Isis

Watched First Omen last night. It was quite good in a cinematic sense, quite interesting to look at, some good performances. As for the supernatural horror aspect of it... it was good, I thought. Not amazing, but...good. We were the only people in the cinema too which was pleasant. It's interesting to put it in the context of listening to some podcasts about The Omen and The Exorcist and the revelation (LOL) that the concept of the number of the beast etc, which although known as accepted symbols of the devil to us today were NOT such obvious signs (lol) back in the 1970's. So therefore watching First Omen set in 1971 and people being like OH YEAH THE MARK OF THE BEAST INNIT? like everyone knows about that is kinda odd.

Yeah. It's good, you should read it. Personally I was pulling for Ewan McGregor in that role when I heard the film was being made. Watched See You Yesterday which is about two super smart kids in Flatbush who have made a time machine (time machines?) but when they finally get it to work they end up embroiled in a racist cop shooting and multiple timeloops ensue. Is it like Primer for disaffected teens? Not really. It's fine I guess but not life-changing.

I'm a fan of his. I read The Beach the year it came out and I've consumed all his stuff since. I thought Ex Machina was great. I also really enjoyed Devs. Men, I thought had a great concept but it felt like it was lacking something and I feel the same way about Civil War. Maybe directing isn't his strongest suit? While the trailers for other films were playing (before watching Civil War) my seat was vibrating but I noted that during the film the sound wasn't as loud. NB this was not an IMAX showing. I might watch it again if it was on TV when I was channel surfing.

We are five eps in (we are only watching on weekends as we don't have time for watching an hour long episode that needs concentration during the week!). I made the same comment about staircases - it reminded me that as a 16 year old I kept a dream diary and my recurring theme was stairs (apparently they stand for challenges). The guy playing Dickie is just not it. Personally I think Andrew Scott works fine. He's different but still definitely works for me as an older, been around the block a bit kind of creep. It's way too long overall and I am still on the fence about Dakota Fanning (in this, not in general - I think she is good generally). AH. STING??? I felt like there was something so familiar about Freddy's face?! I enjoyed that performance - very knowing and cocky. Agree, the end did not ring true with the rest of the film. I dunno, man. Alex Garland as a director might just be an 'eh' for me. I was at a swimming pool in central London yesterday morning and some absolute idiot in the changing room was describing the events at the end of the film in a VERY LOUD VOICE (fucking triathletes). Are you unable to speak about a film you've seen without telling the person what happens??? It's only been out for five days ffs. Not in the UK. I started watching it on Prime a few years back and when I had seen two eps they pulled it.

I found it a bit, obvious?

Aww. I wanted to watch this (have never seen it) but it got vetoed. I'll have to watch on my own. But Ripley omg episode 5

I agree this reasoning makes sense, when you stand back and view all the component parts. I like it better now that I've resolved that section into the whole story arc. More Ripley this evening and then Civil War on Sunday night.

Monkey Man: unremittingly violent and bleak. I'm sure it will be popular based on that alone. I've read a critique of the politics which said that the film is niave, basically. I've read versions of the Ramayana so those bits are familiar, plus the film tells you the outline of that stuff anyway. I will read some more reviews I think.

Watched the first two episodes of Ripley last night. Nearly every shot looks like a work of art. It's beautiful. The staircases! So many meaningful staircase scenes. But no wonder it has eight episodes - it's really taking its time! The guy playing Dickie is a little bit muted. But then Jude Law really shone in that role in the film, probably not easy to match up to that. I love what Andrew Scott is doing as Tom though. Both Scott and Damon are able to do 'creepy, awkward and sociopathic' so well. (I think both are great in the role btw, just slightly different versions of the same thing) Scott does this weird T-Rex arm thing with his hands when he is sitting down in the villa: I love it. And he is so good at doing that ambivalent borderline expression with this face where you aren't sure if he is happy/excited about something or about to lose his temper and smash the shit out of everything. I am looking forward to more unhinged Tom Ripley. But tonight belongs to Monkey Man.

Not yet, but I'm gonna. That's why we did a rewatch of the film recently (the film is brilliant, might be the best thing Matt Damon has done actually).

I found that scene to be a bit too on the nose especially as it comes right before his diagnosis. CHECK OUT THIS SYMBOLISM, GUYS.

The first time I watched The Exorcist I was in my late 20's and I found the film to be too slow and dull - so much so that I actually got bored and turned it off about 10 minutes from the end. I think I was expecting something completely different and at the time that I watched it I was just unable to appreciate it for what it was.

Spot on. We watched this documentary called Murder in a Teacup on Prime at the weekend. It's about a man who is obsessed with poisoning people. All those classic questions about whether being a psychopath makes you a serial killer (or vice versa), with a whiff of terrorism thrown in. Obviously I don't want to spoil anything - the title kind of gives it away - but I would recommend it if you enjoy the debate about the Mindhunter/pathology/understanding serial killers type of thing. One questionable choice is that they have bits from the diary of the murderer read out in this completely OTT salacious 'Tom Riddle going to the forbidded part of the library' kind of voice. But even with that it's absolutely fascinating stuff.

Went to see this last night: now that I have a cheap monthly pass to my local cinema I am able to see stuff that I would not bother to pay full price for AND I get to sit in a fancy seat. Seeing more films on a big screen is great actually. ANYWAY That guy from Stranger Things was the weak link here. In a big cast he stood out like a sore thumb as someone who was distracting to watch from a performance perspective. Everyone else did a good job with what they were given. Phoebe clearly channeling Beetlejuice Winona, which is fine, if derivative. Overall, low hanging fruit (with the OG Ghostbusters) slathered in cheese. The family stuff was (in the words of Tim Messenger) too cutesy pie. was it just me, it did it feel kind of rushed in the end? It was ok as a nostalgia trip, but if it didn't have all those callbacks, would it be any good?

The more people get excited about the light evenings and light mornings the more antisocial I get. It starts getting light in the middle of the night now. Brilliant. How the heck are you meant to be asleep when it's light outside at 4am. I hate it. Even through blackout blinds and sleep masks I KNOW IT'S LIGHT.