Jump to content

Movies You've Seen Recently


Recommended Posts

Forgot to mention yesterday that I'd seen:
 
Okja - I think you can only see this via Netflix at the moment? http://www.imdb.com/title/tt3967856/
 
Directed by Bon Joon Ho (The Host, Snowpiercer) it's largely a film about corporations and engineering food debates/ethics, in the form of what ends up feeling a bit like a PETA campaign. The CGI creature itself is amazing, and the young actress is all right. Many of the smaller roles filled by more famous people were...very strange characters I couldn't relate to at all/were just sorta annoying vs. funny. In the end I found the film too over-bearing/shrill in its message, which meant it lost any potential emotional impact for me. It's not that it's bad - technically/music and beauty-wise it's great and the actors are of caliber - I just didn't find it very rousing, hilarious, or illuminating etc. First half was decent/ok too.
 
Depending on your viewpoints as a parent, it may not be something very young children should watch on their own.

  • Like 1
“Things are as they are. Looking out into the universe at night, we make no comparisons between right and wrong stars, nor between well and badly arranged constellations.” – Alan Watts
Link to post
Share on other sites

Forgot to mention yesterday that I'd seen:

 Okja - I think you can only see this via Netflix at the moment? http://www.imdb.com/title/tt3967856/

 

Directed by Bon Joon Ho (The Host, Snowpiercer) it's largely a film about corporations and engineering food debates/ethics, in the form of what ends up feeling a bit like a PETA campaign. The CGI creature itself is amazing, and the young actress is all right. Many of the smaller roles filled by more famous people were...very strange characters I couldn't relate to at all/were just sorta annoying vs. funny. In the end I found the film too over-bearing/shrill in its message, which meant it lost any potential emotional impact for me. It's not that it's bad - technically/music and beauty-wise it's great and the actors are of caliber - I just didn't find it very rousing, hilarious, or illuminating etc. First half was decent/ok too.

 

Depending on your viewpoints as a parent, it may not be something very young children should watch on their own.

I have seen it on Showbox. It's great!

Just what do you think you're doing?! You dare to come between me and my prey? Is it a habit of yours to scurry about, getting in the way and causing bother?

 

What are you still bothering me for? I'm a Knight. I'm not interested in your childish games. I need my rest.

 

Begone! Lest I draw my nail...

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll probably watch that this weekend. I love both The Host and Snowpiercer. Btw I heard Snowpiercer is getting a TV series or something...?

That would be great! I haven't heard anything about it yet

Just what do you think you're doing?! You dare to come between me and my prey? Is it a habit of yours to scurry about, getting in the way and causing bother?

 

What are you still bothering me for? I'm a Knight. I'm not interested in your childish games. I need my rest.

 

Begone! Lest I draw my nail...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Baywatch. Dumb and mean-spirited.

I'm curious what you mean by mean spirited.

I'd say the answer to that question is kind of like the answer to "who's the sucker in this poker game?"*

 

*If you can't tell, it's you. ;)

village_idiot.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites

Forgot to mention yesterday that I'd seen:

 

Okja - I think you can only see this via Netflix at the moment? http://www.imdb.com/title/tt3967856/

 

Directed by Bon Joon Ho (The Host, Snowpiercer) it's largely a film about corporations and engineering food debates/ethics, in the form of what ends up feeling a bit like a PETA campaign. The CGI creature itself is amazing, and the young actress is all right. Many of the smaller roles filled by more famous people were...very strange characters I couldn't relate to at all/were just sorta annoying vs. funny. In the end I found the film too over-bearing/shrill in its message, which meant it lost any potential emotional impact for me. It's not that it's bad - technically/music and beauty-wise it's great and the actors are of caliber - I just didn't find it very rousing, hilarious, or illuminating etc. First half was decent/ok too.

 

Depending on your viewpoints as a parent, it may not be something very young children should watch on their own.

Sad to hear you were not a fan, though I am looking forward to it myself. Today I watched Hirokazu Koreeda's new film myself, After the Storm, which was a lovely bit of slice-of-life. Bittersweet, poignant, worth seeing.

Edited by algroth

My Twitch channel: https://www.twitch.tv/alephg

Currently playing: Fallout 2

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Baywatch. Dumb and mean-spirited.

I'm curious what you mean by mean spirited.

Movie tries to get way too much comedy mileage out of pain and people being complete **** to each other. Might as well have cast King Joffrey and Ramsay Snow. That the jokes don't land doesn't help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Watched The Salesman. Was ok, but a tad too slow for my taste.

"only when you no-life you can exist forever, because what does not live cannot die."

Link to post
Share on other sites

Saw Rambo (the one when he's in Burma), was a decent enough action film, even with the almost comedic grimdark scenes like the first village attack or the forced minefield runs. 

Why has elegance found so little following? Elegance has the disadvantage that hard work is needed to achieve it and a good education to appreciate it. - Edsger Wybe Dijkstra

Link to post
Share on other sites

John Wick Chapter 2

 

It was fine. Not quite as interesting as the first one, but still with the potential to be the solid backbone for a trilogy.

"Show me a man who "plays fair" and I'll show you a very talented cheater."
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah it was kinda **** compared to the first one. Great unsung silent movie hero my ass. 

 

There was even a product placement scene for a Beretta and a Benelli shotgun and some swanky pistol. Do your murdering like the cool kids.

Na na  na na  na na  ...

greg358 from Darksouls 3 PVP is a CHEATER.

That is all.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Weight make up looks really believable these days. It's gotten really advanced. In general I wouldn't expect someone of his age to put on that much weight. He'd probably kill himself trying.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Heh. It makes an interesting point..

 

 

Viral Tweet makes a point about who gets to be old in Hollywood

 

Marisa Tomei is actually a year older as Aunt May in Spider-Man Homecoming than Rue Mcclanahan was when she started filming Golden Girls.

 

 


What Marisa Tomei's portrayal of Aunt May tells us about being a woman over 50 in Hollywood.

 

Not everyone was a fan of the decision to cast Tomei, who is 52, as Peter Parker's Aunt May, with many critics saying she was too young for the role, which has traditionally been played by actors significantly older. When Rosemary Harris played Aunt May in 2002, she was 75 years old; in 2012, when Sally Field took on the role, she was 66.

In an interview with the New York Times, Tomei addressed some of the concerns she had about being cast as a "dowdy widow," saying she was "horrified" and "crushed" to learn which character she had been cast as, once she was shown an illustration of Aunt May in the comic books.

 

"I don’t want to be coming from an ageist point of view about that, at all. It was my own personal cross to bear at that moment," Tomei clarified. She even considered going "full-on silver hair," for the role, but later learned that the goal was actually to cast May as a sort of "big-sister" to Tom Holland's Peter Parker.

But that begs the question: Just what is a 52-year-old woman "supposed" to look like, anyway?

 

Twitter personality Calvin Stowell blew some minds when he shared this tweet, pointing out that Tomei is older in "Spider-Man: Homecoming" than Rue McClanahan was at the start of "Golden Girls."

 

I know, right? Pick your jaw up off the floor.

 

When "Golden Girls" premiered in 1985, McClanahan was 51 years old. And while she was the youngest of the four main cast members by more than a decade, the show's premise could best be described as the adventures of a group of older women. (To be fair, when Tomei filmed "Spider-Man: Homecoming," she was also 51, but still, it's a really interesting comparison.)

 

Some misinterpreted the point Stowell was trying to make, seeing it as an attack on McClanahan's appearance. But that's certainly not what he meant.

"It was more of a dig at Hollywood for casting someone 51 to be a geriatric retiree than competing their looks against each other," he writes in a Twitter direct message. "I love them both."

 

Actresses in Hollywood aren't given the chance to really get old. They're either young or they're old, with no in-between.

In a recent interview with The Guardian, Tomei touched on this, saying, "Well, I only got to be old very recently. The industry has decided I’m an aunt-type now. I’m like, is this the way it gets broken to me?"

 

Hollywood seems set on pushing women from the role of hot, young leading ladies straight to senior citizen status. And even then, women over 50 are often forced into a binary choice between hot or dowdy. It's all a byproduct of both the industry and society's sexism.

 

But there is room in between. There is room for women in their 50s in movies to be portrayed like Tomei, McClanahan, and everyone in between. And there are a lot of great, diverse actresses in their 50s still making waves, such as Andie MacDowell, Angela Bassett, Catherine Keener, Jane Lynch, Julianne Moore, Diane Lane, and many more.

Sure, the casting of a progressively younger May in each film raised a few eyebrows, but in the end, Tomei's casting was actually a pretty great fit, reframing Aunt May as Peter Parker's actual aunt rather than his great aunt.

 

Until it's no longer "the industry" making these sorts of distinctions, there will always be an issue. But for now, this seems like a step in the right direction.

"Cuius testiculos habeas, habeas cardia et cerebellum."

Link to post
Share on other sites

"a pretty great fit, reframing Aunt May as Peter Parker's actual aunt rather than his great aunt"

 

52 years old is more likely to be great aunt than aunt for 15 years old boy in real world.  :getlost:

Link to post
Share on other sites

"a pretty great fit, reframing Aunt May as Peter Parker's actual aunt rather than his great aunt"

 

52 years old is more likely to be great aunt than aunt for 15 years old boy in real world.  :getlost:

In my experience it's pretty odd to see a couple having a child before 30 (personally I'm the oldest among my siblings and my mother had me at 33, making her 48 when I was 15). If Aunt May is his parent's older sister (for a few years, not a lot), then that gap makes perfect sense. If she's meant to be younger than that parent, it's still not outside the realm of possibility.

 

I would say it's weirder to consider a 37-year gap as making up for two generations instead of one, but in the case of grand-aunts I do happen to have a second great-aunt who's only 15 years older than I am (daughter of my grandmother's uncle's fourth marriage), so, I reckon anything gives. :-P

Edited by algroth

My Twitch channel: https://www.twitch.tv/alephg

Currently playing: Fallout 2

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

"a pretty great fit, reframing Aunt May as Peter Parker's actual aunt rather than his great aunt"

 

52 years old is more likely to be great aunt than aunt for 15 years old boy in real world.  :getlost:

In my experience it's pretty odd to see a couple having a child before 30 (personally I'm the oldest among my siblings and my mother had me at 33, making her 48 when I was 15). If Aunt May is his parent's older sister (for a few years, not a lot), then that gap makes perfect sense. If she's meant to be younger than that parent, it's still not outside the realm of possibility.

 

I would say it's weirder to consider a 37-year gap as making up for two generations instead of one, but in the case of grand-aunts I do happen to have a second great-aunt who's only 15 years older than I am (daughter of my grandmother's uncle's fourth marriage), so, I reckon anything gives. :-P

 

 

When I am 52, my nieces and nephews will be 25-29. 

 

But in generally speaking 52 is youngish to be great aunt and oldish to be aunt for 15 years old. Both are possible scenarios, but I would still say that being great aunt is more likely of those two. Because there is quite lot people that have their first child when they are between 16-25. Like for example Aunt May would be great aunt in scenario where May's sister had child when she was 20 and that child then got child when they were 20 and May is three years younger than her sister, then her grand nephew would be 15 when she is 52. Parker's family is also described to uneducated working class family, where it is more typical to have children in younger age.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I must admit I haven't been paying attention much, and this slipped up on me:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9UrQ4VvFO-c

 

So, we're getting two Churchill films and a Dunkirk this year.... I wonder what's driving that.

"Cuius testiculos habeas, habeas cardia et cerebellum."

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...