Kaos' way behind movie reviews

[The Six]

Recommend 2022's Watcher if you haven't seen it.

[Kaos]

Recommend 2022's Watcher if you haven't seen it.

There were several with similar names around that time. 

Can you specify by lead actress?

[Snakebite]

There were several with similar names around that time. 

Can you specify by lead actress?

Naomi Watts, I imagine.  King Kong's side piece.

[wesfau2]

Naomi Watts, I imagine.  King Kong's side piece.

Love Naomi

And I usually prefer modern to classic film...

but...

Fay Wray was the truth.

[The Six]

There were several with similar names around that time. 

Can you specify by lead actress?

Maika Monroe

That Naomi Watts miniseries was ass

[Kaos]

Deadpool/Wolverine

Let me start this by noting that Naomi Watts has the body of an 11 year old boy and the teeth of a cockney British barmaid. She's not attractive. Has nothing to do with this film, but needed to be plainly stated.

On to D-W. Sorry it took me so long to get to this one.

Not as groundbreaking as the first Deadpool. Still, it was a solid two hours of consistently irreverent, noisy, ridiculous entertainment.

The fourth wall, self-awareness stuff is appropriately mocking enough - of the genre, of the direction of the MCU, of Disney/Fox/Sony, of the entire concept.

The story - as are all current Marvel storylines with the whole multiverse nonsense - is kind of ridiculous and doesn't really work (as acknowledged by a fairly point-blank fourth-wall aside). I honestly think that for Marvel to get back on track and build long-term it's going to have to abandon the whole multi-verse angle anyway. It's a massive failure in the grand scheme. Found it interesting that Deadpool addressed that head on and plainly admitted it was stupid.

Reynolds is good as Deadpool.. Jackman is quality as usual as Wolverine. The rest is really just background flotsam spinning around to move them through the paces.

Enjoyed the injection of past and future Marvel failures (or aborted concepts)-- in particular the absolutely ageless (and attractive, unlike Naomi Watts - you knew I'd tie it back in, right?) Jennifer Garner as Elektra.

The crudity is toned down (again referenced multiple times in wall-breaking asides) "because Disney.." but there are still plenty of quasi-vulgar comments and visual gags along the way, including one long-running joke about the one thing they're not allowed to talk about. Clapton knows.

I have a really hard time seeing how a Deadpool that very clearly knows it's in a movie (dozens of studio and director fourth-wall comments) fits into the broader (now bloated) Marvel multi-dimensional universe.  How could you possibly inject this character into an Avengers film or an X-Men (boot, re-boot, re-re-re-boot?) when it irreverently acknowledges the reality we're supposed to suspend in the age of heroes?

Final verdict?  Not as good as the first Deadpool, better (to me) than the second Deadpool, definitely worth watching. I'm sure I'm the last person on planet Earth who wanted to watch it who hadn't until now. So this review won't sway a soul.

[Kaos]

September 5
Film focuses on the events in Munich at the 1972 Olympics when the Israeli athletes were taken hostage by members of a terrorist group which demanded the release of some Palestinians or something.

I'm a little tired of Holocaust movies and references. Yeah, it was bad, but it wasn't (by a long stretch) the worst thing humans have done to other humans in the history of the world. There needs to be some historical context.

By the same token, I'm tired of movies about and discussion of this event in Munich. Yes, terrorists did something heinous at the Olympics - like 50 or 70 years ago or something. Roughly a dozen people died. Boo freakin' hoo.  There have since been incidents of terrorism and/or just regular mayhem where as many or more were killed. Why the continual focus on this singular event?

The ones I know of?  There was a movie in the late 90s One Day in September. Speilberg did one in 2005 Munich that scarfed up Oscars. There was at least one multi-part documentary recently (on AppleTV I think) and there have been multiple (like a dozen) other documentaries on this event.  In the grand scheme of world history? Who cares? 

This film is framed very similarly to Saturday Night - the semi-true story of the 90 minutes leading up to the first broadcast of SNL. September 5 tells the story of the Munich hostage situation from the perspective of the ABC Sports crew that broadcast the event. SN was entertaining. This is morose, self-aggrandizing boredom.

It's a completely unnecessary entry in a story that's been told far more times than it warrants.

I suspect it was flung together to make some kind of commentary on the Palestinian-Israel conflict going on now. An attempt to resurrect this event to sway opinions and portray the Palestinan supporters in the worst, most barbaric light. Which is fine. Wipe them from the map. I got no problem there. This boring movie about a grainy, decades-old event wasn't the way, though.

[chinook]

Deadpool/Wolverine

Let me start this by noting that Naomi Watts has the body of an 11 year old boy and the teeth of a cockney British barmaid. She's not attractive. Has nothing to do with this film, but needed to be plainly stated.

Final verdict?  Not as good as the first Deadpool, better (to me) than the second Deadpool, definitely worth watching. I'm sure I'm the last person on planet Earth who wanted to watch it who hadn't until now. So this review won't sway a soul.

i have wanted to watch and certainly would have until I read your review. all is not lost. 

though it is disturbing you mention 11 year old b*ys ...maybe it was for Snags.

[chinook]

Recommend 2022's Watcher if you haven't seen it.

watched last night based on your review.  fantastic. 

[The Six]

watched last night based on your review.  fantastic.

I usually enjoy anything she's in and that was a nice surprise little movie.

[Kaos]

Nosferatu

It wasn’t terrible.  It also wasn’t good.

First, Johnny Depp’s daughter is hard to look at.  She’s a homely thing. So much of the movie rests on her character’s bony shoulders. That wasn’t the case in the original (a ripoff of Dracula) where the character’s role in the beginning (and particularly the end) was less impactful. I didn’t really like that change.

Second, Nicholas Hoult yet again underwhelms. It’s time to pull the plug on his career.

Third, the voice choice for Count Orlock was questionable.  He sounded like Davy Jones (Pirates)/Viktor (Underwold) with a bad case of asthma. I could have done without the wheezing. Could also have done without the stupid mustache. 

I know the director was trying to inject his own take on what a vampyre is and would be based on whatever legends he researched but I felt like it was a bad choice.

There were a lot of bad choices story wise as well.

I haven’t seen the 1920s version in a long time. I mostly remember how it “set the table” for so much of the horror that came after.

I did appreciate some of the homage to the original, particularly in the use of shadow.

This film isn’t going to inspire anything, though. It’s doesn’t add anything new to the genre (unless you consider vampyres choosing to breast feed instead of neck feed to be a trend that will endure).

I’ve seen far worse films, but this was a decided disappointment given its promotion and my expectations. Worth watching? Not really.

[The Six]

Nosferatu

It wasn’t terrible.  It also wasn’t good.

First, Johnny Depp’s daughter is hard to look at.  She’s a homely thing. So much of the movie rests on her character’s bony shoulders. That wasn’t the case in the original (a ripoff of Dracula) where the character’s role in the beginning (and particularly the end) was less impactful. I didn’t really like that change.

Second, Nicholas Hoult yet again underwhelms. It’s time to pull the plug on his career.

Third, the voice choice for Count Orlock was questionable.  He sounded like Davy Jones (Pirates)/Viktor (Underwold) with a bad case of asthma. I could have done without the wheezing. Could also have done without the stupid mustache. 

I know the director was trying to inject his own take on what a vampyre is and would be based on whatever legends he researched but I felt like it was a bad choice.

There were a lot of bad choices story wise as well.

I haven’t seen the 1920s version in a long time. I mostly remember how it “set the table” for so much of the horror that came after.

I did appreciate some of the homage to the original, particularly in the use of shadow.

This film isn’t going to inspire anything, though. It’s doesn’t add anything new to the genre (unless you consider vampyres choosing to breast feed instead of neck feed to be a trend that will endure).

I’ve seen far worse films, but this was a decided disappointment given its promotion and my expectations. Worth watching? Not really.

Are you on crack? Specifically, the kind that makes it impossible to recognize art when it's in front of you? The original Nosferatu is a lot deeper than "a ripoff of Dracula." This builds on that legacy in such interesting ways. It's not perfect, but few films are. What this excels at is leaving a viewer with lots to think about and talk about if you accept it on its terms.

Sorry Lily Rose doesn't make your junk rise. She's giving a capital "P" Performance though. Hoult is a solid performer as well. Not sure why you've decided he sucks because he doesn't.

Robert Eggers doesn't make bad movies.

I disagree with your assessment. It's worth another shot.

[Kaos]

Are you on crack? Specifically, the kind that makes it impossible to recognize art when it's in front of you? The original Nosferatu is a lot deeper than "a ripoff of Dracula." This builds on that legacy in such interesting ways. It's not perfect, but few films are. What this excels at is leaving a viewer with lots to think about and talk about if you accept it on its terms.

Sorry Lily Rose doesn't make your junk rise. She's giving a capital "P" Performance though. Hoult is a solid performer as well. Not sure why you've decided he sucks because he doesn't.

Robert Eggers doesn't make bad movies.

I disagree with your assessment. It's worth another shot.

1. I don’t want art. I want entertainment. If I wanted art I’d go to a museum.
2. I don’t have time to delve into the beauty of the original film. Clearly I have an affinity for it. It did (admittedly) “do Dracula without paying for the rights.”
3. Depp Rose is ugly. Her “performance” was overly histrionic and turd like.  Hoult basically what you’d have if you drained all the personality out of Nic Cage. Both of those are opinions. Subjective.
4. All of Egger’s movies are ponderous and plodding. They’re the kind of torturous garbage people pretend to like to show they are somehow elite (but they truly think they are turds in a dirty bowl). I loathed Northman (one of the worst films I’ve ever seen).Vitch was atrociously bad. The Lighthouse made me want to jump off a bridge. It was awful.  He ONLY makes bad movies. 

Thanks for watching.

[The Six]

Both of those are opinions. Subjective.

Funny for you to write that considering I replied with subjective opinions. However, because they were contrasted to your opinions, you felt the need, as you oft do, to retort to convince me how wrong I am, how right you are, and how stupid I am to believe otherwise.

No need to reply. I am not going to read it or reply any further. I just find this dance you perform funny.

[Kaos]

Watcher

Very slow.

Woman moves to some foreign place with her husband. Budapest maybe.  He's from there. She doesn't fit in. Doesn't speak the language. Is miserable. Husband gets tired of her crap.

Notices some guy across the way standing at his window looking toward hers. Creeps her out. Husband still tired of her crap.

Is he really "watching" her or is it just coincidental. 

Takes a long time to get to the answer - a time during which nothing much happens but the woman looking solvenly (sweatpants and socks usually), depressed, morose, and downtrodden.

Most of her questions are answered in the final six minutes, but it just takes a long, long, long time getting there. I guess that was supposed to generate suspense?  For me, it generated boredom. I didn't go to sleep on it like I have other movies, but I did have to watch it over two days and it is probably the most-paused movie I've ever worked through.  Just kept finding other things to do and coming back to it -- sometimes forgetting in the interim that I'd been watching it.

I get that some people would like it. And I didn't hate it. I'm not quite as enamored with the mopey Maika Monroe as others are and I (obviously) wasn't as enraptured with this film as others either.  Watched it once, it was okay for what it was. No interest in watching it again.

[Kaos]

Funny for you to write that considering I replied with subjective opinions. However, because they were contrasted to your opinions, you felt the need, as you oft do, to retort to convince me how wrong I am, how right you are, and how stupid I am to believe otherwise.

No need to reply. I am not going to read it or reply any further. I just find this dance you perform funny.

It's my thread. I'll do as I please. 

No attempt to prove you were wrong. Simply explaining the basis of the position you denigrated.  You took shots - but don't expect to endure a retort?  Ahhh.  You must be a democrat. 

[Snaggletiger]

Looney Tunes' Foghorn Leghorn Episode - Weasel While You Work.

The film's mise-en-scène functions as a liminal space, where the protagonist's fractured psyche is projected onto the diegetic world, creating a labyrinthine allegory of the existential void, much like the enigmatic gaze of the camera in Foghorn's 'Persona,' yet tinged with a postmodernist critique of the spectator's voyeuristic tendencies, rendering the narrative as a fragmented reflection of our own fractured consciousness.

[Snakebite]

Looney Tunes' Foghorn Leghorn Episode - Weasel While You Work.

The film's mise-en-scène functions as a liminal space, where the protagonist's fractured psyche is projected onto the diegetic world, creating a labyrinthine allegory of the existential void, much like the enigmatic gaze of the camera in Foghorn's 'Persona,' yet tinged with a postmodernist critique of the spectator's voyeuristic tendencies, rendering the narrative as a fragmented reflection of our own fractured consciousness.

Say, boy, you have, I say, you have done this episode justice with your review.

[The Six]

It's my thread. I'll do as I please. 

No attempt to prove you were wrong. Simply explaining the basis of the position you denigrated.  You took shots - but don't expect to endure a retort?  Ahhh.  You must be a democrat.

Ooooo sick burn...just another fifth grade bully who never grew up.

I did seriously want to know if you were on crack. That wasn't a shot. I think you are on something.

[Snaggletiger]

Say, boy, you have, I say, you have done this episode justice with your review.

Thanks.  Totally subjective opinion, though.