HULK’S 10 MOSTEST FAVORITE MOVIES OF 2012

January 17, 2013

holy_motors__span

HEY ALL!

HULK DOESN’T LIKE TOP TEN LISTS BECAUSE THEY TEND TO BREED THE WORST POSSIBLE CRITICAL CONVERSATIONS ABOUT AGREEMENT AND WORTH (WHICH ARE TERRIBLY DULL). SO HOPEFULLY HULK’S YEAR END LIST WILL SERVE AS NOTHING A SERIES OF SMALL CASES BEING MADE FOR MOVIES THAT HULK THINKS ARE PRETTY DARN GOOD AND WORTH TAKING A LOOK AT!

CHEERS AND THANKS!

http://badassdigest.com/2012/12/27/film-crit-hulks-10-mostest-favorite-movies-of-2012/

About these ads

4 Responses to “HULK’S 10 MOSTEST FAVORITE MOVIES OF 2012”

  1. Panache said

    “The Hurt Locker” is far from subtle, but as for “Zero Dark Thirty”, I’d argue subtlety as the least of its many virtues. If Hulk watched Badass Digest’s 2012 round-up, I felt a rare moment of synchronicity with Ms. Nicholson: it’s the Gump-ification of the past decade’s foreign intelligence debacles. It kills the film for Ms. Nicholson, but it merely aggravates me.

    I openly cop to forgetting about Khobar, but from that point on, I dreaded the location titles. I was shocked that they left the Danes out because unlike the Marriott that incident holds damned good reason for CIA presence as they do their due diligence. They randomly include 7/7 as the only representation of anything Anglo despite being our closest ally in the conflict and being one of the few failures of the generally excellent (and scary) British intelligence, . They might as well have subtitled each location, “Another Day Whites (Who Don’t Talk Funny) Die.” When Jessica mentions “Chapman”, my only thought was, “Offscreen. Offscreen. Please, keep it off…aw, goddammit. And she’s texting her the whole fuckin’ time! Motherfuck!” It comes off as journalism via HLN scroll or Wiki timeline.

    I couldn’t disagree more with Mr. Faraci about how the film treats its audience. The film shows a consistent lack of faith in its viewer. I suspect this more than anything causes the disconnect for the objectors to the depiction of torture. They feel isolated so they seek a tangible detail (torture! success! causation! boo!) Of course, I’m excepting that one Brit that trashed the film sight-unseen, but how does anyone lend him a modicum of credence?

    Unfortunately, other odds and seem nearly as leaden. Regarding Maya’s exposure: “She’s nonexistent. She’s a known entity–and ginger to boot! Now, her wig makes her darker. Now, she’s covering up. Now, she’s in an all-out burqa! Get it, you fuckin’ monkey, you? D’YA GET IT?!”

    A much bigger issue revolves around the film’s treatment of agency and empowerment, but that’s another discussion.

    P.S. Maybe Hulk might pass along this viewer’s sole suggestion for future roundtable videos: more booze. The current levels of consumption and inebriation may alarm the odd, teetotaling viewer, but this viewer will not be satisfied until Devin’s liver bursts from his side and slobbers lovingly all over Beaks. The film crew breaks, the table continues to drink for three or four hours, then an audio-only crew asks the exact same questions to find out what the talents really think about the year’s movies. I demand a cinematic adjunct to “Drunk History”.

  2. Panache said

    Objectors to the accuracy of “Zero Dark Thirty” should be slapped–nigh bludgeoned–with this week’s “On the Media” (starting 41:10).

    I was taken aback by Mr. Garfield, a successful journalist demonstrating an alarming–I suspect, disingenuous–display of naivety regarding the nature of the written word, let alone journalism.

  3. DM said

    A question on Zero Dark Thirty. You say what the film has to say about torture is summed up by the seen where Dan (I think that’s the name, I’ve only seen it once) wants out, and tries to disguise the fact that he’s leaving because traumitized, by simply making a silly homophobic joke about why he’s leaving. I’m not quite sure what you meant by this, but there’s one way of reading which kind of connects to why I have moral and political gripes with the film. One way of reading what you’ve said is that the film is primarily about the horrible toll that torture takes on the torturers. But it feels kind of off to me to make that the point of a film about torture. I mean, the primary bad thing about torture is its effect on the people being tortured right? So, I guess my question is, is that roughly how your understanding the centrality of that scene to what the film has to say?

    I mean, I guess this bothers me more because of certain things I’ve seen Bigelow quoted as saying about the film. Namely, that she’s against torture, and was just potraying what happened, but also that the film is intended as a ‘tribute’ to the hard work of the brave C.I.A. agents who eventually got the job done. That kind of makes me think that she’s thinking of it in terms of ‘oh how traumitising it was for the poor people who just wanted to protect America, and then were forced into torturing people’. I know that what the artist themselves says about the film isn’t definitive, but I think the film itself in many ways supports a reading on which the C.I.A. agents are basically performing a noble task, as best they can, and one which takes a terrible toll on them. I’m thinking of the fact that its set up as a procedural, which always tends to put you on-side with the detectives, the fact that we see and hear footage of real violence and its aftermath from the terrorists (the 9/11 and 7/7 stuff) but only fictional violence in the torture scenes, the fact that Mya is set up as a woman in a macho world, etc. I mean, sure, all this is qualified by the fact that the Mya’s hunt brings her no satisfaction in the end (I found the shot of her staring into space in the plane at the end very powerful), but even that can be read as being about making us feel sorry for the toll that become obssessive enough to perform the difficult, necessary task of finding Bin Laden has taken on our heroine. The fact that we are kept onside of Mya and the other agents in all these ways seems to me to support the reading of the film as being primarily about how difficult the whole experience, including the torturing of suspects was for them, with only perfunctory attention being spared for the effects of their actions on others. Though I did think the focus on the deaths of women and the presence of children in the final raid mitigated this somewhat, and suggested that maybe the filmakers were going for something a little more complex.

    On the other hand, I wasn’t in the right mood for concentrating when I saw the film, which is clearly (at least by the standards of mainstream narrative films) quite a difficult and challenging work, so maybe I’m missing something?

  4. Hulk dont like a movie with Hulk – paradox))

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 815 other followers

%d bloggers like this: