Veltigar

I had the good fortune to see The Iron Claw yesterday, another wonderful film by A24, by far the most interesting studio working right now. I remember seeing the trailer for this a few months back and it seemed to me that there was some buzz for it back then, but that seems to have fizzled out somewhat as it didn't garner any nominations for the Academy Awards which is absolutely criminal, especially in a year that saw such a dearth in good male performances in both the lead and supporting category.

The Iron Claw on the other hand is full of great performances by male actors. Zac Efron has never been better, Holt McCallany as the despotic wrestling patriarch was a revelation and all the other performers from Jeremy Allen White (who goes from The Bear to playing a character with bearish strength in this film) to Harris Dickinson to Stanley Simmons are outstanding as well. Each of the male supporting performances in this film was miles beyond Downey Jr.'s pity oscar performance in Oppenheimer. Zac Efron's Kevin Von Erich was also better than Cillian Murphy's Oppenheimer to me, so it's a real shame he did not even get a nomination for his leading role here. I guess wrestling is just to low-brow for the Hollywood brass.

The story was also incredibly touching, with a lot of big emotions artfully channeled into these characters who were not equipped to healthily handle their emotions. I was flabbergasted to learn that director and writer Sean Durkin has actually downplayed the tragedy in the lives of the Von Erich dynasty, as their real life story is even more sad, but he did so to great effect.

The narrative drive in this film never lets up and I was genuinely touched by their story. This despite not knowing anything about wrestling beyond what I learned from Mickey Rourke's 2008 film The Wrestler and South Park's parody of a few years ago. That being said, I saw it with a mate who has some knowledge of the sport and he loved it as well, so I guess it definitely treats the phenomenon of wrestling with respect.

Out of all the films that had their original release in 2023, I think only Poor Things was better and it's actually really close for me in terms of quality. I'd definitely recommend seeing this film, it's a real treat and the type of film I want to see more off!

18 hours ago, Corvinus85 said:

Spending 10 minutes on a slo-mo scene about wheat harvesting instead of some meaningful character development. Snyder should not be given full reigns on a movie again. 

I have read about this scene online and really hope someone will upload it to YouTube soon, because I'm very curious to see the result 

2 hours ago, dbunting said:

I don't think I have ever heard The Empire Strikes Back described as light hearted.

Quoted for truth. For that matter, in the original Star Wars the Empire

Very lighthearted stuff indeed.

On 4/19/2024 at 11:20 PM, Arakasi said:

I kinda want to read it again. Problem I think with any adaptation of the history is that I know the history well and how the book makes Tokugawa very different is always hard to get around. Plus I was always a Takeda and Hideyoshi fanboy (read Taiko it’s great) so I was never predisposed to like Tokugawa much.

Like it’s hard to watch this and hear him swearing over and over to protect the Taikos son when in real history he’s the one responsible for killing him.

Book spoilers in my response, so don't click on this if you want to remain unspoiled

I got a chance to see the Argentinian film Los Delincuentes (The Delinquents) in theatre. It's an incredibly well-received film by critics so I was curious to see what made it so special. Unfortunately, the most joy I derived from watching the film came from reading some negative IMDB user reviews afterwards (though it still has a 6.8/10 user score, which I find odd) 

This film basically reads as a contemporary definition of self-indulgent film-making. While I thought some of the hysterically negative user reviews were a tad overwrought, I do sympathize with the people who felt cheated out of 3 hours of their life. There is some nice nature footage in the film and I did find the actors' portrayal of their characters convincing, but the story went out of its way to be simultaneously nonsensical and unengaging.  

I usually have pretty good experiences with smaller indy films, but occasionally a film comes along that reminds you that the negative stereotypes about arthouse films are at least sometimes true. The Delinquents is so obsessed with deconstructing the genre that it forgets to be clever about it. In that sense, it offers up the worst of both worlds. I'd recommend skipping this if you are doubting to see it.

20 hours ago, Heartofice said:

I'm also not sure you should allowed to put in a show where only a quarter of the episodes were ever good (looking at you True Detective). Also I'd include comedies, but that might be a bit subjective. 
 

In general I agree that a show where you have to bracket off the majority of seasons could hardly be seen as the best ever (although that leaves the vexing matter of early Simpsons to resolve), but for True Detective I think it's certainly allowed because of the fact that it's an anthology. I think it's far easier to say that S1 of True Detective or The Terror is amongst the best TV ever, as each season in the series is a self-contained installment  

On 4/19/2024 at 8:10 PM, Corvinus85 said:

Why are those events nonsensical?

I see I phrased that poorly, I actually meant it broader that the entire situation was nonsensical, though I'll admit that knowing how the season is going to end (having read the book and while details while differ, everything is set up to largely end in the same place) might be giving me a leg up on spotting just why it's idiotic.

I have explained below what my reading of it was. I'll also embed another spoiler box in the text below, where I hint at a mild book spoiler

Don't have much time for content lately, but I did manage to get caught up with Shōgun this week. I missed out on three episodes, but being able to do a mini-binge is not doing this series any favours. There are some outstanding scenes, where the costumes and sets really blew me away

The attention to detail throughout remains by far my favourite aspect of the show. They really do seem to offer a window in the Japan of that era.

On the whole however, there is a lot that doesn't make any sense. There are quite a few adaptation choices that are understandable (e.g. reducing the number of characters involved in certain scenes for instance, as that's just necessary to make it affordable) and a few that I think are real contributions (foregrounding Lady Ochiba a bit more, more focus on the Japanese characters although the latter is also necessary since so much of Blackthorne's reflections are thoughts and ill-suited for the screen), but in the whole I think the adaptation also makes a lot of nonsensical choices to get characters from here to there and crafts versions of the characters that are psychologically less compelling than their version in the  books.

On 4/15/2024 at 8:15 AM, TheLastWolf said:

The Last Farmer, I mean this is up there for me with Tarkovsky, don't know how I missed it earlier. An article (supposed to be a review, but... read and you'll know) that embodies the very essence of this film to help ya along the way.

I have actually seen some of the films on your list already. When I have more time to explore, I'll certainly browse through it for some inspiration for future forays into Indian cinema  

I'll be the lone dissenter then. Didn't like BSC when I read it and The Heroes is still my favourite Abercrombie!

On 4/11/2024 at 10:52 AM, TheLastWolf said:

Top off my head I can say La La Land. 500 Days of Summer had a scene where Tom breaks into a jig with pedestrians in sync. But yeah, few and far between.

I have seen 500 days of summer and I didn't remember that at all XD Very good of you to remind me there.  La La Land I'd disqualify because it's an explicit musical I guess? I'm more envisioning something like Top Gun but then all of a sudden the Sweet Balls of Fire sequence gets supersized to give us something like this

Although come to think of it, a lot of these dance sequences really don't give a f**k about fitting in with the story. They just snap you out and go to completely different locales. I love the gall and brazenness of it all you know? 

On 4/11/2024 at 10:52 AM, TheLastWolf said:

Why I'm frustrated is that there are really great films from India, many as good or even better than, say, The Lunchbox. It's always the RRR type excesses getting international attention that irks me.

I'm a sucker for those type of romance films though, so you'll have a hard time convincing me to give up on The Lunchbox, but please do try, what gems of (any of the various types of) Indian cinema do we need to check out?

And agree on the skepticism about RRR. I was rather disappointed by it. Some amazing dance sequences, but in hindsight I would have rather watched those on YouTube, as the rest of the film was an incredible slog.

10 hours ago, dbunting said:

I can't stand those sequences generally.  The Marvels comes to mind. Also the dancing waterfall scene in Black Panther.  Hate both of those sequences.

I do have a vague recollection of a western movie where all of a sudden the cowboys break out in a dance, then go right back to normal, which I found amusing but that's as close as I get.

I haven't seen The Marvels and probably never will because of how poorly it was received, but I'm guessing that even a dance sequence couldn't save that film from itself if the reviews are to be believed.

That sequence in Black Panther didn't ring a bell either. I looked it up and it's very short, more like some fluff to set up the real scene rather than an actual B/Tollywood style stand-alone dance sequence no?

3 minutes ago, TheLastWolf said:

Woe to them all responsible for the export of this irreparable stereotype. 

I do tend to genuinely enjoy the dance sequences though. When I went to see Fighter back in January, they were really the highlight more than the jet action. I'd actually like a western production to take a risk and include something similar. A bit like the mirror image of The Lunchbox, which excised the dance sequences to bring a western-style Indian film that was really great 

I went to see Monkey Man, which was a pretty good experience. The people calling it Indian John Wick are on to something, although the action never quite rises to the Wick level (nor are their any cool dance routines, to really qualify for the title of Indian John Wick).

Plotwise, you know what you are going to get pretty much from the get-go, so there is barely any tension in the film. In addition, I also thought some of Dev Patel's acting when his character was recollecting past trauma was a bit overwrought. 

That being said, it was all pretty good and there were flashes in this film that made me really excited about Dev Patel's future projects. Some were story-related beats, where Patel makes good use of his setting and knowledge of Indian culture, but there were also some nice 'directorial' flourishes that I quite liked.

A final thing I liked was the fact that Dev Patel really did not hide his stance on the state of contemporary Indian politics. It probably doesn't move the needle one bit, but still nice for a celebrity to take a stance.

On 4/8/2024 at 12:08 PM, Isis said:

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.

  Hide contents

One question: are we meant to think that he was always incredible at hand-to-hand semi MMA fighting in a enclosed spaces? But we never saw that in the ring as he was always meant to throw the fights? I guess his one-kick KO was shorthand for that? It's just that the order of the scenes kinda makes it look like punching a bag of rice gave him additional prowess. But no, I guess he had it all physically all along but was just playing it down. 

Also, I got worried near the end that it was going to have some sort of saccharine ending. Phew.

 

To answer your question with my own interpretation of events:

This was actually another flourish I really liked, since it's a lot more credible than the usual post-training montage step up in skills.

On 4/9/2024 at 10:47 PM, Ran said:

Also re-watched Shot Caller, starring Nikolaj Koster-Waldau in what may be his single best performance. A prison thriller, he plays a stockbroker who ends up on a DUI manslaughter charge, and ends up being forced by circumstances to join up with a skinhead gang to protect himself. What goes on from there is often ugly and brutal, and as "Money" (as he comes to be known) we end up moving back and forth in time as we learn the costs of his survival. The script is actually quite well done. Jon Berenthal also features, and he's always worth watching.

I remember that film. Pretty good work-out songs in it. The story is absolutely preposterous, but I do agree that the cast gives such good performances that you can go along with it. Sad that it isn't more widely appreciated.

I went to see Godzilla x Kong: The New Empire two days ago. Between Godzilla Minus One and this, I'd say that Godzilla is on a bit of a role. Not that this is anywhere near as good as Godzilla Minus One, but it is the best thing the American monsterverse has produced since Kong: Skull Island and I did have a good time watching it.

We switched up the Scorsese/Shōgun pairings this week. Instead we watched the latest episode of Shōgun alongside 1988s Time of the Gypsies (original title Dom za vesanje), a Serbian film about the Romani people starring mostly non-professional actors from a Romani background. It's most famous due to its haunting score, including the achingly beautiful song Ederlezi.

I'll begin with what is most definitely my most unpopular opinion of the moment and repeat my weekly observation that Shōgun looks stunning, but that some essential quality of the original is lost in this adaptation. Strangely enough this week's episode had an original element at the very beginning of the episode that I really liked (and added to the source material), before immediately squandering all the earned goodwill which some baffling decisions particularly the reduction of the agency of a significant character.
Book spoilers below:

Time of the Gypsies then, is a difficult movie to accurately discuss. We watched it mostly because of the music and I was expecting it to feel quite... boring or slow by modern standards (being 36 years old and Yugoslavian), however I thought it had remained a superbly interesting film that captivated my attention throughout.

The first act is by far the strongest part of the film, as the viewer is plunged head-first into a bewildering representation of Romani culture, combined with a very strong helping of magical-realist influences by the way of Gabriel Garcia Marquez and consorts. As stated before, the cast is non-professional and are all from Romani backgrounds, but the film is also entirely shot in Romany and the first act takes place entirely within the Romani village from where our protagonist hails.

In other words, you have very few anchoring points, since the film uses a language you have never heard, zooms in on a culture you usually do not get to see, and features levels of abject poverty that I don't think contemporary Western viewers are accustomed to seeing (and certainly not in a "European" context).

I would say that the non-professional actors are not so much acting as giving you a slice of their life in that first act, but given the long history of persecution of Romani people and the difficulty of finding information about the reception and making of this film (e.g., the IMDB trivia is extremely limited) by the community I have zero idea about how accurate this film is (when filtering out the magical elements of course).

The absurdity of it all often made us laugh and there is a sneaking suspicion that Sacha Baron Cohen drew most of his inspiration for the early scenes of Borat in his village in Kazakhstan from this film, but Time of the Gypsies plays it straight and manages to find a strange beauty into this time and place that is easy to overlook. Strongly helped by some absolutely stunning music, which is really the highlight of the movie.

The story then takes a darker turn in act two and three, as the action moves mostly to Italy. I don't want to give anything away, but there are some truly abominable social practices on display and while it remained interesting, I did feel like the film bit of more than it could chew, trying to stuff too much story in too little film. I'll say that I was a bit disappointed in the ending, although I believe others will probably love it

On 3/30/2024 at 3:16 PM, Zorral said:

Enormous amount here in the US, and not just 'online' either.  Constant interviews and articles with and about everyone involved.  As commented above, NF did a real, professional, PR effort on this show, the sort one would see coming out in ye older days from Hollywood for an expected box smash major movie.

It also has an impressive viewing record for NF too -- 80.71 millions streaming hours.

https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/international/us/3-body-problem-on-netflix-hit-or-flop-heres-what-numbers-reveal/articleshow/108827290.cms?

Aha okay, it is very popular then. I had seen there was a thread like @DMC had kindly shared, but I know no one in real-life who has given it a shot. Thanks for the information.

2 hours ago, HexMachina said:

Saw that BBC has The Wiz on iPlayer so I watched that over Easter. I've been aware of The Wiz for some time but never  had the opportunity to see it. I thought it was a really enjoyable adaptation of The Wizard of Oz, the original film of which I dislike (much, if I recall correctly, to @Veltigar's displeasure but hey, I can live with that). 

I really enjoyed the music and thought some of the performances were stand outs - Jackson as the Scarecrow being the big one. 

Having looked up the Wikipedia I see it was a critical and commercial flop but thats the way my taste tends to go  I would love the see it on stage though

It's a bonafide classic, but you know, de gustibus et coloribus non est disputandem.

9 hours ago, Deadlines? What Deadlines? said:

I liked it. I hope it continues. 

D&D's involvement makes me doubtful. Plus, I have the book on my shelf so kind of weighing which to tackle first, book or series  

Is anyone watching 3 Body Problem? I find it so strange that I don't see more buzz for it online.

We're 400 posts into the old thread, so it time for a new thread!

Started Mr. & Mrs. Smith. One episode in and while I see the potential, right now I'd say this is something I'll need to be in the right mood for to watch.  Curious to see whether that will change in time.

Needed some diversion yesterday and made the faithful decision to go watch Anyone but you. I was not expecting much, so I was genuinely surprised by how good this film was. I had a truly awesome time watching it and it just made me wish Hollywood was still making this type of midbudget romcom at the same pace as they did in the 1990s. 

There was so much I liked, that it's kind of hard to determine where to begin. First, I thought the film was really cleverly plotted. It's loosely based on Much Ado About Nothing, which I did not know going in, and like other great modern updates of Shakespeare (Clueless, 10 Things I Hate About You, She's All That) it just works.

It's a testament to the Bard's skills that his story can still feel this fresh after all those centuries. That being said, of course the screenwriters themselves deserve a lot of credit. They really did an excellent job crafting great jokes, weaving in references to Shakespeare and their plotting was also superb. Really effective set-ups and very satisfying pay-offs, sometimes even when I was not expecting it, which is rare. 

Second, the cast was terrific. They were all having so much fun. I was particularly taken in by their acting-within-acting fake performances, which just made me crackle with joy. The chemistry between the two leads was also off the chart. You really need that in a good romcom, it is not enough for both of them to look great individually, you really need to be rooting for the couple-to-be for a film like this to work. 

Of course, that's not to say that our two leads didn't also look great individually. I said it before, when Glen Powell first caught my attention in Top Gun: Maverick, but that guy has movie star written all over him. Sydney Sweeney on the other hand is quite a discovery. I have a friend who's a great admirer of hers, but I never saw her act in anything before. Based on this film alone I frankly get the appeal. She's not only stunning, but her acting was legitimately great here. Definitely someone to watch out for in the future!

Third, I loved the setting. I have a great fondness for Sydney, Australia and Australians, so it was really lovely to see a film set there. The writers lovingly took the piss out of the place (the obsession with their coffee, the exaggerated lingo), but it definitely came from a place of real warmth, so full marks on that front.

Fourth, I thought all the non-Shakespearean references were great as well. Lots of call-backs to the 1990s, early 2000s and all deftly employed to poke fun at the genre:

There were also two minor points of criticism to be levelled at the film, although I do think these two points are a bit endemic to the genre and this film handled them better than most:

All in all, this film was definitely something I would recommend, and will surely watch again in the future.

11 hours ago, Maithanet said:

I am acknowledging the possibility that the new timeline theory is correct.  This is seperate from my comment earlier in the post that it seems unlikely that DV really wanted to adapt the first 80% of Dune, and then tell a radically divergent story for the rest of Part 2 and presumably all of Part 3. 

It would be very refreshing though. Perhaps he'd lose points on the adaptation front, but if it makes the final product better, I'd be all for it.

Did another Shōgun/Scorsese tie up by watching the latest episode of Shōgun and then following it up with Scorsese's Mean Streets.

As to Shōgun, I can basically repeat my critique from all the previous episodes. It looks visually sumptuous and I'm quite fond of the actors, but story wise there is something missing for me. I finished up the novel last week, so this is the first episode where I know to what ending it is building, and I now think that I know what is missing.

The novel is very good at explaining the cultural concepts that animate this faux-Japan. Leaving historical accuracy aside for a moment, it's very effective in giving us as readers a glimpse into a completely alien culture. I feel that is extremely hard to adapt and it shows on screen. I'm still enjoying the series however and I think it does a great job given the difficulties of the material.

As to Mean Streets, this is definitely a film that is of its time. I have read quite a few reviews pointing out a lot of the very novel things Scorsese was doing (e.g. the use of rock music, the hand-held camera, etc.) and acknowledge the fact that it was very influential. 

That being said, as a dramatic piece of work it has aged terribly. I was bored throughout and if it wasn't relatively short I don't think I would have finished it. I think about 10 minutes in we checked to see whether it wasn't a three-hour extravaganza like most of Scorsese latter movies and I don't think my friend and I would have continued very long if that had been the case.

In other words, if you're a completionist, a big Scorsese fan or a student of film history, this might be worth checking out. For anyone just looking for a good time, I'd recommend going elsewhere.

13 hours ago, polishgenius said:

 

It's not actually rotoscoping, as far as I can tell. They weren't tracing over the frames, they were just painting oil paintings replicating each frame. 

Hmmm, they do refer to it as rotoscoping in most articles I have read about the film. You do seem to be right that they didn't trace over the frames on looking into it though. Quite confusing.

12 hours ago, 3CityApache said:

Fun fact: Peasants was one of the books I hated the most when forced to read it at school, but now I just think I was too young for it. Reymont also wrote a book callled A Promised Land (Ziemia obiecana), about industrial Łódź, which was brilliantly adapted for screen by Andrzej Wajda. Also recommend if it’s possible to find it. 

I'm definitely tempted to check out the source novel, though the length is kind of daunting. Perhaps even more surprising is that the film makes me want to check out some of the peasant literature from my own country. I read a few of the books by our own naturalistic authors when I was in high school and also did not like them too much back them. Perhaps I should give them another shot.

12 hours ago, 3CityApache said:

Peasants movie is very good indeed. Though Mirosław Baka, playing old Boryna is imo the best actor in it by far. I haven’t even seen this girl in anything before. 

He was good in it that's true. The fact that the lead actress has only played bit parts in other things is kind of baffling to me, given her age. I'm assuming she is pursuing some other career and the acting is more of a side hustle.

I think the weakest link for me was 

I attended a screening of The Peasants (Original Polish title: Chlopi) and was very happy that I got the chance, for it is not getting as wide a release as it deserves.

The film is a visual master piece, with a very unique style of "rotoscope" animation (i.e. an animation technique which uses live-action motion picture footage as its basis and then traces its animations over it, though whether that definition actually implies here is tricky see convo below) that is inspired by the realist style of painting and the Young Poland movement in particular.

This is a very long-winded way of saying that the film is basically a collection of moving oil-painting and the effect is beautiful, as you can see in the trailer below. Particularly stunning are the two dance sequences (at a wedding and one a bit later). Over a 100 painters worked on this, which in and of itself is already fascinating.

The visuals are not the only attraction however. The film is based on a novel by Nobel Prize winner Władysław Reymont that intrigues me, as the story begins and progresses in a kind of straightforward way for these type of naturalistic peasant stories before veering into a somewhat unexpected ending (which the trailer does not hint at).

I also loved all the folklore depicted on screen. It feels like it really could have been a slice of life of Poland during the early 1900s and the whole atmosphere is improved even further by a wonderful score. It really gives the whole film a kind of eeriness which fits perfectly with the painted visuals.

Finally, I thought lead actress Kamila Urzedowska did a great job inhabiting her character. Not all performances are equally strong, but she brings across the kindness of the character very well. The painted style also further magnifies her considerable beauty. If her English is any decent, I'd not be surprised to see her in bigger films from now on.

Anyways, strongly recommend seeing the film.

The promised trailer:

I'll also share this very interesting article about the production process of this film:

Quote

The Making of 'The Peasants', a Painted Film - Jackson's Art Blog (jacksonsart.com)

^something, something by far the best film of last year which sadly didn't get more awards.

3 hours ago, Ser Rodrigo Belmonte II said:

He's been a fan of the series since he was 14 and has basically wanted to make Dune movies since then.This new reboot itself probably wouldnt have happened without him.

 

Dune 3 still hasnt been officially greenlit though- allegedly this movie needs to make around 700-800 Mn USD to justify it. 

 

 

Stop trying to poop @Deadlines? What Deadlines? and get to work giving us a box office prediction. Will Dune 2 get the 700-800 Million USD @Ser Rodrigo Belmonte II needs to make a third one?

I just read that Dune 3 is probably going to be a thing. I'm a bit surprised, since apparently Villeneuve wants to write and direct it himself. He must really be into the source material to spent his creative prime years solely on this property  

3 hours ago, Mr. Chatywin et al. said:

From her perspective she got blacklisted for her AIDs activism. 

I really liked her in The Quick and the Dead. She's in some bad movies, but they're not bad because of her. However there is this:

Fucking hilarious death scene. 

The Guardian apparently published this article last week:

Sharon Stone names producer who ‘told her to sleep with co-star’ | Sharon Stone | The Guardian

She details why she think she didn't get any bigger roles after this. It's quite sad really.

3 hours ago, Mr. Chatywin et al. said:

From her perspective she got blacklisted for her AIDs activism. 

I really liked her in The Quick and the Dead. She's in some bad movies, but they're not bad because of her. However there is this:

Ah yes, I love that film. The beginning of Leo's luck with the ladies, I'm sure of it.

50 minutes ago, polishgenius said:

Haven't seen the Wild Robot trailer I see.

I had not. It's a beautiful trailer. Made me speechless with emotion for a bit. Thanks for the recommendation.

I spent quite a bit of time staring at the screen this week. I saw Dune 2 in theatre, the latest episode of Shogun and finally Casino.

Dune 2 was marvellous, well worth the (IMAX) price of entry. Visually it's stunning, even better than the first film. However, the biggest step up was in terms of engagement. The first one could be a bit ponderous at times, but I thought this second film zipped along tremendously well.

The latest episode of Shogun gets pretty much the same review as all of them so far. Visually, it's breath-taking. I like the actors, but the story is not always gripping me. I have picked up the book and have now surpassed the point we arrived in the show, so curious how that will influence my appreciation of the rest of the show.

We then switched to Casino, which I have to admit was a disappointment. The first hour was all voice over and I'm just not a fan of it as a storytelling device. Scorsese is pretty much the only director who can sometimes get away with it, but in Casino it was just too much.

It also felt a bit like an inferior knock-off to Goodfellas in some parts, particularly with Joe Pesci's character. Like, his performance was legitimately great, but it felt very similar to the ground he already thread on in Goodfellas. I hear that his performances as mobsters are often regarded as the most realistic ever by former gang members, so I can't blame him too much for it, but still I can't pretend to say that I was gripped by the film.

On the upside, I did feel like Sharon Stone gave a great performance in the film. Very out there and it actually makes me wonder how she wasn't able to build on this in her later career, because of the top of my mind, I can't think of a meatier role for women in a Scorsese film than this.

So yeah, I'm glad to have finally seen it, but I don't believe I'll rewatch it any time soon.

Saw the latest episode. I'm still enjoying the visual representation of the time period, but I do think the story gets progressively less engaging for me. This was also the first episode I saw after having read the associated parts in the source novel (I believe I'll be able to finish the novel by the time I'll see episode 5) and I wasn't a big fan of some of the adaptation choices made.

So still, pretty good, but a bit on the decline. I hope it recovers.

What a stunning film. Visually, I would be very surprised if anything else came close this year. However, Furiosa is still coming, so it might be a very interesting year for the technical awards. 

This film was meant to be seen in IMAX. I also thought that it was a lot more gripping than the first film. I would definitely be curious to know more about this universe.

13 hours ago, Mr. Chatywin et al. said:

I've listened to a handful of her songs and they're all bland imo. That's why I used Cold Play as a comp.

Ah well, de gustibus et coloribus non est disputandum! I'll leave it here before your user name inspires you to Castamere me