Discuss and Rate the Last Film You Watched

Is this the first poll?


  • Total voters
    45

Thaluikhain

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 16, 2010
19,242
3,961
118
Tolkien said he based the dwarves, in part, on Jewish people, particularly their language but also the bit about being driven out of their ancestral homeland and wandering other people's lands.

And there's some not great Jewish stereotypes in play as well, so making them Scottish instead isn't necessarily a bad idea.

Not as much, but still a lot, giving the nature of the setting. If you have a Haradrim in Numenor, or a Rohirrim in Khand, for instance, there should really be a good explanation behind it.

Also, saying "this is how it was in the real world" is a non-sequitur, since high fantasy settings generally AREN'T the real world. Yes, you can pull a "technically" with Middle-earth, the conceit that it's our world in the distant past, but it's a past so far removed from real-world history that it's barely worth mentioning.
True, though, though I think Tolkien mentions contact between the different areas. Not sure on the detail though..
 

Hawki

Elite Member
Legacy
Mar 4, 2014
9,651
2,176
118
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Tolkien said he based the dwarves, in part, on Jewish people, particularly their language but also the bit about being driven out of their ancestral homeland and wandering other people's lands.

And there's some not great Jewish stereotypes in play as well, so making them Scottish instead isn't necessarily a bad idea.
Yes, I know, but "in part" is the key word. If one read any Middle-earth work and didn't know of the inspiration beforehand, I'd be astounded (and, frankly, a little weirded out) that they'd find themselves reminded of Jews when they came across dwarves.

True, though, though I think Tolkien mentions contact between the different areas. Not sure on the detail though..
Well, yes, the Men of the West and East have had contact with each other since the Awakening of Men. And practically all of it is negative.

I'm not saying that you can't have a story that involves friendly contact, but if you want to do that, or have humans of Group X in the lands of Group Y, then you need a good justification for it. This isn't even a question of 'side' - you wouldn't get many Rohirrim in Gondor, or many Haradrim in Rhun, for instance. It's easy enough to justify individual characters, but a mix and mash approach? Eh...
 

Thaluikhain

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 16, 2010
19,242
3,961
118
Superman Returns did well by keeping the original music for the beginning and end, cause the several hours in between that was really boring.

Also, Bryan Singer, notorious sex offender directed, and Kevin Spacey, notorious sex offender plays Lex Luther.
 

BrawlMan

Lover of beat'em ups.
Legacy
Mar 10, 2016
30,098
12,505
118
Detroit, Michigan
Country
United States of America
Gender
Male
Um, Hugo? Silent? Wolf of Wall Street? All of those range from good to great, and none of them are gangster films (in the traditional sense for Wolf, at least).
Like I told Ezekiel, that was mainly hyperbole.

Superman Returns did well by keeping the original music for the beginning and end, cause the several hours in between that was really boring.

Also, Bryan Singer, notorious sex offender directed, and Kevin Spacey, notorious sex offender plays Lex Luther.
Superman Returns: The most boring superhero movie ever made. Created by a guy that hates superhero comic books, and looks down upon people that enjoy them. Singer can get kicked in the dick a billion times with a spiked boot.
 

Thaluikhain

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 16, 2010
19,242
3,961
118
Man of Steel

Unlike the previous Superman films, in this movie, stuff happens. It's just stupid and annoying stuff, which is not an improvement. Instead of Superman going on about all the peoples of the Earth, this is chestbeating America stuff, only it depicts America as being populated by people, who in the words of Kryten from Red Dwarf, you wouldn't trust to open a can of beans that was already open.

Yeah, you've got CGI. So does every big movie nowdays, it doesn't replace everything else. Boo! BOOOOO!

At least the Christopher Reeves films were aware that the concept is inherently silly, though they didn't use that information well.
 

BrawlMan

Lover of beat'em ups.
Legacy
Mar 10, 2016
30,098
12,505
118
Detroit, Michigan
Country
United States of America
Gender
Male
Man of Steel

Unlike the previous Superman films, in this movie, stuff happens. It's just stupid and annoying stuff, which is not an improvement. Instead of Superman going on about all the peoples of the Earth, this is chestbeating America stuff, only it depicts America as being populated by people, who in the words of Kryten from Red Dwarf, you wouldn't trust to open a can of beans that was already open.

Yeah, you've got CGI. So does every big movie nowdays, it doesn't replace everything else. Boo! BOOOOO!

At least the Christopher Reeves films were aware that the concept is inherently silly, though they didn't use that information well.
I actually love MoS, and consider it the best live-action Superman movie ever made. The film has its flaws, but either does not bother me, or I find too many people exaggerating and hating for petty reasons. Mainly online. This means you Cinema Sins, Nostalgia Critic/Channel Awesome, and Honest Trailer. Y'all can screw off; especially you NC.
 

Agema

Do everything and feel nothing
Legacy
Mar 3, 2009
9,329
6,604
118
Superman Returns did well by keeping the original music for the beginning and end, cause the several hours in between that was really boring.
All Superman films are second rate because Superman is a supremely boring superhero.
 

Dwarvenhobble

Is on the Gin
May 26, 2020
6,016
665
118
Aiming to be GoT in terms of "the next big thing" or GoT in terms of tone/setting/story? Because those are different things.

Having watched season 1 of WoT and the first two seasons of The Expanse, they really aren't GoT-like. WoT, like the books it's based on, is closer to Lord of the Rings. As for the Expanse...sure, you can point to some generic similarities (there's no good guys, life's terrible for everyone, etc.), but "generic" is the key word there.
Tone and story seemingly considering the way they took it to try and amp up the dark gritty stuff and blood and gore seemingly.
 

Dwarvenhobble

Is on the Gin
May 26, 2020
6,016
665
118
Justice League Dark Apokolips War (Again)
(Own Copy)

Rating: A damn fine send off to the DCAU phase whatever the hell it was.

Thoughts:

Watching the film again I dunno I got a better appreciation for it as a big coming together film and while it doesn't fit that well into the DCEU because it follows DCAU cannon but honestly if people want to see where the Snyderverse could end up going this is the film but man you really have to have watched other stuff to get it. Basically as a pre-requisite is Flashpoint + Justice League Dark to introduce characters and concepts and that's along with the DCEU up to this point such as Aquaman, Shazam, Batman vs Superman (Extended edition) and The Snyder Cut and Both Suicide Squad films.

It really does show the darker side and tone DC is or was leaning into because this is a film that opens with Superman and the Justice League taking on Darkseid and losing badly. So badly Earth is a dystopian wasteland 2 years later which is where the film really starts.

It really is an animated film about the horrors of war pretty much and the damages it can do and changes it can cause in even the strongest of people. It really is a coming together of so many other groups. The Entire Batman Family shows up even if one of them only for a brief scene I think. Shazam shows up, The Teen titans, The Justice League, The Green Lantern Corps, The Justice League Dark.
 

Thaluikhain

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 16, 2010
19,242
3,961
118
All Superman films are second rate because Superman is a supremely boring superhero.
There's truth in that, but they could try. More crime fighting and less waffle and padding.

Also, they could have the extended Super-family as an ensemble, cause like the Bat-Family, they are more interesting than the guy they are a family of.
 

SilentPony

Previously known as an alleged "Feather-Rustler"
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
12,059
2,472
118
Corner of No and Where
All Superman films are second rate because Superman is a supremely boring superhero.
Part of that is movie writers, being interested in a cinematic angle, fundamentally misunderstand the Superman character. Superman is stronger than God. Literally. He beat up God. He's carried the entire universe on his back. Again literally. He can travel back in time. He can move faster than light. He can hear every heartbeat of every living creature in the entire universe and pick out his friends. He is always, ALWAYS, fighting with a hand behind his back because he fears the corruption of power if he gives into his ability to police the entire universe, and his knowledge he will outlive so many people. His struggle is not "Oh can Superman out-punch this robot monster man?!" its "will Superman's morality hold so he doesn't just punch-out the robot monster man, but in an instant punch-out every robot monster man in existence and declare himself God."
That's why Lois Lane is so important to him. Its not just about getting some reporter tail, its about a human connection to the here and now to come home to. That's why he works well with Batman, because he respect's Bruce determination to keep Gotham safe on his own as a mere human.
Its not about saving planes, its about justifying to himself not saving every plane on every world. Its about doing enough to help, and not just doing everything himself and controlling everything.
And that's not something that makes for a good movie. Watching Superman internally struggle with the concept of not fixing it all doesn't make for a good trailer.
 

Bartholen

At age 6 I was born without a face
Legacy
Jul 1, 2020
790
871
98
Country
Finland
The Batman, 8/10

A pleasant surprise and another example of trailers making something seem worse than it is alongside Arcane, I really enjoyed this. There's lots of things to appreciate about it and how it goes against the grain of current superhero trends, but perhaps most of all is the fact that this doesn't feel like a movie that was made because there needed to be another Batman movie to balance the books. There's actual thought and purpose, and even passion behind it. This would fit snugly into the Nolan Batman continuum, except it's even darker and more than deserves its R rati... wait what??? This is rated PG-13??? Holy smokes! Yet its darkness feels purposeful and like a stylistic choice instead of the Zack Snyder style of just throwing shock value at the screen. It's very grounded and human in how it depicts broken systems and broken people, and it never really becomes overbearing. But holy moley is it not afraid to get dark. This makes Dark Knight look (ironically enough) light and breezy in comparison.

When I say this goes against the grain of current superhero trends I mean it. It's small scale, tightly focused, almost 3 hours long yet it never drags except maybe right at the very end, it just assumes we already know what the characters are about and is more about the investigative element and worldbuilding than big setpiece blowouts. When talking about Far from Home I mentioned a specific scene where I'd have appreciated them using less special effects for a fight scene enormously. Well come to find out this movie does almost exactly what I wished for, and it's so refreshing! Visually it looks great, but what's even better is that there's actually thought and style put into the visuals. There's lots of interesting POV shots and playing with focus and lighting in a way that makes it look more like Se7en than any superhero movie. Oh, and by the way, this movie rips off (or homages) Se7en so much that if you've seen that movie even once it at times treads on eye-roll territory in how blatant it is with its inspiration.

Pattinson makes a great choice for this style of Batman. His performance is rather muted in comparison to his predecessors, which helps distinguish him from them. This version of Batman is less of a growling demonic brute and more creepy and unsettling. It also helps that for the first time this millennium a live-action Batman actually speaks in a normal voice and not like a throat cancer patient. Hooray! We've come all the way from square one to square one. I've seen some criticisms of this movie not distinguishin between Batman and Bruce Wayne enough, but to me it was pretty clear that this version of Bruce Wayne is less of a tabloid-hogging playboy and more of an isolationist weirdo billionaire. And since the movie focuses like 90% on Batman and not on Bruce Wayne that's a tiny complaint anyway.

I feel the Riddler is where this movie is going to divide people the most. I'm sure if you start thinking about the movie you can make a joke like "He's called the Riddler because he riddles the plot with holes", but for me it was gripping all the way through. The gimp mask is where the movie goes maybe a bit overboard with the darkness, but he's shown sparingly enough that he just avoids becoming completely ridiculous. Towards the end his acting starts to go a bit too much into over the top camp, and that's where the movie faltered the most for me. I don't blame Dano for this, he does a great job with what he's given. And it's very refreshing to see a villain in a Batman movie for once that's not either the Joker or a punching bag. Another thing I really appreciated is how the movie actually manages to bring in the old theme of Batman creating his villains as much as he fights them in a surprising and genuinely effective way. The rest of the supporting cast are all superb. John Turturro is great as a sleazy slimebag, Colin Farrell is literally unrecognizable as Penguin, Zoë Kravitz is just AWOOOOGA hot, and Jeffrey Wright makes for an excellent Gordon.

I absolutely loved the score. Yet another way how this movie goes against the grain is its very subdued and minimalist music that at the same time doesn't draw attention to itself yet you can't not pay attention to it. It goes for a more ominous ambient feel than trying to create the next classic film score, and it reminded me of Demon's Souls of all things with its solemn percussion and strings. I can't think of a more fitting score for this film. Hats off to Michael Giacchino!

So yeah, one of the most interesting mainstream superhero movies to come out in years. Highly recommended.
 

BrawlMan

Lover of beat'em ups.
Legacy
Mar 10, 2016
30,098
12,505
118
Detroit, Michigan
Country
United States of America
Gender
Male
All Superman films are second rate because Superman is a supremely boring superhero.
There's truth in that, but they could try. More crime fighting and less waffle and padding.

Also, they could have the extended Super-family as an ensemble, cause like the Bat-Family, they are more interesting than the guy they are a family of.
Batman is only boring in the hands of bad writers. The X-Men are only boring in the hands of bad writers. Superman is only boring in the hands of bad writers. Superman is not some exception. Superman is interesting. He's just, and has, to be put in the hands of people that actually care.


 
  • Like
Reactions: gorfias

Bartholen

At age 6 I was born without a face
Legacy
Jul 1, 2020
790
871
98
Country
Finland
Part of that is movie writers, being interested in a cinematic angle, fundamentally misunderstand the Superman character. Superman is stronger than God. Literally. He beat up God. He's carried the entire universe on his back. Again literally. He can travel back in time. He can move faster than light. He can hear every heartbeat of every living creature in the entire universe and pick out his friends. He is always, ALWAYS, fighting with a hand behind his back because he fears the corruption of power if he gives into his ability to police the entire universe, and his knowledge he will outlive so many people. His struggle is not "Oh can Superman out-punch this robot monster man?!" its "will Superman's morality hold so he doesn't just punch-out the robot monster man, but in an instant punch-out every robot monster man in existence and declare himself God."
That's why Lois Lane is so important to him. Its not just about getting some reporter tail, its about a human connection to the here and now to come home to. That's why he works well with Batman, because he respect's Bruce determination to keep Gotham safe on his own as a mere human.
Its not about saving planes, its about justifying to himself not saving every plane on every world. Its about doing enough to help, and not just doing everything himself and controlling everything.
And that's not something that makes for a good movie. Watching Superman internally struggle with the concept of not fixing it all doesn't make for a good trailer.
Chiming in on this a bit, I think the problem with making a movie about Superman is that despite being THE superhero, he is so astronomically higher in power level than just about everyone else in any property that in order to make a movie that actually makes something of his characteristics it would need to be entirely different from everything else. To truly make a film that actually goes introspective on Superman it would need to be a contemplative, philosophical art film that delves into the nature of such absolute power and the way it affects everyone involved. Defaulting to Superman just punching alien invaders is incredibly boring, because we already know there's no threat. The only thing you can do is just add things that need even more punching. Snyder paid the concept of what such a figure would actually be like in our world the faintest, shallowest lip service but that's all he can do because he's Zack Snyder. Making a working version of evil Superman can be done as evidenced by Invincible and The Boys. Now why have we yet to see a working version of good Superman?
 
  • Like
Reactions: SilentPony

BrawlMan

Lover of beat'em ups.
Legacy
Mar 10, 2016
30,098
12,505
118
Detroit, Michigan
Country
United States of America
Gender
Male
Saw The Batman again earlier this morning. I've decided that this movie is in my top 5 favorite Batman movies now.
 

Phoenixmgs

The Muse of Fate
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
9,884
836
118
w/ M'Kraan Crystal
Gender
Male
I saw The Batman yesterday basically as blind as you can get, I watched the trailer but that was it (I knew it was getting good reviews and one reviewer on Youtube I watch I knew liked it just based on the thumbnail but that's it). And this is a bad Batman movie. The 2 movies I think are most comparable are actually Logan and Joker. Logan in the sense that this movie gets off at disappointing you at just about every chance it gets, but Logan executed it amazingly well and The Batman did not at all. And Joker in the sense that it pulls a lot of aspects from other movies (like Seven, neo noir detective movies, seeding underground mob movies) and executes them all well individually but the same problem as Joker is that these elements don't actually work together in the movie itself to make a coherent thematic through-line. The movie actively hates Batman for most of the movie, which isn't something you can't do, but the movie is always trying to have its cake and eat it too as it has standard Batman scenes like the opening and the car chase but then shows Batman being basically the opposite for most of the movie (or at least most of the major pivotal scenes).

The inconsistency of everything is standard throughout the movie. The movie sets up that Batman is an established crime fighting vigilante and everyone is afraid of him and does this extremely well but then a couple bouncers don't give a shit that he's Batman. At times Batman comes off as a very experienced Batman and then at times, he's like Batman from Year One. One really weird thing about the movie is that I don't know if he's actually ever called Batman yet the main villain sends Batman letters saying it's for the Batman.

The movie is weird because all the pieces individually are good and very well executed. It's just like the writers/director were like we want to do all these cool things with Batman and never asked themselves if any of this works together. The ending is basically like "wouldn't it be awesome to have an ending to a Batman movie that's a kickass Tool song?" without actually setting that up throughout movie.
 
Last edited:

Thaluikhain

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 16, 2010
19,242
3,961
118
Zeppelin (1971)

Set in WW1, a British officer pretends to defect to Germany to learn about their Zeppelins, but ends up part of a German plan to use a zeppelin to make a commando raid to stuff important British documents from Scotland.

Ok, they should have guessed he was working for the British, but it's got zeppelin action, and commando stuff, so there's that. Pay this one.

(Though, they seemed to have mixed up mustard gas and chlorine gas)
 

SilentPony

Previously known as an alleged "Feather-Rustler"
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
12,059
2,472
118
Corner of No and Where
The Batman. Its...okay. Hell, I may even go so far as to say certain parts of it are great, maybe even fantastic. But there is one critical, overwhelming, almost unforgivable flaw in the movie.

Its not the Riddler. They pulled a Iron Man 3 on us with a fake-out villain. He's not the Riddler, he's Hush. Or at least a more modern version of him. Which makes sense, the costume and serial killer vibe the trailers gave him didn't feel at all like a cowardly insecure man who just wants to prove he's smarter than Batman and functionally nothing else. They even show is in bright red letters in a duel picture between Thomas Wayne and Edward Elliot, the reporter who was killed, crossing out half of each name with the big word. HUSH. And what's Hush's real name? Thomas Elliot. And Hush is a master of disguise, in the comics through cosmetic surgery, in this one just through the mask and there being a cult of him. And in this one he has some sorta love thing going on with Batman where he's been waiting for him for years, despite this being only year 2 of Batman.
But the Riddler? Edward Nigma who just wants to prove he's smarter than the world's greatest detective? Nah, fake out villain. I noticed too in all the scenes they called him "Riddler" its either an isolated shot of a single character, or Batman has his back to camera and you can't see his mouth. I can totally see some Suit watching the dailies and going:
"Who the fuck is Hush? Sounds like what you tell a baby to go to sleep! We're not putting babies to sleep! We need action and excitement, like Jim Carrey. What was that character's name again?"
"The Riddler sir."
"Right, make this guy the Riddler."
"But sir that doesn't really go with the costume we made or the casting or the tone of the movie and we're not very good at writing riddles, so..."
"Oh, Im sorry, are you signing the checks?"
"No sir."
"Then make him the Riddler."
"Yes sir."

And they just did some post production reshoots and voice overs and boom, Hush is now the Riddler.

Robert Pattinson as Batman was good. Tolerable. Relied a little too much on walking slowly, and is somehow bullet proof. Best line of the movie was right at the beginning when talking about criminals being afraid of him lurking in the shadows, and he says he IS the shadows. Good line, good use of fear as a weapon. And fuck me running Batman is finally a detective!

Although I think DC has really shot themselves in the foot with this one. This is a solid Batman movie, and you're going to get your DCEU stink all over it? And worse, you're bringing in Keaton's Batman?! Has anyone watched that Batman in 30 years? Maybe compared to Adam West he was a good Batman, but holy fuck the '89 Batman is bad. He solves no crimes, stops no crimes, runs away in two of the three action scenes and throws I think like a dozen punches total. You're going to do Flashpoint with THAT Batman, and then reset the DCEU to include this new Batman. You don't think Aquaman and the Flash are going to look horrifically goofy compared to this? This is the problem with not really having a direction with your extended universe and making a handful of good movies.

Now another thing I've seen in reviews is this is a new Batman, you've never seen Batman like this before. Bullshit. This is Batman classic. Caped crusader out for vengeance solving crimes. This is a very safe and marketable Batman. It pushes no envelopes, takes no chances, but also offends nothing. Its a B+. Its solid. Didn't shoot for the A, but also worked hard enough it new it not only passed, its better than average. Its, and I say this as someone whose seen all the Batman movies, all the Batman cartoon shows, all the animated Batman movies and played all the Batman games including the SNES ones, a top-tier episode of Batman the Animated Series. Its hitting the same high-mark Batman did 30 years ago with the Animated Series. A good mark, don't get me wrong, and well above what DC has been doing of late, but this is more of a return to form Batman than a brave and bold new Batman.

Music was great though.

iTunes purchase of the soundtrack and add it to my running playlist/10

On thing I will give Robert Pattinson that he brought to the character that I don't think any other live action Batman has brought was the overwhelming feeling of yeah, this is a dude who would dress up like a bat. Like there is always this concept of is it better to be Batman the crime fighter, or Bruce Wayne the philanthropist with a billion dollars. Like even in the movie a mayoral candidate calls him out saying he's not spending any money to help the city. In one scene he's dressed at Bruce Wayne at a church, and with his head hung low and slumped shoulders, unkempt hair and dark eyes he just has this pouty faced boy look of "I need to dress like a bat and punch someone". Its great. He really does come off as a billionaire with parent issues who bought a bat costume and decided he could do a better job than trained detectives. and don't get me wrong, he actually does, but its very clear he has the mental capacity and psychological damage that would drive someone to dress up like a bat and fight mobsters rather than see a therapist and open some halfway homes and get a works project going to help at-risk children.
 

Hawki

Elite Member
Legacy
Mar 4, 2014
9,651
2,176
118
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Tone and story seemingly considering the way they took it to try and amp up the dark gritty stuff and blood and gore seemingly.
Where, though? Nothing I've seen in The Expanse is particuarly gory.

If we're talking about Wheel of Time...sure, when the trollocs attack the Two Rivers, for instance. There's plenty of blood and gore there. However, I don't think that's really a GoT-esque inspiration. Most of the gore in GoT came from human violence, the trollocs are monstrous creatures that do monstrous things, made possible by their monstrous size and strength. In that context, gore makes sense.

I could maybe understand a complaint about the trollocs being beefed up. I don't recall them being that 'uber' in the books. Still, "gore=GoT?" Not reall

I've decided that this movie is in my top 5 favorite Batman movies now.
Which are...?