Make Your Picks

Rate The Last Movie You Saw

Tools    





As you could tell from my review, I would recommend it. I would also recommend going into it with as little advanced knowledge as possible. I tried to keep my review really vague because I think there are a lot of fun things to discover in it.
Completely agree.



Oops, one more. (SPOILERS AHEAD)

I had attempted to wipe this film from my mind by subjecting myself to shock therapy for 43 hours straight, but instead of forgetting the film, I managed to fuse my body with one of the skulls of Ghidorah, after which I was electrocuted, transferring part of my consciousness and that of Ghidorah into a giant metal lizard. Our consciousnesses merged, becoming one mega-mecha-consciousness, after which, we ran amuck, smashing up a city, and getting into a tag team match with a giant monkey and a giant lizard. The aforementioned giant monkey and lizard were natives of The Hollow Earth(TM Disney Theme Parks, 2021), a place with inverted gravity that you reach by flying a spaceship into a tunnel, which goes through a gravity warp gate, so as to make sure you don't implode, unless you are a monkey, in which case you just climb up by sliding down while holding on to a hatchet. I know this all happened, because a conspiracy theorist, who has a super-secret plan to infiltrate an evil corporation, which he announced publicly on his podcast, because that's what you do to keep **** secret, documented everything, broadcasting it to everyone, including the people who run the evil corporation.

Kong vs Godzilla

Wingard, 2021



I'm sad to see people not like it.
I was so bummed by Godzilla: King Of The Monsters as I thought its predecessor had done enough to make slogging it through all the human bull**** but G:KotM was just painful bull****. Why, oh ****ing why can't American studios understand that these movies are about the monsters not some lame one-dimensional "characters" they make up in some studio spit-balling meeting?
Haven't seen this new one yet but it hurts me to think that it could be just as bad or worse.



I'm probably just repeating what Stu said, but Faye Valentine's sexualized appearance definitely should not stop anyone from continuing Cowboy Bebop. Her getup is very much meant to manipulate her more toxic and animal-brained marks. She never comes across as a mere sexualized plaything. In fact, she may be one of the best realized female characters in fiction.

Cowboy Bebop is one of the best pieces of art in any medium. It's so damn good.
Ya know, I wanna tread lightly here as this is something I haven't seen (though I've seen little snippets and commercials and whatnot) and just talk about this idea that because male writers say that a female character is only highly sexualized because she uses her sexuality as a weapon against male adversaries and totally not to titillate male audience members... it just really doesn't hold water anymore. I mean, I was totally sold on the idea 20 or so years ago and I was probably still willing to go along with it, with some doubts, 10 years ago maybe even just a few, but... man, it just doesn't hold up anymore.
That's just my .02, but it seems like we've been trucking in that bull**** for a long time and I mean, come on.
Nothing personal intended to you or anyone else but there is no question about why this trope exists and it's not because it totally makes sense in the context of these characters it's cheap thrillz.



I know ya'll mean well, and I do intend to give the show another shot. But I'm going on 17 years of men on the internet telling me how I should feel about objectifying content. Does it tend to work?



But when I do watch it maybe Stu and I can team up for a Newbie/Expert review thread and you can all gloat when it turns out I love it.
Well of course it does the opposite here if you're assuming that I'm trying to dictate to you how I think you "should" feel about it, rather than me just expressing how I feel personally; there's no need to inject such a faulty assumption into what should remain...






WARNING: spoilers below
That being said, I would still love to do a collab thread with you about it if you ever feel like it, though.



Ya know, I wanna tread lightly here as this is something I haven't seen (though I've seen little snippets and commercials and whatnot) and just talk about this idea that because male writers say that a female character is only highly sexualized because she uses her sexuality as a weapon against male adversaries and totally not to titillate male audience members... it just really doesn't hold water anymore. I mean, I was totally sold on the idea 20 or so years ago and I was probably still willing to go along with it, with some doubts, 10 years ago maybe even just a few, but... man, it just doesn't hold up anymore.
That's just my .02, but it seems like we've been trucking in that bull**** for a long time and I mean, come on.
Nothing personal intended to you or anyone else but there is no question about why this trope exists and it's not because it totally makes sense in the context of these characters it's cheap thrillz.
I agree that there are plenty of examples of female characters who have been gratuitously objectified under the pretense of them just using their sexuality as a weapon, but, while it may be tricky, I maintain that there is a right way to do that, since there's a world of difference in the portrayal of say, Catwoman in Batman Returns, and something like this:




Of course, there are more examples out there of the trope being done wrong rather than right, but it still needs to evaluated on a case-by-case basis, you know?



I agree that there are plenty of examples of female characters who have been gratuitously objectified under the pretense of them just using their sexuality as a weapon, but, while it may be tricky, I maintain that there is a right way to do that, since there's a world of difference in the portrayal of say, Catwoman in Batman Returns, and something like this:




Of course, there are more examples out there of the trope being done wrong rather than right, but it still needs to evaluated on a case-by-case basis, you know?
when i saw this movie i always wanted to have halle berry hair cut in this film






An interesting concept, but I wish it had been a little more pared down.




Harry, He's Here to Help (2000, Dominik Moll)

I enjoyed this low-key Chabrol-esque thriller quite a bit, not in small part because it manages to avoid the cliches and conventions of this type of story (obsessive controlling friend that wants to help but goes too far... just a tiny bit), while injecting the narrative with deeper psychological /metaphorical undertones (i.e. conflict between the routine of family life and dreams of artistic career). The final 1/3 of the film may come off as a disappointment (and it probably was) - I thought it was OK. The ambivalence of that final twist was darkly ironic I have to say.

Good movie, not perfect but worth a watch.



Jurassic World 6.5/10
It was a fun little movie, Chris Pratt was entertaining in it

Trolls 6/10

Freaky 7/10
Interesting twist on the body swap genre



Missão dada é missão cumprida!


Small town cops and the big problems they have to deal.



A movie that doesn't know what it wants to be. Also, whats up with that FBI agent using a t-shirt of Che Guevara? A terrorist and assassin that killed many in cold blood? Oh, whatever...



It looks like a bad cartoon movie. Even if the setting was right (imo) the execution was lame af.
__________________
Selva!



ANOTHER ROUND
(2020, Vinterberg)
A film nominated for a Best Picture or Best Int'l Feature Film this year



"It's funny, but there's a point to this, which is important and which I hope you'll understand someday: the world is never as you expect."

Another Round follows Martin who, along with his three friends and colleagues, Tommy, Peter, and Nikolaj (Thomas Bo Larsen, Lars Ranthe, and Magnus Millang) find themselves immersed in the typical mid-life crisis: boring job, routine marriage, etc. When they start discussing the theory of a psychiatrist that argued that having a BAC of 0.05 made you more creative, they decide to put it to the test by working while being a little, well, tipsy. Their experiment has great results at first, as all four improve their execution at work, reconnect with their families, and feel altogether more alive. However, things spiral out of control as they push the limits of the experiment and their BAC.

I don't think I was that interested in this, or even knew much about it, until the Oscar nominations were announced. Which is maybe the reason why I was pleasantly surprised by it. Even though the premise itself is not new and the film follows the sorta typical template of the "revitalized" middle-aged man, it is held together by the great performances from the cast, especially Mikkelsen. He really digs deep into the depression, frustration, and emotional chaos of this character as he goes up and down the wave of alcoholism.

Grade:



Full review on my Movie Loot
__________________
Check out my podcast: Thief's Monthly Movie Loot!



Funny you mention it, I had the same experience of seeing the VHS box at Blockbuster back in the day and being curious and no idea why I never rented it, it's certainly a compelling image. When I finally watched it (maybe a dozen years ago) it wasn't whatever I was expecting from the box-art, but it was good and memorable.
I watched part of a horror movie (or possibly even an episode of something like Tales from the Crypt?) where a man was being buried alive by a group or maybe a couple. It was not so great. And for years I thought it was Dead and Buried and thus wasn't interested in it.



I'm sad to see people not like it.
I was so bummed by Godzilla: King Of The Monsters as I thought its predecessor had done enough to make slogging it through all the human bull**** but G:KotM was just painful bull****. Why, oh ****ing why can't American studios understand that these movies are about the monsters not some lame one-dimensional "characters" they make up in some studio spit-balling meeting?
Haven't seen this new one yet but it hurts me to think that it could be just as bad or worse.
I think you'll like it well enough. It's not the worst movie I've seen, but it just had a little too many things going on. And, as you say, there were a couple of "lame one-dimensional 'characters'." Still, I think if I had to choose, it would be monsters over superheros..
My review is on this page: https://www.movieforums.com/communit...04#post2192704





Intimidation, 1960

A bank worker named Takita (Nobuo Kaneko) is blackmailed by his mistress's pimp and decides to rob his own bank. Taking advantage of night guard Nakaike (Ko Nishimura) who believes the two are friends, Takita sets up the robbery with Nakaike as the fall guy.

The Criterion Channel describes this film as a "pocket-sized" noir, and that's just about right. Barely clocking in over an hour, the story unfolds with streamline efficiency, though it does take a moment here or there to let you catch your breath.

Kaneko is solid as the weaselly Takita, a man who has a trapped, feral look for much of the film. Takita is the victim of a blackmail plot, but he more than deserves a bit of comeuppance. It is an interesting sensation to watch him commit his crime, both wanting him to succeed and also being put off by the position in which he puts Nakaike.

Nishimura, as Nakaike, is his own kind of miserable. Teased and looked down upon by the other bank workers, he is an uncomfortable character to watch. When he becomes more important later in the film, the dynamic between him and Takita--two miserable, trapped men--is both compelling and uncomfortable.

This is a straight-ahead thriller that manages to pack in several twists and turns through its short run time. There isn't a lot of character development, but the momentum of this film is in the plot and so betrayals and reversals more than make up for the lack of character depth.