Utopia Talk / Movie Talk / Movie Reviews 9000+

Cherub Cow Member	Sat Dec 13 22:29:42 continued from.. http://www...hread=69069&time=1418531249509 Ah! Forgot to say, "Hitler was okay" for post 100 :(
Cherub Cow Member	Mon Dec 15 16:05:23 (on Exodus again) Also was nice that Scott tried to do -some- things that made it a little possible, like that a meteorite may have landed in the Red Sea and caused the draining of the Gulf of Aqaba (so not a "parting" of the sea, but a tsunami's draining of it). Which was a big difference from Scott's "10 Commandments" inspiration: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OqCTq3EeDcY ..though Scott left in the goats running down the hill :p And I -did- like that this was a throw-back to the scale of the epic movie era, with all the huge sets (even if mixed with CGI) and extras moments. Plus I forgot to mention the after credits message where they flashed "Hail Satan!" on the screen and then showed a nude and painted Scott slashing open a goat's throat while staring into the camera.
Cherub Cow Member	Tue Dec 16 00:02:12 "Why have you become my enemy?" http://www...wk&feature=youtu.be&t=2h52m30s
Cherub Cow Member	Mon Dec 22 01:29:09 The new "Night at the Museum" was really good :D I know they can kind of be kids movies (just a PG rating), but they're still really funny to me. And they don't really have kids in them, anyways. Ben Stiller's character has a son, but he's kept to the side. So yeah :) .. really enjoy Ben Stiller comedy, so it was an easy movie to like. Looks like Ben Stiller will be stepping away after this one. They allowed the "magic" of the movie to continue so the franchise hasn't concluded, but Stiller's character apparently lost his job by taking the blame for the opening disaster, and there was a symbolic scene where he -could- take part in the festivities, but he decides not to do so. Could be that Rebel Wilson will be taking over -if- they decide to do another, and with Robin Williams' death they don't even have to center the story in NYC, so they can spin off in other directions. Not that I like the movies enough to care -that- much about sequels ;p Anyways.. if you like Stiller, you'd probably like this. Simple fun :)
Cherub Cow Member	Mon Dec 22 01:30:56 *and [they don't even have to center the story in NYC, because they changed museums and can spin off in other directions, so Robin Williams' death wouldn't be an issue for the movie-verse]
swordtail Anarchist Prime	Tue Dec 23 18:54:06 http://io9...-short-films-of-201-1674600632
Cherub Cow Member	Tue Dec 23 23:14:19 Wild (2014) ... Was expecting lots of smug, self-impressed literary tone garbage — and wasn't far off — but it still did a lot of good. It showed a person's sort of naive attempt at self-improvement and self-discovery through the cultural staple of an "into the wild" travel log experience, but going beyond its predictable conceits (like its symbolic red fox), where it did well for me was with showing how spending time submerged in a painful but isolated experience can let the mind renarrativize its past — forcing cathartic moments and finding alternate means by which to reconcile the world. Have to give credit to director Jean-Marc Vallée (direct of Dallas Buyers Club) for this work, because onscreen transitions between the "current experience" of Cheryl's walk along the Pacific Crest Trail and her past remembrances were treated artfully, with temporal jumps being punctuated by softly flickering montages that simulated the persistance of a memory into the consciousness. Cheryl's sort of "Saint's Lives" transition from self-destruction to self-enabled agency followed from these contextual cues, so that her walk wasn't seen for just one decision but a continual convincing — her own way of processing her life through a trial. I think the movie did a good job showing the pitfalls and mistakes of selecting this specific process (though whatever they'd showed, it seems inevitable that hiker numbers will increase on the Pacific Crest Trail), but they didn't do too much to address Cheryl's superiority complex, which — based on Reese Witherspoon's facial expressions in the final scenes — seemed to be left intact. In a way that showed a dimension beyond the scope of the movie's intent, where a trial such as this can remold perceptions, but it may also only harden its surviving core, which may be left confident but potentially dysfunctional. And while I'm curious enough to read the book and see if those expressions weren't just Witherspoon's disconnected acting decisions, the movie's narration indicated that a lot of snobbery might be found in the book, so it could be a painful read... Anyways! Not a crucial movie and it definitely has its character shortcomings, but it was directed well and features some great scenery from the NorthWest U.S., including Oregon's moss-covered trees, Wizard Island, and lots moars. Witherspoon's Cheryl may be too much a product of a limited cultural mind to be likeable, but she still leaves room for greater symbolic capital, so her character can still be relatable and the meaning of her journey valuable.
Cherub Cow Member	Tue Dec 23 23:23:45 Fixed a few typos for the website version of that: http://www...9786498/wild-2014-movie-review
McKobb Member	Wed Dec 24 00:41:53 Red Foxx was a little predictable, like this post :P
Cherub Cow Member	Wed Dec 24 02:43:15 iknowrite? ;D
Cherub Cow Member	Wed Dec 24 02:55:54 Birdman was very good. Just fun to watch, though it does have some cognitive layers that I haven't sorted through. I'd been avoiding it for when I was mentally ready, but it turned out to be very approachable, with its mental steps being bonuses. It deals with desire for recognition/relevance against obscurity, changing mediums (like theater becoming cinema), and pop culture versus "high" art. I think its major accomplishment could be that it blurs all the lines and destroys the intentions of the old systems — like how even the 'prize' of broadway theater must transform.. how the classical critic tries to be a guardian of her sense of high culture, but the world rewrites itself around her.. how there isn't a line between the new "Twittersphere" and the old stage... Definitely worth seeing and there's more to be added here, but I'll delay :)
McKobb Member	Wed Dec 24 12:29:54 Have you seen This Is Where I Leave You?
Cherub Cow Member	Wed Dec 24 18:48:23 Nope! Just watched the trailer. Thinking about watching it? :)
McKobb Member	Wed Dec 24 19:19:27 Yup
McKobb Member	Wed Dec 24 19:26:17 Then again it's rated kinda low
Cherub Cow Member	Wed Dec 24 20:02:30 It does look a little cheesy :p
McKobb Member	Sun Dec 28 03:00:59 Unbroken was a bit slow, and I read the story of the history of that particular prison camp with the birdman so the second half held few surprises. But, I do like true ww2 accounts so I was happy with it.
Cherub Cow Member	Wed Dec 31 06:26:06 Might see that on Thursday.. The Gambler was pretty good; had some very tense moments. Surprising to see something like that in the mainstream though, because it wasn't an action or a common gambling drama, it was mostly an existential/nihilist journey focusing on Mark Wahlberg's character's own sort of quest for meaning or rebirth.. The Imitation Game was okay. The script was a little choppy, jumping around with its content quite a bit and leaving a lot undeveloped (like how Turing was having trouble with his coworkers, then he gives them apples, then they flash forward months into the future and his coworkers support him; not much work onscreen). But mostly the movie focused on Turing's sexuality and social dysfunction and his fight to help people despite them seeing him as deviant. It was a helpful social message in that way; showing that people with different ways of experiencing or seeing the world can offer means of improving the world — in Turing's case, a means to end World War II and the birth of the computer. Not sure that either movie can be considered crucial, though. I'd rather have seen Birdman again. Birdman was definitely good things :p
Cherub Cow Member	Sat Jan 10 13:59:00 A not so surprising article: "Film bosses accused of mutilating scripts and pushing out writing talent Original and subtle work is often altered to follow a money-making formula that results in bland movies" http://www...ing-pushing-talent-out-of-film "Three of Britain’s Oscar-nominated screenwriters say that an increasing tendency among film studio bosses and directors to “mutilate” film scripts is forcing top writers to either direct their own work or write for television, where they command greater respect." Not much need to read more of the article. They mostly just repeat the same theme (producers being evil, writers being abused). Fun to hear the topic come up, though :p
Cherub Cow Member	Sun Jan 11 03:14:33 Taken 3 was really disappointing. It had some okay moments, but I think it was directly really poorly by Olivier Mégaton. I'm pretty sure that no shot in the entire movie lasted longer than about 8 seconds, and most were about 2-3 seconds long. That could be an interesting experiment in a sort of "Five Obstructions" kind of way, but for this movie it meant that a lot of the action was unwatchably choppy. I knew it would be a silly/cheesy movie, but this was just badly done. A fun script was there, it just didn't have good delivery.
McKobb Member	Sun Jan 11 03:33:06 It's been tahen far enough, pa-tum-tum!
McKobb Member	Sun Jan 11 03:48:53 I might see Selma tomorrow depending on what I get done.
Cherub Cow Member	Sun Jan 11 05:11:43 Could be good! Supposedly the lead actor did really well
Cherub Cow Member	Sun Jan 11 23:18:08 Forgot to mention having seen "The Woman in Black 2" a week or so ago. It was okay, but a big step down from the first (which at least did well to make the familiar into horror). I think a big problem that the second had was that they had extra budget but didn't have anything constructive to do with it, so they added in settings that they shouldn't have and diluted the story. It also looks like they made decisions in this 2nd one specifically to give themselves easier production decisions for a third one (like showing that the ghost could now live outside of her town — think "Jason Takes Manhattan") In short: this marks another movie that was turned into a franchise only to capitalize on an earlier success. Very disappointing :/
Cherub Cow Member	Tue Jan 13 05:03:41 Preservation (9 January, 2015) ... trailer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9XcEo7aL67I Very stupid movie with especially bad acting by Aaron Staton from Mad Men and corny delivery by Pablo Schreiber (he played the psycho from SVU). The script and direction was altogether bad, so it's maybe difficult to totally blame the actors for their poor performances. Wrenn Schmidt was at least able to pull the second half together a little, but even then the moment to moment situations stayed nonsensical. Most of the drama came from characters simply being awful at paying attention to their environments, and the camerawork echoed this by being poor at handling space — creating impossible "surprise" moments by acting as though the characters all have tunnel vision... Everything really made it seem like this director has no concept of how to use physical space and doesn't understand how even stupid people would act in certain situations. Add to that the sloppy attempts to make symbolic transformation moments (like Schmidt's Shawshank Redemption tunnel scene) or at making Schmidt into a killer in the style of 2005's "Descent", and this movie ended in a big, uncontrolled mess. It does not look like actor Christopher Denham was ready for the director's chair, but maybe he learned something from this and won't do so terribly if he makes another movie.
McKobb Member	Tue Jan 13 10:02:09 I'm not sure if this has been brought up before but have any of ya'll used or know of anyone that uses MoviePass?
Cherub Cow Member	Tue Jan 13 15:44:16 Oh yeah, the flat rate unlimited theater movies thing.. http://www.moviepass.com/ A friend mentioned that to me a few weeks ago, but even though my favorite theater honors it meow, I don't have a smartphone, which is a requirement at the moment. Plus I don't see enough movies each month to go over $30 (using matinees and discount showings).. It's definitely a good idea for cinephiles, though! If you don't like matinee hours or you want to watch Hunger Games 10 days in a row, the price works out ;D
McKobb Member	Tue Jan 13 15:51:31 You don't have a smart phone! Are you a hipster or something? And you couldn't watch Hunger Games 10 days in a row, as tempting as that might be. You can only watch the same movie once. It sounds good up front until you look at the movies out there and go 'meh'.
tumbleweed the wanderer	Tue Jan 13 16:28:47 i only have an old flip phone myself technology is the devil
Cherub Cow Member	Tue Jan 13 16:44:10 "i only have an old flip phone myself" Me too! Was about $10. I tried an iPhone 3GS a few years ago, but it was too expensive and too distracting.. "You can only watch the same movie once." That dolphinately makes it pretty pointless :/
McKobb Member	Tue Jan 13 16:45:25 http://www.digital-distro.com/www/portlandhipster/about3.jpg Which one of these is you?
Cherub Cow Member	Tue Jan 13 16:50:39 lol
Cherub Cow Member	Tue Jan 13 16:52:32 That second one doesn't look like a hipster, just a lumberjack.. and oddly is the only one that doesn't look judgemental. Now I want to tag them and study their habits!
McKobb Member	Tue Jan 13 17:28:02 So number 2!
McKobb Member	Tue Jan 13 17:55:01 https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/maydaygames/click-clack-lumberjack-axe-game-tok-tok-woodman-20 Click-Clack Lumberjack!
McKobb Member	Tue Jan 13 17:55:14 http://www...ck-axe-game-tok-tok-woodman-20
Cherub Cow Member	Tue Jan 13 20:13:49 I want this! :(
Cherub Cow Member	Sun Jan 18 22:17:32 Definitely see American Sniper! Very good movie — realistically portrayed war drama that focused on combat trauma. ..randomly related: I just google'd the movie to spell check Chris Kyle's name (the SEAL upon which the movie was based), and I guess Seth Rogen made some stupid tweet about it: "American Sniper kind of reminds me of the movie that's showing in the third act of Inglorious Basterds" — (that is, the propaganda film) So to clear up whether or not this was a propaganda film... I really don't think so. You could definitely make that argument for "Hurt Locker" because it made Jeremy Renner's character godlike (walking away from a slow-motion blast in the last scene, for instance), but every time Bradley Cooper's Chris Kyle was praised, Cooper showed a real discomfort with the idea, and not some praiseworthy discomfort that was followed by some cliché like, "nah, the real heroes sacrificed everything" or whatever, but a trauma discomfort that showed how unhealthy his mental life had become. So this movie dealt with the personal realities of trying to fight impossible shadows of former wars, the making of new enemies and of losing even more in the process, and the struggle to operate through a growing disillusionment with the connection between home and a distant battlefield. I don't doubt that some people will still only see its attractive elements and decide that Kyle's was a life worth mimicking, but I think that they will have missed the point of the movie. It was not to glorify or even to totally condemn; it was just to show war and its after effects.
McKobb Member	Mon Jan 19 03:39:48 Wanna see this!
tumbleweed the wanderer	Mon Jan 19 10:16:55 My uncle killed by sniper in WW2. We were taught snipers were cowards. Will shoot u in the back. Snipers aren't heroes. And invaders r worse ~Michael Moore (tweet)
McKobb Member	Mon Jan 19 10:45:58 War is a bitch, so is Michael Moore.
Cherub Cow Member	Mon Jan 19 18:11:18 Yeah, Michael Moore really has no room to call -anyone- a coward.
McKobb Member	Wed Jan 21 20:25:35 Just saw it, not bad.
Cherub Cow Member	Sun Jan 25 19:15:12 Blackhat (2015) ... Was nice. It was by director Michael Mann so it had a lot of his Heat (1995) or Miami Vice (2006) style — scenes of gun violence and their traumatic emotional effects, where the after scenes were stylized by synths instead of the actual actor audio... kind of simulating the temporary echo effects or the shock experienced after fire fights. Overall worth seeing for a realistic action, but I think that casting broke some of that internal realism by having Chris Hemsworth in the leading role. His character was supposed to be MIT/hacker smart, but it's Chris Hemsworth, who is maybe a little too physically perfect and rugged for that kind of role. They tried to balance that by explaining his prison history, but every time he hit the return key too hard it became a sort of reminder of how out of place he was in this script. I think this role was written with someone else in mind, but maybe production felt it would be less of a risk to cast Hemsworth.. Still, the writing was thoughtful if you remove Hemsworth's physicality. Like, after building Hemsworth's character's prison background, when it came time to fight he ended up selecting prison-style items (sharpened objects, magazines taped into a protective vest, etc.), and his fighting methods were stated and shown to be effective for close quarters. Again — thinking of the writing and not Hemsworth — that shows a hacker who had had to become violent and resourceful in prison to survive.. but at the same time.. would he really have had to shank anyone in prison? They also showed that he had made friends in his cell block because he was able to hack money into their commissary accounts, so it seems like he'd previously have been protected from that level of prison involvement and not be personally confident in physical attacks. So one of the movie's written attempts at being clever also became one of its major weaknesses. They clearly wanted Hemsworth to be useful in all situations, so he was involved in almost every scene — scenes which should have taken 8 different actors were instead monopolized by one big star. He'd hack into one place but then physically go to another. At maybe the most absurd moment, he personally goes into a radioactive contamination area to remove a hard drive. Why would a prized hacker be allowed radiation exposure for a task that anyone could be given? Overall While this movie was a good showcase of Michael Mann's scene depth and realism, it seems that casting Chris Hemsworth was a move which single-handedly dismantled its script to make room for Hemsworth's action-hero status. I'm not saying that Hemsworth makes a terrible or irredeemable actor or anything, but it looks like this movie was written around him, and it suffered for that.
Cherub Cow Member	Thu Jan 29 13:31:06 lolz.. I don't get how people can do this in drama movies. I don't even like to eat during stupid/Marvel action movies: "Consumption Of Buncha Crunch Reverently Paused During Unsettling Scenes Of ‘American Sniper’" [Onion News in Brief] http://www...h-reverently-paused-dur,37876/ "EDINA, MN—Despite thoroughly enjoying the chocolate candy as she watched the film, local woman Jessica Kirby reverently paused from eating Buncha Crunch Thursday during an unsettling scene in American Sniper, sources confirmed. According to reports, Kirby refrained from chewing the bite-size pieces of milk chocolate and crisped rice throughout the tense moment when Bradley Cooper’s character trains his sniper rifle on a small Iraqi boy, respectfully holding the candy in the side of her mouth as the action unfolded on-screen. Sources went on to say, however, that Kirby kept her fingers close to the opening of the Buncha Crunch box in her lap in order to quickly retrieve another piece of chocolate when the camera cut to a less disturbing scene. At press time, Kirby was unsure if she could refrain from drinking her soda for the entirety of the main character’s heartbreaking struggle with post-traumatic stress disorder."
tumbleweed the wanderer	Thu Jan 29 14:16:58 seems wasteful beyond the price gouging... do you really even get much taste enjoyment if wrapped up in the movie?
Cherub Cow Member	Thu Jan 29 18:15:32 I doubt it! And I think some weight loss studies have mentioned that as a reason not to casually eat (like endless chips and such) while watching TV — can end up with calories but little/no brain chemistry benefit, so appetite doesn't go away.. ..not that I don't eat meals at -home- while watching TV shows :p
Cherub Cow Member	Wed Feb 04 23:17:29 Project Almanac was bad. It was a found footage time travel movie that degraded into an unimaginative party log. It seemed to be saying things about video nostalgia and the impossibility of really knowing the past beyond what's been recorded, but I don't know if I'll spend the time reviewing it that deeply... Bad movie either way.
The Children Member	Thu Feb 05 01:42:51 noah was spotted on youtube. so i watched it 4 a few min. holy shit was that shit bad...so da movie brought back russel crowe and jeniffer and then u had hermione from harry potter. haha did these ppl hit rock bottom of hollywoodism or what. culdnt get a better movie 2 play in than noah? holy shit.
McKobb Member	Sat Feb 07 19:49:26 I enjoyed Jupiter Ascending, despite the reviews.
OsamaIsDaWorstPresid Member	Sat Feb 07 19:54:56 mila kernis is onlie gud 4 porn she nevar maid a gud movie
McKobb Member	Sat Feb 07 19:56:46 You seen it?
Cherub Cow Member	Sun Feb 08 20:20:15 ..probably won't get to see it until next weekend :(
Cherub Cow Member	Mon Feb 16 13:46:17 Jupiter Ascending was okay I guess. Definitely had nice visuals.. especially liked seeing a generated Great Red Spot. The movie didn't really have much going for it otherwise, though.. it was basically just a very long "who's got the girl?" movie, with Mila Kunis being led around the universe but not really discovering her agency until the very end (and that plot point was left too subtle to matter against a non-subtle backdrop). Mila Kunis was probably a poor choice for the role, though.. Then there were kind of silly world-building decisions. Like Channing Tatum's gravity roller blades, comical gene-spliced characters... Some of it was made up for by the theme of an intelligent species working towards its own immortality (the lofty goal of science) but being subject to a class-based application of that immortality, but the Wachowski take on that theme didn't have much depth. I guess they probably intend to do more of these, though, so maybe they intend to leave depth for later. Whatevs. So not a terrible movie, but it was a lot of theatrics without much substance :/
Cherub Cow Member	Mon Feb 16 13:53:20 Also saw Seventh Son. I'm pretty sure that it had some anti-feminism messages (though those messages can probably be parsed into anti-*misandry*), but it was a fun movie and very well-produced — lots on-location shoots and they really went for accuracy with the medieval wardrobe even though no one would have cared if they hadn't. Its plot was -very- similar to "Hansel and Gretel Witch Hunters" (2013), though. With high witches, blood moons, good witches and bad witches, etc... I think I prefer Hansel and Gretel's take more, but this was still fun..
McKobb Member	Mon Feb 16 14:36:13 I don't disagree with anything you said about Jupiter Ascending, yet I still enjoyed it. They should make their money back but not a whole lot more so I doubt there will be sequels. What is crazy to me is they screened it at Sundance, lol.
Cherub Cow Member	Mon Feb 16 15:12:05 Sundance? D: .. guess having big movies there was inevita-burr.. I did think it was fun enough while watching :) Some of their alien pop culture history rewrites were at least interesting, like how one of the ships left a crop circle design when it took off, or how I kept thinking, "Shut up, Meg." ;D
tumbleweed the wanderer	Mon Feb 16 15:19:51 50 shades! 50 shades! i may go see it in case any pre-heated women watchers develop lowered standards
Cherub Cow Member	Mon Feb 16 15:29:47 But it's just a realistic depiction of sexual relationships that people have -anyways-, instead of those "under the blanket" sex scenes that Hollywood always creates! ;p http://www...ws-fifty-shades-of-grey,37998/
tumbleweed the wanderer	Mon Feb 16 15:53:41 so are you going to see it or not? :p
McKobb Member	Mon Feb 16 16:37:33 Is that the sequel to Venus in Furs?
Cherub Cow Member	Mon Feb 16 18:47:13 Actually, I think it was based on "Taken by the T-Rex" Yep! Seeing it tomorrow :D
McKobb Member	Mon Feb 16 18:53:51 http://youtu.be/YCJ9F6dZFAQ @.@
tumbleweed the wanderer	Thu Feb 19 15:42:38 saw 50 shades... single males and packs of females as the audience :p only the non-sex parts were fucked up... esp. the car selling... and i wish you didn't have to be rich or handsome for stalking to work :/ kind of a weird ending for a valentines day movie... who would've figured he really was a serial killer :p
Cherub Cow Member	Thu Feb 19 18:34:06 "kind of a weird ending for a valentines day movie... who would've figured he really was a serial killer" Wait what?! ;D "and i wish you didn't have to be rich or handsome for stalking to work :/" Did you see Spider-Man 2? Remember that scene where Garfield was all like, "Yeah, I've been following you for months.. isn't it adorable?" .. umm... actually...
tumbleweed the wanderer	Thu Feb 19 22:11:51 i haven't seen garfield as spiderman yet... but i'm totally blaming movies at my next restraining order hearing
Cherub Cow Member	Fri Feb 20 15:11:34 lulz
McKobb Member	Wed Feb 25 00:32:13 Saw African Queen for the first time in a zillion years. The first time I saw it was on a black and white tv in Erie
Cherub Cow Member	Wed Feb 25 13:44:04 Haven't seen many Bogart movies.. :p did watch "Torment" (2013)... terrible horror movie. Awful direction by Jordan Barker (lots of scenes that should have been reshot because of bad performances), story that was just a mix of other horror movies, stupid writing creating characters that make bad decisions ("let's split up again!" / "Let me investigate this noise even though psycho killers want me dead!").. But, finally watching Stoker soon, and Lazarus Effect makes it to theater this weekend.. Lazarus will be PG-13, but it looks okay
McKobb Member	Wed Feb 25 13:52:24 I saw a Katherine Hepburn exhibit at the National Portrait Gallery in DC. I liked this painting: http://www.npg.si.edu/exhibit/hepburn/images/04-04_full.jpg
Cherub Cow Member	Fri Feb 27 13:45:32 Was it a recent D.C. trip? Watching Lazarus Effect tomorrow!! I'm really looking forward to this one. I've been watching a lot of especially disappointing horror movies lately, but this looks well produced at the very least, even though it might be glomming onto the recently-re-popular trope of horror acting in subtle opposition to science from a religious perspective.
McKobb Member	Fri Feb 27 14:01:56 No, back in '07 iirc That name brings me back to Robert A. Heinlein's character Lazarus Long: "Lazarus Long is a fictional character featured in a number of science fiction novels by Robert A. Heinlein. Born in 1912 in the third generation of a selective breeding experiment run by the Ira Howard Foundation, Lazarus (birth name Woodrow Wilson Smith) becomes unusually long-lived, living well over two thousand years with the aid of occasional rejuvenation treatments. Heinlein "patterned" Long on science fiction writer Edward E. Smith, mixed with Jack Williamson's fictional Giles Habibula....The promotional copy on the back of Time Enough for Love, the second book featuring Lazarus Long, states that Lazarus was "so in love with time that he became his own ancestor," but this never happens in any of the published books. In the book, Lazarus does travel back in time and is seduced by his mother; but this happens after his own birth. Heinlein did use a similar plot in the short story "—All You Zombies—", in which a character becomes both of his own parents." Humanity called him 'Grandfather' because after thousands of years most were related to him.
Cherub Cow Member	Fri Feb 27 17:46:43 Nooice. The first reference that comes to mind for me is Batman TAS' Lazarus Pit, used by Ra's al Ghul: http://dcanimated.wikia.com/wiki/Lazarus_Pit
Cherub Cow Member	Sat Feb 28 23:58:15 Lazarus Effect was terrible. It definitely was "glomming onto the recently-re-popular trope of horror acting in subtle opposition to science from a religious perspective," and it was way too obvious for comfort. And aside from that, it seemed like they ran out of things to do way too quickly. They locked the story in a sort of "Hollow Man" tank (basement science lab) and just let the story devolve into a one-by-one slasher. The slight redirection of the ending -might- be an interesting idea, but this movie was written so poorly that I really don't care if they do anything with it. Really wish I hadn't bothered.
McKobb Member	Sun Mar 01 00:00:31 Sorry to hear that, they can't all be Jupiter Ascending :P
Cherub Cow Member	Sun Mar 01 00:07:35 lulz :p
OsamaIsDaWorstPresid Member	Tue Mar 03 12:27:59 ascendin wuz crap mila kernis iz onlie useful az a sex object
McKobb Member	Tue Mar 03 17:08:10 I think she has great emotional depth.
Cherub Cow Member	Sun Mar 15 23:46:07 I thought Chappie was good. Not a lot of ultraviolence (which would have made it fun if everything else had failed), but it was still a pretty okay movie. Not crucial, but good. It was basically a Die Antwoord movie, which was fun to me (and I image was really painful for peeps who hate them or didn't know who they were before this movie). Kind of funny that Jose Cantillo might be turning into Neill Blomkamp's designated gore victim (he was in Elysium also, and things didn't go well there either). This story didn't really add a whole lot to robotic consciousness questions, but it at least stylized the subject by having the criminal elements and wasn't stupid like Autómata. The story also did well gaining audience empathy, though towards the end it followed Blomkamp's plot device of leaving things at a point where he'll probably never bother continuing them until people get completely tired of his gimmicks. So.. worth seeing if you have time, but no rush on this one.
Cherub Cow Member	Sun Mar 15 23:46:10
Cherub Cow Member	Sun Mar 15 23:53:10 ..also finally watched 2009's Gentlemen Broncos. It was artistic but not very comically clever. It had a lot of the visuals of Napolean Dynamite (same director: Jared Hess), but it was probably even less funny than Hess' Nacho Libre — joke delivery was kind of bland. There were signals for when they expected the audience to laugh, but it just seemed like it was missing an extra component. Liked Jemaine Clement in this (Flight of the Conchords), but his character (like most of them) was interesting but not really -that- interesting.. Oh wells
Cherub Cow Member	Sun Mar 29 19:22:02 '71 (2015) ... Was pretty good. Kind of tense. This was the one where a British soldier finds himself stranded alone in a Catholic neighborhood of Belfast during the Catholic/Protestant "Troubles" of 1971. Trailer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J-BaKfl1Ms4 I liked it, but this one generated a lot of stupid comments from the audience at my local theater — *during* the movie. It was apparently difficult for people to understand the Irish and English dialects, so peeps kept asking each other to "translate." People also didn't seem to understand the non-linear plot, the meaning behind the character duplicities, or the "unresolved" ending. That's somewhat understandable, since stupid audiences typically need closure. So, it might help for people going in to understand that this movie was demonstrating the arbitrariness of civil violence. This movie was not just about one soldier's adventure of survival; that soldier was a catalyst used to show how impossible/difficult it can be for a totally individualistic mindset to manifest its designs through violence. With webs of distrust, misinterpretation of the motives behind events, and snap decisions, characters found themselves victims of their own expectations and limited perspectives. Even within factions, ideologies split from moment to moment, with passionate and volatile confidence becoming a symptom of those most manipulated. There can be no confined ending to something like that, because it has no fixed resolution. Former leaders replace the old, understanding becomes buried behind pockets of Inner/Outer party politics, and the latest victims spread the fire, turning their families into freedom fighters — reacting to traumas whose perpetrators died with the act. "So it goes" Anyways, postmodern pedantry aside, '71 makes for a good look at the confusions of violence. While I would not agree with the movie poster and say "extraordinary" or "a winner", it was still worth a watch.
pillz Member	Sun Mar 29 20:43:07 I finally watched The Grey. Think it's hilarious that he led them all to their deaths, as though he were fulfilling his own desire to die, but unknowingly. The incrementally increasing ferociousness of the wolves was a clear indicator of where it was all heading. Small things like why they didn't better arm themselves bothered me, but overall it was a decent movie if a little bit straightforward.
Cherub Cow Member	Sun Mar 29 21:08:13 "Think it's hilarious that he led them all to their deaths, as though he were fulfilling his own desire to die, but unknowingly." Yeah! That's what I liked about it. The other characters were basically filling roles for Liam Neeson's character's facing of death. Each of them was a part of Neeson's dying, cultural weaknesses, and Neeson was like a symbol of what it -means- to survive after those weaknesses have been removed. But, once he's alone, even without all of those faults which so typically get assigned to the progress of civilization (civilization protects the faulty), he still finds some hidden will to live — one that doesn't care if it -seems- that there is no future beyond the immediate, because it still wants to fight for that next moment.
Cherub Cow Member	Sun Mar 29 22:09:09 Backcountry (2014) ... Bad movie. Especially poor direction by Adam MacDonald, though the movie found slight redemption from a single scene of gore violence. About In this one, a couple go to some country realm that is sort of on the outside or "back" of normal country (sadly, no portmanteau exists to describe such a thing, though in German it's "schadenfreude"). There they find themselves lost and without modern conveniences to save themselves from a man-eating black bear. "Based on a True Story" -Not- based on a true story, "but it's certainly true that it is a story". Movies really have to stop reproducing this cliché for theatrical effect. Production and Character Work Although this movie reads like a bad horror, it was at least well-produced despite a seemingly limited budget. They were able to rent canoes, rent a trained black bear, [purchase?] a tent and hiking gear, and [rent? buy?] a roaring black bear model for the attack scenes. And, although it suffered terribly in its later moments, it at least -began- with some attempts at coherence and character building. The acting, for instance, was not bad at all ("bad" being the usual expectation for semi-indy horror), which -does- give credit to its actor-director (actors can make very good directors when it comes to character work). Both leading roles were given to established actors, and they were also able to hire Eric Balfour of the 2003 Texas Chainsaw Massacre for a supporting role, so the character side was not where the flaws were.. Terrible Scene Direction When it comes to spatial awareness, director Adam MacDonald might be -almost- as bad as Christopher Denham (director of Preservation), but, more annoying even than Denham's contrived small space surprises was MacDonald's overindulgence in blur effects. While there certainly exists a sentiment that "[not showing everything can increase suspense or terror]," here that rule was bent into the territory of, "this may as well be an audiobook because I can't fucking see anything." MacDonald could also get some support if people cite that he was using blur effects to simulate confusion, fatigue, and shock, but even that wears thin into the territory of, "this movie is unwatchable." If his intent was to make an unwatchable movie, then sure, I think that he succeeded. Still, it would be a poor excuse to say that this movie's being "unwatchable" because of blur effects could be "good" because "life is sort of 'unwatchable' when we're dying in the woods." No. Sorry. It doesn't work like that. It remains possible to distinguish between good blur effects and overused and poorly managed blur effects, of which this film fell to the latter. (( Spoiler Ahead )) Another Major Issue: The Attack Scene Okay, so a couple ("Jenn and Brad") has become lost in the woods, they have bear mace, a road flare, an axe, some camping gear. Okay. The catalogue has been established. So how was it employed? With total stupidity. I should say that I am aware that imperfect characters produce drama and that that's how the world sometimes works; mistakes can create conflict. Even so, management of mistakes can still be ridiculous. For instance, it was understandable that Brad would not bring a map or GPS because he was trying to cultivate an experienced and prepared image of himself for Jenn; Brad was showing Jenn his familiarity with the area and trying to convey to her his own sense of nostalgia for these woods, which would symbolically extend to his marriage proposal and their beginning of their own shared nostalgias. Thus, while Brad can be faulted for not taking the precaution of a map, that mistake shouldn't be painful; it should be tragic. But how do things go when the bear attacks? - Brad unzips the tent and sees the bear near the camp fire - Brad re-zips the tent and shows how scared he is - Brad unzips the tent again and sees the approaching bear - Brad re-zips the tent and cowers with Jenn Stopping there for a moment, this is already ridiculous. If someone sees a bear walking around outside their tent, they wouldn't just hide under the blanket and play peekaboo — that is a terrible horror trope. Still, moving on.. - Brad and Jenn quickly go through the gear and find the bear mace. Kewls. Brad doesn't have his axe, but they at least have a strategy. - The bear reaches the tent. It manages to paw through, and somehow the bear mace fucking disappears so the bear claws Jenn's arm. Then they find the mace, and -then- spray it. Here, someone could stupidly say, "sure, they panicked," but a far more realistic strategy even for the most panicked camper would be to have sprayed the bear while it approached, from a partly unzipped section of the tent. Second to that, they could crouch in fear away from where the bear was scratching the tent — like they were — but be ready to spray right when/if it enters. Instead, the movie makers decided to add in this separate stupidity of the mace disappearing momentarily. And why? Why bother? This scene could easily have been just fine if they had behaved logically despite the fear, spraying from afar or spraying right when the bear opened the tent. That would have even added to the horror, because then would-be campers in the real world would feel uncertain about their mace saving them. So, either this scene was fucked because MacDonald thought that the bear needed there to be blood to coax it into fighting through the mace (which was unnecessary because Brad was already bleeding from his prior toe injury so that bear motive was already in place) or because unnecessary thought that it was necessary to conjur even more confusion and mistakes. Given the poor use of blur effects, I suspect that MacDonald thought that this was a good way to create confusion. He failed, instead causing this scene to self destruct the entire movie. All that foreshadowing, only for some contrived character action. Even Jenn's being in shock and just watching while Brad was torn to pieces was somewhat believable, even if annoying. Whatever. (( End Spoiler )) Other Things After the climactic moment, Jenn has a scene where she looks at the camera in a common "implication of the viewer" moment, but to this point the viewer has witnessed so much stupidity that only clipped-winged proles would see that gaze and think, "wow, yeah, it could happen to anyone. We all have such fragile mortality, and without society to protect us, someone or something else gains control." Yeah, maybe. Mistakes can add up sometimes. But would you really drop the fucking bear mace? Overall An adequate film. Mostly forgettable. If MacDonald can learn to communicate shock with more control of blur effects and if he can write realism and still show how control falls apart, then he can probably do better in the genre. If not, then he won't. Still, RottenTomatoes somehow gave this shit an 88%, so clearly it only matters if you get paid to critique.
Cherub Cow Member	Sun Mar 29 22:29:15 fixed a couple typos for my tumblr: http://www.../backcountry-2015-movie-review
Cherub Cow Member	Sun Mar 29 23:08:48 "It Follows" was really good!! I've written a partial review, but I want to see it once more, because it has some things that could be worth looking more deeply at. Definitely recommend this one for horror fans; really well done and stylish. It's also a rare R-rated horror, which pretty much automatically elevates it.
McKobb Member	Sun Mar 29 23:23:08 Might have to catch that.
pillz Member	Mon Apr 06 10:27:54 John Wick: Great! Very straight forward, no nonsense action flick. Operators operating and all that. Keanu did a great job with it considering how straight forward the movie and motivations were. Though, admittedly, a bit more range would have been nice.
pillz Member	Mon Apr 06 10:41:47 Oh, and also Snowpiercer: Uh. Really a waste of time. Humanity destroyed itself and all life on Earth by releasing cooling agents into the atmosphere to counteract global warming, which has presumably become a real threat. Predictably this went horribly wrong and plunged the Earth into an ice age. The only survivors reside on a single train, powered by a perpetual motion engine, which runs on tracks that span the world over. There is obviously a class system where the wealthy live in the front of the train, and the poor in the back. Chris Evans leads a revolution, the latest in a long line of failed revolts. It progresses as you would expect, which nothing especially interesting happening until they reach the final car (the engine car). Then a vast conspiracy is revealed, and for some odd reason the Japanese folks who were previously from the front (but were in jail because they were drug addicts... but half the people they meet are drug addicts) elect to destroy the train? My subtitles weren't working for the Japanese guys speech so maybe I missed something but in the end rather than upend the order of things on the train they blow it up and the human race with it. Only, Japanese guy's daughter and the little black boy they were looking for survive and wonder out to see a polar bear, meaning not all life went extinct outside of the train. But those two don't have very good odds of surviving, so, I assume the significance was that life goes on without the terrible and cruel humans. Though you wouldn't see a polar bear living in a continental snow drift or mountains. They'd starve to death.
Cherub Cow Member	Mon Apr 06 14:46:26 "John Wick: Great! Very straight forward, no nonsense action flick." +1 Deer! Really liked it, even though, yeah, his motivations were pretty hilarious. Still, director Chad Stahelski -really- knows how to film lone person firefight movements. Also high marks for ultraviolence :D
McKobb Member	Sun Apr 12 10:46:54 http://sta...t-Sematary-Rachel-Creed-11.jpg I didn't know Hillary Clinton played in Pet Semetary!
pillz Member	Sun Apr 12 11:26:31 Saw The Battle of Five Armies. Fucking terrible.
Cherub Cow Member	Sun Apr 12 16:49:39 You're just saying that because it was.
McKobb Member	Thu Apr 16 20:48:45 So I finally saw The Dark Knight a few days ago. The most blaring thing about the 2008 film was no smart phones.
Cherub Cow Member	Fri Apr 17 13:27:30 And don't you think it would have been better if the ferries had blown up? I've been meaning to make a gif where that happens....
McKobb Member	Fri Apr 17 15:12:18 gay
Cherub Cow Member	Fri Apr 17 15:26:05 Ron Paul 2012?
McKobb Member	Wed Apr 22 13:19:48 I watched Disney Nature's Kingdom of Monkeys yesterday. Not my choice but if you're paying I'll watch a 'documentary', which it was with heavy Disney editing for kids. Examples were the bad toque maqaques had scars and although the mating rituals were touched on it showed the couple sneaking away from the alpha to the protagonist, Maya the lower limber, having an infant strapped to her abdomen in a quick segway. It went on about class and privilege and how the upper fig eaters can smack the lower limbers and war with neighboring troops can change an individual's position in the troop. It didn't show Maya smack the lower limbers at the end. That's just not Disney!!
McKobb Member	Wed Apr 22 13:35:41 All in all I commend Disney for prepping children for The Revolution!
	show deleted posts