SnokesLegs

It definitely is. If these had come out prior to the film’s release and been used as key art for cinema quads and one sheets then I could understand the anger, but they’ve put them out a week after the film came out and aren’t using them anywhere other than social media where they’ve posted them once. It was definitely meant as a joke (maybe in bad taste all things considered, but still a joke).

Good spot! I somehow missed that myself.

It definitely has political things to say, it’s just not the political things that some people going into the film expect it to say based on their preconceived notions of what they think the film is/should be about.

Saw this last night and thought it was excellent. Very tense throughout with a hell of a third act. The whole controversy around the film “needing to take a stand” or “choosing a side” feels so obsolete when you actually watch it. It’s very purposefully not about taking a specific side and just viewing it from the perspective of journalists who are just there to observe and get the best photographs, the characters don’t care who wins, they just want to be there to document it and so they’ve stuck with the side that is least hostile towards journalists. It’s also much more interesting to see a film like this set in the US rather than an actual real life war zone, if this had been set in the Middle East it’d have been far less interesting (at least to me), whereas setting it in a developed first world country gives it a surreal sense of familiarity to the events. It also didn’t need to be “red vs blue states”, never once did I question the story’s internal logic of who ended up siding with who, you just accept that in a catastrophically divided fictional America, maybe Texas and California might have something in common in terms of uniting against a dictator president who self declares himself the winner of a third term. For me this was a strong return to form for Garland after how much I disliked Men. Hope he returns to directing after he’s done writing the 28 Days Later sequels.

If you like the first two, it’s worth watching Alien 3, but make sure it’s the longer Assembly Cut and not the theatrical version. It’s not as good as the first two obviously, but it’s well worth watching if you’re invested in Ripley.

This was excellent, and it’s a shame that it seems to be underperforming. Loved the slow, creeping dread, and the last third really had my heart racing. Nell Tiger Free was outstanding too, she was fantastic in THAT scene outside the church. Without spoiling anything though, I do feel like it should have ended two minutes earlier than it does. That final scene wasn’t needed and felt kind of tacked on. Easily the second best in the franchise after the original, and I’d love another one if they can make it as strong as this.

Apparently Todd Phillips clarified at the panel last night that it’s not a full musical, but music is an “essential element”. I can probably get on board with that.

Similar near me, looks like cinemas might have been a bit overly enthusiastic about its chances. Expecting a jukebox musical about a woman slowly dying from drug abuse was never going to be the crowd pleaser that Bohemian Rhapsody was, especially with less than glowing reviews. It'll still probably be number 1 though, Civil War doesn’t seem to be faring too well based on pre-sales either.

I’m intrigued, but not sold. It really depends on just how much of a musical it ends up being. If it’s La La Land with the Joker then count me out. For what it’s worth, I think @Porthos is right about:

Yeah I’m glad about the delay. Saw X was better than it had any right to be, I’d hate for them to undo all of that goodwill by crapping out something weak just to make a yearly release schedule.

Can you imagine her reaction if Garland DID take a stand? “HOW DARE THIS ENGLISH MAN TRY TO TAKE A SIDE IN AMERICAN POLITICS!! WE KICKED YOU OUT IN CIVIL WAR 1!!”

Wouldn’t be the first time that a film or TV show has used real footage of a far right personality to make a point about the road we’re heading down. Unless Garland explicitly uses the clip to paint him in a good light, I don’t see the problem. It’s archive footage, not an ad for Ngo’s YouTube channel.

It’ll just be footage used in a montage, presumably framed as “this is how we got here”. It doesn’t mean the film makers are in bed with the guy, nor will this affect the film in the slightest. They have to credit him for the footage, just like they’re crediting ITN News and the Seven Network. It’s like how a Louis Theroux documentary has to credit some of the far right personalities that he’s interviewed, doesn’t mean he endorses them.

The fact that this seems to be polarising to certain types of people means that Garland has made a much more interesting film than the trailers suggested. The worst thing he could’ve done from an artistic perspective is make a generic thriller, so to hear that this isn’t that definitely excites me. Randolph being so incensed by it says to me that he’s done it right. Whether general audiences agree is another matter though.

To be fair, on this occasion, that would be pretty funny.

Agreed. The fact that it’s in the US is what makes it more interesting as a concept. As someone from the UK, I don’t really care about the internal politics of the movie itself or why California is teaming up with Texas, all I care about is that there’s a story built around that concept. That whole discourse feels like a uniquely American complaint against a film that most people haven’t even seen yet (see also Joker which had insane controversy in the US, but didn’t elsewhere).

Deleted

I’m glad I’m not the only one who thought that camera work in the first 30 minutes or so was awful, I get that they were going for a chaotic vibe, but it was like Paul Greengrass shaky-cam on steroids. Thankfully it calmed down and they actually let us see the fighting in the rest of the film. I feel like the early reviews overhyped it, but I liked it overall. Dev Patel was great, and assuming he directs more in line with the latter half of the film, I’d be interested to see where he goes next as a writer/director.

My local Light Cinema isn’t showing The First Omen for some reason, and they’ve given Late Night with the Devil their biggest screen in its third week. I think the cinema programmer might be drunk.

Also shows that they didn’t watch that episode of South Park all the way through to the credits too…

It’s out properly on the 12th in the UK I believe, tickets have been on sale for a couple of weeks near me.

Not surprised about LNWTD, it was packed at my showing on Saturday, and seems to have been performing well all week.

Apparently it’s “Godzilla Kong”, the “x” is silent. Should have just gone with “Godzilla & Kong”, you can guarantee that 99% of cinemagoers will be pronouncing the x when buying tickets.

Having read the content synopsis, I can see why a certain scene might trigger the MPAA more than the BBFC, without going into spoilers I feel like the “fantasy” element of it will have helped it avoid a higher rating in the UK, as they’re generally more lenient on things if it’s not something that most people would believe could actually happen. It’s just funny that there’s such a wide gap between “we battled the censors to avoid NC17!” in the US while the UK is just like “yeah, sure, 15” 😂

There’s been barely any promotion for it in the UK, I’ve not seen the trailer at all other than online and there’s no posters anywhere (even in my local cinema). Got to admit though, until these reactions I had zero hype for it even though I’m a fan of the original trilogy, I’d been writing it off as a pointless cash grab prequel (happy to potentially be wrong though!). If it’s genuinely good, they’ve dropped the ball on promo. Interesting to see people claiming it challenges the ratings boards, it’s only a 15 in the UK.