[Movies] Talk about the last movie you saw 2: Electric Threadaloo
- Thread starter Dave
- Start date
The spider Man video game is now my favorite Stan Lee cameo
figmentPez
Staff member
You didn't like Stan Lee in the library in "The Amazing Spider-Man"? Heresy.
That's more or less what I've heard.
figmentPez
Staff member
What doesn't include a Wilhelm Scream these days?
And yet it's made 80 million during it's opening weekend on a movie they probably didn't spend all that much on. It's probably going to make some money.
...which is a shame, because Sony will only learn the worst things from this experience and shovel more shit into theaters.
I think the real take away from this is if people tell you that they'll go to a movie about their favorite character, you should probably believe them. Venom doesn't have the broad appeal of a lot of comic book franchises (especially this version of the character) but there was clearly a hardcore sect of people waiting for this movie. It certainly helps that it's really not running against anything major ether.
Ant Man and the Wasp
It was good, but I feel like a much bigger deal was made of it than it warranted. Just couldn't really get into it.
Marvel released its movies in order of quality this year for sure. Black Panther> Infinity War> Ant Man and the Wasp.
It was good, but I feel like a much bigger deal was made of it than it warranted. Just couldn't really get into it.
Marvel released its movies in order of quality this year for sure. Black Panther> Infinity War> Ant Man and the Wasp.
Cajungal
Staff member
Bad Times at the El Royale
I liked it. Lots of stories intertwining, which made for a lot of kind of jarring moments--but not in a bad way imo. It was a story about the stars aligning for a bunch of people, but for worse instead of better. The cast was small, which made it feel tense and claustrophopic. Enough humor to break the tension. Good night.
I liked it. Lots of stories intertwining, which made for a lot of kind of jarring moments--but not in a bad way imo. It was a story about the stars aligning for a bunch of people, but for worse instead of better. The cast was small, which made it feel tense and claustrophopic. Enough humor to break the tension. Good night.
I finally saw Man of Steel.
Now, I went in with expectations well, well, well below zero. This probably helped. That said, and knowing I'll get some flack for this...I....quite liked it?
The movie is definitely darker and more grim than you'd hope a Superman movie to be. But Superman himself isn't, really. He's new at it and has never been a hero, has never had to make this kind of decisions; he's a simple farmhand trying to make the best of things and occasionally failing.
This is far from a great movie, but I really can't burn it down and dismiss it as being as terrible as I was led to believe.
I do agree the treatment of Pa Kent is horrible - Clark pretty much becomes a hero despite him instead of because of him. I can sort of see where they were going - self-sacrifice is important, you have to be careful with who you are, be a good person, etc - but the way it was handled was pretty horrible. It's Jor-El who gets to be the "inspiring father figure", telling him to be a hero. Heck, it's some random priest (I'm sure he's identifiable for someone who knows the Superman mythos, but I couldn't tell anyway) who tells Clark to take a leap of faith and trust people - definitely something dad should've told him.
As for the damage to the city and innocent bystanders - there's definitely some that falls on Superman himself; especially in his first big fight where he takes Zod to the town himself. That's stupid, and I can't think of a good reason other than wanting to show off some sponsorships (IHOP, Sears,...). And, I guess, a battle in the empty desert being less visually impressive. The final showdown, though, it's the bad guys who choose the location and destroy half the city before he even gets there (since he's literally on the other side of the world). Afterwards, Zod makes it abundantly clear he's going to try to kill as many people as possible and cause as much damage and death as possible - Superman can try to draw him away, but Zod will keep coming back to city centers. I'm sure he could've done more and a fully fledged Superman probably would have done more - but this Clark is very much still reacting to disaster and circumstance, rather than taking control and pushing the narrative.
The final neck-snap...To me, it felt more-or-less earned. Jailing Zod seemed a non-starter, capturing him impossible. Again, yes, a fully grown and evolved Superman would've found an alternative solution - but as an inexperienced tool being pushed to the limit, being confronted with the right-here-right-now moral choice "kill this madman or let 5 innocent people die" (who really could've and should've just run away, idiots), he made the best of it. It worked as a formative moment - he's grown, he's evolving, he's learning what type of hero he wants to be - and saving innocent bystanders' lives is his number one choice, no matter what else he has sacrifice to do that, even his own morals. This is the kill that pushes him towards his no-killing ways, the moment he decides he has to do better, be better, learn, grow.
The world is darker, less forgiving, less accepting of aliens with power - sadly, this is pretty much spot-on. This is a bit of an elsewhere story - what if Superman came now, in the world of Trump and anti-immigration sentiment and aggression and a generally bleak atmosphere, rather than 1950/60's positive yes-we-can America. Frankly, to make the point more strongly, this would've been a chance to make Superman black. Instead we get two black generals who are afraid of him.
There were definitely a whole bunch of plot holes and issues, though. If this is "one of hundreds" of Genesis ships sent out - why does it matter so much if Superman destroys this one? Zod can go find another one. If they've got a terraforming device - why would Zod need to terraform Earth, instead of finding just about any other plant fit for conversion and let the humans live? If they've already taken some of Superman's blood - why do they need his corpse, they've got the Codex right there. Really, going off to reboot Krypton on Alpha Centauri or whatever would've been a perfectly fine way for Zod to follow his programming and Clark would pretty much happily have given them a pint of his blood to help start a new Krypton over there.
Again, this definitely isn't a great movie...But going in expecting an absolute train wreck beyond any hope of redemption, it turned out better than I expected. Batman vs Superman is on TV next week, I'm curious what I'll think of that.
Now, I went in with expectations well, well, well below zero. This probably helped. That said, and knowing I'll get some flack for this...I....quite liked it?
The movie is definitely darker and more grim than you'd hope a Superman movie to be. But Superman himself isn't, really. He's new at it and has never been a hero, has never had to make this kind of decisions; he's a simple farmhand trying to make the best of things and occasionally failing.
This is far from a great movie, but I really can't burn it down and dismiss it as being as terrible as I was led to believe.
I do agree the treatment of Pa Kent is horrible - Clark pretty much becomes a hero despite him instead of because of him. I can sort of see where they were going - self-sacrifice is important, you have to be careful with who you are, be a good person, etc - but the way it was handled was pretty horrible. It's Jor-El who gets to be the "inspiring father figure", telling him to be a hero. Heck, it's some random priest (I'm sure he's identifiable for someone who knows the Superman mythos, but I couldn't tell anyway) who tells Clark to take a leap of faith and trust people - definitely something dad should've told him.
As for the damage to the city and innocent bystanders - there's definitely some that falls on Superman himself; especially in his first big fight where he takes Zod to the town himself. That's stupid, and I can't think of a good reason other than wanting to show off some sponsorships (IHOP, Sears,...). And, I guess, a battle in the empty desert being less visually impressive. The final showdown, though, it's the bad guys who choose the location and destroy half the city before he even gets there (since he's literally on the other side of the world). Afterwards, Zod makes it abundantly clear he's going to try to kill as many people as possible and cause as much damage and death as possible - Superman can try to draw him away, but Zod will keep coming back to city centers. I'm sure he could've done more and a fully fledged Superman probably would have done more - but this Clark is very much still reacting to disaster and circumstance, rather than taking control and pushing the narrative.
The final neck-snap...To me, it felt more-or-less earned. Jailing Zod seemed a non-starter, capturing him impossible. Again, yes, a fully grown and evolved Superman would've found an alternative solution - but as an inexperienced tool being pushed to the limit, being confronted with the right-here-right-now moral choice "kill this madman or let 5 innocent people die" (who really could've and should've just run away, idiots), he made the best of it. It worked as a formative moment - he's grown, he's evolving, he's learning what type of hero he wants to be - and saving innocent bystanders' lives is his number one choice, no matter what else he has sacrifice to do that, even his own morals. This is the kill that pushes him towards his no-killing ways, the moment he decides he has to do better, be better, learn, grow.
The world is darker, less forgiving, less accepting of aliens with power - sadly, this is pretty much spot-on. This is a bit of an elsewhere story - what if Superman came now, in the world of Trump and anti-immigration sentiment and aggression and a generally bleak atmosphere, rather than 1950/60's positive yes-we-can America. Frankly, to make the point more strongly, this would've been a chance to make Superman black. Instead we get two black generals who are afraid of him.
There were definitely a whole bunch of plot holes and issues, though. If this is "one of hundreds" of Genesis ships sent out - why does it matter so much if Superman destroys this one? Zod can go find another one. If they've got a terraforming device - why would Zod need to terraform Earth, instead of finding just about any other plant fit for conversion and let the humans live? If they've already taken some of Superman's blood - why do they need his corpse, they've got the Codex right there. Really, going off to reboot Krypton on Alpha Centauri or whatever would've been a perfectly fine way for Zod to follow his programming and Clark would pretty much happily have given them a pint of his blood to help start a new Krypton over there.
Again, this definitely isn't a great movie...But going in expecting an absolute train wreck beyond any hope of redemption, it turned out better than I expected. Batman vs Superman is on TV next week, I'm curious what I'll think of that.
Most people I know, myself included, consider MoS an alright movie, just a terrible Superman movie.
I liked MoS too. Fear not my feathered friend. I really like Michael Shannon a bunch. It was way, way better than Brian SInger's version, IMO. I totally understand the criticism for MoS though. I never finished BvS.
Nightbreed
Having finished season 2 of Channel Zero in a day, I continue using my month of Shudder to watch movies I've seen mentioned over and over but somehow have never watched.
This one...is a total shitshow. Like, I have a half hour left, and I can't imagine going back to finish it.
Having finished season 2 of Channel Zero in a day, I continue using my month of Shudder to watch movies I've seen mentioned over and over but somehow have never watched.
This one...is a total shitshow. Like, I have a half hour left, and I can't imagine going back to finish it.
It IS a total shitshow. Like... complete. But it's VISUALLY INTERESTING at least.
I was about to say "at least Singer included one scene of Supes being Supes," but I just remembered the oil rig scene in MoS.
That was the only saving grace - the creature design was interesting and well executed. But beyond that...woof.
Michael Shannon was absolutely the best part of that movie.
The Babadook
Surprisingly creepy. I didn't know anything about it going in so I had no idea the theme would be so heavy. The ending is a mixed bag for me, as it works with the story as a metaphor. But if the story is taken literally it seems a bit silly. Nonetheless, on the hole I was surprised and impressed with this tiny budget Aussie film. And it was done without an R rating, without jump scares, and without the monster ever act ually being fully revealed.
Also, on the subject of horror movies:
Drag me to Hell
This is Sam Raimi at the Sam Raimiest he's ever been outside of the Evil Dead franchise. A lot of the scenes seemed straight out of Evil Dead actually. And it wouldn't surprise me to learn Raimi originally wrote this as a new Evil Dead movie and changed a few things to get it made, or took storyboard cards he had drawn for Evil Dead sequences that weren't working and repurposed them here.
The fights with the Gypsy in the parking garage and the shed, the hankerchief, the goat, could very well have originally all been dead items vs Ash. It was fun.
Surprisingly creepy. I didn't know anything about it going in so I had no idea the theme would be so heavy. The ending is a mixed bag for me, as it works with the story as a metaphor. But if the story is taken literally it seems a bit silly. Nonetheless, on the hole I was surprised and impressed with this tiny budget Aussie film. And it was done without an R rating, without jump scares, and without the monster ever act ually being fully revealed.
Also, on the subject of horror movies:
Drag me to Hell
This is Sam Raimi at the Sam Raimiest he's ever been outside of the Evil Dead franchise. A lot of the scenes seemed straight out of Evil Dead actually. And it wouldn't surprise me to learn Raimi originally wrote this as a new Evil Dead movie and changed a few things to get it made, or took storyboard cards he had drawn for Evil Dead sequences that weren't working and repurposed them here.
The fights with the Gypsy in the parking garage and the shed, the hankerchief, the goat, could very well have originally all been dead items vs Ash. It was fun.
Cajungal
Staff member
Yes! The more I think about it, the more I think Cynthia Erivo is my hero in that movie. And what a voice.
I can't believe Venom had a rap theme exactly like the kind that Deadpool made fun of. It's such a shitty barely movie with incredibly bad pacing but that theme in the credits by Eminem made me laugh out loud.
Best part of Venom was that it has like a 3 minute Into the Spiderverse scene as it's post credits stinger that has literally nothing to do with the movie Venom.
Best part of Venom was that it has like a 3 minute Into the Spiderverse scene as it's post credits stinger that has literally nothing to do with the movie Venom.
I'm wandering how they're gonna fuck up Silk next.
They are using the name White Spider now, I think? That's what they did on the Marvel Rising thing.
And a mid credits sequence teasing Carnage. Cause the only thing better than PG 13 Venom would be PG 13 Carnage.
(sarcasm, of course)
I've not been one to criticize Marvel, Sony, Fox or WB for PG-13 interpretations of its characters. Despite what people say, I think it is ENTIRELY possible to do Wolverine, Joker, and yes even Deadpool in a PG-13 way and still do the character justice. Carnage, on the other hand, cannot be given that same treatment. It simply doesn't work.
I might be getting angry at nothing. Because as far as I know they haven't confirmed a rating for Carnage, but if they went for PG-13 here, my guess is they do it again.
I really wish Sony would just.... Stop. Stop making these movies and let the people who actually care for the source material at Marvel take over.
Last edited:
Are you thinking of Spider-Gwen being renamed to Ghost Spider recently? Coz Silk is a different character.