Film The Redcafe Movie review thread
- Thread starter golden_blunder
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) and Jamie (@Vault Dweller) are here to talk about United's dreadful home defeat at the hands of Big Ange's Tottenham Hotspur. Should this have been the end of Ten Hag? How long does he actually have left? And does Nik finally want ETH out?!
I don't really get this. Is the first paragraph suggesting the film would benefit from a spiritual dimension (ick!) and the second that it needs more fake drama and made-up weirdness?
Tbh I think the French title is better. I watched it on Mubi. Its by the same director who has recently done The Beast with Léa Seydoux which I haven’t seen it yet but has been getting incredible reviews.
It reminded me of a Lynch film not in terms of story or style but how its very women focused. The film walks the line between misogynistic and showing the complexity of women. I’m still not sure what side it’s on. Also like Showgirls there is tons of nudity but it’s a zero sexy brothel film. Really shows sex work is work.
Oh I haven’t. Is it any good ?
The world is his oyster
I haven't, but it's on my priority list. It's apparently inspired by creepypasta stuff. I was so impressed by her command of horror on ISTTVG. Her first one has excellent reviews, too.
According to ScreenRant:
Jane Schoenbrun referred to We're All Going to the World's Fair as the first installment in their so-called "Screen Trilogy." Instead of meditating on the all-consuming nature of the internet, and its potential for self-discovery, the filmmaker's second entry in the Screen Trilogy tackles a different kind of looking glass: the television screen.
Hopefully she gets to make film 3! In reality, Marvel will snap her up for an X-Men origin story.
Oh that does very good. Pretty sure Emma Stone produced I Saw The TV Glow which is very cool but definitely the worry is Schoenbrun will get taken up by the studio pipeline. They tend to love smaller directors as I guess it’s cheaper and the directors demand less.
Holy Motors
This is going to be a terrible review as I don’t want spoil anything. Just go watch this incredible piece of art. Denis Lavant is a god.
10/10
This is going to be a terrible review as I don’t want spoil anything. Just go watch this incredible piece of art. Denis Lavant is a god.
10/10
This was a very, very strange film. Probably one where having the sound on or off would not affect the clarity of it one bit.
I think the reviewer was trying to put in terms of Pete Docter's own psyche. I thought the first one wasn't great.
I don't think so: I think the author is rather explaining why they are surprised that Doctor, as a Christian, doesn't include that spiritual dimension ('higher purpose').
I also skimmed through the article now, and I have to say I like it even less now. They seem to think Pixar films are for small kids, but the Inside Outs are clearly primarily aimed at kids around the main character's age - so it shouldn't surprise that a seven year old doesn't get all of the film's concepts. The author also seems to have a simplistic and old-fashioned view of child psychology and what sort self-awareness is useful for children.
The article basically complains that the Inside Out films don't share the author's romanticized, outdated view of childhood and child psychology, but if you'd ask me (I know you didn't
), I think that point is entirely without merit and I am happy that the films do embrace the 'standard, secular consensus' on those subjects.(In case it matters: I also have young-ish kids, so all of the above is very relevant to my and their lives - which helps explain why I'm frustrated with the article.
)I watched The Hating Game tonight. We needed something short and harmless, so a simple romcom sounded alright, but this one was a little too simple. Most of it is alright, but plot keeps bouncing around (how often can two characters credibly appear to like each other but the back off again?) which becomes an irritant. And the main character is more unlikeable than seemed to have been intended. 2/5
Yep it’s a strange one and honestly just watching as a visual experience was brilliant. I loved not knowing what was going to happen next. But having thought about the film more and looked at other reviews there’s definitely lots of points Leos Carax is making.
This review is a good summary of some of the many things the film is trying to say
It’s Carax asking some big social questions while also turning the negatives of modern cinema into art.
I watched the fourth entry in the Expendables franchise and it was aggressively sh!t. I usually enjoy seeing Statham being a one man army but it just didn't do it for me this time. Not even good in a bad way, just plain bad. I also think you need to up the game in each of these films, and ladt time (if I remember correctly) they went up against the army of a country. It wasn't good, but at least it was so ridiculous it was a fun watch. This just wasn't.
Get out
Huge disappointment, you could see the plot twist miles away that were lame anyway. Also most of the linea felt too "over-scripted" if that's a word.
Huge disappointment, you could see the plot twist miles away that were lame anyway. Also most of the linea felt too "over-scripted" if that's a word.
Preach on, brother. I'm an apostate in the church of Pixar. I liked Up and Wall-Eyed. The rest I think are "aggressively shit", as @CoopersDream phrased it. You're probably right though.I don't think so: I think the author is rather explaining why they are surprised that Doctor, as a Christian, doesn't include that spiritual dimension ('higher purpose').
I also skimmed through the article now, and I have to say I like it even less now. They seem to think Pixar films are for small kids, but the Inside Outs are clearly primarily aimed at kids around the main character's age - so it shouldn't surprise that a seven year old doesn't get all of the film's concepts. The author also seems to have a simplistic and old-fashioned view of child psychology and what sort self-awareness is useful for children.
The article basically complains that the Inside Out films don't share the author's romanticized, outdated view of childhood and child psychology, but if you'd ask me (I know you didn't
(In case it matters: I also have young-ish kids, so all of the above is very relevant to my and their lives - which helps explain why I'm frustrated with the article.
I knew you'd break eventually. No man can sit through 4 Expendables without breaking.
You better duck. I fecking hated this movie, but apparently it's brilliant and genius and worth all the Oscars, and anyone who says different is banished to the land of wind and ghosts. It's even worse when you learn the entire last act was a reshoot to try and get a jazzier ending.
Haha thanks for the heads up. Apparently all the movies I watch these days that are supposed to be great are basically shit. They really did a reshoot for the ending? That's crazy.
On a side note, I'm surprised a movie that cost 100 million dollars can look that bad. I guess they spent the entire budget on the cast this time.
Last edited:
I remember very little about this movie except at the time thinking yep that was very french.
Broadcast Signal Intrusion
In the late 90s, a video archivist unearths a series of sinister pirate broadcasts and becomes obsessed with uncovering the dark conspiracy behind them. I really liked the idea of this (and is in the same wheelhouse as something I'm trying to get made) so naturally, I went into this full of optimism. Whilst the movie has a creepy tone and the mystery is intriguing, that's also unfortunately where the film falls flat. It's too concerned on trying to create this web of a narrative where we question coincidences versus sinister plans but the film never really answers most of the mysteries that it sets up. So many plot holes and red herrings make it feel like a lazy script. Characters do random stuff (or even just disappear from the story without explanation) that aren't questioned and many plot points that have no purpose other than to motivate the protagonist to go from A to B. Also found the jazz score to be a little distracting. But it wasn't awful, just a massively missed opportunity. I think Censor is a similar film but way more fleshed out so I would recommend that ahead of this 4.5/10
In the late 90s, a video archivist unearths a series of sinister pirate broadcasts and becomes obsessed with uncovering the dark conspiracy behind them. I really liked the idea of this (and is in the same wheelhouse as something I'm trying to get made) so naturally, I went into this full of optimism. Whilst the movie has a creepy tone and the mystery is intriguing, that's also unfortunately where the film falls flat. It's too concerned on trying to create this web of a narrative where we question coincidences versus sinister plans but the film never really answers most of the mysteries that it sets up. So many plot holes and red herrings make it feel like a lazy script. Characters do random stuff (or even just disappear from the story without explanation) that aren't questioned and many plot points that have no purpose other than to motivate the protagonist to go from A to B. Also found the jazz score to be a little distracting. But it wasn't awful, just a massively missed opportunity. I think Censor is a similar film but way more fleshed out so I would recommend that ahead of this 4.5/10
Definitely. Denis Lavant kidnapping Eva Mendes from cemetery to a underground sewer and then sitting next to her with a hard on is very french.
Ooh la la!
Nothing since 2010 has really been that great and mostly I haven't liked them at all.
I didn't get to the end of the first one if I remember correctly.
Watching the obvious and on the nose "twist" lumber into view was a chore.
Last edited:
My friends told me on Sunday they had watched Get Out for the first time the night before. They loved it. I was speechless. That movie is so fecking dumb it makes me question my friendship.
i could understand people not liking it but what about it is so dumb you'd question a friendship?
@Wing Attack Plan R is about to radicalize himself
Get Out is grand. Not amazing but pretty original for the genre and good fun. Plus Daniel Kaluuya is a very watchable lead. Have no idea why anyone would hate it. Nope was similar. Doesn’t set the world on fire but at least he’s trying something a bit different. I enjoyed both movies. It’s weird the way some people have reacted so strongly to them.
I don't really remember much of Get Out. I was pretty indifferent to it at the time, but I guess it was very well liked so good for them. I've had similar reactions to other Peele films, so maybe just not for me.
Same. Found GetOut pretty entertaining. Nope not as much but whatever. Hype was a bit OTT as was the criticism but those things nowadays almost happen independently of the movie / medium they're based on.
I didn't mind Get Out. It wasn't as mind blowing as some people made out at the time but it was enjoyable and a feel good ending.
Us was a better trailer than a movie. The idea was fun and I kind of enjoyed the film but once you think about it and the rules of the world... It massively falls apart.
I didn't enjoy Nope at all. It did nothing for me.
But I still would rather have someone lined Peele trying to do something different versus the 100s of bullshit horror films released every year.
It was a bit on the nose.
Exactly. Even when his films don’t work for you, personally, you surely have to appreciate their originality. What’s really strange to me is hating them. There are so many films in the horror genre much more worthy of hating, why single any of these out?
that's just a reason for disliking a movie
Is someone could make Get Out but it’s instead about renowned American actor John Gavin Malkovich then that would be a good movie imo.
True and I only mildly disliked it. But you can REALLY dislike a film.
It's probably the super high praise that Get Out got. It makes people want to be contrarian - and that becomes even more pronounced if they actually disliked the movie. If the consensus on Get Out had been 'it's well made from a technical point of view but otherwise just alright', you wouldn't have heard much else.
Peele is like M Night Shyamalan. They both make high concept films with some nice looking scenes but their stories fall apart well before the end of the movie. They rely on the development of plot that is nonsensical and therefore surprising, the proverbial "twist" ending(s). The entire last third of Get Out was a reshoot, everything involving his cop buddy, and because of it the entire movie is a shart.
This. Not only won an Oscar for a very pandering script, but his subsequent films have had his fans saying he's the greatest horror director of all time, which really, really, really gets on my nerves. I wouldn't even call him a horror director. It's an insult to the entire genre that he gets praised as he does.
Small sampling of horror directors who apparently labor in the shadow of Peele: Kubrick (1), Scott (1), DePalma, Cronenberg, Marshall, Soavi, Fulci, Bava, Fincher (1), Argento, Henenlotter, Fuller, Ching Siu-tung, Cohen, Gordon, Lewis, Carpenter, Zulawski, Tsukamoto, Del Toro, Russell, Landis (1), Friedkin (1), Coscarelli, Demme (1), Romero, Goddard (1), Raimi, Verbinski (1), Boyle (1), Mitchell, Eggers, Alfredson, Kent, Barker, Craven, Nakata, Yeon Sang-ho, Miike, Hooper, Dante, Hitchcock, Tourneur, Aster, Franju, Sluizer, Balaguero & Plaza, Aja.
Last edited:
You don’t get the peele experience, and you don’t get his movies. I have reached the conclusion that you’re not a big fan. So you’ve stated this, in several insulting sentences, and made yourself heard. Do you need to hang around in this thread still?
I see what you did there, and no, this is NOT the same as Taylor Swift! You leave Taylor alone!
Last edited:
These fans, are they in the room with us now?