Part two is worse

I watched Singin in the Rain for the first time, and I had a great time! It's surprisingly funny and full of life; I can see why it is considered a classic. Some scenes legit blew me away a little.

real

the korean one?

i prefer the first one tbh

ur so h**** lol

Yeah

Really well shot and I like how much you actually got to see the monster but the characters and their motivations felt kind of undercooked to me and some parts of the movie felt rushed or didn't make sense

But I f***ed with it overall and it gets a lot of love so maybe I just need to run it back or sit with it more

have you seen parasite

Definitely

When I put my Korean roommate at the time on and he loved it

I was shook cause he hadn't heard anything about it until I told him

I kind of get it because we were at school and he was busy asf but Parasite was so hyped and everywhere and he definitely f***ed with Korean movies, I remember we watched some Korean mountain climbing movie that he put me on right before that

Watched it with him and I think he loved it so much he ran it back with a bunch of people we knew not too long after

Can't believe that was almost four years ago

yeah, didn't like this part... for so many reasons (like the defense of pedophiles??)

the actress change was jarring, especially because Shia kept playing his character

the studio did good by dividing both parts because the first 2 hours are better and work really well as a movie

This is the dumbest rating system i have ever seen

3.5/5

Slumber Party Massacre II

objectively s***, but I still had fun
6/10

Crazy they franchised this for mid slashers when the original idea sounds interesting:

Author and feminist activist Rita Mae Brown wrote the original screenplay, titled Sleepless Nights, as a parody of the slasher film. Producers repurposed Brown's script to make a "serious" slasher film against her wishes.

We have a lot of movies like that now, but one made during the 80s could've been special.

Told ya That abortion scene🤮

Deadstream (2022) ⭐ ⭐ ⭐

Evil Dead for zoomers. The Twitch TOS gimmick makes sense for a horror comedy tone and the film gets more gross and violent than you expect. Fun contrast.

La La Land (2016) ⭐ ⭐ ⭐

Chazelle subjects you to a bland romance, the smooth jazz, but he bookends it with some free jazz. He's a cynic and hiding it in something really commercial, but I wish he'd just say what he means.

The Young and the Damned (1950) ⭐ ⭐ ⭐⭐

Bunuel uses the bygone form of the PSA movie to do a systemic critique and make poetry rather than chide the public or push a specific action item. Really bleak and at times beautiful.

8/10 for the plot because they left out the best lines of the book.
10/10 for music and visuals.

Gahhdamn three stars for La La Land
One of my all time faves but I respect it

damn, interesting

havent even seen the first one, imma look into this

Forrest Gump - 3/5

I thought it was well made from a purely entertainment based perspective but I had issues with it’s politics. This review (not by me) pretty much summarizes why:

‘Forrest Gump,’ 25 Years Later: A Bad Movie That Gets Worse With Age

"Gump" backlash is nothing new. But these days, it's even more problematic than it used to be.

indiewire.com/2019/07/forrest-gump-bad-movie-25-anniversary-1202154214

“Forrest Gump” is an easy target: A sweet movie featuring one of the most beloved movie stars of all time. It’s a slick and inviting celebration of the human spirit through the lens of a wide-eyed innocent, and utilizes technology to brilliant ends. However, “Forrest Gump” deserves scrutiny, not because its cheesy protagonist has become a pop culture punchline — after all, Forrest’s box-of-chocolates metaphor works just fine — but viewed 25 years after its release lead to box office success and six Oscars, it remains a bad movie that gets worse with age. Its lazy storytelling has very scary implications.

There’s a reason the movie became a beacon to an antiquated Republican Party when it came out in the run-up to the 1994 midterm elections: “Forrest Gump” preaches conservatism in its bones, whether its creators intended it that way or not. Through the lens of Tom Hanks’ lovable naif, who somehow stumbles through every monumental moment in American history and emerges unscathed, “Forrest Gump” reads as a repudiation to any nuanced assessment of the country. It celebrates family values and obedience to the system over anyone who clashes with it. Every whiff of rebellion is suspect.

This no-nothing white man becomes a war hero and a wealthy man simply by chugging along, participating in a country that dictates his every move. He never comprehends racism or the complexities of Vietnam; the movie portrays political activism and hippy culture as a giant cartoon beyond Forrest’s understanding, while presenting his apolitical stance as the height of all virtue.

Viewed in retrospect, “Forrest Gump” whitewashes and dumbs down American history at every turn. But that’s an old critique that shouldn’t stop the presses.

These days, “Forrest Gump” really blows because it operates within the constraints of a dangerous fantasy in which these hard questions don’t matter. It’s fake news told on an epic scale. Here’s a character born in the Deep South, the grandson of a Ku Klux Klansman, raised surrounded by segregation and bigotry. Though Forrest’s disinterest in these crude values suggests an innate colorblindness, he’s less conscious progressive than disinterested everyman. “Forrest Gump” idolizes that mindset, and what’s worse, director Robert Zemeckis exploits these major aspects of American history as empty signifiers for an exuberant technological experiment.

The special effects haven’t aged all that well, but they were pretty hokey in the first place. The CGI exists to gives this decade-spanning story its true raison d’etre: We get to see young Forrest teach Elvis to dance, shake hands with JFK and Nixon, address an anti-Vietnam protest (alongside Abbie Hoffman), and work the late-night circuit alongside John Lennon. In theory, Forrest’s ability to wander through the “real” world as a fictional character turns him into an avatar for America’s bumpy ride through the second half of the 20th century.

But consider what that means: Though Forrest makes serious strides by asking no hard questions or pushing back on whatever opportunities come his way, childhood sweetheart Jenny (Robin Wright) suffers for her sins. These seem to be comprised of childhood abuse, sexual promiscuity, a bad taste in boyfriends, and hippy protests. Forrest doesn’t get it; by virtue of empathizing with his worldview, the movie doesn’t, either.

When these allegations first came up around the time of the release, the “Forrest Gump” team punched back with a mixture of defiance and confusion. Zemeckis argued that he was playing to both sides of the aisle. “My film is a party to which everyone can bring a bottle,” he said. And when producer Steve Tish accepted his Oscar for Best Picture, he took it to the masses: “‘Forrest Gump’ isn’t about politics or conservative values. It’s about humanity.” Hanks echoed that sentiment. “The film is nonpolitical,” he said, “and thus nonjudgemental.” Two years later, Fox News coined the term “fair and balanced” to describe its partisan a***ysis of the new cycle with the same degree of credibility.

Movies provide windows into the world and the way it fits together; by that very definition, they take on political ramifications, especially when they utilize images loaded with preexisting definitions. As “Forrest Gump” careens through Americana, it can’t help but cast its gaze at the country’s fiery counterculture and roll its eyes. That strikes a notable contrast to the radical energy of several movies released the same year, including Spike Lee’s “Crooklyn” and “Natural Born Killers,” which provide much savvier explorations of American society and its various fragmented pieces through their sharp narrative frameworks.

Yet we remember “Forrest Gump” because it goes down easy, and pretends that the world just works that way.

Like the character himself, the positioning of “Forrest Gump” as lacking any political worldview stems from more innocent times when that argument held some water. Before the country’s charged post-9/11 climate, before the fractured discourse of social media, before Sean Hannity and deep-fakes and catfishing and whatever else has made this world so freakish and unreliable, “Forrest Gump” coasted along without any serious challenge to its logic. (While the similar embracing of “Green Book” might suggest that nothing has changed, the backlash already seems to have put that misconceived movie in its place.)

Viewed today, “Forrest Gump” has the eerie aura of a science fiction movie, with its wandering central figure coming across like an alien who perceives every meaningful aspect of the world around him as so foreign he can only gaze back at it and speak his mind. However, the movie was prescient in one significant fashion. It presents a grinning idiot savant as epitomizing everything about America, suggesting that he could catapult to fame and fortune he doesn’t really earn, while people enduring genuine struggles to make a difference in the world struggle all the way to the grave. To that end, for better or worse, “Forrest Gump” was ahead of its time.

Jesus Christ

posted this not too long ago but this s*** was fantastic

I never seen Death Proof

I just seen it, it’s pretty entertaining overloaded with the annoying dialogue Tarantino trope

Bur also girlpower ending

I like it along with the lowbudget feel thats inspired from the slasher era

AND the film skips that was cute

7/10 enjoyable watch

It’s a purposeful film