- Welcome to Badmovies.org Forum.
Recent posts
#1
Good Movies / Re: Recent Viewings, Part 2
Last post by M.10rda - Today at 03:46:14 PMWORKING GIRLS (1931):
A much-better representation of 20s/30s director Dorothy Arzner than 1930's ANYBODY'S WOMAN, a typically downbeat Ruth Chatterton "comedy" that suffered additionally from early sync-sound challenges. This one was also written by a woman (based on a play by two women!) and edited by a woman, and all of those women are doing better work than a lot of men in the early 30s. Unlike most any film from the era, WORKING GIRLS (which takes place in a "dormitory" for young working class women who have left home in early adulthood to spare their economically Depressed families) would easily pass the Bechdel Test, as it has four times as many female characters as male characters and those characters talk about work and home and booze and dreams and other stuff that isn't "Men"....... though the plot does (natch) end up focusing on Men quite a bit.
To place WORKING GIRLS in a couple other useful frames of reference... yeah, sister protagonists Mae and June
are keeping one eye on their jobs and one eye (and both hands) on potential future husbands, but that seems like less an emblem of their gender expectations and more a (reasonable!) reflection of their economic realities: the jobs generally available to gals kinda' suck and the quickest option out of poverty is by way of a sugar daddy. That doesn't mean (as we see in June's arc) that one must forego all dignity and personal standards to bag a hubby, it just means a girl's gotta' be strategic and at times ruthless w/ her Life Planning. I only watched 1988's WORKING GIRL once, probably in 1989, and (in spite of Harrison Ford, Sigourney Weaver, and a fun score) have no plans to ever revisit it....... but to the best of my recollection WORKING GIRLS is a more progressive portrayal of women at work than vacuous Melanie Griffith and her big hair.
Although there is humor, there's also some palpable drama, underlined by (as mentioned above) thoughtful editing that occasionally emphasizes the sadness and desperation of the characters. June is a year younger than nineteen year old Mae but about twenty years smarter and more mature, and must become her sister's keeper, sometimes at the risk of her own security and happiness. This dynamic does get parlayed into some amusing (if high-stakes) climactic hijinks, with June borrowing her musician boyfriend's handgun in order to strongarm Mae's wealthy and flighty paramour. That tense conflict is resolved at greater length (and more awkwardly) than most glib romcoms of the 30s - actually it feels more like a character-driven script of the 70s or 80s.
But WORKING GIRLS still has more in store - a real left-field last-minute twist that flips the script on our expectations for and understanding of June. Maybe it cheapens June or maybe it makes June more complicated, sympathetic, and authentic - but it's definitely a Choice that shows that Arzner and her distaff crew were going Big with their finale.
Good acting throughout, too, including the less-glamorous/budget Bela Lugosi, Paul Lukas
as one of the love interests. I liked this one. 4/5
A much-better representation of 20s/30s director Dorothy Arzner than 1930's ANYBODY'S WOMAN, a typically downbeat Ruth Chatterton "comedy" that suffered additionally from early sync-sound challenges. This one was also written by a woman (based on a play by two women!) and edited by a woman, and all of those women are doing better work than a lot of men in the early 30s. Unlike most any film from the era, WORKING GIRLS (which takes place in a "dormitory" for young working class women who have left home in early adulthood to spare their economically Depressed families) would easily pass the Bechdel Test, as it has four times as many female characters as male characters and those characters talk about work and home and booze and dreams and other stuff that isn't "Men"....... though the plot does (natch) end up focusing on Men quite a bit.
To place WORKING GIRLS in a couple other useful frames of reference... yeah, sister protagonists Mae and June
are keeping one eye on their jobs and one eye (and both hands) on potential future husbands, but that seems like less an emblem of their gender expectations and more a (reasonable!) reflection of their economic realities: the jobs generally available to gals kinda' suck and the quickest option out of poverty is by way of a sugar daddy. That doesn't mean (as we see in June's arc) that one must forego all dignity and personal standards to bag a hubby, it just means a girl's gotta' be strategic and at times ruthless w/ her Life Planning. I only watched 1988's WORKING GIRL once, probably in 1989, and (in spite of Harrison Ford, Sigourney Weaver, and a fun score) have no plans to ever revisit it....... but to the best of my recollection WORKING GIRLS is a more progressive portrayal of women at work than vacuous Melanie Griffith and her big hair. Although there is humor, there's also some palpable drama, underlined by (as mentioned above) thoughtful editing that occasionally emphasizes the sadness and desperation of the characters. June is a year younger than nineteen year old Mae but about twenty years smarter and more mature, and must become her sister's keeper, sometimes at the risk of her own security and happiness. This dynamic does get parlayed into some amusing (if high-stakes) climactic hijinks, with June borrowing her musician boyfriend's handgun in order to strongarm Mae's wealthy and flighty paramour. That tense conflict is resolved at greater length (and more awkwardly) than most glib romcoms of the 30s - actually it feels more like a character-driven script of the 70s or 80s.
But WORKING GIRLS still has more in store - a real left-field last-minute twist that flips the script on our expectations for and understanding of June. Maybe it cheapens June or maybe it makes June more complicated, sympathetic, and authentic - but it's definitely a Choice that shows that Arzner and her distaff crew were going Big with their finale.
Good acting throughout, too, including the less-glamorous/budget Bela Lugosi, Paul Lukas
as one of the love interests. I liked this one. 4/5 #2
Good Movies / Re: Recent theatrical viewings
Last post by Dr. Whom - Today at 02:15:28 PMI found Reflection more fun because it had action straight from the start, and has a freewheeling attitude to storytelling. Miasma on the contrary is trying to make a point and is not always subtle about it. That being said, Miasma had several laugh out loud moments.
#3
Games / Re: Answer the question with a...
Last post by Rev. Powell - Today at 11:23:21 AM
Who do you want to marry?
#4
Good Movies / Re: Childhood nightmare fuel p...
Last post by M.10rda - Today at 11:07:36 AMI just saw an online petition to urge the MPAA that any film in which a dog dies should automatically be rated R. (No mention of cats in the petition, alas.) Now I hate seeing animals die in movies, but - per your comment, Chainsaw - what's the sense in shielding children from the realities of life? That's why I'm introducing my own petition to the MPAA: All Bigfoot horror movies should automatically be rated G - like in the good old days!
#6
Games / Re: Answer the question with a...
Last post by bob - Today at 10:19:22 AMI was told to see
How did you drink so much?
How did you drink so much?
#8
Trouble Tickets / Re: Constant logging on errors...
Last post by Trevor - Today at 09:51:59 AMQuote from: Rev. Powell on Today at 08:19:27 AMThis site is running extremely slow at times and you're probably timing out. I have checked the box that says "always stay logged in" and I have no problems.
I can't diagnose the reason the site is slow, or do anything about it.Probably needs some maintenance under the hood, hopefully Andrew will randomly stop by and take care of it.
Thanks Rev 🙂🐢
#9
Good Movies / Re: Recent theatrical viewings
Last post by Rev. Powell - Today at 09:20:44 AMTEENAGE SEX AND DEATH AT CAMP MIASMA: A hot new indie director is hired to reboot her favorite slasher franchise, Camp Miasma, and researches by visiting the reclusive star of the original movie, who now lives on the original set, leading her to a sexual and artistic rebirth. I've never liked the slasher genre, but Schoenbrun's movie helps me understand the appeal, somewhat. According to this deconstruction, slashers are not horror movies with a bit of gratuitous sex thrown in; they're pure sex movies costumed in horror. 4/5.
Dr. Whom is right that it's very meta and will appeal to the same crowd who liked REFLECTION IN A DEAD DIAMOND. I'm not really sure I'd say that movie was "more fun," though. I'd say they're about equal. A matter of personal taste. This movie is much more thoughtful than DIAMOND, which was all beautiful surfaces, and that gives MIASMA a slight edge for me.
Besides Patrick Fischler (I didn't know him by name but recognize him from MULHOLLAND DRIVE), I was tickled to see The Kids in the Hall's Kevin MacDonald in a small role.
Dr. Whom is right that it's very meta and will appeal to the same crowd who liked REFLECTION IN A DEAD DIAMOND. I'm not really sure I'd say that movie was "more fun," though. I'd say they're about equal. A matter of personal taste. This movie is much more thoughtful than DIAMOND, which was all beautiful surfaces, and that gives MIASMA a slight edge for me.
Besides Patrick Fischler (I didn't know him by name but recognize him from MULHOLLAND DRIVE), I was tickled to see The Kids in the Hall's Kevin MacDonald in a small role.
#10
Entertainment / Re: What have you been listeni...
Last post by Rev. Powell - Today at 09:04:51 AM
A double album completely covering "Kind of Blue" and "A Love Supreme," although the original melodies are sometimes difficult to pick out. Lots of dub influences. I like.