fucking-amal.com

Totally agree!!!!

The Wraith. A bunch of (poorly acted) hoodlums that run rampant over a town come a cropper at the hands of a masked rider who may be the ghost of a former victim. This mid 80s flick was pretty mediocre, with even Charlie Sheen phoning it in and Sherilyn Fenn coming across as drippily bland, perhaps made worse by me expecting a horror movie. This is not a horror movie. It's a more a sort of weird action revenge fantasy flick, but despite some genre tropes it's not scary, and doesn't really seem like it's even trying to be.

Rented the new Scream on YT last night. All I can say is - I'm glad I didn't blind-buy it. I had my doubts about Scream 4 given the 10 year gap but was really very pleasently surprised. I had my doubts about this given the gap and the lack of Wes Craven and Kevin Williamson and, sadly, I was right this time. This movie is awful. First off, it's BORING. How do you make a Scream movie boring? I dunno, ask them. The original trio are very clearly getting too old for this sh*t, which is probably why they're largely sidelined (Dewey is treated horrendously, too, but he's a middle aged heterosexual white guy so that's okay) in favour of a new cast. Which might work, if the new cast weren't so utterly bland, nondescript and faceless, including the new female lead. Who the hell are these people? The characters are nothing, but I don't even recognise any of the actors bar Dylan Minnette, who is getting way too old to be playing high school students and is hardly a big star. And I've no idea who any of the others are. What happened to the days when the Scream movies got actual names in them?
This movie bored and depressed me. It's Halloween 2018 all over again. Apparently Scream 6 is already on the way.
Sorry, I'm out.

Ian wrote:...This movie is awful...

Not like Ian to be so non-committal is it?

Airport. A snow storm and a would-be bomber cause trouble for a busy airport. Burt Lancaster, Dean Martin, George Kennedy and Jacqueline Bisset star in this 1970 film, which effectively kickstarted the disaster movie genre, though as often noted the disaster movie stuff doesn't really ramp up until the third act, with the film being just as concerned with the workings of the airport and the relationships of its characters. Despite this and a long running time, I found this very engaging with a good cast (I don't honestly know if I've seen a film with Lancaster and Martin in before, but I enjoyed both of them and it took me a while to recognise Bisset as she's younger here than I've seen her before, though her voice and mannerisms eventually gave her away), even if some moments (esp with the passengers) are echoed so much by Airplane! that you have to restrain a chuckle. I really rather enjoyed this though.

Number 77 is the one I liked the most.
I saw it in the cinema when there were giant screens.
At the end of the movie it was said that the USA had that same technology in case one day a plane sank.

I've got the Blu ray set of all four, so I will get to that one.

EUPHORIA.
They are drugged all day.



I love this serie

Santi wrote:I love this serie

So do I.
There's a certain attraction about it.

yes i do.

Saw Spiderman: No Way Home last night (rented it on YT). A mixed bag. The downside of course is that I've never taken to Tom Holland or this version of it, and the same applies to Andrew Garfield (though he's better than Holland). The upside of course is the return of the original Spiderman movieverse. Doc Ock doesn't really do that much, but as if in acknowledgement of the superiority of the Raimi trilogy, The Green Goblin is the main villain and Willem Dafoe is as effective and chilling as ever. The big draw of course was the return of the other Spidermen, and it's good that both get stuff to do and aren't just glorified cameos. The flipside of that is that while Tobey Maguire looks older, he doesn't look old, and you can't help but feel that he could still be the main Spiderman and have been for the last decade or so had they not thrown his series under a bus for no reason. On the whole it was okay, I managed to sit through its buttnumbing running time anyway, but while the nostalgiabait was fun, it did just remind me how much they screwed the pooch with this series.

Ian wrote:...I managed to sit through its buttnumbing running time anyway...

Sounds like a great recommendation.




Had this one for a week or so and enjoyed it a few times already.

"PETITE MAMAN" by Céline Sciamma.

Believe what they say on the poster, it's that good.

I made a heinous mistake the other night night. I decided, against my better judgment, to try and watch Halloween Kills.
Holy cow. "Terrible" does not even begin to cover it. 2018 was bad, but this is somehow even worse. Boring, stupid, with zero characters to speak of, and just constantly banging the nostalgia drum with nothing new to offer.
Oh look, little Tommy Doyle is back (for some reason). He was in Halloween 6 too. Oh look, the Nurse from the original film is back (for some reason). She was in II and H20 too. In shock of shocks, Michael kills her. Oh wait, he did that already in H20.
I tried, I really did. But there is nothing in these movies that the original series did not already do, and in most cases did better in those "terrible sequels" we're all supposed to be happy to throw away to get these new ones. Except most of those sequels were actually pretty good, and certainly infinitely better than these godawful messes. We even get a godawful CGI Donald Pleasance at the start of this one. Or you could, you know, just watch the real guy in the real Halloween II instead. Or IV. Or V. All of which are better than this piece piece of utter crap.