-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Movies You've Watched Lately |OT| - 2021
- Thread starter BadBurger
- Start date
- Status
Billbofet
Member
Wife and I watched The Menu last night. We both liked it quite a bit. It wasn't perfect, but Ray Fiennes' performance was exceptional.
I think it had a lot of themes similar to Glass Onion, it's just The Menu executed everything much, much better.
There's actual tension vs. the no-stakes, goofy weightlessness of Glass Onion.
I also have a theory that Anya Taylor-Joy is an alien from another planet (vampire planet maybe?). This movie, to me, strengthens that theory.
I think it had a lot of themes similar to Glass Onion, it's just The Menu executed everything much, much better.
There's actual tension vs. the no-stakes, goofy weightlessness of Glass Onion.
I also have a theory that Anya Taylor-Joy is an alien from another planet (vampire planet maybe?). This movie, to me, strengthens that theory.
ikbalCO
Member
I watched Fablemans very recently.
It was cliché, boring an bland.
Turns out, just because you are a good movie maker it doesnt mean your life is a movie.
Dialogs in particular was tropey. Yuck.
Great performance from michelle willams though. She must be the unluckiest actors ever. Whenever she is in the running for an oscar, there is always someone better. Sad she will listen to cate balchett acceptance speech come this march.
It was cliché, boring an bland.
Turns out, just because you are a good movie maker it doesnt mean your life is a movie.
Dialogs in particular was tropey. Yuck.
Great performance from michelle willams though. She must be the unluckiest actors ever. Whenever she is in the running for an oscar, there is always someone better. Sad she will listen to cate balchett acceptance speech come this march.
Last edited:
Maiden Voyage
Gold™ Member
Watched This Place Rules. Andrew Callaghan is going to go down as one of the great journalists of our time. Highly recommend.
V1LÆM
Gold Member
Perfume: The Story of a Murderer (2006)
i bought the book at christmas after years of having it on my wish list. didn't know there was movie until i was about half way through the book. finished it this morning so rented the movie.
the movie is a great adaptation and in some ways is better than the book. Ben Wishaw plays Grenouille, Dustin Hoffman is Baldini, Alan Rickman is Antoine Richis, and John Hurt narrates it. it makes some changes from the book but probably for the best.
i bought the book at christmas after years of having it on my wish list. didn't know there was movie until i was about half way through the book. finished it this morning so rented the movie.
the movie is a great adaptation and in some ways is better than the book. Ben Wishaw plays Grenouille, Dustin Hoffman is Baldini, Alan Rickman is Antoine Richis, and John Hurt narrates it. it makes some changes from the book but probably for the best.
- there is no mention or hint of Grenouille not having a smell until about half way through. to be fair that's when he realised but early on in the book there is a scene (which inspired Kurt Cobain when writing Scentless Apprentice which is based on the book) that was left out where another character is scared by his lack of smell and thinks he is the devil. i wish they had kept it in the movie because i felt in the book i really helped set up Grenouilles character and made you feel uneasy about him.
- the girls that Grenouille goes after are aged up in the movie. in the book they are described as children going through or about to go through puberty. in the movie they are played by, at the time, 16-22 year olds. i understand why they done this because when reading the book it made me feel sick he was going after children even if it was just for their smell.
- the scene in the cave is over quick. in the book it's said he spends about 7 years in it but the movie just shows him with longer hair and a beard which suggests maybe about a year he spent there. it doesn't say exactly.
- a part of the book after he comes out the cave is completely cut. in the book he stays with a scientist for a while who uses him to prove some theory of his. it's not really too important so i get why it was cut. it was for the best i think.
- antoine richis (alan rickman) appears much earlier in the movie. in the book he doesn't appear until near the end but in the movie it's just after half way through. i've no problem with more Alan Rickman so i don't mind that change.
- the execution scene i was really curious how they were going to do it. in the books basically everyone starts fucking. the movie does people kissing, undressing, but nothing explicit like in the book. they can't really show that without affecting the rating so not a problem.
Last edited by a moderator:
Mr Hyde
Member
The Hobbit trilogy
I got this edition in 4K UHD as a Christmas gift from my mother. I already have the LOTR trilogy in 4K and wanted to add the Hobbit to the collection as well. I haven´t seen these movies since their release so I was excited to rewatch and see how I felt. I wasn´t too hot about them upon release, but after rewatching this trilogy I gotta say, that these movies holds up very well, and are quite good. First of all, the worthless 48 fps is removed, reverting it back to 24 fps, which looks soooo much better and more natural. The effects have been touched up and the movies look absolutely gorgeous in 4K. They almost look like they released recently, which is a testament to the high quality of the effects.
As for the movies themselves, An Unexpected Journey and Desolation of Smaug are the best ones, with Battle of the Five Armies being the worst. The first two stick to the book rather well, with some changes being made to pad out the length. The casting is great, with the real MVP being Richard Armitage as Thorin Oakenshield. He does a great interpretation as the Dwarf leader and he is the best part about the whole trilogy. Martin Freeman is excellent too, as is Ian McKellen as Gandalf, but Bilbo becomes more and more shoved in the background in part 2 and 3, so his performance is kinda left out. Seeing Gandalf kick so much ass is also great. In the Hobbit he uses a lot more magic and staff wielding than in LOTR, so it was cool to see him battle against the darkness in a way you didn´t in LOTR. There are other great characters too in the Hobbit, such as Radagast the Brown and Thandruil, the Elfen Leader. Smaug is also a highlight, and his interaction with Bilbo in Erebor is a great scene between them.
An Unexpected Journey and Desolation of Smaug is wholesome adventures that doesn´t quite reach the hights of LOTR, but that was never expected either. A lot of the charm and mystery that came with the OG trilogy is kinda gone, and I think that makes these films not as memorable. I also strongly dislike the romantic subplot between Kili and Tauriel, utterly pointless and I can´t for the life of me understand why Jackson and his team went with this plotline. It adds nothing to the overall arc. Legolas is kinda annoying too with his ridicolous action scenes, very reminiscient of LOTR, where I just shook my head over how fake it looked. It should´ve been just Tauriel kicking ass, seeking approval of Thandruil. That would´ve been much more compelling imo. Plus Evangeline Lilly is a sweetheart and should´ve had more screentime.
Now, if the Hobbit were just these two movies, I think the reception would´ve been much better. But the suits at WB had to get greedy and stretch it out to a trilogy. Battle of the Five Armies is not bad, but it takes a considerable nosedive in quality. It´s basically a two and half hours long action sequence where various armies of Middle Earth clash with each others. And that´s cool. But there is hardly any breathing room between all the action so in the end it gets tedious, and quite frankly, boring. The documentary sheds some light about the production of this movie and all the struggles with it, to the point of Peter Jackson nearly killing himself in the process, and you gotta wonder if it was worth it in the end.
Overall, The Hobbit is a great trilogy that doesn´t really capture the magic of the original trilogy. Peter Jackson does his best to entertain us all the way to the end, but some of the material falls flat and feels a bit derivative. But the movies are fun and the cast is great, especially the dwarfs are very fun to watch. The journey to reclaim their lost kingdom is the main quest and it sticks the landing for the most part. It´s just a couple of subplots that drags the movies down. But if you consider the troubled production this trilogy had, with financial struggles and Guillermo Del Toros exit, leaving very little room for Peter Jackson to prep his version, it´s a testament to how fucking talented Peter Jackson is, that the movies came out as good as they were. In any other directors hand, it would´ve have been one the worst trainwrecks of all time. Too bad it basically made PJ go into retirement.
I got this edition in 4K UHD as a Christmas gift from my mother. I already have the LOTR trilogy in 4K and wanted to add the Hobbit to the collection as well. I haven´t seen these movies since their release so I was excited to rewatch and see how I felt. I wasn´t too hot about them upon release, but after rewatching this trilogy I gotta say, that these movies holds up very well, and are quite good. First of all, the worthless 48 fps is removed, reverting it back to 24 fps, which looks soooo much better and more natural. The effects have been touched up and the movies look absolutely gorgeous in 4K. They almost look like they released recently, which is a testament to the high quality of the effects.
As for the movies themselves, An Unexpected Journey and Desolation of Smaug are the best ones, with Battle of the Five Armies being the worst. The first two stick to the book rather well, with some changes being made to pad out the length. The casting is great, with the real MVP being Richard Armitage as Thorin Oakenshield. He does a great interpretation as the Dwarf leader and he is the best part about the whole trilogy. Martin Freeman is excellent too, as is Ian McKellen as Gandalf, but Bilbo becomes more and more shoved in the background in part 2 and 3, so his performance is kinda left out. Seeing Gandalf kick so much ass is also great. In the Hobbit he uses a lot more magic and staff wielding than in LOTR, so it was cool to see him battle against the darkness in a way you didn´t in LOTR. There are other great characters too in the Hobbit, such as Radagast the Brown and Thandruil, the Elfen Leader. Smaug is also a highlight, and his interaction with Bilbo in Erebor is a great scene between them.
An Unexpected Journey and Desolation of Smaug is wholesome adventures that doesn´t quite reach the hights of LOTR, but that was never expected either. A lot of the charm and mystery that came with the OG trilogy is kinda gone, and I think that makes these films not as memorable. I also strongly dislike the romantic subplot between Kili and Tauriel, utterly pointless and I can´t for the life of me understand why Jackson and his team went with this plotline. It adds nothing to the overall arc. Legolas is kinda annoying too with his ridicolous action scenes, very reminiscient of LOTR, where I just shook my head over how fake it looked. It should´ve been just Tauriel kicking ass, seeking approval of Thandruil. That would´ve been much more compelling imo. Plus Evangeline Lilly is a sweetheart and should´ve had more screentime.
Now, if the Hobbit were just these two movies, I think the reception would´ve been much better. But the suits at WB had to get greedy and stretch it out to a trilogy. Battle of the Five Armies is not bad, but it takes a considerable nosedive in quality. It´s basically a two and half hours long action sequence where various armies of Middle Earth clash with each others. And that´s cool. But there is hardly any breathing room between all the action so in the end it gets tedious, and quite frankly, boring. The documentary sheds some light about the production of this movie and all the struggles with it, to the point of Peter Jackson nearly killing himself in the process, and you gotta wonder if it was worth it in the end.
Overall, The Hobbit is a great trilogy that doesn´t really capture the magic of the original trilogy. Peter Jackson does his best to entertain us all the way to the end, but some of the material falls flat and feels a bit derivative. But the movies are fun and the cast is great, especially the dwarfs are very fun to watch. The journey to reclaim their lost kingdom is the main quest and it sticks the landing for the most part. It´s just a couple of subplots that drags the movies down. But if you consider the troubled production this trilogy had, with financial struggles and Guillermo Del Toros exit, leaving very little room for Peter Jackson to prep his version, it´s a testament to how fucking talented Peter Jackson is, that the movies came out as good as they were. In any other directors hand, it would´ve have been one the worst trainwrecks of all time. Too bad it basically made PJ go into retirement.
Last edited:
sedg87
Member
BOY!
Been working my way through one of my favourite horror film series; Phantasm. The first is one of my favourite horror films, the second is a pretty solid sequel and the third is just 'alright. Will be watching the fourth and fifth ones tonight.
Afterward, I'll be watching one of those it's so bad it's actually good kinda film series: Subspecies. Proper bargain-bin, panto, bottom of the barrel shit in every aspect
Mr Hyde
Member
The Lighthouse
Robert Eggers has a pretty impressive streak with his movies. I've enjoyed all of his work, but The Lighthouse is probably his best film. It features not only outstanding direction and writing from Eggers, but also two powerhouse performances by Willem Dafoe and Robert Pattinson.
Two sailors tasked with working as lighthouse keepers on a remote island goes clinically insane after they are marooned on the island due to stormy weather. It has Lovecraft written all over it, with evocative imagery of the ocean and what lies beneath, but it seems much of the influence comes from horror stories on the open sea, mythical monsters, Prometheus, Prodeus, sea gods and other strange creatures.
I cannot imagine how rough this shoot must have been on Dafoe and Pattinson. They are all constantly drenched in water, blood, mud and all sorts of filth, and they are displaying a range of emotions from fear and sadness, insanity, joy, paranoia to laughter and happiness, I mean they are really showing off their acting chops here. Holy shit.
The Lighthouse is creepy, funny, unique and weird at the same time, impossible to even categorize. It's a beautiful mind fuck with stellar acting and writing. Highly recommend to anyone who just loves the art of cinema.
Robert Eggers has a pretty impressive streak with his movies. I've enjoyed all of his work, but The Lighthouse is probably his best film. It features not only outstanding direction and writing from Eggers, but also two powerhouse performances by Willem Dafoe and Robert Pattinson.
Two sailors tasked with working as lighthouse keepers on a remote island goes clinically insane after they are marooned on the island due to stormy weather. It has Lovecraft written all over it, with evocative imagery of the ocean and what lies beneath, but it seems much of the influence comes from horror stories on the open sea, mythical monsters, Prometheus, Prodeus, sea gods and other strange creatures.
I cannot imagine how rough this shoot must have been on Dafoe and Pattinson. They are all constantly drenched in water, blood, mud and all sorts of filth, and they are displaying a range of emotions from fear and sadness, insanity, joy, paranoia to laughter and happiness, I mean they are really showing off their acting chops here. Holy shit.
The Lighthouse is creepy, funny, unique and weird at the same time, impossible to even categorize. It's a beautiful mind fuck with stellar acting and writing. Highly recommend to anyone who just loves the art of cinema.
Cyberpunkd
Member
Kipchoge: The Last Milestone
Incredible account of his life and the events leading up to Ineos 1:59 challenge (where he ran the marathon below 2 hours) - a true inspiration to all. Great movie.
Incredible account of his life and the events leading up to Ineos 1:59 challenge (where he ran the marathon below 2 hours) - a true inspiration to all. Great movie.
GeekyDad
Member
I'm about a decade lttp, but just watched the first Guardians of the Galaxy. That was adorable as shit (despite the surprising violence). I actually wasn't sure I'd sit through the whole thing at first. The first 10-15 minutes I was thinking it was looking like it had been overhyped. But it builds, with such an insanely even flow. The laughs get better as it goes, the relationships come together nicely, and that final scene -- with mini-groot dancing in the pot -- holy shit, I was in tears at that point. Just ended up being good s***. They did a good job with the recapitulation of the passing of his mother, bringing the team together at the ending.
Can't wait to check out Vol. 2.
Can't wait to check out Vol. 2.
AlteredForms
Banned
Great movie with some memorable moments (Dafoe's speech) but loses a lot of points due to how Eggers copied it from the Smalls lighthouse tragedy.
Mr Hyde
Member
Not something I'm familiar with. Care to elaborate?
AlteredForms
Banned
There's a lighthouse off the coast of Wales in the United Kingdom called the Smalls Lighthouse. In 1801 one of the two lighthouse keepers died in a freak accident, the other keeper placed the body inside a coffin and fixed it to the outside wall. Violent storms and winds forced the body out of the box, making it appear as though the dead man's hand was beckoning him. As you can imagine the remaining keeper had to deal with his partner's dead body and being all alone on a remote lighthouse, but despite losing his sanity somewhat he managed to keep the light going. There's also another historical event that took place in 1900 at another lighthouse in the UK, but that involved three people vanishing from it without a trace. Robert Egger's movie is clearly a copy of the Smalls Lighthouse tragedy, it's not surprising he chose a British actor as payback for the idea.
Model of the original lighthouse where the 1801 event happened. The white one in the middle is the second lighthouse installed on the same spot. The third image shows the similarity between the second lighthouse and the movie one.
Mr Hyde
Member
There's a lighthouse off the coast of Wales in the United Kingdom called the Smalls Lighthouse. In 1801 one of the two lighthouse keepers died in a freak accident, the other keeper placed the body inside a coffin and fixed it to the outside wall. Violent storms and winds forced the body out of the box, making it appear as though the dead man's hand was beckoning him. As you can imagine the remaining keeper had to deal with his partner's dead body and being all alone on a remote lighthouse, but despite losing his sanity somewhat he managed to keep the light going. There's also another historical event that took place in 1900 at another lighthouse in the UK, but that involved three people vanishing from it without a trace. Robert Egger's movie is clearly a copy of the Smalls Lighthouse tragedy, it's not surprising he chose a British actor as payback for the idea.
Model of the original lighthouse where the 1801 event happened. The white one in the middle is the second lighthouse installed on the same spot. The third image shows the similarity between the second lighthouse and the movie one.
Interesting. Did Robert Eggers acknowledge any of this in Lighthouse?
AlteredForms
Banned
He said he was partly inspired by the tale, but honestly it’s more of a straight adaptation with some things changed around. The two lighthouse keepers who quarrel, the constant isolation and bad weather, heck even the lighthouses look similar in the images I’ve provided.
Pejo
Member
Just saw Renfield. It wasn't as good as I was expecting it to be. It just felt like it couldn't strike that balance between comedy and action/horror and the characters all felt very forced and awkward the whole way through. I like Awkwafina well enough, but she was absolutely not the right casting for the female lead. Nick Cage was good but the writing was just bad in this film, even for what it is.
Action scenes were great though, with body parts exploding every which way.
Action scenes were great though, with body parts exploding every which way.
I saw Saint Seiya in theaters and it seemed like a netflix movie. It is like a combination of power rangers and the cw. It's been awhile since I've watched any of the anime so I couldn't compare it to that. The storytelling was pretty bad. Like the characters would run off and do things that made no sense. They made rules in the movie that they would break a few minutes later. This movie gets worst the more I think about it. I still can't say I hated the movie. I'd give this movie a rating of C-.
xrnzaaas
Member
Two disappointing movies unfortunately...
Evil Dead Rise for me is not an Evil Dead flick. I initially said the same thing about the 2013 reboot, but looking at it now (and after rewatching it twice) I acknowledge the similarities with the original despite switching to a more serious tone. This one doesn't have that except for the overall idea how to summon the 'evil dead' and some one-liners & scenes (like the flying eyeball) desperately trying to remind it's still Evil Dead. Plus it's not even close to being as creepy as the previous film. Jane Levy has done an awesome job in the previous movie playing a possessed person. Plus this new one has got annoying kids, I rolled my eyes when the
and that's one of the awful scenes involving them.
The Pope's Exorcist reminds me why I hate current Hollywood flicks. It's more like an adventure movie with the exorcist theme and not a proper creepy horror about an exorcism. The possessed kid acted horribly and I actually started laughing at some point during his scenes. Russell Crowe has done a solid job with his part, but that's not nearly enough to recommend watching this even if you're a fan of exorcism flicks. There are far better movies to choose from (and even an Exorcist tv series with a very good first season).
Evil Dead Rise for me is not an Evil Dead flick. I initially said the same thing about the 2013 reboot, but looking at it now (and after rewatching it twice) I acknowledge the similarities with the original despite switching to a more serious tone. This one doesn't have that except for the overall idea how to summon the 'evil dead' and some one-liners & scenes (like the flying eyeball) desperately trying to remind it's still Evil Dead. Plus it's not even close to being as creepy as the previous film. Jane Levy has done an awesome job in the previous movie playing a possessed person. Plus this new one has got annoying kids, I rolled my eyes when the
little girl has decided to open the door
The Pope's Exorcist reminds me why I hate current Hollywood flicks. It's more like an adventure movie with the exorcist theme and not a proper creepy horror about an exorcism. The possessed kid acted horribly and I actually started laughing at some point during his scenes. Russell Crowe has done a solid job with his part, but that's not nearly enough to recommend watching this even if you're a fan of exorcism flicks. There are far better movies to choose from (and even an Exorcist tv series with a very good first season).
Clear
CliffyB's Cock Holster
Evil Dead Rise is pretty terrible. Its got a few good scenes but on the whole its a mess. The entire set-up and wrap-around is contrived and clunky, and the action throughout is poorly paced and lacking in flow and energy. Its a movie where the everything is driven by plot convenience not logic or physical reality. Its genuinely badly directed in that the way a lot of the set-pieces are staged only works because of really obvious editing. Characters literally teleport around from setup to setup, something that's painfully apparent at the climax.
This lack of physicality and consistency is particularly noticable in the gore scenes, which I found weightless and again peculiar in that people frequently get skewered by knives as if they were made of papier-mache, but a chainsaw to the head resists like cutting concrete! Same deal, with the powers of the possessed which go from struggling to walk to literally flying at victims, from having the supernatural awareness to detect the presence of a specific individual behind a door with their back turned, to later being unaware of them because they are hiding behind a car!
Its possible to get away with this sort of thing when the tone is hyped-up splat-stick like Raimi's originals, but the way this is directed... no chance.
Its bad. Really bad actually.
Last edited:
AlteredForms
Banned
Seems as though you're still holding onto nostalgia and crapping on everything subsequent, as if the original Evil Dead movies were masterpieces in plot, pacing and direction. The latest movie has recieved solid review scores on Rotten Tomatoes and 69 on Metacritic which is something not many films accomplish, especially ones from beloved intellectual properties.
Grildon Tundy
Member
I watched Knock at the Cabin. I quite liked it. I'm a fan of thriller movies with religious angles, and this one reminded me of Frailty (2001) in that regard.
Like every M. Night Shyamalan I can recall, it does that thing where people speak in a weird, stilted, verbose way which can take me out of it sometimes, but I thought it fit the surreal nature of the plot.
I read someone else make this point, but I'll steal it:
If the premise sounds interesting, and you liked any of M Night's other movies, I'd say it's worth checking out.
Like every M. Night Shyamalan I can recall, it does that thing where people speak in a weird, stilted, verbose way which can take me out of it sometimes, but I thought it fit the surreal nature of the plot.
I read someone else make this point, but I'll steal it:
I wish they had shown more graphic violence. During the kills, the camera will cut away from the impact. I think the idea is to fill in the gaps with the horrors of your imagination. Maybe my imagination is shot, but I thought it would've been more impactful to just show it all.
Also, I kind of figured that the Four Horsemen were telling the truth the whole time, but the movie still works, even if you're not on-board with the supposed protagonists' views each step of the way. And I liked that the one dad that took longer to buy into the truth of it all probably believed it sooner than he lets on but didn't WANT to believe it and was the type who was tempted to sacrifice the world for his family. Reminded me of Joel in The Last of Us in that regard.
Also, I kind of figured that the Four Horsemen were telling the truth the whole time, but the movie still works, even if you're not on-board with the supposed protagonists' views each step of the way. And I liked that the one dad that took longer to buy into the truth of it all probably believed it sooner than he lets on but didn't WANT to believe it and was the type who was tempted to sacrifice the world for his family. Reminded me of Joel in The Last of Us in that regard.
If the premise sounds interesting, and you liked any of M Night's other movies, I'd say it's worth checking out.
Last edited:
diffusionx
Gold Member
For whatever reason, Karate Kid was one of those movies I never watched growing up. Or maybe I did watch it and completely forgot, whatever. I watched it a few weeks ago and thought it was a pretty damn good movie with tons of 80's soul (even though I lean towards the "Daniel is actually the villain" mode of thinking) and I really enjoyed season 1 of Cobra Kai afterwards. I saw Karate Kid 2 was on TV last night and decided to watch it, what a complete and total piece of shit. Like, what the FUCK were they thinking. The story made NO sense. How the hell did not a single person in this movie, set in Japan, speak any Japanese, even to other Japanese people. What a train wreck. The only redeeming value was the girl who Daniel had a crush on who was a total hottie.
Last edited:
Clear
CliffyB's Cock Holster
Not at all. EDR is just a bad horror movie by any standards.
As to critical reception, if you believed the critics at the time of release you'd end up discarding practically every classic movie in the genre. They have never been a reliable indicator of quality for one reason or another. And now with the barrier for entry to be a critic being basically non-existent... doubly so.
AlteredForms
Banned
That hasn't been the case as classic movies have pretty much always been either popular with audiences and critics for a reason. And Rotten Tomatoes has a specific section for "top critics" to combat that barrier for entry. I haven't watched the movie so I personally cannot comment, but it always comes across as fanboys bitching and nit-picking over something as though the original was a flawless masterpiece. The only movies in recent times that have received warm reception in comparison to the originals are Halloween 2018, Mad Max: Fury Road and Blade Runner 2049.
Clear
CliffyB's Cock Holster
Just untrue. For many years genre stuff always had a stigma attached in mainstream circles, and even within genre publications there was often a clear demarcation between periods that were considered "classic" and those less so. For instance when I first got into the genre in the early 70's titles (because yes, I am that old!) as legendary as something like Romero's Night Of The Living Dead were considered trash.
As I believe Clive Barker once pointed out, horror reinvents itself with new generations.
All that said, I could write paragraphs about what is fundamentally wrong with EDR, because basically you'd have to go out of your way to give it a pass on its problems.
Its not painfully bad, or completely lacking in merit, its just not particularly original or scary or well written or directed!
NotMyProblemAnymoreCunt
Biggest Trails Stan
The Super Mario Bros Movie: A
Had a smile on my face during the whole movie. I'm a grown man and I loved it. F The critics
Bowser simping for the Princess, etc made me laugh out loud
Peaches Peaches Peaches
Had a smile on my face during the whole movie. I'm a grown man and I loved it. F The critics
Bowser simping for the Princess, etc made me laugh out loud
Peaches Peaches Peaches
Cyberpunkd
Member
I really think this thread should be locked when we move to the new year and a new one to be made. I made the same mistake - posting in 2023 in a thread from 2021.
kruis
Exposing the sinister cartel of retailers who allow companies to pay for advertising space.
People, the new thread is here: Movies You’ve Watched Lately [OT] - 2023
Last edited:
GeekyDad
Member
One of the funniest modern comedies I've seen. This is what a Ghostbusters revisit should have been like:
The sound -- just everything, music, dialogue, effects, haptics overall -- is masterful. The weaving of music is such a great storyteller. Remastered to perfection. Cat Stevens...
The character names (namely Gomorrah) are not lost on me, though. Very interested to see where that leads in the next volume.
Holy shit at the cameos (and throwbacks from X-men, What If? and others). Fitting that Stan Lee should get that final scene at the end of the credits.
If this ain't a love-making rock show, then they don't exist.
I am Groot.
The sound -- just everything, music, dialogue, effects, haptics overall -- is masterful. The weaving of music is such a great storyteller. Remastered to perfection. Cat Stevens...
The character names (namely Gomorrah) are not lost on me, though. Very interested to see where that leads in the next volume.
Holy shit at the cameos (and throwbacks from X-men, What If? and others). Fitting that Stan Lee should get that final scene at the end of the credits.
If this ain't a love-making rock show, then they don't exist.
I am Groot.
- Status