...oh, here we go... ...I might risk sounding like a total killjoy here, but I’ll just be honest: I think the movie is overrated. Don't get me wrong—the acting is solid—but it's just way too polished and sentimental to ever feel truly serious...😳
...total off-topic here: I honestly can't stand the whole Sheen clan...not to be too 🙂 harsh, but unlike his son—who is, well, what even 😬 is he?—at least the old man actually knows how to act... ...look, I know I'm being awful, but everyone has their own 👍 and 👎 😳
...just don't come for Brody; at least he's an Oscar winner (if that's even a valid 😬 argument) 🙂 😉
...look, I get where you're coming from, but I decided to just let my imagination run wild for a second and picture the absolute peak of film culture...🙂 now, how realistic is that? Hmm. To some extent, sure, but there’s one catch: willpower. And let's be honest, that's the one resource we're most lacking around here. You need massive, sweeping ideas—they're what push you toward a realization that might not be perfect, but it's damn good. Because if you start with a tiny goal, you'll end up with nothing 🙂
...but honestly, I should probably go to sleep instead of daydreaming on here 🙂
...you know where things start to fall apart when you confine film studies strictly to the realm of American linguistics? It’s not just that you end up with totally disinterested instructors most of the time—and let's be honest, if they're actually English professors who specialized in language, they usually know next to nothing about cinema. They end up teaching nothing more than the rigid stuff straight out of a textbook. Compare that to someone who studied fine arts or drama—they actually bring a different perspective to art than someone whose primary obsession was grammar, right? Instead of exploring anything meaningful, the whole lecture devolve into the absolute worst part: drilling classic film structure—remember those "introduction... climax..." charts buried at the back of an English textbook? 🙂—mostly through rote memorization. They completely bypass what actually matters in a movie—its artistic weight, its message, its social relevance, all of that. In my humble opinion, that kind of approach kills any genuine love for film rather than fostering it... ...obviously, I'm oversimplifying here, but I think you get my drift, even if you don't agree with me...
...I’d actually go the complete opposite way—I think we should introduce film culture as its own distinct subject, at least in high schools. Right now, art class is basically just endless theory—I mean, how many teenagers are actually sitting there painting in class these days? It’s rarely about creative expression anymore; it’s mostly just memorizing facts. If we did that, it wouldn't even be that different from studying film, except they're two totally separate mediums that deserve their own approach—even if the same teacher ends up covering both (which is likely, since I doubt anyone is going to create a whole new teaching certification just for this—did I get that right? I'm not entirely sure...)
@emergence ...we were all huge art nerds back in high school... other subjects just didn't hit the same, so skipping them always felt like the more logical move, right?😉
@Lawrence Booth2/">@@Lawrence Booth2 ...what you're saying about using movies to "summarize" literature—I think that's actually a separate issue entirely. It's not that my English teachers (aside from those rare, anti-movie witches 😁) had anything against adapting the classics—even if they didn't particularly enjoy the adaptations themselves—but rather they hated the fact that high schoolers wanted to swap reading for watching. To them, it was the same thing. I mean, who’s going to slog through Anna Karenina when you can just watch it? But that's the mistake. They're two fundamentally different mediums, each deserving its own treatment and offering a totally different experience...
@quietdriver3/">@@quietdriver3 ...in theory, you're absolutely right—English class should have covered film too. In practice, though? My teacher didn't know the first thing about cinema, so why should we bother learning it? What's the point? Besides, we weren't even watching movies because, let's face it, we didn't have a VCR 😉 ...which brings up a real question: if film studies were actually introduced as its own subject, would things be any different?
...great topic—I'm honestly just glad someone finally brought this up 🙂 ...I am all for introducing film studies, though obviously not as a replacement for art classes, but alongside them. That said, I’m hoping for a slightly different approach—one that bridges the gap between theory and practice. For me, "practice" would mean watching and analyzing films—a sort of "passive practice"—rather than the "active practice" of actually making movies, like filming or editing. Trying to organize full-scale production workshops in American public schools would be a nightmare, mostly because of budget constraints... but seriously, don't you think it's vital to teach kids how to actually *watch* a movie? It should be treated just like learning to interpret visual art, even if it feels like our schools are still failing miserably at that right now... ...but I won't go on a rant here; there will be plenty of time to dive into the details if people are interested 🙂
...honestly, I actually kind of like him—with that whole god-awful-expression he pulls—and I truly believe he’s a solid, top-tier actor. The real issue is his judgment; the guy just can't pick a decent project to save his life. His career is basically a graveyard of flops, and if we're being honest, that's largely his own fault...😁 So, while I wouldn't go so far as to call him the most underrated actor working today (I mean, have you seen Ewen Bremner?!? 😍 who do you think I am? 😁 ), I definitely agree that he needs a few heavy-hitting films under his belt 😁 But look, I'll admit it once more: Greg Kinnear in Little Miss Sunshine was 🙏 🙏 🙏 ...And even though Ray Liotta could have used a little more push there (seriously, why did he end up on CSI?), I still think he's the superior actor...
wearygardener13 said:dammit, that should have been my line😁 😁 To be honest, I didn't have a clue what you saw in that detective from Law & Order: SVU and that maniacal deputy from Oz—it actually took me a damn long time to realize they aren't even the same guy😲
😁 ...but honestly, this is an old debate that started way back with American fans of Oz and Law & Order... though, really, they aren't even that similar... as I've said before, Elias Koteas is Black with dark eyes (of Greek descent), whereas Meloni has light eyes... ...Meloni.... ...and let's be real, Elias Koteas is drastically superior as an actor😍
...Anyway, just to add more fuel to this fire—much to my own embarrassment—I used to have a hard time telling the difference between Ray Liotta and Greg Kinnear. 😳Not that there's any question about who's the better actor or director between them, obviously, but still... I'm cringing at myself...
...what kind of thread is this 🤣 ...but hey, let me throw a little something interesting into the conversation: there’s really no real resemblance between Christopher Meloni and Elias Koteas... except, obviously, that Koteas is way darker and a much better actor ☕
@ Joseph Lee3, Maria Barnes 👍 (I'd add something more—but honestly, I'm feeling pretty 😍 without any actual text to work with, unless maybe through some examples. Though, personally, I'd take Roman Polanski over these modern "young guns" any day 🙂.)
northerncrane4 said:Man, it’s just so slow. I really can't stand those movies where everything exists solely to serve one single gimmick.
...I kind of see your point—I'm not a fan of films built entirely around a single punchline either... but for me, that’s the issue with directors like M. Night Shyamalan, where once you grasp the trick, the whole thing just evaporates. Babluani, in my humble opinion, actually managed to lean into something else: genuine tension. Something M. Night Shyamalan has never quite mastered. You know from the jump that unlucky number 13 is going to meet a bad end somewhere along the way (there's an early scene with a black cat crossing the road, for instance), but you have no idea how. It forces you to stay on edge, trying to stay three steps ahead—a quality the film shares with, say, Amenabarov's The Others, even though they're totally different beasts. That slow pace is actually working for the plot—the less frantic the movement and the more intimate the shots, the higher the tension builds. What sets Gelin apart from its peers isn't just that famous black-and-white cinematography (which, let's be honest, that blend of old-school photography and basic modern tech is just a stylistic choice, not a gimmick), but the fact that the "twist" doesn't turn into some massive, over-the-top revelation that makes the movie a one-time watch—much like Amenabarov's The Others. The movie holds up even if you already know how it ends. It's a solid film, beautifully acted (Jose Miller17, what was your take on the "pushing" of the younger brother in the film? 😁), featuring some brilliantly hit scenes (seriously, that intersection shot was perfectly executed—it used the most pathetic, cliché symbolism possible, yet it still hit me right in the gut! 😍), and a tempo that I actually find worth defending...
...so, yeah, I haven't exactly reinvented the wheel, have I? But hey, at least I tried to convince you to give him one more shot. 🙂
...Alright, let me give a quick shout-out to this brilliant young director—I mean, you have to be pretty talented to pull off a flick like this 🙂—but also a huge thanks to Boris T. matica and the crew for bringing him (the movie, not the gel itself 😁 ) over to our shores...
...But seriously, what an incredible film. I’m really hoping it hits theaters properly or maybe even lands in video rental stores soon, so we can all experience it together once more 🙂. It feels totally original, yet somehow sooooo very retro. Just really, really good 👍
...and let's be real, Elias Koteas is drastically superior as an actor😍 