- Jun 24, 2014
- 10,107
- 7,389
Founding Member
Cloverfield Paradox
This movie sucked balls. 3/10
Does it have anything to do with the other two? This coulda been done well and made some money.
Cloverfield Paradox
This movie sucked balls. 3/10
Does it have anything to do with the other two? This coulda been done well and made some money.
Collateral Beauty - (A pirate gave it to me.) So this isn't bad movie I don't think - I only made it to 30 minutes. So Jaden Smith's dad is in this and he's the majority owner in a company that is having problems cause his daughter died and he no longer talks to anybody but instead writes letters to death, time and love. So he's nuts and the partners need to fix him so they hire three actors to play Death (Gwenneth Paltrow's Mom), Love (Pirates of the Caribean chick) and Time (token black guy). Will's partners are played by Titanic boob girl and Edward Norton. So it's got some good actors in it. And it has a clever plot. Lots of feels and self-actualizing so if your into that Joe Bob says Check it out.
Collateral beauty - will smith is a top executive at an advertising firm. A few years prior to the movie his daughter dies from a rare cancer and he goes off the deep end ( understandably). This causes the firm to hire three actors to play the parts of entities he's been writing letters to. In the end they all end up helping each other's and a few surprises. It's a descent movie with a good message and great cast. Helen mirren, ed norton, Kiera knightly, Michael Pena round it out. 6/10. No boobs shown or harmed and not a movie that might make the wife want fun time.
Yeah, I just enjoyed it for what it was.American made - after DG’s review I read more into this before watching and at least the director admits that it is a lie based on a true story. It does affect how you view the movie a little. If you strip that away and just look at it as a movie and not a true story it is an ok tom cruise movie. Entertaining but you definitely need to treat it as a fictional story. 6/10
So, I just got back from seeing this, with my interracial neighbors (wife is black, husband is white), where they and I all acknowledge one another's movie addictions and enjoyment of Marvel in particular. The wife, is by far the most excited about the movie, but never has she expressed any excitement about it being a 'black' (empowerment?) film...only as a Marvel film.
(read my post in PF if you want more detail about this aspect)
IMO, it is not a 'black' (empowerment?) film. It is a Marvel superhero film. And one that falls a notch below the others in my mind.
Red Sparrow
I went to see this alone late Saturday night (that's how I roll... mainly because everyone else is asleep and therefore, I don't impinge on family time, and I needed to see this one alone). I should have typed this up that night when my feelings were fresh, but I didn't, then got busy, then the Niger video upset me, now here I am. This movie stirred up a lot of memories and feeling for me.
Background
The movie is based on the book by the same name and approximates the book AS MUCH AS A MOVIE CAN in 2:20 minutes. The author is the real deal. He was a career CIA case officer and station chief and he specialized in "denied areas" which means he was out on his own hanging in the wind a lot. His career was Cold War and post-Cold War. The first 2/3rds of his career were also when case officers actually did things personally before everything became illegal and they had to rely on contacts and contractors to do the actual work. The book is 10 times more graphic than the movie and the book is quirky. Each chapter is based on a food and he puts the recipe at the end of the chapter. I thought it was interesting and liked it because I keep recipes from places... they're like memories. Apparently, a lot of "critics" hated the recipes being in the book... f'em. It is clear that the director and the actors wanted to get the story and characters right. I know they met with the author several times and they weren't f*cking around when they met, they really wanted to understand his world and the world of the characters as much as they could. I think they did well.
The Movie
Nothing you can't read anywhere and I'm not going to give any spoilers, because there would be tons. A prima ballerina with the Bolshoi who came from nothing to reach the pinnacle has a State provided apartment (and, the apartment is accurate and appropriate) for her and her sick mom (who gets the BEST doctors of the elite, not the doctors the masses get) gets a career ending broken leg. Her uncle is high up in the SVR, gives her the reality that she and mom will be booted from the apartment and lose the good docs, and while hot, will be lucky to be a bank teller, and offers her an "out" by coming into his world as he recognizes qualities in her that suit his world (not just that she's hot). She goes to the Sparrow school, and yes, there was a Sparrow school, period. The story then twists and turns and develops up until the end, and there is a BIG, realistic, twist at the end that you don't see coming (and there are a lot of twists along the way). The end isn't a happy one or the one that I think most would expect from the trailers and even while watching the whole movie up until the very end. I hope it does well enough box office wise that they make the two sequels.
Critic and Moviegoer Reviews
I read all the IMDB reviews before I saw it.
Moviegoers seem to fall into one of two categories:
Critics: F*ck 99% of them. Their reviews are based on political correctness and they drone on and on about "gratuitous and graphic unnecessary sex and violence." What the f*ck do these people know? EVERY SINGLE scene with violence, nudity and sex in Red Sparrow is 100% required for the movie to hammer points home to the viewer (and the movie is nowhere near as graphic as the book). Again, I liked Atomic Blonde a lot for what it was... but the ENTIRE MOVIE is nothing but gratuitous sex and violence for the sake of... well, gratuitous sex and violence, but they didn't poo poo Atomic Blonde this way. F*ck them.
- Those who only give it a 1. These people fall into one of two categories:
- Those who thought and wanted it to be another Salt (liked it), Atomic Blonde (liked it), or Black Widow (I don't do comic books). These are the people who want to see the fantasy of a 130 pound woman be able to best a 180 pound man with equal training with endless ridiculous action (which is entertaining) and a pat ending. Oh, and they don't mind big plot holes like in Atomic Blonde (which I really liked). Red Sparrow isn't any of those movies, period. Red Sparrow is pretty f*cking close to real life, and the author knew what he was doing.
- Those who b*tch about bad Russian accents and the use of 3.5" floppy disks in a post Cold War setting. F'ck these people... reminds me of bozos I sit next to on domestic flights who on takeoff, look at their watch to time the roll to lift off and then make some dumb f*ck comment about the pilot. Bad Russian accents? So f*cking what? In Hunt for Red October, they spoke sh*tty Russian with English subtitles for 30 seconds then the "Russians" all spoke with British, Australian, and the ever famous Lithuanian-Scottish accent. Did it ruin the movie? F*ck no! ... and f*ck these mental midgets. They neither get, nor ever will get, what was right about this movie and what real life is like.
- Those that give it an 8-10. They get it for what it is, even if they don't really GET it in the way I did. They weren't looking for a fantasy action flick and appreciate it as a non-Bond/Bourne movie about espionage/spying. I could at least drink beer with these people.
My Thoughts
Here's what people don't understand about this movie... it is NOT about a spy who uses her body. It is about a SURVIVOR doing whatever it takes to SURVIVE and take care of her mother and turns to espionage to SURVIVE and take care of her mother, PERIOD. You have no idea how prevalent this is in former Soviet places for young women.
I had several conversations in the past with G2 about this (his wife is Polish) and I've talked about it a LOT in the PF... the fact that the "survival gene" is much stronger still in Russians than it is in the West and most don't get that. Watch this movie and you will finally get it. NOTHING she does in this movie is an exaggeration, not a damn thing. Even when she does get violent, the damage she does is 100% in keeping with her size and training (or lack thereof for violence... no Bourne fighting ****). Her violent acts are those of a SURVIVOR and I've witnessed many Russian/Ukrainian girls do the same exact thing to sh*tbird men. Their "flash to bang" and instant survival instinct violence is frightening and jarring to people not accustomed to seeing it, therefore "critics" call it gratuitous and BS... F*ck them, it's real.
She's a survivor, and she does. There are no silly escapes or situations where you should say, "Really? For real?" Please trust me, the movie is genuine in its regards to survival sex and violence when it comes to some Russian/Ukrainian women. I've known, know, and rescued a lot of women exactly like Dominika, exactly. Eastern Orthodox Christian's in Russia/Ukraine have a lot of superstitions and still visit "witches" living in the forest for advice (think of our palm/crystal ball people), but they BELIEVE it. I chalk it up to the "survivor gene", but I have NEVER met women that can read people, especially men, and read a situation and what is going on, better than some Russian/Ukrainian women. They have to learn this from an incredibly early age (like 5) or they get broken. The movie really caught me off guard in the way the director handled the character and the way J-law portrayed her. They did it right. She did it great. I get that the average viewer won't pick up on this due to their experiences, but the author of the book knew, and the director and J-law conveyed it as well as you can.
Spying/Espionage: for the Soviets/Russians, it is almost always, like 95% of the time, a straight up financial transaction: money for secrets, period. They did this really well with Mary Louise Parker's character in the movie (her role was funny and great, but really accurate too). The other 5% falls in the realm of recruiting true ideologues, angry people, and getting turned through sex/"love" or personal compromise. The movie covers all of them, some subtly, some not, but they get it right.
I liked when the mom told her "don't give them all of you." That may sound pretty standard to Western women, but it's another Russian female thing you'd have to understand. Giving sex can be purely transactional in a survival way, but you make sure that you "don't give them all of you." This hit home. I've actually had two tell me they wanted to give me all of them. This author has been there, and again, the director did it right.
I liked Joel Edgerton's character Nate Nash. He didn't turn out to be a sap like he would've in a stock spy movie. His character was a pro. A human being, but a pro. Again, director and actor got it right, and again, the author has clearly been there, done that in person.
All the other characters were good too and all were people I've "met" before.
There were lots of little things I liked that reminded me of things. I've forgotten too many and need to see it again, I was mentally distracted with thoughts and memories while watching the movie. I'll update when I do.
I've kind of f*cked up what I wanted to right the other night. Not very coherent here and kind of rambled, but I'll see it again and try round two.
Bottom line, yes, you get to see boobs and graphic violence, both are absolutely necessary to the story. I really liked this, but this was really personal for me. I wasn't sure it was going to be, I hoped it would be, and it was.
Believe it or not, I’ve never read LeCarre. I did see TTSS and liked it as well as some of his other stuff made into movies. I preferred Frederick Forsythe when they were both in their prime. Most of my favorite “spy/espionage” books are kind of quirky, slow, and dry, like real life, and I don’t think most people like them as much as Mitch Rapp or Bourne. I like all of them, but definitely have some favorites and categorize them appropriately and go from that starting point.Great write up DG. Was thinking about buying the book as I'm not much into going to the movies but may go check this one out.
Have you seen, or read Tinker Tailor Solider Spy? How would you compare the films?
Red Sparrow
I went to see this alone late Saturday night (that's how I roll... mainly because everyone else is asleep and therefore, I don't impinge on family time, and I needed to see this one alone). I should have typed this up that night when my feelings were fresh, but I didn't, then got busy, then the Niger video upset me, now here I am. This movie stirred up a lot of memories and feeling for me.
Background
The movie is based on the book by the same name and approximates the book AS MUCH AS A MOVIE CAN in 2:20 minutes. The author is the real deal. He was a career CIA case officer and station chief and he specialized in "denied areas" which means he was out on his own hanging in the wind a lot. His career was Cold War and post-Cold War. The first 2/3rds of his career were also when case officers actually did things personally before everything became illegal and they had to rely on contacts and contractors to do the actual work. The book is 10 times more graphic than the movie and the book is quirky. Each chapter is based on a food and he puts the recipe at the end of the chapter. I thought it was interesting and liked it because I keep recipes from places... they're like memories. Apparently, a lot of "critics" hated the recipes being in the book... f'em. It is clear that the director and the actors wanted to get the story and characters right. I know they met with the author several times and they weren't f*cking around when they met, they really wanted to understand his world and the world of the characters as much as they could. I think they did well.
The Movie
Nothing you can't read anywhere and I'm not going to give any spoilers, because there would be tons. A prima ballerina with the Bolshoi who came from nothing to reach the pinnacle has a State provided apartment (and, the apartment is accurate and appropriate) for her and her sick mom (who gets the BEST doctors of the elite, not the doctors the masses get) gets a career ending broken leg. Her uncle is high up in the SVR, gives her the reality that she and mom will be booted from the apartment and lose the good docs, and while hot, will be lucky to be a bank teller, and offers her an "out" by coming into his world as he recognizes qualities in her that suit his world (not just that she's hot). She goes to the Sparrow school, and yes, there was a Sparrow school, period. The story then twists and turns and develops up until the end, and there is a BIG, realistic, twist at the end that you don't see coming (and there are a lot of twists along the way). The end isn't a happy one or the one that I think most would expect from the trailers and even while watching the whole movie up until the very end. I hope it does well enough box office wise that they make the two sequels.
Critic and Moviegoer Reviews
I read all the IMDB reviews before I saw it.
Moviegoers seem to fall into one of two categories:
Critics: F*ck 99% of them. Their reviews are based on political correctness and they drone on and on about "gratuitous and graphic unnecessary sex and violence." What the f*ck do these people know? EVERY SINGLE scene with violence, nudity and sex in Red Sparrow is 100% required for the movie to hammer points home to the viewer (and the movie is nowhere near as graphic as the book). Again, I liked Atomic Blonde a lot for what it was... but the ENTIRE MOVIE is nothing but gratuitous sex and violence for the sake of... well, gratuitous sex and violence, but they didn't poo poo Atomic Blonde this way. F*ck them.
- Those who only give it a 1. These people fall into one of two categories:
- Those who thought and wanted it to be another Salt (liked it), Atomic Blonde (liked it), or Black Widow (I don't do comic books). These are the people who want to see the fantasy of a 130 pound woman be able to best a 180 pound man with equal training with endless ridiculous action (which is entertaining) and a pat ending. Oh, and they don't mind big plot holes like in Atomic Blonde (which I really liked). Red Sparrow isn't any of those movies, period. Red Sparrow is pretty f*cking close to real life, and the author knew what he was doing.
- Those who b*tch about bad Russian accents and the use of 3.5" floppy disks in a post Cold War setting. F'ck these people... reminds me of bozos I sit next to on domestic flights who on takeoff, look at their watch to time the roll to lift off and then make some dumb f*ck comment about the pilot. Bad Russian accents? So f*cking what? In Hunt for Red October, they spoke sh*tty Russian with English subtitles for 30 seconds then the "Russians" all spoke with British, Australian, and the ever famous Lithuanian-Scottish accent. Did it ruin the movie? F*ck no! ... and f*ck these mental midgets. They neither get, nor ever will get, what was right about this movie and what real life is like.
- Those that give it an 8-10. They get it for what it is, even if they don't really GET it in the way I did. They weren't looking for a fantasy action flick and appreciate it as a non-Bond/Bourne movie about espionage/spying. I could at least drink beer with these people.
My Thoughts
Here's what people don't understand about this movie... it is NOT about a spy who uses her body. It is about a SURVIVOR doing whatever it takes to SURVIVE and take care of her mother and turns to espionage to SURVIVE and take care of her mother, PERIOD. You have no idea how prevalent this is in former Soviet places for young women.
I had several conversations in the past with G2 about this (his wife is Polish) and I've talked about it a LOT in the PF... the fact that the "survival gene" is much stronger still in Russians than it is in the West and most don't get that. Watch this movie and you will finally get it. NOTHING she does in this movie is an exaggeration, not a damn thing. Even when she does get violent, the damage she does is 100% in keeping with her size and training (or lack thereof for violence... no Bourne fighting ****). Her violent acts are those of a SURVIVOR and I've witnessed many Russian/Ukrainian girls do the same exact thing to sh*tbird men. Their "flash to bang" and instant survival instinct violence is frightening and jarring to people not accustomed to seeing it, therefore "critics" call it gratuitous and BS... F*ck them, it's real.
She's a survivor, and she does. There are no silly escapes or situations where you should say, "Really? For real?" Please trust me, the movie is genuine in its regards to survival sex and violence when it comes to some Russian/Ukrainian women. I've known, know, and rescued a lot of women exactly like Dominika, exactly. Eastern Orthodox Christian's in Russia/Ukraine have a lot of superstitions and still visit "witches" living in the forest for advice (think of our palm/crystal ball people), but they BELIEVE it. I chalk it up to the "survivor gene", but I have NEVER met women that can read people, especially men, and read a situation and what is going on, better than some Russian/Ukrainian women. They have to learn this from an incredibly early age (like 5) or they get broken. The movie really caught me off guard in the way the director handled the character and the way J-law portrayed her. They did it right. She did it great. I get that the average viewer won't pick up on this due to their experiences, but the author of the book knew, and the director and J-law conveyed it as well as you can.
Spying/Espionage: for the Soviets/Russians, it is almost always, like 95% of the time, a straight up financial transaction: money for secrets, period. They did this really well with Mary Louise Parker's character in the movie (her role was funny and great, but really accurate too). The other 5% falls in the realm of recruiting true ideologues, angry people, and getting turned through sex/"love" or personal compromise. The movie covers all of them, some subtly, some not, but they get it right.
I liked when the mom told her "don't give them all of you." That may sound pretty standard to Western women, but it's another Russian female thing you'd have to understand. Giving sex can be purely transactional in a survival way, but you make sure that you "don't give them all of you." This hit home. I've actually had two tell me they wanted to give me all of them. This author has been there, and again, the director did it right.
I liked Joel Edgerton's character Nate Nash. He didn't turn out to be a sap like he would've in a stock spy movie. His character was a pro. A human being, but a pro. Again, director and actor got it right, and again, the author has clearly been there, done that in person.
All the other characters were good too and all were people I've "met" before.
There were lots of little things I liked that reminded me of things. I've forgotten too many and need to see it again, I was mentally distracted with thoughts and memories while watching the movie. I'll update when I do.
I've kind of f*cked up what I wanted to right the other night. Not very coherent here and kind of rambled, but I'll see it again and try round two.
Bottom line, yes, you get to see boobs and graphic violence, both are absolutely necessary to the story. I really liked this, but this was really personal for me. I wasn't sure it was going to be, I hoped it would be, and it was.
Black Panther - I love the character and the way they’ve conceived him in this “Marvel Cinematic Universe”. It has basic comic movie elements and its own twists. Visually rich.
It’s awfully preachy in spots, some of which is annoying, some of which I liked, some of which echoed “I’d like to teach the world to sing...” which is nice but saccharine. I don’t want to give spoilers so I’ll leave it at that.
All in all, on the top shelf of Marvel’s origin movies.