Ah, sorry. My humour detector seems to be on the blink.

Pibb is somewhat regional; they had it at Ruby Tuesday at least as of early 2015.

That kids in the theater story is nuts, very lucky to have an Alamo Drafthouse (strict no texting/talking) and 2+ other "serious" non-multiplexes near me. I don't think I've been to a multiplex since January.

I've yelled at texters literally across a huge theater (this was during Fire Walk With Me, so I knew in advance that for that film I would quickly and aggressively shame people if necessary). Texters almost always stop for the duration of the movie. The last two times I shushed talkers (along with a look if possible) they did stop, but talkers often do not. It's a different mindset than texters, especially if they're on a date and feeling bold about their ****ing cute little whispering.

Lately I've tried to cool off a bit and have to weigh the disturbance of me saying something vs. the disturbance itself.

I'm often at shows with low attendance in large theaters, so people think it's okay to put their feet up. However, in 2 of my theaters the entire rows are attached, so when people put their feet up 10 seats away from you, you feel it as if they're kicking your seat. Every time they shift a bit, they're kicking you.

The problem there is there's no easy way to communicate to them what the issue is while a movie is playing. In most cases they likely don't realize they're "kicking" your seat, but there's no equivalent of "SHHH" or "PUT THE PHONE AWAY PLEASE" that doesn't make you sound like an idiot. "PUT YOUR FEET DOWN PLEASE!" - yes, the person is rude period for putting their feet on a seat in a public place, but not rude enough for it to be appropriate for a fellow civilian to say something to them. It's not clear why you're telling them to put their feet down.

"PUT YOUR FEET DOWN PLEASE BECAUSE THE WHOLE ROW IS ATTACHED AND THEREFORE WHEN YOU PUT YOUR FEET UP I FEEL IT AS IF YOU ARE KICKING MY SEAT AND EVERY TIME YOU MOVE IT IS LIKE YOU ARE KICKING ME, SO PLEASE STOP THANK YOU!"

There has been a few shootings here in Florida in movie theaters over talking/texting.

Here is one at "Lone Survivor"

Update: Retired Police Captain Charged After Florida Movie Theater Shooting
http://crooksandliars.com/2014/01/on...ver-cell-phone

jeez, that was for texting during the ****ing previews.

Caught Nocturnal Animals last night.

Felt like an improved version of The Counselor by Ridley Scott, got the same vibes in style and design -- as a side note, I need to give that directors cut a watch. Thought Aaron Taylor-Johnson and Michael Shannon were excellent. And once again seeing Armie Hammer made me think wtf did this guy do to ever get a job.

7/10 for me.

Saw Manchester by the Sea today. Wildly overrated. You Can Count on Me is one of my all-time favorites so I had incredibly high expectations, especially given the reviews. But somehow the film, which is entirely about grief, made me feel almost nothing. Casey Affleck was good but certainly not the amazing performance it's been hyped as. Young actor who plays his nephew was fine also but nothing awards-worthy. Slow and over-long by about 40 minutes. Big disappointment for me.

Star Wars Retcon

A lot of stuff blows up. A lot! It's the saltines of action films. It will fill you up but it's just empty calories with no flavour.

The blind guy is a horrifically bad actor.



Grade: C

Rogue One

Very good.

Amazingly tough job to produce a stand-alone story that in some sense has to bridge two disparate storylines. There is very little in III that gets you to IV.

Sometimes I wonder how much we really understand about grief. It's so personal, and none of us experience it in quite the same way. I thought the script tapped into the way I have experienced grief, which is a certain kind of numbness, but I had none of the violent reactions displayed by Affleck's character. For months I was emotionally numb, and at times I still am, but one day I just felt a little better. What I think the movie got exactly right is that grief, for me anyway, wasn't a process of stages, but one thing that one day got better somehow.

Update: shushed someone today, not sure on the demographic. Might have been a couple, slight chance it was a guy talking to himself. My shush led to 1-2 other people acting quickly on subsequent shushes, and it gradually died down. Didn't stop completely, but was quiet most of the time. This may have been just because they were making out more. At least twice I gave long hard looks in their direction, but still couldn't spot where they were. If I had been able to pick them out for sure and if it had continued to the same extent, I had tentative plans for a loud "STOP THE WHISPERING" followed by a lobby visit if still necessary.

There is a 5% chance that the long hard looks contributed to the stoppage.

On a related note, Easter break of 2000 I saw Aida on Broadway with my mom, step-dad, and great-aunt, and my mom got more and more vocally furious with a whispering couple in back of us. I was ashamed of this at the time, but now fully support her and might have ****ing lost it if I was the same as I am now. I'm going to apologize to her for being critical of her at the time.



More appropriately:

Midnight Special, which I just watched on HBO, is quite good. Best not to have any idea what it's about.

Cool, I recorded it. I like Michael Shannon.
99 homes was good too.

Did I not post about Return to Oz? Loved it, didn't expect to (had seen as a kid). Way better imo than its contemporary dark fantasy films like Labyrinth and Dark Crystal.

It's not a sequel to the classic film, more based on the books. However, it works very well as a disturbing sort of follow-up to the classic. The Kansas scenes in the beginning feel like "hey, guess what? This is lower class farm life in the late 19th century - not singing and dancing on a sound stage". Dorothy is taken to a mental asylum because she can't let go of Oz - seems perfectly reasonable, no? Some stuff happens there, and there's a potential interpretation (that I tend to buy into) that's extremely disturbing.

In Oz we continue the dark disturbing tone, except there's well-done puppets and effects and it's a well told story.

Absolutely worth watching as a reality-check follow-up to Wizard of Oz, or if you're a fan of that style.

In keeping with the theme, Where the Wild Things Are I disliked, as I suspected I would from that horrific early trailer that the internet went crazy over 7 years ago.



If you don't think the first 60% of that trailer is the worst thing that's ever been put on film, I don't know what to tell you. (A brave soul already fought that losing battle in the OOT thread years ago though.) How un-self-aware do you have to be to not realize that 100% of the reason you feel "omg this trailer made me feel all the feels for lost childhood" is because of the song lyrics and melody (a song that is not in the film) and nothing whatsoever that the trailer indicates about the content of the film?

And that ****ing awful trailer moment where he's staring out the window at school with tears in his eyes (so we see how misunderstood he is) is actually a semi-humorous bit in the film, FYI. Deceptive trailers FTW.

But anyway...movie is not for kids at all, not so much from inappropriate content as that it's kinda incoherent and directionless even for adults. It wants to say some stuff about growing up etc. but nothing sticks. The indie score is, in the beginning especially, as pervasively manipulative as that trailer might have you believe. This for me is of course the gravest possible sin.

The aesthetic is unbelievably unappealing too. People have said the effects are noteworthy but idk, 40 years after Sweetums I would ****ing hope we have walking puppets of this quality (and I'd take Sweetums or the Fraggle Rock giant family any day over these).

More puppets with Little Shop of Horrors (musical), the "Intended Version". Incredibly impressive puppet; from this layperson's perspective, it's the most impressive large puppet I'm aware of. Better than the T-Rex in JP.

The songs mostly don't do anything for me, which is a problem in a musical. Although one of the songs does have one of those brilliant lines that make you randomly think about it in the shower.

I suspect that if I had seen the standard ending I would have been fairly down on this. With the intended version though I'm pretty satisfied. I was not nearly as high on this film as of Thursday night after I saw it, and it has grown in stature in my mind since then 1) because of one song line and 2) because of the non-standard ending and 3) because of the puppet.

Oh and completely forgot the sublime homoerotic Bill Murray cameo!

Yea this is worth seeing in the director's cut. Interesting, I really did not think so immediately afterwards.

Spoiler if you do plan on watching anytime soon, but if not (first 3:45 is pretty safe if you're familiar with the premise):

I agree it was a pretty realistic representation of grief however that didn't make it a particularly good film, at least for me. Michelle Williams' character was woefully underwritten. Best scenes were with her but she was hardly in it. The character of Kyle Chandler's ex-wife was a weird throwaway and Matthew Broderick had a bizarre and thankless cameo role.

There was also almost zero development of any relationship between Affleck and his brother. Were they close? Who knows. Aside from one flashback scene of him briefly hugging his kids, there was no emotional connection shown between Affleck and his children. I mean he's a dad, we can assume he loves his kids, but there was nothing beyond that.

Also way too long, just no way a small slice of life movie like this needed to be over 2 and a quarter hours. And it just sort of petered out, no real ending to speak of. Again, I get that real life doesn't have pat endings, but it did not make for a satisfying movie.

I'm mystified by the nearly unanimous over-the-top praise this movie is getting.

I agree it was too long, and it really didn't get to me emotionally, but I think some of your complaints about the film would demand the narrative be changed substantially to rectify them. Manchester had much in common with Arrival, which I found more affecting, at least in terms of narrative structure.

I'm guessing you guys haven't seen the director's cut of Margaret?

Man I couldn't disagree more with this, Casey Affleck was incredible. That one scene towards the end - with him & Michelle - just explodes with emotion right off the screen.

Rogue One was decent but well fleshed out characters were even more important to this film than other Star Wars movies, and the main guys weren't that interesting. For one thing, why did they have to be so serious? Why is it that only the sidekicks got some jokes? Han Solo's levity is one of the key reasons that character is so beloved after all.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's Donnie Yen. Terrific martial artist but lousy actor. Grinning is about all can do.

One thing I will say about Rogue One, it does have a big set of balls for a SW movie.

Agree it was way too serious for a movie which is ultimately a cheesy space opera.

Have a feeling Denis Villeneuve may become a household name with this one. He's the best director nobody (besides the type of ppl that would read this thread) has heard of.

He's directed 7 movies, and the lowest Rotten Tomato score is 75%. That is not easy!

Wow. That looks amazing. Gonna blow the Scar Jo version of Ghost in the Shell out of the water.

OMGOMGOMG

Just showed it to my GF and she asked if I had a chub. She knows me so well.

So does this mean Deckard is not a replicant?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk