Rate the latest movie you've seen.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

I refer to that one as "Boring Bitch Reject". The ending was the only one they could afford.

[SGOS]

The notoriety of the Blair Witch was that it was made by rank amateurs with $100 worth of video equipment from Best Buy.  But it's creep factor was high.  Blair Witch II was made by Hollywood professionals, and is the lesser of the two movies.

[aitm]

Again…out of boredom, I watched the newish flick Cruella……meh. Should have stuck with “yank my doodle dandy”.

[SGOS]

Again…out of boredom, I watched the newish flick Cruella……meh. Should have stuck with “yank my doodle dandy”.

I saw that at the theater.  I didn't stay for the whole thing.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

The notoriety of the Blair Witch was that it was made by rank amateurs with $100 worth of video equipment from Best Buy.  But it's creep factor was high.  Blair Witch II was made by Hollywood professionals, and is the lesser of the two movies.

Some folks must be easily creeped...

[Hydra009]

Some folks must be easily creeped...

We've been over this before, but what Blair Witch did really really well (and why they didn't need or even want fancy equipment/sets) is that they went for a very realistic, natural setting.  Something that looked real, not fake.  Someplace where you could imagine yourself going.  Well, there's no more universal setting (at least for US audiences) than a trek in the woods, plus it helps that it's already naturally kind of scary.  So the first half of the movie has no scares because it's focusing on circumventing suspension of disbelief by making things look so true to life that there's nothing to suspend.  That way, when things get progressively creepier in the second half, it really lands because audiences are already immersed.

And I know I've been a broken record about this, but there's an extra layer of creepiness in the two trusty companions being secret murderers.  It explains their odd behavior (like laughing at realizing they're hopelessly lost), them being chummy and secretive despite them being strangers before the outing, their suspicious need to control both the compass and the map, they can sleep fine despite being in danger (which Heather finds odd and creepy) while she's the only one who has difficulty going to sleep, the noises at night only happen AFTER she goes to sleep, the stacked rocks and stickmen, and Mike's extremely uncharacteristic let's-run-into-the-murder-house-while-shouting behavior (second story first, then the basement while shouting where he's going and telling Heather to follow him)

Someone getting murdered in the woods = not scary (well, not for me, I'm sure it's plenty scary for the person being murdered)
Someone getting murdered in the woods and we see the whole thing from their POV = kinda scary
Someone getting murdered in the woods and we see the whole thing from their POV and her only companions are plotting her demise behind her back the whole time = SERIOUSLY SPOOKED

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Well, I guess I'm just going to have to have to kill you. Sneaky-like. 

[Shiranu]

Star Trek (2009): Only have rewatched the first 30 minutes, but honestly... it is a really intriguing sci-fi film that I didn't give enough credit to on first watching, having been a dyed-in-the-wool Trekkie at the time.

The character backstories are legitimately interesting (Kirk's daddy issues, Spock's social isolation as a mix-raced Vulcan/Human, Nero having mystery around him, Star Fleet's elitisms over the bumpkins that live in the post-apocalyptic society that supports their utopia), it's explored the darker side of Star Trek's Utopia... other than the fucking lens flares every 5 seconds blinding the entire screen, I'm actually legitimately invested in and curious.

I vaguely remember the movie, so I am actually genuinely intrigued on if it continue to hold up. It is certainly a departure from Star Trek, but in honesty... I don't think a Utopian Star Trek could even be remotely successful today... not just in an economic sense but in a moral sense as well.

[Hydra009]

Star Trek (2009): Only have rewatched the first 30 minutes, but honestly... it is a really intriguing sci-fi film that I didn't give enough credit to on first watching, having been a dyed-in-the-wool Trekkie at the time.

The character backstories are legitimately interesting (Kirk's daddy issues, Spock's social isolation as a mix-raced Vulcan/Human, Nero having mystery around him, Star Fleet's elitisms over the bumpkins that live in the post-apocalyptic society that supports their utopia), it's explored the darker side of Star Trek's Utopia... other than the fucking lens flares every 5 seconds blinding the entire screen, I'm actually legitimately invested in and curious.

I mean, it's cool-looking and somewhat interesting, I don't remember the plot but I remember the plot falling apart after even basic scrutiny and it didn't really seem to hit on almost any of Roddenbury's themes, which was certainly unusual at the time.

If you want a popcorn movie where you can turn your brain off, you could do worse. 

I don't think a Utopian Star Trek could even be remotely successful today... not just in an economic sense but in a moral sense as well.

Sadly, true.  Though Trek was born during the 60s, and a lot has changed since then.  We've definitely got the all-races-working-together thing down pat, fair progress towards peace (don't @ me, @ Steven Pinker), not a whole lot of progress on the enlightenment and post-capitalism front.  If anything, common people have fallen a couple rungs down Maslow's hierarchy of needs in the past couple of decades and getting ahead in this over-exploited wasteland-in-progress means doubling down on good ol' capitalism and exploiting even harder.  What could go wrong?

Even in Trek, humanity didn't self-overcome - the Vulcans got us most of the way there.  By the way, super nice of them.

After watching Picard and seeing the gang of misfits dock at a space station only to be bombarded by targeted ads for narcotics and similar, descending into drunken stupors and basically existing only as shells of people - if that's humanity's future, then we might as well go ahead and push the button right here and now.

Real talk: we have to work towards something together or humanity will surely die on the vine.  Trek's ideals are basically impossible to fully realize, but they're laudable and at least partially doable.

[Shiranu]

I mean, it's cool-looking and somewhat interesting, I don't remember the plot but I remember the plot falling apart after even basic scrutiny and it didn't really seem to hit on almost any of Roddenbury's themes, which was certainly unusual at the time.

Yeah, I'm still in the world-building stage of the plot. From what I do remember, it didn't make a horrible lot of sense. We will see.

Real talk: we have to work towards something together or humanity will surely die on the vine.  Trek's ideals are basically impossible to fully realize, but they're laudable and at least partially doable.

Without getting into too much of a side tangent, I've noticed that a lot lately; there were so many moral and political champions in the past who saw a peaceful future and  took peaceful means to make that happen (particularly through expressing those ideals in media and through union strikes) to try and promote their ideal of the future; today? Not so much. The dystopian and the weary idealist-turned-pragmatist dominate the modern story arch.

Those that do exist are so much easier to dismiss; no longer is "Socialism/Communism" the dirty word you label someone you want to sway public opinion against, just even the slightest hint of the word "Liberal" will get both sides foaming at the mouth and their message buried under an avalanche of partisanship and vitriol.

Roddenbury, Mr. Rodgers, Charlie Chaplin and all those great men of cinema of the past unfortunately seem to have underestimated just how powerful negative media could be.

[Hydra009]

Roddenbury, Mr. Rodgers, Charlie Chaplin and all those great men of cinema of the past unfortunately seem to have underestimated just how powerful negative media could be.

The fact that they're household names shows that they were successful in getting their message out.  But how many similar people exist today?  And why?

[SGOS]

That 2009 StarTrek did test the limits of sci-fi fan's suspension of reason, but I thought it was a Hell of a lot of fun.  The actor who played Bones did a good job as a younger doctor.  All the actors did reasonably well, which surprised me, because I didn't think they could pull it off without the original cast.

[Shiranu]

That 2009 StarTrek did test the limits of sci-fi fan's suspension of reason, but I thought it was a Hell of a lot of fun.  The actor who played Bones did a good job as a younger doctor.  All the actors did reasonably well, which surprised me, because I didn't think they could pull it off without the original cast.

Karl Urban is an a pretty underrated actor imo.

Finished watching it last night and there is nothing I can overly complain about. It is more sci-fi than Star Trek, but I've always found the movies to be a little bit more that anyways.

The villain not just dropping the blackhole stuff on the surface is just slightly dumb (as is the interior design of the space ship, taking The Empire's lack of regard for safety protocols to an extreme), but I can excuse it with him being absolutely batshit and wanting it to not just exterminate the Vulcans and Humans but do it with flair.

[Shiranu]

The fact that they're household names shows that they were successful in getting their message out.  But how many similar people exist today?  And why?

It's one thing to get your message out; it is another entirely for people to live up to it.

As for the why... I don't know. I would say part of it has to do with growing up either during the World Wars/Vietnam was a major influencer, the Counter-culture Revolution that unfortunately fell apart, the threat of Cold War, Nuclear Annihilation... all these helped breed a large amount of people who had seen the worst of humanity and how on the knife's edge we are but who also believed there was hope for the future.

I would also argue a large part of it is how much more powerful media has become and that they reached a point where they are run fully by businessmen rather than a mix of businessmen but also people who genuinely care about the medium. Drama ultimately just sells more than tranquility.

[Hydra009]

Star Trek has kinda been a mess lately in terms of message:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VuqddbtYE5s

I could swear that these two series are entirely unrelated.