John

Five minutes ago it was all 'boycott Disney'. Now it's 'Disney is the best, boycott Sony'. Fuck sakes, make up your minds, nerds!
 
(Also, called the outrage!)

Two words, man: Monica Bellucci 

Spider-Man: Homeless

Spider-Man: Homeless

I wanted every lobotomised mental patient of a "main character" to get eaten and rooted for the hunters. Disappointing.

Wasn't sure where else to put these pics ... I spent last week on holiday in Nottingham, and one evening I went to this Art Deco cinema for a screening of Terminator 2 - 

Perhaps the only other movie on its level is Spielberg's perennial classic A.I. Artificial Intelligence.

Still trying to make a second great Matrix 
movie!

Death Proof is the one I haven't seen yet (aside from OUATIH).
 
I don't think Basterds is dishonest about its trashiness. I think trashiness is only one aspect of some parts of the film, and those are honest about it. I certainly don't consider the opening sequence trashy, and I don't think the Waltz character is trashy (eccentric, yes, and deliberately goofy in a seriously menacing way). That's why I have less regard for Django, too: Both the film and the Waltz character feel too one-sidedly trashy to me.
 
There's also a strong artistic aspect to the film, including the cinematography (the best in a Tarantino film) and the use of music (especially, unlike in most Tarantinos, "actual" (if not original) underscore for great dramatic effect), and a real tension to those scenes that go for it (Laurent is just as brilliant as Waltz in their cafe confrontation).
 
What I perhaps admire most about it is something that very few films (that I've seen) achieve: It very convincingly includes sequences in another language that feel like they were actually made in their respective country. The German sequences definitely feel like authentic German cinema, and I get the same vibe from the French bits (but I'm not familiar enough with French cinema to be the best judge of that). Very few other films that pull this off come to mind; The Third Man is one of them.

Spider-Man OST
Spider-Man 2 OST

Reservoir Dogs is better than most of those. It's easy for me to say. I'm Mr. White. I have a cool-sounding name.

Apocalypse Later?

*takes long drag of cigarette, sounding like Sam Elliot*
 
Well, folks, you know that time. The cows are home, the summer night breeze is a stirrin', and it's JWFan's time to play. Yes sir, we got C and C versus arranged album, we got Star Trek and its repu'ble status in comparison to just 'bout everythang, and well would you look see here, a debate on the objectively subjective and subjectively objective merits, or lack thereof, of Star Wars The Last Jedi.
 
Yes, sir, it's JWFan's time to play, and it's got all the greatest hits, just for you.

I think it’s pretty clear that there is no general consensus on how good or bad TLJ is.

Because him immediately choosing to train this rando that happened to come across him, or even take up arms after years of self-exile and removing himself from these earthly matters would have been the lamest shit ever. An arc has to have an arc to it to be an arc, a high point needs a low point so it can actually be a high point in relation to something. If you really don't like it, blame JJ for setting up something that couldn't really have been continued well in many other ways.
 
 
I agree with Disco Stu!

I could have watched an entire movie of Luke in his island hermit mode.

"I see a lot of people like this thing that I don't and is objectively bad according to the universal standard of my own opinion."

The Meg is most certainly not trying to one-up Jaws. It’s a tongue-in-cheek action flick.  

It's also just the kind of quirky detail that has no bearing on the plot but gives the movie character.  The kind of thing that was largely missing from Force Awakens, as breathlessly entertaining and quick-paced as that movie is.

I thought milking the giant manatee was badass anyway, made him look like a survivalist boss

Hardly the grossest thing we've seen Luke do!
 

Well, that was...puzzling. For years, 'Deathproof' was considered Tarantino's lamest movie, but this lackadaisical affair now is a hot contender for that throne. Usually when QT's movies start to ramble, it's for good reason: you may not like every digression but you get why they are there. Or they're cool. In positioning his story so squarely in the *real* Hollywood of 1969, the director handcuffs himself into lingering too long on people and places that just not warrant the excessive runtime, even worse, the writing here is so indifferent and all loose ends that it seems only geared towards people who cannot get enough of old B-movie posters and neon-lighted billboards.
 
But first things first. DiCaprio plays a down-on-his-luck western actor (a luckless McQueen), who drinks too much, hangs around too much with his old fall guy pal (Brad Pitt, in a performance of real Marlboro Man splendor) and is now relegated to playing bad guys on lowbrow tv pilots. He, by coincidence, lives next to famous/hip couple Roman Polanski and Sharon Tate. It would be an overstatement to say that after 2.5 hours their fates intertwine, it just happens to be the end of the movie. We follow DiCaprio's travails through B-movie land, including a detour to Rome (a short summation of Cinecitta's movie culture ca. 1969, the movie's only amusing bit), but all this is basically a background for the male bonding between DiCaprio and Pitt.
 
Glimpses of late 60's hippie culture are sprinkled throughout that only gain momentum when Pitt finds an enclave of spooky hippies who squat an old Hollywood western ranch, impersonations of the infamous Manson gang who a short while later brutally murdered the pregnant Tate and her friends. As stated above, by that point the movie has run its course as the end - not to be spoilered here - rewrites history to headscratching effect
that really makes you question what Tarantino possibly could have in mind.
 
So much for story, there are so many things running afoul before the denouement that OuatiH lost me on several occasions: i could stomach DiCaprio, a good actor, never remotely looking like a 50's/60's western guy (it takes you right out of the scenes he has to re-enact) but even worse, a long succession of scenes devoted to seeing old 'Have Gun Will Travel' episodes filmed seem totally arbitrary. I can claim to have watched many programs of that ilk in my merry youth but nothing that Tarantino puts up the screen looks right. That ain't 'Bonanza', it ain't 'The Men from Shiloh' and it ain't 'A Fistful of Dollars', either. It's a rough mix of disparate styles (and totally uncharacteristically high production values) you start asking yourself why QT then so painstakingly re-creates old LA, GTA-style, if he's so blasé here? (don't get me started on silly one-upmanship bs like the scene with Bruce Lee)

The mellow glow doesn't do the movie any good - it lacks punch and observational wit, the things QT is famed for - and when the end credits roll, all that's left is a good needle-drop score (what else is new?) and the impression that 1969 was a banner year because murderous hippies drove old backlot Hollywood down (equated with mediocre assembly line tv here). Except they weren't hippies and nothing really changed (the Tate murders, heinous as they were, came late in a long line of public crimes that shook he US). Tarantino's brutal retaliation pose makes no real sense, one, because it was a freak crime without any systemic connection to anything (many people in my cinema didn't even seem to know the Tate murders) and our main protagonists do not represent anything besides washed-up Hollywood dudes. I still look for possible interpretations that make any sense. Till i find them i file 'Once upon a Time in Hollywood' under 'watchable but doesn't warrant second viewing'. 

https://variety.com/2019/tv/news/obi-wan-kenobi-series-ewan-mcgregor-disney-plus-1203304387/
 
Return of the Jedi.