Rate The Last Movie You Saw

Tools    





It's the "it only cares about style" or "Not enough nudity" type criticisms that bug me.
Ha, oh, come on! I find myself levelling this charge against so many films in this sexless PG Disney-Netflixverse we’re living in.



Yet she survives and can go on doing what she’s doing till the end of time.



If you want to be simplistic, sure. As was demonstrated during the ‘nepotism’ *discussions, vastly diverging definitions exist for all these concepts.

Even ardent feminists disagree passionately on what feminism itself is (see second wave, third wave, TERFS, ad nauseum, ad infinitum), so saying antifeminism is an opposition to feminism is simply not saying anything at all. Some feminists would disagree that they are even for full gender equality.

I quite like this statement (which was applied to feminists where I got it from): “Activists and thinkers in both camps have sought to control the field of discourse by defining their opponents, while resisting definition themselves.”

Antifeminism, by contrast, posits that there are inherent biological and sociological differences between men and women which shouldn’t be ignored and should be used as a basis of shaping policy. Antifeminism also rejects the idea that women in any way have it ‘worse’. In many ways, antifeminism is actually a much better defined thing than feminism itself, which is why it’s simply unreasonable to see it as an ‘opposition to feminism’ and nothing more. To this end, there is not even yet scholarship that looks at international antifeminist mobilisation through the backlash framework. (Yes, I have references). Which would have made sense, you know, if it had been just ‘against feminism’.
And how does the Love Witch embody this concept?



You seem to think that you and I are in an exam-type situation here…

I already commented on that above in one of my first posts.
No exam. I just like to ask for clarification on claims that don’t seem to make sense to me. Keeps me from making assumptions.

Your prescribed definition doesn’t seem to align with your previous description of the Love Witch.



It’s not necessarily appropriate to apply the exact same constructs to discussing film that are applied to sociological debates about feminism. In the above I argued exclusively against the statement that anti-feminism is “literally” about rejecting feminism, my reason being that to posit that you in the very least need to define feminism first.

The reason I think The Love Witch is antifeminist is a bit like the debate around The Hunt back when it got pulled. I don’t know if you’ve seen it, but all sorts of people, Donald Trump included, dished out ire on that film because of its premise that liberals are hunting conservatives for sport. That was interpreted as anti-conservative, and as evidence that dehumanising conservatives has become normalised. But if you actually watch it, it becomes obvious that it is pro-conservative, and the above is used to portray the liberals as “animals”. Yet many people continue to view it as anti-conservative, because that’s how the basic premise comes off.

I feel there is a bit of a similar situation with The Love Witch. Intended though it may be as feminist critique, I think it comes off as antifeminist because you may well find yourself rooting for Elaine. It may well get some people thinking that the “nostalgic” version of femininity Elaine embodies is not bad at all. Anticipating the joke about “and then the man dies”, I would argue that’s not the key thing here. All the other female characters in the film, feminist or not, are openly jealous of her appeal.

On a personal level, she is self-sufficient, presumably lives off making her soap and cooks like a pro chef. This suggests that a woman can embody sexist stereotypes and actively enjoy it, rather than suffer from it. She maybe suffers when it comes to finding a man, but there is no sense that she suffers from putting on all that makeup et etc, she likes it. There is no Orphan-like scene where she gets fed up with herself sand smears her makeup over her face and “chills in sweats”. This is where “there is no definition of ‘feminism’” comes in, because some feminists would say it’s all about her choice, but I would say that the idea that she chooses to always wear heels and look like she’s on a night out is against the idea that women want to be liberated.

It is also antifeminist because it demonstrates that the sexist-stereotypical woman is exactly what men want. Whatever-his-name-is is quickly turned off Trish once Elaine is in the picture.

Sure, the men all die, and it doesn’t last, but except for one example, we are shown that it is she that discards them. They continue to worship her to the point that it disgusts her (as with the guy who gets whiny in bed). I feel that even if she is a villain, and even if she doesn’t succeed, that puts forth a very specific worldview in which exaggerated femininity and subservience are valued by men, and where no man willingly chooses to be with “a feminist” (Trish) if he’s got a choice. That would have been the most obvious move if it were to be an overtly feminist film: as with those abysmal Netflix flicks called “Obsession” and the like, you could have the ugly wife at home that the man comes back to despite having the option of being with Elaine. We don’t get that. Whether or not Elaine herself is happy or successful is irrelevant.

In addition, much though some reviews make of the idea that Elaine behaves the way she does exclusively to get a man, I don’t think so. I think it is simply her philosophy. She applies the same standards to herself when she is alone. We do not once see her with a bed head and no makeup when she is alone. She lives and breathes and embodies antifeminist/sexist stereotypes not because she wants to get a man, but equally because she likes it. Now, sure, some people would argue that that’s the essence of feminism (women do what they like), but again, this is hotly debated. I would argue that the vast majority of feminist scholars/thinkers view the attributes Elaine has such as heavy makeup and the endless quest for self-perfection as relics of oppression and patriarchy. But she keeps at it and the very idea that women would choose to endure discomfort to look this way is antifeminist.

Even if she doesn’t succeed in getting a man per se, we see that her method of “existence” is perfectly viable. It would be an overtly feminist film if said men pointedly refused to engage with her and stayed loyal to their Trishes. Basically, as with The Hunt, whatever the intent, I feel it comes off as antifeminist.

But, as ever, this is my opinion, and unlike with some other discussions, I think this type of discussion will always be coloured by personal views/beliefs. Which is why I wrote, ‘I read it as anti-feminist’ and not ‘IT IS anti-feminist’. In fact, I would argue that is the case very often and that’s normal.



'Songs my brothers taught me' (2015)


Chloe Zhao makes beautiful films. No idea how she gets such natural performances from non actors. Maybe they're just not acting in the first place. This is such a tender, sweet film that mixes coming of age, geographical / social problems with belonging, life choices and love. Johnny is at a crossroads in life as he wonders whether to leave the reservation he lives on in South Dakota. He's very close to his young sister who is angered at the thought of him leaving her and her mum.

Joshua James Richards' photography is as stunning here as it is in 'Nomadland', and anyone who enjoyed that film or 'The Rider' should definitely seek this one out. Although this film is slightly predictable, it doesn't matter as the journey is so wonderful to watch unfold. Zhao's films have an almost spiritual feel to them, there's a strange connection to the landscape, community and characters that we see on screen.

8.4/10




Sator (2019)

It took me days to decide the rating but went with the higher one in the end. A slow-burn and little artsy indie horror that people seem to (rightfully, I'd say) compare to VVitch and Hagazussa. It nails the atmosphere but doesn't really deliver storywise. I love the effort, though.

--
The 8th Night (2021)

A Korean horror or dark fantasy that is a mess. The first half is paced like an hour-long previously happened, and the second half is cliched and unrewarding.
__________________



Sator (2019)

It took me days to decide the rating but went with the higher one in the end. A slow-burn and little artsy indie horror that people seem to (rightfully, I'd say) compare to VVitch and Hagazussa. It nails the atmosphere but doesn't really deliver storywise. I love the effort, though.
Wonder how I missed that one. Need to check it out.







(WOKE) Werewolves Within(2021)


Basically just watch Clue, it's like most films today with lazy writing but I will give credit the black lead has a personality. The problem with the film is that many of the side characters are just lame and the third act is sadly uninspired. But the film has some strong characters and the pacing is pretty good. I would recommend watching the Wolf of Snow Hollow which covers the same subject matter but is better shot, acted and made.




I disliked BTBR the first time I watched it. My love for Mandy pushed me to rewatch it. I still think it’s got issues with pacing and narrative but I did enjoy it a good deal more. Just be prepared for a fairly standard horror/sci fi narrative to be told in the slowest, most garishly stylish way possible.
I felt incredibly let-down by Beyond the Black Rainbow, and I wasn't necessarily expecting anything amazing. I just felt like the pacing was off and the story didn't go anywhere satisfying. I loved Mandy, but it didn't inspire me to revisit Black Rainbow. If anything, it made the thought of a rewatch feel incredibly arduous.

On a personal level, she is self-sufficient, presumably lives off making her soap and cooks like a pro chef. This suggests that a woman can embody sexist stereotypes and actively enjoy it, rather than suffer from it. She maybe suffers in oven, but there is no sense that she suffers from putting on all that makeup et etc, she likes it. There is no Orphan-like scene where she gets fed up with herself sand smears her makeup over her faces and “chills in sweats”. This is where “there is no definition of ‘feminism’” comes in, because some feminists would say it’s all about her choice, but I would say that the idea that she chooses to always wear heels and look like she’s on a night out is against the idea that women want to be liberated.
But . . . she is (1) deeply, incurably unhappy and (2) a horrible, horrible person.

Yes, she looks gorgeous and her makeup and clothing is drool-worthy. But if someone came away from this film being like "Wow, she really had her life together! Jealous!!", I would say they have very poor comprehension. That would be like coming away from American Psycho thinking "Yeah, he had a few problems, but his body was on point and that apartment was banging!"



But . . . she is (1) deeply, incurably unhappy and (2) a horrible, horrible person.

Yes, she looks gorgeous and her makeup and clothing is drool-worthy. But if someone came away from this film being like "Wow, she really had her life together! Jealous!!", I would say they have very poor comprehension. That would be like coming away from American Psycho thinking "Yeah, he had a few problems, but his body was on point and that apartment was banging!"
I mean, I have thought pretty much word to word that about American Psycho, especially with friends in investment banking circles - and so do they, at the time it was a running joke… same with The Wolf of Wall Street - they’re often psychopaths, but at least they’ve got a yacht/Lambo to shipwreck/crash. Don’t see anything odd about this response at all.

So to me that’s a perfectly possible reaction. The stuff about ‘poor comprehension’ is…. Loaded. I’ve always found it amusing how some creators think they can predict the response to their ideas/characters a 100 per cent. Same goes for critics. You and I were discussing Holmes just a few days ago, who continues to be perceived very differently than the author intended. I don’t see why an investment banking intern wouldn’t be jealous of Patrick’s apartment or an aspiring influencer appreciative of Elaine’s looks and lifestyle. If you set aside the witchcraft, many women live pretty much exactly like she does, engaging in constant manipulation - and many men too. It can even be a job. I wouldn’t even be so sure that they’re all so terribly unhappy.

Yes, she is a horrible person, so what? Walter White is a horrible person, does that make him any less of an alpha male?

P.S. I’m sorry, forgot you haven’t seen it! Same can be applied to any character who is a horrible person but nevertheless is getting along fine. For example, Daniel in There Will Be Blood. He may not be ecstatically happy every minute of the day, but why such a focus on happiness, who is happy, anyway? Daniel has reached the top of his profession and has a ****load of money, that suggests his method of existence ‘works’.

You know how in one discussion you said to me that even if my intention is not to show kids how to shoot heroin, that’s what I’m doing if a film includes a scene like that? Well, same applies above, if you’re showing me Patrick’s gorgeous apartment or Elaine’s gorgeous body, I’m within my rights to think, ‘Damn! Good for you, guys’.



I disliked BTBR the first time I watched it. My love for Mandy pushed me to rewatch it. I still think it’s got issues with pacing and narrative but I did enjoy it a good deal more. Just be prepared for a fairly standard horror/sci fi narrative to be told in the slowest, most garishly stylish way possible.
I felt incredibly let-down by Beyond the Black Rainbow, and I wasn't necessarily expecting anything amazing. I just felt like the pacing was off and the story didn't go anywhere satisfying. I loved Mandy, but it didn't inspire me to revisit Black Rainbow. If anything, it made the thought of a rewatch feel incredibly arduous.
I really didn't mind the pace at all. I felt that it added to that eerie, "gets-under-your-skin" vibe that's cemented by the visuals and the score. For me, it was a sensory experience first and foremost. I dug it immensely, whereas Mandy (which I liked) more or less vanished from my mind.
__________________
Check out my podcast: The Movie Loot!



Victim of The Night
i don't remember seeing him in anything else. Looks like he was in his 40s at the time and he's famous for being in Westerns. Would that be like casting '60s-'70s era James Garner as the ninja?
He's also in our recently discussed Force 10 From Navarone and, of course, the glorious The Visitor.



Victim of The Night
Serpentine!!



Fair enough. I enjoy procedurals/mysteries, and I thought that it did a good job of balancing the episode-by-episode mysteries and also the longer character/plot arcs. It did some fun stuff with the source material, both adhering to it and departing from it in a way that made certain elements unpredictable in a nice way.

If it's generally not your thing, cool. It's just that with many network shows I always feel it takes a few episodes to get its sea legs.



The film is anti-Elaine not in the sense that she fails in her mission, but in the sense that she is so obviously wrong-headed and selfish. She has crafted a desire and a world-view that are in opposition to each other, and she pursues her goals with little or no regard as to how her actions will harm (or kill!) others, male or female. She is narcissistic and demented. She is at best an anti-hero and at worst an outright villain. The only thing that complicates things (in a pleasant way, I think) is that the society that she is opposing--that of patriarchy--is also deeply messed up and demented in its own way.



I'm not saying that misogynistic films are allowed to slide and feminist films are critiqued. I'm saying that the criticism that the character didn't grow or that we didn't get to know them well enough is being applied to The Love Witch, but I have never seen it applied to a film where a male anti-hero/villain is the one running around wreaking havoc.

I also feel like the two critiques I most frequently hear of the film are oddly in opposition to each other. I'm not sure how a movie can be "just about style" and at the same time too serious about its themes.

Having seen the film, I totally get why it's polarizing. The pacing is weird (I liked it, but Rock obviously though it just dragged). There is a specific effect that comes from the stilted deliveries and on-the-nose dialogue that I mostly enjoyed, but I can see how it would be off-putting. I don't mind those criticisms. It's the "it only cares about style" or "Not enough nudity" type criticisms that bug me.
Serpentine, Shel!



Victim of The Night
Oh man, every line he says is comedy gold. Truly an all-time comedy performance.
It's true. I think his part of the movie is one of the funniest performances I can think of. And I actually like Arkin's straight-man, Shel, a lot. He's so reasonable.



Victim of The Night




(WOKE) Werewolves Within(2021)


Basically just watch Clue, it's like most films today with lazy writing but I will give credit the black lead has a personality. The problem with the film is that many of the side characters are just lame and the third act is sadly uninspired. But the film has some strong characters and the pacing is pretty good. I would recommend watching the Wolf of Snow Hollow which covers the same subject matter but is better shot, acted and made.

I really liked Wolf Of Snow Hollow.
And believe me, I am the Werewolf Police.



I mean, I have thought pretty much word to word that about American Psycho, especially with friends in investment banking circles - and so do they, at the time it was a running joke… same with The Wolf of Wall Street - they’re often psychopaths, but at least they’ve got a yacht/Lambo to shipwreck/crash. Don’t see anything odd about this response at all.

So to me that’s a perfectly possible reaction. The stuff about ‘poor comprehension’ is…. Loaded. I’ve always found it amusing how some creators think they can predict the response to their ideas/characters a 100 per cent. Same goes for critics. You and I were discussing Holmes just a few days ago, who continues to be perceived very differently than the author intended. I don’t see why an investment banking intern wouldn’t be jealous of Patrick’s apartment or an aspiring influencer appreciative of Elaine’s looks and lifestyle. If you set aside the witchcraft, many women live pretty much exactly like she does, engaging in constraint manipulation - and many men too. It can even be a job. I wouldn’t even be so sure that they’re all so terribly unhappy.
But, again, Elaine is unhappy. And a murderer.

Of course it is possible to envy aspects of the life of a villainous character. One of the delights of an anti-hero lead is that they get to do things that would be out of bounds to most "decent" people. Yes, Elaine's clothing and makeup and body are on point. But I think that taking that portrayal as an endorsement is a different kettle of fish. Same with American Psycho.

Obviously a viewer can interpret a film any way they see fit. I suppose someone could watch American Psycho and be like "Wow, what a great endorsement of that lifestyle!". But I think that doing so means ignoring a lot of really blatant signals (like, you know, the murders) that these people are not meant as role models. If anything, films like this serve as an examination of the consequences (albeit exaggerated consequences) of such lifestyles.

I just go back again and again to the fact that Elaine isn't happy. A viewer has the right to see her life as enviable, and to think that the film's portrayal of her lifestyle is an embrace of "traditionally feminine roles". But she isn't living a satisfying life, and she's hurting a ton of people along the way.



But, again, Elaine is unhappy. And a murderer.

Of course it is possible to envy aspects of the life of a villainous character. One of the delights of an anti-hero lead is that they get to do things that would be out of bounds to most "decent" people. Yes, Elaine's clothing and makeup and body are on point. But I think that taking that portrayal as an endorsement is a different kettle of fish. Same with American Psycho.

Obviously a viewer can interpret a film any way they see fit. I suppose someone could watch American Psycho and be like "Wow, what a great endorsement of that lifestyle!". But I think that doing so means ignoring a lot of really blatant signals (like, you know, the murders) that these people are not meant as role models. If anything, films like this serve as an examination of the consequences (albeit exaggerated consequences) of such lifestyles.

I just go back again and again to the fact that Elaine isn't happy. A viewer has the right to see her life as enviable, and to think that the film's portrayal of her lifestyle is an embrace of "traditionally feminine roles". But she isn't living a satisfying life, and she's hurting a ton of people along the way.
Sure, they’re both unhappy. But I suppose then I, in turn, go back to the idea that happiness is relative, if at all possible, and that ‘good’ guys don’t tend to end up that happy in postmodern films, either, so how did we even get to this stage of the discussion? A character being happy ‘in the end’ doesn’t make the film an endorsement of their lifestyle (see, I don’t know, Hannibal (I would argue
WARNING: spoilers below
they fall off the cliff rather happily
), nor does the character being miserable/tragically dying in the end mean the film has been trying to bring them down/show them to be ‘bad’ (see Million Dollar Baby).

Anyway, my original point is, as per The Hunt, that even if this is not The Love Witch’s intention, it’s quite possible that a certain type of woman in the influencer generation take her as a role model. What the film definitely is not, in my view, is remotely feminist. Unless we argue that you’re meant to root for Trish, which I just don’t find convincing.



It's true. I think his part of the movie is one of the funniest performances I can think of. And I actually like Arkin's straight-man, Shel, a lot. He's so reasonable.
I think one of the reasons they play so well off each other is that Falk acts as such a warm, reassuring presence throughout the movie. It of context, what he says would be perfectly reasonable. If you'd just hear him out, everything will make sense.


If course, Arkin reacts as he does because in context... holy jeez.