MovieChat Forums > lasteven > Replies
lasteven's Replies
No, it didn’t bother or distract me.
I’ve often idly wondered if they’re not the same user who enjoys making box office predictions and then arguing against them with lots of statistics. It’s very entertaining.
"Metascore down to 87 from 55."
--Is that perhaps a typo? If you have the numbers, could you repost them (or edit)? Thank you.
It was entertaining in a weird way, but not scary in the slightest. The tone was all over the place, like two jigsaw puzzle boxes mixed together. . It was like taking a drink and getting coffee when you thought you had Coke in the cup. You like both drinks, but it’s just...off.
Do you mean how could a demon appear beautiful? In that case, I think working from the Catholic framework of the movies, the Christian Bible states that Satan can masquerade as an angel of light. It would be in keeping that any of his demons could also appear beautiful when it suited their purpose.
I didn't mind.
What I was suspecting I had missed was some way in which the ex and son were referenced at the end of the movie, for example addressing the ramifications of putting his son off with another relative when it was supposed to be their weekend together or addressing whether the ex moved, but it sounds like that wasn't the case.
I liked the content of the flashback and what it established, and I'll have to accept the breaking of POV as something that had to be done in order to communicate the information to the viewer in the sequence that the director wanted (for example, not having it come out during an interrogation of someone who was actually present during the flashback and could thus say what had happened).
Regarding blocking people, if you hit the “Ignore button” at the bottom of one of their posts it should take you through the steps. It’s helpful with some posters.
I can't say I felt it glorified her at all as a person (or her choices for that matter). It was definitely based on a specific set of interviews with Harding and those around her, but I didn't feel she came out of it looking particularly good. Her life seemed to be like watching a trainwreck--horrible and yet you can't quite look away. What I did get from the movie was a very interesting set of performances, and I enjoyed those.
Exactly! I mean, if all you have to do is just put on headphones to render his powers useless, then cut his tongue out and save all the people he was going to manipulate into murder and suicide.
I wanted so badly to like this show, but it was just too easy to nullify the main villain’s powers. I kept thinking that JJ had already tried the headphones method (but the show was neglecting to let us know that as part of the back story), so when they pulled that out at the end I was really disappointed. There were other things that I didn’t care for, but that was the nail in the coffin.
I enjoyed TLJ, too, but not as much as Black Panther. The weekend box office was pretty great, especially for a February opening. I would like to see it again, but I’m ok not seeing TLJ again until it’s out on DVD.
Thank you. I, too, had read the books and understood the reason presented there for an all-female team. They were, I think, the 12th such team, each with a different configuration of gender and skill sets. There was a reason, and the movie is following the book.
What’s the category?
Loved this show! It was a great way to marry the freedom of an anthology setup for supernatural stories with the strength of a recurring team. I loved when it was re-run on SciFi channel. My roommate and I would stay up to watch and sometimes they did episodes every night during October, plus special runs for a Friday the 13th.
My favorites included the premiere episode (The Doll?), if for no other reason than getting the ball rolling and seeing a young Sarah Polley. I loved “The Long Road Home” also because it was flat our creepy. But my very favorite is “Scarecrow,” particularly for the scene where the scarecrow is hiding under the covers and suddenly sits up.
Thanks for reminding me!
With regards to your second point, I suspect they’re setting up something for another film. There was a lot of information (Romanian nuns, cloistered, etc) that didn’t really mesh with the A:C storyline. It wasn’t a huge distraction for me personally, but I marked it as something that they might come back to in another film.
Yes, really interested in the BTK case. I followed it for a few years before they caught him in 2005, and it was one of the odder unresolved serial killer cases I can recall.
Agreed! I'd really like to see it get revisited and an expanded appreciation of it as a dark comedy. I keep hoping that with Amy Adams's career doing so well that more people will search out this early gem. The whole damn cast really--Ellen Barkin, Allison Janney, Kirsten Dunst, Kirstie Alley, Denise Richards, Mindy "Send in the FemBOTS!!!" Sterling, and Brittany Murphy RIP.
I remember a friend loaning me this on VHS back in 2000 and I was totally unprepared for how funny, sharp, and sly the humor was. Even the message was smarter than most other teen flicks I had seen. The smartness of having a Joan Jett cover of the Mary Tyler Moore theme play over the final sequence as Amber sticks with it and gets the success she deserves. Wow!
Respectfully, I enjoyed the heck out of MMFR on a lot of levels, from the visuals to the action to the story and spirit of it. I hadn't been planning on seeing it in theaters until I became intrigued by the very high Rotten Tomatoes score. I'm glad I gave it a shot on the big screen--for me it was a really great movie.
Definitely! We're in complete agreement there. I thought her portryal worked well for me, and the mythological element took care of any questions I might've had about how she could pull off the feats she did. Her power came innately from her identity as Diana and not the hours she'd spent at the gym.
I was struck recently by the shift in how musculature is portrayed in comics. I was reading Batman: Year One, which was released 30 years ago in 1987. Batman looked solid, certainly, but nothing like the ultra-pumped look you see common to superheroes now. The style of art itself has changed significantly. I'm not criticizing it, but it does seem to be reflected somewhat on the screen as well.
Thank you for your thoughts. I would agree that a superhero like Superman or Thor is definitely going to need to present a bulked up physique to match the traditional presentation of the character. Even Batman has appeared more muscular on screen (both Christian Bale and Ben Affleck).
For Bruce Banner, I think that his Hulk persona is always going to be very muscular--it's there in the name, the Hulk, ha ha--but his Bruce appearance works best as *not* overly muscular. And Iron Man's strength is in his suit, so he doesn't need to appear muscular, although Robert Downey Jr. is pretty ripped these days. Also, for Flash, it might seem visually odd if Barry Allen is zipping around like Arnold Schwarzenegger when the perception you might have of a fast zippy sprinter is very lithe and lean.
For Skylord, is that maybe Star Lord from Guardians of the Galaxy? I think that a lot of viewers still think of him as buff, although possibly that's a lot because of the transformation that Chris Pratt underwent from being a little schlubby and cuddly in his Parks and Rec days.
Personally, I think a strong female physique is very attractive and appropriate for these roles, but I still suspect that a lot of the *other* roles these actresses might audition for wouldn't suit that look, and so they tend to not work out super hard to pack on the muscle. Exceptions could be Hillary Swank in Million Dollar Baby or Emily Blunt in Live Die Repeat, although even that didn't seem to go to the degree that you see male actors in super hero roles.
All this makes me want to go rent some MCU movies! :-)