Great Movie-Watching Runs (And What They Do to You)

[sebby]

Recently, I have come back to watching a veritable shit-ton of movies (3-5 per week) after a bit of a hiatus where I could only stomach maybe 1 or 2 films a month. I have a tendency to get sick of things easily if I do them often, and so my frequency and enjoyment of movie-watching, like any other past-time, is cyclical.

Naturally, after one of these hiatuses I become re-invigorated by movies; it becomes exciting again to watch something that interests me; it no longer feels like work to watch that 7th post-New Wave Truffaut film or to delve deeper into the Silent Era; once again it's joy. (I would think this common, but maybe your movie-watching habits and reactions are quite different from mine).

With this, however, I become more critical. When watching so many films so frequently, it's easier for one to perceive the flaws in what you watch, specifically in comparison to other films from the same director, stars, genre, era, etc., doubly so if you, like me, tend to become immersed in a director, star, genre, era, etc. for a given period of time. As such, my scores will skew downward as a general rule when I go on one of these movie-watching bonanzas -- e.g., although I watched and enjoyed Fire Walk With Me recently, it came quickly on the heels of two other Lynch films I watched and absolutely loved, and thus FWWM suffers comparatively and will be scored and reviewed less favorably.

Remarkable, then, is the bevy of great films -- by my own opinion, anyway -- I have had the pleasure of watching over the last month or so. How is it that I could score Out of the Blue as a tier 9 film when right before it I saw oft-regarded masterpieces like Le Trou, La Strada, The Maltese Falcon, and Forbidden Games? Does it really stand up? Clearly, I'd say! Whether I pick out an exploitation film, a recognized classic, artsy-fartsy stuff, or whatever else to watch, it clicks with me. Part of the reason is likely that the movies I am choosing to watch are indeed ones with very high PSIs, the films I should love, anyway. Then again, I don't have a history of going ga-ga over my tier 10 PSIs -- they've often been films that have left me with feelings of meh- and blah-ness as often as not.

So what's the point of this thought-dump? I don't know...

...I suppose if you're willing to sign up to a site like this, you have a similar obsession with movies that goes beyond simply passing the time or having something to do with friends; the medium means more to you than that, and you can relate to some degree. For years I felt like I was painfully, stupidly chasing the dragon of the childhood film-watching experience created by movies like Ghost Busters and E.T. and Back to the Future. Seeing so many incredible movies now, in such unlikely succession, has eradicated that feeling of the fleeting chase; it fills me with something else. Something more adult, intellectual, philosophical, to put it very simply. But it also has re-energized me to re-visit my own film-making aspirations, which is a child-like pursuit, anyway. It's as if two oblong polygons have finally overlapped, quieting the tension that comes with tugging ceaselessly at nostalgia rather than gliding gracefully into proper, functional, content adulthood. Growing up, I think they call it. It feels worth it to me to give it a real go this time. To get that electrifying swell of inspiration from anything is noteworthy, so I must make my note, I guess!

[Bojangles]

When I haven't watched any movies in a long time (a week is a long time) I almost invariably rate highly the next one I see. And, like you, I'm tougher when I'm on a binge.

[tef]

I don't think I follow this trend at all. I tend to be pretty easy on so called 'perfect' or 'great' scores though. A film just has to get one element 'right' for me to give it a 85+.

[paulofilmo]

Recently, I have come back to watching a veritable shit-ton of movies (3-5 per week) after a bit of a hiatus where I could only stomach maybe 1 or 2 films a month. I have a tendency to get sick of things easily if I do them often, and so my frequency and enjoyment of movie-watching, like any other past-time, is cyclical.

Naturally, after one of these hiatuses I become re-invigorated by movies; it becomes exciting again to watch something that interests me; it no longer feels like work to watch that 7th post-New Wave Truffaut film or to delve deeper into the Silent Era; once again it's joy. (I would think this common, but maybe your movie-watching habits and reactions are quite different from mine).

Even at about 14 films per month, my heart would still race before watching each movie--covering the LEDs with cushions; a gleeful ritual preceding guiltless escapism. They seem to have lost their luster now that I'm winding down, so I guess the opposite has taken place. I don't want things to become habitual. I'm very aware that it's been a while since I last watched a film that made me think, this is why I watch film. Maybe I'll just end up with silents or westerns--purity--like when experimental tea drinkers always end up drinking . . . tea.

With this, however, I become more critical. When watching so many films so frequently, it's easier for one to perceive the flaws in what you watch, specifically in comparison to other films from the same director, stars, genre, era, etc., doubly so if you, like me, tend to become immersed in a director, star, genre, era, etc. for a given period of time. As such, my scores will skew downward as a general rule when I go on one of these movie-watching bonanzas -- e.g., although I watched and enjoyed Fire Walk With Me recently, it came quickly on the heels of two other Lynch films I watched and absolutely loved, and thus FWWM suffers comparatively and will be scored and reviewed less favorably.

Flaws become idiosyncrasy. and time spent with an auteur's vision sharpens perception. Some surprise is lost. Interesting trade-off.

Remarkable, then, is the bevy of great films -- by my own opinion, anyway -- I have had the pleasure of watching over the last month or so. How is it that I could score Out of the Blue as a tier 9 film when right before it I saw oft-regarded masterpieces like Le Trou, La Strada, The Maltese Falcon, and Forbidden Games? Does it really stand up? Clearly, I'd say! Whether I pick out an exploitation film, a recognized classic, artsy-fartsy stuff, or whatever else to watch, it clicks with me. Part of the reason is likely that the movies I am choosing to watch are indeed ones with very high PSIs, the films I should love, anyway. Then again, I don't have a history of going ga-ga over my tier 10 PSIs -- they've often been films that have left me with feelings of meh- and blah-ness as often as not.

There was a time when I looked up to admirers of classics. Then a time when I was a confidant admirer myself, free from aspiration. Then an especially arrogant time when I felt above even connoisseurs for their poor taste in certain acclaimed films. But before all of that, a time when I just enjoyed film, unsullied by anything.

Out of the Blue - is this an exploitation fiick? I wish there was a way to separate the strange and fun crap from the crap crap ito PSIs.

So what's the point of this thought-dump? I don't know...

...I suppose if you're willing to sign up to a site like this, you have a similar obsession with movies that goes beyond simply passing the time or having something to do with friends; the medium means more to you than that, and you can relate to some degree.

I was after the transpersonal and got a bit lost on the way, inadvertently chasing after canon.

For years I felt like I was painfully, stupidly chasing the dragon of the childhood film-watching experience created by movies like Ghost Busters and E.T. and Back to the Future. Seeing so many incredible movies now, in such unlikely succession, has eradicated that feeling of the fleeting chase; it fills me with something else. Something more adult, intellectual, philosophical, to put it very simply. But it also has re-energized me to re-visit my own film-making aspirations, which is a child-like pursuit, anyway. It's as if two oblong polygons have finally overlapped, quieting the tension that comes with tugging ceaselessly at nostalgia rather than gliding gracefully into proper, functional, content adulthood. Growing up, I think they call it. It feels worth it to me to give it a real go this time. To get that electrifying swell of inspiration from anything is noteworthy, so I must make my note, I guess!

So, have you been making movies?

Right now I'm procrastinating over learning a piece of music (I've never even done a great movie-watching run). It feels like work, when really I'd rather just improvise. Should I learn or should I play?

On film-watching. I'd like to know how everyone watches films. Personally, I just record whatever seems interesting that comes on television. Perhaps I should limit myself to Tier 9+ PSI films and films that my Kumpels like (when that feature arrives), in lieu of zombie-autopilot engorging on almost everything. Any wiser members changed their habits for the better?

[TheDenizen]

Out of the Blue - is this an exploitation fiick? I wish there was a way to separate the strange and fun crap from the crap crap ito PSIs.

Embrace the crap!

As a shameless lover of garbage film, I admit it can be sometimes difficult to slog through a whole bunch of pieces of shit to find that one elusive gem o' crap. But the journey itself is half of the trip...it just makes you appreciate the "strange and fun" crap even more when you find it. If you're looking for info on particular types of crap, I'm your guy, feel free to take advantage of some of the many hundreds of hours I've wasted on cinema de merde. I'm happy to answer questions/give recs.

On topic, I don't know that I rank movies any differently based on the sort of movie watching run I am on...but of course it's pretty difficult to assess that sort of thing objectively.

[Spunkie]

Out of the Blue - is this an exploitation fiick? I wish there was a way to separate the strange and fun crap from the crap crap ito PSIs.

Embrace the crap!

As a shameless lover of garbage film, I admit it can be sometimes difficult to slog through a whole bunch of pieces of shit to find that one elusive gem o' crap. But the journey itself is half of the trip...it just makes you appreciate the "strange and fun" crap even more when you find it. If you're looking for info on particular types of crap, I'm your guy, feel free to take advantage of some of the many hundreds of hours I've wasted on cinema de merde. I'm happy to answer questions/give recs.

On topic, I don't know that I rank movies any differently based on the sort of movie watching run I am on...but of course it's pretty difficult to assess that sort of thing objectively.

Denizen I'd be really interested in those crap with a birtday candle on it. Not the particularly good ones, more the interesting ones that are brimming with energy of strangeness. Why not make a collection out of the ones that you find worth a mention, or excuse my blunder if there already is one. Hail Denizen the crap seperator!

[TheDenizen]

Hmmmm...a "Creme de la Crap" collection has definite potential.

However, it's hard to do a collection like that since everyone's idea of what makes a "good" crap movie is slightly different. If you're looking for recs based on the strangeness factor, I can do that. Drop me a PM to let me know what genres you're interested in and I'll write up a list of flicks to see (that goes for anyone BTW). No need to derail this topic further.

[sebby]

There was a time when I looked up to admirers of classics. Then a time when I was a confidant admirer myself, free from aspiration. Then an especially arrogant time when I felt above even connoisseurs for their poor taste in certain acclaimed films. But before all of that, a time when I just enjoyed film, unsullied by anything.

When I first got into film (in my teens), I ignored the classics, knowing that for whatever reason I would find them boring, predictable, melodramatic, etc. I could appreciate unseen cult films like Roger Dodger or Kicking and Screaming, but watching something like Casablanca bored me to tears. I, too, felt I had the greatest taste in the world and couldn't be bothered with the crap other people foolishly thought was part of the cinematic pantheon. It's taken me more than 10 years of intense film-viewing to reach the point where I can gleefully seek out, unabashedly enjoy, and critically admire films like Treasure of the Sierra Madre or North by Northwest. It's sort of exhilarating, if somewhat predictable and boring as well.

Out of the Blue - is this an exploitation fiick? I wish there was a way to separate the strange and fun crap from the crap crap ito PSIs.

It's a heavy and brutal "punk" movie helmed by Dennis Hopper, who offers up some less cartoonish shades of Frank Booth in his role. Entertaining for sure, but it's probably too "smart" or maybe not violent or sexy enough to be exploitation.

So, have you been making movies?

Right now I'm procrastinating over learning a piece of music (I've never even done a great movie-watching run). It feels like work, when really I'd rather just improvise. Should I learn or should I play?

On film-watching. I'd like to know how everyone watches films. Personally, I just record whatever seems interesting that comes on television. Perhaps I should limit myself to Tier 9+ PSI films and films that my Kumpels like (when that feature arrives), in lieu of zombie-autopilot engorging on almost everything. Any wiser members changed their habits for the better?

I will (hopefully) begin shooting my (feature-length!) movie before the end of this year. I'm cautiously optimistic about this project; it's taken a long time to put together, and there's still a lot to do yet, but things look good.

I have always vacillated between consuming everything that looks interesting and carefully picking out movies that I'm supposed to have a high likelihood of enjoying. Results, as one might expect, vary.

[paulofilmo]

Hmmmm...a "Creme de la Crap" collection has definite potential.

However, it's hard to do a collection like that since everyone's idea of what makes a "good" crap movie is slightly different. If you're looking for recs based on the strangeness factor, I can do that. Drop me a PM to let me know what genres you're interested in and I'll write up a list of flicks to see (that goes for anyone BTW). No need to derail this topic further.

Is there a blog that posts yt vids where I can sample the smorgasbord of crap? the veritable whores doovries of the weird and the awful?

When I first got into film (in my teens), I ignored the classics, knowing that for whatever reason I would find them boring, predictable, melodramatic, etc. I could appreciate unseen cult films like Roger Dodger or Kicking and Screaming, but watching something like Casablanca bored me to tears. I, too, felt I had the greatest taste in the world and couldn't be bothered with the crap other people foolishly thought was part of the cinematic pantheon. It's taken me more than 10 years of intense film-viewing to reach the point where I can gleefully seek out, unabashedly enjoy, and critically admire films like Treasure of the Sierra Madre or North by Northwest. It's sort of exhilarating, if somewhat predictable and boring as well.

Yeah, I did find Treasure of the Sierra Madre and North by Northwest boring. I watched Rope relatively recently and squirmed with delight at its wry structure and camerawork, tier 9. Maybe I wouldn't have been interested a few years ago. I'm definitely conflicted between the value of the developed/undeveloped viewer, for want of better vocab. Last time I watched Fight Club or Ratcatcher or My Brother Tom I was terrified I wouldn't like them anymore. It fascinates me which films retain their value and which don't; and, indeed, what that means.

'couldn't be bothered with the crap other people foolishly thought was part of the cinematic pantheon'

I wasn't haughty in that stage--but shamefully reverent. On the flip-side, I know it's worth probably giving the works of Lang, etc. a second viewing. CK is well-known for improving with multiple viewings.

Tangential: I watched Totorro recently and upped my rating. Same with Kiki's. Yet the opposite occurs with Spirited Away.

Who am I kidding - I'm in the haughty, arrogant, asshole phase, and want to be as far away as possible from the 'if somewhat predictable and boring as well'.

It's a heavy and brutal "punk" movie helmed by Dennis Hopper, who offers up some less cartoonish shades of Frank Booth in his role. Entertaining for sure, but it's probably too "smart" or maybe not violent or sexy enough to be exploitation.

I'd definitely give it a go if one of my more eccentric Kumpels stamped a Tier 10 score right on that. Not looking so good at the moment.

I will (hopefully) begin shooting my (feature-length!) movie before the end of this year. I'm cautiously optimistic about this project; it's taken a long time to put together, and there's still a lot to do yet, but things look good.

!

I have always vacillated between consuming everything that looks interesting and carefully picking out movies that I'm supposed to have a high likelihood of enjoying. Results, as one might expect, vary.

Yet some--and even some with pickier pallets--are able to give mostly dark-green scores. It would take balls for me to be more selective. I'd be interested to know if anyone thinks it would be worth having said balls. I'm not channeling Emerson right now, obv.

[TheDenizen]

Is there a blog that posts yt vids where I can sample the smorgasbord of crap? the veritable whores doovries of the weird and the awful?

I wish. There are, however, several excellent websites which specialize in bad/cult/underground movie reviews.

Here's a handful if you're interested.
http://www.badmovies.org/movies/
http://www.monstersatplay.com/index.php
http://www.coldfusionvideo.com/
http://tarstarkas.net/
http://www.wtfcinema.com/