Search
Search results

Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated Waltz With Bashir (2008) in Movies
Mar 11, 2021
This is the fifth in the series of films I would recommend to an alien to explain humanity. Not, as posted on the Instagram account, #6 – sorry for the confusion, I think I skipped #4 on there when posting for Schindler’s List a few weeks ago. Anyway… today’s choice is Ari Folman’s extraordinary antiwar film from 2008, which combines several forms of animation and live action footage to create a dreamlike landscape of the 1982 invasion of Lebanon, and one man’s journey to reconstruct his own lost memories of events.
I saw this when working at The Cameo Cinema in Edinburgh on release. It was the kind of thing I loved to discover that I wouldn’t normally have paid to see. Its impact on me was immediate, and I went back to see it 3 more times. When it was released on DVD in 2009, it became my go to movie to gift to people who I knew would love it but may not have even heard of it, due to its low profile arthouse origins. It was nominated in the Best Foreign Language Film category at the Oscars, but otherwise went under the radar in many ways. I still doubt it has been seen by a quarter of the people who would immediately say it was one of the most amazing films they had ever seen.
The animation may seem gimmicky at first, but once you identify its utility in this context and understand this is not a film for children, it becomes a transcendent trip of vibrant colour, emotion and… humanity. I would call it as indispensable an antiwar movie as Apocalypse Now, and in many ways so much more moving than that classic. If you have yet to see it, do yourself a favour, pick a time you can reflect and allow the dreamlike quality to carry you away.
I saw this when working at The Cameo Cinema in Edinburgh on release. It was the kind of thing I loved to discover that I wouldn’t normally have paid to see. Its impact on me was immediate, and I went back to see it 3 more times. When it was released on DVD in 2009, it became my go to movie to gift to people who I knew would love it but may not have even heard of it, due to its low profile arthouse origins. It was nominated in the Best Foreign Language Film category at the Oscars, but otherwise went under the radar in many ways. I still doubt it has been seen by a quarter of the people who would immediately say it was one of the most amazing films they had ever seen.
The animation may seem gimmicky at first, but once you identify its utility in this context and understand this is not a film for children, it becomes a transcendent trip of vibrant colour, emotion and… humanity. I would call it as indispensable an antiwar movie as Apocalypse Now, and in many ways so much more moving than that classic. If you have yet to see it, do yourself a favour, pick a time you can reflect and allow the dreamlike quality to carry you away.

Hideo Kojima recommended Blade Runner (1982) in Movies (curated)

Alex Kapranos recommended Greek Music From The Underground by Various in Music (curated)

Daniel Rossen recommended track The Children, Save the Children by Elvin Jones in It Don't Mean a Thing by Elvin Jones in Music (curated)

LeftSideCut (3776 KP) rated Spider-Man: Homecoming (2017) in Movies
Feb 18, 2021
Spider-Man's first solo outing within the MCU is a frequently charming and grounded affair.
As the overarching narrative of this behemoth franchise becomes increasingly cosmic and out there, entries like Homecoming are a welcome change of pace.
Tom Holland is a picture perfect, high school era Peter Parker. There's a lot to love about the Spider-Man movies that have come before, but it's nice to see the focus being on his school years properly. He's a young kid, completely out of his depth juggling his civilian life with fighting, years away from the seasoned hero he eventually becomes. He struggles with friendships and relationships like an awkward teenager does whilst constantly craving more in life and aiming for bigger and better things. It's incredibly relatable in that sense.
The world-building surrounding all this is subtle too. The main villain is Vulture, a veteran Spidey rogue, and played by a genuinely intimidating Michael Keaton. His Vulture is equal parts bad-guy and sympathetic every-day-guy, trying to find his way in a post-Avengers world.
The story also finds time to sneak in a few more classic Marvel villains such as Shocker, Tinkerer, Prowler and Scorpion, and it's executed in a way that's not at all overwhelming.
Happy Hogan (Jon Favreau) and Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.) provide the concrete connections to the wider MCU without ever distracting from the main plot, and the rest of the stellar cast are rounded out by the likes of Marisa Tomei, Zendaya, and Jacob Batalon (as one of the most likable characters to ever grace this franchise FYI)
The set pieces are littered here and there throughout a fairly dialogue heavy screenplay, but they're all pretty solid, the ferry scene being a highlight.
All in all, Spider-Man: Homecoming is an incredibly enjoyable Marvel film, whilst being a touching story about growing up. It's fun, it's exciting, and it's pretty damn wholesome.
As the overarching narrative of this behemoth franchise becomes increasingly cosmic and out there, entries like Homecoming are a welcome change of pace.
Tom Holland is a picture perfect, high school era Peter Parker. There's a lot to love about the Spider-Man movies that have come before, but it's nice to see the focus being on his school years properly. He's a young kid, completely out of his depth juggling his civilian life with fighting, years away from the seasoned hero he eventually becomes. He struggles with friendships and relationships like an awkward teenager does whilst constantly craving more in life and aiming for bigger and better things. It's incredibly relatable in that sense.
The world-building surrounding all this is subtle too. The main villain is Vulture, a veteran Spidey rogue, and played by a genuinely intimidating Michael Keaton. His Vulture is equal parts bad-guy and sympathetic every-day-guy, trying to find his way in a post-Avengers world.
The story also finds time to sneak in a few more classic Marvel villains such as Shocker, Tinkerer, Prowler and Scorpion, and it's executed in a way that's not at all overwhelming.
Happy Hogan (Jon Favreau) and Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.) provide the concrete connections to the wider MCU without ever distracting from the main plot, and the rest of the stellar cast are rounded out by the likes of Marisa Tomei, Zendaya, and Jacob Batalon (as one of the most likable characters to ever grace this franchise FYI)
The set pieces are littered here and there throughout a fairly dialogue heavy screenplay, but they're all pretty solid, the ferry scene being a highlight.
All in all, Spider-Man: Homecoming is an incredibly enjoyable Marvel film, whilst being a touching story about growing up. It's fun, it's exciting, and it's pretty damn wholesome.

Rat Scabies recommended Innervisions by Stevie Wonder in Music (curated)

Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated Videodrome (1983) in Movies
Sep 8, 2020
First It Controls Your Mind Than It Destorys Your Body
Holy shit this movie is good. The effects, the psychological espect, the sci-fi, the horror, the suspense, the mystery and James Woods.
The Plot: As the president of a trashy TV channel, Max Renn (James Woods) is desperate for new programming to attract viewers. When he happens upon "Videodrome," a TV show dedicated to gratuitous torture and punishment, Max sees a potential hit and broadcasts the show on his channel. However, after his girlfriend (Deborah Harry) auditions for the show and never returns, Max investigates the truth behind Videodrome and discovers that the graphic violence may not be as fake as he thought.
Distributed by Universal Pictures, Videodrome was the first film by Cronenberg to gain backing from any major Hollywood studio. With the highest budget of any of his films to date, the film was a box-office bomb, recouping only $2.1 million from a $5.9 million budget.
Now considered a cult classic, the film has been cited as one of Cronenberg's best, and a key example of the body horror and science fiction horror genres.
The basis for the film came from David Cronenberg's childhood. Cronenberg used to pick up television signals from Buffalo, New York, late at night after Canadian stations had gone off the air, and worry he might see something disturbing not meant for public consumption.
After the box office success of Scanners, Cronenberg turned down the chance of directing Return of the Jedi, having had no desire to direct material produced by other filmmakers.
When it came to casting the character of Max Renn, Cronenberg chose James Woods, who was a fan of Rabid and Scanners and met with the actor in Beverly Hills to offer him the part, and liked the fact that Woods was very articulate in terms of delivery.
Its a excellent movie and a must see, same with david cronenberg's early horror films.
The Plot: As the president of a trashy TV channel, Max Renn (James Woods) is desperate for new programming to attract viewers. When he happens upon "Videodrome," a TV show dedicated to gratuitous torture and punishment, Max sees a potential hit and broadcasts the show on his channel. However, after his girlfriend (Deborah Harry) auditions for the show and never returns, Max investigates the truth behind Videodrome and discovers that the graphic violence may not be as fake as he thought.
Distributed by Universal Pictures, Videodrome was the first film by Cronenberg to gain backing from any major Hollywood studio. With the highest budget of any of his films to date, the film was a box-office bomb, recouping only $2.1 million from a $5.9 million budget.
Now considered a cult classic, the film has been cited as one of Cronenberg's best, and a key example of the body horror and science fiction horror genres.
The basis for the film came from David Cronenberg's childhood. Cronenberg used to pick up television signals from Buffalo, New York, late at night after Canadian stations had gone off the air, and worry he might see something disturbing not meant for public consumption.
After the box office success of Scanners, Cronenberg turned down the chance of directing Return of the Jedi, having had no desire to direct material produced by other filmmakers.
When it came to casting the character of Max Renn, Cronenberg chose James Woods, who was a fan of Rabid and Scanners and met with the actor in Beverly Hills to offer him the part, and liked the fact that Woods was very articulate in terms of delivery.
Its a excellent movie and a must see, same with david cronenberg's early horror films.

Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated Vampire in Brooklyn (1995) in Movies
Sep 18, 2020
Brooklyn's Own Vampire
Vampire in Brooklyn- is a entertaining movie. It has horror, comedy and eddie Murphy as the bad guy.
The plot: In the wake of her mother's death in a mental institution, detective Rita Veder (Angela Bassett) is assigned to a baffling serial murder case. After examining the crime scene -- a corpse-filled ship found adrift at sea -- Rita meets Maximilian (Eddie Murphy), a smooth-talking Caribbean playboy determined to romance her. When Rita begins suffering from crippling hallucinations, she calls upon Dr. Zeko (Zakes Mokae), an occultist who suspects a vampire is on the loose.
According to Charlie Murphy, the movie was originally going to be a straight horror film with no laughs but Wes Craven brought a different focus to it. He also said: "Maximilian wasn't going to have any redeeming qualities. But Wes taught us that we must get the audience to care about our characters. And even if they didn't know any vampires personally, they would at least have to identify with the type of person he was.
About the movie, Eddie Murphy said: "I've always wanted to do something where I was the villain in the movie. I love horror pictures and I was a big fan of Wes Craven. This movie started out as something small, this was a movie my company was just going to produce and the screenplay came together so well that I thought it will be a fun role to play. Because I got to do something kind of scary and had a safety net because the vampire can turn into other peoples. I get to be funny when I'm the preacher and I get to be funny when I'm the Italian guy. And the vampire is pretty straight and I got all these funny stuff happening around me. I felt it was a unique piece to do."
Although contemporary reviews were negative, Vampire In Brooklyn has since become a cult classic.
Like i said its a good comedy horror film.
The plot: In the wake of her mother's death in a mental institution, detective Rita Veder (Angela Bassett) is assigned to a baffling serial murder case. After examining the crime scene -- a corpse-filled ship found adrift at sea -- Rita meets Maximilian (Eddie Murphy), a smooth-talking Caribbean playboy determined to romance her. When Rita begins suffering from crippling hallucinations, she calls upon Dr. Zeko (Zakes Mokae), an occultist who suspects a vampire is on the loose.
According to Charlie Murphy, the movie was originally going to be a straight horror film with no laughs but Wes Craven brought a different focus to it. He also said: "Maximilian wasn't going to have any redeeming qualities. But Wes taught us that we must get the audience to care about our characters. And even if they didn't know any vampires personally, they would at least have to identify with the type of person he was.
About the movie, Eddie Murphy said: "I've always wanted to do something where I was the villain in the movie. I love horror pictures and I was a big fan of Wes Craven. This movie started out as something small, this was a movie my company was just going to produce and the screenplay came together so well that I thought it will be a fun role to play. Because I got to do something kind of scary and had a safety net because the vampire can turn into other peoples. I get to be funny when I'm the preacher and I get to be funny when I'm the Italian guy. And the vampire is pretty straight and I got all these funny stuff happening around me. I felt it was a unique piece to do."
Although contemporary reviews were negative, Vampire In Brooklyn has since become a cult classic.
Like i said its a good comedy horror film.

Joe Goodhart (27 KP) rated New Mutants by Zeb Wells: The Complete Collection in Books
Nov 30, 2020
So, thanks to recent good deals on Comixology, as well as mandated COVID-19 stay-@-home in NC (it's the same elsewhere in the U.S., but I just felt like throwing out where I am in the mess), I have taken it upon myself to catch up with some classic Marvel mutant madness that I had missed first time around. For this week's excursion, I took on Zeb Wells' NEW MUTANTS run.
First, let me say that I had never read anything Wells had written before this. That being said, I would agree with what I saw a number of people saying in their reviews: that Zeb Wells does a bang-up job of writing for X-youngins! The dialogue and characterization never felt off or just plain badly written. It felt like he had a genuine fondness for the characters, and it was reflected in the way he treated them in the stories.
The only thing that prevented me from giving it four Stars was the art. I felt the stories detailed were interesting and several towards the end were very tense and exciting to me. However, that art? Not so much.
It started out great in the beginning w/the art by Dio Neves during "Return of the Legion". However, it just became a sea of inconsistency, as just too many artists of varied styles made for a mess that kept it from being a four Star book!
Final conclusion.. The art, while severely conflicting with the differences in styles, was not a high point of the book. Zeb Wells' writing? So, so good! Made me remember that not all the X-books at that point in time were angst-y and full of internalized self-conflicts!
Next on my list? I have the two volumes of Dan Abnett and Andy Lanning's run of NEW MUTANTS, which picks up after Wells' run. To coin a phrase from comedian John Mulaney's act, "This oughta be good!". See y'all when I am finished with that one.
First, let me say that I had never read anything Wells had written before this. That being said, I would agree with what I saw a number of people saying in their reviews: that Zeb Wells does a bang-up job of writing for X-youngins! The dialogue and characterization never felt off or just plain badly written. It felt like he had a genuine fondness for the characters, and it was reflected in the way he treated them in the stories.
The only thing that prevented me from giving it four Stars was the art. I felt the stories detailed were interesting and several towards the end were very tense and exciting to me. However, that art? Not so much.
It started out great in the beginning w/the art by Dio Neves during "Return of the Legion". However, it just became a sea of inconsistency, as just too many artists of varied styles made for a mess that kept it from being a four Star book!
Final conclusion.. The art, while severely conflicting with the differences in styles, was not a high point of the book. Zeb Wells' writing? So, so good! Made me remember that not all the X-books at that point in time were angst-y and full of internalized self-conflicts!
Next on my list? I have the two volumes of Dan Abnett and Andy Lanning's run of NEW MUTANTS, which picks up after Wells' run. To coin a phrase from comedian John Mulaney's act, "This oughta be good!". See y'all when I am finished with that one.

Eleanor Luhar (47 KP) rated Billy and Me in Books
Jun 24, 2019
This is a very, very different genre than I usually read. It was romantic and contemporary and kind of cliche and gross. But I will admit that it was written well.
Despite the gooey topics, this book was easy to sit and read through. The writing was good, though some of the speech didn't feel particularly authentic. My main problem was how cliche this was. A young woman who loves classic literature andworks in a tea shop meets a movie star without realising who he is and falls in love... Yeah, it's kind of a stereotypical romance. I hate this sort of thing. It's tacky and just ugh. But there was more to it than just the romance, which was very good. Sophie had her own issues to deal with, stemming from childhood grief and caring for her mother. It even had a really tragic moment toward the end, that didn't involve the actor - Billy - much at all.
As I mentioned above, the language wasn't always particularly fluid. It sometimes felt like Fletcher was trying too hard to make it more romantic and emotional. Billy was pretty much 'perfect' and extremely romantic, probably extremely unrealistically so. He was likeable, still, just not very realistic.
Sophie herself was a bit... not annoying, but she's not my favourite protagonist ever. She was trying too hard to be unique and strong and independent and it just irritated me. I get what Fletcher was going for (I think) but I just didn't love Sophie that much at all.
Like most other contemporary novels (not that I've actually read many of them), Sophie's life comes together perfectly at the end. Well, not quite perfectly, but the ending was sickly sweet. But I'm a bit of a cynic. You might like this more than me.
Despite the genre and gross cutesy lovey stuff, I think this deserves 3.5 stars. The writing was good and I did actually enjoy reading it.
Despite the gooey topics, this book was easy to sit and read through. The writing was good, though some of the speech didn't feel particularly authentic. My main problem was how cliche this was. A young woman who loves classic literature andworks in a tea shop meets a movie star without realising who he is and falls in love... Yeah, it's kind of a stereotypical romance. I hate this sort of thing. It's tacky and just ugh. But there was more to it than just the romance, which was very good. Sophie had her own issues to deal with, stemming from childhood grief and caring for her mother. It even had a really tragic moment toward the end, that didn't involve the actor - Billy - much at all.
As I mentioned above, the language wasn't always particularly fluid. It sometimes felt like Fletcher was trying too hard to make it more romantic and emotional. Billy was pretty much 'perfect' and extremely romantic, probably extremely unrealistically so. He was likeable, still, just not very realistic.
Sophie herself was a bit... not annoying, but she's not my favourite protagonist ever. She was trying too hard to be unique and strong and independent and it just irritated me. I get what Fletcher was going for (I think) but I just didn't love Sophie that much at all.
Like most other contemporary novels (not that I've actually read many of them), Sophie's life comes together perfectly at the end. Well, not quite perfectly, but the ending was sickly sweet. But I'm a bit of a cynic. You might like this more than me.
Despite the genre and gross cutesy lovey stuff, I think this deserves 3.5 stars. The writing was good and I did actually enjoy reading it.