I am so hyped!! Might go see it this afternoon.
Trailers have looked great. Read a good interview with Maggie that describes how powerful this will be from a female storyteller. Especially based on what they had to cut after test screenings.
1 Like
Not really sure the best place to post this, so Iāll post it here and crosspost it to movies so that it gets noticed the most. Iāve been in the industry for 32 years this July, with the last roughly 25 years spent mixing movie marketing material, TV shows related to movies, occasional documentaries, and a ton of special features for DVD, HD-DVD, and Blu-ray. While some people may say theyāve seen something like Iām about to post, Iād argue theyāre wrong. Iāve done work for something like 900 movies and Iāve never seen anything like this or presented this way, especially so soon after a movieās release.
I have seen some of this type of footage in retrospective pieces, 20, 30 or 40 years later, but never in the era it was done, and never more than a shot here or a shot there with no real explanation about it other than voyeurism to a different time.
In my long career, the only experience Iāve had that was even close to the experience Iāve had being a part of Sinners was being a part of Moonlight. Ryan Coogler is a very special guy and should be considered the best filmmaker of his generation now. If heās not thought of that way now, he will be in 10 or 20 years. Whatās amazing about this piece, and how he talks about a bunch of other stuff is that he invites you in to a part of the process that is usually closely guarded and takes you to school on what the purpose of it is. I think he should be a film professor. He is that good.
Iām putting it in the Oscars thread, because this is again meant to highlight Hair and Makeup, a category Sinners should win but because the work was so subtle while doing so much it has a harder time being seen. They did spectacular work in that department and I really hope it wins for that.
I hope you enjoy this very unique piece.
Oh yeah, if it wasnāt clear, I mixed this piece.
7 Likes
Tonight is the night.
6 Likes
The Bride (2026)
In 1930s Chicago, groundbreaking scientist Dr. Euphronious brings a murdered young woman back to life to be a companion for Frankensteinās monster. What happens next is beyond what either of them could ever have imagined.
Christ I wish this worked, but the script is in absolute chaos and almost none of it comes together. Character arcs for th mains get setup and then forgotten. Arcs for secondary characters get introduced and resolved within twenty minutes. The romance is baffling because at no point is the central conflict ever actually a conflict. The violence is brutal but is it affecting?
The most ingenious thing unfortunately doesnāt really figure into the narrative in any meaningful way.
After being resurrected, the Bride can talk to the alternate dimension spirit of Mary Shelley, who in that dimension is dead and is telling the other ghosts about what happened AFTER Frankenstein.
Except the movie actually starts with Mary Shelley telling the AUDIENCE this story. We see the Bride before sheās dead and she was always crazy. I would have been really into her āreinvigorationā making her nuts and giving her the ability to speak to ghosts from different dimensions. Make us wonder if thatās real.
But yeah. Iām disappointed but no one should see this even for the concept.
3 Likes
Damn thatās sad
2 Likes
Loved it. What a massive step forward in filmmaking by Leone from Fistful to this.
Ennio Morriconeās case for GOAT film score composer only got stronger to me tonight. His work enhances a film so much.
5 Likes
The WSJ movie reviewer trashed it.
No link or quotes?
Brutal but accurate.
1 Like
You can watch it from this link too.
Wow. Did not know they were making digital movie files in the 1800s.
3 Likes
Interesting thing about these early movies is the camera never moves. Itās not clear if that is because they couldnāt or because nobody had thought about it yet.
Pretty cool to see him basically invent editing and special effects.
Whatās that buzz? 
Thatās really cool, I love that stuff. This popped up in my feed this week, this is what I used to do in my yute:
What a Way to Go (1964)
Even people who donāt dive much into classic film will generally have awareness of, say, Audrey Hepburn or Marilyn Monroe, but itās kind of amazing just how big Shirley MacLaineās profile got for a time without her ever seemingly achieving the all-time icon status that some of the biggest legends in film history received. Sheās 91 years old, sheās still a working actress, sheās done incredible work for decades, she got an Oscar along the way for Terms of Endearment, and she just doesnāt have the profile that would go with all of this.
Anyway, during peak Audrey, Shirley MacLaine got what feels like an all-time flex in this movie. Sheās the star, and the movie is basically an episodic one where Paul Newman, Dick Van Dyke, Dean Martin, Robert Mitchum, and Gene Kelly all take turns fawning over her. With good reason too; young Shirley MacLaine was fucking hot. She gets to use her comedic chops, she had serious charisma, she even gets to perform a whole dance sequence with probably the GOAT movie dancer, Gene Kelly. She holds her own.
This movie is fun as hell. Itās streaming nowhere, so just trust me when I tell you that it exists.
4/5
2 Likes
Windows Movie Maker ftw
1 Like
I was worried that I over-hyped that movie; good to hear it still holds up.
Hearing other poeple say this movies sucks. Too bad, I was looking forward to it.
1 Like
Yeah, to be clear, I was never going to hold it up against the ābetter than The Good, the Bad, and the Uglyā framing. Iāve been in love with GBU for decades, itās one of my favorite movies ever, and the chances Iām going to sit down to a first-time viewing of a movie and get up declaring it better than that feels nearly non-existent. So if I set the bar there, I guess it would have failed, but it would be a ridiculous and unfair bar.
Instead, I set the bar at hoping it was great and hoping it was quite a bit better than A Fistful of Dollars. And it met those marks for sure.
It did disorient me for notable stretches of time; Leone is obviously wrong-footing the audience by design. He obscures Lee Van Cleefās character arc at first, then has our main allies openly lying to each other without really cluing the audience in, and the character motivations are fuzzy too until after a while. Iām completely convinced Iāll love this movie even more when I give it another go sometime. But even with all the disorientation I just described, it landed as a great movie for me with probably the potential to grow even further.
2 Likes