Topic: The Movie Thread

@Th3solution I forgot to mention Midsommar. That film has a pretty bizarre orgy sequence near the end that made the audience erupt into incredulous laughter.

But yeah, audience reactions aren't typical where I live in the U.S.

@Foxy-Goddess-Scotchy Yep, I enjoyed his performance and character arc. It feels more integral to the plot than the last film.

@Th3solution @Ralizah OK thanks for the clarification guys, and @RogerRoger for confirming that I don't live in an area of the world where watching a film in the cinema in relative silence is exclusive. Just when I read something like this

eyebrows are raised lol.

Ha ha don't worry @JohnnyShoulder I had the exact same reaction upon reading all that from Th3Solution!

Aside from chatty folk or energetic kids all the times I've been to the cinema have been quiet... Though I admit it's been a while since I last went!

lol Couldn't help but think of this scene from Scary Movie after the previous discussion (somewhat NSFW, obvs)

Joker has made $771.3 million so far at the box office. Very impressive considering the cost to developed the movie was only around $70 million I believe.

So Hitman: Agent 47 was on TV, so I decided to give it a watch. Movies based on video games have a notoriously bad reputation, so my expectations were low.

The film had very little in the way of Hitman's usual stealth and disguises, and instead had a heavy focus on action. Agent 47 is portrayed in the movie as a seemingly unstoppable killing machine, being able to shoot his way out of any situation regardless of how many enemies there are. The action way over the top, using state of the art technology, super human skills, and straight up doing the impossible as cop-outs so Agent 47 could fight lots of people at once.

The story was mostly forgettable, and mostly just existed to advance the action. It doesn't always make sense, and a lot of people's actions seem silly or over the top.

Despite my criticisms, I did enjoy the movie, but it was a so bad it's good kind of feeling.

Dolemite Is My Name, watch it - absolutely cracking!

If Eddie Murphy can avoid the the cynical 80s sequels that have been rumoured, this could start off his McConaissance!

@LN78 It's a shame. The characters and films work incredibly well in their setting - they'll have to be absurdly different to work these days, which defeats the purpose I think.

Given the success of Dave Chappelle's latest - which is mildly funny at best, and isn't a patch on Murphy in his prime - I can see Netflix giving Murphy a free reign for the stand up. Delirious is still one of my favourites, it's about 20 minutes too long, but Raw really wasn't as good.

Nope, you don't even really need any knowledge or appreciation of the blaxpoitation era to be honest. I can see why they chose Murphy/Murphy chose to do it - it's pretty similar to last good thing he was in (Bowfinger) in a few ways.

@LN78 It'll all come down to whether he's got the material in him any more.

Not massively interested in the Watchmen show. I like the comic, but it didn't change my life the moment I read it (or re-read it), and was too young to appreciate the the 'heightening of the medium' when it first released. As with much of Moore's work, I find It a bit overrated in many ways.

I loved Snyder's film - excellently adapted. From what I've read about the TV show - I'm not sure I really fancy it the sequel setting. The recent comic stuff was more than enough.

@crimsontadpoles Yeah, that film only works as a generic, throwaway action flick. Stick it on with zero expectations and it's better than nothing on a rainy Sunday afternoon.

Given how we know Hollywood works sometimes, I wouldn't mind betting somebody had a semi-original script at one point, and an executive came along and said "the only way this'll ever sell is if we slap a recognisable brand on it" to get it made. Explains why all of the Hitman elements are superficial at best, almost trying to desperately reverse-engineer themselves back to anything remotely connected to the game's core storylines.

The same happened to the first film, though, the Timothy Olyphant one. For my money, he made a better Agent 47, but neither he nor Rupert Friend have come close to capturing the character correctly (not their faults, mind, and I'll forever give the latter a pass for his work on Homeland, which is superb).

Watched "The Current War" in theaters. It was interesting. Nice, very morally grey study of a brilliant man (Thomas Edison) and his competition with George Westinghouse to convince various investors and the public at large to adopt his direct current-based lighting system. Does a good job of depicting how various events come about, for the most part, including Edison's role in popularizing electricity as a form of execution in order to smear Westinghouse and his AC-based system, as well as the formation of General Electric. Tesla also features in the film, and we also get the details of their relationship in all its ugly glory (including the $50,000 "joke" at Tesla's expense).

@Ralizah How does it to compare to real-life accounts?

I know many biopic type films tend to take a few liberties here and there, but my recent experiences with some of these films felt like they were really taking the p***. (The Imitation Game being one of the worst culprits).

@KALofKRYPTON It takes a few liberties. All "historical dramas" do. Edison's second wife isn't mentioned or seen. A meeting between Edison and Westinghouse near the end never actually took place. A civil war encounter between Westinghouse and a confederate soldier seen in a flashback and used for thematic purposes was invented. A couple of minor historical characters were combined for dramatic effect in the film. But, broadly, the film is historically accurate.

EDIT: Based on the bit of research I did. I'm not a historian.

Watched The Lighthouse in theaters yesterday and... I genuinely don't know what to say about it. Aside from the often graphic sexual and violent content, it could be mistaken for some long lost horror movie from the early 1940's. It's ostensibly about two men in some unspecified point in the past, shady newcomer Ephraim Winslow, played by an utterly unrecognizable Robert Pattinson, and bizarre and possibly mad veteran Thomas Wake, played by a more recognizable Willem Dafoe, manning a lighthouse and gradually going mad once a storm strands them. The entire film feels like some long, frequently disturbing fever dream. There's little recognizable structure to it apart from the gradual unmooring from any semblance of reality these men might have been clinging to (whether they were ever moored to begin with is an open question, though).

Expect lots of striking black and white cinematography, hallucinatory imagery, violent homoerotic tension between Pattinson and Dafoe, a score that sounds less like music and more like the grinding of gears in hell, literary and mythological allusions and parallels throughout, and lots of hammy, insane, and highly theatrical monologues and rants from Dafoe. Both men act their little hearts out in this film, and I take back any nasty things I might have ever said about Pattinson.

Arthouse horror doesn't get much better.

@LN78 It's funny you mention von Trier, because there was more than one moment in the film where I mentally flashed back to Antichrist while watching this. Without the lampshaded misogyny and cringy nihilistic talking fox, of course.

I wasn't a huge fan of The VVitch, even though it was utterly dripping in atmosphere, but I think the director has really mastered the art of the slow burn with this film. Really exciting to see so many accomplished young auteurs like Eggers, Aster, and Peele creating worthwhile dark cinema these days, considering how stale cinematic horror has become.

@LN78 "Us" is... interesting. I liked it. But it's tonally uneven, and doesn't really fit the bill if you're looking for a horror film. I think it's worth watching, although I didn't like it as much as Get Out. It feels like a unique but failed attempt at sociopolitical satire, but with fewer of the genre trappings that Get Out utilized to decent effect.

Midsommar is amazing, btw. Absolutely see it when and if you get the chance. It's an intense and sometimes overwhelming film with gorgeous cinematography. Interestingly, it's also not REALLY a horror film in the conventional sense, which might be why your friend didn't like it. If you go in expecting anything like Hereditary, you'll be disappointed. I think, in its own way, it's as good as that film was, however.

I don't have high hopes, but Terminator: Duck Fat will actually be my next film this coming Sunday. Before the family and I go see it, we're rewatching the first two Terminator films at home.

@LN78 I enjoyed 'Us', it felt more of a typical horror flick then Get Out but less heavy handed on the social commentary, although there is a bit of that. It had the same eerie, uncomfortable feeling that Get Out had, that I like so much.

I bought Alien 40th Anniversary Edition and Black Hawk Down on UHD today. Really looking forward to seeing them. Was impressed with the HD version of Alien and not seen BHD in years.

@LN78 Oh yeah, Halloween '78 is a must.

I'm one of those weird people who thinks Halloween: Water was a more satisfying sequel to the original than the latest one. Wouldn't mind hearing what you thought of it, though!

@LN78 Weirdly large number of parallels between H20 and the recent one. But, where they contrast, I generally find H20 to be a stronger film.

No Halloween sequel deserves to even lick the dirt from the boots of the first film, imo, but, when push comes to shove, it's the only sequel I'm not wholly disappointed by.

Well, OK, I also kind of like Halloween Resurrection. I'm not a fan of bad horror movie, but I AM a fan of really, really, really bad horror movies.