Movie News and Discussion

The original post: /r/movies by /u/lurker_bee on 2024-12-29 14:18:54.

The original post: /r/movies by /u/prossnip42 on 2024-12-29 14:15:01.

I am specifically talking about the liquid metal scenes of Robert Patrick where the T-1000 reshapes itself after being severely injured. Those CGI effects, let's be honest, look completely fake, like they do not hold up well. But, where this works to the movie's advantage is that the reshaping CGI doesn't have to look real. The T-1000 is a machine trying to imitate human form so it having terrible CGI as it reshapes itself back is actually incredibly thematic to the movie, the character, and the overall story. I don't know if that was James Cameron's intention but whether intentional or not it's one of the rare instances where the outdated CGI actually helps make a movie hold up through time instead of hindering it

The original post: /r/movies by /u/redfoottttt on 2024-12-29 14:07:06.

I was planing to play the Jurassic World Evolution 2, so I think I'll first do re-watch the movies franchise for lore and story before going right in, and boys&girls, The Lost World Jurassic Park making me wanna quit the idea so badly after the ending. It was so bad and so wrong in so many level compared to the Jurassic Park 1993. I can't believe it was directed by the The Wizard of Hollywood, Steven Spielberg and even written by the the same people as the Jurassic Park 1993.

So I think I'll skip the Jurassic Park 3 and go right to Jurassic World, with hope that it going to heal me from this traumas. Wish me luck.

The original post: /r/movies by /u/hunterocean on 2024-12-29 13:52:46.

The original post: /r/movies by /u/Mst3Kgf on 2024-12-29 13:49:28.

Much like Syndrome in "The Incredibles", this character should easily work in a "serious" live-action superhero movie. And while Hal/Titan isn't portrayed as dangerous/evil as Syndrome is (he never tries to kidnap or kill children, at least not on camera), he's still a very disturbing concept, as in "What if an incel type got superpowers?" His behavior towards Roxanne was creepy from the start (the guy has a cutout of her over his bed with "GOOD NIGHT HAL" added to it, yikes), but once he gets superpowers, it just gets to another level. Especially once she gently turns him down, because then his sense of entitlement and rage at rejection causes him to go to some very dark places.

The sequence where he shows off his powers by taking her flying especially shows this off. The scene is of course a parody of the classic Superman and Lois flight sequence in the original film, but in that, Superman invites Lois to fly and after she accepts, he gently and gracefully takes her on the flight while always being mindful of her safety. Hal/Titan just grab Roxanne against her will and takes her flying around while constantly putting her in danger so he can "save" her. Because while Superman genuinely cares for and respects Lois as a person, to Hal/Titan, Roxanne is just an object he's owed. And once he doesn't get his prize, like a classic example of an incel, he can't fathom it (he's a nice guy AND he has powers now!) and he turns violent. You can also justifiably see how terrified Roxanne is of him on that scene alone; if he almost killed her trying to "save" her, she knows how much damage he could do if he was intentional about it.

"Megamind" as a whole is an unexpectedly more complex and well-made film than many might expect (I can see why its reputation and popularity have grown in recent years), but having a genuinely unsettling villain concept is one of its best features. If Syndrome personifies toxic fanboy culture, Hal/Titan is the worst case scenario of the guy who won't take "no" for an answer.

The original post: /r/movies by /u/Davis_Crawfish on 2024-12-29 13:19:05.

Honestly, Van Damme should have played Balrog instead of Guile. He was completely miscast and he would have been a much better choice for Vega. His athleticism and good looks made more sense for Vega and I wish Van Damme, at that time, had played a bad guy. He had more range than he believed and I could see him do Vega justice.

But that isn't the part I was most pissed about. Guile should have never been the lead, he's more of a strong supporting character and he certainly should have been played by someone like Brad Pitt, not Van Damme.

The most offensive part was sidelining Ken and Ryu into this comedic duo. They're pretty much shown as losers who are easily fooled and go through the movie like bumbling idiots. So disrespectful. I'd rather they had not used them if this project was only intended to be a Van Damme vanity project.

There were two characters I feel they got right. Raul Julia is the MVP as Bison, Julia chewed the scenery and made Bison menacing and fearsome but also smooth and fascinating. And I also feel Ming Na as Chun Li was the perfect casting. She was fantastic as Chun Li and the movie was surprinsingly faithful about Chun Li's backstory. The only drawback to me was that she wasn't given more fight scenes but her scene with Bison was worth it.

The original post: /r/movies by /u/bkat004 on 2024-12-29 12:31:00.

It may be sexist to take out the Males from a List of Greatest Lead Cinematic Performances of All Time - and yet, here I am doing so.

It's only fair.

Brando in "On the Waterfront" has become so mythologized that there's no point in continuing that conversation, let alone all the other Male performances in history that were influenced and spawned by him, especially when I'm wanting here, to focus only on female performances.

Before I tell you my three, let me just say, that I haven't analyzed any films in the 21st century, because I really need more than that to evaluate them. But that's just me.

In addition, thanks in part due to Brando, any performance from the Golden Age of Hollywood always seems too stiffling and wooden for my tastes - even from the great Bette Davis and Katherine Hepburn.

Don't forget, Lead not Supporting.

Anyway...

3 - Isabelle Adjani, Possession, 1981

2 - Jodie Foster, The Silence of the Lambs, 1991

1 - Gena Rowlands, A Woman Under the Influence, 1974

Thank you

The original post: /r/movies by /u/JayBailey79 on 2024-12-29 12:17:56.

I don't understand why Sixteen Triple Eight got so much hate. I watched it over the weekend. Tremendous movie. Conversely, the critically acclaimed (always a red flag 😅) "comedy" Anora was not entertaining at all. I know they are two different genres of movies for two distinct audiences, but still... 🤷🏾‍♂️

The original post: /r/movies by /u/Monkey_Paralysed on 2024-12-29 12:14:21.

The original post: /r/movies by /u/acosmicworm on 2024-12-29 11:55:55.

Hey everyone!! Happy new year.

I'm looking for film podcasts that tend towards critique, ones that that talk about theme and reception as well of course, but also structure, camera work & filmic language or tropes or inversal of tropes and all that jazz. I haven't found something so far that actually addresses several aspects of a film (historical context, audience reception, possible influences, but also how the language of the film shapes and reinforces -- or doesn't-- the narrative). I guess it boils down to just film critics or buffs that actually know what they're talking about dissecting movies for fun :) And maybe, if I can be a bit greedy, a film podcast that has women hosts?

The original post: /r/movies by /u/CardinalNollith on 2024-12-29 11:45:41.

I was just watching it the other night with my 72-year-old father and both of us expressed confusion at several points of the movie. Eventually, when Powell and Ms Cooper started singing at each other, my dad just outright exclaimed "this is weird!". I tried to defend it but on reflection, I have to agree.

I suspected it was an adaptation of a novel - certain sections seemed like abridged versions of what would have been much longer sections of a novel.

After it was over, I googled it and confirmed it was in fact an adaptation. But what I also saw was that the film was poorly received on release, and only became a respected classic in later years. But honestly, I think I agree with the original reception. It seems clumsily abridged, and ham-handed in its characterization (at several points characters seem compelled to deliver soliloquys to express thought processes that a better director would have communicated through visual storytelling instead, with the movie ending on Ms Cooper directly addressing the audience). It's no surprise it was the director's first and only movie. I just don't see what the appeal is.

Can people tell me what I might be overlooking, here? And is it STILL considered a classic, or was that only the Roger Eberts of the world who thought so? Have many people even seen it these days?

The original post: /r/movies by /u/Full-of-Bread on 2024-12-29 11:45:21.

I have the following steaming services:

• Netflix
• Max (HBO)
• Amazon Prime (with MGM+ addition)
• Peacock
• Apple TV+

I like to have more movies than I’ll ever have time to watch downloaded so I have options.

Minimizing sex scenes would be helpful since I’m on a plane and feel awkward when those play with others around. Other adult themes are no issue.

The original post: /r/movies by /u/Agreeable-Divide-150 on 2024-12-29 09:01:01.

I doubt any of these thoughts are original. So a common complaint/statement about these types of movies (By which I mean stuff like Pacific Rim or San Andreas or more recently something like Venom, anything that revolves around a few big VFX scenes) is that nobody really cares about the 'main' storyline that takes up most of the runtime of the movie, and they just wanna see the big fight/climax. And to an extent this is true, nobody was watching 2012 for the marital drama or Deadpool to see if he stays with his girlfriend, but to me the studio heads have taken the wrong message

While I'm sure it's not new, a lot of new movies seem to take an approach of "Nobody's watching for this part, so lets just not bother trying" for non-action plot. All the pieces are thrown at our feet, the expository lines run through so that the movie feels like a checklist, and then we get to the action. Here's a couple examples of what I mean, spoilers for the stated movies ofc

Godzilla vs Kong: The title is what people paid for, so I get why they wouldn't elaborate on everything else, but I honestly don't even get what was going on. The classic 'Exploit nature' capitalist villains want to capture Kong and the Kaiju to do evil, so they take him from the island with some girl who taught him sign language which is never explained. They go to the center of the earth and decide to shoot at kong just so he can kill said villains so they're gone, mechagodzilla is defeated by pouring alcohol on its controls and I end up so confused I don't even understand who's doing what or why. This one might just be my shoddy memory, but my point is you end up too confused by the carelessly thrown together plot to enjoy the show

Kraven (Spoilers): Just saw this one so my thoughts are fresh, here we have another symptom of a carelessly produced plot, boredom. Superhero movies have so many cliches that they can be hard to avoid, but that's also why you need to try. Kraven gets his partner on the other side of the law to trust and agree to help in a two minute conversation, we get the title drop, they mention the time they met as kids, why they do what they do. It's all very bare bones and feels like the producer checking off a list for the scene "These people need to team up, every letter is a dollar out of your paycheck" feels like the motivation. There's no fun moments of their characters bouncing off eachother or naturally existing in the world, they meet, sync up, and that's it. Every scene feels like it's being unwelcomly stapled on before the execs can get back to what the people want.

2012: Another thing these plots that fill out the screentime can do, and why people most want rid of them IMO, is the fact that they have so little to do with the actual plot. In this movie most of the melodrama isn't about the rich being the only ones surviving armageddon, or about how a subatomic particle mutates, it's about a divorced couple with kids and all that mundane bullshit. It's about how John Cusack's book sucks, about how his kid still wets the bed, about how his ex-wife's new husband seems to be taking over his role for his kids, nobody gives a shit, we wanna see Woody Harrelson explode.

So to sum up my unhinged and probably incorrect in a few aspects rant, people hate the plots of action packed movies more often than not because they add nothing, take a lot from what the film could be using that time for, and often aren't thought out. The issue is that execs suck at understanding feedback, and assume the winning bet is to not try, which is how we end up with expository dialog and hollow characters. For a big budget movie that does the plot decently well, lets look at The Day After Tomorrow:

For one, the drama is simple, relatable, and easy to understand. The main character is the son of the B plot's main character, he's stuck in a frozen flooded New York, and the B-team needs to save him. This means the plot adds to the movie (The dad gets into danger on the way, there are reasonable stakes that cause tension etc) and stays on fixed on the issue people paid to watch. A lot of the other drama and character moments come naturally from the situation (The lady cuts herself during the flood, so they need to go out and fight wolves made of bad CGI to get medicine for her) The scenes where we breathe and know the characters get the same benefit, it's mostly them talking about the disaster, not about all the weird bullshit they talk about in The Happening for instince. The end result is that it feels like a movie about characters experiencing a disaster, not a disaster happening around some actors after they spent an hour talking about their mortgage.

The funniest part is that by not bothering to try to give their movies a plot, the execs shoot themselves in the foot. It's not like the people who never want to see the quiet parts of an action movie are gonna show up now that those parts suck, they're just gonna do what they always do and wait for the action clips to show up on youtube six months after release. Movie execs seemingly took the advice of people who'd prefer a few entire genre's of film be turned into 15 minute clipshows, and the result is they've made some shitty movies.

The original post: /r/movies by /u/Early-Piano2647 on 2024-12-29 08:08:39.

I can’t imagine how amazing they would be, if they managed to squeeze it into John Williams’ lifetime as well. I know he wanted to direct WWC years ago but it morphed into Deep Impact. And Morgan Freeman is still patiently waiting for RWR. So… what’s the holdup, Spielberg? You saw how great that other sci-fi story you passed up was (Interstellar). Go out and make more!

The original post: /r/movies by /u/Its-From-Japan on 2024-12-29 07:47:24.

I tried watching a new movie a day, but crapped out about three months in

Week 1

Iron Claw 9/10, Cop Land 5/10, Barbie 7/10, Tmnt 2023 8/10, Southpaw 6/10, Us 7/10, Nope 6.5/10

Week 2

Johnny Dangerously 6.5/10, Ladybird 7/10, A Quiet Place 8/10, A Quiet Place 2 7/10, The Last Duel 7.5/10, Palm Springs 8/10, Friday the 13th 5/10

Week 3

3:10 to Yuma 7/10, Pacific Heights 5/10, Edge of Tomorrow 9/10, Skeleton Twins 7/10, The Game 7/10, Death of Stalin 6.5/10, Footloose 7/10

Week 4

Bull Durham 9/10, Uncle Buck 8/10, Source Code 8/10, Oblivion 5/10, Wallace and Grommit Wererabbit 9/10, Dirty Dancing 6/10, The Hurricane 6.5/10

Week 5

28 Weeks Later 4/10, Eraserhead 4/10, My Neighbor Totoro 10/10, Scanners 7/10, Pop Star 8/10, Wargames 10/10, Coraline 9/10

Week 6

Police Story 8/10, Nimona 10/10, Glass Onion 8/10, All Quiet on the Western Front (2022) 7.5/10, Dune part one 8/10, Night Swim 3/10, Appaloosa 6/10

Week 7

Stand by Me 10/10, Silver Linings Playbook 8/10, The Abyss 8.5/10, Highlander 6/10, Warm Bodies 7.5/10, The Equalizer 6/10, Guillermo del Toro's Pinocchio 8/10

Week 8

R.I.P.D. 2/10, LEGO Movie 2 7/10, Equalizer 2 5/10, Equalizer 3 7/10, Buffy the Vampire Slayer 2/10, Life of Brian 8.5/10, Sleepless in Seattle 8/10

Week 9

Ralph Breaks the Internet 7/10, Chip 'n Dale Rescue Rangers 7/10, Fruitvale Station 8/10, The Guard 7/10, Ballad of Buster Scruggs 5/10, Desperado 6/10, Leo 7/10

Week 10

Dune Part Two 8/10, Point Break 9/10, Holdovers 8/10, Big Fan 7/10, The Menu 8/10, Flashdance 4/10, Teen Wolf 4/10

Week 11

Horrible Bosses 2 6/10, Men at Work 6/10, 9 to 5 8/10, Alien ³ 5/10, Elysium 6.5/10, Snowpiercer 9/10, Psych the Movie 7/10

Week 12

Psych 2: Lassie Come Home 6/10, The Guilty 7/10, Psych 3: This is Gus 6/10, Train to Busan 10/10, The Change Up 5/10, Dream Scenario 7/10, Journey to the Center of the Earth 3/10

Week 13

Crazy Stupid Love 8/10, Pig 8/10, The Descent 9/10, The Conversation 9/10

Restart

Empire of the Sun 9/10, Deadpool Wolverine 8/10, Signs 8/10, Sing Sing 8.5/10, Bullet Train 5/10, Alien Romulus 8/10, Beetlejuice 2 6/10, Halloween (original) 8/10, Howl's Moving Castle 8/10, Godzilla Minus One 9/10, Blood Simple 7/10, Bob's Burgers Movie 7/10

The original post: /r/movies by /u/Disastrous-Beat-9830 on 2024-12-29 07:18:47.

Yesterday I solved a movie mystery that has been bothering me on and off for thirty years.

I have a distinct memory from my childhood of an image from a movie. In it, a man is bathed in light and his head is being forcibly tilted back by a device. Something has been shoved in his mouth and an enormous needle is slowly descending towards his eye, and it's quite clear that he is absolutely terrified. I have no other context for this image -- it's like I was walking past the television while it was on. I have no idea how I came to see this image; it's not the sort of thing that I would have been allowed to watch as an eight year-old and nor is it the sort of film that my parents would have watched, either.

Yesterday, thanks to a random suggestion from the YouTube algorithm, I found out that that image comes from the climax of the 1993 alien abduction film Fire in the Sky. From the film's Wikipedia article:

The aliens hold the struggling Walton to a platform in the centre of the chamber, stripping him of his clothes and covering him with an elastic material that completely restrains him. Despite Walton's terrified screams, the aliens clinically subject him to a torturous experiment in which a gelatinous substance is forced into his mouth, a tube is inserted down his throat, his jaw is locked open and a device is stabbed into his neck. Overhead equipment then begins lowering towards him. As a needle-like ocular probe extends towards his exposed eye, Walton suddenly reawakens from his flashback in a doctor's office.

Having rewatched the scene on YouTube, I discovered that this is absolutely the image that I saw. The details don't line up properly, but that can be attributed to misremembering something that I probably shouldn't have seen in the first place. Still no idea how I came to see it, but I have my theories.

So, do you have a personal movie mystery like this, and if so, how did you end up solving it.

The original post: /r/movies by /u/Early-Piano2647 on 2024-12-29 07:01:13.

For those who don’t know, the score released by Jon Brion (which is unusually John Williamsy) sadly features the original track he wrote for the climax scene where Norman confronts Aggie. They later replaced it with a much better, INCREDIBLY POWERFUL musical piece (I’m assuming also by Bruno). But for some unknown reason, likely petty legal bullshit, there is no official release for this track. The best quality of it you can hear is by watching the actual movie.

Why????!!! Can we please reach out to Laika??? I need it in my film scores playlist!!

The original post: /r/movies by /u/BearBearChooey on 2024-12-29 06:41:20.

I’ve been spending some of my time off around the holidays watching some 2000s comedies. Old school, Wedding Crashers, Dodgeball, Talladega Nights. Man they were all so good. Maybe it’s just the nostalgia in me, but I still laugh everytime I watch these and enjoy them so much on rewatch.

What are some of your favorite 2000s comedies?

The original post: /r/movies by /u/Clean-Cupcakes on 2024-12-29 06:23:48.

Recently in the 2020s, there has been a new statement to promote animation on par with live action, famously said by Guillermo del Toro around to the release of his superb Pinocchio adaptation, pushing the medium forward to be on par with live action. I don't think it needs to be said that animation is seen primarily as only for kids in the west, there's been discussed to death for decades. Toro's statement was meant to highlight how animation is a medium, not a genre.

While his intentions were good, because he made a film that did something unique and not just another generic boring kiddie flick with cheap voice acting and tiresome plots, I think the way people started to use it to talk about how animation is cinema is poor. The obvious example is how the statement is only used to promote the mainstream animated films from the likes of Disney, Pixar, DreamWorks, Sony, and Illumination. Not to say most of these studios can't do great animated films in the past or even present, but at the same time, I find it tiring and lukewarm how a lot of people only bother with these kids movies and nothing beyond. How many times have you seen someone post the phrase of how animation is not for kids, but only use multimedia franchise movies for children, and not something like a It's Such a Beautiful Day or Mary and Max. Even this year, you probably seen more people talk about derivate trash like Kung Fu Panda 4, The Garfield Movie, Despicable Me 4, and Moana 2 over modern classics like Memoir of a Snail, Flow, Look Back, and Chicken for Linda that push the medium forward with their unique voices and styles.

Anyone else feel this statement, per how it's used online, is holding back animation from being taken more seriously in the west? It's just pathetic and baffling to see "Animation is Cinema" describe the latest painfully average DreamWorks production and not a film by Satoshi Kon. The term of "Animation is Cinema" is just the animation version of "Video Games Are Art" from before.

The original post: /r/movies by /u/bkat004 on 2024-12-29 06:19:13.

Donald Glover's "Atlanta" was so revolutionary. I never thought the modern African American experience could be expressed so - hilariously weirdly.

As Donald Glover said, he wanted to show "Atlanta" as if it were directed by David Lynch or the Coen Brothers. And it worked.

I've been a big fan of eccentric cinema directors, for a long time: Michel Gondry, Wes Anderson, Spike Jonez, Todd Solondz as well as Lynch and the Coens.

That's why I'm more than delighted to see that that specific absurdist point of view, from African American writers and directors is becoming more popular:

Sorry to Bother You, 2018

American Fiction, 2023

The Book of Clarence, 2023

They Cloned Tyrone, 2023

Bad Hair, 2020

Day Shift, 2022

Project Power, 2020

The Blackening, 2022

Any others I'm missing ?

The original post: /r/movies by /u/Piratedking12 on 2024-12-29 06:10:31.

In Bruges is on of my favorite movies. I think this and 7 psychopaths, also from Martin McDonagh are unbelievably underrated movies. In Bruges is a near perfect movie to me. Every line, ever scene is important and comes back. Even small things like Chloe saying she needs to make a call after her date with Ray, her calling off robbing him, or the fat Americans climbing the tower, comes back and is important. The only thing that has bothered me for years is why Ken leaves Rays gun in the hotel drawer when he was getting ready for Harry to arrive. As far as Ken knew, Ray was gone. The only thing I could ever think is maybe he thought he and Harry would get in a gunfight and end up back at the hotel, but it’s the only thing in the movie that seems like a total contrivance for the plot later, and not something that seems naturally set up.

The original post: /r/movies by /u/johngalvin09 on 2024-12-29 06:07:24.

I really enjoyed the first third of 'Shadow in the cloud' probably largely because my imagination was filling in the blanks. That warm coat feeling of a main protagonist being "locked into" a secure position and then the voices without filling in the details.

I'm looking for other movies in a similar vein.

Already watched Pontypool but cannot find anything similar with that eerie, I'm alone, the horror is without, but the horror is coming for me - kinda vibe. Does anyone have any suggestions?

I'm also playing "Killer frequency" which is kinda feeding into this vibe.

The original post: /r/movies by /u/bulbchanger on 2024-12-29 05:59:32.

I used to buy movies on DVD when I really liked them but stopped when Netflix first rolled around. With movies moving towards streaming and subscriptions I can pay for but lose access to, I am valuing physical media again but am unsure what format is moat future proof.

DVD, Blue Ray, 4K... Which disc is going to have affordable means of using them availible the longest? I'm no snob on quality, DVD is just fine for mw. I just want to be able to easily get a new player 30 years from now if need be.

The original post: /r/movies by /u/sidroy81 on 2024-12-29 05:48:00.

The original post: /r/movies by /u/Few_Interaction1327 on 2024-12-29 05:14:20.

Why when I'm watching a movie, do I need to hear the actors smacking when eating? I'm one of those that when I hear eating sounds like smacking, gulping, lip smacks, it drives me MAD. Can Hollywood just get onboard and agree that there is no reason we need to hear Leonardo, Brad Pitt, or Geroge Clooney smacking their food? We can see they are eating, we don't need to hear it. It bugs me as much as, I need subtitles to hear what they are seeing, but OMG WHERE'S THE REMOTE to turn down the orchestra in the scene change.