The Official Movie Thread

[CiG]

I know a guy who needs a lawyer, interested?

 

[Einherjar86]

 

[CiG]

Perfect reaction gif.

Setting aside the whole true nature of free will thing, I just think calling Midsommar a tale of tourism is kind of like calling a business meeting with Weinstein a sexcapade.

 

[Einherjar86]

I don't want to speak for Challenge, but I'm not sure he was reducing Midsommar to a tale of tourism. I think he was just saying it contained an element that satirized tourism.

 

[CiG]

I didn't mean to give that impression.

 

[challenge_everything]

I really think you and Challenge are ignoring that Pelle manipulated them, they didn't choose or seek out that Swedish village, neither did the foreigners from London, they were more or less brought there and then fed drugs. Don't want to make a big thing out of this either but your comment about tourism implies I'm denying the theme because the place isn't a popular destination when that's obviously never anything I said nor implied.

Perfect reaction gif.

Setting aside the whole true nature of free will thing, I just think calling Midsommar a tale of tourism is kind of like calling a business meeting with Weinstein a sexcapade.

By your logic, if Weinstein invites a woman to a business meeting and then rapes her, the woman didn't choose to go to the business meeting.

 

[CiG]

By your logic, if Weinstein invites a woman to a business meeting and then rapes her, the woman didn't choose to go to the business meeting.

I don't understand this comment.

 

[CiG]

Most (if not all?) of the allegations against Weinstein are of a coercive nature, not forceful rape. Suck my dick or you don't get your leg in the door etc. That's what I meant by calling a business meeting with him a sexcapade, they weren't brought into his office by force, they weren't sexually engaged by force, it was all manipulation (except in any cases where he did actually rape someone that I don't know about).

Just like Midsommar,

Spoiler

none of it was organic for the victims, they were all manipulated into visiting that village.

Unrelated but

Spoiler

another element I picked up on is just how utterly boorish and ignorant/arrogant the Americans are, compared to the two from London, who were horrified by what they saw and were the only ones to try and actually immediately get out of the situation. What undertones are there in that small element of the film I wonder?

 

[challenge_everything]

I don't understand this comment.

It's not supposed to be an argument based on the reality of Weinstein's behaviour, it's a theoretical example to expose your bizarre logic. Your argument is that if someone is manipulated into going somewhere, then that somehow negates any genuine intent or motivation the victim may have independently possessed.

In Midsommar, you can't deny that each of the victims genuinely wanted to go to visit the village. As I've previously said, Josh wanted to go because he was interested in the culture and was writing a PHD on it. Mark and Christian were keen for a boys' trip and a midsummer festival sounded fun. Those motivations aren't negated simply because another person in the group has undisclosed intentions.

 

[CiG]

It's not supposed to be an argument based on the reality of Weinstein's behaviour, it's a theoretical example to expose your bizarre logic. Your argument is that if someone is manipulated into going somewhere, then that somehow negates any genuine intent or motivation the victim may have independently possessed.

In Midsommar, you can't deny that each of the victims genuinely wanted to go to visit the village. As I've previously said, Josh wanted to go because he was interested in the culture and was writing a PHD on it. Mark and Christian were keen for a boys' trip and a midsummer festival sounded fun. Those motivations aren't negated simply because another person in the group has undisclosed intentions.

Fair enough I guess, I just personally don't see how that really satirizes tourism, but I also admit I'm being pretty autistic about this.

 

[Einherjar86]

Unrelated but

Spoiler

another element I picked up on is just how utterly boorish and ignorant/arrogant the Americans are, compared to the two from London, who were horrified by what they saw and were the only ones to try and actually immediately get out of the situation. What undertones are there in that small element of the film I wonder?

Spoiler

I actually think it was the academics in particular who reacted boorishly, or weren't significantly horrified by the sacrifice. Dani was definitely horrified, but pacified by Josh and Christian. I see it as part of the satire of academia.

 

[CiG]

I actually think it was the academics in particular who reacted boorishly, or weren't significantly horrified by the sacrifice. Dani was definitely horrified, but pacified by Josh and Christian. I see it as part of the satire of academia.

Spoiler

I forgot Mark slept through that, my bad. I also forgot that Christian is technically an academic. I need to rewatch it tbh. I was thinking earlier, do you think Dani was so willing to sacrifice Christian (lol "sacrifice a Christian") not because she was hurt by him having sex with another woman (seemed like at the start she would have been willing to let him cuck her just so he'd stick around) but rather because her desperate need to not be left alone after her whole family dies is satisfied by being accepted into Pelle's "family"? I dunno, just a thought. It struck me as a tad crazy she was willing to have him murdered but maybe she "feels held" by the new village and simply let go of her last connection to fully embrace this new one.

Don't mind me guys, not trying to be a dick to anyone I just like arguing through these kind of things, always makes the next viewing more interesting.

 

[Einherjar86]

Spoiler

I forgot Mark slept through that, my bad. I also forgot that Christian is technically an academic. I need to rewatch it tbh. I was thinking earlier, do you think Dani was so willing to sacrifice Christian (lol "sacrifice a Christian") not because she was hurt by him having sex with another woman (seemed like at the start she would have been willing to let him cuck her just so he'd stick around) but rather because her desperate need to not be left alone after her whole family dies is satisfied by being accepted into Pelle's "family"? I dunno, just a thought. It struck me as a tad crazy she was willing to have him murdered but maybe she "feels held" by the new village and simply let go of her last connection to fully embrace this new one.

Don't mind me guys, not trying to be a dick to anyone I just like arguing through these kind of things, always makes the next viewing more interesting.

Spoiler

I think it was her need to be part of something, yes--not because she was hurt. I think she was so doped up by the end, and felt so accepted by the community (being made May Queen), and she simply didn't care about Christian anymore. It wasn't that she hated him, she was indifferent to him.

And yeah, Christian's an academic, and a shitty one. I cracked up when Josh screams "I had to teach you how to use JSTOR!"

 

[CiG]

I wish I got the academic elements, feel like I'm missing out on a lot.

 

[TechnicalBarbarity]

I should say: one thing I think Joker did well was handle the racial dynamic between Arthur and other characters. I thought it was very purposeful that almost all the poor characters he interacted with were black.

ugh, this is where you lose me again. I thought those parts were forced, not purposeful(unless the purpose was to give a nod to the deranged SJW's of today). Are most of the black people you know poor?

 

[CiG]

Watching:

 

[Einherjar86]

ugh, this is where you lose me again. I thought those parts were forced, not purposeful(unless the purpose was to give a nod to the deranged SJW's of today). Are most of the black people you know poor?

Ha, sorry man. And no, definitely not--the black people I know are pretty well-to-do. But if you look at the demographics of NYC and Chicago housing projects (on which Arthur's Gotham is most closely based), it's something like 50% African American in NYC, and 70% in Chicago.

 

[CiG]

Finally seeing this damn thing.

 

[rms]

I wish I got the academic elements, feel like I'm missing out on a lot.

jstor is just a database for mostly historians if I dare say! The go to for collegiate secondary source information, at least from experience

 

[TechnicalBarbarity]

Ha, sorry man. And no, definitely not--the black people I know are pretty well-to-do. But if you look at the demographics of NYC and Chicago housing projects (on which Arthur's Gotham is most closely based), it's something like 50% African American in NYC, and 70% in Chicago.

Gotham is a fictional city that is based on/influenced by quite a few cities, not just those two and focuses on the downtown areas/districts of those cities... not on the housing projects. And btw most of the NYC influence clearly comes directly from midtown and lower Manhattan. So again, it was forced. Also im pretty sure there are just as many hispanics and whites in housing projects than blacks and where those projects are located is also a factor. A housing project in Harlem obliviously has more african-americans, but Harlem has absolutely zero ties to DC's Gotham. So yeah, definitely forced just to cater to the rabid sjw's.