What movie have you seen recently?


Train to Busan
Korean zombie flick.
This movie was great fun, the jump scares were fun and the zombies really seemed more menacing when they were used as a mass of bodies, it was great.

The characters were pretty generic to start off with but became way more involved than I expected for a zombie film by the end.

Zombies on a train. Watch it if you like Snowpiercer zombie films or haven’t watched a fun horror film in a while.


Get Out is a very suspenseful movie where this dude is trapped, and you are wondering how he is going to “Get Out”.


I saw the trailer but wasn’t as interested, however have heard really good things.

I can wait until video. I’m honestly turned off with having to deal with crazy white people. There is more than enough of that going on in the world.

Also Beauty and the Beast live action was great. I went in almost knowing nothing of the movie. Didn’t know they would sing the same songs and new ones from the animated movie. It was great! Luke Evans as Gaston was my favorite. Love the diversity. Also Emma Watson is my hero. I adore her.


This is possibly the most enjoyable Disney film I’ve watched in recent history, that sticks to the original Disney formula of musicals and solo protagonist story arc. Maybe it was just the amazing water animation that had me mesmerised but whatever it was, I thought it was great.

Initially I was turned off by the Maui character but ended up really enjoying the interaction when realising the only purpose was to help shape the story for the protagonist. I’m sort of babbling however, in conclusion - watch it.

Possibly better than Zootopia or equivalent if we’re looking at movies that are to be watched with kids. I don’t know, is Disney hitting a new golden age again?


Beauty and the Beast
There is a lot to like about this film, particularly for anyone who had nostalgia for the animated movie and/or was frustrated by the gigantic plot holes in the animated movie. This film closes those plot holes for the most part. It is visually stunning if a bit too reliant on the CGI, has some of the best costumes I have seen on film in quite some time, and is just a lot of fun. The vast majority of the performances were excellent and the Be Our Guest scene was outstanding.

There were some things not to like about it. Though they lessened the piece, they didn’t ruin it. There was some questionable casting, like Emma Watson as Belle. She cannot sing and is auto-tuned to the point of sounding like a breathy robot. She is also so mild in her approach to Belle that is difficult to see her as in any way rebellious, adventurous character she is meant to be portraying. I am an Emma Watson fan in as much as her work with He for She is concerned, but I just didn’t see Belle on screen; I saw a likable Emma Watson. Also, one of my favorite actresses, Emma Thompson, was simply annoying as Mrs. Potts. Her over-accented straining through two of my most favorite songs in the movie crushed me. Emma Thompson can sing. She has a beautiful voice, but she was acting so hard through the songs that she lost the music.

The much discussed gay character the “gay scene” was disappointing and played into some unfortunate stereotypes. It was little more than a kitschy/campy performance leading up to a split second joke. If Disney was going to take the heat for having a gay character, they should have made him, I don’t know, actually be gay and not “questioning.”


I watched Kong Skull Island and I am looking forward to seeing an American Godzilla movie set in the same 1970s universe.

I loved the whole apocalypse now feel that they put into it.


Fantastic Planet is a weird French animated film from 1973 based on a scifi novel. It’s pretty short so worth a watch if you like 50s/60s era scifi and weird animation in a similar vein to Terry Gilliam’s stuff.


[quote=“Kate_Monster, post:145, topic:73”]
Beauty and the Beast
[/quote]Is Gaston the good guy? Because Gaston is definitely the good guy.


Last night, while Juliane was finishing cooking, I put on Under Siege, mostly as a joke. But then we left it on, watched it all the way through, and enjoyed it way more than I expected. It holds up remarkably well.

Also, due to it being set on a navy ship, with soldiers and very few women, it managed to bypass most of the cloying misogyny and much of the “zany” isn’t-violence-fun macho-ness on display in Lethal Weapon. I mean, it’s still got tits on display and an undeserved woman-as-prize moment at the end, so not full marks, but it didn’t make me feel dirty knowing this was acceptable popular entertainment that I enjoyed so much when younger like Lethal Weapon did.

Gary Busey, again.
Tuco from Breaking Bad.
Colm Meaney as the least convincing special ops guy ever.


I had an Under Siege movie poster in my room as a kid for a while. (I actually collected movie posters and had a lot of them: they’d rotate).


Movie posters used to be amazing works of art. Now that they don’t matter so much anymore, the designs are very generic.


The reason movie posters aren’t amazing works of art isn’t because they don’t matter. They still make them for every movie, and people still put a ton of effort into them, regardless of how much they “matter”. They aren’t amazing works of art because they are just photographs/screen caps that are Photoshopped like crazy. Back in the day movie posters were painted or drawn.


There was a time when we learned about new movies from movie posters appearing in Blockbuster.


Careful there, the medium does not inform whether a piece is a “great work of art” or not. Also, there are still some great movie posters being made (and some of those are made with Photoshop gasp).


I think that goes without saying.

It also goes without saying that a lot of old movie posters are only good because the passage of time added to their greatness. When those posters were new, they were just as meh as the ones outside the theater today. I’m sure that in 2067 the posters of today will be a lot cooler than they are now.

This also ties into the phenomena of Japanese vs US video game box art. Contemporary american marketing departments seem to prefer a very uninspiring aesthetic. It would be very interesting to find out the reasons for this and how it came to be.


You say it goes without saying, but in your previous post you said that the current art was not great because of the mediums used to make it rather than critiquing the artwork itself, so does it go without saying? Just sayin’. ^_~

Anyway, there are lots of great movie posters still being made. Here are a few examples:


You only need to search “unofficial movie posters” to see the disparity between art and commercial intent.



Yeah, there’s always someone putting in the extra effort on the official posters, but it says a lot when someone like Olly Moss can beat out the originals. Even when he’s commissioned to make official posters, they aren’t the ones that get used in actual marketing.



But is that in any way different than “back in the good ol’ days” as was originally asserted? I think not. Could it be that there is some romanticizing of older posters based on nostalgia?


There are still cool posters being made, just usually not for the AAA blockbusters.

Sort of like how every FPS cover has the same art, most comic book/reboot/sequel plays it safe and goes super genero.

A lot of the time big budget movies still get cool posters, they’re just usually used early on and don’t end up being the “main” poster.