News from Tayreads608


























  1. Hereditary and Midsommar were stand outs for me. I loved Get Out, but I found US to be just okay and I haven’t watched Nope yet. If Robert Eggers Nosferatu remake is as good as I want it to be he will definitely edge out Ari Aster.

  2. I don’t disagree that Samantha Sloyan would do a fine job, but Lauren Ambrose is like perfect 90s casting to have standing beside Juliette Lewis, Christina Ricci, and Melanie Lynskey. Like, Van/Lauren Ambrose better find Seth Green in werewolf form out in those woods writing “Denise Fleming is a tampon” on one of those trees or I might riot.

  3. There’s not really anything I hate and there’s not really anything I won’t read. I’m always leery of stuff that uses real people and events because I don’t like the idea of profiting off of them without contributing to a better understanding of the topic or saying something broader about what’s happening, but there’s been a few of those that I really appreciate.

  4. Oates has some hardcore fiction , she is extremely prolific. It's hard to get through books like Zombie.

  5. I think Zombie was the only I’ve ever wanted to put down because of how disturbing it was. I finished and then gave it away. Great writing, but, boy, was that tough.

  6. I'm going to get downvoted, but here goes. I liked the film.

  7. “Honestly, I think part of why people react so strongly to this movie is because it shows the harm of turning a human into a product and many of her fans only relate to her as a product. Would Marilyn, who enjoyed challenging intellectual material, be more disgusted by this single artfully horrific and fictional take on her life, or by the way capitalism has churned out her likeness over and over again for mass consumption? But people who say they are her "fans" are consuming Marilyn posters and t-shirts and home goods – and everything else she would have hated. And yes, this relates back to the film's theme of turning a person into a product. So fans, look at yourselves too, you're complicit.”

  8. His writing tends to be a bit polarizing. I really like his style and found Night of the Mannequin’s to be a lot of fun. I’m guessing you might not like his other stuff but I’m not really sure what you didn’t like about that one so it’s hard to say for sure.

  9. I mean it still totally inverts the meaning of the paragraph in a way that I’m not sure Shirley Jackson would approve of

  10. Look, here’s the thing, I like a lot of what the show does and I think it’s well made, but it’s definitely not super respectful to Jackson or her work. That last line change both inverts what Jackson had built but also what the show itself had built. Then there’s the fact that they decided to make Shirley Jackson’s name sake character a no fun cheater who kind of manipulates her husband to forgive her when so much of Shirley Jackson’s, who was really funny and well liked, real life pain and mental health struggles steamed from her husbands philandering with his college students that he very openly told her about and that she very clearly wrote into much of her work including Hill House. Shirley Jackson didn’t really approve of The Haunting 1963 which was very faithful. As much as I enjoy watching it and think that the first five episodes does a nice job with her book, she would definitely not approve of this series. I do think the thing she would have really liked is that the ghosts are real and not just in the main characters head.

  11. Yes!! It’s such a strange about-face that totally abandons the entire point of the show thus far.

  12. It’s very strange. Maybe a tiny bit of not totally getting the source material and a lot of just liking your characters too much.

  13. Not many. I’m a big baseball/softball fan and there’s just not many professional softball teams near by. Also, other than MLB I mostly pay attention to college sports

  14. Biopics are usually just dressed up fiction, fight me.

  15. You aren’t wrong! Most biopics are fictionalized to make their subject look better and usually to make that brand or person a profit. This one does the opposite.

  16. This one isn’t a biopic. It’s based on an entirely fictional book that uses Marilyn Monroe as a character.

  17. Biopics are the dramatization of someone’s life. The book is biographical fiction. It dramatizes Monroes life to tell a broader story. It’s rooted in moments of her life that did happen like her marriages and the films she was in. It’s a biopic. Part of Dominiks argument in this article is that if it were a biopic that romanticized Monroes life people wouldn’t have a problem with it. I think he’s right about that even though there’s room to criticize other aspects of the film.

  18. I think it just depends on where your cousin is as far as reading comprehension and emotional maturity. Most of those stories do deal with sexuality and Carter can be quite provocative. They’re absolutely beautiful stories dripping in the gothic but they also have an undercurrent of the erotic. I’d check out a few more of them if possible and see what you think for yourself. 12 to me is really an age where I’d go either way depending on the maturity of the 12 year old.

  19. I dunno. I heard from another Jackson fan that while there was good moments, it has a happy ending. Hill House should not have a happy ending.

  20. It’s worth checking out on its own and the first 5 episodes are pretty good in regards to Jackson’s book. After that I think it starts to lose the plot a bit. It becomes a bit of a Where’s Waldo of Jackson quotes and imagery. I wouldn’t necessarily call the ending happy. More saccharine, but there’s definitely a major change I’m pretty sure you won’t be happy with.

  21. See to me, a non-researched, casual reader, I know nothing about Shirley Jackson except the fact that she was an intricate part in the horror genre as a whole and that’s that. So obviously not knowing anything about her personal life- why would I have thought of it that way? Maybe that’s on me and I should study authors as well, but I guess I just didn’t for this one. I had the feeling (of course) that this was Eleanor’s sorry, but never really read into it ~that~ much, and maybe that’s my mistake, who knows. But I found it to be misleading and twisty at the wrong levels. Like I said in a post above, maybe someday I’ll re read it with the history in mind and the thought of Eleanor/ Jackson’s personal intertwined relationship in mind, but not sure if I ever will.

  22. Yeah, I mean, you certainly don’t have to read it with Jackson’s history in mind. That’s just the way I like to read it and what helped inform my answer to your questions. Plenty of people read it in a variety of way without any background on Jackson.

  23. To me, it’s a really good depiction of a codependent platonic relationship. I don’t think Shauna is in love with Jackie or trying to be Jackie. I think she’s lashing out over the way Jackie controls her and the way she lets Jackie control her. None of this is to say that a queer reading of their relationship isn’t completely valid and interesting.

  24. Bly Manor shouldn't have been labelled with "the haunting", the thing isn't even trying to be horror after the first episode. I liked it but as a gothic romance rather than the horror Netflix sold it as.

  25. Technically, the shtick with The Haunting series is adaptations of gothic ghost/haunted house books. Both of the source materials are gothic and both of the series are gothic. That should have been made more explicit in the advertising of both and led to a lot of people expecting something they weren’t going to get.

  26. Yes. Shauna is masturbating in her daughters room. It’s a nice little bit of character development. Here’s this unhappy, unsatisfied housewife attempting to get off at the idea of a youth she lost and in the end she’s still unhappy and unsatisfied. It both shows someone doing a somewhat taboo thing and someone who’s just so desperate to feel something, to feel alive and can’t.

  27. I'm just aghast at people in this thread saying he put no effort into Blonde. It might be his best film yet, and I say that having recently watched all his movies. Every frame of this freaking film is dripping with care and thought.

  28. It’s an incredibly angry film and I think a lot of people are misinterpreting who that anger is pointed at. I think the film is angry with the Hollywood machine and at the viewers who consume it blindly and then use Monroe’s image for profit or as a symbol of empowerment. It’s a very uncomfortable viewing experience especially when you realize that you are being indicted in her mistreatment. It had her staring into the camera in certain shots, shattering icon moments with pain and anger, and literally throwing up in the audience. It’s hard to watch something so upsetting and then have it ask you if you are part of the problem. The question he’s presented in the film and in interviews is, is the idea of women using sex appeal to get some status and success empowering or is it a lie fed to them by the men who benefit from it? There’s valid criticism to be had of the film, but it’s frustrating to see such an important question thrown aside over some internet hand wringing.

  29. Sure, but it’s arguably a worse look to watch someone’s body of work and come away from it all thinking, “They’re well-dressed whores. I don’t know.” 😕

  30. He’s specifically referring to Gentlemen Prefer Blondes and commenting on the transactional relationships seen in that film and the way the interviewer presents that as some kind of female empowerment fantasy. He didn’t originate that particular read/criticism of the film. He’s just delivering it in an incredibly crass way.

  31. I loved the freedom we had to explore our environment as kids and the fact that we were allowed to engage with touch material (films, books, etc.). However I would have appreciated a little more parenting. We were definitely lacking in emotional support and parents who were engaged and responsive to us. We were raised by perpetual teenagers. I’m learning to be okay with all the complications that come with that.

  32. I’d say based of them but I assume that they had no idea what that film would entail.

  33. They’re big thriller/horror fans who absolutely do not believe in censoring anything. I’m pretty sure I was way more weirded out than them.

  34. I watched I Spit on Your Grave (2010) with my grandparents. Their choice not mine.

  35. I think it would just depend on how susceptible that person would be to the house.

  36. You’ve obviously never seen a torture porn film because this regurgitated take is just fucking stupid at this point

  37. Like, I really really don’t think people understand what torture porn is. There’s valid criticism to be had of this movie, but calling it torture porn is not it. There’s not one single shot in this film that doesn’t show rape and abuse as repulsive and most of it just implicates the audience in that torture. I mean, for fucks sake, Monroe literally throws up on the audience. You can’t get more on the nose than that.

  38. It’s a movie that tries to criticize the exploitation of women like Monroe in Hollywood. It attempts to challenge the image of Monroe that people have spent decades fantasizing about.

  39. I hope not a suicide scene as that would be irresponsible broadcasting. Whatever it is though, I’m not looking forward to it. All the possibilities are gruesome.

  40. I’m not opposed to depictions of suicide on tv/film as it’s something worth exploring, but, IMO, it has to be something done really really well for it to work. I wouldn’t necessarily mind it being brought up in regards to some of the girls stories, particularly Shauna’s, but definitely not for shock value. I have a lot of trust in the creators that whatever they do, gruesome or not, will be done with respect.

  41. I thought the overall story was just okay, but really loved the way it played with genre and style. I also just thought it was pretty fun.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may have missed