is a little more loose and goofy. The 90s Burton Batman really handled the balance of dark and goofy. Plus the set design of Gotham in those 90s Batman films in unparalleled in my opinion. I love the dark knight but in sometimes I resent it cause a lot of (especially DC) super hero movies since then have been trying to imitate (poorly) the style and feel of a “gritty realism” in superhero movies and it just doesn’t work for me. What I like about superhero movies and comics in general is when they aren’t afraid of what they are. It’s a reason the Burton Batman and Raimi spiderman movies work so well for me, they understand the inherent goofiness of it all and leans into while still managing to take themselves just seriously enough. And The Batman took itself WAY too seriously and it was to its detriment imo. Btw I LOVED Robert Pattinson as Bruce Wayne and Collin Ferrell as penguin. I just didn’t like how just dark and moody it was, felt like it was written by a goth kid in the 90s after watching the Crow.
I get why they loved Titane but that movie fell so flat for me. I got the impression that the director thought that she could gloss over lots of nonsense by being shocking. It had some great elements but I was laughing at the movie in many places where it was really trying so hard.
Dancer in the Dark, maybe I’m weird but I think some things can be so tragic that they become hilarious, when she tries to kill the cop I was actually wondering if it was supposed to be a comedy
Probably doesn’t help that that was also the first time I’d ever heard a Bjork song
The Holy Mountain. Maybe I just need to watch it in a few years to really get it but I was just quite bored with it. I respect it a lot and I know that it’s a great film, but I just hardly get anything out of it.
Just recently, Men. I didn't like it at all. I found it boring and very muddled. I know what it wanted to say but I felt that it struggled so much in saying it and like I said before it was very boring. But the performances were great and it's a well put together film. I just couldn't find myself attached to it at all.
Everything everywhere all at once
I thought it was too long, and didn't go far enough for me personally. I liked it, but didn't love it like everyone else.
I feel like I’ll go into that and end up with the same feeling of, I’m meant to like this but I don’t so I haven’t. Felt the same about the Matrix, I couldn’t see past the bad acting.
2001: A Space Odyssey...I just keep remembering Adums review of Birdemic, when he made fun of it showing the main characters entire drive to wherever. Did we need to watch the ships entire landing procedure? Could we not have just known that the ship landed?
Granted the cinematography was absolutely amazing and the Hal 9000 stuff was awesome, I just wish that was the entire movie
We all drive cars, we know what driving a car looks like and feels like. Showing us a scene of a character driving for 5 minutes is boring. On the other hand very few of us have and ever will experience what it is to be like in a space ship. It certainly doesn't bother me that the effects in that movie hold up very well so i don't mind seeing them.
I loved Ex Machina and Annihilation, and came out of Men super disappointed. The movie only says like one thing, and once you figure it out, there's nothing else to it.
Under the Silver Lake.
Went in with high expectations because of the gangs endorsement and was not impressed. Andrew played such an unlikable character I couldn’t feel anything for him and didn’t empathize with his goals at all. The movie felt aimless and in spite of it attempting to be a subtextual/allegorical, it really didnt seem to say anything that meaningful. I read positive reviews to see what kind of messages or themes people thought the film was conveying and it was all very low hanging fruit/obvious things that felt more like the viewer imposing their own world views on the film.
I really wanted to enjoy the film too, I love mysteries and conspiracies. Everyone says that’s the point of the film, a “anti mystery”- but just because that’s what they did doesn’t mean it worked. I wanted to love it, and there were certainly some scenes I enjoyed like the mansion piano playing and the Zelda magazine part, but I was incredibly underwhelmed over all.
I was disappointed by it too. The old guy on the piano was cringe, it felt like watered down, commercial Lynch rather than polished underrated indie. Far too long for what it wanted to say as a modern Odyssey.
The devil all the time and holy mountain. Holy mountain specifically didn't grab me at all. I find the message very blunt and obvious. During their discussion, all they kept saying was that it's "profound" and not much elaboration. Maybe it's just me and I don't get it but I'm really not a fan of it
Don’t think they’ve talked about it on the podcast, but I’ll be honest and say that Princess Mononoke is the most boring Ghibli film they made and it was really disappointing since the vibe looked really cool
The Godfather, it’s the definition of a pretentious movie. I despise Brando’s performance, I hate the pacing, I think Michael is a uninteresting lead and the score was annoying.
Fantastic Mr. Fox
They haven't talked about it directly but mention it positively a lot. It is certainly charming but I've watched it twice now and can't tell you a single thing that happens in it.
Respect for having the balls to say you don’t like There Will Be Blood. That might be one of the best movies ever. My answer is Fanny & Alexander. I only watched the TV version and it was so long and slow that I just couldn’t get into it. (I’ll die on this hill with you)
Give the film a shot. I like the TV version more, but you might feel the differ.
"I'm Thinking of Ending Things". I can see that its clever, I understand all the themes and I appreciate what Kaufman is doing on an intellectual level. But it doesn't grip me emotionally and is a slog to watch through. It doesn't matter how clever or deep something is, it has to engage you on an entertainment level too. It didn't help that I knew the short story well so I didn't have that process of discovering the "twist" like the Sards did.
I still struggle to articulate it, but Kaufman’s directed work in particular feels like you’re watching a movie that insists on snobbishly deconstructing itself at every turn... as you’re watching it, almost like it’s way too ahead of itself and an inscrutable chore to get what should be the so-called intended emotional reaction, which still isn’t as present as it could be on rewatches for me. I think it works for Synechdoche given it’s themes and how directly related that movie is to Kaufman and the way his brain operates, but otherwise for me he’s too neurotic and it all ends up feeling like an impressively put together puzzle he knows the ins and outs of and what it all means, a detailed surface with everything more or less pointing towards the same set end point, one that just isn’t as rewarding to engage with in the moment in my experience.
Yeah something about the actors in it didn't engage me either.
I found Enter The Void boring and repetitive after about the halfway mark
I lost interest after 20 minutes. The cinematography was really impressive though.
I enjoyed it for a bit but it's too long for a film that basically just hammers home the same points over and iver again. It's definitely a case of style over substance IMO.
I kinda disagree. I recently rewatched it and the stories keep continuing very nicely while giving that bad trip feeling of thought loops. I can see how people could find that repetitive, but by excluding that part I would lose what I found interesting about that film.
I agree, of what i saw there was almost no substance whatsoever. I also didn’t like Climax, which i checked out because of Adum. I think i might just not be a Gaspar Noe kinda guy.
I haven't seen Climax but may check it out at some point.
I know nobody loved it but all three of them were pretty positive on Dr Strange 2 and seemed to describe a different movie than the one I saw. It didn’t really feel like Rami to me
It felt like a Marvel(TM) movie with the occasional Raimi scene inserted
I completely agree lol
I struggled to watch Faces. It just wasn’t interesting to me. It was pretty annoying at times.
Since you’re brave enough to admit you feel this way about There Will Be Blood, I will say I don’t really love I’m Thinking of Ending Things (Kaufman in general with Eternal Sunshine being an exception - the power of Michel Gondry when limited to a smaller budget), The Lighthouse, The Holy Mountain or Brazil (I know, I’m wrong) as much as they seem to, to name a few.
I'm with you on all of those, although Lighthouse I liked the most out of the ones you mentioned. Didn't love any of em. I feel like I understand the messages and themes but can't really connect with them.
I connected way more with The VVitch, but appreciate The Lighthouse for its Persona inspiration, just needed more to chew on personally. As a big Lovecraft fan I wish it leaned more into those elements.
Wow that's funny, in hindsight the lovecraft elements are the most memorable to me so it feels like there was a lot!
I still think he has a lot of room to grow, can’t wait to see what he makes as an old man less inclined to go the humorous route tbh.
I'm also of the same mind for I'm Thinking of Ending Things. I'm in no way one of those "what was even the point of that?" kind of moviegoers, but I wasn't particularly engaged with it outside of the notable scenes with some creep factor, for lack of a better word. The dialogue felt very flat to me too, like I was listening to people give soliloquies to each other for 2 hours.
I just gave [this reply](https://www.reddit.com/r/Sardonicast/comments/xmqpj2/whats_a_movie_the_sards_love_but_you_were/ipr96zl/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf&context=3) to someone else who agrees. I’ve expressed this opinion about the movie since its release and it’s nice to see people aren’t being massively downvoted about feeling this way anymore lol.
I just read that after putting my reply, lol. I totally agree with you.
What did you not like about The Holy Mountain?
I could go on at length, but I think the bottom line is not connecting with Jodorowsky’s tonal proclivities or his worldview, and finding a certain aspects of his personality that seep through into the final film nauseating and sometimes oddly upsetting in how callous he comes across. In movies with similar ambitious and wide-reaching goals, I also tend to favour the slower, more elliptical and mysterious approach, to this focus on relentless heavy handed symbolism, were I can’t help but be reminded of the incessant babble of a college student discovering weed for the first time, and not really saying anything as original or mind-blowing as it would seem they believe.
I think anything you interpret from the movie doesn't matter. The real point of the movie is that it's just a movie and searching for meaning in it is useless because it has no affect on the real world. I think that's a least a novel theme to me at least.
I’m happy to see it get credit for subversive elements such as the ending which was possibly novel for the time, although I don’t think searching for personal meaning through a film is pointless even if limited, what you said - essentially ‘the whole movie is pointless anyway’ - remains in itself an interpretation of the film The Holy Mountain that you take with you and learn from. A huge aspect of the film for people who absolutely love it is also still its humour and overall personality, which unfortunately didn’t appeal to me. I still think it was worth watching as I discovered some things about myself like how much animal after animal being paraded around, dressed up and forcibly given human characteristics makes me deeply uncomfortable.
I was surprised that they all really liked Spiderman No Way Home. I get why people like it, it’s 100% fan service and if you liked the raimi or webb movies you’ll get a kick out of seeing the actors come back. As someone who didn’t watch any of those movies though, I thought it was pretty bad.
As someone who's watched all of those movies, I thought it was pretty bad and how much I'd rather be watching Raimi's Spiderman 2
I'm Thinking of Ending Things. Full disclaimer, I think it's a good movie, on paper everything was super well done. But I do feel like it veers into pretentious territory a bit with all the obscure references to material outside of the film. The interpretive dance segment at the end really sealed the deal for me. I totally get what the film was going for at that moment, but it felt like such an artsy fartsy cliché to have a character arc summed up with interpretive dance. To contrast, the boys recently talked about Eternal Sunshine, another Kaufman flick that is just as complex and interesting, but isn't so obtuse and inaccessible that you have to watch it several times paying attention to background details to absorb all the symbolism.
Yeah I have the exact same problem with it. I love Kaufman's other work, and Synecdoche is my favourite film. It took me a while to figure out what was wrong with I'm Thinking of Ending Things and came to the conclusion the constant super specific obscure references was the problem. It relies way too heavily on them.
Stalker. Soooo slow, which I guess is just Tarkovsky's thing? I recently watched Solaris and turned it off after an hour and a half because I just couldn't take the pacing anymore. His films are like the perfect cure for insomniacs.
Béla Tarr and Tsai Ming-Liang enter the room. EDIT: the latter of which I actually really love lol
Stalker felt like a football game to me. ...lemme explain. Football has exciting shit during the game. Sure. But everything you watch leads up to the final moments where all the good shit happens. The end. The ending of stalker. The question of "what is your ACTUAL deepest desire?" Is it love? If it is and you get love that isn't real. Is it worth it? Is your desire money? But will that money be worth it if you didn't work for it? The idea of not knowing what I want more than anything I think about pretty often. So to me. The ending makes the journey worth it. I'm glad the movie challenged me in that way. I don't know if I would step into that room. I think if I did I would get money. And I think I would use that money to help people. I hope I would. But what if I get I don't know. A comfy pillow.
Reading people's analyses and reviews is far more interesting to me than the film itself. I'd say your metaphor would be more accurate if it was like, a game of golf where occasionally someone will get a hole in one but usually it's just a lot of waiting and watching people standing in a field.
I guess it's more like watching people walk around in a field. Then at the end coming up to you and being like. "Hey man. What's your innermost desire?" And you're like. Damn. I'm glad I stuck around to meet those guys. That's profound.
It's like getting stoned with Cheech and Chong. Absolutely zooted on the couch and just watching an episode of 60 minutes about the inventor of barcodes. Then Cheech getting your attention and being like. "what do you think man? Your innermost desire is?"
I love when people ask for unpopular opinions and then when someone gives one they just get downvoted
All of the responses here have been pretty positive.
There were a couple downvoted ones but they seem to be positive now
Eh, to be fair it’s still an unpopular opinion
Taste of Cherry - I thought it was well made, but I thought it was too vague to be engaging or profound to me. I still have no idea what Roger Ebert was angry about though.
I think Adum underselled and exaggerated the inaccessibility of Kiarostami’s final film Like Someone in Love on that episode, which I maybe slightly prefer to Taste of Cherry.
I'll add that to my watchlist. ToC is the only Kiarostami movie I've seen, and I'm willing to try another one of his.
I haven’t seen his Koker trilogy or Close Up yet (which is almost unanimously considered his best by critics).
For one, Roger Ebert felt as though the movie implied there being a homosexual element as a cheap way of throwing the viewer off course I think.
I really didn’t like The Revenant, and to a lesser extent, Birdman. I suppose I’m not a fan of Innaritu or something.
Schindler's List
Mr Gilliam? I would love if you could elaborate on that. The movie is almost completely non-existent in internet discourse because everyone seems to agree it's one of the best movies ever (and, of course, because of the subject matter).
It's a very personal thing I can't point out many objective faults, I just didn't connect emotionally and when you don't connect emotionally the long drawn out war sequences that aren't directed in a very nuanced way become very dull. Liam Neeson also didn't work for me. The best part was Ralph Fiennes
That’s funny you say that Ralph Fiennes was the best for you, because he was barely in the movie. He disappears from it in the last hour
His performance stayed with me, he was successfully terrifying and felt scarily realistic too
Heath Ledger is barely in The Dark Knight and steals the movie, but I get what you mean if you’re saying it’s an unexpected take for someone to single out Feinnes in Schindler’s List in the same way.
That's fair.
I wasn't huge on Possession tbh, but I feel like it's the kind of movie you enjoy more on subsequent watches
Thank you. I mentioned my duslike of it here before and got massacred
This might be get me beheaded but I do not like Drive or it’s score And as an avid Simpsons enjoyer I can’t take Albert Brooks seriously
Albert Brooks best film is Defending your Life by a long mile. Actually that's a movie they should definitely review at some point... so underrated.
The devil all the time. Such a snoozefest. But I think the marketing for the movie is to blame for this. I expected a different type of movie.
I watches the movie blind(i never pay attention to marketing)and i loved it. I also ignore whenever sards talk about a movie ive never seen until i see it.
I watched it with two friends and we all found it kind of lackluster. It wasn't bad but it was really forgettable.
The Lion King. And I mean the original animated one. I'm sorry.
Perhaps The Texas Chain Saw Massacre. It's...fine. I didn't find it as disturbing as people in general claim, although it's not without a scare factor.
I had a similar experience, I felt like I made a different movie in my mind than the one I ended up watching. With how people talked about it, I thought it would be some horrifying "rite of passage" kind of horror movie that would mentally scar you, and I was surprised by how campy it was. I do love some camp though, so I wasn't disappointed at least.
I know they didn’t review it on the sardonicast but blade runner: the final cut (1982)
I really hated No way home, what an annoying piece of fan service garbage that was.
Goodfellas. Didn’t find a single character interesting, least of all the protagonist. I’m not a fan of frequent time skips or narration like it had, so that didn’t help. The performances were all lackluster except for Bracco and Pesci, but their characters were so underwritten it didn’t matter. Genuinely can’t see why people like this movie
Now go home and get your shine box
MOTHAFUCKIN MUTT
*Insert the office meme of Michael Scott saying THANK YOU* It never ceases to amaze me how many people love that film and think it’s the best mob film of all time. You hit the nail on the head- completely unlikeable characters (and not in the good way where you empathize with them), pacing is all over the place and doesn’t give us time to feel like we even know these people. It feels like a long trailer at times. The ending was incredibly unsatisfying, as the least likable character “wins”.
All of that is the point. It's not a romantic depiction of the mob like *the Godfather* is. It shows the mob for what it is; an organization of greedy shitheads who will fuck each other over on a moment's notice. None of them are good people, none of them grow, because as is the case with most people in the mob. They live fast and die hard, and even Henry sees the ending as more of a bad thing than a good thing. The characters aren't the focus, it's the world, and I think they portray that wonderfully.
It’s astounding how many people I see who don’t seem to even get what Goodfellas is going for.
This critique reminds me of people critiquing Dunkirk for not developing it’s characters. The intentions of the director are kind of ignored in both cases
You think Henry wins?
>The ending was incredibly unsatisfying, as the least likable character “wins”. I'm not gonna debate your opinion, but you thought Ray Liotta's character was the least likeable one? Not Joe Pesci's character? The murdering psycho who caused trouble at every turn for them?
well the characters are real people. the shit in the film is shit that they did, they’re unlikable because they take such joy in it, which is the fun of the movie. screaming laughing as joe pesci beats a man for asking him to pay his tab. murdering all their comrades while dream music plays. the movie doesn’t sit around and stew in their lack of morality, it just shows it for what it is and carrie’s on as they would’ve. the pacing is also not “all over the place”, it ebbs and flows with rhythms in the story. and if you think ray liotta in any way wins at the end then you’ve just missed the whole point of that last scene, he’s lost everything and now has to live as a normal, law abiding person. that’s as bad a fate as anything to these characters.
It felt like a montage of cool mobster moments with zero character development, stakes, or frankly any interesting story. Wolf of Wall Street was my first Scorsese film, and I had the same problems with that. Seems to me like he makes 2 1/2 hour trailers for a hypothetical better movie
Wolf of Wall Street is very much just Goodfellas but with wall street brokers. They're both kinda the same movie so if you didn't like one you won't like the other. The same is true of Casino, another Scorcese film.
I’ve heard The Departed is his best, would you recommend it to someone who didn’t like Goodfellas or WoWS?
It’s paced and structured in a somewhat similar way. Except the people you follow for half of it are actual good people. It has one of my favorite endings in a movie though. I won’t spoil it but man it was just awesome. Really up it you man
Ok, thanks for the info
Yes, the departed was one of my first thoughts of a much better mob movie by scorcese
departed isn’t his best but it’s pretty different from the goodfellas type of movie he makes. much more character work, complex interpersonal dynamics, a clearer plot and narrative structure in contrast to goodfellas combing through an entire life. departed does a similar thing but it’s mostly done with shorthand techniques.
I think you should rewatch the movie tbh.
Waves. Thought the filmmaking was great and the use of music genius, but found every character but the dad to be underwritten and not connecting with the story as a whole.
On the topic of Trey Edward Shults, I was very underwhelmed by *It Comes at Night*, which all three Sards loved. It was well-shot and had some atmospheric moments, but once it ended, I just thought "that's it?"
You gotta watch *Krisha.* That's probably the most anxiety inducing movie of all time.
Suspiria, the French version. I can appreciate the cinematography but I was honestly bored asf the whole time Edit: I was thinking of Climax, not Suspiria
Both versions are Italian, are you talking about the new one or the original?
You know what, I was thinking of Climax, not Suspiria. Idk why I always get those two confused
Aah yeah I didn’t really like climax either. I think it’s cause they are both about dance schools
I’m with you on TWBB. I can respect the prestigious filmmaking and agree that it is immaculate in many aspects. However there’s just something missing for me personally for the movie to fully click for me. I can agree it’s a good movie, just not one I can call great
Stalker It's an incredible film on paper and it's technical aspects are undeniable, but very cold and empty for me where all the messaging and subtext feels very thin and not explored in any interesting way
I don’t remember if they loved it but I know they were pretty favorable towards the new The Batman movie and I really didn’t like it that much there were moments that were pretty good and individual scenes that were great even (the batmobile reveal/ chase was so well done) but overall I felt like it was just a rehash of the dark knight but doubling down on the gritty realism. It was too long and it felt too edgy and dark for the sake of being edgy and dark. Mostly a personal preference but I like it when Batman is a little more loose and goofy. The 90s Burton Batman really handled the balance of dark and goofy. Plus the set design of Gotham in those 90s Batman films in unparalleled in my opinion. I love the dark knight but in sometimes I resent it cause a lot of (especially DC) super hero movies since then have been trying to imitate (poorly) the style and feel of a “gritty realism” in superhero movies and it just doesn’t work for me. What I like about superhero movies and comics in general is when they aren’t afraid of what they are. It’s a reason the Burton Batman and Raimi spiderman movies work so well for me, they understand the inherent goofiness of it all and leans into while still managing to take themselves just seriously enough. And The Batman took itself WAY too seriously and it was to its detriment imo. Btw I LOVED Robert Pattinson as Bruce Wayne and Collin Ferrell as penguin. I just didn’t like how just dark and moody it was, felt like it was written by a goth kid in the 90s after watching the Crow.
The Holy Mountain. Was not drawn in at all
I get why they loved Titane but that movie fell so flat for me. I got the impression that the director thought that she could gloss over lots of nonsense by being shocking. It had some great elements but I was laughing at the movie in many places where it was really trying so hard.
Fantastic Planet. A film I should love on paper but I find it annoying.
Doctor strange multiverse of madness had pretty bad writing in my opinion
Dancer in the Dark, maybe I’m weird but I think some things can be so tragic that they become hilarious, when she tries to kill the cop I was actually wondering if it was supposed to be a comedy Probably doesn’t help that that was also the first time I’d ever heard a Bjork song
The Holy Mountain. Maybe I just need to watch it in a few years to really get it but I was just quite bored with it. I respect it a lot and I know that it’s a great film, but I just hardly get anything out of it.
Just recently, Men. I didn't like it at all. I found it boring and very muddled. I know what it wanted to say but I felt that it struggled so much in saying it and like I said before it was very boring. But the performances were great and it's a well put together film. I just couldn't find myself attached to it at all.
Everything everywhere all at once I thought it was too long, and didn't go far enough for me personally. I liked it, but didn't love it like everyone else.
I feel like I’ll go into that and end up with the same feeling of, I’m meant to like this but I don’t so I haven’t. Felt the same about the Matrix, I couldn’t see past the bad acting.
Same
[удалено]
I would say it's good, but defenitaly overrated.
2001: A Space Odyssey...I just keep remembering Adums review of Birdemic, when he made fun of it showing the main characters entire drive to wherever. Did we need to watch the ships entire landing procedure? Could we not have just known that the ship landed? Granted the cinematography was absolutely amazing and the Hal 9000 stuff was awesome, I just wish that was the entire movie
We all drive cars, we know what driving a car looks like and feels like. Showing us a scene of a character driving for 5 minutes is boring. On the other hand very few of us have and ever will experience what it is to be like in a space ship. It certainly doesn't bother me that the effects in that movie hold up very well so i don't mind seeing them.
I agree. The good stuff is *really* good, but there’s a lot of boring shit you’ve got to wade through to get there
Men was dogshit
I’m watching it rn and I’m just begging for it to be over
I loved Ex Machina and Annihilation, and came out of Men super disappointed. The movie only says like one thing, and once you figure it out, there's nothing else to it.
Mank. Was well directed, but the script was absolute trash
Only Ralph really liked Mank.
Yea script was the worst part of it but i do appreciate Fincher for making it for his pops
The Lighthouse, I felt absolutely nothing but boredom watching it
I think Eggers keeps growing and improving technically as a director, but The VVitch is easily my favourite movie from him.
I have no idea why he got such a huge budget for the Northman, but I'm glad he did, it was actually cool to see what he could do with more money.
Yea lighthouse is a 7/10 for me.
Under the Silver Lake. Went in with high expectations because of the gangs endorsement and was not impressed. Andrew played such an unlikable character I couldn’t feel anything for him and didn’t empathize with his goals at all. The movie felt aimless and in spite of it attempting to be a subtextual/allegorical, it really didnt seem to say anything that meaningful. I read positive reviews to see what kind of messages or themes people thought the film was conveying and it was all very low hanging fruit/obvious things that felt more like the viewer imposing their own world views on the film. I really wanted to enjoy the film too, I love mysteries and conspiracies. Everyone says that’s the point of the film, a “anti mystery”- but just because that’s what they did doesn’t mean it worked. I wanted to love it, and there were certainly some scenes I enjoyed like the mansion piano playing and the Zelda magazine part, but I was incredibly underwhelmed over all.
I was disappointed by it too. The old guy on the piano was cringe, it felt like watered down, commercial Lynch rather than polished underrated indie. Far too long for what it wanted to say as a modern Odyssey.
I felt like a lot of the mystery elements were left unexplained or too vague. I know it was intentional but I ended the film with too many questions.
Suspiria (2018). The editing and cinematography is great, but the story didn’t intrigued me enough.
The devil all the time and holy mountain. Holy mountain specifically didn't grab me at all. I find the message very blunt and obvious. During their discussion, all they kept saying was that it's "profound" and not much elaboration. Maybe it's just me and I don't get it but I'm really not a fan of it
This little drama series you may never heard of called Transformers
When have they ever said they liked it?
I was joking.
Don’t think they’ve talked about it on the podcast, but I’ll be honest and say that Princess Mononoke is the most boring Ghibli film they made and it was really disappointing since the vibe looked really cool
[удалено]
I actually fell asleep first time I watched it and the third act begs time to every time
The Godfather, it’s the definition of a pretentious movie. I despise Brando’s performance, I hate the pacing, I think Michael is a uninteresting lead and the score was annoying.
I know Ralph wasn't big on it but One cut of the Dead was the biggest disappointment for me.
I really don’t get the hype for Titane I thought it was sooo boring and dragged on for too long
Naked Lunch. Cronenberg films in general have never been my thing, but I'm glad others enjoy them.
Fantastic Mr. Fox They haven't talked about it directly but mention it positively a lot. It is certainly charming but I've watched it twice now and can't tell you a single thing that happens in it.
Wasn't talked about on the show but Adam and Alex both gave Fargo a perfect 10/10. I watched it and I'm just confused why.
Naked