homepage Forums SimHQ Community Community Hall What Is The Last Movie or TV Show You Saw?

I haven't seen that one. Good? Was it as fun as "Days of Thunder" ? I don't like NASCAR, but Robert Duvall + Tom Cruise made a winner. I love racing, though. I need to track my car again, been far too long.

This was fun https://www.amazon.com/Death-Before-Dishonor-Fred-Dryer/dp/B006T2LGBK

Terrorists: don't mess with America and her Marines!

"Days of Thunder" is a fun film to watch but in my opinion it's not even in the same league as "Rush" when it comes to the quality of the script, the acting performances and the dialogue. "Days of Thunder" is essentially the "Top Gun" formula but set in a NASCAR setting instead of a US Navy setting.

The Last King of Scotland with Forest Whitaker, James McAvoy and Simon McBurney



A sinister African dictator, a naive Scottish young man, and an uncomfortably-cynical British operative make for a storyline to rapidly spiral down into a nightmare.
Based on true events

Cheers,
Slug

Forrest Whitaker is a COLOSSALLY underrated actor and he was absolutely spellbinding in this film.


Unfortunately the film was largely ignored at the time due to it being an "artsy" independent film.

Is this movie ok for $5.99? https://www.amazon.com/Burnt-Orange-Heresy-Claes-Bang/dp/B08F683QF8 It has the Guardians Galaxy gold alien.

Athlete A, doco on Netflix about the USA Gymnasts sex abuse coverup and the case as it came together. Watching Astroboy now with my daughter to flush that horror story out of my head.

"Enemy Mine" for about the fourth time. Kinda cheesy in parts, the special effects are dated (were so even at time of release) but I love this movie.

I last saw this on cable tv roughly around 1989 or so. I don't remember much beyond the basic premise but I remember that it was really the chemistry between Lou Gossett Jr. and Dennis Quaid that really made that movie work.

The Equalizer 1&2, one after the other. I'd seen them before and I have to say the first one was far superior in my opinion.

Next up - Jack Reacher 1&2.

I only saw the first Equalizer film but I thought Denzel was absolutely compelling in the role. That final showdown at the hardware super store was a bit over the top though. lol.

Two movies I saw this weekend:

1) Red State, one star. I only watched because a friend insisted, and now I sort of understand why some Americans have such a wrong an distorted view of Christians.

2) Paul - Cute movie of some convention nerds finding an alien. I was going to give three stars, but have to deduct half a star for intentional Christian bashing in the film. I'm now going to re-think Simon Pegg, which is sad, because the humorous part of the bashing is he himself, the writer, created plot holes such as an Alien which supposedly has a completely different evolutionary derivative system somehow... a) can get high from marijuana and b) has cells and DNA just like human beings. Oops. Simon's not a good sci-fi writer, because he overlooked the folly of his Christian bashing by making an alien remarkably similar to life on Earth that came from another galaxy. Whoops. Regardless, I give the film 2 1/2 stars out of 4.

TENET - We didn't know what was going on in this. Don't matter!

We were happy to be watching a movie in a movie theater after nearly 7 months, eating and enjoying popped corn, nachos and drinking cold sugary drinks.

BTW Masks are worn at all times while sitting down unless you are eating or drinking:

so get you something from the food stand and you won't have to wear a mask for almost 3 hours.

Tenet is like Inception: you have to see twice or threece or fourthce to understand it and treasure its beauty.

I can't wait for the home video so I can watch it again and again and truly appreciate Nolan's genius.

Simon Pegg is not American and he's a film actor. I'd say him not being a Christian is utterly NOT surprising. Regardless, the Christian bashing is a low class stunt on his part.

Nolan makes good films, there's no doubt about that, but I think it may be a stretch to put in the same category as Stanley Kubrick, David Lynch or Quentin Tarantino, and to a lesser degree James Cameron(he did also make the awful Avatar but we forgive him) or Kathryn Bigelow.

The problem with Nolan is he's often a one-trick pony, similar to M. Night Shyamalan, with his heavy reliance of continuity obfuscation to wow the audience, but like a master puppeteer, his true skill is that of editing and splicing together the sequences in such a way to create the illusion of something more than what is really there. He did try and trick the audience in "The Prestige," after all, with great hocus pocus, yet totally telegraphed the ending.

My other issue with him is he takes factual liberties in his films and violates the laws of reality and even established worldbuilt conventions in the name of "cinema." What I mean here is take Interstellar, for example, where at the beginning of the movie they need a rocket ship using liquid and solid fuel to blast off the astronauts from Earth to reach orbit, so they may travel to their ship and the wormhole and journey onward. Later, however, these same astronauts ride in a magic carpet craft that can rise above planets in gravity wells many times greater than that of Earth without need of rocket engines or extreme burning of fuel. This "macguffin drive" bestows limitless ability to fly freely, which begs the question, why was such a device not used on craft on Earth? And then of course he tries to abuse the paradox of time travel through the black hole while admitting in interviews he tried to be as true and realistic to science as possible. He even employed Kip Thorne for assistance! Yet he freely unbound the knotted loops of consistency where he saw fit for plotting and movie outcomes.

Not to say Interstellar was a bad film--it was a great film, but it wasn't a hard science fiction epoch to the degree that Clarke and Kubrick created with "2001," however close it strove to be--and it was close. But the violation of physics in the name of "movie" is where we were betrayed and lost. Clarke would never allow such a thing to occur, and if he did, there'd be a #%&*$# good reason for it beyond "plotting."

Inception was fun, but nothing too confusing. The dreams within dreams was a neat concept, but once again, he was trying to obfuscate, but nowhere near as much as the intentionally obtuse "Memento" was. That film did give me a mild headache while watching, and not for difficulty in figuring out, but for the intentional obtuse opaqueness scenes were smashed and sewn together. But to declare it on the same realm of literary genius as something like "Adaptation" ? I'm not so sure...



So yes, I take issue with placing Nolan on a pedestal as oft many folks do, but not to belittle, denigrate or deflate his accomplishments. We're all better for his entertaining films, but let's be truthful and call some of the put-ons he uses for what they are--parlor tricks.

Good post Blastman and is it simply coincidence that his brother who is co-creator of the HBO Westworld series where obfuscation and confusing multiple timelines are also used? Hmmmmm.......

Watched "The Enemy Below" last nigh,,Have to admit that it wasn't the first time i saw it,,Usually once a year

Mr_Blastman must be mad at Nolan for something.I seen the name Nolan on Westworld credits. Didn't know he was his brother.

Yup, Jonathan Nolan and his wife Lisa Joy are the creators and show-runners of the HBO series.

I'm not mad, I'm intellectually critical of praise showered upon him. Praise is due, but let's be real of the facade that exists within the structure of his filmaking.