Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
TV/Film & Literature / Re: In Which I Review Movies
« Last post by cobainwasmurdered on Today at 04:19:56 AM »
I have no idea what he's talking about but I'm sure if you look for it you can find it if you want.
Wrestling / Re: Impact Wrestling Redemption
« Last post by angry.walls.that.steal.the.air on Today at 02:38:55 AM »
I don't watch this show, but I like Penta a lot, so good on him!
TV/Film & Literature / Re: I Just Watched... (Movies/TV/DVD)
« Last post by RedJed on Today at 02:38:03 AM »
Caught a handful over this weekend in the theaters....

Super Troopers 2: This has a large appeal locally as three showings on Friday sold out locally (wtf? didnt expect this) so we ended up driving an hour away to catch it. It was ok but it felt like they didn't think this story out very well as it didnt have the same cult charm as I think the first did. It had funny parts but not iconic quotes or scenes that I even will remember weeks later. Glad they finally did a sequel though, just expected more from it.

Genesis: This was, I think, some Aussie or UK import that actually was pretty well done for what it was. I hadnt heard of virtually anyone in this, though. Effects were pretty well done for this post-apocolyptic sci-fi and I enjoyed the twists and turns of the story. Had some good themes going too, regarding ethics behind AI technology taking off as an example. Feels like it was being set up for a trilogy of films as there was a massive cliffhanger at the end. Probably one of those VOD films that never should have made a theatrical release, though. It was playing at one theater in the Twin Cities with one showing a day.

You Were Never Really Here: This was fucking strange, yet thought provoking at parts. Overall a psychotic adventure of a film though. Joaquin Phoenix should maybe even get an award for this role as it was his most ambitious and extreme to date. The storytelling was wonderful how they slowly broke down the backstory of the main character and explained things in a way to where you slowly gained stronger sympathy for that character for sure. Go out of your way to see this, you will be pleasantly surprised.

Who Killed Cock Robin: A Taiwan import I saw at an international film festival. Really good noir murder mystery stuff in this. Try and seek it out if you can find it anywhere, it really could and maybe should be remade in the states.
Wrestling / Re: Puro Love & Resources V2
« Last post by angry.walls.that.steal.the.air on Today at 02:28:35 AM »
Great photo of the late Mrs Baba..

TV/Film & Literature / Re: I Just Watched... (Movies/TV/DVD)
« Last post by RedJed on Today at 02:15:40 AM »
Yeah, Rampage is the definition of a typical hollywood summer action-fest to me, and with that said, shocked it didnt get moved to summer. It's the quintessential turn your brain off and enjoy popcorn flick. Plus I think this specifically appeals to the type of 30+ age year old who grew up playing the game like crazy too, as there was a lot of wink wink nudge nudge to those who were familiar with the really basic storyline that was told in the game. I liked that they brazenly just had the old Rampage game in the background of a few scenes too.

To me, this might not have been as cool and fun without the 3d element in tact, but it added another layer of fun to this. Like Gary said, they pushed the pg-13 limit on this with the gore and language factor. Plus it was a hoot that JDM basically roleplayed as Negan in this in alot of ways. I figure he must have done this in the middle of Walking Dead being filmed or something and he wanted to keep the Negan character going in his mind.

Overall, I enjoyed this for what it was
Wrestling / Re: Impact Wrestling Redemption
« Last post by RedJed on Today at 02:02:35 AM »
So I guess I was the only one who bought this huh? I still am hoping this company turns things around and since I've been seeing a far better product the past few months (granted, there was a bad week here and there but the work and angles have improved despite losing talent like crazy) I ended up getting it. They should really consider a different pricetag though, $40 is a bit excessive. They should try $20 for the Anniversary and see how that goes. Even $30 would be pushing it but much more easier to accept. They need to bite the bullet on the pricetag to try to get fans back. Doing $40 for ppvs is not going to cut it when the wrestling market has changed as it has.

Anyhow, I ended up being more entertained by this (as well as the preceding Lucha/Impact show in Nola) than anything in Impact in quite some time. While I didn't see any five star matches or anything, the booking on this ppv was not anything really offensive like past creative teams have done with the ppvs. No wacky finishes (except one that was botched) and overall good choices on who went over and how.

I was shocked that Pentagon went over (as good of a match as the Nola one was, btw) but I like the booking of it in that I think they might keep going heavy on this Lucha Underground vs Impact feud, in fact this should probably kick it off more on the weekly TV. Considering they are taping up to mid June this week and Lucha Underground starts in mid June again, I would guess there is some connection there. Plus having Pentagon as champion should get some more eyes on the product that wouldnt be there before. I think its nothing but a good thing.

As far as the rest of the card, the six man hardcore match was good and I loved the post-match, it reminded me so much of the Dreamer-Raven feud when Dreamer tied Raven up to the cage and let him have it. Edwards getting this edge to him is something long overdue and I dig it.

The other men's undercard matches all were good enough to not really complain too much. Eli Drake stood out as taking his ringwork to another step up in that match w/ LAX as he was really looking more athletic than ever, and I dig the new music. Steiner, for what its worth, didn't look god awful either but was clunky here and there. The opener was strong too up until the last two spots (both botched by Aerostar) but there must have been something with the left corner ringropes and turnbuckles as guys were having issues with it all night long.

The only glaring "eh" from this show was the two women's matches. They were just there and not really put together well. I do like though the idea of Tessa Blanchard giving the really weak women's division a boost as it's needed.
MMA/Boxing / Re: The 2018 Upcoming and Rumored Fights Thread
« Last post by Lord of The Curry on Today at 12:38:20 AM »
Askren from what I understand still has contractual obligations to ONE that would need to get sorted out first but both guys seem to want the fight. Which is not a good look for Ben to be honest. The guy had his entire career of beating up C-level competition in Asia to pipe up and say something and now that he's "retired" he's running his mouth about wanting to fight the best.
MMA/Boxing / Re: MMA General Discussion 2017
« Last post by Lord of The Curry on Today at 12:36:02 AM »
I don't think I'm the only one thinking this as it was echoed online elsewhere but holy shit what a disappointing performance from Cub. Just looked off both physically and mentally, didn't seem to want to be in there at all. Having said that given what he's been through lately it was tough to not feel happy for Frankie.

Also I am completely 100% ok with Jim Miller never fighting again. He's a warrior and one of the best fighters to never hold a belt, always a class act but it's not fun watching him fight anymore. And on that note how the fuck did Hooker not bank a POTN for that one?
TV/Film & Literature / Re: In Which I Review Movies
« Last post by Saddam of the 909 on April 22, 2018, 06:18:42 PM »
I feel the need to watch people stab each other with swords after long, drawn out chases and military strife. Doesn't everyone need this?

Fuck yeah.

You still get these movies although a lot of the best are foreign now. Asia loves the Historical Epic and China likes to use them for propaganda purposes too so they can be pretty awesome. In some ways it's like watching old Hollywood movies where America is the best, foreigners are evil, etc.

ypov said there is gay subtext in Master and Commander. Am I the only one who didn't see this shit?
TV/Film & Literature / Re: In Which I Review Movies
« Last post by Saddam of the 909 on April 22, 2018, 06:17:44 PM »
mild spoilers of the first 20 minutes, or less if you're paying attention

Maps to the Stars (2014), directed by David Cronenberg

My initial reaction when seeing this title in relation to a Cronenberg movie was actually...somewhat what this movie turned out to be. As I've said my exposure to Cronenberg is limited, but I did expect a movie similar to this. That doesn't mean it's a perfect film, but the premise is sound. This was also admittedly quite silly, which is something that I didn't expect. I have more specific criticisms and comments below, but I wanted to talk about two of the actresses here. This isn't the first time Julianne Moore and Mia Wasikowska were cast in roles for a film set in Los Angeles. Moore's character here has some superficial similarities to hers in The Kids Are All Right. Wasikowska's couldn't possibly be more different. I haven't seen Wasikowska in something like this year. It was bizarre, in a good way. So, I should explain this. I think I must. I am starting to run out of material for these opening paragraphs, particularly when it comes to films like this one. I will have to explain that too.

Agatha (Mia Wasikowska) arrives in Los Angeles, and needs a limo driver named Jerome (Robert Pattinson) to drive her around town. The reason? She wants to go to the former house of child star Benjie Weiss (Evan Bird), who we meet in one of the next few scenes. Agatha has burns on her face, pretty bad ones, and she takes a shitload of medication. These are things we are made aware of before it's time to address Benjie. Benjie is like a Justin Bieber level child actor, who is visiting a child suffering from non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. She dies sometime after his visit, and it is made clear at the end of his visit that this kid Benjie is a piece of shit. He says some really horrible shit about his agent, then it's back to his huge house. Apparently Benjie has a drug problem, even though he's 13. His mother Cristina (Olivia Williams) has set things up so that Benjie can get back to work and make tons of money, which makes the viewer believe that's sustaining her lifestyle even though I don't think it was. Cristina's husband Stafford (John Cusack), is like a Dr. Phil of this universe. He is weird as fuck.

There is one more character as well, I would consider her the lead of this film. Havana Segrand (Julianne Moore) is an aging actress, who is treated by Stafford for her problems that seem to be sexually related. She wants to star in a remake of a movie that her mother did, and I don't really know why. Now, how does this all tie together? Well, if you're paying attention early, nothing I've said could be considered a spoiler because you should catch on basically immediately. See, Agatha and Benjie? They're siblings. What's Agatha doing in Los Angeles? It seems that she needs a job. Havana hires her. The last little bit to tie this all together is that the Benjie and Havana see visions. Havana sees them of her mother, and Benjie sees them of the girl who died in the hospital. This happens often. What's more? Agatha is a schizophrenic.

This setup is such that it was probably better befitting of an HBO miniseries than a film, because some of the revelations that follow desperately needed to be spread out. Maps to the Stars is also filmed like an HBO show, which is why this is sticking in my mind. I don't know if this was intended in any way, but there are characters here who needed more time in order to develop. As things sit without that, this movie can be very goofy at times. There is no feeling of Los Angeles in this movie, which isn't surprising because it was only barely filmed in Los Angeles. Very few scenes utilize the scenery of the area and the film feels detached from the area. For the record, I was not entirely sure if this was filmed in Los Angeles when watching the movie. My reason for thinking so was that so much time was spent indoors. I think it's a little unusual for a story set in this city to not take place outside. A lot of people here spend their time outside and on the move. Not at home.

This is a satire, obviously, and I see exactly how that works. Let's look at how. First, there's a conversation in which "Harvey" is mentioned as it relates to casting a film. There is much commentary about how actresses and actors have to suck dick in order to get roles, or similar things of that nature. Havana makes these jokes and does the same thing herself. There's also the way child actors are treated. Their problems are buried, they are forced to do things they may not want to do, and they have to take part in a business that treats them like cattle. Not only that, but they're dicks. Everyone is able to see it except their fans, and the people who need them to make money just have to get over it. Benjie is sent to rehab for his drug problem and it is quite comical how the program is described. This film also has the Cronenberg touch of crazy, provocative shit happening when you don't expect it. I don't want to spoil exactly what I mean here. On the negative side there's a special effects scene that is really, really bad. I cannot believe this CGI made it into the film. It is the worst I have seen in a mid-budget film for ages.

There are good performances here, specifically from Moore. Moore seems to relish this role entirely and play it up as far as she possibly can. The things she does and says are both funny and disturbing, and there are many actors who have gone down similar paths over the years. Carrie Fisher had many breakdowns over the years, and she does a cameo in this film, so that's...strange? I don't know if it's intentional. Mel Gibson and Charlie Sheen had breakdowns that speak for themselves. I found this character to be particularly accurate, although I'm not really going to delve into the visions these characters have. I understand them, but I don't think there's anything to be gained from really talking about them. In the case of the mental illnesses Agatha and Benjie had, the implication of why they had them was sitting right there, yet left unconnected throughout the film. I am merely left to wonder. The other performances are what they are. The film is not capable of sustaining the story because it shouldn't be a film, it needs to be longer. There is too much to unpack.

If you say you didn't laugh at some of the big scenes, you'd be a liar, but the presentation of them is such that I'm not sure it was ever intended for people to laugh at them. This seems to be a disconnect between the screenplay and directing. How am I qualified to make that judgment? There are countless lines early that only have comedic value, that's why they're there. There are others as the film continues, yet everything is presented in deadpan fashion. It seems like there was a major tonal clash here. The most interesting part of the movie is the aging actress, yet the movie about Agatha and Benjie. I would like to see more movies critiquing Hollywood in this manner, but there's a reason that there aren't very many of them. This film has a lot of good lines and great moments, and a fantastic performance from Moore, but this is still not a complete film. I love Julianne Moore though, I really do. As for the opening paragraphs and what I wanted to say about running out of material for them, it's because when films hover around the fringes of average such as this, it can be difficult to formulate thoughts until I get rolling and describing the story. So, going forward, I don't know if anyone cares but it may turn out that sometimes I just don't have an opening paragraph, or take stuff that's usually later in the review and throw it in the front.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10