Rate the last movie you saw

[IndieCowboy]

Still a top 10 comedy
“The Whole Nine Yards”

 

[Creeper]

"What's Inside" on Netflix. I was told it is a horror movie but it's not really. I am not sure what it is actually. It was okay. It's a new twist on an old theme. 5/10

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

"What's Inside" on Netflix. I was told it is a horror movie but it's not really. I am not sure what it is actually. It was okay. It's a new twist on an old theme. 5/10

Yeah....kind of a bizarre one. The idea behind it is cool but I think there are too many characters that you do not really get to know well enough before the change happens.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

For what ever reason I just could not get into any of the above movies.
Maybe I will go back and try the witcher one later but just could not get into any of them.



I think I posted this before. Just a smaller movie I kind of liked and you do not hear about much.

Spoiler: Love the scenes with this actor

Really enjoyed when Mark Rylance's character finds the girl and teaches her some things. Was very nice and caring but also had that creepy vibe. Guy is a very good actor that most do not know.

 

[CyberB0b]

Black Phone 2

5/10

Really disappointing. The plot was convoluted and boring. The dialogue and acting was pretty wooden. Ethan Hawke is barely in it.

 

[SlammedZero]

Watched 'Weapons' on Max. It was....interesting. I really enjoyed the mystery behind it all, but the ending was kind of a letdown for me in terms of substance. It felt like they left a lot of story on the table.

Like, why did it happen? Where did this old lady come from? Is she a witch? What’s up with this magic tree she carries? Where did the tree come from? Why is it special? Why did she pick this couple to possess? Why did she keep the kid unpossessed? So many questions left unanswered.

 

[DasTex]

Funny Games (1997), German version.....watched it Monday before the Cowboys game. I saw short clip of someone reviewing it, they warned that it puts you mentally in a bad place. To follow that up with the game Monday, this week has been a struggle.

The same director did an American version in 2007 - with Naomi Watts and Tim Roth...I haven't seen it, but since you know the actors - it might not have the same effect.

Very unsettling movie - 4/5

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

Watched 'Weapons' on Max. It was....interesting. I really enjoyed the mystery behind it all, but the ending was kind of a letdown for me in terms of substance. It felt like they left a lot of story on the table.

Like, why did it happen? Where did this old lady come from? Is she a witch? What’s up with this magic tree she carries? Where did the tree come from? Why is it special? Why did she pick this couple to possess? Why did she keep the kid unpossessed? So many questions left unanswered.

Word is they are going to work on a movie that explores the lady. Sounds like a prequel type thing.

 

[VaqueroTD]

Watched 'Weapons' on Max. It was....interesting. I really enjoyed the mystery behind it all, but the ending was kind of a letdown for me in terms of substance. It felt like they left a lot of story on the table.

Like, why did it happen? Where did this old lady come from? Is she a witch? What’s up with this magic tree she carries? Where did the tree come from? Why is it special? Why did she pick this couple to possess? Why did she keep the kid unpossessed? So many questions left unanswered.

I saw it the other day. Decent flick but not as good as I thought it would be. Horror movies are easy to make into compelling stories. I wouldn't really rank it higher than other horror movies that were decent 2 hour watches. Note to new directors, if you have interesting characters, break it down into chapters. The critics love it.

One thing I really enjoyed was what I assume is a 180 on the main horror villain. We keep seeing all these clues about parasites, but I'm guessing he did that to mislead us and it's really just a classic witch tale? Exactly what the lady had painted on her car to begin with. Including the targets who are kids. Sort of borrows some classic European or Grimm Brothers storytelling? I also give him credit for inventing a new iconic villain like the IT demon. She'll be in Halloween Horror nights next year.

 

[CyberB0b]

Watched 'Weapons' on Max. It was....interesting. I really enjoyed the mystery behind it all, but the ending was kind of a letdown for me in terms of substance. It felt like they left a lot of story on the table.

Like, why did it happen? Where did this old lady come from? Is she a witch? What’s up with this magic tree she carries? Where did the tree come from? Why is it special? Why did she pick this couple to possess? Why did she keep the kid unpossessed? So many questions left unanswered.

The worst part to me was that you have the entire town, the FBI, and lots of reporters and social media personalities in the town, but it takes a random contractor dad 6 months or so to gather footage to see the kids all running in the same general direction.

 

[VaqueroTD]

The worst part to me was that you have the entire town, the FBI, and lots of reporters and social media personalities in the town, but it takes a random contractor dad 6 months or so to gather footage to see the kids all running in the same general direction.

100%. Huge story flaw. Worst police ever.

Also, the fact that in 2025, 10+ kids suddenly disappear and it's covered up? That sucker would be slapped over every social media news conspiracy in the world in 24 hours. Sloppy story telling to create a good horror tale.

 

[CyberB0b]

100%. Huge story flaw. Worst police ever.

Also, the fact that in 2025, 10+ kids suddenly disappear and it's covered up? That sucker would be slapped over every social media news conspiracy in the world in 24 hours. Sloppy story telling to create a good horror tale.

It's been a minute, but I think it wasn't covered up. It was just the flavor of the week for a few months and went quiet. I find it hard to believe that the police and FBI are that bad, unless it was all part of the spell, which like you said is sloppy.

 

[Runwildboys]

The Fantastic Four: First Steps

6.5 from me.

The concept was good, Galactus was very well done, and the acting was alright.

I'm not sure about the sets, and the retro Jetsons vibe. Some I liked, some I didn't.

The big knock I have is that, for a "science fiction" based movie, they just said, "Screw physics!"

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

Not sure how have I managed to miss the above two movies in the past. I do not even remember them coming out. Both were pretty good. All the money in the world is currently free on youtube.



Run of the mill action movie. Ok for a watch. Dan Huston always plays a good bad guy/turd.

 

[SlammedZero]

Frankenstein (2025) - Watched this last night and really enjoyed it. Visually, it’s stunning!! Every shot looks incredible. The cast was great across the board, and while this adaptation takes a lot of cues from the book, it also takes some of its own artistic liberties........but they all totally worked for me. I actually liked the changes as they gave it a fresh perspective while keeping the core themes intact.

I highly recommend this one. It’s on Netflix, and while it’s a long movie, it’s absolutely worth it.

 

[VaqueroTD]

The Fantastic Four: First Steps

6.5 from me.

The concept was good, Galactus was very well done, and the acting was alright.

I'm not sure about the sets, and the retro Jetsons vibe. Some I liked, some I didn't.

The big knock I have is that, for a "science fiction" based movie, they just said, "Screw physics!"

I saw it over the weekend on Disney Plus. I'm usually pretty similar on movie tastes as you, but I enjoyed this one. I would give it at least an 8. Basically, if I put Marvel Entertainment products on tiers of below average, average, and above average, this one would probably be in the above average tier.

I can see what you mean about the Jetsons vibe. I'm not even sure that was necessary. Do they really have to put them in a 1960's alternate dimension to make the story work with the other films? Movie audiences are not comic book fans. They don't need crazy explanations to cover plot holes. A lot of that though was homage to the old Stan Lee era stuff which don't think I've ever seen in a Marvel movie.

Galactus and Silver Surfer were tight! Wasn't sure how I was going to like the new female version of Silver Surfer, but it was much better than the other movies 20 years ago. I never saw the remake with the young cast a few years ago, but I did watch both of the Jessica Alba-Chris Evans movies. The only character in those versions who I thought did better was Chris Evans as Human Torch. Overall though, I like the new cast which makes every character smarter, including the first time you see Mr. Fantastic deal with the cold logic of his super-genius brain and Sue Storm calls him out on it, and they just feel like more of an overall family, which is really the essence of that fictional character. So mission accomplished. This and Thunderbolts were better than Gunn's Superman, IMO. Has me looking forward to their new Avengers movies.

 

[Stash]

I saw it over the weekend on Disney Plus. I'm usually pretty similar on movie tastes as you, but I enjoyed this one. I would give it at least an 8. Basically, if I put Marvel Entertainment products on tiers of below average, average, and above average, this one would probably be in the above average tier.

I can see what you mean about the Jetsons vibe. I'm not even sure that was necessary. Do they really have to put them in a 1960's alternate dimension to make the story work with the other films? Movie audiences are not comic book fans. They don't need crazy explanations to cover plot holes. A lot of that though was homage to the old Stan Lee era stuff which don't think I've ever seen in a Marvel movie.

Galactus and Silver Surfer were tight! Wasn't sure how I was going to like the new female version of Silver Surfer, but it was much better than the other movies 20 years ago. I never saw the remake with the young cast a few years ago, but I did watch both of the Jessica Alba-Chris Evans movies. The only character in those versions who I thought did better was Chris Evans as Human Torch. Overall though, I like the new cast which makes every character smarter, including the first time you see Mr. Fantastic deal with the cold logic of his super-genius brain and Sue Storm calls him out on it, and they just feel like more of an overall family, which is really the essence of that fictional character. So mission accomplished. This and Thunderbolts were better than Gunn's Superman, IMO. Has me looking forward to their new Avengers movies.

I think the Fantastic Four looks even better after a rewatch. For me, the more times I watch it, the more I like it.

 

[DallasEast]

I can see what you mean about the Jetsons vibe. I'm not even sure that was necessary. Do they really have to put them in a 1960's alternate dimension to make the story work with the other films? Movie audiences are not comic book fans. They don't need crazy explanations to cover plot holes. A lot of that though was homage to the old Stan Lee era stuff which don't think I've ever seen in a Marvel movie.

General audiences do not make up the core audience. Star Wars fans do not make up the majority of Star Wars movie audiences. The same with Superman fans, Star Trek fans, etc. The same can be said of Marvel comic book fans.

The MCU general audience is a recurring one. A good percentage has watched several movies at minimum. It is one thing for them to be clueless since they are not comic book fans. It is another thing for them to just accept something new that does not follow with what they have already seen.

In this instance, the general audience has seen Marvel's The Avengers. It's the first team-up film. The final battle is set in New York City (this should not be a spoiler by now).

Comic book fans know the FF is based in The Big Apple. The general audience does not. Do they not question why the FF was missing? Does the MCU compensate by putting the team in another city? Los Angeles maybe?

General audience sees Captain America: The Winter Soldier and Avengers: Age of Ultron. They do not question where's the FF to combat Hydra?

The MCU did a good job introducing new heroes after-the-fact. Black Panther? King of a hidden xenophobic culture. Eternals? Perhaps a lame explanation, but their mission did not involve interacting with humanity in that way.

I agree general audiences find it difficult to wrap their minds around the multi-universal concept. No one here knows how many times I have wanted to strangle a good friend of mine asking those questions. But the general audiences do see Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness in the Multiverse Saga Phase. Shouldn't it make *sense* for the FF to come from another reality after seeing that?

I don't know. I *think* Secret Wars and/or Doomsday integrates FF and the X-Men's bases in New York (or New York State). Could that not be a more realistic transition for these new heroes popping up in the MCU for even the general audience?

Shutting up now. The thread starter may boot me for striking up this kind of conversation not having anything to do with rating a movie.

 

[Runwildboys]

General audiences do not make up the core audience. Star Wars fans do not make up the majority of Star Wars movie audiences. The same with Superman fans, Star Trek fans, etc. The same can be said of Marvel comic book fans.

The MCU general audience is a recurring one. A good percentage has watched several movies at minimum. It is one thing for them to be clueless since they are not comic book fans. It is another thing for them to just accept something new that does not follow with what they have already seen.

In this instance, the general audience has seen Marvel's The Avengers. It's the first team-up film. The final battle is set in New York City (this should not be a spoiler by now).

Comic book fans know the FF is based in The Big Apple. The general audience does not. Do they not question why the FF was missing? Does the MCU compensate by putting the team in another city? Los Angeles maybe?

General audience sees Captain America: The Winter Soldier and Avengers: Age of Ultron. They do not question where's the FF to combat Hydra?

The MCU did a good job introducing new heroes after-the-fact. Black Panther? King of a hidden xenophobic culture. Eternals? Perhaps a lame explanation, but their mission did not involve interacting with humanity in that way.

I agree general audiences find it difficult to wrap their minds around the multi-universal concept. No one here knows how many times I have wanted to strangle a good friend of mine asking those questions. But the general audiences do see Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness in the Multiverse Saga Phase. Shouldn't it make *sense* for the FF to come from another reality after seeing that?

I don't know. I *think* Secret Wars and/or Doomsday integrates FF and the X-Men's bases in New York (or New York State). Could that not be a more realistic transition for these new heroes popping up in the MCU for even the general audience?

Shutting up now. The thread starter may boot me for striking up this kind of conversation not having anything to do with rating a movie.

I absolutely was under the impression the FF came from an alternate universe. I just don't care for the ascetics of that universe, for the most part. I was also under the impression that their timeline was earlier, based on the ascetics, but I think maybe the architects and designers, etc. just took longer to evolve their creations.

But the physics...

Even just having a being the size and proportions of Galactus being able to walk is wrong. And don't even get me started on the stuff that happened in space.

 

[zrinkill]

Frankenstein.

Really liked it ...... was closer to book than any other adaptation