What's good on Amazon Prime Video

sweaty, threatening Donald Pleasance is so great in that film

otm

I'd somehow never seen Wake in Fright before. I think I always confused it with something else, a movie about someone hallucinating in the outback or being hunted in the outback? (Both descriptions not entirely off!) Anyway, what a nuts movie this is. It would make a great sweaty triple bill with, I dunno, Straw Dogs and the Texas Chainsaw Massacre.

Saw it at the cinema a few years ago and loved it, it has that wicker man feel where you’re simultaneously against the uptight prick who won’t go with the flow, revelling in his downfall, and yet totally with him in his descent to hell surrounded by these grotesques

The scariest thing was that ruined steak and egg and the piss that Australians call beer tho

Yeah, I don't know if it's scary so much as unsettling.

call

It’s not 1971 anymore

also some grotesque real-life animal cruelty captured on film, lovely

then ted kotcheff went off to make first blood and weekend at bernie’s

what a career

Good stuff in this interview:

https://www.dreadcentral.com/news/38309/exclusive-ted-kotcheff-looks-back-at-forty-years-with-wake-in-fright/

Dread Central: One of the more unsettling moments of Wake in Fright had to be the kangaroo hunting sequence; it’s a tough watch. Was that one of the bigger challenges you faced when you made this movie- pulling off that scene?

Ted Kotcheff: You know, at the beginning I really didn’t know how I was going to do that sequence; I wasn’t sure how to make it look real because I would never condone killing animals just for a movie. That’s immoral. But then one night, one of the Australians on the film crew said, “You know, they kill hundreds of kangaroos every night in the outback professionally? “They have these refrigerated trucks where hunters go out in pairs on them. They shoot the kangaroos and they bring them back, put them in a refrigerator, go out and then kill some more of them. So why don’t you put your camera in the back and go out with these hunters; they’re killing hundreds anyway and sending the meat out for pet food.”

So, it was kind of gross, knowing that pet food back then was made out of kangaroos too but I was not going to kill one kangaroo for my film either. So I went out with the hunters and shot some footage which was quite an experience. It was so incredibly grueling to watch them shooting the animals but I just photographed exactly what they did and made no judgments on their actions.

There was this spotlight at the top of their truck and a reversible windshield so when they lifted their guns on the dashboard, the light would hypnotize the kangaroos so they were able to shoot them without any problem. To me, I think the most horrific thing in the film was the way the kangaroos’ eyes were red as they stood there waiting for death. It haunted me. But I know we had that warning at the end of the movie about the animals but that’s something I wished we had put in at the beginning, just so audiences would know that we wouldn’t mercilessly kill animals just to make a movie.

yeah i may never be able to watch wake in fright

the roo scene can probably be skipped past without harm to the vibe or the story but yeah if you’re in any doubt i’d probably give it a miss tbh

I think the kangaroo stuff is essential, actually. Or at least, it's essential to the uncomfortable anything-goes violent psychopath general batshit vibe of the whole thing.

It’s not 1971 anymore

Brad you can cover your eyes or go and make a cup of tea during that bit, so you get the vibe without fully watching

it was kind of gross, knowing that pet food back then was made out of kangaroos too

Now it's in midscale restaurants and supermarkets for humans

There was kangaroo on the menu the first time I was ever in Sydney. It was at an upscale Indian place.

i had a couple of cans of beer while i watched, as i often do, and watching them sweatily, very sweatily, guzzle so much beer and liquor day and night was ... something. definitely affected my enjoyment of my two cans and ramps of the quease factor.

I think the kangaroo stuff is essential, actually. Or at least, it's essential to the uncomfortable anything-goes violent psychopath general batshit vibe of the whole thing.

I agree. It's deeply disturbing to watch, but so is everything else in the movie.

Whenever you find an old movie on Prime from before about 1990, from anywhere, not just Italy, you should proceed with caution.

re: shoddy transfers, was stoked to watch china 9, liberty 37, and i did, but it was really rough going. def the worst i've come across of all the old crazy genre stuff i've watched thus far. like, handycam set on a table with a book under it aimed at a goldstar vhs/tv combo bad.

^^Isn't that one kinda-sorta Public Domain? Always tread w/caution regarding those unless you can tell it's provided to the service by a reputable distributor.

just started on Red Oaks, really like it in a flashback, John Hughes way. THis is a convincingly 80's looking cast too. Seems like this show didn't get very much attention while it was running; I don't know a single person who watched it or ever talked about it.

provided to the service by a reputable distributor

sometimes they'll have two different free versions of the same movie, and a third one that costs $3.99 to rent, and the thumbnail on the third one will be a cropped b&w screencap with the title overlaid in blue Times New Roman

https://nonfics.com/best-documentaries-streaming-amazon-prime-july-2019/

just started on Red Oaks, really like it in a flashback, John Hughes way. THis is a convincingly 80's looking cast too. Seems like this show didn't get very much attention while it was running; I don't know a single person who watched it or ever talked about it.

You know, I watched one episode of this, liked it, then forgot about it. I think the current information economy makes it really hard to keep watching a show nobody else cares about, it's like swimming against a slow but consistent current

Not sure if it was mentioned elsewhere but Alan Yang and Matt Hubbard's Forever is great if you looove Maya Rudolph and, er, don't mind Fred Armisen. Hoping to see Noah Robbins go on to bigger things off the back of it also.

Red Oaks is absolutely wonderful, love that show and those characters so much

i've been watching bosch, it's so stupid and hackneyed and i love it

currently on season four, i.e. the season where the most conservative show ever regarding giving police the freedom to do whatever they need to do to solve cases tries to reckon with police brutality/torture. it's a trip and someone should write a doctoral thesis on it.

I oddly enough watched Red Oaks because John Podhoretz loved it so much.

I watched the first season of Red Oaks because my friend's son played one of the supporting car-parking nitwits. It was fine, especially Paul Reiser playing a shit.

the most conservative show ever regarding giving police the freedom to do whatever they need to do to solve cases

uh, have you ever seen Blue Bloods? ... like calling Bosch a conservative cop show compared to that ... impressive collection of Republican Americana ... idk

Bosch is like Hunter crossed with The Wire and it largely owns.

i have very conflicting feelings about it

I guess what I'm trying to say, is that most cop shows are "pro-cop, anti-bureaucracy" ... Bosch isn't all that extreme an example imo

i've only seen the first 3 seasons, they've become progressively better. It's this combination of old-school TV corn (including some of the acting and plotting) and nu-school atmospheric realism and some much better acting by a few of the key players. only thru S3, but 3>2>>1.

worst thing i've seen on this show was the disgusting PDA displays by one of the S3 military bad guys and his gf.

an interesting essay topic would be the portrayal of Irving in the tv series vs. the books -- the series has changed the character significantly and Reddick makes him much more sympathetic than the way that character is written in Connelly's books

i was being hyperbolic about "most conservative ever..." etc. i guess i just meant compared to the wire, which is clearly what bosch is aspiring to.

the seasons do gradually get better, i agree. the action scenes are usually exciting which makes it weird they only have like two-three action scenes per season.

i also like the weird choice to set up the koreatown killer plot in season three, continue it into season four, and then have it end completely anticlimactically as a C-plot (though i haven't finished s4 yet so maybe there's more to come).

haven't read the books but assume Irving is more a gray area type character? it probably is a good essay topic for a lot of TV/film portrayals of book characters, where they take a more nuanced and complex part and push it either towards more of a "good guy" or more of a villain. i feel like i was thinking of a different character in regards to this kind of recently, now i'm blanking.

this show and the Refn series make extremely good use of Los Angeles, w/Bosch being primarily Hollywood and the surrounding area and TOTDY being heavily in the San Fernando Valley.

all cop shows are reactionary and conservative by nature; the cop as protagonist means every other character falls into one of two categories: victim or criminal (bcz this is how cops see the world, naturally)

i guess i just meant compared to the wire, which is clearly what bosch is aspiring to.

I don't see that aspiration at all, unless you are thinking that by casting Reddick and Marlo the show is signalling that? Bosch strikes me as a more "personal narrative" centered show, whereas the Wire was about oppressive and/or dysfunctional systems and how it is near impossible through human agency to dismantle or change those systems.

haven't read the books but assume Irving is more a gray area type character? it probably is a good essay topic for a lot of TV/film portrayals of book characters, where they take a more nuanced and complex part and push it either towards more of a "good guy" or more of a villain.

Actually, in the books he is more of a villain and the show makes him more of a gray area type character.

casting Reddick probably makes the character even more likable i guess, plus he's got an underrated gift for comic underplaying. some of the better moments involve his side eyes at Bosch.

I've watched the first episode of the Refn show and need to keep rolling

after finishing the first, I was thinking that his style really made the episode seem longer than it was, but it really was 90 minutes! it's not necessarily intimidating, but I had to acknowledge it's a series where I'm going to have to actually make a commitment to one episode at a time. episode length seems to taper off after the first few

last episode is 30 min. i haven't gotten there yet, just finished up episode 7.

I'm not sure they do taper off. Last one is 30 minutes yeah, but four clock in at 90 minutes and another four around the 75 minute mark.

I've finished it now - was generally very good but I've no idea how many people are going to stay the whole course.

Anyone watch The Boys yet?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tcrNsIaQkb4

i sorta read the first thirty issues of the comic it's based on and I can tell you that it's based on vile subject matter

Based on the trailers and the Wikipedia page for the original series it looks like real chud bait.

the comic redeems itself a bit by the midpoint but anyone who claims to be a big fan is probably a sociopath

it’s Garth Ennis going into the red on cynicism about superheroes and any show is going to either cut things back entirely, or cut back in ways that obscure the obvious vileness of the enterprise, making it apologetic imo

Under the Silver Lake (by dude who did It Follows) got panned and sunk into oblivion, but... I kinda liked it? It’s messy and shaggy dog, not sure what it all amounts to, but it sinks you into its world. Surreal LA noir thing, easy to see the Lynch fiber, but kinda brought to mind Inherent Vice (the book) maybe moreso than the PTA movie.