2016 EOTY Entertainment Lists • Page 4

I just saw it the other day. I'm sure some of it went over my head, but I still enjoyed it and found it somewhat hypnotic in the way it pulls you in. Also, it's very short at only ~70min.

I haven't. I just looked it up because I saw it on a list a page or so back. I'm not familiar with a lot of these kinds of films but try to check them out when I can, usually towards the end of the year when these lists come out.

 

A lot of his films have a deeper meaning about Thai history (particularly Weerasethakul's criticism of their government) but all can be enjoyed because of his dedication to naturalism. If you are interested, do not rush through them; they are best felt in slower doses.

 

Have you seen his debut? I watched it very recently and I've never seen another film like it.

 

Mysterious Object at Noon? A long time ago, but I remember liking it. I thought I had seen all of his films, but he co-directed something called The Adventure of Iron Pussy.

 

Uncle Boonmee is a life changer.

 

I knew there was something going on with Thai history/mythology and the impact of government (particularly the last shot) but couldn't fully grasp everything. I was more drawn into the other aspects of the film. I am interested to check out more of his work at some point in the future.

 

Syndromes and a Century is his masterpiece. Everything he has done has been great, but Syndromes and a Century is built around repetition through generations, and despite being about a radically different world than ours, it feels more human than anything else you will see.

 

That's the one. I love the film's structure. Iron Pussy is one I haven't seen, but I feel like I may have read once that it was like a director for hire job or something.

 

The best TV performances of 2016

-A.V. Club

 

Good list, even though I've only watched maybe half the shows on there. Nice to see Jason Mantzoukas for B99 on there. He really was great.

 

How in the fuck is not a single Horace and Pete performance mentioned?

 

Cameraperson (2016) - The Criterion Collection

Cameraperson is getting a Criterion release, if you wanna wait til Feb to watch it!

 

I got to see it two nights ago with Kirsten Johnson there. It's quite good, a lot more free form than I had been expecting. It's great to see such a non-traditional doc getting such wide recognition.

 

glad I haven't seen any of these but I also feel like the point should be to highlight bad movies that made an impact and most of these aren't movies I feel anyone ever saw
The 20 worst films of 2016

 

The inclusion of O.J.: Made in America on so many lists makes much more sense now. It is remarkable that a television documentary on a sports channel would spend the first three hours examining race relations in Los Angeles pre-murder before it even gets to the act itself. The documentary lives up to its title; it frames Simpson's rise and fall as analogous to the ways race relations have ebbed and flowed in these decades.

 

When you make a best films list, you should try to include obscure films as a way to promote them. When you are talking worst films, however, you need to target mass-market stuff that many people will see or hear of. Punching down on films no one has heard of (failed indies, mainstream films that were dumped in theaters for a week) like this list does serves little purpose.

 

So basically, be disingenuous for the sake of appearances.

 

Any time someone quotes a post written in clear and concise English and starts a response with "So what you are saying is", you know you are in for something less than genuine.

"Worst" anything always has some sort of qualifiers because of the divide between the professional and the obscure. If you were to rank something like American Presidents, you have a set sample size and a criteria of which to judge them. However, with films, the reality is that thousands of films are made every year, so "Top Ten Films of 2016" is really only "Top Ten Films I Saw in 2016". The same is true for "Ten Worst Films of 2016"; however, there is a difference. While there are great films that fall through the cracks every year, most of them rise to the top; critics and film festivals help them rise to the top. However, there are films every year that play at one obscure film festival or a single screen in Los Angeles that completely disappear from everyone's radar. You are not going to promote terrible films that no one saw, but you will promote great films that more people need to see. Focusing on these non-starters is a way of protecting bad mainstream films. Collateral Beauty is an obvious abomination and deserves to be criticized for it; pointing out how some no-budget film no one saw might be worse is a waste of time. Worst films list are inherently political.

 

Good thing I didn't start a response with "so what you are saying is." It even says it right up there in clear and concise English.

I'm aware of why you make best of lists. I'm saying worst of lists though are pointless and the way you described them makes them sound even more pointless.

 

You know what you did; playing games by trying to pretend "So basically" and "So what you are saying is" are different is the real disingenuous thing being discussed right now. It is discussion in bad faith. It is infecting discussions in all sorts of places at the moment, from forums to politics to every day conversations. It is a way to put words in peoples mouths; clarification is something to be requested, not made up.

The great "Worst of" lists are not disingenuous. Their goal is to point out problems in the area you are discussing. Discussion of art requires strong criticism of bad work as much as it requires strong pride of good work.

 

Man no suicide squad on that worst list?

As a lover of dumb action I do conquer at the awfulness of London has fallen though

 

When you say "my post was written in clear and concise English," there is an implication behind that statement. Don't make that implication and then complain about how people handle discussions. What you said initially sounded disingenuous. I didn't put any words in your mouth, I made an interpretation.

Remember that time Slant said Beasts of No Nation was the worst film of the year? End of the Tour and Green Room also appearing on their lists. I'm sure we're just completely on different pages here so let's just leave it at that. Sorry, I'll be clearer next time.

 

It wasn't any sort of veiled implication; you intentionally misrepresented what I said. I have stated so. It is something that should be avoided.

 

I actually did not do that though. What you said about specifically targeting a certain type of film for the purpose of cutting down sounds disingenuous.

 

You have sports in your avatar; when people discuss how inept the Cleveland Browns are this season, there would be no useful reason to point out that there is some high school team that the Cleveland Browns are so much better then. Last year, Slant named Meghan Trainor's album as the worst of the year. The reasons they did so were obvious; her music simultaneously tries to co-opt the body positivity movement that has existed in black music for years and sell it to a suburban white audience, while also pushing retrograde gender norms like the idea that men should let women win arguments in exchange for sex. Now, was it truly the worst music out there? Of course not; there are plenty of college bands recording an awful EP right now, or someone promoting a SoundCloud mixtape that is unlistenable. The purposes of Best of and Worst of Lists are opposed; I want you to try things on my Best of list while staying away from the Worst of. If you make a list of movies no one ever heard of and then say how bad they are, you are not really doing anything. At the same time, that is why a best of list should not be stacked exclusively with films that made hundreds of millions of dollars.