Not the main focus but a lesbian romance is an important part of the story. Beautiful cinematography and devastating narrative.
Related Recs
🖼
Céline Sciamma’s queer feminist period drama about two wammin passing the Bechdel test in the Age of Patriarchy gets a thumbs up from me. I watched this movie on the plane and it’s common knowledge that flying makes you emotional/horny, which might explain why it left such a lasting impression.This film has everything you could possibly want: lesbians, nudity, costumes, art history references, vision — all while maintaining an uncharacteristic degree of restraint and not going too hard on the political statements. The casual absence of men for the most part is a nice touch. I’d even go so far as to say that it’s up there in my hall of fame, along with Harold Pinter and Joseph Losey’s The Go-Between, Peter Greenaway’s The Draughtsman’s Contract and Alain Corneau’s All the Mornings of the World. The only thing that would’ve made it better in my opinion is if they delivered on all the threats of self-immolation in the end, but endings are something that filmmakers historically seem to struggle with, so next.
Aug 23, 2022
🎞
This film is, to me, perfection. Lesbian adjacent stalking, huge focus on real estate and the two GOATiest GOATS- Cate B and Judi D- going head to head at the speed of hysteria. This is what I hoped I was getting when I decided to make a home in London (every part except an affair with a fifteen year old boy. Not good!) Not only do I love the aesthetic- a kind of drab cashmere cowl-neck with a hippie skirt, the sense that everyone is ten degrees too cold, tons of crown moulding- but I love any film about our obsessive cultural interest in catching mothers stepping outside of bounds, and what that punitive glee says about us. Watch for the complex social message, stay to see a young Juno Temple whimper-cry “I’M FAT AS FUCK, MUM!" (she’s most definitely not, but she plays it perfectly.)
Jan 3, 2023
beautiful design and cinematography. great psychological horror dealing with grief. one of the best sex scenes of all time!
on criterion
Aug 2, 2024
Top Recs from @lucius
Alright y'all, standards have gotten a little lax around here and rec quality has taken a dip (I'm including myself in this). Here are some pointers for High Rec Standards.
ANATOMY OF A REC:
TITLE—This is the rec or recommendations. This is NOT a lead in. Type exactly what you're recommending here. What appears in the Title should finish this sentence, "I recommend _____."
BODY—This supports the rec and anything goes. Supporting statements, supporting essays, additional recs, you can get silly, you can pontificate. You can do anything you want. Except putting the main rec down here. Where does it go? That's right. In the Title 👆
IMAGE—No rules. Add one to preference. It can be relevant or a non sequitur.
LINK—I highly recommend links but it's not as important as the Title or Body. If you are recommending something that has an online presence (music, movies, websites, products, etc.), Piffies want to click on it immediately. Don't make us google. Be kind a leave a link.
EMOJI—No rules. Express yourself.
ANTI-RECS:
They exist and they are valid recs. "Anti-Rec: _____" clearly communicates this is something best avoided. But a better way format this type of Rec is to use a modifier or verb that flows with "I recommend _____." Ex. I recommend... Not Eating Tacks, Avoiding Area X, Leaving Off the Anchovies, etc.—(Formatting Anti-Recs this way first recommended by tyler the Creator)
ANATOMY OF AN ASK:
TITLE—This is the question or topic of the Ask. Asks can solicit advice or start a discussion. You have some flexibility here because the Ask is expected to be expounded upon in the body if it needs more context. Just be clear. Again, this is not a lead in. Be direct and ask the question or state the topic.
BODY—Provide more context. Narrow the recommendation field. Add relevant links. Remember, the Ask goes in the Title 👆
EMOJI—No rules. Express yourself.
ANSWERING AN ASK—Recs on Asks can break style as dictated by the Ask. If the Ask is looking for Recs, give Recs following style. If it's asking for opinions, give your opinion. Asking for links? Give links! Respond however you would respond some someone IRL. Asks start a conversation so you can be more conversational. But keep in mind that these Recs will appear in the main feed. So where you can maintain Rec style, do so.
Example: WHAT’S YOUR CURRENT LETTERBOXD TOP 4?
A response to this with High Rec Standards would look something like this:
TITLE—Lists your current Letterboxd top 4. You are recommending these four movies.
BODY—Free reign here. Drop your Letterboxd @. Talk about the movies. Make a quip. Emoji. Relevant links. Nothing.
IMAGE—Optional. Screenshot of your top four. Frame from a movie. Dealer's choice.
LINK—Add your Letterboxd profile only if you want to be found.
EMOJI—Whatever. But it'd be nice if it was relevant.
DISCLAIMER:
This is a living community document! These are only my recommendations for a foundation. Debate and Discussion of proper style are Encouraged. Any editions and changes to the PI.FYI STYLE GUIDE will be notated with attribution.
Changelog:
07.26.2024—Clarified a Rec is not limited to one recommendation. Recs can recommend multiple things. Thanks to shegoestoanotherschool for identifying the issue. / Added guidance for Anti-Rec format.
02.11.2025—Moved SpongeBob Bubble Blowing Technique video link from the top level into the body ("some pointers") so the embed wouldn't override the High Quality instructional graphic.
Jul 25, 2024
🐸
This combo has just been here the whole time?!
Feb 6, 2025
🥯
i will eat one every day i do not give a fuck anymore
Jan 30, 2024