Mankind has interstellar travel having discovered ships left over by a seemingly vanished civilisation which can do the job.
However, limited control and understanding means it’s a pretty Orky “get in the cockpit, press go, end up where you end up”. Until…one day….
Anyways, this is actually alright. Very CGI heavy, and whilst obvious, it’s not lazy. A limit of budget, not ambition.
The look of it is very cool despite said limitations. Earth is very Megacity-1, and despite an odd weightlessness to the ships and that it’s clear a genuine effort has been made to make this look as good as the budget would possibly allow. Think early 2000’s Sy-Fy Channel, but with more care and attention to detail.
The acting is fine, and the plot is at least intriguing.
I’d say this is worth a watch, me. It’s not prime time fodder, but if you’ve a loose afternoon and nowt better to do, this might just fill your schedule nicely.
I'm rewatching the OG Toby trilogy. Still a solid set of movies imo. Good entertainment and the start of the age of comic movies.
But just to voice something that struck me; you ever notice how fethed up the 2nd movie presents 'doing the right thing?'
Like, Peter quits being Spider-Man but oh no. That man is getting mugged. Damn. Too bad Spider-Man doesn't exist tot do something about it; bitch you're there XD You could do something about it. Peter Parker! It's just a mugger not a supervillain come on if you really wanted to do something you could try!
And then like, total mood whiplash right after that scene where Peter is fessing up the Aunt May all 'Uncle Ben died because he was the only one willing to do the right thing' but it sure sounds like Uncle Ben died because a guy with a gun said give me your car and he was like 'what are you going to do if I say no? Shoot me?' Like yeah, Peter could have stopped that guy too but how is choosing to die over a car the 'right thing to do?' It's a car man. And at least in these movies the guy was just a thief up to that point. Money and cars can be replaced. A life can't.
And then it's just 'wait, was Uncle Ben just a stupid old man who died for nothing?'
Hits different when you're older XD
EDIT: Also MJ knows you're spider-man Peter and she's still being kind of a unreasonable friend. The sweet Russian girl has cake! Come on man there's potential there and MJ's just kind of a lot of work for a kind of vapid girl. Chose the cake Peter! She's into you! Go for it!
My big issue is that Harry Osborn should have become Hobgoblin, not bloody Emo-Surfer-AntiHero-KnockOff-Goblin...
An alleged horror film, though there’s nothing creepy, Spoopy or scary going on here.
And it’s not even set in Salem. But the UK. Come to think of it, there’s no doll so far and there’s only 15 minutes left.
But hey. Student returns to UK to see her family. Her Mum is dead. And she’s set to learn some scary things about her family. Mostly that her Uncle wants to do something that’s vile. Oh, and her entire family……are terrible actors!
Oh yeah and she was tricked into smoking a reefer spiced with Acid (the trippy kind, not the melty facey kind).
Normally low budget British Horror can be a trove of unexpected treasures. But this is just duff.
One of her…cousins, I guess? Is either just addicted to his phone, or meant to be on the spectrum. And he’s either dead….or gone to the Planetarium. No. Really. I’m not being facetious with that one.
10 minutes left not including credits, and the Doll has shown up. Seems it likes to drag people into cupboards.
I'd never heard of this before Youtube served me some clips, I was interested to see more. The full movie is there.
It's a story about a guy who used to fence with a dark past who wants to teach fencing at the same school he used to attend, everything unfolds from there. I enjoyed it.
Yeah we need some, yeah we need some ACTION
if we’re gonna make it as a True Survivor!
This is a 30 minute comedy-action film available free on YouTube. You’ll know whether or not you’ll like it in the first minute. It’s a throwback to 80’s movies and video games with simultaneously an extremely low budget and very slick production. If you want to see a ridiculous video game protagonist wreck his way through an army of Nazis, this if the film for you.
Also, the music video with David Hasslehoff is required viewing.
Mankind has interstellar travel having discovered ships left over by a seemingly vanished civilisation which can do the job.
However, limited control and understanding means it’s a pretty Orky “get in the cockpit, press go, end up where you end up”. Until…one day….
Anyways, this is actually alright. Very CGI heavy, and whilst obvious, it’s not lazy. A limit of budget, not ambition.
The look of it is very cool despite said limitations. Earth is very Megacity-1, and despite an odd weightlessness to the ships and that it’s clear a genuine effort has been made to make this look as good as the budget would possibly allow. Think early 2000’s Sy-Fy Channel, but with more care and attention to detail.
The acting is fine, and the plot is at least intriguing.
I’d say this is worth a watch, me. It’s not prime time fodder, but if you’ve a loose afternoon and nowt better to do, this might just fill your schedule nicely.
Sounds a lot like the game Across a thousand dead worlds
A rather cool hard sci fi single player RPG that tells some interesting stories
Yeah we need some, yeah we need some ACTION
if we’re gonna make it as a True Survivor!
This is a 30 minute comedy-action film available free on YouTube. You’ll know whether or not you’ll like it in the first minute. It’s a throwback to 80’s movies and video games with simultaneously an extremely low budget and very slick production. If you want to see a ridiculous video game protagonist wreck his way through an army of Nazis, this if the film for you.
Also, the music video with David Hasslehoff is required viewing.
I have a copy of that and the soundtrack. I'd only been into new retro wave stuff for a few years when Kung Fury dropped. (It has a huge influence on a Necron army I was painting at the time.) I need to add that True survivor song to my playlist to go with the love song he did for from Euro trip. (It makes me laugh.)
If you liked that you might look for Blood Machines. It's a movie/long form music video. It's quite cool. I enjoy Carpenter Brut's music videos, he does a few that are like B horror movies.
A samurai film.... no, not THAT Samurai film..... a different one.... but telling the same story..... but with a different crew..... but....... made in 1990..... which is a remake of the 1963 film.... which is based on historical events..... which..... oh never mind.
It is solid for what it is. I think the guy playing Shinza and the one playing Lord Hanbei are both very strong in their roles.
I'm rewatching the OG Toby trilogy. Still a solid set of movies imo. Good entertainment and the start of the age of comic movies.
But just to voice something that struck me; you ever notice how fethed up the 2nd movie presents 'doing the right thing?'
Like, Peter quits being Spider-Man but oh no. That man is getting mugged. Damn. Too bad Spider-Man doesn't exist tot do something about it; bitch you're there XD You could do something about it. Peter Parker! It's just a mugger not a supervillain come on if you really wanted to do something you could try!
And then like, total mood whiplash right after that scene where Peter is fessing up the Aunt May all 'Uncle Ben died because he was the only one willing to do the right thing' but it sure sounds like Uncle Ben died because a guy with a gun said give me your car and he was like 'what are you going to do if I say no? Shoot me?' Like yeah, Peter could have stopped that guy too but how is choosing to die over a car the 'right thing to do?' It's a car man. And at least in these movies the guy was just a thief up to that point. Money and cars can be replaced. A life can't.
And then it's just 'wait, was Uncle Ben just a stupid old man who died for nothing?'
Hits different when you're older XD
EDIT: Also MJ knows you're spider-man Peter and she's still being kind of a unreasonable friend. The sweet Russian girl has cake! Come on man there's potential there and MJ's just kind of a lot of work for a kind of vapid girl. Chose the cake Peter! She's into you! Go for it!
My big issue is that Harry Osborn should have become Hobgoblin, not bloody Emo-Surfer-AntiHero-KnockOff-Goblin...
My issue is that Spider Man II has an El Train in the middle of Manhattan which does not exist!
Human-spider hybrids who can climb walls? Fine. People turning into sand? Why not.
But somehow the continued existence of the 2nd Avenue El destroys my suspension of disbelief!
“Someone slipped some acid in my drink…again..China!”
The premise is a wax museum made with black magic so that guests find themselves trapped in one of the diorama scenarios, and when they are killed their bodies become part of the waxwork dioramas. So the movie has a lot of fun with werewolves, vampires, zombies and the like, with heaps of gore and cheese. The Marquis de Sade seemed like he would be the least interesting monster, but he got some great lines/scenes. It all builds to a chaotic, cheesy climax at the end.
It’s a fun 80’s B movie if you enjoy those. As China says, “Dig it or f— off!”
I watched Waxwork once, and rather enjoyed it. I thought it's done way better than something with that premise was required to be. It seemed like somebody was invested in that project. Fun stuff.
Invasion USA - It's a pretty 'large scale' action flick, which is pretty mean-spirited. My most recent watch of that one was very close to watching Delta Force, and I was surprised how mean-spirited these Chuck Norris cannon films could be in the acts the terrorists carry out. Maybe I'm just soft.
“Someone slipped some acid in my drink…again..China!”
The premise is a wax museum made with black magic so that guests find themselves trapped in one of the diorama scenarios, and when they are killed their bodies become part of the waxwork dioramas. So the movie has a lot of fun with werewolves, vampires, zombies and the like, with heaps of gore and cheese. The Marquis de Sade seemed like he would be the least interesting monster, but he got some great lines/scenes. It all builds to a chaotic, cheesy climax at the end.
It’s a fun 80’s B movie if you enjoy those. As China says, “Dig it or f— off!”
I even found and rewatched this recently because I watched it when I was a kid along with Waxwork 2: Thru Time or something. The first is just excellent. The second starts if I remember right with them trying to do time travel but it ends up shooting them thru realities and has them land in classic horror films that are that film but definitely not (Dawn of the Dead, Alien/Aliens, House on Haunted Hill, etc). It's just good fun.
It’s by no means a good film, but it is entertaining, and in the way in was going for.
Yeah, say what you will about that film, but it's got scope and certainly a big finale.
Last night I looked at the wikipedia page for Encino Man. This led me to watching a Pauly Shore stand-up thing from 1993. Two findings: .) People in the US in the 1990s loved cheering stand-up comedians. Reminded me of the absurd amounts of hollering and clapping for Andrew Dice Clay from slightly before that (which I watched a few months ago). .) He isn't much of a comedian, is he. More of a character. Not a funny one, but at least not a harmful one either. There seems to be that constant layer of self-deprication underneath the "I'm on a stage, haha". Seems like the class weirdo who ended up being a success due to what ever circumstances.
Before that I watched the excellent psycho-thrillery, fairy tale-y, horror-y Austrian film Hotel (2004) by Jessica Hausner. Watched the film premier on tv then (first in a series of scary films made on very small budgets pushed by Austrian broadcast back then. Pretty cool series.), watched it a few times since then, and it never ceases to fascinate me. That film is relentless in building a foreboding atmosphere of impending dread. Amazingly well done, with a few little hints of film references (Shining, Lynch, etc), but then going off in a whole different direction. Or none at all. The characters are also all extremely effective. Minnichmayr is one of my favourite villains, because that's the sort of girl everybody's come across in their life. The dialogue, the facials/looks, the off-work outfits... extremely well done. I love that film. Pretty sure I wrote about it before.
Yup, it's a cool film. I always skip the french fries fish scene because I watched the film the first time when I was like 9 or 10 and found it exceedingly mean, and to this day I haven't gotten over it (I also detest Ketchup, most of all the smell, which is probably the main reason I don't like the scene).
The one that terrified your dad or grandpa as a child.
If you liked the 50’s War of the Worlds, you’ll probably like this. There’s a lot of build up, some fun dialogue, and a handful of stand out scenes and ideas that influenced modern horror, especially Alien and Aliens. Unlike the 80’s remake, TTFAW had pretty limited special effects that it could only use sparingly—except for one of the most insane fire stunts ever put on film. They literally couldn’t do this today for liability reasons. It’s worth it just for the build up and execution of that scene.
I recommend it. And remember to always watch the skies!
Forbidden Planet The one with Robbie the Robot…that terrified your dad or grandpa as a child.
This film was an inspiration for Star Trek, so it’s a must-watch for any Star Trek fan. Unlike TTFAW, Forbidden Planet is in color and has surprisingly good production values and special effects. Robbie the Robot is still awesome. The story is an adaptation of Shakespeare’s The Tempest, so solid. The dialogue and some of the tropes feel a lot more ‘old fashioned’ than in TTFAW or even Star Trek TOS, but other than that the movie holds up well.
Also, Doctor Morbius just morbs all over the film.
It’s good. It’s very good. A not particularly dramatised telling of how Q Branch used the body of a destitute to trick the Axis into believing the invasion of Italy would begin away from Sicily, drawing off their forces.
Absolutely stellar cast and very low key, more dealing with the attention to detail put into the deception, and how it wasn’t until the invasion played out they really knew if it worked.
Very much worth a watch, and currently free on Prime in the UK, possibly in other territories. Particularly welcome after the somewhat disappointing Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare (which is still enjoyable, just not what I hoped for)
It’s good. It’s very good. A not particularly dramatised telling of how Q Branch used the body of a destitute to trick the Axis into believing the invasion of Italy would begin away from Sicily, drawing off their forces.
Absolutely stellar cast and very low key, more dealing with the attention to detail put into the deception, and how it wasn’t until the invasion played out they really knew if it worked.
Very much worth a watch, and currently free on Prime in the UK, possibly in other territories. Particularly welcome after the somewhat disappointing Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare (which is still enjoyable, just not what I hoped for)
Forbidden Planet The one with Robbie the Robot…that terrified your dad or grandpa as a child.
Also, Doctor Morbius just morbs all over the film.
The Original "It's Morbin' Time"
Chief of Station
A covert action/thriller starring Aaron Ekhart that starts off strong, but just gets worse and worse until towards the end I suspected the film may have been written by AI. They tossed in plausible and authentic movie spy-jargon, but at strange not exactly right times, and then the culmination of the movie and its plot..... amateur hour in the realm of espionage and screen-writing.
Sign up another person who enjoyed this movie. It's just fun. The whole case seems to have had a great time doing it or they are way better actors then we think.
Roadhouse (the new one)
This one was oddly decent. I never saw the original as it was just enough before my time that when I was getting into movies it didn't rate a watch but I know it has a cult following. This one was fun. Jake Gylanhal(sp?) does his normal bang up job of acting. Some famous MMA fighter chews up some serious scenery. The movie just shoots along as a fun and mostly brainless film with some good moments. Exposition is basically zero. The only let down is the final fight scene which takes the mostly grounded fighting from earlier in the film and goes nuts.
Above the Clouds
What if the only person who could see you was a down on his luck mma fighter whose career you destroyed! Girl is literally invisible to everyone and everything but still can interact with the world physically and has been that way since her mom died when she was a kid. It's pretty silly but it's done decently. It makes zero sense so don't think to hard but it's cute. And it has pre-Reacher Alan Ritchson. Interesting to see how much bulk the dude added in just like 3 years. He was already a big and cut dude.
Lost in time like a bug in a jar,
No matter where you go, there you are.
While it has a different feel to the first film, a bit more stylized and a bit less funny, it’s still clear everyone involved was having fun. There are even more homages to classic horror movies than the first one, some of them quite well done. Bruce Campbell, David Carradine, Marina Sirtis, Buck Flower and other recognizable faces fill out the smaller roles in the film.
And for true cinephiles: yes, someone does rap the plot over the end credits.
These films are so stupid, but weirdly enjoyable.
This one revolves around villain of the previous films Toulon, when he was still a good guy puppeteer before the Gestapo kills his wife, and he goes on a revenge spree.
Of course this brings up questions like "If he's such a good guy, why has he already made a gaggle of murderous puppets?" and "What sort of moron thinks putting on anti-Nazi puppet shows in 1940's Berlin is a good idea?" just don't expect any answers.
I tried it, but the Puppet Master films are just a mess, aren't they. Latest one I saw I think was 5. The story and even rules for the puppets are kinda all over the place, the puppets are of limited charm to me. I get the appeal, and I'll watch a Puppet Master film when asked, but I don't hold the series in particularly high regard.
A friend of mine LOVES the Puppetmaster films. I haven’t yet been able to sit through a whole one. Maybe some day I’ll be in the right mindset when he puts one on…
They’re definitely for a certain taste of audience.
Speaking of which!
Weird, The Al Yankovic Story
A largely fictionalised biopic of probably my favourite musical satirist. Daniel “look, when you’re Harry Potter? You can do whatever you want career wise after” Radcliffe as Al.
Opening was a bit wonky for me, as I had to the my brain into the style it was going for. Specifically, it’s not only spoofing Al’s life, but similar musical biopics.
And I’m absolutely loving it. Available to stream for free on Prime, at least in the UK.
Congratulations! Weird is one of those films that wholeheartedly commits to its own premise. And it is hilarious to watch where it wanders. I watched it with my son, who knew nothing of Weird Al, and it greatly enhanced the experience as he constantly asked- did he really do that?
Flinty wrote: Mr Radcliffe has rightly decided that as he doesn’t really need to work again, he am basically do whatever project tickles his fancy at the time
If you like crime stories like Fargo then you'll probably enjoy this. In a small New Mexico town Lou (Kristen Stewart) manages a local gym where she meets a woman, Jackie (Katy O'brien), stopping in the town on her way to a body builders competition in Las Vegas. The find an emotional (and physical) connection but their personal demons have more overlap than the two realize and a grotesque act of violence leads to another and another as things spiral out of control. The characters have good chemistry and really feel like people who care about each other while also still having problems. Ed Harris as the local crime lord has a quiet and intense menace to him and an unforgettably bad haircut. It also really captures the aesthetic of the time period very well; the whole place seems lived in and authentic for the period. It does dabble in visual metaphor in a few spots which might be a bit off putting to some but I thought within the context of the film worked well. It also touches on generational trauma without being to on the nose.
Chris Pine is booted from the Army Rangers and decides to become a PMC for money. Things do not go well for him.
This is the type of action movie, where the action is focused on realism. Therefore, the gun play is very not exciting, but the hand-to-hand is always a bit brutal.
I know I started watching this at some point but I guess it fell off of Netflix, or maybe I just left the country. So I finally got to see Karen Gilliam play John Wick in a remake of Lone Wolf and Cub. Or something.
It's silly, it's neon and colorful, it's absurd and at times almost as good as it should be.
Almost.
3 stars, add 29 more stars if you're a huge fan of pale red headed time traveling girls.
And I don’t know if it’s revisionist, but possibly a satire on US Militarism?
It definitely upends the 80’s meathead gun movie trope, and has clear inspiration from Vietnam.
In the modern day, especially when Mack and the rest vent their fury and ammo impotently into the jungle with barely any results? The satire could be contrived.
But idiot analysis entirely aside, it is a bloody good film because of how it upended and inverted the tropes of its day.
Not that I have the authority, but I’m declaring Spooky Season open.
Sometimes They Come Back
Above par TV Movie based on a Stephen King short story. Greasers murder a kid in front of his little brother whilst proving how hard they are by picking on kids they outnumber 2:1. They then get squished to death off a train.
In the modern day, they’re back for revenge. And get squished by a train.
Interesting premise, and very well made for a TV movie.
My view - we now have 5 Alien Films!
This has all the ingredients of a solid Alien film served up in a great way and it fits into the original narrative without breaking anything.
It retains a sense of "the horror just won't end" which I think honestly is something we've not had in Alien films, esp since they went more action orientated.
Age of the characters also works great, it gives them enough maturity and age to do things, but the situation and all also means that they do immature things as well and that fits really well.
Spoiler:
There's a few parts where they are clearly lifting scenes from the classic 4 films as nods to them; I also felt some of the scenes could do with being just a touch longer, just to really drive home the horror; but the film overall feels like it has a solid pacing.
There are one or two bits that feel a little forced like swiming through acid in zero-g, but they are minor honestly and make for some cool scenes!
I also loved how we got elements of horror outside of the Alien through the film. That I think is one of the core parts of a true Alien film, the threat from within and from sources other than the Alien.
This one was oddly decent. I never saw the original as it was just enough before my time that when I was getting into movies it didn't rate a watch but I know it has a cult following. This one was fun. Jake Gylanhal(sp?) does his normal bang up job of acting. Some famous MMA fighter chews up some serious scenery. The movie just shoots along as a fun and mostly brainless film with some good moments. Exposition is basically zero. The only let down is the final fight scene which takes the mostly grounded fighting from earlier in the film and goes nuts.
The missus basically forced me to watch the original before we got down to the new one. . . The original had this bizarre and semi out of place love interest story to it that they opted to largely just ignore for the remake. Honestly, the way the new one handles that whole story arc makes more sense for this new movie.
All in all, it's not bad. Not sure I expect I'll go watching it again, but it was indeed what you want in a mostly brainless action flick.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: Not that I have the authority, but I’m declaring Spooky Season open.
Sometimes They Come Back
Above par TV Movie based on a Stephen King short story. Greasers murder a kid in front of his little brother whilst proving how hard they are by picking on kids they outnumber 2:1. They then get squished to death off a train.
In the modern day, they’re back for revenge. And get squished by a train.
Interesting premise, and very well made for a TV movie.
I saw it and it felt very Stephen King TV movie to me. I mean, the Greasers, the boy and Dad relationship, Bullies, old cars, the nostalgia was dripping off it. Not to say it was bad, but it reminded me strongly of Riding the Bullet and various derivative King works.
Revisited 2012. Given that you witness the horrible deaths of thousands of people, this movie is such a fun ride. The heroes should die in every scene they are in but have the thickest plot armour ever observed on film.
And Putin’s psychosis has allowed me to confidently challenge when the fat ugly dude states that the Antonov cargo plane they nick is Russian.
All they aside, John Cusack is as watchable as ever, Woody Harrison does some epic chewing of scenery and pickles, good guys die noble and bad guys are redeemed. Love it
How have I never seen this before? A superior supernatural thriller, in which Kevin Bacon acquires the ability to see the dead, and from there our murder mystery begins.
It’s just really well made and very enjoyable - though there are some scenes which are genuinely upsetting.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Dollman
Sci-if comedy action flick, starring the wonderfully named Tim Thomerson as the daftly named Brick Bardo, space cop. Oh, and Jackie Earle Haley, who’s always welcome on my screen.
Starts off as per more usual Dirty Harry knock offs, with a ridiculous gun, cheesy dialogue and a baddie that after having fallen foul of Bardo enough times that he’s reduced to a very 40K Head On A Floaty Platform, trying to take revenge for becoming Head On A Floaty Platform. Then all his men (all two of them!) suffer explodey bang death from Brick’s handgun, and a space ship chase leads Baddie and Brick….To Earth. New York to be precise.
Where we find out they’re really really tiny, hence the title.
What follows is your usual Maverick Cop Cleaning Up The Town.
Overall, I wouldn’t be surprised if this was originally written as a straight sci-fi, as the comedy side is fairly light, but necessary to make the silly premise work.
The first follow up to Gundam Seed in animated form in just about 20 years. feth I'm old.
It's okay.
Really if you liked the sort of character drama and angsty scenes from Seed and Destiny, this movie is basically made for you. Kind of a 'give the fans what they want' sort of deal. It's all about pleasing people who liked Seed and Destiny and I'll give them that it's probably a better move than trying to win over the critics who disliked one or both.
If you were on the side of hating Destiny because all the characters seemed to forget their character development for the sake of dramatic moments... Well. Freedom has a lot of that too. It hits Kira and Lacus especially hard which is a shame since they were the only two characters who were fairly consistent in Destiny in sticking to their development. Which they forget in this movie for the sake of drama. In an even bigger irony fething Shin 'mega murder baby' Asuka is the person who actually sticks to his character development!
Other than that; big robots go ZAP. The animation quality leans heavily on CGI that stands out poorly in some spots and they made some... Well let's just say I'm curious who the animator for some of this anime was because every woman in it is animated in a certain way, that I associate with the kind of 'animated product' you don't show anyone under the age of 18. And that's weird. But also fitting, given Seed played for sex appeal a lot more than most Gundam shows.
There’s something reliably special about the nonsense Troma Studios puts out.
This time, they go a bit Rambo and a bit Lost with residents of Tromaville suffering a plane crash on an ocean island - which is being used as an infiltration training camp by Naughty Terrorists.
And it’s every bit as bonkers as it sounds and you might expect. And for my money? Superior to Hots Shots! and Hot Shots Part Deux. The battles are surprisingly large, the baddies shockingly inept dying as they do in absolute droves. And yes, the goodies have auto aim, infinite ammo and ridiculous plot armour. And the soundtrack is just pure action cheese nonsense.
Don’t expect anything even vaguely approaching good taste. But do expect a bloody good time. This is exactly the sort of film Troma is famous for, and some will insist “you can’t make films like that anymore”. Truth is? They’re just really hard to do well.
More Chris Pine led cloak-and-dagger, except this one is actually good.
A CIA operative is asked to re-investigate an air jacking that went wrong 8 years ago. However, it is complicated by the fact that he and another agent involved in the investigation were previously lovers.
This is a slow burn drama and thriller that delivers in the end. Do not look for gun play, or stunts. This is a traditional spy flick that focuses heavily in the dialogue and putting the pieces together.
The Martian
Matt Damon!
Yeah, it is good. Much more hopeful and uplifting than I was expecting.
This is a great movie for families, even if there is a bit of naughty language.
He was the guy from Trancers, right? I remember him displaying almost Bruce Campbell levels of knowing cheese.
Did they have a movie where he fought the Demonic Toys, or am I imagining it?
That was Dollman Vs Demonic Toys.
The title was very imaginative.
And yeah, the first Dollman is an Albert Pyun (RIP) film, a real goldmine of a director for enjoyable low budget movies, such as the 1990 Captain America film.
Beetlejuice-Beetlejuice...or just Beetlejuice 2? BJ2? Whatever...
Short but funny sequel to the 1988 original and feels like it was...shot in 1990 but the studio felt there was too many "2"s that year and its been in the vaults ever since, with fans campaigning to have it released for the last 30-odd years...?
I haven't seen Jenna Ortega in anything outside of Youtube SNL sketches, but it seems that fate itself decided that Jenna was destined to cross paths with Burton and Ryder.
Only downside is no Geena Davis or Alec Baldwin this time around, although they're not forgotten. On the other hand I'm glad they didn't slap in the movie for the sake of nostalgia. This sequel had enough going on without all that nonsense weighing it down, and is refreshingly lean...much like any sequel that came out in 1990!
Interesting. I watched the first three Gundam films this spring. Love me some Gundam. Mostly because of the (somewhat) realistic stuff that's going on, but I don't want to deal with too hefty CGI, digital drawing or anime high school drama stuff. Should I carry on watching these films or leave it be? I still got Char's Counter-Attack to watch, which I will do, but from then on I'm not sure. Any suggestions? Thanks.
@Easy E: I watched the Martian at the cinema and was really impressed with the landscapes. But yeah, it's a nice film. I chuckled when they got Troy to explain all the sciency stuff. IIRC they wake him up, and it very much reminded me of Troy and Abed lying in their bunk bed. Also shows the versatility of Jeff Daniels. Or maybe I just imagine it because he was in Dumb and Dumber (and I think also in a pretty silly bowling film).
Last week I met with people, we decided to stop watching the weird dog show and zapped around when Platoon came up! They'd never seen Platoon (1986). I first saw it in high school when our religion teacher showed it to us. Hadn't seen it in ages. The cast in this is pretty amazing. I'd never noticed that Johnny Depp was in this one. Or Keith David for that matter. He's great in everything. Not to mention the usual suspects you instantly remember being in that film. (Charles Sheen, Thomas Berenger, Willie Dafoe, ...)
Well, Platoon is really good. If I was to rank the 'big 3' US Vietnam films (never seen Born on the 4th of July, mind you), I think that they would look like this currently.
.) Apocalypse Now
.) Platoon
.) Full Metal Jacket.
But of course they're all good. I was surprised how 'watchable' and concise a film Platoon is. It's kinda like the antithesis to Apocalypse Now. Very different angle, very straightforward, some amazing shots and some nasty gut-punches (pretty much everything that happens in that village).
Great film, Watch It.
Right after that we watched the second half of Con Air. I'm not a huge fan. I mean all the convicts being broad (very, very broad) characters is kinda fun, but it's so stupid. And I despise Jerry Bruckheimer's "civilian characters". In this film every character is either a cop or a robber, everybody else is either Nicholas Cage's poster family or comic relief. Maybe Con Air isn't the best follow-up to Platoon either.
Said it before but will chip in again. If you want a great Vietnam war film as opposed to a Vietnam film, Danger Close: The Battle of Long Tan is a great example. As a consequence it comes under heavy criticism for not being a Vietnam film with all the context that entails. But if you want to watch some ANZAC soldiering, its great.
Kind of like if you want to see a film about textbook (literally, many textbooks used this as a case study) defence , The Siege of Jadotville is great, but criticised in most other respects!
An American comedian re-dubbed and inserted himself into an old Kung Fu movie with mixed results. There are a few really funny parts, some real duds, and a lot of interesting sections where the comedian is having fun trying weird things that don’t really land but are still amusing.
An American comedian re-dubbed and inserted himself into an old Kung Fu movie with mixed results. There are a few really funny parts, some real duds, and a lot of interesting sections where the comedian is having fun trying weird things that don’t really land but are still amusing.
Watch it if you enjoy MST3k or Auralnauts.
I actually really love that movie, but its been 20 years since I saw it, so I'm sure my comedic tastes have changed. I do remember it being a slog at times.
"Be not concerned with her shyness, soon it will pass." She flashes the goods. "There ya go"
@The_Real_Chris: Yeah, I watched the trailer of Danger Close and a documentary on the thing, read out by a very manly man-voice, but I wanna see that. Not the least because I bought just over a company of ANZACs for Vietnam earlier this year. Jadotville I never watched because there were some things that made me think I wouldn't like it. Can't recall which ones exactly.
@BobtheInquisitor: I watched Kung Pow several times within a short timespan a long time ago. It's really funny, 80% of the time. I feel like the bits which were the original intent of the thing (the MST3k stuff with the dude cut into scenes and so on. I love that sorta stuff. The attention to detail getting the guy in there, redoing scene surroundings when cutting to him. This is the stuff I properly enjoy.) were great. The other things, which I kinda think that some marketing/studio person said they'd have to add to make 'their own thing', maybe it's also a copyright thing, (Breasty lady, aliens iirc, the tongue, that flipping CGI cow stuff, which I despise) fall flat for me. But that's just about 10% or so. The re-dubbed original film and the dude cut into the original film is great.
1988 no-budget British Horror film, and nothing to do with Predator.
This is pretty dreadful. No tension, no real scares, pretty racist portrayal of Irishmen in the pub scene. The worst, lazy “potato beggorah” typecasting.
Anyways it’s about a New York reporter coming to the UK, to investigate the Beast of Exmoor. Which does seem to exist, but we’re not allowed to see it. And its growls sound more like a car engine being revved. And it eats a wee girl who ran away from it, very very slowly, in the most round about path I’ve ever seen.
Our “hunky” lead is one Cliff Twemlow, a bouncer turned zero budget film maker. Who was well into his 50’s if I’m any judge. Big bloke though who clearly looked after himself.
And after all that, the Beast was a man in a suit, except it maybe wasn’t, rendering the entire plot of the film utterly moot.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Invaders From Mars
1986 Tobe Hooper remake. And it’s pretty good! Doesn’t muck with the plot, but updates the visuals conisderably, and whilst the original’s still hold up, I’d say this is for the better on balance.
Only downside is our young lead is a dreadful actor, at least in this. But he’s balanced out by a B-Movie worthy cast, including Louise Fletcher, who’d go on to be despised as Kai Winn.
Not much online except an IMDB. But a TV movie from 1998, about a subtle alien invasion.
Quite the cast here, as we have Marcia Cross, John C McGinley and Christopher Meloni, who’d all go on to find greater fame on the small screen.
And it’s alright. Borrowing heavily from the X-Files and Body Snatchers so our characters never know who they can really trust.
As cheap made for TV sci-fi movies go, this is perfectly tolerable with a decent enough atmosphere. Whilst hardly an original premise, there is enough here I think it could’ve been up budgeted and done as a cinematic release with some success.
It looks fancy and if you go into it with the right expectations, there are worse ways to spend three hours.
Curiously, I found fishy Avatar to be worse than tree hugging Avatar in spite of my not very high opinion of the latter. I never thought I'd say something nice about the cast of cardboard cutout characters in tree hugging Avatar, but they were so predictable and clear in their roles that they drove the equally predictable and clear plot without raising eyebrows or leaving questions. Or, when it comes down to it, allowing any room for the writers to get what they were going for wrong.
Fishy Avatar is different. It's basically the same plot with the same stereotypes, but reskinned to include a bunch of kids to make foreseeably bad choices and take turns getting caught by the bad guys. The indulgence in family life, tribal life, intertribal relations and all that other hippie crap is where the movie shines, outside of looking pretty, of course. But the conflict between sky people and blue people has taken a turn for the worse compared to tree hugging Avatar.
So the sky people return, but this time not with a small rotation of mercs for base defense but with a fleet and substantial manpower. And with regard to the former the movie is as much of a disappointment as the first one. Why does James Cameron of all people so stubbornly refuse to nuke something from orbit? Just once? Just for the fireworks? Maybe drop it on that little village over there that never did nothing to nobody. They're not relevant to the plot. Come on, what's a little war crime between friends? I'm sure it'll be easy to get the bad guys on board. They're not sound of mind. Still no? Okay then, be like that.
The thing I found is that fishy Avatar is incredibly reluctant to pin down the bad guys' plans, unlike tree hugging Avatar where everything was laid out nicely and followed established logic. Fishy Avatar doesn't do that. It's my main hangup with the movie.
So it looks like war is on the menu when the sky people arrive in force and start burning the forest again. The blue people raid a train and its... tiny gunship escort? When the train is wrecked and the paltry air support taken out, the reinforcements consist of... one extra gunship that is taken out with laughable ease. What's the plan here? All that manpower stretched out protecting mining assets? We don't know. The train carried weapons. The mining operation that was so central to the first movie... Well, I honestly don't know if it didn't get mentioned at all or so brief lyin passing that I missed it. Because now the loud barker at the spiffy new beach resort the sky people set up tells the guy who got killed in the previous movie (I guess it didn't stick) that hey, let's just colonize the place and pacify the natives. Sure, let's do that, then.
By going after the enemy leader and finding the hidden base of the tribe the humans are at war with. Sounds real strategy-like, doesn't it? Well, in reaction to the threat to his kids, enemy leader retires and moves to Samoa. And that's it. No one else who has been fighting goes on fighting? No more hits? No sabotage? While the merc team sent after the leader goes camping instead and doesn't try to find the hidden base anymore until chance moves them out of the forest completely and to the sunny shores of Samoa, too? So, is the war still on or did everyone just go home? Did the stupidly belligerent sky people just shrug and not pursue their idiotic cartoon villain goals anymore? Who knows. The movie sure isn't going to tell us.
But that's okay, because now that we plow the ocean waves, we'll just have whale brain juice that confers immortality dangled in front of us. At least it can be obtained. Sure, why not? And while that is going on, not-really-dead-but-kinda-but-not-really-wink-wink bad guy still goes after retired good guy to catch him in order to stop the native uprising that isn't happening anymore?
I'm not sure they thought the military conflict part of the movie through. If they did, it doesn't translate to the screen. But that's fine. Fishy Avatar is pretty to look at. Go into it with the right mindset and it's a good enough watch.
A low budget Italian horror movie about a group of friends who accept a woman's request to be taken to a Greek island, only to find it is almost deserted.
As slashers go, this one is fairly ludicrous, dude isn't even slightly supernatural in origin but still manages to take out an entire island (Admittedly tiny and sparsely inhabited) population.
It has its moments but it's neither scary or gory enough to be that memorable.
A random find on Netflix, and every once in a while I will go for something like that if it doesn't look abhorrent. It's based on a play, and recognizably so.
It's 1924 I think. Dude from lower English nobility comes home and surprises the family with a.) the fact that he'll only stay for a little while and b.) his American wife, played by Jessica Biel. The matriarch (Kristin Scott Thomas) is not happy for several reasons, which would come to light later. His father (Colin Firth, who seems to young and too handsomely-slack-y for the role) is more taken with the new situation. I liked this character's initial detachment from everything. The younger sister (Kimberley Nixon) is excited because Biel's character used to be a racing driver. The other sister (Katherine Parkinson, whom I always enjoy on screen) is less excited. She's one of the more relateable characters in the film.
Things go on, and most of the time there's that sort of lady-bitchy-subtle-sharp-tongued "WAR" between Kristin Scott Thomas and Biel. Because we have to call such stuff "WAR" in films for some reason. Either way, the situation is something I can enjoy in a period drama. I can find a lot of joy in people being people and working within the laws of a restrictive social framework specific to a historical period. Unfortunately it's rather unsubtle, they throw in some general references to stuff wot happened roughly round that time, but the roles in who's wrong and who's right are all too clearly (and a bit crudely) drawn and since we have to market this as a romantic comedy there are several situations which made this film feel very much like Meet the Fockers. There are some bits which are interesting, but these are rarely resolved. Instead yet another scenario is introduced in which Biel's character is behaving badly (much more often not by her own fault than it is).
The ending was less grating than I thought (hey, Glass Onion, pay attention to how it's done!), even though they tucked on something that apparently isn't in the play and would have done the film a favour if they'd kept it that way. Oh and the soundtrack ranges from "too much" to "well, this is stupid".
Now that we got that out of the way, here are things I liked: They assembled a really good cast of actors here to carry this film. I'm not sure if I like Colin Firth in that role, but the whole rest of the cast is really good. I didn't recognize Jessica Biel at first (didn't even look up what year that film was made beforehand). I thought it might be her, but I wasn't sure. Either way, this is the first time I saw her play and really liked her in that role. At some points she hammed it up a little, but that's perfectly okay. It's a stage play, and it's got stage play dialogue (seems like a bunch of bits have been changed to sound a bit more contemporary or to be a bit more obviously bite-y), but I liked the dialogue in general.
The sets and costumes also worked for me. It's a neat-looking film, it's a neat-sounding film (the soundtrack's sillier bits aside), it's a very well-acted film. It's only when it tries to be all too zany or bold and thus shifts the tone needlessly I found it unenjoyable.
I guess I'll give it a Take it or Leave it. It's not bad. It's not very, very good, but I think worth checking out if you want to see Biel being good and Thomas especially.
Last night I saw that German-French culture channel ARTE has Models (1999) by Ulrich Seidl in their online streaming mediatheque thing. I'd seen it before once or twice and I actually watched it again in full last night. Didn't plan to, but it kinda sucked me in. It was the film before his 'big break' with Hundstage, but I can sit through this one way better than I could Hundstage (which I never watched in full I think). It's bascially about four young women who want to be models. Filmed in a very low-key documentary style, lots of talking straight at the camera as the women dress to go out or on a club's toilet to freshen up and such (the camera acting as the mirror for many scenes in that film). Some websites call it a documentary, which is rubbish. It's a film, but Seidl, as with later films, used unknown actors or no actors at all, very little in the way of scripting and just tons of improvisation.
It's not a film that makes ye happy (some scenes are really a bit heavy), but I can sit through that becuase it's such a fascinatingly different world these women live in, and in 1999 I was just slightly younger than they are in that film. The main lady does an exellent job (we follow her for most of the film). Impressive thing, that. Some will say it's pointless, but I'm okay with pointlessness as long as the trip was interesting. And I kinda like that film.
By the numbers comedy-action flick. 12 rated, Mark Wahlberg and Halle Berry, entirely predictable and takes no risks whatsoever. Of most interest were the scenes shot around my office in London.
Fine to watch if, like me, you’re recovering from some horrible lurgy. I would t bother otherwise.
There’s an episode of Dawn French’s “Murder Most Horrid” set in the same office building I work (well, worked, remote now!) in. And they use the same lift I got in for my interview.
Kinda weird to see how it looked in the mid 90’s compared to now.
Yeah, there was a series a while back called The Wrong Mans - pretty funny actually, despite the generally unpopular James Corden - that was filmed around the office block I used to live opposite. Quite weird seeing that. But a lot better than its other prominent media appearance, around the abduction (and as it turned out, rape and murder) of Millie Dowler...
I’ve not seen this is far, far too long. And it remains a fantastic bit of fantasy silliness. And, despite the silliness? It still hits some solid horror notes.
Just don’t expect any real continuity among the ongoing deftness. Just sit back, switch off brain, and enjoy.
I’ve not seen this is far, far too long. And it remains a fantastic bit of fantasy silliness. And, despite the silliness? It still hits some solid horror notes.
Just don’t expect any real continuity among the ongoing deftness. Just sit back, switch off brain, and enjoy.
the first time i watched this, it was immediately coming off the other two, and i definitely had the wrong expectations for it since i was expecting another slasher. was really disappointed because i loved the first two and it was so different, but years later i rewatched it with lower expectations, and it was a much better watch. it's just a whole lot of fun to see Sam Raimi and friends get as wacky as they can
It’s definitely a big change from the first Evil Dead, which was played pretty straight. Evil Dead 2 is part remake, part sequel and leans into the inherent silliness a bit. But yeah, Army of Darkness is just here to have a laugh.
The score is fantastic though, and the fights are decently choreographed.
I think my biggest praise for all involved is that this could’ve been an absolute disaster. All the hallmarks of a completely crap movie are in there. Certainly there are imitators which absolutely are crap. But here it all comes together with style, and is so much more than the sum of its parts.
I’ve not seen this is far, far too long. And it remains a fantastic bit of fantasy silliness. And, despite the silliness? It still hits some solid horror notes.
Just don’t expect any real continuity among the ongoing deftness. Just sit back, switch off brain, and enjoy.
It's brilliant. It's such good fun, and there's so much stuff in there. The effects are amazing and amazingly implemented, and there are several shots which are just great (mill establishing shot, Ash with evil Ash within howling at the moon, several establishing shots actually). And it's still the gold standard on skeleton armies. Quick detour: Isn't it amazing how since CGI got such a thing (and how fantasy in the widest sense of the word being a huge thing in big hollywood films) I can't recall any films depicting an army of skeletons? They got no fur or skin, they're expected to walk jankily and not-quite-right, ... they sound perfectly suited for being depicted in CGI, right?
Oh well. Anyway, Army of Darkness is great fun. It actually was the first Evil Dead film I watched. Few years ago I sat with a bunch of people, watching all three films after another, which was an interesting experience. As a triple feature it works really well, because you get the 'classic' and very underground-looking original first, then you can look forward to the second one, which is the first one, but improved and with some more humour in there, and then you're a bit tired, but you can look forward to the very entertaining and watchable Army of Darkness. Certainly a better trilogy to watch all at once than let's say the Matrix.
Finished Peacekeeper Wars last night. Yeah, you can see in places that they didn't have much time. Somehow it almost felt cheaper than regular Farscape, but okay. It was nice and I'm glad I fully soaked in the whole Farscape things now. Time to start anew.
I’ve not seen this is far, far too long. And it remains a fantastic bit of fantasy silliness. And, despite the silliness? It still hits some solid horror notes.
Just don’t expect any real continuity among the ongoing deftness. Just sit back, switch off brain, and enjoy.
My only complaint would be that Ash comes across as a real jerk in this one.
I much prefer the Vs. The Evil Dead version of him where he's still a complete arse, but you can tell there's a decent guy in there somewhere.
Keep watching because you just know that shotgun’s going to do something cool.
Phantasm 2 continues directly from the bizarre ending of the first one. It’s more linear and action-packed than the first movie, with some Army of Darkness energy, but it’s not scary or nightmarish like the first one. A fun time that leaves you wanting to know: does every Phantasm movie have a WTF ending?
I watched Transformers One over the weekend. It's the best Transformers movie in ages- and actually a very fun, very slick movie. Optimus and Megatron are the focus, but it's well acted, beautiful visuals, and has dialogue that definitely feels Cybertronian. Take the kids, you'll have a great time.
What if the Highlander minus swords add Matrix wire-fu and also Time Cop?
Do you like Sci Fi? Do you like action? Do you like Sci Fi action? You’ll enjoy this. The One had a multiverse before it was cool.
Multiverse Authority cop Yulaw discovers that every time he kills a variant of himself, he gains his quickening, er, life force? sure, that. He’s killed 123 out of all the 125 variants of him who exist in the vast, vast, less than two hundred parallel universes. Will he be able to kill his last variant and gain godlike power? In the end there can be only The One.*
The cast is very 2000: Jet Li, Carla Gugino, Jason Statham, Delroy Lindo, Steve Rankin, Dean Norris. Comfortingly familiar faces getting punched everywhere. The action is well-choreographed and fun to watch. And the ending has one of the best fade outs ever.
*No, Zathras, not that The One. Nor the other The One.
Gonna have me a wee Folk Horror Festival to myself tomorrow.
I already own The Wicker Man and it’s loose sequel, starring Christopher Lee, Honeysuckle Weeks and Honeysuckle Weeks’ birthday suit The Wicker Tree to kick me off.
Sequel is worthy, but of course doesn’t come that close to the original.
But after that? Arriving on Blu-ray via Mr Amazon?
The Devil Ridesout! Blood On Satan’s Claw! Captain Clegg! The Witchfinder General!
I’ve got Nachos. I’ve got popcorn. And I’ve a Tesco’s nearby and I’m not afraid to use it in case of wanting other snacks.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Actually, come to think of it? I’ve also got (not actually movies) Moondial, Children of Greenknowe, Children of the Stones, The Stone Tape and Century Falls
I’ll be running around in an inadvisable loincloth covered in ivy with Antlers atop my bonce by the end of this one.
So a pretty standard Wednesday evening in Grotsnik’s Grotto.
If you ever wanted to know what a sitcom made by David Lynch looked like, here you go. Rabbits is a surreal, unnerving and yet kind of hilarious short film that mimics sitcoms down to the laugh track. And is also loaded with existential dread.
The dialogue is familiar in its vocabulary and structure, but the lack of clear meaning or coherence plays tricks on your mind. (The short film was apparently used in a psychological study, which of course it was.). The score and sound design were haunting. The costumes and uncanny movements were uncomfortable. The set and color scheme perfect. Rabbits will stay with you long after you see it.
MarkNorfolk wrote: It's a Terry Gilliam movie rather than a Python movie but definitely worth a watch, as is Time Bandits.
I was surprised to find out that there was a Time Bandits series on AppleTV+.
Then I was confused as to why there weren't any little people in the main cast. You take a film which gave real roles to little people, including a frankly great performance by David Rappoport, and you remake it and remove all those roles. Baffling decision.
Sigur wrote: @Mad Doc Grotsnik: Sounds like a good time!
@BobtheInquisitor: Sounds maybe too scary for me to watch. Love me some Lynch, but I'm also very susceptible to existential dread.
Oh yeah, the sense of impending dread is almost suffocating by the end, and yet it also made me laugh. But less “ha ha” laughing and more “Sam Neill at the end of In the Mouth of Madness” laughing.
There are very few (though not none) actual horror elements to it; it’s all vibes, yet very effective.
@MadDocGrotsnik. Have you seen The Ritual? It might fit in with your theme…
MarkNorfolk wrote: It's a Terry Gilliam movie rather than a Python movie but definitely worth a watch, as is Time Bandits.
I was surprised to find out that there was a Time Bandits series on AppleTV+.
Then I was confused as to why there weren't any little people in the cast. You take a film which gave real roles to little people, including a frankly great performance by David Rappoport, and you remake it and remove all those roles. Baffling decision.
I forgot that series was coming, but I do 100% agree its a baffling choice to exclude dwarves (real ones) when they were such a major cornerstone of the original film.
MarkNorfolk wrote: It's a Terry Gilliam movie rather than a Python movie but definitely worth a watch, as is Time Bandits.
I was surprised to find out that there was a Time Bandits series on AppleTV+.
Then I was confused as to why there weren't any little people in the cast. You take a film which gave real roles to little people, including a frankly great performance by David Rappoport, and you remake it and remove all those roles. Baffling decision.
I forgot that series was coming, but I do 100% agree its a baffling choice to exclude dwarves (real ones) when they were such a major cornerstone of the original film.
They teased some for the second season, but now the show is cancelled.
A Smuggling Thriller, set on the Romney Marshes (Dymchurch to be precise), starring Peter Cushing and Oliver Reed.
A pretty fantastic film. The set and dressing as top notch, and the location filming gorgeous. Despite being a 1960’s Hammer film, it’s not all campy.
We get some fun cat and mouse with the Smugglers and King’s Excise Men, and something of a supernatural tickle included.
This is most definitely worth a watch, and might serve as a hook for a fun RPG adventure.
Automatically Appended Next Post: The Devil Rides Out
A superior example of the Satanic Cult Up To No Good genre, starring Sir Christopher Lee as our hero.
The effects are really solid for their era, but of course perhaps a bit hokey by modern standards.
That said? Given stronger censorship at the time, I think that works in the film’s favour, as it focuses on tension and atmosphere over gore and nasties.
Definitely one to watch if you’re a fan of spooky thrillers.
Pontypool (2008) - very sure I wrote about this one before. It's really good; a great take on a genre that was extremely stale by then already. It's on youtube in English and German.
A fantasy film which envisions a magical version of modern day America but its become the new "Rome". The architect Caesar, blessed with the ability to stop time itself, goes through many bumps on the road to designing a grand city of the future, and yet society is firmly rooted in the present and not everyone is willing to go along for the ride.
Great cast and visuals but...its a ****ing mad house of a film, and its takes someone with an eye for the arts and a very open mind to get the most out of it.
Reviews of Megalopolis have coming in and "dumpster fire of epic proportions" seems to be the overall feeling so far. It is well shot, well edited, and you can tell a lot of attention and passion went into it and yet it is a fever dream fueled by arrogance and no one willing to tell the boss "no". It isn't a good movie but in the best way possible. "It is incoherent but wants to say a lot, it seems heavy but is weightless" is one quote that stuck. Three different reviews from three very different set of perspectives all mentioned Neil Breen in their reviews.
Ahtman wrote: Reviews of Megalopolis have coming in and "dumpster fire of epic proportions" seems to be the overall feeling so far. It is well shot, well edited, and you can tell a lot of attention and passion went into it and yet it is a fever dream fueled by arrogance and no one willing to tell the boss "no". It isn't a good movie but in the best way possible. "It is incoherent but wants to say a lot, it seems heavy but is weightless" is one quote that stuck. Three different reviews from three very different set of perspectives all mentioned Neil Breen in their reviews.
Yeah, that's been the most common thread amongst people I've seen talking about it online.
"What Neil Breen would make if you gave him a hundred million dollars"
My son really wants to see Megalopolis, but we’re not sure he should. Does it have any disturbing violence or graphic sex scenes or anything else you think would be too much for a tween?
Not the worst I've seen in a film, but yes it does have sex and violence. It has a 15 Certificate here in the UK, and certainly wouldn't take them if any younger.
One thing—I am unfamiliar with Gossip Girl. Is there another comparison that would also describe the level of sexual graphicality? Perhaps something more Sci Fi /fantasy?
One thing—I am unfamiliar with Gossip Girl. Is there another comparison that would also describe the level of sexual graphicality? Perhaps something more Sci Fi /fantasy?
A sort of teen soap opera on broadcast TV, meaning it can't get remotely naughty or bacchanalian. The kind of thing where if they went to a strip club all the strippers would be wearing swimsuits. Imagine if they went to a strip club on Babylon 5 where all the strippers were wearing swim suits.
Free on YouTube under the title Little Girl Who Conquered Time
The Butterfly Effect, but wholesome.
The Girl Who Leapt Through Time is a coming of age movie by Nobuhiko Obayashi, about a teenage girl who becomes unstuck in time, leaping around to save her friends and pick flowers, but she’s all out of flowers. The more she leaps the more she questions the existence of her childhood friend and teenage crush, who may be alive or may have died as a child.
It’s a lot more restrained than his other films, although it gets to go off the rails a bit in the last third. It’s a charming film that feels almost like it could be a live action Studio Ghibli movie made on a TV budget.
Phantasm 3
AKA Return of the Quad-barreled Shotgun
This film feels even more like a Sam Raimi film than the second, with a more grizzled Reggie in the Bruce Campbell role. It’s a lot cheesier than the first two films, but still slick and entertaining. The lore aspects are both fun and the biggest indicator that the series is going off the rails, and this film delivers plenty.
This is a silly film. A very very silly film. Amnesiac US Soldier is secretly a Ninja, which is just as well because, as they’re wont to do, Ninjas in the Philippines are harassing the US Military stationed there, because I guess there’s not much else for a Ninja to do in the Philippines in the 1980’s. Well, other than appear in unconvincing Ninja movies.
I mean, it’s not awful, it’s more unintentionally funny. It’s definitely a film you’d stick on for anything other than a good laugh.
Oh, and the Blackstar Ninja, shortly before I presume he gets his kicked in, just cut electric to the base, with a pair of steel pliers. Never knew Ninja were self insulating.
Oh, I just watched American Ninja. It's okay. I'd say that 2, is more fun and actually has better ninja action too. At that point I'm also a bit of a fan of the dynamic duo of Dudikoff and James.
Caught Starship Troopers on TV. What a fun film and the casting is just marvellous.
Based off of a 1975 Stephen King story. There have been 2 or 3 adaptations of this story over the years since its first publishing, some of which were nominated for TV/entertainment awards. I don’t think this version will get any accolades. Nothing new or groundbreaking here. It very much shows its age, as a story concept. There are much better vampire stories out there, as well as some that are much scarier.
At a runtime of near 2 hours it feels overlong yet also rushed, somehow.
There are definitely some cool visuals, so it has that going for it, and I think Bill Camp is a great “hey its that guy” kind of actor that gives it his all in every project that I see him in. Bill Pullman’s son, Lewis Pullman, plays one of the lead characters, but the story jumps all over the place that I didn’t really get invested in his character.
Just wasn’t a satisfying viewing experience overall. 4/10
I think this was a SAG-AFTRA Strike casualty put out to streaming pasture.
Probably the definitive film in the series, as we go from “everything’s pretty rubbish, but maybe we can claw it back” to “well that didn’t work, sheer unbridled anarchy where everyone has lost their minds”
It also sets the visual language for what’s to come. Modified vehicles, fetishistic clothing and scant resources.
Whilst it’s now somewhat tame in its violence, in its day is was pretty brutal stuff. Yet for my money, it never really crosses into truly gratuitous or grotesque violence. I mean it makes no apologies about including unpleasant deaths, but the camera never lingers, and it’s not being done purely for shock value.
At its core is a pretty simple story, done incredibly well. And I bloody love it.
I dug Salem’s Lot out of storage to read it, as my son wants his Halloween theme to be vampires. Is the original Miniseries good? I’ve heard it was quite frightening for children of the day.
I much prefer Jerusalem’s Lot over Salem’s Lot, but it’s a prequel of sorts. DonI read it first, in chronological order, or second as a treat?
@MadDocGrotsnik
The Road Warrior was the source and inspiration of so, so many post-apocalyptic films in the 80’s. Just for that it’s impressive.
Indie Horror with a Halloween theme from last year that flew under my radar.
Rural American Town is menaced annually by Sawtoothed Jack, whom the young men of the community must hunt down and prevent entering the Church before midnight. There is of course a twist in the tale.
Whilst nothing particularly new nor original, this is very comfortable fare. The pacing and plot progression is very well done, and we do learn to care about our protagonists, which all too often is an easily forgotten factor in modern horror.
Indie Horror with a Halloween theme from last year that flew under my radar.
Rural American Town is menaced annually by Sawtoothed Jack, whom the young men of the community must hunt down and prevent entering the Church before midnight. There is of course a twist in the tale.
Whilst nothing particularly new nor original, this is very comfortable fare. The pacing and plot progression is very well done, and we do learn to care about our protagonists, which all too often is an easily forgotten factor in modern horror.
This was one that I found actually really well done. I really enjoyed it and definitely agree with recommending it!
Also the one with the bowling vampires (and werewolf).
Fright Night 2 has the same goofy energy as the first, but dialed up. All the actors seem to be having a lot of fun. The makeup effects are still top tier. The story isn’t quite as good as the first movie, but it’s an enjoyable horror comedy.
“Whenever Michael isn’t on screen, all the other characters should ask, ‘Where’s Michael?’”
—The Director, probably
Did you like Blade? Would you like to see Blade in a Vampire The Masquerade film? Would you like Blade to be a stunning woman in tight leather? Well, here you go.
Underworld is a nearly-great action movie with a mostly likeable cast and mostly good effects, with very late-90’s lighting and music. Sadly, the actor playing the one character the plot revolves around and lore builds up makes Sam Worthington look charismatic. The special effects that hold up best and still impress kids today are the old tried-and-true in-camera effects and wire work. The Lucan suits look good for their day. The cgi isn’t terrible, but it isn’t great, either.
If you’ve ever wanted to walk the city at midnight in a leather duster, or go clubbing in a choker and bustier, you’ll find something to love in Underworld.
I always think the biggest problem with the Underworld series is its so freaking dark all the time. No not the plot the freaking lighting setup.
It's one of those films that you feel they just used the heck out of it to hide all the set elements they didn't want you seeing. And its a shame because its a good action thriller and casual series of vampire films.
Underworld is a fun slice of film. Plus it has Michael Sheen in it, therefore it’s automatically fantastic. That’s just science and a law of the universe.
I’ve seen the second one, but other than that shot? I couldn’t tell you a damn thing about it.
I’m in the same boat. I saw the first three, but I can only remember one and three. The second one slipped into the same memory hole as such classics as The Journey Of Natty Gan and The Gun in Betty Lou’s Handbag—movies I know I’ve seen but couldn’t tell you a single thing that happens in them.
Wasn't sure I was going to like this after being unimpressed by Afterlife (It wasn't bad, I just found it very slow), but I thought it was a much better movie. Without a lot of new characters to set up, it could just jump straight into things, needed more ghosts though, so it's stuck at 3rd best Ghostbusters film.
George A Romero’s fourth, latter day, entry to his zombie tales. And it definitely stands up amongst its contemporaries and it stablemates.
It’s got his trademark social commentary, some inventive gore, and importantly for me, builds off Bub from Day of the Dead, as some of the zombies display basic reasoning and fine motor control, as well as a general awareness.
Speaking of which? More movies are in the works, which I’m hype for, and I’d love it if Rick Moranis would return. He’s had the best and most wholesome reason for being retired, but he’s done some work in recent years.
A pastiche slashed flick, exclusive to Shudder and starting Alyson Hannigan.
Kind of a Scream style deconstruction of the genre, without being lazy enough to just copy Scream.
Our hero is possibly a psycho killer, who’s been working his way through his fellow camp counsellors. And he phones his friend, portrayed by Alyson Hannigan (who works in a geek store selling GW products!) for advice.
It’s pretty original in its presentation, but with pretty obvious influences it’s not ashamed to hide.
I’d say this is worth a watch. Kind of reminds me of Tucker and Dale vs Evil, whilst being nothing like Tucker and Dale vs Evil.
This one is on one of the streaming platforms (maybe peacock??). It's listed as a horror movie, and it being October, we went in with some reservations. A lot of those reservations were along the lines of "neckbeard rolling up an 'ancient' female character who only looks super young so they can justify doing some pedo gak". Thankfully, there was nothing like that at all.
To call this a horror movie, IMHO, would be like calling The Godfather a telenovella. . . I guess they put the horror tag on it because it has vampires??
Anyway. What a fun little movie. It's pretty well predictable in terms of story, but remains quite entertaining none the less. Realistically, there's not much I can say that wouldn't spoil some of the plot. The synopsis "on the tin" pretty well covers it: a band of ne'er do wells (who are somehow "professionals") kidnap someone they think is just a 12 year old kid. However, it turns out, said kid is pretty powerful vampire, and things take a turn for the worse for all but the main character. In following a trope of the horror genre, Main Character is one of the very few who survives this 2 hour flick, and. . . there aren't much sympathies elsewhere. Did I mention a lot of this is utterly predictable?
While I enjoyed it, I can only recommend this if you go in with expectations of gore and action with the barest hint of suspense. If you're going in expecting jump scares and proper horror, you'll likely be disappointed.
Abigail was originally titled Dracula's Daughter and was a remake/re-imagining of the 1936 Universal horror film. The success of Megan made the producers decide that a change to the title would be a good marketing move.
A childhood favourite.
Grown-up Me can tell it's not technically a good movie, the plot and characterisation are barely there and a lot of stuff just doesn't make much sense (What is that thing kiddie Conan gets shackled to?), but Grown-up Me doesn't care very much.
I still think it's probably the best thing Schwarzenegger ever did, and over 30 years later I'm still annoyed we never got Conan the Conqueror.
I'm pretty sure the Wheel of Pain at the start is a millstone. The kind of thing that donkeys are normally strapped too to walk around. Only in their case they used child slaves and the main thing is that Conan was the only one that kept going, survived and was soon pushing it with ease on his own after many years
Overread wrote: I'm pretty sure the Wheel of Pain at the start is a millstone. The kind of thing that donkeys are normally strapped too to walk around. Only in their case they used child slaves and the main thing is that Conan was the only one that kept going, survived and was soon pushing it with ease on his own after many years
That makes sense. It always threw me because it's literally in the middle of nowhere.
Had a bit of a film day today.
Tremors 1, 2 and 3
They're your quintessential low budget creature feature, if you like that sort of thing you'll like these.
Watching all 3 in one day (Even with other films in-between) probably wasn't the wisest choice, as they are all pretty much the same movie, but I still enjoyed all 3.
The Haunted Palace
A Hammer Horror-esque movie with Vincent Price and inspired by work from both Poe and Lovecraft? It's got to be fairly decent, right?
Nope, so very little happens.
Basically, an evil warlock (Price) is killed by an angry mob, 100 years later his great-grandson (Also Price) inherits the titular Haunted Palace, is immediately possessed by his great-grandad, torments the wife a bit, kills a couple locals, another angry mob burns down the palace, leaves it up in the air whether Price is still possessed or not, the end.
There's a little bit more to it than that, but nothing to make the film worth watching.
Conan the Destroyer
While there's a bit more story to it than the first one, I don't think it's quite as good.
Admittedly, they were always going to have trouble topping James Earl Jones as a charismatic villain.
Overread wrote: I'm pretty sure the Wheel of Pain at the start is a millstone. The kind of thing that donkeys are normally strapped too to walk around. Only in their case they used child slaves and the main thing is that Conan was the only one that kept going, survived and was soon pushing it with ease on his own after many years
That makes sense. It always threw me because it's literally in the middle of nowhere.
Agreed, but it strikes me that its likely one of those "middle of nowhere" that was likely "on the way to somewhere" between the farms and the cities. Thus getting a good passing of people for trade, but also of grains for milling.
Although with Michael Gross passing away a few years back, it seems unlikely that there will be more. Until some studio exec decides to run the old rebooteroonie…
The Tremors movies are good fun. I think I saw the first four ones, but I'm not entirely sure. I'm going to have to catch up on the more recent ones.
The Wolf of Wall Street
A farcical comedy about the rise and fall of a Wall Street broker. Very entertaining movie that especially stood out for the way Leonardo DiCaprio and Jonah Hill brought their characters to life.
It also feels well paced and keeps up its momentum through its three hour runtime.
Yeah, I really enjoy Tremors. The sequels less and less with each ongoing film.
Conan is one of the great examples why "story" and "characterization" don't make a good film. I'm more and more intrigued with the idea that these two things can very much be a problem. Like turning anything into a bloody tv show with unnecessary story padding and characterization that borders "somebody telling you about their awesome role-playing character".
It's just not an intricate winding complex story, its a straightforward story and characters that are mostly pre-developed and going through life.
I would argue it shows that there's a lot to be said for a simple story told well. That there's nothing wrong with a simple adventure and I think that is something Hollywood has forgotten in its quest to always make things grander and bigger.
There are certainly more than a few films where the story feels rushed or has gaps because they are trying to tell some massive saga with so many twists and intricate turns that it ends up FAR too long for a film and loads gets cut or chopped or moved around and what you get out at the end is a rushed feeling messy story.
The first movie is imo the best overall but 2 is still a fun movie. 3 is meh. The prequel film is actually a fun monster western mash that is better than 3 but not as good as 2, and the sequel trilogy of films all mostly just double down on Burt and while I'd not call any of them good they're at least entertaining popcorn fiction.
It's just not an intricate winding complex story, its a straightforward story and characters that are mostly pre-developed and going through life.
I would argue it shows that there's a lot to be said for a simple story told well. That there's nothing wrong with a simple adventure and I think that is something Hollywood has forgotten in its quest to always make things grander and bigger. ....
That's it exactly. It seems like summarizing a character within 20 seconds or less by introducing them properly seems to be a lost art. Watching Robocop again vs. every single Netflix tv show was pretty eye-opening. Or for a more recent example: The Crow vs. The Crow remake. Doesn't mean it's any less complex a character, it just takes less wasted time and fewer wasted words.
And I think that the genius of Conan the Barbarian is 40% Schwarzenegger's performance and 60% John Milius.
Conan’s motivations are kept pretty simple. But relatable. Revenge. He wants to do in the guys that did in his people and his parents.
And we’re treated to a historical appraisal of his early life.
For the sort of film they’re making? That’s plenty, and it also tells us plenty about his world.
And he’s not that far from Pamela and Jason Voorhees really. All three are out for revenge, albeit Conan is avenging himself against the Actual Wrongdoers..
Yep the montage at the start of Conan is well paced. We see his family life established and then ripped from him followed by his fast training
I'd argue that the use of a narrator is also something hollywood has shied away from in films and that's to their own detriment as well. The narrator allows quick establishment of information and lets that montage not just show events but give context to them. Well done a film narrator can establish and end a film conveying lots of information (info dump) in a quick manner that lets the film focus on the meaty middle of the story.
‘Salem’s Lot was made as a TV miniseries, which limited its budget, cinematic scope, and capacity for terror and gore. Getting past that, it does a pretty good job of capturing the creepiness of the story. In terms of vampire movies, ‘Salem’s Lot was foundational, giving us iconic scenes and images that would be reused in all the vampire media that came later, from The Lost Boys to Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Fright Night to The Simpsons.
Still, as a TV miniseries from a time before pacing, I wouldn’t recommend it for any but the diehard vampire or King fans. I’m sure the window scenes and the rocking chair scene are on YouTube, for anyone wanting to find them.
I have to disagree so much about narrators. They are ham-fisted at best, and insulting to the audience at worse. I have rarely seen a film where a narrator helped it, instead it is dumping useless detail beyond what we really need to know for the film to work.
Normally, a Narrator is an excuse to not show. Movies should always strive to show and not tell.
However, I am not sure Audience tolerance for showing is as high as it used to be. Movies are getting longer, but they are not necessarily better at showing than the films of yesteryear. Either it is a shrinking art, or audiences are demanding more exposition than ever. Not sure which it is, but I have my suspicions.....
Easy E wrote: I have to disagree so much about narrators. They are ham-fisted at best, and insulting to the audience at worse. I have rarely seen a film where a narrator helped it, instead it is dumping useless detail beyond what we really need to know for the film to work.
Normally, a Narrator is an excuse to not show. Movies should always strive to show and not tell.
However, I am not sure Audience tolerance for showing is as high as it used to be. Movies are getting longer, but they are not necessarily better at showing than the films of yesteryear. Either it is a shrinking art, or audiences are demanding more exposition than ever. Not sure which it is, but I have my suspicions.....
In a film a Narrator both shows and tells, though you can argue that a text one like at the start of Starwars is only telling. The thing is they can convey very specific information that isn't left to interpretation on the part of the audience. This basically lets you put context to a montage at a point in the film where you don't have time to show the context. It's setting the stage for the story at the start and helping wrap up the story at the end.
Done right it lets the film pace itself better as now you're either not rushing a huge chunk of setup to get things where you need them (which always ends up with the film feeling forced); or you're not spending so long on the setup that you have ot rush the final because you've no more time.
I do agree that pacing in films seems to be much worse today than in the past; and yeah I'd also argue there's a good many films that are not made to be watched. They might have lots going on and tonnes of advanced CGI and stuff - but its not the same as, say, a Spaghetti Western where if you don't watch it the film falls flat.
Personally, after watching older movies with my kids, it's the audience messing up the balance of show vs. tell. Sure some of it is in the method of delivery but most of it is that the audience wants to know ALL the minutia, doesn't want to be just old it, but doesn't have the patience for it to play out onscreen which can only be done at the level they want in a tv show and not a movie. And when it's a TV show people complain about the plot not advancing while they go over the little stuff people want details on.
Example, I watched They Live with my 10 and 14 year old a few months back. That movie has a right proper blend of show vs. tell that actually had me answering almost no questions about things they didn't get at the end of the movie. The hardest concept for them was that the "heros" died.
I actually feel a bit bad for most story tellers nowadays. It's a really really fine line to walk
Hulksmash wrote: ....
Example, I watched They Live with my 10 and 14 year old a few months back. That movie has a right proper blend of show vs. tell that actually had me answering almost no questions about things they didn't get at the end of the movie. The hardest concept for them was that the "heros" died.
...
What a film. What a film! Wasn't it a bit too scary for the 10 year old?
John Carpenter is also really good at making a film that's to the point, even if it's about such important and often complicated things such as They Live. Maybe it's the 80s genre film guys who came up in the 70s who just are good at that stuff. Escape from New York establishes its high-concept setting in 3 minutes by means of a slick 1-minute powerpoint presentation, followed by 1,5 minutes of an escape attempt being blown up. If that film had been made in 2015 we'd have 40 minutes of baddies being evil towards nice people all across the city, with constant reminders to "LEAVE THE BRONX". It would be Escape 2000. BEFORE that we'd have gotten a CGI thing showing the Leningrad raid having gone awry (but sat in Alaska whilst trying to liberate it from the North Koren occupational forces), and THEN the film would have started.
Somehow I think that "show" shouldn't always be put over "tell". Often a half-sentence about past things can do more to flesh out a character than a 10 minute flashback along with a 2 minute dialogue. People aren't dumb; they can extract information from one or two sentences without being shown what to think of them.
Nicole Kidman and Daniel Craig do their best in this flaccid, uninspired remake of Invasion of the Bodysnatchers.
Craig delivers the film’s sole high point, in the delivery of a speech about how The Pod People’s World is a better world.
Of particular disappointment is the “oh her son is immune therefore we beat them and everyone else goes back to normal because it’s an infection and not a replication”
Watch the 1970’s version instead. It’s vastly, immeasurably superior in every way.
Hulksmash wrote: ....
Example, I watched They Live with my 10 and 14 year old a few months back. That movie has a right proper blend of show vs. tell that actually had me answering almost no questions about things they didn't get at the end of the movie. The hardest concept for them was that the "heros" died.
...
What a film. What a film! Wasn't it a bit too scary for the 10 year old?
John Carpenter is also really good at making a film that's to the point, even if it's about such important and often complicated things such as They Live. Maybe it's the 80s genre film guys who came up in the 70s who just are good at that stuff. Escape from New York establishes its high-concept setting in 3 minutes by means of a slick 1-minute powerpoint presentation, followed by 1,5 minutes of an escape attempt being blown up. If that film had been made in 2015 we'd have 40 minutes of baddies being evil towards nice people all across the city, with constant reminders to "LEAVE THE BRONX". It would be Escape 2000. BEFORE that we'd have gotten a CGI thing showing the Leningrad raid having gone awry (but sat in Alaska whilst trying to liberate it from the North Koren occupational forces), and THEN the film would have started.
Somehow I think that "show" shouldn't always be put over "tell". Often a half-sentence about past things can do more to flesh out a character than a 10 minute flashback along with a 2 minute dialogue. People aren't dumb; they can extract information from one or two sentences without being shown what to think of them.
Sorry, I put dialogue in the "show" category because the exposition is happening on screen and not from an out-of-the narrative character or intro character. Yeah, I am looking at you Princess Irulan!
So if Luke mentions blasting Womp Rats in his T-16 back home, that is showing on the screen the necessary background a movie goer needs to understand why he can get into an X-wing and fly it. We don't need or want a Narrator saying, The T-16 is made by Incom and has similar controls to the Rebel's main fighter, the X-wing which is also made by Incom. Therefore, Luke can fly it successfully. Likewise, we don't really need a scene where Luke talks to Biggs, and Biggs says that the controls for the X-wing are just like the T-16s back home.
Modern movies (and to some extent modern movie goers) are terrible about dropping and picking up on these dialogue cues within the movie. If the viewer is not hit over the head with a metaphorical brick on the screen, then the movie makers/viewers act like the film was inherently flawed or made a huge mistake.
You can see this being done much better in older movies. Of course, this is all, like; my opinion man.
The newer version.
Was expecting a by-the-numbers Disney family film, instead got a pretty decent movie about how destructive and all-consuming grief can be.
Just a surprisingly solid film all round.
Not sure how it compares to the Eddie Murphy version, can't remember much about that one.
To stick with Luke and the X-Wing? Nowhere in the film is it explained that Luke’s T-16 and the X-Wing are from the same manufacturer, what a T-16 even is, or that it and the X-Wing have near identical flight controls. All of that is from other sources, which one could consider external exposition and backfilling of the universe.
Note I do not consider this approach a bad thing, otherwise I’d have to burn all my GW books, especially the 1st Edition ones.
Then we come to Rey. How am she pilot? How am she Jedi? How am she know how tie shoe? How am she learn walk? How am her learn cook? Because, apparently, suddenly, If It’s Not Shown On Screen Or Specifically Addressed To The Audience (perhaps in a narrator sidebar, ala Rocky Horror?) then it’s actually a gaping, suppurating plot hole, poor writing and Mary-Sue.
No, I’m not attempting to paint those criticising the sequels as some kind of alt-right, basement dwelling swamp donkey of limited thought and attention span, so knock that off. There’s plenty to criticise, even for someone like I who actively enjoy them. But Rey’s skills really aren’t that valid, given Luke isn’t subjected to the same (who did teach him to Force-grab his lightsaber? He’d only ever seen The Force used for a Jedi Mind Trick, and to aid his aim over the Deathstar. Telekinetics is a very different discipline, no? Can’t have been Obi-Wan, as his ghost hadn’t manifested itself at that point, as that comes after his escape)
But the uneven criticism in this specific example is undeniable. And a chunk of it will likely come from “we first saw the OT when we were tiny, to the point it can be difficult to remember a time when we didn’t know it”, and us being adults for the Sequels, and so having a finer eye (or any eye at all, given for the first example we were tiny, and therefore tiny idiots) for film making and that.
Upside of the OT approach? It basically delivered us spin-off media and a richer galaxy to play in, because those who started off playing with background character figures from Kenner with such inventive names as “Walrusman, Snaggletooth and Hammerhead” were the same folk who gave those characters names, history, and for the really lucky ones? An entry in the Tales Of books (which still rank among my favourites).
But there is a flip side to not explaining everything. Because you can go too far the other way and not explain enough. You only need to go back through this thread, unfortunately read more of my drivel, to find films where the plot leaves me baffled as to why anyone is doing anything, and why we as an audience are supposed to care.
There is an argument about the degree of competence shown though. Luke does a couple of small tricks, then proceeds to get overconfident after a bit more training and gets the snot kicked out of him by Darth Vader who is blatantly toying with him. This leads to a satisfying character arc.
Rey is perfect in everything instantly in terms of mental defence and personal lightsabre combat with a master of the arts. She goes to Luke to train, but he doesn't appear to be able to actually teach her anything as she can do it all already. She doesn't appear to learn anything or develop as a character, so its less satisfying. That then leads people to ask the annoying questions and probably go rather further down the rabbit hole than required.
The implication is that the OT happens over a longer timescale as well, while the three sequel films seem to hare through in ultra fast fashion, so even just the implied time available to Luke to develop through personal meditation and study between the films is different.
The newer version.
Was expecting a by-the-numbers Disney family film, instead got a pretty decent movie about how destructive and all-consuming grief can be.
Just a surprisingly solid film all round.
Not sure how it compares to the Eddie Murphy version, can't remember much about that one.
It's honestly better imo.
This was a surprisingly solid and very fun film. Knew exactly what kind of movie it was and wasn't ashamed to just be itself.
Ahtman wrote: Every time the sequel trilogy is introduced into a discussion the discussion is weakened and the darkness once again begins to creep in.
I wonder what would have if we gradually introduced more and more references to The Chronicles of Riddick every time the Sequel Trilogy came up until every Star Wars discussion just gets swallowed by Riddick gakposts.
Ooh—or Jupiter Ascending, so we can do our Eddie Redmayne impressions. Anything but more Rey/Luke comparisons. Did you know Mila Kunis’ character *loves* dogs?
Dame Judi Dench stars as an air elemental who is held prisoner by the Lord Marshall of the Necromongers and advises him on how to deal with a pesky Furyan who legend fortells will kill the Lord Marshall. Her advice seemingly fails, as the legend turns out to be true and the Lord Marshal is killed by the Furyan.
Possibly the brightest jewel on the crown of Dame Judi Dench's acting career. 10/10.
It should be utter drek, composed as it is from concepts and ideas lifted from other movies, even some shots (Conan on the throne).
But by gumbo, whilst hardly a film that changed the face of cinema? It only bloody works, and is far, far better than it should’ve been and has any right to be,
Filming has begun on Vin Diesel’s fourth outing as Richard B. Riddick for the upcoming film “Riddick: Furya”.
On social media, the actor shared a pair of behind-the-scenes images from the first week of shooting – one with him in costume in a desert somewhere, the other in a dune buggy style vehicle crossing a desert.
Riddick of course is the dangerous escaped convict with the mirror eyeballs who is wanted by every bounty hunter in the galaxy. Diesel played the character across “Pitch Black” (2000), “The Chronicles of Riddick” (2004) and “Riddick” (2013).
In this film, he finally returns to his home world, a place he barely remembers and one he fears might be left in ruins.
But there he finds other Furyans fighting for their existence against a new monster. And some of these Furyans are more like Riddick than he could have ever imagined.
The project reunites him with writer-director David Twohy and shooting will run across Germany, Spain and the U.K.
I didn't like the 2nd film at first, a few plotholes/gaps and a bit too "Riddick is awesome worship" angle. But honestly as time has passed its grown on me and now I really like the trilogy and I want another film too!
WAY better and more exciting than the family car films
I love all three movies. They're finally making a fourth one? About damn time. Yay!
Easy E wrote: Also, Ghosts of Mars is the Riddick film we all really deserved.
Wait, we're ridiculing Ghosts of Mars now? But it's fun!
Automatically Appended Next Post: Intrepidos Punks
An early 80s Mexican exploitation movie that couldn't be more early 80s if it tried. A gang of punks on bikes and trikes causes mayhem across the countryside and hurtles towards the inescapable showdown with the police. Sex! Drugs! Violence! Mucho rock'n'roll! The movie has it all.
It's a decent movie that asks all the right questions. What if we made a movie that's like Mad Max, but dropped the vengeful copper and put our focus on the main creep and his gang of thugs? What if it was set not in the pre-apocalyptic hellscape that is Australia but the pre-apocalyptic hellscape that is Mexico? What if El Toecutter was a Mexican wrestler? What if feds and local law enforcement actually got along? Is there anything more manly than a Mexican mustache? How long does it take a bleached blonde bimbo to register that the bullet to her forehead is fatal?
If the genre is for you, the movie is worth watching. It may not be flawless, but it's entertaining.
La Venganza delos Punks
A not so early 80s Mexican exploitation movie that couldn't be more not so early 80s if it tried. The gang of punks is back and as bad as ever, hellbent on revenge and creating their own downfall. More sex! Less drugs! About the same amount of violence! Still mucho rock'n'roll! Movie's got it all.
It's a decentish movie that asks all the right questions. What if we made a followup movie that's like Mad Max, put our focus on the main creep and his gang of thugs but also reinserted the vengeful copper? Is Mad Mex going to accept getting pulled off the case of his murdered family? Might one manly man with a magnificent Mexican mustache manage to make mincemeat of so many murderous malditos? Where did the redhead federal agent from the beginning of the movie go?
The movie has less road action than the first one. It has less momentum in general, which is owed to it being a feature length slasher version of the finale of Mad Max. Mostly with emphasis on the slasher part as the punks wait around to get picked off one by one and don't do much else. By itself it's probably not worth watching. But it complements the first movie and makes them a complete Mad Mex.
One of those frustrating movies I’ve seen multiple times, know I enjoyed, but couldn’t tell you a damned thing about.
So on it goes again. I think I’m just being hypnotised by Grace Jones. I’ve always had a massive thing for her, ever since I was small and saw her in A View To A Kill.
We're doing the Horror movie thing this month here at home. ( I might drop a full list around the end of the month if there's any interest. )
The one I really like the most, is a movie called Wolfen from the 80's.
It starts with the murder of a very high profile guy and his wife and bodyguard in NY city.
A detective who's been benched is brought back in to work the case. And from there what they discover is unnatural to the modern world. It's a good story with a solid cast and good characters. I think you can watch it on Youtube for free.
Blumhouse (the modern Hammer?) horror mystery about a chef that opens a restaurant on a remote estate, and weirdness ensues.
It’s rather enjoyable if you ask me, and spooky rather than scary with a decent story told in an entertaining manner and pace.
Automatically Appended Next Post: The Secret of Nimh
1982 Don Bluth directorial debut animated movie.
I don’t think I’ve ever seen this before. And if I have, it was likely at a long forgotten friend’s birthday party in the mid 80’s.
It’s pretty bloody charming, isn’t it! The artwork is amazing, and certainly more appealing to me than the modern digital equivalent. How much of that is measurable and much is my impression of “this is the sort of stuff I saw in the cinema as a nipper nostalgia”
But there’s a definite atmosphere to this movie. The score is fantastic, and the voice acting pretty subtle. The most excitable voice so far belongs to Dom DeLuise, but even then he’s not being bonkers all the time, nor when it’s not appropriate.
It’s up on Amazon Prime in the UK, and I’d recommend it.
No I’ve not made this up. Shot in France, with a French cast, who spoke in phonetic English, then dubbed with an English voice cast. Which makes it, presumably unintentionally, hilarious. Like those comedy takes on old films with silly voice overs, but for real. I assume the French actors didn’t really know what they were saying, which just makes it all the funnier.
Anyways, two old ladies fall victim to a Curse and go bananas and all murderous, in a very Evil Dead stylee. And even better? The nuttiness kicks off just 17 minutes in.
The effects are gloriously goofy and inventively reminding me of Peter Jackson’s Brain Dead.
Oh, and one of the characters is the spitting image of Mr Creosote.
A cliche-laden creature feature about a big, clever, killer spider from outer space.
It's entertaining enough, if very by-the-numbers with some seriously clunky scripting ("Mothball water. It's water with mothballs in it." is going to be stuck in my brain for a few days), but it's been done better previously by the likes of Arachnophobia and Eight Legged Freaks.
I watched the O.G. and the newer 2010+ version. I read the book a long time ago, and frankly do not recall it much.
Two interesting things about Ben-Hur in general:
- For a long while, it was the most popular book in the United States
- It was written by a well-known Civil War general
This makes me think of those "A Star Wars Story" films, but is actually a Christian Fan-Fic story. I am honestly surprised we do not see more of these types of films/media. They were pretty popular for a while in Hollywood on the early Cold War era with things like Quo Vadis, Barrabas, and The Robe as well as others.
Anyway, the O.G, took me 4 sittings because it is very, very long. It starts with an overture and even has an "official" intermission. Something like 4 hours long. The newer one is a much leaner 2 hours, and as such makes some very different choices. I wish I could recall the book better, to tell you which was closer but I have a feeling both took liberties.
Notable differences:
- The Simonides one of Ben-Hur's servants, and his wives' father
- The role of Drusus a Roman soldier who is the main villain's sidekick
- The fate and role of Quintus, the Roman naval commander.
- The attempt on the Roman Governor's life that is the main catalyst of the story.
- The newer one gives a lot more on Messala's motivations as the villain.
- The ending of the revenge storylines are very different in both films.
However, one thing they both have in common is great chariot races! However, when they take place and how they are portrayed are a bit different. They also both have a great naval battle, even if slave rowers is not that accurate.
A silly, rather lacklustre comedy horror about a killer Pumpkin.
Nominally a promising premise of blood splattered silliness. But sadly….”oh look, this character is a stoner. Look he’s smoking weed! And listening to a song about smoking weed! And..and…and he’s stoned! Because he smokes weed! Isn’t that rad and edgy! Nobody has ever included a one dimensional character who’s sole trait is “they smoke weed and are stoned and therefore funny har-de-har-har-roflcopter-4:20-weeeeeeed”.
Now, don’t get me wrong. If you indulge? You do you. I’ve no particular problem with weed, but I do find those who still consider it rebellious, or worse, make it their entire personality tiresome. And it being a character’s sole trait and us being told that makes them funny is even more tiresome, hackneyed and lazy.
There is room for stoner comedy. But at least remember to put some actual jokes in it, yeah?
Easy E wrote: This makes me think of those "A Star Wars Story" films, but is actually a Christian Fan-Fic story. I am honestly surprised we do not see more of these types of films/media.
They are they just don't receive widespread release because they don't have widespread appeal, though they often have comedic appeal. There is a streaming service just for such media called Pureflix if you want to start down the rabbit hole of modern Christian fan fiction. Start with Assassin 33 AD about Muslim extremists trying to use time travel to assassinate Jesus.
Well now. Finally had the chance to watch it. But as it’s a recent movie and home media release?
Spoiler:
First and foremost, it’s a load of fun. So this is overall a positive review.
But. It feels oddly restrained. It’s not as manic, mental and fun as the first Beetlejuice. And I’ve various reasons as to why I feel this way.
1. The stop motion being replaced with (good!) CGI. I for one bloody love practical effects, and budget aside, I don’t see why they didn’t go with that this time. Or possibly enhanced it to smooth it out when it’s the jerky nature that brings the charm
2. Beetlejuice’s Wife. What a waste. To the point I feel there’s a bunch of stuff left on the cutting room floor.
3. Due to 2. The pacing feels a bit off.
4. It feels….restrained. Like Tim Burton wasn’t given proper free rein to go as mental as he normally would. I’m going with this take, because the thought Tim Burton might’ve lost his touch doesn’t bear thinking about.
But overall it’s good fun, with a solid cast. It’s just a bit half rice half chips with its flaws. So close to absolute brilliance, and falling disappointingly short.
A silly, rather lacklustre comedy horror about a killer Pumpkin.
Nominally a promising premise of blood splattered silliness. But sadly….”oh look, this character is a stoner. Look he’s smoking weed! And listening to a song about smoking weed! And..and…and he’s stoned! Because he smokes weed! Isn’t that rad and edgy! Nobody has ever included a one dimensional character who’s sole trait is “they smoke weed and are stoned and therefore funny har-de-har-har-roflcopter-4:20-weeeeeeed”.
Now, don’t get me wrong. If you indulge? You do you. I’ve no particular problem with weed, but I do find those who still consider it rebellious, or worse, make it their entire personality tiresome. And it being a character’s sole trait and us being told that makes them funny is even more tiresome, hackneyed and lazy.
There is room for stoner comedy. But at least remember to put some actual jokes in it, yeah?
It's decent fun. It's got its share of tedious parts, and yes, most of the stoner comedy doesn't land. But a lot of what involves the killer pumpkin works.
Kind of middling, but worth a watch if you're into blood-spattered silliness and willing to sit through a few tedious parts especially in the beginning. I wouldn't put so much emphasis on the stoner bits myself, since it's only a part of the movie, but you aren't wrong.
I was gonna write a joke,
before I got high.
My boss said it's kinda my job,
but I got high.
I messed up half of a movie,
and I know why!
Cause I got high,
because because I got high, because I got high!
First things first. Even more so than usual, if you’ve limited or no appreciation for Nic Cage doing what Nic Cage does? Spare yourself this film. It will not challenge your opinion of the man or his approach to acting.
Me? I think he’s great and genuinely admire his passion and intensity, so I’m loving this. Certainly his testicles to the vestibules approach works well here, giving an interesting, if hardly nuanced, spin on a man losing his mind and becoming convinced he’s actually a vampire.
One thing I saw, think it might have been a Wisecrack video, about Nic Cage is that his acting style is born out of a rejection of "method" as the de facto "best" type of acting. That creating a realistic depiction is not the be all and end all of acting, that the art form can transcend that.
And historically, that's right. People didn't always act in films exactly as actual people do in reality, especially when you go back to stage acting and the silent movie era. You needed big, expressive, physical performances in silent movies to help convey emotion that couldn't be conveyed in the sound of your performance, just like on the stage your performance needs to be readable from the cheap sets in the back just as much as in the boxes and stalls. And there's no reason those performances are worse than more grounded performances, it is just a different style that is trying to use different techniques to evoke the desired response in the audience.
Cage is capable of acting like a normal, real person in movies. He won an oscar for such a performance. He makes a conscious decision to try and do things differently.
An action comedy spy movie where Tom Cruise plays a cool as secret agent and Cameron Diaz an unsuspecting civilian who gets unwittingly drawn into a conspiracy. The action's good and so is the comedy. Light but good fare, although the end kind of disappoints by trying to inverse an earlier situation that feels forced and doesn't really land. Still a good watch for most of its runtime.
Let's be Cops
A cop buddy movie about two guys who came to Los Angeles only to find that their younger selves' dreams didn't come true. In a last bid to find their fortune, they pose as cops. What starts as self-gratification through abuse of power soon turns real as fake cops have to go up against real bad guys, as much as it becomes a struggle of eager imposter versus reluctant imposter.
Great comedy in my super objective opinion that got a lot of hearty laughs out of me.
Its simple and at times a little too far fetched with the super-ninja-commando-from-hell antics of it's characters, .but the era and cast are a breath of fresh air, while Mr Pred himself also has his own thing going on. It reminded me of the Darkhorse graphic novel "Predator: Big Game"...in good way!
Ah, Transfomers. A guilty pleasure to help run out Covid infection number 6. It’s so stupid, but entertainingly smashy.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I had a thought. Does Transformers use the Marvel film formula, a year before Iron Man released? Ensemble cast, lots of explosions, snarky dialogue. Overly CG set pieces. The Transformers series didn’t manage to follow up so well with the characters as marvel did, but they seem very similar.
They both follow trends of action movies in the 00s. People blame the MCU for overly quippy banter, but quippy banter was entering into style before any of the MCU films released. Mostly I think it's that the MCU so dominated the model of action movie it based itself on, that it became the model.
The definition of 'good artists borrow, great artists steal' in its originally intended sense.
To be fair, Transformers did less "quippy banter" and more "insufferable quacking". I think that the Avengers did it less annoying, but of course it got worse and now we're stuck with humour in dialogues that always comes with 2 superfluous and humour-robbing extra phrases on top of what may or may not have been an actual joke.
As for Vampire's Kiss: Yup, it's good fun, it's best when you don't know whether it's a comedy or not, and Cage is impressive. On the other hand, it also probably launched (in retrospective) the problematic thing about Cage that haunted him during the 2010s, but I think he's come out of the other end of that deep dark "Cage lol" tunnel and can do things now again.
Right. Ghostbusters:Afterlife (2021) (or "Ghostbusters:Legacy", as it's called in german-speaking countries. We're at this stupid point where they wanna have an English term, but they only trust German-speakers - ALL of whom learn English at school - to know about 200 English words and think that looking up stuff makes people sad and afraid instead of smarter).
I retract everything I said before, even the fact that the one kid is called Podcast is only annoying the first three times you hear it. He thinks that influencers and podcasters are jobs or interesting, but he's just a child, born in the late 2010s. He doesn't know any better.
The film's alright and nice. I only wish they hadn't had the old people show up. I don't want to see the old people. They add nothing, they hold us back.
Watch It, if you're okay with watching a Ghostbusters film from 2021. It's better than you'd expect.
In short? Loved it. A really good showing of a huge mix of influences from Generation 1, the aligned universe, and just about everything in between.
The visuals and voice cast were great; however, the soundtrack was forgettable compared to the 1986 movie or the Bayverse films.
It's definitely set itself up as a very evergreen intro for Transformers as a whole and proves the point that human characters aren't necessary for a good TF story (in fact I firmly believe the better stories are TF focussed).
Sigur wrote: Right. Ghostbusters:Afterlife (2021) (or "Ghostbusters:Legacy", as it's called in german-speaking countries. We're at this stupid point where they wanna have an English term, but they only trust German-speakers - ALL of whom learn English at school - to know about 200 English words and think that looking up stuff makes people sad and afraid instead of smarter).
I retract everything I said before, even the fact that the one kid is called Podcast is only annoying the first three times you hear it. He thinks that influencers and podcasters are jobs or interesting, but he's just a child, born in the late 2010s. He doesn't know any better.
The film's alright and nice. I only wish they hadn't had the old people show up. I don't want to see the old people. They add nothing, they hold us back.
Watch It, if you're okay with watching a Ghostbusters film from 2021. It's better than you'd expect.
Have you seen Frozen Empire yet? It integrates the old guys more naturally and in slightly larger roles, even if it's still about the next generation. Afterlife is gratuitous fan service in that regard, but in hindsight you might look at it more as a way of reintroducing old characters with a bang and setting up the next one without taking the focus off the new characters.
As far as passing on the torch movies go I think Ghostbusters is a nice, perhaps rare example in which returning old characters are treated with respect and not get diminished to make the new characters look better.
Horror film on Disney+, a riff on Freddie Kruger, but the baddie is a demented kids’ TV host, like a Mr Rogers gone very, very bad. And a hint of Ring.
It’s pretty good. Derivative, yes. But has its own charm and is if nothing else an interest adaptation of the overall trope.
Not sure I’d want to see in the cinema, but as a streaming freebie I’m satisfied by this fare.
Watched monster hunter. Ouch that was painful. Had very little in common with the game it's trying badly to cover.
Had little to do with the game at first and then got much worse with the introduction of modern US military which has absolutely no relation to the game. As someone who's enjoyed the game since first playing the original Japanese version mumble mumble years ago I was hoping to enjoy it. Didn't even make it to the end as I was getting increasingly frustrated and annoyed with it.
If you want to watch something based on the capcom game don't go near it!
However if you just want to watch a well acted action film then definitely don't go near it.
On a scale of 1-100 I'd give it negative 50.
This is where the Phantasm series crosses the Buckaroo Banzai threshold of self-involved lore. There’s at least ten minutes of explanatory flashbacks to the previous films sprinkled throughout, not including all of the cut footage from the original Phantasm that found itself woven in.
The old footage works surprisingly well in this film, as there is a whole The End is the Beginning is the End theme even beyond the (multiple?) time loop(s). On the upside, the limitations of low budget mixed with big ideas give the film the same kind of wonderous charm as old Doctor Who and TOS. On the downside, multiple characters now talk like Vorlons.
Then there are the Reggie scenes, little slices of Evil Dead-style cheese to keep the audience interested. He gets plenty of so-bad-they’re-good one liners, and some really gooey gross out scenes. No fewer than three cars explode.
I don’t think I’ve seen any of the phantasm films, so popped over to Wikipedia to have a quick peek.
The plot synopsis starts thus
“ While having sex in Morningside Cemetery, a young man named Tommy is stabbed by his partner, who is revealed to be the local mortician, in supernatural disguise as "The Lady in Lavender".”
That reminds me of some podcast I heard where Lovecraft's Arhtur Jermyn came up and the guy was like 'dude gets a box, looks inside, immediately sets himself on fire. Now that's how you start a story. The rest of it is so uncomfortable but damn that opener!'
The SCP Foundation Some generic evil organization puts 5 college coeds into a horror movie scenario to [REDACTED]. Keter level threat.
Cabin in the Woods is a fun horror comedy that’s also a loving homage to countless other horror movies. It’s not as humorous or weird or disturbing as Waxwork, but it has a similar big ending. I was expecting more one liners after seeing Joss Whedon’s name in the credits, but it still had its moments.
I love that movie. I watch it probably once a year. It's just really well done and fun without being TOO much like Tucker & Dale vs. Evil (which gets watched every other year or so)
The SCP Foundation Some generic evil organization puts 5 college coeds into a horror movie scenario to [REDACTED]. Keter level threat.
Cabin in the Woods is a fun horror comedy that’s also a loving homage to countless other horror movies. It’s not as humorous or weird or disturbing as Waxwork, but it has a similar big ending. I was expecting more one liners after seeing Joss Whedon’s name in the credits, but it still had its moments.
funnily enough, I find Whedon's influence to be the worst part of the film. I found it far too quippy as-is. the core concept is fun, and there's some good laughs throughout, but I wish it was more about being a horror movie in addition to everything else
Bram Stoker's Dracula. Some really cool horror moments , silly accents, and dark humour. Some of it belongs in a Zucker & Abrahams send-up movie, but still a good watch nonetheless - at least watch it for the first five minutes!
The Worst Witch. No how matter how old the cheese is, sometimes you just want to have a trip down memory lane to when you were a little'un. Diana Rigg, Tim Curry and Fairusa Balk star in this pre-Harry-Potter musical".
The Monster Squad. Comical love letter to the classic universal horror icons, and while not quite The Lost Boys its still a damn good laugh and who can say no to Stan Winston's wonderful practical effects?
Near Dark. What happened to Hudson, Vasquez and Bishop after ALIENS? They became vampires of course! A modern-day horror-western that...has layers to it that are either briefly mentioned, hidden in plain sight, and even method-acting mythology that you wouldn't know about unless you follow up on cast interviews. Its a finished film that sometimes comes off as awkward, but still feels...right somehow. Just watch it!
Shadow In The Cloud. Serious-but-then-silly action-horror movie about a female pilot who takes part in a flight in the belly-turret of a WWII Flying Fortress called "The Fool's Errand", and is protecting a "classified" package. But then she sees something moving around on the plane outside...
I quite enjoyed the ironically titled Bram Stoker's Dracula, but Near Dark! I haven't seen that since my 'what can I rent form my local VHS rental store this week' days, having seen the trailer at the start of another rented VHS (probably Space Hunter: Adventures in the Forbidden Zone)! I seem to remember enjoying it but being different to what the trailer sold it as.
Yeah, Near Dark is bloody good, but there's this other vampire movie I only caught the ending of - donkey's years ago - and I honestly don't have a clue what it is! Here goes...
"I'm gonna pluck your face like a chicken!" as one of the big vamp-toughs is pinning someone down, and a female vampire - resigned to her fate - walks off into the sun rise as the film ends?
I’m pretty sure GoodBadFlicks covered that one a couple months ago in one of their “5 Underrated ______ Movies” videos. I’ll see if I can find it…
I think it was loosely based on a Joan Collins book like Sunglasses At Night. It’s on the top of my tongue.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I think I was conflating a few movies. Some googling makes me think maybe it was The Librarian: Curse of the Judas Chalice. I was mixing that up with Sundown: Vampire in Retreat and something else in my addled memory.
Yeah, Near Dark is lovely. That Kathryn Bigelow knows her stuff. For several decades now. Give her something to shoot and night and things turn out well. The other things are good too.
30 Days of Night did vampires properly as well.
Spoiler:
And it has the coolest sucker punch.
The sequel is dire, btw.
I've been watching more 21 Jump Street. With time every single episode turns into a 'very special' one. I find it enjoyable, but yeah, it is very preachy and very ..:Reagan?
More Christian Fan Fic on the big screen in Super Panavision, complete with an Overture as well.
This is a traditional Hollywood Epic, Historical Drama, Christian propaganda, and Disaster movie all in one. The Rome burning scenes are pretty evocative, and the Bull Fight in the arena is tense.
I enjoyed it. Peter Ustinoff as Nero is Amazing. He far outshines any of the leads and chews scenery with glee. I can see why he was a staple in these things, he is great! The guy playing Patronus, the leads wealthy uncle is also pretty solid. Old movies have the best dialogue. Everyone else.... is fine.
Is cold dark months. So it’s Bond O’Clock in Grotsnik’s Grotto.
And man, Casino Royale was the last one to have a decent theme song. Excellent tune, excellent lyrics, fantastic vocals. Bit of life to it, unlike to the milksop drivel that was to follow.
Especially you, Sam Smith. Not to mention Billie Eilish slurring her words on No Way To Die.
Nick Frost stars in this horror, available on Shudder for streaming.
And it’s pretty damned good. Being Nick Frost lead, you might expect this to be a comedy, however dark, but it’s played straight and is genuinely atmospheric.
Given it’s a brand new release, I’ll say no more other than “you must want to check this one out, I for one am loving it”
Nick Frost stars in this horror, available on Shudder for streaming.
And it’s pretty damned good. Being Nick Frost lead, you might expect this to be a comedy, however dark, but it’s played straight and is genuinely atmospheric.
Given it’s a brand new release, I’ll say no more other than “you must want to check this one out, I for one am loving it”
He seems like a guy who'd work well in a drama/genre film that isn't comedy. Good for him.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: His performance is genuinely excellent in this movie. And the movie itself deserves his performance.
Did you see Fighting with my Family? I think he plays the Knight patriarch in that one, right? I haven't seen it, but he seems like a talented guy.
Ad Harry Potter: There are several generations now to whom HP is a very precious thing, especially the films. A friend of mine really likes them as well, despite being in roughly the same age bracket you mentioned.
Chamber of Secrets is probably my favourite. Our main young card have settled into their roles. Whilst they were good in the first, here the rougher edges are rounded off. Especially Hermione who is considerably less annoying (I get that’s a core part of the character, but the over enunciation was horribly Stage School. A place where you send your kids so they can learn to portray no emotion otherwise known to Man Nor Beast)
And yeah, Fighting With My Family is a solid film. Mr Frost definitely has range as an actor.
Aquaman 2 - So, where the first movie was bad but had enough heart to make it fun, this one felt like everyone was there out of obligation. It had way more good ideas than I expected, but everything from the performances to even the editing had this "lets get this over with" feel that had me quite bored.
Godzilla x Kong - Probably my least favorite of the Monarch films. The plane screen and audio did it no favors, but the villain was just a huge letdown for me. The earlier films spent a lot more time building up their threats, where this one felt preoccupied trying to sell the hollow earth thing without actually doing anything with it.
What a damned near flawless slice of adventure nonsense. Beautiful, charismatic leads portraying characters with depth. An excellent villain putting CGI to fair use. The sets are immaculate and the plot compelling.
Sequel is pretty solid too (not you, Dragon Emperor).
I really, really do not understand how you can make a movie of this calibre, then utter dross like the “DaRk UnIvErSe” reboot, which features a reprehensible and deeply unlikeable barsteward as its lead character, entirely sidelining the supernatural villain we were here to see.
LunarSol wrote: Godzilla x Kong - Probably my least favorite of the Monarch films. The plane screen and audio did it no favors, but the villain was just a huge letdown for me. The earlier films spent a lot more time building up their threats, where this one felt preoccupied trying to sell the hollow earth thing without actually doing anything with it.
I agree in general but it has to get some points for this:
Spoiler:
Monkey suplex! And of course using the little ape as a mace was funny.
Personally, I adored Godzilla curled up in the Coliseum. What a clever and cute idea, and it really drives home the idea that humanity is helpless against these kaiju.
Their only response? Starting to sell Godzilla merch and godzilla tours.
My only whinge about that movie is once we get into it, there are scenes where it’s all Kaiju, no hoomans and no hooman architecture and that, so we instantly lose the sense of scale.
Try the Heisei Gamera Trilogy films (Guardian of the Universe, Attack of Legion and Revenge of Iris) if you haven't already, as they do a pretty good job of integrating both the humans and kaiju and keeping them interesting. Just note that halfway through Attack of Legion you may think that a giant flying turtle is fighting a Tyranid Mawloc...
A young girl is visited by her older self, and gets some advice.
I have to say, I was recommended to this movie for it being very funny. However, at this point in my life I did not find it funny. I found it a bit more melancholy than I expected.
The twist is not a surprise at all.
*****************
You may not realize this, but it is Christmas time. Therefore, it is also time for a bunch of Christmas movies. Are you ready for some mini-reviews!
Christmas at Plumhill Manor
Take a Hallmark movie format, add in some English accents, and away you go! Nothing really unexpected to see here.
Sure, they are cliche but they do a few things right. First, they know their formula and deliver on it every time. Two, they are very professionally done and workman-like. Three, they have workman-like, solid, writing.
Six-Degrees of Christmas
What is interesting about this movie is that the woman does not leave the big city to go to the country. She stays in the big city the whole time!
The main idea of the movie is that you buy a gift, and then keep passing it around after a few days to the next person. This is the foundation of the Rom-Com set-up.
Red One Have you seen any Action-Comedies starring the Rock? You have? This is pretty much a Action-Comedy starring the Rock that is Christmas themed. It also has Chris Evans, Lucy Lui, and JK Simmons.
Honestly, it is by the numbers but cute. All the characters have actual character arcs and story beats. There is a deep dive into Christmas lore and leaning into Polar cliches. Here I need to point out that Penguins are not native to the North Pole.
It was entertaining enough, but no need to see it in theatres. This is NOT an instant classic.
Basically Bottom (A wacky 90's British sitcom for those who haven't heard of it) the movie.
And that was my problem with it, as much of a fan of Rik and Ade's antics as I am, I think trying to stretch the material out that much was just asking too much of it. I was so bored and tuned out at the end I can't remember about the last third of the film and I only watched it yesterday.
Would've made a good follow up series, but it didn't work as a movie for me.
Godzilla and Kong: The New Empire
Haven't quite finished this one yet, but I think I've seen enough to comment.
It's entertaining but fairly poor. Biggest issue is that it pretty much drops you straight into the middle of things, with very little call back to the previous movies, and having not recently binge-watched the franchise, I have very little idea of who any one is or what's going.
Also:-
Spoiler:
Lanky Kong makes for a really poor villain, he's just more agile and has a whip. Not sure what makes him worthy of ancient prophecies, but I suppose I'll find out in the end.
BobtheInquisitor wrote: But was My Old Ass good? I’m somewhat interested based on the trailer, but trailers deceive.
It made me feeling things.... which is rare for a movie now-a-days. Therefore, I will positive that it was effective. However, I am not sure what I felt was what the movie was going for.
I honestly do not know if I would call it good, but the writing is a level above what studios have been churning out lately, such as Red One. Kid of reminded me of Juno or Young Adult so if that is your thing.....
I’ll keep it on my watch list, but it’s getting bumped a bit lower than Maxxxine, I Saw the TV Glow and Franky Freako. Still above Beau is Afraid, though.
Automatically Appended Next Post: All this talk of Christmas movies makes me wish there were some good Hannukah movies. I know, I know, Eight Crazy Nights has its fans, but still.
LunarSol wrote: Godzilla x Kong - Probably my least favorite of the Monarch films. The plane screen and audio did it no favors, but the villain was just a huge letdown for me. The earlier films spent a lot more time building up their threats, where this one felt preoccupied trying to sell the hollow earth thing without actually doing anything with it.
I agree in general but it has to get some points for this:
Spoiler:
Monkey suplex! And of course using the little ape as a mace was funny.
Cool moment, but that fight has zero stakes so it's kind of just tedious that it's happening in the first place.
LunarSol wrote: Godzilla x Kong - Probably my least favorite of the Monarch films. The plane screen and audio did it no favors, but the villain was just a huge letdown for me. The earlier films spent a lot more time building up their threats, where this one felt preoccupied trying to sell the hollow earth thing without actually doing anything with it.
I agree in general but it has to get some points for this:
Spoiler:
Monkey suplex! And of course using the little ape as a mace was funny.
Cool moment, but that fight has zero stakes so it's kind of just tedious that it's happening in the first place.
I am aware it is a modern Showa era Godzilla film; it isn't like my comment said it was anything more than a "cool moment".
Basically Bottom (A wacky 90's British sitcom for those who haven't heard of it) the movie.
And that was my problem with it, as much of a fan of Rik and Ade's antics as I am, I think trying to stretch the material out that much was just asking too much of it. I was so bored and tuned out at the end I can't remember about the last third of the film and I only watched it yesterday.
Would've made a good follow up series, but it didn't work as a movie for me.
Godzilla and Kong: The New Empire
Haven't quite finished this one yet, but I think I've seen enough to comment.
It's entertaining but fairly poor. Biggest issue is that it pretty much drops you straight into the middle of things, with very little call back to the previous movies, and having not recently binge-watched the franchise, I have very little idea of who any one is or what's going.
Also:-
Spoiler:
Lanky Kong makes for a really poor villain, he's just more agile and has a whip. Not sure what makes him worthy of ancient prophecies, but I suppose I'll find out in the end.
Finished Godzilla and Kong, if anything that last half hour actually made things make less sense.
Charles Bronson is back! And he’s got his arse in his hands! Though not without justification after some street punks mug him, pinch his wallet, murder his housekeeper, kidnap and cause the death of his daughter.
Naturally, Bronson goes on a revenge killing spree in the first of four sequels to the original.
It’s pretty brutal, even given its age. Worth a watch if revenge thrillers are your thing.
Death Wish 3
Man is this guy unlucky and bad news to know.
This time, it’s his friend who gets killed, leading to pretty much all out war, the sort Judge Dredd would have wrapped up in four progs flat. The action is bigger! The explosions more numerous! And it even stars Bill S Preston, Esquire! Not sure if before Bill S Preston became a vampire, but this is another film he doesn’t survive. Also, Marina Sirtis is in it, and we get a glimpse of her Upper Rude Bits.
This is actually kinda fun. It’s so ridiculously overblown, it kinda fails to shock because it’s all just so, so silly. For instance, the big bad guy doesn’t just get blowed up off a bazooka, but a bazooka pulled from nowhere, and in a sitting room, with two other people in it. Who are entirely uninjured. Because that’s precisely how Mystery But Convenient Bazookas work, right?
Death Wish 4
Isn’t very good. Tried to be all serious, much to its detriment.
Advertised in one preview as a “Lovecraftian horror”, which after viewing I’m not sure fits. One reviewer called it a “cosmic mindf**k’ and it probably fits better.
A man in the 70’s-80’s is driving late at night, and strange lights bathe everything in a green light. A distraught, dishevelled woman appears on the road and tries to get in, fearing some shadowy being out of sight. The man in a panic, flees. Fastfoward to present day and that man is a retiring priest, doubting his faith and haunted by his decision. Then one night the green lights return…
Had some creepy moments and a few jumpscares, along with a timejumping mystery. 7/10.
Onwards to “Daddy’s Head” which got good reviews on a few sites that I peruse. We’ll see!
Daddy’s Head(2024)
Warning:
Spoiler:
a dog is killed in this one.
Decent horror flick. I think the opening credits showed that it was a Shudder production, which is more on the miss side of “hit-or-miss”. This was alright. Not a masterpiece, but its got some freaky moments and crazy visuals.
A man dies, leaving his wife and a son from a previous marriage alone in a house in the woods. The natural mourning/healing period is interrupted by strange lights and smoke from the forest. After a few nights of strange sights and sounds, the family dog alerts the pair to a strange creature hiding under a table. Its chased away, but injures the dog, also taking a photo of the deceased man from a picture frame. The creature returns, with a familiar face(see movie title). Horror movie ensues. Kind of felt like The Babadook at times, but with a much less annoying kid. 8/10.
I grade horror movies rather favorably (unless they are complete ass), so YMMV.
Onwards to The Substance, Oddity and Smile 2. Its always spooky season in this household!
Terrible script! Random nudity! Two lasses who are (not very good) Ninja’s for absolutely no reason. Who run about in safari suits with hot pants! A contaminated snake!
See this film? This film is the sort of film that anyone who makes a three or four hour, ego stroking video ranting about a two hour film, when that film was at worst merely mediocre, shall be forced to watch, Clockwork “Not The Ludwig Van, Sir” Style, on a loop, until they actually understand what a bad film actually is.
Nobody can act. Nobody could write effective dialogue. There is not a modicum of skill nor care to be found. But I’m willing to suggest there was at least a surfeit of Bolivian Marching Powder involved.
Are you making a dig at RedLetterMedia for their long video about The Phantom Menace? Because I have some good news for you about their having to watch awful movies…
I used to watch all those Andy Sedaris films when I was a young man. I have too much nostalgia to hate them.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: Just anyone that confuses mediocrity, or worse, mildly disappointing, with cinematic drivel.
Definitely not the RLM lads considering how much genuine joy they have got out of the movies of Roger Corman, Albert Pyun etc.
They recognise people who try and who squeeze every penny they have out of a budget onto the screen. Like, they actually loved the infamous Roger Corman directed Fantastic Four film from the 90s that was just made to retain the rights and wasn't widely released. The effects were bad, but creatively done within a shoestring budget of 1 million dollars to try and make a superhero movie in 1994. Like puppetry and editing to hide the transition from human limb to puppet for Mr. Fantastics elasticity. Though the CGI in the finale with Johnny Blaze is hilariously awful.
And the maker of Hard Ticket to Hawaii returns! More boobs! More nonsense! Erik Estrada, out of CHiPs! Even more really bad transvestites which wouldn’t fool anyone, and don’t really serve a plot purpose.
I want to slag this film off. I really do. It’s an excellent example of being able to film what you want not being a necessarily good thing.
But, under the most solemn laws of film watching, I am honour bound not to slag this film off?
Why?
Danny Trejo is in it, therefore it’s great.
Automatically Appended Next Post: High Spirits
1988 Spoopy Comedy. Starring Peter O’Toole, Steve Gutenberg, Jennifer Tilly, Liz Smith and Connie Booth, among others. Such as a fairly young Liam Neeson.
The owner of an Irish Castle sets up as a “haunted” hotel to raise funds - only for real ghosts to start manifesting.
For the most part, this is a fun little romp. The sets are absolutely gorgeous, and the cast are clearly all game for a laugh. Which rather made me wonder about its RT Score of 31%.
A little under an hour in, and I know what the problem is. The comedy is a bit too raunchy for kids (blatant innuendos, partial nudity, mild swears), but it’s far too restrained to really appeal to adults. Leaving it neither Arthur Nor Martha in the comedy stakes. And really not the sum of its parts.
And that’s a shame. A little re-editing, maybe a reshoot or two, and it could be either an adult comedy, or a proper family friendly one.
Overall this is a fun watch though, just irritatingly flawed.
Oh dear, I'd forgotten what it was like to sit in a cinema for a musical. The only option was to literally sink down into the chair, low enough, to hide one's embarrasment.
Otherwise, Defying Gravity" is ****ing awesome when listening to it in your car, being chased by coppers down the A14, but the next best thing is experiencing it in the cinema. The only thing that could have been better was to have the T-Rex and Raptors performing the song at the end of Jurassic Park. That said, we do at least get a singing goat...
Definitely going to be the gold standard in guilty pleasures and not sure how they will top Defying Gravity for part two.
Because I only made it 29 minutes into Gladiator 2 before I had the urge to flee from my seat due to the film feeling like an Asylum "mockbuster" version of Gladiator.
Spoiler:
Cgi monkeys are no ones friend
It has some decent parts, but go watch the original again...
Terrible script! Random nudity! Two lasses who are (not very good) Ninja’s for absolutely no reason. Who run about in safari suits with hot pants! A contaminated snake!
See this film? This film is the sort of film that anyone who makes a three or four hour, ego stroking video ranting about a two hour film, when that film was at worst merely mediocre, shall be forced to watch, Clockwork “Not The Ludwig Van, Sir” Style, on a loop, until they actually understand what a bad film actually is.
Nobody can act. Nobody could write effective dialogue. There is not a modicum of skill nor care to be found. But I’m willing to suggest there was at least a surfeit of Bolivian Marching Powder involved.
Right. Now. Well. Hard Ticket to Hawaii. I watch this one every few years, and I tend to fall asleep doing so. Yeah, it's not good, there is not a lot of reasons to watch it. It's not very unfun though. And I fully understand BobtheInquisitor's feelings about these films. Reminds me of a time when the only nudies we got to see came on a Saturday night on late night TV.
"High Spirits"? Spoopy 1988 comedy starring Peter O'Toole and Jennifer Tilly? I imagine the former being on autopilot and not in the film a lot and the latter being all sorts of fun. Given that, I think I can even stand to watch a Gutenberg film.
Wasn’t Darryl Hannah in High Spirits? And Beverly D’Angelo? That’s the one where Steve Gutenberg traded his live wife for the ghost woman by having his wife give up her life to the new girl, right?
She is indeed, and that is the one you’re thinking of.
The whole romance thing really feels like scenes cut in from a completely different movie. Which is probably why it feels so confused, particularly given some scenes are family friendly spooky knockabout silliness. And others? Feel like hastily edited, more explicit scenes from an adult oriented movie.
Such a waste, as cringeworthy romance aside? It is good fun.
Back then there was a whole genre of films about boys becoming ghosts or invisible and finding their ways into women’s locker room showers. I recall High Spirits flirting with that genre a few times with Beverly D’Angelo’s character. I wouldn’t be surprised if, like Ghostbusters, the film began shooting as a much raunchier version of itself before filming, rewrites and final editing eliminated most—but not all!—of those raunchier elements.
BobtheInquisitor wrote: Wasn’t Darryl Hannah in High Spirits? And Beverly D’Angelo? That’s the one where Steve Gutenberg traded his live wife for the ghost woman by having his wife give up her life to the new girl, right?
That is one bloody accepting wife. Fairly sure how the conversation would go if I suggested my wife might like to die so I can hook up with my ghost side-chick...
Oh she doesn’t exactly agree. She’s more murdered by Liam Neeson’s ghost character, and somehow that make her and Daryl Hannah swap places, and she then cops off with Liam Neeson.
BobtheInquisitor wrote: Wasn’t Darryl Hannah in High Spirits? And Beverly D’Angelo? That’s the one where Steve Gutenberg traded his live wife for the ghost woman by having his wife give up her life to the new girl, right?
That is one bloody accepting wife. Fairly sure how the conversation would go if I suggested my wife might like to die so I can hook up with my ghost side-chick...
It’s got a strong case of This Aged Great, but Inremember even at the time it was messed up. Even more so if you prefer Beverly’s character to DH’s non-character.
Is this even a Christmas movie, or just a cheap ripped from the headlines movie about Taylor Swift and Travis Kelsey? Hint: It is the later. The Christmas part is simply marketing hype as nothing in this film requires Christmas to make it work.
That said, it is fun to see them avoid copyright law without paying the rights, try to cheaply make you feel like you are watching the NFL, and on a shoestring budget make someone look like a superstar mega-billionaire with legions of fans. For being so wealthy, everyone sure seems to be living the usual White Collar upper-middle class dream! No extravagant displays of wealth here!
I think this one is from Lifetime, but was not 100% sure. It did not have the same successful, derivative Christmas formula of something from Hallmark.
As you may have noticed from this thread, I’ve a remarkable tolerance for bad movies, and indeed a probably very, very irritating knack for finding something positive.
Not this time. It’s just crap. Not at all helped by our lead not only resembling Jake and Logan Paul, but sharing their complete lack of charm and charisma.
So much stuff happens because the plot needs it to happen, rather for a compelling reason.
However….
Spoiler:
I am open to a second watch being beneficial.
There is a plot, and some proper cunning going on. The sort that initially leaves you scratching your head about something, before a somewhat later “oh you clever sod!” type contextual reveal. And so said second watch, knowing what people are playing at in advance may (but won’t necessarily) raise my opinion.
Bear in mind my wife and I love this. Our kids have grown up hearing the music. We've seen multiple versions of it onstage. All that said, it was pretty damn wonderful. Took a minute to get used to Grande but a bit in even she was doing a great job. Thoroughly enjoyable. Haven't seen spectacle of that quality and fun since Greatest Showman (still the musical movie to which all musical movies are held).
All that said I've have been pissed if I hadn't seen something before seeing it that it was a part 1 (which if you've heard the musical you'd realize about an hour in when you do the math on what song you're on). My wife hadn't heard that and I forgot to tell her and she was a bit annoyed. Kiddos didn't mind cause it'll be another trip to the theatres. Only downside is that the back half of most musicals tend to be the denser/heavier bits. Most of the really fun stuff happens in the first half so I'll be interested in seeing how they try to make the second half match the first.
Sadly never had the pleasure of a stage performance, and only know Wicked through the CD soundtrack, but it felt decent in pace and its only when getting near to "defying gravity" did the time begin to drag. A bit like a Peter Jackson movie, to be honest, but the end of the film is what you've been waiting for.
A retired VP of marketing, who goes to visit her daughter who is running a Christmas themed- start-up company. They are struggling and she steps in to help as an intern.
Starring Jacee Carter, Vivica Fox, and Michael Pare. I pretty stacked cast for what this is, but there are a lot of younger performers as well.
Honestly, these things are craft. No dialogue is wasted and every scene relentlessly moves the story along. Hollywood blockbusters should be this full of craft, but they aren't.
BobtheInquisitor wrote: Vivica Fox and Michael Pare? I have to admit my interest is piqued. It’s a shame they don’t make films like this for most other holidays.
Just to be clear, no one is bringing their A game to this..... they are cashing a check. However, the script is pretty tight.
A retired VP of marketing, who goes to visit her daughter who is running a Christmas themed- start-up company. They are struggling and she steps in to help as an intern.
Starring Jacee Carter, Vivica Fox, and Michael Pare. I pretty stacked cast for what this is, but there are a lot of younger performers as well.
Honestly, these things are craft. No dialogue is wasted and every scene relentlessly moves the story along. Hollywood blockbusters should be this full of craft, but they aren't.
A few years ago I realized how I appreciate that craft. Also: Yup, Vivica Fox and Michael Paré also get my interest. Then it was lost again at the mention of marketing people and some young person's start-up. But a tight story and most of all no wasted dialogue sounds nice.
@Stargate: I like that film. It's not great by any means, but IIRC it looks cool, it's got some neat ideas, and it works. When I was a kid I bought the VHS that came with a soundtrack CD that was pyramid-shaped.
Never been much into the tv show, but a few months ago I watched a bunch of con panels featuring Stargate people (whilst I was looking for Ben Browder panels for he is a wacky man), and Richard Dean Anderson and Amanda Tapping seem to be really neat people and close friends. Also funny: the Daniel Jackson from the tv show seems to have become the real-life Ron Swanson.
As latter day actioners go? This is perfectly enjoyable. It’s not exactly doing owt new, but it is doing its things at least competently, especially given it’s a sequel. Importantly, it’s not playing to anyone in particular’s ego.
It is pretty silly in places, given The Bad Lads somehow managed to infiltrate not only the Met Police, but also the Queen’s Guard. And not just a few. Like….effing loads of them. One or two being blackmailed/bribed. Sure. But dozens? Bloody unlikely.
But then, if you’re watching this sort of film for gritty realism, you’re a daft bugger.
As latter day actioners go? This is perfectly enjoyable. It’s not exactly doing owt new, but it is doing its things at least competently, especially given it’s a sequel. Importantly, it’s not playing to anyone in particular’s ego.
It is pretty silly in places, given The Bad Lads somehow managed to infiltrate not only the Met Police, but also the Queen’s Guard. And not just a few. Like….effing loads of them. One or two being blackmailed/bribed. Sure. But dozens? Bloody unlikely.
But then, if you’re watching this sort of film for gritty realism, you’re a daft bugger.
I took that film at face value, between that and your rogue agent, Johnny English, I'm not sure how you Brits get anything accomplished.
By the way, you have Part III to watch, Angel has fallen. Imagine the first two, remove the plot, excitement, and 80% of the budget.
But don't worry. Part IV, Night has Fallen has been greenlit.
This is the kind of movie you watch with your family when everyone’s overfull and tired, no one wants to make a decision, and a teenager has the remote control. It was quite fun.
The premise is that Santa’s forced 1000 years of jolly kindness just came to an end and he’s got a lot of slaying to make up for. The film is less a story than a collection of great kills, groaner lines, hilarious set pieces, and cheesy filler. The opening scene is worth the price of admission, but there are also stand out scenes in a strip club, a police station (briefly), an Rankin Bass-style cutaway, and a Troy McLure caliber high speed chase.
The cast is absolutely stacked. Name another film where you can see James Caan killed by Turkey leg, Fran Drescher immolated and Saul Rubinek impaled on a menorah.
It’s not as good as Violent Night, but it has a place in every horror fan’s killer Christmas rotation.
It still amuses me that Fran Drescher was President of the SAG during the most recent strike.
Glad she still gets some work.
Speaking of actors still getting work.....
A Nutty Christmas
Starring Sabrina, The Teenage Witch only she isn't much of a teenager anymore. The idea is that she owns a cookie shop and a magical Nutcracker comes to life and steals her heart! This one is low budget even by made-for-cable Christmas movies. However, I still found a few things to like.....
1. The kitchen in the Cookie shop was on point. It reminded me a bit of my old Bakery. However, no way you can keep that kind of inventory on hand at the shop.
2. The small-town community actually felt like a small town community. The events and the scale of things was on point. Unlike many Christmas movies where the Community Events are far to extravagant and well-attended for an actual small town event.
3. The girlfriend has a bunch of kids and lives in a less than middle class house.
4. They slip in a reference to Sabrina: The Teenage Witch 5. The main actress looks like a real person with a real person body
Cheap, but overall enjoyable and whimsical little flick from 2018 or so.
Based on a video game I've never played. A man with serious mental health issues takes a night job at a haunted, run-down, pizza party place to save his sister (Who also has serious mental health issues and is of indeterminate age, I could never figure out if she was a early teen playing a little girl or not) from their cartoonishly villainess aunt. Cursed animatronic shenanigans ensue.
Very much the definition of meh.
The main problem is, it's not even remotely scary (Always a bad sign with horror movies) and pretty stupid but not in a good way.
Jadotville I never watched because there were some things that made me think I wouldn't like it. Can't recall which ones exactly.
out of factual events... bur who cares?