What are ya watch'n [MOVIES]

[Daehawk]

I remember when I was a kid and I only had access to whatever was on one of the three major channels that we picked up over the air.

Now I’m an adult and I get pissed I can’t find something to watch from the literally thousand of movies and tv shows I have access to at any time.

It's not that I can't find anything, it's just rare that whatever I find rarely meets the expectations of the blurb used to decide watching it in the first place.

I would think when your search criteria is only "boobies!" you'd find mostly content that fit the bill for you.

IMDB page for the movie BOOBIES ...theres not even a description.

[hepcat]

I wonder if that's the director's cut?

[Daehawk]

Ok Ive gotten 4 movies on my to watch list so far.

Snack Shack 1992 - 2 teens spend all their money on a snack bar at a local public pool. Comedy and pranks...and lifes lessons.

Zapped 1983 - I saw all these movies but dotn recall seeing this one. maybe when i get to it. A high school science nerd gains telekinetic powers after a laboratory accident and uses them for revenge upon bullies. Willie Aames and Scott Baio.

Curse of Crom 2022. A Halloween horror movie.

Space Truckers 1996. I remember this on the shelves in local rental places but never got it. Thought it looked crappy. But now it looks interesting. A space trucker and his cute fiancee are on their way from a space station to Earth with an unknown cargo. When space pirates hijack them, 5000 disintegrator robots are found in the cargo. Debi Mazar and Dennis Hopper

[hepcat]

At the risk of being chastised for this reply, I have to confess I don’t think I’ve ever heard of someone planning to watched Zapped without a following sentence making it clear they were either joking or being physically forced into doing so.

[dbt1949]

I remember that movie. I watched it way back when I lived in New Orleans on HBO.

[hepcat]

New Orleans will do that to a man.

[Daehawk]

At the risk of being chastised for this reply, I have to confess I don’t think I’ve ever heard of someone planning to watched Zapped without a following sentence making it clear they were either joking or being physically forced into doing so.

im in the mood for 80s movies for some reason. i grew up as a teen in the 80s and movies were pretty much great then. I may add Back to School and watch it for the 5th or so time lol. Saw it in theaters with my friend. man Rodney was so funny.

[hepcat]

Back to School I can get behind. Now THAT'S a classic.

“Girls, this is Lou.” “Lou, these are girls.”

There are tons of great 80s movies. Zapped is on no one's list of them .

[Hipolito]

There's a new horror movie out, The Substance, starring Demi Moore. Every review says it is super-nasty body horror with enough blood to make the Nile candy apple red. Some people walk out because it's just too extreme. But every review says it's a great, must-see movie if you can stomach it.

I've been working up the courage to see it, and just might do so this weekend. For reference, this is my current sanity level: We'll see what happens to me after seeing the movie.

[Hipolito]

I've now seen The Substance. Sanity update:

I built it up too much in my mind before seeing it. The horror scenes were intense and initially had my heart pounding. But eventually, I got used to them. The audience even laughed as they got more extreme.

Most of the movie is kind of boring. I sighed and checked my watch a lot. The critics aren't wrong; I just didn't have as good a time as they did.

I will say, though, that if you see the movie with another horror fan, you will have a fun car ride home as you both rattle off the names of previous movies it references. You'll probably name well over a dozen of them.

Demi Moore and Dennis Quaid give excellent performances. There was also a memorable scene in a diner with another actor, who looks familiar but I don't know his name. I looked at the movie's IMDB page but couldn't identify him; maybe he's uncredited. If anyone sees this movie and can recognize the old man in the diner--the one who drops his wallet, spills all his cards, and talks about feeling more lonely every day--let me know.

I watched Darren Aronofky's Mother! and...yeah. I know it was controversial when it came out and while I appreciated the performances and the experimentation, in the end it felt like a bunch of pretentious nonsense with some clunky allegory thrown in.

Comparing Mother and The Substance, which are both about women desperately trying to hold onto something while descending into madness and absurdity, I actually liked Mother more.

[Daehawk]

I watched Snack Shack. It is not what the art for it and the trailer led me to believe. I thought it was a 80s style teen comedy and hi jinks movie. In fact it was a much more serious movie. it had its share of teenaged stuff and problems in it but make no doubt it was a drama in the end. And that gut wrench near the end was a hard hitting one I never saw coming at all.

[Kraken]

Having finished Deadwood (the series), we saw the movie tonight. Released 13 years after the show was unexpectedly canceled, it was a good reprise...although I missed Powers Boothe, who had died two years previous to filming. Although the rest of the cast show the intervening years, I swear Calamity Jane (Robin Weigert) scarcely aged at all. For fans of the series only, though; the movie would not stand alone very well at all.

[Daehawk]

Im adding.... Me, Myself, and Irene to my watch list.

[hepcat]

You survived Zapped!?

[Daehawk]

Not gotten to it yet. Watched Snack Shack. Was going to watch Gradma's Boy's or Half Baked but both were rentals...bah humbug.

[YellowKing]

My wife and I went through the "new" Planet of the Apes movies starting with Rise and ending with Kingdom.

My biggest takeaway is that somehow CGI got worse between 2018 and 2024.

[hepcat]

Did you end up agreeing with Peter Rosenthal's review from The Onion?

Spoiler:

I honestly think it's gotten so good that I can't even tell the difference. At least in the case of the Planet of the Apes films. They're fantastic at getting the CGI just right, in my opinion.

[YellowKing]

I thought all the monkey CGI was (for the most part) really well done from Rise through War. But Kingdom's monkeys looked like a step backwards. They were more cartoonish to me than the previous films.

Don't get me wrong, the Apes movies still sport better CGI than most other films out there, but it was a bit disappointing in that it felt like the effects really hadn't progressed much at all in 6 years.

[hepcat]

Hmmm....I don't recall thinking they were worse than previous entries at any point in the film.

I like the series as they treat the franchise with respect and thoughtfulness. And even though I thought this latest entry was by far the worst of all of the films, I still enjoyed it. Even if it had an ending that screamed "SEQUEL CASH GRAB!" to me.

[Daehawk]

Daehawk's driveby...................Estella Warrren hubba hubba......EEEERRrrrrrrrrrrrrr vroooooooom...............................

[hepcat]

She was part of the Burton entry, not the current ones.

Also, no "hubba hubba" for Wahlberg? Isn't he one of your favorites?

[Daehawk]

She was part of the Burton entry, not the current ones.

Also, no "hubba hubba" for Wahlberg? Isn't he one of your favorites?

His muscles are way too curvy for me.

[Brian]

She was part of the Burton entry, not the current ones.

Also, no "hubba hubba" for Wahlberg? Isn't he one of your favorites?

His muscles are way too curvy for me.

Sharp elbows.

[Sudy]

Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes - Saw it a few months ago so my thoughts aren't fresh, but I wanted to chime in. I don't remember having any issues with the CGI, I thought it was pretty amazing. But I also don't remember the final two films in the original Caesar trilogy... they just kind of blend together in memory outside of the whole ape Moses ending. Anyway, I quite enjoyed Kingdom, but it's clearly a financially-motivated extension of the franchise that lacks the deeper themes and grand scope of the Caesar trilogy. I think it's a fine action-adventure film that should be extra appealing for younger audiences, but probably not something I'd watch a second time as an adult.

Beau Is Afraid - I think this is an outstanding film that will be highly polarizing due its long runtime and meandering structure. The latter didn't bother me at all because I was in the mood for something less conventional and I adore Joaquin Phoenix, but it definitely lags in the latter segments. But the first act is outstanding and the entire experience phantasmagoric in the best sense. The imagery is wild, and you definitely never know what's going to happen next. The themes are equal parts superficial (but not in a negative sense) and elusive. You will laugh, you will cry, you will be horrified and disgusted.

Dream Scenario - I was really let down by this one. It has a fantastic concept and Cage is great (if intentionally repulsive), but the dark comedy doesn't hit for me at all. I found its commentary on social media fame and cancel culture to be trite and superficial, but perhaps it would land better with an older audience that isn't as deeply hooked into modern digital culture. I'm also not sure it isn't a spiritual sequel Adaptation, another Cage film I remember really disappointing me. (Though I'm curious to revisit it as a middle-aged adult.)

Aladdin (the live-action remake) - I didn't watch this one voluntarily. CGI genie Will Smith is sooooo bad... the uncanny valley is off the charts. Human-form Will Smith eventually kinda won me over though, even though his performance couldn't possibly hold a candle to Robin Williams's in the original. Also, Naomi Scott is blindingly beautiful. But artistically, this film has no reason to exist and it's impossible to see it as anything other than a cash grab. I have no idea how Guy Ritchie could be proud of it. I mean, it's functional... but it does nothing to improve upon or differentiate itself from the original. The Bollywood-esque dance sequences were kind of cool though. But I actually found myself missing Gilbert Gottfried. And while Marwan Kenzari did a pretty good job as Jafar, he just didn't didn't have the menace and bravado of his animated precursor. Which leads me into...

The Lion King (live action) - Why? Just why? Yes, it's absolutely gorgeous. But it's just so unnecessary and a functional downgrade from its predecessor. Be Prepared, one of the best Disney songs of all time, was gutted. And while Chiwetel Ejiofor is great, there's again just no comparison to Jeremy Irons's Scar. John Oliver, Billy Eichner, Seth Rogen, et al. are all inspired casting choices, but the original castings are perfect and those actors are all still alive. I understand that now, as a 40-year-old, I'm noticing remake cycles that have existed throughout the history of cinema. It's normal to see major properties and beloved stories recreated for each generation. And perhaps it's just that I was a kid who was the right age to appreciate the originals, so nostalgia plays a major factor in my judgments. But this feels like remaking Star Wars, line-for-line. It's stupid.

[hepcat]

Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes - Saw it a few months ago so my thoughts aren't fresh, but I wanted to chime in. I don't remember having any issues with the CGI, I thought it was pretty amazing. But I also don't remember the final two films in the original Caesar trilogy... they just kind of blend together in memory outside of the whole ape Moses ending. Anyway, I quite enjoyed Kingdom, but it's clearly a financially-motivated extension of the franchise that lacks the deeper themes and grand scope of the Caesar trilogy. I think it's a fine action-adventure film that should be extra appealing for younger audiences, but probably not something I'd watch a second time as an adult.

Totally agree. Caesar was the heart of the trilogy. His attempts to be better than humans, to lead apes towards a better future than humans, was what made the whole thing work so well. At least they acknowledged that his goals and hopes for his people lived on in some in this latest movie.

[Sudy]

Yeah, I really liked that part. The whole passing down of his legacy and distillation into myth and legend, how it's co-opted for evil, etc.

[hepcat]

Not really watchin', but I am readin' John Carpenter's of his movies (and others) on Letterboxd.com.

I've come across a few articles in reputable online news sites stating this is really him (he does have a history of such things), but I'm still wary. Still, it's fun to come across such reviews as this one for Halloween II:

They paid me more money than I had ever seen to write a sequel to a film that did not need one. I took the check and spent it on beers to get me drunk enough to plow through this crap.
I looked at the final script, which took a whopping 2 days to write, and said "wow, now that's a piece of shit." And it was.
I had faith in Rick Rosenthal and he did not deliver. I suppose I expected him to be a miracle worker and nobody could've made this work. I don't regret hiring him.

Or The Thing:

So this one was a movie that doomed from the beginning. Basically from the moment it was announced in the tabloids, the world erupted with disdain. How dare we remake an all-time classic?
I just did whatever I wanted. People failed to realize that the Howard Hawks original (yes, I said Hawks) is one of my all-time favorites. Why would I tarnish it? I couldn't, so I did something completely different,
I was incredibly proud of The Thing and nobody liked it. I had no idea the effects would be so distracting. I thought they were kinda funny! Great job from Rob Bottin, by the way. Nobody else laughed but us.
It should've opened in November or December, not June. It should've been called "Who Goes There?" and not The Thing.
I was cressfallen that this film failed the way it did. It lost me jobs, and I lost confidence in myself. My career would've been severely altered had The Thing been a hit, but I can't dwell on it like I used to. I couldn't even leave my house for a month when the reviews started flooding in.
But, hey, all's well. I have always stuck out for The Thing and people thought I was crazy. For decades, people only asked me "what were you THINKING with the gore?" and i'd say "that's all you gathered from it?" People didn't start liking it until the late 90's, and people finally started asking about the paranoia, the characters, the ending. Things i figured people would ask when it was first released.
I am pleasantly surprised by this average Letterboxd rating. Whoa mama! Thank you everyone for revisiting this one time and time again like I always have. I'm thoroughly glad we are all on the same page now. If only you were there to help in 1982.

[Brian]

From the same folk who did Aliens: Expanded comes The Thing: Expanded



I have backed both via crowd funding.
Aliens: Expanded was released back in June and was fantastic.
I highly recommend seeking it out and watching.
It clocks in at nearly five hours so it is very in depth.

I fully expect The Thing: Expanded to be just as good.

[hepcat]

Ooooh....thanks for the heads up!

[Daehawk]

Just watched Playing With Fire. Its a John Cena comedy feel good movie. He and some other guys are smoke jumpers and rescue some kids that aren't what they seem and they steal their hearts and he learns some love and life lessons along the way. Its a happy movie. I needed one. I didn't even recognize that the older girl in it is the same actress that plays Negasonic Teenage Warhead in Deadpool.

[Brian]

The last two nights at Alamo:

Last night we saw The Nice Guys. It's a shame we never got a sequel to this one. While Kiss Kiss Bang Bang is the better of these two Shane Black movies, Kiss was a complete story in and of itself while Nice Guys felt like it had more stories to tell and more potential character growth. The dynamic of Gosling and Crowe feels better to me than Downey and Kilmer's and I would like to have seen what they got up to next.


Tonight we saw The Jerk. I haven't seen this in over 35 years and man, did it all come rushing back. Pretty dated but it still holds up. I was surprised though at just how stilted Bernadette Peters performance was in this.
I mean, she's a fantastically talented performer but in this she seemed like she was a wooden prop placed on set for Martin to dialog to.
But whatever. I don't need this. I don't need anything.
Except this ashtray, this paddleboard game, this lamp, these matches, this chair...that's all I need.

[Kraken]

“He hates those cans!” Man, The Jerk was THE comedy back in the day. I should watch it again. I was born a poor black child….

[Isgrimnur]

The Nice Guys. It's a shame we never got a sequel to this one.

“So much of a sequel, I think, is decided by the opening weekend of a movie, and we opened up against Angry Birds,” Gosling told Comic Book in an interview. “So Angry Birds just, just destroyed us. Angry Birds got a sequel.”

[hitbyambulance]

Tonight we saw The Jerk. I haven't seen this in over 35 years and man, did it all come rushing back. Pretty dated but it still holds up. I was surprised though at just how stilted Bernadette Peters performance was in this.
I mean, she's a fantastically talented performer but in this she seemed like she was a wooden prop placed on set for Martin to dialog to.
But whatever. I don't need this. I don't need anything.
Except this ashtray, this paddleboard game, this lamp, these matches, this chair...that's all I need.

this just reminded me of Scorsese's _The King of Comedy_. also very, very dated, but Sandra Bernhard's character is SO good. i don't go for repeat viewings of films usually, but i am thinking of seeing this again just for her performance.

[hepcat]

Iron Balls McGinty deserved his own franchise.

Fun fact I just found out while checking the spelling of McGinty: that actor, Carl Gottlieb, was also one of the writers of The Jerk….as well as dozens of other great movies and shows, including Jaws and the Bob Newhart Show. Damn, the guy is talented.

[Holman]

Finally got around to watching Civil War last night and......I kinda hated it. The performances are fine, Kirsten Dunst is terrific, but I found it dull, plodding, with only a spark of interest in the last 15 minutes. We're never really given an explanation for the setting of the film, and I get it - this is supposed to be about the character journey, not the backdrop. But it was hard to really care about the journey when I didn't know WTF the story was on this war.

In other words, if you wanted to make a war photographer story, why not set it during a real war? Instead of setting it in a fictional war that we're given zero information on? Frustrating and disappointing.

I'm watching this in pieces and am only about three-quarters through. (I'm posting now because I've also heard that the last portion is different.)

Maybe I was already prepared by criticisms that the movie doesn't explain the causes or logic of the war, but I kind of feel like it doesn't have to. Seeing it through war correspondents' eyes means that we're asked to look at the conflict almost dispassionately (although of course that detachment is seriously challenged). Plus, think of all the ways in which real-world war journalism puts images of foreign wars in front of Americans who generally have no idea of the political or local details that drive the violence in the first place. This movie does the same thing, only it's we who are at war.

Most of all (so far), the movie is just visually stunning. So much of its effect depends on powerfully framed images that I think you could almost appreciate it fully with the sound off, except for the fact that it makes very good use of music.

[Smoove_B]

I don't know what exactly I was expecting with Civil War, but I did enjoy it - even if it wasn't at all what I thought it was going to be. I still don't know how I'd describe it to someone, but I did like it.

[Holman]

One little war nerd point: there's apparently a lot of CGI in the military gear seen in battles, but many of the ground-level vehicles near the characters (trucks on the road, a landed helicopter) are UK/NATO rather than American. Presumably this is because some of the movie was shot in England.

[hepcat]

I don't know what exactly I was expecting with Civil War, but I did enjoy it - even if it wasn't at all what I thought it was going to be. I still don't know how I'd describe it to someone, but I did like it.

I liked it as well. But I went ahead knowing it wasn't a "war movie". That being said, I have a coworker who sees it as a political film and she absolutely hates it. That she saw her "side" in the film as the villains should be a warning to her though.

[Holman]

I don't know what exactly I was expecting with Civil War, but I did enjoy it - even if it wasn't at all what I thought it was going to be. I still don't know how I'd describe it to someone, but I did like it.

I liked it as well. But I went ahead knowing it wasn't a "war movie". That being said, I have a coworker who sees it as a political film and she absolutely hates it. That she saw her "side" in the film as the villains should be a warning to her though.

Yeah. The movie goes as far as possible to avoid assigning an ideology to anyone we see fighting (which is probably the point of the fanciful Texas/California alliance), but it does present callous Americans willing to do callous and vicious violence.

If you feel like the callousness is calling you out, well...