Topic: The Movie Thread

Saw Kong: Skull Island on my flight from NYC. I really liked it alot. I am a big fan of King Kong (except for the horrible Peter Jackson remake but that's another story). What I liked about this one is how it's more of an origin story rather then a remake. It shows and explains who Kong is. The action is good and the effects they use for Kong and the other creatures are really good. Throw in an all star cast and you have a great movie. I also liked how they made Kong more human like then in the Peter Jackson version too. It made him more then just a ferocious beast.

Now I can't wait for them to bring Godzilla into the mix.

I'm going to watch Spider-Man on Friday and my hopes are high, I've heard lots of positive things about it.

@crippyd It's pretty good. As someone who's been getting bored of superhero films, Spider Man was great. It honestly felt more like a comedy than an action film - which isn't a bad thing at all - and it's definitely up there with Sam Raimi's Spider Man movies. It's got a twist that actually surprised me, which doesn't happen often with movies, and overall I'd say it's worth watching.

If anyone hasn't seen Dunkirk, though, then seriously go and see it - it's a masterpiece in historical film-making.

@Anchorsam_9 Thanks for that. I'm really enjoying the Marvel films, the DC ones not so much. I've not seen Wonder Woman and the only one I've enjoyed so far has been Suicide Squad.

Saw two films recently.

Wish Upon: I wasn't expecting too much, what with this being one of those lazy horror movies where characters make wishes and things go horribly wrong, but it somehow ended up being even worse than I could have imagined. None of the deaths are fun or scary, the main character is so loathsome that I felt no sorrow in watching her life unravel, the acting borders on amateurish, and nothing interesting is done with the concept. A terrible experience from beginning to end.

Dunkirk: Now... this. THIS! I don't even know what to say about it. This is definitely one of the most involving and anxiety-producing films I've ever seen. Many people describe cinema as a way for the viewer to transport themselves to another time and place, but never has this been so true as it is here, a movie that immerses us completely in the viewpoints of the people it follows, where the action rises and swells like the tide, where the sound design makes us feel like bullets are ripping at the ground around us, where the music pulses in a terrifying, almost tribal fashion along with the events unfolding on-screen. Practically a re-invention of the war movie genre!

A few design choices work really well. There's very little actual dialogue here: events often unfold wordlessly, which creates a kind of organic narrative you rarely see in films these days. You never actually see the "enemy" (German soldiers)... instead, they're a looming, constantly menacing force that manifests itself in the terrifying shriek of German planes, the hail of gunfire piercing through metal at helpless soldiers, etc. Movie monsters often work best when they're left off-screen, and I think the same is true here. Finally, the film is so immediately immersed in the historical events that we don't get backstories or much development for any of the people involved. While this might lead to us not having a protagonist to identify with or root for, it adds to the authenticity of the experience, and, as a result, kind of broadly humanizes everyone involved, because, in reality, nobody is really special or privileged, and all of the people involved are experiencing this horror together in a sense. The film reflects this on a structural level, and I thought that was really cool.

Historical and war films usually bore me to tears, but this is still the best film I've seen this year.

BTW, see this in a theater. It won't be the same at home.

The Founder (Netflix) - Historical film about how businessman Ray Krock discovered a successful little hamburger joint named McDonald's, and franchised it out nationwide into the empire we know today. I thought it was a good watch, though I don't like how he ended up treating the brothers who owned the original store.

the Wraith (Netflix) - In what is probably the most 80's movie I've ever seen, a vengeful spirit uses a supernaturally enhanced car to chase down & kill the street racers who murdered him. It's stupid, but so much so that it's fun, and Randy Quade was the sheriff, so there's that, lol (also suprised at the amount of nudity they were allowed to squeeze into a PG-13 rating at the time).

@booshy89 I was disappointed by it. Reference my impressions below.

Power Rangers: So, I watched this with a friend. It... wasn't good. The film never knew what it wanted to be: a high school drama? A modern blockbuster take on campy super sentai tropes? A commercial for Krispy Kreme? It tries to strike an uneven balance between these various approaches and fails at all of them. The characters are written by people who I assume never experienced the pains of being a teenager themselves and only learned about what these creatures are like through some weird mix of facebook posts and old 80's movies. The plot is somehow worse than in your average season of Power Rangers. The writing is universally horrible. The characters are also weirdly worse than they would be in your average power rangers season: Zordon, for example, has gone from a creepy white face that feels like a wise and ancient intelligence in the show to... just a holographic image of Walter White yelling plot exposition at the main characters. The movie tries to make it seem like he makes a noble sacrifice at one point, but... it just doesn't work for me. Rita Repulsa was a theatrically over-the-top sorceress in the original series, but here she's just... some gross witch that kills people and takes their gold so that she can make a golem that will wipe out human civilization. I feel like this character type must have been a fixture in the sorts of bedtime stories Nazis read to their children. The movie kind of drags along until the final act, where the characters finally jump into action and... it's not thrilling. It's just loud, poorly-choreagraphed action.

Logan: One of those films I intended to see in the cinema earlier this year; but it fell through the cracks. Thankfully, home video releases are a thing now, so I was able to watch this film in the comfort of my home earlier today. My first take on this was that it was a sort of bleak deconstructionist version of the X-Men; Marvel's answer to The Watchmen, if you will. I do think it has aspects of that, as all the silliness of comic book violence is absent here, replaced with violence that is often brutal and almost always realistically approached. It also takes pains to contrast the romanticized vision of the X-Men found in the comics with the "reality" of life for Logan and Xavier in this more realistic setting. The more I thought about it, though, the more I realized this was closer to The Dark Knight Returns... that is, a modern Western. And, make no mistake: for all of the gore, psychic powers, and knives erupting from people's hands, this is most definitely a classic Western at heart, with the grizzled sheriff figure (Logan) being tasked with rescuing the innocent (artificially-engineered child soldiers) from a group of bad guys, in turn redeeming himself as well. As with most Westerns, Logan takes place across a vast and dusty mid-western setting where the myth of American masculinity has yet to entirely die out due to the loneliness of the setting and the prevalence of organized crime. The film plays its material straight, which helps keep the apparent social commentary on illegal immigration and human trafficking grounded and out of the realm of obnoxious preachiness. The action sequences are brutal and visceral, with Logan's superpowers reminding one less of the classic comic book character Wolverine and more of the horror movie monster Freddy Krueger. It wasn't a knock-out, but at the same time, I can't think of any obvious flaws I could point to either: it's an extremely competently produced, superhero-themed Western with good pacing and grounded social commentary. I liked it.

The Dark Tower: I should preface this by saying that I'm not a fan of the books. Stephen King is a talented storyteller, but his amazing success has apparently allowed him to transcend the the desire or need of a good editor, and, as such, he has a talent for turning a good 400 page novel into a rambling 700 page one. Either way, I can only approach this from the perspective of someone new to the Dark Tower universe. And overall... it was OK. It's certainly not as bad as most professional movie critics are making it out to be: at bottom, this is a perfectly competent fantasy Western with disappointingly The Matrix-esque action sequences and good acting from everyone involved. The plot is pretty standard for this sort of premise, and it feels like a hundred other fantasy stories I've watched and read over the years. As usual, there is a dispiriting tendency to portray mental health workers as evil people out to rip families apart and torture children. I knew this is an easy go-to plot device, but I've seen it way too often, and I do think it does a disservice to the real men and women who work in the field and attempt to make life for those living with crippling mental illnesses as tolerable as possible. Anyway, there's a tower at the center of the universe, for some reason, and some jerk who is evil for no apparent reason wants to destroy it, and some other disillusioned guy wants to kill him, blablabla. I'm getting bored even trying to summarize the plot, since it's all so bog-standard. Idris Elba is his usual intense self as The Gunslinger and, as always, his quiet masculinity makes him a perfect fit for the role. Matthew McConaughey is the bad guy, naturally, and he also does a good job, as he has a talent for playing almost theatrically evil or nihilistic people. It makes an otherwise boring character fun and arresting (really: we don't know why he's evil or wants to destroy everything, and his arsenal of powers seem to be limited to jedi mind tricks and ridiculous bullet-time manuevering during fight scenes). The main character is a kid having visions about this nonsense with the dark tower, and he escapes into an alternate world after dodging some mental health workers who are, as I said, evil monsters that want to torture children. He joins up with the gunslinger and, of course, he has some super-powerful psychic abilities and helps to redeem the despairing Gunslinger with his innocence... actually, the more I talk about this movie, the more I realize it's just a worse version of Logan. Anyway, he's a perfectly okay child actor. The movie does all the things you would expect it to do. I was moderately entertained over the duration of the film, but I won't remember it in a month.

The Belko Experiment: At the beginning, I had my hopes that would possess a strong satirical edge, but after the killing game begins any pretense at this being anything other than depressing nastiness is abandoned. I don't mind violence at all (I'm actually a huge fan of exploitation films and Italian splatter cinema), but this film isn't doing anything interesting with it: it's not fun or artful. Boundaries aren't really pushed in any way. There's no commentary or interesting insight about the causes or nature of violence. It's just a bunch of stressed out people being forced to kill each-other. The 'explanation' for the violence at the end of the film is pathetic: clearly the writers weren't interested in the script beyond the nastiness of the central premise.

@Ralizah Bravo, sir! You don't happen to work for rogerebert.com do you? Good gracious man, that is some serious movie analysis and critique (huge wall of text not withstanding).
I really enjoyed reading your well thought out mini reviews. Keep it coming.

@Th3solution Nah, my writing is terrible, but then, I am typing these out almost as a stream of consciousness. Thank you for the kind words, though.

RE: Roger Ebert, though... I can't tell you how much I miss reading his work. I often disagreed with his opinions, but he was the only movie reviewer I've ever really enjoyed reading. He put so much of himself into his craft; you could never mistake one of his reviews for anyone else's.

Cloud Atlas (Netflix) - Really interesting movie that tells six very different stories across six different time periods (the 1850's, 1930's, 1970's, modern day [2012], and two future dates I won't spoil), but as you watch on you'll find out they're all connected in one way or another. It's a bit of a commitment at nearly 3 hours long, but well worth it, IMO. Most of the main cast plays a role in each story, and while they may be the main in one, they'll be a villian in another, or one off side character in another (the costuming is brilliant too, as while I noticed some of their different appearances, I had no idea of the majority until they were revealed in the credits).

The Hitman's Bodyguard: A FANTASTIC action movie. It's almost like a throwback to the star-studded buddy cop action-comedies that were so common in the 80's and early 90's. Like those films, it's a wonderful mix of brutal, visceral, and very stylish violence (so much more satisfying than the bloodless firefights that predominate in most modern PG-13 action movies), heart-warming, if very formulaic, male bonding scenes (Ryan Reynolds and Samuel L. Jackson have such a lovely chemistry in this movie, and, as usual, a desperate fight for survival also becomes a kind of spiritual odyssey where the men can share lessons about life and love), and witty character banter that allows the characters to develop a sense of rapport through the act of continuously annoying one-another for the audience's amusement. Of course, there's no real substance of gravity to the events in this film, but there's not meant to be: it's like eating a bowl of Lucky Charms where you pick out all of the actual cereal and are left with a bowl full of stiff marshmallows and sweetened milk. It's not nutritious, but you'll eat it anyway, because it's delicious and sometimes it's OK to eat something just because it's tasty.

@booshy89 PR is a good shout. It's fun, silly, a bit self referential and a good laugh. Lots of injokes for those of us that watched it as kids in the 90s, too.

Watched Atomic Blonde a little while back, really enjoyed it! Extremely stylish. Thought the action was well done, with all combatants in a scrap really feeling like they were doling out powerful blows. It was refreshing in a way to see bad guys that didn't die from one punch to the face or one bullet. One action scene in particular was desperate and visceral and more memorable for it.

I also watched Rear Window last week! The original Hitchcock movie from the 50s. One of my other half's favourites, and I could understand why. Such a clever film, and what an elaborate set for the time. Loved that the soundtrack was entirely diegetic (I think?) and that it was all filmed from the main character's perspective. We were just as clueless as he was, just as paranoid, just as obsessed. Really liked this film.

Just curious, but for 4K Blu-ray movies like for example Spider-Man Homecoming 4K (Blu-ray + 4K + Ultraviolet), am I right to assume that it'll contain three separate discs? Never bought a 4K movie before.

@WanderingBullet The Ultraviolet is a download code but from how you word it, it'll contain 2 discs.

@crippyd Thanks, my friend's thinking of getting a 4K TV and he was asking me about ordering movies from Amazon.

Oh, I just copied the "Spider-Man Homecoming 4K (Blu-ray + 4K + Ultraviolet)" title from Amazon's page: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B073RV4HYY/ref=ox_sc_act_ti...

@WanderingBullet Ah, sorry. But, yeah, when they are worded like that it is the Blu-ray and the 4K disc separately, like how it was with the DVD/Blu-ray ones when Blu-ray first came out.

@crippyd Noted. Thanks.

Watched some movies on TV this weekend.

Enough: Jennifer Lopez stars as a battered wife trying desperately to herself and her daughter away from her abusive husband. A classic of the feminist revenge fantasy genre. Like other forms of exploitative cinema, it's designed around building up anger and violence throughout the film until the climax is reached and the woman, finally having enough, brutally kills the man that has been tormenting her throughout. This piling up of humilitations and transgressions is used to narratively justify an act of extreme violence such as murder on the part of the protagonist. Granted, the revenge here is less extreme than Lifetime channel classic "The Burning Bed" where the movie tries to convince us that the wife is morally justified in burning her abusive husband alive in his bed at the end, but it still follows the same format.

Now, certainly, in the context of this particular film, Lopez murdering the father of her child is justified because, like any competent piece of revenge porn, it goes out of its way to make the husband as hideously evil as possible to justify her actions. Lopez's character attempts to escape her husband by going on the run, changing her identity, etc. etc. The husband, a classic movie monster who apparently has the forces of the entire patriarchy at his beck and call, never stops hunting her down, beating her and threatening violence on her friends.

Anyway, it's OK if you can stomach this sort of film.

~ * ~

National Security: A buddy cop movie where a cop with a hair-trigger temper (Steven Zahn) has to team up with the security guard (Martin Lawrence) who had him sent to prison for police brutality to take down a smuggling operation.

I didn't like it, primarily because Lawrence's character is the central focus of the film, and I HATED him with a passion. Hated how incompetent he was. Hated how sexist he was. Hated the miserable, constant racist humor (I know Lawrence was known for this sort of comedy, but he really took it up to 11 here). The writing was also pretty terrible, with no convincing character development and improbable scenarios popping up throughout.

~ * ~

Bug: A William Friedkin-directed film about a mentally unstable gulf war vet and a vulnerable, lonely woman he's introduced to who are both dragged into deep, psychotic madness. It's an interesting film. Its stage origins are fairy evident, as the film is highly dependent on manic, stylized dialogue and intense performances. Moreover, Friedkin's skill at creating a menancing and evocative atmosphere is on full display here (in this sense, it reminds me a lot of his 1973 classic "The Exorcist"), and a sense of paranoia and doom builds up throughout. The pacing is very strange, though: the majority of the movie is a slow-burn and driven by extensive dialogues between characters, but things very rapidly go to hell in its final thirty minutes.

A flawed but unique film that I feel was unfairly panned upon release.

~ * ~

Defending Your Life: A 90's rom-com starring Albert Brooks and Meryl Streep with a twist... the romance starts after both people have died and been sent to a version of purgatory to await judgment! I wanted to like this film, but it was just bad: the leads had no romantic chemistry; the romance in general was poorly written; the judgment scenes were unsatisfactory (we're told the person will go through to heaven if they conquered their "fear," but during much of the film, they just seemed to be judging Brooks' character for honest mistakes he made, so the messaging was VERY confused); the attempts at humor were obnoxious; finally, I felt like the romance aspects and judgment scenes weren't well-integrated... it felt like they had two entirely different film premises and were trying desperately to mash them together.