“It’s funny to hear these [mewing little kittens] treating the John Wick flicks like they’re major narrative-driven movies capable of being ‘spoiled.’ I like the new Wick, but neither Wells nor the spoiler whiners seem to understand that a plot doesn’t matter to these movies at all, and [that] notions of death matter even less.” — HE commenter “Chuck.”

“Isn’t the ending of John Wick 4 all over the internet? I haven’t seen the film, haven’t read a single review, have no interest in the Wick films. But I know that Wick dies or probably ‘dies’ at the end of this one. Seems to be an open secret on the web, so calling spoiler in this case sounds a bit like complaining about people talking about Jesus being crucified at the end of a new Jesus movie.” — HE commenter “Renaissance.”

“I wouid have never mentioned the Darth Vader-Luke Skywalker blood relationship two weekends after opening day. That film is sacred and holy, and it would’ve been criminal to spoil it.

“The difference is clear. JW4 is flotsam — a rank and cynical pornoviolent ‘musical’ that pollutes the environment and lowers the spiritual property values in each and every realm with its gross and cynical disregard for life. I spit on this movie.

“I respected the rights of unpolluted viewers for TWO FULL WEEKENDS. What was I supposed to do, wait six months or something? Besides, like I said, it was really Stahelski’s fault.” — Jeffrey Wells, posted this morning [4.3] in response to spoiler whiner kvetching.

Ari Aster’s Beau Is Afraid (A24, 4.21) was previewed yesterday (Saturday, 4.1) to a paying audience at Brooklyn’s Alamo Draft House (445 Albee Square, Brooklyn, NY 11201), and Variety’s Brent Lang was apparently there to endure it.

Before reading any further, HE readers are requested to read Wikipedia’s longish Beau Is Afraid synopsis, which goes on for eight bulky paragraphs.

Presuming that the synopsis is legit, Aster’s 179-minute “horror comedy” (set to open in select IMAX theaters on 4.14 before opening wider on 4.21) is apparently some kind of grotesque, audience–punishing fantasia — a surreal acid trip version of a 21st Century Alice in Wonderland-meets-Homer’s The Odyssey, except with a bloated, gray-haired, “twitchy and over-medicated” Phoenix in the Alice role — and not for the faint of heart.

A few excerpts from Lang’s article, which was filed late Saturday afternoon:

(1) Q&A moderator Emma Stone to Aster following the screening: “Are you okay, man?”

(2) The film features a paint-drinking, antagonistic teenaged protagonist (Kylie Rogers), an animated sequence, a “recurring gag involving Phoenix’s distended testicles”, and “a sex scene with [the mid 50ish] Parker Posey that may rank among the wackiest ever committed to film.”

(3) “The [Draft House] crowd seemed to love it, although the general public may have a tougher time” with this “bladder–testing epic.”

(4) Aster comment during the Stone Q&A: “I want [the audience] to go through [Phoenix’s] guts and come out of his butt.”

(5) The black-garbed Phoenix attended the screening but chose not to participate in the Q&A.

Lang’s article ends as follows:

Posted on 1.10.23:

From David Remnick’s “An American Tragedy, Act III,” posted in the New Yorker on 3.30.23:

In the wake of Gwyneth Paltrow’s Park City victory against Terry Sanderson, the usual pests and trolls tried to characterize my anti-Paltrow stance as deranged or jaundiced on some level. Here’s how I responded this morning:

Their stories wildly diverged, and I was fairly astonished by the apparent fact that either Gwyneth or Sanderson were flat–out lying. We all understand that ski slope accidents occasionally happen. I just couldn’t figure it. Why sue if you don’t firmly believe you’re in the right, and can present a strongly compelling case to that effect?

Sanderson waited three years to file the lawsuit, obviously having loads of time to ponder the situation and calculate the odds and cost. Why file if there was a reasonable chance that an impartial jury might hold with Paltrow? Why go through all of that time and effort and expense if there was any half-reasonable likelihood that the jury might decide that it was a toss-up about who slammed into whom?

Sanderson is allegedly wealthy — why would he go through all that? Because he was bored and needed a little drama in his life?

And what about that fat friend of his who was near the scene and testified that he was convinced that Sanderson was completely in the right?

It didn’t make basic sense to me that Sanderson would just file on a whim. He knew Paltow’s attorneys would point to all the travel and adventure that he’s enjoyed since the accident. Why file if he didn’t at least have a better-than-decent shot at winning? Why file what might be seen as a frivolous nuisance lawsuit? It didn’t make basic sense to me.