Locked Rate and Discuss the Last Movie You Saw v.15

[Lovestorm]

Spiderman: Homecoming

Can't really discuss it without discussing the attractiveness of female characters which would get me sent to prison. Aunt May was hot though!

7/10

 

[splendica]

Don't get me wrong I personally loved Green Inferno. But can easily see how another would hate it. More so considering Eli Roth seems to catch alot of hate here.

A thing I like about Inferno is how misleading the trailers were. Trailers made it seem like these people crashed on they're way into the Amazon.

I cant hate on something that has the ability to make me LOL when most of it is meant to be repulsivly gross.

The "Fuck they have the munchies" line took me out

I don't think it makes much difference if they crashed going in or out lol, no? In fact it made it a little less predictable.

The only thing that wasn't quite as authentic as CH, was that the women wore loincloths. I mean, a bit of a minor details and I guess sort of expected for 2017. But I thought it was really well done overall and very authentic with lots of craziness throughout.

 

[Sir Galahad]

I gave it another shot and picked up where I left off, but I couldn't make it past the one hour mark. I'm giving up on it. Still no plot whatsoever, and I still don't like Natalie Portman's performance.

Don't blame you. The film was depressing with no light moments. @BisexualMMA

 

[koolinkunming]

Prometheus

4/10

Boring

 

[Losfer Words]

Rollerball. It had been a while since I had seen it. Very strange movie with the dope font.

 

[BisexualMMA]

Don't blame you. The film was depressing with no light moments. @BisexualMMA

It wasn't even that it was depressing, it was that there were no stakes in anything. It was just conversations about the details of a funeral. Will they parade or won't they? Open casket? Closed? Does it make a difference? Not really. On to the next detail. Discuss it a bit and it will go one way or the other.

I think this movie just existed to recreate the look of the 60s and so that Natalie Portman could do a Jackie O impression.

 

[DM1982]

Arrival

Okay, what's the big deal with this movie? Maybe I missed something, but this just seemed like one nonsensical mess, that duped people with it's "emotion" and pretty pictures. I was a little in and out during this flick, so bare with me. Spoilers below, so be warned. This is less a review, and more a questionnaire.

Spoiler

Alright, so how does the language help Amy Adams see through time? Why would aliens who can see through time, bother with our stupid monkey brains, and not look for a better solution to their problem? You know, given that they can see through time and all, and they know that we're morons. Is the time they see through only reliant on human beings and Earth? I thought time didn't really matter to them, so why are they reliant on us solving their problem(whatever the fuck it is) within a time constraint of 3000 years? How did Amy Adams even figure out their language? One minute she's all "I don't understand anything. Here, let me write 'Human' on a board", the next she's like "This shit is so simple. I understand everything, because I remember eventually figuring it out from a previous lifetime, in the exact same fucking scenario. You know, time shit."

Language and communication is a better option than war. Don't ask any questions. The end.

Seriously, What?

Maybe I'm just too dumb for it, but this movie did not make any sense at all to me.

5/10

Hint: the film wasn't really about the aliens; the aliens were just a story telling tool.

The film was based on the scientific principle of time as a circular concept that can be viewed as one whole.

To understand this and get a better appreciation of the movie you should watch the making of documentary that comes with the dvd;

The film is based on the short story 'Story of your life' by Ted Chiang

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Story_of_Your_Life

He could have selected from several plotlines to explore language and determinism, he chose aliens. The aliens and the mystery behind them are kind of irrelevant, they are to explore the scientific principle the film is based on. Don't take the alien/human mystery literally, the film is metaphorical/allegorical.

And it merits more than your paltry score of 5/10.

I'm not gonna say you're too dumb for it, but yes, it seems this film was a bit above you.

Perhaps stick with Transformers movies; simple plots and no pesky 'emotions' to deal with ; )

 

[HereticBD]

And it merits more than your paltry score of 5/10.

I'm not gonna say you're too dumb for it, but yes, it seems this film was a bit above you.

Perhaps stick with Transformers movies; simple plots and no pesky 'emotions' to deal with ; )

I can dish out the snark, so I suppose I'll take it as well. Seriously though, the "Transformers" card is played out.

And I do understand that the filmmaker isn't a moron, and was clearly more concerned with exploring the themes underneath the surface of the fairly basic plot. I just didn't think it was handled all that well, and I don't give lazy plot conveniences a pass, simply because there was more going on beneath the surface. It wasn't some dreamlike David Lynch flick, where the plot is deliberately incoherent. It's an alien invasion flick called "Arrival", with a mostly traditional plot structure. To call it all "irrelevant" because it had some higher aspirations, is kind of a cop out for bad storytelling.

Whatever though. To each their own.

 

[Deleted member 220895]

Arrival

Okay, what's the big deal with this movie? Maybe I missed something, but this just seemed like one nonsensical mess, that duped people with it's "emotion" and pretty pictures. I was a little in and out during this flick, so bare with me. Spoilers below, so be warned. This is less a review, and more a questionnaire.

Spoiler

Alright, so how does the language help Amy Adams see through time? Why would aliens who can see through time, bother with our stupid monkey brains, and not look for a better solution to their problem? You know, given that they can see through time and all, and they know that we're morons. Is the time they see through only reliant on human beings and Earth? I thought time didn't really matter to them, so why are they reliant on us solving their problem(whatever the fuck it is) within a time constraint of 3000 years? How did Amy Adams even figure out their language? One minute she's all "I don't understand anything. Here, let me write 'Human' on a board", the next she's like "This shit is so simple. I understand everything, because I remember eventually figuring it out from a previous lifetime, in the exact same fucking scenario. You know, time shit."

Language and communication is a better option than war. Don't ask any questions. The end.

Seriously, What?

Maybe I'm just too dumb for it, but this movie did not make any sense at all to me.

5/10

Spoiler

I think she knew it the whole time and she was remembering from the future. Since time has no meaning to the Aliens, they can remember from the past and the future. Also, the aliens weren't reliant on time, but they know good and well that the humans are, and in 3000 years to us, the people they need help from would lose their opportunity. Kind of like they need our help, but they are in no rush, but we are and they have to revolve around our sense of time.

They didn't fully explain why they needed humans, of all people, to be the ones to help them. But the Aliens, as extremely intelligent and aware as they are, have no other choice but to get help from us. Even though we are the violent little shits they know we are, they still stayed and waited for Amy because she was their only hope. That at least showed how desperate they were for us.

Also, my belief is that the language the aliens speak, transcends through time. It's a new hyper-form of consciousness that got spread to amy so she had the tools to help them, and in turn, help the human race. I don't know how, but it seems like the Aliens had a certain mental power that goes beyond the physical world.

 

[Joseph Budden]

I've been rewatching some of the more obscure Masters of Horror eps that I don't remember well. Gonna post reviews here since more people should've/should watch this show

Dance of the Dead -- 5.5/10. Solid story with some cheesy dialogue and a weird concept with the club Robert Englund runs (who is amazing and steals the show)

Jenifer -- 6.5/10. Weird as fuck.

Homecoming -- 5.5/10. Meh, weirdness masking an anti war agenda during the Bush regime.

The Fair Haired Child -- 5.5/10 -- Most obvious twist ever but enjoyable.

Sick Girl -- 7/10. Angela Bettis has a very lol worthy performance as a butch bug scientist. Great episode. Very entertaining and creepy.

Pick Me Up -- 4/10. They could've done more with this. Michael Moriarty makes it worth a watch, but other than that its the rare shit episode.

Imprint -- 5/10. Miike disappointed with this one. The torture scene was disturbing but a bit much. The rest of the story really just didn't grab my interest very much.

The V Word -- 7.8/10. One of my favorite episodes, and the only of my fave eps I rewatched (wanted some vampire shit). The first 20 mins is just an amazing horror sequence with great suspense being built the whole way through. Rest of the story plays out very well. Plus, Michael Ironside the GOAT

Pro-Life -- 4.5/10. Can't believe Carpenter directed this shit. Not fun, the only likable character is the first guy to die, very predictable. Amazing performance from Ron Perlman at least.

The Screwfly Solution -- 6/10. Solid episode besides the ending.

Right to Die -- 5.7/10. Plays out like a generic horror movie but its fun.

Washingtonians -- 6.5/10. Quite original, and man the ending makes me lol. Spoilers but those Washingtonians are so over the top it makes you laugh rather than be scared. So the fact they all just get gunned down easily was very appropriate.

Dream Cruise -- 5.8/10. Solid episode, but ironically, its the only one with a runtime of 90 mins yet feels like it should've just been 60 mins like the rest.

 

[moreorless87]

It wasn't even that it was depressing, it was that there were no stakes in anything. It was just conversations about the details of a funeral. Will they parade or won't they? Open casket? Closed? Does it make a difference? Not really. On to the next detail. Discuss it a bit and it will go one way or the other.

I think this movie just existed to recreate the look of the 60s and so that Natalie Portman could do a Jackie O impression.

Early on I thought it might be simple impersonation but personally I felt the end result was actually a lot more interesting than yet another historical re-enactment of that era.

I'm not American so don't have the connection but correct me if I'm wrong having a large filmed funeral on TV was one of the biggest shared public experiences of that era? so I would say it had significant importance but really your looking at a film that's much of a character study than focused on the "will they won't they" tension of such events. In that respect I felt it was actually very well done striking a good balance rather than just casting her as a suffering saint.

 

[Sir Galahad]

Yeah, very interesting, weird movie. I think I watched late at night and awhile ago so would have a difficult time trying to discuss it in detail now, but it was quite good.

Spoiler

I kept thinking Michael Shannon's character was going to screw Gyllenhal's over, but it seemed in the end he didn't, Jake was just too slow on the draw. Quite a tragedy though.

It had a David Lynch vibe to it.

Amy Adams is so talented. Wonder if she's a real redhead?

Spoiler

Down there.

 

[splendica]

Amy Adams is so talented. Wonder if she's a real redhead?

Spoiler

Down there.

Yeah, glorious. She was a redhead on the Office too - clearly so, so I believe she is.

 

[BisexualMMA]

Early on I thought it might be simple impersonation but personally I felt the end result was actually a lot more interesting than yet another historical re-enactment of that era.

I'm not American so don't have the connection but correct me if I'm wrong having a large filmed funeral on TV was one of the biggest shared public experiences of that era? so I would say it had significant importance but really your looking at a film that's much of a character study than focused on the "will they won't they" tension of such events. In that respect I felt it was actually very well done striking a good balance rather than just casting her as a suffering saint.

These are fair points, but my comparison is something like The King's Speech. In that movie, he was really just giving a speech, so who cares about the details? But the film built up the stakes, both the enormous stakes for him personally and for the public, and by the time the speech rolled around, I was heavily invested.

The particulars of JFK's funeral may have been significant, but they aren't built up to be so in Jackie, at least not in the first hour that I watched. The only mention I can recall of any stakes is that Jackie wanted a big funeral so that JFK would be remembered more along the lines of Lincoln than Garfield or McKinley, and that came across more as vanity the way it was presented.

 

[moreorless87]

These are fair points, but my comparison is something like The King's Speech. In that movie, he was really just giving a speech, so who cares about the details? But the film built up the stakes, both the enormous stakes for him personally and for the public, and by the time the speech rolled around, I was heavily invested.

The particulars of JFK's funeral may have been significant, but they aren't built up to be so in Jackie, at least not in the first hour that I watched. The only mention I can recall of any stakes is that Jackie wanted a big funeral so that JFK would be remembered more along the lines of Lincoln than Garfield or McKinley, and that came across more as vanity the way it was presented.

Theres a good deal in the film to suggest its potential significant both in the fashion is shown and comments made I would say, basically the point is that his death and funeral end up being of more importance in terms of building shared experience than his achievements in office. You are dealing with events better known to US audiences I spose and indeed a film with less of a purely mainstream aim than the Kings Speech that askes more of its audience.

That really feeds though into there dealing very different stories, the Kings Speech is morally very straight forward I would say being a story of a man's overcoming personal problems for an obvious good. Jackie covers much more of a grey area being a more morally ambiguous character study calling into question her motivations and choices. I enjoy both but I find the latter a significantly better film due to the greater ambition which gives Portman the opening to give a very strong performance more akin to say Colin Firth in A Single Man.

I do actually think when people look back on this decade of cinema one of the trends they'll pickout as significant is for very personal/intense films(often covering very socially awkward subject matter) that use a similar kind of closeup heavy(and often shallow focus and artfully lit) style focusing alot on physical performance. Stuff like Jackie, Portman previously in Black Swan, Fassbender in Shame, Johansson in Under the SKin, again Firth in a SIngle Man and as I'v mentioned previously Blue is the Warmest Colour. Parts of that style do I think end up in a lot of other cinema people rate highly like say Arrival, Drive or even something like Rogue One plus you could argue a good deal of TV like Game of Thrones.

 

[koolinkunming]

The Circle 5/10

Interesting concept and relevant today, but nothing much really happens.

 

[BisexualMMA]

These are fair points, but my comparison is something like The King's Speech. In that movie, he was really just giving a speech, so who cares about the details? But the film built up the stakes, both the enormous stakes for him personally and for the public, and by the time the speech rolled around, I was heavily invested.

The particulars of JFK's funeral may have been significant, but they aren't built up to be so in Jackie, at least not in the first hour that I watched. The only mention I can recall of any stakes is that Jackie wanted a big funeral so that JFK would be remembered more along the lines of Lincoln than Garfield or McKinley, and that came across more as vanity the way it was presented.

What do you feel lifted her performance out of imitation, where I felt it lingered for at least the hour that I watched?

 

[moreorless87]

What do you feel lifted her performance out of imitation, where I felt it lingered for at least the hour that I watched?

I felt more the stuff at the start like the recreation of the tour/interview but really even then did end up serving a purpose, the same with her playing to the journalist that started out more just imitation but developed from there.

 

[Sir Galahad]

I gave it another shot and picked up where I left off, but I couldn't make it past the one hour mark. I'm giving up on it. Still no plot whatsoever, and I still don't like Natalie Portman's performance.

She did have the accent down pat though. I'll give her that.

 

[minute bull]

Arrival

Okay, what's the big deal with this movie? Maybe I missed something, but this just seemed like one nonsensical mess, that duped people with it's "emotion" and pretty pictures. I was a little in and out during this flick, so bare with me. Spoilers below, so be warned. This is less a review, and more a questionnaire.

Spoiler

Alright, so how does the language help Amy Adams see through time? Why would aliens who can see through time, bother with our stupid monkey brains, and not look for a better solution to their problem? You know, given that they can see through time and all, and they know that we're morons. Is the time they see through only reliant on human beings and Earth? I thought time didn't really matter to them, so why are they reliant on us solving their problem(whatever the fuck it is) within a time constraint of 3000 years? How did Amy Adams even figure out their language? One minute she's all "I don't understand anything. Here, let me write 'Human' on a board", the next she's like "This shit is so simple. I understand everything, because I remember eventually figuring it out from a previous lifetime, in the exact same fucking scenario. You know, time shit."

Language and communication is a better option than war. Don't ask any questions. The end.

Seriously, What?

Maybe I'm just too dumb for it, but this movie did not make any sense at all to me.

5/10

It's a bit of a problem because the author of the short story is more of the determinism camp, while the screenwriter likes to retain a sense of free will and change.

Now if you removed the time-travel aspect and regarded this film as a woman who was recounting her story, and that most of it's told through flashback (like THE USUAL SUSPECTS), it's a bit easier to follow. Illustrating the philosophy of regret -- kind of like the question, "If you knew you were going to get your heart broken, would you fall in love in the first place?" That's that fantasy, depicted in the film by the time-travel; we've all pondered what our lives could be if we had a time-machine to correct our mistakes.

However, the reality is, in this hypothetical scenario, we already fell in love and our heart was already broken. This always happened.

The real question becomes, "Will we cherish our memories, or be haunted by them?"

(Literally, the author wanted to posit the question, "If you knew your child was going to die, would you still go forward with having it?")

The hard part is getting over the paradox, but it's not a paradox when you consider there are no alternatives. What happened always happened, and that's why she has a memory of it before it happened. It's how the heptapods know about our assistance 3000 years prior to the event.

It feels weird because we're going through it as it's happening, and thus we figure there must be some option for change but there isn't. (Which makes it a doubly weird reaction, considering people should also realize a movie goes the way it does because that's the way it's written.) That's just the illusion to create tension. The language opened her perception, changing it from our familiar "arrow of time" concept to one that's more like a prism. Once she understood that, the totality of her understanding throughout her lifetime was available to her, including the future mastering of the hepta-language and the private phone number to Gen Chang. It thus became a matter of acculturating herself to her newfound perception, which did not go smoothly.