Posts by Amy Mendoza25

Yeah, I'm with you on that. 😉

spoiler, also:

Honestly, I didn't even stop to wonder if he actually died; I just assumed he did (lesson learned from getting lost on some backroad in Nebraska, I guess). The guy can basically jump through time and manifest himself out of thin air. Reading your posts, I’m starting to think I lean a little too hard into the sci-fi "anything goes" theory. What really trips me up, though, is that final line from the woman: "How much time do we have this time?" Does that mean she knows about all his visits and how he's shaped her life? If so, that kind of ruins my take on the movie...

Come on, don't be like that: he was in Rourke (alongside Jean Michel Vincent) and in 'Buffalo 66' 😉

Saw Bio at the cinema tonight. It’s actually quite fine. Naturally, it immediately brings to mind Marker’s 'La Jetée' or even Gilliam’s '12 Monkeys,' but whatever. Brody is great, though I suspect his supporting cast wasn't exactly the best fit or even in the right headspace on set. That mostly falls on Knightley, and Jason Leighgh wasn't anything special either (considering she was genuinely good in 'The Machinist').
Just to be clear, there isn't any chaotic or impossible plot here. This is a mainstream crowd-pleaser where everything is polished and straightforward, without any weirdly complex script interventions. There isn't much explaining; it's just a situation that's meant to feel mysterious. Since I went in expecting a sci-fi psychological thriller, I was prepared for the lack of explanation, so that didn't make it hard to digest. I guess that's the thing with sci-fi: you watch what you like and take what they give you...
Okay, cinematic enough. Good acting from the lead and some excellent opening scenes where the virtual (well, screen-mediated) and real reality intertwine.

p.s.
Psychologists could probably weigh in here, but if I recall, there was once an experiment involving 'sensory deprivation' where a kit got all worked up and headed into that quasi-womb state just to see what would happen. While we're on the subject of films: those experiments inspired a truly memorable one: 'Altered States' starring William Hurt.

p.p.s.
Got a few questions for anyone who's seen it: what did you think of that last line? I feel like it was totally unnecessary, but let's save that debate for later so we don't have to deal with 'spoiler' warnings and invisible text... 🙂

I’m guessing you missed Robert De Niro’s performance as the shady character in 'Angel Heart'.

Honestly, Al Pacino was totally predictable in 'The Devil's Advocate'. It was almost like in 'Any Given Sunday'. You just KNOW he’s going to launch into one of those intense monologues, so you sit there waiting and waiting, and the movie drags while you wait, only for it to end up being something you've seen a thousand times before—same actor, same thing (that whole worldview of his where his take on life and its problems is always the "right" one). It gets a bit old. So, to answer the question I skipped a few posts ago: both Al Pacino and Robert De Niro, but back when they were younger.

And don't go overthinking 'Sunset Boulevard' either.

Carmela said:What kind of rules actually lack exceptions? 😉
(think Al Pacino in Scarface or Serpico).

Sold! 👍

hm... will the breakdown take 'Serpico' and 'Dog Day Afternoon' into account?
😛

Al Pacino or Robert De Niro, that IS the question...

Well, now you've gone and made me want to watch it again.

Yeah, it sits somewhere between a movie and a philosophical essay. Here are a few links for you, though I’m sure you guys can find them yourselves if you need to 😉
I actually downloaded the screenplay after seeing it and really enjoyed reading through it...

Waking Life

screenplay

Harvey Pekar🙂

You scored higher than 36% on deepness
You scored higher than 20% on anger
You scored higher than 45% on kindness

of course, just another Jeff...

And here comes the new Terrence Malick with 'The New World.' Good old Malick... 🙏

Manderlay

Yeah... still waiting to see what happens with the retailers. They just pushed the filming back again, now it's set for this fall.

As for Chasing Amy, that’s definitely his best work after the retailer stuff.

It’s pointless to argue whether Trier is actually a good director or if Björk is a talented singer. If you follow either field at all, the answer is pretty obvious to you.

And a little more on that donkey (things have been a bit hectic lately so I lost track of this thread): Trier wanted exactly what happened on the previous page. A debate that goes right up to the point where someone asks, "Wait, aren't we being massive hypocrites?" They slaughtered the donkey so fast he didn't even know what hit him, and immediately half the group jumped up—wearing Nike sneakers and Reebok socks. Which are made in sweatshops. Which kill people. Which kill entire provinces in poor countries. And yet we don't complain about it. Of course, we support it by buying it. But when it's just one donkey, suddenly we're all in a coma...

Just so there's no confusion, I wear branded sneakers too. We're all guilty. Let's be honest, we're all stuck in the same coma. So, on to nicer topics—art. Specifically music. For me, it's the purest, most emotional, most direct form of art... and Björk is one of the brightest examples. For me.

👋

Noah Watson4 said:that director was physically abusive toward an animal—specifically a donkey.

He wasn't being abusive, he just executed it on camera. Kind of like Coppola in Apocalypse Now. Remember that film? Or is that too much to ask...

What do you guys think?
I thought it was great. Surreal plot, timeless vibe, killer soundtrack, top-tier acting—but man, that story is just sick. Definitely recommend!

👍

I feel the exact opposite. Immortal is honestly one of the biggest wastes of time I’ve ever sat through. For me, Sky Captain is easily fifty times better, even if they both end up in the same bucket eventually.

Sky Captain is just a self-aware, tongue-in-cheek nod to comic books—both the print stuff and the movies—and it doesn't pretend to be anything more than a fun ride. Sure, the cast is decent and the CGI environments don't always land quite as smoothly as intended, but by leaning into those washed-out colors, heavy light-to-dark contrasts, and that dominant brownish-gold tint, they at least managed to make it look cohesive.

Immortal, on the other hand, does the worst possible thing a Sci-Fi movie can do: it tries to act all pseudo-intellectual and mysterious about "big" life questions—who are our gods, what is true reality, where are we headed—only to leave you with nothing but a pile of half-baked teenage scribbles on a middle school chalkboard. It's fake, plain and simple, from a needlessly confusing start to a predictable, pathetic finish. Look, there are moments where it looks visually striking, but in the end, it's just pure style without any actual substance. That's my biggest gripe: people love claiming European Sci-Fi beats American trash, but here, it feels like Henry just made something that's triple-trash. He still has plenty to learn from the Americans...

🙂

...and now he'll get his chance with Sin City. Honestly, if I could stomach that movie, then so can he. Consider this another lesson in monochromatic color palettes and how a straightforward story, despite its simplicity, can pack a punch if it's actually well-articulated. My takeaway? Henry, stick to the comics. I don't really read them myself (much to my shame), so I probably won't run into you again anyway...

Yeah, I was thinking about those five obstacles. Thanks!