|
Post by annamarie on Sept 14, 2021 11:52:06 GMT
I watched Sisterhood of the Travelling Pants. It’s good…but I find it irritating when a movie ends with wrapping everything up in a pretty little bow. And, were any women involved in the writing at all? Spoiler is about Blake Lively character, and it IS a spoiler. Blake’s character is 17. The councillor she has sex with is over 20. I’m not sure of laws re statutory, but as a councillor, and maybe age difference, having him pop up and say “oh sorry, it was my fault” was icky and just would NOT happen. And his doing that would not suddenly and magically make her all fine emotionally. Anyway, prior to the end….it was a good movie.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 14, 2021 18:32:52 GMT
I watched Sisterhood of the Travelling Pants. It’s good…but I find it irritating when a movie ends with wrapping everything up in a pretty little bow. And, were any women involved in the writing at all?Spoiler is about Blake Lively character, and it IS a spoiler. Blake’s character is 17. The councillor she has sex with is over 20. I’m not sure of laws re statutory, but as a councillor, and maybe age difference, having him pop up and say “oh sorry, it was my fault” was icky and just would NOT happen. And his doing that would not suddenly and magically make her all fine emotionally. Anyway, prior to the end….it was a good movie. According to the wikipedia page, a woman wrote the screenplay and the book. I had never heard of this movie. And yes, based on what you said, that does sound very uncomfortably questionable of a writing choice.
|
|
|
Post by wolf on Sept 14, 2021 22:58:03 GMT
I watched Sisterhood of the Travelling Pants. It’s good…but I find it irritating when a movie ends with wrapping everything up in a pretty little bow. And, were any women involved in the writing at all? Spoiler is about Blake Lively character, and it IS a spoiler. Blake’s character is 17. The councillor she has sex with is over 20. I’m not sure of laws re statutory, but as a councillor, and maybe age difference, having him pop up and say “oh sorry, it was my fault” was icky and just would NOT happen. And his doing that would not suddenly and magically make her all fine emotionally. Anyway, prior to the end….it was a good movie. I watched Sisterhood of the Travelling Pants. It’s good…but I find it irritating when a movie ends with wrapping everything up in a pretty little bow. And, were any women involved in the writing at all?Spoiler is about Blake Lively character, and it IS a spoiler. Blake’s character is 17. The councillor she has sex with is over 20. I’m not sure of laws re statutory, but as a councillor, and maybe age difference, having him pop up and say “oh sorry, it was my fault” was icky and just would NOT happen. And his doing that would not suddenly and magically make her all fine emotionally. Anyway, prior to the end….it was a good movie. According to the wikipedia page, a woman wrote the screenplay and the book. I had never heard of this movie. And yes, based on what you said, that does sound very uncomfortably questionable of a writing choice. I saw that movie. Parts of it were good. ...too much of a teen chick flick for me to ever watch it again really. Though I just might, for I do love the beautiful scenes of Santorini and it's architecture, and those DONKEYS for hire! (gotta bring a buttload of carrots for them!😊 ) One of these days I'm going there to see 'Ioannos'! (one of those lil pack donks there) I love all equines of all kinds. 😊
Last night I got to watch a classic before bed. (found it on hulu Taco Man wireman )
1969/70 Classic, Lovecraft's ..."The Dunwhich Horror" Great cast. Dean Stockwell, Ed Begley Sr., Al Jaffee, Sandra Dee, A very young Talia Shire (when she was still going by her given name : Talia Coppola), and others! Way cool flick. 😊
As far as Lively goes....
Good actress! Like her in all I've seen her in, so far. 🙂
Her character and the situation? ...I don't remember the age difference being all that much. Can't help but remember back to Kubric's once upon a time scandalous 'Lolita' Movie based on Nabokov's Novel with Mason, Sellers, Lyon and Winters.
Girls that age mature much faster and VERY often are far more precocious in such matters compared to their male counterparts/peer group. (and even some men a bit older than themselves) Just a little bit.
Lively's character actively pursued that counselor. (Shamelessly and avidly) I don't think any of it is a big deal. And during the years that movie was made, social climate was a good bit different from what it now. No hot topics here. Please. 🙂
|
|
|
Post by Deviancy on Sept 16, 2021 17:21:33 GMT
So far today I've watched Man On Fire, the Denzel version, once, and I'm now watching it from the 40 minute mark since that cuts through the "development" of Creasy and Pita's relationship and when the film starts getting extremely heart touching. Denzel is an outstanding actor, most know that, but Dakota Fanning, she was a solid kid actor and the chemistry between the two was great. We used to debate which revenge film was better, Taken or Man On Fire on another board, they came out roughly around the same time, I always went with MOF. Taken, it was his daughter that he loved and knew for years, so of course he was upset they took his daughter from him. In MOF, Pita is just a girl Creasy is paid to protect but she renews his faith in humanity and he develops a fathers love for her rather quickly, despite the fact he was callous as hell before she changed him radically, so when the kidnappers took her and he believed her to be dead, the emotions Creasy went through were just far more dramatic.
Tony Scott, much like his brother, was just an outstanding director, not as good as Ridley but very few are, shame he ended his life.
Oh, and not only does one get Denzel magic and not only does Dakota do an outstanding job, Walken is in the mix and while he's all dialog and doesn't get involved in any of the action or really dramatic scenes, he still offers up an outstanding performance in the film.
Ridley and Tony used Giannini to play the cop type but I think Tony did a better job with Giannini, he's a great actor but Ridley didn't give him enough meat in Hannibal while Tony gave him a ton in MOF.
|
|
|
Post by Dizzy on Sept 16, 2021 21:54:08 GMT
I Watch Kill Bill Vol 1 Today lol because i Had a Urge too. Probably Going to Watch the 2nd One Soon too.
|
|
|
Post by Steffen on Sept 16, 2021 23:36:59 GMT
James Wan's Malignant. I love how it goes from creepy to scary to utterly bat-sh** insane.
If you haven't yet seen it, I can point to two specific stories (one by Stephen King) that would give an idea of the plot, but it would spoil the surprise.
|
|
|
Post by wolf on Sept 16, 2021 23:57:36 GMT
James Wan's Malignant. I love how it goes from creepy to scary to utterly bat-sh** insane.
If you haven't yet seen it, I can point to two specific stories (one by Stephen King) that would give an idea of the plot, but it would spoil the surprise. Been seeing the blipverts for that one, I'd like to see it! 🙂
Hey Steffen, good to see you. 😊
|
|
|
Post by wolf on Sept 17, 2021 0:04:23 GMT
So far today I've watched Man On Fire, the Denzel version, once, and I'm now watching it from the 40 minute mark since that cuts through the "development" of Creasy and Pita's relationship and when the film starts getting extremely heart touching. Denzel is an outstanding actor, most know that, but Dakota Fanning, she was a solid kid actor and the chemistry between the two was great. We used to debate which revenge film was better, Taken or Man On Fire on another board, they came out roughly around the same time, I always went with MOF. Taken, it was his daughter that he loved and knew for years, so of course he was upset they took his daughter from him. In MOF, Pita is just a girl Creasy is paid to protect but she renews his faith in humanity and he develops a fathers love for her rather quickly, despite the fact he was callous as hell before she changed him radically, so when the kidnappers took her and he believed her to be dead, the emotions Creasy went through were just far more dramatic. Tony Scott, much like his brother, was just an outstanding director, not as good as Ridley but very few are, shame he ended his life. Oh, and not only does one get Denzel magic and not only does Dakota do an outstanding job, Walken is in the mix and while he's all dialog and doesn't get involved in any of the action or really dramatic scenes, he still offers up an outstanding performance in the film. Ridley and Tony used Giannini to play the cop type but I think Tony did a better job with Giannini, he's a great actor but Ridley didn't give him enough meat in Hannibal while Tony gave him a ton in MOF. I agree on all points here. I really liked both those movies. Good reviews here. ...I think Giannini and Ticotin did very well together too in "Man on fire". I cannot get enough of Giancarlo Giannini. Yeah...I would have loved to see more of him in 'Hannibal" ..but what there was of him there?...it was just damn good. All around.
|
|
|
Post by Deviancy on Sept 17, 2021 2:37:27 GMT
...I think Giannini and Ticotin did very well together too in "Man on fire". I agree with that. Manzano was a cool character but he had it in for Daniel for more than what we were fed on screen, I imagine the novel goes into more detail on what Daniel had done prior to Pita and that plays into why Manzano really had it in for him. Not going to read the novel though... great film but its one of those stories that just would be bland in novel form because a lot of it is the body language and acting that sells it, stuff that can't sell as well in text only.
|
|
|
Post by Deviancy on Sept 18, 2021 2:37:01 GMT
Watched the first two Ape films from the latest franchise, seen them before but its been awhile and the pandemic reminded me that I've meaning to watch all three again. Great story and all three films use a new cast of people but they managed to get cast right all three times, and they got some great character actors like Oldman and even Woody. Apes is one of the reasons why I've never been totally anti reboot, a lot of people are, they hear "reboot" and they have a fit but I'm totally down with it if the reboot has something new to offer that is good.
Speaking of Woody, I need to see Flynt again, been awhile since I watched it, I think it was when the real Larry died. Don't get me wrong, I'm not into p**n but I loved how he fought .....
|
|
|
Post by Steffen on Sept 18, 2021 15:47:27 GMT
Watched the new Candyman film last night. The young director Nia DaCosta is certainly a talent to keep an eye on. The first half of the film is interesting, delving into the nature of myth-making and urban legends via unreliable narration influenced by changing times and societal mores.
That's where the good part ends. The latter collapses into sheer dumbness as it takes a bit of a comic-book cliched turn: a betrayal, a super-villain type origin of the "new" Candyman, and a cameo that is an utter waste. This struggle to balance heavy-handed social commentary with supernatural/sci-fi elements is what made Jordan Peele's Twilight Zone reboot a failure (I couldn't even finish the first season). Ultimately, this is merely an average successor to Bernard Rose's film and a disservice to Tony Todd's magnificent, tragic nightmare.
|
|
|
Post by Deviancy on Sept 19, 2021 2:35:11 GMT
This struggle to balance heavy-handed social commentary with supernatural/sci-fi elements is what made Jordan Peele's Twilight Zone reboot a failure (I couldn't even finish the first season). Very few directors can pull off applying modern day social commentary to horror and pull it off. Carpenter pulled it off with Halloween 3, on the surface the film just seems to be about a company run by a Druid who wants to use masks to kill kids and adults as a sacrifice, but deep within, he applies a total commentary on mass consumerism. The upcoming Halloween film sounds like it will have some social commentary elements, hard to say how well they'll be handled but seeing as how the last film ruled and and its from the same team, I think they'll get it right. They shot the next two back to back, so we get one this October and the next the following October. They were set to be done sooner but the pandemic and all... Scream 4 however wins the gold in the social commentary game. All four films had the social commentary elements but the 4th was the most direct but without being offensive, it was actually dead right on a lot of things. Only thing I didn't like about those films, it was always new people in the costume, it would have been cool if just once one of them turned out not to be dead. wolf My bad but I can't even remember how I ended that post last night. Half asleep, like I am again tonight... minor quake last night so it woke me up... quakes don't scare me of injury but they spook me of things being broken, lost a signed poster of a band I liked because it was in a glass frame, so when it flew off the wall it was shredded. :<
|
|
|
Post by wolf on Sept 19, 2021 2:53:19 GMT
Watched the new Candyman film last night. The young director Nia DaCosta is certainly a talent to keep an eye on. The first half of the film is interesting, delving into the nature of myth-making and urban legends via unreliable narration influenced by changing times and societal mores.
That's where the good part ends. The latter collapses into sheer dumbness as it takes a bit of a comic-book cliched turn: a betrayal, a super-villain type origin of the "new" Candyman, and a cameo that is an utter waste. This struggle to balance heavy-handed social commentary with supernatural/sci-fi elements is what made Jordan Peele's Twilight Zone reboot a failure (I couldn't even finish the first season). Ultimately, this is merely an average successor to Bernard Rose's film and a disservice to Tony Todd's magnificent, tragic nightmare.
This struggle to balance heavy-handed social commentary with supernatural/sci-fi elements is what made Jordan Peele's Twilight Zone reboot a failure (I couldn't even finish the first season). Very few directors can pull off applying modern day social commentary to horror and pull it off. Carpenter pulled it off with Halloween 3, on the surface the film just seems to be about a company run by a Druid who wants to use masks to kill kids and adults as a sacrifice, but deep within, he applies a total commentary on mass consumerism. The upcoming Halloween film sounds like it will have some social commentary elements, hard to say how well they'll be handled but seeing as how the last film ruled and and its from the same team, I think they'll get it right. They shot the next two back to back, so we get one this October and the next the following October. They were set to be done sooner but the pandemic and all... Scream 4 however wins the gold in the social commentary game. All four films had the social commentary elements but the 4th was the most direct but without being offensive, it was actually dead right on a lot of things. Only thing I didn't like about those films, it was always new people in the costume, it would have been cool if just once one of them turned out not to be dead. wolf My bad but I can't even remember how I ended that post last night. Half asleep, like I am again tonight... minor quake last night so it woke me up... quakes don't scare me of injury but they spook me of things being broken, lost a signed poster of a band I liked because it was in a glass frame, so when it flew off the wall it was shredded. :< It's cool Dev, no worries. Everything you and Steffen have here looks good. You guys just please be mindful and don't cross the lines into too much controversy and on to hot topics. Please. 🙂 It happens, and isn't hard to get there accidentally. We got it plenty peaceful around here, just being careful and wanting to keep it that way. Thanks guys! Love you both. 😊
|
|
|
Post by Deviancy on Sept 19, 2021 16:38:53 GMT
Everything you and Steffen have here looks good. You guys just please be mindful and don't cross the lines into too much controversy and on to hot topics. Aye, when reviewing films one has to touch on relevant points of the film, but if it regards social commentary, it can be done without those reviewing the films getting into their personal beliefs on those social topics. Still not sure if I'm down with watching Candyman, it was never that great of a horror franchise to begin with. They tried new slasher/horror franchises at the end of Elm Street but the timing was just off and the vampire genre was all the rage. These days, well, the zombie genre is on its way out so not sure what'll be the new horror trend, probably slasher flicks again but time will tell. Think the masses are also sick of the paranormal stuff as well.
|
|
|
Post by Deviancy on Sept 19, 2021 20:06:19 GMT
I just finished War For The Planet Of The Apes, the third and final part of the film series. As I've said, I've seen them before but didn't really focus on them in the past, glad I did this time. The progression of the story is just really well done, from an ape with the mutated ability to be more human like learning decency and how to do what was right from Franco's character to becoming the leader and reason his species thrived was all handled very well, then those who followed him also learned from him, like Maurice, who I imagine went on to lead after. Yes, there are times when the social commentary, which the apes as metaphors to put out there, was a little heavy handed, but without that metaphorical social commentary, the trilogy wouldn't have been as good.
Hrmm, I need to use the little boys room now so I'm gonna keep this short. If one hasn't seen the newest trilogy, I believe Reeves directed all three, watch them... I mean I just am praising the story and acting, the special effects are outstanding as well.
Oh, and off the Apes, new news on the next Halloween film, it will be released on the 15th of October to the theaters, and Peacock. They don't like going that route usually because the films they've released digitally and at the theaters have done super poorly at the box office because most chose to stay at home, so they took a hit since they usually spend 80 million or more to make modern day films. But since horror films usually have like a 10 million budget, they figure its worth risking it to try and get more to subscribe to Peacock, which is owned by NBC, which owns Fandango, so I'm hoping it'll go to Fandango as well on opening day, not holding my breath tho. For those of us who prefer to stay at home, they said January 15th is the at home release date... not too long of a wait but it won't be Halloween season anymore.
|
|
|
Post by Dizzy on Sept 19, 2021 22:51:08 GMT
I Watch The Movie US Today it was Really Cool but I Kinda Got Lost from it though but I Still Like it Alot an Good Stars in The Movie.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 21, 2021 2:29:45 GMT
Watched the new Candyman film last night. The young director Nia DaCosta is certainly a talent to keep an eye on. The first half of the film is interesting, delving into the nature of myth-making and urban legends via unreliable narration influenced by changing times and societal mores.
That's where the good part ends. The latter collapses into sheer dumbness as it takes a bit of a comic-book cliched turn: a betrayal, a super-villain type origin of the "new" Candyman, and a cameo that is an utter waste. This struggle to balance heavy-handed social commentary with supernatural/sci-fi elements is what made Jordan Peele's Twilight Zone reboot a failure (I couldn't even finish the first season). Ultimately, this is merely an average successor to Bernard Rose's film and a disservice to Tony Todd's magnificent, tragic nightmare.
The original Candyman is great, I could care less for that really corny ending bit, but reflecting on the movie as a whole it's a really well done and creepy horror movie with some subtle social commentary.
|
|
|
Post by Deviancy on Sept 21, 2021 2:38:36 GMT
I watched Harry Potter 4 and 6 today. I used to bash Warner for not mentioning the story takes place in the late 80's and gets into the 90's, but there really is no modern tech in the human world so its kind of obvious it wasn't the 2000's, they just never really felt the need to mention a time line really in the films, and neither does JK really, she mentions his year of birth and may have mentioned a few relevant politicians in that era but I can't remember for sure.
Now I'm wathing ID4, I just love Golblum and Smith's chemistry in the film, it just wasn't expected since Smith was still a little green, yes he had been doing his tv show for awhile, and I think the first MIB was already out, or it was being worked on, but Golblum was the one with the experience, he's been around since the 70's, but yet the two trade lines like they had the same amount of experience.
And that's kind of why the sequel failed, it had a few ok moments but damn, why didn't they just offer SMith a ton of money to come back and just have Goldblum and Smith tear it up on screen again.
Oh well...
|
|
|
Post by Deviancy on Sept 22, 2021 2:38:06 GMT
I actually watched a film I've never seen before today, I do that rarely, I'm not counting sequels mind you, if I was, there's always a new sequel I'm watching but a totally new film, a few times a year if that. The Addams Family isn't new but it also isn't a sequel, its an animated film that puts a 21st century spin on things. It has all the same magic as the 90's films however but I wish it was a little longer, think it was around 77 to 80 minutes, and I do want a sequel. I think the animated route may be the best way to go from here on out, allows them to do really wild things they can't pull off in a live action film.
It was on sale for pretty damn cheap so no buyers remorse... now only if they slashed the price on Cruella, 30 to watch it is just too much. I keep hearing so many good things about it and how well they merged the growing punk scene in with Cruella's personality and style.
Disney isn't known for sales though. Hell, there was a time when they didn't like releasing their films in a normal way, they'd do limited releases and then pull them a month or two later and go back to the theater, then do a limited VHS release again. They've always been super greedy but well, its Disney.
|
|
|
Post by Deviancy on Sept 23, 2021 2:36:59 GMT
Seems like a few are on vacation, this thread isn't getting much love.
Ever since that Candyman discussion,
Today I watched They Live, it's one of Carpenter's cult classics, and its the first film where Piper was cast as the lead. He and Keith David kick serious butt in that film ... and it turns out aliens are among us and only those with special glasses or contacts can see them or their hidden subliminal messages... even the President turns out to be one of the aliens.... a solid sci fi film and Piper surprised me, he really played a solid character despite being new to the industry, and he had solid chemistry with Keith David who has worked with a lot of top tier actors during his career.
I don't know what input Carpenter has with the new Halloween films but they did remove the sister angle, and he always hated that angle but the studio forced it on him because they felt Michael needed a motive. So the new team paid tribute by getting rid of what Carpenter never liked. But what is Michael's motive then? Every killer has a motive, especially Michael, he was in prison for 40 years and he gets free and he goes right after Laurie, there's something about her that makes him want her dead, and if its not the sister angle, what is it? Could he be a guy she rejected in high school?
We may never know.
|
|