Movies 2025 Movie Discussion Thread

[Log]

5 hours ago, odessasteps said:

How does today’s Daily Burgle not give a match when two of the clues are “chair” and “stage” when I guess Flashdance.? 

Was it Clint Eastwood?

[odessasteps]

The answer was 

Spoiler

Whiplash

 

[Andrew POE!]

Movies today....

Cain And Abel (Criterion Channel, leaving on 12/31) - 3.5/5 stars

Spoiler

Cain And Abel is a completely wild movie. It's very melodramatic at first – and is almost soap opera-like in the first half of the movie as two brothers Ellis (Christopher de Leon) and Lorens (Phillip Salvador) deal with resentment and anger towards each other on account of treatment from their mother Pina (Mona Lisa).

Ellis brings a girlfriend from college named Zita (Carmi Martin, with legs for days), while acknowledging his 'side girl' Rina (Cecille Castillo) who is working as a housekeeper for Pina. Ellis is a bit of trashy dude for that! Lorens obviously feels that Pina likes Ellis more than him and has a wife named Becky (Baby Delgado), who is pregnant with his child.

The movie goes along great until Ellis and Lorens get into an argument and Lorens causes Becky to have a miscarriage and die. He leaves and teams up with his friends, who run a bar with him and have access to high powered weaponry. Ellis also has friends that come and have high powered weaponry too. It turns into a Chuck Norris movie out there as they are shooting each other!

The soundtrack is awashed with synths and at times it resembles Brian De Palma or even William Friedkin in its filmmaking. Lino Brocka as a director had to use low budget filmmaking with a lot of the same locations used. But there's just something compelling about this movie that it's difficult to be bored with it.

One scene I liked was the scene where Lorens breaks up a fight between two of his nephews as the camera does a closeup on his face, with his realizing what he has done yet it's too late for him. A similarly nice scene was when Ellis looked at his baby in the crib and strokes his hand; a scene after that has the baby and Rina getting gunned down.

I guess the lesson to learn from this is don't live in the Philippines in the 1980s, people will have M4 carbines and they look cool. Well, wait, live in the Philippines in the 1980s.

Red Dawn (1984) (HBO Max, leaving on 12/31) - 3.5/5 stars

Spoiler

The thing with Red Dawn is it is a propaganda movie; but, it's also an indictment of right wing and leftist political causes. The United States government in this is seemingly useless and unwilling or unable to qwell the invasion forces of Soviet Union, Cuba, and Latin American countries. Those invading are presented as heartless and evil, although there's brief glimpses of humanity with them. Examples include Ernesto Bella (Ron O'Neal) writing a letter home indicating that he'll resign his commission, the young soldiers of the Russian army being captured and pleading for their lives.

What should be addressed is the sheer impracticality and impossibility of the invasion. One of the characters Andrew Tanner (Powers Boothe) described the Russian army going across the Bering Strait and into Canada and coming in from the north, with Cuba/Latin America coming from the south. The implication is that Mexico and Canada rolled over for the forces, which I think would have been met with resistance there too from those countries' civilian population (after all, the United States shouldn't corner the market on a civilian resistance in this movie). The invasion is on their lands too and presumably Mexico and Canada are American allies (although it tells me that the writers John Milius and Kevin Reynolds don't consider them to be US allies). Mexico seemingly being left leaning too and sympathetic to those causes shouldn't mean abdication to an invasion.

What makes Red Dawn work honestly is the absolute charisma of Patrick Swayze as Jed with various “Brat Pack” members like C. Thomas Howell as Robert, Dirty Dancing partner Jennifer Grey as Toni, Lea Thompson as Erica, Charlie Sheen as Matt, and Darren Dalton as Daryl. With it being about teenagers fighting back against an invading force, it's less of 'raging hormones' and more 'Battle of Algiers in America.' The cinematography throughout the movie is practically stunning, nearly John Ford-like with the shots of the vistas, mountain ranges, and snow covered forests.

The drawback is the characters for this aren't very deep; the “Wolverines” are shown to be no better than the Russian army when they gun down weaponless soldiers and Daryl after he is made to swallow a tracking device. To be honest, the explanation and what happened wasn't very well done to indicate how the “Wolverines” were found out; it's just explained in dialogue and that's it. I did like the scene where the “Wolverines” invade a camp and a projection had “Wolverines” spray painted on it as well as a fighter jet being blown up.

What's scary about this movie is how those on the right would use this to justify right wing talking points. Red Dawn should be thought of as a warning about power; when governments fail the people, the people get caught in the middle. It shouldn't be used to justify hatred against Cuba, Latin America and Mexican people; those currently in power in the United States have used their power to essentially kidnap people from the streets from those countries. In a way, they will guarantee that militaries of those countries will decide to support an invasion into the United States. Also, the movie makes no effort to even present the motivations for invasion; a few, like Bella try to argue that “they want to win the hearts and minds” of the civilians, yet he's not listened to and those running the invasion gun down people in front of mass graves. Likewise, Strelnikov (William Smith) wants to no longer gun down civilians as part of their fighting back against the insurgents. One scene that's interesting is when the Russian soldiers visit a park and see an inscription about Theodore Roosevelt founding the park. The soldier, who can read English, tells the others about a 'peasant rebellion that was crushed by imperialistic American forces.' Which goes back to Red Dawn being about abuses of power; those that control the history dictate what's written about it and not any uncomfortable truths. (Obviously, the uncomfortable truths about the Soviet Union should be emphasized too).

Even then, Red Dawn is definitely a movie to watch in a theater; the visuals completely carry the movie and make it better than it actually is.

Starman (Criterion Channel, leaving on 12/31) - 4/5 stars

Spoiler

“Tell me how to say goodbye.”

Without E.T. The Extra-Terrestrial or Close Encounters of the Third Kind, there wouldn't have been Starman.

Jeff Bridges play “Starman,” who is not given a name throughout the movie. If any name is to be given, it's Scott, the deceased husband of a woman named Jenny Hayden (Karen Allen). The movie opens as a way for Jenny to process grief; she's watching home videos of her husband in a cabin late one night. “Starman” arrives and through absorbing of her husband's hair and seeing a photograph of Scott becomes Scott. The movie becomes a road trip - “Scott” is to go to a crater in Arizona and Jenny becomes an unwilling accomplice. At first, Jenny fights to free herself from “Scott.” The scene where she nearly knocks a van off the road and is screaming that she's being kidnapped is indicative of that. Eventually, she develops a sense of 'stockholm syndrome,' despite “Scott” not even being award of his own actions.

For “Scott” and from watching this movie, it's gaining an understanding of American culture in the 1980s. What does language mean? What do phrases that we say that we take for granted mean? In a very brief scene (although played for laughs in the 1980s), what does going to the bathroom mean? Why are people born into genders that they have? “Scott” walks into a women's bathroom, completely not caring or aware of the distinction. He's simply going where Jenny Hayden (he always says her full name) went and sees a paper towel on the mirror saying she's been kidnapped. He naturally wonders what is meant during the car ride with her.

Trying to find “Scott” is Mark Shermin (Charles Martin Smith) and the US government. Shermin seems to view the visitor much more favorably and wants to be able to learn and communicate with him. After all, the Voyager 2 satellite was sent into space as a method of communication with a way for whoever hears it to learn and decipher English on a rudimentary level. I love the shot from inside the capsule as Shermin finds the disc. The US government in this is viewed much more adversarial; the United States government wondered at first if the object landing on Earth came “from Russia” and seem to want to harm “Scott.” The initial kidnapping of Jenny Hayden until she called it off in a scene where they meet Mark Shermin shows the approach; the US government is not interested in the alien's life, they just want to shoot at a target otherwise.

The ending sequence is a bit of a callback to E.T. The Extra-Terrestrial and Close Encounters of the Third Kind as “Scott” and Jenny Hayden reach their destination. “Scott” is to go back to his home planet, having given Jenny a son that she is pregnant with. The camera at the end focuses on Jenny's face as she watches “Scott” flies away with the ship.

The camerawork and cinematography really plays into John Carpenter's past work and is yet much more 'safer' (although still not really kid friendly). “Scott” and Jenny have sex in a scene with a lot of cross-fades and soft lighting; it seems more romantic than sexual.

What makes this movie work is Jeff Bridges' acting. Bridges portrays “Scott” as an outsider, in line with David Bowie in The Man Who Fell to Earth and the character from The Day The Earth Stood Still. The romantic aspects offer a different dimension to the portrayal.

Big Trouble In Little China (Criterion Channel, leaving on 12/31) - 4.5/5 stars

Spoiler

Quite honestly, Big Trouble In Little China is a classic. It's like a martial arts screwball comedy. It's loaded with such manic energy that the runtime literally zips by. There's not a break, no chance for slowdown, or a lull point in the movie. Kurt Russell as Jack Burton literally sweats his way through the movie and you do too. I wonder if Caught Stealing had lifted its inspiration from this movie.

Story wise, it's almost too simple. The characters are a bit trope-y, but it's hard not to get behind it. It completely sucks that 20^th Century FOX didn't give any push to this movie. It would have been a perfect movie with Raiders of the Lost Ark for just extraordinary cinematic thrills. The movie functions as an extended chase – Jack Burton just wants to get his truck back. He gets roped into rescuing Gracie Law (Kim Cattrall) and Miao Yin (Suzee Pal), who is Wang Chi (Dennis Dun)'s finance. The person who captured them is Lo Pan (James Hong).

The reason behind it doesn't make sense, but just roll with it: Lo Pan wants those women because they have green eyes. Why is that important? The reason given is it'll extend his life but also make him mortal. Nothing really happens to the women, but just deal with it. That's part of the charm of Big Trouble In Little China. It's caffeinated, hyped up, and sugary rush of cinema.

The ending is pretty much similar to the ending of Live and Let Die as Jack Burton is driving away with a big rig and Wild-Man has stowed away. The movie never returns though to the story intro where Egg Shen (Victor Wong) is explaining to an attorney (Jerry Hardin) about what happened. Honestly if it did that, the movie would have been a better conclusion. (I really hate it when movies do 'book end' introductions and never go back to them.)

Despite that, Big Trouble In Little China is big fun.

The Bad Guys (2022) (Peacock, leaving on 12/31) - 2.5/5 stars

Spoiler

Cute, charming animated movie that's basically “My First Heist Movie” for the younger set. It does what Steven Soderbergh did in Oceans' Eleven but geared towards a younger audience. The intro is the same style of intro found in Pulp Fiction and Reservoir Dogs.

Great voice acting from Sam Rockwell as Wolf and Richard Ayoade as Professor Marmalade. The rest of the cast has funny bits, but the movie is just a bit uneventful. The reveal at the end is very much fitting with other heist movies.

 

[odessasteps]

In some WD Richter shared universe, they got a Jack Burton/Buckaroo Banzai cross-over.

[Andrew POE!]

10 hours ago, odessasteps said:

In some WD Richter shared universe, they got a Jack Burton/Buckaroo Banzai cross-over.

I would have Baron Munchausen and the kids from Time Bandits in the crossover too. Maybe Snake Plissken and Jareth as well. 

[J.H.]

The Great Santini - In hindsight, I do question my parents taking a 9 year old boy to some of the movies I was exposed. This is one of them.

Let me be clear, I love this movie. Robert Duvall is a force of nature. Michael O'Keefe earned his Oscar nomination as Ben, the son who just never measures upto his father. God this movie is isn't just good, it THAT GOOD!

The Great Santini is a great movie. I remember being 9 and leaving the the theater bawling. I watched it at home. I'm 54. I was more than misty watching it. If we redid our greatest films of all time it might.make my top 59. God, I love this movie!

James

[Ace]

15 hours ago, odessasteps said:

In some WD Richter shared universe, they got a Jack Burton/Buckaroo Banzai cross-over.

I choose to believe Jack Burton has been a roadie for the Hong Kong Cavaliers.

[Andrew POE!]

Movies today...

Plan 75 (Criterion Channel, leaving on 12/31) - 3.5/5 stars

Spoiler

Altman / Paul Thomas Anderson-like in its scope, but Antonioni-like in its quietness, stillness and sadness, Plan 75 shows a future in Japan where those above the age of 75 elect to do euthanasia. Three different characters are followed – Michi Kakutani (Chieko Baisho) is a hotel chambermaid let go from her job on account of guests' complaints for her 'being too old,' Hiromu Okabe (Hayato Isomura) works for the government for the Plan 75 initiative talking with people and eventually encountering his uncle Yukio Okabe (Takao Taka), and Maria (Stefanie Arianne), a woman from the Phillippines living in Japan who works for the government to get money for her daughter's operation.

Much of the movie is more about the sense of community in Japan where this necessitates this initiative. The various characters deal with it differently; Michi is onboard with it due to not being able to find work or to go on welfare. She doesn't really wish to die, but giving all other options she is left with little choice. She connects with a woman working for the service and the woman is seemingly touched with their final conversation; we don't see what happens to the woman, but based on what new recruits to the call center are hearing, it's likely she will quit. Hiromu cheerfully goes about his work, although he encounters people throwing mud at his display. His reconnection with his uncle makes him reconsider what Plan 75 is really about; his uncle dies and he takes the body for cremation before getting pulled over. Maria, as a foreigner to the country of Japan, doesn't really have a sense of community beyond the Christian church she's a member of. Maria simply just does the work of emptying out purses and wallets, but the end of her story has her finding a large wad of cash in a wallet. Her co-worker just shrugs. She helps Hiromu take his uncle's body to Hiromu's car.

A movie like Plan 75 would never happen in America and English speaking societies; the sense of individualism is too well ingrained in American society. We have people like Al Pacino welcoming new babies at age 90; the aging 'baby boomers' would rather burn up the country than to collectively agree to euthanize themselves for the benefit of the greater society.

The drawback with Plan 75 is the movie is a tad 'rudderless' plot wise; it seems to exist more as a mood piece than anything fully exploring the story or characters. The characters don't have great emotional breakdowns, but seem to exist in quiet reserve and dignity. The ending is an example of this; a very long shot of Michi staring at the sun and quietly singing a song to herself. She had elected not to go through the process of euthanasia, but her future is uncertain. Much like the other characters Hiromu and Maria.

Prince of Darkness (Criterion Channel, leaving on 12/31) - 4/5 stars

Spoiler

Prince of Darkness as a movie feels a bit familiar – it seems to have the same sense of dread and tension as The Thing, except in this case the scientists involved are trying to study an enclosed liquid underneath a church and translate a book. The Thing has the characters just living in the South Pole at a research station.

A lot of Prince of Darkness is a bit Argento-like, especially with the focus on female characters and with Walter (Dennis Dun) being queer-coded. The fact that the liquid infects women first seem to be a conscious choice from director / writer John Carpenter. The women Susan (Anne Howard), Lisa (Ann Yen) and Kelly (Susan Blanchard) attack and kill the women in the group, until those killed reanimate and are walking around, like out of The Evil Dead.

Mirrors seem to hold power over the possessed character – which was something that was in Argento's Inferno as well. Eventually, the priest (Donald Pleasence) destroys the mirror where Catherine (Lisa Blount) pushes Kelly into and severs the connection to the world.

The drawback is some of the movie isn't as compelling to watch as previous Carpenter movies were. The evil and horror shown is a bit haphazard and the culmination is not nearly as anxiety inducing as the climax to The Thing was.

Still, it's nice to see actors like Dennis Dun and Victor Wong as Professor Howard Birack play characters in American films that aren't stereotypes of Asian-Americans. It's just too bad none of the characters are really given more depth than “these are quantum physicists working in a lab.” Having the characters be sent to solve a problem and having not much connection beyond that leads the movie to just have them be fodder for the unseen 'anti-God' hidden in the mirrors and possessing people.

Three Minutes: A Lengthening (Hulu, leaving on 12/19) - 3/5 stars

Spoiler

Three Minutes A Lengthening is less of a documentary and more of a video essay, but it covers in almost exhausting detail what occurred in the three minutes of a family video filmed in Poland in the 1940s. Many of the people in the video may not be alive on account of the Holocaust. Helena Bonham Carter narrates the movie with the book author Glenn Kurtz providing background detail.

It's at times not the most interesting documentary (really I felt like it was more of an audiobook), but having recorded footage is important. I liked the analogy about Grecian vases being discussed for their beauty, not so much for the historical timeframe they exist in.

Kill Bill: The Whole Bloody Affair (saw in the theaters) - 4/5 stars

Spoiler

I still think Pulp Fiction and Jackie Brown are Quentin Tarantino's best works. The stories for those are engrossing, tight, and never overstay their welcome - even with Pulp Fiction's length, it never feels tiring to watch.

If Kill Bill: The Whole Bloody Affair ended at the start of intermission, it would be Tarantino's best.

The problem is the part after intermission happened and it tries to be something that it isn't. It tries to paint a sympathetic portrait of Bill (David Carradine) and an unsympathetic portrait of The Bride (Uma Thurman). This attempt feels cumbersome and tacked-on.

A lot of movies that are four hour plus epics (like Lawrence of Arabia) have the main character go through a metamorphosis after the intermission. Situations change, the character views their plight completely differently. T.E. Lawrence at the end of Part One rides the whirlwind. T.E. Lawrence at the start of Part Two is leading a rebellion to attack a train.

The Bride at the end of Part One has killed O'Ren Ishii (Lucy Liu) in a Lady Snowblood-inspired fight. At the start of Part Two, we see a flashback. Which is the problem with Kill Bill for the entire movie...the story is told out of sequence and yet it doesn't feel like there is a progression to the character.

The scenes in Vol. 2 with Bill and the Bride at Bill's house is the best acting portions of the movie; David Carradine exhibits a sense of sadness for his character's relationship with The Bride. A lot of scenes, like the ones with Budd (Michael Madsen) and Ellie (Darryl Hannah) try that, but it doesn't feel as earned.

If anything with Kill Bill: The Whole Bloody Affair, it proves that Quentin Tarantino is the greatest 'homage auteur' ever. He cannot tell a story in four hours. He's not David Lean or Akira Kurosawa. The part after intermission just drags and is just not interesting to watch; part before intermission even with shots that are homages to other movies is so electric to watch. The pacing with Vol. 1 is just incredibly great (even the Production I.G. anime sequence is great).

To be honest, I hope Quentin Tarantino comes back to make another movie. I also disagree with him that there hasn't been a good movie after 2019.

 

[Technico Support]

13 hours ago, Andrew POE! said:

It tries to paint a sympathetic portrait of Bill (David Carradine) and an unsympathetic portrait of The Bride (Uma Thurman).

I never took it that way but I can definitely see how it could be read like that.

Kill Bill 1 and 2 are definitely two different movies and putting them together as one film probably doesn't work, thematically or length-wise.  Of course, I also disliked Hateful Eight because I found it overlong and overindulgent.

Edited December 11, 2025 by Technico Support

[Andrew POE!]

3 hours ago, Technico Support said:

I never took it that way but I can definitely see how it could be read like that.

Kill Bill 1 and 2 are definitely two different movies and putting them together as one film probably doesn't work, thematically or length-wise.  Of course, I also disliked Hateful Eight because I found it overlong and overindulgent.

Well, it's 'sympathetic' until you realize what a psycho Bill actually is. The Bride is psychotic too, but given what happened, it's a 'lesser evil.' It's a credit to David Carradine, Uma Thurman, and Quentin Tarantino to have the characters that way. A different movie (like, say, A History of Violence from David Cronenberg) would had the entire movie be spent fleshing out this relationship and why one person does a terrible thing, what it does to them, and what it does to the other person. It's touched upon in Kill Bill, but it feels like a setpiece amidst the action sequences rather than anything else (maybe I'm giving Tarantino less credit since it's fashionable right now). 

Edited December 11, 2025 by Andrew POE!

[Andrew POE!]

Movies today...not as much as usual. I had a work Christmas party and did offline stuff.

Justice League: Crisis On Infinite Earths Part One (HBO Max, leaving on 12/31) - 2.5/5 stars

Spoiler

It may not be fair to even watch Justice League: Crisis on Infinite Earths Part One without having seen every other animated DC Animated Universe feature before that. It feels like it's not really 'part one,' but rather a continuation of a previous story (Justice League: Warworld I believe).

Even with that the case, it's interesting how much this takes from the live action DC TV shows (having Barry Allen and Iris West resembling Arrowverse's The Flash couple) and DC movies (Wonder Woman sounds purposely like Gal Gadot after eating crayons).

The story is familiar for those following the comic book version, but deviates a bit too. Much of the story is on The Flash (Matt Bomer) trying to stop an anti-matter wave from destroying multiple Earths and jumping between worlds, Quantum Leap style.

Justice League: Crisis On Infinite Earths Part Two (HBO Max, leaving on 12/31) - 2/5 stars

Spoiler

Part One had more of a story going on with Barry Allen Flash, but Part Two completely jettisons Allen and introduces Psycho-Pirate (Geoffrey Arend) as the main villain. It then has Kara Zor-El (Meg Donnelly) be swayed into doing villainy because the Monitor (Jonathan Adams) did nothing to save Krypton. Story wise, it's a bit of a mess.

It's movie junk food, I just had to enjoy it for what it is.

 

[HarryArchieGus]

On 12/11/2025 at 12:06 AM, Andrew POE! said:

Kill Bill: The Whole Bloody Affair (saw in the theaters) - 4/5 stars

  Hide contents

I still think Pulp Fiction and Jackie Brown are Quentin Tarantino's best works. The stories for those are engrossing, tight, and never overstay their welcome - even with Pulp Fiction's length, it never feels tiring to watch.

If Kill Bill: The Whole Bloody Affair ended at the start of intermission, it would be Tarantino's best.

The problem is the part after intermission happened and it tries to be something that it isn't. It tries to paint a sympathetic portrait of Bill (David Carradine) and an unsympathetic portrait of The Bride (Uma Thurman). This attempt feels cumbersome and tacked-on.

A lot of movies that are four hour plus epics (like Lawrence of Arabia) have the main character go through a metamorphosis after the intermission. Situations change, the character views their plight completely differently. T.E. Lawrence at the end of Part One rides the whirlwind. T.E. Lawrence at the start of Part Two is leading a rebellion to attack a train.

The Bride at the end of Part One has killed O'Ren Ishii (Lucy Liu) in a Lady Snowblood-inspired fight. At the start of Part Two, we see a flashback. Which is the problem with Kill Bill for the entire movie...the story is told out of sequence and yet it doesn't feel like there is a progression to the character.

The scenes in Vol. 2 with Bill and the Bride at Bill's house is the best acting portions of the movie; David Carradine exhibits a sense of sadness for his character's relationship with The Bride. A lot of scenes, like the ones with Budd (Michael Madsen) and Ellie (Darryl Hannah) try that, but it doesn't feel as earned.

If anything with Kill Bill: The Whole Bloody Affair, it proves that Quentin Tarantino is the greatest 'homage auteur' ever. He cannot tell a story in four hours. He's not David Lean or Akira Kurosawa. The part after intermission just drags and is just not interesting to watch; part before intermission even with shots that are homages to other movies is so electric to watch. The pacing with Vol. 1 is just incredibly great (even the Production I.G. anime sequence is great).

To be honest, I hope Quentin Tarantino comes back to make another movie. I also disagree with him that there hasn't been a good movie after 2019.

 

 

20 hours ago, Technico Support said:

I never took it that way but I can definitely see how it could be read like that.

Kill Bill 1 and 2 are definitely two different movies and putting them together as one film probably doesn't work, thematically or length-wise.  Of course, I also disliked Hateful Eight because I found it overlong and overindulgent.

17 hours ago, Andrew POE! said:

Well, it's 'sympathetic' until you realize what a psycho Bill actually is. The Bride is psychotic too, but given what happened, it's a 'lesser evil.' It's a credit to David Carradine, Uma Thurman, and Quentin Tarantino to have the characters that way. A different movie (like, say, A History of Violence from David Cronenberg) would had the entire movie be spent fleshing out this relationship and why one person does a terrible thing, what it does to them, and what it does to the other person. It's touched upon in Kill Bill, but it feels like a setpiece amidst the action sequences rather than anything else (maybe I'm giving Tarantino less credit since it's fashionable right now). 

I thought the Whole Bloody Affair played far better as a whole than the intial two volume split. I like the slight alterations to close out V1 and begin V2 - it's much smoother and loses the unnecessary 'she's still alive' cliffhanger (and because I forgot, made for a neat surprise later). I don't recall what was cut from the start of 2 (some sort of recap), but it definitely felt a lot tighter. I disagree with the idea that the V2 opening drags the film down in any way. After the relentless sugar rush of Kung Fu to end V1, the chapel scene is very much welcomed. I always preferred what felt like V2's heavier dialogue focus - more traditionally what I look for from a Tarantino film. To me the portion that drags is that final chapter. Carradine is fine (I'd have probably preferred Warren Beatty), but the faux mysticism kinda runs its course after a lengthy sitting, and Thurman is constantly bordering on hammy. It also gets a bit saccharine as it all shakes out. I don't get the charge you're making about Bill suddenly being sympathetic? There's some humanizing and manipulation happening to be sure, but it feels like a pretty successful choice to show how despicable Bill really is. I thought it was good simple storytelling. 

After a previous underwhelming screening of the two volumes at home, the Whole Bloody edition revitalized my love or like of the film. And 70mm was a nice treat. This movie is so chockerblocked full of fun at nearly every turn. This has to be the fastest 4 hour plus movie out there. And I agree with Poe's 4/5  (maybe rounded up from 3 3/4) despite how we get there.

Edited December 12, 2025 by HarryArchieGus

[Curt McGirt]

On 12/7/2025 at 9:31 AM, Control said:

How the fuck could it be any longer? In the original, she gets more backstory than the Bride.

He just had more animation. Personally that was so disturbing I don't want to watch it again, but it's supposed to hit a little different? Anyway, caught this today on the Ebert site and it was very illuminating: https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/kill-bill-the-whole-bloody-affair-quentin-tarantino-film-review 

I always just looked at as an entertainment and never thought about the Weinstein shit. Sometimes I can be pretty thick.

Re: Red Dawn, I think Milius is too bright and is self-admittedly an anarchist philosophically to put out a true piece of propaganda. Not like that's gonna make me watch the movie though. 

Will always go to bat for Prince of Darkness. Will never understand it either. It isn't MEANT to be, probably. 

So, Bug isn't about people on meth falling apart in their mobile home, or do we just never see them do it? (Always wanted to watch the whole thing through and can't make myself.)

[Andrew POE!]

30 minutes ago, Curt McGirt said:

He just had more animation. Personally that was so disturbing I don't want to watch it again, but it's supposed to hit a little different? Anyway, caught this today on the Ebert site and it was very illuminating: https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/kill-bill-the-whole-bloody-affair-quentin-tarantino-film-review 

I always just looked at as an entertainment and never thought about the Weinstein shit. Sometimes I can be pretty thick.

Re: Red Dawn, I think Milius is too bright and is self-admittedly an anarchist philosophically to put out a true piece of propaganda. Not like that's gonna make me watch the movie though. 

Will always go to bat for Prince of Darkness. Will never understand it either. It isn't MEANT to be, probably. 

So, Bug isn't about people on meth falling apart in their mobile home, or do we just never see them do it? (Always wanted to watch the whole thing through and can't make myself.)

Red Dawn I somewhat feel is like First Blood; it's not meant to be a flag waving 'ooh rah' movie that riles up people to patriotism. It shows that people on their own have to depend on each other, but even then, it's not going to be the outcome intended. 

I wished I saw Prince of Darkness when Regal was playing it in theaters, but I was busy the night it was playing. 

Bug is a metaphor about meth, but at the same time it isn't. It could be heroin, it could be conspiracy theories, it's the same result. It's sorta gnarly to watch.

Spoiler

Ashley Judd is naked a few times in the movie if you need motivation to watch it though. 

 

[Curt McGirt]

I have seen about a quarter of it, on TV once, and it was so intense. I even DVRed it and eventually just took it off because I was like "yeah not watching that". 

Spoiler

But that whole "Ashley Judd naked" thing would be a nice image search...

 

[zendragon]

1 hour ago, Curt McGirt said:

He just had more animation. Personally that was so disturbing I don't want to watch it again, but it's supposed to hit a little different? Anyway, caught this today on the Ebert site and it was very illuminating: https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/kill-bill-the-whole-bloody-affair-quentin-tarantino-film-review 

I always just looked at as an entertainment and never thought about the Weinstein shit. Sometimes I can be pretty thick.

 

That review makes me consider attempting to give it a rewatch in the new form. The original being compared to being trapped in a room with a coke head record collector rings especially true 

[Curt McGirt]

I always thought the original felt flat but the development in the second immediately grabbed me. Plus, Michael Madsen. Hell, there is so much cool shit in 2 that the escalation might feel intense when you pair it with the prior -- and you get the Crazy 88 fight how it should have been done. 

[Andrew POE!]

Movies today...

Justice League: Crisis on Infinite Earths Part Three (HBO Max, leaving on 12/31) - 1/5 star

Spoiler

Justice League: Crisis on Infinite Earths Part Three is utterly confusing to watch and just drags to the end. It's nearly endless exposition about how it's important for the DC heroes and villains to stop the Anti-Monitor, then the conclusion is "Well, let's have the Anti-Monitor destroy the multiverse anyway, the multiverse wasn't supposed to exist" and creating the Monoverse.

The original comic book version made sense and was a culmination of DC comic book history at that point. This tries to do the same thing with DC Animated movies, but doesn't work as well. Cute cameos from Super Friends and Kevin Conroy as Batman: The Animated Series version don't really add to it (although Conroy's final lines were the best part).

This is just a dull movie. Part One was the best of the three.

Memoirs of an Invisible Man (Criterion Channel, leaving on 12/31) - 1.5/5 stars

Spoiler

Memoirs of an Invisible Man is a bit like Chevy Chase's earlier movie Fletch except he wants to have his character be a James Stewart / Cary Grant style leading man in a Hitchcock movie. It almost works - the San Francisco setting was mined in Hitchcock's Vertigo and Chase's Nick Halloway initially operates on a similiar blase rich and 'damaged man' character that Stewart's John Ferguson did.

Except, however, nothing actually seems to happen in Memoirs of an Invisible Man.

The special effects are decent, very reminiscent of what James Cameron would do that year in Terminator 2: Judgment Day and is a great example of early computer graphics in 1990s movies.

The chase after Holloway with Sam Neill as David Jenkins just doesn't garner much in interest. Holloway's confrontation in Jenkins' office has nice shot composition (with a great time lapse shot as well), but nothing really seems to have much in the way of stakes. Holloway's romance with Alice Monroe (Daryl Hannah) seems to just occupy time in the movie rather than any form of acting performance or nuance from Chase and Hannah.

Nick Holloway just seems like a character that's inconvenienced with being invisible rather than seeking out how to stop or reverse it. The confrontation with Jenkins at a construction site seems tone deaf as Jenkins falls to his death and Chase makes an 'ole' joke like he is still in Fletch.

John Carpenter as a director did what he could with the movie; the script failed the movie first with completely uninteresting thrills and then Chase and Hannah failed it second. It's not that Chevy Chase isn't a good actor - I thought his role in Deal of the Century was right on the money, balancing comedic aspects and deadly serious drama with biting satire. I just wonder while watching this how much the low effort and low impact is due to Chevy Chase being difficult to deal with and Carpenter just giving up and putting the movie in the can.

The ending has Alice and Nick walking off with Holloway skiing while Alice Monroe is now pregnant.

For 'work for hire' movies, Christine is still Carpenter's best of those efforts.

In The Mouth of Madness (Criterion Channel, leaving on 12/31) - 4.5/5 stars

Spoiler

It's interesting how In The Mouth of Madness and Memoirs of an Invisible Man. Both are 90 or so minutes long. In The Mouth of Madness doesn't feel long enough and yet is incredibly compelling to watch, while Memoirs of an Invisible Man feels too long even at 90 minutes.

In The Mouth of Madness starts out interestingly, almost like a noir. John Trent (Sam Neill) is an insurance investigator, sent out to find Sutter Cane (Jurgen Prochnow), an author who has disappeared. Sutter Cane's name is close enough to sound like Stephen King if it's said quickly; meaning that Cane is like a doppelganger of King (Cane resides in New Hampshire, King in Maine). Helping Trent is Linda Styles (Julie Carmen), who is an editor at the book publisher of Cane's called Arcane.

Trent is found in a mental hospital, visited by a doctor (David Warner) and he recounts what happened to lead him to the hospital. Within the movie, a lot of other directors engulf the story. The surreal and the sense of warped reality came from David Lynch. The powerlessness and the main character feeling engulfed within the world came from David Cronenberg. Linda Styles being swayed to help Cane and eventually possessed seems like what happens to female characters like in Dario Argento's horror movies. Within the movie, John Carpenter uses those directors' tricks and his own from his past movies (like Halloween, The Thing and Prince of Darkness) to have a main character wonder if he is dreaming or experiencing reality.

The parallels of dream and reality, fiction and fact is a prevalent theme throughout the movie. It's much like what was encountered in American Fiction (that another reviewer pointed out). John Trent believes himself to be a real person; he believes that Sutter Cane is a source of what is happening. He goes into the church to find Linda Styles and meets Cane who pulls himself apart, like paper. Cane tells John Trent that he is a work of fiction. John Trent, in a nightmarish scene, has to run out of a tunnel before he is engulfed in the Lovecraftian creatures chasing him. He finds himself on the highway with a box.

John Trent experiences further breaks with reality (or is it fiction?) as he tells the book publisher Jackson (Charlton Heston) what happened. Linda Styles never existed (or did she?). The movie has Trent doubting if what happened actually happened. Trent kills a Cane fan and the movie goes back to the hospital that Trent is staying. Trent wakes up after the doctor leaves, relaying that civilization is a story that children are told at night. The hospital and everywhere around it is destroyed, like out of George Romero's Dawn of the Dead / Day of the Dead / Night of the Living Dead movies (the crowd that Trent encounters in the town square is another tip of the cap to Romero). An epidemic has broken out as people have started murdering each other.

John Trent goes into a movie theater to watch In The Mouth of Madness and sees everything that happened on screen. The fictional man realizes that he is fiction.

For the most part, John Carpenter created a nearly perfect horror movie that uses a lot of the themes and images throughout his career. I especially loved how Carpenter filmed dialogue - oftentimes, there's two 'parallel lines' as characters stand to talk to each other, either a column or a doorframe. The cinematography feels evocative of David Lynch's work, although the DP Gary Kibbe is known for working on other John Carpenter movies, like They Live and the earlier Prince of Darkness.

In The Mouth of Madness is worth screaming about.

 

[HarryArchieGus]

On 12/11/2025 at 12:06 AM, Andrew POE! said:

Kill Bill: The Whole Bloody Affair (saw in the theaters) - 4/5 stars

  Hide contents

 

To be honest, I hope Quentin Tarantino comes back to make another movie. I also disagree with him that there hasn't been a good movie after 2019.

 

I meant to ask - did QT actually say 'there hasn't been a good movie after 2019'? I mean judging from his earlier 21st century best list, he doesn't seem to watch much of anything but American films. Even limiting to US releases that remains a pretty ignorant statement.

[Curt McGirt]

I presume that's from his recent list of his favorite films of the 21st century, or whatever it was, where he said he hated Paul Dano and that one dork. And the list was shitty. Or maybe it preceded it.

[Andrew POE!]

2 hours ago, HarryArchieGus said:

I meant to ask - did QT actually say 'there hasn't been a good movie after 2019'? I mean judging from his earlier 21st century best list, he doesn't seem to watch much of anything but American films. Even limiting to US releases that remains a pretty ignorant statement.

He did in the list of "his best movies of the 21st century." I forgot where I read it, but that had came from a podcast appearance. It's possible he's misquoted. 

[colonial]

FIVE NIGHTS AT FREDDY'S 2 -- I did promise my daughter to take her to this film today. She's doing well in school, getting good grades, has awesome friends, etc. It took a cast-iron stomach to get through this movie that, to its credit, tried expanding the universe and introducing new paths for the franchise, but it was awful. Arguing which of the two films was worse is a moot point -- both are terrible and a giant waste of celluloid.

My daughter said she liked the movie as we left. I noted that the writing was terrible, which she AGREED WITH ME ON. She admitted a film like this was not for me -- these films are for the FNAF fanatics, pre-teens, tweens and teens who couldn't tell a wristlock from a wristwatch. 

It's PG-13 horror by the numbers -- gore that is only implied, jump scares that are not scary, accepting that everyone in this film has an average IQ of 20.

Spoiler

One of the big draws of the plot is that there was going to be a "FazFest" celebrating the folklore from the first film. So the climax takes place at FazFest, right? NOPE! Outside of Freddy FazBear showing up at FazFest and doing absolutely nothing, that was it.

The animatronics show up at FazFest, a science fair and the like, and everybody around them think this is normal? Yeesh. The opening scene where a boy gets kidnapped by a guy in one of the animatronic suits at the restaurant, then the girl being ignored by at least three adults as she's trying to report what happened? This gave me a massive headache. 

It also appears that school science fairs in this town last about 8-10 hours. Nothing makes sense in this.

I already told my daughter that if she wishes to see a third FNAF movie, find some friends and go on their own. I've had enough with this franchise. 0/10.

[AxB]

3 hours ago, Curt McGirt said:

I presume that's from his recent list of his favorite films of the 21st century, or whatever it was, where he said he hated Paul Dano and that one dork. And the list was shitty. Or maybe it preceded it.

Matthew Lillard deserves better than being labelled as "that one dork"*. He's a very talented actor who has appeared in some very good movies. And also some very, very bad ones.

* Unless you've seen his D&D actual plays.

[RandomAct]

In terms of substance, and what it had to say, "Wake Up Dead Man" is the best of the Knives Out films. I can easily see it ruffling some feathers of people who don't stop and actually pay attention.

[Curt McGirt]

2 hours ago, AxB said:

Matthew Lillard deserves better than being labelled as "that one dork"*. He's a very talented actor who has appeared in some very good movies. And also some very, very bad ones.

* Unless you've seen his D&D actual plays.

Was he talking about Lillard? I like Lillard. I thought he was talking about... who's the dude from those romcoms... Owen Wilson. That's it.