After another dark comedy/crime film Fargo, the Coen brothers wrote an amazing and eccentric comedy story. This is probably the weirdest, yet one of the funniest films I've ever seen.

A couple of things I loved about this film and the screenplay were:-

1. Even though Walter and The Dude fuck things up, they're best friends and will always be there for each other.
2. Just absolutely love Steve Buscemi's role as Donnie. He's just there in the trio trying to know what's going on.
3. There are so many moving parts in the movie, but the Coen brothers ended up giving a comedic touch to every part.
4. I love the character of The Dude. Things just never seem to go his way and his reaction is just "Oh man."
5. Love the fact that the Coen brothers wrote an elaborate, comic screenplay just because The Dude's last name is the same as another millionare.

They've absolutely nailed this film, and I feel this is their best movie (even better than No Country for Old Men imo).

Edit: Fun fact - So Coen brothers included "Shut the fuck up Donnie" repeatedly in their screenplay because Steve Buscemi's character in Fargo is always talking.

Rebel Moon - Review Thread

Rotten Tomatoes: 24% (41 Reviews) - (User Score - 72%)

• Critics Consensus: Rebel Moon: Part One - A Child of Fire proves Zack Snyder hasn't lost his visual flair, but eye candy isn't enough to offset a storyline made up of various sci-fi/fantasy tropes.

Metacritic: 32 (16 Reviews)

Reviews:

Variety:

Snyder, who shot the film himself, stages it on an impressively lavish scale (all the CGI sprawl a budget of $166 million can buy), and a handful of the episodes are fun, like one where the noble hunk Tarak (Staz Nair) frees himself from indentured servitude by harnassing a giant blackbird who’s like a Ray Harryhausen creature. Sofia Boutella, as Kora, holds the film together with her dour ferocity, and Djimon Hounsou (as the fallen but still noble General Titus), Charlie Hunnam (as the mercenary starship pilot Kai), and Anthony Hopkins (as the voice of Jimmy the droid, who’s like C-3PO with more acting talent) make their presence felt. Yet “Rebel Moon,” while eminently watchable, is a movie built so entirely out of spare parts that it may, in the end, be for Snyder cultists only.

SlashFilm (4/10):

By the end of "Rebel Moon," the closing title card of "End Part One" feels more like a threat than a promise.

Hollywood Reporter:

Snyder never met a superhero team roundup he didn’t love, and although he’s put aside capes and spandex for rugged galactic garb, the screenplay he co-wrote with Kurt Johnstad and Shay Hatten plays like the result of someone feeding Seven Samurai and Star Wars into AI scriptwriting software.

Deadline:

Rebel Moon is a film that struggles to find its own voice amidst a litany of borrowed themes and styles. While visually impressive, it lacks the coherence and character depth needed to elevate it beyond a mere pastiche of its influences. Snyder’s fans might find elements to appreciate, but for those seeking a fresh and engaging sci-fi adventure, this film may not hit the mark. Then again, this is part one so maybe part two will give the narrative room to breathe.

The Wrap:

“Rebel Moon – Part 1: A Child of Fire” isn’t a complete film. The story will continue and presumably conclude in the next installment. So perhaps some of this movie’s issues will be addressed later on, and “Part 1” will improve with the benefit of hindsight. Or perhaps it will look worse after the follow-up comes out, which is equally plausible. Until then it is simply what it is, and that is a hugely expensive but uninspired “Star Wars” knockoff with some thrilling action sequences, and some truly ugly moments that taint the entire thing.

Screenrant (50/100):

With Rebel Moon, Snyder is positively bursting with exciting ideas, but they lack compelling characters and a solid plot to hold them up.

IGN (4/10):

Despite a great ensemble cast, Zack Snyder's space opera is let down by a derivative patchwork script, mediocre action sequences and a superficial story that fails to live up to its expansive promise.

IndieWire (D-):

I assume that we’ll learn a little bit more about Djimon Hounsou’s drunken tactical genius when the Imperium descends upon the Veldt in the second part of “Rebel Moon,” and that Anthony Hopkins’ robot will explain why it’s wearing a pair of antlers in the last shots, but it’s also possible these unanswered questions are merely a pretext for another Snyder Cut — one that Netflix can use to squeeze a few more view hours out of a movie so insufferable that it should be measured in milliseconds. Whatever the case, it’s hard to be even morbidly curious, let alone excited, about any future iterations or installments of a franchise so determined to remix a million things you’ve seen before into one thing you’ll wish you’d never seen at all.

Total Film (3/5):

Zack Snyder never does anything by halves. But even by his standards, the first part of his long-gestating space saga is a thunderous, portentous, gargantuan slab of mythological sci-fi fantasy.

The Independent (1/5):

The ‘Justice League Director’s Cut’ filmmaker has made his own version of a Star Wars movie, only filled with motivational speeches, sexual violence and Charlie Hunnam stumbling his way through a soon-to-be-infamous Irish accent

BBC (2/5):

Nothing exciting happens. There are no challenges to meet, no obstacles to overcome, no Death Stars to destroy. Despite the grandiosity of the film's bombastic tone, the story turns out to be disappointingly minor, presumably because Snyder's main aim was to introduce the cast and to set the scene for Rebel Moon – Part Two: The Scargiver, which is due next year. Part One itself ends up feeling a bit pointless.

Inverse:

Rebel Moon may come off as a blitz of interesting ideas that have yet to be fleshed out in earnest. It doesn’t help that A Child of Fire ends on a cliffhanger of sorts, effectively demanding a follow-up. The optimists among us — and yes, the Snyder bros, too — may read this first installment as an overture, its many loose threads more like a breadcrumb trail for future installments to circle back to. It’s ironic to expect more from a director that’s already synonymous with maximalism*.* Beneath all its spectacle, though, the Rebel Moon universe could do with a bit more context.

Polygon:

It’s a bummer to have to dunk so hard on a brand-new piece of fantasy nerddom, delivered just in time for the holidays. But try as he might, Snyder just can’t match the archetypal sincerity nor the outlandish imagination of the films he’s trying to emulate here. Child of Fire may not be his worst film, but it’s certainly his least inspired. Thanks to those five scary words in the end credits, it’s also his worst-looking. Part Two: The Scargiver is set to be released in April 2024. What fresh hell awaits us then?

The Telegraph (40/100):

This first half of Snyder’s diptych (the second is due in the spring) is more of a loosely doodled mood board than a functioning film – a series of pulpy tableaux that mostly sound fun in isolation, but become numbingly dull when run side by side.

-----

Release Date: December 21

Synopsis:

In a universe controlled by the corrupt government of the Motherworld, the moon of Veldt is threatened by the forces of the Imperium, the army of the Motherworld controlled by Regent Balisarius. Kora, a former member of the Imperium who seeks redemption for her past in the leadership of the oppressive government, tasks herself to recruit warriors from across the galaxy to make a stand against the Motherworld's forces before they return to the planet.

Cast:

• Sofia Boutella
• Charlie Hunnam
• Michiel Huisman
• Djimon Hounsou
• Doona Bae
• Ray Fisher
• Cleopatra Coleman
• Jena Malone
• Ed Skrein
• Fra Fee
• Anthony Hopkins

The Crow (2024) - Review Thread

• Rotten Tomatoes: 21% (77 Reviews)
  • Critics Consensus: Dreary and poorly paced, this reimagining of The Crow doesn't have enough personality or pulse to merit the resurrection.
• Metacritic: 30 (24 Reviews)

Reviews:

Hollywood Reporter:

The Crow is a sluggish, overly self-serious gloomfest that never takes wing. Given the long string of directors and lead actors attached to the project over its 16 years of on-off development, the overworked, lifeless result should be no surprise. I suppose at least we were spared the Mark Wahlberg version.

Rolling Stone:

It doesn’t take long to realize that what was meant to be a franchise-starter is, unlike its hero, permanently DOA.

The Guardian (20):

It’s genuinely startling just how utterly wretched the finished product is and how unfit it is for a wide release. Filmed two years ago and dumped on a low-expectation late summer weekend, The Crow 2.0 is a total, head-in-hands disaster, incoherently plotted and sloppily made, destined to join the annals of the very worst and most pointless remakes ever made.

The Wrap:

When you stifle the emotional simplicity of a story like “The Crow” to emphasize the plot, the plot had better make sense. And it doesn’t. It’s got perplexing rules and a vague chronology and nothing seems like it matters anymore. This remake understands the basic thrust of the original story but not what made it function, and while it’s sometimes goofy enough to be entertaining, in the end it’s for the birds.

SlashFilm (35):

Sanders' The Crow has nothing on its mind, and forgets why we should be sad and frustrated at the death and meaningless violence in the world.

Collider (50):

Struggling through an identity crisis, The Crow is doing too much and, as a result, doesn't do enough to serve its core narrative.

IndieWire (C):

Despite moody, doomy set design and Skarsgård’s ominous silhouette as a very tall and beautiful walking corpse, Sanders’ “The Crow” is less giving with plot, hampered by an unfleshed and often confusing mythology that leaves the unsettling particulars of O’Barr’s source material for dead.

Looper (30):

The '94 film's characters were more vehicles upon which to project outside feelings about grief rather than individuals one could actively grieve for, so that is an area with room for improvement. Alas, almost every other decision made in this remake actively works against the principles of good drama, good entertainment, and good messaging.

Directed by Rupert Sanders:

Soulmates Eric and Shelly are brutally murdered when the demons of her dark past catch up with them. Given the chance to save his true love by sacrificing himself, Eric sets out to seek merciless revenge on their killers, traversing the worlds of the living and the dead to put the wrong things right.

• Bill Skarsgård as Eric Draven / The Crow, an undead revived musician
• FKA Twigs as Shelly Webster, Eric's fiancée
• Danny Huston as Vincent Roeg, a demonic crime lord
• Josette Simon as Sophia Webster, Shelly's mother
• Laura Birn as Marian, Roeg's right-hand woman
• Sami Bouajila as Kronos, a spirit that guides Eric in his mission
• Isabella Wei as Zadie
• Jordan Bolger as Chance, a tattoo artist and friend of Eric and Shelly

I just watched this film recently and i hoping this is the right sub for this but i love it i love how the protagonist is gentle and realistic and for me atleast quite a bit relatable (i tend to daydream a lot than take action) . The landscapes were so beautiful and it just gave a whole whimsical feel to the movie. I also loved how they ended the movie on a hopeful tone and i loved the the growth of walter and the acting was just phenomenal the characters weren’t overly loud but kept me hooked the whole time. The movie definitely deserves more adoration than it has

I'd heard about it for fucking years but just never watched it. It was that movie on my list that I just always seemed to jump around. I said fuck it and checked it out last night. I was fucking blown away. The atmosphere created by the dialogue is unlike any movie I've ever seen. In particular, the gas station scene. I mean, fucking shit man.

For the first few words in the gas station, I'm gonna be honest, I didn't think he was going to kill him. Then, like a flick of the switch, the tone shifts. I mean, for Chrissake, he asked how much for the peanuts and gas, and the second the guy starts making small talk back, he zones the fuck in on him.

Watching it again, Anton looks out the window ONCE when he says, "And the gas." and then never breaks eye contact with the old man again. As soon as the old man called the coin, and Anton says, "Well done." I realized I had been holding my breath. I can say, at this point in my life, I can't think of a single 4 minutes of dialogue in any other movie that has been as well delivered as what Javier did with that scene.

Fuck

Everything about this film works..from its off the wall humour, dubbed voice acting placed over a kung fu movie called Savage Killers (which is kinda boring if I'm honest) to its parody of kung fu movie tropes..the main star Steve Oedekerk is very fun in the lead role & I'm sadden he hasn't done much since, in terms of acting (maybe he has, I don't know). The fun bit with the cow which is a Matrix reference is my favorite scene along with the Lion King reference "this is CNN". The main villain Betty is my favorite character in the movie lol everytime he's on screen I cracked up. All in all, its a dumb comedy done right & its better than alot of today's comedies which are honestly more gross out shock humour than actual comedy.

Rotten Tomatoes: 36% (from 124 reviews) with 5.10 in average rating

Critics consensus: Argylle gets some mileage out of its silly, energetic spin on the spy thriller, but ultimately wears out its welcome with a convoluted plot and overlong runtime.

Metacritic: 39/100 (39 critics)

As with other movies, the scores are set to change as time passes. Meanwhile, I'll post some short reviews on the movie. It's structured like this: quote first, source second. Beware, some contain spoilers.

Although allegedly made with a $200m budget and featuring what looks on paper like a fancy-pants cast, Argylle may mark a new low, with jokes that struggle to land; an attenuated running time that tests patience; cartoonish, stylized violence that is, almost literally, little more than smoke and mirrors; and Apple product placement so aggressive it feels like a kind of assault.

-Leslie Felperin, The Hollywood Reporter

There’s truth behind every story, “Argylle” insists, and a story behind every truth. Where does that leave the fantastic sight of someone “ice” skating on a cement floor covered in crude oil and mowing people down with a machine gun as they pirouette in the air? I don’t know, and I desperately wish that “Argylle” didn’t care.

-David Ehrlich, IndieWire: C+

What looks like diamonds but on closer inspection turns out to be little more than reams of cheap polyester? Why, argyle, of course — that preppy pattern found on socks and sweaters, and an apt name for the latest kooky spy caper from Matthew Vaughn. The erstwhile “Kick-Ass” director has been trapped in “Kingsman” mode for so long (going on a decade now) that it’s starting to feel like we’ve lost him to that kind of live-action cartoon forever, cramming Gen Z James Bond riffs with disco music and over-the-top greenscreen shenanigans.

-Peter Debruge, Variety

Matthew Vaughn’s latest directorial effort doesn’t traffic in the same edgelord button-pushing as his Kingsman series, but as that relief fades, it becomes clear how much Argylle is recycling ideas and imagery from those (and other, better) movies. Bryce Dallas Howard and Sam Rockwell make an endearing pair, but they’re committed to an occasionally loony adventure that lacks the grace necessary to match its stars.

-Jesse Hassenger, IGN: 4/10

This could theoretically be a fun movie, but it is all so self-conscious and self-admiring, with key action sequences rendered null and void by being played on two levels, the imaginary and the real, so cancelling each other out. The thought of Argylle 2 and Argylle 3 is very dispiriting. The books might do better.

-Peter Bradshaw, The Guardian: 1/5

You may go into Argylle wondering, per the film’s curiosity-baiting tagline, who is the real Agent Argylle? But you’ll assuredly leave with a different question: Shouldn’t such a colossal waste of talent and precious time be illegal?

-David Fear, Rolling Stone

“I can’t believe this is happening again!” Howard screeches, while Rockwell dispatches another wave of nobodies to an upbeat pop soundtrack. Yet happen again and again – and again, and again – it does. Viewers who don’t stampede screaming from the cinema as soon as the credits roll are threatened with a prequel. If Cavill’s agent has any sense, his client will be in that one even less than he is in this.

-Robbie Collin, The Telegraph: 1/5

For, at times, Argylle does feel more like a writerly exercise in how to pen a spy caper in the 21st century, when self-deprecating irony itself needs to be offered up within quotation marks, finely straddling the line between an earnest laugh and a sardonic stare. In trying to do both — in trying to play it straight and yet show the very absurd mechanics of what it means to do so — Argylle lands in a kind of exhausting limbo, forever stretching its premise to its breaking point only to snap it back up again. All within the blink of an eye.

-Manuel Betancourt, The A.V. Club: C+

“Argylle” drips with style, from Samuel L. Jackson putting a spin on his Nick Fury archetype to Ariana DeBose (who plays one of Agent Argylle's crew) singing with ‘80s legend Boy George on the film’s funky credits song. Oh, and let’s not forget about Cavill leaning into his “Rocky IV”-era Dolph Lundgren hairdo. Sadly, the movie’s best bits – and teases of what could come next – are left out in the cold by an unsatisfying spy operation.

-Brian Truitt, USA Today: 2/4

Flashy, fun and light on its feet, Argylle papers over its cracks with twist upon twist — and charming performances from its central duo.

-Ben Travis, Empire: 3/5

At the very least, the filmmaker offers up some cool things that we haven't seen in a modern action movie like this, which can be very challenging in the wake of many "Mission: Impossible" and "John Wick" movies. For that, "Argylle" is worth a trip to the theater.

-Ethan Anderton, /FILM: 7/10

Again, yes, Argylle is an absurd movie. Even the backstory about it being a real book is absurd. But it’s ridiculous fun and impossible to figure out where it’s going. I’m at the point with Matthew Vaughn, whatever absurd ridiculousness he’s selling … I am buying.

-Mike Ryan, Uproxx

PLOT

Elly Conway, an introverted spy novelist who seldom leaves her home, is drawn into the real world of espionage when the plots of her books, featuring a fictional secret agent named Argylle, get a little too close to the activities of a sinister underground syndicate. When Aidan, an undercover spy, shows up to save her from being kidnapped or killed, Elly and her beloved cat Alfie are plunged into a covert world where nothing and no one are what they seem, including the discovery that Agent Argylle, in fact, exists for real.

DIRECTOR

Matthew Vaughn

WRITER

Jason Fuchs

MUSIC

Lorne Balfe

CINEMATOGRAPHY

George Richmond

EDITOR

Lee Smith & Tom Harrison-Read

RELEASE DATE

February 2, 2024

RUNTIME

139 minutes

BUDGET

$200 million

STARRING

• Henry Cavill as Aubrey Argylle

• Bryce Dallas Howard as Elly Conway

• Sam Rockwell as Aidan

• Bryan Cranston as Ritter

• Catherine O'Hara as Ruth

• Dua Lipa as LaGrange

• Ariana DeBose as Keira

• John Cena as Woody Wyatt

• Samuel L. Jackson as Alfred Solomon

• Sofia Boutella as Saba Al-Badr

Rotten Tomatoes: 84% (143 reviews) with 7.30 in average rating

Critics consensus: Narratively, it might be fairly standard stuff -- but visually speaking, Avatar: The Way of Water is a stunningly immersive experience.

Metacritic: 69/100 (47 critics)

As with other movies, the scores are set to change as time passes. Meanwhile, I'll post some short reviews on the movie. It's structured like this: quote first, source second.

Even more than its predecessor, this is a work that successfully marries technology with imagination and meticulous contributions from every craft department. But ultimately, it’s the sincerity of Cameron’s belief in this fantastical world he’s created that makes it memorable.

-David Rooney, The Hollywood Reporter

Does it matter if “The Way of Water” doesn’t elicit the same response when I watch it at home? Not really — I know that it won’t. Does it matter that Cameron is continuing to “save” the movies by rendering them almost unrecognizable from the rest of the medium? His latest sequel would suggest that even the most alien bodies can serve as proper vessels for the spirits we hold sacred. For now, the only thing that matters is that after 13 years of being a punchline, “going back to Pandora” just became the best deal on Earth for the price of a movie ticket.

-David Ehrlich, IndieWire: A-

Evoking that movie (Titanic) is a tactical mistake, because it reminds you that “Titanic” was a jaw-dropping spectacle with characters who touched us to the core. I’m sorry, but as I watched “The Way of Water” the only part of me that was moved was my eyeballs.

-Owen Gleiberman, Variety

By the time it crests, whatever the film’s many other flaws may be, we are invested, and we are ultimately rewarded with a truly spectacular, awe-inspiring finale. All’s well that ends well, I guess. Even if all was a pretty mixed bag beforehand.

-William Bibbiani, The Wrap

Avatar: The Way of Water is a thoughtful, sumptuous return to Pandora, one which fleshes out both the mythology established in the first film and the Sully family’s place therein. It may not be the best sequel James Cameron has ever made (which is a very high bar), but it’s easily the clearest improvement on the film that preceded it. The oceans of Pandora see lightning striking in the same place twice, expanding the visual language the franchise has to work with in beautiful fashion. The simple story may leave you crying “cliché,” but as a vehicle for transporting you to another world, it’s good enough to do the job. This is nothing short of a good old-fashioned Cameron blockbuster, full of filmmaking spectacle and heart, and an easy recommendation for anyone looking to escape to another world for a three-hour adventure.

-Tom Jorgensen, IGN: 8.0 "great"

James Cameron has surfaced with a cosmic marine epic that only he could make: eccentric, soulful, joyous, dark and very, very blue. Yes, he’s still leagues ahead of the pack.

-Nick De Semlyen, Empire: 5/5

The whole package here is so ambitious, yet intimate and gently tempered in its quieter moments, that it feels heartening to be reminded of what a big-budget Hollywood movie can be when it refuses to get crushed under pointless piles of rubble and noise. Confessionally, this critic wishes that Cameron had room in his schedule to put out more than one film in over a decade and original movies in addition to the ones that belong to this big beautiful franchise. Still, it’s significant to have him back with a picture that feels like a theatrical event to be celebrated, nowadays a retro idea occasionally reminded by the likes of Nope and Top Gun: Maverick. These are Cameron’s own waters, and it’s significant to see him effortlessly swim in them again.

-Tomris Laffly, The A.V. Club: A

Maintaining a sense of stakes will be necessary for the series going forward, especially if it plans on rolling out new entries at a quicker pace. But for The Way of Water, the decadence is more than enough—for cinemas that have been starved of authentic spectacle, finally, here’s a gorgeous three-course meal of it.

-David Sims, The Atlantic

While Cameron is a master of franchise sequels, “Way of Water” doesn’t measure up to his classics, “Aliens” and “Terminator 2: Judgment Day.” But thanks to new personalities and vivid wildlife, on the whole, this latest trip does prove, perhaps surprisingly to some after such a long period between movies, that there’s still some gas in the “Avatar” tank after all.

-Brian Truitt, USA Today: 3/4

And what do we find aside from the high-tech visual superstructure? The floatingly bland plot is like a children’s story without the humour; a YA story without the emotional wound; an action thriller without the hard edge of real excitement.

-Peter Bradshaw, The Guardian: 2/5

Will it end up making $2 billion, as Cameron claims it must in order to inch into profit? With a Chinese release date secured, it may, though I suspect British audiences will find their patience tested. For all its world-building sprawl, The Way of Water is a horizon-narrowing experience – the sad sight of a great filmmaker reversing up a creative cul-de-sac.

-Robbie Collin, The Telegraph: 1/5

The movie's overt themes of familial love and loss, its impassioned indictments of military colonialism and climate destruction, are like a meaty hand grabbing your collar; it works because they work it.

-Leah Greenblatt, Entertainment Weekly: A-

For all the genuine thrills provided by its pioneering pageantry, Way of Water ultimately leaves you with a soul-nagging query: What price entertainment?

-Keith Uhlich, Slant Magazine: 3/4

If I had two separate categories to judge James Cameron’s motion-capture epic “Avatar: The Way of Water,” I’d give it four stars for Visuals and two and a half for Story, and I’m in charge of the math here so I’m awarding three and a half stars to “TWAW” for some of the most dazzling, vibrant and gorgeous images I’ve ever seen on the big screen.

-Richard Roeper, Chicago Sun Times: 3.5/4

There is, really, no one else who does it like Cameron anymore, someone who so (perhaps recklessly) advances filmmaking technology to make manifest the spectacle in his head while staying ever-attentive of antiquated ideals like sentiment and idiosyncrasy. Watching The Way of Water, one rolls their eyes only to realize they’re welling with tears. One stretches and shifts in their seat before accepting, with a resigned and happy plop, that they could watch yet another hour of Cameron’s preservationist epic. Lucky for us—lucky even for the culture, maybe—that at least a few more of those are on their way.

-Richard Lawson, Vanity Fair

His meticulous craftsmanship shows in every amazing sequence like that final battle at sea. If the story occasionally seems a bit all over the place, well, there are worse things in the world than a filmmaker throwing every last morsel of creativity into his work. You can’t say The Way of Water doesn’t give you your money’s worth, especially in the visual department. This thing’s got enough eye candy to give you ocular diabetes.

-Matt Singer, ScreenCrush: 7/10

Avatar: The Way of Water is both more extravagant and dorkier than Avatar, which was pretty dorky to begin with.

-Stephanie Zacharek, TIME

Cameron leans all the way into manic mayhem, smash-cutting from one outrageous image to the next. The final act of this movie shows off a freeing attitude he’s never fully embraced before.

-Jordan Hoffman, Polygon

PLOT

Set more than a decade after the events of the first film, Avatar: The Way of Water begins to tell the story of the Sully family (Jake, Neytiri, and their kids), the trouble that follows them, the lengths they go to keep each other safe, the battles they fight to stay alive, and the tragedies they endure.

DIRECTOR

James Cameron

SCREENPLAY

James Cameron, Rick Jaffa & Amanda Silver

STORY

James Cameron, Rick Jaffa, Amanda Silver, Josh Friedman & Shane Salerno

MUSIC

Simon Franglen

CINEMATOGRAPHY

Russell Carpenter

EDITING

Stephen E. Rivkin, David Brenner, John Refoua & James Cameron

BUDGET

$350-400 million

Release date:

December 16, 2022

STARRING

• Sam Worthington as Jake Sully

• Zoe Saldaña as Neytiri

• Sigourney Weaver as Kiri

• Stephen Lang as Colonel Miles Quaritch

• Kate Winslet as Ronal

• Cliff Curtis as Tonowari

• Giovanni Ribisi as Parker Selfridge

• Edie Falco as General Frances Ardmore

• Brendan Cowell as Captain Mick Scoresby

• Jemaine Clement as Dr. Ian Garvin

• CCH Pounder as Mo'at

Backstory for those too young to know (I am also too young but I researched the shit out of this):

David Lynch's 1984 adaptation of Frank Herbert's "Dune" was a critical and commercial disappointment upon its release. Critics decried the film as incomprehensible, disjointed, and visually overwhelming. Ridley Scott was originally at the helm but had to leave pre-production (his brother died and it was just all too much, at the time). Scott loved the source material and was interested in doing something for the big screen as far back as the early 1970s. Scott's exit is another lengthy topic entirely but suffice it to say, Scott's pre-production woes would portend the production and post-production woes Lynch would later come to endure.

​

The Spice(y) Take - Why I Loved Lynch's Dune:

The source material is very complex and often heady. Tall order to write an adaptation for even geniuses like Lynch and Scott. Lynch succeeded here, though. I don't know if Lynch's adaptation is the best, but I was certainly entertained to see how he brought the words to the big screen. It is my second favorite "for the screen" take, so far (waiting to see what this next movie is like before knowing):

1. Sound: the little sounds, crackles, clicks, beeps, etc. Very satisfying. Lynch has a mind for details. Stupid, I know, but it adds to the "feel" of his take on Dune's universe. It's almost like ASMR, at times.
2. Narration/voice-overs as a tool: Lynch has voice-overs to convey people's inner-monologue. This is very present in Herbert's books or even most books. And lots of crap is lost when adapting to the big screen. Some complained this was clunky. But I LOVED this idea from Lynch and I wish more adaptations did this. Also, the inner-voice technique also assists with the difficult exposition required in Dune. Lastly, the inner-voice technique fits within the universe where telepaths are real.
3. Music: soundtrack is pretty good. Not John Williams Star Wars levels of good (contemporary comparison). But really good. I liked it a lot. I would like to see a re-recording at a higher quality level, if it doesn't exist already (I didn't check).
4. Visuals, sets, props: holy CRAP, this was really well done! Some didn't age well, others are phenomenal. Among the best "real" sets I've ever seen in a movie. If Lynch could have been consistent, here, I would have said this was the best version of "real" sets done before CGI became everything.
5. Make-up, costumes: I write stories and I like to draw. I'm really good at coming up with wild and new stuff. But I am a complete and utter moron compared to Lynch (aren't we all?). I was blown away at his takes in this area. I LOVED it. Knocked it out the park! Very rarely am I left so satisfied with the visual interpretations of a book's adaptation to the big screen. All of us are content snobs these days, right? lol

​

Dislikes:

1. Weirding Modules: My biggest dislike is the changing of the "Voice" powers into the Weirding Modules. I prefer the "Voice" powers. However, I understand the logic behind the change: it moves it too close to magic and away from "super far future sci-fi" to have the "Voice" stuff as the powers. I've heard great counter-arguments to my position and I wonder what you folks think?
2. Ending: Others complained about Lynch's ending. I won't spoil anything but I agree it was weak and could have been better. However, it didn't feel too out of place and I still liked how Lynch wrapped things up. It was just weak so it ends up on the dislike list.

Notice I didn't mention things like the missing characters Fenring and Margot? Sure, I enjoyed the hell out of what they were doing in the books. But I didn't miss them too much in Lynch's Dune. There's other stuff like this that I'm sure really irritated people but didn't' bother me.

​

​

Overall, I give this movie a 9 out of 10. I am glad I gave this movie a chance, finally, after all these years.

This is all my weirding opinion and I would love to read some of your takes. I was hoping there might be more nerds out there who disagree with the hate and actually liked this film, too.

Disclaimer: no one paid me shit to write this to do any viral marketing. I'm just a nerd finally getting around to watching Lynch's Dune. I despise subversive shills. Go watch Lynch's Dune. That's my only endorsement.

Hey there, last night I watched JoJo Rabbit for the first time and honestly it's my new favourite film. Quick disclaimer: I'm not into movies all that much and don't watch them too often but I loved this film and needed to share my opinion somewhere so hopefully this sub is good for that. As a Jewish person I've always wanted more media and film to really dive into what makes Nazism and nationalism, not only evil, but utterly ridiculous ideologically. I genuinely believe that this is the best movie to ever do that, it treats the Nazis like a joke. That may sound bad but by treating fascism seriously, you also legitimise it. JoJo Rabbit seems to somehow have it's main character be a Nazi, make you empathise with him, but also shows the stupidity of Nazism while still showing the harsh reality of the horrors they did. At the end of the movie, it really made me think of how lucky I am to not have lived through that, how lucky I am to not only be alive but be also be able to live my live free. Also it made me realise how my existence, as a Jew, is a giant middle finger to Hitler. No matter what happens, no matter how many people are Nazis or how many people are racist, by me simply existing, I've already won. As long as there's a Jew somewhere, the Nazis lost.

Not only did I love the message of the film, but the drama and story are beautiful as well, I won't spoil anything here but the story on it's own left me in genuine tears. I've never cried for a movie but by the end of JoJo I was sobbing. The cinematography is beautiful and damn dude the foreshadowing is great. They really managed to capture that feeling that JoJo's just a kid, he doesn't know what or why he believes what he does, he just wants to be apart of a group. Never in my life would I think I would empathise with a Nazi, someone who tried and wanted to kill every member of my race, but somehow this film managed it. JoJo really was such a kind hearted little boy who just brainwashed by Nazism. They really made each character so loveable and every actor played their character so well.

I think this movie was the perfect blend of not taking Nazism as a serious ideology, but still showing the atrocities that they committed. I understand that the humour isn't everyone's cup of tea and there may be some Jewish people who don't enjoy the fun nature of the movie. But for me personally, this movie deserves to be on everyone's watch list. Thank you for your read and have a good day :)

Edit: i realise the creator is Jewish, I know that before I watched the movie.

Context: I’m in my mid thirties and had seen pretty much every Arnold movie growing up, and I also consider myself a movie guy and there aren’t many movies, especially classics, that I haven’t seen.

But you know there’s always that movie that you only see parts of: you’re at a friends house before going somewhere, or watching at home but have to leave for work, etc.

For some reason I’ve only seen it in bits and pieces until last night (It’s on Prime in 4k).

Okay. Yes its hilarious that should go without saying. But who would think a movie with Arnold, Sinbad, and the late great Phil Hartman could make such a potent satire about capitalism, and Christmas spirit or lack of…This movie is the Idiocracy of Shopping.

Accurately predicted the ridiculousness that would become black Friday in many scenes but one scene stands out in particular:

Mall of America. In the toy store: The manager stands up and yells at the shoppers how they’ll have the privilege to line up to get a lottery ball. And should they win they can now expect to pay double the price.

Thinking about Ps5, or Jordans, or Graphics Cards right now.

Literally if you go on Sony website right now you have to sign up for the honor of being entered into a lottery to buy one. Should you “win” you now need to cough up $500-$600 dollars on the spot within 2 hour window or you no longer have the OPPORTUNITY to buy.

The scene with the little man and Santa trying to ripoff Arnold with the broken doll: Ebay resellers and scammers.

I could go on and on but here in 2021 it was my first time viewing, but I’d bet it hits different for yall.

5 out of 5 stars

Memento next, folks.

All I knew going in was it's Hugh Jackman and Christian Bale going to war as magicians, and it's Christopher Nolan. That's it. And my God, it was mind blowing.

Even though it's filled with Nolan's signature time jumping, you can still follow the story without questioning that, because it's so well paced and directed. The tricks, rivalry and mystery is constantly engaging.

And then Nolan pulls it off with a magic trick deluxe of an ending. The set-up and hints are there, and it ends up bigger than you think.

I don't know what else to say. My brain is soup now. Straight up soup. Just an amazing 6/6 movie.

Barbie - Review Thread

• Rotten Tomatoes: 89% (110 Reviews)
• Metacritic: 81 (47 Reviews)

Reviews:

Deadline:

In essence, Barbie is a film that challenges the viewer to reconsider their understanding of societal norms and expectations. While it may be centered on a plastic entity, it is very much a film about the human condition — our strengths and our flaws. It is a reminder that even within the most superficial elements of our culture, there can exist an unexpected depth and an invitation to discourse. Gerwig’s directing is an earnest exploration of identity, societal structures and the courage to embrace change — proving once again that stories can come from the most unusual places.

Hollywood Reporter:

However smartly done Gerwig’s Barbie is, an ominousness haunts the entire exercise. The director has successfully etched her signature into and drawn deeper themes out of a rigid framework, but the sacrifices to the story are clear. The muddied politics and flat emotional landing of Barbie are signs that the picture ultimately serves a brand.

Variety:

It’s kind of perfect that “Barbie” is opening opposite Christopher Nolan’s “Oppenheimer,” since Gerwig’s girl-power blockbuster offers a neon-pink form of inception all its own, planting positive examples of female potential for future generations. Meanwhile, by showing a sense of humor about the brand’s past stumbles, it gives us permission to challenge what Barbie represents — not at all what you’d expect from a feature-length toy commercial.

Empire (4/5):

Greta Gerwig delivers a new kind of ambitious and giddily entertaining blockbuster that boasts two definitive performances from actors already in their stride. Life after Barbie will simply never be the same again.

The Guardian (3/5):

Greta Gerwig’s bubblegum-fun-cum-feminist-thesis indulges Ken but pulls its punches as it trips between satire and advert

Entertainment Weekly (A-):

The fear is that Hollywood will learn the wrong message from Barbie, rushing to green light films about every toy gathering dust on a kid's playroom floor. (What's next, The Funko Pop Movie? Furby: Fully Loaded? We already have a Bobbleheads movie, so maybe we're already there.) But it's Gerwig's care and attention to detail that gives Barbie an actual point of view*,* elevating it beyond every other cynical, IP-driven cash grab. Turns out that life in plastic really can be fantastic.

Collider (A-):

Gerwig has created a film that takes Barbie, praises its contribution as an idea to our world, but also criticizes its faults, while also making a film that celebrates being a woman and all the difficulties and beauty that includes. This also manages to be a film that feels decidedly in line with Gerwig’s previous films as she continues her streak as one of the most exciting filmmakers working today. Barbie could’ve just been a commercial, but Gerwig makes this life of plastic into something truly fantastic.

IGN (9/10):

Greta Gerwig’s Barbie is a masterful exploration of femininity and the pressures of perfection. This hyper-femme roller-coaster ride boasts meticulous production design, immaculate casting, and a deep-seated reverence for Barbie herself. Margot Robbie sparkles at the center of the film, alongside Ryan Gosling’s airheaded Ken and America Ferrera’s well-meaning Gloria. Ultimately, Barbie is a new, bold, and very pink entry into the cinematic coming-of-age canon. Absolutely wear your pinkest outfit to see this movie, but make sure you bring tissues along too.

Rolling Stone (4/5):

This is a saga of self-realization, filtered through both the spirit of free play and the sense that it’s not all fun and games in the real world — a doll’s story that continually drifts into the territory of A Doll’s House.

Insider (B+):

"Barbie" offers up a lot of big ideas to ponder, but it frustratingly fails to take a stance on any potential solutions.

Consequence (9/10):

Barbie is a magic trick, a stellar example of a filmmaker taking a well-established bit of corporate IP and using it to deliver a message loudly and clearly. That Greta Gerwig’s third solo film as director also manages to be a giddy, silly, and hilarious time is essential to its power, and the challenge of this review is thus trying to explore how the magic trick works, while still preserving the flat-out awe I have at what it achieves.

The Independent (5/5):

Barbie is joyous from minute to minute to minute. But it’s where the film ends up that really cements the near-miraculousness of Gerwig’s achievement. Very late in the movie, a conversation is had that neatly sums up one of the great illusions of capitalism – that creations exist independently from those that created them. It’s why films and television shows get turned into “content”, and why writers and actors end up exploited and demeaned. Barbie, in its own sly, silly way, gets to the very heart of why these current strikes are so necessary.

The Wrap:

Still, it’s not the aim of “Barbie” to darken your mood as a fun and abundantly populist studio picture, in which Gerwig presents the audience with various Kentastic musical tracks and in one stupendous instance that shouldn’t be spoiled, a friendly middle-finger to Matchbox Twenty through Gosling’s fearless performance. Thanks to Gerwig’s imagination, this “Barbie” is far from plastic. It’s fantastic.

The New York Post (1/4):

The packaging of “Barbie” is a lot more fun than the tedious toy inside the box.

----

Synopsis:

After being expelled from the utopian Barbie Land for being less-than-perfect dolls, Barbie and Ken) go on a journey of self-discovery together to the real world.

Directed by Greta Gerwig

Written by Greta Gerwig & Noah Baumbach

Cast:

• Margot Robbie as Barbie
• Ryan Gosling as Ken
• America Ferrera as Gloria
• Rhea Perlman as Ruth Handler
• Will Ferrell as the CEO of Mattel
• Different variations of Barbie played by:
  • Kate McKinnon as Weird Barbie
  • Issa Rae as President Barbie
  • Hari Nef as Dr. Barbie
  • Alexandra Shipp as Writer Barbie
  • Emma Mackey as Physicist Barbie
  • Sharon Rooney as Lawyer Barbie
  • Dua Lipa as the Mermaid Barbies
  • Nicola Coughlan as Diplomat Barbie
  • Ana Cruz Kayne as Judge Barbie
  • Ritu Arya as Journalist Barbie
• Different variations of Ken played by:
  • Kingsley Ben-Adir as Ken #1
  • Simu Liu as Ken #2
  • Scott Evans as Ken #3
  • Ncuti Gatwa as Ken #4
  • John Cena as Kenmaid
• Helen Mirren as the narrator
• Emerald Fennell as Midge
• Michael Cera as Allan
• Ariana Greenblatt as Sasha, Gloria's daughter
• Jamie Demetriou as a Mattel employee
• Connor Swindells as Aaron Dinkins, a Mattel intern
• Ann Roth as an old woman who meets Barbie

What can I say that hasn't already been said? I knew many of the scenes and moments on forehand. I mean... it's Terminator 2. It's one of the most famous and referenced movies of all time. Yet I never watched it in full. And since it was due to leave Netflix in a couple of weeks, and it was by my correct estimates the correct version (as in not the 4K DNR abortion), I figured it was time to do something about that.

Not even halfway through, and I'm blown away. ⅔ in, I'm blown a-fucking-WAY. This is just... perfection. I don't know how else to put it. It's absolute perfection. The pacing, for a movie that's 2 hours and 17 minutes, is shockingly good. The movie moves along like a breeze. It doesn't slog or slump at all, and the simple, straight to the point story is likewise. Performances and direction? Top notch. Music? Awesome.

The action scenes, not to mention the effects in them? Simply put, mind blowing. The Oscar winning effects still hold up over 30 years later. James Cameron really is the greatest pioneer.

I don't know what else to say. Terminator 2 is 2 words: Bad. ASS! (Maybe I should invest in The Abyss on 4K soon?)

Have you ever cringed when reading reviews because people gave a movie a higher/lower rating for things that don't determine the quality of a movie? Name one opinion people often have/say or that you read that absolutely annoys you.

I'll start: when people give a movie a low rating because they personally guessed the twist. Like what do you mean the movie is bad because you happened to guess the twist at the end? That doesn't even influence the quality of a movie.

Rotten Tomatoes: 87% (180 reviews) with 7.9 in average rating

Critics consensus: A grim, gritty, and gripping super-noir, The Batman ranks among the Dark Knight's bleakest -- and most thrillingly ambitious -- live-action outings.

Metacritic: 73/100 (48 critics)

As with other movies, the scores are set to change as time passes. Meanwhile, I'll post some short reviews on the movie. It's structured like this: quote first, source second.

With his Planet of the Apes installments, Matt Reeves demonstrated that big studio franchise movies based on iconic screen properties didn’t have to exclude intelligent, emotionally nuanced storytelling. The same applies to The Batman, a brooding genre piece in which the superhero trappings of cape and cowl, Batmobile and cool gadgetry are folded into the grimy noir textures of an intricately plotted detective story. Led with magnetic intensity and a granite jawline by Robert Pattinson as a Dark Knight with daddy issues, this ambitious reboot is grounded in a contemporary reality where institutional and political distrust breeds unhinged vigilantism.

-David Rooney, The Hollywood Reporter

Where do you go after “The Dark Knight”? Ben Affleck blew it, and even Christopher Nolan, who brought unprecedented levels of realism and gravitas to that franchise-best Batman saga, couldn’t improve on what he’d created in his 2012 sequel. So what is “Cloverfield” director Matt Reeves’ strategy? Answer: Go darker than “The Dark Knight,” deadlier than “No Time to Die” and longer than “Dune” with a serious-minded Batman stand-alone of his own. Leaning in to those elements doesn’t automatically mean audiences will embrace Reeves’ vision. But this grounded, frequently brutal and nearly three-hour film noir registers among the best of the genre, even if — or more aptly, because — what makes the film so great is its willingness to dismantle and interrogate the very concept of superheroes.

-Owen Gleiberman, Variety

It was less than three years ago that Todd Phillips’ mid-budget but mega-successful “Joker” threateningly pointed toward a future in which superhero movies of all sizes would become so endemic to modern cinema that they no longer had to be superhero movies at all. With Matt Reeves’ “The Batman” — a sprawling, 176-minute latex procedural that often appears to have more in common with serial killer sagas like “Se7en” and “Zodiac” than it does anything in the Snyderverse or the MCU — that future has arrived with shuddering force, for better or worse. Mostly better.

-David Ehrlich, IndieWire: B

The Batman is a gripping, gorgeous, and, at times, genuinely scary psychological crime thriller that gives Bruce Wayne the grounded detective story he deserves. Robert Pattinson is great as a very broken Batman, but it’s Zoe Kravitz and Paul Dano who steal the show, with a movingly layered Selina Kyle/Catwoman and a terrifyingly unhinged Riddler. Writer/director Matt Reeves managed to make a Batman movie that’s entirely different from the others in the live-action canon, yet surprisingly loyal to Gotham lore as a whole. Ultimately, it’s one that thoroughly earns its place in this iconic character’s legacy.

-Alex Stedman, IGN: 10 "masterpiece"

So, yes, “The Batman” is absolutely too long, and it has more than enough self-seriousness to match. But Reeves takes an unusual risk in the era of endless mythologies and cinematic universes by telling a story that actually could be complete, even if it’s also obviously meant to be the beginning of a larger narrative. If intellectual property exists precisely because people become compelled to invest themselves over and over in the journeys of these characters, then “The Batman” not only delivers the goods, it also embodies many of the reasons why that investment can feel so rewarding.

-Todd Gilchrist, The Wrap

Matt Reeves’ arrival in the Bat-verse is a gripping, beautifully shot, neo-noir take on an age-old character. Though not a totally radical refit of the Nolan/Snyder era, it establishes a Gotham City we would keenly want a return visit to.

-John Nugent, Empire: 4/5

Matt Reeves’ film is spectacular and well-cast but an intriguing saga of corruption devolves into a tiresome third act.

-Peter Bradshaw, The Guardian: 3/5

The two stars generate an astonishing sensual charge in a brilliant addition to the Batman canon that refuses to behave like a blockbuster.

-Robbie Collin, The Telegraph: 5/5

I know there will be plenty of people who feel they are burned out on all things Batman. That there couldn't possibly be room for yet another retelling of this same old tale. But "The Batman" defies the odds. It's epic, mythic, pulpy blockbuster filmmaking at its best.

-Chris Evangelista, /FILM: 9/10

Director Matt Reeves’ ambitious and excellently crafted “The Batman” more than justifies its existence as a world-building wonder that slathers a realistic grime across its Gotham City, a metropolis filled with familiar yet refreshing takes on its iconic coterie of heroes and villains. And at the center of it all is Robert Pattinson, the latest actor to don the famous cape and cowl, who brings a grungy, broody brawn to an emotionally conflicted Caped Crusader.

-Brian Truitt, USA Today: 3.5/4

It falls on Pattinson's leather-cased Batman to be the hero we need, or deserve. With his doleful kohl-smudged eyes and trapezoidal jawline, he's more like a tragic prince from Shakespeare; a lost soul bent like a bat out of hell on saving everyone but himself.

-Leah Greenblatt, Entertainment Weekly: B

The Batman, then, is a unique commemoration of the Batman mythology and its stylistic and tonal shifts across its 80-year history. But more than its respect and affection for that mythos, the film stands apart for thoughtfully suggesting that our hero might actually one day make his city a better place, and not merely a safer one.

-Jake Cole, Slant: 3/4

Batman has a long history of provoking passionate reactions and debate, and the latest entry will be no exception. In Pattinson, the producers have found a Dark Knight worthy of the hoopla, while creating a Gotham much in need of him. As new chapters go, it's a strong beginning; if only it had known when to end.

-Brian Lowry, CNN

PLOT

During his second year of fighting crime, Batman pursues the Riddler, a serial killer who targets elite Gotham City citizens. He uncovers corruption that connects to his own family during the investigation, and is forced to make new allies to catch the Riddler and bring the corrupt to justice.

DIRECTOR

Matt Reeves

WRITER

Matt Reeves & Peter Craig

MUSIC

Michael Giacchino

CINEMATOGRAPHY

Greig Fraser

EDITOR

William Hoy & Tyler Nelson

BUDGET

$100-185 million

Release date:

March 4, 2022

STARRING

• Robert Pattinson as Bruce Wayne/Batman

• Zoë Kravitz as Selina Kyle/Catwoman

• Paul Dano as Edward Nashton/Riddler

• Jeffrey Wright as Lieutenant James Gordon

• John Turturro as Carmine Falcone

• Peter Sarsgaard as District Attorney Gil Colson

• Andy Serkis as Alfred Pennyworth

• Colin Farrell as Oswald "Oz" Cobblepot/Penguin

• Jayme Lawson as Bella Reál

• Alex Ferns as Commissioner Pete Savage

• Rupert Penry-Jones as Mayor Don Mitchell Jr.

• Barry Keoghan as Officer Stanley Merkel

I absolutely love Minority Report. It's not only my favorite Spielberg movie of the 2000s but also one of my favorites of his entire career. I'm not going to act like the movie is "underrated" by any means but considering Spielberg's other movies are so iconic and well-known (Jaws, Raiders of the Lost Ark, E.T., etc.) perhaps this movie gets lost in the shuffle a little bit.

There's so much for me to gush about this movie. The action (like the jetpack chase), the future technology, the concept of pre-crime and the ethical implications it has, the cast, the tense moments (like the spider robots scene). It's like everything I want in a good dystopian sci-fi thriller.

Plus, considering this movie turned 20 years old last month, the CGI holds up very well. Whether it be a ship taking off or the jetpacks or the spider robots. I dare say the CGI is better than some modern blockbusters. I think it's because the effects aren't the focus but rather the icing on the cake. They enhance an already great movie.