Last Movie You Watched.

And we passed that point long ago?

Incidentally, what is cisgender? All I know is normal and abnormal.

Perilagu Khan wrote:

And we passed that point long ago?

Incidentally, what is cisgender? All I know is normal and abnormal.

Cisgender is basically "non-trans". So people whose gender conforms to the gender as which they were born.

I have to say that this was a true "WTF" moment for me. When even a young director who writes and directs a 100% sympathetic portrayal of a trans-coming-of-age is accused of transphobia because his casting choice didn't conform to some white unicorn fantasy.

Salomé wrote:

Perilagu Khan wrote:

And we passed that point long ago?

Incidentally, what is cisgender? All I know is normal and abnormal.

Cisgender is basically "non-trans". So people whose gender conforms to the gender as which they were born.

I have to say that this was a true "WTF" moment for me. When even a young director who writes and directs a 100% sympathetic portrayal of a trans-coming-of-age is accused of transphobia because his casting choice didn't conform to some white unicorn fantasy.

Sabs, IMO we've been heading toward the mouths of madness ever since the 1960s, but the Left's wholesale and enthusiastic adoption of the tranny cause was the moment we slipped into the cataract from which we may never return. Thenceforth, the madness will not become qualitatively worse because it cannot, but it will multiply and ultimately engulf civilization.

I trust you're having a nice day?

x

Erica Ambler wrote:

Eva Green had a fit of cowardice and backed out of Antichrist at the last minute; that's probably her biggest career mistake. 

Did that in the Virginia Woolf film with Gemma Arterton too, only to be replaced with Elizabeth Debicki.

Solo.

We moved over $2k in Star Wars merchandise in the preceding 24 hours so I figured what the hell.

It's worth the look although I still don't fancy the new guy.

bitchcraft wrote:

Solo.

We moved over $2k in Star Wars merchandise in the preceding 24 hours so I figured what the hell.

It's worth the look although I still don't fancy the new guy.

How is Donald Glover as Lando Calrissian?
That's really the only thing that gives this movie a tiny bit of an appeal.

DARKEST HOUR

Surprised to say I didn't particularly care for this film. For me, it verged into cartoonish, WWII-for-dummies territory. All a bit same old, same old.

Oldman's performance, in and of itself, was good but the voice just didn't seem quite right to me. I think Lithgow did it better to be honest. Otherwise, Mendelsohn did a fine job as King George.

The film then steered into the absurd with the tube scene. Some of the hokiest trash ever put to screen. Yes, that silly old codger Winnie was ready to negotiate terms with Hitler until a plucky young girl and England's then-only black guy told him not to. What sort of a cunt-for-brains came up with that? Absolutely ruined the climax if not the whole film.

CJB, as we all know full well, YT never accomplished anything without the sage council of dames and indigenes. Where would we be without them?

That scene was heavily criticized by historians who said that kind of meeting was more or less unheard of for Winston Churchill.

It's part of the great white-wash of history in which people want to ban early Tintin books and we must pretend that many of the suffragettes (especially in the U.S.) weren't racists, e.g. Frances Willard.

Salomé wrote:

How is Donald Glover as Lando Calrissian?
That's really the only thing that gives this movie a tiny bit of an appeal.

He saves the movie in many ways...plus is the only character who flirts with droids

Some rellies insist I go for a second viewing later tonight.

I could have guessed Solo would have underperformed. Disney execs are a bunch of fucking morons.

- Released too soon after the previous Star Wars movie - which got mixed reviews;

- Released with competition that would clearly bite a chunk out of box-office.

- Star Wars fatigue is setting in. What next? A light-saber story?

The movie will crash and burn after barely crossing US$200m in the USA, which is a tragedy for the franchise.

Solo - fun enough, but some signs of its awkward production are noticeable ... it's overlong and kinda fumbles the 'build' to its ending, for example.

Rogue One is definitely the better of the SW 'backstory' movies so far.

Might be a sign that some are getting over kids films.

FieldsMan wrote:

Might be a sign that some are getting over kids films.

Disney is going to keep on making them. They need a return of investment on that 4 billion they paid George Lucas for the IP.

How many trilogies do they have in the pipeline? Rian Johnson gets to make one, so do the "Game of Thrones" showrunners.
Then there are the "Star Wars Stories" movies that are in the pipeline. So far I have heard about such movies devoted to Boba Fett, Obi-Wan Kenobi, Lando Calrission and Leia Organa.
So that's ten movies that we know about at this point. But there will be many more, unless all of them start to perform catastrophically bad at the box office.

Not surprised the Star Wars fatigue set in this quickly. There's only so much coattail-riding you can do off a movie released during the Carter Administration. One every three years as part of a cogent, interesting narrative arc you can get away with but farting out some fan fiction about how Han Became Solo or some other such twaddle no one gives a fuck about every year is an entirely different proposition.

Salomé wrote:

FieldsMan wrote:

Might be a sign that some are getting over kids films.

Disney is going to keep on making them... unless all of them start to perform catastrophically bad at the box office.

Exactly... If this fatigue continues even for the next film, I'm sure they'll seriously reconsider whether there is life in the series. 

And considering the $4b they paid for the rights, I'm sure they're not going to want to fork out more money to make films that won't make them their money back.

FieldsMan wrote:

The Bourne Identity
Solid action spy thriller. It felt complete by the end, which is why I feel

The Bourne Supremacy
... was a waste of time. Surely after so much collateral damage you'd stop and think that maybe you should just talk to your old bosses about the desire to stay out of the business and co-operate with them. 

"Identity" is the tighter film in every regard, and even the action took a hit in "Supremacy" (I wasn't surprised to find that the Ronin team choreographed the great car chase in the former). 

Looking forward to seeing Ultimatum though - supposedly it's the best of the lot. 

CR was definitely inspired by the Bourne series. From the death of a loved one underwater and trying to break through a closed door, to central themes and personal journey and it's overall redundancy in the character arc. QOS at the very least had the good sense to be short and show some colour. 

And to those who think a handful of the TND punching sound effects are bad, wait until you rewatch The Bourne Identity (thankfully improved for Supremacy). 

Bourne 1: 7/10
Bourne 2: 4.5/10

Spot on sir! The Bourne Identity was a complete surprise. It did well in theaters but exploded on cable which is where I first saw it and had recently begun reading Ludlum's novels in school. And for a film written by someone (Tony Gilroy) who called one of the all-time great spy novels and one of the best novels of the 20th century "s***" it absolutely works. Doug Liman wanted to do this film so badly that as a young director actually went to the author himself and convinced him to grant the rights for him to make an effective 2 hour studio film out of an exceptionally convoluted novel. And you know what-he made it work. He pissed off the studio by doing it his way and in a style more akin to his earlier independent features. But it is this factor-the spunk, fun and involving quality that makes that film great-and crucially what makes it work. Thus when Universal fired him from "his baby" they effectively killed the series. Because the sequel is an immediate letdown that is only helped by its dark tone and Euro setting. The action is awfully mishandled and the film is generally terrible, but at least it's better than the sequel which is an awful waste of time that somehow stormed the box office and made Bourne a phenomenon to people.
Then came Legacy which had about 90 seconds of good scenes, a completely wasted Rachel Weisz and nothing else other than rampant stupidity. And then of course Jason Bourne which is nothing but a criminal waste of time, money and talent. Imagine Ultimatum with no drama, tension and a cast of truly strong performers.

BTW Ludlum's Supremacy is a great plot premise with many great moments that gets a bit long winded but is still a good read. His Ultimatum is nutty but at least tells a story unlike the film sequels. Don't bother with any of the continuation novels as they become so inane that you wonder about your sanity.
And the Identity miniseries from the 80's is quite good if only a miniature condensed version of the novel.


There is no question CR traded in 007 for a share of Bourne audiences. I knew it then and didn't get it at all. Supremacy was not that successful and yet all of a sudden everyone went uber dark, shaky cam and actual narrative went out the window. The most crucial blunder Supremacy made was what happened to Marie.

The Good The Bad & The Ugly Extended Cut.

My favourite movie of all time....hard to believe it's over 50 years old.

I got the blu-ray boxed set of Clint's Spaghetti westerns, brand new, for US$5

Crimson Peak.

Good I suppose. It's not my genre. A friend had given it to me a while back and was never that interested in popping it in. 

Excellent set design and the actors are all very capable. I don't care much for ghost stories.

I feel the ending heavily alluded to The Shining, which might not work in its favour. I found myself wanting to watch that instead.

I liked "Crimson Peak" fine. A nice role for Jim Beaver, who has been an overlooked actor since his terrific work on "Deadwood". Something we hadn't seen before from Jessica Chastain. Excellent set design, as you say. As a feature, I found it to be more accomplished than the one Guillermo Del Toro ended up winning the Oscar for.

Salomé wrote:

I liked "Crimson Peak" fine. A nice role for Jim Beaver, who has been an overlooked actor since his terrific work on "Deadwood". Something we hadn't seen before from Jessica Chastain. Excellent set design, as you say. As a feature, I found it to be more accomplished than the one Guillermo Del Toro ended up winning the Oscar for.

I did appreciate Chastain's performance. Like most, I imagine, I never could see her in such a world or play such a character. She delivered and then some. I read that Cumberbatch (who was originally cast as Hiddleston's character) left the project because Chastain wanted to play Lucille and not Edith. Perhaps he couldn't see it too.

Have yet to see The Shape of Water, but it's on the list.

2001 : A Space Odyssey. On a 50th anniversary re-release screening.

I'd never actually seen it before ... my mind was suitably blown, it's an extraordinary piece of work.

bitchcraft wrote:

The Good The Bad & The Ugly Extended Cut.

My favourite movie of all time....hard to believe it's over 50 years old.

I got the blu-ray boxed set of Clint's Spaghetti westerns, brand new, for US$5

It's probably my favorite western. Like most of Clint's westerns, it has toughness and humor in equal doses. Hard to watch in spots, yet impossible to turn away from.

FieldsMan wrote:

Crimson Peak.

Good I suppose. It's not my genre. A friend had given it to me a while back and was never that interested in popping it in. 

Excellent set design and the actors are all very capable. I don't care much for ghost stories.

I feel the ending heavily alluded to The Shining, which might not work in its favour. I found myself wanting to watch that instead.

This one is on my To Buy List of supernatural horror films.

So you don't like ghost story films, or scary pictures in general, FM?