Movies That are Going to Suck: Part Deux

I took my niece and nephew (both age 4) to see Turbo. They liked it so much that when I brought them home, they wanted to look for real snails in the garden to play with. (I told them no. Snails may be pests, but there's no reason to torture them.)

High Rise, a book by JG Ballard is to be made into a movie.

From the Independent.

I just can't see it working.  For a start, the book is totally unbelievable.  The story is of a tower block and the people who move into it.  There is everything everyone needs, shops, hairdressers, a school, gyms, etc., so no-one needs to leave, except for work.  The apartment owners all have a share in the building so it's a self-run society.  The top third are owned by the richest and have express elevators, the bottom third are owned by the poorest, (comparatively) and the middle, by the middle.  The middle and poor have the slow elevators. Everyone is professional class in order to afford to live there. So there are no real poor people.

In the space of three months, this leads to a total breakdown of society. As things in the building break down people become savages.  Running battles happen every night, then people get up and go to work during the day.  Soon, most people don't go to work.  The shops close, the school closes and people rampage.  It is meant to be a satire, presumably of class warfare or the thin veneer of civilisation, but it's not insightful, it's not funny, credible or interesting.

Firstly, although this is supposed to be a science fiction book, there is no science in it.  It's just Lord of the Flies in a tower bock.  There were tower blocks in 1975 when the book was published and have been ever since.  There has been no noticeable cases of running battles and cannibalism in them.  You could, I suppose, set it in the recent past, but it would look as dated and irrelevant as the book reads.  You could try to set it now, but how could you posit a closed society in a world with camera phones and the Internet?  With CCTV and twenty-four hour news?

Then there's the plain silly plot.  Once the rubbish chutes are blocked, people throw their rubbish out the windows.  People are even thrown off the roof of the building.  There's no reaction from the outside world.  Once, the police show up, but are reassured by a few residents and go away.  These people have no friends, or relatives, fail to show for work but no-one checks on them.  The building is surrounded by ton's of rotting trash but no neighbours complain.  The people thrown off the roof aren't ever mentioned as being taken for burial, so you assume that nobody notices the rotting corpses.  It's all so damn daft.  These people are starving, resorting to cannibalism and eating domestic pets.  There is no food and no water, but still the people won't leave.

But the main reason this film will suck, unless the plot is basically thrown away, is the women in the book.  None of them have the slightest sign of character, or a backbone.  Even those we are told are strong turn out not to be.  With all the violence and endemic sexual assaults/rapes, not one of them just gets the hell out of the building.  They just do as they are told by men.  They are all stupid, weak versions of the perfect nineteen fifties housewife.  'Yes, dear.  Whatever you say dear.'  Women aren't (thank the fates), like that anymore.  I really don't think they ever were.

The book is meant to be a dystopia, but really it's just a white male's utopia.  A wish fulfillment fantasy, where big strong man wins and women are there to serve them.  All three of the books protagonists are men, so woman are only seen through male eyes.  Since the men are written as emotionless, except for lust, (for violence or women.  Sometimes both), the women are ciphers of ciphers.  Even Dr Robert Laing, the character with whom we are supposed to identify, ends up planning to drug women with morphine so they will be addicted and won't leave him.

I can't see this movie being anything but shite.  All I know is that I'm not going to pay my money to see a film based on a book which uses this line:-

From the book wrote:

Mrs Wilder stood passively with her tray, unaware of Royal fondling her, partly because she had been molested by so many men during the past months, but also because the sexual assault itself had ceased to have any meaning.

Yeah, when women are raped enough times, it doesn't matter anymore.    High Rise has a good director in Ben Wheatley and a bankable lead in Tom Hiddleston, but no amount of gold spray paint or rhinestones is gonna hide this misogynistic turd.

Holy hell, TOM HIDDLESTON is going to be in that shitpile? Jesus, I wonder if he knows all the awful stuff in it...

He knows.

Variety Online

From the article wrote:

Hiddleston added: “I can’t wait to work with Ben. He is one of the most inspired directors in the U.K., and he brings with him impeccable taste, courage, wit and singular brilliance: the perfect combination to realize the ambition of J.G. Ballard’s unique vision.”

For a man who, in the March 2014 edition of Elle magazine says of women:

From Elle. wrote:

Growing up surrounded by women has had a glorious effect on his view of them. "I believe in the strength and intelligence and sensitivity of women.  My mother, my sisters (they) are strong. My Mum is a strong woman and I love her for it.

...and...

From Elle. wrote:

"I was somethines quite alarmed by friends of mine at school who didn't have sisters, the way they treated girls, the way they spoke about them... I was like 'Guys, they're not aliens, they're human beings."

This is the guy who is to play the lead character who ends up keeping his sister on the edge of starving and drugging her in order to have incest with her.

Hiddleston has really gone down in my eyes.  Either the script, which is being adapted by a woman, is far removed from the shoddy misogyny of the book, or he's all pap and no play.  I guess only time will tell.

Summercorn wrote:

Either the script, which is being adapted by a woman, is far removed from the shoddy misogyny of the book...

To be fair, this is pretty much what happened with American Psycho.

bahahah fucking Walter Mitty

I read that in school it's a fucking short story about a dude who daydreams YEAH LET'S STRETCH THAT OUT OVER TWO HOURS

Non-Stop looks like it's going to be total garbage, but Liam Neeson is in it, so off to the pictures I go.

I think I heard of High Rise, when it was a Doctor Who episode titled Paradise Towers and had jack-all to do with rape and misogyny. It's probably, to date, one of my favorite Seventh Doctor episodes.

TheIan wrote:

I think I heard of High Rise, when it was a Doctor Who episode titled Paradise Towers and had jack-all to do with rape and misogyny. It's probably, to date, one of my favorite Seventh Doctor episodes.

Yeah, Paradise Towers was based, partly, on High Rise. I find it heartening. If Dr. Who can turn the idea into something worth seeing, maybe the film can too. Personally, I still don't want to see it, but maybe it won't be a total pile.

Cyberwulf wrote:

bahahah fucking Walter Mitty

I read that in school it's a fucking short story about a dude who daydreams YEAH LET'S STRETCH THAT OUT OVER TWO HOURS

It's a remake to boot, and Ben Stiller is no Danny Kaye.

The 1947 movie wasn't bad, either. All signs point to the Stiller remake being awful.

Penguin wrote:

The 1947 movie wasn't bad, either. All signs point to the Stiller remake being awful.

First indication: Ben Stiller is in it.

cornhole wrote:

I just can't see it working.  For a start, the book is totally unbelievable.  The story is of a tower block and the people who move into it.  There is everything everyone needs, shops, hairdressers, a school, gyms, etc., so no-one needs to leave, except for work.  The apartment owners all have a share in the building so it's a self-run society.  The top third are owned by the richest and have express elevators, the bottom third are owned by the poorest, (comparatively) and the middle, by the middle.  The middle and poor have the slow elevators. Everyone is professional class in order to afford to live there. So there are no real poor people.

Jesus Christ I bet you're one of those people that complains that fantasy books never explain how dragons breath fire holy crap

I mean I don't doubt it's a rubbish book and all but c'mon now

Wulfie wrote:

Non-Stop looks like it's going to be total garbage, but Liam Neeson is in it, so off to the pictures I go.

I dunno I would probably like an action movie taking place in a crashing airplane if they do it really over the top and wild like Crank

Also so since I flew above and beyond The Worst Movie Theater in Philadelphia (TM) I haven't been able to keep up with what movies are coming out when but I think I found a real winner...



drinking games ahoy! I'm thinking finish your drink when Duck Dynasty dude appears, drink every time strawman college professor quotes something, finish your drink when kids class no doubt applauds him at the end, and finish your drink then smash the container over your head when the kid asks the goofy non-question "why do you hate god" and the film treats it with the utmost gravity like it means... something

jesus christ

Mr.Doobie wrote:

cornhole wrote:

I just can't see it working.  For a start, the book is totally unbelievable.  The story is of a tower block and the people who move into it.  There is everything everyone needs, shops, hairdressers, a school, gyms, etc., so no-one needs to leave, except for work.  The apartment owners all have a share in the building so it's a self-run society.  The top third are owned by the richest and have express elevators, the bottom third are owned by the poorest, (comparatively) and the middle, by the middle.  The middle and poor have the slow elevators. Everyone is professional class in order to afford to live there. So there are no real poor people.

Jesus Christ I bet you're one of those people that complains that fantasy books never explain how dragons breath fire holy crap

I mean I don't doubt it's a rubbish book and all but c'mon now

I don't know where that came from, but no, I don't complain about how dragons breathe fire in fantasy books. Fantasy worlds are just that. High Rise might be a satire, but it's firmly set in the world we know. It's a tower block in the Isle of Dogs, London.  

Because if your first complaint about a didactic scifi satire is that its premise is a bit of a stretch you are missing the point

I mean c'mon, the kids survived the plane crash in Lord of the Flies? Call the literacy police weeewoooweeeeeewoooooooo

plane crashes are quite survivable if the pilot can make any kind of controlled landing

I would still say the premise of Lord of the Flies is a big stretch not just because of the plane crash (though the kids surviving without a single adult also being so lucky is still pushing it) but like I said it's kind of besides the point

cornhole wrote:

The book is meant to be a dystopia, but really it's just a white male's utopia.

Also is there just no difference between someone writing misogynistic characters in a misogynistic world and a writer actively promoting misogyny?

Cuz this seems like a story where "sympathize with" is by design rather strong words to use on any of the characters. I mean, yeah violence against women has become the de facto way for lazy writers to get across their big point that things are shitty and that's mad problematic but I would hardly call anything that you described a white male's utopia.

...

Unless the white male in question is GG Allin...

Mr.Doobie wrote:

Also is there just no difference between someone writing misogynistic characters in a misogynistic world and a writer actively promoting misogyny?

Actually this is a good point. I haven't read the book so I can't verify this, but it sounds like the author could just as easily be trying to portray a world that shows the uglier side of the male of the species. It doesn't necessarily mean he fantasises about it, or even supports the idea...maybe he's simply trying to show the possible outcome of what might happen if men are allowed to regress to a primal state in such close proximity with women. Dystopia does, after all, generally indicate that it's not supposed to be pleasant.

Oh, and: a new Noah's Ark film? Seriously? With a white cast, and a Noah played by Russel Crowe, the master of accents...

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Cyberwulf wrote:

plane crashes are quite survivable if the pilot can make any kind of controlled landing

He didn't, though---he ejected and got strangled on his parachute's cords when it caught on a tree. His dangling body is what the kids called the green monster.

^
What are you people talking about. The kids got stranded after a school bus wreck. The monster was Milhouse seeing blurry without his glasses.

Sheba wrote:

Cyberwulf wrote:

plane crashes are quite survivable if the pilot can make any kind of controlled landing

He didn't, though---he ejected and got strangled on his parachute's cords when it caught on a tree. His dangling body is what the kids called the green monster.

Actually, that was a different pilot, from a battle that took place above the island. The kids call it the beast.

That High Rise really sounds stupid and contrived. Even a satire shouldn't have an idiot plot. The only way I can see the movie being good is if they gut the premise and make it different. Maybe the front door will have bomb-proof high-tech security which then malfunctions and lets no one pass, and there are no other entrances because the building was made for people paranoid about security. That's still pretty contrived, but at least the idiot factor is far lesser. I see that on the movie poster there are windows only on the upper third of the building...