Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Other Media / Re: misc book thread
« Last post by jenkins on Yesterday at 09:35:25 PM »

Guillermo Rosales
Born in Havana, Rosales was a lifelong misfit diagnosed with schizophrenia.
Rosales committed suicide in Miami in 1993, at the age of 47. Before doing so, he destroyed most of his work.

the book:
It has been hailed for its precise, lapidary style
basically it's an easy read and he heavy-metal shreds the whole way through. it's like One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest but with only the cuckoos, and written by Knut Hamsun or etc great talent, also written by one of the cuckoos.

it's a short book and it's the best book recommendation i've ever offered. i found my way to the book by chance. but it's that feeling where i always belonged here. if you like tremendous books about troubled souls in troubled lives (lol who doesn't) this is a book you've been wanting to hear about.
The Small Screen / Re: Making a Murderer
« Last post by Jeremy Blackman on Yesterday at 05:12:10 PM »
Just listened to Rebutting A Murderer to get a different perspective. This podcast was done by one of the reporters who covered the case, and he brings journalistic rigor to the story. I have to say, I was not expecting to be so thoroughly persuaded. In fact, it would take a lot to bring me back on board.

What this podcast does quite effectively is remind of you of all those "off" moments from the series, and you quickly realize that the entire show was constructed on suggestion, innuendo, and conspiracy theory, with very little compelling evidence. By contrast, the physical evidence against Steven Avery is actually overwhelming. Yes, the podcast goes through each allegation of evidence tampering and evidence planting and convincingly debunks most if not all of it.

I never thought I would be convinced of Brendan Dassey's guilt, but I have to say I'm leaning in that direction. I previously described how the show's handling of Brendan's interviews/interrogations was outright deceptive. What I didn't realize is just how thoroughly Brendan's answers lined up with the physical evidence. It's a coerced confession, clearly, but I'm not sure how "false" it actually is. I am not convinced that he would've had the information to make those connections were he not present during the murder and/or cleanup.

Many or most of these details he provides are unprompted. I'd be willing to hear a counter-rebuttal, but some of these connections are hard to get around. For example, Brendan describes Steven being sweaty and then messing with the battery in Teresa's car; Steven's sweat DNA was found on the hood latch, and the battery was indeed removed. Those details, as far as I know, were not planted in his mind by the cops.

More than anything, the show is absurdly misleading in nearly every episode, even and especially where it counts. They do things like construe blood DNA with sweat DNA, and claim that a DNA sample was tainted when actually the control sample was tainted, not the sample from the crime scene.

[Edit] Remembered another BS thing the show does. If I'm remembering correctly, the show (and/or Avery advocates) claim that Brendan saying they brought Teresa outside to be killed vs. in the garage to be killed is wildly/egregiously inconsistent. But this is what Brendan actually says:

"When we were done we took her off and we brung her outside into the garage and then he stabbed her and then shot her."
Paul Thomas Anderson / Re: PTA Interviews (on YouTube or otherwise)
« Last post by putneyswipe on Yesterday at 12:10:32 PM »
It’s shot on 35mm and is about a guy who has a lot of kids and listens to Neil Young. I can see why he likes it.
This Year In Film / Re: Burning
« Last post by Something Spanish on Yesterday at 11:36:08 AM »
want to see it bad, problem is it's only playing in one theater 50 miles away, meaning a 100 mile round trip. it played much closer during Thanksgiving week, when i was too jammed up to attend, then was gonezo. considering the dozen or so movies that have peaked my interest currently playing close to home, it's hard to justify making the trip. see the blu comes out in march.
Paul Thomas Anderson / Re: PTA Interviews (on YouTube or otherwise)
« Last post by Something Spanish on Yesterday at 11:22:30 AM »
It's Not Just You, Murray!

(jk, haven't seen it yet, but you're not alone, considering how samsong's contempt for this one was palpable.)

Paul Thomas Anderson / Re: PTA Interviews (on YouTube or otherwise)
« Last post by eward on Yesterday at 09:25:41 AM »
That is the general consensus. Could it...could it be me?
Paul Thomas Anderson / Re: PTA Interviews (on YouTube or otherwise)
« Last post by ElPandaRoyal on Yesterday at 02:41:38 AM »
Well, I have no kids, I certainly am not friends with Krasinski and Emily Blunt, and I enjoyed the hell out of that movie. It was one of the funnest theatrical experiences of the year for me.
The Small Screen / Re: Homecoming
« Last post by pete on Yesterday at 12:53:31 AM »
other people can chime in maybe - but I really like the ending and it for sure gave me enough surprises and revelation without stretching the reality they created, and I think Sam Esmail's direction works so much better in this setting than Mr. Robot, especially after the disappointing plot development in that show.
Paul Thomas Anderson / Re: PTA Interviews (on YouTube or otherwise)
« Last post by Drenk on December 11, 2018, 03:48:07 PM »
That's what happens when you get kids.
Paul Thomas Anderson / Re: PTA Interviews (on YouTube or otherwise)
« Last post by eward on December 11, 2018, 03:44:25 PM »
Paul Thomas Anderson Makes the Case For A Quiet Place

Paul Thomas Anderson and his wife, Maya Rudolph, have known John Krasinski and Emily Blunt long enough that, the filmmaker says, their four children thought of Blunt as Mary Poppins years before she was cast in the role.

Anderson shared this story with me during a recent evening celebrating “A Quiet Place,” Krasinski’s hit suspense-thriller about a family trying to survive a monster apocalypse by not making a sound.

After Anderson raised a glass to the movie and his married friends — Krasinski co-wrote, directed and starred as the father; Blunt delivers a bravura turn as the strong, determined mom — he sat down and reminisced about the first time he saw the film at the ArcLight Sherman Oaks.

“Everybody was completely quiet to the point where you could really hear the silence," Anderson remembered. “It’s so loud, the silence, and it’s not something you’re used to in movies. Everybody’s talking about movies on TV, but there’s a reason why this was a big movie in theaters. And there was a joy going to see it with an audience. It would not have been the same without a lot of other people around you.”

Anderson’s children are still pretty young — the oldest, Pearl, is 13 — so they didn’t see the movie. But it still became a part of their family life.

“I explained the premise to them the next day and I said, ‘When I scream “Quiet Place,” everybody has to be incredibly quiet,’ ” Anderson said. “I usually do it at the dinner table when it gets too loud. I scream ‘Quiet Place’ and — ” Anderson makes the zipping gesture across his lips. He laughs. “It works.”

So does the film, a superbly crafted horror film that works because of the extraordinary emotional investment it makes in its imperiled family. “A Quiet Place” figures to earn the obvious Oscar nominations for sound editing and sound mixing, but it merits consideration in many other categories, including screenplay. Too often, the awards-season merits of scripts boil down to word count and, of course, wordplay. But sometimes simplicity is everything. The taut, inventive “A Quiet Place” embodies that, delivering an emotional gut punch in a way that few films have done this year.

Here’s an early — and, in honor of “A Quiet Place,” economical — look at how the Oscar screenplay races are shaping up.

 :hammer: :yabbse-huh:

I just can't understand the love for this fetid hunk of shit.

EDIT: A Quiet Place, not PTA.
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
DMCA & Copyright | Terms & Conditions | Privacy Policy