Movies: Last Movie You Watched and Rate it | {Insert Appropriate Seasonal Greeting Here}

[shadow1]

A Brighter Summer Day (1991) - 10/10

In 1960 Taipei, a junior high school student becomes involved with a youth street gang after befriending the girlfriend of its leader.

I don't think anything I write in the next few paragraphs will be able to do this movie justice. Based on its acclaim, I am sure there are hundreds of essays out there somewhere; meanwhile I've just seen A Brighter Summer Day for the first time. But here are my thoughts.

This is a very lived in movie. Everything about it feels authentic, and you feel like you're watching real people rather than characters. There is some explanation for that. The film is based upon a real event, and director Edward Yang reported used upwards of 100 untrained actors/locals, including in key roles. Chi-tsan Wang (Cat) and Lisa Yang (Ming) were both sensational, but basically have no other acting credits.

To me, the themes of this movie are belonging and uncertainty. 1960 was only 11 years removed from the end of the Chinese Civil War, in which the Republic of China retreated to Taiwan following the Communist Party's victory. This movie paints a portrait of what life was like at that time: displaced Chinese, living under authoritarian rule, in previously built Japanese housing, with an American rock and roll music backdrop.

The movie focuses on the effects of these factors through one family. As the parents struggle to make ends meet, their children go down dark paths; for main character Si'r - their 14-year-old son, and fourth child - this involves becoming entangled with the local youth gangs. Over the movie's run time, we are witness to the corrosion this causes in his life.

Speaking of the movie's run time - it's 4 hours (3 hours, 57 minutes). It doesn't feel like it though. Even though it's a gut punch of a film, it's hard to look away thanks to its brilliant direction, cinematography, and acting. I scanned IMDB's reviews and I saw a few reviewers rate the movie a 5, citing its run time as excessive. I adamantly disagree; this movie needs to be long to give us the full impact of the events, as well as examining a lot of the more subtle moments that help steer the characters down the paths they end up on.

And this movie has a lot of characters. Though the movie focuses on Si'r and his family, A Brighter Summer Day also has story arcs for upwards of a dozen characters. Frequently, those arcs managed to subvert my expectations. One small example I can give without spoiling anything is the character of Honey; a gang leader the characters hype up to be a big bad, only for the film to show us he is a thoughtful, reasonable person.

Long story short, it's pretty much a masterpiece in my opinion. The next film, not so much.


Sleepaway Camp III: Teenage Wasteland (1989) - 3/10

One year after the events of the previous film, Angela Baker returns to the same campground after stealing the identity of one of the campers.

Ah, the old A Brighter Summer Day/Sleepaway Camp III double header. Probably the most popular double header in the history of cinema... said no one ever.

Sleepaway Camp III was filmed back-to-back with Sleepaway Camp II, and the same filming location is reused. Even so, this movie still manages to dial up the cheapness to another level - nearly the entire run time takes place outdoors, in the woods. The premise is that Camp New Horizons, opened on the same campground as last movie's Camp Rolling Hills, has re-opened with the concept of mixing together affluent and underprivileged youths. To do so, the campers and counselors split into three groups and go camping in the woods.

This obviously gives Angela - having killed and stolen the identity of a girl from the underprivileged group - a chance to go on a killing spree undetected, but it's an extremely lame one. She kills several people by hitting them in the head with branches, and one of them was even off-screen; we see her swing, hear the sound effect, and cut to the camper laying there with ketchup on their forehead.

Like in Sleepaway Camp II, the protagonist (Angela) is the killer, with the film not giving us many other characters to root for. Pamela Springsteen does a good job again, but there's no way she can save this movie. There's less humor here and Angela's character is a bit more insane. Last movie was fun because she comes off as a wholesome (but crazy) person who punishes wrongdoers with the death penalty. Here, she mostly just immediately kills everyone she meets.

Bad movie, and effectively the end of the Sleepaway Camp series. A fourth movie - with no Springsteen - was filmed in 1992, but got shelved until a home media release in 2012. A direct sequel to the original movie was released direct-to-video in 2008, but has horrible reviews. For now, I think I'll spare myself.

 

[Spring in Fialta]

I also watched this on Cinemax a few times years back. Never a real favorite, but it did inspire a great South Park episode.

Love that episode. Kenny-centric episodes tend to be my favorites.

 

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

What? (Polanski, 1972) – On the list of films that could never be made today, this one ranks pretty high. It's a Polanski sex comedy (you're already not comfortable with that), that starts with attempted rape played for laughs (huh-ho), in which Polanski himself plays a self-proclaimed ass-man weirdo named Mosquito, because he stings with his big stinger (no way, José!). The film has been received as an erotico-absurd fantasy variation on Alice In Wonderland, and I guess you could have (some) fun with that reading, but the absurd part of the equation takes over and quickly engulfs the whole thing (and if you want to see that erotico-absurd fantasy variation, just watch Valerie and Her Week of Wonder, a much better film). A naive but strangely undeniably beautiful American woman runs away from goofy rapists and ends up in an Italian Sex Comedy that plays with absurdity and reflexivity, making it closer to the Hispanic Bunuel and Jodorowsky (from the priest in a bathing suit to the ending with the main character acknowledging she's in a movie, it has some of the reflexes of the masters, but never the ideas) than to the Italian subgenre – even though you do have Alvaro Vitali in a small (tiny, tiny) role (it's not a cameo, just a coincidence, Vitali wasn't famous yet at that point – and if you don't know him, you're missing on a whole silly subculture). Sydne Rome is great, Mastroianni matches her most of the time, but otherwise, everybody else seems to be goofing around. Not the masterpiece Polanski thought it would be, but certainly the high-end of 70s Italian sex comedies, you have to enjoy the ride, 'cause there's no destination or point to it all. 6.5/10

and yes, I called Jodorowsky a master just to tick off kihei

 

[kihei]

I'm not going to compile a list of 20 writers. I can't even decide a list of the top three.

Off the top of my head, better writers are/were:

Dickens
Twain
Poe
Fitzgerald
Bradbury
Steinbeck
Atwood
Tolstoy

And there are many, many more, particularly non Americans. And of course, any list like that is subjective and represents favourites more than best.

Having given this a little more thought, he'd be in my Top Ten American writers: The authors whom I would clearly place above him would be Twain, Melville. Nabokov, James, and Faulkner. Hemingway would then be somewhere high in the second group along with Fitzgerald, Updike, Bellows, Roth, and, maybe, Vonnegut. Worst case scenario for me would be #7.

 

[Slats432]

Tomorrowland 2015

A World Beyond (2015) ⭐ 6.4 | Action, Adventure, Family

2h 10m | 12

www.imdb.com

Maybe a 6.5/7 out of 10. Didn't hate it, didn't love it.

 

[shadow1]

Predator 2 (1990) - 6/10

In futuristic 1997, the urban jungle of Los Angeles is stalked by the Predator.

Predator 2 came out three years after the original and tried something very different. Set in the near future, the city of LA is a war zone; there's a massive heat wave, gun violence in the streets is rampant, and the news is flooded with sensationalist broadcasts (hey, is this 1997 or 2022!?). This provides the perfect hunting grounds for the Predator, who stalks gang members, police, and anyone who's armed for that matter.

The concept is good enough, but the execution is mixed. The first half of the movie plays out like generic a police drama, with the Predator stalking in the shadows. It doesn't build up tension or suspense like the first movie (or its much later sequel, Predators) though; it just kind of feels like every other action movie that came out at the time, with over-the-top characters and dialogue.

Fortunately the second half picks up big time, and is basically a non-stop adrenaline rush the final 45 minutes. In the latter half of the movie, we get cool scenes of the Predator fighting in an apartment building, a meat packing plant, on skyscraper, and in the subway (my personal favorite). These scenes are amongst the best in the entire franchise.

The cast is memorable, and features Maria Conchita Alonso, Ruben Blades, Gary Busey, and Bill Paxton. Danny Glover stars as hard nosed police Lieutenant Mike Harrigan. To me, Glover's performance is a rare example of when an actor overcomes bad writing. Harrigan is as generic as they come - a detective who hates authority and breaks the rules at every turn - and has some truly awful dialogue. Somehow Glover acts around this and really carries the movie, commanding a large screen presence.

As for the Predator itself, Predator 2 does a lot to add to its character lore. We get to see the creature use lots of new weapons; a net gun, various lightweight projectiles, the smart disc, and the character's iconic spear. We also find out the Predator's diet (meat) and get to see the Predator's space ship for the first time, which has a wall of "trophies" including a dinosaur and a xenomorph alien skull.

Predator 2 didn't do well at the box office ($57M against a $35M budget) or critically. It's easy to see why; it's a downgrade from the first movie and took a big chance bringing the creature to an urban environment. But I think in retrospect it's a decent sequel, and has somewhat of a cult following.

 

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

Predator 2 (1990) - 6/10

In futuristic 1997, the urban jungle of Los Angeles is stalked by the Predator.

Predator 2 came out three years after the original and tried something very different. Set in the near future, the city of LA is a war zone; there's a massive heat wave, gun violence in the streets is rampant, and the news is flooded with sensationalist broadcasts (hey, is this 1997 or 2022!?). This provides the perfect hunting grounds for the Predator, who stalks gang members, police, and anyone who's armed for that matter.

The concept is good enough, but the execution is mixed. The first half of the movie plays out like generic a police drama, with the Predator stalking in the shadows. It doesn't build up tension or suspense like the first movie (or its much later sequel, Predators) though; it just kind of feels like every other action movie that came out at the time, with over-the-top characters and dialogue.

Fortunately the second half picks up big time, and is basically a non-stop adrenaline rush the final 45 minutes. In the latter half of the movie, we get cool scenes of the Predator fighting in an apartment building, a meat packing plant, on skyscraper, and in the subway (my personal favorite). These scenes are amongst the best in the entire franchise.

The cast is memorable, and features Maria Conchita Alonso, Ruben Blades, Gary Busey, and Bill Paxton. Danny Glover stars as hard nosed police Lieutenant Mike Harrigan. To me, Glover's performance is a rare example of when an actor overcomes bad writing. Harrigan is as generic as they come - a detective who hates authority and breaks the rules at every turn - and has some truly awful dialogue. Somehow Glover acts around this and really carries the movie, commanding a large screen presence.

As for the Predator itself, Predator 2 does a lot to add to its character lore. We get to see the creature use lots of new weapons; a net gun, various lightweight projectiles, the smart disc, and the character's iconic spear. We also find out the Predator's diet (meat) and get to see the Predator's space ship for the first time, which has a wall of "trophies" including a dinosaur and a xenomorph alien skull.

Predator 2 didn't do well at the box office ($57M against a $35M budget) or critically. It's easy to see why; it's a downgrade from the first movie and took a big chance bringing the creature to an urban environment. But I think in retrospect it's a decent sequel, and has somewhat of a cult following.

Glad you could enjoy it. I just couldn't on my last rewatch!

 

[shadow1]

Glad you could enjoy it. I just couldn't on my last rewatch!

You hate it that much? It definitely has lots of cliche and terrible dialogue, especially the stuff between the police (Glover) and DEA (Busey).

 

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

You hate it that much? It definitely has lots of cliche and terrible dialogue, especially the stuff between the police (Glover) and DEA (Busey).

It's a long read, but all of my comments on Alien and Predator movies are still here.

 

[shadow1]

It's a long read, but all of my comments on Alien and Predator movies are still here.

Great write up!

Yeah you are definitely not a fan of Predator 2. But geez, lower than AvP Requiem? At least Predator 2 is properly lit!

 

[Spring in Fialta]

Having given this a little more thought, he'd
be in my Top Ten American writers: The authors whom I would clearly place above him would be Twain, Melville. Nabokov, James, and Faulkner. Hemingway would then be somewhere high in the second group along with Fitzgerald, Updike, Bellows, Roth, and, maybe, Vonnegut. Worst case scenario for me would be #7.

You're forgetting Bowles, aren't you?

Elvis

The good:

Austin Butler as Elvis. Good job done by the kid. Overall, a fantastic performance. It didn't take long before he convinced me that I was watching a credible depiction of Elvis Presley.

David Wenham as Canadian country artist, Hank Snow. Decent supporting role, but limited when it comes to screen time.

The bad:

Pretty much everything else. This movie is over-produced and over-directed. It is terrible, with the worst directing and editing I've seen in quite some time.

Tom Hanks as Colonel Tom Parker. The Dutch accent Hanks uses is total bullshit. Parker never spoke with an accent like that while in America. How either Hanks, or how Hanks under instruction by director Baz Luhrmann, ever thought a fake-ass accent like that would lend itself to making a credible movie, is beyond me.

Elvis is filled with bombastic quick edit montages, and dream-like sequences which rely heavily on style over substance. Indeed, Elvis is so stylized, that substance is just about non-existent and you need a crowbar to pry it out of this mess. Character development should be on a milk carton above the caption, "Missing". Elvis uses period-incorrect hard rock electric guitar solos during live 1950s stage appearances by Elvis, and even uses period-incorrect rap music during 1950s sequences. It has no respect for period-correct facts.

Elvis, the movie, is the cinematic equivalent of throwing a plate of spaghetti against a wall, followed by a bowl of apple strudel, and then blasting it all with a shotgun. It's for people who don't know much about Elvis Presley, but who don't mind watching a movie about Elvis and leaving the theatre knowing even less.

If this movie would have died on a toilet before being inflicted on the public, we would all be better off.

Baz Luhrmann is such a worthless director. Not surprised this sucks.

 

[Chairman Maouth]

Having given this a little more thought, he'd
be in my Top Ten American writers: The authors whom I would clearly place above him would be Twain, Melville. Nabokov, James, and Faulkner. Hemingway would then be somewhere high in the second group along with Fitzgerald, Updike, Bellows, Roth, and, maybe, Vonnegut. Worst case scenario for me would be #7.

Different from mine, but I still like your picks.

 

[Spring in Fialta]

Top-10 American, off the cuff and no real order besides McCarthy and Nabokov, going with pure peak:

Cormac McCarthy (greatest of all-time, IMO. All countries, all eras)
Vladimir Nabokov
Flannery O'Connor
Iceberg Slim
Ernest Hemingway
Joan Didion
Kurt Vonnegut
Paul Bowles
J.D. Salinger
John Cheever

 

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

I love TUBI, it really is my favorite streaming thingy. Nowhere else can you find z-horror trash suggested next to a Peter Greenaway film, Agnes Varda next to Doris Wishman. It does seem like a bottomless pit of trash at times, so I thought I'd try to find rock bottom. I must be pretty close.

Linnea Quigley's Horror Workout (Hall, 1990) – Certainly ain't worth shit as a workout video, and not worth much more as any form of entertainment (it tries to be funny, even making kind fun of the b-horror that made her “famous”, but it never lands), this is still something of an interesting artifact of the 80s. Can't fault them for trying (and they really did, there's even zombies created specially for the video). I guess it could have been a gem of irony and self-parody – the slumber party, the pillow fight, and everything is always an excuse for working out – it's just very boring. Don't watch it, just know it's there. 0/10

With that out of the way, is Prime really more refined? At least TUBI's got some jewels both good and bad.

Is This A Joke? (Haggerty, 2011) – Vignettes of terrible jokes, terribly recorded (I won't even say filmed, there's clearly zero effort being made here – even the sets are lousy). Half the jokes involve naked ladies, so there's that, but it's mostly not very pretty either (no body shaming intended, it does have z-movie superstar Nicola Fiore). Haggerty is just a no-talent loser having fun with friends and a few girls he paid for this – and he made quite a few films along the way. Not so bad it's good, just so, so bad. 0/10

Top-10 American, off the cuff and no real order besides McCarthy and Nabokov, going with pure peak:

Cormac McCarthy (greatest of all-time, IMO. All countries, all eras)
Vladimir Nabokov
Flannery O'Connor
Iceberg Slim
Ernest Hemingway
Joan Didion
Kurt Vonnegut
Paul Bowles
J.D. Salinger
John Cheever

Damn, I'm really out of tone with my Linnea Quigley Horror Workout.... I'm not a big reader like you people are, but my favorite American authors are (or were), in no order: William Burroughs, Philip Roth, Henry Miller, John Fante, and Vonnegut.

 

[Spring in Fialta]

I love TUBI, it really is my favorite streaming thingy. Nowhere else can you find z-horror trash suggested next to a Peter Greenaway film, Agnes Varda next to Doris Wishman. It does seem like a bottomless pit of trash at times, so I thought I'd try to find rock bottom. I must be pretty close.

Linnea Quigley's Horror Workout (Hall, 1990) – Certainly ain't worth shit as a workout video, and not worth much more as any form of entertainment (it tries to be funny, even making kind fun of the b-horror that made her “famous”, but it never lands), this is still something of an interesting artifact of the 80s. Can't fault them for trying (and they really did, there's even zombies created specially for the video). I guess it could have been a gem of irony and self-parody – the slumber party, the pillow fight, and everything is always an excuse for working out – it's just very boring. Don't watch it, just know it's there. 0/10

With that out of the way, is Prime really more refined? At least TUBI's got some jewels both good and bad.

Is This A Joke? (Haggerty, 2011) – Vignettes of terrible jokes, terribly recorded (I won't even say filmed, there's clearly zero effort being made here – even the sets are lousy). Half the jokes involve naked ladies, so there's that, but it's mostly not very pretty either (no body shaming intended, it does have z-movie superstar Nicola Fiore). Haggerty is just a no-talent loser having fun with friends and a few girls he paid for this – and he made quite a few films along the way. Not so bad it's good, just so, so bad. 0/10



Damn, I'm really out of tone with my Linnea Quigley Horror Workout.... I'm not a big reader like you people are, but my favorite American authors are (or was), in no order: William Burroughs, Philip Roth, Henry Miller, John Fante, and Vonnegut.

Shit, actually Miller might deserve a spot, but I don't think he ever reached the utter perfection of Cheever's Goodbye, my brother or Salinger's A Perfect Day for Bananafish, though Tropic of Cancer gets close. I enjoy/respect Fante and Roth but Burroughs never did anything for me.

 

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

Shit, actually Miller might deserve a spot, but I don't think he ever reached the utter perfection of Cheever's Goodbye, my brother or Salinger's A Perfect Day for Bananafish, though Tropic of Cancer gets close. I enjoy/respect Fante and Roth but Burroughs never did anything for me.

Had I read Cheever or Salinger, I'm sure I'd have something clever to add to this, but my cultural landscape is very limited when it comes to literature.

 

[Spring in Fialta]

Had I read Cheever or Salinger, I'm sure I'd have something clever to add to this, but my cultural landscape is very limited when it comes to literature.

They were mostly short-story writers with that northeastern aesthetic that's easy to like and romanticize but man do those two stories hit. Not sure how you feel about Nabokov (or if you've even read him) but he was a hell of a funny/harsh critic and at some point went through the trouble of reviewing every short story published by The New Yorker over a span of multiple decades. The only stories which got an A+ were one of his (lol) and Salinger's A Perfect Day for Bananafish.

 

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

They were mostly short-story writers with that northeastern aesthetic that's easy to like and romanticize but man do those two stories hit. Not sure how you feel about Nabokov (or if you've even read him) but he was a hell of a funny/harsh critic and at some point went through the trouble of reviewing every short story published by The New Yorker over a span of multiple decades. The only stories which got an A+ were one of his (lol) and Salinger's A Perfect Day for Bananafish.

Only read Lolita, liked it a lot though.

 

[Spring in Fialta]

Only read Lolita, liked it a lot though.

Like it too but one of my most radical opinions is that I rate Kubrick's film higher as a work of art. And there's a lot of Nabokov's other stuff that I prefer to it.

 

[ItsFineImFine]

Yi Yi (2000) - 8/10

Really the full human spectrum of emotion on display with acting that subtly pulls you closer to the actors across three hours despite often quick scene cuts and abrupt endings. It has a nostalgic tint now for someone growing up around that time period and seeing it in HD 20+ years later. Some of the conversations seem frustrating but they also seem lifelike, it's not always exciting but it's just really good humanist film making. Does fall a bit into some melodramatic tropes though with how pathetic it portrays some of its characters, especially the men.

 

[OzzyFan]

Some Like it Hot (1959)
3.45 out of 4stars

“After two male musicians witness a mob hit, they flee the state in an all-female jazz band disguised as women, but further complications set in.”
An excellent screwball romantic comedy that is very funny, and arguably deserves its status amongst the funniest comedies of all-time, especially given the context and time period of its release. It’s actually sub-genre bending as well as gender bending. Once the plot kicks in, the fast paced non-stop humor and subtext ensue. Loaded with sharp wit and quotable lines alongside its radical themes and messages. Everyone is so convincing in their roles, Jack Lemmon is the scene stealer, and Wilder’s choice of shooting the movie in black and white pays off. Quite fun and meaningfully significant.

Fantastic Mr. Fox (2009)
3.20 out of 4stars

“After 2 human years of bucolic bliss, Mr. Fox breaks a promise to his wife and raids the farms of their human neighbors, Boggis, Bunce, and Bean. Giving in to his animal instincts endangers not only his marriage but also the lives of his family and their animal friends.”
A great stop motion animated adventure comedy that, like most Wes Anderson films, is fun, witty, whimsical, contains great visuals, notable editing, and here, stuffed with morals. Biggest weakness is probably that everything in the movie is better targeted at “teenager/adult” brains, even with a PG rating and kid accessibility to most things, but that is what it is. Briskly paced, highly entertaining, and stands strongly among Wes’s top films. It’s chock full of meaning and lessons. Some topics covered include jealousy, selfishness/selflessness, greed, ego, pride, existentialism, revenge/justice, rage, bullying, self-acceptance/acceptance, primeval/civilized, and family/friendship. Wes Anderson’s joyously “child-like vision” feels so comfortable in an animated kid-friendly format.

Sightseers (2012)
2.70 out of 4stars

“A new couple’s cross-country road trip across Britain takes a deadly turn when they decide to start killing everyone who annoys them.”
A pretty good dark comedy horror that’s pretty much a one trick pony film, but a solidly effective and insightful one at that. Comically, the film is about a disdain for humanity because of their rude and nagging behaviors. People, random or familiar, generally say or do things mindlessly that push people away, just by being themselves. Whether from lack of manners, or opinion expressing, or even directly making comments about a person to their face, people can often become annoying, or even everyone can become annoying in some way if you spend too much time with them. Annihilation seems to be this films’ obvious answer to that problem. But more seriously, the better answer in the film is finding a release from this stress (sexual even), a distraction, or a quality relationship. I say, why not just ignore or brush it all off instantaneously.

 

[OzzyFan]

It's a long read, but all of my comments on Alien and Predator movies are still here.

Great write up!

Yeah you are definitely not a fan of Predator 2. But geez, lower than AvP Requiem? At least Predator 2 is properly lit!

I'm quite surprised Pranzo how high you are on Prometheus and Alien: Covenant. Prometheus specifically for being almost rated as highly as the original Alien, and for Alien: Covenant you put it on par with Aliens (the original sequel). I don't notably disagree with how highly you think of Prometheus, which I think hit the right notes all around, but I am very surprised on Alien: Covenant at 7/10. I find Covenant to be pretty messy with some poor decisions, albeit visually and thematically and even 'thrillingly' satisfying.

It seems there is a decent amount of variability in audience evaluation of the predator films/sequels for the record, and keep up the interesting reviews shadow1.

 

[Osprey]

I'm quite surprised Pranzo how high you are on Prometheus and Alien: Covenant. Prometheus specifically for being almost rated as highly as the original Alien, and for Alien: Covenant you put it on par with Aliens (the original sequel). I don't notably disagree with how highly you think of Prometheus, which I think hit the right notes all around, but I am very surprised on Alien: Covenant at 7/10. I find Covenant to be pretty messy with some poor decisions, albeit visually and thematically and even 'thrillingly' satisfying.

I'm not surprised. Prometheus and Alien: Covenant are both rather pretentious films.

and, yes, I called them pretentious just to tick off Pranzo

 

[Osprey]

Fall (2022) - 6/10

Two young women (Grace Caroline Currey, Virginia Gardner) climb a 2,000-foot-tall abandoned TV tower in the desert for the thrill of it (and sick selfies) only to get stuck at the top. Oops. It's very cliched and predictable. You can see plot turns coming a mile away. A lot of suspension of disbelief is required and, even with that, the last half hour had a couple of "oh, c'mon" moments (including the big twist) that really bugged me. That said, I still enjoyed it. I'm a sucker for movies in which people are trapped in confined spaces and this was a fresh setting. It's quite suspenseful and anxiety inducing. This is not the movie to watch if you're afraid of heights. I'm not particularly, but I still felt uneasy several times, especially when the camera was pointed down. A lot of it was filmed practically instead of with green screens, which contributes to the realism. The cinematography is a strong point for the same reason. The acting is decent and there's a little character development, along with themes of grief and forgiveness that give the movie a tiny bit of depth. The movie doesn't stand out for its drama, though, but for its situational intensity. It's essentially 47 Meters Down in the sky instead of underwater. It doesn't offer anything new that we haven't seen before in other survival films (aside from the setting), but it's simple and thrilling and that was enough for me.

 

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

I'm not surprised. Prometheus and Alien: Covenant are both rather pretentious films.

and, yes, I called them pretentious just to tick off Pranzo

Joke aside, I did find a pretentious film recently (only the second one I can identify as such) and I forgot to note it in my comment here: May Morning's introductory text, saying the film represents the absolute truth about Oxford is a good example of a film being pretentious. Now if you can tell me where the Alien films are pretentious, other than the fact they went right over your head , I'm all ears .