Re: 625 Eating Raoul
Posted: Tue Mar 10, 2020 1:07 am
I'd assume so as well given I love everything by him including that one episode of Clueless.
I finally got around to this last night after years in the unwatched pile and my first thought was that this is the kind of film John Waters probably thinks he's making-- consistently tasteless, but somehow also oddly not mean-spirited. Everyone knows they're in trash and are completely into it. Contains a lot of amusing barbs, some broader than others, but clearly the best line is, re: the skills of poor people in the bedroom: "They'll suck your box so hard your nose will bleed." The kind of film that has a restraining order on subtlety, but that can be fun in the right hands.therewillbeblus wrote: Mon Mar 09, 2020 11:17 pmI’d definitely say that Scenes from the Class Struggle in Beverly Hills contains that wryness, even if it is a bit more animated in tone toward John Waters, but I think they’re similar enough in comedic delivery to cite a greater overlapknives wrote: Mon Mar 09, 2020 6:20 pm All of his films are certainly black comedies, but I was making a differentiation between the wryness of Eating Raoul and the more medium dependent sensibility of Death Race which you said you didn't like.
I'm now curious what you think Waters' films actually are as my own definition is pretty similarly though with the adverb switched to quaintly.domino harvey wrote: Fri Sep 18, 2020 4:06 pmI finally got around to this last night after years in the unwatched pile and my first thought was that this is the kind of film John Waters probably thinks he's making-- consistently tasteless, but somehow also oddly not mean-spirited.therewillbeblus wrote: Mon Mar 09, 2020 11:17 pmI’d definitely say that Scenes from the Class Struggle in Beverly Hills contains that wryness, even if it is a bit more animated in tone toward John Waters, but I think they’re similar enough in comedic delivery to cite a greater overlapknives wrote: Mon Mar 09, 2020 6:20 pm All of his films are certainly black comedies, but I was making a differentiation between the wryness of Eating Raoul and the more medium dependent sensibility of Death Race which you said you didn't like.
It’s funny because Bartel was apparently self-conscious about this looking too much like a Waters film (though I’m sure that was the basis in the script phase that Bartel had no part in). Unfortunately that’s probably the funniest thing about this movie. The sexually obscene stuff with Divine already reached peak inspiration back with Multiple Maniacs so the gags that are left rest in western genre reflexivity and they they were all D.O.A. for me. I can’t for the life of me see the comparisons made upthread between this and Eating Raoul as the most in sync in terms of sense of humor, partly because this one is so actively parodying while ER was satirizing (Beverly Hills is so far the closest cousin), but also because the comedic styles and methods of formulating gag delivery just aren’t the same. Maybe if one takes “wry” in definition to broadly mean perverse, but still there are much better examples of his work that fit a dryer nonchalant tone while this is just obnoxiously bombastic in its farce. Bartel’s absence from the construction of the script is probably the first detail that should be looked at, since he was hired as director here after Waters passed, so the significant differentiation in humor and cleverness between this and the other films in which he wrote makes a lot of sense from that angle.knives wrote: Fri Sep 18, 2020 9:04 pmAlso have you seen the turgid Lust in the Dust which actively is trying to be a Waters' knockoff?