While true, all they did was intensify what was already there inside of greedy producers, execs, big shot businesspeople, and the system itself. As far as I was concerned: same shit, different day.
Discuss and Rate the Last Film You Watched
- Thread starter Th3Ch33s3Cak3
- Start date
Amusing in that they made a fuss about sex scenes and female pleasure which is sorta totally negated by the twist.
Fresh - Disney plus
It's alright. Better than expected. Cathartic end point.
Bones n All - Apples, purchase
You know, all these cannibal movies merely have an issue understanding consent. Only nibble the humans if they let you after you ask nicely...is simple! Mark Rylance you creepy old git, yet I cannae take eyes off his performance. This film is probably a classier affair than Fresh, and kinder to cannibals, if only slightly. Yummy human flesh crêpes!
It's alright. Better than expected. Cathartic end point.
Bones n All - Apples, purchase
You know, all these cannibal movies merely have an issue understanding consent. Only nibble the humans if they let you after you ask nicely...is simple! Mark Rylance you creepy old git, yet I cannae take eyes off his performance. This film is probably a classier affair than Fresh, and kinder to cannibals, if only slightly. Yummy human flesh crêpes!
The Menu, 7/10
This movie is hard to discuss without spoilers, because it's best experienced knowing as little of it as possible going in. It's a (close to) single-location thriller set in an ultra-high class and exclusive restaurant on a remote island, where a group of 12 people come to enjoy a luxury evening dinner. And then things start to go wrong, and then very wrong. Without spoiling it I'll say that it's very much worth seeing even if it didn't light my world on fire. Ralph Fiennes is in top form as the eccentric and menacing head chef, Anya-Taylor Joy is always a delight, John Leguizzamo is great too, great acting all around. The film is very good at creating tension, yet never escalating it to a completely unbelievable point. It's frankly amazing just how much mileage the movie gets out of this single location, not once did it feel visually repetitive. A lot of emphasis is put on the food, and it's very stylishly shot.
There's not a whole lot I'd criticize about it. The ending can be a bit confusing, but it's all in service of the greater point the film is making, and I think it worked, though not perfectly.
This movie is hard to discuss without spoilers, because it's best experienced knowing as little of it as possible going in. It's a (close to) single-location thriller set in an ultra-high class and exclusive restaurant on a remote island, where a group of 12 people come to enjoy a luxury evening dinner. And then things start to go wrong, and then very wrong. Without spoiling it I'll say that it's very much worth seeing even if it didn't light my world on fire. Ralph Fiennes is in top form as the eccentric and menacing head chef, Anya-Taylor Joy is always a delight, John Leguizzamo is great too, great acting all around. The film is very good at creating tension, yet never escalating it to a completely unbelievable point. It's frankly amazing just how much mileage the movie gets out of this single location, not once did it feel visually repetitive. A lot of emphasis is put on the food, and it's very stylishly shot.
There's not a whole lot I'd criticize about it. The ending can be a bit confusing, but it's all in service of the greater point the film is making, and I think it worked, though not perfectly.
I went into this expecting a thriller, which it is, but what I wasn't expecting was that it's also a scathing, pitch-black satire about how food and cooking are viewed in the modern world. The fetishization of aesthetics, the elitism around it all, obsession over class and originality, the abusive work environments the culture enables, there's a lot to chew on here (badum tss). Nicholas Hoult's character being particularly insufferable, and getting his due comeuppance and then some. Some of these charaters aren't even there to appreciate the food, they're just there because they either can, or because they feel they have to. It's a dark reflection of each type of extreme: either through ignorance with the old couple who can't recall a single dish they've eaten at the restaurant, the fetishistic Instagram foodie culture with Hoult's character, or pretentions of high class with the business guys. Tonally it balances very well between comedy and tension, and by the end you can be left unsure if you even know which is which anymore. The ending is both grim and sweet, reminding the audience of simple pleasures often being the greatest, and showing quite a midle finger to the entire fine dining culture.
The Woman King 8/10
If you're hankering for a 90s/early-00s style action costume drama in the vein of Braveheart or Gladiator, this one's for you. I mean, it's very much a deliberate "let's do this cool thing that was white guys but with black ladies." All the beats, tropes, structures, character archetypes are there. Every plot development is telegraphed a mile away and you're there for the action, the high-drama, the personalities.
It's good. Obviously Viola Davis is good at acting. John Boyega plays a king and he's dynamic and irritating enough to be effective. But neither are the core of the film, it's that young hero that is really the main character going through a classic hero's journey and the excellent supporting cast.
Fight choreography is solid- hectic enough for feel modern but you can't actually follow what's happening. Score is great (Terence Blanchard, of course, who does music for every major films with majority black cast it seems like).
Dumbest criticisms I've seen are:
- It's not "historically accurate." Yeah, neither are the afore-mentioned Braveheart and Gladiator (or, like, any Hollywood historical epic, lol). This movie isn't challenging the genre at all, it's a faithful iteration, and that faithfulness to the genre includes making up stuff to tell a better story for a movie.
- It doesn't show Africans enslaving Africans. This criticism is amazing because that is literally the plot of the film and they show it plenty. The people concern-trolling about this are pulling the "what about black on black crime" style or rhetoric and you should mock them.
If you're hankering for a 90s/early-00s style action costume drama in the vein of Braveheart or Gladiator, this one's for you. I mean, it's very much a deliberate "let's do this cool thing that was white guys but with black ladies." All the beats, tropes, structures, character archetypes are there. Every plot development is telegraphed a mile away and you're there for the action, the high-drama, the personalities.
It's good. Obviously Viola Davis is good at acting. John Boyega plays a king and he's dynamic and irritating enough to be effective. But neither are the core of the film, it's that young hero that is really the main character going through a classic hero's journey and the excellent supporting cast.
Fight choreography is solid- hectic enough for feel modern but you can't actually follow what's happening. Score is great (Terence Blanchard, of course, who does music for every major films with majority black cast it seems like).
Dumbest criticisms I've seen are:
- It's not "historically accurate." Yeah, neither are the afore-mentioned Braveheart and Gladiator (or, like, any Hollywood historical epic, lol). This movie isn't challenging the genre at all, it's a faithful iteration, and that faithfulness to the genre includes making up stuff to tell a better story for a movie.
- It doesn't show Africans enslaving Africans. This criticism is amazing because that is literally the plot of the film and they show it plenty. The people concern-trolling about this are pulling the "what about black on black crime" style or rhetoric and you should mock them.
Black Bear (2020)
Offbeat and very meta drama / quasi-thriller starring Aubrey Plaza. She stars as a film director called Allison who rents with a couple whilst she writes her new movie. The couple, Gabe and Blair, are awaiting the birth of their child, but it soon becomes clear the couple's relationship is in some disrepair as they constantly snipe at each other. Allison, evidently an amoral manipulator, amuses herself by sticking a crowbar into the cracks in their personalities and relationship and leaning on it for all she's worth. Halfway through the film this story comes to a sort of climax... and then the film abruptly changes to a new story, almost as a sort of recurring nightmare. In theme, thread and location the story is the same as the first half: however the roles of the three leads and the superficial plot elements have shifted: it is mid-shoot in a film where Gabe is a manipulative film director, directing Allison as his unhappy wife and star alongside Blair. Plus, just to really rub it in, the movie within a movie that they are shooting is also eerily similar to the story going on in the film-makers.
So what on earth is this film about? My guess is perhaps about the fluidity of stories and perspective. We might wonder, for instance, whether it is real-life events and a story inspired by them, where either half could be the story. Or maybe it could be imagined as two drafts of the same ideas, coming to two similar but different stories.
Anyway, Aubrey Plaza does a great job, and it's an intriguing and well-executed work. But it's not your regular, undemanding popcorn-muncher.
Offbeat and very meta drama / quasi-thriller starring Aubrey Plaza. She stars as a film director called Allison who rents with a couple whilst she writes her new movie. The couple, Gabe and Blair, are awaiting the birth of their child, but it soon becomes clear the couple's relationship is in some disrepair as they constantly snipe at each other. Allison, evidently an amoral manipulator, amuses herself by sticking a crowbar into the cracks in their personalities and relationship and leaning on it for all she's worth. Halfway through the film this story comes to a sort of climax... and then the film abruptly changes to a new story, almost as a sort of recurring nightmare. In theme, thread and location the story is the same as the first half: however the roles of the three leads and the superficial plot elements have shifted: it is mid-shoot in a film where Gabe is a manipulative film director, directing Allison as his unhappy wife and star alongside Blair. Plus, just to really rub it in, the movie within a movie that they are shooting is also eerily similar to the story going on in the film-makers.
So what on earth is this film about? My guess is perhaps about the fluidity of stories and perspective. We might wonder, for instance, whether it is real-life events and a story inspired by them, where either half could be the story. Or maybe it could be imagined as two drafts of the same ideas, coming to two similar but different stories.
Anyway, Aubrey Plaza does a great job, and it's an intriguing and well-executed work. But it's not your regular, undemanding popcorn-muncher.
When Fortune Smiles, starring Stephen Chow.
I watched this with a Taiwanese friend, which was fun since he could comment on things I totally would have missed out on (as this is a piece of Hong Kong cinema).
The story follows the attempts to steal a wealthy business man's fortune after he passes away. This fortune for some reason is totally in the form of previous gems that can fit in a single briefcase. His dipshit son tried to force himself into the will, prevented by his loyal brother. A garbage woman and a con man get involved, and hilarity ensues.
Such a bizzare movie, an action comedy that they just don't make anymore. There are some incredibly juvenile jokes that I probably would have rolled my eyes at in a Hollywood movie, but it was done so earnestly here that I found it hilarious.
The third act feels like the director was a huge fan of Thunderball(?), specifically when they have that huge underwater fight. Which is weird, because the films were almost three decades apart.
All in all, had a great time. Would have been even better if we watched it together in person with some beers instead of on Netflix.
I watched this with a Taiwanese friend, which was fun since he could comment on things I totally would have missed out on (as this is a piece of Hong Kong cinema).
The story follows the attempts to steal a wealthy business man's fortune after he passes away. This fortune for some reason is totally in the form of previous gems that can fit in a single briefcase. His dipshit son tried to force himself into the will, prevented by his loyal brother. A garbage woman and a con man get involved, and hilarity ensues.
Such a bizzare movie, an action comedy that they just don't make anymore. There are some incredibly juvenile jokes that I probably would have rolled my eyes at in a Hollywood movie, but it was done so earnestly here that I found it hilarious.
The third act feels like the director was a huge fan of Thunderball(?), specifically when they have that huge underwater fight. Which is weird, because the films were almost three decades apart.
All in all, had a great time. Would have been even better if we watched it together in person with some beers instead of on Netflix.
Babylon
It's Boogie Nights, but instead of the porn industry being threatened by video in the late 70s it's about silent era movies being threatened by sound in the late 20s. So it's about a wild decadent party coming to a tortuous, ignominious end once glory fades and people can't keep up with the times; there's even a suicide halfway through the movie that serves as the pivot for the rise-and-fall narrative. Alright. What convinced me that Chazelle was copying homework was a lengthy sequence towards the end where the protagonist and a buddy, both at their lowest darkest points, attempt to broker a deal with an eccentric criminal who's hosting them for way longer than they wanna be around, and tension rises while some background goon keeps doing something loud and annoying. Sound familiar?
I liked the chaotic scene in the desert when they're shooting like six different movies at once, and I liked the scene where they keep redoing a single take because of this whole newfangled sound thing, and I liked Brad Pitt and that's about it.
It's Boogie Nights, but instead of the porn industry being threatened by video in the late 70s it's about silent era movies being threatened by sound in the late 20s. So it's about a wild decadent party coming to a tortuous, ignominious end once glory fades and people can't keep up with the times; there's even a suicide halfway through the movie that serves as the pivot for the rise-and-fall narrative. Alright. What convinced me that Chazelle was copying homework was a lengthy sequence towards the end where the protagonist and a buddy, both at their lowest darkest points, attempt to broker a deal with an eccentric criminal who's hosting them for way longer than they wanna be around, and tension rises while some background goon keeps doing something loud and annoying. Sound familiar?
I liked the chaotic scene in the desert when they're shooting like six different movies at once, and I liked the scene where they keep redoing a single take because of this whole newfangled sound thing, and I liked Brad Pitt and that's about it.
This sounds way more interesting than I would have given it credit for. I had no intention of ever watching it, even if it comes to a streaming channel I subscribe to. With your description? Sounds like something worth experiencing.
I am surprised it didn't do better. I've seen some pretty meh movies about the creative industries (most recently the decidedly meh "Tick Tick Boom") that the critics loved as, they seem to love movies about their industry.
I like movies about the industry too. Babylon is definitely worth experiencing. It has top notch production value and knows how to be funny/creepy/sad. Even though parts dragged I was never really bored in a little over 3 hours. And I also have a vested interest in the older history of Hollywood, since I studied all this some ways back, meaning I get to be both nostalgic for a time in history as much as for a specific time in my life.
Here's what: as much as I admire his craft and like his movies I don't agree with Damien Chazelle's cynical worldview about having to self-destruct in order to produce anything worthwhile. And where this applied to one or two people striving for perfection in Whiplash and La La Land, here the implication is that all of Hollywood had to burn through thousands of lives and lesser movies in order to achieve the 'perfection' of a handful of classics, somehow justifying the misery throughout. This to me also devalues the output of the silent era, reducing it to an immature phase that the industry had to outgrow before it achieved the perfection of (cue emotional movie reel).
This in turn I associate with the faux progressive fad of depicting the protagonist/s of your movie as victims who have no agency, are at the mercy of circumstance and any one success is downplayed almost apologetically.
Here's how an Amelia Earhart biopic would play out today:
- She was probably abused.
- She was definitely bullied and opposed by every person she ever met or wouldn't have achieved anything worthwhile.
- Flying planes would be her form of coping with abuse etc.
- Movie starts with her probably sick of flying planes.
- She should've been more socially aware than she was.
- She wasn't even that good at flying planes.
- She rediscovers her passion begrudgingly.
- Her achievements were a fluke that were crucially co-authored by some unsung other.
- Poor Amelia, victim of a tortured psyche.
- And because she rose above victimhood she's worth celebrating.
Narc over.
2 movies off hand:
1) Amadeus. Sure, lots of inaccuracies but a thing they got right: Mozart did not have a lifetime of abuse that made him who he became, able to do the things he did. Appears you don't need to be a victim to make good art.
2) Bird. A fellow musician starts using heroin, as if that will help make him an artist and Bird assures him it will not.
I have heard that sound in movies was a sea change for the industry and many of its players. I think Chaplin did one "talkie"??
Over 3 hours?!? I will need some beer and fried food to get through this one when it is streaming.
A ★★½ review of Winnie the Pooh (2011)
This was a movie I wanted to like more than I did. It's not bad, but there are significant issues that hold it back. The plot of the film, if you can call it that, essentially has three elements to it. The first one follows the titular character (voiced by Jim Cummings now) trying to satisfy his...
letterboxd.com
I appreciate the Babylon review and it does seem like something I may get some enjoyment or interest in. But I don't think I can handle 3 hour movies any more.
I also think Chazelle's whole vibe ain't what I'm about. u/JohnnyNovgorod is getting at some of the reason why, and with Whiplash I take it one step further- I really don't like that movie and hate its message.
I know a little about film history but I do like and know about jazz and Whiplash seems to go out of its why to LIE about enough aspects of this music scene to allow us to celebrate actual abuse. Chazelle does that thing where he's "officially" criticizing something but it's vague enough that enough people get the literal opposite message. For sure I personally knew people unironically praising Simmons' character's behavior.
La La Land was a movie I watched, laughed at, and just figured we'd all be making fun of like the Cats movie and instead half of all white people I know love it, it's so weird.
I also think Chazelle's whole vibe ain't what I'm about. u/JohnnyNovgorod is getting at some of the reason why, and with Whiplash I take it one step further- I really don't like that movie and hate its message.
I know a little about film history but I do like and know about jazz and Whiplash seems to go out of its why to LIE about enough aspects of this music scene to allow us to celebrate actual abuse. Chazelle does that thing where he's "officially" criticizing something but it's vague enough that enough people get the literal opposite message. For sure I personally knew people unironically praising Simmons' character's behavior.
La La Land was a movie I watched, laughed at, and just figured we'd all be making fun of like the Cats movie and instead half of all white people I know love it, it's so weird.
The Aerial Submarine (1910)
113 year old short silent film about submarine pirates. Whose submarine also can fly. Why don't we see more of this sort of thing nowdays? Submarine pirates whose submarine can fly are pretty cool.
Anywho, not much time to tell a story. I like how the pirates sinks a cargo ship because it has an airlock and can send divers to steal the cargo from the underwater wreckage, rather than board it and steal the cargo normally. That's complicated, but would work.
113 year old short silent film about submarine pirates. Whose submarine also can fly. Why don't we see more of this sort of thing nowdays? Submarine pirates whose submarine can fly are pretty cool.
Anywho, not much time to tell a story. I like how the pirates sinks a cargo ship because it has an airlock and can send divers to steal the cargo from the underwater wreckage, rather than board it and steal the cargo normally. That's complicated, but would work.
I watched Special Delivery 2022 (Korean)
A lot of movies I don't bother posting if there wasn't anything interesting to comment on, so it's saying something that I wanted to take the time to recommend Special Delivery. It was quite a ride. It stars Park So-dam as a wheelman. A sort of illegal car services person running out of a junkyard. Very similar to Transporter with Jason Statham, but more variety and more low key work. She gets stuck delivering a Baseball Star and his son to the harbor for exile. He's about to be indicted for fraud and trying to escape the country with ill-gotten gains. So it turns out a large chunk of the underworld and crooked cops are after him because he stole 30 million of the groups money. It's very high octane intense film, but while it jumps the shark here and there the action itself works and they do a really good job of making you believe Park So-dam is a capable action hero, but not some invincible ninja super hero.
For better or worse I also have to comment on the violence. This movie is insanely violent. You've never seen so many people get stabbed, slashed and clubbed with household items. Its quite a blood bath. I wouldn't call it gory, but gruesome for what is nominally a typical hollywood action film. People get fucked up. Imagine if Transporter had the rating of the vengeance trilogy levels of violence. I'd give it an 8/10 as I really enjoyed everyone in it as well as the action. The acting is quite good. I'd give it a 9 or a 10, but its a popcorn flick. This isn't one you're going to be thinking about in a month. It looks like you can still rent it online. Easily worth the $5
I can't empathize enough however that all the violence is cut out of the trailer. It's really like Hard R, do not watch with kids.
A lot of movies I don't bother posting if there wasn't anything interesting to comment on, so it's saying something that I wanted to take the time to recommend Special Delivery. It was quite a ride. It stars Park So-dam as a wheelman. A sort of illegal car services person running out of a junkyard. Very similar to Transporter with Jason Statham, but more variety and more low key work. She gets stuck delivering a Baseball Star and his son to the harbor for exile. He's about to be indicted for fraud and trying to escape the country with ill-gotten gains. So it turns out a large chunk of the underworld and crooked cops are after him because he stole 30 million of the groups money. It's very high octane intense film, but while it jumps the shark here and there the action itself works and they do a really good job of making you believe Park So-dam is a capable action hero, but not some invincible ninja super hero.
For better or worse I also have to comment on the violence. This movie is insanely violent. You've never seen so many people get stabbed, slashed and clubbed with household items. Its quite a blood bath. I wouldn't call it gory, but gruesome for what is nominally a typical hollywood action film. People get fucked up. Imagine if Transporter had the rating of the vengeance trilogy levels of violence. I'd give it an 8/10 as I really enjoyed everyone in it as well as the action. The acting is quite good. I'd give it a 9 or a 10, but its a popcorn flick. This isn't one you're going to be thinking about in a month. It looks like you can still rent it online. Easily worth the $5
I can't empathize enough however that all the violence is cut out of the trailer. It's really like Hard R, do not watch with kids.
Rewatched Top Gun the day after Maverick and I mostly gotta say, at least Maverick didn’t play the opening few bars of Take My Breath Away every fucking time Cruise and his love interest were on screen alone.
*edit* oh FFS…now it’s stuck in my head.
Last edited:
Hah, I'll have to remind you of that song in the future and...argh, now it's stuck in my head!
A ★★★½ review of Wreck-It Ralph (2012)
I really wanted to give this a higher rating, but... The plot of the film follows the title character (voiced by John C. Reilly), the bad guy of the game "Fix-It Felix, Jr." He's not exactly thrilled as the bad guy, especially since the residents of the game tend to either ignore him or treat...
letterboxd.com