[Hutnicks]

Chosen (2016)  2/10
 
 
      A very incoherent attempt at yet another "brave resistance to the Nazi's against all odds"  film. Our hero here goes from objecting don't want to get involved to supersoldier resistance fighter in about 2 seconds flat. Based on a true story I am sure but whatever the truth may have been I am dead certain it did not make it into this film. The events and actions just do not add up. Poorly paced, mediocre acting abilities all around and a director who seems to have lost every second storyboard and is just winging it do nothing to engage one in this film. The highlight for me here is the final battle scene where the untrained resistance fighters are actually now more proficient than the German army with their own weapons.
 
 A note about that. While I am sure a lot of low buck efforts cannot get hold of the fibreglass replicas of German armour of the era, they can just like everyone else get hold of the firearms correct for the period. Not doing so is really inexcusable and a pet peeve of mine. Having the majority of the film occur with troops using a weapon that was not even in service until after the war, and not in Hungary for quite some time later is just annoying to anyone who has made the effort to study the era.
 
 The Simpsons episode where Grandpa killed Hitler is a far better use of time than this one.

 

[MikePio]

   
The Force Awakens has the same problem as for example the new Ghostbusters. The whole concept of Ghostbusters is how to replace male cast with female cast and to show that women can do the same job as men. It is not a movie per se and in itself, it is a concept of replacing gender roles. Critics were trying hard to pretend that the film stands on its own and they raised ratings of new Ghostbusters higher than it deserved because they were rooting for girl power to succeed.
 
In the Force they tried to fit new social agendas into mindset of gone era of men dominance. Eastern Zen motifs of older Star Wars ( exclusively male territory) including themes of a male spiritual Guru and his disciples can't work properly when a leading performer is a female. That leads to a simplification of the script so that modern social dynamics is represented in the movie. An evil guy is almost a hipster not a brutal male. A black guy is also of a softer type. He is not a warrior. How can you exploit warrior theme of old Star Wars in new Star Wars when all males deliberately are on the softer side? Can a female deliver warrior ( also Eastern) spirit properly and profoundly?
 
In contrast to most modern blockbusters were social agenda overpowers real life psychology in Warcraft warriors are brutal males in their traditional perception. Women generally are portrayed as child bearers and house keepers except one brave girl who was an outcast. That is why critics found the movie horrible, boring and ugly which it wasn't. Critics wanted that the script served social agendas but it didn't.

 
What is the point of implementing these social agendas in movies? I mean is it gender equality? Political correctness? Racial diversity? In my opinion none of the movies you mentioned including Star Wars and the new Ghostbusters really succeeded in actually portraying these social "modern" ideas in an appropriate way that would benefit the film and its audience. It actually almost seems forced. I think people are advanced and educated enough in the modern world to know that a man and woman should be treated equally and that no one should be judged based on the color of their skin. I mean do we really need that reinforced to excess in more and more films, including Disney movies for children? I realize that sexism and racism still exist in our world but creating this competitive and unrealistic divide between the genders is not doing anything constructive especially since it so blatantly obvious. Including adding a "token" (insert whatever nationality you want) into a movie without any added significance nor purpose to the overall film. In the 90's this problem was not apparent in cinema as it is today. I mean does anyone remember the Xena  the show? She really kicked some major but and was a female warrior but it felt genuine and without any kind of social/political agendas. I feel like the studios think we are some brain dead drones or perhaps at the rate these movies keep coming out, we will become one soon enough.

 

[mutabor]

   
What is the point of implementing these social agendas in movies? I mean is it gender equality? Political correctness? Racial diversity? In my opinion none of the movies you mentioned including Star Wars and the new Ghostbusters really succeeded in actually portraying these social "modern" ideas in an appropriate way that would benefit the film and its audience. It actually almost seems forced. I think people are advanced and educated enough in the modern world to know that a man and woman should be treated equally and that no one should be judged based on the color of their skin.

 
New gender and race theories look at the world through the prism of Marxist teaching called class struggle theory. Where relations between classes are expressed by exploitation and oppression. Marx's goal was to eliminate classes and to built classless society.
 
In the same manner as in Marxism genders and races relations are based on exploitation and oppression ( in new gender and race theories). Men oppress women, cis-gender ( straight) people oppress sexual minorities, white people oppress other races ( a normal person thinks that classes have to co-exist and that hierarchy is a natural trait of humans, a Marxist thinks that co-existence is not acceptable and that destruction of all classes is the only solution) . As in Marxism the solution is elimination of gender and race divisive concepts ( classes) so that society becomes gender-less and race-less. In new gender and race theories they teach that concepts of gender and race are ONLY social constructs and have no relation to biology. 
 
There is a big difference between treating people of another gender and race with tolerance and a doctrine which teaches that there is no inherent differences between genders and races.
 
Intensity and uncompromising quality of new gender and race doctrine dictates aggressive politics of implementation which some people can see in mass media and content ( games, movies etc).
 
Another example. Because they teach that there is no biological and inherent difference between males and females ( only social differences of nurture), they think that a woman HAS to be as bad-ass as a man. Men oppressed women during centuries that is why they look weaker than men. They are not generally weaker because of specific biological traits but because of oppression. A weak woman in Hollywood nowadays is a blasphemy and every woman has to be bad-ass, self-confident and super-smart.

 

[Double-A]

Star Trek Into Darkness. I've seen it several times before today, but technically it is the last movie I watched. I like using the good ol' letter grade system, so I would give it a B.

 

[WraithApe]

 
The Green Elephant - 2/10
 
Maybe for native speakers this is some kind of art-house satire of the Soviet military but as a Westerner, watching it with what I suspect was an appallingly bad translation, it was unfathomable and barely watchable - one long stream of grainy surreal grimness, mostly centered around two men in a dingy cell shouting at one another. The 'cleaning the toilet with a fork' scene made me laugh out loud, though it was probably a metaphor for something serious.
 
I got the distinct impression that everyone involved with the making of this film was borderline insane. Much like watching the films of Jorg Buttgereit or Marian Dora though, there's a kind of car crash fascination that prevented me from turning it off. Perhaps a Russian who's seen it would be kind enough to explain it to me. 

 

 

[Double-A]

Saw Star Trek Beyond today. I'd give it a D. Maybe it suffered from losing J.J. Abrams as the director, I don't know. Considering the fact that Anton Yelchin (the actor for Chekov) died, I hope that they don't continue this rebooted Star Trek franchise further. This particular reboot series wouldn't be whole without him.

 

[mutabor]

 
 
The Green Elephant - 2/10

 

 

[thatonenoob]

Star Trek Beyond - 5.5/10.  Entertaining, but pacing and script and the crazy panning were all off.  Not to mention the 3D graphics looked at least 3 years old.  Who's in charge of the rendering!?

 

[tdockweiler]

Escape from Sobibor - 8.5/10
 
Old "POW" escape type movie that I never heard about until I saw it for sale for $2.00
Starring Alan Arkin and Rutger Hauer.
 
Star Trek Beyond - 4/10
 
Found it rather stupid overall and nearly as dumb as something like "Red Planet" or "Independence Day".
If I was watching it at home I would have probably turned it off or fallen asleep. I actually liked the last one.
Painful to watch really. I really wish I could have fun watching something like this.
 
Midnight Special - 5/10
 
One of the worst i've seen in a long time. Hard to believe considering it has a 83% score on rotten tomatoes and even a good cast and director (director of MUD and Take Shelter!).
Reminded me of "Tomorrowland" and "Starman". Felt really pretentious and all the movie characters talk so slow and like they're half asleep at all times.
It's even worse than "The 5th Wave". Luckily the movie is pretty nice looking and I like the tone of the movie. I think most of the movie is filmed at night.
I would have liked it more if it wasn't so boring.

 

[thatonenoob]

  Escape from Sobibor - 8.5/10
 
Old "POW" escape type movie that I never heard about until I saw it for sale for $2.00
Starring Alan Arkin and Rutger Hauer.
 
Star Trek Beyond - 4/10
 
Found it rather stupid overall and nearly as dumb as something like "Red Planet" or "Independence Day".
If I was watching it at home I would have probably turned it off or fallen asleep. I actually liked the last one.
Painful to watch really. I really wish I could have fun watching something like this.
 
Midnight Special - 5/10
 
One of the worst i've seen in a long time. Hard to believe considering it has a 83% score on rotten tomatoes and even a good cast and director (director of MUD and Take Shelter!).
Reminded me of "Tomorrowland" and "Starman". Felt really pretentious and all the movie characters talk so slow and like they're half asleep at all times.
It's even worse than "The 5th Wave". Luckily the movie is pretty nice looking and I like the tone of the movie. I think most of the movie is filmed at night.
I would have liked it more if it wasn't so boring.

Good to hear that I'm not the only one who didn't like Star Trek Beyond.  The praise that it is getting is absolutely confounding to me.

 

[WraithApe]

 
Matinee - 7/10
 
A couple of years after The Burbs, Joe Dante returned with this now somewhat overlooked gem. Set against the background of The Cuban Missile Crisis, Matinee is as much a homage to the B-movie era as it is a spoof of the times. Dante clearly has a deep affection for the genre and that really comes through in the attention to detail - the film within the film, Mant!, really does look like an authentic monster movie of the day. The actual film stars John Goodman as schlock impresario Lawrence Woolsey, a character obviously modeled on William Castle. Goodman is really perfect casting for the role and has a lot of fun playing it. From what I've read, it's pretty much on the nose: hiring stooges to stir up ballyhoo, installing giant ant legs on the cinema forecourt, seat vibrators, smoke machines and even a guy dressed as a giant ant to run around the aisles scaring the kids during the film. Just like the real Castle, Woolsey comes up with names and even patents for his gimmicks: Atom-o-vision and Rumble-rama promise an experience to beat all others! He was really the P.T. Barnum of his time.
 
The film's always at its best when Goodman is on screen, causing mayhem. Some of the relationships between the kids verge on mawkish (especially the fallout shelter scene) and when it tries to get too serious about the prospect of nuclear annihilation it runs the risk of overreaching. Fortunately though, the politics take a back seat most of the time and it's just a fun, feelgood tribute to a bygone era.

 

[metalsonata]

Star Trek Beyond (2016): 7/10
 
I liked it; other than the action scenes, which were among the most poorly directed and edited action sequences I've seen on the big screen in a long time. No, it still doesn't feel like Star Trek, though it inches a little closer than the previous two films did.

 

[mutabor]

The Neon Demon ( 2016) 8/10
 
Reminded me in some ways Maps to the Stars ( David Cronenberg) - kind of demonic presentation of Hollywood and Los Angeles fashion scene. Didn't clearly understand what metaphor or a set of ideas Refn was exploiting. Or if there is any need to understand meaning when style is the main goal of the director?  
 
The Purge-3 ( 2016) 7/10
 
Effective but very divisive and provocative political thriller/ horror. White American people ( conservatives) were portrayed as axis of evil.
 
Ghostbusters ( 2016) 3/10
 
Horrible.

 

[keepitsimple]

A Fistful of Dollars -7

For a Few Dollars More-7.5
May revise higher later-both classics

 

[purpledrank]

The Big Short 7.5/10
 
An informative and mostly interesting look at how the housing market went to **** in 2008. I would highly recommend that everyone watches this just for the sake of learning of what really happened.