Posts by Patrick Martin

and hey, you’re not wrong about tastes. everyone absolutely trashed that movie when it first hit theaters, but man, it really grew into a classic over time.
plus, I basically live by Friedkin's rule ☕

ironraven45 said:Cruising

Al Pacino taking on one of his most controversial roles here. It’s about this killer moving through the gay community, brutally picking people off. Pacino plays this undercover cop who infiltrates the scene to crack the case...
It's a decent enough flick with an interesting cast. Honestly, thank god they didn't go overboard with the gay romance scenes, because I feel like that would've been way too much for a movie like this.
I mean, Pacino could almost pass for gay himself. He really went all in to nail the vibe of the crowd.

Rating: 6/10

You didn't mention how it ends, which is kinda weird 🤷

The music in this thing is totally useless and just doesn't fit the movie at all. But hey, that's just how a lot of movies from the eighties were...

totally useless 😕
well, that kind of music fits the gay scene of that era perfectly🤷
would love it if you explained that a bit more☕

Cruising soundtrack (full) .

Dennis Hayes39 said:It’d be pretty sweet if they threw in a Maiden soundtrack. 😁

more like this nah ☕

Man, this looks like some low-budget, knock-off version of Beowulf
The effects aren't even that bad from what I can tell, plus you've got Jeff Bridges and the total MILF Julianna Moore in the mix ☕

Look, this whole V/H/S thing is actually a pretty sweet setup for an anthology. It gives all those hungry, unproven writers a real shot at throwing their wildest ideas and visions out there to see if they stick. In this latest installment, you can really feel that desperate hunger for something fresh, and honestly? That’s a massive win in my book.

can't find a single decent review out there, but I did stumble upon #934

Seriously, what were they thinking? Such a low rating for a movie this unique is just straight-up ridiculous, man. ☕

We’re gonna pick apart every single damn word ☕

briskhound2 said:Technically, South Korea hit The White House because the guy was one of theirs. And you think that scenario is too unrealistic to grab a coffee over? Really? Wasn't Kim Jong Un basically fine-tuning his entire arsenal for a potential strike just a few days ago?

hold up, hold up, hold up... 😕

weren't you guys literally just mocking viral campaigns in another thread—you know, those "innovative" ways to hype up a movie.

What viral campaigns? That stuff is for movies that screw themselves over and then try to explain the subtext afterward. You watch the trailer, you get the plot. Simple as that.

suddenly, for this specific movie, having a clue about the plot is actually a good thing.

interesting... ☕

Not even close. It’s just kind of funny reading these "it's not realistic" comments. Like, what did people expect? A "realistic" movie where some guy successfully seizes The White House and single-handedly wipes out all the bad guys? 🤣

Who even said it was unrealistic? Seriously. They’re leaning hard into all those current flip-flops and backpedaling moves people are making right now. But the way they’re presenting it is just so incredibly pretentious... honestly, it makes me want to go to war.

Viral campaigns? Please. That’s just stuff they tack onto movies that basically trip over their own feet, and then they try to use the hype to explain what the director was actually trying to say. You watch the trailer, you get the gist of the plot, and that’s pretty much it. Simple as that.

Look, if you want a viral campaign that actually works, you gotta use it to get people acquainted with the heavy hitters—the main characters and what they're really after. That way, whether someone catches a glimpse of it before the movie starts or scrolls past it after the credits roll, they already know who's who. It’s about setting the stage early.
Basically, Ridley is out here pushing the envelope all over again. ☕

Not even close. Honestly, it’s just kind of hilarious reading all these comments going, "Oh, this isn't realistic." Like, seriously? What did people actually expect? A "realistic" movie where some random guy successfully storms the White House and one lone hero single-handedly wipes out every single bad guy in sight? Give me a break. 🤣

Look, since it’s set right in the here and now, the whole thing really needs to stay grounded. I mean, if you're tackling a topic that's actually happening in the real world today, you can't just go off the rails with pure fantasy. It’s gotta have at least some level of realism to it, otherwise, what's even the point? If you're dealing with current events, people expect it to feel authentic, you know? Otherwise, it just feels fake.

Man, spotting a scam is getting harder by the second... it’s getting ridiculous.

briskhound2 said:Seriousness? In a movie about some guy single-handedly fixing half of North Korea? Give me a break with that kind of talk. And if we're talking about what the movie is actually trying to sell—man, we could go all day, not even mentioning the pseudo-spirituality, the religious bullshit, or those "fortune cookie" thoughts about whether we're alone in the universe... none of that makes any damn sense.

Speaking of what was mentioned earlier... did you guys even bother to check what the movie was actually about before watching? 🤣

No, briskhound2, I'm talking about a plot where North Korea attacks the US in a terrorist-style strike. ☕

briskhound2 said:Seriousness? In a movie about some guy single-handedly fixing half of North Korea? Give me a break with that kind of talk. And if we're talking about what the movie is actually trying to sell—man, we could go all day, not even mentioning the pseudo-spirituality, the religious bullshit, or those "fortune cookie" thoughts about whether we're alone in the universe... none of that makes any damn sense.

Speaking of what was mentioned earlier... did you guys even bother to check what the movie was actually about before watching? 🤣

Wait, wait, wait, hold up a second. 😕

Weren't you guys literally just in another thread making fun of viral campaigns and how they act like some kind of INNOVATIVE way to introduce a movie?

Now, suddenly, with this movie, everyone's acting like knowing the plot is a requirement.

Funny how that works. ☕

Christian Torres3 said:Don't try to lecture me. I'm not here to write a freaking fan letter to your "masterpiece," which—let's be honest—is basically on the same level as OHF.

And get this: that other flick is pure fantasy. It’s built on letting your imagination run wild. Honestly, that's the whole point. You gotta go into it without any baggage because, hey, it's a fantasy movie.

But this movie right here? This one deserves to be absolutely trashed because it tries way too hard to act like it’s some deep, relevant, serious piece of cinema. It’s just stupid.
It’s like, oh look, an attack on the White House! 😲 Oh man, the White House is under fire, how shocking! 😲
Bottom line? The whole goal behind OHF is just a quick, mindless cash grab. They’re straight-up insulting the audience's intelligence. It's just a massive scam to fleece the sheep.

Look, you gotta be respectful and actually watch the whole damn movie,
otherwise, how are you gonna earn your "license to kill" status?
basically, it's the only way to get full membership in the official club of people who just sit around trashing films. 😬

Christian Torres3 said:Your point is...?

this is top tier☕

Great.

Look, my whole point is that there's zero chance some massive hunk of junk like that could be tearing up Washington D.C. today.
I mean, come on, Americans basically have a damn space-age missile shield at this point, yet we’re supposed to believe some flying cargo truck—something that would've been a big deal back in the Vietnam era—can just cruise around the White House for half an hour? Give me a break.

Christian Torres3 said:The Lockheed AC-130. Absolute beast.Listen, you big bad madafaka, the armament really depends on the specific variant. We're talking GAU-12 Gatlings, 40mm cannons, 105mm howitzers... all mounted on the left side of the aircraft. AFAIK, there isn't a single one out there with four Gatlings on both sides.

They aren't dying in this mess. ☕

There are more candidates in the mix. The offer isn't actually that bad. 😁

It’s been 38 years since the Vietnam War, and even back then, they still needed extra air support just to get the job done effectively.

Christian Torres3 said:The Lockheed AC-130. Absolute beast.Listen, you big bad madafaka, the armament really depends on the specific variant. We're talking GAU-12 Gatlings, 40mm cannons, 105mm howitzers... all mounted on the left side of the aircraft. AFAIK, there isn't a single one out there with four Gatlings on both sides.

They aren't dying in this mess. ☕

There are more candidates in the mix. The offer isn't actually that bad. 😁

Personally, I think this is top-tier stuff.☕

urbanhawk17 said:And what about that stealth jet killing people around the CIA 🤣 I wonder how it manages to dodge the missiles being fired at it 🙏

What kind of effects are we even talking about here? It’s like some old-school war movie.
The camera does this low-angle shot where Americans are getting mowed down by machine gun fire all over Washington while in the background, that evil plane is just gliding through the sky super slow, almost like it's stalling.

urbanhawk17 said:And what about that stealth jet killing people around the CIA 🤣 I wonder how it manages to dodge the missiles being fired at it 🙏

Man, it's like the Red Baron
pulling crazy stunts in a triplane to dodge supersonic missiles. ☕

Eric Patel7 said:The President—aka Morgan Freeman—basically told them to stand down because some Bruce Lee type threatened them.

urbanhawk17 said:Maybe he approved those six helicopters against the threat way too early 🤣

I only watch action movies when I want to shut my brain off, and maybe Jack Reacher is something like that. This pathetic, unserious garbage is just bottom-of-the-barrel stuff.

Man, I don't know... how else are they supposed to actually see that absolute beast of a weapon?
Wait, what was that thing called again? Oh, right—the SPECTRE gunship. 🙏

🤦

You know, that whole staged, "fake" helicopter crash where they claim all those terrorists were wiped out? Total setup. It’s just like every other orchestrated mess you see on the news. 🤦

Man, that CGI sequence where they wreck the tip of the Washington Monument? Absolute madness. Seriously, watching those digital pixels tear through one of the most iconic landmarks in D.C. just hits different when it's done that well. It’s like, you’re sitting there, totally relaxed, and then—boom—digital destruction right in your face. It’s pure spectacle, honestly. Total chaos.

So, you've got all these heavy sighs echoing through the halls of the Pentagon—or wherever the hell they set up that command center this time around. 🤦

Man, these little guys just don't stand a chance. It’s honestly pathetic watching them go down like that. Like, seriously, what are we even doing here? They're basically walking targets at this point. It's just a total wash. ☕

Rachel Ortiz33 said:because Americans have never had a hillbilly president before

Look, you and I are just not on the same wavelength here☕
if I was being sarcastic, it shouldn't be that hard to get what I was actually getting at regarding their specific traits.

The absolute best part has gotta be that whole bit with the name, right when he finally calls out that traitor 🤦
man, I'm sitting here watching this shit and I honestly can't believe my eyes

Joshua Smith5 said:Steven Seagal is such a proven legend that you actually had to establish him twice just to make it stick, right? 😁

Man, did you see that? I saw those big, fancy words and immediately started translating them in my head. ☕