A scary thing happened on the way to the Movie Forums - Horrorcrammers

Well, I agree, it was all over the place. I mean, one moment Rex Harrison is speaking so fondly of his ex-wife... and then she shows up and she's basically a psychopath and yet they have this weird love/hate repartee... but then his current wife, who seems perfectly lovely at the beginning is somehow suddenly a problem of a different stripe or something? I didn't understand much of it but I just hand-waived it for the English charm and Margaret Rutherford.

Sort of in the vein of Ghostwatch, has anyone here seen WIthout Warning from 1994? It's a somewhat stacked television news broadcast type movie about an asteroid crisis. I recommend it, though it's more horror-adjacent than Ghostwatch itself. It's on youtube too.

Watched this last night with some friends and we all gave it a big thumb's up (if you will).
There is so much to like about the film, from Fennell's direction to Kracun's cinematography to a very nuanced script and even another subtly great supporting performance from Clancy Brown... but make no mistake, this movie is carried on the powerful shoulders of Carey Mulligan in a performance so impressive I found myself wanting to win the lottery so I could start a studio just so I could make movies for Carey Mulligan to star in.
The movie did not do well at the box-office which was a real surprise to me when I looked it up. It makes me wonder, do neither women nor men want to hear this story? I obviously cannot speak for women but if the concern of men is that they would be attacked and preached at or whatever, as a man and a man who was "on the prowl" and such during my twenties and thirties, I can tell you this movie offended me not one bit and didn't upset me in the least for myself (though plenty for the characters involved), and I was not turned off by the portrayal of men in the film. The men are actually surprisingly nuanced... as is the whole film really. There is judgement and blame in the film, but fair judgement and blame; it was just really, really honest about the damage we do and how harmful some of our behaviors can be when we don't stop to think about the other person involved. The movie isn't preachy about it either, it just looks you dead in the eyes. And I think it's a great conversation to have. But I also think it was a damned entertaining movie.
One caveat to mention here for viewers is that this comes across from the marketing maybe as a pure thriller and it does thrill and even make you squirm at times but it is also a very thoughtful movie about damage and about our society but also about how the poison in your soul can also poison the people around you.
Really, we thought this was great, all three of us.
(I took off half a star because there were one or two ideas that were not as smooth as the rest of the film, though they did technically work as a part of the film, but I think we almost could have gone to five without those little things.)

I have yet to see Promising Young Woman. I remember that my friends were split on it, and one of them made a comment that really resonated with me which was (SPOILERS, probably).

I also know quite a few women who were uninterested in reliving traumatic experiences, specifically college experiences, and thus did not watch the movie.

I have it on my watchlist.

I can understand all of that. I think the movie is a little deeper than just a revenge film, I've seen a lot of them, and I think that's the reason it was nominated for Best Picture.
I'm not recommending you see a movie you don't want to see but I will say it's a damned good movie.

It's not that I don't want to see it. I've heard enough good things from people whose taste I trust that I'm interested in it.

It's more like I'll see it on a streaming service and think "Do I want to be upset in the way I think this will make me upset?" and often the answer is no. It's the same feeling that's kept me from watching the last 2/3 of Saving Private Ryan.

Mulligan is a great actress and she alone has me interested.

I liked Promising Young Woman too. It’s more of a dark comedy than anything else. I have heard some women criticize the ending for stating that And while I'm not sure I agree with that it still made me think of it in a different light.

I think that was the point of the movie though, to make that statement. So I think that criticizing the movie because you don't like the fact that it makes that point... I dunno.

The problem with Promising Young Woman is it lacks an ounce of authenticity and contradicts itself with its ending.



In other words, it’s exactly the type of film I’d expect a SUPREMELY pampered elitist to make when dealing with “real issues.”

Much preferred Saltburn because at least that film leaned into the pulp and a world she seems to actually know.

Watched Destroy all Neighbors last night, it's about a prog rock musician named William whose life falls apart after an obnoxious new neighbor Vlad moves in to his apartment building and after confronting him Vlad accidentally dies. From their Vlad seems to still be able to talk and move despite being very dead leading to more death occurring, accidental and otherwise. Oh yeah and it's a comedy, so all of this is funny, right it's supposed to be funny. Their are way to many characters that are pretty unlikable from the get go, including the William and Vlad. It finally finds a better tone when all the ******* characters team up to help him complete his album but not enough to really recommend it.

Hm. Neither of your points ring anything for me. I don't agree with either at all. Nor this "elitist" statement you make. That's all I can really say.

Emerald Fennell comes from an ultra privileged, “grew up in a literal castle” background. It’s why Saltburn is the movie rich people thought Parasite was.

Her bubble of privilege is why she can end the film on the note she does (ultimately faith in our systems that her and her folks benefit most from) and not grasp how painfully unrealistic (and stupid) her heroine’s solutions are.

She gets good performances, knows how to pace a film, and has a great eye. But she approaches a serious issue with a similar type of inauthentic exploitation filmmakers of the past did, while being able to pat herself on the back for observations she thinks are novel, like “revenge is bad, actually.” (Not inference there, paraphrasing her interviews on the matter)

Yeah, it sounds like you've brought some baggage to your perception of this film that doesn't necessarily reflect what's on the actual screen but your own feelings. Which is fine, hey, we all do that I guess. I don't agree at all but that's what makes the world go 'round as my mother used to say.

I brought my reaction to the film that was on screen that I later strengthened with context that I learned about the filmmaker and what she said that reinforced my interpretation of her work. Like when you watch a Tarantino film and go “this dude seems to really like feet” then you read an interview about how much he likes feet.

Fair enough. I didn't know anything about Emerald Fennel and at no point did I think, "This film was obviously made from someone who comes from privilege," and now that you've said it, it doesn't give me an aha or even a hm. The statement doesn't make sense to me. And that's fine, we don't have to see the movie the same way.

It comes from the inauthenticity of her approach and the resolution of the story coming from a place of ultimate faith in institutions after spending the previous 90 mins pointing out “issues.” None of it feels like it comes from a place of knowing or experience. And good for her, given the subject matter. But there’s a reason why most vocal critics that I’ve encountered are women who have been victims of sexual assault/violence and it’s not just objections to depiction but rather how she depicts it.

You seriously don’t see an issue with a film whose…



Feel free to wave this away with another “opinions, we’ve all got em.”

Why you wanna fight? I don't agree with you, no, none of that sounds like "privilege" to me and the idea that it is privilege sounds like some weird connection firing in your head - you are not convincing me, and I don't wanna argue, and I'm trying to be nice about it - and you wanna call out my willingness not to argue? You just wanna fight? Well, I don't. I don't care. This sounds like nonsense to me, honestly, and I'm not gonna get in an argument with you about it. So, "opinions, we all got 'em", I'm not buying yours, let's move on.

Being patronizing via immediate dismissal isn’t “being nice.” If you don’t want to argue, then try something like “I don’t agree but it’s interesting to read a different perspective.” Or any number of ways to not say things like “*Yeah, it sounds like you've brought some baggage to your perception of this film that doesn't necessarily reflect what's on the actual screen but your own feelings.”

I could’ve accused you of not actually watching the movie but I chose to actually address my points about the work and it’s failures.*

Dude. Saying, "we disagree a lot so there's no point in arguing" isn't dismissal. And I am not obligated to argue with you. But you pissed me off, so yeah, now I'm snarky. I say, again, let's move on.

I pissed you off because I pointed out that you keep passive aggressively dismissing my points in a condescending fashion rather than defending the movie. Could’ve just said nothing at all if that’s all you were prepared to bring to the table. Think on that.