Nancy Morales2 said:(...)meanwhile, over on some other corner of the internet, I’m out here having a perfectly reasoned, sincere, and friendly debate with some moron, telling them straight up that they're ignorant, dim-witted, or just plain an idiot...(...)
Kyle White2 said:(...) The acting and the storytelling were great, but I felt the son's character was a bit underdeveloped. It left a gap for me; that scene where he’s carrying his father felt almost like something out of Planet of the Apes—just way too over-the-top for my taste.
Essentially, the son doesn't buy a single word his father tells him; he thinks he doesn't truly know the man. Then, while cleaning the pool, he suddenly sees a massive fish fin in the water—that's clearly hinting at the blurring lines between reality and delusion. In the following scene, back at the small house with his mother and wife, he finally realizes there might actually be some truth to his father's stories after all. 😍
Emily Martinez68 said:Yeah, absolutely. Just think about Crash... that guy is seriously twisted. To be honest, I actually dig how slimy "eXistenZ" is. 😎 Not that I’m calling it a masterpiece or anything...
I haven't actually sat down to watch Crash yet, but I've definitely heard the buzz. Given the title and how obsessed David Cronenberg is with anatomy, I can only imagine what he did with it.😲 I finally figured out eXistenZ toward the end. It feels like Cronenberg just has his own specific niche audience; he doesn't really aim for those massive Hollywood blockbusters.
Amanda Fowler2 said:Interesting point. From what I've seen, people rarely get fired up over philosophers. Maybe you should try playing the writer role—do any recitations come to mind?
I'm with you there. Philosophers have never really done it for me; they always feel a bit limp. 🤔
That’s just classic David Cronenberg; he definitely has this obsession with raw meat. 😕 The film theme itself is actually pretty interesting if you can look past the director's personal signature. "Videodrome" was just awful. 😱
I just finished reading "Big Fish." As usual, the book offers so much more detail than the movie version. That said, the film takes some pretty massive liberties with the original plot.
At first, I struggled to judge the book because the movie was still playing in my head, but that whimsical, fairy-tale atmosphere is exactly what translates so well to the big screen 🙂. Credit where credit is due—the screenwriter really nailed the vibe 👍 (I actually briefly wondered if Dan Wallace had adapted it himself 🤔, but it turns out the credit goes to John August) .
I caught a screening of Eugène François Vidocq 👍 It’s well-made and definitely touches on some intriguing themes. Have you gotten around to watching "Wolf Pack" yet?
The Frenchmen are actually serious about competing on the global cinematic stage, so they've put in the work and turned out a few genuinely compelling films 🙂
I finally picked up the book this movie was based on today. So far, Daniel Wallace has written three books, though he actually works as an illustrator by trade. It’s a really smooth transition between the fairytale elements and actual reality 👍
It's honestly a shame the Academy passed this one over; it only managed to snag a single nomination (if I recall correctly, just for Best Original Score).
I found this movie pretty hard to swallow. At the start, Thornton's character chases two kids off his property just because they're Black. By the end, though, he isn't even acting racist anymore 😕
The only part that actually landed for me was the dark humor at the end—that moment where they’re sitting by the door and you realize there's a third corpse after he's already put his father away. Not to mention the guy's constant habit of ordering black coffee and chocolate ice cream at the diner.