Control

Everything Bullock does is incredibly stiff and mechanical, because he has to exert maximum control over himself; otherwise, he'd just shit kick everyone in sight. He's by far the angriest dude on that show. Re watching that show, one of the first things you notice is that he's more motivated by his temper than any sense of "right."

I hear Joyce Carol Oates is the writer to follow.

#5. Fuck yeah.

This review makes me excited for HERCULES.

I don't really look at ZODIAC in the same way as traditional "serial killer" or mystery films. I don't think it's about actually solving the crimes (though obviously it does point to one guy quite hard), and it's not even much of a thriller; rather, I think it's about our obsession with serial killers, and with "unsolved" mysteries. Gyllenhaal's and Downey's characters have a lot of other problems going on, but it seems like both of them fuck up their lives over their obsessions. There are all these attempts to make sense of it, to fill in the blanks, and they're all ultimately fruitless. I wouldn't be the first to point to the Korean film MEMORIES OF MURDER as a good comparison. Not sure which film I like more, though for my money Song Kang-Ho might be the best actor working right now.

I know next to nothing about Bubba Jenkins and Poppies Martinez, but the fact that two such awesome names are facing off has me more interested in the next Bellator than anything else on the card.

It got Alison Bechdel, Ka D'Argo, and Max Headroom pretty quickly. Impressive.

It's not very good with characters from novels. Or authors, really.

My softball team actually won a game today!

It's an incredibly interesting story. I like Cumberbatch quite a bit, so I hope it's the best possible movie we could hope for.

Honestly only like six or so episodes in. So far it's very same-ish to a lot of similar shows. But muppets. And that's OK. So if it gets better, giddy up.

Just started watching FARSCAPE. Digging it.

Watched NYMPHOMANIAC (Vol. I & II) over the weekend. I have to fall inline with much of the criticism out there, that is Vol. I is great, and Vol. II is not so great. Admittedly, I haven't seen a lot of Lars von Trier movies. I'd seen ELEMENT OF CRIME, EUROPA, and ANTICHRIST before this. I have a whole lot of respect for von Trier as a filmmaker, and his skills are really on show here. He has a very impressive visual style, but what's more, he's committed to making movies about ideas. That's pretty rare. He thinks of film as art, and acts accordingly. However, the problem is that the ideas he has are pretty facile. He wants to tackle important issues--whether strictly philosophical, moral, or emotional--but he has a very simplistic grasp of these things (at least in the pictures I've seen). Once you get passed the unsimulated sex, NYMPHOMANIAC is about a conversation between an artist (one who creates art) and a critic (one who does not, but comments nonetheless). Joe (Gainsbourgh), the title character, is the artist: she is compelled to do something that makes her feel good and which makes others feel good. Seligman (Skarsgaard) is the critic: he's a virgin, and believes that his academic approach to her story gives him the appropriate critical distance to judge it. And so von Trier approaches a very old conflict (artists and critics) and sets out to prove the superiority of one point of view. That he does this through allegory (and through a very adept hand at filmmaking) results in a good film, but it adds nothing to the debate. He doesn't like critics: they haven't made art, so they actually don't get it. This can be funny (such as when Seligman tries to add complications to her story that aren't necessary: Fibonacci numbers and historical parallels), but after a while it becomes quite belabored, and the absolutely vile last scene is simply there to further belittle critics. I just wish that von Trier could use his obvious and impressive skills to tackle a more significant issue. It's not worth assembling the talent he did, and spending the effort he did, to write a fairly crude comic polemic about film critics. Furthermore, while I think that his approach to human emotions and sexual relations has been more nuanced in the past (could be wrong), there are simply no characters here; rather, all you have is two compulsions--to fuck, and to intellectualize. Neither can strain from this path. Now, of course, in calling for von Trier to tackle something a bit more complicated, I realize that I'm being a bit of a Seligman here, who keeps demanding complexity where Joe insists that there's nothing but simplicity. But you don't have to add needless complications to approach an issue with some degree of sophistication. I've been thinking of similar directors, and wondering if they suffer from similar limitations. What I've seen of Jodorowsky (just EL TOPO) might support a similar reading: his film is visually interesting and sometimes overburdened with symbolism, but at the root of it is some pretty simplistic ideas about sexuality and religion. But I think I'd still give the edge to Jodorowsky. I haven't seen enough Tarkovsky to see if the criticism rings true there, as well: STALKER might actually be a pretty good parallel. Anyway, I'd like to see von Trier adapt BLOOD MERIDIAN. Seriously.

About ninety people do the same thing every time they post their new release link on Facebook, so no worries. Intrigued by the Jacques Tati set, though I've never seen one of his films. Also, Criterion is really on a Western tear.

Dude, those are both August releases. Scroll down for the October ones.

Just out of curiosity, does your objection apply to dystopian fiction in general?

You're not crazy. He's nominated for a pretty interesting-looking miniseries called DANCING ON THE EDGE.

Hey John, what can you tell me (if anything) about Dorothy Quick and Mary Elizabeth Counselman? Either write anything worthwhile?

What are some good Tenryu matches from his WAR/SWS era? Or really, anytime between leaving and returning to AJPW?

Tagline: BAD MEN WILL BLEED Synopsis: Mads Mikkelsen shoots some cowboys, probably in the face.

We caught the end of Hurricane Arthur, and yet my neighbours' trampoline survived unscathed. Balls.

C'mon, I was hoping to hear your thoughts on WAKE IN FRIGHT. It's a homoerotic nightmare in the outback, featuring Donald Pleasance and an unsimulated kangaroo hunt! What more could you ask for?

Why not watch the films from last round that didn't get any comments (e.g JOSEY WALES, WAKE IN FRIGHT)?

Bryan Clark looks like a roided up middle aged country singer who loves him some Jesus.

Shameful.