15
votes
Midweek Movie Free Talk
Have you watched any movies recently you want to discuss? Any films you want to recommend or are hyped about? Feel free to discuss anything here.
Please just try to provide fair warning of spoilers if you can.
I felt like watching a shitty action movie tonight and I watched Fast and Furious (the 4th in the franchise). It’s bad, but I loved it. It’s so, so dumb, but car go vroom. If I had not known the release date, I’d have guessed 2009 anyways, it’s just so very much a product of its time. I have the rest on deck, this is the furthest I’ve been in the franchise. I’ve seen the first two a handful of times each and now Tokyo Drift and 4 once each. On to Fast Five!
I also watched Deadpool and Wolverine finally. I love both characters and just didn’t get around to it. It’s exactly what I personally wanted. The plot was extremely dumb in places, but I got two hours of R rated Deadpool and Wolverine fucking shit up. The jokes very much landed with me, too, so I thoroughly enjoyed it.
You're going to really enjoy the rest of the franchise. It becomes so much more dumb and way more vroom!
My Summer of Love - 4/10.
I liked some parts of this movie, but most of it not so much. The story was very ungratifying.
Venom: The Last Dance - 6/10.
Good stupid fun.
All the Money in the World - 7/10.
Very well made movie and I couldn't believe that one of the main characters' scenes were only shot like weeks before the release date!? Some things fell flat though, I especially didn't like how streneous Michelle Williams acted throughout the whole movie.
Headhunters - 2/10.
Truly awful. Practically everything fell flat. The action was supposed to be so dumb that you'd laugh, but it was just cringeworthy. Nothing made sense in regards to the plot - Jo Nesbø writes airport novels after all. There is no reason for any character to do any of the things they did. And this is supposed to be a dark comedy? The only thing funny about this movie was how laughably bad it was.
The Outrun - 8/10.
This movie was tough but great. There are a couple of things I though weren't great, like it was a bit overlong in the beginning and kind of trodded along for parts of it. If it had been tighter, it would have been a 9/10. Something else was I was quite confused by the many flashbacks to different periods in time, but that's more of a skull issue lol - the second third or half was incredible and so let me gush:
Spoilers inside
Two moments made me cry. The SA scene was telegraphed but it still shocked me. It was made really well and chaotically, so it had a big punch. It was over quite fast though and avoided any and all tropes as for once the victim could scream for help and actually got it. It was building with tension and then you breathe a sigh of relief as she has pictures taken of her wounds. But the point that I got really emotional was when Daynin was shown to be waiting in the hall for Rona.
The second one was after the party on the island. She steps out for some air and
Santathe grocer finds her there. They smalltalk for a moment and then he just cuts through with "so how long have you been sober?" and that just hit me super hard too. Saoirse's face was just great there.Yet another thing I loved was the intense noise whenever she was feeling a lot of mental anguish.. that is just such a great representation of how it feels to have that much going on in your head. One of the best depictions of this that I have seen.
The ending was great too. It cuts back and forth between her having fun with directing the waves while sober for 63 days, and then back to when she was still drinking and clubbing. So I think it meant she can finally feel happy while sober, even though she said the opposite.
Army of Thieves - DNF.
Got halfway through this but it was too late in the evening and I got tired so didn't finish it. Intended to watch the other half the next day but when it came to it, I just.. didn't care. Pretty soulless movie.
Snatch - 5/10.
Speaking of soulless, this was just kind of boring? Guy Ritchie as much of a hit and miss director as Ridley Scott - even though he is overall just one or two points (out of 10) better. I'll usually check out their new movies but for Ritchie, his movies float around a 5 or 6 and other times between 7 and an 8. 5-6 to Snatch, Sherlock Holmes, and King Arthur, and especially bad in my opinion was The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare which was just such a turd an got a 3 from me. I do intend to check out Operation Fortune: Ruse de Guerre which I do have tempered expectations about but I love Jason Statham, and this seems like another one of his good mindless turn-of-your-brain-for-2-hours movies. A bag of chips with dip and/or candy and Bob's your uncle! Also on the list is The Covenant but that one has a much higher IMDB score which I usually trust.
Ritchie is still an interesting director and going back to Snatch, this is however a movie I definitely don't feel deserves such a high score. It's #120 on the list of all time best movies..! Baffles me. Like I said, it felt soulless and boring, even though I really liked a ton of things about it. It clocks in at 100 minutes but it felt so long! Like at least half an hour longer than it was. The characters are all quite unique and interesting, but none of them seem to go through any development at all. The editing and quick pace in some scenes was a delight to watch, but somehow the movie just still didn't land? I can't quite put my finger on it. I was somewhat entertained but I also found myself yawning and checking my phone because it struggled to keep my attention. I'm glad I watched it though as it's a bit of a cult film, so now I no longer feel like there's a hole in that kinda funny list I feel we all have about "oh I should really watch this some day" - Titanic is in that category lol
Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes - 8/10.
Was pleasantly surprised by this. I had heard some negative things about it but nope! Great movie. It was steering towards cliched storytelling multiple times but it always took another route which was really well pulled off. A rare good reboot. Can't wait for the next one!
Random aside, have you watched Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels from Ritchie? They are very similar movies, I think I remember reading that he made Snatch for American audiences after the first one. I don't know, but I personally prefer Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels.
I have! Been a year or two but I definitely liked that one a lot more.
Speaking of his other movies, I watched Operation Fortune: Ruse de Guerre and then The Covenant the other day and liked both. The former for what it was - braindead action. The latter for some great human interpersonal connection. I might write a little more about them in the next weekly thread.
Sounds about like how I feel about Ritchie. Lock, Stock probably is coasting on a lot of nostalgia for his style. It was all buzzy way back when “the next Tarantino!”
That said, the series spinoff/remake of The Gentlemen was enjoyable. I don’t recall which streaming service it’s on- Netflix I think?
I do quite like his style but yeah, this one was a miss for me.
While I didn't mind The Gentlemen the show, I felt it became kind of muddled towards the last few episodes. I liked the movie a lot more and would definitely recommend that over the show (if anyone is reading along or asked me I guess)
I wrapped up the Kubrick filmography with Full Metal Jacket. It was surprising and fun to see how many quotes I have seen and heard in all kinds of places before that came from this movie. Its influence reaches far. I also enjoyed the choice of music. It sets the tone perfectly. Kubrick uses a different way of making an anti-war movie that isn't as direct as he did in Paths of Glory. We just see the military abuse and brainwashing and where it ultimately leads to, told in a very neutral cold manner. I am not super well versed in Vietnam movies but it didn't do a whole lot for me despite being generally impressed with the high quality of filmmaking that Kubrick always comes with.
With Kubrick in general I think 2001 is the pinnacle achievement, but it has been several years since I last saw it, so I am not entirely sure it will still be my favorite. I found all his film to be worth watching, where I hold Dr. Strangelove and Paths of Glory in pretty high regard. I was also surprised with how much I liked Spartacus, even though Kubrick himself wasn't satisfied with it as the studio limited his creative freedom quite a bit. The film I want to rewatch the most however is Eyes Wide Shut. That had something that was difficult to grasp and it seems like a film that really could develop or change over time by revisiting it.
Would love to hear if anyone has any opinions on Kubrick in general.
Just want to grab onto this tiny part of your comment: the term "anti-war movie". It's hotly debated and it's an interesting subject! This article has a snippet about Full Metal Jacket:
https://www.bbc.com/culture/article/20140710-can-a-film-be-truly-anti-war
Personally, I'm in the camp that there are few if any anti-war movies. At best, they are still action and spectacle.
There is something to that. Because what movies are "pro-war" movies? I guess something like Top Gun at least has recruiting potential without directly praising war itself. And something like Act of Valor that used active duty navy seals. However, I have a hard time imaging concluding that the military is a great place to be after watching Full Metal Jacket, but I guess that greatly depends on what worldview one has going in.
Whichever ones are sponsored by a country's military. Which a lot of US war movies are, because otherwise the productions can't use their planes or tanks or vehicles etc.
I don't disagree. It's probably one of the top 1% least pro-war movies. And I guess there's no way to know if this critic in the article was right.
Here’s food for thought related to this topic. As I’ve said elsewhere, I’m a recovering alcoholic. I’ve spent some time (not a lot, but enough) with people dying of the disease, and a lot more time with people trying to recover from the consequences of an addiction.
I found Leaving Las Vegas (one of the most brutal depictions of alcoholism) to STILL dramatically romanticize dying of the disease.
It seems like maybe the act of even just trying to depict some things in media can’t or won’t ever be sufficient.
Just a thought.
Make sure you get the full frame european release of Eyes Wide Shut — it isn’t censored like the others. In the finished one they have these strange figures in front of others during the orgy and they don’t look right.
Interstellar re-released in IMAX this past weekend. I was aware of the release back in late 2014 (my junior year of high school) but I can't recall why I didn't watch it in theaters. I watched it on a Redbox rental. The TV in our living room at the time had a broken speaker. I remember begging my mom to get a different TV because the broken speaker made things unwatchable but she refused for a while (we bought a new one a year later).
That kind of ruined the experience for me, especially considering how important sound is in the film. But even then I didn't really care for it. 15 year old me really rolled his eyes at the "love transcends dimensions" stuff. I've seen the film multiple times at home, but I decided to watch the film the way it was intended (or at least the closest way I could watch it as such).
It completely changed my opinion. The immersive experience really drastically improved the film for me. It was like seeing the world with a new pair of glasses, or seeing the film for the first time. I felt swept up in everything, I felt in awe of the images.
The love stuff didn't bother me as much this time because I was able to take the film for the metaphor for parentage that it is. I really like the idea of making a sci fi epic just to discuss what it's like to be a parent. It's intimacy on a grand scale.
Broken speaker is definitely the wrong way to watch that ;)
I have a complicated relationship with that movie, and I haven't seen it since release. It is an awesome audiovisual experience in the theater, but it gradually fell apart for me afterwards. The hype up to it focused heavily on how scientifically accurate it was. That they had astrophysicists working on the script and so forth. For a big science fiction fan like me, that set some pretty high expectations. Because very few science fiction movies takes the science part seriously. So it was really jarring when the movie couldn't live up to its own premise, with various scientific inconsistencies and a weird mix of being very precise and verbose with heavy exposition and explanations for some things, whereas other things were just glossed over with vague hand waving. I wasted too much time discussing this with people online, where it basically come down whether one sees science fiction as just fantasy in space or something that should resemble scientific accuracy.
I haven't thought of the metaphor for parentage as a viewing angle, and it perhaps time for rewatch for me as well. Though, I just watched 2001 last night and I am almost insulted by those who dare compare Interstellar to that, so the right state of open mind is probably needed :)
Yeah I think it’s the correct reading of the film in hindsight. The idea that parents experience time differently (faster) than their children. I especially love the line where McConaughey leaves where he says, and I’m paraphrasing, “now we’re just here to be memories to our children, the ghosts of their future.”
I also remember the marketing heavily focusing on the academic side of things, and I agree that’s what maybe painted by negative feelings towards the film. But if you just forget about all that and experience the film on an emotional level it works much better.
For what it's worth, even if your speaker hadn't been broken, the dialogue might well have been inaudible anyway. I watched it on a perfectly fine TV and kept turning the volume up and up, until finally at max volume I gave in and put on closed captions. Nolan is notorious for refusing to balance audio except for the ideal theater experience.
I don't really remember sound being important other than the dialogue, but perhaps that's because I was not getting the "intended" experience. If it ever comes to an IMAX near me, perhaps I'll give it another shot, but I'll always feel a little sour based on my initial watch.
You just reminded me of when I went and saw Neil Stephenson at a book signing and he clarified that he wrote “Speculative Fiction” not “Science Fiction” because all the science he used was as grounded in existing science as possible.
I always appreciated the discernment, but as I write this am wondering if he sticks to that rule maybe he’s locked himself into an unintended box at some point.
That is a pretty weird distinction. Some would say it is just the difference between science fiction and fantasy. From what I know of Neal Stephenson he writes as much science fiction as most other science fiction writers. I see little reason why he should have a different category.
Doh- Neal. Good catch. He might have stepped back from the specific word distinction since this signing- this was circa 2007-8 I think? It was an obviously fairly nerdy gathering and I think he was just thanking some of the people in the audience during the Q&A for calling it that instead of SciFi because he really tries to avoid like “Space Wizards” and whatnot. (My paraphrasing, not is word choices).
That sounds very much like Margerot Atwood when she tried to distance herself from the genre, by saying about "talking squids in outer space".
Authors are of course allowed to try and distance themselves from genre labels, as it can't feel quite restraining to be put into a tight box that comes with conventions and readers expectations. But it is a bit of a pet peeve of mine that annoys me when authors think they somehow need to say that science fiction is beneath them because they write "real literature" or something. Science fiction is as much real literature as everything else, and there is being written crap in all genres. It would be like dismissing every story with a romantic plot just because Harlequin romance novels exists.
Fully agree. One of my favorite things in media is delightful subversion of expectation. Take incredibly well trodden tropes and where it’s usually dumb, surprise with some brilliant writing or character or angle. Can’t do that without the pop part in pop culture.
Plus, I mean, I love me some space wizards to an “I had the crappy pirated Holiday Special” extent.
Besides- talking squids makes more sense to me than pasty skinny weird-shaped midgets with oversized eyes.
…and wasn’t Cthulhu telepathic? I don’t think it spoke.
Oryx and Crake was a downer. That’s the only one of hers I read.
(Edit) all of this was just meant in good fun. Christmas coffee finally kicked in. Though I’ve only read the one, I fully acknowledge her as one of the greats writing today. I’ll just go to the Scalzi shelf first because he delights me more.
Golden Globe winner predictions:
Drama: The Brutalist
Comedy: Anora
Director: The Brutalist
Screenplay: Anora
Lead Actor - Drama: Timothee Chalamet - A Complete Unknown
Lead Actress - Drama: Nicole Kidman - Babygirl
Lead Actor - Comedy: Hugh Grant - Heretic
Lead Actress - Comedy: Mikey Madison - Anora
Supporting Actor: Kieran Culkin - A Real Pain
Supporting Actress: Ariana Grande - Wicked
Original Score: The Brutalist
Original Song: “El Mal” from Emilia Perez
International: Emilia Perez
Box Office Achievement: Wicked
My local theater is showing more Christmas movies than new ones these days. I had never seen It's a Wonderful Life before, and after seeing it the first time, I decided to go back again the next day. The sad scenes in that movie pack a punch. I also went and saw Elf. I had already seen it a long time ago as a kid, but it was still enjoyable this time as an adult. It's different when you can understand both the story and the comedy :P
Just watched Heretic (2024) and loved it! I don't watch a lot of sCaRy movies, but this wasn't scary at all --- just really well done and beautifully shot with a lot of really interesting tricks (an arc and another whip to a door, if you've seen it.)
The two girls had a fun chat on the A24 podcast a while ago, so I've been meaning to check this out, and I'm glad I did.
Yeah I liked it a lot. I love the idea of the villain in the film being a Reddit atheist. I also love that most of the film is just Grant explaining things.
he’s perfect for the role. whoever thought to cast him is on point, even though he’s done other baddie roles lately.
above all, i really like the house. not that i want a basement that also acts as a labyrinth, but i wouldn’t turn it down.
Loved it too. I watched this back-to-back with Conclave. I’m snobby with my horror - it’s gotta have some either very stupid comedy to it or some subtext or metaphor I can enjoy.
I thoroughly enjoyed the irony of how the horror movie was about faith and the Catholic movie was about power.
Both are fantastic.
Somewhere I can feel a long post coming from me about The Substance. Holy shit that was bonkers. My sister might not speak to me this Christmas because I suckered her into watching it. If arty, weird, and body horror are your thing- that’s a new high water mark IMO.
sweet Jesus --- horror is absolutely not my thing. I like basic bitch stuff like House of Wax, Drag Me to Hell, Midsommar etc -- even the first two are a stretch. I rarely watch this sort of thing.
I like pairing this with Conclave as a double feature. But yeah, definitely not into horror. I get so into a film that the mildest jump scare kills me (e.g. the alarm clock in Hand that Rocks the Cradle)
Historically I’m about a once-a-year scary/horror movie guy. No Saw movies here, TYVM. Passed on Hereditary too. In the early oughts I took a long hiatus from scary movies after watching The Exorcism of Emily Rose one night and then a week later a movie called Open Water about a couple getting eaten by sharks while stranded at sea. That one specifically just drained me.
For some reason these past couple of years I’ve started to enjoy some specific subset of horror though. It probably started with an enjoyable 1-2 experience of successfully scaring the shit out of my (at the time) middle schooler (without traumatizing her!) with the original Poltergeist one Halloween and then by enjoying the hell out of Get Out (without the child, of course).
After that, I started dabbling a bit more. I’m not trying to sell you on horror or anything here. I’m not entirely sure I even “approve” of it fully myself. I’m more just trying to understand what it is that has started to appeal to me about some “horror”/scary movies. Some I enjoy and others I definitely don’t and I’ve never really explored what the difference is very much. So, more examples:
I bailed out on Requiem for A Dream about 30 minutes before the end. Took the dog for a walk and based on the pale faces I came back to afterward, I’m good never finishing it.
Someone recommended Terrifier 2 to me a few weeks before the third one came out and I watched the first maybe 15 minutes(?) - until the title card dropped - and I noped out. Not that it was too “hardcore” or something… I just kind of leapt to a conclusion (right or wrong) that it wasn’t for me. (Trying not to yuck someone else’s yum here).
I enjoyed the hell out of an “11 year old” ballerina vampire slaughtering people though. That’s Abigail. Great fun.
There is one “slasher”-style movie that came out this year that I rolled the dice on and came away having… “enjoyed” seems like the wrong word for it… I didn’t feel dirty for having watched it, it was genuinely incredibly well done, it wasn’t derivative one bit, astonishingly, and it did entertain and surprise wonderfully. That’s one called Strange Darling.
In any event, thanks for the exchange. It’s an interesting thought experiment.
Oh- I almost forgot- this year I got my (now college-age) daughter to watch what I, in a moment of fatherly brilliance, called “kind of the final word in horror movies” - Cabin In The Woods. (If you know, you know.)
Merry weird Christmas post, All.
this is great. Requiem for A Dream isn't so bad. I don't like a lot of drug use in movies and it was fine --- if anything, I think its overhyped.
I've never seen The Exorcist or any of the classics --- and I really should. Is Cabin.. super scary?!
No! Cabin in the Woods is a blast. Read nothing about it. It was written by Joss Whedon (and maybe directed? I don’t remember). I hesitate to say anything about it but that I found it really fun. The original Poltergeist was scarier and somehow that was rated pg13.
It’s maybe my favorite “scary” movie because it’s so much fun. It starts slow and maybe a bit campy but finishes very very strong.
haha nice. i’m currently going through Buffy and Angel, so i might as well pop this in the mix. thanks!
Ohh- please do! I have zero evidence to offer in support of this, but it seems plausible to me that CITW is at least in part what landed him The Avengers gig.
Also- I’d never suggest anything really gross or hardcore to my kid. She’s even less into scary movies than me. Total rule follower.
ok, on it. i almost always enjoy a horror / scary movie in the end, but beforehand i’m such a wuss. haha
thanks again!
I've watched a lot of movies over the last few weeks that I haven't discussed here so I'll be cheating a bit and discuss them all there if that's alright.
First up, Django Unchained (2012). I've seen a ton of hype around this movie but never managed to watch it so I decided to finally do so a few weeks ago. What a movie. My only real criticism of the movie would be that it felt a bit long but I still really enjoyed it. Great acting by the entire cast and the story had me glued to the screen right from the first line. I honestly can't recall watching any Tarantino film before this so this was my first real exposure to the excessive violence that people say are in Tarantino's films and they were definitely right haha. The amount of blood and gore seemed comical.
Next up, Inglorious Basterds (2009). After watching Django Unchained I decided to follow it up by watching another Tarantino classic. My only exposures to this film prior to watching it were the Binging With Babish episode and the three finger meme which had gone viral on Twitter in the days leading up to when I watched it. I went into this with an open mind and the first 15 minutes of the movie just grab you like nothing else. Similar to Django, the cast were phenomenal and I was really caught off-guard by Brad Pitt's performance with that southern accent. Christopher Waltz's performances in both films were probably the best I've ever seen. You can tell the roles were written specifically for him.
I'd watched a few other films after Inglorious Basterds but the only one I'd really want to discuss here is 1917 (2019). I remember watching this film back when it came out in theaters and really enjoying it. It really felt like you were in the action with the characters and it really just highlights the brutality of war. However, on this re-watch, I found myself not really enjoying the film as much as I did on my first watch. The visceral realism was still there and it was cool seeing everything flow as if it were one shot but besides that, I didn't really mesh with it somehow.
Ahh Tarantino. I’ve seen them all at least once. No need to see Hateful Eight a second time. I saw it in a theater with the whole “Panavision” super big screen with intermission thing. That’s maybe my least favorite.
I’d be interested to see if Jackie Brown has gotten better with time. It wasn’t a big hit for him but it seems like maybe it might have aged better than some others.
I tried rewatching Reservoir Dogs a few years ago and was underwhelmed. I don’t think it speaks well of the 90s, frankly.
Bill Burr has said some things about how he loves that Once Upon A Time In Hollywood strips the Manson cult of any mystique and recasts them more honestly, and I really liked that. It’s a fun one but requires a little settling in for a leisurely but still really entertaining and pretty enjoyable ride.
I rewatched Jackie Brown for the first time since release recently and I liked it a lot this time. I was a teenager when it was release and probably scuffed it off as it wasn't as violent and didn't have the distinctive dialogue of his, but now I have a very different view on Tarantino compared to back when his style was just cool and edgy. Jackie Brown is notable in how it doesn't have a cast that all speak like Tarantino. It has his directing trademarks but not in the script, which I think works really well. I personally think he later became too obsessed with his own style and what his fans loved that it lost that uniqueness Pulp Fiction had. I am mostly thinking of Django Unchained and Inglorious Bastards which were fun to watch once, but I think he just tried to overdo himself and his abundance of violence to an extent where it become a tad dumb. I do wanna watch The Hateful Eight again, but I am also a sucker for Morricone and spaghetti western aesthetics.
Yeah, I’m not sure why Hateful Eight didn’t score with me. I’m a sucker for westerns too usually. It might’ve been that I dragged my wife at the time to it who was definitely indulging me by going. I probably picked up on her distain/impatience. Oh well. Maybe I’ll give it another go someday.