Jump to content

Festoon

Members
  • Posts

    14,653
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

8,054 profile views
  1. Yeah, I think the knowledgeable interviewer showed him up as very facile, but in such a way as he wasn't smart enough to notice.
  2. Yes, and where they are becomes you-know-where in the future.
  3. Yeah, I don't think something has to be a narrative account in the lame biopic style, but I don't think you can make a comment on the image, without commenting on the real person, which is what he is doing but only in all the negative aspects of her life. The selectiveness of literal events being chosen of abuse, abusive relationships, etc. alone tells a lot, imo. And it's baffling to read he doesn't think it's a film about the person, based on this. He sounds, in this interview, not as smart as he thinks he is, and he handwaves away any question the interviewer (who is excellent) with dismissive answers when he's approached with something he clearly hasn't thought through. For example, there's no way this filmmaker is making a film about the image of Monroe, without Norma Jean sucking JFK off. So he's having his cake and eating it too. And if you are just commenting on the image, well, that's basically what the filmmakers who had her in films did, so he's just the latest in line to exploit it, at best. Then again, people loved The Assassination of Jessie James By The Coward Robert Ford, which as a long, slow version of Eminem's Stan.
  4. It sounds to me, from that interview, like he actively dislikes her. And, for me, there's little point in making a film about a real person if it hasn't a biographical element - particularly have to strip out any positive aspect of their existence to suit your narrative. Also, too many cheerful references to 'whores' for my liking. To me, another bloke exploiting a famous woman who he seems to have no empathy for. More generally, I'm suspicious of blokes making films about famous women which focus mostly on the abuse, suffering and exploitation of those women. Inevitably, those films become part of that exploitation, and I suspect creepy motivations to some degree.
  5. Read an interview with the Blonde director Andrew Dominik. What a fucking creep. Not watching that. https://www.bfi.org.uk/sight-and-sound/interviews/im-not-interested-reality-im-interested-images-andrew-dominik-blonde I really don't like women-focused films from creepy men. I've the same problem with Pablo Larraín.
  6. ST Format Real Crew. Ed Ricketts for the win. I loved Amiga Power but, weirdly, never took to Gillen's writing for it. I much preferred Mil Millington, who I found more gently amusing. I always got an 'I-preferred-the-early-stuff' indie-band-fan vibe from Gillen. Then he wrote Phonogram. Vindicated.
  7. You've never heard of New Games Journalism? He started as a writer of many letters to Amiga Power (as the frankly terribly-monikered C-Monster) and they later employed him to his first writing gig.
  8. It's a fantasy world where women and gay people are treated as badly as they were in our medeival times. And dragons. Meh.
  9. It doesn't work at all as a joke as it implies she's not a good actor. Janney is a great actor. The film, however is shit. The caption should be "Janney is a great actor so the film is good, right?"
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.