I thought it was pretty great too. Sandra Hüller was excellent.
Film The Redcafe Movie review thread
- Thread starter golden_blunder
- Start date
The only time that excuse holds water is when it's a movie for very young children, literally just pretty pictures and cute sounds not meant to do anything but divert a child and give a parent 90 minutes of rest. Or something that on its face is like a live-action cartoon, a Pacific Rim, or a Godzilla movie. But M Night does not make spectacle like that, he thinks he's a brilliant plotter and storyteller, and that's why his movies are so infuriating. I remember someone recommending "Signs", and I had avoided it for like a decade. Figured there were going to be a couple interesting moments relating to crop circles and aliens, decided to watch it -- holy fecking shit, that was the dumbest movie I've ever seen. Just insulting and nonsensical. I saw it after "The Village", which previously held the title of Dumbest Movie. Secret's out about this guy, how can anyone watch his garbage anymore?
I love a brutal review, and this one from Mark Kermode on the movie "Entourage" is cathartic in its vitriol. I hated this TV show.
"In terms of its gender politics, Human Centipede is more sensitive."
"In terms of its gender politics, Human Centipede is more sensitive."
There’s several parts of that film that annoyed me, but the most egregious was
When he was in the back of the police van with absolutely nobody watching him.
M casting his own daughter was annoying too, given that she’s really not good at acting.
The guy casts himself and is always the worst part of every damn film he makes. Of course he'll cast the shit out of his dogmess actress daughter.
The Crow
Everything up to when FKA Twigs dies (not a spoiler, it’s in the trailer) is garbage. Genuinely 0/10 stuff. She is fecking awful. The dialogue is cringeworthy too. Shit like “if I’m hard to love, love me harder” almost had me saying “feck off” at the screen. It’s like Tumblr wrote the film.
Then it’s just meh, up until Bill has a crow all up inside of him. The whole opera bit was great though. Glorious violence.
Overall I’d give it 2/5.
Everything up to when FKA Twigs dies (not a spoiler, it’s in the trailer) is garbage. Genuinely 0/10 stuff. She is fecking awful. The dialogue is cringeworthy too. Shit like “if I’m hard to love, love me harder” almost had me saying “feck off” at the screen. It’s like Tumblr wrote the film.
Then it’s just meh, up until Bill has a crow all up inside of him. The whole opera bit was great though. Glorious violence.
Overall I’d give it 2/5.
If there's crow sex I'm all over it like white on rice.
Yeah it was a lot of fun. Felt like some random ideas Yorgos Lanthimos had stored somewhere and just felt like shooting, and it works. I find it leaves a less lasting impression than Poor Things, but it was still great.
Oh you would pick his side wouldn’t you, you piece of shit.
Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga
5/5. This is brilliant. The two hours went by so fast. Certainly the best film i have seen since Oppenheimer.
5/5. This is brilliant. The two hours went by so fast. Certainly the best film i have seen since Oppenheimer.
I think M. Knight is an alien from another planet who has learned communication from reading text books. His dialogue is always written horribly. Shame though, I like Josh Hartnett.
it's almost worth watching Trap just to see how unbelievably bad at acting the directors daughter is
If “most unexpected use of a Dio song” was an award, Kinds of Kindness would win it.
I was fine with her singing. I was also fine with her being on screen (for reasons of attractiveness). But then she started trying to act.
I’m not sure which I liked less between her and FKA Twigs in The Crow.
I enjoyed Trap. I knew exactly the sort of experience I'd be getting with it, which would be ridiculous, preposterous, things not making sense, characters behaving irrationally, etc. All of these things are exactly what I got from it. It's the perfect future ITV2 10pm on a Thursday sort of film. The type of film you can have on in the background. @Rooney in Paris 's comment about it being stupid but fun is precisely it. I had a good time with it. Loved first 2/3s a lot more with the main setting and quite enjoyed watching Josh Hartnett's performance, particularly the snide nature that he displayed as he manipulated others around him. I can tell he had a great time playing this role.
My wife made a comment at the end when the credits rolled: "Oh, so it was his daughter who played the singer. She was shiiiiiiit at acting."
My wife made a comment at the end when the credits rolled: "Oh, so it was his daughter who played the singer. She was shiiiiiiit at acting."
I enjoyed Trap. I knew exactly the sort of experience I'd be getting with it, which would be ridiculous, preposterous, things not making sense, characters behaving irrationally, etc. All of these things are exactly what I got from it. It's the perfect future ITV2 10pm on a Thursday sort of film. The type of film you can have on in the background. @Rooney in Paris 's comment about it being stupid but fun is precisely it. I had a good time with it. Loved first 2/3s a lot more with the main setting and quite enjoyed watching Josh Hartnett's performance, particularly the snide nature that he displayed as he manipulated others around him. I can tell he had a great time playing this role.
My wife made a comment at the end when the credits rolled: "Oh, so it was his daughter who played the singer. She was shiiiiiiit at acting."
the movie was definitely made to promote her music career
which is ironic because she was the worst thing in it
From wiki it seems each story in Kinds Of Kindness took around three weeks to be finished. Get the feeling they were running around New Orleans improvising.
For a $15 million budget movie it does come across as pretty DIY which was cool.
I didn't mind her music bits too much, but the way they used her as an important character in the final third was a bit ehhhh.
I sort of enjoy his films in the 'what has he come up with this time' kind of way. I don't think he's made anything good since maybe Unbreakable (I don't really know about that one but I do think Sixth Sense is a good film). It's also entertaining to see trainwrecks like The Happening because it's just so bad top to bottom, almost like the actors are surprised themselves over what he has them say.
Lady In the Water is his worst for me, it's such a feckin' stupid idea that I'm almost stunned he got funding for that one. They must have known that it would be sh!t. It features a villainous film critic getting brutally killed, scenes you'd swear were taken right out of a SNL skit and charcaters speaking about scrunts for most of it. It's a wonder he ever got to make another film after that.
Yeah I quite liked the music and can see her making it, just needs to stay in her lane basically
the scenes on the couch that required a bit of acting nuance were a complete disaster
American Sniper
Technically a solid movie but unfortunately had way too much cheesy stuff in it. Also I feel it was a bit all over the place, they should have focused more maybe in the combat scenes to underline the horrors of war, now it was limited to fallen buddies and hesitation of shooting a terrorist kid or not.
4/10
Technically a solid movie but unfortunately had way too much cheesy stuff in it. Also I feel it was a bit all over the place, they should have focused more maybe in the combat scenes to underline the horrors of war, now it was limited to fallen buddies and hesitation of shooting a terrorist kid or not.
4/10
I haven't seen it, but that's how my newspaper's reviewer felt about it as well. There are a lot of issues if you think about the film seriously, but if you don't and let yourself go with the flow, it's good fun.I enjoyed Trap. I knew exactly the sort of experience I'd be getting with it, which would be ridiculous, preposterous, things not making sense, characters behaving irrationally, etc. All of these things are exactly what I got from it. It's the perfect future ITV2 10pm on a Thursday sort of film. The type of film you can have on in the background. @Rooney in Paris 's comment about it being stupid but fun is precisely it. I had a good time with it. Loved first 2/3s a lot more with the main setting and quite enjoyed watching Josh Hartnett's performance, particularly the snide nature that he displayed as he manipulated others around him. I can tell he had a great time playing this role.
My wife made a comment at the end when the credits rolled: "Oh, so it was his daughter who played the singer. She was shiiiiiiit at acting."
The review was also accompanied by an interview with M. Night Shyamalan. Apparently, he kinda had to wrestle himself out of his mindset where he was affected by the performance of his films and the pressure he was under to make certain things - and did so by basically reinventing himself as a kind of indepenent film maker that partly/mostly(?) pays for his movies himself and just does things he thinks sound fun. And so gone are the heavy-handed concept, and instead he now does this kind of thing. (Apparently for a few films already, but I don't remember the details.)
It all sounded pretty sympathetic and I'd like to see (and hopefully like) the movie just because of that.
Trap
I mean, obviously Shyamalan is as heavy handed as Wreck It Ralph. But the movie played with some fun things. Most notably: The kind of person that becomes a mass serial killer, probably is the kind of person that can manipulate and bend life and social situations to their own will.
The horror amongst it all is the fact that he’s clearly a loving father, and I happily assumed that it was his only true emotion shown. But that set against him being one of life’s true monsters was quite ‘fun’.
Though, as always… M.Night gives birth to a great premise then has no clue how to wrap a functional believable movie around it. Honestly, he must wake up in the middle of the night with a strong premise, then insist on shooting the day after, writing as he goes.
I can often be far too judgemental towards his films, but it’s just a silly movie. And, as is almost always the case… it’s well shot in places with some cool framing shots. The turn is pretty fun too.
5/10
I mean, obviously Shyamalan is as heavy handed as Wreck It Ralph. But the movie played with some fun things. Most notably: The kind of person that becomes a mass serial killer, probably is the kind of person that can manipulate and bend life and social situations to their own will.
The horror amongst it all is the fact that he’s clearly a loving father, and I happily assumed that it was his only true emotion shown. But that set against him being one of life’s true monsters was quite ‘fun’.
Though, as always… M.Night gives birth to a great premise then has no clue how to wrap a functional believable movie around it. Honestly, he must wake up in the middle of the night with a strong premise, then insist on shooting the day after, writing as he goes.
I can often be far too judgemental towards his films, but it’s just a silly movie. And, as is almost always the case… it’s well shot in places with some cool framing shots. The turn is pretty fun too.
5/10
It’s so bad.
I 100% believe he just wrote it as a 2 hour advert for his daughter, who is a singer in real life too. She really can’t act for shit.
It also feels like it's never going to end. There were like 3 separate moments it could and should have ended.
I like the bit where she
takes his phone, manages to install TikTok to talk to her fans, and instead of just opening something like google maps to find the address, proceeds to tell them about a “blue door” and if anyone knows a street with a blue door. Yep
It’s like he finished each days shooting, looked at his cat and said ‘was that it?’ and when the cat didn’t nod, he carried on shooting the next day.
He should have asked the cat whether it was a good idea to have 4 different endings masquerading as 30 minutes of cinema.
It just lurched and lurched. So much so that a fairly solid and tense final scene felt empty.
Borderlands
Made it 14 minutes in. No. Just no. Figured the reviews were hyperbole. It’s unwatchable cgi nonsense.
?/10
Made it 14 minutes in. No. Just no. Figured the reviews were hyperbole. It’s unwatchable cgi nonsense.
?/10
Fully agree with everything that was said above about Trap and Borderlands.
Trap indeed feels like an ad for his daughter. There are also so many illogical decisions being made by the characters you ll want to punch the TV.
Borderlands: wtf was Cate Blanchett thinking for joining something like that. The opening alone with Kevin Hart should have told me it was shite but I gave it a few more of my previous minutes.
Trap indeed feels like an ad for his daughter. There are also so many illogical decisions being made by the characters you ll want to punch the TV.
Borderlands: wtf was Cate Blanchett thinking for joining something like that. The opening alone with Kevin Hart should have told me it was shite but I gave it a few more of my previous minutes.
Blink Twice is worth seeing at the cinema. I'm going to use spoilers to talk about it as I didn't know anything about it going in and I think it was better for it.
There are some strong parallels with Epstein, though Zoë Kravitz says it's not a direct re-telling of that sordid story.
It starts off with 2 young women working part time gigs and hoping to make it big in the entertainment industry. They get whisked away by a tech mogul and his posse to his remote island. They're asked to give away their phones at the beginning of the stay, and the holiday starts in earnest, a litany of sun soaked days with frozen raspberries in champagne, gourmet meals and drug fueled night parties. The film takes a sinister turn when one of the women realises they are being abused and they are forgetting it.
The third act is pretty much a rape/revenge arc, quite satisfying in its conclusion, maybe lacking a little more of a punch, but overall done well.
It's worth watching first of all because it's a pretty film - it's well put together, the editing is genuinely excellent, the sound editing is great too and brings a lot to the film, and it's not boring. It's got a patient build-up (about an hour or so) but it's engrossing, notably thanks to a very charismatic cast. The actors are overall really well chosen, with particularly Naomi Ackie who has proper star potential.
It's not perfect, in that it doesn't really say anything about the themes it touches upon - it doesn't say anything new or worthwhile about rape culture, about the Me Too movement, about males in position of power... It definitely hammers home the point men are evil and abusive (and that should be reiterated as often as possible), but it remains at the surface of what might have been a more profound message. I guess it didn't set out to achieve the latter, so maybe it's harsh to judge it on what it's not, but it feels like a bit of a missed opportunity. Which doesn't make it any less enjoyable as a cinematic experience. On this though, what is a shame is how under-utilized some of the cast is, and I'm thinking mainly of Kyle MacLachlan, Christian Slater and to a lesser extent Geena Davis (she does have her moments).
Overall I definitely enjoyed going to see it and am quite impressed that it's a first film (though it seemingly took ages to develop, I read she'd started writing it 7 years ago). It'll be interesting to see how Kravitz's directorial career progresses, if she decides to push on with it.
It starts off with 2 young women working part time gigs and hoping to make it big in the entertainment industry. They get whisked away by a tech mogul and his posse to his remote island. They're asked to give away their phones at the beginning of the stay, and the holiday starts in earnest, a litany of sun soaked days with frozen raspberries in champagne, gourmet meals and drug fueled night parties. The film takes a sinister turn when one of the women realises they are being abused and they are forgetting it.
The third act is pretty much a rape/revenge arc, quite satisfying in its conclusion, maybe lacking a little more of a punch, but overall done well.
It's worth watching first of all because it's a pretty film - it's well put together, the editing is genuinely excellent, the sound editing is great too and brings a lot to the film, and it's not boring. It's got a patient build-up (about an hour or so) but it's engrossing, notably thanks to a very charismatic cast. The actors are overall really well chosen, with particularly Naomi Ackie who has proper star potential.
It's not perfect, in that it doesn't really say anything about the themes it touches upon - it doesn't say anything new or worthwhile about rape culture, about the Me Too movement, about males in position of power... It definitely hammers home the point men are evil and abusive (and that should be reiterated as often as possible), but it remains at the surface of what might have been a more profound message. I guess it didn't set out to achieve the latter, so maybe it's harsh to judge it on what it's not, but it feels like a bit of a missed opportunity. Which doesn't make it any less enjoyable as a cinematic experience. On this though, what is a shame is how under-utilized some of the cast is, and I'm thinking mainly of Kyle MacLachlan, Christian Slater and to a lesser extent Geena Davis (she does have her moments).
Overall I definitely enjoyed going to see it and am quite impressed that it's a first film (though it seemingly took ages to develop, I read she'd started writing it 7 years ago). It'll be interesting to see how Kravitz's directorial career progresses, if she decides to push on with it.
Just got round to watching trap.
fecking terrible.
fecking terrible.
20 minutes in you're like right, this is film I'm gonna have to shut down my brain to enjoy.
Nah, it's so fecking stupid you can't even pretend.
Side note, every black person in the film was either a fecking moron or a servant of some kind, and that annoyed me too.
I had a J.K. Simmons weekend it seems.
That's normally a good idea, but I actually watched The Union, which proved that concept wrong. It's a new action film on Netflix about a secret ops outfit called The Union, which is led by Simmon's character and also features Halle Berry. After an op has gone horribly wrong, Berry recruits her high school sweatheart (Mark Wahlberg), who they think is an outsider that can be trained relatively quickly and is sufficiently unkown to complete a simple job. Or something like that. That plot quickly goes out the window, as Wahlberg within minutes is basically just another team member and we have a regular spy action film. Except everything just falls flat: things are teed up for a nice line or scene, and it's just off and is instead poor and frustrating. Simmons is also criminally underused: he is unable to use any of his charisma and instead mostly has to provide lame bits of exposition without bite or humor. There's some fun in it though, but 2/5 is probably still flattering.
Then Whiplash, Damien Chazelle's 2014 psychological drama about a jazz dummer (Miles Teller) who joins a famous New York conservatory. He desperately wants to join the conservatory's band and become an all-time great, but the bandleader (Simmons) is a kind of sadist who mentally tortures his students when they show any inadequacies. It's for the most part a great story that works really well - even if I felt the development towards Teller's breakdown (the stages leading to the car crash) was a little hurried. Simmons in particular, but also Teller, are great in it, and while it's mostly a more 'plain' film than Chazelle's subsequent work, there's some of his flair in the band scenes, especially the final performance of Caravan, which is a great scene. The only thing I was thinking was -
But yes, a very strong film. 4/5
That's normally a good idea, but I actually watched The Union, which proved that concept wrong. It's a new action film on Netflix about a secret ops outfit called The Union, which is led by Simmon's character and also features Halle Berry. After an op has gone horribly wrong, Berry recruits her high school sweatheart (Mark Wahlberg), who they think is an outsider that can be trained relatively quickly and is sufficiently unkown to complete a simple job. Or something like that. That plot quickly goes out the window, as Wahlberg within minutes is basically just another team member and we have a regular spy action film. Except everything just falls flat: things are teed up for a nice line or scene, and it's just off and is instead poor and frustrating. Simmons is also criminally underused: he is unable to use any of his charisma and instead mostly has to provide lame bits of exposition without bite or humor. There's some fun in it though, but 2/5 is probably still flattering.
Then Whiplash, Damien Chazelle's 2014 psychological drama about a jazz dummer (Miles Teller) who joins a famous New York conservatory. He desperately wants to join the conservatory's band and become an all-time great, but the bandleader (Simmons) is a kind of sadist who mentally tortures his students when they show any inadequacies. It's for the most part a great story that works really well - even if I felt the development towards Teller's breakdown (the stages leading to the car crash) was a little hurried. Simmons in particular, but also Teller, are great in it, and while it's mostly a more 'plain' film than Chazelle's subsequent work, there's some of his flair in the band scenes, especially the final performance of Caravan, which is a great scene. The only thing I was thinking was -
what have we learned? That Fletcher was right, and his sadism brought out Neiman's greatness? Surely not, that would be a terrible perspective to take. I would rather like to think that it was Neiman's step back from Fletcher's regime that allowed him to breath and find his health drive and creativity back; but that doesn't work with the reunion with Fletcher and both of their excitement at the very end. I know films don't have to end clearly or in a way I like, but I feel Fletcher's fall from grace doesn't happen the way it should have.
I didn't really like Whiplash as much as everyone else seems to. It's an interesting film but I felt the plaudits were over the top.
"Again!"
In my opinion, Whiplash received unwarranted praise from the critics. I suspect it was a quiet year for cinema and there wasn't much to write home about, so they lavished praise on this film because it was a bit different.
"Again!"
Whiplash, while seeming to appear novel in its approach to the subject of psychological bullying, borrows heavily from every war movie ever produced that shows soldiers being drilled in boot camp.
Individuals who enter the 'programme' somewhat willingly but soon find the physical and mental toll too much to bear? Check. Unflinching, unweilding, unfeeling instructors seemingly hell-bent on a Darwinist 'survival of the fittest' approach and indifferent to the suffering they impose upon their underlings? Check. A story arc that begins with wide-eyed idealism and ends with dead-behind-the-eyes automatons, their very souls crushed by the brutality of the journey they have embarked upon, their only raison d'etre being the unquestioning obeyance of their new master? Check.
Whiplash? Full Metal Jacket with drums, mate.
"Again!"
Hegel's Master-Slave dialectic describes the relationship between two individuals - the 'master' and the 'slave'. Simply put, the master seeks to dominate the slave but lacks self-awareness. Though in a position of superiority, they are unaware that their exalted position is wholly reliant on the labour of the slave who, ultimately, does achieve a state of enlightenment and overthrows the master.
There are many interpretations of Hegel's dialectic, and critics claim this was intentional, as his language was often vague. In my opinion, Hegel was showing that innovation comes 'from below'. What do I mean by that? Well, to use a parable, the master lives in a big house on a hill and he has a bunch of slaves who toil in the fields at the bottom of the hill, and their job is to till the soil, plant the crops, harvest them and provide the master with food.
The slaves begin by digging with their hands. Back-breaking, exhausting work. One day, they're sitting under a tree taking a break, chatting away, when one of them picks up a stick and starts idly digging at the ground. Another notices this and declares that it looks a lot easier than digging with their hands, so they all grab sticks and start feverishly tilling the soil in the fields, their burden slightly alleviated. The slaves quickly realise that long branches, with broad bases, make the best digging implements, and we can imagine the refinement process over time eventually leading to the invention of the hoe and the spade.
On another occasion one of the slaves ties a stick to a dog's tail and the dog runs across the fields, yelping in terror, much to the amusement of the slaves. But, again, one of their number sees opportunity and points out to the others that the stick is dragging up soil. "Ah!" says his friend, "but the dog is running haphazardly. We need to dig the soil in neat rows. Ten dogs with ten sticks would disturb a lot of soil but it would be a mess."
"Why don't we use that?" asks the first slave, pointing to an ox. "It won't run around like crazy and we could lead it up and down the fields as we like. Plus, I think we could attach 5 huge branches to its back and get the job done in no time!" And so, with future refinements occurring like we saw with the sticks, begins the origins of the plough.
All this time, the master is sat in his big house on the hill. Indifferent to the suffering of the slaves, ignorant of the innovation and progress that is happening far below. His only concern is the end result: food. He doesn't realise that he offers nothing except cruelty and punishment for failure to produce the crops. He doesn't grow, he stagnates. He is not enlightened.
The J. K. Simmons' performance in Whiplash is universally lauded, and he does indeed play an inhumane, brutal jazz band leader really well. Similarly, Miles Teller's portrayal of a talented drummer with a desire to be 'great', unaware of the standards set by Simmons and the lengths he will go to to achieve them, is also excellent.
I mean, it's a good film - don't get me wrong - but it's basically Hegel's Master-Slave dialectic set to a jazz score, mate.
"Again!"
Fvck off!
"Again!"
In my opinion, Whiplash received unwarranted praise from the critics. I suspect it was a quiet year for cinema and there wasn't much to write home about, so they lavished praise on this film because it was a bit different.
"Again!"
Whiplash, while seeming to appear novel in its approach to the subject of psychological bullying, borrows heavily from every war movie ever produced that shows soldiers being drilled in boot camp.
Individuals who enter the 'programme' somewhat willingly but soon find the physical and mental toll too much to bear? Check. Unflinching, unweilding, unfeeling instructors seemingly hell-bent on a Darwinist 'survival of the fittest' approach and indifferent to the suffering they impose upon their underlings? Check. A story arc that begins with wide-eyed idealism and ends with dead-behind-the-eyes automatons, their very souls crushed by the brutality of the journey they have embarked upon, their only raison d'etre being the unquestioning obeyance of their new master? Check.
Whiplash? Full Metal Jacket with drums, mate.
"Again!"
Hegel's Master-Slave dialectic describes the relationship between two individuals - the 'master' and the 'slave'. Simply put, the master seeks to dominate the slave but lacks self-awareness. Though in a position of superiority, they are unaware that their exalted position is wholly reliant on the labour of the slave who, ultimately, does achieve a state of enlightenment and overthrows the master.
There are many interpretations of Hegel's dialectic, and critics claim this was intentional, as his language was often vague. In my opinion, Hegel was showing that innovation comes 'from below'. What do I mean by that? Well, to use a parable, the master lives in a big house on a hill and he has a bunch of slaves who toil in the fields at the bottom of the hill, and their job is to till the soil, plant the crops, harvest them and provide the master with food.
The slaves begin by digging with their hands. Back-breaking, exhausting work. One day, they're sitting under a tree taking a break, chatting away, when one of them picks up a stick and starts idly digging at the ground. Another notices this and declares that it looks a lot easier than digging with their hands, so they all grab sticks and start feverishly tilling the soil in the fields, their burden slightly alleviated. The slaves quickly realise that long branches, with broad bases, make the best digging implements, and we can imagine the refinement process over time eventually leading to the invention of the hoe and the spade.
On another occasion one of the slaves ties a stick to a dog's tail and the dog runs across the fields, yelping in terror, much to the amusement of the slaves. But, again, one of their number sees opportunity and points out to the others that the stick is dragging up soil. "Ah!" says his friend, "but the dog is running haphazardly. We need to dig the soil in neat rows. Ten dogs with ten sticks would disturb a lot of soil but it would be a mess."
"Why don't we use that?" asks the first slave, pointing to an ox. "It won't run around like crazy and we could lead it up and down the fields as we like. Plus, I think we could attach 5 huge branches to its back and get the job done in no time!" And so, with future refinements occurring like we saw with the sticks, begins the origins of the plough.
All this time, the master is sat in his big house on the hill. Indifferent to the suffering of the slaves, ignorant of the innovation and progress that is happening far below. His only concern is the end result: food. He doesn't realise that he offers nothing except cruelty and punishment for failure to produce the crops. He doesn't grow, he stagnates. He is not enlightened.
The J. K. Simmons' performance in Whiplash is universally lauded, and he does indeed play an inhumane, brutal jazz band leader really well. Similarly, Miles Teller's portrayal of a talented drummer with a desire to be 'great', unaware of the standards set by Simmons and the lengths he will go to to achieve them, is also excellent.
I mean, it's a good film - don't get me wrong - but it's basically Hegel's Master-Slave dialectic set to a jazz score, mate.
"Again!"
Fvck off!
I certainly didn't think about it that deeply! But yes, sure. I know nothing about Hegel though.
Either way, what I liked most about Simmons's performance is that he believable plays both sides of his character (nice dude in a social setting, slavedriver with the band) without big chances in anything. It's a true continuation of the person, which is impressive I think.
This is great
That is very cool. I'd love to watch the whole thing.
Same. Looks likes it would be a fun watch. Annoyingly he isn’t sharing it with anyone he doesn’t know!
Hopefully this edit can find its way online.
Reptile
Really solid movie. Missed that intangible bit of extra to take it over the top into something better, but I really liked it.
Del Toro is - of course - a monster of an actor in the right role. I don’t think there’s ever been an actor to use silence so menacingly. Very bold for a new director to include so much empty air in a film, but he does it very well.
The movie was unpredictable until it was quite linear and predictable, but that came quite late. Timberlake had a good turn in it, they’re really screwing up by having his face as the banner on Netflix. Almost didn’t watch it.
Corrupt cops & Benicio’s screaming silences.
7.5/10
Really solid movie. Missed that intangible bit of extra to take it over the top into something better, but I really liked it.
Del Toro is - of course - a monster of an actor in the right role. I don’t think there’s ever been an actor to use silence so menacingly. Very bold for a new director to include so much empty air in a film, but he does it very well.
The movie was unpredictable until it was quite linear and predictable, but that came quite late. Timberlake had a good turn in it, they’re really screwing up by having his face as the banner on Netflix. Almost didn’t watch it.
Corrupt cops & Benicio’s screaming silences.
7.5/10
I'm glad Borderlands tanked. The hubris involved with that project was Olympian. A friend of a friend worked on the movie, and the director was a complete lying weasel to him, lied to his face, then fired him. Hopefully Eli Roth gets placed in Director's Jail with no parole.