And then later tells the woman that he let him go.
Also: "Please don't wake my friend. He's dead tired."
Discuss and Rate the Last Film You Watched
- Thread starter Th3Ch33s3Cak3
- Start date
Also: "Please don't wake my friend. He's dead tired."
Bridge of Spies: Incredible / Great
Based on true events, Tom Hanks portrays James Donovan, an attorney tasked with defending a Russian spy during the Cold War, then facilitating, in person, the spy's exchange for an American pilot captured by the soviets... in East Germany... almost immediately after the assemblage of the infamous Berlin Wall.
I had no idea this movie existed. Never heard of it, never heard anyone talk about it, etc. Fucking great movie. And when the curtains fell, and we saw "directed by Steven Spielberg" both my girlfriend and I threw our hands up in an "of course!" manner. Abso-fucking-lutely fantastic. Even more incredible is that it actually happened. Donovan was a real man, and the things Hanks portrayed are mostly true. Then, Wikipedia research showed that he was also integral in the release of THOUSANDS of prisoners from Cube under Castro's regime (which I think merits another movie, personally.)
Must see.
Based on true events, Tom Hanks portrays James Donovan, an attorney tasked with defending a Russian spy during the Cold War, then facilitating, in person, the spy's exchange for an American pilot captured by the soviets... in East Germany... almost immediately after the assemblage of the infamous Berlin Wall.
I had no idea this movie existed. Never heard of it, never heard anyone talk about it, etc. Fucking great movie. And when the curtains fell, and we saw "directed by Steven Spielberg" both my girlfriend and I threw our hands up in an "of course!" manner. Abso-fucking-lutely fantastic. Even more incredible is that it actually happened. Donovan was a real man, and the things Hanks portrayed are mostly true. Then, Wikipedia research showed that he was also integral in the release of THOUSANDS of prisoners from Cube under Castro's regime (which I think merits another movie, personally.)
Must see.
Hell, just about every line Arnie speaks in that movie is a classic.
- "Right?", "Wrong"
- "Let off some steam, Bennet"
- "I eat green berets for breakfast, and now I'm very hungry"
Still in the middle (well, 4/5ths-ish...?) watching it, but Star Wars: Episode IX - Rise of Skywalker, and it's probably a good thing (maybe not) that I'm working while watching it, and yet, I must ask what on earth I'm watching. So much 'bwuh-ness' I can't even...
The sequel trilogies are widely seen as incredibly sloppy narrative and film making. Shit just kinda happens, with no real connection to anything else. Characters just say lines and scenes just play out, and it doesn't really go anywhere.
Plus it took the heroes from the original trilogy and made them all pathetic losers who failed at stopping evil, undid all of Vadar's arc and redemption with the tie-in comics showing Vadar planned to fake his own redemption so Palpatine could go into hiding and build a fleet, and it undoes Anakin's chosen one arc because well...he doesn't bring balance to the Force.
Its a complete mess of non sequitur lines and cut content to appease the Chinese censorship board who REALLY REALLY don't like seeing Asian women in relationships with black men. And black men in general.
Re : Strange and the Multiverse of Madness
Yeah, I watched through Wandavision, though it wasn't my favorite (possibly because I have no reference frame for a bunch of sitcom reference gimmicks).
And this being almost more of a Wanda movie then a Dr Strange one, I don't really get her motivation and thats kind of central to the story here (Beyond its various obligatory CGI fests and obligatory setups for other movies). Most glaringly, why she doens't just re-hex her own kids back into existence the way she did the first time but now in her orchard cottage instead of enslaving a town. Also if this Wanda is so attached to her fake kids that she goes so far extra, shouldn't other universe Wandas with their (real?) kids be even more extra and just throw her back out of their brains through sheer willpower.
Yeah, I watched through Wandavision, though it wasn't my favorite (possibly because I have no reference frame for a bunch of sitcom reference gimmicks).
And this being almost more of a Wanda movie then a Dr Strange one, I don't really get her motivation and thats kind of central to the story here (Beyond its various obligatory CGI fests and obligatory setups for other movies). Most glaringly, why she doens't just re-hex her own kids back into existence the way she did the first time but now in her orchard cottage instead of enslaving a town. Also if this Wanda is so attached to her fake kids that she goes so far extra, shouldn't other universe Wandas with their (real?) kids be even more extra and just throw her back out of their brains through sheer willpower.
Its a sloppy movie that went through a tone of reshoots after No Way Home when it turns out audiences really like cameos. And a lot of it just doesn't make sense. Like if alternate world Strange was able to kill Thanos during the events of Infinite War, then shouldn't the time stone still exist and be with Sorcerer Supreme Mordo?
and where did the Ultron robots come from? and why wasn't Vision in any of the universes, and white vision in the main mcu reality? And if America Chaves is a one and only, how did Wanda even find out about her? And does this undo all of Loki, 'cause now the multiverse was always a thing?
Its clear this one was really taken apart in the editing room.
You know you get two sorts of movie you want to forget? Like... the sort you want to watch for the first time again and again, and the sort you just want to forget you ever watched.
Yeah... it didn't even look pretty in any real way, just 'big' for the sake of being 'big' (more big, more evil etc.). Richard E Grant was totally wasted on his role and I wonder what happened for Denis Lawson to make his cameo.
Moonfall: No / Great
Really stupid movie. Hard to respect on most levels. It's a toilet bowl, the water is absurdity, and it takes over two hours to flush. It makes for some occasionally nice visual spectacle, but by the time you get to the prettiest parts, you exhausted by all the inanity thus far.
Really stupid movie. Hard to respect on most levels. It's a toilet bowl, the water is absurdity, and it takes over two hours to flush. It makes for some occasionally nice visual spectacle, but by the time you get to the prettiest parts, you exhausted by all the inanity thus far.
Roland Emmeric movies all have that problem. He's a one-trick pony. The only movie of his I fully enjoyed was White House Down. Most of his other movies I only saw once and never felt the need to watch them again. Independence Day I've watched a few times, but I can't even bother to put on the original anymore. I sold my Blu-ray copy a few weeks ago. He's been doing the same crap for 30 years now. The man is clearly running out of ideas, steam, and locations to destroy. It's the same problem with most Michael Bay movies. At least in Emmeric manages to keep the camera still, a majority of the time.
Last edited:
Venom 2
Better than the 1st. Bit weird to see Stephen Graham and Tom Hardy both pretending talks in same scenes.
Better than the 1st. Bit weird to see Stephen Graham and Tom Hardy both pretending talks in same scenes.
The Lost City: Fun / Great
Sandra Bullock plays a romance novelist who, along with her presumptively vapid male cover art model Channing Tatum, is kidnapped by rich mogul Daniel Radcliff who expects them to lead him to an ancient treasure in New Guinea.
Yes, it checks all the boxes for a lot of tired tropes and fails to surprise at every moment, but it was fun, and it is shamelessly self-aware owning what it is. There's a witty quip or jab every 30 seconds, and while there are few "laugh out loud" moments, there are dozens that make you smile and giggle a bit which, by sheer volume, makes it a "funny" movie. I enjoyed it WAY more than I expected. For as dense as the premise is, it's actually one of the more clever "fish out of water" jungle adventures out there. Worth the watch.
Sandra Bullock plays a romance novelist who, along with her presumptively vapid male cover art model Channing Tatum, is kidnapped by rich mogul Daniel Radcliff who expects them to lead him to an ancient treasure in New Guinea.
Yes, it checks all the boxes for a lot of tired tropes and fails to surprise at every moment, but it was fun, and it is shamelessly self-aware owning what it is. There's a witty quip or jab every 30 seconds, and while there are few "laugh out loud" moments, there are dozens that make you smile and giggle a bit which, by sheer volume, makes it a "funny" movie. I enjoyed it WAY more than I expected. For as dense as the premise is, it's actually one of the more clever "fish out of water" jungle adventures out there. Worth the watch.
Dr Strange in the Multiverse of Madness, 7/10
Frankly I don't see what everyone is so mad about. It's an above average Marvel movie, and it comes with all the Marvel baggage you should all be used to at this point. Not that they're not valid criticisms, but you really can't act surprised at this point. I really enjoyed it, but very few of these movies would I ever rate above a 7/10. I went in for the visuals first and foremost, and the movie didn't disappoint. This reality-breaking stuff is just always done so well, and this time it's further enhanced by Raimi's style, which I was pleased to find in surprisingly plentiful amounts. This is absolutely high-end PG-13 stuff for Marvel, it's pretty intense and even graphic in places. The Evil Dead homages were obvious, but the movie never felt reliant on them or like it was "wink wink nudge nudge"-ing you. I was a bit afraid because I'd heard you'd have to have seen What if? to understand it, but that's not the case at all. I'm sure it adds extra context, but here you can just enjoy the ride.
I don't honestly have that much to say about it. It was an enjoyable, silly romp. The script and story are the usual Marvel nonsense, the visuals are great, there's some brushing up against genuinely compelling themes, but it's no more than a scratching of the surface. Wanda's arc is rather cliché, but tolerable enough that it didn't make me roll my eyes. I actually like the fact that we've had these characters go through enough in these movies (and shows) that we can see the toll it's taken on them.
Frankly I don't see what everyone is so mad about. It's an above average Marvel movie, and it comes with all the Marvel baggage you should all be used to at this point. Not that they're not valid criticisms, but you really can't act surprised at this point. I really enjoyed it, but very few of these movies would I ever rate above a 7/10. I went in for the visuals first and foremost, and the movie didn't disappoint. This reality-breaking stuff is just always done so well, and this time it's further enhanced by Raimi's style, which I was pleased to find in surprisingly plentiful amounts. This is absolutely high-end PG-13 stuff for Marvel, it's pretty intense and even graphic in places. The Evil Dead homages were obvious, but the movie never felt reliant on them or like it was "wink wink nudge nudge"-ing you. I was a bit afraid because I'd heard you'd have to have seen What if? to understand it, but that's not the case at all. I'm sure it adds extra context, but here you can just enjoy the ride.
I don't honestly have that much to say about it. It was an enjoyable, silly romp. The script and story are the usual Marvel nonsense, the visuals are great, there's some brushing up against genuinely compelling themes, but it's no more than a scratching of the surface. Wanda's arc is rather cliché, but tolerable enough that it didn't make me roll my eyes. I actually like the fact that we've had these characters go through enough in these movies (and shows) that we can see the toll it's taken on them.
I'm sorry, but I just feel that's a very bad faith interpretation of the character in MoM. While I can see how you'd interpret it as another "woman wants babies, can't have babies, bitches be crazy aight", I think you'll have to ignore substantial and obvious character beats from her to arrive at that conclusion. I think it's pretty screamingly obvious that the desire for a family is the one consistent driving force of her character, and how she's lost hers time and time again: first in an airstrike, then her brother getting gunned down, then seeing her boyfriend die twice in Infinity War, then in Wandavision, and yet again in Multiverse. It's a consistent cycle of loss she can't seem to break out of no matter how she tries: she tried getting vengeance in Age of Ultron, she tried moving on with Vision, she tried forcing back the clock in Wandavision, and now she's desperate enough to essentially steal children from their parents. Now I'm not saying it's done well, it's rather clunky in Multiverse of Madness and pretty cliché, but to paint it as some shallow "woman want baby" motivation is pretty bad faith IMO.
See I disagree. You know what would have been a good use of her character? Adopting war orphans. And maybe those kids are kidnapped into the multiverse and she turns to the Scarlet Witch to get them back at any cost. Instead we have her Wanda, who is capable of creating children in the Hex, creating a new Hex, with no children for some reason, and using the multiverse to find versions of herself with real children, no Vision mind you, just babies, and instead of being happy that these children have a version of herself as their mom, killing the mother and taking her place. She's not looking to bring her parents back, her brother back, her husband/father of her children, none of that. She is simply looking for babies and is willing to kill their biological mother in that reality to become their mother - having never actually carried and given birth to real children before, it was all space magic fantasy land.
And lets not overlook the white suburban mom trying to exploit a latino multiverse immigrant child in order to keep her white suburban mom fantasy going.
Its pretty on the nose what's going on here.
and I know she's alive, I know she's coming back, but honestly I wish she wouldn't. This is the 3rd time she's played the emotionally fragile villain who gets no consequences when they turn good in the 3rd act. Its boring.
Well if her wanting her fantasy babies back is your problem, then Wandavision is the story you should be more mad at. Multiverse is merely following on what that series very very obviously set up. When it comes to the "latino vs white suburban mom" I feel that's a stupidity over malice situation: Marvel wanted to have diversity in their movies, so they brought in a new latino character who's central to the plot. They'd set up Wanda's character as having always seen the typical idyllic suburban american sitcom family as the picture of happiness, so that'd logically be the thing she pursues no matter the cost. On the racism spectrum it's definitely more of an oopsie than a dogwhistle.
Synced the subs from my Criterion BD of Nights of Cabiria up to the StudioCanal BD that I imported before that boxset was announced two years ago. Required first changing the framerate of the subs from 23.976 (Criterion) to 24 (StudioCanal) in BDSup2Sub. Not that Criterion's subtitles are great. In fact, their outline is shitty. Really fuzzy and low res, especially shitty in their 4Ks, with the HDR around. I just don't like the thick outline on the StudioCanal subs. The UK subs are also too close to the border, but I could easily fix that. An alternative is changing the subs from image-based to text-based (SRT), but you end up with hundreds of typos.
Reason I did this is because Criterion overdoes it with the contrast in their transfers, nearly always, to the point that darker details disappear into the darkness. It doesn't really look like black and white of the era, makes it look more revisionist.
Also noticed StudioCanal's 2.0 mono is louder than Criterions 1.0 mono. Probably more noise reduction, as usual.
Reason I did this is because Criterion overdoes it with the contrast in their transfers, nearly always, to the point that darker details disappear into the darkness. It doesn't really look like black and white of the era, makes it look more revisionist.
Also noticed StudioCanal's 2.0 mono is louder than Criterions 1.0 mono. Probably more noise reduction, as usual.
Moonfall
Everything relevant has already been said. Parts of it are cringe, others just plain suck and the science is fiction alright. In my mind I kept comparing it to another recent rather high concept sci-fi film: The Tomorrow War, and even though that's far from a masterpiece, the personal relationships between characters are exponentially more interesting than anything Lexus Tom gets to say.
Everything relevant has already been said. Parts of it are cringe, others just plain suck and the science is fiction alright. In my mind I kept comparing it to another recent rather high concept sci-fi film: The Tomorrow War, and even though that's far from a masterpiece, the personal relationships between characters are exponentially more interesting than anything Lexus Tom gets to say.
You Only Live Twice
The first Bond movie to throw the book out and sort of just make shit up. I don't remember much about the book other than it involves a Poison Ivy style garden in a remote island to which men are drawn to and commit suicide; what the point was behind it I forget, other that Blofeld was responsible. I also remember the ending, which has Blofeld dead and Bond stranded in a beach, completely amnesiac.
The movie instead is more or less a remake of Dr. No, penned by Roald Dahl of all people. And like Dr. No it suffers the absence of its main villain for all but the last 20 minutes of runtime, during which Bond barely interacts with Blofeld. The manner in which Blofeld is finally revealed after all these years, and the timing of showing his face just as Bond finally sees it, is impeccable. The iconography is all there - the white Persian cat, the piranha death trap, the scar across the eye - but the bombast and cat-and-mouse dynamic with Bond is missing (see Goldfinger).
The movie is very gimmicky - a trick gyrocopter is introduced and minutely described by Q, and then the very next scene Bond immediately uses up all of the toys - and bordering on science fiction at parts. It's missing the fun of forgetting about a gadget until it becomes useful in an unexpected way, like the suitcase in From Russia. Here as soon as Bond is given cigarettes that fire explosives once lit you know exactly when and how he's gonna use them.
The Bond girls are fine, sexy as always, but don't stand out. Most of them weren't even named until the credits, I think, which tells you they're more fixtures than characters. There's a Fiona Volpe expy who essentially repeats the Luciana Paluzzi role from Thunderball, and the typical sacrificial second act dame that barely gets a nod from Bond. Kissy Suzuki looks great but doesn't seem as involved in the plot as Pussy or Tatiana or Domino. She's more of a Honey Ryder type - wanders onto the plot in a bikini and proceeds to stick around until the obligatory adrift-in-open-waters ending.
The biggest conceit in the movie however is the part where Bond has to "become Japanese" per orders of the local ally, which involves dressing up and donning a wig and prosthetics to make him look the part and also marrying a Japanese babe and training with a sword and staff. How any of this is supposed to help infiltrate Blofeld's base is beyond explaining. I'm not even sure what was the point of training an army of ninjas either. Except for one particular overachiever everybody else storms in toting machine guns and explosives.
A couple of running gags I never even knew were part of the series: Bond tossing his hat onto a coat rack with perfect aim (eve though he rarely wears one outside the gun barrel intro) and the cold open teasing that Bond dies (Grant killing someone with a Bond mask in FRWL, the funeral to "JB" in Thunderball and here he downright stages his death for the sake of going undercover - hence the title, which Blofeld later says out loud to Bond).
The first Bond movie to throw the book out and sort of just make shit up. I don't remember much about the book other than it involves a Poison Ivy style garden in a remote island to which men are drawn to and commit suicide; what the point was behind it I forget, other that Blofeld was responsible. I also remember the ending, which has Blofeld dead and Bond stranded in a beach, completely amnesiac.
The movie instead is more or less a remake of Dr. No, penned by Roald Dahl of all people. And like Dr. No it suffers the absence of its main villain for all but the last 20 minutes of runtime, during which Bond barely interacts with Blofeld. The manner in which Blofeld is finally revealed after all these years, and the timing of showing his face just as Bond finally sees it, is impeccable. The iconography is all there - the white Persian cat, the piranha death trap, the scar across the eye - but the bombast and cat-and-mouse dynamic with Bond is missing (see Goldfinger).
The movie is very gimmicky - a trick gyrocopter is introduced and minutely described by Q, and then the very next scene Bond immediately uses up all of the toys - and bordering on science fiction at parts. It's missing the fun of forgetting about a gadget until it becomes useful in an unexpected way, like the suitcase in From Russia. Here as soon as Bond is given cigarettes that fire explosives once lit you know exactly when and how he's gonna use them.
The Bond girls are fine, sexy as always, but don't stand out. Most of them weren't even named until the credits, I think, which tells you they're more fixtures than characters. There's a Fiona Volpe expy who essentially repeats the Luciana Paluzzi role from Thunderball, and the typical sacrificial second act dame that barely gets a nod from Bond. Kissy Suzuki looks great but doesn't seem as involved in the plot as Pussy or Tatiana or Domino. She's more of a Honey Ryder type - wanders onto the plot in a bikini and proceeds to stick around until the obligatory adrift-in-open-waters ending.
The biggest conceit in the movie however is the part where Bond has to "become Japanese" per orders of the local ally, which involves dressing up and donning a wig and prosthetics to make him look the part and also marrying a Japanese babe and training with a sword and staff. How any of this is supposed to help infiltrate Blofeld's base is beyond explaining. I'm not even sure what was the point of training an army of ninjas either. Except for one particular overachiever everybody else storms in toting machine guns and explosives.
A couple of running gags I never even knew were part of the series: Bond tossing his hat onto a coat rack with perfect aim (eve though he rarely wears one outside the gun barrel intro) and the cold open teasing that Bond dies (Grant killing someone with a Bond mask in FRWL, the funeral to "JB" in Thunderball and here he downright stages his death for the sake of going undercover - hence the title, which Blofeld later says out loud to Bond).
Last edited:
Did this come out on Netflix or something and that's why yall are talking about it again?