Rock wrote:

Watkins is dead. He's not gonna sue.

Maybe there should be a bioflick screenplay, "inspired from true events", which has a late-era Roger Watkins moving into snuff and dispatching his most vigilant critics.

A great example of the excitement that can be generated by a movie that is basically impossible to market to a built in audience. It you want to laugh, you'll find a couple of scenes that will oblige, and most that will not. If you are looking for a horror film, this isn't it, but it does at times kind of look like one. If you want action, sometimes stuff happens, but frequently doesn't.  It feels both small in scope, but much larger than its one location, two person cast. It's also kind of sad, even though its so weird its hard for you to feel completely sorry for it. It is very aware of how weird it is and is confident enough not to change because of any of your useless judgment.

I really like this. Not only because of how exclusionary it is going to be for anyone who wants to sign up for one particular emotional response, thereby turning film into something about as functionary and lacking in romance as a Phillips screwdriver, but because it legitimately made me both happy and frightened at different times. A great accomplishment.
 

Hm-mm.  Mm.  I'll take a look at it.

What a discovery! Not only of the film, which I had never heard of, but of a musical roster that is at least 50 percent completely alien to me. As a festival which catered specifically to a black audience, I suppose it is understandable that this (much like the recently rediscovered Summer of Soul) has never been mentioned alongside of all the other obvious great movies about musical performance (Woodstock, Monterey Pop, Gimme Shelter, Stop Making Sense). There is something particularly revelatory about watching Rufus Thomas calling his audience down to dance on the field during one saying, leading to a fantastic bit of footage where people of all ages are dancing and not giving a shit about the rules, and then having Thomas immediately scold them back to their seats at the beginning of his next song. Both beautiful and funny.

Arguably the greatest thing of all in this film though are the interviews with Richard Pryor. I think I have rarely seen such a wide eyed view of the man's obvious genius. Yes, his stand up shows are more essential in their ways, and none of this has Pryor at his funniest But just watching him speak on the fly and seeing his mind work in real time, conjuring up characters and situations in such a way that he seems to be living alternate lives in front of us, shows us the range of not only his marvellous use of language and imagination but fully formed empathy. As America continues to burn itself to the ground, it's nice to see the occassional spark of beautiful genius it happened to ignite over the process of its decades long incineration.
 

Adding Wattstax to my watchlist. Looking forward to seeing Rufus Thomas in his Whitesoxx. 

I guess that Robert Eggers turning into John Lennon is a bad thing?

Wait a second... this isn't the music thread... 

Rampop II wrote:

Wait a second... this isn't the music thread... 

Jinnistan wrote:

I guess that Robert Eggers turning into John Lennon is a bad thing?

Yes. It's a high point in movieforums discourse going on there. And I'm still not sure what the outrage is about. Is it because Egger's dared to shit on his own movie and this is a disservice to those who also worked on the film? Is it indefensible because of all the fans who have given him money and adulation and he is now spitting this back in their face? Is it because it simply reminds some of comments about Ringo's drumming? What am I even supposed to do with that? Obviously ignore it, but it's just getting so absolutely ludicrous. If I didn't make any comment at all, blood would have started pouring out of my ears.

Now, I like all of these people who are making these comments. I also know their hearts are all in the right places. But are we really now going to start reading into the cadences and semenatics of comments artists make about the frustration they have with the (perceived) failures of their past work for evidence they are being cruel to....somebody? My initial post in response to this was, more than anything, just to give some amount of credence to the possibility that what Eggers is doing is nothing more than exposing the insecurity that runs through the guts of most artists. That dreaded feeling that a failure has happened somewhere along the line. And that maybe instead of jumping down his throat on a comment that has (been demonstrated to be) completely taken out of context, there should be empathy for the fragility and self-torture that is at the core of the work of so many artists. I thought there might be some kind of understanding amongst these supposed 'empaths' that maybe jumping right to name calling, before we can possibly know the reasons why this initial comment was made, might not be the nice and sensitive thing to do.

But, noooooooo.  Clearly by my saying this, I was being heartless to all his fans. And Anya Taylor Joy. And probably Cynthia Lennon while we are at it. Anyone who may have ever been hurt by an artist and their out of control narcissism.

Like, I swear what this always seems to be be born from is that, after an emotional reaction has been had (which in this, as well as many many other cases, was more of an over reaction), some kind of mental scrambling starts going on to justify this feeling of being injured. It's become much like reading tea leaves for the future, but in these cases, its to find evidence of someone who wasn't 'sensitive enough'. And how they now must learn to speak in ways that will not upset the person who was upset (even though, duh, I imagine every person on the fucking earth has different ways of finding offence in completely innocuous statements)

And the frustrating thing is, I get it all in principal. At least I did initially. I get that the way we use language has impact. It shapes how we view those who have less power than us. It can diminish and harm. I get it I get it I get it. I get it's good that we are trying to police ourselves a little more than we once did. I get that it's good to be sympathetic about the feelings of others. But, bu, but at what point does it become detrimental to all discourse? To all conversation? Its starting to feel like even a simple emotional response about a persons own work (Egger's saying he 'hates' The Witch) is too intense with its possible insinuations of what he might also hate. Who he might also be harming. It's literally come to the point of complete madness.

And, yes, I also know that most of these people keep claiming 'no one is literally banning you from saying these things'. Which is true (but also frequently sounds like a disappointment in their mouths). But when we've gotten to the point where what was very likely a completely off the cuff remark about a man's own insecurities or frustrations about his work, has people finding all sorts of ways to make it seem like they are the scourge of society, that people and communities can be harmed by such careless use of press junket interview time, we are potentially hanging albatrosses on every word that passes through our lips. Literally everything has to be scrutinized just in case someone misinterprets it. Or reads into it. Or is in a bad and sensitive mood when they read it. Or are just completely fucking insane. And it is becoming pointlessly and annoyingly destructive to any kind of honest discourse (or, like they would say, you can be honest as long as your honesty doesn't bother me with its subject matter, tone of voice, or any of the words we've suddenly decided we don't like)
 

Last edited by crumbsroom (5/18/2022 8:24 am)

That movie owns. One of the easier choices on my 2010s ballot.

I know a lot of westerners find Bollywood inaccessible (for reasons varying in legitimacy, imo; discussions on RT about Indian cinema tended to be pretty frustrating), but I think this is where the boisterous Bollywood style is key to the movie's commentary about the protagonists' self-aggrandizement/delusion. Everybody thinks they're the hero of their own movie. And like you point out, the length and intricacy of the plotting is key to its effect. There first half sets up layer after layer of vendettas to the point that the characters can't even grasp why they're being killed off when those vendettas start being followed through on.

Few films make criminality look so dismal in such an entertaining way.