Suicide Squad (2016).
WTF?
I guess that an honest appraisal would require reading the original script to determine the difference of what was on paper to what actually got produced, but it would be hard to justify this incoherent mess.
This is not to say that this movie was TOTALLY unwatchable, but for me it was more of an exercise in seeing how good my predictive powers were. Not so good but only because almost at every point when I thought that there might be attempts to redeem the plot the writers would fail. One example: that scene where the Squad retreats to a bar in a break in the action. Maybe this could be used to build some sort of camaraderie especially in the face of a clearly inhuman enemy which if anything would be even less tolerant of the aberrant behavior of Squad members or even against their inhumane director, Amanda Waller (Viola Davis who was all but wasted in this role), but no, just disjointed conversations between Squad members.
WTF?
I guess that an honest appraisal would require reading the original script to determine the difference of what was on paper to what actually got produced, but it would be hard to justify this incoherent mess.
This is not to say that this movie was TOTALLY unwatchable, but for me it was more of an exercise in seeing how good my predictive powers were. Not so good but only because almost at every point when I thought that there might be attempts to redeem the plot the writers would fail. One example: that scene where the Squad retreats to a bar in a break in the action. Maybe this could be used to build some sort of camaraderie especially in the face of a clearly inhuman enemy which if anything would be even less tolerant of the aberrant behavior of Squad members or even against their inhumane director, Amanda Waller (Viola Davis who was all but wasted in this role), but no, just disjointed conversations between Squad members.
Zhong Kui: Snow Girl and the Dark Crystal (2015)
A joint China/Hong Kong/US-backed sword and sorcery mythological epic. Basically, Chinese Clash of the Titans with gods, kirin, armies of demons and lots of beautiful costumes and scenery. The story itself is kind of sparse, about a warrior sworn to protect heaven who falls for a snow demon and has to decide his loyalties on the day every 10,000 years when heaven, hell, and earth all collide. Lots of sometimes over the top CGI, but also lots of attractive actors in sexy outfits. Some of the scenes are silly and cartoonish, but some of them are breathtakingly beautiful in a way I haven't seen before in Chinese cinema. It's nice to see modern CGI applied to a different art style. Not as epic as it could be with more story development, but an entertaining spectacle.
A joint China/Hong Kong/US-backed sword and sorcery mythological epic. Basically, Chinese Clash of the Titans with gods, kirin, armies of demons and lots of beautiful costumes and scenery. The story itself is kind of sparse, about a warrior sworn to protect heaven who falls for a snow demon and has to decide his loyalties on the day every 10,000 years when heaven, hell, and earth all collide. Lots of sometimes over the top CGI, but also lots of attractive actors in sexy outfits. Some of the scenes are silly and cartoonish, but some of them are breathtakingly beautiful in a way I haven't seen before in Chinese cinema. It's nice to see modern CGI applied to a different art style. Not as epic as it could be with more story development, but an entertaining spectacle.
DEyncourt posted:Suicide Squad (2016).
WTF?
I guess that an honest appraisal would require reading the original script to determine the difference of what was on paper to what actually got produced, but it would be hard to justify this incoherent mess.
This is not to say that this movie was TOTALLY unwatchable, but for me it was more of an exercise in seeing how good my predictive powers were. Not so good but only because almost at every point when I thought that there might be attempts to redeem the plot the writers would fail. One example: that scene where the Squad retreats to a bar in a break in the action. Maybe this could be used to build some sort of camaraderie especially in the face of a clearly inhuman enemy which if anything would be even less tolerant of the aberrant behavior of Squad members or even against their inhumane director, Amanda Waller (Viola Davis who was all but wasted in this role), but no, just disjointed conversations between Squad members.
I was entertained.
justine posted:DEyncourt posted:Suicide Squad (2016).
WTF?
I guess that an honest appraisal would require reading the original script to determine the difference of what was on paper to what actually got produced, but it would be hard to justify this incoherent mess.
This is not to say that this movie was TOTALLY unwatchable, but for me it was more of an exercise in seeing how good my predictive powers were. Not so good but only because almost at every point when I thought that there might be attempts to redeem the plot the writers would fail. One example: that scene where the Squad retreats to a bar in a break in the action. Maybe this could be used to build some sort of camaraderie especially in the face of a clearly inhuman enemy which if anything would be even less tolerant of the aberrant behavior of Squad members or even against their inhumane director, Amanda Waller (Viola Davis who was all but wasted in this role), but no, just disjointed conversations between Squad members.
I was entertained.
Arrival (2016) Amy Adams, Jeremy Renner, Forest Whitaker. Close Encounters of the Thoughtful Kind. Nice.
I heart Amy Adams.
Metacell posted:Lombo posted:Nobody else saw Logan yet ?
DISCUSS ++
TOS and I saw it a few pages back. Really powerful, phenomenal movie. The two best actors in the Marvel landscape really delivering at the top of their game. Definitely not a feel good movie though, but both brutal and moving.
indeed
i would add that it was made with a ton of heart and it shows
Apollo 18 (2011) Got bad reviews but I liked it a lot. The last doomed Apollo mission that officially never happened.
Computer Chess (2013) Weird mockudrama/comedy with mostly improvised dialogue. Has its moments.
Computer Chess (2013) Weird mockudrama/comedy with mostly improvised dialogue. Has its moments.
Ribtor posted:Apollo 18 (2011) Got bad reviews but I liked it a lot. The last doomed Apollo mission that officially never happened.
Not a bad horror film, and well done from a production design aspect. But as soon as the credits started rolling, I asked the fatal question, "If this was supposed to have happened, how did this supposed footage make it back to Earth?"
Pithecanthropus posted:Ribtor posted:Apollo 18 (2011) Got bad reviews but I liked it a lot. The last doomed Apollo mission that officially never happened.
Not a bad horror film, and well done from a production design aspect. But as soon as the credits started rolling, I asked the fatal question, "If this was supposed to have happened, how did this supposed footage make it back to Earth?"
...Russians?
dv posted:Pithecanthropus posted:Ribtor posted:Apollo 18 (2011) Got bad reviews but I liked it a lot. The last doomed Apollo mission that officially never happened.
Not a bad horror film, and well done from a production design aspect. But as soon as the credits started rolling, I asked the fatal question, "If this was supposed to have happened, how did this supposed footage make it back to Earth?"
...Russians?
No, nazis.
Pithecanthropus posted:Ribtor posted:Apollo 18 (2011) Got bad reviews but I liked it a lot. The last doomed Apollo mission that officially never happened.
Not a bad horror film, and well done from a production design aspect. But as soon as the credits started rolling, I asked the fatal question, "If this was supposed to have happened, how did this supposed footage make it back to Earth?"
That, actually, has a potential answer. The Apollo command modules could broadcast television back to Earth where it was recorded. Probably not enough to cover the film, but it's not exactly a complete impossibility of getting "lost footage" like that.
Space-monster movies are one big plot hole. In this case there was a line of dialogue in which it was stated that the video and data links were making it out and it was just the audio from the LEM's radio that was blocked. Best not dwell on the unlikely in a space-monster movie.
Lucy (2014)
I have always been a fan of Luc Besson's films, and this one was definitely a fun romp. Unfortunately, I had a bit of trouble suspending my disbelief over the whole "we only use 10% of our brains thing". However, accepting that it was a cute action film smoothed that over and I actually enjoyed the film.
I can't disagree with the common scores, though. It was good, not great.
I have always been a fan of Luc Besson's films, and this one was definitely a fun romp. Unfortunately, I had a bit of trouble suspending my disbelief over the whole "we only use 10% of our brains thing". However, accepting that it was a cute action film smoothed that over and I actually enjoyed the film.
I can't disagree with the common scores, though. It was good, not great.
maurvir posted:"we only use 10% of our brains thing"
DO suspend your disbelief and get over it. It's a movie, they used that line as a plot device.
To me, that NEVER literally meant we only use "10% of the physical amount of brain" we have. To me it was always like some kind of hyperbole, meaning we only use a small amount of the capacity we have.
Some people can improve themselves given the chance.
And some people refuse to believe scientifically proven facts and get elected to be in charge of stuff. Those use less than 10%.
ukimalefu posted:maurvir posted:"we only use 10% of our brains thing"
DO suspend your disbelief and get over it. It's a movie, they used that line as a plot device.
To me, that NEVER literally meant we only use "10% of the physical amount of brain" we have. To me it was always like some kind of hyperbole, meaning we only use a small amount of the capacity we have.
Some people can improve themselves given the chance.
And some people refuse to believe scientifically proven facts and get elected to be in charge of stuff. Those use less than 10%.
That "10%" is actually a complete misreading of a "real" estimate.
What was originally meant was that we are CONSCIOUSLY using about 10% of our brains AT ANY GIVEN TIME.
A good portion of the brain is devoted to maintaining autonomous systems like heart beat and breathing, and is always active though unconsciously. Most of the time we never have to think about those functions except when we attempt to control something like trying to slow down breathing after a run despite the body's need for more oxygen.
And of course the other common misinterpretation is that we ONLY use the SAME 10% all the time. This is simply wrong. For example: take sight. Most of the time even with our eyes open we are merely passively intaking what we are seeing, but when we shift to READING other portions of the brain--shape-recognition, language-processing, etc.--become active. Perhaps that item being read reminds us of a past event, so the memory portion of the brain becomes active while the parts involved with reading become more passive. So conscious control may be about 10% at a maximum at any given time, but that control shifts around the brain depending on the functions being calling upon.
If you think about it: there are lots of brain functions that we simply have no need to have control. Being able to have FULL control over your digestive system would be akin to a building manager worrying about his building's plumbing and waste disposal: they should only HAVE to come to that manager's attention when there are problems.
A man goes into the brain-surgeon's for a new brain. The surgeon says, "I've got the brain of a scientist for $1 million or the brain of a politician for $10 million." The man says, "Is the politicians brain superior?" to which the surgeon replies, "No, it has never been used."
Lucy was ok.
I thought the joke, or conceit, of the film is that the audience must turn off even that 10 percent if it is to accept the story.
I thought the joke, or conceit, of the film is that the audience must turn off even that 10 percent if it is to accept the story.
Ribtor posted:Lucy was ok.
I thought the joke, or conceit, of the film is that the audience must turn off even that 10 percent if it is to accept the story.
I just thought of it is a cute film where a hot, but initially ditzy, girl turns into a total badass.
If you see this
You do NOT complain about "percentages of the brain". You just don't. Don't do it.
You do NOT complain about "percentages of the brain". You just don't. Don't do it.
maurvir posted:Ribtor posted:Lucy was ok.
I thought the joke, or conceit, of the film is that the audience must turn off even that 10 percent if it is to accept the story.
I just thought of it is a cute film where a hot, but initially ditzy, girl turns into a total badass.
Personally I thought of "Lucy" as totally unsavable despite having Scarlett Johansson in the title lead.
ukimalefu posted:If you see this
You do NOT complain about "percentages of the brain". You just don't. Don't do it.
I'm wondering what percentage of my brain is thinking about her boobs, and what percentage is thinking about her mouth?
Heavy Metal (1981) A movie I watch once a decade. Very uneven but that's part of what makes it fun. I particularly liked John Candy as Den.
Ribtor posted:Heavy Metal (1981) A movie I watch once a decade. Very uneven but that's part of what makes it fun. I particularly liked John Candy as Den.
I never knew John Candy was in that until now.
ukimalefu posted:Ribtor posted:Heavy Metal (1981) A movie I watch once a decade. Very uneven but that's part of what makes it fun. I particularly liked John Candy as Den.
I never knew John Candy was in that until now.
pretty much the whole sctv cast is in it
TOS posted:ukimalefu posted:Ribtor posted:Heavy Metal (1981) A movie I watch once a decade. Very uneven but that's part of what makes it fun. I particularly liked John Candy as Den.
I never knew John Candy was in that until now.
pretty much the whole sctv cast is in it
All I remember is cartoon naked ladies and cartoon aliens doing drugs
Wallace and Gromit : Matter of Loaf and Death
Usual silly slapstick and bread puns this time. It's a short one like The Wrong Trousers.
Usual silly slapstick and bread puns this time. It's a short one like The Wrong Trousers.
Dazed and Confused
ukimalefu posted:TOS posted:ukimalefu posted:Ribtor posted:Heavy Metal (1981) A movie I watch once a decade. Very uneven but that's part of what makes it fun. I particularly liked John Candy as Den.
I never knew John Candy was in that until now.
pretty much the whole sctv cast is in it
All I remember is cartoon naked ladies and cartoon aliens doing drugs
i've always been a fan of that movie, it's just so canadian
Rogue One
Definitely a cool film, even if it had been partly spoiled for me. It definitely had the old Star Wars vibe to it, though. I know why they had to end it the way they did (and that was one heck of an ending), but it was still a bit of a disappointment. These were some of the better characters I've seen so far in these newer Star Wars films.
Definitely a cool film, even if it had been partly spoiled for me. It definitely had the old Star Wars vibe to it, though. I know why they had to end it the way they did (and that was one heck of an ending), but it was still a bit of a disappointment. These were some of the better characters I've seen so far in these newer Star Wars films.
okay but how awesome was that darth vader bit at the end ...
The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks (2017) on HBO.
The story being told in this movie is mainly focused on the trials that the author of the book, Rebecca Skloot (Rose Byrne), had to suffer while trying to get information on Henrietta Lacks through her family mostly through her daughter, Deborah Lacks (Oprah Winfrey), who was 3 years old when her mother died in 1951. The paranoia depicted through most of the Lacks family is perfectly understandable considering that even as recently as 5 or so years before Skloot started the family was led by a huckster who passed himself off as a lawyer who said he was going to represent the family in a lawsuit for $60 M against Johns Hopkins but instead sued everybody including the Lacks family (so in effect costing the family more money just to get legal settlements even in the family's favor because, of course, the huckster never paid a dime).
To be sure: a lot of Henrietta Lacks' story does get told, but myself being a recent reader of the book I'm not sure if enough of her story gets through to the viewer of this movie. Perhaps it would be sufficient to say--as is literally stated in the movie--that if you have benefited from numerous modern medical breakthroughs ranging from as early as the polio vaccine to stem cell research, then you have Henrietta Lacks to thank.
Oprah does a terrific job in depicting the various manic phases that Deborah went through while Skloot was researching her book. The movie does a wonderful turn of switching from recent times when Deborah finally takes up an invitation to visit some of the researchers at Johns Hopkins while paralleling Henrietta's last time going to the facility (she died there while undergoing cancer therapy).
So recommended, but read the book too.
The story being told in this movie is mainly focused on the trials that the author of the book, Rebecca Skloot (Rose Byrne), had to suffer while trying to get information on Henrietta Lacks through her family mostly through her daughter, Deborah Lacks (Oprah Winfrey), who was 3 years old when her mother died in 1951. The paranoia depicted through most of the Lacks family is perfectly understandable considering that even as recently as 5 or so years before Skloot started the family was led by a huckster who passed himself off as a lawyer who said he was going to represent the family in a lawsuit for $60 M against Johns Hopkins but instead sued everybody including the Lacks family (so in effect costing the family more money just to get legal settlements even in the family's favor because, of course, the huckster never paid a dime).
To be sure: a lot of Henrietta Lacks' story does get told, but myself being a recent reader of the book I'm not sure if enough of her story gets through to the viewer of this movie. Perhaps it would be sufficient to say--as is literally stated in the movie--that if you have benefited from numerous modern medical breakthroughs ranging from as early as the polio vaccine to stem cell research, then you have Henrietta Lacks to thank.
Oprah does a terrific job in depicting the various manic phases that Deborah went through while Skloot was researching her book. The movie does a wonderful turn of switching from recent times when Deborah finally takes up an invitation to visit some of the researchers at Johns Hopkins while paralleling Henrietta's last time going to the facility (she died there while undergoing cancer therapy).
So recommended, but read the book too.
I actually have the book but I nEver got around to reading it. Not yet anyway.
maurvir posted:Rogue One
Definitely a cool film, even if it had been partly spoiled for me. It definitely had the old Star Wars vibe to it, though. I know why they had to end it the way they did (and that was one heck of an ending), but it was still a bit of a disappointment. These were some of the better characters I've seen so far in these newer Star Wars films.
I liked the tall robot.
Ribtor posted:maurvir posted:Rogue One
Definitely a cool film, even if it had been partly spoiled for me. It definitely had the old Star Wars vibe to it, though. I know why they had to end it the way they did (and that was one heck of an ending), but it was still a bit of a disappointment. These were some of the better characters I've seen so far in these newer Star Wars films.
I liked the tall robot.
K-2SO was definitely one of my favorite characters in that film. He was what C-3PO should have been IMO.
maurvir posted:Ribtor posted:maurvir posted:Rogue One
Definitely a cool film, even if it had been partly spoiled for me. It definitely had the old Star Wars vibe to it, though. I know why they had to end it the way they did (and that was one heck of an ending), but it was still a bit of a disappointment. These were some of the better characters I've seen so far in these newer Star Wars films.
I liked the tall robot.
K-2SO was definitely one of my favorite characters in that film. He was what C-3PO should have been IMO.
A little C-3PO, a lot HK-47.