Movie Discussion

Best Stoner Comedy

  • Dude, Where's My Car?

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Pineapple Express

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Reefer Madness (lol)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Friday

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Saving Grace

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    9
  • Poll closed .
  • Franchise Potential - Movies these days are measured by the number of sequels they can generate, in a model that's obviously Marvel's doing. More sequels means more merchandise means more potential means more money. While stories and vital crew members were necessities for movie productions back then, producers today only care for the earning potential for their pictures, and that's greatly influenced the way movies are being made right now. It's also led to an over-saturation of the market, since every studio's trying to cash in on the next big franchise. Which, in turn, has also since led to more disposable movies coming out on the mainstream.

Or remakes, the number of remakes these days is INSANE. There is no denying this fact at all today in how many classic movies they are ruining. Just take a look at Disney pulling off the most cynical remake streak of the universe. It's just easier to rehash ideas.
 
I don't like beating dead horses (especially when I was born in the Chinese Zodiac year of the horse), but talking about Snyder and his "contributions" to DC again just brings back a lot of the frustrations I had about Man of Steel, Batman v. Superman, the misfired portrayal of Superman and the entirety of whatever the fuck Snyder was trying to accomplish. I'm not even a DC or Superman fan and even I knew that a lot of folks down at Warner Brothers had massive confusions about what Superman's iconography and symbolism stand for on a universal level. So, with that, I think I'll leave some well-said quotes by people wiser than me about the utter distortion of a universally beloved icon that's Superman himself:

Bob Chipman (in his "Batman v. Superman: Really That Bad" video):
"We had to have, in 2016, a global pop culture conversation, about whether or not it would be too scary, sad, violent, traumatic or emotionally-scarring for CHILDREN to watch a movie about Superman. SUPERMAN."

"Oh, and uh, Superman dies - like graphically and brutally. On-screen. Near universal of hope, optimism, decency, righteousness and genuine heroism, Mr. "Truth, Justice and the American way", hero, idol, imaginary friend and surrogate father figure to generations of young people all over the world, stabbed through the heart and dies - AND NOBODY. CARED.

Killing off an allegorical messianic father figure, one of the easiest narrative emotional triggers in the entire canon, one that works so well in almost any circumstance that an entire generation is still traumatized about when it happened to a talking truck (Optimus Prime in Transformers: The Animated Movie), and this movie manages to fuck it up with Superman. They killed Superman, and no one was all that upset."

HiTop Films (in his video, "Man of Steel v Winter Soldier: Changing an Icon"):
"Pop quiz time: what's Superman's weakness? It's not Kryptonite; it's life. His weakness is human life. Why do you think Lois Lane or Jimmy Olsen are always put in danger? Because that's what can stop Superman. Human life is what drives Superman to do what he does. Superman is never about stopping the bad guy; he's about protecting the little guy. That's what he was created to do. That's what he stands for. That's what Man of Steel failed to understand. That's what Man of Steel changed about Superman."

Speaking of director cuts, thinking back to what the supposedly far superior Snyder Cut of Batman v. Superman did with a certain beloved secondary character in the Superman mythios, my interest towards this godly Snyder Cut of Justice League hits almost zero. For those who haven't seen Batman v. Superman's director's cut, beware of spoilers:
He killed Jimmy Olsen. And not just killed him, but have him appear for what amounts to barely 30 seconds of screentime and shot in the fucking head. All for what purpose? Just to prove a point that this is not your grandfather's Superman, that this is a darker and edgier Superman whose beloved friend in the comics who symbolically represents his surrogate child gets shot in the freaking head. What the actual fuck, Snyder?
Sigh. Okay, I'm done ranting.

To end it on an optimistic note, as befits Superman, I think I'll link a comic strip that perfectly shows just the kind of hero Superman really is, when he stopped a suicidal girl from jumping:
u8twb.png

3XMjr.png

Munw9ii6Ug6SsEKpoXzb7nTp_YTjnRNboA48-eNNFkI.jpg
 
I still think the best version of Superman is the asshole version that existed when he was first created. The morals of those times are so different that reading now he comes off as an alien trying to understand human complexities and blundering his way through with simplistic answers that involved breaking things. For example when he saw a spike in crime near low income housing his answer was the destroy the low income housing.
 
I still think the best version of Superman is the asshole version that existed when he was first created. The morals of those times are so different that reading now he comes off as an alien trying to understand human complexities and blundering his way through with simplistic answers that involved breaking things. For example when he saw a spike in crime near low income housing his answer was the destroy the low income housing.

Superman to be honest is the most boring and overpowered DC hero to me. I think I could dig this asshole superman though, that sounds fun.
 
Last edited:
Thoughts on Suspiria(1977):
Well, this was quite the stylized horror movie. The way it used colors and and the music score with the rock band Goblin. The way some of the characters go out though, Sara getting caught in a barb wire trap. And Daniel getting killed by his own dog.

Seeing someone getting reanimated as a corpse to kill you really added to the pressure though. Suzy does finally kill Markos due to the lightning revealing her location. The school being burned at the end was quite the finale. Glad I got to see another horror movie finally. :love:
 
Superman to be honest is the most boring and overpowered DC hero to me. I think I could dig this asshole superman though, that sounds fun.
Superman's representation has been done dirty for years. While it is Spiderman's motto, "with great power comes great responsibility" is more Superman's thing, and there's so many great stories that can come from how he's the "bland paragon" and OP.
I just really want someone to make live-action Superman and Batman and then have the Justice League cartoon versions be the primary inspirations.
 
Last edited:
Crawl (2019)

Intense disaster horror film about a father and daughter trying to escape their flooded home invaded by alligators during a hurricane. Directed by Alexandre Aja and produced by Sam Raimi this movie had some actually intense scenes despite the usual tropes still making appearances and is a good example of a simple setting used to utmost effectiveness (helps that I hate murky water and crawl spaces). The CGI gators were convincing enough and the scenes in the rain pretty much all looked great. It mainly lacks the B-movie charm of older horror films in that same vein though. It's definitely more modern, intense and serious than say 1980's Alligator but also less memorable and fun. Definitely better than I expected though.

6.5/10


Kingdom of the Spiders (1977)

Hilarious 70s B-horror with a veterenarian (played surprisingly low-key by William Shatner) having to protect his backwater town from an army of angry tarantulas and other spiders. It's mostly a rip-off of Jaws and The Birds but with thousands of spiders instead. It's much less professionally made than the two aforementioned films but the cheesiness of course adds to the fun, there's some great landscape shots in there and some death scenes manage to look pretty unpleasant with spiders crawling over and webbing everything.

Arachnophobia is definitely the better choice for spider horror flicks but this was pretty entertaining nonetheless. Unfortunately there's some animal cruelty in there with spiders getting stomped on and shot at with fire extinguishers.

7/10
 
Last edited:
Superman's representation has been done dirty for years. While it is Spiderman's motto, "with great power comes great responsibility" is more Superman's thing, and there's so many great stories that can come from how he's the "bland paragon" and OP.
I just really want someone to make live-action Superman and Batman and then have the Justice League cartoon versions be the primary inspirations.
I grew up with the animated Justice League series, so I'm being reminded of the reasons why that version of the characters worked so well. It feels so nostalgic in a good way.
 
The Perfection:

This was extremely trashy, so trashy I want to wash my eyeballs out now. And an EXTREME what the fuck, but not in the good way though. I lost brain cells watching this.

The film plays out like an over serious modern day exploitation film. It's slickly filmed and has a decent cast. The script is just a dumpster fire of bad ideas. The film's twists don't make any sense. They're just there to be shocking for the sake of it. The script is also full of clunky dialogue trying to bear the weight of all the non-sense twists. The end result is a film that left me feeling irritated. Not hammy enough to be fun trash and not smart or interesting enough to be arty trash.
 
The Beyond (1981)

Only my second Fulci and I liked it just as much if not better than City of the Living Dead. Another gorefest with unintentionally hilarious overdubs and a fantastic score by Fabio Frizzi. It's zombies again but with the neat addition of the occult and the gates of hell. Definitely a more surrealist film than City and better when just letting the images speak for themselves. It was filmed on location in New Orleans and is beautiful to just look at.

Iconic kills abound in this with nails through the back of the head, eye gouges and a really long scene where spiders eat a man's face. The Italians sure had a knack for gory horror and mechanical crocodiles in those days.

8/10
 
Last edited:
Forget the eye gouging man, this is the most terrifying kill of them all to me.

Schizm is a man of fine nasty taste. :drinking:

Liked it so much in fact that The House By The Cemetery and Zombie Flesh Eaters moved up quite a few spots on my watch list.
The second one has the infamous zombie zombie vs shark scene and no way am I gonna miss out on that :D


Dark Age (1987)

Underrated ozploitation horror adventure about a sacred man-eating crocodile and one ranger's efforts to find a non-lethal solution regarding it to appease his Aborigine friends. Beautiful shots of the Outback, entertaining plot with a mystical quality to it at times and a different approach to filmmaking really made this a stand-out killer animal movie for me. Thankfully the Jaws references were kept at a relative minimum here and the main villains in this are actually trigger-happy poachers. It definitely sparked my interest in actively seeking out more Australian movies in the future, good thing I have an unwatched ozploitation documentary lying around. Hidden gem.

8/10
 
Enemy of the State (1998)
★★★★½
They just don't make Hollywood movies like this anymore.

In spite of the plot-holes and some dated technology inconsistencies, Enemy of the State holds up much better than many other technophobia takes made in the '90s. In fact, I dare to even say that it was so far ahead of its time that made Snowden's leaks look like Wikileaks.

I think when it comes to movies, particularly Hollywood movies like Tony Scott's, there needs to be a certain level of suspension of disbelief. When one pokes around too much and says, "When the movie shows the surveillance camera rotate around the shopping bag, it lost me," I just think he's missing the forest for the trees. I've seen maybe four Tony Scott films by now (Top Gun, Domino, Crimson Tide and this film), and in spite of certain dated misses like Cruise's cruising in the air force, I thoroughly enjoyed Crimson Tide for the kind of dramatic blockbuster it tried to offer between the two big names, Denzel and Hackman. I liked what Scott has to offer in terms of blockbusters, a nice balanced of adrenaline action thrills with enough intelligence and cleverness (nitpicks about its dated references aside) to keep audience both entertained and thinking. That's the ideal kind of film for me. Check out my top favorites list; they are all movies like this, entertainment with enough smarts. Emphasis on "enough." Unlike many critics of this film, I don't demand for the unreasonable, especially when I know how difficult it is to make damn good entertainment.

But with that aside, let's get on talking about the actual film. For starters, this was easily one of Will Smith's most underrated performances. Technically, he didn't do anything here that he hadn't already done in Independence Day (another favorite of mine), but I feel that the role of an average but good man who's just trying to get home to the kids is an ideal casting for Smith, considering his squeaky-clean background. I think Bob Chipman said it best in his video defending Independence Day, that Will Smith was your average action star; he says cool lines while doing cool things and he's nice but not a wuss. And growing up with Smith myself, I could always get behind the idea of him being an action star in spite of the fact that black action stars weren't a thing in the '90s, certainly not black rappers, a career still associated with the term, "gangster" back then.

And if you've seen footage of Fresh Prince of Bel-Air, particularly that one famous scene where Smith really acted the hell out of, the famous "Why didn't he want me, man?!" scene, it makes a lot of sense when you see Smith being just as good in a dramatic role like this. The man might be an action star, but he's also compelling enough as a dramatic actor starring alongside the heavyweight of Gene Hackman.

It's appropriate that we should see Hackman in this film, considering that he starred in yet another movie about government surveillance back in the '70s, The Conversation. And thinking back to that film just makes me realize how much Scott's works entertained me, specifically his works that hearken back to '70s political thrillers about government conspiracies and national paranoia. On a similar note, The X-Files was also portrayed in such a style, and it too received the rather unfair backlash in later years that it's become "dated." Watching The X-Files for the first time recently and having seen this film today, I just don't really share the same resentment or frustration. I had a really good time, and maybe that's enough to ask from a movie.

There are a number of reasons Scott's films work on a level many newer works from the likes of Michael Bay don't. Other than just describing them as "smarter films," there's just a bigger emphasis on the human element. While not completely devoid of the occasional lewd humor, Enemy of the State places its focus on making us care about the characters and their principles. There have been a number of favorite movies of mine that, in spite of their cheesy plot, have excelled greatly because of their excellent character writing, one of which being the aforementioned Independence Day. When you have great relatable characters with values you might care about, I think most of the other stuff hardly matters because they're the connection with your audience, the windows to your story. And I found the idea of a simple man who's just trying to do the right thing having his whole life torn apart, it's just a compelling story that hooks you from the start.

The other reason is just the style of action Tony Scott is famous for. Scott knows how to film action efficiently with its tight frames and fast-paced movements, but he also knows how to utilize the music score just as well. There's a thing I've missed from Bruckheimer-produced blockbusters of old that you just don't see anymore, that big dramatic score hamming things up, making what might already be an intense scene an even more exhilarating experience, just this super-serious music blasting away. Yes, it's cheesy, but it also feels larger-than-life, amplifying these events unfolding on-screen that's a matter of life-or-death for the characters. That same dramatic style can be found in Crimson Tide, where two soldiers played by legendary actors opposes one another on a decision that might decide the start of WWIII.

That's just the kind of overdramatic epic I would go to the movies for, to escape from my boring mundane life for a moment for such an epic adventure on the big-screen. And I think Tony Scott nailed that Hollywood blockbuster experience perfectly for us to escape to these thrillers and confronted by thought-provoking subjects that would have us discussing among ourselves long after the movie was over.

To make a long review short, it's like it doesn't even matter if its accusations about the NSA and government surveillance are completely accurate or not; it matters that it's just accurate enough to make us think and feel excited and be thoroughly entertained by antagonists that mirror the fears and paranoia we face in real life, even now in 2020. That's movies for you.
 
The Harder They Come (1972)

Di fos yardie feature movie An di most influential outta jamrock Ar even di Caribbean. An really get reggae inna di scene even before Bob Marley.

An authentic portrayal ah yardie life widout glamor ar sheen Di corruption an greed Collie an di yardie Pathos. Di fos English movie weh subtitles did needed fi USA! Ih a as raw as ih gets even eff ih nuh ave di bess acting bloodwork Wul heap ah everyting. Buh ih a authentic. Dis a jamrock. Buh di muzik oh di music! fram all kinds ah reggae artists buh listen tuh di title track mon! Plays wul heap inna movie buh eh speaks wul heap an a super criss. An di musicians ramp sum addi actors! How cool a dat.


Gets ah bit uneven at di end buh well wut checking out Ar at least di soundtrack. Eh more well-known dan di movie by fur.

7+/10, Authentic lakka curry rammy ar jerk senseh fowl mon.
 
A Reflection on '90s Action Thrillers (and how they've dated horribly)
I remember that as a kid, the Keanu Reeves starring action movie, Speed, was one of my favorite action films of all time, so much so that I played pretend trying to dismantle a bomb beneath my bed (there was technically no access to the bottom of my bed, so I had to improvise and work on the side frame instead). And then there was that movie with that cheesy pop song that I remembered so well because it was performed at my primary school too, "How Do I Live" by Trisha Yearwood; the movie was a little-known film called Con-Air.

Both films were exactly the kind of over-the-top films I grew up to love, being an adrenaline-junkie. But something happened during my rewatches about five, maybe six years ago; the films dated, horribly. I just wasn't entertained any more, bored by the predictable action sequences as I awaited for the next bombastic set-piece to come. On the same note, the same thing occurred to my rewatch of the '90s Mummy remake as well starring Brendan Fraser, another ex-favorite film of mine from my childhood.

Thinking back to Enemy of the State and why I was entertained by it, I think it's all about the novelty of watching such a film for the first time, not knowing what's gonna happen and how are things gonna turn out for our hero, the thrill of that danger feeling real. For those of us who have seen countless movies, enough to easily predict how an action film is gonna unfold according to our knowledge of film structures and film theory, it would make sense as to say that cliched scripts might bore us, especially when their only appeal only lies within the unexpected to surprise the audience, or rather, "thrill" the audience. Hence the term, "thriller." So it also makes sense, therefore, that I would be bored rewatching these films, when their sole appeal is gone, invalidated. I know that a large number of people still find entertainment value in such predictable sequences, but to me at least, it feels like I'm watching a series of movements that are there for the sake of pushing the plot forward and having no deeper meaning than that. There's no surprise or deeper thought than that, and it's become boring.

This becomes even more frustrating if the characters are thin, shallow, because all that's left that would feel interesting is the dialogue that might still be witty enough to humor us now and then, like the case with Speed, one of the films that was doctored by script doctor, Joss Whedon. But even then, Speed's humor was still not enough to hold my attention for nearly 2 hours (1h 56m runtime).

But with that being said, I hope you wouldn't misunderstand the point I'm trying to make - I loved those movies... past tense, when I was watching them for the first time. And I think there's something to be said when a movie could enthral you in such a manner, even if for only once. I still remember fondly the experiences I had watching them, the adrenaline pumping through my veins as I let myself feel the danger the characters are feeling without regards for how the plot is gonna turn out. I think that's what I meant when I said in my review for Enemy of the State, "the suspension of disbelief." The thrill of being chased down by federal agents hunting down dirty secrets that could expose government corruption, that kind of dramatic tension that you could only experience in movies or similar visual narrative, I do miss those experiences. In fact, I can't get enough of it, still ever the junkie craving for the thrill and the speed.

So yes, they might have dated horribly, but you never forget your first time. It's a memory that will always have a special place in my heart.
 
Last edited:
Seeing this video has made me somewhat reconsider Jurassic World, though it doesn't improve the experience I had with it. It's a shame that a film with surprisingly well thought-out themes and narrative had such... generic execution.
And I refuse to see the other Jurassic World film, and why the fuck are they making another one?!
Unless Dominion is going to be "humanity easily gets rid of dinosaurs from nature", it's the dumbest idea in a while.
 
Not Quite Hollywood: The Wild, Untold Story of Ozploitation! (2008)

Great documentary about 70s and 80s Australian low budget genre films. Tons of smut, gore, explosions, car chases and guerilla filmmaking with insightful and outrageous stories/interviews and Quentin Tarantino pops in ever so often to gush about his favourite ozploitation movies (because of course he's the biggest fan of the genre outside of Australia). I admit that the movie gets more interesting after they move away from the raunchy 70s sex comedies and get to the genre films like Howling III and Mad Max.

I really loved the format of this documentary as it was entertaining and had a lot of heart. Mark Hartley also did a similar film on the history of Cannon Films which is just as good and I can't recommend it enough to the movie buffs here. Definitely have some newfound respect for Australian filmmaking now and can't wait to get my hands on some of those movies.

8/10
 
Last edited:
Back
Top