Discuss and Rate the Last Film You Watched
- Thread starter Th3Ch33s3Cak3
- Start date
Any number of sci-fi/fantasy allegories fail due to the same reason. Big scary vamires/mutants are oppressed LGBT people is a popular one.
Yeah the X-Men problem. Discriminating against people who can kill you, even accidentally, with a random thought or a stray look. Doesn't help that there's also a portion of them who're actively trying to do it too. Yet they're supposed to stand for people who merely look different, or feel different.
I think there's some wiggle room in X-Men though because it doesn't apply to every character the way it does to Zootopia or Elemental. And in real life a small % of people do suffer genetic mutations and are pointlessly discriminated for them. But because it's a comic book it takes the extreme of mutations are all cool and give you superpowers.
Whereas in real life water is wet and fire is burns stuff.
Absent
And twice is the only way to live.
- Jan 25, 2023
- 1,594
- 1,557
- 118
- Country
- Switzerland
- Gender
- The boring one
And really virtually all allegories in scifi and fantasy. Featuring actual different "races" and spieces, with actual genetically determined values, sensitivities, abilities, jobs, etc. Or heck, Disney Star Wars going with a "robots are people too" metaphor (implying that, what... women, gays, asians, as as much "people" as robots are?).
Going for "we could cooperate between our diffrence of nature" is super cute. But this very "difference of nature" is bullshit. These fictions actually enforce racialism, which is the root problem of racism. You can have all sorts of ambiguous patronizing or straight hierarchies when you imagine humans as different, distinct races with pre-determined traits, and then even good intents reinforce these toxic misconceptions. It's not about liking or disliking or forgiving different abilities ("oh we are good at engineering but they make good musicians"), it's about understanding the unity of mankind.
That is that no, we humans are not "elves and dwarves". If we were, a lot of racialist (and, depending on values, racist) theories would be very defensible.
This got me thinking about if there's some alt universe comic version of the X-Men that explores this concept by toning everything down to its bare minimum. Where X-Men mutations don't manifest as superpowers, but as minor abnormal abilities. Like what if Pyro wasn't a human flamethrower, but could maybe heat his hands to a degree where they could cause burns. Or Wolverine's healing factor would mean that he can merely take a lot more punches before going down instead of being able to survive getting nuked. In cases like those the question of whether or not mutants pose a threat would carry a lot more weight, because it wouldn't be so obvious.
OT: I went and saw Across the Spider-verse again, this time in IMAX. Now it's settled: this is the best looking animated film of all time. There is so much artistry, personality, detail and style bursting from its every frame I was just as wowed as the first time. Studio Ghibli films come close, but Across just kicks it into the realm of Redline, and then kicks it even further by having a compelling and interesting story. Knowing what to expect going into it I appreciated the slow stuff a lot more, because it's very purposeful in the context of the events. Hailee Steinfeld is honestly show-stealing as Gwen. Her arc is so incredibly interesting, and her actions drive the story as much as Miles' do. Steinfeld gives such a powerful and compelling performance that if there was an Oscar for voice roles, she'd deserve it. I do consider this to be equal to Into the Spider-verse now. If Into is the rock solid debut album with a bunch of kickass rock songs, Across is the more thoughtful, experimental, artier sophomore album.
I also saw the trailer for TMNT: Mutant Mayhem for the first time, and my jaw just dropped. It looks fucking gorgeous. It feels like we're truly living through an animation renaissance right now. Elemental's trailer, during which I had to put my fingers into my ears to not die of cringe, just felt like a shambolic dinosaur in comparison.
Shazam 2: Fury of the Gods
6/10
I'm not a big fan of the "Marvelization" of the DCEU, I don't like how every third line has to be either a joke or a callback/easter egg to another movie/character in the "franchise", but it seems that is exactly what we'll be getting with James Gunn at the helm... Still, Shazam 2 was an enjoyable albeit a completely forgettable romp, which makes it about as good as the vast majority of "these" movies...
I'm just glad they won't be trifling with The Joker 2 and The Batman 2 (and I'm also praying they won't ever get the idea to put em in a shared universe...)
6/10
I'm not a big fan of the "Marvelization" of the DCEU, I don't like how every third line has to be either a joke or a callback/easter egg to another movie/character in the "franchise", but it seems that is exactly what we'll be getting with James Gunn at the helm... Still, Shazam 2 was an enjoyable albeit a completely forgettable romp, which makes it about as good as the vast majority of "these" movies...
I'm just glad they won't be trifling with The Joker 2 and The Batman 2 (and I'm also praying they won't ever get the idea to put em in a shared universe...)
Yeah, but in something like the vampire case it's generally used not to symbolize persecution, but rather embracing and relishing in "the evil" by certain real-world marginalized groups who are viewed as such by conservatives. Like for example The Rocky Horror Picture Show. Horror in general seems something the queer community is drawn to.
I'm kinda on the fence when it comes to racial or any other marginalized allegory in fiction. On the one hand changing it to something like an animal allegory can "refresh" how you view a real-world issue that one might've become desensitized to. On the other hand it can very much get overused as a stand-in so as not to directly address actual real-world bigotry. And in cases like Zootopia and seemingly Elemental I can't help but detect a plausable deniability so that certain people/parents won't get pissed off for feeling called out. Afterall, white people have a HUGE chip on their shoulder when it comes to this type of stuff, and Disney knows that.
In X-Men's case I certainly understand taking a critical lense to it being an allegory for racism, but at the same time I think it's also important to remember its function as wishfullfillment for those who live on the lower end of the social hierarchy. X-Men presenting you with a world where people are treated like shit for being born different, like in real-life, but where unlike in real-life those same people actually have the power to fight back - To fly away from the bullies or just kick them through a wall.
Last edited:
Sucks to be the white people with huge chips on their shoulders. And yet The Proud Family (a Disney TV show) managed two call out actual racism and systematic racism twice without much pushback the first time around. The second time it happened when the show revived, the usual "anti-woke" reactionaries and Fox News were demanding the show's cancellation. Of course, Disney didn't listen, the show's creator told the racist assholes to fuck off, and the original show and its revival are still on Disney+. Funny how those assholes cried about the show being "too political and woke!", when The Proud Family tackled social and racial issues beforehand. It shows how fucking stupid and ignorant these people really are.
Uh, Joker 2 is happening. As is as sequel to The Batman.
The former is going to be a musical. Fuck off, either way WBD.
All the Details on ‘Joker 2,’ Starring Joaquin Phoenix and Lady Gaga
Todd Phillips returns to helm the 'Joker' sequel starring Joaquin Phoenix and Lady Gaga.
www.indiewire.com
The only shows or movies I know that actually pulls off racial allegory well are Princess Mononoke, which is more nature/God Spirits vs. Humans, but still counts, because it shows the grey areas and neither is in the complete right nor wrong (with a dose of both sides have point, yet both needs to see and move past of each other's hatred). Yu Yu Hakusho has the whole demons and human thing, though that actually works better in the anime than the original manga. Oh, and this clip of Rocko's Modern Life I guess.
Well, there's that, but then you get True Blood and "God hates fangs" and terrible lectures about how not trusting the evil vampires is like racism.
One show I think does a good job of tackling prejudice through allegory is Beastars. It shows that the prejudice is wrong, but also holds back no punches in showing how the prejudice formed in the first place, and how difficult it is to overcome it, and that it doesn't always work just because you really want it to.
Another good example is Avatar: Last Airbender. Granted, it's done a bit more subtly, but the comic sequels, North & South and Imbalance, go all in. Especially Imbalance. I highly recommend both! Note how I never said Legend of Korra. There's a good reason why.
Beastars is also less about how society views the characters and more about how the characters view themselves. It's far more internal than external, eventhough how they feel about themselves was obviously brought about by how they grew up in the world around them.
What also works in it's favor is that few animal allegory fiction actually lean into the truly animalistic tendencies, usually choosing to gloss over it so as not to make the average viewer too uncomfortable. But I guess Beastars showed that the average viewer is actually rather okay with a more raw depiction of animal people fucking and maybe even wanting to eat eachother.
Mass (2021) Hulu
Tough emotional movie focused on a meeting between 2 couples in a church. As IMDB puts it, "The parents of both the shooter and one of the victims of a school shooting tragedy agree to meet and talk in an attempt to move forward."
Felt very authentic to me. B
Tough emotional movie focused on a meeting between 2 couples in a church. As IMDB puts it, "The parents of both the shooter and one of the victims of a school shooting tragedy agree to meet and talk in an attempt to move forward."
Felt very authentic to me. B
I do wonder how many such school shooters are "in pain" vs. just being flat out evil. And an odd choice is made. The 2 couples go at it and ultimately, the shooter's parents explain that there really was no way they could have known their son would one day do this. Just as everything is settled to the extent that it can be and they've left the room and are on their way home, the mom of the shooter relates a story: she went to her son's room and he tells her he does not want to do well and be happy. That she is to get out of his room or he'll beat the shit out of her. It is an admission that she damn well should have known the kid had serious issues.
I saw a trailer for that, thought "Oh, I see, it's about Apartheid" and then forgot about it. It's honestly kind of impressive that a movie can manage to fail at making a point like "Apartheid is bad". I mean, come on. As far as morals go, you'd think that one would basically be a freebie.
The Flash, 7/10
The latest in the long-running and long-troubled DC cinematic universe(?), I was kind of flabbergasted by this film. Not just because it wasn't the absolute clusterfuck it seemed for all the world to be, but it's actually pretty good in a lot of respects. I'd probably put it on par with the first Shazam. When the worst thing in a DC movie is the CG, you know they've done something right by the standards of this franchise. I know this is damning with faint praise, especially when there's a far better superhero multiverse movie in theaters right now. But considering how stacked the odds were against this movie being anything but dogshit, what they've pulled off is almost a miracle.
It's kind of amazing how they've made Flash, who so far has only been defined as "the annoying overpowered one", actually endearing and engaging as a character. This is mostly achieved by Ezra Miller pulling double duty as the lead(s), who, for all his maniac tendencies outside of his work, carries the movie really well. He manages to play two distinct versions of the same character that both feel different, yet the same at their core. There's also a nice thematic throughline that ties into the character in dramatic and also horrifying ways.
The trailers did this movie no favors by making it seem like "The Flash with Batman and Supergirl!!!!" It's not the fanservice wankery you'd expect. Keaton's Batman isn't made into something for redditors to soyface over or for "i KnOw WhAT ThAt IS!!!" moments, but is used thematically appropriately and sparingly enough. Supergirl's part is actually quite minor, but still vital. So props for that. The choreography for Batman's fight scenes is actually really good, about on par with that one scene from BvS, which was a nice surprise. While the trailers thoroughly spoiled the multiverse part, they actually left out some pretty wild stuff from the end of the movie which I won't spoil, but was definitely captivating and visually interesting. There's one absolutely fantastic pseudo-cameo which, if you know your history of DC film adaptations, you'll definitely recognize and get a good laugh out of.
It's nothing amazing. The CG looks like shit a lot of the time (about PS3 prerendered cutscene level), there's plenty of plot conveniences and contrivances, and some things are glossed over way too quickly. It kind of leaves on a horrific unspoken implication that Flash is forced to leave an entire world to die at the hands of Zod, but I understand why they want the audience to forget that, because it would make the movie horribly depressing. But the fact that I was never bored during the almost 2,5 hour runtime, and never started thinking about the logistics of a multiverse/time travel movie speaks to is credit.
This is probably how people who follow M. Night Shyamalan's work felt when Split was released, and turned out actually good.
The latest in the long-running and long-troubled DC cinematic universe(?), I was kind of flabbergasted by this film. Not just because it wasn't the absolute clusterfuck it seemed for all the world to be, but it's actually pretty good in a lot of respects. I'd probably put it on par with the first Shazam. When the worst thing in a DC movie is the CG, you know they've done something right by the standards of this franchise. I know this is damning with faint praise, especially when there's a far better superhero multiverse movie in theaters right now. But considering how stacked the odds were against this movie being anything but dogshit, what they've pulled off is almost a miracle.
It's kind of amazing how they've made Flash, who so far has only been defined as "the annoying overpowered one", actually endearing and engaging as a character. This is mostly achieved by Ezra Miller pulling double duty as the lead(s), who, for all his maniac tendencies outside of his work, carries the movie really well. He manages to play two distinct versions of the same character that both feel different, yet the same at their core. There's also a nice thematic throughline that ties into the character in dramatic and also horrifying ways.
The trailers did this movie no favors by making it seem like "The Flash with Batman and Supergirl!!!!" It's not the fanservice wankery you'd expect. Keaton's Batman isn't made into something for redditors to soyface over or for "i KnOw WhAT ThAt IS!!!" moments, but is used thematically appropriately and sparingly enough. Supergirl's part is actually quite minor, but still vital. So props for that. The choreography for Batman's fight scenes is actually really good, about on par with that one scene from BvS, which was a nice surprise. While the trailers thoroughly spoiled the multiverse part, they actually left out some pretty wild stuff from the end of the movie which I won't spoil, but was definitely captivating and visually interesting. There's one absolutely fantastic pseudo-cameo which, if you know your history of DC film adaptations, you'll definitely recognize and get a good laugh out of.
It's nothing amazing. The CG looks like shit a lot of the time (about PS3 prerendered cutscene level), there's plenty of plot conveniences and contrivances, and some things are glossed over way too quickly. It kind of leaves on a horrific unspoken implication that Flash is forced to leave an entire world to die at the hands of Zod, but I understand why they want the audience to forget that, because it would make the movie horribly depressing. But the fact that I was never bored during the almost 2,5 hour runtime, and never started thinking about the logistics of a multiverse/time travel movie speaks to is credit.
This is probably how people who follow M. Night Shyamalan's work felt when Split was released, and turned out actually good.
Evil Dead Rise
Not great, not terrible. I give it 3.6 roentgen.
Not great, not terrible. I give it 3.6 roentgen.
Return to Oz. I remembered that this was creepy, but forget how creepy. Even when they are doing bad US 80s children's fantasy stuff it's still somehow creepy.
The Rescuers Downunder (6/10)
The TL, DR version is this film is better than its predecessor, if only for the reason that the animation is actually quite good. Beyond that, well, it's really the same film, just transplanted to Australia.
Anyway, the film starts off in the Outback with some kid (Rudy? Checks Wikipedia...nup, "Cody") who goes out into the bush and immediately breaks the rules of the first film. Well, not technically, but in the first film, Penny was shocked to find out that mice could talk, here, Cody and the animals converse in English without any issue. I may as well bring this up now, the film's inconsistent as to which animals can speak and which can't, and it's not even divided by animal group. For instance, the antagonist's goanna (Joanna, hardy hah hah) never actually speaks, but Cody meets a frill-neck lizard who can. The titular Rescuers arrive in Oz using an Albatross who can speak, but Cody makes friends with an eagle who can only make noises. It's not like this makes or breaks the film, but it's a weird quirk that's never explained or even addressed.
Anyway, Cody is captured by evil poacher guy (McLeach...subtle, but subtler than "Medusa," so there's that) who wants to kill mama eagle having killed daddy eagle, and wants Cody to lead the way, and fools the Australian Rangers (not technically a group that really exists, but meh) into thinking he's been eaten by crocs (so, a better plan than the first film). The titular Rescuers head to Oz to save him (because apparently no other child's been kidnapped in the last 24 hours anywhere on planet Earth), meet up with a bush mouse named Jake, and so on and so forth. The fil ends with the kid saved and presumably they head back to his mum (though the reunion is never seen), and so on.
Yeah, there's nothing in this film that really warrants in-depth analysis. It's basically the same formula of the first film but better - better villain, better abductee, far better animation, better paced dialogue, etc. That said, it's still bog standard average. I was actually kind of curious going in, because while this film falls into the so-called Disney Renaissance period, no-one ever seems to bring it up. Some of the films are still loved (e.g. Lion King), some are involved in the cut-off point debate (Tarzan, Emperor's New Groove), some have lost favour over the years (Pocohontas), but Rangers Downunder? No-one seems to even remember it exists, and having seen it, I can see why. It's this weird little anomaly that just, well, it does its thing, and that's the end of it.
Anyway, usual ratings are below:
The TL, DR version is this film is better than its predecessor, if only for the reason that the animation is actually quite good. Beyond that, well, it's really the same film, just transplanted to Australia.
Anyway, the film starts off in the Outback with some kid (Rudy? Checks Wikipedia...nup, "Cody") who goes out into the bush and immediately breaks the rules of the first film. Well, not technically, but in the first film, Penny was shocked to find out that mice could talk, here, Cody and the animals converse in English without any issue. I may as well bring this up now, the film's inconsistent as to which animals can speak and which can't, and it's not even divided by animal group. For instance, the antagonist's goanna (Joanna, hardy hah hah) never actually speaks, but Cody meets a frill-neck lizard who can. The titular Rescuers arrive in Oz using an Albatross who can speak, but Cody makes friends with an eagle who can only make noises. It's not like this makes or breaks the film, but it's a weird quirk that's never explained or even addressed.
Anyway, Cody is captured by evil poacher guy (McLeach...subtle, but subtler than "Medusa," so there's that) who wants to kill mama eagle having killed daddy eagle, and wants Cody to lead the way, and fools the Australian Rangers (not technically a group that really exists, but meh) into thinking he's been eaten by crocs (so, a better plan than the first film). The titular Rescuers head to Oz to save him (because apparently no other child's been kidnapped in the last 24 hours anywhere on planet Earth), meet up with a bush mouse named Jake, and so on and so forth. The fil ends with the kid saved and presumably they head back to his mum (though the reunion is never seen), and so on.
Yeah, there's nothing in this film that really warrants in-depth analysis. It's basically the same formula of the first film but better - better villain, better abductee, far better animation, better paced dialogue, etc. That said, it's still bog standard average. I was actually kind of curious going in, because while this film falls into the so-called Disney Renaissance period, no-one ever seems to bring it up. Some of the films are still loved (e.g. Lion King), some are involved in the cut-off point debate (Tarzan, Emperor's New Groove), some have lost favour over the years (Pocohontas), but Rangers Downunder? No-one seems to even remember it exists, and having seen it, I can see why. It's this weird little anomaly that just, well, it does its thing, and that's the end of it.
Anyway, usual ratings are below:
41) The Black Cauldron
40) Dinosaur
39) Cinderella
38) Dumbo
37) Robin Hood
36) The Rescuers
35) Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs
34) Lady and the Tramp
33) Oliver & Company
32) The Sword in the Stone
31) Peter Pan
30) Sleeping Beauty
29) Pinocchio
28) The Fox and the Hound
27) The Rescuers Downunder
26) Pocahontas
25) Bambi
24) Basil, the Great Mouse Detective
23) The Aristocats
22) Frozen II
21) Bolt
20) Wreck-it Ralph: Ralph Breaks the Internet
19) Tarzan
18) Fantasia 2000
17) 101 Dalmations
16) The Jungle Book
15) Alice in Wonderland
14) The Little Mermaid
13) The Emperor’s New Groove
12) Hercules
11) The Hunchback of Notre Dame
10) Raya and the Last Dragon
9) Fantasia
8) Moana
7) Big Hero 6
6) Beauty and the Beast
5) Treasure Planet
4) Frozen
3) Aladdin
2) The Lion King
1) Zootopia
40) Dinosaur
39) Cinderella
38) Dumbo
37) Robin Hood
36) The Rescuers
35) Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs
34) Lady and the Tramp
33) Oliver & Company
32) The Sword in the Stone
31) Peter Pan
30) Sleeping Beauty
29) Pinocchio
28) The Fox and the Hound
27) The Rescuers Downunder
26) Pocahontas
25) Bambi
24) Basil, the Great Mouse Detective
23) The Aristocats
22) Frozen II
21) Bolt
20) Wreck-it Ralph: Ralph Breaks the Internet
19) Tarzan
18) Fantasia 2000
17) 101 Dalmations
16) The Jungle Book
15) Alice in Wonderland
14) The Little Mermaid
13) The Emperor’s New Groove
12) Hercules
11) The Hunchback of Notre Dame
10) Raya and the Last Dragon
9) Fantasia
8) Moana
7) Big Hero 6
6) Beauty and the Beast
5) Treasure Planet
4) Frozen
3) Aladdin
2) The Lion King
1) Zootopia
Finally watched Avatar 2, water sports.
Did the person who wrote the finale of the major fight sequence speak to any of the other writers??? Just a whole set piece asking us to ignore their underwater adventures to that point.
Did the person who wrote the finale of the major fight sequence speak to any of the other writers??? Just a whole set piece asking us to ignore their underwater adventures to that point.