MovieChat Forums > Drooch > Replies
Drooch's Replies
What changes would you make to improve it?
The kid from Last Action Hero looks like Chloe from 24.
Yep. If someone said this was Cameron’s best film I would have little to say to them. It’s fucking brilliant.
Is she? I find her too butch, too bony. She lacks femininity, but that’s how Cameron likes them - Sigourney is fairly high testosterone, as is Hamilton in T2, and Rose’s daughter from Titanic, who Cameron later married.
Mastrantonio has nice eyes but her head seems horizontally stretched and she has that ‘sport-woman’ vibe that’s quite unsexy. Even as Maid Marien she lacked femininity. The 80’s frizzy hair doesn’t help.
Great actress though, she nailed it in The Abyss, her and Ed Harris were a great duo.
Correct.
I’m just happy Catfish hadn’t left a fat deuce in there, or that Bud didn’t pick up any bowl-cack while scraping around for that ring.
Cameron is now a woke bitch who hates his former, better self, and disapproves of his classic movies:
<blockquote>“I always think of [testosterone] as a toxin that you have to slowly work out of your system," he said.
“A lot of things I did earlier, I wouldn’t do — career-wise and just risks that you take as a wild, testosterone-poisoned young man,”</blockquote>
So I wouldn’t hold my breath. He treated the T2 like dogshit on UHD and basically murdered it with grain-scrubbing and a hideous new colour palette. He lacks to will to release The Abyss (sexist comments, cruelty to animals) and True Lies (prophetic Muslim villains) - these films are bad for you, he thinks, instead he’s going to pummel you with endless Avatar sequels and their tedious eco-messaging, because that’s what’s good for you.
Cameron is now a woke bitch who hates his former, better self, and disapproves of his classic movies:
<blockquote>“I always think of [testosterone] as a toxin that you have to slowly work out of your system," he said.
“A lot of things I did earlier, I wouldn’t do — career-wise and just risks that you take as a wild, testosterone-poisoned young man,”</blockquote>
So I wouldn’t hold my breath. He lacks to will to release The Abyss (sexist comments, cruelty to animals) and True Lies (prophetic Muslim villains) - these films are bad for you, he thinks, instead he’s going to pummel you with endless Avatar sequels and their tedious eco-messaging, because that’s what’s good for you.
If there’s a sudden decline in quality after becoming a weed addict then, yes, he needs to reconsider his drug habit - but this thread is about the crime that is Clerks III and why he’s now cannibalising his earlier, better work, and slaughtering and torturing his most beloved characters in a supposed ‘comedy’.
Smith was my hero… until a few months ago.
The quality of his films took a nosedive years ago when he got addicted to weed thanks to Seth Rogen, but I stayed loyal because his early stuff was so brilliant, his crazy experiments like Tusk were still hugely entertaining, and he was always hilarious in person on podcasts.
Then he made Clerks III. You can read my reaction to that unforgivable POS here…
https://moviechat.org/tt11128440/Clerks-III/6328f9713f21695b42236d50/Im-out-spoilers
While I would have no argument with someone who says Alien is the better film… I prefer Aliens.
Ridley is all about world-building and atmosphere, Cameron is much better with character and storytelling. Ripley is much more complex and interesting in Aliens (Weaver was nominated for Best Actress for her performance) and the space marines, Bishop, Burke, Newt are all such vivid and unforgettable characters.
The last 40 minutes are popcorn perfection, just thrilling in a way that Alien isn’t.
Alien has a cold purity - like the xenomorph itself - it’s nasty and nihilistic, and by the and you almost want to slit your wrists.
Well, I guess that the difference between the 70’s and 80’s.
I actually came up with that one myself, sent it in, and they read it out!
After Smith had made me laugh for so many years with his movies, it was heartwarming to hear him laugh at my gag.
If only the screenwriters could have incorporated some of that stuff. Alas, they didn’t and the film’s ending remains a confusing, arbitrary, deflating anti-climax.
Totally. The people who trash it are edgy trolls and frustrated morons who don’t ‘get it’ because it dares to be clever, inventive and funny.
Which category does this prick fall into?: https://moviechat.org/tt1259521/The-Cabin-in-the-Woods/58c7d58cf9fcca09a0e4f930/One-of-the-best-movie-i-have-ever-seen?reply=63ca06b88bed8b21764a571d
☝🏻ignorance and obnoxiousness personified.
Nichols knows that Richard is innocent and that he’s ‘smarter’, so it’s a safe bet that Richard is in the process of trying to clear his name, digging for the truth.
If he succeeds then he won’t get the death penalty.
Therefore, it makes sense that Nichols would rather have Richard rubbed out before he unearths anything that could implicate Nichols.
Well they’re all naked. So if nudity = perversion, as per your logic, then they must all be ‘pervs’.
Are newborn babies ‘pervs’ too?
Well the film didn’t so it’s terrible screenwriting.
Why were those ruins ‘the site for the final showdown’? What was the newborn supposed to do once there?
‘It was of blasphemous proportions’
It’s a gem, and gets more precious with age as movies turn into endless lazy sequels/reboots/remakes. A genuinely funny and inventive stand-alone movie - the very thing that used to define Hollywood - is now a relic.
Correct response.