https://m.media-amazon.com/images/M/...3MzE@._V1_.jpg

Great cast, great plot, acting and had you guessing at the edge of your seat.

Murder mystery at its finest. Well done to Rian Johnson who write, produced, and directed it (dude Looper & did Star Wars: The Last Jedi (2017)).

40 million dollar budget, 224 box office. Super legit.
Dad and I couldn't make out what the hell is going on; tried to figure out a few loop holes and most (90%) of them were clarified. Not a lot of slow parts, well kept pacing of a film.

9/10

PS: last legit, well casted, good murder mystery I saw was Murder on the Orient Express and this was just as good.

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/BHi-a1n8t7M/hqdefault.jpg

Marriage story
8/10 acting
8.5/10 story, just cause it was so real life like esp. seeing both sides of struggles.

Starts really strong, which I really really liked, then the acting came super alive (for Scarlett). Great job on Scarlett Johansson, man there was this scene with her Laura Dern and it's mind blowing. Camera stays on Scarlett for a solid scene and you can see how her character comes alive with tears and then tapers and then tears... man, solid acting.

Adam Driver was ok, to me he's still a young guy which is sort of the character he is playing but he just seemed a bit disconnected as he's a one dimension actor. There are 2 scenes of him actually shedding a tear which is good to see (but compared to Scarlett, he seems a tad weak).

Lastly, movie doesn't really end well. Its an ending, with closure but no resolution. (classic example: In the movie 500 days of summer, guy finds a new girl, but never got closure on why his X broke up with him. Zoe just decided one day she didn't love him anymore. It just tapers off without a climax...which is what I was sort of hoping for esp. with such strong acting.

PS. I didn't know why Laura (Scarlett's defense lawyer) in this movie kept on taking off her shirt, maybe it's director's fault.

https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/...yL._SS500_.jpg
can't say i'm a car guy and pretend i know exactly what the story is about during that time / era nor driver to say the least; i must say the pacing of the movie made it truly amazing.
Truly what a movie needs nowadays, great editing and it did exactly that. Thought Matt did a legit job and Christian was totally worthy of being within the role and of character. This is what I like about him, you would never say he's too "Christian". We definitely can say that about Leonardo DiCaprio and to an extend Tom Cruise.

Very refreshing of a movie; I'm sure they butchered it to bits regarding its accuracy and would love to find out what's legit and what's not.

to those who pointed out that it didn't really showcase 1960... yeha, that's kinda true. They only had a few 60s clip on a tube TV, radio and that's about it. I'm sure the pit areas were portrayed right. Outfits were probably true to style and copied from Mad Man, but still decent.

8.5/10, oh, loved the female lead in the movie, Christian's wife who played was really refreshing and thought she did a great job.

https://i.redd.it/updprg4r2dq31.jpg
pretty legit film

Kevin G is in the movie playing himself and Adam killed it in this film. Last time I saw a film of him that I actually liked was about a remote control and he can fast forward / rewind. (think it was called Click).

This time, no fart jokes, just about a hustler wheeling and dealing. Very proud of Adam's acting in this one. Some sport / basketball betting and overall a good movie.

i went in with zero expectations and Adam did a decent job on playing the character. Rest of the cast didn't really do much. Good story, legit pace, back and forth tension which was ok... 8/10

I love your comment about the female lead on this one, because I said the exact same to my girlfriend while watching this one.

Too often Hollywood writes the female wife character as this annoying battle axe that constantly tries to destroy the talented husband's dreams or goals with the tired "You said you'd quit!" "What about the kids!!!" "Wahhhhhh".

I loved how in that driving scene when she was at the wheel, and Christian tells her "they're gonna pay me $100 a day", and she essentially tells him to go for it you idiot, take that money and go.

Loved that. She acted like a normal wife would, we need money, they're paying you well, go for it. Good to see characters written more believably like that.

I agree with some of what you're saying here, about the frenetic pace the movie had. You'd think that after 9 movies, they'd have everything ready to come to a conclusion at the end, but here we are adding even more characters. I assume they were only introduced to set up new spinoffs? Did Poe really reconnect with his lost love, she goes from hating him to loving him again, and then the war is over and she's like nah...

Your other issues with a same sex kiss and a black storm trooper are kind of making you look like one of those creepy right wingers though. I don't think the movie made a big deal of two people kissing at the end who were the same sex, so why are you? They had people kissing at the end of ROTJ, and nobody complained. They weren't the same sex, but they were there kissing "right on the center of the screen"... So if non sequitur characters kissing at the end of Star Wars movies isn't the problem, what is?

And complaining about a random storm trooper being black "with a huge afro"... What are the percentage chances that she'd be black and not white? Do you know the demographics of the Star Wars universe? What if you take into account the types of worlds that would be enslaved by the empire? Especially if you consider the allegory of slavery in real life? Or maybe she wasn't randomly black, maybe she was black because they are going to do something with her character and Lando being related? After all, they set off together at the end of the movie...

Normally I wouldn't even bother to argue these things on the internet, I would just avoid these topics with creepy racist homophobic creepers, but I dunno you've been here a long time so I'll give you the benefit of doubt. (so to make it clear, I'm not calling you a racist or a homophobe, I just don't get why you're taking issue with these specific race based and sex based things from the movie)

^
I look at it as like... the right wingers are going to be like "STAR WARS IS RUINED THE CHURCH DOESN'T APPROVE"... I of course noticed the scene, like anyone else would and the only thing that made me want to roll my eyes a little bit is just the whole idea of a big corporation saying "Look!!! We checked off our gender/race boxes! BUY OUR PRODUCTS!" and that's it. They aren't doing anything for the movement like developing those characters, just flashing it on the screen for that solitary purpose.

That's kind of where I think some people are just a bit... I don't even know what the word is... annoyed? Seems harsh... but just don't like big business acting like it cares? Feels a bit insulting to everyone's intelligence when they handle it that way. Maybe it's more a bias against big business trying to seem like they give a shit than anything to do with actual lesbian kisses or whatever?

I actually came across this post the other day... Apparently they had been trying to get a gay SW character for years, but they've been denied the entire time until that kiss. And the guy who led the campaign is very happy about it


I think I see his point in that Disney isn't actually making a huge deal of having gay characters in Star Wars. There's just two people who kissed, who happen to be gay. It's more normalizing and not making a big deal of it at all.

I'll take his opinion about it over mine or yours or the creepers. I think it's cool that it's being normalized, and the only people making a huge deal over it are the creepers. They did the same thing with Beauty and the Beast.

That kiss was not even the worst one at the end of that movie.. The other had me groaning out loud it was so bad. But maybe I'd been misreading the characters...

I agree the other kiss was much much much more out of place... and kind of gross in a way lol

The best thing to happen to star wars since Lucas sold it

1917 was a 9/10 movie for me.

Just saw it on the new IMAX laser screen (dual 4K digital projectors) and was just blown away from start to end. If you want to be completely taken into a world for 2 hours, forgetting anything else exists, go see it.

As for IMAX Laser, I'm going to have to watch all my solo movies this way from now on. Crisp, amazing contrast, and the sound system was crazy. Gunfire legit sounded like it was in the room, and scenes with planes flying overhead was extremely loud with great surround.

Complaints are that the stuttering from digital projection is still very much there during panning, and was distracting at times. Bright static scenes were a bit shimmery, but I didn't notice this until the very end. In this specific cinema, dialog is a bit echoey, and the cinema had a WAY TOO BRIGHT exit sign beside the screen, which completely illuminates the bottom corner of the screen during dark scenes.

And also, I'm not sure who is responsible for this, but subtitles were HUGE, like legit 16 feet tall if you stood next to them, and lit up the entire scene if there is dialog in a dark scene. I tried to read the english subs during a preview for a chinese movie, and the font was so big, I would get dizzy trying to read it all. You'd have to read probably 30 or 40 feet across for one sentence. There is NO way I'd be able to watch a subtitled movie in this way.

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/i...GwxFimSc08lIAP

holy fuck, i have been dodging this film, but dang was it legit and good. Anthony Hopkins & Jonathan Pryce added up are almost 150 years old and their acting does come into amazing ways of such a great movie.

Story is about the Pope and then the archbishop having a long ass conversation between the two over 2-3 days.

You hear one side of the story, then another and flash back on the life of one. It does showcase a rare aspect of the Vatican and signs and views of the private life of the pope and residences. (They didn't use a green screen, it was all built using models at a studio.)

I personally never felt bored, there are some tension between the two; very soft tension but acted out really well.

I have a Christian background so it does it tie closer on what's going on even though it's Roman Catholic.

It's a simple sleeper movie. Doesn't have the intense lawyer scenes, doesn't have a crazy script of a huge teaching / message, doesn't have tear jerking movements, yet somehow it can be appreciated.

At the end, they cuts in 1 real reel of the actual pope which was really touching. Such a nice touch to a great ending of a movie.

I don't man, didn't do it for me one of the worst bad lip readings I've watched. Maybe I'm just old and crotchety and not in the target demographic.

For real? It's like the sequel to seagulls though :lol
Different strokes i guess. Appreciate the feedback

Talk Radio (1988)
-8.5/10

Watched this the other night. Remembered seeing it as a young teen but didn't really appreciate the gravity of it at the time.
One of Oliver Stone's less notable films i think.
Eric Bogosian did a terrific job acting and co-writing this screenplay, imo.

You know what I can't stay right now? Stupid new reporter saying there's not diversity on nominations.

WTF. If the movie suck, actress can't act, actor can't hold his emotions and portray a role properly, how do you expect someone to nominate for an award. There has to be a find line between nominations / award versus "oh, we need more girls / colored people" cause it'll be better politically correct.

This goes for movies, work and life etc. One should be rewarded based on achievement not to just fit the norm.

https://cdn.cinematerial.com/p/500x/...g?v=1576365561

Didn't think this would be a good movie but it was totally legit. Super solid acting; John Lithgow is a no brainer. Super good at what he does, Charlize Theron was the bomb. She acted well and did something totally wasn't a chick flick nor action type roles.
Nicole Kidman was good but i just couldn't get over her botox all over her face. Not sure if it was cause of her role but man, reminded me of MJ's fake nose and all.
Margot Robbie FINALLY an amazing job that wasn't just cause she's pretty. She was still the eye candy, but there was one scene she nailed it and I would praise her for the actual nomination.

Only thing was the flow of the movie wasn't the best and there were a lot of people in the movie. Good solid watch.

Tough call between charlize (bombshell) versus Scarlett (Marriage story) on who would win.

Charlize pull thru the entire movie but Scarlett had 1-2 solid scene...

oh i would give it to Margot over Laura (marriage story) and over Scarlett (JoJo Rabit: which by the way was a shit film) if i had to choose in the Oscars.

8/10

Stephen King is getting railed for saying he votes for quality not equality for award nominations... and then he followed up when everyone started bringing burning torches up his ass online by clarifying that the problem is at the initial stage where not everyone is given an equal chance and THAT is the problem and where things need to change.

I agree completely with him... there needs to be more opportunities for ethnic diversities in film and arts, but to vote for whichever ones are out there just because they're diverse and not because it was good? Or to throw out other better made films because they weren't as diverse? That doesn't make any sense to me.

https://cdn.flickeringmyth.com/wp-co...20/01/1917.jpg

super legit movie; 1 shot movie done really well. There's a whole new video on how they made the movie. I'm actually glad they didn't use anyone epic famous. Both of them grew on me as the story progressed on. Didn't really care about the loop holes in the movie.

I can see how epic they used 1 shot take for the movie, however, after the 1st 20 minutes, you don't even notice.

Honestly, will this win best picture is hard to say.... it's interesting as the actors didn't really get nominated for anything... I would support them for wining best directing.

*leaked copies available today.

1917 had some insane depth scene filming wise.

story was good,but so many new scenes i never saw before since it was ww1.

so glad this film was loaded with new ideas,nothing re-hashed from any war movie before,But you may get some full metal jacket vibes on the Dark night scenes..its damn good tho.

https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/i...ULHLaLPnLgfeuO

Richard Jewell is a super legit movie. Great acting ALL THE WAY thru with all 3 of the characters. From Kathy + Sam Rockwell and even the guy who played Richard. He did get nominated for best Breakthrough Performance and I honestly have to say truly well deserved. BTW, the director is Clint Eastwood and boy oh boy he's like 90 yrs old now.

PS: Olivia Wilde is aging a lot ahahhaha, guess these ladies are getting old fast with all these high def camera and botox.

I am actually really sad because this film did really shitty in the theaters. In HK, the movie did so bad, it was extremely difficult to even a theater to even watch this at.

1917.

Unpopular opinion, but I didn't like it that much. I would probably give it about a 6/10.
I actually found the seamless "one take" a bit distracting.

There wasn't much to the plot. But I guess the movie was trying to take you through an experience instead, but I guess it didn't work for me cause I wasn't able to find the characters relatable.

I expect a lot of people who watch it at home, or worse yet, pirate it, to have similar opinions. I don't think it's that controversial

Gravity was the same way. They aren't regular movies in a classic sense, but an "experience" with a plot to move things along.

I just watched it last night in the theatre. Lol.
I enjoyed Gravity a lot. Also watched in the theatre.
I also watched Dunkirk which I didn't enjoy and I found it's style a bit similar to 1917.

The issue I had is either I didn't feel like I got to know the characters well, or I didn't like the characters so it was hard for me to be attached.

Now that I think about it, maybe I just liked Sandra Bullock in Gravity. 1917 did purposely cast 2 "unknowns". And they were unknown to me, so that may have been a disadvantage for me. I guess it can work for or against, depending on the viewer.

That's too bad. This should have been right up your alley sounds like

I think the use of unknowns helped me get lost in the movie. In fact it wasn't until a familiar actor appeared that I kind of got pulled out of it (and the audience reacted to him as well). On top of being famous, he's a really weird looking dude, so he stood out from the rest of the characters, and kind of reminded you that you're watching a movie.. He was good in the role, but just weird, like why is Dr. Strange in this bunker? WutFace