Topic: The Movie Thread

@FuriousMachine Sorry my timezone right now is very up in the air, I'll answer that properly later but before then can you or someone else confirm that if I block someone on here they can't see my posts, I wasn't sure where else to ask and we're very active in this thread so surely someone knows. All I see is an Ignore tab but I'm not sure how it works or if block and ignore are the same thing, I'll delete this when I get a reply then have a look at what you and Ravix said. Thank you.

@GirlVersusGame I believe if you ignore people it means only you can't see thier posts. If you block people they can't see your posts as well. Hope that helps.

@JohnnyShoulder Thanks Johnny, I'll try that.

Finally got around to watching Darren Aronofsky's The Fountain and now completely understand the review I read that described it as a scientologist's wet dream. Clearly an ode to the director's then girlfriend Rachel Weisz - no wonder she binned him off for Daniel Craig.

@LN78 You aren't the first one to draw the Scientology connection, I did read the literature but only to see what Hubbard borrowed or stole from The Occult/Mythology and other Religions. There's a whole six degrees of Kevin Bacon there for students of The Occult. The same for a movie like The Fountain, so I did appreciate some of that but a lot of people did feel like it was too convoluted because they didn't understand or want to understand those elements, I don't think most viewers were studying The Kabbalah or if they'd even heard of The Samsara. By the same token I heard the same thing about Death Stranding, people hadn't read the Egyptian or Tibetan books of the dead. There are a lot of parallels in Death Stranding that I've never seen anyone mention, they don't know what to look for. Those paths branch too and the result is that it's not everyone's cup of tea.

The Fountain uses branching paths too. Buddhism/Mayan/Christian beliefs are all blended into that chunk of screen-time. If you read any of the works of Hubbard it's more or less that same thing. I did at first think it had some connection to the SeaOrg but it's Hollywood and the Church are deeply ingrained in the industry so even if it didn't, it did. I think most people meet their first Scientologists outside one of their Orgs on a London street or any other major city (except Russia, we kicked them out and labelled them as extremist) for me it was the film industry. The same for Masonry, but I can't elaborate there because a Lodge isn't a church, Free Masonry isn't a religion and I respect the Lodge, not the church. I'd argue that Scientology isn't a church either, but that's just me and I've met enough ex-members to not like the organization very much.

I did like some elements of that movie but I think you are also picking up on the Scientology recruitment vibe and if you've seen any of those, the CGI, all of it, is eerily similar. The problem with that presentation and this happens with Scientology too is that genuine teachings such as The Kabbalah, Gnosticism and Thelema (Crowley's Western Occultism) get swept up into that maelstrom of manipulation and lose their credibility, if you combine all three and cram them into a movie, one single sitting, you end up with what can only be pseudoscience (to most) when really it's a Spiritual allegory for magical realism, and it gets lost on a lot of people unless they did the research, but really who is going to? The best way I can sum up that movie is similar to Spaceballs and Don Quixote.

If a person watches Spaceballs without watching Starwars, and without watching all of the other movies it expertly borrowed from, they'll laugh. They'll appreciate the humor, the set-dressing, the characters, but they'll miss out on so much of that core connection to the original movie. That's what Don Quixote was for me, it's a comedy, it's satire but I hadn't read any chivalric romance novels made popular in 17th-century Spain. I think that's what The Fountain was for so many people. Aronofsky knew the symbolism he's studied The Kabbalah and Jewish Mysticism. He has talked about it a couple of times now, about his encounter in Israel at the Western Wall. It was his introduction to the scripture. I'm not Jewish but I've been to Israel many times and that's how I got curious about Jewish Mysticism, obviously my interest in Allister Crowley's Thelma and Western Occultism came from elsewhere. Aronofsky tried to use something that meant something to his people, combined it with pre-exisiting Mythology/Religion from all around the world and confused a lot of people. I don't think The Fountain as a movie works, as a book, it did. I read the graphic novel, it worked better.

Also I really like Clint Mansell and Kronos Quartet, Lux Aeterna is one of my favorite pieces from the big screen, so at least the score was a bit of a saving grace. But yes I can definitely see where you're coming from with that movie and you definitely aren't in the minority.

Edit: I just remembered someone on here did read the Tibetan Book of The Dead, we talked about it together and it definitely lives on their shelf. I forget who it was, possibly Werehog, English names get a little blurry sometimes. I haven't seen The Kabbalah mentioned though Furious might surprise me. I need to dig through his Goodreads for past adventures in Occultism. I'm sure someone on here had Rudolf Steiner or Madame Blavatsky in their library, I don't recall who.

@GirlVersusGame It was a reviewer (pretty sure it was Peter Bradshaw) who came up with that rather pithy encapsulation of The Fountain - I'm not that witty.
For me, Aronofsky is a bit like Rian Johnson - clearly talented but so consumed with intellectual vanity that he just doesn't make movies that keep me engaged. I really enjoyed The Wrestler but you couldn't pay me to watch Mother or Requiem For A Dream again.

@LN78 It's hard to disagree with that, Aronofsky did put too much of what I just mentioned into the movie and passion projects are one thing when it's a film school project (I saw some really weird features) but when you're dealing with a studio, a global audience, it pays to dial it back a little. I did really enjoy Requiem for a Dream, it was the right kind of movie for me at the right time but The Wrestler was fantastic too. I can't see that movie working with anyone but Mickey Rourke. I think it was redemption for him. Studios and Directors had lost faith in him, assumed he was down and out and he proved that he could still punch above his weight. I do like to attend boxing/MMA and that movie was one of the best of it's kind to really capture and mirror what a life-time of being battered (I used the word Ravix) can result in both physically and mentally. I've watched the Rocky movies too and found nothing relatable there, it was more about the American Dream to me than anything else, and that's fine if people want it.

The Wrestler was more accessible, it crossed that boundary, it wasn't about nationality or fame it was about one man, his life, his regrets, his heart really. I gained a lot of respect for him after that movie, though admittingly I wasn't very familiar with his previous work, other than of course Angel Heart. You've probably seen it at some point, it tackles Faustian themes, The Occult, Black Magik, ritual and De Niro plays a key role. It's up there with Jacob's Ladder, for me at least. Both handle similar themes, psychological Horror can easily fall into the realm of cliche and predictability, both of those movies did something very original and a strong cast didn't hurt either. I think The Wrestler worked because it was raw and realistic, men do get emotionally and mentally battered throughout life but it's rare that Hollywood or the media do shine a much needed spotlight. Movies like The Wrestler probably save lives, by showing people that these problems do exist. It creates a discussion even years later, like right now. I kind of want to watch it again to see if years later I pick up on another else I missed. That's the interesting thing about language, as it improves it's possible to see/hear a movie in an entirely different light. It happens for me regularly.

You enjoyed Requiem For A Dream? Jesus Christ.

@LN78 I liked Mother but hated Requiem for a Dream, which I think under all metrics possible is an indicator of Bad Taste, I don’t even like the Aronofsky that is acceptable to most. Him turning out to be an AI stanning hack is possibly the least surprising thing of all time. And I sort of know that Mother is a mess but it’s like watching a really melodramatic car crash.

@nessisonett He got really close to making a Batman Year One adaptation in close collaboration with Frank Miller who was still in the throes of his post-9/11 "Holy Terror" era insanity at the time. The mind truly boggles.

@LN78 Frank Miller is honestly commendable for his biting satire of police state hysteria via writing fascistic espousals of police state hysteria. It’s an artform.

@nessisonett Unlike his actual art.🤣.

@LN78 I have a problem reading emotions in movies/people that's why I don't comment much about actors and focus on that technical side, I never understood actors on set, on-screen is no different. It has to be heightened emotions and very strong performances like The Wrestler for me to feel that something. I liked Requiem for a Dream because it pushed heightened emotions and heightened soundscapes, for most people it was a barrage of sound and convoluted craziness, for me it was something different. Deeply uncomfortable too, I sometimes use movies as exposure therapy, Requiem for a Dream ticks those boxes. The same for music and it's dynamic-range. Ravix introduced me to the movie Drive not long ago and it was almost life changing, I hadn't inexperienced anything like that before, it was the first time I'd watched a movie as an Adult and experienced that same movie as everyone else. It was really incredible. None of that numbness was there earlier in life, but there's no previous reference point to pull feeling from because children don't watch Aronofsky, they watch Disney and I was no exception.

Now I watch movies, listen to music and game to try find a little more of that something. It doesn't need to be a masterpiece to move me, just do something a little differently and Requiem for a Dream did a lot differently. All of those minimalist cues, the rapid fire rhythm, it matched what the character was feeling, what they were going through, the sound helped me to understand it when nothing else did. For once it was less about the Director (for me) and more about the actual character, it just doesn't happen all that often. It's a bit of an odd answer but that's pretty much why yes I did like the movie. I didn't just see it, I felt it and that's rare. I haven't watched Mother or most of his other work.

Fair enough. I thought it was incredibly superficial.

Watched "The Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou" a movie with a weird extra resonance after the OceanGate tragedy. Wes Anderson Wes Andersons away but a great multifaceted Bill Murray performance anchors (ahem) the whole thing really well. As usual with Wes, far too many characters- I'm not sure what Cate Blanchett was doing or why she was doing it with that accent.

@Ravix I'll be fair, trying to come up with really egregious examples I keep going to streaming TV shows - "Game of Thrones" and "Something Very Bad Is Going To Happen" (but you won't see it) being the worst offenders leaping to mind - and not so much any movies in particular. If I remember any truly vile cinematic offenders I'll post an update.

It's funny you should mention Eggers, as I'm sure the lighting is one of the reasons his movies leave me cold and I do remember "The Northman" having scenes I was annoyed at being too dark. I'm trying very hard not to be excited about "Werwulf", but I can feel myself slipping and I will probably go see it when it opens. Here's hoping it's the first Eggers movie that won't leave me disappointed.

Watched Kenneth Branagh's "Belfast" and was pleasantly surprised. I was expecting a twee, rose tinted nostalgia overload, what I got was a touching, semi-autobiographical snapshot of a particular time and place (the eponymous city in the late 60's) full of wonderful performances (Ciarran Hinds and Judi Dench both outstanding) and some uncharacteristically dynamic direction from Branagh during the stark and brutal sectarian riot scenes - although I could have done without the rather on-the-nose "magic of cinema" colour sequences which punctuated the glorious black and white presentation. Recommended.

@LN78 Nice, that sounds promising! I'm a lifelong Branagh fan (and apologist) but I've shied away from his recent output and with Belfast I actually worried it would be boring. Sounds like I need to get this on my watchlist ASAP, then 🙂

@FuriousMachine The other thing I should have mentioned as a potential negative is the use of Van Morrison on the soundtrack. There's a lot. 🤣.

@LN78 Thanks for the warning; can't say I'm a fan (though that is as likely due to oversaturation as anything else), but I think I'll manage to persevere 😄