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

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

Civil War, 5/10; Stars Kirsten Dunst (and her husband Jesse Plemons also makes an appearance) as a reporter making her way to the Whitehouse during some sort of USA civil war/coup/secession shenanigans. Her and her team have to cross the USA covering the "civil war" and capture the violence going on as two factions go at it, federal army and rebel militants. Despite the scenes that have some action, the movie is ponderous and quite boring. There is some tension brought to the fore when a couple of the team fall into the hands of militants but other than that, the movie was ho-hum.
 
Politesse said:
I assumed the scenario was that, as per a long-held Democratic fantasy, Texas turned blue, thus making it impossible to electorally challenge the Party. It is easy to imagine a conservative uprising were that to occur.
Click to expand...
I thought something along the same lines, and I suppose they could've done a different alliance e.g. the west coast and the northeast, but the movie still works really well. There's a hint that it's left against right during one scene, at least that's what I gleaned from it, but it does an excellent job of not being preachy, which is a pet peeve of mine. I don't want to be pandered to, even by my own side.
 
Longlegs

There was a big buildup for this one, so that horror film community was excited about it.

It was okay and establishes a good atmosphere, but rather than being naturally creepy, it was trying way too hard, which made a lot of it feel forced and therefore inauthentic. It was like the filmmakers watched Silence of the Lambs and then tried to combine it with Frailty (an excellent film). It has its good points, but I did too much eye rolling and groaning to recommend it.

If you like horror, it's better than most horror movies, but considering that most horror movies suck, that's not saying much.

5/10
 
Colonel Sanders said:
Longlegs

There was a big buildup for this one, so that horror film community was excited about it.

It was okay and establishes a good atmosphere, but rather than being naturally creepy, it was trying way too hard, which made a lot of it feel forced and therefore inauthentic. It was like the filmmakers watched Silence of the Lambs and then tried to combine it with Frailty (an excellent film). It has its good points, but I did too much eye rolling and groaning to recommend it.

If you like horror, it's better than most horror movies, but considering that most horror movies suck, that's not saying much.

5/10
Click to expand...
I watched the trailer on YT. Most of the comments were quite positive about the movie.
 
ZiprHead said:
Colonel Sanders said:
Longlegs

There was a big buildup for this one, so that horror film community was excited about it.

It was okay and establishes a good atmosphere, but rather than being naturally creepy, it was trying way too hard, which made a lot of it feel forced and therefore inauthentic. It was like the filmmakers watched Silence of the Lambs and then tried to combine it with Frailty (an excellent film). It has its good points, but I did too much eye rolling and groaning to recommend it.

If you like horror, it's better than most horror movies, but considering that most horror movies suck, that's not saying much.

5/10
Click to expand...
I watched the trailer on YT. Most of the comments were quite positive about the movie.
Click to expand...
My educated guess on this is that the horror crowd will praise any horror movie that is above absolutely terrible.

Horror is my go-to. I've loved it since I was a kid. When I'm looking for something to watch, I look for horror. That's how I know that most horror films are just bad movies, regardless of genre. Thus, when a movie like Longlegs comes along that's a solid cut above most other horror flicks, it's like getting a reasonably decent hotdog after having nothing to eat but meal worms for the last 6 months.
 
7 Psychopaths.
2012
Never saw it before. I like that kind of story telling.
Walken's I don't want to bit was classic.
7.5/10
 
I just watched The Unforgivable, an unforgettable movie starring Sandra Bullock. I suppose it made a big splash 3 years ago, but I'd not heard of it until I noticed it on Netflix yesterday. I won't try to summarize this "drama or thriller" but note that the story comes with an unexpected(?) (but fundamentally unimportant?) twist.

I thought it was excellent; and I would consider it for my personal Favorites Movies of All-Time List EXCEPT that it is definitely NOT the sort of movie one would want to watch more than once. But it does deserve much more than its 7.1 IMDB rating, though Rotten Tomatoes gives it only 39%:
Wikipedia said:
[Rotten Tomatoes critics' consensus states] "The Unforgivable proves Sandra Bullock is more than capable of playing against type, but her performance is wasted on a contrived and unrelentingly grim story." On Metacritic, the film holds a score of 41 out of 100, based on 20 critics, indicating "mixed or average reviews".
Click to expand...

To each his own, I guess. There are LOTS of recent movies in the horror, dystopian and corruption thriller genres I find MUCH more depressing (and "contrived and unrelentingly grim") than this excellent sentimental story.
 
Night Swim

The only reason I gave this flick a shot was for potential nostalgia reasons. The premise was straight out of a low to mid budget 1970s horror film like Burnt Offerings.

Long story short, there's an evil pool. Well, it's a pool inhabited by ghosts. Scary things ensue.

I was actually pleasantly surprised though. It wasn't terrible, but instead it was pretty okay, which is much more than what can be said of the average horror film. There's nothing new in it and it has no real literary value, but I wasn't mad that I spent 90 minutes of my life watching it.

Horror Film Scale: 6/10
Any Other Genre Scale: 4/10
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom