Jump to content

What movie are you watching?

Forge

By Forge
in Entertainment

 Share

Recommended Posts

KManX89

KManX89

Posted
Posted (edited)

Watching Titanic for the first time in over two decades on Blu-Ray, now I know why this film won so many awards and is the 3rd highest-grossing movie of all time adjusted for inflation. Such a wonderfully-directed, written and paced film from start to finish even if it is over 3 hours long. I loved watching the development of Dawson and his relationship with Rose, and that ending, powerful stuff, and by that, I mean very sad, I almost cried when I saw this in the theater. And who can forget that iconic score?

Edited by KManX89
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
MacReady

MacReady

Posted
Posted

Lol I weep for the future of humanity if Tombstone isn’t impressing people today.

That is the best western made since Sergio Leone was around, and even Sergio made only one western better.

And it was only better.  Just better, not funner.  I know funner isn’t a word, shut up.

“Your friends might get me in a rush, but not before I turn your head into a canoe, you understand me?”

That quote right there isn’t even a top 5 quote in the movie.

”You gonna do something about it or just stand there and bleed?”

That quote isn’t even a top 3 quote in the movie.

Once Upon a Time in the West is the best western ever made as it is the perfect microcosm for what westerns are.  Tombstone is right after it.

If you disagree that’s your right.  You’re wrong, but this is America and you have that right.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TENINCH

TENINCH

Posted
Posted
On 12/18/2020 at 7:17 AM, Outpost31 said:

Lol I weep for the future of humanity if Tombstone isn’t impressing people today.

That is the best western made since Sergio Leone was around, and even Sergio made only one western better.

And it was only better.  Just better, not funner.  I know funner isn’t a word, shut up.

“Your friends might get me in a rush, but not before I turn your head into a canoe, you understand me?”

That quote right there isn’t even a top 5 quote in the movie.

”You gonna do something about it or just stand there and bleed?”

That quote isn’t even a top 3 quote in the movie.

Once Upon a Time in the West is the best western ever made as it is the perfect microcosm for what westerns are.  Tombstone is right after it.

If you disagree that’s your right.  You’re wrong, but this is America and you have that right.

I like Open Range a little bit more but Tombstone is incredible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
KManX89

KManX89

Posted
Posted (edited)

Got around to watching the Scream trilogy on Blu-Ray. I'll try to keep my thoughts on all 3 as short and sweet as possible.

Scream is, without question, a slasher classic, one of the few genuinely good slasher films, not just fun popcorn entertainment (a la New Nightmare, Freddy vs. Jason), but actually good with one of the most memorable openings ever seen in a slasher. It's pacing is top notch and never dulls down for a second and it not only handles comedy, which is in itself a unique feat for a horror-slasher, but it does so in the ballsiest of ways that you can't help but get a good laugh. Sidney is also one of the best horror protagonists you'll ever see, she delivers a killer performance (no pun intended) from start to finish. My only real gripes are Dewey was kind of annoying in this film and Gale wasn't given the attention her character deserved. All in all, it's near-perfect, which is a rare feat for a slasher.

Scream 2 has Sidney at her best, showing the most personality out of any of the Scream films, which is really saying a lot. It also follows Gale more closely, giving her more depth and screentime from the first movie. She felt more like a reporter trying to make a name for herself and not a background piece like in the first movie and I love that they explored her and Dewey's budding relationship and even Dewey himself is more likable in this. It also does things no other slasher sequel had the balls to do: make a movie reenactment of the first film (which Austin Powers later stole from this movie with Goldmember) and the commentary during film class about how horror sequels are always inferior to the original is comedic gold, though it does have some flaws, mainly how "convenient" some of the kill are, especially at the beginning in the theater. I also hated how, even though I understand and even dig the why,

the Ghost Face killer conveniently didn't have the wherewithall to make sure Dewey was dead after stabbing him in the school.

 Despite these minor gripes, though, it's a good fun time and one of the better horror sequels and slasher sequels especially, which isn't saying much, but still.

3 has the most jaded plot of all the Scream films (albeit for lack of trying, I mean that literally), but it has just enough new ideas to at least hold your attention while sticking with the tongue-in-cheek, movie-within-a-movie approach of Scream 2. Unfortunately, it's bogged down by a myriad of flaws. It starts out promising enough with an early kill/invasion, but then it goes South by killing off a beloved character early on (a la Alien 3 and Terminator Dark Fate), not to mention there's already a bit of a plot hole beforehand with

Christine "seeing" the Ghost Face in Cotton's place despite having no PTSD, at least not that I'm aware of (she was never involved in any of the previous Ghost Face kill sprees for that to work).

 It does have some things going for it, though. It uses the Stab concept in a unique way by

not actually having the latest Stab movie begin production, but Sidney, Gale, and Dewey instead find a screenplay which starts a whole new investigation and spree of murders

 and the returning cast (Neve Campbell, Courteney Cox and David Arquette) is great, as usual. They even revealed a bunch of new info about Maureen (more than either of the previous films) that I thought was kinda cool. Unfortunately, there's so many plot holes and contrivances (convenient kills) you have to turn your brain off to have any kind of fun with this one. It doesn't help that the kills (the main draw of a slasher film) are a lot more dialed down in this one, mostly offscreen affairs.

PS, prime Courteney Cox gives me the ________ vibes (sorry, couldn't resist).

Edited by KManX89
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Malfatron

Malfatron

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, Daniel said:

Swiss Army Man is every bit as weird as it looks.  Not bad, pretty good.  But super weird.

Im just glad daniel radcliffe isnt typecast

in fact, the harry potter movies are an abberation. 

hes pretty offbeat in this, Kimmy schmitt, and guns ajimbo

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fresh Prince

Fresh Prince

Posted
Posted
15 hours ago, KManX89 said:

Got around to watching the Scream trilogy on Blu-Ray. I'll try to keep my thoughts on all 3 as short and sweet as possible.

Scream is, without question, a slasher classic, one of the few genuinely good slasher films, not just fun popcorn entertainment (a la New Nightmare, Freddy vs. Jason), but actually good with one of the most memorable openings ever seen in a slasher. It's pacing is top notch and never dulls down for a second and it not only handles comedy, which is in itself a unique feat for a horror-slasher, but it does so in the ballsiest of ways that you can't help but get a good laugh. Sidney is also one of the best horror protagonists you'll ever see, she delivers a killer performance (no pun intended) from start to finish. My only real gripes are Dewey was kind of annoying in this film and Gale wasn't given the attention her character deserved. All in all, it's near-perfect, which is a rare feat for a slasher.

Scream 2 has Sidney at her best, showing the most personality out of any of the Scream films, which is really saying a lot. It also follows Gale more closely, giving her more depth and screentime from the first movie. She felt more like a reporter trying to make a name for herself and not a background piece like in the first movie and I love that they explored her and Dewey's budding relationship and even Dewey himself is more likable in this. It also does things no other slasher sequel had the balls to do: make a movie reenactment of the first film (which Austin Powers later stole from this movie with Goldmember) and the commentary during film class about how horror sequels are always inferior to the original is comedic gold, though it does have some flaws, mainly how "convenient" some of the kill are, especially at the beginning in the theater. I also hated how, even though I understand and even dig the why,

  Reveal hidden contents

the Ghost Face killer conveniently didn't have the wherewithall to make sure Dewey was dead after stabbing him in the school.

 Despite these minor gripes, though, it's a good fun time and one of the better horror sequels and slasher sequels especially, which isn't saying much, but still.

3 has the most jaded plot of all the Scream films (albeit for lack of trying, I mean that literally), but it has just enough new ideas to at least hold your attention while sticking with the tongue-in-cheek, movie-within-a-movie approach of Scream 2. Unfortunately, it's bogged down by a myriad of flaws. It starts out promising enough with an early kill/invasion, but then it goes South by killing off a beloved character early on (a la Alien 3 and Terminator Dark Fate), not to mention there's already a bit of a plot hole beforehand with

  Reveal hidden contents

Christine "seeing" the Ghost Face in Cotton's place despite having no PTSD, at least not that I'm aware of (she was never involved in any of the previous Ghost Face kill sprees for that to work).

 It does have some things going for it, though. It uses the Stab concept in a unique way by

  Reveal hidden contents

not actually having the latest Stab movie begin production, but Sidney, Gale, and Dewey instead find a screenplay which starts a whole new investigation and spree of murders

 and the returning cast (Neve Campbell, Courteney Cox and David Arquette) is great, as usual. They even revealed a bunch of new info about Maureen (more than either of the previous films) that I thought was kinda cool. Unfortunately, there's so many plot holes and contrivances (convenient kills) you have to turn your brain off to have any kind of fun with this one. It doesn't help that the kills (the main draw of a slasher film) are a lot more dialed down in this one, mostly offscreen affairs.

PS, prime Courteney Cox gives me the ________ vibes (sorry, couldn't resist).

No scream 4 review

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Daniel

Daniel

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, Malfatron said:

Im just glad daniel radcliffe isnt typecast

in fact, the harry potter movies are an abberation. 

hes pretty offbeat in this, Kimmy schmitt, and guns ajimbo

Horns too. That’s another weird movie on my list to see.

Him and Robert Pattinson both managing to avoid typecasting is pretty impressive, now that you mention it.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing


×
×
  • Create New...