Let's Talk Movies #36 - 2020 - Yep it is a new decade

There is nothing in the trailers that makes me think these people are a family.
I know this is nitpicky of me and very annoying, but it bugs me so much just how clean everything looks. Like it's supposed to take place in the 60's but it looks so crisp and clean that it's actually distracting.

I know this is my fault for most of the movies I've watched over the last couple of years being pre-1970 but it still bugs me when I see the trailer. I do also agree that there is nothing in the trailer that makes them feel like a family.


I saw Thunderbolts and Sinners a couple of weeks ago and I'm going to them again this weekend with my brother. They're both excellent films, very different movies I know but still an entertaining double feature. Sinners in particular is a movie I've been enjoying turning over in my head just thinking about the layers to the plot. It's an incredibly smart movie. Gorgeous soundtrack. I loved Thunderbolts too but I do wish they had been able to let Ava (Ghost) do more. I've been a fan of Hannah John-Kamen since Killjoys, she's very good. It would have been nice to see her get a bit more heavy lifting plot wise instead of just becoming a plot device in second half. Florence Pugh and Lewis Pullman in particular were amazing.
 
There is nothing in the trailers that makes me think these people are a family.

Also, the trailers haven’t “grabbed me” to want to watch it like Superman or even Thunderbolts did.

And I guess the universe needs Pedro Pascal on screen 289,453,762 times. 🤷🏻‍♀️

Bummer. We skipped the credits. What did I miss.

There’s two post credits scenes. One is a funny interaction in a grocery store. The other one at the very end of the credits are The New Avengers (and Bob!) discussing being sued by Captain America and issues from space and they get a distress signal from a spacecraft with a “4”.

Sinners in particular is a movie I've been enjoying turning over in my head just thinking about the layers to the plot. It's an incredibly smart movie. Gorgeous soundtrack.

l’m still thinking about the various themes in Sinners since I’ve seen it.

Florence Pugh and Lewis Pullman in particular were amazing.

Lewis Pullman is one of the “nepo babies” that I think has actually earned his work. Although his dad does seem like a normal person, so there’s that.
 
Just saw mission impossible. It was way too long and the first hour was horrible, like they really should have done some major editing. Way too much exposition
 
I’m going to see Mission: Impossible - The Final Reckoning in IMAX tomorrow morning. I’ll do a review (in spoiler) as soon as I can. I’ll admit that I’m the most nervous about the runtime (2 hrs 49 minutes).
 
I’m going to see Mission: Impossible - The Final Reckoning in IMAX tomorrow morning. I’ll do a review (in spoiler) as soon as I can. I’ll admit that I’m the most nervous about the runtime (2 hrs 49 minutes).
The big stunts were fine, it just had a lot of flashbacks and a lot of them explaining what they were going to do before they showed what they were doing.
 
I’m going to see Mission: Impossible - The Final Reckoning in IMAX tomorrow morning. I’ll do a review (in spoiler) as soon as I can. I’ll admit that I’m the most nervous about the runtime (2 hrs 49 minutes).

That sounds too long just to keep watching stunts. I have wanted to watch this movie. Now I am not sure.
 
sinners is supposed to be a Horror movie. I don’t see horror movies but should I make an exception ?
 
sinners is supposed to be a Horror movie. I don’t see horror movies but should I make an exception ?
It's not that scary honestly, it's mostly classified as a horror movie because it has vampires but you could also make the argument that it qualifies as a musical. It is very tense, more thriller level than horror level. That said it is also very violent and bloody. It's a fantastic movie but I do recall you not being fond of those things in movies so I figured I'd mention it.
 
It's not that scary honestly, it's mostly classified as a horror movie because it has vampires but you could also make the argument that it qualifies as a musical. It is very tense, more thriller level than horror level. That said it is also very violent and bloody. It's a fantastic movie but I do recall you not being fond of those things in movies so I figured I'd mention it.
Thanks. You are correct. I don’t like violent and bloody movies. I don’t like musicals either (some exceptions though).
 
The F1 drivers were given a special screening in Monaco this week. Reading between the lines of the carefully PR'd responses afterwards, they don't think much of the story. Understandably. A few hints at who got cameos dropped, but nothing really substantial.

I wonder if it was weird for them to see the drivers in the background who have either lost their drives or changed teams. There's quite a few differences between the 2024 grid and the 2025 one.
 
Today, I saw Mission: Impossible - The Final Reckoning in IMAX. Being that it is in its opening weekend, I will put my review in spoiler.

If you are a BIG fan of the Mission: Impossible franchise, Tom Cruise, and/or spy action films, I highly recommend this film. Otherwise, you will probably want to skip this or wait until it's streaming.

I give this film an 8.7/10 overall - mainly for the quality of the action and stunts. If you really enjoy watching stunts in films, it's worth it to watch this in IMAX. I do think they left space for Tom Cruise to possibly come back as Ethan Hunt, or for the series to transition to something else with (I'm thinking) others on the IMF team.

Before the film starts, you are greeted by Tom Cruise with a message of welcome, his love for filmmaking, and, "We made this for YOU!!!!" 😁

What's good/great:
1) Most of the stunts.
2) Yeah, that's actually Cruise with the biplane for that "final stunt". 😲
3) Luther's final message. 🥹
4) Bringing back Donloe from the first film.
5) Biplane stunt: Gabriel telling Ethan that, “Only one of us has a parachute. Good Luck! 😉", and then.........🤣

What's meh/bad:
1) This film didn't need to be two hours and forty-nine minutes long.
2) I understand the need for some flashbacks to the previous seven films. We didn't need this many flashbacks.
3) It could be somewhat hard to follow if you hadn't watched some of the previous Mission: Impossible films.
4) Some of the moments at Mount Weather showing the conflicts with POTUS (Angela Bassett) were 🙄 to watch.
 
Last edited:
And I guess the universe needs Pedro Pascal on screen 289,453,762 times. 🤷🏻‍♀️

Some actors go through periods where they are "everywhere" because all their projects come out around the same time, even when they were filmed over a period of 2-3 years. Benedict Cumberbatch has been a victim of this phenomenon once or twice.
 
Today, I saw Mission: Impossible - The Final Reckoning in IMAX. Being that it is in its opening weekend, I will put my review in spoiler.

If you are a BIG fan of the Mission: Impossible franchise, Tom Cruise, and/or spy action films, I highly recommend this film. Otherwise, you will probably want to skip this or wait until it's streaming.

I give this film an 8.7/10 overall - mainly for the quality of the action and stunts. If you really enjoy watching stunts in films, it's worth it to watch this in IMAX. I do think they left space for Tom Cruise to possibly come back as Ethan Hunt, or for the series to transition to something else with (I'm thinking) others on the IMF team.

Before the film starts, you are greeted by Tom Cruise with a message of welcome, his love for filmmaking, and, "We made this for YOU!!!!" 😁

What's good/great:
1) Most of the stunts.
2) Yeah, that's actually Cruise with the biplane for that "final stunt". 😲
3) Luther's final message. 🥹
4) Bringing back Donloe from the first film.
5) Biplane stunt: Gabriel telling Ethan that, “Only one of us has a parachute. Good Luck! 😉", and then.........🤣

What's meh/bad:
1) This film didn't need to be two hours and forty-nine minutes long.
2) I understand the need for some flashbacks to the previous seven films. We didn't need this many flashbacks.
3) It could be somewhat hard to follow if you hadn't watched some of the previous Mission: Impossible films.
4) Some of the moments at Mount Weather showing the conflicts with POTUS (Angela Bassett) were 🙄 to watch.
I should have mentioned i am not a huge MI fan. I basically go to all movies except those that really repel me.
 
I'm seeing Lilo and Stitch tomorrow or Monday and Friendship on tuesday
 
I hope the lesson Disney learns is to stop doing them!

SIGH.

I WISH. And I think How to Train Your Dragon is DreamWorks’ first live-action film.

Problem is, they are making enough money that they probably think it’s worth it.

At least (from what it appears) with Lilo & Stitch, they had enough sense to do filming in actual Hawaii. I didn’t see Snow White, but one of the many rants I kept hearing about it is that it looked like it was entirely done on a sound stage. They spent all that money and retakes on it and they didn’t even consider really using an actual forest. 🙄
 
Last edited:
I saw a LOT of people complaining online that some of the plot points in the new L&S undermined the point of the original.

I haven’t seen Lilo & Stitch yet, but I’ve seen some angry remarks about the ending in particular. I don’t want any possible spoilers about it until the holiday weekend ends tomorrow.

I may see Lilo & Stitch tomorrow or maybe next weekend, but there’s Karate Kid: Legends (and whatever stunts Jackie Chan is apparently still doing! 😱). Then Life of Chuck opens nationwide on June 13 and then it’s basically nonstop blockbusters until mid-August.
 
Last edited:
SIGH.

I WISH. And I think How to Train Your Dragon is DreamWorks’ first live-action film.

Problem is, they are making enough money that they probably think it’s worth it.
I think How to Train Your Dragon might be good based on the trailers.

I'm not really against Live Action remakes per se. But there has to be something about them that makes it worth going to. Not a shot-by-shot remake and not a remake that misses the entire point of the original. But a new take on the story.

Cinderella, for example, is an ancient story that has been told many times in many ways. The "live action remake" of Cinderella was a new take on the story and it was good.

But most of the rest have not been good. So maybe it's less that Disney needs to stop doing these live-action remakes than that they need to make better movies.
 
I saw a LOT of people complaining online that some of the plot points in the new L&S undermined the point of the original.
Yeah that's pretty much all I've been seeing since Thursday when people were able to go to early screenings.
I may see Lilo & Stitch tomorrow or maybe next weekend, but there’s Karate Kid: Legends (and whatever stunts Jackie Chan is apparently still doing! 😱). Then Life of Chuck opens nationwide on June 13 and then it’s basically nonstop blockbusters until mid-August.
Not gonna lie I almost want the new Karate Kid movie to do well strictly because Ming-Na Wen plays the kids mom and I've been a fan of hers since ER in the 90's. It's not a great reason but it's a reason nonetheless.

I hope Life of Chuck makes it here. Opening nationwide is usually a good sign for hitting north western Alberta but sometimes even then we don't get some movies. That's also my concern for The Phoenician Scheme which opens a week later in Canada than in the US.
I think How to Train Your Dragon might be good based on the trailers.

I'm not really against Live Action remakes per se. But there has to be something about them that makes it worth going to. Not a shot-by-shot remake and not a remake that misses the entire point of the original. But a new take on the story.

Cinderella, for example, is an ancient story that has been told many times in many ways. The "live action remake" of Cinderella was a new take on the story and it was good.

But most of the rest have not been good. So maybe it's less that Disney needs to stop doing these live-action remakes than that they need to make better movies.
My issue with How to Train Your Dragon from the trailers is at this point it does look like it's basically shot for shot the animated movie. I'm willing to be proven wrong, but at this point I'm not holding my breath.

I miss when we could just let animated movies be animated movies. There's a fun and a creativity that live action doesn't quite hit and that's fine. Not all animated films need to have live action adaptations. Mining nostalgia for money instead of trying to make new original movies is so depressing. Then when someone does do something original it doesn't get marketed effectively and bombs and the studios just go back to mining franchises and nostalgia.
 
I watched Fountain of Youth on Apple+. An irritating movie because it could have been good but is just meh.

One review calls it the Citizen Kane of second screen entertainment. A perfect burn.
 
The issue with the Disney remakes is that they learned the wrong lesson from Cinderella. Cinderella did well because it corrected a few of the plot holes, threw in a touch of modern humour, but kept the same story at its heart. Every other remake since seems to have completely missed this concept, and this seems to have become particularly egregious with Lilo and Stitch, from what I've seen about it.

I'm also not here for the ridiculous amount of remakes/movies that are supposed to make us sympathise with the villain. Ironically it seems Mufasa might have tried to do this so hard that it went full-circle and some people found it made Scar less sympathetic, but movies like Cruella? That's an irredeemable villain who tried to do something entirely unjustifiable. And yet...
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
Do Not Sell My Personal Information