I love Zoolander. I mean its not the funniest movie of all time or anything, but its one of those rare cases of a modern movie being funny without having to rely on a lot of swearing or crude humor. It actually is pretty innocent. Way back when Jay and Sean had a radio show in St. Catharines, they were reviewing it and Sean was so-so about it, and I drove right up to their (then) studio at Brock radio to defend it. Was kind of a weird lame thing to do, but I was that bored. It happened. This was wow, 7 years ago now.

I definitely liked it a hell of a lot more than Tropic Thunder. Zoolander definitely has Owen Wilson’s best non-Wes Anderson comedy performance.

Duchovny does give good cameo (as in FULL FRONTAL). But David Bowie was flat (I do see the Zane awesomeness, but Stiller and Wilson were too idiotic (even by their standards) to really get the comedy. Just not my thing.

I like the all caps emphasis. It makes you sound even more unhinged for liking that movie as much as you do.

Maybe it sounds like I’m bashing TDK more than I am, because I’m comparing it directly to THE PRESTIGE. I think TDK isn’t going to age as well. But as comic book movies go, yea TDK is one of the best. Period.

If we could modify the style sheet so the text in the comment box were darker against the light background it would be great.

Here’s the thing Matt: EVERYTHING IS A GENERALIZATION. we are all talking shit if you want to get down to the nitty gritty, particularly when talking about issues of taste, anytime you use the word ‘they’ you are undermining individuality, so please, spare me the lecture.

I like to say grandiose things because it gets reactions, people’s ears perk up when someone actually marks a line in the sand, it gets people talking… my tactic is to start off with something grandiose, let people get hot and bothered, and then break down the issues, discuss them, refine them. It wasn’t a coincidence the best discussion about gay rights came from David’s divisive opinions… we wouldn’t of had any conversation without someone sticking their neck out and having an opinion, dare it be a contrary opinion.

I would have thought you knew this is how it works, you are one of the instigators, or are your opinions untainted by rhetorical flourish?

but getting back to the class thing:

I am an out and out egoist, I have never hid that, I trust my opinions, particularly aesthetic tastes. I prefer movies that give me something new, that challenge me, that shake me from my comfort level. Its not so much intellectual elitism, its being bored with familiarity. Different people have different thresholds, my threshold is pretty high.

Come on Kurt, you gave TDK 4.5 stars and were comparing it to No Country and Zodiac. A “thinking man’s comic book film” you said, which is the kind of blatant classism that you and rot fallback on time and again when defending films you enjoy. As if only educated and enlightened individuals can like the movies you do, and anything else is beneath you.

Which begs the question, why don’t the two of you share the same opinions on films as the equally enlightened Henrik?

and Matt, I bet you are the kind of guy that would let Tarantino’s grandiose opinion slide, that there are two types of people in the world, those who love Elvis and those who love the Beattles.

Nope. I think anyone who would rather simplify and stultify individuality by trying to process it into easy to digest compartments is missing the entire point. It is a rigid and conforming outlook that I simply do not subscribe to.

Hell, Mad Men does a similar thing by claiming every woman is either a Marilyn or a Jackie, but then quickly admits that the entire exercise falls apart with even the tiniest bit of effort or knowledge because the whole concept is dumb.

Once again, you dumbfound me with your attack. I have no idea what to say to this, I don’t understand what it is I have done.

I usually hate plots. The more complicated they are, the worse they are. Unless they are constructed with brilliance and surprise you, like Conan Doyle’s Sherlock Holmes stories or the play Dangerous Liaisons where the story becomes utterly unpredictable, it’s a snoozefest. Sorry if you get tired of that Goon. Well, sorry for you mostly, but we’ve been there.

I think I in many ways have been coerced into playing an agent on chaos on this website rot, so it’s an obvious association. The Joker is violent though, which will ultimately be his downfall. I refuse to let my person be defined by physicality.

Even the most gradiose of opinions can have a kernel of truth nestled in them.

and Matt, I bet you are the kind of guy that would let Tarantino’s grandiose opinion slide, that there are two types of people in the world, those who love Elvis and those who love the Beattles.

That said, in retrospect Prestige/Illusionist do not have enough of a contrast to work in the way was thinking, and it is not about ‘loving’ one over the other, its about preference, but there is enough in Prestige to still like it despite its stylistic ambitions, a better analogy would be one where its harder to get around those ambitions.

I assume that was the grandiose opinion being challenged, not the parallel between political and aesthetical preferences, because I am willing to defend that one. Living in a town of 14,000 for some fifteen years, with one theater, its not a coincidence the sort of films that caught the imagination of this very conservative rural town, and the absence of films with any hint of challenge.

Roman Polanski raped me…

in my opinion, anyways.

Bob Dylan (and M. Night Shyamalan) would have a bone to pick with you.

It’s a fun game. The Prestige still rocks my boat. It’ll age better than the somewhat wonky editing of The Dark Knight. It is also a little less clumsy with its themes and message-mongering.

But I did get out to Happy-Go-Lucky today. Thanks again Andrew and Kurt, I’m going to listen to your debate again tomorrow, now that I know what you’re talking about. I can’t decide if I loved the movie or not. I definitely liked it more than I thought I would. But I wanted to slap some sense into Poppy in many scenes, and that final scene ticked me off. Sally Hawkins reminds me of Rachel Griffiths, with more talent. The physical resemblance is uncanny. I started to like her about half way through, but I also wonder how Hawkins was able to get into that frame of mind, especially when her character did really stupid things.