romantic rhetoric

critical generic analysis: romantic comedy

noreply@blogger.com (Buttercup McGillicuddy) — Thu, 26 Jan 2012 18:56:00 +0000

romance

you think that 'love'—much like 'quantum physics', 'spirituality', 'the internet' and, to some degree, 'gravity'—is a memetic coalescence invented by humans to explain something that is currently incomprehensibly abstract, and is persistently referenced to as a single conglomerate to falsely concretize—as an abstraction-trumping security mechanism—an intuitive phenomenon that may or may not exist as humanity understands or experiences it and will change as humanity better communicates mutual subjective experiences and also as scientific studies better explain the phenomenon in more concrete terms

you feel uncomfortable that 'love' is a defining aspect of human interconnectivity, because of its nature as a presumed universal and humanity's linguistic inability to define it, despite its ubiquitousness, and think that the memetic transference of the concept may have developed into a highly flawed rhetorical device, confusing and inaccurately assigning an 'umbrella term' to a complex series of emotional responses and 'desires' that might be better communicated through more nuanced differentiation

but you perceive that 'love' is 'marketable' as a primary theme in various 'artistic media', specifically movies, and that, based on your interest in movies, love 'requires' conceptual dissection

however you find the trend of foregoing all rational story arcs when culminating romantic experiences occur and the resulting sense of 'transcendent euphoria' at the end of movies ungratifying

you feel that this sudden breakdown of rationale is jarring, and 'fucks' the movie's 'suspension of disbelief', but because [most romantic comedies] are generically prescribed the title 'romantic comedies', you think maybe this designation is a device that 'justifies' the dissolution of the story's coherence as long as intense, emotional sequences are periodically present between the middle and end portions of the movie

comedy

you think—based on your preconceived ideas about death, suffering, and existential despair—that life has an inherently, consistently bleak quality that is somewhat alleviated by communication that results in intentional paradoxes

you think that the bleakness-decreasing human instinct considered 'humor' seems to be the simplest response and most difficult to induced subtly in order to prolong combat against bleakness

your are an advocate for combatting bleakness

comedy exists, inherently, you think, in everything, if juxtaposed against an appropriately absurd idea

the very mention of 'love', for instance, at all, ever

romantic comedy

you perceive that the generic concept of a 'romantic comedy' is basically a title given to a movie that's primary focus is to embody the concept of 'romance' by narrating a two-plus interpersonal and possibly sexual relationship and approach it with a certain optimism that will allow the movie to conclude with a sense of euphoric, perhaps existentially impossible 'success' in the context of either a romantic pursuit or a romantic trial

however the nature of relationships, you believe, is fluid and ephemeral, perhaps unknowable, so the creative choice to end a story, regardless of the theme, by indiscriminately leading to the 'happy ending', because [in context] it 'needs' to end that way (happily ever after...), is inherently disingenuous and missing the nuance necessary be considered a 'reflection of the human experience'.

therefore you relegate 'romantic comedy' to a non-art status, in your mind, and will not address the concept or genre again

internet cinema zeitgeist phenomenon coverage: sebastian sommer interviews molly soda

noreply@blogger.com (Buttercup McGillicuddy) — Thu, 19 Jan 2012 21:18:00 +0000

molly soda
sebastian sommer

movie review: 'the future'

noreply@blogger.com (Buttercup McGillicuddy) — Wed, 04 Jan 2012 07:07:00 +0000

miranda july directs
herself
and hamish linklater

you arrive home after living abroad for five months

your brother asks if you've seen 'the future'?

'the movie? by miranda july?' you ask

'yeah,' says your brother

'no, but i've been wanting to'

'it's really weird'

'yeah, she's crazy'

'i got it on redbox, it's in the DVD player'

you go downstairs to the den and wrap yourself in a blanket and use the remote to turn on the DVD player

during the movie you try to discern what the title of the film 'means' or is referring to,

then you remember the title of miranda july's last movie was 'me and you and everyone we know' and vaguely remember a character saying 'me and you and everyone we know' or something like that during the movie

you expect this to happen in 'the future'

after the movie you discuss the themes with your brother

he thinks that the injured cat, the 'soul of the movie' is the worst thing about it

you think about an interview with miranda july in which she admits to never having seen 'lolcats' and think this may have informed, in a way, the movie's overall 'non-self-awareness'

you 'go mad' and contemplate stopping time stopping time stopping time stopping time stopping time stopping time stopping time stopping time stopping time stopping time stopping time stopping time stopping time stopping time stopping time stopping time stopping time stopping time stopping time stopping time stopping time stopping time stopping time stopping time stopping time stopping time stopping time stopping time stopping time stopping time stopping time stopping time stopping time stopping time stopping time stopping time stopping time stopping time stopping time stopping

vimeo.com account review: sebastian sommer

noreply@blogger.com (Buttercup McGillicuddy) — Mon, 26 Dec 2011 22:32:00 +0000

you perceive 'an epiphany'

you realize that there is a high probability that more filmmakers are in the 'muumuuhouse school of experimental filmmaking' [for lack of a better term] besides ellen frances, adam humphreys, pirooz kalayeh, kacper jarecki, david fishkind and MDMAfilms

you feel compelled to look for 'similar artists' on the internet

'at some point' you find the vimeo account of sebastian 'sebsom' sommer, a student at NYU

on sebsom's vimeo account is a video asserting that it is a 'reimagining' of two of tao lin's short stories, found in his bear parade-published collection 'today the sky is blue and white with bright blue spots and a small pale moon and i will destroy our relationship today'

while watching the video titled 'happily drowning', you feel high levels of confusion re choices in characterization, location, and costuming

you think maybe sebsom had difficulty with use of 'narrative tact' and with his attempts at establishing a discernable 'mood', but you also perceive that sebsom, being a student, probably had limited resources, and made the video with fellow students, friends and perhaps SAG actors who [probably] can't communicate his artistic sensibility with palpable, disbelief-suspending clarity

or perhaps sebsom, you think, has yet to 'manipulate' the scenario in a manner that is 'definitively sebsom-like' and not simply unlike other student filmmakers

you watch the other videos on sebsom's vimeo account multiple times and feel similar types/levels of confusion

you think about 'revisiting' sebsom's work in the future, when his 'voice' is more developed/coherent/horrific

sebsom sends you a friend request on facebook

you accept

sebsom sends you a message via facebook:

'hey dude! lookin forward to dead midgets! i wanted to know if you could possibly check out my latest short film EIGHTEEN SLASH STAINLESS and possibly review it? but first, a little about me. I'm from Manhattan and I've been making films my whole life. I made an experimental film Mama Said Sardine Baby that played at the TriBeCa Film Festival. I've also worked with Tao Lin on adapting one of his short stories into a film.

Here is the link to the short: http://vimeo.com/33370714

Here is the link to my site: http://sebsom.com/

Please let me know!

Seb'

in a mutually beneficial 'promotional agreement' you review '18/S'

you watch the video several times and feel consistent levels of an 'indiscernible confusion', like... you feel unable to discern the filmmaker's 'intent', which seems... like... 'jarring', in that you perceive that your ability to enjoy a video is solely dependent on your ability to discern the filmmaker's use of 'narrative tact' and/or 'spectacle', but due to the paradox caused by the video's high production quality, non-existant narrative structure and seemingly 'thrown-together' spectacle, you think '18/S' is like... naive... in its... projection of... like... life's horror... maybe

you decide to use a cliche to describe sebastian sommer's current oeuvre: 'shows promise'... in like a similar way to how the first short film you made in film school 'showed promise'

an essay by stephen michael mcdowell 'surfaced' on 'thought catalog'

noreply@blogger.com (Buttercup McGillicuddy) — Wed, 21 Dec 2011 04:52:00 +0000

POSSIBLE REASONS HOLLYWOOD CONSISTENTLY BUTCHERS BRET EASTON ELLIS MOVIE ADAPTATIONS

vimeo.com account review: john campbell

noreply@blogger.com (Buttercup McGillicuddy) — Sun, 27 Nov 2011 16:00:00 +0000

john campbell of 'boo hoo boo' and 'pictures for sad children' makes videos

you think they're 'pretty sweet'

trailer: 'dead midgets'

noreply@blogger.com (Buttercup McGillicuddy) — Fri, 25 Nov 2011 15:06:00 +0000

you feel strange/awkward/guilty promoting your own movie on your blog

but you like... feel obligated to... like, for two reasons

WARNING/DISCLAIMER/SELF-DEFENSE MECHANISM: DON'T WATCH THIS VIDEO IF YOU HAVE OR WISH TO HAVE ANYTHING RESEMBLING 'RESPECT' FOR THIS BLOG/FUTURE POSTS BY THIS BLOG THAT ARE NOT ABOUT 'DEAD MIDGETS'

first, for promotional purposes, because people who are interested in movies read your blog and are more likely to watch a trailer via your blog than by 'stumbling on' it or watching it via social networks like facebook because your blog gets way more hits

second, because you think that you would be interested in this movie via some hypothetical parallel experience of watching this trailer without the subjective attachment of having been a part of the entire process of making the movie, so you feel obligated to expose other people with similar sensibilities to the project

you contemplate writing a critique of the movie, but feel this is 'too bold', perhaps, and would involve a lot of much information, information that would be better introduced to the world via promotional media outlets to create a 'slow stream' of output and increase in 'buzz'

you think about the fact that 'this is normal, it is normal for "bloggers" to promote creative output via their own media source', however because 'romantic rhetoric' seems designed as a 'farcical' movie critique blog a la 'variety'-meets-HRO, or maybe something else entirely, you think 'this feels weird... awful maybe'

you keep writing things... to fill space maybe...

you think about saying something related to the production of the movie... percentages of completion maybe... something about your relationship with the cast... various scandals that happened during pre-production and production... who the film is dedicated to maybe... why it's titled 'dead midgets'... you can't process or discern what is best to talk about

you consider what marketing repercussions this might have

'will this produce press at all?' you think, 'would this even remotely be considered a tactful marketing strategy?'

'does this movie even "approach" "good enough" to be exposed "to the public"?'

'will anyone enjoy watching these videos? will anyone come to the premier? do i like the movie?'

what is filmmaking? why do people do it? why do i do it? what is the purpose of suspending disbelief and causing extreme emotions? what are the repercussions of this human 'diversion'? what contribution, if any, will my movies have to the process of making movies? will i 'succeed'? will i be 'the greatest filmmaker in the world' as i wanted to be as a child? is that even possible? who else has achieved that? steven spielberg? wes anderson? david lynch? do i respect these people? do i 'genuinely enjoy' their movies or have i been conditioned to? where does 'enjoyment' derive from scientifically? philosophically? memetically? is this important? should i just 'keep going'?

even earlier fundraising promotional video via 'kickstarter'

movie critique: 'another earth'

noreply@blogger.com (Buttercup McGillicuddy) — Mon, 21 Nov 2011 09:08:00 +0000

mike cahill directs
brit marling
and william mapother

rating: 'goddamn... goddamn...'

you dismiss the trailer for 'another earth' without finishing it

you think 'this is maybe one of the worst attempts at fusing sci-fi and drama that i have seen that has gotten anything resembling an accolade'

you move on to 'more interesting' movie trailers and watch like... movies that aren't 'another earth'

you read a review for 'another earth' and feel confused about the positive nature of the review

you contemplate the fact that between lars von trier's 'melancholia' and terrence malick's 'tree of life' it seems coincidental that there is an 'indie' movie with similar imagery/themes and begin to develop slight interest

you watch the trailer again, you feel the same way you did originally

one night while an acrobatics troupe is staying at your house you get extremely high and watch 'another earth' via a spanish-language movie streaming website

while watching 'another earth' you feel extreme emotions, cry, lose suspension of disbelief, but don't care and are 'convinced' that 'another earth' is your 'new favorite movie'

the next day, you watch interviews with the cast and director and find out that mike cahill is part of a trio of actor-writer-directors in the same vein as wes anderson, noah baumbach and owen wilson and feel affected by the group dynamic/'narrative tact' with how they approach 'storytelling' and the extremity of the subject matter

you feel so deeply affected that you think 'i don't care that the movie is "not believable" because it is self aware of its non-believableness and approaches the subject/themes/characters/effects with understanding, tact, wit, and life-affirmation as a basis... sweet'

you contemplate doing a 'write up' of 'the theme of science-fiction-related drama in recent movies...' but... well... maybe you'll do that a little later...

movie critique: 'putty hill'

noreply@blogger.com (Buttercup McGillicuddy) — Mon, 21 Nov 2011 09:08:00 +0000

matt porterfield directs
sky ferreira
zoe vance
cody ray
and dustin ray

rating: 'damn, bro'

mid 2010 you see a promotional video for an upcoming movie via 'kickstarter' titled 'putty hill'

you see the director, who is from a city adjacent to your hometown, talking about the movie in a video and feel abnormal interest in the movie, but mostly negative, maybe jealousy-related emotions about the director

you move to baltimore in late 2010

'putty hill' is showing at 'charles village theater' near your house

you repeatedly make plans to see the movie but do not, instead seeing [other various movies you don't remember]

when people mention 'putty hill' in conversation you consistently assert 'i hate that guy, the director' which garners interest in why

you do not 'hate' the director, though you feel, perhaps, small types of competition-related emotional outbursts when thinking about 'putty hill' and how well 'putty hill' is doing domestically as an insanely low-budget movie

you are solicited to audition for a short video made by students at 'MICA' (maryland institute college of art) and are cast as the co-star of the video, along with your friends kristin and huckleberry

you appear on set and feel surprised to see the director of 'putty hill' standing by the viewfinder and are introduced to him and the crew seems to look at you suspiciously because in social settings you have asserted to 'hate' him

the director of 'putty hill' is the instructor for the course the video is being made for and appears multiple times around many of the same venues as you

you talk casually about movies and life in baltimore and personal anecdotes and perceive that you have established a relationship or at least repertoire

later, the director, who has directed multiple music videos for the band 'double dagger' appears at a 'secret show' at your house, which you make a movie about

he seems excited that you are there, making a movie and multiple times makes friendly gestures and asserts that he is happy to see you

mid-november, 2011, you see via the director's facebook that the DVD for 'putty hill' is on-sale

you have no money and are not in the country, so you search the internet to see if it is available to download via torrent

it is

you watch the movie and feel deeply affected

you feel surprised at how affecting and new-feeling the movie is and feel inspired and maybe 'in awe' of the director a little

you feel happy and watch the movie again that night while falling asleep

you think 'good job, matt' repeatedly while falling asleep

movie critique: 'the tree of life'

noreply@blogger.com (Buttercup McGillicuddy) — Wed, 16 Nov 2011 21:37:00 +0000

terrence malick directs
brad pitt
sean penn
jessica chastain

rating: 'perplexing'

you feel a sort of personal antipathy towards period movies due to their inability to apply existentially to your experiences on earth

you see the trailer for 'the tree of life' and think, 'seems like a less narrative-oriented version of "revolutionary road"' and consistently return to this thought whenever thoughts of the movie 'arise'

you deduce from an article on 'hipster runoff' that there are dinosaur sequences in the movie and think, 'whoa, kind of want to see this now'

you read the wikipedia page for 'the tree of life' and feel confused about the casting of sean penn as brad pitt's son, and develop further feelings of ambivalence toward seeing the movie

you read an article in 'variety' describing the movie as 'more art than cinema' or something and feel annoyed, like... 'if this is art then it's probably boring, abstract, museum-y, etc. and not something that will appeal to me on a basic emotional level... so like... why watch it?'

you 'cave' due to overwhelming desires to experience a movie with a 'cosmic scope', which you have trouble discerning the definition of

you watch the movie over the course of ~3 sittings and consistently do 'other shit' while the movie plays in the periphery

you pause the movie several times to attempt to find interviews with the director, terrence malick, but only happen upon this:

you return to the wikipedia article and feel interested in reading about the special effects in the movie

you find an article saying that the 'sfx' bro who did some of the scenes worked on '2001: a space odyssey'

you finish watching the movie and return to the original state of ambivalence re 'period pieces' and 'abstract narratives' you felt after watching the trailer, but with a heightened sense that maybe some of the events occurred in the life of the director, and validate them in an existential sense

you feel compelled to watch more movies like 'the tree of life' and 'melancholia' that juxtapose planet-level enormity with 'relatable' images of 'modern life' and recall 'diebuster' with positive sentiments

trailer: 'girlfriend'

noreply@blogger.com (Buttercup McGillicuddy) — Sun, 13 Nov 2011 21:52:00 +0000

like... you feel your head performing tiny series of combustions... and like... air leaking out of somewhere... cranial sutures, you discern

you think 'how did i find this? how did i find this without seeing it on a twilight forum?'

'it is so bleak that i found this trailer,' you think

'i need a "break"... a "break" from "movie hell"'...

you think, as you count down one minute to walking away from the computer, 'this was what it was like to discover harmony korine... but this is... this is more depraved maybe... unsure'

two sleeping beauties, one year

noreply@blogger.com (Buttercup McGillicuddy) — Sun, 13 Nov 2011 21:15:00 +0000

two movies came out in the past year, one titled 'sleeping beauty', and the other, 'la belle endormie'

which trailer do you feel most affected by?

the one about a high-end, barely legal prostitute who gets banged in her sleep and calls it a 'skill'?

or the 'retelling' of the fairytale that looks like something out of a magical realism novel that may or may not have a plot?

'i'm going to go masturbate to both,' you think

trailer: 'being elmo'

noreply@blogger.com (Buttercup McGillicuddy) — Sun, 13 Nov 2011 20:39:00 +0000

you discern high levels of of 'bewilderment' after this trailer finishes

you think 'this feeling is similar to the revelation that jaleel white did the voice of sonic the hedgehog i think'

you have, maybe since birth, been... like... abnormally confused by and had like... a pop-culture related fascination with 'elmo'

but have perceived, since high school, that puppeteering, in general, is like... 'low art' or a more objective equivalent

like... not creatively challenging

or... like, delusional because everyone knows it's a fucking puppet, like, you're not fooling anyone, and it's not funny, it's like, creepy mostly

so like, you never thought about the puppeteer

you feel like this is similar to when you found out jim henson did the puppeteering for kermit... or walt disney the voice of mickey... or frank oz the voice of yoda... or tim allen the voice of buzz lightyear... or like... mel gibson the voice of john smith in 'pocahontas'... 'like... who spends their time being a voice,' you think

but like... you realize this guy must have been working insanely hard for a long time... into the 21st century... just... like... doing this... being elmo... every day...

'jesus,' you think, 'why is my brain processing this like this?'

movie critique: 'midnight in paris'

noreply@blogger.com (Buttercup McGillicuddy) — Sun, 13 Nov 2011 02:45:00 +0000

woody allen directs
owen wilson
rachel mcadams
marion cotillard
kathy bates
andrien brody
carla bruni
and michael sheen

rating: 'woody allen'

you don't remember when you saw the trailer for 'midnight'

you remember immediately thinking about owen wilson's suicide attempt after watching the trailer

you remember watching a series of interviews with wes anderson and owen wilson after watching the trailer

you remember 'revisiting' some woody allen movies after watching the trailer

you remember wanting, vaguely, to see the movie, but like... maybe... like... you thought it would be boring or 'indulgent' in the way that woody allen films always seem

you remember thinking—as you frequently do—'i would fuck rachel mcadams' and maybe feeling [something like 'guilty'] about it

you use your friend's laptop to move some photoshop files you worked on a month ago
to your new computer

you remember you downloaded the movie on your friend's laptop while she was on vacation and forgot about it

you ask your girlfriend if she wants to watch 'midnight'

she seems enthused about it, but says she has work to do

you tell her you are going to watch it but that you can watch it together later

you watch 'midnight' while designing some stationary for the hotel you work for

you tell your girlfriend that the movie 'isn't romantic... it's like... like a woody allen movie... you know how woody allen movies are... do you like woody allen movies...? it's like... dark... not romantic or anything really'

you think about doing work curating the art gallery at the hotel and plan to hang some 'pieces' at 5pm

at 8pm you start writing a 'critique' of 'midnight' and realize you haven't done any work and can't really remember what you did for the past four hours besides chug coffee and walk around the hotel aimlessly and think about working

trailer: 'in time'

noreply@blogger.com (Buttercup McGillicuddy) — Sat, 12 Nov 2011 17:47:00 +0000

you feel a series of 'wtf-like' thoughts compiling incoherently in your brain

you feel confused, intrigued, intellectually betrayed, 'hypothetically' aroused, more confused, anxious and alert

you want to see this movie, but you don't know why

your friend tells you it was directed by the same person who directed 'gattaca' which you remember feeling similar emotions and having similar thoughts about

after thinking about how you feel/intellectually respond to this trailer you discern that this movie is a compilation of cliched 'selling points' (actors with recent success, los angeles in 'the near future' as a setting, the poor man-rich man dichotomy) but thematically, the subject of 'impending doom' on an existential level and outside the context of a supernaturally 'talented' main character (james bond, captain kirk, jason statham) or an emo, 'completely fucked' main character (joseph gordon levitt in '50/50', will smith in 'seven pounds', jean michel basquiat) seems somewhat unexplored in movies, you think

you feel interested in 'finding out' if the movie is an existential thriller or just... like... what it looks like... basically

you will probably download a cam of it this evening, if one is available

movie critique: 'limitless'

noreply@blogger.com (Buttercup McGillicuddy) — Fri, 11 Nov 2011 17:44:00 +0000

neil burger directs
bradley cooper
abbie cornish
and robert de niro

rating: 'damn bro'

you watch the trailer for 'limitless' and notice the bro from 'the hangover' is the main character

you feel intellectually attracted to the theme of mental performance enhancement and decide that though this movie seems 'bro-y' you'll watch it

you download the torrent and wait for a few hours

you watch the movie in one sitting and feel consistently alert and entertained throughout

you feel happy that the movie is completely void of kanye west's music (unlike the trailer)

you remember events in your life that seem vaguely reminiscent of the events in the movie and feel affirmed in your efforts to 'do better'

you like that the movie is 'mild' in all of its non-realistic aspects (i.e. 'science fiction' is one experimental drug, 'magical realism' occurs as slight, seamless changes in the main character's perception and never occurs outside of his perceived reality, 'temporal unidirectionality' is only broken once outside of the context of memory, 'class dichotomy' is between struggling writer and successful businessman, and not, like, a third world orphan and a god-like figure)

you watch the movie with your girlfriend, who also enjoys it, and think 'limitless' is a good 'date movie'

trailer: 'angels crest'

noreply@blogger.com (Buttercup McGillicuddy) — Thu, 10 Nov 2011 03:58:00 +0000

you think 'jesus... scenesters... this is like, marketed directly at scenesters'

you perceive the woodland animal motif, eyeliner boy, baby in indian chief hat, jeremy piven 'HBOing it up' as an 'asshole law-man', the bi-curious vibe, the emo 'this world is against me' bullshit, and ultimately the 'i am so sorry' mantra as qualities reminiscent of the 20-something subculture you have previously perceived and currently consider 'scenesters'

watching this trailer, you discern thoughts relating to 30 seconds to mars music videos and middle-class angst and romanticized solitude and think 'what the fuck... like... is that the only group this is marketed towards... like... someone made a movie thinking "scenesters will be into this"?'

you notice an actress from from the first season of 'tru blood' is in this movie

you do not want to see this movie

after watching this trailer you visit yourscenesucks.com for something resembling 'validation' re your opinion about this movie, but end up mostly feeling deflated and like you just want to find a trailer that doesn't 'suck'

trailer: 'young adult'

noreply@blogger.com (Buttercup McGillicuddy) — Sat, 05 Nov 2011 08:19:00 +0000

you think, 'damn,' after seeing the poster, 'seems "indie"'

'charlize theron. wonder what she is pursuing artistically after making the "career-marring" decision to co-star in "hancock"'

you play the trailer you think, 'this is that david bowie song at the end of "life aquatic" by wes anderson', 'seems gimmicky in a way i can't relate to'

the trailer asserts 'by the director of "thank you for smoking"'

you think, 'fuck, oh god, no', then the trailer says 'and the writer of "juno"', and you think 'how did someone let this happen again?'

you calmly decide not to write a rambling, slanderous, unironic article about 'what's wrong with indie [or something]' and just post the trailer and type a brief 'critique' with a neutral facial expression and with your mouth slightly agape

trailer: 'project x'

noreply@blogger.com (Buttercup McGillicuddy) — Fri, 04 Nov 2011 22:47:00 +0000

you think 'damn' and 'joel silver' and 'what is this movie even about' and then 'kid kudi soundtrack, bros being bros, hot bitches. okay, i'll post this i guess'

trailer: 'like crazy'

noreply@blogger.com (Buttercup McGillicuddy) — Fri, 04 Nov 2011 17:58:00 +0000

you think 'jesus' and 'emo' repeatedly while watching this trailer

trailer: 'chronicle'

noreply@blogger.com (Buttercup McGillicuddy) — Thu, 03 Nov 2011 16:48:00 +0000

you feel interested in 'super powers' and narratives that explore what people might do with 'super powers', and assume this movie will be pretty predictable/teen-oriented, but don't feel sure

movie critique: 'dogtooth'

noreply@blogger.com (Buttercup McGillicuddy) — Sat, 29 Oct 2011 09:29:00 +0000

giorgos lanthimos directs
christos sergioglou
michele valley
aggeliki papoulia
mary tsoni
hristos passalis
and anna kalaitzidou

rating: 'not subtle'

you feel affected by the fact that the cast actually participated in making 'dogtooth' maybe more than you feel affected by robert downey jr.'s participation as the lead in 4+ iron man-related movies

you feel abstractly affected by the family construct within the movie and how it relates to your own

you think 'religious ass' and 'magical realism' repeatedly while screening this movie but feel like these are somehow false reactions/interjections and question the relationship between the themes in this movie and certain associative 'religious' and 'zany' neuron clusters in your brain

you feel surprised that 'dogtooth' seems uncomfortably dissimilar to your interpretation of 'dark comedy'

themes in this movie:

prostitution
animal cruelty
incest
pornography
explicit language
expressive dance
self-harm
assault with a deadly weapon
attempted homicide
faking pregnancy
blatant falsification of common knowledge
restricting technology
invention and destruction of an entity created to instill fear
psychological abuse
denying an adult freedom of speech
lying about a disability
parents beating their children
rocky balboa
'jaws' (1975)
self-kidnapping

you don't like this movie

trailer: dragonslayer

noreply@blogger.com (Buttercup McGillicuddy) — Fri, 28 Oct 2011 20:07:00 +0000

website
IMDb
facebook
twitter

"Coming to theaters this fall:

11/04- NEW YORK @ CINEMA VILLAGE
11/11- LOS ANGELES @ DOWNTOWN INDEPENDENT
11/18- SAN FRANCISCO @ ROXIE THEATER
11/18- DALLAS @ TEXAS THEATRE
11/18- PHOENIX @ FILM BAR
11/29- MINNEAPOLIS @ THE TRYLON
12/02- SEATTLE @ NORTHWEST FILM FORUM
12/02- PORTLAND @ HOLLYWOOD THEATRE
12/02- BELLINGHAM @ PICKFORD FILM CENTER
12/06- MINNEAPOLIS @ THE TRYLON
12/09- SAN LUIS OBISPO @ PALM THEATRE

2012
01/06- ATLANTA @ PLAZA ATLANTA

More dates to be announced soon.

Grand Jury Prize, Best Documentary Feature, SXSW 2011
Grand Jury Prize, Best Cinematography, SXSW 2011
Grand Jury Prize, Best International Feature, HotDocs 2011

Directed by Tristan Patterson
Produced by John Baker
Executive Producer Christine Vachon
Cinematography by Eric Koretz
Editors Jennifer Tiexiera, Lizzy Calhoun
Music by T. Griffin
Soundtrack Mexican Summer"

MDMAfilms

noreply@blogger.com (Buttercup McGillicuddy) — Thu, 27 Oct 2011 00:09:00 +0000

megan boyle and tao lin are/were MDMAfilms

rating: 'afk'

on july 2nd, 2009, on tao's birthday, you witness megan boyle and tao lin meet for the first time 'irl' at a book release party in manhattan, new york. you say, 'tao, this is megan, megan, tao...', tao says, 'i know you from the internet' to megan

mid-2010 you hear that tao lin is having a reading in baltimore during part of the promotional tour for his second novel, 'richard yates'. megan asks you if you will be there. you say you will be there. you don't attend the reading. megan later tells you tao stayed at her apartment

in november of 2010 you see that megan and tao 'founded' MDMAfilms, via facebook, and are listed as 'in a relationship'

on january 8th, 2011, you read an article revealing that tao and megan, in fact, got married in las vegas, a day prior to the events in their movie 'bebe zeva', early november, 2010

they subsequently release three films in 2011:

MDMA: megan and tao take ecstasy in a car in manhattan, drive some, take a train, get off the train, get on another train, get off that train in manhattan, take a cab to times square, walk to toys 'r' us, and ride ferris wheel

MDMA (TRAILER 1) from MDMAfilms on Vimeo.
.
i don't feel inclined to enumerate the ways in which tao or megan's style of filmmaking seems similar to their writing

however, i think it is 'worth it' to draw similarities between the various media that they brand themselves with and the products' effect

in narrative, poem, 'art', and film, tao seems detached, distracted and hypersensitive to 'himself' and documentation of 'himself' seems the primary goal, discerning meaning and 'relevance' is, it seems, divided as both a subsequent pursuit, assessed during revision/editing, and a constant bilateral to his experiences

he also seems fascinated with 'boundary-pushing' as if he were leveling the field of collective discomfort by testing the spatial and sensory boundaries of others

megan produces poetry that—and appears in this film to be—constantly assessing 'okay-ness' and vast quantities of information being provided by the surrounding circumstances and a vague sense of her relationship to them coupled with a sort of brown-out observation of—and fascination with—life, desires, and consequences

co-branding their experiences in this mostly unbroken account of one evening in new york city seems a unique, natural way of collaborating and experimenting with ´the movie´as a medium

BEBE ZEVA: megan and tao meet rebecca 'bebe zeva' hershkovitz in a hotel, drive to another hotel, take a cab to a mall, return to the second hotel, drive to [another?] mall, walk through the mall, travis mcfarland joins them, they walk through a casino type area, they drive back to the second hotel, get into a jacuzzi, then get out of the jacuzzi

BEBE ZEVA (TRAILER 1) from MDMAfilms on Vimeo.

feels akin to like, 'snuff films' maybe

while watching this movie, i felt the same range of deeply affecting emotional/analytical responses that i feel watching 'any other "indie" movie', with two exceptions, i think:

one, i did not feel myself become 'immersed' in the plane of view/perspective of the camera, i felt very aware that it was a movie despite there being no credits and seemingly chronological jump cuts

two, i felt no interest in dissecting/discerning technique employed to derive narrative, it seemed like self-conscious people trying to have a 'memorable' experience and seemed honest in its presentation of this, as opposed to implementing narrative tact/wealth to create an illusion of honesty

the 'hollywood-style' title 'mash-up' i might use to pitch this movie is: '"jackass: the movie" meets "the devil wears prada", with warholian sensibility/authenticity/vulnerability'

MUMBLECORE: megan and tao, in a not-necessarily-chronological narrative, travel between new york, maryland, ohio, north carolina, louisiana, and nevada. at the 'climax' of the movie they get married

MUMBLECORE (TRAILER 1) from MDMAfilms on Vimeo.

this film completes 'the trilogy', though it was filmed entirely prior to BEBE ZEVA

the film's clearly labored-over documentation of an essentially 'fucked' relationship harkens strongly to its titular generic relative, though its existence, independently, and especially as dissimilar to its predecessors, which vague the lines between documentation and narration instead of fusing them, has, simply by existing, created a new genre

falling somewhere spectral between mumblecore, pimplecore, and the well-established 'indiewave' movie—now a serious part of the hollywood 'machine'—i think MUMBLECORE establishes muumuucore (a la tao's publishing company) as a definite movie genre, in a similar way that lin and boyle's writing seems to have permanently altered literature

on october 23rd, 2011, you receive an email from tao, authorizing you to view and review for mutual publicity MDMAfilms's current filmography

~.5 hours later, tao's facebook relationship status goes from 'married' to 'single', megan boyle 'likes' this status update

a 140+ comment shitstorm 'arises', with the primary contributor, a certain james morrill, asserting that megan is an 'idiot' and 'slut'

according to megan's formspring account, you see that she still has ~30 copies of BEBE ZEVA left

on october 26th, you see that gossip blog, hipster runoff, has utilized the filmmakers' 'separation' as a national-enquirer-esque buzzline to help 'launch' tao's DJ career, to which article you see tao replied 'jesus' via facebook status update

MDMAfilms's movies are available for purchase on their website, information regarding their movies can be viewed and modified on their IMDb page and individual wikipedia pages, all trailers, short-form movies, and event coverage can be found on their vimeo

PRESS KIT from MDMAfilms on Vimeo.

movies

noreply@blogger.com (Buttercup McGillicuddy) — Tue, 25 Oct 2011 06:07:00 +0000

the artistic medium that affects me the most is commonly called a 'movie'. i watch movies 'on dvd' via various dvd-type 'players', movies downloaded via torrent websites in high and low reproduction quality. movies via movie theaters, some in 3-d. movies via the internet, sub-via netflix, hulu, youtube, pornhub, etc. i think that movies are products. i think that how i experience a product informs my emotional and volitional perception of the abstract life-narrative that i experience. movies seem like products that prevent boredom, provoke moods and thought processes and provide a prestige-based hierarchy and social ‘web’ constructed by-and-for people fascinated with and interested in making movies, to validate their association and contemplation of movies as products and sustain their lives in the context of 'product-development' as a profession

the terms 'cinema', 'film', 'video', and 'picture' are used to define products derivative of the concept 'movie', which has become the most-widely used term, in my experience, to describe this product-base. 'cinema' seems to denote the highest level of prestige, however, the 'newness' of the medium prevents a literature-style hierarchy of prestige in current movie criticism networks. in some cases specific movies that are densely derivative of previous movie, literary, musical and theatrical history, despite the medium's relative youth, produce (in me) a sense of precision in execution that the product seems to have an indelible prestige, eliciting a mood or thought process i associate with 'classic literature' or 'classical music'

i feel hyper-aware that certain movies are affecting in this manner because of a perceived hierarchy of 'quality', predefined by notions of potential canonical longevity, which are based on the preservation, translation and reproduction of previous works of literature and music that are considered 'telling examples of the human condition and zeitgeist in their respective eras'. these works have thus set an abstract 'standard' to which temporally transcendent media must adhere to. because movies require multiple 'players' or hardware used to interpret the audio-visual data as a consumable product, the medium seems more temporary than its predecessors

by making a product that exists in a variety of media and is securely stored with all of the hardware needed to experience the product, one might increase chances of indefinite longevity. 'ancient' literature and musical instruments which have, despite their age been capable of continued lingual and tonal extrapolation seem 'enduring', though their means of interpretation have changed consistently since their inception (papyrus vs. 'eco-friendly' paper, early lutes vs. electric guitar), but the existence of physical evidence and explanation of how the media functions has provided a 'framework' for how to produce approximations of said works for further consumption/product development. it seems that any assertion that a product made in the present day will maintain future standards of longevity with any certainty is negligible, because at any given time innumerable works are produced with varying levels of quality/senses of 'zeitgeist'. consequently, the act of consciously, definitively usurping the majority's concept of 'a great movie' (or any other product) is in every sense 'impossible'

movies that seem to lack concern about longevity and are just densely labored over products made by perceptive humans seem affecting because they are like 'oral histories' to me, subtly changing how future movies are produced; what humans want to experience; how humans memetically understand narratives. 'blockbusters' seem less affecting because of the extreme, revenue-based natures of their production and the fact that the crew's access to massive resources can, like a corporately-funded construction crew building a house for poor land-owners in order to garner 'mad sympathy hits' for the corporation, efficiently manipulate viewers' basic sense of empathy and elicit extreme emotions, abstractly branding the experience with that corporation, without triggering thought processes that challenge the audiences' perspective of subjective experiences or how humans successfully utilize volition despite socio-political-corporate constructs

if a film challenges perspective in a complex, subtly emotional way, the product seems more enduring because its honesty affects perceptive audiences so deeply that the influence 'snowballs', infiltrates the zeitgeist and eventually warps how 'blockbusters' are produced, even without movie historians knowing where the influence came from. this can happen with 'blockbusters' too but usually only if they are a zeitgeist-channeled re-telling of a story that grew 'naturally' to gigantic levels of fame because of its honesty, subtlety and the hard work of its creators. if elements of the story or production are lacking or 'forced' to create a spectacle, the story seems weird

i like movies about humans, animals, brands, ideas, personified 'beings', mythological entities, phenomena and historical events that are from a perspective-challenging (as opposed to a perspective 'normalizing' -- i.e. propaganda, 'sympathepics', performance art) production approach, and that i feel concretize some aspect of my life narrative that felt very abstract, subjective or emotion-based, because i think life is more enjoyable when humans share unfamiliar perspectives on familiar experiences and methods of thinking