Recent comments in /f/movies

devnop t1_j6mefba wrote

Reply to comment by Professional_Toe_285 in The last hour of Cast Away is devastating and beautiful by PastMiddleAge

To put the shoe on the other foot, I'd say calling it projection is to not respect women's needs or see the emotions presented in front of you.

Chuck was a workaholic not present in the relationship. When he called, he would talk about work and about himself. Kelly seemed sad. That slow stare then smile when photocopying seemed like hard work. When together, Chuck fell asleep during the movie. When at the Christmas meal, she again looked really sad. He'd been dragging ass on marrying her and when giving her the "gag" gift of a pager, she didn't seem surprised. When given the "not open in the car" present, she seemed more horrified than happy and her first reaction is to shake her head. Essentially proposing and immediately leaving without an answer is quite the red flag... who would do that?

It's the sort of relationship where when the woman finally says it's over, the man says "but I thought everything was great?!" because he was so self-absorbed. The confounding factor is Hanks, he's just so lovably affable we naturally forgive him anything but if it was a less likeable actor it would be less ambiguous.

edit: if you read the script it's even more overt. Kelly straight up says to Chuck "This isn't working out" and the direction is "This is not a happy woman he is leaving behind.". The last thing she says is "Chuck, you're breaking my heart" .

15

SpecificAstronaut69 t1_j6mcylg wrote

Reply to comment by hastur777 in Australia to Impose Local Content Quotas on Streaming Platforms by Sisiwakanamaru

Yeah, you really suck at this. Good that you're bowing out.

Maybe stick to what you know best, like banning abortion, or perhaps free market health care, since you love competition so much.

You know. Stay in your lane so you're not reduced to pretending to "not care" when you get your arse handed to you.

I'm sure your mum thinks you're cool.

0

Bwills39 t1_j6mcpe5 wrote

Reply to Why Film Festivals Are Steering Clear of Controversial Movies by BobRobot77

I just finished watching Nan Goldin’s incredible documentary film about the pharmaceutical oligarchy known as the Sackler family “All the beauty and the bloodshed.” Correct me if I’m wrong but didn’t it win the Golden Lion at Venice last year? It is full of controversial elements. Not that I’d dispute any of them tbh. The Sacklers are a scourge. Accessibility of crucial information such as the film elucidates seems like something that we should be striving towards in this life. Knowledge over subversion. Truth over profit. Wouldn’t that be something. But again it comes down to the wealthiest individuals in our society’s benefit over the rest of our collective well being.

0

TheRealProtozoid OP t1_j6mc9lx wrote

Reply to comment by Technical_Drawing838 in B'Twixt Now and Sunrise - new cut of Coppola film? by TheRealProtozoid

Thanks, but yeah, that's all I found, too.

My impression was that the Coppola quote about the film being personal was in regards to the original cut, but I may be mistaken.

And I've seen various running times listed in different articles. Blu-Ray.com says it's 95 minutes. Amazon says 2 hours 19 minutes. Most articles say 79 minutes but I think I saw ones that said 88 or 89, which is about the same as the first cut (88 minutes).

I saw one article mention a revised ending. That's the only specific thing I've heard about what has changed.

If it's 79 minutes and has a revised ending, I'm hoping the entire movie has been tinkered with. Tightened up, maybe some rough edges sanded down, maybe some improvements in editing here and there, maybe new color grade.

The more changes, the better. I find recuts by auteur directors fascinating.

2