Just one person’s take, but I enjoy anyone posting any thoughts about a movie they watch (as long as it isn’t a Mad Max movie), probably not too much reason to worry about whether an “it’s okay” opinion merits a post.
I did think the trailer on this looked intriguing, but was a bit reluctant to just start in on a part two and couldn’t find the will to do homework in order to get ready to take a chance on something that I might like but probably wouldn’t love.
A Quebecois film about a young woman’s obsession with a serial killer trial going on in Montreal. Not since Drive have I seen a film this subversive. It deals with the darkest parts of humanity and while you never see anything, as all the truly horrid stuff happens off camera, this is not a light sit.
Anchored by an incredible central performance, it is an exploration of true crime obsession. She is a model, day trader and poker pro with a very dark streak that leads her to sit everyday in the trial of a serial killer who targeted young girls. The film follows her growing obsession with the accused and the crimes.
It has one of the most disturbing scenes I’ve ever seen and yet it contains no violence at all.
Grade: A
One of the best films of the year but holy fucking christ.
A powerful biotech company has breakthrough technology that allows it to clone history’s most influential people. Behind this company is a cabal of Satanists who steal the shroud of Turin, putting them in possession of Jesus Christ’s DNA – the ultimate offering to the devil. Hoping to save mankind, Archangel Michael soon comes to Earth to stop the devil’s conspiracy once and for all.
This was as dumb as it sounds. Terrible script, terrible acting, terrible editing, terrible music. I only watched it because my housemate had it on when I came home.
don’t think 2 is so much better than 1 to justify skipping to it directly (but also don’t think it’s good enough to justify watching the first one just to see the sequel)
that said, the second one is (almost) entirely different characters so it’s definitely enough if you have a basic idea of the mechanics (e.g. from wiki plot summary or just the paragraph below, obv don’t read if you intend to see the 1st one)
the “curse” is a demon that attaches to a person, gives them visions in the form of “smiling” people they see and interact with (can be either randoms or ppl they know, they may not be aware until the smile that they are not real), then after a few days the demon finally “enters” the person, and makes them kill themselves (while smiling of course) in front of someone else, who in turn gets the curse (the demon feeds on trauma). it may be possible to lose the curse without dying by killing someone in front of a witness (as long as the latter is sufficiently traumatized).
specific spoiler for the first one relevant for the 2nd one’s opening : it ends with Kyle Gallner (Beaver Casablancas from Veronica Mars) getting the curse
then good chance you also won’t get into the second one, i’d say they’re of similar quality…but on the other hand the plot is different enough that maybe you will ? if you like horror movies I don’t think this is a movie you’d really dislike anyway, worst case you find it slightly boring
any specific reason for that ? it seems to get similar / slightly better ratings than Smile 1, wouldn’t necessarily recommend it in general but if you’ve already enjoyed the first one seems like you should also like this one ?
Watched the “Speak no Evil” remake last night. The first two acts are quite good and Mcavoy does a tremendous job, but the third act seriously screws the pooch and Blumhouses it all up by turning a psychological thriller into an action/horror chase movie.
The first two acts of the original and the sequel are very similar and both very good, but comparing the two third acts it isnt even close. The original is soooooooooooooo much better and actually ties into the themes of the movie while the remake says “what if we turned the wife into a stealth fighting godess with the powers of foresight?”
Absolutely murders what was a very serviceable psych thriller.
I don’t see how they can extend the premise without basically rehashing the first movie. I guess the first one was only just good enough to finish, not to want to experience again. Contrast that with It Follows, of which I’ll gladly watch the sequel.
hated it. oh my god did i hate this. and i hated it right away, too. from start to finish it was extremely unenjoyable. remember in pulp fiction when harvey keitel shows up as The Wolf and how cool he was in that role? just rewatch pulp fiction. do not watch this movie. DO NOT watch this movie. DO NOT WATCH this movie.
hell yeah! idk how i’ve never seen this one before, but it’s on prime. scorsese doing a cronenberg kinda vibe. new york city at night, unsettling and surreal nightmarish elements. it’s 5 bags from me, dawg
Ridiculously strong atmospheric filmmaking, both visually and aurally. Standout lead performance from Juliette Gariepy. This was truly impressive. As a somewhat squeamish sort, this threaded the needle perfectly for me in terms of making me feel massively uncomfortable just often enough to feel compelled by what I was watching, but without ever crossing the line where I end up thinking of the experience as a truly unpleasant one. One sequence in particular shows just how powerful of a move it can be to show very little and still absolutely freak out the viewer by inducing their mind to fill in the blanks. When that concept is executed well, it feels like an impressive magic trick.
I do leave the movie not exactly sure how to feel about the ending. There are good/great movies with worse endings out there even just this year, but it’s probably the only aspect of this movie that I don’t feel like lavishing with praise. And even then, the craft here was just so strong that that I don’t expect to stay too hung up on that part.
One of the best of the year so far. I plopped down $4 to rent it since I don’t actually think it’s on a streaming service here yet.
All,
Don’t look at the headlines that talk about Emilia Perez being the leading Golden Globes nominee and come to the mistaken impression that it’s one of the best movies of the year. It isn’t. It getting two nominations for best song when it very well might have the worst musical numbers in the history of musicals is certainly something.
This movie is basically the dictionary definition of “solid but forgettable.” I like the cast, and I enjoyed their performances. The story is engaging enough to have not bored me. However, considering the subject matter, it’s not great that I never really felt any tension as I watched it; the concept is good, but something is lacking in the filmmaking when I never really feel any edge.
Shoutout to Ben Chaplin and Leonie Benesch for giving the most magnetic performances in the movie to keep this thing in decent standing. While John Magaro was solid, unfortunately I don’t feel like the material gave him a whole lot to chew on here.
It’s perfectly watchable. It’s just less compelling than the trailer suggests, and it felt like it fell short of its potential.