Iron Crowned posted:

In know that won't be it, but I would love a movie about some ubermensch kids that just turned out to be washed up schlubs in a dead end job by 30.

Iron Crowned posted:

In know that won't be it, but I would love a movie about some ubermensch kids that just turned out to be washed up schlubs in a dead end job by 30.

Red Bones posted:

Two hours of Taylor Lautner trying to do a pivot table in Excel in an open-plan office while he slowly loses the will to live.

Red Bones posted:

Two hours of Taylor Lautner trying to do a pivot table in Excel in an open-plan office while he slowly loses the will to live.

Taintrunner posted:

Oh I was wondering why this tweet blew up


https://twitter.com/dearapriii/status/1286444719065698305?s=21

feedmyleg posted:

Remember when Hollywood optioned that Reddit post about a modern army unit time traveling back to ancient Rome? lol

Taintrunner posted:

What? That was a comic book.

quote:

Greyhound, a Tom Hanks movie about an ill-fated destroyer captain trying to protect merchant ships from German U-boats in World War II, isn’t terrible because it’s historically loose and absurdly indifferent to realism. Actual World War II submarine combat would be a snooze-fest for people who watch Tom Hanks movies. Even more boring would be the perspective of the destroyer, which drives around and listens to the ocean and sometimes hucks giant bombs into the water. Destroyers aren’t even the ones getting shot at. So no one can blame a filmmaker for wanting to Hollywood it up a little, with submarines and destroyers firing broadsides at each other as if they were in a Pirates of the Caribbean movie. With U-boats with actual wolves painted on their conning towers. With German captains prank calling the Allies to make wolf howling noises. Because wolf packs, you see. Not every submarine movie can be Das Boot, and not every submarine movie should be.

It’s also not terrible because Hanks seems to be phoning it in. He spends most of the movie passing orders down a chain of command, often over a literal phone. I suspect he’s trying to sound officious when relaying messages, but he instead sounds like someone doing a bad imitation of how robots are supposed to talk. That Mr. Rogers movie must have really taken it out of him. But Hanks’ flat performance actually works in the context of the movie, because this isn’t Sully. This is a guy who seems like he’s not very good at his job. Regardless of the historical incident, Greyhound portrays its hero as someone uncertain and morose who’d rather be somewhere else as German subs kill all his dudes. We can infer from some unnecessary scenes with Elizabeth Shue as his…daughter?…oops, nope, I called that wrong. We can infer from Elizabeth Shue as his soon-to-be-bethrothed where that somewhere else might be. The script does wag its finger at some plucky British destroyer captains who have a tendency to wander off, but it mostly comes down to a guy who can’t control his fleet and feels really bad about it. No wonder he talks like a robot.

What makes Greyhound a terrible movie is that it has no sense of how to be a movie. It has no structure. It is a series of poorly shot and edited action sequences, all indistinguishable from each other, separated only by brief scenes of Tom Hanks forgetting breakfast or being kind to a seaman or asking for his slippers. Then it’s right back to a bunch of random swooping CG of ships breaking through the waves shooting at something, intercut with Tom Hanks giving an order, quick shots of markings on navigational charts, and sometimes a little screentime for one of the younger actors to look scared or confused. Dramatic music explains that this is all very exciting, very tense. But because Greyhound has no idea how to tie it all together, and most conspicuously no idea how to integrate CG with live action, it just feels like a rough cut of a pitch for a movie. If you’re going to Hollywood it up, you have to know how to Hollywood.

Alan Smithee posted:

https://twitter.com/DEADLINE/status/1286816193257418752?s=20
not content to raid reddit, hollywood will be optioning rights to schoolkids binder paper drawings of mall ninjas

Taintrunner posted:

Odd. The comics came out in 2012. Huh.

wyoming posted:

it actually came out 2007-2008, maybe prufock451 has been doing some wiki-vandalism.

Inspector Gesicht posted:

How is that Rodriguez can take 50 million dollar movies again and again and they all look like poo poo.

Detective No. 27 posted:

When will the Groverhaus movie come out?

Detective No. 27 posted:

When will the Groverhaus movie come out?

MechanicalTomPetty posted:

I wonder how much money I could get for a script about a guy who sets beehives on fire, possibly on a swingset.

Inspector Gesicht posted:

How is that Rodriguez can take 50 million dollar movies again and again and they all look like poo poo.

The Cameo posted:

I did accidentally put a reel of Julie & Julia in upside down once, but that was an easy fix - snip the splices on both ends of the reel and just... flip the film... oh god it’s sagging please don’t fall into a pile oh god oh god oh god - over and resplice! Perfectly simple.

The Cameo posted:

I was just reminded of when Spy Kids 3 came out and we got it at our theater, but whoever was the projectionist on duty the night it came in and was spliced together accidentally put like reel four in front of reel three, so the movie was now out of order.

One person in the entire time - roughly six weeks - we had that movie complained, and that’s because they were somehow seeing the movie a second time, having seen it elsewhere. No one else noticed, or at least complained. We never bothered to fix it because there was no time in the summer to tear down half a film and then re-splice it back together properly.

I did accidentally put a reel of Julie & Julia in upside down once, but that was an easy fix - snip the splices on both ends of the reel and just... flip the film... oh god it’s sagging please don’t fall into a pile oh god oh god oh god - over and resplice! Perfectly simple.

Not 100% sure why “Robert Rodriguez’s movies usually look lovely” reminded me of that beyond “apparently he makes movies where the middle absolutely doesn’t matter at all, too” crossing my mind

pospysyl posted:

Spy Kids 3 seems like exactly the kind of movie where you could mix up the different reels because it's an episodic sort of structure where they go to different videogame levels. Who cares whether they go to the volcano level or the ice level first?

Inspector Gesicht posted:

Doh ho ho ho. The real-life epilogue to Julie is something out of a sketch comedy.

The Cameo posted:

Oh god I don’t know this, tell it tell it tell it

quote:

In her follow-up book, Julie Powell freely admits to cheating on her husband for two years after the events depicted in the movie The book, Cleaving, has less to do with cooking and her newfound interest in butchery than her out-in-the-open affairs, how obsessive she became over her lover, gratuitous descriptions of her sex life and the wounds she received during sex, and how much she enjoyed it and didn't want to stop. Needless to say, the book was largely panned on its release.

Inspector Gesicht posted: