Home
Creators
Search Recent Random
Posts
Search DMs Popular Hash Lookup Tags Random
Importer
Import FAQ
Register Favorites Keys Review DMs Logout
Community
Telegram ThePornDude
Home Creators Posts Import Register Favorites Logout

Come and See full commentary (Patreon)

Published:
2023-11-27 22:54:48
Imported:
2026-06
Tags:
haven't archived this post yet. have a subscription? use the importer!

Downloads

  • 250437875.mp4

Missing 1 full-res photo, 1 video, as this post has not yet been imported.

Content

So, after I finished recording this, I did some research and learned that this is widely considered a masterpiece, famously disturbing, and extremely affecting.  I really wish I knew what went wrong for me, because I can't say I had that kind of experience.  There were some very good parts of it, but  there was a lot that just didn't work for me.  

I hope I don't disappoint you all, especially DroidC, who chose this movie for me.  I'm definitely open to discussion on this one, and I am glad I saw it now that I know it's apparently important.  So thank you to DroidC for the request!  

Files

Previews only

Comments

Michael Nolan

Oh, wow. You have my sympathy for having to experience this. I watched it in my late teens and even as a fairly insensitive guy I found some of the scenes horrifying. As an overall experience, I found it chilling. If you had a different experience, good for you! I already know that you are not a psychopath and do not lack empathy. Different people experience movies in different ways, I guess.

Rhetorical Thrill
>>123174298

The horror scenes just felt...clinical? Flat? I'm not sure. For whatever reason I didn't have any real emotional connection to what I was seeing. There's a chance that it was my brain protecting me, but I've been demolished by other well known traumatic films so I'm really not sure.

DroidC

I agree the film was meandering at times. A lot of scenes that were unnecessary to the plot served multiple roles however, for example as you brought up at the end, tone setting. But to paraphrase one of my favorite reviewers, “you’ve set the tone, you’ve created the atmosphere, you’ve made the suspense; get on with it!” Not all media is for everyone, and I’d prefer you to give your honest opinions rather than play to the audience as many reactors do. So on that level I’m appreciative. I liked the journey and development of the protagonist as time progressed. Another way to see the film is as an expedited coming of age story. Themes like “War is bad” seem self-evident, but it doesn’t hurt to reinforce them. As an aside, the viewing experience wasn’t great. If possible I’d recommend a timer in addition to the blurred footage, or to unblur/deafen the audio during certain important scenes. My preference would be for you to upload to a third party site that wouldn’t require you to blur/remove audio, for example “PixelDrain”, or sites similar. At least, for foreign language films like this, please unblur the bottom section to be able to read the subtitles. I do sympathize with your copyright concerns, but as is, it’s not watchable. I appreciate your reaction and your review. Thank you

Rhetorical Thrill
>>123177901

Oh dear, I didn't think about the subtitles. I bet I can fix that. I'm looking into the third party option as well, unfortunately the ones I've seen people use most are all subscription based and my budget isn't cooperating 😞 The timer part has never been very helpful for me as a viewer, it never seems to match up, but I can certainly try it while I find a workable solution. I'm so glad I didn't disappoint you, you don't even know how worried I was about that! And I'm glad you appreciate honesty. I've been thinking about it more today, and I really think cutting down some of the overlong scenes would completely change it for me. It was kind of like, omg, they're going to burn everyone alive, but once it takes 25 minutes to do it, the tension is gone without a release. Thanks again for telling me about the subtitles, I'll see about reuploading with a fix.

Jimmie V
>>123174298

In regards to horror feeling clinical.... That's kind of intentional and typical of art-house cinema. It's strange, sometimes you just have to watch more of it before it finally "clicks" and for so many people (myself included), it's way more effective than the usual way Hollywood slabs on the sentiment at all opportunities (e.g., like literally scoring a film with scary music BEFORE it actually gets scary to let the viewer know it's time to get scared before even doing the work as a filmmaker.... or films like "Little Miss Sunshine" that open up with music that's already weighted with so much sentiment that the filmmaker only has to do very little to make it seem deeper or more poignant despite their being very little there, at least in that moment). It's almost like complaining that classical music doesn't have enough bass or big enough of a beat to dance to like you're at a rave... that's not really the point. The key thing here is that art-house cinema is designed for ACTIVE viewing, not passive (which is what Hollywood continuity is about where you are supposed to be so immersed in the film, you forget you're watching it and anything that breaks that trance is considered bad). Things move slower this way because there's a LOT more going on here that you're supposed to be analyzing and it's a lot more subtle like reading a literary novel. Longer films in this style do test your patience though... I'd recommend if you ever go with an art-house film again, try something either shorter (Ingmar Bergman's faith trilogy is a good place to learn about this austere style) or in English (Lars von Trier work stands out here, but his stuff can get REALLY dark so watch out). David Lynch films are probably the best place to start (they're not as austere, but they're really "off" from normal films including the middlebrow stuff usually praised as brilliant or innovative but that's usually just ripping off old techniques established by arthouse filmmakers). You can dive in the deep end with Eraserhead, or maybe go with something like Mulholland Drive or Blue Velvet for some accessibility (relatively speaking).

Rhetorical Thrill
>>123174298

That does make a lot of sense. I don't have a lot of experience in art house style film, so whether it's just not being used to it or it's just plain not my cup of tea is hard to say. I haven't seen Von Trier but I think based on what I've heard of him I don't think I would appreciate his work. I have been meaning to try Lynch, so that's a great suggestion!

Jimmie V
>>123174298

Thanks for listening, I appreciate that! So if you go Lynch and don't want to dive headfirst into Eraserhead (or into what a lot of people consider to be peak Lynch, Mulholland Drive), The Elephant Man and The Straight Story are his two films that are done in the traditional Hollywood style without anything too extreme, Incidentally, both are based on a true story and the latter even has a G-rating. You can start there just to get used to Lynch, but it's literally everything else of his that's the art-house stuff. Blue Velvet would be the next step as it's INTENTIONALLY mimicking the old 1950s Hollywood style, but infusing it with darker, experimental things here and there that wouldn't exist back then (though I must warn you, there are some disturbing scenes in it). And about Von Trier... I get why people could be turned off by him even before watching anything, but the guy seriously has pushed cinematic grammar to new places like nobody else from his generation. I'd recommend Melancholia if you want a good taste of his brilliance without any of the more extreme/controversial content. It's still dark, but not offensively so... if you're a Bjork fan, you might also want to check out Dancer in the Dark.