Red Mosquito • View topic

Mecca · **Joined:** Wed December 19, 2012 7:17 pm **Posts:** 7553

Sometimes we fill in the blanks with our own perspective and sometimes a cigar is just a cigar

VinylGuy · **Joined:** Tue January 01, 2013 5:10 pm **Posts:** 36279

tragabigzanda wrote:

Orpheus wrote:

What is actually worth fighting against in the PC/MeToo movements? I see this sentiment all the time, and it's really dumb. "Yeah man, fuck these women for...talking about how they want justice for being assaulted. Not in MY country!" Especially in a movie about essentially retconning the murder of Sharon fucking Tate???

I honestly struggle to figure out what the fuck some of yall are talking about.

1. Identifying the sentiment is not the same as supporting it

2. I think the sentiment is less about sticking it to women or PC police, and more about making the art you want to make regardless of social trends

I agree with this.

BurtReynolds · **Posted:** Mon January 13, 2020 7:36 pm

tragabigzanda wrote:

Orpheus wrote:

What is actually worth fighting against in the PC/MeToo movements? I see this sentiment all the time, and it's really dumb. "Yeah man, fuck these women for...talking about how they want justice for being assaulted. Not in MY country!" Especially in a movie about essentially retconning the murder of Sharon fucking Tate???

I honestly struggle to figure out what the fuck some of yall are talking about.

1. Identifying the sentiment is not the same as supporting it

2. I think the sentiment is less about sticking it to women or PC police, and more about making the art you want to make regardless of social trends

Yeah I was talking about his perspective. Whether one agrees with it or not is up to them, but these things were definitely present in the movie.

Mecca · **Joined:** Wed December 19, 2012 7:17 pm **Posts:** 7553

Literally the ONLY thing that was even a MeToo tangent was Kurt Russel’s wife refusing to work with Pitt’s character because he most likely killed his wife. If anything, it points out how everyone is okay to associate with him and she’s the only one making sense while everyone just kinda turns a blind eye and is like “well he never got convicted of it”.

BurtReynolds · **Posted:** Mon January 13, 2020 8:52 pm

I wouldn't say the movie is specifically about #metoo, though he did catch a lot of flack during that (whether it was deserved or not I can't say for sure). It did motivate him here to some degree.

But it's more general than that. Pitt is raw masculine energy from start to finish, and he's surrounded by ressentiment fueled haters and inauthentic fakes who he easily overwhelms, and his world (and Tate) is better off for it. He's total Nietzschean ubermensch. It's a static character "arc" done right.

It happened after the movie came out, but I think Tarantino's response to that idiot journalist who accused him of misogyny for not giving Robbie enough speaking parts perfectly encapsulates his viewpoint, and that's reflected in the movie.

tragabigzanda · **Posted:** Mon January 13, 2020 9:11 pm

BurtReynolds wrote:

I wouldn't say the movie is specifically about #metoo, though he did catch a lot of flack during that (whether it was deserved or not I can't say for sure). It did motivate him here to some degree.

But it's more general than that. Pitt is raw masculine energy from start to finish, and he's surrounded by ressentiment fueled haters and inauthentic fakes who he easily overwhelms, and his world (and Tate) is better off for it. He's total Nietzschean ubermensch. It's a static character "arc" done right.

It happened after the movie came out, but I think Tarantino's response to that idiot journalist who accused him of misogyny for not giving Robbie enough speaking parts perfectly encapsulates his viewpoint, and that's reflected in the movie.

what's this now?

LoathedVermin72 · **Posted:** Mon January 13, 2020 9:30 pm

When he said “I simply reject your hypothesis.” Which he was totally right to do. Don’t play that dumb game with bad faith journalists. I don’t think that says anything about the subtext of the movie, though.

BurtReynolds · **Posted:** Mon January 13, 2020 9:37 pm

tragabigzanda wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:

I wouldn't say the movie is specifically about #metoo, though he did catch a lot of flack during that (whether it was deserved or not I can't say for sure). It did motivate him here to some degree.

But it's more general than that. Pitt is raw masculine energy from start to finish, and he's surrounded by ressentiment fueled haters and inauthentic fakes who he easily overwhelms, and his world (and Tate) is better off for it. He's total Nietzschean ubermensch. It's a static character "arc" done right.

It happened after the movie came out, but I think Tarantino's response to that idiot journalist who accused him of misogyny for not giving Robbie enough speaking parts perfectly encapsulates his viewpoint, and that's reflected in the movie.

what's this now?

I think it was at Cannes where some NYT journo went on a long winded rant disguised as a (unanswerable) question, and after she was through with her soapbox, his only answer was "I reject your hypothesis" while Robbie just smiled, which was the prefect response. It's made funnier by the headlines afterwards that read "TARANTINO SNAPS AT JOURNALIST", which was so blatantly false.

Dev · **Joined:** Tue January 01, 2013 11:46 pm **Posts:** 5585

god politics are boring

BurtReynolds · **Posted:** Tue January 14, 2020 5:43 am

Go the fuck back to GD dev!

Dev · **Joined:** Tue January 01, 2013 11:46 pm **Posts:** 5585

I like movies. I can post here.

tree_ · **Posted:** Tue January 14, 2020 2:52 pm

VinylGuy · **Joined:** Tue January 01, 2013 5:10 pm **Posts:** 36279

Tarantino´s episode with Fiona Apple on Iconoclasts is wonderful

tragabigzanda · **Posted:** Tue January 14, 2020 5:22 pm

lol thanks tree

tree_ · **Posted:** Tue January 14, 2020 5:36 pm

i thought you'd like that spazzy pants

Birds in Hell · **Joined:** Tue January 01, 2013 9:38 pm **Posts:** 15154

I finally saw this, I thought it was fantastic.

tree_ · **Posted:** Thu February 06, 2020 3:53 am

tragabigzanda wrote:

I agree having Kurt narrate the last stretch felt kind of funny.

this works after multiple viewings for me

Birds in Hell · **Joined:** Tue January 01, 2013 9:38 pm **Posts:** 15154

BurtReynolds wrote:

But it's more general than that. Pitt is raw masculine energy from start to finish, and he's surrounded by ressentiment fueled haters and inauthentic fakes who he easily overwhelms, and his world (and Tate) is better off for it. He's total Nietzschean ubermensch. It's a static character "arc" done right.

Yeah, I got this vibe.

Making the character gay (as suggested by durden earlier in this thread) definitely wouldn't have improved the movie, it would've ruined it.

Kaius · **Joined:** Fri November 15, 2013 6:14 am **Posts:** 11136

I definitely interpreted the Lee/Booth scene as a daydream about what might have happened had he been given the job. He had no delusions about his ability to squander that opportunity, due to his rep, although the fight with Lee was played to his favor if course, as he certainly wasn’t short on confidence.

tragabigzanda · **Posted:** Thu February 06, 2020 6:47 pm

Kaius wrote:

I definitely interpreted the Lee/Booth scene as a daydream about what might have happened had he been given the job. He had no delusions about his ability to squander that opportunity, due to his rep, although the fight with Lee was played to his favor if course, as he certainly wasn’t short on confidence.

I'm leaning this way too, but would be fine if QT officially said it really happened

Once Upon a Time in... Hollywood

Who is online