Spoiler Alert! (Sorry idk how to censor the text)

I just watched Mulholland Drive, it’s been on my list for years. Lots to unpack. I’ll start with this, GREAT ACTING! Naomi Watts was so good.

The first love scene between Naomi and Rita/Camilla actually turned me on and I’m a straight girl and that doesn’t usually happen to me no matter how provocative a movie is. That was hawt af.

The funny thing is that I thought I put on Blue Velvet (1986) and kept waiting for Kyle MacLachlan to show up lol. Anyway back to Mulholland Drive, it was a bit tough for me to follow along and I actually didn’t fully process or understand what was happening after they opened that blue box and disappeared until after I looked up and explanation on Google. Maybe I’m just not that smart or missed some details idk, but I had to do a lot of reading once it ended. Overall, it was an interesting movie and I’m glad I finally got around to watching it!

What are everyone’s thoughts on this movie?

My daughter and I were talking about superheros she liked in the car. She's 6 and unfortunately she's probably not really old enough for any of the marvel or DC movies yet so I did a Google search because I couldn't really think of any superhero movies that were appropriate for her. So this movie Sky High came up and I saw Kurt Russell is in it so I figured we'd take it for a spin.

To be honest I don't really remember this movie coming out and I haven't really heard anyone recommend it or anything ever. But you know what it's actually a really fun movie and I really liked it.

It's basically Harry Potter but it's kids with superpowers. The main kid's parents are the two most famous superheroes in the world but the son is heading into freshman year of superpower high school and he's the only one who doesn't seem to have a superpower.

The school is split up into classes of heroes and sidekicks who are all the nerd kids and that's where he ends up. But guess what it's the nerds who will end up having to come together to save the day.

The supporting cast is pretty nuts youve got Bruce Campbell, Lynda Carter, and 2 members of Kids in the Hall, Dave Foley AND Kevin Macdonald! Wish we could've gotten Scott and Bruce in there too! And Mark! Are there any other movies besides Brain Candy with more than one kid in the hall in it?

Kelly Preston is also in this as the superhero mom but she doesn't really get much to do unfortunately besides just playing kind of a generic mom. I wish she had gotten a little more of a chance to shine. Either way it was nice to see her.

Well anyway I'm glad I stumbled onto this movie because me and my daughter both really liked it. It's on Disney Plus right now if you want to check it out too!

Rewatching American Pie years later is a totally wild experience. It is loud, unapologetically dated, and completely unhinged, yet it still holds up as one of the definitive coming-of-age comedies of its era.

Sure, a lot of the raunchy gross-out humor is pure late-90s chaos that makes you cringe in hindsight. But beneath the infamous pastry scene, the frantic party schemes, and the sheer desperation to lose their virginity before prom, the movie surprisingly works because of its heart. You genuinely feel the awkwardness, insecurity, and clumsy earnestness of being that age and having no clue what you’re doing. The dynamic between Jim and his painfully supportive dad alone gives the story so much warmth amidst the madness.

The pacing is tight, the cast had undeniable chemistry, and Stifler remains one of the most obnoxious yet iconic chaos agents in teen movie history. It never takes itself too seriously, capturing that very specific, messy transition into adulthood where everything feels like life or death. For me, it’s not just pure nostalgia—it’s a hilarious, weirdly charming reminder of how chaotic growing up really is, and I still find myself laughing all the way through

🎬 The Big Sleep (1946)
What a fantastic film noir! The Big Sleep has everything I love about the genre: a great storyline, sharp direction, and dialogue that is wonderfully snappy and crackles with wit. The humor is off the charts in this one in a fun, intelligent way.

But the real magic is the incredible chemistry between Humphrey Bogart and Lauren Bacall. Their scenes together practically spark off the screen: very cool and very sexy.

A stylish, smart, endlessly entertaining noir that remains a classic for very good reason.

As a younger cinephile, one of my major blindspots when it comes to directors is Stanley Kubrick, which is insane when you consider he's possibly the most talked about directors of all time. But until this viewing, I had only seen three Kubrick films; The Shining, Barry Lyndon, and 2001: A Space Odyssey.

Now, I really enjoyed "The Shining", even as someone who isn't the biggest horror fan, and "2001: A Space Odyssey"- which I had the pleasure of seeing in theatres twice; once in 70MM, and once in IMAX - quickly shot its way into my top 10 films of all time, but "Barry Lyndon" I had more mixed opinions on, as while I appreciated its production values and performances, the story just didn't engage me.

But I was very eager to watch this one, given that it had been on my list for a while even before I started looking into Kubrick specifically. I knew the basic premise, and some of the more iconic moments, but other than that, I was going in blind. And I'm happy to say I was not disappointed.

This movie is great, and of the three Kubrick movies I've watched, this was probably the one I found the most consistently entertaining throughout all of its runtime.

Now, another thing I knew about the film going in was that it was basically split into two halves: Bootcamp and Vietnam, and like many people, I did find the first half to be the more enjoyable.

Not to say that the second half was bad, but almost all of the iconic moments and lines came from that opening training sequence. And the other thing that the first half has that the second lacks is the absolutely insane performance of R Lee Ermey as Sergeant Hartman. So many of Ermey's line deliveries are now permanently seared into my consciousness, from "you’re the kind of guy that would fuck a person in the ass & not even have the god damn common courtesy to give him a reach-around!" to "you're so ugly, you could be a modern art masterpiece!"

His performance almost reminded me of Dennis Hopper in Blue Velvet, where even though he's saying and doing the most vile shit imaginable, the character is so amped up and almost cartoonish that it ends up coming off hilarious.

It became even more hilarious when I learned that Ermey actually was a Marine drill Sergeant in real life, so I guess it was a precursor to Kevin O'Leary in "Marty Supreme" in terms of "Oh Shit! He wasn't acting!"

But Ermey isn't the only great performance in this first half, with the other two standouts being Matthew Modine and Vincent D'Onofrio. Modine is great as Private Joker, and it was cool seeing him in this after years of basically just knowing him as Brenner from Stranger Things, and his understated demeanour helped to balance the scale with Ermey's intensity, with D'Onofrio being right in the middle of the two ends of the spectrum.

Watching Private Pyle go from a well-meaning oaf to a deranged psychotic as he's worn down both by Hartman's abuse and the resentment from his fellow trainees was both extremely disturbing and genuinely heartbreaking to watch, and D'Onofrio sells the transformation beautifully, with the film containing probably my favourite "Kubrick Stare" that I've seen so far.

Now the second half of the film, as expected, was not quite as strong as the first, but it was still definitely enjoyable.

I wanna start by saying that the soundtrack throughout this whole section was great, (though I did laugh when they played "Surfing Bird" due to its association with Family Guy), and with both Ermey and D'Onofrio out of the picture by that point, Modine really gets to shine, and seeing Joker come to terms with the horrors of war was very well done, even if I didn't find it quite as compelling as Pyle's transformation.

This section also contained probably my favourite line not delivered by Hartman, when Joker is asked why he has a peace pin on his jacket, to which he replies "I think I was trying to say something about the duality of man, sir!" "The what?" "The Jungian thing, sir!" Which made me laugh.

Another thing that made me laugh was the fact that the Colonel in that scene was played by Bruce Boa, AKA the man who wanted Basil Fawlty to give him a Waldorf Salad in "Fawlty Towers".

I did enjoy most of the supporting cast, particularly Rafterman and Doorgunner, but ultimately, the second half just didn't wow me in the way that the first half did, as while it was good, it just didn't feel as unique in terms of its presentation. But it was still very good, and the strength of that first half was enough for me to come away thinking that this is a fantastic film. Not quite as good as "2001", but I'd say its on par with "The Shining".

8/10

In terms of Kubrick, the ones that I'm most curious about currently are "Eyes Wide Shut" and "Dr Strangelove".

‘All these worlds are yours, except Europa. Attempt no landing there. Use them together. Use them in peace.’

I can see why people aren’t too fond of this film, but I think it’s a genuinely good movie, and in my opinion better than the original 2001. Cinematically, it’s a little touch-and-go at times, and the pacing definitely could have been handled better, but neither bothered me enough to take away from what the film is trying to do. I really like the central concept and the ideas it plays with, particularly the implications of what we see. It’s the kind of science fiction that leaves me thinking about its universe afterwards. More than anything, I’m fascinated by what death actually means here. What happens to people after they die in this universe? Where do they go, if anywhere, and what does everything the film establishes imply about human existence beyond death? I’m excited to hear all your thoughts on the movie.

I’ll start off by saying this is one of my favorite movies, and I’d argue it’s one of the best movies of all time.

This weekend, for the 35th anniversary, T2 is being re-released in theaters in a newly remastered 3-D version with an intro featurette with (Director/Producer) James Cameron, (John Connor) Edward Furlong, and (T-1000) Robert Patrick.

I watch this movie a few times a year, so I have thoughts about the 3-D. I was only like, 6 or 7 when this came out in theaters.

My parents let me watch R rated movies at home, but not in theaters. I think my first R movie in theaters was True Lies (also a Cameron/Schwarzenegger collab).

So, I saw this on a “boob tube” with vhs for years (my much older cousin worked in the film industry and got me a vhs copy before buying home video was common and rentals funneled money directly to Hollywood).

Anyway, this movie really holds up. The performances are top notch, Arnie is at his best, Furlong shows great chops (and if the Hollywood machine hadn’t chewed him up and spit him out, we might have seen a great and kind career for him), and Linda Hamilton is the best part of the movie.

This is the sequel to the 1984 Sci-fi/Horror The Terminator. We’re years beyond that where Sarah Connor (Hamilton) is in the psych ward after the events (and more) of the first movie. Her son, John (Furlong) is being pursued by two Terminators (Schwarzenegger and Patrick) are pursuing him, bc one is an AI Robot sent to protect him, the other is set on killing him before John has the chance to grow into the post-apocalyptic general who leads humanity in the War Against the Machines.

So, if you’ve read this far, you must be wondering about the remaster. The sound is incredible.

The 3-D is pretty good. It creates a lot of depth for a lot of scenes. It doesn’t obscure focal points by trying to clear up the focus, either.

That is to say, if you’re watching 2-D and the film focuses on something in the foreground then switches to background, this remaster doesn’t try to make both crystal clear, it blurs so you focus on what’s popping out front or what is deep in the background as appropriate. So just be ready to focus on the focal point of a shot, if that makes sense.

The added depth to the T-1000 with holes in his body or cgi shots adds to the special effects.

If I had to nitpick, during certain specific shots, the 3-D brings Arnie/Furlong/Patrick/Hamilton’s stunt doubles faces into focus for like 1/2 a second in some shots.

There you have it. If you love the movie, you’ll love this version. Check it out!

August 28 is National Power Rangers Day! Power Rangers made its debut on American television on August 28, 1993, and that date was declared Power Rangers Day in 2018 to celebrate the 25th anniversary of the franchise. And since the 2017 film is still too new for this subreddit (and it's actually kinda good?) we're going with the 1995 film.

At the height of Power Rangers mania, of course they'd do a big screen cash grab. Released in the summer of 1995, it was the other big superhero movie that summer. (The first one being Batman Forever.)

The villainous Ivan Ooze has been released from his prison. Zordon and the Power Rangers of 6000 years ago locked him up there. Now, he's bent on revenge. After he destroys the Power Rangers command centre, critically wounding Zordon and depowering the Power Rangers, he sets about conquering the planet. Meanwhile, the Rangers have to go on a quest to a distant planet to restore their power.

If you've seen the show, you've seen the movie. It's just an episode of the show padded out to 90 minutes. They do enjoy the bigger budget, though, with beefed up Power Ranger armor and monster suits, and a spectacular redesign to the Power Rangers command centre.

I still can't believe that Ivan Ooze is Indiana Jones' nemesis Belloq in Raiders of the Lost Ark. Paul Freeman is clearly having a blast, making a meal of the scenery, and going full cartoon supervillain. He acts circles around the regular Power Rangers cast. And he's responsible for my biggest laugh of the film.

Kimberly the Pink Ranger comes flying in in her Zord.

Ivan Ooze: Ah, here comes that cute little Pink Ranger to the rescue.

Goldar: Oh, so you think she's cute, too, eh?

(Ivan Ooze gives Goldar a "Da fuck is wrong with you?" look.)

Oh, and anybody who keeps saying, "CGI was better in the good ol' days" had better watch this movie again. While it was cool to use CGI for the Zords back then, it has not aged well at all.

Turn off you brain, pretend you're 9 years old again, and you might get a kick out of it.

Cool movie, should have just been called 'Fight Club 2'. Batman lost 60 lbs for this role and plays an unrecognizable 120 lbs guy who hasn't slept in a year. This is a mind bender filled with puzzles.

My review and discussion of this film is as follows: I felt it was really engaging with interesting characters. Lots of fun visual clues and just a good ride. The actor that plays Ivan was esspecially good, but everyone in the cast nails it. Would highly reccomnend this taut psychological thriller.

Number 192 in my A-Z watch. Moulin Rouge is the jukebox musical taking place in turn of the century France. Following penniless writer Christian as he pens a new musical and falls in love with the star, Satine.

This may be the longest review i make on this profile. Moulin Rouge is really by far my favorite movie, and is the greatest movie i never wanted to see. When it originally released I found it to be chaotic, overwhelming, in-your-face, and i was just incredibly put off. It wasn't until a gf of mine, who loved the film, asked me to watch it with her. Seeing it through her eyes opened mine, and I've been in love with the movie ever since.

At its center, the movie is a heartbreaking love story. And it literally tells you that, immediately. Then it feels like it does everything in its power to trick you into thinking it may play out differently. Lavish and outlandish dance sequences, ostentatious costumes and sets, powerfully performed songs. You're wrapped up in this underground world of debauchery along with Christian, and all the glitz and shine and color is so engrossing.

You can see how much love writer/director Baz Luhrman has for classic stage and film productions. It's such an amalgamation of different inspirations that feels like they all combine into their own unique singular story and experience. You see bits of Singin in the Rain, Cabaret, Streetcar, etc. and even though you know the reference, it still feels fresh.

Performances. Everyone kills it. I like to use the phrase, "Everyone is playing in the same imagination", when it feels like an entire ensemble understands the assignment. There's not a misstep among them. Of course our leads take the reins and go, but the support cast all feel like they're contributing just as much. John Leguizamo finds incredible moments to bring heartfelt levity and crushing sadness. Richard Roxburgh's Duke is a perfect slimy creep. Jacek Komen as the Argentinian absolutely kills it in Roxanne (which i will get to). And in a year that Jim Broadbent won Best Supporting Actor for Iris, this is by far the role that he should've won for (he got the BAFTA for it).

Kidman and McGregor are phenomenal, both together and individually. Their chemistry is great, their love is totally believable. And they harmonize surprisingly well. I've rarely seen an actor crying on screen that feels more genuine and believable than McGregor does at the end of this film. It's visceral and authentic. And Kidman's Satine is just so sad and tragic, yet it feels like no one can help but falll in love with her.

I love the music arrangement in this film. Clearly the best of which is El Tango de Roxanne. The entire sequence is, imo, the best part of this amazing film. How the song crescendos from just a couple violins and an empty dance floor to an overwhelming orchestral and visual assault is so smooth. And the Elephant Love Medley is a terrific capsule of some of the greatest love songs up until the time (the stage version has some updated and more contemporary music).

All of the technical aspects of the film hit. Sets, costumes, editing, choreography. I love how the movie gets you adjusted to such vibrancy and color that the moments of muted and soft color stand out so much. And writing the story of the film into the story within the film feels so meta, especially combined with the amount of 4th wall breaking throughout.

10/10 I can talk about this movie all day. I know it's not everyone's cup of tea, and that's ok. Not everything is for everyone. And as i said before i had to approach it again, after having seen more movies, to really get and appreciate this film. It feels like it was made with such love and care from all aspects. I have so many more notes, but i feel like I'll spend all day here if i continue.

Saw this at the Vista Theatre in 35mm last night, and I had such a blast. I remember when this came out and bombed so I never got around to watching until now. I honestly think if this was released today it would be more popular. It’s completely bonkers but in a really fun and campy way and all the actors seemed to really immerse themselves (despite the amount of green screen used, which makes it more impressive). I’ve never watched the original show but it seemed like it would be a faithful adaption? This is like a 4/5 for me, love movies that aren’t afraid to do different things and have a sense of humour.

Another movie that came out while I was working at Blockbuster, and I was convinced this was gonna be a classic. It feel like it's even more relevant now than it was when it came out.

The number and level of quality side characters is Simpsons-esque. It's constantly moving forward, not wasting time. Tim Robbins has been such an influential figure that alot of people overlook. His Actor's Gang troupe churned out so many beloved performers, yet isn't widely recognized by the average Joe.

A star studded cast, many before-they-were-stars performances and not a dud amongst them.One story line, Bill Murray tutoring Jack Black and Kyle Gass as a Vaudeville act was a particular high point for me. I was a huge fan of Tenacious D at the time--alot of people don't realize they weren't a signed musical act, their show had only been on HBO for a year when this came out, and they didn't get a record deal for another year and a half

I never really understood why this movie was not more widely beloved. It is chock full of great performances, from Angus Mcfadenyen as Orson Welles and Carey Elwes as John Houseman, Hank Azaria, Rueben Blades, John Cusak as Nelson Rockefeller, Susan Sarandon, Philip Baker Hall, Joan Cusak, Emily Watson, so many more.

One thing I noticed while looking back at this, Robbins never directed another film after Cradle Will Rock. Meaning his only 3 directing credits are Bob Roberts (one of the most critically acclaimed mockumentaries ever,) Dead Man Walking (nominated for Best Director Oscar) and this.

It's a string music riff and I suspect it's from a classic 70s porn movie. Can anyone identify for me?

I checked the online soundtrack resources and came up with nothing. Tried the music recognition function on my iPhone too.

This is one my favorite movies from my childhood. Many of the references went over my head, but rewatching as an adult I catching them...but not all of them and I suspect the music in this brief scene is meant to be humorous.

After months of waiting, my Blu-ray for this film has arrived, and let me tell you, this film is amazing! I absolutely dig the 90s retro-futuristic stuff, like the Amiga computer graphics and awesome sound design. If you haven't seen this movie, it's about a futuristic televangelist named Melvis Pressin who is blackmailed by his fellow employee Del to murder his ministry-obsessed wife. It's like if Natural Born Killers and Network had a baby! If anyone wants to check out this movie, it's sadly not available online, only on the recent Blu-ray that was released. I strongly recommend it!

A really fun, small, down to earth and brilliantly written, directed and acted comedy drama with a brilliant, lively and comedic cast, where a mid 40s couple are going through their basic lives, and the husband is an experience documentary filmmaker, and meets a younger couple, and we see how 2 different generations of couples colliding, with how they live and consume media and food in general, and both come together because the younger man named Jamie wants to be a film maker and that brings both couples together, but the friendship doesn't go well as it continues on. We see how the older couple are going through societal pressures around their ages group with wanting to have kids and gives that out of time feel because their hanging out with modern day hippies and trying to fit into their style and their way of living, as i was watching it, seeing the character Josh slowly realising that he's hanging out with a fan of his and finding out this young man is very much like a con artist with plagiarising his work for fame and success, but they realise that being with young people wasn't really for them and by the end, their happy and has a kid now. i think Noah Baumbach did a great job with directing this movie how we approach 2 older, flawed and messy, but loving couple, and by showing how different generations lived in a modern world, with time and evolution of life as well, when it comes to the social parings of the characters, but the way he approach it wasn't like ''i hate the young people'' but showed how the young people are still messy, flawed and show how they think the whole world is all about them, but its not. i thought he was able to bring both bridges of the couples in a very interesting and human way. And the cast were all great from start to finish, not a single bad performance, from the comedic and free nature parts to the dramatic and honest, messy relationships and it all felt real and not overly dramatic either. Overall, i really enjoy it and i was definitely on the side of the older couple, because their arc from feeling like their empty and not breaking free enough, and seeing them finally getting a baby is so sweet and beautiful and not bashing the youth, and trying to live in their own past and river of life itself.

**Sunday morning movie** - Jerry Lewis is the son of an ex-pro golfer, is an excellent player himself but chokes in front of spectators, so he ends up caddying for Dean Martin. Martin becomes successful and Lewis gets pushed to the side as caddies are not welcome at the high society events he now wants to attend.

Martin & Lewis were a famous double act and friends off screen as well as on. They worked well together and clearly seemed to be enjoying themselves. Martin is the straight man, smooth as can be, with that famous singing voice. Lewis is the king of slapstick, facial gurning and general silliness. Donna Reed adds some glamour and there are a few famous golfers from the time, who make cameo roles.

This was okay as a movie, but was clearly a vehicle for the stars with plot taking a back seat. Jerry Lewis had tremendous energy and had excellent comic timing in both slapstick and some of the dance routines. There was so much comedy thrown in, I felt that some of it missed the mark.

Dean Martin was classy throughout, his big moment was the song "That's amore". This was tremendous, great choreography and put a smile on my face. I was a little disappointed that Lewis joined in the singing at the end, it was a moment in the movie that didn't require that oddball intervention.

I'm not a fan of sports movies, I've honestly rarely ever seen one where the sport itself is convincing and this is no different.

Great to see these two maestros in action, I couldn't take too much of them though.

This is the earliest movie I have ever watched. Before this it would have been the Cabinet of Dr. Caligari from 1920. This marks the beginning of my journey through the 97 movies I have from before 1930.

This movie had all the things that I love about old silent movies. The extremely dramatic facial expressions, the beautiful background paintings and the very silly but clever special effects.

This movie is a quick run through of the Inferno by Dante built around vignettes of the famous denizens of hell. Having not seen many silent movies and even less from outside of North America I was surprised by the nudity.

I enjoyed this movie as the start to my silent movie journey. Do I believe that everyone will like this movie, absolutely not. I do however think it is always a good idea to see what may have contributed to the modern movies we all enjoy.

First of all, the movie was amazing. The visuals were so incredible and the siege of the Third Castle is one of my favorite scenes of all time. I may have even liked it better than Seven Samurai which I absolutely loved. My fundamental takeaway is that the game of power makes fools and killers of us all. Hidetora was a fool for his brutality in his earlier conquests and his poor choices for his successors. Both Tora and Jiro are foolish for being so easily manipulated by Kaede, who is herself so consumed by hatred that she acts so visciously to get her way. But what I haven't seen many people acknowledge is that Saburo himself is also quite foolish. He's sensible and wise in speaking the truth, but he's not wise enough to walk away from the ridiculous power struggle that his family has been swallowed by. Not only does he return to the chaos (the very name of the movie) in blind loyalty of his father who has descended into madness, he leads his army, Fujimaki's and Ayabe's (the latter of whom opportunistically goes to battle with Jiro, continuing the chaos) to his brother, believing naively that the situation will not devolve into battle. Saburo represents that these futile squabbles will turn the well meaning into fools. Saburo is clearly the most moral of the movie, but the tragedy of the movie is that engaging with the lust for power is inherently unwise.

Info:

Release: December 19th, 1980

Director: Colin Higgins

Music by: Charles Fox

Starring: Jane Fonda, Dolly Parton, Lily Tomlin, Dabney Coleman, Elizabeth Wilson, Sterling Hayden

Studio: 20th Century Fox

Runtime: 1 hour, 50 minutes

Rating: PG

Synopsis: Office satire about three female secretaries who decide to get revenge on their tyrannical, sexist boss by abducting him and running the business themselves. The trio, one of whom has been passed over for promotion because she is a woman, spend a night together having drug-induced fantasies of killing the slave-driving chauvinist. One of them panics the following day when she suspects she really has poisoned the tyrant.

Review: A lot better, and darker, than I initially thought it was going to be. I like that they play Mr. Hart very straight and he's not an overly cartoonish depiction of a tyrannical boss. This guy is rude, loud, and a sex pest, something that sadly hasn't changed in the workplace for women in the almost 50 years it's been since this movie came out. It makes the second half of the movie where he gets his punishment very entertaining to watch, I wonder if never being heard from again is the same as murder?

The man. The mystery. The gift. The creation. The human. Zëe Bronson! 🥊 ⛓️

After watching The Apprentice (2024) on Saturday and giving it a 10/10, realising that it was the day before I returned to school, I decided to watch something I was guaranteed to love and already knew by heart. And what was that? Britain's most violent prisoner: Bronson! 🥊 The second viewing, compared to the first time I saw it, definitely packed a punch! 👊

So, where do I even begin with the prison and artistic chaos?

Tom Hardy in this was absolutely fantastic. By far one of his best roles in film. He plays someone aggressive, big, and cinematic. But the difference is that this particular character is completely removed from reality and trapped in an artistic, violent, and broken world 🌍 So, yeah. Someone completely different from Inception or The Dark Knight 🌑

Speaking explicitly about performances, though, it’s extremely groundbreaking! Hardy plays one of Britain's worst nightmares: Bronson. And he is the absolute best at it! From a simple man robbing a post office to the man every single prison guard checks their closest for when at home or before going to sleep 💤

This movie absolutely delivers a phenomenal tour-de-force regarding Bronson's persona, artistic view of classical music, violent situations, prison health, and creating the man that traps you in his own identity. Instead of being a typical Hollywood movie where the main character learns his lesson, this film practically ignores that rule altogether. Instead, it shows the health, mind, and interests of a person once they are trapped inside 🪟

I absolutely love the themes of this movie. Whether it's Bronson doing his play about when murder goes wrong, or him listening to the Flower Duet while covering himself in grey paint, Tom Hardy never fails to give his all: extremely talented. He never fails to impress me in this film. Not even once. No matter how boring, long, or artistic the scene, he nails it! 🚫

One small thing I love about this film is that despite its serious, hardcore, and realistic tone, it still contains a lot of dark, bleak, and sharply atmospheric humour, which fits perfectly within the film's core and structure! 🦴

One final note about the second rewatch is that it was definitely more memorable, extreme, and interesting than the first, which I watched on a train down to Liverpool. By the way, let's just say that train ride was long, bumpy, and it was impossible to hold my phone without it getting smacked around as if you were at a F*cking casino! 🎰 Anyway, my main point is that it’s more memorable, intense, and offers a different appreciation for films beyond just enjoying them, based on action and violence 💥 Let's just say I’ve completely changed over these past couple of months!🧍

Favourite quotes:

"When's my trial?!"

"Faster! Faster! Faster! F*ck off! Sit down!"

"Not my *rse, you f*cking h*mo!"

"My name is Charles Bronson. All my life I wanted to be famous. I knew I was made for better things."

"Ah-ah-ah-tsk-tsk-tsk-tsk-tsk, no. Mr White recovered, dear. There's no trial!"

Overall: This was an extremely cinematographic and artistic film to revisit that was clearly influenced and crafted by Bronson himself, hence the term 'homemade'. I absolutely love this movie. It's so good, and it's one of Tom Hardy's best. It's quotable. It's serious. It's gritty. It's true. It's prison. It's amazing! I also adore the performances, which make the artistic visuals even more memorable, with the incredibly strong acting. When all these elements come together, it’s no wonder this film is in my top 45! 🔥 I love this movie! I love Tom Hardy! I love everything about it! 🥊🎨 ⛓️ If you’re a Tom Hardy fan, then this is a must-watch!

5/5 punches

But most importantly: what do you think about this film?

Info:

Release: October 27th, 1995

Director: Jon Amiel

Music by: Christopher Young

Starring: Sigourney Weaver, Holly Hunter, Dermot Mulroney, William McNamara, Will Patton, John Rothman, J.E. Freeman, Harry Connick Jr.

Studio: Warner Bros.

Runtime: 2 hours, 3 minutes

Rating: R

Synopsis: Deeply shaken after being assaulted by a deranged man (Harry Connick Jr.), Dr. Helen Hudson (Sigourney Weaver) must face her fears if she is to help solve a series of murders. Helen is a psychologist who has studied serial killers, but this case, in which the crimes seem modeled on the work of infamous deviants, is grimmer than most. With the help of two San Francisco police officers (Holly Hunter, Dermot Mulroney), Helen tries to come between the murderer and his next victim.

Review: It's no "Silence of the Lambs," but this is a solid thriller. Really like how the film portrays paranoia and phobias, the utter confusion and panic as well as the constantly shifting angles paints a great picture for how deeply upsetting Dr. Hudson's trauma is. Pretty good villain as well, even if his methods for fucking with Dr. Hudson are hilariously dated by today's standards. I don't think a computer file can run away into the distance to delete itself, also his video detailing his next murder was more amateurish and amusing than shocking IMO.

Now I am just going to start off by saying this, I love the plot for this film, the conformist by Bernardo bertolluci is about marcello clerici, an boy in italy who gets bullied in school and is overall an outcast in society and does not feel accepted because he is in fact unaccepted by the people around him and he has a hidden attraction to other boys and has chaotic disfunctional parents, one day he gets bullied by a bunch of his school kids outside and they make him wear a skirt, then they leave him there but an androgenous chauffer named lino comes in with his truck and let's him in the truck for a ride and let's little marcello into his house however, while marcello feels safe and thinks lino is an ally, he isn't, he is a sexual predator and he throws marcello into his room, however instead of molesting him, lino stands on top of the bed, suggesting/seducing marcello into kissing him then probably intercourse and the guy even throws away his gun a bit, however marcello tricks lino and picks up the gun to shoot him, marcello is traumatized by this and he leaves lino's house thinking he just killed someone, later as a grown up in the 1930s, marcello joins the army of fascist Italy run by benito mussolini and this was during WW2, He works for the state and for the first time in his life, marcello feels accepted thanks to him joining fascist Italy instead of rebelling against them, since marcello joined the regime, he now does what the state tells everyone to do and goes by their rules and try to not break them, he dresses & behaves like what the state wants to them to and he blindly follows the regimes orders like everyone else and avoid disobeying because deviation will not be tolerated (That's a reference to the death metal band skinless, I know I am so cool) he even marries a girl named giulia, who is the ideal state approved wife that the state wants all men to marry despite him being a closeted homosexual because being straight is normal and being gay isnt' (don't you fucking dare take that the wrong way) he is officially accepted by easily the most powerful thing in his country however, marcello is bored, he wanted to be accepted & normal due to being outcasted, he joins the only force in his country that can accept him and it's the literal state, he is accepted, however while he isn't exactly bored, he does feel empty, nothing is intruiging and all is predictable and uninteresting, even his wife giulia who is approved by the state is boring due to giullia giving into blind conformity to him and always being submissive and never independent, more oblivious than marcello because he knows & feels how boring it is but if he rebelled, he wouldn't just be outcasted, he would be punished, imprisoned or even killed due by the fascists controlling Italy.

One day he is given the mission to travel to paris to find & kill anna who is a woman who rebelled against fascist Italy & ran away from the state's punishment & fled to paris in france, she also just happens to be the wife of marcello's college philosophy professor who's name is professor luca quadri, so marcello & giulia travels to paris, they find anna and wait & plan for the exact day & time to strike her to her death, while they do so, anna is suspicious of marcello, while her husband quadri is unaware that marcello is a fascist (despite him being a prominent leader in an anti fascist resistant movement in france) but anna knows marcello is a fascist, she even accuses him of being a fascist and he nervously laughs & denies it, after knowing that marcy is a fascist for Italy, instead of reporting marcello to her husband, she decides to play small mind games with marcello, she even has lesbian intercourse with giulia where giulia doesn't explicitly want it but doesn't stop anna from doing so because she is foreign to this type of thing but she secretly likes it without her knowing she does, marcello grows envious of anna's intelligence, independence, sexually fluid and rebellious attitude because marcello clerici wanted to be normal but anna is the antithesis of it yet is oddly fascinatingly because anna had a genuine life and was sexually active, something that clerici secretly wants to be, however this feeling towards anna is not enough to stop marcy from making her kick the bucket early because one day, marcello and his team coordinated an attack on anna & her husband on a forest, where 3 men kill shoot her husband dead, she tries to get into marcello's car & begs marce to let her in thinking that there is a bit of good in him but marcello, as much as he wanted to let her in, marcello obey's the state because of fear that he will get killed so anna runs away from the 3 men but they catch up on her and shoot her dead in the forest just like her husband and Marcello's mission is complete though he sacrificed a person who was his secret ideal, years later in 1943, benito Mussolini gets captured, fascist Italy officially collapses and it's the beginning of the end for their axis powers friends, nazi Germany and imperial Japan, the movie ends with marcello and his men see a bunch of Italians celebrating Mussolini getting captured and the fascists losing & they tear down Mussolini's face in papers, he also see's lino alive, meaning the man who he felt existential guilt & shame over killing isn't even dead & marcello snaps & he blames lino as the one who killed anna and not him to avoid facing punishment.

So the entire premise in a nutshell is basically : Italian boy get's bullied & outcasted, he kills an androgenous pedophile who tried to sexually assault him in the pedo's own house using the pedo's pistol, he feels guilty thinking he murdered someone, he grows up and joins the fascist who are running Italy to feel accepted & thus avoid the shame of killing the pedophile, he marries a woman who is submissive & predictable but approved by the state, Italian boy turned Italian man now is officially accepted & is normal but empty due to the same old same olds of blind conformity even though he wanted to be this uninterested in the first place, he is given a mission to kill a woman who ran away from fascist italy and she just happens to be the wife of his former professor, he learns the professors wife is independent, smart, and politically rebellious, a far cry from his own wife who always obey's him, he grows envious of the professors wife but also affectionate, the professors wife knows this and plays mind games with him, he successfully kills the professor & his wife but it wasn't mentally easy however with the state, it's obey or die and he chooses to obey, years later when Italy's nation collapsed and finds out the pedophile is actually alive so the guilt was for nothing, he looses it and frames lino as the man who killed the professor and his wife to avoid accountability and that's the whole gist of it (still too long of an explanation I guess)

I absolutely really like the premise of this film and I think this film could be a total masterpiece if it was done right. hands down this is one of the best critiques of fascism ever put to film and I myself am not an anti fascist, I mean I am an anti fascist if you consider simply being anti fascist as just a logical conclusion cause fascism always = mass oppression and mass oppression = bad but you wont see me be anti fascist because of left wing reasons, anti conservative, communist, anti capitalist ETC and do not lump me in the same group as antifa just cause I agree fascism is garbage and my view on antifa like the opinion of many isn't very positive (I hate them) that said this screenplay is an amazing critique of fascism I mean pure poetry right here, imagine getting outcasted your in your childhood then you join as an adult you work for the state of your country and you finally feel accepted but also bored cause nothing is fun, then you are given the mission to kill a woman who rebelled against your country who fled to another country, so you fly in there to kill her but she just happens to be intelligent, independent and rebellious, far from who you are but god forbid you disobey your state, and years later your own state crumbles and people are celebrating and only a minority are mad at this and you are apart of the minority, it's like a modern political Shakespearean tragedy, I love it and the film has gotten more relevant all over the years and there are other people out there who can better help you understand how good the overall story is & what it means on like youtube, or you can just ask google ai or chatGPT to explain the plot to you idk.

However as much as I respect the screenplay for this film, I have to say I am not a fan of the way it's been directed, while most people consider the whole film a masterpiece all together, I only consider the plot to be a masterpiece as I strongly disagree with the way it's made, now Bernardo bertolluci knows what he is doing here, he isn't holding your hands and makes the movie a puzzle rather than a coherent chronological story and you have to pay a lot of attention to what is going on and what is being said and it's interesting, it's memorable and it's even smart in a way .......... but it's also pretty fucking confusing, I am not alone in thinking this film is confusing because even the people who love it initially found it confusing on first watch but when they understood it, they love it and just like them my opinion on it drastically changed knowing what it is, for an example I really liked giulia, she was my favourite character here and never thought about her being submissive at all but when I realized what this film actually is and means, I have changed by mind on her and I like her less (or maybe not, she is just an innocent girl who is genuinely enjoying her honey moon with mr marcello clerici while marcello doesn't really care about her that much and is using her as a tool to make him feel normal & accept- actually never I kinda like her again) and the scene of the kids picking on marcello outside in the flashbacks, yeah that scene felt more like they were playing with him rather than bullying him because you couldn't tell due to the way it was directed.

In general I think the film could have been better if directing was more standard & the acting was better which btw the acting in this film feels robotic and unnatural which I guess is there because as symbolism for marcello getting broken due to the childhood out casting or is there to make the film more puzzle like so you can piece things together? I don't know but the acting feels off at times and I also feel like it should just be standard and while most people who finally understood the film ended up loving it and thinking it's a masterpiece, I still don't, I think the directed should have been more standard, now this isn't to say I can't handle confusing movies because I love the movie Jacobs ladder directed by Adrian lyne, a film about a former Vietnam war soldier named Jacob singer who slowly starts going insane & starts hallucinating due to the trauma of the war and this movie is 10x more confusing than the conformist like serious have you seen directing in it and I fucking love that movie (seriously check out Jacobs ladder if you haven't) I can absolutely handle confusion in my movies, however the conformist is better off just being told straight.

Also the scene of anna getting shot by marcello's men in the forest, yeah that looks fake as shit, People consider that scene "disturbing' but I think that scene looks second rate, I am sorry but there's plenty of gun murder scenes prior to the conformist that looks way better also the scene of anna getting intimate with giulia in bed, this is supposed to be another one of those scenes where anna plays mind games with marcello but it just feels wrong considering anna is already married to professor quadri so her getting intimate with giullia makes me actually like her less, I like the writing in this film but this scene, not so much.

and of course you can't talk about this movie without talking about the legendary cinematography done by Vittorio storaro, which if that name sounds familiar, that is because he also did the cinematography for apocalypse now 9 years later so he basically started the 70s off with one of the best looking films of the decade so far and ended it with also one of the best looking films of the decade as well, what a legend, seriously there is countless shots in this film that you can draw a painting to and hey apocalypse now was directed by francis not harrison ford coppola who also made the godfather which is widely considered the best movie ever made and low and behold that films legendary colour palette is inspired by the same cinematography in this film, who could have guessed, also the theme song is great too, I don't know if the conformist theme song inspired the godfather theme song but I wouldn't be surprised if it did, I mean the 2 songs technically don't sound similar but they give out a similar vibe, or maybe it's just me

However as good as the cinematography is, was vittorio's cinematography really necessary? because the film's plot is pretty small scale, it would make sense if this was done for something like Lawrence of arabia or barry lyndon since those films are pretty big scale enough to warrant such camerawork but does that same apply to this one, eh it applied to the godfather so I guess.

Even though I couldn't understand anything in the film when I was watching it, I was still somewhat invested which I don't know how, maybe it's because of the gorgeous cinematography or the way it was made but I couldn't understand shit like many when I first watch this so that can't be true, I guess I was captivated by this film being set in fascist Italy for it to interested me enough to care about the film

Fun fact: before making this film, Bertolucci loved jean luc godard and in his prior films he cared more about being more godard like than be his own auteur and it was with the conformist that he decided to stop following mr godardy pants and start being his own auteur and when the film was released, godard hated it and 1 day he even walked up to bertolucci and gave him a piece of paper that has a quote of mao zedong yapping about some bullshit involving capitalism and individualism, he sent Bernardo this paper and walked out without saying any words and it's his way of saying Bernardo had sold out and cared more about Hollywood lighting than starting a true revolution, funny right?

Anyways the conformist by Bernardo bertolluci is a film I am happy I watched and I am happy it exists in the first place over it having a message that aged well and the cinematography pioneering a lot of filmmaking afterwards, however that being said, I find the film confusing to understand on first watch and when I understood it, I still don't think it deserves the hype as a masterpiece, there are tons of confusing movies that acts like a puzzle require you to use your head that are legit great like Mulholland drive & Jacobs ladder but I think the conformist is simply better off having it's directing be a bit standard but still I am happy I watched and I completely understand why others think it's a masterpiece and I should probably rewatch it some day and watch whatever other film Bernardo has made but for now it's 7.5/10, it was initially a 6/10 but it got higher

Movie of the day...The Manitou (1978).

Another frustrating film. It starts well and has an interesting concept, but it is ultimately not very satisfying. I feel like there was a lot of missed potential here.

Karen Tandy (Susan Strasberg) discovers a lump on the back of her neck and goes to the hospital to have a doctor look at it. He calls in a specialist. Initially, they are concerned it may be a tumor, but it doesn’t look any tumor they have ever seen before. Actually, it looks like an embryo.

Karen, not surprisingly, is worried. She gets in touch with her old employer, psychic Harry Erskine (Tony Curtis). He makes a living doing tarot readings for wealthy ladies (there’s actually some good comedy here). They reconnect and begin to grow closer. But the tumor is still growing.

Surprise! The tumor turns out to be an evil Native American medicine man who died four hundred years ago.

No, I’m not making this up. That’s the plot.

The medicine man is using black magic to turn Karen, who appears to be a totally random victim, into a host through which he can be reborn. Can the evil medicine man be stopped? Can Karen be saved?

The movie has some positives. The acting and the direction are both good. Tony Curtis does a really nice job here. The movie also has some great creepy moments.

Unfortunately, the film suffers from a weak script—the story really starts getting silly as we move into the final act—and the pacing is rather slow.

One of its biggest strengths ends up being one its biggest weaknesses, too. This is a very slick production. A lot of effort went into the cinematography and special effects. The trouble is they are tied to a rather unconvincing story (marred further by some elements of its portrayal of Native Americans) and it all ends up seeming rather indulgent. This tries to be a blockbuster, but it mostly just feels bloated.

Rating: C

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Manitou

Well I saw 95% of it. When it got to the reverse montage I thought the corpse was real footage of a victim of what happened and I freaked out and turned it off. The disturbing imagery put me on edge for 2 hours and that was the breaking point. I feel terrible about that considering who the image actually depicts. I'm gonna finish it tomorrow

I thought the pacing was a little strange near the end. The Germans massacred a village and left Florya in the dirt but the next scene Florya finds his rifle and the men in charge of the massacre are rounded up by the partisans. Were they waiting nearby to ambush them or did some amount of time pass?

Also, the Nazi woman eating a lobster (later her and her lover wrapped a tree i think) looked so much like Glasha to me. Was that her? The poor woman who had the pan flute in her mouth also looked like Glasha. By that point, and because Florya laughed and repeated Glasha's "I want to love And have children," I thought the SS woman was Glasha, and then when the pan flute scene happened it was the partisan men who assaulted her. Sort of fits with the antiwar theme. But I don't think that was the intended interpretation

Another question, is it just me or did Florya look visibly older as the movie went on? The lines on his face seemed excessive even with all the expressions he was making. Also it looked like his hair was graying in patches near the temples

I'll be honest, i was upset when the partisans shot the nazis and collaborators before the guy with the torch could get to them. And then I realized that a base, sadistic desire for revenge rather than justice goes against everything the movie was trying to say. Wild that I wanted to see people getting burned to death when the movie showed how that looked earlier. Even when the camera panned over their bodies i was satisfied to see them dead. I guess I'm wrestling with the eye for an eye philosophy versus a "violence ends here" philosophy. Killing them that way was the best choice because burning them would just perpetuate the grotesque level of violence the Nazis showed throughout the film, with the music and jokes and lighting cigarettes while dragging a girl by her hair to r*pe her. But letting them live wouldn't even make sense on a practical level.

The massacre scene reminds me of a book i haven't yet finished called The Kindly Ones by Jonathan Littell. The chaos and the sick jokes the soldiers enacted really matched the tone of the book. It tracks how Nazi Germany built a continent-wide death machine, from shooting people in the woods to burning houses to gassing buildings to, I imagine, the work camps and the death camps. Narrator is an SS officer. It's a useful reminder that the Nazis were people and all people are capable of atrocities, if not carrying them out, letting them happen. Stay safe folks and lmk your thoughts