#it merits that 10/10 on imdb

[colorful-white-ideas]

The crow 2024. (No spoilers)

I want to start off by saying.

The reviews are coming with a lot of mixed feelings with a lot of nostalgia and the eternal debate of " this is not like the '94 movie"

As far as I saw with the rating in IMDb , the reception is a lot better in Europe than in the US. That's interesting.

Now onto my opinion. This is not like the 94 movie, the haters are absolutely right with that. The only references you see are from the og comic. The story ? Completely new, not like the comic even. And for me that was a good choice.

It all happens in a city you don't get to recognize, it is like an alternate universe. Where supernatural things happen.

The love story is good but I honestly wanted more , contrary to what most people have been complaining about , their romance was too quick , intense , passionate ... I'm more of the slow burning type. Still , that worked. I felt the chemistry , the butterflies when they were together.

The villain is ... interesting , it needed more development to fully understand his motives and the supernatural things around him. But still that works if you are not a picky person like me.

The action is exactly like the comic , gory , not subtle at all. I love it. It was also well balanced... Most of it happens by the end of the movie.

The acting was good, Bill did a great job , FKA surprised me greatly although she has some things to work on .

I recommend people to go and see it with the main idea : THIS NOT Eric Draven , This is not a copy paste adaptation of the comic.

I can see how the director used the comic to set the mood , build the character of this new Eric and also the references to the comic are not exactly frame by frame but mostly the interpretation of what he read in the comic.

- ⬇️possible spoiler ⬇️- ( it's not really a spoiler but my take on the references to the comic I caught in the movie )

Like the self harm subject in the movie. Which is a interpretation of :

Same thing with the horse scene

Which is on the movie almost identically but it works as a way to introduce us to the character, the fears and vulnerability of Eric.

For me a 7/10.

I'll watch it again in a few days.

Beware of all the negativity out there. Watch this yourself and form your own opinion.

This movie does not compete in any way with The crow '94 movie. They both coexist in their own merit.

[thisgardenofromance]

I connected the entirety of OHSHC (anime dub) to the calendar :)

This took me too long <3

Alrighty! So what I'm gonna do first is show the calendar charts for when/if people come back to look at them and already understand what the mean, then I'm gonna specify what I mean by each day exactly by telling you the first scene of each day with time-codes under the cut (skipping the full day episodes because... duh), and then I'm gonna explain why (with sources)... It'll make sense if you read the whole post I promise.

So. On the calendar, the days will be listed as episode number and day number (E#:D#). These will be color-coded. Pink means that day definitely is that specific calendar date based on the information I have. Purple means we have some wiggle room. Green are national holidays (found on questionjapan.com and nippon.com).

E1:D1 - Haruhi looks into the fourth library and complains (1:20)

E1:D2 - Haruhi finds out her bag has been thrown in the fountain (17:05)

E2:D1 - Haruhi realizes she's late for the club (1:20)

E2:D2 - Kazugazaki teaches Haruhi to dance (8:30)

E2:D3 - Tamaki begins the Host party (12:20)

E3:D1 - The hosts hold a cherry blossom reception (1:20)

E3:D2 - Tamaki daydreams about a "feminized" Haruhi (7:10)

E3:D3 - First year students head down to their physical exams (11:10)

E4:D1 - The host club holds its "teary men" session (3:05)

E4:D2 - Tamaki discusses the merits of a lady manager (9:50)

E4:D3 - The hosts film the basketball scene of their movie (13:30)

E4:D4 - The girls fawn over the film to the host club (20:30)

E5:D1 - The twins play the "which one is Hikaru" game (2:10)

E5:D2 - The twins greet Haruhi in class (11:45)

E5:D3 - The twins play the "which one is Hikaru" game with switched hair colors (20:45)

E6:D1 - Shiro tells his music club teacher that he's quitting (1:20)

E6:D2 - Shiro watches Tamaki host veerrry closely (3:35)

E6:D3 - Honey and Haruhi sneak into the elementary school in disguise (11:55)

E6:D4 - Hina finds Shiro's piano recital (19:20)

E6:D5 - Shiro hosts in the club (21:10)

E8:D1 - The twins say the host club is going to the beach (1:20)

E8:D2 - The twins ask why they went to Okinawa (2:50)

E8:D3 - The hosts leave Okinawa (21:30)

E9:D1 - The Zuka club twirl their way into the gates for some reason (1:20)

E9:D2 - The Zuka club preform on stage (16:50)

E11:D1 - Kirimi walks through Ouran Academy's grounds in search of her brother (1:20)

E11:D2 - Nekozawa gives his oddly nonplatonic speech to Kuma-chan (12:00)

E11:D3 - The host club muse over Nekozawa's success/failure (20:45)

E12:D1 - The hosts spill tea on Usa-chan (1:20)

E12:D2 - Girls fawn over how cute Honey is despite his anguish (9:45)

E12:D3 - Honey paces the clubroom while everyone else watches warily (15:30)

E12:D4 - Renge explains a happy ending (20:00)

E14:D1 - The newspaper club discusses their dropping numbers (1:20)

E14:D2 - The newspaper club finds the host club playing games (13:30)

E15:D1 - Tamaki's phone call wakes the twins up (1:20)

E15:D2 - Kaoru wakes up on the floor (19:00)

E16:D1 - Haruhi and Arai recognize each other (1:20)

E16:D2 - Haruhi and Hikaru meet up for their date (10:00)

E16:D3 - Hikaru accepts Arai's watermelon (21:15)

E21:D1 - Kaoru thinks about his pumpkin carriage metaphor while tapping him pumpkin pencil against his mouth as one does (1:20)

E21:D2 - The twins tell the class rep the story of the clock tower witch (11:55)

E21:D3 - Haruhi and the twins look at the newspaper article about class 1A (20:40)

E22:D1 - Kasanoda's men wish him good morning (1:20)

E22:D2 - Tetsuya wonders if Kasanoda brought his umbrella with him to school (11:50)

E23:D1 - Kasanoda walks in on Haruhi changing (1:20)

E23:D2 - Kasanoda walks in during club hours and requests Haruhi (7:25)

Oh boy we made it to how you can fact check me!!! This is gonna be an entire brain-dump because I am dead

E1 - Aired 4/4/2006 (info found on imdb). Japanese school generally starts on Monday the second week of April (info found in an article from questionjapan.com), which was 4/3/2006, and various comments seem like it's early but not the first day, so we're setting the first day as the first airing to have a starting point!

E2 - It's still "early spring", the cherry blossoms are only buds, there's a slight sense of normalcy, the club has definitely been open for at least a week thanks to Kanako's shenanigans, and the party takes place in "one week", so the first day would have to be late in the week, likely the week of 4/10. Thanks to the fact that Haruhi's practice session with Kanako is directly the next day, the first one would have had to be Thursday, and the second would be Friday. The party could conceivably be the next Friday or Saturday, but I would really really hope it's Friday because Suzushima waits for Haruhi in his school uniform. Also Suzushima is going to England "next month" (May) which could technically be literally any day in the month...

E3 - So the cherry blossoms were blooming on the night of the party last episode, and they're still blooming for the flower-viewing reception. According to this article on japan-guide.com, after the cherry blossoms start legitimately blooming, you've got about a week. We're gonna assume the earlier the better considering the state they're in! On the day of the flower-viewing reception, physical exams are "the day after tomorrow". When they are back in the music room, Haruhi says "sorry I'm late guys" which means she wasn't with them, ergo it's a new day.

E4 - Renge arrives on the first day, crashes the club, and pronounces herself lady manager. She's transferring into class 1A "tomorrow" (which means two week days back-to-back), and then later she arrives to the club with cookies in her school uniform, so I assume that's the day she officially transferred. Renge has a crew flown in from LA to film the host club movie, which she doesn't have the idea for until she starts working on the hosts' characters. I used travelmath.com to calculate the flight time between Tokyo (as a major city in Japan) and LA, which came out to about a 12-hour flight, so we need a buffer day at least. The movie seems to be filmed on club time, so that's a week day, and then "several days later" the episode concludes, which could literally be anywhere between 4 and 9 days in colloquial terms.

E5 - I think it's pretty safe to say this takes place over three consecutive days just on how the episode is presented (one day fight and make-up). This definitely has to happen after the conclusion of the last episode thanks to Renge.

E6 - Ok ok ok ok ok so: most of the shenanigans have to take place over three days. Shiro greets the club on a costumed club day, he observes them on a non-costumed club day, and he goes back to the club... which could conceivably be on the same day as the observation, except that the club appears to have just opened and the teacher gave the kids a new piece for the day. On that third day, Hina is supposed to move to Germany at the end of the week, so the recital is probably that Friday to give Shiro more time to practice. And now... the incident. There was a date on that invitation that we as the audience get to read. I got so excited!! A concrete date I could place this one on!! Except it's September 3rd fucking September 3rd why does is say September 3rd fuck you bones what the fuck is this shit

Anyway Shiro hosts "10 days later". Interestingly, not for the first time thanks to the comment "I thought [Tamaki] would make it through without exploding this time".

E7 - School day. Post the conclusion of the last episode because Honey "felt threatened last episode" and before the next because that one hinges on the conclusion of this one, but otherwise there's absolutely nothing tying this one down.

E8 - Sometime after episode 7 they decide to go to the beach, then presumably the next weekend they spend one night in Okinawa. Since this ends up falling on the week of the twins' birthdays, I absolutely refuse to believe any of these days happen on June 9th because... come on. Do you think the twins would ever keep their mouths shut about their birthday???

E9 - This starts no later than Thursday due to the fact that the cultural expo lasts two days back-to-back (explicitly labeled). Of course, this is assuming Ouran has a five-day week, as many things on the calendar do, thanks to that same article from questionjapan.com I mentioned earlier.

E10 - It takes place over one day on a Sunday, thanks to Haruhi rejoicing that "there's no better time to hit the supermarket than a Sunday morning"

E11 - Kirimi shows up, the practice in the science room happens two days later because Haruhi says "she's made me read about fifty volumes of shojo manga over the last three days" (Kirimi's arrival, the day before, the day she says that). "Several days later" the hosts see Nekozawa hiding again.

E12 - Genuinely what the fuck why is Honey's toothache only three days long they definitely take longer than that sir??? Anyway it's explicitly in the title so three days it is! The bunny incident definitely happens the same day as the discovery of Honey's toothache (referenced as "earlier").

E13 - I don't know man the actual awake day happens for like a minute and a half. Week day??? If the entire episode was just a nebulous dream I probably wouldn't have even counted it on the timeline lol.

E14 - First of all, the newspaper club's story on the host club is supposed to be the very last story of the semester, so it's gotta be real close to the start of summer vacation. The first day is near the end of the week ("how many copies did we sell this week"), and the second day is the very next one ("tomorrow").

E15 - Explicitly stated by the twins, it starts three days into summer vacation, or 7/23/2006!! Japan's summer vacation starts on the 20th (found traveltips.usatoday.com and that same questionjapan.com article). Obviously, when Kaoru wakes up on the floor would be the very next day, or 7/24/2006.

E16 - Starts on the same day as the last episode (7/24/2006), Haruhi's date is "tomorrow" (7/25/2006), and the conclusion would be "the next day".

E17 - TAMAKI'S EXPO FLYER SAYS 8/27-8/31!!!! AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA THIS IS THE KIND OF SHIT I WANTED FROM HINA'S STUPID INVATATION THANK YOU ANIMATORS FOR THIS CRUMB OF EASE. It's also the last day of summer vacation which would be the week of the 31st!! I can't guarantee which day of the week it would be though, because I would assume school starts up again on Monday, but I could be wrong? It doesn't make any fuckin sense to start school again on a Friday that year but hey man I don't make the rules.

E18 - Who even fuckin knows man. One school day, but there's literally weeks of unused space in the time slot this could fit so like close your eyes and pick a date :')

E19 - Singular day on the weekend. If I had to guess, it would be Sunday (just because Haruhi was planning to go to the supermarket), but no promises. Probably September.

E20 - I didn't include it on the calendar because it literally does not matter. The entire episode is a flashback, there's not a singular moment that takes place at the time of the rest of the anime <3

E21 - Starts the week before Halloween (10/23/2006). Final exams (2-3 days according to this Q&A that I picked and chose from) are almost happening, because clubs generally aren't in session during exam days. Haruhi and the twins skip on the club to help 1A plan, which means it's the same day. The tournament is explicitly stated to happen on Halloween night. The ending is... sometime soon after that?

E22 - Spread over two days: like Renge in the fourth episode, Kasanoda shows up while a costumed club day is in session, but sticks around after that. They're one after the other ("yesterday").

E23 - This obviously starts on the same day as the end of the last episode. Kasanoda refuses to eat dinner "again", but I can't guarantee that this is connected to Haruhi? I don't know, the language around her is all muddled, dude. It seems like it was originally intended to be on the exact same day as the start of the episode, because when Tetsuya talks about how he saw Kasanoda and Haruhi together, the sub says "today" (the scene wasn't in the manga so I couldn't check that :/ ), but the dub says "all the time". For why. Anyway, it seems like he visits as a guest the very next day but I don't have a direct quote for that one. This episode's timeframe is probably the most mindfucky out of the entire show T - T

Then in the conclusion it seems like it was supposed to be the same day but I can't guarantee it and also the roses are in full bloom in fucking November???? Whyyyyyyyyyyyyyy. Literally just put these episodes before the Halloween one literally just put them in September/early October literally all you had to do was air these episodes before Halloween and not reference the pumpkin carriage metaphor I fucking know you guys could do it you rearranged a whole bunch of other shit from the manga timeline why would you do this to me fuck you fuck you fuck youuuu

Also technically according to this article the roses could be blooming if they were in the very very very south of Japan but also that would have literally meant that the cherry blossoms would have been in full bloom in mid-March <3

E24 - Literally it's cold enough for falling leaves and kotatsu tables the very next episode FUCk you bones anyway it's one school day

E25 - The super super fun thing about this is that I could have placed the cultural festival on the weekend it's SUPPOSED to be on (gainjinpot.com and questionjapan.com) if literally just the Kasanoda episodes had come out before the Halloween episode <3 I am a ball of pure fury. Anyway, it starts the morning of and continues to sunset. We're gonna assume its Friday based on the next episode.

E26 - So this is day two of the cultural festival, or the "main fair". Since the festival is generally a one-day event held on Saturdays and this one is supposed to be the main one, we're gonna put this one on Saturday.

OH MY GOD I FUCKIN DID IT!!!!!!!

[see-fee]

What are you thoughts on Apple TVs Foundation version?

Ah. I never wanted to talk about that, but I guess my thoughts on the subject are as worth putting down as any, so here goes.

Boring, dumb, cringeworthy, badly written by hacks.

Bad showrunner/writers, bad cast (one or two exceptions). Bad everything except the visuals. I couldn’t be bothered to continue past the second or third episode, where I Raych-quit from the sheer stupidity.

Not because it strayed from Asimov’s work (though it can hardly be called an adaptation when it so flagrantly disregards its source material). I can assess and enjoy adaptations on their own merits. The show is simply not entertaining—a cardinal sin for entertainment. Things happened one after another and I just didn’t care. I wanted to, but I didn’t.

It wasn’t even enjoyable in a greasy burger/guilty pleasure way (e.g. Whedon’s Firefly or early JJ Abrams like Fringe). I’ve gotten far more discerning with age/maturity but I do still watch dumb popcorn fare (including the I, Robot summer blockbuster). And this show wasn’t that for me. Because it was sold as more than that, in a world where shows like Andor exist.

Because it pretends to be smart when it clearly isn’t, when its incompetent writers have never written anything of value in their lives. Very stupid people are behind it: Goyer and Friedman. Showrunner and writer David Goyer is a talentless hack whose own writing/producing portfolio is riddled with trashy bottom-of-the-barrel superhero mediocrity (rated as low as 3/10, 4/10, 5/10 on IMDb, and the way ratings work is that there are false positives but no false negatives), who somehow weaseled his way into successful franchises where other writers did the heavy lifting. Its other writer Josh Friedman has nothing remotely decent under his belt, either. These cheap hacks have obviously never read or understood their source material beyond a perfunctory skim (and if you believe anything they spew, I've got a waterfront property in Oklahoma to sell you. Two words: publicity & marketing.) The proof is in the pudding—Goyer and Friedman lack the brains to handle the material, let alone deviate from it.

I didn’t finish the season because I don’t think it gets better. The core problems I noted aren't going anywhere, and plenty of sensible people with good taste have shared the issues they have with it, and much of that is in line with my own experience or expectations of quality.

Season 2 reeks of jumping the shark. I’ve seen the trailer and laughed at its ridiculousness. It was a flurry of “we have Star Wars at home” scenes and also for some bizarre reason there were dragons? Or something? They’re not even pretending to be Asimov’s story any more—which is probably better for everyone involved.

Change My View: I sometimes wonder if I ought to give it another go, though I don’t have Apple TV anymore which adds to the friction. If anybody mature (I'm a full decade past my meme years) with decent taste (more modernist than postmodern internet shitposter, more objective than rabid fanatical addict) wants to tell me how this show has some merit despite its flaws and is worth my time, please do. I’m all ears.

Criticism on writing + cast below 👇

Characters, dialogue, plot are badly written/designed.

They do stupid things for stupid reasons (mostly: the plot requires it). Reciting prime numbers beCaUsE mAtH. (Cube did it better.)

That early swimming pool sex scene—whereas it was plausible for the characters in Game of Thrones or the Expanse, here in the hands of dumb writers it’s a girl thirsting over a guy she just met because The Plot Requires It, so that this guy can randomly stab Seldon later in a truly idiotic turn.

Machiavellian characters like Salvor Hardin get downgraded into some basic military chad guarding the Ethereum logo, for some pathetically trite Chosen One storyline and a lame what’s-in-the-vault mystery with a hilariously awful payoff. (I laughed so hard when I found out what it was. That you-know-who was literally in the vault.)

The two decent cast members are surrounded by a pack of Z-rate bargain bin actors whose previous credits hover in the 2/10–5/10 range.

Lee Pace is recycling his Joe MacMillan from Halt and Catch Fire but with a chest-baring wardrobe, since he’s the designated eye candy. Jared Harris is phoning it in, also recycling the same role he’s cornered a niche on: whistleblower-guy-who-gets-ignored-then-dies, a la Chernobyl and The Terror.

Laura Birn is doing a passable job with what she’s given to work with, but, in an utterly inexplicable design choice, the poor woman must stand in an asinine arms-akimbo pose all the damned time because we need to remember iT’s a rObOt. Who can cry and have sex but not stand normally. Or something. (Humans did it better.)

Terrence Mann was a forgettable snooze-fest—so was Lou Llobell.

Leah Harvey and the rest I saw were laughably awful.

[stupidspidey]

AJR - Living Room

if you told me in 2013 that this was the absolute pinnacle of music and that it would get no better than this, chances are i would’ve told you “that’s nice, leave me alone creep” and went to go kick the shit out of my brother at Mario on the DS. Now if you told me now that these guys ended up being my favourite band, i’d probably give you the same response but i’d go play a Spider-Man game instead. Regardless, Living Room by AJR is just… not good, by any sense of the word realistically, don’t get me wrong it’s got its merits but holy fuck, it’s really hard to listen to. Now, i don’t want to be too unfair about this, believe it or not sitting here for a good 5 minute read yelling about how bad something is is REALLY undesirable in a review, and it’s even more undesirable since my girlfriend refuses to sleep with me because of it. (jk rose ily) So, i’m gonna take their advice from one of their next albums that came after this and well, skip to The Good Part, which unfortunately should only take me like, 20 lines, maximum, before i start either repeating myself or talking about how a line in “The World is a Marble Heart” is was reused as a backing vocal in “I Won’t” like, 10 years later.

The Good

My GOD, do these guys know how to write a decent line or few. Sure there’s a few “Thirsty, Thirsty, Thursdays!” in there but, every one of those is definitely made up for by the honestly-adorable Infinity or the surprisingly-hopeful My Calling, each lyric will either strike you as cheesy in a really cute way, or inspiring in a really dumb way, the album could honestly be mistaken as written about someone with how directed and loving each line feels from the start to the end and briefly sidestepping around at least 49.2% of each song. Big White Bed especially, but as i wrote that down all i could think to describe the song was “I love you… BITCH. I ain’t ever gonna stop loving you… BITCH.” from a vine like 10-or-so years ago. So, really, pretty appropriate for their timing on the albums release realistically. A really specific praise for the album but, i think the art itself is really pretty? something about it feels so real. Like, if you made an album with two of your brothers and basically pro-tools, a mic and a big idea (yeah, that’s a quote from one of the songs, Big Idea.) would you not just make the album art you all sat on the comfy family sofa in the middle of butt-fuck nowhere with your band name splattered on the wall in a nice deep red? I know i would if i could fit all 5 of my brothers onto one tiny-ass couch. Now unfortunately i can only realistically think of these two points for the positive part but, i will say this: Every track on this album, has thought behind it. It sometimes comes across as them just lobbing the entire processing power of a Windows 7 computer running pro-tools at you, but if you listen to the audio-commentary edition of the album (because, for some reason they made that?) it really is easy to tell the three of them had passion for the thing, especially seen in Jack’s (the J in AJR) enthusiasm about finally making it out of slummin’ it in the streets while his two way-fucking-taller brothers tap danced and sang, outside of his appearance in Pink Panther 2 and Sesame Street of course. (seriously, i’m deadass, look it up, he even has an iMDB page.) Now, unfortunately, on that point, i can’t realistically stay on the positives forever on this without ending up on some TikTok calling me a brainrotted liberal or some slur that hasn’t been unsealed since some crusty fucking 4channer woke up from his food comatose over a reddit girl with fat tits so, with that point.

The Bad

Ok right so, you know how i mentioned this was considered some sort of principle of music back then in 2013? Well guess what, motherfucker. I wasn’t even joking, the way people view Bruno Mars now is the way people viewed Living Room in 2013, though it was hard not to when their brain cells rubbed together and they decided the best way to promote their album was to tag every artist under the sun on gods green-motherfucking-earth and tell them to listen to it. Even then, the only one who listened really was Sia, and realistically what the fuck have you actually seen Sia do in the past like 5 years? This is a real question seriously please for the love of GOD tell me i have no idea past *Chandelier*. Anyway, enough of throwing Sia some strays (i’m sorry ma’am i’m sure there’s a grammy somewhere i didn’t bother googling), back onto Twenty-One Pilo— Coldplay— I mean, AJR. The album had passion behind it, don’t get me wrong here, but it is completely misplaced. The only way i can describe this is that, if this was the latest release around the time of E.T. for the Atari 2600? Music probably wouldn’t have survived past that either. Though realistically it was probably one of the better albums of that era since by then every other song was the most bassy-pile of “please dance to this” you’d ever seen, but i’m sure there’s someone still out there hitting the dab to fuckin’ The World is a Marble Heart, surely. The album itself had some pretty… interesting, approaches, but really you can only get around 30 seconds into the first song before that fucker starts yodelling? why the fuck is he yodelling? Regardless, no matter how many times you make a sequel to Turning Out or how many times you make some good shit like The DJ is Crying for Help, to those guys at TikTok? you’ll allwwaayyss be the guys who made Thirsty. You could get a treaty and a vulcan salute from half of space, but all those motherfuckers will still only know you for Thirsty. Personally? i’d be so fucking mad. I mean, you look to your left and Kanye has just dropped Yeezus, and what do you have to compete against that? a new national holiday celebrated exclusively by kids who get bullied at school, Thirsty Thursday, if i were them i wouldn’t have even made it to The Click without some sort of apology statement.

The Ending

Now, if i’m being completely real here. I can’t entirely slander Living Room, it’s got ideas, it’s got (marble) heart, and most importantly… It let Neotheater exist so… some good out of the bad right? Sure, for anyone else, unless you’re subconsciously subscribed to every single opinion on r/Music like some sort of absorption sponge. And just… in future, for anyone reading this, Include yodelling in your song and i will fucking SLICE you, not for poor mixing choices, not even for poor taste, but for reminding me that i sat here for an hour, and reviewed an album. Worst part? one out of five baby, i’m not down until i hear the fat lady sing, i’ve still gotta drop my useless thoughts for The Click, Neotheater, OK ORCHESTRA and *The Maybe Man. So, i’m gonna go out with a BANG! and by that? i mean get gunned down by the mexican cartel for even daring to include a good section in this slice of piss.

4/10 - Not enough yodelling really.

[mineofilms]

Review of: "Poor Things"

Poor Things (2023) Writers: Tony McNamara, Alasdair Gray Directed by: Yorgos Lanthimos Stars: Emma Stone, Willem Dafoe, Mark Ruffalo, Ramy Youssef IMDB Rating: 8.3/10 Stars Rotten Tomatoes Audience Score: 79% Runtime: 2 hours, 21 minutes

Spoilers Ahead, You Have Been Warned... Plot:

A young woman brought back to life (Emma Stone) by a scientist named Godwin Baxter, who goes by just [God,] (Willem Dafoe). Under his care she is thirsty for knowledge and adventure. She runs off with a slick and debauched lawyer (Mark Ruffalo), on a mind-bending adventure across Europe. Free from the prejudices of her time, she grows resolute in her purpose to stand for sexual freedom, equality, and liberation. A quasi-retelling of “the Bride of Frankenstein” of sorts, with a few twists and interesting characterization. As all great movies have… Great characters… At the end of the day, movies are made for people by people about people. I think that is why many movies fail these days and why the super-hero genre business is as bad as most see them as far as quality of the story being told goes. $200 million to make a movie that is largely done in and by a computer. “Poor Things” had a budget of 35 million and at the time of this writing, made on its U.S. run 32.9 million.

The movie itself is fairly artsy in its aesthetic. Wide-angle approaches to shots, fish-eye type angles. Part of the movie is in black and white and the other part is of vibrant coloring. The dialog is pretty well crafted with lingo being of the times but closer to 1900 industrialism and some steampunk elements. The tone is childish at times playing on the feelings of Bella Baxter (Stone) as a woman trapped in the mind of a growing child but at an accelerated rate. The story takes a twist when Bella discovers sex and sexual curiosity. She realizes how little of life she has actually lived up to this point. God, has not allowed her off of his property and Bella craves to examine the world with her unique perspective, often literally portrayed through shots resembling the view through a front door peephole.

The film explores the boundaries of life, death, and societal norms. “Poor Things” is not easy to categorize, described by viewers as absurd, ridiculous, and strange. However, it captivates us with its exploration of these dated societal norms and intricacies of the time period it is trying to represent. The plot takes an unexpected turn revealing that Bella carries the brain of her unborn child. The film follows Bella's journey of discovery, from basic life skills to understanding societal norms and sexual liberation. Emma Stone delivers a standout performance, portraying Bella with unparalleled unpredictability. Mark Ruffalo adds a layer of humor to the narrative and is a scene stealer that will make most laugh. The film's R-rating is notable in an era where graphic content like this has been often toned down to get a lessor rating so that it can be seen in theaters by a larger audience. It fearlessly embraces its vision, presenting a violent and thought-provoking storytelling experience that is highly sexualized. This film, unapologetically committed to its vision, invites viewers to delve into its complexity, making it a journey that may not be for everyone, but certainly promises a unique and thought-provoking experience. “Poor Things” is based on Alasdair Gray's book of the same name. However, adapting a complex narrative like “Poor Things” is always a challenge, and I appreciate that the film stands on its own merits, even without having read the original book. Director Yorgos Lanthimos, known for his visually eccentric style, doesn't disappoint. The film transforms famous cities into absurd, otherworldly versions while capturing their essence.

The performances, particularly by Mark Ruffalo, Willem Dafoe, and Emma Stone, are exceptional. Stone's portrayal of Bella is as risky as it gets; yet a compelling performance, adding depth to a character discovering the world from scratch. The film offers a more human touch through Bella’s character growth and exploration. It's a dense, hilarious, disturbing, and heartfelt experience. “Poor Things” feels like a breath of fresh air, deserving multiple viewings. One of the film's standout features is its undeniable beauty. Shot on 35mm film, and uses more practical sets and visual effects, although there is CGI there. It is not as heavily used to create these fantastic visuals, but to enhance or fill up what they shot using practical effects on set. It creates a lush and rich atmosphere, combining classic historicism with vividness. The set design, portraying fantastical Victorian settings, is both outrageous and classical. The range in costume design adds another layer of postmodern flair, creating a visually stunning realm once the scenes in color start to show up later in the film.

“Poor Things” is more than just entertainment; it's a thinking film that encourages the audience to consider its underpinning politics of how women are seen during this time period, even though it is not a true period piece. The film is filled with literary references and symbolism, from “Frankenstein” to ‘Eve’ in “the Garden of Eden,” providing a multidimensional experience. Emma Stone's portrayal of Bella is exceptional, capturing the character's complexities. However, I acknowledge that the film diverges from the book in its characterization. While Bella in the film may display a more intense and unrepentant nature, it doesn't necessarily undermine the film's overall message. The differences in characterization provide a darker, more cynical perspective on human nature, contrasting with the optimism found in the original novel. Despite these changes, “Poor Things” remains a thought-provoking exploration of societal norms and the human condition. Its stunning visuals, coupled with strong performances. The sex scenes, while graphic, are still done tastefully and even comical in the brutal honesty of sexual gratification from an adult body with the maturity of a young child. Bella discovers sexuality and wants to share the bliss with everyone and doesn’t understand that sex is a complicated social barrier for most, especially in Victorian times. The film is cute like this all the way around and I am sure I will watch this again.

One of the oddities within the plot and characters is the backstory of who Bella really is. Why her body was chosen for resurrection and who Godwin Baxter really is? There is some dialog in the film and as I said I had not read the book but Godwin to me is Frankenstein’s Monster. Years later, the Doctor himself, has passed away. Has left everything to Godwin. God refers to the Doctor as his father and that he was heavily abused growing up. I infer this as the Doctor built Godwin. Was constantly attempting to make him better through very painful medical experiments. Only later in life did the Doctor treat Godwin as a human and then later a son. The one point that is shown down the board is the minds of the resurrected seem to have an aptitude for knowledge and experience. They want to learn and once they learn, well, how to learn, they tend to learn quickly and intently. By the halfway point of the film Bella has surpassed Duncan Wedderburn (Mark Ruffalo) in intelligence. This drives him slightly mad and full of jealously. By the end Duncan believes Bella to be a crazed manipulator that has bewitched him to ruin his life. It should be noted that Duncan manipulated Bella, due to her lack of knowledge of the world and being an attractive adult female to whisk her away to travel, make love and Duncan get drunk and gamble. When Duncan loses power over her, he cannot bounce back and it is quite satisfying to watch him descend into madness.

The movie does not linger on these backstories of Godwin, his father and the creation of Bella. They are mentioned to give some contextual meaning but I thought these were some of the more interesting pieces of the plot. All and all this is a beautiful film and a real whacky way to tell a story of growth, adventure and love from a growing woman’s perspective. Sort of coming-of-age story, but not in the same sense or tone as the coming-of-age films from the past. However, here, told in a really abstract, artsy and strange way.

Dr. Godwin Baxter: “My father once told me, "Always carve with compassion." He was a fucking idiot, but it's not bad advice.” Swiney: “We must work. We must make money. But more than that Bella, we must experience everything. Not just the good, but degradation, horror, sadness. This makes us whole Bella, makes us people of substance. Not flighty, untouched children. Then we can know the world. And when we know the world, the world is ours.” Bella Baxter: “I want that.” Swiney: “Now go and fuck someone and bring me ten francs.”

Review of: “Poor Things” by David-Angelo Mineo 3/2/2024 1,481 Words

[rues-films]

Alien (1979)

Alien is a paragon of the sci-fi movie genre and has influenced many more of its kind to date. It's timeless, atmospheric, and iconic.

I also think it's overrated.

The biggest issue I had with this movie was its sound design. Attempts to build tension with deathly silence were annihilated by eardrum-bursting, blaring noise, which defeated the purpose of a lengthy period in the film where very little actually happens. When I wasn't bleeding from my ears, I was listening to the sounds of keyboard tapping from across a room, barely-audible lines, and my verbal discomfort at gratuitous Weaver panty shots (why does she wear them like that?!).

Sigourney Weaver and Ian Holm's performances were fantastic, though each actor flourished in their role. The costuming stood out to me, as well as character and creature design. I especially enjoyed Harry Dean Stanton's performance, which is criminally undervalued. Seeing a Hawaiian shirt in a literally dark sci-fi film was a welcome form of whiplash. Every character felt like a real person, and none were overshadowed by others — a merit we often miss in today's film. The Xenomorph is unforgettable, thanks to designer H. R. Giger, whose IMDB photo represents my face after researching whether or not "Alien 1979 Bush CGI" was legit or not to include in this post. (It's not.)

I struggled with Alien's pacing. Looking at a breakdown of the film, it seems balanced, but many scenes are slow and drag. I think this is in part due to littered establishing information to remind us that yes, we're in space! I was surprised to discover this film's plot takes place over multiple days, rather than hours, but perhaps I didn't pick it up as I was too busy reattaching my own eyeballs, which had melted out of my head, scuttled away, and evolved out of view in a matter of minutes, due to strobe lighting effects.

The set design is remarkable. Sci-fi movies tend to date themselves with their tech, though Alien doesn't suffer from this flaw - simple yet detailed props and scenery make the ship ageless. The film's palette is dark with bursts of light and the blues and greys are evocative of a real sci-fi feeling. The colours make for a great range of shades to pick for your dad's seventh consecutive pair of pyjama pants bought for him for Christmas.

In conclusion:

6/10. That poor cat would have scratched her face off with the jump-rope technique on its cat box.

[variousqueerthings]

okok final thoughts about the movie after all that:

1. pleased to have watched it, despite my laundry list of criticisms

2. I didn’t think any of it was comedic in the gallows humour sense I assume it was going for. that may be an effect of ageing, but then, mash 1974- is frequently excellent at this, including and especially in its first seasons 

3. read that there was a subplot that happened after the movie has ho-jon getting conscripted by the south korean army (after which in the film we never see him again, and I think that was the most “oh, this isn’t my hawkeye” moment actually, because he kinda just goes “dammit” and then it cuts to something else, and that’s it), in which he’s killed and his body comes through the 4077th, and I think that would have been better in the context of what I think the movie wanted to do?

4. I do get a bit lost in the movie’s intentions, I confess. is it war is hell and so we become worse people? is it surreal antics in the face of serious conflict? is it related to the military really? is it that this is just what it was like? none of it really... slots into place for me, because there’s a bits that dispute every one of these, and mainly I guess I just don’t see what apparently a bunch of reviewers saw

5. the roger ebert review at the time: “There is something about war that inspires practical jokes and the heroes ... are inspired and utterly heartless ... We laugh,  ... because it is so true to the unadmitted sadist in all of us. There is perhaps nothing so exquisite as achieving ... sweet mental revenge against someone we hate with particular dedication. And it is the flat-out, poker-faced hatred in "M*A*S*H" that makes it work. ... We laugh, that we may not cry ... We can take the unusually high gore-level in "M*A*S*H" because it is originally part of the movie's logic. If the surgeons didn't have to face the daily list of maimed and mutilated bodies, none of the rest of their lives would make any sense ... One of the reasons "M*A*S*H" is so funny is that it's so desperate.”

6. I get confused about how a lot of the reviews discussed it in the context of war, when for me I felt like the Korean war was almost totally absent (in practicality as well as in feeling), apart from the occasional nuisance it caused the characters. maybe for its time it was very gory/very real/very desperate, but I don’t see it today -- the imdb also states that “the staff of a Korean War field hospital use humor and high jinks to keep their sanity in the face of the horror of war,” and I was just there wondering... what war? horrific to whom? and it’s not like war films in which war is very present hadn’t been made before this, but perhaps just not in really in America. the very idea of challenging the American military logic even a little may have been a breath of fresh air?

7. altman called the book racist and pretty terrible, but apparently the movie doesn’t deviate much from it, which is... interesting

8. I can see why this was a hit when it came out. I just feel such a visceral shudder at it watching it now, that it’s hard to even judge it on the merits of the time in which it came out

9. on that note, I am once again fascinated by the intentions going into the show. the pilot episode especially certainly has more movie DNA in it than the rest, but the casting immediately created different tensions, especially of course alan alda, but also wayne rogers, larry linville, and of course loretta swit. the fact that they’re setting up recurring characters also gives them more of a depth -- you know that things will happen and shift and change, whereas in the movie the point is the aimless drift from thing to thing

10. actually the aimless drifting + loudspeaker interludes were my favourite parts of the film -- my least favourite thing (structurally, otherwise it would be the misogyny) is the football match at the end, which was... odd. dull. if there was an absence of war before that, it totally disappeared for a substantial amount of runtime to just show this flipping football thing happening

11. how many of the hijinks from the movie/book were in the show -- I’m going to make a separate post for that

[vaicomcas]

This made my day. At first I looked at TMWWBK at 8.9 IMDB rating and I was like 😞 but then I saw this, see blue box, and it matches "Weekend at Bobby's" in the same category 🙌

Weekend at Bobby's is widely accepted among fandom as one of the best episodes so the fact that it matches WaB is a compliment

It even tops "Abandon All Hope" in the same demographic by .1 of a rating. Which is also arguably one of the most impactful episodes in the show

Cool statistics, didn't know IMDB has them.

TMWWBK is so much more important to me than those two other episodes, there isn't even any comparison. (I barely even watched weekend at Bobby's. Cas wasn't in it. I believe my husband was watching it and saying it was good but I was not paying attention).

I do wonder what was in people's heads when they rated the episode? Personally I would actually have a hard time rating it. Objectively, it was amazing. It absolutely deserved a 10. But I can't be objective when it comes to Cas, can I? I can't separate the merits of a well produced, well written, beautifully shot and acted piece of television from how it made me feel, which is the absolute hell of my rage and bitterness and sadness on behalf of Cas. One can say my insanity was the evidence of its greatness, but somehow even that doesn't convince me.

Still, no doubt it's one of the most special episode to me (maybe even THE most special) because it's the only Cas-centric one. So I'll celebrate with you.

[world-cinema-research]

"Free thinkers at seventeen!"

Dead Poets Society - Grant Montoya

Security and conformity, or insecurity and the chance to prove all you're worth?

Within many, there lies an urgency; gnawing desperation to do something great before we can't anymore. If one never comes to this realization, then it'll be years more of tearing across the dotted line.

In the 1989 film Dead Poets Society, we get to see what happens when an unorthodox English teacher Mr. Keating (Robin Williams) helps a class of young students lift the veil off of this very subject, and we the audience must decide: Was this for the better, or for the worse?

I was able to find what hit me the hardest in this movie after my long-awaited rewatch. It was a scene where one of the more reserved students, Todd Anderson, was called up to do an impromptu poetry exercise with Mr. Keating after informing him that he didn't do his poetry homework assignment:

I thought this was a brilliant display of the director's use of "show don't tell," as such Todd's poetic rambling is raw and believable. Afterward, I felt sympathy with the character because I too feel as though my voice, literally and figuratively, is weaker than my peers. Dead Poets Society boasts a number of these scenes, and this if nothing else is worthy of applause.

It's interesting to see the rating this film received from renowned film critic Roger Ebert, who has a website where he along with many co-writers reviews various movies. Although he found this movie special enough to review himself, the 2/4 score he gave it doesn't give it much merit.

"The society was founded by Keating when he was an undergraduate, but in its reincarnate form it never generates any sense of mystery, rebellion or daring. The society's meetings have been badly written and are dramatically shapeless, featuring a dance line to Lindsay's "The Congo" and various attempts to impress girls with random lines of poetry." - Roger Ebert

I would argue that the tone of Elbert's assessment is more on the level of a snob's wishlist of things or ideas that could have been. Nonetheless, I guess that a more sophisticated person might find the movie to be lacking compared to other works with similar themes.

Beyond the reviews of the critics which are mostly mixed, there lays an abundance of high audience ratings. A user by the name of 'peterwixongb' of IMDb said the following with a 10/10 score:

"Dead Poets Society has got to be one of the best-written films I have ever seen. The way the writers are able to control your emotion is insane."

The themes and underlying message of the movie are pretty clear and universal; something to the tune of "seize the day and live on your own terms." But the unconventional aspects are apparent in how the movie shows this idea. This is most noticeable (spoiler ahead) at the most emotional moments i.e. when Neil commits suicide, Keating's unhappy ending, etc.

Nonetheless, Dead Poets Society did phenomenally well at the box office for a 1/1 lesser-known adaptation, and it also stars the beloved actor/comedian Robin Williams, so we're definitely looking at a mainstream movie.

I feel that the producers of the film did try and appeal to the masses by implementing all of the things that people like to see in cinema. There were bouts of comedy, a love affair, dramatic music, and relaxed cinematography. The story was linear, and despite a few instances of symbolism, there weren't many loose ends or odd artistic choices.

Honestly, as much as I like this movie, I think that there is a lot that could have been left out. Half of the character interactions felt dry of anything progressing the story, and there may have been too many ideas without enough divulgence. Mr. Keating's character was outspoken but at the same time, it would have been nice to see what he truly thought of the rest of the character's actions, especially towards the end.

More than anything, I would love to see how this teacher would respond to a class that has no initial interest in any of his antics or preachings. Maybe this has been done before.

This movie came from a book as previously mentioned, and as such, I doubt that the release date of the movie was planned in alignment with a certain social agenda or contemporary event at the time. There is nothing of which I've found that even slightly contributes to the premise of the movie.

Anyone who is still looking for their identity in a world that demands conformity would highly benefit from watching this.

[macabresymphonies]

Many people don’t know how to use Rotten Tomatoes apparently and dub it to be “useless” so here’s a little explanation: No, 76% on Rotten Tomatoes does not translate into something like 7,6/10 score on IMDb, procenteges are meant to be seen as “how likely you are to enjoy this movie” since anything above 5/10 (2,5/5 stars) can be described by the reviewer as “yeah enjoyed it”. Critics score is meant to be seen as “chance you will enjoy it for it’s technical merits and/or either original or well executed story”. Audience score is meant to be seen as “chance you will just straight up enjoy this movie, despite it’s flaws”,. That’s why cult classics have low RT scores, it’s literally the definition of a cult classic (a small percentage will enjoy it, a “cult” so to speak). That’s why mainstream movies have high RT scores (they are created to be largely enjoyed while not pushing the envelope). That’s why low or high RT score does not speak of movie’s quality, the same way something like IMDb score does.

[nmitty]

now playing: run the world!!! by dayglow

when neurotic nerd niles mitty is tasked with being a surprise exchange student's tour guide, he doesn't expect the new girl to be addison moon, oscar nominee and lead actress of his favourite sitcom superstar school, which boasts a 10/10 from imdb audiences and a generous 10% from rotten tomatoes' top critics. even more of a shock to the besotted fanboy is her all-consuming hatred of superstar's current story, the glitz and glamour of show business, and all things to do with human existence, really. with bated breath and gritted teeth they expect their relationship to end as soon as the academic year does, but life has a funny way of coming up with inciting incidents for the people most averse to change.

nobody expects superstar school's set to be set on fire, nor for addison's father to bribe niles' school into opening its long-abandoned theatre wing to the show's cast and crew. just when existence couldn't seem more like a running gag bereft of a finish line, niles becomes part of the show's cast and crew, getting to live out the dream of teen idolatry and the nightmare of trying to posture the latter half of an enemies to lovers plotline against someone seemingly intent on strangling him after every buzzfeed interview.

eventually, though, their method-prescribed proximity and the meddling of other principal superstar players creates a situation. the sort of situation where they find common ground. the sort of situation where niles finds that addison does care about the artistic merits of almost-kids'-choice-award-winner superstar school. the sort of situation where addison finds that niles does care about her as a person rather than just her as a performer. then they get into a real situation. the sort of real situation involving an amount of physical and emotional intimacy that can be incredibly inconvenient when being in such a situation can result in:

intense disapproval from family

intense disapproval from employers

way-too-intense approval from friends

a sharp increase in stalkers, angry spam e-mails, et cetera, ad nauseam...

and, well, they might be actors of extraordinary calibre, but mitty and moon are terrible liars.

learn more about the cast here.

learn more about superstar school here.

read chapter 1 here.

[racingtoaredlight]

Profiles in IMDb Greatness: Jerry Counsil

I love the Internet Movie Database. If I want to find everyone involved in the making of 1992's Dr. Giggles in order to send them thank you cards that information is available with one click of the mouse. As such I enjoy looking over random performer pages and arbitrarily judging the scope and quality of their careers to determine if they merit entry into my vaguely defined IMDb Hall of Fame. Today’s enshrinee: Jerry Counsil

IMDb doesn't provide a headshot for Jerry Counsil but if you're going to have just one acting credit to your name you could do a lot worse than it being the 1992 slasher film Dr. Giggles.

First Listed Role: I have to admit I'm not sure who exactly Surgeon #1 was in Dr. Giggles, it's possible it was the guy who was about to do Holly Marie Combs' heart valve repair operation before Dr. Giggles appeared and made another mess of things.

Most Recent Finished Work: Dr. Giggles, my dude went out on top.

CSI/Law & Order/NCIS Guest Spots: Zero, as none of these are the 1992 horror classic Dr. Giggles.

Hall of Fame Ballot Submissions: Dr. Giggles. If he's the guy I'm thinking of he comes in #18 on the kill list here.

Miscellaneous Credits: Dr. Giggles.

Highest Rated IMDb Entry: Dr. Giggles with 5.3/10 stars.

Lowest Rated IMDb Entry: Dr. Giggles with 5.3/10 stars.

IMDb Fun Fact: Jerry Counsil didn't have a trivia section on his page but if there's one thing to know about Jerry Counsil it's that he was in Dr. Giggles as Surgeon #1.

IMDb HOF Members: Just click on the IMDb HOF tag if you care but I don't know why you would since none of those people were in Dr. Giggles.

Next Time: Dr. Giggles Week will continue until morale improves.

[ianslifegoeslikethis]

I think I did it. This crazy bastard went ahead and did it, all Black Mirror episodes ranked. Some choices were very easy, some were exceptionally hard. I think you may notice from the list below that my taste doesn’t really reflect the general consensus on episode quality. I have included in brackets the ranking that each episode has on IMDB as of July 7th 2023 to help show this. I like what I like and no apologies will be made for this.

I would also like to add that I do like every episode and I don’t consider any episode bad or unwatchable. I just like some more than others.

1. San Junipero (5)

2. White Bear (13)

3. White Christmas (1)

4. Black Mirror: Bandersnatch (22)

5. Metalhead (26)

6. USS Callister (9)

7. Demon 79 (24)

8. The National Anthem (14)

9. Playtest (10)

10. Black Museum (3)

11. Hang the DJ (2)

12. Mazey Day (28)

13. Fifteen Million Merits (11)

14. Be Right Back (12)

15. Nosedive (8)

16. Beyond the Sea (18)

17. Joan is Awful (17)

18. The Entire History of You (4)

19. Shut Up and Dance (7)

20. Rachel, Jack, and Ashley Too (27)

21. Men Against Fire (15)

22. Loch Henry (19)

23. Crocodile (21)

24. Hated in the Nation (6)

25. Smithereens (16)

26. Striking Vipers (23)

27. Arkangel (20)

28. The Waldo Moment (25)

Finally able to find the time to finish S6 of Black Mirror and I liked all the episodes, which makes ranking them difficult but here goes.

1. Demon 79.

2. Mazey Day.

3. Beyond the Sea.

4. Joan is Awful.

5. Loch Henry.

Maybe, if I get time and can wrap my head around it all, I’ll try and rank all episodes.

[smoakmonster]

So Tracy Brand is my new fave. As a struggling female graduate student, never have I related to character on The Flash more so than this weary but resilient genius, this person who invested so much of her life into a project only to be dismissed because what she had to say didn’t fit the narrative of ivory tower science. For the most part, people’s intelligence on The Flash has been presented as a “natural ability,” rather than something that is cultivated through years of hard work and training, the latter being much more true to life. And finally Tracy Brand is the true academic--the adorable hard worker who’s been told she’s not good enough for so long, the struggler, the perpetual failure...at last getting her moment to demonstrate her worth. Because, as is so often the case in academia, what is considered hogwash ten years ago turns out to possibly be right after all :)

[wehavethoughts]

Zack Snyder's Justice League Review!

Zack Snyder's Justice League dir. Zack Snyder (2021) Warner Bros. Pictures, DC Films, Atlas Entertainment and The Stone Quarry Science Fiction, Action, Superhero Movie

Rating: 3.5 Waves

Summary: Tormented by visions of a dark future, Bruce Wayne aka The Batman attempts to gather a team of superheroes to defend the planet. When alien tyrant Steppenwolf arrives on Earth seeking a long forgotten technology, this group of heroes must do everything in their power to keep him from locating all three Mother Boxes and destroying the world.

Content warnings: Violence, Death, Body Horror, Gore

This review DOES NOT contain spoilers for Zack Snyder's Justice League

A bit of background for those of you thinking “Didn’t Justice League come out years ago?” You are exactly right! Justice League was released in theaters in 2017 and is the fifth movie in the DCEU (DC Extended Universe). The same company that produced Justice League then funded Zack Snyder's Justice League (2021) which is a different version of the story that was released in 2017. Zack Snyder was actually the original director of Justice League (2017), but he stepped away from the project during post production and the film was handed over to director Joss Whedon. Whedon’s creative decisions led to rewrites, heavy editing and a notorious reshoot that required removal of Henry Cavill’s mustache via CGI. Therefore, Justice League as it premiered in theaters in 2017 was Joss Whedon’s vision of the story. As some of you might remember, Justice League (2017) was considered a “flop” as it lost the studio ~$60 million overall and was received by fans with mixed to negative reviews (6.2/10 IMDB, 40% Rotten Tomatoes). But since Zack Snyder had left so late in the project, there were rumors that his version of the film had been nearly finished and there was hope that the movie Snyder filmed was actually better than what Whedon had created. Fans took to social media to demand that Warner Bros release the “Snyder Cut'' of Justice League and in a move I personally find baffling, Warner Bros actually gave Zack Snyder another $70 million to finish his version. Zack Snyder's Justice League (2021) which was released on HBO Max is the final product.

While understanding the context of how this movie came about is neat and honestly pretty hilarious, I never got around to see Justice League (2017) so I cannot give any commentary on whether this new film is any better. For those who are curious, my fiancée who has seen both says that the movies are extremely similar in plot, but there are significant changes to characterization and pacing. This review will solely be on the merits and shortfalls of Zack Snyder's Justice League (2021) in a spoiler free context since the movie was released just over a week ago (if you want to talk spoilers DM me I have So Many Thoughts).

Honestly, I was surprised how much I enjoyed this movie. My expectations were quite low considering what I heard about the original 2017 version and the fact that I’m more of a Marvel fan. The most surprising thing for me was that I sat through the entire 4 hr and 2 min runtime (for reference the runtime for Justice League (2017) is 2 hrs). Aside from Lord of the Rings (Return of the King runtime 4 hr 11min), I usually don’t indulge in movies that require me to block off an entire day, but I was curious and I love bandwagons.

The highlight of this movie are the characters. Each of our main characters had a deep, solid backstory that drew me in and made me invested in what was happening in this world. One thing lacking in a lot of ensemble superhero movies is balanced screen time between the main cast, but Zack Snyder's Justice League (2021) uses its time wisely to give each character depth and critical purpose in the narrative. Even the villain had compelling motivation as to why he is on earth doing dastardly deeds, and while I wasn’t rooting for him, I respected his motivations. I also appreciated that the writers of this movie made the characters intelligent. Sure, some decisions were driven more by emotion than logic, but the way defenses are set up and how our heroes use their unique powers left me incredibly impressed.

The characters’ interactions with each other was also very enjoyable. Snyder took the time to include scenes centered around the team chilling with each other in ways that were refreshingly low stakes and mundane. The story was interspersed with scenes like Wonder Woman and Alfred making tea, Aquaman and Wonder Woman musing over cultural differences, and Cyborg and Flash digging up a body where you could really see the characters grow from strangers to teammates to friends. These scenes also peppered in some light humor that kept the movie from becoming too dark without distracting from the tone.

Since Zack Snyder's Justice League (2021) is technically an action movie and it is rated R, I feel like I should touch on the action sequences. Overall, the action was incredibly fun to watch! It was made for the big screen so watching the epic battles for the first time on my TV at home was a bit underwhelming, but the well choreographed, high stakes fights were still visually pleasing. For a rated R movie there was not as much gore as there could have been, which I appreciated and the level of violence was pretty much what I expected from a comic book movie.

The action scenes also do a fantastic job with power escalation. By that I mean the action illustrates the limits of one character’s power clearly in relation to other characters’ powers. This way you are aware of exactly how impressive the characters and their powers are on their own and so when someone or something stronger shows up we have context for how big of a threat we are dealing with. The clean way the story shows us everyone’s respective powers and their limits makes it so the stakes feel more tangible and it's not just unfathomably strong characters beating the shit out of each other with the winner decided by chance.

There are a few reasons the movie didn’t get a full five waves from me. First was that the Amazon’s outfits were very clearly made by horny men based on how much skin they were showing. I, a bisexual, personally love to see superheroes in less then full coverage, but when the Amazon warriors have their entire stomachs and cleavage out of their armor for no reason it exhausts me. What happened to the tasteful and stylish armor from Wonder Woman (2017)? This feels like a step in the wrong direction.

The next concern I have that has kept me from recommending this movie to people is the overall pacing and length. While there were some great uses of the extended run time like the action sequences and team bonding I mention above, there were so many scenes that were way too slow for me to stay engaged. I found myself editing the movie in my head, like did we really need 2 full minutes of Bruce Wayne and his horse climbing a dreary mountain? I don’t think so. This was a narrative where I needed to pay attention lest I miss critical pieces of the story, but the random scenes that dragged on too long had me going to get snacks and checking my phone throughout. If I could rate the movie by halves the first half would get 2.5 Waves because of how it dragged and the second half would get closer to 4.5 Waves since the story really picks up and fun things start to happen.

The final part of this movie that kept it from getting a higher rating was how closely it was tied to Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice. In fact, the first scene of Zack Snyder's Justice League is the final scene of Batman v Superman. There were many plot critical tie-ins to previous movies that left me feeling confused until I googled my questions during the slow scenes. If you have never seen Batman v Superman or Man of Steel then you will miss a lot of this movie, which I thought was unfair because other DCEU movies came out before the first iteration of Justice League like Wonder Woman and Suicide Squad and while events in those movies are mentioned in passing they are not nearly as important as the Batman and Superman-centric films. If the DCEU is going to pick favorites, the least it can do is pick movies I actually like (Wonder Woman (2017) remains my favorite DCEU movie to date). In general, superhero movies seem to be trending toward sagas and I prefer movies that you can just watch and enjoy without needing to see a bunch of other movies first.

Overall, I did very much enjoy this movie, but based on the run time alone it is not going to be for everyone. Measuring movie success during the pandemic is trickier than looking at box office numbers and labeling it a success or a flop, but it does appear that Zack Snyder's Justice League (2021) is doing well as far as critical reception and viewership. I hope that this success will allow the DCEU to explore all of the fun nooks and crannies of the universe Snyder pulled together. In fact, half of the epilogue of this movie felt like set up for future movies. I hope they come to fruition because there were some pretty compelling teasers at the end that I would love to see played out on the big screen.

As I mentioned before, I’ve never seen the original cut of Justice League, but Snyder’s version left me fulfilled and satisfied with the narrative, so I am happy to have seen this newest cut first. This is a movie for people who love DC, love superhero movies or are just really invested in the hype.

~TideMod

[artfilmfan]

Occasionally i will see a random review from someone on IMDB that really puts me off and will then check their ratings and i can tell a lot about a character when a certain individual will rate 1/10 one of the most beautiful films made in recent times (Portrait of a lady on fire, just an example), a film which got the main award in Cannes, has +90% on RT, 8.x on IMDB, basically universal acclaim from anyone that actually means something in the world of film. Such ratings can only be a product of pure hatred, misogyny and homophobia and frankly imdb should be also filtering out these types just like fanvoting (because they will and do vote the same on anything even remotely similar themed, be it all black films, lgbt themed, female dominated films, social justice ones, no matter how good and relevant many of them actually are, completely ignoring the artistic merit and overall quality (acting, directing, visuals) involved, merely showing their ignorance and vile nature. I stopped even counting all the films i actually loved that have way lower (even down to 5.x) ratings exactly because of people like these that massively downvote them. As snobby as it may sound, but i honestly mean this, if you hate movies likes these, you are simply a despicable human being showing how empty and full of hatred you are. People have different taste, and prefer different kind of films and that’s fine with me. But this is a totally different thing where its not about the fact how good or relevant a film actually is, but about something much deeper that drives people to vote/rate the way they do. A mentality I will always fight against.