Jimmy Higgins
Contributor
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2001
- Messages
- 49,885
- Basic Beliefs
- Calvinistic Atheist
One exhaust port.
-
Features
Which movie did you watch today and how would you rate it?
- Thread starter C_Mucius_Scaevola
- Start date
thebeave
Contributor
Obviously, there were many jail cells, trash compactors, and hanger bays scattered around the DS. And there were probably multiple areas where the tractor beam (and many other devices) could be messed with.
Fun fact: its often assumed that the trench run at the end took place at that long gap bisecting the top and bottom halves. Apparently, that is not it. It was a more obscure trench located in some random spot. According to some SW nerd on youtube anyway.
Colonel Sanders
Veteran Member
Possession (1981)
I'd heard much critical acclaim about this one e.g. "Oh, it has so much to say about all these things!"
Yeah, whatever.
It's grossly melodramatic, insufferable, boring, and way too long. Yes, it's weird, and yes, it's different, but so is being served a dog turd at a steakhouse.
It's a classic example of critics blowing themselves over a bad film because it's made in a certain style and repeatedly hits you in the face with its message that domestic violence is bad. And the title of the film has a double meaning! Wow, how clever. No one's ever thought of that before.
Oh, spouses cheat on each on each other, weird things ensue. But the whole movie both before and after is weird, so any impact the weirdness has is greatly lessened.
3/10 is generous.
I'd heard much critical acclaim about this one e.g. "Oh, it has so much to say about all these things!"
Yeah, whatever.
It's grossly melodramatic, insufferable, boring, and way too long. Yes, it's weird, and yes, it's different, but so is being served a dog turd at a steakhouse.
It's a classic example of critics blowing themselves over a bad film because it's made in a certain style and repeatedly hits you in the face with its message that domestic violence is bad. And the title of the film has a double meaning! Wow, how clever. No one's ever thought of that before.
Oh, spouses cheat on each on each other, weird things ensue. But the whole movie both before and after is weird, so any impact the weirdness has is greatly lessened.
3/10 is generous.
TV and credit cards
Contributor
Capote 9/10
I watched it when it first came out. I better appreciated it this time around. In '05 most movies and shows were watched in a fog. A less than flattering portrayal of Truman Capote. The dialogue, particularly between Capote and Nelle Harper Lee is wonderful with a perfect closing line from Lee for the movie.
Well worth a second viewing.
I watched it when it first came out. I better appreciated it this time around. In '05 most movies and shows were watched in a fog. A less than flattering portrayal of Truman Capote. The dialogue, particularly between Capote and Nelle Harper Lee is wonderful with a perfect closing line from Lee for the movie.
Well worth a second viewing.
TSwizzle
I am unburdened by what has been.
Straw, 3/10; Streaming on Netflix this Tyler Perry production was pretty bad. It starts off alright but just descends into rubbish. A single mother that has a sickly daughter and is struggling to make the rent and on the verge of getting evicted from her crappy apartment has a run in with the one white cast member in the movie, a nasty white cop no less. Her car impounded and then things just keep getting worse and she gets into more bad situations. The constant yelling was grating on my ears, you know that black woman type of yelling? Ugh. Anyway, not recommended.
TSwizzle
I am unburdened by what has been.
Would You Rather, 8/10; A 2012 psychological horror movie. The plot revolves around mysterious philanthropist Shepard Lambrick who helps people in dire situations. The main character Iris has a brother in need of a bone marrow transplant and lots of money. Through the oncologist she meets Lambrick and agrees to attend his dinner party and compete in a game against others guests for money. What follows is an increasingly dangerous and violent game of "Would You Rather". The opening round starts off with guests either giving themselves an electric shock or tone of the other guests. And it's all downhill from there as more inventive, violent and life threatening options are revealed. It's gory but very enjoyable as the guests are eliminated through each new challenge. The plot works pretty well and the movie creates good tension as things escalate.
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2002
- Messages
- 46,182
- Location
- Frozen in Michigan
- Gender
- Old Fart
- Basic Beliefs
- Don't be a dick.
The Beekeeper
Standard retired super agent on a revenge spree. I like Jason Statham so I give it a 3.5/10.
Standard retired super agent on a revenge spree. I like Jason Statham so I give it a 3.5/10.
Swammerdami
Squadron Leader
I like many epic movies. But first: What IS an epic movie?
IMDB's list of 50 greatest epic movies includes The Thin Red Line, The Good the Bad and the Ugly, LOTR: Return of the King, Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon (OK but only 2 hours), but NONE of the other 46 on the list get rave reviews from me. (Several I've barely heard of.)
A user-submitted list of 50 Must-See epics (actually 91, but I ignored the bottom 41) includes The Messenger: The Story of Joan of Arc, Lawrence of Arabia, Godfather, Godfather Part II, Schindler's List. The Right Stuff, Saving Private Ryan, The Deer Hunter, The Bridge on the River Kwai and Amadeus. That's more like it!
Some other top epics which help define the genre are Titanic, Doctor Zhivago, Gone with the Wind, Spartacus
Epics should be long. This criterion affected my selections from the above lists. Messenger: Joan of Arc at 2 hrs 28 mins is the shortest "epic" above, except for Crouching Tiger.
I bring up the topic of great epic movies to explain why I did NOT like two movies I watched recently. ("Brutalist" BTW is an architecture style and has nothing to do with brutality.)
The Brutalist is over 3 hours long. It got rave reviews and many prizes. A great epic need not be so long, but a movie that long should be a great epic; this movie tried to be a great epic but it failed in my opinion. It has a 7.3 IMDB score, but I'll demote it to 6.5. My objections are many: It never came close to the grandeur we expect from an epic. Subplots were only hinted at vaguely, and then left dangling. (For example, one top character disappears and we never learn what happened to him.) It was hard to care much about the characters one way or the other: Despite the 3+ hour length we barely get to know them. One conflict in the story was about ceiling height. We learn why the hero wanted high ceilings only at the very end.
Brady Corbet was the director/co-writer. I find that I've not heard of ANY of his prior work EXCEPT the TV series 24. Ugh! Easily my nomination for worst TV ever.
I can't quibble with the spectacular reviews. Again, perhaps subtlety is just lost on me. :-(
Someone (Liam Gaughan?) ranked in order the Top Ten Drama films of the 21st century so far. Several of these Top Ten I thought were GREAT. 2 or 3 I've not watched yet. But the #1 at the very top of the list makes me doubt that Gaugham(?) and I have similar taste.
1. The Brutalist
2. The Departed
3. The Social Network
4. 12 Years a Slave
5. The Fabelmans
6. There Will Be Blood
7. No Country for Old Men
8. Brokeback Mountain
9. Mystic River
10. Oppenheimer
Cambridge Dictionary said:
IMDB's list of 50 greatest epic movies includes The Thin Red Line, The Good the Bad and the Ugly, LOTR: Return of the King, Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon (OK but only 2 hours), but NONE of the other 46 on the list get rave reviews from me. (Several I've barely heard of.)
A user-submitted list of 50 Must-See epics (actually 91, but I ignored the bottom 41) includes The Messenger: The Story of Joan of Arc, Lawrence of Arabia, Godfather, Godfather Part II, Schindler's List. The Right Stuff, Saving Private Ryan, The Deer Hunter, The Bridge on the River Kwai and Amadeus. That's more like it!
Some other top epics which help define the genre are Titanic, Doctor Zhivago, Gone with the Wind, Spartacus
Epics should be long. This criterion affected my selections from the above lists. Messenger: Joan of Arc at 2 hrs 28 mins is the shortest "epic" above, except for Crouching Tiger.
I bring up the topic of great epic movies to explain why I did NOT like two movies I watched recently. ("Brutalist" BTW is an architecture style and has nothing to do with brutality.)
The Brutalist is over 3 hours long. It got rave reviews and many prizes. A great epic need not be so long, but a movie that long should be a great epic; this movie tried to be a great epic but it failed in my opinion. It has a 7.3 IMDB score, but I'll demote it to 6.5. My objections are many: It never came close to the grandeur we expect from an epic. Subplots were only hinted at vaguely, and then left dangling. (For example, one top character disappears and we never learn what happened to him.) It was hard to care much about the characters one way or the other: Despite the 3+ hour length we barely get to know them. One conflict in the story was about ceiling height. We learn why the hero wanted high ceilings only at the very end.
Brady Corbet was the director/co-writer. I find that I've not heard of ANY of his prior work EXCEPT the TV series 24. Ugh! Easily my nomination for worst TV ever.
I can't quibble with the spectacular reviews. Again, perhaps subtlety is just lost on me. :-(
Someone (Liam Gaughan?) ranked in order the Top Ten Drama films of the 21st century so far. Several of these Top Ten I thought were GREAT. 2 or 3 I've not watched yet. But the #1 at the very top of the list makes me doubt that Gaugham(?) and I have similar taste.
1. The Brutalist
2. The Departed
3. The Social Network
4. 12 Years a Slave
5. The Fabelmans
6. There Will Be Blood
7. No Country for Old Men
8. Brokeback Mountain
9. Mystic River
10. Oppenheimer
Last edited:
Swammerdami
Squadron Leader
I've been a Bob Dylan fan for 60 years, so of course I watched A Complete Unknown, a mini-bio of this fabulous songwriter. It gets 7.3 IMDB but I'll give it no more than 6.5.
I found myself comparing it to Walk the Line, a bio of Johnny Cash which gets 7.8 IMDB but deserves 8.2. Walk the Line is a genuine epic. We see the teen-age troubles with his father, the difficulty getting his music career started, and the early days when he's just warm-up for stars like June Carter or Elvis Presley. We see his two marriages unfold. We see him at the depths of methedrine addiction. A highlight for me was when Columbia Records turns down his request to record live albums in prison, but Cash insists that's his plan with or without Columbia's help. The lead song from Johnny Cash At Folsom Prison hit #1 on the chart. The next year, an entire album At San Quentin hit #1.
Contrast this EPIC view of Johnny Cash's life story, with the brief glimpse of Dylan we get in A Complete Unknown. Very early in the film an album titled Bob Dyan is released, in contrast to Cash's ordeals. Perhaps the rapidity of success is a key fact of Dylan's bio, but surely some build-up would have helped. There's only 3 years from that 1962 album to the 1965 Newport Folk Festival but if you want more than those three years you're out of luck -- that's the whole movie! Dylan had two wives. He met Sara Lownds -- the "love of his life" -- in early 1964 but she is never mentioned in the movie. Of course his after-1965 2nd wife is never mentioned. The movie hints at his love affair with Joan Baez but never really explains why they came together or why they parted.
Pete Seeger played folk music on a banjo, while Dylan showed off his electric guitar at the 1965 Festival. "Like a Rolling Stone" was booed at the 1965 Festival and Columbia Records didn't want to release it! This controversy was before my time. The movie dwells on that rather than the long interesting life of this great poet. Watch a re-run of Walk the Line instead!
I found myself comparing it to Walk the Line, a bio of Johnny Cash which gets 7.8 IMDB but deserves 8.2. Walk the Line is a genuine epic. We see the teen-age troubles with his father, the difficulty getting his music career started, and the early days when he's just warm-up for stars like June Carter or Elvis Presley. We see his two marriages unfold. We see him at the depths of methedrine addiction. A highlight for me was when Columbia Records turns down his request to record live albums in prison, but Cash insists that's his plan with or without Columbia's help. The lead song from Johnny Cash At Folsom Prison hit #1 on the chart. The next year, an entire album At San Quentin hit #1.
Contrast this EPIC view of Johnny Cash's life story, with the brief glimpse of Dylan we get in A Complete Unknown. Very early in the film an album titled Bob Dyan is released, in contrast to Cash's ordeals. Perhaps the rapidity of success is a key fact of Dylan's bio, but surely some build-up would have helped. There's only 3 years from that 1962 album to the 1965 Newport Folk Festival but if you want more than those three years you're out of luck -- that's the whole movie! Dylan had two wives. He met Sara Lownds -- the "love of his life" -- in early 1964 but she is never mentioned in the movie. Of course his after-1965 2nd wife is never mentioned. The movie hints at his love affair with Joan Baez but never really explains why they came together or why they parted.
Pete Seeger played folk music on a banjo, while Dylan showed off his electric guitar at the 1965 Festival. "Like a Rolling Stone" was booed at the 1965 Festival and Columbia Records didn't want to release it! This controversy was before my time. The movie dwells on that rather than the long interesting life of this great poet. Watch a re-run of Walk the Line instead!
Colonel Sanders
Veteran Member
I didn't watch it because I find Timothy Chalamet so thoroughly annoying.
I don't like Dylan either, but no doubt there's an interesting story to tell about him. With a different actor in the lead role, I would've given it a shot.
Colonel Sanders
Veteran Member
Starry Eyes
A young girl is trying to make it as an actress in Hollywood. She lives with a group of thoroughly unlikeable young people in a rundown apartment complex in L.A. and works a shitty job as a waitress in a 3rd rate Hooters type of restaurant.
If this plot sounds typical, it's execution isn't.
It's a grimy, intense horror flick that pulls the viewer in right away with its sense of dread and oppressive atmosphere. It's violent and gory, but also heartbreaking. You really feel for the protagonist because she's so earnest, hopeful, and vulnerable. The movie then takes those sympathetic elements and crushes her by using them against her. It's brutal, unrelenting, disgusting, and really sad.
This is a damn good movie, but clearly it's not for everyone. Only watch it if you're into serious horror e.g. The Substance, which this movie likely paved the way for.
The one problem I had with it is that they failed to stick the landing. It's ambiguous, which is sometimes good, but more often than not it's because they couldn't think of something better, which seems to be the case here. There also may have been budget issues that didn't allow for what needed to happen in order for the movie to get the special ending it deserved.
Horor Scale: 8.75/10
Non-Horror Scale: Unclear
A young girl is trying to make it as an actress in Hollywood. She lives with a group of thoroughly unlikeable young people in a rundown apartment complex in L.A. and works a shitty job as a waitress in a 3rd rate Hooters type of restaurant.
If this plot sounds typical, it's execution isn't.
It's a grimy, intense horror flick that pulls the viewer in right away with its sense of dread and oppressive atmosphere. It's violent and gory, but also heartbreaking. You really feel for the protagonist because she's so earnest, hopeful, and vulnerable. The movie then takes those sympathetic elements and crushes her by using them against her. It's brutal, unrelenting, disgusting, and really sad.
This is a damn good movie, but clearly it's not for everyone. Only watch it if you're into serious horror e.g. The Substance, which this movie likely paved the way for.
The one problem I had with it is that they failed to stick the landing. It's ambiguous, which is sometimes good, but more often than not it's because they couldn't think of something better, which seems to be the case here. There also may have been budget issues that didn't allow for what needed to happen in order for the movie to get the special ending it deserved.
Horor Scale: 8.75/10
Non-Horror Scale: Unclear
marc
Veteran Member
Sinner 8/10
Been hearing a lot of good things about this movie since it came out. That it is a vampire film, set in the Jim Crow south, made by the same director as Black Panther. They made some interesting changes to vampire lore. That the vampire needs to be invited in is still there and an important part. A big change is there are some people that can play music so true that it touches people even across time, but that attracts the monsters. Apparently a vampire's soul is stuck in their body so they can't reunite with loved ones, and seeking out such music is how they can feel that connection again.
One thing I liked is making religion not a part of fighting the vampires. One character tells another how religion was forced upon their people, but the music is something they brought with them. There are a couple other digs in there I picked up on. Over all a great movie, but not one I'm inclined to watch again.
Been hearing a lot of good things about this movie since it came out. That it is a vampire film, set in the Jim Crow south, made by the same director as Black Panther. They made some interesting changes to vampire lore. That the vampire needs to be invited in is still there and an important part. A big change is there are some people that can play music so true that it touches people even across time, but that attracts the monsters. Apparently a vampire's soul is stuck in their body so they can't reunite with loved ones, and seeking out such music is how they can feel that connection again.
One thing I liked is making religion not a part of fighting the vampires. One character tells another how religion was forced upon their people, but the music is something they brought with them. There are a couple other digs in there I picked up on. Over all a great movie, but not one I'm inclined to watch again.
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2002
- Messages
- 46,182
- Location
- Frozen in Michigan
- Gender
- Old Fart
- Basic Beliefs
- Don't be a dick.
I just watched it yesterday on your recommendation. Pretty good. Thanks for that.
Jimmy Higgins
Contributor
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2001
- Messages
- 49,885
- Basic Beliefs
- Calvinistic Atheist
Das Boot (director's cut), Gandhi, Metropolis (that film has roughly 726 runtime lengths, at least one of which must be an epic).
Colonel Sanders
Veteran Member
Beezel
House is haunted by evil demon-witch. Gory horror ensues.
This a low budget gem but only for the first two acts. Prior to the third act, they really nail the creepiness and dread, and the casting is different, but pretty damn good. The SFX are solid too. The third act though... ugh. It seems like the writers said they were going for a pack of smokes and never came back. Interesting, but worse, the third act highlights what poor actors can do to an otherwise good movie.
The lead actress in third seems like she worked really hard in acting school, but sadly has no natural talent. The lead actor feels like he dropped out of acting school because he thought he was too good for it. He was wrong.
While watching it, I felt like those two actors had somehow cast themselves in the movie.
Turns out I was right. They're married in real life and they co-wrote and co-produced the movie. They're talented behind the camera, horrible in front of it.
I give it a reluctant recommend because the first 2/3 is definitely worth watching.
Horror Scale: 6.5/10
Non-Horror Scale: 4/10
House is haunted by evil demon-witch. Gory horror ensues.
This a low budget gem but only for the first two acts. Prior to the third act, they really nail the creepiness and dread, and the casting is different, but pretty damn good. The SFX are solid too. The third act though... ugh. It seems like the writers said they were going for a pack of smokes and never came back. Interesting, but worse, the third act highlights what poor actors can do to an otherwise good movie.
The lead actress in third seems like she worked really hard in acting school, but sadly has no natural talent. The lead actor feels like he dropped out of acting school because he thought he was too good for it. He was wrong.
While watching it, I felt like those two actors had somehow cast themselves in the movie.
Turns out I was right. They're married in real life and they co-wrote and co-produced the movie. They're talented behind the camera, horrible in front of it.
I give it a reluctant recommend because the first 2/3 is definitely worth watching.
Horror Scale: 6.5/10
Non-Horror Scale: 4/10
marc
Veteran Member
Minecraft 7/10
Never played the game, and honestly thought the movie looked stupid. But when my BIL recommended it we ended up watching it, and found it was a lot funnier and more fun than expected. It's Jack Black, and a lot of dumb jokes, so if those are not your thing then feel free to skip it. Definitely not for everyone.
Never played the game, and honestly thought the movie looked stupid. But when my BIL recommended it we ended up watching it, and found it was a lot funnier and more fun than expected. It's Jack Black, and a lot of dumb jokes, so if those are not your thing then feel free to skip it. Definitely not for everyone.
hurtinbuckaroo
Contributor
Must be genetic. His mom, Judith Love Cohen, helped design the Abort-Guidance System that brought the Apollo 13 astronauts home. She also danced with the New York Metropolitan Opera Ballet and wrote children’s books.
Colonel Sanders
Veteran Member
St. Maud
Giving a synopsis for this film is difficult because its shifts are abrupt and describing them would likely spoil the film, but I'll give it a shot. A very troubled young nurse goes from public to private care. Her voiceovers as the film goes on are really well done*** and the viewer knows fairly quickly that she's a unreliable narrator.
It's a tragic horror flick that incorporates excellent drama. It's somehow slow paced, but a lot is always going on. The film does a great job of making the viewer root for a very disturbed super anti-hero.
I give it a high recommend. This movie is intense.
It gets bonus points for enlightening me to the fact that there's a Coney Island in the UK that looks very similar to the one in New Jersey.
Horror Scale: 8.5/10
Non Horror Scale: 7/10
***See the version of Blade Runner with Harrison Ford's voiceover as a severe counter example.
Giving a synopsis for this film is difficult because its shifts are abrupt and describing them would likely spoil the film, but I'll give it a shot. A very troubled young nurse goes from public to private care. Her voiceovers as the film goes on are really well done*** and the viewer knows fairly quickly that she's a unreliable narrator.
It's a tragic horror flick that incorporates excellent drama. It's somehow slow paced, but a lot is always going on. The film does a great job of making the viewer root for a very disturbed super anti-hero.
I give it a high recommend. This movie is intense.
It gets bonus points for enlightening me to the fact that there's a Coney Island in the UK that looks very similar to the one in New Jersey.
Horror Scale: 8.5/10
Non Horror Scale: 7/10
***See the version of Blade Runner with Harrison Ford's voiceover as a severe counter example.
Colonel Sanders
Veteran Member
The Assessment
In a dystopian future where most resources have been destroyed, an authoritarian government sevrely limits the number of children that can be born. In order to qualify to have a child, an assessor is sent to couple's homes to evaluate whether or not they're fit to have children. Insanity ensues.
The description above doesn't do the film justice. If you've ever had children, you'll know this films nails it. A big part of this movie is how children turn your life upside down; their behavior, the dedication required to accommodate them, the stress and division they can create between each parent, the heartbreak, disillusion etc. These elements of the movie are carried out in a bizarre and intriguing way that's morbidly entertaining.
There are lots of good twists and turns as the movie goes on. It should be surprising that this film has received so little attention, but in a time where the latest pathetic and redundant superhero movies still grab so much attention, good, original filmmaking falls into the proverbial chasm.
See it.
7/10
In a dystopian future where most resources have been destroyed, an authoritarian government sevrely limits the number of children that can be born. In order to qualify to have a child, an assessor is sent to couple's homes to evaluate whether or not they're fit to have children. Insanity ensues.
The description above doesn't do the film justice. If you've ever had children, you'll know this films nails it. A big part of this movie is how children turn your life upside down; their behavior, the dedication required to accommodate them, the stress and division they can create between each parent, the heartbreak, disillusion etc. These elements of the movie are carried out in a bizarre and intriguing way that's morbidly entertaining.
There are lots of good twists and turns as the movie goes on. It should be surprising that this film has received so little attention, but in a time where the latest pathetic and redundant superhero movies still grab so much attention, good, original filmmaking falls into the proverbial chasm.
See it.
7/10