Omni's Random Video Noise [Archive]

Omnizoa

01-24-16, 08:22 AM

http://45.media.tumblr.com/77b43ecc381c4482ea64104666e9abd8/tumblr_n3t0puYdNh1rzd6w3o1_400.gif

Metropolis
Sci-Fi Drama / German / 1927

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
For the Sci-Fi Movie Countdown (http://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?t=46957).

In the spirit of total transparency, I don't watch many black and white movies. In fact, the number of black and white movies I've seen can probably be counted on one hand.

Even less so for silent films. In fact, I've never seen one.

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
"The mediator between the head and hands must be the heart!"

I've long since been turned off by movies that lack recorded dialog because they're fundamentally less engaging if I'm distracted by the fact that black cards with text need to be put up after long periods of mute talking between characters. That and a complete lack of color only really serve to remind me that I'm watching a movie and reminding me that I'm watching a movie during anything other than an attempt to lampshade the fourth wall only serves to break my immersion.

Suffice it to say, I don't hold very high expectations for old movies, and it's not like Metropolis would convince me it isn't stuck in the past if it were in sound and color either.

Metropolis has a number of qualities indicative of very old movies such as the unrealistic speed the movie plays at, the erratic overacting to compensate for lack of being able to hear the urgency in their voices, and the eye makeup which I'm pretty sure exists only to emphasize facial expressions in the face of extreme contrast.

I don't think I was ever totally immersed in Metropolis,
but to honest, I was totally engrossed.

German Expressionism is a term I hear thrown around a lot and it's always been a sort of vague term used to refer to a sort of exaggerated presentation where reality is abstracted to appear surreal. If I was asked prior to watching Metropolis what German Expressionism looks like, I think I'd have trouble describing it, but now having seen it, I feel comfortable now simply pointing at the opening shot of the movie.

http://i1344.photobucket.com/albums/p641/fed2013/metropolis_zpsvhzzmm0a.gif%7Eoriginal

We're offered brief glimpses of whirring machinery and a ticking clock prior to a title card that informs us that it's "Shift Change" and we're presented with the image of rows of men, all in black, all downcast, all marching in uniform beat into one set of gates, while another row of men, leave them a second set of gates identical in every way save the fact that their march is just slow enough to be noticeable.

Instantly, I have a strong impression of what this world is like: the working lower class has been beaten into submission and obedience, there's no joy in what they do, and however gloomy they may be going to work, they're even worse coming out. These people are clearly oppressed and I haven't even seen the oppressors yet.

THIS is the style of film-making I appreciate most. It's artificiality is just barely realistic, but it telegraphs so much to me in it's focused approach that I can't not understand exactly what the movie wants me to think and feel about what's going on.

This style persists throughout much of the movie as we learn that these men are workers who live in "The Depths", a city beneath "Metropolis", where they work on the "Heart Machine", which powers the city and enables the wealthy upperclass like the so-called master of Metropolis, Joh Fredersen and his son, Freder (amusingly named Freder Fredersen). Even the names for things beyond the characters are pleasingly generic. We needn't have to open up a Tolkien Dictionary to understand that Metropolis is the city, The Depths are it's underground, and the Heart Machine runs it all, they're named to be convenient and straightforward.

Not that it would be even remotely difficult to understand anything if they were given actual unique names other than descriptors, but generic names like these serve not only to identify, but to specify: Virtually nothing is told to us about what the Heart Machine is or what it does, but it's purpose is easily inferred.

Sure enough, we're given insight into the luxury of Freder and his life under the thumb of the hard-edged businessman Joh and we get a distinct impression of the classist inequalities in the system he manages through his demeanor and interactions with people.

A big thing I appreciate about the dialog cards is that they're ignored entirely during conversations where body language sufficiently portrays the characters' reactions and relationships with each other. There's no need to hear what's being said in most cases throughout the movie because only key lines of dialog are necessary to drive the plot or make sense of the action on screen. Honestly, I sort of wish the dialog cards were phased out further as the movie went on, but they're sparse as it is, so that's really only a nitpick.

http://www.craveonline.com/images/stories/2011/Film/Metropolis.jpg

Less of a nitpick is the overacting. As the movie goes on we learn that the workers are attending gatherings where they meet Maria, a woman who tells them a variation on the story of the Tower of Babel. She informs the masses that "the mediator between the head and hands must be the heart" which is a somewhat unsubtle metaphor about the morality that is necessary for a top-down government to work, which is made explicitly clear by the end of the film.

The overacting comes in where one of these gatherings is observed by Joh and his mad scientist buddy/rival/person, the unfortunately named Rotwang, and they conceive to sow discord in the underclass by replacing Maria with a robot body double.

When Rotwang pursues Maria with no clear intentions beyond shining a flashlight on her, we're witness to some of the most hilariously bad overracting I've seen. Maria goes mad with fear and the sped up footage only makes the chase look silly.

I'd be inclined to say this makes for the weakest performance in the movie, but the actor playing Maria goes on to steal the show when she also portrays the disturbingly lusty "Man-Machine" body double.

http://i144.photobucket.com/albums/r180/Samwanda/BLOG%20%20Metropolis/Metropolis114-1.gif

Frankly, the overacting is only really distracting insofar as you can suspend your disbelief that the Man Machine has an unrealistic ability for persuasion, which is honestly easier to accept when you can't hear what she's actually saying most of the time.

She inexplicably manages to both rile a mob and incite nearly all of the upperclass men to lust after her in blind infatuation. In this regard she must easily be one of the most destructive femme fatales ever put to film.

Whatever you think happens next is probably what happens, Metropolis isn't a terribly surprising movie, but what it manages to do with a predictable plot is tell a largely compelling, important, and coherent story about classism where the low rise up and the high fall down.

"Coherent" is perhaps the most arguable point there given Metropolis's tendency to venture directly into hallucinatory symbolism with little real regard as to why. Near the beginning of the movie, Freder witnesses an explosion in The Depths and the intriguingly designed machine that the workers are running becomes that of a giant gaping devil's maw which workers are being thrown into.

The symbolism is pretty obvious here, but similar incidents later on are just confusing and just raise the question of whether or not Freder is even mentally sound.

The Man Machine's dance sequence appears to come out of nowhere and lasts much longer than it really has any need to be, which is something I would say about much of the first two-thirds of the movie as well.

Many scenes are drawn out longer than necessary to get the given point across and it only hammers home the fact that Metropolis runs for a wicked 2 hours even in it's incomplete form.

I felt like the halfway point in this movie should have been about the time it was wrapping up, but even so the 2 hour runtime managed to also holster my previous assumptions about the movie due to it's age and limitations.

http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--BETfiQrc--/c_fit%2Cfl_progressive%2Cq_80%2Cw_636/18we7yjaljj37jpg.jpg

I've been watching the critically lauded Kara no Kyoukai series and despite full voice acting, sound effects, color, exceptional animation, and even a run time averaging half the length of Metropolis, they bored me to tears.

I was never bored with Metropolis, and to think I didn't even see the whole movie since many scenes were missing in the version I watched. The whole movie runs approximately 30 minutes longer and I can't really say I wasn't missing them.

It's a shame that Fritz Lang would go on to say he was disgusted with the movie, I'll admit it was perhaps overly simplistic in it's message, but it's still an important message, if not the best movie I've seen to tackle the topic. Supposedly the Nazis were a big fan of Metropolis and I can see why given their stylistic preferences, but hopefully that's the real reason Fritz disparaged it as much as he did, no one wants to admit they like the same thing as a Nazi.

It's kinda funny when you say it out loud though.

All told, I really liked Metropolis, and based on my impressions of the unfinished version, I'm certain I'll like the Restored Version when I see it.

I'm looking forward to it.

REWATCH UPDATE:
Heron, Peacocks, Kissing.

I've now seen an improved version of Metropolis with a couple different scenes restored. It helpfully bridges the gap between events and elaborates on all but one of the biggest scenes I missed before (I still haven't seen the fight between Joh and Rotwang).

A couple flaws have caught my attention this time around including a couple continuity errors. The message for Assistant Guy and Worker Guy is practically identical and contains only a glimpses' necessity of information, but it's shown repeatedly on screen to little benefit.

The relationship between Hel and Rotwang's robot is also tenuous at best given it's never explained. Was the Man-Machine inspired by her? Is that the implication? They put a fair amount of narrative weight on this point given this among other things including the cause for Rotwang's estranged relationship with Joh is unknown to us.

Perhaps most egregious is just how heavyhanded it winds up feeling when it contrives to have every worker in Metropolis forget about their children. Didn't they know that destroying the Heart Machine would drown the city? Wasn't abandoning the city part of the plan? You're gonna abandon it without your children? Fricken' morons.

I really can't overlook this point since I really can't adequately explain it away.

Besides that though, I still enjoyed the movie. Even longer this time, it still managed to keep my interest, but I'm still reluctant to sign off on it without having seen other Fritz Lang/German Expressionist movies like M or The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari.

We'll have to see.

Final Verdict: rating_4 [Pretty Good]

Iroquois

01-24-16, 08:56 AM

Not a bad review, but this does not look like a movie that "takes itself too seriously".

Omnizoa

01-24-16, 08:25 PM

Not a bad review, but this does not look like a movie that "takes itself too seriously".
Oh, but it does. It gets melodramatic as hell. It sells itself on the action, but about a third of the movie are shots of the characters staring longingly out into space and monologuing about their childhoods when they were totally different child actors in equally awkward scenes.

Iroquois

01-24-16, 11:31 PM

Omnizoa

01-24-16, 11:55 PM

Obviously, I can't comment too extensively on a movie I haven't seen, but just because an action movie is willing to get melodramatic doesn't automatically mean that it's taking itself too seriously. Films like Kung Fu Hustle and Scott Pilgrim vs. the World are like live-action cartoons but they still manage to interject some serious dramatic moments into their action-based stories. Maybe in the case of Dragon Tiger Gate they weren't effective, but again, I can't comment. Will have to see this for myself to really provide a specific opinion.
Haven't seen Kung Fu Hustle, but Dragon Tiger Gate's not a comedy at all. It has a couple intentionally humorous moments mostly at the expense of a joke character and with henchmen reaction shots, but it feels a lot more Terminator 2 in it's attempts at emotional drama.

https://heavyeditorial.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/thumbsup.gif

In one scene where a character gets killed with a flurry slash attacks they cut to the guy's daughter who witnesses it. We're obviously supposed to care about him since he gets all this set up so the music is all sorrowful and she's crying and she runs up to each guy who fought him and weakly flails at them in a similar manner. It's just unintentionally funny since I can totally imagine stock slashing sound effects while she does it.

Iroquois

01-24-16, 11:59 PM

Hmm, I guess I will have to watch it for myself then.

skizzerflake

01-31-16, 03:58 PM

I read your review of Metropolis and it's interesting to see the remarks of a silent-virgin. I have an off-again-on-again fascination with silents. You have to just completely suspend your disbelief for a couple hours but once you have done that, some of then are really pretty good. They were made by film makers who were as talented as anybody around today and who were still inventing a medium that drew on the traditions of staged melodrama. I love Metropolis, see hints of if in many subsequent sci-fi films and real world architecture as well as the perverted modernism of the Nazis. As an amateur/semi-pro photographer, I look at Metropolis and am amazed at the quality of composition and image in almost every frame. It's about as good as black and white will ever be. You have to live with the mime-like acting. That and the eye makeup were the main ways those actors expressed emotion. It's why few silent actors made the transition to sound...the could not under-act, especially relative to early talkies, which, with their primitive recording apparatus, required actors to stand still within a few feet of the one and only microphone.

I believe that there are several "completed" versions of the movie. It's out of copyright so many people have tried to piece it together with bits and pieces of surviving film. It was nearly lost for decades.

If you ever get the chance to see this, there are several musical groups that perform live music with silents. I have seen Nosferatu and Phantom of the Opera with live music and it really brings them to life. One group even had a colorized version of Phantom, which was produced like the original which had manually tinted color, done frame by frame with little tiny paintbrushes. The contemporary version was done digitally (also frame by frame), but elite copies of the movie were presented with the hand tinting back in the day.

Omnizoa

01-31-16, 04:56 PM

As an amateur/semi-pro photographer, I look at Metropolis and am amazed at the quality of composition and image in almost every frame. It's about as good as black and white will ever be.
I've seen bits and pieces of a few different versions of Metropolis by now and I was also surprised to see that some of them are very high quality. I'm still not sure if they were touched up after the fact or what.

You have to live with the mime-like acting. That and the eye makeup were the main ways those actors expressed emotion.
I kinda dug the eye makeup actually, it's just the general misunderstanding of subtle acting that seems to evade most of the cast. Joh Fredersen is probably the most unemotional character in the movie and it's still pretty easy to read him.

http://media.tumblr.com/36b0a1f8c2b350757a24d5be43a75959/tumblr_inline_mm4is9gBV71qz4rgp.gif

It's why few silent actors made the transition to sound...the could not under-act, especially relative to early talkies, which, with their primitive recording apparatus, required actors to stand still within a few feet of the one and only microphone.
"Why do we have to do this crap? This'll never catch on!"

If you ever get the chance to see this, there are several musical groups that perform live music with silents. I have seen Nosferatu and Phantom of the Opera with live music and it really brings them to life.
Well, I didn't mention it but Metropolis had music. Since it was the butchered version though I'm pretty sure some of the tracks aren't properly synced to the action.

One group even had a colorized version of Phantom, which was produced like the original which had manually tinted color, done frame by frame with little tiny paintbrushes. The contemporary version was done digitally (also frame by frame), but elite copies of the movie were presented with the hand tinting back in the day.
That's interesting. I found this image of a colorized shot of Metropolis:

http://rbowser.tripod.com/metropolis/film11.jpg

Unfortunately, I feel that in this case, where the environments are intended to be fantastical it is perhaps sometimes best to leave them up to our imaginations, especially when Metropolis is mainly set in industrial locations which would likely be grey to begin with.

This shot appears a lot brighter and more cheerful than the scene really calls for, probably because it wasn't being shot in color.

Guaporense

01-31-16, 08:50 PM

My first silent movie was Modern Times (1936). I have to get over Metropolis some day as well, I have only watched M from Lang.

Omnizoa

02-01-16, 02:53 AM

I have only watched M from Lang.
I've had that one recommended to me, what's that one like?

Guaporense

02-01-16, 03:46 PM

Thriller, very exciting and pretty well made and powerful as well. A genuine classic.

Mäx

02-01-16, 04:17 PM

But not a silent movie, if you should expect that, Omnizoa.

Omnizoa

02-01-16, 05:42 PM

But not a silent movie, if you should expect that, Omnizoa.
It's not a "talkie".

Omnizoa

02-08-16, 01:28 PM

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=25748&stc=1&d=1464884756

Dragon Tiger Gate
Martial Arts / Chinese / 2006

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
When I hear people talk about B-Movies, they too often drift into "so bad it's good" territory which is just not a territory I'm familiar with or interested in. I get why you'd laugh at something really bad, but that's not enough to convince me your movie is worth my [reassessment] time.

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
No, when I think of B-Movies, I think of Dragon Tiger Gate, a movie that tries SO HARD to be cooler than it is that it ALMOST gets there.

Take the following screenshot for example:

http://bitfister.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/dragon_tiger_gate_05-588x249.jpg

Pictured Above: A totally awesome fight scene interrupted by poorly timed slow-mo shot.

That's not just a random screencap, that's a pose that the movie slows down and zooms in to capture.

Dragon Tiger Gate is a Hong Kong action movie through and through and it's only unique claim to fame, beyond featuring a record-breaking-sized punching bag, is an approach to action that's so extreme it starts to become a cartoon.

We're talkin' anime physics here, as in guys are going to be punched CLEAN across the room and thrown through CONCRETE, and still get up.

If you're not sold yet, let me tell you about the story:

https://38.media.tumblr.com/26c81ae1127044f0a8bb989ee7c720a9/tumblr_mrjqhzEtIm1ryw46wo1_500.gif

Two brothers named Tiger and Dragon (yes those are their real names) grow up apart from one another after attending the Dragon Tiger Gate dojo.

Tiger's a good guy and all about the kicks.
Dragon's a bad guy and all about the punches.
There's also a guy named Turbo. He nunchucks.

Tiger gets wrapped up in Dragon's business and a deal involving Dragon's gang (because it's a Hong Kong action movie, of course there are gangs) goes bad and the gang leader who he's grown attached becomes threatened. The two encounter Turbo who begins attending Dragon Tiger Gate.

Faceless evil bad guy, Shibumi, who was on the other end of the deal decides to destroy Dragon's gang and Dragon Tiger Gate which opposes him so it's up to Dragon, Tiger, and... Turbo to save the day.

Simple enough story and there are even moments of genuine human interaction, but the melodrama kicks it into high gear at about the halfway point and the movie just tries WAY TOO HARD to take itself seriously.

There's even this one point near the end where it gets all existential and philosophical on us just before the characters literally gain anime super powers named things like "Electric Dragon Drill". It's fricken' ridiculous.

http://49.media.tumblr.com/3f7a34b4c24028332172a9033a4dba97/tumblr_mrkiy8MV6J1ryw46wo1_500.gif

Honestly, other than the names, the movie's just goofy to look at. All three of the main characters fight in flowing open jackets and not a one of them can be blamed for cutting more than half their bangs off.

Combat looks and sounds appropriately violent and it just gets fricken' ridiculous with characters being thrown through tables, through walls, overhead, into each other, with weapons spanning swords, sai, poles, halberds, nunchucks, THREE-PART-STAVES, and even a billboard.

Cinematography is fantastic all throughout save the occasionally awkward momentary pause and the music is REALLY good! I'm serious, this stuff gets you pumped and one of the tunes has been an earworm to me for YEARS.

Honestly, it'd be hard not to call this an objectively fantastic movie if not for how HILARIOUSLY bad it can be.

https://33.media.tumblr.com/9c0cb0e8b86b31b3171d806395376837/tumblr_mrkiy8MV6J1ryw46wo3_500.gif

One scene has a lady in Dragon's gang approach him all come-hither in a swimming pool and asks him for a tattoo. He draws his lightning bolt insignia on her back and it's all set to this soft piano melody as she tells him that she was meant to kill him and that Shibumi's gang has gone to kill the gang leader. Suddenly BOOM, we smash cut to her SLAMMING into the water and we cut to a prolonged dramatic slow-mo closeup of him having punched her. WOW.

Also, THAT DIALOG...
What's wrong with you? I'm sorry, but I'm not into heartfelt reunions. I'm not. So go.You could come back to the Gate if you want. Just don't work for a bad guy.So... you're a good guy and I'm a bad guy? Well GO AND PLAY YOUR GOOD GUY GAMES!

It could be just the slightly-off-enough-to-be-noticable English dub, but they lay on the cheese SO THICK in this movie you're bound to get a cheese-related analogy.

http://45.media.tumblr.com/dede231e6cd295e90dc697c63a59cf0b/tumblr_mrkiy8MV6J1ryw46wo4_500.gif

It's just too awesome not to recommend though even with the occasionally obvious and terrible wire-fu stunts.

If you haven't already I highly suggest you watch Dragon Tiger Gate, preferably with a room full of action junkies ready to make fun of it.

Final Verdict: rating_5 [Friggen' Awesome]

REWATCH UPDATE 1/1/2023:
I got a hold of a "special edition" copy of the movie with a special feature bonus disc, but unfortunately this version only features English subs. I decided to rewatch it in the Chinese dub and make an actual effort to focus on the story this time around.

My takeaway? Still great. Best comic book movie ever. The wonky English dub is just the cherry on top, like a Jackie Chan movie where he speaks in perfect English.

Jackie Chan is still my favorite movie martial artist, but this still my favorite martial arts movie. It's just realistic enough to make the henchmen being punted through walls, tables, and across ballparks to look sick as ****.

Interestingly, the action choreography here was done by Donnie Yen himself, which I never even knew. He did a fantastic job, and I still think it needs to be emphasized that the camerawork was also pretty stellar. They fit some pretty creative shots all throughout the movie and they clearly modified their sets with the intention of getting those shots.

ANYWAY about the story: It's pretty bog-standard. Tiger and Dragon grew up as brothers(?) at the Dragon Tiger Gate dojo, which is never shown onscreen in flashbacks. Dragon's mom(?) dies in a house fire and he's sincerely adopted by local crimelord, Kun, who he then feels he owes his life to, and consequently breaks his childhood promise with Tiger to "always be a good guy".

Kun is nearing retirement, he's sympathetic towards Dragon, Dragon is torn between returning to Dragon Tiger Gate with Tiger, who he's been forced to fight on a couple occasions already, and eventually he cuts the cord agrees to come back. Happy ending all around!

WELP, this just so happens that some skeevy mini-boss named Scaly decides to backstab Kun and in revenge Dragon wipes out his entire mini-boss gang.

Shibumi, the random kung fu master of the Laoushu Gang (I keep seeing different spellings) which Kun traffics with seeks "a worthy opponent" kills the dojo master of Dragon Tiger Gate.

Supposedly much of this is also predicated on a "Laoushu Plaque" mcguffin which is treated as though it represents a gang's right to some cut of some deals?? I have no idea. There's even a point where Kun advises to give the plaque to Laoushu and this enrages Shibumi for some reason and then it's never spoken of again.

Maybe Shibumi was reacting to Kun losing it in the first place and it's supposed to seem tragic because he was on his way to hand it over anyway? I don't know, either way it's very poorly communicated.

Clearly the particulars of the gang dynamic are much less important to this movie that the relationships of it's characters, which as I've mentioned, is extremely melodramatic. The fight scenes are flying at a million miles per hour, but then the childhood flashback drama feels like such a tonal whiplash. It doesn't help that the child actors aren't great either.

There's also the subplot of Turbo, who's trying to join Dragon Tiger Gate. He's just kinda there to be humiliated and do nunchuck stuff.

However you slice it though, this movie's still rock sold. Great overpowered fight scenes, multiple memorable backing tracks, SUPER cheese throughout... some random super obvious wire-fu, which I normally hate, comes off as charmingly ridiculous considering the absurd scale and quality of the most of the fight scenes.

It's not actor-moving-their-legs-in-a-running-motion-as-a-crane-lifts-them-parallel-to-a-wall for the entire fight like Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon does.

The melodrama is slow and boring, but it's not a terrible story unlike many other martial arts movies, and even action movies in general. It could also be that those scenes just feel disproportionately lethargic compared to the constant batshit intensity of the fights...

Either way, big thumbs up from me, still highly recommend, and still one of the best impulse purchases I've ever made.

Final Verdict: rating_4 [Great]

Omnizoa

02-08-16, 02:11 PM

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24133&stc=1&d=1454955171

American Psycho
Psychological Thriller / English / 2000

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
You could say I've had my eye on it for a while, but the bizarre existence of two people named Cole with American Psycho avatars and American Psycho listed as their favorite movie ever and my personal fascination with drop-dead insane characters push me over the edge to watch it.

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
"This MOVIE meant nothing!"

The rating's tough for me since with a couple small tweaks to this movie, I think I probably would have been able to say I enjoyed it.

My main issue is that the movie takes way too much time away from dropping hints as to realism of what we're seeing (which is the crux of the movie). If more scenes included degrees of questionability then I would have been able to appreciate it for more than what they were. And mostly what they were was a lot of scenes where Bale babbles inanely about music which just bores me, or he's chatting with his friends which just reminds me I don't like any of the characters, or a neapolitan mix of sex and violence.

Hehe, get it? Cause it's a fancy word, but I'm actually talking about something horrible?

It's weird to me that people call this a "satire" of the upper-class since it's not really funny or even a parody if it's true. And enough Donald Trump hate nowadays certainly reinforces that.

I did get one big laugh out of the movie though, what scene was it...?

You think I'm dumb don't you? You think I'm dumb, you think all models are dumb.No! I really don't.That's okay, I don't mind. There's something sweet about you.*DEAD*I also got a huge kick out of Paul's death scene. Bale was just a nut.

http://www1.pictures.zimbio.com/mp/m3oBwCkNJjAx.gif

Lost points for stupid fake blood effects though. I don't care what part of the body you take an axe to, you're not gonna get supersoaked in the face with blood.

Take it from me. I know.

I did like some parts of the movie, particularly when Bale's talkin' to people and just goes, "I like to dissect girls, did you know I'm utterly insane?" and people just laugh him off, but I feel like there was too much filler and stalling between plot relevant scenes that most of the movie just comes across as an odd not-entirely-comedic attempt at dipping into that scary wish-fulfillment side of slasher movies.

I think if I read the book, I'd like the overall story a lot better, but it would be a shame to miss out on Bale's performance, he looks like he had a lot of fun.

*edits

Final Verdict: rating_3 [Meh...]

Omnizoa

02-08-16, 02:43 PM

http://twilighthollowproject.b1.jcink.com/uploads/twilighthollowproject/sexual_.gif

The Secretary

Erotic Romance / English / 2002

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
After seeing Patrick Bateman almost murder his secretary it reminded me, "Hey! The Secretary! I was meaning to watch that!" Mainly because I've heard it suggested over 50 Shades of Grey and hey, it'd be interesting if an SM-centric relationship drama managed to sell me, huh?

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
I really liked the first hour of this movie. It set up an interesting relationship between our main girl and Mr. lawyer dude. I was pleased to see that he wasn't going to be a total dick, but instead seemed legitimately concerned about her well-being, especially with regards to her cutting and family problems.

That was until the movie stepped out onto the railroad tracks and got hit by the stupid train.

The spanking scene comes on way too suddenly, and out of friggen' nowhere we're right where the beginning of the movie flash-forwarded to. They're just suddenly in an SM relationship now. Okay.

I would have preferred to have them more gradually slide into it with Mr. lawyer guy's punishments snowballing into the SM stuff rather that just *SPANK* "OH MY GOD I LOVE YOU NOW."

The rest of the movie gets really awkward, especially when Mr. lawyer guy pulls the, "I MADE A MISTAKE, YOU'RE FIRED" card which is always a rational and well-intentioned end to a workplace relationship, right?

All of it results a scene where our main girl runs away from her wedding and agrees to a test of her obedience by starving herself in his office chair where she pisses herself.

-1 point for the wedding. I hate weddings.

x2 MULTIPLIER! for bailing on a wedding when you had already agreed to it. Dick move.

x4 MULTIPLIER!! for urinating on camera. I didn't want to see that.

x8 MULTIPLIER!!! for urinating on an innocent woman's wedding dress. What'd she do to you?

x16 MULTIPLIER!!!! for another wedding.

Blegh. I've seen better endings to pornos.

By the way, I know the main lead's name is "Edward Grey", but we learn virtually nothing about him while we learn a lot about "main girl". And her name doesn't stick, so why should his?

Final Verdict: rating_2 [Just... Bad]

Omnizoa

02-08-16, 06:44 PM

http://twilighthollowproject.b1.jcink.com/uploads/twilighthollowproject/malkovich.gif

Being John Malkovich

Fantasy Comedy / English / 1999

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
Saw it in Miss Vicky's favorites and that reminded me that I'd been meaning to watch it since I like surrealism and surrealism seems to be the name of the game here.

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-T3Gpqo_jbFY/UgvFGSEUgqI/AAAAAAAAOMw/qYzP4hqvQTs/s1600/hank.gif

Jackson Pollock comes to mind. And Family Guy. And South Park (http://southparkstudios.mtvnimages.com/images/shows/south-park/clip-thumbnails/season-10/1004/south-park-s10e04c07-idea-balls-16x9.jpg).

Basically this movie feels to me like a mess of ideas all written onto the sides of bananas and then thrown at a dartboard that's attached to a beluga whale skating on rollerblades down the New Jersey Turnpike.

Everyone wants to have sex with everyone.

There's a monkey.

And John Malkovich stars in The Truman Show on pay-per-view.

So many disparate elements fail to coalesce into any single coherent vision, purpose, or point that I'm so lost as to the meaning of anything that I feel like the whole movie just wasted my time.

Okay, I take that back, American Psycho wasted my time, it even admitted it. But at least American Psycho was genuinely enjoyable at times, Being John Malkovich was just... vaguely amusing.

I was hoping for the more-that-slightly-off elements like the 7 1/2 floor, the speech impediment, and the roundabout conversations to amount to something. But no. I think they really just dragged a poor monkey into this movie so we could rationalize making one character act implausibly hysterical and have a monkey cage on hand to lock his girlfriend in.

I don't evudeuidnueihdsnteumidmuriimduiqvimduimdvmm
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/ab/06/ae/ab06ae98e81fe806bc5d5869a80e7e45.jpg

Watch Coraline instead.

Final Verdict: rating_2 [Just... Bad]

AboveTheClouds

02-08-16, 07:35 PM

Don't get all sensitive about this Omni, this isn't me picking a fight, just me trying to shed a little more light on an awesome film

American Psycho starts dropping hints about Patrick's twisted reality before the five minute mark, when he's at the bar speaking to the waitress, and she informs him his drink tickets are no longer good and it'll be $25. And when she turns around to get his drink he very audibly says " You're a ******* ugly bitch and I wanna stab you to death and play around with your blood" Now I don't know clubs very well, but that music wasn't very loud and for how loud he said it, she would have heard it. There is also potential evidence around 15 minutes when he goes to the dry cleaner and the Asian lady is freaking out on him and he gets right in her face and says "Lady if you don't shut your ******* mouth, I am going to kill you" Now I don't believe she understands English, because until the point he says this she doesn't understand a thing he's saying so I don't think that she'd understand that statement explicitly and become shocked by it in reality, her reacting was part of the delusion. Then the film appears to cut to them back in their original positions both still screaming at proverbial walls. I firmly believe any instance in the film where Patrick says something horrible and people laugh him off is pure delusion though, he just imagines himself saying this and gives us a glimpse of his reality, which was a little more difficult in film than in print.

And you can kind of gather from his vanity during the shower scene and how ridiculously meticulous he is about his grooming, and from his peak physical fitness that he is a total narcissist, which usually goes hand in hand with being delusional. Also making note that every video he seems to watch is hardcore porn or horror, which also kind of point in the direction of "nope". This point is again illustrated when he is having sex with the prostitutes, his need to tape the proceedings and how he barely pays attention to the girls, but watches himself in the mirror. Even when the scene with the exchange of the business cards is happening you can see he is clearly mortified that he doesn't have in his opinion the classiest card. "eggshell with romalian type, what do you think?" Patrick can barely even reply to him, his anxiety soars at this point.

When he meets Paul Allen and he mistakes Patrick for Marcus Halberstram, you can tell somewhat by the restaurant Patrick takes him too that his intentions are sinister, as there is barely any one there, so no one to really place them there. And after Patrick kills Paul Allen and drags the bag with the body, leaving a trail of blood through his lobby, right past a concierge before loading it into the trunk of the cab, meanwhile Luis Caruthers and his girlfriend are coming down the street and see Patrick, then Luis goes over to look at the bag before mentioning how he likes it and asks who makes it. Also after the scene you mentioned with the "stupid model" the next day Patrick sits at his desk playing with a lock of her hair... Nope.

Also it's not so much a satire of Upper Class life as a whole as it is a satire of a particular people and place, which is the players of 80's wall street and their yuppie attitude. And the film really does a good job of satirizing the need to be cool as it equates being able to get dinner reservations at Dorsia to essential godliness. Or who listens to most popular and hip music (The reason for Patricks love of music isn't emotional but purely superficial, as all that matters is whats new and hot, whatever suits his image. Also comparisons of who has the nicest valentino suit or who's got the best gadgets(Patrick's Walkman and headphones were at the time top shelf). Or who can spend more on a haircut which looks exactly the same. It pokes fun at the consumerism the narcissism and the rat race that these people lived and dealt with daily.

Also if you didn't know Omni, there is actually a book that the film was based on. I would recommend the book, it's much better, and it's partly the reason why I see the movie the way I do, the book is more informative and kind of lets you see stuff in the film you didn't catch before. And aside from the fact that I've seen this movie probably 20 times. And I do agree with the arterial spray though, it wouldn't soak him the way it does. I understand where you're coming from I speak from experience as well.

Miss Vicky

02-08-16, 08:03 PM

Good to see that you gave BJM a try, but obviously I disagree with your review. A lot.

Omnizoa

02-08-16, 11:48 PM

Don't get all sensitive about this Omni, this isn't me picking a fight, just me trying to shed a little more light on an awesome film

American Psycho starts dropping hints about Patrick's twisted reality before the five minute mark, when he's at the bar speaking to the waitress,
Oh, well yeah, I figured that out. It's convenient that in most cases that he has revealing dialog that he's in loud environments where people might reasonably misunderstand him or the other person is drunk. Like I said, I like those scenes. They're just too few in my opinion and the stuff in-between them bores me to death.

And you can kind of gather from his vanity during the shower scene and how ridiculously meticulous he is about his grooming, and from his peak physical fitness that he is a total narcissist, which usually goes hand in hand with being delusional.
That's a scene in my favorite movie too. However it was a lot more subtle, took much less of my time, and repeatedly seeing this guy's morning routine served the alternate purpose of showing change over time.

Also making note that every video he seems to watch is hardcore porn or horror, which also kind of point in the direction of "nope". This point is again illustrated when he is having sex with the prostitutes, his need to tape the proceedings and how he barely pays attention to the girls, but watches himself in the mirror.
I thought that was kinda funny, actually.

Even when the scene with the exchange of the business cards is happening you can see he is clearly mortified that he doesn't have in his opinion the classiest card. "eggshell with romalian type, what do you think?" Patrick can barely even reply to him, his anxiety soars at this point.
Well, actually I liked those scenes. The whole "satire" angle I keep reading about makes the most sense when the guy is literally prepared to kill over a tiny slip of paper. I wished there were more extremes like that.

And after Patrick kills Paul Allen and drags the bag with the body, leaving a trail of blood through his lobby, right past a concierge before loading it into the trunk of the cab,
Yeah, well it's at this point that I think I should have worded my post a little differently. There are certainly clues to his delusions in the movie, they're just too infrequent for me. I might well have liked the movie better if all the filler wasn't bordering on a two-hour runtime.

Also it's not so much a satire of Upper Class life as a whole as it is a satire of a particular people and place, which is the players of 80's wall street and their yuppie attitude. And the film really does a good job of satirizing the need to be cool as it equates being able to get dinner reservations at Dorsia to essential godliness.
I get that, I just wasn't impressed by it. It's nothing I haven't seen in movies NOT satirizing the upper class.

Or who can spend more on a haircut which looks exactly the same. It pokes fun at the consumerism the narcissism and the rat race that these people lived and dealt with daily.
I thought Rat Race did that better.

https://49.media.tumblr.com/fb1b529f16a419b94731066dc7a94c13/tumblr_ms2q0ayMAs1s4itd1o1_500.gif

Also if you didn't know Omni, there is actually a book that the film was based on.
I mentioned the book, actually.

I do agree with the arterial spray though, it wouldn't soak him the way it does. I understand where you're coming from I speak from experience as well.
Good to know I'm not the only one with effects artists going around and defaming my work.

Good to see that you gave BJM a try, but obviously I disagree with your review. A lot.
Well, tell me why you like it. I just didn't get it. What am I missin'?

Did it make you laugh? 'Cause that would explain it. It wasn't entirely my brand of humor.

Omnizoa

02-09-16, 11:22 AM

http://twilighthollowproject.b1.jcink.com/uploads/twilighthollowproject/taxi.gif

Taxi Driver

Drama / English / 1976

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
The Gunslinger45 posted the "Are you talkin' to me?" scene to foster's Movie Quotes (http://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?t=44456&page=2) thread and it reminded me that I still haven't seen Taxi Driver. People also don't have enough reason to hate me either.

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
It's strange that a movie like Taxi Driver, with a reputation for "greatest movie of all time" nearing that of Citizen Kane (another movie I haven't seen yet), feels so... weak.

Taxi Driver has honestly got to be one of the weakest vigilante movies I've ever seen. Isn't the point of a vigilante movie supposed to be for me to root for an underdog character who takes the law into his own hands? How can I do that if I don't like the character?

Robert De Niro as a nearly unrecognizably young Travis Bickle comes across as... a self-righteous wannabe in a bad way.

Before we're even given any reason to think vigilantism might even be necessary, Travis monologues about "all the scum on the streets" as if he was Rorschach or something.

http://www.wallpaperup.com/uploads/wallpapers/2014/01/07/218687/big_thumb_7e29fac082588a69954b0b1288c48469.jpg
I don't recall Rorschach wanting to "clean up the queens" though. >.>

Thing is, Rorschach is already a vigilante. Travis isn't yet. So we have to see what provokes him to become one.

Apparently one scene in which a hooker stumbles into his cab and gets dragged out by a pimp is enough for him to buy multiple guns, design a fancy hidden-gun-esque device for his arms, and then idle until the end of the movie to confuse the **** out of me with his motivations.

He talks up one woman which is just agonizing to watch.

Why would any sane woman agree to a date with someone who creepily stalks and approaches you for you looks alone? RED FLAG.

Then once they're on a date, Travis admits that he has an irrational hatred for her friendly co-worker, likely out of jealousy. RED FLAG.

Then he convinces her to see a porno. OOOOHHH!!! Step BACK! THAT'S CROSSING THE LINE! And here I thought you actually liked me for my personality and political beliefs!

The woman actually works for a senator's political campaign and despite having what seems to be a pleasant exchange in his cab, Travis's first target seems to be the senator himself. Why? What possible excuse could he have to kill the senator? What, does he believe it might somehow allow him to see the woman if there's no candidate for her to work for? Where's the dialog for that? What, why, how, when???????

He talks to probably one of the nicest and most genial pimps I've ever seen and suddenly he comes away with "that guy is the sickest worst scum of the earth", WHYYYY??? Haven't you seen worse by now?

I read that Travis is supposed to be "mentally unstable" which seems to be only reinforced by the medicine he's taking. Without that he might as well just be some random douchebag. And I hate saying douchebag, but really what does it add to the story to make him "mentally unstable"?

Okay, so this is the story about a mentally ill taxi driver who's unrealistic standards provokes him to almost shoot a politician and kill a few thugs to help one girl and impress another who left him? Save his go-go-gadget guns, I'm not impressed.

I liked the noir elements of the movie, the music and attention to detail really helped set the mood, but I was so distant from the characters that everything felt unnecessarily drawn out. Travis's "death scene" is followed by a nearly 3 MINUTE collection of pan shots away from his body which just goes to serve as probably the most egregious example of padding.

He doesn't even die either, which is sorta good. At least the vigilante lives to vigilant again... I guess?

I can think of a bunch of movies that did a better job of giving me reason to empathize with the vigilante:

The Brave One
Falling Down
Taken
Kick-Ass
The Crow
Batman Begins
V For Vendetta

Hell, friggen' DARK MAN, as stupidly cheesy and hilariously over-the-top as it is, did a better job making me feel bad about the hero and want him to beat the bad guys.

http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m5a47x0aKw1qedb29o1_500.gif

Final Verdict: rating_2 [Just... Bad]

Miss Vicky

02-09-16, 11:41 AM

Well, tell me why you like it. I just didn't get it. What am I missin'?

Did it make you laugh? 'Cause that would explain it. It wasn't entirely my brand of humor.

I find it bizarre, highly original, and yes, pretty damn funny. I find the story really engaging and - even though they're not exactly likable - Jonze manages to make me care about the people in it. It also has some really memorable imagery, particularly with the marionettes and the scene where Malkovich enters the portal.

http://www.angelfire.com/music6/walteregan/MoFoMovieGifs/malkotits.gif

I will admit though that I did not like it the first time I watched it.

Omnizoa

02-09-16, 11:59 AM

I find it bizarre, highly original,
Gotta give it that.

I find the story really engaging and - even though they're not exactly likable - Jonze manages to make me care about the people in it.
Likability is pretty important for me to care. Even if they're total bad guys.

http://img.pandawhale.com/76748-Gladiator-thumbs-down-gif-b5MO.gif

It also has some really memorable imagery, particularly with the marionettes and the scene where Malkovich enters the portal.

http://www.angelfire.com/music6/walteregan/MoFoMovieGifs/malkotits.gif
I'd actually heard "Malkovich, Malkovich, Malkovich" referenced before, but I didn't know what it was referring to. Now I know, and it makes sense given the context of the joke was a total mind**** nightmare sequence.

I will admit though that I did not like it the first time I watched it.
Well now you know you were completely wrong not to like it.

I can't think of... any movies that completely turned around my opinion of them. I can think of a couple movies that grew on me after a while, but I already kinda liked 'em.

Swan

02-09-16, 12:00 PM

My friend has never seen Taxi Driver, and until you've seen Taxi Driver you're living a life of sin, so I'm hoping to get him to watch it one of these days.

MovieMeditation

02-09-16, 12:55 PM

You'll come to understand why Taxi Driver is a masterpiece.

Go watch more movies, experience more corners of cinema, come back and be like "wow, what was I doing not loving that film!?"

Shazam.

False Writer

02-09-16, 01:11 PM

Your rating of Taxi Driver isn't gonna go over well with many of the members here. It's pretty much the most loved movie on MoFo. :p

Guaporense

02-09-16, 01:35 PM

The concept of subjectivity of taste escapes most people. I also didn't care about many well regarded novels, films, animation and manga. Thing is besides being good/well made it has to contain stuff that I might find interesting. Casablanca, for instance, put me to sleep with its 1940s American melodrama aesthetic style.

Guaporense

02-09-16, 01:36 PM

Your rating of Taxi Driver isn't gonna go over well with many of the members here. It's pretty much the most loved movie on MoFo. :p

It lost to the Godfather in the 70s poll though. ;)

Guaporense

02-09-16, 01:38 PM

Omnizoa

02-09-16, 01:48 PM

You'll come to understand why Taxi Driver is a masterpiece.

Go watch more movies, experience more corners of cinema, come back and be like "wow, what was I doing not loving that film!?"

Shazam.
I dunno about that... I've seen a lot of "classics" by now. I tend to hold unpopular opinions in general.

Your rating of Taxi Driver isn't gonna go over well with many of the members here. It's pretty much the most loved movie on MoFo.
Good to know. >_>

The concept of subjectivity of taste escapes most people. I also didn't care about many well regarded novels, films, animation and manga. Thing is besides being good/well made it has to contain stuff that I might find interesting. Casablanca, for instance, put me to sleep with its 1940s American melodrama aesthetic style.
I agree, Casablanca was not my thing.

It lost to the Godfather in the 70s poll though.
I never finished The Godfather. I only got about 10 minutes in before I got bored. That was quite a few years ago though.

Well at least he gave it 3/5, Madoka which is the Taxi Driver among animation fans he have it 2/5.
Madoka isn't THAT popular is it? Taxi Driver's more like... Akira. I think.

Omnizoa

02-09-16, 02:19 PM

http://twilighthollowproject.b1.jcink.com/uploads/twilighthollowproject/reginageorge.gif

Mean Girls

Comedy / English / 2004

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
I keep seeing Mean Girls mentioned on here, most recently from CiCi who mentioned it as the movie he's got best memorized. I've seen Mean Girls before, but despite vaguely pleasant memories I have it down as [Meh...], so it's time I reassessed my thoughts on it.

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
Hmmm... Taxi Driver, "one of the greatest movies ever made."

Or Mean Girls, "that one Lindsay Lohan movie with Tina Fey."

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24149&stc=1&d=1455040681

Look, here's the deal: I was never bored with Mean Girls. That's not something I can say about American Psycho, Being John Malkovich, or Taxi Driver.

It keeps up the pace, it remains consistent, and the character arcs all follow logically so I'm not waiting for the next plot beat, I'm not lost as to meaning of what's going on, and I'm not confused about character motivations.

That's not a point in Mean Girls' favor, though, that's just what I want bare minimum, at least from a comedy.

What IS a point in Mean Girls' favor though are these:

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24150&stc=1&d=1455041071

"Love to hate" comes to mind, and it feeds directly into what I was saying to Miss Vicky about needing to like the characters to care.

I like the 'Plastics' insofar as I want to punch them in the face which is precisely the point of the movie. Getting vengeance on them is SUPER SATISFYING simply because they were made so hateable.

So Travis Bickle shot a few pimps. Who cares?

Regina George got hit by a bus. And it was fantastic.

Similarly, it's easy to relate to Cady. I HATE school, so it's refreshing to have an outsider perspective of just how nightmarish and stupid it can be.

Cady's friends seem like friends I could see myself having and when she drifts dangerously towards the dark side (for believable reasons), it's equally satisfying to have karma bite her back hard.

For the most part I like the humor. A couple jokes are crude or stupid (no thank you, fart joke, you're not welcome), but most of those played off of the characters are pretty good. I'd list some of my favorites, but this is meant to be short.

Altogether, it has a few choices that hold it back for me, but mostly it's a movie that justifies returning to it every once in a while for a gag.

http://twilighthollowproject.b1.jcink.com/uploads/twilighthollowproject/meangirls.gif

Final Verdict: rating_4 [Pretty Good]

MovieMeditation

02-09-16, 03:19 PM

gbgoodies

02-09-16, 03:36 PM

Holy Mother of God, you dislike Taxi Driver, Casablanca, AND The Godfather!?

Now it's just getting ridiculous...

- And this is just one random page in your thread. I don't even wanna ask what you think of some other cinema milestones. I might die of pure shock.

Everyone's entitled to their opinion. I'm not a fan of Taxi Driver or The Godfather either, but I like Casablanca.

And don't even ask me what I think of Pulp Fiction or A Clockwork Orange.

MovieMeditation

02-09-16, 03:40 PM

Yes, GB, I know. But it's a wrong opinion he got!

:D

gbgoodies

02-09-16, 03:44 PM

Yes, GB, I know. But it's a wrong opinion he got!

:D

There's no such thing as a "wrong opinion". There are only "different opinions". :)

MovieMeditation

02-09-16, 05:48 PM

There's no such thing as a "wrong opinion". There are only "different opinions". :)
Well, your opinion on opinions is wrong. :p

(C'mon GB, you know I'm just kidding!)

gbgoodies

02-09-16, 05:56 PM

Well, your opinion on opinions is wrong. :p

(C'mon GB, you know I'm just kidding!)

I know. I'm just giving you a hard time about it. :D

Omnizoa

02-09-16, 11:30 PM

Holy Mother of God, you dislike Taxi Driver, Casablanca, AND The Godfather!?
Hey! I haven't finished The Godfather yet.

And don't even ask me what I think of Pulp Fiction or A Clockwork Orange.
Wasn't a fan of Pulp Fiction. Haven't see A Clockwork Orange.

gbgoodies

02-09-16, 11:43 PM

Haven't see A Clockwork Orange.

I would say don't bother, but I think they'd run me off the board if I told you that. I don't even think they'd let me finish the song tournament first. http://www.allsmileys.com/files/kolobok/justcuz/40.gif

Miss Vicky

02-10-16, 12:24 AM

Haven't seen A Clockwork Orange.
Don't bother.

Sexy Celebrity

02-10-16, 12:28 AM

Bother.

Omnizoa

02-10-16, 01:11 PM

http://twilighthollowproject.b1.jcink.com/uploads/twilighthollowproject/ClockworkOrange.gif

A Clockwork Orange

Drama / English / 1971

WHY'D I WATCH IT? Omnizoa: Haven't see A Clockwork Orange.
gboodies: I would say don't bother...
Miss Vicky: Don't bother.
Sexy Celebrity: Bother.
WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
I've heard a lot of crap about A Clockwork Orange.

I knew it contained some really twisted stuff and I've read about people who've had nightmares after seeing the movie.

But I watch anime. So I'm pretty used to seeing twisted **** by now.

After seeing A Clockwork Orange, I honestly feel I must reduce my score for Taxi Driver to a [Just... Bad].

You'll come to understand why Taxi Driver is a masterpiece.

Go watch more movies, experience more corners of cinema, come back and be like "wow, what was I doing not loving that film!?"

Why?

Because after over 2 HOURS of this movie at least I wasn't BORED. At least there was always something HAPPENING, at least the PLOT WAS MOVING ALONG or doing something interesting.

[Meh...] is usually my rating for a competent movie that bores me, but even though Taxi Driver didn't irritate anywhere on the same levels that other movies have, what pitifully little it does spend it's time on I can poke holes in.

Travis' romance? Stupid and unrealistic.

Travis' motivations? Limp and unexplained.

The entire story? It feels like someone took the ideas of a "vigilante taxi driver" and a "hidden wrist gun" and didn't know how to combine the two for most of an entire movie. That SUCKS.

Clockwork Orange didn't bore me, but it falls into my alternate reason for giving a [Meh...] rating: What I liked about the movie is largely offset, but not overwhelmed, by what I didn't like about the movie.

Or more accurately, what I didn't like was offset by what I liked, because A Clockwork Orange starts off REALLY WEIRD.

And goofy.

And kind of appalling.

And I really cannot take their outfits any less seriously.

http://www.slate.com/content/dam/slate/blogs/browbeat/2012/04/26/ClockworkOrangeGIF1.gif.CROP.original-original.gif

The pure distilled NOPE I get by seeing the opening shot of the 4 gang members sitting in a club where they drink glasses of milk poured from dripping tit fountains is pretty strong.

I did not like the beginning of the movie at all. But this stupid mess of ugly design choices and rape for the sake of shock value constitute less than a third of the movie.

The rest of the movie is an interesting ride along with Alex as he gets betrayed by his gang, jailed, and forced into aversion therapy to fix his "violent and sexual urges".

I didn't like Alex, but I don't think I was supposed to. I think the point of the movie is to subvert the idea of aversion therapy it presents this theme in a fairly interesting way. I'm sure plenty of people have argued back and forth about it's effectiveness (probably a lot more in the 70s than now where it's akin to the similarly dubious electroshock therapy), but how best to present that argument?

Well, why not from the perspective of a thoroughly ****ed up dude who's forced to endure it?

The movie's not entirely about that, there's plenty of creative liberties (lots of breasts and penises) and narrative license (karma's a bitch, ain't it?), but was largely focused on presenting this idea from Alex's perspective. And I thought it was mostly interesting.

The movie loses points from me for frequent overacting and unrealistic dialog. The opening few scenes are also a strike against the movie since they're were just unpleasant to sit through, and the whole movie overall lacks design consistency.

On the other hand, this is now hilarious:

https://45.media.tumblr.com/a83e71134ad11f8217c6938c21455592/tumblr_ndujndpbW41qh59n0o1_500.gif

Overall, I can't safely say I liked it, but unlike Taxi Driver, I wouldn't mind watching it again.

Final Verdict: rating_3 [Meh...]

MovieMeditation

02-10-16, 03:08 PM

I can't handle this thread, I simply cannot.

I'll better leave before I get seriously rude and I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. :)

Swan

02-10-16, 03:11 PM

I can't handle this thread, I simply cannot.

I'll better leave before I get seriously rude and I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. :)

I know. Next he's going to give the 2008 Death Race a 3.5 or something.

Omnizoa

02-10-16, 03:18 PM

I can't handle this thread, I simply cannot.

I'll better leave before I get seriously rude and I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. :)
http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c196/reaper_man/Phoenix%20Wright/edgeworth-shrug.gif

Your call. I'm open to criticism though.

Omnizoa

02-10-16, 03:20 PM

I know. Next he's going to give the 2008 Death Race a rating_3_5 or something.
You want me to watch that next?

I can watch that next.

I'm gonna watch that next.

Miss Vicky

02-10-16, 03:24 PM

Personally I think that's a generous rating for A Clockwork Orange. I was pretty indifferent to Taxi Driver myself and I think The Godfather is really boring.

Still think you're crazy for calling Being John Malkovich a bad movie, though.

Captain Steel

02-10-16, 03:35 PM

Just a quick memory about A Clockwork Orange (1971) - my friend's (formerly hippie) parents took us to see it at Princeton University.
It was the late 70's (we were maybe 12 years old). This wasn't a regular movie theater, it was like an on-campus theater for avante garde movies or some such. When the movie started, the rating on the screen said it was rated "X". My friend's parents weren't sure what to do. (I remember overhearing them whisper about whether they should take us out or not.) They decided to stay and we watched the film.

Don't know if the film was ever revised for a lower rating (or it got one because times have changed), but I think it's currently rated "R".

Omnizoa

02-10-16, 03:37 PM

Personally I think that's a generous rating for A Clockwork Orange.
Maybe. I thought it's concept was interesting though and certain scenes like Alex stalling to drink his wine cause he thinks it's poisoned were kinda funny.

Still think you're crazy for calling Being John Malkovich a bad movie, though.
My issue with Being John Malkovich is that it raises questions it doesn't answer. When they first discover the hole the very first reaction isn't, "H-how can this logically be? Who put it here? What purpose does it serve?", but instead, "Doesn't this raise so many philosophical questions about, like... life and souls and stuff?"

No... puppetman. It doesn't. It just annoys me.

http://25.media.tumblr.com/55dffa2d5b0ccea788c4be1e05731369/tumblr_mxe8veyncd1r8bxs1o1_500.gif

Omnizoa

02-10-16, 03:39 PM

Omnizoa

02-10-16, 04:05 PM

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24164&stc=1&d=1455133385

Nana and Kaoru

Erotic Romance / Japanese / 2011

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
Cause I'm stupid. THERE.

Okay, fine. I mentioned in my The Secretary "review" (I don't like calling these reviews) that I'd seen better stories in pornos. Well, "Nana to Kaoru" was what I was thinking of. That's when I discovered they actually made a live action movie.

WHAT'D I THINK?*SPOILERS*
Nana to Kaoru is originally an erotic comedy manga.

You can tell because it's obvious that no one involved with this movie knows how to adapt a manga to live-action.

Nana underacts, Kaoru overacts, and the whole movie HAD ONE JOB.

The basic premise is that a generally uptight and stressed out council president and her skeevy SM-geek distant friend from way back live next to each other and go to the same school. After a realistic altercation they find themselves in a platonic SM relationship which serves to relax both of their chilly personalities, build trust in each other, and eventually develop into a romantic relationship.

It SOUNDS weird, but this manga managed to gain enough traction with non-SM readers it's now published alongside Berserk, which is a cult classic grimdark fantasy series.

The concept and basis was strong enough, but the transition to live-action was terrible.

Kaoru's basically been flanderized into a stereotypical over-the-top Japanese pervert, and Kaoru couldn't act to save her life.

Inner monologue becomes outer monologue and whatever isn't mood-breaking spoken out loud isn't told to us which damages our ability to understand both character's motivations which are far deeper and more appreciable in the manga than in the movie.

Also the pissing scene. They left in the pissing scene.

I don't get that. Why is that supposed to be sexy? Jus-CUT THAT OUT! I DON'T WANT TO THINK ABOUT THAT!

But I watch anime. So I'm pretty used to seeing twisted **** by now.

Nana and Kaoru is spared an [Irredeemably Awful] from me because it managed to get a brief chuckle out of me, both intentionally and unintentionally.

Final Verdict: rating_2 [Just... Bad]

Omnizoa

02-10-16, 07:01 PM

http://twilighthollowproject.b1.jcink.com/uploads/twilighthollowproject/labyrinth.gif

Labyrinth

Fantasy / English / 1986

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
I quoted it in foster's Movie Quotes (http://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?t=44456&page=3) thread (mainly because I was thinking of David Bowie). I haven't seen it in like... over 5 years though. Reassessment time!

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
My opinion of Labyrinth has certainly improved over the years.

I think every time I've seen it I've been inclined to directly compare it to other fantasy movies of the time. Problem there is, that's not really fair, since most other fantasy movies try to have a plot, or... SOMETHING.

As I was watching through Labyrinth this time, I think I was finally clue'd off to what I've been missing: Labyrinth isn't like most fantasy movies because it isn't trying to tell a typical fantasy movie story, at least in the modern sense.

It's a more of a fable, it's a lot more like The Wizard of Oz or Alice in Wonderland. The purpose of both of these narratives is to entertain through their presentation, themes, amusing peculiarities, and occasionally insightful dialog.

http://media.giphy.com/media/corBV2gAzsFTW/giphy.gif

Another thing all of these stories have in common is the adventure serves as a sort of lesson or exercise for the main heroine.

I don't think any of the lessons come off as very strong, especially Labyrinth, but the sense of exploring the new and surreal easily dwarfs The Wizard of Oz and even Alice in Wonderland in all but wordplay.

As hard as I try, it's very tough to come up with criticisms of the movie other than: stage animals and creepy-bird-people-scene (**** that scene, seriously). And that's pretty small potatoes considering how much worse I've seen far less creative movies do.

I could complain about the obviously terrible green screen, but there's so little of it, and most of the effects in the movie are great if not downright how-did-they-do-that impressive (I think a lot of great matte painting work went into certain shots).

Coming away from it, I see the screw-everything-throw-a-party ending pretty much cements my newfound feelings on the movie. It's not so much an epic fantasy story so much as it celebrates fantasy stories, by trying to drag all the most memorable bits into one movie, be it quirky characters, monsters, riddles, spatial deception, or inexplicably attractive villains.

http://25.media.tumblr.com/6b08c686438738a5becedb532615ed26/tumblr_mg7ziolWAD1r58875o3_500.gif

Oh, and 80s montages for literally no reason whatsoever. Gotta have those.

Final Verdict: rating_5 [Friggen' Awesome]

Captain Steel

02-10-16, 07:21 PM

...and teen-age Jennifer Connelly!

Omnizoa

02-12-16, 04:39 PM

http://www.sbs.com.au/movies/sites/sbs.com.au.film/files/styles/full/public/images/9/5/9518_harold-627.jpg?itok=iMy8lKyR

Harold and Maude

Romantic Comedy / English / 1971

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
Saw it mentioned once or twice in orestb333's Your Favorite Dark Comedy Movie (http://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?t=13663) thread and bearing in mind that I haven't seen it for over 5 years I thought I'd give it a rewatch and see if my neutral/boring feelings towards it have changed.

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
And thus ended the only romantic comedy that's ever made me cry.

I'm SUUUPER HARD to sell on romance movies, ESPECIALLY romantic comedies, so I suppose the fact that this one got to me by approaching the general concept so unconventionally makes sense.

I hate so many things about romance movies mainly because I hate so many things about dating and "love" in real life. That **** just gets under my skin in a bad way and I hate it.

The only vague whisper of any of that is Harold's plan to marry Maude.

Say what you will, but that's a checkbox ticked on my list of "Stupid Things You're Wasting My Time With".

That part of the movie is infinitesimally small compared to everything else though.

The idea that the two love interests take a wild stab at taboos by featuring a social recluse and a criminal with an extreme age difference of at least 60 years sounds like a weak shock material. But while young Harold's obsessed with death and suicide and retreating into his own head, Maude brings a frightening counterbalance by being a 79-year-old woman high on life and living in the moment in the truest sense of the phrase.

http://25.media.tumblr.com/aa789d291b7e34451a3954d5a4d92243/tumblr_mulc9qXCjL1s5bh5uo1_500.gif

I like how the two contrast and complement each other in their various ways, Maude to Harold moreso than Harold to Maude though, that would be a criticism of mine. Harold seems to offer Maude little more than what is probably some overlooked attention while Maude serves to enlighten Harold to the little things, small joys, and the thrill of living in the moment, rather than mulling in the distant past or the future.

Neither character is entirely respectable on their own, Harold just seems to miserably loiter around and Maude clearly jacks cars on a regular basis (with the purest of intentions of course), but the relationship, if anything, manages to even out at least one of them by the end.

The humor is so incredibly deadpan that many of the gags throughout just kinda hang (in an incredibly punny way) and while I laughed a few times, most of the humor was very very mild so while I wasn't exactly bored this time around, I didn't feel a whole lot of punch from what was onscreen.

A few scenes are exceptional of course, the scene in which Harold explains why he pretends to kill himself and the finale are very memorable. The scheme to get Harold out of the military was also memorable although for very different reasons.

https://49.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lxy778pNjV1qdau9mo1_500.gif

Something that I noticed this time around is that this romance develops over the course of a week.

Generally I'd be inclined to call BS on an Overnight Romance, but considering that neither of these characters have anything but time, both find each other totally atypical, and Maude's live-in-the-moment philosophy is conducive to it, I'm gonna let it slide.

Not only these things, but unlike the vast majority of romcoms I've seen, both characters legitimately develop their relationship with one another throughout the movie, both by learning about each other AND sharing the same interests (even if they are funerals) without devolving to those ******* "rules" I hate so much.

Harold and Maude breaks rules, it doesn't make them.

http://i2.wp.com/britmovietours.com/wp-content/uploads/Notting-Hill-Tour-530-1.jpg?resize=530%2C295

Final Verdict: rating_4 [Pretty Good]

Omnizoa

02-13-16, 12:12 PM

http://i.imgur.com/E4kVsoy.gif

Pitch Black

Sci-Fi / English / 2000

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
I keep revisiting it so often, that I just bought it.

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
Underrated sci-fi classic.

Aside from the cool premise of crashlanding on a planet where creepy crawlies come out during the eclipse, and the many many opportunities the movie takes to make Vin Diesel, Riddick, a badass without ever venturing into cheesy territory (humor is definitely intentional), a big reason I like this movie is the morally ambiguous characters.

The movie knows we want a good guy to root for, but nearly everyone with major screentime is flawed or portrayed negatively in some way which makes it difficult to ascertain everyone's intentions.

Fry's character opens the movie making the selfish decision to jettison all of the passengers of her ship to save her own life. It doesn't work, and we see her struggle to come to terms with the people grateful for saving their lives despite her concealed intentions not to.

As the movie goes on, Fry's eventually redeemed through her actions and the bigger question becomes which of the two characters, Riddick or John, his bounty hunter, can be most trusted since they clearly don't trust each other for good reason.

http://24.media.tumblr.com/1db934dcdbed92f0223a7637f17d0195/tumblr_mm3tzgeHc91s57cmlo1_500.gif

Riddick's motivations remain questionable nearly all the way into the final scene of the movie, but even then you've been given enough evidence to know what to expect from him by this point. Before this point, the questionability of his motivations as well as his relationship with John (which is valuably improved the Director's Cut) serve to create a constant tension throughout the movie even when there isn't any action on screen, and it's a real treat to see all of the "weak" characters make an effort to hang around one or the other in an attempt to curry favor from the two "powerful" characters even when their intentions aren't entirely transparent and doing so may get them killed.

Among my limited criticisms would be the noticeably weak CG which skates by largely because the most glaring effects are used in dark shots. By biggest complaint would be the bottled glow-worms.

Poor glow-worms. They didn't do anything to you, and yet you stuff a family of them into an old booze bottle and then just left them to die trapped in there. ********.

For the record, I would give the sequels, Chronicles of Riddick, a [Meh...] and Riddick a [Just... Bad].

Chronicles suffers by removing Riddick's ambiguity and... just generally having a weaker plot and themes (points for death by teacup though). Riddick suffers by being a carbon copy of Pitch Black except way way way way worse.

Final Verdict: rating_5 [Friggen' Awesome]

REWATCH UPDATE 1/1/2023
It has been 6 years that this movie has sat on my shelf, long awaiting an overdue review, to confirm that it truly is worthy of the lustrous prestige of sitting amidst my all-time favorite movies.

I'm honestly surprised that I rated this 5 stars.

While it's still certainly my favorite Vin Diesel movie, and still the best of the Riddick trilogy, and did not sport nearly as poor of CG as I recall, this movie falls well short of an exceptional review.

Not that it does anything particularly poorly, but it really doesn't excel in any great respect. Riddick himself is equal parts amusing and enigmatic, but the rest of the cast carries personality about on par with the guest characters of a weak Stargate episode (or Farscape, for that matter). The music is serviceable, but in no way memorable, and the monster design is quite frankly boring and unappealing.

Perhaps the biggest issue comes down to how the movie is structured. The first half takes place in the day time, during which we're hyping up the threat of Riddick, teasing at the night to come, and very minimally developing Captain Lady and Fake Cop. All of the outdoor shots are also inconsistently presented with a bright yellow or blue filter and overexposed in an effort to convey how bright it is on a planet with 3 suns. That's just not appealing to look at. This isn't the deep blue and orange saturation of Mad Max: Fury Road, it's just ugly and difficult to watch.

The second half of the movie takes place at night and they basically let the cat out of the bag in the most literal sense because when you establish that the monsters are innumerable and everywhere, and then you have them randomly pick off the characters, it really just feels like a deus ex character death.

Not so with the Archaeologist(?) character, he was so unreasonably ****ing stupid that he not only left the biggest source of light, which was the best defense the cast had against the monsters, dragging it with him, destroying it, and getting himself killed while endangering the cast. Absolute big-brained genius, no wonder the monsters took a big 'ol bite out of it.

The dialog, mainly involving Riddick creepin' on Captain Lady, still has it's moments, but it's few and far between and I feel like I disproportionately overweighted these relationships the first time I watched it because, as seems to be the case with me at times, I end up drooling over inspirational concepts. If something happens in a movie that sounds like a crazy cool idea or there's a character dynamic that plays out in a way that really appeals to me, I go all in on that, but having that first impression dulled over the course of few years and revisiting with these conceits in mind, I'm left less than impressed.

This is good solid movie, there's not a lot to actually complain about, but there's relatively little to commend it for, unless I'm trying to give a rating relative to the average sci-fi/monster movie... in which case it gets high marks.

Final Verdict: rating_3_5 [Good]

edarsenal

02-14-16, 02:20 PM

just saw this thread; HUGE fan of Harold & Maude and of Pitch Black

Great write ups, will be coming back to see the rest of your thread. Great job, Omi!

Omnizoa

02-15-16, 05:26 AM

just saw this thread; HUGE fan of Harold & Maude and of Pitch Black

Great write ups, will be coming back to see the rest of your thread. Great job, Omi!
Thank you!

Omnizoa

02-15-16, 09:02 AM

http://twilighthollowproject.b1.jcink.com/uploads/twilighthollowproject/planet.gif

Forbidden Planet

Sci-Fi / English / 1956

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
I think this is supposed to be the quintessential 50s sci-fi movie, right? Other then that, I saw the poster and how can I NOT want to see the movie after a poster like this?:
http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24411&stc=1&d=1456791294

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
Mmmmm.... that's some good retrofuture.

I thought it was decent. Most generously I would say I'm shocked by how ahead of it's time this movie feels considering it's over 60 YEARS OLD HOLY DAMN.

It got a few intended chuckles out of me and I'm surprised I liked the plot as much as I did despite a few inconsistencies (how'd that last guy die anyway? He just sort of keeled over offscreen.) though my main complaints would OF COURSE have to go towards the one female character.

She's... just sorta there. To tempt the male protagonists. Because apparently they've been secluded from women for over a year for some stupid reason. She's been secluded too so it's apparently a lot of horny men seeking kisses (and only kisses? man, these guys get off easy) from a woman who doesn't even get the concept of kissing.

I really liked the "Nope, I still don't get it" scene where the one guy keeps kissing her and she's not getting anything out of it. Kissing is one of those things that bothers me in romance movies (thank you, Harold & Maude), but unfortunately the movie takes all of that goodwill when the one guy asinine enough to yell at her FOR BEING A WOMAN ends up kissing her and ooooohhh I totally get that kissing thing now.

http://www.reactiongifs.com/r/2013/06/gag.gif

He tells her to wear something that covers her whole body which reminds me of an episode of Dirty Pair which outright insults that sort of conservatism and she reappears with her legs covered in a dress and her arms completely bare.

"Oh honey, no, that's the opposite of what I meant, I'm turned on by your thighs and BICEPS, you need to cover all that."

Get it? Cause 50s? Cause sexual repression? Cause all those probable closet gays on his spaceship?

Anyway, my only other real strike against the movie would be THE MISLEADING POSTER.

The poster features Robby the Robot and That One Female Actor and NEITHER of them are remotely important to the plot. Thanks for taking my Obviously Evil Robot and Damsel in Distress cliches and COMPLETELY AVERTING THEM!

Final Verdict: rating_3 [Meh...]

Omnizoa

02-16-16, 07:45 PM

Collection Update:

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24244&stc=1&d=1455665270

Pitch Black

Glad I got the Director's Cut of Pitch Black.

Clue
Shame Clue is almost as barebones as it gets. No insert at all and special features on the back of the box include the UNRATED TRAILER and 3 SURPRISE ENDINGS. Ooooohhhh... fancy ****.

I like my DVDs with Production Commentaries, Cast Commentaries, Making Ofs, Bloopers, and Animated Screen Tests. None of this "Special Features Include: Subtitles" crap.

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/3a/9a/33/3a9a33a33e1f45d14b018a2dcfc1fcc7.gif

Omnizoa

02-24-16, 12:28 AM

http://twilighthollowproject.b1.jcink.com/uploads/twilighthollowproject/v.gif

V For Vendetta

Action / English / 2006

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
It's been mentioned all over the place on here. Derek Vinyard brought it up in the Natalie Portman Vs Keira Knightley thread (http://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?t=30120&page=3). Reminded me that I need to watch it again and REASSESS.

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
It's just a great movie. It's paced well, it makes sense, the music's good, the visuals are consistent, the atmosphere is spot-on, and it all-together keeps me engaged in an important parable about government that totally speaks to me.

I HATE modern government, so it's cool to see a movie not only on the same page as that, but actively fighting against it.

Altogether, I have difficulty thinking of a better vigilante movie, especially considering vigilantism exists in direct contrast to government influence and vigilantism can have no more powerful a target than the government itself.

When I think of Taxi Driver as a vigilante movie, this is what I'm comparing it to.

I have gripes though, as I do for every movie.

Strikes against the movie for me include:
+ Eggs on Toast
+ Kissing
+ "There are no coincidences"
+ V’s illusion is both a stretch and tough to totally rationalize
+ "I fell in love" *GROANS*
+ Valory "loves" her totally unknown cell neighbor (what?)
+ Cheesy blood effects and inappropriately hilarious slow-mo screams
+ Bizarre over-emphasis on homosexuality (was that, like, Sutler's whole campaign: "Pray the Gay Away?")

Yeah, I'm weird. Anyway, props to a fun and memorable movie with a immeasurably important reminder that "people shouldn't be afraid of their governments, governments should be afraid of their people".

Besides which it's easily one of the best roles I've seen Hugo Weaving in and probably one of the best comic book adapted movies out there.

http://imoviequotes.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/6-V-for-Vendetta-quotes.gif

Final Verdict: rating_5 [Friggen' Awesome]

Omnizoa

02-26-16, 01:32 PM

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/fc/fa/75/fcfa750cbb6c04c385aced1daeac3a4a.gif

Liar Liar

Comedy / English / 1997

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
Ignoring the fact that I used a gif of it already on this very page, it was most recently brought to my attention with this recent post from Mojo Filter's Top 10 Jim Carrey Movies thread (http://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&highlight=liar%20liar&p=1431149#post1431149):

I hope that Liar Liar makes the list. It's easily my favorite Jim Carrey movie.

I've seen it before, but it's been years. REASSESSMENT TIME.

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
On one hand, it's got Jim Carrey in it, but on the other hand, it's got Jim Carrey in it.

I've seen Liar Liar before, but now more than ever do I empathize with people who say they can't stand him. There are numerous scenes where plausibility just flies out the window and we're left to watch Carrey grunt and make faces and... I'll admit it gets hard to watch.

I've seen the basic plot of father-too-into-his-work before so many times that I'm kinda put out from the get go. The only bit of plotting in this movie that still feels fresh and exceptional is the arc that seeks to dissect the ethical nature of Carrey's character's work, that being the conflict of interest inherent to the job of lawyers.

When it all culminates in the "I HOLD MYSELF IN CONTEMPT!" moment, I'm really into it, but not mere seconds afterward do they try to undercut it with a joke that isn't even all that funny.

The compulsion to tell the truth rings dead similar to Carrey's later movie Yes Man, where he plays a character irrevocably compelled to agree to anything, and while both concepts get a few great moments (Liar Liar much more so than Yes Man), both stumble over their concepts is a couple ways. The plot and performance scarcely intersect and awkward moments abound.

I used to think that Liar Liar was my favorite Jim Carrey movie, but having seen it this time, I think my opinion has changed. I think this is Jim Carrey's funniest movie. It certainly got a few laughs out of me, and it features some of my favorite comedic moments out of any of his movies, but the setup doesn't appeal to me, everyone save Carrey and his character's secretary, Gretta (how come I remember Gretta's name, but not Carrey's?), is pretty lackluster, and the plotting makes unnecessary sacrifices for the sake of humor. It doesn't earn it's whimsical ending even if Carrey plays a pretty likable dad.

At least the cast was clearly having fun with it. There's obviously no attempt to hide what they're selling (the cover art is just Jim Carrey spread-eagled on a white background o_O) when the credits end with a blooper of one of the characters calling Carrey an over-actor. No one really cares, that's what we're here to see, but as I said I think he pushes my comfort level here so at this point I think my favorite Jim Carrey movie will have to be The Truman Show.

Which I also have to watch again.

http://i.imgur.com/SYj3pZP.gif

Final Verdict: rating_3 [Meh...]

Swan

02-26-16, 01:35 PM

Best movie on this page is Harold and Maude.

Omnizoa

02-26-16, 01:41 PM

Best movie on this page is Harold and Maude.
Nuh-uh!

http://data.whicdn.com/images/44408091/original.jpg

Omnizoa

02-26-16, 01:43 PM

Seriously though, Harold and Maude wouldn't need much to get into my favorites. But it would need something.

Perhaps an explosion montage, or CG aliens?

gbgoodies

02-26-16, 04:12 PM

I love Liar Liar, but you may be right that while it's Jim Carrey's funniest movie, it's not necessarily his best movie. It's definitely his most rewatchable movie for me.

Omnizoa

02-26-16, 04:26 PM

http://twilighthollowproject.b1.jcink.com/uploads/twilighthollowproject/babysitter.gif

Adventures in Babysitting

Adventure Comedy / English / 1987

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
1980's Movie Help thread (http://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&highlight=poster&p=1463308):
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/88/Adventures_In_Babysitting.jpgThat poster looks spectacular. I must watch this movie now.

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
Is it 80s? Yes.
Does it live up to the title? Yes.
Does it live up to the poster? Almost...

I've never heard of this movie before and I'm baffled as to why. Why did I see Monster Squad before this? Why is that considered an underrated classic when this so much better (and came out the same year)?

All told I thought it was pretty fun and funny throughout the majority of it's runtime. It has that very... 80s charm to it. The conflicts that run the length of the story feel very nostalgic to me: running away from home, crushing on the babysitter, chop shops... oooh, it all brings me back... wait.

O_O *blink*

I like all four of the main characters here. The babysitter is introduced to us as boy-crazy right off the bat, but she gains dimension as she struggles to maintain her sanity as the night goes on. The little girl is a pleasing aversion of every little girl character stereotype I know of given her unusual fascination with Thor.

http://www.themarysue.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/AdventuresBabysitting5.gif

And the two pre/t/ween boys are unique in that one is noble to a fault give his crush on our babysitter and his buddy who screws his way into the trip only to stir up trouble, but still managing to justify his existence near the end (the restaurant scene was awesome).

I like that the first dark-skinned guy we see doesn't get killed off (I was legit expecting him to), but despite be introduced as a car thief he turns out to be one of the most likable side-characters throughout the movie, most of which are obviously impure, but sympathetic to our main characters in some way.

It was pretty fun seeing the ups and downs the movie takes. That said: strikes.

Strikes against this movie for me (as far as I can remember):
+ Hot Dogs
+ Chicken Soup
+ Some other mentioned food item
+ The poster image is not entirely recreated in the movie.
+ A handful of "homo" jokes (though none are terribly mean-spirited).
+ Main character #4's irrepressible sexual harassment.
+ The fact that I can only remember one character's name (Sarah).
+ Sarah inexplicably abandons the other 3 even though she probably knows better.
+ The other 3 inexplicably track Sarah down even though they shouldn't know better.
+ That the babysitter doesn't either stay with her initial boyfriend so that main character #3 can grow up to deal with disappointment, or leave it open as to whether she may actually develop a relationship with him. Nope. Instead the movie ends with her hooking up with that one guy who called her "the most beautiful woman in the world", danced with her (somehow), gave her 45 bucks, and a ride. He's in such a small fraction of the movie and was so transparently cheesy that I'd have rather she hooked up with Mr. Car Thief.

+ My biggest strike would obviously have to be the scene where Babysitter's semi-blind friend finds what she believes to be a cat. Exterminators show up to say they intend to kill it, she protests, and then they say that it's a giant sewer rat to which she screams, drops it, and runs away.

http://reactiongifs.me/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/rub-it-in-your-face-middle-finger-in-your-face.gif

I came here for the 80s, movie, not the 50s.

Final Verdict: rating_4 [Pretty Good]

Omnizoa

02-26-16, 04:33 PM

It's definitely his most rewatchable movie for me.
That's what I'm leaning towards.

Omnizoa

02-27-16, 06:27 PM

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24375&stc=1&d=1456611538
Locke
Drama / English / 2013

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
Sexy Celebrity's Metalheads Song Tournament: (http://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?t=44218&highlight=metalheads+song+tournament&page=24)
Ironically, of everybody's original lists, I think I liked Derek's best.
Omnizoa's EDM Song Tournament: (http://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?t=44454&highlight=edm+song+tournament&page=7)
I think we have similar tastes Sexy, because it's quite often us two voting for one song, and Omni & Derek voting for the other one
wildboy's (http://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?t=44629)WHAT IS YOUR BEST MIND BOGGLING MOVIE??: (http://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?t=44629)
I've seen all of these, but the only one I really liked was The Butterfly Effect.
my favorite of them all Glad you like it
Well now just look at what you've done! You've forced my hand Derek!

I HAVE to watch your favorite movie!

I HAVE NO CHOICE!</foreshadowing>

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
"D'you know in fact, I would like to take a ****ing shovel and dig you up out of the ****ing ground and make you watch me tonight. I would pull open your eyes and kick the mud and worms and shit out of your ****ing ears just for the duration of this journey. Because it's me driving. Me. Not you. And unlike you I will drive straight to the place where I should be. And I'll be there to take care of my... take care of my ****up."

Locke is a lot like the movie, Buried.

And considering how much I hated Buried, that's easily the worst thing I can say about this movie.

Both movies are an exercise in minimalism to the extreme where the central character is confined to a small space and the majority of drama unfolds through the exchange of phone calls.

However where Buried was a pointless, meaningless, stupid attempt to stuff Ryan Reynolds in a box, spit in his face, take a **** on his porch, and have sex on his casket over the course of an hour and a half, Locke takes an equal amount of time to make me care.

https://45.media.tumblr.com/f41c6a85556bc7ccac7ce2c329915a1d/tumblr_n089wg2du01qe5f96o1_400.gif

Locke is a nice guy. Even though we barely venture outside his car and never see him speak to anybody face to face, our impression of him is built not just on the sneaky exposition that holds him up as a hard worker at his job, but largely on how he interacts with people over the phone.

He's pleasant, he's calm, and he has every reason not to be.

He bails on the advent of the biggest job of his career to go attend the birth of a baby of a woman he had a one-night fling with. During his drive to the hospital he tries his best to break the news to his employer and wife, Katrina, while also attempting to maintain the peace amidst Bethan, the mother-to-be, and his co-worker, Donal, who he leaves the majority of his work.

Far less important than what actually happens in the movie is why anything happens in the movie. And why anything happens in the movie is simply that Locke is a brutally honest guy.

Say what you will about his "cheating" in the first place, this movie is his counter-argument. The point is he's trying to do the right thing. Even when he gets fired from his job, he still tries to keep the cement project on track. Even when his wife 'kicks him out', he never falters in his barely calm demeanor. Sure he freaks, and it's thanks to Tom Hardy's performance that I buy that any of this actually affects him despite the facade of a rational mediator, but it's never in response to people he's talking with. They freak out on him, and he just takes it all on the chin.

Why is he doing this? Because he doesn't want to be like his dad.

https://zuts.files.wordpress.com/2015/01/tom-hardy-locke.gif
I CAN RELATE TO THAT DAMMIT.

He regularly rants at his dad who he pretends is in the backseat and through that, despite initially sounding like fairly transparent exposition, really best serves, more than any other dialog, to cement (no pun intended) Locke as a righteous character.

It's all out of guilt, not out of love for the other woman, he tells her this repeatedly, and I appreciate an absence of white lies for once. JUST BE HONEST! Reality hurts, sure, but it's better than deceit!

And this element seems prevalent throughout the movie, especially when he struggles to reconcile his wife who goes HARDCORE MONOGAMY SYNDROME.

I HATE Monogamy Syndrome, and for the first time ever, I feel like something I'm watching agrees with me. This movie could easily be presented as Locke's punishment for his indiscretions, but it comes across far more clearly as a tragedy. Locke's a noble character, and his intentions are nothing but for the best, and yet despite his plain efforts to articulate himself and make things right, he drives heedlessly into an assault of

gimme a minute

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24376&stc=1&d=1456611767

Wow, that was surreal. I don't think I've ever broken up AFTER watching a movie before.

...well, I guess you could say this movie hits kinda close to home for me.

****! This totally threw off my groove! COMEDY! Let's get some COMEDY in here!

http://38.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_luqfvp1Mpa1qhigt0o1_r1_250.gif

Alright, let's just tally up all the strikes I can possibly think of against this movie.

Ummmm...

1.) Hot Dogs.

2.) Also, they totally mismarketed this movie as a thriller.
http://screenrant.com/wp-content/uploads/locke-movie-poster.jpg

Thanks, The Telegraph. Locke's a thriller the same way Buried's a "masterclass in invention and surprise."

The minimalist setting in Buried helped to impose a degree of claustrophobia which does nothing for this movie other than make me bored with the same imagery (besides, if I wanted claustrophobia, I'd watch Crawl or Die).

What else...?

3.) I don't think we got any resolution on the cement pouring. That cement **** was way important dood, like seriously, did it work out? Did I miss a line? I think Locke just stopped taking Donal's calls.

4.) What was the purpose of the game he was missing out on? I get that it ties him to his children in some way, but the last call we get regarding it doesn't seem to emphasize anything that isn't already apparent. Besides, it's a lot of dialog involving players I don't know about playing a sport I don't care about on a TV I never see.

5.) The music could have been a bit stronger. It's largely absent throughout the movie and I would have appreciated it during certain... "scenes". Maybe they left it out because

6.) People on the phone are difficult to discern past a combination of low volume, audio filtering, and accents. I got the vast majority of what was said at least.

EEEEEEGGGGGHHHHH......

I can't think of anything else offhand. That's the problem with minimalism, there's only so much you can criticize.

Final Verdict: rating_5 [Friggen' Awesome]
*I was gonna give it a 4/5 when I started typing this, but I think it's only fair to give full marks to anything that engages me emotionally like this.

REWATCH UPDATE 5/22/2022:

Locke is one of the rare few movies I've not only given a 5 out of 5, but it is one of the even rarer movies where I gave it that score after a blind viewing, and it is one of the rarest of possible movies to make me cry. Only three other movies can attest to that; Ink, Titanic, and believe it or not, Bicentennial Man.

All three of these movies, however, during at least one scene dwell heavily on the theme of "loss over time", which is, honestly, probably my biggest weak spot when it comes to any story.

...

I'm going to have to take a moment because for whatever reason as I type this, I'm having a moment again. :(

...

It is very strange that during the movie, or even during the credits, I don't feel these emotions, but only once I've completely closed out of the window, loaded up this page and begun typing what I feel and why I'm feeling it does it really hit me. Again.

And for a good moment there I was genuinely convinced this movie hadn't got me again, ****.

https://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24376&stc=1&d=1653269598

What I was going to say was that Locke doesn't really have that theme going for it. Instead I think this movie really just hits me for personal reasons.

Like, I can't relate to marriage, I can't relate to a construction job, I can't relate to wanting to come home to sausages, and I can't relate to giving a single **** about any kind of sport at all...

But Locke's character hits home. He's brutally honest "to a fault", and he tries so hard to break bad news gently, but you can tell he's probably spent a good deal of his life being walked over.

The one motivation that he doesn't tell anyone is his personal hatred for his dad. He desperately wants to show him up in his own mind, even though he's dead, and there's no one to compare them but himself. He loathes that he was ever genetically related to him and it hangs like a shadow over his head; the threat that he could be a failure by the same standard he judged his father.

He wants to be a good person, unlike the bad person his dad was, so upon learning that he royally ****ed up, he stomps the breaks as hard as he can to put it right. But that jeopardizes his job. And it jeopardizes his family. And so, still trying to prove a point to himself, he tries as hard as he can not to abandon his family or his job in addition to the girl he's trying not to abandon.

The point I'm getting at is that Locke suffers for doing what he thinks is the morally right thing to do, which more often than not is a conflict not often explored in movies. There's good guys versus bad guys, tragic deaths of heroes and all that, but in this case Locke's biggest enemy is his himself, we're watching him wrestle with the consequences of choices he made, and he's aware these are consequences for the choices he made, and he hates himself for that. It's very humanizing and relatable.

https://i.gifer.com/9hf.gif

OVERALL, stepping back a moment, and once again attempting to assess this movie objectively; engaging though it is, this movie is very not visually stimulating. It's a lot of panning from one corner of the car to the next, a lot of superimposed traffic shots, a lot of out-of-focus street lights. This would be a terrible watch if the narrative didn't pull me in. The music also isn't terribly strong though it is appropriately present and absent where it feels it ought to be.

Part of the appeal for a movie like this, for me at least, is seeing the character break down over time, I like that kind of psychological torture (I'm a sick ****). But we never really see him snap and instead the movie ends sort of anti-climatically with the news that the baby was born... and that he'll keep driving. Appropriate, but this is conveyed less by what feels like an organic climax to the movie and instead by a swelling score and sudden and unusual increase in out-of-the-car shots.

Part of the difficulty for the sort of character's development is also the fact that he's trying to play it cool, that he's looking for a "practical way forward", but chips in the facade don't really appear so clearly as you might hope. The first big reveal of the movie is simply learning that he cheated on his wife months ago and they're giving birth, the second big reveal is that he's going to her out of spite for his dead dad.

The scenes in which he curses out his dad in the rearview mirror serve both to realistically establish his motivations, but also to exposit on his background, that certain things have happened to him and he's been carrying that pain for his entire life.

I think these scenes are enlightening, but the third time it happens I'm having a little bit of a harder time buying it. We've now seen him shift back and forth between calm and professional Locke to "I want to dig you out of the ****ing ground and make you listen" enough times that it just feels a bit weird to once again hear him launch into third round of swearing at the backseat.

Finally, unlike the above movies I mention (excepting Bicentennial Man which I haven't seen in FOREVER), it's pretty difficult to say I "enjoyed" watching this movie. I consider it a good movie in terms of accomplishing what it set out to do, and evoking the feelings it was supposed to evoke, ****, it's got me to cry twice now, so it's clearly working. BUT, it's not quite the experience I normally appreciate.

In Ink there's the music, there's the aesthetic, there are the themes, there's even brief humor, the dynamic between characters in interesting, and it successfully tugs on my heartstrings multiple times thoughout it's length. Titanic is a bit different; I'm not so sold on the romantic aspect of the movie, but I'm sympathetic enough to the characters, and I'm able to put myself in the movie to live through the ship sinking vicariously, and it's an exciting and horrifying experience.

Locke doesn't really have any of that, it's really just a picture into the isolated torment of one guy and his detached conversations through the phone in his car. Movie's not really exciting, it's not fun, it's not pleasant to look at, it's not intellectually stimulating like a drama like 12 Angry Men might be... It's just kind of there, and my emotional experience is more of a Fridge Logic moment, than a direct feeling the movie is impressing on me.

Still, I have difficulty not rating this well, but I will be docking my score.

Final Verdict: rating_4 [Very Good]

Omnizoa

02-27-16, 06:30 PM

This post used to serve a purpose! But now it doesn't.

http://data.whicdn.com/images/1456798/large.jpg

Derek Vinyard

02-27-16, 09:14 PM

This is the best review I've ever seen !!! :D

So Glad you like it Omni!!

Omnizoa

02-28-16, 05:22 AM

This is the best review I've ever seen !!! :D

So Glad you like it Omni!!
Thanks for the experience. :3

edarsenal

02-28-16, 01:25 PM

serious reps for this one! For taking the plunge AND for immersing yourself in it BRAVO

Cole416

02-28-16, 01:45 PM

Ooh ooh ooh do me! According to your lists, you haven't seen mine :)

Thursday Next

02-28-16, 01:54 PM

Pretty sure Omnizoa has reviewed American Psycho and didn't like it.

Mr Minio

02-28-16, 01:56 PM

You better not review mine.

Omnizoa

02-28-16, 02:08 PM

Ooh ooh ooh do me! According to your lists, you haven't seen mine
Which lists are you lookin' at? The Movie Forums list? Those haven't been updated.

I did watch American Psycho, it was the first one I mentioned in this thread (http://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?t=44485).

Pretty sure Omnizoa has reviewed American Psycho and didn't like it.
I was ambivalent towards it. Somewhat more like than dislike.

You better not review mine.
Werckmeister Harmonies? Well, now I have to look that up now don't I?

Cole416

02-28-16, 02:22 PM

Your opinion really bothers me, but it's refreshing to see your style of reviewing. Your reviews remind me of SC's a lot just style-wise. Only ratings I agree with are Mean Girls and A Clockwork Orange.

Omnizoa

02-28-16, 03:01 PM

it's refreshing to see your style of reviewing. Your reviews remind me of SC's a lot just style-wise.
Just off-the-cuff, what I'm feelin'. But to be fair, again, I don't really consider any of these terribly thorough reviews. Most of my actual reviews are in my Anime thread (http://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?t=43989) where I get pretty long-winded.

Your opinion really bothers me,
I assume you're referring to American Psycho at the very least.

Let me put that movie into perspective for you with an example:

I didn't need to see Patrick make poses in a mirror during sex to know what kind of character he is.

http://static.rogerebert.com/redactor_assets/pictures/far-flung-correspondents/a-psychopath-and-the-female-gaze/american_psycho_posing_mirror1.jpg

I already know that's who he is. I also already know he's the kind of person who can go ON and ON about music he likes because I've already seen it before. During Paul's death scene which also served the dual purpose of setting up Paul's death.

There is no similar purpose to this scene because nothing significant happens during it that warrants it's length (unless you count eroticism, but I don't).

My only other attempt to extract meaning or purpose for this particular scene (as well as many scenes like it) is to assume it's trying to be comedic.

Admittedly Bale flexing for himself in a mirror is almost a caricature of narcissism, but I only find it somewhat amusing. I'm not laughing at it.

If I was supposed to be laughing at it, I think the scenario undercuts it's own joke.

After that LONG LONG LONG sequence of Patrick talking up the girl, bringing her to the apartment, chatting her up, talking endlessly about music, casually insisting that they strip and **** each other, the only thing I feel like I got out of it was a vague sense of amusement from this image:

http://static.rogerebert.com/redactor_assets/pictures/far-flung-correspondents/a-psychopath-and-the-female-gaze/american_psycho_posing_mirror1.jpg

I don't think it was worth the time.

Cole416

02-28-16, 03:40 PM

Just off-the-cuff, what I'm feelin'. But to be fair, again, I don't really consider any of these terribly thorough reviews. Most of my actual reviews are in my Anime thread (http://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?t=43989) where I get pretty long-winded.

I assume you're referring to American Psycho at the very least.

Let me put that movie into perspective for you with an example:

I didn't need to see Patrick make poses in a mirror during sex to know what kind of character he is.

http://static.rogerebert.com/redactor_assets/pictures/far-flung-correspondents/a-psychopath-and-the-female-gaze/american_psycho_posing_mirror1.jpg

I already know that's who he is. I also already know he's the kind of person who can go ON and ON about music he likes because I've already seen it before. During Paul's death scene which also served the dual purpose of setting up Paul's death.

There is no similar purpose to this scene because nothing significant happens during it that warrants it's length (unless you count eroticism, but I don't).

My only other attempt to extract meaning or purpose for this particular scene (as well as many scenes like it) is to assume it's trying to be comedic.

Admittedly Bale flexing for himself in a mirror is almost a caricature of narcissism, but I only find it somewhat amusing. I'm not laughing at it.

If I was supposed to be laughing at it, I think the scenario undercuts it's own joke.

After that LONG LONG LONG sequence of Patrick talking up the girl, bringing her to the apartment, chatting her up, talking endlessly about music, casually insisting that they strip and **** each other, the only thing I feel like I got out of it was a vague sense of amusement from this image:

http://static.rogerebert.com/redactor_assets/pictures/far-flung-correspondents/a-psychopath-and-the-female-gaze/american_psycho_posing_mirror1.jpg

I don't think it was worth the time.

American Psycho is not a perfect movie. I did actually laugh out loud at that part, and didn't feel like it was out of place or worthless. It's a pretty memorable scene and one of the first that comes to mind to people when I ask if they had seen it.

The movie didn't mean nothing. It leaves the viewer up for interpretation on what really happened. You shouldn't like the characters. Thats the message the film is trying to get out there. All those yuppies think they have such great lives with their money, clothes, haircuts, friends, even business cards. They all blab about nonsense and it doesn't seem like anyone gives a rats ass about each others' personal lives. They just use each other to boost their egos. They don't even know each others' name! That's why I think he did actually kill Paul and that everyone is basically the same up there. He even said, "Halberstram goes to the same barber... same job... but i have a slightly better haircut." No one cares about each others' identity. They probably did think Bateman was with them partying when Paul was murdered by him, but they just don't care enough to actually know their acquaintances.

Taxi Driver too...

He's a wannabe because hes a vet who most likely has PTSD. You might not even think vigilantism is necessary, but you're not him. He saw a girl (prostitute) trying to get away from an abusive pimp and decided that something was needed to be done.

I thought the relationship with Cybill helped emphasize how out of touch Travis is with reality. He can't connect to people like he wants to, and longed for a relationship with someone. I don't see how him badmouthing Albert Brooks is a huge red flag, and she probably thought he was cute for approaching her like that.

As for the attempted assassination of the Presidential Candidate, I sort of agree. I thought it helped with the development of Travis. It showed he was unstable and could explode (and did with the pimp at the end). Maybe it's because he didn't think the Senator did a good job of doing anything w/ his advice about the scum. I thought it was still a pretty good scene in the film.

"Nicest and most genial pimps" - still a pimp. Scum to him is what he does, not how he acts about it.

Honestly, I think you just need to remember he's a Vietnam war vet and that definitely made him, for a lack of a better word, crazy. He's not gonna do rational things that you or I would do in that situation.

Omnizoa

02-28-16, 04:17 PM

American Psycho is not a perfect movie.
I've yet to see a perfect movie.

I did actually laugh out loud at that part, and didn't feel like it was out of place or worthless.
I didn't say it was. I just think it was too long for too little.

It's a pretty memorable scene and one of the first that comes to mind to people when I ask if they had seen it.
I'll agree it's memorable.

You shouldn't like the characters.
You miss my point here. I shouldn't like them as people, but I should like them as characters.

I don't like The Joker from The Dark Knight as a person, but I love him as a character.

http://33.media.tumblr.com/70f729408fe3f985ab5d5540d75ffc44/tumblr_nrg3wzwb9W1ru2f8mo3_500.gif

It what makes me want to watch him. It should be the same way with Patrick Bateman, but scenes in which he's fun to watch make up only a fraction of the movie for me.

Thats the message the film is trying to get out there. All those yuppies think they have such great lives with their money, clothes, haircuts, friends, even business cards. They all blab about nonsense and it doesn't seem like anyone gives a rats ass about each others' personal lives. They just use each other to boost their egos. They don't even know each others' name!
I mention this in my original post. I don't think the movie does the concept any better than any other of the many movies that tackle the same concept. The only point in this regard that I think American Psycho excels in when Patrick flips out over a business card. THAT'S the kind of absurdity I wished was consistent throughout the movie.

He's a wannabe because hes a vet who most likely has PTSD.
That an assumption.

You might not even think vigilantism is necessary, but you're not him.
You miss the point again here. Vigilantism is "always" necessary, the question is at what convinces the main character to become one. Another element to vigilantism is catharsis from seeing justice done, however that catharsis is inversely related to the degree of injustice we're tackling.

The movies I listed all do a better job at making be empathize with the main character in this regard.

He saw a girl (prostitute) trying to get away from an abusive pimp and decided that something was needed to be done.
Sure enough, but the build up to this and the execution feel way off to me.

I thought the relationship with Cybill helped emphasize how out of touch Travis is with reality.
It only made me think of how unrealistic and stupid Cybill is.

she probably thought he was cute for approaching her like that.
She probably hasn't lived in the city for very long. Or she's been sheltered her whole life. Or she's stupid.

As for the attempted assassination of the Presidential Candidate, I sort of agree. I thought it helped with the development of Travis.
What did it develop?

It showed he was unstable and could explode
Like I said, DONE WAY BETTER IN OTHER MOVIES.

http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m5a47x0aKw1qedb29o1_500.gif

Maybe it's because he didn't think the Senator did a good job of doing anything w/ his advice about the scum.
He's getting ELECTED, HE HASN'T HAD A CHANCE TO DO ANYTHING YET!

I thought it was still a pretty good scene in the film.
Even though the entire scene is anchored in "maybe" motivations?

"Nicest and most genial pimps" - still a pimp. Scum to him is what he does, not how he acts about it.
How he acts about it factors into that injustice thing I was talking about. In The Brave One, it's bad enough to have your fiance killed in front of you, but if you were to distinctly remember the perpetrators laughing while they did it, it'd leave a stronger impression on you.

Honestly, I think you just need to remember he's a Vietnam war vet and that definitely made him, for a lack of a better word, crazy.
That isn't conveyed at all. At least not as much as it should.

He's not gonna do rational things that you or I would do in that situation.
No, but it should seem rational to him. Just because he does things doesn't mean they're automatically justified, they need to make sense as things he would do.

We get an inner monologue from Travis several times throughout the movie and yet it's completely absent during scenes like the assassination attempt. Where's the sense in that?

It's not like the inner monologue was telling us anything of significance we couldn't already infer before, so why now, when we need it does it go away?

Thursday Next

02-28-16, 04:33 PM

You miss my point here. I shouldn't like them as people, but I should like them as characters.

I think this is a really important distinction, well put.

Omnizoa

02-28-16, 04:43 PM

I think this is a really important distinction, well put.Likability is pretty important for me to care. Even if they're total bad guys.

http://img.pandawhale.com/76748-Gladiator-thumbs-down-gif-b5MO.gif

Omnizoa

02-29-16, 03:19 PM

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24406&stc=1&d=1456770809

Something Wicked This Way Comes

Fantasy Horror / English / 1983

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
I Review Your Favorite: Locke (Derek Vinyard): (http://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=1467951)
You better not review mine.
Mr Minio's favorite is Werckmeister Harmonies which seems to be circus-related. This reminded me of The Devil's Carnival which I didn't care for, but was made by the same guys behind Repo: The Genetic Opera which I really liked. Made me want a really good dark carnival-themed movie, preferably one where the dark carnival represents hell or some kind of purgatory. That's when I found this.

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
The potential's all there. The concept is solid, the story is more than reasonable but... it just never clicked with me.

Perhaps the setups felt too obvious, perhaps the carnival itself didn't give off the atmosphere I'd wanted, or perhaps Mr. Dark just never came across as the compelling central villain he was intended to be.

I've never read the book the movie's based on, but I wonder if I'd have preferred it.

Certain story beats feel way off.

For one, the two main characters are kids, and likewise the movie uses this as an excuse for them to act stupid. Repeatedly.

And for second, the notion that this carnival travels under the facade of a friendly traveling business in entertainment is routinely broken over the writer's knee for all sorts of contrived character dialog.

The two kids never tell anyone what they see happen at the carnival until it's too late and Mr. Dark starts hunting them down, and even once Mr. Dark starts hunting them down, he still seems concerned about maintaining the illusion that his carnival is legit even though he's literally walking around town with a parade of people he's kidnapped behind him.

During the penultimate scene of the movie Mr. Dark gets his best moment to shine as a villain by trying to compel main character #1, Jim's, dad to tell him where he is, EVEN THOUGH BY THIS POINT WHAT'S THE POINT IN FINDING THE KIDS TO SHUT THEM UP IF YOU'RE REVEALING YOUR EVIL PLAN TO DO IT, and the best he can come up with is to try and haggle years back into his life.

His whole strategy is to rip out pages of a book one by one and with each page torn out, that's another year Jim's dad could have got back if he'd have only stopped him and agreed to hand over his son.

Thing is, this presupposes that Jim's dad values his son less than a few years of life and a book. Maybe they thought that because he was a librarian that would irrationally compel him to lose sight of his priorities? I DON'T KNOW it's dumb.

Sure enough Jim's dad never stops him, but Jim gives himself away which just sours the whole moment.

EGH. This movie could have worked, but it's not terrible, so it's just a whatever movie for me.

https://49.media.tumblr.com/0aa778479a7280b2e4f32a08cd7ad505/tumblr_mjd4jxZvSH1qzsq0xo1_500.gif

Final Verdict: rating_3 [Meh...]

cricket

02-29-16, 03:23 PM

I can't believe I'm just noticing this thread now. Looking real good.

Omnizoa

02-29-16, 03:25 PM

I can't believe I'm just noticing this thread now. Looking real good.
Thanks!

Omnizoa

02-29-16, 07:49 PM

http://twilighthollowproject.b1.jcink.com/uploads/twilighthollowproject/madmax.gif

Mad Max: Fury Road

Action / English / 2015

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
A combination of having watched Locke, which is the only other Tom Hardy movie I've seen and the Oscars which I didn't vote for since I'd only seen Star Wars 7 and Mad Max this year. If I had voted for anything, it'd have been Mad Max though.

Feels like more than enough excuse to watch it again. Right?

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
Anytime I describe this movie to someone with the phrase, "and they've got this one truck dedicated to war drums and one guy with a double-necked flamethrower electric guitar to provide backing music" and the person I'm talking to responds with anything other than, "that's ****ing awesome" you're clearly not an action movie person.

What else can I say, really? This is the only movie I've seen since Inception which sold me on the trailer AND lived up to it.

I'm not a car person. I literally have never driven a car in my entire life and desert settings put me off a lot of movies, but THIS... THIS WAS AWESOME.

Sure I can poke holes in it left and right. You can hardly call it "Mad Max" for one. It's not really about Max since Furiosa's character is front and center most of the time and you can hardly call him "Mad" without the completely useless hallucinations he has about characters we never explore and backstory that never factors into the plot.

This isn't Tom Hardy's movie, let's be honest. Locke was Tom Hardy's movie, this was Charlize Theron's movie and for once we get a pretty badass female protagonist rockin' it out.

She even delivers the killing blow to the bad guy which is just as, "OOOOOHHHHHHH!!!!!" as it needs to be.

https://media.giphy.com/media/r1HGFou3mUwMw/giphy.gif

Immortan Joe isn't quite as hateable as other lower-key villains since most of his villainy is just extremely chauvinistic shock material. The "breeder wives" and tanks of breast milk honestly just gross me out and I'm glad the story never turned into a "war against men" even though it would have been extremely easy with a couple bad lines of dialog.

Instead we get about 3 to 4 outstanding male characters and nearly twice as many female characters with all of them cooly slipping into the logic of the world with their resourcefulness and mechanical improvisation.

The improvisation is huge point in favor of this movie since everything we see looks like it's been cobbled together from scrap or designed to fulfill unconventional functions out of practicality from the warboys with traffic signs for literal shields to the War Rig dropping it's plow to dreg up sand to put out the fire on it's engine, it all clicks.

The CG is really sneaky in this movie too. Plainly a lot of practical effects went into this movie which goes a long way to selling the action, but it's so prevalent that CG ranges from nearly impossible to notice to very obvious.

The really obvious CG is generally brief though and some of the best CG you need to take double takes to notice like- wait a second, Charlize Theron's missing an arm!

https://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/drysrmbzaevqylfxgpsd.jpg

My biggest complaints would easily have to be the needless grossout moments of both Max and Nux eating CG critters. No thank you to that.

Still, they account for less than 60 seconds of this two hour hype train of a movie, so I can barely make a fuss about it.

All told, Mad Max: Fury Road is one of the greatest action movies I've ever seen. It's like if The Road Warrior and Speed had a baby. And it was perfect. Perfect in every way.

REWATCH UPDATE:
It's fairly evident on a rewatch that beyond the intentional silliness, there's a fair amount of unintentional silliness besides, stuff that really doesn't help the movie.

A couple action moments blow by so fast that I honestly didn't even grasp what happened, but at worst, reminded me of Sex and Fury 2.

There's this brief area of the movie right around the build to the climax when Mad Max has his premonition about getting shot in the face by the Masked Man where everything kinda slughs apart. Why does that even happen? That part of the movie could have been removed entirely and it would have made more sense. He sees danger, has a momentary flashback, shields his face, survives a crossbow bolt.

That's all well and good without the completely unnecessary foresight scene.

This Masked Man is also the one who manages to stab Furiosa with the gear shift dagger... which she throws, one-handed, over her shoulder, while she's driving, and kills a guy. What the ****!? You want something like that out of Stallone or Schwarzenegger you at least need a few feet of clearance to windup first!

Now, I'd be willing to forgive that as a moment of adrenalized badassery, if it weren't shortly followed by the Masked Man picking up the dagger and stabbing Furiosa with it, only to be defeated by Dying Grandma STABBING HIM IN THE FACE WITH BULLETS.

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24479&stc=1&d=1457273856

YOU CAN'T DO THAT. YOU CAN'T DEFEND YOURSELF WITH A HANDFUL OF BULLETS, THEY'RE ROUND CYLINDERS OF METAL, NOT CALTROPS.

It'dve been more realistic if you full-on poked the guy in the eyes with your fingers instead of trying to mash the equivalent of marbles in his face.

It's a shame too because this whole mess happens right around when Furiosa gets stabbed which I think is the best part of the movie, and now I'm suddenly distracted by the thought of, "Who the **** is this masked guy who's suddenly the most dangerous character in the movie and his mere presence warps the laws of physics?"

I dunno, it's weird. Still think the movie's ace though. :up:

Final Verdict: rating_5 [Friggen' Awesome]

gbgoodies

03-01-16, 02:41 AM

Mad Max: Fury Road rating_5 [Friggen' Awesome]

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
A combination of having watched Locke, which is the only other Tom Hardy movie I've seen

WHAT'D I THINK?
What else can I say, really? This is the only movie I've seen since Inception which sold me on the trailer AND lived up to it.

Wasn't Tom Hardy in Inception?

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
A combination of having watched Locke, which is the only other Tom Hardy movie I've seen and the Oscars which I didn't vote for since I'd only seen Star Wars 8 and Mad Max this year. If I had voted for anything, it'd have been Mad Max though.

I think you mean Star Wars 7, not 8. Star Wars 8 doesn't come out until 2017.

Omnizoa

03-01-16, 08:32 AM

Wasn't Tom Hardy in Inception?
You're right, I totally forgot. He wasn't the central character though.

I think you mean Star Wars 7, not 8. Star Wars 8 doesn't come out until 2017.
Yeah, I realized my mistake a few hours ago.

Omnizoa

03-01-16, 09:28 PM

http://twilighthollowproject.b1.jcink.com/uploads/twilighthollowproject/turbokid.gif

Turbo Kid

Action Comedy / English / 2015

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
It's one of the movies that popped up while I was searching around for Mad Max since it's also rooted in 80s post-apocalptic fiction. And given that poster (http://static1.squarespace.com/static/51b3dc8ee4b051b96ceb10de/t/55a83397e4b08d25ecb5f740/1437086630999/new-turbo-kid-poster-unveiled), how could I not?

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
The crazy blast of retro sci-fi nostalgia I got from this movie's combination of themes, visual aesthetic, and soundtrack were ALMOST enough to make me rate this movie higher. The movie even made me laugh a couple times and after seeing it I desperately want to see more movies follow in it's footsteps and pay homages to those "totally rad" movies of the past the same way Black Dynamite parodied and exemplified the blaxploitation genre.

Turbo Kid is not a parody though, and I'm going to rate it harshly because I feel it shot itself in the face by failing to understand a basic distinction in the sort of tone the medium it's trying to imitate is supposed to go for.

On one hand, the opening of the movie plainly plays up to the 70s/80s/90s impression of child wonderment. Our main character is still a kid at heart and despite living on his own out in the wasteland he spends most of his time collecting comic books, playing with toys, and pretending to be a superhero. It honestly reminds me of a lot of early Spielberg movies back in the day like E.T. and The Goonies.

A strong emphasis is on retro sci-fi/superhero comic book themes.

All of this clashes with what seems to be an attempt to blend these ideas in with more adult action movies of the time like The Terminator or Mad Max: Road Warrior.

This SOUNDS like it could work, after all what movie might better encapsulate all of the various influences someone might have growing up in 80s USA with relatively liberal freedom over what they watched or read?

THE PROBLEM IS that adult aspect goes WAY BEYOND The Terminator's level of violence, it's goes clear into the 90s with Story of Ricky type ****, it gets REALLY graphic.

http://i.imgur.com/J7uKNJD.gif

And that's the thing, why is my Spielbergian whimsy getting mixed up with a horror movie gore? THERE'S SO MUCH BLOOD and I hate gratuitous blood geysers in even REGULAR action movies.

Here, they don't even take the opportunity to make it any sort of joke, like the creator legit wanted to make this really cute nostalgia piece, but he's just seen Dawn of the Dead one too many times.

We get piss, we get kicks to the nuts, and we bisect so many bad guys that they literally stack up. Is that supposed to be funny? I'm not laughing at that. I'm really NOT laughing at that.

You know if Turbo Kid wanted to maintain their tone, they still could have been bloody, there's plenty you can do with PG-13 violence.

But even as someone who utterly loathes the age rating system, I'm appalled to see what might otherwise be a fun-for-the-whole-family throwback action-adventure-comedy feature a scene in which someone's intestines are graphically dragged out of him with a bicycle wheel.

****in' sick.

Final Verdict: rating_3 [Meh...]

Omnizoa

03-02-16, 12:34 AM

http://twilighthollowproject.b1.jcink.com/uploads/twilighthollowproject/nightwish.gif

Imaginaerum by Nightwish

Psychological Drama / English / 2012

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
After watching Mad Max: Fury Road I thought, "gosh there are a shortage of epic metal movies". Then I found Imaginaerum which I had been meaning to watch. A symphonic metal band's concept movie? Sweet.

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
Considering Ink, Imginaerum is the sort of the movie that should be right up my alley, and for precisely that very reason I'm also going to be very critical towards it.

The basic premise is that a man lies demented and dying on his hospital bed and as his daughter finds resolution in his death due to their strained relationship, he battles nightmarish abstractions of his past.

The band, Nightwish, themselves appear throughout the movie lending a rocking soundtrack to some of the more dramatic plot beats, but they're mostly out of sight while the characters themselves wax back and forth about their predicaments.

The events that unfold are interesting and there are a few surprises here and there intermixed with a degree of charm and horror in equal measures. Mostly it feels like an adventure with a point. And I like that.

https://45.media.tumblr.com/a8931ad3b0ba0ea8160bd6186530f20a/tumblr_mhes91Ma4g1qeqyq4o1_500.gif

What few things I might complain about would be the sometimes questionable CG, particularly on our snowman/bogeyman character who never seems entirely real. Other uses of CG are very well done, but this bit seemed off, and I don't think it helped.

Another thing is our main character's daughter (whatever her name is) changes her a tune a bit too quick. She hates on her dad pretty hardcore, but she takes very little convincing to turn around which bothers me.

Some of the symbolism is a bit too on the nose.

It's tough to go much deeper without a rewatch which I'll probably do at some point, but for now I'm going to look up Nightwish, because as much as I like this movie, it must have REALLY SUCKED to see it piss 3 million dollars away at the box office.

REWATCH UPDATE

Imaginaerum really is best served with a second go-round since this movie is so densely packed with foreshadowing, symbolism, and parallels that a fair amount of it is liable to be forgotten by the time enough information is revealed for the audience to piece together.

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=25211&stc=1&d=1462503598

Having seen it again, most everything becomes clear and I was able to enjoy it a fair bit more than the first time.

My criticisms have also shifted a fair bit as well.

The daughter's heel-face turn is easier to buy now that I think about it. The only questions I find raised now are general logical continuity questions like...

How come the snowman is still outside their window after what must be decades? I get that Nightwish comes from Finland and Finland is notoriously cold...

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=25210&stc=1&d=1462503567

But even if you buy zero snowfall for that entire length of time, this line of reasoning only extends to people who make that mental leap to Finland. In most countries SNOW MELTS.

Also, nothing on the mother? At all? Just that HUGE coincidence?

Other things would be a couple scenes that don't appear to inform the audience of anything such as when Tom wakes up in the orphanage in his old age. This scene doesn't really seem to do anything other than very pointedly drawing attention to the snowman, toy soldier, and arabesque. Alright, that accomplished... closure? It wouldn't be so bad if this scene weren't already bookended by scenes that served the same purpose better.

A few moments also feel torn apart from the story and forced, lockstep, into presenting a musical sequence. This is more to do with editing, and honestly it's pretty nitpicky all things considered. The soundtrack's still kickin' and it does get pretty emotional by the end even if it doesn't quite earn tearjerker status from me.

Altogether, Imaginaerum is a fine movie and while I'm yet reluctant to really really make an exception of it, it's EASILY a recommendation for anyone who enjoys metal, dreamlike surrealism, and a story about letting go of grief.

Final Verdict: rating_4 [Pretty Good]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xqqiM_TiiIQ

Omnizoa

03-02-16, 11:00 AM

http://twilighthollowproject.b1.jcink.com/uploads/twilighthollowproject/potato.gif

Death Race 2000

Action Comedy / English / 1975

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
Next he's going to give the 2008 Death Race a rating_3_5 or something.
Nah, that sounds boring, let's watch Death Race 2000, eh?

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*

http://i.imgur.com/kRufL.jpg
wudafuq did i juss wahch???

Well, it was OBVIOUSLY a satire of... something... I think...

Is this The Running Man? Is this supposed to be like the Running Man? Alright...

This whole movie is weird. We spend the first half of the movie following around what anyone would naturally assume is the bad guy only for him to turn into the protagonist by literal process of elimination and all throughout we're given this bizarrely twisted perspective of the world which inexplicably felt more believable in The Hunger Games.

We get cartoony plots, strange dialog, and surprise twists in the form of dead-on-arrival puns. A HAND GRENADE? Really? And they say it so casually like OF COURSE his hand is also secretly a grenade! Jus' go with it, jus' go with it!

I can only assume this was supposed to be some sort of comedy, but everything from the obviously fake blood to the plastic looking cars to the double agent x double agent romance just made me go, HUH??

I was less baffled by Being John Malkovich!

At least now I know where The Tooncinator got his stock car explosion clip.

http://orig11.deviantart.net/8d93/f/2015/077/6/0/derailment_1_by_heartbreakerstudios-d8m8rey.gif

Final Verdict: rating_3 [Meh...]

Omnizoa

03-02-16, 09:48 PM

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24442&stc=1&d=1456967901

The New Barbarians

Action / Italian / 1983

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
Cited as one of Turbo Kid's biggest influences, it's supposed to be an Italian Road Warrior knock-off. And once again, given that poster (http://stuffpoint.com/apocalyptic-and-post-apocalyptic-fiction/image/214897-apocalyptic-and-post-apocalyptic-fiction-the-new-barbarians-poster.jpg), how can I not?

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
Well, the inspiration is certainly obvious. Turbo Kid borrows a lot from The New Barbarians.

Despite being an obvious Mad Max knock-off, or perhaps BECAUSE it's an obvious Mad Max knock-off, The New Barbarians somehow manages to be better than both Turbo Kid and Death Race 2000 when it comes to it's action.

Turbo Kid suffered from an oversaturation of violence that was over-the-top, always gruesome, and always bloody. Lots of CG blood.

Death Race 2000 suffered from most of it's violence being fake to an almost cartoonish degree. Lots of really obviously prop blood.

The New Barbarians restrains itself to realism by barely using any blood, never being overly graphic in it's depiction of gruesome deaths, and smartly limiting it's gruesome deaths in the same way Fury Road does so when one actually does pop up, you're not already desensitized to it and expecting it.

http://cdn.makeagif.com/media/5-16-2015/PLrlbd.gif

The action is easily the best thing the movie has going for it though, so as much as will argue that it's a better movie than both Turbo Kid and Death Race 2000 as a whole, it has neither the nostalgic charm or comedic edge of those movies.

I don't think it really needs them though, as I said Death Race 2000's attempts at humor don't really work and Turbo Kid's graphic bloody violence ruins it's more childish ambitions. That said, The New Barbarians doesn't exactly offer anything else in exchange.

The story is so stock that the bad guy's motivations can be basically explained away as "they're godless homosexuals who love death".

At least I THINK that's what I'm supposed to be getting out of this.

I won't go into why the whole lack-of-women thing doesn't make sense here, but I will say that a homoerotic undercurrent becomes a homoerotic OVERCURRENT by the end of the movie.

After the barbarians (all men) are offhandedly called queers, the villain anally rapes the protagonist and the protagonist gets back at him by literally shoving a drill up his ass, which somehow causes him to explode.

https://media.giphy.com/media/BAxrSGwnvPZYc/giphy.gif
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF- brilliant.

Final Verdict: rating_3 [Meh...]

Gideon58

03-02-16, 09:52 PM

http://twilighthollowproject.b1.jcink.com/uploads/twilighthollowproject/taxi.gif

Taxi Driver rating_2 [Just... Bad]

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
The Gunslinger45 posted the "Are you talkin' to me?" scene to foster's Movie Quotes (http://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?t=44456&page=2) thread and it reminded me that I still haven't seen Taxi Driver. People also don't have enough reason to hate me either.

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
It's strange that a movie like Taxi Driver, with a reputation for "greatest movie of all time" nearing that of Citizen Kane (another movie I haven't seen yet), feels so... weak.

Taxi Driver has honestly got to be one of the weakest vigilante movies I've ever seen. Isn't the point of a vigilante movie supposed to be for me to root for an underdog character who takes the law into his own hands? How can I do that if I don't like the character?

Robert De Niro as a nearly unrecognizably young Travis Bickle comes across as... a self-righteous wannabe in a bad way.

Before we're even given any reason to think vigilantism might even be necessary, Travis monologues about "all the scum on the streets" as if he was Rorschach or something.

http://www.wallpaperup.com/uploads/wallpapers/2014/01/07/218687/big_thumb_7e29fac082588a69954b0b1288c48469.jpg
I don't recall Rorschach wanting to "clean up the queens" though. >.>

Thing is, Rorschach is already a vigilante. Travis isn't yet. So we have to see what provokes him to become one.

Apparently one scene in which a hooker stumbles into his cab and gets dragged out by a pimp is enough for him to buy multiple guns, design a fancy hidden-gun-esque device for his arms, and then idle until the end of the movie to confuse the **** out of me with his motivations.

He talks up one woman which is just agonizing to watch.

Why would any sane woman agree to a date with someone who creepily stalks and approaches you for you looks alone? RED FLAG.

Then once they're on a date, Travis admits that he has an irrational hatred for her friendly co-worker, likely out of jealousy. RED FLAG.

Then he convinces her to see a porno. OOOOHHH!!! Step BACK! THAT'S CROSSING THE LINE! And here I thought you actually liked me for my personality and political beliefs!

The woman actually works for a senator's political campaign and despite having what seems to be a pleasant exchange in his cab, Travis's first target seems to be the senator himself. Why? What possible excuse could he have to kill the senator? What, does he believe it might somehow allow him to see the woman if there's no candidate for her to work for? Where's the dialog for that? What, why, how, when???????

He talks to probably one of the nicest and most genial pimps I've ever seen and suddenly he comes away with "that guy is the sickest worst scum of the earth", WHYYYY??? Haven't you seen worse by now?

I read that Travis is supposed to be "mentally unstable" which seems to be only reinforced by the medicine he's taking. Without that he might as well just be some random douchebag. And I hate saying douchebag, but really what does it add to the story to make him "mentally unstable"?

Okay, so this is the story about a mentally ill taxi driver who's unrealistic standards provokes him to almost shoot a politician and kill a few thugs to help one girl and impress another who left him? Save his go-go-gadget guns, I'm not impressed.

I liked the noir elements of the movie, the music and attention to detail really helped set the mood, but I was so distant from the characters that everything felt unnecessarily drawn out. Travis's "death scene" is followed by a nearly 3 MINUTE collection of pan shots away from his body which just goes to serve as probably the most egregious example of padding.

He doesn't even die either, which is sorta good. At least the vigilante lives to vigilant again... I guess?

I can think of a bunch of movies that did a better job of giving me reason to empathize with the vigilante:

The Brave One
Falling Down
Taken
Kick-Ass
The Crow
Batman Begins
V For Vendetta

Hell, friggen' DARK MAN, as stupidly cheesy and hilariously over-the-top as it is, did a better job making me feel bad about the hero and want him to beat the bad guys.

http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m5a47x0aKw1qedb29o1_500.gif

I love Taxi Driver, but even I always wondered why when Travis finally gets a date with Betsy (Cybill Shepherd), he takes her to a porno movie...that's just not right.

Tugg

03-02-16, 10:03 PM

I'm with Omnizoa on "Taxi Driver". We really don't get to see what motivates Travis to lash out.

Omnizoa

03-02-16, 10:16 PM

I love Taxi Driver, but even I always wondered why when Travis finally gets a date with Betsy (Cybill Shepherd), he takes her to a porno movie...that's just not right.
Because he only wants to get in her pants.
Because he only cares about her sexually.
Because he only knows her skin-deep.
Because he's shallow.
Because he's an unlikable character.
Because it's one of the greatest movies of all time.

I'm with Omnizoa on "Taxi Driver". We really don't get to see what motivates Travis to lash out.
That's really my biggest deal with the movie save the time it seems to waste just setting up and knocking down his love interest. I don't think "character study" means "study the movie's character until you figure him out".

If I understood Travis better I could like him better, if I liked him better I could care about him more, if I could care about him more MAYBE I could excuse a 3 minute dirge before a dumb twist reminds me that those 3 minutes were, in fact, a waste of my time.

MovieMeditation

03-03-16, 02:40 AM

Death Race remake next! :up:

Omnizoa

03-03-16, 02:56 AM

Death Race remake next! :up:
Is that a request?

MovieMeditation

03-03-16, 03:24 AM

Well, I just thought since that was first suggested to you it would be fun to do. Also, yeah, it's kind of a request. :D

Omnizoa

03-03-16, 06:19 AM

Well, I just thought since that was first suggested to you it would be fun to do. Also, yeah, it's kind of a request. :D
Sure, I'll give it a watch. :3

Omnizoa

03-03-16, 03:43 PM

http://twilighthollowproject.b1.jcink.com/uploads/twilighthollowproject/deathrace.gif

Death Race

Action / English / 2008

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
Death Race remake next! :up:

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
Something that will perpetually baffle me until the end of time is why people cling to the originator by sheer virtue of it being the originator.

Sure, there are plenty of examples you can point to that muddy up their source material by trying to go in a different direction or losing sight of what made the originals enjoyable.

Which is better?:
The Star Wars Prequel Trilogy or The Original Trilogy?
The Original Trilogy

Jurassic Park or Jurassic World?
Jurassic Park.

Metropolis (1927) or Metropolis (2001)?

Metropolis (1927).

Am I choosing those because I saw the originals first? No. I saw the 2001 Metropolis years before the original.

I prefer The Thing (2011) to The Thing (1982).

I prefer Rise of the Planet of the Apes (2011) to Planet of the Apes (1968).

And I prefer Death Race to Death Race 2000.

WHY? Because despite their respective faults, Death Race was better at being Death Race than Death Race 2000 was at being Death Race 2000.

They're
DIFFERENT actors playing
DIFFERENT characters in a
DIFFERENT setting in a
DIFFERENT game with
DIFFERENT rules with a
DIFFERENT tone and
DIFFERENT goal.

So it doesn't have any of satirical commentary like Death Race 2000 had.

http://gifsec.com/wp-content/uploads/GIF/2014/08/Adrien-Brody-BFD-Dont-care-Not-impressed-So-what-Uncaring.gif?gs=a

Like Death Race 2000 was even intentionally funny or making any actual points to begin with?

That movie's just friggen' weird. It was a cartoon. That hangs a lampshade on violent entertainment.

This movie indulges directly in that.

You could say Death Race is missing the point, but I can say that Death Race 2000 was a terrible action movie by comparison. And action is all I'm getting out of DR2K. I'm not laughing, there's no interesting story, and it doesn't have anything meaningful to say like Jurassic Park, Planet of the Apes, Metropolis or SEVERAL OTHER movies I could list off the top of my head.

So when it comes to action, Death Race is simply better. In far more ways than I could do it justice by listing here.

With Death Race 2000 my mouth was hanging open because I couldn't process the idea of a couple guys expecting to stop a serial-killing murder car with WOOD.

In Death Race my mouth was open because they disemboweled Mad Max's War Rig with whiplash.

http://www.reactiongifs.us/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/clapping_joey_chandler_friends.gif

Final Verdict: rating_4 [Pretty Good]

MovieMeditation

03-03-16, 04:00 PM

There you go. Respect earned. :up:

Glad you liked it. A little heavy on editing from time to time in the action, but I still think it's a great action film with one hell of a concept! And the practical stuff is so nice to see. Cars flipping, burning, drifting, shooting. And then there's people slashed and driven to death... It's every man's wet dream. Simple but effective.

Swan

03-03-16, 04:01 PM

It's every man's wet dream.

Speak for yourself buddy.

MovieMeditation

03-03-16, 04:09 PM

Speak for yourself buddy.
You just hate on it to be cool and because you compare it with the original, which of course is a "classic" (lol).

Death Race is awesome. Period. End of discussion. That's it.

Swan

03-03-16, 04:12 PM

I've never seen Death Race and am not that passionate about the original.

But, my wet dreams do not involve cars. Because cars are stupid. My wet dreams play out more like Sex & Fury.

http://www.iwannawatch.to/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/Sex-and-Fury-19731.jpg

Omnizoa

03-03-16, 04:22 PM

It's every man's wet dream.
my wet dreams do not involve cars. Because cars are stupid.
Gotta agree with Swan. I do not see the sexy when people talk of sexy cars.

https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/static.nextnature.net/app/uploads/2015/06/tanga_530.jpg

My wet dreams play out more like Sex & Fury.
Yes, see? Samurai are inherently sexy. Look at all that discipline.

Swan

03-03-16, 04:27 PM

MovieMeditation

03-03-16, 04:28 PM

Y'all seem to forget how "every man's wet dream" is a way of speaking...

But anyways, Death Race is awesome, that's the point.

Omnizoa

03-03-16, 04:35 PM

Omni, are you a fan of exploitation cinema much? Death Race 2000 is good but it's nowhere near the best exploitation cinema that I've seen (honeykid would disagree). If you haven't seen much, I'm going to make some requests!
No, I haven't seen much though I had some borderline-exploitation level movies lined up after this. I really liked Black Dynamite for what it's worth.

What do you have in mind?

MovieMeditation

03-03-16, 04:39 PM

Zombie Flesh Eaters. :up:

(just not The Beyond) :p

Omnizoa

03-03-16, 04:40 PM

Zombie Flesh Eaters. :up:
EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE'd rather not...

MovieMeditation

03-03-16, 04:41 PM

But WhAAAAAAAAAAAA not?

Omnizoa

03-03-16, 04:43 PM

But WhAAAAAAAAAAAA not?
Not. A zombie fan... Also, I've already seen video reviews.

Swan

03-03-16, 04:46 PM

No, I haven't seen much though I had some borderline-exploitation level movies lined up after this. I really liked Black Dynamite for what it's worth.

What do you have in mind?

Well, first remember I'm not an absolute expert regarding exploitation cinema, I've always seen bits and bobs of course but started really delving into it only last year, I think. That said I got kind of obsessed and now consider it among my favorites genres, if not my favorite... still have a lot to see though. If you find you do have an interest in the genre, go talk to Used Future. That dude knows the divine gutter of cinema very well.

I'm just going to list some movies and let you pick. I could pick more but I'll just keep it to a few.

Sex & Fury (was my introduction to pinky violence, and is a good one)
Faster, Pussycat! Kill! Kill! (an essential exploitation film, and I like it a lot, but not very dark or anything. Just fun and memorable)
A Fulci film... Zombie seems to be his most popular. I like The Beyond though. MM will tell you the day he watched The Beyond was the day he found out how stupid I was. :p
Thriller: A Cruel Picture OR Thriller: They Call Her One Eye

Regarding Thriller. If I want you to watch anything, watch Thriller, but keep in mind it's a dark film full of sex, drugs, and violence. There are two versions and I'll let you pick which one you go with. There's Thriller: A Cruel Picture and there's Thriller: They Call Her One Eye The main difference is A Cruel Picture features some more explicit stuff, notably unsimulated sex, while They Call Her One Eye doesn't. Tarantino prefers They Call Her One Eye, I prefer A Cruel Picture. I think Gunslinger here on the forum prefers They Call Her One Eye.

The reason I want you to watch that one the most is because when I think of exploitation cinema, my mind immediately goes to that film.

And look, if you don't want to watch any feel free to pass. It's not for everyone. I understand. :)

The Gunslinger45

03-03-16, 05:00 PM

I do prefer They Call Her One Eye. While I think the cadaver eye scene in Thriller was pretty legendary, the uncut and XXX rated sex footage was unneeded.

Swan

03-03-16, 05:03 PM

I do prefer They Call Her One Eye. While I think the cadaver eye scene in Thriller was pretty legendary, the uncut and XXX rated sex footage was unneeded.

This is an understandable opinion. For me, it just adds to the tone and visceral quality of the film.

Omnizoa

03-03-16, 05:03 PM

I'm just going to list some movies and let you pick. I could pick more but I'll just keep it to a few.
I've bookmarked Pussycat and Thriller and queued Sex & Fury.

Swan

03-03-16, 05:04 PM

I've bookmarked Pussycat and Thriller and queued Sex & Fury.

Cool man. Thanks for checking them out! Even if you end up not liking them.

I think you might like Pussycat the most of those. It's a very fun movie.

The Gunslinger45

03-03-16, 05:05 PM

Also I am torn, I love the fact that you loved Mad Max:Fury Road as much as I do, but WOW do we differ on Taxi Driver.

Mr Minio

03-03-16, 05:12 PM

My wet dreams play out more like Sex & Fury. https://49.media.tumblr.com/abcc210781f222991962bf8aab3e0717/tumblr_mqzoskBug41r86835o1_500.gif
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8fp-mk9ARls

Reiko Ike's always worthy of a wet dream.

Omnizoa

03-03-16, 05:17 PM

Also I am torn, I love the fact that you loved Mad Max:Fury Road as much as I do, but WOW do we differ on Taxi Driver.
I think that was a rough one to start with.

I did that cross review with Guaporense on Nausicaa which we both really like, but prior to that I had BRUTALLY ripped into (http://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&highlight=madoka&p=1444986#post1444986) Madoka Magica which he holds in extremely high regard.

I was also pretty underwhelmed by Blade Runner when I finally saw it. I liked The Fugitive more.

Omnizoa

03-04-16, 11:57 AM

http://twilighthollowproject.b1.jcink.com/uploads/twilighthollowproject/sexfury.gif

Sex and Fury

Erotic Action / Japanese / 1973

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
Sex & Fury (was my introduction to pinky violence, and is a good one)

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
Too much Sex, not enough Fury.

I riffed the **** out of this movie as I was watching it, it was so goofy at times.

"I wonder if 'nymphomaniac' is a name for you?"

No, but 'BEDFIRE' IS if you get that cigar any closer to her hair!

The movie's pretty brisk for the most part which keeps me interested in what's going on. The story's not difficult to follow up until the Deer, Boar, and Butterfly plotpoint comes out of nowhere like a shotgun going off in your ear.

UUUUHHHHH, an hour in and we were supposed to know this HOW?

A bunch of characters get introduced and then immediately forgotten for no reason other than a fart joke and a condom joke, but the whole mystery-solving arc of the movie (which is never a mystery) is essentially on vacation until they're referenced one last time for a gay joke.

One of my biggest complaints would easily have to be the sex scenes because they GO ON FOREVER and only two of them really serve any sort of purpose to the story.

There's one rape scene which exists for no other reason than to make the villain more villainous which is almost immediately followed by another rape scene which exists for no reason.

Eventually we get one sex scene in which our hero, Ocho, comes on to the bad guy and instantly I'm thinkin, "she's gonna kill him". Sure enough, given an absurd amount of time later, yep, she's poisoned her skin and his tit-sucklin' gets him killed. Saw that comin' last year.

You know, the second rape scene in this movie actually reminds me of a trope in porno I just find really absurd: The guy is trying to rape her, right? What in the **** is he doing rubbing his face all over her? Foreplay, dude? Really? Or are you JUST THAT REPRESSED?

http://img.pandawhale.com/post-42395-american-pie-jim-and-nadia-gif-a4Do.gif

To be honest, I'd have given this movie a solid [Meh...] if all it ever did was the opening naked swordfight (which was awesome), the poison sex (which took WAY too long), and inevitable final showdown (which couldn't come fast enough), but then this movie took a hard left turn into WTF BITCH!?

The English-speaking girl in the movie is ostensibly on the side of Ocho, and in a final confrontation on a train where Ocho helps to reunite her with her love interest, this girl wheels out of nowhere and pistolwhips her into unconsciousness after which he cut to Ocho chained up and being whipped into a bloody pulp.

WTF, BITCH!?

So now I'm like, "alright, she's gotta die now", but NO! Ocho doesn't get revenge, instead Ocho's off having an Empire Strikes Back moment while the English-speaking girl just gets randomly shot and killed to harp music. Oh no, how sad that she DIED.

http://www.reactiongifs.us/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/stop_dont_come_back_willy_wonka.gif

Ocho finally gets freed... somehow... and goes on a slaughtering spree which is still easier to watch than the Crazy 88s scene from Kill Bill and then the movie just ends like it was some epic journey that really definitely needed those sex scenes.

http://filmpulse.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Sex-and-Fury.jpg

Female Yakuza Tale, can you improve upon the formula?

Final Verdict: rating_2 [Just... Bad]

Swan

03-04-16, 12:06 PM

Shame. I'm not surprised you didn't like it mostly because I've disagreed with a lot of your reviews so far. I'm not going to boast about Sex and Fury being masterful storytelling, at least not in the conventional sense, and I fully admit it's trashy exploitation, but I love that stuff. I feel like the trashiness adds a very grimy style to the exploitation "genre". I also admit I'm a bit weird when it comes to movies, most people seem to have a different perception of what "good" is. In my opinion trash is "great," but not in the way most people think of it. I'm just an odd duck, I guess. Oh wait, I'm a swan.

I should note that from my understanding pinky violence is basically Japanese erotica with violence and style, which is why the sex scenes are so long. Glad you liked the naked swordfight scene, which was definitely the highlight for me, too.

Thanks for watching, though. I wanted to see where you stood with exploitation cinema, and now I have a better idea. :)

Omnizoa

03-04-16, 12:21 PM

Thanks for watching, though. I wanted to see where you stood with exploitation cinema, and now I have a better idea. :)
I'm lookin' at the sequel.

Swan

03-04-16, 12:22 PM

I actually don't like exploitation cinema too and that movie which is in your avatar is kinda weird.

:facepalm:

Thanks for the input.

Swan

03-04-16, 12:24 PM

I'm lookin' at the sequel.

I haven't seen that one yet.

Omnizoa

03-04-16, 12:24 PM

I haven't seen that one yet.
Interesting...

The Gunslinger45

03-04-16, 12:24 PM

Swan

03-04-16, 12:25 PM

Yeah. I've only seen Sex and Fury and Girl Boss Guerilla. If the sex scenes bugged you, stay away from the latter. :laugh:

Swan

03-04-16, 12:27 PM

Well, at least I have Gunslinger to appreciate the gutter of cinema with. Good man, that one.

Omnizoa

03-04-16, 12:30 PM

I thought Sex and Fury was good. Not great (even by Exploitation standards) but I am still glad I bought it. If you want other suggestions for exploitation titles I have a few recommendations:

Vice Squad
Oh my god, who is THIS GUY?

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-lPVGR-XCmbQ/Te1rxdWu5MI/AAAAAAAAAJY/9-GlI9QvOb0/s1600/Vice-Squad-Wings-Hauser-7.jpg

Stripped to Kill
Coffy
Death Wish
All bookmarked.

The Gunslinger45

03-04-16, 12:30 PM

Well, at least I have Gunslinger to appreciate the gutter of cinema with. Good man, that one.

I highly recommend Vice Squad to anyone. Plus last I checked it was on YouTube. Otherwise you have to pick up the DVD. Which is rare and is about 45 bucks for a region 1 version. Then again I bought the DVD immediately after I saw it on YouTube. :D

Swan

03-04-16, 12:31 PM

I highly recommend Vice Squad to anyone. Plus last I checked it was on YouTube. Otherwise you have to pick up the DVD. Which is rare and is about 45 bucks for a region 1 version. Then again I bought the DVD immediately after I saw it on YouTube. :D

You watch Ms. 45, I'll watch Vice Squad. Deal?

The Gunslinger45

03-04-16, 12:32 PM

Oh my god, who is THIS GUY?

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-lPVGR-XCmbQ/Te1rxdWu5MI/AAAAAAAAAJY/9-GlI9QvOb0/s1600/Vice-Squad-Wings-Hauser-7.jpg

All bookmarked.

Wings Hauser as the psychotic pimp Ramrod. Who also sings one of the GREATEST opening theme songs IN ANY MOVIE!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fMFqPFrfZ4o

The Gunslinger45

03-04-16, 12:32 PM

You watch Ms. 45, I'll watch Vice Squad. Deal?

Deal

Omnizoa

03-04-16, 12:35 PM

Wings Hauser as the psychotic pimp Ramrod.
Sold.

Omnizoa

03-04-16, 02:44 PM

http://twilighthollowproject.b1.jcink.com/uploads/twilighthollowproject/slime.gif

The Green Slime

Sci-Fi / English / 1968

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
Well, that poster of course.

You know, if this movie was made in Japan, I'd take this poster as a pretty solid bet that it'll contain tentacle rape.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/4a/The_Green_Slime_%281968_movie_poster%29.jpg

The film was shot in Japan with a Japanese director and film crew, but a non-Japanese cast
OOOOOHHH... O__O

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
No tentacle rape but, you know? I'd kinda prefer that to what we got.

My biggest complaint about the movie is the singularly useless female character who "doctors" offscreen but never actually does anything. The whole reason she exists is to serve as the central object putting our two male leads at odds over a love triangle.

She's not profoundly offensive in this respect, but she's entirely unlikable and she feeds into the second biggest issue I have with the movie which is the that same relationship dynamic.

The two male characters are opposing authorities at odds over how to run things. The older guy knows what he's doing, but the younger guy is compromising to a fault. That whole 1 persons life or jeopardize the whole station bit from Alien. Actually, a lot of stuff in The Green Slime reminds me of Alien. Particularly the argument I see online about how fake the slime monsters look.

I really don't get this argument. Sure the Xenomorphs are far cooler and more detailed monsters, but they're still OBVIOUSLY a guy in a suit with appendages puppeteered by strings.

I'm having this argument in the Ghostbusters 3 thread (http://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?t=20921&page=25) too right now over how fake the CG ghosts look. They're ****ING CG GHOSTS, the effects in the original Ghostbusters were ludicrously obvious too!

I don't BELIEVE they're really there, but there's certainly something to be said of them as actual threats. The slime monsters are plainly stupid and literally just flail themselves at you until you die which any character with Plot Armor can dodge. I'm much more inclined to criticize THAT than the effects.

Besides, before poking at the monsters themselves, how about taking a second glance at that space station bouncing on a string, on fire, IN SPACE.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_mpBGa4P5jUo/TUrWNGE1JgI/AAAAAAAAGTo/cUUAfxAwIis/s1600/greenslime9.jpg

Whatever. Despite my gripes, I actually did enjoy this movie. It's paced very well, it's keeps moving at a clip, and even if it is ludicrously predictable (called that last 20 minutes 4 for 4) it still feels like a classic campy sci-fi movie with all the trimmings true to the bone.

Just check out this review snippet from Wikipedia:
Variety referred to the film as "a poor man's version of 2001",
WHAT THE **** ARE YOU ON!?

That's like comparing Titanic to Jaws because they BOTH TAKE PLACE IN WATER.

Final Verdict: rating_4 [Pretty Good]

Omnizoa

03-05-16, 01:04 PM

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24468&stc=1&d=1457195637

Savage Streets

Action / English / 1984

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
This was another movie with a poster that made me go, "Hm hm hm... what have we here?".

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24469&stc=1&d=1457195840

A woman getting revenge? Perish the thought.

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
THIS is Sex and Fury.

Or one of several different ways you could also do Sex and Fury.

The first 3/4ths of the movie is setup for Linda Blair's character, Brenda, establishing her character as the likable punk girl. She's protective of her friends, she's not afraid to drop mean curses like ****, and she's so cool she wears sunglasses at night.

Knowing this is a revenge movie right off the bat isn't really necessary to call the plot beats note for note. All you need to see is one guy with razors for earrings burn a cigarette into his hand and leer at passing women to know he's obviously going to be the villain.

Drop a naive deaf girl in his path and WHAT THE **** DO YOU THINK IS GONNA HAPPEN?

She gets raped. This enrages Brenda, but since she doesn't know the culprits the movie basically idles in mourning over her teetering medical state as we launch and abort a subplot about Brenda unintentionally stealing away some idiot's boyfriend. Nothing ever comes of it save a half-naked fight in the shower room.

Well, everyone seems to be starting to move on, everything's going good right now and in fact Brenda's friend is getting married and she's pregnant and she's walking home alone and
DEAD.

Eventually Brenda's clued into the villains (even though there are literally no other likely suspects in the cast) and cranks into badass mode with Chekov's Crossbow and an 80s preparing-for-revenge montage.

http://i.ebayimg.com/00/s/NTAwWDM5OA==/z/-QIAAOSw7NNT3rzs/$_1.JPG

The ending is pretty satisfying with my only real complaint being that as soon as she gets injured once she becomes a Screaming Helpless Female until she whips out Chekov's Cigarette Lighter.

All said, the movie's pretty good. Ummm... not a fan of the use of the word, ******, which will be censored when I type this but will become transparent as to it's meaning when I clarify that it never seems to be used as a slur against homosexuals.

It never seems to be used as a slur against homosexuals.

Some food gets mentioned. I forget what.

One final speech about pigs getting castrated in a slaughterhouse puts the situation in an interesting perspective until Brenda says that they can't feel worse than her sister/friend did before they were raped/killed.

Really?

Final Verdict: rating_4 [Pretty Good]

Omnizoa

03-06-16, 05:53 AM

http://twilighthollowproject.b1.jcink.com/uploads/twilighthollowproject/tequila.gif

Hard Boiled

Action / Chinese / 1992

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
Because of False Writer's Favorite Movie Shootouts thread (http://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?t=44656), obviously.

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
I've seen Hard-Boiled many times before and it always kills me. There are SO MANY THINGS TO LIKE about this movie, but it just HAS to squeeze in those one or two things I ****ing hate.

Points in favor of the movie are obviously the shootouts.

It took me a while to really pinpoint what exactly it was that made these shootouts stand out so much to me, but I think it's the distinct absence of clinical intention.

With regular action movies all the stunts are hyper controlled to be safe and only involve a limited number of actors (because only X amount of characters die) and a small part of the set (because we can't replace everything). However with Hard-Boiled we gets HUGE body counts by way of civilian casualties and nearly EVERY part of any set of an action scene gets BLOWN TO PIECES.

You could probably blame the weird explosive power of the shotguns or how bullets create a completely unrealistic shower of sparks on metal surfaces, but I think pretty much everyone who watches this movie is more than willing to suspend that little bit of disbelief if it means seeing these guys absolutely ****ing TRASH every single location they find themselves in. It's no wonder the sequel video game, Stranglehold, featured destructible environments (which is a fun game, by the way).

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24480&stc=1&d=1457273909
Oh yeah. I have plans for these watermelons.

It helps that a big emphasis is put on movement so we see guys rollin' on hospital gurneys, flipping over tables, diving through windows, and using the environment in creative ways to keep the constant gunfire fresh and exciting.

Beyond the action though I'm very satisfied with the straightforward plot which, because it's a Hong Kong action movie, OBVIOUSLY involves triads (as per Rule #1 of The Official Rules of Hong Kong Action Movies), however it manages to keep it simple, straightforward, and grounded towards our hero.

The atmosphere is also a very memorably moody mix of sorrowful jazz and thumpin' action beats. Even though the editing of the movie itself is questionable (strange transitions and awkward moments of slow-mo abound), the music keeps the tension on track.

Beyond any of this though, I can criticize.

I could take a poke at the sometimes silly dialog ("bullshiiiiit!!!"), the OCCASIONAL gout of blood (it's like two or three times, I've seen hella worse), or even the weird religious moments (why in THE **** do they have an altar for worship IN THE POLICE STATION!?), but I'm gonna be honest. If that was all there was to complain about I'd let it go.

My biggest complaints are as follows:

Strike 1: Captive Birds
Strike 2: Beef Jerky
Strike 3: Fishing

https://media.giphy.com/media/IMJIu0wjH8Kdi/giphy.gif

Say WHAAATEVER you want, but that **** skeeves me out hardcore and it stains the characters for me.

If all of that was cut out. 5/5, no question.

But as it is, it's over 20 years old, AND I WATCH THIS MOVIE SO OFTEN ANYWAY, that I might was well just buy it and get it over with.

It's not like some of my other favorite movies don't include that stuff too. Black Dynamite, Hook, and Jurassic Park come to mind, but *********, I WANT LESS OF THAT CRAP, NOT MORE.

Final Verdict: rating_4 [Pretty Good]

Omnizoa

03-06-16, 10:12 AM

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24478&stc=1&d=1457271013

Female Yakuza Tale:
Inquisition and Torture

Erotic Action / Japanese / 1973

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
It's the sequel to Sex and Fury, and hey, it COULD be better.

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
WELP! This is a bottom-of-the-barrel movie for me. A movie I never want to see again and sincerely wish I'd never seen to begin with.

The movie opens up with a completely detached opening credit sequence in which Ocho's character swordfights once again in the nude. No real reason this time. In the first movie she was taking a bath so there was at least a degree of excuse for it, but here it just seems like she didn't tie her clothes on properly since they all fall off within minutes and we see breasts get hang time in slow motion.

Eventually though, the movie snaps into gear and we dig into some sort of crime spree involving what are literally referred to a string of "Crotch-Gouge" serial murders. And no, it's not even remotely attempting to be funny.

Ocho runs into the bad guys right away and I'm thinkin', "great!", we'll get more badassery in this movie, but no. She just idles around, steps on a few toes, and spies on people until we discover that the bad guys are using brothel girls to traffic cocaine (or something) in their vaginas.

There's a LOT OF IMPLIED FISTING.

If I give a single credit to this movie it's that it successfully managed to keep the sex scenes from overstaying their welcome. Perhaps the creators felt they were already compensating by having over half the cast being naked at any given time, BUT AT LEAST I wasn't tapping my fingers waiting for them to end.

In fact, if there's a single memorable scene in the whole movie it's the only time Ocho gets naked with the bad guy (which also doesn't make any sense since she's not killing him this time) and they basically have a foreplay fight. He plays his her ears, belly button, and feet and she puts his head through a wall which results in a silly moment when he discovers his minions eavesdropping on the other side.

That it's though. That's like THE ONLY GOOD PART IN THIS WHOLE MOVIE!

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24479&stc=1&d=1457273856
Be careful when casually brushing your ammunition off a table, THIS CAN HAPPEN.

Ocho only gets into two fights, the first one is against the brothel owner, literally named "Boss Lady", who instantly, suddenly, and unexplainably becomes an ally at the end despite their initial encounter essentially translating to:

I would like to buy a servant from you.*XENA SCREAM*

The second fight isn't even Ocho's fight. She gets in a few swings, but the whole scene is dominated by what seems to be a desperate attempt to drive the nudity level up to 11 when all of the girls strip naked and just dogpile the men. One particular guy gets beaten and stabbed until he's a dead bloody heap and then several of the girls piss on his corpse.

It's at this point that I'm pretty sure that I'm having none of this movie.

It's boring, the plot seems to skip constantly, missing key scenes or adding in entirely new scenes we don't need, and our starring hero, Ocho, doesn't even get to be half as badass as she did in the first movie.

And to put a cherry on top of this masterclass of ass... I've never heard a movie end on such poignant words:

Your pussy is going to catch a cold.

Final Verdict: rating_1 [Irredeemably Awful]

Swan

03-06-16, 10:19 AM

That last line makes me want to see it.

Omnizoa

03-06-16, 10:31 AM

That last line makes me want to see it.
I figured. But it really is a drag of a movie. If you liked Sex and Fury, I can't imagine this is as any sort of step up.

Absurdity like that is far too scarce to justify the rest of it.

Omnizoa

03-06-16, 04:25 PM

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24483&stc=1&d=1457295881

Kung Fury

Action Comedy / English / 2015

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
Ehhh... just another poster (http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24481&stc=1&d=1457294784).

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
Dumb dumb dumb dumb dumbdumbdumbdumbdumbdumbdumb.

Where do I BEGIN with whats wrong with this movie?

The plot skips around.
The characters talk in bad puns.
The special effects look fake.
And the ladies are in barbarian loincloths with bare cleavage on display? THAT'S NOT PRACTICAL ARMOR. And it's SEXIST!

I don't think this movie is historically accurate either.

https://supercultshow.files.wordpress.com/2015/08/a3kds5m.gif

You can watch it here (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=bS5P_LAqiVg).

Final Verdict: rating_5 [Friggen' Awesome]

Omnizoa

03-06-16, 04:44 PM

http://33.media.tumblr.com/c6ef0c6066a71e6ff9827b30c4ac2adf/tumblr_inline_o1jnrilvyj1s3ina4_500.gif
There... there aren't any DVDs... Why aren't there any DVDs?

Omnizoa

03-07-16, 08:14 AM

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24485&stc=1&d=1457352992

Crawl Or Die
Horror / English / 2014

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
I've seen it once before. Felt like reassessment time.

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
I HAAAAAAAAAAAATE horror movies.

Not that all horror movies are terrible, but I'm far fonder of the thriller aspect than the horror aspect.

Blood geysers? No.
Graphic dismemberment? No.
Jumpscares? HEEEEEELL no.

I don't like the idea of a movie that's supposed to make me feel bad and I'm indefinitely baffled that people find this genre appealing.

THAT SAID, this is a horror movie I like. And I seem to be mostly alone in that since this movie has terrible reviews across the board.

Here's the set up: It's a minimalist indie movie. The movie opens up to a group of bodyguards being chased by something unseen in the woods before they escape into an underground complex and find themselves chased through a series of ever-decreasing-in-size tunnels as they get picked off one by one.

The monster at their heels is faster than them and bullets and explosions only seem to slow it down temporarily. When you think the tunnels can't get any smaller THEY DO.

I definitely see why people would harsh on this movie... unfairly.

There's very little dialog and nothing in the way of twists or turns to deviate away from exactly what it says on the box. It's a chase movie. The whole way. And you can't be multitasking with this movie since it's an experience piece. The POINT is for you to absorb every little thing that happens because in a movie like this the little things are far more important than they might otherwise seem to be.

As the tunnels get smaller, we see that the characters slowly lose their ability to move freely.

The first tunnels are rounded and throw them off balance.

The second tunnels make it difficult to see past each other.

The third tunnels make it difficult to change places.

And it goes on. It's a very exhausting movie, but nuance is hugely relevant here.

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24486&stc=1&d=1457353024

I can only imagine most people who watched this simply weren't paying attention or were waiting for jumpscares or had ADD because a lot of people just seem to write off the movie as boring.

I wasn't bored. And I credit that to the one thing this movie desperately needed to get right above nearly anything else: pacing.

With as little that happens in this movie, what does happen needs to occur frequently enough to keep me engaged. A lot of the movie is just meant to be absorbed, but no moment ever goes on too terribly long before someone dies, the tunnels get smaller, and the stakes ratchet up a notch.

If you're cool with that, you can dig this movie, if not, then go watch Transformers or something.

Obviously this movie shares quite a bit conceptually with Buried, which I hated. Suffice it to spoil: the protagonist survives. So no ****** downer ending. Having said that, this movie gets extraordinarily hopeless by the end.

My favorite part is easily when it's just two of them left and the monster's crawling just feet behind them and the music kicks in with this Drums In The Deep-type **** as it becomes a race to wiggle away faster.

Even later in the movie when we can't see the end of the tunnels anymore and the monster's still on our heels, it kicks into this sad piano melody which really does make it seem like it's over... but it's not.

Actually, I'd be inclined to credit the sound design as a whole if it wasn't also one of the weakest parts of the movie.

On one hand, the simple incidental backing music is well placed and the ambient sounds of the monster clicking and rustling away some distance behind them are great.

On the other hand, some of the sounds are terrible. Some digging clips sound muffled when they should sound clear, and one particular gunshot in the movie didn't even register with me the first time it happened because it's so bizarrely quiet. Some of the dialog seems unnecessarily quiet too and when it gets to the end of the movie you'll probably notice that they failed to redub over their scenes since in order to adjust their dialog volume during a quiet moment, they just haphazardly jank it up when a character's talking which is extremely obvious given the spike in background noise.

There's also an issue with lighting at the start of the movie which makes it somewhat difficult to see where the characters are in relation to their surroundings, however this evens out after the first 5 minutes.

My only other REAL complaint is in regards to the plot. Which is largely absent save for a brief couple minutes of flashback which feature the bodyguards getting briefed on their mission to escort "the last uninfected fertile woman" to Earth 2. Apparently Earth is either rampant with infertility or viruses or both (STI apocalypse?) and they gotta relocate to Earth 2 which is where they encounter the monster (oops! not safe after all).

My dig here is simply the "last fertile woman on earth" premise. The implication is obviously that the human race is relying on her to procreate more humans but EEEEEWWWWWWWWWWWWW!!!!!

http://cdn3.teen.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/picky-eater-problems-5.gif

I NEVER liked that set up. That an entire species is depending on one woman to be impregnated and have babies multiple times for what?

"The good of the species"??? What a load of CRAP. I've talked to people who believe this too, that the survival of our species is so ******* important that it would be the "DUTY" of the last woman to have sex with as many men as necessary to ensure the survival of humanity, but UH-UH. I'm not havin' that.

It'd be one thing if the woman WANTED to do it, but this movie, instead of leaving that unpleasant question of consent hanging in the air, just outright says, "BTW guys, if she kicks and screams and says no, ignore her".

O___O That's ****ed up, movie.

FORTUNATELY, this issue isn't compounded by a male lead and instead we get a refreshingly punky badass Action Girl named Tank to helm the escape.

Why can't we have more badass punky girl protagonists in movies?

Why do I have to empty out garbage bins and dig through VHS tapes to find them in **** like Crawl or Die or Savage Streets?

Whatever. The thing with this movie is that Crawl or Die seems to be intent on setting up Tank as a NEW badass Action Girl for a TRILOGY of Crawl or Die movies.

Here's my thing with that: SOUNDS COOL, but don't do the same movie. Crawl or Die works on it's own and it's stretching believability well past Ellen Ripley's Alien magnetism to put Tank through the same exercise of tunnel-crawling again.

Do something different but with a similar gimmick. Like Buried (but not Buried) or Pitch Black or The Thing or It Follows or SOMETHING, just don't do Crawl or Die again.

Unless you're remaking it. Just don't do a direct sequel.

Make it like... Tank's episodic adventures or something. I'd watch that.

Anyway, one little tidbit I've yet to mention is an amusing little note about the movie's title. Apparently the movie was originally going to be named "Crawl Bitch Crawl" which was abandoned for obvious reasons.

Ironically I think it's also an extremely appropriate name for the movie since I can totally see someone watching this, seeing the monster close in on Tank and yell at the screen, "CRAWL, BITCH! CRAWL!"

ANYWAY, since I'm one voice among many dissenting ones, let's take a quick glance at some of the criticisms on iMDB:

This film is only 1h30 but seems to be 3h long. Very little happens...

...Explanations to why they have to do it this painful and dangerous way, are reduced to a minimum. There are other films such as The Descent, The Cave or The Cavern, where all the action is under ground. But these were way better than this one. Because there was a real script, plenty of twists and action, good acting and more generally good filming...

...Some spectators will probably leave half way into the film, some will just keep playing with their tablets or mobile, while checking every 10 minutes to see if the story has moved on...
Like I was saying before, you gotta give some degree of credit to little developments. If all you see when you watch the movie is a bunch of people crawling through pipes, you're not paying attention.

The whole premise of the movie wasn't understandable, to me, anyway, and I had to find a synopsis online to actually discover what the movie was about.
o_O It's really REALLY uncomplicated. The movie didn't even need the flat couple minutes of exposition that BLATANTLY TELL YOU exactly what's happening.

I wish I could give this movie a worse rating. You cant SEE anything, the make up is A JOKE...

The only reason this movie gets watched is because of the cute blonde girl, looking half naked, with a pistol in her hand, as the cover.

Mouth breathing loudly IS NOT ACTING, its filler...

...Snarling in the background...in a fake computer generated way...does not scare me.

The explanation of the mission, trash.

You cant see the characters...doesn't make it claustrophobic, it just makes me angry...
Okay, okay, okay, if that stuff bothered you, that's fine, you're not necessarily wrong, but don't get angry!

and the movie didn't even try anything new, deep, or original...This guy also gave Star Wars: The Force Awakens a 1 out of 10.

He also gave a 1 out of 10 to... WTF is Dyke Hard? Well, if it's anything like Star Wars or Crawl or Die or... Die Hard, I gotta watch it.

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24487&stc=1&d=1457353050

Final Verdict: rating_4 [Pretty Good]

Swan

03-07-16, 08:15 AM

LOUD NOISES

Omnizoa

03-07-16, 08:19 AM

LOUD NOISES
Heh?

Omnizoa

03-07-16, 08:21 AM

Crawl or Die review up over heaaah: CLICKITY CLACK (http://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=1473292)

Omnizoa

03-07-16, 02:30 PM

http://twilighthollowproject.b1.jcink.com/uploads/twilighthollowproject/cube.gif

Cube

Psychological Thriller / English / 1997

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
Another minimalist concept thriller I've been meaning to rewatch.

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
Similar to Crawl or Die, Cube is all about one thing: A bunch of people trapped in a cube surrounded by cubes and trying to escape.

The premise is straightforward enough. How'd they get in the cubes? Where'd the cubes come from? What purpose do they serve?

The answers to these and similar questions are explored over the course of the movie in the form of characters accusing each other of paranoia. Some are answered, most are not. And you know, mystery can work and as far as Cube is concerned, I think it does.

As proven by it's far inferior sequels, knowing the circumstances of the cube or seeing it from the outside looking in really just ruins the deceit.

It's like a magic trick. It's spoiled if you know the secret and sometimes you'll be ****ing horrified by how it's accomplished.

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24489&stc=1&d=1457374522

Ultimately while it's better not knowing the secrets surrounding the Cube, I feel the movie suffers from lack of apparent point. It exercises unique themes and elements not explored in other movies, but it never really does anything with them by trying to be about anything.

Considering that, the movie has to fall back on it's plot which I'm inclined to criticize on two major fronts besides.

Firstly, the graphic death scenes. I get that we want to get an idea of the gruesome stakes at play if the characters screw up and go the wrong way, but even in Kung Fury I don't like seeing crossections of people after they've been suddenly bisected. That's just gross and does nothing for a squeamish audience.

At least in Kung Fury it was immediately played off in a joke about being able to tell whether the guy was dead or not, but here it seems like we get this stuff just because it's a movie only horror fans would watch and horror fans won't be satisfied unless they see guts spilled. This movie came out just a month after Event Horizon, did you know?

Secondly, Quentin. Agghhh Quentin.

Quentin's character is frustrating to watch since we share his perspective for a large chunk of the movie where he can be both personable while throwing out a great line or two ("Kazan, my man!"), but the problem is his sudden heelfaceturn into a psychopath.

Okay, let's be fair, it's well foreshadowed but the approach the movie takes to portray him as increasingly mad pushes cheesy without ever diving into full-on NUTJOB.

GRANTED, I'd have preferred a more realistic twist to the movie in the form of Quentin appearing totally reasonable for the vast majority of it until we, as the audience, are forced to step back and reassess (a la 'the big picture', a theme that would have been perfect to echo one final time in this way), but alas, Quentin just seems to go off the deep end immediately, crosses the line into antagonist by the halfway point, and the movie never really takes a chance to turn him into a memorable villain which it feels pretty empty without.

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24488&stc=1&d=1457373388

Perhaps Quentin could have represented human ignorance, or narrow-mindedness? If that was the goal here though I think it failed to convey those ideas effectively.

It seems equal parts concerned about WHY the cube as well as WHY the characters, and it may be noteworthy to consider that the one police officer, the one guy who's job it is to maintain order, is the only one to lose his ****, but he's also the one guy with dark skin in the entire cast.

To exploit a sour metaphor, it feels like the movie's fishing with the concept of "purpose", but not catching anything with it. It's just there. Driving dialog, but arriving nowhere.

I could attempt to derive about as much meaning from the fact that condiments are mentioned no less than three times in the movie.

Sour Cream, Butter, and Honey.

What purpose do these serve other than to irritate me? It's a conspiracy, that's what.

The characters constantly speak of a 'they', but there's no 'they', just as they speak of food when there's no food to be seen.

It's just a bunch of rooms.

But it's not even a bunch of rooms it's just one room shot from different angles and lit in different ways. You're just here. Because you know something and what you know you can't explain. But you feel it. You've felt it your entire life, that there's something wrong with the world. You don't know what it is, but it's there. Like a splinter in your mind.

Final Verdict: rating_4 [Pretty Good]

Omnizoa

03-08-16, 12:11 PM

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24497&stc=1&d=1457450774

The Night Porter

Erotic Romance / Italian / 1974

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
It was an inspiration for Toy Story.

I have a fetish for schutzstaffel uniforms.

I was told a killer whale with a bazooka would be involved.

One of these statements are true.

Ya got me, I totally thought Night Porter was the name of a porpoise commando.

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
Ya KNOW... this couuuuuuuuuld have worked.

The idea of a concentration camp prisoner falling in with one of her tormentors with a kinky reunion sounds like a HUUUUUGE stretch, not to mention a concept that runs the risk of being offensive on nearly every level, but if Night Porter proves anything, it's that this concept is possible. Just not in this movie.

The first half of the movie resumes years after World War 2 and we follow one such ex-nazi (?) officer when he's working a pitiful service job, largely submitting to people left and right, while he's also dealing with his upcoming trial intended to pass judgment on his past war crimes.

One of his victims shows up and while she seems fearful and uncertain at first, we're tricklefed flashbacks that lead us to believe that their relationship may not have been quite so one-sided as we might otherwise safely assume.

Our main guy meanwhile has a chance to prove himself redeemable to the audience through his reaction to other ex-nazi (?) colleagues that want to see him safely through his trial by "filing away" witnesses.

Two main trip-ups here.

Firstly, we waste no time showing that he raped her, likely more than once, which obviously does worse than NOTHING to endear us to him as a character. It just makes the job of selling this concept harder than it already is, AND IT'S PLENTY HARD BELIEVE YOU ME

Secondly, we get one scene in which he meets with a witness who says he knows the girl and after a proposed fishing trip (URG!) we get an audio overlay while he flips out either implying that he killed the man, or thought to kill the man. It's not made entirely clear.

Alright, we're in a rough patch, our "bad guy" seems like a pretty miserable guy who feels guilty about what he's done and our leading lady appears to harbor some complex feelings towards him. MAYBE this can work.

NOPE.

At the 52 minute mark, the dead-center of the movie, Night Porter pulls The Secretary on us and AGAIN that BDSM switch is flipped like a ******* lightbulb. THAT'S NOT HOW THIS **** WORKS.

I should know, my slaves are very well pampered.

So, not only does our main guy have the weight of a rape history and an eventually CONFIRMED murder of a witness who was honestly, pretty friggen' considerate despite this guy being A NAZI, but he also zones in on the girl, starts yelling at her "WHY ARE YOU HERE!? WHY ARE YOU HERE!?", BEATING HER, AND PREVENTING HER FROM ESCAPING...

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24498&stc=1&d=1457452420
"Ooooh... I fear for my life, I suddenly want your penis now."

It's AAAAAAAAAAAAALL downhill from there. And it's not even a smooth decline, there are giant pits and boulders all over that hill, so you're not bikin' down it without skinning your knees or breakin' a wheel.

The girl's character is effectively broken over the writer's knee and just has this dead stare the rest of the movie while the guy instantly confesses his love for her and just smacks her cross the face at regular intervals. They're not even trying to smack her sexily.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-QvNCwOK5-t4/UrbzXYunAoI/AAAAAAAAPd8/OregQh1zfFc/s1600/trying-not-to-laugh.gif

Eventually the other nazi guys figure out what he's doing which they care about because... her potential testimony endangers him? Even though she's literally subservient to him? IDOFUQQINNO...

Eventually they starve themselves out in his apartment because malnutrition is sexy (just like pissing over somebody's office chair is sexy) until they eventually walk outside and promptly get shot.

Dead.

Movie over.
http://media.tumblr.com/1bb40943b5a3812360f734e8cc376107/tumblr_inline_nkmfg1ff5o1r79k32.gif

Final Verdict: rating_2 [Just... Bad]

MovieMeditation

03-08-16, 02:40 PM

Cube is pretty good indeed. At least the concept is awesome.

Omnizoa

03-08-16, 10:53 PM

Cube is pretty good indeed. At least the concept is awesome.
Yeah, Cube is one of those movies I wouldn't mind seeing remade since I'm certain it can be done better.

Omnizoa

03-09-16, 05:05 PM

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24521&stc=1&d=1457557394

Something From Alice
Stop-Motion Fantasy Horror / Czech / 1988

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
I stumbled over a brief clip of it on Vimeo some time ago. Looked like a long lost stop-motion classic.

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
Let's get the elephant in the room out of the way first.

AAAAAUUUGGGHHH!!!
http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24522&stc=1&d=1457557427

Now that we're past that, I've read reviews saying that this was one of the adaptions of Alice in Wonderland closest to the original source material. I call BOGUS.

1988's Czechoslovakian "Alice" (or "Something from Alice", I'm just going to call it unofficially "Alice Thought" because that makes too much sense) is far from an accurate retelling of Lewis Carrol's story. Entire sections of the story are skipped outright and new sequences are invented out of nowhere.

The new sequences are fortunately right at home with the original story given their curiouser and curiouser combination of discovery and befuddlement. One particular scene (which happened to be the one I watched prior to the movie) features a rat swimming up to Alice after she's filled the room with her tears as he proceeds to climb up on her head and casually build a fire with her hair to cook a pot of food.

Scenes like these are welcome, but the omissions hurt, particularly the total absence of The Cheshire Cat (however...). There's little wordplay here too given that most of the movie is silent and what little dialog there is is narrated to us by Alice.

If there's anything I think Alice Thought nails harder than any other adaption I've seen before it, it's the aesthetic. Nearly everything in the movie looks like it was made from something dug out of the biggest oldest attic they could find and in the process I think they really really captured that ancient nostalgia that few of us still remember and even fewer of us had the chance to experience. It probably emulates the environment a little girl growing up in the English 1850s better than any other movie I've seen.

The Mad Hatter's a marionette, the March Hare's a windup toy, and when Alice shrinks in size, she's presented as a porcelain doll. From pincushions to skeleton keys, the world feels extraordinarily distant from the 80s, save what few effects were only possible given the technology then.

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24523&stc=1&d=1457557447

The stop motion, if you're into that sort of thing, is immediately engaging to me. It's that rough blend of stop-motion framerates and real-time camera footage that gives it a very Wallace & Gromit feel (and by that I actually mean a very Gumbi feel). When you see Alice's hands bat at one of the creatures, it's obvious that they're fake hands, and similarly it's obvious that when the actress herself is in the shot, all of the creatures are suddenly immobile (save a select few effects shots like the one with the rat on her head which is bookended by similar one-or-the-other shots).

The general mix of great stop-motion, the old attic aesthetic, and of course that layer of madness Alice in Wonderland wouldn't be without all makes Alice Thought a very memorable, watchable, and nostalgic ride.

BUT...

This has easily got to be one of the most disgusting movies I've ever seen.

If you can't already tell, that's a real rabbit they're using to portray the White Rabbit. As in a dead one. As in the story literally has a taxidermied rabbit come to life and start running around with scissors.

Now, to be honest, the concept of an old stuffed rabbit coming to life and struggling to maintain it's stuffing by eating sawdust is kinda interesting to me. I liked how every time he takes his pocketwatch out he's got to brush the sawdust off.

I'd be cool with that... if it was a fake rabbit. It's real though. Dead real.

Just like MOST of the critters in this movie. The rabbit itself is easier to feign life into given it's fur, but when they animate a dead fish for the Fish-Footman and whatever the hell monstrosity they got for this hot mess:

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24524&stc=1&d=1457557479

...I'm just sickened. LOOK at that mouth! It's rotted to hell!

Not like skeletons are any better, WHICH THEY ALSO ANIMATE.

It's bad enough to dress up the corpses of some poor thing and pretend to make it dance like some massive ****ing sociopath, but they use LIVE animals too!

Hedgehogs, chickens, A WHOLE LOT A BEATLES, and one PARTICULARLY terrified piglet were subjected to this movie.

Also whatever creature got diced up to play the animate slab of meat.

Yes, they animate a pile of meat.

*breaths* I don't think this movie was made for me.

Final Verdict: rating_2 [Just... Bad]

It does lend itself one very important question though: What might have happened if Tum Burton brought Henry Selick to create a stop-motion Alice in Wonderland instead of that futterwacken **** we got?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6dosfiJdr0g

Omnizoa

03-09-16, 05:10 PM

Alice (1988) review up at the following coordinates: Leftways by Crossways by Slantways by Longways (http://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=1474832#post1474832)

Omnizoa

03-11-16, 04:41 PM

http://twilighthollowproject.b1.jcink.com/uploads/twilighthollowproject/wrongtrousers.gif

The Wallace & Gromit Trilogy

Stop-Motion Comedy / English / 1989-1995

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
After Alice Thought, it got me jonesing for some stop-motion. It's been ages since I've actually seen Wallace and Gromit. Reassessment time!

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
I know there are more than 3 W&G shorts and I know that they're approximately as long as Kung Fury each, but I don't care. It's tough to think of one and not all of them, and by all of them I mean the 3 they made before doing Chicken Run and then returning to the series with a feature-length movie which Dreamworks saw fit to **** with.

That's not part of my nostalgia. Besides, these three movies are listed as one under the title "Wallace & Gromit in Three Amazing Adventures" on moviedb.org, so I'm running with that.

Anyway, without going overlong, let's chat on each short individually and just what thoughts immediately float to the surface.

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24572&stc=1&d=1457981437
1.) A Grand Day Out (4/5)

I think A Grand Day Out hit a lot of people the same way And Now For Something Completely Different hit a lot of people.

"I don't get it. I'm not a fan of British humor."

Frankly, I don't get the complaint. Surely comedy can take it's time and rely less on blatant jokes and more on just sticking a toe over the boundary of silliness.

The first 5 minutes are slow and the pace here comes across like A Grand Day Out was intended to be a demo project. It may very well have been, but regardless of what it comes across as I think it usually catches first time viewers shortly after the setup.

Wallace and Gromit want to vacation somewhere where there's cheese (I know) and decide the moon would be the perfect place (because the moon's made of cheese of course). This joke is honestly pretty dated by today's standards, I can't imagine many people growing up today would actually know that used to be a thing.

After an upbeat rocket-building montage which has a couple moments of slapstick, Gromit's in the pilot seat and Wallace has lit the fuse (because it's like a bottle rocket I guess) and is standing there thinking what he's missed before going...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=47jT8ks8oWk

"The crackers, Gromit! We forgot the crackers!" That musical sting combined with his goofy (and soon-to-be signature) hand gesture just pulls it all together at which point we get a dramatic action sequence of racing the fuse to run up stairs and grab crackers (which appears to be the only thing in their cabinets).

By this point I don't think there's anyone with a sense of humor who couldn't find this amusing. The short adventure that follows takes them to the moon and back again all while exercising a peculiar mix of fairly slow-paced sequences, visual gags, and occasional bursts of energy.

I like it, and I feel the dog/cheese stuff is abstracted out to a fairly comfortable degree for me.

Recommended.

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24541&stc=1&d=1457725835

2.) The Wrong Trousers (5/5)

The Wrong Trousers, being a sequel, serves to cement what Aardman Productions considered to be integral to a Wallace & Gromit short.

Other than the two characters and their relationship, we establish that Wallace is an inventor, Gromit is most definitely the smarter of the two, and there's always an air of a horror atmosphere which is emphasized by the title font and excellent and memorable soundtrack.

The soundtrack for all of these shorts are good, and it's not just the music, the sound design is really great too which lends an appreciable weight and realism to even simple things.

We get a PeeWee's Big Adventure breakfast machine to open up which is a lot more enjoyable to watch and helps maintain the faster pace of this episode which ultimately culminates in an awesome action sequence near the end which must have stretched AP's stop-motion skills to the limit at the time.

Something I always notice going into this episode is Wallace's permanently defined mouth which would shrink to lips in A Grand Day Out. You also can't mention The Wrong Trousers without giving due attention to The Penguin as the antagonist who put's Batman's Penguin to shame without even saying a word, just a chiller sting and a lightning flash.

Also a gun.

I think Gromit's estranged relationship with Wallace due to the introduction of The Penguin plays out ludicrously better and over a shorter running time than most any other character breakups I've seen in movies or tv shows. They make it seem so simple to care. And yet so often I don't.

The usual stuff is still there, even more so this time, but given The Penguin and Gromit sharing awareness with the audience, it's still abstracted out to a comfortable degree for me.

Strongly recommended. Watch it!

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24542&stc=1&d=1457726936

3.) A Close Shave (3/5)

I never really paid attention to the length of these shorts before, but it's telling that A Close Shave always felt way longer than either of the other two shorts despite only lasting a minute or two longer.

The best thing I have to say about it is that the animation has improved ever so slightly, and whether it's skill or budget, whatever it was gave this one room to be fancier with it's claymation work and push further with even more physical comedy, liquid effects, and bigger action sequences.

Beyond that, I'll admit the short has definitely made me laugh in the past, but it's easily the least rewatchable of the three.

Part of the reason for that I think is the subplot involving Wallace hitting on the yarn store owner (who's secretly a sheep thief). I really don't care whether they end up together in the end or not and when she turns him down in the end there's a big empty silence full of all the ****s I don't give.

I care when Gromit gets shown up by The Penguin and steals his place at home even though he has no mouth or words to telegraph his jealousy and loneliness with, but Wallace's fascination with Whateverhernameis comes off as unintentionally weak. Or is it intentional? If it is, it's not funny, because beyond them looking the same save hair and earrings, there's nothing amusing about their banter that isn't the exact same thing I've seen a million times fail in other romcom situations.

The other part is all that crap that was abstracted out in the prior shorts is brought to the forefront here. Cheese, pets, sheep-wrangling, wool, meat, eeeeeggggggghhhhhhhh...

http://i.imgur.com/8IRCJ2e.gif

If you're like me, and who am I kidding of course you aren't, then you won't like this one as much as the other two, but if you aren't then you can probably expect a couple yucks.

This is the movie that introduced the now shockingly popular Shaun the Sheep spin-off series (wait, this is a thing?) and I still don't really know why.

Okay, I get it, he's marketable as hell, but Shaun in A Close Shave is funny only because he's one-dimensional and always has permanent expression of shocked indifference on his face.

Make him the protagonist of his own series? >_> Okayyy...

Not/Maybe/Kinda recommended.

Overall, a very memorable collection of animated classics. Not just some of the first stop-motion-centric movies, but also some of the best. Which reminds me...

Where'd my stop-motion movies go? Last thing I saw was ParaNorman.

Maybe this Kubo and the Two Strings'll be good, but... Seth Rogan's attached and I don't find his schtick terribly funny.

Final Verdict: rating_4 [Pretty Good]

MovieMeditation

03-11-16, 04:44 PM

Arhh, too bad. I've wanted to watch this for quite some time.

Omnizoa

03-11-16, 05:06 PM

Arhh, too bad. I've wanted to watch this for quite some time.
You turned off by that stuff too?

Guaporense

03-13-16, 04:36 PM

I am planning to watch this since 2012.

Omnizoa

03-15-16, 07:35 PM

http://cdn.makeagif.com/media/9-02-2015/uDgv5A.gif

Tron

Sci-Fi Adventure / English / 1982

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
I wasn't able to finish watching it the first time I saw it. What with all this 80s stuff, now seems a good time to wrap it up.

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
Having now completed Tron, I get the feeling that had I actually seen it all the way through back in the day, it would easily have become one of my favorite staples.

Unless I'm missing something, Tron is almost certainly the progenitor of that "80s sci-fi" (https://www.google.com/search?q=80s+sci-fi&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj5xNis1cPLAhWMVz4KHUQGAHoQ_AUIBygB) visual aesthetic I like so much and being the first (again, unless I'm missing something and if so please tell me) I'm inclined to lend some big points to it.

Clearly, Tron's visuals are accomplished in a variety of ways, those foremost being 3D modeling and rotoscoping. Where either would prove excessive or impractical, the sets are designed to conceal their surfaces and textures and are probably brushed over in post to better contrast their light and dark patterns from rogue lights.

The rotoscoping is done very well. It looks quite dated now of course and the human characters stand out with a gross amount of texture, but they clash mostly with the 3D models which is technology still with one foot in crib and the only way it barely manages to get away with it is the explicitly computer-generated setting they exist in.

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24579&stc=1&d=1458080821

Enough about the visuals though. As much as I may geek out over how it looks, it's not just eye candy, it's trying to be a movie. So how does it work as a story?

It's... serviceable. In a bare minimum kinda way.

A lot of the dialog is spattered with computer jargon which will simultaneously goes over the heads of people who don't get it, clash with the understandings of people who do get it, and frequently just venture directly into Star Trek-style technobabble.

This is odd to me considering that being one of the first movies to seriously invest in 3D modeling the creators MUST have had some reasonable idea of how these things work, so I feel like either the writer was either completed detached from that creative process or they felt that they had to stoop down to audience levels and trade out "actually makes sense if you understand computers" with "just sounds cool".

Save that which I can overlook, the story feels pretty stock-standard. Guy gets sucked into a computer, has to fight an evil program, beats the evil program, saves the day. That's it.

This movie loses points for me on two major fronts plotwise:

1.) Inexplicably forced love interest completely blindsides the climactic moment with a kiss that is neither earned, deserved, or makes sense. STUPID.

2.) This movie seems pretty schizophrenic about who the hero should be. The premise is about Jeff Bridges who gets sucked into a computer and has to fight his way out by beating the malevolent AI that runs it. Sounds like he'd be the hero, right? Well the movie's not called "Flynn" is it? SOOO... maybe it's about Tron?

Maybe he's a martyr at the end?
Maybe Tron represents something about the themes of the story?
Maybe Jeff Bridges dies and somehow he leaves the system up to Tron to carry on?

Nope, he's literally just some guy. Granted, he's not a total pedestrian, he's SUPPOSED to be there since his real-world counterpart created him specifically to keep things in order, but he really is second fiddle to Jeff Bridges nearly the whole way through the movie. He has one or two brief moments of fighting, but was that really enough to cement him as our primary protagonist? He vaguely echoes a recurring theme of theism, but that's hardly exercised in any significant way, so what's the deal there?

I think they thought Tron just sounded like a cool name for the movie (not that I can really blame them, still).

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24578&stc=1&d=1458080622
They might as well have named the movie after this guy.

A lot of the movie is simply the capture, escape, and exploration of the world within this basic plot and as much as I appreciate the chance to absorb all the nuance and creativity that went into the world and it's aesthetic, you know what I think it was missing? A really sick soundtrack.

And I'm not talkin' that WUBWUB ****.

There's some music, but it feels pretty generic. Is it wrong to think of the Kingdom Hearts 2 soundtrack (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=zxtPvbzq2EM) at a time like this?

Actually, no. Scratch that. The Space Paranoids level almost always gave me a ruthless headache and I blame that in part on the repetitive synth music.

I have a better appreciation for that level now though. I want to see more nostalgic environments, not new **** like Tangled. GIMME STAR WARS!

http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_ly7sm02Icu1rn9rpxo1_400.gif

Final Verdict: rating_4 [Pretty Good]

Omnizoa

03-16-16, 04:10 PM

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24588&stc=1&d=1458152798

Airplane!

Comedy / English / 1980

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
Considered one of the greatest comedies ever made, it was most recently brought up in Iro's Film Diary thread (http://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?t=44064&page=15).
Been meaning to see that for a LONG time.Please do. It's one of the finest cinematic parodies ever made.

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
https://media.giphy.com/media/tQcR4ZFWypsA0/giphy.gif

Looks like I'm the odd one out here again.

I gotta credit Airplane, it sure went all out to try and get a laugh out me. It put a beard on a plane. Gotta respect that level of dedication to sheer absurdity and with more than every other line feeding directly into some sort dialog gag, visual gag, or physical humor, there's plenty of opportunies to get me.

Just wish I didn't find myself counting.

Moments that got a giggle out of me:
+ Intercom conversation that shifts suddenly to whether the speaker should get an abortion.
+ Little girl who inexplicably ends a polite and sophisticated conversation between children with "I take my coffee black. Like my man."
+ Passenger who somehow manages to hang themselves inside the cabin.
+ Jive subtitles.
+ "I just wanted to tell you both: Good luck. We're all counting on you."

The rest of the movie is just vaguely amusing to me. The inflatable autopilot is humorously baffling (particularly given his expression) and nearly every opportunity to add nonsense to the proceedings is taken and by the end of the movie, regular dialog is constantly interrupted by cutaways to literal interpretations of what the characters are saying like when ground control mentions "flight instruments":

http://twilighthollowproject.b1.jcink.com/uploads/twilighthollowproject/airplane.gif

That's not funny to me. Neither are several of the running gags that just get annoying by the end of it all such as our main character's "drinking problem", which WAIT- STOP.

Take a wild guess.

Yep, he literally has a problem drinking.

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24589&stc=1&d=1458154593
HAR HAR HAR HAR.

This stuff might have been somewhat funny to me years ago when that was the extent of my creativity, but now? Honestly this didn't feel like much of a parody of the airlines. It's more of a farce that takes place at an airport.

Personally I find this funnier:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07LFBydGjaM
http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24590&stc=1&d=1458155349
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Final Verdict: rating_3 [Meh...]

MovieMeditation

03-16-16, 04:39 PM

Airplane had a very few great gags, a couple of good ones, a bunch of so-so ones, and a pretty decent batch of bad ones...

I wasn't too big of a fan either, I was more of an air conditioner... but, uh, anyways, I bet it will get better with rewatches.

Omnizoa

03-16-16, 05:21 PM

I wasn't too big of a fan either, I was more of an air conditioner...
http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m3rtyerfHZ1qir45xo1_500.gif

I don't know. I don't think it would win any more favor from me a second time.

Omnizoa

03-16-16, 08:24 PM

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24591&stc=1&d=1458168169

The Secret of Kells

Fantasy / English / 2009

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
Been meaning to ever since I saw Song of the Sea.

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
Just like Song of the Sea, Tom Moore and Cartoon Saloon bring another Irish myth to life with fantastic visuals and great animation.

While this is clearly inferior to Song of the Sea's level of quality provided it was it's predecessor, it's still exceptional with the same elegant preference for presenting characters as simple rounded polygonal shapes and presenting it's environment as a busy canvas with what I might describe as "a creative disregard for reality".

Again, just like Song of the Sea, The Secret of Kells frequently takes creative liberties with it's presentation and framing, abstracting out environments to appear as portraits and playing with perspective to evoke a sort of paper-cutout aesthetic.

I really like it and even more than before I get a strong impression of the creators' reverence for nature.

As much as I might praise the visuals and talk up the themes the movie might present however, I can't help but point an accusatory finger at the story.

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24592&stc=1&d=1458168876

The story sets up a young Brendan living a sheltered life within the walled town of Kells which is lorded over by his surrogate father (who I'm just gonna call Dad) who maintains a strict belief in the inevitable arrival of a viking horde.

The movie presents Dad is a negative light all throughout giving him all the typical elements of a zealous overprotective ruler: it's always the job before Brendan, he makes light of personal growth, he throws around scary words like "faith" and "pagans", but REALLY...

Dad's not such a bad guy, and that I'm supposed to root for Brendan rebelling against him simply doesn't work.

For one thing, Brendan's main driving motivation is a single speech and subsequent dream that feels to brief to mean anything about a book said to have wondrous powers. When the writer of the book visits, the old man indulges in Brendan's curiosity and pushes him to write in it firstly suggesting he go outside the wall to collect berries in the admittedly dangerous forest.

Brendan's saved by a "fairy" named Aisling (but is pronounced Ashley for some reason, probably because Celtic names are friggen' obnoxious) from wolves that would otherwise have eaten him.

So let's take a moment and consider:

Dad warns Brendan that the forest is dangerous.
Old man urges Brendan to go into the forest.
Brendan goes into the forest and nearly dies because it is dangerous.

Dad's the bad guy?

While Brendan's out in the forest he stumbles across some ancient evil tomb that Ashley warns is dangerous, professing an intimate familiarity with the forest. Brendan, after acknowledging that SHE'S A FAIRY, poopoos her claim as "just kid stories". ****in' really? Are we really going here? Yes.

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24593&stc=1&d=1458170436

Later the Old Man encourages Brendan to go to the tomb to find a jewel that will help him write the book. Once again...

Dad reminds Brendan the forest is dangerous and the vikings are coming.
Brendan goes into the forest, almost dies, and returns to a viking attack.

Dad's the bad guy? He legitimately wants to keep Kells safe, but it's like the audience is somehow supposed to be invested in this stupid book instead EVEN THOUGH both the book and jewel turn out to be completely mundane trinkets anyway. Sorry guys, but your artbook is second to OUR LIVES.

The viking attack is dumb too, so what, they built a wall and really thought any aggressor would just see it and go, "Ah, screw that noise."

No, they siege the damn wall, and you know who's there to stop them? Nobody. There's no offense, this entire population is just building the wall, no weapons, no armor, no other defenses to speak of, they just put all of their eggs in the proverbial basket (which is reminds me... >_>).

On top of everything, the movie ends on a timeskip that tries to force Dad into some sort of redemption arc that obviously can't work because it wasn't set up properly and Ashley who was set up in a key role as a main character isn't resolved either, she's just ignored. She's not even well presented as any sort of narrator on the outside looking in on this story about Brendan and Dad, so what gives? She's so heavily promoted along with this movie, but the story only seems to involve her by chance.

Song of the Sea was WAYYY better. Better visuals, better music, better story, better characters, and an ending that's ACTUALLY pretty emotional.

I hope Tom Moore and Cartoon Saloon do another of these Irish fables because I still think they can do better.

Final Verdict: rating_3 [Meh...]

colejwalker

03-16-16, 10:00 PM

Wasn't really a fan of Secret of Kells either, but I thought the art style was incredible.

Omnizoa

03-19-16, 12:14 AM

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24606&stc=1&d=1458354006

Battle Beyond The Stars

Sci-Fi / English / 1980

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
Yet another 80s sci-fi movie with an epic poster it couldn't possibly live up to.

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
Aaand I take that back. Why isn't THIS movie getting a remake!?

Set on some backwater planet, a group of diehard pacifists find themselves besieged by man in a giant spaceship with an army of mutants who decides to warn the planet that he's going to enslave them all before ****ing off for some reason that is never fully explained.

He leaves Mutant Senior Rapes-A-Lot and Mutant Mr. What-Were-Our-Orders-Again behind to guard the planet despite being confident to the point of argument that this civilization has no means of escaping or means to get help from outside their planet.

The pacifists decide that their aversion to violence is so restrictive that they are all incapable of emoting and can only speak in the flattest of expositional exchanges before the most virginest of all the virgins agrees to fly the planet's one ship (also clearly designed by starved virgins) out to go seek help from the most violentest of violent people he can find.

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24607&stc=1&d=1458354794

And so concludes one of the worst movie setups I've ever seen. Fortunately the movie significantly improves afterwards as the Big Bad's offscreen business serves to give our hero, Shad, the time to round up a small militia to fight back.

One of the best things about Battle Beyond The Stars is that it has absolutely ZERO interest in wasting time. Shad manages to gather up around 6 different party members by the halfway point of the movie and every single one of them have unique personalities, reasons for helping, and all seem reasonably convinced that his offer is in their interests.

The movie obviously suffers from the trope that Space Is Small and so it's convenient that nearly everyone he meets agrees to help, but that would bother me significantly less than if each of these characters felt rushed, but they didn't. They felt BRIEF, I mean after wrapping up a conversation with one guy it's a quick wipe transition into the next encounter, so by the end it's like, "Cripes! I didn't think it'd only take 40 minutes to convince over half a dozen people to risk their lives for me! And without pay too!"

One would hope that the first half being setup would mean the second half was all action, but no, I'm afraid it's not. There are strange clumps of inexplicable downtime when I guess the Big Bad's ship is just floating in orbit and no one's attacking him because... reasons?

Oh well, I still give a lot of credit to this half of the movie due to the MAJOR CHARACTER DEATHS, WOW. I'm sorta split on how they approached these though.

On one hand, I'm glad that they were comfortable killing off major characters, but on the other hand, I'm annoyed that once I noticed the trend, that I was able to accurately predict exactly where they'd stop.

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24609&stc=1&d=1458356305

Alright, Female Lead #1, we're going down the cast list right now and deciding on people to kill off. Do you have any qualifications to live?

I... I'm a human character.

Sorry, that won't cut it. Space Cowboy here's a human too and he's due a "Remember the Alamo" line. What else you got?

Umm... I uh... I'm wearing... pink?

That's not good enough either, Valkyrie Overboob's a bigger stereotype than you and her death is even being foreshadowed. Do you have anything at all?

Oh, uh I- well... uh... I can be a... flaccid love interest?

OH REALLY? Do you have any throwaway lines to guarantee your Plot Armor?

Umm... how about, "I’ve scanned information about mating. Does your species have kissing?"

That pisses me off. Alright, you can live.

Final Verdict: rating_4 [Pretty Good]

Omnizoa

03-20-16, 03:59 AM

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24623&stc=1&d=1458454438

Barbarella

Erotic Sci-Fi / English / 1968

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
It's commonly considered to be a cult classic 60s sci-fi movie. Also this poster (http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24622&stc=1&d=1458454282).

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
I wish Barbarella was a comedy. It TRIES to be, but it takes itself far too seriously besides.

How can I take this movie seriously, though? We're talkin' about a movie where the protagonist gets sexually assaulted with a piano.

THAT'S REALLY WEIRD.

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24624&stc=1&d=1458454709

It's tough to know where to begin with Barbarella because it's just so much ******* WTF, I don't even know.

Why is her ship covered in ****in' fur? That's like if I carpeted my walls.

Why does every time that Durand Durand guy politely asks her to follow him or go this way or do something, even though he's CLEARLY A BAD GUY, she just goes along with it instead of whipping out her friggen' hand cannon? By the third time I'm like, "WHY ARE YOU LISTENING TO HIM!? RUN AWAY!"

And why do two consensual sex scenes take place immediately after Barbarella's still bleeding all over from being savaged by parrots and dolls no-wait WHY WAS SHE EVEN SAVAGED BY PARROTS AND DOLLS!? THOSE SCENES DON'T EVEN MAKE ANY ******* SENSE IN CONTEXT!

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24625&stc=1&d=1458455486

There are moments when Barbarella can be intentionally funny, like when she has hand sex with that one guy, her hair curls, and she lets go before he's finished. That was kinda funny because of how it can be interpreted, but there's hardly anything like that in this movie.

The special effects are stupid fake, the story is nonsensical plotbeat after nonsensical plotbeat, and a lot of that 60s charm is flushed away with Fur Guy (http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24626&stc=1&d=1458456071).

~ GROOVY INTERMISSION ~

I read somewhere that Barbarella should be considered a feminist icon (https://nancyroche.wordpress.com/2011/11/15/in-praise-of-barbarella/) given the time and context it was released in.

I don't know what to say about that except: Typecasting actors by race isn't a commendable step above having that race predictably die before anyone else in the movie (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/BlackDudeDiesFirst).

Barbarella's a walking centerfold with occasional bursts of initiative. If that's impressive by 60s standards then go back to the 60s and be impressed.

Final Verdict: rating_2 [Just... Bad]

Omnizoa

03-20-16, 11:24 AM

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24627&stc=1&d=1458481306
Looker

Sci-Fi / English / 1981

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
One of the few movies that might come up if you dig a little deeper into 80s cyberpunk movies.

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
Well it's NOT cyberpunk, despite what the promotional material might suggest, but certainly echoes some of those themes.

Actually, that's not what I'm thinking when I'm watching this. What I'm thinking is WHY HAVEN'T I HEARD OF THIS MOVIE BEFORE!?

In the first 5 minutes of Looker I knew I was in for something special because it opens up with a terribly cheesy perfume commercial before cutting to one of the models for those commercials being questioned why on earth she would want plastic surgery when she looks beautiful already, citing that she wasn't "perfect". We time-lapse past her surgery and follow her home where apparently we aren't the only ones and she's stalked and killed in her apartment in a scene that is legitimately tense.

The rest of the movie follows her plastic surgeon named, OkayIAdmitIDontKnow, as after a police investigation he follows one of his patients home only to witness her get killed in a similar fashion. He discovers more than one of them have a company printout for desired facial changes to the millimeter and the rest of the movie follows his trip into the darkside of the corporate monster known as Dot Matrix.

While nothing is ever explicitly said about any of the topics the movie presents, it criticizes superficial cosmetic surgery and presents commercial marketing in perhaps the most amusingly cynical of views imaginable.

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24628&stc=1&d=1458482806

Dot Matrix is developing a zombie commercial. You know, the kind of marketing drek so bad it melts your brain and all you want to do is buy the product? Yeah, that fun stuff. Well, part of that plan involves focus testing their commercials so hard that they're literally adjusting their models' appearances to the millimeter to keep your eyes on the brand and once their models are "perfect", they're slotted into a 3D camera so that they can be recreated digitally to reliably perform to the standards their computer spits out for them.

Actually, it's that same just-barely-beyond-the-realm-of-possibility sci-fi that made Jurassic Park work so well, and hey, Looker ALSO happens to be a Michael Crichton story. HMMMM...

I've got my complaints. As always, but they're pretty sparse here. Some eggs here. Some slowdown there. I don't know any of the characters names after having seen it and one guy who I was certain was secretly a bad guy just up and disappears after a mere two scenes. What's the deal with that? The one hospital assistant with a mustache who says, "You do her and I'll take her out"? TAKE HER OUT? AS IN KILL HER? You lead me on, movie!

Also have to mention the limp romantic subplot which only really serves to undercut the otherwise fantastic ending where... oh boy I'm gonna use a spoiler box for once!

The main bad guy gets blasted through the collarbone and while he falls down dead and bleeding, they overlay an upbeat cheesy ad for "Spurt" toothpaste. It's BRILLIANT.

Looking up this movie now, WHY HAS IT GOT SUCH BAD REVIEWS?

6.1 on iMDB?
29% on Rotten Tomatoes? Are you kidding me?

That's less than half the score of The Hunger Games! You people are MAD!

Final Verdict: rating_4 [Pretty Good]

REWATCH UPDATE 8/15/22:
I have nothing of substance to add, it's still a good movie, I'm just going to dock it half a point as I adjust my rating process.

Final Verdict: rating_3_5 [Good]

Omnizoa

03-21-16, 09:01 AM

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24639&stc=1&d=1458567848

Tombstone

Historical Western / English / 1993

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
This scene. (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4yfr_Zj1iU4)

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
I don't like westerns.

Where something like Battle Beyond The Stars already appeals to me on a surface level, Tombstone has already stuck one stirruped foot into the grave by the time it gets to me.

If offered the choice I will always take the fantasy movie over the historical drama, no question.

So to say I'm not judging Tombstone purely on the merits of it's story, presentation, acting, and action is correct. However my judgment will reflect not just those things, but also all the distracting STUPID **** in the background.

In this movie, Kurt Russel plays Wyatt Earp by putting on a silly mustache and acting so intense that after a while you stop wondering whether it's real or not. From here on out I will refer to him as Wyatt Kurt.

Wyatt Kurt rolls into Tombstone with his similarly aged brother, Bill-Paxton-with-a-fake-mustache, and his dissimilarly aged brother, Sam-Elliot-with-a-real-mustache. Apparently Tombstone is a lawless town and somebody's gotta clean it up, but Wyatt Kurt's over that now, he's a retired cop, he don't run around with guns no more, BUT HE'S THE ONLY ONE WHO CAN DO IT.

http://twilighthollowproject.b1.jcink.com/uploads/twilighthollowproject/tombstone.gif
"NOOOOOOOO!!!"

We get a Sam Elliot voice over telling us about The Cowboys being "the first organized crime in America" and over the first 50 minutes all we really do is flip back and forth between The Cowboys being ******** and then idling around cementing our protagonists as hard as possible to the point I'm like, "I get it, Wyatt Kurt's gonna fight 'em, get on with it".

It's at this point someone might argue that "Well, that setup is part of history, we shouldn't leave that stuff out" to which I say, "Boring history makes boring movies". Besides, we glamorize the Old West plenty as it is. I don't see any band marks on their foreheads when they take their hats off THIS MOVIE IS TOTALLY UNREALISTIC!

Anyway, after those first 50, The Cowboys finally butt heads with Wyatt Kurt and until the hour and 30 minute mark they make passes at each other all with the obvious goal of killing off Wyatt's brothers and bringing us to the last half hour where Wyatt goes stone cold cheese on everybody, culminating in The Cowboys suddenly suffering from Stormtrooper Arthritis just in time for the hilariously dramatic "NO" scene where he kills the Cowboy leader who's totally Dave Grohl from Foo Fighters.

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24640&stc=1&d=1458567902http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24641&stc=1&d=1458567984

I'll be honest, the action sequences are really good and they tie in perfectly with the dramatic uncertainty that comes with each character's decisions. The showdown, Bill Stacheton getting shot in the back, and... other less memorable scenes are all pretty fun and for the most part the intervening drama is appropriate.

For the most part.

I like the conflict between Wyatt Kurt and his brothers and Val-Kilmer-with-a-fake-mustache as Doc Holliday (one of extraordinarily few character names I can remember and that one's only because they actually spelled it out for me at the end) and I even think The Cowboys had an appealing level of personality to them. ...that's it though.

Literally any other scene I don't give a crap about and that includes every single scene where any female character had even the slightest hint of focused screentime because you get **** like this:

I wanna move and go places, never look back and just have fun. Forever. That's my idea of heaven. I need someone to share it with though.You mean, Behan. Well then, why are you with him?Because he's... handsome, he's... charming... He's all right. For now. Oh, I know, don't say it, I'm rotten. I try to be good, it's just... boring.

You're awful.

All of these scenes are awful. But what's more awful is the fact that as a western Tombstone subscribes to the philosophy that it's okay to **** with horses just because. The worst scene in the whole movie is this bit where Wyatt Kurt interrupts a man whipping a horse:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g_71ajhyCbA
http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24638&stc=1&d=1458557190
*brain aneurysm*

Look, I know what they're doing here, they're trying to establish Wyatt as being the sort of person who would go out of his way to correct injustices, but there are SO MANY LEVELS OF WRONG to this, I need a checklist.

POINT NUMBER UNO:
Wyatt Kurt doesn't logically follow through on his appeal to empathy.
So he's against horses getting whipped because they don't like it. Unlike WHAT!? Saddling them up, stabbing them in the sides with stirrups, and running them into gunfire purely because it suits your interests? You don't stop any of the carriages that pass you by whipping the horses pulling THEM. **** you, Wyatt!

POINT NUMBER DEUX:
The creators don't logically follow through on their appeal to empathy.
Could you BE anymore disingenuous? You want to act like you a have some sort of standards, but you're LITERALLY WHIPPING A HORSE IN THAT SCENE, JUST SO YOU CAN SAY IT'S BAD TO WHIP HORSES. That's like shooting someone in the face and going, "Okay, that's bad, right? I shouldn't do that. Now you know that I know that it's bad to do that." You're still subjecting horses to the rest of this ****ing movie! **** you, Hollywood!

POINT NUMBER 三:
The uploader of this video doesn't know how to recognize self-contradicting examples.
The video description reads:
A Demonstration of the Virtues of Violent Resistence to Animal AbuseBy 'virtues', this video is obviously being taken to mean, "**** yeah! That's what you get for abusing animals!" when the video itself was only made BY abusing animals. This isn't an effective demonstration of justice when it requires creating injustice to demonstrate! That's literally feeding directly into the scheme where the villain causes a problem and makes themselves look good by solving it (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/VillainWithGoodPublicity). **** you, attacksquirrel1982!

POINT NUMBER चार:
The one commenter on this video is an idiot.
It reads:
PETA could learn a thing or two from this transaction.Are you kidding? PETA's been pulling this **** for ages. Them and the American Humane Association, the same dickwhistlers who gave movies like Tombstone that "No Animals Were Harmed In The Making Of This Movie" pass which has NEVER ACTUALLY MEANT ANYTHING EVER (https://soundcloud.com/colleen-patrick-goudreau/animals-in-film-animals-were-harmed-part-two#t=12:20).

Stop calling them 'animal actors'. 'Actors' suggests an intention to deceive and 'intention' implies consent which is most definitely not what this is.

Final Verdict: rating_3 [Meh...]

Omnizoa

03-21-16, 10:41 AM

THREAD UPDATE:
I know I've been saying these aren't reviews, but considering the fact that I still can't seem to help rambling overlong and some of my posts well outstrip the length of other user reviews, I've decided to go back and flag them on a case by case basis. I'm also going to avoid starting new one-off review threads since this one's turned out to be longer than I expected and it helps to keep everything in one place.

Anime reviews will still be kept separate for now.

Nope1172

03-21-16, 11:06 AM

I think Airplane is hilarious. Good review though :up:

Omnizoa

03-21-16, 11:45 AM

I think Airplane is hilarious. Good review though :up:
Thank you.

Omnizoa

03-21-16, 12:53 PM

http://twilighthollowproject.b1.jcink.com/uploads/twilighthollowproject/dreamers.gif

Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory

Musical Comedy / English / 1971

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
Roald Dahl's dead, Mel Stuart's dead, and Gene Wilder just died and there will never ever ever, in the rest of the recorded history of the world, be a better excuse to watch Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory.

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
"A little nonsense now and then is relished by the wisest men."

Candy, Cream, Centipedes, Mink, Antlers, Bees, Geese, Chicken, Roast Beef, and Bratwurst.

It must seem somewhat hypocritical to praise Willy Wonka after condemning Tombstone when both movies feature on-set animals and Willy Wonka is ostensibly all about that kind of stuff.

However, to be fair, a large degree of it is abstracted out (giant intelligent geese that lay chocolate eggs?) and little is actually seriously said about anything to do with the production of anything coming out of the factory. Obvious disdain goes to the "Creepy Tunnel Scene" which nobody likes anyway despite having grown on me still features a chicken getting beheaded, I mean what the actual **** was that about? Wonka, get your **** together (http://twilighthollowproject.b1.jcink.com/uploads/twilighthollowproject/slowing.gif).

I'd like to think they used stock footage, but I can't really be sure and all it would have done is make a terrible scene slightly less terrible.

Even so, at least it wasn't played for laughs like that ******* scene in CHARLIE and the Chocolate Factory.

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24643&stc=1&d=1458573987
It's funny because animal abuse is funny.

All that crap is in a sharp minority to everything else in the movie though, there aren't horses in the shot every 10 minutes and the movie isn't trying to make some sort of false moral distinction about what it's doing. And because of that, I can mostly focus on the story and still appreciate the characters.

REWATCH UPDATE:

I used to think that I don't watch very many old movies, but it never really quite occurred to me that the VHS tape I would pop in regularly was made in the early 70s and based on a book even older.

I had read the book, always stopping at the sequel where the Great Glass Elevator takes Wonka into space to fight meat monsters (yes, that actually happened) and it reminds me that Dahl never actually liked this movie and that maybe Dahl's exact vision wasn't exactly the most compelling in the first place.

It's also curious to consider the shocked response The LEGO Movie received when it, at base, is a marketing vehicle. Willy Wonka did it too, and it's an utterly perplexing paradox where the most standard movie has all manner of creativity sucked out of it in the raw spirit of greed only for it to fail when the most blatant of product placement movies are born passion projects and become cult classic staples of cinema. How in the **** do we let this happen?

Well it happened, and to be honest, while this movie naturally appeals to me as a musical for it's catchy songs and strong deliveries, it's also a comedy.

But I never really found it to be terribly funny.

Frankly, I'm not sure I ever even really laughed at the movie.

I'm noticing a very BIZARRE trend with my favorite movies. They're not exactly movies that seem like they would appeal to me.

I don't drive vehicles, yet I love Mad Max: Fury Road.

I don't celebrate holidays, yet I love Nightmare Before Christmas.

I don't even eat chocolate, yet I love Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory.

Weird.

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=26881&stc=1&d=1472909353

Anyway, despite numerous jokes in the movie, I don't think it's charms end at the punchline so much as the jokes it chooses to the tell and the way it attempts to deliver them. I'm not saying they're bad, though I might concede that many of them are weak, it's really the really the characters that are fun to watch interact with each other.

Charlie is about as easy to root for as you would hope for (even if he does have that one really off moment where he punks his whole family that he found a golden ticket, that was a pretty dick move) and Grandpa Joe is a classic archetype played to a T. He has his opinions, and he's rather stuck in his ways, even literally so, but lines like "when a loaf of bread looks like a banquet, I have no business buying tobacco" and then later dissolving suspicions of that claim really goes to show he's more 3-dimensional than he may initially appear. He's not just Charlie's hanger-on, he's a doting grandfather, he likes to live vicariously, and his relentless optimism has a tendency to manifest itself in negative ways.

The other kids, Augustus Gloop, Veruca Salt, Mike TeeVee, and Violet Beauregarde play the spoiled foils to Charlie very well and so do their walking doormat parents. Although Augustus gets comparably little screentime compared to the rest, they all seem rather distinct despite sharing space beneath the same umbrella. It's especially easy to hate Veruca who gets her own entitlement song "I Want It Now", but the movie mercifully grants us the mental image of her burning to death in a garbage furnace so that's nice. Good family-friendly fun here.

Naturally the star of the show is, perhaps unintentionally, Willy Wonka who steals his way into the title of the movie by virtue of the Vietnam War at the time (way to pussy out, guys). Wonka, who was at one point considered to be played by one of the Monty Python crew (can't you see an Eric Idle Wonka?) is played by Gene Wilder and he's just great at it. Gene's since ceded much of his comedic acting to good writing, but it's hard not to credit him for bringing a lot of life to this character.

Eccentric is the key word here. Wonka may not be funny in quite the way I that makes me laugh in other movies, but he's very eccentric and acts much as I would and do... or maybe I act that way because of this movie? I dunno. But I do know that it's easy to find a good bit of myself in Wonka's mix of passion, cynicism, wisdom, and random deadpan whatthe****ery just to see how people react.

Randomly speaks in different languages? Check.

Makes concerned references to Noodle Incidents (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/NoodleIncident)? Check.

Casually shrugs off the probable violent deaths of children?

http://i60.photobucket.com/albums/h33/RegalNightmare123/df8.gif

He's just fun to watch and contributes the vast majority of memorable quotes.

It's really just the same tone from his first appearance to last save for the ending when Charlie is denied the lifetime supply of chocolate and when Grandpa Joe inquires he totally flips his ****.

You STOLE Fizzy Lifting Drinks! You bumped into the ceiling which now has to washed and sterilized so you get NOTHING! GOOD DAY SIR!

It's Charlie's predictable humility that gives us the happy ending, but I have to admit, I've always been a bit down on the ending, the Great Glass Elevator always did feel a bit anti-climactic, especially that "he lived happily ever after" line. Pfffft.

Altogether it's not really the story that pulls it altogether, and it's not even entirely the themes that I enjoy, though I do enjoy them.

It's the fact that this really heartfelt magical movie will stop dead as some bug-eyed creeper with a cart full of knives will suddenly sneak up behind Charlie to monologue about "fear of little men" and "nobody ever goes in and nobody ever comes out" before menacingly squeaking away that gets me. WHAT THE **** WAS THAT!?

What is this movie? What this beautiful movie that gives us a creepy man with a throaty German accent saying the phrase "bring it to me so I can find the secret formewlah", that's fantastic.

I really like the songs, I have trouble picking my favorite. It might be Cheer Up, Charlie, it's really sweet.

Get it? Sweet? CAUSE IT'S A MOVIE ABOUT CANDY? HRHRHRHRHR you know I gotta say this one thing: PUNS, they're a thing in this movie and I've heard people say that puns are the lowest form of comedy.

No. Puns are not the lowest form of comedy, you know what is?

MEMES. ****ing memes.

People don't even use the word "meme" correctly anymore, it's just a catch-all term for a reference that's been repeated AD NAUSEUM to such a degree that it ceases to be a reference anymore, it exists for the sake of existing. It's funny because it's supposed to be funny.

Willy Wonka exists online most recognizably as this:

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=26882&stc=1&d=1472909381

Notice how the caption is unrelated to Willy Wonka, isn't anything close to something Willy Wonka ever says, and can just be inserted anywhere irrespective of it's relevance to Willy Wonka.

It's just a random screencap that unoriginal people hijack as a vehicle for their own opinions and always in Impact font. You ****ing hacks.

That this is what kids nowadays recognize Willy Wonka for disgusts me. It's no perfect movie and I won't even hazard to say it's exceptional in any single department, but I will say that it's a joyful disregard for convention by people who know better, and they know you know they know better.

If that makes any ******* sense at all was zum teufel ist los mit peeple, das so ein guten film ist, kann ich nicht verstehen, warum CABBAGES so schwer zu verstehen, Je ne peux pas vraiment parler d'autres langues, собирается бросить в немного русский сейчас здесь, 这是真正的只是谷歌翻译, 雄大なムースを含みます, and that's just Wonka Wash spelled backwards.

http://twilighthollowproject.b1.jcink.com/uploads/twilighthollowproject/pure.gif

Final Verdict: rating_5 [Friggen' Awesome]

Omnizoa

03-22-16, 07:48 AM

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24653&stc=1&d=1458642536

The Game

Psychological Thriller / English / 1997

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
Overdue for a rewatch.

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
Before The Game, to me it was "Eh... Michael Douglas", but after The Game it was "Hell yeah, Michael Douglas!"

The setup here is that a man named Nick Van Orten is far too engrossed in his business-minded life as a wealthy investment banker that he's become estranged from his brother and ex. When his birthday rolls around his brother, Conrad, shows up (kinda acting like a dick) and gives Nick a certificate to a mysterious company that promises a non-descript life-changing experience in the form of a "game".

Nick is initially resistant to the idea and gets little answers when he actually visits the company location, but on a whim agrees to submit an "application" anyway despite casually assuming that his brother is in involved in some sort of Scientology-style cult.

What follows is a mysterious sequence of events that pressures Nick into paranoia, suspecting everyone around him is in on "the game" before things become deadly and he struggles to throw off his stalkers and discover the truth of the organization that manages to disappear as quickly as it appears.

There are plenty of clues as to the nature of "the game" and it's operators known only vaguely as CRS (Consumer Recreation Services), but each one pulls you in a different direction as it goes along.

Is his brother in on it?
Are they trying to rob him?
Are they trying to prank him?
Are they stealing from him or aren't they?
Did CRS ever exist in the first place, or is it all in his head?

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24652&stc=1&d=1458641151

I would argue that one of the worst parts of the movie is simply knowing the twist because knowing the answers to these questions takes away a lot of the punch of the movie. To that end, it's a movie that isn't nearly as rewatchable as other psychological thrillers so it's one of those that you just have to put on the backburner for a while before enjoying it all over again.

It's like if the everything-is-planned-paranoia theme from Cabin in the Woods met the too-proud-for-his-own-good-businessman theme from Ink.

It'd be one thing if it was just an interesting story (if a somewhat generic one) or good actors playing good characters, but a combination of excellent pacing and focus along with a very tiny dose of backing ambiance helps maintain my orientation and engagement in the movie. It even kept me emotionally engaged.

My favorite moment in the whole movie is a very small incidental diner scene in which Nick's been thoroughly beaten down and demoralized and despite being a wealthy businessman, has to beg with what little is in his pockets for a ride.

HE LOOKS SO SAD, I FEEL SO BAD FOR HIM!

But I guess that's just my sadistic reflex. I get a huge kick out of seeing characters go from this:

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24654&stc=1&d=1458643154

To this:

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24655&stc=1&d=1458643240

And I feel too few movies involve me to the point that I feel like I'm taking that emotional ride with the character before we exit off on a satisfying resolution.

All told, The Game, though suffering from one of the most generic titles in existence, is one of my favorite movies and an under-appreciated classic in it's genre where I hold it up alongside the likes of Inception.

If you haven't seen it, WATCH IT! IT'S GOOD! GRRR!!!

Final Verdict: rating_5 [Friggen' Awesome]

Tugg

03-22-16, 09:43 AM

Final Verdict: rating_5 [Friggen' Awesome]

You said it, bro. :highfive:

Omnizoa

03-22-16, 10:44 AM

You said it, bro. :highfive:
https://38.media.tumblr.com/5599a6c1390c56e285a7657f261e4c27/tumblr_n6oko4hMEH1sn0ozpo10_400.gif

Omnizoa

03-22-16, 04:44 PM

Collection Update:

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24659&stc=1&d=1458675100

V for Vendetta

Second copy of V for Vendetta, same version so I know what I'm getting here.

Hard Boiled
Supposedly this version of Hard Boiled is visually inferior to the several-times-more-expensive Criterion Collection version, but I thought it looked better on the surface, besides the presentation's very nice and it includes a surprisingly informative commentary by a guy named Bey Logan who gives a ton of background on the movie and it's actors.

Dragon Tiger Gate
This is the second version of Dragon Tiger Gate I've purchased and it's a definite tradeoff. On one hand it's newer so the presentation is significantly better than the older version I had. On the other hand it lacks the English dub. Not that I necessarily prefer English dubs, I think Hard Boiled is great as it is, but the dub for Dragon Tiger Gate was really good and I feel like it gave the characters a little more personality especially given how it tweaks the lines here and there.

Omnizoa

03-22-16, 09:18 PM

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24663&stc=1&d=1458687072
Seven Samurai

Action Drama / Japanese / 1954

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
In Raven73's Star Wars: The Force Awakens thread (http://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?anchor=1&p=1481103), Iroquois referenced his own Basically Just thread (http://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?t=43406), the first page of which contains the following exchange:
Seven Samurai
Basically just the first erection caused by good cinema for most beginning cinephiles

I haven't seen Seven Samurai (or any Akira Kurosawa film to be honest), however I read it was a major inspiration for Battle Beyond the Stars.

How righteously overhyped is it?

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
"Find hungry samurai. Even bears come down from the mountain when they're hungry."

First off:

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24664&stc=1&d=1458687132

Holy **** do I feel stiff. And not the erection kinda stiff, just the ordinary haven't-moved-in-over-3-*******-HOURS kinda stiff.

There's complaint number one for ya: This movie is nearly 3 and half hours and it had no business being that long.

What happens? A villager eavesdrops on a bandit patrol and learns that their village will be raided at the end of the season and so ventures out to hire seven samurai which help organize the village and defeat the bandit threat. That's not a story that needs to be 3 hours.

To Seven Samurai's credit though, it manages to spend that time wisely building on it's characters and developing further setup without ever being too transparently expositional which means even though it was a wicked marathon of a movie, I at least never got bored or tuned out. It really just feels like a movie where the main script was exercised in it's entirety without any anecdotal scene edited out.

None of our many many characters are ever really very deep either. We have intimate moments with most of our main characters, but it's not as if development is ever taken very far beyond their archetypes. We MIGHT have been able to were there not so many characters, but because there are we end up filling time by briefly touching on only some of them (sadly, two of our seven samurai are practically indistinguishable from each other).

Still, what we get in terms of character development is significantly better than what we had with Battle Beyond the Stars. Battle Beyond the Stars was very quick with it's character introductions and very casual with it's character deaths so despite their unique qualities, there really isn't much of any reason to care.

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24666&stc=1&d=1458692251

Flipping it once again, at least BBTS didn't take an age to get where it's going. I usually give a movie 15 minutes to introduce it's main conflict and arc, but Seven Samurai takes literally twice that amount of time before "we need seven samurai" is ever mentioned. That's the length of a 30-minute TV show episode, and if this were a TV series the first episode would be extraordinarily underwhelming for all of what it accomplishes with it's screentime.

I guess what I'm saying here is there's a middle ground between Battle Beyond the Stars and Seven Samurai. Seven Samurai HAS it's development, but it could be sharply edited to include only the most crucial moments. Scenes we absolutely DO NOT NEED would include:

1.) The entire romantic subplot. Duh. Obviously. This plot goes nowhere, never resolves, and only exists to create conflict with a man who insists on disguising his daughter as a man to hide her from the fiendish samurai that would... rape her, I guess? Oh wait no, because if the dice fall right, the moons align, and just one of those seven samurai SO HAPPENS to have sex with her, she'll become damaged goods.

( -_-) Sssssweet.

At least the general reaction to this guy is upset and disgust, but it's misplaced in my opinion. For one, the response, "remember when you were younger" plainly disregards this guy's real issue by dismissing it as sex drive. For two, BRAINLESS PROMISCUITY is a pretty sickening character trait in general, so that's entirely worth criticizing. This female character doesn't have any personality to speak of, not like the guy who courts her and for all we're aware of they're only into each other for their looks. The vast majority of scenes involving them can literally be summed up as:

"I just noticed you were here."

"I just noticed you were here."

"I'm going to stare suddenly and meaningfully at you."

"I'm going to stare right back."

"I take a step forward."

"I take a step back."

"I take another step forward."

"I run away."

SCENE.

Does she even have any lines beyond wimpering, cowering, and getting beaten by her father? I SURE DON'T REMEMBER. It doesn't help matters when the samurai excuse it as being predictable given that they all might die in the morning. Umm... WHAT?

By this point the samurai have already defeated MOST of the bandits primarily thanks to the villagers spearing them left and right. What reason do you have to believe you won't just MIGHT lose, but PROBABLY WILL lose? The odds were worse yesterday!

Also, why does the concept of getting stabbed or shot to death in the near future make you horny enough to stick your dick in the nearest wet towel that screams like a Japanese girl? THERE'S NOTHING THERE, SHE'S A BLOCK OF WOOD WITH A FACE, SHE'S FLATTER THAN FLAT STANLEY!

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24665&stc=1&d=1458690105

Also double standards.

2.) The scene where Kikuchiyo catches and spears a fish. We really needed that scene.

3.) The scene where Kikuchiyo tries to ride Yohei's horse and we get the excellent line, "Yohei's going to be upset if you break it's legs". We really REALLY needed that scene. I mean, do I even need to explain?

Is it not self-evident? Do we really need an analogy?

How 'bout: "The substitute teacher's going to be upset if you open fire on all those school children."

Alternatively: "It'd be an awful shame to lose a Starbucks because you blew up an airport."

Last thoughts: It seems overacting body language is almost unavoidable in Japanese movies, I don't know why, it's probably something dragged kicking and screaming from stage plays, but at least it's relatively mild here with the main exception obviously being Kikuchiyo who's just generally portrayed to be childishly energetic.

At least we don't have the ruthlessly dead exposition that we got with Battle Beyond the Stars, which is an unfortunate result because what BBTS seemed to take away from Seven Samurai most was just the basic concept, when Seven Samurai's greatest strength is it's varied and thoughtful character interactions.

Admittedly BBTS presents it's story in a significantly more digestable manner, but the same story is told significantly better in Seven Samurai, even down to maintaining unpredictability with character deaths.

I do have one question, though: How did that first samurai die? Did he trip and crack his head or something? He sorta flops over. Was he shot? I DON'T KNOW.

Final Verdict: rating_4 [Pretty Good]

REWATCH UPDATE (4/21/25):
Reading back my review, I think most of my criticisms were on point.

Heihachi's death, that is, one of the samurai who barely has a presence in the movie, is definitely edited terribly.

The way it appears onscreen is that he's fighting with Rikichi and gets knocked over. At the moment he impacts the ground there's a gunshot sound effect and everybody acts like he just got shot.

But he didn't act like he got shot, he acted like he fell over and shot himself... except he doesn't have a gun. So was it just a dramatic sound effect for stabbing himself? For breaking his back? That's a pretty shitty way for any character to go, to randomly fall over and severe their spine so loudly it sounds like a gunshot.

It's ****ing BAD. There's no other way to put it, there's no defending it.

As I also mentioned, Manzo, the character whose daughter brainlessly romances the youngest of the samurai and is paranoid of exactly that, is the worst character in the entire movie. He's just an irredeemably possessive scumbag character, in what is already a trio of shitty characters.

Shino, the daughter, as already no personality, and NO, I literally cannot remember a single line of dialog she speaks throughout the entire movie. She communicates almost entirely through a deer-in-the-headlights stare.

The samurai, Isao (whose name I had to look up), is also just annoying, not just for causing this dumb romantic conflict but also for being the archetypal watery-eyed aspirational character who'd sooner burst into tears or profess their adoration for their nearest senpai than do anything of actual value.

These three characters almost entirely comprise the romantic subplot and dilemma which is not only irrational from a modern day perspective, but it doesn't even make any sense in-universe.

https://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=107342&stc=1&d=1745296518

Isao is allegedly from a "samurai family", whereas Shino is from a "farmer family", and these represent two separate classes. Is it NOT in the interest of the farmers to marry into an upper class family? Isn't that the whole dream scenario in these medieval/feudal settings, that a peasant catches the eye of nobility and nobility commits the faux pas of bringing them into their family?

Like, I don't get any impression from Manzo that he has any love for his daughter, women in these movies are almost all treated as chattel, so shouldn't he be pleased that a samurai takes a liking to his daughter? I just don't get it.

Arguably worst of all, the early scenes where Manzo expresses fear to the other villagers that their daughters are under threat from the samurai... never comes up again. It is super late into the movie when they pull the "I called it, our daughters are sluts for samurai!" card, but nobody cares. It doesn't affect morale in any apparent way, it doesn't disturb the trust that's been established, nobody takes his side... it just didn't serve a purpose at the end of the day. So it was literally just a complete waste of time and had no impact on the rest of the story whatsoever.

It's not even clear that Isao even gets the girl in the end.

The runtime, as already stated, is still pretty awful. Yojimbo is basically half of Seven Samurai's runtime. It is just so long and it doesn't need to be that long, especially when they waste a bunch of it on this vacuous romantic bullshit and animal abuse.

It takes 1 hour to recruit the samurai,
1 hour to fortify and train the village,
and the last hour is the whole siege.

For at reason, if for no other, I have definitely changed my mind about Seven Samurai being better than Yojimbo.

The cinematography's not nearly as interesting in this movie and while the music feels much improved over Yojimbo, I noticed that character dialog frequently sounds muffled and the overall leveling makes some conversations barely audible.

This is less obvious if you're only paying attention to the subtitles, but if I had to listen to them speaking Japanese, I'd have to turn up the volume in some scenes.

I'm mostly just repeating myself this time around, but this time time around I'm going to be a bit harsher with my rating:

Final Verdict: rating_3 [Okay]

False Writer

03-23-16, 02:23 AM

Great job on your last few reviews. Willy Wonka is a childhood favorite for me. I really liked The Game as well, apparently a lot of people hated the ending but I thought it was really good and unique.

I thought Seven Samurai was a masterpiece, but I can see where you're coming from with your criticisms. Especially in today's age, most people don't have the patience for a movie that old and lengthy. It's still cool that you liked it though!

Omnizoa

03-23-16, 07:02 AM

Great job on your last few reviews.
Thanks.

I really liked The Game as well, apparently a lot of people hated the ending but I thought it was really good and unique.
I understand the complaint, and it feeds into it's rewatchability problem, but it's worth considering the subtle note of silence in the very last shot of the movie which implies that questions remain.

I thought Seven Samurai was a masterpiece, but I can see where you're coming from with your criticisms. Especially in today's age, most people don't have the patience for a movie that old and lengthy. It's still cool that you liked it though!
I really liked Metropolis, but even though Seven Samurai is firmly grounded in reality, it didn't feel anywhere near as meaningful to me as that movie. It also suffered from significantly more frustrating tropes.

seanc

03-23-16, 09:33 AM

I'm going to catch up on this thread later Omni. I really like the style of your reviews even if our tastes probably won't align much. You're an entertaining fellow.

Omnizoa

03-23-16, 10:10 AM

I'm going to catch up on this thread later Omni. I really like the style of your reviews even if our tastes probably won't align much. You're an entertaining fellow.
*elaborate bow*

Omnizoa

03-23-16, 09:15 PM

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=25672&stc=1&d=1464475581

Wreck-It Ralph

Animated Comedy / English / 2012

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
Miss Vicky reviewed it in her Resident Bitch's Movie Log thread (http://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?t=43738&page=17) where it got arguably the most collective praise of any movie I've seen on this site so far. The savage tongue-lashing of plebians helped too.

Wreck-It Ralph is easily my favorite modern (non-Pixar) Disney film.
it's one of my favorite Disney movies too.
Wreck It Ralph is great :up:. Top five Disney for me i think and the best of this Century.
Liked Wreck It Ralph and especially all the emotional scenes towards the end really got to me.
I really needed something like that in my life.
I can't even think of any other modern non-Pixar Disney films that stand out in the same way.
the first time I saw it at the cinema I really liked it. However when I rewatched it (I think for the animated films countdown) I absolutely loved it.
I had Wreck-It Ralph in my top 10 for the animation countdown list.

DAMN.
And this is a video game movie. Well I gotta watch it now.

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*

OH NOOOOO...

http://twilighthollowproject.b1.jcink.com/uploads/twilighthollowproject/house.gif

Sooo... I... didn't like this movie.

I don't know what it is, but I feel like it's a bad sign when I'm twenty minutes in, Ralph is running around, risking his life in FPS land, and that big wubbadub soundtrack is all intense and I'm just...

\/( o__o)\/ *shrug*

This movie just never clicked with me.

There are really only two places I can point a finger for that though. Either I'm just a heartless shell of a person, which okay, yeah, that's true, but let's consider the alternative for a moment: The setup doesn't really work.

I see a lot of stuff online including Vicky's review that suggests that the people connected with the major theme of overcoming the adversity of labels and not letting people pigeonhole your potential. Okay, I get that, but if that's supposed to be our takeaway message here, I think they did a really mediocre job of setting that up.

So the movie introduces us to Ralph who's the Donkey-Kong-era-style bad guy of the fictional Fix-It Felix Jr. arcade game. He's the bad guy so he typically loses and Felix along with the rest of the NPCs ostracize him because of it. It's just a job to them, but that mentality doesn't (for some reason) extend to their fear of Ralph. It's implied that Felix is empathetic at first, but he totally buckles and covers his own ass instead of being nice.

Ralph barges in to their party, accidentally causes a mess and we get that whole, "See? You're just a menace, no one likes you, so go away" scene that you see in all manner of other movies where the well-meaning good guy gets treated like a bad guy.

This clashes with the abstraction where bad guys regularly attend an AA-style meetup where apparently the concept of "bad being good" doesn't exist, they're all just generally miserable or malcontent with their station in life as if it's an unshakable assigned job as opposed to reveling in their own personal senses of glory LIKE VILLAINS DO.

This'd be one thing if these were all original characters, but you're using licensed properties from all over the video game industry here like Dr. Eggman, M. Bison, and Bowser most of which are such one-dimensional villains in their respective properties that being the unstoppable bad guy is THE ONE THING THEY LIKE DOING!

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24671&stc=1&d=1458771571

It only makes me wonder: Even if Ralph is ostracized, doesn't he get any satisfaction from beating Felix? If we're playing up video game tropes here, why aren't our villains having fun? One thing I've learned from video games is that it can be ****ing awesome to be the bad guy (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3LyXXlxGmkA).

Surely the player must LOSE on occasion, right? Well if that happens, it's certainly not represented here. Maybe you'll say that, "Well, Ralph isn't REALLY a bad guy" to which I say, "yeah, you're right, but then why is he trying to cope with being one?" WHY IS HE A BAD GUY?

That's just the nature of the game? That's just... how he was born? The problem here is that in reality if you find yourself surrounded by prejudiced ********, you just stay away from them, but Ralph is for some reason invested in his game in a way that's never elaborated on. The best we get is that if he's not a part of the game the game is considered broken and supposedly everything in the game, including everyone in it, is lost indefinitely.

That's it? That's the only thing keeping him there? He's only getting picked on because they need somebody to pick on? That doesn't make any sense.

"Contrived" is a word that came to mind regularly as I was watching this movie and it applies to all manner of logical dissonances that pop up left and right. Vanelope's glitching for example. WHAT'S THE DEAL WITH THAT?

Vanelope's status as a glitch is the main crux of the story and nearly everything related to it MAKES NO ******* SENSE WHATSOEVER.

(I really don't want to make a habit of doing lists, but this post is going to look like a mess otherwise.)

1.) Her "glitching" is very poorly represented. You're in a video game movie and you couldn't get creative with this? Glitching is typically a lot more that bursts of static and inconsistent skipping. My issue here largely just feeds into the bizarre choice of art for the whole movie which just seems like a lump of Pixar with video game stuff sprinkled on top. What to you have to gain by using the typical 3D caricatures for everyone? This is most extremely apparent when an 8-bit Felix praises FPS Girl's (I don't care what her name is) "High Definition" which is obviously a reference to varying video game resolutions. EXCEPT FELIX ISN'T 8-BIT.

He LOOKS 8-Bit from the outside of his game, but on the inside everyone is represented to each other by 3D caricatures so there's no artistic dissonance which would otherwise make the villains in the villain meeting seriously stand out from each other or even warrant Felix's comment.

http://twilighthollowproject.b1.jcink.com/uploads/twilighthollowproject/sparrow.gif

It's this dissonance that leads me to believe that the creators considered what would sell first and what would work second which is why Vanelope's glitching is underwhelming among other things. This is the exact OPPOSITE of what we got in The LEGO Movie which was extraordinarily mindful of the medium they were trying to portray and what the precise way to best represent it visually would be.

2.) Vanelope can control her glitchiness. This bothers me too because it is neither rationalized in-world or even set up. Why can she control her glitchiness? Better yet, why SHOULD she control her glitchiness? Doesn't a deus ex machina like this sorta spit in the face of the whole "you can't change who you are" thing? Apparently she can if she can resist glitching and employ it whenever she wants. Too bad Ralph can't "resist being a bad guy", thatschrui unyc,.p ejkmw

You could interpret this bit as a sort of "if that's your thing, own it" deal, but this is never followed through with Ralph, in fact, Ralph's arc is just a cluster**** of consequences. Ralph doesn't like being the bad guy, the good guys don't like him because he's a bad guy, so they're unfairly mean to him. Ralph decides to steal a hero medal which only represents success in the most shallow and childish of ways and in the process makes a huge mess of other games which is totally unfair to them.

COMPLETELY SIDESTEP into a different plot for a while where Ralph gets to be the hero and Felix is there to help him (because Felix is a lightswitch character), and now automagically, Ralph's arc is resolved and everyone's nice to him now even though Felix was always aware of the problem, no one else from their game witnessed his deeds, and we just completely **** on the idea that Ralph really had it so hard in the first place by showing that even though he lives in a garbage dump HE COULD'VE HAVE LIVED IN A HOUSE THIS WHOLE TIME.

Kind of ****ing trivializes his journey a bit, doesn't it?

3.) Vanelope's a glitch because... she's not a part of the game... I think the whole visualization of code thing was a mistake. A very intentional mistake. The creators thought very simple tech lingo would be too difficult for audiences to grasp so they added in a few shots of King Candy jumping into this hyperdimensional closet where he bizarrely keeps all the code that runs his game which appears as blocks with names attached to strings, plainly representing the interconnection of different functions and subsystems that work off of each other to run a program. Vanelope's not connected to anything.

So she's not in the game.

But she is.

But she isn't.

But SHE WILL BE IF SHE CROSSES THE FINISH LINE OF THE RACE OH MY GOD IS THAT NOT AN EYEROLLER.

Really? The game's code is represented as this stationary ball of interconnected pieces and Vanelope's not a part of it all and YET if she, OF ALL THINGS, fulfills her goal of winning the race, she suddenly becomes a part of it again and NOT ONLY THAT, but inexplicably undoes the specific changes King Candy made? WHY THE ****? I'd accuse this plotpoint of being saccharine and twee, BUT IT ALREADY TAKES PLACE IN CANDYLAND.

3.) "Glitches can't leave the game."

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24672&stc=1&d=1458776051
WHAT.

WHY?
I had to ask that audibly as I was watching the movie and it killed me because the SECOND they said that I line I just KNEW they weren't going to explain it.

No reason... everyone can leave the game at any time... except glitches.

Because **** you, that's why.

It doesn't GET anymore contrived than that. There's a dilemma because of reasons and it can be solved because of reasons, that's apparently all you need to know.

You know, I can OVERLOOK plotholes if the rest of the movie was enjoyable, but I never laughed once.

The "Laffy Taffy" laughed more than me.

"Hero's Duty" joke? Get it? Cause it sounds like "dooty"?

HA. HA. HA.

That's literally the kind of garbage you find from Call of Duty haters in Youtube comments. I'VE HEARD IT BEFORE AND IT DOES NOT FLATTER YOU TO SAY IT.

What was the point of the Darth Vader breathing sound when Ralph's underwater? Cause... Disney owns Star Wars now? Hahahahahahaa.

Well at least I learned one important thing from this movie:
To "vurp" is to vomit and burp at the same time.

Glad I know that now. I'll be sure to use that information in the near future.

*sigh*

You know, as much as I bitch, I don't consider Wreck-It Ralph a bad movie. It's just... misguided. It has the potential to emotionally engage me and REALLY the best scene in the movie is easily the moment where Ralph realizes it's in the best interest of the game to destroy the car he made with Vanelope and she has to watch helplessly as he fulfills his role as a bad guy even if he's doing it for good guy reasons.

That scene's REALLY GOOD and evidently a lot of people connected with it.

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24673&stc=1&d=1458777508

Okay, ignoring the weird "I have never felt true sadness before" bit (watch some more movies, damn), I have to admit, YES, this is a really sad scene. It's well done, it's plays directly into the themes of the movie, and fits perfectly into Ralph's arc of self doubt.

BUT, the first half of the movie utterly failed to emotionally engage me before this scene and after it only managed to UNDERCUT itself when Ralph has to apologize for destroying her car in the first place.

He doesn't have to apologize. He may have to apologize for all the OTHER things he destroyed, but he was essentially stopping her from committing suicide and dragging EVERYONE DOWN WITH HER.

It sucks that it's all King Candy's fault she's a glitch, it sucks that the other racers bully her because they don't know any better, but BECAUSE THEY DON'T KNOW ANY BETTER and BECAUSE KING CANDY IS RIGHT ABOUT THE THREAT SHE POSES, it doesn't justify her choice to race anyway. The parallel to Ralph is beyond forced.

Not that it matters, because she eventually races regardless of the risk, exposing her glitch, and allowing players to cheat until the game's inevitable shut down due to player complaining about lack of balance.

All's well that ends well. For now.

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24674&stc=1&d=1458778408

Final Verdict: rating_3 [Meh...]

Miss Vicky

03-23-16, 09:38 PM

:facepalm:

Omnizoa

03-23-16, 09:49 PM

:facepalm:
http://wondergressive.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/shrug.jpg
I liked Inside Out a lot more.

Omnizoa

03-23-16, 10:16 PM

FOR THE RECORD, I've played actual Disney video games that did a better job of telling "a story that addresses the true meaning of friendship, heroism, and of rising above labels and stereotypes and finding your true self".

http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lp3c2f7BLG1qfl8r7o1_500.gif

False Writer

03-23-16, 11:29 PM

Omnizoa

03-24-16, 12:29 AM

Good job on the review once again, though I'll have to disagree. Wreck-it Ralph is one of my favorite animated movies, after watching it the first time I considered it one of my favorite movies period. Although it fell a bit for me on around the 4th re-watch, I still love it.
I really don't know why this, as opposed to anything else, is what people are gravitating to. Is it just because video games are more popularly topical now and most video game movies are total ****?

I'd rather not settle.

Honestly, this wouldn't make any top list of mine, even if I was limited to 3D animated family movies.

Miss Vicky

03-24-16, 12:57 AM

As a non-gamer, I can say that what I gravitate to is the emotional aspect. I'm really invested in its characters and that's something I place a high value on when I'm watching a film.

Omnizoa

03-24-16, 01:37 AM

As a non-gamer, I can say that what I gravitate to is the emotional aspect. I'm really invested in its characters and that's something I place a high value on when I'm watching a film.
Fair enough, I do too, just not these characters. Ralph and Vanelope feel like characters I've seen before and I have trouble engaging with them on any emotional level because the circumstances that affect them are often transparent plot devices. It rips me out of it.

I didn't have any such problems with Big Hero 6 which at worst suffered from brief moments of crippling predictability.

Miss Vicky

03-24-16, 01:50 AM

I had trouble engaging with Big Hero 6.

Didn't hate it, but it's definitely not a favorite. It just did not have much of an emotional impact on me.

Omnizoa

03-24-16, 02:04 AM

I had trouble engaging with Big Hero 6.

Didn't hate it, but it's definitely not a favorite. It just did not have much of an emotional impact on me.
Can you say why?

Miss Vicky

03-24-16, 02:06 AM

Partly the super hero aspect of it, but mostly I just didn't care at all for the human characters in it. I liked Baymax well enough but found the people mostly irritating.

Omnizoa

03-24-16, 02:35 AM

Partly the super hero aspect of it, but mostly I just didn't care at all for the human characters in it. I liked Baymax well enough but found the people mostly irritating.
I get that.

I think Wreck-It Ralph just assuming I'm totally invested by the end of a cliche self-deprecating monologue is more annoying than any of Big Hero 6's individual personalities.

I think the whole big-bad-guy-who's-actually-a-good-guy-and-overcomes-prejudice-with-the-help-of-a-smaller-comedic-sidekick story was just a lot stronger in Shrek.

False Writer

03-24-16, 10:18 AM

I really don't know why this, as opposed to anything else, is what people are gravitating to. Is it just because video games are more popularly topical now and most video game movies are total ****?

I'd rather not settle.

Honestly, this wouldn't make any top list of mine, even if I was limited to 3D animated family movies.

Well being a die-hard gamer all my life did indeed make me gravitate towards this movie—and I did love all the video game elements they put in.

I also did like the story. For me, it doesn't matter so much about how original the plot structure is, but just how well they're able to pull it off. Similar to Zootopia, which doesn't have a completely original storyline (a whodunnit mystery) but the way it's pulled off I thought was very good.

Also, I agree with Miss Vicky. Although I did like Big Hero 6 it was ultimately forgettable for me, mostly because I wasn't a huge fan of any of the characters.

Omnizoa

03-24-16, 10:46 AM

I also did like the story. For me, it doesn't matter so much about how original the plot structure is, but just how well they're able to pull it off.
I would think that'd give you reason to dislike it then.

Gatsby

03-24-16, 10:52 AM

Omnizoa

03-24-16, 12:10 PM

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24680&stc=1&d=1458827395

Lady Snowblood

Action / Japanese / 1973

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
It popped up for some reason when I was looking at The Criterion Collection version of The Game. Could this be the badass female samurai movie I was hoping for to eclipse Sex and Fury?

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
HAHAHAHA NOPE.

The music's not bad.

That's the only almost-but-not-really-positive thing I have to say about this movie.

Everything else is total crap. Allow me to count the ways...

Prop blood. Because they can't be bothered to make the blood a realistic color or consistency.

Blood geysers. Because that's not always ****ing stupid.

Hand camera. Because they couldn't afford a tripod.

Redundant editing. Because one bad flashback wasn't enough.

Redundant editing. Because one bad flashback wasn't enough.

A plot so bad it collapses in on itself within the first 20 minutes and goes full-on supernova by the last shot of the movie.

WOW. Like... I'm surprised by how awful this was.

I'm not even mad either. Wreck-It Ralph frustrated me, but this... this made me laugh harder than any single joke I saw in Airplane!, DAMN.

Alright, so here's your 10-cent summary of the movie with everything you need to know so you don't have to watch it yourself, all the best spoilers perfectly intact:

http://twilighthollowproject.b1.jcink.com/uploads/twilighthollowproject/snowblood.gif

So the movie opens up with a baby screaming which is always a good sign, right? Stir up my horrible memories of Yoshi's Island before we even even see a single character.

Amidst a horrid mess of cuts we can infer that Snowblood is the name of the screaming baby who now lives as an assassin and exists for no other purpose than for VENGEANCE.

Why does she exist only for VENGEANCE? Well, you see... back in the day... her father was murdered by four people. Those four people then raped her mother. Her mother killed one of them out of VENGEANCE and she was sent to jail for life. Unfortunately, that was only 1/4th of her intended application of VENGEANCE and so because she needed more VENGEANCE she has lots and lots of sex with men. How did she have sex when she's in prison?

Oh, silly billy, what a goofy question. The answer is VENGEANCE.

Soon she has a VENGEANCE baby who exists solely for VENGEANCE and she dies. So the baby which somehow gets the name Snowblood (which is Japanese for VENGEANCE) grows up outside of prison and gets trained by a priest who teaches her VENGEANCE.

This priest of VENGEANCE happens to be a swordsman and trains her the best way to use a sword: By stuffing her in a barrel, kicking her down a hill, and watching her crash which launches her out of the barrel 90 DEGREES IN A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT DIRECTION.

http://twilighthollowproject.b1.jcink.com/uploads/twilighthollowproject/gervais.gif

Okay, so now she's trained for VENGEANCE and she kills the first guy whose daughter also swears VENGEANCE. The second guy's already dead unfortunately, so Snowblood'll have to be satisfied with only 3/4ths VENGEANCE. She finds the last guy, whose a girl, with the help of a newspaper writer but after talkin' a lotta **** she runs away and hangs herself.

Oh. Well... that's everybody then. Kinda anti-climactic.

Snowblood cuts her legs off. For VENGEANCE.

Later the third guy who wasn't really dead shows up to say he's not really dead and because he's so convinced that Snowblood will kill him out of VENGEANCE that he hires a lookalike, he shows up to say he's not really dead and-wait WHAAA-

Snowblood goes to kill the third guy for a quarter of VENGEANCE but the newspaper writer stops her because he's *SHOCK GASP!* secretly his father!

http://twilighthollowproject.b1.jcink.com/uploads/twilighthollowproject/zoom_gasp.gif
Wait, that... doesn't add anything to the story at all-
DON'T THINK ABOUT IT!

So of course she's still got a hard-on for VENGEANCE so she tracks him down in order to pierce him through with her long hot throbbing VENGEANCE and she gets shot in the stomach which was completely avoidable.

Now that her VENGEANCE is done, she decides to just walk off the gunshot wound and *SHOCK GASP!* that girl whose dad she killed returns to stab her in the stomach too! For VENGEANCE!

Umm... okay, first, how did she get there? Second, why is she trying to get revenge for her dad when her dad was so horrible that she spent every day making wicker baskets only to throw them in the ocean because nobody will buy them and they wouldn't make enough money to support her lazy drugged out gambling ******* of a dad anyway so she's resorted to prostitution-
DON'T THINK ABOUT IT!

No, no, seriously, that doesn't make any sense. And it makes even less sense that Snowblood would have any stake in killing these people anyway since she's never met them. She should have the biggest grudge against her mother who explicitly gave birth to her in order to force the task of killing her rapists on her. **** you, Mom, I don't care if they were awful to you, you gave birth to me just I would do your dirty work. Your idea of justice was to waste 20 years of my life by getting some jerkass old priest to stuff me in a barrel and throw me down hills! You know how many bones I've broken!? I can't even write anymore my hand is just a gnarled claw only good for gripping a sword! I have to carry an umbrella everywhere because rain aggravates my skin which is mostly chafed off and covered in splinters! And I can't even emote anymore because I've been psychologically conditioned through negative reinforcement to only desire VENGEANCE!

And now here I am shot, stabbed, and bleeding all over the place and I'm still so single-mindedly absorbed with VENGEANCE that I actually pull the dagger out just so I can bleed to death.

Let's end the movie here. I'll just make some horrible squelching noise to tie the movie back together with how it began and I'll just bleed out and die.

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24681&stc=1&d=1458832124

And I'm still alive. WHAT IN THE FVENGEANCE!!!

Final Verdict: rating_1 [Irredeemably Awful]

Omnizoa

03-24-16, 12:47 PM

IMO, your review nitpicks the film for its minor faults too much, as if you were expecting a film with perfect plausibility. According to your arguments, what's the point of watching an animated film?
If I wanted to nitpick, Gatsby, I'd point out that video game character information can't travel through power cables.

My main gripes are with how the characters' drama is justified and how the world makes sense in-universe. I've emphasized this with my comparisons to Inside Out, The LEGO Movie, Shrek, and Big Hero 6, all of these movies have significantly stronger internal logical consistency.

I don't expect the movie to make sense within the context of the real world, but I do expect it to make sense within the context of the movie. It's not a question of, "WHAT? Video game characters coming to life? PFFT, that's not real." it's a question of, "Why doesn't Ralph build a house to begin with? If he doesn't like his existing home and he has the means to do it at the beginning of the movie, why does it take him until the end of the movie for him to do it?"

There's no such contradiction in Shrek even though Shrek is also self-deprecating about his living environment. The difference is Shrek is strongly established to be stubborn and unconvinced that things can change despite how much he wants them to. It's just the "the way things are" to him and the movie unfolds as his cynicism is toyed with and alleviated. Ralph has no such arc, he starts the movie miserable because people hate him and he ends the movie not miserable because they stop hating him.

It could even be argued that Shrek is the more mature of the two movies because it accepts that regardless of who or what you are, there are always going to be people who don't like you.

https://49.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lpnkar0P5B1qlt6keo1_400.gif

Miss Vicky

03-24-16, 01:16 PM

Omnizoa

03-24-16, 01:52 PM

I love that you keep saying the Ralph could have just built a house for himself from the start when all he could really do is stack bricks and debris to make a ramshackle, unstable structure. He required Felix's help to make it a sound construction.
It was my strong impression that Felix was busy making a fancy neighborhood for the NPCs which is why they look so much bigger and nicer than his tiny crooked house.

http://38.media.tumblr.com/683bd3f7d0725bdf829f1c2bd29b979e/tumblr_inline_mvgqktMZgy1ryypld.png

http://38.media.tumblr.com/f4d4390928af9d50257312c7c6958e93/tumblr_inline_mvgqoq5C2u1ryypld.png

False Writer

03-24-16, 01:58 PM

I don't expect the movie to make sense within the context of the real world, but I do expect it to make sense within the context of the movie. It's not a question of, "WHAT? Video game characters coming to life? PFFT, that's not real." it's a question of, "Why doesn't Ralph build a house to begin with? If he doesn't like his existing home and he has the means to do it at the beginning of the movie, why does it take him until the end of the movie for him to do it?"

As Miss Vicky said Ralph could only "Wreck" stuff, in the end it was Felix that helped him make his house and the little village for the exiled video game characters.

Also at the end Ralph realized it wasn't really the penthouse that he wanted but to be accepted by his in-game acquaintances.

Omnizoa

03-24-16, 02:52 PM

As Miss Vicky said Ralph could only "Wreck" stuff, in the end it was Felix that helped him make his house and the little village for the exiled video game characters.
Are we just assuming that? He's literally inhibited from building anything? See if that's the case, I would have wanted a scene to have specified that because otherwise I'm just left to assume that the NPCs are saying he "only wrecks stuff" the same way someone might say you're "always negative". It's absolutism, not necessary truth. I have no reason to take what they say seriously just because that's all I've seen of the character so far, especially if I'm even remotely genre-savvy.

But you know, even if there WAS some throwaway line I missed that said, "and Felix helped"? It really wouldn't change anything. That's just one example of the sort of stuff that occurs all throughout the movie.

Also at the end Ralph realized it wasn't really the penthouse that he wanted but to be accepted by his in-game acquaintances.
I don't recall the penthouse factoring into any sort of revelation. Being treated equally was a pretty obvious theme right out of the gate and to that end he wanted to get a medal so he'd be appreciated the same way Felix was.

False Writer

03-24-16, 07:44 PM

I don't recall the penthouse factoring into any sort of revelation. Being treated equally was a pretty obvious theme right out of the gate and to that end he wanted to get a medal so he'd be appreciated the same way Felix was.

Whoops I meant the medal, sorry.

Anyways, I don't think there's any use continuing, if you didn't like it then you didn't like it. Definitely wasn't the first time someone didn't like a movie that was liked by many others. But that's okay! No one said that we all need to like the same things. ;)

Guaporense

03-24-16, 08:01 PM

Resident Bitch's Movie Log thread[/URL] where it got arguably the most collective praise of any movie I've seen on this site so far. The savage tongue-lashing of plebians helped too.

I though it was the best Disney movie of the past 60 years or so.

Omnizoa

03-25-16, 12:28 AM

Anyways, I don't think there's any use continuing, if you didn't like it then you didn't like it. Definitely wasn't the first time someone didn't like a movie that was liked by many others. But that's okay! No one said that we all need to like the same things.
Yeah, it's not like it was a rating_1 or anything, then someone would get lynched.

I though it was the best Disney movie of the past 60 years or so.
*laughs* This is easily the biggest exception I've taken since Madoka Magica. In both cases it's the plot that's mucked it up for me. I just can't care about any of the drama or action if they're only motivated by obvious plot devices. "Glitches can't leave the game" is a showstopping SLAP in the face to me because there's absolutely ZERO excuse for it.

Tangled was better.

http://cdn.teen.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Rapunzel-Flynn-Rider-Tangled-Tower.gif

Omnizoa

03-25-16, 11:53 AM

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24696&stc=1&d=1458913607

The Stuff

Horror Comedy / English / 1985

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
I've mentioned it several times around here, been procrastinating on a rewatch. Reassessment time!

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
What happens when you mix the goo from The Green Slime, the body-snatching from The Thing, and the cynical 80s commercialism from Looker?

You get The Stuff.

And yes, it's exactly what it sounds like.

It sounds like the most generic movie title in existence which probably contributes to why it's so heavily overlooked, and it ALSO sounds like a perfect recipe for ironic horror camp.

Truth be told, I really like The Stuff, I eat it all the time, you should too, IT'S VERY GOOD FOR YOU. But I also like the movie, despite the fact that thiiiiisss... is well below anything I'd call exceptional quality.

There are issues all over the place. Pretty glaring ones.

I could point to the editing which implies that characters never see the monster, but later dialog contradicts that assumption.

I could point to the practical effects which may have been somewhat impressive back in the day but are no less disgusting and fake now (props for transforming the Nightmare on Elm Street bed from a literal blood geyser into an actual attempt to represent the monster's amorphous movement).

I could even point to the pretty ****in' shameful use of their single racial minority character who just edges the border of a stereotype before inverting the Black Dude Dies First (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/BlackDudeDiesFirst) cliche and diving headlong deep into the Black Dude Dies Last Because He's Secretly A Monster cliche.

Is that a cliche? It should be a cliche, just so I can criticize it. It's one thing to kill off your token minority first incidentally, but it's another to obfuscate the truth about him to the point that he's explicitly painted as untrustworthy in every single scene he appears in.

Points also lost for the usual stuff. Not that Stuff, THAT STUFF IS BETTER THAN ICE CREAM. I'm talkin' actual ice cream. And dogs. And this:

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24697&stc=1&d=1458914860

So yeah, this movie has problems, and I'm sure a lot of people won't like it because it's either offensive or gross or whatever. But hey, it's not South Park, it's just a little lost B-movie with aspirations of something more.

I usually HATE horror movies, but -PFFT, this? This is just silly.

The basic premise follows as such:

The world's biggest brainiac discovers a bubbling white liquid coming up from underground. Probably some sort of dangerous chemical or moldy fungal slop, right?

Welp, he dips his finger and and immediately sticks that sucker in his mouth. ALAS, a franchise was born. The Stuff, as it was creatively named was marketed as "better than ice cream" and thanks to a mysterious sidestep by the FDA, The Stuff takes the world by storm due to it's frighteningly addictive nature.

Our main character, who I'll just call "Moe", is an industrial saboteur who is hired by ice cream companies to infiltrate the shadowy corporate monster that sells The Stuff, and discover what it is.

What is it you ask? Why it's only THE ONE THING YOU'LL EVER NEED TO EAT of course. Plus "MONSTER" sort of, uhh... gives it away.

And the poster (http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24700&stc=1&d=1458915713) (cool as it is).

Basically anyone who eats it is actually being eaten from the inside and they become walking advertisements for the ****. Yeah. That's GOD-TIER diabolical stuff.

But you know what really sells me on this movie besides the concept?

The characters.

WELL... mainly a few characters.

Mainly a few lines.

Maybe two or three actors.

A couple scenes.

Okay, this guy:

http://orig08.deviantart.net/03b0/f/2016/085/d/e/walking_commercial_by_heartbreakerstudios-d9wigb6.gif

This guy's awesome, and I wish he was in the whole movie because he just ****ing robs, NOT STEALS, ROBS, every single scene he's in.

He's the dad of the main kid who discovers The Stuff moving in his fridge and as the movie progresses we see him gradually transform from a strict father figure into one intimidating freak-of-nature.

Seriously, it's worth seeing the movie just for his scenes alone.

Once you've figured out that The Stuff is actually controlling people and that's all he's been eating for days, he turns on that car salesman smile and rattles off a pitch to his son, even arguing him down with that same word-twisting ******** you get from religious fundamentalists.

And when his son rebels he flips like a light switch into full-on death glare mode which contributes best to the scene when his son (okay, I'll admit, I still don't know the kid's name) pretends that he's tasted The Stuff and really likes it now. His mom and brother totally buy it and they're all happy smiles left and right, but his dad...

Oh ho ho ho ho... Watching like a ****in' predator.

Who is this guy anyway? Robert Frank Telfer (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0854342/?ref_=ttfc_fc_cl_t16)?

What has he been in? A lot of TV dramas...

Mr. Deeds? Pff...

Something's Gotta Give? Whatever...

Arachnophobia? Hmmm...

Wicked Stepmother? Ooh... another Larry Cohen movie... I think we got a winner.

Anyway... all in all, THE STUFF IS PRETTY GOOD.

Final Verdict: rating_4 [Pretty Good]

Omnizoa

03-25-16, 03:25 PM

http://twilighthollowproject.b1.jcink.com/uploads/twilighthollowproject/lucy.gif

Lucy

Action / English / 2014

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
I'd seen ads for Lucy when it came out and immediately wrote it off on the "unlocking 10% of your brain gives you superpowers" premise. However after Hard Boiled, Dragon Tiger Gate, and Mad Max: Fury Road, I decided to dig around for more... "hyper action" movies. And came back across this. Is it really that good of an action movie?

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
He he he he he hell no.

This is a ROUGH movie. And I'm really sorry to say that because this had MASSIVE potential right out of the gate.

The first 15-20 minutes of this movie are really strong. It's well paced, it's upbeat, it's building tension, Scarlett Johansson's boyfriend drags her into a mob exchange, he gets shot, turns out the package she's handcuffed to might be a bomb, turns out it's not, it's a new superdrug, and they knock her out, cut her open, and turn her into a drug mule.

Following an altercation with a mob member which splits the package inside her and drops all that superdrug into her system she suddenly becomes Badass #1, ready to kick some ass, take some names, chew some bubblegum, and get revenge before the high ends and the shock kills her.

Amidst it all we have a collection of brief but inventive intercuts that draw parallels to what we're seeing go down alongside tangentially related events in nature.

Sounds like a fairly reasonable setup for some creative over-the-top action right?

http://twilighthollowproject.b1.jcink.com/uploads/twilighthollowproject/Stallonope.gif

Well, let's start with small issues: The acting is pretty weak.

Now, I know I'm not prone to speaking much on the topic of acting or even ACTORS in the movies I watch, but these two issues really stood out to me:

Firstly: Morgan Freeman is wasted. I know he's a good actor, I've seen him do it, but he brings absolutely nothing interesting to this role, and really what can he do when all he's expected to do is to parrot exposition and look as perplexed as I was when they turned that 20%-of-the-brain crap on full blast? He's a boring character and he could have been played and neglected by easily as anyone else.

Secondly: Scarlett Johansson is wasted. All the way up to the drug trip she's a pretty wracked girl and I totally buy her justified panic. EXCEPT that one moment where that one guy gets shot in front of her. I swear she was about to burst out laughing (why'd they keep that take?). But MOSTLY she's plays out her emotions well.

As soon as she hits that drug trip mode though she immediately falls into that cliche where the more intelligent and enlightened you are, the less you are able to emote because to be human is to be fallible and to be superhuman is to bore me to tears.

A couple other small issues would include awkward dialog and... other stuff, look, they're not my main concern.

My main concern is the scary blackhole of a plot and how this movie manages to excel at both skeeving me out and ****in' DESTROYING my suspension of disbelief.

The movie is REALLY uncomfortable to watch. I said The Stuff was gross, but this is an entirely different level of gross.

We see multiple animals having sex.
We see Scarlet's stomach cut open.
We see multiple animals graphically giving birth.
We see Scarlet repeatedly kicked in her bleeding stomach wound.
We see an antelope get run down by a cheetah (I always want to punch that camerman).
And we see Scalet's face literally melt off.

WOW. Not what I was expecting. Nor is it what I wanted.

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/incoming/article30445884.ece/ALTERNATES/h342/lucy4jpg.jpg

Let's interrupt this negativity for a moment with something positive:

I almost didn't recognize the CG.

Okay, back to the crap.

Obviously, the biggest issue this movie suffers from though, and is obviously the biggest reason people are split on it, is that it goes to extraordinary lengths to ruin your immersion.

Morgan Freeman gives a speech about the hypothetical possibilities of using more than the mere 10% of our brains we use (which is a debatable claim to begin with) and points towards the dolphin as an example (I'll paraphrase):

You see, because dolphins use 20% of their brains they've developed echolocation. That must mean that if we were able to use more of our brains we could do magic tricks *insert literal cutaway to a stage magic performance*

Okay, fine, I'll extend my suspension of disbelief far enough to accept that dolphins have echolocation purely because they can use 20% of their brains. I'm going to just take all of that extremely dubious premise at face value. FINE. Cool. Whatever. So what does that mean? When Scarlett reaches 20% she'll get a personal sonar? Better reaction time? Powerful calculation skills?

No. She can levitate people.

(O_O )

Seriously. She becomes a ******* demi-god. She gains literal omniscience (and I mean LITERAL OMNISCIENCE), can flip cars with her mind, transmit her image to any screen, and shatter suspension of disbelief with every scene she's in.

She's super smart so she's a super fast typer, right? Well apparently her regular laptop is capable of opening, closing, and processing information in dozens of programs many times per second.

I've never seen any computer do that and this is set in modern day when both Youtube and Firefox are sluggish pieces of ****. Yeah right.

She's able to see and hear through walls and great distances, but she's unable to transmit her voice anywhere without a cell phone?

Why does she ever even get in a car? If she can levitate anything, why can't she just float her ass where she's going?

If she's so intelligent that she can see telephone data streams in the air, why does she need to physically move them around to find what she's looking for? Why is this there a literal user interface for her magic god powers?

Also why does she melt? She spits her teeth out, her skin dissolves away, and she explodes on a plane only to wake up perfectly fine elsewhere? WHAT THE HELL WAS THAT!?

Was it... uh.. her.. learning to teleport? Why did that require BODY HORROR?

You know, this whole movie's superpower excuse is paper-thin enough to begin with, why do you pack so many stones on the suspension-of-disbelief scale that it's collapsed three floors down beneath the table you set it on?

She walks into a room unarmed full of bad guys with guns and for a moment I think about that really cool action I was promised, but then she just walks forward monotonously as everyone around her just floats away. ANTICLIMAX.

And you know what dug into me harder than anything else in this movie? What happened NEXT:

Let's go.

I'm not sure I could be of any help for you.

Yes you are.

What for?

*deep kiss*

PENIS. The answer is PENIS.

Final Verdict: rating_2 [Just... Bad]

Swan

03-25-16, 03:26 PM

I was so disappointed seeing Morgan Freeman spout that nonsense in the trailer. He hosts a damn science show!

Omnizoa

03-25-16, 03:39 PM

I was so disappointed seeing Morgan Freeman spout that nonsense in the trailer. He hosts a damn science show!
I laughed when he makes an inane statement and the entire room laughs as if it's funny before the camera cuts to their fingers all rigorously typing on their laptops.

https://45.media.tumblr.com/7210e599d8a3c010717b6a6898a9e497/tumblr_ml2d89fVUI1r14o02o1_500.gif
"THAT JOKE WAS GENIUS I MUST COPY IT DOWN IMMEDIATELY."

cricket

03-25-16, 07:20 PM

I saw The Stuff and Lucy at the movies and didn't like either of them.

Omnizoa

03-26-16, 06:25 PM

I had no intention of seeing Batman v Superman, but you know what? LET'S DO THIS!
*runs off to theater*

Omnizoa

03-27-16, 02:39 AM

https://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/rbpggtxov38mtxkdmlsb.gif

Batman v Superman:
Dawn of Justice

Superhero Action / English / 2016

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
You guys wouldn't believe how disappointed I was in this movie before I'd even seen it, you have no idea.

So apparently, what I thought was Batman X Superman was actually Batman V Superman. V as in Versus. And here I thought we were finally going to get the nerdgasm of the century with Batman stripping down to his ears, Superman draped only in his cape, and out comes the utility belt for some smooooth lovin'...

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24723&stc=1&d=1459084920

DAMN. The movie we might've had.

Anyway the REAL movie is just a straight up fight between the two superheroes. I wasn't really interested in seeing it, but given the controversy surrounding it with fanboys lining up on both sides of the fence, where does someone like me fit in?

I have virtually no interest in western comics. The medium itself is a joke to me. You want me to invest time and money into any one of numerous adaptions across of tens of thousands of comic books that come in the form of coverless 14-page pamphlets, half of which are ads for other comic books?

Hell to the **** to the no.

Factor in my general unenthusiasm towards hyper-machismo superheroes and you've got my general attitude towards them. Superman is intrinsically boring to me as a character. He's one-dimensionally good, he's invincible, and about the only thing that can stop him is a single extraordinarily circumstantial macguffin. Hard to make that interesting beyond a simple power fantasy.

Batman generally fairs better. He has no superpowers, but inventiveness and the resources of a multi-billionaire give him a lot of options. He's got a much bigger personal stake in the action too.

He can still get Mary Sued like crazy though. I liked playing Arkham City, but Batman was so stupidly perfect it was laughable. Just look at this crap:

Trained to a physical and mental peak
Inventor, detective, genius-level intelligence
Expert in most known forms of martial arts
Trained in all aspects of criminology
Mastery of the physical sciences
Computer expert
Master of disguise
Photographic memory
Expert escape artist

The game literally says he's the peak of human strength, a genius, and the world's greatest detective. **** OFF WITH THAT.

I prefer the flawed hero characters in anime who are typically just regular people with only one or two limited abilities to their name and seeing how they take that tiny window of opportunity and exploit it creatively.

All told, my interest in superhero movies was PRETTY MILD before I saw The Dark Knight which kicked tons of ass.

Because of it, I eventually read The Killing Joke and Mad Love, the latter of which is now the only western comic I own.

Does that make me a batfan now? NO. The Dark Knight Rises was weak and if I were to hand out ratings to the trilogy right now it'd be 4/5 for Batman Begins, 5/5 for The Dark Knight, and 3/5 for The Dark Knight Rises. The earlier Batman movies would likely fair worse (though they certainly have their merits).

So, what'd I think of Man of Steel? I didn't see it. And I have no interest in seeing it or any other Superman movie because Superman's boring.

This is my first one and I'm only watching this because I can appreciate the idea of pitting the two most famous comic superheroes against each other for a good old playground "who would win" throwdown.

Is this movie as awesome or terrible as I've heard?

Who actually wins in the end? Batman or Superman?

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
Well, Wonder Woman, obviously.

Now calm your raging ****, let's get the usual criticisms out of the way: Pearls, eggs, horses.

Did we need pearls, eggs, and horses to tell this story?

https://regmedia.co.uk/2015/09/26/batman_slaps_robin.jpg
**** no. GTFOut of here with that ****.

Now that that's out of way, what's the real problem with this movie?

A combination of lackluster setup and WAY TOO MUCH PADDING (also editing that makes it look like a bunch of scenes were chopped up and mixed around).

You could sum the whole thing up as "a misappropriation of time" given the fact that a lot of this movie TEDIOUSLY drags itself out longer than necessary and then inexplicably squanders what few key scenes we need developed.

The biggest culprit here is the demonization of Superman. We get it, we saw it in the trailers, he's indestructible, he's dangerous, he's beholden to no one, and he's caused a lot of collateral damage.

It feeds into a paranoid public which then filters Batman's interpretation of his actions which are seen as catastrophic, intentionally or not.

I really like this angle and I would have been interested to see it explored beyond the obvious made-for-the-trailer scenes, but unfortunately this plotbeat is thoroughly half-baked.

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24719&stc=1&d=1459056981

Batman's suspicion turns antagonistic after an event which frames Superman as the killer of numerous terrorists.

Firstly: They're terrorists. Who cares?

Secondly: They're blaming him based on NOT an eyewitness account, but a testimony where someone walked in on the crime scene after Superman left? Dead bodies everywhere, everyone shot dead. Sounds like Superman, right? CAUSE HE REALLY NEEDS GUNS TO KILL PEOPLE.

There's this one wheelchair guy who seems to want to sue Superman because in the chaos of battle a metal beam ruined his legs. **** off, dude. I totally get that there are really people that stupid out there, but remember, this is all supposed to be informing Batman. And Batman should know better.

Speaking of Batman, might as well talk about the performances and the portrayals of each character.

Superman? Eh. Serviceable.

Batman? Eh. Serviceable. Batman's kinda weird, actually. He wears this big cybersuit that looks clunky as ****, but he mostly manages to pull it off. The more I watched, the more it seemed to make sense given how little of Superman's punches he'd actually be able to withstand besides.

I read split opinions on whether Ben Affleck made a more or less intimidating Batman than Bale or Keaton and I would have to say... Eh. Serviceable.

The REAL nitty gritty is where the reviews say that Batman is an ******* or that his hate towards Superman is entirely unjustified or that Batman doesn't kill or that Batman doesn't use guns.

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24718&stc=1&d=1459056748

Let's knock these off one by one:

1.) Guns. Bruce has one nightmare sequence in which he looks stupid and shoots a ton of people. It's not canon, whatever it is, and I admit it's jarring at the very least. Batman going all gun-fu on people is really a disservice to him as an inventive gagdet-oriented character. Following the main fight with Supes, Batman beats up a bunch of thugs and despite involving guns, it's much more the back-breaking slugout with grappling hooks, smoke bombs, and batarangs we're used to.

Frankly, I think this Batman was underwhelming compared to Nolan's Batman. Not because it's Ben Affleck, but because his suit seems to heavily compensate for his general lack of creativity. The Batmobile isn't as cool or complicated as the Tumbler, he doesn't have projectile arm spikes, and he never pulls anything really fancy out of his ass. He just sorta punches stuff... and shoots on occasion.

2.) Killing. Yes, Batman kills, that's hardly debatable. SHOULD he kill? That depends. A lot of versions of Batman never highlight his strict aversion to lethal violence and so in those incarnations, it's most important to make sure he remains consistent in that regard. In THIS version, Batman doesn't have anything against killing. In fact, this is a big issue I expected to have with a lot of interpretations of this movie.

People seem to think that Batman hates Superman because he kills people which is hypocritical because HE kills people.

That's not even remotely true and there are two huge distinctions here: One being that Superman never kills anyone intentionally, he's unquestionably involved in battles that resulted in inadvertent INNOCENT casualties, but that's it. Second being that Batman doesn't have any apparent record of collateral deaths and he only kills GUILTY people.

The argument here might be that Batman doesn't kill anyone ever, but as some fans would point out, Batman's story has expanded to the point of questioning that thick logic (if Batman would only kill Joker, many more lives would be saved) which SEEMS to be retroactively referenced in one shot of the movie implying that this is a Batman with a history we haven't seen yet. This is a CYNICAL AS **** Batman, so just because we don't know how he got that way doesn't mean he CAN'T be that way. It's not like he's evil now, he's just pessimistic to a fault.

3.) Motivation. Batman's motivation is actually pretty clear, but it's questionable primarily because of the weakass framing-Superman setup. Superman is dangerous, even when he goes to have a peace talk the place blows up around him. To Superman, there's obviously no point in walking out alone knowing what people already think about him, but to Batman it looks undeniably skeevy to see Superman walk into a building, it explodes, and then he just flies away without saying a word.

4.) Jerkass Batman. Batman doesn't come across as an ******* to me, he just comes across as slightly too antagonistic. If the setup were stronger and better portrayed Superman as a monster, it'd be easier to see why Batman thought he needed to be stopped, but it doesn't take a brainiac to figure out that when there's a city-wide smackdown in the sky going on that you should probably get more information before you assume that both involved are callous walking time bombs. If Superman were provoked and publicly portrayed on television to be unstable, that would certainly warrant Batman's fury, BUT they didn't do that and instead Superman gets a lot of glamour shots for saving people. In this regard, I don't blame a badly written Batman, I blame a badly written scenario.

Let's get back to what we were talking about before... where was I... oh yeah, wasting time. So the setup is pretty weak and as it turns out the battles are too. Mostly.

The first "encounter" between Batman and Superman occurs at the 1 hour mark when Batman, driving after some thugs, swerves around a corner and see Superman standing in the way.

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24717&stc=1&d=1459056650

That's a pretty epic OH **** moment, but the ensuing fight I expected never happened, and the claims I heard about "in the first fight, Superman kicks Batman's ass" are beyond false. There is no first fight, Batman hits Superman in the Batmobile and Superman flies away out of mercy. Pretty anticlimactic.

The actual fight is just... AVERAGE... and it's really unremarkable when compared to something like Iron-Man vs Thor in The Avengers which was a very memorable scene in that movie (and actually more narratively justified). My biggest problem with it is with the whole gimmick itself, Superman is only vulnerable to kryptonite and Batman's got kryptonite grenades and a kryptonite spear. Any time Superman is unaffected, it's one-sided in his favor, any time he is affected, it's one-sided in Batman's favor.

That's SO BORING.

Here's how they could have done it AWESOME:

Imagine if the entire fight was built up to with a preparation montage of Batman setting up traps all over the building. He gets a badass workout, sure, but I mean let's see him set up all the cool stuff in advance and watch how and when he uses each as the fight goes on. Put a lot of emphasis on the fact that this is probably Batman's last fight, that this is suicide and he really will die.

Then, and this is the most important part, expand the effective range of kryptonite and instead of making it an on-contact debilitation, make it a gradual radius of effect. This would mean that if Superman got too close for too long he would weaken and lose his powers, and we could play with this environmentally. We could have a lot of back and forth, moving the kryptonite and dancing around it, and what we'd have is an actual fight brought down to somewhere around Batman's level entirely hinging on his technical skill where it'd be Batman's range of gadgets vs Superman's range of powers. THAT WOULD BE AWESOME.

We don't get that though, unfortunately, and instead we get a lot of padding leading up to it which I largely blame on gratuitous slow-mo, real scenes that have absolutely no business delaying the fight everyone came to see, and nightmare scenes that have absolutely no business delaying the fight we came to see.

Uhhh... a few other bits and pieces...

The CG was mostly pretty good. A few shots are really obvious, especially any shot with Supes' cape dramatically flyin' in the wind, but otherwise really nice.

Lawrence Fishburne is slightly better than he should have been, and Jesse Eisenberg is slightly worse than he should have been.

I thought Eisenberg was a weird choice for Lex Luthor too, but this isn't really Lex Luthor anyway and he makes a fine over-the-top villain. My problem is he chews scenery way too much, mainly in scenes that don't warrant it. It's one thing if he's monologuing to Superman, but it's another when he's monologuing to an entire room of clapping people. This guy is just a gibbering twitchy nutjob, I have difficulty imagining him being host to such professional gatherings.

I'm never quite sure what Little Lex's relationship with Zod is either. He cries over his dead body so I guess I'm just supposed to know he meant something to him? But why? Was he even in Man of Steel?

Why was Bruce Wayne getting checks from Wheelchair Guy? Or did I completely misread that scene? I have no idea what was going on there. If he was it doesn't make any sense for Wheelchair Guy to give him grief over his family. Or was that Lex?

Why does Lex have a guy literally standing by Superman's mom with a flamethrower? I know he said he suggested fire as a means of killing her, but I didn't think they meant it that literally. It was kinda funny actually.

Why does Lois Lane trap herself in the final fight? I thought she was a fairly respectable character up until she inexplicably seals herself in a watery tomb. That was kinda funny too.

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24716&stc=1&d=1459056526

Arguably the biggest slap in the face this movie can muster is the flippant masses. The general population revile Superman as a dangerous unstoppable X factor and he's getting ruthlessly catcalled and picketed right up until the explosion scene that they eventually pin on him too. FOR ALL INTENTS AND PURPOSES MOST PEOPLE DON'T LIKE SUPERMAN, and yet even the government, who's building and people were sacrificed because of his existence, throw him a teary-eyed respectful funeral when he dies.

Yes, he dies, and yes there's a huge city full of sad people who hated him with pretty fairly reasonable justification not a few minutes ago.

Actually, Batman's much the same. He's inches from killing Superman and you know he's gonna like it, but Superman says his mother's name which turns out to be Batman's mother's name which pacifies him. That's... oh that's not good. That's a pretty ****ing feeble reconciliation.

Mere minutes later, Batman refers to Superman as his friend as if the two have thoroughly resolved their ideological perspectives.

In regards to Superman's death, I'm in agreement that they shouldn't have done it, especially if they were going to tease his revival as they do in the last shot of the movie. It's not because Superman shouldn't be allowed to die though and it's not because it jeopardizes the stakes in further movies. It's because, once again, it wasn't set up properly. It doesn't feel earned the same way Wreck-It Ralph doesn't feel earned.

Batman v Superman could easily be an fantastic showdown movie where Superman dies in the end, and it could even be the sequel to Man of Steel, but it has to have build up. EMOTIONAL build up. I was more emotionally invested in Batman in this movie, and he's not the one that ****ing DIED.

Ironically I'm hearing a LOT of people complaining that this movie tried to cram too much **** in to set up Justice League simply as a means to catch up to The Avengers without putting in the effort of releasing all these interconnected movies like Thor or Iron-Man or Captain America.

I STRONGLY disagree with that assessment. DC shouldn't have to play up to Marvel's standards. It doesn't have to be a comedy to work, and they don't have to spit out a million and one ****** one-off superhero origin story movies to justify axing off their most iconic character.

It could have been completely justified in this movie, but it wasted time instead of developing that emotional connection. In this regard, I can see where both comic book fans and non-comic book fans would be bothered. No one wants to be expected to care for a character that doesn't earn our concern and DC lore masters don't want to wait another several years for the inevitable Justice League movie only to know that they already played the "Superman Dies" card. They can't play it again. It won't work. Not in this context.

The movie isn't as jampacked full of references as some people may lead you believe either. We get two extremely brief bits of The Flash sequelbaiting, we see a fraction of Cyborg, and even get a long beautiful look at the ravishing shampoo commercial known as Aquaman.

But, you know what I've been putting off...

Wonder Woman.

http://twilighthollowproject.b1.jcink.com/uploads/twilighthollowproject/bvs2.gif

Wonder Woman's awesome. And it's telling that her reveal was the only part of the movie that got any sort of cheers from my theater audience. She's just hovering around in the background being inoffensive for most of the movie, but when the final battle drops, she gets her digs in harder than Batman.

It really just makes me want to see that Wonder Woman movie. Not another Batman movie, not another Superman movie, not even a Justice League movie, just Wonder Woman.

And Suicide Squad.

Please, let that be awesome...

Final Verdict: rating_3 [Meh...]

Omnizoa

03-27-16, 04:19 PM

http://twilighthollowproject.b1.jcink.com/uploads/twilighthollowproject/demoman.gif

Demolition Man

Action Comedy / English / 1993

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
Reassessment time!

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
Demolition Man gives me the giggles.

It's Sylvester Stallone in all the ways you expect, but it's also a fine satire of political correctness.

Humorously named John Spartan (for ****'s sake) is cryogenically frozen in prison after mosted wanted man, Simon Phoenix (for sake's ****) is captured, but frames him for the unintentional deaths of 30 people. When Phoenix is thawed out to wreak more destruction, Spartan is unleashed to take him back out.

The twist? The future is so thoroughly mired in political correctness that the police aren't actually able to handle real criminals. Where the technological progression serves as a user-friendly boost to Phoenix's mayhem, it also serves as an awkward inhibition for Spartan.

The movie's pretty funny, the action's pretty good and I can overlook most of the nitpicky stuff like continuity errors, generic font choices, and some odd editing.

Bigger issues would be plot-related such as how Spartan's daughter is mentioned multiple times, but she never feels totally resolved. Another would be the plan to break out 80 cryo-prison inmates "all without rehab".

This a pretty big ****up if you think about it. Prison is supposed to be a deterrent, right? A punishment, a payment in time and isolation as a means to convince the prisoner that their crimes aren't worth the cost, right?

I absolutely WILL NOT argue the merits of prison system, I think they're thoroughly ****ed in general, but the IDEA still has to make some degree of sense to the operators, right? Well, at the beginning of the movie, the fact that the inmate will be in cryo-stasis the whole time (as in you get in and get out as if no time has passed at all, and don't argue the nightmare angle, that plainly explained to be unintentional) was handwaved because they were being fed rehabilitating signals to their brain.

The fact that there are 80 prisoners with absolutely no rehab doesn't make any ******* sense. For one, why is that prison so small? And for two, when they eventually get out, what the **** do you seriously expect will have changed? Sure, you displaced their lives by around 30-40 years, but if they were raging psychopaths before they're still going to be raging psychopaths now. DUH.

That was just one passing line and it never culminates in anything anyway, no, my BIGGEST issue is obviously all the food talk.

Bacon, Butter, Cheese, Jello, Gravy Fries, Kissing, Rat Burgers, Barbecued Ribs, and T-Bone Steak.

http://twilighthollowproject.b1.jcink.com/uploads/twilighthollowproject/headbang.gif

On top of it all multiple grotesquely overdubbed lines in which they replace Taco Bell with Pizza Hut probably because of some sort of licensing issue.

**** Pizza Hut. **** it hard. It's stained my anime, and now it's bleeding into my action flicks. Go away, nobody wants your putrescent pizza product placement in pics. Palliteration.

Go puck yourself.

At least the movie ends without seriously placing a steel-toed boot in either the liberal or conservative side of the spectrum. You should have a middle ground between extremes. That's a fine message to take away.

Wish there was more of that.

By the way, **** this righteously ********, ****ed up, overzealous, *******, ****** censorship right in the ****. Seriously, I think we're above this pussy-whipped ******* ****, all it does is break my ******* links if it happens to have "****" in the URL and that's nothing if not irritating as ****, so get off my **** with this darn crap. What's your boggle?

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24727&stc=1&d=1459106651

Final Verdict: rating_4 [Pretty Good]

Omnizoa

03-28-16, 10:50 AM

http://cdn.makeagif.com/media/11-15-2015/wXobBu.gif

Rumble in the Bronx

Martial Arts Comedy / Chinese / 1995

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
After an unpleasant little tit for tat in the Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice thread (http://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?t=2605&page=98), I decided to watch something that puts any action sequence by Zack Snyder to shame. Reassessment time!

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
Rumble in the Bronx may be my favorite Jackie Chan movie, but that may be because I haven't seen all that many Jackie Chan movies.

One thing's for sure: I got of a hell of a lot more action to watch.

Basic premise is about as novel as it gets: Jackie Chan is Keung who visits his uncle in The Bronx where he manages a supermarket. The thug wars around the neighborhood threaten the supermarket's livelihood and Keung needs to kick ass. Splash in a paper-thin romance with the thug-leader's girlfriend, a dash of genuine humor, and some overacting bad guys and you got a recipe for B-movie gold.

It takes about 17 minutes to kick in and our fight scenes are heavily restrained around the plot. The best fight scene by far is when Keung busts into the thugs' hideout and proceeds to whoop their asses up and down with everything from arcade machines to refrigerators to sofas to skis to shopping carts, you name it. It's an awesome sequence and it's totally worth seeing the movie just to witness that one scene. It really feeds into my general criticism of Batman v Superman too in that it never gets especially creative with it's combat. I'm not saying Ben Affleck needs to be flipping around like Jackie Chan, but it could certainly learn a thing or two about how to get the most out of an action scene.

There are a couple nitpicky things in the movie, a continuity error in which sand disappears off Chan's wet clothes between shots and the fact that Keung gives his neighbor Danny a handheld game that clearly doesn't have any games in the cartridge slot.

Less nitpicky is the rough dubbing. In this version, Chan voices his own character's English lines (it's always awkward hearing him dubbed), but nearly every other Chinese character is obviously dubbed over by an English speaker feigning a Chinese accent. The boy, Danny seems to be the only one who escapes an accent, but his voice actor is really bad so he's easily the worst of the bunch.

I take issue with one line in which Keung remarks, "Women." after he catches Supermarket Lady trying to sneak off with diamonds. **** off with that.

My biggest issue here are again the typical stuff:
Rats, Tigers, Ice Cream, Kissing, and a Wedding.

If they'd eschewed that crap and added more great action scenes, this movie would easily propel into a 5/5 for me.

As it is, I wonder how Keung's uncle is gonna feel only to come back from his honeymoon and see that his supermarket has been destroyed not once, but twice.

Final Verdict: rating_4 [Pretty Good]

Omnizoa

03-28-16, 04:58 PM

https://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=104851&stc=1&d=1738631427
Titanic

Romantic Thriller / English / 1997

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
Been a few years and I'm still on the fence with this one. Reassessment time!

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
You know it's coming so let's do it:

Rats, Dogs, Dolphins, Squid, Horses, Elephants, Caviar, Meat, Goldfish, and Fur. There's a record-breaker for you, makes me wanna break a record over someone's head.

http://static1.squarespace.com/static/50f14d35e4b0d70ab5fc4f24/t/5414ffe5e4b0e4b35f90999c/1410662396024/

You know, I'm really sick of seeing this **** stain the movies I watch and it repels me from seeing them in theaters, but you know what? I'm getting ahead of myself. There are other issues with this movie.

Let's get down to brass tacks, we all know what the Titanic is and we all know that James Cameron's Titanic took the concept and glommed a romance story onto it creating one of the most extraordinarily profitable movies ever made.

Ever since it's been popular to hate it and everything from it's cheesy lines ("I'm the king of the world"!) to it's arguably overdramatic music ("near... far... whereEVER YOU ARE...") have been mocked and parodied.

*taps fingers*

It's always been REALLY HARD to admit publicly that I like this movie.

PART OF IT.

...

Okay a BIG part of it.

A lot of people took offense to the premise of the movie being that it rode on the heels of a tragic disaster, but I honestly feel that those criticisms are largely unwarranted given care and attention the movie actually gives it.

The movie doesn't shy away in the least by portraying the event as a horrific tragedy and we touch upon several of the myriad problems that were blamed for the Titanic's sinking, all tying back into human stupidity which simultaneously feeds into the themes of classism, decadence, and imposed marriage which surrounds our characters and were prevalent social issues at the time. Irish-themed music and characters also serve to lend validity to the scenario.

The concept of Double Standards could also be considered a theme the movie explores, but I believe it falters here with generally cringe-inducing moments like the "spit like a man" scene. Rose is certainly a rebellious character, but it's never exercised in a manner that demonstrates a sexual disparity. The best that could be put forth in this regard is the "women and children first" rule which is more of a plotbeat than anything the movie seriously concerns itself with.

Speaking of Rose, let's tackle the romantic plot of this movie once and for all.

http://twilighthollowproject.b1.jcink.com/uploads/twilighthollowproject/rose.gif

The romance was always the part of this movie I couldn't get into.

Not that the two actors don't have chemistry or that they're relationship is nonsensical, but it's the contrivance as old as time that sinks this ship: They JUST MET.

The first half of the movie could be considered the romance arc where by the end, both Rose and Jack are in love with each other. The problem here is that this romance literally kicks off over the course of only a couple days.

If they had known each other longer it wouldn't feel so, "AGH! Stupid idiot horny teenagers these days!", but at the 1 hour, 14 minute mark, Jack is already confessing his love to Rose and I cannot help but totally disengage at that point because IT FEELS SO FORCED AND STUPID AND CLICHE AND I can hardly get upset at this anymore.

When I used to think of examples of bad romance movies, I'd point to Titanic, but now that **** like Twilight exists, how could I POSSIBLY denigrate it further? Titanic is a masterpiece by comparison, but you know what? I STILL have standards. I STILL want my love interests to be realistic and I STILL say that if you've spent less time having any sort of meaningful interactions than the actual runtime of the movie, you've ****ed up. TIME LAPSE or something! PLEASE! Or establish that they knew each other before boarding the ship, SOMETHING before you jump into the kissing and sex!

http://twilighthollowproject.b1.jcink.com/uploads/twilighthollowproject/wall_e.gif
Oh, Wall-E, whenever will they learn that it doesn't take words and social
conventions to make me want to see the characters spend time together?

At least the plot makes total sense besides even if Rose immediately puts me off as a protagonist because she's suicidal.

Anyway, Titanic doesn't exist purely for me to empathize with the lovebirds, it exists for me to empathize with them as survivors too.

Lines like, "I'm too involved now, I can't turn back without knowing that you'll be alright" do a fantastic job of serving a dual purpose by emphasizing Jack and Rose's relationship not just in a romantic sense, but in plot sense (if that makes any sense).

I really have to credit Titanic with how layered it is, it's does a fantastic job of juggling Jack and Rose's developing relationship right along with setting up the iceberg collision, the counter-classism, and world-building.

World-building is clearly a massive, MASSIVE part of this movie because it clearly doesn't just portray a social environment or a time period, it's out to present the Titanic as a once impressive and memorable place in and of itself. This grope in the dark is strongly emphasized by the fact that the whole movie is framed as a flashback from modern day where we see the contrast between the Titanic in it's heyday and the Titanic as it exists today, a rotted and overgrown husk that once represented something.

The second half of the movie is easily where the movie shines best because it goes full-on disaster movie, but not in a 2012 sense, this is a slow-burn and I cannot praise it enough.

After the iceberg collision, things seem to rock gently back into rhythm as if the movie was just unpleasantly interrupted, but the audience is privy to everything that goes on from the upper decks to the lower decks to the boiler room and a creeping sense of doom pervades the ship where people on the lowest levels attempt to escape being trapped in a watery prison while those in first class are brutally contrasted with how normal everything is. Ignorance is bliss.

As the movie goes on the ticking clock is rolling down I also have to give a lot of praise to the couple big-picture shots which drive home what might otherwise have been imperceptible before. We know the ship is going down slowly, but we don't know how screwed we are yet, that's when we zoom out to show that the bow of the ship is just barely keeping above the water. That's a big OH **** moment.

A little later down the line when a panic as very definitely broken out we see the ship shoot out flares to signal other nearby ships and that's when we get an extremely landscape shot that shows... there's nothing. They're just a little light in the middle of nothing. There's no one to save them. That's when you lean back in your seat and struggle to process it.

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24736&stc=1&d=1459192745
Is that CGI? That's gotta be CGI. ...Right?

'Cause you're invested! You're immersed! You're already getting claustrophobia and aquaphobia because the water's coming in too fast and there's nowhere to go! You're goin' in and it's just a question of whether you'll make into open water or die on one of the countless rooms where the pressure won't let you escape!

The whole movie just drags you in like riptide with shots such as when Rose is hanging on for her life at the back of the ship and looks over into the face of a total stranger who appears scared out of her mind. You don't know her, but it's a reminder that's there's more than one story going on right now. And it's somewhat humbling.

It's all extremely well done and it merely compounds with one of my biggest compliments I can give the movie: it's pacing.

This movie is 3 HOURS LONG, but I cannot deny that it's intensely absorbing all throughout (save that one moment, but you know...). I was never bored and that's really telling to me. So many movies struggle to keep an even pace and ratchet up the tension at regular intervals that I'm blown away that a movie this long manages to accomplish it in spades.

When musicians finally stop playing, you just KNOW that's when you've reach the big finale. It's do or die time and it's been an intense rush getting here.

I have to lend definite credit to the cast too, particularly Billy Zane who despite overacting somewhat is just too enjoyably fun to hate as a villain (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=_bUnYH1Pa_k). He just a scumbag I wanna punch him in the face, but at the same time... no, that might be an idea I'll live to regret.

EEEGH... what else is there...?

Well, does it say anything about me that despite having issues with the romance, it still gets me to tear up at the end? Yeah. This is one of those few movies. It gets me. Right around the flashback to Rose walking through a Titanic restored to life and seeing all the people smiling and happy.

It gets me.

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24737&stc=1&d=1459194671

But enough. I know a lot of people like to poke holes in the movie, but things like, "Jack didn't have to drown" just feel like "Frodo could've walked" all over again. It's an experience, and it's one I've experienced many times and will undoubtedly wish to experience again.

Which is why I'm buckling down and once again to going to play hardball. Just like Hard Boiled, I'm giving it a 4/5. Had it ironed out it's few glaring issues I'd be able to enjoy the movie virtually unhindered, but as it stands, save a future re-cut, I'm calling it [Pretty Good].

That's a [Pretty Good] that's earned itself a spot in my personal collection though, so that's as close to a 5/5 as you can get without getting there.

2/3/25 REWATCH UPDATE:
Titanic continues it's trend of wrecking me by the end, but also earning a little more appreciation from me each time I watch it.

I used to really hate the first half of the movie and considered it barely salvageable by the second half when it goes full-blown claustrophobic disaster thriller, but the acting's great, I generally like the characters, and the Overnight Romance doesn't seem quite so egregious when you consider it's supposed to take place over the course of 4 days.

I still and will probably always dislike that aspect of the movie, but just about everything else from the CG to the cinematography to the sound design to the pacing to the malevolent undercurrent of the whole movie and fair social commentary besides makes a 3 hour viewing more than tolerable.

Final Verdict: rating_4 [Pretty Good]

Tugg

03-29-16, 11:38 AM

I think this movie got out of Superman everything he can give, because there's only so much that can be made interesting involving all powerful being, albeit with :rolleyes: weakness :rolleyes: .
Warner Bros is better off with him dead.

I enjoyed your review of "Titanic" and I think you were spot on.

Omnizoa

03-29-16, 11:38 AM

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y45/Christopher4myspace/House%20%20of%20Hidden%20Daggers/temp-560-46132158.gif

House of Flying Daggers

Martial Arts Romance / Chinese / 2004

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
CiCi mentioned in the Batman v Superman thread (http://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?t=2605&page=98):
I'll pipe in and say Zhang Yimou :laugh: House of Flying Daggers is probably the best action film I've seen, because it interweaves a terrific story in as well, effortlessly. Hero was fantastic as well. Both are huge favourites of mine :love:

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
This was so ho ho ho ho bad... aw jeez... ****.

Where do I star-okay so...

It's pretty.

( O__O) And that right there ends my praise for the movie.

Just because it's attractive on the surface, alright whatever, let's do this:

So the movie starts off with some drunk ******* guard captain in a brothel who asks to see the newest girl who's suspected to be a member of a rogue anti-government group called the Flying Daggers.

The girl is blind, but despite that puts on a fancy dance which goes on much longer than necessary. The dude decides that he wants to sex her up so he forces himself on her at which point the other women intervene because she's "inexperienced". If you're running a brothel, why in the hell are you teasing customers with jailbait?

So the other guards come in for some reason to break it up and the blind girl, Mei, is arrested for "dressing indecently". Yes, blame the victim, guys, excellent police work. BUT WAIT, they're not done yet! One of them agrees to let Mei go if she can play the "echo game".

The "echo game" is Simon Says. WOW, imagine how many people would get off the hook if after breaking the law they could shrug off any crime by playing a game of Bop It (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=fH4XHwefPVY).

So Bop It is played apparently by surrounding the blind girl with drums and flicking nuts between them with an inexplicable disregard for gravity. I don't mind the idea of a character who can ricochet a walnut between multiple objects in a room, but I do mind seeing it in slow motion because it looks totally absurd.

It's during this game which also goes on much longer than necessary that Mei decides to use her spring-loaded sleeves to GRAB THE SWORD OUT OF THE MAN'S SHEATH AND

http://twilighthollowproject.b1.jcink.com/uploads/twilighthollowproject/gervais.gif

It looks SO GOOFY. Both the sleeves and the sword are flailing around like a worm and the man is making poses for some reason that just...

Suddenly a fight breaks out and we get rubber swords and bad wire-fu like it's Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon (which is also a substandard action movie).

We have a fight that's barely serviceable, we drag our ass a bit and finally Mei is saved by... Drunk Captain Dude? Wait, HE's our male protagonist?

Oh spare me. BUT NO, he's not just our male protagonist he's our LOVE INTEREST.

http://twilighthollowproject.b1.jcink.com/uploads/twilighthollowproject/dion.gif
Ooooooh noooooo.

THIS is the kind of movie I was talking about before, a romance rushed harder than George Costanza with an erection (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Q8YZ4x28zWY).

So yeah, the vast majority of the movie is just these two out in the woods as they get repeatedly attacked by bad guys who really like ****ing up horses for scenes in movies that totally warranted their probable injuries.

Eventually the "flying daggers" make an appearance
AND THEY COULDN'T EVEN GET THAT RIGHT!!

Not only do the daggers act like boomerangs if they were possessed by the mindless spirit of an enraged woodpecker, but even when they're thrown in a DIRECT LINE at their target, their rotation just implausibly stops feet before impacting on their targets! THAT'S NOT HOW DAGGERS WORK! THAT'S NOT EVEN HOW PHYSICS WORK!

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24742&stc=1&d=1459259112

Mei constantly gives Drunk Captain Dude the cold shoulder before they're eventually found by the rebels where it's revealed they were both double-crossing each other and the one guy that Mei tried to kill at the brothel is actually a sleeper agent who's in love with her.

WAT

So now there's a love triangle, kissing, and double-crossers Mei and Drunk Captain Dude double-cross their respective factions which negates the original double crossing by quadruple crossing which makes them... triple agents? WHY IS THIS A THING!?

The final showdown defies all logic by inexplicably fading into winter MID-FIGHT during which Mei is down for the count. Holy hell, that must be jarring to wake up with three inches of snow on your face. I've received concussions that caused me to find myself in places I have no memory of ever visiting, but losing track of the seasons is impressive.

Anyway, I don't care how it ends because I was SO FAR BEYOND CARING by this point I had TUNED THE **** OUT.

All you need to know about this movie is that it contains this line:

I sacrificed 3 years for you, how could you love him after just 3 days?
http://twilighthollowproject.b1.jcink.com/uploads/twilighthollowproject/titanicide.gif

Final Verdict: rating_2 [Just... Bad]

Omnizoa

03-29-16, 11:57 AM

Omnizoa

03-30-16, 02:00 PM

http://twilighthollowproject.b1.jcink.com/uploads/twilighthollowproject/kissing.gif

The Princess Bride

Fantasy Comedy / English / 1987

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
Reassessment time? INCONCEIVABLE!

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
"Buttercup was raised on a small farm in the country of Florin. Her favorite pastimes were riding her farm boy and tormenting the horse that worked there."

The Princess Bride is what you would get if you took a typical epic romantic fantasy movie and pumped it so full of cheese it outright evolved into a comedy.

It occupies a weird middling place, a realm shared by the likes of Labyrinth, where it's not really trying to reinvent the wheel so much as roll it around and see what funny things it bumps into and if it trips anybody.

It's sort of like Army of Darkness, that level of comedy where it's largely concerned with telling an actual story, but it occasionally twists it's situations to be humorous.

I think it's pretty funny. Mostly.

http://img.pandawhale.com/post-27756-Plato-Aristotle-Socrates-MORON-Unu1.gif

A few jokes die on me like the "mawwiage" crap (strike that one off the list) and the second act feels like a lull which is nowhere near as memorable as it's beginning or ending, but are gems all throughout.

My problem with the movie is, once again, the romance (I'm like a broken record aren't I?). At least this time we have a definite time lapse which instantly elevates this above House of Flying Daggers, but the 5-minute setup is still extraordinarily poor given that the movie openly admits that Buttercup and Westley's relationship is entirely based on her only ordering him around and him nonchalantly complying.

"Farm boy, whom I waste not an ounce of my time learning the name of, seek out my parents whom I've misplaced in these scenes."

"As you wish."

"Ohh, your one-dimensional obedience turns me on, DO ME NOW."

"You know I love you, Buttercup, but when do I get paid?"

"Well I'm certainly not gonna pay you to flap your tongue OVER THERE."

http://twilighthollowproject.b1.jcink.com/uploads/twilighthollowproject/thinkitmeans.gif

To be fair there are weak special effects and logical leaps of judgment all throughout the movie (no one gets stabbed in the back despite mortal enemies CONSTANTLY turning their back on each other), but it's largely easy to overlook them because they're always pretty negligible next to the point, and the point is usually to make you laugh.

And that'd be enough for me, but much like Army of Darkness, The Princess Bride is very uneven and it's bouts of comedy are separated by inconsistent stretches of exposition, drama, and action. Some stuff just isn't as funny as they probably think it is, exposition is appreciably brief, and the action is enjoyably memorable (both duels with Inigo stand out of course), but the issue is the drama which is almost entirely dependent on the romance which I have no investment in.

Inigo's revenge arc was both a more engaging story (within a story) and a more satisfying climax (even if Kurotowa from Nausicaa is the main villain). Here it just sort of ends like they had some sort of point, but it neve

Final Verdict: rating_4 [Pretty Good]

DalekbusterScreen5

03-30-16, 02:11 PM

Ever since it's been popular to hate it
Has it? I've only seen love for Titanic.

Omnizoa

03-30-16, 11:30 PM

Has it? I've only seen love for Titanic.
Oh yeah, anything that gets too excessively popular draws out the contrarians and puppets en mass.

It's particularly unpleasant when you admit to liking something and your own family scoffs at the notion and yet when pressed they admit they've never even experienced it themselves.

Miss Vicky

03-31-16, 11:23 AM

Another would be the plan to break out 80 cryo-prison inmates "all without rehab".

This a pretty big ****up if you think about it. Prison is supposed to be a deterrent, right? A punishment, a payment in time and isolation as a means to convince the prisoner that their crimes aren't worth the cost, right?

I absolutely WILL NOT argue the merits of prison system, I think they're thoroughly ****ed in general, but the IDEA still has to make some degree of sense to the operators, right? Well, at the beginning of the movie, the fact that the inmate will be in cryo-stasis the whole time (as in you get in and get out as if no time has passed at all, and don't argue the nightmare angle, that plainly explained to be unintentional) was handwaved because they were being fed rehabilitating signals to their brain.

The fact that there are 80 prisoners with absolutely no rehab doesn't make any ******* sense. For one, why is that prison so small? And for two, when they eventually get out, what the **** do you seriously expect will have changed? Sure, you displaced their lives by around 30-40 years, but if they were raging psychopaths before they're still going to be raging psychopaths now. DUH.

My understanding was that the psychological reprogramming happened during the thawing process and not while the prisoner was in cryostasis, thus Phoenix could wake up unrehabilitated prisoners.

Bacon, Butter, Cheese, Jello, Gravy Fries, Kissing, Rat Burgers, Barbecued Ribs, and T-Bone Steak.

Kissing is food talk? Also why do you give AF? People talk about food. They eat food. They eat meat. They talk about eating meat. It's a pretty normal thing and I would find it odd if a character like Spartan didn't lament the enforced vegetarianism. Meat is pretty damn tasty, though I'd never eat a rat burger for personal reasons.

[LEFT]On top of it all multiple grotesquely overdubbed lines in which they replace Taco Bell with Pizza Hut probably because of some sort of licensing issue.

What version did you watch?

Omnizoa

03-31-16, 04:24 PM

My understanding was that the psychological reprogramming happened during the thawing process and not while the prisoner was in cryostasis, thus Phoenix could wake up unrehabilitated prisoners.
That's a rather strange if not potentially problematic way of doing things, isn't it? So, you're saying that when they were rushing to thaw out John Spartan prematurely, they decided give him knitting lessons?

They set up the "rehab" thing when they stuck that little device on his head right before going in the freeze, so I think it stands to reason that it's working all throughout his sentence.

Kissing is food talk?
That was a joke.

Also why do you give AF? People talk about food. They eat food. They eat meat. They talk about eating meat. It's a pretty normal thing and I would find it odd if a character like Spartan didn't lament the enforced vegetarianism.
*shrugs* Call me weird.

It's not a topic I want to be reminded of (http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-oR6G39FPaMU/VYNCdwKhBmI/AAAAAAAAADw/uy4-zLDDCLY/s640/image021.gif) in my escapism unless it actually has something worth a damn to say about it. That the movie takes the time to emphasize that it's protagonist is "lamenting" makes me like him less if not outright dislike him.

If that doesn't bother you, then I guess I'm the odd one out.

http://49.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lojy07yhNn1qh59n0o1_400.gif

What version did you watch?
The UK release apparently. Supposedly they changed Taco Bell to Pizza Hut because that's a more globally recognized chain. Just another dumb localization move.

Miss Vicky

03-31-16, 06:49 PM

That's a rather strange if not potentially problematic way of doing things, isn't it? So, you're saying that when they were rushing to thaw out John Spartan prematurely, they decided give him knitting lessons?

I'm just going off of memories. I could be wrong. I'll have to give it rewatch.

*shrugs* Call me weird.

You're weird.

It's not a topic I want to be reminded of (http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-oR6G39FPaMU/VYNCdwKhBmI/AAAAAAAAADw/uy4-zLDDCLY/s640/image021.gif) in my escapism unless it actually has something worth a damn to say about it. That the movie takes the time to emphasize that it's protagonist is "lamenting" makes me like him less if not outright dislike him.

I think it makes him more relatable. If I woke up tomorrow and found myself in a society where I wasn't allowed to eat meat, use profanity, or have sex, I wouldn't just lament the restrictions, I'd be pretty damn angry about them.

The UK release apparently. Supposedly they changed Taco Bell to Pizza Hut because that's a more globally recognized chain. Just another dumb localization move.

That's stupid.

Omnizoa

03-31-16, 08:59 PM

I think it makes him more relatable. If I woke up tomorrow and found myself in a society where I wasn't allowed to eat meat, use profanity, or have sex, I wouldn't just lament the restrictions, I'd be pretty damn angry about them.
Some restrictions are more sensible than others.

Omnizoa

03-31-16, 09:55 PM

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24757&stc=1&d=1459468882
Strange Days

Sci-Fi Drama / English / 1995

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
Considered one of the most underrated cyberpunk movies ever made and featuring the combined efforts of James Cameron (Aliens, Titanic) and Kathryn Bigelow (The Hurt Locker), it's a movie I've been needing to see for a long time.

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
Let's have a New Years Revolution!

I'm really at a loss with this movie. Mostly because it's one of those that I really struggle to criticize. It's paced great, the story makes sense, and it manages to be really absorbing all throughout.

Here's what few things I'd consider gripes:
+ Kissing (obviously).
+ The movie opens with a high-pitched shrill that's really annoying.
+ Some characters are introduced only very briefly, but you're expected to remember them and their names.
+ Two or three scenes/shots are set up with predictable conclusions, but idle anyway.
+ A couple actors like Juliette Lewis and Michael Wincott turn in weak performances (Lewis seems stupid bored and Wincott is like if Top Dollar from The Crow smoked a cigarette factory).

That's... about it. Mostly nitpicky stuff. I can't think of much more I can complain about.

The basic premise is it's just on the eve of the new millennium and save a couple predictions of future you hear in the background, there's really only two major deviations from history:

1.) Social order is so screwed that police and military are combing the streets every night.

2.) There's a new previously military black market technology called "wire-tripping" that allows you to record your first person experiences (all senses intact) and share them on tapes. People who regularly use the technology are called "wireheads" and it's portrayed as questionably addictive as well as dangerous because applying it improperly can result in permanent brain damage.

These being the only deviations, I'm disappointed to say that it isn't really a cyberpunk movie, however it certainly manages to capture the underground aesthetic that pervades movies like The Matrix.

I won't go into the story, suffice it to say it's a murder mystery, it's complex but reasonable to follow (it does a great job telegraphing information visually), while juggling themes of anarchy, social upheaval, addiction, and "the end of the world".

Honestly, my biggest praise for the movie has got to land squarely on it's two lead characters, Lenny and Mace, played by Ralph Fiennes and Angela Bassett respectively.

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24758&stc=1&d=1459470551

These characters are great. Lenny's an ex-cop with little of the cop left in him and Mace seems to have picked up the formal mannerisms he's left behind.

Lenny's a talker, always trying to hit up someone new with a wiretrip and struggles to reconcile the relationship that he once had with character, Faith, who seems reluctantly over him despite us never really learning what transpired in their history.

Mace is a mother, nanny turned limo driver, who abhors wiretripping, but maintains a close, albeit strenuous relationship with Lenny. She seems like she might have romantic feelings for Lenny, but it's likely one-sided given his pursuit of Faith.

Mace is easily my favorite character in the movie. Not only does she have several moments of buttkicking badassery, but she stands out also as an emotional character. She contrasts with Lenny in her attitude, her professionalism, and her values. She REALLY IS a three-dimensional character, and I'm amazed that we finally get this from a dark-skinned woman in lead role.

Not only that, but she complements the other half of the only biracial romance between lead characters in a good movie I've ever SEEN.

She puts Rose from Titanic to shame easily, and the best parallel I can make to her is Deunan from Appleseed.

...or maybe Briareos...

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24761&stc=1&d=1459471777
Yes, imagine Angela Bassett as a cyborg supersoldier,
carrying around a little Ralph Fiennes. It's exactly like that.

All told, I'm very glad I watched this movie, HOWEVER... to earn a 5/5 from me, Strange Days has to really hit it out of the park with something that appeals to me specifically.

I don't know what that is.

Maybe I'll have to watch it again sometime and figure it out, but in the meanwhile, Strange Days gets a lean, mean...

Final Verdict: rating_4 [Pretty Good]

REWATCH UPDATE 08/10/22:
Strange Days is one of a few movies that I REALLY wanted to love when I first saw it. I like the setting of an alternate history Millennium New Years Eve, I still really like Lenny and Mace, both their relationship and their individual characters. There's a refreshing bit of nudity in the mix I DON'T KNOW, for whatever reason I saw this once and I had that feeling that I would have to see it again after the effect had worn off.

But that was back in 2016. And we're in a post-2020 world where that national hysteria over a racialized police encounter gone wrong actually happened. So I'm approaching this with some actual exposure to the consequences of the "end of the world" riot scenario hypothesized would happen in this movie.

Firstly, it's very hard to imagine that this would would be made today without current politics taking it from a position of pre-2000s egalitarian idealism and turning it into something frankly putrid and disgusting.

There are casual comments about it being a "police state" in Strange Days, as evidenced by SWAT and the National Guard shown in random tussles on the streets in the background, often alone, or surrounded by bystanders. It's just complete chaos as though the foretold riots are already in progress. Yet, for how "oppressive" we're supposed to believe the police are, the police virtually never interfere with our protagonists beyond screening their IDs at security checkpoints... which they always pass without issue.

And the protagonists are not exactly law-abiding citizens... so it seems to me that the issue isn't actually with the police or military out in force, but the people causing them problems. Jericho One apparently can't "drive a Jeep while black", yet Mace can drive a limo without any problems at all.

And in fact the one scene at the end in which Mace is attacked by police, she is explicitly resisting arrest after beating up one, macing another, holding them both at gunpoint, and detaining them illegally!

Obviously she's in the right because these two are the cops responsible for the street execution that sets up the main conflict of the movie, but cut me a ****ing break, she's like "yeah I'll comply, but only after you let me tell you the story of my people" AMID a gigantic street celebration where you can barely hear shit.

There are how many witnesses that saw these two cops firing into a crowd and killing bystanders?? Also, aren't they trying to kill her to stop her from exposing them as murderers? And you're going to murder multiple more people in front of countless witnesses to keep it secret? ****ing idiots.

https://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=88347&stc=1&d=1660133827

I appreciate that they make a point of showing that not all police are bad guys, and the main characters ultimately decide that discretely releasing the evidence of the execution to authorities is safer that RELEASING IT TO THE MEDIA.

WE SAW HOW THAT ****ING WENT DIDN'T WE!?

I'm annoyed by the line by Mace that Jericho One is "one of the most important" people of our time when our only exposure to him suggests that he's a racebaiting gangbanging piece of shit human being who goes on television to drum up revolutionary sentiments. Making songs about how he (his people) have been oppressed for 400 years and all that.

He's really just a worthless ****ing racist and I'm glad he got shot in the head.

But of course, I'm supposed to feel differently about him because he got shot by a different racist with a badge.

It's totally plausible that this could start a race riot, there are FAR DUMBER reasons why race riots could occur. The cop could have just sat on him for about 9 minutes while some brainless twat records it on her phone and posts it to Facebook. Was George Floyd the most important man of our time? Certain oxygen thieves seem to think so.

Anyway, watching this again I felt much less engaged than I wanted to be. The wire-tripping scenes go on too long, there are music scenes that go on too long... like Lenny's literally just standing watching his Faith sing a song on stage and we keep cutting back to his blank expression. What does this add? Nothing. It's a waste of my time. If you were trying to establish that he's still hung up on her, you must not have read the rest of the script.

It's difficult to think of how I would improve his movie. I may have simply told another story entirely, where the dynamic between Mace and Lenny isn't juggled between a murder mystery and a police corruption arc.

Still like the characters, still like the setting, even still like the whole retrofuturistic concept of recording tapes of your experiences and selling them like drugs... but the rest of it (and that's most of it) I could do without.

Final Verdict: rating_3_5 [Good]

Omnizoa

04-01-16, 11:48 AM

http://twilighthollowproject.b1.jcink.com/uploads/twilighthollowproject/flashpoint.gif

Flash Point

Martial Arts / Chinese / 2007

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
The director and star of Dragon Tiger Gate? I'm in.

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
Mmmm... this was a slog.

How much excuse do you need for Donnie Yen to beat somebody up?

Donnie Yen's a cop with a track record of kicking too much ass. So they suspend him. Then a few minutes later they reinstate him. A few minutes after that I'm checking my watch.

It takes 55 MINUTES for the action to kick in and when it does it's like, "WTF, where'd this kung fu movie come from? I was in the middle of watching this boring-ass cop drama!"

It really is boring. It's a barely serviceable triad plot at best (Hong Kong Action Movie Rule #1: Must Have Triads) and serviceable is not enough, especially when it includes a chicken carcass with a bomb shoved up it's ass.

57 minutes in and one of the bad guys slams a little girls skull into the pavement and Donnie Yen goes beast on the guy.

Give it a few more minutes and you're at the final fight scene which is cool, but not literally-do-something-else-for-an-hour cool.

Dunno what else to say. One of the major characters is shot in the back and chest several times and yet it seems like he might still be alive at the end.

Did he die? Oh... credits... nevermind.

I'd just give this movie a [Meh...], but a chicken bomb? No. No.

Final Verdict: rating_2 [Just... Bad]

Omnizoa

04-02-16, 11:01 AM

http://twilighthollowproject.b1.jcink.com/uploads/twilighthollowproject/policestory.gif

Police Story

Martial Arts / Chinese / 1985

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
It's been many years. Reassessment time again!

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
It's a Jackie Chan movie, and being a Jackie Chan movie it's all about the fight scenes.

There are two significant fight scenes, the beginning and end, both are very memorable, and both include huge stunts that resulted in serious injuries to it's actors (so you know it's brutal). The first scene begins right away and it's an excellent start to the movie while the second scene ("the mall fight") is noteworthy for it's ridiculous amount of shattered breakaway glass.

The actions good. Exceptional, but not amazing.

Unfortunately, there's plenty of not-action in this action movie and it flits between appreciable and terrible. As much as Jackie Chan considers this to be his best action movie, I get the feeling he's giving undue credit to a movie mostly because it's a significant milestone in his career.

Humor is largely sophomoric in all the classic ways: piss jokes, poop jokes, and pie jokes. It's the classic triple threat.

The story itself isn't... terrible... but it suffers from some questionable acting and a combination of leaps in logic and awful characters.

After Jackie Chan playing Jackie Chan humiliates himself in court and gets the bad guys off scot-free and a bunch of promotional material begins to circulate featuring him, they inexplicably get upset. What's the matter? Why do they care? What's it to them if he shows up in a newspaper ad, that seriously warrants, "AW HELL NAW, WE GONNA FRAME HIS ASS!" I don't get it.

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24768&stc=1&d=1459605659

The characterization of Jackie Chan and his girlfriend is bizarre too. This girlfriend, upon seeing the woman he's supposed to be bodyguarding, instantly comes down with a case of Crippling Monogamy Syndrome and instead of Jackie trying to make up or anything he just gets all butthurt and starts lying. In fact, he's a compulsive liar. He lies to everyone. He even lies in court after he's sworn to tell the truth, the whole truth, so help him, god.

And god, so help him, because it immediately removes me from the movie when I'm halfway through the thing and I only just realize that all three major protagonists are ********.

I don't understand women.
It's not because they're women, Jackie, it's because you're an oblivious thick ****.

The movie redeems itself somewhat at the end when, following the big fight, the bad guys are finally cornered and the weasily lawyer comes in to talk **** and Jackie Chan just
"HROOAAAGGGGHHHH!!! JACKIE SMASH!!!"

Final Verdict: rating_3 [Meh...]

Omnizoa

04-02-16, 03:45 PM

http://twilighthollowproject.b1.jcink.com/uploads/twilighthollowproject/aceattorney.gif

Ace Attorney

Comedy / Japanese / 2012

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
Having played Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney, I've been wanting to see this doomed-to-fail movie since I heard about it.

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
Given my familiarity with the source material, I'm going to review this in two parts as I believe all adaptions should be reviewed. Firstly as an adaption, and secondly, but most importantly, as a standalone movie.

AS AN ADAPTION:
I'd say Ace Attorney is [Pretty Good]. At least it's about as good as almost any given live-action adaption could conceivably be.

All of the characters are instantly recognizable, the plot is ripped directly from the original game, abridging the first, second, and fourth cases to present a singular super-case and it all flows pretty much just like the game with the only significant deviation being the crazy far-future technology that appears in the courtroom to logically substitute the presentation of evidence that was simply abstracted out into a user interface in the game.

A couple characters are obviously missing as a result, but all the key ones are here and they all play the part with my only gripe being Miles Edgeworth, who was honestly really disappointing. Edgeworth in the games is initially presented as an uppity smarmy sarcastic buttmongler who acts as Phoenix's foil and rival, but after a while you begin to see chinks in the armor and he becomes quite likable as a reluctant ally in difficult cases.

Here though, Miles is just beyond emotionless and there's nothing pretentious about him besides his hideous outfit. No drawl, no smirk, no shrug, no dice. That sucks, dude, Edgeworth was my favorite character.

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24777&stc=1&d=1459620304
Another issue I have is just the choice to go with a live-action adaption. So much of the charm and humor of the games came through it's presentation, much in the same way that gags in manga don't always translate well to anime (it's why Kiyohiko Azuma refuses to license Yotsuba&!), a lot of the humor in Phoenix Wright is dependent on the cartoonish medium it's rooted in. Seeing live actors perform a Face Fault (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/FaceFault) is wicked jarring and once again, seeing this movie run over 2 hours, I have to wonder why they didn't just do an all out comedy? Everyone has anime hair and absurd outfits and they take it SO ******* SERIOUSLY, jeez guys, I know the games were supposed to be moody, but if that's the tone you were shooting for, you missed it.

It probably doesn't help that you left out a lot of the instantly classic tunes by favoring dead silence so much of the time!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WAUwYEGl_EQ

AS A STANDALONE MOVIE:
If you're like me then you probably enjoyed the games, but felt that the concept would probably be best served as a movie, or anime, or manga (basically I'm saying the game sucks).

Well, I hate to rain on your parade because if you're like me then you also didn't appreciate the nonsensical spirit medium sideplot and the ridiculous leaps in logic. It's the same deal here.

Maya's character in the games ALWAYS came across as a disgustingly weak excuse to shove a young tsundere love interest in there. The whole spirit possession angle at best served to justify a barely used hint-system game mechanic.

Here, there's no excuse, and Maya isn't even developed to the point of even qualifying for the low low status of Stock Tsundere. All we know is she's set up to have legit spiritual possession powers that barely impact the plot at all. Could this clash ANY harder with the caricatured courtroom drama?

The stupid leaps of logic are also on full display here, so to clue you in, here's just one example:

+ Two shots were fired from the gun.
+ But only one bullet was found at the scene of the crime.
+ Therefor the second bullet must have hit none of the three people there and instead struck the imaginary fourth person we have no substantiating evidence of ever existing who for some reason must be THE PROSECUTOR! *SHOCK GASP ********!*

Yeah, that's a nice twist there. You know it's gonna be a real surprise when no one IN THEIR RIGHT MIND WOULD COME UP WITH IT.

Honestly, there are moments of Ace Attorney genuinely finding it's groove, but it's shrugged off so easily with how seriously it takes itself and how scarcely it just cuts loose and does something absurd, like having a parakeet testify in court (which I lay as a strike against the movie by the way).

There was one moment where I actually burst out laughing by an intentional sight gag, and... wow... that has got to be one of the biggest WTF moments I've had in a long time.

All told, it's far from the best adaption of the Phoenix Wright series I've seen. THAT would be THE FAN-MADE 9-HOUR MY LITTLE PONY CROSSOVER (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=rzn6SPWdauo) (yes, that exists, and I strongly recommend it, even if you don't like My Little Pony).

However, I did discover that a brand new Phoenix Wright anime series (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ace_Attorney_%28anime%29) just started. LIKE... TODAY.

I totally didn't plan that, I just now noticed that this was a thing. Count me in!

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24781&stc=1&d=1459622624
The moment when a silly video game movie about courtroom trials
transitions into FULL-ON NIGHTMARE FUEL.

Final Verdict: rating_3 [Meh...]

Omnizoa

04-03-16, 10:43 AM

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24812&stc=1&d=1459707157

Dogtooth

Art / Greek / 2009

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
Whereas I expected Ace Attorney to be stupid, Dogtooth is a movie I never wanted to see in the first place. I saw the trailer (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=QFtDzK64-pk) once years ago and I instantly hated it and despite never seeing or hearing about it again, the name is still locked and fixed in my brain as "that movie I never want to see". It looked disgusting, it looked annoying, and it looked pretentious.

So why am I watching it? A combination of curiosity and pure unadulterated masochism. How bad is it REALLY? Is it even a bad movie at all? Maybe it's simply a poor trailer?

I'm venturing FAR outside my comfort zone for this one, so let's buckle in and see what I've gotten myself into.

WARNING: THIS REVIEW IS UNPLEASANT.

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
Dogtooth is definitely NOT as bad as I expected it to be. Granted, it's not a GOOD movie, but it's not totally ****awful which I attribute to single element:

It's kinda interesting.

The idea is that we're basically watching The Village, except zoned in on a suburban home where the kids, which are plainly young adults, aren't allowed beyond the fence surrounding their yard. You can suspect the degree to which their parents impose this limitation on them, but the vast majority of the movie is simply drip-feeding you the various ways that they're lied to and repressed and basically just making a show of how socially backwards they are.

+ Cats are man-eating predators.
+ An imaginary exiled "brother" is assumed to exist on the other side of the fence.
+ Frank Sinatra songs are played and translated as being from their unseen grandfather.
+ Zombies are referred to as "little yellow flowers" and vaginas are referred to as "keyboards".
+ The sisters get into the habit of trading personal items for cunnilingus (as well as licking other places).
+ The boy is expected to have regular unenthusiastic sex with some woman named Christine (who's the only character I can name by the way) who's never really established to be part of the family or not.

The trailer refers to the movie as a "satire" and yet I cannot even begin to imagine what this movie might be satirizing beyond overprotective parents which even then it doesn't manage to do anything meaningful with it.

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24806&stc=1&d=1459690661

Other than the horrific animal abuse and sex scenes so emotionless and sterile they make me feel worse than watching fetish porn, this movie is just one joyless ride from beginning to end that even Rocky references can't save.

The main issue here is twofold: It doesn't do anything and it doesn't go anywhere.

The whole movie is made up almost entirely of nonsequiturs in that stereotypically "art film" kinda way. It's just a mess of scenes that, save a couple exceptions, could be scrambled and placed into any other part of the movie because all they do is smash cut to an entirely different time and place, hold an egregiously long take, in dead silence, on the kids doing something awkward long enough for the director to lean into frame and go, "Wink, wink, huh, huh, ya get it? Yeah! They're weird, right?" before cutting to Something Completely Different which accomplishes the same thing.

It's not like we ever really find out why their parents treat their kids this way or even what they expect to accomplish by pretending the planes in the sky are just toys which can appear in their lawn or that their mother will just periodically give birth to a dog. It's unexplained, therefor it doesn't serve any known purpose, therefor the entire plot of the movie feels contrived. At least The Village took the time to rationalize it's nonsensical fear-mongering.

The other issue is just how the movie ends. As soon as the movie sets up the "you become immune to all dangers when your right canine tooth falls out" (which is a brilliant lesson all parents should teach their children) you're just waiting for one of the kids to knock their teeth out. They're already rebellious! They're already knifing each other, burning their fingers for fun, and getting beaten by their parents with VHS tapes, so what's seriously gonna stop them from trying to bust their teeth out?

It sure takes a while, but when it finally does happen, at least I credit the movie for LOOKING like it hurts. Most of the violence looks real. Probably because it is real. Just like the sex looks real. But the effects aren't real. ANYWAY...

So, the older sister smashes her tooth out with a dumbbell and bleeding all over she climbs into her dad's car, probably expecting to climb out when he goes to work.

He goes to work, the camera holds on the trunk door, zooms in slowly, and we're waiting... and waiting... and waiting...

Credits.

You couldn't even give us the satisfaction of knowing one of the kids managed to escape, nup, just assume she busted her jaw so hard that she exsanguinated in their trunk. Great.

You know, I was thinking of giving this a movie a [Just... Bad], but now that I think about it, was there anything of worth in this movie at all?

Was there really anything here that rationalized killing a whole bunch of fish in a swimming pool and attacking a cat with hedge clippers? Did the incestuous sex scenes really add ANYTHING of merit to the proceedings? Was a single thing ever said to explain, justify, or make a point of anything in this movie?

No. It's just a vaguely interesting premise wasted on a sweaty gym sock. And the sweat on that gym sock symbolizes something pretentious like the hardships we all go through in life, emphasized by the crusty yellow stain where someone's ejaculated into it. Not artsy enough for ya? Let's overlay that gym sock with a voice over presenting a mathematical problem while we time lapse that gym sock's sweat molding over into something heinous and foul.

Dogtooth is one of the funniest films of the past 12 months, an unforgettable social-satire, a devious little test of endurance for brave movie-lovers and the best argument against home-schooling since The Jonas Brothers.
**** you, Simon. This movie's not "totally ****awful", but it is

Final Verdict: rating_1 [Irredeemably Awful]

Omnizoa

04-03-16, 03:30 PM

http://i.imgur.com/qgZTJwd.gif

Shaolin Soccer

Action Comedy / Chinese / 2001

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
VIOLENTLY shifting back into my usual repertoire, here's a movie about monks who play soccer with anime physics.

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
It's about what you'd expect. Stunts. Slapstick. Lots of terrible CG.

Pretty whatever for the most part. There is a definite charm to how dramatic they try to play up the absurdities and there is something special about a soccer game where kicks are powerful enough to strip people naked and blow apart the goalpost. I feel there's too little of it, though.

It keeps a comedic approach all throughout, but most of it isn't very funny (and it's even pretty gross at times) and we don't even get our Shaolin Soccer team together until the halfway mark.

Easily the most baffling part of this whole movie is the SHOCKINGLY mature romantic subplot they run in the background. Legit, no kissing, no sex, no overnight romance, the girl is even intentionally made to look unattractive while still earning herself plenty of badass points. I wish the WHOLE movie was as self conscious about it's character archetypes (I'm looking at you, Fat Guy), but I guess now any time I criticize another movie for it's half-baked romantic subplots I can say, "WORSE THAN SHAOLIN SOCCER".

And that gives me a very fuzzy feeling inside.

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24813&stc=1&d=1459708197

Final Verdict: rating_3 [Meh...]

Omnizoa

04-04-16, 11:38 AM

http://twilighthollowproject.b1.jcink.com/uploads/twilighthollowproject/policestory2.gif

Police Story 2

Martial Arts / Chinese / 1988

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
It's the sequel to Police Story and I'm not entirely sure if I've seen this one. Reassessment time!

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
Whether the Police Story sequels were better or worse than the original seems to be a matter of debate, but as far as Police Story 2 is concerned I think it's better.

We completely do away with Jackie's compulsive lying and his girlfriend, Mei, is a lot less annoying in this one. In fact, the romantic subplot is really just idling in a Superhero Relationship at this point. He's too righteous to stand by when bad things are happening and it conflicts with his attempts to do good by her.

I think the plot works a lot better this time too with bouts of action occurring more frequently and the tension kept up at a pretty decent clip. There's twists, there's turns, and we smoothly transition between Jackie quitting the force, to rejoining the force, to going undercover, to interrogation, to watching him once again take on the role of the bad guy when the real bad guys strap a bomb to his chest.

Rather than two big fight scenes, we get three, "the diner" at 17 minutes, "the playground" at 46 minutes, and "the fireworks factory" at an 1 hour and 50 minutes, all of which put a greater emphasis on Chan's fighting ability. I would argue that these scenes are less memorable than those in the original Police Story, but referring to them by the locations they take place in just goes to reinforce how important the environment is in every fight. It really can't be understated the creativity and thought that went into each encounter.

Given that this movie is both written, directed, and starring Jackie Chan as himself (in the English dub at least), I offer this movie as a counterargument to the suggestion that action directors can't effectively star in their own movies. Fricken' PROVED.

I will say that while the movie is less boring and annoying as the original Police Story, it definitely still has it's drawbacks.

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24818&stc=1&d=1459780701

The matter of the Fisheye Lens squeezing people's faces at the edge of the screen is still present from the first movie and it's arguably more glaring now given a few specific shots.

A degree of sexism is still present in lines like, "Lucky, you're a woman." or "A man shouldn't have to explain." are still unnecessary even if the lines are coming from bad guys or good guys explicitly referred to by other characters as chauvinistic. It's especially glaring then the movie plainly hangs a lampshade on the matter when he's confronted by both a man and woman and he alternates between punching the first and slapping the second. They're both trying to cripple you, dude, **** your chivalry and punch the bitch like an true equal opportunity badass.

At least we get a scene where the women assigned to Jackie's team get to wheel out the kicks in an interrogation. That was cool. More of that, please.

Also fart joke. Which at the very least plays off better than the piss and **** from the first movie. Small steps. Small steps.

Final Verdict: rating_4 [Pretty Good]

TheMaster

04-04-16, 06:04 PM

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24812&stc=1&d=1459707157

Dogtooth

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
Whereas I expected Ace Attorney to be stupid, Dogtooth is a movie I never wanted to see in the first place. I saw the trailer (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=QFtDzK64-pk) once years ago and I instantly hated it and despite never seeing or hearing about it again, the name is still locked and fixed in my brain as "that movie I never want to see". It looked disgusting, it looked annoying, and it looked pretentious.

So why am I watching it? A combination of curiosity and pure unadulterated masochism. How bad is it REALLY? Is it even a bad movie at all? Maybe it's simply a poor trailer?

I'm venturing FAR outside my comfort zone for this one, so let's buckle in and see what I've gotten myself into.

WARNING: THIS REVIEW IS UNPLEASANT.

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
Dogtooth is definitely NOT as bad as I expected it to be. Granted, it's not a GOOD movie, but it's not totally ****awful which I attribute to single element:

It's kinda interesting.

The idea is that we're basically watching The Village, except zoned in on a suburban home where the kids, which are plainly young adults, aren't allowed beyond the fence surrounding their yard. You can suspect the degree to which their parents impose this limitation on them, but the vast majority of the movie is simply drip-feeding you the various ways that they're lied to and repressed and basically just making a show of how socially backwards they are.

+ Cats are man-eating predators.
+ An imaginary exiled "brother" is assumed to exist on the other side of the fence.
+ Frank Sinatra songs are played and translated as being from their unseen grandfather.
+ Zombies are referred to as "little yellow flowers" and vaginas are referred to as "keyboards".
+ The sisters get into the habit of trading personal items for cunnilingus (as well as licking other places).
+ The boy is expected to have regular unenthusiastic sex with some woman named Christine (who's the only character I can name by the way) who's never really established to be part of the family or not.

The trailer refers to the movie as a "satire" and yet I cannot even begin to imagine what this movie might be satirizing beyond overprotective parents which even then it doesn't manage to do anything meaningful with it.

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24806&stc=1&d=1459690661

Other than the horrific animal abuse and sex scenes so emotionless and sterile they make me feel worse than watching fetish porn, this movie is just one joyless ride from beginning to end that even Rocky references can't save.

The main issue here is twofold: It doesn't do anything and it doesn't go anywhere.

The whole movie is made up almost entirely of nonsequiturs in that stereotypically "art film" kinda way. It's just a mess of scenes that, save a couple exceptions, could be scrambled and placed into any other part of the movie because all they do is smash cut to an entirely different time and place, hold an egregiously long take, in dead silence, on the kids doing something awkward long enough for the director to lean into frame and go, "Wink, wink, huh, huh, ya get it? Yeah! They're weird, right?" before cutting to Something Completely Different which accomplishes the same thing.

It's not like we ever really find out why their parents treat their kids this way or even what they expect to accomplish by pretending the planes in the sky are just toys which can appear in their lawn or that their mother will just periodically give birth to a dog. It's unexplained, therefor it doesn't serve any known purpose, therefor the entire plot of the movie feels contrived. At least The Village took the time to rationalize it's nonsensical fear-mongering.

The other issue is just how the movie ends. As soon as the movie sets up the "you become immune to all dangers when your right canine tooth falls out" (which is a brilliant lesson all parents should teach their children) you're just waiting for one of the kids to knock their teeth out. They're already rebellious! They're already knifing each other, burning their fingers for fun, and getting beaten by their parents with VHS tapes, so what's seriously gonna stop them from trying to bust their teeth out?

It sure takes a while, but when it finally does happen, at least I credit the movie for LOOKING like it hurts. Most of the violence looks real. Probably because it is real. Just like the sex looks real. But the effects aren't real. ANYWAY...

So, the older sister smashes her tooth out with a dumbbell and bleeding all over she climbs into her dad's car, probably expecting to climb out when he goes to work.

He goes to work, the camera holds on the trunk door, zooms in slowly, and we're waiting... and waiting... and waiting...

Credits.

You couldn't even give us the satisfaction of knowing one of the kids managed to escape, nup, just assume she busted her jaw so hard that she exsanguinated in their trunk. Great.

You know, I was thinking of giving this a movie a [Just... Bad], but now that I think about it, was there anything of worth in this movie at all?

Was there really anything here that rationalized killing a whole bunch of fish in a swimming pool and attacking a cat with hedge clippers? Did the incestuous sex scenes really add ANYTHING of merit to the proceedings? Was a single thing ever said to explain, justify, or make a point of anything in this movie?

No. It's just a vaguely interesting premise wasted on a sweaty gym sock. And the sweat on that gym sock symbolizes something pretentious like the hardships we all go through in life, emphasized by the crusty yellow stain where someone's ejaculated into it. Not artsy enough for ya? Let's overlay that gym sock with a voice over presenting a mathematical problem while we time lapse that gym sock's sweat molding over into something heinous and foul.

**** you, Simon. This movie's not "totally ****awful", but it is

Final Verdict: rating_1 [Irredeemably Awful]

:down:

Omnizoa

04-04-16, 06:50 PM

:down:
Reasons?

TheMaster

04-05-16, 02:12 AM

Reasons?

I've watched it once and enjoyed it quite a bit. To me it attains a nauseating sense of self destruction while remaining within the confines of art house filmmaking. By no means is this anywhere near as much a review as you've taken the time to write, but I disagree with your review :D

Omnizoa

04-05-16, 02:56 AM

Omnizoa

04-05-16, 05:14 PM

http://twilighthollowproject.b1.jcink.com/uploads/twilighthollowproject/policestory3.gif

Police Story 3: Super Cop

Martial Arts / Chinese / 1992

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
Okay, this one I definitely haven't already seen. It appears to be considered the only Police Story that can compete with the original, however for my money I'd go with Police Story 2. Where does this one fall in?

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
This time, Jackie spends almost the entire movie undercover and while it's interesting to see him struggle to fib his way through scenes, it's really just one ongoing joke that doesn't seem to peak anywhere.

I have to hand to Super Cop, it managed to avoid the crude humor, but I think it also managed to avoid a lot of the other stuff that I liked about the previous movies.

The plotting feels a lot weaker here. With Jackie undercover, it really just feels like a ride from random location to random location as he's strung along by the bad guys dragging him between their businesses. There's not much structure and I'd barely say it has an arc. We also get a slew of new characters for Jackie to interact with, but none of them really play off of him as well as the cast from Police Story 2.

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24829&stc=1&d=1459887206
Michelle Yeoh's in the movie. She kicks a tiny amount of butt.

The brass crackin' down on him is a trope I'm relieved not to have to deal with again, but I miss the moments from both previous movies when Jackie's pushed to the edge and goes all Jack Bauer on 'em.

Once again, we've got even more action than the last movie, this time 5 major fight scenes if you include the shootout, "training hall" at 17 minutes, "dig site" at 23 minutes, "restaurant" at 40 minutes, "military base" at 58 minutes, and "train" at 1 hour 29 minutes.

Unfortunately, the change I mentioned between Police Story 1 and Police Story 2 is way more glaringly apparent here. We have more fight scenes (and the movie itself is about half an hour shorter), but all of them are very brief and are so unremarkable that if you haven't seen a Jackie Chan movie before, you'd be forgiven for not getting what all the fuss is about.

He never kicks anyone's face through a drawer, he never wrenches anyone's back on monkey bars, and even the opening fight intended to show him off does very little to highlight how unconventional he is.

This movie's very forgettable and even Jackie Chan hanging from a helicopter or fighting on a moving train isn't taken to it's logical extremes.

For one final wet towel on the whole affair we get one scene in which Jackie observes exotic animals in cages and comments to his superior officer, "So cruel. Why isn't Public Security doing anything about that?" mere minutes before sitting down and ordering "civet cat with steamed turtle organs".

Granted, that scene is interrupted by the restaurant fight, but what the ****? Was I supposed to laugh at that? Was that a joke? Am I supposed to find that funny? All it does is remind me, "YEAH, THERE ARE MORE IMPORTANT THINGS YOU SHOULD BE WORKING ON RIGHT NOW."

We got these poor animals being hunted and served up like nobody's business, but we're spending the entire movie chasing down bad guys who we only ever see kill OTHER BAD GUYS? That's friggen' stupid.

I think this is easily the worst Police Story so far. I didn't even bother watching the bloopers this time.

Final Verdict: rating_3 [Meh...]

Omnizoa

04-05-16, 08:27 PM

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24832&stc=1&d=1459895714

Avalon

Sci-Fi / Japanese / 2001

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
Guaporense's been talkin' it up all over and I said I'd watch it, so here goes...

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
Uuuuugggghhh this was rough.

I really like a lot of the ideas in Avalon, this is certainly a movie I could get into. Unfortunately I think a lot of the ideas fall apart or never make it full circle.

Where do I start? Well, how about it's one of those movies that holds static shots for a stupid amount of time and then by the 20-minute mark it's already recycling those SAME SHOTS in an extended flashback montage?

http://img.pandawhale.com/post-56747-Homer-Simpson-Flanders-Hurry-u-L1Ce.gif
YES, I GET IT, move the **** along. I just SAW THIS.

This is also the kind of movie that after establishing that the main character is arguably the best player in a video game and sees someone that might potentially compete with her, it kicks in the Ethereal Choir (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/EtherealChoir) hardcore.

Someone beat my score in Pac-man!? DUN dun DUN!

The game in question is called "Avalon", the only significant similarity to Avalon in Assault Girls being the mercilessly dull color palette.

I was serious when I said it was a big fat **** up to go back and recolor over Ghost in the Shell with piss-yellow filters, and this is exactly that. It looks ugly and boring with only a FEW shots (which also recycle) actually make any real use of it.

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24833&stc=1&d=1459896790

I get that it's intended to create a contrast to the later revealed "Class Real" part of the game, but that in and of itself just felt like a massive slap in the face.

It's the real world, right? The twist is she's been in the game this whole time, which is why a full color palette is "real", right? Nope! Double twist! When Bishop gets shot to prove whether the world is real or not (which itself came right the **** out of nowhere) and he dissolves like he's in the game I couldn't help, but call "********!"

So what, then? The piss-yellow filter world with the piss-yellow filter game is reality? How is this- I don't even-

( O___O)

I'm reminded of that plotpoint in Matrix: Revolutions where they plainly ****ed up by leaving out the obvious plotpoint where Neo is still trapped in another Matrix.

Anyway, what the was the significance of shooting the girl at the end anyway? Why was she trying to shoot her to begin with? Why not try to communicate with her? Why does "follow the girl" translate into "shoot her in the head"?

At this point all she's doing is trying to find the "Unreturned", right? Or did we see them already? Was Bishop one? We're looking for the avatars of the catatonic patients right? So she's pursuing her friend, Murphy's avatar in an attempt to save him, right? At the risk of becoming catatonic herself?

WHY DIDN'T WE SEE THAT PART OF THE MOVIE!?

The whole ****in' plot sets this up with the Nine Sisters and the Morgana taking Odin to the island with the Oblivion Crown and all that crap and yet we climax on a twist that's not a twist?

The rest of the movie isn't even a satisfying buildup to this ending either.

The action is flaccid, the dialog is expositional, and our main character is ASTOUNDINGLY emotionless. She has no personality whatsoever, even less so than Motoko Kusanagi. She has ONE scene in which she cries and throws up, but it comes out of nowhere following a Total Party Kill.

Dude, IT'S A GAME. YOU DIE IN IT. Is it THAT shocking?

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24834&stc=1&d=1459898706

When Stunner dies we get the flattest most BORING deathbed scene I've seen since Dragonslayer and doing anything worse than Dragonslayer is an ACCOMPLISHMENT.

Back to the game thing, though, why is Avalon illegal? Not that I don't understand the risks, but why waste the time emphasizing that this game is illegal if it's legality never ever EVER ties into the movie at all? We never see any law enforcement of any kind, we never get the impression that any of the people involved in this game need to conceal their illegal activity in any way, and removing it would only eliminate a dissonance.

Frankly, the worst part of this movie is just the usual ****, but here the usual **** is taken to a ******** extreme. Dogs, Pigeons, gratuitous close-up of cutting meat, BUT THEN WE GET THE SCENE.

THAT ****ING SCENE.

THAT DRAWN-OUT RAPID-FIRE OF EXTREME CLOSE-UP SHOTS OF STUNNER STUFFING HIS FACE WITH EGGS AND WIENERS.

Stop.

STOP.

STOP.

STOP.

STOP!

STOP!!

STOP!!!

STOP THE ****IN' MOVIE!!!!!

http://www.reactiongifs.us/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/ill_kill_you_office.gif

Final Verdict: rating_2 [Just... Bad]

Omnizoa

04-08-16, 03:32 PM

Collection Update:

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24853&stc=1&d=1460138281

Labyrinth

Amateur. You can tell it's a very very VERY early DVD release because the menus look like crap.

Mad Max: Fury Road
The second disc has a bunch of really cool behind-the-scenes extras that give me a greater appreciation for the work that went into the movie. CG I didn't know was CG is spoiled and a lot is explained about the stunts and how approximately half of the vehicles were made. One thing seems certain: Practical effects look a lot more fun to play with.

Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be any commentary and the menus look BEYOND tacky using some horribly generic Warner Bros. aesthetic that makes me feel like I'm browsing channels through Dish Network.

The Game
Decided to try out a Criterion Collection release for the first time with this one and I gotta say, I'm definitely impressed. It's a pleasantly chunky thing with a high-quality booklet and two discs, including both regular extras AND a commentary featuring both David Fincher and Michael Douglas (you don't usually seem to get the production crew and the acting crew in the same commentary). It's also unusual and interesting to hear them kinda down on their own movie, admitting it was risky to make with it's novelty premise, ultimately only earning B grades, 7/10s, and other "meh" reviews.

The DVD is even spared trailers, but I'm sad to say that Criterion doesn't yet go the full mile because it's still sucking corporate cock as long as it region-locks it's discs. I'm also not a fan of them sticking their logo everywhere. On the spine, I get. In a tiny little spot on the front cover, I can overlook. DOMINATING THE DISC LABEL? Enough, we get it.

My only potential gripe is if it doesn't remain consistent with it's labeling. I'll certainly be on the lookout for more Criterion Collection movies, but it's bad enough that they'll release Lady Snowblood and not Dragon Tiger Gate or The Returner.

Omnizoa

04-08-16, 08:19 PM

http://twilighthollowproject.b1.jcink.com/uploads/twilighthollowproject/scissorhands.gif

Edward Scissorhands

Romantic Comedy Fantasy(?) / English / 1990

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
REREREREREassessment time.

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
Fishing, Eggs, Steak, Lots of Barbeque, Lots of Dogs, Lots of Stupid.

Ahh... Tim Burton... back when 'directed by Tim Burton' meant, "Hell yeah, Tim Burton!" and not "Dark Shadows? With Johnney Depp? Ehhh... I'll pass..."

This is also back when teenage girl romance movies weren't .

This movie really harkens back to also-Winona-Ryder-vehicle Beetlejuice in it's thematic clash of aesthetics. Here we get Johnney Depp (for the first time with Tim Burton) as Edward, the socially awkward robot with scissors for hands living up in the evil castle up on the cul-de-sac when door-to-door cosmetic saleswoman takes pity on him and demonstrates a fish-out-of-water story by dropping him into a painfully caricatured suburbia.

We also get Vincent Price in what I think is his very last big screen appearance. This is a pretty historic movie.

This movie obviously demands an uncommon degree of belief suspension to work and if you can get past that, it's a pretty enjoyable flick. There's an obvious charm to it's aesthetic, it's caricatures, and it's sincere effort to make a modern fable out of social ostracism.

Many of the effects are obvious, from the Freddy Krueger gloves to the hidden debris fans to the wait-a-minute-that's-a-totally-different-dog, but for the most part I find it pleasantly engaging (save when I'm distracted by the fact that they punished several dogs with this movie because they are different in favor of producing a movie about not punishing others because they are different).

http://twilighthollowproject.b1.jcink.com/uploads/twilighthollowproject/57762a20-sparrow.gif

ANYWAY... other than the us' (how do I spell that?), my biggest issues are simply a couple specific plotbeats.

Edward's love interest (*cough*KISSING*cough*), Kim, could not be shoved in our face any ****ing harder with going into full-on shoujo framing with roses, bubbles, glitter, and fog superimposed into the shot. We dwell on the imagery, we SLOOOWLY zoom in, and that Danny Elfman score cranks up the whimsy to teeth-rotting levels.

It's very forced. What does Edward see in her anyway, if he sees anything at all? He demonstrates a very creepily telegraphed attraction to her which has got to be only skin-deep knowing how little the two interact throughout the movie before finally manifesting in early onset Crippling Monogamy Syndrome. Why is this a romance? Really, why did this need to be anything more than an unexpected friendship born out of pity and admiration?

Another issue I have is the scene in which Edward first accidentally cuts someone. Jim cuts in to shout and point "Hey!" right before he actually cuts her. What the **** was he taking issue with? Edward standing up on a ladder with his back turned away from her? Winona Ryder's whimsical dancing? Actually, yeah, I like that.

Finally, before the credits roll, it's revealed that Winona Ryder is the narrator in really good makeup doing a really ****** granny voice as she tells us that following Edward's trip to suburbia, it snowed regularly. Snow that, in that special fairy tale kinda way, comes from Edward, carving obvious plastic sculptures out of giant blocks of ice-WHERE DOES HE GET THOSE!?

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24855&stc=1&d=1460157527

Final Verdict: rating_4 [Pretty Good]

REWATCH UPDATE 8/11/22:
I couldn't get this marked as a review before so now that I've seen it again, let's try to add a bit more substance to it.

Edward Scissorhands is a cult classic nowadays, and ostensibly Tim Burton's most "personal" project, which I can believe. This definitely seems to be the sort of story born out of the imagination of an outcast growing up in suburbia, and that's pretty much what we get here, albeit slightly abstracted out to a nearly Dr. Seussian degree.

I made the mistake of merely referring to Peggy as a "cosmetic saleswoman". Making her an Avon saleswoman is so much more thematic and actually makes her a bit more endearing as a character because she's effectively a naive and struggling victim of a multi-level marketing company from the word go. I honestly can't think of ANY movie in which "the protagonist" is unironically an MLM hun, and they not only do it here, but they still make her likable. That's pretty refreshing.

And to add to the refreshments, she along with her whole family (and most of the neighborhood at first) is extremely welcoming of Edward when we moves in. There's the obvious jokes about The Cougar and The Hyper-Religious Bitch, but for a movie that so readily sets us up for your typical story about fear-of-the-unknown, it's nice to see people just like Edward for Edward, and not even just like Edward, but have no strong opinion towards him.

There's so much bullshit these days about [I]openness and inclusivity, and just bending over backwards to accommodate anyone even remotely disadvantaged... but one of the most pleasant characters in this whole movie is just Dad. Dad doesn't give a ****. Dad just sits in his lawnchair and offers Edward life and financial advice as he would anyone else.

He doesn't treat Edward differently, and if Edward's comments on TV about knowingly wanting to become "more normal" are any indication, than Dad is just the ultimate embodiment of what anyone can ideally be for him. Just treating him like a regular guy. Not "the guy with the scissors".

THAT IS THE DIFFERENCE between "being inclusive" and being impartial.

https://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=88376&stc=1&d=1660267721

It would be so easy to expect this movie to introduce the conflict as soon as Peggy brings Edward home. The conflict is foreshadowed with the all the stereotypical housewife gossip, but the trouble doesn't begin there.

It would also be easy for the conflict to begin as soon as all the husbands arrived home in the evenings (at exactly the same time every day), but as demonstrated that doesn't happen either.

No, at the end of the day, it takes an entitled thuggish douchebag teenager to ruin everything by getting Edward to commit a crime and driving him up a pole until he scares the neighbors by lashing out with petty vandalism.

He's just a genuinely evil character and it stretches belief (on top of everything else, including the Overnight Romance which stretches belief) that Ryder's character would fall for him despite these glaring character flaws. Not that those sorts of relationships don't happen, but so little is communicated about their relationship to begin with and seemingly less is communicated about his motivations to antagonize Edward. We could INFER that maybe he's jealous, because Edward apparently likes her and she pities him back, but that's never made explicit or even implicit by any of the dialog or acting.

It's just suddenly "WHAT UP FREAK!? YOUR KIND DON'T BELONG HERE!"

I guess you could wax philosophical about things like "the court of public opinion" and all that, but the way in which this movie is presented, from it's music, to it's aesthetic, to it's story, and it's characters, this really does seem like it's intended to be, dare I say, a young adult fable.

It seems like an innocent modern fairy tale at first, but it really does juggle some heavy concepts behind the back and it's appreciable in both capacities.

I also just appreciate that Depp wasn't doing puppy-dog eyes the whole movie and actually has a character arc. He manages to be adorable and funny and there's a fair amount of subtle body language in his performance to help communicate what Edward is thinking or feeling even though he's largely a silent character.

I still really like this movie. Only takes 15 minutes to get started, which is a pretty strong pace all things considered. I do wish the ending wasn't such a downer, but it was meant to be a bittersweet story, and there's still some value in that.

A modern classic.

Final Verdict: rating_4 [Pretty Good]

cricket

04-08-16, 08:25 PM

I enjoyed your review of Dogtooth even though I liked it a good amount. It's a pretty weird flick.

Miss Vicky

04-08-16, 08:51 PM

save when I'm distracted by the fact that they punished several dogs because they are different

WTF are you even talking about?

Omnizoa

04-08-16, 09:00 PM

I enjoyed your review of Dogtooth even though I liked it a good amount. It's a pretty weird flick.
Thank you. "Pretty weird" has a very different definition in my book.

http://animationrevelation.com/readables/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/KillLaKill10.gif

Omnizoa

04-08-16, 09:02 PM

WTF are you even talking about?
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/a9/70/ff/a970ff74b257fb5254f929ff01c57826.gif

Miss Vicky

04-08-16, 09:10 PM

So you're not going to bother to explain how they "punished" dogs in the movie?
I've seen it many times and don't recall anything of that nature.

Omnizoa

04-09-16, 01:02 AM

So you're not going to bother to explain how they "punished" dogs in the movie?
I've seen it many times and don't recall anything of that nature.
I was more referring to the fact that they're in the movie, not that anything violent happens to them onscreen. I've edited my post to better clarify that.

Miss Vicky

04-09-16, 01:12 AM

Omnizoa

04-09-16, 01:28 AM

So, what, you have a problem with animals being in movies at all? Is that what you're getting at? Because if that's that case, you probably should just not watch movies. At least not live action ones.
My favorite movie doesn't contain any non-humans, so I contend that there's a reasonable degree of wiggle room for exceptions.

Besides, I already stay away from the _obvious stuff like We Bought A Zoo or Life of Pi. When that's part of the selling point you can easily count me out.

Zootopia even put me off right away by it's name alone, but by the trailers I've seen, I may feel differently about it.

I thought Rise of the Planet of the Apes did a fantastic job with CG apes and making a big deal out of exactly my issue with these kinds of movies... before it shot itself in the face by using real horses.

Dogtooth was... a stupid experiment in going against my intuition.

You already know that I avoid Westerns by and large for this reason.

Omnizoa

04-14-16, 09:44 AM

Haven't watched any new movies these past few days thanks to tech difficulties and because this:

http://www.technobuffalo.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/Bravely-Second-7.jpg

Totally campin' outside Gamestop right now. The first game sold out, so I'm sure as hell catching this one.

PS: Just turned a corner and saw an Alice Through The Looking Glass poster with an extreme close-up of Johnney Depp's face and I suddenly felt pierced with the chill of vile cold fear.

Then I saw a Jungle Book poster which interested me.

Omnizoa

04-22-16, 08:59 PM

Totally campin' outside Gamestop right now. The first game sold out, so I'm sure as hell catching this one.
Dumbass, that game doesn't come out until tomorrow.

http://twilighthollowproject.b1.jcink.com/uploads/twilighthollowproject/mouthofmadness.gif

In The Mouth of Madness

Horror / English / 1994

WHY'D I WATCH IT?
A bunch of reasons. Firstly, I wasn't actually finished with Bravely Default and I thought I was at the end, BUT THEN I discovered that you have to fight 90% of the game's bosses 5 TIMES OVER AND REMIXED TO BE INCREASINGLY DIFFICULT and that's when I went, "Oooooohhh... so this is what everyone was talking about..."

Anyway, all my characters are at Lv. 99 and everyone's unlocked most jobs, so I'm crushing through all the new encounters and then I reach THAT ONE FIGHT with Quada, Ominas, and Mephilia.

Fire Bane + Firaga + Promethean FLAME, MOTHER****ER!

Gawd, **** that fight. Virtually every other fight in the game I can cruise through with a reasonably prepared party, the right strategy, and a little bit of setup (shouldn't have needed the internet as much as I did), but THIS!? Here I have literally every possible resource available to me by this point in the game, all characters at MAX level, all jobs, all the best equipment from both this run AND a false ending, and I even have infinite money to buy 99 Phoenix Downs, but **** I need the most hyper-specifically optimized piece of **** setup to survive
THE FIRST ****ING TURN!!!

And that's why my final rating for Bravely Default is a 5 out of 5.

******* I need a break from this game. Time to watch a good movie, so why not watch something I've been deliberating on for a while?

I've been jonesing for In The Mouth of Madness, so let's watch that.

I thought it might be interesting to note that I originally learned of this movie by looking up John Carpenter's filmography and was encouraged to watch it through a combination of wanting to see Sam Neil in another movie besides Jurassic Park and the open recommendation from Spoony in his tabletop roleplaying series where he calls it "the best Call of Cthulu movie ever made".

I've never read anything from Lovecraft, but I'm vaguely familiar with the themes and general criticisms of the author's personal beliefs.

http://twilighthollowproject.b1.jcink.com/uploads/twilighthollowproject/mouthofmadness2.gif

WHAT'D I THINK? *SPOILERS*
In The Mouth of Madness A.K.A. that one movie that Iroquois has as his profile banner, just manages to sneak into my very short list of horror movies I actually enjoy.

It's weird too, cause it kicks around a bunch of stuff I really don't like.

Useless scenes where people say seemingly significant but meaningless things ("He SEES you!"), jumpscares (**** that ****), and the female lead coming on to the male lead right the royal **** out of NOWHERE (it's offhandedly excused with another version of that Who Framed Roger Rabbit line, "I'm written that way").

All fairly stupid ****. I'd include "gore" in there, but honestly it's pretty dialed back and the special effects are a lot stronger than The Thing. Needa wig people out somehow, right?

And you know, that "wig people out" bit seems to conflict an awful lot with that "I don't want to watch a movie to feel bad" thing I said, but you know what? I can appreciate some creepy ****, a moody atmosphere, and you can be damn sure I'm on board for a movie centered entirely around the concept of GOING INSANE.

https://media.giphy.com/media/ToMjGpGGqES2C4mqL72/giphy.gif
God, I needa watch Higurashi again. Season 2 is boring me to death.

So, the idea is that Sam Neil plays an insurance investigator. Probably one of the grayest area jobs I've ever heard of. He looks to prevents scammers from being scammed. Alright. Kinda like those people who get paid a subscription fee to lay flowers and wreathes out to die on tombstones. Profiting off of death, but doing something superficially "nice", while altogether pointless.

Anyway, he gets dragged in to investigate the disappearance of Stephen King-esque horror author legend Sutter Kane. I'm partial to R.L. Stine myself, but in this universe Sutter Kane's books have literally reached Harry Potter levels of popularity.

****, really? Imagining a world where horror is that popular is already a sign of the end times.

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24977&stc=1&d=1461368053

I mean, really, I don't get horror, what's the ****in' appeal? The Walking Dead was best enjoyed as a drama (before Season 2 ****ed it up, gosh, what is it with Season 2s? You know how much I HATE Code Geass Season 2? Don't get me started.), why should scenes of rotting people ripping the intestines out of a horse appeal to me?

I don't know where I heard it, but someone somewhere sometime said that horror exists to supplement thrills to the lives of people who've been sheltered from such extremes besides.

I don't know if I can really accept that given how desensitized people are to that crap nowadays (which is still pretty scary when you think about it), but it certainly strikes a chord.

There's SOMETHING in these movies that appeals to people who are not me and I CANNOT figure it out.

I CAN figure out why I like In The Mouth of Madness though, and it's because as I've said before, I enjoy psychological thrillers. I like watching characters brought to the brink, and we get that in spades with Sam Neil's character who remains firmly, and understandably, skeptical that anything supernatural is going on for over half of the movie.

It's not like all the spooky reality-bending **** is falling on deaf ears though, he's joined by... some actress who doubles with Sam as our viewer surrogate. So while he remains firmly in denial, to help root us, she's the one going over the edge.

Somewhere past the halfway point though, the roller coaster crosses the peak and Sam's character, Trent, descends into total mind****ery. Everything from chronological anomalies to realities nested within themselves, it's friggen' nuts and I really liked seeing (or should I say NOT SEEING?) the Great Old Ones rise up whisk humanity away to places and for purposes we haven't the language to sufficiently describe.

If this is a "Lovecraft-type story", I'm on board. This falls into that same category shared by Titanic: flawed in some pretty big ways, but I find myself watching it over and over again so much that I gotta add it to my personal collection.

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=24978&stc=1&d=1461369224

That kickin' theme song too.

Final Verdict: rating_4 [Pretty Good]

REWATCH UPDATE (5/22/2022):

In the Mouth of Madness is one of those movies that I was persuaded into liking, but not quite enough to add it to my collection, despite what I wrote above. I mention the "kickin'" music which bookends the movie, but watching it again it feels out-of-place. It feels more like a signature John Carpenter thing than an appropriate complement to the movie.

And I'm certainly fond of John Carpenter movies and their B-movie flavor in general, but watching this again the "B-movie flavor" came off as a bit aggressively bland.

The whole appeal of "B-movies" is ostensibly that, while lacking the budget, production quality, or aspirations of an "A-movie" it's still very entertaining in it's own humble cheeky way. I definitely get that impression from movies like Dragon Tiger Gate, The Stuff, or Returner, but those movies despite often looking worse, being melodramatic, or even unintentionally funny are at least a good romp despite or even because of those reasons. In the Mouth of Madness feels like it's trying to occupy that space, but it takes itself way too seriously.

I still like Sam Neil's character and his acting performance, and I still appreciate the psychological themes explored, but this movie doesn't really engross me and often I find myself waiting for the next semi-memorable setpiece. It takes a third of the movie just to get going, and honestly the best part of the movie to me was just the characters trying to get to the fictional town of Hobb's End. Once they're there, it's just sporadic exposition that means nothing to us as viewers (because it's just Sutter Cane going on about end-times and believing in reality vs. fiction) or townspeople standing around looking menacing.

When Sam tries to leave town and realizes his card keeps getting teleported back to face the mob, just the look on his face, without any words spoken, communicates so much about his headspace in that moment, where's coming to accept the absurdity of the situation, and he's making light of it, as he does when he laughs at his own movie before the credits.

Those moments were interesting, but the character development in this case is very stutter-y so we don't get much opportunity to dwell on Sam's decent into insanity.

The horror elements seemed more to be shock material than anything else, and unfortunately when you're trying to emulate the sort of well-known horror tropes of an established author like Stephen King, the scary children and mob with pitchforks thing just comes off as kinda phone'd in. There's even a scene where Main Girl is stopped by a group of bleeding and mutilated kids who make vague threatening statements, but she has like no reaction. And that's kinda my reaction.

Definitely view this movie in a much less positive light than I did before, but it's still a decent watch.

Final Verdict: rating_3_5 [Good]