Topic: The Movie Thread

@RogerRoger Yeah, his analysis of the black experience isn't entirely gone (there's a pretty cutting subtext about how black involvement in the early developments of American cinema had been ignored, downplayed, and erased over time), but it's nice to see him not making variations of Get Out over and over. I'm just glad it turned out well, since he was starting to look like a bit of a directorial one-hit wonder.

It also avoids the tonal whiplash of his last film, Us, and integrates light humor and scenes of tension and horror in a way that feels organic.

Absolutely worth checking out when you get the chance.

@RogerRoger They're not connected in any way. I'd only recommend Get Out first insofar as it's his best film to date, and I feel like the film's extended satirical and metaphorical exploration of black alienation within the context of the American milieu also makes it his most important work to date.

But if you'd prefer something more straightforwardly enjoyable and less loaded down with the baggage of American racism, Nope might be a better place to start.

Either one is good.

Watched Conan the Barbarian (the original) yesterday.

A bit slow in spots, but I have to say I liked it more than I did the last time I tried watching it.

In preparation for watching the final film, I made my way through all the Fantastic Beasts movies.

This would be my third viewing of the first film (the awkwardly named Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them) and the second viewing of the second film (maybe less awkward but still excessively named Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald). I think it’s a pretty common assessment that these movies don’t really hold up to the Harry Potter legacy, and I’m going to agree that there is a charm that’s missing. However, like many of these big budget films, a repeat viewing does highlight some of the stronger aspects of the films and I found them more enjoyable this time around. Perhaps I was anticipating the imminent watching of the third movie so was more motivated to learn the characters and the labyrinthine plot twists this time around. Of course knowing the late movie twists in both cases meant that I could be on the watch for the clues peppered throughout the films, which also made things more engaging.

I also appreciated some of great acting on display this time around. Eddie Redmayne is quite outstanding in his portrayal of the socially awkward Newt Scamander, and Johnny Depp was chilling and mesmerizing as Grindelwald. Other supportive actors ranged from good to fair.

Both movies suffer from erratic pacing and the aforementioned confusing plot lines that Rowling’s work is known for. Although in the Harry Potter books/films there’s definitely more satisfying reveals than we end up with here and I think it’s on account of lack of time to cultivate these things. In the original HP series, some twists and reveals weren’t realized until 3-4 movies later, and here things seem much more rushed to get to the ‘gotcha’ moments.

A call-out to the visuals, especially in Crimes of Grindelwald. The CGI of the obscuris (sp?) is excellent in its portrayal of chaos, power, and destruction. It reminds me of the art style in one of my favorite games, Control. As for the ‘fantastic beasts’ themselves, they are more hit-or-miss in their art design and graphical believability. Most are actually a tad hokey appearing, but some are quite creative.

After refreshing my memory of the first two, I dived into Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore. In short, it’s more of the same, but didn’t leave as large an impression on me as I’d have hoped. I liked seeing the characters return and had grown interested in some of their plights, mainly Newt and Dumbledore. Unfortunately the charm of Jacob’s cute side story was flat this time around.

The elephant in the room (well, one of the two elephants, the other of which I’ll just say I’m watching this without regard to the creators current controversy, although I do think one can feel the strain of it on the execution of this newest film) is the switching of the actors for Grindelwald. The franchise has done this before, of course when Dumbledore’s actor was changed from HP2 to HP3. It eventually worked out there, and perhaps it will in this series, but I honestly had a hard time seeing Mads Mikkelsen in the role after Johnny Depp’s previous rendition. I think Depp better captured the combination of sociopathic derangement and charismatic crowd pleaser. I really like Mikkelsen, but it seemed his heart wasn’t in it and he was going through the motions relying of his default cold villain portrayal that we’ve seen before.

Again, I say all this just observationally, with earnest attempts to ‘separate the artist from the art.’ I know Depp and Rowling are very polarizing, so I endorse neither’s world view in these comments. I’m simply partaking of the product on screen.

As a whole, The Secrets of Dumbledore falls a little flat in the end, and it feels rushed and thrown together, which should be no surprise. I still enjoyed it enough to recommend it to fans of the franchise. The peek into the life of a young Dumbledore is reason enough. But as the film approached its halfway point I was checking my watch and seeing how much longer it was going to go. When the credits rolled, I had a slight disappointment that I hadn’t experienced with the first two films. I do think one day a few years hence I’ll give it a rewatch and see if it’s better on the next go around.

@Th3solution By all accounts, they aren’t even making another Fantastic Beasts movie. So for the 5 people still invested, there won’t be a payoff.

@nessisonett I wonder if the ending of Secrets was thrown together in an attempt to provide some closure rather than the original plans for more entries, because it did seem slightly tacked on. There is room for a sequel, but also a tying up of most loose ends. I wouldn’t be surprised if they read the room and decided to get out while there was still time.

I wish they gave the series a better send off, although I still found some enjoyment in this last film. But I’m someone who liked all the Star Wars entires, prequels and sequels, blinded by dedication and infatuation to the IP. Same with Marvel, DC, etc. I just love these certain fictional worlds so even when I objectively see the flaws, I have a hard time completely disapproving even the bad entries. 😄

Finally got around to watching Top Gun: Maverick… god I love me some nostalgia and these guys knew exactly how to wield it!

@colonelkilgore Perfect sequel and now one of my favourite films.

@The_Moose yeah it was awesome… cried me a river!

watching these movies tonight

Batteries Not Included
Fanboys
Ginger Snaps on Joe Bob Briggs's Drive in on Shudder

@ThereThere I agree with Bong Joon-Ho, I've not seen Mother but his other films I've enjoyed them all. I think he is such a master craftsman and his films always have something a bit extra about them, something usually unexpected which makes for great viewing.

Interesting. And I see Alicia Vikander in not attached to star in any upcoming Tomb Raider film.

I watched the recent The Gray Man on Neflix. It was enjoyable enough and the cast are great, I get the feeling Chris Evans reveled in playing such a scum-bag after so long as Cap. I think these super expert killer films are getting a bit long in the tooth now though, if they weren't already.

Following on from last week, I watched Conan the Destroyer this morning.

It was decent, though I think I prefer the first. It definitely has a bit of a quicker pace (and shorter runtime), which I think helps it compared to how slow the first could be at times, however I think it overall feels more pedestrian. The set up is very run of the mill fantasy fate (steal a magical jewel from a wizard's castle, etc.), they've added more humor (and removed nudity) to maybe make it seem more palatable as a mainstream appeal, and it completely removes the mysticism from the magical elements (most sorcery in this movie boils down to someone quickly waving their arms to lift a door or spark a fire, which is a step down from the elaborate set ups in the first film, such as the snake transformation or the nightmarish scene where spirits were trying to drag Conan to death).

I will say it has a more exciting climax than the original, with a pretty cool monster.

That sucks about Tomb Raider, Vikander was wicked in the role and I would love to watch more Tomb Raider films with her in it. I know that's probably an unpopular opinion 😅

@ThereThere It is worth it to watch Tilda Swinton's performance, which I thought was menacing and hilarious at the same time. Don't think I've seen her put in a bad performance yet.

@ralphdibny @RogerRoger I've still not seen that one yet. I think when it came out I was disillusioned with movies based on video games, so decided to skip it. May give it a watch at some point as whatever I was feeling back then has passed.

@ralphdibny @JohnnyShoulder @RogerRoger I liked Vikander in the Lara Croft role also. The movie was pretty decent, all things considered. It and Ex Machina made me a Vikander fan.

@JohnnyShoulder I hope it doesn't disappoint. The general consensus indicates that it was unpopular but I still enjoyed it and thought that Vikander carried the film.

@Th3solution I think tomb raider is the only film I've seen with her in it. Ex machina has been on the "to watch" list for a while so I should probably give it a go soon!

@Th3solution She was in the film 'IT'?!

But Ex Machina is excellent @ralphdibny. I remember that was my choice to go and watch it at the cinema, so was chuffed when it turned out like it did, as it was a bit of an unknown quantity when it was released.