Main Menu

Tip jar

If you like CaB and wish to support it, you can use PayPal or KoFi. Thank you, and I hope you continue to enjoy the site - Neil.

Buy Me a Coffee at ko-fi.com

Support CaB

Recent

Welcome to Cook'd and Bomb'd. Please login or sign up.

March 28, 2024, 08:14:23 PM

Login with username, password and session length

'I don't get it'.

Started by saltysnacks, June 23, 2017, 10:39:45 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

armful

Years ago  I used to  go out with this girl who raved about a film called Harold and Maude, all her mates said it was amazing as well. We sat down one night to  watch  it, the only thing I can recall is being very bored. I just didn't get it.

zomgmouse

Quote from: armful on June 24, 2017, 11:05:42 AM
Years ago  I used to  go out with this girl who raved about a film called Harold and Maude, all her mates said it was amazing as well. We sat down one night to  watch  it, the only thing I can recall is being very bored. I just didn't get it.
Oh gosh, this film is quite dear to me. Very very funny and macabre, and sweet. I had "if you want to sing out" stuck in my head just the other week. I need to rewatch this, it's been a while.

marquis_de_sad

Quote from: zomgmouse on June 23, 2017, 08:42:02 PM
And I guess the communist authorities didn't think there was anything "safe" about the film either.

I'm not very persuaded by this sort of reasoning. Films can be banned for all sorts of reasons that may not have anything to do with the content of the film itself. And banning doesn't automatically imply quality or complexity.

zomgmouse

Quote from: marquis_de_sad on June 24, 2017, 12:01:53 PM
I'm not very persuaded by this sort of reasoning. Films can be banned for all sorts of reasons that may not have anything to do with the content of the film itself. And banning doesn't automatically imply quality or complexity.
No, but it was banned among other things for "depicting wanton behaviour" so I'd say that's very much about the content. And yes it doesn't necessarily imply quality or complexity but I'd say it goes some way to counter the statement that it's just superficial whimsy. Which it most definitely isn't.

marquis_de_sad

#34
I think it's reasonable to assume that it was banned because it would have been seen by the censors as being aligned with the youth cult movement (that would have seemed at least partly US-inspired), because it was "elitist", and because it went against traditional ideas of femininity. But crucially, it was banned during the crackdown against the uprising of 1968, so I think it's fair to say the content was a pretext to silence uncooperative voices.

edit: typo

Brundle-Fly

With the exception of The Mask (1994), all Jim Carrey movies (especially The Truman Show (1998) and Eternal Sunshine Of The Spotless Mind (2004) )

But I think he's very talented and charismatic though, so I don't even 'get' my own opinion.

Glebe

Quote from: zomgmouse on June 24, 2017, 11:58:39 AMOh gosh, this film is quite dear to me. Very very funny and macabre, and sweet. I had "if you want to sing out" stuck in my head just the other week. I need to rewatch this, it's been a while.

Yeah, it's fucking fantastic. Give it another go, armful.


Serge

Quote from: Glebe on June 24, 2017, 01:29:50 PMGive it another go, armful.

Don't listen to him, armful!


Glebe

Quote from: Serge on June 24, 2017, 05:43:51 PM
Don't listen to him, armful!

Armful! Armful! Listen to me Armful!

Quote from: Mr Brightside on June 24, 2017, 06:12:26 PM
Lord of the Rings

Well Sean Connery certainly didn't get it, which is why he turned down Gandalf (the role of, I mean... he didn't date the fictional wizard. To my knowledge).

Sin Agog

Give Chytilová's Fruit of Paradise a shot, maybe, if Daisies felt too anarchic and untamed for ya.  Daisies has that first film ugly elan of other debuts like Fando & Lis, Even Midgets Started Small (I think of that as Herzogs first proper film, anyway) and Eraserhead.  Those kind of films are fascinating and grating, and tell you more about the filmmaker than anything else they'll ever do; too much for their liking, perhaps.  Fruit of Paradise, meanwhile, is totally gorgeous to look at in a Parajanov kind of way, and has a slightly more sober style of surrealism with just enough of a plot to hang onto.  'course, if surrealism ain't your bag then there's not really much for you there, though sometimes all it takes is just that slither of an 'in', some tiny tethering to convention to make all the ensuing rule-breaking and chaos work for you, like a repeating bass riff on a crazy Japanese psychedelic noise rock track.

Brundle-Fly

Quote from: Sin Agog on June 24, 2017, 09:37:05 PMEven Midgets Started Small (I think of that as Herzogs first proper film, anyway)

'dwarfs'

Sin Agog

[Gavin McInnes] I bet the PC libtard translators wanted to call it Even Little People Started Small but that sounded too retarded even for them [/Gavin McInnes]

Avril Lavigne

Quote from: Dr Syntax Head on June 24, 2017, 10:40:43 AM
I get absolutely nothing from superhero movies. I guess if I was a fan of the comics then that would be different but no, zero connection for me.

I was like that with Superheroes in general for most of my life til I enjoyed Sam Raimi's Spiderman movies, but more specifically I've never ever 'got' the appeal of Batman and his boring brand of dark, brooding, broody boring darkness.  I get the intended irony that the villain is colourful and always smiling / laughing but the hero is dark and serious and moves around in the shadows, and the fact that Batman is a normal mortal man relying more on gadgetry than magic powers.  I still can't build up the slightest bit of interest in either character.

Edit: Except for in the '60s TV show which was brilliant.

Brundle-Fly

Quote from: Sin Agog on June 24, 2017, 09:56:54 PM
[Gavin McInnes] I bet the PC libtard translators wanted to call it Even Little People Started Small but that sounded too retarded even for them [/Gavin McInnes]

...and surely, it should be 'dwarves' too?    I love that film anyway.

Sin Agog

I should give it a rewatch.  From what I remember of it, it's got a really warm heart beneath all the abrasive weirdness.  Is that the one with Crispin Glover and Herzog together on the commentary track? If so, that was hilarious.  Every attempt at a conversation would go like this:-

Crispin Glover: "I really appreciate how, like, you're trying to make your own sort of twisted version of a '50s love scene here, except it, like literally, never gets off the ground because the dwarves are too small to get on top of the bed."

Werner Herzog: "You see, you have got it all completely wrong.  That is not what I was trying to do at all."


NurseNugent

Quote from: armful on June 24, 2017, 11:05:42 AM
Years ago  I used to  go out with this girl who raved about a film called Harold and Maude, all her mates said it was amazing as well. We sat down one night to  watch  it, the only thing I can recall is being very bored. I just didn't get it.

I love Harold and Maude but when I showed to a now ex boyfriend he hated that much he stormed out of the house, didn't come back for two hours and wouldn't speak to me for the rest of the weekend. It does seem to be a love it or hate it kind of film.

Several people have tried to get to watch The Goonies, telling me it's the greatest film ever but I'm afraid to say I don't see what the fuss is about. I guess it's just not for me.


Sin Agog

Quote from: Mr Brightside on June 25, 2017, 11:49:41 AM
Citizen Kane

I think I get it.  I don't particularly like it, though.  The first forty or so minutes of the film play like the kind of montage you'd find in a newsreel; fragments of footage of meetings, of people talking about how great Kane is...the kind of techniques that Welles cut his teeth on during his Lux Radio Theatre days.  Suddenly things slow down with the introduction of a love interest, but you've never had a glimpse of Kane the man at that point, just emotionless newsreel footage and second-hand accounts (obviously partly the point, considering it's someone flicking through his life story).  The scenes that should be moving are all divorced of emotional investment because Welles skips all the apparently superfluous scenes and goes straight to the highlights.  It's as if Welles, in his young-man's impatience, made a film entirely of big scenes; but in chucking out all the build-up he robbed his characters of life.  I prefer Welles when he's being all pulpy and making films about runaway Nazis and Mexican gangsters, or fucked up documentaries on the nature of truth.

Dr Syntax Head

Quote from: Brundle-Fly on June 24, 2017, 01:23:54 PM
With the exception of The Mask (1994), all Jim Carrey movies (especially The Truman Show (1998) and Eternal Sunshine Of The Spotless Mind (2004) )

But I think he's very talented and charismatic though, so I don't even 'get' my own opinion.

Man on the Moon is pretty impressive if you're a Kauffmann fan

Howj Begg

#50
Godard: Contempt felt far too de-Godarded and mainstream to me! Aside from the central part in between the rooms of their hotel suite, yeah, I felt it was trying to fit certain requirements of the film industry. It was Godard chained. Vivre sa Vie on the other hand is pure uncut Godard, and much better for it.  Don't get me wrong, Contempt is till masterly, but it's not something I would turn to to enjoy Godard's style and approach. Currently watching Masculin Femenin and it's at least half a great film.

I didn't get Tarkovsky's The Sacrifice at all. I wrote a long post about it in the Tarkovsky thread and it was eaten by hackers :(

Brundle-Fly

Quote from: Dr Syntax Head on June 25, 2017, 01:06:33 PM
Man on the Moon is pretty impressive if you're a Kauffmann fan

Yes, I did enjoy that - true.

Blumf

Quote from: Sin Agog on June 25, 2017, 11:57:27 AM
I think I get it.  I don't particularly like it, though.  The first forty or so minutes of the film play like the kind of montage you'd find in a newsreel;

Humm... I don't think you get it.

Quotebut you've never had a glimpse of Kane the man at that point

Yeah you don't get it.


popcorn

The Godfather is just a series of brown rooms with people in brown clothes saying brown things.

Gwen Taylor on ITV

Quote from: popcorn on June 25, 2017, 06:33:05 PM
The Godfather is just a series of brown rooms with people in brown clothes saying brown things.

Godfather III was better because it had more action scenes and it had monks.

Small Man Big Horse

Quote from: Avril Lavigne on June 24, 2017, 09:57:49 PM
I was like that with Superheroes in general for most of my life til I enjoyed Sam Raimi's Spiderman movies, but more specifically I've never ever 'got' the appeal of Batman and his boring brand of dark, brooding, broody boring darkness.  I get the intended irony that the villain is colourful and always smiling / laughing but the hero is dark and serious and moves around in the shadows, and the fact that Batman is a normal mortal man relying more on gadgetry than magic powers.  I still can't build up the slightest bit of interest in either character.

I like the 80's Batman from when Denny O'Neill was writing the comics, at that point they accentuated the importance of Bats being such an amazing detective, and his struggle to separate the worlds of Bruce Wayne and Batman, and it wasn't horrendously grim dark. Gotham still looked like a shitty city but not one which people would go mad living in, and via Jim Gordon they dealt with a lot of social issues too. But now Batman's almost morphed in to a Judge Dredd style anti-hero who murders without thought and has a ridiculous amount of destructive toys and vehicles, and it's not how I like to see the character portrayed at all.

Sebastian Cobb

Quote from: Dr Syntax Head on June 24, 2017, 10:40:43 AM
I get absolutely nothing from superhero movies. I guess if I was a fan of the comics then that would be different but no, zero connection for me.

Well they're just the latest vehicle used to peddle pabulum to people who like to absorb films rather than watch them.

The biggest criticism of most of them are they're boring; 2 hours of men gruffly grunting poor dialogue and a chase/fight scene.

Phil_A

Quote from: Small Man Big Horse on June 25, 2017, 08:07:20 PM
I like the 80's Batman from when Denny O'Neill was writing the comics, at that point they accentuated the importance of Bats being such an amazing detective, and his struggle to separate the worlds of Bruce Wayne and Batman, and it wasn't horrendously grim dark. Gotham still looked like a shitty city but not one which people would go mad living in, and via Jim Gordon they dealt with a lot of social issues too. But now Batman's almost morphed in to a Judge Dredd style anti-hero who murders without thought and has a ridiculous amount of destructive toys and vehicles, and it's not how I like to see the character portrayed at all.

I haven't been following DC comics for a while and I've lost track of all the different relaunches, so I don't know anything about this new murdering Batman. Sounds very off, Batman's whole deal is that he doesn't kill, surely? How badly have they fucked up to get that wrong?

Small Man Big Horse

Quote from: Phil_A on June 25, 2017, 08:56:39 PM
I haven't been following DC comics for a while and I've lost track of all the different relaunches, so I don't know anything about this new murdering Batman. Sounds very off, Batman's whole deal is that he doesn't kill, surely? How badly have they fucked up to get that wrong?

I was talking about the Affleck Batman more than anything else, in Batman Vs Superman he kills a whole bunch of people.

Avril Lavigne

Quote from: Small Man Big Horse on June 25, 2017, 08:07:20 PM
I like the 80's Batman from when Denny O'Neill was writing the comics, at that point they accentuated the importance of Bats being such an amazing detective, and his struggle to separate the worlds of Bruce Wayne and Batman, and it wasn't horrendously grim dark. Gotham still looked like a shitty city but not one which people would go mad living in, and via Jim Gordon they dealt with a lot of social issues too. But now Batman's almost morphed in to a Judge Dredd style anti-hero who murders without thought and has a ridiculous amount of destructive toys and vehicles, and it's not how I like to see the character portrayed at all.

I guess this is the trubs with a lot of comicbook characters, they get written & drawn by so many different people over the years that there can be a real lack of consistency to the look and feel of their stories / characters and it's a bit alienating to non-fans.  Then again, people rate Christopher Nolan's Batman films as some of the best of all time (at least according to IMDB) and I only enjoyed the one with Heath Ledger so maybe I'm a bit weird.