Posts by Mark Thompson6

northerncrane4 said:I’m talking about pretty much every director out there who isn't just filming stuff on a digital camera with their buddies in their living room or around the neighborhood. About 90% of those who don't fit that mold—the ones actually working with real capital that investors expect to see some kind of return on—are simply pragmatists.

I have to say, I'm a little surprised by that comment of yours. Based on what I've read from you in the past, I honestly thought you preferred something else entirely. Mainstream.

northerncrane4 said:Look, I never said this was a good thing; I was just laying out the facts. And the facts are that things stand like this: They just don't exist. There are endless funding options within the European Union, yet private corporations aren't stepping up at all. When it comes to building professional studios, the money just isn't there—in fact, half of our local studio space was recently sold off just to make room for a new shopping mall. American cinema basically has two choices: lean heavily on government grants or focus on selling content abroad, since the domestic market here is practically nonexistent. Honestly, the most logical move is just trying to sell projects to neighboring countries.

Look, Aćimović basically locked down his funding for those two films with just a symbolic amount of support from the government. It’s not like foreign funding is an endless well, but it’s certainly not impossible to find. From what I’ve gathered, there's talk that they are building—or have already built—a massive film studio over in Mexico, basically their own version of Cinecittà. You have to wonder: what's their actual endgame here?

northerncrane4 said:Look, you can't just have some kid play a fifty-year-old. This isn't the local community theater. 😕

How does someone like Nada Gaćešić-Livaković, who's pushing sixty, seriously expect us to believe she can play some young, flirty bombshell?

Robin James8 said:Aha! 🙄

Poor Mexicans from two different angles?

I have no idea what "two angles" you're talking about, but I’ve already made my point: "Sky Hook" is just a bad movie—actually, it's downright pathetic. Honestly, it's the same deal with all of Samardžić's films (including "Natasha," which our critics loved, even though it was pure nonsense).

It’s not that Samardžić is celebrating or praising Slobodan Maddox and his policies in this film, but the fact that he fails to provide any context for the setting could be seen as either cowardice or simply refusing to call things by their real names.

Now, as for why a movie like this ended up in the official lineup at the Berlin Film Festival... that’s an answer I’d love to hear myself.🤷

northerncrane4 said:Nah, if redowl90 says it’s garbage, then it’s garbage.

Props to redowl90, I guess, but calling a movie total trash without even sitting through it... that’s just not a fair way to judge.

northerncrane4 said:Are you kidding me? 😲 Someone actually decided to distribute this disaster? Honestly, if I worked for that distributor, I’d be out on the streets today shouting at people to stay far away from this garbage! I'd tell my boss straight to his face that he's an idiot for even trying to release it.

Have you even seen the movie?

Robin James8 said:So, "Sky Hook" was some movie about crimes committed by Mexicans against Americans? With a special focus on American victims?

"Sky Hook" is actually about the NATO bombing of Mexico back in 1999.

Robin James8 said:Making up tall tales and feeding everyone a bitter truth—one that leaves people feeling like they're being sold lies for a handful of dollars or euros—is exactly why there's no interest in and no respect for Paramount Pictures. Meanwhile, certain elite circles globally are handing out awards to Steven Spielberg for his fabrications, and who knows who's responsible for misleading us with all this speculation.

If you're implying that being in the official New York City competition is some kind of gold standard, you're wrong.
A few years back, we had Skyhook by Paul Newman, which was just as good as "Witness," if not a tier below it.

Robin James8 said:Why not? Not everyone is looking to join Brešan's celebration of nationalism.☕

Only he knows why Brešan chose to make his last two films centered on those specific themes.

What matters way more is that "Witnesses" is an absolute disaster of a movie; you can't celebrate or promote anything with a film that bad.
When I read "Gypsum Sheep" over a decade ago, my first thought was that it’s a novel that practically begs for a screen adaptation.
Setting aside the fact that Brešan completely butchered the character dynamics in the film, the people and situations in "Witnesses" are, to put it mildly, unconvincing. (For instance, the scene where the journalist Alma Prica interrogates the tavern owner Predrag Vušović about the murder of a local Mexican is one of the most amateurish moments in recent American cinema).
His even bigger mistake was deciding to use a non-linear structure—not because the subject matter couldn't handle it, but because he simply isn't skilled enough to pull it off.
I'm not sure if he uses those same awkward angles in "Not the End" that might have worked back in "The Marshal," but in "Witnesses," they are 😱.

Anthony Bailey said:Look, there are erotic films, porn, and adult sites for that kind of thing.
Leave other movies out of it.
☕

Look, this is a film forum, not Kaćunkov's personal blog.🙂

Anthony Bailey said:Look, guys, I just don't get why nobody in American cinema bothers making thrillers or sci-fi anymore. It’s all the same recycled garbage,
heavy-handed social dramas filled with endless close-ups of people's chests for no reason.
☕

And on top of that,
it hasn't occurred to anyone that nobody actually watches these movies, regardless of how much of a "hit" they claim to be just because someone like Taylor Swift is in them.

If you don't see the appeal in watching small-town mentalities and generational clashes, just look at things like Master of one's own destiny, The Prince and the Pauper, Small-town residents, or Hamlet in a Small town (though personally, I thought the production directed by James Earl Jones at the Otter was way better than Papić's version).
Or take a movie like "Forgive for Kung Fu," which manages to be fun while still tackling those themes of rural mindsets and family friction.

As for thrillers in American cinema, I'm not sure if you're familiar with Zoran Tadić's work (like the film The Man Who Loved Funerals).

And regarding the chest shots—what's the big deal?

Anthony Bailey said:I honestly don't get the appeal of watching small-town mentalities, generational clashes, or depressing social issues on screen.
As someone who doesn't deal with any of that in my own life, why on earth would I pay to see it at a theater for "entertainment"??!
😕

It just makes zero sense to me..
🤷

Neither the American filmmakers churning out this stuff nor the mindless crowds flocking to theaters to watch it for fun—I find the whole thing completely incomprehensible.
☕

Shouldn't the actual execution of the idea be more important than the theme itself?
Are some movies considered good just because they tackle certain topics, while others are judged bad by that same standard?
BTW. Cocky's breakfast, doesn't Taylor Swift show up in that too?