• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Which movie did you watch today and how would you rate it?

Ford

Contributor
Joined
Nov 30, 2010
Messages
5,971
Location
'Merica
Basic Beliefs
Godless Heathen
I've been diving back into the rabbit hole that is "Dust" while killing time at work. I watched CTRL-Z tonight. The channel is a mixed bag, but this one - clocking in at just 21 minutes - is one of the many good ones. Simple. Funny. Sweet. With some unintended consequences.

 

DrZoidberg

Contributor
Joined
Nov 29, 2007
Messages
10,417
Location
Copenhagen
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
The Battle at Lake Changjin

3/5


This one is interesting because it's a Hollywood style big budget blockbuster where the commies are the good guys and the Americans kick-the-dog evil.

It's refreshing for a change. It's also a stark reminder how easy it is to make engaging propaganda that effortlessly slides into the brain, in spite of being complete nonsense.

Mao talking about paper tigers is a paper thin portrayal.

Even though it is interesting I dislike Hollywood style films. So the rating is on par. The special effects are impressive.
 

TSwizzle

Let's Go Brandon!
Joined
Jan 8, 2015
Messages
6,828
Location
West Hollywood
Gender
Male
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
I've been diving back into the rabbit hole that is "Dust" while killing time at work. I watched CTRL-Z tonight. The channel is a mixed bag, but this one - clocking in at just 21 minutes - is one of the many good ones. Simple. Funny. Sweet. With some unintended consequences.
Pretty decent, 7/10.
 

TSwizzle

Let's Go Brandon!
Joined
Jan 8, 2015
Messages
6,828
Location
West Hollywood
Gender
Male
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
The Wanderers, 6/10; a cult classic from 1979 starring Ken Wahl as the leader of an Italian American street gang known as the Wanderers in 1960s Bronx. An adaptation of a book which I suspect is better than the movie but was reasonably entertaining as it covered some interesting themes and had a good soundtrack. Friendships and loyalties are put to the test as gang leader Richie tries to form a coalition of gangs to face down another neighborhood gang. Some odd scenes like the game of strip poker are a bit baffling but quite funny. Oh, and don’t fuck with the baldies!
 
Joined
Nov 12, 2004
Messages
313
Location
Western Australia
Gender
Male
Basic Beliefs
Atheism
Avatar: The Way of Water trailer - sigh. Not exactly a day one watch. Felt like it could have been outtakes from the first movie.

Multiverse of Madness - Loved it! I don't go for spoilers so I didn't know who the villain was going to be. And it was great. Could partly feel for the villian even. Good fun for the price of a ticket.
 

TSwizzle

Let's Go Brandon!
Joined
Jan 8, 2015
Messages
6,828
Location
West Hollywood
Gender
Male
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
The Adventures of Priscilla, Queen of the Desert, 8/10; Available on Kanopy. Stars Hugo Weaving, Guy Pearce and Terrence Stamp. A really good movie, ahead of its time maybe as it deals with gay/trans themes. The story revolves around three very different characters who are drag queen cabaret performers making their way from Sydney to Alice Springs by road for a gig. Released in 1994 this movie was very successful and critically acclaimed and it's easy to see why. It's hard to say who the stand out actor was in this but Guy Pearce and Terrence Stamp were particularly good.
 

Playball40

Veteran Member
Joined
Oct 21, 2011
Messages
2,014
Location
Gallifrey
Basic Beliefs
Non-religious
Everything, Everywhere All at Once.

9/10 Interesting take on a multiverse theme. I like films that make you think, laugh and cry in the same sitting. This has all the components.
 

Worldtraveller

Veteran Member
Joined
Nov 28, 2017
Messages
2,765
Location
Layton, UT
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Top Gun: Maverick
Some huge plot holes, unrealistic military/operational sequences, but lots of fun anf worth seeing. Also, Jennifer Connelly is still the hottest woman on planet earth. 😊

Dr Strange: Not the best Marvel movie, a little disjointed storyline, but also fun and worth seeing.
 

ZiprHead

Loony Running The Asylum
Staff member
Joined
Oct 23, 2002
Messages
32,152
Location
Frozen in Michigan
Gender
Old Fart
Basic Beliefs
Democratic Socialist Atheist
Top Gun: Maverick
Some huge plot holes, unrealistic military/operational sequences, but lots of fun anf worth seeing.
I understand TC did all his own flying. Kinda' surprised the movie's insurer allowed that.
 

Worldtraveller

Veteran Member
Joined
Nov 28, 2017
Messages
2,765
Location
Layton, UT
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Top Gun: Maverick
Some huge plot holes, unrealistic military/operational sequences, but lots of fun anf worth seeing.
I understand TC did all his own flying. Kinda' surprised the movie's insurer allowed that.
I think TC was in the plane with someone else flying. And all of the actors did it.
This is more accurate. TC does fly, the P-51 in the film is his personal aircraft, but scenes where they are pulling G's in the F-18 were all filmed with the actors in the back seat, and a Navy pilot flying.
 

Jayjay

Contributor
Joined
Apr 8, 2002
Messages
6,272
Location
Finland
Basic Beliefs
An accurate worldview or philosophy
Scientologist crackpot or not, I've always appreciated Tom Cruise doing (some of) his own stunts.
 

ZiprHead

Loony Running The Asylum
Staff member
Joined
Oct 23, 2002
Messages
32,152
Location
Frozen in Michigan
Gender
Old Fart
Basic Beliefs
Democratic Socialist Atheist
Top Gun: Maverick
Some huge plot holes, unrealistic military/operational sequences, but lots of fun anf worth seeing.
I understand TC did all his own flying. Kinda' surprised the movie's insurer allowed that.
I think TC was in the plane with someone else flying. And all of the actors did it.
This is more accurate. TC does fly, the P-51 in the film is his personal aircraft, but scenes where they are pulling G's in the F-18 were all filmed with the actors in the back seat, and a Navy pilot flying.
This makes more sense. Not only would a pilot have to concentrate on flying intricate maneuvers but also concentrate on acting.
 

Jimmy Higgins

Contributor
Joined
Feb 1, 2001
Messages
37,608
Basic Beliefs
Calvinistic Atheist
Top Gun: Maverick
Some huge plot holes, unrealistic military/operational sequences, but lots of fun anf worth seeing.
I understand TC did all his own flying. Kinda' surprised the movie's insurer allowed that.
I think TC was in the plane with someone else flying. And all of the actors did it.
This is more accurate. TC does fly, the P-51 in the film is his personal aircraft, but scenes where they are pulling G's in the F-18 were all filmed with the actors in the back seat, and a Navy pilot flying.
I presume Harrison Ford was involved too, maybe not actually flying for the movie, but encroaching on the fighter's airspace with his Cessna. :D
Scientologist crackpot or not, I've always appreciated Tom Cruise doing (some of) his own stunts.
Yeah, that scene in MI-5 when he is jumping on the TSV, and then the had the helicopter explode right next to it, while going 100 mph... very impressive. ;)
 

Jimmy Higgins

Contributor
Joined
Feb 1, 2001
Messages
37,608
Basic Beliefs
Calvinistic Atheist
Fantastic Beast and How to Milk a Franchise For Money - This is an odd one. At points in the film, I feel like it is telling a nice quaint story. But then at other points, I feel like I'm being milked like a cow for money... and not in the good sort of way. The title of the film, sarcasm aside, seems to tell of a different story, where as the main mission is actually about movie forward with another plot, and the establishment of another big bad. By the end of the movie, kind of left thinking... well, it is a trilogy.

2.5 of 4
 

Jayjay

Contributor
Joined
Apr 8, 2002
Messages
6,272
Location
Finland
Basic Beliefs
An accurate worldview or philosophy
Scientologist crackpot or not, I've always appreciated Tom Cruise doing (some of) his own stunts.
Yeah, that scene in MI-5 when he is jumping on the TSV, and then the had the helicopter explode right next to it, while going 100 mph... very impressive. ;)
Maybe I should not have put "some of" in parenthesis. It's more like "one stunt per movie", usually hanging on a building wearing safety harness or something. But he's over 50, so it's worth a thumbs up. Imagine what MI franchise would be if they'd cast Bruce Willis...
 

Jimmy Higgins

Contributor
Joined
Feb 1, 2001
Messages
37,608
Basic Beliefs
Calvinistic Atheist
Fantastic Beasts and the Secret(s?) of Dumbledore - Ever have that feeling you wasted 2.5 hours just watching YouTube? Well, this is like that, just without the YouTube. I was expecting something to happen. And then nothing really happened. Movie 2 was like half a movie turned into a full movie. Movie 3 was a short story (a pretty short story) turned into a movie. I will say that the writers at least came up with a very creative way to justify the filler needed to pad out a short story into a full length motion picture. I have HBO Max as part of my Internet, otherwise, I'd been a bit more upset having wasted 2.5 hours for effectively a half hour of actual plot content.

And this is setting aside the really really REALLY cheap ending.

1.5 of 4
 

prideandfall

Veteran Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2007
Messages
2,118
Location
a drawer of inappropriate starches
Basic Beliefs
highly anti-religious agnostic
Everything, Everywhere All at Once.

9/10 Interesting take on a multiverse theme. I like films that make you think, laugh and cry in the same sitting. This has all the components.
i'm curious... have you heard of or seen the first film this writer/director duo made, swiss army man?
if so, what did you think of it?

EEAAO has been getting rave reviews from every direction and i... kinda fuckin' hated it, because it's such an enormous pile of shit compared to swiss army man and i was so hugely disappointed, so i've been trying to figure out if i disliked it on its own merits or just because of what a monumental let-down it was compared to their first movie.
 

Politesse

Lux Aeterna
Joined
Feb 27, 2018
Messages
8,966
Location
Chochenyo Territory, US
Gender
nb; all pronouns fine
Basic Beliefs
Jedi Wayseeker
Jurassic World Dominion (7.5/10)

A rare "blockbuster" watch for me, but I actually had a lot of fun! I seem to have enjoyed this one rather more than the critics in fact. The human plotlines were silly of course, but you sort of expect that in the fifth sequel to a film that didn't need two (or in any Trevorrow film for that matter). The point is to see people running about chased by dinosaurs, and there was plenty of that. I was very pleased to see how many of said dinosaurs were allowed to grow their feathers this time around, and both surprised and pleased when they ran into a Dimetredon, not a dinosaur but one of my favorite extinct creatures when I was a kid. Maybe the least obscure Permian beast, but Permian beasts are all obscure, so I still count it as a win.
 

ZiprHead

Loony Running The Asylum
Staff member
Joined
Oct 23, 2002
Messages
32,152
Location
Frozen in Michigan
Gender
Old Fart
Basic Beliefs
Democratic Socialist Atheist
Jurassic World Dominion (7.5/10)
Been thinking about taking the wife to see it. She loves the original Jurassic Park and she loves the Sam Neill character. We haven't seen a movie in a theater since Avatar.
 

Politesse

Lux Aeterna
Joined
Feb 27, 2018
Messages
8,966
Location
Chochenyo Territory, US
Gender
nb; all pronouns fine
Basic Beliefs
Jedi Wayseeker
Jurassic World Dominion (7.5/10)
Been thinking about taking the wife to see it. She loves the original Jurassic Park and she loves the Sam Neill character. We haven't seen a movie in a theater since Avatar.
He's... well, he's in it.

We saw it at our local drive-in which was fun. Forget popcorn, we came packing curry takeout.
 

Jimmy Higgins

Contributor
Joined
Feb 1, 2001
Messages
37,608
Basic Beliefs
Calvinistic Atheist
Midway - What Band of Brothers would have been had they done a movie instead. This needed to be a 4 to 6 part miniseries. 2 of 4
 

Wiploc

Veteran Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2002
Messages
3,485
Location
Denver
Basic Beliefs
Strong Atheist
Domino:

I watched it all the way through, but I didn't like it.

People acted without motivation. For instance, the Feds machine gunned a room full of people for no apparent reason.

There's a cinematic trope where people cycle their guns to show they're serious. "Yeah, I looked angry, and I was pointing my gun at you like I was about to fire, but that wasn't dramatic enough; so now I've actually put a round into the chamber. Now I'm scary."

In Unforgiven, they did it twice. The first time to prove that there had been no rounds in the chambers up to that point, and the second time to prove that there was no ammo in the guns at all.

Domino topped that. They cycled their guns a third time. No shells were ejected; the guns were just empty. "Now you know I'm triple scary. And now you know that I think people who watch movies are morons."

Then Domino picked up two of the guns and started blasting away. She didn't have to load them. She didn't even have to cock them a forth time.
 

ZiprHead

Loony Running The Asylum
Staff member
Joined
Oct 23, 2002
Messages
32,152
Location
Frozen in Michigan
Gender
Old Fart
Basic Beliefs
Democratic Socialist Atheist
Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings
PG-13
2021 ‧ Action/Fantasy ‧ 2h 12m

I liked it. The martial arts choreography was good, CGI was good. Some family drama, a comedic foil, flying dragons, and Trevor Slattery.

7/10
 

marc

Veteran Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2008
Messages
1,947
Location
always on the move
Basic Beliefs
Atheist, skeptic, nerd
Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings
PG-13
2021 ‧ Action/Fantasy ‧ 2h 12m

I liked it. The martial arts choreography was good, CGI was good. Some family drama, a comedic foil, flying dragons, and Trevor Slattery.

7/10
Trevor was a great part, call back to Iron Man and the short they put out between movies.
 

Jimmy Higgins

Contributor
Joined
Feb 1, 2001
Messages
37,608
Basic Beliefs
Calvinistic Atheist
Batman (Spoilers) - Robert Pattinson plays James Dean playing Bruce Wayne. This movie gets bonus points off the top for not reminding us that Bruce's parents were killed with a scene showing them killed. The movie is more detective work than super action film, though that is likely because of the very long length of this film, clocking in near 3 hours! The movie does an interesting job at developing an unraveling story as Batman tries to piece together what is happening and why. It is dark and gritty, but not overly so. There are a couple brilliantly shot gun battles in the dark! However, the flying scene was its polar opposite and as visually uninspired as it possibly could have been.

The movie did leave me with a sense that Ra's al Ghul might have had a point. The other concern is that I started wondering, why what the Riddler was doing was a bad thing. The actions were targeted, lacked collateral damage and was effectively taking out the bad guys pretending to be good (sound familiar?). Which then leads to the flaw, the ultimate ultimate plan of his seemed completely unrelated and discontinuous to the previous actions. It is completely blind and without specific target. I was figuring the target would be the renewal projects. Instead of a fine incision plan, he uses a blowtorch or drops a large anvil on Gotham. They build him up to be cerebral, cunning, intelligent, but then in the end 'Anvil man'.

The good, this movie stands on its own. The acting is good. I am tiring of the same ole Batman villains, that is getting old, but Pattinson's portrayal of James Dean playing Batman, to me, was much better than Affleck's. It was also his own, so happy with that. The movie's action only include a few moments of these people should have died, but it's okay now. The movie felt a little overly long, I can take long movies, but it started to feel a bit too long. Honestly, a better finish would have been the Riddler doing what he aimed to do (gets away), and then communicates with Batman and has the conversation they had in the prison, and Batman struggles with the idea that two of them are much more alike than he wants, which leads to the epiphany. Skip the stupid flood.

3 of 4
 

Jarhyn

Wizard
Joined
Mar 29, 2010
Messages
11,666
Gender
Androgyne; they/them
Basic Beliefs
Natural Philosophy, Game Theoretic Ethicist
Batman (Spoilers) - Robert Pattinson plays James Dean playing Bruce Wayne. This movie gets bonus points off the top for not reminding us that Bruce's parents were killed with a scene showing them killed. The movie is more detective work than super action film, though that is likely because of the very long length of this film, clocking in near 3 hours! The movie does an interesting job at developing an unraveling story as Batman tries to piece together what is happening and why. It is dark and gritty, but not overly so. There are a couple brilliantly shot gun battles in the dark! However, the flying scene was its polar opposite and as visually uninspired as it possibly could have been.

The movie did leave me with a sense that Ra's al Ghul might have had a point. The other concern is that I started wondering, why what the Riddler was doing was a bad thing. The actions were targeted, lacked collateral damage and was effectively taking out the bad guys pretending to be good (sound familiar?). Which then leads to the flaw, the ultimate ultimate plan of his seemed completely unrelated and discontinuous to the previous actions. It is completely blind and without specific target. I was figuring the target would be the renewal projects. Instead of a fine incision plan, he uses a blowtorch or drops a large anvil on Gotham. They build him up to be cerebral, cunning, intelligent, but then in the end 'Anvil man'.

The good, this movie stands on its own. The acting is good. I am tiring of the same ole Batman villains, that is getting old, but Pattinson's portrayal of James Dean playing Batman, to me, was much better than Affleck's. It was also his own, so happy with that. The movie's action only include a few moments of these people should have died, but it's okay now. The movie felt a little overly long, I can take long movies, but it started to feel a bit too long. Honestly, a better finish would have been the Riddler doing what he aimed to do (gets away), and then communicates with Batman and has the conversation they had in the prison, and Batman struggles with the idea that two of them are much more alike than he wants, which leads to the epiphany. Skip the stupid flood.

3 of 4
Personally, Sparkly Vampire Batman just put me and my husband off.

If they had done as you suggested with the ending, and had cast an actor that wasn't tainted with enough glitter to choke a stripper, then it might have been a good movie.
 

TSwizzle

Let's Go Brandon!
Joined
Jan 8, 2015
Messages
6,828
Location
West Hollywood
Gender
Male
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
The Talented Mr. Ripley, 7/10; Streaming on Netflix this movie was originally released in 1999 and stars Matt Damon, Jude Law, Gwyneth Paltrow and a host of other familiar faces including the recently deceased Philip Baker Hall. The plot revolves around Tom Ripley being recruited by Dickie Greenleaf's father to go on a mission to Italy to get his son to return to to the USA and the family business. Ripley takes on the task and befriends Dickie. Ripley rather enjoys the carefree lifestyle being paid for by the Greanleaf's. But things start to go south when Dickie tires of Ripley and initiates a parting of ways. A very good story with believable scenarios and great performances form a very strong cast. Jude Law is a much better actor than I had him pegged for.
 

Ford

Contributor
Joined
Nov 30, 2010
Messages
5,971
Location
'Merica
Basic Beliefs
Godless Heathen
The Time Machine, 3/10.

The 2002 film with Guy Pearce. I don't even know where to start with this one. I loved the George Pal adaptation, I've got a collection of Wells' stories, and I am at a loss to describe just how terrible this movie was. How do you take such a classic story, cast an actor who had so much potential, and completely, utterly screw the pooch in the process? The H.G. Wells sub-plot in the Sci Fi show "Warehouse 13" was head and shoulders above this dreck. The late 70s film "Time After Time" - with Malcolm McDowell as a good guy - was better. What the hell went wrong with this?

The main character (again, Guy Pearce completely wasted in this role) is a professor about to propose to his girlfriend. They get robbed by the lamest criminal in history, she dies, and next thing you know our hero has a time machine? Whatever...so he goes back exactly ONE time to save his beloved by fixing history, but once that fails? He gives up and "four years later" decides to travel to the future because...that would fix the past...because...?

As often happens, he winds up a few years in the future. Apparently in 2002 it was accepted that 2030 would be an idyllic future where AI was commonplace and we were colonizing the Moon? Oh shit...we blew up the Moon? Fast forward to 800k years in the future and within a hot minute the modern day Weena knew English? CGI Morlocks, Jeremy Irons chewing scenery, and what was the point of this movie again?
 

Jimmy Higgins

Contributor
Joined
Feb 1, 2001
Messages
37,608
Basic Beliefs
Calvinistic Atheist
Thor - Love & Thunder - Two words, "perfectly ridiculous". It isn't perfect (okay, I said perfectly ridiculous not one sentence ago), there are some angles that I think are stealing genuine emotion and their is the occasional comic book plot hole, but overall, this is a perfect continuation of the the Ragnorak version of Thor.

3.5 of 4

Dr. Strange - Multiverse of Madness (spoils) -
The first time I watched this, it felt too muddled and chaotic. The second time, things made a bit more sense and less chaotic. Presumable resolutions were actually addressed and put aside within reason. My problem with the film, however, is that the Sorcerer Supreme put Dr. Strange on a high pedestal. Yet, in a bunch of universes, he ain't that. In fact, he is the antithesis of the high pedestal. I suppose this could be resolved by saying the Sorcerer Supreme was a drunk in those universes as well.

If you are a snowflake and can't handle things not straight and white, you could be dealing with some serious triggers.

3 of 4
 

ZiprHead

Loony Running The Asylum
Staff member
Joined
Oct 23, 2002
Messages
32,152
Location
Frozen in Michigan
Gender
Old Fart
Basic Beliefs
Democratic Socialist Atheist
Prey

The latest in the Predator series. This time it takes place in early American history. The protagonist is a Cherokee woman who has a knack for tracking and hunting. Besides dealing with the Predator, the natives have to deal with hostile French fur hunters. This lacks the bits of humor and catch phrases of other Predator movies and the Predator itself is an earlier version of those we are used to.

The action was well choreographed and the movie moved quickly. A worthy effort in the series. I give it a 4/5.

Available on Hulu.
 

TSwizzle

Let's Go Brandon!
Joined
Jan 8, 2015
Messages
6,828
Location
West Hollywood
Gender
Male
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Hustle, 6/10; Stars Adam Sandler as a scout for NBA team the Philadelphia 76ers. He believes he has found a hidden gem in a Spanish youth who hustles money at scrimmage basketball games in the street courts. The movie is nicely paced and clips along going through the predictable plot. Quite entertaining, worth a watch.
 

Playball40

Veteran Member
Joined
Oct 21, 2011
Messages
2,014
Location
Gallifrey
Basic Beliefs
Non-religious
Everything, Everywhere All at Once.

9/10 Interesting take on a multiverse theme. I like films that make you think, laugh and cry in the same sitting. This has all the components.
i'm curious... have you heard of or seen the first film this writer/director duo made, swiss army man?
if so, what did you think of it?

EEAAO has been getting rave reviews from every direction and i... kinda fuckin' hated it, because it's such an enormous pile of shit compared to swiss army man and i was so hugely disappointed, so i've been trying to figure out if i disliked it on its own merits or just because of what a monumental let-down it was compared to their first movie.
I haven't. But I will check it out.
 

Playball40

Veteran Member
Joined
Oct 21, 2011
Messages
2,014
Location
Gallifrey
Basic Beliefs
Non-religious
The Time Machine, 3/10.

The 2002 film with Guy Pearce. I don't even know where to start with this one. I loved the George Pal adaptation, I've got a collection of Wells' stories, and I am at a loss to describe just how terrible this movie was. How do you take such a classic story, cast an actor who had so much potential, and completely, utterly screw the pooch in the process? The H.G. Wells sub-plot in the Sci Fi show "Warehouse 13" was head and shoulders above this dreck. The late 70s film "Time After Time" - with Malcolm McDowell as a good guy - was better. What the hell went wrong with this?

The main character (again, Guy Pearce completely wasted in this role) is a professor about to propose to his girlfriend. They get robbed by the lamest criminal in history, she dies, and next thing you know our hero has a time machine? Whatever...so he goes back exactly ONE time to save his beloved by fixing history, but once that fails? He gives up and "four years later" decides to travel to the future because...that would fix the past...because...?

As often happens, he winds up a few years in the future. Apparently in 2002 it was accepted that 2030 would be an idyllic future where AI was commonplace and we were colonizing the Moon? Oh shit...we blew up the Moon? Fast forward to 800k years in the future and within a hot minute the modern day Weena knew English? CGI Morlocks, Jeremy Irons chewing scenery, and what was the point of this movie again?
I just watched the 1979 movie, "Time After Time" which depicts HG Wells chasing Jack the Ripper through time. I've watched before but was watching as a tribute to David Warner.
 

Wiploc

Veteran Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2002
Messages
3,485
Location
Denver
Basic Beliefs
Strong Atheist
I loved Time After Time.

I tried to watch Prey a few days ago, and didn't make it thru the movie.
 

ZiprHead

Loony Running The Asylum
Staff member
Joined
Oct 23, 2002
Messages
32,152
Location
Frozen in Michigan
Gender
Old Fart
Basic Beliefs
Democratic Socialist Atheist
I loved Time After Time.

I tried to watch Prey a few days ago, and didn't make it thru the movie.
I too love Time After Time.

And I got all the way through Prey. Had a little twist in the end but it was still kinda' stupid.
 

Tigers!

Veteran Member
Joined
Sep 20, 2005
Messages
3,192
Location
On the wing waiting for a kick.
Basic Beliefs
Bible believing revelational redemptionist (Baptist)
Last night I went and saw "The Conference" https://mhm.org.au/the-conference/
Whist a very good docodrama I found it chilling and disturbing.
The participants knew why they were there and what was being discussed. Mass slaughter of Jews and others.
Discussing the slaughter as if they were to work out how to improve the efficiency of a production line.
At the start of WW2 the Germans were the most educated and cultured group in Europe and yet they did that.

PS: What the movie lacked in my opinion was a list of the participants and what happened to them i.e Executed at Nuremburg, died of old age, missing etc.
Heydrich who organised the conference was killed by Czech partisans 4 months later.
 

Loren Pechtel

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 16, 2000
Messages
37,056
Location
Nevada
Gender
Yes
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Top Gun: Maverick
Some huge plot holes, unrealistic military/operational sequences, but lots of fun anf worth seeing. Also, Jennifer Connelly is still the hottest woman on planet earth. 😊
Yeah, who plotted that mission?!?!

1) You go in on a mission like that with no redundancy?!

2) Why weren't there some more Hornets coming in a bit more sedately--and nailing those SAM launchers with Mavericks when things go loud?! I don't think they could do anything about the SAMs on the far side of the valley but the rest of them should have gone kaboom just after the Tomahawks went in.

3) No HARMs taking down the SAM radars?

4) Any part of the air wing not allocated to the already-listed stuff should have been armed for air-to-air. There should have been AMRAAMs heading for those bandits with the seekers only turned on when they get close.
 

ZiprHead

Loony Running The Asylum
Staff member
Joined
Oct 23, 2002
Messages
32,152
Location
Frozen in Michigan
Gender
Old Fart
Basic Beliefs
Democratic Socialist Atheist
Just watched Saving Mr. Banks yesterday. The story of Walt Disney trying to get the rights from the author of the Mary Poppins books to make the movie. It was pretty good and Emma Thompson was fantastic as the author. It bounces back and forth between her childhood in the Australian outback and dealing with her loving but severely alcoholic father and the memories the process of creating the movie brings back to her.

Only because of Thompson's performance do I give it an 8/10.
 

TV and credit cards

Veteran Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2013
Messages
4,659
Location
muh-dahy-nuh
Basic Beliefs
Humanist
Watched the latest Spiderman movie. The one with the three spider men from different ¿multiverses? I guess. The storyline could have been wrapped around a piece of bubblegum. Speaking of wrapping around, the special effects with the curving cityscapes was cool but even that, Inception. Seriously, why do these movies get such good reviews? I think it's like the Christian nutjobs coming in and five staring their bad movies.
I watched it til the end so I'll give it 54%. That's ten points better than the president who I cannot watch til the end.
 

marc

Veteran Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2008
Messages
1,947
Location
always on the move
Basic Beliefs
Atheist, skeptic, nerd
Samaritan - Sylvester Stallone super hero film on Amazon Prime

The city is falling apart with unemployment, homelessness, poverty. 13 year old kid hopes for a return of Samaritan, Asher that supposedly died 25 years before fighting his brother Nemesis. Thinks he found him when a neighbor of his, a garbage man that just wants to be left alone, seems to have super strength.

the film is a bit predictable, but still pretty good. 8 out of 10
 

TSwizzle

Let's Go Brandon!
Joined
Jan 8, 2015
Messages
6,828
Location
West Hollywood
Gender
Male
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
The Guilty, 3/10; Streaming on Netflix stars Jake Gyllenhaal as Joe Boyler, a demoted LA policeman who is manning a Los Angels 911 call center while suspended for doing something naughty. The movie starts off interesting enough but becomes boring after about thirty minutes. It is filmed entirely within the call center. Boyler takes a call from a woman who appears to have been abducted and has trouble relaying her location to Boyler. The tension builds as Boyler frantically tries to save her and her home alone kids using contacts out on the field who relay situations to him. I had to bail after about 30 minutes as it became apparent the film was not going to have any action in it. Some people like this sort of movie as it gets rave reviews and Gyllenhaal is really good but this was not my cup of tea.
 
Top Bottom