Inspired by recent posts, I’ve ordered Nina Simone’s Pastel Blues and Supergrass’s In It For The Money. Rummaging through my collection for Hats by The Blue Nile, I find I own them already.
It’s too late to turn the delivery back now. Anyone fancy a free album?
What are you like?
More to the point, what kind of system have you got when you come across Nina Simone and Supergrass while looking for The Blue Nile..?
I had a system once. Not any more.
I’m super dubious that the above is, in fact, the “official video” for Where Is My Mind.
Try this one. Seems less ‘official’ to me.
Happy to take the Nina Simone off your hands – don’t have that one.
Great! PM me.
I’m ready when you are @SteveT.
Hi @Tiggerlion I did respond through the site – did you get it?
Cheers
Steve
@SteveT, our PMing doesn’t seem to be working. Shall I contact the Baron? He and I have communicated successfully before.
Hi @Tiggerlion that will work. Seems I am getting your messages but you are not getting mine. Must be doing something wrong. I will alert Baron to expect to hear from you.
Great!
Hmm, tough one – where were you when you last had it, Tiggs?
If I could remember that, I’d know where it was.
*gun fingers*
I need something to change it.
Everything seems to be up in the air at this point.
Don’t know about those two, but I wouldn’t mind ‘Hats’…;-)
I do have two copies. The original CD issue and the remaster. If I can find it and you pm me, I’ll send you the original.
Are you sure? That would be very kind.
Your mind is okay, Tigs, but where is your Hat?
On me ‘ed.
I hate Fight Club. Violence-worshipping, misogynistic bullshit for pudgy middle-class pseudo-intellectuals. ISIS with a college-rock soundtrack. Bollocks.
I may be on the wrong thread.
I absolutely LOATHE Fight Club. Never been angrier or more disappointed watching a film in the cinema.
I was dead excited for it too. I’d read a couple of Chuck Unpronounceable’s books, and Ed Norton was coming off the magnificent American History X. The movie press was full of all sorts of articles about how smart this was going to be, and Fincher was long since touted as an Important Director Who Would Do Great Things.
When release date finally arrived, I dutifully trooped down to my local Odeon, all abuzz. I then spent the next two hours wanting to shout at the fecking screen.
I can stomach the violence. It’s the smugness and hypocrisy I can’t abide. It’s a film that ostensibly opposes materialism, but it climaxes with Pitt wearing a $10,000 dollar Gucci leather jacket (I know the price tag because the producers publicised it in the flipping pre release interviews) and solid gold aviators. It’s a movie that fixed the ideal male body type for about a decade, but which is supposedly about substance over style. At one point Pitt directs Norton’s attention to an underwear ad of a topless, chiseled, man and asks, with furrowed brow, “is this what a man’s body is supposed to be”? I dunno Brad, you’re the former underwear model who’s had his abs out for the last hour, why don’t you tell me?
It’s also a movie about the vapidity of people’s everyday lives, and the characterlessness of their IKEA furniture, directed by a man who made his name shilling for Coca-Cola. I hated, hated, hated the tail end 20th century trend for pronouncing normal life, during what was a long period of peace and prosperity, to be somehow akin to living as a test lab rat – always loathed OK Computer for the same reason. But the same message is so much more objectionable when it’s being beamed down from the Hollywood Hills by multi millionaires.
It’s a movie that pretends to be smart, but which is anything but. It says nothing, it’s rammed full of Fincher’s god awful “look at me” directoral style, and knowing that the principles walked round the set carrying books by Sartre and Camus makes me lightly incandescent.
I’m generally a fairly tolerant man, but this hypocritical bullshit movie sucks donkey balls, with its totally unearned appropriation of the Pixies, its dumb-ass view of masculinity and it’s faux transgressiveness. It’s what stupid people think smart looks like. Fuck this movie.
I think it’s smart and brilliant. which makes me stupid you say? Dammit. I knew something was wrong with me (and I certainly knew it was nothing aesthetic).
I agree there’s a smugness to FC, but when something is that self-aware a little smugness is inevitable. I don’t care about Fincher’s antics outside of the film or the cost of Brad’s jacket. I care that Tyler Durden is a brilliant name, up there with Keyser Soze, Apollo Creed, Snake Plissken, Hilda Ogden and Amy Turtle. I care that the Meatloaf hates his tits. I care that the last line of dialogue is fab. I care that subliminal flashes, freeze frames and “flashback humour” make it one exhilarating, hugely original, sexy, brash, provocative and funny-as-fuck film.
I found the formulaic ‘baddie vs goodie’ tosh that so dominated American cinema in the 80’s (thanks Rocky) were boring. Then Pulp Fiction blew all that away, paving the way for Fight Club, Usual Suspects, Memento, Traffic etc etc, and I became a happy chappy.
Yep. A character has a great name and another character hates his tits. These are the high points.
PS – Just be glad you got the looks.
As a very wise character once said: “You’re so analytical! Sometimes you just have to let art… flow… over you.”
Happy to do so with art. Draw the line at effluent.
I feel the same about Mulholland Drive.
As a self contained film in its own four celluloid walls I like it. As a piece of art in the wider world, it is problematic for all the reasons Bingo lists, but the thing that wound me up about it most of all was that this anti-capitalist screed, this scorching excoriation of the consumerist world, was basically a machine to make money for Rupert Murdoch.
I’ve only seen Fight Club once, and I was courting, so maybe more snogging than watching, but I thought the idea is that the Brad Pitt character is actually a bit of a psychotic nutcase (and thus not expected to be entirely consistent in his worldview), and the Edward Norton character is initially taken in by his prophet-like qualities, only to have the scales fall from his eyes by the end.
This is actually another facet of what bugs the living shit out of me about the movie.
The standard defence to all the various claims of hypocrisy being brought above by Kid and myself are that the film is “ironic”. It doesn’t actually mean any of the things it says! Quite the opposite, in fact!
But that’s not how the audience received the movie. Everyone I know who likes Fight Club likes it BECAUSE of Tyler Durden, not in spite of him. He’s the iconic character, the guy all over the posters and with the quotable one-liners, the one they wanna be like. In no way, shape or form is he taken as a cautionary figure.
This is having your cake and eating it – all the benefits of promoting flashy, meaningless nihilism, with none of the moral or intellectual responsibility for having done so. It’s a Pepsi Max ad with delusions of grandeur.
Presumably they just like him because he looks cool and does weird shit. Same way people like Hannibal or Pinhead.
I guess the idea I’m having trouble with is that the film is somehow hypocritical in its aim at being something, when — personally — I didn’t really see a something to be, er, hypocritcalised.
That said, ‘Pepsi Max ad with delusions of grandeur’ describes the majority of my viewing.
https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/245207
You don’t read many articles like the above re: Pinhead. Have a Google, there are millions like it.
Tyler Durden is also a massive cult figure in the noxious Red Pill community.
Ah, I see what you’re getting at. I was thinking Pop Figures, t-shirts, memes…
But! But! But! …MASSIVE SPOILER ALERT… There is no Tyler Durden.
Oh yeah? Well who brings the Christmas presents then, clever-clogs?