MovieChat Forums > trippycheez > Replies
trippycheez's Replies
Schools like this tend to hire disciplinary issues internally. The administration itself is a buffer between the students and actual law enforcement. It's one of the privileges of being wealthy enough to attend an elite prep school.
Charlie isn't following ordinary rules or pursuing justice in the legal sense. He has his own sense of honor, which includes not informing on his peers, even when he doesn't really like them and it means he himself will go down hard. Maybe it is foolish but it's his own old-fashioned moral code and he stands by it. That's why Slade says something like "I don't know whether Charlie is right or wrong here, but the boy has integrity."
I also prefer the 1994 version. I enjoy Greta Gerwig's work and like the actresses individually, but all together this newer film didn't work well.
Little Women (2019) had so many moments that rang false from a historical perspective. Modern phrasings and behaviors that seemed more contemporary than 1860s. It took me out of the story and I wondered if it would have been better if Gerwig had chosen to rework it for modern times and set it in the present day.
The non-chronological approach dampened the emotional weight of the story. As a viewer it's hard to get a sense of the characters growing up, things changing, and the evolution of the love stories when we are constantly shifting between past and present.
The character of Amy should have been played by two different actresses. Very awkward to have a 20-something grown woman playing a bratty young child. The actress herself just seemed very "now" somehow. Like I could picture her pulling an iPhone out of an apron pocket.
The 1994 version is fantastic. I am not sure why we needed this newer version.
She was channeling the critic Pauline Kael. One of Kael's books is in Jake's childhood bedroom.
As others have said, the censorship of the time meant the filmmakers couldn't be direct about Geoff. But there are plenty of strong hints and clues throughout the movie.
It helps explain why he and Jo live together as friends, but with zero romantic interest in each other. He does offer to marry her, not because he is in love... but because (1) he is genuinely interested in the baby and providing for Jo; and (2) marriage would conveniently provide both Jo and himself with social cover.
The problem with relying on "ignore" is that MovieChat is brand-new, and its culture is still developing. If new, unregistered users come over to lurk and check it out, and all they see is a flood of troll activity, they might not come back. Then the community won't grow as we all want it to, and it may attract more of the troll element.
Hellooooo! Yes, I saw the film over the weekend.
James Baldwin's appearances and words really made the documentary. It was good to learn about him and his thought.
The director's choices to tie Baldwin's words from the Civil Rights movement to the current political situation and Black Lives Matter seemed a little forced to me. We are no longer in the era of MLK and Malcolm X. Some problems are the same, but other key issues are totally different. It's a related, but different, historical moment. To take words from the 60s or 70s and put them over modern footage seemed ahistorical and de-contextualized.
If the director had wanted to make a non-narrative, cut-up collage-style film (like Atomic Cafe, for instance), it might have worked. But this was supposed to be about Baldwin and his work (or so I thought).
Thanks for the tip!
It's not all that useful. The data can be found elsewhere. The unique benefit IMDb had was the message boards.
If they had handled it more professionally (like, say, spinning the boards off in a planned-out way, giving more notice, or giving users a way to export data) I would feel differently. Instead, they thoughtlessly deleted 15+ years of film discussion. That tells me everything I need to know about how much they care about cinema and their users.
Would rather support a different site.
My thoughts exactly! I watched a film from 1949 last night. I was confused about the ending, so I came on here and got to read old IMDb threads to see how other people had interpreted it over the years.
No other site had that archive of thought on specific, obscure movies. On IMDb, you could actually learn something and get new insights. Now MovieChat has inherited the boards, so this will be my home for cinema discussion.
We just need to post and make it grow!
Same here. I've started posting threads in individual movie boards, even if there is no recent activity. Someone has to start the discussion back up, so it might as well be me!
I also enjoy reading the archives. Love that I can still benefit from the insights of people who posted years ago on IMDb.
The way IMDb handled the board shut-down has left me permanently embittered toward them. Now, when I find myself needing some film info, I purposefully skip over IMDb in the google results and find what I want on a different web site. IMDb used to be my first destination after watching any film. No longer.
Thank you for responding! Your post gives me hope for that site will grow and become a good IMDb-replacement. :-)
Yes, that was a nice moment! I liked how Paterson took the little girl's work seriously. He really took the time to hear and appreciate her poem, and not in a condescending way.
I got the sense that the mom had a sort of unhappy feeling about seeing a strange older man talking to her daughter. But Paterson is more of a protective figure -- as I recall, the previous scene was the bus break-down, where he was herding the kids together to keep them out of traffic. He's the kind of good, observant stranger you WANT to have around.
It would be nice if the creators of both sites could merge the best features of each. But right now, this site has all the old posts -- years and years of analysis of film, even obscure films. That was always the draw of IMDb for me. It's a huge compendium of knowledge and ideas, and here we can still learn from it and build on it.
I've been trying to non-intrusively/non-spammily suggest it to people on social media. Because the IMDb message boards closed just now, there's a lot of discussion and sadness as people learn that it's gone forever. It's a good time to let people know about this brand-new site that managed to save a lot of the content.
Maybe there could be one giant "Off-Topic" board. That way, when people post things that have nothing to do with movies, the mods can just move the threads there.
"Let's make love!"
Literally LOL'd to see your post. I remember posting about that scene on IMDb a long time ago. Gonna read some old threads for nostalgia's sake!
Excellent! Glad you are joining. :-)
Agreed! I might suggest that we begin starting new film discussion threads on the various individual film boards here. Even if no one responds right away, it'll be a start.
I just saw "Paterson" and have some thoughts, so I think I'll post something on that board.
RIP IMDb, viva MovieChat!
Ha, I just went to IMDB2 to politely try and promote THIS site, but saw that there was already a MovieChat thread, and people there were complaining about MovieChat people spamming them.
Then I come here, and see someone promoting IMDB2.
Gotta say, I prefer MovieChat and hope that it grows. This is a comprehensive site, with years and years worth of discussions already present and ready to continue. It continues the IMDb style of providing every film -- even the most niche/obscure films -- with their own boards for focused discussion.
IMDB2 looks like it might be good for more general conversations, but I don't have the sense that I can ask about a random episode of "Poirot" that aired decades ago and get a ton of responses. That was the IMDb magic that I hope this site can recapture.