Victor Morton's Avatar

Victor Morton

@vjmfilms

Raised on Blackpool postcards and Benny Hill, religious nut, Film Nerddom's Jake LaMotta, Japan WW2 apologist, loyal adherent to the disco movement, Deplorable. I block headshrinkers.

145
Followers
90
Following
1,480
Posts
15.05.2025
Joined
Posts Following

Latest posts by Victor Morton @vjmfilms

It’s my #1 for the year, but don’t you think it also, compared to the Carpenter (or George Romero if you want an even earlier antecedent), mich more openly wears Significant Themes Present Here on its sleeve (though that would HELP it with AMPAS).

11.03.2026 18:24 👍 0 🔁 0 💬 1 📌 0

You’d lose a lot, but two of his films could be staged as plays with only very light reworking.

11.03.2026 18:02 👍 0 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 0
Post image

Taking a chance on friend’s panegyrics … the Chinese auto-racing blockbuster PEGASUS 3 … you better be right @simonsaybrams.bsky.social … more than your esteem in my eyes may be at stake!!!

11.03.2026 17:58 👍 0 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 0
Preview
Liturgy of the Ordinary ORDINARY PEOPLE (Robert Redford, USA, 1980, 1) I’d absorbed a vague sense of ORDINARY PEOPLE from pop-culture osmosis, but I didn’t expect to hate this film as much as I did. ORDINARY PEOPLE is pra…

Reupping for day crowd … I officially caught up with The Film That Beat RAGING BULL. It wasn’t even as good as RAVING BULLY

vjmorton.wordpress.com/2026/03/10/l...

11.03.2026 17:09 👍 1 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 0
Preview
Liturgy of the Ordinary ORDINARY PEOPLE (Robert Redford, USA, 1980, 1) I’d absorbed a vague sense of ORDINARY PEOPLE from pop-culture osmosis, but I didn’t expect to hate this film as much as I did. ORDINARY PEOPLE is pra…

Another of the films I saw at the weekend besides COOK THIEF, which is an all-time favorite, was ORDINARY PEOPLE. Which is not.

vjmorton.wordpress.com/2026/03/10/l...

11.03.2026 03:21 👍 1 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 0

But yes, the article was worth reading and on the pure merits persuasive that Coogler *deserves to* win (Helene and Bruno aren’t up, durnit). But to quote Clint, “deserve got nothin to do with it.”

11.03.2026 00:29 👍 1 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 0

And no, I don’t believe a-priori that a jury *of 2026 film-industry professionals* (as distinct from a jury of 1950s Southerners judging a literacy test) is an any way reluctant to award a black person. It just sometimes doesn’t work out and three is too small a sample size to rebut that presumption

11.03.2026 00:26 👍 0 🔁 0 💬 2 📌 0

I think you’re being over-rationalistic about something that is (1) a democratic vote (2) on something that is not objectively definable. Those who said “Chazelle won for LALA LAND for reasons X or Y” were just spitballing or gestalting, not establishing a binding precedent like a Supreme Court case

11.03.2026 00:22 👍 1 🔁 0 💬 2 📌 0

Reupping for the evening crowd … Albert Spica as a forerunner for DJT in some amazingly specific amd factual ways.

11.03.2026 00:15 👍 1 🔁 0 💬 1 📌 0

UGH ... should be "(AS these sorts of things..."

10.03.2026 21:09 👍 0 🔁 0 💬 1 📌 0

(3) I think your case for why Coogler should win is (and these sorts of things can go) persuasive. But to say — "If a Black filmmaker still can’t win Best Director under these circumstances" — is overstating matters. The verb should be "doesn't"; not "can't."

[Fin]

10.03.2026 21:08 👍 0 🔁 0 💬 2 📌 0
Post image

(2) the key line is here (and it's the second iteration). Two or even three is simply far too small a sample size to draw any meaningful generalizations precisely because (as you also noted elsewhere) every annual contest has its own dynamic.

10.03.2026 21:04 👍 0 🔁 0 💬 2 📌 0

(1) I don't think the quote to which I reacted negatively was presented out of context. It is after all your walkoff line. And the graf higher up about others' reaction is incorrect. It's not the opposite argument; it's the same one (if Coogler loses, it's because of race) just put in negative form.

10.03.2026 21:00 👍 0 🔁 0 💬 2 📌 0
Post image

I have a couple reactions that will take a couple posts to work out ... but separately, to establish my bona fides, this was my year-end poll ballot; note what's present and what's not

10.03.2026 20:54 👍 0 🔁 0 💬 1 📌 0

OK ... I'll take your word and look.

10.03.2026 20:28 👍 1 🔁 0 💬 1 📌 0

Nothing can redeem that cited quote, if it is accurate and in context.

10.03.2026 20:20 👍 0 🔁 0 💬 1 📌 0

So the meaning of “I wrote about you” is …?

10.03.2026 20:12 👍 0 🔁 0 💬 1 📌 0

Not falling for it … (and rejecting any psychologization)

10.03.2026 19:57 👍 0 🔁 0 💬 1 📌 0

How many illicit affairs …

10.03.2026 17:05 👍 1 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 0

“then we can’t pretend” it’s not racism

Not clicking THAT

10.03.2026 15:15 👍 0 🔁 0 💬 1 📌 0
Preview
The Anachronistic Cook THE COOK, THE THIEF, HIS WIFE AND HER LOVER (Peter Greenaway, Britain, 1990) 10 If an American director had made THE COOK, THE THIEF, HIS WIFE AND HER LOVER in 2026, it’d be impossible to see Thief…

I find a surprising 2026 analogue to The Thief in Peter Greenaway’s THE COOK, THE THIEF, HIS WIFE AND HER LOVER, which I saw at the weekend.

vjmorton.wordpress.com/2026/03/10/a...

10.03.2026 14:11 👍 0 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 1

Changes in theatrical market also mean that middlebrow, adult message-movies are much more rarely seen in the wild now, so the pool is shallower. And then they don't get Oscar nominations, so no cachet, so don't get made. Hard to tell which dog wags what tail (or which is chicken and which is egg).

09.03.2026 19:32 👍 1 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 0

FWIW, his latest ain't much (but still a 6; and I could see loving it if one likes the path it takes in last 15 mins or so)

09.03.2026 19:27 👍 0 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 0

Even after I named AFIRE the #1 film of 2023😔

09.03.2026 19:24 👍 0 🔁 0 💬 1 📌 0

Also, tto get even more pedantic, one reason the use of "whom" is fading is greater willingness to engage in preposition stranding ... "never ask who the bell tolls for." But if one DOES yoke the object and the preposition, the nominative sounds barbarous. "Never ask for who the bell tolls"??

09.03.2026 19:21 👍 0 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 0

But to address directly your exact query ... the only thing that came to mind quickly was the Bee Gees "For Whom the Bell Tolls" (a terrific ballad from early 90s). But that feels like a cheat; they're quoting and alluding to an already-canonical artwork.

09.03.2026 19:17 👍 0 🔁 0 💬 1 📌 0
Lady Love Bug  CLODAGH RODGERS
Lady Love Bug CLODAGH RODGERS YouTube video by sunryse111

My favorite such example is not "whom" but something even rarer / more pedantic ... proper use of the subjunctive.

"Lady Love Bug" by Clodagh Rodgers* ... "If this be love, I'll have it one more time."

www.youtube.com/watch?v=K_5u...

* British star of the early-70s, sorry if you're too American.

09.03.2026 19:12 👍 0 🔁 0 💬 1 📌 0
Post image

This was I

09.03.2026 19:04 👍 1 🔁 0 💬 1 📌 0

I’d suggest “brilliant” but I’m one whom you’d distrust.

09.03.2026 18:54 👍 1 🔁 1 💬 1 📌 0

In partial-semi-dissent from the other end … I first saw GODZILLA MINUS ONE with a couple of kaiju fans (my MMA coach and his now-fiancee) and when I told them that film was made for ~$15M, they were amazed. That knowledge does seem to make the film feel like (even) more of an achievement.

08.03.2026 18:31 👍 1 🔁 0 💬 1 📌 0