The WHF Film Club

[BIGBERNARDBRESSLAW]

i could nominate replacement for Dogtooth & Ashes if you prefer.

No problem, stick with your choices Richard.

 

[BIGBERNARDBRESSLAW]

We've now got 4 members again, but one thing I was considering when we only had 3, was to let the nominator vote too. After all, we all probably favour one of the films we are nominating more than the others, so I think it would make sense.

If everyone agrees, do you want to cast yout votes too, Richard?

 

[richardw42]

Ok. My vote would have been

Dogtooth 4

Mysterious 3

Ashes 2

Hero 1

 

[expat_mike]

I calculate that gives the final scores as:

Mysterious 14

Dogtooth 13

Ashes 9

Hero 4

 

[BIGBERNARDBRESSLAW]

I calculate that gives the final scores as:

Mysterious 14

Dogtooth 13

Ashes 9

Hero 4

Me too. Mysterious Skin it is.

 

[BIGBERNARDBRESSLAW]

What does everyone think of the nominator voting?

 

[BIGBERNARDBRESSLAW]

As Ex Machina was your choice Mike, feel free to start the discussion whenever you're ready.

 

[expat_mike]

What does everyone think of the nominator voting?

In this case it had no impact on the final result, because Mysterious Skin already had the top score, after 3 votes.

I am happy for the nominator to vote, because the larger the number of voters, the smaller the chance of ending up with a tie for first place. When there are just two voters, it is too easy for two films to get 4 or 5 points, and then the nominator has to cast the deciding vote anyway.

 

[expat_mike]

As Ex Machina was your choice Mike, feel free to start the discussion whenever you're ready.

ok. I will draft an initial contextual question to you all, about the film soon.

 

[Frank Harvey]

The way you were talking about doing things other than watching films, I thought you were indirectly letting us know that you wouldn't be returning, so I'm glad you now are. Welcome back.

Naah, I'd say directly if I was. I'm still watching films, and still will be, just not quite as many as usual. I just have books I want to read, and I want to get a bit of exercise into my daily routine too - my crisp and cheese intake during 2015 has been excessive to say the least - time to wind things in and think of the important things! I'm still split between music and movies as my main interests.

 

[Frank Harvey]

What does everyone think of the nominator voting?

How about adding 1 more point to the first choice? So giving 5, 3, 2, and I point?

 

[BIGBERNARDBRESSLAW]

What does everyone think of the nominator voting?

How about adding 1 more point to the first choice? So giving 5, 3, 2, and I point?

This was discussed before, but not adopted; not sure why.

I just used this system on the last lot of votes, and it made no difference to the result at all, other than the top two getting more points. It may make a difference to some of the other votes, I'm not sure.

What do Richard and Mike think?

 

[richardw42]

Sounds pretty fair.

Under the the current system a film with 2 x4 & a single point would lose out to a film with 2 X 3 & 1 X 4, even though it's the most popular choice of the majority.

 

[BIGBERNARDBRESSLAW]

Sounds pretty fair.

Under the the current system a film with 2 x4 & a single point would lose out to a film with 2 X 3 & 1 X 4, even though it's the most popular choice of the majority.

Let's see what Mike says, and if he agrees, we'll switch.

 

[BIGBERNARDBRESSLAW]

Watched a couple of films over the last 2 days.

The Martian - Won't be watching again.....ever!!!

Victoria http://www.imdb.com/title/tt4226388/?ref_=nv_sr_1

It's a German film, but a lot of it is in English, though it's not always easy to understand. Around 15% of the dialogue is in German, and the version I watched didn't have subtitles, but I have a feeling that there never were subtitles, to leave the viewer as much in the dark as the main character. I may be wrong though.

Anyway, it's highly rated on IMDb, and I can see why. At first, I was a little unsure, and you just felt something really bad was going to happen to the main character, but it's not too long before you realise what you thought was definitely going to happen, isn't going to.

It's shot on one camera, on what seems to be one continous take (though I can't see how this is possible). The acting is superb, and you genuinely feel like you're watching a real life documentary at times.

I won't say any more, but I do highly recommend watching it.

 

[expat_mike]

Sounds pretty fair.

Under the the current system a film with 2 x4 & a single point would lose out to a film with 2 X 3 & 1 X 4, even though it's the most popular choice of the majority.

Let's see what Mike says, and if he agrees, we'll switch.

For the current month, using 5 points would have had no impact on the final result, because Mysterious Skin would still have had the top score.

With such a small number of voters, and therefore a relatively small number of score permutations, I am not sure that using 5 points will alter any of the outcomes - but that also implies that there is little risk in trialing 5 points, and see how we feel in a few months. So I am ok to try 5 points.

 

[expat_mike]

I watched The Big Short last night. I am not sure if it has been released yet in the UK, but it includes complex characters, plus much about the dark side of capitalism - so i think that Strapped would find plenty to interest him.

 

[expat_mike]

First some context - the trigger for me nominating the film Ex Machina, was listening to this podcast about conciousness, where the film is referred to during the initial 15s. This inspired my curiousity to watch the film.

The film started out with a relatively simple instruction to Caleb, to move beyound the turing test, and assess if Ava had conciousness.

So the next few scenes showed Caleb questionning Ava about various topics, then reporting back to Nathan. But during the next few scenes, the roles seemed to reverse, with Ava gradually became the chief questioner, and Caleb the willing subject. This already started to suggest that Ava was more than just a 'dumb' robot

The story line kept unfolding, with Ava revealing that she knew how to disable the power supply, and that Nathan was not being truthful with Caleb. Again evidence that Ava had enough intelligence to analyse the world around her, but did that count as conciousness?

By now it was becoming clear that one or more of the characters was not being 100% honest with the others, but it was not clear who was to be trusted. Also it was never predictable how the film would end.

The end of the film, where Ava imprisons Caleb, and escapes alone was the big surprise (one did have to wonder how she arrived at the airport, and was allowed through customs, without a passport). It raised the question that a concious robot would have felt love for Caleb, and let him escape as well - but the fact that Ava used Caleb, and then dispensed with him once no longer needed, did feel like the action of a cold calculating robot. However many humans have been happy to exploit friends, then discard them when no longer needed, so maybe this is just another indicator of Ava being concious, and aquiring real human traits.

But was this just a film about the search for robotic conciousness? I think not, because there are interlinked threads to the story:

1 - the test of Ava for robotic conciousness

2 - the search by Caleb for someone/something to love

3 - the effect of great intelligence/money/access to unlimited knowledge, has on Nathan - inspiring him to be the dr frankenstein character trying to copy god and recreate life

Overall i greatly enjoyed the film - it was a plausible plot, with no gaps or loose ends (apart from the passport), interesting and engaging characters, and a neat twist to the plot at the end.

Over to you guys now.

 

[strapped for cash]

I watched The Big Short last night. I am not sure if it has been released yet in the UK, but it includes complex characters, plus much about the dark side of capitalism - so i think that Strapped would find plenty to interest him.

End of Jan, Mike...

I'm interested to give it a watch, assuming any relatively local cinema screens the film.

I'm no economist, but I've read several accounts of the crash and despite opaque language and tangled explanations, it boils down to this: extraordinary deregulation allowed hugely irresponsible (not to mention corrupt and illegal) practices to flourish.

Not so complicated, then...

The banks didn't have to declare debts and could leverage borrowing against sums they never had, to be gambled on assorted (and sometimes rigged) markets.

If I asked a bank for a mortgage, my salary, outgoings, debts and credit history would be extensively documented before a loan agreement could be signed off (although subprime mortgage lending of course contributed to the monumental clusterf*ck of 2007/8).

There's justifiably no way I could walk into a bank, declare myself cash and asset rich, undergo no checks, before strolling out with a substantial sum to gamble at the nearest casino. This is how the banks operated in an extensively deregulated environment. Only it's worse than that.

Imagine I'd lost that loan money at the casino, but I experienced no consequences. My losses were socialised (those who weren't responsible and couldn't afford to pay were saddled with my debt). In what way would I be deterred from repeating my actions? Then imagine the next time I requested a loan, the same bank again asked no questions and freely handed over more money.

We have no further regulation, beyond tokenistic appeals to electorates. We're continuing with the same light touch policies and bonus culture that existed before the crash. Our chancellor will even jump to intervene at the mere suggestion that earlier banking practices shouldn't be repeated.

It's f*cking insane; even more so when you consider that we voted in May to continue to socialise losses arising from the crash, and to take ever more punative action against the disabled, sick and generally disenfranchised to service debts they didn't create. Indeed, sections of the UK electorate address these unfortunate people with genuine malice.

I didn't mean for this to turn into an essay, but I'm so upset by what's happening that it's hard not to express my views.

Maybe I shouldn't watch The Big Short. It'll no doubt raise my blood pressure.

 

[expat_mike]

Strapped - the film focusses on 2007/2008, but I can already see that you will better understand the storyline better than most. However some of the characters are complex, and one leaves the film, unsure what his motive was.

 

[strapped for cash]

Strapped - the film focusses on 2007/2008, but I can already see that you will better understand the storyline better than most. However some of the characters are complex, and one leaves the film, unsure what his motive was.

I wouldn't want to prejudge the film, or the characters depicted.

As I understand it, The Big Short is about people who anticipated the crash, issued warnings that were roundly ignored, and ultimately profited after the economy imploded.

If I get to watch it I'll definitely let you know what I think. While I might not like the circumstances and characters represented, this doesn't make it a bad film.

I'll also sit down to watch Ex Machina again soon and write up some comments in response to your post. I'm flat out for the next couple of days, though. *smile*

 

[BIGBERNARDBRESSLAW]

The first thing I'll say about Ex machina, is that I really enjoyed it. The plot ,as Mike said, was plausible, and it just had the feel of a classic piece of Sci-Fi.

I think the film, like several others, is a warning of what might happen if we continue on the path of developing intelligent machines. I think humans always believe that they are in control, Nathan certainly did, but Ava was in control from the moment she realised that Caleb was attracted to her, which, along with Caleb's obvious distrust and dislike of Nathan, and Nathan's overwhelming belief that he was in control of everything, she exploited to the maximum.

 

[expat_mike]

The first thing I'll say about Ex machina, is that I really enjoyed it. The plot ,as Mike said, was plausible, and it just had the feel of a classic piece of Sci-Fi.

I think the film, like several others, is a warning of what might happen if we continue on the path of developing intelligent machines. I think humans always believe that they are in control, Nathan certainly did, but Ava was in control from the moment she realised that Caleb was attracted to her, which, along with Caleb's obvious distrust and dislike of Nathan, and Nathan's overwhelming belief that he was in control of everything, she exploited to the maximum.

I see that the film has won (or been runner up) for many awards, so I do think that it could become a classic. The image of ava is even being used to accompany todays announcement by mark zuckerberg, that he would like to build a robotic butler this year - proves that the film is topical.

There was the element of irony, that just as Nathan is euphoric that he has succeeded in creating a concious robot, his creation kills him.

The film was shot in 4k, so it would have been interesting to see what impact that had, on the quality of the cgi, which was pretty good anyway.

 

[Frank Harvey]

I didn't think the picture quality was anything special. Maybe it'll be better when/if it gets a UHD release...

 

[macdiddy]

Hope you don't mind me posting this but I do read these pages occasionally and I know director Michael Haneke's films are a favourite with you all.