Twilight Time Discussion Thread

[Aclea]

I'd say it's gone the other way round, and has done for quite some time - it's the popcorn movies that get the bulk of space in print and TV reviews. That seemed an anomaly when Bertolucci's then-new movie got dismissed in 20 seconds while shows devoted several minutes to interviews with people queing weeks early for tickets to The Phantom Menace, but now it's become the norm as shows, print media and online critics all chase ratings/sales/clicks - and you're more likely to get that talking about the latest blockbuster than trying to persuade your audience that they might enjoy a really good film from another country with subtitles. We're getting to the stage where there's a near entire generation of critics with no grounding in film history or international cinema beyond the latest blockbusters and big studio releases. Try comparing just how much space critics gave to last weekend's new releases that weren't Midway, Last Christmas or Doctor Sleep (all of which don't just drive traffic but might also buy advertising space). Foreign language and 'old' movies in particular are given very short shrift - and that almost complete lack of critical interest in 'old' movies is another problem labels like Twilight Time face when there are so few avenues to even talk about them to build awareness (and since the IMDB shut down its forums there are few places fans can even talk among themselves about such unfashionable things).

[nitin]

Scorsese Marvel...backlash...ahem...

[nitin]

Originally Posted by Aclea

That would be the Scorsese promoting a $160m movie with De Niro and Pacino.

That I agree with, I have edited my comment above to make the point I thought led from yours.

[Richard--W]

Fantastic Voyage, Doctor Doolittle and the re-release of 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea were
among my first big-screen experiences in the late 1960s. I always made a point of reading the
credits in newspaper ad-mats, and if I saw a Richard Fleischer film (or a Robert Wise and many
others), I'd be there. The Last Run is one of my all-time favorite films and one of my favorite
George C. Scott films. I was there for See No Evil, The Don Is Dead, Soylent Green, Conan the
Destroyer and several others. In recent years I discovered Fleischer's more obscure titles via
TCM and blu-ray, such as Violent Saturday, but the quality of the work did not surprise me.

[Professor Echo]

Originally Posted by Aclea

I'd say it's gone the other way round, and has done for quite some time - it's the popcorn movies that get the bulk of space in print and TV reviews. That seemed an anomaly when Bertolucci's then-new movie got dismissed in 20 seconds while shows devoted several minutes to interviews with people queing weeks early for tickets to The Phantom Menace, but now it's become the norm as shows, print media and online critics all chase ratings/sales/clicks - and you're more likely to get that talking about the latest blockbuster than trying to persuade your audience that they might enjoy areally good film from another country with subtitles. Try comparing just how much space critics gave to last weekend's new releases that weren't Midway, Last Christmas or Doctor Sleep. Foreign language and 'old' movies in particular are given very short shrift - and that almost complete lack of critical interest in 'old' movies is another problem labels like Twilight Time face when there are so few avenues to even talk about them to build awareness (and since the IMDB shut down its forums there are few places fans can even talk among themselves about such unfashionable things).

I can count on one hand the film critics I have genuine respect for since I started reading them seriously as a teenager. Many of the pre-Internet ones were elitist pedants or just celebrity c-suckers disguised as critics. As for online, very few even know how to write, let alone master the fine art of solid critical thought.

As it says in the quote above by Aclea, the blockbuster mentality seems so all encompassing now and with more alleged critics jumping on that band wagon, I genuinely fear for older films, smaller independent, artistic ones and certainly foreign titles. Perhaps we are heading into another dark age where ignorance is consistently rewarded by apathy. But it’s not so bleak yet for more generalized audiences who aren’t quite as dedicated as we physical media collectors. A few streaming outlets and risk taking television networks are so far picking up the slack from the glut of theatrical films mired in teen boy fantasies. You can’t watch a series like THE WIRE or a film like ROMA and despair too much over the lack of quality adult filmmaking.

The best critics have to know how to REALLY write with skill and be well rounded in a lot of subjects, especially world history, not just in the primary subject in which they have alleged expertise. Plus they have to inherently enjoy the art they have chosen to write about, even when individual reviews skew negative. One of the reasons I gravitate toward our forum regulars, ACLEA and THE GREAT OWL and enjoy their reviews so much is that each one has an infectious enthusiasm for film, writing and critiquing. I would rank them higher than many others these days who glorify themselves as “professional” critics.

[The Great Owl]

Originally Posted by Aclea

(and since the IMDB shut down its forums there are few places fans can even talk among themselves about such unfashionable things)

I miss being able to check the IMDb forums to read different theories after watching certain films (Red Desert, Last Year at Marienbad, etc.).

I also miss the days when the local VHS rental seemed like a big city in and of itself, where I could rent Walkabout, Tourist Trap, and The Cannonball Run during the same visit. The Redbox rental choices these days seem so fickle and limited, as does the average Netflix queue on any given month. (Which is why I stick to buying physical media)

[deltatauhobbit]

Originally Posted by The Great Owl

I miss being able to check the IMDb forums to read different theories after watching certain films (Red Desert, Last Year at Marienbad, etc.).

I miss the IMDb forums as well and I haven't found anything quite like it since. There's little reason to go to that site anymore since Wikipedia seems to offer more interesting production information than they do, other than technical stuff like OAR and a full list of crew.

Probably the thing I miss the most were reading about other people's interpretations when it came to ambiguous endings.

[RCRochester]

Originally Posted by deltatauhobbit

I miss the IMDb forums as well and I haven't found anything quite like it since. There's little reason to go to that site anymore since Wikipedia seems to offer more interesting production information than they do, other than technical stuff like OAR and a full list of crew.

Probably the thing I miss the most were reading about other people's interpretations when it came to ambiguous endings.

IMDB used to be my go-to place for posting about movies before they got nuked, which is why I went from a lurker to an active poster on this site.

I know IMDB had a bad reputation but that was really only for certain movies, usually newer ones like anything Nolan related. There were also some older movies such as Commando that were a total write-off because every thread was just some d-bags making jokes about "chenny". But for the majority of older classic movies the discussions were varied and interesting.

IMDB still has value for its factual info (the trivia sections can also be pretty asinine at times), but it seems they're all about promoting the latest big studio releases and such these days.

[Doc Moonlight]

Originally Posted by RCRochester

As for Twilight Time, I think if they do continue to exist they really do have to re-think their business model. I really can't see it being sustainable in its present form. As a two-man operation, the idea of paying up front for the licences may have worked but with the fact that people weren't buying a lot at $29.95, and then with all those sales undercutting that even further, how can they stay viable?

I always wondered if the sales were a marketing experiment to determine a viable price-point for new releases; i.e. at what price will releases move most quickly?

[Professor Echo]

Originally Posted by RCRochester

IMDB still has value for its factual info (the trivia sections can also be pretty asinine at times), but it seems they're all about promoting the latest big studio releases and such these days.

Agreed, but remember it is owned by Amazon so they definitely curry the money of the big studios for advertising. I still find it an indispensable site and refer to it at least once most everyday.

[koberulz]

I just miss forums in general. Everything is on Reddit these days and conversation is just way too difficult to follow on there. Basically every place I used to hang out is dead now.

[klauswhereareyou]

IMDB forums might have stuck around had they had fewer places to post on their site (like not allowing posting on the pages of specific movies, actors, directors, etc.) thus making moderation a little easier to do. From what I understand there were actually some movie stars who may have been pissed after going to their pages and reading some of the comments on there.

[The Great Owl]

Letterboxd fills the void decently in the aftermath of the IMDb forums, although it’s not a discussion board, per se. I enjoy reading different people’s takes on obscure movies, even if the only discussions are limited to comment replies for reviews.

Of course, it goes without saying that this here site works equally well.

[HenryHill]

Originally Posted by The Great Owl

This is one reason why I am not cut out to be a professional film critic. The sheer joy of losing one’s self in a movie is not always held in high regard. It probably would not sit well in certain circles that I try to devote the same attention to The Fast and the Furious sequels as I do to an Ingmar Bergman film.

Roger Ebert once wrote, "It's not what a movie's about, but how it's about it." His reviews appreciated movies at the level they were pitched; a well-made movie is a well-made movie, whether it's an Ingmar Bergman classic or a Poverty Row thriller like Detour. To evaluate a movie, you have to ask if the movie respects the audience, if the plot plays fair with no unearned payoffs or deus ex machina endings.

[klauswhereareyou]

Other than aspect ratio info, I don't really bother with IMDB anymore. Most cast and crew info (though not always as extensive) is usually easier to read and just as accurate or more on Wikipedia.

[Gacivory]

Missed out on throwing some Richard Fleischer love? Oh well, let me just throw out a short appreciation! I love him, and I agree his sheer ability to do so many different movies for so long is probably why he isn’t considered up there with the greats! I just blind bought Boston Strangler and loved it! I love that he was afraid to try something new and change up a style!

I also put John Frankenheimer up there! I think he is super talented and done so many different things and feel like he can go underrated. I see people talk about his movies, but I just think he deserves a ton more credit for changing his style and doing so many different and great movies!

[The Great Owl]

Richard Fleischer is one of those directors whom I do not normally consider until I realize that his movies make up darn near half of my collection.

He went to the Billy Wilder “Give me any genre and I will perfect it.” school.

[SeanJoyce]

Originally Posted by Gacivory

I also put John Frankenheimer up there! I think he is super talented and done so many different things and feel like he can go underrated. I see people talk about his movies, but I just think he deserves a ton more credit for changing his style and doing so many different and great movies!

Appreciate the Frankenheimer shout-out, since he's one of my favorites.

A guy I tend to lope in with him is Robet Aldrich; one of the great director of "men's men" movies (typically war and western), he nevertheless gave us one of the canonical films noir in Kiss Me Deadly, a classic sports comedy in The Longest Yard and, perhaps most shockingly, pretty much invented the "grand dame guignol" subgenre with Whatever Happened to Baby Jane and Hush...Hush, Sweet Charlotte.

[bonehica]

Originally Posted by The Great Owl

Richard Fleischer is one of those directors whom I do not normally consider until I realize that his movies make up darn near half of my collection.

He went to the Billy Wilder “Give me any genre and I will perfect it.” school.

Howard Hawks graduated from there with honors!

[SeanJoyce]

Originally Posted by bonehica

Howard Hawks graduated from there with honors!

Aside from Fleischer, the only classic director who could go toe to toe with Hawks when it came to genre dexterity was a one Mr. Robert Wise.

Alright, I'd throw Michael Curtiz in there too for a 4-man death cage match.