Cinema and Movie Thread: I like to remember things my own way.

[Malcador]

So generally, today's take away is that it always gets worse.

[LadyCrimson]

For me the best things re: GotG were Rocket and the music and the little comedy moments. 1 was almost perfect. 2 was ... well it had moments, not the worst thing in the world but I didn't walk out super wanting a third.

That trailer has a few seconds of world/space-environment (when they're in the colorful spacesuits) where I was somewhat reminded of the start of that GotG video game I tried to play. I wonder if there's any minuscule lore connection. Probably not.

Edited December 1, 2022 by LadyCrimson

[Lexx]

What's super annoying is that the trailers always look kinda great but then you see the movie and it's like, man, I could have just went to bed instead of sleeping on the couch.

Edited December 2, 2022 by Lexx

[Chairchucker]

Hot take: Indy 4 was better than Indy 2 on the whole.

[Hurlshort]

24 minutes ago, Chairchucker said:

Hot take: Indy 4 was better than Indy 2 on the whole.

@Chairchucker's hot take.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

I haven't seen indy 4 and can't remember the other movies. Ah well, it is what it is.

[Keyrock]

2 hours ago, Chairchucker said:

Hot take: Indy 4 was better than Indy 2 on the whole.

I have a baffling love for Temple of Doom. If I look at the movies objectively and remove my own feelings from the equation, both Raiders and Last Crusade are better movies. However, if I was on a 2 1/2 hour flight and was given the choice to watch any Indiana Jones movie, I would pick Temple of Doom without a second thought. I really enjoy that movie.

I am forever confused by the hate Kate Capshaw got for the Willie Scott character. People kept telling me that she was annoying and I thoroughly liked Willie. 

There is no debate to be had about Short Round. Short Round is the best and that is a factual and objective statement. Period. Full stop.

I like the monkey brains scene, I liked it then and I still like it now. If that makes me a terrible racist and literally Hitler then so be it. I can get cancelled or whatever. I love the mine cart chase, it's freakin' awesome. I think the Kali Ma, Shakti De scene is the most iconic scene in the series.

Yes, more iconic than the Raiders face melt.

Sure, Temple of Doom has some really stupid stuff, but nothing even remotely as stupid as Indy surviving a nuclear blast in a refrigerator or Shia Labeouf swinging with monkeys.

[Bartimaeus]

Temple of Doom is the best one because Willie and Shorty are silly and fun characters that play well with and off of Indiana. All other considerations are secondary for me. Now I could see liking Last Crusade more, as it's really the better quality film on the whole, the tone is more serious and it's a little more grounded, it's a lot less racist and sexist than Temple of Doom...and the rest of the cast isn't bad by any means - in fact, it's a pretty good cast. So that at least makes sense to me if one prefers Last Crusade, I can absolutely accept that. But Raiders? Yeah, I just don't know, Raiders is pretty stilted in terms of writing and performances compared to the other two, Miriam stinks, and just...yeah, I mean, it was the first one and maybe the varied globe-trotting setting and initial establishment of Indiana Jones is more your thing, so eh, maybe...

Now it's a good thing nobody brought up Crystal Skull, because boy, I would really have some choice words for anyone that might suggest Crystal Skull could ever possibly be even remotely better or even just more enjoyable than any of the first three...

Edited December 2, 2022 by Bartimaeus

[Tale]

I'm such a huge fan of Beast Wars that I'm having to fight the urge to see that Transformers movie. I've skipped the last 4, but Beast Wars was my dang childhood.

Everything about that trailer was simply the worst, though. 

[Lexx]

Temple of Doom was the movie with the least nazis in it, right? I liked the movie with the most nazis in it.

/Edit: And the one thing I liked even more than the movies was The Fate of Atlantis. Man I really should replay that game.

Edited December 2, 2022 by Lexx

[Keyrock]

Crystal Skull's best redeeming quality was Cate Blanchett's Russian accent.

[Hurlshort]

I don't know what the Crystal Skull thing is you guys are talking about. Indy 4 is called Fate of Atlantis.

[Keyrock]

15 minutes ago, Hurlshort said:

I don't know what the Crystal Skull thing is you guys are talking about.

It's a vodka from Canada's favorite conspiracy theorist Dan Aykroyd.

Edited December 2, 2022 by Keyrock

[Amentep]

4 hours ago, Keyrock said:

Sure, Temple of Doom has some really stupid stuff, but nothing even remotely as stupid as Indy surviving a nuclear blast in a refrigerator or Shia Labeouf swinging with monkeys.

I don't really get the hate for Crystal Skull.  I think its easily 4th best out of the bunch, but the refrigerator bit was no more impossible an escape than the raft down the mountain in Temple of Doom which, in reality, would have left them all dead IIRC some physics break downs.  The idea that the explosion is survivable by 'Indy luck" and the fact that the fridge (as they were back then) being lead lined protected him from the worst of the explosion and radiation is literally the kind of cliffhanger resolution that the old cliffhanger would have used.*

*Actually, if I'm honest, a fair number of serials would have just resolved it by having the hero shrug it off.  I'm looking at you Universal and Columbia serial makers from the 40s and 50s.  I'm looking at you.

[majestic]

3 hours ago, Bartimaeus said:

But Raiders? Yeah, I just don't know, Raiders is pretty stilted in terms of writing and performances compared to the other two, Miriam stinks, and just...yeah, I mean, it was the first one and maybe the varied globe-trotting setting and initial establishment of Indiana Jones is more your thing, so eh, maybe...

What I have been told by people who enjoyed Raiders but hated Crusade is that they simply did not like the shift towards having (more) comedic moments, whereas Raiders was a more serious and gritty adventure film than the others.

4 hours ago, Keyrock said:

I have a baffling love for Temple of Doom. If I look at the movies objectively and remove my own feelings from the equation, both Raiders and Last Crusade are better movies. However, if I was on a 2 1/2 hour flight and was given the choice to watch any Indiana Jones movie, I would pick Temple of Doom without a second thought. I really enjoy that movie.

Sure thing, Adolf.  

I would not go that far as I prefer Last Crusade over Temple of Doom, but I understand the sentiment. Having watched all three films at an age that was probably not appropriate, Temple of Doom was funnier and quirkier than Raiders but overall less charming than Crusade.

[Hurlshort]

1 hour ago, Amentep said:

I don't really get the hate for Crystal Skull.  I think its easily 4th best out of the bunch, but the refrigerator bit was no more impossible an escape than the raft down the mountain in Temple of Doom which, in reality, would have left them all dead IIRC some physics break downs.  The idea that the explosion is survivable by 'Indy luck" and the fact that the fridge (as they were back then) being lead lined protected him from the worst of the explosion and radiation is literally the kind of cliffhanger resolution that the old cliffhanger would have used.*

*Actually, if I'm honest, a fair number of serials would have just resolved it by having the hero shrug it off.  I'm looking at you Universal and Columbia serial makers from the 40s and 50s.  I'm looking at you.

The fridge didn't bother me at all. Ending it with this guy did.

I vastly prefer the religious hoodoo juju to a UFO blasting off.

Plus Shia Ladouchebag was not good.

[Keyrock]

Just now, Hurlshort said:

Plus Shia Ladouchebag was not good.

He did later redeem himself by giving us this gem:

 

[Amentep]

2 hours ago, Hurlshort said:

The fridge didn't bother me at all. Ending it with this guy did.

I vastly prefer the religious hoodoo juju to a UFO blasting off.

Plus Shia Ladouchebag was not good.

Didn't mind the aliens either. It was very Chariots of the Gods.

[Bartimaeus]

5 hours ago, Amentep said:

I don't really get the hate for Crystal Skull.  I think its easily 4th best out of the bunch, but the refrigerator bit was no more impossible an escape than the raft down the mountain in Temple of Doom which, in reality, would have left them all dead IIRC some physics break downs.  The idea that the explosion is survivable by 'Indy luck" and the fact that the fridge (as they were back then) being lead lined protected him from the worst of the explosion and radiation is literally the kind of cliffhanger resolution that the old cliffhanger would have used.*

*Actually, if I'm honest, a fair number of serials would have just resolved it by having the hero shrug it off.  I'm looking at you Universal and Columbia serial makers from the 40s and 50s.  I'm looking at you.

Yeah, my problem with Crystal Skull is just that it's generally a giant pile of unenjoyable garbage that's genuinely difficult to watch and enjoy, nothing to do with realism. I don't even really have that much of an issue with Shia LeBeouf or the job he did - much more pressing is the vomit-worthy CGI and action set-pieces because big budget film-making was completely dead by the time that Crystal Skull came out. Seriously, I don't know how people look at so many of those scenes and don't

my kb stopped working and and im using the osd windows keyboard, so im just gonna leave it there - the universe telling that crappy film aint worth it, i guess

Edited December 3, 2022 by Bartimaeus
keyboard works again after reflashing the firmware, still not gonna bother with crystal skull tho

[Keyrock]

I wanted to like Crystal Skull because I liked all the previous Indiana Jones movies and because Cate Blanchett is in it, and I generally really enjoy her work, particularly the rare occasions when she gets to ham it up. Cate couldn't save that mess, though.

[Bartimaeus]

Memento (2000).

Halfway through the film, I paused it to spend a few minutes to try to figure out what missing piece of the puzzle had set the events of the film in motion, because that was obviously what the film was working towards by presenting events in reverse chronological order. I couldn't rightly figure out the answer, even though in retrospect, the film has really given you everything you need by that point.

Spoiler

Gee, the guy with no ability to form memories is an unreliable narrator, who bloody well would've thought it? Even though it should be incredibly obvious, I think it's naturally difficult for me, and probably most general viewers, to question the protagonist when he's very earnest with his present thoughts and actions as well as clearly a victim of his condition - he never lies or intends to deceive the audience, just the opposite. I suppose that's what makes it effective. Pretty good film.

 

Edited December 3, 2022 by Bartimaeus

[majestic]

20 minutes ago, Bartimaeus said:

Memento (2000). Halfway through the film, I paused it to spend a few minutes to try to figure out what missing piece of the puzzle had set the events of the film in motion, because that was obviously what the film was working towards by presenting events in reverse chronological order. I couldn't rightly figure out the answer, even though in retrospect, the film has really given you everything you need by that point.

For what its worth, Memento is one of the few films where the conclusion - or, well, the beginning in this special case - came as an actual surprise without feeling contrived or simply impossible to figure out by having no prior setup and thus coming out of the blue.

Spoiler

I think the real question of the film is: Are Leonard Shelby and Sammy Jenkins the same person, and there never was a killer in the first place, and did John G. just use Leonard for his own ends? It is certainly not impossible. Anterograde amnesia is relatively rare, at least compared to the 'regular' retrograde amnesia and what are the chances of an insurance agent investigating a case and suffering from the same condition afterwards?

Edited December 3, 2022 by majestic

[Bartimaeus]

59 minutes ago, majestic said:

For what its worth, Memento is one of the few films where the conclusion - or, well, the beginning in this special case - came as an actual surprise without feeling contrived or simply impossible to figure out by having no prior setup and thus coming out of the blue.

  Hide contents

I think the real question of the film is if Leonard Shelby and Sammy Jenkins are the same person, and there never was a killer in the first place, and John G. just used Leonard for his own ends. It is certainly not impossible. Anterograde amnesia is relatively rare, at least compared to the 'regular' retrograde amnesia and what are the chances of an insurance agent investigating a case and suffering from the same condition afterwards?

Unrelated: it was weird to see Joe Pantoliano and Carrie Anne-Moss star in the same movie again, even though they never interacted with each other.

Spoiler

When Leonard is telling the story of Jankis and gets to the part where Jankis is in the institution after having killed his wife, it ends with someone walking in front of and past Jankis in the foreground and, for just a few frames, Jankis is replaced with Leonard before it cuts away. Makes me inclined to that what Teddy said is true, that Jankis's story was actually Leonard's. That would strongly suggest an additional psychological condition rather than just amnesia, which I think is actually hinted at by Leonard himself in the way he tells the story about Jankis, insofar that he kept repeating that he did not believe the physical brain impairment was Jankis' primary issue, but rather that there was an additional psychological condition complicating the issue and making him unable to learn through conditioning. Perhaps the shock and trauma of accidentally killing the love of your life - even if you later forget that you're the one that did it, that could understandably still leave psychological scars, scars that Leonard himself mentioned being unable to heal due to his impairment. The ending also makes it clear that Leonard is perfectly happy with lying to himself for the purpose of achieving his own ends in choosing to deliberately forget what Teddy told him - worse, he then also chooses to target Teddy because of it, perhaps so that Teddy can never tell it to him ever again...which, once more makes me inclined to believe Teddy that the root of all this madness is ultimately within Leonard, a double whammy of his condition and what he has unwittingly done and will continue to do.

 

Edited December 3, 2022 by Bartimaeus

[majestic]

I should probably look up the character names next time I talk about a film I've watched like 15+ years ago. Indeed, that's Jankis and not Jenkins. Oh my.

Leeeeeeeeroy!

[Bartimaeus]

17 minutes ago, majestic said:

I should probably look up the character names next time I talk about a film I've watched like 15+ years ago. Indeed, that's Jankis and not Jenkins. Oh my.

Leeeeeeeeroy!

Hey, I wasn't gonna say nothing...but I did need to actually mention the character, .