Asking for a friend so I don't have all the details, but if anyone has any ideas, that'd be awesome. Basically, she’s got some vaginal bleeding—not huge, but enough to notice. No pain or anything else going on. It's definitely not her period, just to be clear 😁, but it's still weird. They had sex a few days before it started, though I'm not sure if that's actually why... She says the blood looks bright red and clean. Obviously, she'll hit up a gynecologist ASAP, but she can't get an appointment right this second. Anyone have a clue what could be causing this? thanks...
William Morris2 said:The source... A movie show that used to air on Thursdays or Fridays from 6:30 to 7 on the second channel. I think it was called "Perfect World"...
man, they don't have a clue what they're talking about. They just read some rumor on some sketchy website where some fat geek pooped himself and suddenly—bam—it's news, it's a fact! you gotta watch who you trust... I say stick to Variety or Hollywood Reporter.😁
The first mention of Alien vs. Predator was actually in Dark Horse Comics, if I remember right... probably back in the late 80s or early 90s. So, the games definitely didn't start this thing. From what I've heard about the movie, it doesn't look like the script is based on the comics or the games at all. And honestly, I wouldn't get my hopes up just because of Paul Anderson. Out of his last five movies, most were just mediocre, and I’d put Soldier right up there with the absolute worst films ever made. But hey, maybe someone will be foolish enough to expect better 😁
It's the same old bullshit Fincher keeps spouting in interviews: "I make a film, then I make a movie, then a film, then a movie. One for me, one for the audience." Obviously, he thinks he's talking about Se7en and Fight Club... which basically means his next project better be fucking legendary. 😁 When is he actually gonna get Rendezvous with Rama moving?
Michelle Gonzalez said:The Matrix concept is pretty cool. but The Matrix Revolutions is just way too cheesy...
man, you guys gotta watch "Equilibrium"
Auuu, are you for real? Equilibrium? I mean, Christian Bale is great, but that movie can't even come close to holding its own against the whole first movie. The other two are basically a different genre anyway. 😁
Also, what you called cheesy, I thought wasn't big enough. If they're gonna go on a rampage through the city, they might as well tear down a few hundred skyscrapers while they're at it...
Noah Murphy46 said:Like, American cinematography could've actually used that money over the next decade to churn out profitable movies while still dropping at least one absolute masterpiece on the world every single year.
Just correcting some wrong info here. An average movie in the States runs about $500k to $750k. If they shot a few a year, you'd be looking at $15-20 million over ten years. The total budget for Lost in translation was $4 million, and Japan isn't exactly cheap for production. (Btw, you can tell in the movie that Lost in translation is low-budget by American standards, but it doesn't really bother anyone)
Regarding Solaris Tarkovsky (haven't seen Soderbergh's yet)... After a decent enough prologue (which is incredibly thin and hollow considering how long it drags), the movie just falls off a cliff. And it stays there until the credits roll. The ideas are either way too on-the-nose—most of the time—or they're so abstract you wonder if the director even knew what he was trying to say... It’s just one scene after another with zero purpose, just padding out stuff that was already established at the start. The whole thing is basically just a house made of plaster with almost no actual bricks underneath. Honestly, Tarkovsky the director isn't the problem here—he’s got that Kubrick-esque style—it’s Tarkovsky the screenwriter. It sucks because even those gorgeous shots get exhausting when there's no real reason for them to be there. Such a shame, especially since the ending actually throws out some potentially cool ideas... but by then it's too late. The previous 150 minutes didn't do anything to build up to it. I have a feeling Soderbergh's might be (slightly) better.
Told you so. 😛 I love this movie too, honestly prefer it over Requiem just because it’s so straightforward and doesn't try too hard. It's kind of all over the place until the end, but then that finale hits you with a totally different perspective on everything... and man, what a perspective. 🙂 Total must-see for any true believers, conspiracy theorists, or anyone who feels like one. 😁
Who would've thought he'd actually make it to an American theater. Or a cinema, whatever. 😁 I'm not gonna repeat everything already said, since a lot of what Michelle Gonzalez mentioned lines up with my own take, but my final score is lower—kind of just mediocre. Maybe because a huge chunk of that creativity comes from the style itself rather than the actual plot or, God forbid, emotional manipulation. The script is thin, and unlike previous Paul Thomas Anderson films, it doesn't really give much to the "average viewer." From a directing/cinematography standpoint, Punch-Drunk Love is brilliant, definitely a movie you can learn a lot from, but for a fulfilling 90-120 minutes in a theater, I’d honestly recommend Boogie Nights or even some better mainstream rom-com like Notting Hill. (flame on😁) At least it isn't pretentious like Magnolia...
One more thing, I ADMIRE how Paul Thomas Anderson manages to build tension in a scene consisting of the most basic "hey, what's up? -nothing" conversation. I know the music plays a massive role, but there's something else there I haven't quite figured out yet. He did the same thing in Magnolia, creating that artificial tension for about a third of the movie, but his scenes there were usually dynamic, both in framing and movement... here, people just STAND there and talk, yet you still feel the tension. Even if the movie was shit, it would be worth watching just for this.
Why can't we just separate someone's worldview from their actual work? Look, Triumph of the Will is a solid documentary, regardless of the subject matter. And Olympia doesn't even have a direct link to Nazism... So, go ahead and trash the woman for being a Nazi sympathizer (even if she did repent later), but there's zero reason to attack her films or her skills as a director. That would be just like trashing Wagner's works just because he leaned into antisemitic ideas... yeah, I know nobody was actually bashing the movies, just trying to get ahead of it. 😁😁😁
Man, if only it were just 18-$7.25. If you ignore those cheap Monday deals at the movie theater, tickets are already running $22-$28, and I bet once they open that new multiplex in downtown Chicago, they’ll jump to $30. Seriously, at this rate, we’re basically paying the same as an average American movie ticket. 😢
I still love trailers too (not on YouTube though), but lately, there are more TV commercials than actual trailers. Sucks... 😢
Honestly, wouldn't it be better to ask, "What movies did you NOT forget the second you walked out of the theater?"
With all this Hollywood overproduction going on, finding a decent flick in theaters these days is a struggle.
I mean, as much as I can't stand Tiger Woods and The Bad Dragons (calling them bad is being generous), I’ll never forget them... if only because of the weirdest use of flashbacks I've ever seen in a movie. 😁
That number two thing sounds like something straight out of Space Quest... no clue about 1 or 3 though.
My turn now? 😁 Just something chill...
"I had an experience. I can't prove it. I can't even explain it. But everything that I know as a human being, everything that I am, tells me that it was real. I was given something wonderful, something that changed me forever. A vision of the universe that tells us, undeniably, how tiny, and insignificant and how rare and precious we all are. A vision that tells us that we belong to something that is greater than ourselves, that we are not, that none of us, are alone."
Fine, if a movie makes you laugh, I can get behind that... but being blown away by a few "deep, spiritual" lines??? We're talking about Bruce Almighty here, for God's sake—just some mass-produced Hollywood junk straight off an assembly line. How does something like that even pass for profound? Even Paulo Coelho seems wise compared to those few universal clichés that Hollywood loves to obsess over. (though he's not much smarter than 😁) As for that New Age stuff, I gotta disagree with you there. We've been putting up with that crap in movies for at least a decade or two now... Don't go thinking I hate everything, though. I'd probably give this one a four out of ten. 😁
Personally, I’m leaning towards the Kaufman version—it hits way better than the "original" for me. While watching, I kept getting this vibe that the director was dancing right on the edge between pure parody and legit horror. Some shots look almost like a documentary just so the next scene can hit you with that over-the-top, cheap jump scare style. Keep an eye out for that one shot of the dog (hehe)... honestly, even by today's standards, those visual effects hold up. But man, the EYES... they're the weirdest part. 😁if you've seen it, you know exactly what I'm talking about hehe
man, now I’m actually kinda bummed I missed the movie... don't mind me, just being a total spammer here. but hey, when you gotta do it, you gotta do it. 😁 (op. aut. - this was basically a "Hello & Welcome" moment)
driftingowl27 said:Interesting you brought that up. 🙂 I remember this one directing book from a university in Chicago that goes deep into using the "Dutch angle" (honestly, I haven't read much else on it). It’s something you rarely see used properly in movies, but in this scene, they executed it so textbook and effectively that it was just insane. Props to Avary 🙂
can you actually try to remember what that book said exactly? 🙂 the whole "slanted shot" thing doesn't really click with what we're watching in this scene. how does that theory even work? or at least tell me the English term if you know it, so I can look it up online myself...
Ambivalence is always a good thing. You’ve got a point there, Susan Wright12. But honestly, with that touch of fantasy thrown in, the movie works as a pretty decent satire. I didn't even realize he was just daydreaming until like the last third of the film. hmm.. that song choice in the scene though.....zzz... brain is fried. Someone else will probably show up tomorrow with the actual answer. 😳
Man, that 'trip across the States' scene drags way too long. If Avary had just cut out all that filler and kept only the parts that actually show who this guy is, we wouldn't be sitting there overthinking the subtext while it's happening (I mean, it was cool at first, totally sucked me into the chaos haha)... then that final shot of the plane with the 'Victor' title would've hit like a total 'wow' moment. Instead, you figure out what the poet is trying to say halfway through and you're just waiting for him to finally say it.
other good/memorable bits: those Lauren/Sean Bateman POV shots—though they could've hidden the intention better so you wouldn't go 'oh, okay, they're gonna meet around that corner'
the suicide. Not just because it's technically solid, but because it tricks you into thinking you're about to see some hot boobs, playing with the character's intent (we don't even see them, but whatever, the details are what matter here) just to pull a massive 'what the fuck?' move once you realize what you actually witnessed. Also, props for keeping the camera on her face in close-up during the whole process... at the end of the day, that's the only thing that matters, we all know what blood looks like.
uh, uh, uh, one more thing (god knows why this scene hits so hard 😁) and from a screenwriting perspective, the suicide is handled well—basically backwards. You see the aftermath first, and then the reasons, which then ripples through the rest of the plot and shifts Lauren's motivation.
That hospital stuff with the crazy doctor... gotta admit, I didn't get it. Unless there wasn't supposed to be anything to get... regardless, I was just grinning the whole time watching it—super bizarre, felt like something Will Burroughs would write. 😁
The whole flashback gimmick was a bit dumb, mostly because they overused it at the start (not that it happens constantly, just that the shots linger too long) that by the middle and end, the whole concept loses its punch.
Bottom line, the movie is just pure entertainment. The script feels a bit 'seen it before' and the ending point is too heavy-handed and unbelievable given the characters we've been following.
Anyway, since I'm writing my first massive post, might as well mention American Psycho. 😁 Christian Bale was decent. Or rather, he played it exactly how the movie needed. Some might call it a matter of taste, but what else is there to debate? Let's leave it at that. 🙂 The tone shifts from satire to straight-up fantasy as the madness ramps up anyway.