Our library gives us Kanopy credits every month, I’ve found all sorts of free movies & TV shows there.
If you get HBO through your cable service, Max is free.
I can’t believe I’m still talking about this, but I think a more accurate version of this statement would be:
If you subscribe and pay for HBO through your cable service, Max is included.
Would you agree with that?
[Moderating]
I think that the discussion of what’s “free” or “included” or whatever is getting to be a bit of a digression, here. If folks still want to discuss that, open a new thread.
Pulp Fiction
It’s on Paramount+
There’s a 30th anniversary thread with spoilers. So, there’s no need to say much here.
Great film and one of Quentin Tarantino’s best work. If you haven’t seen it, be prepared for blood and extreme violence.
It is a serious film and well made. The violence is there for a dramatic reason. It’s not a slasher film.
I hadn’t seen it in at least 8 years. I’m enjoying seeing it again.
However, Be Cool is nowhere near as good as Get Shorty, though Vince Vaughn is more enjoyable than he normally is.
Someone upthread mentioned Batman with Michael Keaton, and there’s a great reference to the first of the Tim Burton films about the Caped Crusader in Deadpool & Wolverine.
I just saw Terrifier 3 and it was… OK I guess? I don’t think I liked it as much as the first two because there didn’t really seem to be a point to it really. The gore effects were super impressive, and any horror movie nowadays that uses pretty much all practical effects has to be given props but I wish the story was better? I know no one really goes to this series for the plot, the selling point is simply the character of Art the Clown and the effects, both of which were excellent, but so much of the story just didn’t make sense. Like was the opening scene related to anything at all? Until they showed her mother I thought Gaby was the girl from the beginning.
I know I’ll be back for Terrifier 4 so I guess in that way it did its job but I really wanted to like it more.
I’d say the opening scene simply existed to do something with Christmas and to simply show they will absolutely kill children in this series.
I figured since Art found the girl at the beginning, she died as well. No sound or visual indication, though. They should have given some kind of clarity on that.
I’ve heard some outcry about children being killed in this movie, but Doctor Sleep has a much more intense “kill the kid” type sequence and I heard nothing then.
I heard plenty about that, but maybe because I engaged in the conversation (but a quick google shows it wasn’t just me). IIRC it was even worse in the extended version.
It’s What’s Inside
Not really recommended.
It was OK, but despite a strong opening 30 minutes or so, it failed to be very satisfying in the end.
It is on Netflix and if you need something on, this movie was actually pretty decent. However, I had hoped for a lot more fun with its premise(which I will not spoil here). It just kind of does stuff…and I didn’t think anything about it was all that surprising.
Smile 2
Recommended.
I actually won’t go as far to say it is better than the first movie, which is what the majority opinion seems to be. It is, however, a really good sequel that in the end actually justifies its existence. I know they will make a third one, but the ending to this movie served as a proper ending to both films, much like Halloween II did back in 1981. However, like Halloween, I bet Smile just continues trying to figure out what to do next and ends up shambling along.
Good movie, but really great ending. Really great.
What do you think people found better about S2? From what I’ve been reading, this one is bloodier and more “exciting”. That doesn’t mesh with my idea of better. Is it gorier?
The remake of True Grit from 2010 (finally got around to it). Bridges was okay, I hated everything else. To me, the charm of the first one was the stilted dialect and dry humor. With this one I felt it was hard to even understand what was being said at times. They even cut short Mattie’s negotiation with the horse dealer, one of the best parts! Not to mention some deviation from the story. Why remake a perfect movie anyhow?
I really didn’t think of it as a remake, but as a revisit (and more faithful adaptation) of the original Charles Portis novel, which I adore. That includes recentering the story more on Mattie Ross, which is how the book went, and also capturing some of the sly tone. (but maybe still not enough)
ETA: also, as to why remake it:
- A lot of people are too young to remember the original
- It’s fun to make a more faithful version
- It revived sales of the novel
- It made a ton of money and got 10 Oscar nominations, so obviously it appealed to a lot of people.
That’s why.
I thought it was fine, but it was one of those remakes of a beloved classic where I asked, why? I do think Bridge’s speech was a bit too authentic. Hard to understand at times and it kind of swamped some of the funniest lines “Now that’s just what them marshalls said!”
The novel is awesome, BTW.
Not sure. It might be more gory, but it wasn’t really all that violent.
It was good. I saw nothing all that better.
Lee. Kate Winslet biopic of WWII photojournalist Lee Miller.
Miller was quite the character but this movie is mostly set during WWII. Told in flashbacks. You really need to read the Wikipedia article to find out what a weird life she lived. The most famous photo of her is when took a bath in Hitler’s apartment in Munich a few days before V-E day. She later that night slept in Hitler’s bed while his body was being burned outside the bunker.
While a 2023 film, it was not released in the US till this year and would presumably be considered Oscar bait. But it’s not that great overall. Winslet might get a nom due to voter inertia at best.
It’s a “well done middling” film. The flashback framing, esp. with repetition in some cases, just doesn’t work. Coulda, woulda, shoulda been better.
The so big, amazing, weird thing about it is Andy Samberg plays Life photographer and Lee cohort David Scherman. He does a very good job. I kid you not.
Give it 3.5 cigarettes.
Having recently re-watched The Mysterious Island, I decided to go full Nemo and re-watched the Disney version of 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea. I have to admit, I am blown away by the special effects. The model work, especially with the Nautilus, is superb (the shots of surface ships, though, sometimes look “off”. Harper Goff’s design of the Nautilus differs significantly from Verne’s description of it as a truly streamlined vessel, but it certainly fulfills the movie’s requirements of being interesting and worth more than one look. (I’ve long been convinced that this vision of the Nautilus was the spark that ignited “Steampunk”). I was mesmerized by many of the underwater sequences.
They rewrote the story somewhat, in an effort to make it a complete narrative, rather than an episodic array, but I can live with that.
Kirk Douglas was great as Ned Land, although he ought to have been bearded. I guess they didn’t want to cover up that iconic cleft chin. Changing Arronax’ assstant Conseil from a circa twenty year old to the middle-aged Peter Lorre was an odd choice, but I suppose it was easier to accept Lorre and Douglas trading barbs than Douglas and some young newcomer.
James Mason was perfect as the enigmatic Captain Nemo. Before you complain that Nemo is supposed to be Indian (as in the 1916 silent film, or the 2003 film of The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen- or Alan Moore’s original graphic novel), note that Verne originally planned to make Nemo Polish, and it was only his publisher Hetzel complaining about losing the Russian market that got him to change this.
Nemo’s character is a really weird one for a Disney film. He’s a conflicted avenger, killing those who destroyed his loved ones (as in Verne’s novel), but surely killing innocents at the same time. Disney tried to always keep scientific and engineering advances and the people who made them positive, but Nemo is one ambiguous character.
Some of the Disney comics from the 1950s and early 1960s ran some episodes of further adventures of Captain Nemo, presumably from before the time of the events of 20kLutS. They’re pretty good, and realistically drawn, with Nemo looking a lot like Mason.
It still bugs me, though, that the giant squid swims the wrong way in the movie – tentacles first. I suppose it looked better that way, and wa an easier effect to manage.
Hold Your Breath (Hulu, 2024) I am a big Sarah Paulson fan. I also like period pieces of any variety. This horror/drama wasn’t compelling. The stark setting and limited cast left me bored rather than feeling claustrophobic. The tension was silly, the reveal was dumb. Not sure what happened, but it doesn’t work. Give this a pass.
Unfrosted (Netflix, 2024) An unassuming Seinfeld comedy about the invention of the Pop Tart in 1963. It was cute, mildly humorous, and a fun parade of Hollywood notables. Definitely recommended for families who like Jim Gaffigan’s humor.
I respectfully disagree. I don’t think it was supposed to leave us feeling claustrophobic; more like isolated, which I think it achieved. The aerial view of the lone house surrounded by acres and acres of nothing but dead earth was pretty effective. Also, I think the story necessitated a small cast; it was the dust bowl and almost everyone had gone. My problem was mostly with the “grey man” subplot. But if that’s what it took to incorporate the Wallace character, as played by Ebon Moss-Bachrach, I’ll give it a pass. Dayum does he do menacing well.
I do agree that it has its faults but I still recommend it. It’s on Hulu, if anyone wants to decide for themself.