Films

Off topic

Re: Films

Postby INNIT » Thu Oct 26, 2017 2:26 am

watched haneke's "code unknown"

excellent exploration of biopower/barelife

any other films like this people could recommend? specifically interested in the way the scenes cut with no real transitions and how the intensity/affects of each scene carried through to the next despite there often being a temporal/spacial disjuncture.


like how the movie was jarringly fragmented yet the intensity of each scene seemed to carry through; that's what i'm after (definitely not trying to trick care-tags into finding films for me to write about in my dissertation)

bonus points if it's avant garde, french (or german), or allows me to shittalk capitalism in some way

@Cowboy ermm, what buzzwords/jargon did you feel i used?
  • 8

User avatar
INNIT
 
Posts: 262
Joined: Sun Aug 24, 2014 2:42 am
Reputation: 1367

Re: Films

Postby talkin2snakes » Thu Oct 26, 2017 4:13 pm

i havent seen that film and generally find haneke quite hard to sit through (late malick too). but from what you're describing, in pure cinematic terms maybe tony scott's 'domino', or olivier assayas' 'boarding gate'?
  • 1

talkin2snakes
 
Posts: 38
Joined: Thu Aug 24, 2017 4:53 am
Reputation: 126

Re: Films

Postby talkin2snakes » Sat Oct 28, 2017 5:33 am

re above, doesnt surprise me that someone immersed in theory would note the agamben motifs, and if so why not say? (that said i work in the art world and get like 73 agamben references a day).
also, perhaps cowboys comment might intentionally or not raise the question fo 'hermeneutic slippage'. any properly philosophical reading of film needs to be careful to avoid reading through or as some kind of philosophical meta-language and missing the cinematic 'thing itself' (to adapt a heideggerian term) and just becoming a kind of bad philosophy. and this is a problem for me with film-makers like haneke who almost seem to present portentous thematics from the outset ,even better example would be that godawful boring handmaids tale adaptation .
  • 1

talkin2snakes
 
Posts: 38
Joined: Thu Aug 24, 2017 4:53 am
Reputation: 126

Re: Films

Postby INNIT » Sat Oct 28, 2017 6:31 pm

talkin2snakes wrote:re above, doesnt surprise me that someone immersed in theory would note the agamben motifs, and if so why not say? (that said i work in the art world and get like 73 agamben references a day).
also, perhaps cowboys comment might intentionally or not raise the question fo 'hermeneutic slippage'. any properly philosophical reading of film needs to be careful to avoid reading through or as some kind of philosophical meta-language and missing the cinematic 'thing itself' (to adapt a heideggerian term) and just becoming a kind of bad philosophy. and this is a problem for me with film-makers like haneke who almost seem to present portentous thematics from the outset ,even better example would be that godawful boring handmaids tale adaptation .


this is why i tagged @cowboy, because i'm actually interested in hearing why jargon is bad. code unknown is about barelife in the same way that bladerunner is about race, and isn't "barelife" the simplest way of saying "barelife," which is actually a very complex, nuanced, hyper-theorized concept? maybe the onus is on me to socialize terms or just avoid certain terms altogether, but then again a number of people on this forum have very sophisticated theoretical backgrounds and routinely respond to my posts (which i always appreciate, btw), so maybe my butchered explanations of agamben/foucault would be more insulting/reductionist than useful?

also, to be fully transparent, i get kind of annoyed with the term "jargon," because imo it's just another instance of devaluing the knowledge produced in the humanities as basically nonsensical abstraction (in the same way that someone like noam chomsky reads zizek and categorically dismisses all of theory as useful, because it "can't be explained to a 5 year old"), and seems to imply that anything complex isnt useful/worthwhile, or that all things must be simple and immediately and easily digestible (as all things are in the consumer culture of late capitalism; no more than 140 characters please and thanks!) else they are pretentious/to-be-ignored

anyways, i agree with your second point. i'm trying to move away from x film means y concept towards "the event of the film itself." some of the most intense/pleasurable parts of code unknown really have nothing to do with societal control over bodies, and even less to do with the ~~symbolic~~, yet imo contribute to our understanding of how states manage bodies more than the bits where racialized bodies are being abused by police.
  • 8

User avatar
INNIT
 
Posts: 262
Joined: Sun Aug 24, 2014 2:42 am
Reputation: 1367

Re: Films

Postby Cowboy » Sat Oct 28, 2017 7:26 pm

sorry deadkitty is right I'm just dumb


but to be honest it feels like academic criticism and theory has been captured in its own language not for the sake of clarifying concepts and identifying them but to prove that the person at hand is up to date with all the hot hip words.

Affect/Intensity could just as easily been called emotion really, and giving the statement "Affect" without any context presupposes the reader at hand understands what has become a rapidly popular statement in the overarching field. This means that the only way to understand is to be part of this institutional education, which I think can take a lot away, seeing as the hopes to change the world through study find themselves in the masses being able to actually understand what study proposes. It's also not even remotely accessible to populations subordinate to the institutions we so readily criticize.

Study here just stands for theory/institutional criticism

So when I say jargon it isn't that it's a nonsense abstraction (which I'm not entirely against being true) but that the portrayal makes it so that to anyone who reads this shit it goes way over their head if they aren't familiar, thus making it nonsense to the common reader. Let's not act like anywhere near a sizeable bit of the population has the remotest of ideas of who Foucault/Agamben are and can even go so far as to discuss what they say RE: barelife.

when you say that digesting information, specifically philosophical education, is akin to digesting capital I honestly have to laugh. That's ridiculously self serving. IDK how much depth I'd have to go in to explain why chomsky isn't actually totally wrong here.

When you have the option to discuss something in a small, casual forum, and you coat it in a esoteric vocabulary, I struggle to believe you actually care to discuss with the forum at large rather than just prove to the other people who understand it that you can keep up/know ur stuff.

Maybe I'm just a reductionist and anything outside of these terms can't actually capture their essence
(like emotion can't capture affect), But i say at least give a bit of a nod to the persons who don't have the background you do. It's a fine line I guess but *shrug*

@INNIT I initially only put the first line cuz I was being sassy and deadkitty is annoying but I tried to engage with the rest

Also I don't think caretags threads are the places to hit the deep end of the philosophical pool, and I'm sure it's best if we just keep things to film as they're meant to be. Feel free to pm me if you want to discuss this further, but I'm not posting here with this tangent further

Also none of this is meant to be personal! You're obviously immensely intelligent and capable, and I'm sure at the end of the day this is me just saying "hey don't be so smart" haha
  • 5

User avatar
Cowboy
 
Posts: 579
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2015 3:11 pm
Location: Austin
Reputation: 2342

Re: Films

Postby INNIT » Sat Oct 28, 2017 9:13 pm

alright raise your hands who knows what barelife is

just kidding, fair enough @cowboy, thanks for responding
  • 4

User avatar
INNIT
 
Posts: 262
Joined: Sun Aug 24, 2014 2:42 am
Reputation: 1367

Re: Films

Postby thephfactor » Tue Oct 31, 2017 1:02 pm

Cowboy wrote:but to be honest it feels like academic criticism and theory has been captured in its own language not for the sake of clarifying concepts and identifying them but to prove that the person at hand is up to date with all the hot hip words.

Affect/Intensity could just as easily been called emotion really, and giving the statement "Affect" without any context presupposes the reader at hand understands what has become a rapidly popular statement in the overarching field. This means that the only way to understand is to be part of this institutional education, which I think can take a lot away, seeing as the hopes to change the world through study find themselves in the masses being able to actually understand what study proposes. It's also not even remotely accessible to populations subordinate to the institutions we so readily criticize.

Study here just stands for theory/institutional criticism

So when I say jargon it isn't that it's a nonsense abstraction (which I'm not entirely against being true) but that the portrayal makes it so that to anyone who reads this shit it goes way over their head if they aren't familiar, thus making it nonsense to the common reader. Let's not act like anywhere near a sizeable bit of the population has the remotest of ideas of who Foucault/Agamben are and can even go so far as to discuss what they say RE: barelife.


So I hate to revive this but I have a very big problem with this.

First of all, "affect/intensity" are not the same words as emotion, and the "jargon" used in the original post also has its own unique meanings. They have different meanings. If one has trouble understanding them, one should look them up. If one is not interested in learning, then one shouldn't bother to complain. One is fully capable of learning the meanings of these words and phrases, which brings me to my main point...

It's just concern trolling to bring up "accessibility" when you, aka the person doing the complaining, absolutely has access to these forms of knowledge. Everybody on this forum has access to these forms of knowledge. Not only is everyone here online and online-proficient due to the very nature of this platform, which is all it would require to acquire a working knowledge of the concepts you found "jargony," almost everyone here is, has been, or will be associated with university studies and academia. The post was clearly not intended for a "sizeable bit of the population" or "populations subordinate to the institutions we so readily criticize" (as if any of us are not subordinate to these institution). It's intended for the readers of this forum, a tiny slice of a tiny slice of a totally liminal class. And there's absolutely no reason to assume the original poster would not easily and enthusiastically shift register to share their views on this movie to somebody outside of this forum. They've already adapted the way they write to this forum in a different way than they would in an academic paper, for example. So why is it woke for one to evoke the "unwashed masses" when one is only using them to complain that what's written isn't immediately convenient for "me"?

This kind of concern trolling is something I see fairly often and it's very irritating. Things like access and accessibility for the masses actually do matter, but deploying those concerns in this manner cheapens legitimate problems. We can have a discussion about proletarian art and criticism! We can do meaningful work to expand access! But let's not make a mockery of those things by using them to back up a meaningless complaint on an internet forum!

(and for the record, I had no idea, regardless of my 6 years pursuing a college degree and ceaseless thinking and talking about theory and "jargon," had absolutely no idea what barelife or Agamben were, but after doing a very small bit of research, now feel like I have some level of familiarity with the concepts and am able to appreciate the original post more as a result)
  • 9

User avatar
thephfactor
 
Posts: 277
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2014 3:57 am
Reputation: 978

Re: Films

Postby INNIT » Wed Nov 29, 2017 3:42 am

has anyone ever seen la vie nouvelle? what the fuck did i just watch, i have never been so disturbed in my life. went wayyyy too far down the rabbit hole of experimental film, back to novels
  • 1

User avatar
INNIT
 
Posts: 262
Joined: Sun Aug 24, 2014 2:42 am
Reputation: 1367

Re: Films

Postby oucho » Mon Jul 23, 2018 4:35 am

I just watched the face of another which seems really clairvoyant and relevant to 'facelessness' on social media now and the collapse of our ability to enforce moral codes that accompanies that as predicted by dr hira in the film

I think Teshigahara is a really great director
  • 0

Image
oucho
 
Posts: 505
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2014 5:34 pm
Reputation: 3694

Re: Films

Postby surfdude69 » Tue Jul 31, 2018 10:53 am

I just recently watched Dogtooth and was pretty much blown away, a really really beautiful film. Are there any other excellent Greek films anyone would recommend?
  • 0

User avatar
surfdude69
 
Posts: 29
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2016 2:36 pm
Reputation: 202

Re: Films

Postby GeorgeT » Fri Aug 10, 2018 5:54 am

My fav one id Me before you! Guys, just check it later.
  • 0

User avatar
GeorgeT
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2018 3:48 am
Reputation: 4

Re: Films

Postby Northwest » Fri Aug 10, 2018 12:50 pm

So no one is talking about American Animals but it ruled. Highly recommend, saw at second run theater for 4 bucks might end up being my favorite of the year.

Mission Impossible: Fallout is also incredible. Saw it in IMAX for $9, again highly recommend. Some of the best action screenwriting of the year.
http://observer.com/2018/08/mission-impossible-fallout-is-a-master-class-in-dramatic-tension-film-crit-hulk/

Missed Leave No Trace like a dummy. I should have seen that in theaters. Re-watching Winter's Bone as penance. Same director, took her 8 years (?) to make another movie, that movie being...you guessed it, Leave No Trace. Premise is a girl on the cusp of adulthood lives with her survivalist father in a park outside Portland, Oregon. Should have gone just to practice location spotting out of context.

Best action sequence of the year for me is in Incredibles 2, if you've seen it you know the one.

Blackkklansman this morning to get that matinee pricing (yee yee yee).

ALSO: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6IcLnerkEZo
  • 1

User avatar
Northwest
 
Posts: 80
Joined: Wed Jun 03, 2015 2:00 pm
Reputation: 287

Re: Films

Postby fun_yunchables » Sun Aug 19, 2018 4:52 am

i just watched to all the boys i loved on netflix because of #asianrepresentation

and I feel like representation took two steps back...
its more like “to all the white boys (+ one token minority for diversity*) i’ve loved before”
which just reinforces the white beauty hegemony (at least for males) which in itself is problematic
I cant believe AA people are actually stanning this kinda crap

hopefully crazy rich asians is more well balanced... goign to watch it v soon. if its just as bad representationally i’m just gonna stick my head in the sand and go back to watching hk new cinema art films

*there’s one black guy. upon further research, this guy was originally white in the novel (making all of them white in the source material) and the race was changed in casting
  • 1

coolest lame guy u'll ever meet
User avatar
fun_yunchables
 
Posts: 762
Joined: Sat Jan 11, 2014 11:39 pm
Reputation: 4877

Re: Films

Postby CheerUpBrokeBoy » Sat Aug 25, 2018 7:43 pm

rewatching boogie nights and i'm still blown away by how well PTA writes characters and their struggles – i suppose it's no surprise that everyone can relate to characters in a film focused around desire, because everyone desires something, but it almost physically hurts to see some of these characters go through it the way they do

julianne moore, william h. macy, and philip seymour hoffman's characters especially have these desires and struggles that are so viscerally real; small in scope but still unbearably sad. successful romances always feel good to watch but there's something about unrequited desire/love/devotion that's so poignant and painful to watch
  • 1

Image
User avatar
CheerUpBrokeBoy
 
Posts: 592
Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2014 11:29 pm
Location: online
Reputation: 2357

Re: Films

Postby rjbman » Tue Apr 07, 2020 9:32 am

bumping an old thread for these trying times (everyone who had that phrase on their bingo card, take a shot). what have yall been watching?

mostly been rewatching old movies i love: snowpiercer, the other guys, life acquatic...

I did watch Bacarau on @thephfactor's recommendation and enjoyed it
  • 3

"Let's be vagabonds." - Yohji Yamamoto
User avatar
rjbman
 
Posts: 1533
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 11:34 pm
Location: CO
Reputation: 6796

Re: Films

Postby jylt » Tue Apr 07, 2020 11:53 am

"sweet bean" by naomi kawase was incredible for me
"shoplifters" and "our little sister" by koreeda hirokazu are both very good too
  • 3

jylt
 
Posts: 20
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2018 12:11 am
Reputation: 173

Re: Films

Postby fun_yunchables » Tue Apr 07, 2020 1:07 pm

go to town on criterion channel tbh

im currently revisiting edward yang
  • 1

coolest lame guy u'll ever meet
User avatar
fun_yunchables
 
Posts: 762
Joined: Sat Jan 11, 2014 11:39 pm
Reputation: 4877

Re: Films

Postby 106-2 » Tue Apr 07, 2020 6:04 pm

definitely recommend both of these! https://now-instant.la/screen and massive shoutout to @jylt for unearthing them

also saw Southland Tales last night - Richard Kelly's next film after Donnie Darko - total hot mess but really fun and honestly fairly prescient in kind of absurd ways. Wouldn't recommend too highly under normal circumstances but it's not like any of us have better things to be doing rn ahaha
  • 1

Image
User avatar
106-2
 
Posts: 128
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2015 6:18 pm
Reputation: 765

Re: Films

Postby thephfactor » Tue Apr 07, 2020 7:00 pm

Portrait of a Lady on Fire was very good. Was one of the last films I saw in theaters before that all came to an end, and it's now on Hulu. Sciamma's back catalog is well worth exploring too.
  • 4

User avatar
thephfactor
 
Posts: 277
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2014 3:57 am
Reputation: 978

Re: Films

Postby bels » Wed Apr 08, 2020 3:49 am

I really liked southland tales, I saw it roughly when it came out and rewatched recently after I read this essay which claims its a masterpiece:

http://www.shaviro.com/Blog/?p=611

If you're weak of mind, like me, and believe everything you read, like me, it may convince you it's actually brilliant.
  • 4

Image
User avatar
bels
Yung Winona
 
Posts: 5077
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2013 2:43 pm
Reputation: 18832

Re: Films

Postby mooncorp » Mon Apr 13, 2020 2:17 am

i watched all about lily chou-chou recently, it was a very very sweet and beautiful film. if you liked shoplifters you'll probably like this, they have a similar atmosphere

aside from that im going through some graff docs on youtube haha i don't know if anyone wants to talk about that, i watched pixo and next i'm watching piece by piece, then up here kids
  • 1

User avatar
mooncorp
 
Posts: 64
Joined: Tue Dec 16, 2014 5:25 pm
Reputation: 610

Re: Films

Postby JewTurk » Mon Apr 13, 2020 4:37 pm

I watched Columbus and really enjoyed it! Definitely pulling from Ozu which I enjoyed. I think I'm gonna rewatch some Ozu because of it. I just like that slower 'pace'.
  • 0

User avatar
JewTurk
 
Posts: 585
Joined: Thu May 29, 2014 3:20 am
Reputation: 1857

Re: Films

Postby jylt » Tue Apr 14, 2020 12:29 pm

where should i start if i'm trying to get into hou hsiao hsien?
  • 4

jylt
 
Posts: 20
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2018 12:11 am
Reputation: 173

Re: Films

Postby popcorn » Thu Apr 16, 2020 12:58 pm

Seems like everybody else likes the same 3 directors that I do. I was delighted to find this 27 page Frederic Jameson essay about Taiwanese New Wave films, including his suggestion that Terrorizers (1986) is the postmodern film par excellence. (Debating whether or not I'll talk about it in an essay I'm writing where I'm taking some points from Jameson's first two Postmodernism essays from 1984 and 1985.)

https://chinese.wooster.edu/files/remaptaibei.pdf

From this cycle, Terrorizer stands out starkly as uncharacteristic: sharing none of the potential sentimentalism of the nativist films, its visual elegance has frequently been characterized as cold, as one would a glassy surface that repels identification. Yet Taipei Story combined fashion-plate visuality with pathos, and its hero - played, as I have said, by Hou Hsiao-hsien himself - was a nonintellectual, fumbling his way, in the manner of U.S. populism, through a series of odd jots and reverses of fortune. What sets Terrorizer off is not the class status of its characters, who are now, as we shall see, professionals and lumpens, but the now-archaic modernity of its theme: art versus life, the novel and reality, mimesis and irony. The co-protagonist is a writer, Chou Yii-fen (Zhou Yufen), with a writer's block (Figure 21) who is freed up by an anonymous phone call denouncing her husband's adulterous affairs, at which point she sits down to write a prize-winning novella about this situation (which has no basis in fact), leaving him in the process. Under other circumstances, the process whereby the possibility of attributing guilt to the husband suddenly grants the wife independence would offer interesting material for interpretation; but Chou Yii-fen's story is only one of four distinct plot strands in this film, whose alternation, I would argue, leaves no distance for reflection of this kind, for interpretive rumination, particularly of this motivational-psychoanalytic type.
  • 0

User avatar
popcorn
 
Posts: 589
Joined: Sun May 18, 2014 5:38 pm
Location: goldheart mountaintop
Reputation: 1571

Re: Films

Postby INNIT » Sun Apr 19, 2020 4:25 pm

my reader made me watch "dogville". i don't get it. can someone find me an essay explaining why it is earth shatteringly brilliant
  • 0

User avatar
INNIT
 
Posts: 262
Joined: Sun Aug 24, 2014 2:42 am
Reputation: 1367

Re: Films

Postby jylt » Wed Sep 16, 2020 11:40 am

watched "the wild goose lake" which was directed by diao yinan. i enjoyed it. apparently some people like diao's "black coal, thin ice" more.

this might be a mundane observation, but i've gotten more relaxed about my movie watching. i used to have these two types that i'd sort all of the movies i'd watch into: (1) entertainment movies that are only about my pleasure without close attention, (2) serious movies that i must dedicate my close and unwavering attention to formally, thematically, etc.

loosening up about category 2 movies feels similar to the loosening up that i experienced with my reading practice. i think i learned skimming as a mode of engagement with different ends/means than the mode of close reading. both are enriching in different ways.

gonna try to do more relaxed movie watching

Image
  • 0

jylt
 
Posts: 20
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2018 12:11 am
Reputation: 173

Re: Films

Postby alby » Mon Sep 21, 2020 12:24 pm

watched prisoners from 2013 it was really good i had clammy hands most of the time would recommend
  • 0

i'd walk a mile for a camel
User avatar
alby
 
Posts: 543
Joined: Thu Jan 09, 2014 10:00 pm
Reputation: 2655

Previous

Return to Care

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests