I apologize for not having replied earlier, i didn't see it on the overboard
>With Reygadas and some of his more degenerate inclinations, I can see that
He was an atomic bomb in the "getting your movie financed by the government" in Mexico due to the unnaturality of his appearance first hand experience via talking with two producers jaded as fuck who said nepotism got a strong part of it
the problem was not so much the act of pulling someone out of your ass, which happens very often in latin american ventures, but because he represented an artistic circuit most associated with deconstructivism (and the mostly-jews who represent it via a certain educational institution) which renders the abstract artistic justification much harder to explain because it uses the meta of it much more than the mere intention.
For example financing by the usual suspects might be easier to get if i make a movie about social criticism in its topic but the fact i plan to use the project as a criticism towards the state government in position (opposing the federal government) while also planning to give recycled toilet paper as napkins at work lunch as part of the ecological impact blablablah will grant it a lot more possibilities than someone wanting to do a road movie with a strong script that will also propel tourism in a certain niche area with mostly local businesses. This happens while the same judges give financing to big studios who didn't need any but used that said meta to push it, said meta being first used before in silly ideas to grant a justification that the nephew of the treasurer is the director of the winning entry.
In terms of artistic intention that's where the shallow and deep comes, he goes deep in the meta but the acts on screen are somewhat shallow or "trivial". Of course every director has his agenda, it is part of every artist, but there's mostly artistic agendas and then there's mostly social ones; one can say a small message of protest about civil security forces' uselessness while doing a very compact action movie while others can drag on two hours saying something very vane while showing three hobos loving each other under a public park's floodlights.
I think one leaves empty after seeing his works, many movies feel like that and that isn't the problem but one learns or particularly enjoys nothing at all after them, at least in a trashy kung fu film you enjoy chinamen kicking each other or learn that they fry with green onions for the flavor, in eastern european stuff you learn about crippling pessimism or enjoy great acting, with Reygadas work i don't even enjoy the lighting which is one of his trademarks, i see better stuff of the same vein in 00's skateboard tapes and their subsequent artsy stoner reels... and they don't have transgressive content for the sake of it like traditional disembodied mexican heads or grannies kissing chicks.
>I'm curious to know what types of movies you like
That's my suicide pill, i always think and fall into the same ones and i honestly think they all can be trashed yet i have strong opinions about them, in many facets they tailored liking or i saw them very young and use them as standards.
Very well, hang me because i might deserve it, i still believe a movie should have a digestible entertainment factor in it because that's the easiest way to make the common someone eat something (food being the message/agenda/the skills and our ego wanting to show how we do something). Will divide them in a) camera, b) story/acting and c) "because", mind you i think they also have flaws or even massive ones and i will name them. Also i like visuals a lot, bit hypocritical from my part while banging on someone's storytelling and narrative intention. They are my "top 10" as of right now and in terms of how i would define my tastes (not the best 10 i've ever seen) tomorrow i might change 3 or even 4 names, next week i might put them back and replace other two, you know how it goes but i think they are a good representation and i still need to watch many essential pieces which i sidetracked to watch other things that might be considered much inferior.
Tsui Hark's Knock-Off
(massive flaws: The Introduction, Protagonist's justification/backstory regarding his abilities, most of the Tritagonist's existence, Deuteragonist being Rod Schneider despite probably doing the best acting of his career) if i may add there's also an extended version seemingly lost which would skew the final act's timing a lot more but features things which would make it more unique than it already is. Certainly the most criticized movie of this list but also the most ignored, not in my case because i still think of it often, has the audacity and fearlessness that i can compare to stuff like Peewee's Big Adventure, as in unorthodox movies that spell death sentences to careers and the ballsy/mentally ill directors who still made them out of their own pleasure/craziness. Script is also a great exercise in overuse of a concept, done by one of the masters of action Stevee De Souza.
Kar-Wai Wong's Ashes of Time
(flaws: Dependency in knowing the source material to "get" the characters who are Dragon Ball-tier famous in Hong Kong but not anywhere else due to lack of translation, deleted scenes from the first version change the plot a bit and were excluded later for who knows why, bit extended at times to present us with feelings/narration rather than just using the natural discourse aka melodramatic timing, adding to this it does use narration too much which is a problem with Wong's works at times as he doesn't show as much as he should)
Ridley Scott's Blade Runner
(massive flaws: Harrison Ford's work and lack of
acting comprehension towards the character and the entire thing, Scott being a dumbass over 35 years about the characters' origins and intentions despite them being clear in the shooting list and screenplay, this made the thing have different editions and voice overs for no reason but to fuck around, did i say Harrison Ford already?) It's been memed to death but if you take Ford out of the equation for a bit we find ourselves with a world and atmosphere building that was effectively used too, there's not much to truly criticize (aside from personal tastes) if we fathom to imagine and see the thing without the imbecilic handling of the protagonist. Had this movie been directed by Walter Hill or had his involvement as a "guardian angel" towards Ridley i think it would've been more enjoyable, specially with good actors like Tommy Lee Jones or Nick Nolte as protag.
Godfrey Reggio's Koyaanisqatsi
(massive flaws: While explicitly using the concept of the Hopi visions the film seems to use it as a justification for the cool shots despite said montages fitting perfectly towards such teachings and them not being fully shown or explained in the movie, the paraphrased part about "being replaced by a more advanced form of people, not malevolent but just different and they would too get their demise" fits to a t. and gives a more forgiving and complete feeling after the nuclear bomb references about the boxes of sand that will burn the skies and boil the seas of their land which are over Nevada, New Mexico and Arizona where they lived; these words give the movie a more complete concept and doesn't make it seem like an afterthought to look cool)
Fred Zinnemann's The Day of the Jackal
("flaws": Very pragmatic cinematography which isn't a flaw but leans much more towards utilitarian photography direction, Jackal finds how good a man who tends pidgeons shoots
, the interesting bilingual version is hard to find for some reason).
Paul Verhoeven's "Robocop" yes yes, the suggestion itself gets memed a lot but it is that good in terms of concept and execution
("flaws": People either see it as an action movie or a satire yet it's not either specifically but both at the same time and also a drama and a psychological piece, dubbing works have missed the aforementioned point and either get worked as fully serious or fully comedy) Commenting on said point this movie is one of the very few films i've seen that combine many different ideas and still pull it off while having its own specific style/identity, it's a masterpiece in integral work and even the script has its own custom font. Mind you i don't think it's a master at any of the specific things it intends to do but the combination of all its pieces into a single digestible product without feeling disjointed is extremely hard to pull off, we can even add a layer of religiousness without irony and the movie still works. A Gesamtkunstwerk in commercial cinema, even the soundtrack was made both to convey emotion and to be pleasing, sometimes they are pleasing but foreign to the work at hand and sometimes they evoke emotions but are frankly not very musically sound (like Hans Zimmer, theoretically good but not really "catchy" or something to brag about on the radio).
Chan-Wook Park's Sympathy for Mr. Vengeance
("flaws": Should've used the chaotic free jazz soundtrack a bit more to reflect the urban settings in contrast to the silence of the rural areas but the diegetic parts make up for it, sex scene feels like the director wanted to rub one off or make the co-protagonist a favour) It's a great movie, maybe not a classic but i always get back to it, it might be considered boring but i feel it didn't get anything wrong or unbalanced like Oldboy or Lady Vengeance did, the former was action gold but went a bit melodramatic while Lady Vengeance was too much of a reflective ride without much substance or gritty reality like Mr. V
Gillo Pontecorvo's Battle of Algiers
("flaws": Many people might be disappointed that Mathieu's character is a composite of a couple guys rather than a single entity that existed and that this movie pretends to be a docudrama aka real facts remade in sets, melodramatic soundtrack in "sad" scenes rather than just showing the fact by itself in silence) Despite being made by a commie and the subjects being commies the italian director showed great restraint in leaning towards a side or ideology so much that no side who was represented liked the movie, this can be seen and resulted in an excellent product albeit a bit skewed from real life's facts because Gillo didn't want to be hit by algerians or bite the hand of his contractors too much.
Takeshi Kitano's Boiling Point
("flaws": No soundtrack although when it occurs it is extremely
crucial towards the inherent concept of the story, making us believe the Protagonist could pick chicks with only his bike but this wasn't the case OR WILL IT
) I think i enjoy some other Kitano works a bit more somedays but this movie is the prime example you can carry a movie forward with the sheer power of an interesting supporting cast and a well-made script even if simple. The protagonist is a sack of rocks and he was fully intended to be so, the directing is very solid and inspiring to me due to us seeing what can be done with relatively little money to hire top notch actors or locations.
Servando Gonzalez' Black Wind
("flaws": Scenes that nail the government into a tree got cut out of butthurt which are hard to find on any release and this already on a movie which not very subtly bashes on the ethnic group that composed said gov, not many movies made with the same quality due to this being a fancy venture by a private company being repaid for political favours which would come again later on but paid differently) A manly movie made by men for men and which also had the skill to criticize the bad things few dare to speak and did so despite said silly group composing another group that allowed this product as a political gold coin.
There you go, you can now disregard my opinion but at least i tried to explain at times lol