Rate the last movie you watched

[yo soy el mejor]

huge payoff at the denouement with smart violence and horror plus some sad shit at the end followed by more creepiness when you see the extent of everything. someone was right when they said it was a horror movie for adults...in, like, no cheese.

[Tchocky]

Captain America: Nerd Circle Jerk

Let's see...by far the most somber of the Marvel Cinematic Movie Universe movies, yet somehow is still light-years more fun and interesting than Batfleck vs. Supermannequin? Check. A surprisingly intriguing storyline? Check. Solid performances all around, including and especially newcomers Chadwick Boseman as the badass Black Panther and Tom Holland as the single best Spider-Man ever put to celluloid? Check. The BEST action sequence ever in a superhero movie, one that will have every comic book movie fan, casual or hardcore, talking for awhile (this is not an exaggeration)? Check. A finale that wisely dials down the mayhem to play up the substantial emotional heft and makes you wonder, what could possibly happen next? Check. The best MCU movie yet? Possibly.

Quibbles: The Russo brothers need to dial down the Paul Greengrass shaky cam during the action sequences, shoehorning the heroes in for the big battle felt more than a little forced (especially poor Spidey and Ant-Rudd), and the villain was probably the weakest one yet in the MCU (a few too many convenient coincidences). That last point, however, is pretty much negated by the fact that the real villain in the movie are the circumstances that threaten to tear the Avengers apart, and in the end, this is what the movie was all about; a brothers' quarrel, one that leaves Earth vulnerable at a time in which the threat of Josh Brolin...err, Thanos is looming.

Much better than Age of Spader. Go see this bullshit. Quit pretending that these movies are getting tiresome, because the sad fact is, blockbusters simply don't get better than this.

A-

[freshfacedyouth]

may see it tomorrow if i can somehow stop being sick, i'm very excited

[vixnix]

For class:

Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind A-
I hadn't seen this before, because I had conflated it in my mind with Requiem for a Dream, which I'm still putting off watching. I hadn't realised that it was Charlie Kaufman, and it is brilliant, but I prefer Being John Malkovich and Adaptation. Adaptation is in my top three. Jim Carrey and Kate Winslet's performances had mixed results I reckon, sometimes they hit the mark and sometimes they were just Jim Carrey and Kate Winslet in costumes. I didn't like about 1/3 of the direction, either.

Juno C+
Jennifer Garner was surprisingly good in this. The screenplay was a bit pedestrian but at least it was very easy to read. I thought the end was very good, but there were a lot of times when Ellen Page just beshittened this movie because she is so obviously a lesbian with no interest in Michael Cera. So the love scenes fell flat. Her vulnerability as a young mother was believable though. So. But the ending what even in the hell is that. I had forgotten how random that was. And awkward.

For pleasure:
Piranha 3DD B
This movie was great. I wanted to watch Piranha 3D after watching an interview with the screenwriters for that film, but we downloaded this one by mistake. I have no regrets. How can anyone say no to David Hasselhoff playing himself, and Christopher Lloyd as a mad scientist who has written a book on how fish are going to evolve and begin walking. And ancient flesh-eating fish being set free in a water park. Also, a lot of fake tits, and a guy getting bitten on the end of his dick by a piranha. Recommended.

[buzzard]

Giving the abysmal waste known as Juno a C+ might have been a tad generous.

[vixnix]

Yes I agree. Could probably take the + and replace it with a -, but there were some good moments. I liked the seasonal titles, for instance. And I was pleasantly surprised by Jennifer Garner. Also, for some inexplicable reason, I have a soft spot for Michael Cera. And I thought Juno's parents were good.

Just to be clear, I liked the ending in terms of how they wrapped up the pregnancy and captured the sense of helplessness and loss that Juno & Bleeker or whatever his name is, feel. But the actual end scene, with them playing guitar together is terrible. Just, totally terrible.

[Disco King]

I tend to dislike Jim Carrey, but the two movies where he plays against his type are two of my faves (Eternal Sunshine and The Truman Show). Well, I guess he still plays his type in the latter, it's just that the script doesn't make his wacky mannerisms the focus. I like it.

[reprise85]

The Cable Guy is also really good. I saw it in the theater when it came out and absolutely hated it, but then saw it as an adult and love it. Really creepy portrait of a personality disordered man.

[Disco King]

I've never seen that one. The trailers just made it look like typical Carrey-isms. But maybe I'll check it out.

[LaBelle]

Tag (Riaru Onigokko) - 2/5

The script is so intent on being confusing for confusion's sake that when the big reveal of what's going on comes it feels cheap and dumb, leaving the few good ideas thrown in there feeling disjointed and underused. The scene where the wind slices a schoolbus in half (students, teacher and driver included) was cool, but it was the high point and happens about 3 minutes in. The rest of the film was a snooze.

[reprise85]

Originally Posted by Disco King

I've never seen that one. The trailers just made it look like typical Carrey-isms. But maybe I'll check it out.

Definitely isn't. Very dark comedy, a bit slow burning. I think everyone expected it to be a normal Carrey comedy and that is why it flopped badly. The wrong audience went to see it. Including me, at the time.

[vixnix]

Originally Posted by Disco King

I tend to dislike Jim Carrey, but the two movies where he plays against his type are two of my faves (Eternal Sunshine and The Truman Show). Well, I guess he still plays his type in the latter, it's just that the script doesn't make his wacky mannerisms the focus. I like it.

I just think he's always Jim Carrey - he can't actually act. So as a person he has a full palette of emotions but he's not even vulnerable enough to use those, so he plays numbness well, and angst, but heartbreak for instance, he snaps right back into a kind of caricature. The scene where he's under the kitchen table is painful, for instance. Not that Kate Winslet helps at all. Even in the opening scenes, I don't think he captured very well the character that was written into the script.

I'm really starting to despise actors.

[reprise85]

He definitely acts in The Cable Guy. I haven't seen it in a few years and it does have funny moments but they are definitely dark and he is playing a very fucked up dude. Fuck it, gonna watch it tonight. I'll tell you if you if it still holds up, Disco King

[reprise85]

Okay so. Somewhere in the middle of the movie it goes from seemingly bad to fucking awesomely surreal and... something. I can't put my finger on it and to try to explain more would ruin the movie. But I can say at first it just seems like bad acting from Jim Carrey but persevere to find the greatness. It needs a big set up.

Also holla at Bob Odenkirk with a cameo near the end. And a bunch of other ppl have them too.

This is a great movie in a shitty movie's disguise, for real. At least the first 30 minutes. It's actually unique but I think some people won't get it or will think it's stupid. But I like it. It's definitely misunderstood and when I first saw it in the movie theater I was way too young to get it.

[slunken]

Originally Posted by reprise85

Okay so. Somewhere in the middle of the movie it goes from seemingly bad to fucking awesomely surreal and... something. I can't put my finger on it and to try to explain more would ruin the movie.

I wouldn't worry too much about spoiling a 20 year old movie

[slunken]

Also it's not a good idea to have sex with a Jim Carrey movie playing in the background. Mixed signals to the brain.

[reprise85]

Originally Posted by slunken

I wouldn't worry too much about spoiling a 20 year old movie

Well they specifically said they haven't seen it.

[Cool As Ice Cream]

TWAS DE MANKEN lol

[Oklahoma Sexual]

solid 8.5

[teh b0lly!!1]

I WATCHED A MOVIE AND I DIDMN'T LIKE IT VERY MUCH B+

[Cool As Ice Cream]

i watched salience of teh lams
i fell asleep but it was because i was tried

[Disco King]

Originally Posted by reprise85

Okay so. Somewhere in the middle of the movie it goes from seemingly bad to fucking awesomely surreal and... something. I can't put my finger on it and to try to explain more would ruin the movie. But I can say at first it just seems like bad acting from Jim Carrey but persevere to find the greatness. It needs a big set up.

Also holla at Bob Odenkirk with a cameo near the end. And a bunch of other ppl have them too.

This is a great movie in a shitty movie's disguise, for real. At least the first 30 minutes. It's actually unique but I think some people won't get it or will think it's stupid. But I like it. It's definitely misunderstood and when I first saw it in the movie theater I was way too young to get it.

Sounds cool, I'll try to see it maybe within the week. It's probably on Netflix or something.

[Disco King]

Originally Posted by Cool As Ice Cream

i watched salience of teh lams
i fell asleep but it was because i was tried

It's been forever since I've seen it, so I don't remember how it went, but I remember liking it.

Cool story: Gillian Anderson was at one point favoured to play the main character, but she couldn't because her X-Files contract prohibited her from playing other FBI agents.

Originally Posted by vixnix

I just think he's always Jim Carrey - he can't actually act. So as a person he has a full palette of emotions but he's not even vulnerable enough to use those, so he plays numbness well, and angst, but heartbreak for instance, he snaps right back into a kind of caricature. The scene where he's under the kitchen table is painful, for instance. Not that Kate Winslet helps at all. Even in the opening scenes, I don't think he captured very well the character that was written into the script.

I'm really starting to despise actors.

I remember when I was in high school theatre class, I also wasn't comfortable just letting myself be in a role and be authentic about it, so I'd pretty much play the same character in any skit we made.

But the world had the good sense not to let me get rich off of that. Jim Carrey slipped through the cracks.

[LaBelle]

The Lords of Salem - 2/5

There's some cool visual moments but the story and acting is so godawful the film turns into a big bore.

[toase]

Pixels
I'm still asking myself why I've watched that movie

[vixnix]

Originally Posted by Disco King

It's been forever since I've seen it, so I don't remember how it went, but I remember liking it.

Cool story: Gillian Anderson was at one point favoured to play the main character, but she couldn't because her X-Files contract prohibited her from playing other FBI agents.



I remember when I was in high school theatre class, I also wasn't comfortable just letting myself be in a role and be authentic about it, so I'd pretty much play the same character in any skit we made.

But the world had the good sense not to let me get rich off of that. Jim Carrey slipped through the cracks.

Yeah, I think he suited Ace Ventura well, and I stand by his performance in that movie and the movie itself. An enduring classic. But unfortunately, Ace Ventura doesn't belong in a lot of movies, even if he is slowly getting older and more depressed in every new ones.

Also, Silence of the Lambs is 1991, and X-files is 1993??

[Disco King]

Originally Posted by vixnix

Also, Silence of the Lambs is 1991, and X-files is 1993??

I just Googled it, and it turns out it was in Hannibal that Anderson was in talks to play Agent Starling, because Foster wasn't reprising her role.

Just realized that I've never seen that movie, or any movie other than Lambs in the Hannibal Lector series.

Like, what's even up with the films? Looks like the first film is an adaptation of the first book (but with a different name for some reason), and the second film is an adaptation of the second book, but it doesn't share any of the cast and crew. Does that make the second one a sequel or just an adaptation of a sequel unconnected to the first film?

[Disco King]

Got around to seeing Interstellar. Really enjoyed it.

The fact that it didn't "look like" a Nolan movie made me realize how much influence a cinematographer has on the final product. I believe this is one of the few films where Nolan didn't work with Pfister. Not being a film guy, I usually only notice the names of the director and maybe screenwriter, and don't really think about the cinematographer. But the shots in this looked more... impressionistic, and less naturalistic, than what I'm used to seeing from Nolan. Like, right at the beginning, the close-up shots of the dust falling in sheets (foreshadowing the morse code).

Even the score was pretty different from traditional Zimmer stuff. None of the heavy, tribal percussion. Less strings and more woodwinds, everything sorta sounded like that Peer Gynt "Morning" piece.

The film shared something in common with another sci-fi film I like a lot (Primer), in that it includes a lot of scientific plausibility, but it's never an exercise in technical accuracy, and only uses these concepts in the service of a very human and emotional story. It treats a lot of relativistic concepts with more fidelity than the standard sci-fi film, but allows straight-up non-scientific fantasy when the character and thematic arcs call for it. It's smart, but not slavish at the expense of the story.

Some of the shit just made me scratch my head, though. Like, when the dust spells out the coordinates in Morse-code, and the characters are like, "it's a gravitational anomaly." Like, wtf does that have to do with gravity. Why do they think this. They don't even really try to explain. He's just like, "gravity, don't have to explain shit." I mean, the climax was also fantastical, but it was easier to accept, because there seemed to be an intuitive story reason for why it'd be that way, and the set up kind of earns the ability to inject the fantasy at that point. But at the beginning, there isn't much justification for the "gravitational anomaly" thing.

[redbreegull]

The Babadook – C

I had heard this is terrifying and was thoroughly disappointed in that regard. Spoilers beyond this point. It's more like a psychological thriller than a horror film and once they start showing the monster it's a lot less frightening. I think the Jack the Ripper aesthetic would have been more frightening if they only ever showed the thing's clothing. The creepiest moment was when the mom goes to the police and the Babadook's coat and hat are hanging up in the station. I have no idea wtf happened at the end of this movie either. The monster was defeated by being stood up to? And now it's their pet? What was the connection to her dead husband? Anyway it was entertaining enough but I wouldn't exactly recommend it. I wanted the movie to be like this



but it left me feeling more like this

[Elphenor]

lol

You totally missed the point thats why you didn't like it

It's one of those movies, just google "Babadook meaning"

As a straight forward horror movie it's just okay, but when you understand the symbolism it's very good