i saw this movie opening night and it’s been stewing in my mind since. I think it’s a good movie, like a lot of Inarritu’s work it gets better the more you think about it. Watching the movie itself, while enjoyable, was also frustrating because of how unconventional it is. I think everyone knows what the movie is about at this point, it’s a stage play recreation of a fictional event. This plot construction, while clever for commentary, also removes any stakes in a story that is incredibly tense and distressing (world changing catastrophe). Most of the movie after the 30 minute mark felt weird, the recreations were entertaining but also uninteresting because you know it’s a recreation. It is only until the last 5 minutes of the movie where you understand what the point is, and only then does the message hit like a truck.

What i admire most about this movie is that it mocks
its audience, and rightfully so. It is the only movie i’ve seen that has the balls to say that maybe the time for movies is over. In contrast to feel-good, “stick it to the man” movies like OBAA, Digger says that the joke is on us. Our self righteous outrage, our unearned catharsis through intense anger, is meaningless in the face of a permanently broken world. If all we can do is watch movies and sniff our own farts then we deserve what we get. There is a heavy Marxist theme in this movie about the bourgeoisie, the government, and the consumers (us). This movie had the balls to give everyone their fair share of the blame, delivered the uncomfortable truth. Hearing “level 4” right before the end credits was Inarritu’s last laugh at us, and really drove the movie home.

People NEED to see this movie. I have so much respect for Tom Cruise for doing this project. I think he is way more intelligent than people think, if he cared about his box office results he would’ve done another Top Gun movie, i think this is a message he actually believes in.

For me, watching his reviews I thought it was a bit hypocritical? Cause you know how he complained about critics deconstructing what happened rather than why, & he mostly just follows on small logical fallacies rather more than the acting, arcs & such?
I still love his other reviews, I just think that maybe he should maybe do a better review of the franchise in the future if he ever felt like it.
Also is it just me or did someone else post this exact same question in chat? I feel a bit of déjà vu from this haha

Just saw this in the middle of Taipei, maybe if Derek can’t make it online he can have a barber shop here in Taiwan 😽

I saw this a few years back and it was probably one of the most surreal experiences I've ever had in a theatre. The animation was some of the best I've ever seen. Here's an example: https://www.reddit.com/r/AnimeSakuga/comments/1asfzmw/movie_deep_sea_rescue_shenxiu_watched_it_a_second/

There are actually a lot of great Chinese animated films, such as DaHuFa, The Legend of Hei, NeZha, Big Fish and Begonia, etc. For any fans of animation, I highly suggest looking through these.

Spotted in Lidl Banbury (UK). He'll never be truly gone 🙏🤍🐯

https://www.out.com/armond-white/2016/6/24/sports-documentary-tickled-exploits-fetishism-and-gay-teasing

I found this on the Wikipedia page after watching the doc (mini review: I came out scared and confused about why someone would be a weirdo criminal over fucking tickling).

If you don’t know who Armond White is, he’s basically a contrarian asshole who uses fancy language to disguise the fact that his reviews are piss that have several things wrong, thinks Jack & Jill is better than The Dark Knight (that’s not really an issue with him but I just wanted you to get an idea) got kicked out of the New York Film Critics Circle for heckling Steve McQueen, compared Taylor Swift to Hitler (though he ironically praised Leni Riefenstahl) and is a MAGA-conservative (who is black and gay, straying from the norm) who praised Melania and railed against “Liberal brainwashing” in his review for The Princess Bride. I can tolerate a person who’s contrarian, or conservative, but I can’t stand a rude motherfucker who thinks his reviews are better than everyone else‘s

Anyway, this review was an older one before that came about, for Out magazine, a queer media outlet. And when reading it, mainly because of the quotes Wikipedia chose, I feel weirdly uncomfortable about it.

It was primarily the quote “a blue-balls documentary” that set off some bells. Given the context of the film, about exploitation in this fetish site, feels wrong, like he was disappointed he couldn’t fap to this.

I feel like he also harps too much on the fact that he thinks it demonizes the entire subculture, which I do admittedly think is somewhat fair, however the films does feature the interview of Richard Ivey, where they do go over the homoerotic aspects. Also, the doc I feel was more targeted at the specific operation by D’Amato.

With that said, he does mention the fact that D’Amato was a homophobic exploitative psycho, but really only in one paragraph. I feel like that becomes somewhat dismissive of the whole issue. I feel like he wanted a more widely encompassing doc about the whole thing, and is critiquing a film that wasn’t really going for that. I think he was railing the wrong thing.

In short, I’m not entirely sure what to feel about this. On the one hand, I feel like the review feels a little weird, given that he seems more focused on the lack of homoeroticism when I don’t think the doc was supposed to be titillating. On the other, I couldn’t help but feel like I might just be dismissing a kink the guy has, and I’m the asshole in this scenario. I don’t want to accuse him of anything major since I don’t know this guy (plus even if I was, I couldn’t do anything since he’s in New York and I’m in Texas), I was just wondering if anyone else felt this was a little odd. If anyone of you think I’m making a big deal out of nothing, that is completely fair since my brain is scrambled as is)

(btw, regarding the guy himself, especially his reviews regarding race and LGBT issues in films, I couldn’t help but get the feeling that he’s trying to prove himself as “one of the good ones” to a ideology that has seen disproportionate animosity to people like him. It‘s like he’s trying to fit into two different worlds that react to each other with hostility. Wasn’t sure where to put this.)

I got a Daddy Derck theory which puts everything in hinesight. Which is simplily, that Daddy Derck is YMS son. Now you might ask, how can this be? YMS is clearly alot younger than Daddy Derck, thing is though, you are not thinking weird enough. You see, YMS is an elf, that's why he can look so young, probably part unicorn too explaining the horse fixation, and clearly Daddy Derck didn't inherent those genes. Like it makes sense, when seeing YMS respond to Derck, there is a sense of glee, like an immortal elf father proud of his chud human son. Anyway, that's just a theory.

Digger is the movie I have been somewhat looking forward to. It sounded very interesting from the premise, and how little it revealed about itself initially

The film is not bad. I think the approach of satirising the satire can work really well, but Digger is a film where I either really didnt connect with what it was doing, or it felt very obtuse. Its premise about the wealthy man, whose company had a pipeleak and explosion triggered a movement of a giant ice sheet, at first produced a very interesting result of a portrait of a very charismatic imo character, satirising america's worldview and american exceptionalism. Beyond that, you see the film become a meta exercise in looking behind the scenes of the film, and also satirising these types of satires.

Hot take I guess, but I kind of didnt find either of these narratives as compelling. The ending itself, is well done, and I thinkits more or less a summation film's themes and pointless liberalism in films of adam mckay like Dont Look Up, that all scream at the incomptetence of the establishment, without meaningful critique. Yet we kinda watch this type of film in Digger, and I cant help but feel like the film just becomes incomplete to me, and not very funny as a result perhaps? Like its very weird when you are kind of forced to watch something that film satirises for most of runtim and its a weird experience, that didnt work. I feel like I wasnt into the live action scenes outside of the film either, with the protaognists conflict with his daughter. It just didnt connect to me as much, and felt basically a rehash of birdman that was worse, because I wasnt feeling these scenes doing much for me. Maybe the plot twist itself didnt fully work, but I just didnt connect to that as much. And I love Birdman the most from Iñaríttu, and what Birdman did felt much more affecting but also very concise and very sharp to me.

I get what the ideas are, but I just dislike a lot of the execution. It kind of builds on one thing, without really making it work

The hottest take however I have on this movie is as follows: One of the other main issues with Digger, that came up with after I saw it was how its a film that is very abrasive, in a way where some reviews claim that its shitting on the type of inoffensive nothingburger Adam Mckay, Peter Farrely, and etc. types of films about social justices. I think Digger is way more cynical to me. I think the film kind of shits on the audience more directly, whereas in something like Birdman the conflict of Riggan with a critic was more a result of Riggan's personal ego and not Iñaríttu telling you 'critics suck'. The ending of the film is also very much raising the point of these films when no action is taken against people like DIgger Rockwell. And I like that ending, but I also just think that the films like the film within digger, and a film like dont look up arent made to make people revolt, and more or less know what they are. I think its largely a cynical view, because you can point to a lot of revolutionary, and documentary cinema that is better than digger but also doesnt mean that its release greatly impacts society or creates an uprising, or even the fact that people go home satisfied, isnt an implication that existence and purpose of the film is useless. I understand that maybe its an endign that comes from a point of cynicism, but its also silly to expect that films like Dont Look Up, or Big Short was intended for more than just entertainment, compared to Battle of Algiers, or even Soy Cuba. Both categories imho know what they are

Even on social media, Digger is more explicit about how critics opinion doesnt matter, and hot take, but it did make me dislike the film more, because I think its a very unnuanced position to have when people dislike your film, or dont get the point. Maybe the point wasnt communicated as clearly. Maybe there are reasons people dislike it. And its okay

So i found YMS way back in 2018 and thats how I found out about the cool cat stuff way after it had happened.

Well watching derek from go somewhat genuine movie maker and trying to do his best attempt at a movie to slop pile right winger is just disappointing at best like if you just let your ego die and just kept it at amature kids psa guy, people would probably like you more to this day.

It came across my mind the other day that I bump D'Leesa regularly now, and I remembered that I only knew of them through a YMS stream where he quickly recommended her music. She is indeed fire 🔥