Last Seen Movie

AncientBoi said:

What do you think about Brandon Lee [RIP ] @RustInPeace , as I watched:

View attachment 576819 last night. I liked it.

Click to expand...

I've only seen The Crow once and that was 2 years ago. I loved it. I also watched Showdown in Little Tokyo once, Brandon Lee was the sidekick in that. He was gone way too soon. He was so charismatic in both movies and legit in the action sequences. Fun fact, after Lee died and they needed to finish his stuff, they had Chad Stahelski as the body double. Stahelski went on to direct the John Wick films. I want to rewatch The Crow. The atmosphere, music, and visuals are fantastic. The cast is really good.

Promising Young Woman - decent thriller, pretty enjoyable.

Just reminded me of Why I ran away from Tennessee. Damn Fascist, Capitalistic Bigots!

Project Hail Mary 8/10
Really like this movie!


Dellamorte Dellamore aka Cemetery Man 8/10
A very odd zombie, drama and arthouse movie, the shameless bluray release is the one to watch.


Model and "actress" Anna Falchi plays 3 rolls for some reason, but I don't really mind

Ghosts of Mars

I haven't watched every John Carpenter film, but this is easily the worst I've seen so far. This was horrible on many levels, and unfortunately, John Carpenter was at fault for this. He claimed that the movie was meant to be a mindless, tongue-in-cheek action film in the same vein as Commando, Predator, and Rambo 2, 80s action romps. It seemed like he wanted to replicate what he did for Vampires, as that was similarly designed as an action romp. Whereas that movie failed because of James Woods as the lead and a very stupid screenplay, Ghosts of Mars fails because of a stupid screenplay (that he co-wrote), a very sleepy cast, a cheapness that was damaging instead of charming, and the most baffling editing I've seen in a long time. From what I read, Carpenter was pretty checked out during and after production, insisting on night-only shoots because he hated getting up in the morning. Refusing to be a more intensive director, which would've led to more committed performances from the cast. Lead actress Natasha Henstridge claimed that Carpenter would refuse to direct her harder in one scene because he wanted to go watch a basketball game on TV. The guy didn't have the passion, and it had a trickle-down effect.

He also approved of the problematic editing choices, opting for a flashback-driven form of storytelling rather than being linear. The problem is that the movie would stop numerous times with flashback sequences. They would be flashbacks for shit that happened while a character was off camera. It messed with the film's pacing, leading to a very start-stop flow. So many damn screen wipes. It was the full-fledged debut for the editor, and it really feels like that. It was as if the guy got access to a free pack of transitions and went crazy with Carpenter letting it fly simply because it wasn't traditional. It seemed like the only thing Carpenter was passionate about was music. The soundtrack is one of the best things about the movie. The big contributor to the score is Anthrax! Their music did a lot to make the action sequences tolerable.

The CGI is dated, even for 2001. Ice Cube actually said it best that the movie looked like it was from 1979! Star Wars had been out by then, and that had much better VFX than Ghosts of Mars. Because of the cheap budget, the sets looked small and raggedy, and the makeup and costume design were sadly limited. KNB FX worked on the movie. They're amazing FX artists, but they didn't get much of a chance to shine in this turkey.

I did laugh a few times from the bad acting and ridiculous moments. The movie has a "so bad it's good" quality, but for the most part, it's a sad failure from a brilliant filmmaker. I initially thought Ice Cube was the best in the cast, or rather, the least shitty, but I now think Jason Statham is more worthy of that distinction. His character's a shameless sleazeball, but at least he had a bit of a personality. At least he spoke in his native tongue, unlike The One, who struggled to do an American accent. Natasha Henstridge as the hero of the film was a strange choice. I respect the effort in the action sequences. She does a pretty damn good throat chop in one scene. But overall, she was miscast, her "assets" were not properly used in the film, apart from a quick shot toward the end. Pam Grier was wasted. Clea Duvall was a complete waste of space! Holy fuck, absolutely no emotion from her. It was appalling because I've seen Clea Duvall do so well in other films, such as But I'm a Cheerleader. But she delivers nothing here. It was as if she didn't want to be in the movie. Even though most of the cast is sleepy, there is some effort here and there from them. Clea Duvall gave zero effort. No, she gave a negative amount of effort.

I think I would like the movie more in a watch party scenario. This movie is meant to be enjoyed with other people as you roast it. That said, I'm not in any rush to watch this again.

4/10

Interstellar 2014 for the fouth time, still a amazing movie.

Haven't finished it yet [ 1993 I think & it's 4hrs+ long], as I had to go to bed to wake up early for a doctor's appointment. But I've seen it way back when. Loved it.

Pizza Movie

I made sure to have pizza while watching the film. I had Domino's Handmade Pan Pizza, pepperoni and Italian sausage. I also had their Sweet Honey BBQ Loaded Chicken. I eat way too much, but somehow, I went through this meal easily. I had similar pizza meals the previous 2 weeks and it took me 3+ hours to eat the pizza. I managed to finish the pizza just when the 3rd act started. Anyway, this movie was okay. The writer/director pair seemingly wanted this to be like a 90s teen comedy, but it's more of a pastiche than a true embodiment of that style. It's basically a stoner movie without the marijuana. The main characters were in a series of wacky events while high from pill. I was hoping that the movie would go crazy with visuals to go along with the drugged out conditions of the characters. Unfortunately, the movie doesn't go far enough there. I wanted crazy visual detours. There was a brief sequence where a certain location is depicted via a black-and-white animation. I wanted more of that. The movie dabbles with crazy visuals, but they were so brief. At least the main cast was enjoyable, the 3 actors had nice chemistry. One of them is from Stranger Things, Gaten Matarazzo. He was great overall, and the writer/directors clearly had the story created with him in mind because they kept talking shit about his face! I know the guy has a distinct face, but while watching the movie, I kept thinking that he looked like a young Sean Schemmel. Schemmel is the English voice of Goku. There's a scene where an older version of Gaten's character appears. I wanted it to be Sean Schemmel! Anyway, the movie is extremely dumb. I kept questioning things from the movie, but had to tell myself to turn the brain off. It really is a movie to watch while having a simple, over-indulgent meal like pizza. I didn't laugh a lot from the film, but I had a decent time. I was never bored, I really liked the performances from most of the cast, including the supporting players. I can see some of those supporting actors being fixtures in future comedy films. In a way, the movie reminds me of Snack Shack where the goal was to be a throwback. Snack Shack had a dramatic turn that made the movie really standout. Pizza Movie didn't have that kind of edge, but it's still pretty creative. I appreciated the effort. I know the movie has gotten some flak, but it's nothing to get mad about. It's dumb fun.

7/10

Hokum

A step above Damian McCarthy's previous film, Oddity. This film is tighter with a better execution of the slow burn than Oddity. Both films have similar themes to the point that you can tell they're by the same director. That said, Hokum does stand on its own. It's not a retread at all. A big reason for that is the leading performance from Adam Scott. Obviously, he was the MVP of the film. I like that his character was an asshole. He was basically the only gray character in the film, everyone else was black and white. Ultimately, he's one to root for, especially because he's not the most unlikable person in the film. Similar to Oddity, the supernatural horror is advertised for people, but the human horror is the real sauce. It grounds the movie, making it feel a little more realistic than one might expect with a story about a haunted hotel and a witch. Like Oddity, the movie is primarily set in one location. The movie never feels boring because of that. I never felt a lull. The biggest reason for that is that there was a major reveal multiple times in the narrative. Things became more intriguing as the story unraveled. Even when it seemed like everything was revealed and the third act is a go, one more reveal comes toward the end. I like that. Slow-burning horror films aren't my favorite, but Hokum works because it actively keeps things interesting. The scares are mostly effective. The cinematography is solid, going along with the suspense of the film. The design of the main location was great. The sound design is a major player, with a bunch of grating and disturbing sounds.

I wish the movie were gory! I got a little annoyed at the film for cutting away from violent moments. I think the movie is only rated R because of the dark subject matter, things that wouldn't fly for a PG-13 film. It wasn't R-rated because of violence or sexual themes. While I complain about the movie not going far enough in the violence, I think that wasn't the point of the film. It was more about atmosphere and a more retro-feeling mindset. It definitely owes itself to Stanley Kubrick's The Shining. Damian McCarthy has established himself as a unique and valuable voice in horror, and I look forward to what he does next.

8/10

Ready or Not

This was the third time I watched the movie. I reviewed it back in October 2024. I had to revisit it to get a refresher for the sequel. The movie holds up, it's still a lot of fun with no dull moments. All killer, no filler. It's also still very funny in places. Nearly every cast member has at least one funny moment. More important than the laughs was the violence. The gore in this movie was pretty cool, some instances were played up for comedy! That worked for me. Watching this a day after Hokum, I was very pleased to watch a movie that gave me certain thrills that Hokum didn't. Most notably, gore. Obviously, they're two different movies, but I prefer fun stuff. That just feels especially right for the weekend. On top of all that, Samara Weaving was such a star. She was a fantastic protagonist in the film, and that's mostly because of her. The writing for her character, Grace, is very basic, so it pretty much fell on the actress to really bring the character to life. I think Samara Weaving did that through her natural charm and strong command of the material. It just felt like she embodied Grace. She understood the assignment. It was so easy to root for her. It also helped that the character wasn't a badass from the start. She more or less developed into one. She doesn't blatantly kill someone until the third act. The violent scenes featuring her before that were either self-defense or accidental.

An important and horny shout-out to Andie MacDowell. Total MILF in this movie. In the third act, she has a conversation with Alex, her son, and Grace's new husband. She sat down, lifted her dress a bit, exposing her upper leg. YES! She was reaching for her cigarettes. Anyway, Adam Brody was also pretty good. The whole cast was a treat, but Samara Weaving was easily the most likable. The film, overall, was a nice reminder that I should watch more films starring Weaving. She's carved out a great career path filled with genre films, especially horror. A modern-day scream queen for sure. Ready or Not is more of a survival thriller/comedy with horror elements, but the point still stands. Ready or Not was also a nice reminder of how much I vibe with Radio Silence's brand of entertainment. The kind that goes all-in as a genre romp with brisk pacing, always wanting to go bigger and crazier as the movie goes on. They pulled this off in this film and Abigail. I was confident that they did the same thing for the Ready or Not sequel. As far as which film is their best, it comes down a bit to preference. I'd rate this film and Abigail the same, for example. I prefer Ready or Not to Abigail. That film is essentially a vampire film, while Ready or Not is basically an "Eat the rich" film. Maybe there was a time when those films became tiring, but as capitalism becomes more soulless, infuriating, and evil, "Eat the Rich" films become more satisfying. Ready or Not is extremely satisfying.

8/10

Ready or Not 2: Here I Come

Much of what made the first Ready or Not fun was present in this sequel. Radio Silence went bigger here. I can't say for sure it's better. I was a little surprised by how good this film is. I feared a significant drop-off, but I didn't get that. I think a major reason for that is being a huge fan of action movies. This sequel veers more into action territory than the previous film, even going for one-liners! Samara Weaving once again leads a Radio Silence film with such gusto and infectious energy. Kathryn Newton paired well with her as Grace's sister up until a certain section. That section of the movie is my least favorite because the writing was pretty weak. The sisters had a major falling-out, which was so predictable and such a speed bump. The film worked best with its foot on the pedal, never stopping. Slowing down for sister problems didn't work for me, and the actresses couldn't elevate the material. Thankfully, the action and overall genre thrills in the film do so much to overshadow this. Still, had that section of the movie not been present, I would have leaned toward this being superior to the first Ready or Not. It just worked so well for me, and I really didn't expect that.

The supporting cast was so great. Elijah Wood worked as a necessary lore dumper while also clearly having a fun time. Sarah Michelle Gellar and Shawn Hatosy were a very dynamic pair, with the latter being a little scary late in the movie. All the actors playing the other families were entertaining in their own ways. The biggest surprise among that group was the little Spanish boy. He actually got the biggest laugh out of me in the whole movie. Kevin Durand was an early highlight, his screen time was much shorter than in Abigail. But his character in this film is a lot more zany. There was an Indian guy who seemed to be inspired by Aziz Ansari. He was a little short, very loud, meager, and obnoxious. He was a lot more likable than Aziz Ansari!

The movie has more dazzling action sequences, better displays of gore, higher production value, more variety in locations, and just everything that truly makes this bigger than the previous movie. I might think it's better than the original Ready or Not after multiple viewings. I just have more history with Ready or Not, and there's something scrappy and humble about that film. It was an unexpected cult hit. While Ready or Not 2 is obviously crafted to be a hit. Either way, this sequel was another example of Radio Silence having so much fun, and I just so happen to vibe with their brand of fun.

8/10

They Will Kill You

If you type the movie in the Letterboxd search bar, you will get Kill Bill Volumes 1 and 2 underneath it. That's funny! It's as if Letterboxd's algorithm is telling you what They Will Kill You is inspired by. Director Kirill Sokolov ripped off Tarantino big time. Certain camera shots resembled what Tarantino did in many of his movies, including Kill Bill and Django Unchained. To give an example, the fast zoom-in shot that was used for Leo's introduction in Django, and Uma Thurman pulling up at Vivica A. Fox's house, and the Ironside theme plays. Zazie Beetz was basically written and directed to be like The Bride in Kill Bill, even down to her gruff delivery and always having a scowl. A family member is in danger. In this film, it's the younger sister instead of the daughter. Zazie Beetz is barefoot for pretty much the whole movie. That does point to Die Hard, but you can't help but think of Tarantino's famous foot fetish. Not to mention some creep had a bit of fun with Zazie Beetz's feet in one scene. The blood shooting out into the air like in Kill Bill or many violent Japanese films. That's an important note to make. I say that this film ripped off Tarantino, but Tarantino has ripped off so many other filmmakers. To say They Kill You rips off Kill Bill is also to say that it takes a lot from Asian cinema and a few motifs from spaghetti westerns. The movie doesn't concern itself with originality. I do get the sense that there's an unapologetic sense of adventure, as well as being style over substance. I was able to let the movie slide with the thin story and lack of originality. I was rewarded. This is a pretty fun movie. Sometimes it's too derivative and stylish that I feel disconnected from the film. But I always get brought back in. Someone who helped keep me invested was Zazie Beetz. She easily carries the film. Even though she's clearly drawn from The Bride, she stands out because of her whole appearance. That includes being Black. You rarely get a Black heroine. I was very delighted that Zazie Beetz got to lead a movie, as I thought she was nice in Deadpool 2 and Bullet Train.

The supporting cast is decent. A few of them are actors I know pretty well, and it was especially nice to see them do a wacky movie like this. Heather Graham was especially delightful. The last film I watched her in was Gunslingers, which was complete shit. Heather Graham deserved better, and seemingly, some people agree because she was in this and is currently shooting the next season of White Lotus. She was the subject of a running gag that worked well enough for me. Patricia Arquette was also memorable. Not for the best of reasons. I found her Irish accent a bit odd. Also, with her being married to a Black man, I couldn't help but think of Holes! I imagined that this movie was an alternate reality if she and Dule Hill didn't die in Holes, and they went on to sell their souls to the Devil. Tom Felton, aka Draco Malfoy, was in this. Interestingly, his character's name was Kevin Sullivan, a former wrestler and manager. He was also quite bizarre. I then thought Tom Felton looked like a younger version of that Kevin Sullivan. Anyway, he was okay in the film. The woman who played the main character's sister was pretty good.

The violence in the movie is very stylized. The choreography was pretty good, though it heavily reminds me of the Kill Bill fight scenes, especially in Volume 1. Characters being sent flying from gunshots and whatnot, that was also prominent in Tarantino films. Most of the action sequences are nice, with multiple funny parts. There's something special about the people at the Virgil Hotel that certainly isn't lifted from a Tarantino film. The gimmick is interesting, but it made the results of fight scenes very predictable. The stakes didn't feel so high because of that gimmick. Still, the action was more satisfying than not. The production design was also sweet, with the hotel interiors being very colorful. The Virgil felt like a character in the movie with how detailed some of the sets were and the various actions done in these locations. The cinematography, despite featuring shots Tarantino utilized in his career, was still pretty dazzling. The storytelling structure was similar to Kill Bill, where you'd move forward and then flash back to stuff, almost a pattern with this movie.

Interestingly, the movie was released in theaters a few weeks after Ready or Not 2. The main reason I watched the two films close together was that I heard about the similarities and how they may have hurt They Will Kill You at the box office. The movie didn't review very well anyway. This film and the Ready or Not movies involve satanic cults comprised of rich people. They dabble in horror, but are also comedies. The balancing of action and comedy is more similar to Ready or Not 2. Leading ladies reuniting with their estranged sisters! The cult must make a sacrifice in both Ready or Not and They Will Kill You. The movies are set in one main location. Guns and swords are used a lot. All these films are gory. The gore in They Will Kill You was more animated. The main character is aided by someone from the inside, a traitor to the cult. I could keep going, it's just crazy how similar these movies are. One thing that They Will Kill You has that neither Ready or Not film has is Black people! Okay, Ready or Not 2 briefly featured a Black woman at the hospital, but she was practically an extra. This movie was willing to have some melanin. While that's a major positive, it doesn't make They Will Kill You better than the Ready or Not films. Those are more grounded in comparison, and I appreciate that. This movie goes places, and it's fun, but it just didn't land like the Ready or Not films or Tarantino films. Or Sam Raimi films! Oh, this movie definitely has some Raimi-isms.

Despite all that, I'm ultimately being nicer to this film than seemingly most people. I did have a good time watching the film. It's very derivative and kept making me think of better films, but it still managed to be entertaining.

7/10

Is God Is

I watched this on Father's Day. The film's title might be off-putting. Certain elements of this film could also be considered off-putting. But I was so into this movie. The movie was an odyssey of sorts, with twin ladies searching for their dad, who burned them and their mother. As someone who had no father figure, it was easy for me to side with the women. Even though the dad was played by Sterling K. Brown, a man who more often plays decent people, I wanted the guy to suffer. There was quite a bit of suffering up until the climax of the movie, and it was always striking. The movie is a concentrated dose of Black female rage. This felt more specific to Black women than They Will Kill You. The writer/director is a Black woman, Aleshea Harris. This was her debut film, and what a bold and confident debut! The movie might be heavy-handed in its messaging, but it worked so well for me. The story is tragic, but the way the movie flowed, the way the violence was presented, and quite a bit of the dialogue and acting, screamed "genre film." Most of the movie was set during the day, and the various locations were filled with very green fields and yards. This was a surprisingly colorful movie.

Aleshea Harris lucked out with the cast as they all seemed to be very down. The most down, the person who seemingly embodied the spirit of the movie the most was Kara Young, who played one of the twins, Racine. She was so commanding and charismatic. Vivica A. Fox was the mother of the twins. If Tarantino ever did Kill Bill Volume 3, he should cast Kara Young as Fox's character's daughter! She would have the right mean streak, and she would be able to square up. All she would need is a rock in a sock. Mallori Johnson, who played the other twin, Anaia, was also great. Not as aggressive, but that was necessary. The sisters were able to stand out and have individual highlights. Unsurprisingly, they're fantastic together, such great chemistry. Sterling K. Brown was fantastic as the villain. The kind of villain that's menacing, but also calm, and says some things that are baffling, such as his justification for burning the twins' mother. I liked how Sterling K. Brown was shot, sticking to a certain tactic until the third act, the main event. Vivica A. Fox was a treat. She mentioned Sterling K. Brown being hesitant to be very physical with her, but she told him that she can handle it because she did Kill Bill. That was a nice example of how down she was for a movie like this. Janelle Monae had a great little part. She was the best-dressed person in the whole movie. Mykelti Williamson, aka Bubba from Forrest Gump, also had a great little role. Erika Alexander was very funny, she played a Southern Baptist pastor. Her son was played by Josiah Cross, who I recognized from A Thousand And One, another great movie written/directed by a Black woman.

The original music was done by Jseoph Shirley and Moses Sumney. They did a damn fine job. The soundtrack was also strong. One of the songs was Guillotine by Death Grips, and that was used so damn well! Surprisingly, both They Will Kill You and Is God Is feature Doechii in their soundtracks.

I really enjoyed the twins' journey to their dad. The climax with the twins and the dad was great, but there was some room for improvement. The ending kind of wrapped up too quickly, not giving much time to really feel what happened. Other parts of the movie could be nitpicked. It seemed like the movie was going to go one way involving the twins, but then they quickly got back on track. It might've been better if they hadn't tried to go that one way and just stuck to the straight and narrow. Any nitpicks could be forgiven simply because it's Aleshea Harris' first film. Hopefully, it's not her only one. I'm so down for more movies from her. The movie is based on a play she wrote. This definitely felt like a passion project, and it was easy for me to get wrapped up in it.

8/10

Disclosure Day, I thought it was reely interesting

I Love Boosters - Boots Riley's sophomore film and it's definitely a follow-up to the bizarre Sorry to Bother You. With a bigger budget and once again seemingly having complete creative control, I Love Boosters is definitely bigger than his previous film in all sorts of ways. The visuals are more varied, more filmmaking techniques, more animation styles, more comedy, bigger set pieces, bigger directing! The biggest star of the film is Boots Riley. The directing is so over the top. Other important elements are weaker, there's no proper balance between directing, writing, and acting. The characters are, to a great extent, avatars for Boots Riley and his commentary. The movie's very unsubtle about its socialist-flavored commentary. They practically stop the film to make speeches about worker's rights and unionizing. The writing is very simple, it's easy to read the metaphors and everything. Boots Riley even had background noise explain things that are rather obvious, like the color-themed variants of the Metro Designers store. Certain character arcs are wrapped up too plainly. I Love Boosters has a big cast and it's very much an ensemble. Sorry to Bother You was focused on LaKeith Stanfield. Keke Palmer leads this movie, but she's sharing the screen with her friends and other characters. You certainly don't know about Keke Palmer's character as much as you do Stanfield's in Sorry to Bother You. The movie's very inaccessible, I think more so than Sorry to Bother You. You have to be down with the message and be very open to the uncompromised filmmaking from Boots Riley. I am certainly down with the message and was open to Boots Riley messing around, but I felt that the writing was weaker, compared to Sorry to Bother You...

But holy crap, the creativity is off the charts! Ultimately, I let many of the narrative and script flaws go. It was clear that Boots Riley was the main character of this film, and there are plenty of directors who lead the movie, and the actors fall in line, still making the movie work. David Lynch is a strong example. The filmmakers are totally different, but I bring him up because he's a singular voice and that's the overwhelming guide for his art. Boots Riley is a singular voice that is so loud and powerful, and the visual stuff that came from that voice was so delightfully insane that it overshadows conventional film critique. Hell, that's like David Lynch. This movie's so unique. Sometimes it's unique to its detriment, but the effort is so admirable. A movie that gets on a soapbox normally doesn't have a lot of slash. It would mostly be a screenwriter's rantfest. But I Love Boosters is spiced up with incredible visuals. Very colorful production design, a tilted set that could pass for an art installation, absolutely dazzling costume design, impressive makeup and effects that could fit in a horror movie, puppetry, and even stopmotion! Some of the filmmaking and animation that's used in this film is uncommon. How many new movies have extensive stopmotion? None of the visual flashes are soulless. I think all of it comes together, making the movie into a Looney Tunes-type of film. It also feels like an amalgamation of dreams. David Lynch also loved dreams. I really didn't mean to bring up Lynch a bunch of times. Again, he and Boots Riley are different filmmakers, but they definitely walk to the beat of their own drum. So I'm not bothered by people who don't like this movie, even if they agree with the pro-worker, anticapitalist commentary. It is heavy-handed, but I was rewarded with dazzling visuals.

There is more to the movie than the visuals, but the visuals are the best aspects of the film. The music from Tune-Yards is addictive! I've been imitating the humming and silly sounds from them. Their music has increasingly stuck with me since finishing the movie! Tune-Yards understood the assignment, making animated and vibrant music that goes along with the film. The needle drops are also enjoyable. Interestingly, Keke Palmer sings the multiple end credits songs. They were all good! Speaking of Keke Palmer, she was good in the movie. The acting in the movie is great overall, even though the characters are somewhat thinly written. Taylour Paige and Naomi Ackie were very nice. Eiza González's character was basically a megaphone for Boots Riley to talk about workers rights and going on strike. But she looked and sounded great doing it. Also her character vaping a lot was rather realistic. Poppy Liu was nice. LaKeith Stanfield was pretty funny, but his arc ended on a whimper. Don Cheadle had a brief, but memorable appearance. Will Poulter was one of the funniest characters and he had a striking look. Demi Moore was pretty funny. It's impressive that Boots Riley assembled such an impressive cast. Even though the script could be stronger, it is still imaginative, and surely that was enough for people to be drawn to it. Quite a few actors had tiny roles, but I assumed they were willing to take up those roles just because they got to work with Boots Riley.

If I focused a lot on some narrative issues and how characters are one or two-dimensional, than the movie would be a 7/10, still giving a lot of value to everything else. But everything else is just so charming and unique that it makes up for these flaws. So it gets an 8/10.

Giant robots, hidden identities, ancient powers, and a war that could destroy worlds. What movie is it?

Ben & Arthur

I heard this movie was the gay version of The Room. Following up The Room with this film during Pride Month felt right. This zero-budget, shot-on-video movie came out in 2002, the year before The Room. So any similarities are coincidental. As it turned out, there aren't that many similarities. Sam Mraovich is like Tommy Wiseau in the sense of being the "creative" force behind the project. He produced, wrote, directed the film, and was the lead. But he did even more than Tommy. He was one of the DPs along with Michael Haboush, who played his character's brother. He was one of the editors, one of the music composers and editors, he did the makeup, casting, and was the script supervisor! He did so many things, but wasn't an expert in any of them! The movie is very obviously bad. The acting, the editing, the camera work, the low production value, the drab settings, shit dialogue, weird musical choices such as techno music during a murder scene and other shady shit going down, lack of continuity, plot points raised and then dropped, and many other flaws. It shares some of the same flaws as The Room. I think it mainly gets the "gay version of The Room" description because it's hilariously bad like that film. It's about a romantic relationship that is at risk of collapsing, but not for the same reasons as The Room. The romantic couple is gay, but the plot is mainly about Arthur's brother trying to end that relationship because he's a religious zealot. As poorly constructed as the movie's script is, it at least captured how awful Christianity and religion can be. Even though Victor resorts to bullshit gay conversion and eventually murder, I believe there are people like him in real life. Hell, Sam Mraovich may have been inspired by certain seemingly random movies in depicting the grappling with another person's sexuality and the fractured relationship between siblings. The 2 movies that come to mind are American Beauty and Scarface!

Anyway, I was very much into the movie. It's always a risk watching a bad movie alone, especially if you're looking for laughs. It's always better watching these fun bad movies with other people. But I laughed a lot from the movie, and had a great experience overall watching it. It is too slow and boring in some parts, but when the comedy hits, it's amazing. There is enough ironic comedy in the film, earning it a pretty positive rating. Compared to The Room, Samurai Cop, and Miami Connection, this movie is a step down. I might change my mind. I've seen those other films loads of times, it's rare for a movie I've seen only once to be instantly in the top tier. With The Room, there's something more magical about how baffling that is. A zero-budget gay drama featuring nothing but amateurs? Of course it would be bad. The Room had a budget, albeit fairly low at $6 million. It had a few competent people in the crew, and the script felt more autobiographical than Ben & Arthur, even though the execution was so horrible. I would like to know more about Ben & Arthur, but as of now, I don't know if the film was autobiographical in any way. I'm not even sure if Sam Mraovich is gay. The gay stuff in this movie is very minor. The first kiss was laughably bad because Sam basically sank into the shoulder of Jamie Brett Gabel, who played Ben Sheets. Arthur's last name is Sailes. Sheets and Sailes, that sounds like a local store. The second kiss was better. Then there's the sex scene, which involved no movement, but Ben, who is more fit and handsome, on top of Arthur. Blankets cover their bottom half, so you can assume they're only topless. Also, I assume that Jamie Brett Gabel's bottom half made no contact with Sam Mraovich's. If the blanket wasn't there, then you'd see the man basically hovering over Sam. That's the extent of the gay stuff in the film. Sam, similar to Tommy Wiseau, goes fully naked. You see his butt. The guns in this movie look worse than in The Room!

Sam was the most entertaining part of the movie until Michael Haboush's screen time increased significantly in the 2nd half. The movie focuses on his character Victor quite a bit, starting at around the midpoint. He gives a bit more emotion than Sam Mraovich, but he was still a terrible actor. Hell, those actors should've played a gay couple. Jamie Brett Gabel was more lifeless than those two. The woman who played the gay couple's lawyer was probably the absolute worst actor of the bunch. Her delivery was rough, but hilarious. She looked at the camera at one point. A friend of Victor also looked at the camera. Oh, and at one point, the camera operator can be heard breathing! I felt like I willed that into existence because I thought about that scenario during the movie and then it finally happened! Thankfully, this movie is only 85 minutes. I'm glad that Sam Mraovich is seemingly receptive to the movie's infamy. He said that since the movie is recognized, that's a good thing for him. He has a better attitude about his movie than Tommy Wiseau, who was very serious in his efforts and wanted to continue on that, but tried to flip the script by saying that The Room is a dark comedy. The man still believes The Room is an incredible movie. I agree, but for different reasons.

Anyway, I would put Ben & Arthur in the 2nd tier of hilariously bad movies. That tier is occupied by movies that are mostly hilarious, but sometimes the low quality is too much. This tier also features Gymkata, Love on a Leash, and They're Playing With Fire. That's some good company.

8/10


Citizen Vigilante

Racist, Islamophobic, xenophobic, anti-immigrant slop. It's not only all those things, but it's extremely boring. Hell, it's more boring than it is offensive. This felt like a grift, Uwe Boll trying to appeal to right-wing chuds by capitalizing on their hatred of minorities and immigrants, ragebaiting them, and then farming outrage by claiming that the movie is banned in Germany. It's not, it's just unrated. That does mean it can be banned by Germany, but as far as I know, it's not banned. Would you even trust Uwe Boll? Maybe the guy is Islamophobic and holds some very extreme and hateful views, but it feels more like a soulless grift. That would explain why it lacks so much emotion, and there are overly long stretches of the film where nothing is fucking happening! The movie is described as an action film, but there's only one shootout scene, and a few other scenes of Armie Hammer killing people. The action sequences were lame anyway! Also, Armie Hammer sucked. The acting overall was shit. The movie is also weirdly pro-landlord. Armie Hammer is the landlord who wants everything perfect, and if tenants don't pay, he kicks them out immediately. No mercy, no forgiveness, just give him the money. The dude is a nepo baby, inheriting properties and assets from his father. Armie Hammer playing a nepo baby, what a stretch! On top of that, Armie Hammer's character is an illegal immigrant, but because he's an American, he can't be grouped with the Black and Brown people. The motherfucker bragged about it in one scene, and it was the only time he smiled! Citizen Vigilante is a repulsive movie. A true symbol of its filth is Elon Musk glazing the film and having it play on Twitter for a free 48-hour period. Admittedly, I laughed a few times from the bad acting and was a little impressed by the makeup work on dead bodies, but that's it. There's no redeeming value here. It is the worst movie of 2026. I can't imagine a movie worse than Citizen Vigilante coming this year.

What a random double feature, Ben & Arthur and Citizen Vigilante. The latter was an impulse decision. It's very interesting that a zero-budget gay drama is a million times better than Citizen Vigilante. I'll close out by saying fuck Armie Hammer and fuck Uwe Boll.

0/10


Obsession

Holy crap, to go from the worst movie of 2026 to maybe the best movie of the year so far? I'm still not fully sure about that, but the fact that I'm considering Obsession to be the best of the year so far says a lot about what I think of it. I love the simplicity of the film. I prefer horror films that go crazy or just have fun with their premise over elevated horror. With that said, I imagine elevated horror influenced Curry Barker when making this film. The look of the movie, the lighting, cinematography, and use of shadows seem to be inspired by Hereditary. Maybe it's no coincidence that both films boast an incredible leading performance from a woman. In Hereditary, it was Toni Colette. In Obsession, it was Inde Navarette. What a star-making performance from her. She was down-to-earth, cute, scary, funny, strong, needy, sad, troubled, and more. Just so many flavors to her character that it felt like she was playing numerous characters. Instant scream queen status here, and I really hope she has a healthy and long career. Not too far behind her was Michael Johnston, who I think got better as the movie progressed and to me was at Navarrete's level toward the end. I was really feeling the man's performance at that point, even though the character had become increasingly unlikable. I've seen various takes on Bear. To me, it's very simple. He was the villain of the movie. He was a shitty person, and that was obvious before the movie tried to tell you that he's bad. Johnston played the character just right. As weird as it is to say this, it is praising the man in saying that he became the new incel icon of cinema. Cooper Tomlinson and Megan Lawless were also pretty good. Curry Barker shot himself to becoming one of the most promising filmmakers in horror. I'm concerned that this ego boost he's been getting from the movie's historic success will make him fumble in his next outing. There's also no certainty that his next film will even do the numbers Obsession has done. I doubt it will, this is truly lightning in a bottle. I just hope he becomes a consistently strong filmmaker. With this movie, he's shown to be great at handling tone. This is a horror movie with strong brushes of comedy. It never goes overboard with the comedy, and the horror is so damn effective. He knows how to pull off a good jump scare. I actually jumped a bit and said "Oh Jesus" at one point. As a writer, he knows how to set up a strong foundation and write dialogue that is somewhat realistic. As an editor, he could use a bit of improvement. The movie was a little repetitive, and it could be shorter, but I was heavily invested from the start. I crouched forward and got close to my monitor in the final 10 or so minutes of the movie. I was anxious to see how the movie would end, and it didn't disappoint me. The sound design is a major factor in the film. I'm not sure if that was talked up enough. I loved how loud the movie got at the right moments. I loved the sudden, intense sound drops. The sound design was often as intense as the visuals. Some great gore, though frankly less than I expected. I thought there would be a bigger kill count. I guess if the kill count was higher, the movie would be longer. At 1 hour and 48 minutes, the movie was already very long for a simple low-budget horror film. The hype for this film is deserved. I was hyped for it when I read about it in an IndieWire article last year. I was hoping that the movie would release in late 2025, but nope. So I've been waiting almost a year to watch this movie, and it finally happened. I was rewarded nicely for waiting.

8.5/10


Supergirl (1984)

I figured with the new Supergirl movie out, I would not bother catching up with James Gunn's DCU and instead watch the original Supergirl film. Even though I have not seen the Christopher Reeve Superman films, which I guess matters because this Supergirl film is in the same universe. Marc McClure, aka Jimmy Olsen, was the only actor from those films who appeared here. Reeve's Clark Kent is referenced, and Superman is already known to the public. These references are minor, so I was able to get through this movie without needing to watch those films. I was going to watch this film either before or right after watching The Legend of Billie Jean, as both films star Helen Slater. Supergirl was her debut! She was 19 when they filmed the movie and 21 when it was released in theaters. I heard complaints about the new Supergirl film that Milly Alcock deserved more. I think that's the case for the ' 80s Supergirl film. Helen Slater deserved more. They really lucked out with the casting. The woman was young, vibrant, cute, and had the charm to make Kara soar. Almost everything around her sucked though! Now, I watched the Director's Cut because I heard that's the best version. The theatrical cut is apparently infamous for having plot holes, being cheesy, and generally being a weak film. The Director's Cut, which balloons the movie to 2 hours and 18 minutes, was said to fill in plotholes, expand the story, and is generally seen as an improvement.

It sounds like the theatrical cut is a trainwreck, but the Director's Cut is still a mess! The film is still incredibly flawed. The script has numerous ideas and plot threads, but most of them never coalesce. There are just too many ideas, and even at 2 hours and 18 minutes, you get shit that is raised and then dropped, like Myra the bully. You get things that are so undercooked, and yet the audience is supposed to have major feelings over it, such as Jimmy Olsen and Lucy Lane's romance. Lucy Lane is Lois Lane's sister, but if the woman never said she was, you wouldn't be able to tell. Bianca was a useless character, mainly comedic relief who was hardly funny. Also, the movie revolves too much around a himbo, Ethan. He was played by Hart Bochner, aka Ellis in Die Hard. It was strange that Bochner tried to play a likable, oafish character when he did a fantastic job playing a sleazeball in Die Hard. He was way too much of an idiot in this film, who busted into Shakespearean dialogue randomly for a few scenes, and then never again! Director Jeannot Szwarc, I suppose, tried his best in putting together a cut of the film that represented his work better. Such an effort didn't help the script play significantly better. The longer cut meant a slower-paced film, and the movie annoyingly meanders at many points. I couldn't help but look at the time often when watching the movie. Kara getting settled in college took up almost 20 minutes of the film's runtime. That was just way too long. The Director's Cut apparently made Myra's beef with Kara logical, while the theatrical cut has her bully the young lady for seemingly no reason. That's cool, but how about not having Myra at all? Whatever improvements the Director's Cut made didn't save the movie for me. The Director's Cut also added more romantic dialogue between Lucy Lane and Jimmy Olsen, which was completely unnecessary.

The best part of Supergirl easily was Faye Dunaway! Her performance wasn't good, it was just hilarious. She was hokey and maybe got wrapped up with playing a literal witch. The fact that they had a witch as a villain just sounded off. Somehow, a witch sounded more far-fetched than an alien girl. Still, Dunaway justified her character's existence, unlike Brenda Vaccaro, who played Bianca. I can understand that Bianca's presence allowed for a comedic back and forth between her and Selena. Many villains have assistants who are comic relief. The problem is that there was no need for comic relief when Faye Dunaway was delivering on the comedy with her hilarious delivery. She would veer into Mommie Dearest territory, which was when I had the most joy from the film! The Director's Cut did give her more screen time, so I'm a little thankful for that. She also pulled some funny facial expressions, once again reminding me of Mommie Dearest.

Helen Slater's positive qualities as Supergirl were always undermined by the script and the director not being able to orient her properly with whoever her scene partner is. Often they operate at different levels. The biggest example of that is whenever Slater shares scenes with Hart Bochner. They didn't have good chemistry. Slater and Peter O'Toole didn't mesh well, mainly because it felt like O'Toole was just phoning in his performance. Surprisingly, Mia Farrow appears early in the film as Kara's mother and is then never seen again! What a waste of a veteran actress. Peter Cook was fine as Nigel, but they mostly did him dirty, wasting the character as being too forgiving of Selena. He was a fool for her basically. Marc McClure was a little annoying as Jimmy Olsen, which worries me for whenever I watch the Christopher Reeve films. Back to Helen Slater, her best scenes are whenever it's just her or she leads a scene and doesn't have to go back and forth in dialogue with anyone. When she's truly being a superhero, it was enjoyable, but sadly that was rare.

Apparently the Director's Cut has better VFX. That's cool. On a technical level, the movie is nice for 1984. Good cinematography and VFX. The production design is great and very busy, I can see why that was the credit that immediately followed the cast in the opening credits sequence. Jerry Goldsmith's score is very good. I assume he was tasked with trying to sound like John Williams, and he comes pretty close. Some decent heroic music. The editing could've been better, I doubt that's the case for the theatrical cut. The movie's a narrative mess. I laughed multiple times, but it was such a pain to get through the film. The timing of the viewing just wasn't good because I started it later than planned. It cut into a Twitch stream I wanted to watch, so I was just hoping for the movie to finish as that stream started. It took so long for that finish to happen. When it finally did, I wasn't relieved. I just said, "Oh ok." I expected the ending to play out a certain way and it didn't. Ah well, at least I finished the movie. I don't want to watch it again unless it's with people and there's roasting involved. This does have some "so bad it's good" elements, but overall, it's just a mess. Maybe the new Supergirl is better. I might never know.

5/10


The Return of the Living Dead - The movie takes place on July 3. I somehow didn't realize that until this week when I saw a screenshot of the film showing the date. So that gave me an excuse to rewatch this amazing movie. One of the best zombie films of all time, certainly in the 80s. One of the most fun zombie films, with fast pacing, the perfect runtime of 90 minutes, great rocking soundtrack and addictive original music a good varied cast of veterans and young actors (fuck Brian Peck though), a very committed Linnea Quigley with her nudity and physicality, impressive gore and makeup effects, hilarious moments, and some surprisingly serious ones. I have no notes for this film, it's top notch fun. 10/10


Kill Bill: The Whole Bloody Affair - This is without a doubt the definitive way to watch this movie. I should just call it "Kill Bill" and nothing else. This is what Kill Bill was meant to be. The whole scope of Tarantino's vision is best experienced in one sitting, with one movie. Yes, there are segments that are stronger than others. Yes, the dialogue can be very stupid. Yes, there are a lot of feet shots. Yes, the amount of ripping off Tarantino does for this movie is astronomical. You can see side-by-sides for proof. Yes, the plot is very simple. But everything comes together beautifully. As a whole, Kill Bill is an incredible filmmaking achievement. Tarantino once said that Once Upon a Time in Hollywood is his favorite movie, Inglourious Basterds is his masterpiece, and Kill Bill is the film only he could make. He's completely right. I also interpret his statement as Kill Bill being the most Tarantino film Tarantino has made. It has all the trademarks of a Tarantino film, all the influences condensed into one epic film. The Eastern and Western influences. This is also his biggest crowdpleaser. I absolutely love Kill Bill, it's one of my favorite Tarantino films. Maybe even number 1. I didn't yawn at all, the 4 hours flew by. Uma Thurman at her best, for sure. Seriously, if the movie had released as one, as intended, then Uma Thurman would've or should've gotten an Oscar nomination. The movie could've been snubbed in every other category, which would've sucked, but the most necessary nomination would've been Uma Thurman. David Carradine getting a Best Supporting Actor nomination would've been cool too. Uma Thurman was badass, but also extremely vulnerable. She played all the right tones for this character. Fantastic choreography, amazing selection of music and RZA's score was tremendous, great cinematography, brilliant directing, just everything that makes a Tarantino movie great is in Kill Bill and then some. A very easy 10/10.


Independence Day - I hadn't watched this in so many years, at least 15. I decided to do it for July 4, but wasn't sure if I would enjoy it. The runtime was also not assuring. I remembered the movie being very stupid. Well, it's still stupid. But it's also good popcorn entertainment. My concerns were dashed away during the first half of the movie. The second half wasn't as great, but I managed the runtime very well. No yawning, constant engagement, and I laughed quite a few times. Easily the best part of the movie was Will Smith. I miss when Will Smith was effortlessly cool and was so damn entertaining in some true bangers. This was before Men in Black, so he wasn't a lead. He was part of an ensemble. Other members of that ensemble were nice, including Jeff Goldblum, Judd Hirsch, Vivica A. Fox, and Bill Pullman. But Will Smith got the biggest reactions out of me. He was the man behind the best scene in the movie, "Welcome to Earth!" The man was crackling with energy, a true movie star in the making at that point. The CGI and VFX were a mixed bag. Half of it was great and holds up, the other half not so much. Still, it's amazing how much of the VFX do hold up. This is a movie that works best when you turn your brain off. A mid-90s computer virus that messes up advanced alien technology? The damn US president getting in a fighter jet and bringing the fight to the aliens? Punching an alien to completely subdue them? Having Vivica A. Fox as a stripper for really no good reason? Just one scene of her at work. A damn dog jumping from the hood of a car, narrowly avoiding the incredible blast radius from the alien laser? Sure, all that is fine because the movie is a pure Hollywood blockbuster. It's a very flawed movie, but it never forgets to be fun and thrilling. 7/10