HorrorMovieFans.com

Borat Subsequent Moviefilm ....... A

Hilarious satire, even better than the first movie in my opinion, and I really liked the character growth involved with the film that I wasn't expecting.

Hubie Halloween ........... B-

The funniest Sandler offering from Netflix to me. It's stupid sure, but it doesn't care and it has fun rolling throughout.

The New Mutants. Plays out like a supernatural horror film rather than the standard comic film, so that was cool. I do wish the cgi was better, though. You'd figure with all the delays, they would've spent some of that time making it look good. I can't comment on whether or not it was close to the source material, as I've never read the comics.

Slaughterhouserock wrote:The New Mutants. Plays out like a supernatural horror film rather than the standard comic film, so that was cool. I do wish the cgi was better, though. You'd figure with all the delays, they would've spent some of that time making it look good. I can't comment on whether or not it was close to the source material, as I've never read the comics.

You didn't hate it so I'm hopeful

Shock Em Dead, 1991. The uber hot Traci Lords stars in it. Low budget as you can get. I laughed so hard though!

Guitar nerds.....the movie features Michael Angelo from Nito fame. The lead character is made to look like him. Fucking hysterical.

Tiggnutz wrote:You didn't hate it so I'm hopeful

I mean, it's nothing spectacular, but it's far from the shitshow most people are saying it is. It's not quite horror and not quite a super hero film, so if you're ok with a mixed bag, it's decent.

Arctic

Absolutely wouldn’t work with any other actor. But with Mads Mikkelsen this thing is a pure triumph. Never felt so exhausted. Just from watching a film. It’s heart rendingly challenging and well acted. Such a journey.

Unmasked Part 25. It's basically Friday the 13th: A Love Story. Weird film. It has a better bdsm scene than anything in 50 Shades of Grey, at least. And some of the deaths are pretty good for a comedy.

Possum. Weird film by Matthew Holness aka Garth Marenghi. Very slow burn and more psychological than anything, you're not sure what's going on the whole time. Definitely worth checking out.

Tenet

What in the blue hell did I just watch? Some Memento-Inception with splashes of Terminator-Matrix shiz. Not quite sure, but it wasn't that good to give it 2-3 more times to understand it fully. My biggest bitch is, this motherfucker is supposed to be super CIA spy or summat, willing to die to protect or do whatever. So what's with the fucking white knight bullshit driving the plot, he's never even met this chick and is jumping through all these hoops and doing dumb shit instead of the mission at hand, pfft, who writes this shit? But I guess that's part of the "inception" of it all.

Forgot about that movie lol. Feel like they should just sell it to Netflix. Nolan’s never going to get the wide release here, can probably get some money back this way though.

Tenet's lack of character development (let alone Character Names) is definitely it's achilles heel. It's like Nolan went out of his way to make a caricature of what his haters claim about his movies. Still a technical marvel though. I'd say still one of the better films I watched in 2020...but I've only watched like 11 movies from this year so that's not saying much lol.

caught a few movies I've put off
Terminator Dark Fate ~ total garbage so disappointed it was hard to watch and so boring
The Grudge 2020 ~ ridiculous lame vanilla stupidity
Fright Night 2 2013 ~ WTF

Hostiles
I'm not sure what the movie was about. A group of folks traveling from A to B, killing and dying along the way. The end.

DancesWithWerewolves wrote:Tenet's lack of character development (let alone Character Names) is definitely it's achilles heel. It's like Nolan went out of his way to make a caricature of what his haters claim about his movies. Still a technical marvel though. I'd say still one of the better films I watched in 2020...but I've only watched like 11 movies from this year so that's not saying much lol.

Hit me with why it was such a technical marvel. I liked the reverse shit, especially some of the car chase sequences, but that partially reminded me of the Matrix. But the lynch pin sequence of it all, the whole "Time pod" and going back and forth, was pretty archaic. And most of the spy stuff, sweeping landscapes or set pieces, Tom Cruise has done it better in MI. Them scaling up the building though was good shit, I want to do that.

Reign in Blood wrote:

DancesWithWerewolves wrote:Tenet's lack of character development (let alone Character Names) is definitely it's achilles heel. It's like Nolan went out of his way to make a caricature of what his haters claim about his movies. Still a technical marvel though. I'd say still one of the better films I watched in 2020...but I've only watched like 11 movies from this year so that's not saying much lol.

Hit me with why it was such a technical marvel. I liked the reverse shit, especially some of the car chase sequences, but that partially reminded me of the Matrix. But the lynch pin sequence of it all, the whole "Time pod" and going back and forth, was pretty archaic. And most of the spy stuff, sweeping landscapes or set pieces, Tom Cruise has done it better in MI. Them scaling up the building though was good shit, I want to do that.

I think it did significantly better than every reference you made (especially The Matrix, which is one I was never impressed by even back in 1999, except maybe for editing, and aside from Tom's stunts and the helicoptor climax sequence in Fallout, I've never really been visually convinced by MI's stuff). It also featured very little CGI, with stunning Imax cinematography to pull it all off. How is it archaic, because it was deliberately avoiding CGI as much as possible? Hell, it being mostly practical and still pulling everything off like it does, as realistic as it does, is precisely why it's a technical marvel. Not a shred visibly comes off a unrealistic or pulled me out of the momentum of what was going on, and in the moment of the movie, I was sucked in. It was after the movie was over I started thinking and feeling cold about any character development and motivation where I ran into problems Seriously, JD Washington's character is literally called "Protagonist"...how lazy is that? I'm also thinking that the "stopping WW3/End of the world" plot point didn't really add up to much.

Now I'm not saying it's the most technically brilliant thing produced to date, if that's what you're thinking. Out of this year, that I've seen, it is (it's my current favorites for Cinematography, Editing, Original Music Score, Sounds, and Visual FX), but if we're talking all time? No, it wouldn't even top Nolan's own resume.

Do expect any of this to turn you over? Fuck no

DancesWithWerewolves wrote:

Reign in Blood wrote:

DancesWithWerewolves wrote:Tenet's lack of character development (let alone Character Names) is definitely it's achilles heel. It's like Nolan went out of his way to make a caricature of what his haters claim about his movies. Still a technical marvel though. I'd say still one of the better films I watched in 2020...but I've only watched like 11 movies from this year so that's not saying much lol.

Hit me with why it was such a technical marvel. I liked the reverse shit, especially some of the car chase sequences, but that partially reminded me of the Matrix. But the lynch pin sequence of it all, the whole "Time pod" and going back and forth, was pretty archaic. And most of the spy stuff, sweeping landscapes or set pieces, Tom Cruise has done it better in MI. Them scaling up the building though was good shit, I want to do that.

I think it did significantly better than every reference you made (especially The Matrix, which is one I was never impressed by even back in 1999, except maybe for editing, and aside from Tom's stunts and the helicoptor climax sequence in Fallout, I've never really been visually convinced by MI's stuff). It also featured very little CGI, with stunning Imax cinematography to pull it all off. How is it archaic, because it was deliberately avoiding CGI as much as possible? Hell, it being mostly practical and still pulling everything off like it does, as realistic as it does, is precisely why it's a technical marvel. Not a shred visibly comes off a unrealistic or pulled me out of the momentum of what was going on, and in the moment of the movie, I was sucked in. It was after the movie was over I started thinking and feeling cold about any character development and motivation where I ran into problems Seriously, JD Washington's character is literally called "Protagonist"...how lazy is that? I'm also thinking that the "stopping WW3/End of the world" plot point didn't really add up to much.

Now I'm not saying it's the most technically brilliant thing produced to date, if that's what you're thinking. Out of this year, that I've seen, it is (it's my current favorites for Cinematography, Editing, Original Music Score, Sounds, and Visual FX), but if we're talking all time? No, it wouldn't even top Nolan's own resume.

Do expect any of this to turn you over? Fuck no

By archaic, I mean it's just the revolving pod with time separated by glass, it's not even the flux capacitor sending the Delorean back in time. Nolan can shoot all that in a warehouse over the weekend. You can tell he had 200 million to play with for sure, shame they wish they had about 150 of that back right about now.

Reign in Blood wrote:

DancesWithWerewolves wrote:

Reign in Blood wrote:

DancesWithWerewolves wrote:Tenet's lack of character development (let alone Character Names) is definitely it's achilles heel. It's like Nolan went out of his way to make a caricature of what his haters claim about his movies. Still a technical marvel though. I'd say still one of the better films I watched in 2020...but I've only watched like 11 movies from this year so that's not saying much lol.

Hit me with why it was such a technical marvel. I liked the reverse shit, especially some of the car chase sequences, but that partially reminded me of the Matrix. But the lynch pin sequence of it all, the whole "Time pod" and going back and forth, was pretty archaic. And most of the spy stuff, sweeping landscapes or set pieces, Tom Cruise has done it better in MI. Them scaling up the building though was good shit, I want to do that.

I think it did significantly better than every reference you made (especially The Matrix, which is one I was never impressed by even back in 1999, except maybe for editing, and aside from Tom's stunts and the helicoptor climax sequence in Fallout, I've never really been visually convinced by MI's stuff). It also featured very little CGI, with stunning Imax cinematography to pull it all off. How is it archaic, because it was deliberately avoiding CGI as much as possible? Hell, it being mostly practical and still pulling everything off like it does, as realistic as it does, is precisely why it's a technical marvel. Not a shred visibly comes off a unrealistic or pulled me out of the momentum of what was going on, and in the moment of the movie, I was sucked in. It was after the movie was over I started thinking and feeling cold about any character development and motivation where I ran into problems Seriously, JD Washington's character is literally called "Protagonist"...how lazy is that? I'm also thinking that the "stopping WW3/End of the world" plot point didn't really add up to much.

Now I'm not saying it's the most technically brilliant thing produced to date, if that's what you're thinking. Out of this year, that I've seen, it is (it's my current favorites for Cinematography, Editing, Original Music Score, Sounds, and Visual FX), but if we're talking all time? No, it wouldn't even top Nolan's own resume.

Do expect any of this to turn you over? Fuck no

By archaic, I mean it's just the revolving pod with time separated by glass, it's not even the flux capacitor sending the Delorean back in time. Nolan can shoot all that in a warehouse over the weekend. You can tell he had 200 million to play with for sure, shame they wish they had about 150 of that back right about now.

Oh definitely. Took two months after its release for me to finally be able to see it because theatres weren't showing much in the way of new releases. That's why WB is working that deal with HBO Max now, which has theatre owners pissed.

Also I don't think Tenet really grabs a depressed and stressed audience, through no fault of its own. Not having characters that audiences can get into and overall feel good, made the movie come off even more bleak. Horrible timing (natch)

Monster wrote:Hostiles
I'm not sure what the movie was about. A group of folks traveling from A to B, killing and dying along the way. The end.

Yeah, that one kept bugging me when it came to reviews, so I watched it and wasn't all too impressed with it. The Nightingale has a better opening with family murder/revenge and if I wanted something bleak in storytelling, I'd watch Brimstone with Guy Pierce again. Which is a better movie if you haven't seen it yet.

Havok wrote:

Monster wrote:Hostiles
I'm not sure what the movie was about. A group of folks traveling from A to B, killing and dying along the way. The end.

Yeah, that one kept bugging me when it came to reviews, so I watched it and wasn't all too impressed with it. The Nightingale has a better opening with family murder/revenge and if I wanted something bleak in storytelling, I'd watch Brimstone with Guy Pierce again. Which is a better movie if you haven't seen it yet.

Wasn't the reviews for Hostiles on the middle-of-the-road side? I remember thinking it was alright, but definitely nothing to boast about.