What movies have you seen recently?

[ProfessaPackMan]

Re: What movies have you seen recently?

^That **** felt like a Comedy watching it lol

[Gotmadskillzson]

Re: What movies have you seen recently?

Plane - 8 out of 10.

I see Gerald Butler is taking the Liam Neilson approach to movies. Make the same type but just change the setting.

[Blzer]

Re: What movies have you seen recently?

Cocaine Bear

Funny and gruesome. I almost would've liked to see what they could've done with a lesser budget (more practical work) or a bigger budget (more impressive visuals), but I went in assuming it was done with less than what we got. Many characters and some I liked to follow more than others. Elizabeth Banks has grown from her directorial debut of Pitch Perfect 2.

Skinamarink

As an experiment, I respect it. From a cinematic/narrative standpoint and 100 minutes of runtime, I don't really think this works. This executed its Creepypasta lore much better than other movies that do too much with it though, like the recent Slenderman. Less is definitely more, though I feel there's a line that goes both ways and this may have gone too heavily in the other direction for mainstream audiences. I'm just glad that a movie like this exists and that more movies like this can get theatrical exposure. A $15k concept making $2 million in the box office ain't a bad way to go.

[tarheelguy4736]

Re: What movies have you seen recently?

Ant Man and the Wasp: Quantumania

Wife and I went and saw this over the weekend. I have to say, I was pleasantly surprised by the film. Honestly, I enjoyed the first two probably more than other people because it was more light hearted and Paul Rudd is a fantastic actor in my opinion (and apparently never ages).

For this one, I kind of enjoyed the more darker tones throughout with the usual lightheartedness that Ant Man brings. Overall, I would have to say this is one of my favorites of the Marvel movies since Endgame. Absolutely dumbfounded at the overwhelming negative reviews of the critics, but I never go off the critics because most of the time they are wrong (but thats another rant for another day).

I am looking forward to seeing where Marvel goes from here with Kang and the rest of the Marvel Universe. I also geeked a little bit at the final post-credit scene. That one stood out more because

Spoiler

I just finished re-watching Loki and glad to see the tied it in with the second season of Loki.

[lowpaiddonkey10]

Re: What movies have you seen recently?

Ant Man and the Wasp: Quantumania

Wife and I went and saw this over the weekend. I have to say, I was pleasantly surprised by the film. Honestly, I enjoyed the first two probably more than other people because it was more light hearted and Paul Rudd is a fantastic actor in my opinion (and apparently never ages).

For this one, I kind of enjoyed the more darker tones throughout with the usual lightheartedness that Ant Man brings. Overall, I would have to say this is one of my favorites of the Marvel movies since Endgame. Absolutely dumbfounded at the overwhelming negative reviews of the critics, but I never go off the critics because most of the time they are wrong (but thats another rant for another day).

I am looking forward to seeing where Marvel goes from here with Kang and the rest of the Marvel Universe. I also geeked a little bit at the final post-credit scene. That one stood out more because

Spoiler

I just finished re-watching Loki and glad to see the tied it in with the second season of Loki.

Big fan of Lilly since Lost. Gotta check this one out.

[Jolly Roger]

Re: What movies have you seen recently?

Watched that Noah movie with Russell Crowe.

They took out 2 of his 3 son's wives, so there's only 1 son with a wife. There's no indication that the wife of the 1 son will also have children with the other 2 sons. In fact, they heavily imply this won't happen.

Then at the end, Noah tells them all to go forth and repopulate the Earth. And I'm like...with who!? The 1 son and his wife have 2 daughters. They could have some sons later maybe, but then what, those siblings will marry each other? No good.

Now if Son #1's wife also had children with Son #2 and #3, then all those kids could maybe make a go of it. But otherwise, how is this all going to work?

Bottom line, it's tricky repopulating the Earth with just a few people. They'll be more inbred than peanut butter.

*high Christopher Moltisanti voice* what I'm saying is.....

[Caulfield]

Re: What movies have you seen recently?

...Bottom line, it's tricky repopulating the Earth with just a few people. They'll be more inbred than peanut butter.

welp, that explains why people are how they are today.
and yep, I'm even gonna start blaming Noah for Facebook, Tweeter, Tik-Tok, and whatever else ya got

[Blzer]

Re: What movies have you seen recently?

Marcel the Shell with Shoes On

Stop it.

Just stop it.

Adorable, timeless, and its profundity is overwhelmingly heartwarming. 80 minutes of earnestness, joy, and wonder. There is an affecting presence of poignancy that I didn't expect on a theatrical level for this little film/mockumentary. Perhaps a bit of hyperbole, but to the right person viewing this could lead to some serious introspective soul-searching.

[Blzer]

Re: What movies have you seen recently?

Creed III

I definitely liked it a lot, but I'm a little torn.

This is the first thing I've seen Jonathan Majors in, and now I'd like to rush out and see the new Ant-Man film as well as rent Devotion. Although a late-bloomer, this guy has some great onscreen presence and his character was written well as a foil to Adonis Creed. Speaking of which, Michael B. Jordan was also great, and he directed himself to be so as well. As this film takes place probably ten years after Creed II (or so it seems), you can see the maturation in the character and the amount of reserve that he is able to display, and the development really stands out when you compare it him in the first Creed film.

MBJ's directing on the other hand takes an interesting approach. I don't feel his style envelops the same maturation that the characters take on, specifically in the fight scenes. He really seemed inspired to give an anime-like visual element to the fights, whether it was in the slow-motion, angles, sound effects, backdrop usage, or anything of the sort. It was undoubtedly cool, but there is a lesser tangibility to boxing that I don't feel when I watch it compared to Creed and Creed II. Basically, although I don't want to become a boxer at all, the first two films would have me leave the theater and feel like I'd want to work out and take on the world in the ring, kind of like how early Fast & Furious movies would make me compelled to want to race the streets. Creed III did not give me that feeling, and they also directed in such a way that every hit felt hard, but only certain hits landed harder because "they decided it so," and I couldn't differentiate one from the other. Creed and Dame had different fighting styles for sure, but you didn't get a sense that trainer conversations between rounds led to an adaptation in the fights, nor did you feel they were depleting in strength or health. So, the fights were cool but a bit of a wash when it comes to getting a good grip on them, and I think that is a directing fault. Otherwise, I think MBJ had a very competent eye for certain shots, and outside of some pacing issues the characters left me very engaged.

There definitely are pacing issues, though. Side plots that are introduced and don't go anywhere or lead to very little payoff, long breaks between fights or training whatsoever, scenes that end abruptly or are left on the cutting room floor without understanding what was to follow, and despite the less than two hour runtime it somehow felt longer than either other Creed film which was well more than two hours in length. It also had a couple of moments that I suppose were supposed to surprise us, but the moment they were introduced I knew where they were going with it. Maybe I should give myself credit for that and not take it away from the film, though.

This movie was very good at being a Creed movie, though. It doesn't live under Rocky's shadow anymore. At the heart of it is a personal Creed story, from his background only and not Rocky's. Stallone doesn't need to be in these films to cement my need for liking it or wanting to see it. It may draw some inspiration to previous Rocky films (like I see Creed II as a Rocky IV clone and Creed III has some Rocky III semblance), but MBJ can thrive on his own with this character whether he does more films in this franchise or not. In fact, although this movie lives in the Rocky film universe and you are aware of it, you also feel this world within that is built by returning boxers, trainers, etc. from previous films and how they connect together. It's like an inner circle that is earned through the previous films and gets you to believe that Creed has lived and thrived in it during this time. This was a genuinely strong aspect that they can continue on with to keep me invested down the line. The score only reminded us of Rocky a few times, otherwise it was often accompanied by a soundtrack with frequent n-word usage (the beats were cool though).

So, did I think the film was good? Absolutely. Do I think it has its shortcomings? Yes, particularly seeded by a first-time director (a lot of it was style choice and that is subjective, but I believe other parts were faults). Am I going to get this on UHD? You betcha. Where does it rank for me among the three Creed films? At the bottom, but not by a lot. Would I go out and see a Creed IV? On opening weekend, but I'd also be satisfied if they decided there wasn't more story to tell either and call it right here. Would I recommend that you see it? On your own time, but after seeing the first two Creed films then yes.

[Gotmadskillzson]

Re: What movies have you seen recently?

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/r1SVuZg5aMs" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Ambush - 8 out of 10. Was it historically accurate ? No, but I liked it for what it was, which a movie about the origins of the tunnel rats in Vietnam.

[NoleFan]

Re: What movies have you seen recently?

I watched "M3GAN" and "Nope" too weeks ago.

[lions67]

Re: What movies have you seen recently?

Marcel the Shell with Shoes On

Stop it.

Just stop it.

Adorable, timeless, and its profundity is overwhelmingly heartwarming. 80 minutes of earnestness, joy, and wonder. There is an affecting presence of poignancy that I didn't expect on a theatrical level for this little film/mockumentary. Perhaps a bit of hyperbole, but to the right person viewing this could lead to some serious introspective soul-searching.

I have no idea what this is, but your write up for it is exceptional and now I am going to find out and watch this.
Thanks!

[ProfessaPackMan]

Re: What movies have you seen recently?

Creed III

I definitely liked it a lot, but I'm a little torn.

This is the first thing I've seen Jonathan Majors in, and now I'd like to rush out and see the new Ant-Man film as well as rent Devotion. Although a late-bloomer, this guy has some great onscreen presence and his character was written well as a foil to Adonis Creed. Speaking of which, Michael B. Jordan was also great, and he directed himself to be so as well. As this film takes place probably ten years after Creed II (or so it seems), you can see the maturation in the character and the amount of reserve that he is able to display, and the development really stands out when you compare it him in the first Creed film.

MBJ's directing on the other hand takes an interesting approach. I don't feel his style envelops the same maturation that the characters take on, specifically in the fight scenes. He really seemed inspired to give an anime-like visual element to the fights, whether it was in the slow-motion, angles, sound effects, backdrop usage, or anything of the sort. It was undoubtedly cool, but there is a lesser tangibility to boxing that I don't feel when I watch it compared to Creed and Creed II. Basically, although I don't want to become a boxer at all, the first two films would have me leave the theater and feel like I'd want to work out and take on the world in the ring, kind of like how early Fast & Furious movies would make me compelled to want to race the streets. Creed III did not give me that feeling, and they also directed in such a way that every hit felt hard, but only certain hits landed harder because "they decided it so," and I couldn't differentiate one from the other. Creed and Dame had different fighting styles for sure, but you didn't get a sense that trainer conversations didn't lead to an adaptation in the fights, nor did you feel they were depleting in strength or health. So, the fights were cool but a bit of a wash when it comes to getting a good grip on them, and I think that is a directing fault. Otherwise, I think MBJ had a very competent eye for certain shots, and outside of some pacing issues the characters left me very engaged.

There definitely are pacing issues, though. Side plots that are introduced and don't go anywhere or lead to very little payoff, long breaks between fights or training whatsoever, scenes that end abruptly or are left on the cutting room floor without understanding what was to follow, and despite the less than two hour runtime it somehow felt longer than either other Creed film which was well more than two hours in length. It also had a couple of moments that I suppose were supposed to surprise us, but the moment they were introduced I knew where they were going with it. Maybe I should give myself credit for that and not take it away from the film, though.

This movie was very good at being a Creed movie, though. It doesn't live under Rocky's shadow anymore. At the heart of it is a personal Creed story, from his background only and not Rocky's. Stallone doesn't need to be in these films to cement my need for liking it or wanting to see it. It may draw some inspiration to previous Rocky films (like I see Creed II as a Rocky IV clone and Creed III has some Rocky III semblance), but MBJ can thrive on his own with this character whether he does more films in this franchise or not. In fact, although this movie lives in the Rocky film universe and you are aware of it, you also feel this world within that is built by returning boxers, trainers, etc. from previous films and how they connect together. It's like an inner circle that is earned through the previous films and gets you to believe that Creed has lived and thrived in it during this time. This was a genuinely strong aspect that they can continue on with to keep me invested down the line. The score only reminded us of Rocky a few times, otherwise it was often accompanied by a soundtrack with frequent n-word usage (the beats were cool though).

So, did I think the film was good? Absolutely. Do I think it has its shortcomings? Yes, particularly seeded by a first-time director (a lot of it was style choice and that is subjective, but I believe other parts were faults). Am I going to get this on UHD? You betcha. Where does it rank for me among the three Creed films? At the bottom, but not by a lot. Would I go out and see a Creed IV? On opening weekend, but I'd also be satisfied if they decided there wasn't more story to tell either and call it right here. Would I recommend that you see it? On your own time, but after seeing the first two Creed films then yes.

I just saw this last night and you articulated my thoughts much better than I could because I feel the exact same way.

I thought Majors was amazing and Michael B was also good in his own right. The story didn’t necessarily pull me in like I thought it would, or at least compared to part 2, where it had you hooked from beginning to end because of the backstory/connection from Rocky IV.

Like you said, Creed movies would have you ready to go to the gym and run 5 miles immediately after leaving the movie lol.

I’ll still check this out once it drops because the series as a whole has been real good. If I had to rank them now, I’d probably go 2>1>>3.

[Blzer]

Re: What movies have you seen recently?

Scream VI

Radio Silence took a lot of ambitious swings with this installment, and it worked way more often than it didn't.

For starters, they moved far away from Woodsboro into New York City, which really opened up the world in many ways. Yes, Scream 3 took place in Los Angeles, but even then it still had a "You can take the movie out of Woodsboro but can't take Woodsboro out of the movie" vibe with it, likely because Wes Craven remained in the director's chair. With Scream (2022) being directed by new folks, you felt the aesthetic difference but it still had Woodsboro as one of the stars, so now removing it also displaces that attachment we had for so long.

This movie is also completely absent of Sidney and Dewey, though it had Gale Weathers in spades. I know that Neve Campbell was out for contract negotiation purposes, but kind of like Creed III and the Rocky character I believe that peppering her in for the sake of it would've taken away from the two-hour film that they wrote in the first place, adding her just because they could. Money aside, it's perhaps the only way that fans weren't serviced this time around, and for that I say fine. I do expect her to return for the next film though, especially if it ends up being the final film.

The meta commentary this time around is about movie franchises, and one aspect of that includes subverting expectations. While watching it I didn't think they did this a lot, but upon my reflection I realized they kind of did it in one big way where perhaps one could fault the movie for it until they realize that was the subversion all along. There is a bit of an incompleteness to this aspect though, and I'll reserve judgment as to whether it was a good or bad decision for when the seventh film will come around. A lot of the rules sounded a bit like a mesh of what Scream 2 and 3 offered though, and a lot of Scream VI had narrative feels to Scream 2, which absolutely makes sense being the sequel to the requel. Since Scream 2 is my favorite of the franchise, I wasn't mad.

There was also something introduced in Scream (2022) which was fresh, neat, and worth developing for anything that comes afterward. It is a majorly explored theme in this movie and I'm glad that they did not shy away from it, but I do not think it developed too much. This is where the ambition seems to be more in practice rather than execution, kind of like a dunk contest where you know the athlete has the ability to do that big one with the potential chance of failure it but plays safe for now with some other cool flashy dunks. Because there are more sequels along the way and I don't know if it will land if they go for it, I'm just glad that they didn't abandon it and will give them the benefit of the doubt for putting it on reservation.

The Scream films have a lot of things going for them in the entertainment department including kills, comedy, and mystery that is shrouded up until its reveal as you play guessing games the entire time. As far as kills go, many are great but many don't linger too long. There isn't necessarily a problem with any character being safe (as one of the rules states), but I think people will find a line where what used to be mortal wounds may not be the case anymore, and this movie can tiptoe that line if not cross it. Even still, they are unflinching in who they want to kill and/or how, and I am all for it. I think this movie had an overall very serious tone, but when sprinkling comedic relief it worked quite well. I tend to laugh more than other audience members though and this was no exception, but the writers know how to engage us at the right time and remind us that we are in the Scream universe.

As far as the mystery goes, just remember that it is one thing to guess who it is, and another to nail the motive, or at least piece together how Radio Silence left clues leading up to the reveal. Clearly anybody shown on screen beforehand is a suspect so if you point a finger at the right time then you have a shot, but I don't think you get all of the credit unless you can get the other two parts. Even though I had a light suspicion confirmed because of what led up to it, enough was thrown at me otherwise to get off the trail and forget my earlier curiosities, and I absolutely did not line up the motive until it was revealed (looking back I probably shouldn't have missed it). It certainly wasn't my favorite reveal of the six films initially, but the motive helped alleviate things to say that it worked better for me than Scream (2022).

I mentioned that this movie is separated from the other films by not having its main character or location, so how did they fill that two-hour runtime? With the core four (their term, not mine) of Sam, Tara, Mindy, and Chad from the previous film, and although I haven't re-read my review I know that one problem I had with that movie was that I led myself to believe Tara (Jenna Ortega) was going to be the star until they literally said out loud that it was Sam (Melissa Barrera), and I found Tara way more interesting than Sam in the movie so it felt a little disjointed. It seems that I am not alone in this matter. Now that Ortega is basically the new "it" girl replacing Anya Taylor-Joy or Florence Pugh in some respects, it would have been a shame for all audiences if she didn't get more screen time and things to do, but it would've been a slap in the face to rewrite their lead and throw Sam under the bus meanwhile. What they decided to do was excellent: developed Sam to be much more interesting and brought Tara alongside her for equal billing. Everybody wins, and I like Sam much more than I did in the last film.

Chad and Mindy also seemed to earn that core four status and are hopefuls to survive when watching this. Many new characters felt expendable without too much struggle, so with that I'm leaning on not introducing too many in the next movie with some they can choose from who survived this time (which of course includes bringing back Sidney). I have thoughts on where they can go with it, but I'll let them choose and I'll be open to any creative decisions. This franchise could have gone stale a long time ago (and for many it already has), but I like what they throw into the mix when I know I couldn't do any better, so I have to give them credit for that.

Chase scenes were brought back. That is a very general term though, as I don't just mean running away from Ghostface in the heat of the moment. I mean a set piece that is introduced, lingers, and with the combination of a slow-burn pursuit or a phone call against the fantastic Roger L. Jackson GF voice, takes its time for a kill to happen or be eluded. I certainly can name two scenes that I would've edited down for time and unfortunately they are in these chase scenes, but only by a minute at most. Going long the other way in response to not really having any of this in the last movie almost seemed appropriate, and it is a staple in the franchise that badly needed to return.

For better or worse, Scream VI falls victim to a lot of fan service, and I am referring to the Reddit crowd. Sometimes it is by giving them what they have asked for, and sometimes it is by actually responding to criticisms or theories, perhaps even by confirming/debunking them in dialogue. The trailer (which I did not watch beforehand) shows some of the fanfiction upfront, and of course the great thing about a franchise like this is that it has a meta commentary of the characters being fans of their own Stab movie franchise so it doesn't feel out of place. Even still, it is not something you would have seen penned by Kevin Williamson or shot by Wes Craven, so if you align Scream (1996) with this movie there is a massive disparity in its evolution, or devolution as some would put it. If Scream wasn't so self-aware this would definitely be a movie that has jumped the shark at this point. I get why they can do it here and even without watching the trailer I buy it, but much of it still feels like fanfiction.

I think the servicing, subversions, reveal, and omission of Sidney are the four biggest negatives moviegoers will bring up about this movie, or at least those who like the previous films and have an expectation for liking this one. I rank Scream VI high up the list after a first-time viewing, very much nearing the first film. I do think I have to see what the next sequel does to cement its ranking better (currently 2, 1, 6, 5, 4, 3) because there are parts here and there that are not yet complete from a storytelling perspective, but this was a good time at the theater and I will be seeing it again before it hits UHD. The horror genre is alive and well, this franchise thrives in the slasher subgenre and continues picking up momentum, and whether you love or hate it I think you can respect its existence as a recognizable IP that can keep strong for six films (and a TV series) where most everybody will pine for #7. The best part is they have the hottest name in the world right now, I believe they have a clear direction on where they want to go, and outside of negotiating with Campbell they can get the next one out cheaply and quickly. Bring it.

[Caulfield]

Re: What movies have you seen recently?

finally got around to seeing Samuel L. Jackson's Cleaner.
the man's acting never fails to live up to and beyond expectations, so I thoroughly enjoyed, even if I did correctly guess early on what was going to happen on all accounts with his daughter. but I don't always have to be surprised to enjoy the ride. it's like when I make a trip to a convenience store, I can join my dog and hold my head out the window and smile just as much as if I were instead heading to a baseball stadium lol