|
Cuban Fury was good enough to not be considered sucky. Edit Because I am a brave soul I am venturing into season 5 and beyond of Dexter despite everyone on earth telling me not too. Season 5 isn't that bad so far after watching about halfway.
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2015 18:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 00:46 |
|
|
Junkie Disease posted:Was Chef just twitters "You got Mail" or that google movie? It was a by the numbers enjoyable movie but man if it wasn't for twitter he would never see the value in his child. And the animated birds... I watched this last night and it was rather take it or leave it, but yeah wow, the whole thing kind of felt like a commercial for social media.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2015 18:38
|
|
|
Aw, Cuban Fury sucks? Doesn't that have Nick Frost in it?
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2015 19:16
|
|
|
Yeah. The cast is game, but it doesn't know what kind of movie it wants to be and isn't really funny.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2015 19:25
|
|
|
The problem with Cuban Fury is that it expends a great cast on a mean-spirited, obnoxiously foul-mouthed comedy that isn't particularly remarkable or consistently funny in any way. The best parts of the movie are the 'dance fight' scenes, including one in particular that rivals even the Step Up films, but ironically they would work much better if the film gave its subject a little more credit. This was asking for something more like Big Fan or Griff the Invisible, but instead the movie is stuck somewhere between Balls of Fury and Blades of Glory, and that's not a good place to be. There's even a brief Simon Pegg cameo where he's driving out of a parking garage and looks at Nick Frost's character like, "What the gently caress are you doing here?," which is pretty much the spirit of the whole picture.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2015 19:27
|
|
|
Kenneth Waste, have you ever watched Nigel Kneale's BEASTS?
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2015 19:57
|
|
|
K. Waste posted:The problem with Cuban Fury is that it expends a great cast on a mean-spirited, obnoxiously foul-mouthed comedy that isn't particularly remarkable or consistently funny in any way. The best parts of the movie are the 'dance fight' scenes, including one in particular that rivals even the Step Up films, but ironically they would work much better if the film gave its subject a little more credit. This was asking for something more like Big Fan or Griff the Invisible, but instead the movie is stuck somewhere between Balls of Fury and Blades of Glory, and that's not a good place to be. It's only just dawned on my that Cuban Fury isn't Tony Tango, so this conversation has been confusing for me. Although by the sound of it "isn't Tony Tango" is about the best thing you can say for Cuban Fury.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2015 20:20
|
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:Kenneth Waste, have you ever watched Nigel Kneale's BEASTS? I hadn't ever heard of it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2015 20:49
|
|
|
I just realized that mentally I got parts of Kinky Boots mixed up with Cuban Fury because I watched them back to back. Though I still think Cuban Fury is at least an average film and not a movie that sucks. Kinky Boots is good though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2015 21:59
|
|
|
K. Waste posted:I hadn't ever heard of it. I think you'd dig them.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2015 23:38
|
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:I think you'd dig them. I mean, guy wrote for Quatermass, I'm sure I would. Those Brits knew suspense.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2015 23:43
|
|
|
The series is out on DVD, so I don't think I could put them up on YouTube again.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2015 23:44
|
|
|
I've never described a film as revoltingly stupid, but Bad Johnson is revoltingly stupid.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2015 00:59
|
|
|
K. Waste posted:I've never described a film as revoltingly stupid, but Bad Johnson is revoltingly stupid. With a name like that, it would have to be brilliant or absolute dogshit.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2015 01:33
|
|
|
precision posted:With a name like that, it would have to be brilliant or absolute dogshit. If I recall correctly it's about a man with a talking penis so you be the judge which category it probably falls into.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2015 01:38
|
|
|
So it's a movie about a talking dick that two of the smartest people on this subforum utterly hated. Where do I sign up? I enjoy suffering.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2015 02:05
|
|
|
LORD OF BUTT posted:So it's a movie about a talking dick that two of the smartest people on this subforum utterly hated. It's not the cool Marquis 'talking penis' thing. The plot is that a lecherous rear end in a top hat keeps ruining his personal relationships because of his sex addiction - though the film never addresses as such, it's explicitly a matter of him just having 'so much pussy thrown at him' - and one night wishes his penis would go away. He wakes up the next morning and his penis is gone, and has turned into a distinct person that he hangs out with while trying to figure out how to re-attach it. This would all be fine if it were, like, some sort of underground, anti-comedy, but it's the most 'lowest common denominator,' pandering, vulgar crap... and not even the good kind. It's terribly written from plot down to basic dialog, and the performances are all lovely, though especially the women, and mostly because every female role is marginally more one note and misogynistic than the male ones.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2015 02:23
|
|
|
So it's literally the Detachable Penis music video extended to feature length?
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2015 02:28
|
|
|
I miss King Missile... I will note that I haven't actually seen the penis movie, but I'm also not sure if that smart remark was actually directed at me.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2015 02:39
|
|
|
Yeah that was directed at you and K. Waste, didn't realize you hadn't seen it though
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2015 03:29
|
|
|
I just know the concept because I'm the type of guy where if there's a movie about a talking penis, I've at least heard about.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2015 03:31
|
|
|
I like Nick Thune so I might actually watch that. There's also Bad Milo, where Ken Marino has some kind of animal that emerges from his bowels to murder people. It's pretty unbearable.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2015 03:50
|
|
|
Leper Residue posted:I watched this last night and it was rather take it or leave it, but yeah wow, the whole thing kind of felt like a commercial for social media. I kept hearing people rave about Chef when it was released so I saw it in theaters and was really disappointed. I thought the social media aspect of it was sappy and I can't even criticize the movie without feeling like the whole food critic thing was written to make me feel guilty for doing so.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2015 04:17
|
|
|
blood_dot_biz posted:I kept hearing people rave about Chef when it was released so I saw it in theaters and was really disappointed. I thought the social media aspect of it was sappy and I can't even criticize the movie without feeling like the whole food critic thing was written to make me feel guilty for doing so. That's kinda weird. The film's perception of Ramsey is colored by Carl's subjective, but he's very consistently shown to know and understand way more than Carl gives him credit for, and to be right in the final analysis. Ramsey maybe doesn't actually know all the intricacies of crafting fine cuisine, but he knows a hack job when he tastes it, and he rightfully accuses Carl of selling out. When Carl finally breaks away from Riva, he's not taking any cues from Ramsey's criticisms specifically, but that's not important. The end result is that Carl is existentially fulfilled, and the man he hates more than anything in the world couldn't be happier for him. If anything, the film's driving point about popular criticism is that while it doesn't make you feel good, it serves an essential purpose of deconstructing pretenses of 'high' and 'low' culture. The film is clearly autobiographical of Favreau's experiences moving on from relatively independent, self-financed films to big Hollywood blockbusters, the latter of which he anachronistically compares to refined dining. This, to me, only makes Ramsey's early role in the narrative more interesting, because he essentially criticizes the technical quality of Favreau's cooking/filmmaking, insisting that it has 'no heart/meaning.' By having Carl literally loose his poo poo at the critic and show up his technical ignorance, Favreau actually does something really clever: He points out that it's possible that a criticism can be 100% wrong while also being 100% accurate. It's not that the Iron Man films 'have no meaning.' It's that they have distinctive meanings that are devalued because they have been copied and copied and copied to the point that all roots in emotional authenticity are themselves just pretenses. Favreau/Carl can't even claim the defense that he's just doing what people like, because what he knows is that what people like is strictly controlled and overseen by the risk-averse Riva.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2015 04:39
|
|
|
Surely some of that could have come across without having to extol the virtues of social media every five minutes.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2015 05:02
|
|
|
I didn't really get that impression at all. Social media is a plot device, and a well-reasoned one given its increasing significance. I mean, yeah, the film literally 'maps' Carl's progression as a independent business owner through his influence on social media, but to say this is about extolling the virtues of social media is missing the forest for the tweets. Like, there's a reason that Carl's antagonism, denial, and insecurities are epitomized and escalated in the first act by his childish use of social media to challenge a bully for... having an opinion. The film is using contemporary technology to juxtapose merely vain, self-congratulatory chauvinism and the cultivation of meaningful emotional connections. Then again, if one is just cynical about social media in general, you're probably better off watching Frank, a film that users Twitter just as if not more prominently than Chef to 'map' the progression of its protagonist. But Jon Ronson isn't nearly as good a screenwriter as Jon Favreau.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2015 05:16
|
|
|
yeah but Carl didn't use social media to overcome anything. His plan was to just drive his truck back home and stop places on the way and hope he could sell some sandwiches. It wasn't until his son came along and with the power of Twitter and Facebook made it possible for him to actually get a decent amount of customers. If it wasn't for his son using social media he wouldn't have learned a drat thing. The entire plot relies on Social media to not only drat him initially, but ultimately be his savior. or maybe his son is his savior/redemption? Either way.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2015 05:28
|
|
|
K. Waste posted:That's kinda weird. The film's perception of Ramsey is colored by Carl's subjective, but he's very consistently shown to know and understand way more than Carl gives him credit for, and to be right in the final analysis. Ramsey maybe doesn't actually know all the intricacies of crafting fine cuisine, but he knows a hack job when he tastes it, and he rightfully accuses Carl of selling out. When Carl finally breaks away from Riva, he's not taking any cues from Ramsey's criticisms specifically, but that's not important. The end result is that Carl is existentially fulfilled, and the man he hates more than anything in the world couldn't be happier for him. Eh, I meant it more in that the critic's cycle of being real harsh, even if deservedly so, and then coming around in the end when the main character has gotten back to his simple culinary roots felt kinda like a pat on the back in context and if even the jaded critic can get into Favreau's passion cooking (this movie), what does that say about me? I didn't despise the movie, it just didn't do much for me. I don't disagree with anything you're saying, I just don't really find any of those points that compelling out of context and I don't think this movie presented them in an interesting way.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2015 05:48
|
|
|
Leper Residue posted:If it wasn't for his son using social media he wouldn't have learned a drat thing. The entire plot relies on Social media to not only drat him initially, but ultimately be his savior. I mean, yeah, basically, his son saves his life. Again, Twitter and social media are more of a prop, the value that the story is expressing isn't really about the technology in and of itself. And while there is an overarching sentimentality to the film, it's appropriate because it's very specifically setting itself against the emotional alienation that comes from mass produced commodities that, while stable and profitable, coerce one into a false paradigm in which security and material needs take precedence over freedom and emotional needs. Like, Percy doesn't just use Twitter to make his dad money, he makes a short film in honor of his father. Even the finale, the re-marrying between Inez and Carl, while a cop-out, I don't think of as being entirely literal. The point is that even here, at this fanciful point at which Carl is 'a made man,' his restaurant is closed. EDIT: Also, the movie is literally food porn made by a famous fat person. I love it implicitly. K. Waste fucked around with this message at 06:24 on Mar 17, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2015 06:02
|
|
|
I'm actually sort of impressed at how off the mark my top picks are. I've had Netflix since before streaming was around, watched and rated hundreds of things, and they still find a way to make a list of only things I actively dislike or have zero interest in.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2015 06:56
|
|
|
NESguerilla posted:I'm actually sort of impressed at how off the mark my top picks are. I've had Netflix since before streaming was around, watched and rated hundreds of things, and they still find a way to make a list of only things I actively dislike or have zero interest in. Same long-standing ratings history here. It's about 50/50 with me. But they must have some kind of promotional bump where they cram a few in there regardless of past ratings. Case in point, that Ralphie May special they've been pushing hard. Netflix anticipates I'd rate it as 1 out of 5 stars. Yet it's in my "top picks". At the same time other stuff has been fairly accurate and enjoyable.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2015 11:39
|
|
NESguerilla posted:I'm actually sort of impressed at how off the mark my top picks are. I've had Netflix since before streaming was around, watched and rated hundreds of things, and they still find a way to make a list of only things I actively dislike or have zero interest in. Same. I've literally never watched a single stand-up comedy show on Netflix yet it constantly pushes them into my picks, 'things you may like', 'because you watched X' etc.
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2015 13:55
|
|
|
I like how Netflix recommends stuff to me and when i hover over the title it tells me that I'll probably I'll give it a one star rating. Maybe one and a half.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2015 14:26
|
|
|
red19fire posted:I like Nick Thune so I might actually watch that. There's also Bad Milo, where Ken Marino has some kind of animal that emerges from his bowels to murder people. It's pretty unbearable. Is Bad Milo so bad and so self aware that it's good, like Poultrygeist (which is hilarious and amazing), or is it just Bad?
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2015 14:27
|
|
|
stickyfngrdboy posted:I like how Netflix recommends stuff to me and when i hover over the title it tells me that I'll probably I'll give it a one star rating. Maybe one and a half. Part of Netflix's new Yeah, click play already you hipster trash algorithm. It happens to me too.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2015 14:28
|
|
|
Bored As gently caress posted:Is Bad Milo so bad and so self aware that it's good, like Poultrygeist (which is hilarious and amazing), or is it just Bad? I thought it was just plain old bad, and I saw it in an honest-to-goodness movie theatre.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2015 16:31
|
|
|
Cognac McCarthy posted:Part of Netflix's new Yeah, click play already you hipster trash algorithm. It happens to me too. Agreed, the recommendations for me are also comically bad. The way the "picks" get generated is pretty puzzling, because, among other things, in my current list I have "Twilight" (predicted rating one star) and "Grey's Anatomy" (predicted rating about 1.1 stars), but I have never seen "Kimmy Schmidt" promoted in any way, and my predicted rating is five stars. And of course the Ralphie May special was on my list of top picks, even though I've never heard of him, it predicts I'd rate the special one star, and his face in the cover picture looks like someone needs to hit it a few times with a crowbar.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2015 17:16
|
|
|
For my part Netflix is scarily accurate in predicting how many stars I will rate something, with very few exceptions. Even when it's something I wouldn't normally watch at all.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2015 17:33
|
|
|
Yeah, I find it pretty drat accurate about movies and TV shows, but it thinks if you like one stand up comedian you'll like them all. Pretty sure it's the same with documentaries.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2015 18:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 00:46 |
|
|
Agreed, they get the estimated stars correct for me almost all the time. The two things I cannot stand: 1. as mentioned, recommending things it knows I won't like 2. FAR worse: recommending me things I've already seen outside of "watch it again." I want a setting that says "never recommend me anything I've ever rated again, outside of 'watch it again'". That would make netflix so much better.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2015 19:55
|
|
