Uh. . . what?What film struck you as most confusing?
Panelist: BevfromNYC
The Kids Are Alright – first I was confused as to how this was Oscar worthy. And then I was even more confused by what the writer was trying to say with the film. All I can say is that this must have been written by a man because all it said to me was that lesbians hate men, but even the most hard-core lesbians can’t control themselves when a man is in the room doing he-man kind of stuff. That is kind of a misogynist message to me.
Panelist: T-Rav
Donnie Darko. I’ve seen some really bizarre stuff—well, bizarre by my standards—but I still don’t understand that movie. They say it was about time travel and existentialism and blah blah blah, but I sometimes think the producers thought if they just put someone in a giant rabbit suit, the rest of the movie would seem deeper than it really was. Or maybe I just wasn’t sympathetic to the protagonist because he was a Dukakis supporter. Who knows. All I know is, I didn’t understand it.
Panelist: Tennessee Jed
Inception comes to mind, although Tinker Tailor would be right there if I hadn't known what was going on beforehand.
Panelist: ScottDS
I've only seen it once and I never read the original book but David Cronenberg's Naked Lunch definitely left me scratching my head. From what I understand, the book (by William S. Burroughs) is a series of loosely-connected, non-linear vignettes and, for the film, Cronenberg combined it with elements from Burrough's own life. I don't remember much from the film, other than Peter Weller's typewriter turning into a giant insect which talked out of its rear end.
Panelist: AndrewPrice
The Exorcist 2 haunts my dreams, and not in a good way. So let me get this right. Richard Burton becomes obsessed with Linda Blair. So he hangs out with her and they hypnotize each other. Bam! He's in some fake place in Africa telling everyone he's a devil worshiper. Moments later, he meets Darth Vader's voice, who is a scientist and laughs at the stupidity of the movie. Then Burton's back in a trance for no reason whatsoever. So he and Blair travel to DC to re-enact the ending of the original movie. W.T.F.? Nothing in this film means anything. It's just pretentious garbage strung together almost randomly.
Comments? Thoughts?
I still haven't gotten everything sorted out in The Usual Suspects, and I've seen it about ten times.
ReplyDeleteThe worst and most confusing movie I've ever seen.
ReplyDelete"Stealth"
To make it worse, both my wife and I felt ill after watching it. Not because of the nonsensical plot, acting, etc. The camera must have been mounted on a trampoline. I don't know about you guys, but I find my vision to be very steady. Not bouncing around with every bump in the floor.
I've never been drunk, but after watching that movie I think I have an idea.
2001: A Space Odyssey
ReplyDeleteI'm going with Floyd, 2001. I have seen that a dozen times and I'm still now sure what it means, if anything!
ReplyDeleteWow, tough question. I'll have to get back to you on this. 2001 was certainly a problem. T-Rav's choice of Donnie Darko fits too. I haven't seen The Kids Are Alright or Exorcist II. I liked Inception and haven't seen Tinker Tailor.
ReplyDeleteNaked Lunch? The Exorcist 2? Wow, I take it back. My pick's got nothing on those.
ReplyDeleteLawhawk, That's probably my favorite movie. It is admittedly complex, but it's all there. :)
ReplyDeleteT-Rav, Actually, you've got a really solid pick! That's one messed up movie.
ReplyDeleteRe: Donnie Darko... yeah, I'll agree with this one. I only saw it once and should probably see it again. I know director Richard Kelly created a director's cut several years later but I don't know if it's better or worse.
ReplyDeleteIt was Kelly's first film and his two subsequent films aren't any easier to understand! Southland Tales was edited before its release, and there was a three-issue graphic novel series which was supposed to set up certain things in the film (never a good idea in my opinion).
And The Box, his most "commercial" film, is pretty confusing as well, though I think I actually got it after reading the Wikipedia synopsis.
I haven't seen Exorcist 2 - I just hear it's a bad movie. :-)
Max, I gave up on that one fairly quickly so the Trampoline-Cam (LOL) never got the chance to bother me. Unfortunately, there are directors who think that when you can't come up with something exciting, just shake the camera and it will all work out. I don't subscribe to that at all. I hate the shaky-cam.
ReplyDeleteJed, I have a fairly easy time following Inception. Okay, maybe that's stretching it, but I can figure out most of what's going on without too much difficulty. It's some of the details which get my head working overtime, and the ending, though we may all be overthinking that.
ReplyDeleteFloyd, That may be the classic film in the category of pretentiousness. I don't think it actually means anything, it's just a bunch of sort-of-recognizable symbols which are meant to make you think it has meaning.
ReplyDeleteDUQ, It means nothing.
ReplyDeleteDoc, This is a tough one. Give it some thought and let us know. Just don't pick something like Ernest Does Christmas. ;)
ReplyDeleteT-Rav, I think he's dreaming at the end of Inception.
ReplyDeleteScott, The Box sucked. It had potential, but it never came near achieving that. Come to think of it, Southland Tales sucked too. Hmm. And I don't like Donnie Darko either. I'm seeing a pattern here! LOL!
ReplyDeleteMaybe I'm easily confused, but Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas and its prequel The Rum Diary come to mind.
ReplyDeleteI know what confused me! Ernest Does Christmas. ;)
ReplyDeletetryanmax, I don't know if confusion is the right word, but "unpleasant" springs to mind. I guess "confused" springs to mind as well.
ReplyDeleteDUQ, You need help my friend.
ReplyDeleteNolan's "Memento" had me guessing too. I had to watch it a few times before I got it down (I think).
ReplyDeleteAlso Aronofsky's "Pi" -- I liked it but it was confusing initially... or maybe another pretentious one.
ReplyDeleteAndrew, the only thing I've figured out is that it somehow involves time travel, although I have no idea how Donnie's able to accomplish that. When I asked someone about this, they said I was missing the point. Yeah, okay. I guess there was supposed to be a point somewhere. It's kind of interesting, I guess, but I don't know that I really like it.
ReplyDeletePerhaps I should clarify. I could follow the narrative in each of those movies just fine. What I could not understand why the Depp characters behaved as they did. I don't believe there is a human being alive (except possibly Hunter S. Thompson himself) who acts like that. I also couldn't find a point in either one.
ReplyDeleteFloyd, I very much enjoyed both Memento and Pi, but I agree that those are films that force you to stop and think about them and then rewatch them. They are not easy films to grasp.
ReplyDeleteI wouldn't call Pi pretentious per se because I think it ultimately makes sense. But it certainly does take a huge bite of the intellectual apple.
T-Rav, your friend was being pretentious. If he weren't he would have simply told you that there is no mechanism by which Donnie time travels. He simply does. There's no real point in that, it's just how the story was written.
ReplyDeleteHey man, Ernest Saves Christmas was deep. You just didn't notice the subtlety of the philosophical arguments it was making about society and existence, as symbolized by one Ernest. Broaden your minds, guys.
ReplyDeleteT-Rav, I got the same reaction when I pointed out that nothing about the film really made sense -- "you're missing the point." That makes me think there was no point. The film honestly strikes me as nonsense, like a couple ideas that never came together properly.
ReplyDeletetryanmax, no one can understand why the Depp characters behave the way they do. Including Depp himself, probably.
ReplyDeletetryanmax, I concur and that's why I thought unpleasant was the word which came to mind, because the film was one of those laborious films where we're supposed to take a messed-up and entirely unreal character and assume that they are someone realistic and worth watching.
ReplyDeletetryanmax, That's how I understood Donnie Darko as well -- just accept that this is how it is and don't ask us to explain it you silly audience.
ReplyDeleteT-Rav, LOL! I'll have to rewatch Ernest Saves Christmas, as I have indeed missed its philosophical underpinnings! ;)
ReplyDeleteT-Rav, I think his characters can be understood if you assume long-term exposure to massive quantities of alcohol.
ReplyDeleteYeah, I was going to say that Depp can best be explained as being a dry drunk... or a wet drunk.
ReplyDeleteAndrew, also formaldehyde.
ReplyDeletetryanmax, maybe I'm asking too much in the way of specific explanations. Given the way the rest of the movie went, though, it just added to the pointlessness. It's about as pretentious as The Fountain.
ReplyDeleteDoc, That would explain Captain Jack Sparrow!
ReplyDeleteT-Rav, So true.
ReplyDeleteT-Rav, The Fountain was awful and absolutely belongs on this list! That was a movie which said NOTHING yet thought it had said everything. I hate that one.
ReplyDeleteT-Rav, I actually enjoy Donnie Darko, but it took me several viewings to sort things out. It's basically a scifi which ignores the sci. Beyond that, it's about a time travel paradox. It doesn't try to sort anything out, it just puts the paradox on display. To that end, it's not a deep film at all.
ReplyDeletetryanmax, The films fans certainly like to pretend that it's a deep film.
ReplyDeleteAndrew, after I posted that, I realized I probably should have made that my entry instead of Donnie Darko. But it's just as well, because Donnie Darko at least interested me enough to be thinking about it and therefore get even more confused afterwards. I just hated The Fountain off the bat and stopped thinking about it at all.
ReplyDeleteT-Rav, I had the same thought. After you posted that, I kept wondering why I hadn't picked it! LOL!
ReplyDeleteCount me on on The Fountain being an absolute mess.
ReplyDeleteYou know, I really wanted to like that one too. I enjoyed the soundtrack, I like the actors, and I thought it was pretty. But it was just a mess.
ReplyDeleteMorning everyone! :D
ReplyDeleteExcellent choices for confused movies. I agree particularly about "Donnie Darko." That amde no sense.
Oh yes, "The Fountain"! That was garbage too.
ReplyDeleteHas anyone seen "Tree of Life"? I hear it's bad.
Ellen, "Donnie Darko" seems to be winning today!
ReplyDeleteI have not seen "Tree of Life." When I heard it was intentionally confusing, I basically decided to avoid it.
The Star Wars prequels. Where those meant to be a comedy or not?
ReplyDeleteEdward, LOL! Your guess is as good as mine on that one!
ReplyDeleteEraserhead. I was able to explain it, at least it sounded cogent, once. Of course, I may have been drunk at the time of the explanation.
ReplyDeleteEric, Yeah, that one didn't work for me either. Maybe there was something I missed, but it just didn't click with me. It seemed confused and kind of pointless.
ReplyDeleteEraserhead was a strange movie. What about "Magnolia"? Tom Cruise, frogs falling from the sky.
ReplyDeleteROCKY HORRO PICTURE SHOW: Lost track of the plot about 30 min in. But the music is still awesome.
ReplyDeleteI didn't see SOUTHLAND TALES. I only saw Linkara's group review of it but if it is an indication of the movie, then it is pretty confusing. (NSFW Warning)
LINK
Interestingly, was ScottDS pointed out above, Southland Tales was made by the same guy who did Donnie Darko. Make of that what you will.
Wait a minute, Rocky Horror had a plot?
ReplyDeleteThe Fountain... thank God for Clint Mansell, Kronos Quartet and Mogwai for that soundtrack!
ReplyDeleteZardoz was confusing... guns penises and Sean Connery in hip boots and a red banana hammock... John Boorman was smoking something.
I was also confused by Woodstock. Where was the nuclear explosion? How can you gather all those damn dirty hippies in one place and not nuke it? Maybe it was a documentary and not a fantasy film. I don't know.
"no point" pictures... Prime example is Lars von Trier's "Melancholia" -- besides a lingering (and beautifully shot -- in an artistic way no kidding) nude shot of Kirsten Dunst -- there is no opoint to the movie -- intentionally. It is the very definition of "nihilistic".
Andrew,
ReplyDeleteI'm assuming it must have one.
Kit, Actually, I didn't know until recently that the whole thing is about drug use. If you listen to the songs, that's what's going on.
ReplyDeleteAndrew,
ReplyDeleteNo surprise there.
Floyd, The Fountain did have an excellent soundtrack. That was it's one saving grace... but it wasn't enough to save it.
ReplyDeleteZardoz was weird as heck and I don't think I understand what the point was at all, if it even had one. All I can think of was that it must have been an attempt to make the banana hammock more mainstream.
LOL! Yeah, Woodstock could have used a nuclear explosion. It might have saved us a lot of trouble!
I haven't seen Melancholia, but it sounds like Tree of Life... some stuff happens, the movie ends, you act smug for having seen it.
Kit, True. But it honestly never occurred to me when I was younger. It wasn't until recently when I watched it again that I suddenly realized that all the lyrics are about drug use.
ReplyDeleteIt wasn't until the third tine I watched Inception that I figured out the film actually had at least six levels of reality: the the movie's main "awake" level, the three dream levels, the limbo level, and a 6th, the audience level. The last indicated by the special 'kicker' music played in the credits, where Nolan indicated it was time for the audience to get up and go back to the real world.
ReplyDeleteAnd by implication making us wonder if we live at the 'top' level ourselves or if there are still higher levels..
Gideon, Inception is an interesting film. I've seen it many times now and I go back and forth about how well it's really put together. But in any event, it's an excellent film and I do wish Hollywood would make more like it.
ReplyDeleteOh, pretty much anything staring Shia Lebeouf. Seriously, what is up with that?
ReplyDeleteEd, LOL!
ReplyDeleteSince Shia Lebeouf comes up, I'd have to say the most visually confusing films are the Transformers series. Stuff is just flying around so fast you can't even process it. Before the first one came out, all the buzz was about how cool the transformations were going to be. I can't comment on that because, even though I've seen all three movies, I've yet to actually see a transformation. All I saw was aluminum foil whipping around inside a blender.
ReplyDeleteI remember being pretty confused after seeing the version of Dune with Sting in it. I hadn't read the book, and they handed out some kind of movie guide when you went in the theater, never a good sign I'd say.
ReplyDeleteIf you weren't familiar with the music already I would imagine Pink Floyd's The Wall would be pretty damn confusing as well. As it is, it has got to be the most depressing album I own.
tryanmax, I absolutely agree with that. It's just a jumble of flashing lights and big noises with no way to tell at all what is happening on screen.
ReplyDeleteEd and DUQ, Let me second that this is indeed a mystery. ;)
ReplyDeleteOutlaw, Very true. If you didn't already know the music, then The Wall would seem like a totally confused mess. And yes, that's a very depressing album. It's excellent, but depressing.
ReplyDeleteI didn't have a problem with Dune, but then I knew the story. I remember the guide they handed out at the theater too. LOL!
I grew up watching The Wall (don't ask) and I still don't get it.
ReplyDeletetryanmax, The key is to realize that it's not that deep. :)
ReplyDeleteGreat choices although some I haven't seen (looks like I should avoid The Fountain).
ReplyDeleteIt seemed to me that in 2001, Dave went into something like a black hole where all the laws of time and space get muddled up. Basically he is experiencing every point of his life simultaneously.
Donnie Darko was a little confusing but somewhat entertaining.
The Wall is confusing because you are trying to make sense of a man who has lost his grip on reality. Like 2001, I see the artist trying to protray something illogical and even incomprehensible but we try to find some sort of logic in it. Similar to trying to understand why that idiot shot all those people in Aurora. It is impossible to rationalize a irrational mind or behavior. Instead, for these kinds of movies, try to shut that off and just enjoy the ride.
Dune was confusing the first time through, especially if you didn't read the book.
I still find Star Wars Episode 3 very confusing. I don't get why Anakin crossed over? Why was he so reluctant to kill Palpatine but no problem killing Windu and the Jedi children? Why were the stormtroopers so easily convinced to kill their embedded Jedi Knights? Jedis had saved them multiple times. They even had a preplanned order? How did so many troopers keep that order a secret? How come the Jedi didn't get "a bad feeling" when the order came down? What date rape drug did Anakin use to convince Padme to have sex with him? Why did she die in a universe with advance medicine to save Anakin? Why didn't Obi-wan finish Anakin off? Did he want him to suffer in excruciating pain? I thought they were friends. Why does General Grevis wheeze? He's freakin' machine! He doesn't need air! AAARRRGGG!
Floyd: 2001 is a great choice. It's like a detective novel that leaves out some of the clues. I read A.C. Clark's (hard to find) book and also a book on Kubrick which actually showed a frame of the advanced energy based aliens which were cut from the film. So with those clues the movie is actually straight forward. In those days, making something purposely obscure automatically made it more profound. Shame on Kubrick.
ReplyDeleteMy choice would be the Brit revolution movie "IF..." starring Malcolm McDowell (soon to star in Clockwork Orange) As near as I can make out, the point the movie is making can be summarized as - getting thrashed at an English public school demands taking up arms and performing mass murder.
More recently would be the Japanese anime series Neon Genesis Evangelion. Which lays down continuus hooks, but never pays them off.
Koshcat, Those are excellent questions about the prequel and they truly highlight the flaws with the whole concept of those films!
ReplyDeleteYou may be right about 2001 and the The Wall. I enjoyed The Wall because I like the album and because like you, I never tried to make sense of it.
I've actually come to enjoy Dune a lot.
K, I haven't seen either IF or Neon Genesis.
ReplyDeleteI haven't seen the aliens you are talking about in 2001, but that would definitely shine a different light on the story. I think you are right that lots of directors (especially in the 1960) simply made things confusing because they thought that would make it profound.
Re: Star Wars Episode 3, don't try to make sense of anything George Lucas has done post-Indy 3.
ReplyDeleteP.S. Didn't see the Fighter squad movie by Lucas. If it is good, I have no idea.
I think that when watching "Rocky Horror Picture Show" you need to be dropping acid. It will make it make sense. Not that I would know personally. You know, kind of like you have to wear the glasses to really see a 3D movie.
ReplyDeleteThat may actually be the same for all of these movies that you've named. Maybe some form of mind-altering drugs would bring clarity.
sorry to miss the fun. Been away since Friday. Lots of really good picks and comments.
ReplyDeleteOff topic - Has anyone notice how big Mitt Romney's head is? I mean, compared to Ryan, it's HUGE!
ReplyDeleteKit, That's probably a good policy.
ReplyDeleteI never saw it either. I think it was called Red Tails. It looked intensely cliche ridden and PC.
Bev, LOL! I hadn't noticed that he had a big head. I'll have to look for that!
ReplyDeleteBev, That could well be with Rocky Horror! Being high would probably help it a good deal.
ReplyDeleteJed, I'm glad you're back!
ReplyDeleteWell Time Travel usually got me confused in general, with one exception being Back to the Future, although that's possibly also because the Back to the Future Trilogy is pretty much comedy.
ReplyDeleteFor a while, however, the original Terminator film from 1984 confused me the most, given the two simultaneous time travel paradoxes that made the origins confusing. Until Donnie Darko entered the scene, so I would go with Donnie Darko for that matter. I mean, the film does an exceptional job at confusing cause and effect, and I really could not get an understanding of all the themes and plot elements on a first viewing.
Andrew, when your childhood is marred by The Wall, you just try to make sense of it. Like a victim of abuse. (j/k)
ReplyDeleteBev, be nice to big-headed people. Our massive brains don't cancel out our feeling. (And yes, I have been called Big Head Todd, though I am not he.)
tryanmax, My childhood was marred with classic country and some western and a lot of Elvis.
ReplyDeleteBut then 70's pop and disco came along! (Which explains the love of jumpsuits!)
Hmm, I can't use the 70s to excuse my fondness for jumpsuits. So I'll just blame Pink Floyd.
ReplyDeleteThough, thanks to my grandfather, I too was marred by classic country. And, God help me, I even like some of it. *sobs uncontrollably*
ReplyDeleteLOL! Yeah, some of that classic country is pretty hard to take at times. I do like Western though, particularly Marty Robbins.
ReplyDeleteI figured the jumpsuit thing meant you were from the future?
BTW, I love the Big Head Todd reference!
now, I have more movies for my "skip 'em" list! I have not seen most of the ones y'all named. I agree that 2001 was confusing - and stupid.
ReplyDeleteI think if they confuse me, I block out the experience.
Except, there is one that I have only seen the first third of and COULD NOT stand, and I don't understand why so many people love it - "Raising Arizona". WHY???!!! (not exactly the"confusing" you had in mind in the question, but...)
(I realized as I wrote that that "Napoleon Dynamite" is another I don't understand why people like it - but I don't care why either. "Raising AZ" is one that I seem to be the only person ever who didn't like it and that boggles my mind!!!)
rlaWTX, That's not an unusual reaction to Coen Brothers films (Raising Arizona). Some people love them, other people hate them. Few people are on the fence.
ReplyDeleteI don't particularly like Napoleon Dynamite either.
Out of curiosity, if you block out the experience, then how do you know that you don't keep watching the same bad movie over and over and just never remember that you already saw it and hated it? ;)
Andrew, I had that experience with the movie Frequency. It was just so forgettable that I checked it out from the video store (back in the day) three times before it sunk in that I had seen it before. And, not coincidentally, I don't like the movie.
ReplyDeleteTryanmax - I meant no offense to all big headed persons, but OMG! Romney's head is huge! I would say something about his potential hand size, but that would be unseemly. ;-)
ReplyDeleterlaWTX, if anything, after seeing Napoleon Dynamite, if anything, it's funny for the randomness and punchlines speckled throughout. Since when does some kid in the midwest live with his loser uncle and older brother, have his pet llama around, and who knows what else?
ReplyDeleteAnyways, I think that was the point of the film, it was supposed to be hillarious just because it is so full of randomness and the unbelievable, you just can't take it seriously. Anyways, I remember when I heard some PA teens joking with "heck yes", and then some people introduced me to the source.
tryanmax, since you mentioned the Transformers movies, I have such a bias as to consider the live action movies abominations in comparison with the original 1980s series. I mean come on, Optimus Prime was really the main character there, and well, I am one of those 80s kids, so that should explain the rest.
ReplyDeleteBen, I feel the same way. I liked the cartoon. I do not like the live action movies. They lost the essence of the cartoon entirely.
ReplyDeleteBen, I ♥ the 80s! It's good to be an 80s kid. The Transformers movies make my inner child cry.
ReplyDelete-------------------------
Bev, we wouldn't want to be unseemly now, would we. But in all seriousness, I do have a big head, and I can't help but think when I'm around small headed people that I could probably kill them with a single head-butt. It must be the Scottish in me.
tryanmax and Bev, My head is so large (probably swollen with ego) that they had to special order me a helmet when I played football because nothing they had would fit.
ReplyDeleteAndrew "El Cabeza" Price wins the freakishly large head contest, then. Last time I got new glasses, I saw these frames I liked with the brand name "FatHeadz" which, appropriately enough, are designed for fat heads. They were actually too big for me (though not by much), which was a bit of a surprise.
ReplyDeleteI agree that Zardoz was unfathomable (Sean Connery in a wedding dress?) I tried watching Tree of Life. Even gave up an hour of my that I will never have back. I am not an ignoramus, but I find I cannot for the life of me comprehend either Bergman or Fellini. I understood 99% of The Wall (without chemical influences). I loved The Usual Suspects, but have had no desire to see Donnie Darko. I get some of the Coen Brothers' material (Oh Brother, Where Art Thou?) but I just did not care for Raising Arizona. I could not understand the love and adoration of Amadeus. I enjoy thinking about and discussing movies; it enhances the experience. However, it shouldn't make my head hurt trying to nail down all the intricate meanings, shadings and symbolism in order to achieve that state of enjoyment.
ReplyDeleteI forgot the word "life" as in "an hour of my LIFE that I will never have back.
ReplyDeleteAndrew, I more meant that I couldn't seem to remember any confusing movies - but maybe I should write them down to be sure I'm not doubling up.
ReplyDeleteAnd, Andrew & tryanmax: your comments about classic country got "There's a Tear in My Beer" stuck in my head, which meant that I sang the part of the chorus I remember (several times). Mom got annoyed with me. I told her it was YOUR fault, so she told me to tell y'all she was annoyed with you! :)
g'night from Nebraska!
[and check out Carhenge in Alliance, NE!]
tryanmax, I always had problems with glasses too when I still wore them. But I will say that my head is not as large as the Talosians from Star Trek. LINK Nor is it as large as Morbo from Futurama, though that would be coooool. LINK
ReplyDeleteFirefly, I agree with everything except Amadeus which I thought was just fantastic.
ReplyDeleteI truly don't get Fellini or Bergman and I can't imagine Tree of Life is worth the time.
rla-NEB, Sorry to hear we upset your mom. :( LOL!
ReplyDeleterlaWTX, seen it. I dated a girl from Alliance briefly. Omaha to Alliance is a bit of distance, though.
ReplyDelete-------------------------
Andrew, Oh! The fun we will have when we finally hold CommentaramaCon. Hey, everybody! Let's all compare heads!
tryanmax, Yeah, they may need to call out the cops to keep us in check! LOL!
ReplyDeleteUnless you like visuals of space and trees and random (allegedly interconnected) images set to pretty music interrupting an attempt at a plot line, then Tree of Life is not for you. I will readily admit my attempt at Amadeus was during my callow youth ages ago when it first came out on video.
ReplyDeleteFirefly, No, that's not for me. The purpose of storytelling is to tell a story... not to hit you with random images.
ReplyDeleteOn Amadeus, I'm into classical music and Salieri did such a fantastic job explaining why Mozart's music was so great. I didn't care much for Mozart/Hulce himself, but I liked Salieri's story and the other supporting characters.
I also have a huge cranium... in junior high football I had to wear the biggest helmet -- from the high school. The downside? I was the only kid out there with a "C" on his helmet (jr. highers had plain blue) -- the upside... it had that killer Alan Page face mask (Goggle it youngsters).
ReplyDeleteStill can't wear sunglasses all that much and hats make me look like Tweedle Dee (or Dum I guess).
I think it was the incessant giggling that kept taking me out of the story.
ReplyDeleteFloyd, Apparently, conservatism and big heads go hand and hand! :)
ReplyDeleteThat was a cool face mask. I had the very generic 1980s 3-bar defensive lineman facemask.
Firefly, In truth, I hated his giggling. But when the story was focused on the others, I loved it. And I love the line from the Emperor about taking out notes from his music. I've had bosses like that!
ReplyDeleteGoing to have to second ScottDS's choice- Naked Lunch. I saw it once when it came out at an arthouse theater, whoa, what a mess.
ReplyDeleteI might also mention Prometheus which was in effect a remake of Alien, but with any semblance of intelligence removed.
Shawn, I didn't enjoy Naked Lunch at all. It was a mess.
ReplyDeleteI haven't seen Prometheus yet, but your description really doesn't fill me with hope!
I wanted to like Prometheus, as Alien is one of my all time favorites, but I can't recommend it in good conscience. The actors do a great job, and it is visually stunning, but the script is horrible.
ReplyDeleteThe Red Letter Media guys have two reviews of it, one is about 4 minutes long, the other is about 30. The 4 minute long one really skewers all that is wrong with the film. The 30 minute review is a weak thumbs up.
Shawn, I generally agree with their reviews so that's a pretty strong sign the film isn't very good.
ReplyDeleteI'm sorry to hear that too because that is a film I want to like -- for the same reason, I love Alien.
To all of the "cranially enhanced" members of Commentarama, please forgive my insensitivity. I promise I will not mention Mr. Romney's huge head again...oops.
ReplyDelete"Cranially enhanced" -- nice! :)
ReplyDeleteLate to the party here. But, yep, Exorcist 2 was incomprehensible. And bad. And wretched.
ReplyDeleteStarship Troopers: Yes, it was a big departure from the iconic Heinlein novel. Still, as a marines-in-space flick, it was fun. Seeing Neil Patrick “Doogie Nazi” Harris, the destruction of the fleet and the fake propaganda pieces made the movie well worth it —- as well as the terrific Michael Ironside as a grizzled marine.
The big problem, though, was one thing that truly made no sense. Why, when the good guys have a huge fleet and battlefield nukes, would they send lightly armed and armored marines into hot zones with no air support, no tanks and no artillery? Of course, they got slaughtered.
After the first encounter, you’d think that somebody would have thought, “Hey, maybe next time we should just pound the crap out of them from orbit!”
Big Mo, Exorcist 2 was crappola. I know they thought they were being deep and filling the film with symbols and whatnot, but what they produced was just incomprehensible garbage.
ReplyDeleteOn Starship Troopers none of their tactics made sense. Why bunch up the fleet to make them easy targets and so they would crash into each other when things went wrong? Why not just nuke the planet if all the bugs are on the one planet?
So we're talking crappola instead of confusing now? Okay, Starship Troopers was hosed by Paul Verhoeven - aka the Dutch twerp, because he's a Euro-weenie leftist who hates Heinlein.
ReplyDeleteIf you want to see what a real version of Starship Troopers would be, think the drop ship scene from "Aliens" - that was a direct swipe from ST.
My head is large. Just look at my picture on the left!
ReplyDeleteK, We tend to drift from the questions around here... all the time. LOL!
ReplyDeletewhitsbrain, You do indeed have a large head!
ReplyDeleteAndrew Price says...
ReplyDelete"Wait a minute Rocky Horror had a plot!"
Andrew
Yes it did.....
and that is what is so confusing about it....
Indi, LOL! I see the truth of it! ;)
ReplyDeleteFor me the most confusing movie was
ReplyDeletefahrenheit 911.....
Evidently bush is abandoning the guarding of the north west pacific ocean byways into out borders because there is only one state trooper in Northern Oregon and he works part time....
This is the only thing that even remotely made sense in the film and it still seems wrong....
Agree with the above mentions (but I love 2001 even though I still don't get it). Here's some others:
ReplyDeleteDark City
In the Mouth of Madness
The Machinist
Jacob's Ladder
Paperhouse
Take Shelter
Triangle (2009)
Indi, LOL! Yes, that was the point to Fahrenheit 911.
ReplyDeletewhitsbrain, Triangle and Dark City are two of my favorite films.
ReplyDeletewhitsbrain: Love the pic.
ReplyDeleteWhat kind of football helmet did you use?
Have to say David Bowie's "The Man who Fell to Earth" was a definite head-scratcher and not in a good way. I saw the film in college and, so far, it's the only one I ever walked out on. The reason I walked out - just didn't seem like the film was going to go anywhere that would reward the viewer with sticking in, through the whole thing.
ReplyDeleteKenn, I can't disagree with that. I wanted to see it because I like Bowie a lot but halfway through I just turned it off. I had the same thought you did, this just wasn't worth watching.
ReplyDeleteOK - for crappola - "Burn after Reading"- it was AWFUL! we watched the whole thing because it HAD to get better sometime - but it didn't.
ReplyDeleteAnd mom says you're forgiven - just don't let it happen again! :)
Tell your mom, "thank you Mrs. WTX!" ;)
ReplyDeleteYeah, I really disliked Burn After Reading.
OT (before I comment): RIP Joe Kubert.
ReplyDeleteOne of the all-time greatest comic book artists.
Most famous for drawing Sgt. Rock and Easy Company, but he drew many others. His two sons followed in his footsteps and inherited their dad's talent.
One of my favorite artists. His art was realistic, gritty, and second to none.
Huh. Having a difficult time coming up with one that wasn't mentioned yet.
ReplyDeleteEven after reading the book, 2001 was confusing at the end, since Kubrick departed from the book ending.
Personally, I don't think Kubrick could find a good way to portray the book ending so he purposely left so much unsaid to appear deeper than he directed it.
Either that or Kubrick didn't get the ending.
Then again, I think Clarke tried to appear deeper than he was as well so perhaps that's understandable that Kubrick didn't get it.
Sometimes less is more but in this case he went to far, IMO.
Still a beautifully shot film.
Ben, I've never read the book, though I keep meaning to do that. I am hoping the book tells us more about the ending, but I've heard that it really doesn't.
ReplyDeleteWell, if I understand the book correctly, I think I know what Clarke was getting at. I could be wrong, of course, LOL.
ReplyDeletePerhaps we could compare notes after you read it.
I should say Clarke ain't one of my favorite writers. He does introduce a lot of science in his scifi, but I never thought he was a compelling writer.
Apologies to Arthur C. Clarke fans. Nothin' personal. :^)
Ben, Let me read it and then we'll compare notes. :)
ReplyDelete