Paul Schrader

Discuss individual directors, actors, cinematographers, writers, and more
Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
John Cope
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2005 9:40 pm
Location: where the simulacrum is true

Re: Paul Schrader

#251 Post by John Cope »

To indicate the disparity of opinion that is possible here I can say that I much prefer Master Gardener to either of the other entries in the "man in a room" trilogy and prefer by far Light Sleeper, which I consider to be the progenitor of that entire series (it's even explicitly referenced in Card Counter), to any of them (but this is far from a surprise as it's one of my favorite films). I am, however, very much looking forward to the forthcoming The Basics of Philosophy as an extension of the series; it actually sounds like a fine complement in its perversity (and possibly in tone too) to Schrader's earlier and still profoundly underrated Forever Mine.
User avatar
knives
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 10:49 pm

Re: Paul Schrader

#252 Post by knives »

I agree with you Cope.
wattsup32
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2007 4:00 pm

Re: Paul Schrader

#253 Post by wattsup32 »

Lowry_Sam wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2026 8:53 pm
domino harvey wrote: Tue Sep 08, 2026 8:33 pm That’s a long way from it being one of maybe three films showing any talent, though. I think you forgot about this movie when you made your claim and are now pretending it still works with it
No it was one of the 3.
What were the other two?
User avatar
Never Cursed
Such is life on board the Redoutable
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2016 4:22 am

Re: Paul Schrader

#254 Post by Never Cursed »

No polite way to say it: The Basics of Philosophy is one of the worst, most worthless films I have ever seen from a director that ostensibly knows better, or at least knew better. It is obviously a filmed first draft (to an extent that it makes some of Woody Allen's recent fare appear mannered and worked-over) and lacks all of the earnest humanity, introspection, or menace found in the writer's superior work. Schrader's characters never hid their purposes or destinations from the viewer, but they are completely functional and flavorless here, uttering the minimum of schematic dialogue required to advance a shamelessly self-serving plot about how sexual predators deserve to be forgiven. If anyone else involved with the film (several reasonably famous actors, including one big-name previous collaborator in a surprise cameo, cinematographer Sean Price Williams) did more than what was necessary to complete the film and cash a paycheck, their efforts are not recognizable in the final product. The movie is morally and artistically empty, and I don't have much more to say about it beyond shaming the film festivals that platformed this garbage. I can't believe I held out hope that it would be any good at all.
Post Reply