Discuss and Rate the Last Film You Watched

Is this the first poll?


  • Total voters
    45

Johnny Novgorod

Bebop Man
Legacy
Feb 9, 2012
18,800
3,350
118
Still: A Michael J. Fox Movie

Documentary that covers the life of Michael J. Fox in familiar beats:
  1. Small beginnings
  2. Struggling actor years
  3. Breakout sensation
  4. Becomes full of himself
  5. String of flops
  6. Personal tragedy
  7. And the comeback!
I don't question that any of that happened, and don't want to be cynical, but it's striking how The Hollywood Story always plays more or less the same. Val Kilmer had his documentary (last year?) and it hit pretty much the same beats. Val lost his voice to cancer, and Michael got Parkinson's. The first half of the movie covers his rise with Family Ties/Teen Wolf/Back to the Future (with production stories that I think everyone's going to be familiar with) but the crux of the movie lies in accepting it and not hiding it and showing the daily grind that is living with Parkinson's (the exercises, the doctor's appointments, the falls). He makes all of it plainly visible without wallowing in it or asking for pity. Happy that he never lost his sense of humor and has a loving family with him.
 

Gordon_4

The Big Engine
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
6,350
5,606
118
Australia
Also

Transformers: Rise of the Beasts: Fun / Great

Probably my favorite of all the Transformers movies, and that's not saying much; I also have a favorite pair of underwear. Mirage and the scene where he turns into a Formula 1 car for a second made me giddy, and it has some good action. I was entertained.
You know I’ve seen that movie three times now. Was never bored. Not once. I think changing the POV Autobot from Bumblebee to Mirage was a very wise move, even though he has way more in common with Bluestreak than Mirage as I know him, he was great fun.

If I had complaints they are thus: Wheeljack should have retained the G1 like design from Bumblebee, OR that character should have been Perceptor or Beachcomber. Also Wheeljack’s obviously Urkle inspired design is a little infuriating and dumb.
 

Hawki

Elite Member
Legacy
Mar 4, 2014
9,651
2,175
118
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Mission: Impossible - Dead Reckoning, part 1 (7/10)

As you can tell from the score, I liked this, but the more I think about it, the uneasier I get. I wondered how best to approach this review, so I'm going to do a five elements of story approach.

PLOT
Okay, the plot is convoluted as hell, and honestly, you'd be better off checking the Wikipedia summary. That, and I really don't want to type out an entire plot summary. Assuming you've read it, or don't care, the plot is ironically close to the first one given the amount of intrigue, double-crossing, triple-crossing, and all that, to the extent that not only is Kitridge back as Ethan's sort-of enemy, but the film's climax is on a fast-moving train. I don't know if these are intentional callbacks, and it's not inherently a bad thing. Certainly I like continuity in general, and there's clear references to the events of Fallout for instance, so that's nice.

That being said, the plot has issues. It's frustratingly vague at times, and I assume that these are elements that will be addressed in part 2 (for instance, we see vague flashbacks to what Ethan did before joining the IMF, but are never elaborated upon. An intelligence agent that hunts Ethan throughout the film is implied to have backstory with him, but it's never explained. We want to believe that an AI called "the Entity" (...well, it's no "Skynet," that's for sure) is a threat to the survival of humanity itself, but it doesn't seem to actually be doing that much. Sure, the first thing we see it do is hack a Russian sub that results in said sub's destruction, but while the AI is said to have infiltrated global networks, it doesn't seem to be doing any actual harm. Also, since we're now at the level of "AI apocalypse" as far as plots go, I don't know if the series's stakes can get higher than that.

Also, a number of times, certain things happen in certain ways because the AI, with its processing power, has calculated them to occur. For
STORYTELLING
Despite being over 2 hours long, the movie never felt slow, I never felt bored, etc. The film's got a good mix of both action and espionage sequences, the best example of the former being a car chase through an Italian city, an example of the latter being a cat-and-mouse game at Abu Dabai Airport. Ironically, the final sequence at the end with the train, and Ethan parachuting onto it (which has long been billed as the film's big stunt) is less engaging than the ones leading up to it. Still, that aside, the cinematography is excellent, from the rapid pace of the Dubai scene, to the atmosphere of the night club scene, to the shots of moody Venice back alleys that harken back to the first film in Prague. I'm not sure why MI: I was chosen to be such an inspiration, but whatever the case, it's well done.

Also, this is probably the funniest Mission: Impossible in the series (least of all the ones I've seen). There were a number of instances where the audience and I burst out laughing. It's not humour in the style as, say, the MCU, with quips, but more individual instances that are so far-fetched/bonkers that you can't help but laugh. This isn't a diss though, the humour definitely works in the context.
CHARACTERS
I'm not going to do a rundown of every character in the film, but that said:

So, I'm going to start by saying a few things about Tom Cruise/Ethan Hunt - his age is really beginning to show, and so is his lack of acting range.

I'm not dissing on Cruise as an actor, but he's over sixty now, and it's clear that he's not the same spring chicken he was back in the 90s. I don't think this series has to end, but I don't know how long he can keep in the field - his fighting's a little clunkier, his running scenes (yes, they're still here) are a little slower. Also, while Ethan Hunt has never been a deep character by any means (heck, James Bond has more depth than him), the film really comes off as trying to turn him into, well, James Bond. For instance, in the scope of a single film, Ethan loses someone close to him prior to joining the IMF, Ilsa is killed (more on that later), and spends most of the film alongside a new character, Grace, while Alanna Mitsopolis (from Fallout) is still fawning over/flirting with him. It's not like there's been a lack of female characters in Ethan Hunt's life, but things feel very different here. The implied motif is that Ethan ultimately can't lead a normal life, and it's outright stated that anyone who gets close to him ultimately dies, or at least, is put in harm's way ipso facto. So when Ilsa is killed, clearly he's agrieved, but the acting is wooden in comparison to the emotion that should be felt at this point.

Kittridge is pretty decent. I'm not sure why he's been brought back now, of all films, especially since there's no explicit mention of the events of the first film, but whatever the case, he does his job well enough. Similarly, Gabriel functions decently as an antagonist, though "decent" is the key word here. He's stated to basically enjoy killing, not so much from the act itself, from the suffering it brings. So if the AI is a threat to humanity, then his allegiance to it kind of makes sense, but if so, it's an allegiance that really just boils down to "I'm evil." I know that MI has never really had deep villains, but even so...Also, he kind of approaches Gary Stuish territory, in that he can calculate events down to the second due to the AI helping him. For instance, he knows the exact moment to jump off a high-speed train, because a truck will be there at that exact spot at that exact point in time. Sure, okay.

Then there's Ilsa. Poor Ilsa, she's done dirty in this film. We can debate whether fridging is a thing (at the very least, I certainly agree it's a common trope in fiction, period, for Character A to die solely to serve the character development of Character B), but here's the problem - Ilsa's a pre-established character, and IMO, a very good one, and I know I'm not alone in that opinion. And there's a lot of things in the film that I do like with Ilsa, such as the gunfight she's in at the start, to her interactions with Ethan in Venice - little moments that aren't overtly romantic, but clear fodder for shippers, if you catch my drift. The problem, however, is that Ilsa is killed by Gabriel in the mid-point. Killed in such a way that it's less about the event itself, and more how it affects Ethan's character development, which is to say, not that much at all, relatively speaking. To be clear, I don't have a problem with Ilsa being killed, it's just that she's killed in a way that doesn't serve her own character, if you catch my drift.

Then that leaves us with Grace, who is kind of Ilsa's replacement. I say "kind of," because that's not literally true in-universe or in a plot sense, though Ilsa's death does mean that Grace has to do things that Ilsa might have been able to do herself. And given that she effectively joins the IMF immediately afterwards (more on that later on)...yeah. Thing is, I like Grace as a character. She's honestly fine, and thankfully, the film never pushes a romantic angle between her and Ethan. I like how the film is simultaniously able to show Grace as being extremely competent in her element (professional thief) and absolutely terrified when she's out of it (e.g. having to impersonate Alanna via face mask). I've seen some people claim that Haley Atwell is being pushed as a replacement for Tom Cruise, and while that's not too far-fetched a proposition (the IP is called "Mission: Impossible" after all, and Renner was originally planned as Cruise's replacement in Ghost Protocol), there's not really anything in the film itself that'll be the case. But while Grace may not come off as a replacement for Ethan, she DOES come off as a replacement for Ilsa, and I've already said how I feel about that.

Other characters to be sure - Benji and Luther are still fun, as is Alanna (she gets more screentime here than in Fallout, and it's highly enjoyable), but that leaves us with one more character to talk about, and that's the Entity. Yes, I'm evaluating the character of an AI, because that's how I roll.

The Entity (which I'm just going to call "the AI" from this point, as it's quicker) is interesting not so much that it's characterized, but the way it is. A lot of characterization it receives is exposited/inferred by characters, and while mostly that would violate the "show, don't tell" rule, here, it works. Among said characterization is that the AI is kinda implied to be like Ethan, in its penchant for going rogue. It's revealed that it was originally a US AI that was designed to perform infiltration 'missions,' but went rogue after being assigned to spook a Russian sub, instead destroying it, and merging with the sub's own network (hence why its core is a Russian sub now beneath the Arctic sea). The AI responds more aggressively the more people try to contain it, but otherwise, does its thing. But more directly, there's segments where the AI has a more immediate presence. For instance, in a night club, the AI is reflected by patterns of lights, forming something akin to an eye. I can't really do it justice, you'd have to see it, but the whole thing is creepy. Afterwards, it misleads Ethan through the streets of Venice by using voice clips from Benji and Luther, before using their own voices to mock them before they're forced to destroy their laptops.

To be clear, the AI isn't about to go down in pop culture history in the same way as, say, Skynet (even if its origins are similar in more ways than one), but credit where credit is due for making it a character at all.
THEMES
I debated whether I should even include this section, since this is an action film first and foremost, and trying to find any deeper meaning would be a wasted endeavour. However, what little there is to analyze does make it clear that the filmmakers are aware of what decade they're in. When this film series started, casette tapes were still used, and the Internet was basically a McGuffin. There's a running undercurrent of technology, of how it factors into survaillance, of how the AI uses it against the protagonists, etc. Nothing deep, but it's there, at least.
WORLDBUILDING
You might raise an eyebrow at the notion of me assessing worldbuilding in a film set in the real world, but there's some elements that I think are worth mentioning. First, there's the ubiquity of survaillance, not just in regards to the AI, but in general (arguably that's more of a theme, but whatever). Second, it dishes some info on the IMF - I'll say it now, the IMF's exact status has never been clear to me, and the wiki's article on it doesn't source any of its claims. Sometimes it appears to be its own independent organization, sometimes it seems to be a branch of the CIA, the wiki claims it's an international organization, but Rogue Nation shows that the US has clear authority over it. Be that as it may, the film more or less implies that the IMF operatives are ex-cons, that they have the choice of imprisonment or doing missions for the rest of their lives. That the phrase "this mission, if you choose to accept it" is more tongue-in cheek, that they really don't have a choice in the matter.

If this reading is correct, I really dislike this. There's some basis in it - for instance, Luther was an ex-criminal before being re-admitted, Ethan being a criminal before being taken in is fine, but in the wider scheme of things...really? The entire organization? Not only is it a stretch, considering that the IMF clearly has its own support structure (see the third film for instance), but it arguably harms the first film in regards to Phelps. If Phelps was pretty much in a position where he's fated to do IMF missions for the rest of his life, then his motivations become a lot more sympathetic. Not that making a villain more sympathetic is inherently bad, but Dead Recknoning doesn't seem to care what its implications are. It also doesn't really jive with the third film, where when it comes to saving Farris, Musgrave gives Ethan a clear choice of the mission.
CONCLUSION

All in all, film's still solid. This review took me ages to type up, and in little bits at that, so it's probably all over the place, but regardless, yeah. Good stuff.

Rankings below:

6) Fallout

5) Mission: Impossible

4) Mission: Impossible II

3) Mission: Impossible III

2) Dead Reckoning, Part 1

1) Rogue Nation
 

Xprimentyl

Made you look...
Legacy
Aug 13, 2011
6,570
4,860
118
Plano, TX
Country
United States
Gender
Male
The Wrath Of Becky: Meh / Great

Becky, a young girl who's dodged a few foster parenting situations finds herself in some semblance of contentment in a secluded home with an elderly woman and a job at a local diner. A run-in with three men who're in town for a rally of the "Nobel Men" (a not so subtle nod to the "Proud Boys," if you're keeping score) leads to their following her home where bad things happen... to everyone.

Apparently this is a sequel to the movie "Becky" which I never knew existed, and will likely watch at some point. But from what I've seen from this sequel, it's a rote revenge action thriller ala John Wick, The Equalizer, etc. Nothing exceptional, but given this is a sequel, I'm curious to find out where Becky got her clever "skills" from that make her as lethal as she is; maybe the first film divulges this. Watch if you want to.
 

thebobmaster

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 5, 2020
2,446
2,358
118
Country
United States
You know I’ve seen that movie three times now. Was never bored. Not once. I think changing the POV Autobot from Bumblebee to Mirage was a very wise move, even though he has way more in common with Bluestreak than Mirage as I know him, he was great fun.

If I had complaints they are thus: Wheeljack should have retained the G1 like design from Bumblebee, OR that character should have been Perceptor or Beachcomber. Also Wheeljack’s obviously Urkle inspired design is a little infuriating and dumb.
The only real issue I had that I still feel holds up on reflection: while it's nice to finally have her in a Transformers live-action movie (and no, the triplets don't count, fuck you Michael Bay), they didn't really do anything with Arcee. She spends a fair bit of time in combat as a support trooper, and lays down some fire, but I can't point to a single thing she did, or a single line she had, to make her stand out as a character, unlike most of the Autobots.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BrawlMan

Thaluikhain

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 16, 2010
19,013
3,763
118
Bright

Ok, the idea has some promise, but it didn't really go anywhere. It also doesn't help that some of the fight scenes where one magic superpowered assassin kills half a dozen armed police or gang members seems less convincing than nominal human John Wick killing dozens.

Oddly, I think this move suffered from too much money. It didn't have a big budget, as these things go, but filmed on a shoestring, with nobody you've ever heard of, it could have been a straight to DVD cult classic. As it was, meh. Spin off anime, and cancelled sequel due to it starring Will Smith.
 

Xprimentyl

Made you look...
Legacy
Aug 13, 2011
6,570
4,860
118
Plano, TX
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Big George Foreman: A'ight / Great

Story about the rise, fall, and rise of heavyweight boxer George Foreman.

About the only thing exceptional about this film is the fact that the actor portraying Foreman (Khris Davis) actually muscled up AND put on weight for the dichotomous times in Foreman's life. As I understand, the film was effectively shot in two halves so Davis could have time to drastically change his body in a very short period of time which is a fairly amazing feat (ask anyone who's gone to the gym every day for years and still can't drop those pesky love handles.) Other than that, it is a rote biopic that checks all of the boxes: impoverished beginnings, meteoric rise to success, infidelity, failure, humbling realities, and redemption; pretty much everything a scan of Wikipedia could tell you in about two minutes spread out across two hours. Not a bad movie; everyone did their jobs just fine, but it's absolutely nothing special.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gorfias

Casual Shinji

Should've gone before we left.
Legacy
Jul 18, 2009
19,987
4,736
118
Led astray by mean dog Thorn.
What the fuck ever happened to that dog anyway? All the vamps bite it, but Thorn is still around by the end. Maybe off to join vampire Tom Cruise and Christian Slater.
 

Baffle

Elite Member
Oct 22, 2016
3,476
2,758
118
What the fuck ever happened to that dog anyway? All the vamps bite it, but Thorn is still around by the end. Maybe off to join vampire Tom Cruise and Christian Slater.
Lost Boys was his last acting credit so I think he's still there waiting for Max to come home.
 

Johnny Novgorod

Bebop Man
Legacy
Feb 9, 2012
18,800
3,350
118
Spiderman No Way Home

I couldn't get over the silliness of the story or Spiderman's stupidity. The whole plot hinges on him not thinking anything through. His college application gets rejected and his first two responses are to either travel back in time or brainwash the world. THEN he tries contesting the rejection and all he has to do is run up to the lady's car and save her from himself so she goes "You're in, kid!" - you know, like those bullshit boomer stories about walking into an office and appropriating a job with a smile and a handshake.

I just don't buy any of it. I don't buy that it would be that easy to get a college to review a rejection, or that it would reject him or his friends in the first place, or that it would be that big a life-changing controversy that some asshole "revealed" Spiderman's identity in a viral TikTok. Are there no deepfakes in the MCU?

I don't even think the filmmaking is that smart by MCU standards. As soon as Spiderman's identity is revealed everyone's pointing at him atop bridges and skyscrapers shouting Look, it's Peter Parker! As if they can only see Spiderman now that they know his secret identity. And I know I'm supposed to be creaming my pants with the chock full of Spidey villains they crammed in here (without making it feel overstuffed) but... two of those are CGI, and the other three are all almost exclusively shot in singles like the actors never even met. Compare that to the scenes with Peter and his civ sidekicks.

And the humor in this sucks. Matt Murdock from the Netflix series shows up as Spidey's lawyer and catches a rock thrown at him despite being blind.

PP: How did you do that!?
MM: I'm a very good lawyer.

Dumb joke. Immediately thought of Wolverine in X2 tersely saying "art" when Iceman's mom asks what's he a teacher of, and what a better joke that is. It's Logan telling the lady to fuck off with the questions while giving a plainly fake answer (and being defiant about it). Instead what's the joke here? We already know you're a very good lawyer. You're not answering the question. Writers literally couldn't think of a single funny word for the punchline.

Nice to see Tobey and Andrew. 10/10
 
Last edited:

Casual Shinji

Should've gone before we left.
Legacy
Jul 18, 2009
19,987
4,736
118
I watched Guardians of the Galaxy 3.

I feel this might as well have just been a Rocket short film, since his flashback sections were the only parts that made me feel something. With the rest you can sense Gunn wasn't as into the story as he was in the previous movies. The humor was kinda cringey too. Gunn isn't a stranger to packing his scenes with very long jokes, but whereas in Peacemaker it succeeds, in GotG3 it really doesn't. Nebula especially had a hard time being a comedic lead.

The villain was nice and evil enough, but again that was mostly the flashbacks. Speaking of, I did like how dreadful and gnarly they made everything that happened to Rocket and the others. Showing the characters living the most painful and miserable existence, and still having this (misplaced) positive outlook, because they've never known anything but agony.

Oh, and Adam Warlock is there too, I guess. It's a shame nothing is really done with him, because Will Poulter gives what little scenes he has a very charming energy.
 

thebobmaster

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 5, 2020
2,446
2,358
118
Country
United States
Just got back from The Haunted Mansion. I had a surprisingly good time with it. The cast was pretty solid, and most surprisingly, Jared Leto was a very effective villain. My only issue with the movie is that it was fairly inconsistent tonally. There were definitely some good laughs to be had, but there were also some surprisingly intense (for a PG film) horror scenes that clashed a bit, so it was kind of hard to tell what tone the movie was ultimately going for. That said, they really did a disservice releasing this in July, because it would have been a great little October family movie.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BrawlMan

Absent

And twice is the only way to live.
Jan 25, 2023
1,594
1,557
118
Country
Switzerland
Gender
The boring one
Dumb joke.
Aw, it really worked on me. The scene and the line. To the point where (and it was the purpose) I watched the 3 seasons of Daredevil because of it (and enjoyed two of them). I barely knew anything about Daredevil, and he's a nice but stupid (or stupidly implemented) concept. But the whole of the MCU is stupid. And that's not the point, it doesn't detract from enjoyability. There's nothing in No Way Home that makes less sense than, say, Thanos' moronic plan for universe sustainability (cull the population 60 years back, once - instead of changing needs, resources, whatever, with this nonsense can-do-everything glove). All the big decisions in these films are based on the reasoning of 8 years old superhero comics readers. There's nothing intelligent to any of them, plot-wise. Their qualities are in the tone, the characters constructions, the interaction. Plots are as much an excuse in an MCU movie as in an escape room or a shoot'em up.

And character-wise, that film was full of sweet moments, like the Andrew Garfield spidey's one. I never was into Spider Man, haven't seen half of their movies, but just having been chatting through the years with fans of these movies made some of the discussions in this film very moving to me, on their behalf, as echoes and validation of their enthusiasms. It's a lovely gift or homage to fans. And also works well as entertainment for non-fans. With the superhero caveat of boringly long pointless fight sequences (peppered with nice little instants), but that's a given.

But again, plot-wise, this is MCU. This is like Gremlins. Nobody complains about the plot in Gremlins.

Heck, I'll put it even more accurately. Plot and plot launching character motivations, in the MCU, are like the murderer's motive in an episode of Monk.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: BrawlMan

Johnny Novgorod

Bebop Man
Legacy
Feb 9, 2012
18,800
3,350
118
Aw, it really worked on me. The scene and the line. To the point where (and it was the purpose) I watched the 3 seasons of Daredevil because of it (and enjoyed two of them). I barely knew anything about Daredevil, and he's a nice but stupid (or stupidly implemented) concept. But the whole of the MCU is stupid. And that's not the point, it doesn't detract from enjoyability. There's nothing in No Way Home that makes less sense than, say, Thanos' moronic plan for universe sustainability (cull the population 60 years back, once - instead of changing needs, resources, whatever, with this nonsense can-do-everything glove). All the big decisions in these films are based on the reasoning of 8 years old superhero comics readers. There's nothing intelligent to any of them, plot-wise. Their qualities are in the tone, the characters constructions, the interaction. Plots are as much an excuse in an MCU movie as in an escape room or a shoot'em up.

And character-wise, that film was full of sweet moments, like the Andrew Garfield spidey's one. I never was into Spider Man, haven't seen half of their movies, but just having been chatting through the years with fans of these movies made some of the discussions in this film very moving to me, on their behalf, as echoes and validation of their enthusiasms. It's a lovely gift or homage to fans. And also works well as entertainment for non-fans. With the superhero caveat of boringly long pointless fight sequences (peppered with nice little instants), but that's a given.

But again, plot-wise, this is MCU. This is like Gremlins. Nobody complains about the plot in Gremlins.

Heck, I'll put it even more accurately. Plot and plot launching character motivations, in the MCU, are like the murderer's motive in an episode of Monk.
The thing is I don't remember Gremlins or the sequel ever asking anybody to take them seriously. But in Spiderman I'm supposed to feel angst for Peter and his friends. I'm suppose to be moved by character deaths and overdue meetings/rematches/whatever.

To me the Tom Holland Spidey just never found his footing in his own movies. He's a good sidekick to RDJ and Strange but not a very compelling protagonist. In all of 3 movies he never even fought a villain that was his own. Vulture is Iron Man's enemy. Mysterio is Iron Man's enemy. Both movies are essentially about Iron Man's relationship with Spider-Man, and Spiderman having to cope with too much RDJ or not enough RDJ.

And for the big finale they had to bring two other Spider-Man(s) and villains from like six different movies, because Tom Holland Spidey never built anything for himself - other than being cute with Zendaya. He's not that interesting and Holland's puppy-eyed aw shucks shtick can't carry a movie.

Garfield very gallantly assumes the role of Ugly Sonic but for Sony to point and laugh at how lame their own movies were isn't that funny.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gorfias