Let's All Go to the Movies

OceanOfMead said:
Honestly, since LurchingBeast mentioned that hot mess of a Devon Sawa film, this year’s Halloween film fest will be Casper and Idle Hands. #basic
Click to expand...
I've watched Idle Hands approximately 10,000 times in my life. It was on one of the movie channels all the time in highschool.

giphy.gif
 
Last edited:
Watched IT Chapter 1 & 2 over the last couple weeks. The first one was alright but Chapter 2 was a meandering mess. Completely loses the main theme of childhood trauma reverberating through adulthood. They also aren't scary in the least. Are these movies made for adults or kids? Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark was better and gets it done with a PG-13 rating.

Chapter 1 - 6/10
Chapter 2 - 4/10
 
www.hollywoodreporter.com

Real-Life ‘Terminator’: Major Studios Face Sweeping Loss of Iconic ’80s Film Franchise Rights

Warner Bros., Disney and Skydance receive copyright termination notices over existing IP, potentially giving other studios an in.
www.hollywoodreporter.com www.hollywoodreporter.com

Interesting article about franchises of the 1980s that are reverting back to their original writers. Apparently they have the right to request (with two years notice) the rights to their script/IP after 35 years. Letters have been sent for the Terminator franchise, Beetlejuice, and Who Framed Roger Rabbit thus far (the studios can then either re-negotiate a deal or the creator gets the rights back and can potentially take the IP to other studios).
 
Joker - 5.5/10

A bleak, twisted, but still quite superficial origin story that will bend the image of the superhero movie for better and worse.

Since we can't talk about Joker without addressing the commentary surrounding it, no, I don't feel this movie is 'dangerous' as certain critics think. For Joker to be dangerous, it would need to have a coherent ideology. It's angry but unintelligibly so. Todd Phillips can't articulate any kind of stance on the surface level questions he raises. I also believe the incels that commentators fear this story empowers lack the self-awareness to identify with certain character traits of this Joker. I would still like to hear Phillips explain the reactions I experienced in the theater. What does he think when some audience members burst into applause at the first homicidal eruption? Should some in the audience be laughing at a mentally ill man completely breaking down? Are little people jokes still funny? What is the difference between being inspired by Scorcese and Lumet and outright stealing from their films?

You have to watch this thing through a thick Disney-fied Marvel lens to see it as shocking or perverse. It's really quite a huge drag the whole way through. Yes, the violence is sudden and vicious and no this is absolutely not a movie for kids. It seems though, that by shoehorning a 70's 'inspired' crime drama into a superhero adjacent studio picture, which after Joker I expect to be a standard practice, you can have the press calling it the most subversive piece of pop culture out there.

Phillips was lucky to get Joaquin Phoenix for a gritty character study. The man is the best actor working today. His portrayal of a mentally ill loser down and out in the slums of Gotham is captivating. The best moments are when Phoenix, the cinematographer, and the score are perfectly in-sync; the scenes capturing his movement in the apartment and bathroom, while unable to support an entire movie, are gorgeous pieces of filmmaking. The problem is and always would be the story. Todd Phillips doesn't have deep thoughts, only basic questions. The Thomas Wayne storyline is total trash. There wasn't even an attempt to write another interesting character so you have great actors like Zazie Beetz and Robert DeNiro with nothing to work with. Bill Camp and Shea Whigham have maybe three lines each.

We were told we would be shocked by the Joker. I left a bit shocked at how vapid it was.
 
17247 More Posts...
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top