• Most new users don't bother reading our rules. Here's the one that is ignored almost immediately upon signup: DO NOT ASK FOR FANEDIT LINKS PUBLICLY. First, read the FAQ. Seriously. What you want is there. You can also send a message to the editor. If that doesn't work THEN post in the Trade & Request forum. Anywhere else and it will be deleted and an infraction will be issued.
  • If this is your first time here please read our FAQ and Rules pages. They have some useful information that will get us all off on the right foot, especially our Own the Source rule. If you do not understand any of these rules send a private message to one of our staff for further details.
  • Please read our Rules & Guidelines

    Read BEFORE posting Trades & Request

The Last Movie(s) You Watched... (quick one or two sentence reviews)

Editzilla said:
Agreed 100%

And Robin may have been lame, but Joel was cooking there haha
Click to expand...

From the 2 or 3 edits I've watched of Forever, Robin almost worked. I like the scene where Alfred talks to Robin about his helmet, and I'm glad that scene made it into the actual film. The main issue I see is that Robin had to be both sympathetic to us viewers due to the loss of his family, and yet at the same time, motivated enough to want cold-blooded revenge against Two-Face. That's a tricky tightrope to walk in the writing department, and I don't think the theatrical version was successful or skilled enough to pull it off.
 
Eyepainter said:
Surprisingly, the only scene in the movie that came across as overcomplicated (for me, anyway) was the first big action sequence. It's the only scene in the film where the audience is forced to focus on too many things. We're supposed to focus on Schreck because of his speech. But we're also supposed to focus on Selina because she forgot his speech notes. But we're also supposed to focus on the Penguin (who we haven't seen yet at this point). But then the speech gets hijacked by the Red Triangle Gang, so we have to focus on that, too. And now because of the gang, we have to be introduced to Batman too. So now we have to focus on Batman. That's a lot of stuff for the audience to focus on in the first 10 minutes of the movie, and I think if that scene were re-edited to have a clearer focus, it would fix a lot of wrongs with the rest of the movie. The constant back-and-forth editing of that scene didn't help either.

With that said, though. I agree on Catwoman. The more uncut her performance is, the better.



It's funny that what bothers you about Batman Returns is the humor and campiness, because this was the movie that got both Tim Burton and McDonald's into a lot of trouble with families who were upset over how excessively dark this movie was for their kids (and who shouldn't be watching PG-13 movies, but that's my opinion). This was one of the big reasons Joel Schumacher was hired to replace Tim Burton for the later Batman films, so that Batman could be targeted to a more family-friendly audience. And we all know the rest of the horror story that resulted from that.

Sure, we're free to laugh however we want to, but back then, those first two Burton-directed Batman movies were hardcore for their time, and not just because Catwoman dressed in that grungy leather outfit. Most people were not familiar with the comics at the time, and only knew the Adam West TV series, where the most evil thing about Burgess Meredith's Penguin was his overuse of quacking noises. So, it's no surprise that Danny DeVito's Penguin came across as quite a shock. I also thought the Penguin's plan at the end was more disturbing than cartoonish. Especially with the whole killing of the firstborn part of the plan which springs to mind a lot of dark biblical comparisons from the book of Exodus.
Click to expand...
I never use what parents get in a twist about as a barometer of what works or doesn't in a film. Harry Potter still routinely gets brought up by parent groups trying to prevent their kids from being exposed to witchcraft. It's ridiculous. Of course, that didn't happen with the first couple books or even when the first film came out...it was after it got quite famous that parents started actually paying attention. Same with Batman Returns.
That said, Catwoman purring in a leather sex suit absoLUTly had a lot to do with American parents thinking rhe film wasn't suitable for kids. And there's nothing to say that films can't have darkness and violence for adults, but also have ridiculous, childish humor. Michael Bay does it all the time.
 
Midsommar.

I've had the bluray on my shelf for years because I saw it cheap used in a thrift shop for like 4 dollars and I knew it was supposed to be a good horror movie and it was 4 dollars for the full bluray with all the packaging so I got it but never watched it until last night.

...uhm.... Oh boy.

8/10. That's all I have to say.
 
The Pale Blue Eye (2022)
Scott Cooper is a talented young director that I wish would work with some other writers. His scripts, like this one deciding to wrap Edgar Allan Poe in a murder mystery, are often unwieldy and take away from the compelling scenes he manages to paint.

The Wild Bunch (1969) - Director's Cut
Had never seen the original cut of this but I think Peckinpah's insistence on adding back in flashbacks and character bits makes the film even longer without changing how you feel about the characters or story. Even the theatrical film feels to me like something I've just seen too many other films build on more successfully by the time I got around to, so that the ending to this felt rather pointless and phony. Peckinpah is in love with the idea of tortured masculinity but has nothing to say on the misogynistic side.

Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street (2007)
I thought this a straight film when it came out and being a fan of the musical, I opted to skip it. Recently was made aware that it does in fact feature nearly wall-to-wall singing, and so I was pleasantly surprised when I finally watched. Burton's tropes are in full-effect here and a bit annoying, but there are some smart adjustments to the original stage-play and the darkness and violence are not downplayed; makes for one of Burton's better films!
 
Redfield
Nicholas Holt plays the titular familiar to Nicholas Cage's Count Dracula. If that premise sounds good, you'll love it. If it doesn't, you'll hate it. I loved it.
 
Eyepainter said:
From the 2 or 3 edits I've watched of Forever, Robin almost worked. I like the scene where Alfred talks to Robin about his helmet, and I'm glad that scene made it into the actual film. The main issue I see is that Robin had to be both sympathetic to us viewers due to the loss of his family, and yet at the same time, motivated enough to want cold-blooded revenge against Two-Face. That's a tricky tightrope to walk in the writing department, and I don't think the theatrical version was successful or skilled enough to pull it off.
Click to expand...
I was actually talking about the movie "Batman And Robin" LOL.

But I will say I think Robin was done best in the novelization, as well as Two-Face's fate.
 
Rewatched the first half or so of Flubber, and one thing stuck with me the whole time, before my kid got bored. Why is Flubber a big deal at all, you already cracked sentient true AI and localized flight, with a seemingly limitless compact power supply, right there in your tiny robot companion you made before the movie started. Who cares about the dangerous green goop at that point? Sell that.
 
Watched Halloween Resurrection as part of my Halloween Marathon.......it stank.

Another attempt to try to make the franchise "hip and cool".

That being said, there were some small moments of legit suspense. And Busta Rhymes made it a bit fun.

So it's already a heck of a lot better than H20, lol.

3/10
 
St. Elmo’s Fire (1985)
The quintessential Brat Pack movie (which somehow I had never seen), this film isn't really about anything more than the relationship dramas of an improbable friend group in the years right after graduating college. It's the kind of nice, white, middle-class story that can feel incredibly low-stakes and hateable nowadays, though the cast is so winning that it coasts on that charm alone.

The Getaway (1972)
Continuing to explore these old Peckinpah classics and finding that, aside from his bursts of violence, I don't much care for his directing style. His editing is too flashy and takes me out of the films, and he paces these things overlong and without much tension. The story to this is interesting, but the paint-drying performances (especially by Ali McGraw) did nothing to pull me in to the characters.

Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves (2023)
I unapologetically dig nerdy stuff, and it's so great to finally get a D&D movie that does it right. This does not try to soft-pedal the specifics in order to make a generic Fantasy world palatable for a general audience. Otoh, it isn't like recent MCU and Star Wars that jams in extraneous characters and references that make you feel like you're missing part of the story. Just a thoroughly enjoyable geeky romp.
 
The Super Mario Bros. Movie (2023)

90 percent of the details in this film might as well be a game of "name that reference." You see, Luigi has a ringtone on his phone, and get this, it's the gamecube intro! Boy, those writers must've thought they were so clever for referencing that. The only character that got a genuine laugh out of me was Bowser. Otherwise, this is just reference after reference after reference. A severe case of memberberries if I ever saw one. I really don't get what all the hype is about.
 
Dune 84 - the third act felt crammed but overall I liked it. I thought it looked amazing a few of the special effects look dated but this was the era where they tried to minimize the special effects and tried to go with practical where they could. 3.5/5
 
Twilight - terrible, garbage.
I finished reading the book today, and it's obviously not great, but it was entertaining enough and had occasionally interesting aspects. I generally enjoyed the experience, despite the dreadful romance at the forefront.
Naturally I wanted to revisit the movie afterwards. I saw it as a child when it came to DVD, and I'd started watching it on at least two other occasions over the years, but I'd forgotten most of it.
This is possibly one of the worst movies I've seen. The way it's filmed, the way it's edited, the acting, it's all so bad, and not even in a way I can laugh at. I know the word "cringe" isn't really taken seriously these days, but man I cringed a lot. The script is fine enough, it's fairly accurate to the book, but that's irrelevant when the execution sucks. I could go on, but this is well over two sentences.
 
Eyepainter said:
The Super Mario Bros. Movie (2023)

90 percent of the details in this film might as well be a game of "name that reference." You see, Luigi has a ringtone on his phone, and get this, it's the gamecube intro! Boy, those writers must've thought they were so clever for referencing that. The only character that got a genuine laugh out of me was Bowser. Otherwise, this is just reference after reference after reference. A severe case of memberberries if I ever saw one. I really don't get what all the hype is about.
Click to expand...
Because it's fun? I dunno maybe I'm just not cynical enough for this place. (A notion I've felt multiple times when interacting here outside of publishing my own edits.) Not really sure how deep you expected a movie about Super Mario Bros to be though? *Shrug*
 
Possessed said:
Because it's fun? I dunno maybe I'm just not cynical enough for this place. (A notion I've felt multiple times when interacting here outside of publishing my own edits.) Not really sure how deep you expected a movie about Super Mario Bros to be though? *Shrug*
Click to expand...
Yeah like....I'm not sure what you want for an adaptation of a game with shallow lore. It's not like Sonic where there's a multitude of stories to take inspiration from, it's Nintendo Mario. The fact they let a film with a simple story be made about Mario is a minor miracle.
 
Editzilla said:
The fact they let a film with a simple story be made about Mario is a minor miracle.
Click to expand...
Honestly, after trying to add a bunch of unrelated crap into the '90s movie, I think they learned their lesson. Given the box office take so far, I'd say it's more of a miracle that they waited so long before making another film effort. Just leaving money on the table.
 
Possessed said:
Because it's fun? I dunno maybe I'm just not cynical enough for this place. (A notion I've felt multiple times when interacting here outside of publishing my own edits.) Not really sure how deep you expected a movie about Super Mario Bros to be though? *Shrug*
Click to expand...

Well, to each their own. I've seen plenty of other "fun" movies over the last few years that were far more interesting and watchable. Movies like Top Gun: Maverick, Everything, Everywhere, All at Once, Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse, and even last week's John Wick: Chapter 4. I don't see my review as being cynical. I've seen better. On top of that, why praise a film for being shallow? Doesn't that imply that the movie is bad? Doesn't that make it a "cynical" cash grab? By this logic, I should like Michael Bay's Transformers movies because they're not supposed to be deep, either. And look, I'm not expecting this to be The Godfather. No one is. But what I am expecting is a movie. Referencing a bunch of stuff is not my idea of a movie. Besides, all of the above movies I mentioned had more to offer than just "'member Rainbow Road? I 'member."
 
Uh, guys, people like different stuff. It’s okay. One person’s opinion doesn’t—or shouldn’t—change your own personal enjoyment (or lack thereof) of a movie. You can disagree with a reviewer without the reviewer being cynical or shallow. Disagreement is fine; disrespect is not.

I’m not a mod, so maybe I’m out of my lane. But I thought it needed to be said.
 
Moe_Syzlak said:
Uh, guys, people like different stuff. It’s okay. One person’s opinion doesn’t—or shouldn’t—change your own personal enjoyment (or lack thereof) of a movie. You can disagree with a reviewer without the reviewer being cynical or shallow. Disagreement is fine; disrespect is not.

I’m not a mod, so maybe I’m out of my lane. But I thought it needed to be said.
Click to expand...
To be clear I didn't mean to say this reviewer was in particular cynical, it was just a broad remark about how I feel about this place sometimes. A remark that was in hindsight misplaced no doubt. And that's a mistake on my part and I apologize.

And I didn't even so much as imply the term "shallow", much less did I say it or call anybody that so thanks for putting words in my mouth. Appreciate that.

Casually remarking again that I guess this is a good example that there's a reason I stepped away from being a part of this community, and I'm re affirmed in it now. I'll still release my edits and answer pm requests for them but I think I'm pretty positive that my decision to stop interacting here on the forums was the right one. And that's more of a statement about me than it is you all.

Peace out. You'll hear from me again if I ever release a new edit. And those of you that have me on discord can deal with my stupid thoughts until then. Lol. In the meantime life's just too short. Later.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom