The Movie Thread

cheapchampion said:
I saw it is directed by Neil Blomkamp who did District 9, and I was on board.
Click to expand...
That reminds me, I used to screen films based on who the director was. I've stopped habitually checking because I don't recognize a lot of the names now and a lot of the great ones are gone, but a good director is the single best metric for judging a film. I've seen some terrible films with top class actors in them--doesn't matter if the story stinks.

Wasn't there supposed to be a District 10?
 
I watched X recently, a horror movie on Netflix. It was fine. Nothing remotely deserving of the high praise it got, but it was... fine. There may be a bit of wokeness, but that was somewhat offset by what I would consider some Red Pill truth. Regardless, it was just average. Two of the main characters are old disgusting people who are meant to gross you out just by looking at them, and it worked. I had to avert my eyes during one particular scene. I have no interest in being grossed out in that manner.

All this is to say, the movie sets up extremely well for a sequel, which the writer/director must have known in advance because he shot 1 and 2 back to back. I haven't seen 2 yet because I'd have to subscribe to a channel and would rather wait, but I would say it's a good guess that Part 2 is pretty awesome. Part 1 is well-made but just uninteresting outside of how it sets up for the next installment.
 
Rax Moscow said:
That reminds me, I used to screen films based on who the director was. I've stopped habitually checking because I don't recognize a lot of the names now and a lot of the great ones are gone, but a good director is the single best metric for judging a film. I've seen some terrible films with top class actors in them--doesn't matter if the story stinks.

Wasn't there supposed to be a District 10?
Click to expand...

Yeah, I've heard a lot about a sequel. I think the director really wants to do it. I imagine it would require a massive budget as it would involve interplanetary warfare on some level. We'll see. Yeah, if a really good director is on board, I am sold on it way before any actor. To me, District 9 was so good that I'll at least be willing to check out the director's work for a few decades.
 
cheapchampion said:
Finally got the chance to watch My Big Break. It is very difficult to find. If you read about the making of it, it was basically blacklisted by Hollywood. Starting with agents afraid that it will show their clients in the wrong light, but I think in general, it just exposes Hollywood in a movie no other movie has. Anything that Hollywood wants to silence, I'm just automatically interested in.

I eventually found it by an independent seller on Amazon, so it's certainly possible. I had been looking for it for about 7 or 8 years, and just kept checking maybe once every six months or so.

Anyway, I thought it was a really good documentary. It is about five roommates living in Los Angeles, four of whom are trying to become actors (Chad Lindberg, Brad Rowe, Wes Bentley and Greg Fawcett), and one who wants to be a director (Tony Zierra). Zierra covers their lives over the course of ten years, and the work he did is really amazing. He managed to get footage of casting sessions, preproduction meetings, red carpet interviews. It does show Hollywood about as intimately as any movie I've ever seen, both the highs and the lows. You really feel for the actors, and I found myself very much drawn to Greg Fawcett, the least successful of the group, who was nevertheless extremely talented, maybe more than any of the others. Fawcett is also the only Christian of the group, and there are scenes of him in this regard that are very powerful. I do also think Bentley is the son of a preacher, although not entirely sure.

In a nutshell, the movie really is about dreams and goals, and the lengths we will go to in order to keep them alive. I think it's a solid 9.5/10, and for Zierra's sake, I really hope someday this movie gets the release and support it deserves. He put everything into it, and it's just sad to think that so few get to appreciate that.
Click to expand...

The other night I looked for this movie on about 10 "alternative" movie sites. Could not find it! And some of these sites have obscure movies from the 50s, 60s and 70s yet couldn't stock this more recent film from 15 years ago.

Was looking forward to seeing it based on the description. Incredible.
 
GuitarVH said:
The other night I looked for this movie on about 10 "alternative" movie sites. Could not find it! And some of these sites have obscure movies from the 50s, 60s and 70s yet couldn't stock this more recent film from 15 years ago.

Was looking forward to seeing it based on the description. Incredible.
Click to expand...

Isn't it wild? When I first heard about it some years ago, and tried everywhere to find it, it kind of became an obsession to see it. I watched it a second time, and maybe now I'd say it's closer to an 8.5 or 9, but still really good. But the two reasons it stands out are because of it being so difficult to find, giving you that "what are they hiding" interest, and because I don't know of any movie quite like it. It really is an original work.

I would definitely suggest that, if anyone were interested, just keep checking for independent sellers. I checked very infrequently. I'm guessing if i had checked every few weeks, I'd have found it pretty soon. I almost felt bad leaving a review for a movie that people can't just up and watch lol. Kind of seems rude, but it does make for good conversation, and like I said, I definitely do recommend it.
 
I watched Saltburn recently and I would absolutely not recommend it.

It was an aggressively homosexual film littered with demonic imagery.

I don't mean to sound like a granny clutching at her pearls here; I would've tolerated the filth if it was otherwise a good movie, but it wasn't even that.

They changed the bad guy's motives 9/10ths of the way through the film (we were lead to believe he was obsessed with the popular kid at school, but it turns out he's actually obsessed with... the popular kid's house I guess?).

It just felt to me like the writers started a somewhat interesting story, but we're unsure how to finish it.
 
Last edited:
Joost said:
I found a good film to recommend:

Detachment (2011)

Same British director from American History X. Starring Adrien Brody (Pianist). I like the way it portraits how kids will have a bad future when the parents are not present to educate their children.

Trailer:
Click to expand...

A film directed by a jewish man starring another jew lecturing the goyim on parenting ethics?
 
My father kept hyping up the Pianist.

"Yeah bro watch Schindler's List, I cried during it"
Then the movie is 2 hours of white people in fancy suits walking around the street and somehow brutally shooting every Jew they see like it's a sandbox game.

In contrast, Downfall was terrific.
 
God's lonely asperger said:
My father kept hyping up the Pianist.

"Yeah bro watch Schindler's List, I cried during it"
Then the movie is 2 hours of white people in fancy suits walking around the street and somehow brutally shooting every Jew they see like it's a sandbox game.

In contrast, Downfall was terrific.
Click to expand...

Dang dude, I don't know about that one. I think The Pianist is phenomenal. Whether or not one agrees with the history, I'd say it's extremely effective in the "survival" sub genre.
 
Joost said:
I know it is hard for Adrien Brody to hide his jewishness with such nose but it is a good film nonetheless.
Click to expand...
Before becoming the youngest actor to win the Academy Award for Best Actor for The Pianist, Adrien Brody was subject to major industry embarrassment when he attended a press screening of Terrence Malick's 1998 war film The Thin Red Line. Malick, a deeply respected filmmaker — and Christian — had not made a film in 20 years, so there was considerable excitement, with many actors desperate to work with him in any capacity (take a look at the cast and it's a who's who of 1990s Hollywood). Brody had signed on for what he believed to be a major leading role, only to discover at the press screening that Malick had edited his character down to one of barely tertiary significance.

We can spend a lot of time speculating as to why Malick reduced Brody's role to almost nothing, instead centering the film on Jim Caviezel's character. There might've been many reasons. But I do think physiognomy had something to do with it. Perhaps Malick had misgivings about casting someone with Brody's appearance as a "Cpl. Geoffrey Fife."

The Thin Red Line was not a mainstream success in 1998, having been released in the shadow of Steven Spielberg's Saving Private Ryan. But it has an artfulness and beauty that Spielberg's workmanlike picture does not (in an end-of-decade retrospective in 1999, Martin Scorsese named it the second best film of the 1990s). The 1990s were fecund ground for "patriotic" war films: the US had won the Cold War and achieved global hegemony, so Spielberg and other impresarios saw opportunity. Given that Iraq and Afghanistan were only a handful of years away, we must now also wonder what exactly militaristic films like SPR were preparing people for. Malick's anti-war film and anti-"war film" unsettled audiences (including Washington, who got a far more flattering treatment by Spielberg) at a time when militarism and patriotism ran high. Caviezel was too intelligent to fall for it. From a 1998 interview:
"If someone is very linear, Saving Private Ryan will work brilliantly for them," Caviezel said. "The Thin Red Line could have been about invading Guadalcanal, going to capture Henderson (air) field, getting the Japanese off the island - making it as linear as possible.

"But it's not. It's about the condition of the human heart and spirit. It's about the thin red line between life and death, between heaven and hell, between sane and insane. It stays true to that line. It's not really tangible."
Click to expand...
 
Bizet said:
I watched Saltburn recently and I would absolutely not recommend it.

It was an aggressively homosexual film littered with demonic imagery.

I don't mean to sound like a granny clutching at her pearls here; I would've tolerated the filth if it was otherwise a good movie, but it wasn't even that.

They changed the bad guy's motives 9/10ths of the way through the film (we were lead to believe he was obsessed with the popular kid at school, but it turns out he's actually obsessed with... the popular kid's house I guess?).

It just felt to me like the writers started a somewhat interesting story, but we're unsure how to finish it.
Click to expand...
I agree it was a tough viewing and several really gross scenes (bathtub scene was the worst). However, I think despite the perversion and depravity shown in the film, it doesn’t promote or have any woke brainwashing going on of any sort, it makes the audience view that spoiled rich elite Sodom and Gamorra lifestyle in a very negative light. I think even the LGTBQ community of viewers would find that lifestyle and personality quirks of the characters in the film quite negatively. Maybe I’m wrong, would have to read the corrupt critics reviews I suppose.
 
I saw a powerful arthouse film the other day called "The Florida Project."

It's about a single mother and her child who live in an extended-stay hotel a few blocks away from Disney World. The mother is a deadbeat with no job, and no life, and only seems to care about her child as she hustles to get money any way she can to provide for the little girl. It's not glamorizing this lifestyle either. This film combines the innocence of what children see with the harsh reality dealt with by their parents who are down and out and struggling to make a living. And yet at the same time, we see this same life through the innocent eyes of a child who don't know how bad things are for their parents.

The child actor in this film, Brooklynn Prince, is quite good for her young age and Willem Defoe does the usual awesome work as he always does. If you come into this movie to peek into the lives of these characters without judgment, then you may come away impressed with the film.

Here's an actual trailer that doesn't reveal the plot:
 
Last edited:
bubs said:
I agree it was a tough viewing and several really gross scenes (bathtub scene was the worst). However, I think despite the perversion and depravity shown in the film, it doesn’t promote or have any woke brainwashing going on of any sort, it makes the audience view that spoiled rich elite Sodom and Gamorra lifestyle in a very negative light. I think even the LGTBQ community of viewers would find that lifestyle and personality quirks of the characters in the film quite negatively. Maybe I’m wrong, would have to read the corrupt critics reviews I suppose.
Click to expand...
It was a tough watch for me as well, and I think I walked away angry from this film and wondering, why make this at all? I think what annoyed me is that the film does present the wealthy as aloof and very stupid, but the darker aspect for me was how good natured the character was for allowing this loner character to stay at Saltburn. And when he finds out that it's all a lie and that this loner actually comes from a middle-class family who are normal and likable, it seemed like there was a mockery being made of the middle-class as well. This film mocks and derides sincerity in people and portrays them as aloof to everything.

The satanic imagery was a giveaway for me, as well as the obsession with the consumption of bodily fluids. I get that they wanted to portray the character as evil, but when I read that the writer of the film is actually from an aristocratic, very well-to-do family, it made me wonder what the true purpose of this film is.

It's also emblematic of how far we've fallen in the west. The fact that we have films like this rather than aspirational films with characters that people can look up to and be inspired by or take a moral lesson from is very Weimar-ish.

I would say that any sort of lesson or takeaway that I got from this film was that I don't want to aspire to be like anyone in this film. But I only have that perspective because I have a Christian framework to measure this against. But what does this do for people who don't have that framework? What are the moral and societal implications for a film like this?
 
I watched Castaway again for the first time since I was a kid. Man this film sucks! Is it literally just a big FedEx commercial? I didn’t remember any of this. I thought it was quite highly regarded, but it’s really boring and the story threads are woven together in an extremely unsatisfactory way. Doesn’t seem to be any real message or takeaway from the movie. Would have been more interesting if he’d become unhinged on the island and started biting people at the FedEx HQ and stuff and then hunting his former fiancé’s husband. Also, Helen Hunt has a massive forehead and I find it hard to believe that Tom Hanks wouldn’t use his wild story to pick up better looking girls upon his return. The point of the film seems to be “if you get lost on an island for years, presumed dead, then everyone moves on” whoa man!

On a positive note I also watched Брат for the first time. I enjoyed it a lot.
 
Rodion said:
I watched Castaway again for the first time since I was a kid. Man this film sucks! Is it literally just a big FedEx commercial? I didn’t remember any of this. I thought it was quite highly regarded, but it’s really boring and the story threads are woven together in an extremely unsatisfactory way. Doesn’t seem to be any real message or takeaway from the movie. Would have been more interesting if he’d become unhinged on the island and started biting people at the FedEx HQ and stuff and then hunting his former fiancé’s husband. Also, Helen Hunt has a massive forehead and I find it hard to believe that Tom Hanks wouldn’t use his wild story to pick up better looking girls upon his return. The point of the film seems to be “if you get lost on an island for years, presumed dead, then everyone moves on” whoa man!
Click to expand...
Yeah, it was a little heavy on the FedEx advertising but I don't think it ruined the movie.

The message I got was that no matter what your circumstances, you have to move on and live your life as best you can. And that's what the Tom Hanks character did, even though he lost the love of his life in the process of trying to stay alive.

I will say, I've never liked Helen Hunt as an actress as I think she comes off bitchy in nearly everything I've seen her in. Thankfully, she only played a small part in the film.
 
Last edited:
Rodion said:
I watched Castaway again for the first time since I was a kid. Man this film sucks! Is it literally just a big FedEx commercial? I didn’t remember any of this. I thought it was quite highly regarded, but it’s really boring and the story threads are woven together in an extremely unsatisfactory way. Doesn’t seem to be any real message or takeaway from the movie. Would have been more interesting if he’d become unhinged on the island and started biting people at the FedEx HQ and stuff and then hunting his former fiancé’s husband. Also, Helen Hunt has a massive forehead and I find it hard to believe that Tom Hanks wouldn’t use his wild story to pick up better looking girls upon his return. The point of the film seems to be “if you get lost on an island for years, presumed dead, then everyone moves on” whoa man!

On a positive note I also watched Брат for the first time. I enjoyed it a lot.
Click to expand...

It's pretty obvious to me that the film shows us that no matter how much of a rich kid you are and you think you have it all that you might just lose it all some day and you just got to get on with it and learn new skills. I've had to do that (and still am) during the scamdemic.

I still like it.
 
Anyone here watch The Last Emperor? I got the 3 hour "director's cut" and it's just been BORING. Apparently most of the scenes in this cut were added for a TV series. My father loves the movie (he watched the theatrical cut), but I feel like it has way too much filler and I had to pause at 1 hour in.

Should I have just downloaded the original cut? I think I'm in it to win it now. Too late to change.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top