So what are you watching?
- Thread starter Argent
- Start date
I have not. My wife and I are waiting for a chance to catch it when we don't have kids. Even though they are teenagers, we want to see this without them first.
Yeah I'm usually the same way with many films that aren't MCU or obvious non-ideological kid oriented films. Watch it first, not only due to potential content concerns, but also because it might be boring as fuck or something and I don't need to deal with that.
Going to see Sound of Freedom today. I wasn't planning on seeing it, but after seeing all of the clips and article screenshots of the mainstream media whining how Jim Caviezel is 'QAnon Adjacent' based mostly on exaggerated pearl clutching and that the movie supposedly inaccurately depicts child human trafficking (THE HORROR, a Hollywood film inaccurately portraying crime) I feel I should try and watch it in theaters just on sheer principle to be contrarian.
Plus if it's an action movie, then it might actually be worth watching in theaters. I usually don't go to the theaters to watch Silver Linings Playbook or Lady Bird no matter how quality cinema they might be. Unless it's like the Winter or I'm hiding from the police/relatives.
Ugh... the theater looks like it's going to be pretty full too. Hopefully it's just Boomers and the Elderly or something who know how to keep quiet at appropriate times. I like the theater experience but... sometimes people exist and it's gross.
Plus if it's an action movie, then it might actually be worth watching in theaters. I usually don't go to the theaters to watch Silver Linings Playbook or Lady Bird no matter how quality cinema they might be. Unless it's like the Winter or I'm hiding from the police/relatives.
Ugh... the theater looks like it's going to be pretty full too. Hopefully it's just Boomers and the Elderly or something who know how to keep quiet at appropriate times. I like the theater experience but... sometimes people exist and it's gross.
filipina84
Well-known member
I've heard the film was sorta blackballed by some quarters of the entertainment industry.
Yeah apparently one of the cast members has said controversial remarks once... so you know... gotta blacklist that.
Imagine if Hollywood released films all the time that had actors or actresses or other crew marred by controversy! Simply unthinkable.
filipina84
Well-known member
Was it Jim Caviezel?Yeah apparently one of the cast members has said controversial remarks once... so you know... gotta blacklist that.
Imagine if Hollywood released films all the time that had actors or actresses or other crew marred by controversy! Simply unthinkable.
Just got finished watching The Sound of Freedom in a theater, and it was filled with Boomers and other assorted aged individuals. The theater wasn't packed and I did see it today, on a weekend so it's more populated then when I'd prefer to see a movie in a theater which is preferably a theater as empty as practical.
Anyways the film was good overall. If you have any fears of the movie being poorly made, poorly acted or engage in very poor hamfisted messaging or something like a stereotypical "Christian" or "Political" movie, have no fear. The production values in this film are of the Hollywood standard. Good acting by everyone involved with lots of recognizable cast member faces. The main characters were interesting for how much of them was shown and Jim Caviezel did a good job, though sometimes I was taken out of the film because dammit, he looks like Jesus with that facial hair.
It's NOT an action movie. Wikipedia described it as one so I kinda came in with the impression it might be, but it wasn't. If anything it was a crime drama/thriller. Tonally, I'd probably say it's similar to a film like Traffic or Zero Dark Thirty or maybe a film like Man on Fire or Sicario but with all of the extraneous action scenes cut out of it. That's to say it wasn't a boring movie by any means.
The first third or so of the film really depicts a lot of the sordid bits of child/sex trafficking from beginning to end with the only exception being the actual sexual acts, which leaves the audience to come to grips with filling in the obvious implications there. It's very sad and depressing seeing children being sexualized and groomed and very uncomfortable. And it touches on the crimes and exploitation of these children throughout the rest of the film, but it becomes more of a mystery/thriller/crime drama as the protagonist tries to rescue these children from these traffickers.
There's a lot of emotional moments and especially the ending gets very, very heavy. With all that said, it's not a film that I think would leave you depressed or so despondent that you shouldn't watch the film if your afraid of it making you feel miserable. There are more depressing movies that left me feeling like crap afterwards. (Requiem for a Dream for example) This movie isn't a misery train from beginning to end. There's good people and good stories and acts of heroism in this film.
Overall good film. Not great... but it's good. And it held my interest.
Oh and it's not political in the least. People who oppose this film because of QAnon adjacent cast members or whatever are just pathetic hypocrites. It's a movie about sex trafficking, not a single "conspiracy theory" or political/ideologial message was mentioned, implied or inferred. If people don't want people to watch this film, they are either ignorant, deceptive, petty or pro-child sex trafficking (or some combination thereof).
...
Yes.
Anyways the film was good overall. If you have any fears of the movie being poorly made, poorly acted or engage in very poor hamfisted messaging or something like a stereotypical "Christian" or "Political" movie, have no fear. The production values in this film are of the Hollywood standard. Good acting by everyone involved with lots of recognizable cast member faces. The main characters were interesting for how much of them was shown and Jim Caviezel did a good job, though sometimes I was taken out of the film because dammit, he looks like Jesus with that facial hair.
It's NOT an action movie. Wikipedia described it as one so I kinda came in with the impression it might be, but it wasn't. If anything it was a crime drama/thriller. Tonally, I'd probably say it's similar to a film like Traffic or Zero Dark Thirty or maybe a film like Man on Fire or Sicario but with all of the extraneous action scenes cut out of it. That's to say it wasn't a boring movie by any means.
The first third or so of the film really depicts a lot of the sordid bits of child/sex trafficking from beginning to end with the only exception being the actual sexual acts, which leaves the audience to come to grips with filling in the obvious implications there. It's very sad and depressing seeing children being sexualized and groomed and very uncomfortable. And it touches on the crimes and exploitation of these children throughout the rest of the film, but it becomes more of a mystery/thriller/crime drama as the protagonist tries to rescue these children from these traffickers.
There's a lot of emotional moments and especially the ending gets very, very heavy. With all that said, it's not a film that I think would leave you depressed or so despondent that you shouldn't watch the film if your afraid of it making you feel miserable. There are more depressing movies that left me feeling like crap afterwards. (Requiem for a Dream for example) This movie isn't a misery train from beginning to end. There's good people and good stories and acts of heroism in this film.
Overall good film. Not great... but it's good. And it held my interest.
Oh and it's not political in the least. People who oppose this film because of QAnon adjacent cast members or whatever are just pathetic hypocrites. It's a movie about sex trafficking, not a single "conspiracy theory" or political/ideologial message was mentioned, implied or inferred. If people don't want people to watch this film, they are either ignorant, deceptive, petty or pro-child sex trafficking (or some combination thereof).
...
Yes.
filipina84
Well-known member
Explains why he's sorta blackballed by some quarters of Hollywood. If I recall I think one of his co-stars in this movie has also been blackballed as well.
TheRejectionist
TheRejectionist
I am watching this.
Watched some horror movies. Terrifier 2 and Suspiria.
Terrifier and its sequel are an interesting franchise. I saw the first Terrifier and it wasn't really... scary. The nemesis, Art the Clown, was fine and the first movie had a bit of an original charm to it and it had some quirky characters and victims but its main hallmark, outside of the antagonist, was obviously the gore. Now, I'm not a big fan of 'torture porn' or gore porn... and even things like 'Body Horror' kinda skeeve me out. I'm not a big fan of the Saw movies and never saw anything like Hostel or even The Dentist. I would cringe too much. I've only seen The Fly once even and I thought that movie was neat.
But Terrifier, I saw the first one once and the kills were really graphic and gorey and practical and I thought it was pretty neat actually though I had to avert my eyes a few times. But I did like it enough that when I saw I could watch Terrifier 2 off of streaming for free, I was actually kind of intrigued to check it out, fully knowing it would likely be more of the same.
And I liked it! Art the Clown, the horrible torturing mutiliating murderer, was a fun character and the kills were graphic... one of them... Wow... it wasn't as horrific as one of the kills in the first movie... but it was far more prolonged. So much so I even darkly laughed at one bit where Art just went overboard without breaking the movies festively murderous atmosphere. Another interesting thing about Terrifier is that it actually expanded the lore and worldbuilding and usually that is what kills my interest in slasher films, when they explain too much. But here, it really improved the films quality and gave it an actual story beyond a murderous clown murderhobo'ing people to death and it worked.
I ah... would recommend it, if your into... real gore filled films. You should probably watch the first Terrifier film though, just so you know what your getting into and also knowing the second film is better and more.. fleshed out so to speak.
Also saw Suspiria. The 1977 version mind you. People keep talking about this Dario Argento film and its great filmmaking and I'm just too dumb to get it. Don't get me wrong, there are some parts of it I like and I'm sure proper filmmaking appreciators like it but... it was just too boring for me. Too stylistic for me I guess. Not liking this film makes me feel like a Philistine.
Terrifier and its sequel are an interesting franchise. I saw the first Terrifier and it wasn't really... scary. The nemesis, Art the Clown, was fine and the first movie had a bit of an original charm to it and it had some quirky characters and victims but its main hallmark, outside of the antagonist, was obviously the gore. Now, I'm not a big fan of 'torture porn' or gore porn... and even things like 'Body Horror' kinda skeeve me out. I'm not a big fan of the Saw movies and never saw anything like Hostel or even The Dentist. I would cringe too much. I've only seen The Fly once even and I thought that movie was neat.
But Terrifier, I saw the first one once and the kills were really graphic and gorey and practical and I thought it was pretty neat actually though I had to avert my eyes a few times. But I did like it enough that when I saw I could watch Terrifier 2 off of streaming for free, I was actually kind of intrigued to check it out, fully knowing it would likely be more of the same.
And I liked it! Art the Clown, the horrible torturing mutiliating murderer, was a fun character and the kills were graphic... one of them... Wow... it wasn't as horrific as one of the kills in the first movie... but it was far more prolonged. So much so I even darkly laughed at one bit where Art just went overboard without breaking the movies festively murderous atmosphere. Another interesting thing about Terrifier is that it actually expanded the lore and worldbuilding and usually that is what kills my interest in slasher films, when they explain too much. But here, it really improved the films quality and gave it an actual story beyond a murderous clown murderhobo'ing people to death and it worked.
I ah... would recommend it, if your into... real gore filled films. You should probably watch the first Terrifier film though, just so you know what your getting into and also knowing the second film is better and more.. fleshed out so to speak.
Also saw Suspiria. The 1977 version mind you. People keep talking about this Dario Argento film and its great filmmaking and I'm just too dumb to get it. Don't get me wrong, there are some parts of it I like and I'm sure proper filmmaking appreciators like it but... it was just too boring for me. Too stylistic for me I guess. Not liking this film makes me feel like a Philistine.
TheRejectionist
TheRejectionist
Terrifier 2 is on my watchlist. Maybe I will add the first as well.
I am a spaghetti eater and even I don't like all Dario Argento stuff. Plus the fact her daughter... had a "fling" with a young one (and she was found guilty) does not make me want to re-watch them. But then again her mother was a tad bit of a voyeur... so maybe she got it from mommy.
I definitively recommend Lucio Fulci is if you like stuff like Terrifier.
Best part is some of his movies (dubbed and original voice) are available on YT for free.
Here a list :
Honestly even though I don't think it's as good, might as well give the first one a watch. Terrifier 2 is a direct sequel to it after all at the very least.
Yeah I don't know. I think this might be the first Dario Argento movie I've seen. I think I can see why other people liked it, but just wasn't my jam. Not surprised his family had such eccentricities though it's pretty interesting from a trivia point of view.
Thanks for the recommendation. I'll check some of his films out. I've kind of wanted to see the Zombi film series for a while now.
Last edited:
TheRejectionist
TheRejectionist
A kind of a friend of mine said explicitly that at a party in Milan Argento's mother was looking to get into a threesome. Which kind he doesn't know.
I wouldn't recommend ALL of the Zombi films but the first one.
Just saw the 2022 film Men directed by Alex Garland who directed other films like Annihilation and Dredd and helped write 28 Days Later.
I guess I would characterize it as a psychological horror like Stanley Kubricks The Shining. It started off good, with the main 'protagonist' being a recent Widower whose husband committed suicide after a violent domestic dispute. She goes to some quaint English village in the countryside for a vacation by herself, likely in an attempt to help process the feelings of guilt and loss of the recent trauma she's experienced.
The first two thirds or so of the film are a great slow suspenseful burner and the film itself is really well made and setup. It uses the setting of the small village with its quirky inhabitants pretty well and a few times the film managed to surprise me with good subversions of expectation. The main character was great and so was the rest of the characters.
But the final act of the film really lost me. Not in comprehension but in the entire squicky and tragically heavy handed allegory laden finale really didn't do the film justice. Ironically unlike with other horror films... It wasn't really the twist at the end that killed this film but just it's attempt at providing effective metaphor. The message is fine, it just needed more nuance.
Keep in mind I don't feel the film was particular woke for the sake of it. The themes of the film were in service to the films suspense and atmosphere and for most of the film it worked.
Overall movie was a really good and well made film. The ending did it a disservice but it wouldn't of been as noticeable in a lesser flick. Despite s disappointing end it was a good suspenseful movie.
Going to check out this Zombi 2/Zombie Flesh Eaters film next.
I guess I would characterize it as a psychological horror like Stanley Kubricks The Shining. It started off good, with the main 'protagonist' being a recent Widower whose husband committed suicide after a violent domestic dispute. She goes to some quaint English village in the countryside for a vacation by herself, likely in an attempt to help process the feelings of guilt and loss of the recent trauma she's experienced.
The first two thirds or so of the film are a great slow suspenseful burner and the film itself is really well made and setup. It uses the setting of the small village with its quirky inhabitants pretty well and a few times the film managed to surprise me with good subversions of expectation. The main character was great and so was the rest of the characters.
But the final act of the film really lost me. Not in comprehension but in the entire squicky and tragically heavy handed allegory laden finale really didn't do the film justice. Ironically unlike with other horror films... It wasn't really the twist at the end that killed this film but just it's attempt at providing effective metaphor. The message is fine, it just needed more nuance.
Keep in mind I don't feel the film was particular woke for the sake of it. The themes of the film were in service to the films suspense and atmosphere and for most of the film it worked.
Overall movie was a really good and well made film. The ending did it a disservice but it wouldn't of been as noticeable in a lesser flick. Despite s disappointing end it was a good suspenseful movie.
Going to check out this Zombi 2/Zombie Flesh Eaters film next.
TheRejectionist
TheRejectionist
The director is likely woke. If you check the movies he did before MEN you notice a pattern that you will not be able to unnotice...
I really need my eyes checked -- that YouTube thumbnail? I thought it said "Toilet of Death" instead of "touch".
Given that there's a film called "Death Bed: The Bed that Eats" (yes, it's about a bed that eats/dissolves its victims), I wouldn't have been surprised.
Also, you can find the entire Death Bed movie on YouTube, and my god it's the funniest/cringiest shit you'll ever see.
Edit: And let's not forget America's Taco Bell restaurants' toilets. 'nuff said.
TheRejectionist
TheRejectionist
There is a movie actually about that subject... and it is on my "never touch" list. If you look at the poster and which country is from, it makes "sense".
You clearly haven't seen the shit that ABCs of Death puts in every iteration.
I don't think there is a Taco Bell here in Italy, even Brazil I don't thik there is one. I only tasted food from Taco Bell when I was in Las Vegas over 10 years ago with my dad (back when I could still him call him father) but I didn't have bowel problems after it.