Movies You've Seen (or would like to see) Recently

[LadyCrimson]

I think I posted this before but here goes nothing:

 

Still laughing out loud every time I watch it. Or would, if I weren't weeping for the franchise.

HAHAHA. That was a lot of lol's. Thanks.

 

....tried to watch "Split" the other day. Turned it off about half way through. It's not that it's terrible, I guess it wasn't really quite right for my personal short-attention-span syndrome. Maybe it becomes more interesting in the latter half, dunno. James McAvoy seemed to have a lot of fun hamming up those multiple personalities, and I did like seeing Betty Buckley.

 

I seem to have lost patience for films in general - the 1.5 to 2.5 hour format I mean. Editing often feels too abrupt, story/characterization (if any) seems truncated etc. eg, I've become way way pickier about movies than I used to be. Even most of the Korean/Asian films feel too scattershot. I wish the majority movies could go back to being always 3+ or even 4 hours with a 10min. intermission or something. I know, I know, not as much daily/weekly money that way (less showtimes). Oh well.

[SonicMage117]

Split is a very slow movie for horror, I'd say the last 20 minutes is what makes the movie worth seeing and the point to point connection to Unbreakable. If your not a fan of M Night Shyamalan then you may not like it or get all the easter eggs which is what the movie was an ode to. I still haven't watched Lady In The Water... I should probably do that as I have enjoyed all of his other work so far.

[SonicMage117]

I can't wait for MEG!!!!

https://youtu.be/LEFdn4kad-A

 

As a fan of sharks, I loved Shark Night, 47 Meters Down, Bait, Deep Blue Sea and so on. They are my favorite animals so I am excited.

[PrestigeWorldwide]

Split is a very slow movie for horror, I'd say the last 20 minutes is what makes the movie worth seeing and the point to point connection to Unbreakable. If your not a fan of M Night Shyamalan then you may not like it or get all the easter eggs which is what the movie was an ode to. I still haven't watched Lady In The Water... I should probably do that as I have enjoyed all of his other work so far.

I found Lady In The Water to be quite horrible. I still think Unbreakable is his magnum opus.

 

I watched The Cure For Wellness the other day. It kept me entertained, but was not very thrilling. I plan on watching Split in the next day or so, along with the latest Planet Of The Apes instalment.

Edited November 7, 2017 by PrestigeWorldwide

[Hurlshort]

I would put Split next to Unbreakable. Although it is a much darker film.

[Amentep]

I wish the majority movies could go back to being always 3+ or even 4 hours with a 10min. intermission or something. I know, I know, not as much daily/weekly money that way (less showtimes). Oh well.

Weirdly, perhaps, I always saw the roadshow format of 4 hour + overture, intermission and such to be the rarer thing than the norm. To me a 90 minute film seems more natural (excepting B and Z grade films, and serials)

[Bartimaeus]

Poltergeist (1982). Uh, yeah, I can see how Stranger Things might have been inspired by this. It was...interesting. I wouldn't say it was a great movie, but definitely interesting and entertaining at times.

Edited November 8, 2017 by Bartimaeus

[SonicMage117]

I plan on watching Split in the next day or so, along with the latest Planet Of The Apes instalment.

The new Planet Of The Apes is really good, I like that it felt it had a purpose of tying up the series.

 

I may get some backlash for saying but, my favorite Planet Of The Apes will always be the one with Marky Mark! Even if it went nowhere, I feel that the costumes were much more authentic than the new cgi although the cgi in the newest one is very well done.

[LadyCrimson]

I may go back and try to watch the latter half of Split later. It was on HBO so easy for me to do. But I'm 99% sure I already guessed the ending concept, since it's telegraphed (imo) so much - which is part of why I turned it off. Still, the first half was much better than Lady in the Water or The Happening. I mostly liked 6th Sense, Unbreakable (altho I found the very end to be a bit unsatisfying for some reason) and Signs (yes it's silly but I was still entertained). And while he didn't direct it, I liked Devil a fair bit. Perhaps the split-personality device has grown stale for me as well.
 
 

Weirdly, perhaps, I always saw the roadshow format of 4 hour + overture, intermission and such to be the rarer thing than the norm. To me a 90 minute film seems more natural (excepting B and Z grade films, and serials)

Yeah, I probably shouldn't have said "go back to." It's just that most of the older/classic films that I like are the very long ones.

I've spent three months binge watching almost nothing but 16-20 episode tv series, however, and now trying to watch most films it's as if films are way too short to feel complete/satisfying. :D

[PrestigeWorldwide]

 

I plan on watching Split in the next day or so, along with the latest Planet Of The Apes instalment.

The new Planet Of The Apes is really good, I like that it felt it had a purpose of tying up the series.

I may get some backlash for saying but, my favorite Planet Of The Apes will always be the one with Marky Mark! Even if it went nowhere, I feel that the costumes were much more authentic than the new cgi although the cgi in the newest one is very well done.

My favorite is still the original with Charlton Heston. I didn’t hate the remake, but you’re right, it didn’t really go anywhere. Tim Roth was awesome in it, tho.

[algroth]

 

 

 

I think both mostly suck. Near the end of any Marvel or DC movie I get tired and partly fall asleep. :>

 

That's pretty much been my experience as well. DC has had such low lows, but there's actually been a couple that I moderately enjoyed...Marvel, on the other hand, I'd characterize as being consistently mediocre/bleh all the way down, but never really quite "turn the TV off" terrible like some of DC's movies have been. Watchable, but not really very enjoyable. So I guess I'd rather waste my time taking a chance on a DC movie than another predictably mediocre Marvel movie.

 

 

I like the Marvel films overall more than you do, but this is roughly how I feel about them. They play each of these films very safe, they deliver a familiar experience and by and large do so in alright fashion nowadays. I do think they are better overall films than DC, but at least up until recently I also felt like DC had the greater ability to surprise. Now, however, I'm not even so sure that DC will do as much - they seem very intent in trying to replicate the MCU formula beat for beat. I actually think Fox are the ones with the greatest capacity for surprise, unpredictability and uniqueness at this point, if both Logan and Legion and their relative success are any indication.

 

With regards to Thor, it was very enjoyable but didn't really break the MCU mold in any fashion. I like that the series is becoming a bit more creative visually, but it does feel like they take babysteps toward that goal, and there's still a long way to go. Dramatically it's still utterly inert.

 

 

Yeah, for Thor, I've only seen the first, which I thought was pretty dull already. Well, actually, I've seen bits and pieces of the Avengers and the Dark World, but I really just couldn't sit through them. I guess the problem with Marvel and DC is that one, I'm really just not very into superhero-ish characters on a conceptual level, and two, I don't know, I just don't seem to really like any of the characters to begin with. So the fact that I'm not invested into literally any of the characters, and in fact have a tendency to grow to dislike them over the course of the movie, makes them a hard sell, especially when all of these movies feel like they're following a very similar formula, as you said. I guess the genre's just not really for me. If I had to pick a favorite Marvel movie, I think I'd have to go with Iron Man 1...which they, of course, immediately followed up with the crappiest sequel that killed any interest I had in the franchise.

 

 

I liked Thor more than Iron Man myself, mostly because I really dig Branagh's sense of humour and timing, and took the film to be something of a parody of self-important fantasy epics. It was the fantasy RPG's Enchanted in a way, and I dug it that way, more than Robert Downey Jr. doing his usual shtick even if that is also enjoyable in its own right. But yeah, it didn't really blow my mind either, and while at some point it may have felt fresh, that freshness has really worn off with the slew of sequels that came right after (as well as the increasingly expected tongue-in-cheek approach to just about every genre roughly alluded to by the franchise's setting, be it fantasy, space opera, heist movie, etc.).

[Bartimaeus]

​I think I had trouble with Thor in particular because I just didn't like anybody for the majority of the movie. Honestly, I think Loki was probably the most likeable of the main characters...

[SonicMage117]

To me, Ragnarok was the best so far, followed by The Dark World, then the first in last place. I didn't think any of the movies were bad. I think each of them have a totally different feel so I'm not sure I understand where people come from when they say "The movies are basically the same except more or less in one direction to the extreme or another". The 1st movie was obviously traditional Thor, the 2nd was Science meets fantasy, the 3rd was very Mad Max: Thunderdome like to me.

 

More importantly, the fact that all of these movies are connected to the Avengers films makes it all the more impressive. Which I'm surprised no one has mentioned, so of course if you didn't watch the first Avengers or Civil War, you may be confused about some parts in separate hero movies afterwards which let's face it, is not going to sot well with the viewer - nobody likes feeling stupid or left out after all.

 

I also look at where alot of these ideas in the movies come from, if you're a Marvel reader, you probably already knew about Planet Hulk, Gladiator Hulk and Grandmaster before the movie even was conceptualized. Sprinkled goodness for Marvel fans all around.

 

As far as characters, it's hard to imagine that characters like Heimdell, Sif or Hela as unlikable but oh well, to each their own (I don't expect anyone who doesn't like Marvel movies to know who those even are).

Edited November 8, 2017 by SonicMage117

[algroth]

​I think I had trouble with Thor in particular because I just didn't like anybody for the majority of the movie. Honestly, I think Loki was probably the most likeable of the main characters...

 

I do kinda feel like he has the most relatable arc in the film. His conflict seems to respect a number of elements that make him closer to a classic tragic hero than that of Thor's, and the film definitely plays some with those elements - he feels always relegated to a second place by his brother's side, but is unaware of his true nature and thus his 'destiny' and so forth. His envy feels quite natural and justified in comparison to Thor's arrogance and hotheadedness. He's probably the most outright tragic character in the MCU thus far, and yet The Avengers managed to **** that arc up quite rotundly by turning him into some one-dimensional "I'm gonna rule over the world"-type villain for absolutely no reason. He's been comic relief since.

[Bartimaeus]

Yeah, I was pretty confused as to what happened between the first movie and the Avengers, and I guess there just wasn't really much of an explanation. Well, maybe there was later in the movie - as I said, I didn't finish it.

[Hurlshort]

The 2nd Thor movie did a great job of salvaging Loki. 

 

I've been having a blast with all of these MCU movies. They've created a very fun universe. I'll probably go see the new Thor this holiday weekend.

[SonicMage117]

I don't think anyone would be disappointed with Thor Ragnarok... so long as they know what it is exactly. I see all the 1980's neon colors in the ads, the fact that it draws that Mad Max: Thunderdome feel (which was also the third film for that hero/anti-hero). Gamers should think "It's the Far Cry: Blood Dragon of the MCU" and that is a very beautiful thing

[Bartimaeus]

The Breakfast Club (1985). Like Heathers, goofy but good. Guess I'm on a little bit of an 80s binge. Blade Runner is next.

​

​Az Ember Tragediaja or the Tragedy of Man (2011). Really unusual animated Polish film that looks at creation, the advancing of civilization and the human condition through the eyes of Adam and Satan, starting at the Garden of Eden, to Rome and then the Renaissance, the present and then a proposed future. It had its peaks and valleys, but overall was a decent watch. Super weird, though, and definitely not for children.

​

​

Edited November 8, 2017 by Bartimaeus

[algroth]

Az Ember Tragediaja or the Tragedy of Man (2011). Really unusual animated Polish film that looks at creation, the advancing of civilization and the human condition through the eyes of Adam and Satan, starting at the Garden of Eden, to Rome and then the Renaissance, the present and then a proposed future. It had its peaks and valleys, but overall was a decent watch. Super weird, though, and definitely not for children.

​

​

 

Sounds pretty interesting, I'll check it out.

 

Last I've seen was Boogie Nights with some friends on Sunday. It'd been about uh... 14 years or so since I'd last seen it. Still great, several scenes really get under your skin... And it's curious how in light of all the Hollywood sexual abuse scandals this film's depiction of abuse towards women within the microcosm of this industry and period feels so much more poignant.

[Bartimaeus]

Beware that it's only in Polish - no English dub (though there are English subtitles). And, uh, it's really, really strange.

[algroth]

Beware that it's only in Polish - no English dub (though there are English subtitles). And, uh, it's really, really strange.

No dubs for me, only subs. And I'm quite used to Polish (and Eastern European in general) weirdness. Seen The Hourglass Sanatorium by any chance? That's an all-time favorite for me, right after 2001: A Space Odyssey.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Is1wg2Ie15M

[Bartimaeus]

I have not. Yeah, that was pretty weird.

[algroth]

I have not. Yeah, that was pretty weird.

 

It's worth checking out. If you enjoy Gilliam's more out there stuff like Brazil or The Adventures of Baron Munchausen, this is sort of a precursor to these. It deals with pretty similar topics too, even: much like Brazil, the film is a Kafkian critique of bureaucracy and institutions, this time seen through a story where a young man in the early 1900s goes to visit his father at a sanatorium where he's being attended, only to find him lost in this almost death-like state of sleep. In order to reach him, he too is subjected to the same 'treatment' and thus starts to look for his father in these series of dreamlike scenarios depicting several scenes of Polish society and history.

[Bartimaeus]

Yeah, I liked Brazil. Well, thanks for the recommendation: I'll try watching it when I get a craving for something weird.

[SonicMage117]

Uhhh.. anyway,

 

While we're on the subject of Thor Ragnarok: