enfant_terrible
@enfant_terrible
17 Years10,000+ PostsLeo
Comments: 1470 · Posts: 13777 · Topics: 204
xxxxxxx
At The Movies. . . with Enfant (Page 2)
You are on page out of 2 | Reverse Order
xxxxxxx
Posted by hydorahYeah...poor Colin...😭😭😭
I agree colin farrell is an actor with great potential, but unfortunately his carreer happened during the worst period of hollywood (early 00s to today)
Annihilation 👍👍👍👍
When I read the plot I immediately thought of Tarkovsky's Stalker yet there was no reference to it except that the writer whose book the film is based on, claimed in some Q&A he was not inspired by Russian's finest, despite clear parallels. In fact one reviewer even called it 'Stalker For Dummies'.
Both movies are about people on a journey through a mysterious area where the laws of nature seem suspended, and where the landscape reflects their inner lives and struggles, with surreal results. Of course this is Hollywood, and there can be no mysteries, everything has to be hard sci-fi so the people venturing into the zone are as follows: a psychologist, a physicist, a scientist, a paramedic and a biologist.
Also all if them are women, bc previously they sent all-male army squads but since none of those guys returned they figured they'd send an all female troop of scientists instead (armed to the teeth nontheless)... or something along those lines. Some of the logic here gets a little murky tbh but what the hell, it's post-metoo Hollywood so we'll be seeing a lot of that.
One reviewer calls it "a thoughtful, philosophical movie, more interested in the nature of humanity and the urges that drive us rather than in who lives or dies." Upon first viewing I thought the last part was true but as for the rest, I found it neither particulary philosophical or thoughtful. Upon letting it simmer a while, I think he's made something quite briliant. The dreamlike horrors of this place with a few truly disturbing sequences -- what kind of threat does this place pose and in what form will it come next?
Underneath the "hard sci-fi" front, It's about the concepts of mirroring and entanglement, both on a moleculare level and a personal/emotional one. Needless to say the full extent of its briliance will be lost on the Maze Runner generation.
I actually prefer this over Villeneuve's thinking-man's-scifi Arrival which it shares similarities with in terms of genre and pacing. Towards the end, Under The Skin (2013) also came to mind, as did 2001.
The score too has this otherwordly quality that intensifies the all-things-alien impression of the film.
When I read the plot I immediately thought of Tarkovsky's Stalker yet there was no reference to it except that the writer whose book the film is based on, claimed in some Q&A he was not inspired by Russian's finest, despite clear parallels. In fact one reviewer even called it 'Stalker For Dummies'.
Both movies are about people on a journey through a mysterious area where the laws of nature seem suspended, and where the landscape reflects their inner lives and struggles, with surreal results. Of course this is Hollywood, and there can be no mysteries, everything has to be hard sci-fi so the people venturing into the zone are as follows: a psychologist, a physicist, a scientist, a paramedic and a biologist.
Also all if them are women, bc previously they sent all-male army squads but since none of those guys returned they figured they'd send an all female troop of scientists instead (armed to the teeth nontheless)... or something along those lines. Some of the logic here gets a little murky tbh but what the hell, it's post-metoo Hollywood so we'll be seeing a lot of that.
One reviewer calls it "a thoughtful, philosophical movie, more interested in the nature of humanity and the urges that drive us rather than in who lives or dies." Upon first viewing I thought the last part was true but as for the rest, I found it neither particulary philosophical or thoughtful. Upon letting it simmer a while, I think he's made something quite briliant. The dreamlike horrors of this place with a few truly disturbing sequences -- what kind of threat does this place pose and in what form will it come next?
Underneath the "hard sci-fi" front, It's about the concepts of mirroring and entanglement, both on a moleculare level and a personal/emotional one. Needless to say the full extent of its briliance will be lost on the Maze Runner generation.
I actually prefer this over Villeneuve's thinking-man's-scifi Arrival which it shares similarities with in terms of genre and pacing. Towards the end, Under The Skin (2013) also came to mind, as did 2001.
The score too has this otherwordly quality that intensifies the all-things-alien impression of the film.
You Were Never Really Here 👍👍👍
Joaquin's deranged, hammer-wielding war-veteran stumbles down the rabbit hole when he's hired to track down the kidnapped daughter of a politician who "doesn't want publicity", and finds himself in the middle of a conspiracy involving a pedophile ring that goes high places.
There isn't hell of a lot more going on here as the treatment of the material is rather predictible throughout, that's not to say it sucks. This is the stuff hardboiled pulp magazines were made of.
Joaquin puts on an excellent onemanshow navigating between different mental states and if anything it's worthwhile for his performance alone.
Joaquin's deranged, hammer-wielding war-veteran stumbles down the rabbit hole when he's hired to track down the kidnapped daughter of a politician who "doesn't want publicity", and finds himself in the middle of a conspiracy involving a pedophile ring that goes high places.
There isn't hell of a lot more going on here as the treatment of the material is rather predictible throughout, that's not to say it sucks. This is the stuff hardboiled pulp magazines were made of.
Joaquin puts on an excellent onemanshow navigating between different mental states and if anything it's worthwhile for his performance alone.
So I'm lying here watching Sunday TV and it strikes me that Ivan Drago is the true hero of Rocky IV.
I don't know if that's the briliance of Stallone or if it was unintentional but think about it. Rocky has lost his way. He's enjoying his big pool and his cars. He bought his brother-in-law a useless fucking slave-robot ffs. If that's not excess I dunno what is. .
Ivan Drago is not the enemy. The American way of life is, or rather how success is measured. Rocky is not a fighter anymore. He's not hungry, he's at the top of the hill.
Enter Ivana Drago. Not our friend but not the enemy either. He represents what Rocky used to be, so in order to get back to what used to matter, he leaves what he's become to get in touch with his roots in the Russian wilderness!
Ok so Ivan enjoys Russia's finest gym facilities and takes roids but without that Ivan wouldn't have looked so bad and the movie needs an antagonist. But the true enemy here is how success turns champions into consumerist mush. Mind blown.
@enfant_terrible
Did you see a movie called The Master? It was recommended to me and i wondered if you had seen it?
Did you see a movie called The Master? It was recommended to me and i wondered if you had seen it?
Posted by MyStarsShine
@enfant_terrible
Did you see a movie called The Master? It was recommended to me and i wondered if you had seen it?
Yes I've seen it. There's a lot of subtext that was lost on me and that I frankly didn't bother reading up on, mainly bc it didn't really grab me. But for what it's worth it's probably the most fascinating depiction of cult mentality and its driving forces. It's pretty much a movie about Scientology and some of its prominent members/founders.. only it doesn't really say that anywhere.
Posted by enfant_terribleROFLMAO!Posted by EvatheDiva52
PFT! Is that all? Mine are alphabetized (call me OCD).
Nah just some favorites from the top of the shelf. I categorize them from favorites (first 2-3 shelves) to lesser titles and mass-editions.
Though now when my gf is living here she has her own brand of OCD so she's categorized them after first letter on the cover... meaning not the title of the film in most cases. I find myself having to look for first letter of actors, directors, production companies, taglines! Takes me 10 minutes to find a movie. I should put that bish in check 😒 Good thing she's not a librarian.
click to expandclick to expand
🤗 cyber hugs!
Love,
Eva
Twin Peaks [2017] 👍👍👍👍
For a contemprorary tv-show this is incredibly chill, and as someone pointed out, it has more in common with Lost Highway and Mulholland Drive and possibly Eraserhead, than Twin Peaks... altough they all take place in the same universe. There are times when the weirdness gets a bit repetetive and patience-trying, a lot of experimental abstract stuff that up until this point has had no place in television - and the show could have easily been cut in half but like they say, it's the journey not the destination.
This time around it's less soap, more dark. David Lynch had clearly no interest in repeating himself or selling himself out for the fans of the 1990 tv show. Here instead, he confidentally explores new routes as freely as you would expect from a cinema's wild child. ?
"Do you really want to fuck with this?
So I spent the summer watching it on and off - it takes a while to get through 18 × 60 min episodes, especially when they move like a slow freight train and in all directions. A lot of threads left hanging, possibly never intended to be tied. Quite a few missed opportunities too. Some letdowns. I gather it would take another 18 episodes to get around to it all. If anything there's too much content here and literally no detail is left to chance.
This time around MacLachlan plays not only Dale Cooper, who manages to escape the Black Lodge and spends most of his air time walking around in a rainman-like state as "Dougie"... - but gives also a chilling performance as his other-wordly evil doppelganger, who switched places with him 25 years ago and left Dale in limbo in the other realm, now spreading mayham across the US. One of the most chilling performance I've ever seen.
Here also the mythology of Lynch's universe grows as never before, bringing more light and perspective not only to the old show and this one, but his overall body of work. Part of Lynch's ambition here reminds me of Stephen King's creationist renderings of the universe in IT.
The framing of the story is something along these lines: The "great negative force" of Jow day or Judy, who feeds on electricity (being a reoccuring thing in most of Lynch's works) has strategically placed her spawn (among them Bob) in our realm, and for every step the good takes to bring light to the world, Judy has a surprise in store. Even yanking people out of their ill-fated timeline and hiding them in another, cannot necesserily save them from the clutches of "Judy". But as someone pointed out, as long as Dale Cooper is around "the bright side of things" will at least always have a chance to prevail.
Among other memorable performances is Grace Zabriskie reprising her role as Laura's mother; and they almost snuck Tim Roth and Jennifer Jason Leigh by me, I didn't recognize them as the 'hit couple'. But the most interesting casting choice would be Laura Dern as Diane. The Diane.
Too bad Ben Horne's brother didn't get more airtime, he took a turn for left between the old show and this one and never quite made it back lol. David Patrick Kelly always cracks me up.
For a contemprorary tv-show this is incredibly chill, and as someone pointed out, it has more in common with Lost Highway and Mulholland Drive and possibly Eraserhead, than Twin Peaks... altough they all take place in the same universe. There are times when the weirdness gets a bit repetetive and patience-trying, a lot of experimental abstract stuff that up until this point has had no place in television - and the show could have easily been cut in half but like they say, it's the journey not the destination.
This time around it's less soap, more dark. David Lynch had clearly no interest in repeating himself or selling himself out for the fans of the 1990 tv show. Here instead, he confidentally explores new routes as freely as you would expect from a cinema's wild child. ?
"Do you really want to fuck with this?
So I spent the summer watching it on and off - it takes a while to get through 18 × 60 min episodes, especially when they move like a slow freight train and in all directions. A lot of threads left hanging, possibly never intended to be tied. Quite a few missed opportunities too. Some letdowns. I gather it would take another 18 episodes to get around to it all. If anything there's too much content here and literally no detail is left to chance.
This time around MacLachlan plays not only Dale Cooper, who manages to escape the Black Lodge and spends most of his air time walking around in a rainman-like state as "Dougie"... - but gives also a chilling performance as his other-wordly evil doppelganger, who switched places with him 25 years ago and left Dale in limbo in the other realm, now spreading mayham across the US. One of the most chilling performance I've ever seen.
Here also the mythology of Lynch's universe grows as never before, bringing more light and perspective not only to the old show and this one, but his overall body of work. Part of Lynch's ambition here reminds me of Stephen King's creationist renderings of the universe in IT.
The framing of the story is something along these lines: The "great negative force" of Jow day or Judy, who feeds on electricity (being a reoccuring thing in most of Lynch's works) has strategically placed her spawn (among them Bob) in our realm, and for every step the good takes to bring light to the world, Judy has a surprise in store. Even yanking people out of their ill-fated timeline and hiding them in another, cannot necesserily save them from the clutches of "Judy". But as someone pointed out, as long as Dale Cooper is around "the bright side of things" will at least always have a chance to prevail.
Among other memorable performances is Grace Zabriskie reprising her role as Laura's mother; and they almost snuck Tim Roth and Jennifer Jason Leigh by me, I didn't recognize them as the 'hit couple'. But the most interesting casting choice would be Laura Dern as Diane. The Diane.
Too bad Ben Horne's brother didn't get more airtime, he took a turn for left between the old show and this one and never quite made it back lol. David Patrick Kelly always cracks me up.
Hereditary [2018] 👍👍👍👍👍
I don't like this film, that is to say I loved it and I finally get what people mean when they say they didn't like a horror film cuz it scared the crap out of them. "Isn't that what it's suppose to do", says I usually, "so it actually means you liked it!"
Hereditary is pretty much a combination of every supernatural thriller you've seen in the last two decades or so - it uses every cliché in the book, but somehow improves them.
After a few nervewrecking scares, I found myself looking forward to the next one because I knew it would be good. Some images, or most of them, will stick with me for a long time.
To those who say Hereditary doesn't live up to its hype I ask, what hype is that? You went to see a movie you expected to have all the usual clichés. And it managed to turn every single one into something scarier and more genuine than any other shitty horror film you sat through.
There are no cheap jump scares. This one digs its claws into you by fucking with your emotions every way it can.
It's the genuine grief of the unthinkable in combination with supernatural terror that makes the experience hard to shake off. I always thought it to be an almost unbearable combination in horror films, and one experience I'd have a hard time sitting through twice because frankly it's draining. Emotionally and psychologically.
Ok, so I was personally slightly disappointed by the conclusion, that is not to say it was a bad ending at all. Just a matter of preference I guess.
The acting is superb by all involved. There is no negligence, it's flawlessly staged and well thought-through every step of the way. I expected it to lose some credibility at some point, but clocking in at 2 hrs it just never happened.
I don't like this film, that is to say I loved it and I finally get what people mean when they say they didn't like a horror film cuz it scared the crap out of them. "Isn't that what it's suppose to do", says I usually, "so it actually means you liked it!"
Hereditary is pretty much a combination of every supernatural thriller you've seen in the last two decades or so - it uses every cliché in the book, but somehow improves them.
After a few nervewrecking scares, I found myself looking forward to the next one because I knew it would be good. Some images, or most of them, will stick with me for a long time.
To those who say Hereditary doesn't live up to its hype I ask, what hype is that? You went to see a movie you expected to have all the usual clichés. And it managed to turn every single one into something scarier and more genuine than any other shitty horror film you sat through.
There are no cheap jump scares. This one digs its claws into you by fucking with your emotions every way it can.
It's the genuine grief of the unthinkable in combination with supernatural terror that makes the experience hard to shake off. I always thought it to be an almost unbearable combination in horror films, and one experience I'd have a hard time sitting through twice because frankly it's draining. Emotionally and psychologically.
Ok, so I was personally slightly disappointed by the conclusion, that is not to say it was a bad ending at all. Just a matter of preference I guess.
The acting is superb by all involved. There is no negligence, it's flawlessly staged and well thought-through every step of the way. I expected it to lose some credibility at some point, but clocking in at 2 hrs it just never happened.
Yah I really can't grasp how it got released in cinemas. That was a tedious, symbolic mess.
A Quiet Place 👍👍👍
I read somewhere that Paramount executives considered making it a part of the "Cloverfield" franchise. I can definitely see why. Initially I thought it was a movie about ghosts but as it turns out a few minutes in, it's about aliens.. looking like aliens in movies do.
"A Quiet Place" relies on one original idea - the rest follows the standard procedure, echoing "It Comes At Night" among others; one of those minimalist horror indies that mostly focuses on a specific situation, only giving vague hints if any, about the state of things on a bigger scale.
For what it's worth it's not as lazy as it sounds, though some important questions are left unaswered. Like how did the aliens take over the world when they have one huge weakness keeping in tune with the basic premise, and that no military or government could have figured it out berfore our total demise? Other plotholes regard mostly the decisions and actions of the characters (as it is with all horror movies), such as why not barricade yourself in a recording studio, especially when you have a baby on the way?
I read somewhere that Paramount executives considered making it a part of the "Cloverfield" franchise. I can definitely see why. Initially I thought it was a movie about ghosts but as it turns out a few minutes in, it's about aliens.. looking like aliens in movies do.
"A Quiet Place" relies on one original idea - the rest follows the standard procedure, echoing "It Comes At Night" among others; one of those minimalist horror indies that mostly focuses on a specific situation, only giving vague hints if any, about the state of things on a bigger scale.
For what it's worth it's not as lazy as it sounds, though some important questions are left unaswered. Like how did the aliens take over the world when they have one huge weakness keeping in tune with the basic premise, and that no military or government could have figured it out berfore our total demise? Other plotholes regard mostly the decisions and actions of the characters (as it is with all horror movies), such as why not barricade yourself in a recording studio, especially when you have a baby on the way?
Yes, definitely that too.
Signs
It Comes At Night
The Mist
10 Cloverfield Lane
... if I'd have to name a few.
Signs
It Comes At Night
The Mist
10 Cloverfield Lane
... if I'd have to name a few.
Terrifier [2017] 👍👍
Aestethically pleasing, lit like a Paul Delvaux painting, it only offers one or two fresh touches somewhere in the beginning, and gets pretty tedious shortly thereafter. The rest is more gory than edgy or even scary. I'm just going to have to accept I've outgrown these slashers, even if they are 80's throwback. Might just be something @Prince_Pisces would enjoy to kick things off this October.
References throughout: Psycho (main character introduced halfway into the film), Texas Chainsaw Massacre (scream fest), Silence of the Lambs (wearing victim's skin) and Saw, even Irreversible to name a few . . .
Aestethically pleasing, lit like a Paul Delvaux painting, it only offers one or two fresh touches somewhere in the beginning, and gets pretty tedious shortly thereafter. The rest is more gory than edgy or even scary. I'm just going to have to accept I've outgrown these slashers, even if they are 80's throwback. Might just be something @Prince_Pisces would enjoy to kick things off this October.
References throughout: Psycho (main character introduced halfway into the film), Texas Chainsaw Massacre (scream fest), Silence of the Lambs (wearing victim's skin) and Saw, even Irreversible to name a few . . .
Mandy [2018] 👍👍
So this wasn't very good. An excercise in how you can transform the northwest into a fantasy landscape just by the use of a rich color palette and a whole lotta fire. It relies solely on its psychedelic style . It's Mad Max meets The Legend meets Andrei Tarkovsky.. which on paper sounds pretty good.
Mad Nic resides somewhere deep in the woods where he leads a peaceful existence with his wife. After they are visited by a murderous cult and his wife is killed, he manages to get away and embarks on a revenge spree with the use of crossbows, chainsaws and a homemade sword-axe of sorts.
The only convincing thing is Nicolas Cage losing his shit, but then he does that in every movie. There is no chemistry and no convincing history between him and his supposed wife of 50 minutes before she's bumped off that would make me interested in the revenge that follows, and way too late into the film for that matter.
Yet somehow people are eating this up. I'm surprised at all the good reviews, apparently even a standing 5 minute ovation at Cannes!
It's directed by the son of George P. Cosmatos (director of First Blood II and Tombstone) who's clearly doing his own thing and I won't lie, I found myself thinking back on the imagery and the whole feel of it throughout the following day, as it is when you see a movie rich on atmosphere.
I predict a cult following, but aside from being all acid and 0 substance, the very core of whatever was going through Cosmatos mind when he sat down to write it seems greatly unpolished and running on empty. Some have compared it to a "80s heavy metal album cover sprung to life" which is kind of accurate.
I may reevaluate after some time has passed, which in itself say it's left a mark. Where's Exo these days, I need her quiet Scorpio Merc expertise?
So this wasn't very good. An excercise in how you can transform the northwest into a fantasy landscape just by the use of a rich color palette and a whole lotta fire. It relies solely on its psychedelic style . It's Mad Max meets The Legend meets Andrei Tarkovsky.. which on paper sounds pretty good.
Mad Nic resides somewhere deep in the woods where he leads a peaceful existence with his wife. After they are visited by a murderous cult and his wife is killed, he manages to get away and embarks on a revenge spree with the use of crossbows, chainsaws and a homemade sword-axe of sorts.
The only convincing thing is Nicolas Cage losing his shit, but then he does that in every movie. There is no chemistry and no convincing history between him and his supposed wife of 50 minutes before she's bumped off that would make me interested in the revenge that follows, and way too late into the film for that matter.
Yet somehow people are eating this up. I'm surprised at all the good reviews, apparently even a standing 5 minute ovation at Cannes!
It's directed by the son of George P. Cosmatos (director of First Blood II and Tombstone) who's clearly doing his own thing and I won't lie, I found myself thinking back on the imagery and the whole feel of it throughout the following day, as it is when you see a movie rich on atmosphere.
I predict a cult following, but aside from being all acid and 0 substance, the very core of whatever was going through Cosmatos mind when he sat down to write it seems greatly unpolished and running on empty. Some have compared it to a "80s heavy metal album cover sprung to life" which is kind of accurate.
I may reevaluate after some time has passed, which in itself say it's left a mark. Where's Exo these days, I need her quiet Scorpio Merc expertise?
Halloween [2018] 👎
Now this is normally something I wouldn't waste my bandwidth downloading for free, let alone paying to watch in the cinema... which is unfortunately what i did, following the overly positive reviews (for a horror movie) and it being a direct sequal to Carpenters 1978 original, directed by someone who's prior works are mostly in the drama category so I had my hopes up that at least it would be an offbeat sequal in the franchise. Boy was I wrong.
It looks and feels like Rob Zombie's blasphemaous entries in the franchise, it's as if he picked apart and remade H2O because thematically it's the exact same film! Only the latter has more substance, credible characters and as far as style and content, more true to Carpenter's original.
Now I wouldn't usually take the time to
break down the stupidity and cringeworthyness of this one had it not been for all the completely ludicrous reviews and praise which made me question if I actually saw the same film.
The one-dimensional character study of Curtis' Laurie Strode, or rather the traumatic ordeal of having survived a mass murderer 40 years earlier isn't only melodramatic and repetetive - and again, it's already been covered and better in H20 - but it's also hard to take seriously in light of all the mean-spirited violence that follows (and usually befalls women). It's like they're trying to have it's cake and it eat too with their audience.
This time around Laurie Strode is sort of the village idiot living in a wooded area in the outskirts of the town, in a house she modified into a trap in case Michael should escape the looney bin again. She has a daughter and a granddaughter and the film in part is about inherited female trauma, but in the most predictible way imaginable: Crazy mother blamed for awkward childhood" becomes in the end "Mother isn't that crazy after all". It's that level.
Ok so it's a slasher! If at least they had put more thought into how to off their victims... but no, that too is unimaginative and lazy, which ironically somehow makes the whole thing even more mean-spirited; I suppose this rage-ridden generation prefers aggression to subtlety and aesthetics.
Quite a few women get strangled kicking and screaming while being dragged up walls; I remember rolling my eyes at a victim getting CGI-stabbed right through the neck like she was not of flesh and bones but meringue. At that point I lost any hopes of at least enjoying some 1980's tongue-in-cheek violence.
Also, Michael is more Jason than Michael. For nerds only now, but this has been a problem with every sequal in the Halloween franchise, the filmmakers simply have a hard time fleshing out and seperating the two: While Jason's rampage and presence is like a bulldozer, Michael's is more like that of a snake.
Supposedly David Gordon Green & Co. set out to make us forget about all the crappy sequals and instead pick up fresh after the 1978 original, but as someone pointed out - it's pretty much a movie that goes through the same beats as any of the sequals.
My favorite part: the wise-cracking babysat Jibrail Nantambu "cutting his nasty-ass toenails". That and the fact that Michael is played by the same guy who portrayed him in the 1978 movie, both him and Curtis fighting it out all greyhaired and old like grandma and grandpa lol.
Now this is normally something I wouldn't waste my bandwidth downloading for free, let alone paying to watch in the cinema... which is unfortunately what i did, following the overly positive reviews (for a horror movie) and it being a direct sequal to Carpenters 1978 original, directed by someone who's prior works are mostly in the drama category so I had my hopes up that at least it would be an offbeat sequal in the franchise. Boy was I wrong.
It looks and feels like Rob Zombie's blasphemaous entries in the franchise, it's as if he picked apart and remade H2O because thematically it's the exact same film! Only the latter has more substance, credible characters and as far as style and content, more true to Carpenter's original.
Now I wouldn't usually take the time to
break down the stupidity and cringeworthyness of this one had it not been for all the completely ludicrous reviews and praise which made me question if I actually saw the same film.
The one-dimensional character study of Curtis' Laurie Strode, or rather the traumatic ordeal of having survived a mass murderer 40 years earlier isn't only melodramatic and repetetive - and again, it's already been covered and better in H20 - but it's also hard to take seriously in light of all the mean-spirited violence that follows (and usually befalls women). It's like they're trying to have it's cake and it eat too with their audience.
This time around Laurie Strode is sort of the village idiot living in a wooded area in the outskirts of the town, in a house she modified into a trap in case Michael should escape the looney bin again. She has a daughter and a granddaughter and the film in part is about inherited female trauma, but in the most predictible way imaginable: Crazy mother blamed for awkward childhood" becomes in the end "Mother isn't that crazy after all". It's that level.
Ok so it's a slasher! If at least they had put more thought into how to off their victims... but no, that too is unimaginative and lazy, which ironically somehow makes the whole thing even more mean-spirited; I suppose this rage-ridden generation prefers aggression to subtlety and aesthetics.
Quite a few women get strangled kicking and screaming while being dragged up walls; I remember rolling my eyes at a victim getting CGI-stabbed right through the neck like she was not of flesh and bones but meringue. At that point I lost any hopes of at least enjoying some 1980's tongue-in-cheek violence.
Also, Michael is more Jason than Michael. For nerds only now, but this has been a problem with every sequal in the Halloween franchise, the filmmakers simply have a hard time fleshing out and seperating the two: While Jason's rampage and presence is like a bulldozer, Michael's is more like that of a snake.
Supposedly David Gordon Green & Co. set out to make us forget about all the crappy sequals and instead pick up fresh after the 1978 original, but as someone pointed out - it's pretty much a movie that goes through the same beats as any of the sequals.
My favorite part: the wise-cracking babysat Jibrail Nantambu "cutting his nasty-ass toenails". That and the fact that Michael is played by the same guy who portrayed him in the 1978 movie, both him and Curtis fighting it out all greyhaired and old like grandma and grandpa lol.
Posted by ValleysofNeptunePosted by Mr_Pinchy
I fell asleep watching Blade Runner, just like i did with the old one. LMAO
I haven’t seen the new one but I was so underwhelmed by the original...so many people hyped it up and I was big into Philip K Dick at the time and loved the book the movie was based on. Idk, it was alright I guess it just didn’t do much for me. But it was a while back I watched it, maybe I wasn’t in the right mood and should rewatch it or somethingclick to expand
I think it was not that great, but don't forget it was released in 82, at the time there were not that many good sci-fi movies or movies at all.
I remember watching it back then and not liking it, but that's because I was very young and expecting sthg like star wars. If I had been a bit older I would probably have liked it. It probably deserves its cult status, although I'm not enough an amateur of dystopia to enjoy it that much.
Posted by enfant_terrible
Halloween [2018] 👎
Now this is normally something I wouldn't waste my bandwidth downloading for free, let alone paying to watch in the cinema... which is unfortunately what i did, following the overly positive reviews (for a horror movie) and it being a direct sequal to Carpenters 1978 original, directed by someone who's prior works are mostly in the drama category so I had my hopes up that at least it would be an offbeat sequal in the franchise. Boy was I wrong.
It looks and feels like Rob Zombie's blasphemaous entries in the franchise, it's as if he picked apart and remade H2O because thematically it's the exact same film! Only the latter has more substance, credible characters and as far as style and content, more true to Carpenter's original.
Now I wouldn't usually take the time to
break down the stupidity and cringeworthyness of this one had it not been for all the completely ludicrous reviews and praise which made me question if I actually saw the same film.
The one-dimensional character study of Curtis' Laurie Strode, or rather the traumatic ordeal of having survived a mass murderer 40 years earlier isn't only melodramatic and repetetive - and again, it's already been covered and better in H20 - but it's also hard to take seriously in light of all the mean-spirited violence that follows (and usually befalls women). It's like they're trying to have it's cake and it eat too with their audience.
This time around Laurie Strode is sort of the village idiot living in a wooded area in the outskirts of the town, in a house she modified into a trap in case Michael should escape the looney bin again. She has a daughter and a granddaughter and the film in part is about inherited female trauma, but in the most predictible way imaginable: Crazy mother blamed for awkward childhood" becomes in the end "Mother isn't that crazy after all". It's that level.
Ok so it's a slasher! If at least they had put more thought into how to off their victims... but no, that too is unimaginative and lazy, which ironically somehow makes the whole thing even more mean-spirited; I suppose this rage-ridden generation prefers aggression to subtlety and aesthetics.
Quite a few women get strangled kicking and screaming while being dragged up walls; I remember rolling my eyes at a victim getting CGI-stabbed right through the neck like she was not of flesh and bones but meringue. At that point I lost any hopes of at least enjoying some 1980's tongue-in-cheek violence.
Also, Michael is more Jason than Michael. For nerds only now, but this has been a problem with every sequal in the Halloween franchise, the filmmakers simply have a hard time fleshing out and seperating the two: While Jason's rampage and presence is like a bulldozer, Michael's is more like that of a snake.
Supposedly David Gordon Green & Co. set out to make us forget about all the crappy sequals and instead pick up fresh after the 1978 original, but as someone pointed out - it's pretty much a movie that goes through the same beats as any of the sequals.
My favorite part: the wise-cracking babysat Jibrail Nantambu "cutting his nasty-ass toenails". That and the fact that Michael is played by the same guy who portrayed him in the 1978 movie, both him and Curtis fighting it out all greyhaired and old like grandma and grandpa lol.
Well you know, if at least they didn't manage to turn it into a man-hating feminist propaganda piece, if you didn't get molested by SJWing during your viewing, well this is at least a little win against the times.
Posted by ValleysofNeptunePosted by Mr_Pinchy
I fell asleep watching Blade Runner, just like i did with the old one. LMAO
I haven’t seen the new one but I was so underwhelmed by the original...so many people hyped it up and I was big into Philip K Dick at the time and loved the book the movie was based on. Idk, it was alright I guess it just didn’t do much for me. But it was a while back I watched it, maybe I wasn’t in the right mood and should rewatch it or somethingclick to expand
lol at the hype. It's just sheep goaded into liking things because it's "trendy".
BlacKkKlansman [2018] 👍👍
When Spike Lee was approached about the story of a black cop inflitrating the KKK he said he thought at first it was a joke. . . a SNL skit. It could might aswell be. Every frame is set up like a comedy penetrated only occassionally by the seriouseness of the topic. The leading man has absolute zero charisma, he sleepwalks through his part while the movie is carried mostly by Adam Driver. If you think it smells like Mod Squad you wouldn't be way off.
The members of the KKK are portrayed as comical caricatures - and altough IRL many of them probably are, there was an opportunity here to truly explore all these things, gone completely to waste in Lee's hands which is not only a shame but downright irresponsible.
Somehow it won the Grand Prix at Cannes which is absolutely mind-boggling, and now with the "critically acclaimed" Halloween reboot, 2018 is pretty much sealed as the year the bars were exceptionally low.
When Spike Lee was approached about the story of a black cop inflitrating the KKK he said he thought at first it was a joke. . . a SNL skit. It could might aswell be. Every frame is set up like a comedy penetrated only occassionally by the seriouseness of the topic. The leading man has absolute zero charisma, he sleepwalks through his part while the movie is carried mostly by Adam Driver. If you think it smells like Mod Squad you wouldn't be way off.
The members of the KKK are portrayed as comical caricatures - and altough IRL many of them probably are, there was an opportunity here to truly explore all these things, gone completely to waste in Lee's hands which is not only a shame but downright irresponsible.
Somehow it won the Grand Prix at Cannes which is absolutely mind-boggling, and now with the "critically acclaimed" Halloween reboot, 2018 is pretty much sealed as the year the bars were exceptionally low.
Posted by tiziani
best of 2018 for me is Sicario 2.
It was ok, shameless how they left the door open for a 3rd. I was like, 'I paid to see an ending!' First one had more plot and edge imo
I'm going with Hereditary myself.
Creep [2014] 👍👍👍
Loooool ! Ok I'm glad I didn't turn this off halfway through, though more work could have been put into the first half.
But this a real oddball found-footage thriller/comedy that had me in stiches during 2nd half. And then it made me choke on it. I may just have to check out the sequal. No really, this is like Napoleon Dynamite with a psycho. I'd like to interpret it as some sort of commentary on male bonding and lonliness lol.
Loooool ! Ok I'm glad I didn't turn this off halfway through, though more work could have been put into the first half.
But this a real oddball found-footage thriller/comedy that had me in stiches during 2nd half. And then it made me choke on it. I may just have to check out the sequal. No really, this is like Napoleon Dynamite with a psycho. I'd like to interpret it as some sort of commentary on male bonding and lonliness lol.
The Vvitch [2015] 👍👍👍👍👍
I was totally mesmerized by the light and darkness, by the dirt and the huts, exteriors and interiors. It's amazing how a low-budget indie effortlessly pulls off something big bucks have failed with time and time again - a historical piece that isn't generic looking. From building the family farm(house) from scratch to the candle-lit interiors - no hold were barred as far as authencity, attention to detail and historical accuracy goes.
The dialogue too comes apperantly from sources of the period. It's best described as a cinematic documentary.
Breakup of the family unit, circa 1630's.
It is uncertain within which realm the film exists, that of science or fantasy. One may at first view it as depiction of superstition and mass-hysteria of the times; one may at second glance see it as literal interpretation of the witches myth set in reality; one may finally come to see it as a portrayal of female empowerement and being a teenage girl during Puritan times.
Is it about people or witches? About the human mind or supernatural elements outside of us? The director leaves it all open to interpretation: there's a key sequence - just a short glimpse of corn rotting, providing a natural basis for the events to satisfy the logicians out there (if that's your preferred take on it) - the rot of the corn being ergot, hallucinogenic fungus found on rye, also said to have sparked the Salem witch trials. The area had supposedly suffered a stormy summer that year, providing ideal conditions for the fungus to flourish on their rye supplies.
Some will call it a slow burn, I'd have to disagree. It was intense from start to finish. Others say it's overhyped. I disagree. There is absolutely no way this movie could have been any better.
I was totally mesmerized by the light and darkness, by the dirt and the huts, exteriors and interiors. It's amazing how a low-budget indie effortlessly pulls off something big bucks have failed with time and time again - a historical piece that isn't generic looking. From building the family farm(house) from scratch to the candle-lit interiors - no hold were barred as far as authencity, attention to detail and historical accuracy goes.
The dialogue too comes apperantly from sources of the period. It's best described as a cinematic documentary.
Breakup of the family unit, circa 1630's.
It is uncertain within which realm the film exists, that of science or fantasy. One may at first view it as depiction of superstition and mass-hysteria of the times; one may at second glance see it as literal interpretation of the witches myth set in reality; one may finally come to see it as a portrayal of female empowerement and being a teenage girl during Puritan times.
Is it about people or witches? About the human mind or supernatural elements outside of us? The director leaves it all open to interpretation: there's a key sequence - just a short glimpse of corn rotting, providing a natural basis for the events to satisfy the logicians out there (if that's your preferred take on it) - the rot of the corn being ergot, hallucinogenic fungus found on rye, also said to have sparked the Salem witch trials. The area had supposedly suffered a stormy summer that year, providing ideal conditions for the fungus to flourish on their rye supplies.
Some will call it a slow burn, I'd have to disagree. It was intense from start to finish. Others say it's overhyped. I disagree. There is absolutely no way this movie could have been any better.
Suspiria [2018] 👍👍👍
"They'll hollow me out and eat my c unt on a plate."
After having seen Call Me By Your Name Luca Guadagnino is becoming one of my new favorite directors, and Suspiria doesn't disappoint. It's a grey film with beautiful lighting, old buildings and a lot of rain.
Setting it in the German Autumn of 1977 perfectly serves as political backdrop to the story of opression and power-struggle among witches at the prestigious Tanz ballet-acadamy in Berlin. Enter Susie Bannion, an ex-Mennonite who's 'disowned' her religious upbringing and her mother for pursuing her passion of dancing. Needless to say there's plenty of subtext going on here...
The remake doesn't bear much resemblence to Argento's B-classic, instead it looks like A-material up until the final act... which kind of falls short of satisfactory in terms of what was built up until that point.
In Luca's previous film it was Sufjan Stevens; this time Thom Yorke has lent his musical services, and as far as the horror factor goes, there's enough of eerie atmosphere and at least one truly disturbing death scene. Though expect more arthouse sensibilities than traditional jumpscares.
It will require at least another viewing from me to truly digest all the subtext, I think I was probably too busy daydreaming of eating Dakota Johnson out to register it all.
"They'll hollow me out and eat my c unt on a plate."
After having seen Call Me By Your Name Luca Guadagnino is becoming one of my new favorite directors, and Suspiria doesn't disappoint. It's a grey film with beautiful lighting, old buildings and a lot of rain.
Setting it in the German Autumn of 1977 perfectly serves as political backdrop to the story of opression and power-struggle among witches at the prestigious Tanz ballet-acadamy in Berlin. Enter Susie Bannion, an ex-Mennonite who's 'disowned' her religious upbringing and her mother for pursuing her passion of dancing. Needless to say there's plenty of subtext going on here...
The remake doesn't bear much resemblence to Argento's B-classic, instead it looks like A-material up until the final act... which kind of falls short of satisfactory in terms of what was built up until that point.
In Luca's previous film it was Sufjan Stevens; this time Thom Yorke has lent his musical services, and as far as the horror factor goes, there's enough of eerie atmosphere and at least one truly disturbing death scene. Though expect more arthouse sensibilities than traditional jumpscares.
It will require at least another viewing from me to truly digest all the subtext, I think I was probably too busy daydreaming of eating Dakota Johnson out to register it all.
Posted by -Romz-
I’m interested in the scenographic aspects of this film and how they bring out the fondue set’esque of Europe in the 70s....moreso than Dakota Johnson’s labia majora-minora.
I happened to have fondue just before the screening lulz.
Lemme know your verdict on either count 😉
And I could never get into 'Delicatessen'. I think I saw like 15 minutes. Too whimsically French
I've never been a fan of jeunet's european-comic style .
It's drab and childish.
It's drab and childish.
Phantom Thread [2017] 👍👍👍👍
I loved this film but know that it relies almost entirely on the performance of the leads and also the fact that it is not about what you think it's about. I'm sure my gfs would probably say I have one or two character traits in common with the lead lol. Fifty Shades of Day-Lewis.
Got pissed off reading a few (feminist?) reviews claiming it's about 'toxic masculinity'. Since when is wanting to be left alone toxic masculinity? Or being passionate about something other than pussy. Now let's talk about toxic women instead who want to take that away from a man and make everything about them. Say what do you call it when a man does that to a woman?
Anywho, truly original slow brew and one of P.T. Anderson's very finest.. and most unusual too if I may say so.
I loved this film but know that it relies almost entirely on the performance of the leads and also the fact that it is not about what you think it's about. I'm sure my gfs would probably say I have one or two character traits in common with the lead lol. Fifty Shades of Day-Lewis.
Got pissed off reading a few (feminist?) reviews claiming it's about 'toxic masculinity'. Since when is wanting to be left alone toxic masculinity? Or being passionate about something other than pussy. Now let's talk about toxic women instead who want to take that away from a man and make everything about them. Say what do you call it when a man does that to a woman?
Anywho, truly original slow brew and one of P.T. Anderson's very finest.. and most unusual too if I may say so.
Gräns / Border [2018] 👍👍👍
A sort of realistic, totally unpredictible modern take on the Nordic troll mythology(-ies) , that's all I can say without spoiling any fascinating and grotesque going-ons. And there are plenty. Based on a novella by John Ajvide Lindqvist who also penned "Let the Right One In". Winner of last years 'Un certain regard' at Cannes; probably showing in an art-house theatre near you.
A sort of realistic, totally unpredictible modern take on the Nordic troll mythology(-ies) , that's all I can say without spoiling any fascinating and grotesque going-ons. And there are plenty. Based on a novella by John Ajvide Lindqvist who also penned "Let the Right One In". Winner of last years 'Un certain regard' at Cannes; probably showing in an art-house theatre near you.
Join the Conversation. Explore Yourself. Connect with Others.
Discover insights, swap stories, and find people. dxpnet is where experiences turn into understanding.
Create Your Free Account →Related Topics
The Sacred Twenty-Eight were, according to the author of the Pure-Blood Directory (widely believed to have been Cantankerus Nott), the twenty-eight British families that were still "truly pure-blood" by the 1930s.
I think they will not be but would the
I finally watched the first one. I was kind of disappointed. But the idea of it still intrigues me.
If you could do that and get away with it with no repercussions, would you? Would you murder someone you have disdain for just because it’s allowed?
Share your personal favorites
Go.
i didn't mean that it has to be a movie with magic just a movie that you will get addicted and love just like harry potter movies
https://i1.wp.com/hypebeast.com/image/2017/05/it-official-trailer-2-a.gif?resize=315,210
Many people among myself were nostalgia-tripping this evening as IT hit the theaters in Sweden. The 1990 mini-series was probably the first horror movie I rememb
Let's critic movies together ?
First I'd like to start with:
Worst 'Book turned to a movie'
The award goes to----> James Pattersons Maximum Ride directed by Jay Martin
Second I'd like to discuss best original and remade film:
The award goes to------>
What films have disturbed you or inspired you recently..perhaps the two are one and the same for some..?
For me..only God forgives was utterly gruesome..?? Think I only watched 15 minutes of it in total..
On the flipside..citizenfour a documentary
After viewing last epic zode of Daily (weekly I would say) facts (haha! Ha!) with star(T now)wars it came to MY mind (avoiding plagiarism) that @Secret and @starT(now)wars are hiding behind DXP innocence and purity to hide their affair as having an affair
this is actually a very popular movie that it made into Netflix series.
i didnt realize how popular. lol
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mvOO2jB206A
i haven't seen the netflix series, but alot of people were turned off by the main character be
wow this is sooooo good.
great for those who are religious too,
and about a selfish egotistical husband who won't even give some extra money to his wife's sister who has a husband who doesn't work and they are struggling, while he makes ALOT of mone
[img]http://i.imgur.com/lxx8LXV.jpg[/img]
https://youtu.be/dxWvtMOGAhw
Tonight is opening night... should I go see it? I dont read comics and I'm not caught up on all the comic movies
What's your favorite scene? Maybe one that particularly impacted you, or that you just thought was very well-composed or especially creative?
Clearly, in making this post I had something in mind.
Whenever I watch this scene from Buffalo 66 I get the
Just seen this and thought it was funny so thought I would share.
https://youtu.be/VYCLctjftgA
And which ones would you recommend?
I really enjoyed a few, Insidiouses, Conjurings(several installments), Prometheus, Predators(actual title), Faults, Edge of Tomorrow...l homestly can't think of others...so if you have any titles l should watch, please
this is a TV series,
based on a book by a Capricorn woman with Cancer moon, Libra Mars, Sagittarius Venus,
http://astro-charts.com/persons/chart/diana-gabaldon/
http://www.dianagabaldon.com/books/outlander-series/
https://www.youtube.com/w
Appreciation thread. I know I'll be alone in this but...
I've been on a superhero binge lately, and the movie industry has turned this category into a cash cow so we are looking at many years of development.
All time favorite to this date is definitely Civil War. Iconic and Disney has done a wonderful job w
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=H0VW6sg50Pk
What do you think?