[Movies] Talk about the last movie you saw 2: Electric Threadaloo
- Thread starter Dave
- Start date
Just finished Joker. It is a well done, stylish dive into the origins of a hard-to-pin down comic villain. Which is then totally thrown down the drain via the unreliable narrator schtick. Was it really an origin story of the Joker? I guess it could be in some universe. I'm not sure what to think of it beyond that.
GasBandit
Staff member
The Dead Don't Die (2019)
Watching this movie is somewhere between listening to a 4 year old tell you a story and listening to a 14 year old joke about his own suicidal impulses. It meanders and drags on forever with unimportant details, and yet also is "humorously" unsettling in a "uh, seriously?" kind of uneasy chuckling way. I laughed twice, total. The 4th wall may as well not exist (actors break character repeatedly, one literally says "I read the script" like it's supposed to make sense in-narrative), and the way it's done is not amusing - it's just lazy. There's unexplained plot developments that happen for no adequately explored reason and then never have bearing on anything ever again. And Bill Murray phones everything in.
All in all, this was probably the most star-studded flop I've ever seen.
Watching this movie is somewhere between listening to a 4 year old tell you a story and listening to a 14 year old joke about his own suicidal impulses. It meanders and drags on forever with unimportant details, and yet also is "humorously" unsettling in a "uh, seriously?" kind of uneasy chuckling way. I laughed twice, total. The 4th wall may as well not exist (actors break character repeatedly, one literally says "I read the script" like it's supposed to make sense in-narrative), and the way it's done is not amusing - it's just lazy. There's unexplained plot developments that happen for no adequately explored reason and then never have bearing on anything ever again. And Bill Murray phones everything in.
All in all, this was probably the most star-studded flop I've ever seen.
lol this is my favorite review of a jim jarmusch movie
After playing through Maneater, I was in the mood for some shark movies. So...
The Meg
It was exactly what it was advertised as and didn't try to be anything else. I wanted dumb action involving a prehistoric shark, I got dumb action involving a prehistoric shark.
Although its size seemed to be inconsistent at times. And I hated how stealthy something so huge could be. It should have been easily spotted, especially among beach swimmers near the end.
Still, it was fun enough.
Jaws
I've seen bits and pieces of it, like catching it on TV as a kid, but I don't think I ever sat down and watched this. And it's absolutely the classic that every says it is. It's INCREDIBLY well shot and you could teach courses on building tension based on this movie. It drags a LITTLE bit at times and probably could have shaved off15-20 without losing much, but it's still a classic.
The Meg
It was exactly what it was advertised as and didn't try to be anything else. I wanted dumb action involving a prehistoric shark, I got dumb action involving a prehistoric shark.
Although its size seemed to be inconsistent at times. And I hated how stealthy something so huge could be. It should have been easily spotted, especially among beach swimmers near the end.
Still, it was fun enough.
Jaws
I've seen bits and pieces of it, like catching it on TV as a kid, but I don't think I ever sat down and watched this. And it's absolutely the classic that every says it is. It's INCREDIBLY well shot and you could teach courses on building tension based on this movie. It drags a LITTLE bit at times and probably could have shaved off15-20 without losing much, but it's still a classic.
Last edited:
Batman and Son
REALLY glad I saw this with a friend to riff on whill watching it, while the action scenes are great, and the characters are pretty good, its still REALLY silly, and honestly NOT the best Deathstroke adaptation I've seen.
REALLY glad I saw this with a friend to riff on whill watching it, while the action scenes are great, and the characters are pretty good, its still REALLY silly, and honestly NOT the best Deathstroke adaptation I've seen.
Superman/Batman Apocalypse
Better than the source material in a lot of ways, but its STILL an awkward story here and there. Especially the scene where Wonder Woman straight up assaults Supergirl in Metropolis "For her own good", that never sat well with me in either comic nor movie.
Better than the source material in a lot of ways, but its STILL an awkward story here and there. Especially the scene where Wonder Woman straight up assaults Supergirl in Metropolis "For her own good", that never sat well with me in either comic nor movie.
I like how it really hits that "public servant downplaying imminent catastrophe for political points" thing. Not realistic obviously, but interesting.
figmentPez
Staff member
Valley Girl (2020 remake)
I enjoyed it, though objectively it's mediocre. It's a jukebox musical full of 80's covers, with varying levels of quality. The love story is very by-the-book. Overall the biggest problem with the movie overall is the same as with the songs, they lack punch. It's just kinda there, and when it's good it's nice, but it's not thrilling, and when it's bad it's just like the songs, where they kinda stretch things by singing the same lyrics over a few times more than they should...
Also, I have to assume that this was an intentional nod to 80s Hollywood, but the cast does not look like they should be playing teenagers. Espeically bad is Logan Paul, who was ~23 when this filmed, but looks like 35 playing 18.
Chloe Bennet looks very good in 80's fashion, though. </bhamv3>
I enjoyed it, though objectively it's mediocre. It's a jukebox musical full of 80's covers, with varying levels of quality. The love story is very by-the-book. Overall the biggest problem with the movie overall is the same as with the songs, they lack punch. It's just kinda there, and when it's good it's nice, but it's not thrilling, and when it's bad it's just like the songs, where they kinda stretch things by singing the same lyrics over a few times more than they should...
Also, I have to assume that this was an intentional nod to 80s Hollywood, but the cast does not look like they should be playing teenagers. Espeically bad is Logan Paul, who was ~23 when this filmed, but looks like 35 playing 18.
Chloe Bennet looks very good in 80's fashion, though. </bhamv3>
figmentPez
Staff member
They did.
Chloe Bennet looks good in everything!
Krampus (2015)
I've been making this one a holiday tradition the last the few years. It's right up there with Scrooged.
I've been making this one a holiday tradition the last the few years. It's right up there with Scrooged.
Also for those curious about the ambiguity of the ending, a linked comic book was released along with the movie that goes into some more details as to what was occurring: The entire town was dealing with the phenomenon because, as the intro to the movie suggests, they had all lost their Christmas spirit as a community. The torn up letter in the film may have simply been the straw that broke the camel's back. The comic is divided up into stories that cover a different survivor or survivors dealing with some aspect of Krampus' influence within the town, including a group holding up at the mall (which is mentioned in the film as a emergency shelter for the town). Most of the stories usually end with some sort of Christmas spirit being reclaimed during the fight for survival such as a particularly mean character being turned into a toy and sacrificing himself to save the mall survivors. The comic ends with everyone waking up on Christmas Day as if nothing had happened but faint memories of the previous days' events, implying that the snowglobe was a method for Krampus to continue to observe the family rather than keep them prisoner.
The Mignight Sky
Sweet JESUS, that was a drag, me and the family were watching it before dinner and we had to stop NOT even half-way through due to how slow the pacing was. THAT and it was basically like, FIVE different sci-fi stories I've absorbed before.
Sweet JESUS, that was a drag, me and the family were watching it before dinner and we had to stop NOT even half-way through due to how slow the pacing was. THAT and it was basically like, FIVE different sci-fi stories I've absorbed before.
Miller's Crossing
Now THAT was an entertaining as fuck movie, first ten minutes, INFINITELY more character than "The Midnight Sky!"
Now THAT was an entertaining as fuck movie, first ten minutes, INFINITELY more character than "The Midnight Sky!"
WW84. Seemed a little longish but overall one of the better DCU movies. Given all the Gods and Magic Stuff, I'd really like her to have a crossover with Captain Marvel *screw you all I'm old school* before Supes.
The Lynda Carter stinger was great!!
figmentPez
Staff member
Playing With Fire
I figured this wouldn't be a great movie, but I didn't expect it to be this bad. The first half of the movie is terrible. This movie thinks comedy is that if you talk loudly long enough people will laugh. The plot is poorly set-up, it doesn't know how to build tension, the world is highly inconsistent, and it was overall painful. I'm honestly not sure why I kept watching.
It got better in the second half, amazingly. It was still mediocre over all, but it actually managed to have some good moments because the movie decided to finally focus on the plot instead of comedy bits. If the whole movie had been like the second half, it might have been okay.
Overall, it's a by-the-book family comedy that doesn't do anything special, and is gratingly obnoxious when it tries to be funny.
I figured this wouldn't be a great movie, but I didn't expect it to be this bad. The first half of the movie is terrible. This movie thinks comedy is that if you talk loudly long enough people will laugh. The plot is poorly set-up, it doesn't know how to build tension, the world is highly inconsistent, and it was overall painful. I'm honestly not sure why I kept watching.
It got better in the second half, amazingly. It was still mediocre over all, but it actually managed to have some good moments because the movie decided to finally focus on the plot instead of comedy bits. If the whole movie had been like the second half, it might have been okay.
Overall, it's a by-the-book family comedy that doesn't do anything special, and is gratingly obnoxious when it tries to be funny.
Bad Santa
DAMN fine movie, I remember when it was out it was just advertised as just a basic bitch comedy, but its got HONEST character to it.
DAMN fine movie, I remember when it was out it was just advertised as just a basic bitch comedy, but its got HONEST character to it.
Soul
Nice flick, not the best animated film I've seen, but an enjoyable experience that I'd like to partake in again!
Nice flick, not the best animated film I've seen, but an enjoyable experience that I'd like to partake in again!
figmentPez
Staff member
Soul
Absolutely beautiful movie. A very different tone for Pixar; it does feel like a Pixar movie, and has moments that feel similar to a lot of others, but the overall pacing and feel hit me differently. It feels smaller, but not lesser, and more adult, but not any less kid friendly.
Highly recommended.
Absolutely beautiful movie. A very different tone for Pixar; it does feel like a Pixar movie, and has moments that feel similar to a lot of others, but the overall pacing and feel hit me differently. It feels smaller, but not lesser, and more adult, but not any less kid friendly.
Highly recommended.
Wonder Woman 1984
It's...fine, I guess? I think I liked the first one more overall. The villains here were more fleshed out and the third act was MUCH better. But it felt overly long and inconsistent at times.
There wasn't any really "wow" moments like the No Man's Land scene in the first movie. One of the final action sequences was really dark and far too fast to follow. And laughable at one point, as it felt less like a fight more like Cirque du Soleil.
Actually, the more I think about it, the less I liked Max Lord as a villain. His motivation for his "end goal" isn't honestly very clear. Cheetah, while interesting as a character, isn't really important to the overall story.
As a story, Diana is oddly barely in the movie as it focuses more on Max and Minerva. Sure, Diana gets plenty of big moments, but really, her story just feels like the same one as the first movie. She barely gets any forward movement as far as character development .
Still, I don't know. I liked it, but I wasn't wowed by it. I wasn't really wowed by the first one, either, though, aside from the previously mentioned No Man's Land scene. I might have enjoyed it more in theaters, but I guess I'll never know.
Also, was it just me or did the 80s gimmick run dry really quick? Like, they hit you with it hard and fast at the beginning, throwing every "THIS IS SET IN THE 80s!" visual gag you can think of, but it quickly peters out after that.
Also, regarding [redacted spoiler] during the end credits, I was spoiled of that surprise, but I guess I expected something more. It was cute, but I guess I expected something more, like...
EDIT: Further thought on Cheetah, I'll put behind spoilers:
It's...fine, I guess? I think I liked the first one more overall. The villains here were more fleshed out and the third act was MUCH better. But it felt overly long and inconsistent at times.
There wasn't any really "wow" moments like the No Man's Land scene in the first movie. One of the final action sequences was really dark and far too fast to follow. And laughable at one point, as it felt less like a fight more like Cirque du Soleil.
Actually, the more I think about it, the less I liked Max Lord as a villain. His motivation for his "end goal" isn't honestly very clear. Cheetah, while interesting as a character, isn't really important to the overall story.
As a story, Diana is oddly barely in the movie as it focuses more on Max and Minerva. Sure, Diana gets plenty of big moments, but really, her story just feels like the same one as the first movie. She barely gets any forward movement as far as character development .
Still, I don't know. I liked it, but I wasn't wowed by it. I wasn't really wowed by the first one, either, though, aside from the previously mentioned No Man's Land scene. I might have enjoyed it more in theaters, but I guess I'll never know.
Also, was it just me or did the 80s gimmick run dry really quick? Like, they hit you with it hard and fast at the beginning, throwing every "THIS IS SET IN THE 80s!" visual gag you can think of, but it quickly peters out after that.
Also, regarding [redacted spoiler] during the end credits, I was spoiled of that surprise, but I guess I expected something more. It was cute, but I guess I expected something more, like...
Linda Carter appearing as the original Wonder Woman from the 70s, signaling the multiverse hijinks we can probably expect if Flashpoint ever comes out.
EDIT: Further thought on Cheetah, I'll put behind spoilers:
Minerva was great at first as a focal point for the wish fulfillment angle. But as Max became more powerful, she became less and less important to the story until she honestly didn't matter by the end.
Last edited:
I'd like to watch this one with my daughter. Do you recommend it for an 8 year old?
Yeah, I'd say this would be safe for an 8 year old. I would be okay watching this with my youngest niece, though she's a little bit older (10...I think?).
While it ended with me feeling very "well, that certainly was a movie", I felt Max kind of worked for that exact reason - he doesn't have an end goal, he just wants more. Very Wall Street vibe to that.
That movie was some disturbing. I cannot emphasize that enough.
(referring to the Devil all the time)
(referring to the Devil all the time)
Me: *finishes watching SOUL*
*wipes away tears*
Stupid movie. Stupid, wonderful movie.
*wipes away tears*
Stupid movie. Stupid, wonderful movie.
GasBandit
Staff member
A Quiet Place
What a great concept, so utterly squandered. I haven't been this irritated with a bunch of disaster survivors since the Tom Cruise remake of War of the Worlds.
So many plot holes. So many boneheaded decisions. So much oblivious blundering. So much bad parenting and stupid kid-ness.
Who decides, a year into a world-ending catastrophe, that you know what we need right now? To bring a new life into this nightmare. A baby. A noisy, cooing, screaming, crying, laughing, babbling, unthinking, uncontrollable baby. In a world were even a medium-sized fart is loud enough to get you instantly slaughtered by Zerg.
What kind of parent, in a situation of mortal peril, just kind of trusts that their 4 year old can bring up the rear and doesn't need any supervision? Who the fuck lets him roam and play unsupervised in a store full of noisemakers?
Who, in a world where safety, quiet, and walking barefoot is CRITICAL to continued survival, does NOT stop and check what their bag gets snagged on when they have to forcably tug it loose from a nail sticking out of the stairs?!
WHO EXPECTS ME TO BELIEVE THAT NEWBORN BABIES DECIDE TO BE SILENT FOREVER FROM THE MOMENT THEY EXIT THE WOMB??
And most of all, what kind of writer expects me to have any kind of sympathy or patience for characters who constantly do such stupid, unthinking things?
And how, in a movie where nobody can talk, did they manage to commit the cardinal sin of telling-not-showing SO many things?
HOW did this colossal turd get such rave reviews and 83% on rotten tomatoes? This is shit. Utter. Shit. And it's such a shame because the premise had such potential. John Krasinski took a bolt of cashmere, a spool of gossamer thread, and wove himself a clogged toilet.
So disappointed.
What a great concept, so utterly squandered. I haven't been this irritated with a bunch of disaster survivors since the Tom Cruise remake of War of the Worlds.
So many plot holes. So many boneheaded decisions. So much oblivious blundering. So much bad parenting and stupid kid-ness.
Who decides, a year into a world-ending catastrophe, that you know what we need right now? To bring a new life into this nightmare. A baby. A noisy, cooing, screaming, crying, laughing, babbling, unthinking, uncontrollable baby. In a world were even a medium-sized fart is loud enough to get you instantly slaughtered by Zerg.
What kind of parent, in a situation of mortal peril, just kind of trusts that their 4 year old can bring up the rear and doesn't need any supervision? Who the fuck lets him roam and play unsupervised in a store full of noisemakers?
Who, in a world where safety, quiet, and walking barefoot is CRITICAL to continued survival, does NOT stop and check what their bag gets snagged on when they have to forcably tug it loose from a nail sticking out of the stairs?!
WHO EXPECTS ME TO BELIEVE THAT NEWBORN BABIES DECIDE TO BE SILENT FOREVER FROM THE MOMENT THEY EXIT THE WOMB??
And most of all, what kind of writer expects me to have any kind of sympathy or patience for characters who constantly do such stupid, unthinking things?
And how, in a movie where nobody can talk, did they manage to commit the cardinal sin of telling-not-showing SO many things?
HOW did this colossal turd get such rave reviews and 83% on rotten tomatoes? This is shit. Utter. Shit. And it's such a shame because the premise had such potential. John Krasinski took a bolt of cashmere, a spool of gossamer thread, and wove himself a clogged toilet.
So disappointed.
TENET
Two things right off the bat. One, I am a huge Christopher Nolan fan even if I think he suffers from David Cage syndrome where he thinks he's much smarter than he is, but is still very smart and a great director so he gets a pass. And two, I like slow build movies that aren't afraid to leave the audience behind with big ideas.
So with that out of the way, this movie is near unwatchable. Every bad habit that Nolan has is condensed into this, and while this might be his worst movie, it's also his Nolanest movie. Characters are constantly babbling at the screen to explain the wibbly wobbly timey whimey stuff, but what I really wanted answers for was simple character motivation. Why are any of these people doing these things, why should I care, and why doesn't the main character even have a goddamn name?
Visually the movie has some stunning sequences, and the time travel stuff is interesting but isn't anything that hasn't been done before. Bill and Ted managed to tackle effect happening before cause better than this bloated monstrosity does, and while I'm tempted to want to watch it again as the movie recontextualizes the beginning after the end (the theme of the movie is palindromes) the idea of giving this movie more time out of my life offends me on a personal level. This movie is like 2 hours and 40 minutes long, and it somehow manages to feel even longer.
Two things right off the bat. One, I am a huge Christopher Nolan fan even if I think he suffers from David Cage syndrome where he thinks he's much smarter than he is, but is still very smart and a great director so he gets a pass. And two, I like slow build movies that aren't afraid to leave the audience behind with big ideas.
So with that out of the way, this movie is near unwatchable. Every bad habit that Nolan has is condensed into this, and while this might be his worst movie, it's also his Nolanest movie. Characters are constantly babbling at the screen to explain the wibbly wobbly timey whimey stuff, but what I really wanted answers for was simple character motivation. Why are any of these people doing these things, why should I care, and why doesn't the main character even have a goddamn name?
Visually the movie has some stunning sequences, and the time travel stuff is interesting but isn't anything that hasn't been done before. Bill and Ted managed to tackle effect happening before cause better than this bloated monstrosity does, and while I'm tempted to want to watch it again as the movie recontextualizes the beginning after the end (the theme of the movie is palindromes) the idea of giving this movie more time out of my life offends me on a personal level. This movie is like 2 hours and 40 minutes long, and it somehow manages to feel even longer.