Heh, yeah it’s a bit idiosyncratic for sure. On the one hand there is definitely a forward affection for genre film here. And a treating of them far more seriously than, for example, your Roger Eberts of the world used to.
Conversely there tends to be an indercurrent of distaste or even outright disdain for your ‘Oscar Bait’ type films, where the community here is far more critical of a, say, The Kings Speech.
Coupled with the film podcast crews deep connection and love for cinema and it definitely creates above average visibility for certain types of films. I mean Moon was one of the first nominees (I approve strongly too, great choice). But I’d wager that if you asked the average film goer at a theater if they even heard of it, let alone seen it, the response rate is probably 5-10%.
Just my perspective as a guy who has only seen maybe 5% of the picks in the frame game (why I love when @Navaronegun get the conch, I feel like I have a chance!) and heard of maybe 10-15%, and almost 0% of your choices ;)
Also, yeah, when I picked The Dark Knight @rhamorim I knew it wouldn’t go past the 60, and figured there was strong chances of it going in the 20. But it’s hard to find movies I’ve seen that haven’t been done (and are also available to get screens of)
This is true. Most of the forum, including The Horror Inflator…I mean @tomchick… treat horror, grindhouse, splathouse whatever, with far more reverence than I do (which is none). I grade them with no curve; but with other films. But that is the thing these days overall on the interwebs; to look at shoddy exploitative flicks from the 70s and 80s and call them lost artworks (see Red letter Media’s Jay). To me, there is no special place. A film is a film. Heck, I think DePalma is a pastiche-merchant, let alone Cosmotos.
Phantom Of the Paradise is uneven but worth it, and Dyonisus in '69 is a blast and pretty special (although one could say he was more of a cameraman than a director there).
But for those two… yeah little appreciation for DePalma here too.
I don’t think of myself as having a particularly arthouse bent, but I have some interest in foreign and occasionally indie films and for me the point (or a big point) of a club like this is to expose people to things they probably have not seen but will at the very least have a strong reaction to. So when I nominate stuff I will probably avoid the acknowledged classics (at least, recent ones) and widely circulated blockbusters because I assume people have seen and discussed those already.
I think most of us do; and I will bet cold hard cash I won’t have to see Michael Bay or JJ Abrams in Qt3 movie club. But I do get a kick out of nominating, like, a Its a Wonderful Life in the 20:20 because its never been done. :)
Yeah that’s an important consideration. There’s lots of weird interesting little movies, but getting them might involve mail ordering DVDs from somewhere…
I really like the way you put this. Especially the last bit, which is why I’m simultaneously excited and nervous about it.
Also, I love your nomination. That one-sheet (poster) is on our kitchen wall, and I had a great time fielding my son’s questions about the characters pictured upon it one night during dinner. In addition to laying out the many other details on the poster.
-xtien
“Oh, that’s right. We’ve got another body buried here, don’t we?”
I think pop is perfectly fine. I love re-watching things I’ve seen, sometimes knowing a lot more about them (like via discussion here.) It’s a bit like reading a long review after a game. You realize you missed parts of it and it makes you want to go play it again. I say go for it, Nesrie.
I had seconded the nomination for In the Mood For Love above, but I think I’ll throw my own in the ring. I’m a fan of pop too, as long as it’s good pop. And I’m a fan of Mexican directors. I’ve never seen Y Tu Mamá También, but in the interest of going for more accessibility, I’m gonna nominate Cuaron’s Children of Men.
