Movie Podcast Weekly Ep. 055: Captain Phillips (2013) and Escape From Tomorrow (2013) and Hell Baby (2013) and Bad Milo! (2013)

Play

In Episode 055 of Movie Podcast Weekly, Jason and Josh welcome back Karl, but lose Andy to the backwood roads of West Virginia. Still, the three trudge on with 4 feature reviews including the Tom Hanks Oscar-bait, “Captain Phillips,” the dizzying Disney guerrilla film “Escape From Tomorrow,” and gross-out horror comedies “Hell Baby,” and “Bad Milo,” yielding a truly lengthy (if not epic) episode.

And you’ve heard about his amazing home theater again and again on the show, but now is your chance to meet the man himself when we welcome our special guest for Episode 055, CHAD DOWNEY.

When Andy isn’t being murdered by rednecks, Movie Podcast Weekly features four hosts (and frequent guests), who give you their verdict on at least one new movie release that’s currently in theaters; mini reviews of what they’ve been watching lately; and specialty recommendation segments. New episodes release every single Monday.

SHOW NOTES — with Time Stamps!
( 00:00:00 ) I. Intro
— Andy is absent
—Welcome Chad Downey
—Karl and Chad talk home theater tech
—Happy birthday to Josh and friends-of-the-show Dave Becker and Scott Teal
—Posting schedule
—More on our premium “Cujo Cast”
—Listener comments

II. Mini Reviews:
( 00:15:00 ) Karl: Gravity (spoilers after the show), Rush
( 00:19:35 ) Chad: The Thin Red Line, Troll 2, Best Worst Movie
( 00:39:38 ) Josh: Prisoners, Devil
( 00:50:30 ) Jason: Triangle, Jug Face

( 00:58:57 ) III. Feature review of CAPTAIN PHILLIPS:
Jason: 10 ( See it in Theaters / Buy It! )
Karl: 
9 ( See it in Theaters / Buy It! )

( 01:15:15 ) IV. Feature review of ESCAPE FROM TOMORROW:
Chad: 6 ( Rent It )
Jason: 
4 ( Avoid It )
Josh: 3.5 ( Avoid It )

( 01:58:10 ) V. Feature review of HELL BABY:
Jason: 4.5 ( Rent It )
Josh: 
5 ( Rent It )

( 02:08:35 ) VI. Feature review of BAD MILO!:
Jason: 0.5 ( Avoid It! )
Josh:
5 ( Light Rental—If you’re not turned off by the synopsis )

V. Genre Recommendation Segments:

( 02:21:43 ) ROBOTIC ROMANCES WITH KARL HUDDLESTON:
Romantic comedy: Date Night

( 02:23:42 ) JOSH’S ABSURD ASSOCIATIONS:
Intended to Watch:
The Private Eyes
Accidentally Watched:
The Ghost and Mr. Chicken

( 02:27:50 ) JAY OF THE DEAD’S CREEPS AND CRIME:
Creeps: Wrong Turn

( 02:31:12 ) VI. Wrap-Up

( 02:41:17 ) VII. Bonus Content
Karl gives a spoiler-laden review of Gravity

Additional recommendations that came up in this episode: Super Speedway (Chad), Senna (Josh), Disconnect (Jason), The American Scream (Josh), Captain Phillips (Andy, sight unseen and via text), Elevator (Jason), Time Crimes (Josh and Jason), A Hijacking (Josh), and In a World (Josh).

Next Monday on MPW: Jason, Josh, and Andy will be reviewing “Carrie” and Karl will likely be reviewing “The Fifth Estate.” Jason may also be seeing “Escape Plan” and we will be giving you our “Top 5 Films About the Human Spirit” inspired by our love of “Gravity.” Join us!

Links for this episode:

Pre-order that other Somali pirate movie Josh talked about, A Hijacking, here after clicking through our banner: Amazon.com

Read the Escape From Tomorrow interview / article that Karl talked about here: KSL News

Watch Thomas Lennon and Ben Garant in the Point Break spoof Josh talked about here: Cinemash: Point Break (by Reno 911 and Human Giant)

Read the Sound and Vision review of the new OLED TV that Karl discussed here: SoundandVision.com

Read Astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson’s tweets about the problems with Gravity’s science here: New York Daily News

Check out our very first premium bonus episode here: Cujo Commentary

Follow Movie Podcast Weekly on Twitter: @MovieCastWeekly

Follow Joshua Ligairi on Twitter: @IcarusArts
Check out Josh on a reality TV show for documentary filmmakers: Pursuit of the Truth
Read Josh’s post on Halloween movies hereIcarus Art & Entertainment Blog

Check out THE DONUT SHOW
Especially for HORROR FANS: Horror Movie Podcast.com
Listen to Jason’s Movie Stream Cast here: Movie Stream Cast.com

Special thanks goes out to singer-songwriter Frederick Ingram and the voice talents of Midnight Corey Graham from The Electric Chair Podcast, Willis Wheeler from the Terror Troop Podcast and Mr. Ron Baird for their help with our recommendation segment intros.

We’d also like to thank The Dave Eaton Element and Dave Eaton himself for the use of his music for our theme song. Today is Dave’s birthday — happy birthday, Dave!

If you like what we do here at Movie Podcast Weekly, please subscribe and leave us a positive review in iTunes. If you want to support the show, we have PayPal buttons in our right-hand sidebar where you can make a one-time donation or you can become a recurring donor for just $2 per month. You can also check out our Premium podcasts, available at BandCamp for a minimum donation of $1. Lastly, remember to start your Amazon shopping here by clicking through our banner ads at no additional cost to you.

You can always contact us by e-mailing MoviePodcastWeekly@gmail.com. Or you can call and leave us a voice mail at: (801) 382-8789. And you can leave us a comment in the show notes for this episode.

Thank you for listening, and join us again next Monday for Movie Podcast Weekly.

63 thoughts on “Movie Podcast Weekly Ep. 055: Captain Phillips (2013) and Escape From Tomorrow (2013) and Hell Baby (2013) and Bad Milo! (2013)

  1. Thanks so much for having me on the show – It was a lot of fun. I wish I could have joined Karl at his place – that would have been even better. I was a bit reluctant to join you because you are all so good at what you do and I did not want to interfere with that, but I am really glad that I joined you. It was cool to be behind the scenes and see how it all works.

    One thing I had in my notes that I failed to mention regarding my rating for Escape from Tomorrow, is that while I rated it a 6, in terms of the movie itself or for sheer enjoyment it would not be a 6 relative to my 8.5 rating for The Thin Red Line. I rated it a 6 because I think it is such an interesting concept and the story behind the movie makes it worth seeing on that basis alone. I definitely think it is worth a rental if you are at all interested in the concept.

    • I agree with what you are saying regarding Escape From Tomorrow. And my rating could have been higher in that regard as well. That’s the trouble with the ratings and recommendations in my opinion … we become fixated on them, but they are actually far less important than listening to the discussion.

      It was great having you on. we should consider doing it again for The Shining/Room 237 double feature.

  2. One more comment regarding the Video On Demand we discussed – The company I mentioned that does provide first run movies at home is called Prima Cinema. http://primacinema.com/index.php

    The hardware is $35,000 and each movie is $500 for one viewing. The hardware is locked to a specific display and each customer is vetted by the company. My guess is that the theaters are not very worried about this impacting their business.

    • That is seriously insane! I would totally do that if I had the money to blow, though.

      This is the Tower Heist home release I was referring to: http://bit.ly/qlPMj0

      I didn’t have all the details right, but apparently it was $60 to watch Tower Heist in your home 3 weeks after release (I suppose you could split that up between friends) and Universal was offering to compensate theaters for significant lost revenue. Kind of silly all around. I’m sure almost every film (save possibly big studio tent pole movies) will be streaming on Amazon the same day they are released in theaters within 5-10 years at no additional cost just like these little indies are now.

  3. Troll 2 was filmed where I live. There was a Troll 2 night about 6 years ago in Morgan. I think my son went to watch it.

    • The Troll 2 Event in Morgan was included as part of the Best Worst Movie documentary. Your son might be in the documentary if he was there.

        • And I’d go the other way. I think it is a lot more fun to watch the movie after you’ve seen the doc. Whatever you do, try to watch them with a friend or friends who like to laugh at ridiculous things.

          • Of course you’d go the other way, Josh… Such a contrarian! Joshua “Armond White” Ligiairi. : )

            Josh, I think you’re my nemesis on this podcast, in terms of our opinions (but best friend in real life)… I can’t believe how divergent and polarized our preferences seem to be from each other.

          • Now the real question is which order are we going to watch the Shining and Room 237? My preference would be to watch The Shining first.

          • Oh, Jay. Armond White makes his living being a contrarian–I doubt he believes half of what he says–whereas I have very reasoned answers for my opinions. Observe:

            Chad, the thing about watching Room 237 first (as with watching Best Worst Movie first) is that it alters your viewing of the original, so it makes for a completely unique viewing experience. You get to think about all of the new information you just learned about the film as you are watching and you see the film in a way you’ve never seen it before. Now if I were talking to someone who had never seen The Shining at all, of course I would recommend that they watch it first because it is a masterpiece that should be viewed on it’s own terms (doesn’t matter with regard to Troll 2 because the movie is ridiculous and the doc just adds to the ridiculousness), but the thing about these docs is that they make you want to watch the original movie immediately afterward. If you watch Room 237 second, you’re going to want to go back and watch The Shining again. And are you really going to do a triple feature with a Shining sandwich? Room 237 is already kind of a uncomfortable approach to documentary,but if it gives you anything, it is the chance to view The Shining in a totally new way. You’re going to want that experience. And I doubt it will have the same impact if you wait until next Halloween to watch the film again. Of course, it is your house, your theater, and I’ve already seen the doc, so do as you like. But, that is my recommendation if you want to get the full effect of the doc (and I’d say the same for Best Worst Movie, Jeff).

          • I watched Room 237 (I couldn’t wait to see it) and it pretty much walks through the theories that they discuss with actual video from the movie so they kind of walk you through it in the documentary. I’m fine watching either way though.

  4. It was nice to hear Chad talk about The Thin Red Line. I’ve always liked that movie as a piece of visual poetry. I am a WWII buff so that probably helps me get past the slow pacing and ethereal plot. The soundtrack to TTRL is also amazing. Hans Zimmer has never been better IMO.

    I have always felt that The Thin Red Line (and Flags of Our Fathers) does a much better job at showing the sadness of war than war films like Saving Private Ryan. After first watching Saving Private Ryan, I remembered just wanting to be a sniper and play war games with my friends. After TTRL, I just remember thinking how sad war is and hoping I could avoid it.

    • Saving Private Ryan gets to me on an emotional level unlike any other film I can think of. I cant help but feel a strong sense of patriotism after watching it. While there are some overly melodramatic parts, to me it conveys the sheer brutality of war better than any other film I can think of. Despite its few flaws I really think Saving Private Ryan is a masterpiece.

      Flags of our Fathers was also an incredible movie, but I think it is even better after watching Letters from Iwo Jima. I watched “Letters” first then Flags of our Fathers and having the perspective from the Japanese side really enhanced the experience for me. I’m not so sure that watching Flags first would have been the same experience.

      • As far as showing the horror and brutality of war, I can’t argue with you. Saving Private Ryan had that in spades. At least one moment disturbs me to this day and I haven’t seen the movie in many years. …Man! War is scary!

        • Vance,
          Are you able to tip us off on what that moment is (for those of us who have seen it) — without spoiling anything (for those of us who haven’t)?

          Jason

          • Jason, it was the hand-to-hand combat scene near the end of the movie. It ended with a horrifically slow stabbing (shudder). Gosh, I hated that part.

    • Vance, I’m curious whether you like any other Malick films or if it is just your WWII interest that gets you through The Thin Red Line. Jason doesn’t appreciate it, but this time of year (Columbus Day through Thanksgiving), I always try to revisit The New World–a beautiful take on the Pocahontas story–and the special features on the DVD that show the level of detail and historical accuracy are particularly amazing.

      • When The New World came to theaters, I remember warning my friends that this was the same guy who made The Thin Red Line. “Expect a lot of voice over, people walking through nature, etc.” It isn’t for everybody, but I do enjoy it. I own The New World and when I sit down to watch it my wife wants to gouge her eyes out.

        I own the single disc extended cut, which didn’t include any special features. I think I like the theatrical cut better. I will have to find it and check out the special features.

        Malick’s films are one-of-a-kind. It is always a visual feast, albeit a slow one. I still have to get through The Tree of Life. I am waiting for the right mix of interest and caffeine. I didn’t care for Days of Heaven (the story just didn’t interest me) and have yet to see Badlands.

      • Josh,
        I promise I’m not trying to be controversial here… This is my honest feeling: I’ve seen “The New World” (2005) twice — the second time just to be sure. And I can’t believe anybody likes that film. In fact, it is so sparse and mind-numbing, it can barely be called a narrative film. I would almost consider it a non-narrative film. It’s more like some Stan Brakhage exercise in viewers’ patience…

        It is shot beautifully. It looks amazing. That’s all I have. I’m out.
        Jason

        • Jason, you are out of your mind.

          How can you say that as a fan of Gerry? The New World has 20 times more dialogue, 20 times more story, and 100 times more amazing visuals. Watching those two movies back to back would really put it into perspective for you.

          It would be like watching Upstream Color after Escape From Tomorrow. Suddenly, Upstream is a completely coherent, deeply meaningful, and a complete thrill ride.

    • TTRL and Saving Private Ryan are two totally different movie… even though they are both about wars, well, the same war really. SPR promotes heroism and courage, even though it has cruel moments at the beginning of the movie, you know the people will do ‘the right thing’, and the good will win. In that aspect it is no different than any other war movie, SPR is just slightly better made, otherwise it’d be the same as ‘Tears of the Sun’ (2003).

      TTRL has no stars and describes real emotions. Given none of the people I know ever went to battle fields, i sense the emotion in that movie are more realistic and the reaction of people in that movie when facing the moments are more on-to the pulse.

      I reckon TTRL is a better war flick but in terms entertainment value, SPR would make a better sale.

      • Good analysis, Que.

        I think all modern war films are (to some extent), to quote TIGERLAND, “war is hell, the troops are brave.” That’s why I always appreciate anything that gives that theme a little more nuance. SAVING PRIVATE RYAN starts out that way, showing us that our troops aren’t always the good guys, but sells out in the end with the message that, basically, he should have killed that damn German when he had the chance. SAINTS AND SOLDIERS (while nowhere as technically good or epic as the primary films we are discussing) is a WWII movie that really humanizes all sides of the conflict. I’m also a huge fan of THREE KINGS, which gives us a totally new spin on a modern war tale. Although I love what Peter Berg did with THE KINGDOM, I wish Mary Mark had tapped David O. Russell to direct SOLE SURVIVOR for him. I want to see what he would do in the Middle East now.

  5. Thanks for the honorable mention in the show! Now you officially got a comment section lingered.

  6. Dear Movie Podcast Weekly,

    I would like to share my Gravity viewing experience with you, after the hype from last week’s discussion. As you all know that I bought ticket for 2 for IMAX 3D, which cost $65. For the best viewing seats I picked the afternoon session, so my wife and I went to lunch before the movie, some expensive burger experience costing me $40 for two; I didn’t buy popcorn or potato crisps for the movie, wanted to fully focus on the story and the screen, didn’t want the chew noise to interrupt. I bought a fruit ice crush which costed $6.5, my wife had a Gelato costing $4.5, then some iced softdrink for $5.

    unfortunately there are two Chinese dudes sitting right next to me kept chatting. they will from time to time stop, when the visual part hits, but when the astronauts floats they started to chat. Which is so annoying and even more so when I thought about the commitment of dollar value I put into this experience! I eventually told them to stop talking, they quiet-down to some degree but this put my blood to boil for very long time, I could hear my own heart beat for like 20 min or so.

    Then, some dude took off their shoes, quietly. talk about the monster of the odor. I don’t know where he is, but I had tear in my eyes.

    Gravity is definitely a recommendable experience, and it pays to see on the bigger screen. But oh dear, if there is a version of Chad in Sydney, please let me be your friend.

    • I’m glad you mentioned the bad theater experience. When listening to the recording I realized I completely missed Jason taking about some of the negative aspects of the theater experience. Must have been formulating some thoughts or something. Back in my college days we used to go to a lot of movies and for a while went through an incredible streak where every time we would go to the theater there would be some bad experience like the one you mentioned. There was a particular incident with a tuna sandwich that comes to mind.

      Jayson – maybe you should have a segment in an upcoming episode where you discuss bad theater experiences.

      • Where in Sydney they started numbering seats only from a few years back. It used to be that if you want the best seats you need to be there early and stand in the line to get in to theatre first, if it is a hot session. Nowadays u can buy tickets on line and you can choose where you wanted to sit. They charge u $1.5 for picking your seats though.

      • Chad, please write down (or leave a voicemail) about your streak of bad theater experiences so we can share them on the show when we have that discussion.

    • Glad you were still able to enjoy the film, Que. I think the Australian ticket prices are what makes it such a big deal. You’ve made a sizable investment! And you probably have assigned seating there. Over here we do occasionally, but it is relatively new so, I’d just switch seats and not stress it.

      The theater experience always plays a big role in my enjoyment of a film, but it is rare that an audience ruins it for me. An audience usually only sticks out to me when it is exceptional (I always seem to have a great time with the audience in Quentin Tarantino movies).

      Although, I will say that comedy trailers before the film are usually a very good indicator of the kind of audience you have. If they are laughing at Adam Sandler in the Jack and Jill before a screening of The Descendants, you’re there with the wrong people.

      Also, horror movies with a lot of high school girls who can’t stop talking and screeching and giggling the whole time, because they are so scared, can get annoying. I remember that nearly ruining the tension of Paranormal Activity when I saw it.

      • Hi josh, I totally agree with that audience makes part of the theatre experience. I went to special screening of blue Jasmin and the audience, being older average age and maturity, they appreciate the movie from life level affection and laugh at the nitty gritty bits of the personality. It primote d me to laugh too and that’s something I don’t get by watching disks at home.

        That said, the theatre experience can be negative rather easily, like when someone start to eat big macs and French fries.

  7. Okay… Jay, I think you should know one thing about me. I see maybe 10 films a year in theaters for the exoerience. I never pay over $3 to buy a dvd or $1.50 to rent a movie. I would never pay $9.99 for virtually any film I was going to watch on a laptop. I got to see Bad Milo! for free. So I’m sorry you wasted your money. But after feeling bad for you all week I don’t now. You say you forgot my comment about the premise. So I guess, but still, you can’t watch a film that isn’t anything you would ever enjoy then give it a .5, for the premise, not cool man. I don’t think a movie about a butt demon could be done much better. And beyond that it wasn’t as bad on bathroom humor as you acted and was even quite heartfelt. Thank you Josh for being the voice of reason.

    • Haha. And thank you, Hammer, for the support. You are absolutely right. There are no better butt demon movies out there! I can’t speak for Jason personally, but I can speak broadly for the podcast to some extent, and it absolutely was not a waste of money, even if (and maybe especially because) he hated it so much, because it yielded good conversation. Keep those recommendations coming!

    • Hammer,
      One may give a film a 0.5 solely for its premise (as long as one endured the film and watched it all).

      For instance, what if the premise were literally 90 minutes of a guy watching paint dry? We just watch him watching paint dry. That’s a 0.5 premise… And I would be willing to bet that a huge percentage of the movie-loving population would give cinematic abominations like “Salo, or the 120 Days of Sodom” or “A Serbian Film” a 0.5 merely for their subject matter, much less their depictions of it. (No, I have not subjected myself to those films, but I’m unfortunately familiar with their content. Nor have I ever rated them, because I only rate movies I see.)

      So, one CAN make a film about a little demon monster that comes and goes from inside a guy’s butt, but that doesn’t mean one SHOULD…

      I’m not mad about investing the money to see it, because I’ve been able to do my “job” (ha ha) as a critic and warn everyone who’s heard my voice to stay away from it.

      I will make it up to you, though, by getting you to watch “a real doozy one of these days…” Mwuh Ha ha ha ha ha ha!

      Confession: After watching “Bad Milo!,” I was initially going to rate it a 2 (Avoid), but the more I thought about it, the more I started to despise it, so I worked myself down to 0.5. : )

      But yes, I second what Josh said. It made for a fun show, so keep your recommendations coming, Buddy.

      Your pal,
      Jason

      • I guess my take is that if you know going into a film there is no way you will like it, you just shouldn’t review it because it wasn’t for you. At least you could have given Milo the Lords of Salem treatment of “for me it’s a .5 (which I’m sorry, is just too low for a film as sound as this one. Watch Cheerleader Massacre for a true 1/10 or Sleepaway Camp 4: The Survivor for a true .5) but for someone who likes this sort of thing it’s a whatever.” And honestly I never meant for you to watch it although I’ll say I’m not into toilet humor either and I really didn’t find this bad at all in that way. I found Milo cute as well. He was like the baby on Dinosaurs mixed with a Killer Condom (another true lowly movie.)

      • Hi Jason, watching paint dry can be a good set up!
        1. He can smell the paint, and have a slight hallucination about things;
        2. He can use that as closure of certain part of his memory, like bad love, sad sons death, etc.
        3. He is using the paint to cover some crime evidence and detective is on his way over, time race;
        4. Color of the paint is the key to his hypnotised girl neighbor;
        5. The wall is portal to some persons mind, and the paint is how to control that person s emotion.
        And more. All these would make some movie that either josh or Andy loves…

        And we get it now, Jason does not like the little demon in the rear end…

  8. To all you guys talking about the war films…

    I once recorded about a three-hour podcast with another movie podcaster (Jamie Coward aka “Captain Howdy”) for his show. We covered, I think, SIX old-school, classic war films and went into some pretty good detail, since he was a war movie buff. A couple of the films are definitely worth seeing.

    Unfortunately, his podcast folded before we ever released it. I still have the recording and have always wanted to do something with it. Let me know if you guys would like me to release it. I spent 12 hours watching those films (and 3 hours recording it), so I’d like it to see the light of day sometime.

    No pressure. Just let me know if there’s any interest.

    Thanks,
    Jason

  9. For the Thin Red Line, I mentioned that Malick shot 1 million feet of film. 90 feet of film is one minute so this represents about 185 hours of footage. Malick’s first cut of TTRL was over 6 hours and later cut down to just under 3. No wonder so many actors had their parts entirely cut. Adrien Brody was apparently supposed to have a major role but it was cut down to a very small part. Many others were cut entirely.

    For the Shining, Kubrick shot 1.3 million feet of film. Kubrick made the actors do many takes without being given any direction as to what he wanted. In one case he shot 127 takes of the same scene. This is 102 feet of film for every foot used in the final film. Typically the ratio is somewhere around 5:1 to 15:1

    • Say, what takes to get a copy of the 6 hour cut of the movie? That would be mind blowing.

      I recently saw ”the grand master” that was just 2hours and bit. I think the directors cut is something like 4 hours plus, so watching the diet version there are so much got lost, it is so bad that the plot don’t even flow properly and characters don’t get developed at all. True shame.

      • It would be interesting to see the 6 hour cut. I’m sure it was cut in half for good reason though – not sure it needed to be any longer.

        I watched The Grandmaster from the imported Hong Kong Blu-ray and the cut is 130 minutes. The US Version is 108 minutes, so you may have seen the Chinese cut. I have not seen the US Version to compare, but the Chinese cut seems a bit hard to follow also. The fact that the timeline jumps around made it difficult to follow. If there is a 4 hour directors cut out there it may do a better job of filling in those gaps.

        Que – have you seen any other Wong Kar-Wai films ? In the Mood for Love is a favorite of mine. A friend of mine is a huge fan and introduced me to Kar-Wai and I have been making my way through all his films.

        • Hi chad, I am Chinese background, and I think I have ticked all Wong’s movies. My favorite is Ash of Time, and Chungking express.

          Wong is also such a director that does hot give much direction to the actors. He is picky in the casting and often rely on actors free acting to capture the real emotion. Like Kubrick’s, the shooting often end with hours of footage for some small scenes. And his movie style barely changed much over the years, which is a good thing.

          • I love Chungking Express too – but have not seen Ashes of Time. Jason commented above about how a 90 minute film of watching paint dry would be rated a .5 based on the concept alone. Kar Wai could make a 2 hour film of a man just smoking cigarettes and it would still get a rating of 8. I love the way Kar-Wai uses smoke in his movies.

        • I’m a bit of a Wong Kar Wai fan, but I haven’t seen much of his work. I loved In the Mood For Love and Chungking Express. 2046 I wasn’t as high on or his segment in Eros. But, I’m dying to see the Grandmaster in as long a form as I can.

          What I like about Wong Kar Wai’s over-shooting, as with Malick’s (and apparently Richard Curtis, who we talked about a few weeks ago) is that it simply yields more good content. If it is good, keep it coming. I’d love to see the 6 hour version of Pirate Radio. I’m sure Adrian Brody was good in The Thin Red Line. I’m sure Sean Penn was good in The Tree of Life. In fact, I think his section of the story would have made the film much more watchable for the majority of the audience. Give me the 6 hour versions of those films too!

          Obviously, most people like an easily digestible 90 minute film, but for us cinema-freaks, I’m of the opinion that if the quality is good, more is always better. For example, I prefer the extended cuts of Peter Jackson’s Lord of the Rings movies. On the other hand, Jackson’s Hobbit films seem to be examples of not over-staying your welcome. So, leaner is probably better for the theatrical cuts, but I’m all for a longer home release if the material is working.

          The best argument for this, of course, comes from the dramatic, cinematic television we’ve been discussing. The Sopranos, The Wire, The Killing, (yes) Breaking Bad, Mad Men, Big Love, Deadwood, The Walking Dead, Game of Thrones (not a fan), (maybe even) Lost (though that one is questionable) have enough story and character to warrant these giant, arcing, epic tales that are really just gargantuan movies in a lot of ways. And because they are good, they don’t seem to long, even when we binge watch an entire series in two weeks (as Tony Hopkins may have done with BB).

          Kubrick’s shooting style was much different, of course. As Chad mentioned, he used all of his additional feet of film on getting what he thought was the perfect take, often driving his actors to the brink of insanity. Tom Cruise talked about being an actor in Kubrick’s endless takes when they were shooting Eyes Wide Shut and it sounded like a nightmare. David Fincher is another filmmaker like that. Shoots forever, but doesn’t end up with an exorbitant amount of movie, just a ton of takes.

          The making of Zodiac doc shows Jake Gyllenhaal doing of an insert shot where Fincher films his character dropping his notebook on the seat of the car. A typical movie would shoot it 2 or 3 times, and with a stand-in, since Gyllenhaal isn’t even visible in the shot, but Fincher shot it 36 times and made the actor do it himself. Compare that to the making of The New World shows Malick only using natural light and not even worrying about continuity in coverage, but choosing his shots based on the beauty of the image and the position of the sun in the sky. I think that illuminates the visual difference between the formalism of a Fincher and the fluidity of a Malick, both of which can be hit or miss, but both of which I greatly admire.

          Anyway, in short, if the content is good, I usually want more of it.

          • Wong is not a productive director. He probably average out 1 feature movie every 3-4 years these days. I think that is a good thing because it stays fresh from the viewing point of view. His style is also relying on actor’s talent so he always recycle that handful of actors as they get more and more comfortable working together.

            I think his earlier time works were better, i am not overly impressed by the recent ones, such as blueberry nights or 2046. but the earlier work of his may be hard to find unless you have a Chinese friend who can dig through the Chinatown videoshop pile for you.

  10. To Chad, it is all about the monologue, monologue. Wongs movie is like reading someones diary. So it is not for everyone, but to those sensitive minds it is a feast.

    Smoke of course is good too.

  11. To Karl, I am so happy someone sees that too… That tethering scene, I was like, this is not right.. And the breathing, any scuba diving exp will show you what to do…

    I think it is the plot’s need to make it easier for normal viewers to make personal connection to the environment and it is obvious you are being punished for being overly intelligent.

    And, yeah, George must die.

  12. you can blame me for Bad Milo. I recommended it to Jeff. how can you be a man and not like potty humor? I do not get it. I thought it was a cool little film and enjoyed Milo. by the way Hell Baby was AWFUL and not even remotely funny.

      • I’d say not similar at all. Hell Baby is much more a comedy (filled with constant goofy jokes) and the gore is also way more over the top. Kind of a unique film in that regard, I guess.

  13. Hi Miss Horror Nerd,
    I love female horror fans. Thanks for writing. In answer to your question, “How can you be a man and not like potty humor?”… I guess it’s because I was raised by women. : )
    Jason

    P.S. If you’re truly a horror nerd, please check out the launch of Horror Movie Podcast next Friday, Oct. 25: http://horrormoviepodcast.com/

Comments are closed.