The Movies Thread

[BojackHorsefella]

I feel like Gyllenhaal was kind of an ironic choice for awhile, especially after Donnie Darko, but I think it was around the time of Prisoners, Enemy (both of which I have not seen) and Nightcrawler (WHICH WAS AMAZING) that audiences started to accept him as better than average.

[Crewe]

I feel like Gyllenhaal was kind of an ironic choice for awhile, especially after Donnie Darko, but I think it was around the time of Prisoners, Enemy (both of which I have not seen) and Nightcrawler (WHICH WAS AMAZING) that audiences started to accept him as better than average.

but that's my thing; is he?
Just a pointless observation by me lol

[BojackHorsefella]

He definitely was in Nightcrawler, and I've heard the same about the other two (even from kiddo, who is a harsh critic).

[Crewe]

The Dirt

I wasn't doing anything and this popped up on Netflix so I thought id glance it at and see how Netflix portrays Motley Crue.
Turns out its an almost 2 hour VH1 like documentary. Characters break the fourth wall, ironically at times to tell you this part of the film was made up or a certain pivotal character was left out to move the story along.
This film touches on the main peaks and valleys of their run, and sometimes does give the casual viewer a pov not necessarily known by those that weren't around then or don't follow the band.
In the end, its kind of fun but I grew up with the Crue coming to life and all that jazz so its probably different for me. It would do little more than wet the appetite for the casual fan to know more because its not that in depth, as it can't be really, I mean, its a rock and roll career spanning decades.
And just an FYI, there's a bit in here about the controversy from their song Shout at the Devil and I can tell you, it was quite fun debating the meaning and lyrics with the supposed Christians back then during the uproar.

If you're a Crue fan then you've probably already read the book, if not, see the flick. If you're not a Crue fan but a rock n roll fan, see it if its raining outside.

[Crewe]

The Highwaymen
Kevin Costner and Woody Harelson

I've been sucked in by Netflix again, although this time is much better.

Costner and Harrelson portray legendary Texas Rangers Frank Hamer and Maney Gault who were already noteworthy prior to gunning down Clyde Barrow and Bonnie Parker.
I had forgotten this film was due out and knew little of it other than the subject matter, I tend to stay in the dark on films I wish to see, but after, I like to read what others thought and Ill get to that in a minute.
This is the other side of the story, the one of the media darlings, the modern day Robin Hood's that were Bonnie and Clyde.
The Highwaymen rears the popularity and adulation Bonnie and Clyde received only to stamp it out firmly and quickly. We view them through the eyes of the law and the eyes of the victims of these road warrior criminals.
You have to talk romantically about B & C when telling their story, because it was true, however, in the past, its always been at the expense of the law.
Creating heroes, which is what Mickey and Mallory Knox were satirically representing. Notably, Arthur Penn's classic, Bonnie and Clyde wit Faye Dunaway and Warren Beatty was at the forefront of retelling this story in the mainstream although I doubt many who see this film will even have a clue there was another Bonnie and Clyde film, much less one that cemented the public's fascination with the murderous couple.
Costner and Harrelson are marvelous together and I consistently find Woody to be a vastly underrated and overlooked actor. He simply nails every part he choose to take.
As for Costner, it always amazed me how he always, always, seems to land such plum roles. Never really a fan of his, sans Bull Durham early on, but I guess I just have to admit he's a good actor.
While we follow these two as they trail the other, more infamous duo, we learn of their history, who they are, the Texas Rangers and the moral reasons for their demise, initially. (It's interesting, read up on it; most resigned as an unseemly corrupt governor was elected)
Barrow and Parker are rarely seen, and even when we do, its from a distance, or, we get a good look at the elegant Bonnie Parker's shoes as she walks up to a fallen officer to finish the job at point blank range. This was, I thought, a terrific effort to not change the potential likability or characteristics of the two, but to tell their story essentially without them being a part of it, in a distracting manner if you will.
The cinematography is wonderful although the sprawling vista we see on screen may be overdoing it just a bit, but it works. I love the art direction, depicting an era accurately is always plus, and directing on the whole The pacing was good, despite a just over two hour run, and the story always interesting.
As with any biopic, some liberties are taken for dramatization, but not much here. Well, as much as I know anyway. Although the Texas Rangers and Bonnie and Clyde are huge interests of mine, sadly, I can't say I've read enough on them to be wholly familiar with everything depicted here.
In any event, see this film, I really liked it but I realize many don't. And about that....

As I noted earlier, afterwards, I read other reviews and it seems people are put off at the idea how this film is a counter argument to Arthur Penn's feature. Apparently everything in this film is to denounce everything stated in the Penn film. Not that it was a story in its own right that absolutely needed to be told, but that its a shot for shot counter argument to the 1967 story. A heavy handed shame on you, society, for porting Bonnie and Clyde as heroes, shame!
That's not what the film says at all, although there is that

Spoiler: show

scene at the end where Woody literally says, "shame on you." Yea, that could have been directed at the camera, but the context of the scene is him watching an entire town rush the car with the two dead icons in it in order to grab a lock of hair, or cut off a trigger finger, so yea, shame on you.

Is it a statement about our mores and social behavior like Penn's masterpiece? You tell me.
I can see by looking online Im low man here and that's fine, but I tell you it's a good film.

[TheNorm]

Thanks, was looking forward to seeing this and your reviews typically fall along similar lines as mine. Might have to check this out on a day when some sportsball event or work isn't consuming my time.

[rollntider]

The Dirt

I wasn't doing anything and this popped up on Netflix so I thought id glance it at and see how Netflix portrays Motley Crue.
Turns out its an almost 2 hour VH1 like documentary. Characters break the fourth wall, ironically at times to tell you this part of the film was made up or a certain pivotal character was left out to move the story along.
This film touches on the main peaks and valleys of their run, and sometimes does give the casual viewer a pov not necessarily known by those that weren't around then or don't follow the band.
In the end, its kind of fun but I grew up with the Crue coming to life and all that jazz so its probably different for me. It would do little more than wet the appetite for the casual fan to know more because its not that in depth, as it can't be really, I mean, its a rock and roll career spanning decades.
And just an FYI, there's a bit in here about the controversy from their song Shout at the Devil and I can tell you, it was quite fun debating the meaning and lyrics with the supposed Christians back then during the uproar.

If you're a Crue fan then you've probably already read the book, if not, see the flick. If you're not a Crue fan but a rock n roll fan, see it if its raining outside.

Cool been looking forward to checking it out.

[BojackHorsefella]

https://io9.gizmodo.com/a-new-clown-prince-rises-in-the-first-teaser-for-joker-1833749728


On the one hand, I'll probably end up seeing it because I'm a sheep and I go to the comic book movies when they release. I even saw Venom (I REFUSE TO SEE MORBIUS UNLESS THE REVIEWS ARE SOMEHOW AMAZING WHICH THEY WON'T BE).

This whole project has sounded weird from the start, and the trailer certainly didn't convince me that it wasn't, but I still just don't understand why? I don't know, it certainly can be good, best thing it has going for it is Joaquin Phoenix as the Joker does seem like a perfect match.

[Crewe]

Thanks, was looking forward to seeing this and your reviews typically fall along similar lines as mine. Might have to check this out on a day when some sportsball event or work isn't consuming my time.

yea, you will have to remember to tell me what you think if you ever see it.

Cool been looking forward to checking it out.

It's an easy entertaining watch

[Crewe]

https://io9.gizmodo.com/a-new-clown-prince-rises-in-the-first-teaser-for-joker-1833749728


On the one hand, I'll probably end up seeing it because I'm a sheep and I go to the comic book movies when they release. I even saw Venom (I REFUSE TO SEE MORBIUS UNLESS THE REVIEWS ARE SOMEHOW AMAZING WHICH THEY WON'T BE).

This whole project has sounded weird from the start, and the trailer certainly didn't convince me that it wasn't, but I still just don't understand why? I don't know, it certainly can be good, best thing it has going for it is Joaquin Phoenix as the Joker does seem like a perfect match.

I don't understand what your questioning? I didn't know much about it, but the trailer interested me and Im sure Ill see it, not at the movies, but Ill certainly take a look, unless it just gets Suicide Squad type reviews

[BojackHorsefella]

I guess I don't get why we need a Joker movie, especially one covering an "origin," and I'm very curious as to what Todd Phillips does with this. It stands outside DC's cinematic universe, which, fine, I can accept that that it's a one-off movie, which is something we haven't seen much for superheroes these days outside of maybe Hellboy or Venom lately.

But Joker? Are we supposed to empathize with Joker that he becomes one of the leading kill-count villains because he was...bullied? Are we going to get a reason, or is he going to just snap one day (which has always been my own interpretation because, it's kind of the point of the Joker).

I don't know, I just....it's a weird concept, making a Joker movie, placing it either in the 70s or just doing a visual homage to Scorsese and that 70s time period, and I'm really curious to see what it ends up being because it seems like it might be unlike anything we've seen in the realm of comic book movies, or it could be an utter trainwreck.

[Crewe]

I guess I don't get why we need a Joker movie, especially one covering an "origin," and I'm very curious as to what Todd Phillips does with this. It stands outside DC's cinematic universe, which, fine, I can accept that that it's a one-off movie, which is something we haven't seen much for superheroes these days outside of maybe Hellboy or Venom lately.

But Joker? Are we supposed to empathize with Joker that he becomes one of the leading kill-count villains because he was...bullied? Are we going to get a reason, or is he going to just snap one day (which has always been my own interpretation because, it's kind of the point of the Joker).

I don't know, I just....it's a weird concept, making a Joker movie, placing it either in the 70s or just doing a visual homage to Scorsese and that 70s time period, and I'm really curious to see what it ends up being because it seems like it might be unlike anything we've seen in the realm of comic book movies, or it could be an utter trainwreck.

I can understand that, I just didn't delve into it that deeply, just taking on the film itself.
Secondly, that's what Im wondering as well.

[Crewe]

Behind the curve

Netflix doc about flat earthers and their savior, Mark Sargent, an able bodied middle aged man who lives with his mom.
The desired outcome probably wasn't humor, but this film just cracks me up, at least in the beginning.
This crew did a pretty good job of being objective for the most part, but, sometimes, it seems, they just couldn't help but to insert some logic, which obviously sailed straight over the heads of these guys.
Towards the end, it really becomes a sad commentary about these folks, at least to me. Don't get me wrong, it's still funny as hell, especially the last experiment, but it could have been flat earth, it could have been why pumpkins aren't really orange, it could have been the conspiracy against round popsicle sticks, literally anything as long as its something these conspiracy theorists can cling to in the warmth of each others company.
Flat earth just happened to be Sargent's vehicle of choice.
This guy, I mean you can almost see his orgasms on screen as he deifies himself to the film crew and his followers.
The gotcha moments are jaw dropping, literally, and his creepy, almost predatory like pursuit of Patricia Steere is a cringeworthy arc you probably don't want to see, but it's such a great flavor to this snow globe idea, you can't look away.
You must give this a look because the film itself is quite well done and as I said earlier, fair for the most part, they just let Sargent et al drone on, and they gladly oblige, giving us this intellectual look in to the society of flat earth.

Ok Im kidding, but they do peer in to the flat earth society.

[Rigg44]

It was very good.  The final experiment was priceless. Like all conspiracies or nutball ideas, no matter the evidence presented they will not budge from their beliefs.  To do so would mean having to redefine themselves.   

[Crewe]

It was very good.  The final experiment was priceless. Like all conspiracies or nutball ideas, no matter the evidence presented they will not budge from their beliefs.  To do so would mean having to redefine themselves.

Thats why it's so sad. To me, its not about the earth being flat. It's so these socially awkward, lacking or anxious types can all be together because they have little or no healthy relationships. Cue Mark Sargent

That ending was absolutely top notch!