TV/Movies Megathread

[Habbaku]

Has anything seen...

[Eddie Teach]

Just saw Showgirls for the first time.

What was up with all the grunting?

And more importantly, what the fuck was up with the last 15 minutes? It was like they said - well we've made an okay, sexually provocative movie - now how can we make sure it ends up in a train wreck?

I like how the last scene shows that none of the shit that happens in the movie has any effect whatsoever on Berkley's character. 

[Kleves]

Has any[one] seen The Raid: Redemption?

I thought it was excellent. I would recommend it.

[Syt]

Has anything seen...

Note to self: refer to Languish posters as things only behind their backs.

[Eddie Teach]

It has a good point.

[garbon]

I like how the last scene shows that none of the shit that happens in the movie has any effect whatsoever on Berkley's character. 

Fair call.

[Ideologue]

but I think I would have liked it more if it had either been slightly less competent, or rather more ambitious.

What does this even mean?  Your review does not elaborate upon this concept.  You just put it out there and left it, while you go onto other themes: your comments about the actors were positive, you liked the violence, the slo-mo scenes were fun, et cetera.  So how do we come to the conclusion that "slightly less competent" or "rather more ambitious" would solve the "wasted potential"?

The movie may have delivered, but your movie review did not.  Rewrite, resubmit.  Grade: INCOMPLETE

If there was not that glimmer of being more--which would be fine, there a lot of movies that are just actioners that are still great--I almost would have enjoyed it more.  I never sit and watch Predator and think, "Gosh, McTiernan could have really explored these themes."  I don't even know what the theme of Predator is, other than a monster trying to kill Arnold Schwarzennegger.  Hunting for sport is wrong?  OK, I can get behind that.  But it didn't really need to be discussed or explored, and it does not textually raise the issue.

A post-due process world is inherently interesting, but failure to do much with that still wouldn't make much of difference if there hadn't been glimmers of something a bit more meaty, well, than the few thousand pounds of meat that gets dropped in the movie.  They bring up the possibilities time and time again, then take the easy way out, using non-lethal force if it would make the audience question the basic benignity of the characters, and having Dredd set some dehumanized villains on fire when it wouldn't.

I wanted humanized villains set on fire.  I wanted them to go for the gusto.  I wanted him to kill the kids, OK?  And I wanted Anderson to be mad about it.  Or not mad.  Or unreasonably pleased.  Just have a thruline to it.

Now, I'll grant, there are a few nice bits where Anderson faces consequences or makes decisions.  [spoiler]Anderson meets the wife and son of the guy she'd just judged guilty of attempted murder of a judge, and it's the kind of thing I wanted to see.  And there is an excellent bit at the end where she judges a guy not guilty due to duress.  And maybe the movie did have more of what I wanted than I thought it did, but it wasn't coherent with it--Dredd lets some kids who are stupid but certainly bad seeds go, then complains when Anderson lets a tortured man-child go free.  Give me some consistency.  Anderson does quit at the end--but it seems clear enough it's because she questions her competence, not her moral standing.[/spoiler]

I dunno.  Just like with class warfare in Dark Knight Rises, post-apocalyptic fascism is just scenery in this movie.  However, I do judge it less harshly for bringing up interesting topics and then dismissing them, because it's more like Predator, or Terminator, or Die Hard, than it is a five hour digression on why it's important a rich man must dress like a bat and be an asshole to his adoptive father.

But you have a point--yes, I'd have liked it less if it were worse; this is trivially obvious.  It's called: a turn of phrase.  If there is a takeaway from the review, I guess don't go in expecting just a truly dumb and pointless but fun! shoot-em-up as I did, but also do not get your hopes up for a great deal meaningful exploration of what it means to be a judge or to live in Mega City One, as I began to about a third of the way through.

Syt: The Raid: Redemption is something I do want to watch.  I understand that it's Dredd without the 80s-vintage science fiction and the flashes of ambition and intellectualism, hence either better, or maybe worse, BUT YOU CAN NEVER KNOW.

[Liep]

Didn't really expect GoT to premiere at midnight, but it only specified April 1st so I had hoped. When's the US showing scheduled?

[Admiral Yi]

I think it's 8 Eastern tonight.

[Sophie Scholl]

9pm EST and then again at 10 and 11.

[CountDeMoney]

[spoiler]Good effort, Milton.[/spoiler]

[katmai]

[spoiler]Carl is hardcore[/spoiler]

[CountDeMoney]

[spoiler]Carl is hardcore[/spoiler]

lol, no fucking shit, man.

[CountDeMoney]

Oh, and I totally spooged at the promo for the new season of The Killing in June.  Linden and Holder are back.  Sweet.

[katmai]

Well now, i think he done did break.