Discuss and Rate the Last Film You Watched

[Xprimentyl]

The Burial (2023)

This going to be the most "wgaf" review ever, but the same could be said of the movie. However, I watched it therefore you get my opinion.

The Burial (2023) is another in a long line of schmaltzy, feel good, loose biography comedy dramas designed to kill an afternoon and give you a quick "TIL" of very medium upvote worthy content.

It stars Tommy Lee Jones as real life Burial director Jerry O'keef and JF as Willie E. Gary a high power personal injury lawyer.

Jerry O'keef is on the verge of bankruptsy, losing all his funeral homes when he's approached by a burial corporation about selling all his homes. Initially disgusted with their attitude of profit over humanity, he agrees to sell enough homes to get out of bankrupsty.

Rather than close the deal they string him along for 6 months, knowing he'll be forced to sell all or face debt collection as his debts mount.

He decides to sue them, knowing at best he would have to settle for less than hes already in debt, but his principles force him to take them to court because he feels unjustly treated, he manages to talk Willie E. Gary into helping with the idea that it could be a big media case and it also happens to take place in an all black county. Willie had initially declined because he specializes in injury but also strictly helps black communities.

As things become more clear about O'keef during the trial it's revealed that he's both a war hero, a serious Philanthropist of impoverished communities and banned the KKK from his city while brief mayor and the story becomes less about contract law and more about classism and racism.

It was a solid movie. Tommy lee Jones and Jamie Foxx are both fine, the story pulls at the heart strings, but not firmly. You feel good for 2 hours and kill an afternoon, but theres nothing coming out of left field and its not winning any oscars.

7/10

If I had any explicit notes I think they needed to punch up the dialog, its very bland procedural with the exception of a rather compelling scene between Jamie Foxx and his counterpart played by Jurnee Smollett, debating the OJ trial. I got the definite impression that was an add-in maybe by Foxx himself. He provides all the energy in the film.

The Burial: 7:10

As you've already provided the synopsis, and an overall assessment I agree with, I'll simply add a couple of my own personal takes on this film.

Might have been an editing issue, but it felt kinda rushed. Foxx comes across as an overly-confident, egotistical, and very particular lawyer, and Jones as a humble, disaffected-if-jaded pushover talked into the quest for unreasonable justice by Foxx which Foxx is more than ready to admit is for his own (Foxx's) benefit. Foxx drags everyone along with him into the teeth of a basically unwinnable trial, and upon his first procedural failure, laments that he "likes" Jones on a personal level, and wishes to stay on for Jones' benefit. However, at no point do we really see this relationship develop beyond a cursory level. I mean, there are a couple of moments of levity between the two of them, but Jones plays such a convincing limp fish countering Foxx's flamboyant ego, that it's hard to buy that the latter might have gravitated to the former in any substantive way.

Still, t'was a decent courtroom drama; one I'd like to see YouTube's Legal Eagle scrutinize, but he's [to my knowledge] not done any of those types of videos in a while. The whole "Trump is a thing that won't go away" has pretty much dominated his content for quite some time.

 

[Piscian]

The Burial: 7:10

As you've already provided the synopsis, and an overall assessment I agree with, I'll simply add a couple of my own personal takes on this film.

Might have been an editing issue, but it felt kinda rushed. Foxx comes across as an overly-confident, egotistical, and very particular lawyer, and Jones as a humble, disaffected-if-jaded pushover talked into the quest for unreasonable justice by Foxx which Foxx is more than ready to admit is for his own (Foxx's) benefit. Foxx drags everyone along with him into the teeth of a basically unwinnable trial, and upon his first procedural failure, laments that he "likes" Jones on a personal level, and wishes to stay on for Jones' benefit. However, at no point do we really see this relationship develop beyond a cursory level. I mean, there are a couple of moments of levity between the two of them, but Jones plays such a convincing limp fish countering Foxx's flamboyant ego, that it's hard to buy that the latter might have gravitated to the former in any substantive way.

Still, t'was a decent courtroom drama; one I'd like to see YouTube's Legal Eagle scrutinize, but he's [to my knowledge] not done any of those types of videos in a while. The whole "Trump is a thing that won't go away" has pretty much dominated his content for quite some time.

Honestly I think he'd tear it to shreds as I'm a layman and picked out several things I just don't believe for a second would be allowed in a courtroom, its hard to say though sometimes he goes pretty soft.

Yeah it does feel rushed like an extra half an hour of character development wouldn't have hurt the film. There just never felt like there was any energy in the writing, you're mostly just watching Foxx prance around chewing scenes.

 

[thebobmaster]

A ★★★★ review of Mad God (2021)

This movie almost defies reviewing. There's no dialogue, so I can't comment on the acting. The music, however, is excellent. There's not so much a story as there is an hour and 20 odd minutes of exploring a very neat stop-motion setting, with fantastic animation doing so. Despite that, however...

letterboxd.com

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

Finch

Another Apple TV+ original successfully consumed. Basically a one man show starring Tom Hanks, who is 1) alone and dying from radiation poisoning in the post-Apocalypse, so he 2) creates a robot to look after his dog when he's gone and 3) the whole gang (Hanks, his dog, the robot and a robot dog) sets out on a motorhome road trip to San Fran. I forgot why go to San Fran as soon as they chose San Fran; after the movie was over I looked up the plot on Wikipedia and there's apparently no reason given.

It's very much a pandemic movie, from its apocalyptic setting, its themes of grief and isolation and the one man show cast (which also kinda deflates the tension when you assume, correctly, that they're never going to run into anybody else). It's clearly on a shoestring budget but the movie looks pretty good. And the robot itself looks cool and feels like a proper character. There's quite a few puppeteers credited at the end which accounts for the very realistic, convincing weight and body language of the actual thing.

It's all fairly straightforward and predictable. Santaolalla does his sad guitar schtick score, which HAS to be a nod to The Last of Us. My only qualm with the movie, other than it's a little too long for such a thin plot, is that I never cared for the dog as much as I did for the robot, since the dog never acts as more than a plot device; nor is the Hanks-dog relationship more meaningful than the Hanks-robot relationship, since the robot gets to be a proper character with an arc and all.

 

[Hawki]

Asterix Conquers America (4/10)

Well this was kinda balls.

This is an adaptation of 'Asterix and the Great Crossing'. Haven't read that particular Asterix graphic novel, can't comment on it, but as a film on its own? Well, that none of the Gauls "conquer" America aside, the film's just lacklustre.

I'll bypass commenting on the irony of a German-produced film adapting a French-produced comic and translating it into English, but what I will say is that while minor, the voice acting is extremely annoying. All the Romans sans a few (e.g. Ceasar) speak in exagerated Italian accents, and while you can obviously make a connection between Italian and Latin, it's grating all the same. The Gauls, for some reason, speak in English cockney accents for some reason, and the Native Americans...heck, they don't get a language at all. But I might be able to forgive the voice acting if the dialogue was anything special, but alas, nup. The writing is dull, the plot is dull, everything's just, well, dull. In a way, it's less aggravating than Secret of the Magic Potion (which irritated me to no end for reasons I've previously described), but I'd say of the two, ACA is worse. It's just got nothing to offer.

Maybe I'm just older? I devoured the Asterix comics as a kid, but looking back, my memories of them were that they were quite clever and humorous, even if they had a wide audience (the equivalent of a family film). I dunno. All I can say is that ACA is balls, Secret of the Magic Potion is balls, and it arguably commits the greatest sin an adaptation can, making you wonder if the original material was ever good in the first place.

Also, minor point, but no-one in 43BC thought the world was flat. Maybe a few loonies, but the Greeks already knew the world was round in this part of the world. Not that I expect Asterix to be a retelling of history, but still...

 

[thebobmaster]

A ★★★★★ review of Blood and Black Lace (1964)

One of the earliest giallos, and possibly one of the best. The plot of this film involves a boutique shop named Christians, where a woman named Isabella is strangled by a mysterious figure in a suit and a mask that completely hides his face. Whatever she was killed for presumably died with...

letterboxd.com

 

[Thaluikhain]

Asterix Conquers America (4/10)

Well this was kinda balls.

This is an adaptation of 'Asterix and the Great Crossing'. Haven't read that particular Asterix graphic novel, can't comment on it, but as a film on its own? Well, that none of the Gauls "conquer" America aside, the film's just lacklustre.

I'll bypass commenting on the irony of a German-produced film adapting a French-produced comic and translating it into English, but what I will say is that while minor, the voice acting is extremely annoying. All the Romans sans a few (e.g. Ceasar) speak in exagerated Italian accents, and while you can obviously make a connection between Italian and Latin, it's grating all the same. The Gauls, for some reason, speak in English cockney accents for some reason, and the Native Americans...heck, they don't get a language at all. But I might be able to forgive the voice acting if the dialogue was anything special, but alas, nup. The writing is dull, the plot is dull, everything's just, well, dull. In a way, it's less aggravating than Secret of the Magic Potion (which irritated me to no end for reasons I've previously described), but I'd say of the two, ACA is worse. It's just got nothing to offer.

Maybe I'm just older? I devoured the Asterix comics as a kid, but looking back, my memories of them were that they were quite clever and humorous, even if they had a wide audience (the equivalent of a family film). I dunno. All I can say is that ACA is balls, Secret of the Magic Potion is balls, and it arguably commits the greatest sin an adaptation can, making you wonder if the original material was ever good in the first place.

Also, minor point, but no-one in 43BC thought the world was flat. Maybe a few loonies, but the Greeks already knew the world was round in this part of the world. Not that I expect Asterix to be a retelling of history, but still...

Yeah, the Asterix movies are a bit hit or miss. Or at least "ok or miss".

 

[thebobmaster]

A ★★★ review of The Infernal Cauldron (1903)

It's two minutes long. Not much to say about it. Amusing enough, and hey, the devils managed to get away with killing three presumably innocent people without the studios demanding punishment, so this might be the first movie where the villains win.

letterboxd.com

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

Killers of the Flower Moon

Another great picture by Marty. My only qualm is the 3 and a half hour length. I can't say I was ever bored but I did grow a bit impatient around certain parts. I think it comes with the territory of making a thing primarily for streaming. You can only screen a 200 minute movie so many times a day in a theater, but Apple TV+ doesn't give a shit how long it is so long as you don't go over budget. So you end up with something like Killers of the Flower Moon (or The Irishman), which is top tier filmmaking, even if slightly overindulgent with how long Marty wants to bask in it.

Fantastically insidious score by the late Robert Robertson. And not just great, great performances by Leo/De Niro/Lily Gladstone, but the whole movie is cast memorably with supporting parts.

 

[thebobmaster]

A ★★★★★ review of OPAL (2020)

One of the hardest short films I've watched, but for all the right reasons. The plot of this film follows Opal, a young girl who is just having dinner with her family when she hears crying, or at least some sound, from the house across the street. Against the wishes of her family, she decides to...

letterboxd.com

 

[PsychedelicDiamond]

Rosemary's Baby (1968)

In the spirit of the season I felt like catching up to some classic horror films. I saw this fairly shortly after the Exorcist, which is still pretty great, where Rosemary's Baby actually comes off as quite awkward in comparison.

First things first, Rosemary's Baby follows a young couple moving into an apartment complex and having their lifes taken over by a resident satanist cult grooming the woman, Rosemary, into giving birth to a child that's integral to a prophecy of theirs.

Rosemary's Baby has a lot of weird idiosyncrasies that I'm neither sure are all intentional, nor what their intention is if they are. On the most basic level, it's about a woman who becomes the victim of an occult conspiracy as a coven of satanist witches and warlocks takes control of her marriage, her social life and her pregnancy. They cut her off from her friends, they indoctrinate her abusive husband, they make sure the doctor she sees is one of theirs, put simply, they take away her agency.

It's here where RB actually has something interesting going on, thematically. When it draws parallels between the existence of the put upon 60's housewife, forced to submit to societal expectations, and the experiences of a cult victim forced to submit to the rules of an authoritarian and highly dogmatic and exclusive clique. Certainly emphasized by how said cult is depicted explicitly not as a cabal of mysterious villainous mystics, but mainly as a bunch of nosy elderly upper middle class busybodies who'd be just as likely to dedicate their retirement to gossiping about their neighbours and getting mad at the kids of today as they are to summoning the antichrist and bringing about the end of days.

The movie is definitely at its best when it sees Rosemary slowly figuring out what has been done to her and trying to escape from it. And definitely peaks, both narratively and thematically, when she finally manages to get an appointment with a regular doctor, only for him to dismiss her experiences as hysteria and hand her over to her husband.

And if the movie only consisted of those parts that work it would have been really good but it doesn't, so it isn't. Rosemary's Baby takes a while to establish an effective sense of hitchcockian paranoia, spending a lot of time on half serious, half tongue in cheek melodrama that insists on character dynamics, well past the point they've been clearly established and drags out a final act that goes from redundant, to ridiculous, to annoying.

And this is where I'm honestly starting to wonder how much of the movie is intended to be kind of ironic and subversive, and how much of it is just really clunky. Aside from its awkwardly paced four act structure and the depiction of its villains as a bunch of goofy eccentric uncles and aunties it feels like it undermines its effectiveness as a horror movie with bathos while the obvious satirical and darkly comedic elements are way cornier than they were probably intended to be.

There is a solid commentary on the role of the housewife and mother in 60's society somewhere in Rosemary's Baby but let me be honest here, as a horror movie it's not really scary and as a satire it's not particularly hard hitting, not any more at least. Maybe this just played better in the 60's. It's a movie that feels weirder the more I think about. And I'm sorry for going on a tangent here, but honestly, what is up with it?

Both this movie and Chinatown prominently features the villains manipulating and sexually abusing a woman, and they're directed by Roman Polanski who was found guilty for drugging and sexually abusing a teenager. Like, is Polanski aware that he has basically cast himself as the bad guy in more than one of his own movies? Did he chose to adapt this material as some weird therapeutic exercise? How did the plot of this movie not only foreshadow his own criminal history, but also to some extent the murder of his wife by a couple of outlaw cultists?

Most of those questions are arguably more interesting than the movie itself, which has its moments but is mostly kind of a mess did didn't really work for me. It's one of those movies that I feel could have been saved in the edit of someone would have found it in themselves to trim the fat and really bring out the stuff that works. But as far as classics go, it's one of those that I don't think live up to their status.

 

[Phoenixmgs]

Unblocked - 5/10

A South Korean movie about a creepy guy installing spyware on a chick's phone so he can see exactly what she's doing via the camera and typing with a keylogger. He has access to all her social media accounts and everything. Overall, the movie is just messy, there's this other half about a murder mystery that really doesn't even need to be there, and the movie would've been far better on a smaller scale with it just focused on the main character and creeper (at a tight 90 minutes or less). There's also just so much camera shots on phones and messages and apps (which makes sense) but kinda annoying watching a foreign language film with subtitles in that regard. The secondary plot feels rather oddly resolved at the end as well to where I was like why'd you even do that if that's how you're gonna end it. The movie is definitely doing some commentary on how attached/addicted people are to their phones and it looks like South Korea is even worse than the US in that regard. Ending spoiler: The creeper was inferred to be this detective's son the whole movie and then, I'm pretty sure, the creeper was like "ha, I tricked you and I'm not your son at all!!!" and I'm just like what was the point of all this then?

Old Dads - 6/10

A movie that Bill Burr wrote and directed so you'll basically like it if you like Bill Burr and hate if you hate Bill Burr's comedy. The movie is legit pretty funny most of the time but it very much feels like a comedian's first try at writing a script and the writing is very much stand-up comedy slightly massaged to make actual dialogue and a plot. I didn't find the core conflict between Bill Burr and his wife to be genuine, it felt very artificial, and Bill Burr overcoming that is the big climax at the end and it really didn't work for me. In the end, the movie was entertaining most of the time because I do find Bill Burr rather funny but overall, it doesn't really work well as an actual movie.

 

[thebobmaster]

A ★★★★ review of Night Crawl (2019)

Not a bad short at all. The music is excellent, and the acting is pretty solid, with only one word of dialogue throughout the 8 minute run time. There are a couple of decent jump scares as well. I just couldn't give it a higher score because...well, there's derivative, and then there's almost...

letterboxd.com

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

Causeway

J-Law is back from Afghanistan with PTSD (she got blowed up but still looks red carpet-ready) and hooks up with another traumatized loner back home in New Orleans. They hang out, they swap backstories, they have a big fight three quarters of the way through (like clockwork) and that's your lot. Lost in Translation meets every indie movie about melancholy homecomings I've ever seen at every festival ever. It all comes down to really good performances by J-Law and Brian Tyree Henry.

 

[Old_Hunter_77]

Old Dads - 6/10

A movie that Bill Burr wrote and directed so you'll basically like it if you like Bill Burr and hate if you hate Bill Burr's comedy. The movie is legit pretty funny most of the time but it very much feels like a comedian's first try at writing a script and the writing is very much stand-up comedy slightly massaged to make actual dialogue and a plot. I didn't find the core conflict between Bill Burr and his wife to be genuine, it felt very artificial, and Bill Burr overcoming that is the big climax at the end and it really didn't work for me. In the end, the movie was entertaining most of the time because I do find Bill Burr rather funny but overall, it doesn't really work well as an actual movie.

I do like Bill Burr mostly (used to love him) but my god that trailer was... you know, one of my pet peeves with the youngs on the internet is calling everything "cringe." But that trailer made me cringe, it was so sad. It's like "what's with the vegan social media woke these days amirite?" ugh.

 

[Dalisclock]

Saw a number of movies this week.

Super Mario Bros Movie

Honestly, I found it entertaining and that's really all I wanted out of it. Does it do anything risky? Nope. Is it jam packed full of fan service? Hell yes. Do I know exactly where this is going from the word go? Very much so. But it also feels like it captures the spirit of Mario Bros, a franchise with infamously little plot or continuity, probably far more then any previous film/tv adaptation and really, that makes me happy. Maybe if they do a sequel they can improve on the base experience but for now this is good enough.

In The Heights

So apparently this was based on Lin Manuel Mirandas first show and it fits. It's not as polished as Hamilton but it's still entertaining and shows his talent. If I have any complaints, it's that it's laser focused on the Latino Community of Washington Heights NYC and while it's good at making it kind of interesting and it clearly cares about the subject matter, it's also not quite good enough to really grab me like Hamilton would, which admittedly has broader appeal. I feel bad for saying that and while I enjoyed it, I'd honestly rather watch Hamilton again given the choice.

Indiana Jones and Dial of Destiny

This is aggressively average and ironically Crystal Skull ends up having more character to it for a number of reasons, namely using the Soviets as villians and going in a more Sci-fi direction. This, OTOH, feels very much like a retread of previous films, desperately trying to bring back indy's glory days and honestly, Harrison Ford just looks fucking tired. He's pushing 80 and watching him try to do stunts is painful. Even the parts that take place in WW2 are basically him digitally De-Aged but with old Harrison Ford Voice and it kind of breaks the illusion. Mads Mikkelsen, the villain, basically steals the movie from Ford, though Phoebe Waller-Bridge is also a lot of fun to watch.

The plot is honestly nonsense, which is basically Werner Von Braun chasing after the Antikythera Mechanism, which here is basically a Time Travel compass and in WAY BETTER CONDITION then the actual device(which I've seen personally) which also kinda ruins the suspension of disbelief. Also the CIA is invovled but that whole bit gets dropped pretty early on. It's wierd. It does pick up in the final act but only because of the audacity of the finale.


Eternals

I have mixed feelings about this. I like the concept but man is the execution all over the fucking place. Chole Zoe is apparently a good director, so I hear anyway, but it feels like she was handed this and didn't really know what to do with it. To be fair, Marvel also can't make up it's mind how to treat the whole "God/s" thing in their movies and this does nothing to help at all.

It also doesn't help that these 10 maybe influenced a lot of earth mythology but it's really hard to tell beyond the names, a lot of which are pulled from Greek mythology(Athena, Icarus, Circe, Hephestus) but then you get Kingo and Drigu who I don't fucking know what/who they're supposed to be. Hell, I don't even know what Kingo's thing IS, other then Bollywood musicals. Mercury is Roman and Gilgamesh is Sumerian. Sprite is basically a Fairy, I guess. But Circe, Ajax and Icarus aren't even gods in greek mythos, they're basically kinda normal people who have a story about them(Circe was a minor character in the odyessy, Ajax is one of the Greek heros of the Epic Cycle and was probably based on a real person at some point while Icarus is basically a dude who had wax wings who got a little to cocky and paid for it). And the fact we don't know who else they supposedly influenced in mythology kinda irks me. The fact apparently these 10 apparently did a lot of that but then THOR and ODIN and LOKI are real no shit gods and not just immortals who have godlike powers. But then you get Arishem is a Legit creator God, and implied to be the Big G God in more ways then one, and Tiamet who is basically a Primordial avatar of the Watery Chaos the universe is made from in Sumerian Mythology and yeah, I'm just fucking confused now.

I'm sorry, I honestly don't know what to make of half the shit going on in Eternals. It feels like Zoe really likes interpersonal relationship in the film(which isn't a bad thing) but when the overall rest of the movie comes into play the whole thing feels held together by Duct tape.

 

[thebobmaster]

A ★½ review of Demonia (1990)

This was my second Fulci. I am glad it wasn't my first, because if it was, I might well have thought the man a schlocky man with little talent. The plot of this film is focused on an archaeological dig site in Greece (I think) led by Paul (Brett Halsey) and his student Liza (Meg Register). While...

letterboxd.com

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

The Killer

Michael Fassbender plays... the titular killer, a cold, nameless, painstakingly methodical hitman that constantly inventories his beliefs and provides his own commentary track as if Fincher is making a documentary about him. Despite his clinical approach he fumbles a hit and spends the rest of the movie cleaning up behind him (often in spite of or contrary to his droning set of mantras). This is as straightforward as it gets and the plot never complicates itself above it. It's a solid character study (Fassbender is compelling as fuck) and a beautifully stylized movie with a great soundtrack by Reznor/Ross that is alternatingly glitchy and angelical. The ending feels like it peters out a little bit, maybe because this is a mere glimpse into a long-running comic book series, maybe because the plot is so thin the ending is necessarily anticlimactic. But I rate this high. It's up there with the deeply meditative Le Samourai and Kitano's meandering Yakuza movies.

 

[Gordon_4]

Eternals

I have mixed feelings about this. I like the concept but man is the execution all over the fucking place. Chole Zoe is apparently a good director, so I hear anyway, but it feels like she was handed this and didn't really know what to do with it. To be fair, Marvel also can't make up it's mind how to treat the whole "God/s" thing in their movies and this does nothing to help at all.

It also doesn't help that these 10 maybe influenced a lot of earth mythology but it's really hard to tell beyond the names, a lot of which are pulled from Greek mythology(Athena, Icarus, Circe, Hephestus) but then you get Kingo and Drigu who I don't fucking know what/who they're supposed to be. Hell, I don't even know what Kingo's thing IS, other then Bollywood musicals. Mercury is Roman and Gilgamesh is Sumerian. Sprite is basically a Fairy, I guess. But Circe, Ajax and Icarus aren't even gods in greek mythos, they're basically kinda normal people who have a story about them(Circe was a minor character in the odyessy, Ajax is one of the Greek heros of the Odyssey and Icarus is basically a dude who had wax wings). And the fact we don't know who else they supposedly influenced in mythology kinda irks me. The fact apparently these 10 apparently did a lot of that but then THOR and ODIN and LOKI are real no shit gods and not just immortals who have godlike powers. But then you get Arishem is a Legit creator God, and implied to be the Big G God in more ways then one, and Tiamet who is basically a Primordial avatar of the Watery Chaos the universe is made from in Sumerian Mythology and yeah, I'm just fucking confused now.

I'm sorry, I honestly don't know what to make of half the shit going on in Eternals. It feels like Zoe really likes interpersonal relationship in the film(which isn't a bad thing) but when the overall rest of the movie comes into play the whole thing feels held together by Duct tape.

I have a deep and abiding affection for The Eternals, although every single criticism you've levied against it is as far as I can recall, very true. But for some reason I loved the stupid thing in all its broken confused glory.

I do suspect that one reason is that for a really long time in the early 2000s, fresh off JLU, I wanted a Wonder Woman movie and as far as I was concerned, Angelina Jolie should be the one to do it. It never happened obviously but seeing her play Thena was kind of getting my wish. And to be honest, I think she was great.

 

[thebobmaster]

Eternals

I have mixed feelings about this. I like the concept but man is the execution all over the fucking place. Chole Zoe is apparently a good director, so I hear anyway, but it feels like she was handed this and didn't really know what to do with it. To be fair, Marvel also can't make up it's mind how to treat the whole "God/s" thing in their movies and this does nothing to help at all.

It also doesn't help that these 10 maybe influenced a lot of earth mythology but it's really hard to tell beyond the names, a lot of which are pulled from Greek mythology(Athena, Icarus, Circe, Hephestus) but then you get Kingo and Drigu who I don't fucking know what/who they're supposed to be. Hell, I don't even know what Kingo's thing IS, other then Bollywood musicals. Mercury is Roman and Gilgamesh is Sumerian. Sprite is basically a Fairy, I guess. But Circe, Ajax and Icarus aren't even gods in greek mythos, they're basically kinda normal people who have a story about them(Circe was a minor character in the odyessy, Ajax is one of the Greek heros of the Odyssey and Icarus is basically a dude who had wax wings). And the fact we don't know who else they supposedly influenced in mythology kinda irks me. The fact apparently these 10 apparently did a lot of that but then THOR and ODIN and LOKI are real no shit gods and not just immortals who have godlike powers. But then you get Arishem is a Legit creator God, and implied to be the Big G God in more ways then one, and Tiamet who is basically a Primordial avatar of the Watery Chaos the universe is made from in Sumerian Mythology and yeah, I'm just fucking confused now.

I'm sorry, I honestly don't know what to make of half the shit going on in Eternals. It feels like Zoe really likes interpersonal relationship in the film(which isn't a bad thing) but when the overall rest of the movie comes into play the whole thing feels held together by Duct tape.

Eternals is probably the only MCU project where I think it truly would have benefited from being made a miniseries rather than a movie. As a movie, it was a bit too long to really hold my interest, primarily because it's a character-focused movie where I didn't really care about the characters who got the majority of the focus (Sirse and Ikaris). As a miniseries, they could have spent more time fleshing out the characters, maybe have each episode putting a different character into focus, which would have helped with that.

As it was, Eternals was...not terrible, but the MCU movie I have the least interest in going back to watch.