Last movie watched...

[Tiplodocus]

It never dawned on me to approach SUCKER PUNCH as anything other than a traditional movie so i guess that's where I got lost. It might work better to think of it as web page vs. book but it would need to be much more of a game changer for that to work and  Snyder's eye is still full of wrong.

On the Godfather/Goodfellas glamourising gangsters gebate. I think they do.  They pretend not to. But they do. Like PLATOON and it's "war is hell" message (followed by a huge wink and a "but also awesome and cool").  But that's OK, I can see that.

[radiator]

Of course there's a certain allure to the gangster way of life - it wouldn't be a popular genre if there wasn't.

For me, what's so great about Goodfellas is the contrast of the glamour/bling/whateber you want to call it and the unpleasant reality.

Haven't seen The Godfather so I can't comment, but I take issue with this concept of disliking a film because you don't morally agree with the characters or world it represents - or if said characters aren't somehow 'punished' for their crimes like they are in soap operas.

[JamesC]

I've never seen the Godfather either - mainly because I find Mafia films boring.
I quite like other sorts of gangster films but the whole Mafia family/dynastic thing really bores the tits off me.

It's amazing that Goodfellas is based on a true story - characters like the Joe Pesci one in Goodfellas always get killed off when they're about 20 in British gangster films (and quite right too)! 

[Professor Bear]

I take issue with this concept of disliking a film because you don't morally agree with the characters or world it represents - or if said characters aren't somehow 'punished' for their crimes like they are in soap operas.

Then I don't think you'll enjoy this thing we have called cinema as it has these things called "protagonists" who you are explicitly supposed to empathise with, and this other thing called a "three act structure" which kind of hinges on closure and/or resolution of conflict.  There are exceptions, of course, but you'll still have a time with the argument that someone is not allowed to dislike a film just because it has a central character who eats babies.

[Hoagy]

See, I was just thinking about Tommy Lee Jones and his choice of roles. He always works a protagonist who doesn't ask to be empathised with. He does this brilliantly in his countless sheriff, ranger or marshal roles. The most recent [I watched] about a Louisiana detective, in the surreal " Into the Electric Mist". Good strong cast and sparse on action. Still, TLJ, gives that performance, that says, he could give a rat's ass if you empthise with him, or not which, in turn allows you to, much easier, as his characters are full of subtle remorse and never praise hunting. Like Al Pacino, like Marlon Brando and Joe Pesci in those gangster flicks. As it is more humanist, what they play.

They all have their bad days. Tommy's two face in Batman Whatever for instance. Even then he wasn't doing much wrong.

[Richmond Clements]

In the cinema: Dark Shadows. Liked Depp, but I always do. Overall though it was overlong and dull and didn't know what it wanted to be. But my children loved it, even though I had to explain to them that [spoiler]Alice Cooper[/spoiler] was a real person.
Watched Jurassic Park a couple of nights ago and by god it's still great. The SFX of the T-Rex attack on the jeeps still hold up today, Winston's models are amazing.

[SmallBlueThing]

While everyone was discussing italian american crime families and other such things that matter NOT ONE JOT and could be wiped from human history without being missed at all, i was enjoying dracula, the wolfman, frankenstein's monster, the mummy and the creature from the black lagoon all getting together and having a party in midtown america at what could be the end of the world. Yep, THE MONSTER SQUAD (deluxe two-disc twentieth anniversary edition) finally got watched with the boys. What a corking film. Havent seen it since 1987, and to be honest, as seventeen year old i didnt like it very much, it being too family-friendly and cutesy in part. Now however, as a forty-two year old dad of a seven and a nine year old, i absolutely bloody loved it. Everything- nearly- is right: tom noonan's frankenstein monster is probably the best such performance since karloff, the wolfman looks great, the gillman is (dissappointingly) redesigned, but the new look is quite cool and the mummy is hilarious. Only
(cont)

[Professor Bear]

Typical bloody SBT - too good to join the debate, and too good to even finish a sentence.

[SmallBlueThing]

(cont) dracula lets the side down, proving- as does the much later van helsing movie, that there are few actors who can do it. Lugosi, Lee, arguably Oldman, and that's about it. Duncan regehr has a decent stab, but he's too lacking in charisma to pull it off.

Fred dekker's movie has grown something of cult following in recent years- but honestly, what hasnt in these days of the internet? But while much shit is passed off as wonderful simply because two people agree on a forum and can quote some moron critic from a provincial newspaper or, worse, a dreaded blog, that accidentally gave it a good review in a week when everyone else liked something else, the monster squad is deserving of outpouring your love. It's made with real heart and fondness for the universals of old, is never cynical, and stands up for the little guy (or fat kid) throughout. The gags mostly still work, wolfman's still got nards, and the poignancy of scary german guy's concentration camp tattoo ('you really know about monsters')
(cont)

[SmallBlueThing]

(cont) and frankenstein's relationship with the little girl are still pitched just right.

This is one i hope hollywood never remakes, but im sure it will. Both my kids loved it- it's my eldest's 'best movie ever', predictably. And i hope that it has only further cemented their love of monsters, which i hope they will take with them through their lives. We dont do football, sport in general, soap operas, godfather films, lord of the rings, or heavy metal in our family- we bond and connect over horror movies and comics. Tomorrow night is poltergeist 2 ('god is iiiiiin his holy tem-ple') and i cant bloody wait.

See you next wednesday!

SBT

[Frank]

Godfather remains a crime fairytale to me - a dynastic tragedy about misunderstood and honorable Robin Hood types - compared to something like Goodfellas, which feels like a far more accurate portrayal of that kind of scumbag: violent, selfish, amoral and delusional about their own importance in the world.  That to me rings true.

The main character's the worst cunt in the world. His soul is gradually eaten away by his insatiable desire for control, leaving only the dead eyed, empty shell of part two's final frame. Everyone else is a venal idiot or a hypocrite.

[JOE SOAP]

I take issue with this concept of disliking a film because you don't morally agree with the characters or world it represents - or if said characters aren't somehow 'punished' for their crimes like they are in soap operas.

Then I don't think you'll enjoy this thing we have called cinema as it has these things called "protagonists" who you are explicitly supposed to empathise with, and this other thing called a "three act structure" which kind of hinges on closure and/or resolution of conflict.  There are exceptions, of course, but you'll still have a time with the argument that someone is not allowed to dislike a film just because it has a central character who eats babies.

It's a slightly confused issue between those two posts but, in the 70's, the moral balance seemed ambiguous in many great films - American films especially seemed all the better for it. Of course this is all by degrees, as are the measure of our morals, but empathy does not equal likability.


I don't agree with anything Dr Phibes does but I love the films and his Quixotic character, that's empathy.

[Frank]

If you think Goodfellas made anyone look cool or glamorous I cannot help you.

Henry Hill, ripped to the tits on coke with Debi Mazar hanging off him didn't look cool?

[JOE SOAP]

Prof's moral turpitude circuit wasn't engaged.

[Frank]

For me, what's so great about Goodfellas is the contrast of the glamour/bling/whateber you want to call it and the unpleasant reality.

The key to Goodfellas's take on the superficial appeal of thug life is Lorraine Bracco's voice-over, where she's describing the contrast between the expensive clothes and jewellery of the wives, and how they have really bad skin and hair. The metaphor of a shiny apple which- underneath the surface- is writhing with maggots would make sense to a good Catholic boy like Scorcese.

See also, the bit in 1984 where Winston picks up a prole prostitute who looks okay under a streetlight ...