Perceval le Gallois

Well, this is very odd — I was expecting a costume drama, but instead it’s… more abstract? And somebody’s spent a lot of money on MDF and paint?

Did this originate as a stage play? Both the sets and the acting are super stylised.

Oh! Gallois means “welshman” — I assumed it meant like er gaul. But I guess it’s Asterix the Gaul, not the Gallois…

Oh, is this based on a fairy tale?

Oh:

based on the 12th-century Arthurian romance Perceval, the Story of the Grail by Chrétien de Troyes

It’s based on the real thing. I mean, as these things go…

This is so weird — the Perceval character is a total moron, and apparently a total psycho, too?

It’s so close to being, well, Pythonesque… but instead it’s serious? Or is it? I’m not quite sure whether Rohmer is poking fun at the Arthur thing or taking it super-hyper seriously?

OK, he’s making fun of it.

Having a Greek chorus is very handy when doing plot recaps.

I like they way the switch between delivering their lines and reciting stage instructions.

This movie is something else, even on an Oddball Movie scale. But is it good? I’m not fascinated exactly, and I’m not laughing either… but I’m not bored. It’s très amusant, as kids say these day.

Rohmer asks the same question.

Wow, that’s cool…

Uhm uhm I zoned out there for a minute, and now we’re somehow doing the crucifixion of the Christ? How did that happen?!

Rohmer was famously very Catholic, but again — this seems to be making more fun of the proceedings than anything else…

What with the choir in a corner singing along to the nails being pounded in.

It’s just such an odd movie.

I did enjoy this puzzling movie, but I’m not sure it was worth spending this much time on it. It’s almost two and a half hours, and while the final half hour did eventually make sense in context (plot threads were tied), it’s… just a lot?

So while there were parts I loved, I’m gonna lowball it:

Perceval. Éric Rohmer. 1978.

A Nightmare on Elm Street 2: Freddy’s Revenge

Oh yeah — I watched a documentary about the Elm Street series: The producers (New Line Cinema) had an unexpected runaway success on their hands after the first movie, and had no idea what to do next. So they thought: Well, Twilight Zone was successful, so we could do that as a series of movies? Like, if you make a movie that has almost nothing to do with the previous movie, that’ll make a ton of money? Wont it? WONT”T IT!?!

And it did.

But they realised that making movies like this didn’t make much sense long term, so the first real sequel is the next movie.

Oh, this is the gay Elm Street movie…

Nooo don’t sleep in class

I just remembered why I lost my enthusiasm for watching this Elm Street bluray box set: It’s been cut down from 1.85:1 to 16:9.

THAT”S SEVERAL PIXELS

Nice digs.

Nice shades.

Nice can.

*gasp*

It’s hawt.

Nooes it’s his gym teacher!!

It’s amazing that this movie didn’t tank the enterprise. I mean, it’s not that it’s horrible… but it has so little of what made the first movie a classic. It’s got a few jump scares, and it’s got the general dream/horror thing going, which is the selling point, but…

That’s a sick jam.

Rude!

Limahl!

Hey, they filmed this in an actual abandoned steelworks?

Mm-hm.

I’m watching the extras here, and this is the director explaining why the movie doesn’t make that much sense, and that’s kind of amusing.

Wow, the extras here are really interesting. It’s not the usual puff pieces, edited together annoyingly — they’re giving pretty harsh critiques of the movies, and are allowed to do so at length.

I give the extras a , but:

A Nightmare on Elm Street 2: Freddy’s Revenge. Jack Sholder. 1985.

Jurassic Park: The Lost World

Huh… this is an odd 2K transfer… it’s very grainy.

Huh. This doesn’t looks as good as the first movie…

Heh heh.

Well, that’s very New York.

This looks like it’s been upscaled from a VHS or something.

Well, it’s nice of Jeff Goldblum to summarise the movie.

Man, this movie just sucks. I guess Spielberg didn’t want to make another Jurassic Park movie, so instead he made a movie about how capitalism sucks (true!) and t. rexes being all maternal (doubtful!) and stuff.

I’m one hour in… and finally something is happening?! Can it be? Spielberg found his schlock gene!?

Nope. I mean, he tries, but it’s just hard to care at this point.

C’est vraiment mauvais. (Yes, I’m duolinguing.) Spielberg tries so hard to make you care for some of these characters, but it doesn’t work. He wants you to rejoice at some of the other characters’ deaths, and that works better, but it’s still not … actually worth seeing?

Right:

Spielberg also expressed disappointment with the film, stating he had become increasingly disenchanted with it during production.

It’s just really bad. It’s boring. And it’s 128 minutes long. The only thing that’s vaguely worth watching is the truck-falling-off-the-cliff scene.

Jurassic Park: The Lost World. Steven Spielberg. 1997.