I have not seen any of his other movies, and have no intention of watching them. My commens are limited to just Shadow in the Cloud, which was clearly filmed from his script, and thought you were considering this to be a feminist movie. I think literally everything you listed in the next paragraph as examples of Liang’s handling of the theme was in the original script in basically the same form.
Well, no. Given the movie was handling the themes with the subtlety of a brick, it would have been hard to miss them. So I really meant the kind of thing I gave examples of. The movie made as if to tell a certain genre of story, and then switched to a totally different one leaving the threads of the original one unresolved. If it was an attempt to subvert expectations, it was too clumsy to be satisfying.
I see movies primarily for the characters, plot, and presentation, not so much the themes. So a consistent handling of the theme doesn’t really score points, when the characters are one dimensional with no character arcs, and the plot is so weak.
Sorry, I don’t really understand what I’m saying wrong here. That is what the movie is about, no? Female empowerment, as the men (and the system, but the system is all men) repeatedly fail her and she takes control of her own fate.
The ‘jump the shark’ moment for me is very percise.
It is when the gremlin steals her package and is hiding out in some damaged alcove of the ship taunting her, and she says some heroic, inspiring one-liner to herself.
From literally that point forward, the events that unfold become utterly ridiculous, breaking suspension of disblief to its very core. It became hard to watch and take seriously.
Right, I get that. But my comment was directed at your assertion that Max Landis is responsible for Shadow in the Cloud being a “feminist movie”, whatever you seem to think that means. Calling something “feminist” is the 90s version of dismissing something as “woke”.
If I may, I think jsnell is just looking for a one word term to describe the theme of a movie where a woman shows up and does a man’s job despite his insistence that she’s in “a man’s world.” I don’t get the sense that he’s trying to insult the movie with it. Perhaps there’s a better term you could suggest.
I just find it curious that he thinks it’s a “feminist” movie, yet he’s accusing the woman who wrote it and directed it of lying about her contribution. He’s also thinks Max Landis does “feminist” themes, which strikes me as wrong on so many levels.
But, yes, if movies about women’s perspectives are feminist, then this a “feminist” movie. I just think you might want to update your lexicon if you’re going to talk about this sort of thing, especially if you’re going to lay it at the feet of – IMO – a talentless serial abuser.
Yes, that is correct, and is what I was trying to explain in the last message. Given Tom thinks “feminist” is some kind of a slur, this conversation is too much of a minefield for me to continue with.
Like “woke”, it’s all in the context. And when you’re trying to apply it to Max Landis, either you didn’t understand the movie you just watched, you’re some kind of MRA dumbass, or you simply don’t know what words mean. Possibly some combination of the three.
So am I off base in thinking the subtext of the film is about parents and pregnancy? I mean, it’s quite literally delivering a baby if you squint your eyes.
Summary
Mom in denial, lies about herself and hides the fact she’s pregnant to act like one of “the guys,” explaining away anything unusual with rationalization.
Battling with depression, feeling stuck and isolated from friends and loved ones. The father is there, but at this point there’s very little he can do except provide vaguely comforting words while dealing with the doubts of others.
Struggles with demons and life’s attempts to knock her down. She almost loses the baby, finally admitting to others what’s going on in her life.
With that acknowledgement, she finds a strength she didn’t feel was possible and pulls herself up out of her depression and takes control of her life the best she can.
A harrowing delivery nothing like it was supposed to be, but she’s through it. Against all odds, she finally gets her footing on solid ground and that mixed sense of awe and fear is replaced by a renewed sense of purpose. With that strength, she finally takes on her greatest demon and threat to her family, coming out victorious.
I knew I’d skip this movie when the trailer showed it took place on a B-17 in the Pacific Theater. My inner WWII nerd would just spend the whole time ranting about how hardly any were used there, something like 20-25 (thirty were destroyed on the ground in Hawaii and the Philippines on the first day of the war) and the surviving ones were replaced with B-24s by 1943. (Turned out that high-altitude level bombing was terrible for attacking Japanese ships. The bombs took so long to fall that the ships could just turn and avoid them. B-17s flew 55 sorties off of Midway during that battle, scoring zero hits.) From the general consensus here, I’m glad they didn’t use a B-24.
B-17 trivia vaguely related to the film: the last surviving B-17D is named “The Swoose” (half Swan, half Goose, having been extensively repaired with parts from other planes). Its final Captain was Frank Kurtz, father of actress Swoosie Kurtz. Reaching a bit to complete the circle, Swoosie Kurtz was in the movie version of The World According to Garp, and Garp’s biological father was a B-17 ball turret gunner.
As far as the gremlin goes, I just figured the filmmakers were fans of Falling Hare:
She got her first name “Swoosie” (which rhymes with Lucy, rather than woozy) from her father. It is derived from the sole surviving example of the early Boeing B-17D Flying Fortress bomber, named “The Swoose” (half swan, half goose), which her father piloted[5] during World War II.
Tom, I know documentaries don’t satisfy your conception of movies, but have you checked out Liang’s debut, Banana in a Nutshell? It served as the basis of her debut fictional feature, which also examined the director’s experience of being a second-generation settler in NZ with parents that are essentially sojourners at heart, but I think the doco’s superior because it doesn’t have to conform to romantic comedy cliches. Might be a bit too cute for you, but there’s some really neat things that I’ve never seen before in a film (including, bizarrely, the reception and subsequent fallout from the premiere of the documentary), which I think makes it stand out. I have to check out Shadow in the Cloud when I get the chance.
Anyway here’s a copy of dubious origin if you’re after a look at mid-2000s NZ, haha.
C’mon, the main character hanging upside down crawling across the bottom of the plane (who knew there were so many handholds on the surface of a WW2 bomber?) was just awesome cinema. Almost as good as cars in space.
Heh, did you make it past the baby reveal? That’s when I had to jump off. “Fuck it, it’s a baby, and now Chloe is in the most obvious sound studio we could devise!”
I finally got around to watching this and liked it quite a bit. I really liked, as @tomchick pointed out, that you never see a single scene from any perspective but Maude’s. That’s a fascinating way to do a film like this, and I actually really liked the scenes in the turret and the over the top action sequences. The baby is like the definition of a MacGuffin and had no impact on the action, so didn’t bother me the way a similar plot device in The Walking Dead did. The movie is ubsubtle, but having been in all-male contexts at many points in my life including the military, I can affirm that the banter wouldn’t be anachronistic even set in the present. The plot here is precisely as realistic as Django Unchained or Inglorious Basterds and serves the same purpose. I don’t need every movie I watch to be hyper realistic, in fact I really enjoy the kind of heightened fairytale fantasy this film provides: Edward Scissorhands, for instance, is one of my favorite films, as is The Hudsucker Proxy.
I just watched this. Why didn’t you guys tell me it was so good? Oh, maybe you did and I didn’t read the thread to avoid spoilers. Oops.
Anyway, I really enjoyed it. I think they should do a series of movies starring Grace Moretz as a Ripley-style action heroine. In fact, in the spirit of the “Alien/Aliens” naming convention, the next movie should be called… Gremlins.
