Torch_Fire

I was familiar with the concept of the Backrooms from games and Kane Parson's shorts on the topic, so of course I had to see this. I knew of the many interpretations of the Backrooms that could be used to tell this story, and while I don't think I would have gone with Parson's interpretation of this movie, I will say it was okay. While the story seemed somewhat mediocre and left a lot to be desired, and I don't think all the characters were done right or fairly, the movie shines for what is the main attraction: the backrooms. The use of them, and their showcasing of liminal space, is done masterfully. It is very obvious the cinematographers appreciated the concept, and enjoyed their work. You see their use of space everywhere and some of my favorite scenes were not even in the backrooms, but in the real world where simple places were given the same liminal treatment. And in this, perhaps there is a message between our world and world of the backrooms in more ways than what the movie explicitly lets known. And it is mysteries and scenes like that that make this film more of an art film, than a theatrical narrative. And it is good for that purpose.

An excellent movie, and in the most terrible of ways. It will go down as a horror classic with it's presiding concepts of desire, the corruption of love, and the old adage of being careful what you wish for. The presentation of the movie hits it out of the park with its dark mood, attention to light and setting, and an acting cast that generates emotion in every scene. For a simple concept, it is a complex movie with many viewers taking multiple things from it. My favorite reviews are from men who feel the movie overloads them with past trauma of their "crazy exes", or men who wished for love in the way the protagonist did, but wonder now if they would make the same wish once they see how monstrous it can become. What I do not like however are the many reviews I am seeing of women, specifically feminists, who seek to reframe it as a feminist propaganda film to fuel their paranoia of men. In their minds, it is simply an entitled man taking control of a women as his sex slave and **** her, even though that's not what happened at all. And they intentionally blur the line between fiction and reality that "all men would do this to you if they could", while ignoring how men who watched the movie were terrified to think of following in the footsteps of the protagonist. The only way to see the movie this way is through selective memory of the film, and a whole lot of "media literacy" from the gender studies department of one's local college. I encourage others to see it without such baggage and focus on what it really is: a movie about desire, love corrupted, and being careful what you wish for. All characters are victims of the situation, and all are deserving of empathy. Going into it with this mindset will allow you to take more from this movie, and it's glorious hideousness, than the simple narratives others would expect you to take.

This was difficult for me to see because I was a Thunderbolts fan and had many of their comics. Because most have not read the comics, let me tell you a bit on what they were. They were former villains who are now super heroes. Some did so reluctantly, or for selfish reasons, but most on the team were interested in redemption for their time as a villain. So many conversations, and stories were based on that theme: redemption. And that's a good theme. None of the characters are redeemable, or even want to be. They're all a rag-tag group of anti-hero types who just have to work together long enough to get through their immediate problems. Becoming better? Striving to be a true hero? Nah. Oh and the team was "Guardians of the Galaxy"ized for loads of weird comedy and laughs. Sorry, but not every super hero team needs to be the Guardians, and not everyone needs to be a comedy troupe. The Thunderbolts definitely didn't need to be.

The villain is a woke's perfect boogeyman: white and male, and a racist and sexist bigot. He kills everyone indiscriminately regardless of if they're innocent or not, because that's what people who believe burning down cities in the name of social justice believe of those who oppose them. Of course, such a man doesn't really exist in the real world, so they need to create him as a fiction to terrorize the peaceful innocent leftist girl who just wants to save everyone. Meanwhile, rightwingers don't need a fiction as a majority of the woke cheered on assassin's bullets aimed at rightwing presidential candidates, Republicans at congressional ball games, kids in Kenosha Wisconsin attempting to put out their fires for innocent businessman, Israeli diplomats who were preparing for a wedding, or several bullets entering the body of a healthcare CEO. They celebrate all this, and then expect you to believe that they are not the violent ones. And they have that Hollywood money to perpetuate that fiction. This movie is just another "when rightwingers attack" Hollywood does to tell the people who to be scared of. But the real life terror Hollywood celebrates has largely made these kinds of films ineffective to anyone who isn't already indoctrinated into their hate filled fictions.

Tell me you don't know anything about Catholicism, without telling me you don't know anything about Catholicism.

I wish Hollywood types read more history about the stuff they made movies **** then, maybe they do and they just don't care to make it accurate ever.

I often complain that aliens in sci-fi often mimic humans too much, and why is that? Why would beings that evolved on another planet look like, act like, and think like us? It's because the human experience is an easy reference point for writers who don't want to think too hard about it. Simply put, it's the easy path. No One Will Save You decides to go the hard path, and are greatly rewarded for their effort. The movie features aliens, and the scenes in which they feature are scary and suspenseful with bumps in the hallway, hide and seek around the house, and other tropes you might expect from an alien abduction movie, but expertly well done. But the real terror is in the aliens minds. Their behavior, their emotions, their actions, are all hard to discern from a human perspective. They are not just aliens, they are truly "alien" in all other ways too. And that mystery, that inability to comprehend, is truly terrifying. The movie can be given accolades for more too, from the great acting of Kaitlyn Dever, to the interesting choice of using hardly any speech in the movie, and the excellent pacing of direction to where there's never a dull moment, but you don't feel overloaded with it. Truly one of the best movies about alien abductions I've ever seen.

I am only watching this for Jim Carrey. If this was all about him and his hilarious performance, then the score is a 10 out of 10. But sadly, there's this dorky Hedgehog and his friends running around the place, and that brings the score down.

Wow, what a surprise. You'd think with the title and topic of "Succubus", this movie would be cinema junk food for dudes to get a little thrill while drunk. But I think the makers of this sat down and said "what if we were to try to do this monster seriously?". Succubus is such an attempt, one that it very impressively pulls off. There is an overall story with a likeable main character played by Brendon Bradley who has relatable difficulties. He's not just some young dude looking for some tail on a Friday night, but one with genuine troubles and insecurities regarding his family that many men have had. That's what makes the Succubus so alluring; she's not just beyond sexy, but can speak to those troubles men often keep buried. But that's the sweetness that lures in, and that's where a lot of genuine horror occurs that does chill one's breath. Truly, I was uncertain the succubus monster could be a scary concept, but I was wrong. Of course, it took good production as a horror movie with good use of camera, lighting, sound, and pace. All of this was done with care and if it hadn't, I am certain this would have fallen flat. But that, combined a few great performances by our main characters really brought it home. If I give don't give it a full 10, it's because of the length of some scenes while using the "let's watch the movie from a desktop computer" gimmick. It was only half the movie, but it is a gimmick and one that's already run its course in a short amount of time.

Animation was good, world design was interesting. But if you're looking for an action movie, skip this one. You don't advertise big cool soldiers as a selling point, but then sell instead a melancholy, depressive soap opera with dose of "art house" cinema. Very boring.

Haunted house, but UNDER WATER! Can you say milking a trope for all it's worth? Eh, if the darkness of water and closed off spaces do it for you, you might get some thrill for it. But be prepared for things to take their merry little time. No one moves fast through H2O after all.

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

The only thing that is mentioned about the main character of this show is her name as a point of genealogy. From that, the creators of this spun a whole fiction of a warrior women, and then have the audacity to hate Tolkien for not acknowledging her greatness, that old sexist (seriously, they did this). War of the Rohirrim shows just how far woke Hollywood will **** ever splinter at the bottom of the barrel to get their girl boss.

Much better than expected. You wouldn't think you could do much with a story about creatures who can't get you at high altitude, but they make it work in interesting ways, and create good, tense action sequences to boot. The production and cast aren't bad either, and while I'm sure this was a lower budget film, it really seems like it and punches above it's weight as a sci-fi thriller.

A gorgeously put together film in so many ways. Excellent acting, pacing, and CG action, and writing. It had me engaged throughout, and NOT just for whenever the big lizard showed up! Godzilla the monster was icing on the cake. It was also a drama featuring post-war narratives, the nature of family, cowardice, and redemption. If the monster was not included, this still would have been a great movie; but he was, so it's a terrific movie! And your draw will drop when you realize this quality of film was done on $15 million max and was two hours long! For comparison, a single 30 minute episode of Marvel's She Hulk cost $25 million a piece! Disney lost on that series big time, yet Godzilla is closing in on making back 10 times its budget at the time of this writing. Makes you wonder why Hollywood needs all that money for such mediocrity when excellence can apparently be had on the cheap.

"Excuse me, my pronouns are 'She' and 'her', not 'it' " -An unalive robot made of metal.

If we were as racist a society as so many blacks seems to suggest, this movie would not have been made. But it was, and if whites tried to make it, their lives would effectively end. ...you know, maybe we do live in a racist society then, just in the opposite way BLM imagines.

The problem this movie had was it had "Final Fantasy" in the name, and that came with a lot of expectations from fans of a certain game franchise, of which this had nothing to do with. When you subtract that one thing out, what you are left with is a very good science fiction movie, expertly crafted for it's year, and engaging in it's story too.

Three words: funny as heck. Oh, and watch in the original French language. Sooo much better.

I was too young at the time to take in some of the themes of this great movie and there are a few. But the main one that lingered with me well after I saw it is how single moments in our past can effect us so much, it defines who we are for our whole lives. But if those moments were ones of shame, failure, or trauma, there is absolutely no reason we can't come back from that, and live a better life than what we are now.

Incredible artistry, a fascinating setting, and an intriguing story, This movie will forever be one of the greats among the lineup of great cyberpunk movies.

If this movie had not had the words "Daily Wire" attached to it, critics would be praising it as a perfect commentary on the times, a cinematic look into the cultural phenomenon of mass shootings, and an absolute gushing for featuring a strong female protagonist in the progressive role of an action hero! But it had the words "Daily Wire", so it's "rightwing propaganda 0/10 don't see it or you're a bigot, the end."

This was a decent horror movie; not the best, but decent. There were some scares, some foreboding, and what horror movie isn't complete without some creepy doors that creek when open. But more than any of these elements was a good helping of mystery, which I think is the absolute best element any horror movie can provide. I truly did not figure out what was going on until the end, and any movie that can keep you guessing is a mark of creativity.

One of the best sci-fi suspense movies out there. Vin Diesel crafts a unique character which plays perfectly in the alien world our adventure takes place. A character which would go on to inspire two more movies after this one, but neither of those is as good as the first. I am given goosebumps every time I watch this classic survival story, and it will always have a permanent place in my collection.

One of the best horror films in existence, combining the perfect combination of both suspense and supernatural mystery, and ten times better than the 90s Japanese movie it is based on. I am fairly certain this is the movie that got me into the horror genre.

As with the first one, I watched this only for Jim Carry. And for him alone, this movie is worth seeing. Unfortunately, there's a sugary, hyperactive fart joke fest that surrounds him which diminishes the overall score.

The original Swedish version was better. If you are coming in to check reviews before seeing either, go with that one.

An experimental film to say the least. Some people will love it, but those people are likely your weird brother who listens to doom metal all day and thinks the Boston city hall building is the pinnacle of architectural beauty (look it up if you haven't seen it)

I'm kinda getting the sense from this movie that bears shouldn't be snorting coke

The idea of a "Christian horror movie" first comes as a surprise to most who would hear the concept. For those outside of the religion like myself, our second thought would likely be that it would not be that interesting or scary. After being dragged to see this by some Christian friends, I am glad to say I was very surprised. A24's The Witch is the first thing that comes to mind to describe this movie. The director in it said the supernatural horror was based on the real beliefs people in earlier centuries had about witches. That is what made the fear of the protagonists so interesting to behold, as it was not the fear concocted in the mind of a story writer bent on giving an audience a thrill, but the fear a people once believed was very real, and very dangerous. Few believe in the power of witches today, but many still believe in demons, and none more so than Christians. And in this movie, they saw their fear. It was not a thrill for them to see, but the image of what is a very real evil. This was a story of demonic possession as they believe it actually is, and not how horror movies typically portray it. There is no upside down crosses, contorted limbs, and green bile, but there is the figure of a man which harbors a sense of pure malice -- one that is initially hidden and you might miss if you weren't looking. To create such an effect would be hard to do from an acting perspective, but Sean Patrick Flanery pulls it off in a masterful sense. It is hard not to be emotionally moved in every direction by his powerful performance, and many of those who didn't like the movie, still agree that he acted very well. I was fascinated by the perspective brought to the topic of this movie, and had long discussions with my friends after we saw it. If you are not a Christian, but a lover of supernatural horror, it is a movie worth exploring for it's unique view on a well worn horror trope.

Weak characters, uninteresting plot, and a blatant cash grab attempting to run on overexposure of the winning concept of the prequal. This garbage should have been left at the bottom of the Trench.

I wanted to like this movie, but unfortunately, it fell quite short of expectations. I wanted to see something scarier with more blood and guts. Maybe I shouldn't have been surprised I didn't get that with a PG-13 rating. But the movie was far less than what it could have been, and the decision to tone it down ultimately is what prevented it from reaching those lofty heights.

I'm afraid I couldn't pay attention to the movie as I was constantly distracted by the smell of a Turd on a bed sheet somewhere.

I was promised a scene where Hillary Clinton would sacrifice a child to the pagan gods and drink it's blood. All the media, in unison promised it. Well it didn't happen, so I want my money back! Seriously though, the only controversy about this film, is that there is any controversy to begin with. It is just a movie about the horrors of child sex trafficking and one man's story to try and fight it, and in that, it was well done. There are no allusions to anything political, or anything linking it to weird Q-something conspiracies. When I finished the film, I thought "that was it? THAT WAS THE BIG SUPER BAD FAR RIGHT PROPAGANDA FILM?!?!?!" That the entire entertainment media came together, and collectively said it was all that, is one of the most crazy things I have ever seen from the film industry (aside from the fact there are ten Fast and Furious films). This says a lot more about them, and how politically warped they are, than it does anything about this movie. If you want to see a heart wrenching drama about a real tragic crime going on this world, then you should see this movie. If you want to see what a real propaganda film looks like in comparison, I'm sure the Barbie movie is still playing.

Words fail me at this moment. How can I describe the horror I feel when I realize this movie took years to make, received over $200 million dollars in a budget, was given such a beloved IP to play with, and was able to attract some of the top star power in the industry, and what was produced was just a single unbridled scream of hatred towards the male gender? Chances are, if you live in a society where you can make this movie, then the people you hate do not have the real power in it, you do. This movie doesn't just hate men, it loathes them. If this movie had been made targeting any other group, a public service announcement would be spread nationwide warning of violence against that group, news companies would report ever minute of every day of aggression towards them whether real or perceived, and the president would give a statement in support. As a man, I truly fear for my physical safety being in the proximity of anyone who loved this movie. I am terrified for the development of any son in the grips of a parent who takes to heart its message.

After watching this, I think it would be appropriate to rename it, "Swimming: The Movie"

An eco-apocalypse story of boring proportions. At times, it felt more like an attempt at an art film with it's heavy emphasis on scenery and production than on engaging story or believable characters. It also did not explain aspects of the story and left loose ends. Some of the scenery was creative though (if also very icky) in its biological horror and that's why I don't give it a full zero.

I have never felt so bored by a Batman film before. It was 3 hours of slow, tedious dialogue, uninspired presentation, and sad sad characters (I never knew Batman could be so emo. That was A LOT of mascara under the eyes). And allow me to educate the film makers from someone who actually reads comics, because I know they don't. Superheroes are larger than reality -- that's what makes them exciting. Previous Batman films had exotic tech, wild characters that wouldn't exist in real life, and Batman did things that stretch the imagination of what is possible for mortal men. But apparently, such extras are not included with Emo Batman action figures. He punches guys, hoists himself with grappling hooks, the bat mobile is a modified 80s muscle car, and uses a stupid base jumping suit to fall with style. It's a far cry from remote attracted bat swarms, trick baterangs, and outrageous vehicles like the Knightcrawler. And don't think the blatant racism and sexism wasn't apparent. I see you DC and Warner Bros. I see how every evil character was a white man, and barring Batman and Alfred every decent character was black or Hispanic. I see your blackwashing and the white erasure of originally white characters like Selena and Jim. I see you getting Selena to specifically call the city of Gotham a place for "white privilaged **** I see you turning the Riddler into a sad, mentally unstable loner reminiscent of the mass shooters leftwing media likes to propagandize to engender misandry and white hatred. I see you and I am calling you out for your racism and sexism and am going to tell everyone it was you're companies. And if you dear reader downvote my review based on this second paragraph, then I say with complete sincerity that you are a sexist and racist too and you should be ashamed of your sad, hate filled life.

I like AI powered robots, and I like cyber punk, so it should have been a low bar for this movie to entertain me. It didn't. It was boring, predictable, and all the characters were uninteresting. But what really upset me was how it choose to keep to the brain-dead trend of making robots EXACTLY like humans. A lot of shows do this now. They make robots look and act exactly like humans to the point that, to use this movie as an example, they cry, they resent their place in life, they hate their jobs, and need a little "me" time to relax and get through the day. Almost nothing seems to separate them from people or makes them different. I think this all lacks imagination and creativity when it comes to AI and robots. It's the lazy way out for science fiction movies as make up artists don't need to do anything drastic, actors don't need to imagine not being a human, and the story writers get to use the word "robot" for their story and call it "science fiction". If we really want to push the concept, then I would ask, If we could design AI or the mechanical figure of it's body, why would we need to make them exactly like us? Why could they not think or look entirely different? Imagine an AI purposefully programmed to love a terrible day; the worse it is, the happier it gets. Or maybe one is programmed to think what is considered ugly is beautiful and vice versa. We could also imagine it's body differently. Why must it have a body with two arms, two legs, and a head? Perhaps it could have 3 arms, 5 legs, the body of an ant, and the head of a cat (actually, don't make that. That sounds creepy) The ideas are endless, and some good science fiction writers have come up with many good ones. The creators of Zone 414 did not and the movie falls into the heap of sci-fi that is labeled for the uninspired, and uncreative.

Remember my beautiful black ladies, it's important to love yourself and especially your hair. Wear it however you want!...unless you choose to wear it like a white women, then shame on you for hating yourself and your race!

Some people do not like this movie because of its connection to the Shining. I've heard some say it's a poor vision for a sequel and that it explains things about the first movie that were better left a mystery. In total, it provides poor synergy when paired with The Shining and it suffers as a result. I actually agree with these statements and it is a bit unfortunate this was to be a sequel to Stanley Kubrick's classic. But if we separate Doctor Sleep from its partner and judge it on its own merits, I think we have a pretty good movie. It's a suspenseful film with moments of painful terror, and it has a cast of interesting and diverse characters that make's for great storytelling. In addition to this, it caused my "sci-fi meter" to spike as it had some of the best ideas I've seen in a while when it comes to psychics. So if you are one of those who've heard how terrible this movie is as a sequel to The Shining, you've not heard wrong. But there is still a good movie worth enjoying here and as long as you ignore its sequel status and judge it on its own merits, I think you will find that enjoyment.

After the disappointment that was the 1984 film and the monstrosity that was the SyFy channels miniseries, I prayed to whatever god that would listen for someone to come again and give this franchise justice in film. When I heard Dennis Villeneuve was selected to direct a new movie, I believed my prayer might have been heard. When I actually saw the movie, I knew it was. This new Dune movie is everything I believed the franchise could be as a motion picture. Villaneuve delivered, as I knew he would, with larger-than-life structures, the expansive wastes of Arrakis, the color and pageantry of the people, and the epic sense of a larger struggle at hand. Such influences were evident from his previous works like Arrival and Rlade Runner 2049, but he perfected them in this movie. The movie was also a good adaptation and covered nearly all the main and important parts from the book, while leaving itself some leeway to format the story to the pacing and style of a motion picture (something the 1984 film failed to do). If there were any flaws, it was in the performance of some of the characters and the somewhat lacking explanations of things for those who would not be familiar with the source material. The actor selected to play Paul could not have been more uninteresting, and I could not always tell if his reactions at times were very appropriate to the situation. This was not the case for most of the cast surrounding him, and I was definitely taken in by many of the performances from the star-studded cast (although as good an actor as he is, seeing a nicely shaved Jason Momoa will always be a hardship to endure in the future). Of course this is only part one to this project. I feel it is important to withhold complete judgement until the next installment can be compared, but for what we have, it is an excellent beginning. Needless to say, I can't wait for part two.

It's a serious drama featuring a strong romance, and a mystery that sets our protagonist on a course with many twists and turns, but no aspect of that was needless and the movie makes use of it's many locals and characters. With all this, it's easy to believe that a plot point will not be resolved, but I found them all wrapped up well to my satisfaction. The scenery was also well done. The movie considers a near future where rising sea levels have overtaken coastal cities, but not to the point that people can't live in them. This is not a major story point, and instead, it simply provides an aesthetic to the movie. The sea is always present -- whether brushed up against buildings with their first floors submerged, or covering the local roads, but not enough to make them unusable. The sun reflects across these features beautifully in many scenes, and it provides an almost fantasy-like setting for the story to be told. I ultimately can't say I liked Reminiscence simply because it made me sad. But when I try to remove that feeling from my head and consider this movie on its own merits, I find that it was well done.

Nothing to see here but another movie about a "Mary Sue" who's belittled by men, but shows she's more capable than any of them in absolutely everything. This movie will definitely appeal to the fat feminist demographic who still believe male and female relations haven't budged since the 1600s, and are in desperate need of having their egos stroked. Oh, and the metaphysical monstrosities make no sense whatsoever.

Better than the first, and anything so far that's come after with Star Trek. Into Darkness is masterfully done with elements of mystery, exceptional sci-fi action, and star performances least not at all from the illustrious Benedict Cumberbatch. A must see for any Star Trek fan.

Although the visuals were interesting, this is an excellent lesson of what can go wrong when you try to create too close an adaptation between two different mediums. The movie tried to copy the famous sci-fi book it's based on very closely, and this resulted in scenes that were oddly paced and dialogue that was unnatural. A movie is not a book and, and you need to make adjustments to make something work from one medium to the next. The writers and directors didn't bother to do this and the result was a slow, boring film with unnatural sounding characters.

This movie was known to me on several list, including Metacritic, as a good film in the arena of early sci-fi and horror that inspired many future ideas in those genres. After watching it myself, I am not sure I can correlate many; the film is very unique. There is a wonderful element of mystery as to what is going on, and along with the characters, you uncover that mystery in pieces which can lead to both interest and some dread as you find out more. It never fully seems to be clear to me by the end of the movie what was absolutely going on, although there is enough to formulate a few solid theories. One thing I think we can be certain of though is the kids in this movie are very creepy.

It was quite slow moving and wasn't that scary at all. A Plymouth Fury could could not be a more non-threatening model. I get an image in my head of my grandpa driving something like that. And aside from memorable moments from Keith Gordan, everyone is unamusing or a cartoon stereo-type of every kind of high school teenager.

I thought I was coming to watch a movie, what I got was a sermon. The screen was a podium to bash the viewer over the head again and again with the tiring, blatent tropes of "patriarchy", "**** culture", and old fashioned "misogyny". It's as artful as a hefty layering of dog vomit.