placidlynx23 said:Hannibal Lecter. It’s forced, fake, and just plain hollow.
p.s. Has the word "annoying" actually changed its definition since the last time I heard it used? A good chunk of people in this thread are talking about high-quality cinematic villains and claiming they're great. hmmm.
...says the man who treats David Lynch like some kind of deity. Talk about irony... 🙏 🙏 🙏 🙏 🙏 🙏 🙏
Ashley Diaz7 said:Anyone know where I can pick up some ice? Cubed, crushed, a big block—doesn't matter. 😕 I haven't seen any at the local supermarkets or even at the corner store. It’d be killer if they just had an ice machine so you could grab a couple of pounds on the fly. 😁
p.s. [spoiler]why did he only realize at the end that it was all in his head?[/spoiler]
Oh man, buddy—you've completely misinterpreted the ending of the movie/story. It wasn't some hallucination. Everything he did was "for real"—it’s just that he finally realized he wasn't going to face any consequences for his actions.
I'm not saying they're a villain, but they are definitely sick... 🙂
p.s. Patrick Bateman is also basically a double personality... a total double yuppie... 😛
That’s just not right. He knows exactly what he's doing—it's just that he isn't entirely sure *why* he's doing it. 😉 I'm not sure if you've actually sat down with the book, but if you haven't, you really should. 🙏 🙏
Jerry Martin19 said:Surprised you didn't bring up Bale in The Machinist or Am. Pschyo 😕
Bale is just a genius, though... ☕
Look, Patrick Bateman is in a league of his own—I'd even go as far as calling him an anti-hero. Like I've said before, he's easily one of the most compelling characters ever put on film. 🙏 🙏 🙏
As for Trevor Reznik, I never really viewed him as a villain. It's a matter of dissociative identity—even when he was doing some truly terrible things, it wasn't coming from a place of conscious malice.
Solid effects. This movie was clearly built for the big screen—provided you're watching it in a theater with a top-tier sound system. That said, there was one thing that kept bugging me throughout the entire runtime. I just couldn't settle on a preference between the blonde and the brunette. At the start, the blonde definitely had the edge—she was just more striking. But then, at some point, I'd find myself leaning toward the brunette, only for the blonde to reappear and take the lead again. It was a constant back-and-forth. Even after the credits rolled, I was still stuck debating which one actually came out on top; the brunette seemed to have pulled ahead slightly, but even then, I wasn't 100% convinced. It wasn't until the next day—after doing a little digging online and scrolling through some stills—that I finally reached a verdict on this crucial debate. The winner is definitively the brunette 👍 🙏
Jamie Ross8 said:Give me a break—I can't believe it. They're actually making a movie about this exact guy, the one who keeps insisting he’s never filming anything again! But that's precisely the point!!! 🙂
So, what's the plan? You going to shoot the whole thing on your iPhone or something? 🤣
You people can talk all you want about how creative some girl might be—blah, blah, blah—but let’s get real: she isn't going to film anything. It's all just a pipe dream. She’s still dreaming. 😍 Look, anyone who shows up to a forum looking for actors to star in a movie for free—well, they aren't getting a production. They aren't getting anything. At best, they might end up with some amateur clip that lasts a few minutes. 🙏
Jamie Ross8 said:Man, look at that cash flow! Haha! And YouTube, definitely not. I wouldn’t dream of dragging my own work through the mud by tossing it onto a digital landfill like that. Maybe Sundance next year—but I'll give it some serious thought before committing. 🙂 It’s quite simple, really—I do this because I love it, and more importantly, because I want to. At the end of the day, my primary motivation is pure enjoyment. And if I actually manage to learn it, too.. And if people actually end up liking it? Well, honestly—you couldn't ask for anything more than that.
Let’s get one thing straight—you aren't going to be filming a movie; you're going to be filming my complete and utter lack of interest. 🤣 🤣 Look, let’s be honest—you don't actually have a grasp on the fundamentals of filmmaking. Beyond that, you haven't even hit the stage of knowing what your purpose is or what exactly you'd be capturing if you actually picked up a camera. 🙏 🙏
Since it’s late and everything is closed now, it’ll be tough to pick it up—I'll give it a shot tomorrow 🙏 but I actually want an answer to your point, so I’m asking you nicely (again): How exactly is it that you claim the lack of camera movement and the sense of boredom during his films are unfounded? How can you possibly argue that any feeling of boredom stemming from watching such a film is baseless? 😕 Can you actually explain that to me? Since you're supposedly the one with the brain here, surely you can manage that, right? 😕
placidlynx23 said:He’s just messing around, man. And honestly? He’s absolutely right.
You're just tossing out a pile of completely misguided and baseless "takes."
If he said the film felt tedious at certain points, or that the camera work didn't sit right with him—so what? Where is the "baselessness" in that?😕 What exactly is unfounded here? Unfounded compared to what?😕
I just finished watching this documentary, and honestly—it’s fantastic. It tackles the history of sexual liberation in a way that is both genuinely engaging and deeply educational. There’s a particularly sharp moment where the director plays around with the concept of morality versus the church's traditional stance on the subject, which was quite clever. My very first thought when I saw the title was that maybe David Lynch directed it—given his status as the absolute king of subtextual sexuality 😍 when it comes to filmmaking—but unfortunately, that isn't the case. Lynch tends to favor implicit, latent themes; he'd likely find it far too direct to actually speak about it explicitly. In my opinion, films like this are practically tailor-made for festivals like Sundance 😍—places where people might actually be free to engage in something more intellectually stimulating than just sitting around feeling sick. I highly recommend it. 👍
nimblestag31 said:So, another Sundance is coming up soon—the crew and I were thinking it might be fun to hit up the festival this year... I'm having a bit of a hard time figuring out the lodging situation, and if we end up staying in a tent, I'm already stressing about hygiene and how comfortable those things actually are... plus, how many days should we stay? And once we get there, how long is the drive from the Napa Valley area to the coast?
Anyway, if anyone here has been to Sundance before, I'd love to hear what you thought about it 🙂
Thanks
I went last year and, honestly, it was a total waste of time because the lineup was garbage. 🤮 Just an absolute train wreck. It got to the point where I felt like losing my mind right in the middle of a screening 🙏. But I didn't—that would have been ridiculous—instead, I just walked out and 🤮. Napa Valley is essentially one giant pile of junk. I'm completely over the whole Sundance vibe. The films were an absolute d i s a s t e r 🤮 🤮 🤮
Think about that scene in Goodfellas where Pesci and De Niro are just staring down that guy who insulted Pesci—the camera stays locked on De Niro’s face while you just hear those dull, sickening thuds of a shoe hitting bone. It's visceral. 🙏 🙏 🙏 It’s the same kind of raw energy in Donnie Brasac when they corner that guy in the restroom just because he insisted someone take off their shoes. They absolutely wreck him—and then, to top it off, they grab a trash can and start using it as a weapon. 🤣 🙏 🙏
Raymond Ramos59 said:The first one is a total masterpiece—the sequel is a bit weird and feels rushed, almost like the plot unravels way too fast at the end leaving me scratching my head—but man, the third one has to be legendary.
Honestly, I think it’s actually better than the first installment. It was damnably good—surprising, even. 👍 I actually toyed with the idea of heading out to catch another sneak preview tonight, but I eventually decided I just didn't have the energy to subject myself to $8.25 again. 😢
My biggest gripe with "Once Upon a Time in the West" is those long, drawn-out sequences devoid of dialogue—very much in the vein of "Space Odyssey"—which can honestly feel tedious and exhausting at times. Aside from that, the core narrative is actually quite strong.
On the flip side, "The Wild Bunch" really resonated with me because of one unique element: the central group of outlaws, rebels, and killers who remain loyal to one another until the very end. Usually, characters like this are portrayed as selfish, cold-blooded types who wouldn't blink before betraying their own crew just to turn a quick profit. But not in "The Wild Bunch." They operate on a strict "all for one, one for all" code. Even at the end, when they set out to rescue their captured comrade, they know the odds are stacked heavily against them, yet they refuse to leave anyone behind.
That final scene is legendary—when Pike Bishop walks into the room where the other two gang members are, stands in the doorway, and they just lock eyes for a few moments before he simply says, "Let's go." There’s another beat of silence, and one of them responds, "Why not." Then all three arm themselves and head outside, only to find Dutch Engstrom sitting there; they just stare at him without saying a word, he gives a small smile, grabs his rifle, and joins them. So there they stand, the four of them side-by-side, once again without a single word spoken, as they slowly advance toward the Mexican Army camp holding Angela captive.
