The Pitters' Place

This is one thing I don't mind being accused of gendoing.

Hidden Figures - This is a great movie. The actors are all great, the timing of the writing is well balanced to know when to be lighthearted and when to remind the people thos was 1961 VA. I really don't know what else to say other than that. Go see it. That is all.

Ok. Posted the first one for-2017

A Monster Calls - All about a kid working through grief. Well acted, emotional. Liam Neeson plays a tree. Go see it.

Split - About as good & ridiculous as The Visit.

Singin' in the Rain - saw it in theaters so it counts. Still as fun as ever.

The Lego Batman Movie - I must be weird because I think The Lego Movie was a better movie but I liked this one more. It's definitely the best theatrically released spoof movie since The Lego Movie, but that's not really hard to do considering all the terrible parodies out there. I definitely think the knew what to make fun of about Batman and how to do it. There's no real payoff like in the Lego Movie, but I laughed a lot more during this than the other. I still recommend it

Is The Visit the one about kids going to see their grandparents?

Islandmur wrote:Is The Visit the one about kids going to see their grandparents?

Yes.

John Wick 2 - Great follow up to the original. The action was really good and I could even follow the scenes in the dark. This movie knows how to use shaky cam and avoid quick cuts. They do a good job of expanding on the lore and worldbuilding without getting lost in it. My only negative is it doesn't have the same emotional thread the first one did, but at least his new dog survived. That, and they still fall into the Hokkywood version of silenceers. Overall, I highly recommend it.

John Wick 2 was awesome. Someone called it Harry Potter for assassins, which I think is entirely accurate.
I liked how he didn't name this dog because he didn't want to get emotionally attached after what happened the last time.

Anakin McFly wrote:John Wick 2 was awesome. Someone called it Harry Potter for assassins, which I think is entirely accurate.
I liked how he didn't name this dog because he didn't want to get emotionally attached after what happened the last time.

I'm not actually getting the Harry Potter analogy

Wow, really been slacking.

Get Out - It's a satire of the black experience in the form of the suspense/thriller genre. The satire aspect as better than the suspense. 3.5 out 5. Still recommend seeing it.

Logan - Good send off for Hugh Jackman as Wolverine. Patrick Stewart was good too. All the brutality and gore you could want plus the dramatic/western style differentiates it from other comic book movies The kid who plays the girl is good too. Not quite perfection, but still really good. 4 out of 5.

Kong: Skull Island: Boring characters with the exception of John C. Reilly's character. Makes up more for with the action and giant monster fights. Fun movies if you just want to see some creatures duke it out. Otherwise, just barelyv above average. 3 out of 5.

Update: This review is no longer a reflection of my thoughts on the movie. There will be an updated review posted soon

Beauty & The Beast (2017) - AKA "Why didn't they just re-release a another special edition?" All kidding aside, this is an almost beat for beat re-telling of the animated movie. They do change a few things and re-order some scenes, but I couldn't help but compare it to the animated film. I did like the few things they did add, including why they're in a small town and what happened to the mother. They even provide a motivation (albeit thin) for Gaston's want for Belle. I enjoyed Luke Evans as Gaston and Josh Gad as Lefou is just gold. The singing was...fine. The biggest weakness unfortunately for me was the romance. That's not to say there wasn't chemistry. It's just that despite their romance being more developed, I bought the animated romance more. It's like I see what they were going for, but the change made it feel like they were rushing the romance until it was revealed they were developing it further (probably another issue of knowing the original). And that's kind of a big issue for this kind of movie. The CGI was mostly believable but the beast isn't always convincing and if you thought the teapot & cup were the stuff of nightmares, they've got nothing on the wardrobe. Overall, enjoyable but unnecessary unless you you absolutely need those answers. 3 out of 5, but only because if gay LeFou.

I'm not actually getting the Harry Potter analogy

In the sense that there's this elaborate underworld going on beneath the surface that only certain people are aware of, with its own codes and customs and currency etc.

and if you thought the teapot & cup were the stuff of nightmares, they've got nothing on the wardrobe.

D:

Beauty & The Beast (2017) - The acting and singing are serviceable, but that's about it. The movie is an almost beat for beat remake of the original. Very few changes are made, and out of the ones that are, most of them aren't explored enough or they don't make sense. Also, the original did a much better job at developing the romance and in a shorter time. I didn't buy the budding romance in this one because it misses a key element from the original. The new songs are alright, but I did like the new song for Maurice. LeFou and Gaston were fun, but that has more chemistry than the two leads. So a prettily dressed remake with too many undeniable flaws. 2 out 5.

Spoilers:
Good Changes
Provided a little more depth to Maurice.
Gay LeFou

Providing more development about what happened to Belle's Mom: she died of the plague.

Bad changes:
In the original, Beast is coached by Lumiere to provide Belle better accomadations. In the trip to her room, he tells her she has free roam of the castle except the west wing. She also promises not to leave. Right here, they have an uncomfortable interaction but Lumiere helps Beast tap into his humanity, even though he still needs to dig even deeper later on. This establishes Belle being able to see more in him when he rescues her. She gets to reflect on that sliver of humanity she experienced and realize that there must be more to him if he's willing to risk his life. This is where the romance begins to develop when he makes a conscious effort to change for the better and she becomes more open to his less refined but non-abusive) ways.

In this new version, Lumiere releases her so there is no direct contact between her and the Beast in a way that shows some humanity between the time she is imprisoned and the time she is rescued. Not only this, she makes no promise to stay so there's absolutely nothing keeping her there, not even her word. In fact she even begins an attempt to escape but is interrupted by Mrs. Potts and she never tries again until the Beast scares her. There's nothing built into her decision to go back beyond his rescue. By decreasing her interaction, they remove any depth from her decision to return which in turn decreased any chemistry they would build.

And speaking of the scene in which Beast scares Belle from the West Wing and castle, Belle actually interacts with the bell bar and nearly comes into contact with the wioting rose. The rose being tied to the curse, this justified Beasts anger, which hides his fear of the petals falling. In the new version, she doesn't get within 40 ft of the damn thing before Beast scares her off.

They have a throw away line about the servants standing by while the son was molded into the terrible beast you saa. This provides an explanation as to why the servants were cursed too, but it's never actually explored. This would have been a great change from the original. They could have really delved into the Beast's background and they didn't.

These issues really stand out when I think about them and just makes me realize how near perfect the original was.

Doug Walker's take on Beauty and the Beast. About what I expected, and I'm pretty sure I would feel the same as him (and Rob):

Gendo wrote:Doug Walker's take on Beauty and the Beast. About what I expected, and I'm pretty sure I would feel the same as him (and Rob):

I saw it. Didn't earn any goodwill with the intro no matter how much I might agree with them.

Unvoiced_Apollo wrote:Split - About as good & ridiculous as The Visit.

First off I like Night's movies even the weird ones like Lady in the water.
I disliked the visit.. did not understand how kids wouldn't know what their grandparents would look like

split which i just saw... was... hUgh?

If there's no sex scene in the new Beauty and the Beast, I'm not interested.

Islandmur wrote:

Unvoiced_Apollo wrote:Split - About as good & ridiculous as The Visit.

First off I like Night's movies even the weird ones like Lady in the water.
I disliked the visit.. did not understand how kids wouldn't know what their grandparents would look like

split which i just saw... was... hUgh?

Hugh?

lol it was just at the end i was like "hu? that's it? where is the rest of it?" it didn't end... it stopped. there was nothing at the end of the movie that I didn't know 10 minutes into the movie.

Saban's Power Rangers (2017]- It's actually watchable. The characters are actually pretty compelling, but the dialogue can be pretty bad. They also don't spend very little time in costume. And the scripture script had a real hard on for Krispy Kreme. And Rita felt like she was from a completely different movie. Entertaining enough with some compelling changes, but falls short of being good . 2.5/5

Unvoiced_Apollo wrote:Saban's Power Rangers (2017]- It's actually watchable. The characters are actually pretty compelling, but the dialogue can be pretty bad. They also don't spend very little time in costume. And the scripture script had a real hard on for Krispy Kreme. And Rita felt like she was from a completely different movie. Entertaining enough with some compelling changes, but falls short of being good . 2.5/5

Mostly everything I just heard Doug Walker say about it; though he liked it a bit more as a whole.

Unvoiced_Apollo wrote:Saban's Power Rangers (2017]- It's actually watchable. The characters are actually pretty compelling, but the dialogue can be pretty bad. They also don't spend very little time in costume. And the scripture script had a real hard on for Krispy Kreme. And Rita felt like she was from a completely different movie. Entertaining enough with some compelling changes, but falls short of being good . 2.5/5

I might make this one of the rare movies I watch out of pure nostalgia. I was pretty hardcore into Power Rangers as a kid, even past the point when it was remotely cool (if it ever was).

Eva Yojimbo wrote:

Unvoiced_Apollo wrote:Saban's Power Rangers (2017]- It's actually watchable. The characters are actually pretty compelling, but the dialogue can be pretty bad. They also don't spend very little time in costume. And the scripture script had a real hard on for Krispy Kreme. And Rita felt like she was from a completely different movie. Entertaining enough with some compelling changes, but falls short of being good . 2.5/5

I might make this one of the rare movies I watch out of pure nostalgia. I was pretty hardcore into Power Rangers as a kid, even past the point when it was remotely cool (if it ever was).

Yeah. I watched it the iterations until I went off to college, even when I was way too old to be watching it .

I think the nostalgia crowd is going to be split into "that was great" and "what did they do?" Overall, though I don't necessarily find it good, it was still different enough where it was enjoyable. One of my friends watched it twice!

Guardians of the Galaxy - I liked this better than the first. Some may find it too jokey but I liked the comedy. They also give some compelling backstory to some of the characters. I know this is too high a rating, but too effing bad. 5/5


[edit]THis is actually a 3.5 movie, but it's good enough to overlook the bad stuff.

Wonder Woman - For me, best DC movie since Dark Knight. Themyscira is beautiful. It's like they discovered there was more to a color palette than grey and it is just a gorgeous landscape. They really take advantage of the Greek mythos that inspired Wonder Woman. Gal Gadot is great and I don't see a model. I see Diana/Wonder Woman. She and Chris Pine have great chemistry. The humor takes advantage of the fish out of water scenario, but it never gets in the way of the drama and action. Speaking of the action, the action is great, even with the CGI. My only nitpick would be that they overused the slow motion a tiny bit and it does slow a bit in the second act. Still, it's a very good comic book movie. And I feel Patty Jenkins was successful in making a great superhero movie with a character that happens to be female. It does not feel at all like only women can appreciate it and I found myself smiling throughout. Oh, one last nitpick. The villain is a hidden one, making them not very compelling, and anyone who is familiar with the tendencies regarding Greek mythology will be able to immediately guess who it is. 4/5

Bambi - Disney classic. Seeing it as an adult, I have a great appreciton for the depth they got for a 2-d animated film. The mix of an impressionistic backgrounds and naturalistic images offers a great contrast. It's a simple story, but with barely any dialogue, it tells the story and enotion through visuals and music. Still didn't make me cry.

Unvoiced_Apollo wrote:Bambi - Disney classic. Seeing it as an adult, I have a great appreciton for the depth they got for a 2-d animated film. The mix of an impressionistic backgrounds and naturalistic images offers a great contrast. It's a simple story, but with barely any dialogue, it tells the story and enotion through visuals and music. Still didn't make me cry.

Grave of the Fireflies is the animated movie that makes adults cry.

Grave of the Fireflies didn't make me cry.

I'll amend that to "makes adults who aren't dead inside cry." :p

I can't stand Studio Ghibli and even I liked Grave of the Fireflies and teared up at it.

Derived Absurdity wrote:Grave of the Fireflies didn't make me cry.

It seems like your tears were...

*puts on sunglasses*

Canned up.