Sleeveless posted:

Mother was like babby's first metaphor: the motion picture. I'm sure there were a few people whose minds were just blown wide open when they realized the titular Mother was Mother Earth and were doing the galaxy brain meme IRL at the ending but honestly it absolutely deserved that score because it was a stupid movie for people who think they're smart.

Groovelord Neato posted:

PAWPYCAWK

Zero One posted:

Yikes

https://twitter.com/variety/status/1226536610273153029?s=21

MH Knights posted:

The last movies I saw in a theater was 1917. Good movie.

Lovely Joe Stalin posted:

This is the furthest thing from a valid criticism of that film you could get without banging on about space travel.

Come And See posted:

Pain And Gain confesses to the accusations of Occupy Wallstreet... and stands firmly with the 1%. The rich deserve to be rich, and the poor deserve to be poor. (Ed Harris, the film's voice of reason, says this much of Tony Shalhoub's character and the film rewrites history so that the latter isn't guilty of scamming Medicare.)

Come And See posted:

And yet the movie repeatedly asks who "deserves" wealth and who "should" own those nice houses and fast cars.

Wahlberg growls that not only does he want what Shalhoub has, he wants Shalhoub not to have it.

Harris pontificates that while Shalhoub may be an rear end in a top hat, he earned his wealth.

Which would be ironic if the movie had included the fact that in real life after the person who Shalhoub plays testified against the himbos he was arrested on the court steps for Medicare fraud. Instead, the movie purposefully removed this real life punchline from its American Dream "satire". Why?

Because the movie is sympathetic not only to Shalhoub and what he went through, but with his financial status.

The American Dream is real. Therefore Wahlberg hadn't done the work and hadn't earned it. Otherwise he'd already have it. Instead he's just a whiner, a cheat, a pretender, a loser who's all talk. Like everyone else who complains about not getting their fair share.

Wahlberg is a caricature designed and directed by a right-wing hollywood elite to represent anyone who questions whether the American Dream is just. The story is how if any one of us had half the chance, or the balls, we would do the same as Wahlberg and use that wealth just as selfishly. We're no better than the rich, and the simple fact is we don't deserve nice things, plus we're stupid, lazy and gross.

The American Dream is working as intended, the rich are where they belong, the poor are where they belong, and by the end of the movie balance is restored.

If the movie is so grotesque you can read it as satire, then great all the more power to you. I wish I could. But that reading is mostly based on illiteracy.

got any sevens posted:

What are some more good modern camp movies?

SunshineDanceParty posted:

The book on Theranos was fun disaster reading and I'm sure there'll be some goofy stories about Quibi. That's it's real contribution.

duz posted:

Nope, it's phone only because you have to be able to rotate your phone to see the alternate view.

CelticPredator posted:

It’s exactly this and it’s directed by Sam Raimi and ends like this!!!

feedmyleg posted:

There's legit thousands of highly-read self-pub mystery books about detectives' cats solving crimes

Alhazred posted:

Hitler routinely had injections of bull semen.

Antifa Poltergeist posted:

I mean its 2020.both can be true and in fact, are. Many people are saying that hitler got high as a kite by injecting bull cum in his veins.

Punkin Spunkin posted:

Tiresome except for that one Munster rebellion episode.

nonathlon posted:

Yeah, I've been surprised by the recent wave of regard for Lockout. It's a fine for a B-grade film, but nothing great.

quote:

A solidly entertaining cyborg action ramp. Decent pace, fun setpieces, couple of good twists. Bloodshot won’t win any awards, but it’s a solid couple of hours spent following Vin Diesel around.

Pope Corky the IX posted:

I forget in what year Robocop was supposed to take place.

Colostomy Bag posted:

About the only thing the movie didn't get right was the 6000SUX with (guessing here) 10 MPG or something. At least we made strides on that one.

Basebf555 posted:

There's a story on CNN's website right now about how Charlize Theron really wanted to play Furiosa again but Miller chose to do a prequel and recast her instead. I don't understand that decision, you've got the breakout character from Fury Road chomping at the bit to return to the role, and you're just gonna leave that on the table because you want to cast someone younger? I trust Miller(and Theron says that as well in the article), but come on man, this seems like a no-brainer.

The Cameo posted:

I think I realized Hollywood hit a nadir when Cline and Cargill, loving AICN talkbackers, were getting screenplays picked up.

The MSJ posted:

feedmyleg posted:

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

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.

Pirate Jet posted:

Resolutions on VR headsets are way too low right now, but in the future I could totally see it.

feedmyleg posted:

Are you asking if she's a Fake Gamer Girl?

MasqueradeOverture posted:

https://deadline.com/2020/08/john-wick-5-confirmed-by-lionsgate-sequel-will-be-shot-back-to-back-with-fourth-installment-1203006611/

"Keanu Reeves is back in the back-to-back sequels game with John Wick 4 and 5 aiming to film consecutively next year.

On today’s Lionsgate earnings call, the studio’s CEO John Feltheimer said, “We’re also busy preparing scripts for the next two installments of our John Wick action franchise, with John Wick 4 slated to hit theatres Memorial Day weekend 2022. We hope to shoot both John Wick 4 & 5 back to back when Keanu becomes available early next year.”

The sequel, John Wick 4, is currently scheduled for May 27, Memorial Day weekend."

Kinda sucks the "Will he die / won't he die" suspense from the next movie, but I'm game.

fatherboxx posted:

Villainess has the same problems with nonsense plot as JW3, but amplified, and doesnt have good actors to cruise that nonsense

Tars Tarkas posted:

This Korean scifi flick Space Sweepers looks cool as hell!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dp8a1DmAdAU

muscles like this! posted:

Saw a headline about a 47 Ronin "sequel" being developed and was really confused since, you know, everybody dies at the end. It turns out that it is a weird cyberpunk reimagining of the movie/original story and not actually a sequel.

Failed Imagineer posted:

Dunkirk recreated the famous evacuation of apparently 5 soldiers from a nearly deserted beach using a handful of small boats. Truly epic in scale