Posts by casualotter21

BONK! <zvuk dizanja topika>

I caught a screening at AMC Theatres with some friends today. Honestly, it was better than those trashy movies about masochistic secretaries and sadistic bosses. Surprisingly, it was actually *good*. And don't worry—no cheap sex scenes here, folks. There isn't any eroticism to speak of, but if you're looking for that kind of thing, go watch something on HBO.

Once you get past the initial impression—which is the bizarre relationship between the two leads—you can actually start laughing. The movie, point blank, *is* funny. I’ve always enjoyed a comedy that possesses enough wit and heart that the jokes don't just rely on parodying other films or gross-out humor. If they happen to be a bit... unconventional, that's just a bonus.

But once you move past the second impression—that this is a black comedy—comes the third: the realization that it's actually a tender little drama about two people who are far too insecure and ashamed of themselves to establish a norm... okay, a nenormalan romantic connection. Once I realized that, I found myself actually rooting for them to end up together. My god, there are all sorts of people out there, aren't there? 😁 👍

It occurred to me just now that, if you stretch the definition a little, you could call this a romantic comedy. After all, we have two people who want to be together, right? Plus a whole string of comedic situations arising from that. So, there you have it: a rom-com. 😈 😁
I won't be recommending this to my dad or my sister, because they'd probably just give me a weird look. Oh well, not everyone can handle this kind of humor! 😁

A very entertaining film, operating on more than one level. 👍

Emily Torres2 said:Look, I don't get what's supposed to be "stupid" here. Sure, a falcon isn't a hawk, but naming things can be flexible. Still, that whole "Lady" part of the title just doesn't sit right with me.

<sigh>
This is exactly why I avoid posting on this Movie forum. If I had made a joke saying that in "Lady Gaga," Steven Seagal plays a ninja who kills aliens, someone would probably reply: "Well... there aren't any ninjas in that Movie. Nor is Steven Seagal in it. Come to think of it, there aren't even any aliens."

You're overthinking it.

Betty Gonzalez30 said:All I know is it stars that main guy from Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon... they do those Japanese Martial Arts fights in the movie too...

Ah! So, we're playing the guessing game where you describe an Asian martial arts flick by mentioning it features Harrison Ford.

How incredibly helpful!

Justin Patel said:Well, John Doe, judging by her username, I’d probably guess you’re more interested in finding some dungeon where things get wild, and all that crap.

Homer Simpson, we certainly have enough material here for an Oscar-winning Netflix production... in the adult industry, that is.

Scott Ramos2 said:You'll find out when the time comes... buddy...😁 🙂 👋 👋

Maybe you two should just book a hotel room together?

There is currently a Sergio Leone Western marathon playing here in the States. Last week they showed "A Fistful of Dollars," and tonight it's "The Good, the Bad and the Ugly." Anyways, I think these films will be running all month, every Friday night around 10 PM. I can't quite recall if it was
Slo1 or
Slo2.
Since I've never actually sat down to watch them before, this feels like a pretty rare chance to catch up. 😁

Jose Miller17 said:Artificial Intelligence is one of those rare films that I would actually praise, though I certainly wouldn't sit through it again.

I see, that’s pretty much my take on it as well. The film was decent enough, but certainly not something I’ll be rushing back to watch anytime soon.

Tyler Grant76 said:Oh, how wonderful that the little witch is playing the role of a little witch yet again.😳

It’s the same pattern in Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon, and even Rush Hour 2. She's getting typcasted. 😁

Though, if I recall correctly, she actually managed a genuine smile in "Hero."

I personally found Warriors to be quite a solid film—actually, it was excellent. For those who haven't seen it, I’d definitely suggest checking out "Hero" starring Zhang Ziyi and Jet Li. It is an absolutely massive cinematic experience. Even if you find the plot a bit silly, the visuals are breathtaking. That is what happens when you hand high-end CGI technology over to the studios in China.😁

I have to tread carefully here since I’ve only seen the film once, so my memory of the final act isn't exactly razor-sharp. As far as I recall, the kid ends up in that submarine-helicopter-whatever thing in the underwater theme park, praying to a statue. Then he's rescued by the Eliens, and later on, they let him spend just one single day with his mother, right? Feel free to correct me if I’ve missed anything.

Emily Torres2 said:What kind of ending would you prefer, or how do you think that hellish Kubrick would have handled it? Personally, I think those open doors leading to multiple endings are a great touch—it allows everyone to have their own bitter, sweet, or whatever kind of conclusion they want.

The issue is that I don't really have a choice; once a film has one specific ending, that’s where it actually *ends*, doesn't it? And then it's over. In this case, the ending with the mother felt just... mediocre to me. The ending with the boy alone at the bottom of the ocean praying to a statue is far more moving; if the film had concluded there, I would have found it much better.

I also didn't particularly care for the way the Eliens suddenly pop up during the last half hour of the film. In any other circumstance—say, if it happened earlier—it might have felt more dramatic. Here, it feels like something they thought of at the very last second. Their arrival feels like a total deus ex machina to me.

Now, even if I accept the Eliens, I still can't wrap my head around the "oh, how convenient for the melodrama" aspect of them being able to recreate the boy's mother for just one day. If that had been woven into the plot earlier, and if the story built up around the fact that the boy could only be with his mother for twenty-four hours, I might have managed some suspension of disbelief regarding the Eliens traveling from another part of space while being unable to simply use DNA to create a clone. But when the Eliens, the mother, and a highly questionable explanation for her short expiration date all crash into the final fifteen minutes, I can't help but roll my eyes.

To me, the film makes perfect sense and works beautifully until those Eliens show up. What on earth did they need them for?

An allegory for Pinocchio, set in a beautiful sunken villa within an underwater Coney Island—complete with sunken tankers (and twins)—isn't that the most powerful cataclysmic image possible of a potential future?

And if the film had ended there, it would have been absolutely devastating because it would have been the most powerful conclusion possible. Instead, it was just... meh.

"Something old"... sweet zombie Jesus, this movie came out in 2001! That isn't old. We're talking about "old" when we discuss silent films or Casablanca.

Personally, I thought the film was alright, but unfortunately, it didn't leave me with the feeling that I’d want to watch it multiple times. Perhaps it felt a bit too... Spielbergian to me. It’s all emotions right on the surface; the lead is this charming, sweet little boy whom everyone treats like a mere piece of hardware (which, to be fair, he is 😁), followed by that whole "Look how terrible this is. Do you see? Do you see?" vibe. And I wasn't a fan of the ending. Or rather, the endev. I got the impression, much like with return of the king, that Spielberg wasn't entirely sure how he wanted to wrap things up: every individual ending works well enough on its own, yet he seemed unable to choose, so he just threw them all in there.

Don't get me wrong, folks, the movie is fine, but it wasn't as earth-shatteringly good as it ought to have been. As I mentioned: it felt a little too Spielbergian for my taste. If Kubrick had been called to direct this, it probably would have been better. Much more depressing and painful to watch, certainly, but better.

Nicole Thompson76 said:I’ll admit—The Matrix 1 is the gold standard, a true machine masterpiece, and while the other two aren't quite as great, they aren't absolute garbage either...

They really are. Here is the definitive evidence:

1) Not enough Monica Bellucci
2) Agent Smith laughs with a giant MUHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHA!
3) Not enough Monica Bellucci
4) Ridiculous, circular dialogue along the lines of
"You must find the truth."
"And what is the truth?"
"It is the path."
"And where is the path?"
"Within the truth."
5) Not enough Monica Bellucci
6) Keanu Reeves' bare backside
7) Not enough Monica Bellucci
8) Morpheus slicing a car with a katana
9) Not enough Monica Bellucci

All jokes aside, the third installment actually outshines the second, primarily because it prioritizes action over endless philosophizing, and thank God for that. Even so, both sequels feel miles below the original; they strike me as somewhat unnecessary, clumsy additions to the story established in the first film.

It's a shame, given all the potential...

Jessica Nguyen85 said:You take my observations far too personally and manage to take offense at things that have absolutely nothing to do with you. Who exactly is being "bitter" here? 😉

It’s funny, I feel like I could say the exact same thing about you. I throw one single sarcastic remark your way and I immediately get a response like this:

This is bordering on harassment. Honestly... if you don't have anything constructive to say in opposition or even a defense for certain views, just walk away. Leave me alone.

Or later.

Try to participate in the discussion without resorting to personal attacks or assuming that everyone is intentionally targeting you and your specific viewpoint.

Well, redgull44, there might be some truth to that critique. I generally have a distaste for getting dragged into long-winded debates, so I tend to condense my thoughts into as few sentences as possible. Naturally, this carries the risk of my posts being misread as mere insults. Let me clarify.

My take is that you didn't enjoy the film simply because it was too long and tedious. That’s a perfectly valid opinion, and I can certainly see why you’d feel that way. However, what I struggle to grasp is why you seem to be intentionally refusing to acknowledge—or perhaps even attempting to find—a single redeeming quality within the work. In my experience, truly terrible films where absolutely nothing works are incredibly rare, much like the films that I consider perfect. I believe there is almost always at least one moment in any movie worth recounting to friends later, even if only to mock it. Generally speaking, I find it quite difficult to view any film, book, or comic exclusively through a binary lens of good or bad.

Whenever I encounter people who write about film with such blatant contempt—refusing to budge even an inch during a debate and simply repeating their initial vitriol—I can't help but wonder how much of their "critique" is actually rooted in experience, reason, and taste, rather than just raw, unexamined likes or dislikes.

You could tell me that I’m overreacting now; that I took this whole debate far too seriously; that I completely misread you and that you aren't even being that subjective. But before we go there, let me offer one example that I believe confirms my position. You said:

As for the commentary regarding the screenplay—honestly, who else noticed how they just whisper during that scene between the two leads? It’s clearly intended as a stylistic choice, leaving the audience to imagine exactly what was said. Personally, I could probably fill in the blanks for the entire movie that way.

But that doesn't actually happen throughout the entire film, does it? It’s isolated to just that one scene. Besides, you were the one who previously argued that the movie lacks any dialogue or actions from the actors that aren't "heavy-handed clichés." Now, suddenly, here is an element that certainly isn't a cliché, yet you're blaming it for being far too unconventional.

Fine, if you’re truly as objective as you claim, name just one single thing in all of Lost in Translation that wasn't absolutely—ueber—terrible, banal, or cliché.

My point on this thread is simply that the film is overrated due to its Oscar nominations (for direction and screenplay), and that’s all. From what I can see, most people agree it isn't anything exceptional; there might be a little something there, but it's certainly not enough to justify the hype.

I honestly can't say whether the film deserves an Oscar or not, mostly because I haven't kept up with the nominees or even seen half of the films in question. Furthermore, you can't really claim you were merely arguing that it was "overrated with its Oscar nominations." If I recall correctly, you actually used the phrase, "Oh Jesus, what a pile of senseless scenes and cuts," which strikes me as being a bit more extreme.

Jessica Nguyen85 said:Look, man... if you don't actually have a counterargument or even a defense for your stance...

I’d argue it’s actually the other way around: Jose Miller3 said she loved that final scene between them. I agreed and went into detail about why it worked so well. Then you just waltz in with a comment like, "Oh, look at me, I'm writing my own screenplay, a whole new book by Sofia Coppola! HAHAHA, I'm so hilarious!!!!111"

As for explaining my reasoning: save your breath. Like I said before, I could spend all day listing everything I enjoyed about this film, whereas you probably wouldn't be able to admit a single thing was remotely good.

Jessica Nguyen85 said:"Be Your Own Screenwriter," the new book by Sofia Coppola, because apparently "Screenwriting for Dummies" is her trademark.😁

But I suppose you aren't actually bitter, are you?

Jose Miller3 said:I just wanted to ask: what do you all think she actually tells him at the end? Does it even matter? Do you even want to know?

The fact that we never actually hear what Bill Murray says to Scarlett Johansson is, in my opinion, a brilliant move. It would have been incredibly difficult for him to say anything without someone immediately rolling their eyes and calling it a cheap cliché. I find this version much more effective because it allows everyone to imagine their own perfectly unique, beautiful moment. 🙂

Susan Wright12 said:If you can't recognize that this movie is garbage, then you lack the basic qualifications to offer any opinion on film as an art form or a craft.
One can certainly debate matters of taste, provided that taste remains the subject at hand. In this specific instance, however, we are dealing with objective quality—or the complete lack thereof.

That interpretation merely anticipated the typical sentiments held by this film's fanbase. Personally, I have little sympathy for the bourgeois boredom of displaced Americans.

My name is Susan Wright12, and I am currently pursuing my law degree. Profundus Maximus!"

redgull44 said:Well, what can I say... 😉

Maybe I'm just talking nonsense now, but (there's always a "but," isn't there? 🙄) those specific dialogues are really what make this movie unique... along with that sort of "boring" atmosphere...
I think it captured their introduction perfectly—that sense of friction between them, the tension in the air, all those underlying emotions...

In other words: you liked the movie and he didn't. That’s the absolute worst part about debating films—actually, it applies to pretty much anything. At some point, you just hit a wall: you describe a scene that you thought was brilliant, while I look at that exact same moment and think it was garbage.

It’s just a matter of personal taste and experience, I guess. Take the scene where Bill Murray talks to his wife about buying a new rug: even though the conversation is technically serious, I was dying laughing when my friends started pointing out what she was *actually* saying, and how Bill was bound to offend her no matter what he said, since she couldn't just claim it was "just a rug" while he's looking at those samples being delivered via FedEx. Both of them had recently dealt with some awkward situations with women, so they were still clearly on edge, which was obvious from the way they commented on it.

Hopefully, they're feeling the sting now.

Jessica Nguyen85 said:😁
I appreciate the commentary on my taste, but I’m sticking to my guns: this movie doesn't deserve a single Oscar nomination. As for the acting—if I wanted to watch expressionless, pampered characters, I'd just go window shopping at a high-end boutique.

But you're not bitter or anything, eh?

If someone can actually point out a single line of dialogue between the two leads that has "it"—something that isn't a heavy-handed cliché—then I'll eat my hat.

It feels to me like if someone actually managed to pull that off, you'd just find some other excuse to dismiss it as a cliché or something banal. Perhaps I'm wrong, but frankly, I couldn't care less.

I thought the film was excellent. It perfectly captures that raw sense of panic you feel when you're stranded in a foreign land where you don't speak a word of the language. It really drives home how much we actually depend on our surroundings and the people around us. Coming from a small, relatively insignificant place myself, I know exactly what it feels like to face culture shock when traveling abroad—though I can only imagine how overwhelming it must be for regular Americans. Television spends so much time convincing them that anyone living outside the States is either someone with a ridiculous accent, a terrorist, an organ trafficker, or just some corrupt politician.

I was genuinely struck by how Japanese cities are depicted as these absolute "Ghost in the Shell" landscapes, overflowing with—and I mean *overflowing*—neon signs and massive skyscrapers. It’s just an endless expanse of concrete, steel, glass, and asphalt... honestly, it gives me the chills. Of course, not all of Japan looks like that, but for someone like me living in a place like Chicago, it feels pretty intimidating.

I actually quite enjoy the atmosphere of this strip club. It looks less like an upscale lounge and more like a World War II bunker, complete with raw, unadorned gray concrete walls punctuated only by the occasional neon light. On small, fluorescent-lit stages, dancers with vacant expressions and pink hair perform, wearing nothing but leather thongs. In the background, heavy bass thumps through the room while a woman with a raspy voice wheezes out lyrics like, "Suck on my titty, suck on my titty now..." Surrounding the stages, men in black business suits sit in leather armchairs barely six inches from the performers, smoking cigarettes and watching the show with an air of profound boredom.
In that entire GitS sequence, Bill Murray is just sitting there. A woman walks up to him and says, "Let's get out of here." Bill stands up, walks over to the woman who’s busy working the bridge—swaying her hips and everything—leans in close to her, says, "So long now!", gives her a wave, and just walks off.

We were absolutely dying laughing at that scene. It’s honestly a rarity these days to see actual comedy that doesn't rely on someone farting or spilling some gross liquid everywhere.

I must admit, I was pleasantly surprised by the wave of computer-animated feature films that have been targeting mainstream audiences over the last seven years. I’ve sat through almost all of them: Toy Story, Toy Story 2, Ice Age, Shrek, Finding Nemo, Antz, and Monsters, Inc. My only regret is missing A Bug's Life. Honestly, each of these felt significantly more substantial than the politically correct lemonade Disney served us throughout the entire nineties. It seems the writers actually put some genuine effort into the scripts to ensure they were appealing to an audience. I still find myself thinking about that end joke in Toy Story 2 and those fake outtakes from the "making of" the movie. Truly, the golden age of animation.

I find myself wondering what I would actually think if I sat down to watch those old Disney classics today—the ones I used to hunt down on bootleg tapes back in the late '80s. I'm talking about the heavy hitters like The Jungle Book, Lady and the Tramp, Snow White, Alice in Wonderland, Sleeping Beauty, and 101 Dalmatians. They were solid films with genuinely well-crafted characters and great soundtracks, but I can't help but wonder how they would hold up under a modern lens.