What are
/r/flicks'
favorite Products & Services?
From 3.5 billion Reddit comments
The most popular Products mentioned in /r/flicks:
![The Killer [Blu-ray]](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/51bvzVXLn6L._SL500_.jpg)
The most popular Services mentioned in /r/flicks:
Letterboxd
MUBI
IMDb
JustWatch
Disney+
CyTube
Netflix
Trakt.tv
Google Groups
Quora
Rotten Tomatoes
MovieLens
Criticker
WordPress
MasterClass
The most popular VPNs mentioned in /r/flicks:
The most popular reviews in /r/flicks:
For some reason I was recently thinking about the review of Darren Aronofsky's <em>Noah</em> that I heard on NPR a couple years back. Of the CGI animals, the reviewer said
> a big part of the Noah story is spectacle, and this one is a feast of computer-generated imagery. None of the animals are real, which has won the appreciation of animal rights activists. But none of them are particularly well characterized either. I didn't expect Dr. Doolittle amid the Apocalypse, but would a few bahs and moos, and a friendly giraffe have really killed the mood?
I can't really articulate why, but I'm really pleased that a critic out there is willing to cite a dearth of friendly giraffes as strike against a movie.
Well, according to Rotten Tomatoes, the top 5 films on the website so far in 2016 are (by adjusted score which takes the number of reviews into consideration):
Zootopia (98% with 217 reviews)
Love and Friendship (99% with 138 reviews)
The Jungle Book (94% with 252 reviews)
Hunt for the Wildpeople (100% with 104 reviews)
Finding Dory (95% with 212 reviews)
You're right. Films with high rotten tomatoes scores generally do know how to please a crowd, but that's not a bad thing. A neutral voting option could probably be added (like yellow on Metacritic), but it would be completely pointless for the website's target demographic. Casual-movie-goers just want to make the informed decision whether or not to see a film. If 98% of the 217 critics that reviewed Zootopia recommended the film to movie-goers by rating it fresh, then that's a very safe bet (and it's not like that film is a complete crowd-pleaser, either, since its topical themes have drawn mixed reactions out of some movie-goers). Meanwhile, films rated lower than 60% are riskier to recommend to a vast majority of audience members. That's why the website uses tomatoes. After all, it's a historical tradition that tomatoes have been thrown by audience members at bad stage-performers. The rotten tomatoes were saved for the worst performers. The audience-members were there to be entertained. So, if a performer was wasting their time, then the audience would let the performer know, even if the act was just mediocre rather than downright awful.
It's not a perfect system, since of course, critics watch movies differently than general audiences. Still, most critics rating a film 6/10-10/10 and giving mostly fresh scores is a better sign for a film's mass-appeal than most critics rating a film 4/10-6/10 and giving mostly rotten scores. The rotten/fresh system should be viewed as a general recommendation, not as a baseline for criticism.
It's funny you should mention Toy Story, Pixar actually re-rendered for a 3D theatrical release in advance of Toy Story 3's release. You can read a bit about it here.
Really though, I don't know if I'd pay to see the same movie shot-for-shot. It's different if it's a remake or a reboot, then it's at least a whole new thing.
Though there's a lot of HD video game remakes, I think that's a little different. Some games are hard to find/run, or require buying old consoles. Plus most of those sales are second-hand, and the developers don't see any of that money. Most importantly though I think is that they can feature updated gameplay. Clunky elements or bad game designed can be updated and modernized. Remade games are usually about more than just making it look nicer.
Respectfully, I think you're missing the key element in why Easy Rider (1969) was so impactful. It wasn't about the technical filmmaking, but rather how the film was made as well as the social context that the film was coming out in.
It was made for very little money with almost no studio influence. The film itself is practically a giant middle finger to the establishment and the studio system of the day. Like you, I'm actually not much of a fan of the film but I can still appreciate the context and historical importance of it.
If you're interested in film history around this era of Hollywood (Scorsese, George Lucas, Francis Coppola, etc.), I highly recommend Peter Biskind's book Easy Riders & Raging Bulls.
As with anything, I'd imagine it affects everyone differently. Christian Bale can walk off something like Terminator: Salvation. Other actors, especially ones who are trying to build their careers, can fare far worse. Tom Hardy became a crack addict as a result of the failure - critical, audience and box-office - of Star Trek: Nemesis.
IMDb, Letterboxd, reddit, tumblr, Twitter - all these social media platforms do is promote narcissism. Everyone has an opinion and nobody is ever wrong, and when every opinion can suddenly be covered and discussed, suddenly opinions become meaningless. To quote Sherlock Homes:
> Ugh, everyone's a critic
...which I think is incorrect.
I think the internet hurts criticism because the 'net is both widening the gap between what a 'reviewer' is and what a 'critic' is and it's blurring the lines. The consensus I get from reddit is: film critics are only here to tell us what to watch. So if that's what the consumer wants, that's what they'll eventually get, and what constitutes actual film criticism, from people who are either a) professional film critics and/or b) academics who study film, is going to slowly be moved out of the way in favour of what-ever-the-hell this is. as it becomes slowly more non-existent and eventually indistinguishable.
I don't see the userbase of IMDb or Letterboxd as critics; I see it as a collection of movie fans; some are intelligent, some are witty, some are sometimes even insightful but I don't think the majority, if any, can be considered critics... a part from the users who are critics, many of whom only use the site to log films and short views and nothing more substantial than that.
I found a version of the 2001 A Space Odyssey screenplay that is very, very different from the final film. At least, I thought so. The dawn of man sequence is more detailed, there's narration, by far the most interesting change I found was that replaced by the famous (and probably superior) Open the pod Bay doors Hal. scene.
Basically instead of chasing Poole's body into space, Dave stays inside. He confronts Hal and argued about the hibernation status on the rest of the crew (Hal hasn't killed them here). Hal disagrees, saying he could handle the mission, that he didn't need people, Dave threatens to unplug him, eventually Hal gives in and gives Dave control. Now as Dave makes his way to the Hibernation area, Hal begins opening doors on the ship. From inside out, doors open, unaware to Dave, until finally, Hal opens the pod bay doors, exposing the inside of the ship to sheer space. Vacuum sucks everything, Dave barely makes it to an emergency safety room, the lights go off, it's frightening.
Of course, Hal proceeds to play the whole Dave, there's been an accident with the pod Bay doors Dave. and It's a good thing you weren't killed. The scene then plays out mostly similar to how it does in the movie, with Dave going and shutting Hal down, singing Daisy.
Here's the link:
https://www.scribd.com/doc/209781712
The scene starts at page 85.
Ok, that's not much less than me, which makes me wonder what movies you're choosing?
I see Birds brought up, but I honestly haven't seen it, and I'm personally not a major admirer of Hitchcock so I can't compare references there. Are you looking at old horror and sci-fi mostly?
Because for me, 90% of pre-70s films I've seen would still blow OK/Good modern films out the water. Everything I've seen from Bergman, Chaplin, Fellini, Kurosawa, Bunuel, Godard, Bresson, Welles, Dreyer, Kubrick, Capra, Ford, etc, etc, etc. Actual classic directors of film.
Calling out the 60s especially, I'm wondering what you've seen. These are some of the films I've seen from the 60s, and I'd say at least 90% of them are better than Imitation Game and Hidden Figures even by modern standards.
The rushes section of Mubi has a good roundup of film writing every week
https://mubi.com/notebook/posts/tag/Rushes
Film Comment too (plus both sites have their own great writing)
https://www.filmcomment.com/blog/category/news/
Thedissolve was great for this. They had a roundup everyday but I don't think there's anything similar to it now to my knowledge.
Otherwise, just follow your favorite film writers on twitter. They'll usually retweet things they like (or their friends have written)
Criticker has a great algorithm it uses to not only recommend movies for you, but also connect you with other users with similar tastes in film. I just started using it recently and it's great, but needs more people using it.
Another list: https://letterboxd.com/films/popular/year/1917/size/small/
How about making it more interesting by increasing the number of films by one each year? So, watch one more from 1916 to catch up and then three from 1917, etc.
You could also cap it so it doesn't get out of hand. Say 5 for the 1920s, then work up to 10 for the 1930s (6 for 1930, 7 for 1931, etc.) and so on. Or some variation.
Not a direct extension, but letterboxd might suit your needs. Letterboxd is a great website to track and review movies you've seen, but if you want to see in depth stats you have to pay a little bit. If you give letterboxd $20/year you get a nice stats page that gives you information like movie distribution by year, ratings by year, most viewed/highest rated actors/directors/crew and a few other stats too. If you maintain a film diary then it can give you the same stats but on a yearly basis as well.
I've never done it (I started from scratch) but I think letterboxd has a feature that will let you import your imdb profile with relative ease.
Edit: formatting and wording
User CFT925 really nails a lot of "How will the 90's be remembered" predictions in this thread.
Excerpts here, links to full reviews on my Letterboxd!
Doctor Strange (2016) - 3/5
> The problem with the Marvel Cinematic Universe movies is one many other franchises would love to have: consistency. Aside from a few exceptions, the MCU movies don’t stand out from one another in the grand scheme of things. Doctor Strange is perhaps the most acute example of this in the MCU thus far.
Los Angeles Plays Itself (2003) - 5/5
> There aren’t very many films that I would universally recommend be seen. Thom Andersen’s 2003 cinematic essay Los Angeles Plays Itself is one of them. Andersen makes use of every second of the runtime and clips from over 200 films to blend not only film theory and the history of Los Angeles, but also architecture, urban planning, race relations and the mere perception of Los Angeles in the media to create a thorough, fractal portrait of Los Angeles.
Shut Up and Play the Hits (2012) - 5/5
> Before their reunion in 2016, Shut Up and Play the Hits and the excellent companion LP The Long Goodbye were my only tastes of what [LCD Soundsystem] sounded like live. Even after having seen the band live twice, the film loses none of its initial power.
The End of the Tour (2015) - 2/5
> The are two problems a script revolving around two people can run into. The first is that it’s a good script, but doesn’t work when committed to film (Passengers is a good example). Secondly, it’s that one or both of the actors aren’t that good. If the film runs into either, it is doomed. The End of the Tour runs headlong into the second.
Those aren't actually the films available for streaming, these are. MUBI functions as a list/review site as well, which is the side of the site that your link came from. It's kind of confusing on their part and I wish there was a better divide.
I wouldn't recommend it for a newbie enthusiast as the selections can sometimes get pretty obscure. It's more for people who are already into film and looking to expand their horizons - lots of foreign films and festival indies that aren't available through other services. It's like $35 for a yearly subscription, which is dirt-cheap if you're into the kind of stuff they offer.
It's an academic non-profit and so, unlike Flixster and IMDb, there are no ads, nor are they attempting to sell you tickets.
It's neat because it provides detailed breakdowns about how you rate films, such as which genres you tend to like, what time periods your movies tend to be from, etc.
Mubi has curated a list of Kubrick's favorite films. Wouldn't you know it, Wild Strawberries is second on the list! The Phantom Carriage appears at number 30.
In 1966, Kubrick said "“There are very few directors, about whom you’d say you automatically have to see everything they do. I’d put Fellini, Bergman and David Lean at the head of my first list, and Truffaut at the head of the next level.”
The main text of the article reads as:
> His favorite films from Cinema (magazine) in 1963:
> I Vitelloni (Federico Fellini, 1953)
> Wild Strawberries (Ingmar Bergman, 1958)
> Citizen Kane (Orson Welles, 1941)
> The Treasure of the Sierra Madre (John Huston, 1948)
> City Lights (Charles Chaplin, 1931)
> Henry V (Laurence Olivier, 1945)
> La Notte (Michelangelo Antonioni, 1961)
> The Bank Dick (W.C. Fields, 1940)
>Roxie Hart (William Wellman, 1942) Note: at one point, he said this was his favorite film Hell’s Angels (Howard Hughes, 1930)
There are also a good number of popular reviews that have absolutely nothing to do with the film itself. Take this review of Miss Stevens for example.
Moonlight (Barry Jenkins, 2016) - Get ready to see this movie on every "best of 2016" list in a couple of months. I was worried going in given how astronomically high the reception has been, but I can tell you that it lives up to them. It is really, REALLY good. I don't want to tell you any more than that, go in knowing as little as possible outside of the basic plot, and enjoy it. But I can tell you that the acting is superb throughout, and it's remarkable to watch three actors of different ages bring the main character to life with the exact same mannerisms and facial expressions. 5/5
Lucy (Luc Besson, 2014) - I had really high hopes for this movie, and the first 20 minutes had me hooked. But once Scarlett Johansson changes from a real, believable person to an emotionless pseudo-God (by the movie's design), it loses all of its charm. Worse still, this movie thinks it is WAY smarter than it actually is. It thinks it has something really profound to say about human existence, but the execution is off the rails. 2.5/5 because the first half is interesting, but really it just made me want the Johansson-led Black Widow movie that we've all been asking for.
Letterboxd profile for all interested. I'm a few movies behind on reviews, but should be caught up this week.
Reservoir Dogs
Solid overall, with great performances all round, fantastic music choices and a great story/script. I found in some places the pacing was a little off though, particularly when they would cut back to the office before the heist 4.5/5
Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory
Still holds up quite well. I never realised how much there is before they actually go into the factory, which resulted in a bit of a slow start. But as soon as Gene Wilder is introduced the movie becomes that much better. Pure Imagination is one of the best songs in a movie and just encapsulates the feeling of walking into the factory for the first time. Gene Wilder, you will be missed 😪 4/5
Everything You've Always Wanted to Know About Sex* But Were Afraid to Ask
Not the biggest fan of this one for my first Woody Allen. The majority of the sketches fell a bit flat and dragged on for longer than they needed to. The only one the was genuinely good was the last one, which if everything else was this quality it would be perfect 3/5
Annie Hall
One of my new favourite movies. Everything about this was amazing, from the acting, to the cinematography, to the bloody incredible script. If I had one criticism it would be the scenes in California were not as interesting as the others, but that's pretty minor. Simply amazing 5/5
Manhattan
Not as good as Annie Hall but still quite good. From the beginning I wasn't the biggest fan but it gradually grew on me, the the cinematography and shot composition being the best part 4/5
When Harry Met Sally
Same with Manhattan, this gradually grew on me as it went on, probably more so. The dialogue between the two leads and everyone else was probably the best part, both being natural and engaging 4.5/5
My Letterboxd for anyone interested https://letterboxd.com/the_whitewash/
I try to write short, unbiased reviews for every film I watch and am currently trying to watch 365 films in 2018. I’m on track to succeed, hopefully I don’t fall off in the waning months.
Letterboxd is the de facto source for lists. It was going to be my suggestion as well. Like you, I didn't connect to it right away either, but as I visited it more and more it became absolutely indispensable. Although I don't have any lists or reviews of my own there. I have a horrible time making lists. It is always an exercise in frustration for me.
Edit: Just in case you were unaware, Filmspotting has a page at Letterboxd
Here's a couple of my favorite lists from Letterboxd: https://letterboxd.com/momsaysitsok/list/r-truefilm-canon-1000-films/ and https://letterboxd.com/lifewithnopants/list/shmight-shmound-2018-the-top-300/. Both of these are quite long, but try and knock out those closer to the top that you haven't seen. AFI.com also has some great American movies, and the IMDb Top 250 is a good, albeit mainstream, list.
From my letterboxd:
Kong: Skull Island (2017, dir. Jordan Vogt-Roberts)- 3/5
Kong: Skull Island is full to the brim with ideas, character and bold formal choices. And while not all these choices pay off, it is a nice change for a huge-franchise-reboot monstrosity.
The Vietnam War stuff was perhaps more interesting than effective, and some of the underlying ideas were a little half-baked. While I appreciated the injections of humour for levity's sake, they were jolting more often than not. However, I can forgive all those bumps and simply enjoy this film as a faux-Apocalypse Now, with a soundtrack and some cinematography that leans into its setting well. I will watch Sam Jackson stare an enormous gorilla down in front of a wall of fire any day of the week.
The CGI seemed really clunky in some places- or maybe that was just me?
Atonement (2007, dir. Joe Wright)- 4.5/5
One of the best examples of a novel being put to screen that I have ever seen. Wright captures the tone and presents the narrative to its fullest extent without it ever feeling rushed or episodic. Add on top of that a style that greatly enhances the material and you have this marvel.
What is a compelling and deeply (deeply) emotional story is given life by a brilliant score, cinematography that is dreamy and innovative (there is a moment where McAvoy breaths deeply and the screen really subtlety lights up around him) and a cast is pretty amazing. Ronan is enchanting and infuriating (all at the age of 13?) and her counterparts in the later parts of the film are able to pull their weight.
McAvoy and Knightley are absolutely electrifying together. I mean... that library scene. This film, while ostensibly about Briony, hinges on you feeling a deep connection with this couple. And... I felt it.
~~here's an idea of what's available. It looks decent if you're looking to get into film and haven't seen many of the classics (old and new).~~
/u/claaaaaaaire has the info!
/u/Dani_Californication, /u/LiteraryBoner
I don't see the need to fight over this picture.
You know, maybe if the Boner Jams thing really doesn't work out you guys are free to use my Antrobus Auditorium. Just tell me your Cytu.be usernames and I'll add you guys as moderators.
please watch my channe too! https://cytu.be/r/EmptyTV
At approximately 3:55 AM PST ‘Ed Wood’ Should be starting. Due to the nature of these videos, times are estimated.
At approximately 7:00 AM PST ‘Mulholland Drive’ should be starting.
At approximately 9:26 AM PST ‘Trainspotting’ should be starting
At approximately 11:00 AM PST ‘The Last Man on Earth’ should be starting
At approximately 1:32 PM PST: ‘The Life Aquatic’ should be starting
At approximately 3:30 PM PST: ‘From Dusk Till Dawn’ should be starting
At approximately 5:22 PM PST ‘The Adventures of Pete and Pete should be starting.
According to Just Watch, it’s only available for streaming on Fandor in Canada
It’s also available for $30ish on Amazon. I’d even recommend checking out your local library if it’s available there
Finally got around to seeing Dunkirk (2017) yesterday. Excerpt here, link to full review on my Letterboxd!
4/5
> The film switches perspectives from the land, sea and air all over varying spans of time; a week, day and hour respectively with the timelines converging toward the end of the movie.
>While this could have been a choice that confused viewers, it ends up being very easy to follow. At the beginning of the film, title cards clearly delineate which perspective is which and the film goes on its way. It also bodes well for the film’s suspense; it’s easy to see where the sea and air timelines will converge plot-wise, but the one week timeline on land leaves the audience guessing as to where those characters will end up at the end of the movie and how they get there.
I have the feeling that this particular review isn't my most well written, so constructive criticism is most welcome.
It's certainly my longest. I had a lot to say.
Excerpts here, links to full reviews on my Letterboxd!
Pair of superhero flicks this week:
Wonder Woman (2017) - 4/5
> As it stands, director Patty Jenkins and lead Gal Gadot have delivered something the DC Extended Universe sorely needed: a splash of color and good movie.
Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 (2017) -3/5
> As Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 opens, it seems like Gunn and company have recreated that same sense of magic and humor [of the original.] And then [the opening] ends. The rest of the film suffers from what many sequels suffer from: the feeling that the danger the team is under has no stakes. Peter Quill and company need not fear; Marvel has them signed for three more films.
Links to full reviews up on my Letterboxd!
Drive (2011) - 4/5
>[Refn] builds Drive more like a crime thriller than a summer blockbuster, using all of the tools at his disposal in service of the idea of the ticking clock. That idea is fascinating in concept but it can go very, very wrong if handled improperly. For the film’s sake, it does not.
Monterey Pop (1968) - 5/5
> Without a central focus or plot line, the selection and editing of the footage becomes key. Pennebaker has a keen eye for the latter; both the structural and moment-to-moment editing in the film are spectacular.
Links to full reviews on my Letterboxd!
Inside Llewyn Davis (2013) - 3.5/5
> It’s a testament to both Isaac’s strength as an actor and Llewyn’s strength as a character that he is able to essentially save the movie. Without him, Inside is a far worse and far less interesting film.
Two people I follow on letterboxd who watch a ton of horror films: Jason Coffman and Scrambled Face. You can search through their films restricted to horror, go through their lists and read their reviews. The former also has a reddit account, unfortunately I can't recall what his username is.
Love these threads, mostly because I don't post here as often anymore (though I lurk daily). Most of my movie talk has moved to LB. https://letterboxd.com/muuurrpphy/
Looking forward to adding some of you!
Yep, that's a pilot episode he shot for Amazon's "pilot season" project. Amazon shoots a half dozen or so pilots and lets Prime members vote on which ones they should greenlight. The Tick, I Love Dick, and Jean Claude Van Johnson are the most recent series to come from this.
I watched Budding Prospects when it was online and it's a lot of fun. Definitely feels like a Zwigoff project. Hopefully Amazon will order it to series.
EDIT: You can watch the episode here.
^^Longer ^^reviews ^^here: ^^(https://letterboxd.com/Jakoh/)
First Reformed (2018, dir. Paul Schrader)
The film tackles a lot of topics in just two hours, most of them are around religion, the environment and politics but it also is about more personal troubles, like our past, our purpose and our relationship with everyone around us.
Balancing all of those things can be extremely difficult, but Paul Schrader does it masterfully with his script and excellent direction.
There are a few hiccups here and there with some scenes not quite having the emotional punch that Schrader imagined, but all in all it's a movie that will stick with you and you're going to be thinking about its themes and messages for a long time after you see it.
4/5
Mission: Impossible – Fallout (2018, dir. Christopher McQuarrie)
"I thought this was 150 minutes, where's the rest 60 minutes?"
That was my first thought when "Mission: Impossible - Fallout" ended, I honestly could not believe this insane ride was already over.
I'm struggling to remember a more adrenaline-inducing third act in an action film and the closest I got was Mad Max: Fury Road. And, honestly, I dare say Fallout surpassed what was one of the most action-packed movies ever made.
4.5/5
Quiz Show (1994, dir. Robert Redford)
A great movie that deals with ethics, morality, fame and wealth, all in the wake of quiz shows in the american households of the 50s. It is gripping, fast-paced with very good snappy dialog and some brilliantly subtle visual story-telling. Sprinkle some amazing performances on top of it and a 10-second uncredited role (not even a cameo back then) by a really young Ethan Hawke and you've got Quiz Show.
4/5
Now that it's available for streaming on Netflix, anyone watched & have thoughts on Ana Lily Amirpour's The Bad Batch?
I am pretty disappointed with it. Amirpour's previous movie, A Girl Walks Home Alone at Night (2014), put her on the map & while being shy of a classic, is still a wonderful mingling of ideas. I was really looking forward to her new movie, & seeing that it's an indie & that she wrote as well as directed it meant she hadn't "sold out" or otherwise compromised her artistic integrity.
Well that last thought is a bit of "careful what you wish for".
edit: Additional, separate thought - with revelations that Harvey Weinstein is, in addition to being a powerhouse movie producer, a serial harasser of women, I'm curious how big-name actors will respond. They've got, & have had, a nasty son of a bitch right in the middle of their industry.
Heres your post I think and this is the page that you linked to.
A lot of interesting stuff here I'd love to read, but I couldn't find anything specifically on Sandler. This is a great idea, though! When we looked up reviews, it was kind of interesting how much critics hated movies like Billy Madison even though it's considered a comedy classics today.
Even though that link didn't work, do you know where I might find something like it that has what I'm looking for?
Set up a IfTTT.
This sounds like something I'd be interested in, however it destroys any interest since anyone that actually moderates other subs.
Also modmail is an absolutely joke of a system. No search function, nothing. I realize you're trying to get people to actually use it, but you should really just stick with regular posts and try to get discussions rolling.
I recently saw Call Me By Your Name and unlike seemingly everyone else I hated it. I found it to be an excruciatingly boring film that does nothing to make me care about its characters which resulted in me not caring about the relationship between Elio and Oliver which is the entire movie. I go into it a little bit more in my letterboxd review, but I want to know what I'm missing that makes this the great film that seemingly everyone else sees it as.
Eh. I don't really think it changes much for me. I mean sure, it does matter. But it's not the most important thing and it's not really a dramatic altering of things.
But then again I thought Arrival was generally overrated, so what do I know?
Managed to see some films this week, but, out of the bunch, Notorious, North by Northwest and Chungking Express are the only ones worthy of talking about.
On Notorious I have to say it's one of the finer romances out there, unsurprisingly well paced given it's Hitchcock and, in my opinion, no one's ever looked better on the silver screen than Ingrid Bergman did here. 8/10
North by Northwest was very competent and had such a great first half but it did drag in places it had no business in. 8/10
As far as Chungking Express goes along, its stylization completely trounces anything I've seen. There's one particular, slowed-down designated shot in the second half of the film where Tony Leung is having his drink and Faye Wong is gawking longingly at him -- really, a one-of-a-kind. Fantastic, and I presume I'll deem this a favorite on a future re-watch. Bewildering, but a necessary viewing nonetheless. 8/10
Taken from my Letterboxd
this is a pretty good site. it takes scores from RT, IMDB, Metacritic, and Letterboxd and creates a combined score
be sure to lower the # of reviews filter from >50 down to >20 though, or a lot of good stuff will get cut off
Here’s a whole month of MUBI. For free. Incredible hand-picked films, by amazing directors. I think you’ll really like it. Happy watching. https://mubi.com/t/web/global/n6VFrxFX
My referral link for anyone interested!
I thought I'd use this place as a good excuse to share my Top 300, recently updated: https://mubi.com/lists/my-250-favourite-movies. Now there's a lot of guilty pleasure films on there as well as a few more serious options but would love to have some recommendations, because if there's a great film on there it probably means I haven't gotten around to seeing it yet.
I have the same feelings. I find I agree with a so many of his writings, but disagree with so many others. But even on posts I disagree with, I find things I agree with and vice versa.
There's a Kodak app that lists them. Not sure how comprehensive it is, but it gets everything in my city at least.
Here's the link if you're on android: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.kodak.kodakreelfilmapp
They're meant for concerts and clubs or any loud sustained activity where you still need to be able to hear and make out audio like at a concert. Otherwise, you just wear regular earplugs if you're operating a machine or something but regular earplugs are useless at concerts or events because they muffle higher frequencies even though they're stronger. Concert earplugs are better at decreasing all frequencies equally instead of one over the other.
It's uncommon for people to wear concert earplugs at the cinema HOWEVER, modern movies have gotten very loud and cinemas are often playing films at above 90 or even 100 dB according to people that measure this. You aren't going to damage your hearing watching a few movies an year at this volume but it does decrease it over time. Modern action films also have far less quiet and are constantly filled with noise or music. This is why I generally wear concert earplugs, it also makes the audio a bit clearer for me when it's so loud that it's crackling. I use these, they come with three sets of filters, the highest filter (one that blocks the most audio) is the one I use at the theatre and I can still make out the dialogue:
(sorry I'm just now getting back to you)
ALL of this is assuming you're in the United States - you never clarified.
See what channels are available to you: dtv.gov/maps
Check whether there's an internal antenna before buying anything. To do this, go to the Setup menu on your TV, and there should be a "channel setup" option. If it asks whether you have cable or antenna, pick antenna. It will then do a scan to find any channels you can pick up.
IF this doesn't turn anything up, or turns up only a channel or two, you'll need to purchase an external digital antenna. You can find these for CHEAP anywhere - any electronics store or any store with an electronics department (Walmart, Target, etc) will have them. If you have a lot of channels that are "green" or "yellow" from #1 above, you can get a standard antenna and get most channels without any trouble. If you have few of those and lots of "orange" then you'll need a stronger receiver and you should go back to finding a streaming source online.
This is the version of the DVD I have and it's the theatrical cut:
Bernard Herrmann's <strong>Great Film Music</strong>
Basil Pouledouris' Conan the Barbarian
Peter Gabriel's Passion (Last Temptation of Christ)
Howard Shore's Lord of the Rings
An old thread, but this Video is available at Amazon, but it is in PAL Format only.
https://www.amazon.com/Lasse-Nielsen-Short-Films-Collection/dp/B07ZWBD48B/
If I had a Multi-Region Universal DVD/BluRay Player, I would definitely buy it.
https://tv.apple.com/gb/movie/inland-empire/umc.cmc.578vl997tsvmknztw2uzvbqjd
Might be a North American thing, it’s highly available for region B players.
Dunno if anyone here has the Napoleon Book by Stanley Kubrick but Christ on a bike, what movie that would have been.
If you read the paragraph contextualizing that quote you cherry picked you will see that the author is admitting that there is a margin of error due to the numerous variables and unknowns involved in the transparent blockchain. In your quote they are saying that a margin of error between 50 tonnes and 100 tonnes CO2 isn't relevant to the purpose of the article as it still broadly describes the scale and is not orders of magnitude off. In layman's, that quote is saying "hey if I say 100 tonnes with margin of error in reality it might actually be 50 tonnes, but it isn't actually going to be 50 g or 50 kg."
The rest of your comment is you making up numbers about natural gas' efficiency (the EIA does not agree with your straight from between the cheeks assessment of 0.182 kgCO2/KwH for natural gas) and varying between oversimplifying and overcomplicating the issue to reach your desired conclusion. The article's calculations are based on average CO2e emissions per KwH broken down by country/region with best possible assumptions as to source of emissions for distributed pools. This is all sourced (article's footnote 7). Your maths—which, shockingly, align very well with your clear bias—are not sourced. So please, do go on about which maths are bad.
I am an IMBd refugee so the conversion to the site is only natural. Here's mine: https://letterboxd.com/gis7thletter/
As you can see I like to write quite a bit and am active in commenting on other's reviews. I used to do the whole "follow for follow" thing but I didn't like reading reviews that were just throwaway one-liners.
Also, I have an unfortunately taken a bit of a break lately due to personal matters, but I should be back in the saddle by the end of the month for my local festival (CIFF!).
I didn't know that people hated Wild at Heart. I thought it was pretty good. I got the order to watch Lynch's films from this website; it worked for me so I passed it on.
https://letterboxd.com/KianHeinsbaek/
I discovered Letterboxd about a year ago and just started to write reviews. I'm reviewing the movies I see at the cinema, which I do a couple times a month, and some random movies I see in my collection. I'm following you now, Marcus!
Let's start a community, if you follow me, I will follow you (y)
I really like logging what I watched, it began logging what I listened to around 2004 but now I have it automatically logging what I watch with the trakt plugin in Kodi. Here's my history and I use that to catch any movies I forgot to log to Letterboxd.
I use trakt as well, and quite extensively, but I don't think they quite align as being redundant. I use trakt to simply track what I'm watching whereas it looks like Letterbox is more for the social aspect, which trakt has but I think we can agree it's not really used that way. Like any of these sites, though, what it gives you mostly depends on what you put into it yourself. I find Criticker to be pretty spot-on for recommendations/prediction scores
Hello, I'm a bot! The movie you linked is called Into the Night, here are some Trailers
Have a look around Amazon... Never mind, I found it for you
I'm 46, so I can really appreciate a good b&w film and sometimes it enhances the film - do you remember the shot-for-shot colour remake of Psycho starring Viggo Mortensen? No? Neither does anyone else...
Yup, turns out it's restricted in the US and Canada. You can use justwatch.com to find out where you can stream/rent it in your location. In the US, it's included in the Criterion Channel or you can rent it from Vudu. If you live in at least a decently sized city, you should be able to find it in a library.
This is my letterboxd profile. I mostly use it to provide small excerpts for full length reviews I write for my site
I have followed a bunch of you but I'd love to interact with more of you. And to the OP / anyone else interested in writing on film, I am looking for people to contribute so if that seems like something you'd be interested in, shoot me a PM!
Anyway look forward to interacting with you all, on this sub and beyond.
I watch one movie a day and review not all but most of them. Here's my profile: https://letterboxd.com/Kandurin/
I'll check everyone in this thread out (I'm pretty sure I'm already following you, OP).
I usually write a review for every feature length film that I watch, although if its a repeat viewing that I have nothing new to write about it, I'll just record the watch
Profile's in the flair! I'm a journalism student. I write movie reviews for fun at this point, but I also won awards for it in high school (I'm 20, for reference).
Hello, I'm a bot! The movie you linked is called Point Blank, here's some Trailers
Seconded.
Your execution looks nice. It's clean and straightforward.
Your idea is cool but it exists.
Possibly with some of the features you were thinking of adding?
Maybe your niche can be to play up the saving money side?
A user adds movies they want to own to their list.
Your service will notify the user if/when it's made available and then again if/when there's a reduction in price?
On that note though you'd probably want it to scour free/subscription sites as well. After all if you're subscribed to a pay-service it's technically free to watch.
There’s a Mubi list of the films shot originally with the two strip process:
As for The Aviator, I think all the work done was unique to that film to get it to look like the early technicolor. There’s a Da Vinci resolve preset to get the same look now, also, in editing, but I don’t know if any films that have released to mimic the effect. The later technicolor looks better to most people; Scorcese used the two strip because it was age appropriate to the movie setting.
There are other movies with interesting color filters to mimic older film stocks, too, like the Lighthouse.
I'm really enjoying working my way through this list of English director Edgar Wright's favorite 1000 films. Not every year is represented but these are all quality
It's funny because for him there's nothing worse than to be called an art-house filmmaker. He's more interested in guys like Fincher than many art-house contemporaries. I'm inclined to agree, there's this subset of whimsical art-house filmmakers I'm really bored with, such as the Dardennes who made really a nothing-film with Two days One night but are treated like they made the most profound piece of cinema of the year. And it's nothing! Ok little rant over.
He sees himself as a craftsman such as Hawks, hence the evolution from the extremely stylized Blood to Horse Money which only consists of static shots.
Here's an interview with the guy, pretty incoherent at times but really funny and gives a good insight: https://mubi.com/notebook/posts/some-violence-is-required-a-conversation-with-pedro-costa
Thanks for the kind words! :)
I agree, blockbusters need it, more so than others. Especially blockbusters that aren't so thorough or 'profound', like many actions movies. Or if there's been poor character development, writing, or even acting, sometimes a character needs to say "Damn I hate that guy!" Most films need and have verbal exposition, too. Exposition on its own isn't a bad thing. Like you said, overdoing exposition is the problem.
Dark Knight Rises is definitely the worst offender. It's basically the height of all of Nolan's problems, especially the final 30-40 minutes.
His exposition becomes a problem sometimes though. You're right, blockbusters need exposition, but I think his is very blatant and insulting. Some characters exist to be expository (Michael Caine, in all Nolan movies 2005-2014), or exist to be 'the audience' and have things explained to them (Ellen page, Inception). It's fine to be expository, but other than Alfred, Caine's characters don't have character. Neither did Page.
In Interstellar there's an 'imperfect docking' scene. The characters say 2 or 3 times that the docking has been "imperfect" and has not connected, while we visually see the failure of the docking about 5 times. There was no need for the characters to blatantly say
Nolan has moments where he seems to assume audience are idiots, but of course he has moments where he doesn't. The Prestige is a good example of this. So is Memento. You only get the full picture and (implied) explanations at the end.
If you have time I recommend you read this (in the truefilm thread I linked at the start of my month-old comment, this is the article they link to). I really love what COOK has to say about Nolan.
At approximately 3:55 AM PST ‘Ed Wood’ Should be starting. Due to the nature of these videos, times are estimated.
At approximately 7:00 AM PST ‘Mulholland Drive’ should be starting.
At approximately 9:26 AM PST ‘Trainspotting’ should be starting
At approximately 11:00 AM PST ‘The Last Man on Earth’ should be starting
At approximately 1:32 PM PST: ‘The Life Aquatic’ should be starting
At approximately 3:30 PM PST: ‘From Dusk Till Dawn’ should be starting
At approximately 5:22 PM PST ‘The Adventures of Pete and Pete should be starting. PLEASE TUNE IN I JUST STARTED TONIGHT! :) : https://cytu.be/r/EmptyTV
Baby Driver
However pencil-thin the character file looks, the film is still a fun ride. It's not meant to be taken literal, and you could easily follow the plot with minor distractions as it's not the most convoluted piece of storytelling, but it has its place. The use of music as guidance to what could happen and the angles this film manages to put on display are nothing short of invigorating. The off-beat shoot-out syncopation and the crazed, almost dizzying array of colours that concoct the car chases make this film a proof that, though a dying art, attempts at non-conventionalism can be interesting sights. 6.5/10
Taken from my Letterboxd -
Links to full reviews up on my Letterboxd!
Sound City (2013) - 2/5
> The creation of the soundtrack feels more like an overlong victory lap than an essential part of the film. It’s undeniably cool to see the remaining members of Nirvana record a song with Paul McCartney, but the wow factor is undercut by the fact that it comes after the audience has already seen four songs recorded. By that point, there’s a feeling of “just get this over with,” which is a feat for a film that’s only an hour and 40 minutes in length.
Here is a link to my Letterboxd, where you can get my "reviews" as soon as I write them.
Had to put it here because I ran into the character limit for comments.
reviews aren't super serious but don't let that fool you LB is probably my favorite place on the internet. I'm about thousand movies behind because I'm too lazy to mark everything I've seen and I'm big into horror/action/b-movies/exploitation and the strange sleazy side of cinema in general, usually going through periods where I'll marathon subgenres and whatever trash I'm in the mood for.
Very few movies are so well crafted, and the only critique you end up offering is "don't understand" and "disappointed" which is just so incredibly vague. You can imagine my confusion.
Carol was a masterpiece for me: https://letterboxd.com/virtu333/film/carol-2015/
I created an account a long time ago but never really go into using it. I have an account on iCheckmovies that I use to track what I've watching and what I want to watch, but I should probably switch to Letterboxd, I hear it's better in pretty much every way.
Edit: Just made a new one. Might as well start now.
I'm doing this. I only started on the 11th so I'm a little bit behind and will catch up after Exam Season but I'm pretty stoked about it because I've been ignoring film for some years and it's a chance to catch up.
I just started a letterboxd account, here it is https://letterboxd.com/fondofboobs/films/ . I don't a have a criteria for choosing movies, if I see one that seems ok and I like the plot, I'll watch it.
The movie you linked is called Terminator 2: Judgment Day, here's some Trailers
Websites like that already exist: CyTube or Watch2Gether, for example. You can create your own room, open it for the public or friends only, and link to videos on sites like Youtube/Vimeo.
The sequel that Max Landis wrote, Martyr actually explained why the various cameras came into play when watching Chronicle, exploring what you were actually watching in Chronicle.
Maybe because the idea of a list of things to do before you die definitely existed before the movie. This book as just one example. And the term "kick the bucket" also existed before. The movie just came up with something that combined the ideas so perfectly people just incorporated it into their past memories without realizing it.
Looks like you have a couple options here. The DVDs are region locked, with the cheap options being for region 2 and the $90 option a U.S. import version that will work in a U.S. DVD player. I don't know the first thing about bypassing region locks, so there may be lots of options to play either version. Also, this is Amazon we're talking about so YMMV in regards to what actually shows up in the mail.
My favourite source for many years has been the book 1.001 Movies You Must See Before You Die
https://www.amazon.com/1001-Movies-You-Must-Before/dp/1438050755/ref=sr_1_1
If you prefer not to use a book, this website also has a very similar top 1,000 list, which is compiled from various sources.
http://www.theyshootpictures.com/gf1000.htm
These lists are great because they include a nice cross-section of world cinema. They also feature short write-ups for each title that give a little background, and help you understand why they made the list.
I thought The Deuce was absolutely incredible and I'd even go so far to say that it is a worthy successor to The Wire. Of course, I am predisposed like this exact subject. For whatever reason, I'm completely fascinated with New York, and Times Square specifically, in this particular time period. I literally cant believe 42nd street was this seedy (literally anything goes) and then completely transformed into the Times Square we have today. There's an outstanding book about Times Square during this period that highlights the grind house theaters and the film's they played called Sleazoid Express that I'd highly recommend if you were interested in the subject at all.
The studio canal Blu is Region A/B and looks great
https://www.amazon.com/Mepris-Studio-Canal-Collection-Blu-ray/dp/B002BC9YYS
Zenmate is a VPN service. It's a startup from Germany and many German (IT) magazines recommend it. They encrypt your data and are trustworthy IMO.
Now the best part: The free version of their service allows you to use their US VPN for an unlimited time.
I use it and it ~~works~~ worked really well. Fuck you, Netflix.
Understanding film beneath the surface level is what I would suggest. There are a lot of books for that type of thing. I'd recommend the new Talking Pictures: How To Read Movies, it's very easy to read in comparison to the more Film Studies textbooks. But beyond becoming more knowledgeable in Film in general, working on your writing will help convey your thoughts and feelings into words as best as possible. Resources at your school (English teacher) could be of great value. As far as things you can do on your own, I find Naked, Drunk, and Writing to be great for this kind of thing. Or any books focusing on writing skill pertaining to reviews/essays and the like. Both books are easy enough for someone your age to understand. Good luck!!
It's not a film, but if you haven't read Robert McKee's Story you should. Ostensibly a book about screenwriting, it taught me more about the structure of film (and storytelling) than probably any other critical work ever has.
Yeah, you are great to talk to, do you have a list of favourite films or something related to that? I know it seems cliched but I only know one person aside from you and myself who loves Frances Ha so much they brought this (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Frances-Ha-Noah-Baumbach-Picture/dp/3869307315/ref=sr_1_8?ie=UTF8&qid=1454017716&sr=8-8&keywords=frances+ha)!
Really agree - have heard so many people dismiss it as a 'typical AI based thriller' but there are really interesting ideas being discussed.
If you enjoy the film I would recommend The Technology Singularity by Murray Shanahan (the guy Alex Garland spoke to when working on the film).
The first level class is a complete General Education course at my school, they use a simplified book that they use. Critical Visions is a collection of essays and is denser both in size and content, more focused on a specific style of interpretation, it is not my favorite book but is well worth a look at. http://www.amazon.com/Critical-Visions-Theory-Timothy-Corrigan/dp/0312446349