What movies have you seen recently?

[oldmen123]

Re: What movies have you seen recently?

Venom 3: The last dance

[Gotmadskillzson]

Re: What movies have you seen recently?

Amber Alert(2024) - One hell of a movie. 9 out of 10.

[Blzer]

Re: What movies have you seen recently?

Winnie-the-Pooh: Blood and Honey

I always had morbid curiosity to see what this was about, having avoided all marketing beforehand. I didn't know what I was getting into: serious horror or spoof, practical effects or CGI, short film or long, would there be a story, would the characters talk? Lots of questions entering it, and this was where the majority of my curiosity laid.

With a $100k budget, I surprisingly got more than I expected, but not a lot of it was very good. The concept begins strongly with exposition in animation form, but the film doesn't follow that in any real way. You have Pooh and Piglet, and half the time when watching it genuinely felt like it was stalker killers wearing masks. Obviously the actors were doing that, but in the film's universe that's what it felt like. They were Michael Myers rip-offs. All regarding Pooh lore was completely lost in the film itself. We have a Christopher Robin, but remove these names and masks and this doesn't lose anything from what it is (which is already low). In short, using the public domain IP was nothing but a gimmick.

When I found out it was almost a 90-minute runtime, I was interested how they would stretch it out, and stretch it out they did! This movie has 30 minutes of ideas stretched into very slow, long, drawn-out, sustained sequences of nothingness. This was the movie's greatest killer. You want this as a 30-minute concept? Fine, I can tolerate it. To purposely give it theatrical runtime length with no story to help it in the process? It was a bit insulting.

There was amateurish-yet-competent filmmaking in play, with enough reverence to the profession that you hope given more budget and experience they can continue to evolve, especially since a "Poohniverse" is already planned and there is a sequel waiting to be watched with the same amount of curiosity: "How do they continue the story, and how do they advance as filmmakers?"


Winnie-the-Pooh: Blood and Honey 2

For what this was, it was extremely entertaining. This time with a $500k budget, you literally see 5x the amount of improvement on every production front, and that isn't very common. Maybe I am only thinking on a comparative level to the first film, but I actually enjoyed a lot of what I watched this time around.

First of all, they did something interesting by making the first installment itself being an actual movie in this film's universe, like inspired by actual events. This was very clever, as it gave them an excuse for the significant upgrade in the creatures, the Christopher Robin recast, and it was actually integrated within the story itself. For me, it kind of excuses the downfalls of the first movie as this "soft reboot" (for lack of a better term) is a much better movie overall. The runtime is justified, there is actual characterization and story development, and they have a little more fun with the Pooh concept and make them much more animalistic in nature.

This time, you get some Pooh, Owl, Tigger, and Piglet. Owl happens to get a lot of action early on, and it seems that budget likely prevented them from being able to use him last time. I was excited when Tigger appeared, and his appearance came around a time in the movie when I was just grinning from enjoyment, so it was perfect timing. The third act is a literal massacre of kills, which again was much better shot this time around.

As I give credit to the filmmakers for making a better movie, I still must give constructive criticism to some basic filmmaking techniques that they have still completely botched, and it begins with blocking, staging, and establishing. As a viewer, I become completely discombobulated at the beginning of a scene for where a character is, how they got from that other place, what is looming, or what their motivations are. These need to occur in any film, regardless of budget or genre. For everything that was improved, this flew completely out the window and stuck out even more as a result. This isn't nitpicking, but rather just a description of what was going wrong.

Regardless, this almost passed as a Hollywood-entry movie. I expect Blood and Honey 3 to have the budget and these filmmakers to have the craft to actually make this pass that mark, and I will actually be there to watch it. Give me Rabbit, damn it!

[Ghost Of The Year]

Re: What movies have you seen recently?

Winnie-the-Pooh: Blood and Honey

I always had morbid curiosity to see what this was about, having avoided all marketing beforehand. I didn't know what I was getting into: serious horror or spoof, practical effects or CGI, short film or long, would there be a story, would the characters talk? Lots of questions entering it, and this was where the majority of my curiosity laid.

With a $100k budget, I surprisingly got more than I expected, but not a lot of it was very good. The concept begins strongly with exposition in animation form, but the film doesn't follow that in any real way. You have Pooh and Piglet, and half the time when watching it genuinely felt like it was stalker killers wearing masks. Obviously the actors were doing that, but in the film's universe that's what it felt like. They were Michael Myers rip-offs. All regarding Pooh lore was completely lost in the film itself. We have a Christopher Robin, but remove these names and masks and this doesn't lose anything from what it is (which is already low). In short, using the public domain IP was nothing but a gimmick.

When I found out it was almost a 90-minute runtime, I was interested how they would stretch it out, and stretch it out they did! This movie has 30 minutes of ideas stretched into very slow, long, drawn-out, sustained sequences of nothingness. This was the movie's greatest killer. You want this as a 30-minute concept? Fine, I can tolerate it. To purposely give it theatrical runtime length with no story to help it in the process? It was a bit insulting.

There was amateurish-yet-competent filmmaking in play, with enough reverence to the profession that you hope given more budget and experience they can continue to evolve, especially since a "Poohniverse" is already planned and there is a sequel waiting to be watched with the same amount of curiosity: "How do they continue the story, and how do they advance as filmmakers?"


Winnie-the-Pooh: Blood and Honey 2

For what this was, it was extremely entertaining. This time with a $500k budget, you literally see 5x the amount of improvement on every production front, and that isn't very common. Maybe I am only thinking on a comparative level to the first film, but I actually enjoyed a lot of what I watched this time around.

First of all, they did something interesting by making the first installment itself being an actual movie in this film's universe, like inspired by actual events. This was very clever, as it gave them an excuse for the significant upgrade in the creatures, the Christopher Robin recast, and it was actually integrated within the story itself. For me, it kind of excuses the downfalls of the first movie as this "soft reboot" (for lack of a better term) is a much better movie overall. The runtime is justified, there is actual characterization and story development, and they have a little more fun with the Pooh concept and make them much more animalistic in nature.

This time, you get some Pooh, Owl, Tigger, and Piglet. Owl happens to get a lot of action early on, and it seems that budget likely prevented them from being able to use him last time. I was excited when Tigger appeared, and his appearance came around a time in the movie when I was just grinning from enjoyment, so it was perfect timing. The third act is a literal massacre of kills, which again was much better shot this time around.

As I give credit to the filmmakers for making a better movie, I still must give constructive criticism to some basic filmmaking techniques that they have still completely botched, and it begins with blocking, staging, and establishing. As a viewer, I become completely discombobulated at the beginning of a scene for where a character is, how they got from that other place, what is looming, or what their motivations are. These need to occur in any film, regardless of budget or genre. For everything that was improved, this flew completely out the window and stuck out even more as a result. This isn't nitpicking, but rather just a description of what was going wrong.

Regardless, this almost passed as a Hollywood-entry movie. I expect Blood and Honey 3 to have the budget and these filmmakers to have the craft to actually make this pass that mark, and I will actually be there to watch it. Give me Rabbit, damn it!

I wish I would be alive to see Mickey Mouse and Star Wars enter the public domain. It would be great to see how a killer rat murdered Luke Skywalker and an entire a galaxy far far away.

[Blzer]

Re: What movies have you seen recently?

I wish I would be alive to see Mickey Mouse and Star Wars enter the public domain. It would be great to see how a killer rat murdered Luke Skywalker and an entire a galaxy far far away.

Steamboat Willie is in public domain, and you can bet they'll do a horror film based off that.

If there's something these movies taught me though, it's that the gimmick can only take you so far. Utilize the genre well or craft a good/entertaining enough movie, and you can gain and audience. If the sequel was the same level as the first film, I would've turned it off early and I wouldn't have sought a third entry. I really see this film taking on the Terrifier formula, which really gives me high hopes for the improvements another sequel might give us.

Now, Star Wars in public domain? Yeah, we might not get that one in our lifetimes.

[LowerWolf]

Re: What movies have you seen recently?

Finally saw Transformers One.

As an OG fan who couldn’t wait to see the 86 movie in the theater as a kid, this was amazing. Easily the best Transformers movie. Not even close. This is the Transformers franchise we need.

[RockinDaMike]

Re: What movies have you seen recently?

Finally saw Transformers One.

As an OG fan who couldn’t wait to see the 86 movie in the theater as a kid, this was amazing. Easily the best Transformers movie. Not even close. This is the Transformers franchise we need.

Watched it a couple more times already. Classic for me


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[KSUowls]

Re: What movies have you seen recently?

Red One

Not much to say about it other than it plays out about like you would probably expect. It was fun but forgettable.

[Master Live 013]

Re: What movies have you seen recently?

• The Creator: 5/10
  Spoiler

  [A movie with a lot of heart, but not much brains. Plus I guess Zimmer woke up 24 hours before the soundtrack was due and basically re-submitted the Dark Knight score?]

• The Substance: 5/10
  Spoiler

  [I had not idea what to expect and was thrown off by the crazy ending, but for the last 15 to 20 minutes of the movie we laughed our asses off like I haven't in a long time.]

• The Zone of Interest: 6/10
• Anatomy of a Fall: 6/10
• Joker: Folie a Deux: 4/10
• Conclave: 5/10
  Spoiler

  [Talk about fiction ]

• The Color Purple (1985): 6/10
• Anora: 6/10
• American Fiction: 6/10
• Past Lives: 5/10

[Armor and Sword]

Re: What movies have you seen recently?

Family and I went to Gladiator II last night.

7/10

Solid movie. Not nearly as good as the epic classic original. But a worthy story and some really fantastic battles.

Denzel was actually really good. I was unsure how he was going to be in this movie and I really enjoyed his character a lot.

[Ghost Of The Year]

Re: What movies have you seen recently?

Family and I went to Gladiator II last night.

7/10

Solid movie. Not nearly as good as the epic classic original. But a worthy story and some really fantastic battles.

Denzel was actually really good. I was unsure how he was going to be in this movie and I really enjoyed his character a lot.

Denzel is one the rare ones that absolutely never ever lets me down. If he made a three hour movie on the history of shoelaces , or ditch digging, or wedding gowns, I'd watch.

[EUBlink]

Re: What movies have you seen recently?

Blzer, your reviews of the Blood and Honey movies are spot on. Mylanta, I wanted for it to be handled properly, but it felt like a child was handling the staging and direction at times. The second one was so much better, especially with the Tigger reveal. I never thought I would find pleasure in saying words relative to enjoying Christopher Robin's life being wholly bastardized in every way.

I swear, the third attempt should bring everything full circle with appropriate directing and producing. I want so badly to love these first two, but at times, they are painful to get through.

[Majingir]

Re: What movies have you seen recently?

Watched "Red One".

Going in I expected it to just be some Dwayne Johnson action movie just with Christmas theme.

The cast includes Dwayne Johnson, Chris Evans, Lucy Liu, JK Simmons.

Given what I'm used to seeing some of these actors do, it's funny to see Chris Evans (known for Captain America) being the opposite of Steve Rogers while JK Simmons (known for JJJ) plays Santa.

Funny that of all the movies Dwayne Johnson has done with Kevin Hart, this would've been a funny one to do simply because they'd make Kevin Hart an Elf.

In the end, it basically was another Dwayne Johnson action movie but with a Christmas theme, but I think that's what made it stand out. If it was just another action movie, it'll feel like just that. But making it a Christmas one makes it at least stand out in the Christmas movie genre. First half of the movie seemed ok, middle felt weird, the end was ok I guess

[KSUowls]

Re: What movies have you seen recently?

The Lord of the Rings: The War of the Rohirrim

Not sure how to feel about this. It was enjoyable enough, but I think it would have lost out on a few points had it not benefited from a nostalgic setting.

The conflict itself is fairly interesting, and the protagonist is very likeable. She does suffer from some consistency problems though. The main villain is pretty meh in my opinion which is always a major blow to a setting like this.

Overall I did enjoy it. However, I think that it is fair to say that it is more aesthetics than substance.

[Blzer]

Re: What movies have you seen recently?

Mufasa: The Lion King

As it began playing, there was a nice hum to the shots of nature and wildlife, that when the first character spoke it almost offputtingly broke this essence of my hope I was going to watch a dialogue-less mockumentary play out. That ended pretty quickly when some of the story played out against action, but this is a very chatty movie and doesn't have any intention of giving you any reprieve from it for the rest of the film. After watching it, I do think there is enough action (and good action) here to dictate an hour-long version of this without any speaking lines whatsoever that I'd love to watch.

I wasn't a big fan of the 2019 adaptation from the 1994 cartoon animation (my favorite of all time) as it sucked the life out of everything, and we were always simply left playing a comparison game of where lines and songs were changed, delivered differently (and often inferiorly, even from James Earl Jones himself), and anticipating every scene and emotional beat that we've all seen dozens of times growing up. Director Barry Jenkins one-ups Jon Favreau's 2019 take in more ways than one, starting with giving the characters some more emotion. Pulling back from some of the "realistic" interpretations that Favreau wanted was a wise choice, especially since the visuals, stunning as they are, are not mistaken for reality at any point in time. Certain female lions can still be a bit indistinguishable when first appearing on screen unless addressed, but if you follow the scope of the film it's never actually a problem.

However, having this be a brand new story in the lore and not having seen the trailers meant I was going into this completely blind. Yes it was a prequel, but I didn't know what the main story was or what action would dictate it. This fresh slate meant I had nothing to compare to in the past, and keeping that out of my mind was a positive for my viewing experience. However, it being a prequel meant that it had to find a moment for each item, location, action, piece of dialogue, etc. woven into the main story that we know. I think if some were done more subtly or left on screen I wouldn't roll my eyes, and I think some deserve to be there, but they did one or two too many just for fan service (one of them they even repeated twice, and it never had to be incorporated to begin with).

The real question for me was how would they treat the evolution of Scar's character, and his relationship with Mufasa? I think it was done pretty well in that they had a lot to lower him from by starting him up so high. He begins (and for a long while remains) very positive and joyous, which was great to see in contrast to the character who we know eventually kills his brother. I think this movie leaves some gaps to let time take its course, plus as we know from the 2019 film he never befriended the hyenas yet, but some questions are answered and motivations are understood. I think moments came on a little suddenly when they did and they weren't the catalysts and planted seeds I had hoped for, but I have seen worse and I'll forgive them. Unfortunately though, I've also very recently seen better in Transformers One, and I kind of subconsciously compared the two. Can't win them all!

I remember there being five total songs. They were catchy, but not very memorable (the villain song was just bad, at least the chorus). They still have trouble infusing the reality that they live in with catching any real fantasy in the choreography. For instance, you can take the song I Just Can't Wait To Be King and turn the colors orange/blue/purple/green on the fly in this world like you can in the cartoon. I think it was wise to bring on Lin-Manuel Miranda, but there are times where I wish he would take his musical abilities and draw more inspiration from Alan Menken. I'm not as down with the modernism of music though so that just might be me. It wasn't that funny of a film, which is a shame because the little Timon and Pumbaa that we have they never really made me crack a smile. They had some strange attempts at meta humor and I think that's all the writers could come up with outside of fart jokes. I didn't hear any kids laugh, but the movie was so chatty that the characters might have spoken over the laughter. I guess their timing just wasn't there.

In all, this is far superior to the 2019 adaptation if for no other reason than it is a fresh take on the lore and leaves comparisons out the window. I love that they lean back to some animated roots and the action is serviceable for the medium. I found it fascinating that even though a prequel normally should be seen "after" its predecessor, this could very well be somebody's entry into the universe and might actually be more fascinating by the time you hit the stampede scene in The Lion King. It doesn't work as well since this movie is actually told in flashbacks (Rafiki kind of narrates it in present-day), plus the 2019 installment isn't as good and would lose the luster that this brings, but I wouldn't be mad bringing by seven-year-old nephew to this even if he hasn't seen that one.

Would recommend.