Jump to content
Forums forums


  • Content Count

  • Joined

Community Reputation

1.5k Excellent
  1. I just binged this because it's absolutely insane! I actually do remember the clip of Joe on John Oliver's show, and I remember thinking how bizarre it was, but the whole story is so much more strange. I think the only decent person might have been Joe's "Campaign Manager" (I always find my political consultants in the ammo section of Walmart). I feel bad that he has to live with seeing a guy, high out of his gord, accidentally shoot himself. I suppose it's lucky Travis didn't shoot him. Even Rick Kirkland's hand's aren't clean, but at least he admit's it. Even the other employees at the zoo, aren't completely absolved of the sins of what was done to those animals...but I also can't completely blame them since Joe prayed on them as much as the animals. While I think Carol's goals are certainly more laudable than Joe's, I actually think they're two sides of the same coin. I think Carol enjoys being the center of attention just as much as Joe and that's a huge part of why she does what she does. I agree with her, that big cats shouldn't be bred in captivity (at least not privately by gun toting rednecks), but I don't think she's actually a good person. Also as Joe pointed out, I don't think the conditions she keeps her animals seem any better than anyone else featured. Though they at least don't get exploited to pick up chicks or shot when they get too old. And as crazy as it sounds...I really do think that she might have had something to do with her first husband's death. I mean how hard would it be to get a bunch of big cats to make a body completely disappear... I'm not shedding any tears about Joe being in prison. Though as far as the charge of conspiracy to kill Carol, I agree that it seems like he was set up and it makes no sense that the man hired to do actually do the murder and the other conspirators (Jeff) aren't in prison. I hope everyone get's theirs eventually. Especially Jeff and Antle, since they are more frightening because they're smarter than Joe. Also did anyone else find Joe's music kind of catchy...I might find myself humming I saw a Tiger later...
  2. Yes Depp is essentially stomping around the kitchen slamming things and eventually (what sounds like) throwing a glass and then grabbing her phone. This might be a YMMV sort of thing, but I wouldn't cal it a "mild" tantrum. Like I said,, I have never in my adult life ever behaved like that. I certainly wouldn't respond in that manner to my partner asking what was wrong. I would say that Depp's behavior certainly reveals how toxic their relationship was and definitely is toeing the line of emotionally and verbally abusive even if he's not physically abusive in that clip.
  3. Well domestic violence doesn't have to always be physical. Depp's behavior in that clip seems fairly abusive to me. To be fair, I've never been married, but in my life I've never argued with any partner, friend or family member in that way and I have a pretty good temper. There's absolutely no reason to slam things, throw things (you can hear a glass breaking) or grab things (even if he did think he was being recorded). That's abusive behavior. And I would hope it's not how typical married couples argue. I'm not saying she's an angel, but Depp's behavior in that video is wildly inappropriate. This! It's entirely possible for both people in a relationship to be abusive towards each other. I think we like to believe that there's always one victim and one perpetrator, but that's not always the case.
  4. It's funny, I would actually like to go my local art house theater more, but I find it to be a far worse experience than at my local multiplex. People show up late, the sit right and front of you (and unlike the mall the floor is pretty flat) and talk. And I've also frequently had people react really strangely to movies. I saw the Whedon version of Much Ado about Nothing there and a couple was laughing at the scene where Leonato yells at Hero and wishes that she was dead...I know it's a comedy but that scene isn't supposed to be funny. It's not the only time I've had people react strangely to movies there, but it is the one that stands out the most. I'm always baffled because you would think people who go to that kind of theater would be film buffs....I'm fairly lucky that most even indie arty movies I wan't to see wind up in the bigger local theaters where I generally have a pretty good experience.
  5. Proclone

    Cats (2019)

    Well I would have lost money on that bet...I went to see this because the reviews were hilarious and I have Regal unlimited and it didn't cost me any extra money. It is both somehow so much worse and so much better than I could have ever imagined. I said the quote above never ever in a million years thinking they would have tap-dancing cockroaches in a mainstream big budget movie. My jaw just about hit the floor when I saw them. In fact I figured despite the horrific CGI that the movie would retool Cats in a pretty significant way, tone down the weirdness of the musical and give it an actual plot and probably make it pretty boring. Well they certainly did none of those things. I mean it doesn't make it a good movie, but it makes it an experience for sure. I agree with Lindsey Ellis that the Old Grumby Cat sequence was one of the most disturbing things from the start. First of all there were several lingering shots of Rebel Wilson's crotch...Why? I have no idea. Then come the mice, which weren't super horrifying until you realize they're played by children and Jenny threatens to eat them...That's right folks, Rebel Wilson threatens to eat small children. The the travesty continues with the tap dancing cockroaches...which she does eat (though mercifully they are played by adults). It's got to be one the most trippy, weird, off-putting sequences ever put to film. I will give them the CGI is slightly less disturbing then it was in the trailer. I mean it's not good, but it's no longer the stuff of nightmares. And I will give everyone who wasn't a big name star props for going full cat. I mean they look like theater students who's instructor made them do animal exercises, but they did commit. Everyone who was a big name star seemed to forget they were in a movie where they were playing a cat...Except perhaps Sir Ian. Judy Dench certainly did. Jennifer Hudson (who did sing the hell out of Memory), seems to have no idea that's she's supposed to be playing a cat, she even looks slightly confused when Dench goes to touch heads with her at the end. I think they forgot to tell her she was actually in Cats, and just asked her if she could swing by and sing a couple songs. Rebel Wilson and James Cordon, simply appear to be in the SNL skit version of Cats. And the less said about Idris Elba the better. I've loved him since he was Stringer Bell in the Wire, but he was bad in this, really really bad. And not really in a fun way. I agree that Taylor Swift did the best musical number (and of the big names looked most like a cat). Though it seemed and odd choice to make her sing in a British accent, which you only hear on certain words anyway. I get it was set in London, but why ask her if you're going to make her do something so out of her wheelhouse. I didn't hear an accent with Derulo. I will also give major props to Francesca Hayward who not only danced her butt off, but has a beautiful singing voice. I hope this gets her work in an actually good musical. This is not a good movie, I repeat this is a very bad movie, but it is fun. And if you have the money to waste (or a rewards card or the like) you should see it in theaters, just to say you did.
  6. While it looses something on the page, the way Regina King says, "Motherfucker," tickles me immensely.
  7. I just got back from seeing this. I thought the acting was good, and I enjoyed the bits that focused on the family and their bickering, but overall I'm slightly disappointed. I thought the middle of the movie dragged quite a bit. And I hate to be that person, but as a nurse I can say the plot actually made no freaking sense. Spoiled in case you haven't seen it yet, or don't care to have your suspension of disbelief ruined. Also it's long and ranty. I usually let medical errors go in TV and movies, but when the entire plot hinges on one and they get it so completely wrong, well it hampered my enjoyment to put it mildly.
  8. I'm pretty sure it's Tom Mison under the mask so, either he's just another "Mr. Phillips," albeit one with more...self awareness, or some reflection of Manhattan. It certainly would be interesting if the clones all looked like Jon did before the accident that made him Manhattan.
  9. It seems appropriate that Guy Pearce is in Blood Shot, since it seems like it's Memento....but as a shitty action flick.
  10. That scene will haunt me too. And for some reason it being the little boy who was in Room makes just a little bit more disturbing...I'm not sure why. I think that scene was necessary though to show just how evil those things were. I mean up until that point, other than the scene with the little girl in the beginning, it's rather easily to like Rosie and her whole vaguely evil discount Stevie Nicks vibe she had going on. But that scene really showed what those things were, brutal, evil, something that had to be stopped. I quite like the movie. Though I admit for not caring much for the title either. Nor have I read the book it's based on (I have read The Shinning though). I don't recall Danny being called "Doc" by either his parents or Dick in the movie or the book The Shinning though. Either way, I thought the performances were really strong. McGregor is really good, and I thought him and the girl that played Aba had good chemistry. Rebecca Ferguson was delightfully creepy throughout. I thought they did a good job at making this it's own thing as well. Obviously being back at The Overlook brought you back to The Shinning, but unlike a lot of reboots/sequels of late it didn't seem to be coasting on just nostalgia to get you invested. It wasn't screaming, "Remember that thing you liked, look we got it!" Overall I really enjoyed it.
  11. I agree the the baboon attack had a WTF quality. It also didn't really work with Pitt's rant about it being filled with rage and how he understood that rage. They were animals, it wasn't rage it was fear. I more fitting action set piece that would have worked better with the themes of the movie would have been a crew member of that ship who flipped (maybe after the stress in being in space so long) and killed the rest of the crew and then the captain of Roy's ship. Then Roy's rant about recognizing that rage in himself and his father would have made a heck of a lot more sense. And the death of the crew was pretty pointless, they were going to do the exact same thing Roy was going to do, blow up his father's ship. Him sneaking on board and getting them killed in no way changed the end result and it was apparently his intention at this point to blow up the ship so why did he care who did it? Why did we spend so much time with them if they were going to die in such an anticlimactic way to begin with? Like I said in my other post there was obviously a set up to something between Roy and the Co-Pilot, but it's never paid off. And the staging of that entire sequence was odd.
  12. I agree, and I'm not a huge fan of Interstellar, but this was just dreadful. It was a really hard sit to be honest. I just got back from seeing it, the cast was good, and I'm a sucker for a drama set in space, so I thought it would be a decent matinee. Boy was I wrong. This was boring, preachy and pretentious. It think's it's being super deep, but isn't really and unlike Interstellar (which I could also argue is preachy and pretentious) it didn't at least have cohesive message. Interstellar was trying to tell a story about love and sacrifice. This jumped all over the place, humans are the problem (that's sure groundbreaking)...the sins of the father are visited on the son...don't close yourself off to your emotions...Jesus movie, pick a message and a theme and go with it, stop jumping around. And despite having good visuals, it had serious pacing issues and there fundamental problems with plotting and payoff. For example you have McBride take control of the ship when landing on Mars because the captain freezes. He then says that he won't tell command about the incident. One would assume that would payoff in someway. The captain helps later to return the favor, or something, but that character just really anticlimactically dies later. It was filled with really unnatural stilted dialogue. And the narration...don't get me started on the narration. I was this close to screaming, "Shut the fuck up," at the screen after the 47th episode of unnecessary narration. I'm honestly not someone who is bothered by narration (I know some people are). But this was excessive to the nth degree. Dear film makers, this a visual medium, you really need to live by the axiom "show don't tell." Especially don't tell what felt like the character's every fleeting thought. At one point McBride says, "he's scared," in reference to the co-pilot of the ship he's on. You don't need a voice over for that! Tell the actor he's supposed to be scared and let him act it. That is what you paid him for. I felt more like I was listening to an audio book (and not in a good way) then watching a movie.
  13. I just got back from seeing it. I get why a lot of people aren't going to care for it, but I enjoyed it. I didn't even really feel the length too much (well my bladder did, but that's another story). It's not as scary as the first one, but it's so much better than the second half of the miniseries focusing on the adults. I think the nature of the story is that the part about the kids is just so much more compelling than the adults. And there's really no way to completely overcome that, but I do think that this works as a satisfying conclusion to the story. Skarsgard is once again fantastic as Pennywise. Hader was also excellent a Richie and added a lot of pathos to a character that could be really annoying if not handled carefully. All the performances are really good. Though I was sad that Mike seems to be just there again. They could have used the opportunity to expand his character. And I agree the Steven King cameo was cute. As was the running joke about the endings to Bill's books sucking (something King get's frequently accused of). I would have liked to have seen some resolution of what happened between Bill and his wife, though. In the book she gets taken by Pennywise as well...and well the less said about that the better in my opinion, so I was glad that was cut from the film. But there seemed to be no resolution to whether they were still together at the end.
  14. I just binged all of this over about two days. I overall enjoyed it. Though I do admit this season felt more like a prologue then it's own story, YMMV. I am glad to hear that's it's already been renewed for a second season, as like I said, this season just seemed a little bit like it was placing the chess pieces on the board. This seemed especially evident in the last episode which didn't seem to end, so much as stop. I'm hoping the second season focuses a little less on Philo and Vini though. I don't dislike them and honestly, Bloom and Delevinge have decent chemistry, I just find to be pretty much the least interesting thing about the show. If we must have star crossed lovers, I much prefer Agreus and Imogen. Which is surprising because I was all ready to hate Imogen when she first appeared, both because the character seemed like a vapid racist rich girl at first blush and I'm not a huge fan of Tamzin Merchant. I really didn't care for her in the Tudors. That being said, does she have some sort of fountain of youth, because she doesn't look any different then she did then (and yes, I realize she was fairly young then, but still). I quite liked their romance and felt it was compelling. And I'd never thought I'd be saying this about a sex scene that involved a half-goat man, but it was fairly hot and sweet. I think Agreus as character torn between two worlds of his own choosing is a more interesting and fresher story to tell than Philo's version. I'm kind of sad that this doesn't seem to be based on any books. I appreciate the restraint the show used in its info-dumping and for the most part just let the world unfold as we were watching as opposed to spoon-feeding us the background. But I would like to know more about the world and the politics that led us to the point at which we enter the story.
  15. Also to be fair to Alex he also didn't know that Danny had helped Grace and Charity had shot him. I'm guessing he assumed that Grace killed Danny too....and then he walked in on her beating his mother's face in. Yeah, Alex is a douche, but he did seem to love his family, turning on Grace seemed to be in character as he decided to protect what family he had left. The car being reported stolen isn't the part I found to be the plot hole, Stevens sits up just as Grace pulls away in the car. We know he has a cellphone, I assume he called "Road Assist" shortly after. The car being operational again is a plot hole, with those kinds of services you generally can't call and say, "Opps found the car, it was parked in the drive all along, could you turn it back on." They would typically require the police to arrive before they would allow the car to be operational again.
  • Create New...

Customize font-size