'Rediculous' Customer & Critic Reviews

[TechnicolorAcid]

Looked at his other reviews, he said 2023 Adam Sandler was in the same vein as 1939 John Ford and 1958 Vincente Minnelli in his review of You Are So Not Invited to My Bat Mitzvah. ????????? I like Sandler I love him more than most but he’s not even a director, he’s an actor. Oh my god he’s so pretentious but I’ll be lying if I didn’t say I haven’t fallen in love with his writings, it’s like watching Tough Guys Don’t Dance, it’s batshit insane mainstream ineptitude that you can’t forget.

[knives]

To be fair on the Sandler account it’s clear he’s making the comparison as a way of saying he made three films in one year and directly addresses his undercutting of the auteur theory (which he is undoubtedly correct on in this case).

[dwk]

Not really a review, but more of a customer complaint, but I don't know where else to stick this Blu-ray.com post

[domino harvey]

I like Diabolik’s preemptive warning to people like that to not even bother ordering from them because they won’t accept returns for cosmetic damages. Sounds like Arrow needs to follow suit

[Matt]

John Demetry

Oh no! I knew him at school ages ago. I’m actually a little proud of him for sticking at it all these years.

[domino harvey]

Pretentious Rubbish

I'm not sure what to make of the reviews in praise of this film. They reviewers are clearly not fans of Arthurian mythos or historical films either. Where they talk about understatement, minimalist approach or stripping the storyline down... I see only poor plotting, poor writing, bad direction and cynicism. There's room in Arthurian Mythos for chivalry to sit quite comfortably alongside anti-war, new age and early feminist messages but the Director fails to take advantage of this.

The action is atrocious. We have monty pythonesque blood spurting scenes and zero fight choreography - we might as well have been watching Ator the Fighting Eagle for all its authenticity. The armour clanks around uncomfortably on their gaunt frames - cuisses worn directly over tights (I pity the poor actors) and helmets worn without straps, padding or gorgets.

The acting is not so much restrained as wooden. On occassion we get a glimpse of emotion out of Guinevere but she seems emotionally worn out. The writing for Lancelot indicates that his character is self-involved and arrogant, but the actor appears simply bored with the role and never shows anything resembling the frustration and anger that Lancelot must be feeling. Gawain is the only decent character in this mess and contrary to legend, he manages to get killed by Lancelot whilst avenging his brother.

Then there's the endless shots of people arming and disarming - shooting sequentially what should have been simultaneous. Not to mention the raucus bird cries, the incessant horse neighing, the truly awful musette (and I love bagpipes...), the local peasant actors (they look like Bretons), the gaudy pink and orange saddles, the castles without gates, the lack of characterisation and the linear plot.

It all combines to make this the greatest waste of money I've ever spent. I'd rather have picked up a copy of Dungeons and Dragons the movie. If I could give it zero stars I would.

[Mr Sausage]

Lancelot du Lac?

[domino harvey]

Yup!

[brundlefly]

Now I want Bresson's Dungeons and Dragons. Nothing but shots of hands spilling weird-sided dice and a stone-faced dungeon master.

[Matt]

[Mr Sausage]

The Hot Ones? I mean, good on Janus’ PR team for broadening their hiring practises to include the elderly and all…

[MichaelB]

A mesmerisingly wrongheaded take on The Zone of Interest:

While the evil of Nazism is an abstraction in the movie, out of sight and out of mind, viewers are invited to identify with the daily life of the family Höss. The lush images of the film convey an idyllic family life, with an immaculately clean house and bountiful garden. The Nazis loved their children and their pets. They played the piano.

Glazer has explained that his goal was to show that the perpetrators of the Holocaust were not monsters but humans, just like us. It could have happened anywhere: to anyone, by anyone. Viewers are invited to consider that as we go about our mundane lives, evil is taking place somewhere behind a wall, which we chose not to look over.

But the whole idea of making a Nazi pastoral film is historically misleading and frankly offensive. As Israeli film critic Avner Shavit has pointed out, Glazer has managed to make a film about the Holocaust in which we never see any Jews.

[furbicide]

“The Zone of Interest” will certainly appeal to those who admire the aesthetics of Nazism: the striking uniforms, the distinctive “fashy” (short for fascist) haircuts, the nice animals. It will also appeal to people who like gardening.

That was certainly my takeaway from watching the film: not sure what was going on over the wall, but the family seemed nice and the dog was cute!

[domino harvey]

The perils of the death of media literacy. Surprised this wasn't a Letterboxd review, but even they understood this one enough to not go in that direction

[MichaelB]

That was certainly my takeaway from watching the film: not sure what was going on over the wall, but the family seemed nice and the dog was cute!

A factory of some kind, I think. It's an unfortunate location for a family home, but they seemed to make the best of it, no doubt thanks to their vim and get-up-and-go attitude.

[therewillbeblus]

i feel like all of Alex Garland's films could be called Annihilation.

I lol’d

[domino harvey]

These are all for the same movie on Amazon. I think they were all written with one hand...

THE GIRLS WERE PRETTY AND THEY WERE NAKED IN A FEW SHOTS BUT THE OVERALL STORY WAS BORING. YOU SEE THE NAKED GIRLS AT A FRENCH BEACH, AND THEY SPEAK FRENCH, BUT SO WHAT.

You won't find this type of movie from a US director. This is a psychological journey through a vacation resort filled with common sights on local French beaches. Watch only if you dare. No CGI. No car chases. No super heroes landing on the street with one knee & one hand on the ground, you know the pose. Do I recommend it? Only if you like pyscho-dramas. Buy it. But be careful.

Good movie. Lots of topless women. Interesting theme.

This is eurotrash, and mainly an excuse to display some amazing female bodies.

A nostalgic piece of Eurotrash Cinema from the days when France was still France. The film is set at a topless beach resort. The plot is thin but the scenery is abundant. No tattoos, piercings, fake breasts or excessive shaving/waxing so as to resemble a mannequin more than a woman.

Many topless women with beautiful real breasts. Two women each give a full frontal at the end of the movie.

[therewillbeblus]

Mektoub, My love: Canto Uno?

[mfunk9786]

Glad to see you're keeping your Tinto Brass collection going, Dom.

[Never Cursed]

Decently large Letterboxd user takes The Hunt (2012) personally for all the wrong reasons. A quick Google search reveals why...

[swo17]

Comment on a video calling The Abyss the best 4K release from last month:

I bought a HD4K Player & TV to get rid of film grain 100%, at all cost....so James Cameron & his remastering technique, is of Paramount importance to me as a Average Movie Collector/Viewer.

[tenia]

Which is exactly why we'll still get movies remastered/restored like this.
(But I've also read such takes on dedicated boards so it's not just a matter of, let's said, uneducated general audience)

[JSC]

Just out of curiosity (and obviously this varies depending on source material), but what would people say is the average amount of
detail lost after DNR is heavily applied to a filmic source to remove all traces of grain. 15%? 20%? Maybe just a ballpark figure.

A 'restoration' like Pathe's on Les enfants du paradis is a good example or maybe Universal's original BD release of Family Plot.

I'm not saying it can really be boiled down to a catch-all number, but just to give a general impression.

[tenia]

I think it's tough to evaluate that with a figure, because it also has to do with how blurry and waxy it can makes the picture, and how one could try and compensate that by sharpening. It can also be a matter of trying to attenuate only the grain or, in a few cases, the scanner noise (high frequencies) without trying to touch too much of the details/delineation.

And then, of course, it depends of the intensity of the filtering. Some works are slightly filteres, others are pretty much nuked.

So I couldn't really say. It might be a lot, or actually only a little but the sensitivity to such filters is such that even 5% is already feeling very intrusive.

[JSC]

Yes, I realize there are many variables that would make a basic number somewhat impractical. It's just that I was recently looking at
the Aliens 4k compared to the previous blu-ray and I don't know how anyone could mistake that smeary waxiness for an overall
improvement in image quality, even with tv or player sharpening applied.