And it was perfect, the very essence of Tolkien's work was captured and portrayed beautifully. The actors and actresses were perfect for their roles, the musical score was and still is considered to be the best musical score ever. It was the highest grossing film trilogy for a very long time. it created millions of fans of Tolkien and are still loved by many to this day.
then a decade later they made LOTR and ruined it.
https://preview.redd.it/75cngnnx9r681.jpg?width=5000&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=3401e988230e8afc26504b5f7f2aab02fa02a0e4
Ho ho hello!
It's time to get festive guys! Tis' the season to be jolly and nothing says 'jolly' like a bit of Satoshi Kon mind-benderry. Our Festive Flick to watch over the holiday period is Tokyo Godfathers! Be sure to check the JustWatch page to find out where it's is streaming in your country. Big thanks to our favourite knight of the realm u/Knight_Of_Nii, for suggesting this movie in our last thread and we hope you enjoy!
Once you've finished watching this edition's selection, you can head to the Film Club channel in our Discord Server to join in with the discussion, or leave your thoughts on the film to discuss in the comments below. Also, don't forget to tag your diary entries with 'lbfilmclub' so if you decide to review the film, it's up for spotlight selection in the next Film Club post! Here are our review spotlights from the last instalment - Uncle Boonmee Who Can Recall His Past Lives.
I DON'T KNOW ABOUT YOU BUT I'M FEELING film club. As we head into 2022, we're heading back a century, watching a film of your choice released in 1922! What better excuse to explore the history of cinema than a marker of all the things we're looking forward to? Feel free to rummage through the history books and leave your suggestions in response to the pinned comment below, be it a beloved classic or an obscure gem!
Reminder: You can follow our r/Letterboxd profile on Letterboxd to follow all of our community events across the subreddit and Discord server.
Not only is Eric Bana's Bruce Banner a perfect and natural starting point for the character development later explored by Nortan and Ruffalo; but plot details and dialog in the "official" MCU Hulk film seem to fit it pretty nicely into the timeline.
Here are a few examples of why its canon:
-
Kevin Feige was involved in producing Hulk (2003), as well as Norton and Ruffalo versions.
-
The military attacks Hulk (2003) with a weapon that can only be described as a Stark Industries Jerhicho missile.
-
The Incredible Hulk begins in South America (where the 2003 film leaves off)
-
Bruce already has his powers in The Incredible Hulk
-
TIH takes place 5 years after Bruce's first transformation (which is in real world time from 2003 to 2008 film releases)
-
Specific names of Hulk's victims are listed in TIH, which match the names of those in the 2003 Hulk film
-
Bruce Banner is working as doctor for disadvantaged communities far out of the sights of the US military at the start of The Avengers, which is in line with his character from Hulk (2003).
-
Banner states "he is always angry" in Avengers which explains why he is able to transform on command for the climax. That only really makes sense if you understand his trauma which is explored in Hulk (2003).
Arguments against it being canon:
-
No returning actors. This is an easy one. The MCU, and the Hulk character specifically is no stranger to recasts. Phase 1 was particularly notorious for it, with Rhodes and Banner both changing actors before the first big team-up film.
-
The name of the research facility where Bruce's accident is different. This is a little more difficult to explain, but considering its hardly important to the plot (aside from being a background) it can be dismissed as a simple continuity error.
-
The origins in the opening credits are different This is the hardest to explain, but I'll try.
With how flawlessly every other aspect of the film fits into the 2003 continuity, its very odd they put this glaring contradiction so early in the film. Especially considering they make no reference to the retcon later in the film. Almost like they forgot they retconned it. Because of this, it stands to reason that the opening credits can be ignored as an exaggerated version of events probably told by General Ross to rile people up.
In addition, many people already dismiss The Incredible Hulk's ending as well due to its confusion nature when considering later MCU films.
Thus, pointing out t
... keep reading on reddit ➡
R1: In a open field R2: In a Kaslan stores (Child's Play 2019) R3: In the woods
I'm not familiar with the remakes since I haven't watched any of them but ok
I'm new to Reddit so my apologies if this looks a little unpolished.
I recall watching a thriller Hindi or Indian movie with my mom as a child, it was about strangers inside a motel getting killed off. Recently, I found the movie Identity and while watching the first 30 minutes of the movie, I immediately knew that it was similar to the movie that I had watched back then.
After searching the movie 'Identity' on both IMDb and Wikipedia, it hadn't said that it was based on the movie I had watched so, the Hindi movie might as well be based on the American movie.
It follows the same details of a murderer being interviewed by a psychiatrist of sorts but, in the movie I had watched before, it was a female psychiatrist..? Anyhow, it still follows the same premise of a mother of a single child getting run over by a famous lady's driver during a rainy night with no cell service, and they all proceed to go to a motel. It still consists of the same characters I had seen in the movie following a motel owner, driver, famous lady, officer travelling with a murderer, another lady(who in the Hindi movie was portrayed as the MC), newlyweds and, a three-membered family.>!The Indian movie also had the same plot twist of the killer being the small son in the three-membered family.!< I hope I described it well enough.
I see this film lambasted on Reddit over and over again and I'm going to stand up for it.
It has everything you'd like to see in a family movie... it has the silly antics, classic Dr. Seuss rhymes and themes that young children will love, the slightly hidden inappropriate humor that teens will get a laugh out of, and the pop culture references for the adults.
It takes the classic tale and expands it into a full length motion picture by adding context, a moral of the story, and antagonists in the boss & the neighbor/boyfriend....
The movie has a quality cast and my kids loved in when they were little and still get a laugh out of it as teenagers...
I get why this is somewhat disliked but it has this indescribable emotional depth that I find so affecting. I was shocked by this on the rewatch.
I have weird, vague memories of news stories about a phenomenon where kids en masse around the world needed to see child psychologists after watching this movie. Real or not, it wouldn’t shock me. This movie had a profound effect on me when I was young and surprisingly still did today.
This was one of the first movies I saw that really explored the ideas of abuse and trauma and I found it deeply confronting as a child. I didn't understand a lot of it but I certainly felt the emotional weight. Even as an adult there's something chilling about how much is left un-shown and unsaid. These are heavy concepts to include in a mass market blockbuster.
The stylistic choices are incredibly offbeat and bold as well, almost as much as the content. It's easy to watch excerpts online and laugh at the weird comic book editing but when watching the film properly it becomes this really unique and adept rhythm. It's not a clumsy attempt to just make it look like a comic book, Lee is really doing something. The flashes of past trauma contextualise the present day rage and emotion in a really striking way. It's blunt but also genuinely heartfelt and human, much like the Hulk himself.
The presentation the Hulk here is really intense too. He's not the gag machine or audience applause button he's is in the MCU, he's a man with genuine issues. Becoming the Hulk isn't a fun thing that happens when he gets mad, it's a manifestation of trauma and rage. The Hulk is what happens when someone completely loses control of themselves emotionally. It asks the question is he not acting like himself or is it who he truly is underneath? And importantly it's a film about what are the fundamental reasons someone would lose control of themselves emotionally. Where does that come from? What sort of person does it make you? Bruce isn't a quiet nerd because he lacks social skills, it's because he's spent his whole life suppressing his emotions and not grappling with his trauma. He seems a completely blank slate because that's what he's had to forge himself into to live with his life experiences. It's more distressing than exciting when you see him start to transform.
While I love comic book media and sci-fi movies I do often have sympathy for actors trying to give earnest performances inside such goofy premises, but I didn't feel that once here. All
... keep reading on reddit ➡As one who grew up watching and loving the Ray Harryhausen Sinbad movies, it took me a while to adjust to what DreamWorks was offering with their Sinbad: Legend of the Seven Seas which was certainly not a traditional telling of the classic middle eastern tales featuring one of fictions greatest heroes, what we get here is a Roman-Greco version that has little to with the stories found within the One Thousand and One Nights.
To be frank, this movie could have easily been a re-telling of the Greek story of Jason and the Argonauts rather than a Sinbad story as most of the characters and monsters are taken from Greek mythology and not the tales of Sinbad the Sailor. We get Sinbad and his crew battling the sea monster Cetus, who in Greek mythology was the monster that Perseus defeated to save Princess Andromeda, later they encounter the Sirens of Homer's The Odyssey and even the main villain of this movie is Eris, the Greek Goddess of Discord. At one point Sinbad does encounter the legendary Roc, a giant bird of prey from the mythology of the Middle East, so they got one actual monster from Sinbad's stories, so that's okay, I guess.
The animation on display here is quite good and it was the last 2D animated film that DreamWorks would release, where it loses points is in the CGI used to create some of the monsters, it works great for the watery sirens but for the giant sea monster it looked very subpar when placed next to the traditional hand-drawn animated characters.
As to the voice cast I'd say that for the most part, they were quite good, with the likes of Catherine Zeta-Jones, Dennis Haysbert and Joseph Fiennes providing depth and fun to these adventurous characters, and then we have Michelle Pfeiffer as the goddess Eris who pretty much steals the movie with her wonderful and exuberant performance and the animators also did an amazing job bringing the chaotic villain to life, but there is a turd in the punch bowl in the form of Brad Pitt as Sinbad, now I think Brad is a great actor but as a voice talent here he was dull, dull, dull and turned the normally charismatic and fun character of Sinbad into a bland and uninteresting hero. What they do to Sinbad in this film is bordering on criminal.
Overall, Sinbad: Legend of the Seven Seas is a fun and entertaining adventure tale but it's not much of an actual Sinbad movie and the plot given to the storey, which hinges on a ridiculous McGuffin - a "Book of Peace" that Eris wants to steal and literally
... keep reading on reddit ➡)
