Crazy Theories About Films?
- Thread starter akirajoel
- Start date
bristol_citizen
Well-Known Member
There's that Synchronisation for the slightly bonkers from Withnail & I:
Try drinking whatever they're drinking at the same time...
(Never actually tried it myself)
Try drinking whatever they're drinking at the same time...
(Never actually tried it myself)
Orang Utan
Maybe I like the misery
That's not a theory though, just a silly student drinking game
Independence Day is about male fear of penetration.
and Alien is - seriously and obviously - about male fear of / disgust for pregnancy / invasion
and Alien is - seriously and obviously - about male fear of / disgust for pregnancy / invasion
Barking_Mad
Non sibi sed omnibus
akirajoel said:
Like I said, my brain cant remember the bizarre parts. Still sorry to have bothered you
Orang Utan
Maybe I like the misery
Alien came out way before AIDS was well known though
Vertigo as death dream.
At the beginning of Vertigo, when Jimmy Stewart falls off the roof, they cut to him in a cast with a broken leg or leg or something in the next scene . I read a film theory magazine ages ago that postulated that it was impossible that a fall from such a height would have resulted in such minor wound and that he more than likely would have died. He went on to interpret the rest of the movie as a long death dream of the character, in which he progressed throught the various stages of dying from denial to acceptance.
Pretty interesting at the time. I didn't realise that it constituted a its own subset of film academia.
siarc said:
At the beginning of Vertigo, when Jimmy Stewart falls off the roof, they cut to him in a cast with a broken leg or leg or something in the next scene . I read a film theory magazine ages ago that postulated that it was impossible that a fall from such a height would have resulted in such minor wound and that he more than likely would have died. He went on to interpret the rest of the movie as a long death dream of the character, in which he progressed throught the various stages of dying from denial to acceptance.
Pretty interesting at the time. I didn't realise that it constituted a its own subset of film academia.
There's the same kinda theory about Fight Club...
Most of the film is pretty dream-like or put another way - there's lots of stuff that happens that couldnt happen in reality (eg the Tyler 'flashes,' the talking to camera, Tyler's existence etc)....
Someone pointed out that the most realistic scene of the whole film is Edward Norton's "dream" about the plane being ripped apart...
So: what if the "dream" is the only real thing in the whole film and the rest of the film is just Edward Norton's characters fantasy? What if its all the dying thoughts of one man before the plane he's in hits the ground? Progressing through the various stages of dying from denial to acceptance...?
Hmmm?
Most of the film is pretty dream-like or put another way - there's lots of stuff that happens that couldnt happen in reality (eg the Tyler 'flashes,' the talking to camera, Tyler's existence etc)....
Someone pointed out that the most realistic scene of the whole film is Edward Norton's "dream" about the plane being ripped apart...
So: what if the "dream" is the only real thing in the whole film and the rest of the film is just Edward Norton's characters fantasy? What if its all the dying thoughts of one man before the plane he's in hits the ground? Progressing through the various stages of dying from denial to acceptance...?
Hmmm?
gsv
liminally queer
Nightmare on Elm Street 2 is about a teen conquering his latent homosexuality
Now bear with me - lets look at the evidence:
If you watch it it's pretty blatant
GS(v)
Now bear with me - lets look at the evidence:
- The gratuitous close-up of his arse thrusting back against a drawer as he dances in his room - before he's interrupted by the female love interest
- "He's inside me!"
- As the teen finally destroys Freddy he falls into the arms of his (now) girlfriend
- Other stuff I can't remember
If you watch it it's pretty blatant
GS(v)
Star Wars is about sex.
Phallic light sabers. X-Wing penetration. A dominatrix father. Ugh. Sounds like a tale of impotence....
Seriously.
http://metaphilm.com/philm.php?id=51_0_2_0
Phallic light sabers. X-Wing penetration. A dominatrix father. Ugh. Sounds like a tale of impotence....
Seriously.
http://metaphilm.com/philm.php?id=51_0_2_0
bluestreak
HomosexualityIsStalin’sAtomBombtoDestroyAmerica
Transformers: The Movie.
Man, that filum is deeeeep. Unicron is a metaphor for internation capitalism, look at his choice of minion... Megatron, motto: peace through tyranny, is basically a decent soul who genuninely believes in imposing order on the world through his way, ok it's a bit fascist but it means well, gets turned into Galvatron, a machine of ultimate destruction with no redeeming features. Meanwhie the Autobots represent the basic failure of the liberal way in fighting democracy. They're hamstrung by not being willing to fight, by being reliant on imitation of the enemy's hierarchical structure. But once they get hardcore, once they release their more spiritual side they are transformed (excuse the pun) into a new system, one that unites both ways of thinking, chaos and order, anarchy, if you will, and destroys the world eating forces of Unicron.
Of course, in the final version it was re-edited so that liberal hierarchial system appeared to win, but if you know where to look you'll find the anarchist version and boy is it right there.
Man, that filum is deeeeep. Unicron is a metaphor for internation capitalism, look at his choice of minion... Megatron, motto: peace through tyranny, is basically a decent soul who genuninely believes in imposing order on the world through his way, ok it's a bit fascist but it means well, gets turned into Galvatron, a machine of ultimate destruction with no redeeming features. Meanwhie the Autobots represent the basic failure of the liberal way in fighting democracy. They're hamstrung by not being willing to fight, by being reliant on imitation of the enemy's hierarchical structure. But once they get hardcore, once they release their more spiritual side they are transformed (excuse the pun) into a new system, one that unites both ways of thinking, chaos and order, anarchy, if you will, and destroys the world eating forces of Unicron.
Of course, in the final version it was re-edited so that liberal hierarchial system appeared to win, but if you know where to look you'll find the anarchist version and boy is it right there.
Orang Utan
Maybe I like the misery
That ain't right - he may be dominant but he's no transexual!akirajoel said:
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
Alien 3 is very clearly about AIDS tho. I think.Orang Utan said:
A Canterbury Tale is an early porno concerning englishmens repressed need to perform bukkake. It includes the first known cum shot in British cinema.
oneflewover
Following "The Tigers"
Kubrick's "The Shining" as an allegory for the genocide of the native americans, and the repercussions down the ages in US society: Bill Blakemore article
Orang Utan
Maybe I like the misery
You don't find out til the end, unless you have already worked it out for yourself
Throbbing Angel
this is no longer a place of honour
some nonsense on The Matrix I was given @ Uni aaaaaages ago
"The Matrix and Marx.
back to 3rdEye Issue
1
Lately the Civic movie theatre has been holding a festival of
‘Classic Films’. Masochists have gathered to shout out the lines to
‘Casablanca’ and ‘Gone with the Wind’ and chew under-salted popcorn. One film of rather more recent vintage featured in the festival was ‘The Matrix’, the slick sci-fi diatribe that ran for over six months in Auckland last year and turned a generation of proletarians into cyber-geeks. What qualities have made ‘The Matrix’ into a ‘classic’ at such a tender age? Hamish Dewe, clever person, answers this question for Third Eye.
Like all good sci-fi, The Matrix is about the present, not the future. In the film, the machines which inherit the earth recreate our own late capitalist society as a tool to keep their human drudges more-or-less happy, and almost totally quiescent. The Matrix is a system of control which is ideological in nature, an ideology being a system of ideas which forms the basis of a political or economic situation. In the economy of the future, run by the machines, electricity is the prime commodity. Ideology keeps its subjects in their assigned place for economic reasons: in order to exploit their productive capacities. The justification for ideology is, as Morpheus explains to Neo, “To turn a human being,” holding up a duracell battery, “into this.” The Matrix is a tactic used in order to extract electricity, as surplus value, from an individual, from any individual unlucky enough to be inserted into it. Ideology is, in short, a tool to enable the exploitation of a mass of individuals so that others may gain an economic advantage.
There has been, perhaps, at no point prior to today, a society as manifestly good at ensuring the obedience of the majority of its citizens in all the major facets of life. The society I’m referring to here is, of course, our society: the society of late capitalism, remarkably international in nature, which is bound by neither linguistic nor cultural differences, but rather by an ideology, the ideology of capitalism. We are, as citizens, forced into the cage of wage labour by pure individual necessity. There is no other option, except the option to starve. Some may point to the existence of the unemployment benefit here, but few of us would choose to live on such an insufficient income, especially when our entire society is enforcing the idea that to receive the benefit is to be a dole bludger, a person who is of literally no worth to (capitalist) society, with the inevitable self-esteem problems that it engenders in the unemployed. Unemployment is a punishment, not a privilege, and the fact that it is seen as such is a function of ideology. It is a concept with a particular economic purpose: to encourage as many of us as possible to remain within the political, social, and economic structures of capitalism. That is, to get a haircut and get a real job. So, the only option open to most of us is that of wage labour. And once we’re inserted into that slot, it is just as if we were batteries in a walkman. We are only there in order to be exploited for our productive capabilities. In the real world, we are the producers of wealth, but not its beneficiaries. In the world of the Matrix, we are the producers of electricity, but not its beneficiaries, which brings us to the problem of resistance.
In the world of the Matrix, resistance was dangerous, but comparatively easy. Just remove yourself from the Matrix, and there you are, on the outside. But how can one get on the outside of our own Matrix, the world of ideology? That one’s much more difficult. The resistance here must take place on different levels simultaneously. We must struggle against the ideology itself, that system of ideas which has no philosophical basis, merely a certain utility in exploitation. We must struggle against authoritarian pseudo-alternatives to capitalism like Leninism and Fascism. We must also struggle against specific instances of exploitation as we come up against them. This is a struggle for power, both social and economic. A power which we produce, but which is somehow taken from us. The only alternative is to remain…a coppertop.
Hamish Dewe"
"The Matrix and Marx.
back to 3rdEye Issue
1
Lately the Civic movie theatre has been holding a festival of
‘Classic Films’. Masochists have gathered to shout out the lines to
‘Casablanca’ and ‘Gone with the Wind’ and chew under-salted popcorn. One film of rather more recent vintage featured in the festival was ‘The Matrix’, the slick sci-fi diatribe that ran for over six months in Auckland last year and turned a generation of proletarians into cyber-geeks. What qualities have made ‘The Matrix’ into a ‘classic’ at such a tender age? Hamish Dewe, clever person, answers this question for Third Eye.
Like all good sci-fi, The Matrix is about the present, not the future. In the film, the machines which inherit the earth recreate our own late capitalist society as a tool to keep their human drudges more-or-less happy, and almost totally quiescent. The Matrix is a system of control which is ideological in nature, an ideology being a system of ideas which forms the basis of a political or economic situation. In the economy of the future, run by the machines, electricity is the prime commodity. Ideology keeps its subjects in their assigned place for economic reasons: in order to exploit their productive capacities. The justification for ideology is, as Morpheus explains to Neo, “To turn a human being,” holding up a duracell battery, “into this.” The Matrix is a tactic used in order to extract electricity, as surplus value, from an individual, from any individual unlucky enough to be inserted into it. Ideology is, in short, a tool to enable the exploitation of a mass of individuals so that others may gain an economic advantage.
There has been, perhaps, at no point prior to today, a society as manifestly good at ensuring the obedience of the majority of its citizens in all the major facets of life. The society I’m referring to here is, of course, our society: the society of late capitalism, remarkably international in nature, which is bound by neither linguistic nor cultural differences, but rather by an ideology, the ideology of capitalism. We are, as citizens, forced into the cage of wage labour by pure individual necessity. There is no other option, except the option to starve. Some may point to the existence of the unemployment benefit here, but few of us would choose to live on such an insufficient income, especially when our entire society is enforcing the idea that to receive the benefit is to be a dole bludger, a person who is of literally no worth to (capitalist) society, with the inevitable self-esteem problems that it engenders in the unemployed. Unemployment is a punishment, not a privilege, and the fact that it is seen as such is a function of ideology. It is a concept with a particular economic purpose: to encourage as many of us as possible to remain within the political, social, and economic structures of capitalism. That is, to get a haircut and get a real job. So, the only option open to most of us is that of wage labour. And once we’re inserted into that slot, it is just as if we were batteries in a walkman. We are only there in order to be exploited for our productive capabilities. In the real world, we are the producers of wealth, but not its beneficiaries. In the world of the Matrix, we are the producers of electricity, but not its beneficiaries, which brings us to the problem of resistance.
In the world of the Matrix, resistance was dangerous, but comparatively easy. Just remove yourself from the Matrix, and there you are, on the outside. But how can one get on the outside of our own Matrix, the world of ideology? That one’s much more difficult. The resistance here must take place on different levels simultaneously. We must struggle against the ideology itself, that system of ideas which has no philosophical basis, merely a certain utility in exploitation. We must struggle against authoritarian pseudo-alternatives to capitalism like Leninism and Fascism. We must also struggle against specific instances of exploitation as we come up against them. This is a struggle for power, both social and economic. A power which we produce, but which is somehow taken from us. The only alternative is to remain…a coppertop.
Hamish Dewe"
tommers said:
"In the film Fight Club, the real name of the protagonist (Ed Norton’s character) is never revealed. Many believe the reason behind this anonymity is to give "Jack" more of an everyman quality. Do not be deceived. "Jack" is really Calvin from the comic strip Calvin and Hobbes. It’s true. Norton portrays the grown-up version of Calvin, while Brad Pitt plays his imaginary pal, Hobbes, reincarnated as Tyler Durden."
Its all true:
http://metaphilm.com/philm.php?id=29_0_2_0
Structaural
in Chatsubo
Wintermute
easy tiger
Star Wars as explained by Human Traffic:
"The Emperor... wants to conquer outer space. Yoda... wants to explore inner space. That's the fundamental difference between the good and the bad sides of the force"
"The Emperor... wants to conquer outer space. Yoda... wants to explore inner space. That's the fundamental difference between the good and the bad sides of the force"
Similar threads
