- Joined
- Oct 22, 2000
- Posts
- 11,105
Well that's just a lesson in finances. You shouldn't need to be pulling a Nic Cage just to keep yourself afloat with shitty movies.
Movie opinions thread (what have you seen, what did you think?)
- Thread starter aria
- Start date
Well that's just a lesson in finances. You shouldn't need to be pulling a Nic Cage just to keep yourself afloat with shitty movies.
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2003
- Posts
- 26,969
You do?!
- Joined
- Dec 25, 2002
- Posts
- 46,755
I liked Glass
Though it certainly raises more questions about the universe and the anti-supers cabal.
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2016
- Posts
- 4,333
Yeah but then it doesn't answer any of them.I liked Glass
Though it certainly raises more questions about the universe and the anti-supers cabal.
- Joined
- May 4, 2004
- Posts
- 11,867
Jackass Forever- Honestly I thought it was kind of weak. The part with whatshisname getting hit in the nuts by the UFC, hockey player and softball pitcher was pretty good though. It just seems that the more elaborate the stunts are the less funny they tend to be. It was a bit weird without Ryan and Bam, though I never found Bam entertaining in the first place so he wasn't really missed. I think they can stop now, more accurately they need to stop. Kind of sad to see them still doing this at 50. Also kind of hard to believe this got wide release, there just an unprecedented amount of dick and balls. Like seriously too much.
- Joined
- May 4, 2004
- Posts
- 11,867
Kind of. I watched the show here and there and have seen the previous movies but the whole extreme prank genre and idiots injuring themselves on tape isn't really all that entertaining to me. I think I was just a couple years too old to have been in their demographic.
Plus a lot of the earlier stuff I had already pretty much seen in the CKY videos back when those were going around in latter days of skateboarding VHS circles. I read Big Brother a lot too so that type of humor wasn't new to me.
Also thinking about it a bit all the dick and balls (and semen) stuff seemed more like a crutch they had to fall back on since Johnny and Steve got injured and couldn't do as much. Instead of being done for the weird shock value like the older stuff. Except the opening, points for creativity there. Plus bringing in new guys seemed off and they weren't that great. The black dude and his dad were alright but the new fat guy was hard to even look at.
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2008
- Posts
- 11,015
Polytechnique
Denis Villeneuve's semifictionalization of the Montréal Massacre. Not much to say other than the black & white, minimal dialogue, and sparse soundtrack make it almost abstract. There's some non-linearity in the story that adds to that. It does a good job of building tension and doesn't turn it into a cops vs. shooter ordeal. On the opposite end, it doesn't turn the topic of a misogynist mass murderer into an SJW rant. For 80 minutes, it was as short and sweet as a movie about a school shooting can be. Recommended.
Denis Villeneuve's semifictionalization of the Montréal Massacre. Not much to say other than the black & white, minimal dialogue, and sparse soundtrack make it almost abstract. There's some non-linearity in the story that adds to that. It does a good job of building tension and doesn't turn it into a cops vs. shooter ordeal. On the opposite end, it doesn't turn the topic of a misogynist mass murderer into an SJW rant. For 80 minutes, it was as short and sweet as a movie about a school shooting can be. Recommended.
- Joined
- May 4, 2004
- Posts
- 11,867
I Come in Peace (aka Dark Angel)- Possibly one of the best pieces of action schlock to come out of the genre at it's height. Dolph Lindgren is a cop who has to take down a group of giant aliens that are murdering random people with flying CDs for their brain juice which is apparently sold as a drug back on their home planet, or something. Doesn't matter, it's just an excuse for the aliens to have these crazy predator looking gloves/gauntlets that suck out brains and have goofy weapons built into them.
It has practically every action and cop movie cliche ever, literally:
Asshole Police chief, check.
Partner gets killed and main character must go on a revenge mission, check.
New partner who strictly goes by the book, while the main character plays by their own rules, check.
Troubled relationship with an old flame, check.
Everything blows up when shot, check.
Unlimited ammo, check.
Car chase, check.
Titties/strip club, check.
It's also a Christmas movie lol
It also has some of the funniest and clever scene transition editing I've ever seen. Like an alien is going to stab someone in the face with a big spike and it cuts mid thrust to Dolph playing pool with the spike dissolving into a pool cue. It's not just once or twice, it's every scene transition.
Oh yeah he also has to fight a gang called the "White Boys" that is comprised entirely of Lambo driving Wall Street yuppies that have machine guns and can kickbox.
It's pretty awesome. I remembered seeing bits of it on cable as a kid but watching it as an adult looking back at the genre and time period elevates it's to something special. It has enough budget, it's creative and Dolph is strong enough to pull off the lead, so it's not a so bad it's good. It's just legitimately entertaining all the way though. It's also got Jan Hammer doing the soundtrack.
It has practically every action and cop movie cliche ever, literally:
Asshole Police chief, check.
Partner gets killed and main character must go on a revenge mission, check.
New partner who strictly goes by the book, while the main character plays by their own rules, check.
Troubled relationship with an old flame, check.
Everything blows up when shot, check.
Unlimited ammo, check.
Car chase, check.
Titties/strip club, check.
It's also a Christmas movie lol
It also has some of the funniest and clever scene transition editing I've ever seen. Like an alien is going to stab someone in the face with a big spike and it cuts mid thrust to Dolph playing pool with the spike dissolving into a pool cue. It's not just once or twice, it's every scene transition.
Oh yeah he also has to fight a gang called the "White Boys" that is comprised entirely of Lambo driving Wall Street yuppies that have machine guns and can kickbox.
It's pretty awesome. I remembered seeing bits of it on cable as a kid but watching it as an adult looking back at the genre and time period elevates it's to something special. It has enough budget, it's creative and Dolph is strong enough to pull off the lead, so it's not a so bad it's good. It's just legitimately entertaining all the way though. It's also got Jan Hammer doing the soundtrack.
- Joined
- Nov 22, 2001
- Posts
- 8,348
Great review, this I have to see.
- Joined
- May 4, 2004
- Posts
- 11,867
Death on the Nile- Absolute trash. I remember Murder on the Orient Express being bad but not like this.
I thought I was watching a Baz Luhrmann movie after about 2 minutes. I don't think Kenneth Branagh understands the source material or the things that made David Suchet's version work. Despite it's cast, costumes and the lavish locations it looks cheap, the constant and un-necessary CG is atrocious and a lot of the dialogue scenes are completely green screened, again for no reason. Not only is the CG bad, it's intrusive and out of place. Like he's trying to make even the simplest of scenes into a Moulin Rouge level spectacle.
There's also constant music and dance numbers for no reason, like 4 in the first 20 minutes alone.
The cast is solid and while hammy aren't really out of place compared to the source material but everyone comes off so flat because of the poor green screening. Branagh's Poirot is wildly uneven in his mannerisms and his mustache is freakish. I mainly watched this to see Gal Gadot and Kiera Knightly in fancy old-timey dresses but this was just so un-engaging and grating that it spoiled that.
If you're a fan of David Suchet's Poirot or the books these new versions have none of the charm and are just empty pandering razzle-dazzle with zero substance.
I thought I was watching a Baz Luhrmann movie after about 2 minutes. I don't think Kenneth Branagh understands the source material or the things that made David Suchet's version work. Despite it's cast, costumes and the lavish locations it looks cheap, the constant and un-necessary CG is atrocious and a lot of the dialogue scenes are completely green screened, again for no reason. Not only is the CG bad, it's intrusive and out of place. Like he's trying to make even the simplest of scenes into a Moulin Rouge level spectacle.
There's also constant music and dance numbers for no reason, like 4 in the first 20 minutes alone.
The cast is solid and while hammy aren't really out of place compared to the source material but everyone comes off so flat because of the poor green screening. Branagh's Poirot is wildly uneven in his mannerisms and his mustache is freakish. I mainly watched this to see Gal Gadot and Kiera Knightly in fancy old-timey dresses but this was just so un-engaging and grating that it spoiled that.
If you're a fan of David Suchet's Poirot or the books these new versions have none of the charm and are just empty pandering razzle-dazzle with zero substance.
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2016
- Posts
- 4,333
I remember when this movie came out. I saw Dolph Lundgren in the previews and immediately begged my dad to take me to the movies to see it. And it was fucking awesome.
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2000
- Posts
- 11,105
The Bubble
Karen Gillian, so I had to see it. This movie is 9 months too late. It's set in peak Covid lockdown, which people are already trying to forget. The best acting is from the background supporting characters. That part is quote good. The stars are bad even when they are trying to be bad at acting. The whole movie is a bad covid joke. It fails at making fun of itself. It's so strange to watch an all star cast make such a dud.
Karen Gillian, so I had to see it. This movie is 9 months too late. It's set in peak Covid lockdown, which people are already trying to forget. The best acting is from the background supporting characters. That part is quote good. The stars are bad even when they are trying to be bad at acting. The whole movie is a bad covid joke. It fails at making fun of itself. It's so strange to watch an all star cast make such a dud.
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2002
- Posts
- 22,052
Turning Red
Pixar movies seem to be churned out more and more. Just had to look, it might be Coco, already five years ago, that I would say was the studio's last truly great movie...
This one got a lot of praise and a some reactionary hate. All of which is completely undue because this movie is a totally surface level plot that strays dangerously close to bland. I imagine with a little editing effort this has the right amount of content for a slightly long Pixar short, but for a supposedly significant cultural divide it is sorely lacking in depth. For a coming of age story, it pales to Inside Out and feels a lot like Luca did for me. There are elements of it that I bet for certain kids (mostly tween girls) it will probably work, but much like Luca was geared toward young boys before it, there is little of the typical Pixar something for everyone feeling in both to make them lasting recommendations.
Pixar movies seem to be churned out more and more. Just had to look, it might be Coco, already five years ago, that I would say was the studio's last truly great movie...
This one got a lot of praise and a some reactionary hate. All of which is completely undue because this movie is a totally surface level plot that strays dangerously close to bland. I imagine with a little editing effort this has the right amount of content for a slightly long Pixar short, but for a supposedly significant cultural divide it is sorely lacking in depth. For a coming of age story, it pales to Inside Out and feels a lot like Luca did for me. There are elements of it that I bet for certain kids (mostly tween girls) it will probably work, but much like Luca was geared toward young boys before it, there is little of the typical Pixar something for everyone feeling in both to make them lasting recommendations.
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2016
- Posts
- 4,333
I agree with every word you typed.
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2000
- Posts
- 11,105
yup. This is the straight to VHS/DVD kind of content they are cranking out now. I used to be interested in every Pixar release....Now I can't even tell what is Pixar.
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2002
- Posts
- 22,052
In fairness to Pixar, Disney has been involved since almost the very beginning (at least before Toy Story) and even since 2006 when Disney fully acquired them, they have had some fantastic movies.
I won't pretend to know the full ins and outs of any critical talent or management departures or changes from the top that might have affected things, which is I guess a long way to say I don't fully blame Disney for this like I do their take on Star Wars.
Pixar still seems to be more or less functional at least and the movies are competent just not stellar. So maybe this is a lull and they can return to form or maybe this is just another stop on a long term decline, but I won't make my judgement yet.
I won't pretend to know the full ins and outs of any critical talent or management departures or changes from the top that might have affected things, which is I guess a long way to say I don't fully blame Disney for this like I do their take on Star Wars.
Pixar still seems to be more or less functional at least and the movies are competent just not stellar. So maybe this is a lull and they can return to form or maybe this is just another stop on a long term decline, but I won't make my judgement yet.
- Joined
- Jan 16, 2014
- Posts
- 3,625
The difference in Pixar pre and post-Disney acquisition is practically night and day. Endless sequels and rehashed ideas and milquetoast children's fare that challenges no one and breaks zero ground in animation or storytelling. A couple of the movies they've made have still been good... but "good" isn't what Pixar did in the late 90s and 2000s.
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2002
- Posts
- 22,052
Eh I still have to disagree. Depending on how we define the post-acquisition time frame (i.e. does a 2007 movie which was certainly well underway count as pre or post?), but my list would have
Ratatouille (2007)
WALL-E (2008)
Up (2009)
Toy Story 3 (2010)
Inside Out (2015)
Coco (2017)
I would consider all of those to be classic Pixar movies. I can quibble with parts of each one (even WALL-E which remains my personal favorite behind Toy Story), they each have something going on that really, really works even if they have a weak spot.
I would even say Finding Dory, Incredibles 2, and Toy Story 4 are solid B+ tier theatrical quality sequels.
So really I'm marking the decline in quality to be very recent 2020 and later with Onward, Soul, Luca, and Turning Red. So far that's only a couple years. The run from Toy Story 3 (2010) to Inside Out (2015) had three movies released, Cars 2, Brave, and Monsters University and I'd put that stretch below the current one still.
So, just my opinion at least, but I'm still optimistic going forward (although I have doubts that Lightyear will be the one to turn things around).
Ratatouille (2007)
WALL-E (2008)
Up (2009)
Toy Story 3 (2010)
Inside Out (2015)
Coco (2017)
I would consider all of those to be classic Pixar movies. I can quibble with parts of each one (even WALL-E which remains my personal favorite behind Toy Story), they each have something going on that really, really works even if they have a weak spot.
I would even say Finding Dory, Incredibles 2, and Toy Story 4 are solid B+ tier theatrical quality sequels.
So really I'm marking the decline in quality to be very recent 2020 and later with Onward, Soul, Luca, and Turning Red. So far that's only a couple years. The run from Toy Story 3 (2010) to Inside Out (2015) had three movies released, Cars 2, Brave, and Monsters University and I'd put that stretch below the current one still.
So, just my opinion at least, but I'm still optimistic going forward (although I have doubts that Lightyear will be the one to turn things around).
- Joined
- May 4, 2004
- Posts
- 11,867
The Brides of Dracula- Classic Hammer British horror. Great stuff if you like old school gothic.
I was skimming through other Hammer trailers and I gotta say the Hammer girls might be some of the hottest chicks in cinema history. The redheads in particular. Every one of them is a knockout and from the time when classic beauty was still a thing, before late 60s and early 70s when there was a cultural shift towards a more modern and less classy emphasis on style. That's not to say the Hammer films are particularly classy but you get what I'm trying to say. Kind of comparing Audrey Hepburn's style to Farrah Fawcett's. Like in a sheer nightgown being sexier than a bikini kind of way. I dunno there's just something about them, I'm sure the casting director loved his job lol.
I was skimming through other Hammer trailers and I gotta say the Hammer girls might be some of the hottest chicks in cinema history. The redheads in particular. Every one of them is a knockout and from the time when classic beauty was still a thing, before late 60s and early 70s when there was a cultural shift towards a more modern and less classy emphasis on style. That's not to say the Hammer films are particularly classy but you get what I'm trying to say. Kind of comparing Audrey Hepburn's style to Farrah Fawcett's. Like in a sheer nightgown being sexier than a bikini kind of way. I dunno there's just something about them, I'm sure the casting director loved his job lol.
- Joined
- Jan 16, 2014
- Posts
- 3,625
Obviously you're entitled to disagree.
When a merger/acquisition like that takes place, it takes time to ruin a corporate culture. The first three you mentioned were all in various stages of production before the acquisition and Wall-E was even one of the original movies conceived during the infamous napkin sketch meeting where five of the studios' biggest ideas were formulated in the wake of Toy Story. Up to that point, the only dud they had put out was Cars but even that was ludicrously successful and well-loved by children.
It happens over time as the head creatives get pushed out/retire on their pile of money/leave out of frustration and there's a gradual brain drain. As that happens, anyone with the stature or the balls to stand-up to executive meddling/notes/dumb ideas are gone and all that's left are bootlickers, people promoted beyond their areas of competence and people who don't have the clout to be involved in those decisions. I know Pete Docter and Andrew Stanton at least are left (they were part of the original brain trust and were big parts of some of the best Pixar movies) and I'm sure there are probably more but you can track the gradual decline from Toy Story 3 on.
That's not to say that all of the movies released since 2010 have been bad by any stretch. Inside Out was a Pete Docter film and has all of the hallmarks of a classic Pixar movie (weird "what if" idea that has multiple layers of theming and is relevant to any age bracket). And most of the rest are perfectly competent... but most of them are completely indistinguishable from a Disney movie (ripping off cultural mythology to tell a mundane coming-of-age story, sequels that add absolutely nothing beyond "more of that thing you liked" and "You can do it despite being different" empowerment story #4,981). And even then, they're totally fine! Like the Marvel movies. Technically proficient. Charming if unremarkable. Totally acceptable ways to spend 2+ hours.
But that's not what Pixar used to be. Pixar movies used to be events. Cultural touchstones. Now they're just more content for Disney+. Indistinguishable from anything else Disney makes. Corporately-produced slurry that all comes out of the same factory. Safe. Sanitized. Soulless.
When a merger/acquisition like that takes place, it takes time to ruin a corporate culture. The first three you mentioned were all in various stages of production before the acquisition and Wall-E was even one of the original movies conceived during the infamous napkin sketch meeting where five of the studios' biggest ideas were formulated in the wake of Toy Story. Up to that point, the only dud they had put out was Cars but even that was ludicrously successful and well-loved by children.
It happens over time as the head creatives get pushed out/retire on their pile of money/leave out of frustration and there's a gradual brain drain. As that happens, anyone with the stature or the balls to stand-up to executive meddling/notes/dumb ideas are gone and all that's left are bootlickers, people promoted beyond their areas of competence and people who don't have the clout to be involved in those decisions. I know Pete Docter and Andrew Stanton at least are left (they were part of the original brain trust and were big parts of some of the best Pixar movies) and I'm sure there are probably more but you can track the gradual decline from Toy Story 3 on.
That's not to say that all of the movies released since 2010 have been bad by any stretch. Inside Out was a Pete Docter film and has all of the hallmarks of a classic Pixar movie (weird "what if" idea that has multiple layers of theming and is relevant to any age bracket). And most of the rest are perfectly competent... but most of them are completely indistinguishable from a Disney movie (ripping off cultural mythology to tell a mundane coming-of-age story, sequels that add absolutely nothing beyond "more of that thing you liked" and "You can do it despite being different" empowerment story #4,981). And even then, they're totally fine! Like the Marvel movies. Technically proficient. Charming if unremarkable. Totally acceptable ways to spend 2+ hours.
But that's not what Pixar used to be. Pixar movies used to be events. Cultural touchstones. Now they're just more content for Disney+. Indistinguishable from anything else Disney makes. Corporately-produced slurry that all comes out of the same factory. Safe. Sanitized. Soulless.
Last edited: