Movies

zombie.modernist said:
As @EvanBenner mentions lots of the Lovecraft adaptations are crappy "indie" fan films, and this certainly felt better if less Lovecraftian.
My favorite recent Lovecraftian films remain Alex Garland's Annihilation which borrows the premise of this story, and The Endless which really punches above its budget to capture the Cthulhu vibe. This feels like a sleazier take on Carpenter's The Thing which isn't bad!
Click to expand...

Totally agree about Annihilation and The Endless. The problem with Lovecraft's cosmic horror, as I've seen it best described, is that even his literary depictions are almost impossible to capture visually, making it almost unsuitable for film. I could see a paranoia angle playing out rather well, actually, especially given the datedness of the original's rural isolationism.
 
EvanBenner said:
Totally agree about Annihilation and The Endless. The problem with Lovecraft's cosmic horror, as I've seen it best described, is that even his literary depictions are almost impossible to capture visually, making it almost unsuitable for film. I could see a paranoia angle playing out rather well, actually, especially given the datedness of the original's rural isolationism.
Click to expand...

I agree with you on his work being unsuitable to film. I think half the appeal is seeing the first person narrators descend into madness, as they attempt to verbalize their fears, totally unachievable in film.

Not give anything away, but the film does sort of reshape the family as former urbanites that have fled to the countryside, but are already ill-suited to live the life they've idealized. You could kind of read it as a soft critique of Lovecraft's idyllic world as pure fantasy even before alien invaders came and fucked it all up. I don't think the movie cares to poke at any of these issues, but intentionally or unintentionally Stanley's hit a good balance in dealing with Lovecraft's legacy almost a century out.
 
zombie.modernist said:
I agree with you on his work being unsuitable to film. I think half the appeal is seeing the first person narrators descend into madness, as they attempt to verbalize their fears, totally unachievable in film.

Not give anything away, but the film does sort of reshape the family as former urbanites that have fled to the countryside, but are already ill-suited to live the life they've idealized. You could kind of read it as a soft critique of Lovecraft's idyllic world as pure fantasy even before alien invaders came and fucked it all up. I don't think the movie cares to poke at any of these issues, but intentionally or unintentionally Stanley's hit a good balance in dealing with Lovecraft's legacy almost a century out.
Click to expand...

In the Mouth of Madness is incredible.
 
Clint Howard said:
In the Mouth of Madness is incredible.
Click to expand...
Clint Howard said:
In the Mouth of Madness is incredible.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the recommendation. I’ve been meaning to check that out for some time. Carpenter’s Thing is also great, I think he gets away with it by warping the source material quite a bit for filming. I also wonder how much copyright gets involved here. I think HPL's stuff is like dubiously public domain or something.
 
Of semi-random note (not totally as I'm asking because I see Mouth of Madness is on there), does anyone know if "free" VUDU titles play ads during the films or just before?
 
kvetcha said:
Contagion is by far the most realistic representation of a pandemic ever put to film. And that makes it terrifying.
Click to expand...

Yeah it does a good job of capturing that, without falling into zanny Andromeda Strain territory. Still I almost feel like it was too flat, certainly not my favorite of his, but his work is so diverse I'm not surprised others are drawn to different films. Except for The Laundromat which I can't see anyone digging too much...
 
zombie.modernist said:
Yeah it does a good job of capturing that, without falling into zanny Andromeda Strain territory. Still I almost feel like it was too flat, certainly not my favorite of his, but his work is so diverse I'm not surprised others are drawn to different films. Except for The Laundromat which I can't see anyone digging too much...
Click to expand...

I think the clinical nature of the film is what really sticks with me. It's so un-sensational and generally keeps things so close to the ground that it feels that much more immediate.

And the science is remarkably accurate.
 
kvetcha said:
I think the clinical nature of the film is what really sticks with me. It's so un-sensational and generally keeps things so close to the ground that it feels that much more immediate.

And the science is remarkably accurate.
Click to expand...

I'm the opposite of a scientist, so that wouldn't stick out to me, but good to know! The best Soderbergs hold up really well to rewatch IMO so I should give it another go.
 
zombie.modernist said:
I'm the opposite of a scientist, so that wouldn't stick out to me, but good to know! The best Soderbergs hold up really well to rewatch IMO so I should give it another go.
Click to expand...

Aside from some relatively minor dramatic license it's actually a shockingly accurate film, and that should scare people. As one of the epidemiologists who worked on the movie said, it's not an if, it's a when.

It's about as clear-headed and realistic a take on the subject as you're ever likely to see. I recommend giving it another whirl!

Folks in the field have mentioned the most far-fetched thing in the film is that the eventual vaccine is produced in six months, when it would actually take closer to a year, year and a half.
 
tvham said:
I finally saw Jojo Rabbit yesterday and it’s definitely one of my top 5 movies of 2019. But man, Scarlett was good in it but Oscar good? I think not.
Click to expand...
I'd actually go so far as to say she didn't fit in the role very well. Which is my only complaint about the film cause otherwise I loved it. It doesn't negatively impact my impression of the whole movie though.

Now, Scarlett in Marriage Story? Amazing.
 
Bennnnn said:
I'd actually go so far as to say she didn't fit in the role very well. Which is my only complaint about the film cause otherwise I loved it. It doesn't negatively impact my impression of the whole movie though.

Now, Scarlett in Marriage Story? Amazing.
Click to expand...
Yeah, maybe someone like Sally Hawkins would have been better suited for the role? All the other performances were fantastic! (and I’m not saying she wasn’t good in it, just not Oscar worthy)
 
tvham said:
I finally saw Jojo Rabbit yesterday and it’s definitely one of my top 5 movies of 2019. But man, Scarlett was good in it but Oscar good? I think not.
Click to expand...
I thought she was terrible in it, and that she got a second nomination for it over Zhao Shuzhen, Park So-dam, or Jennifer Lopez is gross.
 
Bennnnn said:
I'd actually go so far as to say she didn't fit in the role very well. Which is my only complaint about the film cause otherwise I loved it. It doesn't negatively impact my impression of the whole movie though.

Now, Scarlett in Marriage Story? Amazing.
Click to expand...

I think she did well in Jojo, I felt like Taika just wanted a straightforward performance out of her to balance out the zaniness of the Nazis. But I did feel like there was some extratextual dissonance as IRL Scarlett is a proud whitewasher, and the last person I would expect to use her privilege to support marginalized people...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top