SCFZ Blasphemies

[Holymanm]

What are some opinions or preferences you have that you feel put you at odds with general, unspoken, or vociferously spoken 'SCFZ culture'? I'll limit myself to a few:

- not caring about the notion of "pre-code"
- having no interest in abstract-art short films
- thinking film noir is gateway cinema for moody teens

What about youse? What do you see affirmed here continuously that leaves you like "...erm ", but you let it go because you're a mature and respectful adult?

[wba]

I don't believe in categorizations in art and think that e.g. "serious (intellectual) films" and "exploitation cinema" are synonymous.
A film is a film is a film.

I think that's all. Nothing else comes to mind, really.


in regards to your above views, it's probably:

- loving pre-code cinema (and being sad that the code was applied so rigorously after '35)
- loving abstract-art short films
- loving film noir of any era and country

PS: I usually let it go, cause what's the use of discussing something with somebody who obviously doesn't care about it, let alone care about discussing it?

[Roscoe]

The idea that THE LADY EVE is not the summit of human creation, and that Henry Fonda is not the greatest actor ever, seem to be getting me in trouble a lot in a lot of places. One of the things I like about SCFZ is the general tolerance of alternate views. I'm so glad that I'm not the only one round here to find PARASITE, shall we say, underimpressive.

[Umbugbene]

Some of my less popular opinions:

- genre is overvalued
- the word "art" is not helpful in discussing film
- some films are better than others regardless of how people feel about them
- watching films properly takes skill and practice (I still have a long way to go)
- Antonioni is the greatest filmmaker, and everybody misreads his films
- Moon in the Gutter is a masterpiece

[Holymanm]

PS: I usually let it go, cause what's the use of discussing something with somebody who obviously doesn't care about it, let alone care about discussing it?

For sure! "Usually" we should, except in this thread

The idea that THE LADY EVE is not the summit of human creation, and that Henry Fonda is not the greatest actor ever, seem to be getting me in trouble a lot in a lot of places.

Same, with The Rules of the Game... (maybe it would've been better had it had Henry Fonda in it?)

[Umbugbene]

The idea that THE LADY EVE is not the summit of human creation, and that Henry Fonda is not the greatest actor ever

Count me in on that.

One of the things I like about SCFZ is the general tolerance of alternate views.

True. It surprises me sometimes, but I respect that about this group.

[thoxans]

still have no idea how to rank and/or even differentiate a one minute grainy static shot of a train arriving at a station and a one minute grainy static shot of some workers
leaving a factory. also, ingmar bergman is an angsty teenage boy stuck in neutral, after he read a couple pages of cliff's notes on philosophy, thought to himself, 'fuxk yeah i
got this,' then proceeded to make dozens of eye-rolling movies that are the very definition of every single thing that's wrong with the term 'arthouse cinema.' end of rant

[Curtis, baby]

there's no such thing as artistic merit

wenders is a god...i feel like he's not particularly liked around these parts

[Lencho of the Apes]

Sometimes I'm less than convinced that martial-arts movies are significant filmmaking. If there's an scfz dogma, that's the first place I can think of where I violate it.

Usually, though, I just have disagreements with individual members -- I won't give examples -- that aren't reflected in any kind of groupthink.

[Holymanm]

Sometimes I'm less than convinced that martial-arts movies are significant filmmaking.

Oh... good reminder for me to make that thread again!

[Umbugbene]

Sometimes I'm less than convinced that martial-arts movies are significant filmmaking.

I should hope movies can do better than titillating viewers with good guys beating bad guys. It strikes me as juvenile. I rarely watch martial arts movies, but I recently saw The Raid - impressive setpiece, amazing fight sequences, and I'd be lying if I said I didn't get a thrill from it. But I don't judge movies merely by how I feel when watching them. I want something more lasting. Add that to my list of heresies.

[Holymanm]

Man, a proper melodramatic martial arts movie gets right to the heart of the human experience - what are we here for? What is our relationship to others, and what our responsibility to others? - and attempts to answer the even more important metaphysical questions: ...what are our bodies for? What is the relationship between body and mind? Do we have a responsibility to develop either of the two, either for our sake or for that of others? Quite plainly, is it - should it be - every individual's duty to develop themselves sufficiently to be able to protect those around them, and to make the world a better place? Or no? It's perhaps a radical view, but, I think, an intriguing one...

And the flicks can inspire us to get in better shape, to ennoble ourselves so as to be more like David Chiang, to have aesthetically pleasing abs, etc. ...I'm quarter-joking, but really mostly not. Martial arts movies are the strongest on-screen representation of responsibility, duty, and dedication. Not just kick-punching the guys wearing black clothes, though sometimes that too.

And from a cinematic point of view, well... cinematography, directing, acting, whatnot. They're movies. Maybe just think of it like ballet, with huge, phantasmagorical sets, and all the extras and characters rotating and spiralling around on-screen... like, err, those random little geometric lines from film-burn or whatever in abstract movies that you all go crazy about

(Wait, maybe arguing on this thread is taboo)

[greennui]

Hong Kong cheese just doesnt work on me. For an example, I found Tsui Hark's Green Snake to be completely unwatchable.

I really like the relaxed vibe of this site though. So many film forums are overwrought with negative vibes, with people seemingly more interested in disagreeing with each other than to talk about films they enjoyed.

[Umbugbene]

Man, a proper melodramatic martial arts movie gets right to the heart of the human experience - what are we here for? What is our relationship to others, and what our responsibility to others? - and attempts to answer the even more important metaphysical questions: ...what are our bodies for? What is the relationship between body and mind? Do we have a responsibility to develop either of the two, either for our sake or for that of others? Quite plainly, is it - should it be - every individual's duty to develop themselves sufficiently to be able to protect those around them, and to make the world a better place? Or no? It's perhaps a radical view, but, I think, an intriguing one...

There's certainly a place in movies for these questions, but do many martial arts films go beyond the obvious in addressing them? And is one martial arts flick much different from another in handling these topics?

Off the top of my head, the movie that rings truest in this territory is Ugetsu, where Tobei learns that his manhood consists not in becoming a great samurai but rather in staying close to his wife and protecting her. Am I wrong to think that most action movies trigger a testosterone surge while shutting down constructive or reflective thoughts?

[Holymanm]

Well, there's certainly the question of how much of these questions is in the movies themselves, and how much in the viewer's (in some viewers') subjective experience... but while I'm watching them, at least, some combination of those two really gets to me. They're sometimes not written with particular poignance, or any great beauty, but they're not far removed in "concept" from The Iliad, The Bhagavad Gita, or any other classic of war, duty, and existential concerns. And they have much better jump-kicks.

But you're right, at some point they can certainly descend into pure testosterone, rancour, and malice. ...like John Wick, or I dunno, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, or such. And then I don't tend to like them much either. See, I don't even really like action movies, or that sort of thing - but kung fu ones? Yes please!

Anyway, if you're ever interested: it's certainly melodramatic, but I would probably recommend The Magnificent Trio as a great example of the sort of flick I'm talking about - and as one of the major formative early should-be-classics of the genre, even if it seems no one has seen it, overall. Have Sword Will Travel is notable for David Chiang as the apotheosis of that Achilles-mixed-with-Myshkin Hong Kong Kung Fu hero role. The Deadly Duo is more similar stuff. And finally, there are dozens or hundreds of great flicks of the genre in general, where 'YMMV'. If you can see some beauty (in at least the set design and cinematography, if not the martial arts and acrobatics), inspiration, or tragic pathos in them, good good; if not, no problem. The 36th Chamber of Shaolin, My Young Auntie, etc. At the very least, it might be worthwhile watching what could be said to comprise the real golden age of Hong Kong cinema, with all the effort and money and sweat that went into it.

[Umbugbene]

I've had The 36th Chamber of Shaolin in my streaming queue forever... it keeps popping up in lists I look at, including the SCFZ Chinese poll. I'll try to watch it soon.

[nrh]

There's certainly a place in movies for these questions, but do many martial arts films go beyond the obvious in addressing them? And is one martial arts flick much different from another in handling these topics?

i'd say a good comparison would be the american western - within that genre or tendency or whatever you'd want to call it, not just in movies but in books and tv series (much like wuxia), you get a pretty swath of examples. so on the one hand you get cheh chang hypermascualine nationalism and king hu's buddhist abstraction, chor yuen's baroquely stylized tragedies and lau kar-leung doing something like martial club (a film in which nobody dies) where martial arts is as much a matter of community daily practice as violence.

[Roscoe]

It's all gonna come down to the basic idea that Mileage Will Vary. A masterpiece for me is not a masterpiece for you. And vice versa. Again, what I value about this place is the cooler vibe where most takes are welcome, and if not welcome at least tolerated, and disagreements remain exactly that, disagreements. It never devolves to personal attacks or vendettas as all too often happened on MUBI with the likes of dear little Dimitris.

[Holymanm]

personal attacks or vendettas as all too often happened on MUBI with the likes of dear little Dimitris.

haven't heard that name in a while... thought life seemed strangely peaceful

[Evelyn Library P.I.]

As I said in my welcome message a while back, I am of course by no means opposed to narrative arthouse cinema (Red Desert is one of my favourite movies), but I have learned that I tend to really struggle to appreciate narrative arthouse cinema and don't watch much of it as a result. I think it's possible that this makes my taste distant to some members here (certainly it makes my taste distant to that of MUBI's streaming service, if that's any judge), but then, it also aligns me with the taste of other members. I tend to be drawn to the opposing extremes of the avant-garde and genre cinema (not so different or opposed as one might think, i've come to feel!). I've found that both of those interests are happily welcomed here too, something I can't say of many other serious forums for the discussion of movies. In any case, a bunch of people aligned in taste might be rather boring, and I agree with what's been said already about the value of heterogeneity of opinion and interest being valued. The idea that I'd find people who would want to share lists of their favourite films of both W.S. Van Dyke and Kurt Kren is something I never thought I'd find, and has a very warm place in my heart for that reason, among others.

[flip]

I think it's possible that this makes my taste distant to some members here (certainly it makes my taste distant to that of MUBI's streaming service, if that's any judge)

as our origin story, we're the anti-mubi, or at least we used to be, many of us met on the mubi forum. but one day mubi just decided to shut their forum down, probably because it wasn't making them money, with imo no concern for their community. we migrated to letterboxd from there, but that wasn't a great spot for conversation, and that's how the super champion film zone was born! i perpetually boycott mubi now (and i suspect my taste would also be distant from that of their stream service!).

mentioning that because i'm not sure how many newer members know how scfz began.

[flip]

as for the original topic, i'm not sure exactly what would constitute 'blasphemy' around these parts. maybe hating renoir or ozu or something like that? one of the great things about the forum is that it's home to a huge diversity of tastes and interests, take any strain of cinema at all from superhero movies to handpainted films to silent shorts to anime to contemporary bollywood to 70s european 'arthouse' etc etc and there's probably at least one person here who is into it. certainly there are films i think are amazing that most people don't -- like if i was making a list of the top ten westerns of the 1950s, it would include the secret of convict lake, the quiet gun and the wonderful country, and it wouldn't include the searchers -- but i don't think that's blasphemy around here, though it probably would be on a lot of film sites.

i used to feel there was a kind of dominant aesthetic at scfz, a lot of people were interested in directors like eric rohmer, hong sang-soo, mikio naruse, john ford, abel ferrara, johnnie to, jacques tourneur, and even when people had diverging tastes otherwise, that was the part of the venn diagram where a lot of us overlapped. that's still partly true, but with james• and m_penalosa only stopping by occasionally, and with a lot of new members, i feel the scfz identity is more diffuse, i'd have a harder time now listing directors who somewhat represent the site, directors who get discussed most often or top our polls, maybe jacques rivette, chantal akerman, raul ruiz? michael curtiz maybe? i'm curious who others might list now!

[Evelyn Library P.I.]

as our origin story, we're the anti-mubi, or at least we used to be, many of us met on the mubi forum. but one day mubi just decided to shut their forum down, probably because it wasn't making them money, with imo no concern for their community. we migrated to letterboxd from there, but that wasn't a great spot for conversation, and that's how the super champion film zone was born! i perpetually boycott mubi now (and i suspect my taste would also be distant from that of their stream service!).

mentioning that because i'm not sure how many newer members know how scfz began.

Right, I'd pieced together that story, but it's good to know exactly. I guess i figured former members of the MUBI forum would have liked the sort of stuff I associate with MUBI, which i gather these days tends to be stuff from Berlinale and other Euro festivals and the like, but obviously MUBI has gone through all these changes, so it's good to remember there's not necessarily any connection between the tastes of the former MUBI forum and the market niche of the present MUBI streaming service. And yeah, it makes sense you'd want to boycott MUBI now, i haven't given it money or attention in years either, to the begrudgement of my in-real-life film connections.

If memory serves, I briefly joined or at least browsed the MUBI forum when i was in my teens. I seem to recall there was a post calling for thoughts on Hitchcock, one of the only directors whose name I saw that I was familiar with, and the first comment was 'Well, he's no Kurosawa, but he's alright', lol... This made me think Kurosawa was this lofty high art thing above my lowly love of Hitchcock, only to discover years later that Kurosawa was basically a popular genre filmmaker too!

[nrh]

This made me think Kurosawa was this lofty high art thing above my lowly love of Hitchcock, only to discover years later that Kurosawa was basically a popular genre filmmaker too!

that depends if you're talking about something like barren illusions or something like creepy, but based on what he's said in interviews he would largely agree with you.

[Evelyn Library P.I.]

This made me think Kurosawa was this lofty high art thing above my lowly love of Hitchcock, only to discover years later that Kurosawa was basically a popular genre filmmaker too!

that depends if you're talking about something like barren illusions or something like creepy, but based on what he's said in interviews he would largely agree with you.

Oh, I've assumed all these years that the person meant Akira Kurosawa not Kiyoshi (who of course wouldn't have crossed my mind because I would have never heard of him then), but Kiyoshi would have been the more apt comparison to Hitchcock for sure. My description was referring to Akira, but, mmhmm, it could probably apply well enough, though less well, to Kiyoshi too.

[Silga]

My biggest blasphemy is probably my dislike of films from India. I know they are popular among many users here, but I just can't watch them.

I have no trouble with films from any other country or region. I have watched films from Polynesia, African countries, etc. but the only big region of cinema that I cannot get behind is India. The mannerisms and style is too distracting and distant for my liking. I am sure that through the variety of Indian cinema I might find a sub-genre or a selective group of films that I would enjoy, but not sure if I'll ever try.

[brian d]

as for the original topic, i'm not sure exactly what would constitute 'blasphemy' around these parts. maybe hating renoir or ozu or something like that?

i'd have a harder time now listing directors who somewhat represent the site, directors who get discussed most often or top our polls, maybe jacques rivette, chantal akerman, raul ruiz? michael curtiz maybe? i'm curious who others might list now!

i don’t like ozu.

monteiro comes to mind as another generally popular one. i think he was more popular at our previous home though.

[Roscoe]

Want to find names to add to your blocklist? Want to be accused of knowing nothing of cinema? Go to any Facebook movie group and deny the genius of PARASITE.

[Silga]

I'll wait till I finally see Parasite later this month at the film festival. That is if the festival's not cancelled. Also, Parasite is the best selling film at the moment of the festival lineup.

[Holymanm]

I am sure that through the variety of Indian cinema I might find a sub-genre or a selective group of films that I would enjoy, but not sure if I'll ever try.

It's also much harder to "try" them when all the movies are 3 hours long can't just bust out a few 80 minute movies in a day to see what they're all about