• OK, it's on.
  • Please note that many, many Email Addresses used for spam, are not accepted at registration. Select a respectable Free email.
  • See https://www.intpforum.com/threads/incident-of-2018-08-13.27381/

Last movie you watched

Jennywocky

guud languager
Local time
Today, 16:37
Joined
Sep 25, 2008
Messages
10,614
Location
Charn
Well maybe I got the wrong impression from the opening then!
he uses an old urban legend as part of the opening, and i can see why it might come off as pretentious.

I think in the hands of a lesser director, who would force connections, it could have been really terrible; but Anderson as a writer/director usually gives a lot of room for the characters to breathe.

Yeah I've seen the master, it was pretty awesome.
Cool. :) I thought it was great too. Joaquin has been a hell of an actor; sad about Phillip Seymour Hoffman, I have a friend in the small stage drama scene in NYC who knew him personally and said he was a really nice, regular guy in his private life.

"There Will be Blood" has been in my mind as a movie I need to see; I think I need to make an effort to get that done in the next few months.
 
Local time
Today, 21:37
Joined
Mar 17, 2013
Messages
3,899
Location
stockholm
There will be blood is really different from his other films :O Please watch sooner rather than later, I want to hear what you think about it compared to his other work in order to further my understanding of things in general and Paul Thomas Andersson and you in particular. If you watch it I will finish Magnolia deal? :elephant:
 

Jennywocky

guud languager
Local time
Today, 16:37
Joined
Sep 25, 2008
Messages
10,614
Location
Charn
There will be blood is really different from his other films :O Please watch sooner rather than later, I want to hear what you think about it compared to his other work in order to further my understanding of things in general and Paul Thomas Andersson and you in particular. If you watch it I will finish Magnolia deal? :elephant:
heh. i'll do my best then. :)

EDIT: w00t, it's on Netflix here, yeah that keeps me from having to dig up a copy. :)
 

Cheeseumpuffs

Proudly A Sheeple Since 2015
Local time
Today, 13:37
Joined
Jun 27, 2011
Messages
2,238
Location
Earth Dimension C-137
Finally got around to watching Battle Royale.

Man that was br00tal (as the kids say these days)

I should probably watch it a second time. I find that I have trouble keeping up with all the plot threads in movies with such a high number of characters. When there's such a big range of characters it gets a little overwhelming to keep track of all the information presented about them in the first act. There were a few times I caught myself watching a kid's brutal murder thinking "which one was this?" Also, as sad as it is to admit, it is harder to keep track of all the characters when your brain hears their names and immediately tries to write them off as "oh that's a weird foreign name, you don't need to know that" and then you have to tell your brain to remember them because while they might not sound like names it's used to they're still important.


I think the movie itself had a ton of potential. I don't want to make it seem like I'm disparaging the movie for not meeting that potential, because I did quite enjoy it. I just came away from the movie feeling like there was some small thing missing that could have made it absolutely fantastic (sorry that's as specific as I can get, because I don't really know myself what I think would improve it).
 

Jennywocky

guud languager
Local time
Today, 16:37
Joined
Sep 25, 2008
Messages
10,614
Location
Charn
Just finished Insidious 3. Definitely an improvement over Insidious 2, which I barely recall at this point... and with some melancholy tie-in's to Insidious.

Lin Shaye remains the highlight of the series, besides being of course one of the few actors appearing in the string of movies. She's just a great actor, bringing pathos and humanity to the role (she comes off as NFJ in the movie), and still remains someone who would be cool to have as a mother or grandmother. Delmot Mulroney has led bigger pictures in his time, but he definitely takes a backseat to Shaye here.

wasn't sure how Leigh Wannell would do directing this picture, with James Wan [who actually makes a cameo in this movie] busy with the F&F franchise. His writing is stronger than his acting (he's shown up in the Insidious movies + Saw).... but he actually uses silence pretty effectively in I3, his jumpscares are typically legitimate (except for maybe the last one -- not sure I needed that). I can't say he'd win awards, but he's solid enough for this.

Gotta say, i also love Quinn's bedroom. If I could paint walls in my apartment, I'd probably decorate more like she has here. I can still swipe some ideas from this at least.

I ****ing hate that Bride in Black, she's annoying. But the new demon ("The Man who Can't Breathe") is pretty good.

There are also different ways to approach ghosts in stories. These movies seem to show more of the, "Lost and confused" ghosts who have lost some of their own humanity, so they remain rather eerie and "off" in some way. "The Sixth Sense" ghosts (most of them) had an angle where many of them seemed to be caught in intense emotion loops without realizing they were dead; and there's a great jump near the end, where Cole visits the girl's bedroom and the ghost is just staring at him with an intense, compelling, and unearthly look on her face. The kind of emotion that triggers was caught by some of the ghosts here. They really do feel like "lost souls."

When you look back at the movie after finishing it, it's not like there were a ton of jump scenes. But the ambiance and tone are such that my skin was still crawling for much of it, even in scenes where you don't really see anything. I think that's the trick, and it's the kind of thing that can make solitary experiences in old houses alone so frightening at times. Your mind plays tricks on you, and everything can "feel" wrong. The movies taps into that effectively, even if the setting here is an old apartment building.

Finally got around to watching Battle Royale.

Man that was br00tal (as the kids say these days)
I should go finish this movie. I watched about half of it, then never finished it. Not sure why; it's not like it wasn't interesting on some level, but just not compelling.
 

RaBind

sparta? THIS IS MADNESS!!!
Local time
Today, 21:37
Joined
Sep 9, 2011
Messages
660
Location
Kent, UK
Watched all of the Harry Potter movies. The main plot was basically about racism. It was a bit ironic I thought to see such a topic, which most would consider to be very human and natural, used as the main plot point in a movie that has a supernatural and magical (all things being out of the ordinary) theme at it's core. I'd have very much rather preferred Voldemort to be the personification of something more complex, at least in terms of morality, because as it stands, to the viewers, Voldemort is essentially a one(two at most) dimensional character, the bad/wrong/misguided guy due to Reductio ad Hitlerum, and he really is only there for the single purpose of being beaten by the protagonist.
 

Alias

empirical miracle
Local time
Today, 16:37
Joined
Feb 22, 2015
Messages
692
Location
My current location is classified.
Yeah, although J.K. Rowling made Voldemort complex and interesting, the movies kind of restrict him to racism.
 

Jennywocky

guud languager
Local time
Today, 16:37
Joined
Sep 25, 2008
Messages
10,614
Location
Charn
Two hour movies have restrictions unfortunately; he mostly became a foil for harry.

Based on what he was working with, though, Ralph Fiennes did a damn fine job. Liked Frank Dillane too.
 

Pyropyro

Magos Biologis
Local time
Tomorrow, 04:37
Joined
Feb 3, 2012
Messages
4,050
Location
Philippines
Just watched The Martian. Got to nerd out especially at the potato farm.

I wish I'm still alive when they start terraforming either the Moon or Mars.
 

Jennywocky

guud languager
Local time
Today, 16:37
Joined
Sep 25, 2008
Messages
10,614
Location
Charn
Saw The Martian on friday with my INTP kid.

We both enjoyed it, although it just seems like a more light-hearted version of Apollo 13 in some ways. I.e., not necessarily something deep or profound, but fun dialogue and some decent investment in problem-solving along the way. I liked some of the solutions he came up with, especially in terms of referencing the past.
 

Pyropyro

Magos Biologis
Local time
Tomorrow, 04:37
Joined
Feb 3, 2012
Messages
4,050
Location
Philippines
Saw The Martian on friday with my INTP kid.

We both enjoyed it, although it just seems like a more light-hearted version of Apollo 13 in some ways. I.e., not necessarily something deep or profound, but fun dialogue and some decent investment in problem-solving along the way. I liked some of the solutions he came up with, especially in terms of referencing the past.
It's Castaway meets Apollo 13. I agree with it being a bit lighthearted compared to other stuff Ridley Scott worked on.

I've grown quite attached to his little potato garden and was sad when it was flash frozen to death.
 

Jennywocky

guud languager
Local time
Today, 16:37
Joined
Sep 25, 2008
Messages
10,614
Location
Charn
It's Castaway meets Apollo 13. I agree with it being a bit lighthearted compared to other stuff Ridley Scott worked on.

I've grown quite attached to his little potato garden and was sad when it was flash frozen to death.
Yeah, that was a shocking blow, and it was sad to see them all tossed out in a heap after he had scienced the shit out of them. I also happen to love potatoes, but.... i can't imagine eating them for 2-3 years (his original projection) with little else to sustain me.

The movie was a connecting string of solutions, some of which became problems themselves, which then also had to be solved.

When they decided to skip testing the probe because there was only a 5% historical chance of error, I laughed and said, "here we go, Space Shuttle Columbia." My son hit me, but hey... you know how these things work.

I thought it was kind of cool (in the story sense) that we got a shot of Damon bulked up (naked top shot) in the beginning, and then a shot near the end when he was getting emaciated and skin-sored. Made it feel more palpable.
 

Alias

empirical miracle
Local time
Today, 16:37
Joined
Feb 22, 2015
Messages
692
Location
My current location is classified.
Hobbit Battle of the Five Armies extended cut. My INFP brother was super hyped. I liked it. Some of the extra scenes were great, like when Bifur actually talked, or some of the fight scenes. The dwarves were much funnier.
 

nanook

a scream in a vortex
Local time
Today, 22:37
Joined
Aug 16, 2011
Messages
1,933
Location
germany
"beasts of no nation." cute movie.

"the connection" sort of good. i like that it plays in the time of my childhood, in europe. everyone looks like my father on a holiday trip to france. my father likes to think that everyone is the mafia.

"dope" - sweet.
 

Jennywocky

guud languager
Local time
Today, 16:37
Joined
Sep 25, 2008
Messages
10,614
Location
Charn
Crimson Peak. US marketing seemed to focus on the ghost angle, but it's far more a gothic romance w/ an air of foreboding mystery that also involve some ghosts.

Clear visual stamp of Del Toro's direction, the setting and art is quite beautiful and evocative. The three principals (Hiddleston, Wasikowska, and Chastain) are wonderful as well -- they have no real missteps and go a long way towards making what could have been a fairly generic plot hold interest through to the end.

While Del Toro's ghosts are often frightening, they are usually more complicated than just as fright factors, and that is also the case here. There are some brutal acts that occur throughout the movie, yet they are typically carried out by human agents, not the supernatural.

I'm not sure what it is about Hunham; I don't find him a compelling actor, his line deliveries seem generally flat as if he's just walking in off the street and he's repeating what someone's telling him through an earpiece... kind of Channing Tatum Lite. Beaver also didn't feel as natural as i'd expect, although he was better than Hunham.

The house itself, the setting, could likely be considered a character in itself, with its intricate eccentricities and weathered atmosphere.

All in all, not one of del Toro's best works (for me, that's reserved for either Pan's Labyrinth or The Devil's Backbone) but interesting in itself, with a few strong performances.
 

Jennywocky

guud languager
Local time
Today, 16:37
Joined
Sep 25, 2008
Messages
10,614
Location
Charn
Funny Games (1997). AKA the original one, dubbed in English.

Such a low budget and small cast, yet it is emotionally one of the most harrowing things I think I've seen. The casual coldness of the two teens is terrifying in its relentlessness + the emotional responses of the family (especially Anna) are devastating to experience. The teens are just "off" in the right ways at the beginning that you sense something is not right but can't really place your finger on what, and the social constructs that rule polite interaction for most people in this situation are exploited to place the family in jeopardy.

Haneke also is not afraid of periods of silence and inaction in front of the camera -- there's one particular scene that you're just watching nothing happening, but it's perfect in terms of evoking the right emotional responses. It feels authentic and real.

There's also the issue where one of the villains continuously breaks the fourth wall, both to subvert expectations for this genre as well as highlight Haneke's views on media violence.... how we brutalize each other and perhaps reduce our own levels of compassion by repeated exposure to such things. (this might not be as clear until one looks back after the movie and has time to draw everything together.)

The movie was remade for American audiences in 2007 (and flopped, interestingly enough) -- I looked at the synopsis and it looks to be pretty much verbatim of the original, plot-wise, so I'm not sure what the point was of a remake except to gain exposure to American audiences who can't be bothered with subtitles. But I can't imagine the remake having been an improvement, and critical response suggests it wasn't as compelling.
 
Local time
Today, 21:37
Joined
Feb 8, 2015
Messages
1,529
Location
the Purgatory
The movie was remade for American audiences in 2007 (and flopped, interestingly enough) -- I looked at the synopsis and it looks to be pretty much verbatim of the original, plot-wise, so I'm not sure what the point was of a remake except to gain exposure to American audiences who can't be bothered with subtitles. But I can't imagine the remake having been an improvement, and critical response suggests it wasn't as compelling.
funny games is one of the hanekes i havent seen yet, but i can guess why the american remake flopped(you've said it yourself actually). hollywood films like to neglect and contaminate transitions between scenes by making them as short, fussy and unmemorable as possible, basically reducing them to short periods of ventilation rather than a means to experience stretch of time and its thwarting delays. in a movie of this element(that thrives on getting the intensity of the characters' emotional stress through to you) the periods of silence make it all the more real and harrowing.

its weird that the remake happened, did haneke think this way his film would get a big break or larger audience or something through an english script and more familiar cast? majority of film-goers are not used to this stuff and view it as pretentiousness or idk because as i said the more mainstream films have diluted the effect of transitions
 

Jennywocky

guud languager
Local time
Today, 16:37
Joined
Sep 25, 2008
Messages
10,614
Location
Charn
Also, while I did not state it clearly, the title also works with the breaking of tropes to comment ... we construct these "fictional games" with their own genre rules so that we think we know what to expect, but in the process it deadens the weight of their impact in real life. It's a game we play with ourselves -- "we'll hurt this person and that person and then these people, but then this will happen, and so and so will do [this] somehow, and in the end the villains get their comeuppance and somehow this all makes it okay." So with American cinema especially, we create all these films of incredible violence that are actually "fake" in that the violence is never allowed to reach its realistic conclusions. It teaches us false lessons about the impact of violence and the dehumanization of others.

Haneke subverts this by setting up the tropes, then refusing to play along, and in the process we're left with the messy and painful results of what's far more likely to occur.

funny games is one of the hanekes i havent seen yet, but i can guess why the american remake flopped(you've said it yourself actually). hollywood films like to neglect and contaminate transitions between scenes by making them as short, fussy and unmemorable as possible, basically reducing them to short periods of ventilation rather than a means to experience stretch of time and its thwarting delays. in a movie of this element(that thrives on getting the intensity of the characters' emotional stress through to you) the periods of silence make it all the more real and harrowing.
It seems fairly cultural -- Americans aren't really known for super-introspection or observing quietly, we typically want to take action, fix problems, make noise. Most go stir-crazy when they can't actually do something to resolve a problem. Where is the stillness, the contemplation, the "living in one's pain" and exploring what it means? Typically we use cinema here as a distraction or some way to step out of daily life.

These periods of silence in this movie, the audience is stuck... you have no way to sidestep what's going on, you are totally trapped in the timeframe of the characters, and their pauses become your pauses. I also like how Haneke positions the camera far back at times, so you're just fixed on a non-moving specific view of the room, and you can't see what's off-camera, and you're just STUCK there, you're stuck at a distance from the protagonists, you're completely under their control now and watching them, and you can't see more or force anything to happen unless they choose to move. It's very unsettling in that aspect, and also in that you're stuck experiencing what they are as well... and yet you're not up against them either so that it feels like you're at least connecting with them like you would in a personal drama.

With those scenes, it's like being forced to watch a car wreck at a close enough distance to see everything, yet you're not close enough to communicate or help, and you're not allowed to run away either. You're stuck in that "middle space." And he just holds you there.

its weird that the remake happened, did haneke think this way his film would get a big break or larger audience or something through an english script and more familiar cast? majority of film-goers are not used to this stuff and view it as pretentiousness or idk because as i said the more mainstream films have diluted the effect of transitions
Found this:
http://cinema.com/articles/5600/funny-games-michael-haneke-interview.phtml

He states:
How did the remake of Funny Games come about?
I was asked to do it. Chris Coen asked me in Cannes whether I would like to do it. The first version of the film unfortunately didn’t get seen by its intended audience because it was in German, so I thought this would be a good opportunity for it to reach the audience it was originally made for. That is the only reason.
 
Local time
Today, 21:37
Joined
Feb 8, 2015
Messages
1,529
Location
the Purgatory
It seems fairly cultural -- Americans aren't really known for super-introspection or observing quietly, we typically want to take action, fix problems, make noise. Most go stir-crazy when they can't actually do something to resolve a problem. Where is the stillness, the contemplation, the "living in one's pain" and exploring what it means? Typically we use cinema here as a distraction or some way to step out of daily life.
tbh i understand why the last thing most people would want to do after a long day of work or whatever is watch something that would make them feel a knot in their stomach, and would rather think of films as a medium for entertainment and nothing more. i guess its just a matter of approach

These periods of silence in this movie, the audience is stuck... you have no way to sidestep what's going on, you are totally trapped in the timeframe of the characters, and their pauses become your pauses. I also like how Haneke positions the camera far back at times, so you're just fixed on a non-moving specific view of the room, and you can't see what's off-camera, and you're just STUCK there, you're stuck at a distance from the protagonists, you're completely under their control now and watching them, and you can't see more or force anything to happen unless they choose to move. It's very unsettling in that aspect, and also in that you're stuck experiencing what they are as well... and yet you're not up against them either so that it feels like you're at least connecting with them like you would in a personal drama.
yeah and i love the irony of how being stuck within the time frame of slower shots and confined to limited visual perspective makes a scene more than just a retinal trip. normally in thriller films, the camera starts shaking up and shot frames keep shifting perspective quickly when hell breaks loose. i think the speed produces a counter effect, it distances the viewer because its fails to establish a real ambiance
 

Pizzabeak

Prolific Member
Local time
Today, 13:37
Joined
Jan 24, 2012
Messages
1,797
Finally saw Testuo II: Body Hammer and it was a lot better than I would have imagined. Definitely need to see a few more times. Since the first was B&W this sequel succeeded in using a pale blue monochromatic color scheme, indicating an odd sense of chill or isolation. A few flashback scenes used warmer colors as if in summer time; hard to tell if the warmth was achieved before or after filming. Only put off seeing it so long because I could never find a DVD. Maybe only liked it as much due to novelty, having seen the first many times and being disappointed in the third. The soundtrack was alright and accompanied interesting visuals.
Also saw some other movie featuring lots of close ups of a mildly attractive European woman. Later on I was told it was "Blue", from a Red White Blue trilogy. Could barely keep my eyes open or head up at this point and so hope to fully see it again in the near future.
Watched 'Kill Your Darlings", it was decent enough. Had a bit of trouble viewing Daniel Radcliffe as Ginsberg (and a hippie in general) but I suppose he looked the part. Theme seemed to be about things becoming forever a part of who one is, and so considering his Harry Potter work he may have fit the role well. Interesting performance from actor portraying Burroughs. Based on a true story, feel like most of it could have been superceded had at least one character not overreacted. Was expecting quite a different film, more thriller-esque with different pacing and so was a bit put off but amused. Actor portraying Lucien went ahead and did the same thing he did in Spider-Man 2. Not sure if Radcliffe is trying to be taken more serious as an actor. Not too familiar with the characters and wonder how mad the movie makes true fans of them.
Last of the Mohicans, ended rather abruptly. Was expecting a bit more. Was well shot with interesting landscapes, I guess. Wouldn't watch again.
Went ahead and saw Boogie Nights as well as There Will Be Blood, both excellent, quality films and worth a view. Enjoy the occasional flick of such caliber.
To clarify on my earlier negative review of Springbreakers, it could have been better than what it was, although I am sure the style was "meant to be that way", as an experimental movie. Too many montages to be as entertaining as it needed to be. Occasional burst of new age monologue by rebellious females and free nudity was not really enough to save it. Slap in James Franco and you've got yourself a winner. Point could have been gotten across in a five minute music video. Was not amused by anything offered to want to watch it for two more hours. Promising premise, was probably rushed and could have been a lot better. I am sure it was a fun, thrilling experience though. Would not recommend. The other day though I overheard two people talking about how much they liked it though.
 

Alias

empirical miracle
Local time
Today, 16:37
Joined
Feb 22, 2015
Messages
692
Location
My current location is classified.
I don't have any movies right now, but I'm about to go to a Halloween party with my friend where we're going to watch crappy horror movies from the 60s and 70s. I'll alert the forum on how that goes.
 

Jennywocky

guud languager
Local time
Today, 16:37
Joined
Sep 25, 2008
Messages
10,614
Location
Charn

Jennywocky

guud languager
Local time
Today, 16:37
Joined
Sep 25, 2008
Messages
10,614
Location
Charn
A Tale of Two Sisters.

Unfortunately, I saw "The Uninvited" (which is the American remake) a few years back, so I already had a sense of the main twist involved in the story. But there are enough differences that the entire movie wasn't a wash. Essentially a girl is released from a mental ward to come home, where she reestablishes her relationships with her sister, her father, and her stepmother... but not everything is what it seems, and there are suspicions about the stepmother's intentions as well as what actually removed the mother from the picture.

American remakes are odd, they tend to simplify and tangify storylines. The original is actually more of a mind-trip, as you're consciously aware that what you're seeing might or might not be true -- things are distorted and odd. You're aware that at least one of the characters is not a reliable narrator; you're just not sure of the degree of unreliability. There is also ambiguity inherent in what is unfolding; not every one of the distortions translates over one-to-one to some other interpretation. Only the last five minutes of the movie truly clarifies what has happened in the past, and it seems like something that is plausible, even if sad.

The American version is focused much on its particular linear plotline, but it's almost too focused so that everything seems channeled and stripped down. It also adds something to the main plot that seems oddly contrived and ultimately unsatisfying and of course also possesses more direct and brutal mayhem.

I would probably compare the original to a butterfly, in that it's beautiful to watch but might seem at times to move ethereally and in less defined ways, so you're going to get some random fluttering and roundabout exploration of the plot. The remake is like a cannonball fired through your house; it does the job directly enough (with a nice little on-the-nose joke at the end) but otherwise plows through in a straight line without subtlety and you might be left wondering "why."

Which is too bad, as the relationship between the sisters is the most interesting part of both stories. Not just in how the sisters often fill different roles in the family, but just how they engage each other. Browning and Kebbel were well-cast for the American version, so it's too bad they were given such a silly plotline to follow.
 

nanook

a scream in a vortex
Local time
Today, 22:37
Joined
Aug 16, 2011
Messages
1,933
Location
germany
Partisan (2015). it's not a "look at how smart my plot is" type of movie. it's a meditation. it's epic. by that i mean it's out of this world. a perfect movie gives me a world i have never been in before and combines it with just one or a few dramatic memorable characters, motives, challenges. most movies that are like this are science fiction or fantasy. this is one of those movies. movies of this genre are where my ratings are different from the average rating. i give it 9, they give it 6. for most other movies, my rating matches the average rating. the boy in this movie looks a bit like olivia wilde.

Meadowland (2015) - olivia wilde is fascinating to watch in this character. the movie is okay (i give it friendly 7) and she was credible in her emotions, but regarding her actions, i have to say, there were one or two weird scenes in it, that made my realism protest.

The gift (2015) & Queen of Earth (2015). Two movies about how power dualities shape unbalanced characters who become unforgiving enemies. Painful to watch, but interesting.

I have to say, knock knock is a torture of the male audience, i couldn't make myself watch through more than the first half of it.
 
Local time
Today, 21:37
Joined
Jun 27, 2015
Messages
91
Location
Utrecht, Netherlands
Watchmen

I rewatched it and found it just as awesome an experience as when I saw it years ago. A visual feast, with much to tell. Very faithful to the comic I discovered later, which worked for the film mostly (it doesn't always) except for some unneeded gore.

Mixing fantasy with some realism, the movie is great at exploring the ugly side of superheroes, with their self-doubt, vulnerability and cynicism. I've always been interested in the fascination with superheroes.

My favorite scenes are the ones with Dr Manhattan who says very INTP-ish things. Both rational and a bit sad and lonely. I feel like him sometimes, don't understand all the fuss and want to be left alone. I like how he distances himself from people and their problems but, knowing the future and how everything works, still sees how much of a miracle love can be.
 

Jennywocky

guud languager
Local time
Today, 16:37
Joined
Sep 25, 2008
Messages
10,614
Location
Charn
knock knock is the best comedy i have seen in a long time
excellent performance by keanu reeves...my friend and i were in tears by the time film ended
Best "feel good" movie of the year!
You'll laugh! You'll cry!! (You'll wish to die!)

Watchmen

I rewatched it and found it just as awesome an experience as when I saw it years ago. A visual feast, with much to tell. Very faithful to the comic I discovered later, which worked for the film mostly (it doesn't always) except for some unneeded gore.

Mixing fantasy with some realism, the movie is great at exploring the ugly side of superheroes, with their self-doubt, vulnerability and cynicism. I've always been interested in the fascination with superheroes.

My favorite scenes are the ones with Dr Manhattan who says very INTP-ish things. Both rational and a bit sad and lonely. I feel like him sometimes, don't understand all the fuss and want to be left alone. I like how he distances himself from people and their problems but, knowing the future and how everything works, still sees how much of a miracle love can be.
For me, I can't watch it. (I've tried. Maybe I'll try again at some point.)

Snyder shoots the comic frame by frame, sure; but as a long-time fan of the comic, I feel like I'm watching dead things. He's like that way in all of the movies he makes -- they look very stylish but he doesn't know how to generate substance. Any missteps weren't really the actors' faults, I blame Snyder and the format.

But it's a hell of a thing to try to put into a single movie. It should have really been done as a one-season and/or mini-series television show with a decent budget; there's some great stuff being done in the TV format nowadays, with solid actors. It really deserved more space to tell the story.
 

Pizzabeak

Prolific Member
Local time
Today, 13:37
Joined
Jan 24, 2012
Messages
1,797
Read it before the film came out and thought it a fair adaptation. I know lots of fans disliked it because no giant squid. Despite any flaws, and Zack Snyder, I still feel it to be one of the best adaptations (comic book) made so far. Should be hell to sort of watch it sans subtitles if you aren't familiar with the source material. One reason why I liked it. I believe most casual audiences felt alienated. There were a few references and plot points that went by briefly that you wouldn't have got unless you read the comic. The actors were mostly fine except Jupiter... She was in Harold & Kumar so it was a bit tough for me to take serious at that point. The extended director's cut is probably better. I'm all for epic films that are two hours too long for commercial audiences and they should not be split up in to parts. Whether they can be adapted for television is another matter, and more often that not that should be more or less welcome.
 

Jennywocky

guud languager
Local time
Today, 16:37
Joined
Sep 25, 2008
Messages
10,614
Location
Charn
Only Lovers Left Alive.

Tom Hiddleston and Tilda Swinton are always great to watch, especially here, and with a take on the vampire mythos that is totally not what usually shows up in movies. It might be too slow for some; but the characters are interesting. Also amusing that I saw this so soon after Crimson Peak, since in that movie Hiddleston and Wasikowska are lovers and here she's an annoying little floozy vampire who pisses off his angsty brooding "don't get into my shit" persona.

In the end of course, no matter how cultured and refined we appear to be... we still are what we are.
 

Yellow

for the glory of satan
Local time
Today, 14:37
Joined
Sep 2, 2009
Messages
2,864
Location
127.0.0.1
I just watched a 30 minute movie called "Kung Fury". I appreciate that the makers understood their effective limit and didn't try to make it longer. As it was, it had a few funny moments.
Specifically, the slap-fight between the T-Rex and Hitler's gold hawk statue.
 

Cheeseumpuffs

Proudly A Sheeple Since 2015
Local time
Today, 13:37
Joined
Jun 27, 2011
Messages
2,238
Location
Earth Dimension C-137
I just watched a 30 minute movie called "Kung Fury". I appreciate that the makers understood their effective limit and didn't try to make it longer. As it was, it had a few funny moments.
Specifically, the slap-fight between the T-Rex and Hitler's gold hawk statue.
I've seen that in Netflix. I took a moment to appreciate it's synopsis and picture but decided not to watch, as the appreciation I got out of the synopsis for a kung-fu movie about traveling through time to kill Hitler which, according to the picture, includes dinosaurs and vikings was probably the perfect amount of appreciation a kung-fu movie about Hitler, dinosaurs and vikings deserves.
 

Yellow

for the glory of satan
Local time
Today, 14:37
Joined
Sep 2, 2009
Messages
2,864
Location
127.0.0.1
I've seen that in Netflix. I took a moment to appreciate it's synopsis and picture but decided not to watch, as the appreciation I got out of the synopsis for a kung-fu movie about traveling through time to kill Hitler which, according to the picture, includes dinosaurs and vikings was probably the perfect amount of appreciation a kung-fu movie about Hitler, dinosaurs and vikings deserves.
I can assure you that the movie delivered on all of those promises, and more.
 

Jennywocky

guud languager
Local time
Today, 16:37
Joined
Sep 25, 2008
Messages
10,614
Location
Charn
Wolf Creek.

good god. Well, for a crazy stalker/psychopath murderer flick it was pretty effective I guess. It was disturbing, but then again you're choosing to watch a slash/torture nutjob movie, so why complain about content?

The first half of it was actually decent from just a casual perspective with the character interplay.

I think some critics complained about the demographics of the body count and how things tally up at the end. In light of the second one (which seems to have a similar ending and outcomes), that could be a valid complaint. True spoiler:

In this first one, it's the girls who bear the brunt of the damage and are not just murdered but pretty brutally in all cases, especially if you are watching the full-length version. The guy is hurt badly but most of it happens off-screen, and he gets away at the end almost as if an afterthought and survives miraculously, which can almost come off as the point of the movie being to torture the females.

Apparently the second one has a similar ending scene as the first and it's almost like they are building their own motif of some glorified Australian psycho boogieman, but I guess the difference between this and the American "Jason Vorhees" or "Chucky" is that the American flicks with these recurring villains are filmed in a way that it's hard to take them seriously, whereas with his film the psychological and physical tortures are very explicit and feel very real and psychological... it actually feels believable.

I guess I should also note this was another film where I wanted to throw things at the screen because the leads do a few things I find stupid; however, these choices seem more based on personality and I could see them happening, it's just that I would operate differently (I get pretty cutthroat and cold in situations where you cannot afford to take chances) and so I saw their choices as very imprudent. I mean, if you're doing this crazy shit to me or my friends, then I will take every chance to make sure that once you go down, you will most clearly never ever be getting up again.
 
Local time
Today, 21:37
Joined
Jun 27, 2015
Messages
91
Location
Utrecht, Netherlands
Wolf Creek.

good god. Well, for a crazy stalker/psychopath murderer flick it was pretty effective I guess. It was disturbing, but then again you're choosing to watch a slash/torture nutjob movie, so why complain about content?

The first half of it was actually decent from just a casual perspective with the character interplay.

I think some critics complained about the demographics of the body count and how things tally up at the end. In light of the second one (which seems to have a similar ending and outcomes), that could be a valid complaint. True spoiler:

In this first one, it's the girls who bear the brunt of the damage and are not just murdered but pretty brutally in all cases, especially if you are watching the full-length version. The guy is hurt badly but most of it happens off-screen, and he gets away at the end almost as if an afterthought and survives miraculously, which can almost come off as the point of the movie being to torture the females.

Apparently the second one has a similar ending scene as the first and it's almost like they are building their own motif of some glorified Australian psycho boogieman, but I guess the difference between this and the American "Jason Vorhees" or "Chucky" is that the American flicks with these recurring villains are filmed in a way that it's hard to take them seriously, whereas with his film the psychological and physical tortures are very explicit and feel very real and psychological... it actually feels believable.

I guess I should also note this was another film where I wanted to throw things at the screen because the leads do a few things I find stupid; however, these choices seem more based on personality and I could see them happening, it's just that I would operate differently (I get pretty cutthroat and cold in situations where you cannot afford to take chances) and so I saw their choices as very imprudent. I mean, if you're doing this crazy shit to me or my friends, then I will take every chance to make sure that once you go down, you will most clearly never ever be getting up again.
Wolf Creek was the most depressing film I've ever seen. It's easy as a spectator to see what the victims could have done better but they were severely weakened and did not stand a chance, the psychopath just liked to play around with them. You can have a cool mind, but tied up for days, tired, without food or drinks and with wounds, how tough would you be? Sure, if you have a chance to kill a psycho like that, you want to make sure the job is finished.

I remember it to be based on a true story of an outback psycho. It was supposed to be gritty and realistic, surely it was but I lost my "joie de vivre" for a day or two...
 

Jennywocky

guud languager
Local time
Today, 16:37
Joined
Sep 25, 2008
Messages
10,614
Location
Charn
Wolf Creek was the most depressing film I've ever seen. It's easy as a spectator to see what the victims could have done better but they were severely weakened and did not stand a chance, the psychopath just liked to play around with them. You can have a cool mind, but tied up for days, tired, without food or drinks and with wounds, how tough would you be? Sure, if you have a chance to kill a psycho like that, you want to make sure the job is finished.

I remember it to be based on a true story of an outback psycho. It was supposed to be gritty and realistic, surely it was but I lost my "joie de vivre" for a day or two...
The impression I got is that they were tied up for about five hours. It was night when they were knocked out, and still night when the first girl woke up. She also wasn't wounded at all, to start with.

I mean, that's why I say it was "understandable," but I personally was frustrated. I've actually been in car accidents before (and once, a car fire), --- not major accidents, but collisions at least -- where other people screamed/freaked out and/or ran away from the scene, but I calmly got my stuff, extracted myself, and walked to a safe place. When I get into a stress situation, it's like I go into "assessment mode."

so honestly,
after shooting that guy and seeing him not moving, I would have found the big knife he was holding and immediately slit the guy's throat immediately, and deal with the emotions later.

But like i said, I could see those particular characters as reacting the way they did.

I felt the worst after the incident in the car port. That's going to stick in my head a long time. :(


----

I'm sitting here during lunch at home and just saw the last 20 minutes of Halloween II. Why did people watch this shit? I mean, it's not that it's even violent (as nowadays I find it pretty tame), it's just that it SUCKS. At least with Wolf Creek, it was done with enough skill to be highly disturbing; here, none of the scenes are tense, they're all predictable and slow-paced and really dumb. maybe at the time, I guess, the slasher/murder movies were just really getting started so it all seemed new and different, but I never liked them even when they first came out. This is seriously the most I've watched of the Halloween series, and I've only watched about 20 minutes altogether of the Jason Vorhees stuff.

---

I'll toss in a free piece of trivia I ran across...

The reason Halloween 3 was so different from the first two movies (as it didn't even have Michael Meyers in it, really) was because the series was actually envisioned as an anthology series. But Meyers was so scary in Halloween that they brought him back in halloween II; then when they had seemingly killed him off, they moved to this third movie with a new concept, but it was generally pretty panned because everyone wanted Michael Meyers back. So that's why they went back to him for the further movies -- it became a "Michael Meyers" vehicle where originally each film was planned to do something different.
 

Alias

empirical miracle
Local time
Today, 16:37
Joined
Feb 22, 2015
Messages
692
Location
My current location is classified.
Time to describe my experience watching Attack of the Killer Tomatoes on Halloween. It was hilarious. Some of it was so insanely bad it was funny. I have to say my favorite quote is "technically, sir, tomatoes are fags".

Then we only had time to watch Ghostbusters. Who doesn't love Ghostbusters. Driving back from the event the first song on the radio was the Ghostbusters theme.
 

Jennywocky

guud languager
Local time
Today, 16:37
Joined
Sep 25, 2008
Messages
10,614
Location
Charn
Worst censoring ever -- Kill Bill 1 came on AMC a bit ago, and I happened to have it running.

When the Bride has the flashback with Buck's head in the door, they edited it to this: "My name is Buck, and I like to ... PARTY!" ROFL! It doesn't even rhyme. And then she repeats it: "Your name is BUCK... and you came here to PARTY." Then crushes his head in the door. It makes it seem like she has something against partying -- enough to kill a guy over. She's such a stiff.

Then she digs out his keychain. In the original, it says "Pussy Wagon," of course. this time it says, "Party Wagon." And his truck has "party wagon" written across the back. :rolleyes:

I mean, I know they want to tone it down to PG-13 or something, but... it's a Tarantino movie for god's sake. Stuff doesn't work well when you change it. the humor is in the unexpected crassness.
 

Kuu

TENTACLES WILL DESTROY YOU
Local time
Today, 15:37
Joined
Jun 7, 2008
Messages
3,388
Location
The sea of stars
Saw the Baader Meinhof Complex. It's been poking at me in Netflix for a while but never got around to watch it until now. I was surprised because I expected it to be some run-of-the mill action-thriller, but it turned out to be a historical film. It's nice to stumble upon that, and even better that it's not the same old tired settings. It was a worthwhile watch, though I felt it dragged on by the end (though for a movie of its length, the pacing from start to finish was quite solid). It perhaps could have had more character development. I appreciated the musical choices as well. most remarkable perhaps is how neutral the subject matter is dealt with, without demonizing or glamorizing the RAF, it never felt heavy handed nor moralizing, and yet you feel compelled to sympathize with them as people due to the film's focus.


It's always a sad reminder how young people nowadays are utterly de-politicised and ignorant of history. One-click 40-character insta-activism for a doomed generation.
 

soupymess

run the chicken program
Local time
Today, 21:37
Joined
Apr 22, 2011
Messages
91
Spectre

Due to seeing it while very very tired I ended up thinking it was about time travel.
 

Alias

empirical miracle
Local time
Today, 16:37
Joined
Feb 22, 2015
Messages
692
Location
My current location is classified.
I mean, I know they want to tone it down to PG-13 or something, but... it's a Tarantino movie for god's sake. Stuff doesn't work well when you change it. the humor is in the unexpected crassness.
Ugh, that's terrible. If they changed his name to Marty it would rhyme. How do you live with yourself if you censored so badly.
 

Jennywocky

guud languager
Local time
Today, 16:37
Joined
Sep 25, 2008
Messages
10,614
Location
Charn
The Butterfly Effect: Interesting idea, the acting was adequate but the writing/direction was not, so it really didn't have as much dramatic impact as it could have had. I saw the Director's Cut, which apparently at least had the "ballsy" ending versus the "placate the audience/studio" less committed ending. Note that it didn't really explore a true butterfly effect, pretty much nothing changed that we saw except for the lives of 4-5 people. It's unfortunate the movie is kind of a downer -- most of the alternate realities suck in general and seem very over-the-top, and meanwhile all the experiences are very cliche in how they are written, as if someone had watched a bunch of cheesy frat or prison movies (as two examples) in order to learn how frat and prison life works. In fact, much of the movie feels second-hand that way.

Mr. Nobody: It was ironic I overlapped watching these movies, since they're similar in the sense of having a multiplicity of options/events based on choices. TBE, however, really just looked at the effect of any choices made; MN was far more ambitious, examining these kinds of decisions from a far more philosopical POV. I'm actually not quite sure how to articulate much about the movie, the impact of viewing it is hitting me like it is the love child of "Cloud Atlas" and "The Tree of Life." I've referred to Cloud Atlas as a glorious mess, as it transcends its parts in terms of what it invokes, but whereas it's easier to articulate what you take away from Cloud Atlas, Mr. Nobody is more like a Malick movie full of imagery that generates emotion and profound mystery that is difficult to put into words.

All i can do is leave a few quotes here:

"In chess, it's called Zugzwang... when the only viable move...is not to move."

"Before he was unable to make a choice because he didn't know what would happen. Now that he knows what will happen, he is unable to make a choice."

"Every path is the right path. Everything could've been anything else. And it would have just as much meaning."

I also have to say the movie itself is beautiful, full of half-conscious imagery/symbolism tying one scene to the next, and the editing job (and color cording) to keep the viewer aware of enough to follow the proceedings is excellently done. It's almost dream-like at times, with all the time and timeline and space jumping.
 

Cheeseumpuffs

Proudly A Sheeple Since 2015
Local time
Today, 13:37
Joined
Jun 27, 2011
Messages
2,238
Location
Earth Dimension C-137
Mr. Nobody: It was ironic I overlapped watching these movies, since they're similar in the sense of having a multiplicity of options/events based on choices. TBE, however, really just looked at the effect of any choices made; MN was far more ambitious, examining these kinds of decisions from a far more philosopical POV. I'm actually not quite sure how to articulate much about the movie, the impact of viewing it is hitting me like it is the love child of "Cloud Atlas" and "The Tree of Life." I've referred to Cloud Atlas as a glorious mess, as it transcends its parts in terms of what it invokes, but whereas it's easier to articulate what you take away from Cloud Atlas, Mr. Nobody is more like a Malick movie full of imagery that generates emotion and profound mystery that is difficult to put into words.

All i can do is leave a few quotes here:

"In chess, it's called Zugzwang... when the only viable move...is not to move."

"Before he was unable to make a choice because he didn't know what would happen. Now that he knows what will happen, he is unable to make a choice."

"Every path is the right path. Everything could've been anything else. And it would have just as much meaning."

I also have to say the movie itself is beautiful, full of half-conscious imagery/symbolism tying one scene to the next, and the editing job (and color cording) to keep the viewer aware of enough to follow the proceedings is excellently done. It's almost dream-like at times, with all the time and timeline and space jumping.
I absolutely love Mr. Nobody. Probably one of my favorite movies of all time.
 

Jennywocky

guud languager
Local time
Today, 16:37
Joined
Sep 25, 2008
Messages
10,614
Location
Charn
I absolutely love Mr. Nobody. Probably one of my favorite movies of all time.
It felt long at times when I was watching it, yet now that it's been an hour after I finished, I feel like going right back and watching it again. It's a transcendent experience, and I keep trying to wrap my brain around it, but it's bigger and more profound than I can grasp or articulate.

I need to dig up the Director's Cut, it's got some extra scenes.
 
Top Bottom