Film forum off topic/random chat thread

FunLover18

It's just my interpretation although I would say that the media bears the brunt of the blame with their eagerness to create "PC gone mad" headlines.

Sad Professor

I don't think negative representation "through scars" vs "with scars" is a meaningful distinction. Either way scars and deformation are associated with negativity.

Beyond the politics the issue here seems to be people being bullied by people who use pop culture references. I just think the problem is the bullies not the pop culture references.

pixelburp

FunLover18 wrote: »

It's just my interpretation although I would say that the media bears the brunt of the blame with their eagerness to create "PC gone mad" headlines.

Vicious cycle really; the media know the clickbait works, precisely because it gets people animated enough to post on comments sections / Boards with the latest wailing and gnashing of teeth. There may or may not be a 'PC culture', but I'm fairly sure there's a 'PC backlash culture' equally

Certainly reads to me like a somewhat wishy-washy, noncommittal pronouncement that the BFI will 'try', but without any wording to actually hamstring productions that might actually want a bad-guy with a scar. So a purely PR exercise for brownie points with a charity, latched onto and exaggerated by those seeking outrage over these token gestures.

FunLover18

Sad Professor wrote: »

I don't think negative representation "through scars" vs "with scars" is a meaningful distinction. Either way scars and deformation are associated with negativity.

Beyond the politics the issue here seems to be people being bullied by people who use pop culture references. I just think the problem is the bullies not the pop culture references.

I suspect this bit in bold is a view point they're hoping this policy might address.

PS - I'm not staying it's the right way of going about it and neither am I saying that this association is solely perpetrated by the media and/or believed by all those watching the media.

Tony EH

Sad Professor wrote: »

I don't think negative representation "through scars" vs "with scars" is a meaningful distinction. Either way scars and deformation are associated with negativity.

Beyond the politics the issue here seems to be people being bullied by people who use pop culture references. I just think the problem is the bullies not the pop culture references.

Agreed. It's the ability to affect an outcome, no matter how stupid or needed that outcome is, by using a bullying tactic on social media, that's the issue. The fact that an obscure and relatively minor organisation can pressure another organisation into policy making that has a further impact other, completely separate people is serious enough. No doubt the next step would be, if the BFI don't move on this, would be that they "hate" people with facial scars and 'Changing Faces' would let everyone know on Twitter.

I wonder if the UKFC has done the same thing?

It's a champion bit of weasel wording by the BFI, though, I have to say. "...through scars..." doesn't mean a thing, really.

Tony EH

Sad Professor wrote: »

I don't think negative representation "through scars" vs "with scars" is a meaningful distinction. Either way scars and deformation are associated with negativity.

Beyond the politics the issue here seems to be people being bullied by people who use pop culture references. I just think the problem is the bullies not the pop culture references.

FunLover18 wrote: »

I suspect this bit in bold is a view point they're hoping this policy might address.

PS - I'm not staying it's the right way of going about it and neither am I saying that this association is solely perpetrated by the media and/or believed by all those watching the media.

But are "scars and deformation are associated with negativity"?

They're are plenty of heroes (anti-heroes) that are scarred too. Hello Harry Potter.

Scars are an easy - and cheap - way of giving a character a history outside of the current story. How did Snake Plisken get lose his eye? What happened to Furiosa? How did Tony Montana get the marks of the film's title?

CastorTroy

Seeing Edge of Tomorrow on tv made me wonder are there any other movies that became so much better known by their marketing slogan that they actually had to rename the film?
It was even listed tonight as "Live Die Repeat - Edge of Tomorrow".

I know multiple films have alternate titles due to Americans having different titles like "The Professional" or "Point of No Return"

pixelburp

Is it any wonder smaller films struggle when the cinemas put them on at clearly inconvenient times to its expected or logical audience?

I'd quite like to see "Can you Ever Forgive Me?", yet the only showing at my local cinema is at 5:45pm. It's demonstrably a movie aimed at an adult audience, yet IMO working stiffs would struggle to get to a showing that early. Indeed I also see "Destroyer" has a sole showing at 6:30pm, better but not perfect either.

Meanwhile, Bohemian Rhapsody is still showing (though at least Star is Born has finally left) at night-time, while "Escape Room" has 4 showings into the evening

FFS.

/rant.

Agent Coulson

Afternoon films are great for those of us working stiffs who work nights and wouldn't stand a chance of seeing anything in the cinema otherwise.

pixelburp

Agent Coulson wrote: »

Afternoon films are great for those of us working stiffs who work nights and wouldn't stand a chance of seeing anything in the cinema otherwise.

5:45pm ain't the afternoon and I'm not proposing evening-only showings anyway rather that if there is to be only one showing that day, IMO 5:45pm is a contextually poor time to have it; day workers would be barely finished or commuting, while still on too late(?) for those due to start an evening shift.

It's a weird time, and particularly irritating when for months on end, Star Is Born, and Bohemian Rhapsody have been playing ad nauseam (I get they were both fairly popular films, but other blockbusters haven't stuck around half as much)

Agent Coulson

pixelburp wrote: »

5:45pm ain't the afternoon and I'm not proposing evening-only showings anyway rather that if there is to be only one showing that day, IMO 5:45pm is a contextually poor time to have it; day workers would be barely finished or commuting, while still on too late(?) for those due to start an evening shift.

It's a weird time, and particularly irritating when for months on end, Star Is Born, and Bohemian Rhapsody have been playing ad nauseam (I get they were both fairly popular films, but other blockbusters haven't stuck around half as much)

5:45pm can be morning or afternoon for me depending on which shift pattern I work

5:45pm can also be a contractual showing of a film that these chains have with studios to show a film they don't want to take and show at prime time screen times however they have to take the film to get the blockbusters.

pixelburp

Agent Coulson wrote: »

5:45pm can be morning or afternoon for me depending on which shift pattern I work

5:45pm can also be a contractual showing of a film that these chains have with studios to show a film they don't want to take and show at prime time screen times however they have to take the film to get the blockbusters.

Ah yeah I'm sure there are some contractual obligations and especially for blockbusters and yup, were it any other month I'd take that, but January's the graveyard slot for cinemas.

Meh, just annoyed that the one film in this pit of a release schedule I can't get to. But at least Escape Room has plenty of showings lol

The Black Oil

OK, didn't know people actually do this. Robbie was doing a Q&A with Barry Jenkins et al.

https://twitter.com/robbiereviews/status/1094360770572402695

Sad Professor

Q&As are almost never worth the cringe factor.

pixelburp

I knew it as a cliché in Hollywood, but wouldn't have thought in this day and age - especially with social media - people actually did it. Must require some amount of presumption and confidence / arrogance to derail a Q&A for your own magnus opum.

pixelburp

Rotten Tomatoes finally gets around to a blindingly obvious update; preventing users from posting reviews to films before they release.

https://editorial.rottentomatoes.com/article/making-some-changes/

This comes off the back of trolls spamming Captain Marvel with negative reviews (you can take a guess as to the why). These sites otherwise seem incredibly slow reacting to the obvious manipulation and bad-faith rating by 'fans'.

Agent Coulson

I see Candyman is the latest reboot from Jordan Peele with Yahya Abdul-Mateen II cast as the Candyman Candyman Candyman Candyman Candyma.....

CastorTroy

I do like the music. And I must rewatch the film as I know I was young when I first saw it.

Speaking of remakes, I was looking up a list of remakes coming in 2019 and saw there's a new Shaft due soon. Though seems it's more a sequel.
Then I see remakes for Big Trouble in Little China and a few others.

Agent Coulson

Shaft 2019 will get a worldwide release on Netflix it's only getting a cinema release in the States.

I saw the trailer and though it was a straight up comedy sequel to the Sam Jackson one for the late 90's early 00's.

CastorTroy

Could explain why I never heard of it

The Black Oil

Never saw this in full, liked the cartoon, though.

https://twitter.com/Hooraydiation/status/1108009762602606592

Sad Professor

https://twitter.com/JimCameron/status/1110233321936584704

Prediction: Cameron will die before this happens and both films (which are apparently finished) will be released in HD to celebrate his career.

Sad Professor

Oh sure, people are joking about this now...

https://twitter.com/JacobQKnight/status/1114334030001004544

The Black Oil

Was half watching Murder at 1600 earlier. Bloke was looking through security footage on VHS tapes. Shure, nowadays it's just hacking nonsense. :pac: Good old Ronny Cox was in there, got to throw a punch too.

Agent Coulson

John Singleton suffered a stroke over the weekend hopefully he recovers fully.

Agent Coulson

Agent Coulson wrote: »

John Singleton suffered a stroke over the weekend hopefully he recovers fully.

John is to be taken off life support today.

Mr Crispy

That's sad news, and a horrible decision for the family.

Tony EH

He was only 51.

Sad Professor

This is a great and incredibly candid interview with Anjelica Huston.

https://www.vulture.com/2019/05/anjelica-huston-in-conversation.html

Tony EH

Sad Professor wrote: »

This is a great and incredibly candid interview with Anjelica Huston.

https://www.vulture.com/2019/05/anjelica-huston-in-conversation.html

That's a kinda weird interview. Goes all over the place.