Movies


What was the first R-rated or equivalent1 movie you remember seeing? How old were you when you saw it? 17 & up ↩

Question of the Day: Oct. 3, 2015




I read the book, so I wasn’t surprised by any of the numerous twists that Flynn imagined up in her story. I also wasn’t surprised that I found the movie just as convoluted and boring as the book. I still don’t understand how or why it attracted such a following. It’s the mystery/thriller/drama equivalent of the Scream franchise. It uses cliched, trope-filled action while critiquing the culture and society’s thirst for vengeance over justice. The unfortunate thing is that it gets caught up in being melodramatic and fails to adequately execute that social criticism. It’s awful. The actors do a great job, which is why it’s getting two stars instead of just one. I think the supporting cast deserves the most credit. They really try to sell the film. Tyler Perry and Neil Patrick Harris both did absolutely incredible work. Ben isn’t one of my favorite actors, but I generally like his acting work. In this movie, I don’t. As Nick, he carries a constant grimace that just makes him look constipated. He looks more like he needs to find a box of laxatives than his missing wife. Like with the book, I think it is a waste of time and that you should really skip it unless you like the book or members of the cast. It’s just not worth the hype. There are so many better movies out there.

Review: Gone Girl




Janet Morris, I liked this movie a lot. I ordered a copy of it here. Every other reviewer liked the movie. I think your very critical and nasty review says more about you than about the movie. And so it begins…again. You would think that my review was the single most vicious review in the history of the world. You would think that I encouraged people to sacrifice babies or virgins or something. Or that I declared myself to be a servant of the Antichrist, especially since I was pretty much accused of doing just that at one point. What I did do was give a bad miniseries a one star-rating and gave it this review: Like many other movies and miniseries about this topic, this work is horrifically bad. It was poorly written, acted, and produced. It is almost laughable how awful this thing is. This is worse than some of the bad science fiction movies that I watch for kicks. It sticks to a convoluted interpretation of the Christian apocalypse that opportunists like Kirk Cameron, Jerry B. Jenkins, and Tim LaHaye have used to line their pockets for years, but the overused plot not even the worst aspect of this thing. The shaky camera style is reminiscent of The Blair Witch Project, which fits well with the other poorly executed parts of the miniseries. If you are prone to vertigo, migraines, seizures, or motion sickness, especially if these have been triggered in the past by past movies or television shows, you might want to avoid this for health reasons. If not, just avoid it for quality reasons. It’s not entertaining enough to justify wasting so much time on it. People focus so heavily on the first paragraph that they get a bit wonky and think I’m some evil heathen that wants them to join a God-hating cult.1 They don’t realize that the second paragraph is exclusively about the production value or that I say that it reminds me of a secular horror film that I hated. They don’t realize that I love religious studies, even if I’m not always good with religion itself. They don’t realize that I know the difference between the different apocalypse stories and that this one does actually fall in line with that opportunism. They also don’t realize that I wanted to watch the miniseries and I wanted to like it. But I didn’t. And when I didn’t, I felt it was okay to complain about it. Clearly, I was wrong. The first time I got flack over it was the day after I posted the review. It seemed so coincidental that the person would post a five-star review the day after my review went live, especially since it said: Finally, a Christian based docudrama that did not have any negative political overtones. Do not fall for the “anti-Christian” reviews by others. My review of the History Channel miniseries Revelations: The End of Days was the only one until this one posted. Over a month after I posted my review, I got around a dozen comments from someone using “100% Christian” as their username. All the little things that I’ve said I’ve been accused of came from them. I reported their comments to Amazon and they actually deleted them. The person then commented on a comment I’d made2 on the second review saying, “If you aren’t 100% for Christ — then you’re 100% for satan. There is no middle ground.” Five days later, a different user said, in response to the same comment: “Janet Morris: The criticism against your review is valid, since you posted comments that were not relevant. Your comments about Tim LaHaye, et. al. lining their pockets had nothing to do with the movie and is not helpful in determining whether this is worth buying/watching or not.” I responded:3 Respectfully, I disagree with everything you’re saying, Mr. Ruhf. I suggest that you look at professional reviews of works like Vampire Academy, The Mortal Instruments: City of Bones, Twilight, and Fifty Shades of Grey. They’re compared by professionals to other works. They’re accused of trying to manipulate fan bases of similar works, as are so many other works. It is not uncommon or wrong to point out that trends in genres are used to make money off of fans of those genres, especially when the result is considered of particularly low-quality. Now, as for what IS wrong, it is wrong to take a negative review and turn it into a way to personally attack the reviewer. The criticism that you say is valid involved not only this particular reviewer creating a review for this product for the purpose of calling me anti-Christian, but for the other commenter on this review to (before creating their comment on this review) create eleven comments on my review calling me a cultist and Satanist, and comparing me and my review to ISIS. Your calling sort of behavior valid criticism is really quite appalling. I do appreciate your down-voting of my review and your time spent on telling me the errors of my ways. Then I didn’t hear anything for while. In the mean time there have been 5 other five-star reviews4 and one four-star. The four-star is the most critical of them. But most of the others? Not at all. In fact, most of the others are barely long enough to be considered blurbs. It seems like someone is faking reviews for this miniseries. It’s possible that there were a lot of people who enjoyed it, but the timing is all very strange. In the meantime, I wrote this to respond to “Amazon Customer” about their complaints of my “critical and nasty review”: Then write your own review and leave me alone. People are allowed to dislike movies. People are allowed to be critical and my criticism was valid. And, for the record, I’ve received quite a lot of hate (dozens of comments that Amazon had to delete because they were *that* bad) from fans of […]

All the Interesting People Are Missing




I doubt that he’s actually pulling out. First, the sequels haven’t been officially confirmed. Second, he’s probably contractually bound to do them and he would have a hard time backing out on his own. Third, the studio and his reps have yet to even suggest this is happening. Fourth, the reason being given—that his wife wants him out because of what Christian does—MAKES NO SENSE. The “plots” of the books haven’t changed since he signed on. Jamie has been playing the part of Paul Spector in The Fall; Paul is a serial rapist and serial killer. AFAIK: she hasn’t demanded that he quit the series. It seems like she would have wanted him out of that if she was really against his playing a man who is violent toward women. And Amelia is an actress and had a small role in the movie Quills, a fictionalization of the life and proclivities of Marquis de Sade, whose name is where the terms sadism and sadomasochism come from. So this whole thing makes no sense. What it seems like is a way to create a lot of drama and a way to make people feel okay with harassing & hating Amelia. via Tumblr

Jamie Dornan quitting FSOG?


1
I saw Fifty Shades of Grey today and… The movie is better than the book. That was the consensus of everyone who talked about it as they left the auditorium. The movie doesn’t include most of the abusive behavior. Anything abusive that was left in was not as bad as it was in the book. Ana actually comes off as less of a “doormat” and Christian isn’t as horrifyingly creepy as he was in the book. He actually comes off as almost sympathetic, which could be worse in some ways because it might lull some people into thinking that his behavior is acceptable.  The movie highlights how poorly written the books were. Like the books, there’s no real plot. There’s no real way to gauge the time. It ends in what should have been before or during the climax of the story, but that’s a problem with the books.  Though Christian mentions his mom’s drug use (and her preference) and being a prostitute, there was no calling her a crack whore. (His doing that in the books always made me cringe.) I don’t know why they couldn’t hire total nobodies for roles like Mia and Grace. They barely had any lines at all. Also, Max Martini’s main job in the film as Jason Taylor is to stand behind Jamie/Christian and take objects from his hands. It felt like they were using him as an extra. There was one scene where you could infer that oral sex was supposed to be happening. And it was actually a Christian going down on Ana one, which is still oddly taboo in American cinema. But it was the only oral scene. It was also the only real foreplay scene of any kind, which is a little cringe-worthy because there would be a whole lot of chafing. And there were a lot of shots of Dakota’s magically always-erect nipples and Jamie’s very lovely butt.  Oh, if you don’t want to see the movie yourself, for whatever reason, I would still recommend getting the soundtrack. It’s pretty damn awesome. via Tumblr

Fifty Shades of Tame