Cinecast Episode 376 – 2014 in Review: Ski Lifts & Psychological Rape

 
We needed a referee. Seriously. And unless it’s Jesse “The Body” Ventura, we might as well not even bother. The rampages on 2014-in-film are epic: Battles are fought, won, lost and lines are drawn in the sand (Cross this line, you DO NOT…) Also, Jim Laczkowski from The Director’s Club Podcast is here to help us figure out Inherent Vice. Is it “pure shit” or “something that needs to be seen 18 times to enjoy”? And where does Matt Gamble come down within the argument? Shortly after tackling the critical darling that seems to be Selma, we look at all of the trends and highs and lows of 2014: from lack of strong female performances to computer desktop horror to the importance of ski lifts and dog revenge. Everything culminated in our annual top ten list and figuring out the odds (or lack thereof) of best picture winner.

As always, please join the conversation by leaving your own thoughts in the comment section below and again, thanks for listening!

 

 
 

 
 


 

TIME TRACKS:

Inherent Vice spoiler ends @42:15
Selma spoiler ends @1:03:55
See comments for more time track listings – thanks to Ultimolee for the extra elbow grease!

 

PRE-SHOW WARMUPS:

– Guest: Jim Laczkowski (The Director’s Club Podcast – 2014 year in review)
– New episode of High and Low Brow podcast (masterbate theater s5e7)

 

REVIEWS:

Inherent Vice
Selma

 

2014 IN REVIEW:

Doppelgangers – The Double, Enemy, The One I Love, I Origins, Coherence, The Face of Love
Time Travel – Time Lapse, Interstellar, Predestination, Winter’s Tale, Infinite Man
Computer Horror – Open Windows, Cybernatural, The Snow White Case
Found footage sucks ass
Horror – The Babadook, Oculus, Stage Fright, Cheap Thrills, Spring, ABCs of Death 2, Sacrament, The Guest
Revenge for Dogs – John Wick, White Dog, The Rover
Cynical Media – Nightcrawler, Gone Girl, Chef, Birdman, Hunger Games, Edge of Tomorrow
Comedy – Neighbors, Grand Budapest Hotel, They Came Together, Dear White People, Obvious Child, 22 Jump Street
Actors/Actresses

 

TOP TEN FILMS OF 2014:

JIM
10) Birdman
9) A Most Violent Year
8) Nightcrawler
7) Under the Skin
6) The Grand Budapest Hotel
5) The Babadook
4) Coherence
3) Listen to the show
2) Listen to the show
1) Listen to the show
Notable misses: Leviathan

KURT
10) Love and Terror on the Howling Plains of Nowhere
9) Force Majeure
8) Inherent Vice
7) Gone Girl
6) The Grand Budapest Hotel
5) The Duke of Burgundy
4) Snowpiercer
3) Listen to the show
2) Listen to the show
1) Listen to the show
Notable misses: Maps of the Stars, Wetlands, The Tribe, White God, A Girl Walks Home Alone, Top Five, Selma, Whiplash

MATT
10) The Grand Budapest Hotel
9) Guardians of the Galaxy
8) John Wick
7) Dear White People
6) The Babadook
5) The Guest
4) How to Train Your Dragon 2
3) Listen to the show
2) Listen to the show
1) Listen to the show
Notable misses: The Rover, Belle, Calvary, Overnighters

ANDREW
10) Whiplash
9) Coherence
8) Force Majeure
7) Draft Day
6) Interstellar
5) The Guest
4) Nightcrawler
3) Listen to the show
2) Listen to the show
1) Listen to the show
Notable misses: MOVIE_TITLE

 

RSS AND CONTACT INFO:

show content

 

Sort by:   newest | oldest | most voted
Drew
Guest

Hey Matt, can you just lower your voice and chill the fuck out for once?

ultimolee
Guest

Just replying so it appears at the top.

Opening:
In-house business: 00:44
Inherent Vice [SPOILERS] 6:52
Selma [SPOILERS] 42:15
2014 IN REVIEW 1:03:57
Top 10’s of 2014 1:54:11
Next Week: 4:01:18
End: 4:03:13

Kurt
Guest

I’m afraid that is part of his charm. Matt is the super-ego that keeps the show in line from going too far into flights-of-fancy. But, occasionally he does get out of control and becomes the Babadook.

Gerry
Guest

Matt, please never lower your voice or chill the fcuk up. Your passion and energy are the best thing about the Row Three podcast.

You are to Row Three what Stewie Griffin is to Family Guy, what Roger the Alien is to American Dad, what Cartman is to Southpark, what Kramer and Numan are to Seinfeld and what Karen is to Will and Grace.

Val
Guest

The problem is never the energy of this episode, the problem is Matt Gamble refusing to let others have their say-so without being shut out. He clearly isn’t fond of filmmakers who don’t put a storytelling narrative at the top of their priority list. First and foremost, film is a VISUAL medium. If he wanted a cohesive story, stick with books. Not every film has to be clear or make sense look at guys like Lynch with “Inland Empire.” Some of the greats (albeit huge influences on Anderson) like Downey Sr and Altman, could care less if the story is easy to follow. Films like “3 Women” and “Putney Swope” are all over the map in terms of structure and not letting everything make sense on purpose so the audience can actually do some work to fill in gaps or come up with their own conclusion on what it all means. And most people won’t do that with a first time viewing.
And if you read a Pynchon novel, you’ll see the same instincts of mood trumping logic. Downey Sr and Pynchon make impenetrable art that take time to process, and the fact that your guest was scoffed at for calling that audacious by Gamble is sad. He can stick to his safe cookie-cutter choice for favorite film of the year and personally, I will be more than happy to relive challenging films like “Inherent Vice” and “The Master” than sit through any number of choices on his list.
But hey at least the conversation was interesting and entertaining, just wish it wasn’t interrupted by someone whose opinion is ridiculous in this case. Story doesn’t always have to be the goal of a filmmaker and I applaud both Kurt and Jim for saying that it’s okay not to get it the first time through. Honestly, “Inherent Vice” didn’t sit well with me entirely either but I will revisit it in a few years and maybe come back with a different take.

Gerry
Guest

For me different personalities with differing views are what makes me want to listen to a film podcast. If everyone shared the same views and politely deferred to each other the result would be bland mush.

I’m quite capable of formulating my own views on films. I listen to podcasts like this for the debate and entertainment value.

I found Matt raucously shouting Kurt down in good humoured fashioned to be entertaining. If he’d been foaming at the mouth angry it would’ve been a different story, but he wasn’t.

Val
Guest

Your interpretation of what is “entertaining” is subjective, so no argument there. Personally, I found it more disheartening that Matt was not open-minded to the guest’s opinion about having a different opinion. Describing a film as audacious doesnt deserve to be scoffed at. I don’t find yelling to be an engaging form of debate. But hey that’s me, and if you think it’s worth listening to, more power to you. I understand everybody has a different approach to deconstructing an interpretation. It’s just not enjoyable to hear men shouting especially since it’s normally an amicable form of arguing, but then again I’m new to the show so maybe it’s like this every week. I’m not saying everyone should agree or disagree then differ politely at all. I’m a film student and in class, we raise our voices to disagree but never yell things like “That movie was shit!” But maybe that’s considered hilarious to hear for some. For me, it’s just sad when shouting expletives is considered a “fun” form of criticism. And I’m sorry but the last few minutes of this episode sounds like Matt foaming at the mouth angry to me, but hey that’s cool if you think otherwise I suppose.

Kurt
Guest

This happens once or twice a year. Apparently, Matt decided to get it out of the way early this year. But Matt is making some points about how people process movies, and their own reflection of personal taste with his arguments, amidst the bombast…

Drew
Guest

I know it’s his schtick and all, but it just gets really grating sometimes. But oh well, great show otherwise guys.

Andrew James
Admin

It’s what makes it “fun” Drew. Others might call it temporary insanity but tomayto, tomahto.

Rick
Guest

I missed a couple things I wanted to see (Whiplash, Leviathan)

but my list right now stands at

10. Raid 2
9. John Wick
8. A Dream of Iron
7. Nightcrawler
6. Inherent Vice
5. Tokyo Tribe
4. The Guest
3. Citizenfour
2. The Rover
1. The World of Kanako

Fantastic year all in all.

kurt
Guest

Kanako was a great (tiny little) film. I’m ashamed I never found the time to properly write about it.

Andrew James
Admin

To be fair to Matt, I don’t think he was saying that a movie can’t reveal more and get better on subsequent viewings. I think he was just saying that with this particular movie, it’s pretty empty and more viewings won’t add much to the conversation.

antho42
Guest

Yes, it is back!!!

Arnold Schizopolis
Guest

In terms of who or what will win anything, I wholeheartedly trust Vegas odds. Bookies don’t wanna lose money. So if they’re putting odds on Boyhood being the front-runner, then they are basing it on real data because millions are at stake.

Gotta love Gamble for being the stereotypical “white knight” for picking Obvious Child as his #1.

Andrew James
Admin

Of course it’s based on data. This was maybe the most ludicrous argument I’ve heard from Matt Gamble possibly ever (except maybe his claim that starving people don’t riot over food :). I think it was just there because it was late, he was delirious and wanted to push my buttons.

He claims that when making his Oscar picks, he’s “really good at it.” If there’s no data, then how is he good at it? Does he roll a dice and he’s the luckiest guy in the room? No, he knows who the most likely wins are based on certain criteria. If every critic/movie blogger in the country is betting on Cate Blanchett to win for Blue Jasmine, is it coincidence? Are they all just guessing together to be funny? No, based on various pieces of information and data, she’s the fucking front-runner! Do Google search for 2015 Oscar predictions. Why is nearly every single site picking Boyhood? Because it’s the fucking front-runner!

What data? Lots. Critical reception (particularly critics assoc’s and societies – sorry, 98% positive out of 257 reviews on rottentomatoes says a hell of a lot!), general buzz (both in media and Hollywood), momentum, timing, other award ceremonies leading up to the Oscars, guild backing (AFI, NBR, SAG, PGA, etc.), studio backing (i.e. money), nominations in other categories (the more, the better – especially directing and screenplay), production team glad-handing, who the voters are (in this case, mostly white and male – which is huge for Boyhood), ad campaigns and even external factors (for example Selma was released in a pretty timely year which will help it a bit) and yes, even a little bit of a gut feeling.

If the Oscars were today, Boyhood is the most likely winner of best picture (i.e. front-runner). Is it going to win for sure? Of course not, but it’s the safest bet. And Vegas (and hundreds of other movie sites) know this.

Andrew James
Admin

As an addendum to what I said on the show, I don’t think Selma will have the best chance of beating Boyhood. I think Birdman takes that honor. Things can change in the weeks up to voting day, but right now I’d say it’s either Boyhood or Birdman.

Thomas Wishloff
Guest

No “Imitation Game”?

Andrew James
Admin

We talked about it very briefly. I thought it was pretty good if a bit formulaic. Kurt refuses to talk about it.

Robert Reineke
Guest

I think the point Matt was trying, loudly, to make was that Vegas is pulling the odds out of their ass at this point. Yeah, Boyhood is acclaimed by critics and has won some awards, from non-Academy voters, but we’ve gotten zero data from actual Academy voters. We’ll get some from the Guilds in a few weeks and then we’ll be able to assess the actual odds.

For all we know, the narrative could turn out to be “Wes Anderson is due”. It probably helps that people actually went to see Grand Budapest Hotel. For pleasure.

Arnold Schizopolis
Guest

Vegas has formulas, algorithms, actuarial scientists and all that bullshit when it comes to odds making. They don’t pull the lines out of their asses. If there is a bet, they account for it scientifically…coz u know….gazillions of dollars are at stake.

Robert Reineke
Guest

All Vegas odds mean, as far as the Oscars, is how they think people will bet at the moment. They don’t care what the actual chances are for Boyhood, but what the betting perception is. Like, there are people that actually think that the Golden Globes mean anything.

Robert Reineke
Guest

It turns out that Nevada doesn’t allow actual wagering on the Oscars. There are no formulas, algorithms, or actuarial tables for them as a result. Vegas’ odds on the Oscars are all for fun and attention.

Andrew James
Admin

That’s really interesting Robert; I didn’t know that. And the reasoning behind it makes sense too:
“The state bars casinos from accepting wagers on events such as the Oscars in which the outcome is known before it is officially disclosed.”

Robert Reineke
Guest

Yeah, that makes perfect sense.
I certainly think that there is a chance that Boyhood will win and it might be the favorite at the moment. Certainly the fact that it has a Best Director and Best Picture nomination makes it more likely. Obviously it happens occasionally, but the odds are that this won’t be that type of year.
I could honestly see this being a two-horse race between The Grand Budapest Hotel, which surprisingly is the populist choice at this point and between the box office and home video release has likely been seen by the most people of the nominees, and Boyhood. I’d be okay with either.

Andrew James
Admin

I think Budapest and Birdman will split the votes (goofery vs “serious” art). And Boyhood is the safest and most obvious choice outside of those.

Honestly, as much as I love Boyhood, I would be super happy if any of those three won.

Robert Reineke
Guest

I’m about 99% certain that the Best Director and Best Picture categories are going to align this year. So that really only leaves Boyhood, The Grand Budapest Hotel, The Imitation Game, and Birdman in contention. I haven’t seen Birdman yet. Even though I enjoyed The Imitation Game, it has enough obvious problems that it would be the only one that would truly make me mad if it won, at the moment. I’m perfectly fine with either Boyhood or Grand Budapest Hotel winning.

Matt Gamble
Guest

You’re making up straw man arguments again Andrew. I said until the Guilds start publishing their awards (you know, the people actually in the Academy) there is no relevant data to go on. It’s just people throwing up crap for click bait. The Golden Globes have no one in the Academy. The Critic’s Choice have no one in the Academy. The MTV Awards have no one in the Academy. The NYFCS has no one in the Academy. And so on and so forth. Until you start getting results from people who actually are part of the Academy, you are just wasting time on empty metrics and noise.

Also, IFC has little financial sway in the Academy, which is a big reason why Boyhood is going to struggle to win Best Pic. That isn’t to say it isn’t, but it’s going to have a very hard time. You need money to make sure people are seeing your movie, especially for smaller films.

arjay
Guest

The Guilds are not in the academy. A small proportion of them are. The Screen Actors Guild Awards are voted on by over 150,000 members. Very few of them are in the academy. The way they vote gives some indication of how the academy votes, but so do a lot of other things as Andrew outlined. The oscar pundits and campaigners are very good at parsing this information and figuring out what the favourites are. They aren’t just throwing up crap to get click bait, they live in LA, attend academy screenings and talk constantly for months to academy voters. They know which campaigns are spending money and where. They also know the history inside out. Just read someone like Anne Thompson from Indie Wire. Or Kris Taply, or Sasha Stone, or Steve Pond. I’ve been following this for a decade. I’ve actually started to lose interest in the last couple of years, because there’s little surprise anymore, they all have the season pegged so accurately.

Matt Gamble
Guest

The guilds are also ridiculously predictive. Why? Because when it comes down to it you don’t need that many people voting for an award to win it. And since the Guilds tend to follow how they vote you get a significant block of votes already in that categories pocket. This isn’t exactly rocket science, any idiot, including myself, can get 75% on an Oscar ballot just by going off of how the guilds vote. Then you get lucky on one or two other categories and you’ve got a 22 or 23 on your ballot.

Hell, they keep changing how Documentaries are being voted on because people keep gaming the system (most famously in 1995 when Hoop Dreams didn’t even garner a nomination because a handful of voters torpedoed it) which has resulted in it consistently being one of the most difficult categories to predict, and typically the one category that pisses people off when nominations are announced.

And your King’s Speech example only proves my point. So does Argo. So does Gravity. So does all sorts of other films/actors that supposedly had no shot at awards and then steamrolled through the voting to show that no, they really were the favorite with the voters. Declaring a “favorite” before anyone has actually voted on it is a total waste of time. Of course, I also think really talking much about any awards voting is a total waste of time so consider the source.

arjay
Guest

Great episode except for the last 15 minutes. How can Gamble be that f***in stupid? Probably because he doesn’t listen. Boyhood is obviously the favourite. Doesn’t mean it’s gonna win, just that it is the favourite based on all the information available, and there is A LOT OF INFORMATION available, as Andrew outlined.

To move from fact to my own hunch, I’d say Boyhood is the favourite until a clear second favourite emerges. That’s what happened to Social Network/King’s Speech. The Social Network was favourite for months, until the perception emerged that King’s Speech had pulled away from The Fighter/True Grit etc and it became a two horse race. That’s why all the pundits picked SN for the globes and were right, but picked KS for the oscar and were right again.

But at this stage it’s a little early to tell what is the second favourite. American Sniper has box office, but also controversy and no director nom. Selma is socially important and critically loved, but no nomination for director or editor. (winning without one is considered unusual, like Argo, winning without either would be almost unprecidended, ie Grand Hotel, 1932). Imitation Game has Weinstein, who can do anything, but the film itself doesn’t seem to be loved, or winning much. Birdman is still the most likely contender. If it won SAG ensemble, it has a shot.

But Boyhood is still the clear favourite.

Stu
Guest

Hey guys,

Great show as always, here’s my top 10 and honourable mentions top 10.

http://www.geekofoz.com/2014/12/stus-top-10-films-of-year.html

kurt
Guest

Great list. I’m hoping to catch up with WINTERSLEEP (and for that matter, ONCE UPON A TIME IN ANATOLIA) very soon into the new year.

Sean Kelly
Guest

I don’t have the same level of hate of Paul Thomas Anderson that Matt Gamble has, but I did agree with many of the things he said about INHERENT VICE. That film was a bit of a chore to watch for me.

Goon
Guest

Jim’s intro theme should be the permanent Cinecast theme.

kurt
Guest

This is a nice paragraph on processing INHERENT VICE.

“Tim Grierson, a prolific critic for Screen International, Deadspin and elsewhere tells me that “it’s incredibly presumptuous to assume that your initial reaction to that movie is ‘right’; subsequent viewings will often generate fresh insights.” Catherine Shoard of The Guardian counters “fundamentally I think a film must stand or fall on first view,” but is quick to add that “there’s no doubt that the second viewing often reveals pleasures, qualities and flaws that can’t be detected on the first.” She then adds that she even came around and liked Terrence Malick’s divisive To the Wonder on the second go. (!) Critic/author/raconteur Glenn Kenny quotes two great men. One is Vladimir Nabokov who stated “one cannot read a book; one can only reread it.” The other is identified only as “a high school friend” who seemed to be rather prescient about first responses to Inherent Vice. “You don’t get it? You got it.””

Full article (courtesy of Jim L.): http://www.vanityfair.com/vf-hollywood/2015/01/inherent-vice-second-viewing

kurt
Guest

Famously, Pauline Kael declared she only EVER watched film any film ONCE. She was quite idiosyncratic and cantankerous even by film critic standards, and very likely stubborn, by all accounts.

Jay Steneker
Guest

I’ve heard that Kael quote, never quite understood it. So many things can mess up a first viewing of a film ie just not being in the right mood for that type of thing or having too much on your mind at the time, time in particular can change things as you can outgrow or grow into a film so to speak, life experiences altering how you see it.

Haven’t seen Inherent Vice yet as it doesn’t open in Australia till march but found it odd that someone chose to adapt Pynchon as his books are incredibly dense where themes are often buried pretty deeply and you need the written word where you can go at a slower pace and reread certain sections to make things clearer. Can’t do that with film so much, just comes off like a mess.

Great show anyway, 4 hours just flew by

Kurt Halfyard
Admin

It’s because Kael, while awesome to read, and exceptionally astute as she was, was far, far, far from infallible; only human.

Thomas Wishloff
Guest

There was a point when I was watching “Inherent Vice”, where I said to myself “don’t think, just watch”, and by this I mean I stopped trying to follow the tremendously incoherent plot and just followed the visual. There are so many little idiosyncrasies in this film that I truly believe make this film a multiple viewing experience. I started noticing things like weird phallic symbols, strange touches, and various sound beats that I would’ve missed had I been trying to follow the plot.

My theory on re-watching “Inherent Vice” is this: a re-watch won’t make the plot of “Inherent Vice” clearer if you didn’t get it, or make the film suddenly enjoyable if you didn’t like it. It’ll further whatever you got out of the first experience. If you were into the mood, and the visual style then a re-watch will be a truly enjoyable experience. If you didn’t enjoy any of that the first time, then it’s going to probably tough sledding.

Kurt Halfyard
Admin

The repressed homosexuality of Bigfoot is a running gag in the film, look at the posture that Doc assumes as he is being brow-beaten into the squad car early in the film. Then those frozen Bananas! OH My! Brolin sucking on the banana while not in focus (in the foreground to the focal point on Doc) is perhaps my favourite image in the movie. Which confirms the obvious: P.T. Anderson and Robert Elswit certainly know what they are doing in crafting a scene.

Kurt Halfyard
Admin

There are so many things I wanted to talk about in INHERENT VICE, things I caught, but couldn’t assemble upon first blush, that got derailed in terms of Gamble re-framing the discussion towards ad hominem assault on my (and Jim’s) taste and character and integrity that the discussion was more of a defense and a positional circling of the wagons than actually parsing the film itself.

We will revisit the film for sure at some point.

Drew
Guest

I usually enjoy Gamble, but that’s what really annoyed me about him on this particular episode. You brought up many interesting points, and I really wanted to hear you expand upon them, but Gamble just had to derail them so he could go off on some unintelligible rant. But i’m a bit of a PTA fanboy, so perhaps most of my annoyance just comes from him being the complete opposite lol. I don’t think INHERENT VICE is anywhere near PTA’s best though, I just don’t think it’s a meaningless “piece of shit”.

Gerry
Guest

Although not my favourite PT Anderson film I kinda liked the laid backedness of Inherent Vice.

From what I can see it’s theme was how the very richest in the US manipulated the shit out of both the ‘lower’ classes and the system to maintain their wealth back in the day, displaying no empathy in the process, a situation, from what I can see, not dissimilar to America today.

Phoenix’s ‘degenerate hippy’ Doc showed no similar pursuit of wealth but possessed empathy and went out of his way to help his fellow man.

Thus I’m fairly happy that Inherent Vice got an oscar nod.

Andrew James
Admin

Voncaster
Guest

[Gamble]Yes. But whats it based on? Where is the data? [/Gamble]

Gerry
Guest

MAJOR SPOILER ALERTS FOR BIRDMAN XXXXX MAJOR SPOILER ALERTS FOR BIRDMAN XXXXX MAJOR SPOILER ALERTS FOR BIRDMAN XXXXX MAJOR SPOILER ALERTS FOR BIRDMAN XXXXX MAJOR SPOILER ALERTS FOR BIRDMAN XXXXX

I finally saw Birdman. The level of engagement in me for Keaton’s character was phenomenal. I was embarrassed and anxious for him outside the theatre, I was desperately hoping he wouldn’t jump, on both occasions, I was practically pushing him out of his dressing room for the final scene and I was praying the bullets were a figment of his imagination.

Great job Keaton and Inarritu. Plus I didn’t realise it was Galifianakis until I saw the credits.

I can see why Andrew placed it so highly on his list. I agree with you Andrew.

Gerry
Guest

I finally saw Boyhood and I agree with you again Andrew. I thought it was pretty excellent.

Rick Vance
Guest

Vice plays on screen like Pynchon is to read. And the funniest thing about it is while you can just flow in the elements (and there are so many different ones that it is completely enjoyable) it all does coalesce at the end. I really like this bit of writing on what the movie is about and why it coming out now is so perfect.

“It’s a movie about the establishment winning, grinding people up and the ultimately indiscernible nature of crime, government and the corporation. I think it’s neat that it came out in December 2014 because that’s been all this year’s been about. But that’s probably true every year.”

Kurt
Guest

Rick: that quote could easily apply to my favourite film of the year as well, LEVIATHAN.

Jay Steneker
Guest

Has anyone read the Inherent Vice book, how does it compare?. My exposure with Pynchon mostly comes from his early novels V, Crying Of Lot 49, Gravity’s Rainbow etc.

kurt
Guest

Congrats if you are one of the few to finish the massive tome that is GRAVITY’S RAINBOW.

Jay Steneker
Guest

Heh, that’s nothing. Against the Day however broke me, made it about 300 pages into that 1200 page monstrosity before giving up.

Sean Kelly
Guest

I always find it funny that Kurt talks about “missing” films that haven’t played yet in Toronto.

It was just announced that both A GIRL WALKS HOME ALONE (Jan 23) and WHITE GOD (March 27) will be opening soon at the TIFF Bell Lightbox.

kurt
Guest

I’m super excited that TIFF has decided to give both those films commercial releases early in the year.

I say ‘missed’ them, because I attend several big film festivals a year, and often these films have played one of them, in which case I ‘missed it on the festival circiut.’

But you knew that.

Craig
Guest

I like how Gamble has a go at everyone else, but then goes on to have one of the worst top 10 list from any film podcast I’ve heard this year 🙂

I thought Leviathan was overrated, the corruption/bureaucratic stuff was great, but the family drama element was not that interesting. My favourite non English language film was Stations Of The Cross. http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/stations_of_the_cross/?search=stations

I live in England so I don’t know about North American release dates for it. Winter Sleep is also very good but no OUATIA.

My first post btw, hello all.

kurt
Guest

A heartfelt welcome, Craig. I hope you pull up a big comfy chair and stay a while!

Craig
Guest

Thanks, I’ve been listening to the show for 18 months/two years so thought it was time I contributed something!

If you’re interested, the latest (and final) Sound On Sight podcast has a review of Inherent Vice where everyone is positive on the film. Matt Gamble would go on a killing spree after hearing it 🙂

http://www.soundonsight.org/sound-on-sight-podcast-400-inherent-vice-and-top-10-movies-of-2014/

Sean Kelly
Guest

The short film Andrew was trying to think of is called NOAH

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt3001186/

Nate
Guest

Anyone see Cheap Thrills? Thought it was pretty great, filled with dark humor, suspenseful moments, and many surprises throughout. One of the best of 2014.

Rick
Guest

I don’t think The Guest’s quality has anything to do with age, people are always very quick to call out people younger than them for not having the same types of experiences just because it was a decade or two later. Also in the belief that Carpenter and Cameron haven’t made a mark on culture to a point where it all trickles down.

That movie is Hotline Miami in cinema form and the soundtrack being as good as it is, is also incorporated into the movie and the character who burnt the CD.

Sean Kelly
Guest

THE DUKE OF BURGUNDY opens in LA/New York/VOD this Friday. I found a recent interview with Peter Strickland.

http://blogs.indiewire.com/thompsononhollywood/duke-of-burgundy-director-peter-strickland-wants-you-to-stop-comparing-him-to-david-lynch-20150114

Kurt Halfyard
Admin

I interviewed Strickland for BERBERIAN SOUND STUDIO, but it never made it to print, alas. Nice Bloke, crazy smart.

Gerry
Guest

I saw Selma at a preview screening tonight and absolutely loved it. I found it emotionally engaging from the unexpected and shocking thing that happened early on right through to the footage of the real Selma marchers at the end.

It really brought home to me the levels of courage it must have taken, risking life, limbs, ribs and skull/ brain damage to stand up to the bigoted and fearful white people of the south who so oppressed the protestors.

I thought the film was brilliantly directed and acted, both by David Oyelowo and the whole ensemble.

Re the Oscar nominations for best actor and director that failed to materialise I’d say billy club wielding, tear gas lobbing Oscar voters prevented them, but apparently ‘the screeners went out too late’ or some such nonsense. Oyelowo and Ava DuVernay were robbed in my opinion.

Selma has now overtaken Pride as my favourite film of 2014. (I rank films based on the American release year).

Andrew James
Admin

Perhaps you’re really just taken with films about rights and struggle for freedom (which is totally fine). I liked Selma and Pride (Pride a little bit more because the story was new to me), but in general I thought they both lacked a certain, cinematic sparkle. Pride really had the same tone as something like The Full Monty (aka “Bottle Shock” movies) and outside of Oprah getting beaten (which in my opinion was a major casting misstep) and one or two other “tense” moments, Selma felt really movie-of-the-week to me. I find the actual footage of this stuff and interviews with real people FAR more interesting, harrowing and inspiring.

But I seem to be in the minority. A lot of folks are really being blown away by this movie.

Gerry
Guest

SPOILER WARNING FOR THE THEORY OF EVERYTHING XXXXX SPOILER WARNING FOR THE THEORY OF EVERYTHING XXXXX SPOILER WARNING FOR THE THEORY OF EVERYTHING XXXXX SPOILER WARNING FOR THE THEORY OF EVERYTHING XXXXX

I’m taken with good films, period, Andrew. Whether they’re about rights or anything else or are blockbusters, silly comedies, ‘serious’ dramas, animated movies, genre films, or whatever, so long as they’re good I like the film.

I thought Selma was great. It’s direction reminded me of Spielberg’s direction of Schindlers List and of Clint Eastwood at his best (I didn’t like American Sniper but I generally really like Eastwood’s films), i.e. I was focused only on the story which I was totally engaged by.

James Marsh’s direction of The Theory Of Everything seemed a little flashier to me and I was aware of it but I found the film to be fairly ordinary (but well acted) until Hawking’s new carer appeared near the end when there were nice, sad and nice moments which elevated the film.

I’ll be seeing Selma again when it gets its official UK release and I’ll be buying the the blu ray. I won’t be buying the blu of Theory Of Everything.

Andrew James
Admin

Totally agree with everything you said regarding The Theory of Everything. That woman was one of the sexiest things I’ve seen on screen all year and it was 90% because of her actions and demeanor more than her looks.

Evan
Guest

Whoa confrontational show this week! Agreed with everyone else, but I haven’t seen Inherent Vice so I can’t really judge for myself. On the bright side, there weren’t any spoilers in the review for me to worry about! 🙂

As a negative, I get a little sick of people implying VOD = phone or laptop. Doesn’t everyone have a way to get digital content onto their TV? It’s 2015!! I’m glad you guys went on to promote VOD as a source for great movies, so perhaps you could share on the show how you watch your digital content? Apple TV? Roku? I’m a fan of the power of the computer, so I have an HTPC.

…[always start typing these halfway through]… What the fuck is Matt’s deal. I like him on past podcasts, but he’s off the hook in the last 15 minutes (even more than the IV review). No wonder you never place bets on the show! The argument about the chances of the bet working out took longer than the placing of the bet! Weird how he accepts there is some data (ie, what are the good movies of the year) but not extending that data to Oscar predictions. WEIRD!

Andrew James
Admin

I generally don’t watch stuff on my phone anymore. Most of my digital content I do watch on my 48″ TV. I use my phone to broadcast to Chromecast or directly hook up my laptop or use the PS4 to stream Amazon and Netflix and what-not.

That said, I do enjoy crawling under the covers, popping in the headphones and watching a movie on my tablet late at night. It’s a surprisingly immersive experience. No distractions, up close and personal with the screen and the sound is as loud as I want it to be. It’s actually a great experience – plus you can watch a little bit lower-res stuff and you don’t notice because of the pixel density and size of a tablet screen.

Evan
Guest

I considered including a defense of phone watching in my last post, but thought it wouldn’t fit. But I agree with you. My phone is 1920×1080, and when I stick it inches from my face I can get a pretty great experience as I’m falling asleep. So the David Lynch rant notwithstanding, phones and tablets can be good for movie or TV show consumption. Much better than watching on the tube TV in my parents house!

wpDiscuz