Posts by ruggedjackal46

"Yellow Moon" and "Smartest Place in Town" were actually alright for me, and I'd say "Incas" and "Game Over" held their own. But the rest? Honestly, it was a complete train wreck. You’ve got these one-dimensional, stereotypical characters stuck in the same repetitive settings, stumbling through cliché-ridden plot points that the director feels the need to hammer home over and over again. It’s exhausting. I walked out of the theater and managed to have more interesting experiences just wandering around Washington, D.C. for five minutes than I did watching this. I don't know what the directors of those other five films are usually like, but this was nothing short of depressing.

Larry Martin11 said:@Justin Sanchez6, Edward Rivera98

...just one question for you two, since I see you both actually liked it—what was it about Lemon Tree that worked for you? 🙂 personally, this movie was easily the biggest letdown of the whole festival for me. It’s got a great premise, one of those themes that stays relevant forever, but the execution was just... messy. We're talking illogical pacing, clumsy directing, a total lack of sensitivity, and acting that felt incredibly flat—which, let's be honest, is mostly because the script itself was so thin. To top it off, the cinematography was so bleak and dreary that I felt like I was watching some low-budget American indie from the mid-nineties trying way too hard to "sell" its vision of an ideological tragedy. I really wanted to find at least one redeeming quality, something worthwhile... but apparently, some viewers caught a spark that I missed entirely, and I honestly can't figure out why...

Sorry for going off on a tangent here, but 😍 😍 being polite and genuinely curious about a film you didn't personally care for? That's a top-tier approach.

fadedseal8 Asks:
Man, I’d love to jump off your post and take this in a really nasty direction, but honestly? I’m too afraid of getting banned. 😵

So, did you actually end up following up on my post or what? 😕

Is Macaulay Culkin actually going to play Adolf Hitler?

northerncrane4 said:And why does this idea keep dragging on—that Michael Bay just isn't "given" a decent script? Who exactly is "withholding" it from him? Does he even actually want a good script in the first place?

Even if he did, I feel like asking for one would be seen as pure entitlement. It’s almost like, "Hey, we gave you this massive budget, and now you have the nerve to ask for actual substance too?" 😁

Olivia Evans8 said:What receipts? Do I seriously need proof to say that people watch Transformers?

No, what you actually need is proof that you can take the fact that "Transformers" has a certain viewership and use it to conclude that people generally watch Transformers and that they think Transformers is a good movie.

Olivia Evans8 said:Unknown, good luck trying to tell me where I belong...🙄 Maybe if you stepped down from that massive pedestal of yours, you'd realize people actually watch movies because they're fun...

So you roll your eyes, twist your own analogy, and throw a tantrum just because I pointed out how flawed your logic was? And now you're the one lecturing me on why people watch movies. Oh, please. You're an expert on why people sit through a flick while eating pizza, aren't you? Thanks for the insight. And you're talking to me about arrogance? It's easy to call someone arrogant when you don't have any actual substance to back up your own claims, buddy.

Olivia Evans8 said:So, you’re seriously comparing someone disliking a specific dish to someone claiming the Earth is flat? Man, you must be really proud of that comparison... 🙄

Look, you didn't say "some people like beef stew and others like pizza." You said "someone claims pizza is better than beef stew"—which makes it a universal judgment, a standard applied to everyone. Try to spot the difference.

Olivia Evans8 said:O rly? I bet I could find plenty of people who wouldn't touch a pot roast with a ten-foot pole. Look, the whole point is that subjective doesn't mean objective...

And while you're at it, you can probably find folks who think the Earth is flat, too.

It’s just this general mystification of art, isn't it? Like, you actually have to prepare and learn the ropes for almost any other job, but not when you're painting a canvas or writing a novel or filming a movie. Apparently, you just show up, get hit by some drug-like trance, and suddenly everything flows. As if Dostoevsky started writing about a crime and halfway through decided, "You know what? Let's make it about the punishment too." It's nonsense. 😁

And regarding Bulajic, it wasn't just that he had a massive budget and an entire army at his disposal; there was zero pressure on him to actually deliver a decent film. I mean, the guy had Yul Brynner playing a miner working for the Government—when you've got that kind of leverage, you can basically do whatever you want. 😁

Olivia Evans8 said:This is basically like arguing over whether pizza tastes better with pepperoni and peppers or just plain cheese. And then some hipster rolls in and starts lecturing everyone about how pot roast is the greatest meal ever because it has "heritage," it takes effort to make, and it’s a "real" meal instead of just a carb-heavy pizza bomb.

Well, newsflash: I paid for my pizza because I don't feel like eating pot roast! Anyone can make a movie. Just because you guys have this fancy distinction between "cinema" and "movies" and try to shove your personal preferences down our throats as objective truth doesn't make it so...

Beef bourguignon isn't "better" than pizza because of history or how much work went into it; it's better because it tastes a hundred times better, for crying out loud.

Nicholas Walker3 said:Exactly—I already mentioned checking out the supplement on TP regarding how they filmed that sandwich biting scene, which makes a few things about Lynch way clearer... but since I hate repeating myself—and honestly, if my posts aren't being read or understood—I'm just calling it quits on this debate!

So, let me get this straight: a breathing mask just happened to be lying around, Lynch found it, and went, "Hey, Dennis, you want to breathe through this in one of the scenes?"

There is a massive difference between improvising an entire movie and improvising a single scene involving a sandwich.

If you're giving up on the discussion, I’d suggest you spend your time reading "Lynch o Lynch" instead.

Nicholas Walker3 said:He works with a real concept and a vision—he's just such a genius that it's enough... they force you to think because he captures raw emotion, and since he feels so much, you end up living through it while watching!

Right. So he has this grand concept and idea, and then he shows up on set and—poof—suddenly tells Dennis Hopper to just grab an oxygen mask and start breathing into it?

They make you think because they capture what they're actually feeling, and since they feel so much, you end up living through it while watching the movie!

Well, I mean, sedlar also films what he feels, and he feels plenty too, forcing the audience to experience it along with him. Does that make the two of them equals?

Nicholas Walker3 said:Well, sure, Lynch might have had certain thoughts—and I’ve already shared what those were—but there isn't any actual "proof" regarding his exact mindset, which is my whole point... honestly, no matter how straightforward his films might seem at first glance, there just isn't one single rational explanation for them (if there even is one!)—besides, like I mentioned, looking at a production notebook (not sure if you've ever had the chance to dig into one!?) shows just how much is planned out versus how much is improvised... when that's missing, it's a dead giveaway that things are being made up on the fly...

Right, sure. I bet the producers would spend every evening asking Lynch where they were filming the next day, and he’d just spin a globe and point his finger at a random spot. Give me a break!

Nicholas Walker3 said:Of course they do, but they’re deeply personal—there's zero chance you (or anyone else, really) can truly grasp how Lynch was feeling or what was crossing his mind during specific takes that he eventually stitches together under a single label later. Besides, I think you know that Lynch doesn't use shot lists—which is basically standard practice on any US film set—and he doesn't over-explain things to his actors. He mostly lets them shoot first, then figures out if it actually worked afterward (just look at that scene where someone is eating a sandwich in Twin Peaks if you ever get the chance). In the end, he's the only one who knows if the final product actually matches what he had in his head before cameras started rolling!

Could you please explain how you think you're "decoding" his logic?

If Lynch's films are strictly an expression of his own internal monologue, and if they're constructed in a way that doesn't even align with his original vision, then why on earth do these movies provoke anyone else to think at all? Based on how you've described his process, it sounds like Lynch is just making movies for himself, totally oblivious to the fact that an audience exists, working in this messy, unplanned, almost haphazard way. A process like that would only produce a coherent film that triggers specific thoughts and emotions by sheer accident. Not only is that statistically unlikely, but if you listen to his interviews, it’s pretty clear he isn't just winging it without a concept, an idea, or a plan. He knows exactly what he's trying to achieve.

Thomas Wells said:I haven't seen this much sheer lack of class or human crudeness in ages, especially not at a festival like this.

Honestly, people throwing stuff at performers during a set was the absolute peak of American stupidity. I don't even like rap, but watching crowds pelt those rappers with objects was just painful to witness. First off, you could actually hit someone in the eye, and second, they're going to wreck expensive instruments.

And then later, when someone actually clocked Moby in the chest and the guy had to literally beg the crowd to stop throwing things, only then did they settle down.

I mean, I always try to tell myself that not all Americans are the same... but everywhere I go, it’s some flavor of primitivism. On the subway, on the street, in a grocery store, at a concert... it feels like we're all just a bunch of hillbillies who aren't capable of anything beyond listening to Madonna or Johnny Cash!

Too true. Though, personally, I always feel a bit silly blaming "Americans" as a whole for stuff like this. I don't think it's a national trait; it's just that idiots do stupid things. And these were definitely idiots—a minority, I'm sure.

As for the lineup, Art Brut was good, everything else was pretty meh.

Adam Moore said:Lily was a total bore.
Hatebreed lasted about 10 minutes, actually pretty fun though.
Kraftwerk was garbage.
The Killers were great, but I missed their first 15 minutes because I was stuck watching Kraftwerk.
Franz Ferdinand was alright, but by then I was just too exhausted to actually pay attention.

I won't bother writing a novel here, but I'm feeling the exact same way.

Lily was a disappointment. Honestly, she's just Unknown at this point.
Listening to Kraftwerk and The Killers on the fly, they were both intense—but The Killers? They were absolutely crushing it. 🙏 YYYs were on another level.
As for FF, they put in a decent effort, but let's be real, they're just boring by nature.

Henry Cox78 said:My card finally showed up after a bit of a delay. 😬

Why did they lock that thread so fast? It was only open long enough for one self-proclaimed "objective" person to chime in and declare Michelle Johnson16 the ultimate troll of the discussion. 🤣

I mean, if you complain about trolling, then suddenly you're the troll—makes perfect sense, right? 🤣

Yeah, they basically let exactly one user call Michelle Johnson16 a troll and then immediately shut the whole thing down. Like the verdict was already decided before anyone else could even type a word. 😁

Anyway, what actually got Michelle Johnson16 banned?

James Garcia58 said:Did you just ask me the exact same thing I did, or does your post actually have something to do with what I wrote above?

Oops, turns out I asked the same thing. 😁 Sorry about that—I didn't even catch your comment; my reaction just auto-fired based on the original post. 😬>

Alex Walker5 said:Honestly, I’d highly recommend checking out that Bill Maher Religulous documentary if you haven't already. It's worth your time. Bill Maher Religulous.
Hey there. How's it going?

What would even be the point of that movie? And honestly, what would the point of *your* movie be? If the whole goal is just to show us that religious fanatics are, in fact, fanatics... well, hello, Mr. Obvious. But if that’s not the angle, then what exactly are we looking at here? What's the actual point? 🤷