NEW: List some movies you've watched recently. Theatre, rental, TV... and give a */10

[DigDog]

Andor S2 E7, E8, E9

Started a bit slow but really good.

E7 can be a 6.. but E8 is a 8 and E9 a 8.5

 

[DigDog]

i will never get tired of reminding everyone that these reviewers are ragebait when you disagree with them, and then everyone goes awfully quiet when they you're in agreement.
not a dig at you @Indus just more of a broad ATOT thing.
We've had some pretty strong words when it came to things like Doctor Who.

 

[Kaido]

OT but as a Star Wars fan, this is a neat insight:

 

[William Gaatjes]

I should mention that i rate movies with less stringent views when it comes to science fiction or horror. Cause it still is fiction.
I have seen the movie : " ASH".
Was a fun movie that constantly is trying to mislead the viewer, i would say 7/10

edit : forgot to add the horror genre.

 

[zinfamous]

Just finished Breaking Bad with the GF. It's my third time watching it and her first. It's really a top-tier show - up there with MASH, Firefly, and Columbo. There isn't a bad episode, not even a mediocre one. At worst there are slow spots. Going to watch El Camino next. I've been warned that Better Call Saul is way slower, so I'm not sure if I'm going to subject her to that.

It's also better, so there's that. The first season...sure very slow and can get obnoxious, but it has its own merits. Episode to episode though, as it goes on, is just so so good.

 

[zinfamous]

OT but as a Star Wars fan, this is a neat insight:

I mean, all film is a visual medium foremost and above all else. If the film can't be carried visually then it's generally a failure anyway. If dialogue is absolutely essential, then you should be reading the book. That isn't to say dialogue isn't important or useful, but to claim that Star Wars or any film is special because it was designed to be visual, is simply saying "I made a film!"

I don't think this is very insightful. It just points out that a lot of people don't understand film.

 

[DigDog]

I mean, all film is a visual medium foremost and above all else. If the film can't be carried visually then it's generally a failure anyway. If dialogue is absolutely essential, then you should be reading the book. That isn't to say dialogue isn't important or useful, but to claim that Star Wars or any film is special because it was designed to be visual, is simply saying "I made a film!"

I don't think this is very insightful. It just points out that a lot of people don't understand film.

i don't disagree with the sentiment, but there are cinema works that use theatre as a basis, and so rely more on dialogue than anything visual. Of course they are different products, but one isn't necessarily better than the other.
Example: The Man From Earth.
Done on a budget of $200k. One set. Six speaking roles, 8 actors total.
really, this film should be a mandatory watch for everyone, to see what you can do with no money when you have a good script.

 

[Kaido]

I mean, all film is a visual medium foremost and above all else. If the film can't be carried visually then it's generally a failure anyway. If dialogue is absolutely essential, then you should be reading the book. That isn't to say dialogue isn't important or useful, but to claim that Star Wars or any film is special because it was designed to be visual, is simply saying "I made a film!"

I don't think this is very insightful. It just points out that a lot of people don't understand film.

I also like how much of a difference voices make:

 

[William Gaatjes]

Anyone seen "Better man" , starring Robbie Williams ?

That was a smart move how they made that movie with the special effects. The special effects prevented for sure that otherwise the movie would be called "yet another coke snorting and pills popping musician documentary" movie.
It really moves you. I'll give it a 9/10.

 

[Kaido]

KUNG FURY 2 TRAILER AWW YEAH!!

Michael Fassbender

Arnold Schwarzenegger

David Hasselhoff

10-minute preview (cartoony blood warning). It's been stuck in legal limbo for awhile now so who knows the ETA...

 

[William Gaatjes]

Amazon prime has a 2 part series called "Methanol"

It is sort of a reversed breaking bad but then with alcohol and methanol mixed.
The storyline seems to be based on a large scale complot but a true story about what happened in 2012 in Czechia, Europe.

Kind of reminds what happened in the USA (illegal basement ethanol brewer) when alcohol was forbidden during the 1920s - 1930s ?

 

[Dr. Detroit]

The Dark Divide - 6/10 - Now streaming on Prime

David Cross stars in this docu-drama about a butterfly/moth expert who goes for a long hike to fulfill his grant agreement and promise to his dying wife.

Director filmed it as true to the book as possible in the same locations in Washington that were highlighted in the book. They even went so far to utilize the same camping equipment he had.

I quite enjoy these outdoorsy find yourselves in nature flics and this one was just OK but its a compelling story, doesnt drag too much, and really excels at highlighting the naivete of this guy before the hike and during the hike.

 

[thestrangebrew1]

So the last 3 episodes of Andor S2 comes out tonight correct? If so I can binge tf out of it this weekend!

 

[Kaido]

So the last 3 episodes of Andor S2 comes out tonight correct? If so I can binge tf out of it this weekend!

 

[Newbian]

So the last 3 episodes of Andor S2 comes out tonight correct? If so I can binge tf out of it this weekend!

It's a shame they are ending it after only 2 seasons instead of the original 5 as they had planned.

Season one being slow and low views and the cost per episode killed it.

 

[gorobei]

can you imagine if each year bby got a full season to develop and foreshadow, instead of 3 episodes. i would have solved a ton of the issues people have with arcs feeling undeserved. syril could have been fully fleshed out, bix could have more to do, mon could have more time to make the speech hit harder.

 

[Muse]

The Royal Tenenbaums (Wes Anderson, Gene Hackman, Bill Murray, Danny Glover, Ben Stiller, Gwyneth Paltrow, 2001) 2/10

Watched over the last 2 nights, an episode in my private Gene Hackman reprisal. I hate it. It's disingenuous, the characters are almost always thoroughly bored, often explaining their emotions without demonstrating them, occasionally demonstrably angry and acting strangely. Director Wes Anderson is fixated on presenting one striking composition after another. He uses a ton of cinematic tricks that surprise, new ones coming pretty constantly. The characters are typically far too well and carefully dressed, with each in complete contrast to everyone else, and you get the impression that Anderson is toying with you. He uses familiar music by famous artists, analogous to his choices of famous actors for his characters. The overall effect is vapidity. It's supposed to be funny. There are some themes that are a bit daring but that doesn't redeem this pathetic waste of 110 minutes.

 

[Muse]

i don't disagree with the sentiment, but there are cinema works that use theatre as a basis, and so rely more on dialogue than anything visual. Of course they are different products, but one isn't necessarily better than the other.
Example: The Man From Earth.
Done on a budget of $200k. One set. Six speaking roles, 8 actors total.
really, this film should be a mandatory watch for everyone, to see what you can do with no money when you have a good script.

Or My Dinner with Andre (1981), the brilliance of dialog being the point.

Budget	$475,000
Box office	$5,250,000

5 characters:

• André Gregory as Andre
• Wallace Shawn as Wallace "Wally" Shawn
• Jean Lenauer as Waiter
• Roy Butler as Bartender
• Cindy Lou Adkins as Coat-Check Girl (uncredited)

 

[Indus]

Andor S2 E10 easily 9.5
Andor S2 E11-12 hmm 7.. 7.5

 

[DigDog]

The Royal Tenenbaums (Wes Anderson, Gene Hackman, Bill Murray, Danny Glover, Ben Stiller, Gwyneth Paltrow, 2001) 2/10

Watched over the last 2 nights, an episode in my private Gene Hackman RIP at 95 maybe 2 months ago. I hate it. It's disingenuous, the characters seem pretty much always bored, often explaining their emotions without demonstrating them, occasionally demonstrably angry and acting strangely. Director Wes Anderson is fixated on presenting one striking composition after another. He uses a lot of cinematic tricks that surprise, new ones coming pretty constantly. The characters are typically far too well and carefully dressed and you get the impression that Anderson is toying with you. He uses familiar music by famous artists, analogous to his choices of famous actors for his characters. The overall effect is vapidity. There are some themes that are a bit daring but that doesn't redeem this pathetic waste of 110 minutes.

ouch.

To be fair, i sort-of .. agree with you. But i am obviously less offended than you are, because i put the film as a middle-of-the-road effort, rather than "a waste of 110 minutes". I don't dispute any of your observation, i just don't think they are that impactful on a film which is primarily visual. "artistic".

 

[zinfamous]

The Royal Tenenbaums (Wes Anderson, Gene Hackman, Bill Murray, Danny Glover, Ben Stiller, Gwyneth Paltrow, 2001) 2/10

Watched over the last 2 nights, an episode in my private Gene Hackman RIP at 95 maybe 2 months ago. I hate it. It's disingenuous, the characters seem pretty much always bored, often explaining their emotions without demonstrating them, occasionally demonstrably angry and acting strangely. Director Wes Anderson is fixated on presenting one striking composition after another. He uses a lot of cinematic tricks that surprise, new ones coming pretty constantly. The characters are typically far too well and carefully dressed and you get the impression that Anderson is toying with you. He uses familiar music by famous artists, analogous to his choices of famous actors for his characters. The overall effect is vapidity. There are some themes that are a bit daring but that doesn't redeem this pathetic waste of 110 minutes.

One of my favorite Wes Andersons, I've watched this dozens of times. You people are strange. I guess you just have to get into how depressed this generational, aspirationally-aristocratic family is. Everyone is very down in this film, except for Gene Hackman who is the source of all of their psychosis, so I guess you just have to embrace the mood. It's a beautiful film. One of my favorites. I don't think Wes Anderson was as good again until Grand Budapest or Isle of Dogs.

 

[DigDog]

Everyone is very down in this film, except for Gene Hackman who is the source of all of their psychosis

see, what's funny is that THIS is what i didn't like about the film when i first reviewed it. I thought it was a questionable story that somehow wanted me to feel miserable alongside the other characters. I did love the performances and the visual style, so i gave it a 7/10, but i thought "who am i supposed to identify with, here?"

 

[sactoking]

The Royal Tenenbaums (Wes Anderson, Gene Hackman, Bill Murray, Danny Glover, Ben Stiller, Gwyneth Paltrow, 2001) 2/10

Watched over the last 2 nights, an episode in my private Gene Hackman RIP at 95 maybe 2 months ago. I hate it. It's disingenuous, the characters seem pretty much always bored, often explaining their emotions without demonstrating them, occasionally demonstrably angry and acting strangely. Director Wes Anderson is fixated on presenting one striking composition after another. He uses a lot of cinematic tricks that surprise, new ones coming pretty constantly. The characters are typically far too well and carefully dressed and you get the impression that Anderson is toying with you. He uses familiar music by famous artists, analogous to his choices of famous actors for his characters. The overall effect is vapidity. There are some themes that are a bit daring but that doesn't redeem this pathetic waste of 110 minutes.

I think people that like Wes Anderson think he's pretty much the best ever. Everyone else thinks he's pretty much the worst. I'm the latter.

 

[Muse]

I think people that like Wes Anderson think he's pretty much the best ever. Everyone else thinks he's pretty much the worst. I'm the latter.

I'm with you. I've watched maybe 1/2 dozen of his films. All just once and I only rewatched this because I'm watching a bunch of Gene Hackman's films now. Now, I did kind of like Moonrise Kingdom (2012), so figure I'll rewatch that someday. But The Royal Tenenbaums? NEVER AGAIN!

I get that Anderson was going for a sense that each shot was an artistic creation, could be viewed as a still image in that regard. But this is a movie with characters, plot, personal interactions, unfolding story. Wanting your audience to view each moment as a still frame while all that was going on, on top of the fact that nearly everybody was acting without inhabiting their characters just infuriated me.

 

[igor_kavinski]

I think people that like Wes Anderson think he's pretty much the best ever. Everyone else thinks he's pretty much the worst. I'm the latter.

French Dispatch was great art.

Darjeeling was weird.

Asteroid City, hmm...could've been really great but it was too slow and pretty weird.

Fantastic Mr. Fox impressed me a bit in the first 20 minutes but then I lost interest for some reason (maybe I was tired) and then didn't get around to finishing it.

Probably saw a bit of Tenenbaums and got bored I guess. I don't remember much of it.