I don't know if there's any truth to that but I've read a lot of his stuff and seen a number of interviews with him over the past couple years and in my opinion nothing he has said or done has warranted the level of hostility he gets from some people, so I'm inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt. I will say though that the tendency people have to dismiss the message because of imperfections in the messenger is one of the main themes of the film.
OK, so I watched it anyway - My unhealthy fascination with crap was triggering my "I need to see this" reflex, and I gave in this morning.
Most of the cast is amazing. No complaints there. Everybody is doing exactly what is asked of them: Some standouts are DiCaprio as a mild mannered midwestern professor, Jonah Hill channeling Don Jr., Rob Morgan as a bureaucrat who risks his career to do the right thing, and Mark Rylance as the creepy billionaire.
I did have some problems with the science. There's no peer review of the data before being sent straight to the President, yet later on another project is criticized for not having any peer review. There's a few other little things that bothered me, but the details are already fading. Most of this is a cost of the humor, so I'm pretty OK with it.
I generally found it to be funny. I liked the running jokes, like Kate (Jennifer Lawrence) regularly obsessing over a weird power move that happens early in the movie, or her becoming a meme. When they introduce the billionaire during a new product unveiling, the audience is asked not to look directly at him or display any negative emotions. All of the little things that happen, those jokes landed for me.
The bigger theme? It's too much. I think I need some distance from the material. It's obviously drawing on climate change and the pandemic for showing how people and government would act in this situation, but considering the resurgence of a new variant, it's too much right now. If I revisit this in 5 years, I may still think it's too big and obvious.
Overall, I liked it. I liked the dark humor, but I also felt it was almost too obvious as satire - making the subtext text. I'm not sure you have a movie if it's not this obvious?
Most of the cast is amazing. No complaints there. Everybody is doing exactly what is asked of them: Some standouts are DiCaprio as a mild mannered midwestern professor, Jonah Hill channeling Don Jr., Rob Morgan as a bureaucrat who risks his career to do the right thing, and Mark Rylance as the creepy billionaire.
I read somewhere that DiCaprio deserves an Oscar for pretending to be a guy attracted to women his own age.
So I caved and watched Don't Look Up as well. I hadn't seen any trailers, so I got the good stuff in the movie. A bit too much cringe in the middle for my liking, but it got over that.
I was sure it had to be written by a Canadian or something, but no, seems the auteur is American. Which is good news, guys, as it means the Americans already know how they look. The rest of us were really dreading that awkward conversation. Overall, I enjoyed it, but ultimately it won't be what I recommend to my mother when she finally finishes The Crown and wants something else.
When my daughter read the original book, she didn't hate it, but the book itself is just so Victorian in its characterizations. The gentlemen of England are honorable, strong, and strong willed, the ladies are fragile victims, and Dracula is an evil Other. She'd dislike this movie less.
I liked this adaptation a lot. The male protagonists are the victims, and the real hero is Lucy. Dracula, even though he is evil, longs for love and release, but if he can't quite bring himself to voluntarily accept either.
This movie allows everything to be a bit disgusting, dirty, and weird. There is a general malaise whenever Dracula is nearby. It's just the right amount of macabre for me.
Pixar’s Turning Red: is an excellent goofy and occasionally manic animated film about a young girl coming to terms with her satanic powers inherited by her cursed family. As with other children’s films I like, there are no real bad guys, just misunderstood people in hard positions.
With lines like “We don’t worship Gods, we worship our ancestors” coming from the main character, I expect a certain group is going to clutch a few pearls over this film.
Really my two minor complaints are that her friends aren’t really fleshed out beyond being her besties and Toronto felt very familiar with was odd given I’ve never been to Toronto especially circa 2002, so I wasn’t too surprised to learn the animators studied SF’s China Town for inspiration.
Unwierdly enough, there is plenty of pearl clutching because a movie about a adolescing woman dares to talk about, you know... a young woman who first experiences when they are of a certain age? Don't make me say it. But some folken are all up in their vinegar that a period is even mentioned.
I watched this over the weekend and fell in love with the protagonist even before her panda secret was revealed. She loves science, is good at math, and is a totally cool nerd. What's not to like?
I consider movies a risky time investment, so I rarely watch them. I'm only interested in outlandish lefty parables like The Truman Show or They Live. However, I don't seek out movies. My physical movie collection is basically the Star Wars saga. George Lucas is one of my favorite people of all time. However, I haven't seen The Rise of Skywalker. I've viewed Star Wars as a public primer for rebellion. The movie either primed the public for rebellion, or it didn't.
Ryan Reynolds has to go back in time to save someone and accidently runs into his 12 year old self. Together they try to save the world (sort of).
It's a feel good family affair that is pretty decent. There is a lot of swearing and sarcastic Ryan Reynolds type humour, so maybe not for super young kids. The kid playing young Ryan is pretty damn awesome in the role.
Overall I wouldn't say this is a must watch, but if you like Ryan Reynolds, 80s movies like Flight of the Navigator and can shut off your brain for a while, I think you'll enjoy this. Definitely has multiple funny moments and some nice special effects.
I honestly can't even remember if I've ever seen the Peter Ustinov version, although I loves me some Ustinov. This one is a serviceable murder mystery, with an appealing mix of realism and goofiness. The Poirot character gets some tragic backstory that makes his affectations more understandable and less foppish. YMMV on how much you like this interpretation; I'm not enough of an Agatha Christie or Poirot fan to judge how this characterization stacks up against previous ones.
Worth seeing, but also not a must watch. As murder mysteries go, the solution is reasonably tied to the clues given, although I can't say I solved (okay, mostly guessed) it more than 1-2 scenes before Poirot's reveal.
There is also some inclusiveness, both racially and sexual orientation-wise, that I don't think was in the original novel. I never read it, but the inclusiveness is very 2020s - although I give them credit for acknowledging the racial attitudes of the period without martyring -- or otherwise marginalizing -- the minority characters. This is at least an improvement over so-called "color-blind casting."
__________________
hide, witch, hide / the good folks come to burn thee / their keen enjoyment hid behind / a gothic mask of duty - P. Kantner
...........
Last edited by Sock Puppet; 03-30-2022 at 02:31 AM.
Sonic the Hedgehog is a dumb simplistic kids movie, and it knows it. It’s not some amazing masterpiece by any means but it was enjoyable fun. I bet this would be hilarious while high!
Sonic is basically young kid flash where his speed manifests in a quicksilver style time slow/stop ability, he is special somehow and must run away from space echidnas, the rings are portals to anywhere you can think. You are now caught up on the whole plot of Sonic.
Fucking Jim Carrey!
Is really all anyone needs to know. Do you want to see Jim Carrey act in an off the hook, cartoonishly violent manner that really balances the CGI hedgehog with a human playing a villain that when animated could drop into a goofy kids show. Complete with an odd D/s subtext to his relationship with his assistant. If yes, you may want to see this movie.
Spoiled because I thought it coming out of nowhere was hilarious. The most blatant product placement for Olive Garden. Echoing the Wayne’s World skit, where they were just one step away from out right saying “Olive Garden paid us a lot of money to feature their product, so here’s an ad.” If end credit scenes didn’t exist, they basically ended the movie on either a blatant push for people to buy Olive Garden gift cards, or a subtle reminder the entire reason a kids movie about a game from the 90s exists is to sell you more things.
We saw this joint a couple weeks ago on a limited release (brag) and it was fucking awesome. Michelle Yeoh is funny as hell and also a Kung Fu goddess. Short Round from Temple of Doom is all grown up and lovable and kick-ass. The main villain has a style of dress that is indescribable but extremely my shit.
They do the whole Metaverse thing SO WELL. It's skyscraper-high-concept, but not too far up its own ass. However weird you think it is, it's weirder. Eat a big old pot brownie ahead of time if you want.
Spoiler more for mood than actual plot:
I feel like the wackiness scale runs from Looney Tunes to The Mask to Angie Tribeca. I personally find Angie Tribeca "too much", and the same applies to some parts of this movie. You'll know them when you see them.
Totally cliche here but. Where the Crawdads Sing was pretty good. I am happy I did not read the book though because otherwise I would have known the ending and in this rare case I did not
__________________
What are sleeping dreams but so much garbage?~ Glen’s homophobic newsletter