So what are you watching?

You also have them attacking in overwhelming numbers. The military does need time to get in position to fight and they will need Intel to determine where to attack. If the things hit every coastal city in the world at the same time?

Pacific Rim it took them 6 days to stop the 1st Kaiju.
 
Typhonis said:


So how would you turn this into a full length movie?
Click to expand...


Opening scene would be a news report about the giant holes opening up off the shorelines before the same scene is super imposing on a PSA emergency pamphlet she promptly steps on as she crosses some post-apocalyptic road. The first ten or twenty minutes would be establishing her routine of survival and what she does to survive and how this apocalypse is different from other ones displayed in fiction and how she avoids becoming fish food and whatever the specific threats against her survival are.

Then after that first day she can go to sleep and it can flashback to her life prior to the cataclysm. Maybe she was on a family vacation to the beach resort town and she actually lives inland. And after spending time establishing her relationships, it can be established how the monster there emerged and how she has Survivors Guilt since she basically survived by running away. Wouldn't want to make her too dislikable though, but still give her reason to have resentment for the fact she is still alive and none of her loved ones are.

The main theme would be established is whether living just for lifes sake is worth it, especially since she left her loved ones behind. So it'd be an existentialist thing and a personal story as she survives.

She can meet a survivor or survivor(s) and I'd like to do a subversion of the "evil survivor" trope since I feel that its actually overdone. She can meet a survivor whose maybe a first responder or law enforcement/military person who asks all of those questions as to why it happened and everything and how he's surprised she's still so close to the coast. That there are safe zones inland. He's near the coast because it's his duty to gather information on the monsters and how they are travelling overland. And also help people blah blah blah and during a bit of a crisis encounter, she is reluctant not wanting to risk herself to help him but it turns out okay. He says he'll help her get inland. But instead she leaves in the middle of the night, not wanting to feel the obligation of being responsible for someone elses welfare.

The movie can then have her approach the safe zone as per the short film, do some investigating and find the place is wiped out and that there's a big sea monster that got there somehow, maybe through a pipeline or something and she starts to flee as smaller gribbles come after her. She escapes but then finds a convoy of armed survivors is approaching that same place. She informs them about the big monster there and they're like oh we don't see anything, not this far inland. But we'll stop here and investigate tomorrow. Just relax and rest with us for the night.

So she sneaks off again, knowing if they investigate they'll just trigger the big monster waking up and nomming them. So instead she heads into the beastly overrun safe zone, awakens the monster and then leads it away from the other survivors. The Convoy of refugees can see the giant monster waddling off and realized they almost made a big oopsie and the monsters are somehow coming inland.

The climax meanwhile would be her having to survive the Kaiju via evasion and subterfuge and all of the survival tricks she learned and revealed up to this point of the film. She attempts to lure the creature into its death or being trapped but doesn't succeed. But she does escape, maybe wounding or crippling or trapping the creature and can look back at the monster towering over the previous safe zone knowing she had at least saved those refugees and she does have a purpose in living. Instead of heading further inland though, she actually heads back to the coast, to actually help in the cause, not just survive for survivals sake.

So that would be an anti-climax which... I'm not really comfortable with but would fit with the short film.
 
DarthOne said:
You’d also need a reason why those things would not be turned into mincemeat since they’re apparently huge and slow moving.
Click to expand...
Given the obvious reference... Obligatory video:


From Sandy Petersen himself.

Although the video is effectively be implying the issue proposed is...


The Polyps getting free from the Great Race of Yith's efforts to drive them underground.
 
Last edited:
Saw Minecraft. It was pretty funny and entertaining. I never played the game in my life fortunately we have like seven kids in our party that could helpfully explain the lore regardless of need or desire.

Very entertaining humor even for adults.
 
Husky_Khan said:
Saw Minecraft. It was pretty funny and entertaining. I never played the game in my life fortunately we have like seven kids in our party that could helpfully explain the lore regardless of need or desire.

Very entertaining humor even for adults.
Click to expand...
It is a very Jack Black movie. if you like him he makes it worth it. if he rubs you the wrong way it is... yeah.

Went to see King of Kings with my Mom, Dad, and one of my Brothers. was pretty good. about where I would rate the old Dreamworks movies that told the story of Joseph and Moses. Not a Musical but the scores were great. you can tell that this was a passion project for the people who made it. I'm surprised Mark Hamill was in it but he did good. pretty good for telling the story of Jesus at a PG level. my only Caveat for the show would be that the parts that take place in Victorian England with Charles Dickens and Walter are very directed at kids. Walter is a very ADHD kid and if you find that behavior particularly annoying it can be grating. overall 8.5 out of 10. really good and had a root beer and soft pretzel. good way to spend an evening. also the movie is 1 hour 45 minutes. I am glad to see yet another movie manage to tell it's story in less than 2 hours. parents with kids who can't sit still much longer than that are grateful too.
 
Husky_Khan said:
Saw Minecraft. It was pretty funny and entertaining. I never played the game in my life fortunately we have like seven kids in our party that could helpfully explain the lore regardless of need or desire.

Very entertaining humor even for adults.
Click to expand...
Oh? Surprising, but good news. I had heard it was mostly in jokes for the minecraft audience, but if it's enjoyable in general I might watch it with my kid.

Anyway, my wife and I are going through Hunter X Hunter the 2011 anime, and it really feels like what 10 to 12 year old boys would come up with as they go on fantasy adventures together, except with a lot of worldbuilding done. Quite enjoying my time with it when viewed through that lens.
 
TheMadOne said:
Oh? Surprising, but good news. I had heard it was mostly in jokes for the minecraft audience, but if it's enjoyable in general I might watch it with my kid.
Click to expand...

Yeah. I was laughing a lot and doing so before the movie even ended up in the Minecraft world. Honestly it might've worked as a comedy just from the real world setting and schtick and characters in and of itself without the Minecraft setting even though that's the main point of the film. Probably wouldn't make a billion dollars of course...

There was one joke which had a fourteen year old who I think understood the joke... repeatedly asking me... "What does he mean by that?" :sneaky:

Yeah... you know what he meant. Your not that naive....

Blasterbot said:
It is a very Jack Black movie. if you like him he makes it worth it. if he rubs you the wrong way it is... yeah.
Click to expand...

Yeah I agree with that common critique that Jack Black was basically himself. It wasn't bad for the film per se. Everyone else in the cast, Jason Momoa included, did a pretty good job. The Sibling characters were likable but kind of derivative but well acted. And Jason Momoa did a great and very funny job portraying the 'Garbage Man' in what is kind of a stereotypical character archetype with the emotionally immature Gamer who aged out of his fame and popularity peak.

Another thing I was kind of surprised by was that the audience was applauding the movie, like four times in the film due to the game references or appearances or whatever. It was like the kids doing the clapping. It was surreal because I've taken the anklebiters to movies before and I never witnessed them actually applauding moments of a film before. Maybe it's a meme or something... who knows.
 
I was going to watch Sinners today but some of my friends bailed on me and I felt like it was a film I wanted to see with other people and since I had the afternoon free and still wanted to watch a movie in a theater... I went and saw the Alex Garland film Warfare instead despite not really having heard anything about it or thinking it was something I wanted to see.

Don't get me wrong, I love war movies but this seemed like some sort of Generation Kill type of movie that was going to invest pretty hard in the whole grit and realism and trauma of war without all of the personable bits that made the Generation Kill book (and miniseries) a pretty decent watch.

Anyways I saw Warfare and it was not a good movie... or film in my humble opinion?

But it wasn't bad. It was good for portraying... Warfare or specifically one instance of warfare that took place when a unit of Navy SEALS was surrounded in a house during the 2006 Battle of Ramadi. It portrayed that one scene of combat and its tension and gruesomeness and shock as well as you probably could onscreen without it being a documentary because despite all of its grit, it was still using traditional filming techniques and cinematography. None of that shaky cam nonsense to impart realism.

It did a really good job of portraying its subject matter faithfully.

But as a movie. For some sort of narrative or goodness forbid, entertainment value? I felt pretty vacant and drained watching the film. The first thirty minutes of the film are boring. Extremely boring. With a steadily growing tension. There was a bit of establishing of characters and lots and lots of military lingo I had no idea they were talking about but I could still follow what was going on onscreen.

Then there's an eruption of action the theater surround system was deafening with grenades going off and the massively loud sound of a machine gun being fired from inside a small room at barely seen enemies outside. Then there was more breaks in the action. People talking to each other, seemingly word for word from interview transcripts and after action reports I'm guessing. Then casualties occur.

The screaming goes on... and on... and on... for a good chunk of the movie. A third of it if not more is dealing with these traumatic injuries to these individual combatants. Dragging their bodies, as they're screaming, to a safe spot. Plugging their wounds with gauze, as they're screaming. Struggling to apply pressure to wounds, fumbling for medicine, applying tourniquets, calling for medical evacuation, all while they're screaming and blood is smeared across the floor and the radio is constantly babbling and people are concussed from a nearby IED blast, and the film shows the injures they're sustained and they don't look nice at all.

And it goes on and on and on.

It's almost a relief when it cuts to combat. But it's not like... the least bit cinematic combat. You only see shapes briefly onscreen. I don't even know if a single insurgent is "killed" onscreen. You see people popping out and popping back, bullets thudding into things and cracking around. Explosions occur. Who knows if anyone is getting killed or wounded or maimed.

After ninety minutes you realize, Oh the movie is just over. That was short. But I was also kind of hoping and relieved it was over. It wasn't an enjoyable film to watch because it wasn't really working as a movie. It was like a... 'recreation' of a firefight. Almost gritty and yet clinical and filled with boredom and then tension and nothing else to pad it really beyond some rare character moments which actually stood out to me. So maybe it did work in some respects as a film.

But yeah not a film. Not a good movie. But it wasn't a documentary either. It was like professionally filming a battle sequence and cutting away anything extra that a film would put in to it to make it an actual functioning movie.

Do I recommend it?

Not if you want a good time. If you wanna experience the squalid, gritty, anxiety filled chimerical "thrills" of a Ramadi firefight in 2006 and hear injured SEALs screaming for the better part of an hour then maybe? This might be the closest rendition of a battle on film but... I don't know if that makes it work as a film.
 
Last edited:
I saw G20, the action movie where Viola Davis portrays a former Army Veteran who becomes President and then when a band of terrorists take over a G20 Summit in Cape Town, South Africa, she has to go full Air Force One/Die Hard on them. Is it a dumb action movie?

I guess. But then again... most action movies are.

Is it a good movie?

Ehhhhh it's alright. I was fairly entertained by it. People have been bringing up how Viola Davis is pushing sixty in this role and I couldn't give less then a fuck. She's looking fit in this movie. Like more then she did in The Woman King and she was like a melee warrior in that film. She puts in a good performance. I liked her character. She was physical enough. She fit the role as a Presidential Action MILF (trademarking that term) pretty well and for being fifty nine years old, I think she just did a good job with the physical elements of the role and her general appearance.

Regarding the action I don't think any of the scenes were particularly bad. It was standard high budget action movie fare. The earlier action scenes were actually more interesting then the later ones because earlier on they seemed a bit more gritty and grounded and as the movie went on the action scenes rose in tempo they became larger and more elaborate and didn't do a good job matching the grounded tone it had before. In the earlier action scenes she's actually overpowered (subtext: because she's a WOMAN) and needs help or wits to eliminate various terrorists instead of using some sort of Waif Fu.

Then towards the later part of the film there's this large action scene and it kind of landed with a wet fart where she's basically doing a shooting drill and one shotting random terrorists as they pop up out of random doorways or hallways or whatever and it was kind of boring. And when she gets into hand to hand combat in the latter scenes the film doesn't quite forget that she's weaker then these people, but the choreography doesn't feel as good.

But overall I thought Viola Davis was great in the role. Believable? About as believable as vintage Harrison Ford, Bruce Willis or Liam Neeson or Denzel Washington I guess? 🤷‍♀️ If I wanted to watch a gritty, grounded, realistic action movie I probably wouldn't start with G20 starring Viola Davis on Amazon Prime.

Sadly... the movie is dragged down by weird moments where you have various characters making eye contact or bonding with other characters and it kinda breaks up the pacing or atmosphere of the movie. Really breaks up the tension.

Also the terrorist leader is the same guy who plays Homelander. He puts in the effort but I was never really convinced of him as a menacing, broken, traumatized and vengeful Special Forces operative turned Terrorist Leader. He's not grizzled. He's charming. But he's not too charismatic because he hams it up a bit too much. So his performance as the megalomaniac just doesn't work. He's almost... too comic booky to take seriously. And his scheme for why he seized the G20 leaders really didn't gel with me. Destabilizing the world markets and most powerful countries of the world and investing in crypto so he'll make billions? *fart sounds*

Along with the deeply flawed and uninteresting plot there is a lot of cringe in this film. Viola Davis is spared this but there are some extremely cringey lines spoken here by secondary characters about their motivations, why they're doing what they're doing... and talking about disinformation and deepfakes and AI and stuff that was just smh'ing me on how half baked these concepts were needlessly shoved into this movie to try and make it seem more relevant. Just dumb things... but sometimes it was so bad it's entertaining. Maybe its the modern equivalent to 80's terrible action movie dialogue. :p

Only you know... that wasn't their intent. 😁

And this is just me. Some random mainstream reviewer pointed out that all of the terrorists were basically White and most of the protaganists were actually people of color and I didn't even notice the latter thing because I was like... "Oh South Africa. Makes sense." But yeah... all of the terrorists were apparently White. Which is weird... because their motivation... at least in part, was bringing down the rich nations and elites who manipulated people into going into war over "gasoline" and stealing money from poor countries and all that stuff so there's no reason for them to be all White beyond you know... them being White.

Then again White Males need acting jobs too.

Would I recommend G20?

It's a decent action movie. 🤷‍♀️

Honestly, it's no Air Force One or Die Hard (1, 2 or WITH A VENGEANCE) But compared to Equalizer 3? Taken 2... or Taken 3? The last decade of Bruce Willis' career? Red Notice or one of those other $200 million dollar action movies on Netflix? It's comparable to them. I won't shit on an action movie just because Viola Davis is the main star if she does a decent job in it. And she did.

Overall very average IMHO. YMMV.
 
The Whispering Monk said:
I haven't seen the movie, but wouldn't Jason Statham have been a better action movie Prime Minister?
Click to expand...

Absolutely not. The Prime Minister in this one was some older mildly smug and pompous career politician type who had a personable warmth and candoe under his crusty exterior and quoted and referenced Churchill due to his affinity for history.

Kinda looked like Jeremy Clarkson too.

He even complained about the steering wheel being on the wrong side of the Presidential Limo.
 
Finally saw Sinners today. Usually I like to let my thoughts stew for a moment before I start discussing it in case I'm in some sort of film high which can happen after you finish watching a movie. But now, just under a couple hours later and letting the film sink in, I gotta say that it's a really, really, really good movie. It's the best film I've seen in a while. I really enjoyed it.

And I appreciated going into the film relatively blind. I didn't even know Michael B. Jordan was portraying two characters... what the hell?
The first half of the movie is basically a period piece that introduced a healthy cast of characters in the setting of the Mississippi Delta in 1932 where two Brothers, both portrayed by Michael B. Jordan, veterans of the Great War and former enforcers in Chicago returned to their home to open up a Juve Joint purchasing an old sawmill. Jordan portraying two characters actually worked and shockingly they were both distinct characters while also not some sort of complete opposites. Similar in many cases but still different people just like many siblings can be.

And the movie took its time with the setting, introducing the characters, their background, touching on their back history and everything in the one day long lead up to night when they open up their Juve Joint for the first time. I loved the first half of the movie. It was a very interesting historical drama up to that point, especially considering the setting.

Then as the night falls, the film shifted into the actual horror film. And I was impressed with how the movie carried into that realm and set up the threat of the vampires and used their lore and everything. And I was really impressed with how well developed the vampire adversaries actually were. Vampire villains can always be interesting, even likable or whatever but the vampires in this movie were, despite their supporting status in the film, really well set up and explored during their short time in the film.

What was really amazing, and odd coming from me, was the music was amazing. I'm not the type of person to know one soundtrack from another. I don't really pay attention to musical scores or soundtracks beyond how it feels when watching the movie in the moment. But I can't name songs to scenes or have a favorite soundtrack or whatever.

This movie really integrated music well. It wasn't a musical (thank goodness) but the musical songs and set pieces were organic and beautiful and wonderfully integrated into the film. I loved how the music, not just the emphasis on Blues here, really improved the film. There was one scene in particular, the first Blues song that takes place in the Juve Joint by the third main character, a young man named Sammie whose the Cousin of the two Gangster brothers and is an aspiring Blues Guitarist and Singer and that took on a surprisingly immersive and almost surreal scene that divided the film between the prior historical drama and the following 'horror' film. Like describing it more would ruin appreication for the film and somehow it worked.

But it's not just Blues music featured. There's gospel, and country, even European and American folk or dance style music and it's all so wonderfully and reverently done.

Overall the movie was great. All of the actors in it did a great job and their characters were interesting. Not just Michael B. Jordan, but Hailee Steinfelds "White" Girlfriend character, Delroy Lindo as an aged veteran Blues player, the character 'Cornbread' who was a Sharecropper turned bouncer, as well as Chinese Shopkeepers, the local Mystic/Occultist who was also a Cook and even (especially) the Vampires. The real stand out performance was from the actor who portrayed Sammie the Preacher Boy and was an extremely skilled Blues Musician, one with a talent so remarkable that his talent is a main focal point of the story.

The story itself had some really good themes too. People going into this film "expecting" to see a certain kind of movie probably won't get what you expected out of it and that's a good thing. It had some really strong emotional moments as well, nothing quite tearjerking but it left an impact on me watching these character they spent their time developing coming under threat and facing temptation and the like. Sinners is a really good title for the film and it makes you think about things which is good for a Horror movie.

Highly recommend watching it. More if you're interested in a period piece. Even more if you love good music in your movies. I typically could care less about movies about music but this one was amazing.



(also I wouldn't watch the second trailer at all since it shows far too much IMHO, if you want a bit of taste of the film the first trailer above is good enough)

There's been a lot of talk of like a bit of a renaissance of vampire movies and media with Castlevania and the never going to happen Blade reboot and whatnot. What Ryan Coogler directed here blows everything out of the water in the genre. Another thought that came to mind was Lovecraft Country, which was a Woke as shit 1950's horror series. This film is the complete opposite of that in quality and how to make a proper horror period piece. Just write a fucking good story. Whatever "MESSAGE" you want to send will shine through without needing the blunt force trauma of pounding what you think into the audiences head.

This film is way better then Black Panther and especially Black Panther 2 as well. It just is clearly far higher quality. Ryan Coogler needs to do more of this stuff... not more shitty studio franchise films.
 
I watched The Accountant 2 in theaters yesterday after having rewatched The Accountant on some streaming service again, having not seen that excellent movie since I saw that in theaters as well IIRC. And it's a good thing I did see first one again because I completely forgot about a whole subplot involving federal law enforcement investigators.

Anyways with my mind refreshed from how much I loved the original movie, having watched the sequel I will say it's a very good action movie with lots of humor and the same fun and interesting main characters with Ben Affleck and Jon Bernthal just doing a great job as the odd sibling couple. Ben Affleck's Christian Wolff character might be extremely neurodivergent and autistic or whatever but his "normal" Brother has some deep emotional issues as well :p.

But while the movie was fun and good, it didn't actually reach my expectations which were pretty high after having seen and loved watching the first film. I think the first film is clearly superior to the sequel. Despite Jon Bernthal's Brixton character having even more screentime now and the fact his scenes where he's interacting with his socially awkward Brother are the best in the movie (and not just for the comedic interplays either, there's actual emotional beats as well) are wonderful to watch onscreen, the first film just had really nice character development with the main character, Anna Kendrick's love interest character and just how the main character develops through the film. Plus the first film had a tighter story I feel and a more interesting one as well.

The villains here are pretty meh, the story is okay and while it has some interesting plot developments and none of the plot beats are bad or anything, it's also not exceptional. It's just a good slick action movie with two strong leads in a new form of a buddy action pair. Ben Affleck and Jon Bernthal just do a great job. So yeah despite being a solid, good, entertaining movie I was actually disappointed because it didn't quite match up to the original.
 
Had the chance to do a bit of binging this weekend on a relatives Netflix... and Apple TV... and HBO Max... which I have none of... and it was entertainment leisure time well spent.

On AppleTV I finally saw the movie The Gorge which is about a secret location located in the wintry North somewhere where two snipers... one on each side of this large Gorge, are standing watch over said crevasse in order to keep contained what resides within the Gorge contained. I absolutely loved the setup and world building idea. And the two main characters were very likable and the first portion of the film was neat as they could only communicate with each other via sending written messages and staring at each other through scopes and binoculars.

The movie was good, but not great. As the mystery of the Gorge was revealed it was a bit of a letdown but it can be hard sometimes to really meet the high expectations some film watchers want. The allusions to bioweapons, or the paranormal, or a hidden realm, or other themes means someone will be disappointed regardless of the revelation. But the journey to get there was pretty fun.

Besides not meeting the high expectations it set up very well, the only real drawback was what was a bit of cliched plot beats that occurred in the film which really didn't gel with me. The movie felt too smart to fall for some of the contrived storytelling it was telling. Regardless of those drawbacks, it was a fun thriller/horror type of film to watch. It really felt like a survival horror style film exploring this isolated Gorge in the middle of nowhere and unraveling its secrets. It's part Resident Evil and SCP-610 as much as its the Silent Hill type of setting or the "Well from Hell" conspiracy popularized by like Art Bell and National Enquirer type of conspiracies. World building and set up was absolutely great and well worth the investment of time and interest.


I also saw Devil May Cry on Netflix, all nine or whatever episodes of that animated series and despite what I've read on Social Media and here, I'll be honest, I liked the series a fair bit. 🤷‍♀️ A big controversy was how the showrunners were making this show some sort of analogue to the Iraq War and while that might be so, I honestly wouldn't of really put it together unless someone told me. So I mean that idea was in the back of my mind while watching this but while it had some strong moralistic messaging, it didn't feel particularly woke to me.

The animation was great. The action scenes were great. I liked most of the story. Dante was fun. Lady/Mary was cool. I liked the world building. I know a little bit about the DMC setting but not much and what world building this show did I enjoyed and it did a good job presenting its world and lore to the viewer in a digestible manner IMHO. Also the one episode which explained the origins of Lady/Mary and the main villain, 'the Rabbit' which was done in a different animation style and with no dialogue just music, was absolutely amazing as well.

It's ironic because I feel the villains were the weakest part of the show. The Rabbit, I loved his origin story and I kind of understood his motivations but once he became the supervillain of the show I honestly didn't find him that interesting. Just too pretentious and smug IMHO. He always felt a little pretentious. Some of his Demon Lackeys like the Quantum Mirror Demon, the Plant Serpent Demon and especially the Demon Knight were kinda more interesting IMHO.

Likewise with the Vice President Baines character, I get that he's religious but he overdid it quite a bit to the point he was religious cliche which is probably about as "woke" as this show became I suppose. But his being a deeply religious imperialist Neocon just seemed like... generic political scheming villain type of stuff IMHO. Like the political equivalent of the Corrupt Corporate Executive or Cult Leader stereotype in how cliche he was in his presentation.

In fact just like with the demons, it wasn't the leadership but the other DARKCOM (some paranormal organization that defends Earth from demons) Agents that seemed far more interesting. But outside of Mary/Lady none of them got any real character development through the series. Even some of the mercenaries and demon hunters from the beginning seemed to have some character to them.

The big issue of this being "woke" is the apparent creator confirmed Iraq War analogue. I guess this could be seen as a critique of the Iraq War but the tone of the series, it always felt almost satirical in its feel kind of similar to the Fallout series for example or the Starship Troopers movie only this is more like the former and self aware. I don't think the plot was trying to provoke any powerful feelings or offering deep questions on Just War or Morality or anything, but the analogue to the Iraq War isn't so hamfisted that it's trying to hammer some sort of anti-war message into your head. The most preachy it gets I feel is that War can kill innocent people.

As for the issue of "Demons are people too" I mean... AFAIK DMC as a game didn't really have a proper religious Hell or Heaven and here Hell is just treated as a crapsack dimension splintered off from our own dimension ages ago. So I mean the show did enough to sell me on the world building... Okay Demons are from a crapsack hellscape dimension. Many are assholes. Many aren't or victims of circumstance. Worked well enough for me.

The final issue I think people were bringing issue to was that Lady was somehow the hero, not Dante and while Lady is the second biggest character in the series, Dante is the primary hero here. I wasn't counting but I'm pretty sure he saves Lady more then vice versa. Outside of the first meeting between Lady and Dante, it makes it pretty clear that Dante is the superior warrior and combatant and at no point does Dante somehow get dominated or replaced or emasculated by Lady or whatever. Dante is the main hero here. When Lady does stuff, she's often taken advantage of opportunities opened up by Dante, or supporting and helping Dante do his hero stuff. So it's not a big concern to me.

Now granted Lady, for a Human, seems really, really skilled. But so is fucking Batman and DareDevil or Chris Redfield so... I mean... I don't care as much. This series is about as grounded as other action video game or comic book settings. Lady is really good, but she's not on Dante's level. Maybe just in his ballpark.

So yeah... saw Devil May Cry... and I liked it. And if I get the chance, I'll watch Season Two.

And seeing the US Military invading Hell was hilarious cheese. I loved the spectacle of it!


I saw the first season of The Last of Us, all nine episodes and must say I thoroughly enjoyed the series for the most part. The only weak episode IMHO was the third one, which is what everyone else loved because it was Gaaaaaaaaaaay. I posted my thoughts on the first four or so episodes here and not wanting to babble about it too much all over again, the series remained just as strong through the end of the season. It wasn't the identical story as to the video game due to the nature of the adaption but any changes made I felt made sense and most of the additions made sense.

The Last of Us...

https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/103539?tab=posts&BH=0 Golf clubs will never be the same again.
www.the-sietch.com
 
Just saw Fight or Flight in theaters and in a year that so far has really delivered on good theatrical releases so far, this movie also delivered.

It's an action-comedy that takes place on a big luxury airliner plane basically. The movie it's most similar to would probably be Bullet Train which I also liked.

But despite this from probably having a smaller budget and a far less recognizable cast, I think this film is superior to that one in almost every respect. Funnier and more entertaining and more memorable.

Josh Hartnett was fantastic. Talk about how Keanu Reeves was perfectly cast as John Wick... Josh Hartnett was perfectly cast as the desperate hapless principled highly skilled mercenary who ends up on a plane trying to protect an asset he doesn't know the identity of against a plane full of colorful assassins and hitmen and expendable thugs, dispatching of them in various brutal, bloody and brutally comedic ways.

Orks would love this film.

It's seriously a good action movie. Looked dumb. Was amazing. It has like three or four climax action pieces... No joke. And the movie was only like ninety minutes long. It didn't waste any time. If there anything right in Hollyweird this film should raise Hartnett stock a lot. He was perfectly cast.
 
Ted Lasso. Season 1 was amazing. Season 2 was merely good. Season 3 is turning out to be... somewhat annoying with the constant zingers against the boogiemen of religion, "fascists", and conservatives.
 
posh-goofiness said:
Ted Lasso. Season 1 was amazing. Season 2 was merely good. Season 3 is turning out to be... somewhat annoying with the constant zingers against the boogiemen of religion, "fascists", and conservatives.
Click to expand...

Even with the activist messaging aside it was also slower and dragged on because they decided to make the episodes longer or something IIRC. You could tell they were just throwing in more storylines and stretching them out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 7 (members: 0, guests: 7)
Back
Top