24th Hall of Fame

Tools    





The trick is not minding
So is your position that certain content doesn't belong on screen, regardless of intent or perceived intent?
Just to step in here, since I had similar feelings as Rauldc, though I liked it a little more, regardless of the intent, if the film is nauseating to what ever extent, or vile or what ever, the message, for me, tends to get lost in the delivery.
Now this is a case by case basis, obviously. I really enjoyed Oldboy, despite making my skin crawl with its revelation, but how it was delivered mattered more to me.



I think that their bond went beyond just being friends. I think that the main character sees Yelchin's character as a chance to do the things he should have or wished he had done for his son: help him express himself, help him be more social, encourage him to pursue his dreams. And I think it's weird and unhealthy for him to do that when he hasn't come to terms with the loss of his own son and his own role in it.
I disagree that their relationship is weird, in fact I see it as healthy male bonding between two friends. I don't think the director or the actors intended the relationship between the two men to be interpreted as anything weird or icky. But you're entitled to your opinion so I'll let it go at that.

I do have another question though

Day of the Jackal, 1973

It's also very of the time, but the film's gender and sexuality biases come off a bit silly. There are multiple instances of nudity from the female characters, but very little from the men. And when the Jackal becomes romantically involved with a man later in the film, there's never so much as an embrace or a kiss between the two. We can watch murders and we can hear the screams of a man being tortured, but heaven forbid the lips of two male characters touch!
I'm scratching my head as I didn't see the Jackal hint at any homosexual relationship in the movie. What character are you referring to that the Jackal becomes romantically involved with? Do you mean in the book? Or is there different versions of this movie? Because I didn't see anything like that.


To everyone who's seen Rudderless and The Day of the Jackal, I'd like to hear your interpretation of these two relationships. What do you guys think?



Just to step in here, since I had similar feelings as Rauldc, though I liked it a little more, regardless of the intent, if the film is nauseating to what ever extent, or vile or what ever, the message, for me, tends to get lost in the delivery.
Now this is a case by case basis, obviously. I really enjoyed Oldboy, despite making my skin crawl with its revelation, but how it was delivered mattered more to me.
The question wasn't meant to be confrontational (and I almost wrote "genuine question" after and then deleted it).

While the content is graphic, it always seemed to me that the film clearly empathized with the victims and didn't glamorize the main character.

I understand that everyone has a personal line of "too much!". But saying that a film has no merit seems a bit extreme. I honestly do think that intent matters, and I think that In a Glass Cage is after more than cheap shocks. I'm just interested in where people draw that line, including people who are really into more extreme stuff.



The trick is not minding
The Jackal did have homosexual tendencies however, though it has been awhile, I think it may have been more based on convenience for his purpose rather then anything serious



The trick is not minding
The question wasn't meant to be confrontational (and I almost wrote "genuine question" after and then deleted it).

While the content is graphic, it always seemed to me that the film clearly empathized with the victims and didn't glamorize the main character.

I understand that everyone has a personal line of "too much!". But saying that a film has no merit seems a bit extreme. I honestly do think that intent matters, and I think that In a Glass Cage is after more than cheap shocks. I'm just interested in where people draw that line, including people who are really into more extreme stuff.
Apologies if you took my response as you being confrontational, that wasnít my intent.
Again, this is a case by case basis, but I disagree that a film canít be devoid of any merit, depending on ones reaction to it and itís subject matter.
I donít think anyone can seriously argue that the Friday the 13th sequels or
The Human Centipede have any merit whatsoever.

Your mileage may vary, of course



The Jackal did have homosexual tendencies however, though it has been awhile, I think it may have been more based on convenience for his purpose rather then anything serious
In what scene? And how was it manifested? I didn't notice anything and I asked my wife who also watched the movie and she didn't remember seeing anything to that effect.



The trick is not minding
In what scene? And how was it manifested? I didn't notice anything and I asked my wife who also watched the movie and she didn't remember seeing anything to that effect.
I would have to rewatch it for this. Itís been a few years since I have seen it. But I do remember it.



I would have to rewatch it for this. Itís been a few years since I have seen it. But I do remember it.
I wonder if there's different versions? I have to go now, dinner time, but I'll check back

Nite Nite MoFos!



I disagree that their relationship is weird, in fact I see it as healthy male bonding between two friends. I don't think the director or the actors intended the relationship between the two men to be interpreted as anything weird or icky. But you're entitled to your opinion so I'll let it go at that.
It gave me Vertigo vibes. That's all I'm saying.


I do have another question though
I'm scratching my head as I didn't see the Jackal hint at any homosexual relationship in the movie. What character are you referring to that the Jackal becomes romantically involved with? Do you mean in the book? Or is there different versions of this movie? Because I didn't see anything like that.
The guy he picks up in the steam room and then later is staying at his apartment and the guy brings home flowers and lobster.

Also, while doing some "is it just me?" googling, I found out that this film is on the Wikipedia list of "films featuring gay bathhouses".



The trick is not minding
In what scene? And how was it manifested? I didn't notice anything and I asked my wife who also watched the movie and she didn't remember seeing anything to that effect.
Itís possible you watched an edited version



Apologies if you took my response as you being confrontational, that wasnít my intent.
Again, this is a case by case basis, but I disagree that a film canít be devoid of any merit, depending on ones reaction to it and itís subject matter.
I donít think anyone can seriously argue that the Friday the 13th sequels or
The Human Centipede have any merit whatsoever.

Your mileage may vary, of course
No worries.

Movies are made up of so many elements and depend so much on the interplay of those elements, that I have a hard time dismissing someone's art unless I feel that, deep in its heart of hearts, its intentions are garbage. I definitely have many times argued that what a film showed was too much or much more than necessary to make its point, so I'm no stranger to asking "And why, exactly, did that need to be on screen instead of just implied?" And, as I wrote in my review, I certainly feel conflicted about the use of child actors in those scenes, whatever precautions may have been taken.

I find some of Spanish cinema's reckoning with WW2 and the Holocaust really interesting. Have you seen Who Can Kill a Child?.



The trick is not minding
No worries.

Movies are made up of so many elements and depend so much on the interplay of those elements, that I have a hard time dismissing someone's art unless I feel that, deep in its heart of hearts, its intentions are garbage. I definitely have many times argued that what a film showed was too much or much more than necessary to make its point, so I'm no stranger to asking "And why, exactly, did that need to be on screen instead of just implied?" And, as I wrote in my review, I certainly feel conflicted about the use of child actors in those scenes, whatever precautions may have been taken.

I find some of Spanish cinema's reckoning with WW2 and the Holocaust really interesting. Have you seen Who Can Kill a Child?.
I have not seen it, no. Sounds like a future HOF nomination to me 😉



Wow, I didn't see their relationship that way at all. They had a bond with a mutual love of music, and yes the film makes the 22 year old a surrogate for the lost son who the dad had shared that love for music with. I sure don't see anything sick or icky about their relationship.
This is more or less where I stand in terms of their relationship. However, even though I don't think the intention was to be "icky", I do understand some of Tak's comments...

I think that their bond went beyond just being friends. I think that the main character sees Yelchin's character as a chance to do the things he should have or wished he had done for his son: help him express himself, help him be more social, encourage him to pursue his dreams. And I think it's weird and unhealthy for him to do that when he hasn't come to terms with the loss of his own son and his own role in it.
Not that I would go as far as to perceive it as "icky", but it's obvious that their relationship is built on Sam's need for closure, and it is ultimately unhealthy for him to fill this "hole" with another person, instead of actually dealing with his own loss and grief. But then again, that's part of the point of the film. That is what he actually realizes towards the end and that's why he leaves the band and faces his own demons in that last song. It's part of his arc.
__________________
Check out my podcast: Thief's Monthly Movie Loot!



There was a couple things I didn't like...You mentioned the 'whole thing with the boat guy' and I agree, I didn't like that brief scene either. More so I didn't like what the makeup department did to the boat guy official. I'm guessing the makeup people were trying to make him look like an uptight nerd? But he was done up too comical looking. My least favorite scene was when the father is playing his guitar while boating through the middle of the boat regatta. OMG that was like a Ferris Bueller moment
But they weren't that "brief". They had like 3 or 4 run-ins, each of which escalated the situation, and then there was the whole regatta scene which, I agree, was probably the weakest part of the film. But like I said, I don't think it was necessary. All of that ultimately didn't contribute anything more to Crudup's character.

I see what you're saying there. I too wanted more of this and more of that story, but then the film would've been 3 hours, OK maybe it would've been 2 hours 20 minutes long...But yeah I'd liked to seen more too. But I did enjoy the world it showed me.
I wouldn't have wanted more of everything, but just a bit more focus and polish. Instead of giving equal doses to all this subplots (the dad and his grief, the relationship with Quentin, the rising band, the boat thing, the record store guy, the ex-girlfriend), they should've reined in or downright cut some of those, while adding more meat to the ones that remained.



Think you used enough dynamite there, Butch?
Migod I need to watch some of these films -- I am missing out on WAY TOO MANY good discussions
__________________
- This is one of those films where I liked it on first viewing but I feel like watching it again might actually make me dislike it, but that's pretentious existentialism for you.



There's no place in film for sexual predators like in In a Glass Cage, IMO



I wouldn't have wanted more of everything, but just a bit more focus and polish. Instead of giving equal doses to all this subplots (the dad and his grief, the relationship with Quentin, the rising band, the boat thing, the record store guy, the ex-girlfriend), they should've reined in or downright cut some of those, while adding more meat to the ones that remained.
Yes--I wish the film had gone for depth instead of breadth.



...The guy he picks up in the steam room and then later is staying at his apartment and the guy brings home flowers and lobster...
Oh that scene, I had forgot all about it. It was brief but yeah it did seem like a pick up. But it wasn't real clear on that point so it could be interrupted different ways. I though you meant the scene with the forger.



28 days...6 hours...42 minutes...12 seconds
Not to spoil my review too much, which I hope to post next week, but don't hesitate about watching The Secret in Their Eyes.

Speaking of, how does the American remake compare? I see it has mediocre reviews, but what a cast.
I'll watch the original soon-ish, but the remake was pretty tame and predictable.
__________________
"A laugh can be a very powerful thing. Why, sometimes in life, it's the only weapon we have."

Suspect's Reviews



28 days...6 hours...42 minutes...12 seconds
I'm glad there is so much discussion on Rudderless. I really connected with the movie and as I said at the VERY BEGINNING of this thread, this is not a film that I think is amazing or a "Hall of Fame" material, just something I think more people should see.

Two other films that jump out at me that deal with similar parents of a school shooter situation; We Need To Talk About Kevin, which examines the before and after with a riveting performance from Tilda Swinton and a creepy and provocative performance from Ezra Miller. The second is a film I have not seen but stars Maria Bello and Michael Sheen as parents of a school shooter, called Beautiful Boy. Both of those films look/are more depressing than Rudderless and approach a similar topic with different themes and viewpoints.

As for the relationship between Yelchin and Crudup...who am I to deem what a grieving person is going through appropriate or not. He clearly wants nothing to do with the kid at the beginning, but the annoyance and pestering finally get to him to give it a try. His intentions are clear from the beginning, he uses his son's music as a cathartic release, while the band has no idea.

For a film that deals with such tragic events, it felt uplifting to me. We Need to Talk About Kevin is in no way ever uplifting. Does the film need to be uplifting? No, it doesn't, but it chooses to be. I agree the film has some faults (that damn boat guy, we can all agree on that) but overall, the film had more positives than negatives for me and like Thief, I really connected with the music. I have the soundtrack and listen to it often. My wife cried during this film, but she tends to cry at a lot of movies now that she is a mother of two.

A powerful moment in the film for me was when he went to see the memorial. He looks at all the names of those killed and his son's name isn't present. Should it be there? Absolutely not. But to him, his son was lost that day. It's such a conflicting scene of emotions. I think it was handled rather well and Crudup sold the performance for me as a grieving father lost in life. His wife has "moved on" as much as one can, but he can't and it took a young kid with similar talents to help him finally find his path.