Tigers X - Number one Source to Talk Auburn Tigers Sports

Kaos' way behind movie reviews

Kaos

  • *
  • 27709
  • Jeez
    • No, YOU Move!
Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
« Reply #3220 on: April 24, 2022, 09:47:51 AM »
Today we profile a pair of major missteps by successful comedians with lengthy careers.  Both of these films had solid supporting casts and the star power of the lead. Both are indicative of how the two main stars spent time wandering the desert of failure that could have left them in the dust of obscurity. Both of these films also make me think that the longevity of these two comedic actors is more due to fortunate casting in the right roles than it is to any transformative, great talent.

First, Steve Martin.

My Blue Heaven
Martin made a name for himself with the white-suited arrow-through-the-head skits on variety shows.  Cemented his status with appearances on Saturday Night Live. Moved on to film and gave us The Jerk ,Parenthood, Roxanne, Planes Trains, and Three Amigos (along with some other pretty massive turds like Pennies from Heaven and Dead Men Don't Wear Plaid).

In all honesty if you look at his career as a whole, most of what he's been involved in is pure un-funny shit. He's not Will Ferrell bad, but he's pretty awful in a lot of things.  Think the two abysmal Pink Panther reboots if you want a frame of reference.  Or think My Blue Heaven. 

How hysterical!  Nora Ephron was can't miss on the script. The guy who directed Steel Magnolias was at the helm.  In addition to Martin, you've got Joan Cusack (who was at the height of her limited hotness), Daniel Stern, Rick Moranis, Melanie Mayron, Bill Irwin, and William Hickey. And it's absolute garbage.

Martin plays a gangster turned federal witness. With a ridiculous pompadour and mannerisms/accent copied from his Wild and Crazy Guy schtick, he's completely unwatchable. Every second he's on the screen is cringe inducing. The rest is just a garbled mish-mash of idiotic nonsense with no redeeming value.


Which beings us to Tim Allen and ...

Crazy on the Outside
Allen has done some good work, mostly in television.  But he's also done good things with Santa Claus, Buzz Lightyear and was absolutely perfect for the part in Galaxy Quest, which remains one of the most underrated films in history.

And then there's this turd in the sandbox which clearly shows that when Allen is left to his own devices (he was fully in charge of this film as director) he can't carry the load.  This movie felt much more like a TV pilot that wasn't picked up than it did an actual movie.  It squandered Sigourney Weaver, Jeanne Tripplehorn, JK Simmons, Julie Bowen (at the peak of her hotness), Ray Liotta and Kelsey Grammer.  How is that even possible?  Watch and find out. Actually don't.  It's bad. 

It's nothing more than a series of failed attempts at humor, stale setups, unconvincing and rushed plot devices, abandoned story threads, and improbable events. 

Allen plays a "charming" ex-con, out of prison after a three-year stint for video piracy.  Every character in the film is a caricature and each has a trait that appears and disappears as needed for "comedic impact."  It's a jumbled mess of shit.  Weaver is a compulsive liar. Simmons is her horny husband (except the horniness is dropped mid-film and never re-visited), Tripplehorn (never liked her) is the probation officer who immediately falls head over ass for Allen. Bowen is his thought-to-be dead ex girlfriend (who is way too hot for him and 20 years younger on top of that) who is engaged to Frasier Crane (utterly wasted in this role).  Liotta is essentially a ridiculous version of Henry Hill - supposedly making billions pirating DVDs to the Chinese (something that Hollywood apparently thinks is a 'thing'). 

It's all unconvincing and dreadful, drained of any charm. Nothing about the film works.  Nothing.

-------

Saw these two films on the same day quite by coincidence. Just kind of reinforced to me how the film makes the actor and not vice versa in a lot of cases. Maybe most. 
friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
If you want free cheese, look in a mousetrap.

wesfau2

  • ***
  • 12373
  • I love it when you call me Big Poppa
Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
« Reply #3221 on: April 24, 2022, 02:06:16 PM »
I still love My Blue Heaven.

Tim Allen can pound sand.
friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
You can keep a wooden stake in your trunk
On the off-chance that the fairy tales ain't bunk
And Imma keep a bottle of that funk
To get motel parking lot, balcony crunk.

Kaos

  • *
  • 27709
  • Jeez
    • No, YOU Move!
Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
« Reply #3222 on: April 24, 2022, 05:57:51 PM »
I still love My Blue Heaven.

Tim Allen can pound sand.

Wrong (as per usual). Dead wrong.

Steve Martin really doesn't have a great overall record.  My Blue Heaven is abysmal shit. 

Tim Allen?  National treasure for having the guts to stand up for his conservative values.  Not really a great actor, but Galaxy Quest is significantly better than everything Steve Martin ever did combined (with the lone exception of Planes, Trains and Automobiles which which was more John Hughes than him). 
friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
If you want free cheese, look in a mousetrap.

Kaos

  • *
  • 27709
  • Jeez
    • No, YOU Move!
Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
« Reply #3223 on: April 29, 2022, 01:33:36 PM »
El Camino

I loved Breaking Bad (although I feel it got to almost parody by the end).  Still it was one of the greatest shows in the history of episodic television.  It somehow managed to glide to the end without completely crapping the bed (like Sopranos).  The end was fitting. While it provided closure, it also left some threads dangling -- and that was fine.

This month, creator Vince Gilligan added El Camino, essentially a two-hour coda to the end of a show that had already come tantalizingly close to perfection.

I have to admit, I enjoyed seeing the characters on screen again, but the reality is that this movie added absolutely nothing to the overall canon.  In truth, it just wasn't necessary.  It didn't break any new ground, really. 

The movie bounced around in time, enough so that it was occasionally disorienting. It added pieces that fleshed out events that had happened in the series -- none of which was really that illuminating or valuable.   It debunked one long-held theory (Walt is alive) and gave us an almost schmaltzy "happy ending" that wasn't true to the series at all. 

It was fun to see Mike, Badger, Skinny Pete, Jane and a few others for the fleeting moments they were on stage, but the payoff just wasn't there. 

Not a bad movie, but so utterly and completely unnecessary that it felt forced/fake.  Like some bad fan fiction or something.  I get that Aaron Paul has no other career path and that there may some day be an entire Jesse Pinkman series/film/whatever to keep him employed.  I just think in this case it was better left alone.  It provided "closure" I didn't want or need.

Over the past month or so maybe more, I've rewatched all of Breaking Bad. All of Better Call Saul. So I rewatched this too. 

It's like Saul in a way because I get lost in the timeline. People are older, heavier....different.... when they should be younger.  I know they did the best they could with it.

It's not a terrible movie. It's not a bad movie. I still don't know that it was necessary.  The biggest failure in my opinion is that it just doesn't have the same amazing attention to detail that both Breaking Bad and Better Call Saul do.  It doesn't paint from the same stunning palette of colors, quirky camera angles, odd points of view that those two other series wallow in. It didn't drop hints and breadcrumbs in odd places that somehow show up in the most unexpected ways. It was far more straightforward. 

Regardless of whether Jesse has a life outside the Breaking Bad universe - my original review didn't change much.  Unlike my feelings toward Better Call Saul which changed significantly.
friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
If you want free cheese, look in a mousetrap.

bgreene

  • ***
  • 1535
Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
« Reply #3224 on: May 12, 2022, 02:52:40 PM »
No Batman review yet, Kaos?
All 3 hours of it were a waste of time.

Review, done!
friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
"Men are made stronger on the realization that the helping hand they need is at the end of their own arm."

                -Sidney Phillips

wesfau2

  • ***
  • 12373
  • I love it when you call me Big Poppa
Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
« Reply #3225 on: May 22, 2022, 12:37:23 PM »
Dr. Strange in the Multiverse of Madness.

You can definitely tell that Sam Raimi directed this one: more horror/gore than your typical Marvel outing.

Lots of fun visual effects and a heavy dose of the Scarlet Witch.

Alternate universe Avengers were interesting and they (don't think this is a spoiler) set the stage for all the X-Men and Fantastic Four crossovers you could ever want.

Fun times, but not a very strong entry in the pantheon (though they do a Raimi-signature ending for Strange that I wonder if they'll carry through to the future Marvel movies and they introduce Charlize "Rowr" Theron at the end.)
friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
You can keep a wooden stake in your trunk
On the off-chance that the fairy tales ain't bunk
And Imma keep a bottle of that funk
To get motel parking lot, balcony crunk.

Kaos

  • *
  • 27709
  • Jeez
    • No, YOU Move!
Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
« Reply #3226 on: May 29, 2022, 08:34:52 AM »
X

The search for the next great horror movie continues.  This isn't it. 

The buzz on this film was that it would take the whole horror genre in a new direction, etc. etc.  New! Fresh! Shocking!

It was, instead, a porn soaked, weiner riddled, occasionally funny, cringe loaded failure to connect. Written and directed by the same guy who wrote In A Valley of Violence - a weird, quirky, unusual semi-comedic western with John Travolta, Ethan Hawke, Tassia Farmiga and (hot as fuck) Karen Gillian. So he knows how to bring 'big stars' into a sprawling production. But like IAVOV, X doesn't quite land.

In the 70s a group of budding porn purveyors head to a rural farm in Texas to make a movie they hope will put them on the road to fortune and fame in the brand new x-rated home video market that's exploded in the crossover success of Debbie Does Dallas. 

The two-person film crew (a cameraman and his boom operator girlfriend - Jenny Ortega who is supposed to be somebody I guess?) are interested in making a work of erotic art. The sleazy executive producer (think Andy from WKRP mixed with a little Matthew McBongohey and a dash of Owen Wilson) and his barely-teen girlfriend (the lanky and loose is she ugly or is she potentially hot Mia Goth - who seems to have no eyebrows) and a couple of pals from a grungy strip club (Brittany Snow and a young, skinny Apollo Creed looking dude) just want to get to fuckin' so they can make money and get famous.

They rent a place way out in the country owned by a decrepit old geezer and his creepy wife. 

The production values are great. There are some occasionally funny scenes (just like in Valley), including one that helps drive the final nail of the final act.  The acting is good enough.  It has a fairly quality soundtrack with some songs you know. You can tell it's not supposed to be your typical straight-to-video B-level cookie cutter horror churn.

The problem is that it never rises above that bottom of the barrel dredge when it comes to the story.  Other than some repetitively gratuitous and overly long to the point of being boring porn scenes there's nothing new.  We've seen the creepy old farm family recluse trope done better in many other films -- Texas Chainsaw, House of 1000 Corpses, House of Wax, etc.  It's just stale. 

The movie was 80% cringey porn, 5% gore-horror, and 15% extraneous pointless rabbit holes that were barely explored.

The one thing the movie got right was the raw 70s feel. Goth, in particular, nailed it all - hair, makeup, dress and even the way she walked.  When she wasn't naked and writhing on top of the movie's buck, she walked around in a set of overall shorts with no top on underneath. The first girl I ever thought I loved used to wear those same overall shorts with baseball sleeves underneath all the time.  I will never ever forget her meeting me at the door when her parents were out of town wearing those overalls minus the sleeves. That image and the feeling that came with it is burned into my memory for all eternity. Sexiest thing I've ever seen in my life.  So thanks for bringing that back to the top of my mind at least. 

As for the rest of the film? Unless you just want to watch Snow and Goth fake-railed by faux Apollo for extended periods of time, you can skip this one. 
friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
If you want free cheese, look in a mousetrap.

Kaos

  • *
  • 27709
  • Jeez
    • No, YOU Move!
Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
« Reply #3227 on: May 29, 2022, 10:58:57 PM »
Emergency

Three college roommates -- two black, one hispanic -- find a white girl drunkenly passed out on the floor of their apartment as they're preparing for a pre-spring break night of parties.

Call 911?  Yeah, no. Three brown guys and a drunken goldilocks?  That's a recipe for incarceration according to the more street-wise of the three. Better figure something else out. 

How the three handle the situation and try to get the girl somewhere she'll be safe and they'll avoid questions leads to a comedy of misunderstandings. 

But it's much more than that. This movie says more about the current state of race relations and how people perceive each other -- and says it with more impact and resonance -- than six months of bullshit CNN/msnbc babbling; than any angry, bellowing activist; than any blowhard politician; than any nonsensical rambling by Biden or cackling by Kalama; than any march or riot; than any BLM protest; than any race-baiting film.  It has more authenticity than all of that combined. 

It did it without stooping to caricature. It did it without tropes. It did it without hyperbole. It did it without beating the viewer over the head with the issue. It did it without characters spouting phony narratives just to make sure you saw it.  Even The Batman was guilty of that.  This film wasn't.  Every situation it addressed was done so in the natural course of events, in a way that was subtle and 'real' enough to lay the topic out there in a way that made sense. It didn't succumb to hysteria, offering valid arguments for various positions and perspectives both in word and action.

Beyond that, it's also a layered examination of the nature of friendship. It speaks to the entirely human inclination toward self-preservation and how sometimes we put that aside when we're needed, even if that means our own peril. 

I may be the only person on the planet who does, but I liked this movie.  I liked it a lot more than I expected to.  A lot more.

The rest of the cast is solid, but the guy playing Baby Sean -- RJ Cyler -- is fucking outstanding.  Every single second his character was on screen was real. I've known guys exactly like that, with the same mannerisms, the same patterns, all of it.  He did a really great job in that role.  I've never heard of him before, but if that's an indication of his ability?  Hope I do. 

friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
If you want free cheese, look in a mousetrap.

Kaos

  • *
  • 27709
  • Jeez
    • No, YOU Move!
Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
« Reply #3228 on: June 12, 2022, 10:50:40 AM »
Monstrous

I find Christina Ricci oddly, weirdly, sexually attractive.  Not visually attractive, necessarily.  Sexually.  I don't know what it is, but it's just there.

So I watched this alleged horror movie. 

It allowed her to channel her quirkiness; the same cheerful insanity she exhibits in the funky-weird Showtime series Yellowjackets in which she's probably the best part. 

Other than that, this 'horror' movie has nothing to offer.  Muddled storyline? Disposable, uninteresting characters? Zero scares? Zero horror? A fraudulent ending that doesn't pay off? Confusion about motivation? All of that is piled to the metaphorical rafters. 

Unless you just want to take a look at Christina Ricci in some super cute 50's era strap shoes while she drives around in a beautiful vintage Chevy station wagon?  Passsssss hard on this one. 
friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
If you want free cheese, look in a mousetrap.

Kaos

  • *
  • 27709
  • Jeez
    • No, YOU Move!
Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
« Reply #3229 on: June 12, 2022, 12:02:36 PM »
Hustle

*sigh*

1. Adam Sandler is a terrible actor.  He plays the same mumble-mouth schlub character whether he's trying (and failing miserably) to be funny or trying (and failing miserably) to be dramatic.  Here?  Same character. The only difference between this movie and all his others is that he didn't cast some woman he could never attain in any known universe (Kate Beckinsale, Jennifer Aniston, Salma Hayek, Bridgette Wilson, Paz Vega, Jessica Biel, Brooklyn Decker, Teresa Palmer, etc.).  Nope, in this one he cast Queen Latifah.  No chemistry whatsoever. 

2. This is a movie about the NBA.  Other than Shaq, Barkley, Kenny Smith, and Dr. J (and Dirk Novitzki's name), I didn't recognize any of the multitude of alleged 'stars' of the league that were in this film. Never heard of any of them.  Kind of shocking how completely disconnected from the NBA I am at this point.  Ask me to name 10 current NBA players on penalty of death and you might as well go ahead and kill the shit out of me.  I couldn't do it. 

3. Sandler's character did scream the name 'Lebron' once and after I found out after the fact, that the Chinese bought-and-sold double-stuffed moron was an 'executive producer' of this film I guess that's why.  If I'd known from the start that overhyped waste of flesh was involved in this project I would never, ever have watched it.  Fuck him and every word that comes out of his ignorant piece of shit mouth.  Fuck him. 

4. Story-wise, it wasn't necessarily awful.  Sandler's character, an NBA scout, discovers a hidden gem on a pick-up court in Spain and schemes to get him to the league.  The problem is that the acting is so wooden, the film is completely flat, totally lifeless, absolutely devoid of realistic emotion.  The only one in the film that even has a modicum of believability and presence is the kid who played at Georgia a year or two ago -- Anthony Edwards.  The rest are just stiffs. It took what could have been a good, compelling, moving, and inspirational film, interjected hack Sandler and a bunch NBA punks who can't act, and completely fucked it up.  Put anybody else -- literally anybody, even Nicolas Cage - in the lead role and you might have something. 

If you run across this film and consider watching it?  I advise you to do the one thing LeDumbass James would never consider..... pass.

I'll be glad when Sandler finally decides to give up his lengthy con game on the American populace.  There's a rumor that he purposely makes shitty movies just to see (and laugh) at how stupid we collectively are.  After seeing this, maybe the rumor is true. 
« Last Edit: June 12, 2022, 12:13:36 PM by Kaos »
friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
If you want free cheese, look in a mousetrap.

Kaos

  • *
  • 27709
  • Jeez
    • No, YOU Move!
Re: Kaos' way behind movie reviews
« Reply #3230 on: June 16, 2022, 08:28:11 AM »
Studio 666

Always liked Foo Fighters.  Dave Grohl seemed like a regular, relatable guy, the least likely star to rise out of the ashes of Kurt Cobain's tortured Nirvana.  Foo Fighters always made straightforward rock, never seemed pretentious and had a better and more enjoyable catalog than Nirvana in my opinion. Not ground-breaking or genre shattering, but quality. 

Their music videos were some of the more creative. Really good, self-effacing stuff.  Kind of gave the vibe that they were normal guys, a garage band that you'd enjoy hanging out with, one that would be just as comfortable playing your back yard bbq as they would doing a stadium tour. 

Given that I like their music and that they made some pretty amusing self-aware music videos, I figured their foray into horror/gore/comedy - Studio 666 couldn't be all bad and had potential.  The idea of mixing Foo music with Monkees-esque horror antics seemed like a promising concept.

Good lord.  It was bad.  So, so, so fucking bad.  Dave is funny in ten-second bursts in music videos.  He absolutely cannot act in the least.  The rest of the band is worse. Tossing in the worst SNL alum in history (Will Forte) and the overrated and unfunny as fuck Whitney Cummings (whose entire career apparently consists of being a whore) and you've done the film no favors. It was already shitty, those two made it even worse. Add career-ending-level performances from Leslie Grossman (American Horror Story 1984) and Jeff Garlin (who knows?) and a profane/worthless cameo by Lionel Ritchie and you've got a noxious stew that isn't horror, isn't humor.  It just lays there and stinks.

Basic story, such as it is... Foo Fighters rent a mansion to get the right sound to record their 10th album.  Mansion is haunted by the demonic souls of a band that never finished its satanic song.  I think.  Idiocy, bad acting and ill-conceived scenarios ensue, including one where Grohl literally cannibalizes one of his bandmates.  I don't know who thought it would be a great gag to show Dave snacking down on the steaming, bbq'd bones of his guitarist, but that person just doesn't get it. 

It's not fun. It's just cringe-inducingly bad at every turn.  Really horrible. 




friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
If you want free cheese, look in a mousetrap.