Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Days Won


Posts posted by R.CAllen

  1. 1 hour ago, Cerina said:

    See now, this is why you're my favorite. 


    I used to be able to scroll down on the main Nightly.Net page and click 'Today's Top Posters' and then everyone would get ranked as my favourites in the order they were listed there! I can only love twenty Nightly.Net members at a time! And in descending order of priority! My heart could only be so full!

    Luckily, things have changed now there's no such thing as a 'Today's Top Posters' page and my heart is freed to love everybody here the exact same amount i.e. not at all.

  2. P.S. I gotta assume whoever's marking your class's homework is blitzing through it, quick as they can, desperately trying to finish. They just want to vaguely eyeball you regurgitating the concepts delineated in the course itself in your own paraphrased but ultimately familiar language. They don't want to read anything new about the subject at hand. They just want to finish marking these papers! If these particular circumstances obtain then you asking for help from people outside the course itself may be counterproductive. Nothing anyone unexposed to the specifics of what you've been taught in the way you've been taught is going to register in any way as being the right answer.  Not to a frazzled overworked person skimming through both your answers and the answers of everyone else in the class!

  3. Answers For The Questions About The Movie I Have Not Seen

    1. Was there a protagonist and antagonist?  If so, who was the protagonist?  Who was the antagonist?

    The protagonist was Sam Worthington and the antagonist was Stephen Lang!

    2.  What can you infer from the title of the film?

    Very little!

    3.  How would you change the costumes?

    I don't think there were any costumes in the movie. Everyone just wore ping-pong balls on their leotards and then the computer managed to dress 'em up using math!

    4.  How would you describe the setting of the film?

    The movie takes place on Pandora, an alien planet so beautiful to look at people became depressed.

    5.  What criteria (identification, idealization, or moral complexity) would you use to assess this movie? For identification, is the film mostly about the audience being able to identify with the characters, or is the film identifying a new approach to a genre-type?  For idealization, does the film idealize a character or a subject?  And for moral complexity, does the film show that there’s no one right answer to a question?  Explain your response.

    THIS AGAIN!????

  4. Answers For The Questions About The Movie I Barely Remember

    1. Was there a protagonist and antagonist?  If so, who was the protagonist?  Who was the antagonist?

    Yes. The protagonist of Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince (2009) was a boy named Harry Potter! The antagonist was ... Voldemort? Brendan Gleeson? The Doctor from Doctor Who ('05-'10) disguised as Brendan Gleeson? Uh oh. I'm not sure who the antagonist of the movie is. And I'm even starting to doubt there's even a singular protagonist!

    Oh, wait, no! That was the one before this one! The antagonist is Alan Rickman. Professor Alan Rickman, final answer!

    2.  What can you infer from the title of the film?

    Fifty percent of the blood in our prince is missing!

    3.  How would you change the costumes?

    I wouldn't! I know a lot of folks were kind of mad at how they abandoned the robes-only approach from the books but I think it works well on screen to have these contemporary teenagers in contemporary dress.

    4.  How would you describe the setting of the film?

    The movie is set in a school for children where for generations they have learned magic in secret and, up until the eighteenth century, pooped on the floor.

    5.  What criteria (identification, idealization, or moral complexity) would you use to assess this movie? For identification, is the film mostly about the audience being able to identify with the characters, or is the film identifying a new approach to a genre-type?  For idealization, does the film idealize a character or a subject?  And for moral complexity, does the film show that there’s no one right answer to a question?  Explain your response.

    I don't understand how this format works! Am I supposed to choose between identification and idealization and moral complexity by answering one among the subsequent three questions? Or am I supposed to answer the first question, then the second question, then the third question, and then the fourth question?

  5. Before clicking on this topic I was all set to answer with "I don't have a favourite movie. I only keep watching movies in the hopes I'll find ones better than those I've seen before!" but now I realize I have to try and do your homework!???? And I have to choose to do your homework either about a movie I haven't seen or a movie I barely remember? Okay, sure, I'll try! For both!

  6. Saw it.

    I liked it, surprisingly enough! I tend to run hot and cold on Nolan, don't think much of him one day and am willing to give him a chance the next, can't really decide if in his bones he's any good or not. But this was one of his good ones! It's not better than The Prestige or The Dark Knight but in the sorting piles of Nolanalia it definitely belongs next to them along w/some of his TV work instead of among his two mediocre Batmans and Inception and Interstellar.


    The movie is a kind of Ballardian nightmare on a few different levels. It understands the essential appeal of the childhood pastime of pressing the rewind button on the VCR to make the makebelieve people run backwards, that's what it's really got going for it. Does it make sense? Is it about anything at all? Is it even understandable in any conventional fashion what with the heavily accented dialogue being drowned out by the oppressive sound mixing? I don't think those three questions have definitive answers but I enjoyed watching the movie sort of scrape and gesture its way towards some kind of meaning.


    Best bits :


    * underplaying the presence of the significant fingerlocking gesture when Priya does it while holding her drink

    * Himesh Patel getting a chance to have the Thomas Lennon / Colette Wolfe role

    * Kenneth Branagh reprising his YouTube stunt fake Russian accent from that one Jack Ryan movie where he basically played the exact same guy

    * dope soundtrack

    * extremely strong central performance from Denzel Washington's son. The first time I've seen him in anything where he's really good. Should've had him do more pull-ups, though!

    * Clémence Poésy's one scene as Professor Basil Exposition

    * lol the pandemic means this movie probably made Nolan the least amount of money in decades

    * there was one twist that I didn't quite catch from the very moment it was hinted at; one small element of surprise in a movie that clearly thought it was blowing the mind of its audience over and over again but this time it actually worked, had the desired effect


    Worst bits :


    * what

    * how?

    * that's not the way things

    * wait, what are we after right now!?

    * but where did they?

    * if that's what happened then why

    * but then they can't even if they did


  7. Oh boy!? Owen Wilson's going to be in the Loki show? Did they cast him BECAUSE of the impression or was that just a bonus? I remember seeing a clip of Tom Hiddleston on the red carpet and he's doing the 'burdened with glorious purpose' monologue from The Avengers (2012) in character as Owen Wilson, it was great, it wasn't just the voice, it was little asides, it was posture, he did something with the way he moved his face which made him seem like he even had the guy's nose. (It occurs to me now that I might be misremembering a deepfake where someone used a computer to synch up Owen Wilson's face with Tom Hiddleston's impression?)

  8. C.A.R.S. Protection Plus?


    Yeah, when that is spoken aloud that particular string of phonemes registers to me as six words and math. Cee Aye Are Ess Protection Plus. It's not surprising to me many people don't automatically understand what the full name of this business is in a way that allows them to repeat it back with the necessary accuracy and precision! I don't think it's a problem with their short-term memory, per se, I don't think that's what's up. It's not like they're hearing the name properly and then failing to recall it a moment later or anything like that. I think they're not even getting the name right the first time it goes into their ears.


    I do not recommend trying to get the name of your business changed so potential customers will actually understand what the name of the business is. I think that's probably an uphill climb.


    (Why their wrong answers on this issue are only two words long is a complete mystery to me! Sorry!)

  9. I've never really understood what Susan Sontag was saying on the subject. I have sometimes suspected she didn't understand what she was saying on the subject. Having your opinions about the nature of a work of art or your opinions about the intentions of the artist dictated entirely by how other audience members besides yourself react to it doesn't make a whole hell of a lot of sense to me.


    What is camp? What isn't? Is Star Trek ('66-'69) camp? Is Batman ('66-'68) camp? Are any of these questions actually answerable without peeking over someone else's shoulder to see what they came up with? I don't get it. I've never been to a bookstore or a Blockbuster Video ® or any other commercially accessible point of sale for any medium of art where there was a camp section; I don't think it counts as an actual genre to any one but a handful of enthusiasts.


    None of these people can even agree on what is or isn't camp. Throw these people in a room and ask them to settle for themselves which of the following is camp and which isn't :


    • the original Dan DeCarlo strips for Josie and the Pussycats

    • the Hanna-Barbera animated show Josie and the Pussycats ('70-'71)

    • the vinyl album of music from the selfsame show

    • the movie from 2001

    • the currently ongoing television show Riverdale ('17-'39)

    • the stage show parody Roberto Aguirre-Sasca got sued for putting on in the early oughts

    • the comic book Afterlife with Archie where they're all zombies and witches and whatever


    And some of the people who believe in camp will insist all of these are, or none of 'em are, or have elaborately worked out schema why some are or some aren't. But they won't agree. There won't even be fuzzy boundaries to the category.


    Which episodes of Star Trek ('66-'69) are camp? Which ones are the campiest? Don't talk to me in broad generalities, don't even talk to me about individual characters or scenes, line up all the episodes of the show in order of campiness. Which episode was the least camp? Where's the scampi?


    tldr = Anything that provokes a certain kind of laughter from a certain kind of person counts as 'camp' to someone or other, as near as I can tell. So the decision about whether or not something is camp is ultimately just a judgment at a distance about what another member of the audience feels rather than how you yourself react to it.

  10. 34/M/Toronto.

    Things about where I call home that I like and dislike? I try not to make those sorts of judgments about where I live, man. Every day is a gift! That's why they call 'em days! Right now I'm just scared because the numbers of people w/the plague keeps going up and up. I understand this is far from merely being a local problem but it's still plenty disturbing!!!!1!

  11. Welp! This may be the end of Nightly Movie Club if no one but the person who suggests the movie is going to, y'know, watch the movie! Certainly the end of my participation in it from now on. Don't get me wrong, I appreciate the 200+ views and the 'like' from Jacen123 (did one hundred and twenty two other Jacens register before you back in '99?), no question, they are a comfort to me. They are a balm to my spirit. I feel like Frodo on the rock in Mordor surrounded by lava at the start of the many many endings of Peter Jackson's adaptation of John Ronald Reuel Tolkien's Lord of the Rings. I feel like those views and that 'like' are my Samwise Gamgee, here with me in that moment. I'm glad to be with you, 200+ views and Jacen123's 'like', here at the end of all things.



    [addendum : omigosh, Jacen! Your reply in this thread indicating your plans to see the film in one of the next few days is, uh, like the three (3) eagles at the end of that movie! This last minute rescue really made my day! I hope you enjoy the film!]



    I did watch the movie over the weekend and wrote up a little of what I thought about it. Here you go! Not going to pick anyone else to do the next week of Nightly Movie Club. Going to go into the West and diminish, instead!


    ·         Any picture which includes an exclamation of "Jumpin' Jehoshaphat!" is well worth the price of admission.

    ·         I do wonder about whether or not this picture would be so beloved if it hadn't gone out of copyright. Or if all other pictures went out of copyright in a sensible fashion, too. Do you think alternate timelines enjoy it and It's A Wonderful Life (1946) and Night of the Living Dead (1968) in the same way? Please go ask the people or intelligent crab-men (and WOMEN!) living in the alternate timelines what pictures they enjoy and in what way they enjoy them. I suppose much of it depends on whether or not they have television over there.

    ·         I think this might be my fourth time seeing this picture. I saw it once or twice as a little kid, again in summer '10, recently to make sure it would still hold up so I could pick it for the movie club w/a clear conscience (fat lot of good that did me!), and now again. So four or five times, minimum.

    ·         I don't think it counts as a noir, obviously. It's so funny! It ends happily! But it IS a black and white picture set in a contemporary city featuring plenty of gunplay released in the correct time period w/an appropriately cynical attitude towards the pillars of society. It's one long sneer against domesticity, against government, against the free press, against the whole world, just an unending tirade of the motor-mouthed against the slow-witted.

    ·         There's a repeated conversational refrain "Can that girl write an interview?" / "She'll do until something else comes along." & "She ain't no albino." / "She'll do until one comes along."  that may have resurfaced with the Coen Bros. in No Country for Old Men (2007), the line they put in Tommy Lee Jones' mouth in reply to Garret Dillahunt saying "This is turnin' into a hell of a mess, ain't it, Sheriff?". It might have been in the book for all I know but I think they've also used it once or twice in their other stuff. And it may also have been a commonplace bit of banter, may not even come from this particular picture at all. Still, I like to think there's a connection.

    ·         I don't know. We're going into another official lockdown up here and the weather's taken a turn for the worse. I'm in a pretty sour mood! I'm sure I'm not alone in feeling that way, of course. And yet there's something magical about this movie. It's just scene after scene after scene of long take after long take. None of them ever quite call attention to themselves but in retrospect it seems impossible to imagine they ever managed to get it right once, let alone again and again. Cary Grant shaking Ralph Bellamy's umbrella instead of his hand! How wonderful it is to be to be able to witness such seemingly effortless acts of craftsmanship, doled out and eaten up by two practitioners at the absolute top of their game, strung together in a row like pearls on a string. Eighty years later and it's still such a pleasure to see! Maybe some pictures really are like poetry, like sculpture, maybe some pictures will really last. (Yes, I understand that I'm talking about a farcical comedy with, like, a condom joke in it. I know! I just find it v. moving!) (I laughed out loud @ Rosalind Russell tackling the warden after the jailbreak!)

  12. AT&T appears to have given up on using its stable of universally recognized intellectual properties to make for real money one dollar at a time. What are they doing instead? Desperately trying to survive & thrive in the imminent post-apocalyptic media future wherein consumers are maybe subscribed to one or two feedbags/firehoses of 'content' and that's about it. That's what this is, that's what shovelling tens of millions of dollars into Zack Snyder's open mouth is, that's what the stuff going down at Detective Comics Comics seems to be for. Just a complete abdication of any kind of standard 'buy a bag of flour for a dollar and sell it for a mark-up' Richard Scarry understanding of business in favour of something that seems more like a scam than anything else. Maybe it is a scam? Maybe it's even securities fraud, maybe it's a lie to investors, I suppose when you're $168.96 billion dollars in debt you have no choice but to look other people in the eye and say something like, "Very very soon most homes in western educated industrialized rich democratic societies will probably be paying for one or two of the following. They'll be paying for Netflix, they'll be paying for Amazon Prime, they'll be paying for us. We are going to be one among a very select few competitors in this marketplace. At this juncture doing anything that doesn't permanently latch ourselves onto a consumer is a waste of our time and money. We do not want anyone to buy our products. We want them to be permanently contracted to us forever in perpetuity." Is it true? Is it false? Will it work? I have no clue.

    I just wish they'd go all the way with it and insist that the movie will not be playing in movie theatres in countries still in the full throes of the pandemic. I get it, all the data we have so far suggests that movie theatres aren't high-risk. I understand! It's still a low-to-moderate risk! Enough of those stacked up on top of each other equals death! Save a life or two, why not!!!!????

  13. This week's Nightly.Net movie of the week is His Girl Friday (1940) starring Cary Grant and Rosalind Russell. The movie was directed by Howard Hawks. The Internet tells me that "it is a screwball comedy about a newspaper editor using every trick in the book to keep his ace reporter ex-wife from remarrying." Okay!


    His Girl Friday (1940) is a black'n'white movie. No need to adjust your television set! The colours are absent by design and deliberate intention! Not unfortunate error!


    It is widely considered a classic and was selected in 1993 for preservation in the United States National Film Registry of the Library of Congress as "culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant". Oooooh! Congress!


    His Girl Friday (1940) is available to stream, uh, everywhere? It's on Amazon Prime, ImdbTV, The Roku Channel, Hoopla, Vudu, Tubi, Kanopy, DirecTV, epix, Popcornflix, PureFlix, Pluto TV, Classix, and The Film Detective. It can be also be seen for free via the Internet Archive or on DailyMotion or on YouTube.



    It has a 7.9 rating on the Imdb. Movies that the ImdB algorithm considers to be better than or as good as His Girl Friday (1940) include such classics as Monster's, Inc (2001), The Help (2011), Logan (2017), Rush (2013), Star Wars Episode VI : Return of the Jedi (1983), Green Book (2018), Batman Begins (2015), A Beautiful Mind (2001), The Dark Knight Rises (2012), Life Is Beautiful (1997), Joker (2019), La La Land (2016), Star Trek (2009), Cinderella Man (2005), Dragon Ball Super : Broly (2018), Boruto : Naruto the Movie (2015), Todd McFarlane's Spawn 2 (1998), and Todd McFarlane's Spawn 3 : The Ultimate Battle (1999).



    His Girl Friday (1940) is appropriate for all Nightly.Net participants. Its running time is ninety two minutes long. Please, enjoy!

  14. On 11/8/2020 at 12:51 PM, Ms. Spam said:

    Alex Trebek passed away in his sleep last night.


    Even though this has been anticipatable for the past nineteen months or so, nevertheless, actually hearing this news was still like being told of the death of a mountain or an ocean. An impossible loss.

  15. I'm kind of slow on the uptake but I just put it together that if the weather's real bad on Election Day this could actually be a landslide.


    absolute best case scenario : terrible weather all across the United States delivers Biden an absolute landslide in the electoral college, 413-125


    Biden win Texas, Florida, Ohio, Georgia, North Carolina, Iowa and Maine.


    no, no, absolute best possible case scenario : 462 - 76. The President wins Idaho, Utah, Wyoming, the Dakotas, Kansas, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Tennessee, Kentucky, and West Virgina + part of Nebraska. He narrowly loses Texas, Florida, Ohio, Georgia, North Carolina, Indiana, Missouri, South Carolina, Iowa, Kansas, Utah, Maine, Montana, Alaska + most of Nebraska.


    middling best case scenario :


    375-163. Biden wins Florida, Ohio, Georgia, North Carolina, Iowa, and Maine.


    realistically best case scenario :


    300-238. The President wins every state he did in '16 except for Pennsylvania, Florida, and Ohio.


    I don't think any of that's going to happen and even if it does America's 45th President will still be in office on January 21, 2021 regardless but it'd still be kinda funny. "In the Bible, Mr. President, rain is a blessing!"


    (P.S. Sorry if the numbers don't add up or some of the states are missing!)

  16. A small thing about Borat Subsequent Moviefilm: Delivery of Prodigious Bribe to American Regime for Make Benefit Once Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan (2020) that kind of blows my mind. Almost always when it is Borat speaking his native tongue Sacha Baron Cohen is saying something in slow but fluent modern Hebrew that's usually roughly approximate to what gets subtitled into English. I assume that Maria Bakalova's fake Kazakhastani is actually Bulgarian or a language spoken in Bulgaria (Turkish???). I don't think either of them understands the other's language, like, I don't think this Bulgarian woman can speak Hebrew and I don't think Sacha Baron Cohen can understand Bulgarian. But they often act together in a way that involves the carrying out of whole conversations. Sometimes with other people around too.


    I assume the obvious answer to this mystery is nothing more than preparation and post-production. They plan what they're going to do in advance, try it out, and stitch it together into something usable after the fact. Duh-drr! It's like everything else in the movie. But there are still parts of this movie that are emotional, and affecting, and intended to be taken as quasi-serious amidst all the farce. And those parts are basically two actors hearing what sounds like gibberish to them and saying what sounds like gibberish to the other person and yet each is managing to act in the scene nonetheless.


    Also, the bit where they're in the beauty salon and Maria Bakalova reaches over and eats the lipstick followed by Sacha Baron Cohen eating the lipstick too was so immediately funny and so immediately gross that it made me actually physically retch. I coughed just writing that sentence, from the memory of it.

  17. Saw it again.

    I like all of Edgar Wright's stuff, been a huge fan since Spaced (1999-2001), I feel like The World's End (2013) is the best of the Cornetto trilogy and may actually be his best movie period, good to see A New Leaf (1971) and Deep Cover (1992) and Frailty (2001) make the top 1000 list, but just about every encyclopaedic-level cineaste kind of hates his breathing guts. I'm not a mindreader but I think they find him cutesy, glib, a sort of chameleon who has no substantial aesthetic and just assembles his screenplays with smarmy incessantly repeated half-jokes. (They also might be just be jealous of a guy who so clearly shares their preoccupations and mindset nonetheless being fairly successful at producing work suspiciously close to what they'd be able to manage yet feeling no need whatsoever to ever be serious about it in any way, shape, or form. They'd all like to make a zombie movie! They'd all like to make an action flick! They've all read some piece of creative work they'd love to adapt! My point is he gets to do it and yet he's clearly no cooler than they are. He's a complete drip! They can't look up to him because he's just a huge nerd and they can't look down on him because, again, they're just huge nerds.) I'm looking forward to Last Night In Soho (2021) although that'll probably be the first one in a while of his movies I don't catch in theatre. But. that's. due. to. unavoidable. circumstances!

    - I literally laughed out loud @ "Wallace! Amazon.ca! What's the website for that?" Just a perfect joke. I think the first time I can recall hearing it was in The Little Rascals (1994) with "What's the number for 9-1-1?".

    - Ramona's line of "You're just another evil ex waiting to happen" is a good'n. It's been a while since I read the volumes of the book that came out subsequent to the movie but I think that's something Scott gets offered, a future of grinding resentment where he joins the League of Evil Exes and gets to haunt Ramona forever rather than moving on like a grown-up. I think there's also something about how Gideon keeps the rest of his exes in crystal stasis diamonds ... ??? ... Great, now I've realized I don't remember how Scott Pilgrim ends. Great.

    - If this movie had taken place in January 2020 I don't think the level of hostility and condescension shown to Scott by his bandmates, roommate, friends, and relative over dating a 17-year old girl would have existed. I think they'd have thrown him out of the band, out of his apartment, and out of their lives. I don't think he'd be believed that the two weren't really intimate at all, I don't think that'd actually even matter to them one way or the other, I think they'd call it grooming and he'd be chucked so fast. And if a vaccine ever pops out of the ground and life returns to grudging normalcy then I'm gonna guess this movie'll feel like Manhattan (1979) but if things go on too long as they are now then I'm betting things head the other way and it'll be inexplicable to audiences in the semi-plausible future why they're all so mad at poor Scott and Knives in young chaste love and the alternate ending from the Special Features will probably be semi-canonized to boot.

    - oh, and R.I.P. Honest Ed's

  18. On 10/17/2020 at 12:35 PM, monkeygirl said:

    I'm exploring this right now. I've asked my therapist to help me because I came out of a discussion with a woman I really like, who is smart and who disagrees with everything I hold dear and the same for me to her. I can't 'fix' her (nor does she need fixing) so I decided to fix me. My therapist offered some homework. I'm to watch "the Vow", check out a journalist named Matt Talby, a book called "Why Liberalism Failed" by Patrick Deenan and a podcast called "Unspeakable" by Meghan Daum. Anyone know any of these?



    Oh! Me! I do! I'm going to reply privately because I don't want to deliberately post in that specific thread! Sorry! (Oops. Scratch that plan.)



    I have read Patrick J. Deneen's book, did not like it, and don't think it'll help give you particularly concrete answers as to why a smart person you like would disagree with you.



    Matt Taibbi was a good writer, very accessible style, sharp, but I think the last couple of years have sort of ... broken? him. As it has done for us all, certainly. I'm guessing he might be more able to offer up something close to what you're looking for.



    No clue on the documentary or the podcast.

  • Create New...