12.21.2024

Let's do some memos!


Too long for Tweets, too short for essays, too hot for TV! It's memos! To-the-point protests, suggestions, observations, and aggravations. These are not debatable so sit down. 

- Paul

Cult Movies
Beetlejuice? Scarface? Pulp Fiction? Lebowski? Does this pointless genre label really hold any water anymore? I think once Home Video gained momentum about 40 years ago just about everything became way too accessible to have any kinda "cult" following. I don't care how offbeat the subject matter is, once you've received the Criterion 4K treatment your spooky street cred is null & void, so get in the bin with the rest of the Barbies. 

Ironic Santa Claus
He's been portrayed as a maniac, villain, superhero, tough guy, imposter, layman, drunkard, and asshole. Over a century of Cinema and that should seem fine but I feel like the bulk of these were just from the past 10 years. Not to sound like a namby-pamby but can't we have some more nice Santa movies - ones where he isn't firing rockets from a jet-powered sleigh? I know these aging Hollywood stars need to remain relevant but that doesn't mean Kris Kringle has to become the other James Bond. 

With a cherry on top
Why are we so stingy with the cherries? Toppings include candy, cookies, condiments and various syrups, all kindsa other fruits - there's even a sundae built around a whole-ass banana. There's even all these yuppie options like potato chips and bacon and coffee beans, so let's stop pretending the singular cherry is so precious. Even Del Monte is like "here's your cherry slice" - and don't tell me about Cherry Garcia because that's bullshit. Next time they ask you what you want on your whatever just say "oops! all cherries!"

Product placement
Integrating name brands into your content is an art form - and stuff like Mac & Me and The Wizard are Van Goghs. If you wanna sell a product then build your movie right on top of it - don't even move the headstones. It's when they try to sneak it in there that it feels cheap. Anyone catch Fincher's The Killer? What an excessive amount of shill (especially from the Fight Club guy) - 10 minutes in and I was prepared to credit it as a McDonald's movie until I began to realize it shares just as much screen time as Starbucks and Amazon. That's not gonna work for me. 

Superman's suit
Even before the new trailer dropped, the behind-the-scenes pics of the newest costume went viral -- once more into the comments section, dear friends. James Gunn sucks, new suit blows! Yes, of course it blows you neck-bearded child, it's a grown man in candy-colored spandex with his underwear on the outside. Am I too cynical for admitting that maybe these lucha libre wrestling tights accessorized with a cape(!) was probably cooler in the 1930s than it otherwise would be today? Maybe if these movies didn't take themselves so goddamn seriously then these stylized pajamas would seem slightly less obnoxious. 

POV
"Point of view". Does anybody fall for this? It can be an exhilarating camera move like in Jaws or even Evil Dead, but when I see it I just think about the camera. A lotta 50s Monster Movies employed it to cut costs, and 80s Slasher Movies used it because they misunderstood the voyeuristic approach of old Giallos and Hitchcock films; looking through the eyes of the killer doesn't do anything for me if I don't care about anything that's going on. Same goes for porn; what kinda dimwit believes they're actually being blown because of some clumsy camera placement? It takes more than eye contact to think we're watching a Jonathan Demme picture, folks. 

Computer generated dead actors
I was kinda fascinated by this when it started to become trendy ca. Rogue One - heck, I though it was neat when Fred Astaire danced with a Dirt Devil back in the 90s. Now that they're using it just as continuity caulk in the cracks of their stupid multiverses I couldn't give less of a piss. That + they're getting so much worse at it - the most disgusting thing I've seen in any Alien movie is Ian Holm's irrelevant return from the dead in Romulus - Lyndon Johnson was more believable in Forrest Gump

Artificial Intelligence
"AI" for short, though I always read it as "Al", as in "Al Pacino". It doesn't have many fans amongst 99% of people - it takes away jobs and probably starts nuclear wars. Frankly machines have been doing that since the Industrial Age, and in the end it's always the living, breathing people we have to blame. Whatever, I'm not on about the political or even the SciFi angle of it; the biggest effect that's most in my face in the artistic angle - particularly the video and photography that shows up on social media. And my not-so-hot take is... I love it. All of this weird, distorted, psychedelic imagery has been infinitely more interesting and creative than most of the terrestrial content I've seen in the past few decades. Sympathy to the background artists and voice actors, but if we could replace the endless franchise shitshow with some of this abstract nightmare fuel then I say bring on all the HAL 9000s you got. 

12.17.2024

BENNETT INVENTORY : That Moment


INLAND EMPIRE
-- The bus to Pomona

It's always a nice surprise to take in a movie that's better than you expected it to be. But it's an unforgettable moment that's burned into your timeline when you see a film that ends up being exactly what you needed at that point in your life; when you find something that's like less of a movie and more like medicine. In the winter of '06/'07 INLAND EMPIRE opened in only a handful of US cinemas and fortunately for me one of those cinemas was only a train ride away - to The Brattle Theater in Cambridge, Massachusetts. where I missed an actual appearance from David Lynch himself by only two days. Oh well, at least he left behind his experimental three hour shot-on-video mind-melting masterpiece that engulfed me in amazement and wonder and reignited my passion to be an artist. I was at the starting point of my college internship, and anyone who's ever endured one of those would testify that it can be a soul-crushing experience that could rob you of your ambitions. But then there was this movie - a DIY feature that entirely captured and illustrated a specific mood. My mood. Yeah it's cute to order a pizza and watch a Ninja Turtles movie, but hiking through indifferent city streets in the cold darkness of a New England winter to sit and shiver in a drafty arthouse theater with my own despair was easily the best way to experience this movie. I came back, all alone, for two more viewings so I could relive this entire journey. 

Part of that experience (apart from the entirety of the movie itself) was the sound design - I knew eventual home video would never be as loud as the theater atmosphere (even as antiquated as The Brattle is). Many great movies have That Moment - for me, this one has at least half a dozen; I gasped and giggled my way through it in surprise and sometimes disbelief at its innovations and abstractions. And then, after roughly 2.5 hours as its weirdness began to seem predictable and pretentious, the movie outdoes its own incoherence as we land on three new "characters" in a 7-minute scene centered around Japanese actress Nae as she delivers a monologue as meandering and engrossing as the movie itself. It took me subsequent viewings to recognize how beautiful and bizarre this detour is in a film full of mysteries and mazes; it's this scene that best helps us understand that this artistic journey was never meant to be linear or literal, but instead a voyage of moods and ideas with a filmmaker who's flexing a newfound form of freedom, and for me, his enthusiasm is palpable. 

- Paul

12.13.2024

STATIC SHOTS

Friday the 13th Part VII: The New Blood






12.10.2024

Is "Die Hard" a Christmas Movie?

How about that? Does that title grab your attention, or is the plain vanilla flavor putting you off? It may seem like an otherwise pedestrian talking point (and one that certainly doesn't need any extra emphasis from Bennett Goddamn Media - you know how we feel on these issues) but really this is just a low-key backyard exploration of what exactly is a Christmas Movie. (Spoiler: it's whatever the hell you want it to be.)


Folks who are against the Die Hard idea (as with all people who are collectively against anything) are always the loudest - they got their reasons, their equations, their conclusions; their gate is well kept, much to the point that they often doth protest too much in the process. Understandably so - this is their battle that otherwise wouldn't exist had they not rattled that cage; in other words, this problem (like most problems) didn't exist until someone decided to make it their business. We've all just been chillin' at the Nakatomi Christmas party ever since '88, then the Internet gets invented and some robbers blast their way in and steal our joy by letting us know that we're apparently doing it wrong. I would never fall for this shit, would you? The trick is to not engage -- which is easy to say when I can just sling arrows from this site right here, but it's also easy to say when you're in a position of impunity. The phrase is "I'll die on this hill." That's it. I'll lie the fuck down and expire because I owe you nothing. So, there's that approach. 


Let's say, just for fun, we were to make a less abstract argument in favor of Die Hard as a Christmas Movie. I've seen various spreadsheets and flowcharts and Venn diagrams mansplaining what are and aren't "Christmas Movies" but I find that kind of clinical science to be more for the normies - debating categories and genres of Film should come more from the heart and less from the keyboard (though I'm not against rigid principles and philosophies - especially when one keeps them to thyself). When I was much younger my mother and I would watch Die Hard 1 & 2 (and eventually 3) as a sorta marathon on New Year's Eve. The reason for that is that they're a solid block of cohesive entertainment that can carry you to midnight (I have memories of doing Back to the Future a couple times too), but through that a tradition was organically conceived, which is a pretty indisputable origin for anyone's subjective cause for celebration. Then, when I reached whatever age and began to grow tired of the same short list of Christmas Movies I grew up with, I made the conscious choice to incorporate the first two Die Hard movies into my holiday rotation - which didn't take a lotta heavy lifting, I'd already been watching them in December for years. But the point is that freedom: the basic human right to assign any movie (or album or book or food or any external stimuli) to whatever time of year to add to your own sense of self, and maybe even, God willing, a sense of community. But, of course, there are the infidels who don't want this. 


So by my count we can have nice things: either by some rhythmic convention, or though the channels of our own free will as our forefathers intended. And of course there's the secret third option: following the rules. You know, the same kinda rules that determine "good movies" from "bad movies", put in place by some dogmatic ghost who'll always be a little bit smarter than you. Some people are bold and articulate enough to give their reasons of opposition and I always appreciate the effort, but they almost never give the right reason, which is basically "My body, my choice." Just about every damn movie I watch is anchored to a specific time of year -- some require a specific time of day, some need certain weather conditions, some need food, etc. etc. And if you've spent any time here then you know I can rattle off my reasons in a mostly coherent way, but those reasons always land in the same spot: they are my own. These are the rules as they pertain to me, and I will elaborate for fun. Feels good to exercise your rights, doesn't it? 


It takes place at Christmastime - Christmas Eve actually which creates an even stronger electricity - but that's sort of its superficial basis for both sides of the argument. It's never aggressively Christmassy; apart from some incidental source music, the two prominent Christmas songs are used ironically: RUN-DMC's "Christmas in Hollis" and Vaughn Monroe's "Let it Snow! Let it Snow! Let it Snow!" (which actually has nothing to do with the holiday). There's also the "Now I have a machine gun ho ho ho" bit with Karl's brother that's often used as the visual signpost to its Christmas Movie Status. Beyond that it really is a stretch - particularly if you're narrow-minded and unimaginative. It's not like anyone's discovered some secret layer that creates an airtight Commandment that solidifies it as a Christmas Movie - you just have to believe - which is a huge ask of a modern audience plugged into mythology and "canon". By their measure there's probably only like 6 Christmas Movies -- and I'm guessing none of them have anything to do with Jesus so what are we even talking about here? Wonderful Life, Home Alone, even A Christmas Carol don't necessarily need the holiday as any major plot function, but most people are hooked on plot and any kinda abstraction can only be perceived as a plot hole


This whole season should be about spirit, not some rigid grocery list of what does and doesn't apply. Even if a movie has a teensy bit of Christmas in it I'm bringing the stamp down: Toy Story, American Psycho, Goodfellas, Addams Family, 12 Monkeys all have that little pinch of fairy dust that's enough (for me) to overwhelm any story arc. There's so much Nightmare Before Christmas hullabaloo around Halloween time and I just hafta hold my nose and ignore the clear-cut Christmas Film constantly being thrown in my face. There's even a heavy list of movies that were released in December (typically the Oscar bait stuff) that I just associate with Christmas due only to that incidental correspondence; No Country For Old Men is, for me, by and large a Secret Christmas Movie. Every Christmas Eve we watch a Jess Franco movie we've never seen before (preferably one that features Lina Romay). I have separate memories of watching Reservoir Dogs, Fear and Loathing, and Throw Momma From the Train on Christmas Day - and those memories are hard to shake. 


I'm giving you these examples not just to illustrate my own connections or to put them upon you or anyone else, but to allow and encourage you and your own; embrace the ones you have and invent new ones for fun. And not just for Christmas or Hanukkah or Kwanza, but for December. For Winter, or Spring, or Summer, or Saturday night, or your lunch break. This holiday of Peace and Joy is mired in conflict; our differences are contrasted so sharply that the media weaponized it as "The War on Christmas". Even if it's a petty cultural war of words we're entirely missing the point; some people are adapting and championing this behavior: "Aww, the Die Hard debate really puts me in the mood." Fuck that. If someone tried to put their religious angle upon you every Holiday Season you'd tell them to piss off, yeah? Well I suppose movies are my religion, and if I wanna pray to Santa Claus or George Bailey or Alice Harford for John McClane then that's my basic human right, free from any form of persecution. The most we've been able to evolve is now in the form of a recycled meme I've seen for the past few years or so, always posted to the platforms in a self-congratulatory way, that reads "If Die Hard is a Christmas movie then so is Lethal Weapon". Welcome to the party, pal.

- Paul

12.07.2024

ROGER CORMAN and CHEESE, part V: "Little Miss Millions" and Screamin' Sicilian Bessie's Revenge Cheese Pizza


"A Roger Corman Family Film?" I hear you ask. It was rare but there were certainly a handful - mostly in the 80s and mostly Science Fiction stuff. Some even found their way onto the Walt Disney Video label. But a Roger Corman Christmas Movie? Seeing is believing! 


1993's Little Miss Millions (sometimes called Home For Christmas) is directed by longtime Roger Corman employee Jim Wynorski, who also cowrote the film specifically as a vehicle for Jennifer Love Hewitt shortly after directing her in 1992's Corman kid pic Munchie. 14-year-old Jennifer (credited only as "Love Hewitt") plays 9-year-old Heather who's run away from her bitchy foster mom's L.A. mansion in search of her birth mother. The foster mom hires a bounty hunter by the name of Nick Frost (Howard Hesseman) to bring Heather back. Nick finds her pretty immediately and the authorities mistake it as a kidnapping; the FBI chases them for the duration of the picture as the two leads bicker and sass their way to L.A. via busses and hitchhiking and stolen cars. The snot kid/grumpy grownup dynamic is derivative of a thousand other things, but ounce-for-ounce (and sometimes scene-for-scene) this is an impressively decent redo of Midnight Run, with James Avery in the Yaphet Kotto role, Steve Landesberg in the Joey Pants role, and a music score by Joel Goldsmith for which Danny Elfman could've easily sued. The mismatched buddy setup is almost always exciting to us, and having two good actors like they have here can usually make it feel kinda fresh (even if it's a total ripoff). 


There's a kinda cult around this pizza brand; the folks who like it really like it. We got some crazy excessive cheese kind with the big frozen equidistant blobs of mozzarella that are supposed to melt into each other when you cook it. And for the most part they did, and the cheese was excellent and definitely the best part - almost enough to distract from the curiously tangy sauce that dominated every bite. And of course no frozen pizza has mastered the crust yet so we don't deduct points there (usually). You certainly can't say it was bland -- this one felt so close and yet so far. 

The Movie: A-
The Pizza: B-

12.01.2024

It's time to let old things die

Hello. Yeah, it's been a while. Not much, how 'bout you? Have you stayed strong in the face of social discord or are you letting the bastards get you down? More importantly, is my cordiality transparent enough to set the tone of my tirade? Without rushing things I don't think it's too early to say it's been a long year that also seemed to go by too fast - but clearly nothing is good enough for people like me. We're always busy populating this site with the stuff we love and why we love it, because that's our general approach to life and what it has to offer... but along that journey there are distractions and aggravations and lamentations and any schlub with advice to spare will tell you that it's healthy to talk about those things. I would never burden or bore you with the battles of my own personal life - this blog is largely a land of Pop Culture. And Boy Howdy! there are some battles to be fought in that land! So pull up an ice block and lend an ear because there's been some awful developments in the world of Art & Entertainment and I don't want you to think I haven't noticed. 


Save for a new PTA or QT movie, I don't feel any excitement when I go to the theater anymore. Some would blame my age, I blame the mediocrity of the movies - but that's a separate argument. Point is, as usual, I was entirely lukewarm on the idea of seeing Joker: Folie à Deux; while I liked the first one as much as the people who liked it, I disliked it as much as the people who didn't. At the end of the day it's the only comic book character I truly like as portrayed by one of my favorite working actors, and from that angle it melded harmoniously enough to recommend. So I found myself in a theater watching the sequel, not because I sought it out, but because, like everything, it was just the next thing. And what I found was exactly how everyone describes it - that is, to say, the people who actually have the tools to describe it beyond a single four-letter word. And while most people's observations were accurate, that is not to say I digested it in the same way as them. 


Look I'm not gonna review the goddamn thing, I'm as sick of it as you are - but I will say that the fact that we're all sick of it is a problem in and of itself. Personally I can't think of any recent movies that generated this volume of discussion - the only problem was that the "discussion" was an avalanche of lowbrow toxicity and aimless frustration saturated in grammatical errors. One of the items on my very concise and coherent list of complaints I had about the 2019 film is how causally it would insult the intelligence of its audience. And then, in the purest and most maddening example of irony imaginable, the Sequel attempted some very mild abstractions and it went largely over the audience's head. Little to no surprise in a year that gave us the most generous helping of fan service to date. That's not based on some vague barometer - to my understanding, Marvel released a movie about Marvel movies. Conversely, Todd Phillips released a movie that grown men thought would turn them gay if they watched it. As much as people crave competition, there really wasn't one - not in this case. 


I thought Joker 2 was considerably better than the first one, but it was still just a B/B+. That's why I haven't gone on some aggressive defense jag in its honor; it's pretty good but not enough for me to go out ridin' fences. And that's where we're at: as Film Criticism was once as much of a valued art form as Film itself, the new adjacent form entertainment is audience reaction. There's always been published "audience polls" and such for as long as I've paid attention, but now we have all these shared public forums where brains of all sizes can flesh out the reasons for their trivial point systems. But even still it comes down to the numbers; a lengthy essay (or even a girthy paragraph) is no match for a cluster of stars or a drawing of a tomato. And these services are put in place for a reason: just as the snobs need validation from IndieWire and Sight and Sound to inform their preferences, the "real fans" need their voices to be heard, free of all that pretentious academia put forward by critics. "If critics don't like it, that probably means it's good." And therein lies the root of that great moronic divide that's always haunting me and that I'm always complaining about: the senseless belief that there's a difference between "good" movies and "entertaining" movies. And naturally, professional critics know what's "good", amirite folks?


I've watched many of you abandon social media as a whole, and while I'm sad to lose your company in the vacuum of cyberspace, I commend your discipline; the greatest tragedy we've come to realize is that communication on a global scale is apparently bad for our health. Oh well. Masochist that I am I still rattle around these URLs just so I can read it over and over again...


I lie awake in bed staring into the darkness, pitying these poor souls who're convinced there's an illusive list of criteria that only the greatest Cinema can possess. And then I, an accredited scholar of Film and Film Studies, find myself struggling to calculate what these unique attributes could possibly be. Every once in a while I'll still muster the energy to engage with these commoners to find out if they have any ideas as to what makes a quality picture, and the common response is simply a list of the duties performed on a basic film production. 


Indeed, movies do have these things - so much so that they've gone as far as to categorize them for award shows and the like. But there it is: films with "good editing, good writing, good cinematography, and good acting" are, by definition, objectively good. Seems so simple it's as though it was fabricated by the mental midgets who actually believe it; I'm no culinary expert but I can tell you food tastes better when the ingredients are really good. I'm also not a scientist but I believe matter is at its strongest when it contains elements. Point is, the film bros are adamant about that figmental weather gauge that's been calibrated by the uppity critics and out-of-touch filmmakers who they admire and respect - until they have a difference of opinion regarding the state of Modern Cinema. 


Quentin recently came under fire for his daring observation that there are simply too many remakes nowadays. That's right, the moviegoing public unanimously vilified a genuine Film Expert for expressing an interest in risk and originality; as if to say "no, we want more remakes". Coppola, Gilliam, Cronenberg, Villeneuve, Nolan, Ridley Scott, and Alejandro González Iñárritu have all joined Scorsese in publicly disparaging the Comic Book scene, and while the general response is "ok boomer, you don't know what good cinema is", the bootlickers don't have the resolve (or the cognitive dissonance) to defend these foul franchises; it's a wasteland of guilty pleasures, and when the fans are forced to confront that guilt, they lash out with the very ugliness that gives the World Wide Web its reputation. To agree with these giants of filmmaking (regardless of whenever their prime was) would be admitting to your own poor taste, but when we assert that "art has the potential to be objectively good and correct", to whom do we look to set the dial? And I have to assume that this idea of "correct" and "well-crafted" Cinema is gaining so much traction because of the ongoing decline in quality - but that statement in and of itself reveals my own subjectivity. I guess what I'm really pushing for is a truer and more nuanced appreciation from my peers; for people to have the bravery and ability to articulate their own feelings, rather than just being like "let someone else do it". If for no better reason than I'd personally like a better understanding as to why they keep droving out for this dreck. 


I've always remained publicly sensitive about people's love for a lotta these big franchise films - particularly the Comic Book Movies. My polite excuse has repeatedly been "I've not seen many of them so I can't judge either way", but I should think everyone's been perfectly able to see through my bullshit: I've got a pretty strong understanding of how studio marketing and movie trailers and posters work, and if they're doing their jobs adequately then I'm obviously not seeing these films on purpose. And I say it time and time again - I don't care that they're "Comic Book Movies"; I've seen protagonists and antagonists and explosions before so this isn't some entirely new genre that's too intelligent or innovative to grasp (or too dumb or disorienting to dismiss). But this sort of passionless platform of unrelatable characters and expository dialogue and pushbutton animation and an obnoxious preoccupation with continuity and cameos and mythology is never gonna be appealing to me -- and those are just the superficial elements; some years ago I was in a situation where there was a TV nearby with a Captain America movie playing on mute, and just watching the cutting and compositions of basic dialogue scenes and the transitions between them didn't feel too dissimilar to the countless student films I saw in school. Put differently, even when I disregard how vapid the content is, it's presented in a laughably amateurish way - and it's frustrating because I think even the fans know this to be true. 


My son recently said something along the lines of "I only wanna see movies I like with characters I know." While that 6-year-old mentality may be publicly prevalent, it takes the honesty of a child to say it out loud. My plan was to go to my grave having never watched Beetlejuice 2, but once he found out about its existence and release it would've been extremely petty of me to prevent him from seeing it. Miraculously, the movie made me feel as though I was a child again - specifically when I got an overwhelming urge to lie down in the aisle of the movie theater out of immense boredom. What a puerile miscarriage of a movie, but the otherwise agreeable audience reception was a loud indicator that microwaved leftovers will always be preferable to trying new things. Fans of Zack Snyder will tell you that one of his strengths is that his adaptations are "comic book accurate", as if to say he dares not deviate into anything too intensely original. It doesn't matter how godawful the STAR WARS prequels were, they'll remain superior to the Disney Sequels because they never colored outside the lines. And so I don't scratch my head in bewilderment when whatever remaining theaters that are left are filled with video game graphics and ramshackle nostalgia; You get what you fucking deserve! 


We were only a few years into the new millennium when it had occurred to me that it'd been a long time since I'd seen a truly original movie - like, roughly since the beginning of the 2000s; big or small, Indie or Hollywood, the heavy rotation of life-changing Cinema had seemed to come to a halt. That was it? 18 years old and I'd completely lost touch with what was new and exciting? I'd like to say it was a slump, but here we are, and there doesn't seem to be any Enlightenment or Renaissance creeping up on us any time soon, and it all coincides with that Y2K changeover. And it's not hard to understand why...


This century began with a sorta "Four Horseman of the Apocalypse": STAR WARS, Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter, and Spider-Man. You could argue there were more, or implicate others, or defend these because you liked them, but it is undeniable that they've cast an everlasting shadow from under which we will not escape for a long time; nearly 25 years of pronounced cultural stagnation and it is in no doubt due largely to the success of these four conglomerates of Fantasy and Action that captured the hearts and minds of audiences and producers alike. Nearly all media has attempted to match the model created by these four installments and the only new measures we've seen is some lateral expansion: nothing new, just more of this. The urge to binge multiplied by the advent of streaming; radio serials updated for lower standards and shorter attention spans. TikTok and all that. In an age where we spend $400 million on shaky special effects and turn on subtitles just for fun, visuals and writing seem to be weaker than ever. The storytelling angle has become the singular focus, and the central theme of these stories are all the same: "Here's stuff you remember from before, and be sure to stick around for more." They've become a goddamn bingo card; a system of checks and balances to ensure absolute satisfaction with no loose ends. It's become STAR WARS Prequels x 1000. In 2023, Fangoria Editor-in-chief Phil Nobile Jr. observed the following: 


Of course he's able to melt down my entire complaint into a single paragraph - and it so eloquently explains why a moviegoing public can't cope with a shirtless Kylo Ren or a singing Joker -- "this absolutely does not fall in line with what I'm used to!" With this kind of dogmatic approach to art - to anything - how could there ever be progress? Here, I'll make an objective observation: 20th Century Cinema was better. Everyone goddamn knows it, otherwise they wouldn't keep tryna remake the shit every two bastard weeks. Danny DeVito once said something to the effect of "Hollywood will keep trying until they get it wrong." Can't really say it's their fault - the public fights originality in every possible form; for better or worse we got a wholly original Barbie doll movie and the common reaction was "Welp, Hollywood has officially run outta idea." 


People don't just form their opinions based on the consensus, they hijack it entirely; we know what all the good and bad movies are because those areas have been drilled, and the emergence of social media keeps us up to date on the new stuff. I used to love riding on the bandwagon and sharing the excitement and adoration of The New Big Thing but I didn't come to make friends - my connection to the movie came first, and if it didn't happen for me then that was my cross to bear. It's difficult to share a conflicting point of view nowadays without fear of coming across as attention-seeking or problematic, so the leading lesson I'm preaching is this: dare to feel what you feel without bending to unanimity or licking boot, and make sure you have the vocabulary and the valor to back it up -- because they'll come for you.

- Paul

11.27.2024

Bennett Media DECKS YOUR HALLS

And the Lord regretted that He had made man on the earth, and it grieved him to his heart
- Genesis 6:6

There's no peace on Earth tonight. Not any night. No one wants that - we wouldn't know what to do if we got it. We'd be bored, that's what - and when we're bored we become even more dangerous. So, for this particular holiday stretch we'll be on a steady drip of bile and bellyaches as Bennett Media DECKS YOUR HALLS: an assemblage of agitation and conflict to angry up the blood and stimulate the senses. Mostly what that means is we've got some thoughts we plan to share without fear of reprisal. Or, bring the reprisal, whatever, we've grown tired of neutral and polite and we don't feel like hiding anymore. There may also be holiday-related material.
Ramadan Mubarak!

11.23.2024

NAME THAT MOVIE!

How's your November been? Yeah, ours too. Whatever, we don't care - every year this month becomes more and more like the ultimate B-side: it felt like filler for most of our lives but it still carries that haunting, nostalgic melody that now we simply can't do without. 

But anyway, the movie game. Leticia decided to play the last set and whenever that happens it's always game over for everyone else - though she received a little boost from an anonymous samaritan to bring us all to the finish line. But isn't that nice - a "game" would otherwise insinuate competition and here we are helping each other reach a common goal. Look for love where you can find it and we'll all be alright. So here we go. 



EASY





FAIR





DIFFICULT