Filming on film and showing in the theater is wildly outdated and unecessary. At the same time we have reached so much bloat in digital content that even the act of sorting what is worth watching takes a lifetime and feels disappointing. It also feels like a guantlet to find anything for a rewatch to the point I give up and just do other things like write tepid takes on lemmy.

I never met another person who like Eye of the Beholder, I really enjoy it. https://m.imdb.com/title/tt0120662/

I like a lot of the campy horror movies that typically have 5 or below on IMDb. One of my favorites is Sorry About the Demon (2022) on Shudder/AMC+, which currently has a 4.9 rating.

Blade runner 2049 was a boring slideshow of backdrops with the “bwaaa” music overlaying it and occasionally plot happened. What plot is that? I don’t fucking remember.

Inception is one of the worst executions of an interesting idea. My imagination can imagine anything. Hollywood’s? Well I guess you imagined too hard so now there’s people with guns. Oh and this applies to everyone.

Ryan Reynolds finest role in film was Van Wilder. Deadpool is basically Van Wilder in a costume.

The Christopher Nolan Batman trilogy, started out great with it’s first movie and then it plumed straight down with the two next ones.

Last year’s DnD movie is the best film of the last ten or so years. It succeeded on every level, except in the box office.

My hypothesis is that Hasbro insisted on branding it “Dungeons & Dragons” to push the brand, and non-gamers figured it wasn’t for them. If they’d have made the main title “Honor among Thieves”, all the game nerds would have seen the DnD logo, and others wouldn’t have been turned off *. As it stands, people will find it and it’ll become the new “Starship Troopers” that bombed but shines forever in retrospect.

* See “Arcane”.

Dune is complete crap from the soundtrack to the script. The characters are as thick as cardboard and their interactions motivate nothing. It’s full of slow motion nonsense, flying metal dragonflies and Zimmer’s horns. These days filmmakers are convinced visuals make storytelling. They don’t. Dialogue does and here there’s not a single line I remember.

Cloud Atlas was good if you paid attention, didn’t notice the face cgi in theaters.

Indiana Jones 4 is a great entry of the series. It’s just as slapstick and ridiculous fun as the rest of the series (I didn’t enjoy the 5th one as much though).

And yea that is an unpopular opinion, can’t tell you how many have disagreed with me as soon as I say that, both in real life and online.

The critic rating is better than the audience rating. I’ve never seen a film with a high critic rating that didn’t have something worthwhile about it. But I’ve seen a lot of audience hits that were garbage.

Terminator is better than Terminator 2, and as cool as it is Terminator 2 should never have been made (or should have a different script).

I know the mob is raising the pitchfork, but hear me out, there are two main ways time travel can solve the grandparent paradox, these are Singular Timeline (i.e. something will prevent you from killing your grandfather) or Multiple Timeline (you kill him but in doing so you created an alternate timeline). Terminator 2 is clearly a MT model, because they delay the rise of Skynet, but Terminator is a ST movie. The way you can understand it’s an ST is because the cause-consequences form a perfect cycle (which couldn’t happen on an MT story), i.e. Reese goes back to save Sarah -> Reese impregnates Sarah and teaches her how to defend herself from Terminators and avoid Skynet -> Sarah gives birth to and teaches John -> John uses the knowledge to start a resistance -> The resistance is so strong that Skynet sends a Terminator back in time to kill Sarah -> Reese goes back to save Sarah…

The awesome thing about Terminator is how you only realise this at the end of the Movie, that nothing they did mattered, because that’s what happened before, the timeline is fixed, humanity will suffer but they’ll win eventually.

If Terminator was a MT then the cycle breaks, i.e. there needs to be a beginning, a first time around when the original timeline didn’t had any time travelers. How did that timeline looked like? John couldn’t exist, which means that sending a Terminator back in time to kill Sarah was not possible, Reese couldn’t have gone back without the Terminator technology, which they wouldn’t have unless the resistance was winning, and if they are winning without John, the Terminator must have gone back to kill someone else and when Reese went back he accidentally found Sarah, impregnated her and coincidentally made a better commander for the resistance which accidentally and created a perfect loop so that next time he would be sent back and meet Sarah because she was the target (what are the odds of that). Then why is the movie not about this? Why is the movie about the Nth loop after the timeline was changed? The reason is that Terminator was thought as a ST movie, but when they wanted to write a sequel they for some reason decided to allow changes in the timeline which broke the first movie.

That “The Man from Earth (2007)” is the best movies there is. I recommend it to people all the time but no one seems to realise how profoundly interesting it is. And it doesn’t need any scenery or special effects. It’s literally just conversation and dramatic music, tuned to perfectly tell a story that touches on many philosophical questions. I just love that film.

In Alien 3, not only was it a good thing that Hicks and Newt died in the beginning, but that it was absolutely necessary for the film to thematically fit the trilogy.