Yes I remember that list. I find your articulation very angry and condescending, but I think I could've clarified myself as well. When I say "worth watching", I don't mean to be amazed or enjoy myself by the narrative of the movie. It's whether there's something in the movie I can enjoy. For many of the movies you mention, the enjoyment for me comes mostly from the ridiculousness in the plot and the admirable personas that often go into mainstream movies (famous actors are often funny, even if they are stupid and/or arrogant). As I kinda mentioned, I like stupid optimism, I often spend time around stupid people because I find they are more happy, and it's often contagious, even if I don't agree with the reasons that they're happy.
When it comes to action movies, I think I can enjoy many kinds of movies. Many of them also for their ridiculousness. Maybe I'm just startled by an action movie that actually seems to be more serious (what you call "harder and more grounded") on this topic, in an age where criminological literacy is becoming increasingly important for the united society we need for humanity to survive long-term. Since I wrote these few forum posts I've watched two separate interviews with Denzel, Antoine and R. Wenk about this movie, and it seems it was just a script that was done very quickly, and that the people influencing the script have little knowledge about criminology, and hold a passion for personal retaliation. I understand and sympathize with the feeling of being able to independently serve justice, but I distance myself from this version of it because it's an unrealistic way to solve problems - let alone that it helps maintain and magnify the problem ("an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind"). Usually I don't care, because most action movies don't take themselves very seriously, and just do it for the testosterone, adrenaline through cool stunts and manly characters. But I think this one was very different. The message I got was "us vs injustice" using brutal violence to solve problems. And I would hate to see that view become more common again. I probably wouldn't have minded if there was some backstory that told us he had super natural powers - and I would neither mind if there was some kind of connection between Denzel and Moretz but I didn't feel any. It was like it wasn't relevant - or that they just thought their acting was great enough to feel chemistry regardless. But to me, McCall was just this cold, robot-like character, rarely showing any humanity. Killing everyone without a thought of the consequences. And I have yet to hear what people really liked about this movie.
My oldest brother told me he liked the movie today, and since I'm the big brother he seemed embarrassed to disagree with me, but what I got him to say was just that he liked the personal retaliation part, and that he was a man with supernatural powers, able to make justice. That's how I thought the movie would be, but that wasn't what I experienced. (I haven't watched the TV-show though, so maybe that's also part of the reason).
It's funny how touchy a subject it is, to talk about what you're passionate about, to people that disagree with you. I often encounter this - also in myself - and it seems it's something like an irrational fear for our passion to be belittled or ruined. But I know that I have no such intent when I talk about this movie. I'm merely curious and fascinated of our differences. I like to humbly understand people who are different than me, and have come to respect those who have the courage to show it sincerely.
reply
share