The Children (dir. Max Kalmanowicz, 1980): Children riding home on the bus in an idyllic New England town are turned into radioactive zombies by a cloud of toxic yellow gas?! That's my idea of a good time! This a low-budget hoot.
The Lighthouse (dir. Robert Eggers, 2019): Whatever the filmmaker was aiming for, he missed wide: ugh!
Recorder: The Marion Stokes Project (dir. Matt Wolf, 2019): Absolutely fascinating documentary about a woman who spent the last 30+ years of her life obsessively recording television programs, mainly news, onto VHS tapes. A frightening warning about how incredibly short our cultural memory has become in the 24/7 news cycle, there is also an important lesson to be learned from Stokes's legacy about the importance of media preservation, in this case TV. Plus, Marion Stokes was a Trekkie - what's not to like?!
Portrait of a Lady on Fire (dir. Céline Sciamma, 2019): Incredible film by a fascinating young director!
Cure (dir. Kurosawa Kiyoshi, 1997): Spine-tingling, cerebral creepfest as only Kurosawa can deliver about a detective (Yakusho Koji) investigating a baffling series of murders. Completely unique and wonderful!
Four movies I've watched recently:
ReplyDeleteTerror Train (1980). A fun slasher film. Jamie Lee Curtis does not disappoint. Also starring David Copperfield, basically as himself.
The Man who Shot Liberty Valance (1962, Directed by John Ford). A great story combining the talents of both John Wayne and James Stewart. Also starring Vera Miles and Lee Marvin.
Megalodon (2018 TV movie, starring no one who can act). Usually, I really like a bad giant sea creature movie. However, the acting was so bad, I had to listen to the music to know how I was supposed to feel. It's a good thing that the music composer had experience from such films as Sharknado 2 and 4, along with the 3-, 5-, and 6-Headed Shark Attack movies.
Room at the Top (1959). A great movie. My favorite of the "angry young men" series. My first experience seeing Simone Signoret, who was phenomenal.
Terror Train? Fun is right: I'll ride that train! Liberty Valance and Room at the Top? Both great! Megalodon? Heh, haven't had the pleasure: do you know the wonderful term mockbuster...?
DeleteI knew that Megalodon was a cheap copy of The Meg, but I was unfamiliar with the term mockbuster.
ReplyDeleteA mockbuster is (thank you Wikipedia): "..(also known as knockbuster or a drafting opportunity..) is a movie created with the intention of exploiting the publicity of another major motion picture with a similar title or subject. Mockbusters are often made with a low budget and quick production to maximize profit. Unlike films that are produced to capitalize on the popularity of a recent release by adopting similar genre or storytelling elements, mockbusters are generally produced concurrently with upcoming films, and released direct-to-video at the same time the real film reaches theaters or video outlets. A mockbuster may be similar enough in title, packaging, etc. in hopes that consumers confuse it with the actual film it mimics, but their producers maintain that they are simply offering additional products for consumers who want to watch additional films in the same subgenres."
I thought this was a really stupid idea until I realized that I did, in fact, watch Megalodon because it was free (The Meg isn't....yet) and I figured it was "close enough." It was not. I may just have to pony up the $3.99 for The Meg...
I wonder how many other times I've been sucked in by a mockbuster...
Have you found any mockbusters that were better than the real thing?
No, not as yet, though, considering the state of most blockbuster films today, the real question might be: "Are there any mockbusters as bad or worse than the real thing?!"
DeleteOMG, I picked up The Meg and it is AWESOME; it was everything I had hoped for in this genre (in as far as these types of movies are entertaining, thrilling, fantastical, somewhat ridiculous, and CGI-ridden). Perhaps my excitement is partially due to being able to "rent" (with BVFCC subscription) movies again! Or perhaps it is because Jason Statham and Rainn Wilson are in the same movie together. But, it is such a good movie that I will watch it again and collect information on what (in my opinion) helps makes a good crappy movie (does someone have a better term for "good crappy movie"?) and how The Meg fulfills these standards. More soon....
ReplyDeleteIt's interesting that you bring up, however indirectly, the age-old topic of taste and its complex relationship to our culture's conceptions of good and bad art (and that elusive sensibility: camp) because... it will be the subject of a future post (whenever I get around to it!). In the meantime, to give you a preview of my thoughts on this very complicated subject, I will leave you with a few sentences that I wrote in an e-mail recently when I was criticizing the Golden Raspberry Awards ("the Razzies"):
Delete"The Razzies highlight films, performances, etc., that are supposedly the 'worst of the year.' Why is it, then, that so many famously terrible movies are enjoyed by viewers of all types and on a regular basis? If a movie, screenplay, performance, or whatever is truly terrible, then I usually forget about it, perhaps intentionally suppressing the memory. If a movie gives me joy, even if that joy was achieved through total misfire, then surely it has some 'greatness' to it?!"
I think that there are good movies and bad movies, but it is a spectrum, *and* there are many other categories (such as the one you mentioned: forgettable). On one end of the good-bad spectrum, we see ‘good’ movies (as agreed upon by most) and on the other end, the ‘bad’ (as agreed upon by most).
DeleteThere are devices, such as the Academy Awards, which take on the task of identifying ‘good’ movies, via best actor, best screenplay, etc. However, that does not mean that a good movie is enjoyable, nor a ‘bad’ movie unlikeable. And both good and bad movies can be forgettable.
For example, I always tell people, I don’t care how ‘good’ a movie is, if the main character’s entire loving family is killed in the first 5 minutes and the rest of the movie is her/him getting revenge…..no, not watching it. It would be a movie that I will dislike…even if it is ‘good.’ In the same line of thinking, there can be ‘bad’ movies that I love.
So, ‘good’ movies are good and ‘bad’ movies are bad (in accordance with whatever societal means have defined them), but in actuality, there are many more categories that fit both good and bad movies. And these categories are susceptible to individual tastes (not that good and bad are not, but with ‘good’ and ‘bad,’ we theoretically have “standards.”)
So, I very much agree with your assessment of the Razzie awards. There are redeeming/enjoyable aspects to many movies, even ‘bad’ ones. Even if they are in a driving-by-an-accident kind of way….
I love camp!! I am looking forward to your discussions on different movie genres (no pressure….) :^D
Follow-up to The Meg comment…
ReplyDeleteI found The Meg to be truly enjoyable. I would, however, still consider it to be what I call a good/bad movie (please let me know another term if you have one)…a movie that is bad (i.e. has an unrealistic plot), but is high quality and very entertaining. (Megalodon was just bad/bad. Awful, actually. Let us not speak of it again). There appear to be several themes/plot components that occurred in The Meg that I have noticed in other, similar-genre movies (both good/bad movies and bad/bad movies), and I am going to attempt to list some of them. While I will try to avoid spelling out most of the specific details of components that occurred in The Meg, this list WILL describe some plot points. So, if you have not seen The Meg and do not want any parts of it spoiled, please read no further. If you have seen The Meg, or do not care about spoilers, please review, and correct/enhance/add to the list…
Themes/plot points/components found in The Meg and similar movies, in no particular order:
1. Ex-husband/wife/past love thrown back together with ex, in a trying situation that they must work through, generally without warning/notice
2. Beast/creature, possibly prehistoric, returning unbelievably from depths, outer space, another time, extinction, volcanoes, or the depths of the earth (often via earthquake)
3. Precocious child who bonds with one or more of the main/supporting characters. Child obviously needs no supervision, as he/she is running around everywhere and their parent is out battling creatures, solving the world’s problems, etc., or dead
4. Character, with past failure/history, in need of redemption
5. Adversarial relationship between associates that is repaired/forgiven by the end of the movie
6. Impossible action scenes (obviously) involving super-human capabilities (also see #25)
7. One character, generally rich and wacky, who shows hubris/greed and gets his/her comeuppance
8. Love-interest connection (which may or may not involve persons in #1) that generally starts as incompatible or adversarial, but ends otherwise (also see #18)
9. Multi-racial cast with women and minorities in leadership/expert roles (also see #18)
10. The rules of science do not necessarily matter
11. The rules of biology do not necessarily matter
12. The rules of physics do not necessarily matter
13. Initially thinking the beast is dead, but then characters realize they killed a different one, or a smaller one, or there are more of them
14. Made-up locations on the earth (or in space)
15. Good, but obvious, CGI
16. Characters accents that come and go
17. B movie/TV stars or has-beens (though The Meg way overshot this with Jason Stratham and Rainn Wilson)
18. Female characters who are not only beautiful, smart, talented, and strong but can also be “one of the guys” and/or be uncharacteristically attracted to one of said guys
19. Subtle and not-so-subtle nods to other movies
20. A sequence where the threat gets closer and closer and closer, and then “No! It’s right beneath you!”
21. Women’s makeup (which they probably would not really be wearing) is perfect after they have been under water, showering, sleeping, being in the hospital, etc.
22. Statements along the lines of “I don’t get paid enough for this,” “This was not part of the job description,” “This is above my pay grade.” “I’m getting too old for this,” etc.
23. Tough guy or gal who finally breaks down
24. Ignorant, panicky crowds of people
25. Unrealistic chase scenes (obviously)
26. Catchy tune and/or visual for portions of beginning or ending credits
27. Cute/heartwarming scene with an animal or pet
Looking forward to comments, corrections, and/or additions!
Who says that chase scenes in action movies are unrealistic: have you seen how I drive?! (Heh, just kidding, luckily!)
DeleteWow, what a great list (although I think 2 & 13 are my personal favorites)! I will not add anything to it right now but... (another teaser) I will be writing about film genres and their various conventions regularly in this blog (again, once I can get around to it!). So, it is good that you are paying attention to this stuff already: stay tuned! (And watch out for those sharks....)
Rob, I loved your article on video store clerks. You surely must be one of the best!! I remember having short conversations with the owner of "Now Playing", or whatever it waS in Madison. He was a talker. I always want to comment to the clerk how I liked the movie. The clerks in Guilford at Blockbuster were good listeners. I am very opinionated about what I like and they listened politely and agreed with me sometimes. Anyway I'll bet you are one of the best video clerks around! Love, your Mom
ReplyDelete