Web Hype
5 More Thangs
1. Nice interview with Eric Skillman, a designer for Criterion DVDs.
2. If you’ve never happened upon Vincent Gallo’s merchandise site, his personal services, are something else. Oldie but goodie. Here’s Yes + Briefs —>
3. Watched Shutter Island the other night. B-. Finally Scorsese’s made a movie I won’t be watching again and again. Memory twist? Really? I guess everyone gets old.
4. If you have questions for Hiromi Ito, author Killing Kanoko, drop them in Johannes’s comments here.
5. The new round of Significant Objects, raising funds for Girls Write Now, is live, with texts written around weird objects by quite a list of people (including our own Justin Taylor, favorites Evenson, Moody, Mellis, Dalton, Greenman, and live right now myself). Watch out and do a bid!
Tags: eric skillman, shutter island, significant objects, vincent gallo
I thought Shutter Island looked great. Too bad.
I thought Shutter Island looked great. Too bad.
I wonder if Vicent Gallo would breed with a jewish lady aluminum shark? I would gladly pay 1 million dollars (minus $50,000 for the Jewish discount) so that our genes would span time together.
I wonder if Vicent Gallo would breed with a jewish lady aluminum shark? I would gladly pay 1 million dollars (minus $50,000 for the Jewish discount) so that our genes would span time together.
i think it’s all about having the right frame of mind. i went into it expecting what was, essentially, supposed to be a b-movie, the kind of thing that samuel fuller might’ve come up with. it’s more of a throwback to the genre-bender trash flicks of the 60s and 70s. i loved it. but then again, venus in furs is one of my all-time favorites, so trust what you will.
i think it’s all about having the right frame of mind. i went into it expecting what was, essentially, supposed to be a b-movie, the kind of thing that samuel fuller might’ve come up with. it’s more of a throwback to the genre-bender trash flicks of the 60s and 70s. i loved it. but then again, venus in furs is one of my all-time favorites, so trust what you will.
it’s not without merit. it was fun and ok to watch once. i was just sad that of all his movies, this is the only one that doesn’t have much of a draw to see it again. the questions are answered, and the story of getting there loses a lot once that happens, esp. since you can see it coming like a red sore.
there’s lot of great things about it tho. i’d rent it. the music at certain points was very powerful. dicaprio does a great job with his role. and i think scorsese did some things with postproduction i’ve never seen from him, which were really nice. but ultimately, man, i didn’t expect him to stay within the confines of those throwbacks, ending up with a movie that just doesn’t span time.
it’s not without merit. it was fun and ok to watch once. i was just sad that of all his movies, this is the only one that doesn’t have much of a draw to see it again. the questions are answered, and the story of getting there loses a lot once that happens, esp. since you can see it coming like a red sore.
there’s lot of great things about it tho. i’d rent it. the music at certain points was very powerful. dicaprio does a great job with his role. and i think scorsese did some things with postproduction i’ve never seen from him, which were really nice. but ultimately, man, i didn’t expect him to stay within the confines of those throwbacks, ending up with a movie that just doesn’t span time.
yeah, i liked the use of the richter on the soundtrack, thought all the hallucinations were vibrant and fresh. but i know what you’re saying. it is a one-time-see kind of thing.
yeah, i liked the use of the richter on the soundtrack, thought all the hallucinations were vibrant and fresh. but i know what you’re saying. it is a one-time-see kind of thing.
if you thought the trailer looked great, you might dig it. i saw the trailer and was immediately turned off and thought, “why is scorsese doing a horror movie in some island insane asylum??” admittedly, i have anti-genre biases (if you’re following the conventions, why do we need to see this again when it’s been done awesome so many times? / if you’re subverting genre big-time, that’s fun, but how can I “connect with” or “get a lot out of a movie” that’s just fucking with the conventions?—having said all that, i love plenty of godard movies and several tarantino movies, but that’s probably because they let their messy idiosyncratic selves into the picture, however genre-y or based-on-previous-shit, so it’s still a personal experience. i don’t see where scorsese really IS in his pictures, and that’s a drawback for me). so really im not the ideal audience for scorsese, in general. to me he’s a sublime technician, but not a sublime artist.
if you thought the trailer looked great, you might dig it. i saw the trailer and was immediately turned off and thought, “why is scorsese doing a horror movie in some island insane asylum??” admittedly, i have anti-genre biases (if you’re following the conventions, why do we need to see this again when it’s been done awesome so many times? / if you’re subverting genre big-time, that’s fun, but how can I “connect with” or “get a lot out of a movie” that’s just fucking with the conventions?—having said all that, i love plenty of godard movies and several tarantino movies, but that’s probably because they let their messy idiosyncratic selves into the picture, however genre-y or based-on-previous-shit, so it’s still a personal experience. i don’t see where scorsese really IS in his pictures, and that’s a drawback for me). so really im not the ideal audience for scorsese, in general. to me he’s a sublime technician, but not a sublime artist.
I find the photo too unpleasantly distracting to read the article. I’ll try again later. Naked would have been easier to deal with than this choice of outfit. Also, I don’t go to beaches.
I find the photo too unpleasantly distracting to read the article. I’ll try again later. Naked would have been easier to deal with than this choice of outfit. Also, I don’t go to beaches.
get up
get up
“i don’t see where scorsese really IS in his pictures, and that’s a drawback for me”
do you really think a director has to be “in” his movie in order for it to be good? there are plenty of great films that weren’t made by auteurs. many auteurs have disappeared into bigger studio films with decent results.
there’s nothing wrong with a little escapism now and then. the “fucking with conventions” is just that. it’s fun to play along, guess at where things are going to go, feel good when you’re right, be intrigued when you’re wrong–and realize that, most likely, the director is playing against your game.
there are different kinds of scorsese movies. no, shutter island isn’t taxi driver, it’s not mean streets. it falls more into the “cape fear” camp. and at least from my perspective, there’s nothing wrong with that.
“i don’t see where scorsese really IS in his pictures, and that’s a drawback for me”
do you really think a director has to be “in” his movie in order for it to be good? there are plenty of great films that weren’t made by auteurs. many auteurs have disappeared into bigger studio films with decent results.
there’s nothing wrong with a little escapism now and then. the “fucking with conventions” is just that. it’s fun to play along, guess at where things are going to go, feel good when you’re right, be intrigued when you’re wrong–and realize that, most likely, the director is playing against your game.
there are different kinds of scorsese movies. no, shutter island isn’t taxi driver, it’s not mean streets. it falls more into the “cape fear” camp. and at least from my perspective, there’s nothing wrong with that.
[…] writers to write flash fiction about the random items they put up for auction? If not, why not? Blake told you about this a month ago! Anyway, at present SO is in a five-part partnership with The Believer, and yours truly is one of […]