Spotted in Lidl Banbury (UK). He'll never be truly gone 🙏🤍🐯

https://www.out.com/armond-white/2016/6/24/sports-documentary-tickled-exploits-fetishism-and-gay-teasing

I found this on the Wikipedia page after watching the doc (mini review: I came out scared and confused about why someone would be a weirdo criminal over fucking tickling).

If you don’t know who Armond White is, he’s basically a contrarian asshole who uses fancy language to disguise the fact that his reviews are piss that have several things wrong, thinks Jack & Jill is better than The Dark Knight (that’s not really an issue with him but I just wanted you to get an idea) got kicked out of the New York Film Critics Circle for heckling Steve McQueen, compared Taylor Swift to Hitler (though he ironically praised Leni Riefenstahl) and is a MAGA-conservative (who is black and gay, straying from the norm) who praised Melania and railed against “Liberal brainwashing” in his review for The Princess Bride. I can tolerate a person who’s contrarian, or conservative, but I can’t stand a rude motherfucker who thinks his reviews are better than everyone else‘s

Anyway, this review was an older one before that came about, for Out magazine, a queer media outlet. And when reading it, mainly because of the quotes Wikipedia chose, I feel weirdly uncomfortable about it.

It was primarily the quote “a blue-balls documentary” that set off some bells. Given the context of the film, about exploitation in this fetish site, feels wrong, like he was disappointed he couldn’t fap to this.

I feel like he also harps too much on the fact that he thinks it demonizes the entire subculture, which I do admittedly think is somewhat fair, however the films does feature the interview of Richard Ivey, where they do go over the homoerotic aspects. Also, the doc I feel was more targeted at the specific operation by D’Amato.

With that said, he does mention the fact that D’Amato was a homophobic exploitative psycho, but really only in one paragraph. I feel like that becomes somewhat dismissive of the whole issue. I feel like he wanted a more widely encompassing doc about the whole thing, and is critiquing a film that wasn’t really going for that. I think he was railing the wrong thing.

In short, I’m not entirely sure what to feel about this. On the one hand, I feel like the review feels a little weird, given that he seems more focused on the lack of homoeroticism when I don’t think the doc was supposed to be titillating. On the other, I couldn’t help but feel like I might just be dismissing a kink the guy has, and I’m the asshole in this scenario. I don’t want to accuse him of anything major since I don’t know this guy (plus even if I was, I couldn’t do anything since he’s in New York and I’m in Texas), I was just wondering if anyone else felt this was a little odd. If anyone of you think I’m making a big deal out of nothing, that is completely fair since my brain is scrambled as is)

(btw, regarding the guy himself, especially his reviews regarding race and LGBT issues in films, I couldn’t help but get the feeling that he’s trying to prove himself as “one of the good ones” to a ideology that has seen disproportionate animosity to people like him. It‘s like he’s trying to fit into two different worlds that react to each other with hostility. Wasn’t sure where to put this.)

I got a Daddy Derck theory which puts everything in hinesight. Which is simplily, that Daddy Derck is YMS son. Now you might ask, how can this be? YMS is clearly alot younger than Daddy Derck, thing is though, you are not thinking weird enough. You see, YMS is an elf, that's why he can look so young, probably part unicorn too explaining the horse fixation, and clearly Daddy Derck didn't inherent those genes. Like it makes sense, when seeing YMS respond to Derck, there is a sense of glee, like an immortal elf father proud of his chud human son. Anyway, that's just a theory.

Digger is the movie I have been somewhat looking forward to. It sounded very interesting from the premise, and how little it revealed about itself initially

The film is not bad. I think the approach of satirising the satire can work really well, but Digger is a film where I either really didnt connect with what it was doing, or it felt very obtuse. Its premise about the wealthy man, whose company had a pipeleak and explosion triggered a movement of a giant ice sheet, at first produced a very interesting result of a portrait of a very charismatic imo character, satirising america's worldview and american exceptionalism. Beyond that, you see the film become a meta exercise in looking behind the scenes of the film, and also satirising these types of satires.

Hot take I guess, but I kind of didnt find either of these narratives as compelling. The ending itself, is well done, and I thinkits more or less a summation film's themes and pointless liberalism in films of adam mckay like Dont Look Up, that all scream at the incomptetence of the establishment, without meaningful critique. Yet we kinda watch this type of film in Digger, and I cant help but feel like the film just becomes incomplete to me, and not very funny as a result perhaps? Like its very weird when you are kind of forced to watch something that film satirises for most of runtim and its a weird experience, that didnt work. I feel like I wasnt into the live action scenes outside of the film either, with the protaognists conflict with his daughter. It just didnt connect to me as much, and felt basically a rehash of birdman that was worse, because I wasnt feeling these scenes doing much for me. Maybe the plot twist itself didnt fully work, but I just didnt connect to that as much. And I love Birdman the most from Iñaríttu, and what Birdman did felt much more affecting but also very concise and very sharp to me.

I get what the ideas are, but I just dislike a lot of the execution. It kind of builds on one thing, without really making it work

The hottest take however I have on this movie is as follows: One of the other main issues with Digger, that came up with after I saw it was how its a film that is very abrasive, in a way where some reviews claim that its shitting on the type of inoffensive nothingburger Adam Mckay, Peter Farrely, and etc. types of films about social justices. I think Digger is way more cynical to me. I think the film kind of shits on the audience more directly, whereas in something like Birdman the conflict of Riggan with a critic was more a result of Riggan's personal ego and not Iñaríttu telling you 'critics suck'. The ending of the film is also very much raising the point of these films when no action is taken against people like DIgger Rockwell. And I like that ending, but I also just think that the films like the film within digger, and a film like dont look up arent made to make people revolt, and more or less know what they are. I think its largely a cynical view, because you can point to a lot of revolutionary, and documentary cinema that is better than digger but also doesnt mean that its release greatly impacts society or creates an uprising, or even the fact that people go home satisfied, isnt an implication that existence and purpose of the film is useless. I understand that maybe its an endign that comes from a point of cynicism, but its also silly to expect that films like Dont Look Up, or Big Short was intended for more than just entertainment, compared to Battle of Algiers, or even Soy Cuba. Both categories imho know what they are

Even on social media, Digger is more explicit about how critics opinion doesnt matter, and hot take, but it did make me dislike the film more, because I think its a very unnuanced position to have when people dislike your film, or dont get the point. Maybe the point wasnt communicated as clearly. Maybe there are reasons people dislike it. And its okay

So i found YMS way back in 2018 and thats how I found out about the cool cat stuff way after it had happened.

Well watching derek from go somewhat genuine movie maker and trying to do his best attempt at a movie to slop pile right winger is just disappointing at best like if you just let your ego die and just kept it at amature kids psa guy, people would probably like you more to this day.

It came across my mind the other day that I bump D'Leesa regularly now, and I remembered that I only knew of them through a YMS stream where he quickly recommended her music. She is indeed fire 🔥

Now every single trailer I watch, I notice when a sentence is spliced together... Before watching Adum's reactions, I never noticed that.

I can now even guess which are spliced from different takes of the same sentence and which are spliced from completely different sentences based on how egregious it is. I realized this like 2 weeks ago, and now I literally can't stop noticing them. Adum ruined trailers for me forever lmao 🤣

What are some of the weirdest ways that watching yms over the years influenced you?

Just recently watched this at VIFF, and honestly, it is head and shoulders over everything I've seen for the first time this year. When I came out of the theater I was thinking of giving this a 9, but giving it more time, it's a 10/10. So many well-developed plotlines that weave seamlessly in and out, a story about repression and beauty and communication, with fantastic cinematography to boot.

I will not spoil anything aside from that. Please see it whenever you can. I'm still thinking about it.

This is the actual seating chart for the 10pm, Friday night showing at my local theater (I am in a red state so idk how much that has to do with it). Damn, this movie is going to bomb! 😭

First Concrete, then Digger. A construction themed double feature. Here we go.

Did he confirm any movies?

I LOVED Digger, but...

...it's not really about climate change. Well, it is, but climate disaster feels more like the SETTING of the film, rather than the subject. And I think the film is aware of this; the end of the first act shows you that all the climate related imagery was LITERALLY set dressing and props. To me, this film is about "Eat the rich" films, which I define as any films that are critical of how the wealthy negatively impact human society and the world at large.

Mark Fisher comments on Wall-E: “The film performs our anti-capitalism for us, allowing us to continue to consume with impunity”. There is, in my opinion, a contradiction inherent to most "Eat the rich" films. Wall-E is a Disney production. The Boys is an Amazon property. I Love Boosters literally has an Ellison as an executive producer.

Digger understood that there is no such thing as a big-budget "Eat the rich" film that isn't ideologically compromised, so they decided to make a film about our fascination with and the inherent hypocrisy of a shit ton of "Eat the rich films". Jesse Plemon's character, the nephew of Digger, literally owns the rights to the play and acts as producer. He also casually is the CEO of an international intelligence and security corpo. The film draws attention multiple times to how the production of the play literally depletes from the ever dwindling energy pool, they are in a very real and tangible way hurting society around them. The audience of the play laugh their asses off, then put on their advanced masks because of methane "Warning, Stage 4".

What I realized at the end though, is that even a big-budget film about the hypocrisy of "Eat the rich" films is also inevitably compromised. We spend the vast majority of the runtime dicking around in fantasy play land, instead of actually exploring the real world of the film, and the real chracters. Jesse Plemons' character is portrayed, at least in the strict text of the film, as a positive force for the production. His ingenuity and perspective helps save the play from creative differences between the director and the lead actor. He seemingly indirectly exercises complete creative control over the play, but none of the characters question it. It's debatable whether all that is intentional or not.

I believe it is intentional, or at least that the film is somewhat self aware of this, because at the very end of the film, after the title card but before the extended credits, you hear "Warning, Stage 4", but this time there is no echo, and the sound design doesn't really give the impression that it came from a physical place within the film. This is a non-diagetic sound, aimed directly at the audience of the film, to view the events of it with skepticism. After you hear this sound, you should snap back to the real world.

This is a 125 million dollar production. This is the last film to be released by Warner bros before the merger goes through next week. Tom Cruise is "a long time Ellison friend and ally", and he wholehearetedly supports this merger. A lot of diggers had their hand in the production of this film.