The GMD Movie Club Thread
- Thread starter no country for old wainds
- Start date
CiG
Approximately Infinite Universe
I kinda feel the same. It's really just a dumb fun violent flick, that it got so destroyed here is probably an indicator of how pretentious we are lol.
Einherjar86
Active Member
I also maybe should have tried to have a more open mind, but I’d basically decided almost right away I wasn’t going to like it…
When the asshole criminal, after shooting the family in the car, says “He had a phone!” and the ringleader says “You have a phone—should I kill you too?”
I suppose if this is supposed to signify a breakdown in communication among the group, then… ok. But honestly, how stupid do you have to be for that to go over your head?
I suppose if this is supposed to signify a breakdown in communication among the group, then… ok. But honestly, how stupid do you have to be for that to go over your head?
rms
Active Member
challenge_everything
Active Member
I decided it couldn't be taken too seriously as soon as
the killer decides to infiltrate the criminals by wearing the dead guy's body as a suit.
rms
Active Member
CiG
Approximately Infinite Universe
challenge_everything
Active Member
rms
Active Member
CiG
Approximately Infinite Universe
rms
Active Member
Braindead maybe...forgot that scene. Been awhile. Oh well
Point Blank
Following lord Vegard again. Much like Black Book, this film requires some more than usual effort to get through it and possibly even enjoy it, if you're like me. Maybe this is why it's getting some hipster-y level praise when I quickly went through the interwebs following a viewing
Would never have guessed Deliverance and this shared the same director, the style is somewhat psychedelic and plainly out there. My opinion, tough to follow and I'm not sure I had enough interest to put myself through a second viewing.
This film is also a relic of a different age. The treatment of women is hilarious and the antics of the lead are also out there. Definitely drink a cup of Joe / tea & crumpets before heading into this one, maybe it's for you.
Interesting shooting style, but poor story building drags it down. 2/5. Also, I was able to rent this for free on Prime and not sure why, but maybe a better option than the stream/download option that was provided.
Point Blank
Following lord Vegard again. Much like Black Book, this film requires some more than usual effort to get through it and possibly even enjoy it, if you're like me. Maybe this is why it's getting some hipster-y level praise when I quickly went through the interwebs following a viewing
Would never have guessed Deliverance and this shared the same director, the style is somewhat psychedelic and plainly out there. My opinion, tough to follow and I'm not sure I had enough interest to put myself through a second viewing.
This film is also a relic of a different age. The treatment of women is hilarious and the antics of the lead are also out there. Definitely drink a cup of Joe / tea & crumpets before heading into this one, maybe it's for you.
Interesting shooting style, but poor story building drags it down. 2/5. Also, I was able to rent this for free on Prime and not sure why, but maybe a better option than the stream/download option that was provided.
Einherjar86
Active Member
Black Book was good, felt like it dragged at times but I'm not sure what I would have cut or edited to change that. And somewhat contradictorily, I appreciate the time it took in certain scenes to build character dynamics, including either trust or antagonism.
I also really appreciated the film's sense of historical consciousness, underscored by the frame narrative. Here we have a story of Jews being ruthlessly oppressed and slaughtered by an imperial/fascist power, and then we end (and begin, chronologically) with the onset of the Suez Crisis in which Israel is becoming--in addition to a home for displaced Jews--a formidable imperial power in its own right, and a serious agent of Western interests in the Middle East. I don't think the film is saying much beyond that, but it's a nice touch.
rms
Active Member
For your spoiler, what did you think of the historical consciousness regarding Western Europe/Netherlands? I'm thinking that was more of the plot, which ties into your spoiler comment
Alexandra's Project - 2/5
Vegard cements himself as someone other than me haha. Thinking the best part of this flick is the quality for the low budget, but this film may have had a larger impact on me if I saw it when it came out. I didn't get as worked up as Vegard as the plot went on, so for me just didn't hold attention.
Didn't help that my wife thought I was watching a low budget porno and kept asking why her tits are out for so long.
In the end, like Point Blank I think this serves an historical purpose for where media was at the time of release, but did not hold up for me.
For me, I'd only watch Black Book again from the first iteration of the movie club. Appreciate all the recommendations, it's been awhile since I've gotten the interest to check out flicks. Going to try and find Lady Snowblood and cap this round off.
Vegard Pompey
ALLY TO GOOD, NIGHTMARE TO YOU
I thought it had an interesting angle in that it showed how the antisemitism and groupthink that propped up the Nazi regime didn't end following the war but simply found more fashionable forms of expression, for instance as antagonism toward supposed collaborators who were only trying to survive a desperate situation while the real crooks found their place in the new order, fled to South America or were hailed as heroes. Maybe it speaks to my historical illiteracy that I thought this take was interesting but it's certainly a degree of nuance that seems absent from most WW2-related media.
I listened to part of Verhoeven's commentary track of the film and realized for the first time that the guy's old as fuck and actually grew up during WW2, so it's obviously a very personal project for him. He added a lot of interesting historical context for the film, most of which suggests that even in its bleakness the film's story is actually much kinder than the real events often were. I think he mentioned that Rachel in the film is based on three different real women involved with the Dutch resistance, most/all of whom were killed by either the Nazis or the resistance.
It certainly had a sordid vibe that reminded me of something lurid I downloaded from cinemageddon as a teen and probably shouldn't be watching. Can definitely see it being an awkward viewing experience with people around. That weird mix of domestic drama, dark-side-of-the-internet wrongness, PS1-era horror game desolation and information age disconnection pulled together with enough humor and craft to keep me invested in an hourlong conversation between a man and a VHS recording of his wife really did it for me.
Einherjar86
Active Member
I think Vegard's comment below speaks a bit to what you're getting at, if I understand you...?
Yeah, I sensed a lot of philosophical undertones in the narrative, e.g. Hannah Arendt's Eichmann in Jerusalem. The film was conscientious toward the plight of those caught up in Nazism while not being apologetic toward them (rightfully so). Additionally, I think there's an unspoken nod toward Nazi sympathizers in Scandinavia, which is part of the region's legacy now, unfortunately.
@rms yes, the plot was certainly about the Dutch resistance. I just thought the frame narrative was a nice bookend to the more explicit dynamics of political resistance and expedient collaboration.
challenge_everything
Active Member
Overall a great selection. Three movies I really enjoyed, a fourth that was shit but at least in an entertaining car crash kind of way.
(Warning some vague spoilers follow, I have put the more obvious ones in spoiler quotes).
4. No One Lives
2 stars
A staggering mess of a film that still managed to entertain me for 2 reasons, the first being the rather inventive kills, the second being the Shakespearean dialogue. “Are you outta your mind?” “I’m very much in my mind”.
The plot could’ve had potential in the hands of a better director, but so many of the dynamics here just don’t work. I don’t understand what the opening scene in the diner between Driver and his girlfriend was supposed to achieve, other than maybe trying to skew our expectations. The criminals are annoying and incompetent, and as a result we’re deprived of what could have become an entertaining battle for survival. It’s much less fun when they’re simply cannon fodder. The absence of a clear protagonist really kills this movie.
Worst of all is the relationship between Emma and Driver which hints at being more than meets the eye, but ultimately goes nowhere. We were led to anticipate some kind of Stockholm Syndrome twist but it never arrived.
3. Point Blank
3.5 stars
A real curiosity for 1967. Pre-dates most of the New Hollywood movement but it’s clearly a prime example of it, in the sense that it borrows heavily from the Nouvelle Vague, perhaps to the detriment of having its own style. You can see Antonioni’s influence all over this.
The story could’ve been made into a caper a la Hitchcock, but Boorman instead opts for a brooding anti-hero, clunky inner monologues and artsy flashbacks. Audiences in 1967 must've been scratching their heads. It’s notable though that the best scenes are where those elements are dialled down, and it opts for a more straightforward approach (eg the money exchange in the spillway). The final scene is pretty great too.
It would have helped to have a more charismatic lead, since Lee Marvin is so wooden and probably too old for the role. The ‘romance’ with Angie Dickinson lacks credibility. It’s also not clear what is motivating Marvin’s character - revenge, money or perhaps appeasing some third party. He doesn’t seem to know (which may be the point), but I’m not sure the director does either.
2. Black Book
4 stars
Starts out more like a Spielberg flick than Verhoeven - refined, formulaic, with a bombastic score. It clicks into gear once Rachel joins the resistance where, despite the wartime setting, it essentially becomes a noir. Carice Van Houten really carries this, it’s an understated role but she really nails the determined stoicism of Rachel/Ellis, eg coolly dyeing her pubes in full view of her comrades (though I’m still not sure why she went to so much effort to do that only to neglect the regrowth on her head).
It’s certainly refreshing to have a bit of nuance in a WWII movie, with good Nazis and treacherous partisans. And as others have pointed out, it’s a unique perspective to see the post-war witch-hunts on screen. I picked most of the twists except the last but I felt that one was rather implausible -
Anyway - great movie. There’s not much Verhoeven I don’t like. I would hesitate to call it a revenge movie though. That element is certainly there but I feel it’s peripheral to other themes.
1. Alexandra’s Project
4.5 stars
It’s been a long time since I’ve seen this, and I thought it might’ve lost some of its impact second time around, but it still had my balls retreating upwards at a rapid rate.
It’s an ingenious set up, and I always love thrillers that take advantage of a limited setting and can wring every drop of tension out of it. The whole atmosphere of the movie is wonderfully sordid and it feels like a horror despite anything that could be clearly identified as such.
It’s an under-explored area of cinema to delve into intra-marriage sexual politics and the subtleties of control and coercion within a relationship. Nothing Steve does is particularly unusual, and certainly not illegal. The effectiveness of the film lies in the banality of it all. In fact, as I watched, I was thinking that any intervention by the police or divorce courts into this situation would have ultimately resulted in Steve having sole custody of the kids. His years of control would be far too subtle a factor to take into account. I love how easily the power dynamic is flipped though. Steve goes from being the alpha male, the breadwinner and patriarch, and all it takes is a VHS tape to strip all that away from him. His superiority was illusory from the beginning.
Alexandra is still a psychopath and despite the refrain “if I’m mad, you made me this way”, there are things that go well beyond that.
Her character is a necessary exaggeration, but I think the film really nails both the normalcy of Steve and the takeaway moral of how easily one can end up in a relationship with little clue as to what's going on in the other's head.
(Warning some vague spoilers follow, I have put the more obvious ones in spoiler quotes).
4. No One Lives
2 stars
A staggering mess of a film that still managed to entertain me for 2 reasons, the first being the rather inventive kills, the second being the Shakespearean dialogue. “Are you outta your mind?” “I’m very much in my mind”.
The plot could’ve had potential in the hands of a better director, but so many of the dynamics here just don’t work. I don’t understand what the opening scene in the diner between Driver and his girlfriend was supposed to achieve, other than maybe trying to skew our expectations. The criminals are annoying and incompetent, and as a result we’re deprived of what could have become an entertaining battle for survival. It’s much less fun when they’re simply cannon fodder. The absence of a clear protagonist really kills this movie.
Worst of all is the relationship between Emma and Driver which hints at being more than meets the eye, but ultimately goes nowhere. We were led to anticipate some kind of Stockholm Syndrome twist but it never arrived.
3. Point Blank
3.5 stars
A real curiosity for 1967. Pre-dates most of the New Hollywood movement but it’s clearly a prime example of it, in the sense that it borrows heavily from the Nouvelle Vague, perhaps to the detriment of having its own style. You can see Antonioni’s influence all over this.
The story could’ve been made into a caper a la Hitchcock, but Boorman instead opts for a brooding anti-hero, clunky inner monologues and artsy flashbacks. Audiences in 1967 must've been scratching their heads. It’s notable though that the best scenes are where those elements are dialled down, and it opts for a more straightforward approach (eg the money exchange in the spillway). The final scene is pretty great too.
It would have helped to have a more charismatic lead, since Lee Marvin is so wooden and probably too old for the role. The ‘romance’ with Angie Dickinson lacks credibility. It’s also not clear what is motivating Marvin’s character - revenge, money or perhaps appeasing some third party. He doesn’t seem to know (which may be the point), but I’m not sure the director does either.
2. Black Book
4 stars
Starts out more like a Spielberg flick than Verhoeven - refined, formulaic, with a bombastic score. It clicks into gear once Rachel joins the resistance where, despite the wartime setting, it essentially becomes a noir. Carice Van Houten really carries this, it’s an understated role but she really nails the determined stoicism of Rachel/Ellis, eg coolly dyeing her pubes in full view of her comrades (though I’m still not sure why she went to so much effort to do that only to neglect the regrowth on her head).
It’s certainly refreshing to have a bit of nuance in a WWII movie, with good Nazis and treacherous partisans. And as others have pointed out, it’s a unique perspective to see the post-war witch-hunts on screen. I picked most of the twists except the last but I felt that one was rather implausible -
if Hans was the traitor then why did he put himself on the line by walking into the trap with everyone else?
Anyway - great movie. There’s not much Verhoeven I don’t like. I would hesitate to call it a revenge movie though. That element is certainly there but I feel it’s peripheral to other themes.
1. Alexandra’s Project
4.5 stars
It’s been a long time since I’ve seen this, and I thought it might’ve lost some of its impact second time around, but it still had my balls retreating upwards at a rapid rate.
It’s an ingenious set up, and I always love thrillers that take advantage of a limited setting and can wring every drop of tension out of it. The whole atmosphere of the movie is wonderfully sordid and it feels like a horror despite anything that could be clearly identified as such.
It’s an under-explored area of cinema to delve into intra-marriage sexual politics and the subtleties of control and coercion within a relationship. Nothing Steve does is particularly unusual, and certainly not illegal. The effectiveness of the film lies in the banality of it all. In fact, as I watched, I was thinking that any intervention by the police or divorce courts into this situation would have ultimately resulted in Steve having sole custody of the kids. His years of control would be far too subtle a factor to take into account. I love how easily the power dynamic is flipped though. Steve goes from being the alpha male, the breadwinner and patriarch, and all it takes is a VHS tape to strip all that away from him. His superiority was illusory from the beginning.
Alexandra is still a psychopath and despite the refrain “if I’m mad, you made me this way”, there are things that go well beyond that.
(the fake cancer scare is an epic psycho moment)
Last edited:
Vegard Pompey
ALLY TO GOOD, NIGHTMARE TO YOU
This audience was scratching its head in 2022.
Inclined to agree. On one hand some of those experimental artistic flourishes kinda took me out of the movie, but on the other they might've added to the jagged, feverish vibe of it all.
I think a more charismatic lead performance would be missing the point. Walker is supposed to be this despondent figure going through the motions in a meaningless search for a meaningless thing.
I listened to the director's commentary and it sounds like Lee Marvin contributed a lot to the character of the film, both by negotiating final cut for John Boorman and through suggestions made on set. It seems to have been a very personal project for him in which he drew on his own experiences struggling with PTSD from his service in WW2. I'm not very familiar with Lee Marvin but it's cool to see that kind of 50s tough guy actor so on board with a cerebral mind fuck tone poem like this.
rms
Active Member
There are definitely some unusual things and definitely some illegal things, come on!
Einherjar86
Active Member
1. Alexandra's Project
2. Black Book
3. Point Blank
4. No One Lives
Others have voiced my thoughts on Point Blank, but I'll reiterate a few things. I don't think this movie makes sense, lol.
I found its tone and genre more interesting than its content. It's a cross between the noir of late '40s/'50s and the paranoid cinema of the late '60s/'70s. This could have been done more seamlessly and thoughtfully, but it was a cool effort. Walker is a somewhat typical one-dimensional, macho gunslinger casually making his way through a labyrinthine plot; but in this case the labyrinth has talons in the kind of conspiratorial bureaucracy that we find in films like The Conversation, The French Connection, and All the President's Men.
Re. Alexandra's Project (since I didn't comment earlier):
I'm a sucker for the camera as a conceptual figure within the diegesis of a film, and this movie used it really well. As both an instrument and sign of visualization, it's doing a lot of interesting work: enabling sight but also signaling things that remain unseen/unnoticed, an archive of preservation but also a record of loss
, and a surveillance system.
2. Black Book
3. Point Blank
4. No One Lives
Others have voiced my thoughts on Point Blank, but I'll reiterate a few things. I don't think this movie makes sense, lol.
The premise involving Yost helping Walker and then his reveal as Fairfax strikes me as overly complicated--which I realize is kinda noir's thing. But I couldn't help but feel like there were too many threads for a narrative that could have been more gracefully simple. Of course, then it wouldn't have been the movie that it is.
One thought on the unnecessary complexity: after reading the critical consensus that Walker is dreaming, the idiosyncrasy makes more sense. That's a conceit I'm not fond of, but it at least explains the narrative logic.
One thought on the unnecessary complexity: after reading the critical consensus that Walker is dreaming, the idiosyncrasy makes more sense. That's a conceit I'm not fond of, but it at least explains the narrative logic.
I found its tone and genre more interesting than its content. It's a cross between the noir of late '40s/'50s and the paranoid cinema of the late '60s/'70s. This could have been done more seamlessly and thoughtfully, but it was a cool effort. Walker is a somewhat typical one-dimensional, macho gunslinger casually making his way through a labyrinthine plot; but in this case the labyrinth has talons in the kind of conspiratorial bureaucracy that we find in films like The Conversation, The French Connection, and All the President's Men.
Re. Alexandra's Project (since I didn't comment earlier):
I'm a sucker for the camera as a conceptual figure within the diegesis of a film, and this movie used it really well. As both an instrument and sign of visualization, it's doing a lot of interesting work: enabling sight but also signaling things that remain unseen/unnoticed, an archive of preservation but also a record of loss
the neighbor's offer to leave just a bit of the kids on the tape was a very nice gesture in this regard
The flip from recording to live feed (not sure how that works, but I'll suspend my disbelief) also performed what I thought was a fascinating collapse of time and space, since we move abruptly and unknowingly from the past to the present and from what we thought was a space inside Steve's house to a space in the neighboring house. The disorienting sense of repositioning that occurs here is a nice complement to Steve's realization that his life hasn't been what he thought it was.
challenge_everything
Active Member
I think we are probably in agreement more than you realise. I'm talking about a kind of silent charisma, an Alain Delon type if you know what I mean. I just didn't think Marvin had the intangible presence for the role.
Similar threads
