Posted by Rampop II  12/12/2022 10:56 pm | #1 |
How about this as a way to handle spoilers? If we have spoilers to divulge in whatever conversation we're in, we can post them here and link to them there, wherever there may be.
Proceed at your peril...
|
Posted by Rampop II 12/12/2022 11:36 pm | #2 |
|
Posted by Rampop II 12/13/2022 12:14 am | #3 |
For example, here's a juicy spoiler about that Netflix show Midnight Mass:
SPOILER: Monseigneur Pruitt is the Jim Jones of vampires.
I pretty much spoiled every reveal in the entire series with that one sentence, and the series is still very much worth watching. So what if we know we're going to Wally World? It'll be all about the ride...
We don't even know what the menace is for the first three episodes of Midnight Mass. We just know there is one, and it has started haunting this implausibly diverse, economically–impacted conservative Catholic island fishing community.
One of the coolest things about this series is how much careful attention was paid to the minutiae of Catholicism, and of Christianity in general, to draw an elaborately–detailed connecton to the wealth of vampire lore. An aging priest, bitten and restored to health, believes he has been resurrected, interprets his vampire master as an "angel of the Lord" heralding the apocalypse, and begins secretly adding vampire blood to his congregation's sacramental wine... in preparation for Passover.
Excellent story all the way through that deliberately dodges clichés in defiance of predictability. Every time my brain expected to go on auto–pilot through familiar tv trope territory, my brain would find itself pleasantly surprised. The show sticks the landing adroitly as I said before. It's rare that I see a narrative in which things get fucked so far beyond repair, and yet the story still manages to secure a satisfactory ending without copping out or jumping the shark. I'd say more about that but I don't want to spoil everything.
It's hard to ignore the insertion of various sociopolitical themes (a lesbian couple coping with conservative smalltown life, a police chief of Persian descent enduring racial stereotyping, a heated parent/teacher meeting about bibles in school), but they don't overpower the narrative or anything, they're just woven in.
Also, the vampire is really cool–looking. I hate when the reveal is a letdown, some rubber suit, bad makeup job, bad casting job, unbelievable CGI ("fakey" was the word we used in grade school), or worse, a reveal that isn't a reveal, like invisible aliens (or plants :/ )
This one does not disappoint. This "Angel of the Lord" was done right. The fucker is even downright scary.
I think I've spoiled enough. Or sold enough, as the case may be. In the glut of mediocre Netflix shows, as with their movies, the gems can easily get obscured and buried. Midnight Mass is one of the few that I consider worth your time.
(Sorry I haven't posted much recently due to time constraints but I have been keeping up with the discussions from the shadows.)
Last edited by Rampop II (12/13/2022 12:31 am)
|
Posted by Jinnistan 12/13/2022 1:03 am | #5 |
|
Posted by Rampop II 12/16/2022 1:45 am | #6 |
“You saw life brimming brightly with optimism and verve and you just had to snuff it out!”
|
Posted by Jinnistan 1/10/2023 6:33 pm | #7 |
The Slate article which Little Ash linked. Again, major spoilers, even well beyond what I'm putting in this post.
One of the most fascinating aspects of Tar is the extent to which the film may have a supernatural element (a ghost story, in effect) or may be more symbolically presenting Tar's own psychological breakdown into guilt-induced paranoid delusions. Someone could say that this isn't technically a spoiler since (*spoiler*) the film isn't interested in definitively answering this mystery, but I still think it's absolutely a spoiler because it's far more satisfying to not know about this conflict until it emerges in the course of the film.
Here's a gif from the above article that shocked me because I completely missed it. I now understand why. The preceeding scene has Tar walking into her apartment, and we can see a draping wardrobe, maybe a jacket, in a similar position, hanging in a corner in the background, slightly obscured by a wall. And the scene is overall quite banal and slow, the kind of scene that doesn't inspire your attention to wander to too many ambient details. But it wasn't until this gif that I noticed the hair.
Could this be a subjective phantom of Tar's paranoia? Even if, subjectively, she doesn't perceive it?
|
Posted by Rock 2/13/2023 10:15 pm | #8 |
I've avoided reading too much about the movie. I've roughly gathered that the Julliard scene has generated a lot of discussion for obvious reasons, and I think I'm with you in that Tar is right in that situation. I also don't think her conduct in that scene is particularly demonstrative of her cruelty as I've seen some suggest, not by itself at least, aside from the snide remark she tosses off at the end of the exchange. (And I think we're on the same page that the student was being close-minded.) If anything, I think Field planted it as a bit of a red herring to throw a wrench into the stupidity of online discussions around the subject. I think in part he was having a bit of fun at the expense of the audience.
As for the article, I'm not sure I perceived the last act purely as a dream (perhaps this is me being a bit of a luddite, but I tend to read films literally unless they spell out why I should think otherwise), although I'd agree with the article that there is a clear formal tension at play (I didn't catch it at first, but the editing of the video from multiple angles is a pretty interesting deployment of that strategy), and that the visuals are intended to be expressive in certain ways. There are a lot of things it brings up that I didn't catch (or noticed but didn't fully grasp) so I'll likely pull it back before I do a rewatch somewhere down the line.
I am not above abusing mod powers for my own amusement.
|
Posted by Jinnistan 2/14/2023 2:06 pm | #9 |
How do you feel about the "ghost story" read?
|
Posted by Rock 2/14/2023 10:21 pm | #10 |
I'd like to see the movie again to see how the ghostly clues line up, for lack of a better phrase. The way I was reading the proceedings realtime were that Francesca and the cellist were scheming to give Tar her comeuppance, but in retrospect I am not sure all the events support that reading.
The appearances of the redhead, who may or may not be Krista. Is this the ghost of the Krista? Is it Tar's memory of Krista or a personification of her guilt about her treatment of Krista? Does the fact she doesn't perceive it rule that out? It's possible something is nagging at her at the back of her head, but she might not be able to fully grasp what that is, hence the lack of perception. I don't think there's a clear answer here, but I appreciate the movie throwing a wrench into the ability to "solve" or "decode" it.
I keep coming back to that cellphone video. I don't remember what the students were doing with their hands, but I didn't get the sense that their ability to film covertly was ruled out. Maybe I can confirm if this is the case on a rewatch. But I do think the fact that the video was edited together from multiple angles captures something about the conspiratorial yet irrational nature of cancel culture. I was more interested in the movie's ability to evoke and reflect on such mechanisms and the overlap of the digital and the personal than whether she "deserved" it.
I do think the one thing that's becoming clearer as I reflect on this is that I'm growing increasingly pleased with the movie's determination to upend the more annoying tendencies of current online film analysis ("decoding" movies, slathering them in lazy social justice tinged judgements).
I am not above abusing mod powers for my own amusement.
|
Posted by Rock 2/14/2023 10:23 pm | #11 |
Anyway, it would be great if Crumbsroom could join the conversation, either through a trip downtown or through whatever magic JJ has managed to conjure.
I am not above abusing mod powers for my own amusement.
|
Posted by Jinnistan 2/15/2023 10:18 pm | #12 |
Rock wrote:
If anything, I think Field planted it as a bit of a red herring to throw a wrench into the stupidity of online discussions around the subject. I think in part he was having a bit of fun at the expense of the audience.
I agree, and he succeeded because this scene became the focus of her "character study", when, like you said, it doesn't really crack the surface of her character issues. At worst, it shows her in a controlling and condescending light, (even though I found the condescension appropriate), and it does give at least a glimpse into her capacity for casual cruelty, in that there is a detectable relish she takes in completely dismantling his objections. But, for an easy comparison, let's take Simmons in Whiplash, and any objectionable aspect of this confrontation looks pretty weak to me. But you can sense the cat waiting to pounce within her. (The same could be said for the scene with her daughter's classmate.) On the other hand, because his objection is so patently ridiculous (is there a more stable standard for classical composition than Bach? This is like going to Oxford and refusing to read Shakespeare or Alexander Pope or David Hume. You hate the patriarchy game of the age, but you can't hate the players) it's irresistable not to sympathize with her consternation. In this sense, another one of Fields' tricks in addition to priming the Twitter patrol to castigate and prejudge Tar, he is putting the rest of us on Tar's side, where we're already in a stance of defensiveness against the more predatory accusations. I was thinking for a minute that maybe Tar's sin with Krista was pure neglegence, a refusal to deal with a desperate woman out of her own convenience, that her complicity in her death was her ignoring and deflecting her need for help. But, eventually (ala the celloist) it's clear now that Tar was engaging is pure predatory behavior.
As for the article, I'm not sure I perceived the last act purely as a dream
Neither do I. I much prefer to see it as either hallucinatory or supernatural, in a magical realism type of sense.
The way I was reading the proceedings realtime were that Francesca and the cellist were scheming to give Tar her comeuppance, but in retrospect I am not sure all the events support that reading.
I don't agree about the celloist, I think she was a young naive girl who only slowly realized Tar's intentions. (Would she have even heard about Krista? Not until the shit hit the fan in New York.) I think Francesca was fine putting up with Tar as long as it advanced her career. Maybe you could say the same for both of them.
I keep coming back to that cellphone video. I don't remember what the students were doing with their hands, but I didn't get the sense that their ability to film covertly was ruled out. Maybe I can confirm if this is the case on a rewatch. But I do think the fact that the video was edited together from multiple angles captures something about the conspiratorial yet irrational nature of cancel culture. I was more interested in the movie's ability to evoke and reflect on such mechanisms and the overlap of the digital and the personal than whether she "deserved" it.
I think it was highly unlikely that multiple people could have filmed it. There were maybe 12-15 students there total, including on the bandstand? The cinematography of the scene includes roving, sweeping shots, and not a since cellphone is seen. But what gets me is similar to the above, which is in the complete unnecessity of this cellphone video to make any difference in affecting her career, so there's definitely a cynicism in that. Tar was caught grooming underlings, and this power dynamic is damning even if we don't consider how selfishly and cruelly she engaged in this. Tar tried to destroy evidence of these crimes. This should be sufficient cause for her to lose her position, but for some random reason we get this unlikely video, clearly out of any context, where she seemingly is making a masturbation joke to a student. The idea that any sane person could find these comparable trangressions does say something about the pile-on nature of cancel culture. It's like being appalled at someone like Kobe Bryant or Matt Lauer for not picking up the check at dinner before they sodomized their victims against their will.
I do think the one thing that's becoming clearer as I reflect on this is that I'm growing increasingly pleased with the movie's determination to upend the more annoying tendencies of current online film analysis ("decoding" movies, slathering them in lazy social justice tinged judgements).
There is one reading that I'm not so sure about, but it's interesting enough. The idea is that the furries, video game concert at the end somehow represents these kinds of identity "snowflakes", a reflection of cultural debasement. I don't think it's completely worth discarding this read out of hand, but another part of me is pretty sure that this is the kind of read Armond White would have come up with. (White did not like the film, fwiw.)
|
Posted by Rock 2/15/2023 11:44 pm | #13 |
The way I was reading the proceedings realtime were that Francesca and the cellist were scheming to give Tar her comeuppance, but in retrospect I am not sure all the events support that reading.
I don't agree about the celloist, I think she was a young naive girl who only slowly realized Tar's intentions. (Would she have even heard about Krista? Not until the shit hit the fan in New York.) I think Francesca was fine putting up with Tar as long as it advanced her career. Maybe you could say the same for both of them.
I suspect my initial reading won't hold all that strongly, but I do wonder if Field was priming the viewer for the type of dismissals that often greet accusers in Me Too type situations, that they were conspiring against a more powerful or famous figure.
I keep coming back to that cellphone video. I don't remember what the students were doing with their hands, but I didn't get the sense that their ability to film covertly was ruled out. Maybe I can confirm if this is the case on a rewatch. But I do think the fact that the video was edited together from multiple angles captures something about the conspiratorial yet irrational nature of cancel culture. I was more interested in the movie's ability to evoke and reflect on such mechanisms and the overlap of the digital and the personal than whether she "deserved" it.
I think it was highly unlikely that multiple people could have filmed it. There were maybe 12-15 students there total, including on the bandstand? The cinematography of the scene includes roving, sweeping shots, and not a since cellphone is seen. But what gets me is similar to the above, which is in the complete unnecessity of this cellphone video to make any difference in affecting her career, so there's definitely a cynicism in that. Tar was caught grooming underlings, and this power dynamic is damning even if we don't consider how selfishly and cruelly she engaged in this. Tar tried to destroy evidence of these crimes. This should be sufficient cause for her to lose her position, but for some random reason we get this unlikely video, clearly out of any context, where she seemingly is making a masturbation joke to a student. The idea that any sane person could find these comparable trangressions does say something about the pile-on nature of cancel culture. It's like being appalled at someone like Kobe Bryant or Matt Lauer for not picking up the check at dinner before they sodomized their victims against their will.
Not quite the same thing, but I suppose we can compare this to how Hannibal Buress' joke brought more attention to Bill Cosby's crimes than the allegations by his victims. Something easily digestible and concentrated rather than individual claims.
I have no doubt that Tar is a shitty tipper.
I do think the one thing that's becoming clearer as I reflect on this is that I'm growing increasingly pleased with the movie's determination to upend the more annoying tendencies of current online film analysis ("decoding" movies, slathering them in lazy social justice tinged judgements).
There is one reading that I'm not so sure about, but it's interesting enough. The idea is that the furries, video game concert at the end somehow represents these kinds of identity "snowflakes", a reflection of cultural debasement. I don't think it's completely worth discarding this read out of hand, but another part of me is pretty sure that this is the kind of read Armond White would have come up with. (White did not like the film, fwiw.)
I believe they were cosplayers, not (necessarily) furries.
I am not above abusing mod powers for my own amusement.
|
Posted by Jinnistan 2/16/2023 9:16 am | #14 |
I have no doubt that Tar is a shitty tipper.
Absolutely. 12%, tops.
I believe they were cosplayers, not (necessarily) furries.
I know there's a difference. I just don't care.
|
Posted by Rock 2/16/2023 11:16 am | #15 |
I have no doubt that Tar is a shitty tipper.
Absolutely. 12%, tops.
I believe they were cosplayers, not (necessarily) furries.
I know there's a difference. I just don't care.
First Fran “Liebowitz”, now this. Unbelievable.
I am not above abusing mod powers for my own amusement.
|
Posted by Jinnistan 5/26/2023 11:09 pm | #16 |
*Tilda sacrifices for the Genie, not the other way around*
|
Posted by Jinnistan 10/30/2023 5:24 pm | #17 |
Everyone are ghosts. Mom kills everyone; that's Dad under the bed.
Some theories are that Dad is the killer, and that the "guide" voice throughout is his. Possibly, or possibly this guide voice is an entirely separate malicious spirit in the house who may have forced the mother, or both parents, into committing these murders, and is now keeping the children's ghosts trapped in the house in a never-ending (but seemingly deteriorating) loop of half-remembered memories. Other theories have this malicious spirit as something more abstract, as some spiritual manifestation of the trauma of domestic violence. Personally, I prefer the "Henry Kane" read myself.
|
Posted by Jinnistan 12/16/2024 5:59 pm | #18 |
Re: I Saw The TV Glow
I'm inclined to read everything in the film, including Maddy herself, as figments of Owen's imagination.
