Hollywood, 1969!
We've had Once Upon a Time movies for all sorts of things. America, The West, China, Mexico, Venice, and now... Hollywood. Tarantino loves the era, and that's evident in a lot of his works, where he'll showcase grindhouse cinema, kung fu, Italian films, westerns, and whatever else inbetween.
This time, it's all about the behind the scenes for these movies, where we follow the washed up Rick Dalton and his stuntman Cliff Booth as they struggle to find work and relevance in an age of movie-making when Hollywood was breaking all sorts of new ground.
DiCaprio does his best, but he doesn't really have much to do in this movie except act. Brad Pitt steals the show with his ultra cool and extremely laid back persona. Nothing brings this guy down, and somehow, he manages to be very sexy even in his mid-50s. He has some of the best scenes in the movie, even though he's basically doing nothing the whole time, because he's got charisma for days.
Then, we have Margot Robbie shoe-horned into this film as Sharon Tate. She also has nothing to do the entire movie, and for those familiar with the true story of her life, you'll be waiting the entire movie to see how her part connects with the Manson family ordeal, but it's totally worth it, in that unexpected yet typical Tarantino fashion.
A lot of the fun parts of this movie relate to the movies that Rick Dalton stars in, whether he's currently filming them or reflecting back on them. I would totally watch some of those shitty old school movies and tv shows he was in, be it the westerns or Italian sleaze he ends up doing.
The movie has a few major scenes regarding the Manson family hippies and the ranch they dwell in, but it isn't so much about any of that as it is about the era and events around and leading up to that, so don't expect too much historical significance relating that plot, or even Sharon Tate. As said, she really is a mostly pointless character that will hardly if ever interact with our main two characters.
It seems like I'm saying some of these things as if they're detriments to the overall film, but they're not. Somehow, this movie is still rather fascinating as a period piece. It's all about soaking up that late 60s Hollywood atmosphere, and the film does an exceptional job at capturing those vibes. The film also has a phenomenal cast, but with so much of the screentime going to our primary characters, you'll wish you could get a little more out of the other side characters, because there are some awesome actors in this movie.
Most of the time, I was watching the screen rather hypnotically, because Tarantino movies at the very least are always entertaining. There are a few laugh out loud moments, and I basically loved that ending. So what's Tarantino going to do next? It seems rather out of character for him to do that rumored R-rated Star Trek movie, but fuck it. I'd watch it. I'd watch anything this fucker makes.
๐ My Feed
โ๏ธ Add Post
๐๏ธ Markup
Posts and comments support the following markup:
- **bold**
- *italic*
- ~~strikethrough~~
- [u]underline[/u]
- [color=red]red text[/color]
- @username (limit 10)
- #hashtag (limit 10)
๐๏ธ Preview
๐ Reply to Post
๐ Repost
What would you like to do with this post?
There are too many posts by this Box of Hair character
And I don't like it! Where's the diversity around here? I want to see other people talking about stuff, and not just that idiot box! Who does he think he is? Some kind of admin?!
This place is all about hospitality! You hear that?! HOSPITALITY!

And I don't like it! Where's the diversity around here? I want to see other people talking about stuff, and not just that idiot box! Who does he think he is? Some kind of admin?!
This place is all about hospitality! You hear that?! HOSPITALITY!

๐ Reply to Post
๐ Repost
What would you like to do with this post?
Casualties of War
I've slacked hard on this month's war challenge, but I deemed it necessary to watch one of my favorite Brian De Palma movies. This one is based on a grizzly true story of a group of grieving soldiers who kidnap a local Vietnamese girl and proceed to torture and rape her.
The cast is excellent. Sean Penn is the main perpetrator of this heinous act. A man with seemingly no conscience as he views any natives as VC scum who deserve whatever harm they may get. Don Harvey plays his asshole lackey who you want to punch in the face. John C. Reilly is the guy who's too dumb to realize the error of his ways, and John Leguizamo plays the quiet reluctant culprit who's roped into the dirty deeds because Sean Penn is an intimidating fuck.
The only guy who wants nothing to do with any of this is Michael J. Fox, who plays the voice of reason, but he can't do much of anything because these guys are his commanding officers. This whole ordeal is a nightmare for him, leading him to question his morals and purpose in the war, since the good guys prove to be no better than the men they're fighting a war against.
This movie is rather hard to watch, because the girl really sells it, and you feel awful for what they put her through. It's emotionally devastating and downbeat, made even worse by the fact that it's true. War is tough enough when you're trying to do what's right, but here we have a bunch of soldiers knowingly doing the wrong thing.
It's hard-hitting, and if it doesn't get a reaction out of you, then you're fucked.
Also featuring Erik King (Doakes, from Dexter), Ving Rhames, and real life Nam vet Captain Dale Dye. Too bad Michael J. Fox doesn't do much these days, due to his health, because he put out one hell of a performance in this.
I've slacked hard on this month's war challenge, but I deemed it necessary to watch one of my favorite Brian De Palma movies. This one is based on a grizzly true story of a group of grieving soldiers who kidnap a local Vietnamese girl and proceed to torture and rape her.
The cast is excellent. Sean Penn is the main perpetrator of this heinous act. A man with seemingly no conscience as he views any natives as VC scum who deserve whatever harm they may get. Don Harvey plays his asshole lackey who you want to punch in the face. John C. Reilly is the guy who's too dumb to realize the error of his ways, and John Leguizamo plays the quiet reluctant culprit who's roped into the dirty deeds because Sean Penn is an intimidating fuck.
The only guy who wants nothing to do with any of this is Michael J. Fox, who plays the voice of reason, but he can't do much of anything because these guys are his commanding officers. This whole ordeal is a nightmare for him, leading him to question his morals and purpose in the war, since the good guys prove to be no better than the men they're fighting a war against.
This movie is rather hard to watch, because the girl really sells it, and you feel awful for what they put her through. It's emotionally devastating and downbeat, made even worse by the fact that it's true. War is tough enough when you're trying to do what's right, but here we have a bunch of soldiers knowingly doing the wrong thing.
It's hard-hitting, and if it doesn't get a reaction out of you, then you're fucked.
Also featuring Erik King (Doakes, from Dexter), Ving Rhames, and real life Nam vet Captain Dale Dye. Too bad Michael J. Fox doesn't do much these days, due to his health, because he put out one hell of a performance in this.
๐ Reply to Post
๐ Repost
What would you like to do with this post?
2019 War Movie Challenge
It's the 75th Anniversary of the D-Day landings, so what better way to commemorate them than a challenge for the month of July. The challenge will commence at 00:01 GMT on the 1st July and finish at 06:00 GMT on the 1st August.
Points will be awarded for running time, so with most war movies clocking in at well over two hours, you should be able to rack up the points. You can also watch any TV series, including documentaries if you missed out this month (The World At War comes highly recommended).
The general rule will be: the movie or TV series has to be tagged with "war" on either IMDb or Wiki. The movie or TV series does not have to include scenes of combat and can just be set during the war (i.e. Casablanca) as long as the war is integral to the development of the plot, whether it is in the foreground or the background of the story.
Horror movies set during real wars or campaigns will be permitted, as long as there is at least one scene of combat (i.e. Overlord). But no, something like Dead Snow would not count despite the Nazi theme.
Although they will not be tagged with "war" on IMDb, I will also permit fictional wars so that will include fantasy (i.e. The Lord of the Rings, Game of Thrones) or science fiction (i.e. Aliens, Starship Troopers), but bare in mind there is a challenge for these genres coming up later in September I believe, so try to stick to real world history!
So sign up now (no pun intended)!

It's the 75th Anniversary of the D-Day landings, so what better way to commemorate them than a challenge for the month of July. The challenge will commence at 00:01 GMT on the 1st July and finish at 06:00 GMT on the 1st August.
Points will be awarded for running time, so with most war movies clocking in at well over two hours, you should be able to rack up the points. You can also watch any TV series, including documentaries if you missed out this month (The World At War comes highly recommended).
The general rule will be: the movie or TV series has to be tagged with "war" on either IMDb or Wiki. The movie or TV series does not have to include scenes of combat and can just be set during the war (i.e. Casablanca) as long as the war is integral to the development of the plot, whether it is in the foreground or the background of the story.
Horror movies set during real wars or campaigns will be permitted, as long as there is at least one scene of combat (i.e. Overlord). But no, something like Dead Snow would not count despite the Nazi theme.
Although they will not be tagged with "war" on IMDb, I will also permit fictional wars so that will include fantasy (i.e. The Lord of the Rings, Game of Thrones) or science fiction (i.e. Aliens, Starship Troopers), but bare in mind there is a challenge for these genres coming up later in September I believe, so try to stick to real world history!
So sign up now (no pun intended)!

๐ Reply to Post
๐ Repost
What would you like to do with this post?
Disturbing movies to show to young women
A few female coworkers have been watching movies at my place lately. I'm trying to educate them on good movies. Currently, the goal is to show them something disturbing, to mess them up.
I figured "Bug" 2006 would be a good place to start, but it didn't phase them so much. I'm thinking of whipping out the big guns, and showing them something like "Megan is Missing". I was creeped the fuck out by that movie, so that's my best idea for a disturbing movie.
What would you show to someone if you wanted to really unnerve them?
A few female coworkers have been watching movies at my place lately. I'm trying to educate them on good movies. Currently, the goal is to show them something disturbing, to mess them up.
I figured "Bug" 2006 would be a good place to start, but it didn't phase them so much. I'm thinking of whipping out the big guns, and showing them something like "Megan is Missing". I was creeped the fuck out by that movie, so that's my best idea for a disturbing movie.
What would you show to someone if you wanted to really unnerve them?
๐ Reply to Post
๐ Repost
What would you like to do with this post?
Just when you thought I couldn't sink any lower...
Now, I'm a goddamn pizza guy!
My life is hilarious.

Granted, I only worked one shift of pizza hut at my current theater job, but still. A fucking pizza guy.
Now, I'm a goddamn pizza guy!
My life is hilarious.

Granted, I only worked one shift of pizza hut at my current theater job, but still. A fucking pizza guy.
๐ Reply to Post
๐ Repost
What would you like to do with this post?
Amelia Kinkade (Angela from NotD)
I am watching Night of the Demons 1988 for the fifty kajillionth time, and I just want to say, I really want to track the actress down and chainsaw her head off because of the way she says "Oh!" very insultingly, at 23:15 here:

OK, now that I got that out of my system... I looked at her IMDB page, and apparently she does a lot of work with animals, and tries to help head off possible future animal poachers in Africa by reaching out to them when they're young and getting them to have empathy. So, OK, I guess she turned out cool. She's off the hook. Her neck will not have a close encounter with my chainsaw. A very close call for Amelia Kinkade. I now return you all to your regularly scheduled lives.
Seriously though, the way she talked at that moment was really odious, and makes me mad. I need to not watch that scene on days when I've had more than twenty cappucinos. It makes me very angry.

I am watching Night of the Demons 1988 for the fifty kajillionth time, and I just want to say, I really want to track the actress down and chainsaw her head off because of the way she says "Oh!" very insultingly, at 23:15 here:

OK, now that I got that out of my system... I looked at her IMDB page, and apparently she does a lot of work with animals, and tries to help head off possible future animal poachers in Africa by reaching out to them when they're young and getting them to have empathy. So, OK, I guess she turned out cool. She's off the hook. Her neck will not have a close encounter with my chainsaw. A very close call for Amelia Kinkade. I now return you all to your regularly scheduled lives.
Seriously though, the way she talked at that moment was really odious, and makes me mad. I need to not watch that scene on days when I've had more than twenty cappucinos. It makes me very angry.

๐ Reply to Post
๐ Repost
What would you like to do with this post?
Deep Fakes always existed in 2019
Has anybody seen the viddie where they put Jim Carrey into The Shining? It's incredible how far technology has come, and it's also incredibly scary. This stuff can and will compromise the integrity of surveillance footage. It's only a matter of time before a grand conspiracy occurs involving this stuff, but is it new? Haven't we all been faked out for decades?
Shortly after the Shining video, we went back to the 90s for a T2 redux with Stallone's face on Arnold's body. I read that this was actually the idea for Face/Off with Travolta and Cage, and it's much more believable to two beefcakes who have a similar body type than it was for Cage/Travolta, but that movie wasn't bad either way.
So photoshop is definitely a thing, and it's much more easy to believe that someone doctored an image rather than a video, but we can go back a few years further... Back to the future... and with Arnold again... in... The Running Man!
Made in 1987 (one of the greatest years of cinematic history), The Running Man was set in the distant future of 2019, just like Blade Runner, only much more believable. We didn't have flying cars and replicants in this dystopian future. Just a few interactive game shows and bad fashions.
So there's a bit in the later half of the movie where Arnold's face is digitally put onto a double's body for a fight with Jesse Ventura. This deep fake is a bit more advanced than our current tech, because they were able to capture and impose his Austrian accent, and they pulled no punches with their body double when Ventura impales him into a spiked wall.

So much talk about deep fakes lately, but they're nothing new! After all, this is the future!
Has anybody seen the viddie where they put Jim Carrey into The Shining? It's incredible how far technology has come, and it's also incredibly scary. This stuff can and will compromise the integrity of surveillance footage. It's only a matter of time before a grand conspiracy occurs involving this stuff, but is it new? Haven't we all been faked out for decades?
Shortly after the Shining video, we went back to the 90s for a T2 redux with Stallone's face on Arnold's body. I read that this was actually the idea for Face/Off with Travolta and Cage, and it's much more believable to two beefcakes who have a similar body type than it was for Cage/Travolta, but that movie wasn't bad either way.
So photoshop is definitely a thing, and it's much more easy to believe that someone doctored an image rather than a video, but we can go back a few years further... Back to the future... and with Arnold again... in... The Running Man!
Made in 1987 (one of the greatest years of cinematic history), The Running Man was set in the distant future of 2019, just like Blade Runner, only much more believable. We didn't have flying cars and replicants in this dystopian future. Just a few interactive game shows and bad fashions.
So there's a bit in the later half of the movie where Arnold's face is digitally put onto a double's body for a fight with Jesse Ventura. This deep fake is a bit more advanced than our current tech, because they were able to capture and impose his Austrian accent, and they pulled no punches with their body double when Ventura impales him into a spiked wall.

So much talk about deep fakes lately, but they're nothing new! After all, this is the future!
๐ Reply to Post
๐ Repost
What would you like to do with this post?
Wicked World (1991) - Could this be the next THINGS?
"A Barry J. Gillis Film" is already selling me.

You got to love how his trailers feature titties in them. You also got to love how it takes nearly 30 years to get this piece of shit on video. I'll be keeping my eyes peeled for this turkey.
"A Barry J. Gillis Film" is already selling me.

You got to love how his trailers feature titties in them. You also got to love how it takes nearly 30 years to get this piece of shit on video. I'll be keeping my eyes peeled for this turkey.
๐ Reply to Post
๐ Repost
What would you like to do with this post?
What movies did you buy or watch this week? (7-21)
The Gingerbread Man (Blu-ray)
Con Air (Blu-ray)
Lust for a Vampire (Blu-ray)
Also about to preorder Who Saw her Die? and Alice Sweet Alice, both on Blu-ray.
The Gingerbread Man (Blu-ray)
Con Air (Blu-ray)
Lust for a Vampire (Blu-ray)
Also about to preorder Who Saw her Die? and Alice Sweet Alice, both on Blu-ray.
๐ Reply to Post
๐ Repost
What would you like to do with this post?