Kenneth Johnson12 said:Still waiting for someone to put together a list of about ten films so I actually have something worth watching. People keep mentioning great series in this thread, but nobody ever suggests specific movies unless they’re talking trash about them. I realize there are other threads for this, but I am specifically looking for top-tier recent films that match the quality of elite shows like GoT or Homeland. 🍿
For starters, you've got Kings of Summer 2013.,World's end 2013. and Grand Budapest hotel 2014.
@Patrick Martin, half of those movies aren't even that great. Some are just okay, and some are straight-up bad.
It was actually pretty solid CSI: Las Vegas, especially back when it first started. Now, they’ve got Ted Danson playing in the new episodes. I guess he's trying to crack cases using nothing but that silver hair of his...
As for the rest of them, they just don't really measure up much...
coppersailor28 said:Just one more thing—since I initially dismissed the "goof," thinking that unidentified flying object was just some pyrotechnic prop that missed the football entirely:
It’s nothing more than a simple rifle reload ( 🤷 damn, the most mysterious phenomena usually have the simplest explanations)
once you weigh everything against each other, that scene was actually shot with only a handful of mistakes...🙂
James Garcia50 said:Everyone watches movies differently—there aren't any rules. If there were, what would be the point?
@Jessica Morris6, Boorman is obsessed with life in the wild, hunting, and all that crap. He’s worth checking out, including The Emerald Forest, 1985, even if it doesn't hit the legendary status of Deliverance.
The issue here is the continuity—in the previous shot, he’s standing in a perfectly safe spot where there's no way he could have been impaled, yet in the very next frame, the arrow has suddenly pierced right through him. But honestly, if you can just look past that, one single scene isn't going to ruin the whole experience. It’s an excellent film, easily one of the best in its genre... whatever you want to call it... adventure, man vs. nature, or something along those lines.
I put together this GIF so you guys can actually see what I mean. The whole thing feels incredibly cheap and poorly executed... especially that part where he basically impales himself on his own arrow—it’s such an obvious, lazy stunt 🙂. Most of the other scenes hold up fine, but they really dropped the ball on this one.
coppersailor28 said:That "pyrotechnics" bit looks like total nonsense. As for the arrows? He already had a wound in his neck from earlier. He took that hit during the scene where they were measuring—and shooting—each other...
That’s certainly a possibility. I mean, when Ed (Voight) was creeping around behind him, visibly shaking with fear while clutching that bow... he somehow managed to land a shot. It just seems like they skipped over the actual moment of impact, which is why everyone is making such a massive fuss about it. Even then, that idiot was facing him and aiming right at him. And if you look closely at this second gif, it looks like the arrowhead is pointing backward, which would imply he was actually struck from the front...
James Garcia50 said:Ah, I see where the confusion is.
Look, if someone gets hit in the upper back at that specific angle, where would the shooter even have to be standing?
And that injury to Voight is tripping me up too. It looks more like he tripped onto his own arrow—you can see the tip sticking out of his chest—and then we see him pulling it out by the shaft.
And if you look closely at these GIFs, it’s pretty obvious the shooter was positioned behind him, which just doesn't align with how the scene is supposed to play out. I also noticed what looks like an arrow might have just fallen from the tree above him. The bottom line is they missed the mark. It's pretty clear they botched this whole sequence...
116 seconds. Can you believe how surreal that looks? It’s either some impossible shot where he throws the arrow by hand, which makes zero sense, or someone else just happened to nail him from a distance...
Watching that scene unfold, I was fully expecting Bucko (since he was part of the group) to pop up, but it turns out Ed was all on his own.
I’ve got a bit of a dilemma on my hands. I'm looking for some input from someone who actually knows their way around cinema (Spoiler)... After those four guys take out that first hillbilly who raped them and make their break for the Kanawha River, Drewa (Ronny Cox) goes after the second toothless local. This guy holds some kind of high ground, just waiting for them to emerge from the brush... Ed (Jon Voight) ends up scaling that cliffside where they have their final confrontation, and he manages to kill him. But there’s a massive problem, because Ed is lying right there in front of him and the arrow... I honestly don't even know where to start with this one... it’s just one of those things that gets under my skin more than I care to admit, especially when you see how people react to certain archetypes in film. There's this specific type of character—that gritty, unpolished, rural American archetype—that people love to pick apart or mock, but they completely miss the nuance of what makes that persona actually work on screen. It isn't just about being loud or unrefined; it's about a very specific kind of survivalist grit that feels deeply rooted in the American landscape, whether we like to admit it or not... and yet, whenever someone tries to portray it authentically, the critics lose their minds. It’s exhausting, really, watching the constant back-and-forth over characters who are just trying to exist in a world that wasn't built for them... Take a guess. Now, am I just missing something here, or was the director simply too blinded by his own obsession to actually notice...
Anthony Ortiz said:Yeah, sure, I get it—it’s stupid that they ended up like that, truly... but from a purely visual standpoint, the way I had it pictured in my head was more like... 🙏.
(Spoiler) That ending was exactly what I wanted to see. Honestly, isn't this much better than those nauseatingly happy, heart-wrenching endings that American screenwriters seem to be obsessed with lately? You know, like when... The Exorcist She’ll find a way to make it through...🙄
I’ve been sitting here staring at this video for the last twenty minutes, just trying to wrap my head around the sheer level of incompetence on display... it’s almost impressive how much they managed to miss the mark, isn't it? You watch this and you start to wonder if anyone involved actually sat down to think about the implications of what they were doing, or if they were just blindly following some half-baked script without a single thought for the reality of the situation... It feels like we're seeing a complete breakdown of basic logic, where the people in charge—whether it's the media or those supposed "experts" on screen—are more interested in performing for the camera than actually delivering something of substance... I mean, honestly, when you look at the way they handled that specific segment, it’s clear that the intention was there, but the execution was just fundamentally flawed from the jump... it reminds me of those old movies where everything goes wrong because the protagonist refuses to listen to common sense, though even those films usually had a bit more grace than this... There’s a certain kind of frustration that builds up when you realize that the effort being put in is being wasted on something so superficial, and it makes you want to just turn the whole thing off and walk away, yet you can't help but stay tuned just to see how much deeper the rabbit hole goes... it’s a cycle of disappointment that seems to be becoming the new standard for modern content, and frankly, it’s exhausting to witness...
It was with this particular movie that we first saw the rise of one of those handsome actors who possesses absolutely zero actual talent...
That’s exactly my point, though you also have to consider J. Lawrence and the previous installments, since they really set the stage for this movie... I can't exactly sit here and critique a film that hasn't even hit theaters yet, can I? There's obviously some sort of social commentary buried in there, but honestly, it all falls flat because the filmmaking itself is just mediocre. If a movie wants to deliver a powerful message, it actually needs to be well-made first... I can't speak for the books, but I'd assume they hold more weight than the films. It shouldn't be such an uphill battle to get it right.
A random comment from post #23 actually makes more sense than most. You really ought to include a desperate, vacant-eyed heroine played by Jennifer Lawrence to complete the picture. She’s such an overrated actress... out of all the films I've sat through, maybe Winter's Bone had some merit, but only because the role actually demanded that kind of grit. Still, I suppose I'll give this a watch since it has its own certain charm, though I seriously doubt it's anything close to high quality. Projects like this are forgotten within a couple of years, much like Lady Gaga (who seems to be fading from the spotlight already).
They didn't make their debut until 1995, which is probably why the numbers look a little underwhelming... It was the first film to feature this updated, modern style of tailoring.
Jamie Baker3 said:So, let me throw this out there... if you were looking to bankroll a series consisting of thirty episodes, with each one running about twenty minutes, how much capital would you actually need to sink into a project like that?...
I have to say, I was absolutely floored when I finally sat down to look at the production budgets for these massive animated blockbusters... It’s actually staggering how much capital they're throwing at these projects, with some of them easily burning through hundreds of millions of dollars just to get a single film onto the big screen...😲
I was just revisiting the data on Shrek the Third, and honestly, looking back at the numbers and the critical reception, it’s hard not to feel a certain level of frustration regarding how the franchise's momentum stalled out... You have this massive powerhouse of a series that had completely redefined the animated landscape, only to hit this specific wall where the storytelling felt significantly more rushed and less cohesive than its predecessors. When you look at the actual financials—it had a budget of $160 million and pulled in a box office of $798,958,162—the sheer scale of the commercial success is undeniable, yet the creative soul of the trilogy feels like it was spread much too thin to satisfy the fans who had grown up with the first two films... It’s one of those instances where the industry math says "home run," but anyone who actually sat through the runtime can feel the lack of narrative weight that made the earlier entries so special... It's just a shame when a studio leans so heavily into the spectacle and the brand recognition that the actual substance starts to fray at the edges... The production costs were sitting right at a budget $ 160 million... The total box office earnings reached a staggering $798,958,162...
The Outer Limits... I've mostly been sticking to the newer stuff lately, though I might sprinkle in some of the classics once in a while if they happen to be on the schedule. But yeah, of course... Twilight Zone... It had an influence on... The Outer Limits...Yeah, the concept and the themes are pretty much the same... It’s just that... Zone S. It’s entering a total horror zone... The Outer Limits... there's just something about that specific kind of dread, isn't there? It’s not like the flashy, high-budget jumpscares you see in modern blockbusters, but rather that creeping, existential unease that settles deep in your bones. It captures a certain type of cosmic isolation that most shows today seem too afraid to touch... it lingers. I’m leaning much more toward science fiction lately... honestly, I don't see the point in playing judge and deciding which one reigns supreme when both are perfectly good shows in their own right. It's enough for me just knowing they're both worth the watch... A Twin Peaks... I'm thinking about giving it another shot sometime... last time I tried, I actually ended up calling it quits right after the first episode of season two.
^Under the Dome is okay, I guess. It’s just your average series, nothing special... honestly, it feels like a story meant for just one season and then done. I haven't seen everything on that list, but some of them look solid. Twin Peaks is good, sure, but it didn't quite click for me... there was just too much atmosphere for my taste.
Sandra Brown10 said:Take Fargo, for instance; it has a complete, self-contained plot wrapped up in 10 episodes. True Detective does the same in 8. Even if both shows eventually get second seasons, they’ll likely pivot to entirely different stories and characters.
Karen Smith9 said:🤣 Based on what, exactly? Look, the film industry has been celebrating for 119 years now—that is a massive amount of treasure, damn... I mean, seriously, there are just so many incredible films out there waiting to be seen. I’m constantly digging, exploring, staying curious... and honestly, thank goodness for those amazing websites that make finding them so easy. For instance, there are still plenty of works by brilliant directors that I haven't even touched yet... why would I waste my precious time on an endless TV binge?
Then you have those conceptual series that only run for a few episodes. And if you're really a cinephile at heart, you could always dive into anthologies instead. Twilight Zone, The Outer Limits, The Ray Bradbury Theater, Tales from the Darkside...
