These are MAN movies !!!

Tools    





Welcome to the human race...
Where did this woman learn to bread veal?!
As a man, I can assure you that is NOT how one breads veal.
Yeah, I need to see a training montage or else she's a Mary Sue.

“… when women were women”? You do know she’s a prostitute?
I was parodying this post that GulfportDoc made earlier in the thread:

WELL! Most of the responses give me hope that masculinity has not been totally brow-beaten out of the Gen Z'ers and later Millennials. Might be a good subject for a documentary or even a movie. Good luck getting funding, though..
Anyway, an underrated reply...

Heat is my favorite, but I also really like Thief and The Insider.
__________________
I really just want you all angry and confused the whole time.



I was trying to be humorous, but my honest intent of the thread was to get others to list some MAN movies. Not that im against any other organic input, or insight. Of course hopefully they arent either.


I capitalize MAN because its an exaggeration, tongue and cheek, yet a type of genre really.



I don't know, a scene where a bunch of soldiers fire off oversized machine-guns indiscriminately for minutes on end and barely put one scratch on their enemy seems like it's undercutting the connection between firepower and masculinity a bit but what do I know.
Yeah, that was actually John McTiernan's specific intention, if you listen to his commentary for that scene:
h ttps://www.youtube.com/watch?t=891&v=InyKZ0F-fVU&feature=youtu.be (yes, I know the URL's spaced out, I couldn't post the specific timecode here without the site just automatically embedding the whole video instead; just delete the gap, and it'll work)



"How tall is King Kong ?"
I was trying to be humorous, but my honest intent of the thread was to get others to list some MAN movies. Not that im against any other organic input, or insight. Of course hopefully they arent either.


To be fair, this use of "man", here, feels genderless to me.

But still terribly true and important. For me, a genuine list starts and end with this.



Seen about 4 posts here already with Predator...

This thread need more Predator.
__________________
Originally Posted by doubledenim
Garbage bag people fighting hippy love babies.

Bots gotta be bottin'



I don't know, a scene where a bunch of soldiers fire off oversized machine-guns indiscriminately for minutes on end and barely put one scratch on their enemy seems like it's undercutting the connection between firepower and masculinity a bit but what do I know.
The scene was McTiernan's satire of studio masculinity tbh.

He was told by the suits, namely Joel Silver, that he wanted more gunfire after the big gunfight scene in the jungle palapa... I think the post-it he received was that they wanted at least 45 seconds more of gratuitous gunfire and muscles... so he shoehorned the jungle-salad scene into the movie, 45 or so seconds of gratuitous gunfire, all in one scene, as a middle finger to the studio interference.
They wanted more muscles and gunfire, they got it



"How tall is King Kong ?"
The scene was McTiernan's satire of studio masculinity tbh.

He was told by the suits, namely Joel Silver, that he wanted more gunfire after the big gunfight scene in the jungle palapa... I think the post-it he received was that they wanted at least 45 seconds more of gratuitous gunfire and muscles... so he shoehorned the jungle-salad scene into the movie, 45 or so seconds of gratuitous gunfire, all in one scene, as a middle finger to the studio interference.
They wanted more muscles and gunfire, they got it
It's a great scene though. I mean, it doesn't feel tacked on as a pointless joke, it's really an important moment of the narrative. It looks so despaired and ineffectual, it's, like, the moment you really measure that what they're good at, their firepower, is not what is needed against a nimble invisible advanced hunter. It's a bit like the ceiling scene in Aliens. Or the first encounter under the generator. The machismo transparently becomes mere words in that context.

What I'm saying is that McTiernan was lucky if the producers are the reasons he inclued that scene.



It's a great scene though. I mean, it doesn't feel tacked on as a pointless joke, it's really an important moment of the narrative. It looks so despaired and ineffectual, it's, like, the moment you really measure that what they're good at, their firepower, is not what is needed against a nimble invisible advanced hunter. It's a bit like the ceiling scene in Aliens. Or the first encounter under the generator. The machismo transparently becomes mere words in that context.

What I'm saying is that McTiernan was lucky if the producers are the reasons he inclued that scene.
It's a testament to McTiernan's direction tbh.
He was a fantastic director.

You should see his interview on how he learned cinema. Says a lot about his shot choice and framing.



Welcome to the human race...
Yeah, that was actually John McTiernan's specific intention, if you listen to his commentary for that scene:
h ttps://www.youtube.com/watch?t=891&v=InyKZ0F-fVU&feature=youtu.be (yes, I know the URL's spaced out, I couldn't post the specific timecode here without the site just automatically embedding the whole video instead; just delete the gap, and it'll work)
The scene was McTiernan's satire of studio masculinity tbh.

He was told by the suits, namely Joel Silver, that he wanted more gunfire after the big gunfight scene in the jungle palapa... I think the post-it he received was that they wanted at least 45 seconds more of gratuitous gunfire and muscles... so he shoehorned the jungle-salad scene into the movie, 45 or so seconds of gratuitous gunfire, all in one scene, as a middle finger to the studio interference.
They wanted more muscles and gunfire, they got it
Thanks for the confirmation, though I thought that the sarcastic tone of my post was clear (especially since it was a response to WHITBISSELL posting the scene unironically). Maybe I am too sarcastic for this place.



10 years of excellence in denim
Seen about 4 posts here already with Predator...

This thread need more Predator.
I ain’t got time to post, but I’ll upvotarannosaurus the greatest gif ever!



"How tall is King Kong ?"
Yeah, I had watched several analysis of his films, notably the construction of space in Die Hard. He knows his craft. It's interesting to see such an efficient, meticulous talent in the service of "simple" action movie plots. I know how questionable is the notion of 'elevated horror' for the latest trend of carefully made, well polished scary movies ("it follows", "hereditary", etc). but if the term is accepted, McTiernan would be the archetype of 'elevated action' director.



…I know how questionable is the notion of 'elevated horror' for the latest trend of carefully made, well polished scary movies ("it follows", "hereditary", etc)...
Why exactly is it questionable?



"How tall is King Kong ?"
Why exactly is it questionable?
It implies some sort of qualitative jump of quality, as if it was about two different genres (horror and artsy horror ?) instead of a continuum of movies in various styles. It's maybe also used as an artificially snobbish, greenlighting notion for spectators who require some label of nobility to enjoy or show interest for genre movies. So, the relevancy and uses of this notion is sometimes debated.

There's been an interesting podcast on The AVClub about this, in case :



I cannot say I have any strong opinion either way, on this.



Yeah, the term "elevated horror" annoys me, even if I do like enough of the movies that get that label. I think there's been an improvement in the overall level of craft in mainstream horror releases over the last decade, but I'd actually credit James Wan's work with driving that trend rather than any of the "elevated" movies.



Yeah, the term "elevated horror" annoys me, even if I do like enough of the movies that get that label. I think there's been an improvement in the overall level of craft in mainstream horror releases over the last decade, but I'd actually credit James Wan's work with driving that trend rather than any of the "elevated" movies.
I would agree. But that’s also why I tend to think, though it’s a controversial view, that the film industry is evolving and films are getting better, more sophisticated visually, craft-wise and narratively. Not just horror, but all of them.



"How tall is King Kong ?"
I would agree. But that’s also why I tend to think, though it’s a controversial view, that the film industry is evolving and films are getting better, more sophisticated visually, craft-wise and narratively. Not just horror, but all of them.
I'm not sure I'd say "better". It's a whole matter for another discussion (and I'll certainly raise it in its own thread one of these days), but I feel that this evolving quality is a lot due to narrative and visual recipes that "function" but are ultimately quite soul-less. Hence the interest for some rough B-movies, or daring independent ones, or older ones, that make lack this polish, that may appeal to less people, but may be richer on several levels.

Okay, I'm being vague here. I'll soon try to explicit better my impression of stagnating quality under thicker and thicker layers of varnish.



I'm not sure I'd say "better". It's a whole matter for another discussion (and I'll certainly raise it in its own thread one of these days), but I feel that this evolving quality is a lot due to narrative and visual recipes that "function" but are ultimately quite soul-less. Hence the interest for some rough B-movies, or daring independent ones, or older ones, that make lack this polish, that may appeal to less people, but may be richer on several levels.

Okay, I'm being vague here. I'll soon try to explicit better my impression of stagnating quality under thicker and thicker layers of varnish.
That’s a perfectly reasonable take which I respect. But, having been brought up on the very cream of film classics - Hitchcock, Bergman, Malick, Fellini, Lelouch, etc, etc ad infinitum, I quite consciously think I prefer modern filmmaking. Not ‘modern’ as in ‘wokeness-gone-mad’, god forbid, but post 1970s.

You are right that it’s a topic for another thread, but to me, even if they are soulless (fair point), the narratives have become more nuanced, more complex, characters more grey. For everyone who says that’s a ‘huge generalisation’, perhaps so, but that’s how I feel.

So, polished look aside, modern plots are, to me, for the most part, more engaging and the ideas more, I don’t know, outlandish, in a good way. Also, as I’ve said elsewhere, there are fewer constraints and taboos regarding the attitudes and feelings that can be explored. Hence we have mothers not loving their child (We Need to Talk About Kevin + Hereditary), incest (The Dreamers, Beautiful Kate), miscarriage (Pieces of a Woman.) It is certainly not for the lack of watching/appreciating old classics, which I do. But the fact that controversial/‘hardcore’ topics can be explored head-on, rather than implicitly, now, really appeals to me.

Edit: good lord, what a horrible ****ing typo! Shame on you, Agri.



Thanks for the confirmation, though I thought that the sarcastic tone of my post was clear (especially since it was a response to WHITBISSELL posting the scene unironically). Maybe I am too sarcastic for this place.
F*ck off. Feel free to misinterpret that.