Movies The Movie Thread! - Continuation - Part 1

[Eigengrau]

I don't really watch horror anymore. It feels like recently there's a comeback with movies such as The Babadook, Get Out etc ?? Those were by no means gore-fests though. I'll admit I watched tons of those movies when I was younger, practically everything my video store had in the horror section. I just don't like them anymore.

I love horror, probably my favorite genre of films, but I value a good story above all else, first and foremost. I could care less about gore, I just want a story and a good/original concept that makes sense.

I can't say I was a fan of the Babadook, but I liked It Follows, The Witch, Goodnight Mommy (my favorite film of 2015), Don't Breathe, The Wailing, Demon, Under The Shadow, Train to Busan, Raw, A Dark Song...

And notice how most of these films are either foreign, or films that made waves at film festivals, as opposed to shitty films like Rings and Jigsaw and stuff that are made "for the masses".

But there's also been quite a lot of films that I hated, like We Are The Flesh, Baskin, Housewife, The Greasy Strangler, A Cure For Wellness, just to name a few.

If that's simply not your thing anymore that's fine, naturally, but you could try checking some of those out or looking up foreign horror.

Okay, I see where you're going with this.

I think I heard about the Uma Thurman thing years after seeing Kill Bill and didn't think much on it. It's 'easy' to be the ignorant consumer. I wouldn't be able to answer why, but it's a good question - what is an acceptable cost for artistic expression? The choking part is okay for me, but the dangerous stunts, no, I don't think that is.

I guess that actors/actresses consent to do these things (and are paid), so does that make it okay?

I only know of the stuff that I read, can't really say for sure what went down and why, but to me the fact that the director himself had to (wanted?) do those things feels a bit wrong.

Hey, if the actors feel like it's "less wrong" for the director to do it since they have a good relationship or something, then sure, why not.

I'm also not gonna say that you don't ACTUALLY need to have someone do the spitting/choking/whatever have you; some things just need to actually be done in-camera, there's no other way around it.

But see, another example would be Dario Argento, who, in quite a number of his movies, would have his own hands be those of the killer's in certain shots where only the hands are visible.

Again, maybe it's just a trademark kind of thing, but I can't help but wonder if he's secretly doing these big budget features as a cover for wanking material where he gets off knowing that "those are my hands that killed those beautiful girls"...

I know you gotta have some loose screws if you wanna make it in this business, but still.

Unfortunately some people are treated as disposable more often than not.

Like, I'm fine if you have your own fetishes and stuff, but you should leave those things at home and not contaminate your movie, set and workers, otherwise I start feeling like I'm not actually watching a film meant for an audience, but something secretly made only for the director himself at the expense of everyone else.

Maybe it's just me and this doesn't make any sense :v...

 

[Jammin]

But technically doesn't every single film resort to some form of manipulation, considering that everything we're seeing IS manipulated footage according to the director's vision? But I get what you mean.

It's the difference between setting down at a piano and playing a piece of music vs banging on one key incessantly.

Movie makers should be trying to evoke emotional reactions but for a purpose. To tell a story. To use the contrast between the happy moments and the horror moments to magnify the impact. To make you care about certain characters and hate others in order allow you to invest.

If you heap unpleasantness on top of more unpleasantness what you get is, unsurprisingly, too much unpleasantness. And it doesn't work nearly as effectively as a milder dose that's combined with other elements. When they do one horror scene. Then it's a fairly normal movie for like 20 minutes then BAM somebody is getting stabbed. Then it's normal again. Then BAM. That was the fun of horror movies to me. But now it's all horror stuff all the time and I think that's just a bad way to do it.

It's like drama movies that are all drama. It just doesn't work well. It's why kids movies make people cry more because it's the contrast that hits you the hardest.

 

[FetherMan]

Deadpool 2 8 / 10

Honestly thought the sequel was standard and delivered on the same strengths that made the first film a classic. At some point in the film, particularly when you learn more about ***** it starts to drag somewhat and trying to make Deadpool into a more settled version of himself didn't work to well in this film.

Not sure, what they'll do with this character in future films, but the humor literally keeps the film alive in the best way possible.

 

[M3J]

I don't really watch horror anymore. It feels like recently there's a comeback with movies such as The Babadook, Get Out etc ?? Those were by no means gore-fests though. I'll admit I watched tons of those movies when I was younger, practically everything my video store had in the horror section. I just don't like them anymore.



Okay, I see where you're going with this.

I think I heard about the Uma Thurman thing years after seeing Kill Bill and didn't think much on it. It's 'easy' to be the ignorant consumer. I wouldn't be able to answer why, but it's a good question - what is an acceptable cost for artistic expression? The choking part is okay for me, but the dangerous stunts, no, I don't think that is.

I guess that actors/actresses consent to do these things (and are paid), so does that make it okay?

Acceptable cost honestly should be up to the people involved. if Uma doesn't want to do this, she shouldn't have to. If she wants to do that, she's allowed to unless it's too dangerous to not use a stunt double. Some things should be off limits though, like how Marlon Brando legit sexually assaulted his costar for a movie with his director's approval.

 

[Brandish μ]

I love horror, probably my favorite genre of films, but I value a good story above all else, first and foremost. I could care less about gore, I just want a story and a good/original concept that makes sense.

I can't say I was a fan of the Babadook, but I liked It Follows, The Witch, Goodnight Mommy (my favorite film of 2015), Don't Breathe, The Wailing, Demon, Under The Shadow, Train to Busan, Raw, A Dark Song...

And notice how most of these films are either foreign, or films that made waves at film festivals, as opposed to shitty films like Rings and Jigsaw and stuff that are made "for the masses".

But there's also been quite a lot of films that I hated, like We Are The Flesh, Baskin, Housewife, The Greasy Strangler, A Cure For Wellness, just to name a few.

If that's simply not your thing anymore that's fine, naturally, but you could try checking some of those out or looking up foreign horror.

Yea, I check out 'foreign' movies as well for anything, it's just the genre isn't for me anymore. I'll watch some here and there, when I'm prepared mentally/emotionally, or a friend tells me it's good. It's partly due to that though (your point about mainstream horror) where the tropes are too worn, or there's a lack of story to pull you in; or the slasher movies where teens have sex and then are massacred... I just really couldn't be bothered with that. The jump scare is also annoying, it's not even emotional manipulation, it's reflex manipulation. Someone drops a cup in your home and you're startled; it's the same thing.

Horror movies that I like have a mood of dread, or hysteria, or similar about them... something that unnerves me. Maybe I'm going soft but I generally don't want that in my life. Only in small doses. Like I said I still watch horror movies, particularly atm, with some of the newer approaches to the genre. The Babadook, Get Out, It Follows, The Invitation - those have a theme or drama with the dread/horror/supernatural twist put on it. So there's more to them than the scares which helps it as a movie.

I'm the same with war movies, they're depressing for me, so I watch them sparingly, despite many of them being great films.

Acceptable cost honestly should be up to the people involved. if Uma doesn't want to do this, she shouldn't have to. If she wants to do that, she's allowed to unless it's too dangerous to not use a stunt double. Some things should be off limits though, like how Marlon Brando legit sexually assaulted his costar for a movie with his director's approval.

Yea I don't like the idea of putting a person's life in danger to that degree when they're not trained for the stunts.

See I'd be semi-okay with what happened in that Brando movie if it wasn't for the allegations that female actor made (with the scene not being in the script).

 

[FetherMan]

Solo: A Star Wars story 8 / 10

After seeing this second spin-off, what I do like about the Star Wars franchise as a whole is the expectation and excitement that is advertised and put out there for fans of the series, who have been devoted to it for over 30 years now. That said, for me personally, I had seen the first trailer and wasn't really excited or pumped for this second spin-off and having seen the film this past Thursday, the film felt average at best.

Han Solo has this rags to more rags story, where he's basically pushed into becoming the character we were introduced to in Episode 4 and after Episode 7, you kind of realize that a person like this never really "learned" a real life lesson and paid for it. There is a full circle in Solo's fate from this new film to the original trilogy and episode 7.

I think, heavy Star Wars fans will enjoy this quickly and await the next fix, which is literally a year-plus aways. But, I think that maybe the problem and it's pushing Star Wars films out so quickly, I mean, this is the 4th Star Wars film to be released in theaters in under 3 years, which use to be the same length of time for one film to come out. Maybe Lucasfilm and Disney should take more time in releasing these films whether it's a new episode or spin-off.


p.s., Glover's performance was great as Lando and there is an unexpected cameo in the film that threw me off, but made me smile.

 

[Jammin]

Finally got around to seeing Deadpool 2. It was a 9 out of 10 for me.

Really loved it. Very hilarious and managed to get some actual drama in there shockingly. Ryan Reynolds as Deadpool continues to be the most perfect casting ever. What I really liked though was how successfully it is at being a superhero movie while making fun of superhero movies.

Domino stole the show for me though. That was probably the character I was most worried about going in but I very much came around on what they decided to do with her. She and Metasonic Teenage Warhead are really just the perfect characters to compliment this version of Deadpool.

 

[Eigengrau]

Solo: A Star Wars story 8 / 10

After seeing this second spin-off, what I do like about the Star Wars franchise as a whole is the expectation and excitement that is advertised and put out there for fans of the series, who have been devoted to it for over 30 years now. That said, for me personally, I had seen the first trailer and wasn't really excited or pumped for this second spin-off and having seen the film this past Thursday, the film felt average at best.

Han Solo has this rags to more rags story, where he's basically pushed into becoming the character we were introduced to in Episode 4 and after Episode 7, you kind of realize that a person like this never really "learned" a real life lesson and paid for it. There is a full circle in Solo's fate from this new film to the original trilogy and episode 7.

I think, heavy Star Wars fans will enjoy this quickly and await the next fix, which is literally a year-plus aways. But, I think that maybe the problem and it's pushing Star Wars films out so quickly, I mean, this is the 4th Star Wars film to be released in theaters in under 3 years, which use to be the same length of time for one film to come out. Maybe Lucasfilm and Disney should take more time in releasing these films whether it's a new episode or spin-off.


p.s., Glover's performance was great as Lando and there is an unexpected cameo in the film that threw me off, but made me smile.

8/10 is quite generous for an "average" film...

I haven't seen it/nor do I intend to, but to me this is just a worthless and unnecessary film.

Out of all the stuff they could do (Knights of the Old Republic for example?), they decided that a Han Solo spinoff would be a good idea...

Why? It's not like a 2-hours long film would ever be enough to give enough backstory to such a character (but apparently they want to make a trilogy out of this? Oh boy...), and besides, what's the point, really? We know that nothing is going to happen to Han, we know that nothing is going to happen to Chewie...

You might say "it's all about the adventure", but to me it just seems like there are absolutely no stakes at all, so yeah.

Again, I haven't seen the film or anything, but that's just my opinion on it. I wouldn't even go see it if someone offered to pay for my ticket.

If Disney ends up buying Fox, they should make a Star Wars/Alien crossover. Now that's something I'd gladly pay to watch.

(there's a lot more artwork - even a comic! - regarding this crossover)

 

[Jammin]

If Disney ends up buying Fox, they should make a Star Wars/Alien crossover. Now that's something I'd gladly pay to watch.

I would also pay to watch that. I would pay to watch a lot of Alien crossovers, actually.

As for the Han Solo film. I'll probably check it out on Netflix sometime. I'm just not interested in any more Star Wars prequel content. Doesn't matter what it is. I just don't want it. I've had enough. If it's not positioned in the timeline after the Last Jedi I'm just not interested.

 

[Eigengrau]

Also I've finally seen You Were Never Really Here, and I quite enjoyed it.

With the title and its plot in mind, I thought the first teaser had potentially ruined a lot of things, but I was wrong.
Also it's a really, really great teaser/trailer.

The film is barely 90mins long, and I wish it could've had a slightly longer runtime (like an extra 10-15min), especially because this is more of a character study, and the actual "plot" isn't exactly important or even original, but yeah, give it a chance if you can.

That, and because Joaquin Phoenix is simply a great actor, period. This is the kind of performance I wish I could've seen a lot more of, like for example in a TV series I guess, where you could have a lot more time to spend with such a character... but oh well, it is what it is.

I wasn't completely blown away (although some sequences are simply incredible and astonishing), but it was well worth the money and time.

I've also seen Accident:

"A troubled assassin, who works by orchestrating "accidents", suspects that an accident that happens to his team is not an accident at all."

It was alright, nothing spectacular but it did its thing quite well. The movie could've easily been longer, with maybe yet another twist after the final one, but instead they decided to stop it there and for what it's worth - and considering what everything turns out to be in the end - I think it was quite refreshing and bold, in a certain way.

 

[FetherMan]

8/10 is quite generous for an "average" film...

I haven't seen it/nor do I intend to, but to me this is just a worthless and unnecessary film.

Out of all the stuff they could do (Knights of the Old Republic for example?), they decided that a Han Solo spinoff would be a good idea...

Why? It's not like a 2-hours long film would ever be enough to give enough backstory to such a character (but apparently they want to make a trilogy out of this? Oh boy...), and besides, what's the point, really? We know that nothing is going to happen to Han, we know that nothing is going to happen to Chewie...

You might say "it's all about the adventure", but to me it just seems like there are absolutely no stakes at all, so yeah.

Again, I haven't seen the film or anything, but that's just my opinion on it. I wouldn't even go see it if someone offered to pay for my ticket.

If Disney ends up buying Fox, they should make a Star Wars/Alien crossover. Now that's something I'd gladly pay to watch.

(there's a lot more artwork - even a comic! - regarding this crossover)

What I liked most about Solo and I can't really post it, because it'd be a spoiler. However, what I'm referring to is a particular scene in the film that involves Solo and the Empire itself. Leave it at that.

I'd love for them to do a film adaptation of "Knights of the Old Republic", however, I think the reason they won't is because of two reasons.

1. Writers credit. Disney and Lucasfilm Ltd. more than likely do not wish to give proper credit (and pay) where it's do and that's why, you get a lot of "made up" crap put into movies. I think, this is a similar problem with DC and Warner Bros. They have so much source material and refuse to use it, but that's my guess anyways.

2. Kathleen Kennedy. Hell, I'd say she's the reason Solo didn't pan out the way it could've.

 

[Jammin]

I'd love for them to do a film adaptation of "Knights of the Old Republic", however, I think the reason they won't is because of two reasons.

That would be amazing. I'm not sure how they would hold up now but KOTOR 1&2 (Though obviously 2's ending was trash.) and the old Jedi Knight game series are actually some of my favorite Star Wars stories. Even SWOTOR had some decent stuff story wise, especially the dark side campaigns, even if it was ultimately drowned in MMO fluff.

2. Kathleen Kennedy. Hell, I'd say she's the reason Solo didn't pan out the way it could've.

I'm curious what you mean by that. I don't actually follow the Star Wars movie production too closely.

 

[Calebb]

It was alright, nothing spectacular but it did its thing quite well. The movie could've easily been longer, with maybe yet another twist after the final one, but instead they decided to stop it there and for what it's worth - and considering what everything turns out to be in the end - I think it was quite refreshing and bold, in a certain way.

Agree. It reminded me of Taxi Driver a bit.

 

[Eigengrau]

Agree. It reminded me of Taxi Driver a bit.

The portion you quoted of my comment wasn't about You Were Never Really Here, but another film I saw (Accident), but yeah I get what you mean!

 

[gnut]

That would be amazing. I'm not sure how they would hold up now but KOTOR 1&2 (Though obviously 2's ending was trash.) and the old Jedi Knight game series are actually some of my favorite Star Wars stories. Even SWOTOR had some decent stuff story wise, especially the dark side campaigns, even if it was ultimately drowned in MMO fluff.

I'm curious what you mean by that. I don't actually follow the Star Wars movie production too closely.

https://movieweb.com/star-wars-knights-old-republic-game-of-thrones-creators/

 

[M3J]

Out of all the stuff they could do (Knights of the Old Republic for example?), they decided that a Han Solo spinoff would be a good idea...

Han Solo would bring in more cash as he's an extremely popular and well-known character. I haven't seen the spinoff yet, but it's probably not as bad as made out to be. Aren't some Star Wars fans boycotting the movies nowadays because of some stupid reason?

--- Double Post Merged, Jun 3, 2018, Original Post Date: Jun 3, 2018 ---

Oh, forgot to mention this, but Deadpool 2 was a fun movie, I enjoyed it. Domino and Cable were pretty cool.

 

[Eigengrau]

Han Solo would bring in more cash as he's an extremely popular and well-known character.

But even Harrison Ford fucking hates the character and Star Wars altogether, and everyone knows about that, which just makes the whole thing even sillier.

I mean I'd get the fanaticism surrounding the character in the 70s/80s, but not in the present time. Like, he was cool and all, but much like Boba Fett there just wasn't much to his character.

Funny, witty, whatever, there's not much to warrant a prequel/origin story in my opinion.

I'm a casual fan at best, not big on lore and stuff like that, but in my opinion it's not the fact that Ford wasn't a part of Solo that made it a flop; it's just that it's simply an uninteresting character/story altogether.

I haven't seen the spinoff yet, but it's probably not as bad as made out to be.

I've seen a fair amount of people complaining about a lot of things, namely how the cinematography is shit/super dark and you literally can't tell what's on screen more often than not... which is simply inexcusable for a film such as this.

Aren't some Star Wars fans boycotting the movies nowadays because of some stupid reason?

You mean movies in general? Well, The Last Jedi is pretty bad, but no matter how bad it was and how much people hated it, people will still flock to see IX since it's part of the trilogy. I mean, I'm sure some people have given up on it altogether, but I think the stand alone movies are what people are dreading the most.

 

[M3J]

But even Harrison Ford fucking hates the character and Star Wars altogether, and everyone knows about that, which just makes the whole thing even sillier.

I mean I'd get the fanaticism surrounding the character in the 70s/80s, but not in the present time. Like, he was cool and all, but much like Boba Fett there just wasn't much to his character.

Funny, witty, whatever, there's not much to warrant a prequel/origin story in my opinion.

I'm a casual fan at best, not big on lore and stuff like that, but in my opinion it's not the fact that Ford wasn't a part of Solo that made it a flop; it's just that it's simply an uninteresting character/story altogether.

I didn't know he hates Star Wars in general. But regardless, Han Solo himself is still one of the most popular and iconic Star Wars character, probably after Vader, if not before. Not silly at all for them to do a movie on him.

How not? It'd be interesting to see what led him to be a smuggler, and why he cared about himself (and Chewie) more than anything else. I don't think the movies ever told us how he met Chewie, did they? All I remember about his past is that he used to be part of the Empire, but I don't even remember if that's from the Expanded Universe or not.

I heard it wasn't a flop?

I've seen a fair amount of people complaining about a lot of things, namely how the cinematography is shit/super dark and you literally can't tell what's on screen more often than not... which is simply inexcusable for a film such as this.



You mean movies in general? Well, The Last Jedi is pretty bad, but no matter how bad it was and how much people hated it, people will still flock to see IX since it's part of the trilogy. I mean, I'm sure some people have given up on it altogether, but I think the stand alone movies are what people are dreading the most.

to be fair, people complain about tons of things, so it's whatever.

That and the new trilogy have gotten complaints and boycotts. That might have hurt Solo's performance. Plus, Kathryn something isn't popular either, and I've read many refuse to see the movies until she gets the boot.

 

[Jammin]

I didn't know he hates Star Wars in general. But regardless, Han Solo himself is still one of the most popular and iconic Star Wars character, probably after Vader, if not before. Not silly at all for them to do a movie on him.

How not? It'd be interesting to see what led him to be a smuggler, and why he cared about himself (and Chewie) more than anything else. I don't think the movies ever told us how he met Chewie, did they? All I remember about his past is that he used to be part of the Empire, but I don't even remember if that's from the Expanded Universe or not.

I heard it wasn't a flop?

Is it interesting? I don't think it is.

I mean, the captain of smuggling ship living on the edge thing works just fine. I'm on board for that. From my perspective the fact that it's Han Solo is actually a problem because it removes the stakes. We know how the story ends. Threat of doom for Han? Doesn't matter. Love interest shows up? Doesn't matter. It's basically just Retcon the movie.

If they made the same movie about somebody other than Han Solo I'd actually be very interested but as it is... I'll catch on Netflix sometime.

That's why it's flopping like it is. It was a 250 million dollar movie. In order for a movie to be considered a success it needs to make back double it's budget. Worldwide it's made 200 million. It's not making it to 500 million. That won't happen and never was going to happen. I don't think the quality of the movie matters much in this case. Because most Star Wars fans never wanted this movie. And that's a serious problem.

 

[M3J]

But do we really need stakes? I know Han survives, I know Chewie survives, and I know Lando survives. But, what I don't know is what led to Han as we know and love him? Was he always out for himself until he met Luke and Leia? What we don't or didn't know is what led to the game that allowed Han to win the Falcon from Lando, and how Lando got the Falcon. I can't see how it'd really retcon anything.

Most Star Wars fans can be quite fickle and annoying though.