Support NeoGAF

[shaneo632]

An Inconvenient Sequel (2017) - 7.3/10 - A persuasive follow-up to Al Gore's seminal climate change doc, this sequel may not hit quite as hard, but it also felt less like an actual PowerPoint presentation which was nice (at least according to my memory), and Gore is always a hugely compelling speaker.

There were some really intriguing issues raised here, like the India problem, and while it's essentially preaching to the converted on the whole, considering Donald Trump's refusal to acknowledge climate change, the fight must continue to be fought hard.

Annabelle: Creation (2017) - 5.3/10 - Really surprised this one scored so well with critics.

That's not to say Annabelle: Creation is a bad film, because it's not, and it's certainly MILES ahead of its dogshit predecessor.

However, it also strands a talented director and cast in a thoroughly mediocre horror flick powered by obnoxious jump scares you'll see coming a mile off and moldy genre tropes that stopped being scary like 15 years ago.

Also, what the fuck is this movie's tone supposed to be? I found myself giggling at a lot of scenes that seemed to take themselves dead seriously, which was a bit troubling.

The ending was pretty cool and it's definitely a step in the right direction, but just a bit lazy and low-effort from a narrative perspective.

 

[Net_Wrecker]

I was thinking of starting a personal film challenge in a few weeks. One new movie everyday for one year, so 365 films over 365 days, and write a review of each movie as I watch them, even if the review is a paragraph or two.

I have a load of films in my blu-ray pile of shame and I was thinking something like this could motivate me to watch them, this will also includes films via iTunes, Netflix and visits to the cinema. It just has to be a film I've never seen before, rewatching doesn't count. TV series don't count either.

Thoughts?

As someone who can't keep a consistent movie watching pace whatsoever, definitely don't do it! I don't need another poster in here making me feel bad for not attacking my backlog.

Go have like 3 or 4 kids instead. Help me help you help me.

 

[Sean C]

Murder, My Sweet (1944): A competent but unexceptional Raymond Chandler adaptation that was made two years before Humphrey Bogart defined the role of Philip Marlowe, and can't help but be in the shadow of that performance.

The Little Hours (2017): An unusual setting for an American comedy renders this film distinctive, and it's consistently pleasant to watch, though I don't think it ever really builds to anything even though it feels like it should be doing that in some way.

 

[HollowCentral]

I was thinking of starting a personal film challenge in a few weeks. One new movie everyday for one year, so 365 films over 365 days, and write a review of each movie as I watch them, even if the review is a paragraph or two.

I have a load of films in my blu-ray pile of shame and I was thinking something like this could motivate me to watch them, this will also includes films via iTunes, Netflix and visits to the cinema. It just has to be a film I've never seen before, rewatching doesn't count. TV series don't count either.

Thoughts?

Sounds like a great idea.

In fact, I might join you in that endeavor.

 

[HollowCentral]

3:10 to Yuma (2007)
Starring: Christian Bale, Russell Crowe, Ben Foster, Logan Lerman, Alan Tudyk, Luke Wilson
Director: James Mangold
9 times out of 10 when I see a remake, it feels like it doesn't need to exist. 3:10 to Yuma is an example of the 1 out of 10 where it does. Having recently seen the original, I can safely say that this is the rare remake that takes what made the original pretty decent, updates it with modern filmmaking techniques, and even makes it better in some ways (the ending, specifically). While there are many parts that feel straight from the original, all the way down to the exact same lines, it's delivered in a way that feels fresh, mainly due to stellar performances all around. There's not a single weak link in the main cast, and even Logan Lerman, with whom I've been less than impressed with in the past, managed to pull out a great performance. But it's Bale and Crowe who are the main attraction, much like the original, playing off each other like a symphony orchestra. And the score is just phenomenal. Of course, it's not perfect. My main complaint is how the scenes in the bridal suite (my favorite part of the original) seemed to be slightly watered down. I honestly wish the movie was about 15 minutes longer just so we could get more of Crowe and Bale in that room just talking, because the conversations don't go nearly as in depth as they did in the original. But that pales in comparison to just how damn good this movie is. See it! It's $5 on Amazon right now! Go get it!

 

[Icolin]

3:10 to Yuma (2007)
Starring: Christian Bale, Russell Crowe, Ben Foster, Logan Lerman, Alan Tudyk, Luke Wilson
Director: James Mangold
9 times out of 10 when I see a remake, it feels like it doesn't need to exist. 3:10 to Yuma is an example of the 1 out of 10 where it does. Having recently seen the original, I can safely say that this is the rare remake that takes what made the original pretty decent, updates it with modern filmmaking techniques, and even makes it better in some ways (the ending, specifically). While there are many parts that feel straight from the original, all the way down to the exact same lines, it's delivered in a way that feels fresh, mainly due to stellar performances all around. There's not a single weak link in the main cast, and even Logan Lerman, with whom I've been less than impressed with in the past, managed to pull out a great performance. But it's Bale and Crowe who are the main attraction, much like the original, playing off each other like a symphony orchestra. And the score is just phenomenal. Of course, it's not perfect. My main complaint is how the scenes in the bridal suite (my favorite part of the original) seemed to be slightly watered down. I honestly wish the movie was about 15 minutes longer just so we could get more of Crowe and Bale in that room just talking, because the conversations don't go nearly as in depth as they did in the original. But that pales in comparison to just how damn good this movie is. See it! It's $5 on Amazon right now! Go get it!

Told you so.

 

[HollowCentral]

Told you so.

That you did.

 

[Infernostew]

Been crazy lately and didn't sub the new thread.

Top 5 in July:

1. Throne of Blood
T2. Baby Driver
T2. Lady Macbeth
T2. Endless Poetry
5. Popstar: Never Stop Never Stopping

It's getting to that point where I can't be rating what films I liked this year that are better than others. 3 really awesome 2017 films tied for 2nd as of now.

 

[HollowCentral]

Best in Show (2000) - Rewatch
Starring: Christopher Guest, Eugene Levy, Catherine O'Hara, Fred Willard, Parker Posey, Jennifer Coolidge, John Michael Higgins, Jane Lynch, Will Sasso
Director: Christopher Guest
I absolutely love mockumentaries, almost as much as I love documentaries. It's the reason I saw Popstar in theaters (even though it was an almost empty theater), and I'll still defend that movie. But Christopher Guest is the king of mockumentaries. I originally saw this after I had already seen Mascots, which was good, but nowhere near as great as Best in Show is. And rewatching it just reaffirms how good this film is. Sometimes, mockumentaries feel like actors acting like they're in a documentary, but with this film, they feel like actual people. Each of the actors embody their characters so well, and the characters never feel fake as a result. The jokes are clever, and don't often feel forced. However, some of the interview portions go on for a little long, and some of the improvised bits feel like they're going nowhere for too long before they end. But it's still a pretty great comedy, and absolutely one that warrants multiple watches.

 

[TissueBox]

Waiting for Guffman is best Guest.

 

[AngmarsKing701]

I was thinking of starting a personal film challenge in a few weeks. One new movie everyday for one year, so 365 films over 365 days, and write a review of each movie as I watch them, even if the review is a paragraph or two.

I have a load of films in my blu-ray pile of shame and I was thinking something like this could motivate me to watch them, this will also includes films via iTunes, Netflix and visits to the cinema. It just has to be a film I've never seen before, rewatching doesn't count. TV series don't count either.

Thoughts?

Great idea. I wouldn't be able to pull something like this off. Too busy with work, writing and TV watching (some shows my wife and I watch are about to come back for the fall).

 

[Apt101]

Miss Sloane. It's a political drama, pretty par for the course. Jessica Chastain is amazing in it.

 

[HollowCentral]

The Lion King is getting a limited run in theaters this weekend prior to the re-re-release on the 29th, so I'm going to that today.

Was originally going to see Homecoming again, but I never got the chance to see Lion King on the big screen, so fuck it.

 

[Messofanego]

Saw The Beguiled the other day and it was pretty good. Couldn't help feeling it could have ended a little better, maybe taken another direction once in the third act. Duno. 8/10

Wind River is playing atm at a close by theatre, anyone seen this? Trailer looks a bit ho-hum but have read it's great. Taylor Sheridan writer of Sicario, Hell or High Water etc. etc.

Seeing The Killing of a Sacred Deer on Monday. That'll be my second dose of Colin Farrell and Kidman in a movie together, in the span of a week. lol

Hype!

I've come back around on Colin Farrell. In Bruges, Miami Vice, The Lobster, The Beguiled, and now another Yorgos movie.

What did people here think of Seven Psychopaths?

 

[Ridley327]

Sinbad and the Eye of the Tiger: Wearing its rushed production entirely on its sleeve, this final installment in Harryhausen's Sinbad series is sadly its worst. While it's not without its strengths, primarily concerning a rather impressive rendering of a baboon that may just be the most beautifully expressive creation that Harryhausen had ever worked on, little else works in this film, one that suffers greatly from a shocking lack of action and a surplus of ancillary elements that rehash too much of Harryhausen's past creations and the inordinate amount of screen time that is given to our villains, with Margaret Whiting's dreadful performance dominating much of those scenes. While the acting in general isn't much to write home about either, especially Patrick Wayne as the weakest of the three Sinbad actors by a good country mile, they are served no favors with the dodgy special effects aside from the stop motion work that make them look even worse, with badly done traveling mattes that makes every look out of place whenever they're employed. Throw in a story that would barely cover a film half the length, let alone the near-two hours this one lasts, and you've got yourself a tough film to sit through comfortably. It's a shame, since the stuff that works is worthwhile, but not with how much of a struggle it can be to get to them.

 

[Net_Wrecker]

I've come back around on Colin Farrell. In Bruges, Miami Vice, The Lobster, The Beguiled, and now another Yorgos movie.

What did people here think of Seven Psychopaths?

Not as good as In Bruges, still very entertaining.

Colin Farrell's been dope for a while now. How dare you leave out The New World.

 

[pauljeremiah]

As someone that keeps doing it, do it.

Don't let your dreams be dreams

Did something similar years ago when I had a website and did reviews. Would watch two or three during the week then make up the rest on the weekend (or go ahead of schedule if I think the next week might be too busy).

Once you get into a schedule it's easy.

Definitely go for it! Once you settle into a habit, or double up on movies on days off or weekends, that pile of shame will shrink fairly quickly!

Thanks for all the positive feedback guys. I'm planning to start this little cinematic adventure on the first of November. Will be posting the reviews to my Letterboxd page,

 

[Icolin]

Not as good as In Bruges, still very entertaining.

Colin Farrell's been dope for a while now. How dare you leave out The New World.

Yep. The New World is definitely one of the GOAT movies.

Spoiler

The Thin Red Line and The Tree of Life are still better tho.

 

[Gnome Scat]

Finally was able to watch The Deer Hunter last night and wow, what a gut-wrenching movie that was. It was a bit slow and dragged in a few places during the beginning, but the story and themes that it told were incredibly powerful. Great performances from the cast, too.

 

[Messofanego]

Not as good as In Bruges, still very entertaining.

Colin Farrell's been dope for a while now. How dare you leave out The New World.

Will check it out, it's on Amazon Prime. Weirdly, that's the one Malick I haven't seen yet. Even though it's got my man Bale in it.

 

[Boogs31]

Finally was able to watch The Deer Hunter last night and wow, what a gut-wrenching movie that was. It was a bit slow and dragged in a few places during the beginning, but the story and themes that it told were incredibly powerful. Great performances from the cast, too.

I didn't take Christopher Walken seriously as an actor until I saw that. One of the greatest performances I've ever seen.

 

[darkwing-buck]

I didn't take Christopher Walken seriously as an actor until I saw that. One of the greatest performances I've ever seen.

It's his best role, also netted him an oscar.

 

[kevin1025]

Annabelle: Creation

"That scary Conjuring doll, huh? Psshhh," I said, going into this. "That word of mouth can't be ri--- oh shit."

I'm really hovering on what to rate this. It's either a strong 7/10 or a soft 8/10. I've studied so many movies over the years (in and out of school) that horror movies never really get me like they're supposed to, but I admire the hell out of ones that work. This one really works. Talitha Bateman is fantastic as polio-stricken Janice, the house set and surrounding area has a ton of character, the camera work and horror tricks are delightful... and though I wasn't personally scared, it was tense as all hell. Writing this talked me into an 8/10, haha. The ending was not mega strong, and the tag at the end was meh (

Spoiler

which, having not seen the original Annabelle, I guess ties into the original?

). But otherwise, a worthwhile horror movie finally!

 

[Divius]

^ Have you seen The Conjuring and its sequel? I especially dug Conjuring 2. Very well made horror movie.

 

[brianjones]

I didn't take Christopher Walken seriously as an actor until I saw that. One of the greatest performances I've ever seen.

 

[UrbanRats]

^ Have you seen The Conjuring and its sequel? I especially dug Conjuring 2. Very well made horror movie.

I liked Conjuring 1, but didnt like 2, though a couple of sequences were great (

Spoiler

out of focus metamorphosis

)

 

[kevin1025]

^ Have you seen The Conjuring and its sequel? I especially dug Conjuring 2. Very well made horror movie.

Loved the first and really liked the second. These are all going back to the old school horror that has been missing for a while now!

These movies also must have the best casting director, the younger actresses, especially in Conjuring 2 and Annabelle: Creation are insanely good.

 

[Sean C]

Five Graves to Cairo (1943): Billy Wilder's second English-language film is a considerable improvement on the bizarre The Major and the Minor, released the previous year. Set during the recently-concluded North African campaign, a lone British soldier ends up impersonating a hotel employee behind Axis lines, only to learn that the dead guy he is impersonating

Spoiler

was actually an Axis spy

. Leading man Franchot Tone, who doesn't even attempt an accent for the role, is kind of boring, but the film is livened up by a just-getting-started Anne Baxter (as a bitter Frenchwoman who basically ends up enacting Rick's dilemma in Casablanca) and Eric von Stroheim as Erwin Rommel.

 

[pauljeremiah]

first, thanks to everyone who just followed me on Letterboxd, really appreciate that.

Just wondering about the 365 films in 365 days challenge, should I set myself some rules?

1. At least one film to be watched every day from November 1st 2017 till October 31st 2018
2. Just because you watched two films in one day doesn't mean you can skip the next day
3. It has to be a film I have not seen before, no rewatching!
4. TV Shows or Mini Series don't count
5. Films can only be watched via physical media (blu-ray, DVD, 4K) Digital (Netflix, iTunes, Mubi) or going to the cinema.
6. The review for the film must be posted the same day
7. Short films don't count
8. Different edits or cuts of films do count as separate films, but cannot be watched on consecutive days

Any other rules I should add?

I was thinking of maybe allowing a rewatch of any film that I haven't watched since Jan 1st 2000. Just so I could rewatch some films that I haven't seen since I was in my teens or childhood.

I'm currently in the process of re-arranging my blu-ray collection (nearly 1100 films) to films I have watched and films I have not, keeping the ones I haven't watched in my screening room and the ones I have watched in my bedroom.

 

[Discotheque]

Colin Farrell got the best filmography of the century for male actors imo. A lot of shit but also a large number of dope movies. A few of which are among my favorite films

New World, Miami Vice, Minority Report, In Bruges, Seven Psychopaths, The Lobster, Crazy Heart

Hell he was the best part in the Harry potter spinoff. Looking forward to that killing of a sacred deer movie, Yorgos been great with the extremely dark humor so far.

 

[Icolin]

Colin Farrell got the best filmography of the century for male actors imo. A lot of shit but also a large number of dope movies. A few of which are among my favorite films

New World, Miami Vice, Minority Report, In Bruges, Seven Psychopaths, The Lobster, Crazy Heart

Hell he was the best part in the Harry potter spinoff. Looking forward to that killing of a sacred deer movie, Yorgos been great with the extremely dark humor so far.

Casey Affleck comes close. The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford, Ain't Them Bodies Saints, A Ghost Story, Manchester by the Sea, Gone Baby Gone, and the Ocean's trilogy, and I guess Interstellar and Paranorman count...whew.

 

[UrbanRats]

Y'all should watch Alps from Lanthimos.
It's no Dogtooth but it's good, yet gets mostly ignored, due to the lower profile.

 

[AngmarsKing701]

Colin Farrell got the best filmography of the century for male actors imo. A lot of shit but also a large number of dope movies. A few of which are among my favorite films

New World, Miami Vice, Minority Report, In Bruges, Seven Psychopaths, The Lobster, Crazy Heart

Hell he was the best part in the Harry potter spinoff. Looking forward to that killing of a sacred deer movie, Yorgos been great with the extremely dark humor so far.

Casey Affleck comes close. The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford, Ain't Them Bodies Saints, A Ghost Story, Manchester by the Sea, Gone Baby Gone, and the Ocean's trilogy, and I guess Interstellar and Paranorman count...whew.

Would be an interesting exercise to do this by decade for actors/actresses going back to the 40s. If you all agree, do it here or new thread?

 

[daydream]

Wall Street: Oliver Stone's Wall Street is about as disinterested in subtlety as most people are in finance. The film is preachy and at the very least talkative when it's not. Visually, it strives to be garish and lurid and it can frankly be quite ridiculous. When Gekko is being particularly devious again and turns into a dark silhouette, the only thing missing is a dramatic orchestra hit to really hammer it home. Interestingly enough, Wall Street establishes a tone – a sort of restlessness – that films treating a similar subject would later adopt, e.g. The Big Short or Scorsese's venture into the topic. It's an easy film to pluck and tear apart and, yet, the shrillness of its every part, the strange mimicry of its subject, works out in its favour. For the most part, the film is aware of the absurdity of its restrained hysterics and exhausts that conceit before ending in a blurry, diffuse way – like a dream ending or a bubble bursting.

 

[Ridley327]

The Man Who Knew Too Much (1956): Hitchcock remakes his own film, to solid if somewhat tempered success. The skeleton of the story is certainly strong enough to support a new adaptation that changes motives and locations around, though I must admit that I was disappointed that this tried to be a bit more of a crowd-pleaser with how much of the sociopolitical element it dropped from the original. Sure, the 1950s weren't as fertile a time where it would make sense to have an assassination plot that could very well have started a world war as it did in the original, but here, Hitchcock decides to push it so far into the background that it feels rather extraneous, making the stakes feel a lot lower in the event that the scheme could have been successful. And though the film is a good half-hour longer, with a lot of that time being spent fleshing out the relationship between Jimmy Stewart and Doris Day, who do quite well in their roles, almost all the intrigue for the villains is eradicated and the story is poorer for it. Now, our schemers feature very little of the desperation and menace that Peter Lorre's group felt in the original and don't feel even half as fleshed out, which once again diminishes the impact that they could have had. Along with a completely different finale that doesn't come close to hitting the same level of narrative satisfaction of the original's thrilling shoot-out, these elements combine to make you really feel the longer length of this version, which can feel flagging at times and doesn't have nearly the energy or excitement that the original was able to generate. This isn't to say the film is a failure, far from it, but it feels more like a lesser Hitchcock film practically in spite of all the production advances it has over the original, in spite of Hitchcock's famous opinion of both films. That being said, it is unfair to focus entirely on what I didn't like as much about this version, since there are quite a few things it does well. I already mentioned the strong performances from both Jimmy Stewart and Doris Day, and having no idea that this is where Que Sera, Sera originated, it was a rather swell surprise to be serenaded by Day and also have it feature so heavily into the plot, but their characterization is very well rounded where it's easy to buy them as a married couple. I also rather liked how much time they spent with the setup in Marrakech, particularly as it gets a lot funnier than I expected it would (Jimmy Stewart trying to sit down at dinner is some top-notch physical comedy), along with the delightfully strange detour to a taxidermist that subverts your expectations in a very satisfying manner. And even though it runs a bit long, the Albert Hall scene here is very beautifully shot and edited and does a lot of justice to the original while advancing on it in some key areas. All in all, I certainly have my preference locked in, but this is still a good film and I can see why it has endured all this time.

 

[HollowCentral]

The Lion King (1994) - Rewatch
Starring: James Earl Jones, Nathan Lane, Matthew Broderick, Whoopi Goldberg, Jim Cummings, Jonathan Taylor Thomas, Cheech Marin, Rowan Atkinson, Jeremy Irons
Directors: Roger Allers & Rob Minkoff
Damn, this movie has aged phenomenally! While a lot of the older Disney movies suffer from feeling dated at times (sometimes weak animation, outdated worldviews, etc.), The Lion King avoids all that with some still stellar animation, top-notch voice acting and a timeless story about finding who you really are. The villain is threatening, and the character's relationships feel fully fleshed out and make sense. Even the comedic sidekick characters manage to avoid being annoying and are actually interesting characters in and of themselves. And with the advantage of having time on my side, I can safely say that all of the songs have aged well, and are still entertaining and well-written. And the score from Hans Zimmer is still my favorite that he's done. While some of the dialogue is a tad hammy, this is still an incredible example of what the best animated movies can do, telling a realistic story in a fantastical setting and having it all work together. There's a reason this is my favorite animated movie of all time (followed closely by The LEGO Movie fight me).

Cautiously optimistic about the remake.

 

[kevin1025]

Live By Night

Ben Affleck is a ghost in his own film, wandering through a story that connects a lot of wonderful actors to wasted opportunities and beautiful cinematography. But the movie is flighty in a bad way, not quite sure of itself and trying to be a classic gangster picture when all it amounts to is a disappointing time. Gone Baby Gone is still my favorite of his, along with The Town, but this does not stack up against those whatsoever. It's not awful, just... bland. Chris Cooper and Chris Messina are highlights, though.

The Trip to Spain

I had watched the other two over the past few weeks, and then randomly the arthouse theatre downtown started playing this one, so I timed that all out perfectly.

The epic conclusion to the BCEU (British Comedian Expanded Universe). Steve Coogan and Rob Brydon take their comedic chops and food eating chops to Spain this go-around, trading impressions and life lessons while in beautiful locales and during insanely good-looking meals. This one was my favorite of the three, the jokes and conversations a lot more fun and absurd and, finally, rather personal. This could be the best comedy of the year so far. So glad I stumbled onto these!

I read they're considering making a fourth, this time in Ireland, which would make me mega happy.

 

[TissueBox]

Mother's Day (2010) was probably never going to be a great movie but I was at least hoping for an impeccable villainess via DeMornay, and frankly for the first wiling half or so, it was one of the best I'd seen this decade -- only for the ending to come, which handily stonewalled me. Along with this, the overall reliance on black-and-white morality ended up dousing the fluctuating fascination I at first had (and wanted to have) for her character as the obsessive, torrid Mother. I suppose it no longer appeals to me to see good and evil, or stupid vs. stupid, or lucky tormenter vs. lucky tormentee, let alone all three altogether. I was hoping at least for a little grey, and if not that, a little believability or empathy, and if not that, maybe a full-fledged villain protagonist or Joker treatise, Dark Knight-style, rather than a compromise that's anti-nihilistic yet also upended by people being more seemingly dumb than sympathetic.

That said, for the first moments alone, through a coolly dedicated, venomous performance from DeMornay, where there is uncertainty, mystery, and intimidation commanded so delightfully upon first glare, this still -- indeed -- manages to boast one of the turn of the century's greatest villainesses on screen, and with effective performances from the supporting cast, and charismatic distraught in the twisted, contorted children, the movie succeeds as theater, even if quick escalation sticks a cork in the grill (and a spiked drink in the camerawork) come act three.

In the end, for the head honcho of a guerilla crime family, though, Mother can get sidetracked by her own sadism and un-subtle superiority complex quite easily -- perhaps, one day, she will be able to find redemption. Perhaps, next time, we'll get a psychological thriller-drama. It would make a better fit.

 

[Apt101]

Who wanted to see you in a cage, man?

So many great performances in that film. I'm surprised they haven't remade it.

 

[Mi goreng]

Wind River (2017)

I mean yeah it was ok, it was good even. But I didn't feel like it had anything particularly fresh or new to show cinematically apart from its sometimes interesting soundtrack, remote setting and flashes of sicario style hard violence. Maybe i'm jaded, maybe i'm just too excited for some hyper weird Greek cinema tomorrow at MIFF. IDk. 7/10

 

[Fancy Clown]

E.T.: Despite being affected greatly by this film as a child, as I'm sure all watched it were, over the years it sort of calcified in my mind as the standard bearer for Spielberg's worst instincts like the sentimentality he's always getting dumped on for.

Well, sentimentality be damned because this movie is still charming as all hell.

 

[Window]

Alien:Covenant: I could watch Fassbender as David all day. That slight tinge of sadness that's present in his performance is what makes you sympathise with David despite everything he does. I would be happily surprised if a character in the new Blade Runner comes even remotely close to being as interesting and fascinating to watch as him. The rest of the film was just kinda there. I really do feel like Scott would have been better off making these films about David and solely exploring the concept of AIs which would have removed the need to adhere to the trappings of an Alien film.

 

[grosvenor_92]

The Lego Batman Movie. Really funny movie and I didn't even recognize Zach Galifianakis as The Joker.

 

[ronaldthump]

PET:

domique the hobbit plays an obessive animal shelter staffer who kidnaps a

Spoiler

serial killer

and um, I've read that it was good. except it doesn't really go far and i got quite bored - the end

Spoiler

surprise with him being the pet

is unneccessary. I think the movie would have worked better with 2 different leads - she was terrible; quite a b-tier actress with an awful shrieking voice.


KILL SWITCH:

some sort of sci fi thriller with a echo universe and some cool cgi - dan rather (the guest/downtown abbey) is the lead and this could have been good except for some strange reason, they chose to go FPS view ala hardcore henry so you dont even see Dan's face/act = negating any sort of emotional connection to the shenanigans on screen.
I read up on it after and I think the movie's CGI is actually really good - wonder what the budget is. Worth a watch but its not much good outside of some of the cgi work. Annoying FPS visor warnings are way overused.

 

[kevin1025]

The Fifth Element

A rewatch. It's been a while since I saw it, so it felt almost new again. I'll always admire it for its inventiveness, beautiful design and lived-in, dank and dirty world that feels living and breathing. It's a good time. But it does have some flaws around the surface, mostly in the larger plot that surrounds the main characters. It can bog down the film, but the things around that are so well done and so interesting that it's forgivable. The movie is just a lot of fun to watch. So while I give it a 3.5/5 on Letterboxd (7/10), and its rougher parts can be unfortunate, I recommend watching it or giving it a rewatch, it's something you may end up loving again, or loving for the first time.

 

[AngmarsKing701]

So I'm 30 minutes into Spectre. The opening scene in Mexico City is completely fucked up. Bond blows up a building and two streets over nobody is freaking out and the cops haven't been alerted to there being like half a block toppled over. Then we get into exposition city for the next three minutes with M. Then we get a "the funeral is in 3 days" and a comment that "the smart blood program might be a little finicky for the first 48 hours." So, technically, M should know where Bond is given the gaping holes in reasoning going on here. And did he drive the stolen car to Rome from London? I guess technically he could have, as it's about 19 hours of driving.

But still.

Going back to plow through some more of it, but so far not very pleased with the loosey-goosey writing for this one.

 

[HollowCentral]

So I'm 30 minutes into Spectre. The opening scene in Mexico City is completely fucked up. Bond blows up a building and two streets over nobody is freaking out and the cops haven't been alerted to there being like half a block toppled over. Then we get into exposition city for the next three minutes with M. Then we get a "the funeral is in 3 days" and a comment that "the smart blood program might be a little finicky for the first 48 hours." So, technically, M should know where Bond is given the gaping holes in reasoning going on here. And did he drive the stolen car to Rome from London? I guess technically he could have, as it's about 19 hours of driving.

But still.

Going back to plow through some more of it, but so far not very pleased with the loosey-goosey writing for this one.

Trust me, it doesn't get much better

 

[Discotheque]

E.T.: Despite being affected greatly by this film as a child, as I'm sure all watched it were, over the years it sort of calcified in my mind as the standard bearer for Spielberg's worst instincts like the sentimentality he's always getting dumped on for.

Well, sentimentality be damned because this movie is still charming as all hell.

Schmaltz isn't always bad. It was quite effective in ET no doubt. That scene at the end with the Williams music made me tear up a bit when I saw this again about a year ago lol.

 

[Messofanego]

So I'm 30 minutes into Spectre. The opening scene in Mexico City is completely fucked up. Bond blows up a building and two streets over nobody is freaking out and the cops haven't been alerted to there being like half a block toppled over. Then we get into exposition city for the next three minutes with M. Then we get a "the funeral is in 3 days" and a comment that "the smart blood program might be a little finicky for the first 48 hours." So, technically, M should know where Bond is given the gaping holes in reasoning going on here. And did he drive the stolen car to Rome from London? I guess technically he could have, as it's about 19 hours of driving.

But still.

Going back to plow through some more of it, but so far not very pleased with the loosey-goosey writing for this one.

Can't decide whether Spectre or Quantum Of Solace is worse. Or they're just tied for the worst of Bond films since the 90s.

 

[Fancy Clown]

Schmaltz isn't always bad. It was quite effective in ET no doubt. That scene at the end with the Williams music made me tear up a bit when I saw this again about a year ago lol.

Yeah I caught some feels too

Ouch ;__;